no subject

[taimatsu]

I have just had my first lecture of the year - the introductory session for Women's Writing 1. This involved defining feminism, mostly, and the horrible but not unexpected discovery that about six of the 60 predominantly female people in the room defined themselves as feminist. Gaaaaah!

Also Gaaaaaah was the thing where the lecturer was talking about an essay on basic feminism which discusses the terms 'feminist' 'female' and 'feminine', and dismissed biological sex - 'female' - as binary 'apart from a few hermaphrodites and things'. I was so cross. I know a variety of people who are women but for whom the biological clues to 'sex' are not straightforwardly female - whether that's because of a chromosomal disorder, or physical intersexedness, or being transsexual/transgendered. The lecturer has no idea if one of those people is in the room, and I was cross that she made them invisible and used what I suspect is rather an inappropriate term for the biologically different. She's my seminar leader so I might be able to tackle her about it tomorrow, though it's tricky when I'm not in that group myself.

Similarly, she was talking about the prevailing image of feminism as all about 'hairy humourless lesbians'; while it's *true* that that's what people think, what if I *had* been a hairy lesbian? It really sounded very dismissive, and her talk didn't make any compensatory mention of the contributions lesbian community has made to the women's movement.

I think I sound way too 'right-on' here, but then the whole point of the lecture was to make the girls who go 'eww, I'm not a feminist!' think again. Maybe it ought to make me think again about saying 'erk, I'm not one of those radical queer folks!' (Actually, I think I'm not, but I get the feeling if I make the fairly basic points above about sex and gender non-hegemony, I'll be thought of as one.)

It makes me nervous to think of saying any of this in a seminar, but I want that to be a safe(r) space where I can talk about, you know, lesbians and queer politics if it's relevant without being afraid to come out. *sigh*

Thoughts most welcome. Anyone got any experience with feminist literary criticism or feminist writing in general? I'm making this public so I can link to it in a community.

Comments

[syllopsium.livejournal.com]

The problem is that feminist writing is not a homogeneous whole. Unsurprisingly because there is no unique female experience, there is no standardised feminist either. Some are quite reasonable and some are.. not. Unfortunately the people that shout the loudest tend to be noticed more, and they tend to be the ones that only see one side of the argument.

Feminism is, to my mind, a good thing provided that the proponent realises reality is a bit more complex than an 'us vs them' situation, that you're not entitled to something simply because you don't like the way things currently are and that many women have different perspectives and life experiences.

Unfortunately gender is still an area that people are not comfortable with non binary definitions, and there's quite some way to go on it.

[taimatsu]

Hmm, no, *gender* being non-binary is kind of okay, as that's part of the point of feminism - that one should not have to conform to the social construct of masculinity or femininity which corresponds to your assumed biological sex. People are (just) beginning to grasp that it's okay to be a 'career-focussed' woman as well as a 'housewife' woman. *Sex* is the area (IMO) where people really really aren't comfortable with non-binary definitions.

[syllopsium.livejournal.com]

I disagree with that. Sex is biological and gender sociological, at least in my eyes.

As such it is reasonably accurate, even if blunt, to refer to people with non binary sex as 'apart from a few hermaphrodites and things' seeing as people with non binary sex consists entirely of the intersex (whether of obviously different or invisible chromosonal mix), transsexuals and those on T/E/P. Yes, many people really aren't comfortable at all with those of non binary sex.

Gender encompasses both behaviour and appearance. It is, IMO, entirely possible to be either/both a career-focused woman or a housewife and still be entirely female in appearance and behaviour.

Or, in other words, doing the same job but with 'male' and 'female' approaches. That allows for the feminist approach to be honoured, but still doesn't cross gender boundaries - as such.

[taimatsu]

I have lost my brain somewhere and don't understand this comment. In your first comment I understood you to say that society does not like non-binary *gender* (not biological sex) and I was saying that I think society is starting to cope with the *gender*-different in the sense of gender roles, but that differences which are to do with biology and physical difference (trans/intersex/etc) are not accepted at all. Did I communicate that?

I am confused!

[syllopsium.livejournal.com]

I don't think society is particularly keen on either yet, but biological sex is more of a problem. I basically agree with the lecturer; poor phrasing aside - the numbers of people with varying biological sex are in a small minority. Intersex people may comprise as many as 1 in 500 or so, but the number who are very noticeably different is small. Transgendered people don't count, unless you're including brain structure/operation in biological sex differences, or possibly if they have been on hormones.

I personally see sex and gender as going beyond the strictly medical approach, but if you take that viewpoint she's not exactly wrong. Of course, the more useful question is 'Does this make them less of a woman, and if so - why?' and other questions such as 'if person x is a woman in every aspect but y, but person z is a woman but lacks whatever, why do you consider one to be a woman and the other not to be?'

Unfortunately I think it's going to be quite tricky to discuss lesbian contributions to the feminist movement without outing yourself. I don't see it as necessarily being unsafe though - again, it may be insensitive to refer to hairy lesbians, but it is a commonly held stereotype and is in some cases true.

[anotherusedpage.livejournal.com]

the numbers of people with varying biological sex are in a small minority.

Not as small a minority as you might think.

Have you had your own hormones checked out? Do you know for certain how many sex chromasomes you have, and what types they are? Many, many people have at least some level of intersex biology without ever even really knowing it. And many more have some level of hormonal or chromasomal abnormality which has a small impact on their lives, eg increased hairiness in women. Dismissing all of that as 'hermaphrodite' is... well, I find it insulting. Also, in what sense to transgenered people not count? Because they're as likely to be insulted by the use of the phrase 'hermaphrodite' as intersex people are...

[syllopsium.livejournal.com]

I did state that it's as low as 1 in 500 (some have even said as low as one in 300). The number of people that are *noticeably* different is rather lower, though. I would not be terribly surprised to find my own chromosones are a bit unusual, but I've never bothered to have them checked.

The exact words listed above were 'hermaphrodite and things' and yes - it is insulting, even if the proper term intersex was used. The reason I'm not including transgender, is that it's a very general term, and unless the person in question knows for a fact they have a chromosonal abnormality they may not qualify under the biological definition the lecturer appeared to be using.

I take a somewhat wider view of gender and sex than that.

[medland.livejournal.com]

What is T/E/P?

[syllopsium.livejournal.com]

Sorry, I should have been more obvious. Hormones - Testosterone, Estrogen, Progesterone