Friday, March 27, 2009

Gender as a Social Practice

The chapter “Gender as a Social Practice” spoke about how gender is a social practice and it affects the major structures and institutions of the world. Institutions are divided into being either masculine or feminine (for example, the state is masculine because “the overwhelming majority of top office-holders are men because there is a gender configuring of recruitment and promotion…internal division of labour and systems of control...” etc.).(370) However, it is made clear that gender and masculinity has nothing to do with reproduction when the author discusses the exclusion of gays in the military as important to military officials to preserve the cultural importance of a specific definition of what is masculine.

Gender is an “internally complex structure” (370). Connell says that power, production and cathexis can explain the structure of gender and masculinity. First, power relations are created by the “overall subordination of women and dominance of men” (371). It endures through modern role reversals (women-headed households, female teachers of males, etc.) and resistance, like feminism. Second, Connell says production relations exist because of gendered division of labor. Females do “womanly” tasks—cooking, cleaning—and males do “manly” tasks—outdoor work. Unequal wages can be found here and the author says that it isn’t a statistical accident that males head major corporations and private fortunes, because the “accumulation of wealth has become firmly linked to the reproductive arena” (371). Finally, cathexis, or emotional attachment, says that even sexual desire is gendered.

Gender isn’t exclusive from other forms of social structures; it is also affected by race and class. Masculinity can’t be thought of without considering what it is in relation to black and white men. At the same time, it can’t also be thought of without considering what masculinity means for a working-class man versus a middle-class man. Connell says “to understand gender, then we must constantly go beyond gender. The same applies in reverse. We cannot understand class, race or global inequality without constantly moving towards gender” (372).

While understanding that there are different kinds of masculinity is important, it is also important to study the associations between the differences. The author speaks of hegemony as a “cultural dynamic by which a group claims and sustains a leading position in social life” (373). Hegemonic masculinity refers to the dominant position of men over women. It can be altered though, as groups challenge the dominance.

Within the hegemony, there is dominance and subordination between groups of men themselves. Homosexual males can be seen as culturally dominated by heterosexual males through exclusion, abuse, violence, discrimination and boycotts. Heterosexual men and boys can also be subject to this cruelty if they are seen as not living up to the masculine norm through use of names such as wimp, sissy, and mother’s boy.

Masculinity is complicated because of the fact that not many men live up to the hegemonic standard. “Marriage, fatherhood and community life often involve extensive compromises with women rather than naked domination or an uncontested display of authority” (374). However, most men gain from the hegemony simply through the advantage of being men.

Marginalization “refers to the relations between masculinities in dominant and subordinate classes or ethnic groups” (375). Connell says that power given to each group is determined by the masculine hegemony and can be given to individuals as they see fit. His example said that a black athlete may be exalted for his talent, but the fame and respect the individual receives doesn’t tickle down to all black men receiving respect.

5 comments:

nacar1tm said...

“Gender relations, the relations among people and groups organized through the reproductive arena, form one of the major structures of all documented societies” (369).

Gender and the roles that are played have always struck my curiosity. Where did the idea of being masculine or feminine come from? People now learn gender roles as early as a baby. You are immediately groomed to either be masculine or feminine, determined by the colors pink and blue. You are brought up to play with certain toys, and to act a certain way. Boys are to be tough, show no emotions other than aggression, and play with toys such as trucks. Girls are to be proper, polite, and nurturing. They show emotion and are given Barbie’s. We are taught this by our parents, who were taught that by their parents. It’s seemingly a never ending cycle, because we will most likely treat our own children the same one day.

These stereotypes are placed upon us and we are expected to obey them. If we don’t, we are considered deviant and looked down upon. Why do men have to be the head of the household, while women stay home with the kids, cleaning and cooking? Times are changing, and I think it’s about time that people stop being so traditional toward gender roles. Just like Connell said on pg. 371, females do “womanly” tasks and males do “manly” tasks.

Our future aspirations are so dependent on our gender. This may not be so strictly the case today, but it still exists. The pay gap is so frustrating to me. Woman make around $.82-.83 for every dollar a man makes. While the gap has decreased, it’s still significant. When did someone decide that it’s okay to pay a female less for doing the same work a man does? Why does gender even matter in that situation?

I like where Laura said: “Connell says “to understand gender, then we must constantly go beyond gender. The same applies in reverse. We cannot understand class, race or global inequality without constantly moving towards gender” (372).” I found this rather intriguing.

The idea that one gender is preferred and better than another baffles me. And also saying that heterosexual males are better than homosexual males…seriously? I completely disagree, besides that..they’re both MALES! How can one sexual orientation seriously be considered preferable these days? I’m just happy that hegemonic masculinity, which is the dominant position of men over women, can be changed. It seems that women have/are started moving up in the world and are filling more roles that were traditionally masculine. By doing this, it gradually reduces the preexisting gender roles and stereotypes.

I personally would like to see the day where males and females are on a level playing field. They are paid the same, and are not pushed toward the gender roles that have been previously enforced. It would be equally nice to see that if males want to stay home with the kids while the female goes to work, that they won’t be chastised or looked down upon.

Brooke said...

This chapter was much easier to digest than most. I have had a hard time understanding a lot of the material that we have covered to the fullest extent however, this chapter was pretty straight-laced. I found interest also in Pg. 370 where Connell discusses the issue of homosexuals in the military. It is very ridiculous in my opinion to tell someone that they cannot do anything based upon who they have a preferred attraction to. I enjoyed greatly the argument that "object-choice has little to do with the capacity to kill." Regardless of orientation, your ability to complete your job is just the same as any other man. Going on Connell talks about how this is because of the "unadmitted reason... [being that the military has a certain definition of masculinity.] Interesting concept considering there are females in the military, who probably don't fit that model of masculinity.
Connell also brings up production relations and gives the example of the english village where women would traditionally wash in the inside of windows and men would wash the outside. A lot of social norms are the product of induction. We think if something happens again and again then it will be true. For example the sun rises every morning and we have gotten so used to that being the norm that it seems true and certain for us when in reality we have no idea if the sun will rise tomorrow or not, it's a fallacy. So the same has occurred in gender roles and social behavior. If one thing goes astray from the gender roles that have been put in place by society people freak out, and their immediate reaction is rejection and at times anger. Few men and women meet the standards that are in place and thus are labeled regardless of reality. This same concept affects the way society treats race. Because you are one way or another there is a list of things that you should relate too. This is obviously again, a fallacy. It's a matter or realizing that and finding a way to make those ignorant to it realize it as well which has been a problem in American society for quite some time.

Brittany Krieger said...

I actually for the most understood this chapter. With several of the classes I have take we often talk about gender and the different gender roles portrayed by men and women. I however agree with the one comment about the idea of masculinity and feminism. It has was always thought that men were in professions such as the police, fire departments doctors etc and women were stay at home moms, teachers, nurses etc. back in the day it was "strange" if there was a female doctor, however over the years we have seen more an more women in what are thought to be male professions and many men in what are thought to be female professions. How did this sort of "gender role" identification come about?

It seems that through out the chapter it is mostly about men and masculinity, what about women, and the working woman?

I like how the person critiquing this chapter added how if a boy is not raised in a masculine home they will be mad fun of. I agree that this does happen, but its not the truth. There are many boys whom grow up to be just as tough as boys raised in masculine homes. If boys don't live with a man, they still receive male attention and can gain experience and what have you through their peers.

Even though stereotypes and these roles have changed and are not as prevalent as they were from years ago they are still around. however, i think as the years go on that they will diminish almost all the way. I like how the one commenter brought up the difference in the pay gap. this is very important because women work just as hard as the man and should receive equal pay. I hope that in the future we move away from this gap and women can be seen equal to the man, it may take time but i think it can actually happen!

alyssa.cook. said...

Something in this reading that really caught my attention was where Connell talks about how if you do not have a preferred partner gender, if you are bi-sexual it is very questionable and undefined. It kind of got me thinking though and I know the trouble that transgendered people face, so where exactly do fall in this equation… ??

Like this reading and everyone else commenting has said, gender plays an extremely important role in defining our society today whether we want it to or not. Men are supposed to do manly things and women are supposed to do womanly things. This has lessened a little over time but still we give our baby girls dolls and our boys trucks… that’s still saying something.

It is interesting to notice the differences in the way society treats people even within genders. This seems a little more evident with males because Connell talks about how homosexuals are treated differently because they are not as masculine as they are supposed to be (according to the way society thinks), also there are differences in the way black men are treated compared to white men, there was even mention of a higher number of Aboriginal men in prisons.

As one other commenter noted, Connell says “To understand gender, then, we must constantly go beyond gender.” I kind of don’t really get this because, yeah we need to go beyond gender but I don’t think anyone really takes the time to do this. How do we go beyond it? I don’t disagree that we need to understand it because discrimination of all kinds is wrong, but I just don’t know exactly what that means.

I found the paragraph interesting that talked about how although men are supposed to be these rude, crude, raw figures exuding testosterone most of them do compromise with women. They love their wives and they respect the women in their families. It’s a weird type of standard that society or other men hold one another to when in reality who lives like that?

I found this article to be easy to understand and it also made some very interesting points and discussed things that I really hadn't spend that much time thinking about.

smith9j said...

I don’t really agree with the part where it says that the state is a male institution because most of the top officials are male. I believe that what he is saying is that the way that the state is organized is related to the reproductive arena meaning that the reason that most of the top officials are male is because of the way that those positions are recruited, like where and how they do their recruitment.

Power relation is not only that men are dominate but also that women are not dominate it is a combination of both. You couldn’t have one without the other. Production relation is familiar because of the division of labour is based on gender. Women are doing jobs that people believe are feminine and therefore can only be done by females while men are doing more masculine jobs where a female would not be able to perform the functions of the job. Cathexis is the things that shape sexual desire, making sexual desire to be gendered.

Connell does say that gender has influence from race and class. There is a difference between a middle class white man and a bourgeois white man. You can’t talk about gender without including a discussion about race and class.

Hegemony means that there is a certain relationship between which group claims and keeps a leading position in social life. A great example given is that homosexual males have always been dominated by heterosexual males in our society. The way that this continues is to associate bad things with being feminine. Many males will call more feminine males by names that will make them want to be more masculine.

I agree with the reaction that masculinity is hard to describe because not only do you have to look at masculinity you have to include race, class, and gender. There are many things that you have to look at to define what exactly masculinity is in today’s society. It can mean something different today than it meant years ago or even in a different society.