ROWENA CASIPLE

BEED – 3
A3A

1. Differentiate Sex and Gender according to the Perspective of Eckert et Al (20

points)

Gender is not something we are born with, and not something we have, but
something we do and something we perform. This means that gender comes off
naturally, the things that we do can identifies what gender we have in. Some of it can
acquire on social interaction and some are hereditary. Social interaction in a way that
whatever a child sees in his environment, it can affect his gender as he grow older,
either he copies it or not but as we all know, children are great imitators, they copy what
they sees so its better to keep an eye on them if you don’t want them to have that kind
of attitude. It is also hereditary in a way, in my own opinion, like if someone is
considered as gay or lesbian, the following generation like literally inherit that kind of
gender status as what I have observed to the people I’ve known. And sex by the way is
a biological categorization based primarily on reproductive potential, whereas gender is
the social elaboration of biological sex. This means that sex is the categorization of
what we are born with, biologically. It categorizes as male and female, no other sex
included. Sex is based only on what chromosome you are born with either it is male or
female. However, in this 21st century, there are lots of procedure that can give you an
opportunity to change what sex you fond the most.

2. Take the advice of Eckert et Al in page 1, as educator or learner, how can we

examine and understand gender from the new perspective? (20 points)

As an educator my understanding about gender is Gender is embedded so

thoroughly in our institutions, our actions, our beliefs, and our desires, that it appears to
us to be completely natural. The world swarms with ideas about gender – and these
ideas are so commonplace that we take it for granted that they are true, accepting
common adage as scientific fact. As scholars and researchers, though, it is our job to
look beyond what appears to be common sense to find not simply what truth might be
behind it, but how it came to be common sense. It is precisely because gender seems
natural, and beliefs about gender seem to be obvious truths, that we need to step back
and examine gender from a new perspective. Doing this requires that we suspend what
we are used to and what feels comfortable, and question some of our most fundamental
beliefs. This is not easy, for gender is so central to our understanding of ourselves and
of the world that it is difficult to pull back and examine it from new perspectives. But it is
precisely the fact that gender seems self-evident that makes the study of gender
interesting. It brings the challenge to uncover the process of construction that creates
what we have so long thought of as natural and inexorable – to study gender not as
given, but as an accomplishment; not simply as cause, but as effect; and not just as
individual, but as social. The results of failure to recognize this challenge are manifest
not only in the popular media, but in academic work on language and gender as well. As
a result, some gender scholarship does as much to reify and support existing beliefs as
to promote more reflective and informed thinking about gender.

3. What is Dichotomous beginnings as explained by Eckert et Al in page 8? (20 points)

Dichotomous beginnings are the stage where the male and female builds there
selves from the moment of birth. These are linguistic acts that set up the baby for life,
launching a gradual process of learning to be a boy or a girl, a man or a woman and to
see all others as boys or girls, men or women as well. This is the process which the
parents introduce the gender roles of their babies that they will eventually carry the
settings as they grow older. This is where they identify whether it is a girls work or just
for boys. It is perhaps at this early life stage that it is clearest that
gender is a collaborative affair , that one must learn to perform as a male or a female,
and that
these performances require support from one’s surroundings.

4. How is plough technology shapes the participation of women in the agriculture as

explained by Giuliano? (20 points)

Plough technology uses great strength to be executed properly and successfully

that is woman don’t have. The application of plough technology prohibits the women in
agriculture because it requires significant upper-body strength, grip strength, and bursts
of power to either pull the plough or control the animal that pulls it. Farming with the
plough is also less compatible with childcare, which is almost always the responsibility
of women. Therefore, women tend to stay at home because they are specialized in the
activities within the home unlike the men.

5. Is Giuliano’s historical perspective of gender viable in your personal experience with

your own local community or family? If YES or No? why? (20 points)

Yes. As what I have observe the great labor force are well dominated by men
whereas the female remains in their respective homes taking care of their children and
her husband. Most of the men go to the farm and do the task in any different occasions,
some higher class go to the city and work but mostly are on the farm as our area are
large in agricultural land. Also, way back then where my older brother are still staying
with us, he alone go to the farm while my sister-in-law stay in our home taking care of
their daughter. It is same as my father way back when we are younger, he do all the
hard work together with my brothers while me and my mother is just preparing their
food. When it comes to the house chores, it is always our duty- me and my mother- to
make our home orderly and neat as well as cooking our foods.
Bonus questions:

1. What is plough negative and plough positive as explained by Giuliano? (5

points)

Gender inequality is an old story. This column presents new evidence to

suggest it may be as old as the horse and plough. It says there is a robust
negative relationship between historical plough-use and unequal gender
roles today. Traditional plough-use is positively correlated with attitudes
reflecting gender inequality and negatively correlated with female labour
force participation, female firm ownership, and female participation in
politics.

2. Using the perspective of Giuliano, how is the division of labor or task in your
family organized (Male and Female assigned works)? (5 points)

The gender division of labour varies significantly across societies. In

some cultures women actively participate in employment outside of the
home, while in others there is a clear specialisation of tasks along gender
lines with women tending to stay at home while their husbands go out to
earn the money. These differences are most clearly illustrated by the vast
differences in female labour force participation, which in 2000 ranged from
16.1% in Pakistan to 90.5% in Burundi.Many determinants of these
differences have been thoroughly studied, including per capita income and
the specialisation of the economy in female-friendly industries. However,
even controlling for these variables there remain important time-invariant
differences in gender roles.