Symbolic Interactionism and Gender

1. The first premise says that people behave towards ‘things’ on the basis of the meanings which these things have for them. ‘Things’ here encompasses everything which a person is capable of perceiving in his or her world – physical objects such as trees or chairs; other people such as a mother or a salesperson; categories of people such as friends or enemies; institutions such as school or government; ideals such as individual independence or honesty; other people’s actions or wishes; and such situations as the individual encounters in his or her daily life.
2. The second premise says that the meaning of such things is derived or arises from the social interaction in which one engages with his or her fellow humans.
3. The third premise says that these meanings are dealt with and altered in an interpretive process which the person uses in his or her engagement with those things which he or she encounters” (Blumer 1973: 81).

The (possible) modification of acquired meanings is equally a learning process which can occur as anticipatory in thinking (Rose)

One of the most notable criticisms of the theory is that it focuses on almost entirely on the small scale face to face interactions and seems to ignore notions of structure and constraints. Nobody can consider the society to be fiction and here large scale interaction takes place. Only in this broader perspective can we understand the interaction of different genders in the social situations and judge the feminist concerns. Therefore, greater provision for larger scale of social interaction needs to be incorporated in the approach. In the same way, this theoretical perspective fails to conceptualise power in the background for its concerns. It is mainly because it is linked to a notion of social structure. The point that interests us is that the approach “tends to imply that ‘society’ results from some sort of consensus achieved through interaction, but also – since we do not come into an empty world – through learning how to interact and the rules for interaction through social interaction.” (p 532, Sociology in Perspective, By Mark Kirby, Heinemann: 2000)

Fine (1993): “The shared interests of interactionists and feminist researchers emphasize the gendered’ quality of self – that is, self is not biologically given, but is created from social demands learning about the “significant other” and the “generalised other” (Mead),
Learning steps in play and games processes
Balance between “social identity” and “personal identity” (Goffman)

Cooley: The primary group is “primary in several senses, but chiefly in that they are fundamental in forming the social nature and ideals of the individual” (Cooley 1962b: 145).
The primary group is the group which first puts its stamp on behaviour in the socialisation process, so normally the family in which one grows up, later one’s S.I. and emotions
There are basic human instincts such as self-assertion, subjugation or fear (Mead).

Emotions are shaped through socialisation

Feeling rules (Hochschild)

Capabilities of role behaviour are empathy, tolerance of ambiguity, and role distance* (Krappmann)
* Two things are meant with ‘role distance’: Firstly the ability, to consider oneself and one’s role critically from outside and from a distance, so to say with the eyes of others. On the other hand it can also be a medium to create a distance to demands of others on one’s role, which one considers as status inadequate or unreasonable.

(Symbolic Interactionism, Gender Differences in Adolescent Sexual Attitudes: The Influence of Individual and Family Factors, Journal article by Ronald Jay Werner-Wilson; Adolescence, Vol. 33, 1998) Role distance is one important aspect of the Symbolic Interactionism. Gender roles and their distance can be analysed by the approach. “For Goffman, the purpose of “everyday life” performances is precisely the normalizationof appearances with regard to social standards; it is therefore only when the performance is “interrupted” — i.e., when the illusion is thwarted — that the dependence of the front-stage appearance on back-stage preparations becomes apparent. The presentation of self-sufficiency, autonomy, and universality by the modern individual is compromised should he be seen while burdened with the menial tasks of office maintenance or household life. Thus, the wife stays at home, the janitor only comes in at night, and the “self-made man” is free to engage in his “higher” purposes.” (Brian Milstein, Moral Critique and Symbolic Interaction: Augmenting Tronto’s “Ethic of Care”)

It is also noticeable that the social roles of women as interpreted in the modern society can be studied with the help of Symbolic Interactionism. “Symbolic interaction, part of the social behaviorism views of sociology, is concerned with how culture influences people’s learning and considers where learning takes place… Contemporary critics suggest that people’s interpretation of the environment is based on communications, including advertising. What people know of the world is based on their prior experience, including indirect experiences from communications. These communications guide people in their everyday lives in their concept of self, their roles, situations, and expectations. Portrayals of men and women in mass media help create and maintain images of each gender.” (Women in Advertisements across Cultures, Pamela K. Morris)

Primary reference groups (e.g. family) and secondary reference groups (neighbourhood, colleagues).