Quote:
Originally Posted by TomC
The feminist and queer theorist has really been popping out in me in the last few months! I’ve been reading the book Gender Trouble which discusses ‘compulsory heterosexuality’ as a construction born out of the use of the sexes for the polarisation of our identifiable performative genders. The subordination of woman in these dualised genders serves masculine oppressiveness, as does compulsory heterosexuality. Thrilling!
Essentially I agree. Gender (being the actions we perform that are typically ascribed masculine and feminine) is socially constructed for the purpose of the patriarchy. The world would be a much better place if gender and sexuality were more fluid, and we created a more even playing field.
|
I don't have time to start going too into depth really but just something to consider for now;
Whilst I do (broadly) agree that gender is a societal construction, it logically
cannot have been constructed "for the purpose of the patriarchy", as the very concept of patriarchy
requires gender as a precursor. That is to say, "the male" HAS TO predate "the patriarchy", and thus, gender can't be a social norm created
to serve the patriarchy. Thus, for me, a patriarchal society is a wide-scale secondary symptom of a gender divide, not your starting point.