Gender conversation is something that has evolved over time, and stands in a much more malleable state in society than it may have once before. People have always been non-binary, or felt themselves to be something beyond the labels of man or woman, and with studies on gender we can begin to unpack how society pressures gender performativity in people. Cinema is a great way to explore this topic, creating a space where the conversation can not only be held but examined further.
What does this phrase “gender performativity” actually mean? To understand that better, it is best to establish in simple terms what performative language itself is. As mentioned in Sarah Chinn’s article, “Gender Performativity,” she cites the language philosopher J.L. Austin in saying that this type of language is not merely descriptive, and actually holds action behind it. Examples can include a sentencing from a judge, a pronunciation of marriage or a promise, in these cases the language implies an actual consequence from the spoken word.
This ties into gender by the proclamation of others upon the self, be a girl, act like a girl. Man up, be a real man. If one is to stray from the guidelines set upon them by these words, they are tearing themselves away from their declared identity. Thus, when these genders are applied, individuals seek out to “perform” the roles they have been assigned. What makes something inherently feminine or masculine is of course subjective to environment and enforcement, oftentimes forming in the role of parenting.
This brings us to the film “Tomboy” by Céline Sciamma. After moving to a new neighborhood, our protagonist Laure establishes a new identity outside of what is assigned to her by her parents. When introducing herself to the new kids, she tells them that she is Mikael, and presents as a boy. We as the audience see Laure enjoy herself as Mikael, playing with the other boys, kissing girls and loving life. However, this stands outside of the performative “girlishness” that her parents expect of her, particularly her mother. Spoilers for the film lie ahead, be warned.
Laure’s mother soon finds out about her establishing herself as Mikael, and seeks to tear it down before what she perceives to be a “lie” goes on any further. Forcing Laure into a dress, she parades her to each of her friends and informs them that Mikael is actually a girl. This is tough for us as the audience to watch, because we know how much Laure tends to stray away from the typical “girly” natured things, such as wearing a dress. Her mother is blind to Laure’s feelings of masculinity, and wants to prescribe her into the gender that she sees fit for her daughter.
I found that this film explores the topic of gender performativity from the angle of subversion, and shows how an individual can explore their feelings outside of the pressure from society. Laure is not simply putting on a mask, she becomes Mikael. She enjoys doing traditionally masculine things with her father, and enjoys being a big brother to her little sister. These themes and topics are well suited to be included in the gender conversation, and help us to explore how performative language exists within queer culture.
