Nice Girls Don’t Wear Cha Cha Heels
Jeff Allred (he/him/his) on In “Gender Trouble”, Judith Butler focuses on the concepts of gender identities between gender and sex. In this exploration, Butler introduces the notion of gender as performative. To be performative, means a production of series of effects that consolidate an impression. To Butler, gender is a phenomenon where we as people perform gender constantly through what we wear, our posture, mannerisms, utterances, etc. Performative gender is produced socially through repetition. Butler stands to believe that no one is born with a gender but performs it, once they are born in a world that has already predestined their gender for them.
Butler argues that sex is a socially constructed category stemming from social and cultural norms within a context that is reflective upon history and social/political aspects. Butler develops their performative theory of gender through the analysis of drag queens in order to prove that a gender identity is not a manifestation of something that comes naturally, but rather a product of actions and behavior that counts as performative. Butler argues that utterances, gestures, apparel, behaviors, even the fringe or taboos all work collectively to produce what is perceived as an essential masculine and feminine identity. This is problematic because it enable people to police another person’s gender identity, sexual orientation, gender, and validate/invalidate their own experiences.
Within this piece she outlines the relationship between the body and societies that construct them. Butler undermines the grounds in which modern theory attempts to frame which is a static understanding of identity markers that ignore the contracted nature of identity. Butler builds on Foucault (who is the go to guy which many gender studies theorists turn to) and his claim that “the body is a plane of inscription”. From what we know about his work from “The History of Sexuality” it is apparent how normative and juridical powers can mold and form impressions onto bodies. Institutions within both of these schools of power are tethered to their own beliefs that are reflective of political and social dynamics that can affect people (mentally/physically) and their perceptions. Butler highlights how bodies are under constant scrutiny of social norms where society and history construct their own values and meaning through their process of inscription to which the body indicates.
The affects that social norms have over bodies is where Butler references Mary Douglas’s diagnosis that the body and it’s limits are never only cosmetic or physical. They have the potential to be articulated into larger social orders. This process of construction allows for specific practices and bodies to be perceived as threats to he social order. Butler uses the AID’s epidemic and the media’s deviation of male homosexuals and other non normative sexualities. IT is because of this process that homosexuality was deemed unnatural and uncivilized. This goes against Butler’s stance that no one is born with a specific gender, therefor the performative gender identity of homosexuals is just as valid and the performative gender identity of a straight person. This helps combat the process in which specific practices and bodies are perceived as threats to society.
Butler uses Kristeva to help them formulate the concept of “the other” which is created by the repetition of something that is originally central to the body. Which leave us to question, how and why are these norms produced? Butler argues this yearning for inner coherence works to conceal the deviant iterations that exist along sexual contexts. This includes situations where gender, sex, and sexuality don’t align with each other to breach the understandings of the body. These bodies disrupt conventional understandings and reveal valued ideals as normative and fictional. Butler builds upon Foucault again to argue that the self is constructed outside of the body, hence the soul is never preexistent as it is presented in Western culture. Instead, the subject is defined by the actions being made by the body. Butler understands that social norms which are built on fiction and normative enforced ideals prioritize political rules and disciplinary practices which assist in producing subjects.
Butler utilizes the culture and lifestyle of drag queens in order to further prove their point of a performative gender. Drawing from “Paris Is Burning” the 1990 documentary of drag and queer culture, a large part of the drag culture were the ball circuits. These balls would have categories in which people could compete in, where one of the categories was “realness”. In this specific category, contestants would dress in a way of performing gender as Judith Butler explains through her concept. Their goal in this category is to be able to assimilate into the binary of social normalities of socially “acceptable” men or women. This categories and many others allowed the contestants to perform class, gender, and race within the ball circuits that allowed them to feel accepted into the world even though they were institutionally ignored. Butler references one of my favorite people on Earth, John Waters and his movie Female Trouble where Divine plays Dawn Davenport and performs a gender identity of a bratty high school runaway. In this case, Divine is literally acting but also is involved in gender performance because we all are involved in gender performance whether we know it or not. References of “Paris Is Burning”, “Female Trouble” and “UNHhhh” featuring Trixie Mattel and Katya display the degrees of femininity which also proves Judith Butlers theory that there is no right or wrong way to be feminine or no true way to be a woman. This is seen especially through the contrast of the contestants in the “Realness” category compared to Trixie Mattel. The contestants in “Paris is Burning” realness category are purposefully trying to align themselves to be viewed as passable for the gender identity they are performing. While Trixie Mattel is cosmetically challenging this notion. Her inspirations are rooted in 60’s artificial Barbie Doll aesthetics which led her to her intense appearance. But in her own way she is performing what it means to be a woman which is valid while challenging drag from the past. It seems that the more dynamic drag becomes, the more gender and it’s enforcers of social norms become questioned.
Butler’s example of drag is that this particular art subverts the inner and outer binary and mocks the notion of what it means to be a “true” man or a “true” woman or even having a “true” gender. Drag allows the imitating of gender and reveals the imitative structure of gender itself as well as it’s continuation in society. The parodic performance exposes the possibility for continuous resignification when original markers are put into a new context such as drag. The originality of this notion is then challenged and questioned if bodies are the boundaries. Butler uses the exemplification of drag to indicate the gendered self is always only a surface presentation that is achieved through social means of repetition.
http://https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDie8goaBDU
