female, and so for the last year has been using the term non-binary to describe their gender and the pronouns ‘they’ ‘their’ ‘them’. Participants were asked to write 500


words about what lead up to CJ’s decision to describe themselves as non-binary and how CJ’s life has changed since making this decision. Participants were informed they could


withdraw their data at any time and data was collected anonymously.


Results Themes from the data analysis provided


a developmental perspective of the journey of a non-binary person within the context of a ‘modern generation’. For the quotes below, letters are used instead of names so the reader can appreciate the spread of responses.


Modern generation Non-binary gender was considered


acceptable in modern times: FA – modern generation which tends to be more accepting of societal issues like homosexuality and transgender. And to explain some people’s reactions:


GC – CJ’s dad grew up in an era where being non-binary wasn’t something people did, and gender fluidity wasn’t a thing. Even homosexuality was more taboo in CJ’s dad’s time. However, an equal number of


participants suggested prejudice and misunderstanding still existed: NW – In today’s society, there is no in- between to classify a non-binary person. BS – Apprehension about how this will be received by a still largely cis-gendered normative society. And that CJ would have diffi culties with


practical issues such as: MZ – filling in forms and asking people to refer to them, using gender-neutral pronouns. IY – toilets, changing rooms, etc.


Nature vs nurture Half the participants off ered up ideas


about whether there might be a biological or environmental reason for non-binary gender. Some of the biological reasons refl ected medical and psychiatric explanations: PR – Their anatomy was not fully complete with that of a male or female. As a result, throughout childhood, CJ felt that they were living inside the wrong body.


28


SP – CJ may experience gender identity disorder. Some off ered chemical explanations:


HB – The brain activity of those who were assigned female at birth, but identify as male have brain structures or brain activity that is more similar to that of male brains than that of female brains. Therefore, it may be that CJ has brain activity and structure somewhere between the genders, or brain activity and structure that is entirely diff erent. MC – Hormones play a large role in the diff erence between males and females. Perhaps, in this situation during pregnancy, there was a diff erent balance of chemicals the foetus was exposed to in the womb. This may have led to diff erent levels of oestrogen, testosterone, progesterone etc. To the contrary, there may be a genetic factor for this change in balance. Counter to this, other people suggested


gender is “partly a social construction” (PM) or “concept” (TA) and so CJ was making “a choice” (LM). Others suggested that “early life experiences may aff ect how CJ identifi es” (DT) with the proposal that these experience were negative: JU – There may have been aspects of CJ’s upbringing that made them not want to identify with either gender, for example, CJ may have had bad experiences in the past with either gender.


Childhood Most participants mentioned childhood


as a formative time. Many mentioned the importance of a “good support system” (FA) and to be able to: EH – discuss this with friends and/or family in order to make the decision. However, most participants painted a


bleak picture of the support they imagined CJ would have received: RW – The whole process of gendering and policing children’s expressions and interactions in the world was cruel and limiting for CJ. DT – They may have worse relationships with their parents, friends and other family than before they decided to identify as non- binary. Bullying in childhood was commonly


described: GC – They did this when they reached adulthood due to the poor evocation of gender fl uidity before this point. For example, in primary school they were teased for not conforming to their gender’s stereotypes. This continued into secondary schooling.


Moving away from home Going to university and/or moving


away from home was seen by many as the triggering event to CJ adopting a non- binary identity: GC – It wasn’t until CJ left home and started university that they realised that people could be accepting and people could understand. This was partly being “away from parents


or family who may be restrictive” (FA), but also because CJ could make a “fresh start” (KS). It was also suggested university would expose CJ to new ideas: LH – They started reading up on gender theory. JD – They decided to learn more, and go to events and talks about being non-binary. And space to experiment:


JD – CJ should try out diff erent pronouns and identities. However, these ideas were balanced with


a recognition that university would also be challenging: PM – CJ may have encountered discrimination… This is particularly signifi cant in a university environment where entering a new social environment is already intimidating without stigma such as this. DT – If marking is not anonymous, this may result in them receiving lower marks than they should. It is also possible they will have reduced teaching quality due to the biases teachers may hold.


Coming out Coming out was seen as an important and


necessary step for CJ: LH – They also felt like by not coming out and saying that they are gender non-binary, they would be hiding an important part of themselves. JD – Once they were out to everybody, CJ felt a lot more comfortable in their own skin. And that doing so would create a sense


of “relief and acceptance of the self” (PM), although it was recognised how diffi cult this could be: CR – it may also have involved diffi cult conversations and uncertainty as to when to introduce the concept of identity, when to correct people, and how to do so. Only one participant picked up that CJ


was described as white. This participant suggested being white “may make it easier for them to express themselves as non- binary because traditionally other cultures can be more restrictive for example being more religious” (FA). While the coming out literature on minority sexualities describes


Context 155, February 2018


The social construction of non-binary gender identity


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64