In The Prism of Gender, Catherine G. Valentine explores and shares her insight on how western culture conditions us to think about gender and how social scientific research challenges those beliefs. The author explains how in cultures such as the United States, most people grow up learning about gender as two concreate boxes that everyone fits into when gender is actually much more complex. They go on to explain the harm this does to our social perception of self and others and suggests that we could solve this by relying more on “the power of social facts to explain sex, sexuality, and gender” (Valentine, p.4) rather than biology. The author asks the reader to do their own sociological research when exploring the second question of this paper by giving a list of questions to apply to our own lives and social experiences about gender and sexuality. For me, this really helped me grasp their perspective and realize how constraining and impractical the Western beliefs on gender can be. The paper continues to explain how modern social science “opens the door to the diversity of human experience and rejects the tendency to reduce human behavior to simple, single-factor explanations.” (Valentine, p. 5).
The ideas brought forth by Maxine Baca Zinn and Bonnie Thornton Dill in Theorizing Difference from Multiracial Feminism also opens the door to the diversity of human experience by expressing the importance in analyzing the social structure of gender through the lens of other social structures like race- which is highlighted in this work. They introduce and explain the framework of “multiracial feminism” as an idea that derives from a diverse, and ever-evolving body of knowledge based on the experiences and ideas of men and women from a plurality of social positions. Something that really stuck out to me about this work was their insight on how difference as a main theme of feminism and women studies creates a counterproductive idea that actually supports the traditional norms behind gender and race and ignores the inequalities that cause and stem from them. Their work provided me with a new perspective on feminism and made me realize how mainstream feminist theory often discounts the experiences of women of color in America.
I believe the authors of these two works all reflected that gender is not a universal or solidified experience and there are negative affects to the Western and specifically- American culture treating it like it is. Instead, gender should be viewed with consideration to a diverse set of experiences and ideas and by examining the social influences that shape gender. And this is new to me—until now, when thinking of feminism, I thought strictly in gendered terms. That is, I viewed the subject broadly, without a specific focus on the varied and unique experiences of individuals from the multitudes of backgrounds. I am excited to have found this fresh “theoretical direction for feminist thought” (Dill & Zinn, p. 321).
I was able apply the idea from this text about how gender in American culture is “characterized by a marked contradiction between people’s beliefs about gender and actual human behavior” (Valentine, p.3) to my own life and experiences. I grew up in a very small, rural town where the majority of people held strict, traditional beliefs on gender. Specifically, the power relation between men and women and the abilities and roles of women in society and the household. I am able to look back now and see that “marked contradiction” in my own struggle to fight against gender norms and stereotypes that negatively impacted the development of my perception on gender. Some of their beliefs on gender were so outdated that it made me relate to my “Little House on Prairie” books in ways that I shouldn’t have when reading them in the mid 2000’s, hence the picture.
KEYWORDS
Gender | Race | Society | Difference | Perspective
Awesome blog! in my opinion the two authors gave very much insight to everything thorughout, but there is a lot of differences. Because from the first of she shares of how the culture thinks about gender and the second explains it through racial feminism they all have their differences, but it gives an open door on seeing everything in a different perspective.
Hey Sgclark,
This is Gpward. I really enjoyed reading your blog post. You made some great points about The Prism of Gender and Theorizing Difference From Multiracial Feminism. To answer your question, yes, I do see the contradictions of gender that Valentine lays out. I stated in my blog that Valentine made me think of all the birthday’s I had as a child and the toys, objects and other material things I had as a kid and how everything I wanted, I wanted it in the color blue, such as having my entire room painted in blue, the Lego’s I played with were blue, my clothes, shoes, were mostly blue. I also stated that every memory or birthday I can remember as a child has always been the color blue which I think represents the stigma that me being a male or boy in this case, the color blue represents a male gender. Overall, great blog post!