Sex and Gender

A person is surrounded by gender lore from childhood, which dictates their conversations, humor, and conflicts they encounter. Gender has been used to associate behavior to sex, including driving styles and food choices. These aspects are evident in our institutions, current beliefs, desires, and actions, which appear natural in entirety. Some of these perceptions have become deeply embedded in human life such that science has proved them to be facts (Lorber, 1993). The social construct of reality regarding actions and behaviors to have also contributed to the fundamental beliefs of gender. Therefore, although gender is not something a person is born with, doing it is driven by social constructs and perceptions, as explained in this discussion.

            Sex is the biological categorization of being based on reproductive potential. In that regard, the care for children in heterosexual relationships is defined by social norms that have been practiced over time (Fausto-Sterling, 2000). However, although gender also subscribes to these aspects, it exaggerates biological differences and moves to more irrelevant fields of argument. Scientists have related the result of sex from nature and gender from nurture. Furthermore, the definition of male or female can be related to hormonal, chromosomal features, which drive particular capabilities for one gender different from the other. However, these physical and natural models of definition were effected through social definitions during human evolution. Nevertheless, the dichotomous male and female prototypes related from humans to animals and other species can confirm its natural standing rather than its social construction.

            Basic gender terms should have defined some of the roles to be divided between men and women. Scientists do not know how the sexual body is connected to the brain, behavior, and cognition. In that regard, the connections between brain physiology and activity could be said to be unclear. However, the stereotypes of gender have continuously dictated gender-defined behavior and continuously shaping reality (Nieschlag, Behre, & Nieschlag, 2012). In extreme, these compositions were adopted in policy-making, which grounded this reality firmly. For instance, the policy used gender and sex to create educational systems, leadership incorporates, and government. In that regard, this system continues to add to this reality and ground these stereotypes even further.

            Gender is filled with the ubiquity and an overwhelming narrative of development. If gender had been viewed as strictly biological, the patterns of relations that develop over time would be ignored. Gender is more integrated into society and the social interactions of a person. Additionally, arguing in biological terms would completely ignore the power and privileges that gender has given to human beings’ different sex compositions. For instance, men are perceived to be more masculine and controlling (Nieschlag, Behre, & Nieschlag, 2012). Therefore, there would be confusion on who to step up for particular responsibilities in society. Also, there would be confusion in society due to the lack of an essential identity that people will belong to.

            Therefore, gender and sex are far apart based on definition and purpose. Gender is more complex and influenced by the social constructs of society. As explained, sex can be defined from a biological perspective. Non-conformance with these social constructs can lead to the feeling of not belonging or alienation. Therefore, taking gender as a biological composition only can block other forms of definition and other social constructs that define it. In that regard, gender would remain used in diverse ways to adverse construction of reality. However, deconstruction of gender reality could also be possible through extensive research.

References

Fausto-Sterling, A. (2000). The five sexes revisited. The sciences, 17-23.

Lorber, J. (1993). Believing is Seeing: Biology as ideology. Gender & Society, 7(4), 568-581.

Nieschlag, E., Behre, H. M., & Nieschlag, S. (Eds.). (2012). Testosterone: action, deficiency, substitution. Cambridge University Press.