Monday, November 4, 2013

A response to Maria's post

I wanted to post this as a comment here but the blog wouldn't let me. I tried in different browsers and everything. But it's okay because I think the map I link to is interesting so check it out! (Please grade this as a comment!)

I think these types of reports have a very hegemonic view of sexuality, gender, and from a quick look-through, including economics and work. I also do not think a hegemonic view of the world typically allows for intersectionality. While it is understandable to want to limit a large global study as much as possible - to the binary gender roles - and this may be needed on account of what data is available, it is very ignorant to not even mention the existence of trans* people. From an intersectional point of view it becomes even more complicated because generally in the US (at least to my knowledge) one would think of trasngendered, agendered, intersex, and genderqueer people, with the last touching on the points in Zhou's latest post about a gender continuum. However, as mentioned in some of the readings, other cultures have different presentations of a non-binary gender identity, for example the travestis and the hijras. There are other examples of these "third genders" across the world, both historic and contemporary. Some are shown on this map.

I wonder why the World Economic Forum did not even make a mention of any non-binary gender identities. Plain ignorance? Purposefully? Because of donors or possible backlash?

No comments:

Post a Comment