Cordelia Fine, "Delusions of Gender"

[foosnark]

Mostly this has been a book about bad science influenced by sexism, trying to prove the superiority of men over women (or women over men in nurturing/domestic areas) ever since the Victorian era.

But I've gotten to the section on how children learn about gender, and it's particularly brilliant.

Imagine... that we could tell at birth whether a child was left-handed or right-handed.  By convention, the parents of left-handed babies dress them in pink clothes, wrap them in pink blankets, and decorate their rooms with pink hues.  The left-handed baby's bottle, bibs, and pacifiers -- and later, cups, plates, and utensils, lunch box, and backpack -- are often pink or purple with motifs such as butterflies, flowers, and fairies... Right-handed babies, by contrast, are never dressed in pink; nor do they ever have pink accessories or toys.  Although blue is a popular color for right-handed babies, as they get older any color, excluding pink or purple, is acceptable.  Clothing and other items for right-handed babies and children commonly portray vehicles, sporting equipment, and space rockets... they also distinguish them verbally.  "Come on, left-handers!" cries the mother of two left-handed children in the park... at playgroup, children overheard comments like, "Left-handers love drawing, don't they," and "Are you hoping for a right-hander this time?"  At preschool, the teacher greets them with a cheery, "Good morning, left-handers and right-handers."

...in such a society, even very young children would soon learn that there are two categories of people -- right-handers and left-handers -- and would quickly become proficient in using markers like clothing and hairstyle to distinguish between the two kinds of children and adults.  But also, it seems more than likely that children would also come to think that there must be something fundamentally important about whether one is a right-hander or a left-hander, since so much fuss and emphasis is put on the distinction.

How much recognition of ambidexterity would you think a society like that has?

[justmeinoz]

Problem is, those of us here already know the answer to that question. 
Maybe it should be compulsory reading as part of the school curriculum.

Karen.

[foosnark]

It seems like such a good analogy.  Take a biological trait that is usually binary, assign great significance to it beyond its actual effects, expect and reinforce (by example or intentionally) sets of secondary traits according to it, and get so caught up in it that people (A) believe the secondary traits are innate and (B) fail to account for anyone who does not display the expected secondary traits.

As an aside, my grandma always said I was born left-handed and trained/forced  to be right-handed, which is why my handwriting is terrible.  My parents say this is not the case.  I don't know which is true, but I'm right-handed now.  Though playing musical instruments and touch typing a lot have me just a little more ambidextrous than not.

[Shana A]

One of the best books I've read on how scientists study gender, how skewed their results can be and how those results then influence societal attitudes.

Z