8
CATEGORIZATION IN RELATION TO SEXUAL IDENTITY
Susanne Freimüller
In everyday life we tend to think and live in binaries, especially when it comes to
describe our sexual identity. There is either the possibility of being “normal” and
“heterosexual”, or of being “queer”. In conservative minds, sexual identities seem to
be clearly reduced to this binary and this is where the matter of categorization comes
in.
In this work, I want to draw a comparison between the idea of categorization and the
idea of a fluid identity, an identity that is able to change and constantly in progress.
Moreover, I want to focus on some of the problems that the process of categorization
can create, especially with regard to the “Masculine Continuum” and the tensions
between butches and Female-to-Males.
Stuart Hall suggests a conception of identity which he calls the ”post-modern
subject”. This perception of identity suggests that identity is not fixed, essential or
permanent – instead it is fluid and able to change from time to time. “Identity
becomes a ‘moveable feast’: formed and transformed continuously in relation to the
ways we are represented or addressed in the cultural systems which surround us.”
(Hall, Stuart. 1996.) We adopt different identities or different positions during life,
which are not “unified around a coherent self”. (Hall. 1996.) Therefore, Hall suggests
that there is no stable inner core which is unchangeable and fixed, there is more or
less a fluidity of identities which we temporarily identify with.
But if there is the assumption that an identity consists of different subject positions,
different categories that make up a subject, it also offers the question if we can be
forced into certain subject positions. Althusser explains this through his “concept of
interpellation”, which says that we are in fact “called” into subject positions and
therefore not free to choose (Cf. Giles. 1999). Sexuality is a great part of everyone’s
identity and so it also offers the question if it is fixed, stable and therefore possible to
be categorized or if it is fluid and changeable.
Concerning sexual categories people tend to think in binaries, especially in the
binary of either being “normal” and “heterosexual” or of being “queer”. David
Halperin argues in his book Saint Foucault:
Queer is by definition whatever is at odds with the normal, the legitimate,
the dominant. There is nothing in particular to which it necessarily refers. It
is an identity without essence. ‘Queer’ then, demarcates not a positivity but
a positionality vis-à-vis the normative. (Sullivan. 2003:43.)
9
This again underlines the common opposition of being normal versus being queer.
Also Michael Warner refers to queer as not just being a resistance to the norm, but
states that “more importantly, it consists of protesting against the idea of normal
behaviour”. (Sullivan. 2003:50.)
One problem is that if we refer to “queer” in the sense of being the opposite of
“normality”, it again gets a category which is in addition also a very powerful one.
The term “queer” also unifies, it ignores differences between lesbianism and
gayness, between “women” or between transsexualism and cross-dressing, for
example. Gloria Anzaldúa mentions the differences of class, race and age, which are
also ignored when using the term “queer”.
Queer is used as a false unifying umbrella which all ‘queers’ of all races,
ethnicities and classes are shoved under. At times we need this umbrella to
solidify our ranks against outsiders. But even when we seek shelter under it
we must not forget that it homogenizes, erases our differences. (Sullivan.
2003:44.)
So the broad category of being “queer” includes lots and lots of different sexual
identities people adopt. As a consequence these identities suggest the idea that there
are different territories and borders that can be crossed. People who are in-between
maybe want to cross from one category or territory to another, which makes other
people feel uncomfortable and therefore cause sexual political conflicts. As Gayle
Rubin mentions:
In addition to the definitional and legal wars, there are less obvious forms
of sexual political conflict which I call the territorial or border wars. The
processes by which erotic minorities form communities and the forces that
seek to inhibit them lead to struggles over the nature and boundaries of
sexual zones. (Halberstam 1998:141.)
This is also the sense of border I am going to use here, border as a metaphor for the
boundaries of sexual categories or territories. Another similar view of the idea of
“border” and “border war” by Judith Halberstam is: “[…], the idea of border war sets
up some notion of territories to be defended, ground to be held or lost, permeability
to be defended against” (Halberstam 1998:163.)
There is a strong tension especially between lesbian and transgender masculinities,
because the so-called “Masculine-Continuum” suggests categories that look
somehow like this (Cf. Halberstam 1998: 151.) :
Androgyny ---- Soft Butch --- Butch ---- Stone Butch--- Transgender Butch --- FTM
Not Masculine Very
Masculine
There are just small differences but a lot of overlappings concerning these categories
and so it becomes quite easy to cross borders.
I believe that the confusing overlaps between some forms of transsexuality
and some gender-deviant forms of lesbianism have created not only
10
definitional confusion for so-called medical experts but also a strange
struggle between FTMs and lesbian butches who accuse each other of
gender normativity. (Halberstam 1998:143.),
Overlappings are maybe one of the reasons that cause border wars, another may be
the different perceptions of people:
Some lesbians seem to see FTMs as traitors to a “woman’s” movement who
cross over and become the enemy. Some FTMs see lesbian feminism as a
discourse that has demonized FTMs and their masculinity. Some butches
consider FTMs to be butches who believe in anatomy, and some FTMs
consider butches to be FTMs who are too afraid to make the “transition”
from female to male. (Halberstam 1998:144.)
An obvious question is rather what it is that separates them, which is not easy to
answer because there are no hard and fast rules for sexual categorization. It again
gets difficult concerning the distinctions between transsexual and lesbian identities.
One point of criticism is that many Female-to-Males do come out as lesbians before
they come out as transsexuals, another one is that “many transgender men
successfully identify as butch in a queer female community before they decide to
transition”. (Halberstam 1998: 150.) So the distinctions between transsexual and
lesbian identities might become a bit blurred, which makes it possible that a lot of
people feel offended and perceive “territory-crossers” as the enemy.
More recently, some lesbians have voiced their opposition to FTM
transsexuals and characterised them as traitors and as women who literally
become the enemy. More insidiously, lesbians have tended to erase FTMs
by claiming transsexual males as lesbians who lack access to a liberating
lesbian discourse. (Halberstam 1998: 149.)
An example which shows how small the differences in-between the lesbian
community are, is stated in the collection Dagger: On Butch Women, which focuses
on an urban butch scene and therefore includes a chapter of interviews with Femaleto-Males.
In this particular chapter, the limits of lesbian identification are put into
question. Billy, for example, speaks about the great problems pretransition
transgender men have when they identify as lesbians. Billy remembers: “I’ve had
this problem for ten years now with women being attracted to my boyishness and my
masculinity, but once they get involved with me they tell me I’m too male”
(Halberstam 1998: 154). Lots of Billy’s lovers get confused by his strong masculine
part and think that he crosses the line because, for instance, he wants a real
moustache and a real beard. “Billy’s experience testifies to the ways in which
masculinity within some lesbian contexts presents a problem when it becomes too
“real”, or when some imaginary line has been crossed between play and seriousness”
(Halberstam 1998:154). This underlines the idea of lesbian masculinity as a “matter
of degree”, where lines can easily get crossed and in consequence maybe upset other
people.
Categorization involves two different processes: the process of being categorized by
others, from the perspective of the outside-world and of being categorized by
oneself. Often these perceptions contradict each other, like Mario Martino shows in
11
his autobiography Emergence. He presents the problem of “pretransition
identification”, which means that he distinguishes himself from lesbians and from
butches in particular. Before his transition Mario falls in love with Becky and he tells
her: “You and I are not lesbians. We relate to each other as man to woman, woman
to man” (Halberstam 1998: 154). But one day Becky comes home from work and
asks Mario if he knows the term “butch” and in effect she wants to know the
difference between Mario and a butch. Mario gives her a simple answer: “A butch is
the masculine member of a lesbian team. That would make you the feminine
member. But, Becky, honest-to-God, I don’t feel that we’re lesbians. I still maintain I
should have been a male” (Halberstam 1998: 154). In truth, Mario feels absolutely
offended and confused because he had never seen or referred to himself as a woman.
“The word butch magnified itself before my eyes, Butch implied female – and I had
never thought of myself as such” (Halberstam 1998: 154/155). So Mario’s
experience shows that one’s perception often contradicts with the outside view of
one’s identity. But how is it then possible to categorize? Can there be strict rules that
say which category one belongs to, even if the inside perception of the person
contradicts with the outside view?
A great problem is that many transsexuals do not have the possibility to cross
borders, they live somewhere in-between two territories and can never be “at home”.
“Some bodies are never at home, some bodies cannot simply cross from A to B,
some bodies recognize and live with the inherent instability of identity” (Halberstam
1998: 164). Prosser mentions in No Place like Home his model of “home”, which
symbolises “the place in which one finally settles into the comfort of one’s true and
authentic gender” (Halberstam 1998: 163). Moreover, he underlines the problem of
transsexuals who have to live in-between:
[…] such a move leaves the transsexual man with no place to go and leaves
him languishing in the ‘uninhabitable space – the borderlands in between,
where passing as either gender might prove quite a challenge’. (Halberstam
1998: 163.)
Halberstam also comments on this problem:
It is true that many transsexuals do transition to go somewhere, to be
somewhere, and to leave geographies of ambiguity behind. However, many
post-op MTFs are in-between because they cannot pass as women; many
FTMs who pass fully clothed have bodies that are totally ambiguous; some
transsexuals cannot afford all the surgeries necessary to full sex
reassignment. (Halberstam 1998: 163/164)
People who are in-between try to pass in society, they try to look as normal and
acceptable as possible. Therefore they try to avoid for example, typical clothes or
looks for not being mistaken.
In some bulletins, transsexual men send each other tips on how to pass as a
man, and many of these tips focus almost obsessively on the care that must
be taken by the transsexual man not to look like a butch lesbian. Some tips
tell guys to dress preppy as opposed to the standard jeans and leather jacket
look of the butch; in other instances, transsexual men are warned against
12
certain haircuts (punk styles or crew cuts) that are supposedly popular
among butches. These tips, obviously, steer the transsexual men away from
transgression or alternative masculine styles and toward a conservative
masculinity. (Halberstam 1998: 156.)
Crossing borders does not just have the result of disturbing some people, it has social
and political consequences, especially when it comes to Female-to-Males.
Halberstam mentions the same question concerning the effects of crossing borders:
“If some female-born people now articulate clear desires to become men, what is the
effect of their transitions on both male masculinity and on the category of butch?”
(Halberstam 1998: 142). Nowadays, the technological availabilities of surgeries to
reassign gender have made the option of gender transition available and especially
for Male-to-Female transsexuals these surgical transitions have been embraced by an
increasing number. But the discussions get much more complicated with surgeries of
Female-to-Male transsexuals, who “access male privilege” (Cf. Halberstam 1998:
143). So, in conclusion, there is a great difference in-between the category of
transsexuals, which means that the transition of Male-to-Females is more accepted
than the transition of Female-to-Males and therefore “gender reassignment for FTMs
does have social and political consequences” (Halberstam 1998: 143), as said before.
I have now pointed out some of the problems categorization creates, especially in
relation to the categories unified under the term “Masculine Continuum”. I want
again to stress that it gets easy to cross borders or to be in-between two categories
and therefore not being accepted by the outside world. There are, of course, two
different perceptions: at first the perception that it is necessary to categorize and
secondly the perception that there is a fluidity of identities that cannot and need not
be categorized. To conclude, my work I want to quote Gayle Rubin who says:
the border between these two modes of identification (this refers to the
tensions between butches and Female-to-Males which she calls “frontier
fears”) is permeable at least in part because ‘no system of classification can
successfully catalogue or explain the infinite vagaries of human diversity.
(Halberstam 1998: 172/173.)
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Giles, Judy, and Tim Middleton. Studying Culture. A Practical Introduction. 1999.
Halberstam, Judith. „Transgender Butch“. Female Masculinities. Durham: Duke
UP, 1998.
Hall, Stuart. “The Question of Cultural Identity”. Modernity and its Futures. Ed.
Hall, Stuart, David Held and Tony McGrew.1996.
Sullivan, Nikki. A Critical Introduction to Queer Theory. New York: New York
University Press, 2003.