Believing Is Seeing: Biology as Ideology Review

375 Words2 Pages
Believing Is Seeing: Biology as Ideology, by Judith Lorber, talks about that in order times, people believed that the biological differences of men and women determined their different social positions destined to be, but as time goes, the bodies have not changed, while the justifications for gender inequality have been changed. At first, he introduces that male and female genitalia develop from the same fetal tissue, and so infants can be born with ambiguous genitalia (Money and Enrhard 1972). In the middle of the nineteenth century, people categorize an infant with anomalous genitalia as a boy or a girl depends on the size of the penis. However, in the late nineteenth century, it is determined by the presence or absence of ovaries because a woman who could not procreate was not a complete woman (Kessler 1990, 20). As a whole, Lorber uses “two familiar areas of social life - sports and technological competence - to show how myriad physiological differences are transformed into similar-appearing, gendered social bodies.” In sports, several women were found to have chromosomal ambiguity. Then tests are being used to determine sex by simple genital inspection (Kolata 1992). Also as women practice more, some of them might similarly successfully compete with some men in many sports, like marathon. On the other hand, competitive sports become a way of constructing a masculine identity for boys and men. The distribution of rewards is unfair. Usually the men athletes are glorified and women athletes ignored in the mass media. Media images of modern women athletes tend to focus on feminine beauty and grace. The other area, technology, illustrates that men have a larger advantage too. Men create, program, and market. Women enter data in offices. However, women can also do programming well, like Grace M. Hopper, who is a mathematican and pioneer in data processing. “It is the
Open Document