A2 Irigaray Georgetown

TOC/NDCA PC
2AC
When the negative says that some people have peniss and others have vaginas
they erase all of the people who do not fit within those arbitrary categories they
have literally made invisible thousands of intersex people you should reject this
rhetorical framing as a unique act of violence and exclusion
uenther asst prof phil @ vandy 2!"! (Lisa Other Fecundities: Proust and Irigaray on Sexual Difference Differences: !
"ournal of fe#inst cultural studies $olu#e %&' (u#)er %*
Irigaray offers a trenchant criti+ue of the patriarchal #onoculture that fails to recogni,e sexual difference' and so
represses -o#en.s voices' )odies' and -ays of )eing/ 0ut her recent focus on the duality of the sexes' and her
apparent suspicion of #ultiplicity' lead to pro)le#s theori,ing other for#s of difference such as race'
culture' and sexuality' and it #ay pre#aturely dis+ualify possi)ilities for i#agining sexual
difference )eyond the #agical t-o/ 1ven !lison Stone.s recent revision of Irigaray' -hich atte#pts to reconcile her
account of sexual duality -ith )odily #ultiplicity as a -ay of addressing the exclusion of intersex )odies in her -or2' still #aintains
the pri#acy of duality and in #y vie- fails to address clai#s of #ultiplicity on its o-n ter#s/ In -hat follo-s' I test the li#its of
Irigaray.s approach to sexual difference through a reading of Proust.s novel Sodo# and 3o#orrah' in -hich I develop a #odel of
sexual difference )ased on an irreduci)le duality of sexual parts' )oth of -hich #ay )e found in the sa#e individual )ut that
nevertheless relate to one another and so )eco#e #eaningful only through the circulation of an incongruous third ele#ent or
li)idinal force that generates #ultiple for#s of pleasure and fecundity/ Proust.s novel opens -ith an extended co#parison of a
sexual encounter )et-een t-o #en to the fertili,ation of a rare orchid )y a )u#)le)ee4 the #en connect to the sexual difference in
the#selves and in the other through their #utual en"oy#ent of pleasure across a threshold of alterity that is as #o)ile and
contingent as it is irreduci)le to sa#eness/ In #y reading' this scene fro# Proust suggests a flexi)le -ay of accounting for practices
that co#plicate the sexual duality of #ale and fe#ale -ithout dissolving it' )ut also -ithout enshrining it in the figure of the
heterosexual couple/ !s such' it pro#ises to open ne- -ays of theori,ing sexual difference in contexts -here to )e t-o is si#ply
not enough/ Irigaray and the Li#its of Sexual Difference !lison Stone.s recent analysis of Irigaray.s later -or2 addresses precisely
the concerns I have raised here a)out the relation )et-een duality and #ultiplicity/ In Stone.s reading' Irigaray is a realist
essentialist' -hich #eans that she )elieves in a natural' irreduci)le' and really existing sexual
duality/5 6his duality has yet to find ade+uate cultural expression4 under patriarchy' and even under certain for#s of fe#inis#'
sexual difference is reduced to an explicitly neutral )ut i#plicitly #asculine #onoculture of hu#anity/ For Stone' Irigaray.s concept
of sexual difference is )est understood in ter#s of different rhyth#s or te#poralities such as expansion and contraction' -hich are
lin2ed in a process li2e )reathing -here each pole' alternately' inhales and exhales air' so that the one expands -hile the other
shrin2s (Luce 78*/ Fe#ale rhyth#s' li2e fe#ale sexual develop#ent' are depicted as irreversi)le and discontinuous4 they are
connected to cyclical processes in nature li2e the change of the seasons/ 9ale rhyth#s' on the other hand' are characteri,ed )y
ho#eostatic processes that hover around an ideal #ean' )uilding up tension and releasing it -hile #aintaining a steady e+uili)riu#/
Stone locates these processes not only in sexed organis#s )ut also in #ore diffuse natural processes li2e -eather or the gro-th of
plants4 ulti#ately' she dra-s on 3er#an :o#antic thought to fill in a #ore general account of #ale and fe#ale principles operating
in all of nature (Luce 7%;7<' &<=;><' &?>;@8' &7<;%&?*/ Stone fran2ly ac2no-ledges the li#its and potential pro)le#s of Irigaray.s
realist essentialis#/ It is si#ply not the case that every -o#an experiences her )ody in ter#s of
irreversi)le cyclical rhyth#s' and the reason for this is not #erely )ecause our culture fails to
give expression to innate fe#ale rhyth#s/ 1ven in a fe#inist utopia' it is not clear that each and
every -o#an -ould identify -ith Irigaray.s account of our real natures' nor is it clear that
everyone -ho identifies as a -o#an -ould count as such for Irigaray/ 6he conviction that there
are t-o and only t-o sexes #arginali,es an experience of )odily #ultiplicity that is "ust as
pheno#enologically real and co#pelling as the experience of sexual duality (Luce =?' &&%;&<*/
Irigaray.s repeated suggestion that the only genuine encounter -ith difference can happen
)et-een the t-o sexes enforces a heterosexual paradig# that #arginali,es sa#eAsex
relationships (Luce 5' >=' &=7;78' %%&;%%* and #a2es it i#possi)le for Irigaray to account for intersex
or transsexual )odies -ithout characteri,ing the# as a)errant or unnatural (Luce >7' &&<;%&*/
#"$
A2 Irigaray Georgetown
TOC/NDCA PC
2AC
%he refusal to recogni&e people in'between gender and sexuality is an act of
violence that reifies hierarchies reject their exclusive framing that marginali&es
those who do not fit in their strict binaristic definition of sex
(agoshi" phd student in social -or2 @ !SB and )r&u&y Chair and !ssociate Professor of Social Dor2 @ xavier 2!"!
(Eulie L' StephanFie 6ransgender 6heory: 1#)odying :esearch and Practice !ffilia: Eournal of Do#en and Social Dor2 %?(>*
><&A>><*
6he experiences of transgender individuals (hereafter GGtransgenders..*' those -ho do not confor# to traditional
gender identity )inaries' raise co#pelling +uestions a)out the nature of socially defined identities/ Does one.s identity in a
category' such as gender' re+uire that this identity )e fixed in a particular )odyH Dhat if one.s
central experience of oppression is )eing forced to confor# to a socially constructed identity
category that one does not actually identify -ithH Io- do social -or2ers e#po-er and colla)orate -ith
individuals -ho have fluid identitiesH 6ransgender theory is a ne-ly e#erging theoretical orientation that enco#passes the uni+ue
experiences of transgenders/ !lthough previous essentialist approaches vie-ed social identities as fixed -ithin the person' fe#inist
and +ueer theories locate social identities in the conflict )et-een socialA and selfAdeter#inants/ 6hese approaches are inco#plete for
social -or2 practice/ If so#eone.s social identity is understood as )eing fixed or essential -ithin the
person' it can validate and justify sex* racial* class* and other differences as being
++natural '.. -hich can ulti#ately reify the multiple systems of oppression / !t the sa#e
ti#e' +uestioning and desta)ili,ing all social identities disintegrates the individual.s sense of
core self -ithin a socially oppressed group' even though such an identity can )e the )asis for
personal e#po-er#ent and e#po-er#ent to oppose social oppression/ 6ransgender theory enco#passes
and transcends fe#inist and +ueer theory )y explicitly incorporating ideas of the fluidly e#)odied' socially constructed' and selfA
constructed aspects of social identity' along -ith the dyna#ic interaction and integration of these aspects of identity -ithin the
narratives of lived experiences/ Starting fro# fe#inist and +ueer theory approaches' this article discusses the
evolution of transgender theory as an i#portant next step to a #ore co#plete and inclusive
understanding of gender and sexual identity/ Suggestions are then provided for applying transgender theory to
specific issues of understanding' -or2ing -ith' and e#po-ering transgenders and )uilding coalitions )et-een transgender
co##unities and other socially oppressed groups/ 6ransgender and 6ranssexual 6ransgenderis# can )e defined as the )rea2ing of
gender roles and gender identity andFor going across the )oundaries of gender to another gender (3reen' %88>*/ 6ransgenders
typically express gender identities outside traditional heteronor#ative definitions' )ut #ay have little or no intention of having sexA
reassign#ent surgeries or hor#one treat#ents (0ornstein' &77>*/ 6ranssexual individuals can )e either
pretransitionFoperative' transitioningFin the process of hor#onal and surgical sexreassign#ent'
or posttransitionFoperative (Iird' %88%*/ 6ransgenders differ -idely in their degree of )elief in the fluidity of gender
identity/ So#e accept such fluidity only to the extent that one can s-itch )et-een t-o other-ise separate' essentialist' and pure
gender categories' -hereas others )elieve that an e#)odied gender identity is still highly #allea)le/ Lane (%887* noted the
concern that transsexual voices #ay )e silenced or ulti#ately erased under the u#)rella of transgender/ Concentrating on the
artificiality of gender can deAe#phasi,e the need for transsexuals to change their sexed )odies' -hich is central to a transsexual lived
experience' thus excluding transsexual narratives in +ueer and transgender theories/ 6ranssexualis# is defined as
innate and )iological' not chosen' therefore deserving of )oth social and legal recognitions/
Conversely' transgenderis# is thought of as learned' freely chosen' and socially deter#ined' therefore not deserving of legal
recognition (Dall)an2' %88>*/ 6he transgender experience thus challenges heteronor#ative assu#ptions of the nature of gender'
sexuality' and identity in -ays that cannot )e fully addressed )y fe#inist and +ueer theories/
#2$
A2 Irigaray Georgetown
TOC/NDCA PC
2AC
,ven if sexual difference exists* those biological differences have no inherent
meaning and cant be said to be the root of war
uenther asst prof phil @ vandy 2!"! (Lisa Other Fecundities: Proust and Irigaray on Sexual Difference Differences: !
"ournal of fe#inst cultural studies $olu#e %&' (u#)er %*
Dhile critical of Irigaray.s recent efforts to construct a foundational role for sexual duality' the alternative account I have developed
here nevertheless re#ains inspired )y Irigaray.s -or2 insofar as it affir#s sexual difference as irreduci)le to the one or the sa#e/ In
the Proustian #odel' #ale and fe#ale parts exist' )ut they have no inherent content ' pattern' or
tendency4 -hat #a2es the# #eaningful' and -hat produces the effect of sexed tendencies or
-orlds' are patterns of circulation and exchange' specific practices of sexuality' and local
histories of sexual encounters/ Dithout the search for -hatever rare and delicate pleasures -e
are capa)le of experiencing' the #aterial sites of sexual duality remain sterile and
meaningless / 6his is not to say that )iological sex does not exist or does not count as real'
)ut that it does not #ean anything -ithout the continuous )ut continually shifting patterns of
exchange )et-een )odies/ 6he #ultiplicity of )odily drives' and the encounters -ith alterity that
they engender' fertili,e the #eaning of sexual duality4 and li2e-ise' the duality of the sexes
orients and sta)ili,es' -ithout there)y restricting' the circulation of #ultiple drives/ For Proust'
there is nothing unnatural a)out a #an )eco#ing a -o#an to penetrate another #an -ho has
)eco#e a -o#an in a different )ut co#ple#entary -ay/ It.s as natural as the )irds and the )eesJ%< Far fro#
)etraying or disavo-ing sexual difference through their transfor#ations' Charlus and Eupien are follo-ing its higher la-: a la-
that see2s pleasure -ith others in difference and selfAdiffering' )ut for -ho# this difference need not appear in one particular shape
or another/ 6he local specificity of such encounters is as rich and varied as the #oral )otanist could hope for' and the possi)ilities for
their expression are li#ited only )y our patience to discover the#/
#-$
A2 Irigaray Georgetown
TOC/NDCA PC
2AC
they dont solve the . other forms of oppression are not lin/ed to sexual
difference racial oppression for example is lin/ed to percieved differences in
s/in colour their inability to account for this prevents coalition building with
other actors* means they dont solve the .
(agoshi" phd student in social -or2 @ !SB and )r&u&y Chair and !ssociate Professor of Social Dor2 @ xavier 2!"!
(Eulie L' StephanFie 6ransgender 6heory: 1#)odying :esearch and Practice !ffilia: Eournal of Do#en and Social Dor2 %?(>*
><&A>><*
!s IesseA0i)er' 3il#artin' and Lyden)erg (&777* discussed' the issue of -hether the gender )inary itself should )e desta)ili,ed
ulti#ately polari,ed fe#inist theory/ French fe#inists' such as Cixous (&7=@*' Irigaray (&77&*' and Kristeva (&7=@*'
see#ed to GGesta)lish the fe#ale )ody and #aternity as foundational and sy#)olic sources of
-o#en.s psychic and sexual difference.. (IesseA0i)er' 3il#artin' L Lyden)erg' &777' p/ >*' that is' that an essentialist
vie- of GGfe#aleness.. as )eing natural and different fro# GG#aleness.. -as necessary for understanding and e#po-ering -o#en/ In
contrast' poststructuralist critics' li2e 0utler (&77<*' argued that the #ateriality of the )ody -as GGalready gendered' already
constructed.. (p/ xi*' such that the supposed physical )asis of the gender )inary -as a socially derived construction of reality/ 6he
degree and #anner to -hich gender should )e deconstructed continues to )e )oth an issue a#ong fe#inist theorists and a source of
tension )et-een fe#inist and +ueer theorists (Eagose' %887*/ Scott (&7=@*' for exa#ple' applied the post#odern perspective of
individualis# to argue for the social construction of gender and' therefore' that essentialis# and the ta2en for granted role that GGthe
sexed )ody is given.. needs to )e +uestioned/ She stated that GGgender is a constitutive ele#ent of social
relationships )ased on perceived differences )et-een the sexes' and MthatN gender is a pri#ary
-ay of signifying relationships of po-er.. (p/ &8@5*/ !ccording to Shields (%88=*' one.s identity is not "ust
a)out his or her o-n selfAidentification )ut is also a)out the intersecting larger social structures
and the po-er differentials that are associated -ith )elonging to a certain group or groups/
Individuals #ay )elong to #ultiple socially oppressed groups' experiencing not only the sexis#
addressed )y fe#inis# )ut also the racis#' classis#' ho#opho)ia' and so forth/ 6hese
intersections generate )oth oppression and opportunity (Oinn L Dill' &77@* including opportunities
for coalition )uilding to oppose #ultiple oppressions/ !s :is#an (%88>' p/ >>%* noted' GGone #ust al-ays
ta2e into consideration #ultiple axes of oppression4 to do other-ise presu#es the -hiteness of
-o#en' the #aleness of people of color' and the heterosexuality of everyone/.. ! fe#inist theory
that adheres to an essentialist' fixed )inary conception of gender identity is inade+uate in
addressing intersectional issues and fails to account for ho- a supposedly autono#ous self in
such a syste# can )e e#po-ered to resist oppression (see also' criti+ue of li)eralAindividualist #odels of
Shot-ell and Sangrey' %887*/ 0ettcher (%8&8* noted that Iara-ay (&77&* +uestioned the universality of the experience of oppression
a#ong -o#en and !n,alduPa (&7=5* proposed that it is the consciousness of the plurality of selves' -hich are associated -ith
#ultiple social identities that allo-s for resistance to oppression/ For transgenders' at least t-o identities' those of gender and of
sexuality' are al-ays intersectional' although' as -e discuss later' fe#inist and +ueer theorists have at ti#es tried deli)erately to
2eep these identities separate/
#0$
A2 Irigaray Georgetown
TOC/NDCA PC
A2 1dentity is 2ixed
3ou can win that there is an essential difference between the sexes and we still win
the debate you can still approach sex and gender from a constructivist
perspective regardless of its truth value this approach is /ey to solve exclusion
caused by the alternative
(agoshi" phd student in social -or2 @ !SB and )r&u&y Chair and !ssociate Professor of Social Dor2 @ xavier 2!"!
(Eulie L' StephanFie 6ransgender 6heory: 1#)odying :esearch and Practice !ffilia: Eournal of Do#en and Social Dor2 %?(>*
><&A>><*
Social -or2ers need to understand that' -hile the roots of oppression #ay )e lin2ed to fixed identities' this
does not have to be the case for responses against that oppression4 one can still
empower oneself against oppression by starting from a fluid identity / 6ransgender
individuals can )e e#po-ered to create their o-n identities outside the socially constructed
)inary gender )oxes/ 0eyond e#po-er#ent' transgender theory provides an alternative to fe#inist and +ueer theories in
addressing the thorny issue of coalition )uilding for social activis# in an intersectional -orld/ Fe#inist theory.s pre#ise is centered
on the ongoing struggle for gender e+uality/ Several authors (e/g/' 0ettcher' %8&84 Ieyes' %88<*' ho-ever' have noted that #any
fe#inists have regarded transgenders as either gender )etrayers or pretenders' and 0ettcher (%8&8* presented a history of the
exclusion of transgenders fro# -o#en.s consciousness events/ 6ranssexuals -ho choose to transition fro# one
sex to another are seen as reiterating the sexist #odel )y see#ing to #ove GGeffortlessly.. to the
other )ox/ In this' F69s are considered traitors )ecause they have gained #ale po-er -ithout
earning it and have turned their )ac2s on -o#en.s oppression/ 96Fs are also traitors for trying
to call the#selves real -o#en -ith e#)odied experiences' although they have not experienced
oppression throughout their lives' as #any -o#en have/ Such exclusions are pro)le#atic for
)oth transgenders and -o#en -ho are -or2ing to challenge gender and other social identity
oppressions/ For transgenders' such exclusion ro)s the# of affiliations -ith nontransgender -o#en'
-ho -ould see# to )e natural allies in opposing the sexis# that is co##only experienced )y
)oth groups/ For nontransgender -o#en' transgenders provide a uni+ue perspective on the nature of gender oppression and
ho- to resist it/ 0y creating the o)stacle that 96Fs cannot )e a part of -o#en.s coalitions'
nontransgender -o#an are ulti#ately solidifying the gender binary that oppresses -o#en
in the context of po-er differentials -ith #en/ In addressing these issues' the transgender theory approach to
intersectional identities provides a general fra#e-or2 for coalition )uilding across #ultiple oppressed social identities/ Clearly'
)uilding coalitions )et-een transgenders and nontransgender fe#inist -o#en should )e seen as not only possi)le )ut highly
desira)le/ 6he fe#inist relational #odel of Shot-ell and Sangrey (%887* #a2es the point that any outside i#position of a social
identity on an individual is a for# of oppression' -hereas the selfAassertion of a social identity forces those outside that identity to
consider -hat it #eans to have or not have that identity/ 6hus' fe#inist nontransgender -o#en.s exclusion of
96Fs as not )eing GGreal.. -o#en and their vie- of F69s as GGtraitors.. is a for# of oppression'
-hereas the selfAassertion of a transgender identity forces those -ho are not transgenders to
have to understand the nature of this identity/ 6he i#plication of these ideas is that #e#)ership
in coalitions for resisting oppression should )e )ased on the experience of oppressionQho-
social forces coerce individuals into fitting into social identity )oxes -ith prescri)ed
expectations for social appearance and functioningQnot on the degree of selfAidentification that
an individual has -ith the oppressed group/ Such an approach recogni,es and dra-s strength
fro# the co##onalities of individuals -ith #ultiple' intersectional oppressed social identities/
#5$