Assuming a Body
September 28, 2014 6:34 AM Subscribe
University of South Carolina Upstate based the Critical Lede interviews Gayle Salamon about her groundbreaking transgender study, first published in 2010 titled Assuming a Body.
In the interview, Gayle and the academic panel discuss her book and evenly explore the nuanced tensions that exist between performativity, gender construction and trans identity.
Other reviews of the book for more background:
Lambda Literary Review
Metapsychology Review
Amazon Editorial Review
In the interview, Gayle and the academic panel discuss her book and evenly explore the nuanced tensions that exist between performativity, gender construction and trans identity.
Other reviews of the book for more background:
Lambda Literary Review
Metapsychology Review
Amazon Editorial Review
Right around minute 20, she gives a nice explanation of the issue with the "gender is constructed, blah, blah" thing. I am getting kind of annoyed that she's talking about trans writers misreading concepts of gender construction and performativity. The people she's talking about were writing in a context where virtually everyone is misreading performativity. They're defending against the attack of the misreading of Butler. She's picking up on a certain existing datedness to some of the books she's mentioning,* but I feel kind of uncomfortable about a (presumably) cis person arguing that they're theoretically flawed when they're part of a conversation at a totally different level of abstraction.
(There's totally a really good dissertation to be written on gender as constructed by paperwork, if someone hasn't already done it. I also think it's interesting that the hosts of the podcasts feel compelled to ask Salamon about policy implications for trans people, given that that's totally not her subject, as if we can't talk about this without talking about trans people as a "problem".)
*I mean, I disclaim a little Becoming A Visibile Man every time I recommend it, but it remains far and away the best book about transmasculinity out there.
posted by hoyland at 5:16 PM on September 28, 2014 [4 favorites]
(There's totally a really good dissertation to be written on gender as constructed by paperwork, if someone hasn't already done it. I also think it's interesting that the hosts of the podcasts feel compelled to ask Salamon about policy implications for trans people, given that that's totally not her subject, as if we can't talk about this without talking about trans people as a "problem".)
*I mean, I disclaim a little Becoming A Visibile Man every time I recommend it, but it remains far and away the best book about transmasculinity out there.
posted by hoyland at 5:16 PM on September 28, 2014 [4 favorites]
Hoyland, you are freaking awesome.
posted by Annika Cicada at 6:29 PM on September 28, 2014
posted by Annika Cicada at 6:29 PM on September 28, 2014
I believe her scale is tilted in the direction of the psyche, while I'm still working on a gut feeling there's something in the soma still being dismissed too easily by academic studies. But this book appears to be at least trying to bridge the gap.
posted by Annika Cicada at 6:33 PM on September 28, 2014
posted by Annika Cicada at 6:33 PM on September 28, 2014
I also think it's interesting that the hosts of the podcasts feel compelled to ask Salamon about policy implications for trans people, given that that's totally not her subject, as if we can't talk about this without talking about trans people as a "problem".
I'm having trouble going back over it to make sure because the file is broken in some horrible way that makes seeking super slow, but I think the "problem" the host was alluding to was that the notion of gender "as a border crossing" creates situations in which the gender binary is bureaucratically enforced in ways that have no connection to the experience of the person the label is assigned to. According to the reviews, the final chapter is about pretty much that topic. Maybe I'm missing something, but it seemed pretty on-point to me.
posted by WCWedin at 9:51 PM on September 28, 2014
I'm having trouble going back over it to make sure because the file is broken in some horrible way that makes seeking super slow, but I think the "problem" the host was alluding to was that the notion of gender "as a border crossing" creates situations in which the gender binary is bureaucratically enforced in ways that have no connection to the experience of the person the label is assigned to. According to the reviews, the final chapter is about pretty much that topic. Maybe I'm missing something, but it seemed pretty on-point to me.
posted by WCWedin at 9:51 PM on September 28, 2014
I believe her scale is tilted in the direction of the psyche, while I'm still working on a gut feeling there's something in the soma still being dismissed too easily by academic studies.
I'm inclined to disagree (I think the two of us have had this conversation, actually), in the sense that I think the question of why people are trans is largely irrelevant when we get into this sort of theory (or any sort of queer/trans theory--it's scientifically interesting, but I'm not even sure about political utility). On the other hand, she does spend some time talking about her work in the context of previous work that doesn't take the existence of trans people as read, so I see where you're coming from.
I think the "problem" the host was alluding to was that the notion of gender "as a border crossing" creates situations in which the gender binary is bureaucratically enforced in ways that have no connection to the experience of the person the label is assigned to.
I'm not going back either, but I kind of think the hosts were asking "In light of all this, how ought we to handle gender markers?" But her point was about literal border crossings was about the question of to what extent our identities exist if they are not documented on paper. I don't doubt that she doesn't want trans people to change their documents more easily, but she's talking about the symbolism of that rather than the practical aspect. She sort of alludes to this question of whether the body is the right place to be locating discussion of gender at all, given that some trans people are going to talk about document changes as the defining moment of their transition, not the usually assumed physical changes. (Disclaimer: I going to be sympathetic to anything that puts a lot of symbolic power in passports.) If I understood correctly, the last chapter of the book is talking about the idea of using crossing borders as an analogy for transition and how that maybe doesn't work because it assumes clearly delineated masculine and feminine territories. (And that seems like it leaves trans people adrift in no man's land (but perhaps that's intentional?), but it also seems like it doesn't really account for diversity among people, trans and cis. But then I haven't read anything using this analogy, so what do I know?)
posted by hoyland at 4:37 AM on September 29, 2014 [2 favorites]
I'm inclined to disagree (I think the two of us have had this conversation, actually), in the sense that I think the question of why people are trans is largely irrelevant when we get into this sort of theory (or any sort of queer/trans theory--it's scientifically interesting, but I'm not even sure about political utility). On the other hand, she does spend some time talking about her work in the context of previous work that doesn't take the existence of trans people as read, so I see where you're coming from.
I think the "problem" the host was alluding to was that the notion of gender "as a border crossing" creates situations in which the gender binary is bureaucratically enforced in ways that have no connection to the experience of the person the label is assigned to.
I'm not going back either, but I kind of think the hosts were asking "In light of all this, how ought we to handle gender markers?" But her point was about literal border crossings was about the question of to what extent our identities exist if they are not documented on paper. I don't doubt that she doesn't want trans people to change their documents more easily, but she's talking about the symbolism of that rather than the practical aspect. She sort of alludes to this question of whether the body is the right place to be locating discussion of gender at all, given that some trans people are going to talk about document changes as the defining moment of their transition, not the usually assumed physical changes. (Disclaimer: I going to be sympathetic to anything that puts a lot of symbolic power in passports.) If I understood correctly, the last chapter of the book is talking about the idea of using crossing borders as an analogy for transition and how that maybe doesn't work because it assumes clearly delineated masculine and feminine territories. (And that seems like it leaves trans people adrift in no man's land (but perhaps that's intentional?), but it also seems like it doesn't really account for diversity among people, trans and cis. But then I haven't read anything using this analogy, so what do I know?)
posted by hoyland at 4:37 AM on September 29, 2014 [2 favorites]
This came across my tumblr feed this morning and really made a hell of a lot of sense to me in regards to what you are saying about accepting that one is trans as opposed to trying to constantly figure out why.
http://tonidorsay.tumblr.com/post/98719915605/what-is-to-feel-like-a-woman-or-a-man
What do you all think of the notion that documentation and gender marker changes are less of an external material body and instead a validation of the felt sense of self? And pondering that, maybe what Gayle is trying to say, is that validation of the self as real *is* a primary source of a sense of a felt body to which trans people are routinely limited access. Taking it further, maybe until we allow trans people the same freedom to manage our felt sense of identity as any other person can, understanding what a trans material body *is* will be a limited study and the data gathered will not extremely useful in helping answer these tough questions...I'm just riffing on stuff here...Thoughts?
posted by Annika Cicada at 7:10 PM on September 29, 2014
http://tonidorsay.tumblr.com/post/98719915605/what-is-to-feel-like-a-woman-or-a-man
What do you all think of the notion that documentation and gender marker changes are less of an external material body and instead a validation of the felt sense of self? And pondering that, maybe what Gayle is trying to say, is that validation of the self as real *is* a primary source of a sense of a felt body to which trans people are routinely limited access. Taking it further, maybe until we allow trans people the same freedom to manage our felt sense of identity as any other person can, understanding what a trans material body *is* will be a limited study and the data gathered will not extremely useful in helping answer these tough questions...I'm just riffing on stuff here...Thoughts?
posted by Annika Cicada at 7:10 PM on September 29, 2014
my own gut says that for me, state gender markers are more of an external material body.
That they exist at all, why it's so hard to change them, and, as Gayle touches on, the simplified and exclusionary and tailored arguments needed to convince people in authority to change that: knowing all that, how the sausage is made, its hard for me to imagine myself feeling validated by them.
(this is very much me Right Now though)
posted by thug unicorn at 7:51 PM on September 29, 2014
That they exist at all, why it's so hard to change them, and, as Gayle touches on, the simplified and exclusionary and tailored arguments needed to convince people in authority to change that: knowing all that, how the sausage is made, its hard for me to imagine myself feeling validated by them.
(this is very much me Right Now though)
posted by thug unicorn at 7:51 PM on September 29, 2014
I agree, the boundaries (gender markers) of the gender map are drawn in such a way as to define the territories and codes of where and how you get to be you (AKA how the sausage is made) in a way that is extermely harmful, but that does not negate the idea of a map of gender and sexuality that shares a healthy coexistence between trans and queer/feminist theory.
posted by Annika Cicada at 8:46 PM on September 29, 2014
posted by Annika Cicada at 8:46 PM on September 29, 2014
« Older There is a Starbucks inside the CIA | 10 things you should never say to someone with... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by hoyland at 4:32 PM on September 28, 2014