In the beginning, there was man; at the same time (or shortly after, depending on who you ask) there was also woman. After those first men and those first women, there were more men and more women; evolving, shaping cultures, shaping practices, changing norms of work and of family size and of clothing. After hundreds upon hundreds of years, finally, gender began to change, too; the rigid lines between male and female behaviors started to blur, very slightly. As gender roles shifted, as the world got more progressive, as views of human sexuality evolved, people who understood gender not as a biological phenomenon but a cultural one felt safer to speak up; while being transgender was, and is, still not widely accepted and understood, it is significantly …show more content…
more noticeable in the media and in social relationships; with its increased overall visibility, there has also been increased discussion of, and pushback against, transphobia. In order to understand the roots of transphobia, one must consider the roots of gender itself -- one must understand that gender is a cultural norm posed as a biological reality, and that it is a norm so deeply ingrained in modern society that in order to make a significant difference in the acceptance of transgender people, the entire concept of gender must be attacked. Although understanding of gender and gender norms varies from country to country, there is a general discourse across the world which views gender as a binary system; there are two very distinct genders -- male and female -- which are still most widely understood to be based solely on people’s primary and secondary sex characteristics. For a long time, this opinion and connection was viewed as solid fact -- men have penises, women have vaginas -- and there were very few people (if any) who dared to argue that sex and gender may not be as directly intertwined as they commonly were understood to be. Starting around the 1990’s, scientists and researchers started considering biological explanations for why some people were gay; one author, Roger Lancaster, commented on the fact that “when it comes to questions about ‘human nature,’ biology is almost always taken to be sociobiology, a set of claims organized around the assumption that biology is destiny for humans…” (2003:11); he later takes this a step further to comment that “sociobiology has become common sense” (2003:12). When discussing the cause of people being transgender, there is no one idea that has been settled on, but many that have been discussed; one of the most common ideas is based around a fetus having received too much of the alternate sex hormone while in the womb. Additionally, as one article states, “there are studies on enzymic or hormonal abnormalities, physical dexterity, auditory phenomena, psychological profiles” (Whitehead 2000), all trying to determine a biological root of being transgender. In a society where gender is still considered to include two options, which are directly linked to only two sexes (also ignoring the existence of nonbinary and intersex people), the preferable explanation that researchers and others hope to find is that there is some tangible biological difference which sets transgender people apart from “normal” people; rather than considering the implication of gender and sex in general, most people continue to consider the current discourse around gender as fact, and simply work to understand why some people do not fit into that connection as perfectly as most others do. One of the most accessible examples which expresses the idea of gender as something innately intertwined with bodies’ characteristics is Mattel’s Barbie dolls.
Barbie is tall, thin, has large hips and a large chest; she is beautiful, blonde, and she loves to shop; overall, Barbie is the feminine ideal. As researchers Jacqueline Urla and Alan Swedlund acknowledge, “little girls learn, among other things, about the crucial importance of their appearance to their personal happiness and to their ability to gain in favor with their friends” (1995:281). Gender roles are both centered around behavior as well as around bodies; this poses huge problems for transgender people, as well as explanations for transphobia; society has, for so long, accepted gender and sex to be synonymous. Because of this, a person whose gender is female and whose body is (rhetorically) male is a frightening and concerning deviant to most people’s understanding of the way in which gender exists. Everything that has to do with ideals for bodies leads to problems for transgender people; whether it is, as Urla and Swedlund also commented, that “...woman’s body was understood through the lens of her reproductive functions” (1995:287), or the general idea of “norms” for body proportions. When considering women’s bodies’ main purpose to be that of reproduction, it is apparent why the concept of transgender people may be concerning; transgender women -- that is, people, assigned male at birth but who live as women -- are women whose bodies cannot reproduce in the way that women are expected to; transgender men -- people assigned female at birth but who live as men -- may still have bodies which are viewed as useful mainly for their reproductive capabilities, but which they do not intend to acknowledge or use as such. When things stray so drastically from a norm which has long been accepted with minimal thought, onlookers panic that other norms will start to change as well. Straying from this norm also
causes trouble because in a culture where people are aware of norms and ideals for women’s and men’s chest and hip sizes and proportions, problems arise for transgender men whose chests are “too large” or transgender women whose bodies are “not curvy enough.” When perception of gender is so directly intertwined with understanding of sex, many trans people run the risk of being “read” as transgender everywhere they go; as such, transgender may face problems every single day, be that being kicked out of a bathroom for having the “wrong” body or simply being stared at by strangers due to seeming “out of place” and “confusing.” At the same time, the idea of gendered bodies and a general desire for everyone to “fit in” and not question such norms leads to an unfortunate push for all transgender people to have surgeries and take hormones in order to appear more “normal,” lest their gender identity be questioned. For some transgender people, this idea becomes so deeply ingrained that they may become self-proclaimed “truscum” (a term originally intended as a slur against them); as one website explaining their ideology states, “The truscum argue that transsexuality is a medical condition and that transsexuality is defined by the symptom of physical sex dysphoria... They accuse non-transsexual people of ‘transtrending’, i.e. appropriating real transsexual identities” (Crossdreamers 2013), with the definition of “transsexual” as opposed to “transgender” being a distinction for people who intend to medically transition as opposed to only socially transitioning. Because of the emphasis which the cisgender world places on gender’s link to assigned sex, some transgender people internalize the issue to a point where they view their “deviance” as a shameful medical condition and become angry at others who they feel are not taking the issue as seriously. Gender and transphobia are so deeply ingrained in our society that they are present in, and must be addressed in regards to, every modality of power; interpersonal, organizational, and structural (lecture notes, 2/4). A broad, working definition of transphobia is understood to be “...an irrational fear of, and/or hostility towards, people who are transgender or who otherwise transgress traditional gender norms” (Transphobia n.d.); transphobia is not solely reserved to transgender people, but to any person or any act which goes against the norms of gendered behavior. As Wolf notes, “power works differently in interpersonal relations, in institutional arenas, and on the levels of whole structures” (1999:5). Overall, examples of gender norm enforcement and examples of transphobia are extremely similar; an example of a gender norm enforced by an interpersonal power may be parents not buying their son any dolls or pink clothes, whereas an act of transphobia would be parents punishing their son for trying on his sister’s dress; on an interpersonal level, transphobia most frequently shows itself in the form of reactions to people going against expectations of gender. In terms of organizational power, transphobia may be present in school dress codes which enforce different rules for boys and girls, especially which include specifications about the length of a girls’ skirt and a general rule that boys could not wear skirts at all (or else face a visit to the principal’s office). Structural gender norm enforcement and transphobia, on the other hand, is nearly too big to offer any example; it is the legal gender binary of male or female, assigned at birth; the hoops through which transgender people must jump in order to get hormones or to have their legal gender marker changed; it is the general format of media and culture which portrays only two genders, and sells products marketed at those two genders, and sets “norms” and “ideals” for those genders’ bodies and behaviors. As Wolf mentions, “to the extent that all social relations involve communication, they must also utilize codes and engage in coding and decoding. Thus, this concept of code and codes is applicable not only to language and formalized behavior such as rituals, but to other facts of cultural life as well” (1999:281). Gender roles are a code; every action which one performs or views has a code assigned to it which relates back to gender. The code is structural, and typically only those who actively break apart from the typical structure of gender with their own actions and identities dare to criticize and question this code. With every action that one takes, one is saying something about oneself and one’s position to gender roles -- every action may call into question whether one is a man who is masculine and wants nothing to do with the feminine, or whether one is a person assigned to be a man who portrays just enough femininity to raise concern from those who are still not willing to accept variation within gender. Transphobia cannot be fully eradicated until there is a huge reform in regards to gender as a whole; until the gender binary is broken down and gender is understood completely as performative as opposed to rigidly defined, there will continue to be transphobia. Until society understands that gender roles are made up and that there does not need to be any specific justification for viewing one’s gender one way or another, there likely will always be problems with misunderstanding around, and lack of support for, transgender people. Because gender is so central in the general functioning of the world, the structural basis of it is not going to go away anytime soon; instead of expecting to eradicate transphobia on a structural level, once and for all, it is instead best to target specific problems at the interpersonal and organizational levels of power, which both improves transgender people’s lives as well as works to build a strong enough foundation that the structural forces may eventually start to shift in response.
The medicalization of transgender tendencies, under what was Gender Identity Disorder, was demoralizing to all transgender people. This resulted in a form of structured and institutionalized inequality that made an entire group of people internalize their problems, making them question not only their own identity, but also their sanity. Therefore, the removal of this disorder from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) in 2013 and the newest editions was important in that it shows society’s recognition and acceptance of the transgender
Gender role conflicts constantly place a role in our everyday life. For many years we have been living in a society where depending on our sexuality, we are judged and expected to behave and act certain way to fulfill the society’s gender stereotypes. The day we are born we are labeled as either a girl or boy and society identifies kids by what color they wear, pink is for girls and blue is for boys. Frequently, we heard the nurses in the Maternity facility saying things like, “Oh is a strong boy or is beautiful fragile princess.” Yet, not only in hospitals we heard this types of comments but we also see it on the media…
Envision yourself entering a toy department and noticing numerous diverse aisles. In one aisle, you encounter toys packaged in complementary and color triads colors that include building sets (such as “LEGO”, “LEGO Super Heroes”, and “Angry Birds”) and a wide selection of action figures—Spider Man, Transformers, The Dark Knight, Power Rangers, etc. In the next aisle, adjacent to the aisle with complementary and color triads colors, you find toys packaged in shades of pink and purple. These toys range from “Hello Kitty” dolls to “Barbie Dream” house play sets. Inside a toy department, such as Toys R Us, it is extremely difficult to retrieve a toy that is not marketed explicitly or subtly by gender. If toys were marketed only according to ethnic and racial stereotypes, many individuals would be infuriated. However, we come across toy departments that are highly, as well as strictly segregated—not by race, but by gender.
Gender Stereotypes Among Children's Toys When you walk into the toy section of any store, you do not need a sign to indicate which section is on the girls’ side and which section is on the boys’ side. Aside from all the pink, purple, and other pastel colors that fill the shelves on the girls’ side, the glitter sticks out a lot as well. The boys’ toys, however, are mostly dark colors – blue, black, red, gray, or dark green. The colors typically used on either side are very stereotypical in themselves.
Furthermore, the article clarifies that many transgender people experience a stage of identity development that aids in helping them better understanding their own self-image reflection, and expression. More specifically, they reach out to professional...
“Boys will be boys, and girls will be girls”: few of our cultural mythologies seem as natural as this one. But in this exploration of the gender signals that traditionally tell what a “boy” or “girl” is supposed to look and act like, Aaron Devor shows how these signals are not “natural” at all but instead are cultural constructs. While the classic cues of masculinity—aggressive posture, self-confidence, a tough appearance—and the traditional signs of femininity—gentleness, passivity, strong nurturing instincts—are often considered “normal,” Devor explains that they are by no means biological or psychological necessities. Indeed, he suggests, they can be richly mixed and varied, or to paraphrase the old Kinks song “Lola,” “Boys can be girls and girls can be boys.” Devor is dean of social sciences at the University of Victoria and author of Gender Blending: Confronting the Limits of Duality (1989), from which this selection is excerpted, and FTM: Female-to-Male Transsexuals in Society (1997).
In this article, Shaw and Lee describe how the action of labels on being “feminine” or “masculine” affect society. Shaw and Lee describe how gender is, “the social organization of sexual difference” (124). In biology gender is what sex a person is and in culture gender is how a person should act and portray themselves. They mention how gender is what we were taught to do in our daily lives from a young age so that it can become natural(Shaw, Lee 126). They speak on the process of gender socialization that teaches us how to act and think in accordance to what sex a person is. Shaw and Lee state that many people identify themselves as being transgendered, which involves a person, “resisting the social construction of gender into two distinct, categories, masculinity and femininity and working to break down these constraining and polarized categories” ( 129). They write about how in mainstream America masculinity and femininity are described with the masculine trait being the more dominant of the two. They define how this contributes to putting a higher value of one gender over the other gender called gender ranking (Shaw, Lee 137). They also speak about how in order for femininity to be viewed that other systems of inequality also need to be looked at first(Shaw,Lee 139).
Living life as a transgendered person is not easy. There are very few times when someone comes out as transgender and their lives are still relatively easy to manage. There are a copious...
As a child, our toys were not exactly as gender neutral as earlier times, but also were not as gender stereotypic as the toys in today’s time. The fact that everyone eventually comes into contact with buying toys whether you have kids or you have a friend or family member who have kids which makes this an important topic. Eventually, everyone has to buy a child a present. Would it bother you that all toys are either pink or blue and there is no in between? Or does sticking to what your child is already familiar with and knows the more ideal option when it comes to gender stereotyping with children’s toys? Authors James Delingpole and Eleanor Muffitt both do a good job at arguing both sides to this issue. Although both authors provide valid points throughout each article, about gender stereotyping with toys, James Delingpole clearly was more effective in persuading the audience because he used all three elements; ethos, logos, and pathos to support his idea.
Nowadays, there are lot of unexpected changes are coming in our lives every day which are challenging to our society. Gender issue is one of the hot topics among new changes. Transsexuality is a critical part of this gender issue. After reading the article “Night to his day” by Judith Lorber, I found a clarification regarding the social construction of gender. While looking for some facts about transgender, I have also found a lot of articles with different point of views from researchers, scientists and individuals who has transformed from their origin to transgender men/women. Now I am going to describe why some men and women want to change their gender, what are the impacts on individuals and in the society?
According to Brenda Cooper, the most basic understanding of heteronormativity is that gender is ‘natally ascribed, natural, and immutable’. The literature surrounding gender identity initially defines two categories, male or female and is something that is resistant to change. However, the transgendered identity problematises this assumption within the response from popular culture and in particular, film. With the contradictory ideas addressed in the films Boys Don’t Cry and The Crying Game , gender identity is certainly a complex notion. This essay will explore ways in which these texts conform to, or are in denial of, the transgender identity through discussion of stereotypical masculine and feminine identities, transgender as performance, the complex nature of sexuality and the revelation of biological sex.
Around the world gender is genuinely seen as strictly male or female. If you step out of this “social norm,” you could be considered an outcast. This disassociation includes, biological males/females, interssexed, and transgendered individuals. These people are severely suppressed by society because their gender identification, behaviors, and even their activities deviate from the norm. Most Americans are exceedingly devoted to the concept that there are only two sexes. Therefore, the constrictive American ideals of male and female gender identities inhibits growth and acceptance of gender expression.
Since the 1930s when the press started telling stories of transgender individuals in society, the transgender community has been depicted negatively. They are thought of as “social deviants or medical oddities” (Capuzza, 2016). In 1952, Christine Jorgensen, a trans woman, became a celebrity for having a sex reassignment surgery. Capuzza (2016) argues that this changed the discourse around the transgender community and only focused on the “physical transition process”.
Background to my research My research will be looking into how the spatial layout of a toy shop is gendered and what effect this has on children. There has been increasing recognition that children’s toys are extremely gendered (Clark, 1999; Mertala et al., 2016). Often toys are marketed at “boys’ toys” and “girls’ toys” (Blakemore and Centers, 2005). These toys reflect gender roles and can have a lasting influence on children as to what toys they should be playing with.
When non-binary genders are told that their gender is ‘just a phase’ it further erases their identities not only on a micro level, but also on a macro level. In society, “non-binary trans people are often outright ignored by mainstream media” (Dennison 1). This is because the media only expresses interest in trans people who have always been trans rather than the people who don’t fit into any specific