Let's talk about Judith Butler

[dark_crystal]

Originally Posted by SoNotHer

It might be helpful to excerpt a couple quotes from her work to guide the conversation and reponses - quotes like this one -

"If gender is constructed, could it be constructed differently or does it constructedness imply some form of social determinism, foreclosing the possibility of agency and transformation?"

Yes that would have been helpful, sorry! Here are some more:

“... that gender is a choice, or that gender is a role, or that gender is a construction that one puts on, as one puts on clothes in the morning, that there is a 'one' who is prior to this gender, a one who goes to the wardrobe of gender and decides with deliberation which gender it will be today.”

“...gender is a kind of imitation for which there is no original"

[Toughy]

Butler has never believed that 'femme' exists as a gender identity. She (or is it he...I thought she transitioned). Interesting she has moved to denying butch. Post modern blah blah blah

I never liked her or her ideas.

[Novelafemme]

Originally Posted by Toughy

Butler has never believed that 'femme' exists as a gender identity. She (or is it he...I thought she transitioned). Interesting she has moved to denying butch. Post modern blah blah blah

I never liked her or her ideas.

I disagree. I haven't read anything that would lead me to believe she feels femme as an identity to be lacking in value. My understanding is that she wants to look at gender and desire more fluidly and without the influence of socially constructed acts of gender performance...which are traditionally very heteronormative.

Would she prefer that I do away with my heels, skirts and makeup? I think so! But most intellectuals prefer to deconstruct socially acceptable norms in order to find alternative methodologies. Personally, I love gender-bending no matter what form it takes!

[Novelafemme]

"And as far as I know, Butler identifies as Butch."

I need to correct this (since I have to admit that I pulled it right out of my ass)...Butler doesn't stake claim to any "identity" so to speak. She reminds me of my partner in that she wears mens clothing and sports a very short haircut, but refuses to latch on to any gender recognizable identity. Again, a refusal to adopt socially constructed norms.

[dark_crystal]

Originally Posted by Toughy

Butler has never believed that 'femme' exists as a gender identity. She (or is it he...I thought she transitioned). Interesting she has moved to denying butch. Post modern blah blah blah

I never liked her or her ideas.

I perceive her as invalidating both butch and femme in the selection i was assigned to read. i may be misperceiving

Originally Posted by Novelafemme

I read her work very differently. I see her as challenging the binary of sexual "normativity" as a social construct in and of itself. She takes the intersectional nature of gender (the social construct of race, class and sexuality) and then deconstructs it by way of questioning its validity and ability to stand on its own without the narrative of performance that inevitably informs it as more than a theoretical abstract. Can gender exist without heteronormative binaries? Can there be an absence of gender?

it just sounds too much like the second-wave "butches and femmes are tools of the patriarchy" rhetoric.

i see how it this theory would have been very liberating for cissexed and cisgendered feminine females, esp. the straight ones. Which is ironic to me since the theory is supposed to liberate us from heteronormativity

and i am not butch so i don't know for sure, but i can imagine if you spent your childhood being bullied for being a tomboy, and then got to college and your gender studies professor said you had chosen that, it would be a little hard to take

Originally Posted by Novelafemme

She is not attempting to invalidate how anyone identifies, rather she is trying to disassemble the way gender is constructed as a social norm. She wants us to look at gender presentation as a performance based more on desire rather than gender based on sex alone.

that helps- the selection we read was more about performance based on social cues rather than desire. desire makes more sense. It makes perfect sense that masculine females would perform a masculine gender from a place of desire. It makes no sense that social conformity would drive this

Originally Posted by Novelafemme

Would she prefer that I do away with my heels, skirts and makeup? I think so!

see, i just have a really big problem with that!!! i think she is just naturally in the middle of the gender spectrum and she is projecting her andogyny on everybody else! Like, if she doesn't happen to feel masculine or feminine then nobody should!

[dark_crystal]

Originally Posted by Novelafemme

I need to correct this (since I have to admit that I pulled it right out of my ass)...

i so heart you for this!

[Novelafemme]

hmmm...she kind of devalues the femme presentation if that femme presentation has been construed in conformity with social norms that weren't questioned the way Butler questions them and then derived through self (rather than though social norms). I also think that to the extent that a femme presentation is made in opposition to something more masculine, that one is then playing into a social polarity that Butler was trying to make us more aware of. does that make sense?

I prefer to think of her as an AWESOME proto-punky badass philosopher and feminist, but not perfect, and not a huge supporter of the femme persona. And certainly she was writing at an historical moment when the notion of an informed, powerful, revolutionized femme was, perhaps, still not quite an acceptable notion amongst feminists. I believe it took later queer theory to open that door.

[Toughy]

Originally Posted by Novelafemme

hmmm...she kind of devalues the femme presentation if that femme presentation has been construed in conformity with social norms that weren't questioned the way Butler questions them and then derived through self (rather than though social norms). I also think that to the extent that a femme presentation is made in opposition to something more masculine, that one is then playing into a social polarity that Butler was trying to make us more aware of. does that make sense?

I prefer to think of her as an AWESOME proto-punky badass philosopher and feminist, but not perfect, and not a huge supporter of the femme persona. And certainly she was writing at an historical moment when the notion of an informed, powerful, revolutionized femme was, perhaps, still not quite an acceptable notion amongst feminists. I believe it took later queer theory to open that door.

You do realize that the beginning sentence of each paragraph is a bit contradictory....

you prefer to ignore her devaluing femme and femininity.....okie dokie

her book was Female Masculinity not Female Femininity....just saying....

once again..........post modern blah blah blah.....

you have not convinced me........the devaluing of the feminine and the valuing of the masculine right down to the book title....

[Novelafemme]

Originally Posted by maryoosa

I'm not gonna get overly involved here, because I haven't touched Butler's work since finishing my dissertation. But in general, all of my readings of Butler are in agreement with novelafemme. And I've read Butler extensively as both a grad student and when writing my dissertation.

ooooo, i would love to take a peak at your dissertation!

[boobookitty]

Originally Posted by dark_crystal

“... that gender is a choice, or that gender is a role, or that gender is a construction that one puts on, as one puts on clothes in the morning, that there is a 'one' who is prior to this gender, a one who goes to the wardrobe of gender and decides with deliberation which gender it will be today.”

“...gender is a kind of imitation for which there is no original"

I totally 100% do NOT agree... I have lived with animals and small childrem through my entire life.. gender expression has a basis in brain function balanced with hormonal effect.

Gender Roles, are learned - social constructs, which vary according to the culture of our up bringing.

male and female are not the only genders -

someone who is Neutrois or Androgynous could very well fit the discriptions presented in those quotes. As could someone who is gender fluid.

My gender is not / was not -- a choice.

[julieisafemme]

Well I think Judith Butler would be appalled to learn that her book Undoing Gender is where I learned the word femme and that it applied to me. Then I googled the word, found the dash site and signed myself up as Julie is a femme! Yay!

I am not an academic by any means. Much of the references she makes I do not understand. What I did take away was that gender is not some inviolate thing that cannot be questioned. It is worth taking a look at it as a social construction because that is where it intersects with patriarchy. I found her thoughts (at least those that I think I might have understood) to very helpful to me in exploring my own gender and sexuality.

[Melissa]

Originally Posted by boobookitty

I totally 100% do NOT agree... I have lived with animals and small childrem through my entire life.. gender expression has a basis in brain function balanced with hormonal effect.

Gender Roles, are learned - social constructs, which vary according to the culture of our up bringing.

male and female are not the only genders -

someone who is Neutrois or Androgynous could very well fit the discriptions presented in those quotes. As could someone who is gender fluid.

My gender is not / was not -- a choice.

I don't agree that Butler sees gender as a choice or something similar to clothing that one puts on. She argues that it is normalized through repetition and so "feels" natural when it is really cultural.

melissa

[boobookitty]

Originally Posted by Melissa

I don't agree that Butler sees gender as a choice or something similar to clothing that one puts on. She argues that it is normalized through repetition and so "feels" natural when it is really cultural.

melissa

yes she does...

on the video in this very thread, at time stamp 1:11 .."we act as if ... it is a fact no body really is a gender from the start .. thats my claim.." through 1:35

and at timestamp 2:30 ... "its my view that gender is culturally formed"

--her words--

and my life experience does not agree. I know gender is variable, not a fixed point... gender roles and gender expression and gender pressentation are all cultural... internal gender awareness, is a product of our body via the brain and hormones and biological sex. How we interpret our internal experience is cultural...

social culture... is a system of chosen behaviors ... hence culture is choice, or better said cultural expression is a choice.... if she used the term "gender expression" instead of only stating "gender" ... I would agree with most of what she says. But "gender' and 'gender expression' are not the same thing.

[dark_crystal]

Originally Posted by Melissa

I don't agree that Butler sees gender as a choice or something similar to clothing that one puts on. She argues that it is normalized through repetition and so "feels" natural when it is really cultural.

melissa

My quibble is that, to me, this only makes sense for the cisgendered. I feel like she implies there is no such thing as transgender **

**although i am cisgendered and i would never presume to speak to what transgender "is," which is what i would be doing if i went toe-to-toe on her assertions

which is precisely my problem- Butler does not let her cisgendered perspective stop her from making assumptions about what transgendered individuals are thinking and feeling

I particularly don't like the way she takes the David Reimer case and decides for herself what led him to report that he "felt like a boy"

[boobookitty]

I have learned about gender issues because I had to understand in order to survive. I make a diliberate effort in include all the various gender expressions when I talk about gender... or I try to remember to place the correct quailfiers on my comments.

The variations are endless.... for anyone to make statements based on their own perpective of their own experience, ...to the effect of being "more correct" than someone else. Well, ...

There are so many people who are searching for the words to discribe and explain who they are, and are looking for some point of connection with another human who shared some part of their path in life. To feel less alone and a place to 'fit in' ... to find such a slanted view of the issue, (as Butler presents) that is heartbreaking to me, ...

I keep thinking of the trangender kid who is trying to fit into the social construct of what they should be... (being sarcastic here) .. because according to Butler, "gender is culturally formed" ... and can not make themself "fit" into the
cultural form, ..because it is not a choice.. it happens and we have to learn to deal with and live with it...

hopefully they can find someone who understands that gender issues, are a wide and far reaching spectrum... before its too late for them to find peace and happiness with who they are inside.

[Novelafemme]

Originally Posted by dark_crystal

My quibble is that, to me, this only makes sense for the cisgendered. I feel like she implies there is no such thing as transgender **

**although i am cisgendered and i would never presume to speak to what transgender "is," which is what i would be doing if i went toe-to-toe on her assertions

which is precisely my problem- Butler does not let her cisgendered perspective stop her from making assumptions about what transgendered individuals are thinking and feeling

I particularly don't like the way she takes the David Reimer case and decides for herself what led him to report that he "felt like a boy"

Queer theorists like Judith Butler are relatively new to the world of transgender issues. She, like author/Chicana activist Cherrie Moraga, are quite forthcoming about their individual struggles with transphobia. For latent second wave feminists like them, the struggle is very internal and often goes against their anti-assimilation backgrounds. I am not saying they are right or wrong, rather inserting a bit of information that might shed some light.

added: by anti-assimilation I mean that some people feel transgender males have divorced themselves from the feminist community by "assimilating" into the heterosexual world. NOT ME! But "some people"

[EnderD_503]

Originally Posted by Novelafemme

Queer theorists like Judith Butler are relatively new to the world of transgender issues. She, like author/Chicana activist Cherrie Moraga, are quite forthcoming about their individual struggles with transphobia. For latent second wave feminists like them, the struggle is very internal and often goes against their anti-assimilation backgrounds. I am not saying they are right or wrong, rather inserting a bit of information that might shed some light.

added: by anti-assimilation I mean that some people feel transgender males have divorced themselves from the feminist community by "assimilating" into the heterosexual world. NOT ME! But "some people"

Yeah, both Butler and Halberstam seem to still carry these opinions about transguys, in particular. You can see them trying to work through it in their later works, but it still shines through pretty strong. They both also have trouble seeing transmen as transmen, instead of "biological women" with a "gender identification" that makes them fully identify as male. Again...yeah...they have their theories definitely have their problems. That isn't to say there isn't something useful to be taken out of it, as a lot of what they say about performativity and hetero/homonormativity is still very useful in the post-marriage rights/post-homo age of successful white gay dudes who think no one undergoes oppression anymore.