News Flash: My Princess Boy

 

http://www.thenewstribune.com/2011/02/13/1542771/sometimes-boys-wont-be-boys.html

 

Blue. Pink. Barbie dolls. Action figures. Society, as it is today, is completely gender based; every action we choose, whether how minuscule it is, we have continued to promote and perpetuate the binary system of sexes. Even before a child is born, the child has already been placed on a path—the girl or the boy—and as he or she grows up, his or her surroundings will constantly reinforce and make sure he or she is on the “right” path. Besides family members being a factor that constrains the child in a specific category, the way society functions is one of the greatest factors that demands children to be clear of their sex in every aspect from the way he/she behaves to what he/she wears to upholding expectations others have about “manhood” or “womanhood.” So what happens when a child chooses to rebel against society’s demands? Is the child going to be loved and accepted for who he/she is? If so, what happens to the parents who allow their child to defy the rules of the two-sex system? This is the plight for an African American mother, Cheryl Kilodavis, and her five-year-old son, Dyson. Dyson is like any other ordinary boy who likes to play chess and climb trees, however, he also likes to wear dresses and is infatuated by things that are pink and sparkly. While Kilodavis tries to bring awareness and acceptance for not only her son’s unique fashion, but for everyone to embrace others’ differences in her book My Princess Boy, due to the systematic embedded values of society, it is hard to achieve universal acceptance for differences, especially those related to gender norms.

Kilodavis and Dyson’s story plunged into the media as talk shows, newspapers, and magazines share their profound message that society has yet to agree with. At first Kilodavis had difficulties with accepting her son’s fashion style, but she learned to accept her son’s choice when her older son, Dkobe, proposed the question: “why can’t you just let him be happy” (Silor 1). This moment not only enlightened Kilodavis, but also it brings to light a deeper question—why does it have to take a little child to state the obvious need for acceptance? The simple answer to that is society is not fond of people who don’t follow the social norm—changes and differences frighten the world. To analyze this statement on a small scale, Kilodavis stated, “In the black community, it’s (boys showing feminine traits) taboo.” As I surfed YouTube to see people’s reactions to Kilodavis and Dyson’s story, I found both positive and negative comments; overall, I saw a common trend of African American people commenting on the story and how most of them had translated Dyson dressing up like a girl into homosexuality. Can an early childhood decision determine Dyson’s sexual orientation? In our society, YES it can. It is the prevailing stereotype that if a male have any feminine traits, he isn’t masculine or isn’t a “real” man and therefore he must be gay. This mentality is of a problem in itself, however the fact that Dyson is African American makes the situation twice as bad. It is similar to African American fighting for women rights during the Civil Rights Movement, black women were like double minorities (once for being a women and once for being a black); in Dyson’s case its once for being black and once for being possibly gay.

Besides African Americans not accepting the idea cross dressing, especially of a boy dressing as a girl, society, in general, isn’t welcoming of that idea either. As Johnston would argue, gender roles are a system where whatever participants feed into the system is what is generated back out. Just to think about the types of decisions parents make when they raise their child—everything obediently follows within the strict lines of what it means to be a girl or a boy. And since as young as we can remember, we have enforced this by they activities we are involved in. Can you really think of a settling or activity that doesn’t enforces gender role? No, not really right. For example McDonald’s Happy Meal’s toys strictly enforces what types of toys a girl or a boy should play with when they ask the parent if their child is a boy or girl so the employee can properly place the specified toy for each gender. Society is rooted in gender, whether we like to think about it or not. Kilodavis and Dyson’s story affirms ancient historical and religious views, which Simone De Beavovior’s “The Second Sex” argues against: the value that men are the positive and neutral whereas women are negative and less than men (hence women are the second sex). It seems that today’s society is more accepting of girls dressing like boys than it is of accepting boys dressing like girls. So does Dyson’s situation portrays and perpetuates the notion that males are of more important than females? Yes it does. The idea that society completely rejects boys dressing like girls confirms the idea that male quality is of more important than females; in this binary, females will always come second and seen as everything opposite of the positive males. 

Although society is not tolerant of having boys dress like girls, Kilodavis is a leading example of Anne Fausto-Sterling’s idea, especially in terms of giving the children rights over the other parties involved in the situation. Kilodavis said, “It was then she realized that her conflict wasn’t about what Dyson wanted, but what she wanted” (Sailor 1). Kilodavis exemplifies the notion that the gender a child wants to grow up isn’t fully in the decision of the parent (or the doctor), instead the child must be able to have a voice in saying what he or she wants to grow up like; whether how small the decision from choosing ones clothes to a bigger decision intersex treatment, the child should always have a right to choose how he or she wants to live their life instead of following the guidelines society normally forces upon us. Kilodavis’ book My Princess Boy is a courageous act that will speak to the many audiences going through Dyson’s situation or similar situation. This children’s book could potentially be the start to a tale of acceptance that society will eventually embrace.            

As much as American wants to pride on its democracy, freedom, and justice for all—we as a society are so far away from an environment that accepts and embrace differences. We have been so rooted in social norms, especially gender norms and roles that it is difficult for one to see outside of the box. As Kilodavis writes in her book, “If you see a Princess Boy…will you like him for who he is?”  

Premature Sex and the Media

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/09/opinion/09dowd.html

Growing up in Bethesda Maryland, and having four brothers that attended the Landon School for all 10 years, I couldn’t help but pick an article from the New York Times titled “Their Dangerous Swagger.” Maureen Dowd writes about a fantasy football league that was set up by a group of 8^th graders from the Landon school. Instead of using NFL football stars, they used girls from the area in their grade to create the teams. The criteria for a good “player” included bra size, weight, personality traits, height, and whether or not they were willing to get “down and dirty.” Dowd writes, “The young woman who was the “top pick” was described by one of the boys in a team profile he put up online as “sweet, outgoing, friendly, willing to get down and dirty and [expletive] party. Coming in at 90 pounds, 5’2 and a bra size 34d.” She would be a special asset to the team, he noted, because her mother “is quite the cougar herself.” Before they got caught, the boys planned a “opening day party” where they had made t-shirts and planned to invite the girls over and score points by how many sexual meetings they had with them.

If Douglass were to have written her book Enlightened Sexism in a year or two, I think that this scandal would have been good evidence to prove her point about enlightened sexism. Enlightened Sexism is the idea that women have achieved their rights and now it is time for them to focus on their physical appearance and materialistic world. In the third wave of feminism, the women’s movement has been focusing on the problem of women being sexually objectified. Although we may have our basic rights as citizens, the media, and both men and women are contributing to the idea of enlightened sexism. There is no doubt in my mind that sexual advances and encounters are starting at a younger age now because of the media. These 8^th graders that were apart of this scandal had probably been watching MTV for years leading up to the incident. Shows like Jersey Shore, Real World, Exposed, and Parental Control objectify women and tend to concentrate on their bodies’ and image rather then their accomplishments and life goals. In the Jersey Shore alone, terms like “grenades”, “GFA/GFF”, “bomb”, “Poundin’ it out” and many more. Grenades are considered large women who are hard to look at. GFA and GFF stand for Grenade Free America, and Grenade Free Foundation. A bomb is a stubborn woman who cannot be easily seduced. Poundin it out refers to sexual intercourse and the male cast of this show usually uses this term. In the Jersey Shore alone, terms are being created and it makes male teenagers across the nation think that it is socially acceptable to use such degrading terms. It also gives female teenagers the impression that it is okay to dress like Snooki and J-woww, and that the norm is for boys to bring you back to their sex lair. I think that if the media concentrated less on the “hook up” scene and didn’t have so many shows and movies about the world of sex, then we could have steered this new generation of kids away from being sexually aware and advanced at such a young age.

When I was in 8^th grade, our brains were not wired to think about how far we would go sexually. The biggest scandal of my 8^th grade year was when a girl performed oral sex on her boyfriend. Everyone in the D.C area found out about it because it was against our societal norms. Although I do think how mature and sexually advanced a teenager is depends on context, such as whom they were raised by and where they grew up, I think that most of it depends on the media and the social norms that are constantly changing. A teenager who has parental control and is raised well in an environment with limited drugs and alcohol is more likely to sexually mature at a normal rate compared to a teen that has to take care of him or herself and lives in an environment with violence and drugs. Bethesda Maryland comes in 2^nd place as the city with the highest income with a population of over 50,000 just behind Cupertino, California and above Greenwich, Connecticut. Some may argue that the richer cities have kids that are forked over money and then go use it to buy drugs. However, just by growing up in Bethesda, I know that kids are extra careful with what they get themselves into because everyone finds out everything and you would never want to tarnish your families reputation.

Some of the parents of the girls commented on the scandal and one father said, “They evidently got points for first, second and third base. They were going to have parties and tally up the points, and money was going to be exchanged at the end of the season.” He said that the boys would also have earned points for “schmoozing with the parents.” He also talked about how upset his daughter was and asked if this is really how we teach boys to treat women. He argued that teenage girls have enough to worry about so the added pressure that boys inflict is self- destructing. Another parent talked about how the girls felt targeted and completely used.

As I reflect on this scandal, I have realized that the norms of the society are changing because of the media and the environment in which the teens are raised. The only way we can put a stop to women being sexual prey is if we teach kids at a young age about the value of a woman as a human rather than an object.

Animation Sexism?

http://www.thewrap.com/movies/article/pixar-sexist-blogosphere-angry-studio-replaces-woman-director-‘brave’-21874?page=0,0

Animated movies are a growing part of children’s lives. Whether they watch them with friends, with a babysitter, with their family, or in theatres; children are watching more and more animated films in modern day than ever before. The animated movie industry caters specifically to a child audience and creates good, whole-hearted family appropriate films that provide examplatory behavior and role models for children. Yet can this same industry, which seems so innocent, be installing sexist ideas in children’s heads that women have fought to abolish for so long? A recent article came out discussing Pixar’s films and the firing of Brenda Chapman, the first female Pixar director. The article, “Is Pixar Sexist? Anger as Studio Replaces Female Director on ‘Brave’” discusses the lack of women and their impact on the Pixar Company, and the lack of female lead roles in Pixar’s films. Pixar has yet to produce a film with a leading female role until now. Pixar’s new film, “Brave”, if untampered with, can be revolutionary in Pixar’s films because it stars a female lead and may in the long run help reduce sexism from a very young age.

Every Pixar film (Toy Story 1-3, Cars, Wall-e, Monsters Inc, The Incredibles, Finding Nemo, A Bug’s Life, Up and Ratatouille) has a male protagonist with females always in a supporting role. The female characters are never portrayed as role models and are simply additions into the films to make them more interesting. For example, in Wall-e the entire film is focused about Wall-e and his life on earth, and includes Eve as a side character who is only in the film because of Wall-e’s attraction to her. Eve may have respectable characteristics and be portrayed as kind and loving, but again is not the main character or meant to be a role model for young girls. This is also the same for Cars and Toy Story. In Toy Story 1, Little Bo Peep is seen as the typical damsel in distress and exemplifies the typical housewife Betty Friedan describes in her excerpt from The Feminine Mystique that so many women strived to be in the 50s and 60s. In Finding Nemo, Dori is portrayed as the mentally slower comical character that again has good characteristics, but is not meant for the leading role. The films focus on male characters and include females as less important characters. Since children learn from observation, this issue can greatly affect the way young females view themselves, the way they should act with other females and males, and lead to furthering male dominance in modern society.

But this article does not just focus on the lack of leading female characters in the films; it also focuses on the lack of leading female positions in the workplace. It seems almost as if Pixar makes an effort to keep women out of controlling positions in their films and workplace. The article states, “for one thing, the animation industry is not know as a warm and fuzzy place for women”, and only around 7 percent of directors were women in the entire Hollywood film industry (p.1). These facts show the increased difficulty there is for a woman rather than man seeking a job in the film industry, which many think of as to be a more modern and equal part of our society. It also shows how even though women have come such a far way to being completely equal with men, there is still hidden sexism in modern society. One of the main upsets with this issue was not only that Chapman had been the first female director for Pixar, but also that the movie she had written known as “Brave”, staring a female archer as the main character.

The film “Brave” is supposed to be about an archer-princess, who unlike all other Pixar films, plays the leading more masculine role in the film. The article quotes that the girl is the “impetuous, tangle-haired Merida, who despite being the daughter of a king and queen, would prefer to make her mark as a great archer”. This film will be enlightening and extremely important for children to see because it will hopefully start to break the male dominated animation world that children are so captivated by. It can also help decrease the stereotypes for girls and push women’s equality to the next level. Girls will now have an option of watching someone from their sex succeed and play the brave, courageous heroine role instead of just watching female characters be dependent on male characters. Some people fear that due to the director change, “Brave” may change and become more tailored to boys than girls. The final quote in the article perfectly describes not only the problems with gender in the film industry as well as in the films themselves. The article says,

“Gender matters,” wrote Kecky. "Yes, men and women are different. That’s precisely why it’s so important to have a balance between both perspectives, with equal respect given to each. Both movies and the movie industry are overrun with men. 'Brave' is also the first Pixar movie with a female main character, and personally, Chapman getting replaced by a man makes me worried that 'Brave' is going to get 'Tangled 'and made “more interesting to boys” as well."

Gender does matter. It matters in films and in the workplace. It is present in everyday life and makes up an enormous part of an individuals identity. So, when females are so blatantly ignored in the animation film industry it calls to question how progressive our society really is.

By creating this film “Brave”, Pixar is taking a step towards furthering women’s equality and reducing the sexism in society. “Brave” will hopefully allow young girls to think outside of societies image of a woman and her duties. Though Pixar may be sexist, by producing this film, Pixar can help breaking down sexism from a young age, enabling children to grow up in a less sexist environment, possibly leading to real equality for women.

Response Post

In "Of Gender and Genitals", Sterling talks about the procedure of dealing with intersex new borns and how they go about telling the parents. It is very surprising that they rush judgement to determine what sex the newborn should be. You would think that they would consult the parents more then they actually do, thinking about the challenges to social life that this child might face. Sterling writes, "Before 24 hours pass, the child must leave the hospital "as a sex", and the parents must feel certain of their decision. How can parents feel certain of their decision if this is all dealt with in 24 hours?

Caroline makes a great point when she brings up the social issues that will arise if we have more than 2 genders. Creating more then 2 genders will bring about a completely new movement, but this time it will be for the fight for rights of intersex beings. Caroline raises a good point when she states how issues would arise with sports. Are they going to have another Title IX to make equal opportunities for intersex students? I feel as if creating another gender would create more social instability and problems among our society.

Sterling argues that intersex is not a rare deformity and in fact doctors are lying when they say that there is nobody whom the parents consult because it is so rare. Why do the doctors feel the necessity to make such a statement? Is it because they do not keep a tight network of who was born as an intersex? Is it because it is against the social norm to be born this way so they feel as soon as they complete surgery, they should forget that the baby had a deformity? I think that instead of creating a new gender, we need to acknowledge the fact that intersex births are not as rare as we think, and we need to find a way to make it more socially acceptable, so that surgeries and decisions aren't rushed, and the child can have a better future.

Leading Post: How Many Sexes Will Be Enough?

In "Of Gender and Gentials," Fausto-Sterling she explains the irrational reasons doctors decide to change an intersex infant into a female or a male and she further discusses the historic debate whether nurture or nature is the main determinant of a person's gender/sex. In this chapter Fausto-Sterling gives readers insight on the procedure that goes on in a hospital and how doctors are obligated to make sure intersex infants leave the hospital as one definite sex--because there is no room for ambiguity. There is a 1.7% chance for intersex babies--this is higher than the chance of albino in new born. When these cases of intersex infants occur doctors normally don't fully inform the parents about the situation; instead doctors vaguely tell the parents that there is a mix-up that's not allowing them to see the sex of the baby. Factors such as penis size and vagina appearances help doctors determine what sex to choose for the baby; normally it is easier to make girl than a boy. It is argued that doctors don't tell parents the full truth because they don't want the parents' knowledge to interfere with their child rearing. As Money and the Hampsons argue, nurture is a greater factor than nature in determining a child's gender. On the other hand, Diamond argues that sexuality identity is not fundamentally malleable--nature (hormones) is a greater factor than nurture (environment).  Fausto-Sterling ends her chapter with a powerful statement: "scientific and medical understanding of multiple human sexes brings with them both the means to disrupt and the tools to reinforce dominant beliefs about sex and gender" (77).

In "Should There Be Only Two Sexes" Fausto-Sterling problematize intersex infant procedures and how that process reaffirms the binary system. In this chapter she encourages a five sex system rather than a two sex system. She also advocates for the need to change the medical management of intersexual birth in three aspects: 1) stop unnecessary infant surgery (only for emergencies) 2) determine the sex with better knowledge (rather than based on penis size or vagina appearance) and 3) inform parents and child about the process. Fausto-Sterling provides many cases where the doctors decision on what sex the intersex child will be, in the future that decision what not of the best one and how it had negative effects on the child. Due to so many cases like that, many organization arose to enlighten and fight for intersex rights.             

Too Many Sexes?

Sterling raises controversial and interesting points about gender, gender issues, and possible solutions in her two chapters, "Of Gender and Genitals" and "Should There Be Only Two Sexes?". Her chapters focused on the biological and emotional problems of intersex babies and choosing the "correct" sex.

At the end of "Of Gender and Genitals", Sterling asks, "Should there only be two sexes?" (p. 77). This question really got me thinking because I did not know the answer. It seems like more and more people are blurring the lines between male and female in our modern world, so making other genders could be more helpful in order to specify a person's sex and help others recognize their gender. Yet, I also feel that having more than two genders can cause many social issues and anxieties. For example, who would intersex kids play against on sports teams? Sports teams are divided up due to gender to create a more fair competing ground, so would intersex children only be allowed to play against each other? Would there even be enough of them to have a strictly intersex team? Also, which bathroom would an intersex child use? If intersex children were given their own facilities to use, wouldn't it just be replicating segregation? Would schools be required to admit a certain number of intersex children in order to appear as diverse? How would intersex children's' mental and physical state be different from those of male or female children at the same age? Would doctors treat intersex children any differently? Many social issues would arise if there became more than two politically accepted genders, if instead of just male or female, there were other options.

However, though these social issues may create short-term social turmoil and problems; I think that if people were to consider there to be more than two sexes, it would exemplify the worlds increasing awareness and interaction with intersex children. Yet, I think that since the issue has to do with gender, (which people rely on so much to help define and categorize others,) there won't be any major societal changes towards intersex children; and unfortunately, our society is stuck with this issue of placing intersex or transgender children into male or female categories.

Responding Post

In this week's readings "Dueling Dualisms" and "That Sexe Which Prevaileth," Fausto-Sterling opened my eyes more to the wider spectrum of gender and sex (which aren't talked about as often). After reading the many definitions for the terms, gender, sex, and hermaphrodite, I was curious to see what definitions were given in various dictionaries; therefore I looked up these terms in three dictionary websites, what I think are most consulted websites: Google dictionary, Merriam-Webster, and Dictionary.com. For the term "sex" the general definition went along the lines of "either male or female," for "gender" it went along the lines of the behavior aspects associated to the sexes and for "hermaphrodite" its common trend talked about someone having put reproductive organs. Besides "hermaphrodite," the other two terms' definitions are problematic. Society is rooted in the idea of binaries and that is no different for gender and sex--there's only a female and male (at least what is acceptable in society).

While reading "Dueling Dualisms," I thought about Caroline P (and other female athletes) and how they would have responded to Pierre de Coubertin's claim: "women's sports are all against the law of nature" (2-3). Although females have made it into the athletic realm, I think Coubertin's ideology still lives on. Besides the examples Fausto-Sterling provided in this chapter of females athletes being questioned for their gender, I can think of two recent highly publicized accounts of this: 1) South African runner, Caster Semenya (2009) and 2) the controversy over the age of the Chinese gymnastics in the 2008 Beijing Olympics. Even though, I didn't follow these two accounts in detail--I don't know the final results of these two examples--but all of these examples exemplify a common theme: the controversy of women sports seems to revolve around the idea of their ability to actually perform in their sport area (whether questioning their gender, their age, etc.). To follow this point, I don't think there is any mass media coverage on men sports that question their ability to play (and I don't consider Michael Phillips, ARod, and other males athletes who use drugs and steroids--these are external factors that can't compare to questionings a females age/gender/sex). Instead the media focuses on male athletics like OJ Simpson's murderer case, Tiger Woods sex scandal, etc.; all of these stories have nothing to do with the male athletes' biological makeup. The point being, society still embrace the idea that "sports are outside of "women's sports are all against the law of nature" (2-3).

In relation to Coraline C's post and the examples she provided, I also want to add how it seems with today's medical advancements the gender/sex guidelines seems to be more difficulty to define. However, trying to select which gender box one belongs in is not the problem, but the problem is the great amount of people who are actually trying to alter their bodies. To make it clear, I am not against a person wanting to become another gender they self identify better with, but my main concern is the ways people are altering their bodies to fit into what society portray as the "prefect" men or women. Just think about plastic surgery, breast implants, and facial or bodily alteration, etc. And it doesn't even have to be this extreme either, our alteration of our bodies include botox, hair growth products, anti-wrinkles creams, height alteration (heels). To think about it: is society really that scared of aging and looking unattractive? It seems bothersome that people are now actually are more and more deliberately changing themselves.

Lastly, what I liked about Fausto-Sterling is unlike other authors who don't give us the clear answer to what comes first (the chicken or the egg), she clearly states that "our beliefs about gender affects what kinds of knowledge scientists produce about sex in the first place" (3). In others words gender and sex are social constructs that we are in control of. Our first step can start with discarding this binary of only two genders (male and female) and start to openly accept and acknowledge the variations in the gender/sex spectrum.                                     

She-male?

From the two chapters we read for class, I found the first chapter more interesting. The story of Patino and the gender issue she faced is quite intriguing. It reminded me a lot of a story I heard about a "man" having a baby. There is a Barbara Walters exclusive on a Hawaiian beauty pageant star who later in life realized she was lesbian and made the decision to become a man.

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=6244878&page=1

Thomas Beatie, a transgender, who had been taking male hormone pills and started changing her appearance to a more socially accepted "male look" decided that she and her partner wanted to have a baby. Thomas was artificially inseminated and 9 months later gave birth to a baby girl. Though Thomas may look like a man to society, he still has female sexual organs and was able to have a baby. He is quoted saying in the article that he has stopped taking his male hormonal pills so that he can have a second baby, and is in fact pregnant again.

The reason I was interested in this story is because I think it has a lot to do with "Dueling Dualism's". Thomas Beatie was a woman, and then became transgender and considered himself transgender/on her way to becoming a man, and then had a baby. The reason this story is so controversial is because like Patino, it deals with female gender and the typical social norms about being female. People were outraged by Beatie's pregnancy because it was deemed as unnatural for a "man" to have a baby.

Looking at these two stories together, I think it is evident how the definitions of male and female are becoming more and more confusing in the modern world. What would you consider Thomas Beatie to be? He acts as a father, looks like a man and relates to himself as a man, yet is able to have babies because he was born a woman. Does this make him transgender? He seems to not fit into any sexual group society has created. He is not seen as a woman or as a man. Social definitions of male and female are not as black and white as they used to be. There are many people who identify themselves as neither male nor female, or as transgender, or some in the process of becoming the opposite sex. The world has become more complicated and there is no strict definition of male or female anymore. I think that this problem will only become worse because more and more people like Thomas Beatie will break societies normal expectations for gender and sex. I am also interested to see what the class would think of Thomas Beatie and whether they consider him more male or female.

Dueling Dualism

Out of the 2 chapters for today, I was really intrigued by "Dueling Dualism".

As an athlete, I was very surprised that I did not know more about Patino's conflict as an woman Olympic athlete. The fact that she had no idea that she was anything but a female is shocking to say the least. From one simple test her life fell apart. "Spanish officials stripped her of past titles and barred her from further competition. HEr boyfriend deserted her. She was evicted from the national athletic residence, her scholarship was revoked, and suddenly she had to struggle to make a living. After giving her life up to sports, she lost everything. This fact makes me very conscious of what I have. I have given up 16 years to ice hockey, and have been out for almost an entire season due to injury. Sometimes I wonder why I stay committed and find myself having negative emotions about the entire situation, but now I know that I have been blessed in some ways because it could be so much worse. The only thing that I have lost is the time to get in shape and improve myself as a hockey player. Before things were resolved, Patino had lost everything, and the permanent damage is that Patino is now treated differently because of the conflict of her sex/gender.

I found myself reading these 2 chapters out to my roommates as some stuff really surprised me. I thought it was interesting to learn that until 1968, "many female Olympic competitors were often asked to parade naked in front of a board of examiners. Breasts and a vagina were all one needed to certify one's femininity". I found this to be somewhat inappropriate for them to have to parade around naked, but because they banned this, chromosome tests began to replace them, and that is how Patino had a life altering experience.

I also found John Money and Anke Ehrhardt's idea to be fascinating. I never have pinpointed the differences between gender and sex until i read their argument. Sex refers to physical attributes and gender refers to a psychological transformation of the self. many people use these terms interchangeably, but now that so many issues have arisen with sex and gender, it is empirical that these two terms are defined individually.