Before taking this subject my idea of ‘identity’ was something that could be defined or categorised; something fixed and unmalleable. However, upon studying this subject, the readings, lectures and tutorial material have broadened and expanded my knowledge in this area. My previous conception of race and gender were taught to me in earlier schooling, that race, as well as gender was something biological, and that biological factors determined why races and genders may be different. This conceptualisation was gratefully challenged by participation in this course. I have come to understand that there is no explicit evidence supporting biological determinism and that race and gender are just forms of a social construction. Furthermore, I have
…show more content…
I maintain that I have never been a racist by any means, as I have never been sure of the ‘differences’ that the biological determinist view entails, and I have just simply not bothered to challenge previous sentiments. That is, until taking this course. My former conceptualisation loosely translated to a biological determinist view. This however has been challenged by Sally Haslanger’s account that investigates the nature of race and phenomenology of racial embodiment and the theory that race is a social construct (Haslanger 2012, 236-238). Haslanger’s argument stipulates that race is the social meaning for colour, and that race is not biologically real, but we need to acknowledge that race is socially real (Haslanger 2012, 236-238). We should no longer regard race as something with natural categories and properties as this is the result of a discursive construct. The readings on Haslanger has sparked a revaluation of my concept of race, and led me to realise the injustice that transpires because of my former understanding which many others still …show more content…
For example, I was taught that genders were different because of the brain and that there was only two ‘natural’ sexes. Moreover, I was educated that male brains are more capable than women, and young men are often think more about sex while young women think about appearance. I understood gender as some innate and unchangeable social category which is determined by sex. This biological account of gender is however not a plausible one. Gender is assumed to be biologically innate because we are socialised into a certain gender role from birth. Biological determinism also explains that our gender fits us for certain social role identities, and that this is something which cannot be altered. Simon Baron-Cohen (2005) reflects this biological determinist view, as he describes the cognitive and behavioural differences between women and men to be a result of biology. He does this by looking at brain differences in males and females. Cohen writes incredibly well, and offers a text that is written very convincingly, and to the uncritical minds this will have great influence. He describes that male brains are better at systemizing (Type S brains) and women brains are better an empathising (Type E brains). According to Cohen (2005) and his ‘evidence’ this causes men to be naturally more capable to systematise, while the female brain is programmed for empathy, which causes women to be emotional and submissive.
I maintain that I have never been a racist by any means, as I have never been sure of the ‘differences’ that the biological determinist view entails, and I have just simply not bothered to challenge previous sentiments. That is, until taking this course. My former conceptualisation loosely translated to a biological determinist view. This however has been challenged by Sally Haslanger’s account that investigates the nature of race and phenomenology of racial embodiment and the theory that race is a social construct (Haslanger 2012, 236-238). Haslanger’s argument stipulates that race is the social meaning for colour, and that race is not biologically real, but we need to acknowledge that race is socially real (Haslanger 2012, 236-238). We should no longer regard race as something with natural categories and properties as this is the result of a discursive construct. The readings on Haslanger has sparked a revaluation of my concept of race, and led me to realise the injustice that transpires because of my former understanding which many others still …show more content…
For example, I was taught that genders were different because of the brain and that there was only two ‘natural’ sexes. Moreover, I was educated that male brains are more capable than women, and young men are often think more about sex while young women think about appearance. I understood gender as some innate and unchangeable social category which is determined by sex. This biological account of gender is however not a plausible one. Gender is assumed to be biologically innate because we are socialised into a certain gender role from birth. Biological determinism also explains that our gender fits us for certain social role identities, and that this is something which cannot be altered. Simon Baron-Cohen (2005) reflects this biological determinist view, as he describes the cognitive and behavioural differences between women and men to be a result of biology. He does this by looking at brain differences in males and females. Cohen writes incredibly well, and offers a text that is written very convincingly, and to the uncritical minds this will have great influence. He describes that male brains are better at systemizing (Type S brains) and women brains are better an empathising (Type E brains). According to Cohen (2005) and his ‘evidence’ this causes men to be naturally more capable to systematise, while the female brain is programmed for empathy, which causes women to be emotional and submissive.