Gender
The notion of gender can be understood to be referring to the cultural
assumptions and practices that govern the social construction of men, women and
their social relations. The concept gains much of its force through a contrast with
a conception of sex as the biological formation of the body. Thus, femininity and
masculinity as forms of gender are the outcome of the cultural regulation of
behaviours that are regarded as socially appropriate to a given sex. Given that
gender is held to be a matter of culture rather than ‘nature’, so it is always a matter
of how men and women are represented.
A good deal of feminist writing has sought to challenge what they take to be
essentialism and biological determinism through the conceptual division between
a biological sex and a culturally formed gender. Subsequently, it is argued that no
fundamental sex differences exist and that those that are apparent are insignificant
in relation to arguments for social equality. Rather, it is the social, cultural and
political discourses and practices of gender that are held to lie at the root of
women’s subordination.
However, the sex–gender distinction upon which this argument is based has
itself become the subject of criticism. The differentiation between sex as biology and
gender as a cultural construction is broken down on the grounds that there is in
principle no access to biological ‘truths’ that lie outside of cultural discourses and
therefore no ‘sex’ which is not already cultural. In this view, sexed bodies are always
already represented as the production of regulatory discourses. Judith Butler has been at the cutting edge of this argument by suggesting that the category of ‘sex’ is
a normative and regulatory discourse that produces the bodies it governs. Thus,
discourses of sex are ones that, through repetition of the acts they guide, bring sex
into view as a necessary norm. Here, while sex is held to be a social construction, it
is an indispensable one that forms subjects and governs the materialization of bodies.
Butler’s work is emblematic of a wider body of thought produced by feminists
who have been influenced by poststructuralism and postmodernism. These writers
have argued that not only are sex and gender social and cultural constructions, but
also that there are multiple modes of femininity (and masculinity). Here, rather
than a conflict between two opposing male–female groups, sexual identity concerns
the balance of masculinity and femininity within specific men and women. This
argument stresses the singularity and multiplicity of persons as well as the relativity
of symbolic and biological existence.
(adapted from: The SAGE Dictionary of Cultural Studies, by Chris Baker)
The notion of gender can be understood to be referring to the cultural
assumptions and practices that govern the social construction of men, women and
their social relations. The concept gains much of its force through a contrast with
a conception of sex as the biological formation of the body. Thus, femininity and
masculinity as forms of gender are the outcome of the cultural regulation of
behaviours that are regarded as socially appropriate to a given sex. Given that
gender is held to be a matter of culture rather than ‘nature’, so it is always a matter
of how men and women are represented.
A good deal of feminist writing has sought to challenge what they take to be
essentialism and biological determinism through the conceptual division between
a biological sex and a culturally formed gender. Subsequently, it is argued that no
fundamental sex differences exist and that those that are apparent are insignificant
in relation to arguments for social equality. Rather, it is the social, cultural and
political discourses and practices of gender that are held to lie at the root of
women’s subordination.
However, the sex–gender distinction upon which this argument is based has
itself become the subject of criticism. The differentiation between sex as biology and
gender as a cultural construction is broken down on the grounds that there is in
principle no access to biological ‘truths’ that lie outside of cultural discourses and
therefore no ‘sex’ which is not already cultural. In this view, sexed bodies are always
already represented as the production of regulatory discourses. Judith Butler has been at the cutting edge of this argument by suggesting that the category of ‘sex’ is
a normative and regulatory discourse that produces the bodies it governs. Thus,
discourses of sex are ones that, through repetition of the acts they guide, bring sex
into view as a necessary norm. Here, while sex is held to be a social construction, it
is an indispensable one that forms subjects and governs the materialization of bodies.
Butler’s work is emblematic of a wider body of thought produced by feminists
who have been influenced by poststructuralism and postmodernism. These writers
have argued that not only are sex and gender social and cultural constructions, but
also that there are multiple modes of femininity (and masculinity). Here, rather
than a conflict between two opposing male–female groups, sexual identity concerns
the balance of masculinity and femininity within specific men and women. This
argument stresses the singularity and multiplicity of persons as well as the relativity
of symbolic and biological existence.
(adapted from: The SAGE Dictionary of Cultural Studies, by Chris Baker)
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario