Social construct has been established as a notion that has been developed and embraced by people within a society based on their class distinctions. The same differences have been stretched to comprise gender, race, sexuality, and to some extent, age (Du Bois 5). Societies worldwide have struggled with this notion, and through it, people have encountered various challenges regarding how equality can be established among them. The differences in inequality issues have been primarily associated with egalitarianism. The distribution of power, resources, wealth, and opportunity, for example, continues to categorize people in two significant positions, the rich and the poor. To some extent, Du Bois (5) argues that due to dramatically unequal distribution of wealth, priority is given to those considered superior in the race, sex, and class. That has been the reason why differences in gender and ethnicity continue to be portrayed as immutable and unbridgeable to date.
Throughout history, society has conditioned people to embrace that men and women are innately distinct based on their capabilities and abilities. The opposite portrayal of the two genders has been the critical defining characteristic that makes people perceive those positive traits in men as dysfunctional in women (Du Bois 5). One of the best examples that explain the society’s perspective of the two genders is in politics, where in America, less than 20 percent of women hold congressional seats (Du Bois 5). From another lens, the nursing profession has been viewed as a woman’s career, which has been the reason behind the small percentage (9 percent) of male nurses in the profession (Du Bois 5). The notion established by the society and how the people have embraced it has been a significant player in the responsibilities of men and women.
The same fundamental aspects that segregate men from women regarding responsibilities have been employed in racial differences between the Caucasian and African American races. Based on social construct theory, humanity creates constructs to make sense of the objective world (Pfadenhauer and Hubert 23). According to the social construct definition, human interaction between the two races resulted in the African American race being considered inferior to the Caucasian counterpart. The oppression subjected the black man, and the poor conditions that led to inequality in this race paved the way for the White race to consider itself innately superior relative to its ability and intelligence (Du Bois 5). Therefore, being black resulted in people referred to as ‘Negroes’ being considered individuals associated with a lesser or different race. Likewise, the Whites’ inhumane treatment of the Native Americans was justified on the same assumed distinctions between the Caucasians and other races.
In the United States, talks about ethnicity simplicity are often associated with commonalities that have been coined to be social rather than biological in origin. As Ronald Takaki suggests, “[r]ace … has been a social construction that has historically set apart racial minorities from European immigrant groups” (378). Moreover, politics has been the arbitrary way people have been and continue to be regarded rather than their scientific or biological categorization. For example, in contemporary U.S. society, Latin Americans with dark skins are categorized as ‘blacks’ based on the political equation of skin color as a classification of the race (Du Bois 8). Throughout history, the concept of white privileges and whiteness was a social construct developed to segregate people based on their race. The divisions associated with the construction served to safeguard the privileged elite, power, and wealth by a few people within the society (Du Bois 8). Race as a social construct portrays the distinctions on a diversity continuum instead of reflecting the innate differences found among people.
However, despite science arguing that all people have the same ancestral background, race as a social construct has been used in denying the manifested differences in physical characteristics and skin color. Racism constitutes stressors of the distinctions found in people, and the differences can be imagined or real but do not comprise the actual racism (Du Bois 8). That is why in the U.S., African Americans and racial minorities are perceived as dissimilar from their white counterparts, with the differences being deviant from what is usually accepted.
Likewise, the class has been associated with what society supposes to be an innate moral worth or ability. How people qualify to vote based on material possessions has been used as a factor to cripple African Americans from practicing their democratic right (Rothenberg and Soniva 51). Moreover, the same privileges were denied by Whites that were classified as poor. Since the beginning of a nation, material possession in the U.S. was considered an essential indicator of superiority relative to character and intelligence. Furthermore, like race and gender, class is socially constructed instead of being naturally given. Due to this, how the society perceives class mirrors the cultural construction differences that serve to keep the prevailing privilege and power distribution (Du Bois 6). And as changes in race differences dictate what is usually accepted, class changes are relative to the people’s economic, political, and social lives.
Science argues that regardless of whether a person is born female or male or belonging to any race, in particular, their birth is an outright biological question. However, with the several dissimilarities that allegedly position race, class, sexuality, and gender as immutable, natural, or unchangeable, how gender and race are categorized portrays an elevated level of complication than what is seen (Rothenberg and Soniya 49). Respectively, social science distinguishes sex and gender as categories assigned at birth and socially constructed set meanings linked to each sex. Despite sex being assumed to be biological or natural, it is subject to social construction. Only two available options exist, male and female, due to collapsing complicated and diverse genetics, biology, and physiology (Du Bois 6). Even with the distinctions in the classification meaning of man and woman in different cultures, the connotation dissimilarities are what makes gender and sexuality to be socially constructed.
In one culture, the concept of femininity or masculinity might be the exact opposite in another culture. The variations in the levels of consistency in how different cultures identify sex-related roles and responsibilities reflect divisions in what is considered natural in the duties. For example, in several cultures, women have the mandate of undertaking agricultural labor, while in others, it is the responsibility of men (Du Bois 7). Additionally, while some societies claim that heavy manual work insults their women, others expect them to carry out those manual tasks. Based on the distinctions in how various cultures relate to the issue of gender, it becomes a socially imposed sexuality division (Rothenberg and Soniya 54). Despite men and women having dissimilarities, they are not as notable as night and day. The notion that the two sexes are more different from each other must originate from elsewhere but not from nature.
Work Cited
Du, Bois W. E. B. The Souls of Black Folk. ChumpChange. 2021.
Pfadenhauer, Michaela, and Hubert Knoblauch. Social Constructivism As Paradigm?: The Legacy of the Social Construction of Reality. New York Routledge, Taylor et Francis Group. 2020.
Ronald, Takaki. Different Mirror: A History of Multicultural America (revised Edition). EBookIt.com. 2012.
Rothenberg, Paula S, and Soniya Munshi. Race, Class, and Gender in the United States: An Integrated Study (10th ed). New York: Worth. ISBN13:9781464178665 Part1 Introduction. 2016.