Summary of Readings
Reading One: “The Prism of Gender” by Catherine G. Valentine
In “The Prism of Gender,” Catherine Valentine challenges Western culture’s simple notions of sex, gender, and sexuality and argues that social science research shows they are actually highly complex and evolving. She eschews the Western idea of 2/2/2 or “pink and blue syndrome” — that there are only two sexes (male and female), two genders (masculine and feminine), and two sexualities (heterosexual and homosexual) (p. 3–4).
In reality, she says that people’s beliefs about gender conflict with how people really behave.
“Our real behavior is far more flexible, adaptable, and malleable than our beliefs would have it. To put it another way, contrary to the stereotypes of masculinity and femininity, there are no gender certainties or absolutes. Real people behave in feminine, masculine, and nongendered ways…” (p. 3).
She asserts that sex “is not a clear-cut matter of DNA, chromosomes, external genitalia and the like,” and that gender is “built into the larger world we inhabit in the United States, including its institutions, images, symbols, organizations, and material objects,” and that sexuality, like gender, is socially constructed and doesn’t fit into the “binary and oppositional sex and gender template” (p. 5, 7).
Reading Two: “Theorizing Difference from Multiracial Feminism” by Maxine Baca Zinn & Bonnie Thornton Dill, 2000
In “Theorizing Difference from Multiracial Feminism” authors Maxine Baca Zinn and Bonnie Thornton Dill examine the importance of race in understanding the social construction of gender by using a conceptual framework they call “multiracial feminism”(p. 321).
They say that multiracial feminism “encompasses several emergent perspectives: AA, Latinas, Asian Americans, and Native Americans women whose analyses are shaped by their unique perspectives as ‘outsiders within’ — marginal intellectuals whose social locations provide them with a particular perspective on self and society” (p. 324).
The authors go on to explain that multiracial feminism grew out of socialist feminist thinking and race and ethnic studies (p. 325).
Multiracial feminism asks that women’s studies be more inclusive and consider race, class, location, and other differences so that we can “grapple with core feminist issues about how genders are socially constructed and constructed differently” (p. 39).
“The model of womanhood that feminist social science once held as “universal” is also a product of race and class” (p. 329)
How the Readings Connect
All authors agree that gender is pervasive and shapes almost every aspect of our lives. The authors also agree that gender is a construct, meaning it can vary over time and from society to society. Where Valentine helps us build a foundational understanding of sex, gender, and sexuality, Baca Zinn and Thornton Dill apply another layer and ask us to consider the intersection of race, place, and gender and how that view (multiracial feminism) can contribute to a more universal theory of feminism.
The Replacements’ song “Androgynous” describes a couple who defies traditional gender roles. The song says while they may be laughed at in the moment, one day their perceived differences will be a thing of the past, that it will be normal. It reinforces Valentine’s assertions that gender is malleable and societal definitions/expectations of gender evolve.
My Key Thoughts & Takeaways
First, I appreciated Valentine’s description of Western beliefs regarding sex, gender, and sexuality. I also appreciated her explanation of how modern research is challenging these notions. I think “The Prism of Gender” was a solid introductory read.
However, one aspect of “Theorizing Difference from Multiracial Feminism” really stood out to me. On pages 326–327, the authors list the distinguishing features of multiracial feminism. On page 328 they write about “three specific guiding principles of inclusive feminist theory: ‘building complex analyses, avoiding erasure, specifying location.” They go on to say that “In the last decade, the opening up of academic feminism has focused attention on social location in the production of knowledge” (p. 328).
It’s the mention of place that caught my attention. In the spring of 2022, I took a Special Topics in History and Geography course called The Queer South. The goal of the class was to question fixed notions about place and identity and to question historical assumptions about where people belong. One important aspect of the class was to consider who historically has been doing the storytelling. I think that’s what Maxine Baca Zinn and Bonnie Thornton Dill are asking us to do. They are asking that we question our traditional understanding of women and gender — even our feminist understanding of women and gender — by asking who has been doing the “telling” and to consider if all people, places, and identities have been included and are represented. They are asking that we reconceptualize our notions of gender and feminism by being more inclusive.
Question for Consideration
Pick and choose as you’d like:
- Have you been able to connect any of what we have read so far to a personal or academic experience? If yes, what? If not, why do you think that is?
- What fascinates or puzzles you most about defining or redefining sex, gender, or sexuality?
Keywords
Sex | Gender | Sexuality | Feminism
1.Have you been able to connect any of what we have read so far to a personal or academic experience? If yes, what? If not, why do you think that is?
I have been able to connect with some parts of the reading to personal experience but not all of it. The thing I connected with the most was how they talked about African American Women’s Rights. I was born to an African American woman and a Caucasian father. I haven’t had any issues with it but my mother did because I am pale so everyone would look at her weird and question her.
Hey really enjoyed your blog for this week. I can connect the first reading on a lot of personal experiences I’ve had when i was younger. My grandma was very strict on us girls being and dressing like a lady. When we would go to church i would want to play with the boys all the time but i was told i had a dress on and couldn’t do everything that the boys did. it made my hate dresses! HAHA im glad that as i gotten older my point of view on gender changes overtime.
To answer your second question, I found the information on the views of gender outside of the traditional western views to be fascinating. There is very interesting insight on how different cultures go about defining gender when I have grown up only hearing about how Americans view it. I didn’t know about any of the specific examples prior to reading the text. Nonetheless, it does a great job at illustrating just how limiting the western views are. Not only that, but it also shows how much the views of gender fluctuate depending on region/culture.
I love that you were able to connect the reading to something you learned in another class! I think your ideas about location and place are interesting and certainly contribute to our understanding of intersectionality. Geography can really shape us, just as we can shape geography. Good ideas!