These two readings examined gender categorization and the consequences of not fitting into the rigid male and female roles. The first reading, “That Sexe Which Prevaileth,” by Anne Fausto-Sterling, recounted hermaphrodites’ roles in historical societies. Over time, categorization and acceptance of hermaphrodites has continuously changed. Hermaphrodites have always struggled to find their place in the two sex dominated world, and the choice to be the correct sex. In ancient times, some societies were more accepting than others and attempted to clearly define their roles in society, split between the two typical roles of men and women. In Pre-19th century Europe, different nations had varying tolerations for hermaphrodites, while some countries sentenced them to death, others were supportive and made exceptions for them. Then in the 19th and 20th centuries, with scientific advancement, doctors began new classifications of hermaphrodites. Gonads become the defining factor of biological sex. Definitions for “hermaphroditism” became stricter and stricter. The increased knowledge of the 19th century led to a greater focus on the biology of hermaphrodites and the ability to convert hermaphrodites to better fit into “normal society.” The second reading, “One Bad Hair Day too Many,” by Jennifer Reid Maxcy Myhre, describes the authors decision to rebel against the societal norms of what it means to be a woman. Sick and tired of the endless hours put into beautification, the author embraces her idea of feminism and quits shaving her legs and cuts off all her hair. She believes that the time she isn’t spent wasting on her looks can be better spent elsewhere. She also enjoys what her androgyny does to rattle societal views and how it brings attention to the issue of gender categorization. Because gender is typically based on appearance, the author believes that her questionable appearance makes it very difficult for people to classify her, and thus people must delve deeper to get to know the real her.
I had the greatest reaction to the second reading. I also often wonder why there is so much emphasis put on the way women look and the substantial amount of time put into getting ready. At Colgate, there is definitely a standard of dress and appearance for not only going out, but also for going to class. Is it really necessary to spend an hour of my life getting ready every time I have to take a shower? When first getting into this reading, I found myself critical of the author’s emphasis on looks to promote feminism. But I think by the end, she finally makes her point that women could be spending their time much more wisely, such as promoting feminism, instead of fussing over their looks. I also got caught up in her desire to look androgynous. As we discussed in class, it seems like if you choose not to be feminine, you are automatically classified as masculine, instead of being classified somewhere in the middle. If true, does that really allow the author to transcend gender categorization?
The selection from “Listen Up” was especially interesting to me because it was a radical feminst view of a minor part of women’s lives. The author explores the role of shaving her body and her choice of haircut in her life. She decided while in college she would stop shaving and cut her hair short. This was all done in an effort to save time and also because the author did not particularly care about those aspects of her appearance. She noted the differences between male and female appearances- female appearances are much more labor intensive. More time is required for women to set their hair, put on makeup and (presumabley) select stylish outfits. The author states that it became a feminist statement to stop conforming to the female norm. I, however, feel that her point is not very effective.It seems to me that the author stopped following female norms and instead followed male norms. Conforming to male appearances is not what the feminist movement should stand for. To me, the feminist movement means the right to choose to look however you wish to look. That means you cannot shave your legs, but have long hair if you so desire- straddling the lines between male and female expectations. It should not be that you must fit one mold or the other; humans are unique individuals and should therefore look unique. By choosing the male norm it seems as though the author is just another cross-dresser of sorts. Furthermore, the author is presumptious when she assumes that all males revel in the fact that they do not have to shave. I was reminded of a time when my male cousin had to shave his body for a swim meet. He half- jokingly noted that he loved his smooth legs. This got me wondering and I searched the internet for opinions on men shaving their bodies.
ReplyDeletehttp://hairremoval.about.com/u/ua/menshairremoval/should-guys-shave-their-legs.htm
It seems in this particular discussion board that more men are open to shaving their bodies than the author realizes. All people seem to take pride in a certain appearance. Also interesting on this board is that women are mostly the people that are demanding men be unshaved. Men seem to be more open minded.
The author did make a good point when discussing people’s reactions to her new style. I think these reactions are more so directed at the violation of social norms rather than at the actual hairiness of author’s legs. Again, I checked online to see more people’s reactions and they were all pretty similar.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080127130409AAAkEnR
there was also a sarcastic column that listed awful reasons to go unshaven, thus reiterating the fact that women should indeed shave.
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/29838/5_reasons_girls_shouldnt_shave_their_pg2.html?cat=46
Overall, I think the author made some valid points but unfortunately fell short of an effective argument and may have instead distanced herself from her target audience.
I really agree with this post, it's really disturbing how doctors treat intersexuals. It really speaks to the way we are brought up because doctors wouldn’t act like this if they weren’t taught that there are only two sexes. Doctors should be the ones teaching everyone tolerance not trying to hush up intersexuals.
ReplyDelete