Gender is a nearly universally understood concept. It is one of the first things we notice when interacting with another person, and it exists from the moment a baby is born. For something so universal, it’s also very complicated. Considering there is no biological reason for assigning genders, we as humans assign gender to nearly everything. Professors Penelope Eckert and Sally McConnell-Ginet address the process of gendering in their essay “Learning to Be Gendered.”
Eckert and McConnell-Ginet (2013/2015) begin their essay with Simone de Beauvoir’s famous quote: “women are not born, they are made” (p. 736). They go on to explain the way a baby’s gender is decided at, or even before birth and how this assigned gender is made public through …show more content…
One of the most influential tactics that makes their essay persuasive is the citation of real studies. Throughout the essay, they use facts that support their ideas and include the source where the facts came from, such as when they say “parents use more diminutives (kitty, doggie) when speaking to girls than to boys (Gleason et al. 1994)” (p. 740). They also follow that by saying that parents “use more inner state words (happy, sad) when speaking to girls (Ely et al. 1995), and they use more direct prohibitives (don’t do that!) and more emphatic prohibitives (no! no! no!) to boys than to girls (Bellinger & Gleason 1982)” (p. 740). Not only does this prove that they did their research and make it easier for a reader to trust what they’re talking about, it also provides a balance in research with information about how parents speak to boys as well as girls. Eckert and McConnell-Ginet have some very strong opinions, but if they hadn’t referenced so many studies, it would sound like they made it all up. Another good strategy they use is a very confident tone of voice. The topic of this essay is a rather controversial one, and they admit it themselves by saying that “there is considerable debate among scholars about the extent to which adults do treat boys and girls differently” (p. 741). Nevertheless, they write as though what they’re saying is the only …show more content…
I personally do not think it’s a good practice to assign genders to babies based on their genitalia. As Eckert and McConnell-Ginet (2013/2015) say, “if gender flowed naturally from sex, one might expect the world to sit back and simply allow the baby to become male or female. But in fact, sex determination sets the stage for a lifelong process of gendering” (p. 738). The gender assigned to a baby at birth is the one that baby is expected to adhere to for the rest of its life, whether or not it grows up to identify as that gender. This process is even more ridiculous considering as not everyone identifies as male or female. Gender, like race and class, is an unnecessary social construct that wouldn’t be possible if people everywhere didn’t buy into it. Even though Eckert and McConnell-Ginet only addressed the two binary genders (male and female) and left out all other genders, I think they really gave life to an idea that isn’t thoroughly expressed
Eckert and McConnell-Ginet (2013/2015) begin their essay with Simone de Beauvoir’s famous quote: “women are not born, they are made” (p. 736). They go on to explain the way a baby’s gender is decided at, or even before birth and how this assigned gender is made public through …show more content…
One of the most influential tactics that makes their essay persuasive is the citation of real studies. Throughout the essay, they use facts that support their ideas and include the source where the facts came from, such as when they say “parents use more diminutives (kitty, doggie) when speaking to girls than to boys (Gleason et al. 1994)” (p. 740). They also follow that by saying that parents “use more inner state words (happy, sad) when speaking to girls (Ely et al. 1995), and they use more direct prohibitives (don’t do that!) and more emphatic prohibitives (no! no! no!) to boys than to girls (Bellinger & Gleason 1982)” (p. 740). Not only does this prove that they did their research and make it easier for a reader to trust what they’re talking about, it also provides a balance in research with information about how parents speak to boys as well as girls. Eckert and McConnell-Ginet have some very strong opinions, but if they hadn’t referenced so many studies, it would sound like they made it all up. Another good strategy they use is a very confident tone of voice. The topic of this essay is a rather controversial one, and they admit it themselves by saying that “there is considerable debate among scholars about the extent to which adults do treat boys and girls differently” (p. 741). Nevertheless, they write as though what they’re saying is the only …show more content…
I personally do not think it’s a good practice to assign genders to babies based on their genitalia. As Eckert and McConnell-Ginet (2013/2015) say, “if gender flowed naturally from sex, one might expect the world to sit back and simply allow the baby to become male or female. But in fact, sex determination sets the stage for a lifelong process of gendering” (p. 738). The gender assigned to a baby at birth is the one that baby is expected to adhere to for the rest of its life, whether or not it grows up to identify as that gender. This process is even more ridiculous considering as not everyone identifies as male or female. Gender, like race and class, is an unnecessary social construct that wouldn’t be possible if people everywhere didn’t buy into it. Even though Eckert and McConnell-Ginet only addressed the two binary genders (male and female) and left out all other genders, I think they really gave life to an idea that isn’t thoroughly expressed