Content deleted Content added
→Doing difference: Most of if not entirely all of this article was written by a feminist-left leaning author and bluntly conceptualizes many things per the book. This causes bias in the midst of objectively quantifying causes and factors towards the development of ideologies. For example, not everyone is first-world. Tag: Reverted |
Removed link to (closed) learning management system, as not everyone has access |
||
(29 intermediate revisions by 20 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{Short description|Gender studies concept}}
In
==
The concept of "doing" gender came from conversations of gender from sociology and gender studies. The specific term "doing gender" was used in [[Candace West]] and Don Zimmerman's article by the same title, originally written in 1977 but not published until 1987.<ref name="West and Zimmerman 2009" /> In the article, West and Zimmerman illustrate that gender is performed in interactions, and that behaviors are assessed based on socially accepted conceptions of gender. Rather than focusing on how gender is ingrained in the individual or perpetuated by institutions, West and Zimmerman emphasize the interactional level as a site where gender is invoked and reinforced. They begin by differentiating [[sex]] from sex category and [[gender]]. In this piece, sex is the socially agreed upon criteria for being male or female, usually based on an individual's [[genitalia]] at birth or chromosomal typing before birth. Sex category is the assumed biological category, regardless of the individual's gender identification. This is "established and sustained by the socially required identificatory displays that proclaim one's membership in one or the other category".<ref name="West and Zimmerman 2009" />{{rp|127}} Gender, in this context, is the degree to which an actor is masculine or feminine, in light of societal expectations about what is appropriate for one's sex category.<ref name="Doing Gender" />
Doing gender according to West and Zimmerman "is to advance a new understanding of gender as a routine accomplishment embedded in every day interaction".<ref name="West and Zimmerman 2009" /> Essentially,
Gender is described as 'omnirelevant,' as it is apparent and relevant in almost every interaction. In their article, West and Zimmerman use examples such as bathrooms, sports, coupling, conversations, professions, and the division of labor to illustrate the ways in which gender is prevalent in many taken for granted activities. This description of
West and Zimmerman proposed that the two main aspects of “doing gender” are gender performance and accountability.<ref name="Doing Gender" /> Hollander’s 2013 work focuses on accountability, where she argues that it has three parts: “orientation", "assessment", and "enforcement”.<ref name=":1">{{Cite journal|last=Hollander|first=Jocelyn A.|date=2013|title="I Demand More of People: Accountability, Interaction, and Gender Change"|url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/23486615|journal=Gender and Society|volume=27|issue=1|pages=5–29|doi=10.1177/0891243212464301 |jstor=23486615 |s2cid=145382164 |issn=0891-2432}}</ref> Hollander describes orientation as self-accountability to biological sex. Assessment is explained as the process of measuring an individual’s way of doing gender in comparison to their sex. Hollander states that assessment holds people accountable to themselves and others. The third part is enforcement, which is when someone is actively held accountable to societal norms.<ref name=":1" />▼
▲Gender is described as 'omnirelevant,' as it is apparent and relevant in almost every interaction. In their article, West and Zimmerman use examples such as bathrooms, sports, coupling, conversations, professions, and the division of labor to illustrate the ways in which gender is prevalent in many taken for granted activities. This description of gender’s interactive nature is supported by Joshua and Kristin Smith (2016) where they explore what factors impact the process of “doing gender”.<ref name=":3">{{Cite journal|last1=Smith|first1=Joshua S.|last2=Smith|first2=Kristin E.|date=2016|title=What it Means to Do Gender Differently: Understanding Identity, Perceptions and Accomplishments in a Gendered World|url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/humjsocrel.38.62|journal=Humboldt Journal of Social Relations|volume=38|pages=62–78|issn=0160-4341}}</ref> West and Zimmerman employ the example of a professional woman in a male-dominated field, through which it becomes apparent that the woman will have to make decisions as to whether or not she should engage in "unfeminine" behavior that would otherwise be an integral part of her identity.<ref name="Doing Gender" />
Another component of this theory is gendered assessment of behavior. In the above example, the woman is engaging in behavior that will be assessed as either masculine or feminine by her co-workers. According to West and Zimmerman, this woman will be evaluated based on how her actions compare to accountability standards of the sex category she belongs to. Deviations from these expectations do not have an immediate effect on the accountability structure itself. Instead, failures to meet these standards are attributed to the individual rather than to the rigidity of recognized categories. With this theory, West and Zimmerman stress the importance of social interaction in maintaining the gender structure. Because individuals "do" and assess gender in interaction, gender is visible in a wide variety of activities such as conversation.<ref name="Doing Gender" />
== Foundations ==▼
The idea that gender is something that individuals actively 'do' was largely inspired by the social psychological approach taken by [[Erving Goffman]] in "Gender Display".<ref name="Doing Gender" />{{rp|129}} Goffman theorizes that humans make the assumption that each has an "essential nature," which can be interpreted by reading "natural signs given off or expressed by them".<ref name="Doing Gender" />{{rp|75}}
One of the most basic natures that can be assumed from interpreting these signs is one's masculinity or femininity. Not only is gender often determined by others relatively easily, but this determination often establishes the ways in which individuals interact with one another. Goffman asserts that, because we habitually function within such scripts, they are taken to be further evidence of essential natures. He coins the term "gender display" as a way to conceptualize the ways in which individuals act in a gender appropriate manner.<ref name="Doing Gender" />
▲==Foundations==
However, these performances are optional and vulnerable to disturbance, as inappropriate gender display can just as easily be invoked as socially accepted ones. Goffman asserts that there is a "scheduling" of gender displays around activities, so that the activities themselves are not interrupted by gender displays. For instance, colleagues may interact in a gendered manner during their lunch hour, rather than while they are working together on a project. West and Zimmerman take issue with this piece of Goffman's perspective, claiming that this masks the ways in which gender displays permeate nearly all social situations in that individuals cannot avoid being interpreted as masculine or feminine. "Doing Gender" also comes into play in individual settings such as emotional, cognitive, or communicational behaviors interpersonally but also appears in interpersonal settings such as peer and familial relationships and their expected outcomes. <ref name="Doing Gender" />
== Gender as a social transaction ==
In 1987, Deaux and Major proposed a model of social transaction to explain doing gender. In this model, there are three components or determinants for the social behavior of doing gender - the perceiver, the target, and the situation.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Deaux |first=Kay |last2=Major |first2=Brenda |date=July 1987 |title=Putting gender into context: An interactive model of gender-related behavior. |url=https://doi.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0033-295X.94.3.369 |journal=Psychological Review |language=en |volume=94 |issue=3 |pages=369–389 |doi=10.1037/0033-295X.94.3.369 |issn=1939-1471}}</ref>
A perceiver interprets their observations of others through a social filter consisting of their expectations and attitudes. This leads to two types of confirmations. [[Confirmation bias|Cognitive confirmation]] occurs when a perceiver sees things in a way that confirms their preexisting beliefs. [[Behavioral confirmation]] occurs when the target changes their behavior based on perceivers’ expectations. Together, these can lead to a [[self-fulfilling prophecy]], where other people’s beliefs about a person affect their actions toward that person, which in turn reinforce that person’s beliefs about themselves and thus change their behavior in a way that confirms the people’s beliefs. For example, a parent might treat their daughter as fragile and vulnerable because that’s what they were raised to believe about girls. Even if the daughter did not possess either of those qualities at first, she might learn to believe those things about herself and adjust her behavior accordingly, only to confirm the parents’ original belief.
A target is the person performing gender. When a target is focused on acting in a way that is consistent with their [[self-concept]], it is referred to as [[Self-verification theory|self-verification]]. Self-presentation is the opposite, where the target is more focused on adjusting their behavior based on the opinions and attitudes of others. Self-enhancement is a type of self-presentation that especially focuses on presenting oneself favorably.
==Responses and critiques==▼
Finally, the situation refers to the effect of context on how one does gender. For example, the perception of an “appropriate” outfit can depend on the event, location, and setting. Dressing up for work will likely yield different results than dressing up for a beach party. A perceiver’s [[Gender schema theory|gender schema]] may be activated by the situation, such as when a person is told that a particular toddler is a boy, the perceiver often reaches for cars and robots to play with the toddler, because a common gender schema dictates that boys like to play with those types of toys.<ref>{{Citation |title=Girl toys vs boy toys: The experiment - BBC Stories |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWu44AqF0iI |access-date=2024-03-16 |language=en}}</ref> A wedding presents a situation in which there tend to be very specific and rigid expectations and pressures relating to gender.
▲== Responses and critiques ==
The concept of doing gender has been critiqued by scholars who assert that it does not take human agency and acts of resistance into account.<ref name="Vidal-Ortiz" /> In order to illustrate the possibility of change, several works have been published in which researchers claim to document an 'undoing' or 'redoing' of gender.
In January 2009, the academic journal ''Gender and Society'' published a West and Zimmerman Symposium, in honor of the concept of doing gender.
Catherine Connell (2010) presented the idea of "redoing gender" as well as "doing [[transgender]]" in her work, "Doing, Undoing or Redoing Gender?: Learning from the Workplace Experiences of Transpeople". Connell posits that transpeople may redo gender by altering normative ideas of gender in their interactions, but may simultaneously participate in the doing of gender in other ways. Connell coins the term "doing transgender" in order to provide a way to examine how transpeople must make sense of the disconnect between sex, gender and sex category, which they may obscure or actively express in interactions.<ref name="Redoing" />▼
West and Zimmerman responded with an article titled "Accounting for Doing Gender", in which they restated their original argument, with an emphasis on accountability.
▲In January 2009, the academic journal ''Gender and Society'' published a West and Zimmerman Symposium, in honor of the concept of doing gender. Nine short articles were composed for the symposium, including a piece by West and Zimmerman. Several authors argued that the doing gender framework did not allow for agency, intent or consciousness. Other authors argued that biology needed to be focused on when considering doing gender, in order to understand what role the body plays in gender assessment.<ref name="West and Zimmerman 2009" /><ref name="Jurik" /><ref name="Vidal-Ortiz" /><ref name="Smith" /><ref name="Risman" /><ref name="Mess" /><ref name="Jones" /><ref name="Kit" /><ref name="Raewyn" />
▲West and Zimmerman responded with an article titled "Accounting for Doing Gender", in which they restated their original argument, with an emphasis on accountability. In this, they argued, the doing gender framework does not hide agency, but contextualizes it. Because individuals' gender will be interpreted based on the accountability structure, the effectiveness of their resistance may not serve to "undo" gender. The authors contend that gender may be "redone" but never "undone", as accountability structures may change but gender will not disappear.<ref name="West and Zimmerman 2009" />
The 'doing gender' framework, developed by West and Zimmerman, is highly influential in housework research.<ref>Brines, J. (1994). Economic dependency, gender, and the division of labor at home. American Journal of sociology, 100(3), 652-688.</ref><ref>Greenstein, T. N. (2000). Economic dependence, gender, and the division of labor in the home: A replication and extension. Journal of Marriage and Family, 62(2), 322-335.</ref><ref>Kolpashnikova, K. (2018). American househusbands: New time use evidence of gender display, 2003–2016. Social Indicators Research, 140(3), 1259-1277.</ref>
A 2009 article by Kristen Schilt and Laurel Westbrook expands upon West and
▲Catherine Connell
▲
A 2016 article by J. Smith and K. Smith references the role of accountability and states that the act of "doing gender" is verified according to established standards for a specific circumstance.<ref name=":3" /> Determining gender is regarded as a subjective behaviour based on an individual's personal views and experiences, according to the aforementioned sources.<ref name=":3" /><ref name=":4" />
Helana Darwin
Nordmarken
== Doing difference ==
{{
The authors also highlight how simply placing communities facing immense social disadvantages, such as poor black women, at the bottom of an abstract listing of vulnerable populations in the United States offers little information about how the interaction of race, class, and gender constrains and directs various aspects of their lives. Their analysis of these core differences from an [[Ethnomethodology|ethnomethodological]] standpoint shifts the focus away from individual characteristics. Instead, they are understood processually as "emergent properties of social situations"<ref name=":02" /> which simultaneously produce systematically different outcomes for social groups and the rationale for such disparities.
The authors assert that the reason [[Race (classification of human beings)|race]] and [[Social class|class]] were not adequately considered in earlier works is because the [[feminist movement]] has historically been the province of white middle
The central theme of "difference" in this article intends to illustrate how the concepts of race and gender have been falsely conceived as biologically bound predictors of behavior and aptitude among those who of a certain skin color or sex.<ref name=":02" /> The commonalities within these somewhat arbitrary categories often exaggerated and the behavior of the most dominant group within the category (e.g. rich white men or women) becomes idealized as the only appropriate way to fulfill one social role. This conceptualization is then employed as a means of excluding and stigmatizing those who do not or cannot live up to these standards. This process of "doing difference" is realized in constant interpersonal interactions that reaffirm and reproduce social structure. Experiencing the world through the interaction of these "essentialized" characteristics and especially through dominant group's frame of reference (power interests) produces a pattern of thought and behavior that reproduces these social inequalities.
This theme has been further addressed by Karen Pyke and Denise Johnson (2003) where they integrated the concept of "doing gender" with the study of race.<ref name=":2">{{Cite journal|last1=Pyke|first1=Karen D.|last2=Johnson|first2=Denise L.|date=2003|title=Asian American Women and Racialized Femininities: 'Doing' Gender Across Cultural Worlds|url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/3081813|journal=Gender and Society|volume=17|issue=1|pages=33–53|doi=10.1177/0891243202238977 |jstor=3081813 |s2cid=33823557 |issn=0891-2432}}</ref> They explain that being part of racially or ethnically marginalized communities can lead to conflicting gender expectations from society and their own cultural values. The authors state that white society manufactures and normalizes racialized gender stereotypes for non-white populations. They reference how the aggressive images associated with Black women lead to the belief that they are not feminine enough, whereas the submissive representation of Asian women results in their hyperfeminization.<ref name=":2" /> The authors suggest that white dominance is reinforced using these derogatory representations of racialized individuals to manipulate them into "doing gender" in a way that emulates the idealized, white standards. Pyke and Johnson (2003) conducted a study with one section focused on how Asian American women do gender differently depending on their setting.<ref name=":2" /> These respondents viewed white femininity as the standard, with many citing mainstream guidelines which frequently glorify white femininity compared to Asian femininity. The authors also discovered how the hypermasculine representation of Asian men allow white men to be viewed as less oppressive. Pyke and Johnson (2003) focused on the influence internalized oppression has on how racially and ethnically marginalized populations "do gender".<ref name=":2" />
West and Fenstermaker (1995) state that social science research has rendered dubious any claim that race can simply be conflated with color; gender with genitalia; class with paycheques.<ref name=":02" /> The authors acknowledge that class appears less prone to ideas about natural social differentiation, but argue that within capitalist societies, it is often assumed that one's economic situation acts as a direct indication of one's capacity to achieve, further engraining sexist and racist assumptions. Given the general observation that powerful groups display heavy reliance on these ideas of natural subordination, many liberationist thinkers have concluded that this essentialism would be a prime rhetorical vehicle to subvert. Thus, the [[deconstruction]] of [[role theory]] and [[Structural functionalism|functionalism]] within sociology was a central theme from the 1960s onward. This still left a gaping purely theoretical vacuum, one that continues to be felt by people struggling with the challenge of fundamentally altering their social cosmology.▼
▲West and Fenstermaker (1995) state that social science research has rendered dubious any claim that race can simply be conflated with color; gender with genitalia; class with paycheques.<ref name=":02" /> The authors acknowledge that class appears less prone to ideas about natural social differentiation, but argue that within capitalist societies, it is often assumed that one's economic situation acts as a direct indication of one's capacity to achieve, further engraining sexist and racist assumptions. Given the general observation that powerful groups display heavy reliance on these ideas of natural subordination, many liberationist thinkers have concluded that this essentialism would be a prime rhetorical vehicle to subvert. Thus, the [[deconstruction]] of [[role theory]] and [[Structural functionalism|functionalism]] within sociology was a central theme from the 1960s onward. This still left a
[[Social constructionism]] has assumed the major explanatory role in these discussions by positing that the meanings of these supposedly [[ascribed status]]es are in fact situationally dependent on the sort of social context in which we employ them. That is, race, class, and gender aren't just objective scientific facts, but dynamic processes of culturally constructing cues for moral behavior (for which one can be held personally accountable) in a particular circumstance. It is these constantly occurring processes, not a divinely decreed grand plan, which reproduces social structure. Individuals "do difference" when they acknowledge (knowingly or unknowingly) how their categorization renders them socially accountable to acting in a particular way in a situation. However, when individuals recalibrate "doing difference" to produce alternative ways to conceptualize interaction patterns, it amounts to social change.<ref name=":02" />
==See also==
* [[Judith Butler]]
* [[
* [[Symbolic interactionism]]
* [[Social construction of gender]]
* [[Sociology of gender]]
==References==
Line 76 ⟶ 77:
<ref name="West and Zimmerman 2009">{{cite journal | last1 = West | first1 = Candace | last2 = Zimmerman | first2 = Don H. | title = Accounting for doing gender | journal = [[Gender & Society]] | volume = 23 | issue = 1 | pages = 112–122 | doi = 10.1177/0891243208326529 | date = February 2009 | citeseerx = 10.1.1.455.3546 | s2cid = 146342542 }}</ref>
<ref name="Jurik">{{cite journal | last1 = Jurik | first1 = Nancy C. | last2 = Siemsen | first2 = Cynthia | title = "Doing gender" as canon or agenda: a symposium on West and Zimmerman | journal = [[Gender & Society]] | volume = 23 | issue = 1 | pages = 72–75 | doi = 10.1177/0891243208326677 | date = February 2009 | s2cid = 144468830 }}</ref>
<ref name="Doing Gender">{{cite journal | last1 = West | first1 = Candace | last2 = Zimmerman | first2 = Don H. | title = Doing gender | journal = [[Gender & Society]] | volume = 1 | issue = 2 | pages = 125–151 | doi = 10.1177/0891243287001002002 | jstor = 189945 | date = June 1987 | s2cid = 220519301 }}
<ref name="Vidal-Ortiz">{{cite journal | last = Vidal-Ortiz | first = Salvador | title = The figure of the transwoman of color through the lens of "doing gender" | journal = [[Gender & Society]] | volume = 23 | issue = 1 | pages = 99–103 | doi = 10.1177/0891243208326461 | date = February 2009 | s2cid = 143693702 }}</ref>
<ref name="Undoing">{{cite journal | last = Deutsch | first = Francine M. | title = Undoing gender | journal = [[Gender & Society]] | volume = 21 | issue = 1 | pages = 106–127 | doi = 10.1177/0891243206293577 | date = February 2007 | s2cid = 220442752 }} [https://www.smu.ca/webfiles/Deutsch-UndoingGender.pdf Pdf.]</ref>
Line 82 ⟶ 83:
<ref name="Smith">{{cite journal | last = Smith | first = Dorothy E. | title = Categories are not enough | journal = [[Gender & Society]] | volume = 23 | issue = 1 | pages = 76–80 | doi = 10.1177/0891243208327081 | date = February 2009 | s2cid = 144473680 }}</ref>
<ref name="Risman">{{cite journal | last = Risman | first = Barbara J. | title = From doing to undoing: gender as we know it | journal = [[Gender & Society]] | volume = 23 | issue = 1 | pages = 81–84 | doi = 10.1177/0891243208326874 | date = February 2009 | s2cid = 144997602 }}</ref>
<ref name="Mess">{{cite journal | last = Messerschmidt | first = James W. | title =
<ref name="Jones">{{cite journal | last = Jones | first = Nikki | title = "I was aggressive for the streets, pretty for the pictures": gender, difference, and the inner-city girl | journal = [[Gender & Society]] | volume = 23 | issue = 1 | pages = 89–93 | doi = 10.1177/0891243208326676 | date = February 2009 | s2cid = 144121901 }}</ref>
<ref name="Kit">{{cite journal | last = Kitzinger | first = Celia | title = Doing gender: a conversation analytic perspective | journal = [[Gender & Society]] | volume = 23 | issue = 1 | pages = 94–98 | doi = 10.1177/0891243208326730 | date = February 2009 | s2cid = 143104943 }}</ref>
Line 89 ⟶ 90:
==Further reading==
* {{cite journal | last1 = Bruni | first1 = Attila | last2 = Gherardi | first2 = Silvia | last3 = Poggio | first3 = Barbara | title = Doing gender, doing entrepreneurship: An ethnographic account of intertwined practices | journal = [[Gender, Work & Organization]] | volume = 11 | issue = 4 | pages = 406–429 | doi = 10.1111/j.1468-0432.2004.00240.x | date = July 2004 | doi-access = free }}
* {{cite book | last = Dryden | first = Caroline | title = Being married, doing gender: a critical analysis of gender relationships in marriage | url = https://archive.org/details/beingmarrieddoin0000dryd | url-access = registration | publisher = Routledge | location = London New York | year = 1999 | isbn = 9781317725114 }}
*{{Cite book |last1=Eckert |first1=Penelope |last2=McConnell-Ginet |first2=Sally | author-link1 = Penelope Eckert | author-link2 = Sally McConnell-Ginet | title = Language and gender | publisher = Cambridge University Press | location = Cambridge New York | year = 2013 | isbn = 9781107659360 }}
|