This paper examines the social construction of gender as depicted in the 2003 film Mona Lisa Smile. Drawing on Paula Rothenberg's framework and feminist theory, the paper analyzes how characters at the fictional Wellesley College embody competing gender constructions — conservative, marriage-centered norms on one side and progressive, career-oriented feminism on the other. Key conflicts include art professor Katherine Watson's struggle against institutional conservatism, the firing of a school nurse for dispensing contraception, and student Betty Warren's privileged exemptions rooted in traditional gender roles. The paper argues that the film illustrates how socially constructed gender statuses are taught, enforced, and contested within institutional settings.
The paper demonstrates applied textual analysis: it takes a primary source (the film) and reads specific plot events through the lens of secondary theoretical literature. By quoting both the film's dialogue and Rothenberg's scholarship, the writer bridges popular culture and academic theory — a useful technique in cultural studies and women's studies essays.
The paper opens with a brief introduction stating its thesis, then establishes the theoretical framework for social construction of gender. It moves into a character-by-character analysis of the film, tracing how each conflict illustrates competing gender constructions. A short conclusion synthesizes the argument and returns to the broader implications for women's studies. The structure is linear and straightforward, making it accessible as an undergraduate analytical essay.
An article in The Feminist Agenda points out that a social construction does not simply appear in the natural world; instead, it is invented or created by society. It is developed through "cultural practices and norms," and as it becomes a social construct it may "govern the practices, customs, and rules concerning" the way we understand and use them (Feminist Agenda). The article explains that various social pressures work to "reinforce the idea that gender is a social construction" rather than some "essence" that originates from biology (Feminist Agenda).
The social construction of gender also means that within each of the two genders there are differences in status, entitlement, language, knowledge, attitude, and goals, among other distinctions. Social statuses are "carefully constructed through prescribed processes of teaching, learning, emulation, and enforcement" (Rothenberg, 2007). Indeed, Rothenberg asserts on page 56 that "gender cannot be equated with biological and physiological differences between human females and males." The "building blocks" of gender are "socially constructed statuses," and that is precisely where gender construction comes into play in Mona Lisa Smile. Social activities, cultural beliefs, and practices eventually distinguish one character's philosophy and goals from another character of the same sex — which is another way of describing the social construction of gender.
Though this film, starring Julia Roberts, Kirsten Dunst, Julia Stiles, and Maggie Gyllenhaal, was not generally well received by critics — some reviewers ridiculed it and others made dismissive comments — it offers compelling examples of the social construction of gender in action.
Katherine Watson (played by Julia Roberts) wages an ongoing battle with an administration far more conservative on social values than she is. Many students are scornful of Watson's California background, and they even regard her lectures on modern art as somehow "subversive." The social construction of gender at Wellesley College in the film is seemingly anchored in the value of marriage: women there are being primed and prepared for marriage, not for careers, and when an instructor like Watson arrives, clashes are inevitable.
Although there is tension and resistance to Watson's values, the plot flows through her character. Watson hears the school president telling students, "A few years from now, your sole responsibility will be taking care of your husband and children." Watson's response to the conservative school president (played by Marian Seldes) is pointed: "I thought I was headed to a place that would turn out tomorrow's leaders — not their wives." It pains Watson that some of the best students turn their backs on careers to marry men who have already begun to cheat on their wives before the wedding. The differences in gender construction throughout the film are vast, yet they are conveyed in an entertaining way.
What Watson is doing is going against the tide at the college — attempting to instill a sense of feminism in her female students against what amounts to an uphill battle. Having a liberal, feminist woman from UCLA teaching art history at one of the most conservative colleges in America sets the stage for sustained conflict. According to critic Roger Ebert, the film would have been "more absorbing" if Watson and her students were "fighting their way together out of the chains of gender slavery" (Ebert, 2003). That is not quite the case, however; it is more like Watson fighting alone to make her points heard at a college where women are asked to take classes in home decoration and table settings.
The concept of feminism that Watson embodies stands in stark contrast to the institutional norms around her. Her insistence that female students deserve the same intellectual and professional aspirations as their male counterparts challenges the deeply ingrained gender construction the college has long enforced. The resistance she encounters — from students, faculty, and administration alike — illustrates how effectively those constructions are maintained through social pressure and institutional authority.
As is apparent throughout this film, gender roles are so vastly different that they necessarily come into conflict with one another. Viewers can take sides and either support the conservative themes emanating from Wellesley College, or support the feminist, more open-minded approach of Katherine, the art teacher. Alternatively, those watching the film can simply approach it as a study in contrasts. But the bottom line, in terms of women's studies, is that institutions like the one portrayed in Mona Lisa Smile exist in the real world — places where instructors with progressive ideas will inevitably clash with the old, established, conservative social construction of gender.
Ebert, Roger. "Mona Lisa Smile [2003]." RogerEbert.com. Sun-Times News Group, June 2003. Retrieved July 30, 2014.
Mona Lisa Smile. Revolution Studios / Columbia Pictures. Directed by Mike Newell, produced by Fredward Johanson. 2003.
Rothenberg, Paula S. Race, Class, and Gender in the United States. New York: Macmillan, 2007.
"The Social Construction of Gender." The Feminist Agenda. Retrieved July 30, 2014, from http://thefeministagenda.blogspot.com. 2009.
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.