--------------------Aditya Mongra @ Professors Classes--------------------

Gender

It was Ann Oakley who introduced the term gender to sociology.

Ann Oakley made a conceptual distinction between biological sex, which

relates to mens and womens different reproductive capabilities, and gender,
which varies cross-culturally and is socially constructed.

In general, sociologists use the term sex to refer to the anatomical and
physiological differences that define male and female bodies. Gender, by
contrast, concerns the psychological, social and cultural differences between
males and females.

Gender is linked to socially constructed notions of masculinity and femininity;

it is not necessarily a direct product of an individuals biological sex. Some
people, for example, believe that they have been born into the wrong bodies and
seek to put things right by switching genders part way through life, or
following the lifestyles or dress of the other sex.

The conceptual separation of gender (cultural) from sex (natural) made it

possible to understand that social relations based on sexual difference were
social rather than natural.

In practically every human society, the most basic division of labour appears to
be founded on sex or gender. There are mens jobs and womens jobs in the
simplest hunting and gathering bands and the most complex industrial societies.

But in terms of the rewards of prestige, wealth and power attached to gender
roles, women simply do not fare as well as men. Mostly women are placed in
subordinate roles in relation to men. They are largely excluded from high status
occupations and from positions of power. These generalizations apply, to some
degree, to practically every known human society.

In recent years, particularly with the rise of the Womens Liberation Movement,
the reasons for a sexually based division of labour and for the inequality
between male and female roles have been currently debated.

1
 --------------------Aditya Mongra @ Professors Classes--------------------

Two main positions have emerged from the debate. The first maintains that the
sexual division of labour and inequality between the sexes is determined to
some degree by biologically or genetically based differences between men and
women. This position is opposed by those who argue that gender roles are
culturally determined and inequality between the sexes results from socially
constructed power relationships.

Position 1: Those scholars who maintain that the sexual division of labour and
inequality between the sexes is determined to some degree by
biologically or genetically based differences between men and women

Hormones and the brain:

Some scientists believe that variations in the behaviour and social roles of men
and women can be explained in terms of hormones and brain differences.

They argue that the activity of a wide range of hormones is closely integrated
with the activity of the nervous system, and so hormones can influence
behaviour, personality and emotional disposition.

Men produce more testosterone and other androgens

Women produce greater amounts of progesterone and oestrogen

Animal experiments female rats and female monkeys when given extra
androgens displayed aggressive behaviour

Similarly, some studies seem to show a direct link between testosterone levels
in human males and aggression.

However, Ruth Bleier points to a number of flaws in using animal behaviour to

explain human behavioural differences. In general, she observes that it is
dangerous to assume that the same hormonal changes would result in the same
changes in behaviour in humans as they had in animals. She does not accept
that such experiments are conclusive.

Furthermore, the experiments were carried out in unnatural laboratory

conditions, and fighting might not have increased if the rats had been in their
normal environment.

2
 --------------------Aditya Mongra @ Professors Classes--------------------

Oakley accepts that dominant males in monkey groups have higher testosterone
levels than low dominance monkeys. However, she argues that social context
also affects hormone levels. Experiments show that when low dominance
monkeys are caged with females only, their testosterone levels rise. Dominance,
or lack of it, might affect testosterone levels, as well as vice versa.

Further, there are claims that hormones have indirect effects on male and
female brain development, as well as the direct effects discussed above. One
area of research has concentrated on the issue of brain lateralization.

According to John Nicholson, right hemisphere specializes in visuo-spatial

abilities, which relate to the ability to locate objects in space, while left
hemisphere specializes in verbal and language skills.

It is argued that boys have greater abilities in those functions concentrated in

the right hemisphere, while the left hemisphere of the brain is more dominant in
girls. Hence, boys perform better in spatial and mathematical tests and girls
have greater verbal ability than boys.

However, Ruth Bleier has noted the contradictory findings of studies in this
area. For example, some studies claim that girls brains are less lateralized than
boys; some claim the reverse to be true; and some find no difference between
boys and girls.

Bleier also raises doubts about the results of verbal and visuo-spatial tests. On
average, girls do score slightly higher than boys in verbal tests and slightly
lower in visuo-spatial tests. But she argues that what small differences there are,
could well result from differences in socialization rather than from brain
lateralization.

Nicholson also points out that both verbal and visuo-spatial abilities are affected
by and can be improved by training.

3
 --------------------Aditya Mongra @ Professors Classes--------------------

Sociobiology the evolution of human behaviour

There have been a number of attempts to relate sex differences to differences in

the behaviour of men and women by using evolutionary ideas. Of these perhaps
the most influential today is sociobiology.

Sociobiology was first developed by E.O. Wilson and has been applied to sex
and gender by David Barash. It is based in part on Charles Darwins theory of
evolution, but it goes well beyond Darwins original theory.

Like Darwin, sociologists believe that humans and other species develop and
change through a process of natural selection. But sociologists go beyond
Darwin in two main ways:

1. They argue that it is not just physical characteristics that evolve, but also
behaviour.

2. They attempt to explain sex differences in the behaviour of male and

female humans as a result of different reproductive strategies that the two
sexes employ.

Wilson and Barash argue that human males produce millions of sperm during
their lifetime, while females usually produce only one egg at a time, and about
400 in total during their lifetime. Furthermore, the female gestates the foetus in
her body.

The male, therefore, has an interest in making as many females as possible

pregnant to produce the maximum number of offspring who will carry his
genes. Hence, it pays males to be aggressive, hasty, fickle and undiscriminating.

However, the female invests so much time and energy in each offspring that she
must go for quality in her mates. Hence, in theory, it is more profitable for
women to be coy, to hold back until they can identify males with the best
possible genes.

Wilson and Barash go on to assert that different reproductive strategies produce

different behaviour in males and females and also lead them to occupy different
social roles.

4
 --------------------Aditya Mongra @ Professors Classes--------------------

However, critics argue that sociologists assume a direct link between patterns of
genetic inheritance and behaviour in humans. There is no scientific evidence
that such a link exists.

Scholars like Bleier and Oakley are dismissive of sociobiology. They argue that
sociobiologists merely assert that females are coy and males are aggressive
without examining different societies. For example, amongst the Trobrianders,
women frequently take the initiative in sexual relationships.

Another problem with sociobiology is that it has real difficulty in explaining

behaviour such as homosexuality or voluntary celibacy that preclude the
possibility of passing on genes to offspring.

George Peter Murdock

An anthropologist, who argued that biological differences between men and

women are the basis of the sexual division of labour in society.

He suggested that biological differences, such as the greater physical strength of

men and the fact that women bear children, lead to gender roles out of sheer
practicality. In other words, given the biological differences between men and
women, a sexual division of labour is the most efficient way of organizing
society.

In a cross-cultural survey of 224 societies, ranging from hunting and gathering

bands to modern nation states, Murdock examined the activities assigned to
men and women. He found tasks such as hunting, lumbering and mining to be
predominantly male roles, and cooking, gathering wild vegetable products,
water carrying, and making and repairing clothes to be largely female roles.

He argues that because of her biological function of childbearing and nursing,

woman is tied to the home; because of her physique she is limited to less
strenuous tasks.

Murdock found that the sexual division of labour was present in all of the
societies in his sample and concluded that the advantages inherent in a division
of labour by sex presumably account for its universality.

5
 --------------------Aditya Mongra @ Professors Classes--------------------

Talcott Parsons

According to Parsons, the fundamental explanation of the allocation of roles

between the biological sexes lies in the fact that the bearing and early nursing of
children establish a strong presumptive primacy of the relation of mother to the
small child.

Parsons argues that the isolated nuclear family in modern industrial society
specializes in two basic functions:

1. The socialization of the young

2. The stabilization of adult personalities

Parsons characterized the womans role in the family as expressive, which

meant she provided warmth, security and emotional support.

The expressive female, according to Parsons, due to her intimate, nurturing and
emotional nature, is able to perform both the basic functions.

John Bowlby

Bowlby examined the role of women, particularly their role as mothers, from a
psychological perspective.

He conducted a number of studies of juvenile delinquents and found that the

most psychologically disturbed had experienced separation from their mothers
at an early age.

Bowlby concluded that it was essential for mental health that the infant and
young child should experience a warm, intimate and continuous relationship
with his mother.

Bowlbys argument implies that there is a genetically based psychological need

for a close and intimate mother-child relationship. Thus the mother role is
firmly attached to the female.

Dear candidate, in this section, we have examined some of the arguments which
base the sexual division of labour on biological differences between the sexes.

6
 --------------------Aditya Mongra @ Professors Classes--------------------

Position 2: Those scholars who argue that gender roles are culturally determined
and inequality between the sexes results from socially constructed
power relationships

Ann Oakley (1944 )

a British sociologist and feminist scholar

She explicitly rejects the views of Murdock, Parsons and Bowlby.

She does not accept that there is any natural or inevitable division of labour or
allocation of social roles on the basis of sex.

Oakley challenges Murdocks argument that because of her biological necessity

of childbearing and nursing, woman is tied to home; because of her physique
she is limited to less strenuous tasks.

Oakley finds plenty of evidence from Murdocks own data to attack the
assumption that biology largely determines the sexual division of labour.
For example, she found several societies where women also perform the task of
lumbering and go for hunting.

Mbuti Pygmies, a hunting and gathering society (Congo) have no specific rules
for the division of labour by sex. Men and women hunt together. The roles of
father and mother are not sharply differentiated, both sexes sharing
responsibility for the care of children.

Turning to present day societies, Oakley notes that women form an important
part of many armed forces, particularly those of China, the former USSR, Cuba
and Israel. Women also work at construction sites and mines in several third
world societies like India.

Oakley also criticizes Parsons view of the family and the role of the
expressive female within it. She argues that the expressive housewife-mother
role is not necessary for the functioning of the family unit it merely exists for
the convenience of men. Oakley claims that Parsons explanation of gender
roles is simply a validating myth for the domestic oppression of women.

7
 --------------------Aditya Mongra @ Professors Classes--------------------

Oakley also attacks Bowlby and using the example of Alor, an island of
Indonesia, she shows how in this and other small-scale horticultural societies,
women are not tied to their offspring, and this does not appear to have any
harmful effects on the children.

Turning to Western society, Oakley dismisses Bowlbys claim that an intimate

and continuous relationship between mother and child is essential for the
childs well being. She notes that a large body of research shows that the
employment of the mother has no detrimental effects on the childs
development.

Oakley draws the following conclusions:

1. Gender roles are culturally rather than biologically determined.

2. Evidence from a number of different societies shows that there are no

tasks (apart from childbearing) which are performed exclusively by
females.

3. Biological characteristics do not bar women from particular occupations.

4. The mother role is a cultural construction. Evidence from several

societies indicates that children do not require a close, intimate and
continuous relationship with a female mother figure.

Jessie Bernard (1903 1996)

an American sociologist and feminist scholar

in contrast to Parsons view of family and the role of expressive female within
it, Bernard argues that any analysis of marriage must contain two parts:
an examination of the husbands marriage and the wifes marriage.

Bernard maintains that the benefits that the husband and the wife draws from
the marriage are radically different.

Bernard argues that a wide range of evidence points overwhelmingly to the

beneficial effects of marriage for men. Compared to single men, married men
are more likely to have successful careers, high income and high status
occupations; their mental and physical health is significantly better and they are
likely to live longer and happier lives.
8
 --------------------Aditya Mongra @ Professors Classes--------------------

The evidence indicates that marriage itself produces these effects rather than
suggesting that healthier, happier and successful men are more likely to get
married.

Bernard sums up the husbands marriage by claiming that there is no greater

guarantor of long life, health and happiness for men than a wife well socialized
to perform the duties of a wife, willing to devote her life to taking care of him,
providing, even enforcing, the regularity and security of a well-ordered home.

However, Bernard argues, the wifes marriage presents a very different picture.
Compared to their husbands, wives suffer considerably more stress, anxiety and
depression.

Supporting Bernard, Oakley states that the housewife role in modern industrial
society has the following characteristics:

i. it is exclusively allocated to women;

ii. it is economically dependent on men;

iii. it has the status of non-work compared to real or economically

productive work, and

iv. it takes precedence over all other roles as the role for women.

Oakley argues that housework is unpaid, privatized and isolated.

Housewives have little bargaining power compared to wage earners, for example,
they have no trade unions to represent their interests. The role of housewife is a
dead-end job with no chance of promotion and little or no opportunity for job
enrichment or personal development.

9
 --------------------Aditya Mongra @ Professors Classes--------------------

The social construction of gender roles

Oakley believes that gender roles are culturally rather than biologically
produced. In other words, humans learn the behaviour that is expected of males
and females within their society. This behaviour is not produced by innate
characteristics: studies of a number of societies show that gender roles can vary
considerably. Whatever the biological differences between males and females, it is
the culture of a society that exerts most influence in the creation of masculine and
feminine behaviour.

Oakley outlines how socialization in modern industrial societies shapes the

behaviour of girls and boys from an early age. Oakley discusses four main ways in
which socialization into gender roles takes place:

1. Through child-rearing practices, the childs self-concept is affected by

manipulation. For example, mothers tend to pay more attention to girls hair
and to dress them in feminine clothes.

2. Differences are achieved through canalization involving the direction of

boys and girls towards different objects. This is particularly obvious in the
provision of toys for girls which encourage them to rehearse their expected
adult roles as mothers and housewives. Girls are given dolls, soft toys, and
miniature domestic objects and appliances to play with. Boys, on the other
hand, are given toys which encourage more practical, logical, and aggressive
behaviour, for example, bricks, guns, etc.

3. Another aspect of socialization is the use of verbal appelations, such as You

are a naughty boy, or Thats a good girl. This leads young children to
identify with their gender and to imitate adults of the same gender.

4. Male and female children are exposed to different activities. For example,
girls are particularly encouraged to become involved with domestic tasks. In
addition, numerous studies have documented how stereotypes of masculinity
and femininity are further reinforced throughout childhood, and indeed adult
life. The media have been particularly strongly attacked by feminists for
tending to portray men and women in their traditional social roles.

10
 --------------------Aditya Mongra @ Professors Classes--------------------

Important:

One of the key contributions of feminist theory is the creation of a

distinction between sex and gender. As stated earlier, the term sex is used to
refer to the biological differences between men and women, while gender indicated
the vast range of cultural meanings attached to that basic difference.

This distinction is important for feminism to make because the subordination

of women has been fundamentally justified on the grounds of the biological
differences between men and women. The philosophical reasoning which
legitimizes various forms of oppression as natural and inescapable, because the
oppression that arises supposedly from natural and therefore unchangeable factors,
is called biological determinism. Racism is a good example of this, as is the caste
system, because both ideologies are based on the assumption that certain groups of
people are superior by birth, and that they are born with characteristics such as
greater intelligence and special skills that justify their power in society. Biological
determinism has also been one of the most important legitimizing mechanisms of
womens oppression over the centuries. The challenge to biological determinism
is, therefore, crucial for feminist politics.

Feminist anthropologists, particularly Margaret Mead, have demonstrated

that the understanding of masculinity and femininity varies across cultures.
In other words, not only do different societies identify a certain set of
characteristics as feminine and another set as masculine, but also, these
characteristics are not the same across different cultures.

Margaret Mead (1901 1978)

Margaret Mead was an American cultural anthropologist and feminist

scholar. In her study Sex and Temperament in Three Primitive Tribes
Mead studied three tribes, namely Arapesh, Mundugumor and Tchambuli (in the
Western Pacific). She concluded that personality patterns were culturally
determined rather than biologically. In brief, her comparative study revealed a full
range of contrasting gender roles. Her argument is that different societies tend to
have different ideas about what is or isnt masculine or feminine.

She found among the Arapesh a temperament for both males and females
that was gentle, responsive, and cooperative. Among the Mundugumor, both males
and females were violent and aggressive, seeking power and position. For the
Tchambuli, male and female temperaments were distinct from each other, the
woman being dominant, assertive, impersonal and managerial and the man being

11
 --------------------Aditya Mongra @ Professors Classes--------------------

less responsible, emotionally dependent, and passing the time gossiping and
decorating themselves.

Thus, feminists have argued that there is no necessary correlation between

the biology of men and women and the qualities that are thought to be masculine
and feminine.

Rather, it is child-rearing practices that try to establish and perpetuate certain

differences between the sexes. That is, from childhood, boys and girls are trained
in appropriate, gender-specific forms of behaviour, play, dress and so on. This
training is continuous and most of the time subtle, but when necessary, can involve
punishments to bring about conformity. Further, the stereotypes of masculinity and
femininity are reinforced throughout childhood and adult life via education, media,
etc.

So feminists argue that, sex-specific qualities (for example, bravery and

confidence as masculine and sensitivity and shyness as feminine) and the value
that society attributes to them, are produced by a range of institutions and beliefs
that socialize boys and girls differently. As Simone de Beauvoir puts it,
one is not born, but is made a woman.

There is nothing natural about the sexual division of labour. The fact that
men and women perform different kinds of work both within the family and
outside has little to do with biology and more to do with ideological assumptions.
It is, thus, clear that the present subordination of women arises, not from the
unchangeable biological differences (sex), but from social and cultural values,
ideologies and institutions that ensure the material and ideological subordination of
women (gender).

Sex and gender differences conclusion

Some sociologists have tried to move beyond the debate on whether sex or
gender shapes the behaviour of men and women. David Morgan and Linda Birke
argue that sex and gender interact. Sex differences influence gender differences
and vice-versa. Linda Birke argues that womens biology actually and materially
affects their lives. She suggests that feminists cannot ignore biological facts, for
example that women menstruate and can give birth.

However, both Morgan and Birke also argue that the cultural interpretation
placed on biological differences is very important. What matters most is the
meaning attached to differences, real or imagined, in a society.

12
 --------------------Aditya Mongra @ Professors Classes--------------------

In recent years, there has been an increased theoretical emphasis upon the
differences among women, and the differences among men. It has been recognized
that there are a variety of ways to be feminine and a variety of ways to be
masculine. There have been less emphasis on the sex/gender differences between
men in general and women in general.

13