The narrator in LeGuin’s “The Question of Sex” might reveal just as much about herself as she does about the subjects of her anthropological inquiry. What does she rely on to anchor her understanding of the universe, herself, and others? How does she try to cope with understanding people alien to her? Do you think she has good or bad strategies for that? Don’t just generalize. Explain how a particular moment in the text helped you come to your understanding of the character.
6 thoughts on “LeGuin–Group 2”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
My first thought when reading this chapter is that the narrator has deeply contradicted herself trying to explain the sexuality/sexual physiology of Gethenians. Her observations are laden with parenthesis and questions, which suggests she is uncertain of everything, yet on page 92 she says: “What else have I learned for certain? That seems to sum it up” regarding elements she has observed for herself. I think that this contradiction between her observations and her theories stems from the language in which she thinks. On page 95, the narrator says: “But the very use of the pronoun in my thoughts leads me continually to forget that the Karhider I am with is not a man, but a manwoman” in regards to using the pronoun He. LeGuin has brought to the forefront the problem of language and thought: to what extent does language shape our thinking, and therefore the extent to which it shapes how we can grasp reality and limits the stretches of our imagination. A psychologist who knows what they are doing will always ask their multilingual patients: what language do you think in? As someone whose first language is not English, I find it is laborious especially when speaking to keep to it only — it changes my voice and personality to some extent. The author’s aware there is something she cannot grasp about Gethenians, and relates it back to the gendered aspect of the language that shapes her reality. Furthermore, on page 95 she adds: “A man wants his virility regarded, a woman wants her femininity appreciated […] One is respected and judged only as a human being. It is an appalling experience” This passage I found intriguing. Why is it an appalling experience for her? Is it perhaps because her identity as a woman has been effaced? It could be that if womanhood and manhood are intrinsic to identity in her culture that ambisexuality as she puts it, or androgyny, has deeply shaken her understanding of what is essential and what is constructed.
The narrator carefully examines and describes the absence of gender in the world of the non-gendered Gethenians in order to contrast it to our gendered world. We note that the Gethenians are not bound to a specific gender and only take on those roles at the time of Kemmer in which the 2 individuals are assigned a sexual role. Throughout the chapter, the narrator explores some of the benefits of this gender fluid world which almost seems utopian by the way it is described. The narrator claims in one instance, “There is no unconsenting sex, no rape” and, “There is no division of humanity into strong and weak halves, protective/protected, dominant/submissive, owner/chattel, active/passive.” The narrator continues to list benefits that this world experiences because of this alternative gender fluid system that seems to rid the world of the patriarchal issues in ours. It is evident that the narrator is fond of this alien world because of its ability to eliminate issues commonly occurring in human relationships.
The narrator seems to identify with the Gethenian’s restrictions on vowing kemmering, particularly related to monogamous marriage and incest. Even as the entire mechanism of sexuality is altered, the Gethenians respect monogamous marriage as being “socially and ethically…an ancient and vigorous institution” (92). This may suggest that LeGuin holds monogamous marriage as being intrinsically important to herself personally, or perhaps she suggests that any society with sex would likely hold it in high regard. Considering how LeGuin seeks to break down conventional ideas surrounding sexuality, I am surprised that this attribute was given to the Gethenians; I would have expected them to be completely fluid in their relations and oblivious to the idea of monogamy.
A similar parallel between human and Gethenian sexuality exists in how incest is viewed. Although “incest is permitted”, “siblings are not allowed to vow kemmering, nor keep kemmering after the birth of a child to one of the pair” (92). Incest appears to be discouraged, but is at the same time allowed; perhaps, in a Darwinist vein, LeGuin is implying that the Gethenians wish to maintain the genetic integrity of their population by trying to avoid sexual relations between family members. Why then is it permitted at all? On the next page the narrator mentions “the use of contraceptive drugs”–this may shed light on how incest is allowed (93). So long as the no children are born between siblings, than the actual act of having sex itself is not to be discouraged. I find it strange how monogamous marriage appears to be given some kind of arbitrary societal virtue for no explicit reason, yet incest is only discouraged due to what seems to be its genetic implications. In a world where the nature of sex is completely different than the human kind, monogamy is still championed and incest prohibited (at least partially).
To fully understand the culture of the Gethenian people, the narrator relies on the bifurcated gender system that is so familiar to human beings. Obviously, in this society, gender does not exist; individuals assume a sexual form based on the form assumed by their partner. The only time when this division occurs is during kemmer, or the term used to refer to when Gethenians are able to engage in sexual intercourse. The narrator demonstrates that fact that one cannot apply the gendered system to these people is somewhat paradoxical because to be able to actually describe the sexual process that the Gethenians engage in, they must incorporate a gender distinction.
One excerpt I found to be conceptually relevant here is as follows:
“…you cannot think of a Gethenian as ‘it’. They are not neuters. They are potentials, or integrals. Lacking the Karhidish ‘human pronoun’ used for persons in somer, I must say ‘he’, for the same reasons as we used the masculine pronoun in referring to a transcendent god: it is less defined, less specific, than the neuter or the feminine.”
Here we see again the narrator attempting to apply terms from Earth’s societal gender system to describe the Gethenians. In my view, however, this is the closest she comes to accurately portraying the identity of these people. In the narrator’s view, “he” refers to a general human being. The word draws distinction from “it” in that the former (in my view, now) implies a sense of alien mystery. “He” on the other hand (as its usage is described in the excerpt) belies no such mystery: it could refer to either gender, however the word does not specify as it may not be important in the context.
Again, this is the closest the narrator comes to using a human term to conceptualize the Gethenians. I still don’t think that its necessarily perfectly accurate, but given the universe of terms humans have to rely on for describing these matters, its one of the better attempts made in the excerpt.
I agree with what Graham said regarding how our differences from the Gethenians are especially drawn from gender and sexuality. I found it interesting how LeGuinn really pushed the boundaries of what we know society as today—having individuals (aliens) that were a certain gender for only a fraction of their lifetime, and then another day they could become a different gender. I think this is especially important when LeGuinn discussed how any person could give birth to a child, not just a man or a woman, which LeGuinn calls a “parent in the flesh”. This creates a different dynamic than what we see in our current world today. Instead of having a set gender that gives birth to their children, this society has more variability since all individuals could give birth to a child. This creates a different dynamic between relationships of parents and their children. The child in this story will be more attached/loyal to their parent that gave birth to them, even if the parent is male or female. Meanwhile, in our society, we have more allegiance to both of our parents since they created us together. I think LeGuinn’s strategy for pushing these boundaries is a good strategy. By creating a world where the individuals are gender fluid, then there will be more equality and fairness since all individuals will be able to experience what the other gender experiences—everyone at some point in their lives will experience both male and female lifestyles.
I found this idea to be really interesting. The narrator explores how the Gethenian differ from us. The key focus was on how their world couldn’t be gendered. The self discussion the narrator has about attempting to not apply a gender to an individual Gethenian raises intriguing possibilities. At first we think of these Gethenians as “its” but to do so implies a lack of sex for the individual. However to think of them as both sexs also seems strange. Going through this thought process reveals how gendered our human world is, which is our narrator’s point. Similarly, it was important to note four fifths of the time the Gethenian’s are in what the narrator described as a child like state where there is no sex drive. The narrator seems to suggest this lack of sex drive could be the cause for why there are not wars. Overall the narrator’s message seemed to suggest many problems in our world could be solved by this non gendered world, and many imbalances could be removed from our society. Her most telling and interesting quote was, “Therefore nobody here is quite so free as a free male anywhere else.” Our narrator believes the Gethenian’s world is a more fair world and I’m inclined to believe her.