Biosocial approach to Gender development

Biosocial theory
1. A01
  1. Money + Ehrhardt
    1. Argued sex of rearing = the pivotal point in gender development
  2. Once biological M or F is born social learning + differential treatment interact w/ biological features to steer development
    1. Theory attempts to integrate influences of N+N
    2. Some individuals are intersexes + may be mistyped at birth
      1. M + E predicted they would acquire assigned genders identity if labelled before the age of 3
        Believed the key to gender development is the label they are given
2. A02
  1. Lack of evidence
    1. The ultimate outcome of David Reimer
  2. Sample bias
    1. M + E collected other evidence to support their theory
      1. Yet it was still all derived from the study of abnormal individuals
        Study of genetic females exposed to male hormones prenatally due to drugs taken by their mothers
        Such evidence may not be relevant to understanding normal gender development
Social role theory
1. A01
  1. Eagly + Wood
    1. Argue the evolutionary explanation of GD is not fully correct
      1. E theory proses selective pressures caused both physical and psychological sex differences
    2. S-R theory suggests selective pressures don't cause both physical + psychological differences
      1. They only cause physical differences
        These lead to sex role allocations which in turn create psychological sex differences
        This means psychological sex differences are seen as the consequence of different roles to which M + W are allocated rather than vice versa
2. A02
  1. IDA - Real-world app
    1. E approach has been seen as a force against gender equality - might be seen to imply sex differences are innate + cannot be changed by altering social context
      1. Value of S-R role approach = supports feminist view that changes in social roles will lead to changes in psychological differences between men and women
        In addition, it has high ethical appeal because sex roles are perceived as social + therefore more flexible
Division of labour (S-R theory)
1. A01
  1. Biologically based physical differences between M + W allow them to perform certain tasks more efficiently
  2. In societies where strength isn't required for occupational roles +/or societies where their is alternative childcare - social roles will be similar between M + W, and psychological differences reduced
2. A02
  1. Luxen argues E theory can explain influence of social factors + provides a simpler theory which is preferable for a no. of reasons, such as:
    1. Selective pressures
      1. Behaviour is at least as important as physical characteristics- therefore SP would act directly on behaviour to create psychological as well as physical sex differences
    2. Sex differences without socialsation
      1. Research has shown very young children + even animals display sex differences in toy preference
        Suggests such preferences would be biological rather than psychological because sex role socialisation is unlikely to have occurred in these ppts
Mate choice (S-R theory)
1. A01
  1. What M + W see in a partner can be related to their social roles rather than to reproductive value of certain traits
  2. Physical differences between M + W create social roles
    1. Women maximise outcomes by selecting a M who is a good wage earner
      1. Men maximise outcomes by seeking a mate successful in the domestic role
        Different social roles can explain sex differences in mate choice
2. A02
  1. Buss's study re-examined
    1. E + W suggested...
      1. Due to fact W generally earn less it is no wonder that, universally, W seek M w/ resources
        Along w/ resources, men also have power + domiance
        E + W supported this identification of power as root of mate choice by re-analysing Buss's data using Gender Empowerment measure
        Found when W had a higher status, + M-F division of labour was less pronounced, sex differences in mating preferences become less pronounced
        Further suggests social roles = driving force in psychological sex differences
      2. Men want younger W not because of fertility but because they will be more obediant
    2. E + W's conclusion was challenged by Gangestad et al
      1. Conducted further analysis of same data, adding some additional controls (such as affluence + social structure
        Found gender equality was not related to sex differences
        Concluded E theory can provide a better explanation for the joint effects of biology and culture
  2. IDA - Social constructionist approach
    1. Suggests much of human behaviour is an invention or outcome of a particular society or culture
      1. No objective reality, such as real difference between M + W - or if there is it isn't really relevant
        Behaviours = best understood in terms of social context in which they occur

Next up

Biosocial approach to Gender development

Description

Resource summary

Similar

	Created by bebe97 about 9 years ago