Is Anatomy Destiny - Grade: A PDF

Preview

Summary

Paper based off the speculation of sex and gender, and whether the anatomy of a person declares their gendered make up. ...

Description

Stacey Rodrigues 80776_2159P: Biology of Human Sexuality Taking Sides Reaction Paper: Is Anatomy Destiny?

Submission Date: December 1, 2015 Professor Thompson

In Western culture, there is typically a dichotomous definition of gender that includes two specific sexes: male and female. However, this definition that places people into a specific category of being either male or female does not take into consideration other possibilities such as the anatomical sex not matching the psychological sex, or those who do not identify themselves into a specific gender role. While it is difficult to conclude what leads to a person’s gender, these two scholarly articles, Sexual Dimorphism in Mammalian Gene Expression by John Rinn and Michael Snyder, and Ending the Male Patina in Biology and Busting Bogus Biology Beliefs from Our Genders, Our Rights by Mahin Hassibi offer differing arguments that support whether or not gender is determined more so by anatomy, or by environmental factors. To begin, Rinn and Snyder creates the argument centered around sexual dimorphism, and therefore proposes that sex is determined at birth through differing sex hormones and chromosomal influences. Throughout the essay, it is presented that although males and females are undifferentiated during embryonic development, the Y-chromosome that contains the SRYgene leads to the production of testosterone and the male sex hormones, which leads to the development of the male gonads. Since the X-chromosome does not contain the SRY-gene, male sex hormones are not produced, and testosterone is not at a large enough quantity to warrant testicular development, but rather the female sex organs. This initial development of sex differentiation leads to how males and females vary from each other from how they react to certain diseases, to a sexually dimorphic prenatal brain. The research offered throughout the essay provides several successful and supporting facts to for their argument–– including the ones mentioned above–– that anatomy determines the sex, but they do not fill in the holes for where their argument goes astray. For example, despite the prenatal brain being sexually dimorphic, there have not been studies to prove that there are significant variations in gene expressions between the adult male and female brain. That being said, it can be argued that perhaps prenatal development of male and females do not automatically determine the gender for the developmental stages from infant, to childhood, to adolescence into adulthood. In addition, a limitation is that the studies Rinn and Snyder utilized were performed on rats; the anatomy of a rat differs greatly from the anatomy of a human. Studies of animal psychology are not a reliable enough source to make conclusions about human’s behaviors when there is species diversity. In addition, although Rinn and Snyder are correct in factoring in the Y-chromosome containing the SRY-gene to enable male development, it’s not accurate to conclude that because females do not have the SRY-gene, and because there is the absence of testosterone that female development “just happens”. Rather, it would be more fair to cite that both genders “actively develop through various genetic processes” (White 110). Moving on to the second argument proposed by Hassibi, she debates on the issues regarding gender roles and stereotypes, and the differences between how men are perceived and how women are perceived. Throughout history, women have been considered to be inferior and subordinate to men; Darwin theorized that the female evolutionary process is slower than males, and that females are not as developed as males are. Sigmund Freud created the argument that women have “penis envy”, which essentially refer to women as being the inferior gender, thus causing them to want to be males. Utilizing these arguments regarding female’s inferiority throughout history, she introduces those intersexed individuals who are born with an extra X-

chromosome. This is an establishing factor throughout the essay because it introduces the question to whether there is more to a female than just having two X-chromosomes. It is discussed throughout the article that perhaps gender is not such a black and white concept, and that not everyone falls so neatly and simply to that either male or female category. Another successful concept is the example of those individuals who develop a deep, persistent dissatisfaction and disagreement with their biological and anatomical sex. This involves the sense of self not matching the physical self, and, in this regard, it is unfair to say gender is dependent on the anatomy when there are factors that involve someone’s psyche. One of the weaknesses of Hassibi’s essay is she does not include concrete examples of those individuals who were born with an extra X-chromosome, or those who feel they were born in the wrong gender. In addition, much of her focus was not necessarily on why biology is not the only factor in gender, but she criticizes how women have been unequally and unfairly represented throughout history, and her attempt to dismantle the stigma placed on women. Rather than focus on the feminist perspective regarding gender roles and stereotypes, it would have been more relevant to the topic to mention more points regarding the fluidity involved in sex and gender. Personally, due to the unknown fact of how much one’s sex is determined by biology and how much is determined by environment, it is difficult to voice whether one is more influential than the other. However, based of the reading of As Nature Made Him: the Boy Who Was Raised as a Girl, the evidence in that book proves that biology has a more influential factor on gender than the environment. In the case of the Reimer family, if David decided to stay in “her” female role as Brenda, there is easy to predict that her entire life would have been filled with doubt on whether she is a true woman. In my opinion, gender is not as concrete as mentioned in the first essay, because just because there are anatomical differences in men and women does not account for one’s anatomy being the only factor in gender. Gender has the ability to be fluid, and this is proven when we see those individuals who do not agree with their being born as a boy or as a girl, or even those who do not define themselves as either male or female. In these cases, however, it is debatable on whether this is environmentally influenced, or psychologically influenced. Many of these conflicting emotions are deep-rooted and most likely go beyond cultural and societal influences. When in terms of biology, I do not believe that just because someone is born with a certain set of chromosomes with a specific set of sex organs that it automatically deems them as a male or female. Other factors can be influential but not necessarily from environmental factors, but perhaps more so by the psyche and a person’s psychological makeup....