I had a guy in my literature society bring up a theory on whether or not the monster in Frankenstein was representative of 'transgender' (Don't worry, he isn't one of those 'thousand-gender' Tumblrettes).
How far would you guys argue that Frankenstein's Monster lacks a gender? The Creature is presented as the "modern Prometheus", yet Shelly consistently labels Victor's creation as "it".
Then it is genderless, isn't it?
>>7871591
Well it specifically wants a wife at a certain point so It wouldn't be too hard to argue for it being a male. Ultimately it's a fucking monstrosity but I think implying that it is representative of transgender is kind of reaching.
>>7871630
genus=!=sexus, just fyi
i think it's ridiculous to retcon classic works of literature to fit contemporary issues, it's the same as replacing the word nigger with slave in huckleberry finn and making hermione black (well larry potter is not a classic work of literature, but you catch my drift). this is just pandering to a certain audience. also >>7871654
>>7871684
What do you mean by genus=!=sexus?
>>7871591
You could mention Frankenstein's monster represents Victor's anima and animus
Of course Frankenstein's creature is genderless, it's a monster, it's a barely conscious golem cobbled together from the parts of several different corpses. Why would you possibly think that something as higher-functioning as gender identification would even play a part in that thing's awareness?
Look I understand that gender, sexuality, race, and all those other issues are part of the zeitgeist but you really are just viewing the past through the lens of the present. Have you honestly never heard of this fallacy?
Goddamn it, I think I should just end it all now.
>>7871718
Are you trying to be sarcastic? The Monster is smarter than Frankenstein and articulates itself better as well.
>>7871739
Ya got me :^)
My point still remains about viewing the past through the lens of the present though.
>>7871684
I don't think OP was retconning. He was only bringing up an idea made by some other guy...
That said, I would argue that the monster is male, as it desires a wife and it is meant to be a metaphor for Adam and the fallen angel
The monster is male and has a dick. One of Victor's reasons not to create a second monster is to prevent the monster and her from breading together.
>>7871718
What is that fallacy called?
>>7871847
Presentism
The Creature desires a female partner and it is implied heavily that it has male attributes. Retroactively arguing that the Creature is genderless, let alone a politicised trans character is pretty difficult to argue as there simply isn't much evidence for it. All of the references in the work to the fall of man and Paradise Lost also imply that the Creature is a male figure. While it's a fun idea to play around with it's a pretty tenuous interpretation to attempt to make, to be frank.
>>7871860
Thanks senpai
>>7871591
Transgender doesn't mean lack of gender or both genders. The "trans" part means on the opposite side. A transgender person identifies as the opposite gender, but still very much as a gender. Maybe more so than many people who falls so much inbetween they don't care much about what they perceived as.
If Frankenstein's monster was transgender it would have a female brain or female soul or would simply be characterized as acting feminine.
>>7871847
Anacronism?
So how come Victor is so ashamed of himself for making the monster and why does he think its a failure? Nigga created life who gives a shit if its ugly?
>>7871918
>female brain
>female soul
>>7871936
It's fiction, it could literally have the brain of a woman or some voodoo magic soul of Frankenstein's mum.
>>7871866
To be honest, it was an interesting concept to play around with, but I view the Monster as male, due to its comparison with Lucifer in Paradise Lost.
>>7871880
Stop posting on /sci/
All trans people are monsters, but not all monsters are trans.
>>7871691
genus is grammatical gender, i.e. calling people/things he, she and it, sexus is the gender people/things have irl. those two notions do not necesserily coincide.
>>7871781
>I would argue that the monster is male, as it desires a wife
and everything else is retconning, whether it was op's idea or another guy's
This is a pointless discussion. Frankenstein's monster is a male.
>>7871758
Frankenstein created a lot of the lens we use to view the present. Beyond that, the author and her associates were very interested in trying to imagine the lens of the future and very willing to engage with controversy. It's unlikely growing up the daughter of Wollstoncraft and Godwin, and marrying Percy Shelley, that she didn't know about radical ideas of gender. She's from the same generation that produced Florence Nightingale and James Barry, so it was arguably a larger part of her zeitgeist than ours even if you ignore the sexual politics of Byron and Shelley and those close to her.
>>7871591
That's retarded. "It" is the result of Frank hating the Monster's guts and not considering it a person.
Also this:
>>7871812
It is, at the very least, biologically male. Since gender is a social construct, I don't think a person that learned everything it knows from books and watching that French family go about their lives would decide to change the sex it was assigned at birth.
The social and sexual norms of the very small community it "grew up" in would probably dictate how it developed sexually. Unless that blind dude identified as a lady, I don't think the Creature would be trans.
>>7871847
Feminism
>>7871918
wrong, but to say Frankenstein's monster is trans is to imply that it had a gender to begin with and transitioned from there.
>>7873362
>wrong
How?
>>7872704
>It is, at the very least, biologically male. Since gender is a social construct, I don't think a person that learned everything it knows from books and watching that French family go about their lives would decide to change the sex it was assigned at birth.
Sex and gender are the same thing artificially divided by an insane ideology into two different categories. Sex which a human has since conception in his or her dna shapes the society and not the other way around.
>The social and sexual norms of the very small community it "grew up" in would probably dictate how it developed sexually. Unless that blind dude identified as a lady, I don't think the Creature would be trans.
Creature wouldn't have a concept of trans, not at that time and not that wishful thinking or mental issues would make a difference in determining sex.
>>7873362
>a person who does not conform to societal gender norms or roles
So a woman who works as a plumber and likes football is now transgender?
are there any good books with a transgender protagonist?
Does it really demand a wife and not just a companion? Read it a long time ago...
>>7871591
HOL UP
>The Creature is presented as the "modern Prometheus"
Frankenstein is the modern Prometheus. Because he, you know, creates a living man from unliving matter.
This is what happens when you neglect to start with the Greeks.
>>7871591
I'm flipping thru my copy because I think this is a stoopid question. Here, before the creature is animated, Victor speaks of it as a he:
>How can I describe my emotions at this catastrophe, or how delineate the wretch whom with such infinite pains and care I had endeavoured to form? His limbs were in proportion, and I had selected his features as beautiful. Beautiful!—Great God! His yellow skin scarcely covered the work of muscles and arteries beneath; his hair was of a lustrous black, and flowing; his teeth of a pearly whiteness; but these luxuriances only formed a more horrid contrast with his watery eyes, that seemed almost of the same colour as the dun white sockets in which they were set, his shrivelled complexion, and straight black lips.
Now this doesn't make the creature identify as male, but it does grant insight into the design and intention. I'll keep looking for more.
>>7873442
I didn't realize that working as a plumber and liking football was a requirement for being a man.
>>7873550
When Victor encounters the creature onthe mountain he refers to it repeatedly as "he." The creature also identifies with Adam: "I oughtto have been your Adam." It's interesting to note, then, that his first seeing himself in the water is like Milton's Eve does.
>>7873570
About the wife bit, the creature goes from saying
>You must create a female for me, with whom I can live in the interchange of those sympathies necessary for my being. This you alone can do; and I demand it of you as a right which you must not refuse.
to saying
>What I ask of you is rea-sonable and moderate; I demand a creature of another sex, but as hideous as myself: the gratification is small, but it is all that I can receive, and it shall content me.
So if the companion is female and of another sex, and the creature is assumed male by all observers, I think we can reasonably also assume that thecratire is male and identifies so.
Enough?
>>7871591
if it has a gender, it of course is male
god made man in his image and frankenstein made the monster
Frankenstein is the modern Prometheus, not the monster.
>>7871847
Anachronism.
>>7873362
>a person who does not conform to societal gender norms or roles
wouldn't that be non-binary though?
>>7871930
did you even read it?
>>7872609
I see. Thanks for clarifying that.
the 'modern prometheus' is VICTOR, the myth follows that the titan prometheus created man as frankenstein created the monster- you could see this as argument for the monster also representing a male gender.
Aditionally, the creature is a doppelganger to Victor so it would seem strange if it was not considered male like Victor
>>7871591
Well, what did the author say?
