Invisible Genitalia: A Look Beneath the Suit and Skirt

The mainstream porn industry relies on a rigid set of constraints. In “Calling the Shots” Tristan Taormino identifies these as “men and women as one-dimensional objects—where men are sexual robots and women are vehicles for their pleasure” (261). The arrangement takes advantage of presupposed social constructions such as: men are dominant and women are submissive; men receive the gratification while women give it; and finally—men have a penis and women have a vagina. This can be referred to as the dyadic imaginary of genitalia. In the “Dyadic Imaginary” by Danielle Hidalgo et al, the dyadic imaginary is “an ideology or hegemonic concept that renders non-dyadic intimate and sexual relationship forms invisible and unnatural” (173). In the same way “non-dyadic” sexual relationships are considered “unnatural” so too are non-dyadic genitalia in that the dyadic imaginary of genitalia renders the possibility of a man having a vagina or a women having a penis invisible. Therefore, when society views both men and women clothed, they are projected with dyadic genitalia regardless of his or her true genitalia.

If a person with non-dyadic genitalia is viewed in the nude, the individual is labeled as “unnatural.” In Sherilyn Connelly’s piece “The Big Reveal” Connelly details a scene from a 1984 “straight” porn entitled L’Amour in which two straight males (Harry and Jaime) are engaging in the mainstream porn template by receiving sexual gratification from two women—Ivory and Racheal. As the scene unfolds, “Jaime and Racheal fuck as Ivory continues to blow Harry… [then] Ivory stands in front of Harry, lifts her skirt to reveal a Dirk Diggler-esque penis” (76). Up until the actual reveal of Ivory’s genitalia, the viewer of the porno as well as the male actors attach a vagina to Ivory. Even through the textual representation of the pornography, Ivory’s genitalia is projected as dyadic because she is referred to as a “she”; thus, the reader automatically applies the dyad to her genitalia establishing her non-dyadic genitalia as invisible. However, as stated above, once the non-dyadic genitalia is actually exposed, the individual is met with revulsion and treated as unnatural. Connelly reveals this reaction after Ivory shows her penis to Harry when “He and Jaime then rush out of the room, their pants literally around their ankles but their heteromasculinity intact” (76). The two men’s reaction occurs when the dyadic imaginary of genitalia is suddenly reversed. Surprisingly, as Connelly points out, Harry’s heteromasculinity stays “intact.” But how can this be true?

Upon identifying Ivory’s true genitalia, the dyadic imaginary of genitalia applies the male identity to Ivory to keep the dyad itself intact; therefore, Ivory is no longer a woman but a man because his genitalia says so. However, at the time of Harry’s oral sex with Ivory, the dyad had clearly identified Ivory as having a vagina, and thus, Harry’s heteromasculinity is safe because his sex act functioned with a woman and her dyadic imaginary of genitals. Conversely, if Harry engages in sex acts with Ivory once the dyad has assigned her with the male gender, Harry’s heterosexuality would then become homosexuality.

Pornography that operates outside of the mainstream constraints can become an effective tool for deconstructing the dyadic imaginary of genitalia; however, to accomplish this task, individuals with non-dyadic genitalia would have to display their genitalia from the very first scene. At the same time, the individual must maintain a strong genderqueer image. For example, if a women—who has a penis—displays her non-dyadic genitalia, but still advertises male physical features, the dyad will attach a male gender to the woman. However, a man who has a vagina and displays a strong representation of the male gender, while exposing his non-dyadic genitalia from the very beginning, will shatter the dyad through queered gender and queered genitalia. The combined queered image leaves no room for the dyadic imaginary of genitalia to operate within; thus, the dyad is deconstructed.

Social Identities

“When I think about how much of my life has revolved around men I can hardly imagine the great silence” (73). Katha Pollitt cannot escape the magnitude that males have on her. They obsess her time; they occupy her thoughts; they create her identity. Katha’s dilemma is not a biological construct; it is a social construct—the patriarchal society. In this case, the dominant male forces the subjugated female to identify herself only through him. His strengths are all her weaknesses, and all her strengths are merely compliments to his awesomeness. Katha’s identities are filtered through man’s socially constructed identity.

Now, Katha’s identity relies solely on another. Is this because “people are always telling women they can’t live without a man? Maybe they say this so often because something so visible untrue needs to be constantly reinforced” (79). I would argue yes. The unfortunate side effect of social constructions is their constant subtle reinforcement. Katha finds herself quite capable of self-reliance. She pays her bills; she feeds and clothes herself; she is a published author. However, her Driver’s Ed instructor, Ben, is her “boyfriend.”

His role dictates her identity. She is a woman who cannot drive; she has to rely on men. Thus, Ben must fill the dominant slot in Katha’s identity equation. He evaluates Katha, and every time she fails, he tells her what to do. She follows his commands, but still does it incorrectly. Katha’s constructed relationship with Ben is ultimately supposed to result in a payoff, a certificate, a license. Just like her marriage, Katha is being tested by a man to be deemed worthy. Her acceptance by a man leads to her social constructed identity—needing a man’s approval—to be neatly slotted in a feminine identity. (3-4)

Katha’s predicament reveals an insight into all social constructed identities. The identity is not created from the self; however, social identities are created by another’s projection of what our identity should be. Even Katha’s feminist identity, which we would assume severs her ties from the patriarchal society, is dependent on a demonized male figure. Katha can survive by herself, but her male created identity cannot.

The Masculemininity Narrative: Redefining Gender Fluidity's Voice

In Barbara Ann Cole’s “Gender, Narrative and Intersectionality” the problem is presented on how narrative can challenge gender normativity and binaries. Cole writes about the fragility of the marginalized narratives: “narratives, as well as having the potential to bring about change, can reaffirm existing conceptions and marginalizations and keep in place ‘existing structures of domination’” (570). These “structures of domination,” in this case gender normativity, can hijack genderqueer narratives and assert an identity that fits within the gender binary of masculine (male) or feminine (female). This theory is discussed in Leila Rupp et al’s “Drag Queens and Drag Kings: The Difference Gender Makes” when they write, “Some scholars view drag queens as primarily reinforcing dominant assumptions about… gender presentation and sexual desire because they appropriate gender displays associated with traditional femininity and institutionalized heterosexuality” (277). In this case, the scholars referenced are the “structure of domination” that is hijacking non-normative gender narratives and re-ordering them to fit into the normative sexual power structure of masculine and feminine. This does not remain the case through Rupp’s case study in that the narrative of the kings and queens is accurately represented through their live shows. Cole discusses this process as the “relationship between the researcher and researched is claimed to be one of the strengths of narrative in that it represents, in part, the ‘voice’ of the ‘other’ person” (Cole 570). Furthermore, the king and queens enact this process during the live shows with their audience; their performances (conducting in front of a live crowd) place them in a researchable/dissectible position for the audience, who can choose to either hijack the narrative, or they can choose to “voice” the non-normative narrative of the “other” (genderqueer). Although the existing sexual structure of power attempts to restrict non-normative gender into binaries of masculine or feminine, genderqueer narratives can redirect power and challenge binaries through gender fluidity and repurposing.

 The genderqueer performances employ a variety of tactics to create the gender fluidity narrative. In one such performance “R.V. changed out of drag on stage… transforming himself from woman to man. And… Kylie stripping entirely to ‘Queen of the Night’, leaving the audience with a contrast between her blond wig, makeup, high heels, and well-hung body” (Rupp 286). These physical narratives redefine gender binaries by displaying different stages of gender transitions; this process creates the gender fluidity that challenges the normative system. The effects of genderqueer performances were evident on the audience when “one gay man concluded that the labels of ‘gay’ and ‘straight’, like ‘man’ and ‘woman’, just do not fit,” and another said, “it all kind of blends together a lot more so than maybe what we want to live in our normal daily lives” (289). In each case, the individuals had the gender binary narrative hijacked, and through a power reversal, had a rewritten sense of the overall gender narrative. The performances thus adopt a Foulcaudian sense of power by utilizing it as a process to restructure gender.

The gender binary exerts a power structure over sexuality through many hierarchies and narrative repurposing. However, power can always be viewed as a constantly changing process that can be redirected (in the case of gender) against the heteronormativity narrative. The use of gender fluidity is key to this process. Non-normative genders can blur the definitions that the binary system reinforces, and the narrative displayed by genderqueer performances does just that. However, the existing structure of power is constantly forcing non-normative narratives into compliance. The continued the success of gender fluidity relies on the genderqueer narrative to remain their narrative.