Galen Rosenberg
Sasha Sobol: What are your definitions of “man” and “woman?”
Galen Rosenberg: I mean, just like what the word means?
SS: Yes.
GR: I guess I would initially go with to the extent that there’s genetically measurable differences that people categorize as male and female, that male are the people who have the genetic characteristics of male and women are the people who have genetic characteristics of women. I know there’s genetic variation that sometimes makes it more complicated. I have a niece who’s got [triple X syndrome and] she has an extra X chromosome. She presents as female, everybody calls her a girl, but I guess even genetically it’s a little complicated sometimes.
SS: Are there any gender roles that you think should be there and are there any that you wish did not exist?
GR: I don’t know about should, I think whatever the biological and cultural forces are that guide people’s behavior in one direction or another, they are what they are, I guess, in a given culture and in a given time. I think there definitely are cases where people’s gender roles seem wrong for them as individuals, make them uncomfortable, make them feel untrue to themselves, or limit them in terms of what they think they would like to be or do. So, generally I think that’s not a good thing. People feel like whatever the biological or cultural norms are makes them unhappy.
SS: Do you, for the most part, conform to society’s gender expectations?
GR: Yeah, I would say pretty much. It depends on which kind of society, or which part of our culture, let’s say you’re looking at, and there’s definitely been times when I pretty consciously felt like what I thought some people or some part of the culture thought about me as male was not what I thought of as myself. And there’ve been times when I thought that who I think I am as an individual is not consistent with the simple black and white dichotomy of male and female, that’s for sure. But I think if you ask most people they’d say, you know, Galen Rosenberg is pretty male, I guess.
SS: Is there anything that you do that is not typically associated with your gender?
GR: Well, going with the high school, I’ve always been literary, I guess. I like sports, but there’s always been stuff about the kind of hypermasculine aspects of male sports that I have felt uncomfortable with. So, when I remember high school sports, I think, even though I liked sports, I was not comfortable with the kind of macho, you know, behaviors associated with that. When I went to Berkeley and was a women’s studies major, I was the only guy in the program. I was obviously very aware of that, and the fact that I was the only guy meant that I was not “typically male,” I guess, just data-wise, but I felt fine about that. I like to do some things that are traditionally thought of as female. I learned to sew when I was in high school and sewed some of my own clothes and sewed stuff for girlfriends, sewed my wife’s wedding dress. But that’s not terribly radical, I don’t think.
SS: For the things that you do conform with, is it more because society expects you to or because that’s just how you are?
GR: It’s hard to say. Sometimes. My measure of that kind of thing is that there’s always a complicated kind of mirror to look through on those things about if I’m comfortable with who I am and how I feel about what I’m doing or how I am being, then I think that’s me being authentic with myself or something, not conforming to expectations, but on the other hand, it’s hard to know within my own head whether I’m just comfortable with conforming to the expectations or there’s something genuine about wanting to sew clothing or whatever. I definitely know that the kind of macho aspect of what is thought of as masculine normal behavior, I always been-- just thought that was just kind of weird. And I’ve never been really drawn in that direction. So if I were in a culture where that was, like, I don’t know, to be stereotypical about it, if I grew up in a small midWestern town where all the boys were on the football team and stuff like that, I know I would have not been comfortable. I think. Of course I didn’t grow up there.
SS: So the next question is about two situations. I’m going to tell you what they are and ask you what you think about them. The first one is how often when it’s acceptable for a man to expose his chest, a woman has to cover hers and in many places there are laws that prohibit women from showing their chest in public. And the second situation is about formal wear and how women can show their arms, legs, and cleavage and men kind of don’t really have any options and they have to wear suits.
GR: Well, it’s an interesting paradox. It was never pointed out quite that directly to me the way you’re describing it. That is interesting. Although obviously there’s big cultural differences and in some cultures women can’t expose themselves, legs, arms, at all, regardless of the formality, although at home they can, etcetera. But in our culture, I think our culture’s really paradoxical and hypocritical in its understanding of people’s sexuality to the extent that bearing skin can either implicitly or explicitly be associated with sexual attractiveness or whatever. Because in some ways our society is very in your face and sexualized, by all kinds of things that don’t have anything to do with sex, really, like so much of marketing, you know, you could sell your car, insurance, using sexualized imagery or whatever. And so, clothing is an expression of that. And I think that for whatever reason our cultures felt like women’s breasts are sexualized and therefore shouldn’t be exposed, but then because our society uses sexualized imagery to convey things and women are taught to do that, I think, that’s probably also natural on some level to do that. On the one hand, you’re not supposed to expose, on the other hand you “should” because it’s attractive. I think men’s bodies are not seen, at least historically in our culture, have not been seen as sexual in quite the same way. So like a guy walking around the quad with his shirt off might on some level be sexualized, but I don’t think in quite the same way. And so, that’s changing. Not necessarily in a good way, and I think fairly recently in our society. But I don’t know that the fact that in formal wear men have to wear suits and are covered has a whole lot to do with sexuality. I think it has to do more with authority and power or something like that. Where as with women, it definitely does. I think what gets covered and what doesn’t get covered is primarily about that in our society.
SS: In our society it's more acceptable for a woman to be masculine than for a man to be feminine. Why do you think that is and why do you think femininity is valued as less than masculinity?
GR: Not sure I agree with that. When you're thinking of our culture, do you think at [this school]?
SS: Possibly, and I guess the stereotypical Western culture in general.
GR: I don't know, when I think even in the Bay Area cultural norms vary, let alone across the United States, let alone Western Europe or whatever, let alone globally. But thinking about my perception of this immediate community, when a guy is a little bit more effeminate, how would he be perceived as opposed to a girl who's more masculine in her appearance or behavior? I guess it would be a question of degree, you know what I mean? WHat's your perception?
SS: I guess my kind of thought is that maybe femininity in boys if they're over-the-top feminine, they aren't going to be taken seriously as opposed to like really masculine girls.
GR: I think up to a point a girl can present in a more masculine way through her clothing, haircut, or demeanor, or voice, or speaking pattern, or whatever. And people might even not think anything of it up to a point. Whereas with a guy if his clothing or haircut or appearance or, like you said, makeup or something like that, or speaking voice was more feminine, I think people would - yeah, you're right - probably would notice that more. Might be less accepting of it, I guess. I'm not sure if the girl pushed it further into masculine behavoir and appearance, when the guy did the same thing, in terms of... Yeah, I guess so.
SS: Do you agree that maybe femininity is valued as less than masculinity?
GR: I think it's seen as less serious. I don't know about valued in a totally general way, but I think you used the word serious before. Yeah, I think whatever the characteristics people generally attribute to feminine as opposed to masculine, they may be valued differently, but I think they're less serious, or, depending on the context, less important.
SS: Do you think that kind of relates to discrimination in the workplace.
GR: Yeah, for sure. And like, if the girl wore frilly dresses to work, and a guy wore traditionally masculine clothing, he would be taken more seriously than her. Again, it's sort of a question of degree. If she dressed in a more kind of masculine way with the women's suits or that kind of thing, or even pants and a shirt, whereas the guy dressed in a more feminine way, that'd hurt him more professionally. Probably.
SS: Do you think it's important to make the world a more accepting and welcoming place for gender nonconforming people? And if so, how can this be done?
GR: Well, did anybody say no? I mena, people should be always accepted for who they are, especially to the extent that their identity is genuine. I mean, when it appears to me that the person is trying to be somebody tha tthey're not, if it feels that way, what appears to me to be inauthenticity feels like somehting's not right and I will judge a person like that or whatever, but if I think a person appears to be authentic about who they are and that's gender nonconforming, they need to feel comfortable and safe in being who they are without being judged because they don't conform, to kind of even somewhat less rigid standards in this community, compared to places where the standasrds are even more rigid, but there's definitly standars and expectations in this community that limit people's ability to kind of feel comfortable with being authentic with who they are. I think that's changing. It's a sign that it can change. I think it mostly changes because individuals speak out about their own experience, they organize with other people who have the same experience or feel the same way to kind of create a sense of unity around their own experience and share that with other people. I think political activism and organizing changes how cultures work. I think art changes how people see the world that they live in. So people who want a world that's more accepting, who speak out, share their experience, organize with other people, advocate for what they think is right, create art that expresses their experience and poin tof view, that's how things change.
SS: Is there anything else you would like to add?
GR: Well, what do you think?
SS: About the last question?
GR: Pick one. Which one's most interesting to you?
SS: I don't know, they're all somewhat interesting. I could go on a rant about all of them, basically.
GR: Okay, rant on one.
SS: One of them... I can't pick.
GR: WEll, you've talked to a whole bunch of people so far. Which one seems to be the one that made you think the most?
SS: I don't know, I guess the first one about defining "man" and "woman," as well as the one about whether or not it's appropriate for women to show their breasts in public. Because there's the most disagreement on those two, I guess.
GR: Like what?
SS: For the first question, one of the things I was looking for was seeing if the people are going to say anything about people identifying with a gender, which kind of shows how much transgender awareness there is, possibly [and/or whether or not they understand the terminology]. And not a lot of people said something about that. Like, maybe a quarter or a third, I'm not sure. I haven't really counted yet. And then for the chest thing, I guess it was just weird how some people didn't even understand the question. It's like, "Oh, that's because women have breasts," and I'm like, "Ok, that's a great answer, but it doesn't--"
GR: That's the point.
SS: Yeah, they kind of miss the point of the question.
GR: People are really uncomfortable talking about it.
SS: Possibly, yeah. I guess maybe they don't really think about other possibilities.
GR: What's your sense of how accepting this community, like [this school] is of gender nonconformity?
SS: I think they're pretty cool with it, for the most part. I mean, I'm doing fine.
GR: Are there other students who you think identify that way, consciously?
SS: Yeah. I mean like I have a friend who's a guy and experiments with makeup and stuff and I don't think he's gotten any[/much] negative feedback, so I think it's pretty accepting.
GR: I think your topic is interesting because the way you're stating it, it's not about sexuality. I mean, it probably is on some level, but it isn't necessarily about sexuality. It's about other aspects of gender. And I think it's something that probably most people experience on some level, and I'm sure when you talked to people, they all had examples of how they don't conform to gender expectations.
SS: Most of them did.
GR: So, on some level, more maybe than asking a question about sexuality, like "Do you have homosexual feelings, even if you identify as heterosexual?" or whatever, it's something that most people can kind of identify on some level with the kind of main experience you're talking about.
SS: I was going to say something, and then I forgot...
GR: What's the endpoint? So you're collecting these, are you going to have your own thesis?
SS: No, I'm not going to have a thesis [not true], I'm going to write something about it. Probably no more than a couple pages. Maybe just go on my rants about all the questions.
GR: And you say "rant," is that because you feel really strongly about your point of view?
SS: Possibly. Maybe, I don't know. I guess rants because... I guess I do have opinions about a lot of things and I just want to get them across, but also like write about what I learned from the interviews. About people's thoughts/perceptions.
GR: You know, another example that I have thought about before that fits your point is the way tomboys, especially up until middle school, are way more accepted and approved of than a boy who presents more feminine. Even pretty conservative parents would not be terribly unhappy with a tomboyish girl. They'd assume as she got older she'd become more feminine. I think that's my stereotype, in a way. Where as with a boy who presents as more feminine, they're gonna get more tense about it. I think that's indicative of what you were saying about valuing masculinity more than femininity.
SS: Yeah, and I guess the thing with feminine boys is that the whole thing with homophobia kind of come in.
GR: I think it's really interesting, and I'm not sure what I think about this, there's the whole question of separating the relationship between presenting with characteristics of a gender, sexuality being part of that. And so, there's feminine presenting boys who are straight, and masculine presenting girls who are straight, and vise versa and everything. And the boy who's growing up feminine, I think people are much more likely to think that he's gay, and that's also bad from some people's point of view. And the girl who's presenting as a boy, they're not necessarily going to assume or have the same kind of negative judgements about her sexuality.
Note: This interview was done in person.
Note: This interview was done in person.