Gender and Culture Importance in Disability - Essay Example

GENDER AND CULTURE IMPORTANCE IN DISABILITY Gender and Culture importance in Disability IntroductionGender refers to a structure of social relations that is centered on the productive arena, and some set practices that tend to bring reproductive difference between bodies into communal processes. It is closely related to sex though with variations on ideas about how sex is usually understood in relation to biological and the physiological body (Connell, 2002). Gender, as it relates to the different sexes in the society is usually seen as operating in a way that men dominate and are stronger than their female counterparts are. Women are often seen to be less powerful and with very little powers. On the other hand, culture refers to set of beliefs and norms that govern the way of living in a given society. Disability refers to a physical or a mental condition that limits the movement of an individual from one part of the other (Barnes and Mercer, 2003). The importance of gender and culture in understanding disability Many of the issues that relate to gender are used in understanding the importance of gender in understanding disability. The simple binaries have developed to be complicated as we are in the process of learning more issues about the communal structure of the body and the organic influences on the human body. Culture and sex, gender and sex all have their manifestation in showing the difference that exists between disability and impairment. It is through these aspects that impairment has been used in describing the functional limitations that happen to a person due to personified differences (Dellinger, 2002). On the other hand, disability has been used to refer to a given system of social relations that tend to limit a person in performing their day-to-day activities. The importance of gender can well be explained by looking at the gendered experience of disability (Eisler and Hersen, 2000). The Gendered Experience of Disability For a long time, the disabled have been represented as ones without gender, referred to as sexual creatures and as freaks of nature as per the social norm. It has also been assumed that gender has a little bearing to the disabled people and yet the image of disability may be amplified by gender. The images that exist about the disabled have real effects in the education, living arrangements, employment, and to some extent personal relationships and abuse that to some degree improves the images to the general public (Eisler and Hersen, 2000). It is through these experiences that disability has been related to gender and revealed sustained patterns of men and women. For the disabled people, gendering is always conditional. The western industrial nations have carried out gendered studies of disability and they came up with the following patterns of the public and private dimensions. Publicly, more women than men are always classified as disabled arguing that the aging population is mostly comprised of the elderly women who have much impairment (Dellinger, 2002). The studies have also shown that, while the disabled are more likely to live in poverty, women have been seen to be poorer than men are and this is more in the developing countries where men are the heads of the family. The studies found out that young disabled women tend to achieve lower educational outcomes than their male counterparts do. Through the evaluation of the existing literature, it was found that, the disabled women in the society have a low potential to be in the paid workforce compared to their male counterparts who are disabled and they always have fewer incomes that come from their employment (Macey, 2011). Women with disabilities are limited in their ability to access rehabilitation facilities. The age distribution for women and men also differs in an excellent deal. Feminine gender is also more likely to face sexual violence when engaged in some forms of relationships and even when working in some institutions. Lack of gender equity has also led to women being exposed to intense social categorization compared to men (Riddell and Watson, 2003). Moreover, in the third world countries, the patterns of gender in relations to disability have indicated that, the disabled women in the society are mostly vulnerable to domestic violence. Those girls with disabilities are in a better position to access education as compared to those girls with no disabilities and their male counterparts. Those women who have been disabled by issues of war tend to have few resources for their survival. It is always hard for the sexually abused disabled women to receive any support from the society or any other options. In the industrially advanced countries, disabled women stand very little chance of being accepted as refugees (Macey, 2011). An example is Australia that prohibits the movement of persons with disabilities to their country as refugees. Gender has been positively used widely within humanities and social sciences as a mean to classify differences and as a logical perception that explains the stated differences. In both the fields, studies on feminist disability has cropped up as a result of trials to clarify the issue of gendered experience of disability and to some extent as a challenge to the contemporary feminist theory on gender that has failed to completely take account of disability (Riddell and Watson, 2003). Disability has for a long time been used as a potent metaphor in the field of psychology and particularly as a way to assign to the women the level of deformed men. Additionally, the stereotypes of gender have been applied in the characterization of disabled people, and more particularly those men who have been said to have feminine traits with them and those who lack masculine traits (Smith and Hutchison, 2004). The analysis carried on disability concerning gender has tried to move past the metaphors to form a disciplined account of the effect on the gendered psyche of disabling the social relations. The psychological theories of personal development have gained momentum in taking account of gender information (Middleton, 2002). There are cases where the disabled in the society may have the privilege of getting something that is viewed to be basics for them yet they cannot acquire them. It is common for men to look down upon the disabled women in the society. In an example, disabled girls may have their desires to acquire babies at one point of their lives and become mothers in the process. The gender of these girls tends to support their expectations but at the same time denied by their disability status. It, therefore, becomes important in understanding the role played by gender equality in the provision of equal and fair services from the Society (Riddell and Watson, 2003). For those people who are born without impairments and later they are disabled, their changed status tends to create fundamental conflicts to their future expectations and their self-image that is reinforced by the perception of the public as being disabled. Social workers and psychologists may be useful in supporting those people with impairments and are seeking to survive with their disabilities (Middleton, 2002). The approaches that these persons may adopt include adaptation and adjustments as the primary means of coping with the disabilities. The assumptions of suitable character, appropriates outcomes, and task allocation replicate professional stereotypes and models, and they are often dominated by the assumptions of medical models about gendered bodies. Enough evidence exists that those women with disabilities tend to experience key psychosocial challenges that remain hugely neglected that include depression, lowered self-esteem, stress and social isolations. There is also evidence that disabled women tend to be directed to home-based activities while their male counterparts are more likely to be supported by the public and other outward-looking opportunities. There is a common believe that people often recognize that disability is capable of undermining masculinity and therapies often assert traditional masculine identity. On occasions when identity assertion happens for women, there is always the likelihood for it to be about hyper-feminine self-presentation and it includes things like make up and grooming sessions (Middleton, 2002). Culture and its importance Stereotypes refer to the artifacts of culture that are only understood by the exploration of the relations to one another in the cultural system. Stereotypes associated with gender tend to interact with disability stereotypes to form a broad matrix of gendered disability in all most of the cultures (Middleton, 2002). These cultures are developed within some particular historical contexts and they tend to affect these contexts over time. The two aspects interact in many other cultural aspects like in cinemas, fiction and when using body language. Therefore, society’s culture tends to sustain the social relations of the gendered disability in constant reiterations of expectations and stereotypes (Riddell and Watson, 2003). In normal circumstances, the disabled in the society are expected to behave in such a way to express how different they are to the rest of the society. There is a difference in a way in which disabled men and women behave in the society with men showing that they are more superior to men though they are all disabled. The manner in which the differences are expressed has to be different culturally. The hierarchies of power of male determine the cultural parameters that exist in the society over female and the disabled over the able-bodied (Middleton, 2002). In most culture, the subordinate groups are not always passive but instead have developed particular strategies for resistance and self-affirmation. In some cases, the interactions of stereotypes can lead to the generation of resistance that consists embracing the stereotypes. In an example, the disabled women in the society may be seen to be inappropriate mothers and have the status as only receivers by the others. The result of this is the development of resistance by the disabled women that may consist of asserting a given desire for a certain traditional career role relating to their children (Riddell and Watson, 2003). Disabled men who are not in a position to behave in a way that displays their masculine ways come up with a number of strategies that help them in coping with the stigma that they go through during their day-to-day operations in the society (Riddell and Watson, 2003). The responses may include the redefinition of masculinity as a financial autonomy rather than defining it as a form of physical prowess. The other way to respond may be that of creating an alternative masculine identity that puts more efforts on personhood but not on gender roles (Smith and Hutchison, 2004). Conclusion Both disabled men and women have narrated their experiences in gendered terms with all the materials and styles showing the way in which the disabled in the society often modulate gender expectations. Gender and culture are all important in understanding the issue of disability in the society. The disabled in the society tend to be given different treatment by the society. The beliefs that govern the way in which these people relate to one another are clearly defined by their culture. It, therefore, becomes important to understanding an individuals culture and gender in addressing issues that are related to disability. Disabled men are given different treatment as compared to the disabled men. The gender of an individual plays a significant role in helping scholars to know how different people of different genders are treated in the society. Disabled women also are denied some rights that they deserve as they live in the society. It is clear that men tend to run away from disabled women and they do not usually marry them denying them the right of becoming mother. References Barnes, C. and Mercer, G. 2003. Disability. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. Connell, R. 2002. Gender. Cambridge, UK: Polity. Nizational culture at work. Gend. Issues, 20(1), pp.3-25. Eisler, R. and Hersen, M. 2000. Handbook of gender, culture, and health. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Macey, M. 2011. Gender & Culture. Gender & Development, 19(1), pp.165-168. Middleton, J. 2002. Culture. Oxford, U.K.: Capstone Pub. Riddell, S. and Watson, N. 2003. Disability, culture and identity. Harlow: Pearson/Prentice Hall. Smith, B. and Hutchison, B. 2004. Gendering Disability. New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press. Read More