The question of being a male or a female is not purely answered by the biological composition of every individual. Sexuality or gender is defined in many aspects that it extends beyond sociological, cultural, economical, political, and other dimensions of human life. The traditional assumption is that sex is naturally given while gender is the cultural definition built upon that identified nature of sex (Delaney 2007, p. 37). A considerable number of research studies on the different branches of the social sciences particularly that of psychology, sociology and anthropology have raised intriguing questions about the relation between sex and sexual orientation. Among these socially or culturally controversial questions is, whether there might be more than two genders and whether sex itself may, to a large extent, be culturally constructed (Delaney 2007, p. 37). Are ideas of a person in relation to sexuality or gender socially constructed or inherent and essential parts of individual’s character? Looking on the various sources provided on the succeeding discussions, the main thesis of this report states that sexuality or gender is socially constructed as related to various factors (e.g. culture and media) that effect its definition yet the nature of sexuality or gender – being a male or a female is a prime consideration of such social construction. It is also significantly emphasized that the word socially indicated in the phrases qualifies the main argument as the word synonymously understood as within society or in a social extent.
The Concept of Sexuality or Gender
The basic understanding of human sexuality or gender is based on the understanding on what is to be a man or a woman. Providing a definition of sexuality or gender is also problematic as it may raise heated arguments and points of discussions among linguists and social sciences specialists. In this report, it is necessary to provide a definition of what sexuality or gender means in terms of its lexical meaning. Most dictionaries define sexuality as a noun that refers to “the condition that is characterized by sex”. Sexuality connotes intimate thoughts or anything that pertains to sexual activity. Meanwhile, gender is a classification that is based in the characteristics of sex or sexual identity in terms of societal and cultural foundation. Gender connotes the condition of man or woman as a distinguishing form. These two terms, although technically different, are synonymous in this report.
Sexuality or sex commonly connotes the biological and anatomical make up of human beings, that is, male sex or female sex as determined by three sets of characteristics namely external sex organs, internal sex organs, and secondary sexual development at puberty (EngenderHealth 2005). As stated earlier, the word sexuality is also used to represent sexual intercourse or activity that satisfies the sexual drives of humans. On the other hand, gender has a more social definition as it refers to a set of qualities and behaviors expected from a female or male by society (EngenderHealth 2005). It also constitutes roles that are learned and can be affected by factors such as education or economics and be widely different within and among given cultures.
The biological sex is determined at birth by various factors beyond control (Romaine 1999, p. 1) like heredity or genetics and other applied sciences. Yet, it is recognized that being born male or female is probably the most important feature of human lives. Traditions show that when a person sees a newly born baby, the first question which is commonly asked is whether it is a boy or girl. This is also similar to the situation when we see someone for the very first time, that is, if that someone is male or female. In application, people identify if they are male or female in every officially permitted transactions, in school, or in any other social instances. Various factors like physical appearance, clothing, behavior, and language commonly provide some of the most important means of identifying a male from a female. The establishment and development of gender boundaries that are increasingly less rigid do not change the fact that gender or sexuality (or anything it is referred to) is still one of the most visible human traits.
Social Construction of Sexuality or Gender: a Cultural Perspective
The main thesis of this report claims that the ideas of sexuality or gender are socially constructed seeing that culture plays a crucial role in the building up of its definition. Culture by definition is similar to culture itself. It does not have established definition; however, there are common denominators or concepts that connect various definitions from each other. The basic definition of culture in the dictionary is anything that pertains to human knowledge, belief, and behaviour including shared attitudes, values, goals, and practices shared by people in particular place and time that transcend beyond generations. A culture is innate to all society who owns it. Social scientists frequently try to find definition for what is culture and such definition inclusively encompasses all the key concepts mentioned above. Culture is cannot be defined specifically because the meaning is diverse for each individual. It is dependent on the circumstances in a society where someone grows up and some other influences in daily life. The definition of culture develops with the individual's experiences. If a person is talking about culture, it is just a personal view on how the person itself understands it. According to Handwerker (2002, p. 107), culture mainly consists of the knowledge on what or how people use to live their lives and the way in which they do so. Culture consists of both explicit and implicit rules through which experience is interpreted.
Culture in relation to sexuality or gender is evidently pervasive in control. Most anthropological studies involving demographic criteria like age, race, ethnicity, social class, language, etc. do not undermine the important role of culture. For example, the ethnographic/sociolinguistic work of Eckert (1989, 1999) involving preadolescent and adolescent communities of practice shows varied ways in which gender and other aspects of identity are co-constructed. The cultural practices of people in specific culture define their identity. This simple analogy is applicable on the social construction of sexuality or gender. Historically, men are the ones who work in order for a family to sustain the basic needs to live. Women, on the other hand are responsible for child-rearing and taking care of the households. The pre-historic narrations signify that men are the hunters as women are the gatherers. In reflection to culture, men and women have their specific roles designed exclusively for their individual capabilities. Other cultural factors dictate what or how a man or woman is like. The biological composition of sexes are defined and constantly redefined, presented and further represented, valued, and communicated or passes through different roles that are derived in various culturally dependent ways.
During childhood, a child is exposed to other people, things, circumstances and other factors that might influence his/her growth. A substantial amount of research has been conducted regarding the ways in which children acquire culturally-related gender behaviors. In simple terms, male children normally plays in large group that are have given hierarchy, where they play games and winners and losers emerge. Female children are more comfortable in playing with small group where they can refer other playmates as best friend. Early childhood practices are already defined by practices and traditions on the environment where the child is living. The adults, what they say or do, how they act and relate to other for example, are adopted by children. According to Bandura (1969) in his social learning theory, children learn their appropriate sex-roles through observing the actions of others, as well as being either rewarded or punished for acting appropriately or inappropriately. Children gain knowledge of their personality and behavior patterns by imitation of their own parents' attitudes and behaviors. The practices as part of culture dictates how a male or a female child should act, thus creating the definition of his/her sexuality or gender bounded in the cultural practices in the environment he/she belongs. Bandura also observed that children acquire the patterns of behavior more rapidly if there is an attractive model whose behavior is rewarded (Smith 1994, p. 324).
Murphie and Potts (2003, p. 2) noted that the function of culture is to establish modes of conduct, standards of performance, and ways of dealing with interpersonal and environmental relations that will reduce uncertainty, increase predictability, and thereby promote survival and growth among the members of any society. It affects behaviour and provides explanations on how a group communicates and filters information. The cultural meanings of such elements of culture render some forms of activity, may it be normal and natural while others are strange or wrong. On the social construction of sexuality or gender, culture indicates the male and female roles. This indication of culture on how to be a man or a woman or what constitute a male or a female is evidently natural. Because if a person acts against the given cultural practices and traditions of the society he/she belongs, he/she is considered outcast or cultural delinquent. As Cockburn (1991, p.2) argued, men and women are the same and different. By exploring their potentialities as well as their limits, one is able to understand what is appropriate and what is not. In shaping societal norms, for instance, gender identify the different set of standards that are singularly intended for each sex and are useful in creating materials apposite to the practices and traditions of the existing culture. Anything that is in divergence to the host culture is considered taboo or unacceptable.
What the culture dictates to a certain individual makes up his/her her identity. According to Eckert and McConnell-Ginet (1999, p. 190-91), the social practices that construct sexuality or gender are also simultaneously constructing other aspects of identity – such as life stage, heterosexuality, ethnicity, or social class. The social construction of sexuality or gender in relation to culture is associated on the views of other aspects of human life. The reason of these two authors is bounded on the fact that generalizations involving gender are presumably to appear when gender is not singularly examined, but in interaction with other relevant social variables. Amidst the passing of time, cultural beliefs, values, customs and other elements carry on and are to be followed so long as they yield satisfaction on the group of individuals or society that uses it. This is a simultaneous chain of events and reactions. However, when a specific standard no longer fully satisfies the members of a society, it is modified or replaced, so that the resulting standard is more in line with the current needs and desires of the society (Murphie & Potts 2003, p. 3). The definition and redefinition, presentation and representation, importance, and delivery of cultural practices and traditions that provide ideas on sexuality or gender are continuous. As long as an identified featured of culture is defined to be masculine or feminine, it will serve the benefits of the person him/her self. Thus, culture gradually but continually evolves to meet the needs of society.
To strengthen the claim that the idea of sexuality or gender is socially constructed, Foucault has shown that categories of sexuality in The History of Sexuality (1980) where he took issue with the conception of sexuality as a singular and all-important human attribute, involving members of one sex being oriented towards members of the opposite sex as their object (Tseëlon 2001, p. 6). The amalgamation of cultural practices and traditions constitute sexuality or gender as reflected to gender roles. Such roles are regulated by gender relations that regulate the interaction between male and female. Gender relations are evidently seen on the perspective of media and its communication channels. The role that is being portrayed in various avenue of communication also affects the social construction of what is sexuality or gender – on how to be man or woman on contemporary standards.
Social Construction of Sexuality or Gender: a Media and Communications Perspective
The role of media as a catalyst of change goes beyond the development of values, practices, thoughts, and other attributes that characterize a man or a woman. What the media shows, writes, or tells, it affects the definition of sexuality or gender. The case of advertising and portrayal of men and women can be a relevant example. Also, the transformation of the traditional definition of sexuality or gender on both male and female sexes is influenced by media. According to Gauntlett (2001, p. 1), today’s media and all forms of communications are fundamental elements that have an effect on the people’s ways of life particularly in relation to gender and sexuality. Media and the channels of communications contain images and messages that affect the sense of identity in both beneficial and harmful ways. At the same time, media has directed and straightforward effect on various audience especially on the perspective of a man or woman. Media ands communications certainly is among the most influential source of developing people’s identities in various aspects like sexual, cultural, and others.
Meanwhile, the representations of man and woman in media serve as reference in existing development of the idea of sexuality or gender. This active, creative process through which images signify different meanings rather than merely presenting themselves as objective reflections of reality is called media representation (Rotstein & Henkel 1999, p.100). Media representation contributes to the ideas of sexuality or gender. On this case, media representation is reflected on the issue of gender relations and other sexuality issues. By providing specific cases like advertising in televisions and portrayal in films, the concept of media representation is elucidated in relation to the idea of sexuality or gender.
In an effort to fully describe the influence of mass media to teenagers, Bordo (cited in Blumenstein, 1994), observes that, while parents and teachers taught kids of earlier generations on how to become well-bred men and women, young people nowadays learn same lessons through “emotionally compelling” and “utterly fabricated” images present in billboards, magazines, music videos, and in the movies. Bordo (cited in Blumenstein, 1994) became very alarmed by the pervasiveness and power of such images in modern popular culture. Advertising and media are vastly influential and attractive and creates a room for human beings to live their lives in a state of commerciality (Nome 2006). Sender (1999, p. 172) referred advertisements to constitute a system of cultural production offering meaning to a consumer society which is otherwise symbolically, mythically, or spiritually, impoverished. Advertisements serve dual functions, as according to her, to provide role models for people to identify with and through whom they make constructions and images of themselves as social beings and to guide consumers towards trends and development in the marketplace and quantities of purchasing in an increasingly commodified social environment (Sender 1999, p. 172). In application, the advertised articles of trade that identify what are exclusive to man or woman builds up their individual sexual identity. For instance, the perfumes that were used by either man or woman are labeled as For Him or For Her. The clothes are also manifestation of masculine and feminine identity. For example, when baby dress in pink with a decorative bonnet, it could be concluded to be for a girl while a blue chemise with buttons is presumably for a boy. Even though unisex fashions have made gender boundaries increasingly less rigid, advertising in media socially construct the idea of sexuality or gender in terms of what a male or a female should use or consume. Recent developments in advertising imagery often involve the use of explicit sexuality and have consistently reflected prevailing views of appropriate gender relations and heterosexual norms, both endorsing proper femininity and masculinity (Eliot et al 2006; Sender 1999, p. 172). All in all, advertising culture as part of a given culture directs the social construction of sexuality and gender on the part of a man or a woman.
The identity of male and female on media representation on film portrayal signifies gender segregation. Media standards in connection to segregation of sexes are based on the role a character play. For instance, domestic or romantic dramas in film or television (including soap operas) show us how males and females interact on given instances. The main reference points are surely seen on films and TV or even theatre and that it is no longer needed to purposively elaborate on this. Media standard and convention in the segregation of sexes define the extent of the role of man as well as woman. Culturally, men are breadwinners as they are engaged in strenuous activities outside the house. On the other hand, women are expected to be caretakers of the family where they are kept within the vicinity of the house. Today, there are media portrayals and representations that are in disparity with the previously existing cultural beliefs (Crompton 1999, p. 8). With the given function of media as catalyst of change, the ideas of sexuality or gender in terms of social construction depicts personalities that challenges the possibilities of reversing or bridging the gap of sexual or gender identity or even segregation. As Ortner and Whitehead (1981, p. 2) have argued, gender itself is a system of prestige or social ranking (maleness is more highly valued than femaleness), and it is always crucially linked to other prestige systems.
Conversely, today’s media tries to equate the role of men and women in society. Even if the movement for gender equality gradually evolved in the late 19th century and was fuelled by women movements in the 20th century, the mild, moderate and radical feminist groups mustered their organizing influence to slowly inflict change in the society (Kimmel 2000, p.324). The changes in the definition of male and female in films as well as to other areas of life such as employment, politics, and the likes are evolutionary and similarly revolutionary. The traditional societal definition of men and women is already altered by media representations seen evidently on films and other visual communication mediums. All in all, media and its vehicles socially construct the idea of masculinity or femininity as shown on advertising culture and the filmic portrayals and representations.
In conclusion, the social factors that affect the idea of sexuality or gender are dynamic. As long as forces of development or change are at hand, the identity of a man or a woman will revolve around the given cultural standards, definitions, and conventions dictated by what are commonly acceptable in terms of practices or traditions. A man will always be a man and vice versa yet it is significantly recognized that the emerging forces of globalization that affects the socially constructed yet culturally restricted idea of a man or a woman will determine on how or what constitute its individual sexes or gender. The unending debate on the overall construction of the idea of sexuality or gender is nowhere to go. This is because various occurrences that appear in the process of justifying findings affect or totally alter such given findings. Like culture itself, the definition of sexuality or gender is standardized and bounded. The various sources and examples provided on the discussion above supported the main thesis that sexuality or gender is socially constructed as related to various factors (e.g. culture and media) that effect its definition yet the nature of sexuality or gender – being a male or a female is a prime consideration of such social construction. Having all this, therefore, the idea of sexuality or gender is socially dependent and ordered.
References
Bandura, A 1969, Principles of behavior modification, New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
Blumenstein, R 1994, “Same as it ever was?” Michigan Today, vol. 26, no. 4, December, no page indicated.
Cockburn, C 1991, In the Way of Women, Basingstoke: Macmillan.
Crompton, R 1999, Restructuring Gender Relations and Employment: The Decline of the Male Breadwinner, New York: Oxford University Press.
Delaney, CL 2007, “Anthropology,” Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Retrieved October 18, 2007, from http://www.search.eb.com.ezproxy.aut.ac.nz/eb/article-236865
Eckert, P 1999, Variation as social practice, Oxford: Blackwell.
Eckert, P 1989, Jocks and burnouts: Social categories and identity in the high school, New York: Teachers College Press.
Eckert, P & McConnell-Ginet, S 1997, “New generalizations and explanations in language and gender research,” Language in Society, 28, pp. 185–201.
Elliott, R, Jones, A, Benfield, A & Barlow, M 1995, “Overt sexuality in advertising: A discourse analysis of gender responses,” Journal of Consumer Policy, vol. 18, nos. 2-3 (June), pp.187-217.
EngerderHealth 2005, “What is Gender?” EngenderHealth. Retrieved October 18, 2007 from http://www.engenderhealth.org/wh/sg/egwhat.html
Gauntlet, D 2002, Media, Gender, and Identity: An Introduction, London: Routledge.
Handwerker, WP 2002, “The Construct Validity of Cultures: Cultural Diversity, Culture Theory, and a Method for Ethnography,” American Anthropologist, vol. 104, no. 1, pp. 106-122.
Kimmel, M 2000, The Gendered Society, London: Oxford University Press.
Murphie, A & Potts, J 2003, Culture and Technology, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Nome, D 2006 Culture Jamming, AnthroBase Website. Retrieved October 18, 2007 from http://www.anthrobase.com/Txt/N/Nome_D_01.htm
Ortner, S & Whitehead, H 1981, Introduction: Accounting for sexual meanings. In Sherry Ortner & Harriet Whitehead (eds.), Sexual meanings: The cultural construction of gender and sexuality, pp. 1–27, Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press.
Romaine, S 1999, Communicating Gender, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associate.
Rotstein, M & Henkel, M 1999 “Review of Stuart Hall’s Representation and the Media,” The Literature and Psychology, March 22 issue, pp. 100.
Sender, K 1999, “Selling Sexual Subjectivities: Audiences Respond to Gay Window Advertising,” Critical Studies in Mass Communication, pp. 172-196.
Smith, L 1994, “A Content Analysis of Gender Differences in Children’s Advertising,” Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 323-37.
Tseëlon, E (ed) 2001, Masquerade and Identities: Essays on Gender, Sexuality, and Marginality, New York: Routledge.
No comments:
Post a Comment