The Self and Society

SOCY 1002

Semester 1, 2003

Outline of Module 2 – Sex, Gender and Sexuality

In this module we have a powerful illustration of social myth 1, that is, that the social world is ‘out there’, fixed, unchanging, obvious and taken for granted. As we will later see, one aspect of this module - the nature of ‘the sex – gender dichotomy’ – is a good example of this myth. As the words of the song suggest, in the social world many people do not ever think about the many facets of sex, gender and sexuality: it’s taken for granted, "that’s just the way it is, some things will never change …"

At this point there are two key questions to be explored.

1. What is the sex – gender dichotomy?

2. In what way does the gender dichotomy illustrate myth 1?

Let’s begin by looking at the first question and examining how sex, gender and sexuality have been viewed in wider sociological and social circles. There are some definitions to consider here:

The sex – gender dichotomy is the collapsing of these three terms into the one entity. In other words, it refers to the taken for granted assumption that if one is born male, then one is automatically a masculine, heterosexual man, and if one is born a female, then one is similarly a feminine, heterosexual woman.

One way of beginning to expose the social myth embedded in this area is to see how these separate concepts have been approached. There are a few relationships that are worth noting:

Now which of these relationships is the most appropriate for our understanding?

At this point we introduce a brief examination of transsexuals to clarify the answer to this question. Transsexuals are people who as males and females have an abiding conviction that they are women and men respectively and wish to live as such. Transsexuals are not a routine topic for examination of this area but, as an extraordinary phenomenon, they shed light on our understanding of the ordinary aspects of how sex, gender and sexuality are related.

In brief, transsexualism tells us that we need three separate concepts, that is, sex, gender and sexuality and that they cannot be compressed into a dichotomy; that the relationships between sex and gender above are all inaccurate; and that sexuality has not been incorporated where it should have been.

Let’s examine how these concepts are related and how transsexualism assists our understanding of those relationships?

1. sex and gender

The nature of transsexualism itself demonstrates that we need two separate concepts. Almost by definition it is clear that sex and gender are not the same thing because transsexuals’ patterns of gender identification contradict social expectations of gender associated with their biological sex (eg. if a transsexual is born a male then it is not the case that that person is automatically a man).

In addition, the nature of the gender markers suggests that gender is more than mere biology and, therefore, an independent concept. By ‘gender markers’ we are referring to those biological qualities that are socially significant in public situations in determining a person’s gender. On close inspection, we see from the experience of transsexuals that there are few such markers that actually have to exist to convey gender successfully. ‘Actually’ is accentuated because if we examine what biological properties indicate that someone is a woman, then the absence of facial hair and the presence of a high(er) pitched voice are perhaps the only two qualities that are gender coded and also biologically different for males and females. Other biological differences, such as specific genitalia and the presence/absence of breast development, are often simulated by transsexuals. They do not need to be actually there for someone successfully to convey a particular gender identity. It also needs to be mentioned, in making the point that biological sex and gender are two different concepts, that other gender markers are not qualities that are linked to the differences in biological sex. Two examples would be the length of hair and fingernails.

2. sex and sexuality

To see the need for two distinct concepts, that is, biological sex and sexuality, we can see in the nature of everyday interaction certain qualities that link these two concepts. Take, for instance, an interaction between two people who, potentially, could be in the first stages of a sexual relationship. Let’s assume they are male and female in this case because it corresponds with the array of concepts with which we are dealing. In the initial stages of that interaction, when the situation is assumed by both persons to be going ‘well’, a number of assumptions about sex and sexuality, but also implicating gender, are made but rarely reach the conscious level. Specifically, each person assumes the following:

(a) I know that I’m a male [female] and therefore I’m a heterosexual man [woman]

  1. She [he] is a woman [man] and therefore is a female [male] and heterosexual

    2. (c) She sees me as a man [woman] and therefore knows that I’m a male [female] and heterosexual

    When such a relationship is proceeding smoothly, then there is no need for the persons involved to think about these assumptions in this way. It is a good illustration of the taken for granted nature of everyday life. On the other hand, when there is disruption to these taken for granted assumptions, as in mistaken identity involving transsexuals, we see even more clearly the way in which biological sex is related to sexuality.

    In the example we used in class, there was a case of a mistaken identity involving Kerry (a gay man) and Kim (a male to woman transsexual). It went something like this:

    Kerry Kim

    Initial attraction:

    A gay man who is attracted to Male to woman transsexual

    Kim, seeing’ him’ as an effeminate who sees herself as heterosexual.

    gay man Attracted to Kerry, seeing him

    as a heterosexual man

    Assumptions in interaction :

    I am a gay man I am a heterosexual woman

    He is an effeminate gay man He is a caring heterosexual man

    He must be male He must be male

    He thinks I’m a gay man He thinks I’m a heterosexual

    woman

    The realisation of a mistaken identity:

    Kim is a woman Kerry thought I was a man and

    therefore a male

    ‘She’ therefore is a female Kerry therefore is a gay man

    or transsexual and heterosexual

    In mistaken identity involving transsexuals, it is clear that we have a more bold view of the assumptions that surround sexuality and biological sex. In other words, assumptions about another’s sexuality are accompanied by assumptions about that person’s body.

    3. gender and sexuality

    Although gender is implicated in the example above, we saw how transsexuals relationships demonstrate a clear link between the two concepts of gender and sexuality. Specifically, in close sexual relationships involving transsexuals, their partners see them as they see themselves. In other words, a female to man transsexual, who sees himself as a heterosexual man, is viewed by his female partner as a heterosexual man. It is important to stress that this link is between gender and sexuality and not sex and sexuality. In other words, the female partner does not see her transsexual partner as a heterosexual male: in this instance he is actually a biological female.

     

    In this module we also raised two important questions concerning the continuity of the sex – gender dichotomy.

    1. What factors explain this dichotomy?
    2. In light of social change involving these explanatory factors, what are the implications for how we view sex, gender and sexuality in late modernity?

 

First, we how in feudal times the family was the key to human survival. Because of this empirical reality, certain structural arrangements emerged to help reinforce the family that depended on the heterosexual, man – woman dichotomy. The church sanctified marriage; certain social proscriptions developed to protect marriage, such as the stigma surrounding the loss of virginity among women; and laws emerged concerning who could marry whom. Concerning the second question, the impact of industrialisation has meant that, increasingly, the family is no longer the source of human survival. By removing this structural support progressively, the consequence has been the progressive emergence of ‘ways of being’ that were hitherto socially invisible, namely gay and lesbian identities and transsexuals. One key implication of this broad social change is that these ways of being will assume increasing social prominence along with the decreasing universality of the family as a unit and mode of existence.

 

Three important insights emerge from this module:

1. In social interaction, gender is prior, that is, one’s gender is the first attribute we establish: biological sex and sexuality follow

2. Sex, gender and sexuality are separate concepts but related. All are needed because to understand one, we require the other two

3. Gender is something we do, that is, a process: it is not a quality