Core Gender Identity

firstly, I have to completely agree with Ankita's comment on Hope's post. Sedgwick's essay was easier to follow and you're less prone to getting lost in the eclectic references. However one aspect of Lee's essay I found peculiar is the Medusa analogy to the castrated boy. The snakes as a phallus, decapitation as a symbol of castration. Medusa is a female mythological creature though, and the "male Medusa" thing was just confusing for me. I felt that connection strained at best. Sedgwick's essay, which I connected with more, perhaps because of the more biological/psychoanalytical perspective (neuroscience major) has insightful explanations of what it means to be masculine of feminine.

What I recognized most was the Core Gender Identity idea, one's sense of being male or female. This is a part of "Gender Identity Disorder" with the other piece, separate from CGI, being sexual desire. This directly compares to Thomas Beatie and other transgender individuals, begging the question, how do your biological gender, CGI, and sexual desire determine whether you have a Gender Identity Disorder? Thomas Beatie was born female, identifies as male, and desires women, but of course defining a disorder, even under these guidelines, is speculative. Is matching how you identify yourself with your desires more normative (able to be considered not a disorder, which, by its very definition, is something against widely accepted concepts) than matching your born gender with sexual desire? Lieutenant Nun was born female and desired women, yet considered herself a man. This example also raises questions to the long standing debate on homosexuality, transgenderism, and cultural norms.