Gender Identity as a Conflict of the Present and the Dissolution of Bipolarity
In the current discussion about gender and identity, a profound conflict emerges: the binary conception of gender as either male or female increasingly contradicts a more comprehensive understanding of identity as fluid, multifaceted, and dynamic. The question of how we can address this tension and whether it is possible to break free from the traditional bipolar categorization is central to social, political, and personal life in the present day.
To address this question, it is worth looking at the philosophical foundations that shape our ideas about gender and identity. In particular, the writings of Judith Butler, Simone de Beauvoir, and Jean-Paul Sartre offer valuable insights into how gender and identity are constructed, performed, and lived.
Simone de Beauvoir, a central figure in existentialism and feminist philosophy, laid the groundwork for the exploration of gender as a social construction in her work The Second Sex (1949). Her famous quote “One is not born, but rather becomes, a woman” points to the idea that gender is not a natural, biologically fixed category but is shaped by societal norms and expectations. This insight is essential for understanding that the binary gender order is not naturally given but is a historical product of social practices.
Jean-Paul Sartre, Beauvoir’s partner and co-thinker, extends this idea through his theory of freedom and “being-for-itself.” In Being and Nothingness (1943), Sartre argues that humans are condemned to be free—that is, they must constantly create and construct their own identity. This existentialist freedom stands in opposition to the rigid notion of fixed gender roles. If identity is formed through action and choice, then gender should also be seen as a choice that is not limited to a bipolar framework.
This existentialist perspective opens a path to overcoming the bipolarity of gender. If identity and gender are socially constructed and performatively shaped, there is no compelling reason to cling to rigid categories. Instead, we could understand gender as a spectrum or an open possibility that is continuously changing.
Judith Butler takes these ideas to a new dimension in the late 20th century. In her work Gender Trouble (1990), Butler argues that gender is not only socially constructed but also performative. This means that gender is not something one is, but something one does—through repeated actions and performances. In her theory, Butler describes how people constantly perform gender roles by repeating socially recognized norms and behaviors. These performances are not natural givens but are the result of societal pressure and normative expectations.
Particularly noteworthy is Butler’s view that gender is also a linguistic problem. For Butler, language is a central tool through which gender identities are created and regulated. She emphasizes that the way we speak about gender—which terms we use and what categorizations we employ in language—profoundly influences the reality of gender. Language not only structures our thinking about gender but also shapes the social spaces in which gender is lived. Language reproduces and reinforces binary notions of male and female, leaving little room for other forms of gender identity.
Butler shows that by reformulating and deconstructing the language we use to talk about gender, traditional gender categories can be dismantled. If language produces the norms that solidify gender orders, then by subverting language, we can challenge and change this order.
Butler’s approach suggests that we can dissolve the bipolarity of gender and identity by questioning the power structures and linguistic norms that sustain this bipolarity. If gender is performative and mediated through language, it can also be acted upon subversively and renegotiated linguistically—through acts of resistance, “queering” of gender roles, and playing with norms of identity.
When we bring together the thoughts of Beauvoir, Sartre, and Butler, it becomes clear that the bipolar notion of gender and identity is problematic both philosophically and socially. From an existentialist standpoint, humans are free to choose and shape their identity. From a social theory perspective, gender is a performative practice that is constantly changing and negotiable. Linguistically, gender is a construction shaped by our word choices and the categories we employ.
The challenge of the present is to recognize this shift on a societal level and reform the legal, political, and social structures accordingly. A binary gender model is not only philosophically untenable but also socially restrictive and exclusionary. It forces people into predetermined categories that often do not align with their actual identity and experience.
A radical thought might be: What if we simply stop talking about it? Has the bipolar gender order perhaps already quietly “slipped away,” and our fixation on the discussion only keeps us trapped in old ways of thinking? If gender is already a fluid and open category, wouldn’t it be more meaningful to let go of the debate and allow people to navigate their identity processes without societal discourse?
A fundamental shift in thinking and the dissolution of the bipolarity of gender cannot be forced through endless discussions. Instead, this change must gradually emerge from society and “sneak in.” Perhaps we no longer need to talk about gender because the shift has already taken place, and it is only the debate itself that holds us back. The question remains open: Is it time to let the issue rest?
Ali Gharib
Berlin, 2024