What is Gender? Is it a Social Construct?
Before we can get into defining gender, we need to cover a couple of things.
Gender and Sex
While the terms Sex and Gender are interchangeable terms for many people, it is important to understand the distinction.
Sex refers to biological differences; chromosomes, hormonal profiles, internal and external sex organs.
Gender describes the characteristics that a society or culture delineates as masculine or feminine.
Gender Identity and Sexual Orientation
In this picture we see four independent spectrums. This means that a position chosen on one doesn't effect (or limit options) on the others. A common misconception is that Gender Identity is the same as Sexual orientation. For example, a male to female transgender person has to like men, right? In fact, this transwoman, whose gender identity is female and could like men, women, both, be pan-sexual, asexual, or a slew of other options on the sexual orientation spectrum. The same availability of options apply to gender expression.
And Finally....What is Gender
Imagine a world where people were free to think, talk, dress, and present as they please? Do you think there would even be a concept of gender? Couldn't males act feminine or females act masculine without any issue? Society has developed what is acceptable for each gender and for a long time have gone against those who dare to step outside such "norms."
Language is also deeply embedded with gender. Have you ever noticed how many he/she pronouns you use in a day? Ever find it strange that languages including French, Spanish and Italian all have gender designations for inanimate objects? Do we really need to know that the table is feminine and use 'la' instead of 'le'?
Thousands of years back our biology ruled and was the primary concern for pre and early civilization. It's only natural that ways of thinking and language became embedded as the norm. With modern society we've gained the ability to think outside of this and see that gender can differ from sex, ideally allowing people to identify and express themselves freely.
Gender is a social construct.
Yes, biology has some effect and so does social interactions. There are still kids out there that are told (or worse) that "they shouldn't play with certain toys because it's not for their gender." This statement highlights key issues.
- Parents assuming that their child's biological sex is the same as their gender identity (male = masculine, right?)
- Social and/or familial norms of what someone else's gender should be.
These things are subtle and easily missed so I'm not trying to make anyone out to be a bad person. Things like this are rarely brought up or presented. However, it is still important to notice the effects these have to a young child who doesn't fully understand the world yet. Many times a child (or older) will present a gender identity or gender expression different from how they feel for practical reasons. The abuse, scorn and violence to the transgender community is staggering, can you really blame them?
Gender Feedback Loop
As nice as it would be to have gender be a non-issue, where people were free to live, act and express themselves according to their own compasses, many parts of society backlash against those that don't hold to society's standards of gender roles or the gender binary itself (i.e. non-binary, gender fluid, etc.) To live life as a trans or non-binary person requires not only coming to grips with internal feelings and preferred methods of expression but also running these through a feedback loop with society.
For example, when I was about 5 or 6, expressing myself in ways that were socially considered feminine (at the time) such as wearing "my emotions on my sleeve" or crying was met with being picked on, sometimes bullied. The practical decision for me was to not express such things and hence be left alone. How I look and express is "digested" by others and how they treat me either positively or negatively reinforces my behavior. This is the feedback loop.
The sense of one's gender identity is acquired through the internalization of external knowledge. However, it is in fact never fully acquired – it has to be constantly performed and reenacted in social interactions.
-Source
Trans and non-binary people have to first find the courage to identify and express as they see fit, and then hope for positive interactions with society. While many are able to succeed in their transition the statistics of those who aren't so lucky are staggering. On every study I've seen in the United States or the UK, over 40% of all transgender people attempt suicide at some point in their life, compared to about 5% rate for the general population.)
I know we've all heard the counter arguments here, saying the trans or non-binary person is "sick" which leads to the horrifying statistics of suicide. But they never seem to mention that these are people who were kicked out of their home or disowned by parents, bullied endlessly, trolled online, shunned by friends, kicked out of their places of worship, beaten up, raped and sometimes murdered. Is it any wonder that at least 4 in 10 transpeople try at some point to take their own life?
Until the day that gender is irrelevant (i.e. people are free to identify and express as they please) society MUST accept it's role in propagating these imposed "norms." While it takes times to change something as deeply embedded in society and language as gender, simply being accepting of somebody who has the courage to Identify and Express their core self outside of these "norms" goes a long way in the mean time.
Be a part of the Positive feedback loop.
Additional Reading:
What's Gender Anyway
Transgender Suicide Statistics
[NOTE: This was something I had written almost a year ago. It was a piece I was rather proud of at the time, but it didn't get a lot of readers back then.]
Don't Miss the Show! Follow the Steemit Talk Podcast (STP) Account
New STP Website!!
Are you new to Steemit and Looking for Answers? - Try https://www.steemithelp.net.
Image Sources:
Gender Roles
Spectrums
Trans Statistics
Jazz Jennings
I think people should be able to be who they are, and even with out arbitrary distinctions like gender really. The world doesn't seem to agree with me, but I think it would be a better place if we all took a step back and said to people "you do you and be happy, none of this affects me at all."
"you do you and be happy, none of this affects me at all." Indeed! It's the way I've always seen it, just a shame the ones that don't cause such a fuss!
Some people like to make a lot of noise. Unfortunately their noise often makes life a lot harder for certain people, which irks me to no end. I have friends of all orientations/genders, and they are all wonderful people. :)
I'm totally with you there! I couldn't have said it better. :)
Look it's difficult for someone who doesn't have gender identification issues to answer. You don't want to come across heartless or phobic but you do want a say so or can you? Sure there is political correctness, and there is biology. Where do you draw the line of distinction. It makes us uncomfortable because it's a taboo subject.
I expect people to not understand. That's why the discussions are so important. It doesn't really have to be the taboo topic that it's become.
Both sides hold part of the blame on this. I don't need others to agree, merely to acknowledge that my decisions are what I've felt best for me. We all try to figure this question out in general, well beyond gender identity.
Feel free to ask anything. I'll give me subjective opinion. :)
I'm not too concerned if someone doesn't like me because of how I've chosen to deal with my gender dysphoria. They can think what they want. I do care however if they want to get in my face about it or try to reduce my civil rights because of it. The only thing I expect is to be treated the same way as everyone else.
I'm with you there. In the end let people think what they want..just let me live my life my way.
*high-five!
Great post corey. very well written
Thank you!
We really need to stop using LABELS to define ourselves. I am gay, i am straight, i am a potato.
I am a human being and I'm attracted to another human being. We need to stop defining and labeling people.
but we tend to fear what we don't understand... And we should not be driven by fear, but by love!
That's not really a reasonable way to go about things. Human beings use heuristics in order to organize and order the world around them into some easily-digestible and recognizable form. It behooves us as individuals to not allow preconceptions to limit our interactions, but we're always going to categorize people. It's a natural function of the human brain; it's designed to seek out patterns and use labels.
Yes, it is true that our brain is designed to see patterns, but everything is not as it seems. The world around us is constantly changing and we use same old patterns in different instances in our society. It's time to look at things from different perspectives and not let labeling to define ourselves. Can you be defined by something? Are you able to categorize yourself? I think it's only limiting.
Well, generally speaking, you define yourself by your ethical framework. This is inescapable, as it will determine how you interact with other people. All things being equal, your ethics definitively categorize you. Beyond that its what you choose based on your subjective preference, and what limits your biology imposes on you.
In that case there are multiple things that can define me, not only my ethical framework and they may change over time. What defines me today, is maybe not what you see tomorrow.
First let me thank you for compiling all this and putting it out there. I really appreciate it. It is obvious that your work is sourced well and you put allot of effort into making this palatable for a wide range of readership. Wonderful read, I enjoyed it very much!
Having read threw the comments and taken a moment to digest the over arcing themes I feel ready to address some of the issues raised. Having spent my fair share of time hunting threw some of the most dry hardly readable medical examinations on this subject I will say that if you are a medical professional at all interested in the biological factors and psychology of gender asking base questions that first year med students already have a working knowledge of you are not being sincere. The overwhelming preponderance of evidence points to gender being a spectrum, this is not new, bigoted people simply dislike it. There are a range of credited sources instantly available to confirm this, a simple Google search will provide pounds of data tho starting at Harvard's web portal is probably the best way to go. I would say that as far as discredited sources are concerned the family counsels funded studies have been laughed out of every major publication along with their lackey doctors so bringing that data set to bare simply shows your lack of knowledge and where your biase is. Understanding progress is not a gut reaction or a confirmation of your existing bigotry. If you have facts to bring to bare do so questioning validated sources because you need reality to be less scary but have no data to back your position is small and meaningless.
There is no meaningful religious debate to be had around sexuality or gender. The presence of a two thousand year old book is not an argument, there are many Babylonian tablets and Egyptian papyrus scrolls that make no mention of the need to overtly judge others so as to form in groups of small minded people in order to propagate egocentric misogynistic ideals that no one lives up too but feel must be inflicted upon others. There is no moral, ethical or logical standard by which religious people live that makes them different or better. The acknowledgment of personal interior interactions dictating action in others is insane and archaic. The fact that you have the freedom to live out your personal beliefs should encourage you to allow this freedom for others not appose it. All you are proving is your own hypocrisy believe me when I say it is noted and understood by most of the population how self serving you are being in this argument and I can only say that the life you have chosen must be very taxing and internally dismal, there are better paths that allow both faith and acceptance that will bring you much more joy and community, in the interim I am very sorry for you.
To close I will say this willful ignorance is not permission for hatred. Listen to those experiencing these changes as opposed to trying to scream over the top of them in order to keep your world view in tact. No one has ever forced gender neutrality upon children, that is catagoricly false and completely alarmist rhetoric. Stop it, it serves no purpose and only creates division where unity wants to flourish. Kindness and understanding may make you uncomfortable however they are not only easier they are better for everyone involved. When you speak from ignorance on this subject to the people going threw it and studying it intensely you make yourself look silly, petty and childish.
I believe you have pointed out the key aspect of this very important issue: many people are truly unaware that gender is a socially constructed concept which has been, in most societies, historically defined by associating more or less rigid sets of social roles and admissible attitudes with the two biological sexes.
Throughout history, this kind of construct has probably been advantageous at many points for societies to deal with their hardships and challenges. It is indeed possible to identify, on average, correlations between the typical fitness of the two biological sexes in performing specific kinds of tasks, be they physical, emotional or intellectual in nature.
However, it should be clear by now that these correlations are dynamically subject to feedback influences from the natural and social environment. In a nature vs. nurture confrontation, nature is mostly responsible for potential, while nurture is the most important factor for such potential to be realized. Furthermore, the variability in the biological predispositions within the same biological sex is huge. While the opportunities to develop and nurture variable and complex personal identities and expressions might have been lower in the past, with hard life conditions demanding more systematic and rigid responses from individuals, many societies today are free and efficient enough for people to be able to develop these identities which do not conform to the historically normative ones.
I believe variety of thought, identity and expression is not something to be frowned upon, but to be cherished and to be seen as a creative and developmental opportunity for society as a whole. Fortunately, the number of places where gender and sexual orientation issues are being positively addressed by societies' informal and formal structures has been growing.
People who are doubtful about these issues should look for unbiased information and healthy debates on it; they should try to meet people who are having hard times because of society's non-acceptance of their inoffensive identity and expression forms and establish some empathy; they should look deep within and try to find any repressed things they might carry concealed within themselves for fear of judgement and rejection.
I don't understand. Your source for defining gender is the "Project Officer for the Gender Working Party of 2002." This does not sound like an acceptably unbiased source. Actually, it sounds rather Marxist.
If I type gender into google, the first result for gender is "the state of being male or female, synonym: sex."
I don't see any evidence here, only opinion. Where does the authority come from to define the word gender?
Labels are identity politics.
Actually the source i give is from monash university. I'm not sure what you were referring to.
While i understand where you're coming from, simply saying top return in Google isn't exactly source worthy either. Often it's Wikipedia that sometimes is right, sometimes not.
Once I'm home from work, I'm sure i can get a dictionary source if that's sufficient since they tend to be the gold standard of word meaning.
Well, this is my point. The source link you provided says this:
"Content by Ann-Maree Nobelius, 23 June 2004 "
If you google her, it becomes pretty clear she is a gender and diversity idealogue, whose job at "Gender and Diversity Consulting Now" no doubt entails telling all their clients they are racists and sexists so they can have something to get paid consulting on.
http://www.genderanddiversity.com/about-us/
"professional life researching and conducting institutional change management."
"...process of gender and diversity mainstreaming..."
This sounds like the stuff of the Orwellian wing of feminism who popularized the #killallmen hashtag. That was bad enough that Time Magazine had to chime in.
She seems extremely biased as a source. Further, your link provides no evidence at all. It's literally just a couple of paragraphs of her telling you "what is" with no evidence, on a page potentially endorsed by a university I personally haven't heard of.
I actually googled Webster's Dictionary first, but I thought I might get attacked for not using the first result and accused of cherry-picking. It lists gender as a synonym of sex.
a : sex the feminine gender
b : the behavioral, cultural, or psychological traits typically associated with one sex
There is no mention of cultural creation/attribution of gender, rather culture is subsumed under other normal factors which naturally affect our brain patterns.
The b definition refers to the traits typically associated with sex. Which implies their not pure synonyms.
It's the non physical traits they're referring to there. That definition essentially makes the destinction between the biological sex and the non physical gender.
But I'm ok if we disagree on the interpretation of this.
Setting aside the dictionary issue, since it's whatever...(still, the second definition does not nullify or modify the first)
Let's look at the chart with 4 axes which you followed up with this: "This means that a position chosen on one doesn't effect (or limit options) on the others."
I noticed that 3 of the things on your chart, out of 4, can't be chosen. They just "happen" to you:
So, you don't get to pick the hormonal chemistry you are born with, nor your objectively measurable organs, nor who you are physically attracted to (again, hormones).
Per your own data, 3 of these 4 components are objectively not cultural, but rather biological. This would seem like strong evidence that gender is not a social construct, but mostly immutable biology (hormonal treatments, notwithstanding). Your evidence does not appear to prove your point, in fact, it may prove the opposite. What is your evidence for calling something run by hormones a social construct, other than the opinion of one likely gender idealogue?
I am open-minded and ready to be convinced, and I ask as a psychologist, not a troll.
Kind regards.
Also, I think this is extremely relevant.
Monkey's don't really have a culture in the way we define it, yet young boy monkeys choose boy toys and young girl monkeys choose girl toys. How is this explained, other than by biology?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2583786/
"Total frequency showed a significant interaction between toy type and sex, F(1,32)= 4.49, p=.04"
"Total duration also showed an interaction between toy type and sex, F(1, 32)=4.65, p=.04"
I will weigh in on this one specifically, the other is not a study I have looked into past today so I can't speak to it. What you are presenting as contradictory evidence to the point of social construct versus biology in my mind is not relevant to the over all argument but was brought up and bares looking into. Firstly there is no pushback from me that both social and biological factors are at play. As to the relevance of the study you have linked I would say that there is no silver bullet in it, the control group was minimal, the age and puberty levels of the participants was not, in my opinion, given enough weight and overall the numbers support the variance you expect to see with a healthy transgender population considering we make up one percent of the overall population. Second I take issue with the premise that there is no social influence inside the family of monkeys at that age, Goodall published many observations pertaining to gendered learning early in the life of her subjects. So just some of my thoughts on this, hope your day is good :-)
The facts or statistics on the matter are irrelevant. I'm a religious person but we all bleed the same. Gd made all of us and we all have internal struggles. There are many transgender who made the switch and still didn't find their comfort zone. Perhaps because of society, or perhaps because it's a different internal struggle. We are commanded to not judge and we shouldn't.
My wife has taught me to be tolerant because she brought to my attention how hard the person may be suffering inside. I think we forget about that in such a selfish age.
I would caution you about using the commandment not to judge out of context. Jesus did not tell us that passing judgment on others was prohibited, only admonished us not to judge others by a measure that would damn ourselves if it was applied to us.
So in terms of tolerance I would say belief is subject to your religious interpretation. People have been murdered due to their own personal dogma relating to judgement. I do agree that as long as it doesn't "damn" you, but some dogmas say if you don't do anything about it that will "damn you".
I am not in a position to say transgender is
a good thing. I am only pointing out that a person who has gender identification issues is suffering. So we shouldn't remove the human element of that all. Wether it's right or wrong on what they do, I leave it up to Gd because we are all his creation.
And that's really the larger point, which is why Jesus frames it how he does: "for by what measure ye judge, so too shall ye be judged." It's an admonition about presuming that you are in a perfect position to judge someone. That's not to say that judgment cannot be cast, but if it positions you as a hypocrite, it most certainly is not your place to cast it.
Gender is not a social construct.
And trying to force it on people has ended in suicide.
And, I do not mean that every male is masculine and every female is feminine, however, most are. Most are so much so that trying to get them to be gender neutral ends in psychosis and trauma problems.
So, I am all for people figuring out what their gender is, without manipulation. However, I am strictly against forcing boys to play with dolls or girls to play with blocks, as I see in so many of the places where "Gender is a Social Construct" is the rule.
I was once one of those that stood against the different groups that weren't strictly heterosexual, but through the years, i have come to realize that a 'male' or 'female' tag does not necessarily translate into the our personality as a human being.
I love your post! And I hate imposed norms :( A while back there was a television program about this subject on Dutch tv, I found it so interesting to see how many 'variations' there are and there's actually no way to classify anyone. It made me more aware of my own identity (I've never been much of a girly girl ;)).
I try to teach my children that everyone is unique and they can be whoever they want to be and like whatever they want to like.
My 5 year old daughter for example loves Marvel and DC superheroes and hotwheel cars and she loves running around in a Captain America outfit. I loved it when they were celebrating carnaval at school and they made a group photo, my girl was Captain America and one of the boys was Queen Elsa. That really warmed my heart!