Summary of Performative Acts and Gender Constitution

“Performative Acts and Gender Constitution: An Essay in Phenomenology and Feminist Theory” is a 1988
article published in Theatre Journal by philosopher and gender theorist Judith Butler (who uses they/them
pronouns). It is a foundational work for Butler’s idea of “performative gender,” which they went on to develop in
their later work. This article draws from phenomenology, theater studies, anthropology, and linguistics to show
how gender can be understood as performative in both a theatrical and philosophical sense. Theatrically, gender
functions as a script that members of the culture perform and, through performing, bring to life. Philosophically,
gender is created through a series of “performative acts”—a type of ritualized action that serves to create many
elements of society.
Butler opens with an exploration of the term “act,” which encompasses phenomena as varied as an actor
performing a role and a performative speech act—such as promising, where the act of speaking a promise brings
the promise into existence. Another kind of act creates and reinforces a social reality. Gender identity is one such
created social reality. Many theorists have noted that gender roles are not completely determined by physiological
sex characteristics, and they differ across individuals, cultures, and periods. Yet, many people still have a sense of
gender identity. Butler investigates the formation and meaning of gender, describing it as “an identity tenuously
constituted […] through a stylized repetition of acts”. Butler offers a theory for how gender comes to exist as a
compelling social category: it is created through the performance of “gender acts”—a performance so convincing
that even the actors come to believe in its reality.
In Section I, “Sex/Gender: Feminist and Phenomenological Views,” Butler discusses the similarities and
differences between the feminist and phenomenological definitions of the body. Although gender is not wholly
dependent on physiological sex characteristics, it is a form of embodiment. The embodied nature of gender is part
of what makes it such a powerful construct. Both feminist and phenomenological philosophers differentiate
between sex—the physiology of the body—and gender—the meaning of the body in terms of masculinity and
femininity. From the phenomenological perspective, history and culture determine the possible meanings of the
body, while the body itself materializes those possibilities, dramatizing and reproducing them. “Doing gender” is a
performance not just because it is playing a role, but because it recreates and reinforces the existence of the role.
Butler’s feminist theory, similarly to phenomenology, sees theory and practice as interrelated. The key example
is of course the oppression of women, where patriarchal political structures create patriarchal patterns of thought
and feeling—such as the idea that women are inferior intellectually—and these patriarchal thoughts help to
replicate patriarchal political structures by discouraging women from accessing education and taking positions of
authority. Butler is wary of feminist organizers who, for the sake of solidarity, argue from the position that the
essential nature of womanhood involves being oppressed. This definition makes it impossible to reach true
equality.
In Section II, “Binary Genders and the Heterosexual Contract,” Butler draws on ideas from the field of
anthropology, where theorists like Gayle Rubin have argued that the structures of kinship in many societies are
based on categorizing women as commodities to be traded between men. To maintain this categorization, cultures
develop taboos and punishments for alternative sexualities and gender presentations, which motivate and are
motivated by a cultural assumption that heterosexuality and specific gender roles are “natural.” This assumption of
naturalness then becomes an argument supporting laws and practices that formalize gendered oppression.
The formalization of gendered oppression means that although, in theory, people might be able to freely perform
their preferred gender acts, there are strong reasons why they cannot. One reason is that the culture determines
what gender possibilities exist, and it becomes difficult if not impossible to imagine alternatives. The other reason
is that the cultures regulate gender acts. Social stigma and gendered violence are tools societies use to maintain
their gender structures.
In Section III, “Feminist Theory: Beyond an Expressive Model of Gender,” Butler acknowledges that the theory
of gender acts does not prescribe a particular political program and that some feminist theorists may consider it
counterproductive. Butler confirms that it is at odds with the type of feminist theory that treats “femaleness” as an
essential category or a singular perspective. However, the theory of gender acts offers a tactic for resistance.
Gender is not written onto passive bodies. Bodies must perform gender to make it real, and because of the need to
continually perform gender, subversive performances of gender can change and expand the set of cultural
possibilities.

Themes, Ideas and Concepts

Judith Butler opens her essay with a paragraph addressing how philosophers approach "acts." Her main point of
comparison is theatre. She argues that despite an element of theatrical understanding, philosophers tend to treat "acts"
as concrete objects that develop from predictable elements. Her introduction provides summaries of positions held by
several different philosophers. In particular Butler
draws on French academic feminist Simone de Beauvoir (1908–86) and Maurice Merleau-Ponty
(1908–61), a French existentialist philosopher who had written about actions and phenomenology. Phenomenology
is the study of structures of consciousness from a first-person point of view. Butler draws on the different approaches
of de Beauvoir and Merleau-Ponty in her study of gender theory and gender identity.

Performance
Butler pursues the concept of gender identity by using the development of theatrical performance as a metaphor.
They argue that a person exhibits a gender identity in response to society's demand and what that person's
imagination develops as a result of that demand. They refer to Simone de Beauvoir's statement that women are not
born but made over time. They see this as grounding the development of gender identity in time as a process
dependent on growth and change. Repeated interpretations of the gender role in all types of circumstances eventually
resolve in a construction of the imagination that people recognize as gender. Butler explains that they want to review
this idea of gender identity as a developed role. They maintain that their idea of gender construction is more real and
natural than existing models and allows gender identity to change over time. Butler explains what their goal is in
"Performative Acts and Gender Constitution: An Essay in Phenomenology and Feminist Theory. They set up their
argument using principles originally offered by Simone de Beauvoir and Maurice Merleau-Ponty. If gender identity is
a theatrical performative role as Merleau-Ponty argues, and is developed and learned over time as de Beauvoir
believes, then gender roles are malleable and subject to change rather than rigid and tied to a single form.

Time
Butler explores a theory of how a gender role develops over time and repetition to establish gender behavior and
meaning. They note that, "In order to describe the gendered body, a phenomenological theory of constitution requires
an expansion of the conventional view of acts to mean both that which constitutes meaning and that through which
meaning is performed or enacted." They clarify that they want to examine the idea of "acts " both as actions and as
performances in the theatrical sense. They examine the idea of gender identity as a performed creative work. Butler
argues that when Maurice Merleau-Ponty writes "the body is an historical point" he is suggesting that humans
negotiate the cultural meaning of the body. Butler points out that regardless of the actual physical traits of people's
bodies the meaning of those bodies is negotiated between individuals and their cultures over time. Throughout time
people within society have constructed and performed gender roles. They are not constant and consistent from era to
era. Even when there are common elements the details are often unique. Butler contends that people dramatize the
meanings of their bodies. They then argue that in the same sense people "perform" gender by negotiating between
their own physical traits, their culture's expectations and perceptions, and their own responses. Gender presentation is
a performance even when it is not a successful or appealing performance. Simone de Beauvoir argues that "woman"
is a historical attribute rather than an inherently physical one. Butler explains that this has to do with how quickly and
easily people's ideas about a virtuous woman can change. Ideas about gender roles can change over time. Two
hundred years ago there were different expectations of what constituted a proper woman than there are now.

Gender Fluidity
According to Butler it is useful for feminists to have a new theory of gender roles and self that is not based in a
purely physical reading. A system that recognizes the fluid, transformative potential of a new perception of gender
allows for more dialogue regarding the possibilities that are open to people. Butler explains that when people
understand gender roles as self-created the stigma of "unnatural" non-heterosexual identities can be discussed more
easily without automatic moral judgements. There is thus an understanding of gender roles as self-created. By
shifting society's ways of understanding body and gender, it also becomes easier to explore gender without guilt or
fear. Expanding the idea of gender as performance and theater leaves more room for individuals and academics to
explore and experiment with other options. Recognition of the theatrical elements of gender play also acknowledges
that the audience matters. Butler asserts that gender roles are constructed by people within a family or community and
are intended to be viewed. According to them, gender construction happens over time in families and communities as
individuals attempt to establish styles and individual identity. They argue for a non-binary, performative model of
gender roles rather than a binary model based on a physical male body and a physical female body. Other feminist
academics have since argued for a wider sense of gender model based on increasing awareness of physical
differences. The two-body system falls apart when it is recognized that there are many forms of ambiguity found in
human bodies.
The Fiction of Gender
Butler's concluding passages state that they are reaching beyond anything restricted to the body alone. Their model
is a performance by individuals, developed as each person learns and changes or enhances what they understand of
community gender expectations. As Butler themselves suggest, taken to extremes this idea of gender performance by
individuals means that gender itself is a fiction performed and interpreted by individuals and their audiences. Gender
seen this way can be fluid, forever changing, designed to satisfy individual needs, for, gender is not just to conform to
biological imperatives of binary sexual body types.

Analysis of the Essay

Butler's Reasoning

Butler was writing at a time when a binary male-female gender breakdown was preferred. Gender was seen by
many as a sexual behavior pattern tied to a male or female body type. Physical variations from the binary were seen
simply as genetic errors and variations in gender behaviour were seen as "deviant." In the late 1980s many people
believed that the body defines behaviour. The question of gender roles affected both those whose sexuality
conformed to that of the "normal" heterosexual man or woman and those who failed to conform. During the mid-20th
century, feminist academia supported theories of sexual identity and gender identity. Sexual identity was defined by
whether a person had a male or female body. Gender identity was defined by how people looked, felt, and behaved.
The French feminist academic Simone de Beauvoir (1908–86) is largely credited with originating the theory of a
distinction between sexual identity and gender identity. At the time scholars argued over their differing ideas. The
more traditional academics believed that the body was destiny and normally and properly controlled the sense of
gender. Other academics took on the new feminist point of view that there were two distinct structures that defined
gender. One was the body and the other was a mental or emotional identity. Both sides tended to see "normal" sex as
binary male/female. Variations such as forms of intersexuality were seen as "abnormal" and even "deviant" or wrong
in some way. Each side viewed sexual identity as having a powerful effect on gender identity, with feminists arguing
for greater room for variation within people's sense of gender identity.

Femininity

Much of the basis of the discussion between academics and the feminist academics was a strong conviction on
both sides that a woman would have to be crazy to ascribe to a gender identified as unappealing as the mid-20th
century notion of "feminine." The mid-20th century idea of feminine gender was not particularly appealing to
academics or to academic feminists. Feminine gender consisted of a rationalized litany of submissive traits, domestic
limits, and social restrictions. People claimed that women were inherently weak and subservient as a result of natural
selection, the theory that only the fittest organisms survive. People who believed the body was destiny and that sex
defined gender argued that there was no clear line between sexual form and gender identity. The first was the
physical expression of one's sex. The second was the social and emotional expression of the same thing, imposed by
instinct, evolution, and custom. Simone de Beauvoir and second-wave feminists argued that sexual identity and
gender identity were different though interactive things. They also maintained that women's gender identities could
be at odds with the culture's demands and the norms associated with particular bodies. Butler explains, "There is ...
nothing about femaleness that is waiting to be expressed; there is, on the other hand, a good deal about the diverse
experiences of women that is being expressed and still needs to be expressed." Women's life experiences have an
effect on how they express gender identity. A girl can be a tomboy. A woman can want a career. Perhaps a woman
could want sex with another woman. Gender identity was larger than just the cultural ideal of a fiery lover or tender,
attentive wife.

Gender Performance

Judith Butler wrote Performative Acts and Gender Constitution because second-wave feminists disagreed with
their predecessors who viewed gender as a social and emotional expression of sex. Much of Butler's focus is on how
gender identity is separate from sexual identity. They ask how gender roles are made and then answers that they are
made like theater roles. "The acts by which gender is constituted bear similarities to performative acts within
theatrical contexts." Gender identity is developed over time and through thought, observation, and rehearsal. One
important aspect of the comparison between gender and theatrical performance is that it provides a plausible
alternative to the prior theories that tended to see gender developing either with the sexual body or with the
personality. If gender is flexible then it is subject to the same kinds of personal growth and evolution as other learned
roles. Butler bases their essay primarily on the works of the French academics Simone de Beauvoir and Maurice
Merleau-Ponty. Each offers elements they want to reference. De Beauvoir presents the divided sex/gender system
from the feminist point of view. French existentialist philosopher Merleau-Ponty offers a philosophy of action
providing Butler with a route into analysis of action, performance, and developed roles.
Butler establishes the possibility of gender identity being a developed social role rather than a static function
associated with sexual identity. They then suggest that their thesis allows for nearly infinite change and adaptation.
This moves gender identity from a binary male-female notion to a concept that can expand to accept a wide range of
differences without those differences being labeled as "deviant " or inappropriate. Butler's theory of gender
construction over time means that people create and change their gender roles. The theory makes room for the idea
that gender is not set and can change over time. If people can alter their gender roles and adapt them and change them
from era to era then they can also encounter enormous variation in the patterns of gender they experience. Gender
stops being a male-female and normal-deviant binary. It becomes a matter of how people can see their bodies
functioning in relation to the sex they were born with. The binary is replaced with a flexible gender identity in which
variations are themselves normal though still subject to evaluation as adaptive or not adaptive.