Compulsory Able-Bodiedness Analysis

…offers up particular notions of agency in which white working class and middle class men are allowed to see themselves as oppressed and lacking because their masculinity has been compromised by and subordinated to those social and economic spheres and needs that constitute the realm of the feminine.

Heterosexism, according to Warren J. Blumenfeld, is the system of advantages given to heterosexuals based on the social construct of gender roles and heterosexual norms, while marginalizing and oppressing homosexuals and others who do not fit into the heterosexual culture (373). The enforcement of this system is known as heteronormality. This is seen in the binary system, which is a social construct that divides people into different strictly bordered categories organized by “social roles, values, stereotypes, and behavioral and attitudinal imperatives, expressions, and expectations” (Blumenfeld 373). Those who stick to the binary system, maintain power and privilege. People who may live in the binary system, but also intentionally

A peculiarity he mentions after explaining the search for a specific gender partner is how, in the South where he is, gay men tend to seek “masculine” partners, which defeats the idea of gender roles in same-sex relationships. The concept of gender is defined as “the identity and roles associated with, and/or appropriated by specific persons, regardless of their biological sex,” (Rich, 2016). While the concept is different across cultures and time, a constant happens to be the grouping and automatic attribution of roles based on a person’s biological sex. The author challenges the idea of gender roles associated with biological sex, however, saying that these men in the South tend to seek boyfriends who are sporty and have other classic masculine characteristics. Mays comments that there are few actions or characteristics that can be classified as gender neutral as these can be in present-day society. Thus, in their case, if both partners will exhibit these masculine qualities, they will both, in turn, be forced to take up women’s roles to live normal lives, for example cooking and cleaning, which would lead to the canceling out of masculine or feminine qualities.

Firstly, Frye discusses the etymology of the word ‘oppression’ stating that it has its elements from the word “press”, 1983, p: 2. She then gives imagery in order to demonstrate that the word is very restrictive in nature as if something were; “caught between or among forces and barriers which are so related to each other that jointly they restrain, restrict or prevent the thing’s motion or mobility”, (Frye, 1983, p:2). Frye makes the point that he first criterion in defining oppression is that the oppressed is restricted or limited in some manner, giving the sense that they have been moulded, immobilised or reduced. She exemplifies this notion with the following comparison using her theory of the “double-bind” theory. According to Frye, in the United States, young women, are locked in a bind where if they exhibit that they are heterosexually active, then she is explicitly regarded as “loose, unprincipled or a whore”, 1983, p:2. The woman may then feel that she must hide her behaviour from her parents who are likely to look down on her for her promiscuity. She will also face criticism by her peers as being an “easy lay” and put down in comparison to her friends who practise more restraint, (Frye, 1983, p:3).

In society, heterosexuality is a principal method of organizing institutions and regulating individual behavior. A culture based on ideas of heterosexuality values relationships that are between men and women; as a result, sexual contact occurring between same sex individuals is seen as deviant and labeled as homosexual. In her book, Ward explains how straight white men can have sex with other white men while retaining their heterosexuality in addition to gaining a masculine appeal. Ingraham and Namaste’s discussion of heteronormativity, heterogenders, and supplementarity aids in understanding why straight white men are not labeled as homosexual and how this functions to reproduce inequalities based on race, gender, and sexuality.

In American culture in the 1950s, men were the predominant head of the household and women were expected to cook, care for their kids, and clean. This is an excellent example of gender roles, and how they control certain aspects of life. Gender roles are, according to multiple sources, the way people behave, what they do or say to express being a female or male. (“Gender Identity”; Blackstone; "Understanding Gender") They are forced upon an individual from the day they are born even in the most trivial of terms of putting baby boys in blue clothes and baby girls in pink. Throughout that person’s life from then on, they will face cultural expectations every day to act according to their sex. Gender roles can often be confusing and hurtful,many stores are moving away from assigning products to a specific gender, but not only can gender roles affect a person’s behavior, it can play a huge role in transgenderism.

Gender norms surround every person in every culture, even though they have variety in each culture, they are still real and still impact individuals who stand out from the norms. Leslie Feinberg's book “Stone Butch Blues” shows how hard it is to challenge gender in the 1960’s when homosexuality and the transgender movement was something that was just starting up. Leslie shows the reader that just by existing in a transphobic environment ze is challenging what it means to be a man or a woman, and more importantly, what’s in between. Leslie shows that gender isn’t just black and white, it’s a spectrum of colours.

In “A Conceptual Framework for Understanding Race, Class, Gender, and Sexuality”, Lynn Weber claims that categories such as race and gender are socially constructed. In this paper, I will defend Weber’s claim with a particular focus on gender and gender identity, with gender being defined as a state of masculinity or femininity which is either based on the sex of a person or on their personal identification (Oxford Dictionaries). I will first explore the for and against arguments to Weber’s position, then in my own response, I will argue that gender is a social construct as gendered behaviour is learned over time, and that gender is contextual in nature. Additionally, I will explore the implications of the social construction of gender in

Once again, concerns of eugenics come into play, and because it was widely believed that defects in mind and body inevitably reflected lacks of moral quality and character. As Baynton observes, American criminologists were quick to seize upon the disabled as explaining criminal nature. Immigrants were often described as “degenerate and psychopathic types,” so certain physical characteristics of European populations became identified with a criminal “type” (Baynton, 2011, 20). This in turn reflects the thinking of the 19th century's eugenics advocate, Albert Wiggam, who asserted that good-looking people tend to be morally superior to ugly people, and that the mating of good-looking men and women should be greatly encouraged (Mitchell, Snyder 91). This is a critical reality, and one explaining why, even today, the disabled create senses of discomfort among much of the population. In Western thinking, there remains an association between moral character and physicality, despite the reality of this as irrational. It is arguable that “normal” people feel the need to justify their discomfort with the disabled, and view such individuals as somehow deserving of their limitations. Similarly, it may be that guilt triggers feelings going to marginalization. However it has happened in the past and occurs today, however, there is no

Sex and gender categories, such as “men,” “women,” “masculine” and “feminine,” have been in place for generations. They are socially constructed categories and expectations assigned to children at birth, in order to regulate and shape them into this “ideal” heterosexual being. Men are expected to embrace masculine qualities, while women are required to be feminine and submissive to the male authority. Monique Wittig’s article, “One is Not Born a Woman” observes how the class of “women” is not “natural,” but is created by the society and framed by the male ideology, as a way of producing a clear gender difference between men and women. J. M Coetzee reinforces Wittig’s beliefs by sharing similar ideas of hegemonic masculinity and male dominance

Adrienne Rich also speak compulsory heterosexuality in her work, Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence. Compulsory heterosexuality as discussed by Rich is how we view heterosexuality as a part of institution of capitalism that maintains power through the ideas of heterosexuality being acceptable to society and how we do not allow for differences in the binary system. As Rich states, “the failure to examine heterosexuality as an institution is like failing to admit that the economic system called capitalism or the caste system of racism is maintained by a variety of forces, including both physical violence and false consciousness” (Rich, 135). Meaning that we understand how heterosexuality is maintained by our capitalism system just as we understand oppression of classism, racism, and gender differences. Heterosexuality becomes institutionalized by maintaining through the normalization of forcing us to believe in the capitalism

Queer theory questions creations of normal and divergent, insider, and outsider.2 Queer theorists analyse a situation or a text to determine the relationship between sexuality, power and gender. Queer theory challenges basic tropes used to organize our society and our language: even words are gendered, and through that gendering an elliptical view of the hierarchy of society, and presumption of what is male and what is female, shines through. Queer theory rejects such binary distinctions as arbitrarily determined and defined by those with social power. It works to deconstruct these binaries, particularly the homosexual/heterosexual binary.4

The category of "compulsory able-bodiedness" certainly makes sense to me, especially considering how McRuer bolsters such a concept through Adrienne Rich's thought-provoking text, "Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence." In these texts, Adrienne Rich constructs terms such as "lesbian existence" and "lesbian continuum" in an attempt to tackle the patriarchal point of view typically used to address female relationships. This dominant view, steered by patriarchal ideologies, is steeped in compulsory heterosexuality, or the assumption that romantic relationships between men and women. Rich's "lesbian continuum" considers relationships, romantic or otherwise, in an entirely feminine sphere. It allows women the construction of self-identity

Masculinity and femininity are unescapeable. We are taught how to be masculine or feminine from birth but for men, the highest form of masculinity achievable is hegemonic masculinity. In this essay, I will define hegemonic masculinity, discuss how it perpetuates homophobia by restricting the way men interact with one another and by the use of the word fag, and how it perpetuates gender inequality through the expectations of violence, no emotions, and being breadwinners.

Gendered existence is not a matter of free individual choice because there are cultural and social constraints determining people’s lives. When we try to figure out which spectrums we are from we tend to make people’s differences a problem (Heiskala 215-231). This is the problem with diversity; we use what is different about people to oppress them. People who aren’t in our “reference group”, those we use as, what sociologists call “standards of comparison” (Johnson), are people who are beneath our social construction. Derrida’s