The Resistance

The human brain loves to make connections. From the moment we open our eyes to the moment we close them, we seek out patterns. It is a way for us to understand the complex world around us. We create labels to recognize objects, organize everything into categories, and simplify what we may never understand. So, it’d make sense that if something doesn’t fit into our categories, then it would make us uncomfortable. Regardless of how much anyone can deny it, we subconsciously dislike the abnormal. Hence, the concept of otherness. Those that defy their predetermined categories will face endless misunderstanding. What makes them different from everyone else is their will to fight our human desire to fit in. What we all must acknowledge then, is not to ignore our differences, but to live equally, in spite of them. Yes, it may be fighting our human instincts, but perhaps that’s something we should stand to fight. Take it from Anna Quindlen, an American author and mother, and Gwendolyn Ann Smith, a transgender activist. Both Quindlen, author of “Between the Sexes, a Great Divide” and Smith, author of “We’re All Someone’s Freak” demonstrate society’s desire to separate ourselves from those who are different, creating gender divides, and both respond with solutions to confront otherness by entering the divide and embracing our differences.

Anna Quindlen’s “Between the Sexes, a Great Divide,” showcases otherness through her life as a wife and mother. She notes that differences between men and women do exist, interior and exterior, big and small. She points to one moment in her life when she noticed one of these small differences, causing a divide between the ones she loved. Quindlen placed an amaryllis bulb in the bathroom, an unfamiliar plant that blooms into a marvelous flower. But, her husband and two sons could not understand its purpose. That subtle distance between them and their mother left Quindlen to question what makes us different. She ponders, “Men are the other. We are the other, too, of course. That’s why we want to believe so badly that there are no others at all […]” (165). This difference in perspectives that Quindlen points out creates divides. First, we become disappointed or frustrated when we are misunderstood by the opposite gender. Second, we avoid these differences, and the misunderstandings can turn into prejudice. And third, that the prejudices will lead to our divisions.

On the other hand, Gwendolyn Ann Smith’s “We’re All Someone’s Freak,” investigates the effects of otherness against anyone who is different. She ties in her transgender lifestyle with the idea that we negatively point out our differences in order to put others down. While Quindlen points to otherness between men and women, Smith stretches the concept to anyone that doesn’t fit into one of those two options. The problem, through Smith’s perspective, is that we look for the differences in one another because it makes us feel more normal. She writes, “We just want to identify the “real” freaks, so we can feel closer to normal” (186). This behavior is an endless wave of dark energy. Everyone, even from the smallest minorities, sees someone else as different and strange; as alien. This hostility makes for a social hierarchy—where someone always ends up on the bottom. Even within the LGBTQ+ community, people will see someone else as more different. Both Quindlen and Smith acknowledge this cycle of differentiating ourselves from others. However, Smith indicates that our unnecessary desire to segregate one another is rooted in every individual. For example, even her friend requested not to be associated with Smith’s transgender lifestyle. This labeled Smith as the ‘freak’, and herself as the ‘normal.’ Angered and impassioned, Smith elaborates, “all I need to do to cause someone difficulty is to call them a friend” (185). With all this shaming and labeling and ‘freakifying,’ even our own friends, people within our own communities, can turn on us. No one is safe from being othered.

To reverse otherness, Quindlen provides an analogy. At school dances, boys and girls are divided. I can reflect back to my own 6th-grade dance. Although we could have been united by our awkwardness, instead, we stayed divided. Quindlen proposes that if we conquer this gap on the dance floor, then we can conquer judgment of differences. Dancing in the middle of the divide, with whoever’s around, is what will defer our prejudice. Of course, Quindlen is not only referring to school dances. Her analogy can be linked to any gender-divided situation, from workplace inequality to common misunderstanding at home. Perhaps Quindlen is really encouraging us to break all of the divides, no matter the obstacles. She states, “difference simply is” (165). The acceptance of the differences, along with resisting our tendency to segregate, is what will break down barriers. So let the differences be and dance away.

Rather than providing any analogy or concrete instruction like Quindlen does, Smith’s solution is to quit discussing who is normal and who is not, and start recognizing that everyone is entitled to their own life, however they chose to live it. She testifies, “We can worry about who is this and who is that [...] In the end, we are all somebody’s freak—and basic human dignity is not a privilege of the lucky superior few, but a right of all or none” (187). What Smith is suggesting is that we should not allow ourselves to pass judgment on each other because we are all unique. We shouldn’t judge, because normality is nothing more than a concept, having no real significance in one’s life, unless of course we hand over the control. Allowing the opinions of others to decide whether or not we are normal is dangerous. Smith has experienced this in a variety of ways, so she would know how it can drive us to insanity. Even within the LGBTQ+ community, backs are turned and divides are built. Even against their brothers and sisters, people who were once united by their identity can later be divided. While Quindlen suggests that each individual conquer their own dance floor, it seems that Smith believes that we must all—as one—conquer these gender divides. Everyone must overlook prejudices in order for society to move on. Smith concludes, “We live in a world of incredible variations, where there are some 200,000 species of moths and butterflies to be found in this planet, where one can find snowy ice caps and boiling cauldrons of lava, and where biodiversity is the very thing that keeps the whole complex system in tune” (186). In order for society to succeed, we must work together, using our differences, to create a world of diversity and acceptance. Smith establishes that teamwork will be necessary to eliminate the misunderstanding from our lives.

Together, Quindlen and Smith clearly establish the effects of otherness on society. While Quindlen experiences it through gender divides amongst her family and suggests dancing into the great divide, Smith faces scrutiny as a transgender woman and suggests the disposal of outdated labels, encouraging the freedom to be different. I challenge to take on both of these solutions. We should both do the dance and invite everyone. Humans may have been programmed to make categories, but you can embrace the differences, rather than run in fear. We will have to work together to fight gender stereotypes. It is our duty as intellectuals to not avoid the unknown, but to face it. It will continue to overcome our desire to belong and strengthen the divisions between us until we can resist the poisonous prejudice of gender divides.