Diversifying Gender – Emily Ewing
Dominant United States culture holds that there are two easily identifiable genders, which match up with two easily identifiable sexes. Men have male anatomy, XY chromosomes, and testosterone and act masculine. Women have female anatomy, XX chromosomes, and estrogen and act feminine. However, this is not the case for everyone. There are many people who are born and identify as intersex, which can mean that when they are born, their anatomy doesn’t fit into the more common definitions of male or female or genetically they could not fit clearly into XX or XY genes, with some cells having XX and some XY chromosomes or having XXY, XXX, XO, and other variations in chromosomal sex.
While some people experience life as cisgender, or fit mostly into and identify with masculine or feminine gender categories that correspond to the sex and assumed gender they were assigned at birth, this is not true for all people. Many people identify within the umbrella term of trans*. There is incredible diversity of what it can mean for an individual to identify as trans* spectrum.
For some it means that they do not identify with the gender they were assigned at birth. Others identify as both, neither, or in between masculine and feminine genders. People have a variety of ways of identifying themselves and expressing themselves including but not limited to genderqueer, genderfuck, agender, nongender, nonbinary, queer woman, and queer man. In many cultures, especially indigenous cultures, there can be a third gender option as well, such as Two Spirit in Native American communities.
People who identify in these ways may choose to use hormones or may not and may use pronouns like ze/hir/hirs/hirself, they/them/their/themself, etc. This can oftentimes be lived into by appearing as the gender they understand themselves to be. Sometimes this also includes taking hormones to aid in that process and/or undergoing gender affirming surgery or surgeries. Choices around hormones and surgeries are often determined by more than whether or not a person wants them. Many times transfolk are not able to be on hormones or have gender affirming surgery because it’s expensive and usually not covered by insurance. For those who cannot afford surgeries on their own, some people have gone to varying and at times extreme lengths to fund surgeries.
In addition to these more explicit ways that people can relate to their gender, class, as was already mentioned briefly in connection to access to and money for hormones and/or surgeries can impact how a person presents their gender as well as what gender expectations might be placed on the person. For example, the derogatory term “welfare queen” is a clearly gendered term, yet it does not evoke the same image as the gendered term “homemaker” does. Both terms have implications of class and can also have racial implications.
Another gendered comparison could be the term “thug,” which, as was clear in the treatment of Seattle Seahawks cornerback, Richard Sherman, is a derogatory, racially charged term, and “breadwinner,” which tends to have both masculine and white connotations. In addition there are certain words that are clearly gendered even without an explicit gender identifier. For example, “bossy” is a term applied to women rather than men and “assertive” tends to be a masculine term. Each word gets at the same idea, yet bossy holds a negative connotation while assertive holds a positive one.
The Bible is also full of archetypes and gender expressions, oftentimes reinforcing problematic gender norms and expectations. From Solomon the “player” and “womanizer” to Mary the impossible virgin and mother in one, to the devoted Ruth and rage-filled Saul. Not to mention the ways the church has added to those gendered archetypes, most notably relegating Mary Magdalene to the status of prostitute in an attempt to discredit the importance of this first witness to the Resurrection. In addition to these more negative archetypes, there are many positive characters as well, such as eunuchs, who are found in the book of Esther as well as Acts. In addition, many of the women in the Bible make their way into the Bible precisely because they are acting “out of character” for a typical woman of the time.
The expectations and archetypes for how people live out their own gender identities are many and varied. My hope in this week is that with each exploration of gender we would have the opportunity to learn from the writer and learn a bit more about our own gender identities and expressions, especially as they intersect with other aspects of our identities.
As a white queer woman, I struggle with expectations of what it means to be female bodied and yet not fully feminine-identified as well as dealing with the gendered expectations of being white and middle class—expectations of education and work, independence and partnership. There is no way to tease out one singular part of my identity without ignoring the real ways that it is informed by and informs other parts of my identity, and that is what this week is about.
Throughout this week you will hear from a variety of people about what gender means for them from expectations to disappointments, pressure to joys. I hope that in hearing from them, you are also able to think more about your own gender—how it informs you and how you inform it.
—–
Emily E. Ewing is a native of Colorado. Emily graduated from Luther College (’09) with a triple major in Spanish, Religion, and Women’s and Gender Studies before spending a year in eastern Slovakia with the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA)’s Young Adults in Global Mission program. Currently finishing her final year of studies for her M. Div. at the Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago, Emily is awaiting first call in the ELCA.