Sexuality/Gender Boundaries Between Antiquity
and Modern Eras
In modern history, we use
categorical terms like homosexual, queer, fag, bisexual, etc. to define someone
who does not partake in heterosexual acts.
In ancient texts from Greek and Roman historians, modern historians have
determined that homosexuality, with the categories that fall under the term,
did not exist and sexuality was based off of activeness and passiveness. The homosexual and bi categories run rampant
in today’s society, defining people in negative and positive fashions based off
of religious, cultural, political, personal, etc. interpretations of these
categories as a whole. Yet ancient
society saw these acts as normal with the lack of definitions/categories. The question posed by many historians in the
field of sexuality, and by analysts of how modern sexuality plays a role in
popular culture, is which way of thinking is better in terms of categories or
lack of? Is modern sexuality truly
liberated? Were the ancient thoughts on sexuality by the Greeks and Romans
better for certain individuals to express themselves sexually? Overall, the views of sexuality today are
more liberating in the sense of participation in homosexual and bisexual acts
as a whole. However, modern society is
more restrictive than the ancient Greek’s and Roman’s society, based off of
placing individuals in categories like homosexual and bisexual that define how
they are supposed to act in society through gender and sexuality.
An example to summarize the example of restrictive
modern categories would be an article from the Huffington Post called The Evolution of Ricky Rebel: From 90’s Boy
Band Star to Bisexual Glam Rocker. In the title alone, the implication of
categories placed on the musician Ricky Rebel as bisexual allows the reader to
form biased opinions that construe visions on how he acts, dresses, or
represents himself in public. During the
interview, Ricky was asked what the most surprising aspect about the 90’s music
industry to an outsider. He replied, “At one point I
got chastised by the label for wearing an outfit that got a couple guys (out of
thousands of people) in the audience calling me a homophobic slur.” Ricky was
punished for being himself, and was defined by slanderous terms that society
ties individuals down to, in order define gender and sexuality as a whole. The ancient Greek’s and Roman’s system was
fundamentally different compared to ours in describing gender and sexuality. In the Histories
of Sexuality by Stephen Garton, he describes the one-sex model of male
society used by the Greeks and Romans as seen in this quote, “Men could become feminized if
they were passive rather than active, or if they were excessively active they
could dissipate their energies.” (Garton 38). This shows that the lack of categorization in
ancient times allowed for men, and even women, to make their own independent identity
without the watchful eyes of the public trying to define them as something that
they were not. Ricky Rebel describes
being bisexual in modern times as this, “Socially
speaking, it’s a little more difficult to be accepted as bi. You’re not 100%
gay or straight. I never felt like I belonged fully to any sexual “team.” This quote summarizes modern sexuality today because
it shows that definitions and categorizations enforces people to try to fit in,
and stick to conformity based off of the fear of judgement from the outside world. The solution to this issue is simple, we
should keep adapting our liberated views on sexuality and gender by incorporating
basic/productive ideas of sexuality from past societies like the Greeks and
Romans.
Intersex Invisibility
ReplyDeleteContemporary sex culture in America is complex and dynamic changing with the people who are living and therefore forming it. However, it is based off a two-sex model resulting in the binary system of male/female, heterosexual/homosexual, and man/woman. This system is exclusionary in that it ignores the spectrum of other possibilities including people that identify as intersex. Because we perceive that only to sexes are possible at birth we use this to place people in society as male or female. This categorization excludes many people, intersex being only one of many with an identity that is struggling with invisibility. Part of this struggle is based on parental decisions at the birth to have the children undergo reconstructive surgery for more normative genitalia.
During the rise of medical discourse society labeled everything including sex. Accounts of people born with ambiguous genitalia were documented during this time but doctors were not inclined to share this information because as Foucault would say believing is seeing. People believed there were only two possibilities therefore this is what they saw. Arguably, in the twenty-first century things are not much different. We still categorize people in the same way and react very similarly. Before a child is even born society wants to determine the sex. Why is the sex of a baby so important? How would parents react to a child that does not fit into the two-sex model or binary system?
People born intersex undergo serious and often risky surgeries to assign them a perceived appropriate sex. Maybe this does not sound like an awful thing to most, but intersex children do not have a choice in remaining intersex or having surgeries. Doctors and parents often make that decision for children while they are young sometimes not even knowing why they are having surgery. Model Hanne Gaby Odiele is one such example who underwent surgery without knowing why. She thought she has cancer, but she had testes that her parents and doctor decided she needed to be removed. She later had vaginal constructive surgery, only finding out the real purpose for both in adulthood. Odiele speaks about the trauma of her surgeries not her being born intersex. Many intersex children experience similar circumstance leaving them as adults wishing that had a choice.
The Intersex Society of North America(ISNA) has what is considered healthy recommendations for intersex children states “surgeries done to make genitals look ‘more normal’ should not be performed until a child is old enough to make an informed decision for himself or herself.” They also suggest that children be introduced to intersex people that opted out of surgery and maintained their intersex status.
Although the ISNA suggests waiting many parents do not follow these guidelines. When a child is born with ambiguous genitalia parents are afraid something is wrong with their child and that this child should be fixed. Parents want their children to have normal lives and believe that by choosing for their child they are helping their child fit into the sex culture we have built.
However, many people born intersex do not feel that their anatomy is wrong. In fact, there are cases of children feeling traumatized afterwards. It is important to understand that our binary society created a system that erases intersex children and adults. We should acknowledge intersex as a category without associating it with something bad or wrong. Instead, we should look at them just as people instead of male or female.
http://www.isna.org/
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2017/01/23/model-hanne-gaby-odiele-reveals-she-intersex/96622908/
While I do agree that ancient civilizations did not categorize sexuality in the way the we do I think the idea that they saw same-sex acts as normal is an oversimplification. To some extent our society does take a harder line on same-sex acts in part through categorization. But same-sex relations were set apart from male-female relations in ancient cultures. In the reading from Byrne Fone’s Homophobia he states that in classical Athens sex was “deeply polarizing.” Strict rules regulated who participated and in what capacity. In Greek society male-male sexuality was defined within strict ideals of whether it was beneficial or detrimental to society. The most accepted practice was pederasty in which adult males were active partners and young men were passive partners. It was believed that these relationships taught young men how to be good citizens. The relationship was only normalized because it could benefit Greece. But it was largely expected that Greek men’s primary relationships would be with women to create Greek families. To say same-sex relationships are normal conjures the idea that it was unremarkable throughout society. This was not the case in Greek society. There is also an argument to be made that a lack of categories is not necessarily liberating.
ReplyDeleteIn one of our readings the author claims that having a category allows individuals more personal freedom. Not having to explain oneself of a regular basis, to themselves or others, allows non-heterosexual people to move on with their lives. Even without the categories non-heterosexual behavior was taboo in ancient cultures if it did not conform to the strict guidelines of the particular society. Puritan societies certainly did not tolerate sexual or gender deviance and they did not have the categories we have today. Patholoigization definitely has detrimental effects but categorization is not universally disadvantageous.