UNSPECIFIED (1996) Resisting sex/gender conflation: A reply. SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW, 44 (4). pp. 728-745. ISSN 0038-0261

Full text not available from this repository.

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.

Item Type:	Journal Article
Subjects:	H Social Sciences > HM Sociology
Journal or Publication Title:	SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW
Publisher:	BLACKWELL PUBL LTD
ISSN:	0038-0261
Date:	November 1996
Volume:	44
Number:	4
Number of Pages:	18
Page Range:	pp. 728-745
Publication Status:	Published
URI:	http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/id/eprint/18255

Data sourced from Thomson Reuters' Web of Knowledge

Request changes to a record

Actions (login required)

View Item