Gender: Difference between revisions

The word ''gender'', originating from the Latin ''genus'' (sort, kind) has gained several meanings over the centuries and especially during the past decades.  Significant debate exists between ideological groups that wish to highlight the importance of one particular definition of the word. The words ''feminine'' and ''masculine'' are usually associated with concepts of gender, as opposed to the words ''female'' and ''male'' which more commonly relate to [[sex]], though all of these words and concepts are frequently conflated by the general public.

Another old and mostly non-political definition of gender is as a synonym to [[sex]], i.e. the categorization of an organism with respect to its role in binary reproduction.  This use of the word is popular presumably because of the vulgar connotations the word "sex" might be perceived to have.  The use of "gender" as a synonym for "sex" likewise seem to date back all the way to the 15th century, and can be found even in academic texts which clearly deal with a strictly biology-based reproductive categorization of organisms.

Similar to the use of gender to mean sex, the words "feminine" and "masculine" are also sometimes used as close approximations of "female" and "male".  In biology, it is not uncommon to hear terms such as "feminization" or "masculinization" when referring to anatomic developments associated with the female and male sexes.  Similarly, the euphemism ''feminine hygiene products'' is often used to refer to menstrual hygiene products, relating clearly to the female sex.

What is meant with ''gender as a social construct'' is the realization that words such as "woman" and "man" (also "girl" and "boy") do not merely induce thoughts of just any human that happens to be anatomically female or male.  Rather, on hearing these words (or their translation to one's native language), one is likely to imagine a person who not only belongs to a certain anatomic sex category, but also fulfills certain expectations with regard to clothing, speech, behavior, and so on.  For instance, upon hearing "woman", one is more likely to think of a person with long hair and perhaps a dress, even though both of these "gender markers" have no relation to female anatomy.  (Male humans can also grow long hair, and wear dresses.)  These gender markers/expectations differ from culture to culture and across history, and include many aspects with no relation to sexual anatomy.  As such, they are understood to constitute a ''social construct'' of gender, that is separate from the anatomical facts of being female or male.

A naive reading of both de Beauvoir and Dworkin can lead to a confusion where one is led to believe that their writings are in line with contemporary "gender identity" theory.  Dworkin for instance writes that ''"it is not true that there are two sexes which are discrete and opposite"''.  (It's possible to give multiple interpretations to the clause "... which are discrete and opposite."  Was she denying binary reproductive sex?)  However, both authors make extensive mention of female anatomy in relation to experiences of female oppression.  For instance, in the very same chapter from which the aforementioned quote is taken, Dworkin speaks of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intrauterine_device IUDs] and of the clitoris as the source of female sexual pleasure.  As such, the compatibility of her theory with contemporary gender identity theory is rather questionable.

<div style="clear: both;"></div>

''Main article: [[Gender identity]]''