Supermarket of Identities
I recently read an article in the
Guardian’s supplement on a topic that is dear to my heart – identity. The article was entitled “I’m a girl – just
call me ‘he.’ It went on to document one
of the most recent additions to the potpourri of identities available in
Western societies, specifically a variety of no- no-hormones no-surgery
The article, which was served up
with a generous dollop of humor, went on to ask “Have the Americans gone too
far this time? On one hand the ‘transboy’ movement seems fantastically avant
garde – after all, why should it be possible to buy
at least six different kinds of bagel in New York city and yet be limited to a
mere two choices of gender?” Apparently
this group of women chafes under the onerous inequities that identifying with
one’s gender confers and believes that by calling themselves ‘hes’ they will ‘sink the gender boat.’ According to a prominent feminist, Jami Weinstein, “if biological females use the pronoun ‘he’
enough, then the power of ‘he’ as an essential category will be eroded and
maybe one day ‘he’ and ‘she’ will be on an equal plane.” One twenty-six year old (female) lawyer
says, “I choose to use the name Dean and masculine pronouns. In part this feels right because most people
who look at me take me to be a woman, so using these words helps to disrupt
that process a little and opens a space for me to be something more complicated
than that, which I feel better fits who I really
am.”
The article went on to describe some
of the additional practices that this group have taken up to free themselves of
this limited identity: breast removal,
breast binding, wearing ‘frog bras’,
using devices that allow them to pee standing up, and dressing like men, etc. Then, as far as I am concerned, we come to
the punch line. “Still, every London gay
party you go to these days is filled with lesbians having babies (yawn), or
lesbians turning straight, if the men are rich enough (yawn). Sinking the gender boat would at least be an
interesting new pastime for British lesbians who don’t want to do either of the
above and are looking for a new focus.
After all, the idea of identity flux, of being able to be whoever you
want, is an essential part of the times we are living in.”
Yes, quite. Why? Obviously, because limited identities fail to
address the fact that our true identity is limitless. Trying to cram the vastness of one’s self into such tiny containers is painful. The solution suggested by the boy poseurs,
that taking refuge in an opposite identity will somehow cancel out one’s former
identity, is understandable, if somewhat unscientific. If I assert one identity to cancel another,
what do I do with the second identity once the first is cancelled? If I get rid of it, I am faced with the
prospect of returning to where I started.
Why? Because, the ostensible
reason for making this change in oneself is to challenge the limited identities
that others project on us. If the
purpose were solely to change one’s own view of one’s self, there would be no
need to perform the outer disciplines designed to erase one’s identity. One would simply change the way one thinks
about oneself…which, at least in the case of Dean seems to have already been
done…and be happy with who one thought one was.
While I would argue that ‘who he really is’ is not ‘complicated,’ ‘he’
is clear that his identity is too big to comfortably rest in the shade of a
gender category. But the confidence to
refuse the identity projections of others is a very rare quality, so we feel the
need to continually attempt to educate the world about who we are. Youth is not know as a period of foresight
so the boy poseurs are eventually going to have to confront the fact once they
have removed the breast bindings and men’s clothing the world, heaven forbid,
is going to go right back to seeing them as ‘shes.’
I went through this identity crisis
when I was in my twenties. I grew up in
the Forties and Fifties…which were not periods of introspection… and, at the
age of twenty five thought of myself (in so far as I thought of myself at all)
as I really was, ‘a straight (in those days it meant ‘someone who has not used
drugs’) white Anglo-Saxon businessman.’
LSD changed all that. Within a
year I was a ‘turned-on hippy,’ or a ‘head’…meaning a
stoner…and I looked down on my former identity as a ‘plastic person’ with
contempt. A few years later I realized
that ‘hippy’ was merely a reaction to the limitations of being ‘straight,’ that
it was not a transcendent category,
shared the same existential level with ‘hippy’ and merely saddled me
with a different set of limitations.
For better or worse you are what you
think you are…and anything you can think about yourself will necessarily be
limited. One could argue that the only
solution would be to accept the limitations imposed by one’s concept of one’s
self, but there is another way…investigation.
Identity is not, as we have come to
believe, necessarily specific to our bodies and minds and the roles they
play. There is a simple something that
is much more essentially ‘us’ than any of these things…our consciousness, our
intelligence, the light, some say spirit, that illumines the body and the mind. It is not something one necessarily discovers
by merely reacting to the limitations that society’s limited identities
impose. However, suffering limitation
sometimes causes one to think about who one actually
is. And when this kind of thinking
becomes rigorous and allows itself to be shaped by the time-tested body of
teachings on the subject of the ‘I’ it can lead to the freedom from limitation
that Vedic culture calls enlightenment or ‘moksha.’ It will probably be some time before the boy
poseurs strip off their breast bindings and abandon
their soft-pack dildoes in favor of the hair shirt
and the mediation cushion but they are definitely thinking in the right
direction.