#doinggender

In the Night to his Day reading what I found to be the most interesting was this idea of “doing gender.” It’s something that we do on a daily basis and most of us probably don’t even know that we’re doing gender. The reading describes doing gender as an everyday activity that we don't even realize that we’re doing. 

To me doing gender is assuming someone’s gender because of the way they look/ are dressed. We associate certain clothing with whether or not we label someone as a boy or a girl and same thing goes for someones appearance such as hairstyle. An example of doing gender as mentioned in the reading was when she assumed that the child was a boy because of the yankee cap that was put onto the child but then realized that the child was a girl once she saw flowered sneakers and lace trimmed socks. 

How do you do gender? 

Well, I am asking you because gender can be “accomplished” in many ways more than one, but one way seems to be the most efficient. The most efficient way of doing gender is through the social constructs that were set up based on what people attributed to different sexes. Performing masculinity and feminine behavior are directly rooted to what was born between your legs. So, where do we place “masculine” females that like women? Are they, now, men or will they always be a woman? Due to social constructs, they will be performing their gender and not their sex: short haircuts, heavy lifting, rugged style. Let’s look at a masculine male that fits the same MO as the women previously discussed, but instead he likes men, is he now a woman or does the way he “perform” gender still make him a man? “Doing” gender is a tightrope and up for societies judgement, your opinion could be different than mine and who validates who’s judgement?

Do I perform masculinity? 

Being a 6 foot 300-pound black man, sure! Please trust me as far as you can throw me. Why? Because, I partake in transgressive behavior, as some would call it, every day. My major, psychology, is what they call a “soft science”, I paint and draw (you know that artsy shit), and I can cook the hell out of anything you put in front of me. I clean like a black house made, post the Civil War, I can bread/ plat any hair, and I match the colors in my clothes every single day. Let’s not mention that I get pedicures with my girlfriend and Aunt when I visit Georgia. So, what is my gender? Who the hell knows and cares? I am me, the same person that does all the above and can talk about sports all day, cut the grass like a professional landscaper, can lift well above 200 pounds in the gym, and the same person that builds things like 7’x7’ canvases.

Anzaldúa writes in "now let us shift . . ." a hope for a "new tribalism." She writes, "Reframing the old story points to another option besides assimilation and separation -- a 'new tribalism'" (560). She continues to suggest that when we can see/perceive the old myths, the old stories, the old constructs, we can then choose our own stories. We can make a conscious decision to CHOOSE OUR own story. When first I read this essay, I had to stop and really consider how radical this idea is. And how a "new tribalism" would affect the world around me, the wonderful people that I love, those I feel connected to, those I teach, and all of the loving people I am interconnected with (but have not met), and how this would affect my connection with the natural world. 

If I can educate myself about the old stories, and I can see/perceive the old stories, then I can shift to changing them. Radical. At least it was for me. I've been shifting ever since. It is freeing!

My point in sharing this as I introduce another journal post assignment is to point to the connections this idea has with all of the readings for this week.

bell hooks writes in "Understanding Patriarchy," "Most children do not learn what to call this system of institutionalized gender roles, so rarely do we name it in everyday speech. And how can we organize to challenge and change a system that cannot be named?" (25).

Audre Lorde writes in "Man Child: A Black Lesbian Feminist's Response," "The strongest lesson I can teach my son is the same lesson I teach my daughter: how to be who he wishes to be for himself" (77).

Judith Lorber writes in "The Social Construction of Gender," "the paradox of human nature is that it is always a manifestation of cultural meanings, social relationships, and power politics; 'not biology, but culture, becomes destiny'" (143). 

In Chapter 3 of WVFV, Shaw and Lee often note what it means to "do gender." We talked about this earlier in the semester when we collaboratively created gender boxes on the whiteboard. 

DJP#7 instructions:

From the readings for this week, week 8, choose any reading other than the reading your group was assigned yesterday. Choose something you have not yet explored with others. For example, Group 5 was assigned Deborah H. Brake's "Wrestling with Gender." So all of you in Group 5 will choose to write on any reading other than this essay.

Here is a reminder of the list:

WVFV: Chapter 3; Judith Lorber, “The Social Construction of Gender,” Evelyn Blackwood, “Trans Identities and Contingent Masculinities: Being Tombois in Everyday Practice,” Deborah H. Brake, “Wrestling with Gender,” bell hooks, “Understanding Patriarchy," Audre Lorde, “Man Child: A Black Lesbian Feminists Response," Rosario Morales “We’re All in the Same Boat."

How does the author (from your choice of essay) consider/suggest/write about what it means to not "do gender"?

Choose 1 essay from the list. One other than the essay your group was assigned in class. Read it!!!! Consider it! (Please read the entire essay. When one of you reads just the first few paragraphs and then attempts to write a post on that, it shows. But, more importantly, mostly you walk away having learned very little, and have found a way to confirm your own previous biases. Please consider with us the entire essay. You are absolutely welcome to disagree, but you must consider an entire concept before you can do so responsibly. This is how we learn.)

What does this writer have to say about "doing gender"? What do they have to say about NOT "doing gender"? (Use direct quotes or paraphrasing -- cite author and page numbers; practice responsible ethics in honoring others' work.)

How does a "new tribalism" lend to what this author is writing? Is there a connection here? (If you choose Lorde, hooks, or the chapter, be sure to use an idea outside of what I quoted above. There are multiple powerful connections outside of what I noted above.)

In Judith Lorber’s “The Social Construction of Gender”, Lorber discusses what it is to “do gender”. Lorber describes the way people become uncomfortable when they are unable to identify the gender of the person in front of them. With the way gender has changed overtime it is difficult to identify someone’s gender based on their outer appearance. Lorber proved this when she was sure a child was a boy because of their yankee hat and shirt, but eventually she realized the child had two earrings and flower designed shoes on.