Naming Laws Their Reinforcement of the Gender Binary
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
NAMING LAWS THEIR REINFORCEMENT OF THE GENDER BINARY 2 “The segregation of the world into two sexes is, on a daily and systemic basis, a function of gender and its correlate sex category; and it is that fact that brings sexism, heterosexism, homophobia, and transphobia into existence.” Gilbert, 2009, p.109 Author: Hester de Boer Student number: 4161386 Email address: [email protected] Master Thesis MA Gender Studies Faculty of Humanities Utrecht University, the Netherlands Supervisor: Katrine Smiet Second reader: Berteke Waaldijk Utrecht, 2- 7-2019 3 ABSTRACT This research focuses on the connection between naming laws and the reinforcement of the gender binary. Although naming practices have been studied extensively (Finch, 2008), it has received limited attention within feminist and gender studies. This research builds further on the article of Plicher (2017) in which she puts forename practices at the core of the production and reproduction of the gender binary. Using Foucault’s and Butler’s work on sexuality and gender, this research shows how naming practices produce gendered bodies even before one is born. By focusing on naming laws that encompass gender restrictions, i.e. when only ‘gender- corresponding’ names are allowed, a new perspective on the institutionalisation of the gender binary is given. Because these naming laws force parents to accept the gender binary as a ‘truth’, they lay at the centre of the reinforcement of the gender binary. Therefore it is of great importance to bring these laws under the attention of feminists who plea for a rejection of the dichotomy. Feminist legal theory and critical discourse analysis are used to analyse two case studies of naming laws that include gender restrictions: the German naming law and the Danish naming law. Both laws show different manifestations of the gender binary, which provide the opportunity to obtain more information. Throughout this study, it is argued that these naming laws, an often unrecognised institutionalised form of the gender binary, should be modulated, and idyllically, be repealed. To achieve this, possible starting points are given, while taking different feminist perspectives into account. Keywords: naming laws, gender binary, gender construction, Butler, feminist legal theory 4 CONTENTS Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 6 Gender and feminism ............................................................................................................................. 11 Building a foundation ........................................................................................................................... 16 What’s in a name? .................................................................................................................................. 21 Naming practices and gender construction ................................................................................... 26 Case studies ............................................................................................................................................. 30 Germany ................................................................................................................................................... 30 Denmark .................................................................................................................................................... 36 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................. 41 5 INTRODUCTION “One is not born, but becomes a woman”, a famous statement by Simone de Beauvoir in 1949, signifies the fundamental rejection of biological definitions within feminism (de Beauvoir, 1973, p. 301). Although the concept of ‘gender’ was not yet introduced at that time, the quote reflects the body of thought behind its notion: that the division between men and women is a social one and that gender should be seen as a social attribute instead of a natural one (Rahman & Jackson, 2010). Since its introduction, gender has been an exceedingly important concept within feminist and gender studies. Many discussions have fixated on the meaning behind gender and its potential for feminist movements. One of the most influential views on gender has been given by Judith Butler, in her book Gender Trouble (1990). In her work, Butler contests the split between sex and gender, arguing that both are socially constructed. Butler expresses great criticism against the gender binary: the division of gender in man and woman. For Butler: “bodies cannot said to have a signifiable existence prior to the mark of their gender” (1990, p. 8). The two quotes given above, may leave the reader with an image of a baby. It makes you question if and when gender construction starts. Before someone is born, a sex is often already ascribed to their body. One could argue that an individual gender construction begins at that very moment. Parents are often socialised into constructing a babies gender before it is born. A relatively recent trend, gender reveal parties, makes an explicit example. Feminist scholars have made a connection between this trend and a reinforcement of the gender binary (Applequist, 2014). Furthermore, the process of naming a child, the choosing of a forename, can also been seen as a form of gender construction. An extensive amount of studies has shown the importance of forenames, through denoting ones individuality, but also marking ones social connections (Finch, 2008). However, little research has been done on the connection between forenames and gender construction. Plicher (2017) is the exception, she makes a strong plea in her article “Names and “Doing Gender” that forename practices are at the core to the production and reproduction of the gender binary. As she argues, forenames have important cultural work in ‘displaying’ sex and gender. Forenames help ‘creating’ gendered identities. Taking this back to Butler’s quote, forenames operate as ‘markers’. This research will focus on 6 forename practises and their reinforcement on the gender binary. Naming practices of parents do not exist in a vacuum, they are, of course, highly influenced by social construct. To follow a Foucauldian approach, gender is socially constructed and can be thought of as a result of discourse. Although Foucault’s work has mostly focused on sexuality (1978), his approach is also applicable to gender. A Foucauldian perspective will be used within this research, to illustrate how one comes to life within a constructed society even before one is born. Naming practices thus not solely reinforce the gender binary, the gender binary system is entrenched and institutionalised within society. There is no ‘start’ or ‘end’ in gender construction. Examples of the institutionalisation of the gender binary can be found in numerous laws. Besides discourse, laws influence and bound one’s identity possibilities. Laws help to establish normative and non-normative identities. Because laws restrict people to stay within the ‘norm’, it is important to start the research on forename practices and its reinforcement on the gender binary at the base: naming laws. Naming laws are laws that regulate naming practices within a country. Parents are obliged to follow the rules that are within these laws. A common law is that a child cannot have a swearword as forename. Most of the countries within Europe have this law. However, some naming laws are explicitly about gender. In this study, the naming laws of two countries, Germany and Denmark, will be analysed for its relation to the reinforcement of the gender binary. In the next short sections, I will discuss the methods that are used, shed light on my politics of location and introduce the following chapters. Methods In this study, the research question will be: “How do naming laws in different European countries create and reinforce the gender binary?”. The sub questions will be “What is the relation between naming practices and the gender binary?”, “What are the consequences of naming laws on gender?” and “Which modifications could be suggested for the naming laws to minimalize the reinforcement of the gender binary?”. The aim of this research is to show how deeply entrenched the gender binary is in our lives, by means of laws that restricts one’s freedom in choosing another ‘truth’ than the gender binary. This research should be read as a plea to repeal these laws and subsequently tear down the gender binary system little by little. For this research I have conducted a literature analysis, a comparative law analysis and a content analysis. The chapters one, two three and four will discuss the outcomes of my 7 literature analysis. Gender and feminist studies have always been denoted by their interdisciplinary character (Hesse-Biber, 2002). This research is no exception, the literature analysis included works from criminology, feminist studies, gender studies, psychology and sociology. The academic search engines Google Scholar, WorldCat and Web of Science were utilised to gain access to literature. Words such as: “forenames”, “naming”, “practices”, “gender”, “performativity”, “binary”, “non-binary”, “genderqueer”, “parents” “doing gender”, “laws”, “institutes”, “European” were used to find the right bodies of work. I have tried to take Hemmings (2011) citation tactics into account, by what she calls ‘feminist