Question

Sociologists representing all three major theoretical perspectives study the role sexuality plays in social life today. Scholars recognize that sexuality continues to be an important and defining social location and that the manner in which sexuality is constructed has a significant effect on perceptions, interactions, and outcomes.

1. Which of the 3 main sociological perspectives do you most identify with when thinking about gender, sex, and sexuality (Structural Functionalism, Conflict Theory, or Symbolic Interactionism)? Why?

2. To what extent do you support full gender equality? In our text, it says: "...Family is the first agent of socialization. There is considerable evidence that parents socialize sons and daughters differently..." // When/if you are raising your children, how do you think boys & girls should be raised differently? How should they be raised similarly? Be specific and use examples from your own life! (200 words)

Answer 1

2. Parenting Boys Vs. Girls: How Different Is It?

When it comes to parenting girls versus. parenting boys, the “nature versus nurture” debate has been going on for centuries. Are boys and girls inherently different? Or do parents just raise them that way? A survey conducted by Newsweek in 1997 found that 61 percent of parents believe that the differences in boys and girls come from the way they are raised rather than genetics. But the truth is that arguments can be made for both sides. Read on to learn the many facets of parenting boys versus girls.

The Nature Debate
Studies have found several profound differences between boys and girls, and the way they respond to their world, beginning at birth. Newborn girls, for example, spend more time maintaining eye contact with adults. As a result, at four months, infant girls are better able to recognize faces. Infant boys, on the other hand, tend to stare just as attentively at a blinking light as at a human face.

Most experts believe that girls reach initial developmental milestones earlier than boys, such as talking, developing hand-eye coordination and controlling their emotions. This latter gender difference is the result of hormones. Baby boys have higher levels of testosterone than girls and lower levels of serotonin, which causes them to be more easily stressed and harder to calm down. Infant girls, on the other hand, show a greater tendency to comfort themselves by sucking their thumbs. Higher levels of testosterone are also responsible for boys’ typically more “aggressive” behavior.

At four years of age, girls seem to be better at interpreting emotions and building relationships, while boys have a better understanding of spatial relationships. There are also notable differences between boys and girls when it comes to language. Research shows that girls tend to develop their verbal skills faster than boys. While girls use words almost exclusively, young boys tend to use words about 60 percent of the time, and substitute noises and sounds the rest of the time (such as machine-gun fire, car-engine sounds and animal growls).

In school-age children, the difference between the sexes is most evident on the playground. For boys, play often centers around winning. Boys tend to play in large groups with structured games that keep score. They thrive on competition and one-upsmanship as each strives to be the leader of the pack.

Girls, however, tend to play in small groups of two to four. They often engage in intimate conversations, listening intently to each other and maintaining eye contact. Their play often centers around building and discussing relationships. Traditionally “female” games, such as jump rope and hopscotch, emphasize group support and sharing (everyone gets a turn).

Some studies show that teenage girls perceive more “stressors” in life than teenage boys, especially when it comes to interpersonal relationships (with family, friends and romantic interests). These studies also show that teenage girls react more strongly to these stressors, and are more likely to experience depression. For example, if a teenage boyfriend and girlfriend have a fight, the girl is more likely to obsess over it, while the boy is more likely to distract himself with an activity.

The Nurture Debate
While some discrepancies between boys and girls may be inborn, parenting definitely makes a difference – especially parenting boys versus girls according to gender stereotypes. For example, some parents may provide less affection for their young son for fear of turning him into a “mama’s boy.” They may be less quick to comfort him when he makes a mistake or hurts himself, and they may be more lenient when he roughhouses or displays other signs of aggressive behavior. “Boys will be boys” becomes the mantra.

However, studies show that infants and children who do not receive proper emotional support experience mental and emotional developmental problems. This might help explain why many boys reach their developmental milestones later than girls. Parents may be more likely to coo at, talk to, and read bedtime stories to a daughter than a son, which may also explain why girls develop verbal skills earlier than boys.

In contrast, some parents are quick to rush in and help their daughter when she is struggling to complete a task. Only through trying, failing and trying again do children learn to be confident and self-sufficient. Despite their good intentions, when parents deprive their daughters of this learning experience, they teach them to rely on others for help rather than learning to be independent.

Girls may also have a leg-up on boys in the classroom. Since girls develop language and fine motor skills earlier than boys, they tend to do better in elementary school classrooms. To level the playing field, many parents have begun to enroll sons in kindergarten a whole year later.

In addition, many schools have replaced free-play recess with more structured activities that reduce competition. Classroom games are also on the way out as teachers switch the focus to “cooperative activities” in which “everyone is a winner.” While this type of environment is often helpful to girls, studies show that many boys become frustrated and aggressive in competition-free situations.

Some schools, however, seem to be pushing the gender differences theory too far. Especially with the recent push from the Bush administration, many schools are adopting “single-sex” classrooms in which boys and girls are separated by gender. More than 360 classrooms across the United States have adopted this single-sex policy.

One of the strongest arguments in favor of this approach sites the discrepancy between boys and girls in specific subjects, such as math and science (in which boys typically score higher than girls), and reading and language arts (in which girls typically score higher than boys). Many teachers are “compensating” for these differences by allowing girls to turn in science projects that compare cosmetics or letting boys read action novels rather than the literature in the curriculum. Some boys-only classrooms are implementing a “boot-camp” style teaching method that de-emphasizes verbal communication.

The Bottom Line
Many experts agree that the best parenting techniques focus on a combination of nature and nurture. Yes, boys and girls are naturally different in several ways, but they should be raised in equally nurturing environments. Both boys and girls need to be taught the same values: empathy, compassion, respect, confidence and independence. Physical aggression should carry the same consequences for both genders, and parents should teach their children alternative ways to problem-solve.

When parenting boys versus girls, keep in mind that every child is different. Parents should observe the way each child expresses him- or herself, and allow each child to explore varying interests. Encourage children to hone their unique gifts, whatever they might be. And remember, all children need affection, support, and – most of all – unconditional love.

How Boys and Girls can be raised similarly

Children start learning gender expectations as soon as their parents and other adults know if the baby will be a boy or a girl. These gender roles often lead to an unequal access to resources and decision-making power that harms women’s health. One way to make sure girls and boys will be equally valued is to raise children with the same expectations, rights, and responsibilities.

Changing how we pass on ideas about gender

There are many ways a group of parents, teachers, and other adults can work with children to help all of them develop their full capabilities equally, free of harmful gender expectations. Parents can support each other by meeting regularly to talk about how gender expectations affect the ways they are raising their children.

Adults can teach girls and boys to respect each other, share things fairly, and cooperate on tasks together. Boys should not to be shamed for showing emotions, especially feelings of fear or sadness. Adults can help boys name and express their feelings, and also help girls say what they think and feel without fear of rejection or ridicule.

Both boys and girls can learn to do all kinds of chores and share the same responsibilities, such as cooking, cleaning, caring for younger brothers and sisters, tending crops and animals, and using tools and machines.

A parents’ group can organize to make sure that girls and boys have the same opportunities at school, such as playing sports or taking certain classes. Adults can also help children create puppet shows or plays that use new stories or change traditional ones so they do not reinforce gender roles. (An example would be a story about a girl who rescues a boy from a monster instead of the boy rescuing the girl.)

It is also important to talk with children about the stories and magazines they read, the songs they listen to, and the TV shows, movies, and videos they watch, and help them question harmful gender roles when they are promoted in these media.

1) Theoretical Perspectives on Sex

Sociological Perspectives on Sex and Sexuality

Sociologists representing all three major theoretical perspectives study the role sexuality plays in social life today. Scholars recognize that sexuality continues to be an important and defining social location and that the manner in which sexuality is constructed has a significant effect on perceptions, interactions, and outcomes.

Structural Functionalism

When it comes to sexuality, functionalists stress the importance of regulating sexual behavior to ensure marital cohesion and family stability. Since functionalists identify the family unit as the most integral component in society, they maintain a strict focus on it at all times and argue in favor of social arrangements that promote and ensure family preservation.

Functionalists such as Talcott Parsons (1955) have long argued that the regulation of sexual activity is an important function of the family. Social norms surrounding family life have, traditionally, encouraged sexual activity within the family unit (marriage) and have discouraged activity outside of it (premarital and extramarital sex). From a functionalist point of view, the purpose of encouraging sexual activity in the confines of marriage is to intensify the bond between spouses and to ensure that procreation occurs within a stable, legally recognized relationship. This structure gives offspring the best possible chance for appropriate socialization and the provision of basic resources.

From a functionalist standpoint, homosexuality cannot be promoted on a large-scale as an acceptable substitute for heterosexuality. If this occurred, procreation would eventually cease. Thus, homosexuality, if occurring predominantly within the population, is dysfunctional to society. This criticism does not take into account the increasing legal acceptance of same-sex marriage, or the rise in homosexsual couples who choose to bear and raise children through a variety of available resources.

Conflict Theory

From a conflict theory perspective, sexuality is another area in which power differentials are present and where dominant groups actively work to promote their worldview as well as their economic interests. Recently, we have seen the debate over the legalization of same sex marriage intensify nationwide.

For conflict theorists, there are two key dimensions to the debate over same-sex marriage—one ideological and the other economic. Dominant groups (in this instance, heterosexuals) wish for their worldview—which embraces traditional marriage and the nuclear family—to win out over what they see as the intrusion of a secular, individually driven worldview. On the other hand, many activist legal marriage is a fundamental right that cannot be denied based on sexual orientation and that, historically, there already exists a precedent for changes to marriage laws: the 1960s legalization of formerly forbidden interracial marriages is one example.

From an economic perspective, activists in favor of same-sex marriage point out that legal marriage brings with it certain entitlements, many of which are financial in nature, like Social Security benefits and medical insurance (Solmonese 2008). Denial of these benefits to same sex couples is wrong, they argue. Conflict theory suggests that as long as heterosexuals and homosexuals struggle over these social and financial resources, there will be some degree of conflict.

Symbolic Interactionism

Interactionists focus on the meanings associated with sexuality and with sexual orientation. Since femininity is devalued in U.S. society, those who adopt such traits are subject to ridicule; this is especially true for boys or men. Just as masculinity is the symbolic norm, so too has heterosexuality come to signify normalcy. Prior to 1973, the American Psychological Association (APA) defined homosexuality as an abnormal or deviant disorder. Interactionist labeling theory recognizes the impact this has made. Before 1973, the APA was powerful in shaping social attitudes toward homosexuality by defining it as pathological. Today, the APA cites no association between sexual orientation and psychopathology and sees homosexuality as a normal aspect of human sexuality (APA 2008).

Interactionists are also interested in how discussions of homosexuals often focus almost exclusively on the sex lives of homosexuals, especially men, may be assumed to be hypersexual and, in some cases, deviant. Interactionism might also focus on the slurs used to describe homosexuals. Labels such as “queen” and “fag” are often used to demean homosexual men by feminizing them.

Queer Theory

Queer Theory is an interdisciplinary approach to sexuality studies that identifies Western society’s rigid splitting of gender into male and female roles and questions the manner in which we have been taught to think about sexual orientation. According to Jagose (1996), Queer [Theory] focuses on mismatches between anatomical sex, gender identity, and sexual orientation, not just division into male/female or homosexual/hetereosexual. By calling their discipline “queer,” scholars reject the effects of labeling; instead, they embraced the word “queer” and reclaimed it for their own purposes. The perspective highlights the need for a more flexible and fluid conceptualization of sexuality—one that allows for change, negotiation, and freedom. The current schema used to classify individuals as either “heterosexual” or “homosexual” pits one orientation against the other. This mirrors other oppressive schemas in our culture, especially those surrounding gender and race (black versus white, male versus female).

Queer theorist Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick argued against U.S. society’s monolithic definition of sexuality and its reduction to a single factor: the sex of someone’s desired partner. Sedgwick identified dozens of other ways in which people’s sexualities were different, such as:

• Even identical genital acts mean very different things to different people.
• Sexuality makes up a large share of the self-perceived identity of some people, a small share of others’.
• Some people spend a lot of time thinking about sex, others little.
• Some people like to have a lot of sex, others little or none.
• Many people have their richest mental/emotional involvement with sexual acts that they don’t do, or don’t even want to do.
• Some people like spontaneous sexual scenes, others like highly scripted ones, others like spontaneous-sounding ones that are nonetheless totally predictable.
• Some people, homo- hetero- and bisexual, experience their sexuality as deeply embedded in a matrix of gender meanings and gender differentials. Others of each sexuality do not (Sedgwick 1990).

Thus, theorists utilizing queer theory strive to question the ways society perceives and experiences sex, gender, and sexuality, opening the door to new scholarly understanding.