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.