David Reimer Nature Vs Nurture

The nurture side of the debate states gender is essentially a product of socialisation. It is dependent on environmental experiences. Family upbringing and society’s expectation would therefore play an important role in gender. This would then mean that most boys learn to behave masculine and girls learn to behave a feminine way. The nurture argument can explain why some people, adopt the gender role not expected of their sex. In theory, a feminine boy would have had some experiences that had led him to acquire a different gender role from most boys. If gender roles are nurtured, it also explains why an individual’s gender may change over time as

David Reimer was born on 22nd August 1967 as a male identical twin. His birth name was Bruce and his twin brother was named Brian.

The nature vs nurture issue has been a controversial argument among psychologist for decades. This argument exposes two different views. One of them emphasizes that our personality depends solely on genetics (nature). On the other hand, the second view suggests that humans “develop through experience” (Myers 2013, SG 6) (nurture).

Those who agree that gender is a social construct would also argue that gendered behaviour is not innate, and that it is learnt throughout development. Gender identity is defined as “the way in which being feminine or masculine, woman or man, becomes an internalized part of the way we think about ourselves” (Ryle, 2014). The idea of masculinity and femininity and the strong distinction between the two are taught to us throughout our lives. An individual’s earliest exposure to the concept of gender comes from parental influence. Many studies show that parents socialize their children from birth by creating distinct environments for boys and girls and treating son’s and daughter’s differently. For instance, parents are more likely to assign domestic chores such as cooking, mending clothes and doing laundry to daughters, whereas sons are more likely to be assigned maintenance chores such as mowing lawn, small household repairs and carrying out garbage (Lackey, 1989). Parents may also use more emotive language when talking to their daughter’s and might encourage certain interests such as math and science in son’s, by purchasing more math and science toys and committing to other promotive activities (Jacobs & Bleeker, 2004; Leaper, 1998; Tenenbaum &

Gender identity is defined as the identification of a human being as being male or female. The knowledge that we have about gender acquisition is still not as accurate as we would like. Biological and environmental factors are at play and not one or the other seems to be completely wrong. Biological views relating to gender identity are supported by chromosomal and hormonal based differences. Environmental perspectives emphasize on modeling and experience (individual and cultural) affecting gender acquisition. However, the only unbiased way to assess gender identity is by taking into account both biological and environmental factors (McCabe, 2007). This paper focuses on gender identity in early childhood development.

“Children observe the people around them behaving in various ways. This is illustrated during the famous Bobo doll experiment Children pay attention to what adults do and observe their behavior. After, they may imitate the behavior they have observed. They may do this regardless of whether the behavior is ‘gender appropriate ' or not, but there are a number of processes that make it more likely that a child will reproduce the behavior that its society deems appropriate for its sex” (Bandura, 1961). Certain situations impact a person life leading them to different paths.

There is much debate that homosexuality is a developmental problem caused by a weak bond between a father and son during one’s childhood. A failed relationship with one’s father can lead the boy to not fully internalize male gender identity and develop homosexually (Baird & Baird, 1995). Consider the gender development of identity. Infants indentify with their mother who is the first and primary source of nurturance and care. As girls age, they continue to identify mostly with their mother and boys shift towards their father. Through a father-son relationship, masculine identification is attained which is necessary if the boy is to develop a normally masculine personality (i.e. heterosexuality). This development task helps explain why boys have more difficulty than girls in developing gender identity and may also explain the higher ratio of male to female homosexuality (Baird & Baird, 1995). It is important that

For centuries, human’s behavior has been the center of attention not just for scientists, but also psychologist, scientist, and physiologies have always questioned what the root or main factor that contributes to a person's personality, sexuality; in other words, their entire behavior. Nature v.s. nurture has been one of the biggest debates that the scientific world has faced. Nature states that genes are responsible for human behavior, sexuality, and predisposition to certain diseases. On the other hand, nurture is defined as the theory that says all the contrary compared to nature. According to the nurture theory, the environment is the main factor that contributes to someone’s behavior, sexuality, and predisposition to diseases. This debate goes back to the era of the great philosopher Plato (428-348 B.C.E); who stated that temperament and intelligence are innate. Also, this debate has caused disagreement in two of the major psychologists known to mankind, Lev Vygotsky and Jean Piaget. The disagreement originated when Vygotsky stated that the cognitive development of a child is mainly influenced by

The nurture argument can explain why some people adopt the gender role not expected of their sex. In theory, a feminine boy would have had a set of experiences which have led him to acquire a different gender role from most boys. If gender roles are nurtured, it also explains why an individual’s gender may change over time as anything that is learnt can be unlearnt and replaced by a new set of behaviours.

Gender coding is not a natural or biological characteristic. People are born with different physical and biological characteristics, but make sense of their gender roles through cultural influences. “Stereotypes are amazingly powerful, and we may not realize the degree to which our thoughts, beliefs, and actions are shaped by them” (Silverman, Rader, 2010). Boys and girls are labeled as masculine or feminine, which is considered the “norm” for society. Children are not born masculine or feminine, they learn these roles from parents, peers, media, and even religion. Concepts of gender identity are sometimes placed on children even before their birth, such as with the selection of paint colors for the nursery.” Children begin to form concepts of gender beginning around the age of 2, and most children know if they are a boy or girl by age of 3” (Martin & Ruble, 2004). From an early age, children are encouraged to identify with gender coding. Gender is formed at birth, but self-identification as being male or female is imbedded into their minds by parents and society. A child learns to understand their gender role and their identity by what is taught and expressed to them by others. Yet as a child grows, gender coding can cause cultural confusion, and insecurity issues throughout the course of their life.

An eclectic use of both of these theories would enhance our understanding of gender development because it is important to understand that biology and socialization play a part in gender development. Hormones, sexual organs, culture, and society intertwine and make a child aware of his or her gender. A cognitive understanding does not suffice. For example, for parents who believe that culture, school, peers, and media influence their son or daughter to be transgender are incorrect. Both of these theories demonstrate that biologically their child was born with the awareness that they belong to a different sex; it is embedded in their chromosomes. Meanwhile, society simply enabled them to observe the gender roles and determine which gender they felt most comfortable in.

The biggest question asked is how it comes around, however there is not a solid reasoning or proof of one main causal factor. According to Lippa, exposure to testosterone during the second trimester of pregnancy, when the development of both male internal and external genitals and a male-typical nervous system forms, may influence gender identity. (98) Brown counters this argument by saying the formation of a secure unconflicted gender identity and gender role is influenced by social factors, such as the character of parent’s emotional bond or the relationship each parent has with the child; he asserts that the biological factors (genetic complement or prenatal hormones) do largely determine gender identity however they do not act alone, more or less just setting the stage to go one way or the other.

As evident from the generalized patterns found in differences in behaviour and outlook observed between the sexes, it may be tempting, as has been done in the past, to conclude that gender is an unavoidable aspect of human existence as determined purely from one 's genes. Indeed, human physiology is subject to sexual dimorphism; statistically significant differences in brain size and rate of maturation of specific substructures in the brain exist between males and females (Giedd, Castellanos, Rajapakese, Vaituzis, & Rapoport, 1997), yet these physical differences fail to explain how individuals form their concept of their own gender, and why they tend to conform to their perceived gender roles as defined by the society in which they live, when these roles are ever-changing. Thus, it is important to differentiate between the physical and nonphysical traits, and how the labels of femininity and masculinity should not confuse the two aspects. As defined by Unger (1979), “sex” would be used to refer to the biological differences in males and females, while “gender” describes socioculturally determined, nonphysiological traits which are arbitrarily designated as being appropriate for either females or males. With more recent awareness and interest in matters of gender nonconformity and individual gender identity, new research now explains how these concepts of gender are shaped by social influences (Perry

Interpersonal Theories of Gender are described as factors that influence the development of masculinity and femininity. Our text states, “Psychodynamics theory emphasizes

It is normally thought that gender is something that is developed at birth and is something that is set in stone. More recently in time, people have started to express that they feel that their gender identity is different and separate from their sex at birth. Egan and Perry are considered very important researchers in the field of gender identity and psychology. The two proposed that gender identity is multi-faceted and is made up of five different components that are generally independent of one another. The categories are as follows: knowing one belongs to one gender or another, how much they feel they belong to the category, how happy they are with that gender, how much pressure they feel to conform to gender stereotypes and how much they feel their sex is superior to the opposite (Carver, Yunger & Perry, 2003, p. 95). All of these relate to adjustment in different senses. Egan and Perry found that by middle childhood, most have a fairly stable idea of their standing on all of these categories. Their perception thrives most when they are confident in themselves and when they feel that they are not constricted in their freedom to explore other