I recenty wrote an essay on this subject for my sociology module at university. i wanted to hear what everyone thought of it?
'When you meet a human being, the first thing you differentiate on is, "are you male or female?" and you are accustomed to make the distinction with unhesitating certainty.' (Freud) Sex and Gender are two terms are at the core of human social existence, and they have caused great controversy and debate within sociological circles. Are they social constructs? Or natural givens? Or something in between? Its really impossible to look at one, without the other, as both are intrinsically linked, although different. The classical definitions of sex and gender are greatly debated by feminist and other sociological theorists, they are as follows: Sex, refers to the biological and physiological differences between men and women. Our secondary, and primary sexual characteristics. Gender refers to the individuals self image of themselves, their identification with a gender role, and the social expressions of 'masculine' and 'feminine'. Feminist writers have always looked at sex and gender as core parts of life and social interaction, how they are influenced by social construction, the way that they control society, and how they allow male dominance in the public and private spheres.
The industrialisation of Britain in the 1700s onwards lead to a massive requirement for labour, gap was filled by female labour, this lead to women having dominance as employees during the 18th and 19th centuries, such as in the cotton trade in Manchester, but not as employers. This, and the massive female roles in both the first and second world wars pushed feminism into a new age, and the 1970s sparked a new wave of feminist theory. This produced three main spheres of western feminism; Liberal, Socialist and Radical feminism.
Liberal feminism called for equal opportunities for women, socially and privately. Rights regarding children and their right to what is theirs in the event of divorce. They believe that they can achieve this equality by legal means and social reform, and that men as a group, need not be challenged. 'The goal of liberal feminism in the United States was embodied in the Equal Rights Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which was never ratified. It said, "Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state on account of sex."' (Lorber,J Gender Inequality: Feminist Theories and Politics.) Liberal feminism tends to encourage pro choice in the abortion debate, and self regulation, including the legalisation of prostitution. They see the criminalisation of this as a legislative act of the patriarchy. They argued that women with regards to their sex, were the equal opposite of men, and that they were not the property of others. An English folk saying encapsulates this... ', a son is a son till he gets a wife, a daughter is a daughter for life.' This suggests that women are at all points in their life, the property of either her parents, or her husband, and this is what liberal feminism sought to change.
Socialist feminism is connected to the masculine domination within the capitalist market and the exploitation of women in the workplace and the home. Its is a development of the Marxist feminist theories of writers like Gayle Rubin who, in 1975 wrote 'The traffic in women; notes on the 'political economy' of sex'. Marxist feminists considered the position of women in both domestic labour and the capitalist system as part of a significant gender inequality. This inequality extended to academic circles where gender had for a long time, been marginalised by the male dominant force.
Radical feminism is the belief that the oppression of women as the system of power that human social relationships are built around. At its core, is the theory of Patriarchy, which feminists argue that by which, men benefit from the oppression of women. This is both Private and public patriarchies, where women are dominated both socially and in relationships within the home. Some feminists agree that at the heart of patriarchy is oppression of the perceived 'non normal' with regards to gender, race, sexuality, perceived attractiveness. Anything that isn't a white, straight, male...
Sex is perceived classically, as a biological given, people are either male or female. How is this defined? One way, is by 'Sexual Dimorphism' as Archer and Lloyd write, this is the differences in bodily featured and behaviour that define man and woman (Archer J, Lloyd B 'sex and gender' 2002). But what are male and female? The chromosomes in the cell. XX for female, and XY for male. As it is known, the foetus is originally female in the womb, and differentiates into male, a process like this is by no means clear cut. And by no means, produces the same end result every time, its is known that there are 52 individual genes that code together to make up a persons sex. Conditions like intersexuality and hermaphroditism show that this is not always one or another. And by these ends, sex is a social construction, that we are either one or another to fit to social norms. People with ambiguous external genitalia are in western culture, given surgery to make them look like whichever sex is given to the child. This just reinforces the 'sex as a social construction' idea. In feminist views, this is part of the patriarchal control that forces conformity to the male defined system.
Gender, in 1970, was perceived as an analytical category to distinguish between biological sex and the way these were used to inform behaviours and competencies , which are then seen as either 'masculine' or 'feminine'. It was associated with the way in which we teach children to behave, like a girl, or like a boy, within their gender roles. This is most prominent in western cultures where gender differences are exaggerated and socially encouraged. Radical feminist theorists have claimed that gender, as a 'social classification' (Butler) was created by the patriarchy to maintain the oppression, as Mary Wollstonecraft (1700s) writes; " 'femininity' as a distortion of women's human potential." The classifications of 'masculine' and 'feminine' are used as a method of keeping the 'sexes' in check also, as women not behaving in a feminine manner, and more masculinely, have their sexuality brought into question, and the same with men acting in a feminine manner. By 'masculine' and 'feminine' I refer to traits such as emotionality, sensitivity and passivity as are perceived 'feminine', and Level headedness, protectiveness and aggression that are seen as 'masculine'. When a man shows these or other feminine traits, society shuns the idea, and associates it with homosexuality. This social construction, according to feminists is the heart of what is wrong with society. People cant be people, they must fit profiles. In my opinion, while i believe this to an extent, I believe that it is socially exaggerated and not entirely a social construct. In the case of David Reimer for example, gender is seen to be fixed no matter what was done. David was circumcised with his twin brother shortly after birth, in his case, the operation failed, severely damaging his penis. The doctor, a Dr Money, with the consent of the parents performed surgery on the child to change his external genitalia to that of a female child, and instructed the parents to raise the child as a female, as with current thought, gender was considered nurture, rather than nature... Throughout his childhood, David was more interested in boys toys, was very aggressive and very uninterested in boys in the way 'she' should as a teenage girl. 'She' began to question her sex, and the truth was eventually revealed. The experiment was a failure, and after transitioning back to being a male, the now male David killed himself largely due to psychological stress induced by being forced to spending a large portion of his life in a gender that wasn't his. This shows that our gender is a defining force in who we are, its engrained into our being and cannot be changed by treating the child for all of their cognitive life, as the other sex. This shows that gender is more nature, rather than nurture.
Gender traits are also not fixed to the 'sexes' they represent, as, a woman, for example, can be feminine, or masculine, and the same with men. Both sexes can express gender traits of the other. Feminist theorists believe that 'Gender is both individual and collective, drawing on the general facts of individual and collective biology and the collective local specifics of gender' (Jenkins 2002). Gender must be seen as an embodied concept. The differences between both men and women can be contrasted with the generality of sex differences, and grouped by gender differences. Although there are members of both sex that transition the divide.
While the classical definitions of sex and gender still stand. They have come under fire from feminists and social theorists. It is seen as a confining set of ideas that is constructed to socially constrain. 'Femininity is a romantic sentiment, and nostalgic tradition of imposed limitations' (Brownmiller). Society imposes these stereotypes on new babies, girls clothes are predominantly pink, and blue for boys. Throughout childhood and adolescence, the gender differences are nurtured, not the similarities, this in feminists' views, helps create the social divide. Sexuality must also be considered while looking at sex and gender. Sex has been interpreted as political by some theorists, including Monique Witting, who believed the in the political nature of sex as a category, founded society as Heterosexual. As without defining man and woman merely by physiological differences, homosexuality would be irrelevant, why is it not homogenderality? As butler writes, 'It makes no sense then, to define gender, as the cultural interpretation of sex.' This is probably the cause of the main argument regarding sex and gender within sociological circles and feminist theorists. Which one is the fixed one? Writers like Butler believe that Gender is the natural fixed category. But in reference to my opening quotation from Freud, we cannot think, on meeting a person, 'what gender are you?' because we cant see that, therefore we categorise on what we can see, therefore, sex is the cultural interpretation of gender. While this goes against social structure at the moment, theorists believe that this will change as recent law changes for transgender individuals have shown. Those who transition to either male or female from their previous 'sex category' to correct their body to be in line with their gender are now allowed to marry as their gender, not their previous bodily sex. This clearly shows that the gender is seen as more fixed than sex.
Gender and Sex have been greatly debated by theorists, and no definition held today will hold the same weight tomorrow, as the debate is still ongoing. It is becoming accepted, that a persons gender is the more natural and fixed part of their being. Sex is viewed by more theorists as the analytical category as its something that people categorise on visually. Although both have elements of social construction. As without creating 'masculine' and 'feminine' gender would have many more categories than the numerous it currently covers. This is the view of feminist theorists. Social construction of 'masculine' and 'feminine' have created the Patriarchy and its perceived stranglehold over society by the radical feminists. In my opinion, the terms sex and gender problematise themselves by existing. Trying to categorise something that cannot fit a mould.
Reference List
Butler, J (1990) 'Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity' Routledge, London
Archer, J & Lloyd, B (2002) 'Sex and Gender' (2nd Edition) Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Randall, McGuire & Paynter (1991) 'The Archaeology of Inequality' Blackwell, Oxford
Bradley, H (1996) 'Fractured Identities (Changing patterns of Inequality)' , publisher unknown
