The Enforcement Of Gender Norms Sociology Essay Essay

essay B

Get Full Essay

Get access to this section to get all the help you need with your essay and educational goals.

Get Access

The passage of sport-created norms, every bit good as the glorifying of the male build as the ultimate tool of featuring success has non merely take to the increased marginalization of adult females from professional sporting Fieldss, but has besides set a criterion of what is and is n’t acceptable in mundane life. These norms have helped distance an already unbridgeable spread between males and females, and have highlighted a set of socially constructed differences between the sexes which are frequently grossly over-emphasised in the clean universe. Masculinity and muliebrity are, nevertheless, relational in signifier. In other words, maleness would be impossible to observe and specify if there was n’t something to compare it to. Men tend to specify their individuality in relation to other work forces, and in making this, a set of acceptable and unacceptable features are constructed. The media frequently presents work forces with an image of the absolutely masculine sportswoman who dominates in his clean field and is besides successful, attractive and affluent in other countries of his life. He, in many ways, encompasses what it is to be a adult male, and this sends a really strong message to other work forces while besides feeding on their insecurities. It is these insecurities which lead work forces to oppugn their ain maleness, and in bend, this prompts them to go more like the masculine function theoretical account that is created by the media. Dollimore ( 1991 ) noted that in building a sense of insiders and foreigners in male-culture, it has frequently been gay work forces who have provided the strongest sense of contrast of ‘otherness ‘ for consecutive work forces. However, maleness is besides defined in relation to adult females. The simplest and most accurate manner of depicting signifiers of maleness in a peculiar society is to state that maleness is non femininity. This contrast between muliebrity and maleness is really of import for a figure of grounds. In many carnal species, males and females are differentiated to an extraordinary extent by organic structure form. In comparing, worlds are non so differentiated and are merely somewhat sexually differentiated, and yet maleness and muliebrity have assumed a immense symbolic importance. These minute differences are strongly accentuated in apparels, in gestures, in societal and cultural circles, and of class, in the sporting kingdom.

Feminist theoreticians believe that athletics revolves around an political orientation that rewards domination, conquering and moreover, male high quality. These thoughts of maleness do non, nevertheless, stretch into the spheres of female athletics. On the contrary, female sportspersons are capable to objectification, sexualisation, take downing advertisement runs, and torment from the media. Despite professional female jocks stand outing in their sporting Fieldss due to their ability entirely, media compulsion in respects to their physical visual aspect overshadows and vastly devalues any of their achievements. Feminist theory besides highlights the huge disparity of adult females in athleticss today. This is mostly due to there being less societal and economic support for female jocks than for their male opposite numbers, and for this ground, fewer females prosecute athletic callings. ( Butt, 1987 ) Due to the greater accent placed upon male jocks, there is besides a much higher degree of outlook attached them, and in bend, there is less involvement in the female public presentation. This degree of disinterested and sensed lower status of the female public presentation in athletics has transcended the sporting universe and found its manner into wider society. Both males and females persist that the female physical public presentation capacity is inferior to that of work forces. This attitude of inactive bias is encouraged and displayed in many countries of the sporting universe today. It is normally accepted that athletics is a male interest designed specifically for males, and females hence lack both the psychical and psychological capacity required. Sport broadcast medium besides sends a strong and alone message about masculine behavior to society. Sporting observers, squad AIDSs, managers, referees and linesmen are most normally male, while females are frequently reduced to sexual objects of amusement such as cheerleaders or terpsichoreans. The thought that the clean universe encompasses all that it is to be a adult male while besides devaluating adult females ‘s ability and intelligence is one that is steadfastly accepted and expected by society today.

In order to derive an penetration into how these norms have come to be accepted and expected, one must see how and why the norms were created. When analyzing athletics and its effects on society it must be remembered that athletics is a societal concept which has been defined by people, and like all societal establishments, it is invariably altering and accommodating. Sport may be viewed as a site in which civilization and societal administration is created, changed and affirmed. It may besides be viewed as a direct contemplation on wider society. Both society and sporting-society draw methods of normalcy and aberrance from one another, and therefore be in a round relationship of cause and consequence. Norms created in the kingdom of athletics can leak into wider society, such as the impression that force is acceptable and expected, and similarly, norms created in wider society can happen themselves into the clean universe. This relationship has created new thoughts about muliebrity, maleness and organic structure image, and these ideals have become widely accepted by the remainder of society. This spherical relationship between the sporting universe and wider society indicates that members of society are actively involved in the building of societal universes. Humans set and define norms and criterions in athletics as they interact with each other, and are capable of puting and specifying norms that differ wholly to the norms found in wider society.

The enforcement of gender norms has had a strong impact on what it means to be masculine or feminine. The impression that force and aggression exist as outstanding male properties is still an ideal promoted and enforced by athletics. Viewing audiences are overwhelmed with images that promote and reward aggressive physical behavior during featuring events, and those who employ such aggressive drama on-field frequently win. This message of aggression as a agency to acquire in front or win has farther enforced the ideal of aggression being an of import masculine property. Media coverage of featuring events frequently emphasise the impression that force and aggression are to be expected, which in bend leads to it being exhaustively accepted and frequently encouraged. Sporting observers frequently refer to male jocks as ‘owning ‘ or ‘dominating ‘ their fellow participants. These words are used often and interchangeably to depict the act of winning or out-skilling another participant on the field, but they bear much more significance than this. Wordss such as ‘own ‘ or ‘dominate ‘ are, in kernel, words of ownership, and their really usage implies that by using such tactics as aggression or force, one can basically get the better of and have another individual. This straight relates to the power-struggles often witnessed on playing Fieldss in which the participant who is the most ‘masculine ‘ , or who conforms to the socially constructed thought of what it is to be a adult male, will win. The significance of athletics as an country in which norms, and in bend, individualities are created is that of undeniable power and illustriousness. Males who have no engagement in athletics are affected by sport-constructed thoughts of maleness whether they intend to be or non, and coevalss of individualities and individualisms have stemmed from these thoughts.

Identity is a complex entity, but in understanding how one ‘becomes ‘ their ain individual, it is possible to understand how full groups can organize shared individualities. Sport is to a great extent involved in the building of maleness, but our apprehension of what individuality means and how it evolves over the class of a life span is invariably altering. Erikson ( 1968 ) noted how one ‘s sense of self-importance individuality is shaped by three interesting elements: one ‘s biological features, one ‘s ain demands and involvements, and the cultural surroundings in which one lives. In the instance of maleness as a subscriber to individuality, it is largely influenced by what is and is n’t acceptable in any given society. These thoughts of what is and is n’t acceptable are created by people, and as norms and criterions are invariably altering – both in and out of the sporting universe – one can reason that individualities are besides invariably altering. The thought that individuality is an organic and personal creative activity is challenged by the fact that things which contribute straight to individuality, be it maleness or muliebrity, are in fact societal concepts. Turner ( 1982 ) argued that when people identify with their group, they begin a procedure of what he calls depersonalization and self-stereotyping. As we begin to depersonalize and self-stereotype as Turner suggests, our sense of who we are and what we ‘re like alterations to conform to the group norms. As a society we are used to the thought that we stereotype others by concentrating merely on a few of their alleged features and disregarding fluctuations and diverseness. However, as Turner has suggested, we stereotype ourselves when we think in footings of our societal individualities, and this is particularly true when talking about gender individualities. Corporate images of what it means to be masculine or feminine may come to rule our self-perceptions and, possibly more significantly, our apprehensions of how we should act in state of affairss where these group individualities are relevant.

In decision, maleness is a negotiated reading of what it means to be a adult male. The accent of maleness can be seen as profoundly oppressive to both work forces and adult females on a figure of different degrees. It can be seen as the hyperbole of gender difference as it dictates complementary universes for work forces and adult females, and it can be seen as an impenetrable barrier between the sexes in the clean universe. However, by understanding that maleness and so, muliebrity, are societal concepts, it is rather possible to alter their very definition through the medium of athletics. This is, although improbable as it may look, easy go oning in the sporting universe today. Females are marginally more involved than they were a figure of old ages ago, and equality appears to be an end-goal for many featuring administrations across the universe. However, this end-goal of equality is far from fruition, and marginalization and bias are non uncommon subjects in the sporting kingdom today. Sport will stay one of the few countries in which norms and actively created and enforced, and this offers a alone penetration into how norms in wider society come to be accepted. These norms have set a criterion of maleness for 1000000s of males, and in the procedure have undisputedly hindered 1000000s of females. Sport should be viewed as a powerful force which can be both constructive and destructive to life in wider society.

Get instant access to
all materials

Become a Member