{"version": "1.0", "type": "rich", "title": "You realize, \u201cgender is socially constructed\u201d doesn\u2019t mean your ~real~ pronouns are whatever you say they are, it means they\u2019re...", "author_name": "kontextmaschine", "author_url": "https://kontextmaschine.com", "provider_name": "kontextmaschine", "provider_url": "https://kontextmaschine.com", "url": "https://kontextmaschine.com/post/123631176903/", "html": "

cinefeminism:

\n\n

thededekindadafunction:

\n\n

kontextmaschine:

\n\n

You realize, \u201cgender is socially constructed\u201d doesn\u2019t mean your ~real~ pronouns are whatever you say they are, it means they\u2019re whatever everyone else says they are.\n\n

Seriously, if you guys still bothered to actually read your fucking Foucault instead of goddamn sad teen bloggers\u2026 the fuck did you think \u201crepressive power is a creative force that gives rise to meaning\u201d was about?

\n\n

I have no idea what that means, but fortunately one doesn\u2019t need to read Foucault (or Butler) to Think About Gender Well.

And since gender is *not* entirely socially constructed\u2026.

\n\n

According to Foucault, one\u2019s\u00a0\u201creal\u201d pronouns are\u00a0\u201cwhatever everyone else says they are\u201c? No.

I disagree with such an interpretation of Foucault. He\u2019s not interested in what is real, authentic, or true at all, and doesn\u2019t suggest that meaning is exclusively imposed from the outside. (He also actually argues that power is NOT repressive, so \n\nkontextmaschine\u2019s\u00a0interpretation is off there as well.)\u00a0

What I believe Foucault allows us to do is step away from negotiations over what is real/authentic/true and understand ourselves to be operating within systems of language and power that give specific meanings to (in this case) biology. Right now,\u00a0we have competing social constructs of how pronouns are used to produce meaning about bodies and people.\u00a0

Personally, given the two generally available options for using pronouns to produce meaning, I\u2019m going to follow the social construct that\u00a0\n\nkontextmaschine\u00a0dismisses as being created by\u00a0\u201csad teen bloggers\u201d: use the pronouns that the person you\u2019re talking about says produces the appropriate meaning. While this may be the more real, true, or accurate approach, the argument about its objective validity is far less compelling to me than its ethics.

Foucault has many problems. However, here it is the misrepresentation of his argument, rather than the argument itself, that is problematic.

\n\n

That\u2019s a popular reading in the academy, but that\u2019s mostly \u2018cause they so want to reach that result they\u2019re willing to do pretzel twists to get there. Mine\u2019s better.

And the conceit that the best models of peoples\u2019 natures are the constructs that they consciously promote to others, like holy shit, have you ever MET people?

"}