Critical Response

Kimberly Brown

QS 462

            One important point that stood out to me from both of the pieces by Driskill and Butler is that sex and gender are constructs, but they are the reality of the situation. By this I mean that although they are not “natural” or a result of our nature, they are the situation in which dominant society functions and we all participate. What is pivotal in both of these works is challenging the way we perform gender and, as Driskill suggests, performing intentionally. Though the two pieces compliment each other, it seems Driskill provides a more individualistic framework for navigating social constructions of gender while Butler simply offers an explanation of how the world works.

Butler argues that gender and sex are both constructs. In reference to gender as a performance Butler states, “Gender is the repeated stylization of the body, a set of repeated acts within a highly rigid regulatory frame that congeal over time to produce the appearance of substance, of a natural sort of being” (Butler, 45). The concept of gender as a performance, in this sense, allows us to start to deconstruct what we think we know about the assignment and proliferation of normative gender performances. These ideas, while incredibly important, don’t provide many options for divergence. Butler gives a breakdown of gender performance and Driskill provides a real life application as well as an analysis of gender with an emphasis on the complexity of the system that constructs gender in the first place. Driskill also allows for more discussion about gender and cultural dynamics when they bring up the way roles shift amongst different cultures. They state, "I think maybe I need to make a distinction here between 'masculinity' and 'femininity' as the specific gender expectations of the current overculture and 'masculinities' and 'feminities' created and reimagined by Queer and Trans communities, and genders within pre/decolonial Indigenous communities” (Driskill, p. 100). They then clarify by saying that Cherokee traditions are quite different than Western dominant culture. Because what we see as gender roles now is largely a “colonial concept” we really cannot apply them to indigenous peoples or traditions. This is really important because it further emphasizes the idea that gender is constructed by bringing cultural differences into view. If sex and gender were inherent to human nature, they would be the same across genders and communities. Because this is not true for Indigenous communities, we are prompted to question the origin of such standards. We are also encouraged to question, what next?

While I don’t believe Butler is arguing for the tossing out of sex or gender, Driskill is more clear about how gender can be performed while resisting the reinforcement of a binary system and dangerous masculinities. They state, “If there are parts of “masculinity” that we don’t need any more, that are hurtful to ourselves, our relationships, our communities, then why on earth keep them? But if there are parts of “masculinity” that we really love, that we value, that are fun or sexy and don’t hurt other people or the world, then we can keep those things and certainly, be anti-sexist” (pg. 105). Butler’s argument aligns with this when they say that repeating intentional gender performances such as masculinity can create a, "radical proliferation of gender to displace the very gender norms that enable the repetition itself." (Butler p. 203). Both of these create an opportunity to first deconstruct gender as a performance and then take control of that performance. This allows us to perform in a way that may be true to us but also challenges a violent and oppressive system based on binaries rooted in imperialism and compulsory heterosexuality.