Sex and Gender

Social scientists, including anthropologists, make a distinction between sex and gender. An individual's sex is often used as an example of an ascribed status, something you are born with, and which was biologically determined at the moment of conception. Sex is assigned or ascribed at birth on the basis of possessing male or female genitalia, and is done in every culture. [While there are people born with certain chromosomal abnormalities involving the 23rd pair of chromosomes--the chromosomes which determine sex--these are relatively rare cases. Usually even individuals with chromosomal abnormalities can at birth easily be assigned to one sex or the other, though for a number of reasons a very small number of babies can not easily be assigned to one sex.]

Gender is something else. Gender refers to the culturally proscribed and acceptable role that an individual is assigned to because of his or her sex, and cultures in the past and in the present do not agree on appropriate male and female roles within a culture. While biologically males produce sperm, females produce ova or eggs, females carry the developing fetus for nine months, and only females can nurse babies, cultures have nonetheless developed widely varying notions of appropriate male and female roles within these biological realities.

Women Breastfeeding in Public at a Seattle Rally: Many Americans do not consider this part of the acceptable role for women, contending breastfeeding is offensive and should be done only in private.

As the text notes, many cultures have culturally approved gender roles for three or even four genders. These roles may differ from one culture to another, as the text makes clear in its discussion of three cultures with accepted third gender roles: that of mahu in some Polynesian cultures, berdache in Zuni culture, and hijra in India. The actual behavior, dress, occupation and other aspects of these third gender roles varies from culture to culture. And it is also not simply, as many Americans like to believe, that these cultures have created culturally acceptable roles for homosexual men. Pay attention to what your text says on this subject and try to avoid simplistic answers! Homosexuality would indeed appear to exist in all cultures, with or without third or fourth gender roles, and studies indicate that both homosexuality and heterosexuality are the result of genetic and environmental factors . (Click here for more information.)

Gender in Non-State Cultures

Gender roles in foraging, horticultural, and pastoral societies were often clearly defined, but not necessarily identical from one culture to the next. Foraging societies often had the clearest definition: for most men did the hunting, women the gathering. Women often made clothing, were primarily involved in child care, and depending on the culture had other tasks assigned (such as house building among the Mbuti foragers of the Congo).

San Men in Traditional Role as Hunters

In horticultural societies, the heaviest farm labor often fell to the men, but usually women also had planting and harvesting duties. Since patrilineal societies dominated, and political leaders such a big men in tribes and chiefs in chiefdoms were almost always men, males acquired more prestige, as well as power and authority , in horticultural societies. Religious specialists were also more likely to be male than female in these types of societies, and resources as well as other goods were more likely to be controlled by men, or at least by patriineages and clans. The matrilineal horticultural societies tended to be exceptions to some of these statements, but even in the matrilineal Iroquois, chiefly positions could only be held by men (though essentially they were appointed by women). Pastoral societies were almost universally patrilineal, and had clear and often separate gender roles. For specific details on gender roles in horticultural and pastoral societies, pay attention to what the readings say with regard to the two horticultural societies studied in this unit, the traditional Hmong and the Yanomamo, as well as the pastoral society, the Nuer. And of course pay attention to lessons and text information on general traits of horticultural and pastoral societies.

As horticultural chiefdoms developed into intensive agricultural states, the prestige and power of men, and their ability to control goods and resources, generally increased across the world. As in horticultural societies like the Yanomamo, religious ideology (see text for discussion of Yanomamo ideology) often supported distinct roles for men and women in state societies, often related as in the Yanomamo to religious accounts of the origin of two sexes, or to the roles God had set for men and women. Since intensive agricultural states had well developed class systems, or class stratification, the actual gender roles of males and females in such states was defined differently depending upon the social class of the individual involved.

Industrial states also each have differing notions of appropriate gender roles, and within each state variation exists due to social class. While industrialism as a mode of production will not be discussed in detail until the next unit, it is appropriate here to look at changes in gender roles within one industrial state, the United States.

Gender Roles in the United States: A Brief History

When the founders of the United States declared in the Declaration of Independence that "all men are created equal", they were helping to create a secular ideology for Americans. Given that many of these founders owned slaves, that in general neither non-white men nor white or non-white women had rights in the colonies or the new United States, it is hard to know what they really intended by their words. The new United States was of course almost entirely a Christian country, and thus was also influenced as well by religious ideology. The Hebrews at the time most of the Old Testament of the Bible was written were in many respects a typical pastoral, patrilineal, tribal and patriarchal culture. The New Testament has been variously interpreted as to whether or not it advocated more egalitarian gender roles.

Some of the New Testament religious ideology is still debated amongst various religious groups in the U.S., particularly some of the quotes attributed to Saint Paul. For example, in 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 Paul states: “Women should keep silent in the churches, for they are not allowed to speak, but should be subordinate, as even the law says. But if they want to learn anything, they should ask their husbands at home. For it is improper for a woman to speak in the church.” Earlier in 1 Corinthians 11:3-16 Paul writes: “But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a woman is her husband, and the head of Christ is God.” He goes on to say that “any woman who prays or prophesies” should keep her head covered, whereas a man should never cover his head, “since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man. (For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man.)” In many respects, US history with regard to gender roles can be viewed as a struggle between one interpretation of a religious ideology with an unequal creation of men and women, and one interpretation of our founders more secular ideology with an equal creation for men and women. (There are certainly other interpretations of both the Bible and what the US founding fathers intended.)

As part of this struggle, women did not receive the right to vote until the passage of the 19th Amendment of the Constitution, finally ratified in 1920. However many jobs and much of higher education remained closed or almost so to women in this country, discrimination on the basis of sex was common, and women were normally paid less than men even if doing the same job. Much of this was reinforced by beliefs that women were biologically not capable of many jobs, or that the main job of women should be to take care of the home and raise babies, or that since men were legally the heads of households women should be paid less and should not take jobs away from men.

Legally at least much of this changed with the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Today the Civil Rights Act is often thought of as the law that prohibited discrimination on the basis of race in terms of hiring, promoting, and firing. The word "sex" was added at the last minute, so that the main provision of the bill made it illegal for an employer to "fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions or privileges of employment, because of such individual's race, color, religion, sex, or national origin." Though attitudes regarding gender roles were already changing in the US (or else the Civil Rights Act would never have been passed) the 1964 Act significantly accelerated changes in gender roles.

As early as 1923, some women's groups who had fought throughout the 19th century for the right to vote saw the need to introduce a Constitutional Amendment since they realized that the right to vote hardly gave women equal rights in the US. Often referred to as the Equal Rights Amendment, it simply said "Men and women shall have equal rights throughout the United States and every place subject to its jurisdiction." This amendment was introduced every year until 1972, when it passed Congress in a modified form. The new language of the ERA stated that "Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state on account of sex." While twenty-states, including Hawai'i, immediately ratified the Amendment, ratification slowed dramatically as opponents organized to block its implementation. Opposition was based on several premises, among them the claim that the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (see above) meant that the Equal Rights Amendment was unnecessary. More important reasons were the belief on the part of business that the Amendment would cost them money, and arguments advanced by more conservative Americans that ratification would lead to more abortions (Roe v. Wade was decided in early 1973), that wives would not be supported by their husbands, that women would be sent into combat, and that same sex marriage would be promoted. The extended deadline for ratification expired in 1982; since then the ERA has again been introduce into every session of Congress through 2008, but has never been approved.

Gender Roles in the US Today

Many young American women (and men) believe that there is little if any difference in gender roles in the US today, and that sex discrimination is a thing of the past. [I know this because many of them tell me so!] That view is highly debatable, even though in the 2008 presidential election, a woman (Hillary Clinton) ran to be the presidential candidate for the Democratic Party, and a woman (Sarah Palin) was the vice-presidential candidate for the Republican Party. [It is worth noting that in January 2007 Clinton was taunted by two men yelling "Iron my shirt"! While the two men appear to have been trying to create a radio stunt, one was later quoted as saying “I just don’t think a woman should be President.” Click here for information.] Rather than be concerned if sexism was part of the reason why these two women were not elected, it is more instructive to look at actual figures for political leaders in our country.

The 112th Congress took office in January 2011, with 541 members. Of these, 100 are in the Senate, 435 in the House of Representatives, and 6 are non-voting delegates from areas such as Puerto Rico and DC. Of these 83% are male, and 17% are female. For the world as a whole, the 2007 average for women at the parliamentary level was 17%, so the US is not doing better in this area than the rest of the world. (For more information, click here.)

Jeannette Rankin (1880-1973) First US Congresswoman (Montana 1917-1919) [Public domain photo]

There are fifty states in the United States. As of Feb. 2011, six state governors, or 12%, were women. Twenty-four states have never had a female governor. [Click here for more data.]

In terms of leadership roles in business, as of late 2010, 12 women were CEO's of companies listed as Fortune 500 companies (less than 3%); the remaining 97% were men. For the next 500 companies included in the Fortune 1,000 listing, 14 had female CEO's. (Click here for list.) On average, however, these women were paid more (by some studies almost 42% more) than their male counterparts. (Click here) A 2005 study found that 16.4% of corporate officers in Fortune 500 companies were female, an increase from the 8.7% of 1995. However, at this rate of increase, it will take 40 more years for women to gain equality as corporate officers. [Click here for data.]

Carol Meyrowitz, CEO of TJX (home to off-price retailers like T.J.Maxx and Marshall's) Age 54; Total Compensation in 2008 $7.6 million

Of course it could be argued that women choose not to compete for political power or for wealth, and that is the reason they are less likely to be found in the types of jobs considered above. However there is ample data to conclude that while women as of 2009 made up 50% of our workforce, most of them were found in relatively few types of jobs (compared to men) and most were in jobs that paid less. In addition, women were all too frequently paid less than men for doing the very same job, even when figures are adjusted for qualifications and experience. Consider the following information.

Close to half of all women work in the top twenty leading occupations for women, and almost all of these occupations are dominated by women. (2009 data) Many of these types of jobs are also low-paying and frequently non-union employment. Four of these female dominated jobs paid the lowest median wage of any form of employment for women: Cashiers, Cooks, Maids, and Waitresses.

Statistics from the US Dept. of Labor for 2009

The above statistics would suggest that there are indeed definite gender roles related to occupations in the US.

Even when men and women are doing the same job, and have equal experience and training, men still tend to be paid more than women. This discrepancy in pay appears regardless of whether or not the job in question requires considerable education, or essentially none at all. The statistics below are from the 2000 US Census. (Data from the 2010 Census not yet available.)

[Note: Median income means that half the people surveyed earned more than the median, and half earned less. It is not an average or mean income.] The Census Bureau analysis concluded that "there is a substantial gap in median earnings between men and women that is unexplained, even after controlling for work experience...education and occupation." Most studies have concluded the same: not all the differences can be explained by assuming that women work fewer years, take more breaks in employment, or tend to take more part-time work or less stressful and risky jobs, than do men. It was partly for this reason that the first act of Congress signed into law by President Obama (on Jan. 29, 2009) was the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Restoration Act. The Act was named for a former Firestone Tire employee who sued in 1998, claiming gender discrimination in terms of pay. She was awarded some $360,000 by an Alabama court, but the ruling was overturned in May 2007 by the US Supreme Court. The Court stated that Ledbetter should have sued with 180 days of her first unequal paycheck, even though she filed suit as soon as she learned of the unequal pay (and even though most companies do not provide data on others' pay to an employee.)The new law states that suit can be filed within 180 of the time a person learns of the unequal pay.

As a result of women primarily occupying low-paying jobs, plus gender discrimination in pay, as of early 2009 employed women on average earned around eighty cents for every dollar earned by men. This including all occupations and all education levels. While this discrepancy has improved significantly in the last 40 years (I remember when it was fifty-nine cents), the gap remains.

While gender role differences remain in our culture, as well as some gender discrimination, there will certainly be change in the next thirty years, as there has been since the 1920 Constitutional Amendment, or the 1964 Civil Rights Act. For one thing, college educated women, who normally would expect certain types of jobs, and generally better-paying jobs, have increased from a small minority of college graduates to a majority of college graduates. At Leeward CC, 60% of the student body is female (in 2010), and this is typical for both two and four year colleges today in the United States. Women have been earning more bachelor's degrees than men since 1982, and more master's degrees since 1981. In 2008, women earned 59% of all post-secondary degrees, including almost 49% of all doctorates. While these statistics raise many additional questions regarding changing gender roles in the US--most critically, why are more and more men not including higher education as an important goal?--gender-free job choice and compensation for women may indeed become a reality.

To date however, that is not the reality. In 2007 (the last year with available data) women high school graduates earned 26% less than men high school graduates; women with bachelor's degrees earned 25% less, women with master's degrees 25% less, and women with doctorates 22% less than men with comparable degrees. (For more information, click here .)

With the current economic recession still lingering, it will be interesting to see what happens to our culture's notions of male and female roles; certainly, as a cultural materialist would say, it will be driven by economic reality. As of Feb. 2009, more men than women were losing their jobs; in fact 82% of those who have lost their jobs in recent months are men. Women have become the majority of those employed in our country, and the main "breadwinner" for 40% of families in 2010. (Since women generally earn less than men, that is a dismal prospect for most of those families.) Still, in 1970, only 7% of American families had a woman as the main breadwinner. All of the changes described here will certainly promote more shifts in our culture's perception of gender roles.