Monday, October 1, 2007

Midterm 1

Midterm 1

Sex and gender are two very tricky concepts and are not always black and white. Sex is defined as the body that you are in biologically speaking. In “Women’s Voices Feminist’s Visions,” they say that sex is something you “have.” It is essentially what you are biologically born with. Gender on the other hand is culturally defined. In the book it is said that it is something you “do” rather than “have.” It is your sexual identity in regard to society and culture, and there are many ways in which gender can be explained theologically. Three different theories about gender are Bornstein’s model, social construction, and the integrative perspective.
The first theory about gender is Bornstein’s idea. This theory explains how gender is in somewhat of a pyramid, much like the food pyramid. The area at the top is needed in moderation and as you go down you need more and more or there are more and more. In her model, the top was, in brief, a powerful, white male. As you go down the pyramid, though, the criteria get less and less specific. For example, in the middle is where most people would probably be. This area might be the males who are in touch with their sensitive side, who are classified as “sissy” males. Along side which you would have the women who are classified as “tom boys.” This theory of gender is not a very cut and dry theory but rather has much grey area.
The next theory of gender is social construction. This framework of looking at gender is basically that we learning gender through our society. There are certain ideas of how a female and male should be in this society. Females are suppose to be passive, dependent, and emotional, and males are suppose to be strong, independent, and in control. These criteria of how we are “supposed to be” is set by society. When you are trying to figure out your gender, society rewards certain behaviors that are seen as appropriate to your gender. We, in essence, learn to “perform behaviors that are socially expected of us.” (Shaw and Lee)
One more framework for gender is the integrative perspective. This approach is a mix of the biological factors and sociological factors. This theory pays attention to the biological aspect of gender, but states that it is only the framework and basic outline for gender. In this perspective, you also have to look at sociological factors like social sexual influence and family environment. The integrative approach believes that the world and society have just as much effect on people and their gender as does your biology.
In our society, though many people hate to admit it, gender does shape science and technology. When you think of certain genders, for example, males, you automatically think of them being successful in the science and technology field. Women on the other hand are seen more as the homemakers and mothers and should not at all be associated with the technological part of society.
Science and technology defiantly shape our understanding of gender in our society today. One way that science shapes gender is the fact that all throughout history, men have dominated the field of science. Science is seen as a hard field and you have to be a strong and smart person to succeed in this field. Since men are more successful in this field, or have been in the past, it makes them seem as if they are the stronger gender. Technology also shapes gender as well. One way it does this is that technology is quickly growing in our world with more Internet websites, video games, and more specialized electronics. In all of these aspects, men seem to be the dominant gender. They understand it more and seem to know more about all these things. In video games you never see females in them and if you do it is usually the person you are trying to save. (aka. The damsel in distress) This puts a negative light on women and defiantly shapes how women are looked upon in this society.
Women’s studies scholars seem to think that science and technology are an important aspect in gender because they both make males look dominant and stronger than females. In this way, feminists study this aspect because they are trying to make this stereotype change. Just because in the past men have succeeded in these fields of study doesn’t mean that women cannot just as easily succeed.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

in regards to your midterm:

1. talk more about where bornstein is coming from with her model - how she works in race and class...

add to social construction -- that ideas about gender change with time and place (fluid depending on context)

instead of integrative (or along with it) explain the essentialist/bilogical determinist view.... this would strengthen your discussion of integrative as well

2. this is a wek essay -- do much more -- bring in ideas from the scanned readings (Wajcman, Martin, etc.)...