Gender Exercise

Somewhere along the sliding scale of things I realized that gender might be fluid. The idea that persons who occupy traditional gender roles; roles where male=masculine and female=feminine stay in some sort of stationary existence wherein the duality or multiplicity inherent in each biological being is at rest or stifled, has clouded my own reality.

In this reality, I have come to realize that one may be coming into oneself in a manner where change is necessary for feeling wholeness, but where it also involves removing oneself from historical identification and therefore, selfhood. There is always this element in growth of letting go of something, in order to move forward. But is this always necessary? Can one move forward, change, and still hold all parts in tact?

There are a confluence of factors which culminate in one's self concept, obviously. Take a look in the mirror and answer this question, how many of those factors reflect or revolve around your self concept of your own gender? When you get up in the morning, and you have your very first thoughts... are you aware of your body and how you feel within it? Are you aware that your mind somehow does not match your body? Are you aware of which items of clothing and which style of dress you adorn in order to perform your gender and embody your true self - your timeless being?

When I wake up in the morning, I enjoy the sensation of my body. I am not even aware of its gender until I get dressed. And then I am made aware of the daily ceremony I must go through and how that ceremony is in contravention to societal norms. For me, putting on a pair of pants is not an act of warmth. It is not simply an exercise in fashion preference. It is a statement of my cross gender affiliation. It is signalling to the world my masculinity. A masculinity which is in opposition to all things considered acceptable for those categorized as women.

So why can't I just wear a dress? Oddly enough, even when I had long hair and managed a bit of mascara, I did not feel capable of wearing a dress. It felt as foreign to me as a clown suit and every bit as ridiculous.

Yet, despite this discomfort in female assigned clothing and accoutrements, wearing "male" or masculine defined clothing, while comfortable and suitable to my gender identity - signals to the rest of the world that I am something *other*. That which makes me feel comfortable in private, while reflected back at me in public, detracts comfort. One would hope the opposite would be true. You wear what makes you happy, others notice the ease with which you embody yourself and you are rewarded with this acknowledgement. Somewhere in this equation, if one is in contravention of societal norms, the reflection can become toxic. What is reflected back has been corrupted by the negative filters of social distortion.

Exercising one's gender through dress preference becomes an act of resistance. Any female who feels the pressure of leaving the house in contravention of her constructed feminine role demands... and, likewise, any man who acts and dresses in contravention of standards of male masculinity can understand the pull to conform to gender ideals.

Now imagine if you were pulled in the opposite direction - to the point of your own idealism - and you were subjected to violence, hostility, and general misunderstanding. The act of self alignment through dress has pulled you in the direction of oncoming traffic. Pause. You must now exercise self control.

in relationship to

I feel like most things are dependent upon their relationship to other things... proximity, distance, and directionality.

There is this idea that sexual desire can be located in relation to one's sex. Or more precisely, the sexual organs which one wears. If I have a penis and I dig men, I am homosexual. Gay. If I have a vagina and dig women, I am a lesbian. But this language is confusing. Exhibit A: Bisexual. This term often gets confused by the general audience as meaning two-sexed as opposed to indicating a desire for men and women, or possibly, multiple genders.

Another example: If I am a butch dyke, someone who appears masculine, and read as an androgynous female to the naked observer and I am dating a femme, a woman who's expression of femininity is easily recognized to be in alignment with her sex.... on what basis do I say I am in a same-sex relationship? Based on my organs? This is where it gets confusing. The question from those who have not given too much thought about queerness often is: "So, who's the man, and who's the woman in the relationship?" This is to assume that any relationship that is valid starts from a point of heterosexual normativity. Sex normativity. Gender normativity. These are the standards from which relationships are often judged and classified. But this is besides the point.

In our search for terms that identify who we are and how others can conceptualize us in relation to themselves, terms based on sex organ relationships don't seem quite adequate. I'm just trying to deconstruct this a little bit to see where it goes. Would we use the term same-gender to indicate our sexual preferences in a clearer way? But this is problematic as well. Because if I apply this term to my dating preference, for instance femmes, then I would be in an opposite gender relationship. You get the idea.

Anyways, all this to say that we may very well be too caught up in how we label relationships and desire. Maybe a language that indicates neither/nor would be a better option. My partner. My date. My relationship. My desire. Of course this is not so easily understood and achieved by a broader paradigm which demands positionality so as to determine normalicy. There is also the basic function of indicating one's preferences in order to open the dating pool.

And we are perhaps not at a place yet where queer or non-normative relationships have been respected and honoured for long enough that we can take for granted that we do not need to reclaim our worth by way of self-identifying. But, it will be nice when such language is no longer required. I'm hoping this will be indicative of universal acceptance of diversity.

But in the mean time, I'll just use the word queer.

bridging the divide

Let's talk groups for a minute.

We've got breeders, straights, gays, queers, people of colour, transfolk, disabled, various levels of income and class stratification... religion, age, ethnicity and whatnot. Cool.

Now say, if one was a member of any one of these groups (and maybe two or three or more) how do we bridge the gaps that exist between? If for instance, one is a person of colour and a member of the queer community - how do gaps between those two groups get bridged? Because clearly, there aren't many formal spaces where the dominant Queer Community in Vancouver for instance, encourage spaces for and work to dismantle the barriers that exist for people of colour and queers with white privilege to get along. And by get along, I mean mingle. Like chat. Hang out. Cruise. Dance. Celebrate. Feel safe and comfortable. Desired. Make friends... you get the picture. I'm just wondering how accepting and integrated our community is of all its different elements, and what can be done to improve this?

I know there are fabulous people out there doing fabulous work and organizing, and all manner of social justicey type stuff. And, no, we don't all have to get along. I'm just curious though, how we (and by we, I mean any individual capable of understanding the gaps that exist within subcultures) make an effort as individuals, and within our own little comfort zones and groups for folks who are different than ourselves? How do we make it easier to get along? Do we build spaces for ourselves to meet across difference? Places where segregated groups can come together and understand each other - amongst our own circles? Because forget about the broader community for a minute.... how do we invite or let people in to our own homes, friendship circles and families first?

Just curious.