Skip to content

The borderlines of gender behaviour

December 1, 2013


“There is one thing I must tell you because I just found it to be a truth . . . You must always be yourself no matter what the price. It is the highest form of morality.”
— Candy Darling (James Lawrence Slattery) —


What is it that defines our position in society, and by society I mean the different circles of individuals  that totally cover our lives. For, unless we live completely isolated from any other fellows, our character and behaviour is constantly reshaped by the rest out there.

In a concert performed by Pitter Gabriel some years ago, he said: “We are what we see”, but I would go pedantic and assure: We are the result of others’ rules, and those who succeed in reducing the influence of others to the minimun I call them free. But this is just a general principle I live by; what about role-models in the development of gender consciousness? Is it possible to disregard a conscience of gender and live totally in astray? Is it possible to reach that gender-freedom in a society?

In “Making sex” by Chris Anderson, the author portraits a woman who, after living a life of a fictitious man, she concludes that “love is lost” when crossing over. This is a radical statement about love, specially when her research wasn’t about love … was it!?. Norah Vincent, who became Ned, redefines her wardrobe and even takes lessons on men’s behaviour. She experiences how to be a desirable man among women and a men’s man among men, but in her quest she focused on the social establishment : the sex appeal, and missed the rest, actually the part that makes up the persons she just met: their whole past life. It seems that by crossing over the other gender, just to be a passive observer, you achieve the level of freedom that allows to reach such a radical conclusion: “love is lost”. For me the phrase sounds like the end of a B-movie or an overrated song. By the way, she wrote a book about the little adventure and, who knows, went back to her husband right away.

On the other side of the “ocean”, Richard O’Brien in an article by Jo Fidgen, published on March 13 of 2013, he claims he is “70% man”.  Dressed as a beautiful woman, he really is, Richard is presented on the BBC NEWS magazine as a statue of gender borderline.  He even needs to explain him self, saying that “It’s my belief that we are on a continuum between male and female. There are people who are hardwired male and there are people who are hardwired female, but most of us are on that continuum and I believe myself probably to be about 70% male, 30% female.”. 70%? Where did he get this calculation from? What about the role of the mirrors and all the beautiful men infront of them? Most men are attracted to men, not to women, for women have become a threat to their survival … so you better don’t be around them. And if it were OK for men to have a necessaire around, they would become the rise of the queens.

And right in the middle, we hear and SEE India Arie singing “Video” like she doesn’t care. And she gets a hit, and lots of people love her for her freedom and courage, and Oprah  Winfrey embraces her …. and SHE LOOKS ASTONISHING!

We live in others’ eyes and expectations that have been around for more than 10 thousand years, and passed from generation to generation. In maybe 200 years there will be males, females, she-males, hybrids ans x-men and the kind of article I am writing right now will be much longer and complex, and yet the strive for freedom of gender will stand still like a giant oak.


From → Philosophy, Society

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: