User:So47009/work03

現代英語「gender」的前身為中古英语「gendre」。後者借用了盎格鲁-诺曼语和中古法語的同樣字詞。而「gendre」则来自拉丁语的「genus」 ——兩者皆指「類型」。它最終可追溯到原始印歐語的词根「*ǵénh₁-」，即「产生」和「孕育」^[18]。它跟「kin」、「kind」 、「king」等同根。此外亦與其他印欧语系的部分詞彙同源^[19]，像是現代法语的「genre」。它跟希腊语词根「gen-」亦有一定關係，後者成為了英語「gene」、「genesis」、「oxygen」的一部分。1882年的《牛津英語詞源詞典》把「gender」定義為「種類、品種、性別」，指其就像「genere natus」（出生）般，一樣源自拉丁語中的離格「genus」^[20]。

社會性別是近代的概念^[21]。在20世紀中期，人文社會科學界才開始著力探討之^[21]。現時意指社會性別的英語「gender」在此之前一直只跟文法有關^[22]。

英語圈在用字上嘗試區分生物性別和性別角色之前，「gender」一般只用在文法分類上^[3][1]。比如一本有關婚姻家庭的書籍雖列出12,000多條1900年至1964年出版的參考資料，但當中沒有出現「gender」一詞^[3]。研究者在分析3000萬篇1945年至2001年出版的學術文章標題後，得出結論： 早期的文章很少應用到「gender」，其應用多跟文法分類有關。到了1970年代，女性主義學者開始把生物性別和社會對性別的建構分開，致使人文社科界使用「gender」的次數遠多於「sex」^[1]。

到了1980年代至1990年代，在女性主義思潮的影響之下，學者使用「gender」的次數出現較大幅的增長，在社會科學界中甚至拋棄「sex」一詞。但在實際應用上，部分人會把之當作「sex」的同義詞，違背原意。戴维·A·黑格提到：「在生物學界，部分科學家以『gender』替代『sex』是為了表達對女性主義理想的認同。其他的可能認為此一用法較有學術風格；或能以之減少歧義，避免跟交配混淆」^[1]。1993年，美国食品药品监督管理局（FDA）為了減少歧意，決定以「gender」取代「sex」^[23]。2011年，FDA決定在生物分類上改用後者，前者則改以形容「人們對自身是男或女的展示，以及社會制度對此的反應」^[24]。

2006年，梅雷迪斯·伦德（Meredith Render）在回顧多宗有關歧視的判決時寫道：「自1964年民權法案生效以來，性/別的觀念起了不少變化，令法案中性別歧視的涵意也隨之變遷」^[25]:135。朱莉·格林伯格（Julie Greenberg）在1999年的一篇文章中提倡把「sex」的法律定義延伸，令之更為強調「自我性別認同」。他寫道：「大多法律條文都採用『sex』一詞，但法院以及立法和行政機關往往在解釋法規時以『gender』取代之」^{[26]:270, 274}。在J.E.B. v. Alabama ex rel. T.B.案中，美国最高法院為「平等保護條款是否禁止建基於社會性別的歧視」頒下判決，大多數意見認為需承認「我國在性別歧視上有著一段難堪的過去……提醒我們需嚴格考慮所有建基於社會性別的分類是否合理……當各州行為者只因對社會性別的刻板印象而要求某人無因迴避時，他們就在認同和加深男女相對能力不同的偏見」^[27]。

The word was still widely used, however, in the specific sense of grammatical gender (the assignment of nouns to categories such as masculine, feminine and neuter). According to Aristotle, this concept was introduced by the Greek philosopher Protagoras.^{[28][页码请求]}In 1926, Henry Watson Fowler stated that the definition of the word pertained to this grammar-related meaning:

"Gender...is a grammatical term only. To talk of persons...of the masculine or feminine g[ender], meaning of the male or female sex, is either a jocularity (permissible or not according to context) or a blunder."^[29]

1945年，麥迪遜·本特利把社會性別定義為「社會對生物性別的觀察」^[30][31]。4年後，西蒙·德·波娃在《第二性》中開始套用該一區別，使得此一概念正式步入女性主义理论^[32][33]。不過薩拉·海納瑪表示此一演繹有一定爭議^[34]。

性別角色的概念由性學家約翰·曼尼所創^[35][36]。他在1955年的一篇文章中把它定義為：「人們為表達自己是男是女的所說所行」^[37]。最遲在1945年，學者開始以社會性別來表達性別角色^[38]。

The popular use of gender simply as an alternative to sex (as a biological category) is also widespread, although attempts are still made to preserve the distinction. The American Heritage Dictionary (2000) uses the following two sentences to illustrate the difference, noting that the distinction "is useful in principle, but it is by no means widely observed, and considerable variation in usage occurs at all levels."^[39]

The effectiveness of the medication appears to depend on the sex (not gender) of the patient.
In peasant societies, gender (not sex) roles are likely to be more clearly defined.

系列条目
跨性別专题
性別認同 跨性別男性 跨性別女性 非二元性別 第三性別 雙靈 海吉拉 順性別 性別盲 異性戀酷兒 非常規性別 兩性化
保健和医药 性别认同诊所（英语：Gender identity clinic） 性別不安 兒童 性別指派 性別重置療法 性别肯定激素治疗 女性化激素疗法 男性化激素疗法 青春期阻滞剂 性別肯定手術 女跨男 男跨女 面部女性化手术（英语：Facial feminization surgery） 面部男性化手术（英语：Facial masculinization surgery） 脱毛 怀孕 生殖（英语：LGBT reproduction） 语音疗法 世界跨性別健康專業協會 《護理指引（英语：Standards of Care for the Health of Transgender and Gender Diverse People）》
權益问题 權益運動 权利组织（英语：List of transgender-rights organizations） 宗教取態（英语：Transgender people and religion） 迫害 收養 跨性別恐懼 厭跨女症 排跨基女 非二元性别歧视（英语：Discrimination against non-binary people） 中性廁所
社群和文化 活动（英语：List of LGBT events） 跨性別追悼日 國際跨性別現身日 旗幟 人物 出版物（英语：List of transgender publications） 主题（英语：Outline of transgender topics）
理论和概念 變裝 性別二元論 性別表現 性別存疑 棄名錯稱 性別過渡 去性別轉換 後性別主義 跨性別女性主義
参见 成因 性行為 性别 社會性別 性別之分 性别研究 雙性人 LGBT 性倾向
LGBT主题 跨性别主题
查 论 编

性別認同指人們對特定性別和性別角色之認可。在社會性別這個概念出現之前，女性一直靠著身體特徵來定義，之後一些女性主義者開始挑戰這一理解^[40]。

女性主義者會挑戰有關性別角色和生物性別的主流意識形態。朱迪斯·巴特勒認為「生為女性」的概念具有較大挑戰空間，因為它除了是一門社會分類之外，還是一種自我認知和文化建構的主觀認同^[41]。社會認同是一種建基於社會分類的共同認知，能夠讓成員創造出共同文化 ^[42]。社會認同理論認為^[43]。社群之間的互動和共同經歷會為人提供相當一部分的自我概念，塑造人們如何舉止的規範^[44]。

在社会角色上把人以男女二分會讓部分人認為自身只屬於當中一種角色，並按其規範行事。但社会角色事實上是一門光譜，人們可處於當中的任何一點^[45]。世界各地都會以男女在的生物差別為由，創造出一套界定他們該如何舉止的社會期望。並在權力、權利、資源分配等事宜上作出差別待遇^[46]。大多社會會優待男性，令它們出現性別不平等的現象^[47]。很多社會皆為性別創造出一套規範和信念，不過性別角色卻沒有普世劃一的定義^[48]。男女在社會上的角色和彼此之間如何互動皆受文化規範影響，令一套性別系統得以誕生。它是很多社會格局的基礎，令它們隔離性別和偏好於男性氣質^[47]。

哲學家米歇尔·福柯認為人是性的主體，但卻受制於權力影響，而它最終可歸因於「各種權力策略」^[49]。權力決定了人們的態度和行為，並令人們受到標籤。比如女性在不少社會上被視為情緒化和柔弱的，沒能力作出跟男性一樣的行為。朱迪斯·巴特勒表示，社會在把自身視為女性的同時，也把一套行為舉止規範施加在自身身上，因此性別更像是個動詞。他表示「因為社會把性別視作政治的一部分，並對之作出規限，所以它不許我自由建構自身的性別……」^[41]。不過也有批評指其行文加強了傳統的性別二分法^[50]。

性別理論家凱特·博恩斯坦（英语：Kate Bornstein）表示，社會性別存有一定的模糊地帶，並具流動空間^[51]。至少有兩套不同但又有共通之處的理論定義了何謂社會性別^[52][53]：

世界衛生組織定義社會性別為「社會建構的男女特質」^[54]。根據該一定義，社會性別是社會規範加諸於人們身上的信念和態度，個人對此的看法相對而言較不重要^[2]。

社會為人指定社會性別時，會先考慮人們與生俱來的外表及生理特質，然後按此一特質分配社會認為合適的行為舉止。因此社會性別指的是特定社會文化對「男性氣質」和「女性氣質」的建構。儘管生物性別是一門可以得到人們認知的事實，但性別角色會因文化而異^[55]，且受到照顧者、學校教育、媒體的影響。因此，社會性別自幼開始便開始習得——例如為嬰兒挑選的玩具和衣服都是學習有關規範的途徑。不過，人們的社會性別不一定跟其出生時指定的性別相符，其還會受學習行為等因素影響^[56]。

Template:More sources needed

Sexologist John Money coined the term gender role in 1955. The term gender role is defined as the actions or responses that may reveal their status as boy, man, girl or woman, respectively.^[57] Elements surrounding gender roles include clothing, speech patterns, movement, occupations, and other factors not limited to biological sex. In contrast to taxonomic approaches, some feminist philosophers have argued that gender "is a vast orchestration of subtle mediations between oneself and others", rather than a "private cause behind manifest behaviours".^[58]

大多社會在過去都只把人按生物特徵分為兩種性別角色^[8][59][60]。它們會根據嬰兒的性器官，為之分配社會性別^[55]。

不過仍有一些社會會承認有些人處於男性—女性氣質光譜的中間。例如夏威夷人會承認他們的社會有人是處於「男女之間」，他們稱這一群體為māhū^[61][62]，在奥吉布瓦語中，「ikwekaazo」或「ininiikaazo」指的都是選擇以另一性別角色過活的人^[63]。性别社会学研究者會把上述情況稱為第三性別。符合上述身份的當代美國原住民和加拿大原住民可能也認為自己是屬於雙靈圈子^[64]。不過，這類概括式語言可能不為該些社群大多成員所認同^[65]。

能夠歸作第三性別的還有印度和巴基斯坦的海吉拉，以及墨西哥瓦哈卡州的muxe^[66][67][68]。苏拉威西岛和印度尼西亚的布吉人在傳統上有著與上述分類不同的系統^[69]。

除了第三性別外，現在許多文化皆接受了各種的非二元性別。 People who are non-binary (or genderqueer) have gender identities that are not exclusively masculine or feminine. They may identify as having an overlap of gender identities, having two or more genders, having no gender, having a fluctuating gender identity, or being third gender or other-gendered. Recognition of non-binary genders is still somewhat new to mainstream Western culture,^[70] and non-binary people may face increased risk of assault, harassment, and discrimination.^[71]

女性主义哲学
主要作品
《为女權辯護》（1792） 《妇女的屈从地位》 （1869） 《家庭、私有制和国家的起源》 （1884） 《第二性》 （1949） 《女性的奥秘》 （1963） 《性别政治（英语：Sexual Politics）》（1969） 《性的辩证法（英语：The Dialectic of Sex）》 （1970） 《女太监》 （1970） 《像女孩那樣丟球（英语：Throwing Like a Girl: A Phenomenology of Feminine Body Comportment Motility and Spatiality）》 （1980） 《不同的声音（英语：In a Different Voice）》 （1982） 《政治的现实（英语：The Politics of Reality）》 （1983） 《迈向女性主义的国家理论（英语：Toward a Feminist Theory of the State）》 （1989） 《性别麻烦（英语：Gender Trouble）》 （1990）
著名学者
沃斯通克拉夫特 · 波娃 · 戴莉 · 戈尔德曼 · 哈斯兰格 · 伊瑞葛來 · 傅瑞丹 · 费尔斯通 · 基爾 · 斯坦能 · 戴维斯 · 胡克斯 · 克莉斯蒂娃 · 盧森堡 · 麥金儂 · 米歇尔 · 魯賓 · 萨达维 · 楊 · 蔡特金 · 勒纳（英语：Gerda Lerner） · 巴特勒  · 普魯姆德（英语：Val Plumwood）
重要概念
女性主义 · 性别 性別平等 · 性别操演（英语：Gender performativity） · 关怀伦理学
分类
女性主義哲學家
查 论 编

Biologist and feminist academic Anne Fausto-Sterling rejects the discourse of biological versus social determinism and advocates a deeper analysis of how interactions between the biological being and the social environment influence individuals' capacities.^[72]

The philosopher and feminist Simone de Beauvoir applied existentialism to women's experience of life: "One is not born a woman, one becomes one."^[73] In context, this is a philosophical statement. However, it may be analyzed in terms of biology—a girl must pass puberty to become a woman—and sociology, as a great deal of mature relating in social contexts is learned rather than instinctive.^[74]

Within feminist theory, terminology for gender issues developed over the 1970s. In the 1974 edition of Masculine/Feminine or Human, the author uses "innate gender" and "learned sex roles",^[75] but in the 1978 edition, the use of sex and gender is reversed.^[76]By 1980, most feminist writings had agreed on using gender only for socioculturally adapted traits.

In gender studies the term gender refers to proposed social and cultural constructions of masculinities and femininities. In this context, gender explicitly excludes reference to biological differences, to focus on cultural differences.^[77] This emerged from a number of different areas: in sociology during the 1950s; from the theories of the psychoanalyst Jacques Lacan; and in the work of French psychoanalysts like Julia Kristeva, Luce Irigaray, and American feminists such as Judith Butler. Those who followed Butler came to regard gender roles as a practice, sometimes referred to as "performative".^[78]

Charles E. Hurst states that some people think sex will, "...automatically determine one's gender demeanor and role (social) as well as one's sexual orientation (sexual attractions and behavior).^[79] Gender sociologists believe that people have cultural origins and habits for dealing with gender. For example, Michael Schwalbe believes that humans must be taught how to act appropriately in their designated gender to fill the role properly, and that the way people behave as masculine or feminine interacts with social expectations. Schwalbe comments that humans "are the results of many people embracing and acting on similar ideas".^[80] People do this through everything from clothing and hairstyle to relationship and employment choices. Schwalbe believes that these distinctions are important, because society wants to identify and categorize people as soon as we see them. They need to place people into distinct categories to know how we should feel about them.

Hurst comments that in a society where we present our genders so distinctly, there can often be severe consequences for breaking these cultural norms. Many of these consequences are rooted in discrimination based on sexual orientation. Gays and lesbians are often discriminated against in our legal system because of societal prejudices.^[81][82][83] Hurst describes how this discrimination works against people for breaking gender norms, no matter what their sexual orientation is. He says that "courts often confuse sex, gender, and sexual orientation, and confuse them in a way that results in denying the rights not only of gays and lesbians, but also of those who do not present themselves or act in a manner traditionally expected of their sex".^[79] This prejudice plays out in our legal system when a person is judged differently because they do not present themselves as the "correct" gender.

Andrea Dworkin stated her "commitment to destroying male dominance and gender itself" while stating her belief in radical feminism.^[84]

Political scientist Mary Hawkesworth addresses gender and feminist theory, stating that since the 1970s the concept of gender has transformed and been used in significantly different ways within feminist scholarship. She notes that a transition occurred when several feminist scholars, such as Sandra Harding and Joan Scott, began to conceive of gender "as an analytic category within which humans think about and organize their social activity". Feminist scholars in Political Science began employing gender as an analytical category, which highlighted "social and political relations neglected by mainstream accounts". However, Hawkesworth states "feminist political science has not become a dominant paradigm within the discipline".^[85]

American political scientist Karen Beckwith addresses the concept of gender within political science arguing that a "common language of gender" exists and that it must be explicitly articulated in order to build upon it within the political science discipline. Beckwith describes two ways in which the political scientist may employ 'gender' when conducting empirical research: "gender as a category and as a process." Employing gender as a category allows for political scientists "to delineate specific contexts where behaviours, actions, attitudes and preferences considered masculine or feminine result in particular" political outcomes. It may also demonstrate how gender differences, not necessarily corresponding precisely with sex, may "constrain or facilitate political" actors. Gender as a process has two central manifestations in political science research, firstly in determining "the differential effects of structures and policies upon men and women," and secondly, the ways in which masculine and feminine political actors "actively work to produce favorable gendered outcomes".^[86]

With regard to gender studies, Jacquetta Newman states that although sex is determined biologically, the ways in which people express gender is not. Gendering is a socially constructed process based on culture, though often cultural expectations around women and men have a direct relationship to their biology. Because of this, Newman argues, many privilege sex as being a cause of oppression and ignore other issues like race, ability, poverty, etc. Current gender studies classes seek to move away from that and examine the intersectionality of these factors in determining people's lives. She also points out that other non-Western cultures do not necessarily have the same views of gender and gender roles.^[87] Newman also debates the meaning of equality, which is often considered the goal of feminism; she believes that equality is a problematic term because it can mean many different things, such as people being treated identically, differently, or fairly based on their gender. Newman believes this is problematic because there is no unified definition as to what equality means or looks like, and that this can be significantly important in areas like public policy.^[88]

The World Health Organization states "As a social construct, gender varies from society to society and can change over time."^[89] Sociologists generally regard gender as a social construct, and various researchers, including many feminists, consider sex to only be a matter of biology and something that is not about social or cultural construction. For instance, sexologist John Money suggests the distinction between biological sex and gender as a role.^[57] Moreover, Ann Oakley, a professor of sociology and social policy, says "the constancy of sex must be admitted, but so also must the variability of gender."^[90] Thus, sex is regarded as a category studied in biology (natural sciences), while gender is studied in humanities and social sciences. Lynda Birke, a feminist biologist, maintains "'biology' is not seen as something which might change."^[91] Therefore, it is stated that sex is something that does not change, while gender can change according to social structure.

However, there are scholars who argue that sex is also socially constructed. For example, gender studies writer Judith Butler states that "perhaps this construct called 'sex' is as culturally constructed as gender; indeed, perhaps it was always already gender, with the consequence that the distinction between sex and gender turns out to be no distinction at all."^[92]

She continues:

It would make no sense, then, to define gender as the cultural interpretation of sex, if sex is itself a gender-centered category. Gender should not be conceived merely as the cultural inscription of meaning based on a given sex (a juridical conception); gender must also designate the very apparatus of production whereby the sexes themselves are established. [...] This production of sex as the pre-discursive should be understood as the effect of the apparatus of cultural construction designated by gender.^[93]

Butler argues that "bodies only appear, only endure, only live within the productive constraints of certain highly gendered regulatory schemas,"^[94] and sex is "no longer as a bodily given on which the construct of gender is artificially imposed, but as a cultural norm which governs the materialization of bodies."^[95]

With regard to history, Linda Nicholson, a professor of history and women's studies, argues that the understanding of human bodies as sexually dimorphic was historically not recognised. She states that male and female genitals were considered inherently the same in Western society until the 18th century. At that time, female genitals were regarded as incomplete male genitals, and the difference between the two was conceived as a matter of degree. In other words, there was a belief in a gradation of physical forms, or a spectrum.^[96] Scholars such as Helen King, Joan Cadden, and Michael Stolberg have criticized this interpretation of history.^[97] Cadden notes that the "one-sex" model was disputed even in ancient and medieval medicine,^[98] and Stolberg points out that already in the sixteenth century, medicine had begun to move towards a two-sex model.^[99]

In addition, drawing from the empirical research of intersex children, Anne Fausto-Sterling, a professor of biology and gender studies, describes how the doctors address the issues of intersexuality. She starts her argument with an example of the birth of an intersexual individual and maintains "our conceptions of the nature of gender difference shape, even as they reflect, the ways we structure our social system and polity; they also shape and reflect our understanding of our physical bodies."^[100] Then she adds how gender assumptions affects the scientific study of sex by presenting the research of intersexuals by John Money et al., and she concludes that "they never questioned the fundamental assumption that there are only two sexes, because their goal in studying intersexuals was to find out more about 'normal' development."^[101] She also mentions the language the doctors use when they talk with the parents of the intersexuals. After describing how the doctors inform parents about the intersexuality, she asserts that because the doctors believe that the intersexuals are actually male or female, they tell the parents of the intersexuals that it will take a little bit more time for the doctors to determine whether the infant is a boy or a girl. That is to say, the doctors' behavior is formulated by the cultural gender assumption that there are only two sexes. Lastly, she maintains that the differences in the ways in which the medical professionals in different regions treat intersexual people also give us a good example of how sex is socially constructed.^[102] In her Sexing the body: gender politics and the construction of sexuality, she introduces the following example:

A group of physicians from Saudi Arabia recently reported on several cases of XX intersex children with congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH), a genetically inherited malfunction of the enzymes that aid in making steroid hormones. [...] In the United States and Europe, such children, because they have the potential to bear children later in life, are usually raised as girls. Saudi doctors trained in this European tradition recommended such a course of action to the Saudi parents of CAH XX children. A number of parents, however, refused to accept the recommendation that their child, initially identified as a son, be raised instead as a daughter. Nor would they accept feminizing surgery for their child. [...] This was essentially an expression of local community attitudes with [...] the preference for male offspring.^[103]

Thus it is evident that culture can play a part in assigning gender, particularly in relation to intersex children.^[102]

The article Adolescent Gender-Role Identity and Mental Health: Gender Intensification Revisited focuses on the work of Heather A. Priess, Sara M. Lindberg, and Janet Shibley Hyde on whether or not girls and boys diverge in their gender identities during adolescent years. The researchers based their work on ideas previously mentioned by Hill and Lynch in their gender intensification hypothesis in that signals and messages from parents determine and affect their children's gender role identities. This hypothesis argues that parents affect their children's gender role identities and that different interactions spent with either parents will affect gender intensification. Priess and among other's study did not support the hypothesis of Hill and Lynch which stated "that as adolescents experience these and other socializing influences, they will become more stereotypical in their gender-role identities and gendered attitudes and behaviors."^[104] However, the researchers did state that perhaps the hypothesis Hill and Lynch proposed was true in the past but is not true now due to changes in the population of teens in respect to their gender-role identities.

Authors of "Unpacking the Gender System: A Theoretical Perspective on Gender Beliefs and Social Relations", Cecilia Ridgeway and Shelley Correll, argue that gender is more than an identity or role but is something that is institutionalized through "social relational contexts." Ridgeway and Correll define "social relational contexts" as "any situation in which individuals define themselves in relation to others in order to act."^[105] They also point out that in addition to social relational contexts, cultural beliefs plays a role in the gender system. The coauthors argue that daily people are forced to acknowledge and interact with others in ways that are related to gender. Every day, individuals are interacting with each other and comply with society's set standard of hegemonic beliefs, which includes gender roles. They state that society's hegemonic cultural beliefs sets the rules which in turn create the setting for which social relational contexts are to take place. Ridgeway and Correll then shift their topic towards sex categorization. The authors define sex categorization as "the sociocognitive process by which we label another as male or female."^[105]

The failure of an attempt to raise David Reimer from infancy through adolescence as a girl after his genitals were accidentally mutilated is cited as disproving the theory that gender identity is determined solely by parenting.^[106][107] Reimer's case is used by organizations such as the Intersex Society of North America to caution against needlessly modifying the genitals of unconsenting minors.^[108][109] Between the 1960s and 2000, many other male newborns and infants were surgically and socially reassigned as females if they were born with malformed penises, or if they lost their penises in accidents. At the time, surgical reconstruction of the vagina was more advanced than reconstruction of the penis, leading many doctors and psychologists, including John Money who oversaw Reimer's case, to recommend sex reassignment based on the idea that these patients would be happiest living as women with functioning genitalia.^[110] Available evidence indicates that in such instances, parents were deeply committed to raising these children as girls and in as gender-typical a manner as possible.^{[110]:72–73} A 2005 review of these cases found that about half of natal males reassigned female lived as women in adulthood, including those who knew their medical history, suggesting that gender assignment and related social factors has a major, though not determinative, influence on eventual gender identity.^[109]

In 2015, the American Academy of Pediatrics released a webinar series on gender, gender identity, gender expression, transgender, etc.^[111][112] In the first lecture Sherer explains that parents' influence (through punishment and reward of behavior) can influence gender expression but not gender identity.^[113] Sherer argued that kids will modify their gender expression to seek reward from their parents and society, but this will not affect their gender identity (their internal sense of self).

Some gendered behavior is influenced by prenatal and early life androgen exposure. This includes, for example, gender normative play, self-identification with a gender, and tendency to engage in aggressive behavior.^[114] Males of most mammals, including humans, exhibit more rough and tumble play behavior, which is influenced by maternal testosterone levels. These levels may also influence sexuality, with non-heterosexual persons exhibiting sex atypical behavior in childhood.^[115]

The biology of gender became the subject of an expanding number of studies over the course of the late 20th century. One of the earliest areas of interest was what became known as "gender identity disorder" (GID) and which is now also described as gender dysphoria. Studies in this, and related areas, inform the following summary of the subject by John Money. He stated:

The term "gender role" appeared in print first in 1955. The term gender identity was used in a press release, 21 November 1966, to announce the new clinic for transsexuals at The Johns Hopkins Hospital. It was disseminated in the media worldwide, and soon entered the vernacular. The definitions of gender and gender identity vary on a doctrinal basis. In popularized and scientifically debased usage, sex is what you are biologically; gender is what you become socially; gender identity is your own sense or conviction of maleness or femaleness; and gender role is the cultural stereotype of what is masculine and feminine. Causality with respect to gender identity disorder is sub-divisible into genetic, prenatal hormonal, postnatal social, and post-pubertal hormonal determinants, but there is, as yet, no comprehensive and detailed theory of causality. Gender coding in the brain is bipolar. In gender identity disorder, there is discordance between the natal sex of one's external genitalia and the brain coding of one's gender as masculine or feminine.^[116]

Although causation from the biological—genetic and hormonal—to the behavioral has been broadly demonstrated and accepted, Money is careful to also note that understanding of the causal chains from biology to behavior in sex and gender issues is very far from complete.^[117]

There are studies concerning women who have a condition called congenital adrenal hyperplasia, which leads to the overproduction of the masculine sex hormone, androgen. These women usually have ordinary female appearances (though nearly all girls with congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH) have corrective surgery performed on their genitals). However, despite taking hormone-balancing medication given to them at birth, these females are statistically more likely to be interested in activities traditionally linked to males than female activities. Psychology professor and CAH researcher Dr. Sheri Berenbaum attributes these differences to an exposure of higher levels of male sex hormones in utero.^[118]

In non-human animal research, gender is commonly used to refer to the biological sex of the animals.^[1] According to biologist Michael J. Ryan, gender identity is a concept exclusively applied to humans.^[119] Also, in a letter Ellen Ketterson writes, "[w]hen asked, my colleagues in the Department of Gender Studies agreed that the term gender could be properly applied only to humans, because it involves one's self-concept as man or woman. Sex is a biological concept; gender is a human social and cultural concept."^[120] However, Poiani (2010) notes that the question of whether behavioural similarities across species can be associated with gender identity or not is "an issue of no easy resolution",^[121] and suggests that mental states, such as gender identity, are more accessible in humans than other species due to their capacity for language.^[122] Polani suggests that the potential number of species with members possessing a gender identity must be limited due to the requirement for self-consciousness.^[123]

Jacques Balthazart suggests that "there is no animal model for studying sexual identity. It is impossible to ask an animal, whatever its species, to what sex it belongs."^[124] He notes that "this would imply that the animal is aware of its own body and sex, which is far from proved", despite recent research demonstrating sophisticated cognitive skills among non-human primates and other species.^[125] Hird (2006) has also stated that whether or not non-human animals consider themselves to be feminine or masculine is a "difficult, if not impossible, question to answer", as this would require "judgements about what constitutes femininity or masculinity in any given species". Nonetheless, she asserts that "non-human animals do experience femininity and masculinity to the extent that any given species' behaviour is gender segregated."^[126]

Despite this, Poiani and Dixson emphasise the applicability of the concept of gender role to non-human animals^[121] such as rodents^[127] throughout their book.^[128] The concept of gender role has also been applied to non-human primates such as rhesus monkeys.^[129][130]

Gender studies is a field of interdisciplinary study and academic field devoted to gender, gender identity and gendered representation as central categories of analysis. This field includes Women's studies (concerning women, feminity, their gender roles and politics, and feminism), Men's studies (concerning men, masculinity, their gender roles, and politics), and LGBT studies.^[131]Sometimes Gender studies is offered together with Study of Sexuality.These disciplines study gender and sexuality in the fields of literature and language, history, political science, sociology, anthropology, cinema and media studies, human development, law, and medicine.^[132]It also analyses race, ethnicity, location, nationality, and disability.^[133][134]

Many of the more complicated human behaviors are influenced by both innate factors and by environmental ones, which include everything from genes, gene expression, and body chemistry, through diet and social pressures. A large area of research in behavioral psychology collates evidence in an effort to discover correlations between behavior and various possible antecedents such as genetics, gene regulation, access to food and vitamins, culture, gender, hormones, physical and social development, and physical and social environments.^[135]

A core research area within sociology is the way human behavior operates on itself, in other words, how the behavior of one group or individual influences the behavior of other groups or individuals. Starting in the late 20th century, the feminist movement has contributed extensive study of gender and theories about it, notably within sociology but not restricted to it.^[136]

Social theorists have sought to determine the specific nature of gender in relation to biological sex and sexuality,^[137][138] with the result being that culturally established gender and sex have become interchangeable identifications that signify the allocation of a specific 'biological' sex within a categorical gender.^[138] The second wave feminist view that gender is socially constructed and hegemonic in all societies, remains current in some literary theoretical circles, Kira Hall and Mary Bucholtz publishing new perspectives as recently as 2008.^[139]

As the child grows, "...society provides a string of prescriptions, templates, or models of behaviors appropriate to the one sex or the other,"^[140] which socialises the child into belonging to a culturally specific gender.^[141] There is huge incentive for a child to concede to their socialisation with gender shaping the individual's opportunities for education, work, family, sexuality, reproduction, authority,^[142] and to make an impact on the production of culture and knowledge.^[143] Adults who do not perform these ascribed roles are perceived from this perspective as deviant and improperly socialized.^[144]

Some believe society is constructed in a way that splits gender into a dichotomy via social organisations that constantly invent and reproduce cultural images of gender. Joan Acker believed gendering occurs in at least five different interacting social processes:^[145]

• The construction of divisions along the lines of gender, such as those produced by labor, power, family, the state, even allowed behaviors and locations in physical space
• The construction of symbols and images such as language, ideology, dress and the media, that explain, express and reinforce, or sometimes oppose, those divisions
• Interactions between men and women, women and women and men and men that involve any form of dominance and submission. Conversational theorists, for example, have studied the way that interruptions, turn taking and the setting of topics re-create gender inequality in the flow of ordinary talk
• The way that the preceding three processes help to produce gendered components of individual identity, i.e., the way they create and maintain an image of a gendered self
• Gender is implicated in the fundamental, ongoing processes of creating and conceptualising social structures.

Looking at gender through a Foucauldian lens, gender is transfigured into a vehicle for the social division of power. Gender difference is merely a construct of society used to enforce the distinctions made between what is assumed to be female and male, and allow for the domination of masculinity over femininity through the attribution of specific gender-related characteristics.^[146] "The idea that men and women are more different from one another than either is from anything else, must come from something other than nature... far from being an expression of natural differences, exclusive gender identity is the suppression of natural similarities."^[147]

Gender conventions play a large role in attributing masculine and feminine characteristics to a fundamental biological sex.^[148] Socio-cultural codes and conventions, the rules by which society functions, and which are both a creation of society as well as a constituting element of it, determine the allocation of these specific traits to the sexes. These traits provide the foundations for the creation of hegemonic gender difference. It follows then, that gender can be assumed as the acquisition and internalisation of social norms. Individuals are therefore socialized through their receipt of society's expectations of 'acceptable' gender attributes that are flaunted within institutions such as the family, the state and the media. Such a notion of 'gender' then becomes naturalized into a person's sense of self or identity, effectively imposing a gendered social category upon a sexed body.^[147]

The conception that people are gendered rather than sexed also coincides with Judith Butler's theories of gender performativity. Butler argues that gender is not an expression of what one is, but rather something that one does.^[149] It follows then, that if gender is acted out in a repetitive manner it is in fact re-creating and effectively embedding itself within the social consciousness. Contemporary sociological reference to male and female gender roles typically uses masculinities and femininities in the plural rather than singular, suggesting diversity both within cultures as well as across them.

The difference between the sociological and popular definitions of gender involve a different dichotomy and focus. For example, the sociological approach to "gender" (social roles: female versus male) focuses on the difference in (economic/power) position between a male CEO (disregarding the fact that he is heterosexual or homosexual) to female workers in his employ (disregarding whether they are straight or gay). However the popular sexual self-conception approach (self-conception: gay versus straight) focuses on the different self-conceptions and social conceptions of those who are gay/straight, in comparison with those who are straight (disregarding what might be vastly differing economic and power positions between female and male groups in each category). There is then, in relation to definition of and approaches to "gender", a tension between historic feminist sociology and contemporary homosexual sociology.^[150]

According to Alex Iantaffi, Meg-John Barker, and others, gender is biopsychosocial. This is because it is derived from biological, psychological, and social factors,^[151][16] with all three factors feeding back into each other to form a person's gender.^[16]

Biological factors such as sex chromosomes, hormones, and anatomy play a significant role in the development of gender. Hormones such as testosterone and estrogen also play a crucial role in shaping gender identity and expression. Anatomy, including genitalia and reproductive organs, can also influence one's gender identity and expression.^[152]

Psychological factors such as cognition, personality, and self-concept also contribute to gender development. Gender identity emerges around the age of two to three years. Gender expression, which refers to the outward manifestation of gender, is influenced by cultural norms, personal preferences, and individual differences in personality.^[153]

Social factors such as culture, socialization, and institutional practices shape gender identity and expression.

In some English literature, there is also a trichotomy between biological sex, psychological gender, and social gender role. This framework first appeared in a feminist paper on transsexualism in 1978.^[1][154]

Historically, science has been portrayed as a masculine pursuit in which women have faced significant barriers to participate.^[155] Even after universities began admitting women in the 19th century, women were still largely relegated to certain scientific fields, such as home science, nursing, and child psychology.^[156] Women were also typically given tedious, low-paying jobs and denied opportunities for career advancement.^[156] This was often justified by the stereotype that women were naturally more suited to jobs that required concentration, patience, and dexterity, rather than creativity, leadership, or intellect.^[156] Although these stereotypes have been dispelled in modern times, women are still underrepresented in prestigious "hard science" fields such as physics, and are less likely to hold high-ranking positions,^[157] a situation global initiatives such as the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 5 are trying to rectify.^[158]

Gender inequality is most common in women dealing with poverty. Many women must shoulder all the responsibility of the household because they must take care of the family. Oftentimes this may include tasks such as tilling land, grinding grain, carrying water and cooking.^[159] Also, women are more likely to earn low incomes because of gender discrimination, as men are more likely to receive higher pay, have more opportunities, and have overall more political and social capital then women.^[160] Approximately 75% of world's women are unable to obtain bank loans because they have unstable jobs.^[159] It shows that there are many women in the world's population but only a few represent world's wealth. In many countries, the financial sector largely neglects women even though they play an important role in the economy, as Nena Stoiljkovic pointed out in D+C Development and Cooperation.^[161] In 1978 Diana M. Pearce coined the term feminization of poverty to describe the problem of women having higher rates of poverty.^[162] Women are more vulnerable to chronic poverty because of gender inequalities in the distribution of income, property ownership, credit, and control over earned income.^[163] Resource allocation is typically gender-biased within households, and continue on a higher level regarding state institutions.^[163]

Gender and Development (GAD) is a holistic approach to give aid to countries where gender inequality has a great effect of not improving the social and economic development. It is a program focused on the gender development of women to empower them and decrease the level of inequality between men and women.^[164]

The largest discrimination study of the transgender community, conducted in 2013, found that the transgender community is four times more likely to live in extreme poverty (income of less than $10,000 a year) than people who are cisgender.^[165][166]

According to general strain theory, studies suggest that gender differences between individuals can lead to externalized anger that may result in violent outbursts.^[167] These violent actions related to gender inequality can be measured by comparing violent neighborhoods to non-violent neighborhoods.^[167] By noticing the independent variables (neighborhood violence) and the dependent variable (individual violence), it is possible to analyze gender roles.^[168] The strain in the general strain theory is the removal of a positive stimulus and or the introduction of a negative stimulus, which would create a negative effect (strain) within individual, which is either inner-directed (depression/guilt) or outer-directed (anger/frustration), which depends on whether the individual blames themselves or their environment.^[169] Studies reveal that even though males and females are equally likely to react to a strain with anger, the origin of the anger and their means of coping with it can vary drastically.^[169]

Males are likely to put the blame on others for adversity and therefore externalize feelings of anger.^[167] Females typically internalize their angers and tend to blame themselves instead.^[167] Female internalized anger is accompanied by feelings of guilt, fear, anxiety and depression.^[168] Women view anger as a sign that they've somehow lost control, and thus worry that this anger may lead them to harm others and/or damage relationships. On the other end of the spectrum, men are less concerned with damaging relationships and more focused on using anger as a means of affirming their masculinity.^[168] According to the general strain theory, men would more likely engage in aggressive behavior directed towards others due to externalized anger whereas women would direct their anger towards themselves rather than others.^[169]

Gender, and particularly the role of women is widely recognized as vitally important to international development issues.^[170] This often means a focus on gender-equality, ensuring participation, but includes an understanding of the different roles and expectation of the genders within the community.^[171]

Gender is a topic of increasing concern within climate change policy and science.^[172] Generally, gender approaches to climate change address gender-differentiated consequences of climate change, as well as unequal adaptation capacities and gendered contribution to climate change. Furthermore, the intersection of climate change and gender raises questions regarding the complex and intersecting power relations arising from it. These differences, however, are mostly not due to biological or physical differences, but are formed by the social, institutional and legal context. Subsequently, vulnerability is less an intrinsic feature of women and girls but rather a product of their marginalization.^[173]Roehr^[174] notes that, while the United Nations officially committed to gender mainstreaming, in practice gender equality is not reached in the context of climate change policies. This is reflected in the fact that discourses of and negotiations over climate change are mostly dominated by men.^{[175][176][177]}Some feminist scholars hold that the debate on climate change is not only dominated by men but also primarily shaped in 'masculine' principles, which limits discussions about climate change to a perspective that focuses on technical solutions.^[176] This perception of climate change hides subjectivity and power relations that actually condition climate-change policy and science, leading to a phenomenon that Tuana^[176] terms 'epistemic injustice'.Similarly, MacGregor^[175] attests that by framing climate change as an issue of 'hard' natural scientific conduct and natural security, it is kept within the traditional domains of hegemonic masculinity.^[175][177]

Forbes published an article in 2010 that reported 57% of Facebook users are women, which was attributed to the fact that women are more active on social media. On average women have 8% more friends and account for 62% of posts that are shared via Facebook.^[178] Another study in 2010 found that in most Western cultures, women spend more time sending text messages compared to men as well as spending more time on social networking sites as a way to communicate with friends and family.^[179]

Research conducted in 2013 found that over 57% of pictures posted on social networking sites were sexual and were created to gain attention.^[180] Moreover, 58% of women and 45% of men don't look into the camera, which creates an illusion of withdrawal.^[180] Other factors to be considered are the poses in pictures such as women lying down in subordinate positions or even touching themselves in childlike ways.^[180]

Adolescent girls generally use social networking sites as a tool to communicate with peers and reinforce existing relationships; boys on the other hand tend to use social networking sites as a tool to meet new friends and acquaintances.^[181] Furthermore, social networking sites have allowed individuals to truly express themselves, as they are able to create an identity and socialize with other individuals that can relate.^[182] Social networking sites have also given individuals access to create a space where they feel more comfortable about their sexuality.^[182] Recent research has indicated that social media is becoming a stronger part of younger individuals' media culture, as more intimate stories are being told via social media and are being intertwined with gender, sexuality, and relationships.^[182]

Research has found that almost all U.S. teens (95%) aged 12 through 17 are online, compared to only 78% of adults. Of these teens, 80% have profiles on social media sites, as compared to only 64% of the online population aged 30 and older. According to a study conducted by the Kaiser Family Foundation, 11-to-18-year-olds spend on average over one and a half hours a day using a computer and 27 minutes per day visiting social network sites, i.e. the latter accounts for about one fourth of their daily computer use.^[183]

Studies have shown that female users tend to post more "cute" pictures, while male participants were more likely to post pictures of themselves in activities. Women in the U.S. also tend to post more pictures of friends, while men tend to post more about sports and humorous links. The study also found that males would post more alcohol and sexual references.^[183] The roles were reversed however, when looking at a teenage dating site: women made sexual references significantly more often than males. Boys share more personal information, while girls are more conservative about the personal information they post. Boys, meanwhile, are more likely to orient towards technology, sports, and humor in the information they post to their profile.^[184]

Research in the 1990s suggested that different genders display certain traits, such as being active, attractive, dependent, dominant, independent, sentimental, sexy, and submissive, in online interaction.^[185] Even though these traits continue to be displayed through gender stereotypes, recent studies show that this isn't necessarily the case any more.^[186]

• Butler, Judith. Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. Thinking Gender'. New York & London: Routledge. 1990. ISBN 978-0-415-38955-6. 
• Butler, Judith. Bodies That Matter: On the Discursive Limits of "Sex". New York: Routledge. 1993. ISBN 978-0-415-61015-5. 
• Fausto-Sterling, Anne. Sexing the body: gender politics and the construction of sexuality . New York: Basic Books. 2000. ISBN 978-0-465-07714-4.  含有內容需登入查看的頁面 (link)

从维基百科的姊妹计划 了解更多有关 “So47009/work03”的内容
	维基共享资源上的多媒体资源
	维基语录上的名言
	维基学院上的學習资源

查看维基词典中的词条「work03」。

• GenPORT: Your gateway to gender and science resources
• Gender in Agriculture Sourcebook