Devor and how I really am not as much of a unique snowflake as I had hoped

I found the Lorber Devor reading to be both insightful and informative. While I was reading, I could not help but apply Lorber’s Devor's points to my “I.” Imagine my delight when I found out that the first blog prompt synced up with what I was already doing. :)

The first time that I actively considered the implications gender was when I got yelled at for shouting across the hall of my dorm that “my computer was being gay.” I had never stopped and thought about how or why that term carried negative connotations and why it was so freely used dergoatorily. Maybe it was because of that rude awakening, or the intriguing class title, or possibly because I wanted to take a class with my girlfriend at that time, that lead me to take “History of Sexuality.”

Before taking “History of Sexuality,” I had blindly conformed to conventional gender roles. However, the socializations/expectations of these roles that I “followed” were Western based. I make this distinction because in Saudi Arabia, it is customary for male friends, to kiss on the cheeks when greeting each other and that it was not unusual to witness these men hold hands as they walked. Personally, I perceived it as “weird.”
I was/am not homophobic. I was just apathetic, which arguably could be just as worse. It was not “weird” in an uncomfortable sense to witness these exchanges between two males; it was just a different culture from the one that I had been accustomed. As a Filipino, despite being heavily influenced by Western culture, we still tolerate, if not accept, homosexuals in our society. On a side note, I briefly looked up homosexuality in the Philippines and what I discovered was that the word “kasarian” which resembles “gender” in English, does not imply a dichotomy like its English counterpart. Instead, it simply means “kind, species, or genus” according to the Tagalog-English Dictionary. 2nd. ed. 1986. Also, it is interesting to note that the origin of the English word “gender” did not imply a gender binary as it originally meant “kind.” (dictionary.com)

“To what extent have you been pressured to conform to conventional roles?” What a tough question. Tough, not because it’s difficult to find the answer, but tough because it is difficult TO answer. I would like to say that I have not been pressured to conform in any way shape or form but deep down I know that I am largely a product of society. (What a terrible thing to admit, I guess I’m not exactly a special little snowflake :P.) I am sure that during my early childhood, before I consciously began to examine who “I” was, everybody was a “generalized other;” the only “significant others” would have to be my parents or babysitter as I am sure they were the only ones that I interacted with enough to be able to establish any association. During my “tween/teenage” years, my parents became less of significant others and the “generalized others” ironically transformed into the “significant others.”

On the flip side, it is easy for me to state that I have not resisted any pressures to conform to conventional roles because I always assumed that gender was inherent/natural. Now that I am more aware of how it is a social construct, I still don’t resist conventional roles/norms per se, as I don’t know what I would be fighting for/against, but my form of resistance lies in the power imbalance, and the use of gender’s and identities derogatorily. Mainly, I “resist” any individual or idea that holds itself/themselves to a more privileged, higher level than its counterparts. Since identity is largely due to socialization, I feel that society denying an individual’s choices as to who or what they want to be/become to be foolish and hypocritical. After all, individual ideas collectively created society and nobody questioned the norms and conventions when they were being constructed, so who is to say what can or can’t be part of society or even if it is “finished.”

*I mixed up the authors by accident in the first paragraph :S