Gender Through Different Lenses: A Sociological Breakdown

Sociology helps us understand many social issues such as race, ethnicity, gender, sexuality, marriage, and family. I will use different perspectives by putting on the functionalist, symbolic interactionism, and conflict theory glasses, to understand how different visions conduce to an integral and scientific consideration of the topic. I will let everything be seen by a real-world example and evaluate the strengths and limitations that could be noticed in each perspective.

Central Concepts of Functionalism, Symbolic Interactionism, and Conflict Theory

The functionalist view is an integral system made of interconnected parts. We can notice that the social role of a divided society with its limited view of development is considered as something that can help the community to be solid and unified; a consideration such as that the man has his lifestyle and the woman her own one–man as breadwinners and woman as caregivers – (Parsons and Bales, 1955).

The Symbolic interaction emphasizes a fluid vision of gender in which the social norms are created by the people who live in it, through socialization, social interactions, social norms, etc. People, in this way, will act the gender by going over the simplicist view of gender. Social Expectations become in this way the vital point of observation (West and Zimmerman, 1987).

The Conflict Theory is a categorization of social powers that explain the organization by groups that lead and groups that receive orders. In this case, the topic is another one, the gender is described by groups of people that control others with no freedom of expression, as the freedom is dictated by elitist groups that decide for the lower society (Collin, 2000).

The various Perspectives, Social Approaches

The perspective of Functionalism suggests that any deviations from the social role and norm evolved is considered as a disruption of the social balance. All the people act for what they could be biologically considered as what the reductionist vision of the society said, human people as cells composed and nothing else (Murdock, 1949). Symbolic interactionism introduced a new concept, a person that is like a blank page in which the same person can decide his/her “To be” through social interactions with family, media, etc. (Blumer, 1969). Now that we have done one more step, people are starting to understand that self-identity is shaped by individual consideration mixed with the social shape of the environment. The Conflict Theory can add another brick, society may present social inequality with dominant groups (Connell, 2005). Therefore, the Conflict theory is an important topic to be aware of what the imbalance of power could cause, such as economic, inequalities as the marginalization of a group of people for the developed identity.

Real-World Example

All these three theories can let us understand many aspects of the society. Let’s think about the global movement for same-sex marriage. From a functionalist view, it may be seen as something that can the maintenance of social order as a point that is vital for raising children in stable environments. The Symbolic interactionists would say that such changes are just developed by the normal reshaping of social norms to reflect awarded identities, a mechanism that conduces to the identifications of the macro social changes. The conflict theory would help the symbolic interactionists to say that the imbalance of power is its path, the challenging of the structure that has historically marginalized LGBTQ+ individuals; the equality movements become the highlight of the ongoing battle against discrimination (Erez, 2002).

Strengths and Limitations

All these aspects can let us understand the various points of power and points of weakness. Functionalism lets us know how important the maintenance of social order is by underlining the power of social norms developed in the community. Such a vision is positive from this point of view but weak if we consider that these obligated social norms can cover the personal identity searching of people. Symbolic interactionism is excellent if we think of people in everyday life, people assume another level of humanity, and it is not anymore just an agglomeration of cells. Interactionism is, despite that, limited to understanding the macro vision, it is focused on the macro level of the individual interaction of groups of people; it is difficult in this view to conduct research that covers a bigger aspect of Gender Sociology. The conflict theory can explain how society can interact in a macro vision as we live in a world where there are still marginalized groups of people. The Conflict theory can explain all of that, but it leaves an important aspect, we are not just a conflict world, we are an interactive world, dynamic, and always focused on changes.

The integrated Perspective

In my view, the Conflict theory is a good point where to start a social exploration. Understanding gender is for me important for addressing inequalities. Observing social limitations and segregation with the filter of the Conflict Theory can identify the unequal distribution of power. Let’s think about the leadership role and the lack of women. Additionally, the fight for LGBTQ+ rights exemplified the conflict theory by explaining the power dynamics. LGBTQ+ have historically marginalized by laws and social norms but they are challenging these oppressive structures by social fighting and resistance (Connell, 2005).

Conclusion

Gender and sexuality are complex social issues that can be filtered by different sociological perspectives. While each perspective offers valuable insights, Conflict Theory provides me the most compelling explanation in a world where social imbalances are covered under globalization, where issues of gender and LGBTQ+ rights are the proof of our social change.