What Exactly is a Gender Role?

Gender roles are other people's expectations of you based upon your perceived biological sex. They are related to biological sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity, all of which are also social constructions. Something that is socially constructed is perceived to occur naturally, when in fact humanity has created it. Gender roles are social constructions because society gives them to people based upon apparent biological sex-they do not occur naturally. Biological sex is a social construction because doctors label a baby as a male or female at birth depending on four factors that are not always black and white-hormones, gonads, genitalia and chromosomes.. A baby may possess biological traits of both a male and female, but ultimately the doctor will choose one sex or the other for the baby. Sexual orientation, yet another social construction, has been invented by society despite the fact that same sex relationships have been documented throughout history between both humans and animals. Lastly, gender identity, or how a person views himself or herself with regard to gender, is also socially constructed. People may or may not view themselves as the sex they are labeled as. A female may view herself as more masculine than feminine, and in the same way, a male may view himself as being more feminine than masculine.

All of these social constructions have evolved over time to what they are today. Gender roles have developed over the years and can be attributed to historical stories, biological explanations and reinforcements from the media. Natalie Angier, author of Woman: An intimate geography, uses science and biology to disprove the stereotypes given to women. By demonstrating how these stereotypes have no scientific basis, Angier challenges many of the gender roles imposed on women. For instance, Angier counters the stereotype that women are the weaker sex. She does this by demonstrating how women are generators of diversity. She explains that while for hundreds of years it was thought that the male's Y chromosome created diversity, the X chromosome carried by women actually carries more information on it, including crucial information about the brain. Angier also attempts to squash the idea that the female body is passive. She uses body parts as representations of gender roles, including the vagina. People often describe the vagina simply as an opening for which a penis to enter, meaning that the man has all the control while the woman has the passive role. However, Angier challenges this idea by pointing out that the vagina is actually an ecosystem with bacteria present in it that prevents harmful bacteria from entering. Furthermore, the vagina is a dynamic entity that can accommodate the head of the baby. Power is also placed in the hands of males because they are the ones who can break a women's hymen. Angier attacks this by providing the reader with the fact that few women have a hymen that covers their entire vaginal opening. Some women's hymens are broken due to athletic activity, injury, or with the use of tampons. Therefore, men do not actually have all the power and the female body is not actually passive. By spinning stories around and providing real scientific evidence to back them up, Angier is doing the same thing that scientists have been doing all along. She wants people to rethink the ideas about women they had previously just accepted, and perhaps reconsider the gender roles given to women based upon these supposed biological facts. (Angier)

Fasuto-Sterling agrees with Angier that the origin of gender roles comes from stories about history and biology. She maintains that state and legal systems have always had an interest in maintaining only two sexes. However, male and female stand on opposite ends of a biological continuum, with many different types of bodies in between. Fausto-Sterling explains, "If nature really offers us more than two sexes, then it follows that our current notions of masculinity and femininity are cultural conceits." (Fausto-Sterling) People in the past have invoked scientific and physical differences to invalidate claims for political and social emancipation. For example, some doctors used to argue that permitting a woman to obtain her degree would ruin her health, eventually leading to sterility. By releasing this false information to the public, gender roles were created. People in the past treated women like they were too weak or fragile to be educated, and as a result, today it is sometimes difficult for people to accept the fact that women are just as intelligent and capable as men. (Fausto-Sterling)

During the Enlightenment, women's gender roles were questioned, but in the end scientific evidence was once again provided to keep them in place. Studies showed how women and non-European men differed from the European male norm. Women and black males had narrow, childlike skulls and European women shared the apelike jutting jaw of the lower races. Using this scientific information, women were kept below men on the chain of society. As a result, their roles in life were limited and they were not treated as equals at all. (Schiebinger)

While the gender roles placed on females are often discussed publicly, it is important to note that gender roles also affect males. Like the gender roles given to females, they are falsely backed up by scientific explanations. Many people are under the impression that males are aggressive and even violent because of high levels of testosterone. However, while testosterone does contribute to natural behavior somewhat, it is certainly not the major factor in determining overall behavior in males. Despite this, it is still accepted that testosterone leads boys to be naturally rough, energetic and competitive. As a result, boys are expected to exhibit these behaviors from an early age. Society demands that boys be strong and masculine, when in fact testosterone has less impact on behavior than other factors such as how the boy is loved, nurtured, and shaped by his parents, as well as how society functions around him. Gender roles for males are socially constructed on the basis of scientific information. Because of them, boys grow up believing they should not express their emotions, but instead conform to society's expectations. (Pollack)

Gender roles can be clearly seen in the division of labor within a household. Women are expected to take care of the household tasks, while men are supposed to take care of the exterior of the home (trash, lawn maintenance). Recently, though, these roles are being shared more due to the fact that women have entered the workforce. In Kurdeck's article entitled The allocation of household labor in gay, lesbian, and heterosexual married couples, different types of couples are compared. It is interesting to note that gender roles do not make sense in lesbian or gay relationships because the work must get done somehow or another. If both women or both men did only what their gender roles required, a certain amount of work would never be completed.

Surprisingly enough, gender roles can also be found in the plant kingdom. When classifying plants, Linnaeus assigned sex and gender roles to plants, yet another example of how gender roles and biological sex are socially constructed. By naming the parts of the plants, Linnaeus was demonstrating the power he had. He controlled both knowledge and people by telling them what an object should be called and insisting that they forget how plants were previously categorized. His system was hierarchical, with class coming first, followed by order. Linnaeus felt that it was appropriate to have the number of male parts determine a plant's class, while the female parts determined the plant's order. By classifying plants in this manner, Linnaeus indicated his belief that males were the dominant sex. Furthermore, by assigning sex to plants, Linnaeus showed how society constructs biological sex and gender roles and places them on any object it can. (Schiebinger)

Since it is now clear why gender roles exist, it is appropriate to discuss how they relate to sexual orientation, gender identity and biological sex. Sexual orientation, as mentioned before, is a social construction. Homosexuality is really a way of being and behaving interpreted differently by particular societies at different times in histories. The proof that sexual orientation is socially constructed stems from documentation of animals having same sex relationships in nature since the time humans first started recording their behaviors. Over one hundred different species in nature participate in same sex intercourse, some throughout their lives with a single partner. (Bagemihl) So, clearly it can be said that both gender roles and sexual orientation are socially constructed, as humans have created both of them. This is not the only way the two are related though. When a person does not fulfill the gender roles of his or her perceived biological sex, it is often assumed by society that he or she is a homosexual. Women who do not act and dress femininely, for instance, are often immediately classified as lesbians. Men who dress well or are not especially strong are instantly labeled by society as being gay. Therefore, the rejection of one's gender roles directly leads to society making a judgment regarding sexual orientation.

Gender identity is also directly related to gender roles. If a person is aware that he or she is not fulfilling the gender roles given to them by society, his or her gender identity may be affected. For example, a woman with short hair and baggy, athletic clothing may feel like a man sometimes because she is fulfilling male gender roles instead of female roles. A male who wears dresses and likes to decorate homes, both gender roles for females, may eventually feel more like a woman partially due to the fact that society is inclined to treat him like one.

Lastly, gender roles can be tied to biological sex. Once a baby is born and its biological sex is labeled, it is treated a certain way and expected to act in a certain way. Girls are put in pink and boys are put in blue from day one of their lives. The testosterone level in boys is supposed to make them tough and aggressive while the estrogen in females supposedly makes them emotional. The penis a boy has gives him the powerful, dominant role in sexual intercourse, while a female's vagina gives her the passive role. These roles are expected to extend into life, as women often have the gender role of being submissive while the male is supposed to be in charge. Basically, once biological sex is determined and labeled by society, people are expected to conform to the gender roles of that sex, however unfair or absurd they may be.

After completing this assignment, I now realize why we read each assigned reading. There were times during the semester when I was baffled as to how the individual articles/readings related to gender roles. However, after much thought and consideration, I think I have managed to put most of the puzzle together. Before taking this class, I had never even considered that biological sex and sexual orientation were social constructions. Now, however, I can see how society created both of them as well as how gender roles relate to them. The article entitled Are We Having SexYet by Greta Christina also made me realize how even sexual intercourse is not as black and white as I originally thought. I always equated sexual intercourse with a penis penetrating a vagina, but as Christina pointed out, there are many other ways of defining sex. Reading Plous' article about treating animals as an outgroup was another reading that I questioned at first. However, after discussing it in class and tying it to the other readings we have completed, I can see how because of gender roles, women are sometimes valued less than men, in the same way that animals are treated as objects beneath humans. When people dare to challenge the way we treat animals as inferiors, they are often given the same excuses that sexist or racist people give-it is natural, necessary or inevitable. Overall, the readings and this paper have forced me to look at things a bit more carefully before accepting them as facts or natural occurrences as opposed to social constructions.

Works Cited:

Angier, Natalie. (1999) Woman: An intimate geography. New York:Anchor.

Bagemihl, B. (1999) Biological exuberance: Animal homosexuality and natural diversity.

New York: St. Martin's Press, pp. 43-121.

Christina, Greta. (1994) Are we having sex yet? In M. Crawford & R. Unger (Eds.),

In Our Own Words. New York: McGraw-Hill, pp.145-148.

Fausto-Sterling, A. (2000) Sexing the body:Gender politics and the construction of

Sexuality. New York: Basic Books, pp. 31-77, 170-94.

Kurdeck, L.A. (1998) The allocation of household labor in gay, lesbian, and heterosexual

married couples. In D.L. Anselmi & A.L. Law (Eds.), Questions of Gender

(pp. 582-591) Boston: McGraw-Hill.

Plous, S. (2003) Understanding prejudice and discrimination. Boston: McGraw-Hill,

pp. 507-536.

Pollack, W. (1998) Real boys. New York: Henry Holt, pp. 3-64, 272-337.

Schiebinger, L. (1993) Nature's body: Gender in the making of modern science.

Boston: Beacon, pp. 11-39, 143-183. (2 separate articles)