Gender performativity analysis
Introduction.
For Butler, both canonical, hegemonic, as the transgressive, "unintelligible"to a style related to one of the two cultural genres.
In this way, gender and sex are actions, performative acts that are modalities of authoritarian discourse;Such performativity refers in the same sense to the power of discourse to perform (produce) what states, and therefore allows us to reflect on how hetero hetero power centered acts as a discourse creative of sociocultural realities. In this sense, and in the Foucaultian line, language performativity can be understood as a technology;as a social and political power device in the following two phrases of another important and current theoretical.
Developing.
Beatriz Preciado, lucid reader of Butler, could condense the central critical approach of this theory: gender has no ontological statute outside the acts that constitute it. In this reading, the genre would be the retroactive effect of the ritualized repetition of performances. In this sense, sex and gender can be understood as a construction of the body and subjectivity as a result of the preformative effect of a ritualized repetition of acts that end up naturalizing and producing the illusion of a substance, of an essence.
Such generic and sexual productions are given within the framework of the one called by Butler, heterosexual matrix. As an example of this heterosexual matrix, body producer and heterBlue, their games will be related to strength, competition and power (weapons, cars, football, wooden horses.);He will have fewer restrictions on his movement (he will not wear long and uncomfortable dresses, skirts or sandals that, for example, prevent him from climbing a tree), the treatment of the men of the house towards him will have a certain level of strength and temper;And of course it will be prohibited as much as possible to cry (‘men do not cry’) or be ‘effeminate’ (makeup, play with dolls or with kitchen utensils), as well as express attraction or aesthetic feeling by other children.
Radical Democracy and Gender Performativity
The concept of radical democracy has been strengthening in recent years as a transformative political exit, which allows the progressive inclusion of those sectors that such as LGTBIQ, have been excluded from the democratic and political game. Talking about radical democracy is talking about anti essentialism, criticism of all kinds of exclusive universalisms, of policy claim as conflict and agonistic struggle for the positioning of historically excluded social sectors.
For such reasons, the Butlerian proposal has reinforced this transformative vision of current hegemonic politics and culture. Among the most relevant authors of radical democracy, I will quote Chantal Moufe, Slavov Zizek and Ernesto Laclau. For these authors, due to the construction of antieseialist radical democracy, the transformation of the collective imaginary about difference and diversity, which will be reflected in the medium or long term, in a rethinking of identity issues that were previously seen as essential andimmovable.
This, as a consequence that in radical democratic policy, there is precisely space for any type of immovable, all have full validity in political and transformative discourse. In this order of ideas, it should be noted that radical democracy necessarily demands politicization (political action) and mobilization of the LGTBIQ sector (abjection politicization) that positions it as a central actor in construction
of such a radical democratic system and allows, in the not too distant future, the construction of a new notion of citizenship that celebrates differences and diversity as an essential contribution to human wealth. The policy that is based on the theory of gender performativity, exposed by Judith Butler, and that I have tried to present within the framework of the radical democratic struggle, allows an incisive and essential question to the way in which we understood gender andsex until a few years ago.
This constructive and antieseialist solution raises a radical transformation in our society that would definitely achieve full recognition of human complexity and diversity, but we must also admit that their mechanisms are not clear or can lead to in critical cases (in the hands of extremists, byexample) to be another source of oppression and discrimination
Body anthropology. Gender, bodily itineraries, identity and change
Thinking the body as a subject, as a place of resistance and reflexive space is the purpose of Mari Luz Esteban in body anthropology. Gender, bodily itineraries, identity and change. Formed in medicine and later in anthropology, Esteban has focused on studyReproductive sexuality.
This author reflects on a social and feminist theory of the body, reviewing the study of the body in the social sciences from sociology and anthropology of the twentieth century;the new challenges of feminist theory against demands in the analysis of women’s body;A self-analysis of the trajectory itself to think about the body as a subject, as a place of resistance and reflexive space is the purpose of Mari Luz Esteban in body anthropology. Gender, bodily itineraries, identity and change.
Individual factor
One of the relevant aspects of the argument held by the author is to establish the ontological distinction between "possessing a body" and "being the body". With more poetic words: the correspondence between the flesh of man and the flesh of the world is broken. The ontological distinction becomes, with Descartes, in axiology;Thought (reason) rises, at the same time that the body is denigrated. The scholarly culture of the subjects belonging to the dominant social groups despises the issues related to the body, a grotesque exemplary exalted by popular culture.
Between the 16th and 17th centuries the man of modernity was born: a man separated from himself (in this case under the auspices of the ontological division between the body and man), of the others (the cogito is not the cogitamus) andFrom the cosmos of now the body does not complain more than by itself, uprooted from the rest of the universe, finds the end in itself, ceases to be the echo of a humanized cosmos.
This operation also implies reducing man to the limits of his body. Returning to Durkheim’s expression, the body becomes a factor of individuation. It is, therefore, specific intervention target.
Conclusions.
We arrive, in this way, to a bifurcation: the body despised by scholarly culture represents an inalienable and inalsenable residue;But, at the same time, it is appropriate as an object of knowing an expert for biomedicine, which erects its prestige around a growing specialization over it.
The deacralization of the body reaches its climax in the practice of body dissection. Le Breton argues that from Vesalio, an implicit differentiation is born within the western episteme between man and his body. There is the origin of contemporary dualism that includes, also implicitly, to the body in isolation, in a kind of indifference with respect to the man who lends his face.
This epistemological rupture indicates the beginning of a path that will slowly break into modern rationality. Its engravings still reflect a suffering body: the engravings of the factory and those of many other treaties produced until the 18th century, have executed bodies;In these alternate images loaded with
Leave feedback