Identity & Gender Norms

In Bitches in Solitude: Identity politics and lesbian community, Chang Hall argues that our “identities never become final because new experiences continue to affect the way we see ourselves, and these new identifications in turn affect the kinds of experiences we can have and the kinds of communities we can create" (Chang Hall, 229). Even though the topic of “identity” in itself is an issue that I rarely like talking about, I’ve realized that it’s exactly for the reasons that Chang Hall describes. I find it hard to define myself in one way because of the fact that my identity and identifications are always developing and changing with my experiences. There are so many dynamics to my identity when one considers my race, culture, political beliefs etc and it’s a difficult process to convey that. However, I do think also that many perceive identity as a fixed thing, that we will always be x, y, z which is problematic in that fundamentally we remain the same, but our identities per se are constantly changing. With regards to transsexuals, identity is a major issue especially within feminist movements, because of the gap between how transsexuals identify and how they are perceived. It is once again problematic because when boundary lines are drawn, it excludes many. This process undermines the institution as a whole since there are strength in numbers, and through exclusion solidarity becomes impossible.

In some regards, I can understand why feminist movements would want to exclude male-to-female (MTF) transsexuals in that feminist movements challenge male privilege, and to have a MTF transsexual be a part of the feminist movement would seem almost contradictory. However, the greater issue is that of “male privilege”, a thing which a MTF would not have. As I see it, a MTF transsexual would not be considered part of what is prescribed as “gender norms” if their birth sex was revealed, which render that argument invalid-what privilege would they have? What makes more sense to me is the aim of preserving the hierarchy within feminist movements: it always seems as though it is about exclusion. In the earlier years, men were almost strictly prohibited from entering the sphere of women’s issues addressed by the feminist movement, and activists such as Bell Hooks, have contested that they should be allowed to show their solidarity with the movement.

Returning to the issue of gender presentation, Bornstein addresses how obsessed our society is with maintaining a dual gender system. We have always been taught right from the get go that there are only two genders: boy & girl, who grows into man/woman. There is never any room for contestation. These categories are so rigid that even children who seem to deviate from the “norm” are immediately reprimanded and considered to be acting “gay”, as "sissies" or "tomboys". That is, notions of appropriate gender is reiterated and enforced during childhood. For example, boys are taught to play with trucks and get involved with sports, while girls play with dolls and strive to be ballerinas; essentially, there is a great polarization and reinforcement of the “gender norm”.

One’s gender presentation is highly associated with one’s sexuality and this is entirely based on stereotypes…even pop culture has taken note of this. For example, the reality TV shows “Gay, Straight or Taken” and “Playing it Straight”. In both shows, a woman has to use her “gaydar” (gay radar) to essentially identify the straight man. It is worth noting that these decisions are based on the stereotypes of what is appropriate ways of dressing and acting for straight and gay men.

During our class discussion, the question of how much energy do we invest in gender was posed, and from Chang Hall’s, Bornstein’s and observations from the media, it is evident that a great deal of energy is invested into issues of gender, especially when it comes to maintaining gender “norms”.