DOI: 10.17072/2078-7898/2019-1-5-16

Construction and deconstruction of gender in the contemporary humanities

Olga A. Voronina
Doctor of Philosophy,
Leading Researcher (Professor) of the Department
of Philosophy of Culture

Institute of Philosophy, Russian Academy of Sciences,
12/1, Goncharnaya str. Moscow, 109240, Russia;
e-mail: olga-voronina777@yandex.ru
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1122-2886

The purpose of this article is to analyze the evolution of the concept of gender in social knowledge and the humanities. The term «gender» encompasses biological (sexual), psychological, social, cultural, symbolic aspects of human life. Even before the introduction of this term into scientific publications in the 1960s, the phenomenon itself was discovered in three types of knowledge: in psychology and psychiatry when studying various forms of sexuality and sexual identity, in anthropological and ethnographic studies, and in the feminist philosophy of culture. This largely determined the main directions in the study and understanding of gender for several decades. The theory of socio-cultural construction of gender played the main role. It developed in parallel with other critical and constructivist scientific concepts, which in no small part led to its adoption by «academics» and the inclusion of the gender perspective in the body of scientific research. However, along with the development of postmodern feminist philosophy, the concept of gender undergoes redefinition. The constructivist model of gender is displaced by the performative concept of Judith Butler. She argues that not only gender but the biological sex does not exist outside the cultural framework and power discourse. The binary matrix of gender, gender identity and heterosexuality is approved within the framework of the dominant discourse with the help of various regulatory actions (performatives). Butler rejects this model because she claims that bodies, sex and gender identity have different configurations. The performative concept of sex was actively used in the queer project, as it provided justification for rejecting the normative binary concept of femininity and masculinity and the corresponding heterosexuality. Today, queer includes political movement, research, art, and discursive deconstruction of normative heterosexuality. The variant of mosaic nature, hybridity and relativism of identity proposed in the queer project destroys the possibility of social and political transformations in the sphere of gender equality. Instead, queer activists advocate an elusive equality of opportunity to try on different identities at one’s own discretion. At the present stage, the theoretical radicalism of queer makes the development of new social programs unlikely, while they appear to be necessary. In contrast, gender theory (in its feminist, constructivist, and cultural-symbolic modes) has had a significant scientific and social impact. The use of the gender perspective in social knowledge and the humanities has provided better understanding of the individual and society. The principle of achieving gender equality has been accepted by the world community and has become part of many programs at the international and national levels. However, the problems in the understanding of the relation between sex and gender, discovered in performative and queer theory, become significant against a background of spreading biotechnologies (from sex reassignment surgeries to assisted reproduction). This requires wider research and further discussion among different schools.

Keywords: binary matrix, power, gender, deconstruction, discourse, identity, queer, constructivism, culture, performative theory, gender, postmodernism, body, feminism, philosophy.

References

Bachmann-Medik, D. (2017). Kult’urnye povoroty. Novye orientiry v naukakh o kulture. [Cultural turns. New landmarks in the sciences of culture]. Moscow: Novoe Literaturnoe Obozrenie Publ., 504 p.

Berger, P. and Lukman, T. (1995). Sotsial’noe konstruirovanie real’nosti [Social construction of reality]. Moscow: Medium Publ., 323 p.

Butler, J. (1990). Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York, London: Routledge, 256 p.

Butler, J. (2000).Gendernoe bespokoystvo [Gender Trouble]. Antologiya gendernoy teorii [Anthology of gender theory]. Minsk: Propilei Publ., pp. 297–346.

De Lauretis, T. (1998). Amerikanskiy Freud [American Freud]. Gendernye issledovaniya [Gender Studies]. Kharkov, no. 1, pp. 136–137.

Gontermakher, B. (2018). OON vklyuchila smenu pola v spisok bazovykh prav cheloveka [The United Nations has included gender transition in the list of basic human rights]. Panorama. Apr. 11. Available at: https://panorama.pub/2792-oon-vklyuchila-smenu-pola.html (accessed 16.09.2018).

Gradinari, I. (ed.) (2015). Tekhnika «kosogo vzglyada». Kritika geteronormativnogo poryadka [Technique Oblique view. Criticism of heteronormative order]. Moscow: The Gaidar Institute Publ., 352 p.

Heywood, L. and Drake, J. (1997). Third-Wave Agenda: Being Feminist, Doing Feminism. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 280 p.

Kemerov, E.V. (ed.) (1998). Sovremennyy filosofskiy slovar’ [Modern philosophical dictionary]. London et al.: Panprint Publ., 1064 p.

Levi-Strauss, C. (1969). The Elementary Structures of Kinship. Boston: Beacon Press, 524 p.

Mead, M. (1935). Sex and Temperament in three Primitive Societies. New York: W. Morrow & Company, 335 p.

Moore, H.L. (1988). Feminism and Anthropology. Cambridge: Polity Press, 320 p.

Nomerovskaya, A.D. (2015). Issledovanie gendernoy identichnosti v filosofsko-antropologicheskoy perspective: dis. … kand. filos. nauk [The research of gender identity in the philosophical and anthropological perspective: dissertation]. Saint-Petersburg, 168 p.

Ortner, S.B. (1974). Is Female to Male as Nature is to Culture? Woman, Culture & Society. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, pp. 67–88.

Pulkinen, T. (1999). O performativnoy teorii pola. Problematizatsiya kategorii pola Judith Butler [On the performative theory of sex. The problematization of the categories of sex by Judith Butler]. Germenevtika i dekonstruktsiya [Hermeneutics and deconstruction]. Saint-Petersburg, pp. 167–181.

Rabzhaeva, M.V. (2002). Gendernaya antropologiya: kontseptualnaya i institutsionalnaya kharakteristika [Gender anthropology: conceptual and institutional characteristics]. Zhurnal sotsiologii i sotsial’noy antropologii [The Journal of Sociology and Social Anthropology]. Vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 133–147.

Raibman, N., Smirnov, S. (2014). Facebook predlozhila pol’zovatelyam 58 polov na vybor [Facebook offered users 58 sexes to choose from]. Vedomosti. Feb. 14. Available at: https://www.vedomosti.ru/technology/articles/2014/02/14/facebook-rasshiryaet-profil-polzovatelej (accessed 16.09.2018).

Rubin, G. (1975). The Traffic in Women: Notes on the «Political Economy» of Sex. Toward an Anthropology of Women. New York: Monthly Review Press, pp. 157–210.

Sapiro, E. (1986). Women in American Society: an Introduction to Women’s Studies. Mountain View CA: Mayfield Publishing Co., 511 p.

Stoller, R. (1968). Sex and gender: on the development of masculinity and femininity. New York: Science House, 383 p.

Trufanova, E.O. (2018). Sub’ect i poznanie v mire sotsialnykh konstruktsiy. [Subject and knowledge in the world of social constructions]. Moscow: Canon+ Publ., ROOI «Rehabilitation» Publ., 320 p.

Voronina, O.A. (ed.) (2008). Gendernoe ravenstvo v sovremennom mire [Gender equality in the modern world: the role of national machinery]. Moscow: Max-Press Publ., 768 p.

Voronina, O.A. (2017). Osnovnye idei i kontsepty feministskoy sotsial’noy epistemologii [Main ideas and concepts feminist social epistemology]. Vestnik Permskogo Universiteta. Filosophiya. Psikhologiya. Sotsiologiya [Perm University Herald. Series «Philosophy. Psychology. Sociology»]. Vol. 2, pp. 141–151. DOI: 10.17072/2078-7898/2017-2-141-151.

Voronina, O.A. and Klimenkova, T.A. (1992). Gender i kul’tura [Gender and culture]. Zhenschiny i sotsial’naya politika [Women and social politics (gender aspect)]. Moscow: ISEPN Publ., pp. 10–22.

West, K. and Zimmerman, D. (1997). Sozdanie gendera [Doing gender]. Gendernye tetradi [Gender Notebooks]. Iss. 1: Proceedings of St. Petersburg Branch of Inst. Of Sociology of RAS, Saint Petersburg, pp. 94–120.

Zider, R. (1997). Sotsial’naya istoriya sem’i v zapadnoy i tsentralnoy Evrope (konets XVIII–XX veka) [Social history of the family in Western and Central Europe (late 18th and 19th centuries)]. Moscow: VLADOS Publ., 301 p.

Received 27.09.2018

For citation:

Voronina O.A. Construction and deconstruction of gender in the contemporary humanities // Perm University Herald. Series «Philosophy. Psychology. Sociology». 2019. Iss. 1. P. 5–16. DOI: 10.17072/2078-7898/2019-1-5-16