After spending the past weeks talking about gender, Fausto-Sterling’s excerpt on sexual identity helped me further see the differences between sex and gender. In addition, this excerpt also problematized arguments about sex. I thought that sex was relatively easy to determine because physical characteristics are easier to determine than gender identity. However, Sterling shed light to the reality that sex, just like gender, is not dichotomous; there are many shades of gray in between. Sterling points out that sex is also constructed – by physicians and especially in the Age of Conversion.
What causes this problem is our obsession with oversimplification. This makes it harder to break away from thinking in terms of binaries and only binaries. We like order, and we like definite answers, but by categorizing everything, we end up forcing labels on things that cannot be defined by a simple label. This applied to things even outside of gender. If we go to the bookstore, we can see books erroneously labeled. We see self-help books that fall under the category of pseudoscience in the Psychology shelves. We see hybrid genres like Spielberg’s Maus causing problems for people who do the labeling because labeling Maus as a comic book dismisses the fact that it also incorporates a biography, a historical event, and even an auto-biography. Now, we face the consequences of oversimplifying sex. Even if we are able to get physicians to acknowledge the multiplicity of sexes, I think that’s only half the battle. The other half entails society to accept that reality.
What really stuck with me after finishing the reading was Sterling’s observation that our sexual organs seemed to dictate who gets rights in our society. When she puts it this way, it seems silly that if one has a penis, they get more pay, more political rights and gain more societal benefits. Also, I was really interested in the debate on nature versus nurture in determining sexuality. I don’t know where I stand on this debate because I don’t think I have enough background on both sides to take a stance. Regardless, I think that it’s very fascinating. However, I don’t think this should outweigh the debate over the variety of sexes that exist. Should we continue to live in a society that allows physicians to choose your sex if it’s questionable? Should a choice even be made?
No comments:
Post a Comment