TheDaak review

EXPLAINER

Pratham Gupta

This explainer seeks to open up avenues for more constructive and nuanced engagement with gender, by providing a brief description of it and many other concepts that usually find mention in the discourse— academic and otherwise— around gender, the new front of the culture wars.

Mard ko dard nahi hota. Sharam ek aurat ka gahana hota hai. Boys don’t play with dolls. Girls should be gentle. Notions and norms such as these galore in our everyday lives, dictating how we act and interact. More importantly, these rules differ staggeringly for men and women. Several questions arise in a curious mind: who decides these rules? What if an individual doesn’t live by them? Are these rules the same everywhere? Answers to questions like these inevitably require us to delve into the conundrum that is gender.

What is gender? How is it any different from sex? 

To put it simply, gender refers to socially constructed roles, patterns of behaviour, characteristics and expressions that a society attributes to, and expects from, men, women, boys and girls. Sex, on the other hand, refers to physiological and physical characteristics (eg. chromosomes, gene expression, reproductive anatomy) that set males and females apart. So, sex is biologically determined while gender is socially constructed. 

An individual is classified as a male or female depending on certain natural and unalterable factors– a male if a person has XY chromosomes, a penis, seminal vesicles and prostate gland; a female if a person has XX chromosomes, a vagina, a cervix and a uterus. 

An individual, however, is thought of as a man or woman depending on whether they fulfil the roles the society expects them to– a man is to be the breadwinner of the house, must be rational, aggressive and bold; a woman is to take care of the child, must be passive, nurturing and gentle. Society attributes to the two sexes two genders or two sets of expectations and roles.

If that is true, how do male and females become men and women? 

Individuals don’t live in a vacuum; they interact with those around them and come to think of roles and behaviour of those around them as normal. Gender norms similarly are learned in the socialisation process, through schools, family and media. Even for young boys and girls, there exist rigid gender norms (boys shouldn’t wear pink, girls should play with dolls) that make them aware of their difference vis-a-vis the other gender. 

Gender differences are imposed through contrasting notions of masculinity and femininity. Gender determines what is valued, expected, allowed and aspired. Boys should aim for a successful career, girls for a happy marriage. In Kuch Kuch Hota Hai, it’s the docile, barbie-like Tina who is liked by everyone while the tomboy-ish Anjali only remains there to be friend-zoned.

Any deviation from what is considered appropriate incites shame, repudiation and even violence. Boys are routinely pushed about, made fun of in social settings for not being ‘masculine’ enough. Girls who are loud, daring and themselves are often at the receiving end of violence, both physical and verbal.

What’s wrong with this arrangement? Afterall, it’s natural, no? 

Scholars of feminist and queer theory have argued that traditional understanding of gender and the way(s) it pans out in the real-world, is deeply unfair. It puts in place, and sustains, a system that privileges a few and discriminates against the rest. They point out how oppression is in-built in any conception of gender and sex that is based on a hetero-normative and patriarchal model, both of which prescribe a rigid gender binary.

This either/or model provides for only two categories (men and women), and argues there’s a ‘right’ way to belong to either of that category. It equates gender with sex. An individual is normal within this set-up if they conform to the roles and expectations society sets for them at the time of their birth, including whom they should feel attracted towards. 

Far from being natural, this linking of a particular sex with specific, rigid gender roles and responsibilities is a purely social construction. As Judith Butler argues, it’s the ritualised repetition of gender-specific social norms that constitute gender. Gender is thus a performance, whose reproduction in our everyday lives lends it stability and fixity, or at least an illusion thereof. Work of anthropologists has also shown the cultural relativity of gender: different societies and cultures prescribe different, and at times contradictory, gender roles to the two sexes, thus driving home the fact that there is nothing universal about how we perceive gender.

Then, how many genders do we exactly have? 

Before we answer this question, it’s imperative to de-link sex, sexuality and gender from each other, and from value-judgements: being vulnerable isn’t the same as being weak; the autonomous and rational masculine figure isn’t necessarily superior to the connected and emotional feminine and not being attracted towards the opposite gender isn’t gonna damn you to eternal hell! 

In fact, the moment we think beyond the rigid gender binary, we create avenues where opposites cease. Gender, social scientists have increasingly argued, exists along a continuum: one can identify as a man, a woman, both or none of them. One’s gender identity is a personal choice and there exists considerable diversity– outside of the rigid binary– in how individuals and groups express their gender, in terms of how they dress, how they do their hair, how they perceive and understand themselves. Gender is also not static; it’s rather dynamic and fluid, given how it’s influenced by social, cultural, psychological and personal factors.

As for enumerating different gender identities, it’s important to recognise how complex, and personal, gender is; people are constantly finding new ways of expressing themselves and who they feel they’re, as we gain deeper understanding of the concept. To come up with a fixed number of gender identities then is to disregard individual experiences and restrict avenues for self-expression. 

But one claim can be made definitively: there are more than two genders. Examples of gender identities include,

–Cisgender: you identify with the gender you were ascribed at birth

–Non-binary: an umbrella term for identities that fall outside the male-female binary. It can mean different things to different people.

–Transgender: your gender identity is different from the one you were assigned at birth. 

–Genderqueer: you’re neither male nor female, or a combination of both, or between or beyond the two. 

–Gender-fluid: your gender identity varies over time: you might identify as different genders at different times or might identify as multiple genders at the same time.

Again, these are just a few of the MANY identities that exist. Even labels that do exist might not succinctly capture an individual’s sense of how they perceive themselves. When in doubt, it’s always preferable to ask a person who they identify as, instead of assuming who they’re based on your own preconceived notions.

What about LGBTQ+ and pronouns? How do they fit in this entire arrangement?

The different terms that constitute the acronym LGBTQ+ are examples of identities/sexualities that don’t fit in the heteronormative framework. These include lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer.

The ‘plus’ in the end signifies the space for newer, and more, identities. 

Pronouns, to put simply, indicate how we like to be referred to by others in conversations. As conventional knowledge goes, they’re used in place of names. Conventional understanding also dictates that there exists just two sets of pronouns depending upon the perceived gender: he/him for men & she/her for women. However, individuals whose identities don’t conform to the gender binary have come up with new pronouns like they/them, ze/zir, ve/vis and many others.

One common objection to gender pronouns is their alleged inconsistency with our traditional understanding of how language operates: how can ‘they’, a plural pronoun, be used for an individual? Or how can someone use she/they pronouns? Firstly, it’s imperative to realise that language evolves with time and is informed by the larger socio-political and cultural contexts. Secondly, in most cases, it’s on the basis of factors like appearance that we make the assumption that certain pronouns are correct for certain people. To assume that all ‘masculine’ looking individuals go by the pronouns he/him is to reinforce stereotypes about gender. 

Pronouns are integral to who we are, and respecting other people’s pronouns, especially those of non-binary individuals, is a way of respecting them and who they are. Gendered language always runs the risk of invalidating experiences of individuals who deviate from the norm. Using gender-sensitive pronouns, thus goes a long way in affirming their identities. A few suggestions are in order with respect to gender pronouns, 

– never assume another person’s pronouns based on how they dress/appear, always use gender neutral pronouns like they/them when you’re not sure of how they might like to be referred to as.

–share your pronouns, it encourages the other person to share theirs and makes them realise you understand how important getting pronouns correct is.

–it’s OK if you misgender someone by mistake or ignorance, just apologise and make a mental note not to do that again.

Why does being gender sensitive even matter? 

The status quo is structured such that while certain sets of individuals are disproportionately advantaged, there exists individuals who run the risk of being killed just because of who they are. Structural misogyny, homophobia, queerphobia and transphobia means those at the bottom of the gender hierarchy (like women) or those excluded from it (like non-binary people) are never able to lead a life of dignity. They face discrimination, deprivation, rejection and ostracism. They are forced to lead double lives, giving rise to gender dysphoria and subsequent adverse psychological repercussions.

It thus becomes a moral responsibility to question such a system and lend support to those who bear the brunt of it. Effective ally-ship requires a willingness to introspect and be cognizant of the ways in which one might be unconsciously contributing towards furthering these systems of oppression. It requires a resolve to engage critically, unlearn, learn and relearn. It exhorts us to be empathetic and be willing to listen. It’s perhaps our only shot at radically transforming the times we live in and creating a world that is inclusive, egalitarian and just.

Pratham Gupta is a student of political Science at Hindu College, Delhi University