It’s fascinating how expectations can be a significant aspect of human nature. We often seek attention and feel disappointed when it isn’t given. We long for love and wish that others would be genuinely interested in what we say; if they’re not, we feel hurt. We might even believe that we are alone in the universe or that the universe exists just for us. We expect not to be forgotten and assume that tragedies reported in the news won’t affect us personally.
Similarly, we have specific expectations about how people should behave based on their gender. For instance, we assume that someone identifying as male should act, dress, and speak in traditionally masculine ways. When someone challenges these norms by wearing makeup, a skirt, or otherwise deviating from expected gender performances, it can lead to discomfort or conflict.
The concept of gender is often seen through a binary lens, male or female. But what if we looked beyond this binary to see gender as a spectrum, a fluid and dynamic identity that evolves and performs based on social expectations? This perspective can challenge traditional views and reveal how deeply entrenched patriarchal structures still shape society.
The claim that says gender isn’t a fixed category but a spectrum that allows for a range of identities beyond just male and female, known as gender performativity1, suggests that gender is not something inherent but something performed. In other words, our gender identity is shaped by how we act, speak, and present ourselves, influenced by the norms and expectations around us.
This reaction often comes from a deeper fear of having our understanding of life and norms challenged. the idea that gender is not an inherent trait but something that is performed and shaped by societal expectations can be discomforting for some. It disrupts established views and can provoke anxiety about how we perceive ourselves and others.
I also recognise, like others2, How this claim overlooks the long-standing struggles of communities that have fought for decades if not centuries. Women’s movements battling against hostile patriarchal structures worldwide and transgender women confronting entrenched discrimination and institutionalized transphobia, even in Western democracies, are not to be dismissed.
Part of the ongoing struggle comes from the expectations tied to gender performance and the binary framework that benefits some while disadvantaging others. The idea that binary gender norms are beneficial for society is often held with strong conviction. However, still, imposing a non-binary concept, that still widly only in Western societies, onto societies that are deeply structured around binary gender lines can not be the solution. We learned this from other colonial events in the last century.
A question here could be, why is maintaining a binary system so important to social structures? It often boils down to the preservation of power dynamics, where the binary system enhances unequal rights and duties between genders. This system allows those benefiting from it to maintain their advantage.
In some communities, patriarchy isn’t just about men having power over women. Interestingly, historical instances show how even within marginalized groups, internal discrimination can occur. For example, feminine gay men have faced prejudice from other gay men who conform more closely to traditional masculine norms. Some women can be misogynistic or are benefiting in one way or another in patriarchal settings that is built upon discriminating against women. This doesn’t change the argument, but it is easily a separate conversation. Non-binary-ness is a remarkable concept because it directly challenges patriarchy without relying on its rules or tools. Unlike other approaches that try to work within the confines set by patriarchy, non-binary doesn’t play by those old rules at all. Instead, it offers a completely different perspective that goes beyond the traditional boundaries set by patriarchal systems.
Judith Butler first introduced the concept of gender performativity in her seminal work, Gender Trouble (1990).
For example, Nancy Fraser (1997) in Justice Interruptus and Sheila Jeffreys (2014) in Gender Hurts have published strong critiques of Butler’s ideas, with Jeffreys coming from a radical feminist perspective.
No comments:
Post a Comment