Gender and Race - Sally Haslanger

Sally Haslanger’s Gender and Race addresses the issue of defining the ambiguous term that is ‘gender’. The debate regarding this definition in the feminist movement is ongoing today. In her work, Haslanger explores beyond the traditional concept that gender is associated with ones sex and asks of us to reconsider the social aspects that comes with the word gender. I agree with her approach, which is to offer a definition of gender that directly correlates to one’s social position as I believe it is broad enough yet explicit for the issue at hand. Haslanger sheds light on the flaw that exists within society that being a woman’s subordination to the privileged male and how this comes from women being viewed and treated based on their lower social class.

In her article, Haslanger opts to define gender as she did with the hope of acknowledging that “social implication[s] of being female var[ies] for each because sexism is intertwined with race and class oppression”. I agree that her definition addresses many of the issues that feminists face in trying to support women as a whole. On the other hand, I find that any attempt to define a controversial term such as gender is problematic. Haslanger was not only faced with having to be sensitive to similarities and differences between males and females, but also she had to be wary of anti-racial feminism. In today’s society, there are things that make defining gender even more challenging including bisexuality, transgender and other sexual identities. To me, it seems nearly impossible to formulate a definition that would be able to incorporate it all.

I personally find myself conflicted with many of the attempts to define gender in feminism. Haslanger’s condition “iff” you are observed or imaged to have a female body and occupy subordinate position are you then considered a woman alludes to the fact that transwoman are subjugating themselves to self-imposed oppression. In addressing objections to her claim, she states how she doesn’t believe there are any positive aspects women are able to collectively share besides their subordinate social standing. Based on this response, one could infer that Haslanger has a pessimistic view of womanhood or a hostile attitude towards trans individuals. Though she was writing during a different time period, it serves to show how even the most seemingly functioning definitions are flawed. While I contemplate whether it is useful to go through so much trouble to include all different types of people in a definition, one could argue that it seems counterintuitive to stand up for a disconnected and undefined group of individuals. Haslanger recognizes this and puts it perfectly in saying that “the normativity problem raises the challenge that any effort to define women will problematically privilege some women and (theoretically) marginalize others, and will itself become normative”.