Course:ANTH213/2024/topic/Normativity 2

Normativity

Social deviance

Normativity refers to the societal expectations, stereotypes, and norms that determine how individuals should behave and present in a way that upholds and reinforces a standard. These binaries are often reinforced through traditional notions created and upheld within a particular society or context. Norms strengthen traditions, binaries, and restrictive notions of what is acceptable through the eyes of society. Concerning sex and gender, normativity delves into the intricate interplay between biological attributes, cultural constructs, and social practices, illuminating how these elements converge to regulate and define human experiences. Through normativity, societies establish hierarchies by privileging certain identities and marginalizing others. In Western society, norms are present within many aspects of society including medicine, individuality, marriage, relationship practices, and gender performativity. The intersectional lens that we can analyze normativity through allows us to see the perpetuation of western cultural superiority. As we explore the complications of Normativity and its pervasive impact, we make room for social and structural deconstruction of oppressive forces facilitating an environment where collective prosperity is made possible.

Normativity in Gender

Gender normativity refers to a set of expectations and standards dictating how individuals should identify based on their perceived gender, and encompasses a wide range of practices that reinforce behaviours within a binary, usually masculine or feminine. Normativity assumes that biological males identify with a masculine identity, and all biological females identify with a feminine identity, a notion that is tightly bound to the way society operates, the way we interact with one another, and the way we perceive and expect others to act. Gender normativity relies on a unanimous yet ambiguous understanding of gender, similar to the way morality evokes a common understanding of what is “good” and “bad”. Normativity is heavily reliant on gender expression, which is the external manifestation of gender through appearances, behaviours, and outward presentations used to communicate a particular identity, often within the male or female binary. Gender normativity can be both broad and explicit, heavily reliant on observations and performative actions as opposed to innate distinctions. The performative functions of gender are not inherent or unanimous to one specific set of cultures and can vary based on several factors, such as the colonial influence of imposed superiority. Many societies are built upon conforming to gender expectations deemed valuable and socially acceptable, dictating the way individuals operate in a given society according to heteronormativity and cisnormativity, two concepts that align with traditional binary notions where individuals are expected to perform respective male and female roles and appearances.

Gender Performativity

The notion that gender is built upon routines, conditions, and traditions within a societal network is known as Gender Performativity, which defines gender as constructed rather than inherited at birth, a concept originally introduced by feminist philosopher Judith Butler. Gender performativity argues that biological sex does not determine behaviour, rather these behaviours are learned following societal norms and expectations. Individuals ‘do’ gender through actions and behaviours, and these performances of gender are not natural or predetermined but rather learned and reinforced through normativity. Performing gender allows individuals to break away from hegemonic masculinity and emphasized femininity by experiencing gender in a way that validates their identity, such is the case with transgender and gender non-conforming individuals. The performative function of gender widens the spectrum of identities that can exist outside the realm of normativity, choosing to align with hegemonic norms of gender or exist outside of them. Though gender performativity is inherently expressed through physical means, gender is also materialized through spaces such as the workplace, and professional settings rely heavily on functional gender performativity and power dynamics between masculinity and femininity, especially as it relates to women in corporate settings.

Gender Coding

Gender expression is a principal catalyst in the formation of identity. From birth, individuals are assigned a gender that correlates to their biological sex, and are catered to based on this distinction. Through repeated practices and traditions, gender norms are constructed and become the default way human identities are differentiated, especially in young children and babies before they develop the means to express gender autonomously. A common example of gender coding can be observed in baby clothing, which is gendered by pink and blue corresponding to their associations with femininity and masculinity respectively. The colour-coding of gender is a socially produced structure that has cemented the way we perceive normativity from a young age, and persists throughout childhood by stereotyping children's interests based on associations of gender. Similarly, certain clothing styles, hobbies, occupations, and emotional expressions may be coded as either masculine or feminine based on societal norms and expectations. These associations correlate to hegemonic masculinity and emphasized femininity, which both refer to the culturally dominant forms of gender expression that are highly valued or idealized in a particular society, upholding notions that men are strong, dominant, and aggressive while women are dainty, nurturing, and submissive. These ideas of gender are learned through repeated emphasis and practice, and play a significant role in shaping individuals' understanding of gender.

Gendering Language and Biology

Normativity impacts the way individuals are expected to act and speak according to expectations related to their gender. Pronouns are a widely understood and valued form of validating one's gender, and have a very important place in gender-inclusive discourse . In a heteronormative and cisnormative context, pronouns are assumed based on biological sex rather than gender, but gender performativity plays a huge role in how individuals are perceived by others. Though gender is not biological, it still affects how individuals perceive themselves in accordance with their gender identity. Self-report measures of empathy and emotional intelligence have frequently revealed significant gender differences, with females typically scoring higher than males, showing that men are expected to be less emotionally driven while the opposite is true for women. Gender performances can be linked to assumptions we hold about how others should behave based on their external appearance and biological characteristics. Additionally, men are expected to have more reserved and serious personalities whereas women are often told to “smile more” or expected to be bubbly and engaging. Gender normativity perpetuates a fixed idea that masculinity and femininity are mutually exclusive categories, leading to the marginalization, stigmatization, and exclusion of those who do not conform.

Gender identity is created and formed through positioning the constructivist, performative roots of gender as paths to freedom of expression. Gender normativity can be used to dominate gender through male and female binaries and assert control to undermine a particular group or identity, but it also has the power to rewrite these rules of gender to be malleable and inclusive. As the normative structure of gender continues to evolve and change to include identities outside the male and female binary and acknowledge the performative nature of gender expression.

Normativity in Medicine

Understanding the interplay between culture and medicine requires a lens that allows us to explore how social norms, cultural beliefs and structural factors shape healthcare practices and experiences. The lens that emerges is normativity. Within our medical systems normativity holds great significance as it influences various aspects of healthcare including gender norms, mental health stigmas, and equal access to healthcare systems. By analyzing these themes, we will gain an understanding of norms in medicine and how these play into larger fields of anthropology, specifically regarding sex, gender, and culture.

Gender Norms in Healthcare

One of the most profound examples of normativity in healthcare comes from gender norms which are cultural expectations regarding the behaviors, roles, and attributes associated with gender. In our society there are many specific beliefs about who should be managing healthcare and treatment affecting the ways people behave in these settings. For example, in patriarchal societies men can be expected to prioritize their work and brush off the need for medical attention, often leading to health conditions and delayed diagnosis. On the other hand, women are pressured into prioritizing everyone else’s health needs over their own. These expectations shape individuals' roles and responsibilities regarding their health. This influences not only those seeking medical care but also those with decision making authority, contributing to disparities in health care access and utilization based on gender and social norms. Research highlights the interaction between gender norms and normativity shedding light on how these social constructs affect individuals’ behaviors when dealing with their health. Traditional gender roles still play a role today in pertaining to males and females perceptions of illness as well as their ability to manage pain. The interplay of normativity with other aspects of identity, including race, ethnicity and economic status, and gender exhibits additional health inequalities and disparities in access to equal treatment and care.

Stigma Surrounding Mental Health

Another space we see normativity in healthcare is surrounding mental health care. These norms vary across different cultures and can extend stigmas and discrimination against individuals seeking treatment for mental health diagnosis. Attitudes towards seeking treatment and the availability of this care is shaped by society's cultural beliefs and values. The stigmatization against this can force individuals looking for support to stop and contribute to issues of marginalization and social isolation. An example that is highly researched are cultural beliefs that surround the cause of these mental health disorders. The different reasonings behind these impact the individual’s decision when it comes to seeking help treatment and we see this most often in youth. Additionally, the examination of how norms shape society’s responses to mental health intervention emphasizes the need for more finely tuned approaches to combating stigmas as well as fostering mental well-being. This makes clear the intense implications for the discussion of mental health discussions and mental health practices.

Norms of Body Image and Beauty

When examining normativity in terms of healthcare, it is important for us to reflect on how societal constructs of body image and beauty interact with medical policies and practices. Society has created standards of what femininity and masculinity should look like. An example of this has to do with femininity and athleticism as society tries to regulate hyperandrogenism among these athletes, resulting in marginalization, stigmatization and discriminatory practices against those who do not fit traditional gender norms. Exploration of body image and beauty marks.

es clear that the interplay between normativity and healthcare is abstruse. Medical regulation on female athletes reflects society's strict expectations regarding one's performance and physical appearance. Other aspects of identity and society including race, gender and ethnicity, and media perpetuate the inequalities faced in our healthcare systems. Another case where this is often recognized is in terms of intersex infants. Kessler’s research on the medical constructions of gender dives into the use of medical practices to reinforce binary gender norms through surgical intervention, which is used to align infants with one gender or the other. This again, plays into society's expectations and norms surrounding one's physical appearance. These expectations also have a great effect on the individual as their sense of identity and self worth is impacted by society. Healthcare practices must take on more inclusive and culturally sensitive approaches to respect the wide range of experiences and individuals identities beyond just their physical appearance. Beyond that we must strive to challenge normativity in healthcare and push for equitable medical decision making for all individuals no matter the difference.  

Religious Beliefs and Medical Decision-Making

While we work through the complexities of healthcare decision-making we need to recognize normativity, especially in terms of religious norms as they play a crucial role in this process. Encompassing societal norms, values and beliefs of individuals normativity shapes individuals and actions within healthcare systems. Individuals' preferences on medical procedures are shaped by their religious beliefs and often affect areas including reproductive care, organ donation and end-of-life care. Forms of contraception and blood transfusions are seen as unnecessary interventions to many cultures as religious teachings dictate certain attitudes towards procedures based on the rules of their faith. In the long run, this can affect the individual's access to indispensable healthcare providers. Research on normativity and the interplay between religious beliefs and medical decisions allows us to gain insights on how these religious beliefs change and shape perceptions of health and illness. Religious institutions themselves also play a role in providing support and helping individuals gain access to healthcare, specifically for marginalized groups and individuals. Once understanding this we are able to comprehend the extensive implications of cases like Dobbs is a Disaster for Disability Justice. By recognizing the effects of religious beliefs on medical care, we can work towards inclusive and equitable healthcare for everyone, regardless of religious affiliations or disability status.

Normativity in terms of medicine, shapes our healthcare practices and experiences by attempting to regulate cultural beliefs, structural factors, and social norms. Gender norms, stigma around mental health and religious beliefs show the elaborate connection between culture and medicine and the ways in which they intersect. It is important that we investigate healthcare practices within their larger frameworks as many different aspects of the individual and society play into this. We must strive for culturally sensitive and informed approaches to all aspects of healthcare.

Normativity in Individualism

Normativity can create strong social and structural compliance, while this may not necessarily only promote negative consequences; reinforcement of certain norms can heavily restrict our capacity for change. Individualism and the prioritization of self interests have been promoted by western cultures over collective issues. The origins of this ideology and the resulting norms could be traced back to philosophers like John Locke who promoted the idea of individual enlightenment as a means for prosperity. Since influential figures have promoted ideas of individualism and meritocracy the adoption of this as a societal norm has created a culture that places all responsibility of failure on the individual. This facilitates dangerous ways of thinking that reduces empathy for others, makes us fail to see structural inequalities and limits the capacity for social change in times of crisis.

Historical Context and Analysis

As we look at individualism today it can be difficult to see how our various norms of social isolation have actually come to be, but like most ideals the influence of western philosophers is deeply ingrained in how we practice this today. Some of the earliest thinkers we can see promoting individualism come from the enlightenment period where a focus on attaining a better life for oneself was prioritized. An influential figure in this discipline is John Locke who argued for rights concerned with the individual and promoted a philosophy of “possessive individualism”. This ideology centered around rights like labour and property being an inherent right for all citizens earned from laboring the land. Of course those who could be counted as citizens or property owners were very limited. In Locke’s conception these rights did not apply to Indigenous people of America, slaves taken from Africa or women (Cammarota 4-5). Because of the influence of this philosophy it is not surprising that norms around individualism have been used to subjugate certain groups or races. By limiting ourselves we engage in what is called ‘the walk toward the magnificent future’ instead of a sprint; in both instances we know that change can be made but instead we are taught that gradual or slow change is best (Paragi and Henson 156). Foucault saw the influence of this in many classical era institutions like prisons, hospitals and schools. He saw the division of whole social groups into individuals as an intentional and malicious form of control in which ‘enlightenment’ had many social and structural restrictions (Cammarota 2). Thus the idea of meritocracy is put in the forefront of increasing individualism and ‘enlightenment’. Meritocracy places the individual as the sole influence to success or failure and promotes harmful ideas that ignore structural causes of inequality.

Gendered Aspects of Individualism

With the history of how we have come to see these norms in mind, looking at how individualism harms marginalized genders is an important step before we analyze the whole. When we see ourselves in our current society we often see our status or position as inherent to the decisions we have made for ourselves. One instance of this can be seen in the structures we see as natural or normative like Marriage. In the talk “Love in the Promiscuous Style” the author Tallbear talks about her own experience dealing with individualism as a limitation to finding what truly makes her happy. In this talk the idea of traditional structures that have historically restricted women like marriage and monogamy are put up for debate. As she explains, the practice of monogamy and marriage has become so normalized and thought of as natural that desiring a different kind of love is often not even considered (Tallbear). As with other marginalized groups women face issues of individualism in which the blame for systemic injustices are turned into problems of individuals. A man may act in violent ways and be seen as a violent individual instead of a product of society that allows him to be this way. Similarly women are taught that when violence happens to them to consider what personal failings would lead to this. Consequently women often remove themselves from feminist thought or movements because they are taught to blame women as individuals, “these women are reluctant to associate with a group that would be seen as victims, since victimhood would undermine their carefully constructed sense of agency that is vital to their identity narratives”(Anderson 4). In this way western ideals and social pressures around conformity have made us see a fault in ourselves as individuals when we face problems within structures of oppression instead of the faults in the structures themselves.

Individualism's Impact on Social Movements

Act Up protest for AIDs/HIV victims

The idea of individualism in times of collective crisis can be especially harmful, when viewing contemporary issues like homelessness or illness like the HIV/AIDS crisis. The norms around meritocracy are especially prevalent in how society views those who are unhoused, “in plain sight” tells the story of women on the downtown eastside of Vancouver who face stigma and significant barriers to basic necessities. From the very beginning of this book we see the effects of individualism as a participant in the study narrated her experiences with being completely ignored by society (Robertson 8). When we see those who are unhoused we automatically assume that they have ended up in this place because of their individual problems because this is how we have been taught to view ourselves. Since individualism has become normalized people often also fail to see how certain issues connect to themselves, as with the example of the HIV/AIDs crisis, a lot of people failed to join movements connected to accessible medical care until they realized it would also help themselves. Individualism in the criminalization of the spread of HIV/AIDs was successful in that it was able to place blame on individuals who spread this illness as opposed to the government who failed to provide accessible and affordable healthcare to those with AIDs (Hoppe 140). The norms around individual responsibility may influence public perceptions of HIV/AIDS or being unhoused, shifting focus away from structural factors such as poverty, discrimination, and inadequate healthcare systems that contribute to these crises. Addressing issues like these effectively requires a holistic approach that recognizes the importance of community engagement, collective action, and social justice.

Individualism not only promotes the idea that the issues we face are a direct result of our own failures, it also works in reducing those around us to stereotypes to explain their ‘failures’. Focusing on a collective lens as many Indigenous practices have could help to reduce some of the negative consequences we see emerging from individualism. The idea of the ‘relational self’ as a piece of a puzzle or whole promotes the idea of care for the individual and also the collective (Cammarota 13). Moving away from the normativity of individualism could be very beneficial in changing systemic issues, accepting our own ‘failures’ and reforming the systems that teach us this.

Normativity in Heterosexual Marriage

Legal Frameworks and Policies

Historically, many western countries had laws that prohibited non-heterosexual marriages. These laws were changed over the past few decades as the society’s attitude toward LGBTQ+ rights evolved. Nonetheless, they had made a great impact on the society’s perceptions of heterosexual marriage as the norm.

In the United States, Defence of Marriage Act (DOMA) was enacted through 1996 to 2013. This federal law defined marriage as “the union between one man and one woman”, allowing individual states to refuse recognition of same-sex marriages that were performed and recognized in other states. Due to DOMA's denial of federal benefits to same-sex couples, this law faced criticism and challenges which lead to the 2013 Supreme Court case — United States v. Windsor, where the Court finally ruled Section 3 of DOMA unconstitutional as it was seen to “impose a disadvantage, a separate status, and so a stigma upon all who enter into same-sex marriages”, and its principal purpose imposes inequality, as “responsibilities, as well as rights, enhance the dignity and integrity of the person. And DOMA contravenes this basic precept of the Fifth Amendment’s guarantee of equal protection.”

A survey on the opinion on legalization of same-sex marriages in the United States from 1996 to 2013 reflects a steady increase in public’s positive response to the agreement of same-sex marriages. In 1996, only 27% of respondents agreed that same-sex marriages should be recognized by law as valid with the same rights as traditional marriages. Whereas in 2023, 71% state that same-sex marriages should be recognized as valid.

A 54% increase over 27 years shows the significant erosion of the normativity of heterosexual marriage. While the trike down of Section 3 of DOMA in 2013 was a pivotal moment for LGBTQ+ rights, the stigmatization created by DOMA and similar laws, such as Proposition 8 in the United States in 2008 that explicitly banned same-sex marriage in California, creates ingrained prejudices that do not simply disappear with legal changes. These laws perpetuated discrimination against non-heterosexual marriages, which can linger in the form of social prejudice that still propose challenges to same-sex couples today.

Religions

The historical foundations of heterosexual marriage normativity within major Western religions, such as Christian, reveal the Western culture’s deeply rooted prejudice against non-heterosexual marriage and its endorsement of heterosexual marriage.

In Genesis 1:27-28 of the Bible, God creates human of two genders, “male and female He created them.” God blesses them and commands them to be “fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it.” This passage implies God’s design and blessing for heterosexual unions, as well as for procreation. In passage 2:18-24, God says, “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him.” So God creates Eve from Adam’s rib as his companion. This passage concludes with, “Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.” Putting emphasis on the companionship between men and women, and the union of husband and wife as central to God’s design for marriage.

Additionally, the Bible encourages believers to live according to the teachings of the Scripture. For example, in Joshua 1:8, it is written, “Keep this Book of the Law always on your lips; meditate on it day and night, so that you may be careful to do everything written in it. Then you will be prosperous and successful.” This quote emphasizes the importance of adhering to the teachings of the Scriptures for it is the guidance to prosperity. Consequently, these biblical teachings serve as a guidance for many religious individuals, framing their understanding on various aspects of life, including marriage.  

In fact, research shows that religious individuals tend to hold more traditional views on marriage, and that religious upbringing plays an important role in the forming of religious beliefs among children, which can in turn influence their perspectives on traditional values, including those related to marriage. According to the 2021 census data on ethnocultural and religious diversity in Canada, over 19.3 million people, 53.3% of the Canadian population, reported a Christian religion. With over half of the population identifying with Christianity, it is evident that the religious beliefs and values in Canada have a significant influence on shaping and reinforcing societal norms, including those surrounding heterosexual marriage.

Challenging Heterosexual Marriage Normativity

As LGBTQ+ rights have gained awareness across the western countries, there have been many influential campaigns challenging the normativity of heterosexual marriage. For example, the Yes Campaign in Australia, which played a pivotal role during the 2017 Australian Marriage Law Postal Survey. Responding to the question, “Should the law be changed to allow same-sex couples to marry?” 61.6% of the eligible Australians who participated in the survey responded “Yes”, and 38.4% responded “No”. This result was a decisive moment for LGBTQ+ rights in Australia as it led to the legalization of same-sex marriage in December 2017, changing the previous definition of marriage from being between a man and a woman to a union of two people. This movement was not only about the legal right for same-sex marriages, but was also about fighting against the normativity of heterosexual marriage that the history had reinforced.

After the legalization of same-sex marriage in Australia in December 2017, there was a significant number of same-sex marriages. According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, in 2018, 6538 same-sex marriages were registered in Australia. 6538 same-sex couples were finally given a voice in society and were viewed as equals to heterosexual couples. This increase in same-sex marriages in Australia is not only an indication of the legislative change, but also a shift away in cultural values from the normativity of heterosexual marriage. By redefining marriage to include all couples, regardless of gender, Australia acts as one of many examples for other countries and pave the way for societies where marriages are valued equally and free from the constraints of traditional normativity.

Normativity in Hookup Culture

Younger generations, especially those in the west, have been heavily influenced by normativity when it comes to hookup culture. Hookups are when two people who are not in a committed romantic relationship engage in sexual activity. The strategically ambiguous definition is entirely intentional, as it helps serve the already existing gender roles and orders our society has put into place. It can fall between a broad spectrum of encounters, from kissing to oral sex to penetration . It is often glamorized in western media through TV shows, movies, and even song lyrics. However, it also promotes the double standards put on the public.

One of the most important roles of normativity found within hookup culture is the double standard placed on both men and women. Our societies' need for hegemonic masculinity and emphasized femininity in heterosexual relationships have been greatly normalized. Hegemonic masculinity is the most valued form of masculinity in western society. It's when hegemonic men, who are usually heterosexual, have power dominance over women and other non-hegemonic men, who are usually homosexual. While emphasized, femininity is when women are encouraged to conform to and adhere to hegemonic men's desires. Often keeping up an innocent, pure, good girl persona along with other typical western feminine traits such as long hair and painted nails These double standards play into hookup culture by having each gender adhere to these characterizations.

From a young age, boys are encouraged to be “players'' and have many romantic and sexual partners. The need for them to live up to these pressures results in a large portion of hookup culture. Western society normalizes these stereotypes from a very young age through the use of many phrases. Often, boy toddlers are told “they are going to be heartbreakers when they grow up” and asked if they have a girlfriend yet, while girls are told they are "cute" and "sweet" . Society constantly distinguished the difference between boys and girls . These statements often lead to boys and men feeling coerced into being sexually advanced from a young age. With the ambiguity of the term hookup, they are able to overreport their experiences and play into these societal norms. Magnifying their sexual encounters also helps them fit into male-dominated communities, as their actions are seen as impressive. Women, on the other hand, use the vagueness of the term to play down their experiences in fear of being slutshamed or called a whore, often by underrepresenting their actual number of sexual encounters. The ambiguity helps one protect their self-image and identity . The peer pressure to fit into the contradicting double standards western society has put on each other is often very drastic and normalized.

Netflix, a popular streaming service for movies and TV shows.

Society has also normalized and glamorized these hookups through various forms of media by incorporating them into story plotlines. The influence that movies, TV shows, song lyrics, and even social media platforms have on today's adolescence is extensive. They tend to depict hookups as an exciting aspect of growing up and having independent freedom . With characters engaging in casual sexual activity, Hollywood is constantly normalizing this culture within western society. From movies like “No strings attached” to TV shows like “Skins” and “Jersey Shore,” they are actively glorifying the act of casual sex .

Similarly, song lyrics also add to and enhance the normalization of hookup culture among the public. With constant renditions of these storylines ingrained into the lyrics, they glamorize the thrill of engaging in these casual, sexual hookups. Lyrics like “There's a stranger in my bed; there's a pounding in my head; glitter all over the room; is this a hickey or a bruise?” from Last Friday Night by Katy Perry signifies the casual aspects of a hookup with zero emotional attachment . Many of these popular songs get streamed on the radio as well as promoted on social media platforms, which allows the public to be immersed in the normalization of hookup culture.

Popular dating apps.

Social media platforms can help enforce societal norms of hookup culture as well. Dating apps like Hinge and Tinder allow individuals to meet new people with the intention of a sexual encounter. Many of these apps were created in hopes of helping people find romantic partners. However, with younger generations, it often ends up being an easy way to find people they are attracted to, to hook up with .

Although the normalizations of these carefree and liberating portrayals are not evil, they can have harmful consequences. Many young adults base their knowledge of sex on the hookups they observe in the media . Even the inaccurate depictions of sex from hookups end up as a form of sexual education in adolescence . The commonality of the culture can make individuals feel the need to conform to these societal expectations. Even those who abstain from sexual activity can start to question their own values, beliefs, and level of maturity. Sexually inexperienced people may feel undesired and unwanted.

The normalization of hookup culture can reinforce harmful gender stereotypes. These double standards put on both men and women, especially those who are young, can impact their self-image and mental health. With the help of popular media, the glamorization of hookup culture is normalized throughout western society's adolescence.