sign in sign up
<<
Home , Shulamith Firestone, Transfeminism

,\nlly Hines 2L

rliscussed in the last chapter, and the troubling of unitary categories. Cneprpn Two Wlrilst the relationship between and deconstructionist theory has lictluently been contentious, there are also important areas of overlap. These ,rrc especially evident in the recent material 'turn' within deconstructionist Feminist Theories tlrcorg and in debates about embodiment (see Woodward and Gillis in this volume). It is these areas that I will move on to explore; firstly to reflect upon thc challenges for fe minist theory, and secondly to consider the intersections Snlly HrNEs l)ctween deconstructionist theory and . 'fhe first section of this chapter addresses how feminist theory has diver- rificd from the[arlier dominant frameworks of radical, Marxist and liberal lL'nrinisql The next section explores the ways in which the development of l)()ststructuralist and postmodern theories of gender both challenges, and con- nccts with, feminist theory. The chapter the n moves on to look in similar ways Introduction ,rt dialogues between feminism and theory. The last section of the chap- tcr addresses the development of studies; highlighting significant Women's studies developed in the late 1970s with[ihe political goal of recti$'- tlcbates between feminist and transgender scholars and examining work within ing the marginalization of women's experien.., ,nhin*r.r,!*iihin academia. transgender theory around the bodv. Such studies are important because they In seeking to theorize gender inequalities, and thereby help to end women's rnfbrm a number of key issues and debates in women's and oppression) women's studies mirrored the prevailing link between feminist including: theory and activism. fu Stacey outlined in the previous edition of Introd,ucing Wornen's Studier.lJh. aim was to explain the problems in order to transfbrm O the construction of the category gender; the patriarchal reiitions of all spherei of sociai, cultural and economic lifc.J o the relationship between and gender; (Stacey, 1997:54). In the 1980s, then, feminist theory and the politics of o the relationship between'the body' rnd1dglJ5 feminist gctivism, went hand in hand. Yet, by the 1990s, this connection had o feminist politics and who can claim a feminist identity. become troubled by debates within women's and gender studies and femi- nism more broadly concerning whose interests were being represented and by whom Beyond the 'Big Three': developments in feminist theory Through the 1990s, and over the past decade, there have been numerous shifts in feminist theory, which are captured in other chapters of this book. From a feminist perypeltrve,f-gender is a socially constructed concept which Significant developments have occurred around the theorizing of gender (see gives'i'@id"entitiesandgendei'olflFeministscholarshave Richardson in this volume); 'race' and ethnicity (see Reed in this volume ) and .rnalysed the operation of power at both a micro and a macro level in order to sexuality (see Taylor in this volume). Moreover, running through these devel- inveitigate the pays in wirich gender inequalities are construct.fl Diff.r.nt opments has been the importance placed upon global social positionings and fbminist perspectives have foregrounded particular social sites as central to the inequalities. It is not possible to encapsulate all of the developments in femi- construction, maintenance and reproduction of gender inequalities. Feminist nist theory in this chapter. Rather, I focus upon three areas which, I believe, perspectives have accounted for gender inequalities in different ways and have have posed distinct challenges and represent key shifts within feminist theory: offered competing solutions toSnequal power relations between women and nreq! During the 1970s and 1980s, feminist perspectives can be loosely sum- o the development of poststructuralist and postmodern theory; rnarized as falling within a radical, Marxist or liberal school of thought. These o debates between and feminism; rnain points of argument are outlined in the box overleaf. o the development of transgender studies. It is important to note, however, that the divisions between these three fem- The development of deconstractinnist frnelvw_- poststructuralism, post- inist perspectives were not wholly demarcated. For example, . modernis-,qu..,th.o'_havepresentedkeycnd. emerged in the 1970s in the US alongside the civilrights movemenls and many lenges to feminist theory over the past decade. Moreover, debates within these radical feminist activists had been involved in working-class politics and anti- areas are important to the ways in which feminist theory is presently being racism campaigns in the 1960s. Yet by the 1990s each of these schools of femi- nist thought for neglecting the positioning and experience rethought. Central to these developments is the sex/gender distinction, as werfitiqued of 20 Ferninist Tlteories ,\nlly Hines 23 Fe,ninisrr1 l?10's l46o's L Ea-ly rhat the conceptfteglected cultural and historical specificities. The notion of ^ p.rtriarchy was therefore challenged for not accounting for how 'race' and Radical Feminism cthnicity impact upon women's experiencesJln this way hooks (1981)argued The concept of 'patriarchv'- systematic male dominance of women - was central rhatftadical feminism takes white women's experiences as the norm; failing to radical feminism. was seen to be universal in that it existed across all cultures and historical periods, if in different forms. Radical feminists highlighted ro r-ognize the distinct experiences of non-white *o-efl Similar points of the nuclear family as a key site of women's oppression, whereby men exploited ,trlaument have been made in relation to the ways in which[patriarchy' fails women through unpaid domestic labour in the home, which, in turn, restricted t() account for the wap in which social class intersects with gender relations power their ability to gain positions of in society. &groduction was identified ,rnd processes of powegl[ Criticisms were also brought to bear on Marxist and as central to these processes of inequality; whereby women become materially dependent upon men. (1971), for example, argued that the by radical feminists who argued that these schools of thought abolition of the family was intrinsic to women's liberation. Other radical feminists Sit.a to account for the ways in which women's oppression is structured by and highlighted gggg!_yiglgnce - rape, domestic violence, J-rractices and understandings of sexuatirfrnubi n,,1975). M + L - as part of the patriarchal system of male oppression of women. As the recognition of 'difference' led to more complex models of feminist perspective, From a radical feminist women's liberation is only achievableif -pg, triarchv is overthrown. .rnalysis, work fitting under the broad church of 'feminist theory' spread across .rcademic disciplines and the need for women's studies as a discrete field was (prestioned (see Chapter 3 for further reflection on these debates). Accordinglg as the category of came unstuck within the broader While radical feminism positioned patriarchy as an over-arching structure of '' women's oppression, Marxist feminists argued that the system of .g3g!!g!g- politics of feminism, so feminist theory diversified. Whilst politically it became structured . From this perspective, economic class relations lay .rppropriate to talk about a diversity of , within the academy feminist at the root of the subordination of women. The oppression of women is main- l)crspectives developed in increasingly extensive and interdisciplinary ways (see tained through domestic labour and as a result of women's unequal position in Itichardson in this volume for discussion of how feminist theory has diversi- the labour market. Gender inequality is therefore a system of glqss; inequality, which is maintained to serve the interests of the ruling class. From a Marxist femi- licd in relation to theorizing gender; Robinson in this volume for discussion nist perspective, women's freedom from oppression is only achievable ifSrullg.b of the relationship of masculinity to feminist theory; Reed in this volume for ----rism is overthrown. discussion of developments in feminist theory in relation to 'race' and eth- niciry). Moreover, during the past decade the scopg of feminist analysis and Liberal Feminism the breadth of feminist concerns have continuffi-gklgg. The chapter will Rather than focus upon an over-riding cause of women's inequality (for exam- ,'.,'ffiaddresshowdevelopmentswithinpo't't'.,-iuralist,postmodern, ple, patriarchy liberal highlight issues such or capitalism), feminists tended to (lueer and transgender theory have reflected recent conceptual and substantive as and gender divisions in the home and_ruL*_ ment. These aspects of gender inequality, liberal feminists argued, can be ended shifts in feminist theory. through equal opportunities legislation and other democratic measures. From this perspective, equality for women is achieved through gradual processes of social and legal reform. Poststructuralist and postmodern theory

C h n I le ng e s fo r fe m i n is rn non-white non-middle-class *o..{l Working-class, black and femi- 'l'he nists in particular argued that traditional feminism centred on the interests of central premise ofpoststructuralism is tat@iscourse constructs meaning] middle-class, white, heterosexual women. As Robinson outlines: Iudith Butler (1990) defines discourse as fuhe limits of acceptable speech'. l)iscourse, then, structures what can, or what cannot, be said about a cer- Reflecting debates and divisions within the women's movement, the most fLnda- tain subjec! From a poststructuralist perspective [de ntiw is produc ed through mental dilemma of Women's Studies has concerned the marginalisation of Black, rliscourse] Poststructuralist feminist analyses take-the discursive formations of working-class and lesbian perspectives amongst others, and often in opposition, it gender.f,d r."urlity as their starting point to examin.fno* gender and sexual- - has been argued to the prioritising of the needs and experie nces of white , middle ity are constructed through language and institutionalized ways of thinkin$ class Western women. Early feminist writers differentiated between 'sex' and 'gender'. Within this (Robinson ,1997 18) binary framework,fsex' referred to the biological body and gender to the Radical feminism's positioning of patriarchy as universal attracted much crit- social roles and cultural understandings that were attached to male or icism from other feminists and, particularly, from black feminists who argued bodie{ Conceptually separating 'sex' and 'gender' was politically significant 24 Ferninist Theories ,\nlly Hines 2S for feminism as it followed thatffender roles were socially and culturally, rather Stefano (1990) has also been concernecl aboutfiow feminism can articu- than 'naturally', constructedl During the 1990s, however, feminist scholars l.rte and organize around the interests of women if the identity category of developed alternative ways of theorizing the relationship between sex and gen- '\\,orran' itself is abandoneil der. Significantlffiex' became to be seen as socially and culturally constructed, as was gend{}see Richardson in this volume). o Postmodernismfteglects the material, wl-rich is central to women's experi- From this perspective, Butler shows how the binary categories of 'sex' and .rt..$ From thii perspective, scholars such as Walby (lgg7) argue that 'gender' have restricted feminist understandings. As Richardson also points postrnodernism's[ocus on the discursive formations of gender is at the ex- out, she argues that the way in which feminists have understood 'sex' as con- pense of a stmctural analysis necessary to examine the social and economic stituting the biological male or female body and 'gender' as referring to the fbrces that affect the lived experiences of gender] social meanings attached to such bodies, has limited understanding of gender as distinct from sex: lrr different ways, then, many feminist writers and activists have argued that postmodernism fuoststructuralism and are incompatible with feminisr{l Oth- i'rs, however, disagree and look at their areas of overlap; these argrrments will fWtt.n the constructecl status of gender is theorized as radically independent of sex, lrc outlined in the next section. gender itself becomes a free-floating artifice , with the consequence that rnnn and mnsculine might just as easily signi$ a female body as a male one, and womnn and fernininea male bocly as easily as a female ottt (Buder, 1990:6, italics in original) Cornrnon groand

l(.rther than viewing postmodernism as oppositional feminism, other femi- An understanding of gender as separate from sex thus holds the potential for to rtist rvriters have traced the common ground between the two. Flax (1997), a greater diversity of masculinities and , which, in turn,[llows for lirr example, argues the recognition of dffirently embodied gendered identities and expressions, thatfrostmodernism's deconstruction of gender catego- lics complements feminism's problematizing of gender relation{ However, or of di_fferent ways of being women and menlFurther, Butler argues that we rlrc prroposes that is necessary for feminism extend its deconstmctive shoul@e wary oiseeing 'sex' as a purely bioligical characteristic. Rather, 'sex' it to .rrr.rlysis in order to think more carefully about the relationship between sex is socially and culturally determined.l Alongside poststructuralism, pgSimodernism has been influential on the .rntl gender. Whilst[alking about women's experience]is of continued impor- t,rnce, Flax belieuesJhat such accounrc@. invariably partial, way in which strands of feminist thinking have reconfigured the sex/gender since 'none of us c,rtt speak for because no such person exists except a binary. In challenging the idea of unified identity categories (for example, of "woman" within specific rct of (already relations-to 'woman' or'man') feminist postmodern writers have troubled the notion of Sendered) "man" and to many concrete and dif- lcrcrrt womenllFlax, 1997:78). Rather, she proposes way forward shared identity and experience. Subsequentl5 the belief that feminism is able that the and acceptance of multiple gendered experiences and ro speak on behalf ofwomen per se *r, qu.ttioned. Yet infejecting the notion of common experi.nq postmodernism has appeared as politically divisive to :[:Jl ,sbcognition As well as usefully highlighting the common ground feminism some feminists. There-has existed a contentious relationship between femi- between and nist and postmodernist theory and for many feminist scholars a postmodern I'ostntodernism, these types of argument indicate the benefits postmodernism In;ly hold feminism. instance, suggests framework is at odds with feminism. The arguments of feminist writers who for For Wright that: 'postmodernist tlrcory provides feminism with an additional framework, enabling it articu- are critical of postmodernism can be summarized as follows: to l.rtc the diversity and contradictions that spring up not only between various o with-a politics of identitflthat is central to femi- 1'ositions but also within various positions' (1997:179).In this way,E post- f-Postmodernism*nist conflicts politics. This is becausefin deconstructing the category-'woman' it rrtoriern framework may be used to move on from the concept of a unitary identity (of recognize threatens the idea of organiziFg politically this catigorflFrom this ;,tcnr'ler 'woman' or 'man') to differences across and "ro.rnd l,c t rveen gender categories] perspective Benhabib states: llraidotti's (199a)work is important in signposting a feminist incorporation This political The postmodern position(s) thought through to their conclusions may not 'l'postmodernism. approaclftnables allegiances whilst recogniz- nlg, that unitary identity categories are unstablg] A postmodern feminist ap- only eliminate the specificity of fe minist theory but place into question the very can also be seen in the workof Spivak (1990), Butler (1992),Ahmed e mancipatory ideals of the women's movements altogether. I'r'o:rch ( (Benhabib ,1994:78-9) 1996), Heckman (2000) and Roseneil (2000a) who variously illustrate how Ferninist Theories Snlly Hines 27 ffhe deconstruction of identity categories can be followed through with an One of the central critiques by feminist scholars of queer theory is thatf,ul- analysis of how identities and gender politics are continually shaped and re- rural analyses of gender and sexual transgressions have bee n developed at the shaped ,t'teQ Very similar themes and points of debate to those that have cxpense of political theoriefl Hennessg 1995 ;Fraser, 1997 a;)ackson, I 999b ). been discussed here can be seen in the dialogue between feminism and queer Yet, recently, a number ofiriters have stressed[he importance of bringing a theory. social and economic analysis to the deconstruction of ge nded These deve lop- nlents, which will be outlined below, also provide methods through which to navigate the analytical dilemmas for feminism ofpostmodernism, as previously Debating queer and feminism tliscussed. Conternpoca'r1 G)r.,t eec Theo'{' i cS Like poststructuralist and postmodern debates about identiryfrueer theory o sociology has posed a challenge to feminism's theorization of gender and Q,teer Writers such as Seidman ( 1996), Roseneil ( 1999) and Hines (2007) have f,ormatiog/ Moreover, queer theory has, both positively and negatively been called for a 'queer sociology'. Queer sociologyfixamines how pow.t seen to have taken centre stage within sexuality studies in rece nt years (see also ! produced and resisted in relation to both discourse and material factorsJ Taylor's chapter in this volume)LQueer theory draws on poststructuralist and A queer sociological approach is helpful inftlowing feminism to positively postmodern deconstructions of identity categories, and sees gender and sexual recognize gendered differences. whilst exploring the lived experiences and ide ntities as potentially flu@ In arguing for the importance of analyzing how competing forms of differencf this model also pevelops deconstructive and sexual identitieiare constructed and localized in the everyda] this Sender approaches to gender by grou.gding analyses of gender pluraliry within a has provid.S'...increased space for exploring how sexual and gender identi- social and economic framewor\l ties are thdrroduct of local situations and conte xtg!,vithin which such ide nti- ties have meaning and value' (Richardson et a1.,2006:8).A micro-analysis of o Material queor studies identity formations has shed light upon the factors that interweave within and Alongside proposals for a queer sociology, recent work by feminist scholars between identity categories. This has brought greater attention to the ways has brought a[ocial analysis to deconstructive gender theorf, In theorizing in which [nder-theorized aspects of identity, such as race and ethnicity (for th{ntersectiJns of sexuality and social clas{f Taylor (2005"J, for example, example, Anzaldua,1999); geographical and cultural location (for example, explores women's material positioning alongside their subjective identifica- Bell and Binnie, 2000) and (for example , Halberstam, 2005; tions. Hennessy (2006) has termed thelgonvergence of material feminism Hines, 2007), intersect with gender and sexuality to impact upon powel rela- and queer theorf[as 'material '. tions and jlbjgctive-identification! Further, a queer analysis has illuilittated o Intersections offeminisrn and, qaeer theory the ways in rvhich the cultural realm acts as a site of identity construction and As some postmodern writers have examined the commonalities beween re sistance. postmodernism and feminism, others have traced the connections between In viewing genaered or sexual identities as socially consructeQ queer Fl feminism and queer theory (Butler, 1994; Martin, 1998a; Mclaughlin, theoryfai[ls to challenge the naturalization of n_ormative gender and sexual 2006). Significantly Warner (1993) and Richardson (2000, 2006) have .rt.gofi.$ Yet, as Seidman notes, queer the o.y'r@buttal ofldentity may para- stressed the ways in whichfeminism has been instrumental in the devel- doxically lead to the denial of differencg[ opment of queer theory]Warner argues that: 'feminism has made gender This very refusal to anchor experience in identilications ends up, ironically, denying a primary category of the social in a way that makes queer social theory dif'fbrences by either submerging them in an undiflbrentiated oppositional mass or newly imaginable' (Warner,1993:viii). For Warner{jeminism as a method by blocking the development of individual and social differences through the disci- of analysis has much to offer queer theory in relation to developing further prlining compulsory imperative to remain undiflbrentiated. distinctions beween the categories of ge nder and sexuality. In turn, this (Seidman, 1993:133) would enable a more detailed analysis of the ways in which sexuality is gen- dereQ Richardson et al. (2006) suggest that the juncture between femi- As wi$ poststructuralist and postmodern analyses, then, queer theory pres- nist and queer theory reflects 'the wish to bring global and local dynamics ents the[5lilemma of how to deconstnrct identity categories and positively ac- together and the role a ftrsion of queer and feminist ideas can play within count fbr difference, without losing sight of the experiences that constitute thisfievolves around a desire to see material and cultural issues examined differencQThus, very similar criticisms are levelled at queer theory as those togetherl|(Richardson et 'a\.,2006: ll). In attempting to forge stronger previously'discussed in relation to postmodernism, i.e.(t nlns the risk of ob- links between feminism and queer theorg Richardson (2006) identifies scuring gender divisions and inequalitie! several ways in whichfgueer theory can enhance feminist theorfl Feminist Theories Sally Hines 29

o The categories of 'sex'and'gender'are inherently co-dependent. 1. Oueer theory is helpful in focusing attention uponfio* sexuality affects social o Transsexuality (male to female) is a genetic male practice that is created by relation$ a patriarchal medical system to construct servile women. 2. Oueer theory has been important in developing[6ritiques of normative as- sumptions about gender u and sexualityJ Raymond argues thatfransgender women are not, nor can they ever be, 'real' 3. Oueer theojy has the potential to offer feminism further tools through which women: to theorize[he relationship between gender and sexualityll 4. treoiy rpTll,?;is^on 'difference)mav engQte te#nist theory tofna- It is biologically impossible to change chrornosomal sex.If chromosomal sex is taken iy_ee_r lyze power across and between identity categorielf to be the fundamental basis for maleness and femaleness, the man who undergoes 5. Oueer theory offers feminism theoretical tools through which topnderstand sex conversion is not femal$ the sex/gender binarfl (Raymond, 1980: I0, italics in original)

Sh. t..ond strand of Raymond's argument is that transgender practices are The theoretical developments within feminist theory discussed so far have <>ppositional to the values and politics of feminismi| firoubled conceptualizations of unitary gender ..t.go.i.s ancl have facilitated a more careful theorization of the sex/ gender distinctiofl Th.r. tende ncies o Transgender women are men who ,.infor.. a stereotypical model of are also evident through the development of transgender studies, which the ; chapter will consequently now move on to explore. o Transgender men are women who seek to acquire male power and privilege.

Transgender studies Raymond's book was widely read and created the dominant feminist per- spective on transsexuality throughout the 1980s in both the US and Britain. Riddell (1996) documents how transgender feminists Tr n n sg e n de r n n d fe rn i n is rn and/or were frequently excluded from feminist and lesbian communities, and argues that The termftransgender' relates to a diversity of practices rhat call into question Raymond's work had personally and politically damaging consequences: traditional ways of seeing gender and its relationship with sex and sexualitfl (see also Richardson in this volume). Used broadly, the concept of transgenl My living space is threatened by this book. Although I have had to challenge its at- der is extensive -[ttcotporating practices and identities such ai t.rnru.stism, tacks on women[ts dogmatic approach and its denial that fbmale experi- transsexualiry , gender queer, female and male , cross-dressing e nce is our basic starting point are a danger signal of trends emerging in the whole and some butch/ practicell Transgender may refer to[ndividuals who women's moue-entil have undergone hormone treatment or surgery to reconstrucftheir bodies or (Riddell, 1996:189) to those who cross gender in ways that are less permanerQ Second wave feminism was one of the first academic -flelds to resoond to More recently, Jeffreys (1997a) has rekindled the radical feminist tradition the growing public awareness of modern western transgender practices (Hird, of positioningfiransgender practices as anti-feminist: 'Transsexualism oppos- 200?). Howiver,fteminism has traditionally been hostiie to .rrnrg.nder prac- cs feminism by maintaining and reinforcing false and constructed notions of tice$Raymond, 1980; |effreys, 1997a). The publication of fanice Raymond's correct femininity and masculiniry'l(1997a57). Such feminist approaches to bookTheTranssexualErnpire(|980)establishedananti-traqsgeq49@t transgender show how! binary uilderstanding of gender is unable to incor- perspective that was to significantly affect the d_ominant Gminist position for porate transgender into-feminist theory and politic! Rtttrough some feminist successive decades. There arfuwo central strandlo Raymond's position. I will writers (Hausman, 1995; Wilton, 2000) conrinue to reflect Raymond and address these in turn and summarize the key points of argument in relation feffreys' critique, other feminist writers have adopted[-more progressive ap- to each.ffirst, from a biological position, she argues that it is impossible to proaches to transgende{ Here it is possible to see the wiys in which a feminist separate 'sex' and gender] fi'amework can be used t{theorize 4_iverse gendered identities and expressions that are unfixed to the 'seTed' bodiJ o 'Sex'is chromosomally dependent and thus secured at birth. Rubin's ( 1996) work is use ful in examining.th{inte rsections of feminism and o 'Gender'is the coherent expression of biological 'sex'. transgendd l" contrast to an essentralrzlng lnslstence that 'one must inhabit 30 Feruinist Theories ,\nlly Hines 3l

a female body to have the experiences that makes o-ne a feminist' (Adu-Poku, ru,riters have drawn attention to identities that arefionsciously constmcted on 2001 :157), Rubin calls for an understanding that[-feminist identity arises out tlrcborderlandsofgendefln"ffigg4),foF.*,,nple,blorvsapartany of politicai commitment rather than femrtJ Uiot8gy] str. states:f"wo-rn- [5.rrcgorization of sex as defined by biological genitali'] hood" is no longer a necessary, nor sufficient qualification for feminist identity. A feminist is oni who acts in concert with feminist idealsJ(Rubin, 1996:308). Most fblks r.vould define a man by the presence of a penis or some fbrm of penis. Thus,Political practice, rather than gender or sex, lies at the heart of femi- Some rvould define a woman by the presence of a vagina or soffIe fbrm of vagina. nist idEntirfl Koyama's (2003) discussion of 'transQnrinism' also shows how It's not that simple though. I know several wonlen in San Francisco who have pe- [ra n sge nde r- poli ti cs m ay e nabl e co n te mporarJi6-triiilIt" reconfi gure the rrises. Many wonderfirl men in my lifb have vaginas. And there are quite a fbw people -relationship betwe.n ,.* and gend.flf"yr-a *rites' '[] is not rvlrose genitals fall sornervhere between penises and vaginas. What are they? n'rerely about merging trans politics with feminism, but it is$ critique of the (Bornstein, 1994: 56-7, italics in original) second wave feminism from third wave perspectivesil(KoVama, 2003:244). Here, Koyama uses the term third wave' to refer to feminist perspectives de- llornstein uses queer theory's deconstruction of gender identiry categories: veloped tirrough the 1990s. Slili[Githat, in addition to enabling stronger 'l knorv I'm not a man - about that much I'm very clear, and I've come to the links between feminist and transgender theory and politics, closer attention to t'onclusion that I'm probably not a woman either, at least not according to a ffiender diversity may enable a collective arena in which gender differences pro- lot of people's rules on this sort of thing' ( 1994:8). In articulatingherselfiot tu.. a more e*tenriu. feminist knowledg.]X I will now move on ro.*pio.., rrr the 'rvrong body' but as a 'gender outlaw'/Bornstein explicitlylgtrallenges a a focus upon embodiment within feminism and transgender studies indicates scx/genderbinaryandtrou@offixedgerrdercatdgorie! further how material concerns are being debated and developed. Over the last decade transgender writers have articulated their personal gen- tlcr trajectories, and have engaged with the theoretical debates of feminism, postmodernism and queer theory. Transgender studies brings varied mean- Embodying gender nrgs to understandings of gender and reflects a diversity of theoretical posi- tions. Whilst some writers have continued to articulate a transsexual narrative In taking the formations of gender and sexuality as their startiqg point, queer (l)rosser, 1998), others have worked to reshape the meanings of transgender feminist analyses have engaged directly with transgender. For$utler, gender .rrrtl to problematize normative understandings of gender and sexuality more does not exist outside of discourse . She develops the concept of 'performa- lrroadly (Stone, l99l; IJalberstam, 1998). Thus the key question in transgen- tivity' to address the ways in which the rules of gender are compulsively and rlcr studies has become[iwhat is the "right" bodyf ][Halberstam, 1998). repetitively acted out to reinforce the idea of gender as natural. The practices 'l'ransgender studies incorporates a body of work that is autobiographical of cross-dressing and drag are employed as examples of how the naturalization rn its style and content, an{includes political comm.ntr.y[ligned with trans- (gender of gender ..n b. challenged through parody - io signpost trouble.ll gcncler community activisn! In common with much fe miniit work, there is no (See Richardson in this volume for a fuller discussion.) slrict demarcation between these areas, leading many writers to move between Yet many transgender theorists have argued that$ueer analyses of transgen- tlrc theoretical, the autobiographical and the political. A mix of deconstruc- der have neglected the centrality of the !g!y withln ffanssexual experien.E tivc gender analysis, social critique and autobiography is employed to explore Prosser (1998) argues that Butler's focus on drag presents a selective analysis .r tliversity of gender and sexual identities. In line with the feminist influenced of transgender, which$eglects the role of embodiment within gendered expe- Itostmodern and queer work I discussed earlier, much work from transgender riences and expression$ For Prosserftranssexualism is the outcome of being sttrdies argues for the[mportance of bringing a social and material framework

born in the 'wrong boily'. Transsexualiry then, is a state whereby self-gender t o :rnalyses of transgende{ identity and the bqdy are at odds. Gender reconstructive surgery thus enables MacDonald's (1998) emphasis uponpender as socially relational as well as .ir=ffi to correlatlAlthotrgh as Halberstam (1998) and Heyer 1ZOOO) point Pclirrrnatively constructe{Jis helpful in overcoming the theoretical problems out, and, indeed, as has been the focus of feminist wolk around women's lirr fbminism of deconstructionist perspectives. Whilst acknowledging that the bodily image and experience (for example, Woolf, l99l)G it not only trans- lirctrs on difference within deconstructive analyses is useful, she argues that sexuals who express disharmony between the imagined and the material bodgl postmodern and oueer theorv has a\gendency to ignore the specific subject po- (See also Woodward in this volume.) ritions under.n"lysil In a similar way to Prosser (1998), MacDonald argues Rather than focusing upon[ranssexuality as synonymous ofthe'wrong body', tlr.rt'lt fqueer theory] does so at the expense of investigating the actual lives, and surgery as a means of constructing the 'right' bodf other transgender 1'olitical demands, or feelings expressed by transgendered people of having S*ppor+ a poStrnnc.,derni St apPrclactr 33 32 Ferninist Theories Sally Hines

unfixed to the 'sexed' bodfl an identity that is often experienced as "authentic" or "integral" and that it :rn analysis of divergen{fiender expressions that are postmodernism and queer theory' how- is considered to be neither "chosen" originally nor "performed" strategically' I have e xplored tt"* tF.. .rp..i, of particular, there has been a (MacDonald, 1998:4). She proposes that{-the celebration of difference be ac- .u.r, haue posed problems fot femittist theory. In these perspectives have companied by an analysis of the social .*pFri.n.es of differ.n.Q'to p_ostmod- [i.^O.n.V . ,t.gl..t material condition! Mottover) as symbolic sites of ern theory, transgender argues, then, for the reality of difference and[ghe need i*.r i..rined ti focus upon gender t.Jntgt.ttions .gtr* , nt under-theorize{l to investigate the social structures which enfbrce sex/gender incongruity and rler deconstrucdon. This has ieft[-quesdons of embodime postmodernism, however, stabilipi.u.ry levefllUacDonald, 1998: l0). MacDonald's icleas mirror the Rece nt developments withinfiosts*iructuralism and that situates the mate- aims of the feminist scholars previously discussed who attempt to analyze how ipdicate the emergence ola f,..onrtructive framework which gender is constructed at the level of discourse and at the level of the material. rial alongside the"cult,rra! This provides a model through formationsJ'"it:tly,': Such a This frameworkfnables the theorization of differences within and beween ro.i-"l srrucrures impict upon distinct E"* ofgender as socially relational gender cultures and identity positions, as well as accounting for subjective and f,.,e of enquiry is valuabie in its understanding tools for embodied experience{ nnd, perfoimrtiu.ly.construct.dl Th.te develop-intt convey useful for Jiversiry and differencfl. Work from transgender studie$rovides a complex analysis of the sex/gen- fbminist theory ;ii;;"t r queer theor!I-tv have again at- der binary, and firrgher troubles the positioning of gender categories as either In addressing dJLates between[eminism and what queer theory authentic or unifiefl tcmpted to *rp out the areas of intersection and to consider have challenged the To feminism, transgender studies offers a further model through which to ntay offer conre mporary feminist theory.[gu..t theorists .s€x', untie these features. Yet, I account for gender differe nce. This is not only relevant to theorizing the social correlation of andiende!and have iought to neglect social positioning and subjective identifications of transgender people but, impor- have argued that queer theory has had ,[.nd".ncy to , framework't'uttutt! tantly, sheds further light upon the constntction of the category of gender 't'his limitarion is being overcome, howevir, by apueer sociological how gender and sexuality itself. This enables a richer understanding of the constructions, social position- and through materiallueer studies, which e*amlhe ings and subjective experiences of all . are constructed through both discourse and social structuresJ has much to I moved on to ,uig.r, that work fromfiransgender studies bring to both deconstrucdve analysis and-to. feminist theoryJTransgender theory that not only cele - Conclusion sruclies articulates the importance of[ grounded to the material brates the deconstnlcrion of gender caTegories, bgt also attends the intervention I began this chapter by addressing how the diversification of feminist knowl- a.d bodily formations and experiences of gend.! Mot.over' does not have to edge and politics over the past two decades has brought particular challenges by transgende, theorists has ihown thatI queeiimaginary fbr ltminist theory. I suggested that the development of poststructuralist, run cottnter to social analYsis] poststructuralism, postrnodern, queer and transgender theory has been especially contentious In conclusion, I suggest tlat the intersections of Post- studies and feminist theory offer a within feminism. K.y issues at stake here concern understanding of 'se x' and modernism, queer theorS transgender more nuanced analyses of gender, and their relationship to each other, and the constitution of gender space in *hich to develop new uid.rrr"ndings and Dialogues within and categories. Moreover, these questions stand as important issues for feminist contemporary gend., fo.-r,ions and identifications' of gender, sex theory. In order to explore developments around these issues, I have focused beween these iheoretical fields indicate how understandings the intersecdons my attention in this chapter upon debates within poststructuralism, postmod- and embodiment continue to be reconfigured. Moreover' difference and diversity ernism, queer theory and transgender studies. I have sought to examine the beween these fields enable an arena in which gender ways in which the relationship berween 'sex' and gender has been theorized can be productively retheorized across the next decade. within these fields and to explore what such dialogues say about understand- ings of ge nde r categories. I have attempted to think through these questions in two ways. First, by reflecting upon thefthallenges these developments have Further reading brought to feminist theorfi Seconcl, by ionsidering howftomnron grou"d (1999) What is Feminism?: An lntroduction to Feminist Theory, London' beween poststructuralism, postmodernism, queer theory, transgender studies c. Beasley Sage part of the book presents ar4t feminist theory may be mapped out. This is an accessible introduction to feminist theory. The first political theory. Later chapters ,nd qn.., tbminist approaches provide an understanding of an analysis of feminist critiques of traditional social and fostmod.rr, well as more recent feminist de- gender that is able to account for non-normative identities and practices. In address early feminist theories and perspectives as poststructuralist, postmodern and postcolonialist feminisms' iheorizing gencler as distinct from biological 'sexl these *pproril',es present bates; including