Analyzing Sex and Gender Through the Lens of Clothing (ANTHRO342)

This essay, written for an anthropology course, examines the intricate relationship between sex, gender, and clothing. It begins by differentiating between sex (biological) and gender (social construct), referencing Simone de Beauvoir's work. The essay then focuses on clothing, analyzing how sex and gender influence choices, including color, genderization, and eroticization. It discusses the historical shift in color associations (pink for girls, blue for boys), the commercialization of gendered clothing, and the eroticization of women's apparel through the lens of Laura Mulvey's Gaze Theory. The author argues that societal values and commercial interests contribute to how clothing shapes outward appearances and influences identity formation, conforming to or deviating from dominant narratives. The essay provides a comprehensive analysis of how clothing reflects and reinforces societal expectations of sex and gender.

Running head: SEX AND GENDER
SEX AND GENDER
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1SEX AND GENDER
French Feminist Simone De Beauvoir has provided of one of the best specimens for
explaining the difference through her iconic catchphrase “one is not born a woman, one becomes
one” in her celebrated book, titled ‘The Second Sex’. Through the statement she had very clearly
tried to explain the differences between sex and gender. The terms sex and gender have different
meanings in sociological discourses, sex is associated with the biological aspect and gender is
associated with the social aspect of the biological category of sex. The term sex has its basis in
the bodily construct of a particular person, and is denoted appropriately by the biological terms
of male and female. The biological tag of being a male is associated with a certain physical
construct which is different from that of a female and definitely the physical capacities and
capabilities are also different for males as well as for females. The gender is on other hand is a
sociological category which derives its basis and the model of differentiation from the biological
category of sex. The category of gender is associated with certain roles and code of conduct that
one is supposed to fulfill by virtue of being born as a male or a female. Simon de Beauvoir had
opined that it is owing to the roles that women are supposed to play by virtue of being born as a
female and being rendered with physical power less than a male. Hence, the norms of women to
behave in a submissive manner, perform household chores, reproduce, nurture the children and
take care of the family’s daily physical and emotional needs. The men being stronger than
women had to venture out behind the protected sphere of household and fend for the family. The
economic power being the prerogative of the men, they had gained much importance and got the
prerogative of dominating over women, which had been determined both by virtue of the greater
physical force and economic power of a man compared to a woman. Thus that was how the
social construct of a woman has taken place as per the views of Simone de Beauvoir which was

2SEX AND GENDER
essentially rooted in securing the male privilege, hence the women had to mould themselves in a
way which would uphold the male superiority (De Beauvoir 2012).
Having provided a theoretical understanding of the sociological concepts of sex and
gender, the discussion shall now focus on how the sex and gender dynamics work in matters of
clothing, which is supposed to be the thesis statement of this particular essay. In the following
sections the discussion shall be focusing on how sex and gender has influenced the choice of
clothing for men and women, and how has the transformations in the pattern of clothing for men
and women have taken place over the generations. In the following sections, the dichotomy
between male and female clothing shall be explained by means of discussing the choice of colour
for male and female clothing, the genderization of clothing and the eroticization of women’s
apparel shall be discussed.
The popular narrative that is prevalent in the contemporary times that, ‘pink is girls and
blue for boys’ is indicative of social sex and gender expectations. The rule has however been
subject to transformations down the generations. The genderization of clothing based on the
colours blue and pink to tell the gender and sexual identities of the children apart is a 19th century
product before which clothing and colour code for apparels were gender neutral as babies
irrespective of their gender and sex were dressed in white, and similarly. The genderization of
dresses on the basis of the colours blue and pink had commercial underpinnings apart from the
social factors. Until the period upto the Second World War, pink used to be the colour of the men
while blue for the women as per the trade publication of 1918. Pink was considered to be a
stronger colour which was in tandem with the personality of a man while blue was supposed to
be a very delicate colour which matched with the personality of a woman. The children were
socialized right from the outset to follow that code of colour (Paoletti 2012).

3SEX AND GENDER
Pink was considered to be a lighter variant of red, a manly colour, and thus could be
associated with boyhood. Blue was a feminine colour as the veil of Virgin Mary was blue.
However, post Second World War, the transformation of the societal value predispositions had
also led to a change in the commercial strategies which sought to gain the benefits of male
female genderization of clothing. The feminist movements post the Second World War sought to
impersonate male fashion by wearing pink dresses to feel the essence of power and authority as
they were the male prerogatives. Thus the women wore pink to their work place in order to assert
their self, their dominance and thereby reject patriarchal authority. On the other hand, there was
also a baby boom following the Second World War which was a very good opportunity for the
corporate houses dealing in clothing, especially for the children to increase their business
prospects. Back then the pink colour had been successfully associated with femininity and blue
had transformed itself to be the colour of men to break the gender neutrality and mark the sexes
apart and distinct from each other. However the drawback was that the general people were
reluctant to associate pink with femininity and blue with masculinity and even the ones who
bought huge number of dresses for their children, passed it down the generations. Hence a
massive commercial campaign was launched reverse the social order of pink for men and blue
for women was launched in America and that has become the norm which is universally
followed even today (Frassanito and Pettorini 2008).
For corporate gains, the clothing industry has also resorted to eroticization of feminine
clothing in order to gain more business. The gender as sexual connotation is also immanent
herein and that can be explained by providing an account of Laura Mulvey’s Gaze Theory. The
ideal image of a beautiful woman has been shaped by patriarchy in such a way that she has been
socialized to seek validation in being a sex symbol readily and has thus accepted the fact with

4SEX AND GENDER
resignation. The yardstick for measuring the degree of attractiveness of a woman has been
fixated at the amount of skin she exposes, both of which are as determined by patriarchal control
mechanism directly proportional to each other. Hence, adjudging a woman’s beauty and
attractiveness is contingent on the intensity with it awakens sexual feelings in a man’s body
(Mulvey and Rogers 2015).
Thus patriarchal societal value predisposition and the commercial pursuit of gaining the
economic benefits out of it has led to the genderization, sexualization, and eroticization of
clothing. This particular phenomenon has been contributed by a multitude of factors and this
does exert a certain degree of influence on human beings as they want to mould their outward
appearance and shape their personality as per the dominant narrative of conformity and deviance
for greater societal acceptability.

5SEX AND GENDER
References
De Beauvoir, S., 2012. The second sex. Vintage.
Frassanito, P. and Pettorini, B., 2008. Pink and blue: The color of gender. Child's Nervous
System, 24(8), pp.881-882.
Mulvey, L. and Rogers, A.B. eds., 2015. Feminisms: diversity, difference and multiplicity in
contemporary film cultures. Amsterdam University Press.
Paoletti, J.B., 2012. Pink and blue: Telling the boys from the girls in America. Indiana University
Press.