The Making and Breaking of Gender Stereotypes in Young Children
Abstract
From the moment most of us are conceived, our gender plays a definitive role in our
lives. Parents eagerly wait to find out the sex of their child, many choosing to find out before
birth. For some, this is just a natural curiosity, but many begin planning their child’s life
immediately after gender is revealed. If it’s a girl, her nursery is pink and glittery, with
butterflies and flowers and lots of sparkly stuffed animals. She’s wrapped in a pink blanket, a
pink pacifier is stuck in her mouth, and soon she’s wearing bibs that blare “Daddy’s Little
Princess.” The baby has no ability of choice or free will at this point, but her parents have
decided her interests and likes for her. If the baby is a boy, the parents decorate the room with
blue furniture and buy trucks and cars. They plan for a noisy, raucous child that will be a
headache at times. Fathers dream of teaching their sons football, and mothers buy dolls upon
dolls upon dolls for their daughters. Thus, gender stereotypes are enforced even before the child
is born. The gender stereotypes, from even seemingly harmless sources like clothing, toys, and
media, can result in negative changes to children’s self-worth and self-esteem. Gender role
stereotypes are even more harmful. Not only do they limit the child’s self-expression, but they
influence the child’s major life decisions, such as career and relationship choices. My research
paper explores how gender stereotypes form in the minds of children, and how they can be
destructive to a child’s identity and relationships with others around them.
The child is never asked what they want with their Happy Meal. Instead, one glance at
the child apparently makes it clear which one they would like. Barbie for the girl, Hot Wheels
car for the boy. Simple, right? Part of the reason we make these assumptions is that it just makes
things simpler. Gift-shopping is a lot easier when you can just take a sharp right turn into the
boys’ aisle and grab the first Nerf gun off the shelf, or pick off a play kitchen from the girls’
section. Compartmentalizing people is something that comes almost natural to us: but the
consequences can be dire for the child’s self-identity and development, and the nature of his/her
relationships with others. These gender stereotypes, or sets of expectations about how an
individual should behave, look, and dress, are formed from a very early point in a child’s life.
Regina Hughes, Professor of Psychology at Collin College, notes that children are very “spongelike in their curiosity and desire to learn about their world”, and subtle messages from toys,
clothing, media, parents, teachers, and peers will affect the way they view themselves and
everyone around them.
Although this paper is not focused on the complicities between gender and sex, it is
important to understand the background behind gender itself. So what part of a human’s gender
is based on biology? The answer is only two aspects: hormones and chromosomes. Hormones,
chemical substances that are secreted throughout your body by various glands, affect different
parts of the body in different ways for males and females. Some say that because testosterone,
which affects male bodies, was believed to cause aggression due to a study on rats in 1966
(Young), it has the same effects on human males. This study was done in a lab, however, which
allows for very low ecological validity, and it did not have operationally defined variables or
properly researched procedure. The scientists attempted to give a female rat some male
hormones and hastily concluded that male hormones cause boys to be more belligerent and
aggressive. Since then, however, numerous biologists have completely destroyed the credibility
of this study: the results on rats cannot be used to draw conclusions about humans, when the rat
genome, at “approximately 2.75 billion base pairs.... is much smaller than the human genome,
which is 2.9 billion base pairs.” (NIH). When it comes to something as intricate as DNA, a few
million base pairs can definitely make a difference. Although rodents are often used in medical
research because it appears that their genes do similar tasks to what those human genes do, these
tasks are quite different (Test Tube). The other half of the biological aspect involves our
chromosomes, or the 23 pairs of biochemical heredity that determine much of our physical
characteristics: but not much of our personality. Biological sex is determined by the 23rd pair,
and the arrangement of X and Y chromosomes.
A biosocial approach to gender is often adopted by many in the field of psychology.
Many of our stereotypes derive from a deterministic approach, in which one believes that men
and women are defined by the biology inside them and cannot control the choices they make;
holding a deterministic approach would mean that one believes women have a natural nurturing
tendency and men have a natural career-driven personality. John Money and Anke Ehrhardt
developed the biosocial approach in 1972. The basic idea of this approach is that both nature and
nurture play a role in gender development; that is, that once a biological male or female is born,
their development is steered and shaped not just by biological factors, but by social stereotypes,
stigmas, labeling, etc as well. This approach basically promotes the theory that gender is not just
biological sex; a lot of it comes from the environment around you. (Hint: gender stereotypes are
also a huge part of the environment around us)
Psychologically and neurotically, there is little proven difference between males and
females. The “Big Five” personality traits (openness, conscientiousness, extraversion,
agreeableness and neuroticism), which are often used in the psychological field to describe a
person’s behavioral traits, do not vary based on the sex of the person being tested, according to
Bobbi Carothers who conducted a study published in the Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology .
Cognitive-developmental and information-processing models portray that children
acquire gender stereotypes in three stages. First, they become aware of the two sexes and are able
to make some distinction between them. Next, they begin to become aware of certain
characteristics or traits that they can differentiate between known members of the sexes. Finally,
knowing these differentiations causes them to adopt many of the traits associated with their
identified gender. However, according to Mischel’s social learning position (Mischel, 1966),
children acquire stereotypes from an early age (perhaps even infancy) due to reinforcement and
modeling within the environment they are raised in. Only later do they distinguish the two sexes
and associate certain characteristics with males and females.
Notice that both these timelines don’t actually name any ages of the children that are
affected by the stereotypes. Some studies conclude that the stereotypes can manifest themselves
in children under three years (Kuhn, Nash, and Brucken, 1978; Thompson, 1975). However,
there are still some questions that remain concerning the specific timeline.
Studies have shown time and time again that from a very early age, children begin to
develop stereotypes about familial roles. This is often a result of the roles they observe around
them, and leads them to adopt the same roles in their families later on. Gender roles and
stereotypes affect interaction between family members. One of the most prominent examples is
the division of household labor based on gender. Chores such as mowing the lawn and taking the
trash out are often given to the boys and men of the household, while washing the dishes or
laundry is attributed to the girls. Overall, the caring for children, is considered the woman’s
priority (Walzer, 2001). Women are also often responsible for the household work, and some
studies think that being assigned the bulk of the work in the family contributes to the lower
marital satisfaction reported by women (Walzer, 2001).
How far does the parental influence on gender roles extend in young children? The
family unit is a strong starting point for most children, and sometimes the primary place for
children to develop gender stereotypes. Parents and children, especially the younger kids, tend to
have very similar ideals and values. The strong bonds between most parents and young children
allow for easy transmission of the parents’ values, beliefs, and interests to the children.
Influence from parents can be both intentional and unintentional. In terms of
unintentional influence, stereotypes can be transmitted through the most subtle of gestures. Susan
D. Witt of the University of Akron notes that gender stereotypes are first observed within the
home and then “reinforced by the child's peers, school experience, and television viewing.” From
infancy, parents make the first distinctions between boy babies and girl babies. Parents tend to
dress them in gender-specific colors, give them gender-specific toys, and treat them and expect
them to behave differently (Thorne, 1993.) One study even noted that parents enforce genderrelated stereotypes a mere 24 hours after the child is born (Rubin, Provenzano, & Luria, 1974).
Nowadays, there is technology that reveals the gender of the child in the very early stages of
pregnancy, and this makes the enforcement of stereotypes evens stronger. The parental messages
conveyed are internalized at a young age. One study found that two-year-old children had an
awareness of adult sex role differences (Weinraub, Clemens, Sachloff, Ethridge, Gracely, &
Myers, 1984). Another found that children at that age even applied these stereotypes and were
likely to generalize the stereotypes to a variety of “activities, objects, and occupations” (Fagot,
Leinbach, & O'Boyle, 1992; Cowan & Hoffman, 1986). Another interesting report noted that
children sometimes ignore the stereotypes observed in the home and rely on those gender
expectations enforced by peers and media (Sheldon, 1990).
Parents also influence the interests and preferences of their children as they mature. This
includes toys, chores, and other preferences. Stereotypes in this area lead the children themselves
to make the same generalizations about the people around them. Many parents encourage sextype-related activities for boys and girls; girls are encouraged to play with dolls, dress-up, or
homemaking-related activities, and boys are encouraged to play with trucks or engage in sportsrelated activities (Eccles, Jacobs, & Harold, 1990). Parents also assign gender-specific chores to
their children; boys are asked to take out the trash, while laundry is often attributed to the
daughters. Sometimes, even subtle comments can enforce stereotypes; a mother telling the child
“I can’t fix this- this is your dad’s job!” implies that it is the father’s duty to “fix” things. It may
seem silly or petty, but these comments can heavily impact the child’s self-perception.
Not all influence is unintentional. Some parents resort to ridicule or disapproval when
seeing behaviors that don’t necessarily conform with the stereotypes for the gender that their
child identifies with. A common example of this would be a father who refuses to buy his son a
doll that the son asks for, because the idea of playing with a doll doesn’t conform to recognized
standards of masculinity. Children are hugely impacted by these responses from parents and
authority figures, and often internalize these stereotypes and may, in turn, enforce them on their
peers. Often, the parents use rewards or disciplines to display their support or dislike of
something the child chooses or does. For example, a mother could praise her daughter for
picking flowers for her and admonish her son who did the same. At one Family Fun Night event
I attended at a local elementary school, we applied glitter tattoos for young children. A boy in
kindergarten came up to me with his mother, and asked for a pink tattoo. The mother
immediately stiffened and repeatedly told him to stop choosing pink because he is not a girl and
asked me to apply a boy color.
Parental influence on gender stereotypes is often very heavy in terms of the skills and
abilities of their children. Janis E. Jacobs of the University of Nebraska conducted a study that
was published in the Journal of Educational Psychology in Nebraska, and titled the report
Influence of Gender Stereotypes on Parent and Child Mathematics Attitudes. In this study,
approximately 400 parents and their 6th to 11th grade children were given a questionnaire about
the child’s abilities in mathematics as well as differences in abilities when gender is considered.
Jacobs found that parents’ stereotypes directly vary with the sex of their child and influence the
parent’s view of their child’s abilities. The parent’s beliefs also directly influenced the child’s
self-perceptions and performance. The stereotypes relating to education also correlate to the
career choices the child is interested in. Even subtle gestures from the parents can lead to change
in the beliefs of the child; for example, a child who sees their mother helping with language arts
homework and their father helping with the math homework is likely to adopt certain stereotypes
and attribute excellence in school subjects to genders. In terms of gender, parental beliefs
correlate with parental behaviors, which in turn influence children’s “development of selfconcept, interests, and career goals” (Education.com)
Stereotypes pertaining to career choices can also be independent of parental influence.
Dr. Kathleen Moritz Rudasill and Dr. Carolyn M. Callahan of the National Association of Gifted
Children discuss this in an article published on Education.com. One of the authors, a mother of a
young girl, recalls a moment where the daughter claimed she wanted to be a nurse when she got
older. When questioned as to why she wanted this job, the girl simply said “because I’m a girl.”
The article points out that because the young girl had seen and heard of male doctors and female
nurses, she had automatically come to the conclusion that a nurse was the right career for her.
Gender stereotypes are also plentiful in the school environment. Gender role stereotypes that
schools help to reproduce include the notion that girls are caring, nurturing, quiet, helpful,
considerate of others, and place others' needs before their own. Academically able girls'
achievements are attributed to their hard work, whereas successful boys are considered naturally
gifted. In contrast, underachieving male students are considered lazy, whereas underachieving
girls are regarded as not capable. Many times, boys are viewed as rational, logical, unemotional,
and strong and are also expected to be outgoing, smart, and naturally academically talented.
Stereotypes also influence classroom interactions between teachers and students. Most often, the
males in the class are called on, and male teachers consider their male students to be more
academically talented. Overall, boys are more likely than girls to answer teachers' questions.
Often they call out answers, a risk-taking behavior expected of males, and seek the teacher's
attention. In contrast, girls are more likely to receive criticism rather than praise for such risktaking behavior. Teachers reward girls for being compliant, quiet, and helpful, which are
stereotypic feminized behaviors. There is a huge impact on the course selection of the students.
Science and math are often marketed to boys, while English and reading are emphasized as
valuable for girls. Boys are viewed as less able than girls in reading and the language arts,
subjects that are stereotyped as feminine. In many science classes boys dominate equipment and
relegate girls to roles such as data recorder, reading instructor, or cleaning up the work area.
However, laboratory work can be an important facet of learning science and if girls are
disengaged or relegated to peripheral roles they may not fully focus on the subject matter.
Different forms of behavior are also tolerated for students of different genders. "Boys will be
boys" is a foolish statement that often supports recklessness and violence in young children.
The subtle inequities make all the difference. In high school, girls are much more less likely to
take AP Physics or higher-level math courses than boys, and this begins with some of the
stereotypes they see throughout their life. Similarly, few boys pursue careers that are regarded as
"feminine", or demonstrate interest in language arts or reading. Many males are attributed with
something known as "natural intelligence", which stems from the idea that they are the more
rational and logical of the sexes. When they find themselves failing in an endeavor, it is more
difficult for them to understand what is going on, if they've been told that they are "smart
enough." Studies find that middle- and high-school girls often study and work harder in order to
please somebody other than themselves. In an environment like college, where you're just one
face among many, these girls are left with nothing to motivate them if they are not working hard
for themselves.
Gender stereotypes do not only extend to limitations in careers and activities- they also
stifle the child’s individuality and alter the choices they make at school, at home, and in later
years. Things that seem very petty, like the color of their nursery or the slogan on their shirt all
ascribe a certain set of expectations to the child, quashing his self-identity and freedom to
express himself. The belief in girls liking pink and boys liking blue is just as discriminating as
the belief that boys are doctors and girls are nurses. As an adult, would you like to wear the same
color each day, go home to that same color, and own everything in that one color? Of course not!
Why do we, then, expect little girls to appreciate being swaddled in pink and purple, and dress
young boys in blues and blacks?
Taking a walk into any toy store will open your eyes to a multitude of stereotypes. In
fact, the toy industry is one of the biggest promoter of gender stereotypes. Toys R Us has distinct
aisles for boys and girls, and it’s not difficult to tell which one is which. The girls aisle is almost
entirely pink and purple, with a multitude of dolls, princess clothing, and cooking sets. The boys
aisle is all blue and black, with a variety of ninjas, superheroes, and trucks. From a very early
age, children learn to identify the “gender” of the toy just by looking at the packaging or label
(Social Development). Gender stereotypical toys portray to young children that there is a defined
set of activities, clothing, and interests limited to their gender. This can lead to impacts in school
activities in later years; teenage girls might choose sports or activities considered “feminine” and
boys opt for rougher sports. Most of the masculine gendered toys tend to be associated with
aggression and fighting, like wrestlers, soldiers, or guns. The toys most associated with girls
have to do with fashion or appearance, like Barbie dolls, makeup, jewelry, and ballerina
costumes.(NAEYC) A study conducted by Judith Blakemore, professor of psychology at Purdue
University, found that “girls” toys were associated with physical attractiveness, nurturing, and
domestic skill, whereas boys’ toys were rated as violent, competitive, exciting, and somewhat
dangerous.”(NAEYC) Gender typing leads to an emphasis on qualities that may not actually be
desirable in kids. No parent wants their little girl to be obsessed with her appearance over all- so
why is she given heaps of appearance-related toys? On the other hand, many boys are often
criticized in later years for being overly violent, when their entire childhood was spent with guns,
ninjas, and action figures. It’s true that each type of toy has its benefits, but these benefits should
be equally shared among boys and girls. All children need toys that help them excel in building
things, spatial skills, and motor skills, and also toys that teach them to nurturing and housework
skills.
One of the biggest monsters when it comes to gender stereotyping is labeling, whether it
be through clothing, toys, media, or just spoken word. Some scorn this belief, saying that them
saying “What a strong boy!” to their son does not make a difference in the boy’s life. However,
Rebecca Bigler, a professor of developmental psychology at UT of Austin, has discovered
multiple times that simply labeling a group results in kids developing stereotypes about the
group. A Psychology Today article highlights a study conducted by Bigler very early on in her
career. In this study, half of the teachers were told to use gender to label, sort, and organize the
classroom. They had a pink bulletin board for girls and a blue one for boys; each child’s name
card was written in either pink or blue; and children always lined up boy-girl-boy-girl. The
teachers would say, “The girls are doing a great job today,” or, “The boys are being good
listeners”…..The teachers simply had to “use gender” to sort, label, and classify. In other words,
it was a typical, ordinary classroom. The other half of the teachers in the study was instructed to
completely ignore the gender of their students. They used individual names when referring to
children and always treated the classroom as a whole. There were no comments like, “What a
smart girl," or, “I need the boys to settle down." Instead, they said, “Lauren, you are being a
great helper” or “Tommy, what a good learner you are!” After managing these two classrooms
for four weeks, Bigler discovered that students in the gender-labeling classes developed stronger
gender stereotypes than those in the individual-focused classes. In a matter of just four weeks,
just these simple labels had caused these children to say things like “only men can be presidents
or firefighters.” Many psychologists note that these labels attribute gender to a higher importance
in the child’s mind. Professor Barbara Lusk of Collin College notes that children are not
experienced or knowledgeable enough to challenge what they see or hear, or think critically.
They are simply inferring that because Mommy says often that the baby girl next door is very
pretty, girls must be pretty.
There is work being done to break stereotypes in the toy and clothing area- most of the
successful attempts, however, are in Europe. In Norway and Sweden, many toy companies are
using gender-neutral advertising and labeling. Examples of these are featured below. It’s a little
ironic to note that although many Americans boast of being completely tolerant of everybody,
it’s the foreign advertisers that are doing it right.
Some American toy marketers have tried to make “girl-versions” or “boy-versions” of
popular toys. These alternative versions, however, often spread even stronger stereotypes, say
many. For example, the new Lego ‘Friends’ set has drawn both proponents and opponents. The
set is part of LEGOs new campaign to get girls involved, and features a group of girls in pink
and purple going to cafes and taking care of pets. The packaging definitely screams ‘stereotype’;
it’s all pink, purple, and blaringly ‘girly.’ Some mothers and researchers alike have criticized this
new LEGO set, pointing out that it could possibly be dividing the gender gap further. After all,
only the girls’ toy aisle features the ‘Friends’ set, while the boys’ aisle has many other cool
things to build. Dr. Christia Brown Spears, associate professor of psychology at the University of
Kentucky, however, disagrees. She has studied gender stereotypes for quite some time, and says
in a blog post on Psychology Today that, “girls better learning spatial skills is good, even if the
packaging isn't perfect.” Others who agree say that something like this product is needed as a
gateway to introduce many atypical girly-girls to the world of building and spatial reasoning.
Perhaps if we continue to move forward this way, there will be no gender gap at all in the
packaging in the future.
Media constantly surrounds kids in America: all the time, everywhere. Media of all forms
are widely known to portray stereotypes of all kinds. Mass media has the power to reach people
quickly and enforce beliefs and ideas upon them in the matter of seconds. Mass media not only
gives people information and entertainment, but, according to a Canadian communication
theorist Marshall McLuhan, it also affects people’s lives by shaping their opinions, attitudes and
beliefs Keeping in mind the end goal to make a medium which is general, justifiable and
satisfactory for various and assorted recipients, senders frequently utilize stereotypes, which fill
the social life and bring out specific affiliations. Commercials are one of the most effective ways
in which companies can appeal to audiences, and stereotypes are widely prevalent in them.
Females and males in real life are slowly breaking out of traditional roles in many places;
however, commercials still present females in traditional roles such as housekeeping and
cooking. Young girls are shown playing dolls, shopping, or engaging in other activities
concerned with being popular and beautiful. Boys, on the other hand, are usually outside, doing
something rough or active, and seeking power or action. Research has also proven that
commercials show the full figure of a female, while turning to close-up shots for men
(Matthews, J. L. 2007). According to Debra Pryor and Nancy Nelson Knupfer (1997), “If we
become aware of the stereotypes and teach critical viewing skills to our children, perhaps we will
become informed viewers instead of manipulated consumers”.
Our media landscape has widened — creating new forms and sources of pressure for girls
to look pretty and "sexy," and for boys to toughen up and "act like men." When kids are
introduced to these images in media, it’s difficult to change their views from the rigid ones
portrayed on TV. Television is, in fact, in 96.7% of American homes, making it the most
pervasive form of media. In various advertisements and TV shows, there are multiple gender
stereotypes portrayed, both subtle and glaringly obvious.
The best examples of stereotyping in media for children may be in the “princess
phenomenon” and the “superhero culture.” I interviewed Regina Hughes, who serves as a
Professor of Psychology at Collin College. She says that the princess obsession is faulty for the
main reason that “ultimately, the princess is out there waiting for Prince Charming to come
sweep her off her feet and take care of her.” It might seem subtle, but Professor Hughes notes
that “we have to be careful of those images out there and the long-term effects they subtly have
on young girls.” Another mother, Peggy Ornstein, writes about the “princess phenomenon” in
her book Cinderella Ate My Daughter. She speaks to this whole princess myth and how it really
does a disservice to our young girls to imagine that they can't be independent on their own, that
they can't take care of themselves, and that they're waiting for Prince Charming to come sweep
them off their feet. In “Images of Gender, Race, Age, and Sexual Orientation in Disney FeatureLength Animated Films,” Mia Adessa Towbin and her colleagues from Colorado State
University discuss the portrayals of numerous stereotypical roles in Disney films and the various
conventional images being exposed to children. They state, “Men are depicted as physically
aggressive, non-expressive, and as heroic saviors, particularly of women. Women are portrayed
as beautiful, dependent on men, and engaged in domestic responsibilities” The superhero model
for young boys is another fad that has also been under scrutiny. Study researched Sarah Coyne, a
professor of family life at Brigham Young University, says that the superhero obsession “may be
contributing to what I call the hyper masculinization of American society.” Coyne further
elaborates that this hyper masculinization promotes- perhaps even celebrates- tough and
aggressive behavior, and looks disapprovingly upon boys showing emotion. Unfortunately,
young boys and girls often grow up idolizing these characters and aiming to be more like them,
which some researchers say can lead to lower self-esteem in later years (Bispo)
The negative effects of gender stereotypes are long-lasting. Teenagers often have a
difficult time with themselves, and grapple with their identities. Society has these restrictive
borders and pressures them to be this or that or to do or not do, and the stereotypes make it even
worse. This pressure actually begins from the moment a child is conscious and aware of his/her
surroundings. Even at the young age of 3, when the child only knows around 200 words, the
child begins to make connections about everything around him/her. Their peers, elders, and the
media that they are exposed to all influence the connections they are making. Biases that they
hear or see often have profound impacts on themselves. Even simple things, like withholding a
boy from choosing a doll as a toy or not exposing girls to trucks and ninjas create a genderstereotype-filled culture that the child is practically bathing in. This culture is the child’s identity.
Dr. Christia Brown Spears mentioned in an email to me that she believes that the stereotypes
young children are exposed to are related to “girls and women having such bad body image (70%
of girls are unhappy with their body after age 12), being more likely to have eating disorders,
girls having higher rates of depression and anxiety, being the victim of domestic violence….for
boys, it is related to higher rates of violence and aggression, higher rates of suicide (because they
can’t deal with sadness and aren’t “supposed” to ask for help), men being uncomfortable with
their babies, and having trouble communicating with their wives.”
Furthermore, stereotypes provide as a framework for how the child develops relationships
with his/her peers, especially as they near adolescence. During this time, “...girls feel pressure,
from both media and peers, to be sexual objects who are pretty and compliant. Boys feel pressure
to sexually pursue…..those girls.” (Spears, 2014) A Vogue India advertisement released in
October of 2014 took it as far to say that telling a young child “boys don’t cry” is stifling his
emotional outlet and can lead to abusive relationships. Raising boys to be tough and dominant,
and girls to be the homemakers and the pretty things to look at can lead to domestic abuse: after
all, why wouldn’t a husband feel like he has control over his wife when that’s what he’s been
taught since Day 1?
In summary, gender stereotypes can stem from the smallest and subtlest of messages sent
to young children by parents, teachers, siblings, clothing, toys, and the media. They have longterm effects and can shape who we are as a society and what we achieve. In boys, stereotypes
relating to masculinity lead to violence and aggression in teenage boys, and may even be traced
to domestic abuse in later years. In girls, stereotypes relating to feminine behaviors lead to the
sexualization of teenage girls and young women, and major body image issues. Gender
stereotypes relating to careers can determine the jobs that the young people in our community
choose, and their self perception and family life. Kids around us don't have the freedom to be
who they want to be. Gender stereotypes aren't ever supposed to limit you, and neither is the
basic ideal behind my project. It's okay for a girl to love princesses and pink, or for a boy to
obsess over Power Rangers and trucks- gender-neutrality is about giving the kids the freedom to
be who they want to be, not what society tells them to be. Stereotypes also matter because of the
plain and sad fact that kids are bullied when they stray from the standards of the stereotype of
their gender. Vicious examples of this are in the newspaper, such as when twelve-year-old Ronin
Shimizu took his own life last year for being bullied about being a male cheerleader. As parents,
siblings, and educators, you have a responsibility to stop this cycle of hatred by enforcing antistereotypical views by way of "talking the talk" and "walking the walk."
Bibliography (to be updated)
Brown, Christia Spears. Parenting beyond Pink and Blue: How to Raise Your Kids Free of
Gender Stereotypes. Berkeley: Ten Speed, 2014. Print.
Theories of Gender Development. (n.d.). Retrieved January 25, 2014, from
http://www.uni.edu/kopper/outlines2005/Theories_of_Gender_Development.htm
Hendrix, K.G., & Wei, F.F. (2009 ). Gender differ- ences in preschool children’s recall of
competitive and noncompetitive computer mathematics games. Learning, Media and
Technology, 34(1), 27-43.
Scantlebury, K. (2006). Gender. In K. Tobin (Ed.), Teaching and learning science: A handbook
(pp. 201–206). Praeger Publishing.
Macsai, D. (2013, March 25). Play Without Stereotypes. Time, 181(11).
Eccles, J. S., Jacobs, J. E., & Harold, R. D. (1990). Gender role stereotypes, expectancy effects,
and parents' socialization of gender differences. Journal of Social Issues, 46, 186-201.
Carothers, B. J., & Reis, H. T. (2012, October 22). Men and Women Are From Earth: Examining
the Latent Structure of Gender. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.
Carter, D. C. (1987). Current conceptions of sex roles and sex typing: Theory and
research. New York: Praeger.
Cowan, G. & Hoffman, C. D. (1986). Gender stereotyping in young children: Evidence to
support a concept-learning approach. Sex Roles, 14, 211-224.
Davies, B. & Banks, C. (1992). The gender trap: A feminist poststructuralist analysis of primary
school children's talk about gender. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 24, 1-25.
DeLucia, J. L. (1987). Gender role identity and datingbehavior: What is the relationship? Sex
Roles, 17, 153-161.
Etaugh, C. & Liss, M. B. (1992). Home, school, and playroom: Training grounds for adult
gender roles.Sex Roles, 26, 129-147.
Fagot, B. I., Leinbach, M. D., & O'Boyle, C. (1992). Gender labeling, gender stereotyping, and
parenting behaviors.Developmental Psychology, 28, 225-230.
Hargreaves, D. & Colley, A. (1986). The psychology of sex roles. London: Harper & Row,
Publishers.
Haslett, B., Geis, F. L., & Carter, M. R. (1992). The organizational woman: Power and
paradox. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Heilbrun, A. B. (1981). Gender differences in the functional linkage between androgyny, social
cognition, and
competence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 1106-1114.
Henshaw, A., Kelly, J., & Gratton, C. (1992). Skipping's for girls: Children's perceptions of
gender roles and gender preferences. Educational Research, 34, 229-235.
Hoffman, L. W. (1977). Changes in family roles, socialization, and sex differences. American
Psychologist, 42, 644-657.
Kaplan, P. (1991). A child's odyssey. St. Paul: West Publishing Company.
Lauer, R. H. & Lauer, J. C. (1994). Marriage and family: The quest for intimacy. Madison:
Brown & Benchmark.
Lewis, M. & Rosenblum, L. A. (1974). The effect of the infant on its caregiver. New York:
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Lundy, A. & Rosenberg, J. A. (1987). Androgyny, masculinity, and self-esteem. Social
Behavior and Personality, 15, 91-95.
Lytton, H. & Romney, D. M. (1991). Parents' differential socialization of boys and girls: A
meta-analysis.Psychological Bulletin, 109, 267-296.
Maccoby, E. E. & Jacklin, C. N. (1980). Psychological sex differences. In M. Rutter (ed.)
Scientific Foundations of Child Psychiatry. London: Heineman Medical.
Martin, C. L., Wood, C. H., & Little, J. K. (1990). The development of gender stereotype
components. Child Development, 61, 1891-1904.
Bailey, S. (1992) How Schools Shortchange Girls: The AAUW Report. New York, NY:
Marlowe & Company.
Sadker, D., Sadker, M. (1994) Failing at Fairness: How Our Schools Cheat Girls. Toronto, ON:
Simon & Schuster Inc.