Sugar & Spice & Everything Nice
There was a plaque hanging on the wall in my childhood bedroom with the inscription of a 19th century nursery rhyme: What are little girls made of? Sugar and spice and everything nice. (The other lyric of the rhyme is: What are little boys made of? Snakes and snails and puppydog tails.) Even as a child, I found this sentiment to be absurd. I remember wondering who decided those qualities, and feeling that as a “little girl” myself I was not accurately represented in that description. I didn’t yet understand that expectations that I would be deferential, obedient, mild-mannered, people-pleasing, happy, pretty, thin, chaste, and heterosexual generated not just from how my parents were rearing me but also from long-standing, insidious, and pervasive norms in culture and society.
Like so many other children, I was socialized based on the presumption that because I was assigned the female sex at birth that it meant my corresponding gender was female. It was also presumed that the tidy categorization of binary was appropriate based on the female genital area observed in the ultrasound when I was in utero. But “genetics does not dictate a gender binary,” and even a gendered body is “not constrained by the genetics of sex determination” and is thus “free to adapt evolutionarily” (Roughgarden, 201). It’s erroneous to presume that female or male sex is so clear-cut given that all of us are “as genetically diverse as snowflakes” (Roughgarden, 201).
Individuals are genetically diverse, but males and females are not entirely different biologically. For example, both sexes possess similar hormones such as estrogen and testosterone. These “sex” hormones are actually quite similar to each other chemically, and both males and females can synthesize them all too. Hormones are vital to developmental morphology. In both males and females, estrogen causes breast growth and testosterone causes pubic hair growth. Likewise, the anatomy of the brain is similar for both sexes; some differences are found in aptitude such as verbal fluency for females (thought to be influenced by estrogen) and spatial relation / tasks for males.
Here’s where it gets tricky. These variations in aptitude “can be amplified by social convention… The social character required by an occupation may lead to the belief that an occupation is a ‘man’s job’ [spatial tasks] or ‘woman’s work,’ [verbal fluency] far outweighing differences in native skill” (Roughgarden, 216). This leads me to posit that anticipatory socialization, both in real-time and carried inside of us from all prior generations, impacts our aptitudes as well as orientations.
In many ways, we are prisms that reflect and refract the myriad influences that socialize and shape us. Culture, society, media, education, and peers all play a role, but it can be argued that “parents remain central to the process of gender socialization because they control their children’s exposure to cultural discourses about gender” (Averett, 191). Parents are also the ones controlling the names, pronouns, clothing, decor, books, toys, and behaviors of their children from the very start.
The practices of child-rearing are usually gendered, with emphasis on conforming to gender-normative behavior. This comes with a baked-in assumption that gender conformity is linked to heterosexuality – even though there is no provable correlation that gender-normative behavior in early years predicts a child’s future sexual identity. But that’s not stopping so many parents from molding their children into what they want them to (and think they should) be.
Take clothing, for example. Just as it’s presumed that spatial skills correlate to a “man’s job” (e.g. construction worker) and verbal fluency correlates to “woman’s work” (e.g. schoolteacher), so too are colors and clothing assigned to gender. But oddly enough, before the 19th century, there were no color options for babies – they all wore white gowns that were practical, functional, and universal. In the late 1800s and early 1900s, gender-designated colors emerged, but with a twist: pink was suggested for boys and blue for girls. This only changed when clothing manufacturers and department stores reversed those color correlations in the 1940s and since then, those gendered colors have been cemented in the collective social and cultural consciousness.
University of Maryland Professor Jo Paoletti explains that clothes are associated with gender when “their pattern of use [lines] up with concepts and cultural norms that we assume are unambiguously connected to a specific gender” (PBS Origins). Hence little girls in frilly pink dresses that are preparing those “little princesses” for their presumed feminine roles where they will perform gender with emphasis on appearance, beauty, and caregiving, and little boys in practical blue overalls that are readying these “tough guys” for their masculine gender roles as stoic, strong, providers.
From the very beginning, the influence of gender binary is at play in a person’s life. It’s an all-encompassing force that “establishes a set of cultural presumptions about one’s gendered preferences, expressions, and identity relative to an assigned sex” (Rahilly, 356). The ultimate result of this entire process of socialization is an individual’s sense of self – thus little boys are raised for “snakes and snails and puppydog tails” (gender- and hetero-normative masculinity) and little girls are brought up as “sugar and spice and everything nice” (gender- and hetero-normative femininity).
That plaque on my bedroom wall served as a sort of challenge; a catalyst that propelled me into an adolescence that rebelled against what was expected of me as not just a girl, but a good girl. No dolls, no frills, no pink, no princess mindset – I refused to conform then and now. We owe our children so much more than these pre-packaged gender norms. By acknowledging all the ways that we are biologically similar and by awakening to the presumptuous dictates of society and tradition, we can expand gender expression and identity beyond the binary and into free, flexible, individual authenticity.
WORKS CITED
Averett, Kate Henley. “The Gender Buffet: LGBTQ Parents Resisting Heteronormativity.” Gender and Society. Vol. 30, No. 2: April 2016.
Rahilly, Elizabeth P. “The Gender Binary Meets The Gender-Variant Child: Parents’ Negotiations with Childhood Gender Variance.” Gender and Society. Vol. 29, No. 3: June 2015.
Roughgarden, Joan. Evolution’s Rainbow: Diversity, Gender, and Sexuality in Nature and People. University of California Press, Berkeley. Tenth Edition: 2013.
“Why was Pink for Boys and Blue for Girls?” PBS Origins. 30 January 2018. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohwbtkMXJJ0
Normal & Worthy
I came of age in the early 1990s, reared by repressive and dysfunctional “old-fashioned” Roman Catholics. Puberty wasn’t explained to me, nor was any other facet of my body or developing identity. Gender was either male or female, sexuality was hetero, and that was that. The extent of sex-ed at my Catholic school was sole emphasis on binary gender and biological sex (using Adam and Eve as the source of “truth”) and heterosexual intercourse that was strictly for procreation. Anything that strayed from a strict heteronormative binary was a “sin” and out of the question. It was also out of the conversation at home, so I had to cobble together an understanding on my own through media influences and years of exploration and experience.
Many people (including me) say that you couldn’t pay them to go back to puberty, that period of transition between childhood and adulthood that is marked by such significant growth. There are three “endocrine events” (Blakemore, et al) that comprise puberty. First is adrenarche, the activation of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis to release hormones. Second is gonadarche, when the hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal axis is at play; the follicle-stimulating and luteinizing hormones are produced with the purpose of maturing gonads and developing secondary sexual characteristics such as enlarged breasts, and the growth of facial hair and pubic hair. Finally there is the pubertal growth spurt, resulting in changes in the composition and size of adolescent bodies. The pubertal growth spurt is responsible for causing “high rates of suicidal ideation, suicidality, depression, anxiety, and substance use due to social hostility, harassment, bullying, and [associated] stressors” (Poran). Puberty is also a time of “profound changes in drives, motivations, psychology, and social life” (Blakemore, et al) for adolescents.
During my youth in the 1980s and ‘90s, “gay” was a prevalent pejorative and being anything other than heterosexual and gender-conforming meant you were portrayed in entertainment as insane or a killer (Basic Instinct, Silence of the Lambs), a token best friend used as a prop by a heteronormative peer (Clueless), and demoralized, demonized, or reduced to a joke (Ace Ventura, Mrs. Doubtfire, Soapdish, The Crying Game). These tropes persist in present-day and couple with “an environment of school, family, and peer life that is often hostile to notions of sexuality and gender diversity” (Poran) – it is through this lens of perception (driven by the binary norms enforced by society) that so many young people learn about gender and sexuality as they are going through puberty.
Both within the family and outside of the home, “gender intensification pressures youth to adhere to dominant… norms of gender; bodily developments are then measured and experienced in relation to those norms” (Poran). At the crucial time of puberty, an adolescent experiences heightened awareness and development of their bodies and identities. “Kids who don’t fit the perfect boxes [imposed by the gender binary dominant in society] are often left asking themselves what the truth is” (Johnson, 1).
Gender dysphoria is when a person feels “marked incongruence between the expressed or experienced gender and the biological sex at birth” (Kaltiala-Heino, et al). This can cause anxiety, confusion, distress, and depression – all compounded by familial and social environments, bodily changes, and blossoming potential for romantic relationships with peers. Of significant note, “adverse parental reactions toward an adolescent’s gender nonconformity have been noted as a special risk… [for] negative psychological outcomes” including not just overall mental health but also risk-taking behaviors and homelessness (Kaltiala-Heino, et al).
The Trevor Project is the leading suicide prevention and crisis intervention nonprofit organization for young people who identify as LGBTQ+. In 2023, it reported that less than 40% of LGBTQ+ youth felt that their home is LGBTQ-affirming, and 41% of LGBTQ+ youth seriously considered suicide. This is shocking, disturbing, and I believe preventable through intervention and support at home. Young people deserve compassion and care; to feel that they are worthy of belonging and love. It starts by caregivers creating a family environment that is an open and nonjudgmental safe space, free of shame. This includes learning together through a “gender conscious perspective that provides a fuller space to talk about gender pressures and gender identities, and to discuss that bodies do not mean how one relates to that body and/or that one must identify as the culture expects one” (Poran).
And for young people struggling with gender dysphoria, it’s crucial to have caregivers who not only listen with empathy and an open heart, but also support them with quality healthcare options such as gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogues (known as GnRHA therapy) that temporarily suppress the process of puberty. This is a completely reversible therapy that delays the developments resulting from puberty, which gives the young person time to reflect and “explore gender identities without the pressure of dysphoria associated with gender-incongruent physical development” (Turban, et al).
Throughout puberty, I was riddled with confusion, discomfort, and questions such as: Was it “normal” that I’d rather dress in baggy t-shirts and combat boots than preppy dresses? Was it “normal” that I had butterflies in my stomach for both David Duchovny in The X-Files and Madonna in Dick Tracy? Was I “normal?” I felt out of place within my own body; my very existence was a deep source of shame, exacerbated by a complete lack of empathy and support from my parents. My heart aches for young people struggling with gender dysphoria or any crisis of identity in a world that enforces binary rules and expectations that simply aren’t realistic for the fluid beings that we truly are. Caregivers must display through their actions and words that their children are “normal” just as they are, no matter what. They can do this by creating safe spaces in their homes to offer support and unconditional love for their children, showing them throughout all stages of their development that they are not alone, that it’s okay to have questions or feel confusion, and that however they identify, they are worthy of acceptance, care, respect, and belonging.
WORKS CITED
2023 U.S. National Survey on the Mental Health of LGTBQ Young People. The Trevor Project. https://www.thetrevorproject.org/survey-2023/
Blakemore, Sarah-Jayne et al. “The role of puberty in the developing adolescent brain.” Human Brain Mapping. 2010. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3410522/
Johnson, George M. All Boys Aren’t Blue. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York: 2020.
Kaltiala-Heino, Riittakerttu et al. “Gender dysphoria in adolescence: current perspectives.” Adolescent Health, Medicine, and Therapeutics. 2018. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5841333/
Poran, Maya A. “Teaching Puberty for LGBTQIA + Diversity, Inclusion, and Beyond: A New Model of Expansive Pubertal Understanding.” American Journal of Sexuality Education. Volume 17, Issue 4: 2022. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/15546128.2022.2053259
Turban, Jack L. et al. “Pubertal suppression for transgender youth and risk of suicidal ideation.” Pediatrics. 145(2): February 2020.
Borne Into Boxes
I didn’t plan on having a child… ever. I was a cat and dog mom and an Auntie, and was perfectly content in those roles. I didn’t even think I could have kids because of the endometriosis, ovarian cysts, hormonal treatments, and other complications I endured since my teens. So when I got pregnant in 2012, it was a shocking and disruptive upheaval. I felt no connection with this anonymous conglomerate of cells growing inside of me that was making me so physically sick and mentally and emotionally anguished.
But as the first trimester eased into the second, my bitterness (and nausea) waned. The day I discovered that I was having a girl, I came home to find that a beautiful white lily had bloomed in the backyard – it felt like a sign and also confirmed the name I had chosen for what I now knew was my daughter. Her nursery was painted sage and filled with stuffed animals like ALF and the Muppets. Her closet was filled with pop-culture-themed outfits. Her library was filled with Little Golden Books and other classics. And the life that awaited her was filled with loaded expectations regarding her sex and gender – boxes that all of us are unwittingly and unwillingly borne into, shaping and structuring and defining and confining us.
It was presumed and seemed completely natural that I would find out the sex of my child in the fateful doctor’s appointment that so many expectant parents look forward to. It was an exciting milestone both in my pregnancy journey and in the planning for my child’s life outside of the womb. Twelve years later, I have the perspective to ask: What determined her sex to begin with? and more personally: Did I do my daughter a disservice by proactively assigning her the gender that is assumed to correlate with her sex?
When I was pregnant, all I had to go on was my very basic knowledge of XX and XY chromosomes, and that we all start out with the potential for both sexes. I can presume that the Sex-determining Region Y (SRY) gene did not factor into my daughter’s sexual development, as that gene provides a push for male differentiation. So in the absence of SRY, a follicle-stimulating hormone activated the development of her ovaries, which then produced estrogen, and in turn triggered the development from the Müllerian duct of her oviducts, cervix, and uterus (Hake and O’Connor).
But this is just one aspect of how genes interact. It’s humbling and awe-inspiring to consider that “a bewildering number of underlying mechanisms” (Bachtrog, et al) determined the biological sex of my child, including unpredictability and “a cacophony of developmental histories” (Roughgarden, 205) that play into the process of how sex is developed. Additionally, while chromosomes do play a role in determining sex, “environmental factors introduce additional wrinkles into the developmental process” (Hake and O’Connor).
If sex can be perceived as the outcome of relationships among components (to loosely borrow a phrase from Roughgarden), then so too can gender, which is constructed from the integrations and intersections of society, culture, religion, tradition, and the interpretation of biological sex as always being binary and always determining a correlating binary gender. From the moment of conception, we are being fitted for our boxes – biological males in the male gender box; biological females in the female box. This either/or binary classification maintains tidy categories in virtually every aspect of our lives, from athletics to algorithms and even to assumptions made about interpersonal relationships (Men Are from Mars, Women Are from Venus, anyone?)
Our society and rearing also genders personality traits with the expectation that males are stoic, strong providers and females are emotional, maternal caregivers. “As these behaviors are continually performed, they are assumed to be essential gender differences” (Zheng, 51). Legendary entertainer RuPaul quipped we’re all born naked, and the rest is drag, meaning that people “do gender” through a variety of external expressions such as body language and verbal communication, clothing, accessories, hair and makeup, color palettes, and even entertainment – think of how beer and action movies are geared towards men, while rosé and rom-coms are targeted at women.
While I didn’t furnish my daughter’s nursery and closet with pink frills and princesses, learning that her biological sex was female did result in my use of “gendered verbal interactions” and “anticipatory socialization” (Barnes, 187) which manifested as using she/her pronouns, the choice of her formal name, and even just the concept of having and raising a girl/daughter. I was well-intentioned, but didn’t consider that “anatomy is not always destiny” (Barnes, 188)
For as open-minded, progressive, and feminist as I thought myself to be, I only now understand that I still predetermined my daughter’s gender based on my understanding of her biological sex, and reinforced certain social expectations of how that gender would be expressed. The boxes of binary that enclose us create and sustain a world that dictates what are acceptable and normal attributes, inclinations, and behaviors for sex and gender. We can challenge and reject these constraints by honoring all the nuance behind the biology of human development and embracing the myriad forms of sexual identity and gender expression.
WORKS CITED
Bachtrog, Doris et al. “Sex Determination: Why So Many Ways of Doing It?” 2014: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4077654/
Barnes, Medora W. “Anticipatory Socialization of Pregnant Women: Learning Fetal Sex and Gendered Interactions.” Sociological Perspectives, 58(2), 2015.
Hake Ph.D, Laura and Clare O’Connor, Ph.D. “Genetic mechanisms of sex determination.” Nature Education, 1(1):25, 2008. https://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/genetic-mechanisms-of-sex-determination-314/
Roughgarden, Joan. Evolution’s Rainbow: Diversity, Gender, and Sexuality in Nature and People. University of California Press, Berkeley. Tenth Edition: 2013.
Zheng, Lily. Gender Ambiguity in the Workplace: Transgender and Gender-Diverse Discrimination. Bloomsbury Publishing, New York: 2018.
Alma Canción 