Judith Butlers Text-Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity - Essay Example

Name Course Instructor Date Gender Text-context analysis enables to assess text within the context of its historical and cultural setting, as well as in terms of its qualities. Text-context analysis integrates features of formal analysis with those of cultural archeology, situating the text within the milieu of its era and assessing the roles of that author, readers, and commentators in reception of the text. Texts in media are inevitable tools of communication and are used to portray the intended message. Text-culture analysis is important in enhancing a critical understanding of how texts used in media give meaning in conjunction with their audience in the day to day life (Thwaites, et. al., p.p.96-97). In this paper, a text context analysis is done on the conceptual framework of gender theory, basing the analysis on Judith Butler’s text-Gender Trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. To spin the analysis is the quote from John Berger’s Way of Seeing "Men act and women appear. Men look at women. Women watch themselves being looked at" (p 47). Three images from a VAM (Victoria and Albert Museum) project showing the essence of ‘women appear’ have been reckoned in the analysis. Gender Trouble traces the ambiguous annotations around gender/sex and reveals the trouble with them. The work is classic in terms of sublimating to the private struggle of marginalized persons into a collective struggle displayed in the era of feminist theories. The language used relays the voice of a person standing firm on her beliefs in gender, which diverts from the society’s long-held belief in the matter. Consequently, Butler’s text evokes controversy yet at the same time remains influential in the cultural studies of gender. The text’s placement generates theoretical debate and unusual exaltation. It stands in for a larger critique of textuality, post-structuralism, and social constructionism, with a dense writing style. The work is organized in three main sections in which the text manifests thematic organization. In the first section, Butler talks about subjects of gender, sex, and desire which contrast the central assumptions of feminist theory that supposes an identity and subject of representation in language and politics. The second section is about prohibition, psychoanalysis, and the production of the heterosexual matrix (Butler, Chapter 2), where Butler attacks the common feminist view on patriarchy. Butler notes that feminists have time and time again made recourse to the implied pre-patriarchal state of culture as a framework upon which to base a new society that is non-oppressive. The third section talks about subversive bodily acts (Butler, Chapter 3) and Butler disregards the aspect of having defined maternal logo for the female body. The central idea in the text is that “gender is performative, and no identity sojourns behind the acts that supposedly ‘express’ gender, and these acts constitute-instead of expressing- the illusion of the stable gender identity” (Butler, Chapter 1-3). In the normative culture, gender is spilt into male and female. Deriving from the feminism debate of the time, the text composition begins by describing the constitution of the ‘woman’ category. Butler’s work especially receives criticism when she questions the constitution of gender and sex. According to Butler, “sex is biological while gender is culturally constructed,” (p. 10). The text illustrates that if the appearance of ‘being’ a gender is an effect of culturally influenced acts then no solid universal gender exists. The gender ‘woman’ is constituted through the practice of performance, just like the gender ‘man’ and remains contingent and open to both interpretation and re-signification. Hence, there is an opening for subversive action and Butler calls for gender trouble in which people can trouble the category of gender through performance. This forms the controversial component found in the style of the text. Butler’s text has been criticized for manifesting too much concern with signification rather than the real or material women, or their bodies (Nussbaum, p. 39; Vance, p.878). Some critics see this as insensitivity to the various bodily experiences as Butler endorses an individualistic mode of subversion. The criticisms articulate with Berger’s observation that "Men act and women appear. Men look at women. Women watch themselves being looked at" (p.47) which is based on the concept of the gaze as a feature of texts manifesting the ‘way of seeing’. Berger is not a supporter of female subordination and only seems to agree with Butler that the female image has been culturally constructed to please the male’s gaze. The male gaze is directed to see others, mostly females, as being for them and their desires (Berger, p.45). Hence, women are to be looked at, as their mode of being is given over to be seen by the male gaze. Butler’s perspective contrasts the critics on the basis that the object of the gaze can either be the male or female sex depending on the performance of cultural acts. This is a tricky scenario considering that it is already constructed in people’s mind that women subject to the male’s gaze through their portrayal as a weaker gender. Images of women posing seductively are evident everywhere, from advertisement posters, artistic drawings, screens of television, to realism in which women can be seen in streets wearing attire that accentuates their physical sexuality. The VAM’s project ‘Women Appear’ illustrates graphical representation of women manipulated in such a way that they protrude from a central triptych but posing semi-nude and alluring seductive looks. Despite the images being alluring to the male gaze, the women seem poised, and confident in their looks, as opposed to the tradition supposition of naïve female beauty. Their flamboyant figures are well exhibited in promotion of a powerful sexuality. This is the manipulated reality that some critics prefer in gender characterization and illusion is examined as it perpetrates truth through the manipulated reality (VAM). With such images, texts can be used to establish visual philosophies on such important forms of communication. Culturally, the sexualized image of women is a seduction for the male gaze, although it can also be an image of women to be seen by women (Berger, p.47). In the case where the viewer is a female, she must do a strange thing such as turn herself inside out by occupying the viewer’s position normally reserved for males (Berger, p.47). However, the female addressee must not look as the male looks, but as the ‘to-be-looked-at female/an appearance for the male gaze. The seductive aura in the picture is not for the female viewer but for the male that she imagines she will attract when she poses with a similar body. Berger illustrates this notion clearly when he says “the surveyor of woman in herself is male: the surveyed female. Thus she turns herself into an object – and most particularly an object of vision: a sight” (p.47). On the contrary, it is a worrying conclusion that women’s independence is paradoxically dependent on the male gaze as embodied in the female’s seductive gesture if Butler’s perspective on gender is considered. Butler (p. 11) argues that the woman sex does not necessarily imply that a person belongs to the female gender The element of binary opposition can be used to describe the distinct in gender between male and female. Here, it is also important to apply Butler’s drawing on Wittig’s work that that the female can actually gaze at another female as a male would. “Sex is coded as a way to designate the non-male through an absence” (Butler, pp. x, 166). In binary opposition, the male can be is described as a masculine person who lacks the feminine attributes while the female has feminine attributes and lacks masculine attributes (Hartley, et al. p. 19). Thus, woman is opposed to man. Binary opposition in the text can be used to support of Butler’s gender subversion to gender trouble. Masculinity does not have an inherent meaning, unless it is signified in the cultural practice through performing acts that are associated with the masculine attribute (Halberstam, p. 234). In the society today, it is evident that some women appear to have masculine physicality, while some men tend to have feminine attributes; from being physically soft to having nurturing behavior that culture has long assumed to be of the female sex or gender (Halberstam, p. 255). Therefore, it is clear that indefinitely placing women under the female gender and men under the male gender is ambiguous. The supposition that women may have the masculine will or ability has also been drawn from the work of Joan Riviere, who provides a psychoanalytic description, that “womanliness is a masquerade that hides masculine identification and hence hides a desire for another woman” (p.38). Butler extends this gender identification from Riviere’s work by asserting that the essence of gender of gender is formed by masquerade and mimicry. Women who flaunt their femininity in an exaggerated way as seen in the VAM graphical illustrations use the behavior as a mask to hide the masculinity that they possess. Butler insists that heterosexual melancholy is culturally instituted at the compromise of stable gender identities. Therefore, for heterosexuality to maintain stability, the notion of homosexuality must be demanded, but it remains prohibited yet necessary within cultural boundaries (p.147) The text is unique in theorizing language and the material body, melancholy gender, gender performativity, and power, subjectivity and the psyche. In conclusion, the analysis of text-in-context in this paper has enabled an understanding of gender theory through the work of Judith Butler. The text is placed in the historical setting of feminism in which women rose to protest for their rights of existence as equal to men. Culturally, women are believed to be of the biological female sex while men are believed to be of the biological male sex. These are suppositions rejected by Butler who believes that gender is a culturally constructed gimmick. Thus the language of the communicated text appears to be controversial as it contradicts the existing feminist and cultural concepts on gender. The patriarchal society has used gender to place women in positions lesser than men. Women thrive under the gaze of the male while males are there to look at females. Women simply watch themselves being looked at. However, from Butler’s work the audience learns that sometimes the exaggerated provocative images posed by women is a mask that hides the masculinity inside. Thus, a female can still look at another female in the way expected of males, hence the ambiguity of gender theory. Text-context analysis has enabled this analysis and interpretation of gender theory, bringing out the intended meaning in a comprehensive way. Works Cited: Berger, John. Ways of Seeing, London: BBC/Penguin, 1972. Butler, Judith. Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York: Routledge Classics, 1990. Halberstam, Judith. Female masculinity. London: Duke University Press. Hartley, John, Montgomery, Martin & Brennan, Marc. Communication, cultural and media studies: The key concepts. New York: Routledge, 2002 Nussbaum, Martha. “The Professor of Parody: The Hip Defeatism of Judith Butler.” The New Republic, 1999, vol. 220, pp. 37-45. Riviere, Joan. “Womanliness as a Masquerade” In Formations of Fantasy, ed. Victor Burgin, James Donald, and Cora Kaplan. London: Methuen, 1986. Thwaites Tony, Warwick Mules, and Davis Lloyd. Introducing Cultural and Media Studies: A Semiotic Approach, London: Palgrave, 2002. Vance, Carole. “Anthropology Rediscovers Sexuality: A Theoretical Comment.” Social Science and Medicine, 1991 vol. 33, pp. 875-884. Victoria and Albert Museum/VAM. Women appear/VAM projects. Accessed online March 26, 2012 from http://www.vam.ac.uk/projects/va-illustration-awards- 2012/students/women-appear 2012. Read More

Butler’s work especially receives criticism when she questions the constitution of gender and sex. According to Butler, “sex is biological while gender is culturally constructed,” (p. 10). The text illustrates that if the appearance of ‘being’ a gender is an effect of culturally influenced acts then no solid universal gender exists. The gender ‘woman’ is constituted through the practice of performance, just like the gender ‘man’ and remains contingent and open to both interpretation and re-signification.

Hence, there is an opening for subversive action and Butler calls for gender trouble in which people can trouble the category of gender through performance. This forms the controversial component found in the style of the text. Butler’s text has been criticized for manifesting too much concern with signification rather than the real or material women, or their bodies (Nussbaum, p. 39; Vance, p.878). Some critics see this as insensitivity to the various bodily experiences as Butler endorses an individualistic mode of subversion.

The criticisms articulate with Berger’s observation that "Men act and women appear. Men look at women. Women watch themselves being looked at" (p.47) which is based on the concept of the gaze as a feature of texts manifesting the ‘way of seeing’. Berger is not a supporter of female subordination and only seems to agree with Butler that the female image has been culturally constructed to please the male’s gaze. The male gaze is directed to see others, mostly females, as being for them and their desires (Berger, p.45). Hence, women are to be looked at, as their mode of being is given over to be seen by the male gaze.

Butler’s perspective contrasts the critics on the basis that the object of the gaze can either be the male or female sex depending on the performance of cultural acts. This is a tricky scenario considering that it is already constructed in people’s mind that women subject to the male’s gaze through their portrayal as a weaker gender. Images of women posing seductively are evident everywhere, from advertisement posters, artistic drawings, screens of television, to realism in which women can be seen in streets wearing attire that accentuates their physical sexuality.

The VAM’s project ‘Women Appear’ illustrates graphical representation of women manipulated in such a way that they protrude from a central triptych but posing semi-nude and alluring seductive looks. Despite the images being alluring to the male gaze, the women seem poised, and confident in their looks, as opposed to the tradition supposition of naïve female beauty. Their flamboyant figures are well exhibited in promotion of a powerful sexuality. This is the manipulated reality that some critics prefer in gender characterization and illusion is examined as it perpetrates truth through the manipulated reality (VAM).

With such images, texts can be used to establish visual philosophies on such important forms of communication. Culturally, the sexualized image of women is a seduction for the male gaze, although it can also be an image of women to be seen by women (Berger, p.47). In the case where the viewer is a female, she must do a strange thing such as turn herself inside out by occupying the viewer’s position normally reserved for males (Berger, p.47). However, the female addressee must not look as the male looks, but as the ‘to-be-looked-at female/an appearance for the male gaze.

The seductive aura in the picture is not for the female viewer but for the male that she imagines she will attract when she poses with a similar body. Berger illustrates this notion clearly when he says “the surveyor of woman in herself is male: the surveyed female. Thus she turns herself into an object – and most particularly an object of vision: a sight” (p.47). On the contrary, it is a worrying conclusion that women’s independence is paradoxically dependent on the male gaze as embodied in the female’s seductive gesture if Butler’s perspective on gender is considered.

Read More