Gender and Nature

Gender forms one of the most important variables in human aging because it is

one of the most important aspects of human experience. If a person displays

masculine, feminine or androgynous behavior, then gender is either innate or it has

been learnt, or that gender is biological. This would explain the strong relationship of

sex and ones gender. Some theories state that because each sex shares the same

physiology and anatomy, they may have physiological traits in common too. In the

same way that genetics hormones determine an individual’s sex, they also determine

whether a person will behave in a more feminine or masculine way which we call the

gender.

The nature states that gender is for the most part, biologically determined and

that two sexes(boy and girl) think and act differently, often in opposing ways

considering that gender is fixed and not much changing across cultures and time

period, it is accepted.

Buss’ research about gender indicates that sex-based mate preferences are also

universal and so must be determined by nature although nature doesn’t explain those

cases where a person does not adopt the gender roles expected of their sex even when

there are no genetic abnormalities. In addition, it doesn’t explain how both sexes are

becoming more similar as gender roles become more androgynous.

different societies. Also, other cultural research has highlighted cultural variations in

gender related to behavior that gender variations is gradually accepted by society.

Under the nature umbrella are theories that variously attribute gender

differences in religious commitment to physical or physiological causes such as

hormones, genes or biological predispositions. Many religious teachings and practices,

especially scriptural statements, religious rites, beliefs, theological doctrines,

institutional offices, and authority structures are closely intertwined with and patterned

by gender differences, even when gender remains officially unacknowledged and is

deemed invisible. The existing religious arrangements are considered natural by sacred

scriptures and other religious teachings handed down by traditions from the ancestors

or “God-given”, and thus, unalterable most likely in the biblical teaching shared by the

Christians that only man and woman is created by God in his image and likeness.

The Bible teaches that man is for woman and only a man is for a woman. Human

nature was perfect by virtue having been created by God. Human nature reflects some

of God’s attributes, although in a limitedway. We love because we are loved by Him, so

we can be compassionate, faithful thankful, kind and just. And these attributes are

destroyed by sin which also resides in our nature.

Religion and gender are not simply two parallel categories that function

independently of each other; they are mutually embedded within each other in all

religions, suffusing all religious worlds and experiences. It is because of this deep

hidden embeddedness that gender is sometimes so difficult to identify and separate out
from other aspects of religion until one’s consciousness is trained into making a gender

critical turn. Thus, Christians stand strong in their belief about God’s creation of human

and teachings about man and woman.

For Anne Fausto Sterling, she states that in identifying gender, many people

assume that color code represents not only set of cultural norms, but also the innate

preferences of the child. By the time a female becomes a toddler, the fact that she

prefers pink dresses and toys seems like nature just taking its course. A closer look at

human development suggests that the truth is more complex. Rather than defaulting to

explanations rooted in biology and genetics, sex-related preferences should be an

invitation to ask broader questions about gender. For example, what is the source of

the pleasure for things that girls and boys get from certain colors? Or perhaps it is

positive feedback children receive for liking colors (gender appropriate). So instead of

viewing gender as something inherent and fixed, we should understand that it is a

developmental process involving the ongoing interaction of genes, hormones, social

cues, cultural norms, and other factors.

Also, Barbara Ehrenreich illustrates in her “The Hearts of Men” how gender roles

have highly constricted men, not just women. She deviates from conventional wisdom,

which says that gender roles have been largely detrimental to only the population which

is simultaneously confined to working in the domestic sphere and prevented from

participating in the public realm. Ehrenreich looks at the issue of gender equality from a

unique, untraditional perspective. Instead of focusing in female benefits, The Heart of

have to give up ruling-class privileges, but in return they will no longer be the only ones

to support the family or bear the strain of power and responsibility.

Gender acquisition is how one acquire, recognize and acknowledge his gender as

he grow considering how he is raised by parents, environmental factors, cultural or any

other factor that might influence how his gender is being shaped. There are a lot of

ways how gender is acquired. Kohlberg says that children actively socialize themselves

rather than being passive targets of social influence (opposition of the biosocial theory

of gender acquisition). In addition, gender consistency and stability can be understood

by children ahead of time if they have sufficient knowledge of the male and female

anatomy to realize that it is the genitals that determines one’s gender.

The social acquisition of gender is a theory in feminism and sociology about the

operation of gender and gender differences in societies. According to this view, society

and culture create gender roles, and these roles are prescribed as ideal or appropriate

behavior for a person of that specific sex. Some supporters of this idea argue that the

differences in behavior between men and women are entirely social conventions,

whereas others believe that behavior is influenced by universal biological factors to

varying degrees, with social conventions having a major effect on gendered behavior.

One way to analyze the social influence that affect the development of gender is

through the perspective of the social cognitive theory. According to Bussey, social

cognitive theory describes how gender conceptions are developed and transformed

across the life span. The social cognitive theory views gender roles as socially
constructed ideas that are obtained over one’s entire lifetime. These gender roles are

repeatedly reinforced through socialization.

For the individual, gender construction starts with assignments to a sex category

on the basis of biological genitalia at birth. Following this sexual assignment, parents

begin to influence gender identity by dressing children in ways that clearly display this

biological category. Gender development continues to be affected by the outlooks of

others, education, institutions, parenting, media and etc. These variations of social

interactions force individuals to learn what is expected, act and react in expected ways,

and thus simultaneously construct and maintain the gender order.

Social gender construction is also influenced by media. In the 21 st century,

modern technology is abundant in developed countries. In 2018, 42% of teens

experienced feelings of anxiety when not near their phones. This data reflects how

much of a teenager’s personality is dependent on media. Media influencing gender

construction can be seen in advertising, social networking, magazines, televisions,

music, and music videos. These platforms can affect how a developing human views

themselves and those around them. There is both positive and negative media and

each type can be perceived differently. Media will often portray men and women in a

stereotypical manner, reflecting their ideal image for society. These images often act as

an extreme expectation for many developing teenagers.

In television, men are usually shown as being non emotional and detached.

Women are often portrayed as the opposite. Gender roles are generally more enforfed

for women in media than they are for men. Females in media are often weak,
dependent, and passive personalities. Media presence often perpetuates that men are

not allowed to be caring and that women are not allowed to be strong and demanding.

These gender influences from the media can mislead a growing child or teenager

because while they are still trying to construct their identities and genders in a social

environment, they are surrounded by biased influences. With these, there should

always be equality to both women and men to avoid misleading the growth of children

who look up to adult.

Also, education influence gender acquisition. Due to the amount of time that

children spend in school, not only teachers but adults in the school are influential role

models for many aspects of children’s educational experiences, including gender

socialization. Teachers who endorse the culturally dominant gender-role stereotype

regarding the distribution of talent between males and females distort their perception

of their students mathematical abilities and effort resources in mathematics, in a

manner that it is consistent with their gender-role stereotype and to a gender extent

than teachers who do not endorse the stereotype.

A study conducted at Illinois State University examined the effects of gender

stereotypes on the teaching practices of three third grade teachers, noting that

teachers claimed neutrality, yet they expressed numerous beliefs about gender

difference about gender during study, such as allowing boys (only) to respond to

questions without raising their hand or providing reading selections that promoted

women in non-traditional roles, but not doing the same for men.
Most standard tests of intelligence have been constructed so that there are no

overall score differences between males and females. Overall, differences in student

performance that arise from gender tend to be smaller than that of demographic

differences, such as race or socioeconomic class.

One of the rituals that influence gender acquisition is the religious rituals. Rituals

that establish gender usually occur early in life. While many religious traditions treat

young children as somewhat androgynous beings, there are traditions in which

gendered existence begins at birth. An example is the Judaism. The first event after the

birth of a baby boy is a “bris”, or ritual circumcision, which traditionally occurs eighth

days after birth. The purpose of the bris is to remember and re-enact the covenant of

made between God and Abraham. Traditionally, this covenant was made between the

male descendants of Abraham, and because the action of the rituals involves marking

the male body, there was historically no parallel ceremony for girls. This made to

segregate boys and girls at an early age by indicating that being male is a prerequisite

for full participation in Jewish rituals.

The social construction of sexual behavior, its taboos, regulation and social, and

political impact has had profound effect on the various cultures and of the world since

prehistoric times. Various types of same-sexes around the world have existed, ranging

from informal, unsanctioned, and temporary relationships to highly ritualized unions

that have included marriage. State-recognized same-sex unions have recently become

more widely accepted, with various countries recognizing same sex-marriages or other

types of unions. More recently, people construct gender by performing it regardless of

how the society sees it and what sex ones belong.

In the theory of gender essentialism, there are certain universal, innate,

biologically-based or psychologically based features of gender that are at root of

observed differences in the behavior of men and women. With the advent of

Christianity, the earlier Greek model was expressed in theological discussions as the

doctrine that there are distinct two sexes, male and female created by God, and that

individuals are immutably on or the other. During the second-wave feminism, feminists

theorized that gender differences were socially constructed. In other words, people

gradually conform to gender differences through their experience of the social world.

Societal attitudes towards same-sex relationships have varied over time and

place, from expecting all males to engage in same-sex relationships, to casual

integration, through acceptance, to seeing the practice as a minor sin, crashing it

through law enforcement and judicial mechanisms, and to prohibiting it under penalty

to death. In detailed compilation of historical and ethnographic materials of pre-

cultures; it was accepted or ignored by 21% and 12% reported no such concept and

59% reported homosexuality absent or rare in frequency and 41% reported

uncommon. Many historical figures, including Socrates, Lord Byron, Edward II, and

Hadrian, have had terms such as gay, or bisexual applied to them. Michel Foucault,

have regarded this is as risking the anachronistic introduction of a contemporary

construction of sexuality foreign to their times, though other challenge this.

Same-sex practice were known in Ancient Greece and Rome, ancient

Mesopotamia, in some regions of China, and at certain times in ancient European.

Same-sex marital practices and rituals were more recognized in Mesopotamia than in

Egypt.

In United States same-sex practices started from the beginning of interactions

among Native Americans, European colonists, and enslaved Africans to the present. It

begins with the story of Aunt Leila, who lived in a couple relationship with another

woman but never, as far as her namesake knows, identified as a lesbian. Rupp thinks

about Aunt Leila to raise questions about what we can and cannot know about history,

about categories and identities, and about historical interpretation. Each chapter begins

with a personal story that connects to some aspect of the history of the covered period.

In the beginning, when European explorers and settlers arrived from across the

Atlantic, peoples with different sexual systems came into contact with each other.
Europeans expressed shock at the sexual openness and acceptance of gender crossing

that they found among some Native American peoples, despite the history of elite male

sexual privilege to penetrate social inferiors, secret gender crossing and emerging

urban worlds where same-sex sexual cultures flourished in Europe. Africans too,

brought complex ideas about sexuality to the world, and in contact among these

different cultures, a new sexual system came into being where colonial laws singled out

male same-sex acts for punishment yet ordinary people did not always harshly judge

those accused of engaging in acts defined as sodomy.

In the late 18th and early 19th centuries, the movement of different groups of the

population into new territories had a profound impact on sexuality. Romantic

friendships (passionate, intense, loving, physically affectionate relationships) developed

between same-sex friends in the homosocial worlds of the middle and upper classes.

The frontier also provided an opportunity for gender crossing. Back east, cities began to

provide the numbers, mobility, and anonymity that made same-sex sexual subcultures

viable. With the emergence of an urban working class came the formation of culture in

which sexuality was more public and, for women, less confined to marriage. Until the

late century this working class subculture was overwhelmingly heterosexual for women

but began earlier to make contact with other men for both intra- interclass sexual

encounters.

In the half 20th century, what we can begin to call not only lesbian and gay but

the LGBT COMMUNITY developed in big cities across nation. Men and women with

same-sex desires knew where to gather, used certain terms to identify themselves,
marked them as particular kind of people. But it was not just the notorious locaitons

such as Greenwich Village, Harlem and some places where they can be able to meet

other with similar sexual desires. Communities sprang up in the most unlikely places.

What is perhaps most remarkable is the conceptions of who was queer, to say nothing

of the toleration of same-sex wexuality in certain social context. The formation of

different building of diverse communities was new, yet the salience of gender

differences for the expression of same-sex sexuality, found in places where men

camping it up in their private lives, and working-class women in men’s clothes,

remained. In the building of what we came to be named LGBT COMMUNITY, we can

see the origins of the modern world in which we live.

By the mid 20th century, anti-homosexual policies spread from the military to the

civilian sector of government, leading to witch-hunts that made life dangerous at the

same time that sources of information on homosexuality multiplied and enclaves of

acceptance persisted or opened up in a variety of places.

Later, lesbian feminist, masculine gay men,, gay and lesbian couples with

children who see themselves as just like their straight neighbors, women in romantic

friendships, transmen and transwomen, secret gender crossers, and other American’s

with their own way of naming same-sex relationships- all these diverse people are part

of our contemporary world of same-sex communities. The multiple and changing

meanings of sexual desire and behavior that we see in the past still exist in the present.