Gender Performativity Theory: Term and Concept
Term
The term “gender performativity” in gender performativity theory rose to prominence within feminist and queer theory following its articulation by philosopher Judith Butler in her seminal work Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity (1990). Butler drew upon existing theories of performativity in linguistics and philosophy, specifically J.L. Austin’s concept of speech acts. In the context of gender, performativity shifts the focus from an assumed innate gender identity to the actions and behaviors an individual engages in to signal their gender.
Concept
Gender performativity theory destabilizes the notion of gender as a fixed, biological essence. Instead, it posits that gender is a fluid and dynamic construction produced through reiterated acts, stylized behaviors, and social cues. These “performances” are not mere expressions of an inner gendered self. Rather, they create the very illusion of a stable gender identity. By emphasizing the repetitive and constructed nature of gender expression, Butler challenges traditional gender binaries and the power structures they uphold, opening up possibilities for more diverse and flexible understandings of gender.
Gender Performativity Theory: Theorists, Works and Arguments
Key Theorists
- Judith Butler: The foremost figure in gender performativity theory. Her groundbreaking works include:
- Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity (1990): Butler’s most famous work, where she lays the foundation of performativity theory and how it deconstructs the concept of gender as fixed and inherent.
- Bodies That Matter: On the Discursive Limits of Sex (1993): Explores how the concept of the material body itself is shaped by social discourse.
- Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick: A key figure in queer theory whose work intersects with Butler’s. Works include:
- Between Men: English Literature and Male Homosocial Desire (1985): Examines patterns of male relationships and power within literature.
- Epistemology of the Closet (1990): Explores the construction of sexuality and its impact on identity formation.
Foundational Works
- J.L Austin: Philosopher of language.
- How to Do Things With Words (1962): Austin’s concept of speech acts (performative utterances) provided a theoretical basis for Butler’s understanding of gender as produced through performance.
- Michel Foucault: Philosopher and historian.
- Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison (1975): Foucault’s analysis of power, discipline, and how institutions shape subjectivity informed Butler’s understanding of the regulatory power of social norms in shaping gender performances.
Central Arguments
- Gender is not innate: Gender is not a biological given but rather a social construct produced through repeated actions, behaviors, and social expectations.
- Performance creates identity: The “performance” of gender precedes and creates the illusion of an inner, essential gender core – one does not have a gender that they are expressing, but gender identity is formed through repeated performances.
- Subversion of binaries: Performativity theory challenges the rigid binary of male/female and the social structures that uphold it, opening up possibilities for more fluid and diverse gender expressions.
- Power and regulation: Gender norms are not neutral but serve to maintain power structures. By exposing the performative nature of gender, Butler highlights how these norms can be challenged and subverted.
Gender Performativity Theory: Key Principals
Key Principles
- Gender as Performance, Not Essence: Gender isn’t something you are, it’s something you do. Literary examples:
- Shakespeare’s cross-dressing comedies (like Twelfth Night): Characters disguising themselves as the opposite gender highlight the performative nature of gender roles and expectations.
- Virginia Woolf’s Orlando: A protagonist who lives centuries, shifting between male and female genders, destabilizes notions of fixed gender identity.
- Repetition and Citation: Gender norms are reinforced through repeated performances that cite an idealized (but non-existent) original. Literary examples:
- Fairy tales: The repeated tropes of damsels in distress and heroic princes perpetuate restrictive gender roles.
- Jane Austen’s novels: Societal pressure on women to perform femininity that signifies marriageability.
- The Body as Inscribed by Power: The material body itself is not outside of discourse but is shaped by social norms and expectations. Literary examples:
- Gothic literature: Female bodies portrayed as fragile, threatened, in need of male protection.
- Toni Morrison’s Beloved: Explores how the trauma of slavery is physically and psychologically inscribed on the bodies of Black women.
- Subversive Potential: By making the performative nature of gender visible, it can be disrupted and challenged. Literary examples:
- Characters in drag or otherwise flouting gender norms: These become acts of defiance against restrictive expectations.
- Modernist and Postmodernist Literature: Fragmentation of identity challenges ideas of a fixed gendered self.
Important Note: It’s crucial to remember that not every literary instance of cross-dressing or gender ambiguity is automatically an endorsement of gender performativity. Some works might reinforce rather than disrupt traditional gender constructs. Careful analysis is key!
Gender Performativity Theory: How to Use in Literary Critiques
Here’s a guide on applying Gender Performativity Theory to literary critiques, along with a simplified case study:
Steps for Using Gender Performativity in Literary Critiques
- Identify Gender Performances: Look for instances in the text where characters consciously or unconsciously “perform” their gender. Consider:
- Clothing and appearance
- Speech patterns and mannerisms
- Roles characters play (mother, warrior, lover, etc.)
- How characters interact with others based on gendered expectations
- Question the “Naturalness”: Analyze how the text presents these performances. Are they treated as essential and unchanging, or is there a hint they are constructed?
- Does the text reinforce traditional gender roles or challenge them?
- Are there characters who defy expectations? How does the text treat them?
- Examine Power Structures: Consider how gender performances are tied to power dynamics within the text.
- Who benefits from upholding traditional gender roles?
- Are there characters whose gender expressions give them more or less agency?
- How does the text treat characters who challenge gender norms?
- Look for Subversions: Identify moments where the text undermines or exposes the performative nature of gender.
- Are there instances of deliberate gender-bending or characters who refuse their assigned roles?
- Does the text highlight the artificiality of gender constructs?
**Case Study: Shakespeare’s Twelfth Night **
- Gender Performances: Viola disguises herself as a man (Cesario), Olivia falls in love with this male persona, Orsino is attracted to the feminine side of Cesario.
- Questioning “Naturalness”: The play highlights the fluidity of gender and how easily appearances can deceive. Love for Cesario calls into question traditional notions of heterosexual attraction.
- Power Structures: Viola gains more agency disguised as a man, yet is also constrained by her assumed gender identity. Olivia’s power as a woman of status is limited by societal expectations of female behavior.
- Subversions: The comedic chaos caused by gender confusion exposes the absurdity of rigid gender roles. The final resolution (Viola revealing her true identity) hints at the possibility of greater flexibility in gender expression.
Remember:
- Not every text will be equally rich for this analysis.
- Gender performativity is just one lens among many you can apply in a literary critique.
- Your analysis should always be grounded in close textual evidence.
Gender Performativity Theory: Criticism Against It
Here’s a breakdown of some of the main criticisms leveled against Gender Performativity Theory:
- Neglect of Material Reality: Critics argue that Butler’s emphasis on the discursive construction of gender risks downplaying the material realities of lived experience. These include things like physical differences between bodies, unequal access to resources based on gender, and the very real violence directed at people due to their gender.
- Overemphasis on Agency: Some critics suggest that performativity theory overstates the individual’s ability to subvert gender norms. Social structures, inequalities, and ingrained cultural beliefs heavily constrain this freedom of performance, especially for marginalized groups.
- The Problem of the Pre-Discursive Subject: Butler argues that there’s no essential “self” that exists prior to gender performance. However, critics note this leaves little room for understanding how individuals experience and navigate the constraints of assigned gender roles, requiring a degree of self-awareness and agency that performativity theory struggles to accommodate.
- Lack of Political Strategy: Some scholars argue that while performativity theory effectively deconstructs traditional gender categories, it provides limited guidance on how to build a transformative feminist or queer political movement, ultimately focusing on individual subversion rather than collective change.
- Risks of Appropriation Ideas of gender fluidity, while liberating, can paradoxically be appropriated by conservative forces to undermine the rights of transgender people. For instance, some argue that womanhood is no longer an identity based on lived experience, but a performance anyone can imitate.
Important Considerations
- These criticisms don’t invalidate Gender Performativity Theory entirely. It remains a valuable tool for understanding how social forces shape gender.
- Many of these criticisms have led to productive dialogue and refinements of feminist and queer theory over time.
- Butler herself has acknowledged some limitations and responded to critics in subsequent works.
Gender Performativity Theory: Key Terms
| Key Term | Definition |
| Performativity | Gender is not inherent but enacted through repeated behaviors and actions. |
| Normativity | Societal norms dictating acceptable gender expressions. |
| Discourse | Language and cultural systems constructing and maintaining gender identities. |
| Subversion | Challenging dominant gender norms through resistance. |
| Drag | Theatrical gender performance exposing its artificiality. |
| Heteronormativity | Assumption of heterosexuality as the norm, reinforcing binary gender notions. |
| Queer | Challenges fixed gender and sexual categories, embracing diversity. |
| Parody | Humorous critique of traditional gender roles. |
| Agency | Individual capacity to shape gender identity within societal constraints. |
| Performativity of Sexuality | Extension of gender performativity theory to sexual identity, highlighting constructed nature of sexuality. |
Gender Performativity Theory: Suggested Readings
- Barker, Meg-John, and Julia Scheele. Queer: A Graphic History. Icon Books, 2016.
- Bornstein, Kate. Gender Outlaw: On Men, Women, and the Rest of Us. Routledge, 1994.
- Butler, Judith. Bodies That Matter: On the Discursive Limits of Sex. Routledge, 1993.
- Butler, Judith. Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. Routledge, 1990.
- Fausto-Sterling, Anne. Sexing the Body: Gender Politics and the Construction of Sexuality. Basic Books, 2000.
- Halberstam, Jack. Female Masculinity. Duke University Press, 1998.
- Kessler, Suzanne J., and Wendy McKenna. Gender: An Ethnomethodological Approach. University of Chicago Press, 1978.
- Meyerowitz, Joanne. How Sex Changed: A History of Transsexuality in the United States. Harvard University Press, 2002.
- Nestle, Joan, Clare Howell, and Riki Wilchins, editors. GenderQueer: Voices from Beyond the Sexual Binary. Alyson Books, 2002.
- Stryker, Susan. Transgender History: The Roots of Today’s Revolution. Seal Press, 2008.
