Zael Matthews Ellenhorn
Blog post 9.11
“Believing is seeing” is an interesting concept. Humans themselves don’t always believe everything that they see, and we also don’t always see everything that we believe. Not to get too far into a religious gray zone, because I know thats a delicate area, but there is very little to no physical proof of a God, yet the majority of the world puts all of their belief into Him. While there have been people that claim to have seen him, or people who were around back when Jesus Christ existed, the majority if not all of the people that put all of their faith blindly into religion have never seen anything to make them believe that God actually exists. I’m not saying that he doesn’t, I’m not even expressing an opinion on this issue. I am simply stating a fact: a massive belief system, religion, has nothing to do with actual sight, so it’s interesting that something as small as the differences between men and women (compared to the idea of a God) needs physical proof in order to be validated.
This article stated that physically seeing the differences between men and women was what determined the ideas of femininity and masculinity. Physical things, such as different genetalia, lactation, and physical strength. However, men that possess feminine traits, such as male lactation, are not considered female, and it is not a determinant of their social category. For example, sex change operations for newborn infants were determined based on the size of the penis. This decision made at the beginning of the child’s life creates an anatomical difference that creates an entirely different social life for them.
In terms of the sports part of this article, I do agree with the idea that sports create a masculine identity, or a “legitimated outlet for violence and aggression.” In fact, I think that it is the masculinity of sports and of physical activity favored towards men can be traced back to before sports even existed, when the men would go out and hunt. Biologically, men are meant to be the more physically able sex, and without the development of sports, media, and technology, it would probably have stayed that way, because thats the way that men and women were built different from the ground up.
At the most primal level, women’s bodies are meant to reproduce, which is the ultimate goal of life; to pass it on. So, because of this role that women’s bodies play, they are constructed in a way that allows them to play their part in the circle of life. Breasts, wider hips, and different hormones and reproductive organs make women’s bodies different than mens because they are meant to serve a different purpose.
On the other hand, at the most primal level, men are supposed to be the hunters and the providers. Because of this, they are stronger and more physically apt to deal with challenges. If it weren’t for chefs and microwaves, we would still be going out to search for our own food, so through the process of evolution and natural selection, men that could provide and were physically able to do so were the ones that survived, and therefore the ones that stuck around.
In terms of gender roles being played at preschools, I think that this article, while very interesting, points out a bit of an obvious point. Being a toddler is a very impressionable time, and a unique time as well, because individualism is a huge focus but so is dependency on others for just about everything. Toddlers are trying to find their identity, and gender is part of who you are. Because of this basic principle, it makes sense that things such as dresses and colors and toys would be divided up among toddlers, and why girls would dress up to model clothes while boys built train tracks. To a certain extent, it is always easy to point at society in general and blame this unknown group of people for setting gender roles so early on in life. However, learning about your gender and who you are along with what you like at such a young age is a great way to find your identity. In terms of social interactions between toddlers who are boys and girls, I don’t think that their differences matter all that much. I think that they are generally widely accepted. The boys thought that the girls halloween costume as a woman was “scary”, and the author took that to mean that they were scared of women that way because of their gender. While I can see how it would be easy to think that, I also think that if I saw a little girl wearing a clear mask with woman’s features and eyeshadow and makeup on it, I would be just as scared as those boys in the class, and not because she looked like a women.
TJ Brady: I agree with what Zael said regarding the Believing is Seeing reading, but regarding the Becoming a Gendered Body reading, I disagree with his evaluation. I agree that some of the points such as what clothes the children wore were overdramatized a bit, but I think that how the teachers disciplined the children differently based on gender was very interesting and something that doesn't make much sense to me. The article described how boys would ignore the teacher during circle time and roll around without getting yelled at, while the girls would be very polite and make one mistake and be reprimanded immediately. This stuck out to me as very strange and something that makes little sense because in preschool, boys and girls are both young and shouldn't have different restrictions on their behavior simply because of gender. I remember my mom describing something silly or stupid me and my friends would do as "just boys being boys" when I was younger and now it sounds a little off to me. The one example I can remember was in Kindergarten, me and my friend got cupcakes for a girls birthday and instead of eating them like normal kids, we smushed them in each others faces and made a big mess everywhere. Everyone laughed and probably thought the same thing, "just boys being boys". But now thinking about it, I couldn't imagine everyone having the same reaction if two of the girls in my class did the same thing. Thats why I think the "Becoming a Gendered Body" article has more importance than Zael might have thought.
ReplyDeleteSarah Wills: I agree with Zael about the primal instincts of men and women. Both men and women serve different purposes when it comes to reproducing and child rearing. Men and women have different hormones that create different instinctual behaviors. Men have more testosterone, which causes them to have “hunting” and protective instincts. Women have more estrogen causing them to be more nurturing and emotional. Despite these biological differences, they should not cause such drastic societal gaps between genders. These biological differences are not the reasons why “real men don’t cry” or why women belong in the kitchen. These gendered stereotypes are the results of societal norms. Also, I do not agree that children should be pushed into these gender stereotypes at the young age of three. If children fall into their gender categories naturally, then there is no issue. However, the fact that the teachers are actively enforcing these gendered behaviors changes the situation. This is going beyond the biological differences between men and women, and has become a societal norm.
ReplyDeleteKelsey Warkentin
ReplyDeleteI was eager to read your post because it would most likely be slightly different from the girls posts. And it definitely was.
First of all, your “Believing is Seeing” analogy was amazing. I had never even thought of that! As for the rest of your post…
While I am a feminist by definition (solely because I feel we deserve most of the same rights), I do agree with some of your points. It would be ignorant of me to say that there were no gender differences between a man and woman because there clearly are. You were right by saying that men are built stronger because they would gather food, and women are built to reproduce. But this notion was conceived thousands of years ago. Are you saying that if a woman was built just as strong as a man nowadays, she would be masculine? Or if a man was weaker than a woman he would be feminine? In modern day society, gender differences overlap, which is the sole reason why feminists believe they deserve the same rights and recognition as men. It is not black and white like it used to be.