The Engendering Process - Essay Example

How are we engendered The basic premise in which we realize that we are socially engendered into certain roles, is the knowledge that “sex roles vary from culture to culture” ( Ortner, 1986, 1). The society as a whole has a tendency to think that “male and female are predominantly natural objects rather than predominantly cultural constructions,” according to Ortner (1986, 1). This kind of biological determinism was questioned by many researchers from the beginning of the 20th century and the findings of such studies now give a perfect picture of how we are engendered (Ortner, 1986, 1). Crooks and Baur (2007, 9) have drawn attention to the fact that in every society, individuals are forced into rigid gender roles. The nature versus culture theories have been the most instrumental in constructing gender identities (Isis International, n.d). The preconceptions promoted by these theories about gender include: Women are weak and very emotional therefore unfit to occupy leadership positions. Men are natural leaders because they are very rational beings. Women are naturally nurturing which is why they make good nurses and teachers. Men are really “bread winners” as they are good economic providers All women want to be wives and mothers. Fathers remain to have the final say. Childcare is the mother’s primary responsibility. All men are good in sports. (Isis International, n.d). The problem with this kind of preconceptions is that they force women into the gender roles described earlier. It is through two major systems of the society that we get engendered, namely, “the family structure and socialization processes” (Lee, 2005, 1). The process begins soon after the birth of a child and is transmitted through “culturally shared beliefs and values associated with masculinity and femininity” (Lee, 2005, 6). Gradually the child develops a self-concept based on these values and beliefs. In the social space also, the process goes on. Finally, when a child becomes an adult, he/she might have been tailor cut into specific identities of male and female. Engendering: Inclusion and exclusion aspects The engendering process has as its major aim, establishing the dominance of the male (Ortner, 1986, 12). One consequence of engendering is that men are always defined in terms of their social achievements (like doctor, politician, statesman etc.) while women are most often defined in terms of their “relational” roles like “wife, mother, sister” etc. (Ortner, 1986, 8). Prestige, or “social honour” naturally comes to the male with this dominance (Ortner, 1986, 13). Thus “gender hierarchy” has become one of the prominent “prestige” hierarchies of a society (Ortner, 1986, 18). One manifestation of this phenomenon is seen inside marriages, where the women are forced to remain submissive with no right to take their own decisions. Exclusion in decision making, economic and social opportunities, and cultural space will be the result, for women. Because of this fixing of gender roles, men are always encouraged to be “assertive and dominant” while, women are expected to be “affiliative and cooperative” (Lee, 2005, 6). This situation moulds a man’s and woman’s self concept in different ways, and often in mutually opposite directions. This often lessen the confidence of women, which in turn will enhance their exclusion in social realms. These assumptions also “defines the external world” for a man and woman in totally different ways (Isis International, n.d). For a woman, the external world is defined as a place not so friendly for her. This notion makes a women prone to keep away from social spaces as much as possible. But for a man, the same social space is defined as a place full of opportunitites, which make them go out and grab them. Also the preconceptions that bring about engendering, define a woman to others, and their relationships as well in a very disadvantageous way for women (Isis International, n.d). So the society as a whole, views a women as a secondary citizen, a weakling, a less intelligent being. This will prompt the members of the society to act violently and in a dominating manner, to women. Finally, these preconceptions “encourages and discourages acquisition of certain skills by (members of different) gender” groups (Isis International, n.d). This results in discrimination of women in job opportunities and economic opportunities. Thus the results of engendering, in the case of women are “violence, exclusion, discrimination, marginalisation…[ and].. exploitation” (Isis International, n.d). The engendering of men, apart from providing them an array of privileges, often “stereotype” them also, pressurise them to fulfil duties which they have no choice to avoid, and “puts unnecessary burden” of financial responsibilities, of always behaving strong and wise, on them (Isis International, n.d). The individuals who do not conform to the prescribed gender roles are often cast away from the mainstream life of the society and branded as “less likeable, competent and attractive” (Lee, 2005, 6). This results in the gender roles being accepted by individuals out of fear of social ostracism. Kail (2007, 181) has drawn attention to the exclusion faced by children based on gender in social and domestic lives. The children are made to play with “gender-identified toys” and in academic activities, encouraged and even forced to learn “gender-identified skills.” (Kail, 2007, 181). For example, in many countries, girls are encouraged to go for a teaching profession or the job of a nurse. Even the play groups of children “become separated by gender” (Kail, 2007, 181). A gender-based job division is a very common thing when it comes to the household responsibilities assigned to children inside the home (Kail, 2007, 182). Thus from child hood, the roles are reinforced and the individual is left with no choice than to conform with them. Technology and gender: Inclusion or exclusion ?  Society and technologies are two entities which have been found to be “mutually shaping” each other (Lerman, Oldenziel and Mohun, 2003, 2). So gender, which being a social construct, is no exception from that. When we look into recent history of humanity, we can see that cars were “machines run by men” (Lerman, Oldenziel and Mohun, 2003, 5). But once the “self-starting ignition” to operate the car, evolved, this machine was marketed for “wives” as well (Lerman, Oldenziel and Mohun, 2003, 5). But soon after that, women acquired control over this machine and instead of “wives”, society began to see “independent women” in the driving seats. Then the cars also began to evolve to satisfy the needs of the female customer. Thus technology has been changing the dynamics of inclusion and exclusion throughout history. And gender has also been reshaping technology, to certain extents. Here, Lerman, Oldenziel and Mohun (2003, 7) rightly makes a correlation between technology and power. Technology has always represented “social, cultural, economic and political power in our society (Lerman, Oldenziel and Mohun, 2003, 7). Those who has command over the technology has ruled the world and this is why technology is powerful enough to bring about gender-based inclusions and exclusions. It is in this context that scholars (Kuriyan and Kitner, 2007) have argued that technologies like computer and mobile phone have been instrumental in the equalization process going on “between men and women.” The inclusion of women has been made possible by these technologies by way of giving them “greater access to information, educational training in computers and employment opportunities,” to name a few (Kuriyan and Kitner, 2007). It has been hypothesized by Kuriyan and Kitner (2007) that women are “constructing identities, trying to cross perceived class boundaries, and maintaining middle class positions” by using information and communication technology. Hafkin and Taggart (2001) have studied the connection between gender and technology in the context of developing countries and have inferred that “most women in developing countries who use information technologies, use it at work” (Hafkin and Taggart, 2001). This is an indication that new technologies are yet to trickle down into the personal lives of women, as empowering agents. But even in the use of information technology, women are found to be discriminated by getting assigned only to the low end jobs in this sector (Hafkin and Taggart, 2001). Thus the technology becomes inclusive in certain areas while being exclusive in some other segments. And it is observed that a “gendered division of labor is emerging” in IT sector (Hafkin and Taggart, 2001). But there are brighter aspects to the phenomenon also. IT boom in some countries like, in India, Brazil and Malaysia, where majority of software programmers are women show such a picture of hope (Hafkin and Taggart, 2001). IT jobs have provided the much desired economic empowerment for women in this area (Hafkin and Taggart, 2001). Another aspect of this change has been that women entrepreneurs are making use of information and communication technologies to develop their businesses (Hafkin and Taggart, 2001). And women’s political empowerment is made possible via the platforms and forums provided by internet (Hafkin and Taggart, 2001). Lerman, Oldenziel and Mohun, (2003, 3) have put forth an interesting proposition that “biomedical innovations and the internet” have the great potential to “change the sanctity of the body itself.” This is why “individual technologies, such as the (contraceptive) pill, the computer or the internet have often been considered causes of women’s liberation” (Lerman, Oldenziel and Mohun, 2003, 6). But it has to be kept in mind that it is not the technologies themselves, but the way humans put them to use that determine their power to transform gender roles (Lerman, Oldenziel and Mohun, 2003, 6). This is why feminist theorists have been experimenting with concepts like “cyborg” so as to rescue women from the stereotypes that exist related to her body (Lerman, Oldenziel and Mohun, 2003, 3). The disembodiment of individual caused by the internet experience, thus becomes a liberating experience for the gendered female. A female user can sit under the safe cover of this phenomenon and communicate with the world in whatever way she thinks possible. Such possibilities put forth by technology can finally redefine the gender roles even, if the excluded gender put in a serious effort in that. References Isis International, Gender Issues in Six Interpenetrating Spheres, ppt., An Interactive Workshop on Gender Sponsored by PEARL2 and Isis International-Manila, n.d., accessed 09 November 2010, http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:oVEKILFeEbEJ:www.isiswomen.org/index.php%3Foption%3Dcom_phocadownload%26view%3Dcategory%26id%3D5:gender-fairness-as-good-business-practice%26download%3D60:unpacking-the-concept-of-gender%26Itemid%3D243+construction+of+gender+roles&hl=en&gl=in&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESiWdZrhPp3IW0q1GKnvnsj87wrjXbQnkLdlp38N7fB86mbTAE4YOvQuuBptQvG7u9AA9fy3FFQVkQRQa9WNIKp-jHGq0cV5M8dMVLzJ1FDEnEUHhTtEIZxddL0nKen7iWEGkKAN&sig=AHIEtbTw-M3CGtVv5VmIZLws3xrSvCFHZA Janice W.Lee, Gender Roles, (New York, Nova Publishers, 2005), 1-. Nancy Hafkin and Nancy Taggart, Gender, Information Technology and Developing Countries: An Analytic Study, For The Office of Women in Development Bureau for Global Programmes, Field Support and Research, United States Agency for International Development, June 2001, accessed 09 November 2010, http://www.onlinewomeninpolitics.org/beijing12/womenandit.pdf Nina E. Lerman, Ruth Oldenziel and Arwen Mohun, Gender and Technology: A Reader, (Maryland, JHU Press, 2003), 2 Reenee Kuriyan and Kathi R. Kitner, Constructing Class Boundaries: Gender and Shared Compution, Proceedings of the 2nd IEEE/ACM International Conference ICTD, 2007, Accessed 10 November 2010, sites.google.com/site/reneekuriyan/KuriyanandKitner_PDF.pdf Robert Crooks and Karla Baur, Our Sexuality, (New Delhi, Cengage Learning, 2007), 9. Robert V. Kail, Advances in Child Development and Behavior, Vol. 35, (Maryland, Academic Press, 2007), 181-183. Sherry B. Ortner, Sexual meanings: the cultural construction of gender and sexuality, (Cambridge, CUP Archive, 1986), 1-8. ESSAY PLAN NAME: STUDENT NO.: DATE Topic: Technology and gender: Processes and consequences Introduction : Gender is a social construct rather than a biological construct Argument/Thesis statement : Every individual in a modern society goes through a gendering process Mainpoint (a) Gendering of men and women moves in opposite directions which ends up as social discrimination of women Mainpoint (b) The gendered male and gendered female are viewed by the society in different ways and this results in the social inclusion of the male and exclusion of the female Mainpoint (c) New technologies have always initially excluded women from handling them, but has then gradually evolved into tools for them to fight exclusion Concepts to define: Gendered male, gendered female. Scope: This study will help develop a new paradigm for a human society where there is no discrimination on the basis of gender by drawing attention to the potential of technology as an equalizing factor, if used in a conscious way. Mainpoint (a) Gendering of men and women moves in opposite directions which ends up as social discrimination of women Mainpoint (b) The gendered male and gendered female are viewed by the society in different ways and this results in the social inclusion of the male and exclusion of the female Mainpoint (c) New technologies have always initially excluded women from handling them, but has then gradually evolved into tools for them to fight exclusion Conclusion: A conscious effort to use technology as a tool to cast away gender differences can bring in a great social change in connection with gender roles. Read More