The editorial “The identity quota trap”, published by The State of S. Paul on 11/04/2025, criticizes the recent decision of the State University of Campinas (Unicamp) to adopt quotas for trans, transvestite and non-binary people. In doing so, the newspaper ignores not only the concrete data and legal foundations that support this policy, but also the constitutional principles that govern the construction of a more just society in Brazil.
The editorial is based on the idea that quotas for trans and transvestite people would violate the principle of equality provided for in Article 5 of the Federal Constitution. However, this interpretation ignores the spirit of the 1988 Constitution, which is structured on the principle of equity. Equity starts from the recognition that it is not enough to treat everyone the same: it is necessary to consider the historical and structural inequalities that prevent real access to fundamental rights. Treating those who are unequal in proportion to their inequalities is precisely what makes true equality possible.
In this sense, trans quotas do not violate the Constitution – they make it concrete. The presence of trans people in public higher education is still minimal, not due to a lack of capacity or interest, but because this population faces a continuous cycle of exclusions: early school dropout, family breakdown, physical and symbolic violence, stigmatization, social marginalization and institutional barriers. The report by the Unicamp Trans Quota Working Group (GT) shows that these exclusions are influenced by factors that go far beyond income: they concern gender identity and expression, marking a specific and persistent pattern of exclusion. This pattern is not limited to impoverishment and is much more severe than that found among gays, lesbians or bisexuals, people who are equally affected by inequalities based on their sexual orientation.
The editorial also resorts to a false dilemma by stating that quotas should be restricted to family income. However, the text itself recognizes that racial quotas were essential to increase access to universities for black students – precisely because racial inequality is not limited to poverty. Likewise, the structural transphobia that impacts the lives of trans people cannot be resolved solely by economic criteria. Reducing complex inequalities to a question of income ignores the multiple dimensions of social exclusion in Brazil.
Another point of fundamental importance is that Unicamp's trans quotas do not remove places from the general competition. As explained by Professor José Alves, president of the GT, in a recent interview, the policy will be implemented through additional or idle places, that is, those that are not filled by the regular selection processes. This is an affirmative action that expands access without reducing opportunities for other candidates.
The approval of this policy by Unicamp occurred in a responsible and democratic manner: it was the result of a technical, participatory and ethical process, culminating in a unanimous decision by the University Council (Consu) on April 1, 2025. Although a pioneer among public state universities in São Paulo, Unicamp follows a trajectory consolidated by other public institutions that have already adopted trans quotas, such as the Federal University of ABC (UFABC), the Federal University of São Paulo (Unifesp), the Federal University of Bahia (UFBA), the Federal University of Southern Bahia (UFSB), the Federal University of Santa Catarina (UFSC), the Federal University of Paraná (UFPR), the State University of Paraná (Unespar), the Federal University of Pernambuco (UFPE), the Federal Fluminense University (UFF), the Federal University of Santa Maria (UFSM), the Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG) and the University of Brasília (UnB), among others.
The editorial also criticizes the use of “life stories” in the admission process, questioning the validity of self-declaration of gender identity. However, the Brazilian Supreme Court (STF) has already recognized gender identity as a subjective right, which does not require medical or judicial reports to be validated. This recognition follows the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and the removal of gender incongruence from the condition of pathology by the World Health Organization (WHO) in ICD-11.
Life stories, as part of the self-declaration process, will not be used as a subjective or moral criterion, but only to record the story of each person who applies for the vacancy. No one will “win” or “lose” a vacancy based on some discretionary criterion. Universities that adopt trans quotas have created specialized committees and clear criteria to ensure seriousness and fairness in the selection processes – all without disrespecting the dignity of those seeking entry into these spaces. By submitting the documentation, the person who applies undertakes to provide truthful information, and the discovery of fraud, even after the course has started, results in the cancellation of enrollment. Such instruments have been sufficient to prevent fraud, and this is what other experiences show us.
It is sad that the newspaper ignores these data, principles and institutional advances. By doing so, it perpetuates the idea that the entrance exam is a neutral space, when, in fact, it has historically favored those who have already had access to quality education, social protection and institutional recognition. The supposed neutrality only maintains the same privileges as always.
Furthermore, it is important to state clearly: Unicamp’s excellence is not built despite diversity – it is built through it. It is the multiple perspectives, experiences and knowledge that fuel the production of critical, transformative and socially relevant knowledge. Including people with disabilities, as occurred in 2024, and trans people, as was approved now, is to expand this wealth, it is to expand the horizons of the public university and make it even more committed to the future that the country needs to build.
Trans quotas are not a privilege. They are instruments of equity – and, therefore, of justice. By addressing structural inequalities with targeted policies, public universities fulfill their constitutional role: not to repeat the exclusion of the outside world, but to correct it. Equity is not a deviation from equality: it is the only way to achieve it in fact. Therefore, Unicamp’s decision is not only legitimate – it is necessary. And it must be defended.
