The fetishization, commodification, and exposure of transness and trans bodies has become rampant in the past years because transness is being seen as more accepted (read interesting.) The gross interest in trans bodies, especially when it comes to anatomy, transitions, and gender performance, has only increased and is still believed, by many, to be acceptable topics to discuss with trans individuals. 

Asking about a trans person’s genitals is no more acceptable than asking a cis man if he is circumcised or not, and yet these questions are extremely common to ask trans individuals online, IRL, even in talk show interviews (looking at you Katie Couric.) The fact that these questions are still asked every day of every trans person means, essentially, that as a culture we view transness as an act and not as a state of being. And yes! Gender is indeed an act preformed by all (who have a gender) but by no means does sex equal gender and by no means are trans individuals pretending to be trans. Therefore, why are these questions still ok to ask? Why aren't we asking trans individuals about their experiences as a trans individual rather than trying to put ourselves in their place? Why are we not asking how to be more respectful of them? Why are we not asking how we can be effective allies? Why are we not asking them about how they experience job discrimination? How medical access can be legally denied or made all but impossible to achieve? Why are we not more concerned with the way the government treats trans individuals and the laws that make legally changing their names or getting new birth certificates almost impossible? Why is it that we would rather see a trans individual as an experiment, play thing, or zoo animal than a human?

When we start to ask if a trans person is really “committed” to their transition based on whether or not they've had “the surgery” there is a problem. The fact that experts on queer and gender theory still write papers, with little to no backlash, about how “gender isn't real” is a problem. As a community, we need to come together and realize that there are so many ways to do gender that it’s not revolutionary or “strange” at all to have people doing gender that isn't their assigned sex. And, we also need to understand that there are many reasons people do gender the way they do. Many people use gender as armor: if you can preform it well enough no one can fault you for your behavior or beliefs because it’s all about your gender. Some people do gender as a self care act or a statement, there is, I believe, no wrong way to do gender. But, we need to start realizing that it is different for everyone and that’s ok. It’s not all about understanding someone’s gender, it’s about accepting their gender as valid and real and ok.    

Categorizing Silence

         During our discussion of Silence, I came across a major issue when we were discussing the characteristics of Silence. The question of Silence’s gender identity came up, and people went back and forth debating whether or not Silence was transgender, agender, or gender fluid. I joined in on this argument, because at first, I found it to be interesting. However, the more I thought about it, the more it really bothered me. I think that when we are discussing Silence, or any character from the middle ages, it is important that we do not try and force our 21^st century nomenclature and thought processes on the character. Silence was not thinking that perhaps she was transgender, instead she was concerned that despite being female, she had played the role of a male for so long that she was beginning to become more comfortable in this role. I understand the desire that we, as 21^st century students, have to try and bring everything into this century, but it simply isn’t realistic, and we lose sight of the actual issue being told in the story.

            A more appropriate comparison to make would be to Julia Serano’s essay in Gender Outlaws, where she argues that gender is an act that helps us categorize in society. Despite being female, Silence was forced into the role of a male, due to inheritance laws. After lots of internal struggle, she finally comes to the decision that this is not the role that she fits into, and begins to play her “natural” role, which is that of a female.

            My statement is not meant to say that there are not people from the middle ages, who if we brought into today’s society, would be regarded as transgender, it just isn’t applicable to Silence.

            To compare it to something more modern, within the community of Drag Queens, there are queens who become lost in the role that they play when they paint their face. Their true selves become lost inside the outgoing personality that is their stage persona. It leads to the same type of internal struggle we see with Silence, where they attempt to sort between this fake personality that has taken over their lives, and their true selves. Eventually, they tend to find their way, just like Silence, back into their natural roles. They are not transgender, simply lost in the roles that they are forced to put on.

Gender: An Act?

Growing up, my room was white. When we redid the room, I chose the color of a soft bubblegum pink, not quite a coral, but not so god-awful one couldn’t stand to be in there. In my room, I had a plethora of stuffed animals, Barbie dolls, ballerina figurines (even though I was not a dancer in any shape or form), a dress up box in my closet, all the typical things one would think of when they heard the words “girl’s room.” I loved playing with my dolls in the pink dollhouse, coming up with kid-friendly soap operas, and making little tea parties as I clopped around in those little plastic princess heels. My brother was born and he received the GI Joes, the trains, the cars, the Bakugan toys, a blue room, and the little plastic toy soldiers too.

Never once did I question that there were other terms out there than just “boy” or “girl.” I had no idea that sexuality was even a thing. Growing up, I brushed my long hair, sang into my hairbrush, listened to music in the shower, had a birthday slumber party dedicated to the color pink, and did all the things that “girls” were supposed to do.

Never once did it occur to me that everything I was doing could be perceived as an act, that all of it had been placed in front of me to consciously think about which gender I was performing. I never questioned if I was doing as girls were supposed to do. I was instructed to wear shorts underneath skirts and dresses, to keep my knees together while sitting down, and just thought it made sense. I never questioned why. I figured it was just modesty.

Now that I’m in college, my “act” has not changed. To hear that gender is a social construct, that everything is acted just confuses me. Being a “girl” came naturally. Yes, l was given every opportunity there was to act the part of a girl, to dream of being a Disney princess and tie the huge bow on the backs of my dresses (I later told my uncle that those were for babies), but never did it occur to me that I might be performing something I didn’t feel like I was. With my background, I’d never heard the words “hermaphrodite” or “intersex” until college and never knew about different sexualities from my own until high school, when I made that scary transition from Catholic school to public school.

It frustrates me to think that my life could have been a lie, to get me to “become” a girl. It saddens me that some don’t feel like they’re who they’re meant to be. Personally, I don’t believe gender is an act at all. I believe with that the way we’re raised might or might not determine who we are or want to be. I believe that putting on earrings every morning to match the rest of my attire does not determine that I am a girl. If a fellow “boy” peer of mine has eyeliner "on fleek," or a nail polish color I like, I don’t believe that to be “wrong” in any way. I’d probably ask him for tutorials! When it comes down to it, the way we view ourselves may be mistaken in the eyes of someone else, but just because others act, speak, or “perform” their gender differently than another doesn’t mean that they shouldn’t be treated with the same and utmost respect that all humans deserve.

Gender as an act? Please. Instead of thinking about what gender someone’s “performing,” maybe we should all try to perform the role of a respectful human being.

Are Women’s Bodies Objectified in Media?

This blog post will focus on the objectification of women’s bodies in Middlesex and Marilyn Monroe's portrayal in media. Marilyn Monroe’s peak career and the first half of Middlesex both occurred during the mid-1900s; this similar timeline makes the comparison somewhat relevant, as well as the study on gender in Middlesex and the status of Marilyn Monroe as a sex symbol in American culture.

In Middlesex, different female characters share different attitudes on the “ideal” female body type. Desdemona is described as having a very curvaceous, feminine figure that she is embarrassed about. She attempts to hide her figure behind bulky clothing, as she believes that her body sends off sexual messages that she does not want. For example, she gets catcalled by men while walking down a street in Detroit for her curvy figure. While Desdemona tries to hide her feminine figure, Victoria Pappas and Lucille Kafkalis try to play up their femininity by dressing up like women from an erotic magazine to attract a man. On the other hand, Lina is criticized by her husband for daring to wear bolder, western clothing. Lefty capitalizes on women’s curvy body figures through his erotic photography business in which barely-dressed women are portrayed in suggestive poses on cars. In such erotic photos and magazines, the person behind the body becomes lost, as the body is the sole focus. With the emergence of a market that capitalizes on the sex appeal of female figures, it seems that the female body has become more objectified within society.

In media, Marilyn Monroe is known for her curvy figure and her acting, as she plays women who are highly sexualized and seemingly objectified. For example, in the movie “Seven Year Itch”, Marilyn Monroe plays a female character who was a former model and commercial actress who made money by capitalizing on her body’s sex appeal. In the same movie, Marilyn Monroe’s character is lusted after by a male neighbor who daydreams about her upon her first visual appearance. In the movie “Gentlemen Prefer Blondes”, Marilyn Monroe plays a blonde bombshell character who voluntarily flaunts her body to manipulate men into giving her wealth and riches. 

In real life, it seems that Marilyn Monroe struggled with her own public image. Although she became Hollywood’s most famous sex symbol, she seemed to resent the title and fought against it. She felt that she was never taken seriously for her acting and person but appreciated for her body instead. Although Marilyn Monroe broke past many barriers for women and helped them to achieve more freedom in dress, she may have also suffered from objectification of women’s bodies in society.

Gendering Kids Starts Early and Just Doesn't Quit

Just like Desdemona and her spoon as well as Milton and his thermometer, every couple wants to know what the gender of their unborn baby is- and since it’s no longer the seventies, it’s often fairly easy to do for a baby. Which is understandable for parents to want- with the pretty clear-cut lines of gender that our society draws, it’s a natural next step that everyone wants to know ahead of time. Even without the male-centered inheritance laws in Silence, a baby’s early life is going to be different whether they’re a boy or girl, even though those differences are shaped by the same society that dictates that people know ahead of time so that they can choose to treat their unborn child as a boy or girl early… so it sort of seems like a cycle that feeds itself to me.

And with social media being so prevalent in our society and a big way of how we keep in contact with others, I guess it’s another natural next step for “gender reveal” parties or announcements start popping up. Like the cake filled with blue or pink m&m’s. Or the box filled with blue or pink chalk that you then shoot to make the gender of your baby… explode… (?) into the air… filling the air with your love/ its gender? That’s where it gets weird. I feel like there’s some strange associations to be made with that particular type of gender reveal.

And even once they’re born, the babies are going to be highly gendered once again. There’s the clear cut of “boy” and “girl” clothes from the very start, with vastly different messages on the tiny, identical in structure, little onesies. Often, the messages on girls’ clothes are self-deprecating or talking about dating before they’re even old enough to understand what self-esteem or boyfriends are. Even though they obviously aren’t able to read this message, other people are and these people are going to be able to and will form some opinions of this and other babies from the very start. This also seems like of Silence being the most over-sexualized, hourglass figure little newborn, but updated and created for the mass consumption of all consumers.

This trend continues as the babies grow up into kids, with one notable exception that is also making small-time, facebook feed news- Target is specifically creating a kids’ room decoration brand that doesn’t have an overly gendered vibe. There’s a lot of speculation about why they’re doing it, and the main conclusion is, of course, profit. However, the fact remains that there’s some amount of hope that this weird gendering of babies and kids who don’t have any concept of what gender is could maybe not be so widespread in some future.

I think this concept also illustrates the difficulties in distinguishing the influences of nature and nurture, because the nurture that two babies will get is going to be different based on their nature, at least in some senses. While these are some extreme examples, I think they show the distinction that is made in the way kids are treated from the moment they enter social media and how it’s not the same and is often very strange.

Is the American standard couple “normal”?

When asked to think of what a “normal” American standard couple consist of, the typical response is a husband and a wife, or a male and a female relationship. But have you ever stopped to think why we believe this is normal and a natural response? If you think about it, there’s nothing normal or natural about it. We construct what is normal by our own culture and standards that we set for ourselves. Media today has a major impact on how we construct this reality of the world around us and in doing so normalizes us to what our standards should be.

One thing that is typically prevalent in the majority of TV shows are some type of depiction of heterosexuality as the type of relationship a person should have. The main characters or couples of the show are a man and a woman in the relationship. Whenever there is a homosexual couple in a show, they tend to be shown as a problem that needs to be solved. This relationship is typically called out to be abnormal, because it does not blend in with the rest of the show content and have comments or actions directed towards this type of relationship that calls it into question.

Main characters of movies constructing our relationships as we know it in society

The reading of Silence reinforces this idea where the main characters who were involved with each other were always of the opposite sex such as the couples: Cador and Eufemie, Kind Evan and Queen Eufeme. However, the scene where the Queen attempted to seduce Silence and he rejected these advances, she called on the fact that he must be a queer to not want her. Due to this rejection, she attempted to have him punished and killed. This kind of comment of Silence being a queer brings attention that this kind of behavior is not natural or acceptable and that when one exhibits such characteristics, something must be done to fix it. This thirteenth century novel and the present media today still have similar cultural responses to the couples.

Even in the reading of Middlesex, although they are not the typical contemporary American relationships with the incest, all the main couples are heterosexual. For the one character, Sourmelina "Lina" Zizmo, who is presented to have secret lesbian activities, this “problem” is solved by sending her to America by marrying her off to a man, in order to curb these unwanted desires. Even here the non-heterosexual lifestyle is not accepted as normal, so it is considered evil, as it is depicted in many shows.

The normalized 'ideal" relationship: heterosexuality

Obviously, homosexuality is not something that has just presented itself in society recently, this has been a type of relationship since the beginning. But still, this is not something that is considered conventional or normal for the majority of people. Do people accept it? I believe so. But this does not mean these people consider it normal. It is not yet an integrated part of our reality as a whole. Granted, these standards are slowly changing by more and more roles with the different gender and sexual roles of the characters to follow today’s changing culture. However, will the family power couple “norm” ever change from all the years we have been taught about heterosexuality as the ideal standard? Perhaps, but only time will tell.

Are We Unicorns or Minotaurs?

Like any proper girl, I loved unicorns (like that gender stereotype? Yeah, me neither). I had a giant stuffed unicorn and dreamed of unicorns until my nightmares would transform my pink water into a red river as a Jaws-like great white shark would come through and rip the head off of my innocent unicorn. In retrospect, I think it was foreshadowing my struggle with gender-identity.

When introduced to the Gender Unicorn by Landyn Pan and Anna Moore, I was fascinated and, naturally, shared it with every person I knew -aka I shared it on Facebook. It spoke to a lot of my friends and we all loved the ability to relate to the graphic. I shared it with one friend who related it to the genderbread man and when I told her that the Gender Unicorn was more appropriate and correct, she became short-tempered with me and questioned, “But does it matter if the information is still getting out? It’s not about credit, it’s about learning.”

Her words struck me because they were reminiscent of how I felt only a year ago. Credit shouldn’t matter as long as everyone is learning, except that it does matter and we should care about it. It’s good that people are learning, but that is the argument that is generated from a patriarchal white society. There is a long history of people taking credit and claiming to understand concepts that they didn’t really understand. Akin to women being diagnosed with hysteria simply because they were women, but we don’t question it because the male doctor clearly knows best. There just seems to be an issue with this line of thinking?

It’s similar to arguing that gender is a performative concept. When scholars try to dissect and analyze gender to the point that it loses it’s human aspect, suddenly it becomes a lot easier to criticize the people whose reality is determined by their gender identity. A year ago, I would have sided with Judith Butler when she claimed that gender is performative, but now I see the world differently. When we make such claims, we deny the struggle of thousands of peers in the trans community. They struggle internally with their gender identity and they feel attached to that identity. Who are we to determine if that struggle is real in the sense that it comes from them and is not solely a byproduct of our society?

Furthermore, I found it interesting that Cal, an intersex man, saw himself as a minotaur child in the book, Middlesex. From class, I remember we discussed that disfigured babies of monstrous form were often the result of interracial or incest-breeding, in literature at least. In Cal’s case, his intersex body is a result of incest, so his ability to relate to the minotaur makes sense, but does that not speak to some deeper truth? What makes us feel so relatable to monsters and why do we relate such human interactions to having monstrous outcomes when in reality they are very human outcomes?

Monsters in literature in regards to sex and gender are negative, but in contemporary culture, I feel as though this is changing. Whether it be to unicorns or minotaurs, I’m not sure I can say.

Racism in Fantasy

Though one may not really believe it, video games deal with sexual right and wrongs as well as people who decides where the line is, even though others may disagree with the results. Dragon Age Inquisition has been one of such games. Dragon Age Inquisition is a fantasy rpg (Role Playing Game). In Dragon Age Inquisition you may be surprised by the amount of raunchy scenes that are in the game and how quick they are to point fun at sex or sexual preference. If you have played this game then you may be aware of a female dwarf scout named: Lace Harding (Scout Harding). 

Why is it worth mentioning her? Well, in Dragon Age games, a part of the game is about being able to romance characters and unlock different endings with them by picking what dialog to go with. So, in Dragon Age Inquisition, you may flirt with Scout Harding a few times, but you cannot actually romance her. Now, you may think that they may not have had time to program an ending with her or something in that light. However, what if I told you that it was on purpose? Before I get to that, let me just say that if they had not wanted to give her an ending then they really should have not put in the flirting options in the first place. Because of putting the flirting options, popularity for the character actually soared and demand for a romance ending with her was highly desirable by a great many. Why? Well, i’ll just use this to explain, “She's a pretty female dwarf who has a pleasant personality but also proves herself to be a capable archer.  I think the fact that she's only the second female dwarf of significance (third, if you count Branka, I guess) makes her notable.  Add to it the fact that you can flirt with her and there are a ton of people clamoring for dwarf romances, and that's the reason why people are obsessed with her.” People have even asked for them to make a DLC (Downloadable content) to fix this, and give them the ending that they want. To this the Designers said no. I say Designers, even thought it was mostly one of the main three designers: David Gaider. David Gaider posted this:

By actively demonstrating a racial prejudice—even if the prejudice is based in a videogame—the designers, especially David Gaider, are indicating that to them, dwarves don’t matter. By picking one race that you cannot have pursue romantically when all other races have this option available, Dragon Age Inquisition not only shows how it fails to meet standards of equality on a basic design level, but it insinuates that treating those of a different race is okay. It acts as a gateway towards further normalizing exclusion and racism, and that’s a major issue. 

End of Thing: https://forum.bioware.com/topic/532342-scout-harding-digs-the-inquisitor-the-dwarf-romance-that-never-was/

MiddleShreks

A few nights ago I was watching a movie with a group of friends. The film we chose was Shrek: The Musical for a multitude of reasons, one being that none of us had seen it. We had seen many Shrek films but had not seen it in a musical format.

Shrek takes place in Duloc where Lord Farquaad wishes to become king. To do this he must marry a princess and sends for Princess Fiona. Fiona has been locked in a tower since her childhood. Shrek, an ogre, is sent to retrieve her. Shrek and Fiona fall in love in the few days’ travel back to Duloc.

As we finished the film I realized that Shrek was the closest thing to a prince Fiona had ever met. Sure, she had read fairy tale books, but outside of that she knew nothing about men. Shrek also has not had much exposure to love and women, or even friendship for that matter.

After taking this into consideration it is not a surprise as to why Fiona and Shrek grow close over the period of a few days. (They are literally bonding over burps and farts.) Shrek is not the model prince, but Fiona is not the model princess either. In my mind they bonded over their imperfections.

         This then made me think of Desdemona and Lefty in Middlesex. Growing up in the same room for over 20 years (with the only separation being a curtain, mind you), they were the first impression they had of the opposite sex. Lefty even mentions how he had looked at her outline once he realized their sexual differences. Desdemona undoubtedly did the same.

         Now, the two tried to like other people. Or rather, Lefty tried to love other women; however, he only liked women who reminded him of his sister. Desdemona also tried to pair her brother with girls from the village. If he chose one, maybe then she could move on and find someone else she could love.

         Desdemona and Lefty’s relationship also reminds me of Sigmund Freud’s theory. This is the theory where all men want to kill their fathers and marry their mothers and vice versa where all women want to kill their mothers and marry their fathers. Desdemona is not Lefty’s mother, but she does take on the motherly role after their parents die. Desdemona and Lefty quickly realize what they really want is each other. 

In both cases the couples fall in love with what they know, pointing to Freud’s point.

Let's Play Dress-Up

In this course we read Silence, a tale of a child born female, at least according to its genitals, but who was raised as a male so that the child could inherit land. This book does not delve much into the interiority of how Silence identifies personally, but we do know that Nature and Nurture argue about whether or not it was a good idea for him to ever live his life as a female as his genitals dictate he should be living. Honestly, I don’t think Silence even knew which was better for him. In the end he ends up living as a female, even getting married, but unfortunately, as readers we have very little insight into how Silence felt about that.

                So what happens when the opposite happens? What happens when someone has been assigned male as their gender due to what’s in their pants and raised as such, but as they go through life they start to realize they identify with the opposite gender? The one society doesn’t think they belong as? Well in the C/I course I am a CL for, we read a play that explores this concept. The play is titled La Llamada de Lauren… or translated, Lauren’s Call, by Paloma Pedrero.

Carnvial - Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

                The play takes place on the wedding anniversary of the two characters, Pedro and Rosa. It also happens to be Carnival. Carnival is a celebration that marks the beginning of Lent. During Carnival it is not at all unusual for men to cross-dress as women and the character Pedro in this play, takes advantage of that. Rosa comes home to Pedro completely dressed as a woman, saying that they should fully participate in this year’s Carnival as he has even purchased a costume for her. He wants them to be Lauren Bacall and Humphrey Bogart, actors who were co-stars in movies, but fell in love in real life. Pedro insists they fully commit to their roles, acting their respective parts and even going as far as to bind down Rosa’s breasts and gifting her a dildo. That he wants her to use.

Bogart & Bacall

                Well, Rosa becomes confused and angry, feeling that Pedro is going too far. But finally it comes out that Pedro actually feels more like himself when he can dress and act as a female. However, he feels he has to overcompensate now to act as a stereotypical man due to the reaction his father had to him dressing as a female with his sister when he was young, calling him a “damned queer”. Unlike Silence, we get a clear glimpse into the interiority of gender that Pedro experiences. We see the internal struggle Pedro experiences with feeling the need to satisfy societal expectations for a man, like getting married or being dominant. He says, “It’s as though what’s expected of me contradicts what… I am. I mean, sometimes it seems to go against… my internal desire or logic.” This is very different from Silence who never seems to explain to the audience that he identifies with either gender. It is as if Silence was raised as a male and does not know any differently, but with Pedro, he was raised as a male and he does know differently, he knows that acting as a male does not feel natural to him. So who's out-performing who - Silence or Pedro?

                And what does this say about our society? The fact that Silence was written in medieval times and Lauren’s Call is set in a different culture from our own but are still relatable in 21^st century American culture, to me, goes to prove that this is a persisting problem, of imposing expectations attached to an assigned gender and not understanding when someone does not fit nicely into the tidy boxes we create. So my question is – how do we address this? How do we create a society that is more open to people who do not conform to our expectations? Will we ever be able to be supportive as a society of people like this, or at the very least, neutral? 

Body standards

Society and culture shapes body in a variety of ways, ranging from current hairstyles and fashion trends to the impossible ideal body size and shape. This can be clearly seen in both of the readings thus far, though through different lenses.

In silence, the main character goes through a debate where nature and nurture try to sway him one way or another. Nurture does this by going over Silence’s body, and how it doesn’t conform to the way that a woman’s body should look addressing the “arms too rough for men’s embraces” and the tanned skin  that he has. Nature rebuffs this by saying how she made Silence to be the most beautiful lady of the time, with a full bosom, pale pink skin, and a long neck (which at the time was very sexulaized for women).

Throughout this debate among Nature and Nurture, we can see how society was biasing the author as to what was ‘ideal’ for women at the time. He was using descriptions for women that told readers/listeners exactly what a women should strive to look like.

The flip-side of these expectations can be interpreted in Middlesex where Cal talks specifically about the way his body looks “under the armor of..double-breasted suits is another of gym-built muscle”. Though this isn’t much, it implies a body standard that Cal is trying to meet so that he has another kind of armor to protect his secret. He even addresses that his presentation is a kind of hypermasculinity.

Both of these show that society has placed certain standards of masculinity and femininity on people throughout time; from thirteenth century France to 20 century Germany, it’s hard to get away from.

This is important because these standards hurt everyone they are applied to. In Silence, the main character was considered too masculine (based on a tan, some calluses, and short hair) to ever be considered a female even if he wanted to be. Then at the end of the Romance, Silence was magically feminized by reversing the aforementioned characteristics, thus making her conform to the ideal beauty standards of the time, so that she could go and marry King Evan. In Middlesex, the standards that men have to conform to hurt him when they fail. When Calliope surfaces, Cal feels like he’s being “possessed” by her feminine nature because he is trapped in a traditionally male role where her feminine actions are unacceptable.

Sister, I'll make a man out of you

In Sarah Roche-Mahdi's translation of Silence, we witness the heated arguments between Nature and Nurture over how Silence should conduct herself, as either a man or a woman.  While it is clear Nurture has developed Silence into becoming a very rough, strong "man", Silence still struggles with her identity throughout the story and by the end, is forcibly reverted into becoming female and thus giving the victory to Nature.  Throughout the story, I noticed some strong parallels (and divergencies) with Silence to everyone's favorite Savior of China, Fa Mulan.  Like Silence, Mulan is forced to hide her true gender and disguise herself as a man and undergo training that is thought to be too rough for women and reserved only for men.  While Silence's main reason for hiding her sex is to bypass the inheritance laws against women, later it becomes apparent to her that if she were to reveal herself, it would make her father be seen as a dishonorable man.  Mulan is also aware that if her identity were to be discovered, it would not only bring dishonor to her family but it would also be grounds for execution.  So both protagonists undergo training to develop masculine skills, which they manage to do with extraordinary success.

Both Silence and Mulan become outstanding warriors, surpassing the skills of the men around them.  While training, neither Silence nor Mulan's (Ping's) gender is ever questioned by their peers, despite Nature making Silence into a beautiful woman and Mulan having feminine characteristics as well (only cutting her hair and deepening her voice as to appear masculine). This tells me that during their respective time periods, it was so ridiculously out of the question that women have the capability of developing strong, physical skills that them being anything but a man would be ludicrous.  Both protagonists are shaped by Nurture into developing the skills necessary in order to be perceived as masculine. However, unlike Silence, Mulan never has an identity crisis pertaining to her gender. Mulan wholeheartedly identifies as a woman, unlike Silence who (due to being raised since birth as a boy) is conflicted with her identity. Mulan's inner conflict is that she is not performing her gender role correctly and thus being shamed by society for it.  She screws up every lesson in training to become a "proper wife", yet finds peace in developing her strength in fighting.  Similarily, Silence discovers that since she was brought up learning only masculine skills, that she would be shamed by society if she came out as a woman without knowing any skills of the role.  Yet Silence decides to learn to play the viele and becomes a minstrel, giving Silence a safety net to fall back on, unlike Mulan who drops the idea of becoming a "proper woman" entirely.












At the closing of both stories, both Mulan and Silence are wed to men as their genders are revealed.  Mulan, who is comfortable with her gender, happily weds General Shang while maintaining her "masculine" skills of a warrior. Silence, on the other hand, is practically forced into a marriage with the King and all the work of Nurture becomes unravelled as Nature makes Silence's physical traits feminine again.  For Mulan, Nurture seems to come out ahead of Nature, while Nature wins over Silence.  We cannot with certainty say which future came out for the better despite the similar outcomes, but we do know that both protagonists were able to outperform their male counterparts suggesting there is much more to defending an entire country than what's in your pants.