I think she makes a good point by challenging the simple idea of traditional gender categories. I agree that masculinity and femininity aren’t fixed and can change based on things like culture, race, or religion. This connects to intersectionality—how race, class, and gender mix together to shape a person’s identity.For example, in a South Asian religious community, masculinity is often more about being responsible for the family, like being a provider or protector, instead of being about physical strength or dominance, which is more common in Western views of masculinity. In Western cultures, masculinity might focus more on independence and competition. Similarly, in South Asian communities, femininity might be tied to family roles and religious duties, while in the West, it could be more about personal empowerment and making independent choices.This shows how gender expectations can be very different depending on the culture, But I wonder if we can fully move away from these gender categories. Even if we know that gender isn’t just man vs. woman, we still use these categories to explain how society works. While I agree with Najmabadi’s point, it feels like it’s hard to stop thinking in terms of these simple categories because they’re so deeply part of how we understand gender and identity across different cultures.

Here, Najmabadi is pointing out that even though we try to think critically about gender, we often still rely on the same old categories—male and female, masculine and feminine. She’s asking us to think about why we keep using these binaries, and what that might mean for our understanding of gender.I find this point really thought-provoking because it highlights a limitation in how we study gender. Even though we know gender is complex, it seems like we still get stuck in binary thinking. It makes me wonder if we can ever really move beyond that when it’s so ingrained in our language and culture.

Najmabadi is making it clear right away that she’s not trying to ask a question with a simple yes or no answer. Instead, she wants us to really think about how we approach the categories of gender and sexuality, especially when thinking beyond the usual context of the Americas and modern times.It’s interesting that she doesn’t want a simple answer, but instead wants us to question the assumptions behind the categories of gender and sexuality. This makes me curious about how these ideas will be explored in other cultural and historical contexts.