Nature Vs Nurture: Gender Roles?

Question

If gender roles are merely imposed by nurturing, why are they so consistent throughout nature? Of course, there are species where gender roles are reversed, but these are greatly outnumbered by those that support 'traditional' roles. Throughout most of nature, the male protects the females, while the females protect and nurture the offsprings.

If gender roles were merely created by human society, would nature support and/or confirm them so fervantly? Does man think himself greater than nature to correct nature's design? Can man strive against nature and win? Do the species that abide by nature have more wisdom than us?

Answer 1

"If gender roles are merely imposed by nurturing..."
Is that so? Are gender roles merely imposed by nurturing? That's a whole discussion to itself.
I think not.
The male and female brain are different.
As the female is the one to bear children, she is the one 'programmed' to do the nurturing - just in case the male decides to take of and leave her and the baby to themselves... There's plenty of experiments that show that nature plays a pretty big role in things!

And then there's the theory that women do more cleaning because they can see more detail = dirt than men. (Can't remember the exact way it works but women have more of the little stick-thingies that send images to the brain - like having more pixels on your screen). Ah well, although I believe women can see more detail, I'm not too sure if that's why they do the major part of the cleaning... ;-)

Answer 2

You are wrong about "Throughout most of nature, the male protects the females, while the females protect and nurture the offsprings."

Hardly any species have monogamy and family units like we humans do.

In most species, the male abandons the mother right after sex. It is the mother who hunts for food, protects the kids, teaches them how to survive, and kicks them out of the nest when the time comes. Nature is full of single moms.

I repeat... in most species the male abandons the mother right after sex and has nothing to do with the family.

Conclusion: Our modern society is becoming more like nature rather than the other way around.

Answer 3

In fact, "traditional" roles are very complicated and are dependent on the environment and available food resources. Most studies indicate that traditionally men hunt large or mobile game (women with babies couldn't travel so easily) and provide protection for the group (usually protection from other men in neighboring groups, and protection from the environment by means of shelter). The entire community (men and women) cares for the children, with the women having the primary role in this. In many or most environments, women gathered and processed the majority of the food base for the family or group, including hunting or trapping small game. Most women did not spend their day sweeping house, but rather out in the environment gathering roots, berries, seeds, water, and small animals for consumption. Both men and women made tools and crafts. The roles of both men and women varied significantly depending on the survival needs to live in a particular environment. In esse, everyone worked for their survival.

Modern society is a completely novel situation for both men and women, and it is impossible to follow traditional roles: food, tools, shelter, everything we use for survival is purchased rather than obtained in its raw form and processed. Our occupations are completely novel too--many jobs are focused entirely on intellectual skill, and there is no gender bias in who is best at performing these jobs. Humans are very adaptable to new situations, and right now our environment requires us to have a different social organization than, for example, ancient hunter-gatherers in Siberia.

In addition, most species do not have "traditional" roles of the male protecting the female and the female protecting the offspring. Aside from some birds and some primates, I am having trouble thinking of many species at all that follow this pattern (fish?, lizards?, deer?...). Most species are not even monogamous. Different species developed through natural selection by surviving in a niche in their environment. The roles of the parents are determined by the needs of the offspring. Those that have more and heartier offspring have less involvement from the parents (for example, for many insects the eggs are fertilized and left somewhere and that's the end of it), while those with fewer and more helpless offspring (for example, humans) require heavy involvement from both parents (and indeed, the whole community) for survival of the species.

I think it would benefit us greatly if men did see it as their role to protect women--these days the balance seems to be towards exploitation. And I think men and women should see it as their job to protect and nurture children (as has always been the case). However, these roles preclude occupations and the like. Humans are not trying to "correct" anything; they are doing the best they can to survive and flourish in the environment that they were born into. As it is, nature has no rules and no standard other than that successful species survive.

Answer 4

Read Animal Dads by Sneed B. Collard III.

Female lions do most of the hunting.

Male seahorses carry the young.

Male emperor penguins balance the female's egg on their feet for nine weeks while the female searches for food. Once it hatches they both participate in the care and feeding of their young.

Male Hip Pocket frogs accept their young tadpoles into pouches on either side of his legs where they develop until they're ready to hop away.