Alanah VanCleve

Professor Mary Fox and Professor Billie Dziech

ENGC 2016
April 14, 2014
Males & Females Reflection Paper
Males & Females: Insights from Biology, Film, Literature and Social Sciences
has been very influential on me during my first year of college. The topics we have
discussed during class have opened my mind to the stereotypes we blindly assign males
and females, and have made me truly aware of some of the ways women and men are
affected by doing so.
Before I entered this class, I did believe in a lot of traditional stereotypes that are
fed to us by interactions with friends and by the media. I believed that women were
monogamous, emotional naturally better parents, had a overwhelming desire for
closeness and intimacy rather than sex, are better listeners, are naturally disadvantaged
when it comes to higher education, are more emotionally vicious, more constrained and
less aggressive. I also originally believed that men were polygamous, not as caring and
therefore not as good of parents, not very good listeners, are more lustful rather than
emotional (more focused on sex than intimacy), are naturally better at math and science,
are more physically aggressive, and less emotional. I had these original assumptions in
my mind because of personal experience, media influence, and stories from friends. The
media feeds a lot of traditional female stereotypes the ones that imply we are weak,
monogamous, more caring, emotional beings who arent as talented as boys. It also feeds
into a lot of the traditional male stereotypes, which say that men are strong, polygamous,
unemotional and less caring, bad listeners, and overly lustful. A lot of my interactions
with males throughout my elementary, middle and high school careers seemed to prove
these stereotypes true, as they seemed to behave the exact way they were stereotyped as.
My interactions with females during this same time period also proved a lot of this to be
true. Overall, personal experience and media were large factors in influencing my beliefs
in stereotypes.
Some of my original assumptions stayed static, whereas some changed over the
course of the semester. The assumptions that changed, such as women being
disadvantaged in higher education, women being more emotional and better listeners,
men being less caring, more advantaged in higher education and less emotional all
changed with the various articles and research information we read for class. For the most
part, when research was involved, it changed my opinion, such as how we learned that
the numbers of women tower over those of men in higher education, showing me that
women werent as disadvantaged as I believed. The assumptions that stayed static, for the
most part, were the opinions that werent proved wrong for me. For example, we learned
that due to the biological history of humans, men naturally sought out more female
partners to produce more heirs, whereas females typically didnt do the same because
they were left with the responsibility of raising a child and therefore couldnt be
promiscuous, which seems to hold true with the belief that men are promiscuous and
polygamous and women are monogamous. Other times, if my belief was not changed, it
was due to the fact that there was conflicting or inconclusive research. Nothing has
explicitly proven that women arent more emotional than men, so I still hold that opinion.
We read a lot of articles in which the views expressed were conflicting. I think
these were intentionally assigned to show that trait differences between males and
females are so hard to define. Theres no foolproof system or even a way to measure
these differences, and whether they occur as a result of sex or the individuality of the
person is hard to determine. Because of the lack of a method or system to do this
research, many of the research conducted would probably be done in a different was, and
thus might give different results. I think the whole purpose of giving us these conflicting
articles is to prove that, without a foolproof, set system, and since we are examining the
brain, which is hard to research in people who are alive, it is nearly impossible to come
up with data that leads us to any definite conclusions in traits between sexes. These
conflicting articles made me realize just how inconclusive all the data truly is.
Our exchanges of ideas and experiences during class, I believe, were expected to
demonstrate that everyone has different experiences with male and female stereotypes,
and that no two people will necessarily believe in the same stereotypes because of their
personal experiences in their life. I believe this might affect my future assumptions about
males and females and sex and gender issues by leading me to keep an open mind when it
comes to making them. Because of the discussions in class and learning that everyone has
different experiences, I believe I will be able to keep an open mind when it comes to
thinking every male or female is a certain way or that a certain stereotype holds true to
them. I think this will be helpful, because keeping an open mind will allow me to form an
idea of someones traits based on their personality, not their sex, which will lead to me
not making bad assumptions about people simply because of their sex.
I think these two approaches tell us that the current study of sex and gender is still
relatively new and we still dont have many answers. Actual research about sex
differences is still in its infancy, so we cant really make many conclusions and we dont
have many facts yet. The topics and research we discuss allow us to take a look at our
lives and our experiences with these sex differences, and the films we watch and stories
we read show us that, though we may not know much factually quite yet, we are not
alone in the stereotypes we see and experience. I think that this sends the message that, in
the future, we might have more information and be able to come to conclusions, or
provide more facts. I think the stories and films might, in the future, be shown as
evidence of what we might then be able to prove as fact. I think they greatly mirror the
views about human knowledge expressed by Kripal and Eagleman because those
messages dont arrogantly assume that we have all the answers. In class, both Professor
Fox and Professor Dziech said that we dont have the answers, and I think there was also
another small message sent that we might never know the answers because there might
not be any. I think thats extremely similar to what Kripal and Eagleman tried to get
across. We cant arrogantly assume that we know, or will know, all the answers to why
humans the way they are, because people are complex and there might be more to it than
science and research. I think the way our class approached the information and topics is
very similar to how the article we read approached them, because in both we simply
looked at peoples experiences and some research without coming to definite conclusions
and while admitting that we dont know everything and possibly never will.
I was, unfortunately, not able to go on the trip to Buckhorn. If I had gone, though,
I feel that it would have showed me again that traits are different for everyone and not
based on gender or sex but on personality and the individual. I know that if I had gone, it
would have had a lasting personal effect on me.
Im very grateful for the insight this course has given me throughout this
semester. Learning everything I have through this course has allowed me to keep more of
an open mind when it comes to stereotyping people unfairly because of their gender. I
had such a great experience during this course, and I know that, in a STEM major where I
have a tendency to be disregarded because of my gender, I can look at what I have
learned and apply it and show that I am more than a stereotype.