Rachel Ng Jie Ying
SC2220 Essay
From the time that they are born, girls and boys are inducted into a gendered society – from
gendered colours, clothes and toys to career paths and professions. These heteronormative
practices only serve to reinforce and reproduce normative conceptions that there are only two
genders, that biological sex determines one’s gender and only relationships between opposite
genders are normal or natural (Schilt and Westbrook, 2009). While society is still apparently
divided across the lines of the gender binary, does the increasing visibility of gender nonconformists spell a revolution in the way we view sex, gender and sexuality? With our
evolving understanding of gender identity and sexuality, as well as insights into the
performativity of gender, I argue that we are undergoing a measured transformation in the
way we think about sex, gender and sexuality. The way we see the links between these
concepts is not so linear anymore, but rather, much more complicated. The gender binary that
so colours people’s perceptions is being slowly chipped away at. Such progress could mean
that we are moving towards a society more accepting of diversity, and perhaps, even a
gender-neutral future.
In today’s society, we commonly associate sex, gender and sexuality. Sex is ascertained
according to socially agreed upon biological standards for categorizing people as male or
female (West and Zimmerman, 1987). Gender is the process of organising one’s behaviour
while considering normative perceptions of what is appropriate for one’s sex category –
which is established and sustained by socially required identificatory displays. Gender is
commonly taken to subsume sex. If someone appears masculine or feminine, we
automatically assume they have the corresponding sex genitalia; are biologically male or
female. If one exhibits masculine or feminine attitudes and behaviours, they are assumed to
be attracted to women and men respectively. With regards to homosexuals, gay men are
widely perceived as feminine and lesbian women as masculine. Such assumptions are rooted
Rachel Ng Jie Ying
SC2220 Essay
in biological essentialism. Men and women are commonly conceived of as naturally different
and these differences are seen to determine their gender identity and their sexuality. Gender is
such a mundane feature of our daily lives that people fail to question these assumptions. We
see primary sex characteristics as more decisive than secondary sex characteristics to assign
gender (Kessler and McKenna, 1978). However, in everyday life, we rely on physical
appearance and behaviours rather than genitalia. Despite the prevalence of such normative
ideas, society is slowly but surely moving away from them. The variety of definitions of
masculinity and femininity across different cultures and time periods challenge the
presumptions of biological essentialism of natural biological difference. Social
constructionism emerged from anthropology and psychology in part to challenge biological
essentialism.
West and Zimmerman (1987) advance a conceptualization of gender as a repeated
achievement inherent in our everyday interactions. Individuals act with the awareness that
they will be evaluated according to what is perceived as appropriate masculine or feminine
behaviour. To “do” gender is to conduct oneself with the possibility of judgment according to
normative standards of one’s sex category. This marks a shift away from the internal
biological characteristics of the individual, to the interactions and institutions involved in
producing gender differences. Gender is not an innate feature of the individual but evoked
and reproduced in social interaction. West and Zimmerman discuss the case of Agnes, a
transgender woman, to illustrate their concept. Agnes was successful in performing a gender
that was different from her biological sex. Though Agnes did not have the “right” genitalia
before she underwent sex reassignment surgery, she was able to draw upon people’s tendency
to assess her appearance as that of unquestionably a female and to assume that there are only
two sexes. She was able to maintain her categorical status as female by tailoring her social
Rachel Ng Jie Ying
SC2220 Essay
interactions, behaviour and appearance to situations such that she would be perceived to be
acting in accordance with normative conceptions of how a woman should behave.
Transgendered men and women are a living reflection of the disconnect between gender
identity and biological sex. Their experiences highlight how gender is not an indisputable
variation of biology but simultaneously constitutes and is constructed through interaction.
Dozier’s (2005) study on transgender men challenges popular understandings of sex, gender
and sexuality as highly interconnected, immutable, binary categories. She furthers the
concept of “doing gender” and questions how gender is usually seen to emerge from sex.
Dozier criticises West and Zimmerman’s definition of gender as the performance one is
responsible for based on sex category for excluding feminine men and masculine women.
Not all transgender women are like Agnes i.e. wish to be feminine, nor do all transgender
men desire to be masculine. “Doing gender” does not just comprise of acting in a masculine
or feminine way based on one’s sex category. Rather, how conduct is interpreted is
dependent on sex attribution. Whether one is perceived as male or female affects how others
interpret and ascribe significance to their behaviour and the nature of social interaction.
Sex category and behaviour are both accountable for the performance of gender. After the
transgender men in the study took hormones, they were seen as men due to their secondary
sex characteristics, irrespective of their conduct and contradicting physical attributes such as
breasts and even, pregnancy. The transgender men were motivated to take hormones to attain
social validation of their gender identity and experience interaction in line with it. Traits seen
as confident for a masculine lesbian can be arrogant in a man. When transmen are perceived
as men, behaviour that is seen as inappropriate for their gender is deemed remarkable and
praiseworthy. Gender is not just what one does and performs for others according to their sex
Rachel Ng Jie Ying
SC2220 Essay
category but whether others recognize one as male or female affect how their behaviour is
evaluated. Transmen also challenge the link between gender and sexuality. After
transitioning, most became newly attracted to gay men. This change in sexual orientation
reflected their desire for interaction corresponding to their gender identity as opposed to
being sexually attracted to a male or female. Interaction then, particularly sexual interaction
here, is central to validating transmen’s male identity. Gender is not derived from biological
sex nor is sexuality the product of one’s gender. Sexual attraction is not necessarily about the
sex of one’s partner, or attraction to someone of the “opposite” sex, but can be about the
gender organisation of the relationship.
Butler’s (2006) concept of gender performativity holds gender identity as the outcome of
repetitive action, not an expression of some internal truth. Performing gender by repeating a
variety of gendered behaviours that agree with dominant social norms structures the meaning
of masculinity and femininity; of being a man or woman. Rather than an expression of an
intrinsic fact or essence, gender creates the individual and social reality. Gender identity does
not exist behind the expressions of gender; it is performatively established by the very
expressions that are said to be its results. Furthermore, for Butler, the distinction between sex
and gender is also an area of contention; the division that defines sex as biological while
gender is culturally, socially constructed. The performance of gender is widely seen to
indicate biological sex and is restricted by it. Sex is perceived to exist before discourse and
cultural imposition is only an effect of the functioning of gender; sex and gender are both
constructed.
Butler uses the example of drag to demonstrate the weakness of the relationship between sex
and gender and how the naturalness of gender is undermined through parody that reveals the
Rachel Ng Jie Ying
SC2220 Essay
performative nature of gender. Rupp, Taylor and Shapiro’s (2010) study of the drag troupes
801 Girls and the Disposable Boy Toys (DBT) revealed how drag queens and kings challenge
hegemonic gender and heteronormativity in their distinct performances of gender and
sexuality. Rather than identifying as male or female, they label themselves on a scale of
masculinity and femininity. By performing masculinity/femininity on the non-cisgender
body, drag kings and queens challenge the gender binary. Through performing an assortment
of gender identities, DBT made gender fluidity and non-normative gender presentations
arousing. By using contradictory gender displays and presentations, 801 Girls illustrate
gender performativity and question the biological basis of gender and sexuality through their
performances. Though these drag queens dressed in hyper-feminine ways, they also made
allusions to and flaunted their male bodies to intentionally provoke desires outside their
audience’s sexualities. They also asked audience members who identified as straight to act
out queer sex, contesting heteronormativity. Drag queens and kings thus demonstrate in
varying and exaggerated ways, the performative and socially constructed nature of gender,
which has no essential or natural basis.
In summary, gender is not an expression of our innate, natural sex, but is socially constructed
through interaction and also structures interaction. Doing gender and gender performativity
reveal the socially constructed nature of gender and challenge essentialist and
heteronormative ideas of how sex, gender and sexuality are interconnected. Biological sex
does not automatically lead to gender and gender to sexuality; these categories are not related
in a rigid, linear fashion but are fluid and not immutable. Despite the various cultures and
groups of people who are challenging our closely held preconceptions about sex, gender and
sexuality, we can see that gender is still very much central to our society. Norms of how a
man or woman should behave still very much affect how we attribute sex to individuals.
Rachel Ng Jie Ying
SC2220 Essay
Gender still seems to be an important institution in society and of organising social life.
Nevertheless, such transgressions of social norms still spell progress for a slow but sure
gender revolution, or even idealistically, a gender-neutral society. Gender non-conformists
are pushing the boundaries of gender and could even render them increasingly arbitrary, and
perhaps, eventually eradicate it.
Rachel Ng Jie Ying
SC2220 Essay
References
Butler, J. (2006). Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York and
London: Routledge.
Dozier, R. (2005). Beards, Breasts and Bodies: Doing Sex in a Gendered World. Gender and
Society, 19(3), 297-316.
Kessler, S. and McKenna, W. (1978). Gender: An Ethnomethodological Approach. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Lorber, J. and Farrell, S. (1991). The social construction of gender. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Rupp, L., Taylor, V. and Shapiro, E. (2010). Drag Queens and Drag Kings: The Difference
Gender Makes. Sexualities, 13(3), 275-294.
Schilt, K. and Westbrook, L. (2009). Doing Gender, Doing Heteronormativity: 'Gender
Normals,' Transgender People, and the Social Maintenance of Heterosexuality.
Gender and Society, 23(4), 440-464.
West, C. and Zimmerman, D. (1987). Doing Gender. Gender and Society, 1(2), 125-151.