Gender ideology: what it really means and what science says

“Gender ideology,” ”gender theory,” “gender indoctrination in schools”: these expressions recur frequently in the Italian public debate, in political statements, and in social media discussions. But what do they actually mean? And what does science say?

This article analyzes the origin of the term, the academic disciplines it refers to, the positions of major scientific organizations, and the Italian context in which the debate has developed.

What gender studies are

The most useful starting point is understanding what the academic disciplines that use the term “gender” actually study.

Gender studies (also called Women’s Studies in their origins, then Feminist Studies, Queer Studies) are a multidisciplinary research field born in North America between the 1970s and 1980s, then spread to Western Europe [13]. They are not an ideology: they are a set of research methods and approaches — historical, sociological, psychological, literary, anthropological — applied to understanding how gender functions as a category in human societies [1][13].

Their fundamental premise is not a radical novelty: it is the distinction between biological sex and gender, introduced in scientific research in the 1950s by sexologist John Money [8]. Money, working with intersex patients at Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore, coined the term gender role in 1955 to indicate “everything a person says or does to manifest their status as a boy or man, girl or woman” [8]. Sex described biological characteristics; gender described psychological and social behaviors and identities.

This distinction was then elaborated by French philosopher Simone de Beauvoir, who in her The Second Sex (1949) had already formulated the foundational idea: “One is not born a woman, one becomes one.” De Beauvoir distinguished between the biological condition and the set of norms, expectations, and roles that society constructs upon it. De Beauvoir’s thought inspired decades of empirical research in psychology, sociology, and anthropology.

The most discussed theoretical contribution is that of Judith Butler, who in Gender Trouble (1990) [9] proposed the concept of gender performativity: gender is not an innate biological essence but a set of acts, gestures, and behaviors repeated over time that produce the effect of a stable identity. Butler did not deny the materiality of the body: they argued that the way we classify and interpret bodies is always mediated by cultural categories.

Today, the field of gender studies encompasses hundreds of university departments worldwide. In Italy, the first master’s degree entirely dedicated to Gender Studies was activated by Sapienza University in Rome in September 2022 [13].

Biological sex and gender: why they are distinguished

The distinction between sex and gender is not an ideological invention: it is a recognized and operative distinction in biology, medicine, psychology, and sociology.

Biological sex is determined by a set of characteristics — chromosomal (typically XX or XY), gonadal, hormonal, and anatomical — that in the vast majority of people are aligned in a female or male direction. Biology, however, has long recognized that this system is not strictly binary: intersex conditions (variations of sex characteristics, or DSD — Differences of Sex Development) affect approximately 1.7% of the world’s population according to United Nations estimates, a frequency comparable to that of red hair. There are people with a 46,XY karyotype who are phenotypically female (androgen insensitivity syndrome), people with a 46,XX karyotype who develop masculine characteristics, and numerous chromosomal variations (XXY, X0, mosaicisms) that escape binary classification.

Gender is the psychological, social, and cultural dimension of identity: the inner sense of self as a man, a woman, or something else; the way one expresses and lives this identity; and the social norms that society projects onto bodies and behaviors. Psychology and sociology study gender as a complex phenomenon, influenced by biological, evolutionary, psychological, and cultural factors in interaction [13].

This distinction is therefore an analytical tool, not a political manifesto. It is used by endocrinologists studying hormonal effects on behavior, epidemiologists analyzing health differences by gender, historians reconstructing how gender roles have changed over time, and psychologists studying identity development in children.

Where the term “gender ideology” comes from

If gender studies are an established academic discipline, the term “gender ideology” has a very different origin: it was not born in a scientific context, but in a religious-conservative one, in the 1990s.

The starting context is international diplomacy. In 1994, the UN International Conference on Population and Development in Cairo, and in 1995 the Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing, adopted documents using the term gender to distinguish social roles from biological traits, opening the way to equality policies and protections for LGBTQ+ people. The Holy See and its allies actively opposed the use of this term in UN documents, fearing it would pave the way for recognition of rights for same-sex couples and the weakening of the traditional family [4].

It was in this context that the American Catholic journalist Dale O’Leary, who had participated in the Beijing conference at the head of the Women’s Coalition for the Family, distributed a critical pamphlet about the use of the term gender to delegates. In 1997, she published The Gender Agenda [7], one of the founding texts of the anti-gender movement, in which she described gender as a tool of an international feminist agenda aimed at destabilizing the natural family.

Within the Holy See, then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger developed this critique in theological terms. In 2004, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which he led, published the “Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Collaboration of Men and Women” [6], which criticized those feminist currents that, according to the document, tended to erase sexual difference. In 2019, the Congregation for Catholic Education published the document “Male and Female He Created Them” [5], which identified in “various forms of an ideology that goes by the general name of ‘gender theory’” a threat to education and explicitly contested school policies on gender identity education.

The term “gender ideology” is therefore not a neutral description of a field of study: it is a deliberate rhetorical construction. The use of the English term serves, as critics have observed, to create the effect of something foreign and anomalous, distinct from normality [12]. The term lumps together legitimate academic disciplines, anti-bullying educational policies, and LGBTQ+ movement demands into a single vague and threatening category.

What the AIP said about gender ideology

In 2015, the Italian debate on the alleged “gender ideology” in schools was already very heated. The Italian Association of Psychology (AIP) — the scientific organization that brings together university professors and researchers in psychology in Italy — decided to intervene with an official document.

The document, approved by the AIP Board on October 5, 2015 [1], is explicit: the AIP deemed it necessary “to intervene to clarify the scientific inconsistency of the concept of ‘gender ideology.‘” The document states that gender studies — Gender Studies, Women Studies, Lesbian and Gay Studies — “have contributed significantly to the knowledge of topics relevant to multiple disciplines, from medicine to psychology, from economics to jurisprudence, to the social sciences” [1][2].

The AIP specified that education-for-differences initiatives on gender and sexual orientation in Italian schools had been labeled as a pretext for spreading a nonexistent ideology, and invited people to distinguish between scientifically grounded education and political instrumentalization of the debate.

The AIP’s position is consistent with that of other Italian scientific organizations. The Italian Society of Historians declared that “‘gender theory’ does not exist”: gender is “a conceptual tool for thinking about and analyzing the historical-social realities of relationships between the sexes in all their complexity” [12]. The Order of Psychologists of Puglia wrote that “regardless of personal evaluations and ‘beliefs,’ there is no ‘gender theory’ nor a ‘gender ideology’” [2].

What is taught in Italian schools

One of the most recurring arguments in the Italian debate is the idea that “gender theory” is taught in schools. We discuss this in detail in the article on gender in schools. What does Italian legislation actually provide?

Sex and affective education has never been included as a mandatory subject in Italian school programs. From Italian unification to today, none of the numerous legislative proposals on the matter has become law: sixteen proposals have been submitted and rejected over the decades. When affective education projects or programs to prevent homophobic and transphobic bullying are organized, these happen on a voluntary basis, often involving healthcare experts or accredited associations, and in most cases concern prevention of sexually transmitted diseases and unintended pregnancies — not “theories” about gender identity.

In this regulatory vacuum, political debate has focused on sporadic initiatives: some schools that have adopted the alias career for transgender students, education-for-differences projects funded by municipalities or regions, and teaching materials that include non-traditional families. These initiatives, often presented as proof of a “gender agenda,” are episodic and non-systematic measures.

In December 2025, the Chamber of Deputies passed a bill introducing mandatory parental consent for any affective education activity in schools, with an additional requirement for primary schools: content must be limited to biological and reproductive aspects. The measure was awaiting final approval by the Senate.

The debate in Italy: an essential chronology

The spread of the term “gender ideology” in Italy is a phenomenon that can be dated and reconstructed.

2013. The term begins circulating in Catholic associations and conservative circles in conjunction with the Scalfarotto bill against homophobia. Groups such as the “Difendiamo i nostri figli” (Let’s Defend Our Children) Committee, the Sentinelle in Piedi, and associations like Pro Vita form [12]. The explicit objective is twofold: to block a law against discrimination toward LGBTQ+ people and to prevent any school education on gender and sexual orientation.

2015. Mobilizations intensify around ministerial circulars on education for differences during the Renzi government. The AIP intervenes with its statement. Tens of thousands of signatures are collected against the alleged “gender ideology in schools.”

2016. After the passage of the Cirinna law on civil unions, the Family Day of January 30, 2016 in Rome sees the participation of hundreds of thousands of people, with “gender in schools” as one of the central arguments.

2020-2021. The DDL Zan, a bill against homo-transphobia passed by the Chamber in November 2020, brings the topic back into circulation. Opponents argue that article 7 — which provides for awareness initiatives in schools on May 17, the day against homophobia — constitutes an introduction of “gender theory.” The text of the law contains no reference to teaching gender theories: the proposal is defeated in the Senate in 2021 [12].

2022-2025. Under the Meloni government, the topic acquires institutional relevance. In March 2023, the Prime Minister states that “gender ideology” is a threat to women. Massimo Gandolfini, a prominent Family Day figure, is appointed ministerial advisor. Education Minister Valditara promotes “relationship education” with mandatory parental consent, approved by the Chamber in 2025.

What scientific research says

Beyond political controversies, there is a solid scientific consensus on some fundamental points.

Gender identity has biological bases. Research in genetics, neuroscience, and endocrinology documents that gender identity is not simply a cultural choice or a “trend.” Twin studies show significantly higher concordance for transgender identity in monozygotic twins compared to dizygotic twins, indicating a hereditary component. For more information, see the article on the biological bases of gender identity.

Gender incongruence is not a mental disorder. In May 2019, the World Health Assembly voted to adopt the ICD-11, the WHO’s new International Classification of Diseases, which came into effect on January 1, 2022. In it, gender incongruence was removed from the category of mental disorders and placed in the chapter on sexual health, with an explicit note: the condition cannot be considered a mental disorder [10].

Conversion therapies do not work and cause harm. The APA (American Psychological Association) adopted a resolution in February 2021 formally opposing efforts to change people’s gender identity, citing evidence of harm and the absence of demonstrated benefits [11]. The resolution is supported by a broad front of international scientific organizations — medical, psychological, and psychiatric.

Gender variance is documented in every culture and every era. Anthropology and history record the presence of nonbinary gender roles in diverse cultures across all continents: the hijra in the Indian subcontinent, the two-spirit in Native American cultures, the fa’afafine in Samoa, the muxe in Mexican Zapotec culture. Gender variance is not a recent or Western phenomenon.

The synthesis that emerges from the scientific literature is precise: gender identity is a complex aspect of human experience, influenced by biological, psychological, and cultural factors in interaction. Gender studies as an academic discipline study this complexity with empirical methods. The term “gender ideology,” as established by major Italian and international scientific organizations, does not describe any recognizable scientific reality.