Download Gender as a Social Construct: Performativity and Identity and more Exams Construction in PDF only on Docsity!
IS GENDER A SOCIAL CONSTRUCT? A
PHILOSOPHICAL APPRAISAL
Hyginus Chibuike Ezebuilo
Abstract Humanity appears to be facing what one might call a gender crisis , especially in the field of affectivity and sexuality. In many educational institutions today, curricula which “allegedly convey a neutral conception of the person and life are being planned and implemented, which, in fact, reflect ‘an anthropology’ opposed to ‘faith’ and right reason.” The disorientation regarding anthropology which is a widespread feature of our cultural landscape has undoubtedly helped to destabilize the family as an institution, bringing with it a tendency to cancel the differences between men and women, presenting them instead as merely the product of historical and cultural conditioning. This current mentality is characterized by challenges emerging from varying forms of an ideology that is given the generic nomenclature ‘gender theory,’ which “denies the differences and reciprocity in nature of man and woman, and envisages a society without sexual differences, thereby eliminating the anthropological basis of the family. This ideology leads to legislative enactments that promote a personal identity and emotional intimacy radically separated from the biological difference between male and female. Consequently, human identity becomes the choice of the individual, one which can also change over time. In the light of this, a positive approach on gender issues must consider the totality of the person and insist therefore on the integration of the biological, social, and spiritual elements. This is basically the aim of the paper. Employing the critical approach in philosophy, the study, thus, provides a crucial element for understanding women,
PREORC JOURNAL OF GENDER AND SEXUALITY STUDIES, Volume 1, Maiden Edition (2020)
which has been missing from the public discourse; an understanding of human sexuality that neither denies nor overemphasizes the differentiation of human beings into two kinds, masculine and feminine.
Keywords: Gender, Constructionism, Performativity, Commonality, Analogy, Essentialism.
Introduction Gender often entails adhering to normative behavior and roles. It is ‘done’ or ‘performed’ as some have argued, remarking that the performance of gender reinforces the essentialism of gender categories (West, 2002, p.126). Essentialism argues that there are essential differences between genders which manifest themselves in differences in gender performance. Gender performance consists of a stylized practice involving gestures, language, speech, etc., and serves to form and build identity (Butler, 1988, p.520). When an individual performs their gender to the standards set by societal norms, it bolsters the argument of gender essentialism. Historically, and as a result of this position, men have assumed a dominant gender role, and women have been prescribed a role submissive to men. The non-essentialists which we have tagged social constructionists is against this development. They believe, contrary to the essentialist arguments, that there are no essential differences between genders as the differences which manifest themselves in gender performance are matters of social construction. Judith Butler, thus, argued that gender is not an essential category, the repetitious performances of male and female in accordance with social norms which tend to create an essential dualism notwithstanding. Gender, for her, is never a stable descriptor of an individual rather an individual is
PREORC JOURNAL OF GENDER AND SEXUALITY STUDIES, Volume 1, Maiden Edition (2020)
cultural, and psychological traits linked to males and females through particular social contexts (Lindsey, 2015, p.4). Sex makes us male or female; gender makes us masculine or feminine. Sex is an ascribed status because a person is born with it, but gender is an achieved status because it must be learned. Free Social Science Dictionary defines gender as a socially defined behavior regarded as appropriate for the members of each sex. In trying to draw a distinction, (Ezebuilo, 2009) wrote elsewhere: Now, gender refers to the roles of women and men of all ages, which are defined culturally, socially, economically and historically. These ideas vary across culture. ‘Gender’ itself is a term that evokes various debates and controversies. At a minimum, to the word ‘gender’ rather than ‘sex’ is to indicate that male and female roles in a given society are shaped not only by biology but by social practice, and that the role of women and men will not be identical in every society. In general terms, ‘sex’ refers to the biological differences between males and females, such as the genitalia and genetic differences, while gender can refer to the role of a male or female in society, or an individual’ conceptions of [himself or herself] in terms of identity. West and Zimmerman (2002, pp.3-4), give this definition for sex in the paper Doing Gender : “Sex is a determination made through the application of socially agreed upon biological criteria for classifying persons as females and males. The criteria for classification can be genitalia at birth or chromosomal typing before birth, and they do not necessarily agree with one another.” The differentiation
Ezebuilo: Is Gender A Social Construct? …
between gender and sex did not arise until the late 1970s, when researchers began using “gender” and “sex” as two separate terms, with “gender” referring to one’s self-identity and “sex” referring to one’s chromosomal makeup and sex organs (DeFrancisco, et al, 2014, p.11). The duality of ‘male’ and ‘female’ leaves out everyone who does not fit into these categories because of genital makeup, chromosomes, or hormone levels. In discussing this point, Eckert states that: “the first thing people want to know about a baby is its sex, and social convention provides a myriad of props to reduce the necessity of asking (2013, p.4).” Thus, this reinforces the importance and emphasis that society places not only on sex but also on ways in which to point towards one’s. Eckert (2013, p.4) furthers this in stating that determining sex at one’s birth is also vital of how one presents themselves in society at an older age because sex determination sets the stage for a long life process of gendering. Eckert’s position points to Judith Butler’s view of gender as being performative which we shall discuss in more details. Similar to Butler, Eckert is hinting to the fact that gender is not an internal reality that cannot be changed. Instead, he is saying that this is a common misconception that a majority of the population unknowingly reinforces, which sees its emergency during infancy. Fundamentals questions which this paper tends to resolve are therefore: if gender roles are differentiated, does it imply inequality? Must all forms of equality obliterate all differences? Or, is it possible for there to be an equality of differences? This does not seem possible because the difference as such, lacks commonality – that of which an analogous term is predicated – or common ground, whereby they can be compared and known as equal, or even as inferior/superior (Ezebuilo, 2020, p.60). So, the question
Ezebuilo: Is Gender A Social Construct? …
ascribe to them. The naira , for instance, is only worth as much value as Nigerians are willing to ascribe to it. Note that the naira only works in its own currency market; it holds no value in areas that do not use it. Nevertheless it is extremely powerful in its own domain. This basic idea of social constructionism can be applied to any issue of study pertaining to human life, including gender. Is gender an essential category or a social construct? If it is a social construct how does it function? Who benefits from the way a gender is constructed? Are men and women essentially different? Is gender learned or is it something intrinsic in us? In other words, is gender a fact about us or is it something that is taught to us and is being constantly reinforced by society? The social construct theory of gender is a theory about the manifestation of cultural origins, mechanisms and outcomes of gender perception and expression in the context of interpersonal and group social interaction. Specifically, it holds that gender roles are an achieved status in a social environment, which implicitly and explicitly categorize people and therefore motivate social behaviors (Lindsey, 2015, p.4). It should be noted that in the context of feminist theory, the word “status” refers to the categories by which societies are divided according to ascribed roles. Social constructionism is a theory of knowledge which describes the relationship between the objectivity of reality and the capacity of human cognition. It asserts that reality exists as the result of social perceptions and expression, and that the reality which is perceived is the only reality worth consideration. This is accompanied by the understanding that reality is subject to manipulation through control over social perceptions and expressions. Social constructivism specifically rejects objectivism, the notion that empirical facts
PREORC JOURNAL OF GENDER AND SEXUALITY STUDIES, Volume 1, Maiden Edition (2020)
can be known about reality. This is well demonstrated in Steven Pinker’s The Blank Slate , which paid attention to the existence of some socially constructed categories such as money, tenure, citizenship etc, which exist only because people tactically agree to act as if they exist (Pinker, 2002, p.202). Nevertheless, Pinker does not subscribe to social constructionism as the lens through which to understand reality. Instead, he thinks that our understanding of reality consists in the autonomy and biologically informed nature of human existence (Pinker, 2002, p.202). In this way, Pinker contradicts social constructionist scholars, Mareccek, Crawford and Popp, (2004, p.193) who in their On the Construction of Gender, Sex, and Sexualities , deny the autonomy of the individual, as well as assert the tabula rasa theory of thinking, as they hold that knowledge and meaning are generated exclusively as a collective effort and that the individual is incapable of doing so independently of the society. This further implies that the perception of the creation of meaning independently of the society is an illusion resulting from manipulation of social perceptions and expressions. Alsop, Fitzsimmons and Lennon (2002, p.64) also remark that the constructionist accounts of gender creation can be divided into two main streams, namely materialist theories and discursive theories. The former attempts to underline the structural aspects of the social environment that are responsible for perpetuating certain gender roles while the later stresses the creation of meaning that are associated with gender through language and culture. They also argue that both the materialist and discursive theories of social construction of gender can be either essentialist, assuming a clear biological division between women and men when
PREORC JOURNAL OF GENDER AND SEXUALITY STUDIES, Volume 1, Maiden Edition (2020)
A recent synthesis of meta-analytic studies of gender differences provides strong evidence for a social construct understanding of gender Ethan Zell and colleagues examined more than 20,000 findings from 12 million participants comparing men and women on topics ranging from risk-taking to body image. The authors found that the majority of effects were very small (to small), indicating for more similarities than differences between genders (p.718).
Berkowitz has noted that gender is a major axis along which factors of oppression are considered. He remarks that: “The gender order is hierarchical in that, overall, men dominate women in terms of power and privilege; yet multiple and conflicting sources of power and oppression are intertwined, and not all men dominate all women” (Berkowitz, 2010, p.135). He also asserts that gender at large, especially gender roles, contributes greatly as a prolific and potent avenue by which manipulations of social perceptions and expression manifest reality – specifically, a reality in which women are typically oppressed by men within a social structure that establishes roles for women , which are explicitly lesser capacity for accruing and exercising arbitrary power. The system which manifests and exercises this power is typically referred to as patriarchy. Take for example the Igbo-Africa. The traditional Igbo society is patriarchic in structure. Hence, women are said to have the legal status of minors, to be unable to own property in their own names, to be excluded from inheriting property, and to be barred from holding traditional leadership positions. Customary discrimination of this sort creates a tension for democracy in contemporary Africa, which values both customary practices
Ezebuilo: Is Gender A Social Construct? …
and women’s equality. Consequently, sexism, a belief that women are weaker, less intelligent, and less important than men has become entrenched in the Igbo traditional and contemporary societies. Condry and Condry (1976, pp.81-82) observe that from infancy, male and female children are interpreted differently and interacted with differently. It is not only that male adults seem to enforce male gender more than female’s, available evidence suggest that adults’ perception of babies are affected by their beliefs about the babies’ sex. Gender discrimination is thus deeply engrained in our social practices, in our understanding of ourselves and of others, that we almost cannot do anything without some consideration for gender implications. Simon de Beanvoir, in a memorable statement cited in Butler (Butler, 1993, p.17), claims that women are not born, they are made; the same is true of men: The making of a man or woman is never ending process that begins before birth; from the moment someone begins to wonder if the expected child will be a boy or a girl, and the ritual announcement at birth that it is in fact one or the other instantly transform an “it” into a different pronoun: “he” of “she,” and standardly assigning the lifetime attribute “male” or “female.”
The implication of this observation is that apart from the natural differing genital organs, every child is born the same; hence, that a child becomes man or woman is a social construction, otherwise the children are alike. Culture is like an umbrella under which some people like to hide from rain, and also to shade themselves from the sun. But sometimes you need to fold it. Every social grouping in the world has specific traditional cultural practices and beliefs, some of
Ezebuilo: Is Gender A Social Construct? …
(Bussey & Bandura, 1999, pp.667-668). Children then act in a way that fulfils their conception. This view does not account for the fluidity of gender asserted by some psychologists who purport that gender identity is not a stable fixed trait, but is rather socially constructed and may vary over time for an individual (Diamond & Butterworth, 2008). The development of gender identity is seen in this case as a process of self-identification which must precede the ability for “children to label themselves and others as males or females.” Thus, the development of gender becomes a tool for developing children to better categorize and define the social behaviors around them. Here, there is the possibility that a developing child may refine and curtail their gender differentiations according to experiences as they develop. Bussey and Bandura’s view, however, contravenes the notion of gender identity being individual and internal by explaining its source as social behavior and its manifestation as a desire for compatibility with a received notion of gender. According to this view, the concept of gender in a developing child is immutable once established by society. As a term, gender identity allows individuals to express their attitude towards and stance in relation to their current status as either men or women (LaFrance et al., 2004, p.328). Turning the scope of gender from a social consensus to objectivity to one’s self-identification with a certain gender expression leaves much more space for describing variations among individual gender theorists. The question of accountability is also important to the ongoing. While men and women are held accountable for normative conceptions of gender, this accountability can differ in content based on ethnicity, race, age, class, and so on. According to West and Zimmerman (2002), gender is not simply what one is, but what one does; and it is actively produced within social interactions.
PREORC JOURNAL OF GENDER AND SEXUALITY STUDIES, Volume 1, Maiden Edition (2020)
Accountability is interactional because it does not occur solely within the individual. Accountability can apply to behaviors that do conform to cultural conceptions as well as those behaviors that deviate, that is, it is the possibility of being held accountable that is important in social constructionism. For instance, one may wonder why there are probably only men in the field of motor mechanics in Nigeria. The reason cannot be unconnected with the fact that such a dirty work is unsuitable for women and, perhaps, women are unable to train because of family duties. Gender, thus, is the activity of managing situated conducts in light of normative conceptions of attitudes and activities appropriate for one’s sex category. This performance of gender occurs not only with others but is also performed alone, in the imagined presence of others. Again, doing gender is not just about conforming to stereotypical gender roles rather it is the active engagement in any behavior that is gendered, or behavior that may be evaluated as gendered. It is argued that it is these sex performances that normalize the essentialism of sex categories. Sustaining this point, West and Zimmerman (2002, p.126) writes:
In other words, by doing gender, we reinforce the essential categories of gender – that there are only two categories that are mutually exclusive. The idea that men and women are essentially different is what makes men and women behave in ways that appear essentially different. Though sex categorization is based on biological sex, it is maintained as a category through socially constructed displays of gender (for example, you could identify a transgender person as female when in fact she is assigned male at birth).
PREORC JOURNAL OF GENDER AND SEXUALITY STUDIES, Volume 1, Maiden Edition (2020)
compliance with dominant societal norms. However, Butler is not stating that gender is a sort of performance in which an individual can terminate the act; instead, what he is saying is that this performance is ongoing and out of an individual’s control. In fact, rather than an individual producing the performance, the opposite is true. The performance is what produces the individual. This is in concomitant with Nietzsche’s claim that “there is no ‘being’ behind doing…the doer is merely a fiction added to the deed – the deed is everything.” Thus, the emphasis is placed not on the individual producing the deed but on the deed itself. For instance, paint your lips with some curtest plait your hair in Igbo Africa and you are a woman. The designation also applies to gossipers, weak individuals, etc. Although a seemingly difficult concept to grasp, gender performativity is realized throughout many aspects of our lives, especially in our infancy and young childhood, our teen years, and finally our adult lives. The idea around gender performativity, when applied to infancy and young childhood, deals with the idea that from the moment one is conceived, arguably even before that, who they are and who they will become is predetermined. Children learn at a very young age what it means to be a boy or a girl in our society. Parents sometimes go as far as coordinating their daughter with the color pink because it is feminine or blue for their sons because it is masculine (Witt, 2020). This emphasizes the fact that gender is something that is taught to us and is continuously being shaped by society’s expectations. Thus, calling back to Butler’s perception that gender is not a fact about us and is being constantly reinforced. This idea that gender is constantly shaped by expectations is relevant in the online community. Teenagers are easily able to formulate relationships and friendships online, thus increasing the
Ezebuilo: Is Gender A Social Construct? …
probability of a teenager’s delicate identity to be manipulated and distorted. They often come across situations in real life and online that cause them to question to themselves when facing society, including gender performance.
Equality is not Sameness and Difference is not Inequality There is no room for the slightest sexist discrimination anywhere in human life. But the equality of men and women is an analogous one, so that the differentiation of the sexes must not be lost, not in any of our behavior, any of our laws, any of our customs and traditions. Departing from the status quo over the centuries, John Paul II teaches in no uncertain term that women and men are equal as persons before God (IMRI, 2020). He believes that both “man and woman” are human beings to an equal degree.” For like men, women are created in the image and likeness of God. The power of this at first glance rather theoretical affirmation of spiritual and metaphysical equality is nuanced in practice by the Pope’s commitment to gender difference. His work consistently draws upon the traditional view that men and women embody human nature in two contrasting but complementary ways, which means that they play distinct social roles. Advocating the equality and dignity of women does not mean to play them off against men as is often done in certain feministic circles. According to the Pope, therefore, any rivalry between woman and man was not part of the divine plan, but part of human sinfulness. Man and woman are equal but the equality does not imply sameness. As a matter of fact, no two things can be ontologically the same. The equality of man and woman, according to John Paul II is neither univocal nor equivocal, but analogous. As Ogbo and Ogbuishi (2019, p.131) noted, a term is said to be univocal if one and the same name is predicated of many according to concepts which are entirely the same. Again, a term is said to
Ezebuilo: Is Gender A Social Construct? …
relationship of the artists to art. Since those relationships pertain to excellence, they are equals; but since their excellences are different, their equality is analogical. Hence, John Paul II is univocally supportive of gender equality while upholding gender roles that would allow equality to be based upon a commodality that is analogous rather than univocal or equivocal. A gender role is a set of societal norms dictating the types of behaviors which are generally considered acceptable, appropriate, or desirable for people based on their actual (or perceived) sex or sexuality.
The Challenge of Apposite Response From what we have discussed earlier, gender often entails adhering to gender normative behavior and roles. Over time, therefore, men and women’s attitudes have been becoming more liberalized with regard to gender roles. Men and women are agreeing on a more egalitarian responsibility distribution within the family sphere and the society at large. It has become a common practice that women should and can have roles in the public sphere, especially in leadership positions, and that men can involve themselves in the private and domestic spheres. This practice does not prevent a man from being a man nor does it prevent a woman from being a woman. As a matter of fact, it does not imply a total denial of gender roles some of which are truly natural and divinely ordained (as in a woman giving birth and a man obtaining ordination in ecclesial setting). Essential differences between sexes should not be problematic. Some gender roles can actually be socially agreed upon to avoid chaos and conflict in the society, provided it does not have subordination of one gender in view. Undeniably, however, some of these roles are quite natural as well as spiritual. The idea of male superiority, meanwhile, is not peculiar to any particular society. In several passages in the Summa
PREORC JOURNAL OF GENDER AND SEXUALITY STUDIES, Volume 1, Maiden Edition (2020)
Theologiae , Thomas Aquinas asserts the inferiority of women in both bodily strength and in force of intelligence. To top this off, he maintains that feminine intellectual inferiority actually contributes to the order and beauty of the universe. But he also affirms that in Heaven there are and will be women who occupy higher places than men (Ezebuilo, 2020). Perhaps, in this apparent inconsistency he is simply hedging on his seemingly chauvinistic positions to accommodate Mary, Queen of Heaven. To begin to understand his position, we must ask why Aquinas thinks women intellectually inferior in the first place. Scripture is likely his first guide. St. Paul says in 1Corinthians 11:10 that “man was not created for the sake of woman, but woman was created for the sake of man.” This passage echoes Genesis 2:18, 19: It is not good that the man should be alone. I will give him a helpmate. “Aquinas reasons from these scriptural passages that when one thing exists for the sake of another, it is inferior to that other. Other passages indicate that women’s inferiority is something divinely ordained. When in 1Corinthians 11:3 St. Paul says that “man is the head of woman,” and in Ephesians 5:22 that “a husband is the head of his wife,” Aquinas takes it as evident that if men are meant to rule, it can only be by virtue of intellectual superiority. Yet Aquinas says: “Just as some human beings will surpass certain angels in glory despite the inferiority of human nature to angelic nature, so too some women despite their inferiority as to intelligence” (Ezebuilo, 2020). There is at least one important thing we can learn from Aquinas – we should love who we are. The beauty of nature lies in diversity. It is pride, the excessive desire of our own excellence that tends to make us sad when another has perfection or grace we do not have. In our discussion of the differences between the sexes, we must avoid yielding to
