Gender Roles: Cultural vs. Biological

People have been debating whether biological influences determine gender roles

or cultural influences. To determine which side provides the best argument for gender

roles, many studies and researches had been done to provide each claim. The following

papers involve an article analysis of two viewpoints on gender roles from two author’s

argument. The papers will analyze two articles by comparing the author’s strength and

weakness, claims, reasons, evidence and ethos to determine the best analysis for

biological or cultural influences.

In analyzing Norman claims for biological influences, I will pay attention to the

language in his writing, his choice of audience, and his strength and weakness. Norman

claim on his section, Realistic Expectations that, “I base this on nothing more scientific

than my own experience” (Norman 23). Though his claim is legitimate to his readers and

make him a confident writer, his reasons and evidence could be more persuasive.

Norman’s writing sound like he is intimidating the audience to be on his side. Basically,

Norman believes his life experience will convince his readers to take his position. Lets

discuss Norman reasons and evidence for his claim. The audience Norman’s article

intended for is the Men Health’s magazine reader that will buy into his masculine and

assertive tone of voice. Norman quoted, “Men are aggressive and hierarchical, women

nurturing and cooperative” and tying it to his example of the boy playing in the puddle

and coaching his daughter soccer team display his reasons and evidence for biological

influences (25). Norman descriptions of a boy playing in the puddle as aggressiveness in

male were not persuasive enough to the reader’s interest in reasons and evidence. And

Norman example of women being nurturing and cooperative could be identify with the

relationship of a father and daughter moment would only reach to male reader that have a

daughter. By not utilizing any expert’s work, Norman displays weak evidences for his

claims.

As for Norman’s ethos, he display as a confident and assertive command of the

audience attention, thus showing that he is biased for biological influences. Norman did

use one of the “Spectrum of Purpose” aim to “Express and Reflects” on the “writer’s own

life and experience” (Bean 19). Unfortunately Norman’s life and experience does not

justified his claims. Norman should do more research on his finding with scientific

evidence and relevance resources that will make his arguments credible. Norman’s

audience could be the readers who read magazine for leisure time and aren’t concern with

expert’s analysis. It did mention that Norman is a writer for the Men’s Health, the

National Review, and other publications that were not stated (Norman 21). The reader of

Men Health’s magazine would not by interested of what influences gender roles because

they would be more focus on “how to get a 6-pack abs” exercising tips and “eating

healthy” advices. In a way, his ethos could be his way of reaching out to the masculinity

of men. As far the National Review, it could be a mix audience reader that Norman

could also easily persuade his case. Thus, Norman targeted audiences and his lack of

research did not help his article win any credibility for biological influences on gender

roles.

I will begin to analyze Kimmel’s argument for cultural influences on gender roles.

Kimmel displays credibility and appeals to his Ethos by displaying knowledgeable, fair-

minded, and trustworthy (Bean 71). Kimmel is the author of The Gendered Society,

which tells the audience that the Kimmel has a great understanding of the gender roles

issues through his research. Thus, the intended target audiences are strong academic

readers that have knowledge of gender roles issue or who are researching on gender roles

topic. While Norman did not give any example on the opposing side of biological

influences, one of Kimmel strength is pointing out some flaw of biological points of view

to make his article strong. He pointed that evolutionists like Steven Goldberg ignore the

role of women and the role of colonialism in establishing differences in traditional

cultures (Kimmel 28). By pointing this out makes Kimmel claims credible and show that

he is unbiased. Also, Kimmel helps his argument by showing the audience that he is fair-

minded by adding a few paragraphs on biological influences.

Kimmel provides several variations in defining gender roles by using Mead’s

works on gender roles and his research on the rituals of gender circumcision. Margaret

Mead was both a popularizer of the insights of anthropology into modern American and

Western culture (Mead). The audience will be more convince with Mead’s Work because

she is very known through mass media. From Mead’s research on the South Sea,

Kimmel state that sex differences were “not something deeply biological,” but rather

were learned, and once learn, became part of the ideology that continued to perpetuate

them (Kimmel, 29). The key points in Mead’s quotes that Kimmel claims are “sex

differences were not something deeply biological”. In Reading rhetorically, the authors

define claims as the key points that a writer wants readers to accept (Bean 73). Second

part of a writer’s logos is reasons, which support a main claim (73). Kimmel reason for

his claims is “sex differences are rather learned” (Kimmel 29). To support his argument,

Kimmel provides evidence of Mead’s study in the South Sea that the first two cultures

exhibited remarkable similarities between women and men (Kimmel 30). For example,

all members of the Arapesh culture appeared gentle, passive, and emotionally warm (30).

Kimmel reference of “all members” defines the meaning of culturally learning of traits in

the Arapesh tribe. By claiming this throw any doubt that Kimmel is just writing what he

think gender roles is influence by, but with insightful research from other culture

cemented his argument.

In rituals circumcision relating to gender roles, Kimmel points out the purpose of

the ritual are different among men and women. Ritual circumcision is interprets

differently in different cultures, but all cultures done it as a rite of passage for boyhood to

manhood. For men, it is a marking that simultaneously shows that all men are

biologically and culturally alike- and that they are different from women (Kimmel 35).

Again, Kimmel was not biased in keeping the biological side, but he claims that rituals

circumcision of men is culturally done to differentiate themselves from women.

To conclude the analysis of the two author’s arguments, each author is judge by

their ethos, claims, reasons, evidences and assumptions in their article. Biological

differences tweak a little with the role of female having more chances of success and

higher education than their male counterpart. Gender roles are important to society

because it shapes how an individual identify their place in society. People want to learn

about this topic from various sources and researchers that are knowledgeable about

gender roles. Therefore, Kimmel’s article provides the best argument for gender roles

with his analysis of cultural influences.

Argument Analysis

In the two view points Biological Differences establish Gender Roles by Geoffrey

Norman and Culture establishes Gender by Michael S. Kimmel. One of the Two Authors

makes a better argument Using Reading Rhetorically by John C. Bean. Norman argues

that differences between men and women are rooted in human biology. He contends that

boys consistently choose to play with trucks and weapons while girls opt for dolls.

According to Norman, men are aggressive and hierarchical while women are nurturing

and cooperative. Kimmel on the other hand, argues that cultural mores determine male

and female roles. Various cultures in Africa and Asia, he contends, produce gender roles

that differ from those in Western societies, evidence that gender roles are culturally

determined. He concludes that gender roles are determined more by one’s environment

than by one’s sex. The two articles both talk on gender roles why males have distinctive

characteristics, which lock them into static roles, compared to females characteristics.

Kimmel makes a better argument by using techniques of Reading Rhetorically. But first

lets focus on the viewpoint flaws of Norman.

Norman does a terrible job by being too personal (using his own family to

prove a point). Many people grow up in a different environment, and to make a claim for

everyone does not make logical sense. Norman bases his understanding of roles off and

on of his early stages of fatherhood. His claim, (his key points that a writer want readers

to accept), as proven when he says, “When boys came over to play, they’d leave a trail of

disassembled toys behind, something my girls almost never did”(3). There is no scientific

information to back him up. Norman’s story-telling of why girls did not leave a trail of

disassembled toys behind is a sub claim because it needs to be supported with reasons

and evidence. When he states his claim he uses “my girls” lacks evidence. Evidence

according to Norman is the “facts, examples, statistics, personal experience, and expert

testimony that an author offers to support his or her view of the topic”(74,Bean). I am

skeptical of his contention and demand his delivery of the reasoning behind his claim. In

others words again this claim of his is a fallacy of composition. If it’s true for something

doesn’t necessarily mean it’s true for everyone. Norman does a lot of story- telling and

being biased using the word “I”. Norman should of used this technique from Bean, Bean

says, “ Writers wanting to inspire respect and admiration might adopt a formal scholarly

tone, choose intellectual words, or avoid “I” altogether by using the passive voice--- “it

was discovered that…”(75). Notice the other author does not even use “I” unless he is

giving a story form another person use not his. Norman usage of ethos could well

possible get readers lost in the article. He says, “He didn’t really do much as far as taking

his girls shopping. It was mostly outdoor things, ex, fishing, rock climbing, hunting,

sports.”(3). Norman does a terrible job of destroying his credibility when he says, “ I

admit it, and I was guilty of sexual stereotyping”(2). In fact Norman comes off as biased

on sexual stereotyping children. He frequently uses his girls and boys but does not use

outside references to conclude his logical statements. The author also uses the appeal to

fear and tradition when he says, “fight biology and you get zapped”(2). This is a

subjective opinion than a logical statement based on facts. When he says being logical or

using logos.

In Culture establishes Gender, Kimmel makes an excellent job of

conveying his knowledge, Reading Rhetoric. Instead of using personal life experience,

the author shows many detail examples in Culture Establishes Gender Roles; these

anecdotes are from a girl from another country. Which is worldwide instead of one

person’s belief system. An example is the anecdote of a young Sudanese women used in

the portrayal of her painful experience of her female circumcision. The story uses vivid

detail. The strong usage of pathos in the story telling is evident. The horrific story will

stir up empathetic emotion to the reader of what this young 6-year-old girl went through

without sedatives. Beans describes this when he writes, “Although these three appeals

interconnect and sometimes overlap --- for example, a writer may use a touching

anecdote both to establish credibility as an empathetic person (ethos) and to play on the

reader’s emotions (pathos) --- we introduce them separately to emphasize their distinct

functions as mean of persuasion”(70). Not only does the reader focus the readers on the

attention of the story. The story is an excellent persuasion tool for readers to over look

the fact that cultural difference establishes gender roles more often outside the United

States. The way the article is set up using the anecdote uses ideology, a technical term for

the notion of a worldview. The ideology of a girl’s excruciating ordeal with no anesthetic

is a common belief that this circumcision was really painful to anyone. In this story

alone the author conveys excellent usage of logos. According to Bean, Bean says, “This

writer wants to root his argument in a belief or value that he and his readers already

share, so he focus on concerns”(72). The writer grabs the readers attention by letting the

reader feel the pain and agony of the poor girl through detail visual words such as, “ They

held me tight while the midwife started to cut my flesh without anesthetics. I screamed

till I lost my voice”(Kimmel 8). The reader’s empathy will stir a heartbreak emotion. In

this it will make the reader draw into the story.

Both females and males are equally used in examples to help generate his points

of view. The author uses credible sources like anthropologist Dr. Margaret Mead.

Numerous anthropologists are used to give insight to the readers of worldly female/male

roles. The way the article is set up using the anecdote uses ideology, a technical term for

the notion of a worldview. Ideology is exactly what Bean talks about that sets up a

difference between both authors. Kimmel uses this technique to generate more persuasion

in why to choose his side than Norman. Kimmell uses ethos and pathos for the persuasion

and logos for the argument. This is the driven force behind a great-established

argumentive paper. With its roots in orality, rhetoric has a bias for viewing audiences as

particular. Aristotle said, “The persuasive is persuasive to someone.’ In contrast to

rhetoric, writing has a bias for an abstract audience or generalized conception of

audience. . . . For this reason, a particular audience can be persuaded, whereas the

universal audience must be convinced; particular audiences can be approached by way of

values, whereas the universal audience (which transcends partisan values) must be

approached with facts, truths, and presumptions.” This is evident on page 70 of Reading

Rhetoric. Norman uses explain subjective statements and Kimmel reflects on analytic

finding to prove his argument.

Both authors do a great job of persuasion but by using Reading Rhetorically, there

is clearly one front-runner of using Beans knowledge of pathos, logos, and ethos. There

are also many key methods described and used as examples in the text. Kimmel’s article

has laid out for the reader a variety of strategies for questioning texts and composing your

responses to them, process that involve carefully interrogating a text’s argument and

methods in order to critique it and join its conversation. We explained questioning

strategies for examining: a writer’s credibility, an argument’s reasoning and logic, a

writer’s strategies for engaging an audience and appealing to it’s interests and emotions, a

writers language, a text’s ideology, and a text’s use of visual elements.

Final Essay: Gender Roles

Gender roles don’t always conclude the sex of a person. Gender roles are

established by stereotypes in where it is believed that men should always act tough and

bring money and food to the family. Women are believed to be the weakest, should be

home making sure the chores are done, and the children are being taken care of. In the

reading, Biological Differences Establish Gender Roles, by Geoffrey Norman he states

that females and males play their roles on their human biology. He believes that people’s

reactions is all biological. Though on the other hand Michael S. Kimmel states in the

reading, Culture Establishes Gender Roles, that cultural mores determine male and

female roles. Kinder states that he believes that cultures determine the role of the gender.

After reading both papers, I strongly agree with Michael Kimmel’s argument.

Geoffrey Norman had the experience of raising his two daughters,

although he always wished to have had the experience of having a boy. He believes that

men and women have different levels of aggression, “men are aggressive and hierarchal

while women are nurturing and cooperative” (21). He bases these examples only on the

way his daughters responded to his activities. Norman believes that females are born with

sensitive feelings compared to men. Norman confesses to have done a laboratory of his

own in which he would have his girls and other boys paying in a room. He would set

trucks and dolls on the ground for the kids. Surely enough his daughters were soon to

grab the dolls and the boys were fast to grab the trucks (23). Norman would practice

outside activities with his daughters such as fishing, canoeing, hunting and BB gun

shooting (24). Norman ensures that although his girls became great BB gun users they

never became real hunters (23). By this he understood that although his daughters would

practice various sports with him, they wouldn’t keep doing these activities unless his dad

would take charge. His daughters always expressed their feminine side.

On the contrary of what Norman believes, Kimmel states that cultural

mores determine male and female roles (27). He believes that each gender grasps their

own role depending in the culture they grow up in. Kimmel uses worldwide examples to

prove his point of view. He states that an anthropologist by the name of Margaret Mead

says that in Tchambui, women are economic providers and men spend their days

primping and shopping (27). These roles compared to other countries such as Mexico are

very different. In Mexico the male is the provider, but overall it demonstrates being

protective of his family. Another great example he exposed was the Gender roles in

Mundugamor. He explains that both men and women had to be equally aggressive,

“Women showed little “maternal instinct”; they detested pregnancy and nursing and

could hardly wait to return to the serious business of work and war” (30). This is really

surprising to many because people don’t usually expect women to have that much dislike

towards a baby or the process to have a baby. This example explains very well that not all

women are sensitive, it demonstrates how women can be equally aggressive to a man.

Another interesting fact he states is that in some parts of the world such as in Africa,

women get circumcised when they enter their sexual functioning. This is to help reduce

their pleasure feeling and have men control their sexual life. Unlike in the United States

this is not medically accepted. As you can see Kimmel explains his points of view from

different parts of the world to make his point of view more considerable.

After reading both articles and the Reading Rhetorically, by John C. Bean,

I noticed that in the book it states that the evidence an author uses must be reliable, timely

and adequate to make the case (Bean). In the case I didn’t take sides with Norman

because his evidence were all based on personal experiences. He only used his daughter’s

reactions to his conclusions. It could have be that maybe his daughters are the exception

to his argument, that’s why he needed to state more evidence that were not of his

personal experience. If he would have added more examples it would have made his

point more reliable. A technique that was used to grasp a reader’s attention is rhetorical

appeal, “an audience interest and emotions” (75). Writers use a hook to keep the reader

interested in their reading, for instance Kimmel uses worldwide examples throughout his

narrative and begins it by providing evidence from another country to show that females

can also be providers to their family not just men. This keeps the reader interested in the

material especially if a female is reading it and can relate her life to the evidence

concluded by the writer. This specific topic kept me interested because I come from a

Latino background where it is believed that a female’s job is to stay home, cook, do

chores, and raise the children. Then men in my culture are expected to have a business or

at least a well-paid job in which he can provide for his family. In the reading of Kimmel I

noticed he uses pathos and ethos. Pathos is the persuasive power of the author’s appeal to

the interest identified by Aristotle and ethos is the persuasive power of the author’s

credibility of character (70). While reading his story it seemed to me that Norman had an

overlapping in ethos and pathos because he was trying to grasp the readers mind by using

ethos and sharing examples of his daughter’s and explaining how much of an effect they

had on him. Though the ethos overlapped because he was persuading his reader into

believing that due to the reactions his daughter’s had to his experiments he tried to prove

that gender roles are biological.

Therefore after reading the two stories and the book, Reading Rhetorical, I

decided to take sides with Kimmel. I agree with Kimmel because he uses a variety of

examples to prove his point of view, but most important he uses worldwide. It’s

interesting to see that Gender Roles are played based on the culture someone is raised in.

It gave me a lot to think of especially since I come from a Latino background in which

women are supposed to be nurturing and stay home to cook for her husband and children.

All the people in my group agreed that Kimmel had more reliable evidence compared to

the one Norman Offered. Therefore, all this takes me to generate that gender roles are not

biological, but it is the cultural environment in which someone is raised in that influences

the role on the gender.

Many people have various views on gender. Gender roles are easily defined as the

behaviors and attitudes expected of male and female members of society by that society.

Reading the articles arguing Biological Differences Establishes Gender Roles and Culture

Establishes Gender Roles, I feel that Michael Kimmel does a better job defining gender

roles. This article is well reasoned and presents its arguments fairly convincingly. In

Culture Establishes Gender Roles, Kimmel examines that biological models assume that

sex determines gender and innate biological differences lead to behavioral differences.

Biological differences between men and women can be complicated and in order to

clarify them, Kimmel included a review of literature in related disciplines such as

anthropology, biology, psychology and sociology.

Kimmel begins his article with anthropological evidence of the diverse cultural

definitions of gender and sexuality around the world, which is one of the things talked

about in Reading Rhetorically. “The facts, examples, statistics, personal experience, and

expert testimony that an author offers to support his or her view of the topic are referred

to as evidence” (Bean 74). The evidence discussed in this article was very sufficient and

supported Kimmel’s position. As discussed in Michael Kimmel’s article, American

women are certainly not plagued with the same concerns as women in many African,

Middle Eastern and Asian societies. “Assertions of past inferiority for women should

therefore be irrelevant to present and future developments,” writes anthropologist Elenor

Leanock (Kimmel, 37). Gender is a set of rules, not a set of anatomy. Gender was once a

rule set that historically kept women from voting. Some cultures devalue women and

condone violence against them. Kimmel states, “If the anthropologists have demonstrated

anything, it is the rich diversity in human cultural arrangements and the disparate

definitions of gender and sexuality that we have produced within our cultures” (36).

As an anthropologist, Margaret Mead had been trained to think in terms of the

interconnection of all aspects of human life. Mead took on claims of biological

inevitability in the Culture Establishes Gender Roles article, she “hoped to show

enormous cultural variations possible in definitions of masculinity and femininity, and,

on doing so, enable Americans to better understand both the cultural origins and the

malleability of their own ideas” (Kimmel, 29). Mead felt that sex differences were not

something deeply biological, but rather were learned. In this article she examined three

different cultures in New Guinea. The Arapesh culture appeared very gentle, passive, and

emotionally warm. Males and females were equally happy, trustworthy, and confident.

The Mundugamor were violent, competitive, aggressively sexual, and jealous. Even

though these two tribes seem to be totally opposite they saw gender roles as nonexistent.

Lastly, the Tchambuli were very similar to Americans, where women and men were

extremely different. Mead notes that the Tchambuli were the only culture she had ever

seen “where little girls of ten and eleven were more alertly intelligent and more

enterprising than little boys” (Kimmel, 31). This statement is somewhat similar to

Norman’s article referencing what he labeled as “Balance and Brute Force”.

Kimmel concludes that gender roles are determined more by one’s environment

than by one’s sex. Gender roles depend on society, culture, geographic location, politics

and more. We can find common ground without erasing our varied experiences and

gender identities. Over the past few decades, Americans have made great strides in

accepting and adjusting to new definitions of gender roles.

According to Geoffrey Norman’s article, Biological Differences Establishes

Gender Roles he argues that the differences between women and men are rooted in

human biology.

Norman uses his personal experiences with his daughters and nephew to support

his argument on gender roles. Norman states that, “Men are aggressive and hierarchal

while women are nurturing and cooperative” (21). This is considered a claim, as

discussed in Reading Rhetorically, “the key points that a writer wants readers to accept

are referred to as claims” (Bean, 73). Arguments assert different types of claims. To

support a main claim, writers must provide reasons. Norman discovered that girls will be

girls and boys will be boys. “I’ve watched a young nephew of mine sit enthralled in front

of construction videos that show lots of D-9’s, front-end loaders, and backhoes; his sister

would rather take a nap than watch that video” (Norman 22). I have to agree with

Norman, that influence and reinforcement of gender roles comes from the toys children

play with. Norman didn’t share facts outside of his personal experience, “I base this on

nothing more scientific than my own experience” (23).

As discussed in chapter 4 in Reading Rhetorically, I would have to say both

author’s facts, statistics, personal experience, and expert testimony offered support on

their views of gender roles (Bean 74). Of course Kimmel’s article supported his claim in

more detail. The diction (an umbrella term referring to speakers and writers expression of

words) of Norman’s article was a little more inviting than Kimmel’s article, which leads

to another approach discussed in Reading Rhetorically. “Ideology, is a belief system-a

coherent set of values and concepts through which we interpret the world” (Bean, 78).

Our perspectives are generally shaped by our family backgrounds, religion, personal

experience, race, class, gender, and sexual orientation.

In conclusion, analyzing these two articles between Kimmel’s research of cultural

differentiation and Norman’s biological differentiation between the sexes, it is clear that

gender roles vary. Kimmel and Mead argue that different cultures impose different

expectations upon the women and men who share that culture. While Norman argues that

differences between girls and boys is relatively biological and observational. Both sides

had valid points but like I discussed previously Kimmel’s argument was a lot stronger.

According to Reading Rhetorically, we want to believe the authors and in order to do this

it is important to examine the author’s use of evidence. Kimmel clearly supported his

claim and Norman’s assumptions; “the often unstated values or beliefs that the writer

expects reader to accept without question” were not as reliable (Bean, 74). So through

completing this analysis, we want to know if gender roles are determined by innate

biological differences or have our cultural influences actually molded and established our

roles. I would have to agree with a combination of both.