category imposed on human experience, but a fluid one whose meaning emerges in

specific social contexts as it is created and recreated through human actions" (p. 317).

 West and Zimmerman's (1987) concept of "doing gender" captures the

interactional nature of constructing gender. These theorists asserted that gender is not an

isolated characteristic of individuals, but rather is a social enterprise becoming both "an

outcome of and rationale for various social arrangements" (p. 126). They noted the act of

"doing gender" requires an understanding of what constitutes gender-appropriate

behavior, which varies across time and context. Despite the fact that individuals must

often purposefully mold their behaviors to be deemed gender-appropriate, "doing gender"

creates an illusion that gender differences are natural and inherent. As such, "doing

gender" allows imbalanced societal patterns and institutions to appear as if they are only

reflecting the natural and essential differences between the sexes. West and Zimmerman

(1987) contended gender done "appropriately" legitimizes these societal patterns and

institutions, whereas gender done "inappropriately" calls into question the individual, not

the institution.

 Although this concept of "doing gender" provides a helpful understanding of how

individuals actively create gendered behavior, the framework can over-focus on the

individual's relationship with society or culture while not focusing enough on the

influence of personal relationships (Fox, 2001). Individuals do not simply "do gender."

They "do gender" in various forms and have varying responses to its practice. They also

"do gender" in the context of relationships. Significant others play a particularly

important role in this process because they may support a person's way of "doing gender"

or argue against it. Significant others may persuade or coerce a person into a different