Reflections on Ignorance-Some thoughts on gender...

    Talk about gender is not spared in our time. It is something that is constantly presented to us. Whether rural or urban, liberal or conservative, old or young, we are all brought into this conversation. But I do not even know what we are talking about. 

    Some will say that gender is a social construction, and others will say that it is an obvious biological fact. Who is right? Certain expressions of our gender appear to be shaped by our society. This seems indisputable! At some points in history women wore pants, and at other times men wore dresses. Sometimes women wore makeup, and at other times men did. One could probably list these changes until the cows come home. With the advent of modern scientific knowledge, there appear to be distinct physiological differences between men and women. A man's bones are different from a woman's, and their chromosomes are different, and their gonads are different (although some of these statements are now called into question). 

    Again, who is right? I think both sides miss out on the crucial distinction between the spiritual differences between man and woman. A lot of the people involved in this debate will hardly ever refer to the Genesis account of the creation of man and woman. The man and woman were created by God for one another. Adam is called to serve Eve and vice versa. But what governs the conversation about male and female relations now? It appears to me to be a reliance on biological reductionism. One side says that the gender binary is dissolved in some way given the sort of mastery we have over our own nature. Hormonal changes can be introduced through science. Genitalia can be changed through science. Both of these changes then manifest themselves in the changes of gender performance. Given the change in genitalia and hormones, one must use a different bathroom, wear different clothes, and speak and act in other different ways. The other side says that we can be essentially defined by our chromosomal expression. This is what allows this side to triumph over the other. Potential scientific advances that could render this argument invalid aside, both sides see us as mere physical organisms, at least in the way they present their arguments. 

    I will venture a guess that if one were to poll 100 people from the street about their thoughts on this matter, a large majority of the answers would fall into this description. At one time I would certainly fall on the side of the chromosomal identity, but I am not so sure about that now. I certainly think that distinguishes man from woman in a way, but I do not think it is a satisfactory way of answering the question. I do not know what exactly the answer is to this debate, but that is what future learning is for I suppose.