Nature Vs Nurture

Nature vs Nurture

 

This essay will discuss two explanations for the development of gender, the two explanations are biological and social constructionist. Firstly the essay will review each explanation, look at key thinkers and discuss strengths and weaknesses. The essay will then move on to compare the two explanations against one another and therefore by the use of research studied, lead to a conclusion. 

 

The biological explanation as stated by Udry, R. J. (1995) looks at evolution, endocrinology and genes (p.1267). Evolution looks at how behaviour has evolved through time and the impact it has on the development of gender. Pinker, S. (2003) explains that throughout the animal kingdom, females have to endure the risks and hard labour with each pregnancy and also have to devote time nurturing the offspring as it is the female that would have to endure all this again to replace a child rather than the male (p. 297). Pinker is suggesting that this may be an evolutionary explanation for the nurturing trait of the females. Genetics looks at how behaviour is effected by genes, a common method of researching this has been through twin studies such as a study done by Thomas Bouchard. According to Udry, R. J. (1995) Bouchard found that two identical twins who had been separated whilst growing up were found to have no behaviour or manner on which there was not a definite genetic effect (p. 1271). Furthermore, endocrinology takes account of the responsibility hormones have for an individual’s behaviour from birth and throughout life. As Pinker, S. (2003) describes “Androgens have lasting effects on the brain during fetal development, in the months after birth, and during puberty, and they have transient effects at other times. Estrogens, the characteristically female sex hormones, also affect the brain throughout life” (p. 298). Pinker, S. (2003) also states that studies have shown that the amount of testosterone is found to be greater in violent criminals than it is in non-violent criminals and also higher in trial lawyers rather than those who deal with paperwork (p. 298). This suggests that hormones can largely effect an individual’s behaviour and that different hormones assist in developing an individual’s gender. For example, according to Pinker, S. (2003) women with a higher level of testosterone tend to outshine in apparent male traits such as not smiling as much and possessing a stronger handshake (p. 299).

A major strength to the biological explanation is that it is scientific, this makes the research valid and reliable. On the other hand, there is little space for free will, this explanation suggests that gender development is down to biology alone without taking into consideration any social factors.

 

Moving on to look at the social factors, it is suggested that gender is constructed through socialisation. This is known firstly as early socialisation which is the impact aspects such as home life, friends, family and anything else in your early years has on your development. This could be a parent dressing a baby in Blue because they are male or the toys you are bought such as cars and trucks. A child may be oblivious to the gender being forced upon themselves, the parent may also be unaware that they are forcing a gender upon their child. Following on from this is secondary socialisation which is any institution outside of home such as media, church, school and work. Society creates a stereotype image of how genders must portray themselves, for example slouching, using inappropriate language and dressing in unkempt clothes are not traits you would expect to see of a woman. As Butler, J. (1988) states “gender is instituted through the stylization of the body, and hence, must be understood as the mundane way in which bodily gestures, movements, and enactments of various kinds constitute the illusion of an abiding gendered self” (p. 1). Every aspect of society has an impact on how an individual’s gender develops, from seeing famous people in the media that you may look up to or the respectable teacher at school that acts gracefully as a lady apparently should. The consideration of all environmental factors within this explanation is a major strength, however at the same time it is a limitation as the social constructionist is limited to just this, the effect only society has.

 

Both the biological explanation and the social constructionist share the view that gender develops throughout life, it is not something we are born with. Both explanations also share the deprivation of free will, neither take into consideration that an individual could create their own gender, the view is it is constructed either by society or biologically. A further similarity of the nature vs nurture debate is that they both acknowledge gender roles and sexuality, they recognise that gender has an impact on how you act, the role you play in society and your attraction to others.

On the other hand, a difference between the two explanations is that society can and does change, whereas although biology may be improved, it will not change. A further difference is that biology is something that can be tested repeatedly, it is tangible whereas society is not. Society is not something we can touch, it is intangible and theories cannot be repeatedly researched in the way that biological theories can.

 

In conclusion, research studied suggests that both explanations have strong arguments as to the influence each have had on the development of gender. However it has been discussed that starting at early socialisation the people in a child’s life are influencing a gender upon ones self, this includes the colour of clothing or variety of toys different sexes may wear or play with. Although the biological explanation offers clarification as to the different characteristics and behaviours of male and female, it does not offer justification as to why it is usually possible to tell an individual’s sex just by their appearance. It seems that the greatest explanation offered as to how gender develops is the unquestionable effect of society.