Nature vs Nurture

Nature versus nurture is a common debate.  Are we the way we are because of our genetic material or because of the environment in which we grew up?  Hubbard and Dobson have different opinions on this subject.  Hubbard believes that we are socially constructed; whereas, Dobson believes we are the product of biology.  Hubbard states that women and men are not born women or men but become women or men.  Hubbard believes that people are trying to fit into society’s interpretation of what is the norm.  She feels that women and men are fulfilling these predetermined lives.  Boys are taught to play with action figures, and girls are taught to play with dolls.  As an aside, that didn’t work out for me.  I played power rangers and ninja turtles, and I hated barbies.  Hubbard says that there is more overlap in the height, weight, and strength of men and women than we realize.  She thinks that the differences between men and women in these areas are due to the types and proportions of foods that men and women eat.  Many social factors, such as diet, exercise, and stress, contribute to the ways in which we develop.  Society’s view of what is beautiful pressures men and women to conform to these ideal shapes and sizes.  On the other hand Dobson shows proof that there are biological differences between males and females.  He states that males and females differ anatomically, sexually, emotionally, psychologically, and biochemically.  Some of the differences include the way the brain is wired and the way hormones are secreted such as during menstruation.  He argues that women are more future-oriented because they are concerned for their children.  Personally, I don’t think we can say that biology determines gender roles or biology does not determine gender roles.  We are a combination of nature and nurture.  Understanding human behavior is far more complicated than I think we, as humans, will ever be able to understand.  No one fits the cookie-cut mold of what a male or female is suppose to be like.