|
  |
|
|
Biological explanations of gender development
Influence of hormones Females who are exposed to male hormones during pre-natal development show more masculine behaviours. Beach (1974) :- Found that female dogs that were exposed prenatally to male hormones were subsequently likely to urinate in the manner of males. Similarly, Young et al. (1964) found that female monkeys exposed to male hormones during the critical pre-natal period were more likely to engage in rough and tumble play in their early years. There is also some evidence for the same effect on human behaviour. At one time, mothers who were liable to miscarry were treated with male hormones to prevent this. This treatment was stopped when the mothers gave birth to genetically females with male genitals. The girl received corrective surgery, but appeared to behave in more of a tomboyish fashion when assed later in
childhood (Money and Ehrhardt 1972) The ideal way of testing biological theories of gender development would be to study individuals in which there is a clear distinction between sexual identity (based on biological factors) and the way in which they are treated socially. Thus, for example, if an individual was born but was treated as a girl, would biological or social factors be more important in their gender development? The ideal study has not been carried out, but approximations to it are discussed next. Research Evidence Suggestive evidence in support of the biological approach to gender development has been obtained in animal studies. For example, young, goy and Phoenix (1964) gave doses of testosterone to pregnant monkeys. This male sex hormone produced greater aggressiveness and higher frequency of rough-and-tumble play in the mother’s female offspring.
However, gender is not necessarily a matter of biological sex. Early research evidence appeared to suggest that individuals would accept their sex or rearing and learn appropriate gender role behaviours in association with the gender assigned at birth. For example, about 500 people in Britain have what is known as testicular feminising syndrome. They are male in the sense that they have male chromosomes and testicles. However their body shape and their breasts develop. Mrs DW has testicular feminising syndrome. She had always thought of herself as a woman but when she found it impossible to become pregnant she consulted a doctor and found out that she was biologically a male and had no internal female organs. Nevertheless, she felt that she was a woman and elected to stay in that role, adopting two children (Goldwyn, 1979). This, of course, is a case study of one, which makes it hard to draw firm conclusions. It also isn’t entirely clear whether we can say that Mrs DW was influenced by social factors (reared as a girl) or biological ones (exposure to male hormones). Other case studies recorded by Money and Ehrhadt at first appeared to support Goldwyn’s conclusion. However, the evidence now appears to suggest that biological sex may have a greater influence that was once thought. Further support for this latter view comes from a study by imperator-McGinley et al. (1974) of a family in the Dominican Republic. Four of the sons in the family appeared biologically to be female at birth, and were reared as girls. However, at the age if about 12, they developed male genitals and started to look like ordinary adolescent males. In spite of the fact all four of them had been reared as girls, and had thought of themselves females, they seemed to adjust well to the male role. According to Gross account (1996) “They have all taken on male roles, do men’s jobs, have married women and are accepted as men.” These findings suggest that biological factors can be more important than social ones in the formation of gender identity. Money and Ehrhardt Money and Ehrardt (1972) discussed cases of female that were exposed to male sex hormones prior to birth. The reason for this was a treatment to prevent miscarriage in mothers who had previous history of such difficulties. The effect of the hormones on the foetus was not considered. Even though their parents treated them as girls, they tended to be more tomboys. They played and fought with boys, and avoided more traditional female activities. In addition, they preferred to play with blocks and cars rather than with dolls. However, many of these girls were given hormone cortisone to prevent them from becoming too masculine anatomically. One of the effects of the cortisone is to increase activity level, and this may have made their behaviour more like that expected of boys. A further consideration is that male hormones during the prenatal development have the effect of masculinising the brain (Geschwind & Galaburdam, 1985). This is what makes men behave in a male fashion, such as having a more dominant right hemisphere of the brain, and thus would have the same effect on biological females. Therefore, in such cases the individual is, at least some sense, biologically male. However, evidence that social factors can override biology was also reported by Money and Ehrhadt. They studied male identical twins, one whom had his penis very severely damaged during a circumsicision operation. Money advised the parents that the best solution would be to reassign the boy’s gender and rear him as a girl, giving him female hormones at puberty. The parents endeavoured to raise the boy as a girl, calling her Brenda and rewarded gender appropriate behaviour. Money reported that Brenda played with girls toys such as dolls and doll’s house, whereas his brother asked for a garage. He was neater and more delicate in his behaviour than his identical twin. A recent book by Colopinto (2000) described quite a different reality, of a child who was totally confused and more boyish that his/her brother. Eventually, in adolescence, Brenda chose to return to being a man and later married. Money had used the case to argue that social factors can override biology and many feminists embrace this view because it suggests that many gender prejudices and gender differences.
|
|
 |
|
PLEASE VISIT THE CONTRIBUTOR'S WEBSITE
No reactions yet.
Please login or sign up to rate this intel.
Please login or sign up to add a comment.
The copyright for this content entitled "Biological explanations of gender development" has been specified by the contributor as:
All Rights Reserved
This content may not be copied, distributed or adapted by anyone under any circumstances.
|
|
May, 2012
2008
January, February, March, April, May, June, July, August, September, October, November, December
2009
January, February, March, April, May, June, July, August, September, October, November, December
2010
January, February, March, April, May, June, July, August, September, October, November, December
2011
January, February, March, April, May, June, July, August, September, October, November, December
2012
January, February, March, April, May
|
|
Not a member yet?
Qondio is a powerful network for making it online. If you have a website to
promote, we can help.
Sign up and get in on the action.
|
|
Welcome to Qondio! Discover the awesome power this network can deliver by going to our About page. Or you could skip straight to the Sign Up form.
|
|
