You are viewing a free preview of this lesson.
Subscribe to unlock all 10 lessons in this course and every other course on LearningBro.
Gender is one of the most fundamental dimensions of identity, shaping how individuals understand themselves, interact with others, and are treated by society. Sociologists distinguish between sex (biological) and gender (social), and examine how gender identities are constructed, maintained, and challenged through socialisation, culture, and power relations. This lesson examines key theories and debates relevant to the AQA specification. The organising question is the nature/nurture debate applied to gender: are masculinity and femininity rooted in biology, or are they — as the overwhelming sociological consensus holds — socially constructed through socialisation and reproduced through power relations?
Key Definition: Gender identity refers to an individual's subjective sense of their own gender — whether they identify as male, female, non-binary, or another gender identity — and how this sense of self is shaped by social, cultural, and biological factors.
This lesson maps to the AQA A-Level Sociology specification (7192), Paper 2: Topics in Sociology, Section A — Culture and Identity, addressing the bullet point on "the relationship of identity to gender". It applies the topic's master theme — that identity is socially constructed — to gender, and connects to the socialisation sub-topic (how gender identity is learned) and to debates about production, consumption and globalisation (how femininity and masculinity are sold and reshaped). Assessment spans AO1 (knowledge of theories and studies of gender identity), AO2 (application to the Item and to contemporary examples such as social media and changing masculinities), and AO3 (evaluating social construction versus biological influence). On Paper 2 the discriminating questions are the 10-mark "applying material from the Item, analyse" question and the 20-mark "evaluate" essay (Paper 2 essays are 20 marks, not 30).
| Concept | Definition | Nature |
|---|---|---|
| Sex | Biological differences between males and females (chromosomes, hormones, reproductive anatomy) | Biological, generally fixed |
| Gender | The social and cultural expectations, roles, and behaviours associated with being male or female in a particular society | Social, culturally variable |
This distinction is fundamental to the sociological study of gender. It allows sociologists to argue that what we think of as "masculine" or "feminine" behaviour is not biologically determined but socially constructed — learned through socialisation and varying across cultures and historical periods.
The sociologist most associated with establishing the sex/gender distinction in British sociology is Ann Oakley (1972), in Sex, Gender and Society. Oakley argued that sex (biological) and gender (cultural) are analytically distinct, and that gendered behaviour is learned rather than innate. She identified four channels through which the family carries out gender-role socialisation:
| Channel | How it works |
|---|---|
| Manipulation | Parents encourage "gender-appropriate" behaviour and discourage the opposite (e.g. praising a girl for appearance, a boy for toughness) |
| Canalisation | Channelling children towards gender-specific toys and activities (dolls vs construction sets) |
| Verbal appellations | Using gendered language ("good girl", "little soldier") that conveys expectations |
| Different activities | Steering children towards different domestic and play tasks |
Through these processes, children internalise a gender identity that feels natural but is in fact culturally produced. Oakley's framework is the bedrock of the liberal feminist case that gender inequality is learned and can therefore be unlearned through changed socialisation. Evaluation: Oakley powerfully establishes the constructionist position, but critics note her account can appear deterministic — treating children as passive recipients — and biological/evolutionary theorists argue she understates innate sex differences (a debate that remains unresolved).
Evaluation (AO3):
R.W. Connell (1995), in Masculinities, introduced the concept of hegemonic masculinity — the dominant form of masculinity in any given society, which is culturally exalted above other forms of masculinity and above all forms of femininity.
Hegemonic masculinity is characterised by:
Connell argued that hegemonic masculinity is not the only form of masculinity — it exists alongside:
| Type | Description |
|---|---|
| Complicit masculinity | Men who do not fully embody hegemonic ideals but benefit from the "patriarchal dividend" — the advantages that accrue to men in a gender-unequal society |
| Subordinate masculinity | Masculinities that are actively oppressed by the hegemonic form — most notably gay masculinity |
| Marginalised masculinity | Masculinities shaped by class and ethnic marginalisation — e.g., Black masculinity, which may be both celebrated (in sport, music) and demonised (in relation to crime) |
A central Connell concept is the "patriarchal dividend" — the collective advantage that all men gain from the overall subordination of women (in pay, power, safety and domestic labour), regardless of whether an individual man personally endorses or embodies hegemonic masculinity. This is why "complicit" men, who do not live up to the macho ideal, still benefit from it. The concept allows Connell to hold two things together: that masculinities are plural and hierarchical among men, and that men as a group remain advantaged relative to women. It is a powerful analytical tool for evaluating the "crisis of masculinity" claim, because it implies that even where particular masculine identities are in difficulty, the structural advantage of men may be largely intact.
Key Sociologist: Connell (1995) argued that hegemonic masculinity — the dominant cultural ideal of manhood — is not natural or inevitable but is socially constructed and maintained through cultural practice, and that multiple, competing masculinities exist.
The diagram below maps the main perspectives on gender identity along the nature/nurture and structure/agency dimensions:
graph TD
A["Gender identity"] --> B["Social construction (Oakley): sex vs gender; learned through socialisation"]
A --> C["Biological / evolutionary view: innate sex differences"]
B --> D["Connell: hegemonic & subordinate masculinities"]
B --> E["McRobbie: femininity via media & consumer culture"]
B --> F["Butler: gender as performance"]
B --> G["Intersectionality (Reay, Skeggs): gender x class x ethnicity"]
D --> H["Crisis of masculinity (Mac an Ghaill)"]
Evaluation (AO3):
Angela McRobbie (1978, with Garber) argued that studies of youth subcultures (by the CCCS) had focused almost exclusively on boys, rendering girls invisible. McRobbie studied teenage girls' culture and identified "bedroom culture" — a distinct form of cultural participation in which girls socialised in private, domestic spaces (bedrooms), engaging with pop music, magazines, fashion, and romance.
McRobbie and Garber argued that girls' exclusion from public subcultural spaces (streets, clubs, sports grounds) was a product of patriarchal control — parents, schools, and wider society restricted girls' freedom of movement and public participation. "Bedroom culture" was not a trivial sideshow but a feminine form of cultural participation that the male-focused CCCS had simply failed to see — an early demonstration of how mainstream sociology had rendered women's experience invisible (a methodological point Oakley also pressed).
Different strands of feminism offer different accounts of how and why femininity is constructed and constrained:
| Feminist strand | Account of gender identity |
|---|---|
| Liberal | Gendered identities are learned through socialisation and can be reformed through changed socialisation, equal opportunities and law (Oakley) |
| Radical | Femininity is constructed under patriarchy; the personal is political; control of women's bodies and sexuality is central |
| Marxist | Women's domestic and subordinate identity serves capitalism (reproducing and servicing the workforce) |
| Difference / postmodern | There is no single "femininity"; identity varies by class, ethnicity and sexuality (intersectionality) |
In later work, McRobbie (2009) analysed how contemporary femininity is constructed through media and consumer culture. She argued that post-feminist culture involves a "double entanglement":
The result is a femininity defined through consumer choice, body culture, and individual empowerment — but one that paradoxically reinstates many traditional gender norms (emphasis on appearance, attractiveness, and romantic success) under the guise of "empowerment."
Some sociologists and commentators argue that contemporary society is experiencing a "crisis of masculinity" — a widespread sense of uncertainty and anxiety among men about what it means to be male.
Mac an Ghaill (1994), in The Making of Men, studied masculinity in a secondary school and identified a "crisis of masculinity" among working-class boys. He found that boys constructed their masculine identities in response to perceived threats from feminism and educational change, adopting hyper-masculine behaviour (aggression, homophobia, academic disengagement) as a defensive strategy. He identified distinct peer-group masculinities within the school — for example the "Macho Lads," who rejected the school's authority and valued toughness and manual work, much like Willis's "lads," and other groups who embraced academic achievement. Crucially, Mac an Ghaill showed that masculinity is policed horizontally by peers as much as imposed from above: boys enforce hegemonic masculinity on one another, using homophobic abuse to mark the boundaries of acceptable maleness. This links the crisis of masculinity directly to deindustrialisation: as the secure manual jobs that once anchored working-class male identity disappeared, the breadwinner role at the heart of traditional masculinity was undermined, leaving some boys without a clear route to a respected adult male identity.
Evaluation (AO3):
Transgender is an umbrella term for people whose gender identity differs from the sex they were assigned at birth. This includes trans men (assigned female at birth, identify as male), trans women (assigned male at birth, identify as female), and non-binary individuals (who do not identify exclusively as male or female).
The existence and increasing visibility of transgender people raises important questions for sociological theories of gender:
Subscribe to continue reading
Get full access to this lesson and all 10 lessons in this course.