Gender_ Ideas, Interactions, In - Lisa Wade.pdf - Gen der I...

Unformatted text preview: Gen der I DE A S, I N T E R ACT IONS, I NST I T U T IONS R ece n t Sociolog y t i t l eS from W. W. noRton Code of the Street by Elijah Anderson The Cosmopolitan Canopy by Elijah Anderson Social Problems, second edition, by Joel Best The Family: Diversity, Inequality, and Social Change by Philip N. Cohen You May Ask Yourself: An Introduction to Thinking like a Sociologist, third edition, by Dalton Conley The Real World: An Introduction to Sociology, fourth edition, by Kerry Ferris and Jill Stein Essentials of Sociology, fifth edition, by Anthony Giddens, Mitchell Duneier, Richard P. Appelbaum, and Deborah Carr Introduction to Sociology, ninth edition, by Anthony Giddens, Mitchell Duneier, Richard P. Appelbaum, and Deborah Carr Mix It Up: Popular Culture, Mass Media, and Society by David Grazian Crime and the Punished, edited by Douglas Hartmann and Christopher Uggen The Social Side of Politics, edited by Douglas Hartmann and Christopher Uggen Doing Race, edited by Hazel Rose Markus and Paula M. L. Moya Readings for Sociology, seventh edition, edited by Garth Massey Families as They Really Are edited by Barbara J. Risman The Sociology of News, second edition, by Michael Schudson The Social Construction of Sexuality, third edition, by Steven Seidman Sex Matters: The Sexuality and Society Reader, fourth edition, edited by Mindy Stombler, Dawn M. Baunach, Wendy O. Simonds, Elroi J. Windsor, and Elisabeth O. Burgess The Contexts Reader, second edition, edited by Douglas Hartmann and Christopher Uggen More than Just Race by William Julius Wilson Color Lines and Racial Angles, edited by Douglas Hartmann and Christopher Uggen American Society: How It Really Works by Erik Olin Wright and Joel Rogers Cultural Sociology: An Introductory Reader edited by Matt Wray To learn more about Norton Sociology, please visit wwnorton.com/soc. Gen der I DE A S, I N T E R ACT IONS, I NST I T U T IONS L isa Wa de Occidental College M y r a M a r x F er r ee University of Wisconsin–Madison n W. W. NORTON & COMPANY, INC. New York • London W. W. Norton & Company has been independent since its founding in 1923, when William Warder Norton and Mary D. Herter Norton first published lectures delivered at the People’s Institute, the adult education division of New York City’s Cooper Union. The firm soon ex­ panded its program beyond the Institute, publishing books by celebrated academics from America and abroad. By midcentury, the two major pillars of Norton’s publishing program— trade books and college texts—were firmly established. In the 1950s, the Norton family trans­ ferred control of the company to its employees, and today—with a staff of four hundred and a comparable number of trade, college, and professional titles published each year—W. W. Norton & Company stands as the largest and oldest publishing house owned wholly by its employees. Copyright © 2015 by W. W. Norton & Co. All rights reserved Printed in United States of America. First Edition Editor: Sasha Levitt Assistant Editor: Thea Goodrich Project Editor: Diane Cipollone Manuscript Editor: Katharine Ings Managing Editor, College: Marian Johnson Managing Editor, College Digital Media: Kim Yi Senior Production Manager: Ashley Horna Media Editor: Eileen Connell Associate Media Editor: Laura Musich Marketing Manager: Julia Hall Design Director: Jillian Burr Photo Editor: Stephanie Romeo Permissions Manager: Megan Jackson College Permissions Associate: Bethany Salminen Composition: Achorn International Manufacturing: Maple-Vail Book Group Permission to use copyrighted material is included in the Credits section of this book, which begins on page 401. ISBN: 978-0-393-93107-5 (pbk.) W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 500 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10110-0017 wwnorton.com W. W. Norton & Company Ltd., Castle House, 75/76 Wells Street, London W1T 3QT 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 a bOUt the aUthOrs Lisa Wade is an associate professor of sociology at Occi­ dental College in Los Angeles. She earned an MA in human sexuality from New York University and an MS and PhD in sociology from the University of Wisconsin−Madison. She is the author of over two dozen research papers, book chapters, and educational essays. Aiming to reach audiences outside of academia, Dr. Wade founded the popular blog Sociological Images and appears frequently in print, radio, and television news and opinion outlets. You can learn more about her at lisa-wade.com or follow her on Twitter (@lisawade) or Face­ book ( /lisawadephd). Myra Marx Ferree is the Alice H. Cook Professor of Sociology at the University of Wisconsin−Madison. She is the author of Varieties of Feminism: German Gender Politics in Global Perspective (2012), co-author of Shaping Abortion Discourse (2002), and Controversy and Coalition (2000), and co-editor of Gender, Violence and Human Security (2013), Global Feminism (2006), and Revisioning Gender (1998) as well as numerous articles and book chapters. Dr. Ferree is the recipient of various prizes for contributions to gender studies, including the Jessie Bernard Award and Victoria Schuck Award. She continues to do research on global gender politics. COntents pr e Face ix 1 INTRODUCTION 2 2 IDEAS 8 Gender Ideologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Binary and Our Bodies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Binary and Everything Else . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Blurred Vision and Blind Spots . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 BODIES 12 16 25 28 34 Research on Gender Differences and Similarities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Defining “Real” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 A Different Question Altogether . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 4 PERFORMANCES 58 How to Do Gender . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Learning the Rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Why We Follow the Rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . How to Break the Rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The No. 1 Gender Rule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 INTERSECTIONS 60 65 68 74 78 82 Intersectionality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 Economic Class and Place of Residence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 Race . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 Sexual Orientation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97 Immigration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 Ability and Disability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 Age and Attractiveness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 6 INEQUALITY: MEN AND MASCULINITIES 112 The Gender of Cheerleading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114 Gendered Power . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116 Gender for Men . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121 viii c o n t e n t s 7 INEQUALITY: WOMEN AND FEMININITIES 138 Cheerleading Today . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 Gender for Women. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141 The Big Picture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157 8 INSTITUTIONS 162 The Organization of Daily Life . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164 Gendered Institutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167 The Institutionalization of Gender Difference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .169 The Institutionalization of Gender Inequality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173 Institutional Inertia and Change. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183 9 CHANGE 188 A Clash of Civilizations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190 The Changing Value of Children . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192 How Cities Changed Marriage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .199 Separate Spheres . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202 The Funny ’50s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204 Going to Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212 Work and Family Today . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218 10 SExUALITIES 220 The Sexual Revolution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222 Contemporary Rules of Sexuality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225 Hookup Culture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237 11 FAMILIES Gendered Housework and Parenting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ideological and Institutional Barriers to Equal Sharing . . . . . . . . . . . . Divisions of Labor in Families . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Housework, Parenting, and Power . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 WORK The Changing Workplace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Job Segregation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Discrimination and Preferential Treatment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Parenthood: The Facts and the Fictions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 POLITICS 246 248 253 260 271 280 282 286 301 309 314 The State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 318 Feminist Activism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 329 14 ONWARD 344 GLOssary NOTes crediTs iNdex 353 359 401 403 Pr eFaCe Writing a textbook is a challenge even for folks with lots of teaching experience in the subject matter. We would never have dared take on this project without Karl Bakeman’s steady encouragement. His confidence in our vision was in­ spiring and his patience and unshakeable faith in the project kept us going. With his help, and the hard work invested in us by Sasha Levitt, to whose care he entrusted our project, this book has taken form. Sasha’s meticulous reading, thoughtful suggestions, and words of encouragement have been invaluable. We have become fast friends in the process of bringing this book to life. Of course, Karl and Sasha are but the top of the mountain of support that Norton has offered from beginning to end. The many hands behind the scenes include project editor Diane Cipollone for keeping us on schedule and collating our changes, production manager Ashley Horna for turning a manuscript into the pages you hold now, assistant editor Thea Goodrich for her logistical help in preparing that manuscript, designer Jillian Burr for her keen graphic eye, and our copyeditor, Katharine Ings, for crossing our t’s and dotting our i’s. The many images that enrich this book are thanks to photo editor Stephanie Romeo and photo researcher Elyse Rieder. We are also grateful to have discovered Leland Bobbé, the artist whose half-drag portraits fascinated us. Selecting just one was a collaborative process aided by the further creative work of Jillian Burr and Debra Morton Hoyt. We’re grateful for the result: a striking cover that we hope will catch the eye and spark conversation. We would also like to thank the reviewers who commented on drafts of the text in its early stages—especially and always the extraordinary Gwen Sharp— but also Shayna Asher-Shapiro, Kristen Barber, Shira Barlas, Sarah Becker, Em­ ily Birnbaum, Valerie Chepp, Nancy Dess, Lisa Dilks, Mischa DiBattiste, Mary Donaghy, Julia Eriksen, Angela Frederick, Jessica Greenebaum, Nona Gronert, Lee Harrington, Sarah Hayford, Penelope Herideen, Rachel Kaplan, Made­ line Kiefer, Caitlin Maher, Janice McCabe, Karyn McKinney, Carly Mee, Beth x preface Mintz, Stephanie Nawyn, Megan Reid, Jaita Talukdar, Kristen Williams, and Kersti Alice Yllo. Our gratitude goes also to the friends who took preliminary versions out for test-drives—Dianne Mahany, Naama Nagar, Gwen Sharp—and the students at Babson College, Occidental College, Nevada State College, and the University of Wisconsin−Madison who agreed to be test subjects. Most of all, we are happy to discover that we could collaborate in being cre­ ative over the long term of this project, contributing different talents at differ­ ent times, and jumping the inevitable hurdles without tripping each other up. In fact, we were each other’s toughest critic and warmest supporter. Once upon a time, Lisa was Myra’s student, but in finding ways to communicate our interest and enthusiasm to students, our roles were reversed. Today, we appreciate each other’s strengths more than ever and rejoice in the collegial relationship we developed in the process of doing this book. We hope you enjoy reading it as much as we enjoyed making it. Lisa Wade Myra Marx Ferree Gen der I DE A S, I N T E R ACT IONS, I NST I T U T IONS a man in heels is ridiculous. —ch r isti a n lou bou ti n 1 introduction I n the late 1500s, under the reign of Abbas I, the Persian army defeated the Uzbeks and the Ottomans and re-conquered prov­ inces lost to India and Portugal. These soldiers were widely ad­ mired throughout Europe as some of the most vicious and effec­ tive killers who had ever lived. And they wore high heels.1 They fought on horseback; heels kept their feet in the stirrups when they rose up to shoot their muskets. Enthralled by the military men’s prowess, European male aris­ tocrats began wearing high heels as a testament to their own viril­ ity. The aristocrats adopted high-heeled shoes in order to associate themselves with the Persian army’s masculine mystique. In a way, they were like today’s basketball fans wearing Air Jordans. They weren’t necessarily any better at horseback warfare than your av­ erage Bulls fan is on the court, but the shoes symbolically linked them to the soldiers’ extraordinary achievements. As symbols, the high heels invoked not just power, but a distinctly manly power re­ lated to victory on the battlefield, just as the basketball shoes link the contemporary wearer to Michael Jordan’s amazing athleticism in a male-dominated sport. 4 Chapter 1 i n t r o d u c t i o n As with most fashions, there was trickle down. Soon men of all classes were donning high heels, stumbling around the cobblestone streets of Eu­ rope feeling pretty suave. Women decided they wanted a piece of the ac­ tion, too. In the 1630s, masculine fash­ ions were “in” for ladies. They cut their hair, added military decorations to the shoulders of their dresses, and smoked pipes. High heels were the height of masculine mimicry. These early fashionistas irked the aristocrats who first borrowed the style. The whole point of nobility, af­ ter all, was to be above everyone else. In response, the elites started wear­ shah abbas the i, who ruled Persia ing higher and higher heels. France’s between 1588 and 1629, shows off not only his scimitar, but also his high heels. King Louis XIV even decreed that no one could wear heels higher than his. 2 In the New World, the Massachusetts colony passed a law saying that any woman caught wearing heels would incur the same penalty as witches.3 The masses persisted, however, so the aristocrats tried a different tactic: They dropped high heels altogether. It was the Enlightenment now and there was an accompanying shift toward logic and reason. Adopting the new philos­ ophy, aristocrats began mocking people who wore high heels, suggesting that wearing such impractical shoes was, well, stupid. On and off since the mid-1700s, the footwear that aristocrats once used to prove that they were superior—and later laughed at with derision—has contin­ ued tweaking the toes of women in every possible situation, from weddings to the workplace. Meanwhile, the shoe has remained mostly out of fashion for men. The attempts by the aristocrats to keep high heels to themselves are part of a phenomenon that sociologists call distinction: efforts to distinguish one’s own group from others. In this historical example, we see elite men working hard to make both class- and gender-based distinctions. Today high heels are still a marker of gender distinction. With few exceptions, only women (and peo­ ple impersonating women) wear high heels. Some of us love them, and some of us still think they’re pretty stupid, and there remains the sense that the right pair brings a touch of class. Distinction is a main theme of this book. The word gender exists only be­ cause we distinguish between people in this particular way. If we didn’t care IntroductIon about distinguishing men from women, then the whole concept would be utterly unnecessary. We don’t, after all, tend to have words for physical differ­ ences that don’t have meaning to us. For example, we don’t make a big deal out of the fact that some people have the gene that allows them to curl their tongue and some people don’t. There’s no concept of tongue aptitude that refers to the separation of people into the curly tongued and the flat tongued. Why would we need such a thing? The vast majority of us just don’t care. Gender, then, is about distinction. Like tongue aptitude, it is a biological reality. Because we are a species that reproduces sexually, we come, roughly, in two body types: one built to gestate new life and one to mix up the genes of the species. The word sex is used to refer to these physical differences in primary sexual characteristics (the presence of organs directly involved in reproduction) and sec­ ondary sexual characteristics (such as patterns of hair growth, the amount of breast tissue, and dis­ tribution of body fat). We usually use the words male and female to refer to sex, but we can also use male-bodied and female-bodied to specify that louis XiV, King of France from 1643 to 1715, gives himself a boost with high sex refers to the body and may not extend to how a hair and high heels. person feels or acts. We all know, though, that there is more to gender than this. There’s all the other stuff that comes to mind when we talk about men and women. It’s the dividing of the world into pink baby blankets and blue, suits and dresses, Maxim and Cosmopolitan magazines, and action movies and chick flicks. These are all examples of the world divided up into the masculine and the feminine, into things we associate with men and women...
View Full Document