Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Bruno Rodríguez
FEMINISM, BODY AND BIOLOGY:
FROM DE BEAUVOIR TO ALMODÓVAR
One is not born, but rather becomes, woman
De
BeauvoirESSENTIALISM
SOCIAL
CONSTRUCTIVISM
“An individual woman’s life will be structured, but not dominated,
by her biological, economic, historical and cultural situation, by the
attitudes of others, and by the affective characteristics and creative
intelligence she brings to her situation.”
And I Gathered Their Feathers” (2014), Aleah Chapin
The card game metaphor
“She cannot determine the conventions that govern the game, the value of
the cards, or the hand she is dealt, but she is nevertheless free to choose how
she plays the game”
Gatens, 2003, p.271
“An individual woman life will be structured, but not dominated, by
her biological, economic, historical and cultural situation, by the
attitudes of others, and by the affective characteristics and creative
intelligence she brings to her situation.”
And I Gathered Their Feathers” (2014), Aleah Chapin
“If being a woman is one cultural interpretation of being female, and if that
interpretation is in no way necessitated by being female, then it appears that
the female body is the arbitrary focus of the gender woman”
Butler, Sex and Gender, 30
“It is our genders we become, not our bodies”
Butler, Sex and Gender, 32
Who’s right?
Are both perspectives (Gatens/Butler) exclusive?
Is De Beauvoir unchallenged?
La piel que habito
The skin I live in
La piel que habito
The skin I live in
“...but rather become a woman”
La piel que habito
The skin I live in
“...but rather become a woman”
“Existence precedes essence.”
“essence does not precede existence; in pure subjectivity, the human being is not anything”
De Beauvoir, The Second Sex, p. 65.
La piel que habito
The skin I live in
“...but rather become a woman”
“Existence precedes essence.”
One is the sum of its acts, and since being a female human being structures your acts, one becomes a woman rather
than being born one. In this case sex change is imposed, and affects the “becoming” of Vicente/Vera.
As he/she accepts his/her new body, also becomes more passive, submissive.
“An individual woman life will be structured, but not dominated, by
her biological, economic, historical and cultural situation, by the
attitudes of others, and by the affective characteristics and creative
intelligence she brings to her situation.”
Sex/gender duality
De Beauvoir doesn’t necessarily understand woman as a gender category, but recognizes the terms female,
femininity and woman.
Almodóvar, through the film’s narrative and symbolism, recognizes a difference between biology and identity more
aligned with the sex/gender division in social constructivism.
“An individual woman life will be structured, but not dominated, by
her biological, economic, historical and cultural situation, by the
attitudes of others, and by the affective characteristics and creative
intelligence she brings to her situation.”
This is especially obvious in the yoga scene.
Also, at the end of the movie when, even after going through that transformation, he/she identifies
himself/herself as Vicente, but has accepted a feminine body.
“An individual woman life will be structured, but not dominated, by
her biological, economic, historical and cultural situation, by the
attitudes of others, and by the affective characteristics and creative
intelligence she brings to her situation.”
The very title (The skin I live in, the skin which is also my home) is a metaphor for the body as
the physical home for our identity. Even if there’s a duality sex/gender the body is the way we have to
experience reality and construct our gender, even in the form of a rejection of our body.
You don’t choose the cards or the game.
Vera’s first interaction with someone outside the house ends with her being raped.
In the end, this movie raises questions more than answers about the role of the body in becoming a woman,
and articulates a discourse that recognises the important role of the body as a social and biological factor
while making a clear differentiation between body and identity.
In other words, a discourse that can be compatible Gatens and Butler’s takes on De Beauvoir’s ideas.
Maybe both interpretations aren’t so different?
Maybe both interpretations aren’t so different?
“An individual woman’s life will be
structured, but not dominated, by her
biological, economic, historical and
cultural situation, by the attitudes of
others, and by the affective
characteristics and creative
intelligence she brings to her
situation.”
Gatens, 2003,
“the body is (...) a particular
nexus of culture and choice”
Butler, Sex and Gender, p. 38
Maybe both interpretations aren’t so different?
“the body is (...) a particular nexus of (biology, economy,
history, culture and the attitudes of others) and choice”
Thanks!
