In Chapter 2 of Gendered Lives, Wood introduces us to 4 major, yet different theories surrounding gender. She prescribes that the theories we hold influence us in the arena of gender, whether we recognize it or not. The theories explained are biological, interpersonal/psychodynamic, cultural and critical. Neither one of these theories can take the place of another, but rather they are able to compliment each other.
Wood first introduces us to biological theory. This theory boils the differences in gender down to biological characteristics. As in the previous chapter, she brings anatomy such as chromosomes, hormones, and brain activity into the picture. Wood provides us with the specific information in biology that will classify an individual as male or female. Females have chromosomes XX, males have XY. The female hormone is estrogen, and the male hormone is testosterone. Females are associated with right brain (lobe) thinking while males are associated with left brain (lobe) thinking. However, she also introduces us to the corpus callosum, which links the two lobes of the brain, allowing multiple uses of the brain's different skills. It appears that her introduction of this 'element' of the brain would serve to undermine biological theory. Perhaps Wood does not want us to buy into this theory?
The second type of theory is interpersonal/psychodynamic. This theory assumes that the relationships we form and the way we interact within those relationships are key to our developement and understanding of gender. There is a focus in this section put on the relationship between a mother and her child, due to the large amount of time a mother (usually) spends with her child. Here is where the Social Learning Theory comes into play. This theory, 'claims that individuals learn to be masculine and feminine primarily by imitating others and getting responses from others to their behavior' (49). This comes in two forms. Imitation; from family members, television, video games, etc. And validation; those who are in authority over us, a type of positive (or negative) reinforcement. These all seem to offer what is called 'gender repertoire' or contexts in which certain gender activities are performed. We are also introduced to Cognitive Development Theory. This theory assumes that we each take an active, participative role in shaping our gender identities. We operate in a gender schema, a mental framework for how we're supposed to act as a boy or girl.
Following this are cultural theories of gender. These theories are comprehensive because they will incorporate parts of other theories, as well as the influence of culture. A big area here is what is called symbolic interactionism. This says that we know who we are and how culture views us because of our relationship, communication and interaction with others. This is reinforced when dad says to his son, 'way to be a tough guy' or when mom comforts her daughter when she is crying. This sort of communication enforces and reinforces roles, or expected behaviors.
Lastly, Wood goes into critical theories of gender. As she herself says, '...[they] go beyond the standard goals of theory, which are description, explanation and prediction' (58). They look at how more dominant groups are privileged compared to lesser groups according to culture. Wood first goes into Standpoint Theory. This focuses on how our participation with a certain group shapes us as an individual. There is much we can learn from those who are considered 'marginalized' in a society. There is an important distinction to be made, though, between location and standpoint. Location refers to state of being, while standpoint refers to one's action within that state. Also included in this section, and the last part of the chapter, is queer performative theory. This is an in-depth look at 'normal' and 'abnormal' within identity and culture when it comes to sexuality, gender, etc. Judith Butler adds an important contribution here when she argues that we can only understand gender when it is performed or expressed.
Sister Outsider Headbanger
This article is a bio on an African American girl who grew up liking heavy metal, rock music. It was the contradiction of heavy metal to what she grew up with that first attracted Keidra Chaney. As she said herself, "I knew that heavy metal was power , and power was irresistable." Chaney described an alienation from the normal that society expected that appealed to her, though it seemed to be self imposed. She also enjoyed the loyalty and almost downright obsession that came with the heavy metal territory.
Still, Chaney recognized that not only was she an outsider because of her skin color, but also because of her gender. Guys would point and stare at her at concerts, but when the lights when down and the music started playing. There was no black/white, male/female; there was only headbanger.
Chaney says the music is not as prevalent in her life as it once was, most likely contributing that to the fact that she has found her own identity as a person and 'doesn't need the music to help express [her] feelings or provide a sense of community anymore.'
Mormon Demystified
This lengthy interview covered many topics within the Mormon faith that were testified to by Joanna Brooks. My attention was firmly focused when Brooks began to talk of the Mormon church's anti-feminist history. She herself is a feminist and a scholar, all while holding the Mormon faith.
A 'high-ranking' church official had once made the comment that, "Feminists, intellectuals and gays & lesbians are the 3 greatest dangers to the church."
She thought of her faith and how much she longed for Zion, as did the rest of the faith. She began to weep because she wasn't sure how she (as a feminist & intellectual) was a danger to that ideal.
The official's comments came at a time when there was great turmoil in the church regarding the above-state people. I believe her response to those comments was echoed by many women who believed, but were struggling with the same thing at the time.
Links to articles, blogs, music...
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/tennis-storm-over-mansized-mauresmo-1077214.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAfyFTzZDMM
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1920289,00.html
Questions to ask...
Why do religions (Mormonism, Islam, even Protestantism) seem the advancement of women in the church and women's rights in general as a problem?
It seems as though no matter which theory we follow, perception is reality when push comes to shove. Is that true?
No comments:
Post a Comment