Sexing the Body by Ann Fausto-Sterling
Chapter 1 – “Dueling Dualisms”
Fausto-Sterling begins with the example of Mario Patino, a female athlete, who was revealed during Olympic testing to technically be male and barred from competing. She had a Y chromosome, underdeveloped testes, and no ovaries/uterus. But, she had developed as a woman due to her cells responding to estrogen and not testosterone though both were released by her testes. She fought to get reinstated and was eventually successful. Fausto-Sterling argues that testing of female athletes results from two fears: that countries will cheat by having men compete and that women as athletes cannot be true women because it is unfeminine to compete.
Fausto-Sterling argues that sex, like gender, should be a spectrum. She argues that science does not play as integral role that “We may use scientific knowledge to help us make the decision, but only our beliefs about gender - not science - can define our sex.” Though science is somewhat rooted in fact, it is informed by the cultural climate and disturbingly shifts accordingly. This continuum, for gender and sex, is mutable and not constrained by what one identified as in the past. Coming out as a lesbian does not necessarily mean that one did not enjoy vast amounts of heterosexual sex in the past.
The history of sexuality lends itself to a fluid definition. In different times, homosexuals as we understand them today did not exists. Behaviors that we associate with homosexuals did occur but they were outside of modern boundaries. This supports the idea that sexuality as well as sex is not inherently biological, but is deeply dependent on current social trends. Furthermore, the same individuals and behaviors of a past era may be categorized differently in the present era.
Our society is one of opposing binaries (dualisms). This creates a world where gender and sexuality sometimes pose on opposite side of these binaries. This implies that sex is scientific while gender is purely constructed. Feminists cannot critique sex because it is scientifically determined.
Fausto-Sterling argues that our bodies themselves provide the material but society can influence the form. Children reared in extreme non-social situations do not develop a sex-drive. Developmental Systems Theory (DST) joins the processes of Nature and Nurture as inseparably related to one another.
Chapter 2 – “The Sex Which Prevaileth"
Our society structures for only two sexes. We can see this through the way inter-sex individuals have no clear classification in terms of pronouns and whether laws apply. Doctors can correct deviations at birth.
This chapter begins with a historical look at how different societies have dealt with hermaphrodites. They have undoubtedly been a part of human history. Some cultures acknowledge sex as a continuum but may still persecute hermaphrodites.
Today, true hermaphrodites have gonads associated with both of the sexes. Any less clear variations are not considered true hermaphrodites. This, along with medical plastic surgical intervention, has led to the almost disappearance of the intersex.
Fausto-Sterling ties this chapter in with the first by examining how rigid sex boundaries are problematic because they deny the continuum of sex.
Tenth grade biology introduced me to the world of hermaphrodites to which I was previously ignorant. We watched a video that followed the stories of inter-sex individuals from birth. For the first time I was introduced to the idea that sex is a complex culmination of chemistry, society, biology, attraction, etc. Our current society demands that one falls within one of two easily defined markers. Only recently have variations within attraction been acknowledged. I always sympathized with hermaphrodites since sex is such a pervasive marker in our society. To not belong decisivley to either of the two options effects so much of social, legal, and romantic interactions. These chapters brought me back to those themes and added to them.
The argument that Ann Fausto-Sterling makes in chapter one, “Dueling Dualisms” is a very interesting one. She talks about the difference between gender and sex and explains why they are not the same thing. Sex is biological and scientific in nature. Gender, on the other hand, is a social construct. This is a concept that few people truly understand but it is hard to argue against. What I didn’t like about this first chapter is how Fausto-Sterling presents this information. She references Mario Patino who was an Olympic athlete who competed as a women but actually had a y chromosome. Fausto-Sterling concludes that female athletes are tested for two reasons. One, because countries could cheat by having men compete as women and two, because women competing at such a high level is unfeminine and should therefore be questioned. I think that the first reason is extremely legitimate while the second reason is completely off-base. I do not think that women are tested in sports because they are women, the same way I don’t think men are tested for steroids in sports because they are men. Testing in professional sports is a necessity to make sure no one cheats and that is the bottom line. Lance Armstrong is not only a man, but also one of the most well respected and well-liked men in sports, and even he is tested regularly for steroids. Great talent breed’s jealousy and doubt and any person, male or female, who performs at such a high level is subject to hormone and steroid testing. The fact that Mario Patino is a woman has nothing to do with the Olympic’s incentive to test her for hormones.
ReplyDeleteThe second chapter talks about the strict boundaries associated with sex. Hermaphrodites have existed throughout the history of the world yet they are ostracized and even “fixed” to become one of the socially accepted sexes. Although hermaphrodites are quite rare, they are not classified under male or female and are therefore considered different and deformed. This is unacceptable because it goes back to the socially constructed meaning of sex and gender. Because society believes that every individual must either be male or female, hermaphrodites are considered bad. This is unacceptable but society does not address this problem with as much zest as equality for women/homosexuals because hermaphrodites are so much more rare.
In her first chapter, “Dueling Dualisms,” Anne Fausto-Sterling makes a clear distinction between sex and gender. I remember learning the difference last year in modernity. Our professor defined sex as biological makeup and gender as a social construct. Interestingly, Fausto-Sterling writes, “It seems hard to avoid the view that our very real, scientific understanding of hormones, brain development, and sexual behavior are, nevertheless, constructed in and bear the marks of specific historical and social contexts” (Sterling, 29). I found this statement to be particularly baffling. How can one’s biology be a construct? However, I understand that when surgeons remove genitalia from intersexuals at birth to be able to categorize them as either male or female, they are concealing the truth; in the end, rendering all intersexuals invisible. I had never considered sex as a social entity or nurture over nature.
ReplyDeleteI thought the Kinsey scale was interesting:
http://www2.hu-berlin.de/sexology/GESUND/ARCHIV/GIF2/KINS.GIF
In the second chapter, "The Sex Which Prevaileth" I too found myself sympathizing with hermaphrodites. I found their marginalization upsetting. In a western society that enforces the categorization of being male or female, and nothing in between, hermaphrodites are left with the short end of the stick. If we think back to a couple of years ago, the famous American vocalist, Lady Gaga was highly scrutinized for being a hermaphrodite.
Lady GaGa - Interview with Barbara Walters on 20/20: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDS0GCQ9cTs