This week 's readings investigated the question of what gender is and how different societies regulate the genders of their citizens. Gender according to this week 's authors is greater then appearance and behavior, but an accumulation of a complex web of personal action and social influence, including the perception of others and the self. Most of the authors interrogated the intricate construct of gender from varying angles of power relations, gender norms, theory and socialization. Finally, Swatos Jr. 's article on constructionism ties the varying points of view together under the notion, that at is foundation gender, like the majority of social norms and rules, is a construction created and made "real" by people. According to Swatos Jr.
…show more content…
The Nacirema have cultural and spiritual beliefs that appear odd and pointless to Miner because he is not one of them (Miner 1956:503-504), illustrating Swatos Jr. 's point that culture is a construct understood by its creators. However, when analyzing the Nacirema piece as a satire of how Western researches study and report on foreign societies the constructed nature of culture, and its elements becomes irrevocably clear. By viewing American culture through this lens of difference and unknown one easily grasps the overall point, that everything holds meaning only because it is given such meaning. While the Nacirema article does not touch heavily on gender the jump to understanding that gender is given different forms and levels of importance depending on culture is feasible. Miner demonstrates that gender, like all other elements of culture, such as hygiene, are merely constructions to which we apply significance. Menstruation is a perfect example of how we award gendered significance to rituals, as seen in Gloria Steinem 's article, If Men Could Menstruate (1978). Through her ability to express how society would positively view the menses cycle if men preformed it, she illustrates that while the actual biological cycle is real, the ideas we associate with the process are only "real" due to our views of gender …show more content…
This piece brings up several questions about how we are complicit in our own gender-based discrimination through practicing culture and subscribing to its harmful ideas of gender. According to the author practice theory, which attempts to understand how our motivations and actions shape culture, fundamentally undermines people in subaltern groups because it ignores the "subject" and the "agency" they do, or do not, possess (Ortner 1996: 4,8). This is harming to women, (people of color and other minorities), because it assumes that all people have the same ability to influence culture through their actions, which is untrue due to our elevation of masculinity over femininity and other genders. For example, when attaching this notion to the life of Egyptian actor, Farid Shaqui 's life as told in the piece by Armbrust, (2006:199-226) it illuminates why Shaqui 's wife 's fame and fortune challenged his masculinity. Masculinity holds greater power according to people in his society so his lower status in terms of film and earnings made him appear less masculine, despite him not changing his gender identity in any way. This proves that masculinity, and gender in general, is much more than a personal identification, but
The Nacirema have cultural and spiritual beliefs that appear odd and pointless to Miner because he is not one of them (Miner 1956:503-504), illustrating Swatos Jr. 's point that culture is a construct understood by its creators. However, when analyzing the Nacirema piece as a satire of how Western researches study and report on foreign societies the constructed nature of culture, and its elements becomes irrevocably clear. By viewing American culture through this lens of difference and unknown one easily grasps the overall point, that everything holds meaning only because it is given such meaning. While the Nacirema article does not touch heavily on gender the jump to understanding that gender is given different forms and levels of importance depending on culture is feasible. Miner demonstrates that gender, like all other elements of culture, such as hygiene, are merely constructions to which we apply significance. Menstruation is a perfect example of how we award gendered significance to rituals, as seen in Gloria Steinem 's article, If Men Could Menstruate (1978). Through her ability to express how society would positively view the menses cycle if men preformed it, she illustrates that while the actual biological cycle is real, the ideas we associate with the process are only "real" due to our views of gender …show more content…
This piece brings up several questions about how we are complicit in our own gender-based discrimination through practicing culture and subscribing to its harmful ideas of gender. According to the author practice theory, which attempts to understand how our motivations and actions shape culture, fundamentally undermines people in subaltern groups because it ignores the "subject" and the "agency" they do, or do not, possess (Ortner 1996: 4,8). This is harming to women, (people of color and other minorities), because it assumes that all people have the same ability to influence culture through their actions, which is untrue due to our elevation of masculinity over femininity and other genders. For example, when attaching this notion to the life of Egyptian actor, Farid Shaqui 's life as told in the piece by Armbrust, (2006:199-226) it illuminates why Shaqui 's wife 's fame and fortune challenged his masculinity. Masculinity holds greater power according to people in his society so his lower status in terms of film and earnings made him appear less masculine, despite him not changing his gender identity in any way. This proves that masculinity, and gender in general, is much more than a personal identification, but