do you believe in gender essentialism??

[roosmum]

well that's it really, do you buy into the mars/venus thing or not?

thinking about it a lot recently, would value opinions...

do you have sleep-deprivation-induced wooden brain?!

me too, most days

that's why i'm asking MN, can't face my tomes atm!

there is possible a case for this but is it (gender) biological or a social construction for example would there be difference if all babies were treated the same

I do, I think males and females are programmed differently (my two kids would be a pretty good example of this). Male and female raised the same however both are defined by their gender. Also, DS is older than DD, DD has had more male gender specific influences (toys, books, places we visited etc etc) and yet she has shown preferences for toys etc that are very feminine.

Is that the sort of thing you mean? Sorry do not have all the jargon but explaine dit the best I could.

thanks, the nature/nurture thing makes it SO hard to think about, doesn't it...you know i'm convinced that it exists - but i'm not entirely happy with the idea re: feminism - isn't the problem with gender essentialism that it licences anti-feminism?? a sort of 'see women ARE different' so, eg, why should they have the same opportunities/pay/etc etc.
so not happy with it on these grounds, but can't think round it...

feminism is a response to patriachy which comes back to teh social construction theroy so therfore whilst acknowledginng there are biological differences it is the way in which society sees gender roles that affect how people than respond and react

I don't think feminism has to be constructed around a belief that men and women are the same, but that they are of equal value.
Many of the systems in which men have fought to the top have been created by men and are systems in which men flourish. Original 'essentailisms' are exacerbated by nuture, and then polarised yet more because women find themselves so often in a world which values it's own strengths - a male world. So are further disadvantaged.

And of course woman doing the same job a a man should be paid the same, however venusian their language might be. And women as childbeareres should be valued for that, not treated as dependents on men.

I have no difficulty reconciling feminism and difference.

GM, i see that, but isn't it a more fundamental question than that? ie that essentialism (whether it really exists, or is socially constructed) actually makes patriarchy possible? rather than being a way of interpreting patriarchy - a tool to unpick social construtions.

but things that are socially constructed exist they are discourses that become truth

bumping to see if there's any more funky ideas on this.

maybe my question's not so much whether essentialism exists (on whatever level- biological, as discourse) but whether it's politically dodgy/irresponsible.

genuinely interested in this, in no way trying to start a fight.

i d like to if i knew what you were on about

cod, it's just 'women are from venus, men from mars' thingy really.

that they're fundamentally different.
but saying that CAN lead to creating arguments that make opressing women legit.
which is a problem!

Blu's post sums it all up beautifully imo

yep, blu's post was great!

i don't (usually) have any trouble combining feminism/difference either, & i certainly think mothers should be valued & women paid equally.

i just wonder atm if there's more to it, that i'm not thinking through properly...

Roosmum, what undermines the essentialist view for me is the existence of so many people who simply don't fit into the categories. For a start there are plenty of gay men and women, as well as people who are physically neither one thing or the other. Lots of people who change sex or live as the other sex are absolutely certain they have been born into the wrong body.
Then there are the people who are straight but quite simply don't fit into the stereotyped men/women roles or personalities. If a man wants to wear make up or stay at home with the children or isn't ever violent, I would object to saying he is somehow less of a man, but that's what's implied by a lot of the essentialist arguments.

thanks kathy.

actually i'm surprised that more people haven't posted like this, ie being not convinced by essentialism. current gender studies makes essentialism fairly untrendy i think, so i expected more replies on gender being sort of indeterminate.

ah well!

Ah, we haven't had a good nature vs nurture debate in a long time. I'm in the nurture camp... mostly.

I think deep down there are certain traits that are but these could be un-learned. In discussions with many friends when we'er having a good old 'my man doesn't understand me' gossip, the same basic traits are there (in both the males and females) but they manifest themselves in different ways.

I think I'm going to tie myself in knots on this thread (if you'll pardon the pun

uwila, i don't actually think it is about nature/nurture, think it goes deeper than that.

but if you want to know exactly why/how, i'll have to go digging out some gender studies stuff!