Caster Semenya – man or woman? Poor woman, because – however the medical evidence may decide to categorise her – that’s clearly what she feels herself to be.
The world likes symmetry. Neat, binary divisions: yes/no, black/white, zero/one. I like symmetry too – the first band I ever loved was ABBA, for God’s sake. It’s satisfyingly neat and tidy, deceptively simple. But the process of becoming an adult taught me that it’s not the entire truth. It’s merely a starting point from which further questions emerge.
A wholly bipolar existence is a fantasy. As a teenager I discovered the philosophical concept of Hegelian dichtotomy and it instantly explained the world in a way that nothing had done previously. You have a thing, an idea (thesis) and then you have its opposite (antithesis). But they’re inextricably connected, two sides of the same coin.
The coin has a name: synthesis. A bigger idea that unites two apparently irreconcilable differences into a convincing whole. A concrete example: left-wing vs right-wing. Together, they form part of a political system. Zoom out: political system vs anarchy. Two different modes of societal operation. Synthesis.
I’ve never liked the line that divides two extremes. It’s always felt rather artificial to me. It’s not a line; it’s a continuum, a sliding scale. Shades of grey, if you like, though grey has negative associations with dullness, boredom, depression. A rainbow of colours, maybe. Building blocks: RGB, or CMYK. Just a starting point for infinite variety.
Go out onto the streets, observe your fellow wo/man. Speculate. Make judgements. Put people into boxes. Really, you have no idea what nestles between their legs, what squats in their heads. Man/woman. Mad/sane. Saint/sinner. Lover/destroyer. None of the above, or all of the above? Pigeonholes are for the birds. We’re much more.
Identity is such a rich and fascinating phenomenon. Who’s to say that your “real” name and date of birth define who you truly are? Facebook’s mono-faceted view echoes the dilemma faced by the IAAF, which suddenly finds that the principles on which it has organised its field of operation might not actually work in the real world.
We all do this. When our world-view comes up against something that doesn’t fit our mental concept of how life should be structured, it’s uncomfortable. But it’s also incredibly healthy and that short-term discomfort is, in the long-run, one of the things that makes life vibrant, rather than merely a parade of familiar experiences.
As far as I’m concerned, the truth of Caster Semenya’s gender is whatever she chooses it to be. The “problem” unfairly foisted upon her is the real lie.
A quick note-to-self to park Alex’s excellent phrase from last night, before it slips through the sieve-like holes in my brain: the value of diversity.
The holes are getting bigger! It was the value of uncertainty. The possibilities inherent in flux.
Funny, even as I typed “diversity” it didn’t seem quite right… still a good phrase, but not quite as radical as I remembered.
A little bit too much like an extract from an equal opportunities statement, maybe; without the punch I remembered it having from Saturday night.
Yeah – the value of uncertainty. Something that society traditionally perceives as a weakness actually being a strength. Excellent, thanks for the correction.
Reminds me of one by my friend David W. Morris ‘The value of difference and diversity is as infinite as is the cost of its destruction.’
Re the gender question, I always feel a twinge of frustration when I come to the M/F boxes on those civic forms – what about the in-betweeners ?? I have always felt there should be an ‘Other’ box. To me, as well as being unimportant, gender can be as fluid as anything else we choose to label ourselves with.
There are two kinds of people in this world, the ones who say things like “there are two kinds of people in this world” and everyone else.