Reflection on the debate between Nature and Nurture concerning Gender
CC608 Men and Women Love and Work
Reflection
The nature versus nurture debate explaining sex and gender has been going on for around a century (AboutGender, 2003). Amongst the three approaches, I find sex and gender theories as the most persuasive, although a part of me is inclined towards biological determinism.
I believe that femininity and masculinity is due to biological differences to a certain extent, as there is a difference between female anatomy, hormones and genes and that of a male. Schiebinger (1987, p.69-70) claimed that women think according to feelings and intuitions while men are more objective. I have to admit that sometimes I make decisions based on what my heart tells me, although there is a conflict with making the right moves. One example whereby I followed my heart blindly is during my application to the National University of Singapore (NUS). Although I knew my grades were not good enough for the Law Faculty, due to my deep interest in that subject I still went ahead to apply it as my first choice.
However, what convinced me that there are more shortfalls than merits to this theory is that even up until now, no human behavior has been proven by any researcher to be connected to genetic factors (NARTH, 2002). Furthermore, I have an intention of challenging the notion that men have natural qualities that render their aggressiveness. In Singapore for example, increasing cases of maid abuse have been reported; most of the abuses were inflicted by female employers of foreign domestic helpers. Thus I noted that not only men, women also have the propensity to be violent. Elshtain (1987) further justify my point by asserting that the level of aggressiveness of males vary widely across different cultures and women are expected to be more passive in certain cultures than others.