Gender Construction

In “Imitation and Gender Insubordination,” Butler ridicules normative cultural expressions and performances and encourages us to resist the power structures which regulate our lives and gender identities. She uses key terms that denote both conformity and ownership to expose the control society has on our way of thinking about gender.

In the reading, Judith Lorber discusses the social construction of gender. She talks about “performing gender” as a way to fit into society and describes how gender construction begins at birth and has to be either reaffirmed or redefined. Mock

“One is not born, but rather becomes a woman”. The definition for sex and gender is different depending on which theory one uses to describe each concept. There is the Biological, Psychological and Social Constructionism theory. This essay will highlight each of the theories definitions for sex and gender but, will focus on the Psychological theory as an opposing theory to Butler’s beliefs of gender and sex as performative. Intersectionality allows one to embody more than one identity at any given time.

The concept of gender and gendered objects have always been connected to traditional views of the gender binary, and to this day this stands true even though society has become more open-minded. The story My Princess Boy, by Cheryl Kilodavis, tells about a young boy who has a love for dressing up in all things pink and traditionally girly. This tale rocks the foundations gender norms in today’s society as well. Throughout the book, the mother of this young boy narrates the experiences of their family pertaining to the “abnormal” gender expression of this child. While My Princess Boy sets its eyes on breaking the barriers of the binary, it only does so by focusing on clothing choices.

The way society is taught to be socialized is salient and goes unnoticed, therefore it is valid to claim that gender is socially constructed through our everyday practices, whether we are aware of the construction or not. With socialization beginning the instant a child is born, the process is continuous through out adolescence and varies dramatically across the two genders. With guidance from institutions and arenas such as education, sports, music and the mass media gender seems to be coerced, as it comes with a scripted set of behaviors and attitudes. This essay argues that gender is socially constructed on an everyday basis. To further explain this thesis the essay will draw on early childhood socialization of masculinity and femininity,

From the moment children are born they are instantly assigned the gender that society considers appropriate, this can usually be characterized by the pink or blue clothes they are given. The immediate separation of gender emphasizes the importance of dividing gender and keeping strict constructs in our society. So when a man or woman diverges from how they are expected to act, they are seen as outcasts that need to be molded into what is acceptable in society’s eyes. In her book, An Introduction to Female Masculinity Judith “Jack” Halberstam examines the ideas and struggles surrounding masculine women, and those who deviate from society’s view of a normal male or female. One of the main ways Halberstam analyzes the struggles of masculine

We are currently living in a society where the lines between gender are blending in unimaginable ways. Male makeup artist have begun to pop up everywhere, Facebook has expanded the gender options to more than 50, gender neutral bathrooms are a necessity, and the prevalence of the singular pronoun “they” has increased and been accepted by many. The hard rigid lines of gender and being bent and broken, and we are watching the world as those who do not fit demand change. We are getting closer to destroying the gender binary for good. In the following I will compare Ali Smith’s “How to Be Both”, to several articles regarding the topics of the ambiguity of gender, the differences between sex assigned at birth, gender, and gender expression, as

The construction of gender that Butler explains is a mixture of performative actions that create a gender constitution defined by physiological characteristics, social interactions and phenomenology. Phenomenology in this context explains the formation of gender identity due to the

Now, let’s say you had a baby boy, it would be considered not normal or deviant to put him in a dress. These types of gender expectations will create “different feelings, consciousness, relationships, and skills---ways of

As with any set of ideas that have been aligned in binary opposition, each word means only in relationship to its partner. In this case we might argue that comfort is nothing more or less than the absence of discomfort. At any rate, this relational mode of meaning making seems to have been useful for authors grappling with the challenge of articulating discomfort surrounding their genders. In an essay titled “Just Living” an author appearing mononymously as Micah uses the analogy of a fish in water to express what it is to feel comfortable in one’s gender. They write, “Like fish in water, people don’t necessarily think about gender or even realize it’s there, until it’s taken away and they can no longer breathe” (229). It is unsurprising, therefore, that the concept of comfort in clothing is less explicitly articulated than discomfort across the essays. While nearly every author seems to have an experience that aligns with the narrative of feeling discomfort in particular types of gendered clothing, the ways in which comfort is expressed instead tends to follow a narrative in which clothing becomes clothing a symbolic reclamation of

Judith Butler questions the belief that behaviors of either sex are natural. She proposes a rather radical theory that gender is performative and that sex is constructed. When gender is being performed, it means that someone would take on a role, acting in such a way that gives society the idea of their gender and constructs part of their identity. To be performative means that we produce a series of effects.Gender is constructed and is not in any way connected ‘naturally’ to sex.

I paused when someone questions my masculinity. It was a sign that I had absorbed what society views how a man should behave. I never understood why this is so. Throughout my life, I have loved giving my friends hugs and getting close to them and going shopping for as long as I can remember. Surprisingly, I even recall asking my mother and father that I wanted a Barbie for Christmas. At American University, I hope to continue these discussions with AU students and form a group where we support each other to accept ourselves and understand these gender

If something is ‘performative’ it constructs a series of effects (Butler 2013). Identity and topics of representation are based on these “performances” that builds what it means to be male or female, or man or woman. These roles are unconsciously performed every day with most people not even realising that they even do it. The most important role performed daily is when people dress to leave the house; fashion has for decades played a very important role in people’s lives. Two of the main writers to have discussed about this role is Judith Butler and Diana Crane. Both writers analyse the performance of gender identity and fashion roles in society. Butler’s difference between “performed” and “performative” is not fully concretized, and this

In Gender Trouble, Judith Butler discusses complications with constructions of inner and outer worlds of the body. She argues that “internalization of gender”, as common linguistics describes it, is a part of the heterosexual hegemonic binary of gender conformity which distinguishes inner and outer worlds. Gender, in the commonly accepted model, is innate and through a process of bringing out the inner gender is expressed. Butler proposes, instead, that “the gendered body is performative” and “has no ontological status apart from the various acts which constitute its reality” (173). Thus, gender does not exist within a person, a part of the body itself, but is a performance constructed through many displays. Gender is not explicitly

In her essay, “The Social Construction of Gender”, Judith Lorber explains that in society we often “assume gender is bred into our genes” (112), meaning that as a society we often times relate a person’s gender (behaviors, traits, and identity) with their sex (biological makeup), thus labeling a person’s gender as something grouped together with their genetic makeup. The reality of this is that gender is created, and “done” by every individual person. Lorber states that gender, “like culture, is a human production” (112), and “doing” gender can appear as small as how a parent chooses to dress their child, resulting in how the child looks. This then