Esstenialism, Social Constructionism and Division

Social constructionist theory contrasts essentialism, which states that sexuality and “human behavior is natural predetermined by genetic, biological or physiological mechanism and thus not subject to change,” (29 Vance). Essentialism is a likely to be a more widely accepted view of human beings around the world. On the other hand, Social Constructionism seeks to change our meaning of how sexuality is derived. “Culture and society construct seemingly stable reality and experiences,” (30 Vance). Our culture has a large effect on how we act, and thus has a great impact on gender, gender roles and sexuality. This leads to the question, does this theory leave room for choice of who we are? Or, does this mean that instead of biology determining our sexuality, does our culture choose for us?

Leslie Feinberg writes in Transliberation that every person should have the innate right to choose their gender and begin life as “gender neutral”. “I am very grateful to have this chance to open up a conversation with you to why it is so vital to also defend the right of individuals to express and define their sex and gender, and to control their own bodies,” (3 Feinberg). Feinberg proceeds to complicate this notion by suggesting a new movement, transliberation which she says will expand on the different ways to be a human being. She asserts that a person, like herself, can be neither man nor women. “This either-or leaves no room for intersexual people, born between the poles of male and female,” (7 Feinberg). Instead of letting these people living in purgatory, we should use their situations as a new opportunity to create something new. It is true that not only these “transgender” labeled people feel this way, but every person can feel like this, no matter if they feel masculine or feminine. “…I see individuals express their gender in exquisitely complex and ever-changing ways, despite the laws of [science],” (10 Feinberg). Every person has the opportunity to be different, and there really is no person that can fit a cookie-cutter definition of man or women. Feinberg does a wonderful job of not pointing the finger at women/men, and not dividing people into groups. She is able to include everyone, and helps point out our similarities rather then our differences. This leads to why looking at the ethics of research on the genetic component of sexuality has great importance. “Genetics can tell us what is normal and that the content of what is normal tells us what ought to be...” which would most definitely lead to people being categorized and seems differently (48 Schuklenk). Feinberg would disagree with this type of testing because of its unconcealed result for the entire population. Not only does everyone would feel the pressure to confine to what is normal, but the people whose genes are dissimilar would find that it is impossible for them to change, but they shouldn’t have to.

Violence Against Women

Crenshaw introduces intersectionality, which is the idea that many aspects make up a person’s entire identity. She acknowledges the complexity of belonging simultaneously to several groups. Specifically, Crenshaw, as well as Dorothy Allison and Helene Clarkson, look at how intersectionality affects women that are abused and sexually assaulted. All three authors imply, but Crenshaw states, “The violence that many women experience is often shaped by other dimensions of their identities such as race and class” (200 IWS). Looking these aspects, race and class can help fill in the gaps between feminism and racism for women that are abused. Another thing that affects violence against women could be their location. Clarkson’s “War Crimes” refers to a city in Africa called Baraka which is “at the cross roads of armed groups—from Congo, Rawanda, Burundi,” (613 Clarkson). Being in such a dangerous, hostile place increases the chance of these women being hurt. However, that doesn’t mean a women in America won’t experience violence, rather the violence is experienced in a different way. When looking at Dorothy Allison’s story, we see that abuse in a small town in North Carolina can change a women’s perspective of herself. For example, often times Allison refers to herself as “unbeautiful” and speaks of how typically women see themselves as less significant as people in their society (Allison 32).

Location also has a great effect on how these women can receive help. Clarkson shows that African women are often times too scared to tell anyone about rape. This is due to a multitude of factors. The women are at risk of having contracted HIV or other diseases. There is also “social consequences…The stigma of rape leads some men to abandon their wives (613 Clarkson). Abandonment by a husband can typically leave a woman without any resources. These are important factors to consider when explaining why receiving help would be difficult or nonexistent. The women are too embarrassed to receive help and no one feels they deserve help. In the United States, Crenshaw shows the limited services for black women as well as immigrants. “Despite this woman’s desperate need, she was unable to receive the protection afforded English speaking women,” (204 IWS). Even in the United States, she shows that there are many things that can stand in the way of a woman getting help after they have been hurt. Interestingly, she also states that the help given in the United States typically is below average because of its inability to give specific help for someone who is both colored and a woman. “When the practices expound identity as woman or person of color as an either or proposition, they relegate the identity of women of color to a location that resists telling,” (200 IWS). The services are not representative of their experience, so these women feel they are unable to come forward to receive help. Women cannot be expected to receive the same care around the world, for their experience, identity and locations are all very different.

I thought this was a cool link, and the organization made me want to join!

Who owns your idenity?

All of these readings had very interesting comments about the identity of a person. Identity can refer to someone’s race, gender, sexual orientation or even the type of activities they like. However, identity is such a broad word, which has a different meaning for every person. In turn, people tend to try to simplify it. This is done by making identity an objective issue, with no grey area obtained. These authors relate to having multiple identities, as all of us do, rather than being defined by one thing. They lent to the idea that having grey area is necessary for a full, accurate description of themselves. In “Los Intersticios” by Eveyln Alsultary, she talks about being the child of an Arab and Cuban descent living in the United States. “ I am shocked by the contextuality of my identity: that my body is marked as Gringa in Costa Rica, as Latina in some U.S. contexts, Arab in others, and sometimes in spaces not adequately Arab or Latina, or ‘American’…”(292). The author is literally of multiple identities, but she feels that she can only be defined by one at a time. Alsultary shows that any person, either literally or figuratively, should be able to define themselves as an complexity. She is trying to exemplify that people can define themselves in many ways without having to separate one identity from another.
Lauren Martin also makes similarly interesting remarks in “Through Strangers Eye’s”. Martin identifies herself with being Asian, lesbian and a woman. Similar to Alsutary, she remarks that people generally see being an “in-between” as unfavorable and dangerous. Martin takes it one step further, and compares how others perceive her compared to how she sees herself. “’Who owns gender?’…[the phrase] seemed to perfectly sum up the ideas I’ve had about ambiguity, about those of us whose lives falls between the lines, and who are then subjected to outsides invasive curiosity,” (11). She means that no one should be concerned with how other perceive them or categorize them, rather they need to be comfortable with an “inconsistent” identity that won’t match up with what everyone else sees. Obviously, this is much easier said than done, as it is likely that the way I have already identified myself is based on how other people see me. I think that these authors strike up thinking about not only their own situations, but every persons individually. You do not have to be ‘ethnic’, gay or disabled to have similar issues to these authors. I think all people are faced with similar problems of identity, which is perhaps why we feel need to categorize others (because we feel that way ourselves). Theses readings emphasize the importance of looking at oneself holistically. Idealistically, if we all could begin to look at ourselves this way, we would be more comfortable with it, instead of seeing it as “dangerous” as put by Martin.

Meet Emily Webb

Three things about me:

1. I am currently in the process of applying to medical school.
2. I am from Saint Louis, MO.
3. I'm currently learning how to play tennis.