Jackson 1

Destiny M. Jackson
Professor Jon Beadle
English 115
3 October 2016
Sex and Gender: Normal vs. Natural
Normal is an ideal. But its not reality. Reality is brutal, its beautiful, its every shade
between black and white, and its magical. Yes, magical. Because every now and then, it turns
nothing into something (Tara Kelly). An ideal is a standard or unwritten principle of a certain
concept that allows something to be considered normal. The reason why these standards are
ideal is because they are usually unnatural and unattainable. In addition to this, anything that is
able to conform into the ideals society defends, is considered normal. Whether we know it or not,
our reality is defined by a host of many different norms or social constructions. Social
constructions are basic concepts and ideals that are agreed upon within a society that form our
reality. As unnecessary as it seems when it is being interpreted, the social construction of gender
is an organization method society uses to assign ways of living to two kinds of people; male and
female. Even though the present social concepts in society are there to help us understand the
world around us, many of the constructed beliefs created are not genuine. One of the main
common ideas I have realized in these readings, Rethinking Womens Biology, by Ruth
Hubbard, Night to His Day: The Social Construction of Gender, by Judith Lorber, and
Becoming Members of Society: The Social Meanings of Gender, by Aaron Devor, was how
the prominent social construction of gender negatively represents females, contributing to gender
inequality.

Jackson 2

From the moment the sex of a child is learned, society unnecessarily constructs ideas,
codes, and roles specifically for that childs gender. First of all, sex and gender are two entirely
different things. Sex is what someone is born with and the gender is how one identifies their self.
Author Judith Lorber explained in her article that in society, the gender of a child must be
constructed because gender and sex are not equivalent, and gender as a social construction does
not flow automatically from genitalia and reproductive organs, the main physiological
differences of females and males (Lorber). This process is so accustomed in society the
distinctions between sex and gender is somewhat concealed. Gender is constructed with the
segregation of the sexes and the only way they are segregated is through gender codes as stated
in Becoming Members of Society: The Social Meanings of Gender, As we move through
our lives, society demands different gender performances from us and rewards, tolerates, or
punishes us differently for conformity to, or digression from, social norms (Devor). Being a
member of society means one accepts this structure where gender divides work in the home and
in economic production, legitimates those in authority, and organizes sexuality and emotional
life and conforms to what is expected of them for their sex (Lorber). This structure tells men to
act masculine and females as feminine.
In spite of the masculine and feminine characteristics society demands from people, there
are many falsely conceived notions in society specifically designated to women. Unfortunately,
the purpose of these notions are to contribute only to female retardation in civilization. One
example of these notions is the biology of a woman. According to author and biologist, Ruth
Hubbard in Rethinking Womens Biology, the socially and politically accepted concept of a
womans biology is constructed to support what roles, and jobs society deems is appropriate for

Jackson 3

women. For example, one socially constructed discrepancy portrays men as naturally stronger
than women. Although this statement may have proof, male/female comparisons are made
between physically more highly trained men and less trained women so that so-called sex
differences at least in part reflect this difference in activity levels (Hubbard). This goes to show
that not only are these beliefs false but they are created for women to be viewed as secondary in
society.
Due to the presence of the false beliefs of one gender being above the other in our
community, people now have the tendency to devalue femininity which is the cause of gender
inequality. Society is underlied by a blueprint of how gender is supposed to work that has
everyone convinced that gender segregation is natural when it is not. This blueprint dictates how
women and men should act while supporting the belief system that women are secondary to men.
For example, one characteristic of masculinity is to not be feminine Such values lead to those
who subscribe to them to view feminine persons as born losers and to strive to eliminate any
similarities to feminine people from their own personalities (Devor). As a female, growing up, I
have noticed that in order to be taken serious in certain situations, I would have to demonstrate
masculine characteristics just to be seen as conscientious. The prominence of these gender roles
allows Masculinity [to] becomes innately valuable [causing] femininity [to serve as] a
contrapuntal function to delineate and magnify the hierarchical dominance of masculinity
(Devor).At heart, the repression of females serves as groundwork for the social construction of
gender.
Even though the only differences between man and woman is their reproductive organs,
the social construction of gender constitutes inequality in our society by contributing to a

Jackson 4

hierarchy of male dominance. The authors of these articles wrote these articles to bring
awareness to a social issue that contributes to inequality in our society. Because the social
concept of gender is so prominent, concepts of femininity and masculinity are now systematic.
The reality of our society is a host of ideals that are deemed normal but the true reality about the
population is what is natural to them and is not conformed to fit into these ideals. Several of the
deeply rooted social concepts in our society are derived from historical fabrications, experts,
parents, and even the media.

Jackson 5

Works Cited
Devor, Aaron. Becoming Members of Society: The Social Meanings of Gender. Composing
Gender. (1989): 35-43.
Hubbard, Ruth. Rethinking Womens Biology. Composing Gender. (1990): 46-51.
Kelly, Tara. Harmonic Feedback. Henry Holt and Co., 2010.
Lorber, Judith. Night to His Day: The Social Construction of Gender. Composing Gender.
(1994): 19-30.