The issue of gender draw a lot of
attention around the globe .The thesis that gender inequality is
natural and irreversible raised a lot of debate .Applying the theory
of gender socialisation which refers to the learning of behaviour and attitudes
considered appropriate for a given sex(Horton Cooley 1996) ,it is this papers
view that gender inequality is not natural and it is reversible .The gist of
this paper is to critically analyse gender socialisation theory in a bid to
prove that gender inequality is not natural and can be reversible .The paper
will start by defining important terms in the question and then explore the
thesis using variety of example.
Gender refers to the social, psychological
and cultural attributes of masculinity and femininity, many of which are based
on biological distinctions. Gender includes peoples self image and expectations
for behaviour among other things .Gender describes societal attitudes and
behaviours expected of and associated with the two sexes .Gender are human
traits, linked by culture to sex (Haralambos and Holborn 2004).Walter and
Manion (1996) n maintain that gender is the difference that sex makes within a
society ,guiding ,how we are to think of ourselves, how we interact with
others, the social opportunities, occupations, family roles and prestige
allowed males and females .This definition by Manion indicate that gender is
biological but the fact that he said ‘prestige allowed males and females’ means
gender inequality is not natural and can be reversible.
Gender inequality means that women and men
are not enjoying the same status and conditions and have no equal opportunity
for realizing their potential to contribute to the political, economic, social
and cultural development of their countries. They are also not benefiting
equally from the results of development.(Horton Cooley 1992) This means that
there is a set up which is binding equality and that cannot be said
natural and irreversible.
Gender socialisation ‘refers to the means
whereby social expectations regarding gender-appropriate characteristics are
conveyed to the child .These expectations are often based on stereotyped
beliefs .It has a dual significance for these children, that is, it provides
them with models for present behaviour and it prepares them for adult
life(Dokker and Lemmer) .Gender socialisation refers to the learning of
behaviour and attitudes considered appropriate for a given sex(Horton Cooley
1996).Socialisation is the means by which human infants begin to acquire the
skills necessary to perform as functional members of their society. The process
of learning one’s culture and how to live within it .Sociologist,
anthropologist, political scientist and educationalist describe socialisation
to the lifelong process of inheriting and disseminating norms, customs and
ideologies, providing an individual with the skills and habits necessary for
participating within his or her own society. Socialisation is thus the means by
which social and cultural continuity is attained. Socialisation is the most
influential learning process one can experience. Gender socialisation believes
that behaviour of human beings are not biologically set as other species,
human need social experiences to learn their culture and to survive.
Therefore basing on this assumption it is of more great value to say that
gender inequality is not natural and is irreversible.
The looking –glass self concept created by
Charles Horton Cooley (1902) believes that a person’s self grows out of
society’s interpersonal interactions and the perceptions of others. Therefore
this concept states that if a boy taught masculine and girl taught feminine
therefore those interactions are not inborn and not biological hence they can
be reversible and are not natural but nurtured in humans. The assumption refers
to people shaping themselves based on other people’s perception, which leads
people to reinforce other perceptions on themselves .People shape themselves
based on what other people perceive and confirm other people’s opinion on
themselves. This Horton Cooley assumption indicates that gender inequality is
not natural and it can be reversible since it is the society, parents or
extended families which can also nature change into a boy child or boy child to
achieve gender equality.
George Herbert Mead claimed that the self
is not there at birth, rather it is developed with social experience which
means it is not natural but nurtured in children as they grow up. These are sex
roles nurtured into children as they grow up and this can be reversible .Unlike
biological determinism and psycho-analytic theories which believes that gender
inequality is natural and biological ,gender socialisation believes that a
human being is born blank and filled in as the chid develops. This indicate
that a child can be filled with anything to shape his or her self being
therefore gender inequality can be reversible if that blank child filled with
equality and nurtured in a way of equality .Sex roles can be changed if a male
child is nurtured with an type of a job and the sense of equality can also be
nurtured, the issue of superiority can also be removed, a girl child can also
be nurtured superiority which means gender inequality is not natural and can be
reversible.
Group socialisation is the theory that
individuals ,peer groups ,rather than parental figures ,influences his or her
personality and behaviour in adulthood .Adolescents spend more time with peers
than with parents .Therefore, peer groups have stronger correlation with
personality development than parental figures do .For example ,twin brothers,
whose genetic makeup are identical, will differ in personality
because they have different groups of friends ,not necessarily because their
parents raised them differently .This indicate that since twin brothers can
have different characters due to different groups of socialisation, gender
inequality cannot be natural but nurtured and it can also be reversible for example
if these twins nurtured by the same group, same people etc.(Henslin 1999)
Henslin (1999) contends that “an important
part of socialisation is the learning of culturally defined gender roles” .The
word “learning” means things are not fixed or biological but learned through
time. This content clearly shows that gender inequality is not natural but
learned and a learnable thing can be reversible .Henslin goes on to
say that gender socialisation refers to the learning of behaviour and attitudes
considered appropriate for a given sex .This means that gender inequality is
reversible if the things taught to a given sex are being considered therefore
this considerations can be equalised and the inequality being reversible .He
says “Boys learn to be boys and girls learn to be girls”. This learning happens
by many means of different agents of socialisation .For example family is
certainly important in reinforcing gender roles as well as friends, school
,work, and mass media .If there are agents for socialisation, they can also
play the same role reversing the issue of superiority about masculine and
feminine. They can play awareness of gender equality for example
mass media adverts can use girls to advertise engineering products and even
construction and use boys to advertise in salons and catering thereby reversing
the issue of superiority about masculine and feminine.
Gender socialisation states that behaviour
is determined by the environment. This means the change of environment brings
also change to the people therefore change in inequality and the situation can
be reversible .Gender socialisation is the process of educating and instructing
males and females as to the norms, behaviours, values, and beliefs of group
membership as men or women .If it is a “process” and “instruction” which means
it is not natural and can be reversible .Instructions can be changed and are
reversible.
Murdock in Haralambos and Holborn (2004)
says that family is the Child’s first window to the world and no other gender
socialisation institutions rivals it in gender socialisation .This means the
family is the gold producer of either gender inequality or equality. The case
therefore can be reversible if there is an early change in family bringing
gender equality A girl child can be nurtured to be masculine and do an sex role
as well as a boy child which means gender inequality is not natural.
Murdock goes on to say that primary and
secondary forces create, reinforce and perpetuate gender differences but the
primary forces are the chief creators ,while the secondary forces are the chief
maintainers ,reinforces and perpetuators .Therefore according to this
assumption equality can also be nurtured by the family and maintained by
secondary socialisation hence reversing gender inequality. It is the family
which gives a child toys, assign the roles, position the child within the
family and even give a child a name therefore inequalities are nurtured and not
natural and can be reversible if families correct biases over a boy or girl child
.Equal positioning of a child and even equal sharing of any duties reverse
gender inequality.
Gordon (1995) says that teachers may not
explicitly each gender, but gender emerges on its own in the perspectives
teachers bring to school form have and importantly in the curriculum. This
shapes what the schools pupils eyes see, what their ears hear and what their
minds in turn believe in through the ways teachers talk, organise and treat the
pupils even subject allocation .However this cannot guarantee that gender
inequalities is natural and irreversible .These secondary socialisation can
also be sensitised and change in expectations and attitudes thereby reversing
the inequality since it is not natural but attitudes and expectations.
Verbal appellations, manipulations,
limitation are way of gender socialisation which can be said natural (Gordon
1995) .However since these activities are human constructed it certainly means
that they are not natural and anything not natural can be reversible .Gender
socialisation justifies patriarchal oppression of women through the
socialisation process and ignore the issue that these are human man things and
not biological like sex organs which cannot be changed. It ignores the fact
that every human being hands are equally flexible for equal work and
opportunities.
Gender socialisation includes
psychoanalytic, social learning and cognitive development .Freud’s(1997)
psychoanalytic theory focuses on children’s observations about their
genitals(for example contraction, anxiety, penis, envy).It has not marshalled
much empirical support since there is a sense of nature .Social learning
theories are behaviourists that rely on reinforcement and makes people do
things .Those theories once they mention environment there is a sense of change
then .Environment do change which means behaviour change from place to place
meaning it is not natural and it is also reversible.
Cognitive developmental theories posit
that “children learn gender(and stereotypes)through their mental efforts to
organise their social world .One problem with some variants of this perspective
is the assumption that children learn gender because it is a natural facet of
the world ,rather than that it is an important facet of the social word
.Research shows that the importance children placed on gender varies by class,
race, family structure, sexuality of parents .This means that it can be
revisable and the issue is not natural.
Bem and Coltrare views gender acquisition
as a self-fulfilling prophecy. The most important insight from research on
gender socialisation is that because boys and girls are treated differently and
put into learning environments, they develop different learning environments,
they develop different need; wants, desires, skills, and temperance, in short
they become different types of people .Men and women then hardly question why
they are different or they are ended up that way. The question will be if
needs, wants, desires and skills develop due to how boys and girls nurtured
therefore the thing is not natural but it can develop .If it develops it can
also be revisable during the early stage of its development.
The essence of the self-fulfilling
prophecy, people think boys and girls are supposed to be different, they treat
them differently and give them different opportunities for development .This
differential treatment promotes certain behaviours and self
images that recreates the preconceived cultural
stereotypes about gender .Coltrade alluded that the process repeats itself over
and over in an unending spiral across the generations so that although gender
stereotypes are being constantly re-created and modified, they seem natural and
impervisious to change .The question will be if it is the “people who think” as
she propounded then the issue of naturalist will be greatly questioned .She
said it is a repeating process and constantly recreated which means there is an
opportunity for reversibility. Gender equality can also be
‘thinked”,”repeatedly done “and “constantly created” which means it is
reversible and not natural.
Coltrane said children learn about gender
and how to “do gender’ because it is central to the way we organise society
.Children learn culturally appropriate ways of thinking and being as they
follow routine rituals and respond to the everyday demands of the world in
which they live .The fact that she gave a room to “we organise society” which
means societies are organised by people who are gender biased and if those
people became gender sensitised and want equality the case is reversible since
it is not inborn or natural. The fact that Coltrane admits that gender
socialisation turns children into “cultural natives” who know their cultures
reality without realising that other realities are possible which means it is
not natural. “Other realities are possible simply provides a room for change
which means gender inequality is not natural and can be reversible.
The theory of gender socialisation based
its thesis on culture which is hard to change and gives a room to natural and
that gender inequality is reversible .However due to both social ,economic and
political changes around the world and the issue of globalisation it will be of
more importance to note that culture is no longer that constant and things do
change therefore the situation of gender inequality is not natural it can be
reversible also.
In Lesotho gender inequalities are said to
be reinforced by socio-cultural beliefs and practices (socialisation).The
government put a National policy in 2003 to address the challenges and the
participation of women is slightly improving. These indicate that though it
took time the issue is not natural because it can be changed and by time the
issue will soon be reversible if not yet starting to reverse itself.
One can postulate that gender inequality
is not natural and irreversible basing on the issue that it’s not biological as
postulated by biological determinism. Gender socialisation theory believes that
society create inequalities which are natural. The theory forgets that there is
no naturality in human creation but Godly made things. Therefore to say that
gender inequality is natural and irreversible is an overstatement and abortion
of historical justices. Socialisation is dynamic and culture is not constant
which means gender inequality is not natural and can be reversible. Henslin
(1999) come up with the view that there are many socialisation agencies which
are very important in promoting inequality but that does not mean that gender
inequality can be natural and irreversible.
Conclusively the claim that gender
inequality is natural and reversible applying the socialisation theory is not
valid to a greater summation .Since it is not biological but human constructed
the claim become of less value .Due to measures which are taken by various
African countries in a bid to attain gender equality, it simply mean that
gender inequality is not natural and can be reversible .The only solution
needed is to effectively implement the issue of equality through socialisation
so that the next generation will attain gender equality.
Bibliography
Bem
and Coltrane, A Social constructionist approach, Longman ,London
Dokker and Lemmer in Heslin J
M,(1999) Sociology: Down to approach, Boston, Allen and Unwin.
Freud Sigmant,id2cego.2c and
super-ego, http//en,Wikipedia.org/.
George Herbert Mead, Theories
of Socialisation .http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki george Herbert mead
Henslin (1999), Sociology: A down
to Earth Approach, core concepts, Boston, Allen and Unwin.
Gordon (1995), Sociology,
Oxford, Polity Press.
Horton Cooley (1996),Socialisation
theories, http//en.wikipedia.org/charlse Horton cooley.
Haralambos and Holborn (2004) Sociology:
Themes and perspectives, London, Collins Educational
Horton Cooley (1992) in Haralambos and
Holborn (2004) Sociology :Themes and perspectives,
London. Collins Educational.
ILO/SEAPAT online Gender learning
and information module (12/08/2013)
Murdock in Haralambos and Holborn (2004),Sociology
:Themes and Perspectives, London ,Collins Educational.
.UNDP Lesotho country office; Lesotho
gender national policy 2003,www.undp.org/gender.
Walter and Manion (1996) Society
the Basics, Oxford. Politics Press
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.