Communicative conditionality of gender identity in social and philosophical dimension
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21847/1728-9343.2016.4(144).78096Keywords:
"sex", "gender", "gender identity", "communication", "social role", "gender display"Abstract
The essential factors of implementation of gender identification in the context of social and communication interaction have been considered in terms of the social and philosophical analysis. The author focuses on the achievements of postmodern philosophy in terms of the scientific analysis that focused on the problem of understanding gender marking subjectivity not as immutable biological forms but as socially constructed conducted by certain types of social and communicative strategies.
The author indicates that different social aspects of biological sex of the individual associated with the process of public perception and the system of established socio-cultural relationship. These require the individual to a particular type of gender communicative behavior, the most appropriate in a particular society, and language becomes from an external tool in a tool of external means of formation of subjectivity, begins to define the essential contents of the subject. Language appears not only a way of individuals communication, but it is also organic strategy "involvement" of the subject in contemporary culture system, it acts as the key to his self-expression and identity.
The author emphasizes that gender role is a differentiation of activity, status, rights and duties of individuals based on their gender; it belongs to the category of social roles and expressing certain social expectations. The value-regulatory system family (patriarchal or egalitarian), which brought up a specific person, has an influence on the formation of gender roles. In terms of the communication gender display is means of gender roles implementation.
Gender identity should not be seen as attributive property of the individual, but it should be seen as a model of social and communicative behavior, that enables selection of the most effective communication strategies for social interaction and social causes of self-identity. This idea is emphasized in the conclusions.References
1. Bendas, T.V. (2009), Gender Psychology, Piter Publishing, St. Petersburg, 431 p. (rus).
2. Berger, P. and Lukman, T. (1995), Social Construction of Reality. A treatise on the sociology of knowledge [trans. from English], Medium Publishing, Moscow, 323 p. (rus).
3. Burns, R. (2007), What I – concept [trans. from English], Psychology of consciousness. Reader.Bahr-M Publishing, Samara, 333-395 (rus).
4. Bondarevska, I.A. (2003), Gender as a category of theoretical analysis, Gender Studies, educational prospects (teaching materials), Foliant Publishing, Kyiv, 80 p. (ukr).
5. Hornostay, P.P. (2003), The gender development and gender identity of the individual, especially the male and female socialization, Gender Studies, educational prospects (teaching materials), Foliant Publishing, Kyiv, 80 p. (ukr).
6. Kon, I. S. (2009), Sex differences and differentiation of social roles, Moscow, 763-776 (rus).
7. Semenova, V.E. (2009), Gender philosophy in search of a subject, Bulletin of the Nizhny NovgorodUniversity. NI Lobachevsky, 1 (13), 139-145 (rus).
8. Serebryanska, V.N. (2011), Gender in Social Communication, News of Volgograd StateUniversity, Ser. Philosophy, 1 (13), 148-150 (rus).
9. Philosophical Encyclopedic Dictionary (2000), INFRA-M Publishing, Moscow, 576 p. (rus).
10. Yaroshovets, V.I. (2004), History of Philosophy: from structuralism to postmodernism, Znannia Ukrainy Press, Kyiv, 214 p. (ukr).
11. Bem, S. (1974), The measurement of psychological androgyny, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, Vol. 42, 155-162. doi: 10.1037/h0036215
12. Bosak, J. and Sczesny, S. and Eagly, A.H. (2008), Communion and agency judgments of women and men as a function of role information and response format, European Journal of Social Psychology,Vol. 38, Issue 7, 1148-1155. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.538
13. Butler, J. (1990), Gender Trouble. Feminism and the Subversion of Identity, Routledge, New York, 172 р. doi: 10.1353/esc.2015.0078
14. Goffman, E. (1979), Gender Advertisements, Harper Colophon Books, 10-31. doi: 10.1007/978-1-349-16079-2
15. Hyde, J.Sh. (2005), The gender similarities hypothesis, American Psychologist, 60, 581-592. doi: 10.1037/0003-066x.60.6.581
16. Kaufman, M. and Kimmel, M. (2011), The Guy’s Guide to Feminism, Seal Press (eng).
17. Koenig, A.M., et al. (2011), Are Leader Stereotypes Masculine? A Meta-Analysis of Three Research Paradigms. Psychological Bulletin, 137(4), 616-642. doi: 10.1037/a0023557
18. Winkiel, L. (2001), Doing Time: Feminist Theory and Postmodern Culture (review), Project Muse, Vol. 8, issue 2, 373-375. doi: 10.1353/mod.2001.0048
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2016 Svitlana Zagurska
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
1. Authors bear responsibility for the accuracy of facts, quotations, numbers and names used.
2. Manuscripts are not sent back.
3. The publisher does not always agree with the authors' opinion.
4. The authors reserve the right to authorship of the work and pass the first publication right of this work to the journal under the terms of a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License, which allows others to freely distribute the published research with the obligatory reference to the authors of the original work and the first publication of the work in this journal.
5. The authors have the right to conclude separate supplement agreements that relate to non-exclusive work distribution in the form in which it has been published by the journal (for example, to upload the work to the online storage of the journal or publish it as part of a monograph), provided that the reference to the first publication of the work in this journal is included.
