Are social dynamics defining what’s male and what’s female?

Gender – the social dynamic?  The long hair for the maid of honor, the short hair for the good man. The flowers for the girl who strolls in the meadows, the kite for the boy who jumps from one rooftop to another. Pink for the daughter, blue for the son. Valor for the knight, distress for the damsel. Keeping it traditional, mythological and very in tune with the stereotype today in many cultures and social settings, the gender is a myriad of subjective perceptions of how the female and male roles are thought to be. But do they have

Do psychologists support the traditional social dynamic of the gender

In the world of Sigmund Freud’s, everything was automatically compared to the male. The idea of being female was simply not owning the male reproductive system. Freud based his theory on gender on the idea that the ownership of a penis reflects masculinity and power. According to Chodorow, the process of Male Inexpressiveness causes detachment and anything that contradicts this behavior terms the man as “mummy’s boy” or a “sissie”, something men take as an offense to their masculine sense of self. The man was suddenly imposed with the suit of the knight and was demanding valor by force to qualify as man-enough while the female despised herself never having the stronger shot at the world, weeping herself to sleep as the damsel in distress.

These studies, despite their revered and “pioneering” status in the world of psychology, have been proven to be untrue in the wake of movements and events such as the suffragette movement, #metoo and “Times up!” as criticisms of the fearless voices grew from the era of modernism to post modernism leaving the world devoid of one definition for a particular gender. It’s not just the society that’s telling you to comply to a particular gender image, perhaps psychologists have been biased and generalizing about it too causing the act of imposing gender roles absolved by a science.

Can we let live a Knight Of Valor Who Loves everything Floral?

The romantic idea that carrying flowers in the scenic beauty of fresh meadows filling the air with fragrance enlightens the sensory world and is an aspect of the self that is only suited to a woman who is feminine, beautiful, resorting to gender roles in all her femininity. A man carrying the same flowers running in meadows will be asked if he’s crazy, gay or seeking attention in a childishly funny manner. His behavior will become the subject of laughter because who does that? Suddenly he will not qualify to be man enough, causing him to lose all sense of belonging to the community that shares his anatomy. The “sissie” boy will be marginalized, not too masculine to completely grow as wholesome and strong as the other boys. But is that really how it should work? Is the blind faith in the gender role and anything standing in opposition to it really just letting certain individuals have a better chance at life than others? Are we letting people succeed by pathetic standards, discouraging freedom of expression because we have our own subjective criterion that suddenly defines how each and everyone is ought to behave?

The subjective, irrational, traditional gender-definitive criterion to judge a person does exist in so many social settings in the digital age of postmodernism where expression is aided in the forms of social media, and art and yet such expression becomes the target of irrational biases. A good writer who wishes to question sexuality because he himself has picked flowers as a young boy while other boys played cricket will have to face the stigma of not being like the rest. Sometimes, it is the unwilling conditioning that every individual has accumulated over the years believing that no normal boy likes flowers. If this is so for each one of us, does this conditioning leave our minds free enough to imagine the world beyond how we’ve been taught to see it?

Our minds have the capacity to be free. And so does the girl who wants to be the damsel of valor or the boy picking flowers. Our minds are free to roam in the meadows if we don’t let them become defined by traditional theory of power and its strong association with having a p*nis or the lack of it by not owning one. We don’t need to fear the boundary beyond which the world is “sissie”, the boundary beyond which a damsel falls out of her tower that locks her only to be saved by the Knight. One can be free when one raises flags of freedom empowering everyone to define themselves by suddenly growing bigger than the boundaries defining genders set up by social standards carry no rationale, unlike the growing human intellect that is panting as it speeds to break all locks set to its exploration.

One is free if the sense of self is free of all external definition, even gender.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.