Has the Construct of gender been more harmful or beneficial to humanity throughout history?

We see the construct of gender centre-stage when Queen Elizabeth could only reassure and motivate her troops before the battle of Tilbury in August 1588 by saying, “I know I have the body of a weak and feeble woman; but I have the heart and stomach of a king”. Has this way of thinking benefited or harmed humanity?

First, we need to consider some definitions and models. The construct of gender refers to the process by which a whole society agrees to assign certain responsibilities, obligations and privileges to those based on the different attributes people are perceived to possess as gendered individuals. There are two main types of gender constructs that have appeared in history: the ‘rigid’ construct, and the ‘fluid’ construct. To determine whether these constructs are beneficial or harmful, we need to construct a model. I propose that in order to classify as beneficial to humanity, three key criteria are fulfilled under the construct; happiness is experienced by individuals, the existence of fairness in society and finally, the potential of individuals is being fulfilled. In this context, happiness means people are afforded long-lasting satisfaction; fairness means people are treated equally and afforded the same opportunities; and, potential means peoples’ ability to develop and succeed is not inhibited^[1]. Being harmful is having a regressive effect in these three areas. Thus, this essay will assess the extent to which these three conditions are experienced by men and women in societies under both rigid constructs of gender and more fluid constructs of gender throughout history.

First, we consider the rigid construct of gender that has existed in most societies throughout history, which heavily relies upon biological determinism^[2]. This involves the process of one being born a male or female and consequently being arbitrarily assigned expected attributes and characteristics that will determine how they are perceived by the whole of society, which roles they are pushed towards and thus the level of power they hold. 

It is often argued that the experience of women throughout history has been harmed by the construct of gender due to the patriarchal^[3] society that is created. For example, in Byzantium, the construct of gender resulted in society labelling women as excessively emotional and lacking logic logos. Due to the fact that expressing excessive emotion was understood as synonymous with barbarian behaviour, women were seen as foreigners and subsequently as inferior (Lung, 2017). The consensus that women displayed these inferior traits meant that women were denied the right of choice in almost every aspect of their lives. Women could not choose who they wanted to marry; they were excluded from the political arena; they were denied the right to the same level of education as men; and, they did not have the right to speak in public (Lung, 2017). This perceived inferiority materialised in women being given value only in their relation to men^[4]. For example, this is illustrated in Justinian’s Code (565 AD) which states “the wife rises with her husband and shares his distinction” (Justinian, 565). Such attitudes of women have largely persisted across history. Examples include when Victoria Woodhull was ousted out of the political arena in America when she ran for president in 1872 (Horne, 2016) or when women were only legally secured ‘equal rights with men in political, economic… life’  in the People’s Republic of China in 1949 (Li, 2000).

Women have been able to enjoy power and status by actively separating themselves from their assigned gender. On the extreme end we have Hatshepsut, who ruled as pharaoh for 21 years and increasingly presented herself as a man in statues (for example, by wearing the male pharaonic nemes headdress) to portray the male attributes of strength in leadership (Wurtzel, 2009). Women of lower social status have also employed this tactic. For example, during the Long March,1934, Chinese women shaved their heads and dress as men so that the other side would not see women and automatically assume they were fighting against a weaker force (Kent, 2002). Thus, it appears that women have been able to exercise their full potential and viewed as legitimate only when they have actively denied their sex and thus gender^[5].

Ultimately, the harm is done because the female identity has been constructed negatively. We see this in the fact that they are given attributes that are the antithesis of men’s attributes e.g. weak and irrational, rather than strong and rational. Subsequently they have been viewed as the ‘other’^[6] in society, denied not only of their own subjectivity^[7] (the right to view themselves as individuals), leaving them psychologically dehumanised, but also left  materially powerless in comparison to men due to the political and economic exclusion these labelled attributes rendered them. Fairness in no way was achieved due to the immediate limitations on women at birth and their assumption of domestic responsibilities. Although this perhaps gave them more power in the home; their intellectual and political potential was left unexercised. While an oversimplification of the history of women, these examples illustrate how the rigid construct of gender has proved harmful to women through its tendency to construct female identity negatively; having regressive effects on the three criteria outlined.

However, women only make up 50% of ‘humanity’, thus we must consider the impact of this construct of gender on the experience of men throughout history. Initially, with the construct of gender created by men and affording men with positive attributes, it could be argued that men have only benefited from it.  The positive traits of rationality, moral and physical strength and intelligence that are attached to the word ‘man’ have permitted many men economic, social and political power. Thus, it may initially appear that men have at large had their potential exercised. Further, one can only assume that access to such choice and freedom did not retract from their level of happiness.

Despite this, the construct of gender has not always benefited all men. A symptom of the construct is that of the male breadwinner (Humphries, 1997) a social doctrine that proclaims that men, due to their supposed strength and superiority, must financially provide for their families. However, we see men who did not live up to this expectation were denied of the right to be a ‘man’. For example, in ancient Athens, the non-elite landless and poor men were classified in political terms as ‘feminine’ (Kent, 2002) as they could not by their nature display the self-sufficiency necessary to transcend personal concerns. The failure to meet this expectation can result in the loss of a sense of identity for men, due to the failure to perform what they are told is their primary purpose. 

Furthermore, in the 1930-40s in Chile, following protracted debates over what constituted fair compensation, the leaders of the Popular Front came to conclusion that industrial and mining workers were deemed engaging in ‘real’ productive work simply because they were male dominated. However, this gendered work hierarchy meant that other male labourers, who did not work in such areas, such as the rural campesinos, were not paid sufficiently (Rublack, 2011). This lack of recognition of work did not exercise fairness, nor would it have amplified the happiness of the subordinated men who were denied wealth and subsequently who were now no longer recognised as worthy men as they did not fulfil the role of male breadwinner. This extends to the modern period where we see men who choose to be ‘house-husbands’ treated as social pariahs as they are succumbing to less impressive domestic responsibilities  (Dugan, 2013). Thus, a consequence of the construct of gender puts pressures on men to fulfil ‘male’ roles by making them synonymous with the sense of their identity. Therefore, we may conclude that it retracts from their happiness, but also from their potential by discouraging all men to pursue livelihoods that do not conform to their genders. 

Finally, this construct of gender has had negative impacts on the relationship between men and women. Research has shown that strong emotional relationships are a key source of happiness (Solan, 2017). Marriage has been promoted in many societies (ranging from Confucian China to modern day Italy) as the strongest emotional relationship one develops. However, with society arbitrarily divided into man and woman, resulting in a physical divide that is reinforced by the encouragement to socialise with your respective gendered group; the ability to form emotionally deep relationships between men and women was restricted for a long time, even though they were getting married. For example, in Byzantium wealthy married women had to live, secluded, in the gynaikonitis (Lung, 2017) As such, the way in which the construct of gender separates men and women appears to be harmful to humanity by restricting the ability of men and women to form meaningful relationships, having a regressive effect on happiness. 

However, there are societies which hold comparatively flexible gender systems that do not work under the principle of biological determinism. These societies have different implications for how the experience of males and females is impacted by gender.

Pre-colonial Igboland is characterised by a ‘flexibility of gender constructions in the Igbo language and culture’ (Amadiume, 1989) where biological females could assume male subject positions as sons, called nyanye (male daughters) and could also become female husbands if they became economically powerful enough. For example, Okenwanyu, one of the richest women in the rural town on Nnobi was one of the wives of two husbands, but also had nine wives herself. (Rublack, 2011) Thus, in this society being a ‘man’ in terms of holding power and authority over others did not always correspond to one’s anatomy but was dependent upon each individual’s displayed character traits.  This meant that biological women and men were not inhibited by their sex in the same way as the societies previously discussed but could develop their gender depending on which roles they decided to take as the concept of ‘women’ as a collective group sharing certain traits did not exist. As such, the criteria of ‘fairness’ and ‘potential’ initially appear to be fulfilled in this society and the construct of gender appears beneficial through the liberty given to females to move between genders and define their own identity.  

However, once again we must consider the experience of males in this society. Conversely, there is no possibility of male wives or male daughters; the flexible gender spheres in Igbo that are not biologically determined only seemed to go in one direction (Hoppe, 2016), that of female to male. This pattern emerges in other societies which take fluid approaches to gender. For example, in pre-colonial Philippines, there existed a third category of gender: male shamans, bayougin (Brewer, 1999), were regarded as being being a composite of male and female, being biological males who did not display typically masculine traits. Further, they were revered by their society as this gender was synonymous with spiritual status and prowess. Yet, while this seems progressive and liberating for those males involved, this was not open for females to participate in. Moreover, even when there is a ‘third gender’, it does not mean people are any less bound within the constraints of that gender, still having to base their identity off characteristics and behaviours they are expected to display.  Once again, a fluid construct of gender is not all-inclusive of the two sexes, despite being separated from sex itself, nor even as liberating as we would like to think (at least in the case of the Philippines). Therefore, fairness and potential are not fully realised under these fluid approaches, and the construct does not prove to be force for good. 

While the fluid construct of gender has been less harmful than the rigid construct of gender (as the latter tends to simultaneously leave several criteria unfulfilled), it cannot be said to be beneficial as it tends to only afford fluidity and liberation to one sex, always leaving the criteria of fairness unchecked. Thus, in conclusion, history has proved that no matter what construct of gender is adopted, there is inequality between the sexes in terms of who is afforded the power, liberation and fluidity. As such, the construct of gender has been more harmful than beneficial to humanity throughout history.

Figure 1 – Hatshepsut presenting herself with male features to gain respect and reverence. 

Works Cited

Amadiume, I., 1989. Male Daughters, Female Husbands: Gender and Sex in an African Society. 2 ed. s.l.:s.n.

Brewer, C., 1999. Baylan, Asog, Transvestism, and Sodomy: Gender, Sexuality and the Sacred in Early Colonial Philippines. Intersections: Gender, History and Culture in the Asian Context, Issue 2, pp. 2-3.

Dugan, E., 2013. [Online] 
Available at: https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/dads-fear-social-stigma-staying-home-8439821.html
[Accessed 10 June 2021].

Hoppe, K. A., 2016. Ifi Amadiume. Male Daughters, Female Husbands: Gender and Sex in an African Society. International Feminist Journal of Politics, 18(3), pp. 488-489.

Horne, E., 2016. ‘Notorious Victoria’: the first woman to run for president. [Online] 
Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jul/20/notorious-victoria-first-woman-run-for-us-president
[Accessed 20 May 2021].

Humphries, S. H. a. J., 1997. The Origins and Expansion of the Male Breadwinner Family: The Case of Nineteenth-Century Britain. JSTOR, pp. 1-2.

Justinian, 565. The Code of Justinian. Constantinople: s.n.

Kent, S. K., 2002. Gender. In: Gender, a World History . s.l.:Oxford University Press, p. 300.

Kent, S. K., 2002. Gender; a World History. s.l.:Oxford University Press.

Li, Y., 2000. Women’s Movement and Change of Women’s Status in China. Jan, p. 31.

Lung, E., 2017. Depictions of Women in the Works of Early Byzantine Historians and Chroniclers. JSTOR, 43(1), p. 8.

Lung, E., 2017. Depictions of Women in the Works of Early Byzantine Historians and Chroniclers : Between Stereotype and Reality. pp. 8-9.

Lung, E., 2017. Depictions of Women in the Works of Early Byzantine Historians and Chroniclers: Between Stereotype and Reality. pp. 6-7.

Lung, E., n.d. Depictions of Women in the Works of Early Byzantine Historians and Chroniclers : Between Stereotype and Reality. Bergahn Books.

Rublack, U., 2011. In: U. Rublack, ed. A Concise Companion to History . s.l.:Oxford University Press, pp. 211-213.

Rublack, U., 2011. A Concise Companion to History. In: s.l.:Oxford University Press, pp. 221-223.

Solan, M., 2017. Harvard Health Publishing. [Online] 
Available at: https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/the-secret-to-happiness-heres-some-advice-from-the-longest-running-study-on-happiness-2017100512543
[Accessed 21 July 2021].

Wurtzel, K. H. a. K., 2009. Power and Gender in Ancient Egypt: The Case of Hatshepsut. JSTOR, pp. 1-3.

---

^[1] These definitions are taken from the Cambridge dictionary. 

^[2] ‘sex, by definition, will show to have been gender all along’ says Judith Butler in her Gender Trouble.

^[3]‘Patriarchal’ in this context means men hold primary power in political and economic life.

^[4] Joëlle Beauchamp called this process ‘la femme-reflet’.

^[5] As laid out earlier, the two are inextricably linked in the ‘rigid’ construct of gender, where your sex determines your gender. Thus, these women are only denying their sex because of the consequences of their gender. 

^[6] ‘Other’ means that which is separate or distinct from the human self.

^[7] Simone de Beauvoir highlights this process in The Second Sex.