News Flash #3: My Parents’ Failed Experiment in Gender Neutrality

Today, identifying oneself as female, male, or other, is determined by an array of factors, which primarily fall under the categories of sex and gender. Historically, looking at the baby’s genitalia, or sex, made this determination. As time went on, another category, gender, entered the equation. The differences between sex and gender are thought to be fairly clear. Sex is thought of as “nature”: something innate we are born with that biology controls. Gender is thought of as “nurture”: something that is socially constructed and learned. The concept of gender fit into the first wave of feminism belief that women and men are created equal, and so, the reason that girls like pink frilly dresses is because feminine preferences have been socially constructed. The concept of sex as nature and gender as nurture has molded the way that society talks about issues of male and female identification. Yet recent literature such as Anne Fausto-Sterling’s book, Sexing the Body, and Jesse Ellison’s article, “My Parents’ Failed Experiment in Gender Neutrality” call the nature/nature paradigm of sex and gender into question. Therefore, sex and gender cannot be placed under separate nature and nurture distinctions. Fausto-Sterling’s research finds sex can be constructed and as Ellison’s childhood shows, gender can be innate.

Jesse Ellison (pictured at the left in overalls) was born in 1978 during the time of immense social change. In 1972, sexologists John Money and Anke Ehrhardt asserted “sex refers to physical attributes and is anatomically and physiologically determined. Gender… is a psychological transformation of the self- the internal conviction that one is either male or female (gender identity) and the behavioral expressions of that conviction” (Fausto-Sterling 3). This theory had a lot of influence on society, including Jesse’s parents. Her mother, a first wave feminist, “embraced the notion that gender roles were entirely rooted in the way you were raised” (Newsweek 1). The first fringe of first-wave feminists in the early 1970s fought for legal equality and women in the latter half of the 1970s, like Jesse’s mother, focused on personal equality. Personal equality meant believing that “it was nurture, not nature, that made women and men different” and in order to break free from gender oppression, one must “assert that there was absolutely nothing different about our biological makeup” (Newsweek 1). Girls acted like “girls” because of how they were raised, not because that is how they were born.

When Jesse was born, her parents decided to put this feminist belief into practice and raise Jesse without any type of gender construction. They named her “Jesse”, a name that could signal either a boy or a girl. Because the family lived in rural Maine, her parents thought they would be able to shelter Jesse from societal messages of how to be a girl. Her parents sported matching long braids one year and short haircuts the next. When she was a toddler, her parents dressed her in overalls and cut her hair into an androgynous haircut. Instead of playing with Barbies, Jesse played with wooden blocks.

Yet as time went on, Jesse’s parents discovered that their gender-neutral parenting method was not producing the expected results. Jesse mother recalls an experience when Jesse was two. Her parents were in the process of building a new house, and when the big trucks came to dig out the foundation, all of the neighborhood boys lined up to watch the commotion. Jesse’s mother tried to get Jesse to watch the trucks, but Jesse took a glance out the window and returned to play with her toys. Later, as Jesse grew up, she demanded that her parents replaced her overalls with a dress. Instead of being gender-neutral, Jesse was definitely a “girl”. As her mother recalls, “It was really a wake-up for me” (Newsweek 1). Jesse’s identity as a “girl”, despite her parent’s attempt to raise her in a gender neutral setting, caused her mother to rethink the first wave’s views on gender: “We all thought that the differences had to do with how you were brought up in a sexist culture, and if you gave children the same chances, it would equalize. It took a while to think, 'Maybe men and women really are different from each other, and they're both equally valuable.'” (Newsweek 1).

Jesse’s story brings up two interesting issues: the nature/nurture debate regarding gender and sex and the differences between first-wave feminism and third wave feminism. First, just as Fausto-Sterling found that sex can be physically constructed, Jesse’s story illustrates one can be born with gender. It is interesting to think about what implications this finding may bring. Fausto-Sterling’s book discussed the common belief towards sexual anatomy corrective surgery was if a sex-ambiguous child was physically turned into a boy, then he would be treated like a boy, and then identify as a boy. However, if gender is innate (to an extent) then this practice can be faulty because when a child is born, there is a possibility that the child is truly a “boy” or a “girl”. Of course, discussion about whether gender nurtured will affect more than just the intersex community. Namely, the finding that gender can be innate gives women more freedom to choose how to express their femininity.

Jesse’s upbringing, while unique, is somewhat symbolic of the current ideology of third wave feminism. Specifically, if gender is not nurtured, there can be a new acceptance of embracing femininity and acknowledging that one can still be a feminist even if she likes to wear frilly dresses and paint her nails. As Jesse states, “By the time my generation came of age, women could call themselves feminists and also embrace the standard trappings of femininity. We could wear pink, spend money on fancy shoes, and simultaneously expect—no, demand—the same success as men. Femininity and feminism were no longer a contradiction.” (Newsweek 1). This sentiment relates to the current “girlie” feminist theory that Amy Richards and Jennifer Baumgardner discuss in their book Manifesta. They state, “Girlie says we’re not broken, and our desires aren’t simply booby traps set by the patriarchy. Girlie encompasses the tabooed symbols of women’s feminine enculturation- Barbie dolls, makeup, fashion magazines, high heels- and says using them isn’t shorthand for ‘we’ve been duped’” (Manifesta 136). Girlie culture is not about regressing back to the 1950’s, but rather having the freedom to make a choice.

Today, in the third wave, there are women who identity with feminine culture and call themselves feminists. And while it may seem like a girl running around in a short skirt and heels calling herself a feminist is a far cry from the vision of the first wave feminists, the difference is choice. As Jesse states. “My generation is different from my mother's, in countless ways. But just because we chose high heels over Birkenstocks, it doesn't mean our commitment to equality should be any less than ardent… Ultimately, the whole point was to ensure that I had the freedom, and choice, to be whoever I wanted—which is, after all, what feminism is all about.” (Newsweek 1). The ever-changing concept of gender is inextricably linked to the ever-changing concept of feminism. Jesse’s story illustrates two important points: first, gender is not always a choice, and secondly, the ability of third wave feminists to choose, or not choose, to express femininity is a right earned by first wave feminists.

Sources:

"My Parents' Failed Experiment in Gender Neutrality" by Jesse Ellison.

Sexing the Body by Anne Fausto-Sterling.

Manifesta by Amy Richards and Jennifer Baumgardner.