Aadya Gupta, Week 1

Commentary On: Night to his Day- the Social Construction of Gender by Judith Lorber

One of the conclusions this article draws is that Gender is ‘performative’. The fact that men and women can learn to act like each other, means that Gender is not inherent- it is learned and internalized through the way our parents treat us, and society expects us to act- a numbered list of qualities that we must tick off, to be able to fit into any one category.

Infact, Gender becomes so familiar to us that when we cannot use it as a category to mentally order the social world around us, we feel off-kilter- if I see an androgynous male or female infront of me, some part of me while keep on trying to identify them- male or female?

One of the things I really appreciated about this article was its explanation of exactly why gendering is done from birth, that ‘human society depends upon a predictable division of labour, and one way to efficiently organize them by the predicted level of productivity is gender.’ While a common method of division, we have done enough research now to realise this way is not necessarily the best.

For example, “Women are more detail oriented or more patient that men. Or, Men are smarter, more analytical than most women tend to be.’ All of these dialogues are told to us until we internalize them, and then exhibit them.

While these differences are not inherent for birth, we end up crippling both our men and women- by restricting them from an activity they might excel at, just for the sake of conformity. The social categories we are slotted into- whether they be high or low- have the privilege of determining our self esteem, and many a times, the trajectory our life will take.

Performing gender inaccurately has consequences, and until we become more accepting of non-conformity, we end up limiting ourselves.