Through our last couple of class discussions and today's videos, I think it is quite apparent that "Western culture is deeply committed to the idea that there are only two sexes" (Fausto-Sterling, Five Sexes). However, I approach this topic from a historical, medical, and sociological standpoint as I explore why "Western culture" is obsessed with this two-sex system. To begin this discussion, I delve into the results of a Google search on a few of our key terms. I end up with the CNN article, A Eunuch's Tale from the Slums (URL source at the end of this post). In this article, the journalist explores the "'third gender'" in Mumbai, India. In this city, "eunuchs are known as hijras, or a 'third gender,' neither a he nor a she." However, contrary to the idea that a eunuch is castrated, "[h]ardly 8 percent of hijras...are castrated." The article continues to discuss that the hijras "were once worshiped in the Hindu world," but are now seen as both a blessing and a curse. They are said to be important because they can "take the ill luck and misfortune" away from people. In a sense, they are supreme bodies of bad luck and misfortune, as they are already born mutated and take misfortune from others. However, contact with a hijra is not necessarily good. While a blessing for a hijra can take away bad luck and misfortune, a curse from a hijra can do the exact opposite, bringing bad luck and misfortune.
The reason I bring this article into play is because it shows the stark contrast between the Western view on intersexuals and the Indian (possibly extended to Eastern) view on intersexuals. In the West, being intersexed is seen as a sociological problem that must be corrected as soon as possible, even in not medically necessary (as we saw on the TLC video). In other words, this sociologically based problem is seen as being correctable if medicalized (which it is). In India, being intersexed is not necessarily seen as a medical problem, but is seen with more of a good luck/bad luck perspective. Being intersexed in India constitutes power (do I want to curse that man staring at me or do I want to bless him?). Afterall, anyone who catches a glimpse of a hijra is scared about what s/he might say or do.
Perhaps this reasoning stems from the idea that something can actually be done about intersexulaity in the West. While medicine is advancing in India (and the East), perhaps there is no cure for intersexulaity or perhaps, also very likely, it is taboo to even consider discussing the sex of a child if it’s not definitely male or female. The reason I hint at this is because I wish to express that much of the West is based on medicalization. If there’s a social problem, we can use medicine to fix it (as another example, being fat is socially unacceptable and we have created ways of fixing this through stomach stapling and diet pills). Therefore, I believe that the sociological problem of the acceptance of only two sexes seems to be only a Western problem.
http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/asiapcf/09/07/india.eye.eunuch/index.html
4 comments:
Good work on researching this issue! I think it is extremely helpful to think about this outside of a western context. I am curious about the shift from hijras being worshiped to the good luck/bad luck dichotomy you describe. I wonder if it is tied to colonization or an influx of western influence. As we will see in the Evelyn Blackwood piece, colonization played a role in some indigenous American tribes' shift from their traditionally non-dichotomous views of sex and gender to more rigid ones.
your use of the word "cure" is interesting as I think many intersex people and their allies would say that their is nothing to cure. Something we will no doubt come back to.
The reason I use the diction of "cure" is because I was pointing toward the contrast between Eastern and Western culture. In the West, if something is not sociologically or medically normal, we try to "cure" it, even if it is not life threatening. I agree that intersex does not need to be cured. However, I also believe that society thinks otherwise. One may argue that I can't prove this, but we all know that society views intersexed people differently. If the whole of society can't accept to men having sex, how can it accept someone with both a penis and vagina having sex with anyone without seeing him/er as gay?
ahh thank you for the clarification. I agree whole heartedly. As you point out the question of more than one sex raises the specter of of homosexuality. Furthermore, homosexuality and heterosexuality become questionable categories if we accept the reality of a spectrum of sexes.
I thought your comment at the end of your post was really interesting. You commented on how it seems that Western culture uses medicine to fix social problems, intersex individuals, obesity. It almost seems to me like taking the easy way out. Instead of dealing with the issue head on, in the case of obesity, creating a healthier lifestyle and trying to figure out why some people over-eat, people would rather take a pill. It sounds like cop-out; we don't want to deal with something that strays from our norms (male/female) so let's just use our technology to "fix it." Also leading to the idea that it's something that even needs to be fixed, which perpetuates the stigma and the continued desire to make intersex individuals "normal."
Post a Comment