Can society operate without gender and even biological sex classifications? Queer Post-Gender Ethics argues that we could exist, formulate our relationships and be sexual in more androgynous ways. Outlining a political vision for how a post-gender sociality might be achieved, it presents queer social practices for a truly gender neutral world
Access options:
The following links lead to the full text from the respective local libraries:
There is increasing resistance to gendering in contemporary society, seen in gender-neutral childrearing and pronouns, expansion of legal sex categories and intersex rights, and queer and genderqueer movements. This timely book considers the utopian question of whether, and how, gender could be eradicated and how we might understand identity and relationships without it. It considers the implications of arguments from 'new materialism' about the malleability of biological sex, and of queer theory and gender deconstruction, for social change and political practice. The original theoretical and practical argument is for an androgynous, reciprocal ethic or way of being in the world that transcends both sex/gender and some of the debates plaguing gender studies. It takes inspiration from real-world queer and post-gender practices, for example by being written using gender-neutral pronouns, and also considers the reality of implementing such an ethic in a highly gendered world, especially in cross-cultural contexts.
This article returns to Simone de Beauvoir's philosophical oeuvre in order to offer a way of thinking beyond contemporary feminist divisions created by 'gender critical' or trans-exclusionary feminists. The 'gender critical' feminist position returns to sex essentialism to argue for 'abolishing' gender, while opponents often appeal to proliferated gender self-identities. I argue that neither goes far enough and that they both circumscribe utopian visions for a world beyond both sex and gender. I chart how Beauvoir's ontological, ethical and political positions can be used to overcome the material/cultural, sex/gender bind that the contemporary divide perpetuates. I outline Beauvoir's 'ambiguous' non-foundational ontology that attends to both the cultural origins, and material effects, of both sex and gender, and to the extent that humyns are fundamentally social. After outlining Beauvoir's definition of freedom as purposive action, I then outline how the existence of the humyn-made and intersubjectively-upheld 'situations' of both sex and gender delimit this, urging feminists to return to the lost question of eradicating both. I use the utopian impulse in Beauvoir to argue that an ethics of reciprocity is an alternative mode of understanding the self and others. Beauvoir also calls for a political strategy that I call a 'utopian realism' that I apply to the contemporary divide. A way forward that is attentive to the concerns of both positions is the pragmatic use of identity politics that is nonetheless mindful of identity's limits, alongside Beauvoir's proto-intersectional vision of solidarity politics based not on identity but on a position of alterity and shared political strategy. Ultimately, I use this to argue that feminism would do better to unite around a shared commitment to challenging alterity, rather than further contributing to it.
This paper explores visions that imagine selfhood beyond sexual difference and therefore re-imagine sexuality beyond an "orientation." Further I draw on theory to formulate ontological bases for such visions and discover potential methods for programmatizing these. The paper looks to and brings together non-theoretical and disparate sources such as fictional utopias in feminist science fiction and the practices of contemporary anarcho-queer communities in order to find visions of alternative telos and ethos that dare to imagine a future landscape of selfhood beyond sexual difference. It then draws on ontological philosophy not directly related to issues of sex/gender or sexual difference in order to formulate ontologies that may offer alternative ways of understanding the formation of self that could underpin and enable such ethics beyond sexual difference. Specifically the "ontological ethics" of Simone de Beauvoir's Ethics of Ambiguity and Judith Butler's later works (1997-2005) that enable an ethos of "reciprocity" or "nurturing" that offer an alternative account of the development of selfhood than the antagonistic self / other relation presumed by sexual difference. Finally it looks to similarly disparate ontological, political and pedagogical theories and practices in order to formulate strategies for the practical end of programmatizing a future of selfhood beyond sexual difference.
Gender fluidity, genderqueerness and non-binary gender are increasingly embraced and visible and offer exciting new ways of understanding gender, the self and others. There is certainly not consensus on what they mean, which can be seen as a strength. Some trans exclusionary 'gender critical' or 'radical feminists' labour under the idea that these identities, and the option of rejecting binary genders, are a threat to women and girls' rights and at odds with feminism. While popular discourses have often been either celebratory or adversarial and aggressive, much academic work on this topic thus far has, importantly, been from the fields of psychology (see Barker & Richards 2015) or health (Smith et al. 2014), centred around monitoring and overcoming the negative: discrimination, health issues, violence. As Armitage puts it in their contribution to this special issue 'academic narratives mostly position trans and queer people, especially youth, exclusively in terms of victimhood and of needing help'. Some of this is for good reason: urgency of protecting the most vulnerable, framing research for funding, and evidencing the need for services. Recently there has been somewhat of a shift to more positive works (Iantaffi & Barker 2019: Nicholas 2019). Given this context, this roundtable and special issue sought to respectfully and productively discuss the positive aspects of these approaches to gender, in particular what they might mean for sexual ethics and politics, and how they may be enabled and affirmed more widely.
Rigid positions have emerged in contemporary feminism, based on totalising assumptions about the nature of gender, and the concomitant implications for what feminist politics should do, and who it should be for. This division can be characterised as between self-titled 'Gender Critical Feminists', sometimes called by others 'Trans exclusionary radical feminists', and 'gender diversity feminists.'
"Surrounded as we are by a masculinized populism that continues to enable insecurity, violence, and oppression, this book demonstrates the depth and breadth of the lineages that facilitate these masculinist practices."--Brent J. Steele, University of Utah, USA 'This book shows how reactionary movements systematically mobilize masculine resentment, and how that links up with broader structures of patriarchy, white supremacy, and colonialism. It is essential for scholars, writers and journalists seeking to fully understand antifeminism as a political and ideological force.' - Jason Wilson, Columnist and Journalist at The Guardian This book examines whether we are witnessing the resilience, persistence and adaptation of masculinist discourses and practices at both domestic and international levels in the contemporary global context. Beginning with an innovative conceptualisation of masculinism, the book draws on interdisciplinary work to analyse its contours and practices across four case studies. From the anti-feminist backlash that can be found in various men's rights movements, and responses to gender-based and sexual violence, to the masculinist underpinnings of human rights discourse, and modes of intervention to protect, including drone warfare. This interdisciplinary work will appeal to students and scholars of gender studies, security and international relations, and sociology. Lucy Nicholas is Senior Lecturer in Sociology at Swinburne University, Australia. Christine Agius is Senior Lecturer in Politics and International Relations at Swinburne University, Australia
The argument of this paper is that, despite their limits, gender 'proliferations' like nonbinary and genderqueer are the most effective and pragmatic approaches to overcoming or dismantling the gender binary whilst also expanding the range of 'cultural resources' of gender in the meantime. We make this case with the political and ethical caveat, however, that it would be politically ideal for these invocations of proliferation to be complemented by ongoing attempts to challenge sex/gender itself. We first outline the many ways that non-binary and genderqueer identities are invoked by numerous commentators as either symbols of progress, or weaponised for antithetical political purposes by a coalition of forces hostile to their proliferation. We then outline a defence of these identities as ontologically, pragmatically and socially justified, with feminist and queer political potential. We will make an argument as to why the invocation of non-binary and genderqueer as identity or subject positions is both understandable, due to the cultural constraints of the compulsarity of gender identity in society, and a potentially politically effective strategy. We then go on to engage, generously, with some potential limitations around non-binary and genderqueer and their potential collapse in to normativity, and consider how these may be addressed or mitigated against by a queer ethics. In short, we argue that non-binary and genderqueer can be understood as ways to make space in a structure that is not likely to crumble any time soon.
The argument of this paper is that, despite their limits, gender 'proliferations' like nonbinary and genderqueer are the most effective and pragmatic approaches to overcoming or dismantling the gender binary whilst also expanding the range of 'cultural resources' of gender in the meantime. We make this case with the political and ethical caveat, however, that it would be politically ideal for these invocations of proliferation to be complemented by ongoing attempts to challenge sex/gender itself. We first outline the many ways that non-binary and genderqueer identities are invoked by numerous commentators as either symbols of progress, or weaponised for antithetical political purposes by a coalition of forces hostile to their proliferation. We then outline a defence of these identities as ontologically, pragmatically and socially justified, with feminist and queer political potential. We will make an argument as to why the invocation of non-binary and genderqueer as identity or subject positions is both understandable, due to the cultural constraints of the compulsarity of gender identity in society, and a potentially politically effective strategy. We then go on to engage, generously, with some potential limitations around non-binary and genderqueer and their potential collapse in to normativity, and consider how these may be addressed or mitigated against by a queer ethics. In short, we argue that non-binary and genderqueer can be understood as ways to make space in a structure that is not likely to crumble any time soon.
