In today’s society, within this modern world and contemporary culture, the concept of authenticity is fluid and flexible, varying across contexts. It is a subjective and ever-changing idea, constantly in flux. Simply put, it evolves with time, dictated by cultural narratives and shifts rather than by objective reality. One striking contradiction emerges in discussions around gender and body modification: biological women who undergo surgeries — such as breast augmentation, lip fillers, or Brazilian butt lifts — are frequently dismissed as “fake,” while transgender women are encouraged to be fully embraced as “real women.”

This paradox raises important questions: What defines “real”? Why is one form of bodily alteration seen as artificial and another as affirming? And what do these conflicting standards reveal about our evolving relationship with identity, self-perception, and societal validation?

Cultural Contradictions in Womanhood

The policing of women’s bodies is nothing new. Throughout history, beauty standards have shifted dramatically, yet the expectation for women to conform to them remains constant. A woman who undergoes surgery to enhance her femininity — whether for personal confidence or societal acceptance — often faces criticism. She’s told she’s “not natural,” that she has “cheated” beauty, or that she is “seeking attention.”

Yet, when a transgender woman undergoes medical transition, including surgeries to align her appearance with her gender identity, she is often praised for her courage and authenticity. Society largely encourages the idea that gender identity is an intrinsic truth, not determined by biology alone.

This contradiction highlights an underlying cultural bias: the perception of “realness” is not actually about modification, but about which narratives society prioritizes. When a biological woman alters her body, it is often perceived as deception; when a transgender woman does, it is seen as affirmation.

Essentialism vs. Existentialism

At its core, this issue touches on deep philosophical divides about identity. Essentialists argue that identity is rooted in innate, biological traits — i.e., a woman is a woman because of her chromosomes, reproductive capacity, or physical characteristics. By this logic, any attempt to modify the body is seen as artificial, a disruption of natural order.

Existentialists, on the other hand, believe that identity is shaped by lived experience and self-definition. A transgender woman is “real” because she experiences herself as such, regardless of biological factors. From this perspective, authenticity is not about what you are born with but about who you become.

However, if society accepts an existentialist view for gender identity but an essentialist view for beauty and femininity, contradictions emerge. If “realness” is about experience and self-perception, then why are biological women denied that same agency when they modify their bodies?

The Role of Social Power and Validation

Another crucial factor is the role of social validation in identity. Transgender advocacy has pushed for the recognition that identity is deeply personal and should be affirmed. But ironically, biological women who alter their bodies often face derision rather than support. This suggests that society is not actually invested in “authenticity” — it is invested in maintaining control over who gets to define it.

The reality is that all women — transgender or biological — navigate a world where their identities are constantly scrutinized. If we are to have a truly inclusive society, we must ask: Why do we force women to prove their “realness” at all?

Conclusion:

Moving Beyond the “Real vs. Fake” Debate

Rather than debating who is “real” or “fake,” a more constructive approach would be to examine why these categories exist in the first place. Why do we view body modification as artificial in some contexts but validating in others? Why do we grant some people the right to define themselves while others are dismissed as inauthentic?

Ultimately, the conversation should not be about whether a woman — trans or biological — is “real.” It should be about why society continues to impose rigid, contradictory standards on womanhood itself.

Until we dismantle these double standards, the debate over authenticity will remain less about truth and more about power.