Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Community
Ask the community for help and clear up your study doubts
Discover the best universities in your country according to Docsity users
Free resources
Download our free guides on studying techniques, anxiety management strategies, and thesis advice from Docsity tutors
The idea that gender is socially constructed has been accepted as common knowledge for a long time. This raises the question how does the construction of ...
Typology: Lecture notes
1 / 20
This page cannot be seen from the preview
Don't miss anything!
Introduction
Context
You could look at gender from different perspectives. Individuals have their own personal conviction of which gender (one, several, or neither) gender they identify with. It is not always possible to guess from an outsider’s perspective what someone’s gender identity is, because it is a personal identity experienced only by that individual. Moreover, how someone expresses themselves through their clothes or hairstyle may not match the way they feel internally, or match what society may expect of them, being a certain gender. Sports such as soccer and ballet and the colour pink are typically associated with a specific gender. These ideas on gender are not stable, they vary over cultures and throughout history. For example, in the United States soccer is considered a girls sport and in Europe it is typically for boys. It is described by many authors that there are differences between what is now commonly attributed to a specific gender, in comparison to what was common for that gender a few decades or a few hundred years ago. The colour pink is now seen as a girly colour, but this was not the case one hundred years ago. Hence, gender norms are changing. This raises the question: how they are formed and changed?
It has long been thought that gender is socially constructed and this has been described by several authors such as Millet (1971), Haslanger (1995), Kimmel (2000) and Mikkola (2017) to name only a few. In 1970 Stoller was the first to make a distinction between the terms sex and gender (Mikkola 2017, 1.2), this distinction became commonly accepted among feminists. Butler expressed the idea that sex could be socially constructed too. We might wonder how differences in gender are socially constructed. Judith Butler claims that gender is performative. She was inspired by Searle’s speech acts and by Austin’s description of the term performative. Derrida claimed that the iterability of the performative is where it’s power comes from, which inspired her even more (Kroløkke 2006, 38).
Research Question
To what extent does Judith Butler’s view that gender is performative, exclude a stable gender identity?
To answer this question we need to know how Butler views gender. Furthermore, we wonder what the definition is of performativity. Next we ask what does it mean if gender is performative. Given that gender is performative, we can ask what that implies about gender as a stable identity.
Method
This thesis focusses on Butler’s notion that gender is performative. Before we can discuss what this notion means and implies, we need to understand what is meant by the terms gender and performativity. In literature the word gender is used to refer to different concepts. Sometimes it
refers to acts done by individuals, while other times the word gender is used interchangeably with sex. I choose not to start with giving a commonly accepted definition of gender and the related concepts of sex and identity , neither do I use a definition of gender of my own. Both of these options are risky because those definitions may not match with Butler’s definition of gender and that could result in insensible comparisons and conclusions. I realize that there are ways to avoid this, but in this thesis I prefer to keep the focus on Butler and her ideas.
At the time Butler wrote Gender Trouble it was commonly thought that sex and gender are different. However, Butler argued that these concepts could be the same. This shows that she has a very different perspective on gender. Therefore in order to understand Butler’s view it is relevant to start this thesis with the difference between sex and gender. The next step is to give Butler’s critique on this distinction. Butler’s reasoning consist of the idea that sex is socially constructed, just as gender is socially constructed.
The next step is to explain the idea that gender is socially constructed. Wondering how that construction works, Butler claims that gender is performative. To understand the meaning of her claim, first the general concept of performativity needs to be explained. Then is discussed what ‘gender is performative’ means. If gender is performative it is continuously subject to small changes and keeps constituting itself. Gender and gender identity do not exist separately from each other. Gender being performative does not seem to leave room for gender as a stable identity. Since it is impossible to view gender performativity separate from gender as an identity, I choose not to gender identity in a separate chapter.
The conclusion that gender identity is not stable has provoked criticism. Transgender people claim that they experience a stable gender identity and they use the notion of a stable gender identity to explain to others that there is a mismatch between their body and their gender. Butler uses examples of transgender people and examples of drag culture to confirm her idea that gender is performative. Prosser and Namaste take issue with these examples because they are missing context and are misrepresentative. Butler is aware of and has responded to the criticism she received, therefore it is relevant to discuss this in the third part of this thesis. Moreover, it is relevant to discuss the critique in an attempt to find if it brought Butler to change her view. We find that the critique on her examples did not influence Butler to change her view that gender is performative and that gender is not a stable identity. However, the criticism on the idea that gender is unstable did influence Butler to give some more explanation. According to Butler we can’t conclude that all identity claims and all gender assignments are by definition opposed. This could mean that an identity claim of a stable gender is not excluded. Therefore to a small extent gender performativity could leave room for gender as a stable identity.
Outline
The first chapter addresses the relation between the concepts of sex and gender. Then the first section explains the difference between gender and sex as it is seen by several authors. The last section describes Butler’s critique on this distinction and suggests that sex and gender could be the same. This suggestion is based on the argument that sex is, just as gender socially constructed.
It is important to realise that Butler’s views in Gender Trouble have been misinterpreted by other authors. After Butler received criticism on Gender Trouble (1990), she responded to those critiques in the new preface of the 1999 edition of Gender Trouble. She also addressed criticism in her later works Bodies that Matter (1993)^1 and Undoing Gender (2004). In my view she did not agree with the criticism that she received. She never wrote that she was wrong before. On the one hand she defends her earlier work by indicating that some of the criticism is based on misconceptions, while on the other hand she mitigates critique by giving more elaborate explanations of her previous statements. She only fine-tunes the points that she made before, hence I don’t see a need to distinguish an early and a late Butler, I am presenting her view as one narrative including the additions she gave in her later work.
Before explaining Butler’s view that gender is performative, it is helpful to have some background knowledge of the customary ideas of feminists at the time that Butler wrote Gender Trouble (1990): the belief that gender and sex are different. This is relevant because Butler does not completely support this distinction. Her criticism is discussed in the last past of this chapter. Given this context the relation between gender and sex, the next chapter describes Butler’s view on gender being performative.
1.1 The Distinction Between Gender and Sex
We grow up with the idea that a person’s gender is determined by their sex^2. Moreover, in general people think that the sex of a person is something stable^3 and we develop the idea that sex and gender are binary^4. However, gender and sex are two different notions: Psychologist Robert Stoller was the first to distinguish between the terms gender and sex (Mikkola 2017, 1.2), according to Stoller the word gender describes how much feminine and masculine behaviour an individual displays and the word sex describes the biological characteristics of a person. Mikkola (2017, 1.1) gives a similar definition: Gender denotes men and women depending on social factors such as social roles, position, behaviour and identity and sex denotes the biological characteristics of someone’s body. Which characteristics do we refer to when we talk about sex? When we consider the sex of a person, we think about the biological features that we associate with male/female/intersex, such as the genitals, hormones, chromosomes or gonads. From realizing that e.g. people exist who have XY
(^1) “This text is offered, then, in part as a rethinking of some parts of Gender Trouble that have caused
confusion” (Butler 2011, x).
(^2) Even though transgender, non-binary and intersex people report that for them that is not the case.
(^3) My great-grandmother used to tell my mother when she was a child, “it will all be better before you become a
boy”. Which I took as a sign that my great-grandmother saw that as an impossibility.
(^4) This is disputed by the experience of intersex and non-binary, genderqueer people.
chromosomes and a vagina, or both XX and XY chromosomes or XX chromosomes but no womb^5 , we have to conclude “that sex is not a single, unitary, easily-determined feature.” (Bettcher 2014, 5.1), i.e. sex is an umbrella term.
The distinction between gender and sex as made by Stoller has been found useful by several feminists. It helped them explain how perceived differences between women and men are changeable because they were socially produced (Mikkola 2017, 1.2). The following section addresses some of the response Butler gave on this distinction between gender and sex.
1.2 Butler’s Critique of the Distinction Between Gender and Sex
The distinction between gender and sex is used to make a separation between the sexed body on one hand and the gendered behaviour of people on the other hand. Butler says that the distinction between sex and gender intended to show that biological sex does not determine gender. “If sex and gender are radically distinct, then it does not follow that to be a given sex is to become a given gender; in other words, ‘woman’ need not be the cultural construction of the female body, and ‘man’ need not interpret male bodies” (Butler 1999, 142). This distinction argues that gender is not as stable as sex and that gender is socially constructed (Butler 1999, 9). More on the notion that gender is socially constructed is discussed in section 2.1.
Moreover, Butler suggests that “sex is as culturally constructed as gender” and she concludes that if that is the case, then gender and sex are the same (Butler 1999, 10-11). She calls sex a cultural norm because sex is no longer treated as something that is determined by the body (Butler 2011, xii). In our culture at this point in time it is a cultural norm that everyone should either be of male or female sex, only these two sexes exist. That is why babies who are born with ambiguous genitalia are being operated on to normalize their genitalia, to make their bodies into male or female. Likewise there are transsexuals who themselves want to get operated on their genitals to make them the gender they know they are. Since the sex of people is being changed to fit the current norms, Butler sees sex as socially constructed.
I think that Butler is trying to deconstruct the concepts of gender and sex because in her view the norms of gender and sex are the norms of the ones who are in power. What they view as right, is seen as right by most people in society. Examples of these norms are: the idea that heterosexuality is normal and homosexuality is deviating from that norm, or the idea that there are only men and women. Ideas about which traits are associated with each gender are socially constructed, this is explained in the next chapter.
(^5) Many other biological variations exist.
Bettcher (2014, 5.2), Butler views the agent as performatively constituted by their gendered behaviour. The following section describes the definition of the term performative and explains what is means to say that gender is performative.
2.2 What it Means to be Performative
Butler was inspired by Austin’s description of performative and even more by Derrida’s criticism and claim that the power of the performative comes from their iterability (Kroløkke 2006, 38). “The Derridean notion of iterability, formulated in response to the theorization of speech acts by John Searle and J.L. Austin, also implies that every act is itself a recitation” (Butler 2011, 187). When something is performative, it produces a series of effects. For example when a person says “I promise you” they are uttering this sentence and at the same time making a promise and changing your expectations. An important aspect of performativity is the repetitiveness of the acts that are being done (Butler 2011, xii). Butler also compares it to “a ritualized production” (Butler 2011, 60). Imagine that specific acts are being done over and over again. If many young boys would start wearing dresses tomorrow and they would continue to do so for the years to come, then over time our view of what is normal for young boys to wear will change.
Butler states that gender is performative. Gender “is real only to the extent that it is performed” (Butler 1988, 527). In the new preface of Gender Trouble , she explains her reasoning^8 : The view that gender is performative gives an explanation of how gender identity is formed through a set of acts. What does it mean for gender to be performative? Butler says that it means that nobody is a gender prior to doing gendered acts. Butler (1999, 23) states that “ identity is assured through the stabilizing concepts of sex, gender, and sexuality”. Which we might interpret as a reference to gender performativity. Butler (1999, 33) writes that “gender proves to be performative— that is, constituting the identity it is purported to be. In this sense, gender is always a doing, though not a doing by a subject who might be said to preexist the deed”. That sentence sounds like an acknowledgement of gender as an identity, but with the important side note that there cannot be a gender identity before doing gendered acts. This is also reflected by Butler’s comment that there “is no gender identity behind the expressions of gender; that identity is performatively constituted by the very ‘expressions’ that are said to be its results” (Butler 1999, 33). That may give the impression that the gender identity becomes a shell, since it does not exist before, but only during gendered acts.
In Chapter 2 of Undoing Gender (2004), Butler mentions that there are various ways in which gender is regulated. She raises the question whether a gender could exist prior to regulation or if a gendered subject arises from regulation (Butler 2004, 40-41). “It seems fair to say that certain kinds of acts are usually interpreted as expressive of a gender core or identity, and that these acts either conform to an expected gender identity or contest that expectation in way” (Butler 1988, 527). Butler can imagine that certain acts of people are seen as an expression of a gender identity. In Gender Trouble, Butler wonders what is meant by identity. She states that it is assumed that the term women for
(^8) “The view that gender is performative sought to show that what we take to be an internal essence of gender
is manufactured through a sustained set of acts, posited through the gendered stylization of the body.” (Butler 1999, XV).
example, refers to a common identity, which she calls problematic. This is problematic because the group that consists of all women contains so many different people that it makes it impossible to find a common denominator. Butler (2011, 86) calls “'being a man’ and ‘being a woman’ internally unstable affairs”. She also writes that gender “ought not to be construed as a stable identity […] gender is an identity tenuously constituted in time, instituted in an exterior space through a stylized repetition of acts.” (Butler 1999, 179). Both of these sentences state clearly that to Butler gender identity is unstable. It is probably with that in mind that we should interpret Butler’s claim that it is impossible to be a sex or a gender (Butler 1999, 22-25), (Butler 2004, 42). Since gender is performative, it only exists while it is being performed. “If the inner truth of gender is a fabrication and if a true gender is a fantasy instituted and inscribed on the surface of bodies, then it seems that genders can be neither true nor false, but are only produced as the truth effects of a discourse of primary and stable identity.” (Butler 1999, 174).
Two possible misinterpretations of Butler’s view on gender are contemplated here. Butler’s view on gender should not be generalized to the claim that gender is equal to behaviour. In that case, when a person goes into a men’s bathroom that would make that person a man and when the same person is wearing a skirt at that moment that person would be a woman. This would make gender completely fluid, which is a claim she does not make. Butler suggests that such a person would treat gender as a choice and “fails to realize that its existence is already decided by gender.” (Butler 2011, ix). Butler is questioning if properties that precede gender exist, by doing that she is not suggesting that there is a loop between gender and gender identity. It is not the case that there are people of a certain gender, who behave in a certain way, which influences the norms of what is appropriate for that gender. Butler suggests that that people can’t be of a certain gender beforehand. “the I neither precedes nor follows the process of this gendering, but emerges only within and as the matrix of gender relations themselves.” (Butler 2011, xvi).
In conclusion, Butler says that gender identity does not precede gendered acts. It seems that gendered acts and gender identity exist at the same time. Gendered acts are continuously constituting gender as an identity. From Butler’s statements about gender identity it follows that gender identity is unstable. The next chapter discusses criticism based on Butler’s description of gender identity and on the way she uses examples of transgender, transsexuals and drag culture to confirm that gender is performative. Also Butler’s reaction to criticism is given. From her response we find that there could be a little room for gender as a stable identity.
queer theory is only “opposed to unwanted legislation of identity” and she explains that is cannot be concluded that queer theory would cast doubt on the gender assignment of for example intersex children, or that queer theory is opposed to all gender assignments. It might be possible that an identity claim of a stable gender identity is not excluded by Butler’s view that gender is performative. The following section discusses critique on Butler’s description of transgender, transsexual people and on drag culture.
3.2 Butler’s Example of Transgender People is Problematic
Prosser sees as an area for discussion “the (mis)representation of the transgender body within queer theory as a privileged example of gender performativity” (Halberstam, 2000, 313). I think this argument applies to Butler’s description of Venus who was assigned male at birth (Butler 2011, 91). Venus has expressed “her desire to become a whole woman, to find a man and have a house in the suburbs with a washing machine”. Butler describes Venus as an example that confirms the notion that gender is performative. She sees Venus as a person who is performing drag and denaturalizing^10 gender. This description raises the following question: does Butler view Venus as a person who is trying to change gender norms? Venus expressed the desire to live life as a woman, which could indicate that she is transgender and would be perfectly happy with fulfilling a traditional female gender role. Possibly Prosser thinks Venus is being used here to serve as an example, without considering her as a subject^11. Prosser feels strongly about “the importance of autobiography by transsexuals”^12 (Halberstam 2000, 313). To Butler this may not pose a problem. She wrote about transgender and transsexuals without identifying as one. Clearly Butler does not feel like she is forbidden to write about transsexuals without identifying as one.
Butler (1999, xxvi) responds to general cristism by saying in the new preface of Gender Trouble that if “I were to rewrite this book under present circumstances, I would include a discussion of transgender and intersexuality, the way that ideal gender dimorphism works in both sorts of discourses, the different relations to surgical intervention that these related concerns sustain”. This is a general response. Including a discussion on transgender does not reject or admit to criticism.
(^10) “We may well question whether the denaturalization of gender and sexuality that she performs, and
performs well, culminates in a reworking of the normative framework of heterosexuality. The painfulness of her death at the end of the film suggests as well that there are cruel and fatal social constraints on denaturalization” (Butler 2011, 91).
(^11) “Prosser finds that queer theory in particular has made use of the transsexual as figure without considering
the transsexual as subject” (Halberstam, 2000, 314).
(^12) Both Butler and Prosser have confided their personal experiences in the introduction of their books.
3.3 Butler’s Example of Drag is Problematic
Butler also received critique on her description of drag queens, because she describes drag as being submissive. “Butler missed to provide the context of the drag gay bars example to show that it is NOT an example of ‘gender liberation’” (Namaste 2000, 10). Butler suggests that “drag fully subverts the distinction between inner and outer psychic space and effectively mocks both the expressive model of gender and the notion of a true gender identity” (Butler 1999, 174). Here Butler uses drag as an example to suggest that a notion of a true gender identity does not exist. Prosser demonstrates an inconsistency, in Gender Trouble Butler uses “transgender figures of the drag queen” and butch lesbians as examples gender performativity, while in Bodies That Matter transsexuals represent a limit to performativity (Halberstam 2000, 314).
Concerning her description of drag, Butler (2010, 85) defends herself by explaining that she does not necessarily see drag as an example of subversion. According to her drag can be used to idealize current gender norms and drag can also be used to destabilize current gender norms.
Both gendered acts and gender identity exist at the same time because gender identity is constituted through the repetition of acts. However, if we look at the criticism on gender identity that Butler received and her response, then there could be some space for gender as a stable identity. Butler writes that queer theory is not opposed to all identity claims, and that it is not opposed to all gender assignments. It is possible that an identity claim of a stable gender might not be excluded. This leaves a possibility that to a small extent there is space for gender as a stable identity.
Implications in a Broader Context
What are some of the implications gender performativity? The view that gender is performative and that there is no stable gender identity raises a problem. People who are transgender use the term sex to refer to the body that they were born with, or the gender they were assigned at birth. They use the term gender or gender identity to refer their internal gender identity. This helps them to explain to others the mismatch between the way they are perceived by others / their sexed bodies and the way they feel internally.
Method
The method I chose for this thesis was to rely on the definitions as they are used by Butler herself. I did not choose to use a general definition of gender and compare how Butler relates to that definition. Even though that could have been a legitimate choice if I approached it with care. My choice was in part an attempt to avoid misinterpreting Butler’s ideas and in part to keep the focus of this thesis on Judith Butler’s notion. I tried to give as much body to her ideas as I could, but it is impossible to be sure that Butler’s view as presented here is completely accurate.
Another approach I contemplated is to respond to Butler’s definitions within each section by discussing critique of others and myself. However, in order to keep the focus on Butler’s notion of gender performativity, I chose to discuss critique in a later chapter to avoid distraction.
To confirm that gender is performative, Butler used examples of people who are trans and examples of drag to confirm that gender is performative. She received critique on those examples. Moreover, Butler received criticism on the idea that gender identity is unstable. Therefore it seemed relevant to discuss both the critique and Butler’s responses. Since the main question was already answered in chapter 2, this discussion may seem unnecessary. Investigating the critique and Butler’s response was an attempt to find out if it influenced Butler to nuance her view that gender is performative or to admit that gender identity is stable as Prosser argued. The critique on the examples of transsexuals and drag only convinced Butler that if she were to rewrite her work, she would use more words to explain why the examples of drag and transgender people are valid confirmations of her earlier work. However, from the extra explanation Butler provided after receiving critique that gender identity is unstable, we could conclude that an identity claim of a stable gender may not be excluded. This tells us that to some small extent gender performativity may not exclude gender as a stable identity.
Further Research
It would be interesting to investigate the relation between gender roles as they are seen by society, gender identity as a personal identity and gender expression as the conscious acts of people of certain genders. These three terms can be seen as completely separated from each other, however that is a very different approach to the way that Butler writes on gender.
Both in Butler’s books and in other literature, examples often contain women or the relation between male-female, which gives the impression that there are only two genders. There are several cultures that recognize three or even five different genders. Therefore another suggestion for further research is to focus on other genders than male and female.
Appendix 1 – Form Cognizance Plagiarism
