I may have a bias already but yeah 100% gender is a performance and for different societies, different performances are called upon to maintain those norms, or even as you pointed out, the same societies but different time periods. One example coming to mind is how pre Great Depression team sports (like american football) used to take team photos. Earlier photos shows commraderie and touching. Team mates practically leaning one one another. Again, football. The tackling game with beefy strong people. But post depression/war, they become columns with isolation standing apart and no hint of intimacy with their team mates. I'm not suggesting romantic intimacy, but maybe my words are failing me but more so the stronger effort to be a stoic island alone, even within a team. Tangentially, I'd like to circle back to Superman's earlier form because I recall reading some comic strips (before he got collected as a comic book) in which Superman was also attacking slum lords and I'm just thinking about how Unions, while somewhat supported today, used to take far more direct action. Unions feel far more passive now in that the only action they take is maybe striking and now we have things like freakin' child labor returning. Direct action has a lot of effect and maybe it needs a return
I found showing people the performativity to be very entertaining as well as enlightening. I do costuming and historical re-enactment, I'm trans and very androgynous in appearance, and took a friend out in full extravagant fancy dress while explaining to them to expect completely different reactions from people. In typical encounters just going out in casual clothes, pants and shirt, usually quite obvious that I'm neither male nor female, you'd get a variation ranging from basic psychological script responses to awkwardness or avoidance from being unsure how they should perform to straight out hostility. But going out in full dress, elaborate carnivale attire, they got to see the reactions shift to excitement, engagement and admiration... people who would typically treat you with disdain or scorn were now expressing 'omg you look amazing' and every half dozen people you'd get someone asking for a picture or a selfie. Just from appearance. If we enacted onto this performance, in voice and mannerisms, asked for a coffee as 'fair weather to you dear creature, might we partake in some of those scrumptious little chocolate coffee beverages you do so well?' ...half the time they themselves would join in on the performance, start speaking or acting with similar mannerisms or portray their own roles as they wished. And so, they got to see for themself how things like masculinity and femininity were performed, as well as see it from a lens completely outside of those performances. I never acted in any stereotypically masculine or feminine manner, I acted like a stereotypical noble, royal, high class fancy snob or aristocrat... and very much looked the part in our elaborate dresses. So the people we encountered recognized this, they recognized the performance and went along with the role and joined in... because they perceived and understood the basic script - be fancy talk fancy. Most people know of and have learned this from media, films about royalty, nobility, history, kings and queens, posh noble fancy speak with old english etc. etc. It is interesting that you can do these with or without performing gender roles, and that peoples' behaviour can vary wildly in response.
I may have a bias already but yeah 100% gender is a performance and for different societies, different performances are called upon to maintain those norms, or even as you pointed out, the same societies but different time periods. One example coming to mind is how pre Great Depression team sports (like american football) used to take team photos. Earlier photos shows commraderie and touching. Team mates practically leaning one one another. Again, football. The tackling game with beefy strong people. But post depression/war, they become columns with isolation standing apart and no hint of intimacy with their team mates. I'm not suggesting romantic intimacy, but maybe my words are failing me but more so the stronger effort to be a stoic island alone, even within a team.
Tangentially, I'd like to circle back to Superman's earlier form because I recall reading some comic strips (before he got collected as a comic book) in which Superman was also attacking slum lords and I'm just thinking about how Unions, while somewhat supported today, used to take far more direct action. Unions feel far more passive now in that the only action they take is maybe striking and now we have things like freakin' child labor returning. Direct action has a lot of effect and maybe it needs a return
I found showing people the performativity to be very entertaining as well as enlightening.
I do costuming and historical re-enactment, I'm trans and very androgynous in appearance, and took a friend out in full extravagant fancy dress while explaining to them to expect completely different reactions from people.
In typical encounters just going out in casual clothes, pants and shirt, usually quite obvious that I'm neither male nor female, you'd get a variation ranging from basic psychological script responses to awkwardness or avoidance from being unsure how they should perform to straight out hostility.
But going out in full dress, elaborate carnivale attire, they got to see the reactions shift to excitement, engagement and admiration... people who would typically treat you with disdain or scorn were now expressing 'omg you look amazing' and every half dozen people you'd get someone asking for a picture or a selfie.
Just from appearance.
If we enacted onto this performance, in voice and mannerisms, asked for a coffee as 'fair weather to you dear creature, might we partake in some of those scrumptious little chocolate coffee beverages you do so well?'
...half the time they themselves would join in on the performance, start speaking or acting with similar mannerisms or portray their own roles as they wished.
And so, they got to see for themself how things like masculinity and femininity were performed, as well as see it from a lens completely outside of those performances.
I never acted in any stereotypically masculine or feminine manner, I acted like a stereotypical noble, royal, high class fancy snob or aristocrat... and very much looked the part in our elaborate dresses.
So the people we encountered recognized this, they recognized the performance and went along with the role and joined in... because they perceived and understood the basic script - be fancy talk fancy.
Most people know of and have learned this from media, films about royalty, nobility, history, kings and queens, posh noble fancy speak with old english etc. etc.
It is interesting that you can do these with or without performing gender roles, and that peoples' behaviour can vary wildly in response.