SYD 3804-Question Development (QD) Assignment Handout I.
Pe0512
Lecture1-IntroductiontotheStudyofGender1.pptxIntroduction to the Study of Gender
Defining Sex & Gender
Sex is not a dichotomy
During the first 6 weeks of uterine development, human fetuses of both genetic sexes possess sex tissues which have the potential to develop into either male or female sex structures.
Most people talk as if women and men are dichotomous hormonally, as evidenced by male behavior being referred to as “testosterone laden” or female behavior as “estrogen overload.” In fact, all three sex hormones (including progesterone) exist in the bloodstreams of all women and men.
Not all women and men have the secondary sex characteristics thought typical for their sex.
Biologically, sex is understood to be a continuum whereon the reproductive structures , hormones, and physical features range somewhere between two end points.
Sex is not fixed
We now have the surgical ability to change a person’s genital and secondary sex characteristics.
Some people have persuasively argued that sex is a social construct and not a biological given.
Defining Gender
Gender used to be seen as the psychological, social, and cultural aspects of maleness and femaleness.
This definition was too narrow because the natural and social cannot be separated cleanly. They are not discrete realms of human existence. It is also problematic because gender is seen as sets of traits or behavioral dispositions that people possess based on their assignment to a sex category.
Many consider gender and its components (gender roles, gender norms, etc.) vary along a continuum of masculinity and femininity and that gender should be thought of as being independent of ones’ biological sex.
Yet others define gender a variable among intersections of oppression (e.g. bell hooks refers to this dynamic as “White supremacist, capitalist, heteronormative patriarchy.”). Therefore, it cannot be thought of in a vacuum, or even a continuum.
Wharton’s (2005) definition: “a system of social practices which creates and maintains gender distinctions and organizes relations of inequality on the basis of these distinctions.” 3 features of this def. are important:
gender is as much a process as a fixed state. Gender is being continually reproduced. Gender is being enacted or “done” and not merely expressed.
gender is not simply a characteristic of people, but occurs at all levels of social structure. It is the idea of gender as a “system” of practices that are far-reaching, interlocked, and that exist independently of individuals. Gender is thus a multidimensional phenomenon.
this def. refers to its importance in organizing relationships of inequality. The important thing to remember is that, as a principle of social organization, gender is one critical dimension upon which social resources are distributed.
Why does a study of sex & gender matter?
Because it shapes the identities and behavioral dispositions of individuals. Gender enters into how people see themselves, the ways they behave, and how they view others. Gender identity may be among the most influential in shaping the standards people hold for themselves.
It shapes social interaction. Social interaction is an important setting in which gender emerges and is enacted.
Gender organizes social institutions, including the “rules” that constitute some areas of social life (e.g. education, sports, religion, as well as marriage, parenthood, and family) Many institutions can’t be understood without attention to the ways they embody and reinforce gender meanings.
Reciprocally, we cannot fully understand the social world without attending to gender; and we can’t understand gender without understanding the social world.
How to deal with a study of sex & gender
The social and physical sciences have produced a staggering amount of research on sex & gender.
As this research has become known, so, too, have the number of theoretical and conceptual approaches to the study of it.
This multiplicity of views and perspectives doesn’t have to result in chaos. The field’s conceptual and theoretical diversity can be a source of enrichment, rather than fragmentation (remember, sociology raises more questions than it answers).
In order to receive the benefits of this diversity, however, students of gender must be skilled at communicating across perspectives, identifying points of overlap, convergence, and opposition.
But, because they focus attention on different aspects of the social world and ask different kinds of questions, the interplay of these diverse perspectives and methods helps facilitate the production of knowledge. And the most useful sociological knowledge is produced collectively, through dialogue and debate, rather than self-contained isolation.
Sex/Gender bias in the social and physical sciences
There are several ways in which science has historically ignored women
Until very recently (and even still, to a large extent), science has been an all male club-women weren’t welcome. So it wasn’t until very recently that women began contributing their own varying knowledge to the study of ANYTHING scientific.
In early 1900’s science, women-as a species- were thought less variable among themselves than men were. All women were considered pretty much alike, but men were thought to range enormously in their talents and defects. This argument was used to explain why men were superiorly distinguished from women and had a higher intelligence than women.
When scientists investigate a stereotyped “masculine” behavior (e.g. aggression), they are less likely to include girls and women as participants.
Historically, the results of research using boys or men would likely be generalized and discussed as “individuals are…,” while research based on girls and women was likely to be generalized only to their sex. Researchers have typically issued conclusions about individuals in general, when in fact only one group, typically white, middle-class men, have been observed.
Until very recently, women were rarely the subjects of any type of research, and activities heavily dominated by women (e.g. housework) received little attention. Sociology reflected a male bias, generating knowledge most applicable to men’s lives rather than to the lives of women and to society defined more broadly. Even in the physical sciences, virtually all of the animal-learning research on rats has been performed on male rats.
As an early “fix” to these problems, sociology reformed its biased ways and added women to the mix – the “add women and stir approach.”
Courses on the sociology of women were seen to help counterbalance the rest of sociology, which was still viewed as essentially about men.
Also, a problem with this is that “gender” researchers and teachers focused on women and femininity, to the sole exclusion of men and masculinity.
Also, much more was written about the differences between men and women than to variations among men and women. The overemphasis on differences supported the stereotype that women and men are “opposites” and that the male is normative and the female is a deviation from the norm.
Overall, the underlying assumption was that sociology as a discipline could add new knowledge about gender without having to rethink some of its own key assumptions about the world.
Ultimately, it is insufficient to simply add knowledge about gender to existing sociological literatures. Social scientists today a focusing on rethinking taken-for-granted sociological concepts and ideas, with the aim of transforming them.
Recent developments in the study of sex & gender
There is a growing literature on men and masculinity
There is a growing recognition of variations among men and among women, resulting in increased attention to MASCULINITIES and FEMININITIES.
The acknowledgement of the multiplicity of these concepts is accompanied by a recognition that some forms of masculinity or femininity are more social valued than others. These are framed in relations of domination and subordination.
The field has also been increasingly concerned with the intersection of sex/gender and other bases of stratification, like race, ethnicity, religion, class, and sexual orientation.
This research challenges the notion that sex/gender is something you can study in a vacuum, outside relationship of it to other social forces.
Some postmodernists suggest that this diversity within and among genders makes our ability to conceive of –and draw any conclusions about- “gender” extremely problematic
They assert that men and women see the world as particular individuals, shaped by unique forces that shape unique selves.
This perspective raises the question of whether the concept of gender is a fiction, a product of language rather than social relations and organization.
Three overarching frameworks in the study of sex/gender:
Individualist – focusing on individuals’ personalities, traits, and emotions
Interactionist – gender cannot be understood as an identity or set of personality traits, but must be seen in the context of the interactions between people
Institutional – gender is embedded in the structures and practices of organizations and social institutions, even though they appear to be gender neutral.
These frameworks each ask different kinds of questions and draw different kinds of conclusions
