Gender Notes Vol 1

Theories of Gender Differences

Scholars and philosophers of different disciplines have invested much time and thought on efforts to understand and explain the differences between men and women world-wide. Various theories have been constructed and among them most central ones are the Gender Constructionist Theory and the Biological Determinism/essentialism theory.

Biological determinism/essentialism

-This is an explanation of gender differences based on a set of other sub-theories founded on the belief that all differences between men and women result from biology. It is a perception in the wider community that there is an essential difference between men and women, that male and female behaviors are biologically fixed. This theoretical approach, referred to as the “anatomy is destiny” perspective asserts that certain behaviors are justified and unchangeable based on anatomy. In this explanation an organism's behavior is determined entirely by factors innate to that organism e.g. DNA.

- Biology has been the most widely accepted explanation for inequalities between men and women for a long time. Scientists observe natural differences ranging from hormones, chromosomes, brain size and genetics as responsible for innate differences in behaviour of women and men (Giddens, 2001).  Even stereotypical behaviours like men’s physical strength, superior intelligence, aggression and women’s softness, care, docility and love are all attributed to biological determinism.

-It also justifies stereotypical generalizations such as men are naturally more able in Maths, technological subjects, decision making occupations including at work or in politics, while women are naturally suited to domestic duties within the private sphere or its equivalent e.g., nursing, kindergarten and primary school teaching among others.  

-The theory of biological determinism, also called genetic determinism, is therefore the exact opposite of the Standard Social Science Model (SSSM) described in Evolution and Human Nature. Whereas the SSSM assumes that no part of human nature is inherited and all human attributes are outcomes of cultural forces, biological determinism assumes that virtually all human behavior is innate and cannot be changed or altered.

Some of the Theories that fall under Biological determinism are:

Theory	Theorists
Brain Laterisation Theory	John Nicholson  Gray J.A.  Buffery A.W.H.
Psychoanalytic Theory	Sigmund Freud
Socio-biology	E.O.Wilson  David Barash
Biology and Practicality	G.P. Murdock
Biology: Expressive & Instrumental Roles	Talcott Parsons

 Brain Laterisation and Hormonal Explanations of gender differences

Scientists believe that behaviour, personality and emotional disposition are controlled by hormones in males and females.  Studies by Nicholson showed that there is correlation between levels of testosterone and male aggression.  John Nicholson cited in Haralambos and Holborn (2004) argue that the Right and left wings of the brain specialize in different tasks because of hormones, which have effects on the brain. The right specializes in visio-spatial abilities while the left specializes in verbal and language skills.  This is supported by Gray and Buffery (Ibid) who pointed out that the left is dominant in girls hence girls have verbal ability, while boys perform better in mathematical texts. 

However, the theory does not leave room to understand that not all boys score higher in maths and lower in languages.  Similarly not all girls score low marks in maths and higher in language.  There are also differences in ability at infant stage where girls score higher in all subjects. This shows that there are other factors that influence ability.

2.7.2 Psycho-analytic theory (by Sigmund Freud)

Freud in Giddens (2001) argues that gender differences at infancy are centred on the presence or absence of the penis.  Having a penis is equivalent to being a boy while being a girl means one lacks a penis .  The boy views the father as a rival in the affection of the mother.  The boy suppresses feelings for the mother and identifies with the father in fear of threats, discipline and demand for autonomy by the father.  Girls suffer from penis envy and devalue the mother who does not have one.  She identifies with the mother and takes dependent and submissive attitudes. The above theory assumes that the male organ is superior to the female organ and that perceptions of  gender differences are concentrated on the presence or absence of the male organ from the age of 4-5years.

However, there are more factors and processes that contribute to gender learning, genetic factors are not enough.

2.7.3 Sociobiology

The theory was propounded by William (1975) and applied to gender by David Barash (Haralambos and Holborn, 2004). Barash argues that males produce many sperms and hence have interest in making many females pregnant.  As a result males are likely to be promiscuous than females. Men compete for scarce reproductive capacities of females.  Females invest more time and energy in one off-spring and gestate the foetus in her womb. Women are sure that children are genetically theirs hence devote time to child-care. It is assumed that women can tolerate men’s infidelity more readily than men.

- The theory falls short of the realization that human behaviour is governed by the environment not instincts. It is conservative and views human behaviour as natural, inevitable and universal.

2.7.4 Biology and Practicality

                                              

George Murdock in Haralambos and Holborn (2004) views males and females differences in physical strength, as leading to differences in roles.  Sexual division of labor is taken to be the most efficient way of organizing society.  He points out that a survey of 224 societies showed that men’s tasks were those demanding physical strength eg, mining, hunting, quarrying etc.  Women were limited to “less strenuous tasks” like fetching water, cooking, gathering firewood, preparing clothes. Women were tied to the home, child bearing and care.  To Murdock, physical strength like child bearing is biological and determine roles and spheres of operation in the home and public place.                                               

-However, the findings from the survey of 224 societies are not enough to conclude that sexual division of labor is biological.  Societies construct roles but these roles are not universal.  What would be the biological explanation in these societies, which do not stick to the roles given above?

2.7.5 Biology:  Expressive and Instrumental Roles (Talcott Parsons)

Though a sociologist, Parsons starting point in explaining sexual division of labor is in biology.  He argues out that childbearing and early nursing is linked to biology.  The male is achievement oriented; playing instrumental roles that have stress and anxiety.  The woman’s role is expressive, that is providing warmth, emotional support and stabilizing adult personalities. She relieves stress by providing the breadwinner with love, consideration and understanding.  Sexual division of labor is for efficiency OF THE social system.  Expressive and instrumental roles complement each other and promote family solidarity.  Each sex is biologically suited for these tasks. 

-However, parsons did not foresee the future of the modern industrial society where women also perform instrumental roles that are stressful.  Mothers can have substitutes in childcare for love and affection (O’Donnell, 1992). This is because although child bearing is biological, child rearing is not.   In a modern industrial society, even the type of work has changed and sexual division of labor is not universal.

Generalized Critique of Biological determinism

Because of its application, either consciously or unconsciously in various institutions including in schools,  Biological Determinism becomes a stumbling block in efforts to mainstream gender equity in Schools Behavior Management programs for instance. According to Clark, (1989, p12), with Biological determinism, the effort to change the stereotypical behavior of children, particularly boys, is often seen by members of society an unnatural. This is seen by the persistence of an arrangement of tasks based on sex, with boys undertaking what are categorized as heavier and hence masculine tasks in clearing, watering gardens, and harvesting and yard work; in metal work and carpentry as well as other technical classes. Girls are confined to sweeping classrooms, toilets, sewing/fashion and fabrics as well as food and nutrition/cookery i.e. “education for domesticity.”

-Biological determinists negate the idea of free will entirely, placing all behavior in the realm of control by the genes. The view that everything about a person is innate means even criminals cannot be reformed - they were, in effect, "born that way" (which immediately suggests a defense for the criminal in question), and when applied to gender relations, a defense of male domination. It divorces human action from human responsibility, placing the blame - or the credit - for actions on the genes exclusively.

Biological determinists disregard or deny the effects of environmental variables on behavior and identities. It thus implies that non-biological factors, such as social customs, expectations and education have less or no effect on behavior. It thus assumes that nature is more significant than one’s social experiences.  

-Sociologists and feminists however feel that the differences between men and women are socially rather than biologically produced. In other words, biology alone is not enough to explain social, economic, political and religious differences between men and women.

-There is little consideration of the wide variety of behaviors among members of each sex or how masculinity and femininity relate to each other in different settings. Researchers in the 1990s have argued that the variation within each sex far out-weighs any differences between sexes (Segal: 1990: p63; Gilbert et.al:1998: p49). ****These scholars have argued that the view of natural difference propounded under biological determinism is difficult to sustain when most notions of appropriate behavior for men and women are not static, but differ over time, between ethnic, racial, class and cultural divides and even between and within families.

-J. Butler (1990; p.ix) introduces the concept of the elasticity of gender perceptions arguing that, “all identity categories including gender are infact the products of institutions, practices, discourses”.  To these scholars, individuals are not locked –up in anatomy, with no room for maneuver but have the capacity to challenge biological deterministic or essentialist stereotypes unsed to give them identities. Some have even given the examples of heterosexuality versus homosexuality. If biology says a men must be attracted to a woman, and yet some men are attracted by men, then the essentialism of biology as a central identity determinant becomes questionable. Homosexuality defies the explanatory logic of Biological determinism and so does trans-sexuality   (Deidre)

Gender constructionist theory

The theory asserts that gender behavior is not innate, but is socially constructed. It is based on the concept of gender socialization, which “refers to the means whereby social expectations regarding gender- appropriate characteristics are conveyed. These expectations are often based on stereotyped beliefs.” It has a dual significance for children, that is, it provides them with models for present behavior and it prepares them for adult life (Dekker and Lemmer, 1993:9).

The theory stresses that boys and girls are not born men and women but learn to be masculine and feminine in conformity with social values and practices. Boys and girls (***exam question )learn the appropriate behavior for their sex during primary socialization in the family and secondary socialization i.e. at school, at church and among their peers.

With gender socialization, power, authority, action and achievement are named as masculine attributes and are generally highly valued across all cultures. In contrast, characteristics identified as feminine such as service, empathy, caring, nurturing and intuitive reasoning are generally devalued. Through their everyday behavior, influenced by the media, the examples of parents, teachers, peers and other influential people, boys and girls may develop limited and limiting concepts of femininity and masculinity. These gender constructs largely underpin the social arenas of home, school, church, workplace and society in general.