Men, Women, & “Nature’s Mistakes”: Problems Facing Inter-sexed Individuals in Society Today

In the first two chapters of Anne Fausto- Sterling’s “Sexing the Body,” she discusses many important ideas and implications behind our society’s construction of sex and of gender. She points out that placing a label on an individual (such as “man” or “woman”) is a social decision, and it thus must not be confused with a scientific one. In fact, Fausto-Sterling states that the major conflict surrounding sex and gender is between scientific and social forces (i.e. the nature vs. nurture debate). Fausto-Sterling summarizes that “sex” differs from “gender” in that one’s sex can be viewed as one’s physical attributes, while one’s gender can be viewed as one’s conception of self in relation to social expectations. She also states that today, a continuum exists for sex since there are many possible combinations of physiological attributes and mental states for differing individuals.

One of the most interesting ideas that I have gleaned from these chapters is that while Western culture is deeply devoted to the two extremes of this continuum, biology often contradicts what we have come to accept as normal. Moreover, due to our inherent tolerance of only two sexes in today’s world, inter-sexed individuals are forced into silence through legal and social action. Fausto-Sterling also discusses the history of how inter-sexed individuals have been perceived in society throughout time. She states that today, we have come to an Age of Conversion in which any deviation from the sexual continuum is seen to be unnatural, and even “pathological.” Thus, in dealing with hermaphrodites we require physicians to “cure” this pathology through gendered surgeries in order to correct nature’s “mistakes.”

This mindset is extremely problematic when it comes to treating inter-sexed individuals as humans. For example, when a doctor chooses a sex for an inter-sexed child they are not only disregarding this child’s naturally born physique, but they are also violating this child’s future life choices. Thus, because of the existent sexual continuum, I believe that as a society we need to re-conceptualize our ideas of gendered norms and practices devoted to solely two sexes (i.e. begin to think about whether a mere two gendered labels is enough). We also need to attempt to stray from the Age of Conversion, so that we can reach a place where inter-sexed individuals do not need to choose one of our socially constructed genders, thus reaching full integration into society. Overall, only when we both recognize the many levels of sex that exist and accept them as normal can we move forward and grow as a society.

Moving forward

Notions of race, gender, and identity often intersect, overlap, and play a pivotal role in the fight against women's oppression, and these terms are frequently used in discourse regarding social reform. This weeks readings touch on several aspects of race, gender, and identity and recognizes the importance in embracing these differences that separate women, reconciling them as a source of empowerment. Audre Lorde goes into detail about these differences in female identity that are essential; "Difference must be not merely be tolerated, but seen as a necessary polarities between which our creativity can spark like a dialectic."

Difference as a source of empowerment and creativity, acknowledged and embraced, is no doubt necessary in order to dismantle social misconceptions about gender and race. However, Lorde's assertion that "The master's tools will never dismantle the master's house" is what I found most interesting. Implicit in this assertion is the suggestion of something more radical to enact social change; Does Lorde suggest that a complete and radical overhaul is necessary in order to enact social change and reform in a patriarchal society? If so, in what form should such radical change present itself, and if not, will acknowledging differences between women really be enough to accomplish these goals? Enacting cultural change is a slow, painful, and resilient process which requires patience, education, and continued awareness; Will this be feasible given the momentum of the current feminist movement and the increasing prevalence of enlightened sexism?

Leading Post: Race, Sex, and Oppression

The main theme of all three of these pieces is the refusal to separate race, gender, class, and other individual qualities, in fight against female oppression. Often, when it comes to feminist activity there is an absence of the voices of poor, black, Third World, and lesbian women. In response to this problem, Audre Lorde discusses the importance of viewing these differences as strengths. In fact, Lorde’s words stem from the fact that she was the only black feminist (and lesbian) asked to speak at the NYU Institute for Humanities Conference, in which American women’s issues are discussed.

Lorde brings up many important points regarding the need to unite all different types of women in order to rise above oppression. She also states that maternity is the only social power open to women, and thus, women are inherently dependent on each other. Thus, she advocates for more tolerance between all women as a tool for reforming society. Lorde’s argument can be summed up in her own words: “In our world, divide and conquer must become define and empower.”

In the Combahee River Collective’s speech, “A Black Feminist Statement,” there is also a stand against separating the politics surrounding race and gender when it comes to the feminist agenda. This group states that the only way that liberation will be possible is if all women, regardless of race, sexuality, or class, can bond over female oppression. This group also criticizes the racism that is present within the women’s movement. Moreover, they claim that the group that is the most worthy of liberation is that of black women, since they are the most oppressed people in society due to racism and sexism. Thus, once black women are free, everyone in society will be free.

Peggy McIntosh also discusses the fact that female differences must intertwine in order to obtain equality. She states that hierarchies (such as male and white privilege) are linked, and thus, oppressed groups within society must also be linked. She further states that many individuals view privilege as something that people a certain people at an advantage, as opposed to something that also places others at a disadvantage. Thus, privilege becomes an invisible object.

McIntosh states that as a society, we need to recognize the oppressive power of certain groups even if we have never viewed them in this way. She reinforces these points by creating a list of ways that she has privilege in society (which she had previously overlooked) because of the color of her skin. I think that this list illustrates the ignorance that many whites exude when it comes to racial issues. For example, I found number 46 on her list to be a very subtle example of an advantage I have over black women that I have taken for granted in that I do not have to worry that my skin color will not be matched at the make-up counter. In short, I think that whites often deny their dominance in today’s world as a mode of keeping power in their hands, thus remaining color-blind to many racial disadvantages.

I agree with McIntosh in that often, whiteness protects individuals from many kinds of social hostility, distress, and violence. Similarly, I think that masculinity protects men against oppression in society. Thus, we need to do more work in identifying how male dominance affects the daily lives of both women and men so that men can see the forms of oppression we face as women, allowing for change. Overall, the redesign of our society can only occur once these unseen dimensions of oppression come to light for both men and women.

Race, Gender, Class and Sex

The Combahee River Collective reading discusses black women fighting for their rights against a racist patriarchy and the oppression that they face. The black feminist statement "refuses to separate the politics of race and gender" (325). The women created at National Black Feminist Organization in 1973 to fight for antiracist and antisexist policies. They were sick of white women only fighting for white rights and the male black men only fighting for male rights. So they combined a group that is against both. They wanted to seriously end oppression all together. They talk about how difficult it is to "separate race from class oppression because in their lives they experience it simultaneously" (326). They use examples such as the labor force and speaking out in public. The one quote that I really liked was "If black women were free, it would mean that everyone else would have to be free since our freedom would necessitate the destruction of all the systems of oppression" (328). I completely agree with this statement because being a black women of this time means you are the lowest of all when it comes to rights and equality. I don't think it was right at all, and standing up was the right thing for these women to do.

Andre Lorde's incorporates lesbian in the mix with being black and a women. It further extends the oppression that these women receive. She talks about the gap that is between her and other women because of the lack of support, systems and mutuality. She brings in the reality of class into picture as well. "Poor women and women of color know there is difference between daily manifestations of marital slavery and prostitution because their daughters line 42nd Street" (2). In my social inequality class we talk about class, race, and gender and how women like this resort to prostitution because they need to make a living and they don't have the means to live a better life. They don't have the opportunity for education and they do what they can to stay out of debt. This is also brought up in Peggy MacIntosh's article about white privilege. She talks about how white people don't know the advantages that hey really have. Especially white males. They can see the disadvantages of other but they don't see themselves as being in the advantage, they see themselves as the norm. When reading the list that Peggy came up with, I realized that I did notice most of the things on this list as being an advantages but there were some that I never even thought about. Its easy to be oblivious and ignorant to these problems, but its harder to notice them and deal with them or help others deal with them.

Oppression and Socialization

Jonah Gokova writes that the "antisexist organization for men in Zimbabwe, encourages men to respond to gender equality in our society" (421). I think that this is a great idea and that we should encourage men in the US to do the same thing. When he talks about his daughter, they raised her to be able to see the equality in their relationship so he as the father figure does the dishes, diapers, making the beds and the cooking. She is starting to notice and ask important questions such as "why do you both wear pants but not dresses?" (422) I think this is important because you see that she sees no difference in the jobs they do so why wouldn't they dress the same as well? Another good point that Gokova makes is that men are not supposed to openly cry or admit weakness in the presence of a women. I find this interesting because this is what my father used to tell my brother and my mother would come back and tell him that it was okay to cry. Men take on the more typical role of being strong and dominate but they do have feelings like women, just they are taught not to express them. I think it might be easier to communicate with men if they did open up a little and share their feelings.

Johnson talks about patriarchy and why men always assume that means "dealing with men". Also about oppression and why men think or say the most sexist things that come to mind. The example Johnson uses is Ray Barone in Everyone Loves Raymond. He says stupid, sexist and immature things all the time but Debra puts up with him because she loves him. Why? We don't really know, but if the situation was reversed do you think that Ray would actually stick around? We are shaped by socialization and the path of resistance which to me means that because men being immature is the social norm all women accept it.

Fyre talks about oppression to women in different ways the Johnson. One good example she uses is the oppression of women who are or are not sexually active. If they are then they have to deal with the ridicule of names like whore or slut. If they aren't then they are harassed by people who ask why they are so uptight or man-hater or even bitch. Another example, would be the barrier for being married, single or raise children alone, together or no children period. The pressures that society puts us in make it hard to see the real decision that we want and makes it harder to deal with the situations. Oppressed can be in other ways like financially, discriminatory, racially or sexually. There are many ways one can be oppressed in society but it can be hard to see when your not looking for them.

Female Oppression as the “Safe Path”

In Allan Johnson’s “Patriarchy, the System: An It, Not a He, a Them, or an Us,” he describes that the root of many social problems (including female oppression) are reflected in individuals’ behavior. Thus, as a whole, our society is not a patriarchy in itself; instead, as members of this group we merely participate in the idea of patriarchy. Therefore, as we develop, we are provided with social cues that elicit certain behaviors within us, leading to the establishment of a male-dominated world. This thought connects to Douglas’s ideas regarding embedded feminism and enlightened sexism, since Johnson explains that our participation in patriarchy stems from the media’s demonstration of how the world works (and they do so in a highly male-domineering sense). Thus, from childhood and onward, we know nothing else but patriarchy, we then continuously fall into gender-assigned roles, and ultimately, oppression continues.

One interesting point that Johnson makes is that this quality of patriarchy unfairly blames the entire male race for female oppression. This point connects to that of Jonah Gokova in that he demonstrates that not all men strive to control society. In fact, many men try to surpass socially constructed gender roles, thus rejecting our current image of manhood. For example, even when bombarded with estrogen (from me, my mom, sister, and dog) my dad tries to take on many typical feminine roles in our house, such as washing the dishes, making dinner, and even sewing my ballet shoes for me.

Another important part of Johnson’s chapter is in his description of how men and women all try to take the path of least resistance when it comes to female oppression. This means that as separate sexes, in the face of female oppression we will often make decisions based on what is safest and most comfortable, instead of standing up for one another. This further relates to Marilyn Frye’s example of women being caught in a bind of sexuality. She explains that women who are highly sexually active are viewed and talked about with the negative connotation of “sluts”, while women who refrain from such activity are viewed and talked about with the negative connotation of “virgins.” I find this to be true throughout Colgate’s campus, even though we are considered to be an informed and elite institution. Both sexes use these terms, and it seems that this double standard will continue to remain a rule of society unless individuals stand up to it. Perhaps instead of maintaining the status quo in society, it is time to begin to jump off of the path of least resistance, thus allowing for social change and enlightenment as opposed to female entrapment.

Feminism, Film, and Television

Feminism has not lost its presence within the media; in fact, there are many feminist elements that frequently show up in contemporary film and television. However, public perception has shifted drastically with the ascension of “Enlightened Sexism”, relegating modern day feminism as trivial and unnecessary. The pervasive reach of embedded feminism in the media has provided “fantasies of power” for women to internalize: the illusion that women’s rights have been secured and gender equality has been accomplished. Thus, these fantasies of power suggest women should channel their desires for power through sexual display, rampant consumerism, and the approval of men.

Susan Douglass examines these fantasies women are subjected to in thorough detail, discerning the subtle ways which the media targets, informs, and constructs societal notions of gender performance and identity. I found her analysis of many television shows and films in the 90s extremely insightful, and grew curious as to how big of an effect the women depicted in these shows had on the mentalities and attitudes of their respective female viewers. More specifically, I began to wonder if the fantasies of power embedded in film and television had any substantive effect on the female viewer’s mentality toward how she views herself and the feminine identity. I unfortunately never watched Legally Blonde, Miss Congeniality, or Clueless, but I do admit watching Xena Warrior Princess when I was young. However, I was not cognizant of the feminist elements that Xena came to present until after reading Douglass, which I can now only appreciate through hindsight. But I did not formulate beliefs on gender performance and feminine identity through my experiences watching Xena on television or other representations of women through the media.  Thus, I feel that claims that the representations of women in film and television discourage women from pursuing professional success because of the emotional shortcomings of fictional characters should be met with a grain of salt.  Although I can only speak from a male perspective, I can assure you that my personal conception of gender, masculinity, and identity did not derive from television or media, but through personal experiences.