Reading Levy’s chapter “From Womyn to Boys” shortly after reading Lorde’s speech last week raised several similarities and differences between the two works. Like Audre Lorde, Ariel Levy is extremely inclusive in her interpretation of the feminist movement. This chapter focuses specifically on the lesbian culture. While Lorde emphasized the power that could be generated from including lesbians and alternative female sects in the feminist movement, Levy demonstrates how various groups frequently have both positive and negative effects towards feminism.
As Lorde pointed out in her speech, mainstream heterosexual women do not need to be the only helping force in the feminist battle. While the gay community and other alternative sexualities may bring more support to the movement, it is important to recognize they are not exempt from perpetuating patriarchal domination within our culture. Levy focuses her attention upon females of alternative sexualities. Within this unconventional population, patriarchal domination is used in similar ways to those within popular culture. More and more gay women have started to refer to themselves as “bois” rather than “butch” because of the negative connotation associated with the original term. While those who label themselves as “bois” emphasize the youthful nature of the categorization and the non-monogamous lifestyle, we must look deeper into the social implications of associating themselves with the male gender. Levy closes her chapter with the statement, “this isn’t about being a lesbian, it’s about being a woman. Or a girl” (Levy, 138). This statement emphasizes the fact that in order to act as a united and powerful force, the feminist movement but recognize and reject all forms of female objectification, even if it is coming from unexpected angles.
Within her short article, Myhre’s language reflects her strong beliefs and self-respect. Rather than using her sexuality and appearance to degrade other females or take part in various forms of sexual activity like that described in Levy’s book, the feminist uses her looks to make a statement. I think that Levy would fully support Myhre’s mentality and hope to fight masculine domination by breaking down the cultural social roles we have grown to be so accustomed to. This mindset is a positive means of achieving change because it does not demote the female sex in any way but merely calls social norms into question.
One idea that Teal brings up in her post is the concept of alternative sexualities. I think Levy and Fausto-Sterling would engage in a provocative discussion on this topis exploring the definitions of sexuality and gender in our society. One interesting aspect that both of these authors explore is that there is no concrete definition for either sexuality or gender. As Fausto-Sterling highlights repeatedly throughout her chapter Dueling Dualisms, "the categories used to define, measure, and analyze human sexual behavior change with time" (Fausto-Sterling 10). This distinction about alterations in both practice and perception of these practices over time is helpful in highlighting many of the points that Levy brings up in her text. I'm not sure whether or not this is because I read Fausto-Sterling's text prior to Levy's chapter From Womyn to Bois, but certain ideas from Levy were more prominent than others. The most striking idea from Levy was that "elective cosmetic surgery- ...masectomies for FTMs- is popular to the point of being faddish" (Levy 138). This followed in direct parallel to Fausto-Sterling's idea of change through time. In the more liberal society of today the capability for practices such as sex changes and embracing what some may call 'unorthodox' gender roles is a readily achievable possibility. There exist many different definitions of gender and sex today from earlier times where little more was known, but more effectively in limiting these definitions, little was accepted. The commentary from both Levy and Fausto-Sterling provides much insightful material. The texts compliment eachother well and aid in gaining better comprehension of ideas expressed in the particular texts after reading them together. I think it would be very interesting to sit in on a discussion on this issue between Fausto-Sterling and Levy to see if my assessment of their agreements would be as close as I perceive them to be.
ReplyDeleteReading the chapter "From Womyn to Bois" made my opinions of Ariel Levy shift in a manner. Her ideas about "Raunch Culture" have come across as a bit extreme in her book, Female Chauvinist Pigs. As Teal mentioned, Levy is very successful in this chapter in contextualizing what goes on within the lesbian movement. Being at Colgate, I think students are not exposed at all to many alternative cultures that are going on in the big cities of America. This chapter allows us to take a step back, and realize just how big the feminist movement really is. So many women are involved and there are so many avenues in which to pursue reform. Levy's conversation about "bois" and her comparison of some "bois" to teenage adolescent boys really allows a picture to be illustrated. I also think the last sentence of her chapter: "This isn't about being a lesbian, it's about being a woman. Or a girl." allows us to see the greater whole. When one thinks of a woman, a lot of times a person will picture a heterosexual attractive woman. However, as Levy illustrates, in cities like San Francisco and New York, the tides are changing. Being a woman is no longer being defined simply in this manner.
ReplyDeleteFausto-Sterling brings up many valid points in her chapter, and I think the fact that she acknowledges the scientific aspect of our gender differences as well as social constructions adds a lot of validity to her argument. As a sidenote, with the Olympics currently going on, the story about Maria Patino specifically hit a sensitive chord. I found myself upset that an International Committee would discriminate in the way they did against Patino. Fausto-Sterling points out: "A body's sex is simply too complex. There is no either/or. Rather, there are shades of difference." I agree with Dave in that Fausto-Sterling's argument runs parallel with what Levy is trying to make a point about: the ambiguity between genders is becoming greater, and that is okay. Gender, culture, and experience play together in a type of matrix, and brings to mind Patricia Hill Collins' "Matrix of Oppression." All of these forces interact with each other in unique ways for each individual human being, and there is no fine line - a difference in every single person. Fausto-Sterling also points out how race and gender have to be understood both together and separately. This was remniscient of Lorde's speech in last week's reading, as Teal mentioned above. Gender divisions become more and more complex as we consider all of the biological and social factors that shape the way people think about them. A "discontinuity" can no longer exist in discussing gender roles. Historical contexts must be taken into account, and we must finally understand that we are not all men and women, but rather human beings. After taking an African Art class at Colgate, I really liked the Yoruba example that Fausto-Sterling uses: Seniority over gender. Many regions in Africa have different ways of conceptualizing gender and power relations within their systems. Women are the dominant force in some cultures. This comes through strongly not only in art, but in many aspects of their lives. We must understand that there is more out there, that we must go "Beyond Duelisms" to fully work in understanding our human nature.