#gender theory

[thefiresofpompeii]

if i won’t have lost the special interest by the time i’m back at uni and i’d have seen most of classic by then i want to write an academic paper on gender in doctor who. because there is SO MUCH to say about it. thinking about missy’s lampshading of the companion-as-gender in world enough and time. companion is a de facto gender, right? and the doctor is a gender. thirteen is not more feminine than ten or eleven, in fact, she’s emotionally distant and harsh in highly masculine-coded ways and the doctor will always find themselves taking on the masculine role re: the narrative, no matter what gender the actor that’s playing them is. of course amy pond as the ur-example of the companion without agency, treated by the story as a vessel and an object to pass between husband and doctor. then there’s subversion (ace, bill) and deconstruction (clara). martha’s character being simplified in the public consciousness as ten’s tragic rebound, ignoring her doctorification arc. doctorification itself as a transition of sorts. time lords’ gender-fluidity contrasted with their culture’s rigid social norms. cybermen and daleks turning themselves genderless as a marker of dystopian uniformity. the role of river song. rose noble and her magical mystery metacrisis transgenderism. charley sneaking onto the R101 dressed as a boy. ace dressing gwendoline in a man’s costume in ghost light as a symbol of evolution

i swear it could go on forever . i bet when i’ve watched the rest of classic the list of examples would be twice as long, the earlier you look

#the thing about it is that even the misogynistic/problematic depictions are fascinating somehow #dw #doctor who #doctor who meta #jamie.txt #jamie catches up #nuwho #classic who #gender theory #clara oswald #ace mcshane #thirteenth doctor #amy pond #river song #missy #thoschei #steven moffat #russell t davies

[whitehairedanimeboyfriend]

"We can always tell" is a violent threat btw.

#transphobia #gender theory

[arielthedaydreamer]

The world would be a better place if cis people understood the concepts of gender euphoria and dysphoria as things that everyone experiences, not just trans people.

The woman is not wearing makeup and a short skirt for male attention. She is doing that because it gives her gender euphoria as a woman.

On a more serious note, if a man doesn't feel comfortable to wear a pink shirt; eat a pink ice cream; listen to a female singer who is popular; express his feelings; drink fruity juices; hold his girlfriend's purse; say certain words; act with kindness towards his loved ones; apologize; deescalate conflict; watch a movie enjoyed by women; play with a small and fluffy animal; because he thinks these things make him look girly, less manly or "nor a real man", that is no way to live. That man is experiencing intense levels of gender dysphoria and he needs help.

I feel like people only look at men like that and laugh and call them sexist. Some of them might be and they need to be called out for it, but I feel like gender dysphoria is very common in cis men and we should be calling it what it is.

A cis man doesn't "feel uncomfortable" when he paints his nails for the first time, he gets dysphoric. Just like the cis woman who wears jeans during summer because she forgot to shave her legs and is embarassed about it.

Dysphoria happens to cis people, All. The. Time. Pass the message on.

#transgender #trans #gender dysphoria #gender euphoria #feminism #ftm #mtf #trans man #trans woman #non binary #masculinity #femininity #gender identity #gender #gender theory #gender roles #feminine men #men #cis people #cisgender #lgbt #patriarchy

[misespinas]

I feel like the thing Mulan (1998) accomplished better than any other Disney ‘princess’ film was how her society valued women based off 1. their attractiveness and 2. their ability to be submissive.

Other Disney movies (ex. Beauty and the Beast) make references to the misogyny women face for being unable to fulfill traditional female roles, but the disgusting standards aren't explored nearly as much as they are in Mulan. The entire song “You'll Bring Honor to Us All” focuses on all these horrible beauty standards she is expected to uphold:

“With good breeding/ And a tiny waist”

“Like a lotus blossom/ Soft and pale”

“a perfect porcelain doll”

But the song also reflects the social status of women and their roles in society:

“Boys will gladly go to war for you”

“A girl can bring her family/ Great honor in one way/ By striking a good match”

“Men want girls with good taste/ Calm/ Obedient/ Who work fast-paced”

“A man by bearing arms/ A girl by bearing sons”

Mulan’s reflection of this caricature she is meant to become is so much more powerful and sticks out even compared to other more recent Disney movies (Frozen, The Princess and the Frog, etc.)

I personally feel like Mulan is the only ‘princess’ who does not fall into the society's expectations of feminity in come category. She does not seek to become an object, and she defies the roles her society wants her to uphold. Mulan is the only Disney film that shows the impossible standards women are given. The only film that comes close to this would be Brave.

#Disney films #disney princess #mulan #hua mulan #mulan (1998) #feminism #feminist #feminist theory #gender roles #gender theory #oppression of women #radical feminism #radical feminist #radfem #libfem #liberal feminist #liberal feminism #intersectionality #intersectional feminist #intersectional feminism #beauty standards #asian feminism #chinese feminism #asian beauty standards

[intersexcat-tboy]

Benevolent sexism is still sexism.

If you think placing women on pedestals is feminism or suggesting all women are victims who need protection from men, that's benevolent sexism, not feminism.

If you think abuse is inherently less abusive, less harmful, painful, serious, anything of that sort because a woman is perpetrating it, you've fallen for benevolent sexism.

#sexism #gender theory #intersectional feminism #feminism #transfeminism #transfeminist #benevolent sexism #misogyny

[thebutchtheory]

i find it so disingenuous that some people act like transmasculine people can't relate to transfem people.

transmasculine people, GNC cis women and butches, for *years*, have been writing about how they are seen as predatory in the women's restrooms because they 'look like men' or 'don't look woman enough' to be in there. i personally have experienced dirty looks and weird stares in the women's restroom as an openly butch person AFAB.

there are countless videos of cis women being removed from women's restrooms because they don't look 'woman enough' to be in there to take a leak. a video of a cis lesbian actually went viral for this.

there's a song by tribe 8, a lesbian queercore band, titled 'wrong bathroom' about these women not looking 'woman enough' to be able to use the women's restroom.

s. bear bergman has an essay titled 'tranny bladder', in hir book, 'butch is a noun', about how ze has been forced to be able to hold it instead of choosing to use the women's restroom because of how ze has been harassed in the women's restroom in the past over not looking quite 'woman enough', same for the men's restroom.

leslie feinberg wrote in hir book 'stone butch blues' about how the main character, jess, (butch) and her friend, ruth, (a trans woman), would declare that 'the world is our restroom' because of how they would rather use it on the side of the road than continue to be harassed in public restrooms about their presentations, assumed to be predatory.

like, do people just think that transmasculine people are not seen as predatory at all?

trans women are hypervisible and that definitely leads to them being labeled as predatory in a much more visible manner, but just because you don't see it, just because it may not be reported on as much or go viral, does not mean that transmasculine people aren't seen as predatory, and the idea that we can't be seen as predatory or that we have some sort of special privilege that means we're somehow not seen as predatory by society is, frankly, dangerous, especially for younger transmasculine people, who are going to experience a pretty rude awakening in the real world when they get questioned and harassed or even removed for not looking 'female enough' to use the women's restroom.

#txt #anti-transmasculine transphobia #transandrophobia #transmisandry #only reason i use those two terms #is for visibility #gender theory #transgender theory #queer theory #gender studies #trans #transgender #transsexual #transmasculine #transfeminine #transmasc #transfem #transfemme #mtf #ftm #discourse #lgbt discourse #queer discourse

[autogyne-redacted]

Ok, so let's talk about "misandry."

(Heads up that I use terrible US foreign policy as an example of underlying gender ideology, Death to America of course)

1) if we're working within a social justice, privilege-oppression type framework, there is no systemic oppression of men as men, or trans men as trans men (beyond transphobia). Within these privilege oppression frameworks treating misandry or transandrophobia as a real thing is gonna have disastrous consequences.

2) But we need to be abandoning the identity politics social justice orthodoxy as fast as we can. Occupying a position of privilege within the discourse is dehumanizing and hellish, it has a terrible track record with transmisogyny (not a coincidence), and trying to map gendered power just by looking at identity groups means you miss a ton of what's happening within the groups, and in less straight forward ways.

3) a huge part of the gender binary is between camab ppl as (instrumental) subjects and cafab ppl as (responsive, feeling) objects. And this is fucked all around.

To pick one of the more egregious examples, US military directives make heavy use of the category of "military aged males." People outside this category are (theoretically) assumed to be non combatants while "military aged males" in ~warzones~ are basically valid targets by default. https://tinyurl.com/4skt53tx

This category also faces extra exclusion from refugee and asylum status: https://tinyurl.com/4txsmepy

We could explain this as a symptom of misogyny. That women should also be recognized as being capable of enacting violence and treated equally. This is the most straight forward application of orthodox gender theory and likely the worst.

Or we could say that there's something about the intersection of being Arab/Muslim/young/read as male that leads to a unique oppression.

But it's not like it's just this intersection. If we look at prison populations, or who gets hit by police violence, or weaponized accusations of Sexual Assault the logic is actually fairly consistent here, if a little messy to talk about.

Ppl seen as men are seen as capable of wielding power and this leads to benefits if they're seen as basically good. If they're seen as crazy, dangerous, evil, hostile, or at risk of being any of these, being seen as capable of violence makes shit way worse. Lots of intersections push you further towards being viewed as a threat.

(A pretty good bite sized model of transmisogyny is that it misgenders us as men + we get negative respect since we rejected masculinity + it frames us as crazy/dangerous).

Ppl seen as women are going to be seen as less competent, in need of guidance, control and protection by default. But it comes with certain (conditional) protections. Violence against women certainly happens, but the fact that it's a special protected category says a lot. (There's a lot to say about how much these protections are worth, who they really apply to and when they disappear and what happens then, but it's very clear that they exist and that they mean something).

4) so am I arguing for the existence of misandry? Absolutely not*. Gender is just a fucked up system of division and control all around. Privilege frameworks suggest that women are going to experience the same shit as men they share identities with + misogyny + possible extra intersectional oppression. And while this approach is sometimes helpful, I think a better default framework is that gender is just a way to create more social categories for a more complicated system of control with common threads like the subject-object binary that can play to different ways in different contexts.

The whole thing needs to be dismantled and we need to see ppl across gender categories as whole human beings with a meaningful interiority, the capacity for violence, etc. And if we recognize that gender is a complicated system of control, it follows naturally that our gender discourse shouldn't all ask men to sit down / shut up / listen.

5) the issue with transandrophobia BS is that it really wants to exceptionalize the trans masc experience. "It's fucked up that I'm being seen as suspect and capable of violence like terrible cis men, I'm obviously one of the good ones." And as they fight for the best of both worlds ("I should be respected like a man but still seen as incapable of chauvinism") it pushed naturally for trans fems to get the worst of both worlds.

6) returning to feminist "man-hating" there's a lot i oppose for being essentialist or doubling down on subject-object binary. Beyond that, a lot of it is just mean. And like, ppl can be jaded and mean sometimes. But a lot of social justice feminist dogma was ppl developing a bristly defensiveness from constant harassment and trolling. Ppl defending this as an understandable response, and then that shifting into codifying and valorizing it. And I just think it's a miserable way to live and it's miserable to be on the receiving end of it.

I think some grace and understanding for ppl being jaded and bristly is rly helpful but I'm done with valorizing it.

7) all of this said, basic feminist takes about men having lots of pressure and motivations to be chauvinist still apply. And they certainly apply to trans men. But there's a difference between having social expectations that you be a chauvinist and bowing to that pressure. And lots of men are chill and nice! Yes even cishet men!

It's easy to want to draw a hard line where you're "one of the good ones" and are categorically separated from the possibility of being sexist (ontologically incapable of violence, even?) and that goes really poorly.

(most of my beef with transandrophobia is that it's doing this + exceptionalizing trans masc experience in a way that fucks over trans fems).

But I'm not gonna ask ppl to constantly self flagellate or be hyper vigilant to make sure they don't slip up. Sin frameworks are miserable and it's not like being interpersonally shitty in a way that lines up with oppressive systems actually has consequences that much worse than just being an asshole.

So much of the more aggressive side of social justice just feels like ways to treat enemies, not your friends or ppl you want to be in community with.

I'm glad we've been moving on from it.

*editing a footnote since this has already come up a couples times / this post seems to be leaving my immediate circles: by saying misandry isn't real I mean: there isn't a systemic oppression of men as men that parallels misogyny. Gendered oppression isn't a "both sides" situation. When "egalitarian" or mra types brought "misandry" into the discourse this is what they were pushing for.

While I object to the idea that all men evenly oppress all women, patriarchy absolutely has men at the top. It's a complex and multi-directional system of power but there is an overall gendered slant to it. My framework here is still a feminist framework.

#writing #long post #not coming out of the closet #coates #transmisogny #gender theory #misandry #transandrophobia #i use men some places and ppl seen as men others none of it is super straight forward gender as it applies to trans ppl is complicated sry

[hmsindecision]

Whenever I pick up a book and the writing is barely edited trope-y bad YA fanfic, 9/10 times it’s an author identifying as q*eer. I have a few theories about why this is true.

1. Identity sells. Publishers are not marketing books, they are marketing people. Manuscript quality matters less.

2. People are afraid to criticize them.

3. The effort of pouring all your creativity into making a new identity, new language, and constant policing and editing of said identity robs you of all ability to actually use your creativity. You suppress your body, your feelings, any “bad” thoughts… pretty soon you lose the ability to be original. You have created nothing but a strict vision of the self, one that fits easily into a certain marketable demographic—er, sorry, “gender”—and you are incapable of original thought. To be creative you must have mental freedom. To be constantly monitoring your brand—uh, sorry, gender—and how it is affirmed/unseen/ignored/slighted means you have set all your powers of observation on this task. You don’t fully experience the world around you, like how women who self-objectify feel less cold. This is not a permanent state. We also lose creative energy when we are burned out by capitalism. When we are being exploited and abused.

Anyways I was disappointed in my library haul

#gender theory #gender

[whereserpentswalk]

Being entirely genderless is so weird. There's this set of emotions people feel about themselves that people view as really important, even people in the queer community view as important, and I just don't feel them at all. Like, I wouldn't even care if I suddenly became the opposite sex outside of being curious about how sex stuff feels with alternate genitals. It's like it's just void for me, and it feels so lonely. It's like everyone else is human and I'm just this weird fae thing, and sometimes that's fun but sometimes it's really fucking lonely.

#196 #my thoughts #gender theory #gender rolls #gender #queerness #queer theory #queer community #queer #my thougts #queer liberation #lgbt #lgbtq #lgbtqia #agender #nonbinary #non bianry #non biney #enby #genderless

[intersectionalpraxis]

something needs to be said about cishet men who think it is 'insulting' to tell a woman that she will be living alone with her cats when she's old & grey if she doesn't (essentially) cater to patriarchal values

aside from the fact that lifestyle being comfortable for so many of us (& what did cats ever do to you? aside from probably having more maturity & emotional intelligence) is that it is statistically untrue.

single & childfree women are the happiest on the planet. women's mental/overall health improves when she's not married to men. women patients are also far more likely to be accompanied by loved ones (kids/relatives/friends) to appointments compared to men in all stages of her life.

so what is it here that makes them believe a statement like this could 'put a woman in her place'? could it be the ways in which young boys & men are taught women need men to feel a sense of validation, safety & love? and that when women say they don't, they resort to reinforcing biological essentialist discourse because controlling women's bodies is a tale as old as time?

i think part of the uncomfortable truth for so many of cishet men is that their identities, having been shaped around heteronormativity in ways it has for women with specific roles and expectations, has been challenged in ways that no longer benefit/are relevant to most women (of course i acknowledge cross-cultural exceptions, such as matriarchies & countries where equity/inclusivity has been/is a genuine a focus)

but access to autonomy in many ways is key here & women growing/unlearning/learning about themselves in ways that reinforce their choices, their desires, their wants over someone else's is what men here are really threatened by.

like women can want to have men as romantic/sexual partners, but they don't NEED men & those men in turn get angry because they aren't able to control the narrative about women needing men to be happy.

the fear of being alone is ironic because ultimately if women, who have been perpetually objectified in patriarchal, white supremacist, capitalistic, sexist, misogynistic societies, are saying enough is enough & are finding ways outside of heteronormativity to feel fulfillment then the one's most scared of being alone are mostly cishet men.

the 'old cat lady' sentiment will always be an ageist/sexist/misogynistic sentiment meant to guilt/shame women for doing what is best for them. and is entirely a projection on his end, which is ultimately very pathetic.

#feminism #feminist #intersectional feminism #intersectionality #patriarchy #womens rights #empoweringwomen #gender ideology #gender theory #queer

[finnlongman]

Trans and Genderqueer Subjects in Medieval Hagiography (ed. Blake Gutt and Alicia Spencer-Hall) is now available open access! This is great news because this book was super expensive, but it's such an important piece of work for premodern queer and gender studies.

#gender theory #queer theory #medieval #trans and genderqueer subjects in medieval hagiography #the introduction to this is very useful for justifying why these topics exist too

[identitty-dickruption]

stability thesis

okay this is going to be a long one, so strap in and get comfortable! I present to tumblr: the stability thesis

background: in the UK, there was a study done about swearing. they were trying to work out which social class swore the most. the answer? working class and upper class people swore the exact same amount. it was only the middle class who considered swearing to be rude. why? because it’s only the middle class who has BOTH something to gain and something to lose within the class system

I am proposing that the exact same thing applies to queer theory

so let’s talk about gender non-conformity! have you ever seen a bunch of footy bros wearing a tutu for a laugh? have you seen the most macho man “put on” femininity as a joke? now think of the most middle of the line masculine person you can imagine. is he able to get away with the fake/jokey femininity?

how about a woman who wears a suit in order to be taken seriously at the office? that woman is only actually benefitting from the suit if she’s white, thin, and otherwise generally the perfect picture of femininity. masculinity only helps women if their social class has been granted femininity to begin with (e.g. a woman of colour is often not seen as a complete woman in the first place)

gender conformity is complex, so I won’t pretend that there is one answer to why some people can be nonconforming in specific contexts and some can’t. but I think that a huge part of it depends on how stable that person is within the gender hierarchy. the stability thesis proposes that the only people who have to conform 24/7, 365 are the people who both have the most to gain and the most to lose

right, so what about those who have nothing to gain? the “working class” of the gender world?

when I was a young teen, I was butch as all hell. I’m a disabled genderqueer intersex lesbian. femininity was never an option for me. when I did wear the occasional dress, well… I was once told that I looked like a drag queen’s day off. I gained nothing from pretending to be feminine, because nobody was ever going to see me as the perfect woman. and, since I had nothing to gain from putting on a dress and heels, I thought I might as well do and wear and say whatever the fuck I wanted

this is not to say that the super gender-nonconforming people aren’t punished. I was still punished for my nonconformity. but since conformity was never an option, I was going to be punished no matter what I did

so, the stability thesis:

those with a lot of pre-existing social credit can get away with (and even benefit from) nonconformity

those with no social credit (or very little) have nothing to gain from conformity, so often won’t bother

the only people conforming are those who see themselves as having something to gain AND something to lose, should they choose not to conform

if you read this far, thank you very much! feel free to let me know what you think!

#stability thesis #queer theory #queer #queer stuff #trans #trans stuff #transmasc #gender theory #gender #masculinity #femininity

[thelostgirl21]

I wish there was a way to clearly say:

I'm personally comfortable being called a "woman", only because I have the sexual dimorphism typically associated with a female of the human species, and that's how other people see me as when they look at my physical appearance; nothing more.

While making 100% sure not to accidentally bring any harm to the trans community, or making it sound like one's gender identity should always match their physical appearance, when that's far from being the case.

Because, until very recently, I'd always been calling myself "a girl", or "a woman" exclusively based on how I physically look.

To me, defining myself as "a woman", has always been the equivalent of describing an external characteristic of my body that others are able to see.

- I'm a woman.

- I'm 5'7''.

- I have brown eyes.

- etc.

It's always been exactly the same to me. It's what you can physically see, not who I am.

Somehow, it's like I completely forgot to develop a sense of personal identity tied to "being a woman" while I was growing up.

I could wake up tomorrow with a body that has the sexual dimorphism of a male of my species instead, have everyone call me a man and suddenly have to live my life as one, and I'd have only ONE problem with it.

Just the one.

My partner is a heterosexual man, so that would be a challenge.

But otherwise, I think I'd just be really curious to explore the physiological differences between my prior body and my new body, and then move on with my life without changing a single thing to the things I like, my behavior in general, personal interests, probably the way I like to dress, too, etc.

I'd just be "looking more masculine" while doing it.

It would be like having blonde short hair instead of my current brown long hair.

The rest of the world would treat me differently as a man, sure! But that wouldn't reflect how I identify or feel inside about who I am.

Just how others now see me as and choose to socially treat me.

My gender, to me, is something that's always existed outside of myself.

I have no personal use for it, nor is it a part of my personality.

I guess I've often been gender-non-conforming, too, not because I was attempting to rebel against my own gender, felt a need to distance myself from the binary, or anything... But just because I've never seen the point of it.

I've had boyfriends telling me that it was like I wanted to be the "man in the relationship", and being upset that I wasn't letting them play their role at times (that hasn't really been an issue with women, oddly enough); and I broke up with them without looking back, because what the fuck was that even supposed to mean?

I wasn't trying to behave like a man or a woman, I was just being myself, and adopting the social roles and behaviors I'm comfortable with. If you can't love me as I am, then what am I supposed to do?

Younger, I've had little boys back at school telling me that "it was weird for a girl to like certain things or express herself a certain way", and my response has always pretty much been to shrug, go "guess I'm a weird girl then", and then continue doing things my way.

(Yes, I'm aware that I've been very privileged to live in a world where I've merely been occasionally bullied or suffered verbal micro-agressions for ignoring the social standards set for "little girls"... Then again, I've probably embraced some of them!

I loved playing with my "He-Man and the Masters of the Universe set", or walking around with a lightsaber pretending to be Luke Skywalker... But I was cool with "My Little Poney" (the originals) and "Rainbow Bright", too!

Like I said, I wasn't trying to be "non-conforming", I just liked whatever I liked!

I was also lucky enough that my parents fully allowed me to go for what I enjoyed in terms of toys, games, activities, playmates, etc., regardless of gender.

And my physical appearance as a child occasionally had people mistaking me for a boy. So, perhaps, the other adults that saw me behave as one in public assumed I was one, and thus put less pressure on me to behave in a way that would have been deemed more "feminine" than "masculine".

By the point I really started looking more "feminine" (like I do now), I guess I'd moved past caring about it, and/or had reached a point where it made no sense to me that it would suddenly have been upsetting that I occasionally behaved "as a boy" or enjoyed "boy things" now when, until then, it had always been perfectly fine and well accepted that I did!

I guess there's something to be said about the influence of early socialisation, and how adults in the social environment of a child respond to a young child's gender, in the level of importance they might instinctively give to it later on.)

Like, I'm pretty sure that, if I were to ask you to determine my gender based on my looks alone (while fully giving you permission to do it), especially when I'm performing on stage wearing makeup, you'd go "you're a woman!" with a fair level of confidence!

But that's just it! To me that's just the way I look. A stylistic choice based on the way my body chose to develop, if you will.

What drives me nuts, though, is that I have zero problem empathizing with the trans community and their need to express their own gender identity, because I know what it feels like to need to be seen and respected as one's authentic self!

You tell me you identify as a woman, a man, agender, genderfae, etc., and/or feel a need to express it? Be yourself, and rock that gender! It is who you are, and it is your right to own it!

The fact that I feel like I don't have any particular use or need for gender doesn't mean that it can't be important for others, and that they don't have a use or need for it themselves.

Just because I don't intimately understand it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist or doesn't matter. It doesn't mean that I can't support, and actively advocate for proper gender recognition and respect in schools and other public places.

I "get it" without "getting it", if you will.

The problem, however, is that I am extremely uncomfortable with the idea that, if I identify as a "woman", people will assume that it means more to me than "I physically look female".

That it will be assumed that I emotionally and psychologically connect with my gender, and feel a need to express it, or a sense of attachment and belonging to the woman gender.

After having called the way my physical body "looks" to others on the outside "being a woman" for decades, it's hard for me to suddenly go "being a woman is not the same as passing for a woman, it's about the gender you identify with inside..." and stop calling myself a woman, because I feel like I've no gender identity inside of myself.

But "agender" doesn't quite feel right to me, either, because I'd never had any problem with the idea of being a woman, until I learned that I was supposed to give a damn about being a woman, and personally connect with my gender, that is.

And "gender non-conforming" doesn't sound quite right, either, because I'm not trying to avoid conforming to the woman gender, or expressing a different gender than the one that was assigned to me at birth.

They basically gave me a gender based on my genitalia when I was born, and I went "Yeah, sure! I guess I can look the part... Why not?"; while ignoring the whole social instructions booklet and guidelines that went with it.

So lately, every time someone has asked me what my gender is, or what gender I identify with, I've had a tendency to freeze, panic, and mentally go:

Like the idea of my having a gender makes no internal sense to me. It's not something I can relate to, "vibe with", or identify with.

Is there a way to respectfully say "I'm calling myself a woman for convenience's sake, because that's the gender traditionally associated with the way I look, and I'm okay with having grown into a feminine appearance by default? But please, don't assume it means anything to me beyond that, or expect me to behave, dress, or do anything according to the woman gender."

I've been using "gender apathetic" in an attempt to convey it, but is that really what it means, and how most people understand it?

Basically, I feel like my answers to these questions would be:

- What physical look do you most resemble? Woman / feminine / female.

- What gender do you identify with? None.

- Do you feel comfortable being called a woman, and her / she pronouns, based on the way you look? Yes.

How do you freaking call or define that?

Non-internalized cisgenderism?

#Gender theory #Non-internalized gender issues #Gender apathetic #Agender #Transgender #My posts #My thoughts #My very very confused thoughts re: whatever my gender identity is meant to be! #Hopefully none of what I've written will be perceived as dismissive or offensive. #I'm genuinely trying to figure out where I stand or fit in all of this... #Personal

[librarygoth]

to preface I did enjoy Barbie, and I feel like I need to make that really obvious bc it’s the internet and some feminine presenting cis woman will call me a misogynist bc I’m butch lmfao, but I think the movie’s core messages are weakened by the way it handles manhood, masculinity, and queerness. Forgive the typos—I’m probably not gonna read this back:

In Barbie world, there is no room for meaningful gender variance. All gendering is idealized gender, with only feminine presenting women and masculine presenting men fitting into the paradigm—queerly gendered figures like Allen, Weird Barbie, Earring Magic Ken, and Sugar’s Daddy Ken are largely excluded from Barbie world society, both under the Barbies’ matriarchy and the Kens’ patriarchy, are regulated to the fringes and are either ridiculed or ignored. Allen, arguably the closest of these queerly gendered figures to the Ken’s idealized masculinity because his queerness is quieter but ultimately present, finds that under the Barbies’ supposedly utopian matriarchy, he is tolerated but not accepted, and that in the Kens’ patriarchy, he is fully terrified for his life.

Stereotypical Barbie’s narrative arc is a queerly gendered one, hinted at by everything from the Indigo Girls to her inability to fit in with the other Barbies. Ultimately, the movie wants us to understand that idealized expectations of gender are harmful, but simultaneously doesn’t provide any real source of liberation for its queerly gendered characters other than escaping their society for another one. The only reason the queerly gendered Weird Barbie is offered a cabinet position at the end is because she is a woman in a matriarchal society, and because the other Barbies feel guilt at not accepting her—but their feelings about her don’t change. They still think she’s not like them.

On the front of manhood and masculinity, something the movie glosses over is that before the Kens are introduced to the concept of patriarchy, they are marginalized people in the Barbie World society. They have no political, social, or economic power, and during the course of the movie it’s even revealed that they not only don’t have homes, but that the Barbies don’t even care enough to know that they don’t have homes. When the Kens discover patriarchy, their enthusiasm isn’t because they inherently think men deserve to rule the world, but because they were exposed, for the first time, to a system where they had power, and they decided they were sick of being subjected. But this point is undermined by a subtle through line of biological essentialism; early on, we see two Kens ready to fight over Stereotypical Barbie’s affections, suggesting that even here, men are inherently more prone to violence. And the society built in Barbie world is a society in which women are naturally intelligent and capable leaders, and where men are vapid and stupid. Interests and activities viewed as classically masculine are dismissed as frivolous and goofy—even ones without any moral or ethical association.

The only men who are exempt are those with queer genders, and even then, this ignores the well-documented misogyny many cis gay men express, and still positions them outside of society without any greener grass in sight. And in Barbie world, queerness for men equates femininity (just as Weird Barbie’s queerness is something more masculine than the other Barbies, even if not masculinity proper), which implied that masculinity, not manhood, is actually the crime, and that manhood and masculinity are inextricably linked (again, Weird Barbie isn’t masculine, per se. She just isn’t feminine).

So while the movie’s message seems to be rooted in the idea that idealized femininity and idealized masculinity are harmful, it seems to also believe that masculinity and manhood are bad, and femininity and womanhood are good, but only if performed in the right way. We are supposed to understand that even if Stereotypical Barbie needs to leave to truly understand herself, the other Barbies have concrete senses of self and purpose, and that even if idealized gender expectations are harmful, Barbie world is better when ruled by the femininity—even that under feminine rule, it’s a utopia. But it’s still a world where queer expressions of gender and sexuality don’t have the opportunity to exist (Barbies only date Kens after all, no matter how many young sapphics made their Barbies scissor). Weird Barbie is specifically an interesting representation of queerness—it is only masculine girls (masculine in this context just means sapphic; sapphicness is a divergence from femininity in any society that values idealized femininity above all other forms), who are believed to have destroyed their Barbies as children. It’s often a point of pride among women who “aren’t like the other girls,” or those who like to feel different. Of course the reality is different—I’m a butch who never destroyed my Barbies; I just made them help my Power Rangers save the day. But the discrepancy between Weird Barbie (who is queer coded in a way straight audiences will likely understand) and Stereotypical Barbie (who is queercoded in a way likely only more accessible to queers, but specifically lesbians, who isn’t attracted to any of the Kens who want her but can’t figure out why), is stark. Stereotypical Barbie isn’t cast out of society because she is still performing a degree of acceptable femininity, and has the privilege choosing to leave. Weird Barbie, on the other hand, is forced to the fringes of society because she is visibly queer.

It’s fascinating to me that feminine presenting cis women (or those like AFAB she/theys who may not be cis but essentially move through the world as if they are feminine presenting cis women), have universally labeled the Barbie movie “for the girls,” when in reality, it feels to me more of a movie for those who fail to perform gender correctly. But I understand why, because the movie still, loudly and clearly, sends the message that femininity is good, and masculinity is bad—and of course the people most harmed by this message, which is oh so prevalent in leftist spaces, queer spaces, feminist spaces, are trans fems (bc transmisogyny), trans mascs, butches, studs, people whose masculinity is racialized, and people who experience marginalized masculinities.

#barbie #barbie movie #queer #lesbian #butch #dyke #trans #trans masc #trans masculine #nonbinary #movies #gender #gender theory