Ok so originally this post was going to be about pansexuality and the roles of labels in sex and gender and sexual orientation, but I think there is also the bigger issue of how we so often insist that things be black or white and fail to see or accept everything that lies in between. I now hope to discuss one in the process of discussing the other.
One of the biggest challenges of any label is that within any group the individuals that make up that group can be very different and that there may not be a label that fits an individual particularly when it’s an either or system. What happens to the person that fits requirements of both or neither? Then we create the idea of you’re this or that or neither, neither being a catch all for anything that doesn’t fit the original (often binary) system.
At this point I would like to mention while I do have some firsthand knowledge on what I’m about to discuss and have done some limited discussions with others as well as done some reading on the subject(s), I am by no means an ‘authority’. There may be some info that does not reflect the general consensus, and there may be some opinions that are, not only, not agreed with, but feel somehow painful; my goal is to express my thoughts on the subject with hopes of furthering discussions and understanding. This is written out a place of love and wanting to understand, not out of a place of hate, so please try and keep that in mind. (And if you feel I am misinformed, please feel free to share your thoughts, but also understand that while I will listen and try to understand your point of view, I may not agree with you. I am trying to be as respectful as possible and ask that you do the same.)
Another issue that comes up with labels is that we do not all agree on the definitions of labels and yet act as if the definitions are obvious. We need to speak the same language if we are to get anywhere closer to really understanding what the other is trying to say. This is true for most things. In math we can’t simply combine fractions with different denominators without first finding a common denominator. In a game to really be fair and have fun we need to establish the rules at the beginning. Language is a bit more obvious, but the example of the word ‘gift’ in English meaning a present has a far different meaning than the word ‘gift’ in German meaning poison, shows how if we’re not using the same language, the same word can have a grossly different meanings.
But then comes the challenge of using the same language, what if we cannot agree on the basics, what if the language is inadequate. This is the problem I’ve come across lately, particularly where gender, sex and sexual orientation come in.
I have a friend who is trying to learn about sexual orientation for, among other reasons, as part of a class for social work. She knew I did not consider myself part of what the majority labels itself, in this case, as I do not consider myself straight (nor do I think I really have ever met anyone who would classify me as such) and so she asked to interview me as part of a paper for class. And had she asked me the first question a year ago, my answer would have been different, not because I feel my sexual orientation itself has actually changed, but because I did not (and still do not in some ways) have a word that accurately described my sexual orientation. I chose pansexual because it’s the only group I have found that does not exclude me. And through the course of these discussions with her (as well as others) I came to the conclusion that there is a problem with the language, there is no accurate label for me beyond the catch all of pansexuality. And the thoughts and feeling surrounding this label show me even more the lack of a label for it and perhaps a need for it, or more so the acceptance that not everything fits into our neat little boxes and not trying to force it to.
Here are some of the basic problems I have in terms of claiming a sexual orientation under the labels that society has created: all our traditional definitions of sexual orientation are based around gender and/or sex. Again I am aware of the failure of the language because I have issue with the definition(s) of both sex and gender; I somewhat cringed with using “gender and/or sex” because on some level they have the same problems that sexual orientation labels have.
I think part of the problem is the whole black/white thing. At the extremes it is significantly easier to classify one as one or the other, but the closer we get to the middle is where it becomes unclear. Now I am more than aware that it will be impossible to ever come up with labels that capture all that an individual is. (Please see the affect/effect of labels post for more discussion on labels themselves) So I guess it’s a big improvement to have a catch all, a way of accepting that the other labels do not fit, but it is also important to note that catch alls are more likely to be grouped by what you’re not instead of what you are.
Traditionally there is male and female. But the definitions of these are not always clear. And then there is also the dilemma between the definitions of sex and gender. For many, sex is a biological and physically based definition, often using criteria of chromosomes, genitalia and biochemistry. While gender is even more confusing as it seems to be a societal construct based on what is agreed on to be ‘masculine or feminine’.
Many societies agree generally on what is on a biological sex nature as being either male or female and more and more are accepting that there is, at least, a third option for those that don’t really fit either. But it is really not definite. Some may look at the chromosomes and say XX is female and XY is male. Ok good a definition… but what about those that are XXY (and yes it happens)? Is it the having two ‘X’s that makes you female or the having a ‘Y’ that makes you male? So then let’s go to genitalia, males have penises and testicles while women have vaginas, ovaries, uteruses and clitorises. OK again for the majority this will help define them, and usually correlates to the chromosome definition, but what about those that have all of the above? Or what about someone where it is not clear, particularly at birth, what they have? Also if you have a hysterectomy does that mean you aren’t a woman anymore? Then how about biochemistry, again not only is it always not definite or obvious, it changes over a person’s lifetime, I mean look at puberty and menopause. And secondary sexual characteristics are not really anymore clear, there are women who are hairier and bigger and stronger and have smaller breasts, etc than some men. And then also take in consideration that physiologically there seems to exist some correlation between sex and brain chemistry and structure, which while typically falling along the sex lines, does not always. My point is what defines sex is not black and white.
Which is a problem because on some level gender and then sexual orientation are built on the idea that it is. In a culture, the society has some agreement, on average, on how a male or female is viewed and should act in society. This shapes not only our view of ourselves, but how others view us and therefore treat us. This can change over the course of time and also from culture to culture. One culture might say that women are supposed to be submissive and quiet, while men are dominant and loud; where as in a society like the Amazons the reverse may be true. And at one time men of wealth equally wore high heels in Europe. At one time in western civilization, for a woman to wear pants was taboo, while it’s still quite taboo for a man to wear a dress. Gender is somewhat a push to prove you’re either a man or a woman to society and does not have to match one’s defined biological sex either. The problem is many do not fit classically, in the same way, into either group all the time. There really needs to be more options. There is to some extent, tomboy, effeminate male, butch so on, but these come with so much judgment and often a proof of how one doesn’t fit the ‘norm’. What if you don’t feel masculine or feminine, or what if you’re both? What if your biological sex that society gives you does not match how you feel, what if the sex assigned is not what you agree with even without gender roles? What if you have no specified sex, which gender roles are you expected to follow? What if you consider yourself a woman, but act entirely masculine? And so on. There is just so much grey here and yet so often we’re forced to pick one or the other (and what we label ourselves is not always what others would).
And then consider that our classical definitions of sexual orientation are based on whether you’re male or female and whether you’re attracted to males or females. If you’re attracted to the opposite only you are considered heterosexual. If you’re attracted to the same you’re considered homosexual. If you’re attracted to both the same and opposite of you you are considered bisexual. The problem with all these definitions is they depend on a binary system of gender/sex when there isn’t one. Yes a person who by all definitions fits male who dates only people who by all definitions are female, nicely fits into the classification of heterosexual, but what about someone whose sex/gender is not clearly defined?
At this point I feel the need to point out the importance I see with how people define themselves. To me, a self proclaimed man could be either cis-man (one where biological definitions and gender role definitions match) or trans-man, either way he is a man and so if he is attracted to a woman (whether cis or trans) he is by usual definition heterosexual. If a trans-man is attracted to men (whether cis or trans) he would fit into a definition of being gay. I know many would not agree with this, mostly I believe with the debate in society as to whether a trans-man is a man. I think because there is no definite definition and it is not a black and white thing, we must accept what labels people give themselves and be respectful of that, and keep in mind no person fully meets all of everyone’s definitions of even the same label. I also wanted to point out that just because someone is trans does not mean they are gay or straight or bi. Also by the same token just because someone doesn’t feel they fit either gender or fits both doesn’t mean they have to lay claim to one or the other. A transgendered person does not necessarily mean their sex is opposite from their gender. It can be a catch all for anyone who doesn’t feel they fit the standard definitions. And not everyone who’s sex and gender roles don’t match considers themselves trans. I know many, particularly women, who while comfortably calling themselves women actually fit the masculine gender roles definitions more than the feminine, I still accept them as women. Also just because someone doesn’t feel they fit homosexual, heterosexual or bi because they’re attraction is not limited to a binary system, does not mean they don’t label themselves as male or female. I wish there didn’t seem to be such a need by people to categorize, it wouldn’t matter so much if we weren’t expected to treat someone differently based on this label. I mean it’s on so many government forms, and often without an alternative.
Here’s where my problem really happened. I don’t believe I fall into a binary gender/sex system and neither do my attractions to other people, I can be attracted to men and women and anyone that either biologically or socially falls somewhere in between; and therefore can’t classify ‘same’ or ‘opposite’. So the catch all of pansexual is where I went. Because I like men so I’m not homosexual, I like women so I’m not heterosexual and I see that there are other options beyond men and women so I’m not bi. So pansexual it is by default.
But this had a problem. Not many people know what this mean and it’s an all inclusive group…. (see next post for continuation as to pansexuality)
No comments:
Post a Comment