1

Rethinking Rigidity: Fluid Genders Liquid Identities

Not to transmit an experience is to betray it. -Elie Wiesel ! The topic of gender demands complexity and rigor of ongoing research as well

as a commitment to ethics. Much has been learned in the past century on how gender functions in societies, but limited constructions and norms continue to pervasively deter further scholarship and understanding of human gender identities. I am interested in exploring the uidity of these categories of male and female and how cultural assumptions shape these categories. In short, I believe easy boundaries and clear cut denitions do not exist, nor do we currently possess an expansive enough vocabulary to fully understand and discuss these ideas. ! Coming from the perspective that freedom of gender identity is a human right, the

purpose of this research is to investigate the uidity and structures of gender variances. The purpose desires to nd constructions that better t genders as they exist in humanity; we must consider carefully before we make essentialized judgements. Additionally, I will address why an advocation for multifarious genders is an ethical investment and how it can be an act of resistance to the hegemonic structures that oppress and divide all of us. ! This paper attempts to be mindful of its language for a variety of reasons; First, I

try to be as realistically accurate as possible, using the most up-to-date language in my diction while still making this paper as accessible to as many readers as possible. Second, I do not want my words to offend those identities which I am discussing. I

cannot speak for everyone (only my own experiences and research); indeed, there is no one who can speak for all. Occasionally, I will use third person plurals (they/them) even when referring to a singular subject in order to avoid binary pronouns such as he and she. Finally, I use language with the intent of providing an overtly ethical, feminist discussion that is mindful of intersectionality and the ultimate uidity of humanity. The Biology of Normal ! Biological sex depends on a variety of factors including the genetic conguration

of X and Y chromosomes, the sex hormones (estrogens, progesterone, and androgens), and anatomical characteristics of female and male genitalia. The difference between sex and gender is that mainly biological factors mainly construct the sex of an individual whereas culture constructs gender through gender roles (Crooks & Baur 112-116). Psychologist Carol Tavris notes, however, The similarities between the sexes in behavior and aptitude are far greater than the differences (qtd. in Crooks & Baur 120). As scientists and researchers conduct more studies on the subject, we continually reconsider how to dene sex more accurately. ! Though sex appears to have biological basis, humans do not begin innately

sexed. Hormonal sex differentiation does not begin until about eight weeks after conception (Crooks & Baur 116; Fausto-Sterling, Society Writes Biology 64)). FaustoSterling points out how each of us in the indifferent stage look very similar; it is only later that we develop into what is socially considered male and female. ! Sex does have biological basis rather than a strictly cultural one, but nature, too,

is complicated. The sex of an individual at birth is not always easily distinguishable as male or female. Rather there naturally exists atypical chromosomal and hormonal

patterns and/or atypical genital constructions; such individuals are considered intersexed. What makes an individual typical or atypical (although it does have to do with biological factors) functions largely through the culturally constructed distinctions of gender (Crooks & Baur). ! ! Intersexed: Also Normal Intersexuality is a complicated category lumping together all those with atypical

biological characteristics of sex into one category and does not refer to one specic syndrome. There are more than seventy different conditions that are considered intersex manifestations (Crooks & Baur 120; isna.org). The Intersex Society of North America estimates that approximately one in 1500 or one in 2000 births result in what could be classied as intersex. Some intersex people have different patterns of sex chromosomes, some exhibit biological traits of male and female, some contain a mixture of male and female genitalia, and some still are hard to classify. Although still a common practice, I avoid using the term ambiguous and prefer atypical to describe intersex individuals genitalia. Ambiguous infers a somewhat insulting fallacy: a persons genitals are not ambiguous to them, even if they are not quite the norm. Indeed, everybody varies greatly in their genital constructions. Furthermore, many intersex people do have typical female or male genitals externally; the differences are instead internal (isna.org). ! Most frequently in the past and still today, doctors recommend sex assignment

surgery rather than gender assignment, sometimes causing detrimental effects to the person in question. Gender assignment requires no surgery; rather infants are assigned a gender depending on which one they are more likely to identify with as they develop.

This assignment has a level of uidity and depending on what the child chooses, and can be changed at any time (isna.org). Sex assignment surgery, however, refers to choosing a sex/gender for the child in an effort to normalize them through surgical modication and often has detrimental physical, psychological, and social effects should an incorrect sex/gender have been chosen (Fausto-Sterling, The Five Sexes Revisited; Preves; Butler, Undoing Gender; isna.org). ! Since our society asserts that gender exists in the binary of female and male,

we have preconceived notions about gender which leads to further confusion in intersex situations. Laurence B. McCullough, the medical ethicist working for the Center for Medical Ethics and Health Policy at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, Texas echoes assertions that various forms of intersexuality should be dened as normal, intersexual conditions are not diseases (though certain disease sometimes accompany different forms), and surgical and irreversible sex assignment modications should be greatly minimized for people unable yet to consent (McCullough in Fasto-Sterling, The Five Sexes, Revisited 21). ! Furthermore, as intersexuality is a somewhat obscure subject for most folks,

information must be given in depth and not lost in the medical jargon. Most Americans do not realize that their sex at birth comes down to a measurement on a ruler based upon a culturally constructed value. As Preves writes, The range for medically acceptable clitoral size is between 0-0.9 centimeters, that is, three-eighths of an inch. Any phallus larger than 0.9 centimeters is considered too large and therefore unacceptable by Western clitoral standards. Thus, according to current medical standards,

the overbearing clitoris must be receded or trimmed back despite potential loss of sexual function or other possible iatrogenic consequences. Conversely, to be considered a penis within this model, an organ must be at least 1 inch long, that is at least 2.5 centimeters in length. (Preves 530) A doctor and a ruler, essentially, is what determines ones sex and consequently, ones gender. Infants whose developing clitoris/penis falls between the range of 0.9 centimeters and 2.5 centimeters are often trimmed or mutilated1 just because as infants, their body parts did not fall within the proper aesthetic range (Preves 530). ! Many intersexed people are assigned the female sex since it is medically easier

(as crudely and colloquially voiced) to, Dig a hole than build a pole (Holmes 169; Preves 531). While it is true that the medical establishment has had more success with constructing female parts, the practice has serious implications in feminist theory on an ethical level and ultimately reects sexist ideology. The idea that it is better for a child to be raised a female with partial or no ability to feel sexually stimulated with her genitals nor an ability to give birth (especially since motherhood is closely tied to womanhood) than a male to be raised with a fully functioning albeit, smaller micropenis, is deeply troubling. Micropenis is the medical term describing males whose penis falls below proper range (Preves 532). While the term insults, I use it because it illustrates the pervasiveness of cultural standards. They inform and interact with institutions, such as the medical and biology that are often credited with standing outside of those standards. The cultural problems of sexism, racism, classism, mental and physical ability, etcetera I may entertain the use of a charged word used to describe a similar practice in Africa often condemned by our society.
1Mutilated:

...if

still help advance those institutional constructs; the normal measurements most likely are based upon a Western, white standard that remains ignorant to multiplicities of all other ethnic populations whose measurements are different than this regulated norm. Additionally, these measurements taken at infancy are estimations which only can hypothesize growth over the following two decades of development. Often, these lengths are found unrelated (Lee). ! A ethical perspective asserts that such practices violate an innate human right

since such surgeries alter parts of peoples bodies without their explicit consent and because the effort is done to more aesthetically normalize them, often leaving them with little or no feeling for future sexual pleasure. No child should have tissue removed from their body unless the procedure is required for their overall physical health, such as a urinary drainage surgery. Destroying a persons agency in a matter so intimate in order to hold everyone to a particular, narrow beauty aesthetic while potentially destroying a persons ability to have sexual pleasure are not ethical ideals; many other feminists support this opinion (Preves; Butler, Undoing Gender; Fausto-Sterling, Society Writes Biology; isna.org). ! Even on a biological basis, not everyone ts into a clear-cut sex category.

Intersex politics question how society thinks about gender, especially since a signicant percentage of people are born chromosomal various. Namely doctors, who determine a persons sex/intersex at birth, make the decision for us. It is the doctors cry, Its a boy! or Its a girl! that calls us into a gendered being, the ultimate naming act for many. Cultural Identities:

As discussed, gender is not the same as sex, though they are often conated.

Gender most specically refers the range of characteristics that distinguish one as male or female in our society. It can reect ones biological sex, and it often does. The inuential psychologist John Money rst started using the term gender in 1955 to distinguish biological sex with a persons desired gender identity though its popularity didnt pick up until the 1970s when feminist began using gender to distinguish purely cultural constructs from biological sex. ! John Moneys work, however, generated controversy due to his involvement with

the non-consensual sex-reassignment case of David Reimer, who was biologically male (Fausto-Sterling, The Five Sexes, Revisited). Moneys theories of correcting intersexual deviance are still widely used (Preves). Reimer as an infant lost much of his penis in a horric malpractice circumcision, and Money suggested that he have a sex reassignment surgery. Money believed that gender identity was completely changeable up to eighteen months after birth and that cases should be decided based upon what constituted the most surgical sense. David (known in the case study as John/ Joan) underwent years of treatment as female under Money. Money used Reimers case as successful proof that sex and gender are malleable; his team removed the rest of Reimers penis and testes with his parents consent. Reimer was unhappy being raised as a girl. Allegations of abuse of Reimer and his twin brother by Money, ranged from showing the two pictures of heterosexual adults in sexual poses, to when they were six, insisting that the two disrobe and pretend to have sex while he watched in an attempt to get Joan to accept her female gender and agree to vaginal construction surgeries. These allegations have been disputed, but either way, Money overstepped

his boundaries when David showed little interest in being female. When Reimer learned of his assigned gender at fourteen, he began taking testosterone and had his estrogencreated breasts removed (Fausto-Sterling, The Five Sexes, Revisited ; Preves; Butler Undoing Gender; Diamond; Crooks & Baur). ! Though Reimer was not intersex, doctors treated his body similarly, expecting it

to present perfectly as one particular sex (the sex he biologically was not) after another professional had botched his genitals in a routine circumcision. His case brings up a lot of the issues surrounding the conation of sex and gender in our society. Gender is biologically constructed through sex as well as culturally constructed, but it is also individually constructed, based upon an individuals identication as female, male, or other possibilities that exist between and outside of the female/male binary. ! ! Cisgender and Transgender People whose biological sex and gender identity match are considered

cisgender. These individuals have the privilege of sex and gender categories that do not conict so cisgender people usually do not have to worry about passing as a particular gender. The opposite is transgender, which describes someone whose gender identity does not match their assigned sex. A transgender person can identify anywhere on the gender continuum of male and female, exist outside of it, or encompass both genders into their identity. Some transgender people prefer specic gender pronouns with which they identify (he/she/ze for example); others prefer the term transgender, and still others prefer more uid terms such as bi-gender, genderqueer or two-spirit, coming from Native American traditions which acknowledges uidity between male and female. Transgender refers to any cultural transgression of the gender binary whereas the term

transsexual, though considered a form of transgender, is specic in its desire to surgically alter the body to match the desired sex/gender. Medically, transsexual people are considered to be gender dysphoric which refers to an unhappiness and discontentment with ones biological sex and prescribed gender role (Hausman; Butler, Undoing Gender; Crooks & Baur). The term implies a pathology, but currently transgender people are required to be diagnosed with gender identity disorder if they wish to receive changes in legal statuses and sex reassignment surgeries. In her book, Undoing Gender, Judith Butler explains: To be diagnosed with gender identity disorder (GID) is to be found, in some way, to be ill, sick, wrong, out of order, abnormal, and to suffer a certain stigmatization as a consequence of the diagnosis being given at all. As a result, some activist psychiatrists and trans people have argued that the diagnosis should be eliminated altogether, that transsexuality is not a disorder, and ought not to be conceived of as one, and that trans people ought to be understood as engaged in a practice of selfdetermination, an exercise of autonomy. Thus, on the one hand, the diagnosis continues to be valued because it facilitates an economically feasible way of transitioning. (76) If sex and gender identities are to be considered human rights, the choice to change ones own gender, without institutionalized pathology and cultural stigma, must be a feminist ideal. Agency to decide ones sex and gender identication ultimately must be granted in a ethical utopia if we seek to subvert oppressive normative structures of power.

10

Feminine and Masculine Performativity: ! Ive been discussing gender as an identity at length, but how exactly is gender an

identity? According to Judith Butlers work, gender is a performance. She writes in her book Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity that this performance is not a single act but a lifetime of culturally constituted behaviors. She writes, Performativity is not a singular act, but a repetition and ritual, which achieves its effects through its naturalization in the context of a body, understood, in part, as a culturally sustained temporal duration (xv). Indeed, by putting on clothes, reacting to specic situations, and interacting with others, we constantly perform and relate through our gender. Our performance thus becomes part of our identity. Like Butler, I assert that gender is constantly being performed in our society without anyone being particularly conscious at any given time of its performance. Bernice Hausman agrees that gender is perpetually in the process of production and adds, Gender, then is an emphatically social category, similar to race and class in its dependence on ideological regulation and equivalent to them insofar as each contributes to the construction of subjectivity (273). ! From childhood to late age, everyone goes through periods, shifting of how they

present their gender. Though many people may never change their gender in their lifetime, their presentation and identity of their gender does change with age and social setting. Consider how little girls perform their femininity depending on their environment and how that changes when they grow older. Consider the performance of young males around each other and how that changes when they are alone with their romantic interest. Consider also, how gender identity changes when one launches a career or

11

becomes a parent. All of these instances are both culturally and individually constructed. Each person performs their gender in a specic and coded way according to the appropriateness of the particular situation in which they nds themselves. Butler elaborates further: If gender is a kind of doing, an incessant activity performed, in part, without ones knowing and without ones willing, it is not for that reason automatic or mechanical. On the contrary, it is a practice of improvisation within a scene of constraint. Moreover, one does not do ones gender alone. One is always doing with or for another, even if the other is only imaginary. (1) Gender performs and thus, the reality of gender is itself a product of performance, enforced by coded norms of how each gender should behave. This unnatural, humancreated process is especially exposed when one embodies an identity that dees normative expectations such as drag performers or some transgender people. Other Genders, Other Cultures ! In American mainstream, female and male are only genders recognized. Yet,

as explored earlier transgender and intersex people exist in the United States and seek to challenge the gender binary essentialism (Wallace; Winter; Bakshi). However, many of the original people of America had more distinctions than male and female. Most Native American Indian cultures have distinct gender queer categories, lumped together under the title, two-spirit. Likewise, many cultures around the world exist with more than the normative binary of male and female. Though other genders describe gender as distinctly different from male or female, it would be a mistake to not describes some of

12

the ux between other intersectionalities that make a particular gender distinctly cultural. Gender has invested in particular relationships with sexuality and culture, and simply dividing gender as a distinct category for theoretical purposes attens conceptions and makes assumptions less likely to be present in real life experiences (Wilson 303). ! ! Two-Spirit Native Americans were the original people in the United States and, thus, their

gender identities must be recognized as distinctly American. However, after centuries of imperialistic, racist, brutal treatment of original peoples, their identities including the recognition of two-spirited individuals remains marginalized, Othered, and not considered part of American mainstream culture (Mayer; Walters et al.). ! Two-spirit people typically exist somehow outside the normative systems of the

gender binary, heteronormativity, and Western ideals. In My Spirit in My Heart: Identity Experiences and Challenges Among American Indian Two-Spirit Women, Karina L. Walters and her colleagues note, Individuals embracing these genders may have dressed; assumed social, spiritual and cultural roles, or engaged in sexual and other behaviors not typically associated with members of their biological sex (126). Wilson, too, notes that two-spirit people are thought to be in balance with their masculine and feminine qualities. The identity often incorporates both a female and male spirit inside the person and as Wilson notes, They are often seen as bridge makers between male and female, the spiritual and the material, between Indigenous American and non-Indigenous American (305). Walters and her colleagues note also that for many two-spirit women today, these roles have expanded, to included political organizing and engaging in legal battle for indigenous sovereignty (130).

13

However, it is important to not try to generalize what two-spirit identities are in

these descriptions. Wilson says that the term two-spirit, proclaims a sexuality deeply rooted in our own cultures. Two-spirit identity afrms the interrelatedness of all aspects of identity, including sexuality, gender, culture, community, and spirituality (303). Twospirit identities include many individual interpretations on gender, sexuality, and culture. Nor would it be accurate to describe two-spirit people as special people in Native societies. Although two-spirit individuals have had and still have specic spiritual roles and responsibilities within their communit[ies], most Native American cultures do not dene them as special, seeing them merely as a part of their multifarious communities. Indeed, there are over ve hundred distinct Native American tribes in the United States and Canada, which creates quite a diversity of cultures and lived experiences. ! Though most Native American cultures are matriarchal and inclusive, they

nonetheless exist within the contexts of European American patriarchal imperialism whose racism, sexism, and homophobic culture co-exists within these communities to some degree (Wilson 308). Not only can the term two-spirit be attened by one manifestation of identity, but also those identities are often dened on the cross-roads between indigenous and white, imperialist cultures (Walters et al. 134). Walters and her colleagues write, Indigenous worldviews tend to embrace ambiguity, complexity, and nonlinearity-processes that run counter to group mobilization for a singular unifying construct. Perhaps, then, this is why some of the two-spirit women noted the ambiguity in the construct of two-spirit. (134-135)

14

Thus, the term two-spirit by organizing under a unifying term, it may simultaneously privilege a single identity experience. However, it also works similarly to the term queer in the sense that it seeks inclusion of multiple marginalized gender and sexuality identities in an effort to politically mobilize their needs and desires. Ethical Conclusions ! As discussed at length in this paper, sex/gender cannot be dened as xed

constructions. On a biological level, people are not always born male or female; indeed intersex people are natural, too. Medically, decisions are made in order to normalize babies in a variety of ways in order to make a population t normative gender/ sexuality constructions. Even then, however, transgender politics question the rigidity of the two categories. Some transgender people seek to exist as genderqueer or genderless with various degrees of aesthetic, medical, and sexual success. And yet these physical, concrete ways of dening gender do not create the entire construction. Consequently, many individuals identity continues to shift and adapt throughout the course of their lives. ! Gender is created mostly through its performance of masculinity and femininity,

though the performance normatively desired matches an individuals sexed body. When gendered as female or male, society has particular expectations for our behaviors, interests, and identities that do not always sync with our inner needs and desires nor are they always appropriate for our well-being in real-life contexts. Ultimately, people exist and have existed for thousands of years without the gender constructions conceived in contemporary American society as normal.

15

In an attempt to provide more accurate information about human uidity, describe

what is occurring in multiple real-life contexts, and provide new insights to gender that are not based off of old hegemonic models, we must understand that these experiences of gender identity that defy the binary are multifarious manifestations of humanity that are deserving of our recognition and acceptance. My interests in this ethical endeavor are motivated by political as well as personal ethics. Politically, I want to increase awareness on an issue that does not receive enough public understanding and compassion. Personally, I am invested in this topic since I see others struggling with gender identity oppression and want to help. As a cisgender female whose outward appearance ts mostly into normative constructs of appearance but whose interests and interior gender identity might best be described as androgynous, I can relate to those struggling. Gender is not only experienced through essentialized, rigid constructions of male and female. No matter how we visibly present ourselves, however, we are all equal and deserve to identify personally however we choose.

16

Works Cited:

Bakshi, Sandeep. A Comparative Analysis of Hijras and Drag Queens: The Subversive Possibilities and Limits of Parading Effeminacy and Negotiating Masculinity. Journal of Homosexuality. 46.3/4. (2004): 211-223. Print. Blackwood, E. Sexuality and Gender in Certain Native American Tribes: The Case of Cross-Gender Females. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society. 10. (1984): 27-42. Print. Butler, Judith. Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York: Routledge, 1999. Print. Butler, Judith. Undoing Gender. New York: Routledge, 2004. Print. Crooks, Robert and Karla Baur, eds. Our Sexuality. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning, 2011. Print. Diamond, Lisa M. Sexual Fluidity: Understanding Womens Love and Desire. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2008. Print. Fausto-Sterling, Anne. The Five Sexes, Revisited. Sciences. 40.4 (2000): 18-23. Web. 1 Oct. 2011. Print. Fausto-Sterling, Anne. Society Writes Biology/Biology Constructs Gender. Daedalus. 116.4 (1987): 61-76. Web. 11 Oct. 2011. Print. Hausman, Bernice L. Demanding Subjectivity: Transsexualism, Medicine, and the Technologies of Gender. Journal of the History of Sexuality. 3.2 (1992): 270-302. Web. 13 Oct. 2011. Print.

17

Holmes, Morgan. Rethinking the Meaning and Management of Intersexuality. Sexualities 5.2. (2002): 159-180. Web. 10 Nov. 2011. Print. ISNA: Intersex Society of North America. Frequently Asked Questions. http:// www.isna.org/faq/what_is_intersex Oct. 1 2011. Online. Jacobs, Sue-Ellen and J. Cromwell. Visions and Revisions of Reality: Reections on Sex, Sexuality, Gender, and Gender Variance. Journal of Homosexuality. 23. (1992): 43-69. Print. de Lauretis, Teresa. Technologies of Gender: Essays on Theory, Film, and Fiction. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. 1987. Print. Preves, Sharon E. Sexing the Intersexed: An Analysis of Sociocultural Responses to Intersexuality. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society. 27.2 (2001): 523-556. Web. Oct 1. 2011. Print. Raymond, Janice. The Transsexual Empire: The Making of the She-Male. Boston, MA: Teachers College Press. 1979. Print. Wallace, Lee. Faafane: Queens of Samoa and the Elision of Homosexuality. GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies. 5.1. (1999): 25-39. Web. 2 Nov. 2011. Print. Walters, Karina L. et. all. My Spirit in My Heart: Identity Experiences and Challenges Among Americna Indian Two-Spirit Women. Journal of Lesbian Studies. 10.1/2. (2006): 125-149. Print. Weston, K. Lesbian/Gay Studies in the House of Anthropology. Annual Review of Anthropology. 22. (1993): 339-367. Print. Wilson, Alex. How We Find Ourselves: Identity Development and Two-Spirit People. Harvard Education Review. 66.2. (1996): 303-317. Web. 2 Nov. 2011. Print.

18

Winter, Sam. Thai Transgenders in Focus: Demographics, Transitions and Identities. International Journal of Transgenderism. 9.1. (2006): 15-27. Web 28 Oct. 2011. Print.