By Marla Louise

It's amazing how language can form reality in societies mind. For example, if one looks in a dictionary under female and woman, two words that those in the gender community treat as uniquely different, we will find almost the same identical definition. And it is from this ambiguity in the language that the image that female begets woman and male begets man emerges. I'd like to examine some definitions here. When we speak of gender, I see three distinctly different things. Just as distinctly different as how we view the division of physical sex and gender.

The first can be best defined as a self identity. How each of us views our own 'self'. Do we view ourselves as a man? do we view ourselves as a woman? both? neither? The second can be best defined as personality. Does the summation of our personal character match what society describes to men or women? This can be a very vague description for one person yet a very distinct description for another.

The third is social class. If you observe our society, we have two very distinct social classes. That being man and woman. They are much more distinct than any other social class we have in our society. Society generally assigns a member to one or the other classes based on physical body. But then 150 years ago, society assigned individuals to two different social classes (slave and free) based on physical body as well. So this arbitrary assignment to social class based on biology does not have to exist. And I therefore refute the arbitrary social assignment.

One of the problems though with the above three definitions is that we use the same words, gender, masculine and feminine, man and woman to refer to all three distinctly different aspects of gender/sexuality. This leads us into the same traps that society at large has created by using the same words to refer to physical sex and gender. But they are not the same thing, so we must be aware of what aspect of gender we are talking about when we speak of gender.

Some thoughts on 'passing' with respect to the above view. Passing can be defined as a) being perceived as female by society or b) being perceived as woman by society. These are two distinctly separate possibilities. But this gets confused since society at large (and even those in the gender community) assume female and woman are the same thing.

I reject the first definition since that implies fraud. I am not female. I will never be female. Therefore I do not actively lie about my physical sex. However, I am a woman (as well as a man). This is very true when we apply it to self identity. It is partly true when we apply it to personality traits. And I have found it is true with respect to society IF I project that internal womanhood, presenting myself within the social rules describing the social class woman.