brennen rigley

SCORE VIDEOS

• BACK TO HOME

(my) ART

ART (of me)

• BACK TO HOME

• 12/22 - viewing genderism and identity labels more broadly

VIEWING GENDERISM AND IDENTITY LABELS MORE BROADLY

gender is obviously nothing new — our languages show that ancient humans ascribed certain masculine or feminine traits to certain objects or sensations, which is why many germanic languages have gendered cases and conjunctions for each noun. if biological sex is the foundation for gender's existence, the reality of only two sexes (with rare exceptions, i.e. intersex individuals) would easily lead to sociological traits being assigned to them.being that gender is, in its more solid definition, the application of certain traits independent to both sexes, it’s much easier to trace the origins of why certain traits/attributes exist and why some don’t. never in my adolescence, or even as a toddler, did i exhibit such clear-cut signs as to what pre-defined gender box i was shoved into. when i was 4 years old, i would secretly paint my nails and play 'my little pony' video games. my leaning towards homosexuality in the midst of puberty was also not fitting well into the portrait of an ideal man.my stance by the time i'd reached 18 was that although i certainly did not fit snugly into either the male or female boxes, i was still a man, albeit on a lesser scope than the media depiction of a bruting, rugged, masculine male. similar to how bases and acids are measured in chemistry, the extremes of both ends representing the most stereotypical depictions of man and woman. so, the thinking went, wouldn’t the best way of defying and rejecting these stereotypes be to carry on as a man but not adhere to these traits, therefore giving the perception that gender is an entity separate from specific sociological inclinations?after considerate research, this line of thinking doesn’t seem to have much historical precedence. the view among most modern social scientists and sexologists is that gender and biological sex are two separate entities, being the social and physical characteristics of identity, respectively. this idea was first proposed in 1945 and has been consistently studied ever since (some contemporary thinkers have proposed a trichotomy of biological sex, psychological gender, and social gender roles, but the jury is still out on that). it was later brought to my attention after some digging that the existence of people beyond the gender binary has existed for centuries, albeit in relatively small exclaves from the rest of the binary-dominated world; among them being the polynesian concept of mahu, and the hindustani concept of hijra, which is in essence a glamorized eunuch.thereafter, i reached a conclusion that satisfied my beliefs and identity, to live the rest of my life without gender labels. this is the stance some non-binary people take, but i reject the non-binary label as well, as it implies that i still fit within the mold of some hypothetical third or fourth gender either of my own design or someone else’s. the disorienting mass categorization and labeling of unique peoples and circumstances more broadly render concepts like gender needless and obsolete.the natural order of the world is embedded in human beings, as we are products of the earth on which we do all things. to have a concept as manufactured and arbitrary as gender be determined as final and uncompromising, is thus a corruption of the natural world. labelling and categorizing classes of humans into broad camps is a perfect example of the human condition and how the brain is wired. when you were born, you were not a boy or girl. you were you, with a unique dna fingerprint, uniquely shaped and functioning sex organs, and unique experiences that will shape your identity. one having disregarded the system is one who can be more of a reflection of earth’s primality and complexity.gender is actually quite similar to another regularly touted and disposable concept — race. a theoretically infinite number of races are identified through things like small differences in skin pigmentation and genetic traits, the region in which you were born, the specific language or dialect you speak, the identity of your ancestors thousands of years ago, and other arbitrarily defined physiological traits. today, scientists consider such biological essentialism obsolete, and generally discourage racial explanations for collective differentiation in both physical and metaphysical traits. why not a similar unaminous sentiment for gender?participating in or endorsing the creation of brand new genders is not based in objectivity, it's rooted entirely in sociology and the same arbitrary categorization mentioned previously. the creation of new genders into an already absurdist binary-oriented system is like simply changing the font of a document without doing anything to its actual contents. it’s my view that the best way to eradicate gender stereotypes is to eradicate the concept of gender altogether.by all means, if someone feels comfortable identifying as a man, woman, or anything else, they have the right to do so. i only believe it’s fair to point out that these gender spectrum creations are still a product of the malformed and subjectively sexist aspects of society, and i choose not to partake in them. i am comfortable being referred to by whatever pronouns being used to address me, with the nondescript 'they/them' preferred.

brennen rigley
december 2022

• BACK TO HOME

• VIA EMAIL

• VIA BANDCAMP

• BACK TO HOME