Nature vs. Nurture... (continued?)

[henshawb]

Butler says that "malleability is, as it were, violently imposed.  And naturalness is artificially induced" (66).  This statement must lead to the nature versus nurture debate, and it seems to have a different answer than may be expected.  If gender is not something that is definitively malleable, and it is not something that is strictly static in nature, then how should it be conceptualized?  Furthermore, is it possible to conceptualize gender and uphold justice, or does the idea of gender necessitate unjust norms?

[Katherine]

I believe that it holds both states at once. Gender is able to be transformed from simple acts to a physical change, like gender transformation completely. It does allow for much malleability  especially in terms of femininity and masculinity, but also gender. Gender is something static, but it can also be transformed, thus I would say that it is malleable over unchangeable. It is possibly to conceptualize gender while upholding justice as well. I believe that it would be unjust to categorize and assume ones gender norms, but you can understand and make sense of it while upholding justice as well.

[xiey]

I agree with Katherine's point that gender is malleable over unchangeable, but not completely malleable. I think this topic can bring us back to one point we mentioned during class yesterday, that sex is something a person born with, it is their biological definition. However, individuals form their own concept of gender. In other word, we cannot determine our sex at the first place, but we should be able to choose our gender. In this case, the traditional conceptualized gender does help foster the unjust norms, because it limits people from making choices. This kind of fixed way of thinking lacks inclusiveness for the whole society.

[bellm]

Personally, I view gender as being socially constructed like many of the readings and class discussions have suggested.  But our society does not allow for gender to be easily malleable, we want people to stay in their designated roles. A big contributor to this mindset is our lack of language to describe this growing occurrence of gender change. We are unable to conceptualize something that we cannot think about in words present in our native language.  Until our language expands to include those with different gender identities, there will always be a degree of injustice done to these groups. 

[johnsond]

The article makes it apparent that one's biological make up is highly determinate of his personality and interests. In the case of John/Joan, while he is being raised as a girl, he is interested in playing with toys categorized as those proper for boys to play with. However, this only further complicates things with respect to gender norms and societal constructions. It becomes a question of whether the act of playing with toys of this nature is a result of a person of the male gender's biological tendency to play with those toys as they coincide with his inherent attitudes. Or as the case with Ludo in the film we watched, did Ludo seek to play with "girl" toys because that was his biological tendency as constituted by his inherent conceptions or was it a result of the want to be a girl and to conform to the norms of a girl? Regardless, each case shows how one's biological make-up plays a definitive factor in the interests. Point Nature. 

[godleskim]

I'm not sure if there is really a biological standpoint or tendency that is guiding Joan/John to chose to play with stereotypical "boy" toys or causing Ludo to choose more feminine toys. I believe that is touching into a twisted road relating to homosexuality or transgenderism being biological or not. I don't believe that they were playing with the opposing toys to fit in either, I personally believe that it had to do with preference. Ludo, for example, was so young- I don't believe that he was thinking about these things when he dressed up like a girl in the first scene. He has an affinity towards those toys and those clothes, not because he is trying to fit in, but because he is young and is doing what he wants, without thinking about the consequences that will follow.

[Aleasha Andrews]

I feel like the idea or gender does not make for oppression and marginalization of social groups, although, I believe the ideas of sex does cause these abstractions of social norms. Especially is one sees there sex being other than that of their gender. Gender is more nature based, whereas sex is more socially constructed so I believe people will be marginalized from society based of sex perception or how they perform in society, rather than their gender.\