Module 3

As discussed in the readings and lecture, culture and socialization play a huge role in our conceptions of gender, as well as our gender identities and (arguably) our sexual identities. I thought it was an important point in the lecture that "nothing is essential, intrinsic, or static about femininity or masculinity," because so much of our society operates, or even depends on this faulty assumption! Advertisements targeting a certain sex are a great example of this.

In the essay by Kathleen Trigiani, "Masculinity and Femininity: Society's Difference Divided," I found the discussion of Sex-Role Theory interesting, in that it has several shortcomings that one would seem to be able to recognize, without any in-depth analysis. One example of this is its characterization of men as "aggressive, rational, dominant, objective" and women as "passive, intuitive, submissive, subjective" - while claiming that "our culture values the characteristics of each sex equally and that they complement each other in a balanced way." If by 'complement' they mean "operate in contrast to," that could be true, but not in the sense that these traits complete each other, because it is so clear that one set is subordinate to the other. It is certainly not balanced. If something is 'dominant', then by definition it is holding and/or exerting power over something else; in this case, men over women. Additionally, the description of men as "rational" implies that women, by contrast, are irrational, and adding insult to injury, serves to dehumanize women. Because if humans are rational beings, and women aren't rational, well then...

This brings me to my discussion of men as an 'unmarked' category. Basically, what this means is that while men are the norm, women are "others", or the 'marked' category. This applies to other aspects as well: 'white' is the unmarked category of race, 'heterosexual' is the unmarked category of sexuality, etc. This is evident in Theory of Hegemonic Masculinity as well, as Trigiani notes that "femininity is constructed around adaptation to male power" (emphasis added). It is also relevant to her musings on whether androgyny is necessary to "attain gender justice." Well, no, it shouldn't be; as discussed before, one of the goals of feminism is supposed to be a valuation of sexual difference. She quotes Robert W. Connell as saying that "Pursuing social justice does not mean pursuing uniformity...", but notes that it (social justice) is all the more difficult to obtain because of the patriarchal, masculine hegemony in which it occurs, "where the '"male is the norm," or the masculine is authoritative." Breaking down marked and unmarked categories, and recognizing those which have traditionally been marginalized or ignored are two important steps on the road to a more egalitarian society.