Resisting sex/gender conflation: a rejoinder to John Hood-Williams

The Sociological Review 44 (4):728-745 (1996)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The irony of the rejection of the sex/gender distinction is that it renders sociology per se an impossible enterprise. For it is my submission that, contra Hood-Williams (1996) and others, the biological and the social constitute distinct, irreducible levels of reality: to conflate (in a ‘downwards’ or ‘upwards’ direction) the two levels is immediately to render analysis of their relative interplay at best intractable. It is indeed arguable that Hood-Williams is not so much concerned with (rightly) rejecting the so-called ‘additive’ approach to the biological and the social where the biological base is seen a priori as immutable, but more fundamentally with rejecting the necessary dualism of nature and culture (ie the biological and the social). In contradistinction, a realist defence of the sex/gender distinction will be made, involving critical reference to various major writers in the field and offering a brief but tentative discussion of the provenance of gender.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2021-01-06

Downloads
701 (#82,863)

6 months
152 (#87,386)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

Volatile Bodies: Toward a Corporeal Feminism.Elizabeth Grosz - 1994 - St. Leonards, NSW: Indiana University Press.
Objective Knowledge.K. R. Popper - 1972 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 4 (2):388-398.
Do We Need a Sex/Gender Distinction?Val Plumwood & R. Stollers - 1989 - Radical Philosophy 51:2-11.

View all 6 references / Add more references