Examining The Link (Or Lack Thereof) Between Sex And Gender

A couple is expecting a child. The doctor tells them that “it’s a boy,” and with those three short words, the soon-to-be parents spring into action.

The father’s hopes for a son that he can teach how to play baseball and shoot hoops are finally realized, while the mother’s desire for a daughter that will accompany her on manicure trips and play with dolls are quickly shelved.

Perhaps their next child will be a girl, but certainly not this one. In anticipation for the baby’s arrival, an assortment of sheets, blankets, toys, and bottles are purchased, all in various shades of blue.

For centuries, the link between sex and gender has been firmly cemented into society and its institutions. Clothing, toys, bathrooms, and even colors have taken on a gendered/sexed meaning.

It seems to be taken as fact that one’s sex at birth will completely and correctly correlate with their gender throughout life, and that the characteristics laid out for one by nature societal standards will be a perfect match for how one wants to act and exist.

Simply put, this is not always the case. With increased prevalence of and research about transgender, non-binary, and gender non-conforming individuals, the world’s understanding of gender is changing, and the conversation about gender is being reshaped.

It is thus necessary, now more than ever, to closely examine the link (or lack thereof) between sex and gender.

The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines sex as “either of the two major forms of individuals that occur in many species and that are distinguished respectively as female or male especially on the basis of their reproductive organs and structures” (“Sex”).

The Oxford Dictionary definition of gender is as follows: “Either of the two sexes (male and female), especially when considered with reference to social and cultural differences rather than biological ones. The term is also used more broadly to denote a range of identities that do not correspond to established ideas of male and female” (“Gender”).

There are clear differences between sex and gender: sex denotes a biological state of being, whereas gender is mainly defined by social and cultural identity. However, these terms tend to overlap in society and are often used interchangeably and incorrectly linked.

When someone is assigned male at birth, it is often presumed that they will adhere to society’s definition of what a man should be. Throughout childhood, the child will be educated on the socially-appropriate and socially-inappropriate behaviors of his gender, and will be steered to follow them by parents, teachers, mentors, and even some peers. In some cases, shame or punishment will be applied as corrective measures. The same applies for a person assigned female at birth; they will be taught how to act and expected to act accordingly.

Of course, most parents understand that there is a range of behaviors appropriate for each gender; not all boys or girls will act in the exact same way. Still, there are behaviors that, for many parents, do not fall within this range of acceptability.

A 2013 study conducted by Norton and Herek sampled 2,281 U.S. adults to examine “the attitudes of heterosexual men and women toward transgender people in the United States” (Norton and Herek 738). Participants were tasked with completing a questionnaire about their attitudes toward transgender people as well as sexual orientation groups. They read a series of statements about different types of people and were asked to rate their favorability of the person described on a scale from 0 to 100.

The study found that “attitudes toward transgender people were significantly more negative than attitudes toward sexual minorities.” (Norton and Herek 749).

Revisiting the aforementioned example applies these findings to a real-world context. As the male baby arrives into the world, the work really begins for his newly-minted parents. It is now time to raise their son to be the strong man they know he can become. It will be his job to carry on the family name with a wife and children of his own. Before that, he has a lot of growing up to do.

Over the years, his parents will encourage him to play with toy cars and action figures, excel at sports, and take up an interest in math or science like only a man could. Outside of the home, he will be met with an onslaught of peripheral signals from other adults…men are dominant, men cannot cry, men are the breadwinners, men are tough (not soft), men lead their households…until they are engrained in his psyche. The boy now knows what is expected of him.

For his own sake, he must live up to those expectations.

From a young age, children are highly impressionable. The opinions of their parents, teachers, and other adult figures have great impacts on their own ideas and behaviors. Thus, it is no surprise that the views of children about gender norms seem to mirror those of adults.

In 2003, Judith Blakemore conducted a study examining children’s understanding of gender norms and roles. A cohort of 186 children, ranging from preschool to fifth grade, were divided into five different groups based on their ages. The children were asked questions about gender norms including “activities, toys, clothing, hairstyles, adult occupations, play styles, and the items ‘mommy’ and ‘daddy.’”

For each item, children were asked who normally interacts with the item, whether it was acceptable for members of the other gender (males or females) to interact with the item, and how likely they would be to associate with someone of the other gender who interacted with the item.

The study found that “both knowledge of the norms and flexibility about the possibility of violating them generally increased with age” (Blakemore 417). Violations of various gender norms were negatively rated across the age groups, including boys wearing girls’ clothing, boys playing with Barbie dolls, and girls who were loud and rough or who played football.

This study reveals two important points. First, while children in the younger age groups have less understanding of the concreteness of gender (as defined by societal standards), beliefs of children in the older groups align more strongly toward societal expectations of gender presentation and behaviors. This shows that, as the children grow older, they begin to more closely embody the ideas of their adult counterparts, perpetuating the gender definitions laid out by previous generations.

Conversely, the younger children, who have been impacted by society for a lesser amount of time, have less concrete belief in gender norms. Children’s understanding of gender becomes more closely aligned to societal standards with age, affirming that the gender norms are socially constructed.

Second, though “flexibility about the possibility of violating [gender norms]” (Blakemore 417) was found to be greater for older age groups, this still reinforces societal norms. According to the study, “about 20% of the fifth graders said that it was possible for children to grow up to become a parent of the other gender” (Blakemore 417). This percentage was higher than that of the group of third graders.

Though fifth graders are more aware that transgression of norms is still possible, this awareness relies on the idea that norms exist and anything deviant from them is a transgression. This reinforces the ontological structure set forth by previous generations by upholding the establishment of normative and non-normative conditions.

Another study, conducted in 2012 by Meagan Patterson, employs a similar methodology. The study recruited 100 children to examine the link between gender-typed attitudes and self-perceived gender. The participants were asked to rate whether they participate in certain activities or exhibit certain behaviors at similar rates to most other members of their gender.

Ultimately, the findings of the study “indicate that even young elementary-school-aged children use their knowledge of cultural gender roles to make subjective judgments regarding the self, and, conversely, that views of the self may influence personal endorsement of cultural gender stereotypes” (Patterson 423).

Patterson’s study also found that, “Despite older elementary-school-aged children’s greater flexibility in thinking about gender, these children continued to base their views of themselves as typical boys or girls (at least in part) on their interests in same- and other-gender-typed activities and occupations” (Patterson 431). This mirrors the findings of Blakemore’s study, but also shows that children define their own gender by socially-constructed definitions.

Taken together, the studies presented so far have shown that gender is socially constructed, and that the perpetuation of this social construction is cyclical. Norton’s and Herek’s analysis shows a negative popular opinion of gender transgressions among adults. People who conformed to norms were rated as favorable, and those who did not were considered unfavorable by the majority of participants.

Results from Blakemore’s and Patterson’s studies mirror this. Children in these studies uphold the normative structures set forth by the adults in their society by considering the identities of themselves and others as a function of these structures.

When these children grow, they will continue to uphold these normative structures, passing “tradition” and “ritual” on to the next generation without questioning their origins.

Many critics claim that transgression of gender norms is “against nature.” Consideration of cultural differences in gender norms prove that gender cannot be biologically defined. The male-female gender binary is regarded as so normal and natural by American and Western societies, but many cultures have different normative ideas about gender.

A man or boy in America who wears a skirt would be considered abnormal, but Scottish men and boys have worn kilts for centuries without incident.

Additionally, many Americans would say that blue is for boys and pink is for girls. However, in Belgium, “Pink was thought to be stronger, and blue was thought to be dainty, hence the gender distinction. In contemporary Belgium, this is still considered normal” (Waldeck).

Next, though many Americans see hand-holding among men as inappropriate, “hand-holding is a common sign of friendship among people of the same gender” (Waldeck) in many Arab countries.

Some Samoans in New Zealand live as a third gender, called fa’afafine. This third gender is very important to the fabric of Samoan society and culture. Katrina Roen discusses this in Transgender Theory and Embodiment. She interviews three fa’afafine subjects living in New Zealand about their experiences with society.

Roen reports that “[the subject] describes being taught from an early age that to be fa’afafine was to be valued and respected, despite shifting to New Zealand as a child and having to learn that fa’afafine were far less tolerated there” (Roen 257).

Samoan culture and mainstream New Zealand culture both differ in their views of fa’fafine as a gender, but Western ideas of gender also differ from both of these. One of Roen’s interview subjects further highlights this difference: “All the Palagi [English] terms: gay, faggot, queer . . . [they’re] awful . . . [Those terms] actually tell you how that society views that person. My culture just views it ‘like a woman’. And it’s like a special woman. It’s a knowledgeable woman but recognised [as] . . . anatomically male” (Roen 257).

Clearly, the definition of gender differs across cultures. If gender was linked to biological sex, humans as a species would have a common definition of and adherence to gender, and this definition would be common across all societies and cultures. Instead, culture, not biology, is the deciding factor for how gender is understood, identified, and communicated.

Further evidence that gender is socially constructed comes from analysis of the markers of gender. In Blakemore’s and Patterson’s studies, children claim that one’s gender identity is defined by certain markers: specifically, how closely they mirror the typical activities and appearance of one’s gender.

Gender must be socially constructed because the markers of gender themselves are socially constructed. The human body and its biological systems do not understand the difference between pants and a skirt, painted and unpainted nails, or long and short hairstyles. Clothing, nail polish, and hairstyle are social inventions, not biological. Thus, the value assigned to them by society is socially invented as well.

Again, consider a couple expecting a child. Though nothing about this child’s biological structure suggests that he should wear certain clothing, cut his hair short, and have unpainted nails, his parents will likely raise him to believe that these conditions are necessary to his identity and that deviating from them would be cause for concern.

As the child grows, he will spend his days subscribing to a social construction of identity. In a culture that emphasizes free will and independence, his personal freedoms will be reduced to a predefined category.

Three simple words, “it’s a boy,” set all of this in motion. This child’s entire life was predetermined by the doctor’s seemingly harmless decree. If the words had instead been “it’s a girl,” the child’s life would have been steered in an entirely different direction.

Who knew that one chromosome could alter so much.

###

Works Cited:

• Blakemore, Judith E. “Children’s Beliefs About Violating Gender Norms: Boys Shouldn’t Look Like Girls, and Girls Shouldn’t Act Like Boys.” Sex Roles9/10 (2003): 411-19. Web.
• “Gender | Definition of Gender in English by Oxford Dictionaries.” Oxford Dictionaries | English. Oxford Dictionaries, n.d. Web.
• Norton, Aaron T., and Gregory M. Herek. “Heterosexuals’ Attitudes Toward Transgender People: Findings from a National Probability Sample of U.S. Adults.” Sex Roles 68 (2012): 738-53. Web.
• Patterson, Meagan M. “Self-Perceived Gender Typicality, Gender-Typed Attributes, and Gender Stereotype Endorsement in Elementary-School-Aged Children.” Sex Roles 67 (2012): 422-34. Web.
• Roen, Katrina. “Transgender Theory and Embodiment The Risk of Racial Marginalization.” Journal of Gender Studies3 (2001): 253-63. Web.
• “Sex.” Merriam-Webster. Merriam-Webster, n.d. Web.
• Waldeck, Katie. “6 Gender Stereotypes Around the World.” Care2 Healthy Living. CARE2.COM, INC, 13 Jan. 2013. Web.