The second film in my analysis of the films of Celine Sciamma is the genderbending film, Tomboy. The sophomore film in Sciamma’s coming-of-age trilogy encompasses the ideas of gender nonconformity and the fluidity of gender expression; during a time when neither were embraced by the mainstream as acceptable identities, or even concepts. This paper is a brief look at the film’s place in the cultural conversation and undo criticism of nonbinary gendered bodies and identities while attempting to interrogate the film’s impact beyond indie French cinema.
PLOT
Arriving
in a new town after changing schools, Laure decides to introduce themselves as
Michael to the local group of kids, especially Lisa. As the summer progresses,
and friendships are forged, Michael tries to navigate both worlds: their home
life and the life they have built with the community of children and fellow
teenagers. Everything begins to unravel when Michael’s sister is the flashpoint
for an altercation that Michael has with another local boy. When the civility
of parental surveillance intercedes in the resolution of this conflict,
Michael’s world crumbles; swallowed by the resiliency of the gender binary.
TERMINOLOGY
For
clarity and reference: I will be using
Helena Darwin (2022)’s terminology found in the book Redoing Gender: How
Nonbinary Gender Contributes to Social Change. In her text, Darwin (2022) defines
the terms “Transgender”, “Cisgender” “Nonbinary” “Genderqueer” “AFAB” and
“AMAB”
Transgender: These
are individuals who move away from the gender that is assigned to them at
birth. This is usually used in conjunction with trans men and trans women, who
transitioned woman to man and or from man to women; but this also includes all
gender variant people. This usually includes individuals who’s gender identity is
not represented by their sex assigned category at birth.
Cisgender: These
are individuals who’s gender identity fit the sex assigned categories at birth often
reinforced and represented by the gendered social norms that are often learned
through a binary gendered attitude infused in the process of socialization
Nonbinary: Nonbinary
people are the inclusive range of individuals that do not fit within the
strict, and often hierarchical structure of the male/masculine, female/feminine
binary. Some nonbinary people identify as both, some neither, some as fluid,
others as changing
Genderqueer: This
term is sometimes used interchangeably with Nonbinary but whereas nonbinary is
a broader umbrella term, Genderqueer can include agender, bigender, gender
flux, gender fluid, pangender, polygender, and gender variant. For some
individuals the distinction between these two terms is the difference between
gender and sexuality.
AFAB/AMAB Assigned
Female/Male at Birth (Sometimes DFAB for Designated Female/Male at Birth) This
is to distinguish the difference between the Binary sex/gender category was officially
applied (imposed) through a variety of social institutions (p7)
HISTORICAL CONTEXT
In
2012, around the time of the film’s production, France removed gender identity
disorder as a diagnosis. Yet, as indicated by a variety of trans rights groups,
this was done only for lip service rather than create any type of substantive
change. It is against this backdrop that Sciamma decides to engage in crafting
a story about the liminal space between the gender binary.
Production
All
of the limited information that can be gathered about the development and
production of this film reveals that Sciamma’s intention was for this film to
be read as a story either cis gender girls or trans boys could identify with.
She exclusively wanted to keep Laure/Michael’s gender identity and sexual
orientation vague so that the film could speak to as many people as possible. While
this seems to be motivated by capitalism in not wanting to alienate a segment
of a potential audience, it could also be a form of protection. This way
Sciamma does not have to worry about her film being a definitive representation
of the trans experience. Yet, even if that was the goal, certain cinematic
choices Sciamma makes tips her hand.
Early in the film, we are introduced to a nameless child looking like they are in the age range of pre-teen to early teens. By binary gender norm convention, and the way that the child presents their gender, it is easy to assume a male/masculine sex and gender identity. Yet, as the child stand up out of the bath you see a glimpse of female genitalia. The choice to show visible sex organs of a child is dangerous due to the way that those images can be used (child pornography), and while Sciamma shoots the scene in a non-sexually mundane way to minimize its potential sexualization, the belief in the necessity of the scene also has the potential to reinforce the binary. This reveal at the beginning of the film is necessary for the tension and conflict to follow, and thus, undercuts a trans inclusive interpretation of the film for the sake of the narrative. The gender binary is so ingrained in our understanding and functioning of almost every aspect of life, that presenting Michael’s naked body to the audience can be perceived as making the audience feel like they know “the truth” of Michael's gender identity. This can fuel a sense of biological determinism and minimizes the possibility of a positive a trans/ nonbinary representation. Therefore, Michael’s behavior becomes more reminiscent of the gender bending that takes place in Kabul, where the “Bascha Posh” allow for young girls to experience what it is like to be a boy in their culture rather than an actual trans inclusive narrative (Nordberg,2014). Through this lens, Sciamma’s film becomes functionally inert when it comes to Trans Rights.
Brief History of Trans
exclusion by Progressive Groups
The history of Trans
rights is longer and more intricately complicated that most would assume. In
1952, the trans rights officially started with the foundation and publishing of
the
journal Transvestia: The Journal of the American Society for Equality in
Dress by Virginia Prince. Christine
Jorgensen was one of the first trans women who, after Danish
medical care, became fully accepted into mainstream society. Unfortunately,
this was only successful because she not only distanced herself from others
that were considered sexually deviant at the time (Gays, lesbians, bisexuals,
sexual explicits), but she also reproduced whiteness and cultural norms of
femininity. She was invisible because of the patriarchal gender structure she
perpetuated. This started to establish hypothetical gender norm cues that
people could use to both identify and police gender identities. These norms
usually fell back on biologically deterministic criteria centered around
genitalia and reinforced through an acceptable gender performance.
The policing of gender
identities also began the entangling of Trans rights and Gay rights. In 1969,
several trans individuals were involved in the Stonewall riots that sparked the
beginning of the Gay Rights movement. Prior to this landmark event, there were
two other altercations with police (also mislabeled as riots) that stemmed from
harassment and false arrest. The first was in 1959 at Cooper’s donuts in Los
Angeles where after repeated harassment police falsely arrested three patrons.
Secondly, in 1966 in the tenderloin district in San Francisco when a Trans woman
resisted arrest by throwing coffee in a police officer’s face. In all three
cases, there was an amalgamation of trans rights with gay rights: a conglomeration
of similar but different identities. These
incidents also illustrate that police did not perceive or care to understand
the distinction between the two civil rights movements, their goals, or their
platforms. Additionally, while there is an overlap and solidarity that can
exist between gay and trans rights and those that support them (many people
supporting both) There are several instances where Feminists, gays, and lesbians
have alienated and discriminated against those who are trans.
The exclusion of trans
rights by other civil rights activists have been historically common beginning with
the alienation of trans individuals from the feminist movement. Some Radical
feminists during the third wave feminist movement did not recognize trans women
as women. The origin of this could be a backlash to Christine Jorgensen not
identifying as feminist and her role in reproducing the patriarchy and binary
gender norms. Additionally, Janice Richmond’s book The Transexual Empire
equates the trans experience to that of sexual violence; thereby invalidating
what it means to be a woman. This transphobia was crystalized with the acronym
“TERFs” (Trans exclusionary Radical Feminist) in the late 2000’s to describe
these individuals and practices. Since then, the term “TERF” has gained in
recognition and popularity[1] often being used as a slur
against anyone who is not being (or is perceived to not be) trans inclusive. This
exclusivity of trans individuals continues in some gay and lesbian communities.
The exclusion of Trans individuals from Gay
and Lesbian communities is consistent. Several trans activists have expressed
that, of the umbrella categorization of LGBTQAI+, it is those identities and
practices that are further removed or outside of a binary structure that
receive less attention, support and inclusion, specifically trans and bisexual
individuals. Bisexuals being criticized for their sexual attraction, they are admonished for the false perception that they
are in denial of being gay or straight. With trans folks, trans men
specifically, are alienated because some
cis gendered lesbians find it difficult to support “women morphing into men”.
This exclusive attitude supports a popular criticism of people in the LGBTQAI+
community, that regardless of their sexual orientation, many gays and lesbians are
still operating under the heterosexist binary parameters established by cis
straight white men. Much like how early Sociology attempted to model itself
after more established natural sciences for validation, Trans and bisexual
exclusion in the Queer community can be traced back to the foundation of Gays
and Lesbians looking for societal validation. However, as
several trans scholars have stated, a validation based on a
gender/sexual model that is exclusionary for any group is not valid. Instead,
it reproduces the same kind of inequality and discrimination just directed at a
different group.
SOCIAL ANALYSIS
The
social analysis of Sciamma’s Tomboy centers around the structures of
childhood and gender performance. The understood purpose of childhood is that
family and and other social institutions impact not only the child’s gender performance, but the
perception/ acceptance of that performance based in if the family (a macrocosm
of society) internalizes rigid or fluid gender norms.
Childhood
and a Trans Identity
Childhood
is a period of transition that is designed to foster a sense of identity and
prepare children to be law-abiding productive members of society. This process
is a spectrum that attempts to both protect children during their physical and
mental development as well as further their social development through the
process of socialization. In Sociology, this is discussed as the balance
between prepared and protected childhood. Prepared childhood consists of all
those behaviors that children need to learn to become productive adults. This
includes something as basic as learning to change a tire and paying bills, to
sex education and an understanding of democracy. Protected childhood are the
behaviors that both shield children from the physical and emotional dangers the
reality of adulthood imposes, while also encouraging imagination and creativity.
Most children on this progressive
spectrum are rarely at its polls. This variability is not just what makes us
diverse, bordering on unique when compared to others, but it allows for a space
for experimentation.
Childhood is a space
where you are allowed to question who you are, and part of this transitory
period involves experimentation. We develop our own attitudes, style, beliefs
and behaviors through attrition in different stages of childhood. Yet, the
polymorphous parenting possibilities often get synthesized into behavior and
attitudes that reflect the expressions of already established socio-cultural
norms through an elaborate system of policing tactics. The result is a limiting
of self-expression until it is little more than a regurgitation of what children
have learned from their parents, minimizing introspection. This is childhood
under the gender binary.
The gender binary is biologically
determined through chromosomes and genitalia. Parents collectively want to know
the sex assignment of their children so that they can “properly prepare” their
children for gender socialization; thereby reinforcing being cisgender. This
becomes an ouroboric process of perpetuation. Parents promote cisgendered heteronormativity
because it was what they were taught, they do not want their children to experience
the social consequences of not being accepted or they don’t know how to
challenge it. Sure, there is some boundary breaking that is allowed, usually
among sex assigned girls, because of the irrational valuing of masculinity and
a long cultural history of misogyny. But once puberty hits, that acceptable
subversion is rescinded and policed.
An example of this gender
policing is the backlash against Algerian Olympian Imane Khelif. During the Summer 2024 Olympics in Paris, Khelif
defeated Angela Carlini from Italy in the opening 46 seconds of the second
round of competition, after just two blows. The latter stating that it “wasn’t
fair!” This sparked online debate as to Khelif’s sex despite being
born female, was registered female, lives her life as a female, boxes as a
female, and having a female passport”. The resulting outcry
was not only transphobic, but it also smacked of sexist paternalism against
Carlini. This also speaks to the idea that identity, especially gender, is a
social construction that is, in part, validated by others within society. The
stability of one identity is secured through the acceptance of social
institutions and the community they live in. Khelif has never been seen as nor
identified as trans. However, that identity was then put into question because
of the power of social media as an agent of socialization. She functionally
became trans in the eyes of a segment of the public; therefore, she was
discriminated against as a trans person regardless of not identifying that way.
The danger lies in the media’s ability to shape public perception without
evidence nor understanding. For instance, some on the internet have “reported”
that Khelif had higher than average levels of testosterone, without
understanding that A. Women also have testosterone. And B. That a person’s
testosterone and estrogen levels are different among people. Some
self-identified cisgender women have higher testosterone than some self-identified
cisgendered men. Yet, most of these ignorant internet imbeciles base their
determination of gender identity upon a cis gender performance, visible
secondary sex characteristics, and cherry-picked “scientific” data that
reinforces their point. Thus, Khelif almost became trans because society deemed
it. Regardless of the accuracy of the label, the social consequences can be
very real, as the backlash against her illustrates.
Sciamma’s Tomboy elucidates
the ease at which childhood could be a fluid space of self-expression and adult
preparation if we would just be able to rid ourselves of the pestilence of biologically
deterministic categories, and a reliance on reproduction as a tool of
validation. The conflict and anxiety that Michael experiences in their summer
of gender nonconformity stems from the stress of having to pass, and not having
their family find out. If they would just be allowed to be themselves, there
would be no need for conflict. Imagine if they had supportive and understanding
parents who protected and supported their self-expression. When the other kid
came to the door to apologize for their behavior in starting the fight, the
parents would have stayed on the issue at hand, rather than being distracted by
Michael’s nonconforming behavior. Instead, Michael’s parents out them to
everyone just so that they are not inconvenienced and have to field intrusive
questions about their child once school starts in the fall.
Michael’s parent’s
response to their gender deviance is indicative of the overwhelming desire for convenience, which promotes the reductive tendency to provide simple explanations to complex
social issues. They don’t want the complication. Therefore, rather than having
clear communication with Michael about their underlying desires and reasoning
for their behavior, the parents choose the hard line of disciplining them, reinforcing
Michael’s behavior as morally wrong. However, Michael’s punishment is not a
simple reprimand. Micheal is forced to
participate in their own ‘outing’. Unfortunately, the United States is
bifurcated on this issue with some states classifying
Michael’s parents behavior as a hate crime (California), and others enshrining
the practice in State law for public education (Florida). As an advocate for
Trans rights, I tend to subscribe to the former, rather than the latter. Plus,
there is an element of selfishness that has yet to be addressed. Given the
trajectory of the film, the parents don’t also want to be publicly policed by their
neighbors as being poor parents. This sense of failure they may feel in the
face of their child’s nonconformity can be perceived as a reflection of them as
parents, regardless of a lack of evidence to support that position. The irony of course being that the very thing
the parents do as a corrective measure to “set Michael straight”, which they
believe is them being good parents, is the very symbolic form of violence that
solidifies themselves as the opposite.
In this review, I have
made a conscious effort to use they/them pronouns when referring to Laure/Michael.
Sciamma leaves it ambiguous as to whether Laure is using this summer as a
benchmark test to gauge the complications of the coming out process, or if this
gender bending is temporary sojourn. As stated earlier, this was an attempt to reach
and embody the broadest audience possible. However, the hedging of bets here
just seems disingenuous. Laure not using Michael anymore at the end of the film
seems like a cop out; a way to smooth over the ruffled feathers of less
progressive film patrons. Granted, it could just as easily be interpreted that
Laure was experimenting and had no intention of a permanent identity shift.
Yet, because that choice was taken away from them, the audience is left to
contemplate Sciamma’s actual intentions and stance on trans politics.
CONCLUSION
Tomboy
is a richly contextual film that questions gender norms and promotes
nonconformity for the purposes of experimentation and expression. As with Water
Lillies, Sciamma’s interrogation with gender, and
identity in Tomboy is ambivalent. Whereas in Water Lillies she reinforces
cultural male gaze through the erotic capital of the female lens, with Tomboy,
they allow for the gender nonconformity to take place but then immediately
sanction them without an interrogation of the consequences. Sciamma’s use of
biological determinism to create conflict undercuts any positive message this
period of childhood nonconformity creates. This solidifies for the audience the
sex/gender divide rather than leaving it ambiguous and allowing the audience to
get comfortable within the grey area of the gendered spectrum.
REFERENCES
Darwin, Helana 2022. Redoing Gender: How Nonbinary Gender
Contributes Toward Social Change New York: Palrave Macmillan
Nordberg, Jenny 2014. The Underground Girls of
Kabul: In Search of a Hidden Resistance in Afghanistan New York: Crown
publishing
