Megan Tay P7

“To what extent can the body inform us on our understanding of gender?”

With reference to the agency-centered anthropologist Judith Butler, I will be explicating the
notion of gender to be an ongoing interpretation of bodies, within a field of cultural
possibilities. In this essay, I will be exploring the notion of ‘gender performativity’ (Butler,
1990) as a stylized repetition of acts, an imitation or miming of the dominant conventions of
gender, and how this ‘performance’ in gender is embodied and affected by the body. The
‘performative’ aspect of gender is constructed through the idea that gender is both a choice and
accumulation; in which one ‘chooses’ a gender, and approaches it as an embodiment of
possibilities within a network of deeply entrenched norms within a culture.

The role of the body in our understanding of gender is supported by ‘Live and Die like a Man:
Gender Dynamics in Urban Egypt’ (2013) (LDLM) by Farha Ghanam, an ethnography that
details the everyday practices and struggles of a low-income neighbourhood in al-Zawiya in
Cairo, which peel away to reveal masculine trajectories constructed by the culture in the area.
The ethnography traces how masculinity is continuously maintained and reaffirmed by both
men and women under changing socio-economic and political conditions in Egypt, and I will
be exploring the ways in which this ethnography navigates masculine trajectory in the body.
I will also be referencing ‘At the intersection of disability and masculinity: exploring gender
and bodily difference in India’ (2011) by James Staples, which offers an account of how
disabled men negotiate their gendered identities and highlighting the gender ramifications of
specific embodied conditions.

The body informs us of the way masculine identities are formed through habitus. The concept
of habitus (Bourdieu, 1987) refers to the internalised disposition acquired by all persons of
society to behave in specific ways. Bodily habitus reveals the deepest dispositions of the
habitus which is a socially constituted system of cognitive structures, reflecting the masculine
identities and expectations deeply imbedded in the daily lives of men. In LDLM, the concept
of being an “authentic man” (raagil) is a notion that pervades the everyday life of boys and
men who are ubiquitously reaffirmed implicit expectations of a masculine identity. These
social conventions of gender are materialized as behavioural expectations, bodily movements
and modifications that attempt to present a performance of manhood and masculinity in Egypt.
An example is Ahmed, a boy Ghannam observed growing up in al-Zawiya. His family
members and neighborhood shape his masculine trajectory from childhood. “Be a man”
(khalleek raagil) is a recurring sentiment imposed onto Ahmed as he grows up and navigates
his way around ‘the street’, and is materialized through the regulation of Ahmed’s bodily
gestures and movements. This example of a marker of gender is a performative act through the
way Ahmed aquires the way to walk, sit, and carry himself like a man by imitation and without
any clear verbal instructions. A ubiquitous example of Ahmed’s habitus that is shaped by his
family is when his mother severely scolded him for walking misahhim (looking preoccupied
and absentminded), which is ‘not befitting a man’, who should be alert and aware of his
surroundings. This acquisition of the way Ahmed should present himself holds a performative
aspect to it, ‘performing’ what construes his masculine identity. Hence, the subtle, and
everyday constructions and impositions of corporeal qualities reflect the social expectations
that define him as a boy and a future man.

In LDLM, the materialisation of a socially credible and recognized masculine identification

are also underscored by a set of loosely defined social norms. This can be seen in the case of
Samer, a 40 year-old single man, and the way in which standards of “ruguula” (manhood) are
manifested in his behavioural attributes and traits. Samer asserts his agency as a man and
materializes norms of courage (qawi), toughness (shideed), and fearlessness, all of which are
central to Samer’s masculine trajectory. This is projected upon bodily decisions such as
Samer’s enactment to run into the burning house to save a child. Samer acquires a habitus that
is expressed in the way he uses his agency to defend the weak, to go to the rescue of those in
danger as he has embodied certain classexpectations about the way a ‘real man’ is. When
recounting his narrative, an observation Ghannam took notice of was Samer’s unconscious
emphasis on comments that delineated him as real man (raagil bi saheeh). Hence, Samer’s daily
experiences that have led him to embodying his class position and unconsciously acquiring
habitus reflected in the gestures, movements, and enactments of various markers of his
masculine identity.

Since the body constructs and reaffirms the dominant conventions of gender, the body also has
the power to inhibit the performativity of gender, through bodily disabilities. Bodily disabilities
can immobilize men from constructing a fully functioning gendered identity and have different
implications of male personhood. The loss of certain abilities to perform attributes of the
masculinity trajectory creates a difference in the way the self is produced for bodily disabled
men. An example of this is illustrated in ‘At the intersection of disability and masculinity:
exploring gender and bodily difference in India’ (2011). In this case study, leprosy victims of
Bethany experience muscle wastage and injuries often resulting in amputations. The body
hence becomes a site of incorporated history, and impedes the disabled men’s presentation of
their gendered identity. Being a man in an Indian context entails certain hegemonic masculine
ideals, such as the capacity to father children, economic capacity, and the ability to make
decisions and act as the head of the family. However, leprosy renders them unable to fulfill
these set of goals that define them their masculine identities, and the extent to which men
succeed or fail in achieving them is an extremely important part of male personhood. The
transformation of the body and the production of corporeal qualities materializes social
expectations about physical distinctions between a ‘masculine’ man and a disabled man, hence
affecting society’s view of their male personhood. Hence, not all bodies are free to enact their
identities at will.

Extending beyond the implications of bodily disabilities to general society, gender relations
within Bethany transcended conventionalized patterns and constructed a new sphere of gender
dynamics within the leprosy colony. For instance, Bethany men had to perform what were
considered emasculating activities outside the village in order to perform their roles as
providers and householders within it. In this paradoxical example, the Leprosy sufferers
demonstrated an embodied act of coercive subordination, which at the same time enabled the
leprosy-deformed man to function as a householder back home. This shifts the gender
dynamics within the leprosy community, allowing the leprosy disabled men to assert their male
personhood and fulfill an extent of the masculine ideals present in India. Thus, the disability
of the body enables the shifting of paradigms of gender relations within the disabled
community.

In conclusion, gendered identities and masculinity are grounded in the body. This notion of
gender and its embodied aspect can be aptly summed up by the idea that ‘One is not born, but
rather becomes a woman’ (de Beauvoir, 1956). Bodies are objects of social practice and agents
in social practice, and are produced by and producers of social life – and the construction of
our gendered identities are manifested in the enactment of these social bodies. Thus, gender
pervades every facet of our life, and the body is a pertinent canvas by which we project these
masculine trajectories upon.