Sex is biologically given. Some animal species have one sex; others have two, or three. Gender is how nature interprets the apparent biological differences between particular human bodies of different sexual anatomy. The distinctions between bodies observed and imposed by our culture is where sociologists and theorists of gender identity find their theoretical interests aroused, poised for deconstruction action. This essay will visit the various approaches to gender realization under biological, interpersonal, or cultural. The essay will specify the one that I view being most valid, citing two personal experiences and two examples from scholarly sources. Over the years numerous major theories have been projected to explain gender development. Interpersonal-oriented theories tend to emphasize intrapersonal processes governing gender development. In contrast, cultural theories focus on social structural determinants of gender-role development and functioning. According to Biologically-oriented theories, gender differences arising from the disparity biological roles played by males and females in reproduction bring about gender-role maturity and differentiation (Allen, Felluga p.1-5). Biological theories have been proposed to explain gender development and differentiation. Evolutionary psychology views gender segregation as ancestrally programmed. The ancestral origin of differences in gender roles is analyzed in terms of mate preferences, reproductive strategies, parental investment in offspring, and the aggressive nature of males. From this viewpoint, modern gender differences originated from successful ancestral adaptation to the diverse reproductive anxiety faced by men and women. Men contributed less to their offspring’s likelihood of survival so they required multiple partners and were less selective with whom to mate. In addition, uncertainty of paternity raised the risk of investing resources in children who were not their own. In...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document