Gender Trouble in Social Psychology: How Can Butler's Work ...

This repeated performance of gender is also performative, that is, it creates the idea of gender itself, as well as the illusion of two natural, ... ThisarticleispartoftheResearchTopic GenderRolesintheFuture?TheoreticalFoundationsandFutureResearchDirections Viewall 18 Articles Articles AliceH.Eagly NorthwesternUniversity,UnitedStates MarianneLaFrance YaleUniversity,UnitedStates PeterHegarty UniversityofSurrey,UnitedKingdom Theeditorandreviewers'affiliationsarethelatestprovidedontheirLoopresearchprofilesandmaynotreflecttheirsituationatthetimeofreview. Abstract Introduction Butler’sViewonGender IsButler’sViewCompatibleWithConceptualizationsofGenderinSocialPsychology? FutureResearchDirections Conclusion Notes AuthorContributions Funding ConflictofInterestStatement Acknowledgments Footnotes References SuggestaResearchTopic> DownloadArticle DownloadPDF ReadCube EPUB XML(NLM) Supplementary Material Exportcitation EndNote ReferenceManager SimpleTEXTfile BibTex totalviews ViewArticleImpact SuggestaResearchTopic> SHAREON OpenSupplementalData REVIEWarticle Front.Psychol.,27July2018 |https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01320 GenderTroubleinSocialPsychology:HowCanButler’sWorkInformExperimentalSocialPsychologists’ConceptualizationofGender? TheklaMorgenroth1*andMichelleK.Ryan1,2 1DepartmentofPsychology,UniversityofExeter,Exeter,UnitedKingdom 2FacultyofEconomicsandBusiness,UniversityofGroningen,Groningen,Netherlands Aquarterofacenturyago,philosopherJudithButler(1990)calleduponsocietytocreate“gendertrouble”bydisruptingthebinaryviewofsex,gender,andsexuality.Shearguedthatgender,ratherthanbeinganessentialqualityfollowingfrombiologicalsex,oraninherentidentity,isanactwhichgrowsoutof,reinforces,andisreinforcedby,societalnormsandcreatestheillusionofbinarysex.DespitethefactthatButler’sphilosophicalapproachtounderstandinggenderhasmanyresonanceswithalargebodyofgenderresearchbeingconductedbysocialpsychologists,littletheorizingandresearchwithinexperimentalsocialpsychologyhasdrawndirectlyonButler’sideas.Inthispaper,wewilldiscusshowButler’sideascanaddtoexperimentalsocialpsychologists’understandingofgender.WedescribetheButler’sideasfromGenderTroubleanddiscussthewaysinwhichtheyfitwithcurrentconceptualizationsofgenderinexperimentalsocialpsychology.WethenproposeaseriesofnewresearchquestionsthatarisefromthisintegrationofButler’sworkandthesocialpsychologicalliterature.Finally,wesuggestanumberofconcretewaysinwhichexperimentalsocialpsychologistscanincorporatenotionsofgenderperformativityandgendertroubleintothewaysinwhichtheyresearchgender. “We’rebornnaked,andtherestisdrag.” (RuPaul,1996) Introduction Aquarterofacenturyago,philosopherJudithButler(1990)calleduponsocietytocreate“gendertrouble”bydisruptingthebinaryviewofsex,gender,andsexuality.Keytoherargumentisthatgenderisnotanessential,biologicallydeterminedqualityoraninherentidentity,butisrepeatedlyperformed,basedon,andreinforcedby,societalnorms.Thisrepeatedperformanceofgenderisalsoperformative,thatis,itcreatestheideaofgenderitself,aswellastheillusionoftwonatural,essentialsexes.Inotherwords,ratherthanbeingwomenormen,individualsactaswomenandmen,therebycreatingthecategoriesofwomenandmen.Moreover,theyfaceclearnegativeconsequencesiftheyfailtodotheirgenderright. WearguethatButler’sphilosophicalapproachtounderstandinggenderhasmanyresonanceswith,andimplicationsfor,alargebodyofgenderresearchbeingconductedbysocialpsychologists.Indeed,Butler’snotionofperformativityechoesarangeofsocialpsychologicalapproachestogenderandgenderdifference.Whatwesocialpsychologistsmightcallgendernormsandstereotypes(e.g.,Eagly,1987;FiskeandStevens,1993),orgenderschemas(Bem,1981)providethe“scripts”forwhatButler’sdescribesastheperformanceofgender. WearenotthefirsttopointouttherelevanceofButler’sworktosocialpsychology.Bem(1995)drawingonButler’swork,arguedinthatasgenderresearchersweshouldcreategendertroublebymakinggendersthatfalloutsideofthebinaryvisible,inordertodisruptbinary,heteronormativeviewsofgenderwithinandoutsideofpsychology.Minton(1997)arguedthatqueertheorymorebroadly,whichchallengesthebinary,heteronormativesystemofsexandgender,shouldinformpsychologicaltheoryandpractice.Similarly,Hegarty(1997)usesButler’sargumentsregardingperformativitytocriticizeneuropsychologicalresearchthatessentializessexualorientation,pointingoutthewaysinwhichitignoreshistoricalandculturalvariationinsexualityandexcludeswomenandotherminorities.However,despitethesecallsforgendertroubleover20yearsago,webelievethatsocialpsychology,andexperimentalsocialpsychologyinparticular,hasyettotrulystepupandanswerthecall. DespitepastacknowledgmentsoftheimportanceofButler’sworkbysocialpsychologists,inparticularbyqualitativepsychologist,toourknowledge,littletheorizingandresearchwithinexperimental(andquantitative)socialpsychologyhasdirectlydrawnonButler’sideas.ThisisdespitethefactthatthereareidentifiablesimilaritiesinbroadtheoreticalideasespousedbymanysocialpsychologistswithaninterestingenderandButler’sideas.Thus,wearguethatthereisgreatvaluein(again)promotingtheideasButlerputsforwardinGenderTroubletosocialpsychologists.Whileexperimentalsocialpsychologicalperspectivesongenderhavebeenconcernedprimarilywiththeoriginandperpetuationofgenderstereotypes,Butler’sworkismorepoliticalinherexplicitcalltocreategendertrouble.ThepoliticalnatureoftheworkisperhapsonereasonwhyexperimentalsocialpsychologistshavebeenreluctanttobuildonandintegrateButler’sideasintheirwork–but,wewouldargue,itisindeedoneofthereasonstheyshould.Combiningthesetwoperspectivesseemspotentiallyfruitful,bringingtogetherButler’stheorizingandhercallforsocialandpoliticalchangewithestablishedexperimentalsocialpsychologicaltheoryandempiricallytestablehypotheses. InthispaperwewillfirstdescribeButler’sworkinmoredetail.Wewillthendiscusstheextenttowhichherworkfitswithdifferentconceptualizationsofgenderinthesocialpsychologicalliterature,withafocusonexperimentalsocialpsychology.WewillthenproposenewavenuesofresearchthatcouldpotentiallygrowoutofanintegrationofButler’sworkintosocialpsychology.Finally,wewilldiscussthedifferentwaysinwhichButler’sworkcaninformandchallengethewaysinwhichwe,asexperimentalsocialpsychologists,studyandoperationalizegender. Butler’sViewonGender InherbookGenderTroubleButler(1990)arguesthatwithinWesternculture,sex,gender,andsexualorientationareviewedascloselylinked,essentialqualities.Theprevalentviewisthatbiologicalsexisbinary(malevs.female),essential,andnatural,andthatitformsthebasisforbinarygender,whichisviewedastheculturalinterpretationofsex,andsexualdesire.Inotherwords,thereisabeliefthatababybornwithapeniswillgrowuptoidentifyandactasaman–whateverthatmeansinaspecificculture–and,aspartofthisgenderrole,besexuallyattractedtowomen.Similarly,thereisabeliefthatababybornwithavaginawillgrowuptoidentifyandactasawomanand,aspartofthisgenderrole,besexuallyattractedtomen.Butlerarguesthattheseconfigurationsofsex,gender,andsexualdesirearetheonly“intelligible”gendersinourculture. Thissocietalviewofgenderisalsoreflectedintheworksofmanyfeministwriters,whodefinesexasbiologicalandgenderascultural(seeGould,1977,forareviewandcriticaldiscussion).Butlercriticizesthisdistinctionbetweensex–asnatural,essential,andpre-discursive(i.e.,existingbeforecultureandbeforeinterpretation)–andgenderasitsculturalinterpretation.Shearguesthatitisnotjustgenderthatisculturallyconstructedandhasprescriptiveandproscriptivequalities,butthatthisalsoappliestosexasabinarycategory.Throughthis,Butler(1990)arguesthatthedistinctionbetweensexandgenderismeaningless,notingthat“perhapsthisconstructcalled‘sex’isasculturallyconstructedasgender;indeed,perhapsitwasalwaysalreadygenderwiththeconsequencethatthedistinctionbetweensexandgenderturnsouttobenodistinctionatall”(p.9). Butlercitesevidencefortheconsiderablevariabilityinchromosomes,genitalia,andhormones,thatdon’talwaysalignintheexpected,binarymanner.Indeed,evenbiologists,whotraditionallyviewthebodyasnaturalandpre-discursive,increasinglyarguethatabinaryviewofhumansexisoverlysimplisticandthatsexshouldbeviewedasaspectrumratherthanadichotomy,intermsofanatomical,hormonal,andevencellularsex(seeFausto-Sterling,2000;Ainsworth,2015seealsoFausto-Sterling,1993).Thisvariabilitycanincludeambiguousgenitalia,a“mismatch”betweenchromosomesandgenitalia,orabodythatiscomprisedofamixof“male”(XY)and“female”(XX)cells1.Someresearchsuggestthatupto10%ofchildrenarebornwithsexcharacteristicsthatdonotclearlyfallintothecategoryoffemaleormale(e.g.,Arboledaetal.,2014),althoughthesenumbersaredebatedandsomearguethenumberismuchlower.Forexample,Sax(2002)arguesthatonlyveryspecific“conditions”shouldqualifyasintersexandthatonlyabout0.018%ofpeopleshouldbeconsideredintersex.Wewouldargue,however,thatexactnumbersorspecificdefinitionsofwhatconstitutes“intersex”areirrelevanthereandthatdebatesaboutexactnumbersareindeedillustrativeoftheveryprocessButlerdiscusses–thatthereisno“objective”ornaturalsex,butthatitisperformativelyconstructed. Regardlessofexactnumbers,Butlerarguesthatanyindividualwhodoesnotfallclearlyintooneofthetwosexcategoriesislabeledasabnormalandpathological(seeSax’susageoftheterm“condition”),andstepsaretakento“rectify”thisabnormality.Forexample,themajorityofbabiesbornwithintersexcharacteristicsundergosurgeryandareraisedaseithermaleorfemale(HumanRightsWatch,2017),protectingandmaintainingthebinaryconstructionofsex. Tobeclear,Butlerdoesnotarguethatbiologicalprocessesdonotexistordonotaffectdifferencesinhormonesoranatomy.Rather,shearguesthatbodiesdonotexistoutsideofculturalinterpretationandthatthisinterpretationresultsinover-simplified,binaryviewsofsex.Inotherwords,biologicalprocessesdonotthemselvesresultintwo“natural,”distinct,andmeaningful,categoriesofpeople.Thetwosexesonlyappearnatural,obvious,andimportanttousbecauseofthegenderedworldinwhichwelive.Morespecifically,therepeatedperformanceoftwopolar,oppositegendersmakestheexistenceoftwonatural,inherent,pre-discursivesexesseemplausible.Inotherwords,Butlerviewsgenderasaperformanceinwhichwerepeatedlyengageandwhichcreatestheillusionofbinarysex.Sheargues: “Becausethereisneitheran‘essence’thatgenderexpressesorexternalizesnoranobjectiveidealtowhichgenderaspires;becausegenderisnotafact,thevariousactsofgendercreatetheideaofgender,andwithoutthoseacts,therewouldbenogenderatall.Genderis,thus,aconstructionthatregularlyconcealsitsgenesis.Thetacitcollectiveagreementtoperform,produce,andsustaindiscreteandpolargendersasculturalfictionsisobscuredbythecredibilityofitsownproduction.Theauthorsofgenderbecomeentrancedbytheirownfictionswherebytheconstructioncompelsone’sbeliefinitsnecessityandnaturalness.”(p.522) Thus,forButler,genderisneitheressentialnorbiologicallydetermined,butratheritiscreatedbyitsownperformanceandhenceitisperformative.Thetermperformativity,originatinginAustin’s(1962)workonperformativeutterances,referstospeechactsorbehaviorswhichcreatetheverythingtheydescribe.Forexample,thesentence“Inowpronounceyoumanandwife”notonlydescribeswhatthepersonisdoing(i.e.,pronouncingsomething)butalsocreatesthemarriage(i.e.,thethingitispronouncing)throughthepronouncement.Butlerbuildsonthisworkbyexploringhowgenderworksinasimilarway–genderiscreatedbyitsownperformance. However,asthisbinaryperformanceofgenderisalmostubiquitous,itsperformativenatureisconcealed.Thebinaryperformanceofgenderisfurtherreinforcedbythereactionsofotherstothosewhofailtoadheretogendernorms.Butlerarguesthat“Discretegendersarepartofwhat‘humanizes’individualswithincontemporaryculture;indeed,thosewhofailtodotheirgenderrightareregularlypunished”(p.522).Thispunishmentincludestheoppressionofwomenandthestigmatizationandmarginalizationofthosewhoviolatethegenderbinary,eitherbydisruptingthepresumedlinkbetweensexandgender(e.g.,transgenderindividuals)orbetweensexandsexuality(e.g.,lesbianandgayindividuals)orbychallengingthebinarysysteminitself(e.g.,intersex,bisexual,orgenderqueerindividuals).Thisstigmaisclearlyevidencedbythehighrateofviolenceagainsttransgenderwomen,particularlythoseofcolor(Adams,2017);surgeriesperformedonintersexbabiestoachieve“normal”sexcharacteristics(HumanRightsWatch,2017);andthestigmatizationofsexualminorities(Licketal.,2013). Thesenegativereactionsandthebinaryperformanceofgender,Butlerargues,donotexistbychance.Instead,theyserveastoolsofasystemofpowerstructureswhichistryingtoreproduceandsustainitself–namelyapatriarchalsystemofcompulsoryheterosexualityinwhichwomenserveasameansofreproductiontomen,astheirmothersandwives.Thesepowerstructuresarebothprohibitive(i.e.,proscriptive),repressingdeviatinggenderperformance,aswellasgenerative(i.e.,prescriptive),creatingbinary,heteronormativegenderperformance. Butler’sworkisacalltoactiontooverthrowthesestructuresandendtheproblematicpracticesthattheyengender.However,shecriticizesfeministvoiceswhoemphasizeasharedidentity(“women”)tomotivatecollectiveactiononbehalfofthegroupinordertoachievesocietalchanges.Byarguingthatgenderisnotsomethingoneis,butrathersomethingonedoesorperforms,Butlerarguesthatgenderidentityisnotbasedonsomeinnertruth,butinsteadaby-productofrepeatedgenderperformance.Framinggenderidentityasaninherentpartoftheself,asmanyfeministwritersdidatthetime(andindeedstilldo),sheargues,reinforcesthegenderbinaryandinturnplaysintothehandsofthepatriarchyandcompulsoryheterosexuality.Feministsshouldinsteadseektounderstandhowthecategoryof“women”isproducedandrestrainedbythemeansthroughwhichsocialchangeissought(suchaslanguageorthepoliticalsystem). Thisargumenthasparticularrelevancetothenotionofgenderidentity.Assuch,ithasbeencriticizedasinvalidatingtransgenderindividuals,whoseexperienceofatrueinnergenderidentitythatisnotinlinewiththesextheywereassignedatbirthisoftenquestioned.Thisisdespitethefactthatfromayoungagetransgenderindividualsviewthemselvesintermsoftheirexpressedgender,bothexplicitlyandimplicitly,mirroringself-viewsofcis-gender2children(Olsonetal.,2015).Butlerhasrespondedtothesecriticismsrepeatedly.Forexample,answeringaquestionaboutwhatismostoftenmisunderstoodabouthertheoryinaninterviewin2015,shereplies: “IdoknowthatsomepeoplebelievethatIseegenderasa“choice”ratherthanasanessentialandfirmlyfixedsenseofself.Myviewisactuallynotthat.Nomatterwhetheronefeelsone’sgenderedandsexedrealitytobefirmlyfixedorlessso,everypersonshouldhavetherighttodeterminethelegalandlinguistictermsoftheirembodiedlives.Sowhetheronewantstobefreetoliveouta“hard-wired”senseofsexoramorefluidsenseofgender,islessimportantthantherighttobefreetoliveitout,withoutdiscrimination,harassment,injury,pathologizationorcriminalization–andwithfullinstitutionalandcommunitysupport.”(TheConversationProject,2015) Thus,Butlerdoesnotquestionpeople’ssenseofself,butinsteadcriticizesasharedgenderidentityasthenecessarybasisforpoliticalaction.Shepointsoutthatabandoningtheideaofgenderasanidentitydoesnottakeawaythepotentialofagencyonbehalfofwomen.Instead,itopensupthepossibilityofagency,whichotherapproachesthatviewidentityasfixedandstabledonotenable.Thefactthatidentityisconstructedmeansthatitisneithercompletelyarbitraryandfree,norcompletelydetermined,leavingroomforre-structuring,subversion,andfordisruptingthestatusquo.Thus,thecommonidentity“we,women”isnotnecessaryforcollectiveactiononbehalfofthefeministmovement,asanyonecanengageinsubversionandthedisruptionofthegenderbinary.Indeed,wewouldarguethatfeminismbecomesmorepowerfulasaninclusivemovementforgenderequalitymorebroadlydefined,notjustequalitybetweenwomenandmen. Inconclusion,Butlerarguesthatwe,asasociety,needtocreategendertroublebydisruptingthegenderbinarytodismantletheoppressivesystemofpatriarchyandcompulsoryheterosexuality.WhilesomeofButler’sideasseemverydifferentfromhowgenderisgenerallyviewedintheexperimentalsocialpsychologicalliterature,othersresonatewellwithsocialpsychologicaltheorizingandempiricalresearch.Inthenextsection,wewilldiscusswaysinwhichButler’sviewiscompatible–andincompatible–withsomeofthemostprominentconceptualizationsofgenderinexperimentalsocialpsychology. IsButler’sViewCompatibleWithConceptualizationsofGenderinSocialPsychology? Genderhasbeenanincreasinglyimportantfocuswithinpsychologymoregenerally,andinsocialpsychologyinparticular(e.g.,Eaglyetal.,2012).Whilethereisconsiderablevariationinhowpsychologistsviewandtreatgender,wearguethatmanyofapproachesfallintooneofthreetraditions:(1)evolutionaryapproacheswhichviewbinary,biologicalsexasthedeterminantofgenderandgenderdifferences;(2)socialstructuralapproacheswhichviewsocietalforcessuchasstatusandsocialrolesasthedeterminantofgenderstereotypesand,inturn,genderdifferences;and,notmutuallyexclusivefromasocialstructuralapproach;(3)socialidentityapproacheswhichviewgenderasoneoutofmanysocialcategorieswithwhichindividualsidentifytovaryingdegrees.Inaddition,integrativeapproachesdrawonmorethanoneofthesetraditions,aswellasdevelopmental,socialcognitive,andsociologicalmodelsofgender,andintegratethemtoexplaingenderedbehavior.Whilenoneoftheseapproachesisentirelycompatiblewiththeargumentthatbinarysexisconstructedthroughtherepeatedbinaryperformanceofgenderwithgenderidentityasaby-productofthisperformance,therearegreatdifferencesintheextenttowhichtheyareinlinewith,andcanspeakto,Butler’sideas. Evolutionarypsychologyis,wewouldargue,theleastcompatiblewithButler’sviewonsexandgender.Evolutionaryapproachestothepsychologyofgendermaintainthatgenderdifferencesare,forthemostpart,genetic–resultingfromthedifferentadaptiveproblemsfacedbywomenandmenintheirevolutionarypast(seeByrd-CravenandGeary,2013),particularlyduetoreproductivedifferencessuchaspaternaluncertaintyformenandhigherparentalinvestmentforwomen.Thesedifferences,itisargued,thenshapedourgenes–andgenderdifferences–throughsexualselection(i.e.,genderdifferencesinthefactorspredictingsuccessfulreproduction;Darwin,1871).Theseapproachescanbedescribedasessentializinggender,thatis,promotingthebeliefthatmenandwomenshareanimportantbutunobservable“essence.”Essentialismincludesarangeoffactorssuchthedegreetowhichindividualsperceivesocialcategoriestobefixedandnatural(Robertsetal.,2017)andhasbeenshowntobeassociatedwithgreaterlevelsofstereotypingandprejudice(BrescollandLaFrance,2004;BastianandHaslam,2006).Evidencefurthersuggestspeoplewhoholdhighlyessentialistbeliefsofgenderaremoresupportiveofwhattheauthorscall“boundary-enhancinginitiatives”suchasgender-segregatedclassroomsandlegislationforcingtransgenderindividualstousethebathroomassociatedwiththesextheywereassignedatbirth(Robertsetal.,2017).Thereby,essentialism,andtheresultantstereotypesandprejudice,contributetothereinforcementofthestatusquo. Evolutionarypsychology’sapproachtogenderexemplifiesmanypointsButler(1990)criticizesinGenderTrouble.First,ittreatssexasapre-discursivebinaryfactratherthanaculturalconstruct.Inotherwords,itignoresvariabilityinchromosomes,genitals,andhormones(Fausto-Sterling,1993;Ainsworth,2015)andviewsbinarysex–andgender–asaninherent,essentialquality.Moreover,evolutionaryapproachesarguethatgenderfollowsfromsexandthusportraybinarysexasanexplanationfor,ratherthanaresultof,genderdifferences(i.e.,genderperformance).Inadditiontoignoringtheexistenceofintersexindividuals,theseapproachesalsooftenignorehomosexuality,focusingexclusivelyonheterosexualdesiresandreproduction.Thus,wewouldargue,suchevolutionaryapproachesplayintothepatriarchalsystemofcompulsoryheterosexualityinwhichwomenfunctionprimarilyasmothersandwives. Socialstructuralapproachestogendersuchasearlyconceptionsofsocialroletheory(Eagly,1987)andthestereotypecontentmodel(FiskeandStevens,1993)aremorecompatiblewithButler’sviews.Suchapproachesarguethatsocietalstructuressuchassocialrolesanddifferencesinpowerandstatusdeterminegenderstereotypes,whichaffectbothgenderedbehavioraswellasreactionstothosewhodeviatefromgenderstereotypes.Inotherwords,genderstereotypesprovidethe“script”fortheperformanceofgenderwithnegativeconsequencesforthosewhofailto“learntheirlines”or“sticktothescript”. Thesocialpsychologicalliteratureprovidesmanyempiricalexamplesofthesenegativeconsequences.Forexample,Rudmanandcolleaguesdescribehowthosewhodeviatefromtheirscriptsoftenencounterbacklashintheformofeconomicandsocialpenalties(forareviewseeRudmanetal.,2012).Thisbacklashdiscouragesindividualsfromengaginginstereotype-incongruentbehaviorastheyavoidnegativeconsequencesinthefuture,reducingtheirpotentialtoactasdeviatingrolemodelsforothers.Moreover,witnessingthebacklashgendertroublemakersencountermayalsovicariouslydiscouragesothersfrombreakinggenderstereotypestoavoidnegativeconsequencesforthemselves.Theliteratureonprecariousmanhoodfurthersuggeststhattheseissuesmightbeparticularlypronouncedformen(Bossonetal.,2013).Researchdemonstratesthatmenmustcontinuouslyprovetheirmasculinitybyavoidinganythingdeemedfemininetoavoidnegativeconsequencessuchaslossofstatus.EachoftheselinesofresearchareverymuchinlinewithButler’sarguments,bothwiththeideathatthosewho“failtodotheirgenderright”arepunishedandwiththeideathatthegenderbinaryisatooltoupholdthepatriarchy. However,inotherrespects,socialstructuralapproachesarelesscompatiblewithButler’sarguments.First,theytendnottotakenon-binarygenderintoaccount,andtheempiricalresearchtendstooperationalizemenandwomenasdisjunctcategories.Althoughresearchfocusingonhowintra-gendervariabilityisoftenmuchlargerthanbetweengendervariability(e.g.,Hyde,2005)isagoodfirststep,itstillultimatelyreliesondividingpeopleintothebinarycategoriesoffemaleandmale.Moreover,theseapproachesalsorarelytakeissuesofintersectionalityintoaccount(seeShields,2008)andfocusonstereotypesofwhite,heterosexual,middle-class,ciswomenandmen,althoughtherearesomenotableexceptions(e.g.,FingerhutandPeplau,2006;Brambillaetal.,2011). Approachesfromthesocialidentityandself-categorizationtradition(TajfelandTurner,1979;Turneretal.,1987)viewgenderasasocialidentity(e.g.,SkevingtonandBaker,1989).Thistraditionarguesthatinadditiontoone’spersonalidentity,differentsocialgroupsareintegratedintotheself-concept,formingsocialidentities.Thesesocialidentitiescanbebasedonmeaningfulsocialcategoriessuchasgenderoroccupation,butalsoinresponsetorandomallocationtoseeminglymeaninglessgroups.Thestrengthoftheidentificationwithone’sgenderaswellthesalienceofthisidentityinanygivencontextdeterminetheextenttowhichtheself-conceptisaffectedbygenderstereotypes–andinturntheextenttowhichgenderedpatternsofbehavioraredisplayed(e.g.,Lorenzi-Cioldi,1991;RyanandDavid,2003;Ryanetal.,2004;CadinuandGaldi,2012). Whiletheideaofgenderasanidentity–ratherthanaresultofgenderedbehavior–maybeseenasbeinginconsistentwithButler’sargument,resultsfromminimalgroupstudies(e.g.,Tajfeletal.,1971)areverymuchinlinewithherreasoning.Thesestudiesdemonstratethatidentitiescanformonthebasisofcompletelyirrelevant,artificialcategoriesandarethusbynomeansinherentnorinevitable.Thus,whileinourgivensociety,theseidentitiesareconsideredtobelargelybinary,thisisnotinevitableandlikelytheresultofsocialforces.Moreover,theevidencefromasocialidentityperspectivethatsupportsthenotionthatchangesincontextcanaffectgendersalience,levelsofidentification,andthustheextentofgenderedbehaviors,arealsoverymuchinlinewithButler’sarguments. Lastly,integrativeapproachesdrawonmorethanoneofthesetraditionsaswellasdevelopmental,socialcognitive,andsociologicalmodelsofgender.Forexample,socialroletheoryhasdevelopedovertime,integratingbiologicalaswellassocialidentityaspectsintoitsframework,resultinginabiosocialapproach(EaglyandWood,2012).Morespecifically,morerecentversionsofthetheoryarguethatthedivisionoflaborleadstogenderedbehaviorviathreedifferentmechanisms:(1)socialregulation(asdescribedabove),(2)identity-basedregulation,similartotheprocessesoutlinedbysocialidentitytheory,and(3)biologicalregulationthroughhormonalprocessessuchaschangesintestosteroneandoxytocin.Importantly,theseprocessesinteractwithoneanother,thatis,hormonalresponsesaredependentonexpectationsfromothersandgenderidentity.WhilethesocialregulationofgenderisverymuchinlinewithButler’sarguments,theintegrationofbiological–andparticularlyevolutionary–perspectivesfitslesswithherideathatgenderperformanceiswhatcreatesgender. Anotherinfluentialintegrativeapproachistheinteractivemodelofgender-relatedbehavior(DeauxandMajor,1987).Ratherthanfocusingondistalfactorswhichaffectgenderstereotypes,thismodelfocusesonthesituationalandcontextualfactorswhichresultingenderedbehavior.Themodelassumesthattheperformanceofgenderprimarilytakesplaceinsocialinteractionsandservesspecificsocialpurposes.Genderedbehaviorthusemergesbasedontheexpectationsheldbytheperceiver,suchasstereotypes,schemata,andknowledgeaboutthespecifictarget;thetargetthemselves(e.g.,theirself-schema,theirdesiretoconfirmordisprovetheperceiver’sexpectations),andthesituation.Forexample,largegenderdifferencesinbehaviorarelikelytoemergewhentheperceiverbelievesmenandwomenareverydifferentandthusexpectsstereotypicalbehavior,changingthewaytheytreatandcommunicatewithmaleandfemaletargets;whenmaleandfemaletargetsholdverygenderedself-schemataandaremotivatedtoconfirmtheperceiver’sexpectations;andwhenthesituationmakesstereotypessalientandallowsfordifferentbehaviorstoemerge. ThismodelisperhapsthemostinlinewithButler’sperspectivesongender.SimilartoButler,itfocusesonthedoingofgender,thatis,ongenderedbehavioranditsemergenceinsocialinteractions.Moreover,themodeltakesamoresocialcognitiveapproach,referringtogenderedself-schemataratherthangenderidentities.Thus,whileretainingthecontextdependenceofgenderedbehaviorinherentinsocialidentityapproaches,thismodeldoesnotnecessarilypresumegenderasasocialidentityintermsofmenandwomen.Incontrasttoallothermodelsdiscussedabove,thismodelallowsforalessbinary,morefluidunderstandingofgender. WhiletheseapproachesthusvaryconsiderablyinhowcompatibletheyarewithButler’sargument,allofthemtreatgenderasagiven,pre-existingfact,whichisinstarkcontrasttoButler’scoreargumentofgenderbeingaperformativeact,comingintoexistenceonlythroughitsownperformance.Theworkofsocialpsychologistsoperatingoutsideoftheexperimentalframeworkismorecompatibleinthisregard.Morespecifically,discourseanalystsarguethattheself,includingthegenderedself,iscreatedthroughlanguage(e.g.,KurzandDonaghue,2013)andfocusontheproductionofgenderininteractionsratherthanongenderasapredictorofbehavior.Forexample,researchersconductingfeministconversationanalysishaveexaminedhowpatternsinthedeliveryofnaturallyoccurringspeechreproduceheteronormativegender(e.g.,Kitzinger,2005)andresearchfromtheethnomethodology-discursivetraditionexamineshowpeopleacquireagenderedcharacterthroughspeech(e.g.,WetherellandEdley,1999). FutureResearchDirections Intheprevioussection,wehaveoutlinedhowsomeoftheissuesraisedbyButler,suchasthenegativereactionstothosewhofailtodotheirgenderright,havealreadyreceivedconsiderableattentioninthesocialpsychologicalliterature.Otheraspectsofherargument,however,havereceivedverylittleattentionandholdthepotentialforinterestingfutureresearch.WeidentifytwobroadwaysinwhichButler’sworkcaninformandshapefuturesocialpsychologicalresearch:(a)engenderingnewresearchquestionswhichhavenotyetbeeninvestigatedempirically,and(b)challengingourwayofstudyinggenderitself. NewResearchQuestions Butler’sworkispurelytheoreticalandthusmanyofherideashavenotbeentestedempirically,particularlyusinganexperimentalapproach.Perhapsthemostcentralquestionthatcanbeexaminedbysocialpsychologistsiswhethercreating“gendertrouble”bysubvertingideasaboutsex,gender,andsexualdesire,canindeedleadtochangesinbinaryviewsofsexandgenderandtheproscriptiveandprescriptivestereotypesthatcomewiththeseviews.Basedonpredictionsderivedfromsocialroletheory(Eagly,1987),wewouldindeedexpectthatadecreaseintheperformanceofgenderasbinary(i.e.,lessgenderedsocialroles)wouldleadtodecreasesingenderstereotypingandtherelianceongenderasasocialcategory.Inotherwords,ifgendersarenottiedtospecificsocialroles(orviceversa),theylosetheirabilitytobeinformative,bothintermsofself-relevantinformation(“whatshouldIbelike?”)andintermsofexpectationsofothers(“whatisthispersonlike?”). Ontheotherhand,asgenderidentityisverycentraltotheself-imageofmanypeople(RyanandDavid,2003),challengingideasaboutgendermaybeperceivedasthreatening.Socialidentitytheoryandself-categorizationtheory(TajfelandTurner,1979;Turneretal.,1987)arguethatmembersofgroups–includingmenandwomen–haveaneedtoseetheirowngroupasdistinctfromtheoutgroup.Ifthisdistinctivenessisthreatened,highlyidentifiedmenandwomenarelikelytoenhancethecontrastbetweentheiringroupandtheoutgroup,forexamplebypresentingthemselvesinamoregenderstereotypicalwayandapplyingstereotypestotheothergroup(Branscombeetal.,1999)orbyconstructinggenderdifferencesasessentialandbiological(Falomir-PichastorandHegarty,2014).Theseidentityprocessesmaythusreinforceasystemoftwodistinctgenderswithopposingtraits,andfurtherpunishandalienatethosewhofailtoconformtogendernormsandstereotypes.Futureresearchneedstoinvestigatethecircumstancesunderwhichgendertroublecanindeedleadtolessbinaryviewsofgender,andthecircumstancesunderwhichitdoesnot.Thisneedstoincludeidentifyingthepsychologicalmechanismsandbarriersinvolvedinsuchchange. Importantly,thisinvestigationshouldgobeyondexaminingreactionstowomenandmenwhobehaveincounter-stereotypicalways,suchaswomeninleadershippositionsorstay-at-homefathers,andincludeafocusonmoreradicalchallengestothegenderbinarysuchasnon-binaryandtransindividualsordragperformers.Butlerdiscussesdragasanexampleofgendertroubleindetail,quotingtheanthropologistNewton(1968)inherobservationsofhowdragsubvertsnotionsofgender.Discussing“layers”ofappearance,Newtonremarksthatontheonehand,theoutsideappearanceofdragqueensisfeminine,buttheinside(i.e.,thebody)ismale.Atthesametime,however,itappearsthattheoutsideappearance(i.e.,body)ismale,buttheinside(the“essence”)isfeminine,makingithardtoupholdconsistent,essentialistideasaboutsexandgender.Butlerfurtherarguesthattheexaggerationoffemininity(inthecaseofdragqueens)andmasculinity(inthecaseofdragkings)indragperformanceshighlightstheperformativenatureofgenderedbehaviors,thatis,howgenderiscreatedthroughgenderedperformance.Ontheotherhand,wewouldarguethatbecausedragperformancesoftendrawheavilyongenderstereotypes,theymayalsoreinforcetheideaofwhatitmeanstobeamanorawoman.Toourknowledge,thereisnopsychologicalresearchonhowdragaffectsperceptionsofgender,butasdragbecomesmoreandmoreaccessibletoawider,andmoremainstream,audience(e.g.,duetopopularTVshowssuchasRuPaul’sDragRace)itmightbeanenlighteninglineofresearchtopursue.Doesdragindeedhighlighttheperformativenatureofgenderordoesitsimplyreinforcestereotypes?Arereactionstoappearance-baseddisruptionsofthegenderbinarydifferenttobehavior-basedonessuchasreactionstoassertivewomenorsubmissivemen? Anotherpotentiallineofresearchtopursuewouldbetobuildonthediscursiveliteraturebyexaminingtheperformativenatureofgenderfromanexperimentalsocialpsychologicalperspective,testinghowgenderiscreatedthroughspeechandbehavior.Drawingonsomeofthefindingsfromqualitativepsychologicalresearchdiscussedintheprevioussectionmightbehelpfulindevelopingpredictionsandquantitativelytestablehypotheses. Finally,ifgendertroubleisindeedeffectiveinchallengingbinary,essentialistviewsofsexandgender,itisworthinvestigatinghowdisruptivegenderperformancecanbeencouragedandusedasameansofcollectiveaction.Theliteratureoncollectiveactiontoachievegenderequalityhasoftendrawnon(gender)identity-basedideasofmobilization(e.g.,KellyandBreinlinger,1995;Burnetal.,2000).Asoutlinedabove,Butlercriticizestheseapproachesandarguesthatgroup-basedidentities(“we,women”)arenotnecessarytoachievechange.Howthencanweinclusivelymobilizeotherstoengageincollectiveactionwithoutdrawingongenderidentitiesandinadvertentlyreinforcingthegenderbinary–andwithitthepatriarchalsystemofcompulsoryheterosexualityitsupports? Morerecently,psychologistshavearguedthatitmightbemoreeffectivetofocuson“feminist”(ratherthangender)ideologieswhichacknowledge,ratherthanignore,issuesofintersectionality(seeRadkeetal.,2016),andtoencouragementoengageincollectiveactiontoachievegenderequality(e.g.,Subašićetal.,2018).Weagreewiththeseargumentsbutfurthersuggestthatcollectiveactionresearchshouldexaminehowindividualsofanygendercan(a)bemotivatedtoengageincollectiveactiontoachievegenderequalitygenerally,and(b)bemotivatedtoengageingendertroubleanddisruptbinarynotionsofgenderasaformofcollectiveaction. StudyingGenderFromaPerformativePerspective Inadditiontonewresearchquestion,Butler’sworkalsohighlightstheneedfordifferentmethodologicalapproachestogenderinexperimentalsocialpsychology,andindeedthereismuchthatcouldbelearntfromthosethatworkinthediscursivetradition.Thereisalsothepotentialforgenderresearcherstoengageingendertroublethemselvesbychangingthewayinwhichtheytreatgender. Forthemostpart,experimentalpsychologistshavetendedtoexaminegenderasapredictororindependentvariable–examininggenderdifferencesinallmannerofsocial,cognitive,andclinicalmeasures(e.g.,MaccobyandJacklin,1974;Hyde,2005).Indeed,asresearchers,we(theauthors)areguiltyofpublishingmanypapersusingthismethodology(e.g.,HaslamandRyan,2008;Morgenrothetal.,2017).Similartoperformativespeechacts,wewouldarguethatthiscanbeseenasaperformativeresearchpractice.Thewayinwhichweconductourresearchandthechoiceswemakeinrelationtogendercreatingtheveryconstructthatisstudied,namelygenderandgenderdifferences.Ourassumptionsofgenderasbinary,pre-discursive,andnaturalproducesresearchthatfocusesonbinary,categoricalgenderasapredictorofgenderedattitudesandbehavior. However,toourknowledge,thereisverylittlequantitativeorexperimentalresearch,thatlooksatthepsychologicalprocessesimplicatedintheperformanceofgender,thatis,treatinggenderasanoutcomeordependentvariable.Ifexperimentalsocialpsychologistsaretocontributetogendertrouble,weshouldshiftourviewsawayfromsexandgenderascausesforbehaviorandpsychologicaloutcomes(i.e.,asanindependentorpredictorvariables).Instead,weshouldtreatgender–whethermeasuredasanidentity,intermsofself-stereotyping,assimpleself-categorization–asaresultofsocietalandpsychologicalforces.Ratherthanaskingwhatsexandgendercanexplain,weneedtolookatwhatexplainssexandgender. Moreover,whiletheliteratureacknowledgesthatgendersalienceandgenderself-stereotypingvarydependingoncontext(e.g.,Lorenzi-Cioldi,1991;RyanandDavid,2003),genderitself,regardlessofhowitismeasured,ismeasuredasastable,anddiscreteconstruct.Oneisamanorawomanandremainssooverthecourseofone’slife.If,however,weviewgenderasaperformance,thenwemustalsoviewgenderasanact,abehavior,whichchangesdependingoncontextandaudience.Askingparticipantstotickaboxtoindicateone’sgender–asmanyofusoftendoinourresearchpractices–isanoverlysimplisticmeasureandcannotcapturethenuancesofdoinggender.Itisneitherinformativenor,wewouldargue,terriblyinteresting.Instead,onecouldmeasuregenderidentitysalienceandimportanceorgenderperformance–forexamplemeasuringgenderstereotypicalbehaviororothertypesofgenderedself-stereotyping(e.g.,usingmeasuressimilartotheBemSex-RoleInventory;Bem,1974). Similarly,we,asresearchers,needtostoptreatinggenderasabinaryvariable.Thisincludesourresearchpracticesaswellasourtheorydevelopmentandresearchcommunications.Forexample,thedemographicsectionsofmostquestionnairesshouldnotrestrictgendertotwooptions.Instead,theyshouldeitherprovidearangeofdifferentoptions(e.g.,non-binary,genderqueer,genderfluid,andagender)orallowopenresponses.Wewouldalsosuggestnotusingtheoption“other”inadditionto“male”and“female”asitcanbeperceivedasstigmatizing.Similarly,ifaskingaboutsexratherthangender,atleastathirdoption(i.e.,intersex)shouldbeprovided(seeFonesca,2017,forexamples). However,weneedtogobeyondthat.Atthemoment,evenwhengenderismeasuredinanon-binaryway,thosewhofalloutsideofthegenderbinaryareusuallyexcludedfromanalysis.Thisisequallytrueforsexualminorities.Unlesssexualorientationiscentraltotheresearchquestion,thosewhodon’tidentifyasheterosexualareoftenexcludedbygenderresearchersasstereotypesandnormsofgay,lesbian,bisexual,orasexualindividualsoftendifferfromgeneralgenderstereotypes.Whilethesedecisionsoftenmakesenseforeachindividualcase(andwe,theauthors,haveinfactengagedinthemaswell),thisoverallproducesapicturethaterasesvariationandreinforcestheideathattherearetwoopposinggenderswithclearboundaries.Asexperimentalsocialpsychologistswithaninterestingender,weneedtodobetter.Similarly,ourtheoriesthemselvesshouldallowforafluidunderstandingofgenderwhichalsotakesissuesofintersectionality–withsexualorientation,butalsowithrace,class,andothersocialcategories–intoaccount. Finally,whenwetalkaboutgender,weshoulddosoinawaythatmakesgenderdiversityvisibleratherthanwaythatmarginalizesnon-binarygenderfurther.Forexample,replacingbinaryphrasessuchas“heorshe”withgender-neutralonessuchas“they”oronesthathighlightnon-binarygendersuchas“he,she,orthey”or“he,she,orze”3.Whiletheuseofthegender-neutralsingular“they”isoftenfrowneduponanddeemedgrammaticallyincorrect(AmericanPsychologicalAssociation,2010;UniversityofChicago,2010),ithasinfactbeenpartoftheEnglishlanguageforcenturiesandwaswidespreadbeforebeingproscribedbygrammariansadvocatingfortheuseofthegenericmasculineinthe19thcentury(Bodine,1975).Despitetheseefforts,thesingular“they”hasremainedpartofspokenlanguage,whereitisusedtorefertoindividualswhosesexisunknownorunspecified(“Somebodylefttheirunicorninmystable”)andtomembersofmixed-gendergroups(e.g.,“Anybodywouldfeedtheirunicornglitteriftheycould”). Theuseofnewpronounssuchas“ze,”specificallydevelopedtorefertopeopleoutsideofthebinary,mightbemoreeffortfulandequallycontroversial.However,evidencefromSweden,wherethegender-neutralpronoun“hen”hasbecomemorewidelyusedsincethepublicationachildren’sbookusingonly“hen”insteadof“han”(he)and“hon”(her)in2012,indicatesthatattitudestowarditsusehaveshifteddramaticallyfrompredominantlynegativetopredominantlypositiveinaveryshortamountoftime(GustafssonSendénetal.,2015).Asgenderresearchers,weshouldbeattheforefrontofsuchissuesandpromoteandadvancegenderequality–andgenderdiversity–notonlythroughourresearchbutalsobycommunicatingourresearchinagender-inclusiveway,especiallyinlightofButler’s(andothers’)argumentsthatlanguageisacrucialmechanismincreatinggenderandreinforcingthegenderbinary. Conclusion InthispaperweputforwardsuggestionsforwaysinwhichJudith’sButler’s(1990)notionsofgendertroublecouldbeintegratedintoexperimentalsocialpsychology’sunderstandingofgender,genderdifference,andgenderinequality.Wehaveoutlinedherworkanddiscussedtheextenttowhichprominentviewsofgenderwithinpsychologyarecompatiblewiththiswork.Moreover,wesuggestedpotentialavenuesoffutureresearchandchangesinthewaythatwe,asresearchers,treatgender. Webelievethat,asexperimentalsocialpsychologists,weshouldbeawarethatwemayinadvertentlyandperformativelyreinforcethegenderbinaryinthewayinwhichwedoresearch–inthetheorieswedevelop,inthemeasuresthatweuse,andintheresearchpracticesweundertake.BytakingonboardButler’sideasintosocialpsychology,wecanbroadenourresearchagenda–raisingandansweringquestionsofhowsocialchangecanbeachieved.Wecanprovideagreaterunderstandingofthepsychologicalprocessesinvolvedincreatinggendertrouble,andinresistinggendertrouble–butaboveall,weareinapositiontocreateourowngendertrouble. Notes Thefirstauthorofthispaperusesthey/them/theirpronouns,thesecondauthorusesshe/her/herspronouns. AuthorContributions TMandMRjointlydevelopedtheideasinthepaper.TMwrotethepaper.MRreadthepaperandprovidedfeedbackonseveraldraftsofthepaper. Funding ThisprojecthasreceivedfundingfromtheEuropeanResearchCouncil(ERC)undertheEuropeanUnion’sHorizon2020researchandinnovationprogram(GrantAgreementNo.725128).Thisarticlereflectsonlytheauthors’views.TheEuropeanResearchCouncilandtheCommissionarenotresponsibleforanyusethatmaybemadeoftheinformationitcontains. ConflictofInterestStatement Theauthorsdeclarethattheresearchwasconductedintheabsenceofanycommercialorfinancialrelationshipsthatcouldbeconstruedasapotentialconflictofinterest. Acknowledgments TheauthorswouldliketothankThomasMorton,TeriKirby,ChristopherBegeny,andRenataBongiornofortheirhelpfulcommentsonapreviousversionofthemanuscriptandPeterHegartyforhiscontributionasanengagedreviewer. Footnotes ^Pleasenotethatthesetermsarebasedonthecommonviewofnaturallybinarysexunderwhichmostresearchersoperate.WedonotmeantoimplythatButlerherselfwouldusethesetermsor,indeed,wouldbeconvincedbytheideathatthesebodies–oranybodies–exist“naturally”priortointerpretation. ^“Cis”referstoindividualsforwhomthesextheyareassignedatbirthandtheirgenderidentityalign. ^Theexactoriginsofthenon-binarypronounsze/hirorze/zirareunknown,butze/hirisoftencreditedtoBornstein(1996).Therearenoclearconventionsaroundnon-binarypronounuseandmanydifferentalternativeshavebeenproposed. References Adams,N.(2017).GLAADCallsforIncreasedandAccurateMediaCoverageofTransgenderMurders.Availableat:https://www.glaad.org/blog/glaad-calls-increased-and-accurate-media-coverage-transgender-murders GoogleScholar Ainsworth,C.(2015).Sexredefined.Nature518,288–291.doi:10.1038/518288a PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar AmericanPsychologicalAssociation(2010).PublicationManualoftheAmericanPsychologicalAssociation,6thEdn,Washington,DC:AmericanPsychologicalAssociation. GoogleScholar Arboleda,V.A.,Sandberg,D.E.,andVilain,E.(2014).DSDs:genetics,underlyingpathologiesandpsychosexualdifferentiation.Nat.Rev.Endocrinol.10,603–615.doi:10.1038/nrendo.2014.130 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Austin,J.L.(1962).HowtoDoThingswithWords.Oxford:ClarendonPress. GoogleScholar Bastian,B.,andHaslam,N.(2006).Psychologicalessentialismandstereotypeendorsement.J.Exp.Soc.Psychol.42,228–235.doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2005.03.003 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Bem,S.L.(1974).Themeasurementofpsychologicalandrogyny.J.Consult.Clin.Psychol.42,155–162.doi:10.1037/h0036215 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Bem,S.L.(1981).Genderschematheory:acognitiveaccountofsextyping.Psychol.Rev.88,354–364.doi:10.1037/0033-295X.88.4.354 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Bem,S.L.(1995).Dismantlinggenderpolarizationandcompulsoryheterosexuality:shouldweturnthevolumedownorup?J.SexRes.32,329–334.doi:10.1080/00224499509551806 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Bodine,A.(1975).Androcentrisminprescriptivegrammar:singular‘they’,sex-indefinite‘he’,and‘heorshe’.Lang.Soc.4,129–146.doi:10.1017/S0047404500004607 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Bornstein,K.(1996).NearlyRoadkill:AnInfobahnGenderAdventure.London:Serpent’sTail. GoogleScholar Bosson,J.K.,Vandello,J.A.,andCaswell,T.A.(2013).“Precariousmanhood,”inTheSAGEHandbookofGenderandPsychology,edsM.K.RyanandN.R.Branscombe(London:SAGEPublications),15–130. GoogleScholar Brambilla,M.,Carnaghi,A.,andRavenna,M.(2011).Statusandcooperationshapelesbianstereotypes:testingpredictionsfromthestereotypecontentmodel.Soc.Psychol.42,101–110.doi:10.1027/1864-9335/a000054 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Branscombe,N.R.,Ellemers,N.,Spears,R.,andDoosje,B.(1999).“Thecontextandcontentofsocialidentitythreat,”inSocialIdentity:Context,Commitment,Content,edsN.Ellemers,R.SpearsandB.Doosje(Oxford:Blackwell),35–59. GoogleScholar Brescoll,V.,andLaFrance,M.(2004).Thecorrelatesandconsequencesofnewspaperreportsofresearchonsexdifference.Psychol.Sci.15,515–520.doi:10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00712.x PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Burn,S.M.,Aboud,R.,andMoyles,C.(2000).Therelationshipbetweengendersocialidentityandsupportforfeminism.SexRoles42,1081–1089.doi:10.1023/A:1007044802798 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Butler,J.(1990).GenderTrouble:FeminismandtheSubversionofIdentity.Abingdon:Routledge. GoogleScholar Byrd-Craven,J.,andGeary,D.C.(2013).“Anevolutionaryunderstandingofsexdifferences,”inTheSAGEHandbookofGenderandPsychology,edsM.K.RyanandN.R.Branscombe(NewYork,NY:SAGEPublications),100–114.doi:10.4135/9781446269930.n7 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Cadinu,M.,andGaldi,S.(2012).Genderdifferencesinimplicitgenderself-categorizationleadtostrongergenderself-stereotypingbywomenthanbymen.Eur.J.Soc.Psychol.42,546–551.doi:10.1037/pspp0000124 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Darwin,C.(1871).TheDecentofManandSelectioninRelationtoSex.London:Murray. GoogleScholar Deaux,K.,andMajor,B.(1987).Puttinggenderintocontext:aninteractivemodelofgender-relatedbehavior.Psychol.Rev.94,369–389.doi:10.1037/0033-295X.94.3.369 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Eagly,A.H.(1987).SexDifferencesinSocialBehaviour:ASocial-RoleInterpretation.Hillsdale,NJ:Erlbaum. GoogleScholar Eagly,A.H.,Eaton,A.,Rose,S.,Riger,S.,andMcHugh,M.(2012).Feminismandpsychology:analysisofahalf-centuryofresearchonwomenandgender.Am.Psychol.67,211–230.doi:10.1037/a0027260 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Eagly,A.H.,andWood,W.(2012).“Socialroletheory,”inHandbookofTheoriesofSocialPsychology,edsP.A.M.VanLange,A.W.KruglanskiandE.T.Higgins(ThousandOaks,CA:SagePublicationsLtd.),458–476.doi:10.4135/9781446249222.n49 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Falomir-Pichastor,J.M.,andHegarty,P.(2014).Maintainingdistinctionsunderthreat:heterosexualmenendorsethebiologicaltheoryofsexualitywhenequalityisthenorm.Br.J.Soc.Psychol.53,731–751.doi:10.1111/bjso.12051 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Fausto-Sterling,A.(1993).Thefivesexes:whymaleandfemalearenotenough.Sciences33,19–24.doi:10.1002/j.2326-1951.1993.tb03081.x CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Fausto-Sterling,A.(2000).SexingtheBody:GenderPoliticsandtheConstructionofSexuality.NewYork,NY:BasicBooks. GoogleScholar Fingerhut,A.W.,andPeplau,L.A.(2006).Theimpactofsocialrolesonstereotypesofgaymen.SexRoles55,273–278.doi:10.1007/s11199-006-9080-5 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Fiske,S.T.,andStevens,L.E.(1993).“What’ssospecialaboutsex?Genderstereotypinganddiscrimination,”inGenderIssuesinContemporarySociety,edsS.OskampandM.Costanzo(ThousandOaks,CA:SagePublications). GoogleScholar Fonesca,S.(2017).DesigningFormsforGenderDiversityandInclusion.Availableat:https://uxdesign.cc/designing-forms-for-gender-diversity-and-inclusion-d8194cf1f51 Gould,M.(1977).Towardasociologicaltheoryofsexandgender.Am.Soc.12,182–289.doi:10.1186/s40064-015-0933-7 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar GustafssonSendén,M.,Bäck,E.A.,andLindqvist,A.(2015).Introducingagender-neutralpronouninanaturalgenderlanguage:theinfluenceoftimeonattitudesandbehavior.Front.Psychol.6:893.doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00893 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Haslam,S.A.,andRyan,M.K.(2008).Theroadtotheglasscliff:differencesintheperceivedsuitabilityofmenandwomenforleadershippositionsinsucceedingandfailingorganizations.Leadersh.Q.19,530–546.doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2008.07.011 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Hegarty,P.(1997).Materializingthehypothalamus:aperformativeaccountofthe‘gaybrain’.Fem.Psychol.7,355–372.doi:10.1177/0959353597073009 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar HumanRightsWatch.(2017).IWanttobeLikeNatureMadeMe”:MedicallyUnnecessarySurgeriesonIntersexChildrenintheUS.Availableat:https://www.hrw.org/report/2017/07/25/i-want-be-nature-made-me/medically-unnecessary-surgeries-intersex-children-us Hyde,J.S.(2005).Thegendersimilaritieshypothesis.Am.Psychol.60,581–592.doi:10.1037/0003-066X.60.6.581 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Kelly,C.,andBreinlinger,S.(1995).Identityandinjustice:exploringwomen’sparticipationincollectiveaction.J.CommunityAppl.Soc.Psychol.5,41–57.doi:10.1002/casp.2450050104 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Kitzinger,C.(2005).Heteronormativityinaction:reproducingtheheterosexualnuclearfamilyinafter-hoursmedicalcalls.Soc.Probl.52,477–498.doi:10.1525/sp.2005.52.4.477 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Kurz,T.,andDonaghue,N.(2013).“Genderanddiscourse,”inTheSAGEHandbookofGenderandPsychology,edsM.K.RyanandN.R.Branscombe(London:SAGEPublications),61–77.doi:10.4135/9781446269930.n5 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Lick,D.J.,Durso,L.E.,andJohnson,K.L.(2013).Minoritystressandphysicalhealthamongsexualminorities.Perspect.Psychol.Sci.8,521–548.doi:10.1177/1745691613497965 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Lorenzi-Cioldi,F.(1991).Self-stereotypingandself-enhancementingendergroups.Eur.J.Soc.Psychol.21,403–417.doi:10.1002/ejsp.2420210504 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Maccoby,E.E.,andJacklin,C.N.(1974).Myth,realityandshadesofgray:whatweknowanddon’tknowaboutsexdifferences.Psychol.Today8,109–112. GoogleScholar Minton,H.L.(1997).Queertheory:historicalrootsandimplicationsforpsychology.TheoryPsychol.7,337–353.doi:10.1177/0959354397073003 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Morgenroth,T.,Fine,C.,Ryan,M.K.,andGenat,A.E.(2017).Sex,drugs,andrecklessdriving:aremeasuresbiasedtowardidentifyingrisk-takinginmen?Soc.Psychol.Pers.Sci.doi:10.1177/1948550617722833 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Newton,E.(1968).TheDragQueens:AStudyinUrbanAnthropology.Ph.D.dissertation,UniversityofChicago,Chicago,IL. GoogleScholar Olson,K.R.,Key,A.C.,andEaton,N.R.(2015).Gendercognitionintransgenderchildren.Psychol.Sci.26,467–474.doi:10.1177/0956797614568156 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Radke,H.R.,Hornsey,M.J.,andBarlow,F.K.(2016).Barrierstowomenengagingincollectiveactiontoovercomesexism.Am.Psychol.71,863–874.doi:10.1037/a0040345 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Roberts,S.O.,Ho,A.K.,Rhodes,M.,andGelman,S.A.(2017).Makingboundariesgreatagain:essentialismandsupportforboundary-enhancinginitiatives.Pers.Soc.Psychol.Bull.43,1643–1658.doi:10.1177/0146167217724801 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Rudman,L.A.,Moss-Racusin,C.A.,Glick,P.,andPhelan,J.E.(2012).“Reactionstovanguards:advancesinbacklashtheory,”inAdvancesinExperimentalSocialPsychology,Vol.45,eds,P.G.DevineandE.A.Plant(SanDiego,CA:AcademicPress),167–227.doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-394286-9.00004-4 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar RuPaul,Y.(1996).LettinitAllHangOut:AnAutobiography.NewYork,NY:Hyperion. GoogleScholar Ryan,M.K.,andDavid,B.(2003).Genderdifferencesinwaysofknowing:thecontextdependenceoftheattitudestowardthinkingandlearningsurvey.SexRoles49,693–699.doi:10.1023/B:SERS.0000003342.16137.32 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Ryan,M.K.,David,B.,andReynolds,K.J.(2004).Whocares?Theeffectofgenderandcontextontheselfandmoralreasoning.Psychol.WomenQ.28,246–255.doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2004.00142.x CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Sax,L.(2002).Howcommonisintersex?AresponsetoAnneFausto-Sterling.J.SexRes.39,174–178.doi:10.1080/00224490209552139 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Shields,S.A.(2008).Gender:anintersectionalityperspective.SexRoles59,301–311.doi:10.1007/s11199-008-9501-8 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Skevington,S.M.,andBaker,D.(1989).TheSocialIdentityofWomen.London:SAGEPublications. GoogleScholar Subašić,E.,Hardacre,S.L.,Elton,B.,Branscombe,N.R.,Ryan,M.K.,andReynolds,K.J.(2018).““Weforshe”:mobilisingmenandwomentoactinsolidarityforgenderequality,”inGroupProcessesandIntergroupRelations,edsD.AbramsandM.A.Hogg(ThousandOaks,CA:SAGEPublications). GoogleScholar Tajfel,H.,Billig,M.G.,Bundy,R.P.,andFlament,C.(1971).Socialcategorizationandintergroupbehaviour.Eur.J.Soc.Psychol.1,149–178.doi:10.1002/ejsp.2420010202 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Tajfel,H.,andTurner,J.C.(1979).“Anintegrativetheoryofintergroupconflict,”inTheSocialPsychologyofIntergroupRelations,edsW.G.AustinandS.Worchel(Monterey,CA:Brooks),33–37. GoogleScholar TheConversationProject(2015).GenderPerformance:AnInterviewwithJudithButler.Availableat:http://radfem.transadvocate.com/gender-performance-an-interview-with-judith-butler/ GoogleScholar Turner,J.C.,Hogg,M.A.,Oakes,P.J.,Reicher,S.D.,andWetherell,M.S.(1987).RediscoveringtheSocialGroup:ASelf-CategorizationTheory.Oxford:Blackwell. GoogleScholar UniversityofChicago(2010).TheChicagoManualofStyle,16thEdn,Chicago,IL:UniversityofChicagoPress. GoogleScholar Wetherell,M.,andEdley,N.(1999).Negotiatinghegemonicmasculinity:imaginarypositionsandpsycho-discursivepractices.Fem.Psychol.9,335–356.doi:10.1177/0959353599009003012 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Keywords:gendertrouble,gender,genderperformativity,socialpsychology,non-binarygender,genderqueer,JudithButler Citation:MorgenrothTandRyanMK(2018)GenderTroubleinSocialPsychology:HowCanButler’sWorkInformExperimentalSocialPsychologists’ConceptualizationofGender?Front.Psychol.9:1320.doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01320 Received:28March2018;Accepted:09July2018;Published:27July2018. Editedby: AliceH.Eagly,NorthwesternUniversity,UnitedStates Reviewedby: PeterHegarty,UniversityofSurrey,UnitedKingdom MarianneLaFrance,YaleUniversity,UnitedStates Copyright©2018MorgenrothandRyan.Thisisanopen-accessarticledistributedunderthetermsoftheCreativeCommonsAttributionLicense(CCBY).Theuse,distributionorreproductioninotherforumsispermitted,providedtheoriginalauthor(s)andthecopyrightowner(s)arecreditedandthattheoriginalpublicationinthisjournaliscited,inaccordancewithacceptedacademicpractice.Nouse,distributionorreproductionispermittedwhichdoesnotcomplywiththeseterms. *Correspondence:TheklaMorgenroth,[email protected] COMMENTARY ORIGINALARTICLE Peoplealsolookedat SuggestaResearchTopic>