Authors
A social theory of gender is implied and required by current sexual politics. Its scope cannot be defined a priori, but can be defined practically by the reach of a network of arguments generated by feminism, gay liberation, psychoanalysis and some branches of academic sociology and psychology. Two main types of theory have emerged: one emphasising attitudes and social expectations, centring on the idea of `sex roles'; the other presupposing the categories of `women' and `men' and focussing on power relations between them. Criticisms of both general approaches to gender relations are outlined. An argument is advanced for a modification of the second, centring on the practices that constitute gender categories. Some examples of this third approach are mentioned. The problem of `natural difference' can be handled in a practice-based theory of gender by a radical reversal of usual assumptions about biological `bases' of gender, stressing negation and practical transcendence. Some political implications of this approach to theory are raised.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Raewyn Connell (1985) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: