CRJ # 3
When Carole Vance presents the idea of gender and sexuality not being understood as “natural” or unchanging “truths” but as “social constructions,” she is going against many people and taking a stand against how she thinks society should be. Gender and sexuality has always been looked at as the “natural” and unchanging “truths,” and she says that it should be looked at as “social constructions” which is being more “fluid and changeable and the production of human action and history.”(29) Which means, Vance believes that when you are born there should not me a set way in which you are to live your life sexually. You should be able to change what kind of person you are sexually attracted too, whether that is a male or female. Essentialism is the belief that your human behavior is indeed biological and that you can not change it under any circumstances. Biological determinism is the predisposition to see women only by their reproductive and biological selves and nothing else. This biological determinism sees women one certain way and leaves no room for any change. Which leads to the social constructionist view, in which women go against the “biological determinism” view and may change their sexual identity. Being lesbian or gay is considered to be socially constructed, because people do not believe it to be real, therefore, constructed and unreal.
Historically, men have had all the rights and have held the upper hand in society. When we talk about women starting to get rights and become equal to them, men do not realize how bad our situation really is. The quote, “the fish is the last to discover the ocean” by Kimmel, is referring to this problem. They have not discovered how we feel in society because they have always lived one way and don’t notice it. They take the life they have for granted and don’t realize anyone else has a problem because they have never walked in our shoes. Therefore, I believe, not only do feminists have to try and get women more rights and become more equal, but should also strive to inform and help men understand where we are coming from so they appreciate what we are trying to do more.
2 comments:
Social construction theory is different than the nature v. nurture debate whihc you seem to be referring to here... the idea ias that the very concept of gender... what it means to be a male or a female... along with the very concepts of sexuality... what it means to be heterosexual, etc... are determined/given meaning by society... this is why we looked at the history of science... to demonstrate how gender has been different throughout time...
it isn't that society makes someone gay... but rather that society decides that there is this thing called sexuality and that we are going to divide it along the homo/hetero line and that we are going to give those categories such and such a meaning...
Check out the notes on this section available with the scanned readings::::
Current scientific ideas about male and female bodies and cultural definitions of masculinity and femininity all have histories. Studying the different models that practitioners and scholars of the body and health in different cultures and time periods have used to conceptualize human bodies can help us realize that these ideas are not essential. Vance’s essay describes this way of thinking about bodies as a social constructivist theory: a belief that the cultural context in which a person, act, or behavior is situated determines the way gender will be perceived and experienced. In contrast, essentialists assert that bodies possess qualities that do not change over time and space. Biological determinism considers gender to be biologically determined.
Social constructionist view: “… physically identical sexual acts may have varying social significance and subjective meanings depending on how they are defined and understood in different cultures and historical periods. Because a sexual act does not carry with it a universal social meaning, it follows that the relationship between social acts and sexual identities is not a fixed one, and it is projected from the observer’s time and place to others at great peril. Cultures provide widely different categories, schemata, and labels for framing sexual and affective experiences…” (Vance, 30-31). The social construction view makes us question the “naturalness” of sexuality – remember we have seen how human values and stereotypes get into science and the lens by which we “see” sex/gender
also, the kimmel reading wasn't in the section referred to by this assignment...
Post a Comment