nef@calmasd.Prime.COM (Nancy Fox) (02/01/90)
In article <25C26AAE.27180@paris.ics.uci.edu>, tittle@ics.uci.edu writes: > Review by Cindy Tittle > > Gender Blending > by Holly Devor > > Holly Devor interviewed fifteen women who are consistently mistaken > for men as the basis for this book. I am frequently mistaken for a man. This occurs most often over the phone, but has also occurred occasionally in person. I'm a lesbian, and I usually wear pants and flannel or cotton shirts. This mistaking me for a man though has always made me and my friends curious, though, because I don't really look masculine. > All the women interviewed for Devor's book were dedicated tomboys with > the support of their fathers (or father figures) as children; all felt > betrayed when their fathers suddenly expected them to act feminine > when they entered puberty -- to the extent of disparaging the same > masculinity they had earlier encouraged. In resisting the new roles > expected of them, the women found that they were often mistaken for > men. Devor explores the effect of this on the women, as they are > forced to examine their own gender identity in the face of so much > demonstrated confusion, examine the perception society has of men and > women, and examine their sexuality. This is true for me also. > Some of these women correct people when they are mistaken for men. > Others have learned to ignore it, still others get very angry at > people for making the mistake. On the other hand, some tended to be > uncomfortable with what they saw as their duplicity, blaming > themselves rather than others for the mistakes. Often they were > puzzled, pointing out that other women dressed in pants and had short > hair as well. One thing that has occurred to me is that, though I don't look masculine, I don't act or look feminine, so that leaves masculine as the alternative. This has particulary occurred to me when speaking over the phone. I don't have a low voice, so I don't think it's the sound of my voice that makes people think they are talking to a man. I think it has more to do with the manner of my speech. My manner is direct and straightforward, which I think more people interpret as masculine. I used to correct people, but, I finally figured out that I get better service, better reservations, and treated with more respect when the person at the other end of the line thinks they are talking to a man. Of course not all the time, but often enough that I started noticing it. > All of them refused to be obviously feminine, stating that they would > break their ankles on stiletto heels, feel ridiculous in dresses and > silly in makeup and jewelry. Some women pointed out that they > actually looked like transvestites when they tried, like men dressing > as women. Yes. I've wondered if it is just because I haven't worn a dress in twenty years. But I do remember always feeling ridiculous in dresses, and I never wore makeup. However, I see myself as female, but not "feminine". I have no desire to be masculine, or appear masculine. I wear the clothes that I wear because they are comfortable, not because they are masculine. You know the old joke about lesbians and comfortable shoes...I think there is some truth to the joke. No one has ever been able to sell me on the idea that wearing a bra and pantyhose and heels and short skirts or tight jeans is comfortable. I have had several women say to me when they see me at work dressed in pants and shirt and deck shoes that they wished THEY could dress that way. I'm always too surprised to ask them why they can't. > Many of the women are lesbian, while others prefer "hypermasculine" > men for their partners. Many described periods during which they used > men as sexual objects in their anger toward being unfairly expected to > give up their masculine behavior. Many were actually mysogynistic to > some extent, feeling that other women could and should take the same > route that they did. I don't understand what you're saying here. In what way is that mysogynistic? I sometimes get very frustrated with what I call "fembots" or those women who play into the helpless female role. It makes it more difficult for all of us to move ahead out of sexual stereotyping when some women are still actively playing the game. Is this what some of the women were expressing? Maybe I should read the book? > Others could see clearly how men and women were treated: I have raised a daughter, my lover's daughter, who is absolutely my opposite. She has worn makeup, or at least tried to wear makeup, since she was about six. She is now twenty, and she is the extreme of feminine - the clothes, the makeup, the heels, the jewelry, the perfume, and especially the way she relates to men. And I've seen what a different life she lives from my own. If her car breaks down, five guys trip over each other to stop and help her. I could grow old and die...Half the time, car repairs are free. I don't think she's ever bought a meal...I remember walking with her down the street when she was about fifteen, and guys would come to a complete stop in the middle of the street to stare. It was weird. It not so much that she's beautiful, she just knows how to attract men. But you know, I've also felt that, because she knows how to manipulate men, she doesn't have a lot of respect for them. But that's another issue... Thanks for the review. I'll pick up the book. Nancy
tittle@blanche.ics.uci.edu (Cindy Tittle) (02/03/90)
In article <922@calmasd.Prime.COM>, nef@calmasd (Nancy Fox) writes: [Commenting on my review of _Gender Blending_] |I am frequently mistaken for a man. This occurs most often over the |phone, but has also occurred occasionally in person. I'm a lesbian, |and I usually wear pants and flannel or cotton shirts. This mistaking |me for a man though has always made me and my friends curious, though, |because I don't really look masculine. Holly Devor made much the same comment about some of the women that she interviewed -- she found it hard to believe that people would think of them as men. |One thing that has occurred to me is that, though I don't look |masculine, I don't act or look feminine, so that leaves masculine |as the alternative. Devor covers this in her book. There have been studies done that show people really require very few cues to determine masculinity, but more to determine feminity. Thus the absense of feminine clues leads to assumption of masculinity, but not the reverse. |> give up their masculine behavior. Many were actually mysogynistic to |> some extent, feeling that other women could and should take the same |> route that they did. | |I don't understand what you're saying here. In what way is that |mysogynistic? I sometimes get very frustrated with what I call |"fembots" or those women who play into the helpless female role. |It makes it more difficult for all of us to move ahead out of |sexual stereotyping when some women are still actively playing |the game. Is this what some of the women were expressing? They would criticize and belittle feminine women, mostly for reasons described above. Others tended to be sympathetic. I may have used too strong a word here. |Thanks for the review. I'll pick up the book. You're welcome! Please let me (or the net) know what you thought? --Cindy -- Anyone's death diminishes me, \ | ARPA: tittle@ics.uci.edu Because I am involved in Humanity, /\ | BITNET: tittle@uci.bitnet And therefore never send to know | UUCP: ...!ucbvax!ucivax!tittle For whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee | USNAIL: POB 4188 Irvine CA 92716
huxtable@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu (02/06/90)
In article <25C9FF6C.16128@paris.ics.uci.edu>, tittle@blanche.ics.uci.edu (Cindy Tittle) writes: > In article <922@calmasd.Prime.COM>, nef@calmasd (Nancy Fox) writes: > [Commenting on my review of _Gender Blending_] > > |One thing that has occurred to me is that, though I don't look > |masculine, I don't act or look feminine, so that leaves masculine > |as the alternative. > > Devor covers this in her book. There have been studies done > that show people really require very few cues to determine > masculinity, but more to determine feminity. Thus the absense > of feminine clues leads to assumption of masculinity, but not > the reverse. In _Gender: An Ethnomethodological Approach_, by Suzanne Kessler and Wendy McKenna, they discuss this. Their goal was to determine how gender attribution is made, i.e. how a person decides (usually within a few seconds) whether the person before them is male or female. It seems that if you have facial hair, or one of a few other cues, you are male. If not, you are female. Parts of the book are a scream. The most annoying thing about gender (to me) is that you have to be one or the other. You can't be both, you can't be neither. I've ordered _Gender Blending_. -- Kathryn Huxtable huxtable@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
holstege@Neon.Stanford.EDU (Mary Holstege) (02/09/90)
In article <22150.25ce9c96@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu> huxtable@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu writes: >In _Gender: An Ethnomethodological Approach_, by Suzanne Kessler and >Wendy McKenna, they discuss this. Their goal was to determine how >gender attribution is made, i.e. how a person decides (usually within >a few seconds) whether the person before them is male or female. It >seems that if you have facial hair, or one of a few other cues, you >are male. If not, you are female. Parts of the book are a scream. What is interesting to me is how often my husband is taken as female *when he is with me*. It doesn't happen when he is by himself. He is not feminine in his demeanour, and although his hair is fair so that incipient beard does not show up as well as it might, he does not look like a woman by any stretch of the imagination. What I think is going on is that he is somewhat shorter than the average man, but quite a bit shorter than me, and while he has plenty of muscles, his build (bones) is quite slight. I think people see *me*, recognize a female, and then apply the stereotype -- tall big man + short small woman -- have it fail, and address us as 'ladies'. It happens surprisingly often, even at places like the grocery store where we go often enough to be known by sight. Do they talk in this book about this sort of effect? -- Mary Holstege@cs.stanford.edu ARPA: holstege%cs@score.stanford.edu BITNET: holstege%cs@STANFORD.BITNET UUCP: {arpa gateways, decwrl, sun, hplabs, rutgers}!cs.stanford.edu!holstege
era1990%ucselx@sdsu.edu (smith m) (02/18/90)
In article <25C9FF6C.16128@paris.ics.uci.edu>, tittle@blanche.ics.uci.edu (Cindy Tittle) writes: > In article <922@calmasd.Prime.COM>, nef@calmasd (Nancy Fox) writes: > [Commenting on my review of _Gender Blending_] > > |One thing that has occurred to me is that, though I don't look > |masculine, I don't act or look feminine, so that leaves masculine > |as the alternative. > > Devor covers this in her book. There have been studies done > that show people really require very few cues to determine > masculinity, but more to determine feminity. Thus the absense > of feminine clues leads to assumption of masculinity, but not > the reverse. In our culture and many others, the natural human state is considered masculine. In order to appear male, men need do nothing whatsoever. The natural human state is NOT, however, considered feminine. Therefore in order for either a man or a woman to appear female, they must DO QUITE A BIT. Short, simple, unfussed with hair won't tell people that you want special treatment based on sex, so millions of women visit beauty parlors regularly while millions more fuss with curlers and hairspray. A human face is considered male, so men and women who simply want to be treated as female must do something to make their face look less human by plucking, electrolysis, and applying paints. Simply functional clothing is considered a male perogative, so in order to appear female both men and women have to wear drag--clothing that is sexier, more colorful, more revealing, tighter, flouncier, etc. Unbound feet and unshaven, unencased legs are also considered male, so men and women who want to look female have to shave and wear pantyhose. Less comfortable shoes are also viewed as marking one out for sexual rather than serious treatment. I'll try to find the book. I was greatly amused by the woman who got better treatment and therefore didn't bother telling people he had female sex organs in his pants. Male is the default and we do not yet have equality. In fact, since they assume that their oppression is part of their female identity, the vast majority of women do not want equality. We are socialized to believe that if women looked as natural and human as men, people would fail to propagate and the species would die out. Anybody with teenage kids knows how dumb that assumption is! --Mark
bevans@gauss.unm.edu (Mathemagician) (02/27/90)
In article <1990Feb8.162125.20758@Neon.Stanford.EDU>, holstege@Neon.Stanford.EDU (Mary Holstege) writes: > What is interesting to me is how often my husband is taken as female *when he > is with me*. What I think is going on is that he is somewhat shorter than > the average man, but quite a bit shorter than me, and while he has plenty of > muscles, his build (bones) is quite slight. I think people see *me*, recognize > a female, and then apply the stereotype -- tall big man + short small woman -- > have it fail, and address us as 'ladies'. This has, on more than one occassion, happened to me and I, too, don't fit the "feminine" stereotype except regarding my hair (I have [make that "had"] it quite long in the back but quite short on the front/sides). The first time it happened, I was wearing shorts which showed my rather hairy legs (gawd, this is beginning to sound like a personal ad) and was being faced by the person doing the misrecognizing. Another time, a FRIEND of mine mistook me for a woman when she saw me from behind. > Do they talk in this book about this sort of effect? I would be interested to know this, too. -- Brian Evans |"Momma told me to never kiss a girl on the first bevans at gauss.unm.edu | date...But that's OK...I don't kiss girls."
huxtable@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu (03/01/90)
In article <1661@ariel.unm.edu>, bevans@gauss.unm.edu (Mathemagician) writes: > In article <1990Feb8.162125.20758@Neon.Stanford.EDU>, > holstege@Neon.Stanford.EDU (Mary Holstege) writes: >> What is interesting to me is how often my husband is taken as female *when he >> is with me*. What I think is going on is that he is somewhat shorter than > > This has, on more than one occassion, happened to me and I, too, don't > fit the "feminine" stereotype except regarding my hair (I have [make that > >> Do they talk in this book about this sort of effect? I got the book and read it this weekend. It's pretty interesting. No it doesn't talk about men being mistaken for women at all. The author has focussed her investigation on women who are mistaken for men. She has some interesting diagrams in the summary chapter describing a model for how sex, "sex identity", gender identity, and gender attribution all support each other in most individuals. She also has some MES-like (only more cautiously worded) suggestions about future directions we might take. I'm donating my copy to the Kansas City gender dysphoria support group. I think anyone interested in gender issues would find the book quite fascinating. In general, I like her (social) model. The biological theories of gender have never been satisfying to me. Another interesting book I've just read (not really related to feminism) is _Our Kind_, by Marvin Harris. It's really anthropology for the masses, but I like his critique of the sociobiologists. -- Kathryn Huxtable huxtable@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu