Tori Amos once sang, "Maybe she's just pieces of me you've never seen well."
The propensity to cling to the existence of a biologically determined set of differences between the sexes often leads us to pose blanket statements that reproduce gender differences in all arenas of society. In doing so, we cultivate a defeatist attitude in facing gender inequality, for if difference is rooted in biology, it must be natural and inevitable. Thus, the dissemination of another approach toward the supposed polarity of men and women is essential to feminism in order to dismantle the misleading foundations of gender difference that support the continual existence of gender inequality. In this column, I hope to challenge the idea of biologically based gender differences through a more nuanced perspective.
Conceptualizing a diagram of the genders in terms of characteristics and behaviors that overlap significantly across a spectrum, instead of one that places women and men at opposite ends, would provide a more accurate portrayal of reality by highlighting our similarities. The self−fulfilling longing to suppress our resemblances more accurately points to the nature of our sexist society and its effects on our worldview, rather than to scientific fact.
We subscribe to a certain level of faith in scientists, but we cannot overlook the influence our imperfect society wields on their interpretation of results, especially when considering the confounding effect of the media in its oversimplification of data. In the last century, research on the hemispheres of the brain has performed some noteworthy acrobatics. Regarded as superior, the left hemisphere used to be the domain of men — that is, until the right side asserted the many advantages it could provide. Science now attributes the right hemisphere to men and claims that women use both sides equally.
In addition, let's not forget that the mainstream discourse once considered education as too dangerous to give to women, for it would surely overwhelm their delicate sensibilities and lead to horrors like sterility and a proclivity to leave the domestic sphere. Current statistics, however, attest otherwise, as more women obtain college degrees than men. It seems that the switcheroo has been a little too confusing for men. The changing stories surrounding the brain provide evidence that institutionalized bigotry permeates the scientific field in order to support the politicized, useful narrative of gender differences.
Consequently, in order to properly assess research findings and form a better conception of reality, we must use a more complex approach that not only takes nature into account but also recognizes the importance of nurture and the society we live in. Applying an approach that takes into account societal misinformation to a rather well−known gender stereotype, team−oriented versus competitive behavior in the workplace attributed to females and males, would provide a strong argument to dissipate the existence of gendered behavior in this example.
A 2009 study that refused a simple acceptance of gender difference found that women, when placed in situations similar to those surrounding men (e.g. being presented with opportunities for advancement and networking) behaved in the same "masculine" way as men; men meanwhile behaved in "feminine" ways when placed in situations more common to women. The results suggest that gender difference is rooted in responses to the environment more so than biology. Therefore, we should be wary of the insistence upon gender differences.
Taking into account the previous two examples, I support the notion that though some women may differ from men, more women are ultimately similar to more men. We must actively remember the influence of institutionalized sexism which supports, instills and reproduces sexist conceptions.
--
Elisha Sum is a junior majoring in English and French. He can be reached at Elisha.Sum@tufts.edu.
