Extract: from a beautifully researched article that read all the primary sources:
However, Pauli Murray does not fit this definition of transgender either, since:
a. She never identified as transgender, transsexual, or non-binary.
b. She never identified as a man, either publicly or privately.
c. She speculated as to whether she was actually biologically male or intersex based on her homosexual behavior, and later confirmed that she was not.
Noting the last point, the genuine speculation Pauli had about the true nature of her biology due to how well she fit into male gender stereotypes, is not the same thing as affirming the idea she is indeed male or intersex based on a metaphysical claim of being “born in the wrong body”.
…nor is the same as simply choosing to identify outside of womanhood, with full knowledge and awareness of her female biology, and then attempting to live in society in the way that she perceives herself to be.
The latter two examples are hallmarks of modern-day transgenderism, and she fits neither.
But if people truly wanted to rest on the notion that Pauli Murray was trans, they would also have to acknowledge that she was a “desister”. A “desister” is a person who socially transitions, identifying as transgender or nonbinary without medical intervention, and later returns to identifying with their biological sex.
But no case has ever been made that Pauli Murray was a desisted woman, because it seems that most sources who claim that she was transgender, want to erase or gloss over the fact that she eventually settled into her womanhood after all. Also, the term “desister” doesn’t accurately apply here, since Pauli Murray never socially transitioned, or identified as Trans in the first place.
The fact is, she was questioning her biological sex. She was a woman, and she also identified as such. That ought to be respected, without putting words in her mouth.
