Submitted to: Mam Tahira Akbar

Submitted By: Muhammad Usman Soomro: 51 M

Semester: 7th

Literature Reflects Gender and gender Roles Categorically?

In the search for a better understanding of genetic and environmental interactions as determinants of health, certain fundamental aspects of human identity pose
both a challenge and an opportunity for clarification. Sex/gender and race/ethnicity are complex traits that are particularly useful and important because each
includes the social dimensions necessary for understanding its impact on health and each has genetic underpinnings, to varying degrees.

Gender differences in autobiographical memory emerge in some data collection paradigms and not others. The present study included an extensive analysis of
gender differences in autobiographical narratives. Data were collected from 196 participants, evenly split by gender and by age. Each participant reported four
narratives, including an event that had occurred in the last 2 years, a high point, a low point, and a self-defining memory. Additionally, all participants
completed self-report measures of masculine and feminine gender typicality. The narratives were coded along six dimensions namely coherence,
connectedness, agency, affect, factual elaboration, and interpretive elaboration.

The results indicated that females expressed more affect, connection, and factual elaboration than males across all narratives, and that feminine typicality
predicted increased connectedness in narratives. Masculine typicality predicted higher agency, lower connectedness, and lower affect, but only for some
narratives and not others. These findings support an approach that views autobiographical reminiscing as a feminine-typed activity and that identifies gender
differences as being linked to categorical gender, but also to one’s feminine gender typicality, whereas the influences of masculine gender typicality were more
context-dependent. We suggest that implicit gendered socialization and more explicit gender typicality each contribute to gendered autobiographies.

Although there have been numerous genetic studies of sex and gender—and more recently race and ethnicity—over the past several decades, detailed
information about the extent of our genetic similarities and differences did not reach the public’s attention until the completion of the Human Genome Project.
With base pair comparisons possible across the individuals sequenced, the estimate that any two humans are 99.9 percent the same has raised our awareness
that all humans are incredibly similar at the genetic level. Paradoxically, the evidence of vast numbers of DNA base pairs at which humans differ also became
known at this time. It is estimated currently that any two people will differ at approximately 3 million positions along their genomes. Although there is some
evidence that information about an individual’s sex or ancestry would provide information about the likelihood that he/she carries one allele versus another, it is
typically a matter of probability—not a discrete or absolute determinant (even for the Y chromosome). While there is growing evidence of a number of
significant differences between males and females in terms of health and health outcomes “considerable controversy remains about the existence and
importance of racial differences in genetic effects, particularly for complex diseases”

Previous chapters have discussed the contributions of the social environment, behavior, psychological factors, physiological mechanisms, and genetic variation
to health. This chapter highlights the fact that the contributions of these variables are not monolithic and that fundamental individual traits, such as sex/gender
and race/ethnicity, can change their meaning and health impact in different contexts. These complex traits are multifaceted, and the goal is to tease apart the
facets at different levels of organization in order to identify which of them directly modulate health. This is a reciprocal process, because these various domains
in turn inform our understanding of sex/gender and race/ethnicity. Failing to distinguish these different facets, both in the aggregate and within each level of
analysis, will compromise the ability to obtain a more fine-grained understanding of how the different aspects of these fundamental individual traits interact to
influence health.

Sex-linked biology and gender relations, as well as the concepts of race and ethnicity, require conceptual clarity in order to determine the interactive influences
of each in giving rise to health differentials. To narrowly focus on such concepts impedes an appreciation of the rich variety among humans, however attention
must be given to these and other categories in order to conduct meaningful research assessing the impact on health of interactions among social, behavioral, and
genetic factors. For example, although a consistent genetic effect across racial groups can result in genetic variants with a common biological effect, that effect
can be modified by both environmental exposures and the overall admixture of the population. The challenge is to parse out how health outcomes are
influenced by genetic variations, behavioral and cultural practices, and social environments independently and as they interact with each others, while
recognizing that sex, gender, race, and ethnicity may play important roles in their own right and because of their social meanings.
The freshman literature survey course I teach offers readings rife with sexism and limiting gender norms. Romeo and Juliet, penned in the late 1500s, illustrates
the way women were defined by their relationships with men, how they were treated as material objects to be admired and owned (the owners being husbands
and fathers), and how physical beauty was the primary consideration in assessing a woman’s worth. Harper Lee’s To Kill a Mockingbird is another. Beyond the
more obvious theme of racism, there is also a strong undercurrent of sexism as Scout struggles to navigate her desire to “act like a boy” in a society with
strongly polarized and clearly defined roles for men and women. When her brother laments, “Scout, you act more like a girl every day,” he does not mean to
flatter.

The key step to making these narratives pertinent to today’s students and that may help them formulate clearer ideas about the meaning and value of justice—is
to have students examine how much of the media they consume reinforces the same gender-normative ideas. It seems easy for my students, at first glance, to
view these works as outdated. Closer examination reveals something else.

High school relationships have always had a big helping of physical attraction at their core, and teenagers are still trying to understand what matters beyond the
initial hormonal rush. Now, from my vantage point, cellphones and social media have made physical attributes even more of a preoccupation than they were
when I was in high school. Between sexting and posting provocative pictures to Instagram and Snapchat, students are more frequently exposed to sexualized
images particularly of women and young girls are increasingly pressured to take part in that objectification.

As a teacher, I see the cultural messages that continue to tell girls they are objects to be appraised by boys and that how women look is a key determinant in
deciding who they are. Photo-edited images on magazine covers and in ad campaigns add to the pressure for girls to alter their weight, hair color and body
proportions in real life.

It’s worth noting that standards of appearance are becoming increasingly unrealistic for men as well; the male cosmetics industry is exploding, and the
normative belief that men should be broad and muscular also stands out from most magazine racks. Not only that, but the messages that limit what women are
expected to look like and do undermine the authenticity and humanity of men as well, pegging them as conquerors, owners and judges rather than as individuals
capable of empathy, collaboration and tenderness.

So as we cover the curricula we are given to teach, let’s make sure we keep contextualizing those points in terms of present-day media literacy.

 Have students examine the coverage of women and men occupying the same spaces. The recent Olympic commentary is a good place to start. Red
carpet appearances in which men are asked about their craft and women are asked about their clothes is another. Teach them how these are vestiges of a
time when women were literally considered property, objects to be owned. You can tie back to literature to make those connections.

 Have students write journal entries about times they have seen the value of girls and boys being measured by their looks or their willingness to engage
in sexual behavior. Discuss the results of their writing, and talk about possible solutions to the problems. 

 Have students spend a week examining the world around them. Tell them to look at interactions among peers, their social media accounts, movies,
television shows, music videos and lyrics as a start. Ask them to write down all the examples they can find of behaviors that match up with the standards
they see in literary works written hundreds of years ago. Again, examine the underlying biases. 

 As a follow-up to that week-long examination, ask them to make an attempt to change what they have seen in some way. It may be as simple as telling
someone they don’t want to see the picture on their phone or not buying a certain artist’s new album. Those who want to go bigger can create a school-
wide awareness campaign or write an editorial for a local paper or website. Have them write a short reflection on that process, emphasizing what they
objected to and how they took a stand against it. Teaching Tolerance's “Do Something” student tasks offer a variety of approaches to having students
take action that builds civic engagement and critical literacy skills. 

We can use curricula to give students a better understanding of the past and present. More important, we can use them to help students think about how to solve
today’s problems for a better, more just future.