Gender is different

Note added 12-18-13: The following piece was one that I hastily wrote and blog-published back in July. It was meant to critique a growing tendency among *some* trans people to reduce all experiences of gender and sexism down to a singular cis-versus-trans axis. As with cis feminists who view the world solely through a male-versus-female mindset, or cis gay men and lesbians who reduce everything down to a heterosexual-versus-homosexual mindset, such singular-axis views can (and often do) erase many people's experiences with marginalization. (I discuss this phenomenon at great length in Excluded.)



Anyway, I specifically wrote the piece in response to two incidents in which cis queer women that I know personally had their own experiences with gender and sexism dismissed by trans people because they "had cis privilege." These were not instances where my friends were denying their cis privilege or exercising it over others. Nor had they said or done anything cissexist. They were merely discussing their own experiences, but were shut down simply because they were cis - this obviously ignores the fact that cis queer women face oppression too, and they should be able to express their views about such matters.

I was angry when I wrote the piece and I just wanted to vent that anger into the universe. So I wrote it and pressed the publish button. Never a good idea, I suppose. And I am not using that as an excuse - I wrote what I wrote and I take full responsibility for it.

It has since become clear to me that, in trying to explain why gender is more complicated than a singular cis-versus-trans axis, I oversimplified other issues. I did this in the opening to the piece, which goes like this:

"As a white person, I never have to think about race, except on those rare occasions when I am in a non-white majority space.

I never think about being a U.S. citizen except when I am outside the country.

While I have had multiple health concerns over recent years, I am still predominantly able-bodied, and as such, I do not have to think about how to navigate my way through the world.

But gender is different. . ." [at which point I go onto talk about the numerous different types of sex/gender/sexuality-related privileges that exist: e.g., male, masculine, heterosexual, monosexual, cissexual, cisgender, normatively-bodied privilege, and so on.]

I realize in retrospect that this passage makes the marginalization and/or privileges that people experience based upon race, ability, and citizenship status seem overly simplistic and cut-and-dried, when they are in fact just as complex as gender is. As someone who has an autoimmune condition that made my every day life (e.g., going to work, typing on the computer) quite difficult for me for about a year of my life, but which has since gone mostly into remission, I am acutely aware that able-bodied privilege is not simply an all or none phenomenon. And people who are disabled in different ways may differ significantly in the different obstacles and oppression they face.

Most of the critiques that I have heard focus on how the opening of the piece represents an overly simplistic analysis of racism. I completely agree. There are multiple forms of racism that target different groups in different ways, and any given individual may experience racism (or privileges related to not facing racism) to varying degrees or extents. And because racism intersects with all other forms of marginalization, there will inevitably be a multiplicity of different experiences with racism, just as there are a multiplicity of different experiences with sexism.

It is fucked up to oversimplify one set of issues in order to make another set of issues seem complex. This is especially true when you are privileged with regards to the set of issues that you are oversimplifying. Indeed, it is often our own privilege that enables us to oversimplify forms of marginalization that we do not personally face. That's what I did here. I was wrong and I apologize. I will try to learn from this mistake and do better in the future.

I have been told that there is another interpretation of the piece going around. Namely, some people seem to be assuming that in the opening of the piece I am claiming that gender is different (i.e., an entirely separate thing) from race, ability, and so on. In other words, the assumption is that I am denying the existence of intersectionality. That was most certainly not my intention at all. I have discussed intersectionality in many of my previous writings (e.g., here and here, not to mention throughout Excluded, especially the second half of the book). While I was not in any way claiming that gender or sexism exists outside of other forms of marginalization, I can see how some people might misinterpret the piece that way. I take responsibility for that misinterpretation, as it was likely caused by my sloppy writing and hastily publishing the piece rather than taking the time to make sure that my thoughts and intentions were clear.

I considered completely retracting the piece, but I feared that if it suddenly disappeared from the internet, people would think that I was trying to sweep the incident under the proverbial rug. That is not my intention - I am trying to be accountable here. So instead I have written this preface to the piece as a clarification and an apology.


Here is the original piece:
As a white person, I never have to think about race, except on those rare occasions when I am in a non-white majority space.

I never think about being a U.S. citizen except when I am outside the country.

While I have had multiple health concerns over recent years, I am still predominantly able-bodied, and as such, I do not have to think about how to navigate my way through the world.

But gender is different.

Everybody has a gender - or more accurately, even if we don't identify with any particular gender, others will still (mis)perceive us as belonging to one gender or another. And we all are forced to think about gender all the time, whether female or male, queer or straight, trans or cis, agendered or gendered. There are always rules to follow, expectations to meet, assumptions to deal with, ideals that we will inevitably fall short of.

Some people have gender-related privileges of various stripes: male, masculine, heterosexual, monosexual, cissexual, cisgender, and normatively-bodied privilege, to name a few. Some people have more of these privileges, while others have less. But even people who have most or all of these privileges still have to deal with gender on a daily basis - the countless expectations, assumptions, norms, and so on.

All of us have the right to talk about gender, and about the gender-related issues and obstacles that we personally face. Granted, we should not do this in ways that undermine other people's identities or experiences. And we should be sensitive to people who do not have the privileges that we have - we should not drown out their voices or use our experiences to trump theirs. But as long as we are respectful of these concerns, all of us have the right to discuss gender. In fact, we should all be discussing gender, as the only way that we will ever eradicate all the various sexisms that exist in the world is if we all stop projecting gendered expectations and assumptions onto one another.

There was a time when trans activists talked about the gender binary, not just to describe how we are oppressed by it, but to encourage the cisgender majority to think about how they are oppressed by it too. Maybe not to the same extent as we are. But nevertheless, if they fail to check all the right boxes (e.g., wear "gender appropriate" clothing, take up "gender appropriate" interests and occupations, behave in a "gender appropriate" manner) then they will be dismissed, ridiculed, or harassed just as we regularly are.

Nowadays, some trans people use the gender binary solely to discuss how we are marginalized by it, while cis people are privileged by it. Some go so far as to suggest that cis people do not have the right to discuss some of their experiences with gender because they are coming from a privileged position. And this is not just a "trans thing": some queers seek to silence the straight majority, and some women seek to silence men's perspectives and experiences with gender. While I think that it's gross whenever anyone denies their male, straight, or cis privilege (or when they exercise those privileges over others), I think that it is wrong to insist that others do not have the right to talk about their gendered experiences simply because they have some particular privilege or other.

If someone said to me that I should step aside and let people of color express their views about racism, and let disabled people express their views about ableism, they would have a point - not only because I am a member of the majority and experience privileges in those regards, but also because I don't ever (or at least extremely rarely) have to deal with racism and ableism personally. But all of us face gendered expectations, assumptions, and norms on a daily basis. Gender complicates all of our lives. We all have a story to tell.

We should be expanding conversations about gender, not limiting them to a chosen few.