Drag Analysis

Correctly defining gender bears to some risk, particularly when failing to adequately do so, as this completely undermines the issue from a political perspective where differentiation is necessary (Butler,1993). Gender is performative, although the performance itself is unnatural and yet it is viewed as natural. The culture of drag serves as a testament to this. Drag culture points out that gender is in fact a form of impersonation, as the purpose of the culture is to imitate women (Butler, 1993). Butler states that this imitation of women corroborates the notion gaining cultural acceptance only requires some cosmetic changes as well as mannerism, which are not inherent qualities that women have from birth (Butler, 1993). Ultimately, drag goes against the norms people accept as the truth, as it boils down to men merely exaggerating their appearance by way of cosmetics to be accepted as women.

In addition, Butler deconstructs the genealogical argument and its reluctance to explore the natural difference between genders, opting to rather investigate the result of the demand for this distinction. In essence, the genealogical approach is more
Butler (1993) builds on this argument, expressing that drag culture questions gender identity, in the sense that it perceived as an imitation of gender and whilst the sex of the individual is deemed the original. According to Butler (1993), drag culture is often viewed as a parody of the gender divide, as it draws attention to elements that are falsely normalised even though the the culture is intent on portraying women. Furthermore, drag culture reinforces this notion by providing insight as the construction of an image in addition to questioning what makes a woman. Thus, gender is not inherent, it is but a performance or a