Introduction
The notion of nature and nurture are considered as classical opposites of each other. They at times complement each other as well. An individual is born by nature and it is the nature that has decided about the birth of an individual whereas nurture helps the individuals to learn so that they can become something, for instance, civilized (Becker, S. W., & Eagly, A. H. 2004). A similar debate continues in an educational setting as well and it questions that whether the gender stereotypes in education are influenced by nature or nurture. Research studies suggest that men and women face gender stereotyping in the educational environment despite the fact that the concept of gender equality is promoted in the educational institution to a great extent. Further, the promotion of gender equality in the labour market has also one of the main agenda of various countries especially in the European Union (European Commission, 2015). Further, the stereotypes still exist in the systems with respect to the performance of the students and their motivational levels as well. Not only this but there are various other factors such as the vocational aspirations, their participation in different fields is also indulged in manifesting the gender differences despite the fact that various educational opportunities are being introduced by the countries to promote gender equality (Kollmayer, M., Schober, B., & Spiel, C. 2016).
Masculine and Feminine are the two sexes between which the world is segregated in terms of specie. The word sex is often confused with the word gender, however, both have different meanings (Chou, 2011). Sex deals with the biological, physical and anatomical areas of human life whereas gender encompasses more of social and cultural difference between males and females. Further, society plays a pivotal role in designing the role of both males and females so that a differentiation could be made between two in order to maintain a social order within a society (Campbell, A. 2012). According to Simone De Beauvoir, that an individual is not born as women it becomes women.
Thus, the statement clearly manifests that the gender is an outcome of culture and society. There are beliefs in a society that are adhered in order to maintain social order. A society plays a significant role in defining the roles of gender. Sam Killermann elaborates that there are three components on which the gender can be classified these include gender expression, gender identity and the biological sex. Moreover, the gender identity and the gender expression is always based on the societal values (Clark, R. D., & Hatfield, E. 1989). These are shaped by the society. It is the society that determines and approves the right behaviour that an individual is allowed to demonstrate in order to be a part of the society. This essay shall discuss both perspectives about the gender debate that either gender is determined by nature or it is the environment that is responsible for it.
There are a variety of areas that fall in the realm of this debate and are mostly considered as taboos. Those who support the idea that the gender is influenced by the nature, such as the biological scientists and the genetics argue that everything is predetermined about the gender and sexuality of a person, on the other hand, the psychologists and the evolutionary theorists believe that there are certain stereotypical and the environmental influences that are responsible for the differences in the gender (Daly, M., & Wilson, M. 1983).
Moreover, Gender stereotypes play an important for the development of an individual and the importance of education cannot be denied while shaping the personality of an individual either male or female. Gender stereotypes develop different expectations of men and women with respect to the skills they should possess and the attributes their personalities should demonstrate in order to fit into the frame set by the society through these stereotypes. These stereotypes are the lens of the society through which it sees the individuals and categorizes them as male or female. Education mediates between these two poles and helps to modify the roles played by the individuals irrespective of the context of being a male and a female. It is education that has caused the society to foster the notion of gender equality in a way that it has now one of the sustainable development goals of the United Nations.
Discussion
One of the most fluid concepts that have been studied in the past and in different cultures is gender. Most of the cultures and societies have always restrained the gender into the two binaries that include male and females, however, the mainstream societies as well have introduced the other concept of gender in the late 1970s. A clear distinction has always been made between the societies that what would be the characteristics that shall cause a man and woman to fall into a specific category and to identify themselves as males or females. Further, the physical characteristics of the males and females also support the claim made the by those who believe in the theory that the differences are created by the natural processes. The sexual characteristics are based on the sexual dimorphism that is the reason there is a strong belief that the gender differences are based on nature.
The role of stereotyping cannot be ignored in this regard. It causes both males and females to be different at a cognitive level as well. It means that the situations and the tasks they approach also differ in the way they are perceived and executed. Further, research studies also suggest that the behavioural patterns are the outcome of the human brain, they may also be because of the hormonal secretion as Moir (2001) found that the recognition in the female babies who were four years old were more as compared to the male babies. Moreover, it is also found that the brain of the males tends to be 10% larger as compared to the females however when the body to weight ratio is applied the female brain turns out greater. Such explanations are also used to justify the differences in the behaviour of girls and boys in the educational context as well.
The girls are better behaved and focused on learning, on the other hand, the boys show more disruptive tendencies in their attitudes. Research studies suggest that the gender stereotyping affect the school performance as well. A study conducted by OECD (2014) suggest that the performance of boys in mathematics is better than the girls in most of the countries. However, the girls outperform boys in reading. Stereotyping not only affects the performance of the students but it also affects the student motivation as well (Glienke, & Burg, 2006; Wigfield, Battle, Keller, & Eccles, 2002)
The differences between the average minds of males and females are interesting. These differences must be realized and recognized so that they could lead to the mutual respect between the two genders. These differences are subtle and are related to the relative proportion to the different drives that are present in the typical male and female mind. Such sort of debate regarding the role of biology even while considering the role that culture plays in the lives of individuals and acknowledging the importance it has in the lives of individuals, was not possible in the 1960s and 1970s. Those people who investigated the role of biology have been accused that they have defended essentialism in a way that it has caused to inculcate between the sexes perpetuated inequalities There was no such climate where the scientists could have asked the questions regarding the mechanisms of nature. In the contemporary world, the nature and nurture debate has set the pendulum in the middle and those who feel a deep concern regarding ending the inequality and the oppression from the society can talk freely about the biological differences that are found between the minds of an average male and a female (Hilliard, L. J., & Liben, L. S. 2010).
Further, the differences in the minds studied in the field of sex require that the proceedings must be made in a way that is sensitive to the history of conflict and that must look for the evidence so that the facts could not be overstated in opposite to what the actual scenario is. One important point of consideration is that the data does not consider individuals as a whole but the merits of individuals as these merits vary from person to person. It is because of the fact that it is not necessary that an individual is typical for his/her sex.
Research studies have suggested that socialization and learning play an important role in the development of sex-related differences (Bandur, 1977; Kagan, 1964). Further, the research studies have also revelated that certain factors such as stereotypes, the norms, roles and the identities that tend to support the differentiation in gender in terms of cognition and social behaviour are also important for the social and the personality psychologists (Eagly, 1983; Deaux, 1984). Few studies have taken into consideration both the biological factors and factors that can cause an impact on the socialization as well however the emphasis in most of the studies was given to the nurture (Macooby and Jacklin, 1974).
In order to curt the gender gap, there are many international institutions that are working on this issue. One idea that is widely used throughout the world is, that the female teachers must be recruited so that the gender gap should be reduced. However, this is not the only solution. One important consideration in this regard is that the most of the times the only options which are left for the females is to become a teacher in the developing countries so they can earn to meet their expenses. Most of the cultures also see teaching as a prestigious job for a woman so they are not encouraged to participate in the other professions. Specifically, in the developing countries where the family traditions do not allow women to even work, this permission tends to appear as an only opportunity. Moreover, the skill set of the females is also limited as they are supposed to be restrained to the domestic chores.
The brain of the males and females are defined by the two key dimensions these are systemizing and empathizing. Those individuals who have a certain psychological profile may be categorized as talented and systemizers however they are also ‘mind-blind’ at the same time (Baron-Cohen, 1995). Research studies suggest that the female brains are good at empathizing whereas the male brains are good at systemizing. The characteristics that had led to this conclusion are multifarious. The preferences and choices the individuals make play an important role while deciding about the category in which they fall (Eagly, 2012).
The boys strongly prefer to watch videos of the cars that to watch a film that is showing about the human face etc at the age of one. This is an example of the predictable mechanical system. The preferences demonstrated by the girls are opposite to these. The eye contact demonstrated by the girls is more as compared to the boys at the age of 1. Research studies suggest that even at this stage of age, these differences may be present due to the factor of socialization. However, the evidence that exists for the differential socialization which contributes to sex differences does not tend to be sufficient information. Research studies done by Connellan and Colleagues show that among the babies who are one year old the boys look longer at the mechanical mobile -that contains a system of predictable law of motion as compared to a face of a person that is nearly impossible to systemize- as compared to the girls. The girls of the one-year-old show an opposite profile. Thus, after seeing this scenario, the conclusion raises the possibility that the culture and socialization may partly determine the development of a brain and it depends that whether it is with stronger interests of systems or a female brain that has a strong interest over empathy. On the other hand, biology may also partly determine this.
Research studies suggest that there is a direct correlation between the gender differences in education and the socialization process. As the socialization process increases the gender differences also tend to increase and the individuals are hampered from utilizing their full potential. This finding has been affirmed by another research that (Evans, Schweingruber, & Stevenson, 2002; Retelsdorf, Schwartz, & Asbrock, 2015)
Culture has remained one of the major determinants and the information that is present in nature travels on genes intergenerationally. The information in culture travels neutrally as the individuals get the education into transmissible cultures. The determinants that gauge the behaviour of the plants and the animals are never political, economic, anthropological, technological, ethical, religious etc.
Moreover, a deliberate modification that is made within nature tends to separate the humans in their cultures from nature increasingly so high in technology cultures. Since the human genome is being decoded, people are now standing at a point where they can rebuild even their own genetic culture (Fine, D. 2010).
Cultures, in particular, the present cultures tend to change more rapidly in the recent times whereas the genes of an individual hardly change in thousands of years. Thus the slowly paced genes can in no way found pace with the fast-paced cultures and face certain challenges (Lott, 1985). A mind that is relatively pliable and is educated is more of an adaptive advantageous position as compared to a mind that is with the instinctive routines. The complexity of the mind is so huge that the number of neurons and their possible connections can result in a myriad of cultural options.
Thus in this way, it exceeds the number of gene coding so it is possible for the genes to specify all the connections amicably. These genes of an individual create an organism whose behaviour is resulted from an education beyond direct genetic control. The more knowledge is inserted, the genome selected will be in the position where it could be instructed maximally by a tradition that is increasingly knowledgeable. It reflects that the consistent and the continual learning firstly require a stable intellect and further, due to the consistent approach of this for a long period of time in the nuclear families, it results in the usually large brain babies (Finkel, E. J., & Eastwick, P. W. 2009).
Conclusion:
To sum, human beings (and other animals) are part of the world only in evolutionary, biological and ecological senses that is the composition of nature and on the other hand, the homo-sapiens seek wisdom by means of culture that is nurture. Thus nature determines the behavioural outcomes of the human behaviour. Research studies suggest that in the future the debate regarding the differences between the gender and sex shall take an ideological leap. The concept that favours this ideological leap has been witnessed in the consideration of gender equality by the United Nations in its sustainable development goals. It works on overcoming the ideological barriers and the identity biases that are caused due to the limitations caused by these ideology barriers. Further, the theories catering such areas shall also come to play a major role in this regard.
It is because of the fact that the theories present the intellectual challenges and cause the researchers and scientists to model the intrinsic dependencies of nature and nurture in thorough details. These issues are further aggravated by the media and require proper working to be addressed so that simple frameworks can be created in order to satisfy the needs of the public. Not only this but the importance of Education cannot be sidelined while discussing the future implications of the topic. Education plays a pivotal role in shaping the society and clarifying the confusions that might arise. It enlightens the minds of individuals and helps them in understanding the core issues that are required to be addressed rather than engaging in the debates that either nature or environment shapes their behaviour.
References
Abelson, R. P. (1985). A variance explanation paradox: When a little is a lot. Psychological Bulletin, 97, 129–133. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.97.1.129 Alexander, M. G., & Fisher, T. D. (2003). Truth and consequences: Using the bogus pipeline to examine sex differences in self-reported sexuality. Journal of Sex Research, 40, 27–35. doi:10.1080/00224490309552164
Baksh, M. Nature vs. Nurture and the Gender Divide.
Baron‐Cohen, S., Campbell, R., Karmiloff‐Smith, A., Grant, J. and Walker, J., 1995. Are children with autism blind to the mentalistic significance of the eyes?. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 13(4), pp.379-398.
Becker, S. W., & Eagly, A. H. (2004). The heroism of women and men. American Psychologist, 59, 163–178. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.59.3.163 Bell, R. Q. (1968). A reinterpretation of the direction of effects in studies of socialization. Psychological Review, 75, 81–95. doi:10.1037/h0025583
Campbell, A. (2012). The study of sex differences: Feminism and biology. Zeitschrift für Psychologie [Journal of Psychology], 220, 137–143. doi:10.1027/2151-2604/a000105 Carothers, B. J., & Reis, H. T. (2013). Men and women are from Earth: Examining the latent structure of gender. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104, 385–407. doi:10.1037/a0030437
Chou, K.-H., Cheng, Y., Chen, I.-Y., Lin, C.-P., & Chu, W.-C. (2011). Sex-linked white matter microstructure of the social and analytic brain. NeuroImage, 54, 725–733. doi:10.1016/j .neuroimage.2010.07.010
Clark, R. D., & Hatfield, E. (1989). Gender differences in receptivity to sexual offers. Journal of Psychology and Human Sexuality, 2, 39–55. doi:10.1300/J056v02n01_04
Daly, M., & Wilson, M. (1983). Sex, evolution and behaviour (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Eagly, A. H., Eaton, A., Rose, S., Riger, S., & McHugh, M. (2012). Feminism and psychology: Analysis of a half-century of research. American Psychologist, 67, 211–230. doi:10.1037/ a0027260
European Commission. (2015). Evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses of the Strategy for equality between women and men – A review of the situation and recent progress. Brussels: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
Fine, D. (2010). Delusions of gender: How our minds, society, and neurosexism create a difference. New York, NY: Norton.
Finkel, E. J., & Eastwick, P. W. (2009). Arbitrary social norms influence sex differences in romantic selectivity.
Hilliard, L. J., & Liben, L. S. (2010). Differing levels of gender salience in preschool classrooms: Effects on children’s gender attitudes and intergroup bias. Child Development, 81, 1787–1798. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01510.x
Hines, M. (1982). Prenatal gonadal hormones and sex differences in human behaviour. Psychological Bulletin, 92, 56– 80. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.92.1.56
Kollmayer, M., Schober, B., & Spiel, C. (2016). Gender stereotypes in education: Development, consequences, and interventions. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 1-17.
Lott, B. (1985). The potential enrichment of social/personality psychology through feminist research and vice versa. American Psychologist, 40, 155–164. doi:10.1037/0003- 066X.40.2.155
Meece, J. L., Glienke, B. B., & Burg, S. (2006). Gender and motivation. Journal of School Psychology, 44, 351–373.
Moir, A., & Moir, B. (2001). Why men don’t iron: the fascinating and unalterable differences between men and women. Citadel Press.
Wigfield, A., Battle, A., Keller, L. B., & Eccles, J. S. (2002). Sex differences in motivation, self-concept, career aspiration, and career choice: Implications for cognitive development. In A. McGillicuddy-DeLisi (Ed.), The development of sex differences in cognition (pp. 93–124). Westport, CT: Ablex.
