Subverting the Normative, Idea of Gender, Sexuality and love in Jeanette Winterson’s ‘Written on the Body’ Body plays an important role in describing ones identity. One with breast is considered to be women and one with penis is man these are biological identifiers to determine ones sex. Terms, for example, he/she, his/her is related to recognize the sexual orientation of man or women and when such parallels are expelled then it becomes difficult to distinguish ones gender. Such an endeavor is made conceivable in Jeanette Wintersons fictitious world in her most fascinating and controversial postmodern novel ‘Written on the Body’ by its genderless narrator. Consider, what if the normative structures of society are seen in different ways?
The fusion of Sartre’s concept of “other’ and Hook’s emphasis, on patriarchal adversary effect on both the genders, reveals another interesting aspect of the patriarchal subjugation of women. Dick’s continual failure produces a sense of inferiority in him; he always ask for suggestions from Marry but, at the end, “began defending himself” (Lessing 136). This shows how Dick himself is the victim of the Patriarchal gender role. Therefore, when he attempts to compartmentalize Mary in a specific gender role, he is actually trying to validate his own gender role which he feels is threatened due to his failures. For the gratification of one’s own injured self, Dick’s forceful repression of Mary’s “superior abilities”, and creating “other” in her, leads her to neurosis.
Since the beginning of humankind, discrimination is an unfair parameter, which categorizes people according to same criteria such as religion racism, politics, gender and sexual orientations. The most crucial type of discrimination is gender discrimination since “gender” is an inherited feature that was given to human and it is not a preferable thing. Although it is not preferable, people damaged notion of human-being by considering people separately as women and men, and clearly categorized them according to social norms and unfounded information. Contrary to this discrimination, gender is not an indicator of strength, superiority, courage and ect. Gandhi(1930) “To call woman the weaker sex is a libel; it is man’s injustice to woman.
She is harassed both on account of her sexuality and class and treated as “body” and object” (590). Therefore, Atwood deconstructs the “belief of masculinity as biologically superior and femininity as biologically inferior. She nullifies the essentialism associated with gender and gender identities proving them to be the product of social and cultural construction”
In theory, sex, except for the purposes of reproduction transpires as taboo. According to Foucault’s hypothesis, the only way to liberate ourselves from sexual repression is to express and vocalize our sexuality (Foucault 8). In the entirety of this class, I find Foucault’s Repressive Hypothesis fascinating as it correlates to modern sexuality. With the influential division between the physical aspect of sex and the mental component of sexuality, Foucault from my personal bias would still recognize that sex is still private and considered taboo, but human sexuality has become an endless condition. In modern society, sex is talked about openly, undividedly, and often without limitations.
Girls Will Be Boys and Boys Will Be Girls: Gender Confusion and Compulsory Heterosexuality in Geoffrey Chaucer’s The Miller’s Tale On the surface, Geoffrey Chaucer’s The Miller’s Tale is a traditional fabliau, a bawdy tale of trickery, mistaken identity, and plenty of sex, designed to titillate and amuse the reader. The characters are typical of the trope: the effeminate buffoon, the lecherous lodger, the foolish husband, and his lusty wife. However, a closer reading, and application of the principles of queer theory, reveal The Miller’s Tale to have a deeper purpose than mere amusement. The main characters all behave in ways that are at odds with their stated desires and motivations, as well as their genders and professed sexual identities.
The Masculine Man must man up The fragility of masculinity as a concept is worrisome. It breeds on creating fear in the other. Yet, what the in-breeder of masculinity seeks in the other is a concept far from it. That concept is femininity. Strangely, in popular queer literature, masculinity is defined as anything that is divorced from the idea of femininity.
Rubin (1984) stated that “The realm of sexuality also has its own internal politics, inequalities, and modes of oppressing” (p.267). Sexuality is full of repression. She indicates sex hierarchies to point the sex have been good and bad, but it is not that dualistic indeed. Masturbation is one of the example that can show society always control sex strictly. Masturbation In “Sex and Society: Generations”(2009), Cavendish indicates that masturbation is the act of stimulating genitals and point of orgasm.
Although there is some value to the functionalists’ interpretation, it contains several weaknesses. The following review of some aspects of the plot will reveal some of those weaknesses. According to O’Brien (Hale 2013, 82-83), radical feminists argue that the core issue surrounding men and women lies within the domination of sexuality by men. Concerning rape, it is said that women who are virgins are off limits whereas women who are who have lost their virginity are known as “open territory”. Feminists believe that these arguments are absurd and that rape is considered one of the most extremes ways of showing male domination.
While the protagonists out of desperation and poverty use their sexuality to make a living, the documentary also looks at the other side of the coin; their own enjoyment of sexual pleasure. India Cabaret makes a strong statement on the way patriarchy divides women into the categories of virgin and whore, depending on their profession, while completely disregarding a woman’s right to her own sexual