The Social Construction of Sexuality and Gender - Article Example

The Social Construction of Sexuality and Gender The social construction of sexuality and gender remain important, yet often misunderstood, features of the human condition. While gender is an underlying characteristic of all societies, the social construction of gender in the modern Western world is culturally-specific and unique. Similarly, sexuality remains culturally-specific and heavily influenced by the norms, practices and expectations of a particular society. Accordingly, renowned cultural historian Jeffrey Week “As far as gender and sexuality are concerned, nature has ‘nothing to do with it’ (Weeks, 1985)”. Seeking to explain the social construction of sexuality and gender with an eye to understanding how sexual and gender expectations influence our lives, this essay will provide an in-depth analysis of the social construction of sexuality with an emphasis on how gender roles, expectations and beliefs are created. This essay will begin with a brief introduction to human sexuality and gender with an overview of the most important scholars in the study of sex and gender. Following this, we turn an exploration of the social construction of gender roles and an analysis of transgender scholar Aaron Davor’s arguments regarding the fluidity of gender. As a transgendered scholar, Davor provides a unique perspective on the construction of and sexual and gender roles in society. An analysis of his arguments will provide an introduction to sexuality and gender from the perspective of a transgendered person. Through an overview of Davor’s arguments, this section will shed important insight into sexuality and gender in the modern Western world. An introduction to the social construction of sexuality, with an emphasis upon the heterosexism embedded within modern society, will explore how social forces effectively construct normative sexuality. This will be followed by an analysis of the effects of the social construction of sex and gender on the lives of people today. We now turn to introduction to sexuality and gender as well as the arguments for the naturalness of these two aspects of the human condition. Introduction The categorisation of men and women into two binary groups is a universal phenomenon which in many societies favors men thus creating power imbalances and gender inequalities. In Britain as well as throughout much of the world, notions of sexuality and gender have historically been for granted and perceived to be natural. According to Jeffrey Weeks, We learned very early on from many sources that "natural sex" is what takes place with members of the opposite sex...The social processes through which this is taking place are complex. But the implications are clear, theyre the ones we still live with. In the first place there is the assumption of a sharp distinction between the sexes, a dichotomy of interest, even an antagonism (the battle of the sexes, which can only be precariously bridged. Men are men and women women - and rarely the twain shall meet (Weeks, 1990, 13). Accordingly, while the sex of an individual is innate and established at birth, gender and human sexuality are now understood to be shaped by social forces and socially constructed concepts with important societal ramifications. Social constructivism is the belief that certain ideas, beliefs, behaviors and concepts are socially constructed and shaped by environmental factors. The argument that gender roles were socially prescribed did not appear in scholarly literature until the 1940s with Klein’s The Feminine Character and thus began an exploration into the arbitrariness of the social categories of male and female. Influential scholars such as Judith Butler, Jeffrey Weeks, and Michel Foucault have sought to shed light onto the socially prescribed nature of gender categorisation, and onto the lives men and women throughout the world with an eye to the in the ramifications of the sexual and gender binary. Michel Foucault’s groundbreaking analysis of gender, sexuality and power highlighted the implications of living a world in which gender binary exists and in which women are conceived of as being emotional or weak while men are conceived of as being strong and decisive (Klein, 1946; Foucault, 1990). The categorisation of men and women into distinct binary categories was further explored in Judith Butlers highly influential Gender Trouble which dissects the concepts of sex and gender and argues for a more nuanced approach to gender and sexuality. Arguing that the universality of patriarchy has led to the global oppression of women, Butler demonstrates how sex and gender are socially constructed categories in which “being a man” and “being a woman” are performative acts which are played each and everyday. While Michel Foucault outlined the power balance which results from the social construction of gender and sexuality, Judith Butler demonstrated how gender is performed with important ramifications of the lives of men and women throughout the world. These scholars, along with British sociologist Jeffrey Weeks, have done much to further our understanding of the social forces which shape sexuality and gender. When arguing that sexuality and gender are socially constructed ideas, one is arguing that these concepts are shaped by social forces and are also learned behaviors. People learn how to become a man or a woman and while these identities are fluid, there also socially prescribed and heavily influenced by these society in which one lives. With the aim of providing a thorough analysis of the social construction of gender, the following looks at the roles that social forces play in shaping the attitudes, behaviors and expectations of men and women in modern society (Butler, 2006; Foucault, 1990). The Social Construction of Gender and Sexuality Unlike the sex of an individual, gender is artificially imposed. Although gender is based upon biological differences between men and women, it is socially constructed and culturally-specific. As a social construct, gender roles, behaviors, attitudes and expectations are created by society and enforced by social norms. Importantly, in modern Western society we are led to believe that gender is innate and something that we are born with. Accordingly, “children themselves become active participants in the gendering process by the time they are conscious of the social relevance of gender, typically before the age of two” (Kivel, 1999, 13). As transgendered male Aaron Devor so eloquently points out in his ground-breaking and incredibly illuminating essay, “Gender Role, Behavior and Attitudes”, gender is created, acquired and constructed by the greater society at large. The sex of an individual has a biological basis and is predetermined at birth. Gender, on the other hand, is a social construction and gender roles and expectations are unique to each and every society. As social actors, individuals play an important role in the construction and creation of gender roles, attitudes and expectations and are not simply passive recipients of societal expectations about how men and women are to behave. While women are expected to be docile and caring, “men in our society are supposed to be powerful” (Munro 2000). Gender role expectations are also explained through social cues such as body posture and demeanor, speech patterns, and style of dress. The nature of these cues lends credence to the argument that gender is socially constructed and the way that we talk, the way we carry ourselves and the types of clothes that we wear are all determined by social forces. One would be hard pressed to find someone say today that women wear dresses because they have a biological need to do so; this would be an example of sex stereotypes and sexism. Accordingly, these norms are embedded with our consciousness and taken for granted (Devor, 1993). Seeking to dispel the myths surrounding sex and gender, Ore (2000) persuasively argues that a gender hierarchy exists within our society and unmasks the argument for the naturalness of gender roles, behaviors and expectations. Asserting that gender roles are created and not innate, Kivel (1999) argues that the naturalness argument for gender has no biological basis and is a social construction. Our society is organized under a patriarchal gender schema in which men and women, as dichotomous members of the gender hierarchy, are situated on opposite ends of the schema. While we are taught from a very young age to believe that gender differences are normal and natural, it is now commonly understood by scholars that a power imbalance underlies the gender hierarchy so prevalent in our society. Importantly, this power imbalance has ramifications in a variety of social realms and informs our beliefs about gender. Seeking to understand the social construction of sexuality with an eye to the construction of heteronormativity in Britain as well as in the Western world, the following explores the social construction of sexuality (Devor, 1993; see Camparo, 2005; see Kivel 1999). As with the social construction of gender and gender binary, a sexual binary exists. The sexual binary is predicated upon the belief that people are divided into two sexual categories which are gendered, male and female, and that these are natural social roles. Accordingly, heterosexuality is conceived of as the only natural sexual orientation and anything which deviates from the sexual binary is conceived of as a natural and by some, abhorrent. Heteronormativity marginalizes people who deviate from the heterosexual behavioral norms and is predicated on the belief that heterosexuality is natural and normal sexual behavior. Compulsory heterosexuality has been a feature of the public Western world for centuries and but is found throughout much of the world. Importantly, the gender binary and the sexual binary are interrelated and serve to promote a world in which men and women are divided into two opposite categories in which heterosexuality is the normative and only social form of sexual behavior between human beings. Anything which deviates from this normative behavior is conceived of as unnatural. Transgendered people must contend with both a sexual binary which informs societys beliefs about gender and compulsive heterosexuality which argues that anything which deviates from normative heterosexual behavior is wrong and abhorrent. How do transgendered people understand and contend with the sexual and gender binaries in modern society? (see Foucault, 1990 for a more thorough analysis of the sexual binary). A Transgendered Perspective on Sex and Gender As someone who crossed over and made the transition for female to male, renowned transgender activist and scholar Aaron Davor provides excellent insight into the issues of gender modification and “crossing over” from female to male. Accordingly, what are the emotional and societal problems associated with crossing over? According to Davor, there are many problems, both individual and societal, when it comes to gender modification and changing one’s gender. Individual problems may include a feeling of isolation, hopelessness and doubt. Accordingly, many transgendered people often feel as though they are the only ones on the planet who feel as though they do not belong in their bodies and that the sex to which they were born is undeniably false. Fear of rejection as well as the challenges associated with life living as a transgendered person are also important individual emotional problems which are commonly associated with the transition from one gender to another. For thousands of transgendered people in America and around the world, feelings of fear, isolation and hopelessness are unfortunate features of life. What are the social ramifications of this transition? From a societal perspective, we live in a patriarchy in which heterosexuality is presumed to be the norm. Patriarchy is defined as a type of social structure in which men are perceived as superior to women and it is impossible to understand the construction of gender roles and expectations in modern Western society without first understanding the omnipresent patriarchal nature of our society. Renowned scholar Judith Butler famously remarked that "to become a lesbian is an act, a leave-taking of heterosexuality," (2002, 143) and for many lesbians in Britain and around the world, this sentiment rings true. The binary logic of sex is inherently hierarchical and in modern society, men are perceived of as being superior compared to women, according to this subjective sexual hierarchy. This hierarchy has important ramifications in the social, cultural, economic and political realms as access to social services, jobs, and political office are presumably easier for men than for women. Similarly, the binary logic of sexuality and gender also postulates homosexuals are inferior to heterosexuals, with its own ramifications in the social, cultural, economic and political realms (Butler, 2002). Ramifications of the Social Construction of Gender and Sexuality There are numerous social ramifications of the social construction of sexuality and gender in modern society. Accordingly, social stratification can be explained by the gender hierarchy. Female job ghettos including those of teacher, nurse and librarian tend to be overpopulated with women and characterized by low wages and low prestige. Interestingly, scholars point out that these jobs tend to be based upon the same characteristics which are viewed as innate to women. Feminine qualities such as caring and nurturing are found in job descriptions for employment in the ‘pink collar ghetto’ of daycare workers, elementary school teachers and nurses. Accordingly, women almost universally earn less than their male counterparts and the employment mobility of women is often hindered by preconceived ideas about sexuality and the economic roles that women can play in the modern world. Anthropologists and cultural theorists have written for years about a pink ghetto, in which women are regulated to a sector of the labour market which is poorly remunerated and oftentimes unrewarding. Ideas about “women’s work” force women into so called female-ghettos in which women predominate and their upward social mobility is hindered by preconceived notions of what women can (and should) do. Accordingly, there is also an invisible “glass ceiling” which limits the future job prospects of women in American society and their future earning power. According to Barry Deutsch, “If I do the same task as a woman, and if the measurement is at all subjective, chances are people will think I did a better job” (Deutsch, 2006, 22). Looking at the medical sector, a profession formerly limited to men, the New England Journal of Medicine reports that as in “young male physicians earned 41% more per year than young female physicians” (Baker, 1996, 960). Is this the result sexism, either latent or overt? Although it is difficult to say, it is important to remember that these disparities do in fact exist and have real world implications. What are the ramifications of the social construction of sexuality on the lives of gays, lesbians and transgendered people? Heteronormativity is an important ramification of the social construction of sexuality for men and women throughout the world. Importantly, gays, lesbians, and transgendered people have been socially marginalised for centuries and are only now asserting their rights in the political arena. Whilst stigma remains for those who do not conform to the gendered sexual binary, gays and lesbians and transgendered people are now demanding equal rights and acceptance in society. Historically, people who do not conform to the social events prescribed sexual norms have faced marginalisation, stigmatisation and even persecution. In the United Kingdom, Oscar Wilde was a famous author, playwright and social figure who rejected the sexual binary prevalent during the era in which he lived and was subsequently tried and imprisoned for his rejection of his heteronormative sexual binary. In 21st century, homosexuality remains a crime punishable by death in many countries such as Iran and Saudi Arabia and the consequences of the social construction of sexuality are deadly throughout much of the world. Although weve been programmed into thinking of our sexuality is something which is natural and which is a normal feature of life, sociologists have been able to deconstruct the argument for naturalism and determine how social interaction has framed gender and sexuality in binary terms. Sexuality is a historical construct which has been shaped by social forces and is predicated upon a power imbalance in which men exert control over women. Similarly, the social construction of gender looks at gender as a historical manifestation created within a unique social context and evolution of social forces (Weeks, 1990; Edwards, 1998; see hooks, 1981 for the intersectionality of sexuality, gender and race). Concluding Remarks Simone de Beauvoir famously remarked, "one is not born a woman, but rather becomes one" (Cahill & Hansen, 2003, xxii). Similarly, one becomes a sexual being in society and social forces shape the sexuality of an individual. The sexual binary is predicated upon gendered ideas about men and women compulsive heterosexuality is a ramification of the sexual binary. Jeffrey Weeks debunks the argument that sex and gender are natural classifications and many social scholars now agree that gender is socially constructed and culturally specific. As Aaron Devor persuasively argues in “Gender Role, Behavior and Attitudes”, gender is socially constructed and culturally specific. Accordingly, gender role expectations are largely a product of social forces and are the result of systemic power imbalances with our society. These expectations and attitudes serve to reinforces discrimination based upon gender and are socially constructed. The social construction of gender influences of behaviors, roles, attitudes and expectations and because of the hierarchical nature of gender in our society, masculinity becomes superior and femininity is deemed to be inferior. Because of a socially enforced gender code, our engrained ideas about gender are incredibly difficult to change. We are all products of our own individual societies and we subconsciously impart the ideas and beliefs which make up our cultures. Ideas about gender roles are subsequently often unquestioned since they are perceived to be so integral to our understanding of how the world works. Gays, lesbians and transgendered people challenge these ideas and fundamentally challenge our beliefs about sex and gender. Understanding that gender is a construction is perhaps the first step in breaking free from the bonds of gender and heteronormativity. REFERENCES Baker, L C. (1996). “Differences in Earnings between Male and Female Physicians.” New England Journal of Medicine 334.15: 960-964. Bristow, J. (1997) Sexuality, London: Routledge. Butler, J. (2002). Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York: Routledge. Cahill, A.J. & Hansen, J. (2003). Continental Feminism Reader. London: Rowan & Littlefield. Carpraro R.L. (2000). “Why College Men Drink: Alcohol, Adventure, and the Paradox of Masculinity” Journal of American College Health, 48.6: 307-315. Deutsch, B. (2009). “The Male Privilege Checklist” Alas. Retrieved November 23, 2009 http://www.amptoons.com/blog/the-male-privilege-checklist/ Devor, A. (1993). “Gender Role, Behavior and Attitudes”. Annual Review of Sex Research, 7, 44-89. Devor, A. (1997). "Toward a Taxonomy of Gendered Sexuality." Journal of \ Psychology and Human Sexuality, 6(1), 23-55. Edwards, T. (1998). “Queer fears: against the cultural turn”, Sexualities 1(4): 471- 484. Foucault, M. (1990). History of Human Sexuality. Vintage: New York hooks, bell. 1981. Ain’t I a Woman? Black Women and Feminism. Boston, MA: South End Press. Kane, E.W. 2006. “No way My Boys Are Going to Be Like That” Gender & Society, 20.2: 149-176. Kivel, P. 1999. Boys will be Men. New York, NY: New Society Publishers Klein, V. (1946) Feminine Character: History of an Ideology, London: Paul, Trench, Trubner. Read More