Until the middle of the 20th century, “gender” was used to name only the grammatical category that classifies nouns into feminine, masculine and neuter or distinguishes animate from inanimate objects. Currently, “gender” is used when referring to social identities such as “woman”, “trans”, “man” or “other”. Although the same word “jins” is used to denote both gender and sex in Arabic (as well as “sexual act”), the modern differentiation between sex (male-female; مذكر - مؤنث) and gender (man-woman; رجل - أمرأة) exists today.
In English, a common way to define gender is by distinguishing it from sex: whereas sex is understood as biological, gender is socially constructed. Overall, the differentiation between biological sex and constructed gender is problematic. Recent research has argued that so-called “biological sex” is also gendered. For instance, Anne Fausto-Sterling points out that there is enough evidence in biology that suggests that sex is a spectrum of possibilities, rather than a solid male-female binary, which is also argued by Intersex persons. Assumptions about gender have shaped scientific research so that a male-female binary system is imposed on a far greater variety of configurations in humans, animals and plants(1).
Debates about “gender” (and its relation to “sex” and sexuality) are central to feminist theory. The term “gender” was popularized in the 1970s in the United States and Europe in order to combat biological determinism – claims that women’s social subordination was rooted in their physical “otherness” (i.e. that because they are female, they are inferior). Such claims were equally widespread across the Middle East and a fight against the naturalization of women’s subordination was led by renowned feminists such as Nawal al-Saadawi in Egypt(2), and the feminists of the second wave in Lebanon who contended the normalization of gender roles الأدوار الاجتماعية. In the North American academy, Marxian feminists like Shulamith Firestone and Gayle Rubin claimed that “gender” referred to social conceptions about masculinity and femininity that built on an exaggeration of biological differences between women and men. They defined “gender” as a historically variable social construction(3). Their insights were incorporated into psychoanalytical approaches and constructivist theories which highlight the importance of early childhood socialization for subordinating women to men and creating normative masculinities and femininities. All three stances support the idea that women and men exist as groups and that certain experiences and social expectations bind some persons into the category “women”. Because of this, they have been termed “gender realist” approaches. The political implications of the realist definition of “gender” is that claims for gender justice can be made in the name of “women” as a group (which is the main premise of second wave feminism, and continues to be relevant today in fighting gender based discrimination)(4).
Gender can also be understood as performance. Most famously, Judith Butler has argued that gender must be “repeated” continuously in order to exist. In her 1990 book Gender Trouble, Butler used the notion of performativity to contradict some key assumptions of second wave feminism. She argued that when some feminists claim that “women” are oppressed by patriarchy, they create an implicit and fixed definition of what “women” are, which serves to continue this very binary without breaking it. Instead of the identity politics of gender realists, Butler advocates a politics that constantly questions and subverts any definition of gender, especially one based on identity. Her stance has been influential in queer activism and the development of queer theory(5).In a 2014 interview, Butler has clarified that “gender performativity” does not imply that gender is always fluid or should be. Rather, she stated that Gender Trouble was meant to emphasize the possibilities beyond gender binaries and the importance of self-definition. This position fully supports recognizing transgender persons’ experiences and identifications, and makes an ethical commitment to destigmatizing their choices about gender presentation and sex reassignment surgeries(6).
“Gender” is replacing “sex” in common speech, while نوع إجتماعي and/or جندر is increasingly replacing “jins” in Lebanese activist speech and publications specifically as part of gender mainstreaming efforts that are intimately linked with rising NGOization, institutionalization of feminist and women’s movements, and overall professionalization of activists and women’s issues. In particular, fourth wave feminists in Lebanon have taken “gender” out of its binary (or often singular) meaning and engaged with the queer feminist reconceptualizations outlined above which expand the term’s reference beyond cisgender women. European and American grassroots LGBT and queer activism – and to some extent local Lebanese activism – have countered the same binary popular confusion through gender-bending performances such as drag, and the visible embracing of identities such as genderqueer(7). What such performances accomplish is the challenging of the gender binary as something natural and coherent, and reveal that all gender self-presentation can be/is performative.
