A concept that has significantly influenced gender theory, gender performativity enables a more fluid understanding of gender by challenging fixed notions of identity. Poststructuralist scholar Judith Butler introduced this idea in her 1990 work, Gender Trouble. Butler critiques the essentialist view, which associates sex to the binary of the masculine and the feminine. Instead, Butler argues that gender is a socially constructed identity — produced, reproduced, and maintained through repeated actions, behaviours, and discourse. Therefore, it can never truly be a fully stable identity; even if it appears persistent.
Butler explains that social norms surrounding gender are so embedded in our lives that they seem natural and appropriate, confining individuals to rigid gender roles. However, these norms are not fixed and the roles can be subverted because they depend on constant repetition for their seeming stability. Acts of resistance within social structures can lead to transformation and a new understanding of gender. Butler’s work on gender not only challenges traditional theories but also marks a milestone in third-wave feminism, making a significant contribution to queer theory.
Two theories of gender
While there are many debates surrounding the definition of gender, two of the most significant theories are gender essentialism and social constructivism. Gender essentialism, in simple terms, posits that gender is best explained through biology — sex chromosomes and DNA determine one’s sex, which in turn defines their gender. According to this perspective, the traits, roles, and behaviours associated with masculinity and femininity come naturally, as they are predetermined by biological factors.
On the other hand, social constructivism explains that gender identity is constructed through discourse, which includes not only language but also bodily, verbal, and non-verbal acts. Gender norms become internalised to the point that they feel natural to those who align with their assigned gender. For example, a child with a uterus is assigned the gender of a girl at birth, given the pronouns she/her, and exposed to traditionally feminine roles. Deviations from these norms are often met with bullying and disciplinary actions.
For example, in many schools in India, while girls are expected to have long neatly tied hair, if a boy grows his hair long, he may face criticism and be pressured to conform to traditional masculine norms and cut his hair short. This demonstrates how regulations and expectations shift according to gender, even in contexts where uniform standards should apply.
Iris Marion Young’s 1980 essay, “Throwing Like a Girl: A Phenomenology of Feminine Body Comportment, Motility, and Spatiality,” examines how gender norms can also influence movement. Young shows that girls are expected to act in ways perceived as weaker and more restrained, such as using less physical space and energy when throwing a ball, compared to boys. Interestingly, these behaviours and roles are not constant and may shift over time and across cultures; for instance, in the 19th century, pink was considered masculine, while blue was associated with women.
This also reflects Simone de Beauvoir’s assertion in the 1949 book, The Second Sex: “One is not born, but rather becomes, a woman.” De Beauvoir’s statement underscores that gender identity is shaped and constructed through societal norms, and is not an innate quality.
Sex and gender
Judith Butler extends this discussion, and critiques second-wave feminism’s distinction between sex and gender. Scholars like Gayle Rubin argue that sex is determined by biological factors while gender is shaped by social norms. However, Butler challenges this separation, contending that even “sex” is subject to social interpretation. According to Butler, we cannot experience biological sex apart from the social meanings attached to it. Thus, both sex and gender should be viewed as socially constructed, as gender ultimately subsumes sex. The idea that a person’s body predetermines their gender identity is a product of social discourse, not a biological fact.
Butler explains that gender is not something we are, but something we do. Instead of viewing gender as a noun, Butler conceptualises it as a verb — something one performs rather than possesses. One is not a woman but does ‘womanness’. Gender thus, is defined as the stylised repetition of acts through time. This can be compared to the act of speaking. Just as talking involves the continuous repetition of words within the structure of language, gender involves an ongoing enactment of set roles. Speaking requires not just uttering individual words but engaging in a consistent and rule-governed process over time. Similarly, gender performativity involves the repetition of acts and behaviours aligned with societal expectations.
Performativity and performance
While expanding on the notion of performativity, it is important to distinguish it from the concept of performance. Performance suggests that individuals take on a gender role and actively embody societal expectations of what it means to be masculine or feminine, as if role-playing is central to the gender we express. However, performativity of gender is not a conscious act that one can alter at will. Rather, it refers to the ongoing process through which individuals unconsciously perform and reinforce societal norms of masculinity and femininity. These norms are deeply ingrained, creating the illusion that they are natural, even though they are socially constructed.
For example, we give baby dolls to young girls to play with, which plays into feminine stereotypes of being nurturing as eventually a woman, as per societal norms, has to become a mother. Although these actions of caregiving seem instinctive, they are learned through imitation and reinforced by societal expectations. Performativity, in this sense, means that these repeated actions produce a series of effects — talking and acting in ways that reinforce the impression of being a man or a woman.
Gender expression then, according to Butler, does not originate from within the individual but is shaped by external social norms. People don’t instinctively know how to be masculine or feminine; instead, it is through the repetitive enactment of societal expectations and norms that individuals come to express these gender characteristics.
Critiques of gender performativity
Despite the groundbreaking impact of Butler’s work, the theory has faced criticisms, particularly from transgender theorists like Julia Serano.
As a transgender and bisexual activist and author of Whipping Girl: A Transsexual Woman on Sexism and the Scapegoating of Femininity, Serano argues that gender essentialism fails to explain the numerous individuals whose gender expression defies societal expectations. There are far too many of them to be dismissed as genetic anomalies. Yet, Butler’s theory and social constructivism also fail to account for transgender individuals, whose gender expression is not merely a response to societal norms but often aligns with what feels right for the individual. This suggests that gender identity can emerge from within, especially as these expressions frequently manifest at a young age, before the full impact of social conditioning takes effect.
To address these gaps, Serano introduces the concept of “subconscious sex” where individual minds are intrinsically inclined toward a certain gender identity, independent of societal conditioning. While cisgender individuals experience alignment between their physical bodies and gender identities, transgender individuals face a mismatch, leading to gender dissonance.
But while emphasising the role of the brain in gender identity, Serano agrees with Judith Butler and Simone de Beauvoir that social norms can influence or interpret one’s subconscious sex. Thus, gender becomes both subject and object— shaped by internal inclinations as well as societal influence.
Rebecca Rose Varghese is a freelance journalist.
Published - October 01, 2024 08:30 am IST
