H01
Judith
Butler is an American philosopher who studies gender norms. Her studies have
been influential in political philosophy and the feminist debate, among other
topics. She questions the origin of gender and sex as well as the effects
society has on these matters. Her most popular book, “Gender Trouble,”
addresses these questions in detail, and provides new insights into what it
means to be male and female. Judith Butler has some interesting theories on
gender, and many of these theories are becoming increasingly prevalent in
today’s society.
Butler
was born in 1956, and spent her adolescent years in Cleveland, Ohio. Her father
was a dentist and mother’s family owned movie theaters. She developed an
interest in philosophy at a young age. When asked what she wanted to be when
she grew up, she claimed that she either wanted to be a philosopher or a clown.
She started school at Bennington College, but transferred to Yale for their
philosophy program. Being gay herself, she was interested in the study of
gender. Her original aim was to uncategorized herself in the eyes of society,
and fight for the rights of marginalized groups.
Much
of Butler’s work focuses on the question of whether or not gender behaviors are
natural or learned. Are humans born with an idea of what it means to be a man
and what it means to be a woman? Butler doesn’t think so. How much of what we
perceive as feminine and masculine has to do society? Butler would say that it
all has to do with the social constructs surrounding gender. Gender, according
to Butler, is only real to the extent that it is performed. Her famous
performative theory of gender attempts to connect identity, gender, and the
social constructs of sex. It has nothing to do with anatomy and everything to
do with society. It is not a fixed attribute, but rather something that is
learned throughout our lifetimes. In Gender
Troubles, Butler quotes Frederick Nietzsche, saying “the ‘doer’ is merely a
fiction added to the deed,” meaning identity lies in our actions. It helps
prove her theory that identity is not pre-determined, and is rather always evolving
and developing. In her book Bodies that
Matter, she writes, “…if gender is constructed, it is not necessarily
constructed by an “I” or a “we” who stands before that construction in a spatial
or temporal sense of ‘before.’ Indeed, it is unclear that there can be an ‘I’
or a ‘we’ who had not been submitted, subjected to gender, where gendering is,
among other things, the differentiating relations by which speaking subjects
come into being…the ‘I’ neither precedes nor follows the process of this
gendering, but emerges only within the matric of gender relations themselves.”
We
live in a society that continuously reinforces a binary view of gender. You are
either male or female. If you are boy, you like the color blue, cars, super
heroes, sports, etc. If you are girl, you like the color pink, dolls, dance,
hair, etc. Girls wear dresses, boys don’t. Guys wear suits and ties, girls
don’t. You get the point. Everything we are exposed to, from the youngest age,
has strengthened the fine lines separating males and females. Butler dates this
idea back to pre-patriarchal times. Somewhere in history, a definition of
gender was created and never questioned. Unfortunately, this idea of gender is
exclusive to (what we have defined as) heterosexuals, and neglects to recognize
those who do not identify as strictly male or female. Gender, according to
Butler, should be seen as fluid and changeable depending on the context and
situation. In her eyes, we have created a culture that praises men and women
who match up with societal definitions of gender, and shames those who do not.
Men who possess feminine qualities are seen as weak and unmanly. Women who
possess more masculine qualities are seen as tom-boyish and unwomanly. The
words to describe those who do not match up with common standards (gay, queer,
butch, dyke, fag, etc.) have negative connotations, and reinforce the idea that
any person who strays from the norm is inherently bad and un-normal.
Butler
doesn’t stop at the theory that gender is a social construct, she also claims
that biological sex is a social construct, and it is subsumed by gender. We
give meaning to biological sex. Without the man-made ideas that surround
gender, sex is merely an anatomical difference. Women identify as women and men
identify as men because it is culturally enforced and expected, not because
there truly are huge inherently different qualities between the two. Butler theorizes
that the differences we see in men and women are direct results of the ideas we
have enforced, and not biological sex. Butler writes, “If gender consists of the
social meanings that sex assumes, then sex does not accrue social meanings as
additive properties, but rather is replaced by the social meanings it takes on;
sex is relinquished in the course of that assumption, and gender emerges, not
as a term in a continued relationship of opposition to sex, but as the term
which absorbs and displaces ‘sex.’”
Surprisingly,
Butler argues against the mainstream idea of feminism. Feminism, in her
opinion, leaves little room for interpretation of what it means to be a woman.
In other words, mainstream feminism only makes room for the societal vision of
women. By being an exclusively female category, it legitimizes the discrepancies
between men and women (even though it’s aim is to convince others that women
can do anything men can do). In Butler’s words, “the spectators of
discontinuity and incoherence, themselves thinkable only in relation to
existing norms of continuity and coherence, are constantly prohibited and
produced by the very laws that seek to establish causal or or expressive lines
of connection among biological sex, culturally constituted genders, and the ‘expression’
or ‘effort’ of both in the manifestation of sexual desire through sexual
practice” (Gender Troubles). It undermines its own mission.
In
my lifetime, I have seen a growing acceptance of the LGBT community, as well as
a general awareness of those who do not match up with the social gender norms. There
are many people in today’s society that seem to agree with a lot of what Butler
proposed. Take Jaden Smith, for example. He was recently a model for a Louis
Vuitton womenswear campaign, sporting a fringed top and black skirt. He also
wore a dress when he took Amandla Stenberg to prom. He seems to ignore all
gender norms and dress and act as he feels. Caitlyn Jenner is another obvious
example of someone who does not see gender is boxes. Although, one might argue
that she does relate gender to biological sex, seeing as she is transgender. As
a whole, today’s society (the youth especially) is very accepting of gender fluidity.
In 2015, Facebook got rid of its two gender preset options, and now allows
users to enter their own terms. Target has made certain sections of their store
gender neutral so as to remain inclusive and abolish the idea of
gender-specific toys, household items, etc. You see countless adds showcasing
gay couples now from stores like Target, Gap, and J.C. Penny (to name a few).
It seems as though much of Butler’s beliefs are being practiced today (or are
at least beginning to be practiced). I’m not sure that humans will ever be able
to step completely away from the social constructs surrounding gender, but I do
think that we are on a positive path of acceptance and knowledge.
Websites Used:
"As a whole, today’s society (the youth especially) is very accepting of gender fluidity" - indeed, and it's important to remember how very recently that was not the case. Social progress seems slow to come, until it does, and then it can happen like lightning. The recent election notwithstanding, I have to agree that we're on a path to more universal acceptance. The haters are going to run out of a place to stand eventually, don't doubt it.
ReplyDeleteIt is also interesting to note that if you go back in time, there is plenty of evidence of gender lines being blurred as well. There is a famous picture of president Theodore Roosevelt dressed in girls clothes. And many times children played with the same gender neutral toys. It wasn't until the invention of the TV that gender marketing, and targeted advertising aimed to separate the genders even more. Having toys, clothes, brands, etc. gender specific brings in more profit as a whole.
ReplyDelete