Diala Bazzi
Professor Abigail Heiniger
GSW 2500 001
4 November 2013
Project Three: Annotated Bibliography
Kaivola, Karen. "Revisiting Woolf's Representations of Androgyny: Gender, Race, Sexuality,
and Nation." Tulsa Studies in Women's Literature. Vol. 18, No. 2. Page 235-26. JSTOR.
University of Tulsa, Autumn 1999. Web. 04 Nov. 2013.
This scholarly source analyzes how Woolf’s ideology of androgyny reflects on Kari
Weil’s idea that androgyny should not only pertain to gender or the heterosexual couple, should
also include race, ethnicity and sexuality with no differences in between. First, the author, Karen
Kaivola, introduces Woolf’s theory and proposal of androgyny through her work, such as the
fictional character Orlando, who interchanges genders, yet remains the same internally. Kaivola
points out that Woolf is trying to imply that we much like Orlando. She connects this with A
Room of One’s Own, in which androgyny it is thought of a unity of difference. Kaivola explores
different forms of androgyny from the 1920s until today, such as gender, race, sexuality and
geographics. She connects these forms of androgyny that Weil and others claim, with Woolf’s
hermaphrodite ideas to successfully achieve her analysis. She comes to the conclusion that
inequality in society will always go against the socially equal ideal, and Woolf cannot ever
change that, although she tries through her androgynous mind. This source is useful to a limit, it
is informative, but not persuasive. By reading this, I have learned much more on Woolf’s
perspective of androgyny, however, it is clearly evident that Woolf’s theory would ever change
the mind of critics in society. Kaivola makes logical and understandable points in her last few
sentences regarding androgyny and society. Her claims are biased, however supports these
claims with reliable sources and a useful analysis.
Osofsky, Joy D., and Howard J. Osofsky. "Androgyny As A Lifestyle." The Family Coordinator,
Vol. 21, No. 4. Page 411-418. JSTOR. National Council on Family Relations, Oct.
1972. Web. 04 Nov. 2013.
In this scholarly source, Joy and Howard Osofsky discuss and investigate by using
reliable research, what it would be like if androgyny was a possible lifestyle in the future, or “a
society with no sex-role differentiation”. Their arguments are that society never remains the
same, it is constantly going through change, and androgyny is part of that change. It gives
examples such as in the family; it is not defined as a man works outside the home while the
women stay home caring for the children. Androgyny is continuously growing in society and for
society’s benefit, this essay endorses that these life styles must logically change, thought through
and gender roles must be redefined. This source is biased because the authors invoke their own
opinion that they believe androgyny is best for future society, when focusing on certain changes.
They provide much reliable information to make the reader understand that in order for society
to become better and have various options for the youth, male and female must have their own
socialization and education roles.
Woodhill, Brenda M., and Curtis A. Samuels. "Positive and Negative Androgyny and Their
Relationship with Psychological Health and Well-Being." Vol. 48 Springer Link. N.p., 01
June 2003. Web. 04 Nov. 2013.
This scholarly source claims that although many works of literature promote androgyny
for positive benefits, it is not always a good thing. Undesirable conflicts can come out of the act
of androgyny because the important gender stereotypes may be crucial to well-being. Androgyny
comes in different forms; there is the positively androgynous person and the negatively
androgynous person. This source argues that androgyny relates more to psychological traits
rather than physical. The goal of this source was to prove that positively androgynous people
were extremely psychologically healthier than negatively androgynous people. It succeeds in
doing so through an experiment tested on 196 women and men. Given the fact that this source
used experiments and recorded results makes it different from the other sources.
"Art Nouveau and the Erotic." Victoria and Albert Museum, Online Museum, Web Team,
Webmaster@vam.ac.uk. N.p., n.d. Web. 04 Nov. 2013.
<http://www.vam.ac.uk/content/articles/a/art-nouveau-and-the-erotic/>.
The purpose of this article is to discuss the different symbols of erotic nature in Art
Nouveau. Art Nouveau can contain sculptural or decorative arts that can be portrayed through
different pieces of art. These pieces of art were important in specifically the Victorian Era (18401901), some of them even a few years after, which showed descriptive erotic images that could
be displayed in households in that time. In this article, it specifically indicates that androgyny
was a very important illustration of homoeroticism. This source can be useful to readers who are
looking for visuals and descriptions of how erotic images were used and views as in the
Victorian Era. Unlike other sources in this bibliography, this article represents androgyny
through art. This source gives the reader an idea how different views of androgyny have evolved
since the Victorian times. The information being discussed in the article is reliable and objective
because it discusses and provides content, making it a credible source.
Wright, Elizabeth. "Re-evaluating Woolf’s Androgynous Mind." Durham University. University
of St. Andrews, n.d. Web. 06 Nov. 2013.
<http://www.dur.ac.uk/postgraduate.english/ElizabethWrightArticleIssue14.htm>.
The argument of this essay is to determine whether or not Virginia Woolf succeeds in
spreading her “theory of the androgynous mind” in the book A Room of One’s Own. This theory
was directed to give a chance for men and women to write completely oblivious to thought of
gender. The essay goes into huge detail exploring different views of androgyny from back in the
Victorian Era until modern day to find out if Woolf has achieved in providing her theory. It
explains points of views from supporters and neglectors of this theory. It is useful for those who
would like to get into Woolf’s perspective of androgyny and create their own view of androgyny.
This essay is reliable because it uses a numerical amount of credible sources from scholars and
specifically from Woolf herself. This source is both biased and objective because the author,
Elizabeth Wright, states both her opinion of Woolf’s theory and other opinions as well to achieve
her point of the essay.
Historical Overview
The annotated bibliography above and the following historical overview demonstrate the
progression in scholarship of views of androgyny from the 1920s until today. It is not clear when
the ideology of androgyny was first introduced, some say it has existed since the beginning of
time, while others believe it was first shown in literature about a century ago. In the 1920s,
Virginia Woolf gave the most influential idea of androgyny through her works of literature.
Since then, scholars have had their either critical or supportive views of androgyny and its effects
on society. Beginning in 1972, scholars began to realize that androgyny is not such a terrible idea
to be practiced throughout society as a lifestyle. By 1999, scholars state that the idea androgyny
is just a fantasy, and there is no way that it can be a complete change throughout society. From
2003 until today, scholars have said that although androgyny is trying to be endorsed in society,
it is not always a good thing, and will come with more disadvantages rather than benefits for
society. The idea of androgyny has been around for the last century, maybe even way before.
However, arguments by scholars on views on androgyny have come into play beginning the
1970s and still continue to do so today. Androgyny has become more and more socially
unacceptable in society and will continue to do so until it is completely unaccepted in society as
a whole due to social inequality.
In the early 1970s, through research, scholars have reached to a point where it was agreed
that androgyny will be a great benefit for society. With the right decisions and strategies, society
can achieve the androgynous life style that would come with many advantages. These advantages
include a much better development of talents of all people, regardless of sex, and more
appreciation for aspects of life (Osofsky 1972). The theory is that if society were to achieve the
androgynous lifestyle by teaching children from a young age, boys would no longer think of
school or house or child care is feminine, and girls would achieve great self-development
without dealing with resentment (Osofsky 1972). Scholars were trying to reach out to society to
make this idea reality in order for what they believe life to be beautiful and easy and bring
benefits to everyone. After that, it was up to society to go by these new ideas to eventually make
them norms.
It is clear that by 1999, this was not the case and these changes that were suggested did
not come into action. Researchers have studied the past of androgyny in literature and scholars
before, and come to the conclusion that due to social inequality, society will never reach a
complete change to androgyny as a socially acceptable lifestyle (Kaivola 1999). Male and female
gender roles will always remain those same gender roles. Scholars believe that the idealized and
tradition form of androgyny will always be and must be nothing but a fantasy (Kaivola 1999).
Some people do accept and go by the belief of androgyny, it was a stable belief that there will
never come a time in which androgyny will reach a high socially acceptable belief. Although
androgyny is not believed to be a bad thing by these scholars, it is just unrealistic and basically
too good to be true.
Finally, in 2003 and on, androgyny was finally seen as negativity in society. Just as
gender stereotypes include undesirable masculine and feminine traits, androgyny also includes
negative masculine and feminine traits. Although androgyny is trying to be promoted, and people
believe to see it as a good thing, it comes with disadvantages as well. The disadvantages that
come with androgyny outbalances the advantages that come with this lifestyle idea. For example,
a negative androgynous person will hold traits such as selfishness and aggressiveness, resulting
in acting in an undesirable feminine or undesirable masculine way in different situations
(Woodhill and Samuels 2003). Therefore, after this realization, the negative concepts of
androgyny began to be studied and researched. The desire and advancement for androgyny to
become a socially acceptable aspect had declined from then on. Yes, androgyny comes with
positive effects, but the negative aspects of androgyny will grow and there will eventually be
more negative androgynous gender roles than positive. Although the theory of androgyny as a
lifestyle is viewed as beneficial to society, endorsing it to become applied to society as a whole
will not greatly benefit it and is not necessary. Each gender has defined roles from the moment
they are born determined by their sex, and that is the way it should be and was desired to be
since the beginning of time for a male or female’s benefit. Changing society to be completely
androgynous will bring just as many problems as there are today in society, with the specific
gender role restrictions that are already applied. In the 1970s, androgyny started out to be a great
idea for society and would come with many benefits, a few decades later it was realized to be
just a “too good to be true” concept, from 2003 until today, androgyny has become less socially
acceptable and viewed as disadvantageous to society.