Social psychology is the study of the influence of the genuine, obscure, and the anticipated presence of an individual on the emotions, contemplations, and actions of another. This essay highlights the concept of androgyny and its benefits in the society, and describes situations where an androgynous individual might be suited than either a masculine or feminine individual.
We will write a custom Assessment on The Concept of Androgyny and Its Benefits in the Society specifically for you
807 certified writers online
The term Androgyny is derived from two Greek terms, Andras (man) and Gyne (woman). Therefore, an Androgynous individual is endowed with the female and male characteristic traits. Being an Androgyne in today’s society is difficult because one is viewed as an outcast.
If people had a better understanding of what androgyny really is, they might not be so quick to judge. An androgyne is a person who exhibits traits, which are both masculine and feminine. These traits could be either physical or mental or even both. The society should be blamed for assuming that the male and female groups are the only genders.
Some of these beliefs are attributed to the influence of the western culture, which disregards the existence of Androgynous individuals in the society. However, in other cultures, the situation is a little different. Gender is not a choice to be made because it is part of what and who individuals are in various societies. Therefore, there is the need to accept the existence of more than two genders in the society and live with that fact in mind.
Society would be functional and better if more people were androgynous rather than being either masculine or feminine because they have a different perspective towards life. They are able to see things from both male and female perspectives. This benefits the society in the sense that they can perform duties from both sides, and this helps to save labor, time that the society cannot afford mainly because their characteristic traits have no gender value (Bem 114).
There are no specific situations where an androgynous individual might be better suited than either a masculine or a feminine individual (Bem 115). Bern (115) notes that a person has to be either feminine or masculine but not both. It all depends on the situational appropriateness of various behaviors. Individuals are limited in the range of behaviors available to them as they move from one situation to another.
The Bern Sex Inventory theory distinguishes the sex typed person as someone who has internalized society’s sex typed standards of desirable behavior for men and women and these characteristics were selected as masculine or feminine based on sex typed social desirability. Masculine males are thus good in situations that call for instrumental orientation focusing on getting the job done.
Since the BSRI was designed to measure the extent to which a person divorces himself from those characteristics that might be considered appropriate for the opposite sex, masculinity and femininity scales were used to determine situations that someone is only capable of masculine behaviors.
A personality characteristic qualified as masculine if both males and females in both samples independently judged it. The masculine sex role represented rejection of female attributes and it is here that masculine behaviors are more appropriate (Bem 116).
Feminine females are good in settings where concern for the feelings of others is important. Similarly, a personality characteristic qualified as feminine if both males and females judged it to be significantly more desirable for a woman than for a man.
Feminine behaviors were appropriate when the females rejected men attributes. Females are known to be more expressive and are more concerned with the welfare of others. In such situations where the community is involved, they tend to be part of it. Females are more concerned with the society as a whole because they believe that it is within their reach (Bem 116).
Some images that are shown by the media can make some individuals to appreciate what they see rather than what is real. Research studies indicate that when an individual is obsessed with the attractive images, there is the possibility that one will loose the psychological attachment with others in the society.
This is because one tends to think that there is a variety of people out there and this makes one to lack the appreciation of what one has and desire what is attractive in other people. In the case of men, exhibiting visions of beautiful women, this can make them to think that their partners are less physically attractive and this can lead to divorce and separation. The images can make people to imagine that there are numerous attractive people in the world apart from those near them (Levine 157).
A pool of alternatives gives the perception that one cannot settle when there are great people out there. Even when it is well known that the women on magazines cover are supermodels, some people still adore them in the sense that they will end up dressing like them. This is one way of not appreciating who one really is and what one really has but instead desire to be like others in the world of dreams.
Get your first paper with 15% OFF
The ultimate implication of the influence of the media on different individuals is that it destabilizes marriage besides making many young men to stay unmarried for long. They prefer staying single blaming the media of their infatuation with the young and beautiful images it displays everywhere. A research carried out by Kanazawa found out that most divorce cases happen because one or the other spouse is dissatisfied with their mate (Levine 159).
In conclusion, androgynous individuals should be accepted in the society since they are also human beings and the only difference is their characteristic traits. Whether one is gay, transsexual or Androgynous, it is imperative that the society accords them the freedom they deserve whenever and wherever.
Bem, Sandra L. The Measurement of Psychological Androgyny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42(1974): 155-62.
Levine, Michael. Why I Hate Beauty. Psychology Today. July 2001. 19 August, 2010 <https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/articles/200107/why-i-hate-beauty>.