著者
鶴田 幸恵
出版者
日本社会学会
雑誌
社会学評論 (ISSN:00215414)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.59, no.1, pp.133-150, 2008-06-30 (Released:2010-04-01)
参考文献数
19
被引用文献数
1 1

本稿の目的は,「性同一性障害の正当な当事者であること」をめぐる当事者の語りを検討し,そこでいかなる基準が用いられているかを示すことである.まずは,サックスによる成員カテゴリーの自己執行/他者執行の区別を参照しながら,性同一性障害カテゴリーがどのように用いられているのかを見ていく.次に,「正当な性同一性障害」について当事者が語っているインタビュー・データを分析し,そこで用いられている基準を析出する.その結果,「医療への依存度」「自己犠牲の程度」「女/男らしくあることへの努力」「社会性の有無」という複数の基準が用いられていることがわかった.これらの基準はもともと医学において用いられている基準を参照したものであったものだが,現在ではそれが独り歩きし,性同一性障害コミュニティ独自の基準となっている.以上の議論によって明らかになったのは,性同一性障害カテゴリーが,それを執行する権利が医学にのみあるのではないものとして,コミュニティのなかに存在しているということである.また,そのカテゴリーを適用されるための基準が,医学の求める基準をさらに厳格化し,社会にいかに適応的であるかによるものとなっている,ということである.性同一性障害カテゴリーは,医学から離れた当事者間の相互行為においても,当事者自身によって,非常に道徳的なものとして管理されているのである.
著者
鶴田 幸恵
出版者
東北社会学会
雑誌
社会学年報 (ISSN:02873133)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.46, pp.17-31, 2017-12-26 (Released:2019-01-28)
参考文献数
16

この論文の目的は「トランスジェンダー」概念と「性同一性障害(GID)」概念の関係について,トランスジェンダーとして生きる三橋さんと,性同一性障害として生きるAさんへのインタビューの分析から見通しを与えることである. 三橋さんは,「トランスジェンダー」が性別役割の押しつけからの解放を求める運動と結びついたカテゴリーであるのに対し,「GID」は医学の身体本質主義と結びついた医療カテゴリーであると語る.それに対してAさんは,「GID」をある種の「障害」カテゴリーとして,「トランスジェンダー」と対立的には捉えていない.Aさんは,「障害」というものを社会の側にあると位置づける理解の仕方によって,また三橋さんや私が前提としているようにトランスジェンダーと性同一性障害を対立した存在だとは捉えないことによって,性同一性障害というものをアイデンティティとすることができている. 両者の概念の用法は対立するように見えるかもしれないが,いずれも彼女らが直面してきた問題をサバイブするための手段だと考えることもできる.それゆえ,彼女らのアイデンティティ・カテゴリーは,彼女らの生きている社会関係と,その関係の中でカテゴリーが埋め込まれた概念連関の中で理解されなくてはならない.
著者
鶴田 幸恵
出版者
社会学研究会
雑誌
ソシオロジ (ISSN:05841380)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.49, no.2, pp.21-36,157, 2004-10-31 (Released:2016-05-25)
参考文献数
14
被引用文献数
1

The past studies on passing practice have accounted for the interaction about one's appearance and recognition of it. But these studies started their argument from the point that one already has a "normal appearance," and did not account for how it is accomplished that one has a "normal appearance" in the viewer's recognition. The aim of this article is to argue that such a way of accounting of past studies can not adequately account for passing practices of transgenders who intend to accomplish being a "normal natural female," using the transcript data from interviews of Male-to-Female transgenders, because accomplishing that appearance is the most important problem for them. For this, I focus on "viewing" as an action. First, I discuss the logic used in Goffman's Stigma and Garfinkel's famous paper on "Agnes," who is transgender. Through this work, it is found that the person who is passing is categorized in two ways. One is "categorization at a glance" which is an immediate and spontaneous practice. The other is "categorization from inductive judgment," which is conscious judgment by clues in one's appearance. Second, it is found from data that the person who is passing refer to "categorization from inductive judgment" to accomplish being categorized as "normal" with "categorization at a glance." Third, it is only when the question for instance, "Is that person is male or female?" is relevant that "categorization from inductive judgment" usually arises. So, for transgenders, to be categorized with the way of "categorization from inductive judgment" is to fail passing. This means that accounting for achievement or failure in passing must distinguish two ways of categorization. Through that consideration, I conclude that being categorized as a "normal natural female" with the way of "categorization at a glance" is necessary for transgenders to pass as normal. That is, on the one hand, the first step to passing, and on the other hand, the endless practice for transgender people.
著者
鶴田 幸恵 小宮 友根
出版者
社会学研究会
雑誌
ソシオロジ (ISSN:05841380)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.52, no.1, pp.21-36,159, 2007

Recently, it has become a new methodological agenda to discuss the methodologies of interviews which could be collected under the rubric of "interview as interaction." But it seems that such discussions do not make clearer the sociological status of the description which is produced by that method.The task of this paper is to point out some confusion in such discussions, and make the viewpoint of "interview as interaction" into a methodological discussion which can thoroughly describe "peoples lives." Methodologies that emphasize the view of "interview as interaction" often differentiate themselves from the standpoint which emphasizes "the facticity of data" or "the pattern of narrative." But apart from facticity or pattern, it is unclear what becomes the value of the data.There are two confusions concerning the view of "interaction." First concerns the usage of the two terms, "construction" and "interpretation." By virtue of the confused usage of these terms in such methodology, our understanding of others conduct is reduced to the activity of "interpretation." The second confusion concerns the claim that they describe not "fact" or "pattern of narrative" but "the mode (or form) of narrative." But in such a claim, "the mode (or form) of narrative" becomes a "model" prepared on the researchers side.Both miss the difference of the various actions and activities in actual interaction and do not make clear the implication of the term "interaction" within the methodology of interviews. But, for the interviewee, the interview is one scene of his/her life in a literal sense.If this is so, the behavior and the activity which appear there must be the part of his/her life and describing them must be directly describing his/her life.Here, using particular data, we present that proposition and argue the importance of the viewpoint of "interview as interaction."
著者
鶴田 幸恵
出版者
日本社会学会
雑誌
社会学評論 (ISSN:00215414)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.59, no.1, pp.133-150, 2008
被引用文献数
1

本稿の目的は,「性同一性障害の正当な当事者であること」をめぐる当事者の語りを検討し,そこでいかなる基準が用いられているかを示すことである.<br>まずは,サックスによる成員カテゴリーの自己執行/他者執行の区別を参照しながら,性同一性障害カテゴリーがどのように用いられているのかを見ていく.次に,「正当な性同一性障害」について当事者が語っているインタビュー・データを分析し,そこで用いられている基準を析出する.その結果,「医療への依存度」「自己犠牲の程度」「女/男らしくあることへの努力」「社会性の有無」という複数の基準が用いられていることがわかった.これらの基準はもともと医学において用いられている基準を参照したものであったものだが,現在ではそれが独り歩きし,性同一性障害コミュニティ独自の基準となっている.<br>以上の議論によって明らかになったのは,性同一性障害カテゴリーが,それを執行する権利が医学にのみあるのではないものとして,コミュニティのなかに存在しているということである.また,そのカテゴリーを適用されるための基準が,医学の求める基準をさらに厳格化し,社会にいかに適応的であるかによるものとなっている,ということである.性同一性障害カテゴリーは,医学から離れた当事者間の相互行為においても,当事者自身によって,非常に道徳的なものとして管理されているのである.
著者
鶴田 幸恵 小宮 友根
出版者
社会学研究会
雑誌
ソシオロジ (ISSN:05841380)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.52, no.1, pp.21-36,159, 2007-05-31 (Released:2016-03-23)
参考文献数
23

Recently, it has become a new methodological agenda to discuss the methodologies of interviews which could be collected under the rubric of "interview as interaction." But it seems that such discussions do not make clearer the sociological status of the description which is produced by that method.The task of this paper is to point out some confusion in such discussions, and make the viewpoint of "interview as interaction" into a methodological discussion which can thoroughly describe "people's lives." Methodologies that emphasize the view of "interview as interaction" often differentiate themselves from the standpoint which emphasizes "the facticity of data" or "the pattern of narrative." But apart from facticity or pattern, it is unclear what becomes the value of the data.There are two confusions concerning the view of "interaction." First concerns the usage of the two terms, "construction" and "interpretation." By virtue of the confused usage of these terms in such methodology, our understanding of other's conduct is reduced to the activity of "interpretation." The second confusion concerns the claim that they describe not "fact" or "pattern of narrative" but "the mode (or form) of narrative." But in such a claim, "the mode (or form) of narrative" becomes a "model" prepared on the researcher's side.Both miss the difference of the various actions and activities in actual interaction and do not make clear the implication of the term "interaction" within the methodology of interviews. But, for the interviewee, the interview is one scene of his/her life in a literal sense.If this is so, the behavior and the activity which appear there must be the part of his/her life and describing them must be directly describing his/her life.Here, using particular data, we present that proposition and argue the importance of the viewpoint of "interview as interaction."
著者
鶴田 幸恵
出版者
社会学研究会
雑誌
ソシオロジ (ISSN:05841380)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.49, no.2, pp.21-36,157, 2004

The past studies on passing practice have accounted for the interaction about ones appearance and recognition of it. But these studies started their argument from the point that one already has a "normal appearance," and did not account for how it is accomplished that one has a "normal appearance" in the viewers recognition. The aim of this article is to argue that such a way of accounting of past studies can not adequately account for passing practices of transgenders who intend to accomplish being a "normal natural female," using the transcript data from interviews of Male-to-Female transgenders, because accomplishing that appearance is the most important problem for them. For this, I focus on "viewing" as an action. First, I discuss the logic used in Goffmans Stigma and Garfinkels famous paper on "Agnes," who is transgender. Through this work, it is found that the person who is passing is categorized in two ways. One is "categorization at a glance" which is an immediate and spontaneous practice. The other is "categorization from inductive judgment," which is conscious judgment by clues in ones appearance. Second, it is found from data that the person who is passing refer to "categorization from inductive judgment" to accomplish being categorized as "normal" with "categorization at a glance." Third, it is only when the question for instance, "Is that person is male or female?" is relevant that "categorization from inductive judgment" usually arises. So, for transgenders, to be categorized with the way of "categorization from inductive judgment" is to fail passing. This means that accounting for achievement or failure in passing must distinguish two ways of categorization. Through that consideration, I conclude that being categorized as a "normal natural female" with the way of "categorization at a glance" is necessary for transgenders to pass as normal. That is, on the one hand, the first step to passing, and on the other hand, the endless practice for transgender people.
著者
鶴田 幸恵
出版者
社会学研究会
雑誌
ソシオロジ (ISSN:05841380)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.49, no.2, pp.21-36,157, 2004

The past studies on passing practice have accounted for the interaction about ones appearance and recognition of it. But these studies started their argument from the point that one already has a "normal appearance," and did not account for how it is accomplished that one has a "normal appearance" in the viewers recognition. The aim of this article is to argue that such a way of accounting of past studies can not adequately account for passing practices of transgenders who intend to accomplish being a "normal natural female," using the transcript data from interviews of Male-to-Female transgenders, because accomplishing that appearance is the most important problem for them. For this, I focus on "viewing" as an action. First, I discuss the logic used in Goffmans Stigma and Garfinkels famous paper on "Agnes," who is transgender. Through this work, it is found that the person who is passing is categorized in two ways. One is "categorization at a glance" which is an immediate and spontaneous practice. The other is "categorization from inductive judgment," which is conscious judgment by clues in ones appearance. Second, it is found from data that the person who is passing refer to "categorization from inductive judgment" to accomplish being categorized as "normal" with "categorization at a glance." Third, it is only when the question for instance, "Is that person is male or female?" is relevant that "categorization from inductive judgment" usually arises. So, for transgenders, to be categorized with the way of "categorization from inductive judgment" is to fail passing. This means that accounting for achievement or failure in passing must distinguish two ways of categorization. Through that consideration, I conclude that being categorized as a "normal natural female" with the way of "categorization at a glance" is necessary for transgenders to pass as normal. That is, on the one hand, the first step to passing, and on the other hand, the endless practice for transgender people.
著者
鶴田 幸恵 小宮 友根
出版者
社会学研究会
雑誌
ソシオロジ (ISSN:05841380)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.52, no.1, pp.21-36,159, 2007

Recently, it has become a new methodological agenda to discuss the methodologies of interviews which could be collected under the rubric of "interview as interaction." But it seems that such discussions do not make clearer the sociological status of the description which is produced by that method.The task of this paper is to point out some confusion in such discussions, and make the viewpoint of "interview as interaction" into a methodological discussion which can thoroughly describe "people's lives."<br> Methodologies that emphasize the view of "interview as interaction" often differentiate themselves from the standpoint which emphasizes "the facticity of data" or "the pattern of narrative." But apart from facticity or pattern, it is unclear what becomes the value of the data.There are two confusions concerning the view of "interaction."<br> First concerns the usage of the two terms, "construction" and "interpretation." By virtue of the confused usage of these terms in such methodology, our understanding of other's conduct is reduced to the activity of "interpretation." The second confusion concerns the claim that they describe not "fact" or "pattern of narrative" but "the mode (or form) of narrative." But in such a claim, "the mode (or form) of narrative" becomes a "model" prepared on the researcher's side.Both miss the difference of the various actions and activities in actual interaction and do not make clear the implication of the term "interaction" within the methodology of interviews.<br> But, for the interviewee, the interview is one scene of his/her life in a literal sense.If this is so, the behavior and the activity which appear there must be the part of his/her life and describing them must be directly describing his/her life.Here, using particular data, we present that proposition and argue the importance of the viewpoint of "interview as interaction."
著者
鶴田 幸恵
出版者
関東社会学会
雑誌
年報社会学論集 (ISSN:09194363)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.2006, no.19, pp.37-48, 2006-07-31 (Released:2010-04-21)
参考文献数
24
被引用文献数
1

We, as Sociologists or as Laymen, often explain human conducts using categories, as in “A does X, because A is woman”. But as Harvey Sacks showed, we have at least two (collections of) categories that can correctly be applied to any member of society. “Sex” and “Age”. So, here is one problem. How can we, especially as sociologists, justify explanations such as the example? Sacks's answer is: By analyzing the orientations that members themselves regard as relevant to their conduct. But, again, we do not usually explicitly enunciate the categories that are applied to us such as in saying “I am woman, so I do X”. Here, another problem occurs. How can we access to the orientation of members? This paper will try to answer this latter problem by analyzing data in which sex-categorization is done by members themselves without actually explicitly stating any sex/gender category.
著者
鶴田 幸恵
出版者
関東社会学会
雑誌
年報社会学論集 (ISSN:09194363)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.2003, no.16, pp.114-125, 2003-06-13 (Released:2010-04-21)
参考文献数
17

In psychotherapy of “gender identity disorder” in Japan, psychiatrists assess the “sex of mind” of their clienteles. In this process, medicine first treats the invisible “sex of mind” as more essential than the visible sexed body, then as visible in the clientele's looking, behaviors, talks etc. The aim of this article is to examine how medicine treats the sex category according to this paradoxical logic, using the review of medical discourses and scripts based on interviews of “gender identity disorder” clientele. Through this process of description of the medical practice, it is showing how, by seeing the clientele's display as trans-situational clues of the “sex of mind”, this practice may be actually seeing very “sex of mind”.
著者
鶴田 幸恵
出版者
奈良女子大学
雑誌
若手研究(B)
巻号頁・発行日
2008

本研究は、性同一性障害概念の広まりが、「性の多様性」の認知といかに結びついているかを、明らかした。そのために、(1)性同一性障害のカウンセリング場面における性別規範の使用に関する分析、(2)かつては批判の対象となっていたような、完全に性別越境を行わない女から男へのトランスジェンダーの語りの分析、(3)性別の越境を明らかにしながら行う就労の受け入れ側の語りの分析、という3つの視点から接近を試みた。
著者
鶴田 幸恵
出版者
関東社会学会
雑誌
年報社会学論集 (ISSN:09194363)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.2003, no.16, pp.114-125, 2003

In psychotherapy of &ldquo;gender identity disorder&rdquo; in Japan, psychiatrists assess the &ldquo;sex of mind&rdquo; of their clienteles. In this process, medicine first treats the invisible &ldquo;sex of mind&rdquo; as more essential than the visible sexed body, then as visible in the clientele's looking, behaviors, talks etc. The aim of this article is to examine how medicine treats the sex category according to this paradoxical logic, using the review of medical discourses and scripts based on interviews of &ldquo;gender identity disorder&rdquo; clientele. Through this process of description of the medical practice, it is showing how, by seeing the clientele's display as trans-situational clues of the &ldquo;sex of mind&rdquo;, this practice may be actually seeing very &ldquo;sex of mind&rdquo;.