Theme
1:42am August 11, 2014
Anonymous asked: what do you mean by wanting to viewed as a woman in a sociological context? i may have very much misunderstood

It’s not so much wanting to be viewed as a woman in a sociological context.  It’s that there are sociological contexts, where viewing me as a woman makes sense, even though my actual gender identity is genderless.

Like… most people have a gender identity.  I don’t.  So I’m genderless, and that’s how I see myself, and that’s how I’d prefer most people see me, when it comes to how I feel about myself.

But also, I was raised as a girl, I am frequently treated as a woman, and there are times when I don’t mind being socially included in the category of “woman” for purely sociological purposes.  I think it’s a purely personal choice, whether a person prefers to be viewed as a woman in this context, and it can be because you were raised female, it can be because your gender identity is female, it can be any of a number of reasons and they are all equally valid.  But like… I’m involved in the Autism Women’s Network and they have a deliberately broad definition of woman, so that people without a female gender identity (but who are treated as women in some contexts) can count, as well as people with a female gender identity (whether they are trans or cis) can also count, etc.  And I think it’s important to allow that flexibility, because I do face sexism regardless of the fact that I’m genderless, and to be counted as if I am a woman, in the context of facing sexism, does not bother me, even though I don’t have a “woman” gender identity.  (Meanwhile someone else who faces both sexism and transmisogyny should also be able to count as a woman in the exact same context.)

I’m not sure if I’m being very clear.  The problem with gender is that it’s a muddled concept and it’s always going to be a muddled concept, because it brings together so many different aspects of our identities:  our internal identity, the way we were raised, the way other people see us and treat us, our sociological status on multiple levels at once, the way we look to others, the way we look to ourselves, the kinds of sexism we face, and all kinds of other things.  So five different people, for sociological reasons, can find ourselves using the identity of “woman” for certain purposes, even though the purpose for each person is completely and totally different in origin, yet equally valid for each person.  It’s never going to totally make sense, because gender will never totally make sense.  Gender is too slippery a concept to ever make sense.

But at any rate, for me, it’s because I face sexism and misogyny despite not having the gender identity of female.  And that’s one of many valid reasons to provisionally accept the role of woman “sociologically” instead of as an identity.  I know I explained it better in another post a long time ago.  But it’s not about “being a woman” socially, it’s about sometimes when people say the word “women”, I don’t mind being included in that word, such as “Women with developmental disabilities are far more likely to experience sexual abuse than nondisabled women.”  In that sentence I don’t mind being a “woman with a developmental disability” even though I’m actually a genderless person with a developmental disability.  The sociological definition becomes more important than whether they got my internal (lack of) gender identity precisely accurate.  Because the people (yes, plural, many over time, which is pretty common for people with developmental disabilities who are victims of sexual abuse) who sexually abused me saw me simply as a woman with a developmental disability, they did not look inside me and see my gender identity or lack thereof, and my lack of gender identity did not protect me against their misogyny.  Does that make more sense?

Notes:
  1. withasmoothroundstone posted this