be eradicated by cultural change, unlike biological differences which were seen as immutable, the exposure of gendered or sociaHy constructed differences was an effective strategy for defying male dominance. For feminist lawyers the distinction between sex and gender assisted in exposing how these assumptions were also embedded in the structure and logic of law. The sex/gender distinction gave to nse attempts to ascertain which differences were biological and which were sociaL Some feminists argued that most of the differences between men and women which institutions like the law regard as natural or 'given' are, in fact, sociaHy construed and therefore subject to change. From this proceeds the argument either that women could behave like men, or that men could be socialised to behave more like women. Bartky, for instance, argues that even the typicaUy female body, generaHy regarded as 'natural', is produced by three types of social practice: 4 105. The statement made in paragraph 11 of the Respondents' Affidavit is based on stereotypes, Messrs E. Bonthuys and Cathrine Albertyne stated as follows at page 26:~ "Stereotypes contain both descriptive and normative elements - they describe how certain people are, but also prescribe how they should behave5 • The belief that stereotypes reflect 'natural' or biological differences between men and women translates into a view that behaviour which defies stereotypes 4 5 The Feminine Body in Jaggar & Rothenberg (eds) Feminist Frameworks 454, 455. O'Sullivan 'Stereotyping and Male Identification: 'Keeping Women in their Place"' 1994 Acta 547 549-550. Page 33 of 46 Applicant's Heads of Argument in the matter between: Love ness Mudzuru & Another v Minister of Justice Legal & Parliamentary Affairs & 2 Others Case Number CCZ 79/2014 Prepared by Tendai Biti Law