Author Archives: JMichelle

Fraternity Semi-Formal: Does Rich’s continuum apply to both genders?

Adrienne Rich, in her article, “Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence,” outlines her theory about women, and how every woman exists somewhere on the “lesbian continuum.” Rich’s continuum includes all women, whether they identify as lesbian, straight, or otherwise, and accounts for both sexual and non-sexual experiences between women. As well, some women may move from one point on the spectrum to another during the course of their lives. The idea behind the continuum is that we should “begin to discover the erotic in female terms: as that which is unconfined to any single part of the body or solely to the body itself, as an energy not only diffuse but omnipresent in ‘the sharing of joy, whether physical, emotional, or psychic (650).

This weekend I attended a UBC fraternity semi-formal, and, having read Rich’s article, I believe this was a prime example of how Rich’s continuum can be applied to men as well. The Brothers of this fraternity were definitely well bonded, and fond of each other. The company of the party ranged from new members, to alumni that had come to catch up with old friends and meet new members. There was definitely a warm vibe of comfort around each other, and several acts of care between the boys, despite some of the most stereotypically ‘frat’ boys that were in attendance. This is not to say that the idea of the fraternity is in any way homosexual, although I have definitely heard that being implied by others. What I am trying to point out is that there was a definite continuum to be seen within the fraternity brothers, which demonstrates Rich’s theory of the Lesbian Continuum.

Although the boys had brought dates to the party, with whom they were conversing with and enjoying the company of, it was very apparent that a large part of why they were there was to spend time with each other. Pockets of Brothers were dispersed around the room, each enjoying the evening together in different ways. It was interesting to see the contrast of behaviour with individual Brothers when they were with their dates, versus when they were with their Brothers. Rich explains that women can move from one point in the continuum to another at different points in their lives. What was interesting about the semi-formal was to see how the Brothers were moving along different points in the continuum within one evening. Being at the semi-formal was like seeing Rich’s continuum in fast-forward.

I enjoyed spending the evening with this group. I was able to have a night out with a group of people whilst simultaneously witnessing this theory come alive. Yet one more way that I’ve learnt to incorporate sociology into my daily life!

No commentsAdd a comment

“It’s all Greek to me” – “Doing Gender” at a Frat bids party

As the end of the “rush” period for most fraternities comes to a close, UBC’s Greek population is gearing up for its next big step in the initiation process. Aspiring members will be (or will not be) given ‘bids’ to their fraternity of choice. As a non-Greek member of the UBC population, I don’t normally have much involvement in this process, save for the fact that I have been invited to some “rush parties” along the way. This year, I was invited to what they boys were calling a “bids party,” where their aspiring members will be awarded bids before the official “bids day” which takes place at the SUB. The party was held on the Saturday night before the week of “bids day” so that the boys would have a heads up as to whether or not they would get their ‘official’ bids the coming week.

Having attended the party as somewhat of an outsider, it was interesting to observe the boys as they went through the process. It was apparent that the boys were desperately trying to radiate their most masculine features in order to impress both each other, as well as any girls that were in attendance. I found this display of gendered body language, attitudes, and actions to be very applicable to an article that I recently read for one of my sociology classes. West and Zimmerman’s “Doing Gender,” highlights some of the ways in which people interact with and “do” their gender in public environments. ‘Gender,’ according to this article, is described as the degree to which an ‘actor’ is masculine or feminine in comparison to the stereotypical expectations of gender.

As I observed the fraternity, it was extremely obvious that the boys were trying their hardest to meet the expectations of the stereotypical male. According to the article, individuals constantly perform scripts of their gender. After my initial connection of their actions to the West and Zimmerman article, this became somewhat comedic to watch. Most of the boys were buff, wearing tight fitting tops, and walking with straight backs to accent their muscular physic. As well, their language exuded what they probably associated with as being sufficiently “masculine” in order to keep themselves within the confines of what they were presenting as what fraternity members should look like.

This went on for an hour or two before the actual bids process began. Each of the aspiring members were called into a back room, where they would remain for approximately 10 minutes before being brought back out into the main room. When they re-entered the room, the members of the fraternity began clapping incessantly, and howling their fraternity chant to welcome their new pledge. I was informed that from the moment they received their bid, they became pledges, and would be made to prove themselves worthy and willing to become an official member of the fraternity, come “official initiation.”

For me, this party was an excellent example of West and Zimmerman’s theory of “doing gender.” Each member and aspiring member of the fraternity was an active participant in their gender in order to impress others and stay within the margins of the stereotypical “male.” My speculation for why the boys felt such a dire need to stay within this stereotype again follows West and Zimmerman’s theory. According to their theory, failure to properly ‘do gender’ is possible, and gender assessment and accountability are ever present. I think that especially for fraternity members, the idea of being evaluated based on how they measure up to the standards put in place for their gender category is very apparent, and constantly at the back of their mind. Overall, it was certainly interesting to observe this evaluation and presentation of gender from an outside point of view, and I wish the boys luck in their process of becoming members of their fraternity of choice.

West, Candace and Zimmerman, Don H. 1987. “Doing Gender.” Gender & Society 1(2): 125-51.

No commentsAdd a comment

This, I know, I am Not… But what am I? – Goffman’s explanation of how individuals define themselves

As a sociology major, I find myself constantly asking questions about myself, and the things I do. What do I identify with as an individual, and how do I fit in with others? Why do I fit in with certain individuals better than others? How do we figure out who we are amongst all of the other individuals around us? Are we all different? What qualities do we share? What social situations do I feel comfortable in, and which are out of my comfort zone?

Recently I came across a quote, which has inspired even more questions to flow through my mind. The quote can be found in “Asylums,” by Erving Goffman, and it highlights yet another way of thinking about individuals in society. His definition of individuals is as follows…

“A stance-taking entity, a something that takes a position somewhere between identification with an organization and opposition to it, and is ready at the slightest pressure to regain its balance by shifting its involvement in either direction. It is thus against something that the self can emerge…” (502)

One idea that I find myself constantly returning to is an exercise that my SOCI100 Prof used, which was meant to promote us to think sociologically about our environment. He asked us to think about a line up for something, like a Starbucks, and the different social cues that surround it. This prompted me to realize that I have always been fascinated with observing people following (or breaking) social cues and interacting with their environment. I have often found myself ‘people watching’ at Starbucks, and elsewhere. This exercise really got me thinking about all the sociological thoughts that I have, but had never identified them as such prior to taking my first sociology course.

Returning back to the Goffman quote, I had previously never contemplated the idea of defining myself against something I am not. After considering this idea, however, I realized that I am able to apply it to my Starbucks adventures. The Goffman quote prompted me to rethink some of the questions I have previously asked myself about line-ups. Why do I choose to be polite and follow the social cues that tell me I should wait my turn? I feel confident in saying that I am a fairly polite individual, but how did I come to identify myself as such?

This leads me to the main purpose of this post, which is to discuss how individuals in society approach situations, and how the decisions we make in these situations can define how we are seen in society, and how we identify ourselves. How each individual’s socialization guides them through their daily decisions.

More specifically I want to talk about UBC Clubs Days, and how individuals decide which clubs they are interested in, and which to avoid. Some of the behaviour students exhibited highlights the relevance of Goffman’s definition of individuals to the daily life of a UBC student.

This year I had the opportunity to “table” for two clubs on Clubs Days, one academically inclined, and one socially inclined. It was interesting to see how some individuals would scoff at the thought of joining an academic club, whilst others were uninterested with the idea of joining a club that wouldn’t benefit them on their resumes. I heard many statements beginning with “I am not”… “I’m not really interested in a social club,” “I’m not really looking for extra work outside class.” Which, in my head, translated into “I am not whatever your club is,” which leads us back go Goffman. These individuals defined themselves against what my clubs had to offer, but this is only one clue into the complexity that is each individual I interacted with during Clubs Days. All I know about those who passed off my clubs is one thing that they are NOT, but I have no idea what they ARE. Why are they not interested in my clubs? Is it because they truly do not want to have a social life? Or is it because they have been socialized to see social clubs a certain way?

…And do they budge in Starbucks line-ups?

I AM interested in my  academic club, but at the same time, I AM NOT interested in focusing solely on my studies when I am faced with so many amazing social opportunities. I line up at Starbucks for fear of being known as that one rude chick that budges because this, I know, I am not. But what AM I? I am polite because I don’t budge… I am a sociology major because I clicked the SSC button… but what else?

References:

Goffman, E. (1961). Asylums: Essays on the social situation of mental patients and other inmates. Garden City, N.Y: Anchor Books.

No commentsAdd a comment