Gender Identity and Identity

Race/Ethnicity or Sex/Gender as Socially Constructed Categories Sociological ethnicity and race theories have been dictated by the social construct metaphor, which indicates that these theories are ideological groups that serve to conceal the actual social structural principles. The above notion is a problematical one as it ignores the context wherein ethnicity and race function as bases of social significance as well as working material exclusion principles (Smaje, 1997). While gender and sex are words that are frequently employed interchangeably, their meanings are, in fact, different.

Sex represents a categorization on the basis of biological dissimilarities -- for instance, dissimilarities between females and males grounded in their physiology or anatomy. On the other hand, gender represents a categorization on the basis of the societal creation and preservation of cultural differences between females and males. That is, gender denotes a social concept pertaining to culture-bound conduct, rules, and roles for, and relations among and between, men and women, girls and boys (LM & DG, 2006).

Graphic showing diversity in people -- by color, race, ethnicity and gender (Source: Pixabay.com; free image, no attribution needed) Gender Identities According to researchers, ethnic, racial, gender, class and sexual identities are personalized, flexible, and complex social constructions reflecting a person's socio-historical group and present context. But hardly any empirical studies encapsulate the abstract, richly textured ideas of identity formation, retention and transformation. There are now advanced techniques to evaluate individual identity structures and content.

Analyses in the future ought to take into account other groups besides kids or college-goers, delve into other identity functions besides adaptation, wellbeing or self-confidence, and apply longitudinal practices capable of evaluating the multiple social identities of individuals. The definition provided by Richard Ashmore (R., 1990) for the term gender identity is: Gender identity denotes the structured collection of personal gendered identities ensuing when a person integrates biological sex-related information and gender's social construction into an inclusive self-concept.

This facet encompasses social and personal traits, talents, hobbies, social relationships, material/physical/biological characteristics, and stylistic and symbolic behaviors. The gender identity of a person differs from gender attitudes and sex stereotypes held by the person. The model proposed by Ashmore is especially helpful in defining every potential element of the gender psychology of people. Furthermore, relationships between various elements may be assessed through presently existent measures of conduct, principles, and qualities (Frable, 1997). Social constructionists are of the view that gender identity emerges from organized, social constraints.

Personal conflict is considered fairly absent in gender identity attainment by scholars belonging to every sub-discipline of psychology (for instance, clinical, social-personality, developmental, etc.). But some people rebuff gender's current social classification system, electing to modify their relation to it, thereby essentially redefining their respective gender identities. There are two models which can help explain the above revision, one of which deals with feminist identity formation, with the other describing a switch from external to internal gender standards (Frable, 1997).

Racial and Ethnic Identities Ethnicity represents a multifaceted social construct impacting personal identities and social relations in groups. Ethnic grouping schemes, ethnic identity, categorizations in individual systems, and the effects of assigning people to some or another racial/ethnic group are all context-, place-, and time- specific facets. Racial categorization in America distinctively influences understandings regarding, and expressions of, ethnicity. Race or ethnicity normally calls this aspect to mind.

But it is not clear whether this signals a move away from "ethnicization" or simply proffers faulty racial categorizations to societies whose phenotypic and cultural diversity contest conventional racial categorization. There are numerous ways to define ethnicity. In this paper, it will be described as a multilevel (individual-level, group-level, etc.) context-specific, complex social construct associated with race and employed in distinguishing different population groups as well as establishing group or individual identity.

The social context wherein an individual lives decides whether or not he/she is ethnicized and what factors (for instance, religion, numeric minority, etc.) reinforce this ethnicization. Race/ethnicity is a context-specific element as a collection of common sociocultural features might ethnicize the inhabitants of a particular nation or world region, but might not have any impact on similar inhabitants of another nation or region (Ford & Harawa, 2010). Ethnic groups' social construction shapes both identity formation and social and individual understandings with regard to group similarities and variances.

Collective identity serves to maintain group interests; however, those belonging to a given group might contest how their group defines itself. Leaders might assert a specific factor, say, religion, represents the distinguishing factor for the group, whereas others may believe it to be something else, say, culture. Power dynamics within an ethnic group might play a role in social status discrepancies within the group (for instance, males versus females). Disentangling key intra-group dispute areas can shed light on intra-group hierarchies, thus facilitating the identification of weaker subpopulations.

Individual identity forms the most salient ethnicity influence on the individual level. Ethnic identity development represents a developmental procedure molded by social contexts wherein it transpires and is different for people from majority and minority groups (Ford & Harawa, 2010). Conclusion Ethnicity denotes a multilevel, complex and context-specific social construct. Racialization in America firmly supports ethnicity-linked social systems and exposures. The relational ethnicity facet is introduced for shifting focus from attribution of health disparities to sociocultural features, whilst promoting more precise research into the linkages.