Gender definition Essay

Cultural and social differences stand out as being unmatched in their ability to redefine masculinity and feminism in relation to gender, in contrast to the enormous magnitude of human understanding given to the perception of anatomical distinctions that characterize male or female. (Calhoun 558). Male and female are fictitious representations of sexuality, and when feminism, lesbianism, and vocal redefinition are used to characterize the political, social, economic, cultural, and traditional landscape of humanity, a complex result is unavoidable. This paper aims to distinguish lesbian theory from feminist theory in this respect, but it has previously placed a greater emphasis on the issues of race, Community and Female Labor Supply in the London Clothing Industry social structures as well as vocal performances about gender.

The concept of feminism and lesbianism hypothesizing in the 1980s is a critical factor that defines gender, since then to date. Principally, it has been portrayed through scholarly arguments that the rise to the revelation of the theory of feminism has played a critical role in ensuring that the efforts of lesbianism and its meaning in the contemporary society is concealed (Calhoun 558). The lesbianism and feminism theories, in essence, seeks to demystify the particular agenda of lesbianism, so that it is regarded independently as an entity free of feminism influence, but rather, a radical position that distances those who embrace it from heterosexuality and a reference to womanly allegiance. Nevertheless, the inclination to lesbian culture in entirety without regard to feminism and in opposition to the norms of patriarchy is wrong and unfounded in itself. However, research-based data makes it clear as evidenced by manifest misunderstanding that the core objective of lesbianism is to achieve everything in controversy with the desires of feminism as well as particle advocacies (Calhoun 562). On the contrary, even if the concept of gender and sexuality presents heterosexuality and patriarchy as inseparable and interdependent of each other, the collapse of patriarchy due to the influence of the social values held as morally upright by lesbianism cannot in any one way or another lead to the end of the dominant estate of heterosexuality. Therefore, with a keen scrutiny and critical analysis of research-based information about the concept of gender dating from four decades ago, it is as futile as it elusive to make a postulate inclined to a meaning that the advocacies by feminism will lead to the liberation of the rights of lesbianism or vice versa, in the twenty-first century, as heterosexuality set the pace in socio-political, economic, cultural, and traditional platforms globally.

The arguments concerning lesbianism in the scholarly arena have been trivialized and turned into mere hypotheses, following the theorization of the feminist related issues. On the one hand, feminism was originated on principles very distinct and different from those of lesbianism, nevertheless, across decades, the core objective of feminism seemed to shift ground and rather embrace a new dimension of highlighting, rebuking, and condemning the oppression lesbians face (Calhoun 580). On the one hand, a group of theorists has rated lesbianism as a movement that resists patriarchal dominance in its strongest from by working against heterosexuality, hence is opposition to feminism as well. On the contrary, the other wing of theorists has hypothesized that lesbianism is a form of feminism that does not condemn male ascendency across the social domain.

When subject to the scrutiny of test, the theorists that argue for the position of lesbianism do not express a clear platform of the union which lesbianism depicts its command of autonomy from, because the experience of heterosexual, productive, reproductive, affection, sexual, and domestic phenomena is unknown lesbians as opposed to the feminist heterosexual woman. Therefore, to the heterosexual world, as well as the feminist advocates, the concepts of marrying, starting up families, falling in love, creating homes, attaining sexual fulfillments have no even an iota reality. As such, lesbianism has no social position, considering that heterosexual feminists are into the politics of the society, as well as religious, economic, and traditional facets without question. The feminists recognize well that the male dominance in the affectionate, marriage, love, and family issues is a real social problem, and therefore, heterosexual feminists do not need to begin from thence, as opposed to the lesbianism who should seek to declare female-female marriages as legally justified, hence the huge difference in hypothetical approaches in the two elements of controversial discussions (Calhoun 571). Therefore, a clear position here would be that lesbianism is subject to a lot of detailed critical intrigues in law, politics, social and psychological spheres, as opposed to feminism and related theories, which has a clear foundation from the patriarchal and heterosexual controversies.

As opposed to the feminism and feminism theories, where gender arguments are founded on these two hypotheses, the Bangladesh society is a new reflection that outlines how privileges, resources, and discrimination is unleashed based on race as well either male or female gender. Indeed, a detailed discussion about Race, Community and Female Labor Supply in the London Clothing Industry reveals a new structure in the concept of gender, which serves to further demystify what the perception of male or female stands for in the contemporary society rolling back to several decades inside of the twentieth century (Kabeer 307). A scholarly evidence-based analysis is employed in reflection on the role of the female gender in the society, by mirroring the responsibilities of the Bangladesh women in the London clothing industry as opposed to the occupation of their male counterparts in the sweatshops and factories. Elements of culture, economy, constraint and the will come in the scene of play extensively and at length when it comes to the autonomy of self between male and female responsibilities. As opposed to the mundane expectation that people would do what they have passion for to earn a living provided it is within the statutes of law and held as morally upright, in the Bangladesh community, just like many more across the world, women have no sole preference over what they do, and their behavior as human persons, their liberty, freedom, and exclusivism is dependably reliant on other powerful forces in the family set up, including the male gender and elderly female partners. Moreover, the social values and resource to be enjoyed are majorly decided by specific groups in a common environment as is established in the beliefs and norms of virtues held to be solemn. A keen following reveals that based on gender, males and females have different opportunities in the society, with the former having access to more privileges in the mainstream as opposed to the latter, whereas responsibilities are inversely proportional in a contrary order (Kabeer 313). Therefore, as opposed to concentration on specific individuals, social norms or groups of persons, the understanding of gender calls for a broad spectrum of understanding and exposition, which mirrors the society as a whole to depict the reality in the homework, discriminative, and racial, issues factored out by distinct elements.

On the contrary, an understanding of the fate of individuals in the society is shaped by personal choices on the liberal platform is untrue, as the political factions founded on gender and race spearhead the outcomes that reflect the mainstream events. As much as Bangladesh women play a role in their unilateral labor services, the result is a dominant reflection of the male factor and patriarchal distinction. For instance., in the cloth labor industries in which Bangladesh women worked, it was within their preference to embrace the occupation, however, it was the only choice presented to them by the society, which eliminates and thought of preference, choice, and liberty, rather, a picture is formed that their respective husbands, fathers, and prominent feminine icons influenced the outcome (Kabeer 321). Nevertheless, as much as the patriarchal elements dominate the society, a bargained process in decision making that would influence female behavior, workforce, and character usually in itself is a reflection of the male gender in the masculine dependent society. Therefore, as opposed to the theories of feminism and lesbianism whereby the latter loses ground in entirety to the later in a concerted argument of heterosexuality and patriarchy, in this case, a mutual coexistence is critical, where decision making affects the female gender, however, the outcome is a true reflection of the male gender, hence success, or at worst, failure, is a candid reflection of the patriarchal factor. Nevertheless, when a universal and multifaceted approach is maintained, one could argue that if the Bangladesh women founded themselves as immigrants subject to another master who embraced liberty, freedom in totality, and autonomy in entity, then the question of gender in terms of the role, behavior, character, labor workforce, and social norms would have been a totally different phenomena in manifestation as outcomes would not be under influence and constraint (Kabeer 315).

Across millennia, it has become a typical distinction to rate gender as a controversial discipline of personal description, with scholars citing, sexual orientation like lesbianism, heterosexuality, or otherwise feminism and patriarchy. Nevertheless, the vocal performance is yet again a cardinal factor that sets at stake the definition of gender. In the social space, political, economic, and cultural realms, the definition of heterosexuality, gender-based roles, and identity has been founded on voice and vocal intonation (Delph 138). Indeed, self- representation in the sensitive segments of universal definition have been related to being the term voice, as a critical domain of gender and sexuality. Voices define the anatomical and physiological structure of individuals; voices create a distinct scene that questions why, when, how, and where factors, to give a vivid position of the value and dignity accorded to a given individual or group of persons. A day to day examination of voices and variation in vocal intonation often gives new meaning to the geographical, physiological, cultural, sexual, and moral identities of gender. Similarly to the case of occupation, heterosexuality, feminism, and lesbianism, the voice is a powerful tool of humanity that defines roles and spacing of gender as an entity of identity. Voice remains to be a central and core aspect of human behavior, culture, character, and norms which are held as virtuous and morally upright. Nevertheless, even this could vary from culture, tradition, geographical destinations, and professional establishments, the effect hitherto enforced by the substance of voice on universal human behavior like sexuality, gender, and social aspects remain standard (Delph 156). This stance is subject to a spree of controversial arguments, notwithstanding the fact that feminism and lesbianism theorists highlight distinct and opposing reasons as cardinal contributors to a similar realization.

In conclusion, therefore, the concept of gender has been perceived and defined in different forms, based on the manifestations of sexuality and human behavior among the people across the world. Nevertheless, the conventional understanding has been shaped into a new meaning following the effects of globalization in the twenty-first century. On the contrary, elements of sexuality like feminism, lesbianism, heterosexuality and its patriarchal controversies as well as vocal orientation in sexual redefinition expressly outline gender as a common platform for humanity, where facts and proven theories have towering influence over the hypotheses otherwise vulnerable to reason and scrutiny of rationality.

Works Cited

Calhoun, Cheshire. “Separating Lesbian Theory from Feminist Theory Author ( S ): Cheshire Calhoun Published by : The University of Chicago Press Stable URL : http://www.jstor.org/stable/2381979 REFERENCES Linked References Are Available on JSTOR for This Article : Separating.” 104.3 (2016): 558–581. Print.

Delph, Janiurek. ”Sounding Gender(ed): Vocal Performances in English University Teaching Spaces.” Gender, Place & Culture 6.2 (2010): 137–153. Web.

Kabeer, Naila. ”The Structure of ‘Revealed‘ Preference: Race, Community and Female Labour Supply in the London Clothing Industry.” Development and Change 25.2 (1994): 307–331. Web.