Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T15:13:30.076Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Irreducibility and (Trans) Sexual Difference

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2020

Oli Stephano
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article illuminates a tension internal to Elizabeth Grosz's provocative theory of the irreducibility of sexual difference: while it establishes sexual difference as an ontological force of differentiation, it simultaneously delimits the forms sexual difference can take as fixed and uncrossable. This model thus privileges cissexual difference while invalidating trans modes of embodiment and identification, a move that perpetuates antitrans logic and practices while impoverishing feminist conceptions of the generativity of sexual difference. This article examines the uses of transsexuality throughout Grosz's work on sexual difference, evaluating her claim that sexual difference is irreducible alongside her insistence that transsexuality is an impossible attempt to assume a bodily sex other than that assigned at birth. Illustrating how Grosz's account narrows the generativity of sexual difference down to unchangeable dimorphic sex, this article argues that fixed dimorphic sex is not simply irreducibly given but is the effect of normative schemas. If the power of sexual difference lies in its capacity to generate difference, it need not be constrained to an immobile binary of sexually specific bodies whose morphological possibilities are fixed. This article thus argues for the capacity of sexual difference itself to become otherwise than solely cisgender.

Type
Found Cluster on Trans Feminist Philosophy
Information
Hypatia , Volume 34 , Issue 1 , Winter 2019 , pp. 141 - 154
Copyright
Copyright © 2019 by Hypatia, Inc.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ahmed, Sara. 2017. Living a feminist life. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aristotle. 2001. The basic works of Aristotle. Trans. Richard McKeon. New York: Modern Library.Google Scholar
Bornstein, Kate. 1997. My gender workbook: How to become a real man, a real woman, the real you, or something else entirely. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Butler, Judith. 1993. Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits of “sex.” New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Connell, Raewyn. 2012. Transsexual women and feminist thought: Toward new understanding and new politics. Signs 37 (4): 857–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Currah, Paisley, Juang, Richard M., and Minter, Shannon, eds. 2006. Transgender rights. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Enke, A. Finn. 2013. The education of little cis: Cisgender and the discipline of opposing bodies. In The transgender studies reader 2, ed. Stryker, Susan and Aizura, Aren. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Fausto‐Sterling, Anne. 2000. Sexing the body. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Grosz, Elizabeth. 1994. Volatile bodies: Toward a corporeal feminism. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Grosz, Elizabeth. 2011. Becoming undone: Darwinian reflections on life, politics, and art. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Grosz, Elizabeth. 2017. The incorporeal: Ontology, ethics, and the limits of materialism. New York: Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grosz, Elizabeth, and Wolfe, Esther. 2014. Bodies of philosophy: An interview with Elizabeth Grosz. Stance 7 (April): 115–26.Google Scholar
Irigaray, Luce. 1984. An ethics of sexual difference. Trans. Carolyn Burke and Gillian C. Gill. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Irigaray, Luce. 1996. I love to you: Sketches of a possibility felicity in history. Trans. Alison Martin. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Namaste, Vivianne. 2009. Undoing theory: The “transgender question” and the epistemic violence of Anglo‐American feminist theory. Hypatia 24 (23): 11–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salamon, Gayle. 2010. Assuming a body: Transgender and rhetorics of materiality. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Weinstein, Jami. 2010. A requiem to sexual difference: A response to Luciana Parisi's “Event and Evolution.” Southern Journal of Philosophy 48 (s1): 165–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar