Have you ever seen someone walking down the street and thought, Are they a male of female? They would be androgynous. The definition of Androgyny is "Having both female and male characteristics; hermaphroditic. 2. Being neither distinguishably masculine nor feminine, as in dress, appearance, or behavior" (dictionary.com). More recent well known cases of this is the runner from Jamaica, Caster Semenya. She was going to have her medals taken away from her because she looked more masculine than feminine. After many tests they concluded that she was indeed a woman but they still wanted to strip her of her medals and declared that she was not to participate in competitive sports again. While being one sex, yet looking like another can be hard to live with an overcome, yet some comedians feel the need to make fun of it. Like Saturday Night Live (SNL) had an ongoing skit with a character named Pat, and it was a joke to figure out whether or not Pat was a boy or a girl. Observations have led to the discovery that more and more androgynist women are prevalent in society today.
Food for thought: do you notice that more and more women or men today look androgynous?
Shakespeare uses the witches and Lady Macbeth as his andogyinists characters. Lady Macbeth strips herself of a woman so that she can be a man to be more strong and to be brave. The witches are made fun of because they have beards and seem to be manly, which makes them unappealing to look at. I am beginning to think that Shakespeare had something against women or maybe, he thought women wanted to be men, anyways I wonder how Shakepeare felt about women?
ReplyDelete(for some reason the post was cut off so the definatition of androgyny is being both male and female; hermaphroditic. OR having both masculine and feminine characteristics. OR having an ambiguous sexual identity)
ReplyDeleteI agree with Caitie Moore on this. Shakespeare uses both Lady Macbeth and the witches. Lady Macbeth wishes to be "unsexed" and been seen almost as a male counterpart when they are plotting the assination of the king. Yet because she is a woman Mecbeth is hesitating to tell her about the plan to kill Banquo. Her feminity is an obstacle for her throughout what we've read so far in the play. The withces also are his prime examples because they don't really have a place in society so instead of being the desitute men or women they hold supernatural abilities since they are already outcasted and the power they hold in forseeing futures gives them the "manly" traits that comes along with power, yet they aren't always taken seriously so they are women. Caitie brings up a good point though. I too want to know if Shakespeare had a negitive view on women? He seems to target them a little much. Could he possibly be suffereing from a negative experience with a particular woman, which is why he's showing women in a "negative" light?
When Mary stated, “her [Lady Macbeth] feminity is an obstacle for her throughout what we've read so far in the play”, it makes me a bit upset and angry. I find it completely wrong that women are viewed as inferior to men in a lot of situations. People have gone a long way to being more tolerant towards other races, cultures, religions, and gender; yet, sometimes there is still a negative attitude towards women. Women, in my opinion, are capable of doing almost anything a man can. A major argument about women lies in whether or not women should be permitted to do combat and be in the army. Thoughts?
ReplyDeleteI agree with Julie, that women are still being set as inferior to men. Like women not being able to fight in combat. I believe that if women pass the same exact tests, psychologicaly and mentally, as men, then they should be granted the right to fight in combat like any other man. Even in todays society we can see that men are still the dominant gender, no matter how much people say that we are equal.
ReplyDeleteTrying to answer Catie and Mary's question about why Shakespeare viewed women through a negative light, I don't really think he did. The witches are an exception though. But as for Lady Macbeth, she has A LOT of power.
ReplyDeleteThe following [background] information was pulled from this site: http://www.slashdoc.com/documents/54537
Some modern critics claim, Shakespeare was a feminist. Particularly in his comedies we frequently see a woman take on the strongest character, while often in his tragedies he has a male play the isolated tragic hero.
A couple hundred years ago, the women couldn't do much of anything but cook and clean for their husbands. Also the women did not get to choose who they married. Their loyalty belonged first to their fathers and then to their husbands. This patriarchal structure has forced them to become repressed and helpless, and they were treated horrible.
Nevertheless, in the midst of this male-dominant society, Shakespeare portrays women with strengths at least equal to those of men. Shakespeare's views on women clearly define his plays and how, by using the women as some of the most powerful and stage dominating characters, and he shows a remarkable gift for breaking down the barriers that held women captive.
But there could have been many reasons why he gave his characters such qualities. It could have been that Queen Elizabeth I was sitting in the audience for most of his plays, or he was influenced by his marriage with older woman.
I suppose there's been a rise in "androgynous looking" people, but it's one of those things I, personally, haven't payed much attention to. Come to think of it, I have been mistaking boys for girls and girls for guys a lot. It's mostly the hair and the pants. I blame the media.
ReplyDeleteI do not believe Shakespeare viewed women negatively. In Macbeth he has women playing some of the most powerful roles. As in his other plays, women took on strong powerful roles. I think he used women in his plays as a way to give them a voice, becuase in his time women were supressed and not given the chance to have an opinion. As for the witches having beards, and lady Macbeth requesting to be "unsexed" maybe Shakespeare was giving these women some masculine features to show that they were on the same level as men, and not so much as to mock them or be little them.
ReplyDeleteIt is funny that Nick says that he blames the media for mistaking women and men and men as women. I don’t think it should matter how someone dresses or wears their hair. Looking in magazines and on television, the media does send out signals on what defines a “woman” and what defines a “man”. Men are expected to have six pack abs and have short hair. Women are supposed to be a size 0, yet have breasts and a butt. These images are sending out negative images to today’s youth. No one in real life actually looks like those photo shopped picture, however. Where what you want and be who you are. The media should not have a say in what a person of either gender should wear.
ReplyDeleteI have to agree with Nick, Zach, and Shayna on this one. I think Shakespeare was using women to show their equal strength, and that the unsexing might simply have been a way to show his audiance that they were on the same level. And like what Nick says this Androgynoous behavior was the fault of the media, for had people of Shakspeares time been, if not completely accpeting, but of todays tolerance levels then its very possible Shakespeare could have left his characters as powerful women instead of powerful manwomen. Shakespearian theater also typically used an all male cast, typically with youngish boys playing women since there voices were still high. Its also possible that his unsexing was simply a joke on his male actors playing female roles. Again, a product of the media and times. In today's society though it kinda creeps me out when i can't tell what gender a person is. I don't know how to address them or how to refer to them with others making the conversation socially awkward.
ReplyDeleteIs the original question supposed to say, do you notice that more and more women or men today look androgynous than they did in the past?
ReplyDeleteIf so, then I would have to say yes. For girls in the past, it seemed only natural that female biology prepared them to be mothers, while men could go to work and earn a living. If there were androgynous people 'back in the day', it's more likely that they weren't noticed as much as they are today.
In response to the question in the blog, I do believe I see more androgyny today than I ever have. I can see it becoming more and more popular in our generation. I agree with Nick and Willy that androgyny can be blamed on the media. I remember when the boy-wearing-girl-pants trend blossomed in the media and everywhere I looked I saw boys squeezing themselves into girl pants. But maybe that's just what the current flare of androygny is: a fad.
ReplyDeleteIn terms of androgyny and Macbeth, I agree with Mary and Julie and their opinion of Lady Macbeth's "feminity is an obstacle for her throughout what we've read so far in the play." Just as we saw in the movie today or in other examples of Macbeth, Lady Macbeth seems to be struggling with herself and the face that she can't "man up" to kill Duncan. Shakespeare could have been using this as an insult to women, making it seem as though they are too sensitive to handle a man's job.
In response to Julie's question of women in the military, I believe it proves that there has always been a complex that a woman can't do a man's job. It's almost as if we are raised to think that. I still remember when Disney (whose movies are targetting towards children) released the movie Mulan as a little girl. I remember thinking how unfair it was that Mulan had to disguise herself as a man to fight in the war. Do you think we are programmed from early childhood to think women can't handle a man's job?
I too think that androgyny is more common these days, guys dressed up like gils, its more of a feminie world these days, at least in America. Ithink that people are less scared of what people think.
ReplyDeleteEmily, i think that we are just automatically programmed to think women can not handle a man's job. It has been in our society since the beginning of time. Notice things are always written as MAN, or HIM. Many cultures still today put women lower than men.
I agree with Zach when he mentioned that Shakespeare might not have seen women in a negative light. Though Lady Macbeth is mentally unstable, she has a ton of power. She pretty much decides what goes on.
ReplyDeleteI also wanted to say that I strongly agree with Julie's statement about men needing a 6-pack and women needing size 0 pants but a C cup bra and some junk in the trunk. Unrealistic!
I think Emily's example of Mulan actually shows the change in the acceptance of androgynous behavior. Mulan is shown as being more capable than most of the men around her. If it was intended to belittle women she would not be the hero.
ReplyDeleteAs for there being a complex that women can't do everything men can, I would agree that it exists. But there is also a complex that all women CAN do anything a man can, which isn't true. I can't get pregnant, and I don't have a problem with that. So why do so many women have a hard time accepting that most men are physically superior to most women? No one is saying women aren't as smart, but really why do you think there aren't women playing in the NFL or MLB?
I think for so long society has always believed that Men are superior to women. Only in the recent years have women really gained more of a respect when it comes to equaling men. The mulan reference makes sense actually. When someone is cross-gender like that they are seen as an equal because they have a level playing field to start off with. No one really knows the real story behind yourself. Julie your comment about the men needing 6 pack abs, is AWESOME! its so true. Thats the ideal that is being shoved down our throats! Ever since we were little. Completely unrealistic.
ReplyDeleteBob Dylan once wrote, "The Times They Are A Changin'" and they most definitely are. Women are becoming more and more equal, but there is still that idea that they are not as good as men and perhaps that is why there is more Androgyny.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Cameron though. While men and women may be treated equal now, there are things women can't do that men can, and vice versa. That's how it is and there's not a problem with that.
I agree with Cameron and Nick. I think a certain amount of inequality (on both sides) is a good thing. It creates some kind of diversity. I think our differences are what intrigues us. I think the fact that we can never truly understand the opposite sex keeps us interested and wanting more. If we were equal, there would be no point to discovering someone of the opposite sex. I appreciate that there are some things about a man that I will never understand. And I am glad that there is some degree of mystery about me to a boy. I find it to be somewhat comforting and I can't say I would change it if I could.
ReplyDeleteI really dislike discussing feminist topics. Girls, please don't get angry with me. In my opinion, males and females are different. We naturally have different strengths and weaknesses. I think in today's society we too often try to compete with each other, all the while claiming to be working towards equality. If we are competing with our brothers or sisters, how is that being equal? I think instead we should be embracing our differences. And please let me clarify something. I am not one that believes that women should have long hair, men short, women should wear skirts, be mothers, etc. I just think that it's ok to accept that MOST women are physically weaker than MOST men and that MOST women are more emotional connected with the world than MOST men. I think somewhere we'll have to find a balance and accept ourselves as we are.
ReplyDeleteI think that this is something Lady Macbeth has yet to do. She is a strong woman and I think that she needs to take pride in that. Being a strong woman is better than being just a man, but I do understand that her society tells her differently. I hope that in today's world women can see that though.
In response to Cameron's comment:
ReplyDeleteThe reference to Mulan was meant to show how sexism was introduced at a young age, not so much women are inferrior to men. After seeing the movie, it sparked a curiosity that made me question why women weren't allowed to be in the army. I'm curious- how would you answer that question?
It's also interesting to think that we haven't had a female president yet either. But maybe Hillary Clinton's attempt at presidency shows that we are making small progress towards the rise of women. We've already made the leap to gaining women's suffrage. Perhaps women are using androgyny as a method to gain more progress in the overall plan to have gender equality. But is that even a possibility?
I think Ashley does a prettygood job summing this whole thing up. People need to stop concentrating on who is better and just live their lives.
ReplyDeleteI don't think Lady Macbeth is a very good example of androgyny. She tries to be but I think we see both in her actions and in the way Macbeth treats her that she is still very feminine.
I guess while I was writing my last comment, Cameron was a couple minutes ahead of me on the same thought. And then people agreed! I'm glad to see that there is acknowledgement of the unnecessary gender feud--and from both genders!
ReplyDeleteEmily said that we still haven't had a female president and she wonders if Hilary's attempt is showing our progress. This makes me a little sad. Do we as women really have to measure our "progress" in society through politics and movies like Mulan? I am a big believer that perception is everything, and my personal perception is very internal. I see the world through how I see myself and I believe that the possession of respect, education, and love is far more important than any political standing a woman might hold.
I think in general, women are respected and loved by men and also educate themselves. However, I think the real progress will be shown when women (especially young women) learn to respect/love themselves and each other. Men are not to blame for our core issues of low self esteem and insecure/unstable sense of self.
I would like to open up by saying that I do not mean to offend anyone tonight... Being on as late as I am, it is my job to tie up all of the hanging conversations.
ReplyDeleteThe topic is sexism, and the distinct differences there are between the two sexes. In Western Civilization I learned that very early on in human existence, the male and female differed very little. In fact, the only differences were the sexually reproductive organs. Both possessed equal strength, ingenuity, and stature in the community; both shared similar roles in society, as well. Eventually women were confined close to the home (when nomadic tendencies ended) to take care of the children that she bore. She was then expected to maintain the home, and feed the family.
Basically what I am saying is that society is what created the gap between our seemingly opposite genders. What made women weaker than men, and more "fragile" than men was the shift in women's obligation (A shift that has been encouraged and cultivated by men through present day). Any progress that is made by women to bridge the gap is considered "unfair" to all the poor women, the women who are too incompetent to follow suit. Of course, society would hate for women to actually have a chance at becoming as powerful as the men. Then we might have to actually treat ourselves equally.
With that out of my system, I feel a bit better about expressing my emotions on a few other issues that have been discussed.
ReplyDeletePopular belief seems to be that Shakespeare made the witches androgynous in an attempt to convey that women had power as well... I would have to disagree. I think that Shakespeare was trying to say that a normal woman couldn't have that much power, that's why she had to have male characteristics. And the common interpretation of Lady Macbeth's scenario rings just as false in my mind. I think that while Lady Macbeth held power, it was the power of trickery and seduction; both given a negative connotation both in Shakespeare's plays and in modern society. As the play develops, it is clear who holds more power in the relationship, and who simply tries to convince the other to direct it in a certain way.
One sidenote that also stood out to me was EmilyJan's comment that "It's also interesting to think that we haven't had a female president yet either." This exact statement was made about there never being a black president last year with Obama running. He was elected, and I think it is blatantly obvious that great accomplishment of black people has done nothing to ease the rift between the races. I doubt that anything less than a perfect term from Hilary or any other woman would ease relations between the sexes either.
I dont personally see Lady Macbeth as an androgynistic character. Yes, she wants to take more control as a man would in the play, but she uses her feminism as a lure for Macbeth. I definitly see the witches as androgynistic characters, with "beards" and all. They definitly have the male/female ratio that makes up the entire defintion Mary stated earlier. Like Caitie, it makes me wonder if Macbeth thought of witches to be that way, or women in general?
ReplyDeleteI really like what Caitlin said about our differences in sex attracting us and intriuging us. Thats so true. We have so many differences in not only appearance but in mentality as well, that we are always confused by one another, urging us to keep that constant competition to learn more.
ReplyDeleteI also liked what Ashley said about we should all stop worrying about which sex is better. Do I ever believe that is ever gonna happen? Not at all. The constant competition to be better than the other is what keeps the mystery alive.
Caitlin was right about the differences in sex attracting us. I think when people get overly attracted, obsessed even is when androgyny comes into play. What Ashely said about us trying to stop worrying about which sex is better, well some women are big feminists and they will never let it go. Thats not a bad thing, like Danielle said, it keeps the mystery alive. I personally believe women are stronger, emotionally and men are physically, simply because we are supposed to complete each other.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Danielle that Lady Macbeth isn't androgynous. The example of her using her feminism is a great example. She wants the best of both sides. Lady Macbeth uses her emotions to play Macbeth's, and she uses the fact that she is a woman. She also uses a males strength and, stubbornness to get the job done of killing the king.
ReplyDeleteI'm going to oppose what Merissa and Danielle are saying, I believe that consciously Lady MacBeth isn't androgynous, but in her unconscious she is. She shows her feminism on the outside, to get what she wants with her husband, but she is power-hungry like a man, and she is very manipulative and masculine about wanting to take over the country. I almost would go to think that if MacBeth had become King successfully and the country didn't start to fall apart... that lady MacBeth would have killed him to make herself the one and only true leader. Making her even more masculine.
ReplyDelete