Explaining Gender
Chapter 3
Theory- a set of principles that helps us organize facts and understand phenomena. It
helps us predict future events more accurately.
Gender typing- process through which individuals acquire the roles, behaviors, and
values that society deems appropriate to our gender. These theories either emphasize
biology & genes or socialization. Although biological theories are presented as more
immutable, early experiences in life become so ingrained they are rarely questioned.
Psychodynamic theories focus on internal, unconscious forces & conflicts that drive
behavior.
Freud and Biological Identity- Freud is known for saying “anatomy is destiny.”
He believed our anatomy determines aspects of our personality. He described infant
sexuality- our innate desires to fulfill sexual instincts. He used the term libido to mean
sexual energy, although later theorists expanded it to mean all life force energy. He also
believed all sexual excitation is connected to erogenous zones, parts of the body
especially sensitive to sexual stimulation. These zones shift in concert with
developmental changes. He believed the phallic stage (3 – 5 years old) was the most
critical stage, as children realize boys and girls do not have the same genitalia. Focus of
children shifts toward the opposite-sex parent. Boys develop the Oedipus complex and
girls develop the Electra complex. There is jealousy toward the same sex parent until the
child realizes the threat inherent if his/her desire is known. Boys experience castration
fears and so shift attention to the same sex parent and attempt to be as much like him as
possible. He adopts the father’s behaviors & attitudes out of a fearful identification. Girls
resent their mothers for not having a penis, since mothers don’t have penises either, and
experiences penis envy – a longing for what she doesn’t have. Girls come to develop a
desire for children as a substitute for the desire for a penis. Since they don’t experience
such a fearful thing as castration, however, they don’t develop as tight an identification
with the mother as boys do with fathers. Freud believed girls are less gender typed than
boys because of this. So Freud believed that anatomical differences set up gender typing.
Gender typing occurs as children identify with the same-sex parent and acquire that
parent’s behaviors and attitudes.
Evaluation- Freud has been controversial in the women’s movement. He can only
explain gender development within a patriarchal context of male as standard. Other
problems with Freudian theory include the lack of testability- falsifiability. Since
awareness of anatomical differences is critical to gender identification at this age,
research has been done to test that. It has found that this age child is not very aware of
genital differences. Boys this age determine sex on the basis of clothing and hair. There is
also no evidence that children at this age lust toward the opposite sex parent. Freud
derived this from listening to adult patients recalling their childhood. These women were
being treated for serious pathologies, yet he generalized from their narratives to all
people. He also did not take seriously their descriptions of being sexually abused as
children, so he did a disservice to his own clients in this respect. But Freud was a fine
observer of behavior and his observations of childhood behaviors have been used by
other researchers to establish other theories of childhood development. He also opened up
the concept of the unconscious, and the importance of early childhood experiences. In
that he was ahead of his time. His problem was the interpretation he offered for his
observations. One must see his theory in the context of Victorian European values. The
common view of women was that they were dependent, weak, not as bright, emotional,
passive, and inferior to men. Read Steinem’s “What if Freud were Phyllis?” essay to see
how deeply ingrained these beliefs are even today.
Post-and Neo-Freudians – Neo-Freudians came after Freud, used many of his
concepts, but differ in their emphasis on social influences on personality.
1. Karen Horney was trained as a medical doctor and psychiatrist, trained with
Freud, but argued against the idea of penis envy. She suggested men experience womb
envy – that males denigrate women and force attention on what women seem to lack
instead of feeling the loss and envy of women’s ability to bring life into the world. She
also believed women didn’t have penis envy, but envied what was associated with having
a penis- power and position in society. She emphasized cultural influences in producing
the common traits ascribed to women. She was the first researcher to point out the flaws
in Freudian theory and the patriarchal focus of his interpretations.
1. Nancy Chodorow diverged from Freud regarding penis envy, suggesting it
arises not from girls’ desire for a penis, but what it represents- the power and control men
have in the world. Her ideas about gender identification were very different from Freudshe believed that since mothers do the lion’s share of child care in the early years, both
boys and girls first identify with mothers. To acquire a masculine identity, boys must use
mothers as a negative model. They will devalue feminine qualities and repress the
attachment they have felt toward the mother. Boys must see themselves as separate and
distinct from others- to move to a positional identity- defined by men’s position in the
structure in society. Girls do not experience this same wrenching choice. They can
continue to identify with the mother- so they develop a relational identity- one based on
connectedness and building relationships with others. So women learn better to care for
others and develop a richer emotional life, as they are more willing to focus on others.
Social-Learning and Social-Cognitive Theory- Bandura developed social-learning
theory as he recognized how environmental factors shape behavior. It was revised to add
the cognitive element to reflect children’s active role in their own socialization.
Social Learning theory- we acquire gender identity the way we acquire all
behaviors- through observation, imitation, and differential reinforcement. So they
look around and choose who and what to observe, and as they imitate behaviors they get
reinforced or ignored or punished for that imitation. Not only do they get reinforced
themselves, they observe others being reinforced and learn from that. There is also
differential reinforcement in different contexts. So we may learn to behave one way at
school, another way at home, etc.
Reinforcement and Imitation
Society is powerful in reinforcing and shaping traditional gendered behaviors. Even
young peers make comments if a child is behaving counter the stereotype. Role models
behave in gender stereotypical ways, and children model those behaviors. Children
actively choose the models that seem most typical, so even if a parent behaves against the
stereotype, the child may not take that in as much as the other stereotypical models s/he
sees around. Parents also offer feedback according to stereotype in many ways. Fathers
particularly shape boys’ behaviors more stereotypically than mothers do. Mothers talk
more with daughters and use more emotionally based language with daughters than with
sons. Overall parents treat children very similarly, except in the area of encouraging sextyped activities, toys, and in chores. As early as 12 months parents will begin to
reinforce toy choices that are gender stereotypical. They more often buy gender
stereotypical toys for children. They show more enthusiasm for play/ toys that are
stereotypical. Mothers are less stereotyping, but fathers send strong messages to boys
regarding play of a girlish nature. The gender-typed script is in place by the end of
toddlerhood.
Evaluation- while this theory seems to explain a lot in gender typing, it doesn’t
explain everything. Strongly gender-typed parents do not have strongly gender-typed
children particularly. Parents’ actions (how much their reinforce gender-typed behaviors)
are related to children’s understanding of gender, however. It also doesn’t explain why
children will behave in ways they have been explicitly reprimanded for. Children may
persist because they believe society approves of these behaviors, even if parents do not.
Some act in the face of parental disapproval, as if it is reinforcing, not punishing.
Children also do not always mimic same-sex models- it depends on if the model is
perceived as having power. Also parents may treat girls and boys differently because the
children themselves react differently- boys enjoying rougher play and girls shying away.
The social-cognitive theory adds the idea that cognitive forces also shape gender
roles. While children can display behaviors of both roles- they learn the behaviors- but
they choose which behaviors will be most accepted socially. They internalize genderlinked standards, and even reward themselves (or shame themselves) for behaving
appropriately as they understand it. If boys have no toys but girl toys to play with, they
will play with them, but they use them differently than girls. (Barbies as swords)
Cognitive Theories consider how we think about gender, and how those thoughts
influence how we behave.
Cognitive-Developmental Theory – this theory links children’s understanding of
gender to their general cognitive understanding. First they must understand gender as a
concept, then they develop gender-typed behavior. They aren’t passive in this process.
Gender typing and socialization – Kohlberg described the cognitive steps in
developing gender-typed behavior:
1. Gender identity- Labeling oneself as male or female (usually by 3)
2. Gender stability- Knowing one’s gender stays the same across time
3. Gender consistency- Knowing one’s gender stays the same across
situations (not usually developed until after 5)
Complete gender constancy occurs when children recognize that biology
determines gender and it can’t be changed at will. Once they have constancy, they value
same-sex activities and actively behave the way they think boys or girls should. If they
can’t, they experience disequilibrium which is uncomfortable and motivates change.
Even infants show a preference for same-gender persons by age 2. They are limited to
visual cues, however- appearance or behavior. So gender constancy does not seem to be
necessary to developing gender stereotypes. Two and a half year olds used dolls in
gender stereotypical ways (shaving boy dolls’ faces, putting lipstick on girl dolls)
Dishabituation was shown in children watching adults doing gender inconsistent
behaviors. (Children looked longer at inconsistent behaviors than consistent ones.)
Consistent with Freud’s observations, 3 – 5 year olds show the most rigid gender roles
and they are more rigid for males than females. So culture seems to be the defining aspect
of stereotyping. Boys were more likely to play with boring boys toys than interesting
girls toys once they developed gender constancy.
Gender Awareness in Children- Bem studied gender constancy in 3 – 5 year old
boys and girls and found that 40% understood that changes in appearance do not change
the person’s gender. Those who understood genital differences understood this was more
important than clothes or cultural clues. Some children could understand as young as 3.
Boys particularly did not understand girls’ bodily differences. This particularly flies in
the face of Freudian concepts of Oedipal complex due to recognizing genital differences.
Half the children could not use genitalia to distinguish boys and girls. Children respond
more powerfully to cultural cues than physical ones. Gender seems to be more socially
constructed- and at a very early age.
Gender Schema Theory- we categorize the world at an early age and we use
salient characteristics to categorize- age, race, gender. If we can’t determine gender, it is
disconcerting to us- Pat on Sat. Night Live.
Gender categories- gender schemas are concepts or structures that
organize information held in memory, as well as influence what incoming information is
noticed, remembered, or dismissed. Children engage in simple schema-buildingassociating trucks with boys, dolls with girls. These schemas expand and become more
complex, including personality characteristics- nurture/ care with girls, aggressiveness
with boys. These schemas become filters, allowing stereotypical information in, and
excluding or diminishing countering information. Children remember consistent (with
gender expectations) information better than inconsistent information. Sex forms a basis
for organizing information. It’s a shortcut for ordering memory & recall. Children will
distort incoming information to make it fit their schemas. (Children watching a film about
a male nurse and female doctor misremembered the roles, although when shown a film
about a male doctor and female nurse, they remembered roles correctly.) Also children
are subject to “in-group bias”- children come to associate characteristics common to
their gender as more desirable and those of the other as less desirable. This occurred by
age 5. This theory suggests that culture is so important in forming gender roles, that if the
culture doesn’t change, the thinking about differences won’t change. Part of this has to do
with cultural orientation toward gender is posed as polar opposites- either- or. Children
internalize this polarization and behave accordingly.
Evaluation – this theory is testable, and useful as it posits that culture does
impose powerful influence on gender typing. But children’s knowledge of gender doesn’t
always predict behavior or preferences. Another interesting phenomenon is that initially
girls attach greater value to feminine things, so they behave more stereotypically
feminine. But soon they realize society doesn’t value feminine characteristics as much as
masculine ones, and they may be willing to give up some behaviors or become more
flexible in gendered behaviors. Boys, on the other hand, find their early valuing of
masculine things is reinforced by culture. They will not be as flexible in this areas as
girls/ women.
Social-Role Theory considers factors that maintain gender differences in adulthood.
Structured Social Roles – social roles, the common work and behavior styles of
men and women contribute more to gender differences in adulthood than childhood
socialization or biological differences. (Eagly) She believes that gender differences occur
following early division of labor in our tribes. This was initially based on biological
differences- women had children, so adopted behaviors that most contributed to
children’s welfare and survival. (kindness, helpfulness, sensitivity to others, emotional
expressiveness) Men acted more outside the realm of childcare, developing
characteristics that were more successful there- aggressiveness, independence. Division
of labor leads to differences in skills developed. Different work places and demands lead
to different belief systems. (People in the military gain beliefs about the usefulness of
aggression that leads to justification of aggression. People in counseling, EMTs, see the
destruction due to aggression and develop beliefs that condemn aggression.) These
differences lead to wider gender differences in behaviors & attitudes. One interesting
outcome of this is the recognition that as people fulfill different roles, they also develop
changing beliefs. Seeing opposite gender people in unexpected roles gives them
associations of characteristics of that role. (Male teachers assumed to be more nurturing.)
Evaluation – weakness of the theory is the inability of the theory to account for
initial gender differences except as a result of division of labor.
Feminist Perspectives
Gender as Social Construction – social constructionism means that belief that
gender is constructed, invented through a joint interaction with others. We agree to call
these characteristics feminine, or those masculine. But there is no absolute truth beyond
our agreement about it. Essentialism on the other hand is the belief that gender resides
within individuals & is essential to them as people. It maximizes gender differences.
There is the feminist belief that one’s perspective is unique based on one’s experiences.
A woman who struggled to make it in a man’s world will have a different view of that
world from a man. Likewise, those who give birth and nurture children have differing
views on the value of children to a healthy woman’s development, compared to women
(or men) who do not have children or take care of them. A third feminist theme is that
women’s behavior is consistent with their lack of power in society. Lesser social status
constricts people as they develop. It also confers different skills (servants and women are
more aware of characteristics of more powerful people or men than vice-versa.) So some
commonly assumed traits of women are actually traits of subordinate peoplesubmissiveness, nurture, and sensitivity to needs of others. Even children respond to
commonalities in the culture, being naturally discouraged from taking paths deemed
inappropriate to their sex.
Evaluation- feminists are right in noticing that most explanations of gender
typing are based on androcentric views. It is also true that social messages are not taken
in whole cloth, but processed actively by children as they learn in general.
Critique: How Well Do the Theories Do?
Theories are useful if they help us organize facts, understand events, and even
predict future outcomes. Gender typing is a complex concept including:
1. biological factors
2. activities and interests- toys, play, work, achievement
3. personal-social attributes or personality characteristics
4. gender-based social relationships
5. symbolic content- gestures, nonverbal behavior, language patterns, styles of
play, styles of interacting with others.
Most theorists in this area describe themselves as eclectic- using ideas from multiple
sources to better understand this aspect of our humanity. But we will see in this book, that
for a theory to be useful, it must be able to be useful to all women, not just a narrow
demographic, such as middle class white women. Culture plays a strong part in gendertyped behavior. African American families promote a different feminine model- women
who are aggressive, independent, self-confident, sexually assertive. This is not the same
model promoted in middle class white culture for girls. African American homes also
promote a more egalitarian gender model to children, as the culture is more matriarchal in
some sense. (This can be tracked to historical experiences unique to African American
history- the traditional splitting of the family under slavery.) Minority women have
always assumed different roles in society- such strong roles that their gender is almost
obliterated in some respects. (Sojourner Truth- Ain’t I a Woman?) So most theories are
not only androcentric but ethnocentric. Interestingly, though, as we will see later, since
the women’s movement- even though African American started off with less power in
society, they are making more progress in the workplace than white women are. So some
of the qualities of toughness that helped them survive over the years are now helping
them thrive.