Gender is a social construct and depends on the context in which it is created, but it is also a dynamic system that experiences changes, despite the resistance that often clings to traditional norms and gender roles. A review and comparison of gender roles in India and the US reveals how the oriental culture and western culture share certain similarities when defining male and female gender roles. However, it also shows how certain cultural aspects, such as religion, can affect the structure of gender in different cultures. For example, India also recognizes alternative gender roles, which are not recognized in the western culture. While some key differences among cultures remain, traditional gender roles and differences are currently being questioned in all cultures as women are given equal opportunities in education and business. Although the changes are met with resistance, it is important to consider why gender equality may improve social prosperity while gender differences and gender bias may inhibit development and productivity.
It is important to understand both nature and nurture in terms of gender construction. Researchers agree that gender is a social construct (Lorber 14). Some viewpoints consider the implication of hormonal differences and brain activity in defining gender roles and accounting for gender differences (Leathwood and Read 11). However, those viewpoints are not supported by empirical studies (Leathwood and Read 11). Therefore, gender is a social institution created to organize society, and it cannot be considered equivalent to biological sex (Lorber 14).
Because gender is a social construct, a variety of social agents, including parents, religion, peers, and media, can affect the development of human psychology based on gender differences (Lorber 14). At the same time, it is possible to notice how different cultures can support similar values and how those constructs are susceptible to change when exposed to different environments.
In India, male and female roles in families were mainly distinguished by dividing the responsibilities of each member. The male was expected to engage in business activities and provide for the family while the woman was allowed only to contribute by engaging in household activities. The role of women as mothers was to raise the children, so their influence over the children’s activities and choices were sometimes higher than the fathers’, who were considered heads of the family and involved in decision-making processes.
In all families, marriages were negotiated. Traditional family values in India suggest that the parents are responsible for arranging marriages without the children’s participation (Dasgupta 965). Instead they remain strangers until their wedding, and that rule applied to both genders. Although Indian immigrants in the US are currently less rigid about their attitudes towards marriage, Indian females still sometimes have to follow the dating and marriage rules imposed by parents who still follow traditional family values (Dasgupta 957).
Besides male and female genders, India acknowledges a third gender. The third gender is a group of men called hijras. They undergo surgery to remove their genitals, but the vagina is not constructed, so they remain eunuchs. Although they are impotent and emasculated, hijras are appreciated in the Indian cultures as the vehicles of the Mother Goddess and her power (Nanda 5). Their role in society is to perform at rituals, such as weddings or births, and they are appreciated by the local culture (Nanda 4-5).
A similarity between the Indian family structure and the western family structure can be observed in terms of strict labor and responsibility division. For example, Etzioni correlates the role of gender in the US with clear and rigid values represented by functionalism (216). Because of the norms and rules imposed by that structure, men had more education and business opportunities because they were expected to provide for the household while the women’s role was to look after the household. Although those values improved various social issues, such as reducing crimes or drug abuse, the rigid structure also supported traditional norms that discriminated against minorities and women (Etzioni 216).
In the western context, the concept of third or fourth gender was mainly ignored because of the dichotomous construct created to categorize male and female genders (Nanda 136). However, modern categorization recognizes that gender identity and sexual orientation can affect the gender system, so new theoretical frameworks are designed to include alternative gender roles (Nanda 140).
Transgenderism and differences in sexual orientation are examples that can be referred to as the third gender, but there is no specific categorization in the western gender construct, even though external influences may contribute to the development of alternative gender roles. Various social agents, including parents, religion, and the media, can affect gender as a social construct, and because each social agent often presents a conflicting viewpoint, it can eventually cause confusion regarding gender roles and differences.
Consequently, gender identity and sexual orientation are at stake because of the conflicting inputs received from various sources. Despite the acknowledgement that multiple gender categories can be created when analyzing sexual orientation and gender identity, the dichotomous model of gender differentiation still remains predominant in the western culture and alternative gender roles are not clearly defined (Lorber 14).
One anthropological hypothesis suggested that alternative gender roles exist only in societies that did not emphasize the importance of gender roles, differentiation, and stratification (Nanda 145). However, when observing traditional family roles and values, it is evident that gender roles in India are highly structured and well-defined. Despite the views of genders as two complementary sides that take on different roles in society, marriage, and sexual relations, the Indian gender construct acknowledges gender transformations, alternative genders, and overlapping genders (Nanda 145).
The acceptance of a third gender in the Indian culture most likely occurred because of religious influences. In Hindu philosophy, each person has a moral duty, but the ultimate goals of all humans are salvation and bliss (Nanda 147). However, following the moral duty can take many different paths, and one of those paths is to take on the role of the ascetic or hijra, people who transcend the duality of male and female genders (Nanda 147). Therefore, religious influences played a significant part in the definition and acceptance of alternative genders in India.
Western cultures are mainly focused on dichotomous models, such as male-female and heterosexual-homosexual, so there was no room for the development of alternative gender roles (Nanda 149). The gender role of hijras in India is clear from the viewpoint of their cultural system, just like the concepts of alternative genders are accepted in various cultures worldwide, including Native North American societies, Tahiti and Polynesia (Nanda 148).
It is not possible to predict how exactly the introduction of alternative genders would impact the western society. It is evident that the western gender system is not a universal model because multiple genders were recognized by most other cultures while the western cultural construct limited the classification of genders in a dichotomous model. However, the existence of alternative models raises several issues.
First, if the existence of multiple alternative genders was accepted in a variety of different cultures, it is possible that the western culture only denied or suppressed the existence of alternative genders. With that in mind, the accuracy of social research might be flawed if improper models are used for research purposes.
Second, it is important to ask whether religion is exclusively responsible for the acceptance of multiple genders. If religion did support the existence of alternative gender roles, researchers will have to investigate why religion in the western society did not introduce or approve those concepts.
Finally, the traditional gender construct is changing in western society and increased female presence in higher education and the labor market is meeting severe resistance from critics (Leathwood and Barbara Read 9-25). Even if researchers adapt the dichotomous model to take alternative gender roles, such as transgenderism, in account, it will most likely encounter severe criticism and lack proper support.
The gender construct in both India and the western culture is currently changing. According to Etzioni, several social movements in the 1960s attempted to remove existing norms, but they all failed because they focused on removing traditions rather than introducing new norms (217). While those movements failed because they lacked a clear vision of values they wanted to achieve, contemporary society empowered women with more opportunities in education and on the job market.
Studies suggest that female education in India is rising, and that will certainly impact gender roles and traditional values (Murthi, Guio, and Dreze 747). Although Murthi, Guio, and Dreze suggest that female education reduces gender bias and improves the position of women in society, further research is required to examine other factors that may affect gender bias (772). However, it is proven that gender empowerment improves the economic development of a country and the socioeconomic status of the population while societies remain impoverished and underdeveloped if they support gender discrimination (Best and Maier 140), so it is possible to expect that India will experience positive effects of reducing gender bias and supporting equal opportunities.
Of course, some values still remain consistent because society resists changes to the gender construct. For example, the participation of women in higher education and equality in the labor market has increased in the US (Leathwood and Barbara Read 1). At the same time, various perspectives suggest that the feminization of the higher education institutions will take place. Because women are often more caring, supportive, and cooperative than men, several arguments propose that male values, such as competitiveness or self-reliance will be at stake (Leathwood and Barbara Read 14).
Furthermore, it is suggested that the feminization of the labor market will have a negative impact on organizations that are defined by the masculine managerial culture. Again, the feminine values, such as sensitivity and empathy, are criticized in the workplace because of the potential to induce gender detraditionalization and change the structure, practices, and constitution of those organizations (Leathwood and Barbara Read 23).
The resistance to changes in gender roles is also evident in other areas of life. For example, Indian families still retain specific expectations when it comes to gender roles. Even among Indian immigrants in the US, traditional values are often practiced when it comes to religion, raising children, marriage, and family organization (Dasgupta 956).
The female gender role remains the same, and the Asian Indian community often prohibits dating in order to practice some of its traditional values. For example, Indian females should avoid dating, be shy and delicate, and marry a person chosen by her parents while male progeny is less restricted by those rules (Dasgupta 957). Conflicting attitudes regarding rigorous family values were recorded in studies (Dasgupta 970).
Although several changes in the gender construct are evident, such as empowering women with opportunities and equality, the resistance to those changes makes the transition process difficult. However, it is important to consider the consequences of gender differences in terms of creating permanent gender constructs.
First, it is already evident that gender differentiation in social roles can hinder the development of society and reduce the socioeconomic status of its population (Best and Maier 140). Even though the existing social organizations function on male principles (Leathwood and Barbara Read 14), supporting gender differences can only hinder their development. Without values that are generally recognized as feminine, such as collaboration, empathy, or support, individuals work less as a team and productivity consequently suffers. The introduction of feminine values in various institutions can be used as an advantage to improve development, learning, and productivity.
Second, supporting gender differences and promoting traditional values can hinder the liberty of individuals. If traditional norms and values restrict liberty, which is one of the basic human rights (United Nations, “Universal Declaration of Human Rights”). By hindering personal freedom, traditional gender differences can also hinder the development of society by creating a permanent structure that resembles a closed system and does not receive any input or produce output and is therefore useless.
The review of traditional values in both Indian and the western culture reveals that society immediately assigns roles to individuals based on their genders. It is also possible to notice how culture affects the differences in the constitution of gender structures. Because children can notice differences in behavioral patterns and personality traits at an early age (Rowley et al. 151), the values can remain preserved across several generations. However, it is also evident that gender roles and differences are changing in different societies. The change can be considered positive because gender differentiation and predetermined roles are often a hindrance to both social and individual development.
Gender categorization and roles will continue changing in the future, and rather than discussing the consequences, researchers should focus on understanding why resistance to change occurs and why some traits are automatically assigned to either gender. For example, empathy and supportive behavior are considered female values while aggressive and competitive behaviors are considered male values. It is important to ask why those values are labeled by gender and how removing gender-based prejudice towards certain behaviors and traits could impact society. When it comes to resistance towards change, it is important to consider why some individuals believe traditional norms and values should be preserved and why they are willing to defend traditions by making vague predictions that are not based on facts.
Works Cited
Best, Michael L., and Sylvia G. Maier. "Gender, Culture and ICT Use in Rural South India." Gender, Technology and Development 11.2 (2007): 137-155. Print
Dasgupta, Shamita. "Gender Roles and Cultural Continuity in the Asian Indian Immigrant Community in the US." Sex Roles 38.11-12 (1998): 953-974. Print.
Etzioni, Amitai. "Response to Simon Prideaux's" From Organisational Theory to the New Communitarianism of Amitai Etzioni"." The Canadian Journal of Sociology 30.2 (2005): 215-217. Print.
Leathwood, Carole, and Barbara Read. Gender and the Changing Face of Higher Education: A Feminized Future? New York, NY: Open University Press, 2009. Print.
Lorber, Judith. "‘Night to his Day’: The Social Construction of Gender." Paradoxes of Gender 1 (1994): 13-36. Print.
Murthi, Mamta, Anne-Catherine Guio, and Jean Dreze. "Mortality, Fertility, and Gender Bias in India: A District-Level Analysis." Population and Development Review (1995): 745-782. Print.
Nanda, Serena. Neither Man nor Woman. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 1990. Print.
Rowley, Stephanie J., et al. "Social Status as a Predictor of Race and Gender Stereotypes in Late Childhood and Early Adolescence." Social Development 16.1 (2007): 150-168.
United Nations. “The Universal Declaration of Human Rights.” United Nations, n.d. Web. 28 May 2013.
