gender conformity essay

Understanding Gender, Sex, and Gender Identity

It's more important than ever to use this terminology correctly..

Posted February 27, 2021 | Reviewed by Kaja Perina

• The Fundamentals of Sex
• Find a sex therapist near me

Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene hung a sign outside her Capitol office door that said “There are TWO genders: MALE & FEMALE. ‘Trust the Science!’” There are many reasons to question hanging such a sign, but given that Rep. Taylor Greene invoked science in making her assertion, I thought it might be helpful to clarify by citing some actual science. Put simply, from a scientific standpoint, Rep. Taylor Greene’s statement is patently wrong. It perpetuates a common error by conflating gender with sex . Allow me to explain how psychologists scientifically operationalize these terms.

According to the American Psychological Association (APA, 2012), sex is rooted in biology. A person’s sex is determined using observable biological criteria such as sex chromosomes, gonads, internal reproductive organs, and external genitalia (APA, 2012). Most people are classified as being either biologically male or female, although the term intersex is reserved for those with atypical combinations of biological features (APA, 2012).

Gender is related to but distinctly different from sex; it is rooted in culture, not biology. The APA (2012) defines gender as “the attitudes, feelings, and behaviors that a given culture associates with a person’s biological sex” (p. 11). Gender conformity occurs when people abide by culturally-derived gender roles (APA, 2012). Resisting gender roles (i.e., gender nonconformity ) can have significant social consequences—pro and con, depending on circumstances.

Gender identity refers to how one understands and experiences one’s own gender. It involves a person’s psychological sense of being male, female, or neither (APA, 2012). Those who identify as transgender feel that their gender identity doesn’t match their biological sex or the gender they were assigned at birth; in some cases they don’t feel they fit into into either the male or female gender categories (APA, 2012; Moleiro & Pinto, 2015). How people live out their gender identities in everyday life (in terms of how they dress, behave, and express themselves) constitutes their gender expression (APA, 2012; Drescher, 2014).

“Male” and “female” are the most common gender identities in Western culture; they form a dualistic way of thinking about gender that often informs the identity options that people feel are available to them (Prentice & Carranza, 2002). Anyone, regardless of biological sex, can closely adhere to culturally-constructed notions of “maleness” or “femaleness” by dressing, talking, and taking interest in activities stereotypically associated with traditional male or female gender identities. However, many people think “outside the box” when it comes to gender, constructing identities for themselves that move beyond the male-female binary. For examples, explore lists of famous “gender benders” from Oxygen , Vogue , More , and The Cut (not to mention Mr. and Mrs. Potato Head , whose evolving gender identities made headlines this week).

Whether society approves of these identities or not, the science on whether there are more than two genders is clear; there are as many possible gender identities as there are people psychologically forming identities. Rep. Taylor Greene’s insistence that there are just two genders merely reflects Western culture’s longstanding tradition of only recognizing “male” and “female” gender identities as “normal.” However, if we are to “trust the science” (as Rep. Taylor Greene’s recommends), then the first thing we need to do is stop mixing up biological sex and gender identity. The former may be constrained by biology, but the latter is only constrained by our imaginations.

American Psychological Association. (2012). Guidelines for psychological practice with lesbian, gay, and bisexual clients. American Psychologist , 67 (1), 10-42. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024659

Drescher, J. (2014). Treatment of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender patients. In R. E. Hales, S. C. Yudofsky, & L. W. Roberts (Eds.), The American Psychiatric Publishing textbook of psychiatry (6th ed., pp. 1293-1318). American Psychiatric Publishing.

Moleiro, C., & Pinto, N. (2015). Sexual orientation and gender identity: Review of concepts, controversies and their relation to psychopathology classification systems. Frontiers in Psychology , 6 .

Prentice, D. A., & Carranza, E. (2002). What women should be, shouldn't be, are allowed to be, and don't have to be: The contents of prescriptive gender stereotypes. Psychology of Women Quarterly , 26 (4), 269-281. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-6402.t01-1-00066

Jonathan D. Raskin, Ph.D. , is a professor of psychology and counselor education at the State University of New York at New Paltz.

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Online Therapy
• United States
• Brooklyn, NY
• Chicago, IL
• Houston, TX
• Los Angeles, CA
• New York, NY
• Portland, OR
• San Diego, CA
• San Francisco, CA
• Seattle, WA
• Washington, DC
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Self Tests NEW
• Therapy Center
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

At any moment, someone’s aggravating behavior or our own bad luck can set us off on an emotional spiral that threatens to derail our entire day. Here’s how we can face our triggers with less reactivity so that we can get on with our lives.

• Emotional Intelligence
• Gaslighting
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

Chapter 6. Influencing and Conforming

6.3 Person, Gender, and Cultural Differences in Conformity

Learning Objectives

• Summarize the social psychological literature concerning differences in conformity between men and women.
• Review research concerning the relationship between culture and conformity.
• Explain the concept of psychological reactance and describe how and when it might occur.

Although we have focused to this point on the situational determinants of conformity, such as the number of people in the majority and their unanimity, we have not yet considered the question of which people are likely to conform and which people are not. In this section, we will consider how personality variables, gender, and culture influence conformity.

Person Differences

Even in cases in which the pressure to conform is strong and a large percentage of individuals do conform (such as in Solomon Asch’s line-judging research), not everyone does so. There are usually some people willing and able to go against the prevailing norm. In Asch’s study, for instance, despite the strong situational pressures, 24% of the participants never conformed on any of the trials.

People prefer to have an “optimal” balance between being similar to, and different from, others (Brewer, 2003). When people are made to feel too similar to others, they tend to express their individuality, but when they are made to feel too different from others, they attempt to increase their acceptance by others. Supporting this idea, research has found that people who have lower self-esteem are more likely to conform in comparison with those who have higher self-esteem. This makes sense because self-esteem rises when we know we are being accepted by others, and people with lower self-esteem have a greater need to belong. And people who are dependent on and who have a strong need for approval from others are also more conforming (Bornstein, 1992).

Age also matters, with individuals who are either younger or older being more easily influenced than individuals who are in their 40s and 50s (Visser & Krosnick, 1998). People who highly identify with the group that is creating the conformity are also more likely to conform to group norms, in comparison to people who don’t really care very much (Jetten, Spears, & Manstead, 1997; Terry & Hogg, 1996).

However, although there are some differences among people in terms of their tendency to conform (it has even been suggested that some people have a “need for uniqueness” that leads them to be particularly likely to resist conformity; Snyder & Fromkin, 1977), research has generally found that the impact of person variables on conformity is smaller than the influence of situational variables, such as the number and unanimity of the majority.

Gender Differences

Several reviews and meta-analyses of the existing research on conformity and leadership in men and women have now been conducted, and so it is possible to draw some strong conclusions in this regard. In terms of conformity, the overall conclusion from these studies is that that there are only small differences between men and women in the amount of conformity they exhibit, and these differences are influenced as much by the social situation in which the conformity occurs as by gender differences themselves.

On average, men and women have different levels of self-concern and other-concern. Men are, on average, more concerned about appearing to have high status and may be able to demonstrate this status by acting independently from the opinions of others. On the other hand, and again although there are substantial individual differences among them, women are, on average, more concerned with connecting to others and maintaining group harmony. Taken together, this means that, at least when they are being observed by others, men are likely to hold their ground, act independently, and refuse to conform, whereas women are more likely to conform to the opinions of others in order to prevent social disagreement. These differences are less apparent when the conformity occurs in private (Eagly, 1978, 1983).

The observed gender differences in conformity have social explanations—namely that women are socialized to be more caring about the desires of others—but there are also evolutionary explanations. Men may be more likely to resist conformity to demonstrate to women that they are good mates. Griskevicius, Goldstein, Mortensen, Cialdini, and Kenrick (2006) found that men, but not women, who had been primed with thoughts about romantic and sexual attraction were less likely to conform to the opinions of others on a subsequent task than were men who had not been primed to think about romantic attraction.

In addition to the public versus private nature of the situation, the topic being discussed also is important, with both men and women being less likely to conform on topics that they know a lot about, in comparison with topics on which they feel less knowledgeable (Eagly & Chravala, 1986). When the topic is sports, women tend to conform to men, whereas the opposite is true when the topic is fashion. Thus it appears that the small observed differences between men and women in conformity are due, at least in part, to informational influence.

Because men have higher status in most societies, they are more likely to be perceived as effective leaders (Eagly, Makhijani, & Klonsky, 1992; Rojahn & Willemsen, 1994; Shackelford, Wood, & Worchel, 1996). And men are more likely to be leaders in most cultures. For instance, women hold only about 20% of the key elected and appointed political positions in the world (World Economic Forum, 2013). There are also more men than women in leadership roles, particularly in high-level administrative positions, in many different types of businesses and other organizations. Women are not promoted to positions of leadership as fast as men are in real working groups, even when actual performance is taken into consideration (Geis, Boston, & Hoffman, 1985; Heilman, Block, & Martell, 1995).

Men are also more likely than women to emerge and act as leaders in small groups, even when other personality characteristics are accounted for (Bartol & Martin, 1986; Megargee, 1969; Porter, Geis, Cooper, & Newman, 1985). In one experiment, Nyquist and Spence (1986) had pairs of same- and mixed-sex students interact. In each pair there was one highly dominant and one low dominant individual, as assessed by previous personality measures. They found that in pairs in which there was one man and one woman, the dominant man became the leader 90% of the time, but the dominant woman became the leader only 35% of the time.

Keep in mind, however, that the fact that men are perceived as effective leaders, and are more likely to become leaders, does not necessarily mean that they are actually better, more effective leaders than women. Indeed, a meta-analysis studying the effectiveness of male and female leaders did not find that there were any gender differences overall (Eagly, Karau, & Makhijani, 1995) and even found that women excelled over men in some domains. Furthermore, the differences that were found tended to occur primarily when a group was first forming but dissipated over time as the group members got to know one another individually.

One difficulty for women as they attempt to lead is that traditional leadership behaviors, such as showing independence and exerting power over others, conflict with the expected social roles for women. The norms for what constitutes success in corporate life are usually defined in masculine terms, including assertiveness or aggressiveness, self-promotion, and perhaps even macho behavior. It is difficult for women to gain power because to do so they must conform to these masculine norms, and often this goes against their personal beliefs about appropriate behavior (Rudman & Glick, 1999). And when women do take on male models of expressing power, it may backfire on them because they end up being disliked because they are acting nonstereotypically for their gender. A recent experimental study with MBA students simulated the initial public offering (IPO) of a company whose chief executive was either male or female (personal qualifications and company financial statements were held constant across both conditions). The results indicated a clear gender bias as female chief executive officers were perceived as being less capable and having a poorer strategic position than their male counterparts. Furthermore, IPOs led by female executives were perceived as less attractive investments (Bigelow, Lundmark, McLean Parks, & Wuebker, 2012). Little wonder then that women hold fewer than 5% of Fortune 500 chief executive positions.

One way that women can react to this “double-bind” in which they must take on masculine characteristics to succeed, but if they do they are not liked, is to adopt more feminine leadership styles, in which they use more interpersonally oriented behaviors such as agreeing with others, acting in a friendly manner, and encouraging subordinates to participate in the decision-making process (Eagly & Johnson, 1990; Eagly et al., 1992; Wood, 1987). In short, women are more likely to take on a transformational leadership style than are men—doing so allows them to be effective leaders while not acting in an excessively masculine way (Eagly & Carli, 2007; Eagly, Johannesen-Schmidt, & van Egen, 2003).

In sum, women may conform somewhat more than men, although these differences are small and limited to situations in which the responses are made publicly. In terms of leadership effectiveness, there is no evidence that men, overall, make better leaders than do women. However, men do better as leaders on tasks that are “masculine” in the sense that they require the ability to direct and control people. On the other hand, women do better on tasks that are more “feminine” in the sense that they involve creating harmonious relationships among the group members.

Cultural Differences

In addition to gender differences, there is also evidence that conformity is greater in some cultures than others. Your knowledge about the cultural differences between individualistic and collectivistic cultures might lead you to think that collectivists will be more conforming than individualists, and there is some support for this. Bond and Smith (1996) analyzed results of 133 studies that had used Asch’s line-judging task in 17 different countries. They then categorized each of the countries in terms of the degree to which it could be considered collectivist versus individualist in orientation. They found a significant relationship: conformity was greater in more collectivistic than in individualistic countries.

Kim and Markus (1999) analyzed advertisements from popular magazines in the United States and in Korea to see if they differentially emphasized conformity and uniqueness. As you can see in Figure 6.14, “Culture and Conformity,” they found that while U.S. magazine ads tended to focus on uniqueness (e.g., “Choose your own view!”; “Individualize”) Korean ads tended to focus more on themes of conformity (e.g., “Seven out of 10 people use this product”; “Our company is working toward building a harmonious society”).

Kim and Markus (1999) found that U.S. magazine ads tended to focus on uniqueness whereas Korean ads tended to focus more on conformity.

In summary, although the effects of individual differences on conformity tend to be smaller than those of the social context, they do matter. And gender and cultural differences can also be important. Conformity, like most other social psychological processes, represents an interaction between the situation and the person.

Psychological Reactance

Conformity is usually quite adaptive overall, both for the individuals who conform and for the group as a whole. Conforming to the opinions of others can help us enhance and protect ourselves by providing us with important and accurate information and can help us better relate to others. Following the directives of effective leaders can help a group attain goals that would not be possible without them. And if only half of the people in your neighborhood thought it was appropriate to stop on red and go on green but the other half thought the opposite—and behaved accordingly—there would be problems indeed.

But social influence does not always produce the intended result. If we feel that we have the choice to conform or not conform, we may well choose to do so in order to be accepted or to obtain valid knowledge. On the other hand, if we perceive that others are trying to force or manipulate our behavior, the influence pressure may backfire, resulting in the opposite of what the influencer intends.

Consider an experiment conducted by Pennebaker and Sanders (1976), who attempted to get people to stop writing graffiti on the walls of campus restrooms. In some restrooms they posted a sign that read “Do not write on these walls under any circumstances!” whereas in other restrooms they placed a sign that simply said “Please don’t write on these walls.” Two weeks later, the researchers returned to the restrooms to see if the signs had made a difference. They found that there was much less graffiti in the second restroom than in the first one. It seems as if people who were given strong pressures to not engage in the behavior were more likely to react against those directives than were people who were given a weaker message.

When individuals feel that their freedom is being threatened by influence attempts and yet they also have the ability to resist that persuasion, they may experience psychological reactance , a strong motivational state that resists social influence  (Brehm, 1966; Miron & Brehm, 2006). Reactance is aroused when our ability to choose which behaviors to engage in is eliminated or threatened with elimination. The outcome of the experience of reactance is that people may not conform or obey at all and may even move their opinions or behaviors away from the desires of the influencer.

Reactance represents a desire to restore freedom that is being threatened. A child who feels that his or her parents are forcing him to eat his asparagus may react quite vehemently with a strong refusal to touch the plate. And an adult who feels that she is being pressured by a car sales representative might feel the same way and leave the showroom entirely, resulting in the opposite of the sales rep’s intended outcome.

Of course, parents are sometimes aware of this potential, and even use “reverse psychology”—for example, telling a child that he or she cannot go outside when they really want the child to do so, hoping that reactance will occur. In the musical The Fantasticks , neighboring fathers set up to make the daughter of one of them and the son of the other fall in love with each other by building a fence between their properties. The fence is seen by the children as an infringement on their freedom to see each other, and as predicted by the idea of reactance, they ultimately fall in love.

In addition to helping us understand the affective determinants of conformity and of failure to conform, reactance has been observed to have its ironic effects in a number of real-world contexts. For instance, Wolf and Montgomery (1977) found that when judges give jury members instructions indicating that they absolutely must not pay any attention to particular information that had been presented in a courtroom trial (because it had been ruled as inadmissible), the jurors were more likely to use that information in their judgments. And Bushman and Stack (1996) found that warning labels on violent films (for instance, “This film contains extreme violence—viewer discretion advised”) created more reactance (and thus led participants to be more interested in viewing the film) than did similar labels that simply provided information (“This film contains extreme violence”). In another relevant study, Kray, Reb, Galinsky, and Thompson (2004) found that when women were told that they were poor negotiators and would be unable to succeed on a negotiation task, this information led them to work even harder and to be more successful at the task.

Finally, within clinical therapy, it has been argued that people sometimes are less likely to try to reduce the harmful behaviors that they engage in, such as smoking or drug abuse, when the people they care about try too hard to press them to do so (Shoham, Trost, & Rohrbaugh, 2004). One patient was recorded as having reported that his wife kept telling him that he should quit drinking, saying, “If you loved me enough, you’d give up the booze.” However, he also reported that when she gave up on him and said instead, “I don’t care what you do anymore,” he then enrolled in a treatment program (Shoham et al., 2004, p. 177).

Key Takeaways

• Although some person variables predict conformity, overall situational variables are more important.
• There are some small gender differences in conformity. In public situations, men are somewhat more likely to hold their ground, act independently, and refuse to conform, whereas women are more likely to conform to the opinions of others in order to prevent social disagreement. These differences are less apparent when the conformity occurs in private.
• Conformity to social norms is more likely in Eastern, collectivistic cultures than in Western, independent cultures.
• Psychological reactance occurs when people feel that their ability to choose which behaviors to engage in is eliminated or threatened with elimination. The outcome of the experience of reactance is that people may not conform or obey at all and may even move their opinions or behaviors away from the desires of the influencer.

Exercises and Critical Thinking

• Bill laughed at the movie, even though he didn’t think it was all that funny; he realized he was laughing just because all his friends were laughing.
• Frank realized that he was starting to like jazz music, in part because his roommate liked it.
• Jennifer went to the mall with her friends so that they could help her choose a gown for the upcoming prom.
• Sally tried a cigarette at a party because all her friends urged her to.
• Phil spent over $150 on a pair of sneakers, even though he couldn’t really afford them, because his best friend had a pair.

Bartol, K. M., & Martin, D. C. (1986). Women and men in task groups. In R. D. Ashmore & F. K. Del Boca (Eds.),  The social psychology of female-male relations . New York, NY: Academic Press.

Bigelow, L. S., Lundmark, L., McLean Parks, J. M., & Wuebker, R. (2012). Skirting the issues? Experimental evidence of gender bias in IPO prospectus evaluations. Social Science Research Network. Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1556449

Bond, R., & Smith, P. B. (1996). Culture and conformity: A meta-analysis of studies using Asch’s (1952b, 1956) line judgment task.  Psychological Bulletin, 119 (1), 111–137.

Bornstein, R. F. (1992). The dependent personality: Developmental, social, and clinical perspectives.  Psychological Bulletin, 112 , 3–23.

Brehm, J. (1966).  A theory of psychological reactance . New York, NY: Academic Press;

Brewer, M. B. (2003). Optimal distinctiveness, social identity, and the self. In M. R. Leary & J. P. Tangney (Eds.),  Handbook of self and identity  (pp. 480–491). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Bushman, B. J., & Stack, A. D. (1996). Forbidden fruit versus tainted fruit: Effects of warning labels on attraction to television violence.  Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 2 , 207–226.

Eagly, A. H. (1978). Sex differences in influenceability.  Psychological Bulletin, 85 , 86–116;

Eagly, A. H. (1983). Gender and social influence: A social psychological analysis.  American Psychologist, 38 , 971–981.

Eagly, A. H., & Carli, L. L. (2007).  Through the labyrinth: The truth about how women become leaders . Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press;

Eagly, A. H., & Chravala, C. (1986). Sex differences in conformity: Status and gender-role interpretations.  Psychology of Women Quarterly, 10 , 203–220.

Eagly, A. H., & Johnson, B. T. (1990). Gender and leadership style: A meta-analysis.  Psychological Bulletin, 108 , 233–256;

Eagly, A. H., Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C., & van Engen, M. L. (2003). Transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership styles: A meta-analysis comparing men and women.  Psychological Bulletin, 129 , 569–591.

Eagly, A. H., Karau, S. J., & Makhijani, M. G. (1995). Gender and the effectiveness of leaders: A meta-analysis.  Psychological Bulletin, 117 , 125–145.

Eagly, A. H., Makhijani, M. G., & Klonsky, B. G. (1992). Gender and evaluation of leaders: A meta-analysis.  Psychological Bulletin, 111 , 3–22;

Geis, F. L., Boston, M. B., and Hoffman, N. (1985). Sex of authority role models and achievement by men and women: Leadership performance and recognition,  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49 , 636–653;

Griskevicius, V., Goldstein, N. J., Mortensen, C. R., Cialdini, R. B., & Kenrick, D. T. (2006). Going along versus going alone: When fundamental motives facilitate strategic (non)conformity.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91 , 281–294.

Heilman, M. E., Block, C. J., & Martell, R. (1995). Sex stereotypes: Do they influence perceptions of managers?  Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 10 , 237–252.

Jetten, J., Spears, R., & Manstead, A. S. R. (1997). Strength of identification and intergroup differentiation: The influence of group norms.  European Journal of Social Psychology, 27 , 603–609;

Kim, H., & Markus, H. R. (1999). Deviance or uniqueness, harmony or conformity? A cultural analysis.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77 , 785–800.

Kray, L. J., Reb, J., Galinsky, A. D., & Thompson, L. (2004). Stereotype reactance at the bargaining table: The effect of stereotype activation and power on claiming and creating value.  Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30 , 399–411.

Megargee, E. I. (1969). Influence of sex roles on the manifestation of leadership.  Journal of Applied Psychology, 53 , 377–382;

Miron, A. M., & Brehm, J. W. (2006). Reaktanz theorie—40 Jahre spärer.  Zeitschrift fur Sozialpsychologie, 37 , 9–18. doi: 10.1024/0044-3514.37.1.9.

Nyquist, L. V., & Spence, J. T. (1986). Effects of dispositional dominance and sex role expectations on leadership behaviors.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50 , 87–93.

Pennebaker, J. W., & Sanders, D. Y. (1976). American graffiti: Effects of authority and reactance arousal.  Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 2 , 264–267.

Porter, N., Geis, F. L., Cooper, E., & Newman, E. (1985). Androgyny and leadership in mixed-sex groups.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49 , 808–823.

Rojahn, K., & Willemsen, T. M. (1994). The evaluation of effectiveness and likability of gender-role congruent and gender-role incongruent leaders.  Sex Roles, 30 , 109–119;

Rudman, L. A., & Glick, P. (1999). Feminized management and backlash toward agentic women: The hidden costs to women of a kinder, gentler image of middle-managers.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77 , 1004–1010.

Shackelford, S., Wood, W., & Worchel, S. (1996). Behavioral styles and the influence of women in mixed-sex groups.  Social Psychology Quarterly, 59 , 284–293.

Shoham, V., Trost, S. E., & Rohrbaugh, M. J. (Eds.). (2004).  From state to trait and back again: Reactance theory goes clinical . Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Snyder, C. R., & Fromkin, H. L. (1977). Abnormality as a positive characteristic: The development and validation of a scale measuring need for uniqueness.  Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 86 (5), 518–527.

Terry, D., & Hogg, M. (1996). Group norms and the attitude-behavior relationship: A role for group identification.  Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22 , 776–793.

Visser, P. S., & Krosnick, J. A. (1998). The development of attitude strength over the life cycle: Surge and decline.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75 , 1389–1410.

Wolf, S., & Montgomery, D. A. (1977). Effects of inadmissible evidence and level of judicial admonishment to disregard on the judgments of mock jurors.  Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 7 , 205–219.

Wood, W. (1987). A meta-analytic review of sex differences in group performance.  Psychological Bulletin, 102 , 53–71.

World Economic Forum. (2013). The global gender gap report 2013 . Retrieved from http://reports.weforum.org/global-gender-gap-report-2013/

The strong emotional response that we experience when we feel that our freedom of choice is being taken away when we expect that we should have choice.

Principles of Social Psychology - 1st International H5P Edition Copyright © 2022 by Dr. Rajiv Jhangiani and Dr. Hammond Tarry is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

DOING GENDER FOR DIFFERENT REASONS: WHY GENDER CONFORMITY POSITIVELY AND NEGATIVELY PREDICTS SELF-ESTEEM

2000, Psychology of Women Quarterly

Related Papers

Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

C. Moss-racusin , Jessica Good , D. Sanchez

Journal of Sex Research

Diana Sanchez

Diana Sánchez

Psychology of Women Quarterly

diana sanchez

The present study examined the relationship between investment in gender ideals and well-being and the role of external contingencies of self-worth in a longitudinal survey of 677 college freshmen. We propose a model of how investment in gender ideals affects external contingencies and the consequences for self-esteem, depression, and symptoms of disordered eating. Specifically, we find that the negative relationship between investment in gender ideals and well-being is mediated through externally contingent self-worth. The model showed a good fit for the overall sample. Comparative model testing revealed a good fit for men and women as well as White Americans, Asian Americans, and African Americans.

Journal of Business Ethics

Lucas Monzani

Role congruity theory affirms that female managers face more difficulties at work because of the incongruity between the female gender role and the leadership role. Furthermore, due to this incongruity it is harder for female managers to perceive themselves as authentic leaders. However, followers’ attributions of prototypicality could attenuate this role incongruity and have implications on a leader’s organizational identification. Hence, we expect male leaders to be more authentic and to identify more with their organization, in particular compared to female leaders low in prototypicality. We hypothesized that (1) authentic leadership mediates the relation between leaders’ gender and their organizational identification, but that this indirect effect (2) is conditional of team prototypicality. To test these hypotheses, we conducted an online experiment with 149 managers (Mage = 43.42 years SD = 11.41; 43% female) from different work sectors using a 2 (gender participant) x 2 (prototypicality: low vs. high) between-subject design. As predicted, men scored higher on authentic leadership, and three dimensions of authentic leadership partially mediated the effect of gender on organizational identification. In the low prototypicality condition, women scored lower in authentic leadership and identified less with the organization, whereas in the high prototypicality condition no gender differences were found.

Journal of Research in Personality

Alicia Del Prado

Lennart Hallsten

Psychology of Men & Masculinity

Although heterosexual men typically hold positions of dominance in society, negative aspects of masculinity could lead some men to feel that their gender group is not valued by others (D. A. Prentice & E. Carranza, 2002). Previous research has largely overlooked the impact of men’s own perceptions of their gender group membership on their relationship outcomes. To address this gap, we posited that when heterosexual men feel that their gender identity is devalued, they may relate better to close others who have devalued identities (e.g., their female romantic partners). Specifically, we predicted that heterosexual men who view their masculine gender identity as important but devalued would more successfully take the perspective of their female partner. Results confirmed predictions, such that for undergraduate men whose gender identity was important, lower levels of perceived group value predicted greater ability to take perspective with their romantic partners. Implications for men’...

Annual review of psychology

Mahzarin R. Banaji

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

John Jost , Rachel Calogero

RELATED PAPERS

Nicholas A Palomares

Personal Relationships

Lora Park , Ariana Young

Beth Livingston

Social Psychology

Shaki Asgari

Aoliaocc Chen

Rachel Calogero , Lora Park

Terry Humphreys , Deborah Kennett

Women's Internalization of Sexism: …

Polish Psychological Bulletin

Bogdan Wojciszke

Review of General Psychology

Hart Blanton

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

Handbook of Social Exclusion

Pallavi Chatterjee

Reinventing the Squeal: Young New Zealand women negotiating space in the current sexual culture

Lesley Wright

Amir Rosenmann

Annual Review of Psychology

Galen V Bodenhausen , Sonia Kang

Richard Petty

Kim Chantala

Catherine Sanderson

Psychological Review

Hazel Markus

Mehmood Hassan

Terri Conley

Social Justice Research

Archives of Sexual Behavior

Journal of Applied Social Psychology

Delphine Martinot , S. Guimond

Andrea Vial

Hanna Li Kusterer

Ali Ziegler

Spike W. S. Lee

Motivation and Emotion

Nikos Ntoumanis

Handbook of Motivation and Cognition Across Cultures

Daphna Oyserman

Social and psychological bases of ideology and system justification

Mina Cikara

John T Jost

The Psychology of Social Status

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Gender is a Social Construct Essay

How is gender socially constructed? The essay answers this question. It defines gender as a social construction and explains its significance as a cultural phenomenon.

Introduction

Social construction of gender, relationship between the two genders, sex, gender and gender conformity, works cited.

Gender as a topic has become very popular over the recent past. The global society has witnessed many changes in social construction of gender. According to World Health Organization, gender is a socially constructed trait, conduct, position, and action that a given society considers suitable for men and women. Lockheed (45) defines gender as a given range of characteristics that distinguishes a male from a female.

Gender refers to those attributes that would make an individual be identified as either male or female. As can be seen from the above definitions, gender is more of a social than a physical attribute. We look at gender from a societal point of view. Lepowsky (90) defines social construction as an institutionalized characteristic that is largely acceptable in a given society because of the social system.

Social construction, in a narrower term, refers to the general behavioral patterns of a certain society shaped by beliefs and values. A socially constructed characteristic therefore varies from one organization to another. Different societies have different beliefs and cultural practices that help define them. Therefore, a social construction of one society would be different from another society.

To social constructionists, social construct is a notion or an idea that is considered obvious and natural to a certain group of individuals in a given society, which may be true or not. This means that it holds just to the specific society. In this regard therefore, gender and associated beliefs would vary from one community to another depending on perceptions.

On the other hand, essentialists hold there is a set of characteristics that are universal in a certain entity. This means that a given entity can receive a single definition, regardless of the societal set up. In this regard, gender is a universal entity, irrespective of the society and the cultural beliefs associated with it. This perspective dilutes the notion that gender is a social construction.

This is because it gives it a universal definition, where there is a remarkable difference in the social construct of different societies in the world. This is due to differences in religion, cultural beliefs and civilization. To validate this discussion, the essay is based on social constructionist thinking as opposed to essentialism.

Gender is socially constructed. As Lepowsky (31) notes, there is a remarkable difference in the way different societies view the two genders that is, male and female. This scholar says that issues related to gender purely take the approach of social constructionists. He says that societies in the world have varied characteristics, depending on cultures.

He notes that the way one society would view the relationship between the two genders would vary from another, which also depend on a number of factors. Lerro (74) is opposed to this notion. He says that gender is best viewed from essentialists’ perspective. He holds that universally, women have always been regarded as the weaker sex, irrespective of the society. In many regions in the world, women have been treated with low esteem.

This is because of the fact that they are physically weak as compared to men. To various societies across the world, women are expected to be below men socially. Although the current wave of change has seen women take active roles in income generating activities, many societies still consider them as home keepers who should always be willing to receive and obey instructions from men.

This scholar’s argument is valid. However, his explanation, though leaning towards essentialism, still points out that gender is a social construct. Although many societies have almost a similar perception regarding gender, the fact is that they have construed the meaning of gender. The perception is a mere creation of the society members.

According to Lepowsky (53), gender cannot take an essentialist approach. The current world has varied perceptions towards women. The society in Saudi Arabia defines gender in a very different way as compared to the United Kingdom society. Saudi Arabia is an Islamic society that follows strict teachings of the holy Quran.

In this society, there is a big social gap between men and women. The society defines a woman as a subordinate who should always serve men. When it comes to addressing issues of importance, a woman must consult a man because by virtue of being a woman, the society assumes that one cannot make a decision personally.

This is a very sharp contrast to how this gender is viewed in a liberal country such as the United Kingdom. This society has completely narrowed the gap between the two genders that what remain are the physiological differences between the two genders. The country has embraced equality between the two sexes, a fact that saw it elect a female Premier Margret Thatcher.

The social environment in Saudi Arabia is very different from that in the United Kingdom. Because of this, the two societies have different views on what the two genders are and how they should relate. While one society is of the view that gender is just but the biological differences that makes one male or female, the other society sees more. It sees difference in roles, freedom, and positions in the society.

The society is waking to a new down where women and men are considered equal. The only differences existing are biological. Man has been the dominant sex over years. Terms such as mankind, chairman and fireman were used to refer to both men and women. However, these are currently considered sexist titles, which should be avoided at all costs. Although the global society is still largely patriarchal, there is an observable effort to create equality between the two sexes.

However, men are not willing to relinquish their prestigious positions in the society. In social centers such as schools and colleges, men would try to prove that they are in control. Plante (6) notes that jokes are always essential in our society. Although they are always taken from the face value as a form of entertainment, it has a purpose beyond entertainment.

This scholar gives an analysis of sexist jokes used by men towards female students in learning institutions. What comes clear is that men still rely much on their physical superiority, as their way of showing dominance. They use force in order to make female students listen to their jokes, which is highly sexist.

When it comes to sex, men completely change. Chappell (19) gives a confession of a certain girl and her sexual encounter. Through this, it can be observed that when a man has the desire for sex, he is willing to bend very low to a woman. However, things change immediately after the process. He becomes rude and he would easily pick mistakes from the same woman.

Gender identity is the biological characteristic that would define an individual’s gender. In this regard, it would be appropriate to just categorize humanity based on sex. This would mean that the two categories would be men and women. However, because of these biological differences between the two sexes, there is another way of classifying the two sexes that is, gender. Gender is more of a social than a biological difference between the two sexes.

As Plante (110) notes, in this approach, the two genders are analyzed based on the abilities and inabilities. Because men are considered stronger physically, they are given a higher rank in the society because it is assumed that their capabilities are superior to those of women. Sex in itself is a gendered word. In many societies, sex is used to emphasize the difference between the two genders.

Because societal pressure, the ‘weaker’ sex (woman) is forced to conform to the position they are given. They conform, not because they like the assigned position, but because they are not allowed to oppose the decision. They may not necessarily accept the position given to them by the society. However, because the society is intolerant and very rigid, they are left with very limited option other than conforming to the norm.

In some instances, women are exposed to physical abuse from their male counterparts who are keen on asserting their authority in the societal set up. Plante (136) says that this high handedness has seen many women suffer in silence, simply because they are women. Gender identity disorder is a syndrome that is always traumatizing.

An individual who cannot clearly be categorized as a man or a woman may find either himself or herself at the center of social stigmatization. Such an individual lacks a gender to identify with in a society that is so keen on identifying individuals based on gender.

It can be seen from the above discussion that gender can be defined differently, depending on the community in question. Depending on the societal structure of a given community, gender will assume a meaning depending on how men and women relate. Unlike sex that is defined based on biological differences, gender is defined based on the behavioral patterns of the two genders and the society’s perception of the concerned individual.

Every society has its own way of viewing men and women and the relationship between the two. In some societies, women are treated with very low esteem. In such societies, gender is held with high esteem, as a way of showing the boundary that exists between men and women. In other societies, civilization has made a woman be accepted as equal to a man hence the term gender has lost its previous meaning.

Issues of gender have raised many questions in the current society. In the current world, women have acquired a new status. They no longer depend on men for everything. As a number of authors note, gender has to be given a new definition other than what it was before. Based on how gender is defined, the current society needs a to re-define it.

Chappell, Marissa. The war on welfare: family, poverty, and politics in modern America . Pennsylvania: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2010. Print.

Lepowsky, Maria. Fruit of the Motherland: Gender in an Egalitarian Society. New York: Columbia University Press, 1993. Print.

Lerro, Bruce. Power in Eden: The Emergence of Gender Hierarchies in the Ancient World . Manchester:Trafford Publishing, 2005. Print.

Lockheed, Marlaine. Gender and social exclusion . Paris: Education Policy series publishers, 2010. Print

Plante, Rebecca. Doing gender diversity: readings in theory and real-world experience . New York: West view Press, 2010. Print.

• Why is society a social construct
• Social Constructs of Childhood
• Social Constructs in Gender: The Social “Cover” of Biological Sex
• Analysis of the Peculiarities of Gender Roles Within Education, Families and Student Communities
• Representation of gender in media
• Everything You’ve Always Wanted to Know About Sex
• Gender Studies and Society
• The Sexual Revolution
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2019, March 29). Gender is a Social Construct Essay. https://ivypanda.com/essays/social-construction-of-gender/

"Gender is a Social Construct Essay." IvyPanda , 29 Mar. 2019, ivypanda.com/essays/social-construction-of-gender/.

IvyPanda . (2019) 'Gender is a Social Construct Essay'. 29 March.

IvyPanda . 2019. "Gender is a Social Construct Essay." March 29, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/social-construction-of-gender/.

1. IvyPanda . "Gender is a Social Construct Essay." March 29, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/social-construction-of-gender/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Gender is a Social Construct Essay." March 29, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/social-construction-of-gender/.

Module 9: Gender, Sex, and Sexuality

Gender and socialization, learning outcomes.

• Explain the influence of socialization on gender roles in the United States
• Explain and give examples of sexism

Figure 1.  Traditional images of U.S. gender roles reinforce the idea that women should be subordinate to men. (Photo courtesy of Sport Suburban/flickr)

Gender Roles

As we grow, we learn how to behave from those around us. In this socialization process, children are introduced to certain roles that are typically linked to their biological sex. The term gender role refers to society’s concept of how people are expected to look and behave based on societally created norms for masculinity and femininity. In U.S. culture, masculine roles are usually associated with strength, aggression, and dominance, while feminine roles are usually associated with passivity, nurturing, and subordination.

Gender role socialization begins at birth and continues throughout the life course. Our society is quick to outfit male infants in blue and girls in pink, even applying these color-coded gender labels while a baby is in the womb. This color differentiation is quite new—prior to the 1940s, boys wore pink and girls wore blue. In the 19th century and early 20th century, boys and girls wore dresses (mostly white) until the age of 6 or 7, which was also time for the first haircut. [1]

Figure 2.  Fathers tend to be more involved when their sons engage in gender-appropriate activities such as sports. (Photo courtesy of Shawn Lea/flickr)

Thus, gender, like race is a social construction with very real consequences. The drive to adhere to masculine and feminine gender roles continues later in life. Men tend to outnumber women in professions such as law enforcement, the military, and politics. Women tend to outnumber men in care-related occupations such as childcare, healthcare (even though the term “doctor” still conjures the image of a man), and social work. These occupational roles are examples of typical U.S. male and female behavior, derived from our culture’s traditions. Adherence to them demonstrates fulfillment of social expectations but not necessarily personal preference (Diamond 2002).

The phrase “boys will be boys” is often used to justify behavior such as pushing, shoving, or other forms of aggression from young boys. The phrase implies that such behavior is unchangeable and something that is part of a boy’s nature. Aggressive behavior, when it does not inflict significant harm, is often accepted from boys and men because it is congruent with the cultural script for masculinity. The “script” written by society is in some ways similar to a script written by a playwright. Just as a playwright expects actors to adhere to a prescribed script, society expects women and men to behave according to the expectations of their respective gender roles.

Socialization

Children learn at a young age that there are distinct expectations for boys and girls. Cross-cultural studies reveal that children are aware of gender roles by age two or three. At four or five, most children are firmly entrenched in culturally appropriate gender roles (Kane 1996). Children acquire these roles through socialization, a process in which people learn to behave in a particular way as dictated by societal values, beliefs, and attitudes.

Figure 3.  Although our society may have a stereotype that associates motorcycles with men, female bikers demonstrate that a woman’s place extends far beyond the kitchen in the modern United States. (Photo courtesy of Robert Couse-Baker/flickr)

For example, society often views riding a motorcycle as a masculine activity and, therefore, considers it to be part of the male gender role. Attitudes such as this are typically based on stereotypes, which are oversimplified notions about members of a group. Gender stereotyping involves overgeneralizing about the attitudes, traits, or behavior patterns of women or men. For example, women may be thought of as too timid or weak to ride a motorcycle.

Mimicking the actions of significant others is the first step in the development of a separate sense of self (Mead 1934). Recall that according to Mead’s theory of development, children up to the age of 2 are in the preparatory stage, in which they copy actions of those around them, then the play stage (between 2-6) when they play pretend and have a difficult time following established rules, and then the game stage (ages 7 and up), when they can play by a set of rules and understand different roles.

Like adults, children become agents who actively facilitate and apply normative gender expectations to those around them. When children do not conform to the appropriate gender role, they may face negative sanctions such as being criticized or marginalized by their peers. Though many of these sanctions are informal, they can be quite severe. For example, a girl who wishes to take karate class instead of dance lessons may be called a “tomboy,” and face difficulty gaining acceptance from both male and female peer groups (Ready 2001). Boys, especially, are subject to intense ridicule for gender nonconformity (Coltrane and Adams 2004; Kimmel 2000).

One way children learn gender roles is through play. Parents typically supply boys with trucks, toy guns, and superhero paraphernalia, which are active toys that promote motor skills, aggression, and solitary play. Daughters are often given dolls and dress-up apparel that foster nurturing, social proximity, and role play. Studies have shown that children will most likely choose to play with “gender appropriate” toys (or same-gender toys) even when cross-gender toys are available, because parents give children positive feedback (in the form of praise, involvement, and physical closeness) for gender normative behavior (Caldera, Huston, and O’Brien 1998). Charles Cooley’s concept of the looking-glass self applies to gender socialization because it is through this interactive, interpretive process with the social world that individuals develop a sense of gender identity.

Figure 4 . Childhood activities and instruction, like this father-daughter duck-hunting trip, can influence people’s lifelong views on gender roles. (Credit: Tim Miller, USFWS Midwest Region/flickr)

Gender socialization occurs through four major agents of socialization: family, schools, peer groups, and mass media. Each agent reinforces gender roles by creating and maintaining normative expectations for gender-specific behavior. Exposure also occurs through secondary agents such as religion and the workplace. Repeated exposure to these agents over time leads men and women into a false sense that they are acting naturally rather than following a socially constructed role.

Family is the first agent of socialization. There is considerable evidence that parents socialize sons and daughters differently. Generally speaking, girls are given more latitude to step outside of their prescribed gender role (Coltrane and Adams 2004; Kimmel 2000; Raffaelli and Ontai 2004). However, differential socialization typically results in greater privileges afforded to sons. For instance, sons are allowed more autonomy and independence at an earlier age than daughters. They may be given fewer restrictions on appropriate clothing, dating habits, or curfew. Sons are also often free from performing domestic duties such as cleaning or cooking and other household tasks that are considered feminine. Daughters are limited by their expectation to be passive and nurturing, generally obedient, and to assume domestic responsibilities.

Even when parents set gender equality as a goal, there may be underlying indications of inequality. For example, boys may be asked to take out the garbage or perform other tasks that require strength or toughness, while girls may be asked to fold laundry or perform duties that require neatness and care. It has been found that fathers are firmer in their expectations for gender conformity than are mothers, and their expectations are stronger for sons than they are for daughters (Kimmel 2000). This is true in many types of activities, including preference for toys, play styles, discipline, chores, and personal achievements. As a result, boys tend to be particularly attuned to their father’s disapproval when engaging in an activity that might be considered feminine, like dancing or singing (Coltraine and Adams 2008). Parental socialization and normative expectations also vary along lines of social class, race, and ethnicity. African American families, for instance, are more likely than Caucasians to model an egalitarian role structure for their children (Staples and Boulin Johnson 2004).

The reinforcement of gender roles and stereotypes continues once a child reaches school age. Until very recently, schools were rather explicit in their efforts to stratify boys and girls. The first step toward stratification was segregation. Girls were encouraged to take home economics or humanities courses and boys to take math and science. Studies suggest that gender socialization still occurs in schools today, perhaps in less obvious forms (Lips 2004). Teachers may not even realize they are acting in ways that reproduce gender differentiated behavior patterns. Yet any time they ask students to arrange their seats or line up according to gender, teachers may be asserting that boys and girls should be treated differently (Thorne 1993).

Schools subtly convey messages to girls indicating that they are less intelligent or less important than boys. For example, in a study of teacher responses to male and female students, data indicated that teachers praised male students far more than female students. Teachers interrupted girls more often and gave boys more opportunities to expand on their ideas (Sadker and Sadker 1994). Further, in social as well as academic situations, teachers have traditionally treated boys and girls in opposite ways, reinforcing a sense of competition rather than collaboration (Thorne 1993). Boys are also permitted a greater degree of freedom to break rules or commit minor acts of deviance, whereas girls are expected to follow rules carefully and adopt an obedient role (Ready 2001).

Mass media serves as another significant agent of gender socialization. In television and movies, women tend to have less significant roles and are often portrayed as wives or mothers. When women are given a lead role, it often falls into one of two extremes: a wholesome, saint-like figure or a malevolent, hypersexual figure (Etaugh and Bridges 2003). Gender inequalities are also pervasive in children’s movies (Smith 2008). Research indicates that in the ten top-grossing G-rated movies released between 1991 and 2013, nine out of ten characters were male (Smith 2008).

Television commercials and other forms of advertising also reinforce inequality and gender-based stereotypes. Women are almost exclusively present in ads promoting cooking, cleaning, or childcare-related products (Davis 1993). Think about the last time you saw a man star in a dishwasher or laundry detergent commercial. In general, women are underrepresented in roles that involve leadership, intelligence, or a balanced psyche. Of particular concern is the depiction of women in ways that are dehumanizing, especially in music videos. Even in mainstream advertising, however, themes intermingling violence and sexuality are quite common (Kilbourne 2000).

Watch the following video to think more about the social construct of gender.

Further Research

Watch this CrashCourse video to learn more about gender stratification .

Gender stereotypes form the basis of sexism. Sexism refers to prejudiced beliefs that value one sex over another. Like racism, sexism has been a part of U.S. culture for centuries. Here is a brief timeline of “firsts” in the United States:

• Before 1809—Women could not execute a will
• Before 1840—Women were not allowed to own or control property
• Before 1920—Women were not permitted to vote
• Before 1963—Employers could legally pay a woman less than a man for the same work
• Before 1973—Women did not have the right to a safe and legal abortion
• Before 1981—No woman had served on the U.S. Supreme Court
• Before 2009—No African American woman had been CEO of a U.S. Fortune 500 corporation
• Before 2016—No Latina had served as a U.S. Senator
• Before 2017—No openly transgender person had been elected in a state legislature

While it is illegal in the United States when practiced as overt discrimination, unequal treatment of women continues to pervade social life. It should be noted that discrimination based on sex occurs at both the micro- and macro-levels. Many sociologists focus on discrimination that is built into the social structure; this type of discrimination is known as institutional discrimination (Pincus 2008).

Figure 4.  In some cultures, women do all of the household chores with no help from men, as doing housework is a sign of weakness, considered by society as a feminine trait. (Photo courtesy of Evil Erin/flickr)

Like racism, sexism has very real consequences. Stereotypes about females, such as being “too soft” to make financial decisions about things like wills or property, have morphed into a lack of female leadership in Fortune 500 Companies (only 24 were headed up by women in 2018!). We also see gender discrepancies in politics and in legal matters, as the laws regarding women’s reproductive health are made by a largely male legislative body at both the state and federal levels.

The Pay Gap

One of the most tangible effects of sexism is the gender wage gap. Despite making up nearly half (49.8 percent) of payroll employment, men vastly outnumber women in authoritative, powerful, and, therefore, high-earning jobs (U.S. Census Bureau 2010). Even when a woman’s employment status is equal to a man’s, she will generally make only 81 cents for every dollar made by her male counterpart (Payscale 2020). Women in the paid labor force also still do the majority of the unpaid work at home. On an average day, 84 percent of women (compared to 67 percent of men) spend time doing household management activities (U.S. Census Bureau 2011). This double-duty keeps working women in a subordinate role in the family structure (Hochschild and Machung 1989).

Figure 5 . In 2017 men’s overall median earnings were $52,146 and women’s were $41,977. This means that women earned 80.1% of what men earned in the United States. (Credit: Women’s Bureau, U.S. Department of Labor)

The Glass Ceiling

The idea that women are unable to reach the executive suite is known as the glass ceiling. It is an invisible barrier that women encounter when trying to win jobs in the highest level of business. At the beginning of 2021, for example, a record 41 of the world’s largest 500 companies were run by women. While a vast improvement over the number twenty years earlier – where only two of the companies were run by women – these 41 chief executives still only represent eight percent of those large companies (Newcomb 2020).

Why do women have a more difficult time reaching the top of a company? One idea is that there is still a stereotype in the United States that women aren’t aggressive enough to handle the boardroom or that they tend to seek jobs and work with other women (Reiners 2019). Other issues stem from the gender biases based on gender roles and motherhood discussed above.

Another idea is that women lack mentors, executives who take an interest and get them into the right meetings and introduce them to the right people to succeed (Murrell & Blake-Beard 2017).

Women in Politics

One of the most important places for women to help other women is in politics. Historically in the United States, like many other institutions, political representation has been mostly made up of White men. By not having women in government, their issues are being decided by people who don’t share their perspective. The number of women elected to serve in Congress has increased over the years, but does not yet accurately reflect the general population. For example, in 2018, the population of the United States was 49 percent male and 51 percent female, but the population of Congress was 78.8 percent male and 21.2 percent female (Manning 2018). Over the years, the number of women in the federal government has increased, but until it accurately reflects the population, there will be inequalities in our laws.

Figure 6 . Breakdown of Congressional Membership by Gender. 2021 saw a record number of women in Congress, with 120 women serving in the House and 24 serving in the Senate. Gender representation has been steadily increasing over time, but is not close to being equal. (Credit: Based on data from Center for American Women in Politics, Rutgers University)

Global Sexism

Gender stratification through the division of labor is not exclusive to the United States. According to George Murdock’s classic work, Outline of World Cultures (1954), all societies classify work by gender. When a pattern appears in all societies, it is called a cultural universal. While the phenomenon of assigning work by gender is universal, its specifics are not. The same task is not assigned to either men or women worldwide. But the way each task’s associated gender is valued is notable. In Murdock’s examination of the division of labor among 324 societies around the world, he found that in nearly all cases the jobs assigned to men were given greater prestige (Murdock and White 1968). Even if the job types were very similar and the differences slight, men’s work was still considered more vital.

In parts of the world where women are strongly undervalued, young girls may not be given the same access to nutrition, healthcare, and education as boys. Further, they will grow up believing they deserve to be treated differently from boys (UNICEF 2011; Thorne 1993).

Think It Over

• In what way do parents treat sons and daughters differently? How do sons and daughters typically respond to this treatment?
• How is children’s play influenced by gender roles? Think back to your childhood. How “gendered” were the toys and activities available to you? Do you remember gender expectations being conveyed through the approval or disapproval of your playtime choice?
• What can be done to lessen the sexism in the workplace? How does it harm society?
• Maglaty, J. 2011. "When did girls first start wearing pink?" The Smithsonian. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/when-did-girls-start-wearing-pink-1370097/ . ↵
• Revision, Modification, and Original Content. Authored by : Sarah Hoiland and Lumen Learning. Provided by : Lumen Learning. License : CC BY: Attribution
• Gender. Authored by : OpenStax CNX. Located at : https://cnx.org/contents/[email protected]:IThELyrX@5/Gender . License : CC BY: Attribution . License Terms : Download for free at http://cnx.org/contents/[email protected].
• Gender Equality: Now. Provided by : WorldFish. Located at : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4viXOGvvu0Y . License : Other . License Terms : Standard YouTube License
• Gender Roles. Provided by : OpenStax. Located at : https://openstax.org/books/introduction-sociology-3e/pages/12-1-sex-gender-identity-and-expression . Project : Sociology 3e. License : CC BY: Attribution . License Terms : Access for free at https://openstax.org/books/introduction-sociology-3e/pages/1-introduction
• Is Gender Real? -8-bit Philosophy. Provided by : Wisecrack. Located at : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkilQ87UUj8&index=50&list=PL93FF46F5BC6A27CF . License : Other . License Terms : Standard YouTube License

Home — Essay Samples — Life — Self Assessment — A Study of the Relation of Gender and Self-esteem in Conformity

A Study of The Relation of Gender and Self-esteem in Conformity

• Categories: Self Assessment

About this sample

Words: 2267 |

12 min read

Published: Oct 22, 2018

Words: 2267 | Pages: 5 | 12 min read

Table of contents

Gender and self-esteem differences in conformity: revisiting asch’s conformity test.

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Verified writer

• Expert in: Life

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

3 pages / 1435 words

6 pages / 2514 words

1 pages / 507 words

4 pages / 1619 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Self Assessment

Cultural competence is an essential aspect of providing quality healthcare, particularly in diverse and multicultural societies. It involves understanding and respecting the beliefs, practices, and needs of individuals from [...]

Adams, P., & Maclaine, S. (1999). Gesundheit!: Bringing Good Health to You, the Medical System, and Society through Physician Service, Complementary Therapies, Humor, and Joy. Inner Traditions.Allen, J. (2015). You Can Change: [...]

Self-evaluation is a reflective process that holds the key to personal and professional growth. This essay explores the significance of self-evaluation as a tool for enhancing one's capabilities and achieving goals. Drawing from [...]

After assessing my diet through the process of recording my intake of food over the course of two days and analyzing its nutritional value, relative to my gender, weight, height, activity level and age, I have successfully [...]

The HEXACO Personality Inventory is a six-dimensional model of human personality that is constructed by Ashton (2013). A lot of researchers did make use of the Big Five framework since 1990, but now many researchers make use of [...]

I took all five surveys that were distributed to us in class. Surprisingly, the results of each survey were parallel with each other. For the 16 Personalities test, I was assigned the Defender personality type. This personality [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

• NAEYC Login
• Member Profile
• Hello Community
• Accreditation Portal
• Online Learning
• Online Store

Popular Searches:   DAP ;  Coping with COVID-19 ;  E-books ;  Anti-Bias Education ;  Online Store

Gender Identity and Expression in the Early Childhood Classroom: Influences on Development Within Sociocultural Contexts (Voices)

You are here

Thoughts on the Article | Barbara Henderson,  Voices  coeditor

Gender is an element of identity that young children are working hard to understand. It is also a topic that early childhood teachers are not always sure how best to address.

It’s not surprising, then, that Jamie Solomon’s article is the third teacher research study  Voices of Practitioners  has published that focuses directly on gender, joining articles from Daitsman (2011) and Ortiz, Ferrell, Anderson, Cain, Fluty, Sturzenbecker, & Matlock (2014). Jamie Solomon’s teacher research demonstrates how pedagogy that takes a critical stance on gender stereotyping is a social justice issue because the performance of femininity still maps directly onto disparities in opportunity within our society.

Further, she suggests how the male/female gender binary remains a default perspective and suggests how a more inclusive view of the gender spectrum can enhance and inform our practice and worldview. Her work interprets instances that arose naturally in her teaching, and it displays how teacher research is simultaneously a study of our professional and our personal selves.

During the past 10 years of teaching in the early childhood field, I have observed young children as they develop ideas about gender identity. I soon came to understand gender expression as a larger social justice issue, realizing how external influences were already at work inside the preschool classroom, impacting children's interactions and choices for play and exploration.

This matter became a great priority in my professional life, leading me to look for ways to advocate for change. Some of this eagerness stemmed from my own frustrations about gender inequity and how, as a woman, I have felt limited, misunderstood, and pressured by societal constructs. These personal experiences inspired me to help further discussions about gender development within the early childhood field so that, one day, young children might grow up feeling less encumbered by unfair social expectations and rules.

Teaching preschooI for six years at a progressive school, I was able to engage in ongoing learning opportunities, including observation and reflection. The school's emergent curriculum approach required me to pay close attention to the children's play in order to build the curriculum and create environments based on their evolving interests.

Early one semester, while on a nature field trip, I noticed great enthusiasm coming from a small group that consisted mostly of girls. They attempted to "make a campfire" using sticks and logs. After observing several other similar play scenarios and listening to their discussions, I began building a curriculum based on the children's evolving interests. I started by offering opportunities to encourage this inquiry—for example, through drawing activities and providing tools to more closely explore the properties of wood. Several weeks later, I was gratified to see that among those most deeply engaged in our emerging curricular focus on wood, fire, and camping, the majority continued to be girls. The girls' behavior and interests involved characteristics historically categorized as masculine: joyfully getting dirty, doing hard physical work (in this case with hand tools), and being motivated by a perceived sense of danger acted out in their play—for example, pretending that a fire might erupt at any moment.

These exciting observations prompted me to investigate how a particular curriculum might encourage and support children to behave outside of society's gender constructs. My understanding of gender influences built over time; each year I noticed the power and presence of these influences in the classroom.

These questions guided my study:

• How can I offer a curriculum that provides children with more opportunities for acting outside of traditional gender roles?
• How can I encourage and support children who wish to behave outside of traditional gender roles?
• How can I foster increasingly flexible thinking about gender among 4- and 5-year-old children?

The following study highlights excerpts not only from our major emergent project on camping and firemaking, but also from examples drawn from all of my teaching experiences that spring semester.

Literature review

Young children are continually making sense of their world, assimilating novel information and modifying their theories along the way. Most influences in the lives of young children—both human and environmental—reinforce existing stereotypes (Ramsey 2004).

Without prominent caring adults helping them consider perspectives that challenge the status quo, children, left to their own devices, tend to develop notions that conform with stereotypes (Ramsey 2004). If children are regularly exposed to images, actions, people, and words that counter stereotypes—for example through books, photographs, stories, and role models—they are likely to modify and expand on their narrow theories (Brill & Pepper 2008).

Thus, educators of young children should offer their student different perspectives, including those that counter society's confined constructs, to allow children access to a range of roles, expressions, and identities (Valente 2011). Without such efforts, we stymie young children's development, keeping them from realizing the extent of their potential.

During this teacher research project, I found many examples of girls crossing traditional gender role boundaries but only a few examples involving boys. Some researchers believe this phenomenon, a common finding in gender studies, results from our male-dominated culture, in which being male or having male characteristics is associated with power, opportunity, and prestige (Daitsman 2011).

Many young boys demonstrate awareness of these desirable qualities and perhaps worry about losing such advantages if they were to cross gender lines. Accordingly, educators must take an active role in providing both boys and girls counternarratives, and helping children question the status quo. Forman and Fyfe (2012) show faith in our human capacity to evolve, describing our understandings of the world as malleable. They write, "We hold that knowledge is gradually constructed by becoming each other's student, by taking an inquiry stance toward each other's constructs, and by sincere attempts to assimilate or reconcile each other's initial perspective" (247).

My goal is that this research will prompt educators to work on softening the system of gender rules that surrounds and governs our children. As Brown and Jones (2001) explain, "Changes in attitudes will not be achieved until certain fundamental dichotomies, which currently regulate aspects of classroom life, have been shifted" (143).

This study took place at a progressive San Francisco Bay Area preschool offering a full­ day, year-round program. The school serves 2 1/2 - to 5 1/2-year­ olds. I conducted the study in my classroom of twenty-one 4- and 5-year-olds.

The children were from diverse backgrounds racially, culturally, and socioeconomically and represented a wide range of family compositions. While all 21 children in my class were observed during the research process, particular children and groups of children became more visible in the data for various reasons. Some children stood out to me as particularly conforming or nonconforming to traditional gender roles, as compared to their peers. Alternatively, I also focused on cases where I felt I had witnessed a child break from their typical role or gender expression. I was the lead teacher and worked alongside and collaborated with two coteachers.

During the spring semester when this study was conducted, the children spent most of the morning hours in unstructured play time with the choice of working indoors or outdoors. We also spent at least one hour of every morning engaged in more structured activities, including circle time. The afternoons also included choices for indoor and outdoor play. Weekly field trips had long been integral to the school's program, so my class left the campus each Wednesday to embark on a local adventure together.

Beginning this study in the Spring, I benefited from having established relationships with the children over the first five months of the school year. By the time I began this teacher research, I had met with their parents during fall conferences and spent countless hours observing the children, connecting with them, learning their idiosyncrasies, and building trust. In fact, I had already come to know many of these children the year prior when preschoolers from various classrooms intermingled while playing in our shared yard.

My data sources included  field notes  and reflective notes, video and photos, and weekly journaling. The field notes generally consisted of my observations, which were recorded during natural discussions and spontaneous events. After leaving the classroom I revisited the field notes to fill in contextual holes or other missing information. Fully detailed, my field notes offered vivid samples that I could use to effectively recall experiences for analysis. I believe in many cases I reproduced conversations accurately. At other times, I captured more of the flow of an event. Excerpts from my field notes, in the upcoming Findings section, reflect this range of detail.

My analysis uses a theoretical lens suggested by Rogoff (2003), which holds that human thinking and behavior should be understood within its particular sociocultural context, that is to say an environment greatly influences those who live and learn within it and vice versa. Thus, the data is viewed in consideration of situational factors such as structured versus unstructured play, children’s varied personalities, and larger societal influences like the media. My analysis also includes self-reflection, as I continually questioned my views on gender, knowing that my data had been gathered through my personal feminist lens.

The data collected—notes and images capturing young children’s expressions, behavior, and interactions—was examined for evidence of gendered thinking and possible influences that caused it. After first organizing my data chronologically, I proceeded to go through it, jotting down one to five words to describe each data sample. Moving slowly, I regularly returned to previous samples, making comparisons between records and reevaluating the descriptions I was making. As new words or “codes” came to mind, I again returned to previous data samples to determine whether this concept was visible throughout the data. Thus, the process continued, moving forward and backward to compare, reevaluate, confirm new patterns, and then review.

Next, I studied my list of codes and pulled those that seemed most encompassing to serve as overarching themes. The three themes that resulted, in relation to gender, were (1) influences of materials and teacher expectations; (2) children’s desire and search for power; and (3) expressions and behavior illustrating children’s state of mind and development. In the following section I explore these themes, illustrating each with supporting data excerpts and my analysis of them.

Influences of materials and teacher expectations

Many factors influence children’s learning experiences in the early childhood classroom. This first theme examines how the available materials—whether closed or open-ended—might guide the children’s work and interactions with one another.

I primarily focus on the props and tools that I, the teacher, provided the children, the intention behind the materials offered, and my expectations on how they might be used. Of course other compounding factors should be considered here as well. For example, how our school’s philosophy plays out in our classroom, the physical environment, and the emergent curriculum topics we teachers have chosen. Such factors combine to create a stage upon which the children and teachers act.

Data collected on two different days revealed contrasting behavior among the children. The first excerpt focuses on two girls exploring new materials inspired by our emergent unit on wood, camping, and fire. During this play they assume less conventional female roles.

In the second sample, the subjects of my observation include three boys whom I observed handling baby dolls—props available throughout the year in our classroom—in a manner congruent with stereotypical gender norms.

Also included in this excerpt is a girl who was seeking to interact with me while I watched the boys. The first data sample stood out to me during analysis and I have included it for the reader because it caused me to consider how some curricular materials might offer children opportunities for acting outside of traditional gender roles. In contrast, the second sample made me think more deeply about the types of materials that we typically offer children (e.g., baby dolls), how many of these play props have strong associations with only one gender, and how open-ended materials might be less limiting for a child’s self-expression and learning. (See “Field Notes, February 12, 2014.”)

When the children approached the camping activity table, I gave very little instruction. Instead I explained I had seen them working with wood recently, and I wanted to give them more time and tools for their investigation. Whenever I share such observations about children’s work and express curiosity, it seems to validate their interests and encourage their exploration. The group readily experimented. The activity was approachable, open-ended, and afforded a safe place to try out new ideas, actions, and roles.

The girls appeared empowered and stayed with their work for as long as possible. Their verbal expressions resembled those I had heard more often from boys in my classroom. For instance, Caitlyn and Stella deepened their voices noticeably as they loudly delighted in each discovery, saying, “OHHH” and “WHOA!” Apparently, this natural wood paired with carpentry tools served as entry vehicles into the vigorous roles that the girls assumed.

The logs were like those they had been gathering on our field trip when they tried to make fire, while the hand tools suggested new ways to transform the wood. Something about this scenario obviously captivated them, as the girls’ interest in working with wood and dramatic play related to campfires and camping continued over the next several months.

In organizing this activity, I had expected more boys to be drawn to the wood and hand tools. On reflection, I see these expectations were based on my own gender-biased assumptions. Instead, this activity attracted more girls, providing them the opportunity to further explore an interest outside of traditional female roles. Such traditional roles are reinforced when girls role-play motherhood, princesses, or female characters commonly found in popular movies and other media—activities far more common in my classroom than these girls’ work with wood.

On a separate occasion, much later in the school year, I found myself drawn to a group of three boys working in the dramatic play area—Robby, Peter, and Mason—during unstructured play time. I noticed that they had picked up the baby dolls, and I was intrigued, as I hadn’t seen them use the dolls before. They had also brought over a roll of tape.

Perching on a nearby stepstool, I grabbed my camera, a notepad and pen, and began recording. Meanwhile, I was slightly distracted by Ella standing next to me, as she simultaneously began sharing her future plans for motherhood. (See “Field Notes, April 11, 2014”—the following dialogues are presented side by side, as they took place.)

These data samples stood out to me because of the coincidence of these two concurrent stereotypical portrayals of gender roles. While observing the group, I had perceived Ella’s dialogue as disruptive, unrelated to what I was in the process of capturing. In the moment, I was not fully focused on her thoughts and did not consider them significant to the situation. When I later reflected, however, I realized that Ella had noticed I was observing this group of boys and their rough play with the dolls. Looking to connect with me, she offered her perspective on babies and caregiving.

Upon reflection, the boys’ behavior reminded me of teacher researcher Aaron Neimark’s description of his preschool boys playing what he called “basketball babies” (2012). Through his studies, Neimark (2012) noticed how young children often use objects in silly ways that diverge from the expected or intended use—for instance, pretending that basketballs were babies—and that this sense of creativity and comedy is an important component of peer culture.

While there seemed to be an element of humor as the boys played with the baby dolls during my observation, I further wondered about possible gender-related influences that may have caused them to interact with the props in this way. Though connecting the babies to plates and flying them around was a creative idea—a divergent one from how I had expected children to use dolls—I felt that their gender role expressions guided their actions more than simple imagination. The girls in my class didn’t play with the dolls often, but when they did, their play was typically nurturing and gentle. I wondered if the boys had a tacit understanding that playing with dolls in a school setting is only acceptable if it is clearly distinct from the typical female version of such play (Brown & Jones 2001).

I find myself caught between a feminist perspective and that of the progressive teacher I sought to be: one who embraces each child’s unique interpretation of an activity or idea (Brown & Jones 2001). The gender roles that children assume, as defined by our culture, affect their play, from determining their interests to deciding how to play and how to make use of props (Meier & Henderson 2007). The data samples in this section suggest that the type of materials offered to children may provoke them to assume roles that are more or less stereotypical and could thereby influence their social interactions and learning. For instance, because baby dolls are socially constructed as feminine toys, they are less accessible for young boys.

With an understood purpose for caregiving role-play, young girls can feel comfortable behaving in line with their stereotypical gender role while playing with dolls. Boys, on the other hand, are perhaps implicitly excluded from using these toys, lest they should act outside of their traditional gender role. If they do use such materials, I have observed that their play usually deviates from the expected purpose. As a result, I find such gendered toys to be limiting for both young girls and boys. In contrast, materials that are less gendered and more open-ended—for example, natural materials such as sticks, pinecones, shells—encourage more creativity, stimulate imagination and allow for endless interpretations. Accordingly, open-ended materials are more likely to further children’s cognitive, physical and artistic development (NAEYC, n.d.).

Children’s desire and search for power

This second theme explores the human desire for control and power. I noticed that the children sought and expressed power, for example, using it to exclude or include others, to influence a situation in their favor, or to feel strong. As with the first theme, the key data samples occurred on different days. I chose examples that involved one child across two similar events: first in a position of subordination and then in a place of power. The first event took place at school and the second on a field trip.

Both events occurred during structured playtime and both observations involved a group of three children—two had already established their play when a third approached and tried to join in. As teacher researcher Chris Taaffee (2012) found, such triangulated situations often prove challenging for the third child. The excerpts from the two field notes (See “Field Notes, February 24, 2014” and “Field Notes, April 9, 2014”) demonstrate complex desires for power and how children learn approaches for exercising control.

In the field notes from February 24, Violet used her knowledge of gender constructs and her understanding of her friend Cora’s somewhat conforming gender expression to control the situation. Violet did not offer Cora any role, like a sister or mom role, other than a monster. She knew that playing the monster is a less conventional option for a girl, and thus, a choice that Cora would probably not accept. Cora seemed to be penalized here for acting within her predictable gender role, which I found thoughtprovoking, as acting within one’s gender role is frequently considered desirable and conducive to acceptance. Yet in this case, Cora’s preference to express female gender conventionally gave Violet an easy way to exclude Cora.

More than a month later, on April 9, I was fascinated to see Cora try a similar tactic with Lillian. This time, however, the interaction played out quite differently. Lillian readily seized the opportunity to become the monster, and I was pleased and surprised that Cora and Eddie were completely open to her involvement. While Violet’s intentions in the first scenario seemed clear to me, I was uncertain about Cora’s motivation. I had observed that unlike Cora, Lillian assumed nonconforming roles on a regular basis. If Cora really didn’t want Lillian to join the pair, she would have had to make a different kind of proposal.

Both scenarios demonstrate the complexity of young children’s interpersonal relationships within the sociocultural contexts influencing their lives. I and many other teachers have observed countless interactions involving a small group of children trying to protect their harmonious play from outsiders who could potentially disrupt the often fragile unity of young friendships (Neimark 2012; Taaffe 2012). I have witnessed children employ various strategies to exclude others and now realize how frequently they use their understanding of gender and culture to successfully block others from the play and determine who is permitted membership to the group (Brown & Jones 2001).

Like Cora, some children can be understood as behaving from within a dynamic process that includes learning from peers and the media, experimenting with ideas, and making sense of gender roles and relationships.

Expressions and behavior illustrating child’s state of mind and development

I have noticed that around the age of 4, children can become resolute in their thinking and uncompromising on their theories about the world, as they try to organize experiences and concepts into neat, often dichotomous categories. The following data sample typifies the kind of shortsighted perspectives children might adopt. Left unchallenged, these early views may be reinforced and become more permanent convictions. (See “Field Notes, February 25, 2014.”)

Addie has two younger brothers, one of whom is a very active 3-year-old and, according to Addie, “causes a lot of problems.” I thus attributed Addie’s concern mostly to her experiences at home. Still, I wondered about her belief that boys don’t like her. Where did this conviction come from? Teddy quickly disavowed Addie’s notion, and I noted how eager he was not to be implicated in an unfair assumption made about his gender.

In an effort to counter such gender stereotyping, my coteachers and I began implementing activities to acquaint children across genders, such as coed lunch seating arrangements and partnered projects. We also began performing childauthored plays in which crossgender roles were common (Paley [1984] 2014).

Discussion and implications

I began this study wondering how I might offer young children more opportunities to act outside of traditional gender roles. In the end, I realized that the children were working through complex ideas about the world. Our curriculum on fire and camping had encouraged some girls to step outside of gender roles, but it didn’t have a widening effect on all children—no single approach would. My findings showed that we needed a broader approach to advance children’s ideas about identity.

Accordingly, I selected the following strategies to modify my practice and undertake future teacher research:

• nurture flexible thinking across all situations
• find opportunities for children to step outside their comfort zones in regard to activities, peer relationships, and personal challenges
• foster advocacy skills in oneself and others

If people have the capacity to consider unconventional ideas and bend their thinking, our interactions with one another might look very different and be healthier for individual identity development. Furthermore, I realized that exploring and understanding gender identity shouldn’t be concentrated on the experiences of a select few, such as the girls who were so interested in the camping project. Rather, my goal should be to expand everyone’s mind, thereby making more room for children to express themselves individually across the identity spectrum.

While this research provides insight into the processes of children’s identity development, my findings are based upon one study I conducted independently over a spring semester. My feminist lens and personal perspectives influence all areas of my study—from gathering data to analyzing for interpretations, and deriving conclusions.

However, such subjectivity is inherent in teacher research and considered an advantage of the methodology, as it offers an honest insider’s perspective of a practitioner in action (Meier & Henderson 2007).

According to Meier and Henderson (2007), “Since early childhood is the foundation for young children’s views and experiences with getting along with one another, and with understanding and taking a stance toward the world of relationships, a focus in teacher research on social justice will deepen our character/social curriculum” (178). I began this research project to take action on a social justice issue, but, over the four months of this study, most of my work focused on first making sense of what I was seeing. I ended up generating more questions than answers. Yet, it was this process of questioning that helped me to deduce some useful ideas for how best to continue identity work with young children.

I hope this study encourages other early childhood teachers to question gender issues that they might have otherwise accepted at face value. Looking critically at gender can allow teachers to have broader perceptions and interpretations of daily classroom events, thereby allowing children more space as they develop their gender identities.

My data shows the complexity of this topic, including compounding factors, influences, and considerations. It also demonstrates how pervasive socialized ideas about gender roles and expression are in our lives. While my findings need to be considered within the study’s limitations, I feel that I have successfully achieved a personal goal of sharing my feminist thinking with a larger audience within the field of early childhood education.

Accordingly, this study gives voice to an important issue, and its value lies in my efforts to question the world, ease rigid thinking, and counter oppressive constructs (Valente 2011). Hopefully my teacher research “charges and challenges us to renew our commitment to an active, inclusive feminist struggle” (hooks 1994, 74).

Field Notes: Gender Identity and Expression in the Early Childhood Classroom

Field Notes | February 12, 2014

While on a field trip, a co-ed group of children worked together gathering sticks to build a fire. Several of the girls led the effort, directing others to gather more grass, sticks, and small logs. Meanwhile, the group discussed their theories about stoking a fire. Several days later, I observed many of the same children using trowels to chip away at bark while trying to “make fire” in the school garden. Thus, I decided to offer the class different types of wood, child-safe saws, and sandpaper during small group time in the classroom and see who was interested. I stayed close by to ensure that the tools were used in a safe manner. Four children, Stella, Caitlyn, Anna, and Robby, joined the activity when I invited them over, and I was pleased to see the three girls in this group so enthusiastic to use the tools and experiment with the wood.

Photos capture the children’s intensity and concentration and, thus, their interest in the activity. Stella and Caitlyn focused intently on the wood as they worked solidly for over 35 minutes and stopped only because they were asked to clean up for lunch. Before leaving the table, Stella exclaimed, “I’ve never done anything so serious!”

Field Notes | April 11, 2014

Robby (R), Peter (P) and Mason (M) gather around a small table in the dramatic play area, while I, teacher Jamie (J), watch. Mason watches with interest while Peter and Robby play with the two baby dolls, which they have brought over.

R: Rip the head off. P: No—you do it. J: Pause and think, you guys. [They all look up and over, now realizing that I’m watching.] P: We’re not actually strong enough. Shiiiiing! [P pokes a stick into the doll’s eye.] R: Watch this. [R bangs the plate on the baby and then proceeds to tape the baby to the plate. P follows his lead. The two boys fly the babies around the room, having connected them to the plastic plates, which seemed to serve as the dolls’ wings.]

Field notes | April 11, 2014

Ella (E) leans in close to me (J), ostensibly wanting to chat, as she so often does. She shares the following idea with me, while I try my hardest to focus on the group of boys. After a couple of minutes, I realize how similarly meaningful Ella’s monologue is to my study on gender.

E: I’m gonna be a mommy when I grow up. J: Oh yeah? [I raise my eyebrows, hoping that my response won’t provoke her too much, as I try to return my focus to the other children.] E: I’m gonna have one baby, because it’s hard to carry 120, 120, and 120 babies! J: [I smile]

Field Notes | February 24, 2014

Ella and Violet, 4 and 5 years old, respectively, are playing house. It’s clear that they want to maintain their harmonious two-person play, as Violet tells Cora, “I just want to play with Ella right now.”

Usually, I would have respected the wish of two children to play alone, but because Violet and Ella spend the majority of their time playing together, without the inclusion of others, I decided to push and see if they could find a way to include Cora. “Can you think of a way for Cora to play?” I ask.

Violet offers, “She can be the monster.”

Cora immediately rejects the offer; she wants to be the baby. But, according to Violet, there are no babies in this game and the only possible role is that of a monster. Cora resigns herself to finding a different playmate, and Violet and Ella continue their game, uninterrupted.

Field Notes | April 9, 2014

Cora and Eddie are playing together while on our field trip in a wooded park. They walk closely side-by-side, talking quietly, every so often looking behind. Lillian follows after them and no matter how many times they change course, she remains several feet behind them, yet not really making her intentions known. Finally Eddie bursts out, “You can’t play!” and Cora adds, “Stop following us!”

I move closer, intending to ask Cora and Eddie to tell Lillian their feelings in a kinder way. As soon as Cora sees that I’ve noticed the conflict, she quickly offers Lillian an alternative: “You can be the monster.”

Lillian smiles and begins contorting her face and body to assume the role. Cora adds, “And you can chase us!” Lillian shows them she’s ready by creeping forward just as Cora and Eddie take off in the opposite direction, screaming happily!

Field Notes | February 25, 2014

Four-year-old Addie (A) approaches me (J) and shows me a jewel she is carrying in a special container. Her classmate Teddy (T) is playing nearby. I ask about it, and Addie explains why she is keeping her jewel in the container:

A: . . . the boys might break it. [A looks down at jewel while talking] J: The boys might break it? What makes you think that? A: Because boys don’t like jewels. [A continues to look down; T looks up from work and toward A] J: Is there a reason why you think boys don’t like jewels? A: Because they don’t like me. [Looking down] T: I like you. [Said seriously and honestly]

Brill, S., & R. Pepper. 2008.  The Transgender Child: A Handbook for Families and Professionals . San Francisco, CA: Cleis Press.

Brown, T., & L. Jones. 2001.  Action Research and Postmodernism: Congruence and Critique . Conducting Educational Research series. Philadelphia, FA: Open University Press.

Daitsman, J. 2011. "Exploring Gender Identity in Early Childhood Through Story Dictation and Dramatization."  Voices of Practitioners  14.  www.naeyc.org/files/naeyc/file/Publications/VOP_Daitsman_Final.pdf .

Forman, G., & B. Fyfe. 2012. "Negotiated Learning Through Design, Documentation, and Discourse." Chap. 14 in  The Hundred Languages of Children: The Reggio Emilia Experience in Transformation , 3rd ed., eds. C. Edwards, L.Gandini, & G. Forman, 247-71. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger.

hooks, b. 1994.  Teaching to Transgress: Education as the Practice of Freedom . New York: Routledge.

Liang, Y. 2015. "A Journey of Journals: Promoting Child-Centered Second­ Language Acquisition in Preschool."  Voices of Practitioners  10 (2): 45-58.  www.naeyc.org/files/naeyc/file/vop/VOP_Summer_2015_joumal.pdf .

Meier, D.R, &B. Henderson. 2007-  Learning From Young Children in the Classroom: The Art and Science of Teacher Research . New York: Teachers College Press.

NAEYC (National Association for the Education of Young Children). N.d. "What the Research Says: Gender­ Typed Toys."  www.naeyc.org/content/what-research-says-gender-typed-toys .

Neimark, A 2012. "'Do You Want to See Something Goofy?' Peer Culture in the Preschool Yard." In  Our Inquiry, Our Practice: Undertaking, Supporting, and Learning From Early Childhood Teacher Research(ers) , eds. G. Perry, B. Henderson, & D.R. Meier, 53-64. Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.  www.naeyc.org/files/naeyc/file/vop/Voices_NeimarkGoofy.pdf .

Ortiz, A, D. Ferrell, J. Anderson, L. Cain, N. Fluty, S. Sturzenbecker, & T. Matlock. 2014. "Teacher Research on Boys' Literacy in One Elementary School."  Voices of Practitioners  9 (1):1-19.  www.naeyc.org/files/naeyc/file/images jvoices/9_ortiz%20v9-1 .

Paley, V.G. 2014.  Boys and Girls: Superheroes in the Doll Comer . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Ramsey, P.G. 2004.  Teaching and Learning in a Diverse World . 3rd ed. New York: Teachers College Press.

Rogoff, B. 2003.  The Cultural Nature of Human Development . New York: Oxford University Press.

Taaffe, C. 2012. "Two's Company, Three's a Crowd: Peer Interactions in a Preschool Social Triangle." Chap. 3 in  Our Inquiry, Our Practice: Undertaking, Supporting and Learning From Early Childhood Teacher Research(ers) , eds. G. Perry, B. Henderson, & D.R. Meier, 21-35. Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.

Valente, J. M. 2011.  D/ Deaf and d/ Dumb: A Portrait of a Deaf Kid as a Young Superhero . Disability Studies in Education series. New York: Peter Lang.

Voices of Practitioners: Teacher Research in Early Childhood Education , the online journal of the National Association for the Education of Young Children, has been published since 2004.

Voices editor Gail Perry passed away in the summer of 2015, and her presence, expertise in teacher research, and deep knowledge of early childhood education are sorely missed. Starting with this issue, a Voices of Practitioners article will be published in each issue of Young Children as well as online.

Voices of Practitioners is a vehicle for dissemination of early childhood teachers’ systematic study of an aspect of their own classroom practice. Deeply involved in the daily lives of children and their families, teachers provide a critical insider perspective on life in their classrooms through communication of their investigations, the results, and their reflections.

Photographs: courtesy of the author

Jamie Solomon, MA, worked in the early childhood field for over 10 years, teaching at the preschool and college levels in San Francisco. Her teacher research projects have focused on gender development and emergent curriculum. Jamie has recently relocated to Southeastern Michigan.

Vol. 71, No. 3

Print this article

Encouraging Gender Conformity or Sanctioning Nonconformity? Felt Pressure from Parents, Peers, and the Self

• Empirical Research
• Published: 13 January 2021
• Volume 50 , pages 613–627, ( 2021 )

Cite this article

• Emma F. Jackson   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-4973-1256 1 ,
• Kay Bussey   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-6806-0892 1 &
• Emily Myers 1  

4 Citations

1 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Expectations regarding gendered behaviors are understood to emanate from many sources, including parents, peers, and the self but there has been little research directly comparing these three sources of pressure. The present study assessed felt pressure regarding masculine and feminine stereotypic behaviors and compared pressure from parents, peers, and the self and how these sources are associated with self-perceived gender typicality. Participants ( N  = 275; 53.09% female; grade 7  M  = 12.35 years; grade 9  M  = 14.3 years; 71% Anglo-Celtic) were recruited from independent schools in Sydney. Felt pressure from the self to engage in masculine behavior was greater than felt pressure from parents or peers. Male adolescents reported higher felt pressure to conform to gender conforming behavior from parents and the self and pressure to avoid gender nonconforming behavior was greatest from peers. Female adolescents reported felt pressure to conform to gender nonconforming behaviors and this pressure was the strongest from the self. Additionally, for both genders, felt pressure from the self was most consistently associated with gender typicality. These findings highlight the importance of self-expectations for gender cognitions relating to both masculine and feminine behaviors.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Development of Gender Non-Contentedness During Adolescence and Early Adulthood

The Perfect Storm: A Developmental–Sociocultural Framework for the Role of Social Media in Adolescent Girls’ Body Image Concerns and Mental Health

Your Happiness Is My Happiness: Predicting Positive Feelings for a Partner’s Consensual Extra-Dyadic Intimate Relations

Allison, P. D. (2001). Quantitative applications in the social sciences: Missing data . Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.

Andrews, N. C. Z., Martin, C. L., Cook, R. E., Field, R. D., & England, D. E. (2019). Exploring dual gender typicality among young adults in the United States. International Journal of Behavioral Development , 43 (4), 314–321. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025418811125 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Australian Bureau of Statistics (2018). Schools, Australia, 2018 (cat. no. 4221.0). Retrieved from https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/mf/4221.0 . Accessed 10 Oct 2019.

Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority (2016). In My school website. Retrieved from http://www.myschool.edu.au .

Bussey, K., & Bandura, A. (1992). Self-regulatory mechanisms governing gender development. Child Development , 63 (5), 1236–1250. https://doi.org/10.2307/1131530 .

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Bussey, K. (2011). Gender identity development. In S. J. Schwartz, K. Luyckx, & V.L. Vignoles (Eds.), Handbook of identity theory and research (pp. 603–628). Springer New York.

Carrotte, E. R., Prichard, I., & Lim, M. S. C. (2017). “fitspiration” on social media: A content analysis of gendered images. Journal of Medical Internet Research , 19 (3), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.6368 .

Connell, R. W., & Messerschmidt, J. W. (2005). Hegemonic masculinity rethinking the concept. Gender and Society , 19 (6), 829–859. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243205278639 .

Cook, R. E., Nielson, M. G., Martin, C. L., & DeLay, D. (2019). Early adolescent gender development: The differential effects of felt pressure from parents, peers, and the self. Journal of Youth and Adolescence , 48 (10), 1912–1923. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-019-01122-y .

Cottingham, M. D. (2019). The missing and needed male nurse: Discursive hybridization in professional nursing texts. Gender, Work and Organization , 26 (2), 197–213. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12333 .

Dean, M. L., & Tate, C. C. (2016). Extending the legacy of Sandra Bem: Psychological androgyny as a touchstone conceptual advance for the study of gender in psychological science. Sex Roles , 76 (11–12), 643–654. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-016-0713-z .

Diamond, L. M. (2020). Gender fluidity and nonbinary gender identities among children and adolescents. Child Development Perspectives , 14 (2), 110–115. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12366 .

Egan, S. K., & Perry, D. G. (2001). Gender identity: A multidimensional analysis with implications for psychosocial adjustment. Developmental Psychology , 37 (4), 451–463. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.37.4.451 .

Fast, A. A., & Olson, K. R. (2018). Gender development in transgender preschool children. Child Development , 89 (2), 620–637. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12758 .

Fisher, C. M., Waling, A., Kerr, L., Bellamy, R., Ezer, P., Mikolajczak, G., Brown, G., Carman, M., & Lucke, J. (2019). 6th National Survey of Australian Secondary Students and Sexual Health 201 (No. 113). Australian Research Centre in Sex, Health & Society, La Trobe University. https://doi.org/10.26181/5c80777f6c35e .

Halim, M. L., Ruble, D. N., & Amodio, D. M. (2011). From pink frilly dresses to “one of the boys”: A social-cognitive analysis of gender identity development and gender bias. Social and Personality Psychology Compass , 5 (11), 933–949. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2011.00399.x .

Halpern, H., & Perry-Jenkins, M. (2016). Parents’ gender ideology and gendered behavior as predictors of children’s gender-role attitudes: A longitudinal exploration. A Journal of Research , 74 (11), 527–542. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-015-0539-0 .

Hoskin, R. A. (2019). Femmephobia: The role of anti-femininity and gender policing in LGBTQ+ people’s experiences of discrimination. Sex Roles . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-019-01021-3 .

Jackson, E. F., & Bussey, K. (2020). Under pressure: Differentiating expectations regarding stereotypic masculine and feminine behavior. Sex Roles . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-019-01113-0 .

Kornienko, O., Santos, C. E., Martin, C. L., & Granger, K. L. (2016). Peer influence on gender identity development in adolescence. Developmental Psychology , 52 (10), 1578–1592. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000200 .

Larson, R. W., & Richards, M. H. (1991). Daily companionship in late childhood and early adolescence: Changing developmental contexts. Child Development , 62 (2), 284–300. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1991.tb01531.x .

Leaper, C. (2011). Research in developmental psychology on gender and relationships: Reflections on the past and looking into the future. The British Journal of Developmental Psychology , 29 , 347–356. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-835X.2011.02035.x .

Lee, E. A. E., & Troop-Gordon, W. (2011). Peer processes and gender role development: Changes in gender atypicality related to negative peer treatment and children’s friendships. Sex Roles , 64 (1), 90–102. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-010-9883-2 .

Liben, L. S. (2016). We’ve come a long way, baby (but we’re not there yet): Gender past, present, and future. Child Development , 87 (1), 5–28. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12490 .

Martin, C. L., Ruble, D. N., & Szkrybalo, J. (2002). Cognitive theories of early gender development. Psychological Bulletin , 128 (6), 903–933. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.128.6.903 .

Messerschmidt, J. W. (2012). Engendering gendered knowledge. Men and Masculinities , 15 (1), 56–76. https://doi.org/10.1177/1097184X11428384 .

Mulvey, K. L., & Killen, M. (2015). Challenging gender stereotypes: Resistance and exclusion. Child Development , 86 (3), 681–694. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12317 .

Nielson, M. G., Schroeder, K. M., Martin, C. L., & Cook, R. E. (2020). Investigating the relation between gender typicality and pressure to conform to gender norms. Sex Roles. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-020-01136-y .

Olsson, M., & Martiny, S. E. (2018). Does exposure to counterstereotypical role models influence girls’ and women’s gender stereotypes and career choices? A review of social psychological research. Frontiers in Psychology , 9 , 2264. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02264 .

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Oransky, M., & Marecek, J. (2009). “I’m not going to be a girl”: Masculinity and emotions in boys’ friendships and peer groups. Journal of Adolescent Research , 24 (2), 218–241. https://doi.org/10.1177/0743558408329951 .

Perry, D. G., Pauletti, R. E., & Cooper, P. J. (2019). Gender identity in childhood: A review of the literature. International Journal of Behavioral Development , 43 (4), 289–304. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025418811129 .

Podsakoff, P. M., Mackenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology , 88 (5), 879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.87 .

Rider, G. N., Mcmorris, B. J., Gower, A. L., Coleman, E., & Eisenberg, M. E. (2018). Health and care utilization of transgender and gender nonconforming youth: A population-based study. Pediatrics , 141(3). https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2017-1683 .

Scholes, L., & Stahl, G. (2020). ‘I’m good at science but I don’t want to be a scientist’: Australian primary school student stereotypes of science and scientists. International Journal of Inclusive Education . Advance online publication https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2020.1751316 .

Schroeder, K. M., & Liben, L. S. (2020). Felt pressure to conform to cultural gender roles: Correlates and consequences. Sex Roles . Advance online publication https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-020-01155-9 .

Spivey, L. A., Huebner, D. M., & Diamond, L. M. (2018). Parent responses to childhood gender nonconformity: Effects of parent and child characteristics. Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity , 5 (3), 360–370. https://doi.org/10.1037/sgd0000279 .

Williams, J. E., & Best, D. L. (1990). In D. L. Best (Ed.), Measuring sex stereotypes: a multination study (Rev. ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Centre for Emotional Health, Department of Psychology, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia

Emma F. Jackson, Kay Bussey & Emily Myers

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

E.F.F. jointly conceptualized the study, participated in design and coordination, conducted statistical analyses and interpretation and drafted the manuscript; K.B. jointly conceptualized the study, participated in the design and interpretation of the data, and helped to draft the manuscript; E.M. participated in data analysis and helped to draft the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Funding for the research reported in this manuscript was provided through the authors’ institution, Macquarie University.

Data Sharing and Declaration

This manuscript’s data will not be deposited.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Emma F. Jackson .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. The study was approved by the Human Research Ethics Committees of Macquarie University (No. 5201953358323).

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from legal guardians and individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Alternate Analyses

Calculation of alternate subscales . To establish the subscales of same and other gender behavior in felt pressure, items regarding masculine behaviors were coded as same gender for male participants and other gender for female participants, then repeated in reverse for feminine items. For gender typicality, for participants that identified as female in demographic information, items regarding girls were summed to form the same gender typicality subscale, and items regarding boys were summed to form the other gender typicality subscale. For participants that identified as male, the process was repeated in reverse. These scales were then used in alternate analyses which are presented in the tables below. Further, the means for male and female adolescents listed in the main text are the same means as for these analyses, with renaming of the variables such that masculine felt pressure for males is same gender felt pressure and feminine felt pressure for males is other gender felt pressure.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Jackson, E.F., Bussey, K. & Myers, E. Encouraging Gender Conformity or Sanctioning Nonconformity? Felt Pressure from Parents, Peers, and the Self. J Youth Adolescence 50 , 613–627 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-020-01387-8

Download citation

Received : 23 September 2020

Accepted : 20 December 2020

Published : 13 January 2021

Issue Date : April 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-020-01387-8

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Gender identity
• Gender development
• Adolescence
• Gender typicality
• Gender stereotypes
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Int J Environ Res Public Health
• PMC10218532

Gender and Media Representations: A Review of the Literature on Gender Stereotypes, Objectification and Sexualization

Media representations play an important role in producing sociocultural pressures. Despite social and legal progress in civil rights, restrictive gender-based representations appear to be still very pervasive in some contexts. The article explores scientific research on the relationship between media representations and gender stereotypes, objectification and sexualization, focusing on their presence in the cultural context. Results show how stereotyping, objectifying and sexualizing representations appear to be still very common across a number of contexts. Exposure to stereotyping representations appears to strengthen beliefs in gender stereotypes and endorsement of gender role norms, as well as fostering sexism, harassment and violence in men and stifling career-related ambitions in women. Exposure to objectifying and sexualizing representations appears to be associated with the internalization of cultural ideals of appearance, endorsement of sexist attitudes and tolerance of abuse and body shame. In turn, factors associated with exposure to these representations have been linked to detrimental effects on physical and psychological well-being, such as eating disorder symptomatology, increased body surveillance and poorer body image quality of life. However, specificities in the pathways from exposure to detrimental effects on well-being are involved for certain populations that warrant further research.

1. Introduction

As a social category, gender is one of the earliest and most prominent ways people may learn to identify themselves and their peers, the use of gender-based labels becoming apparent in infants as early as 17 months into their life [ 1 ]. Similarly, the development of gender-based heuristics, inferences and rudimentary stereotypes becomes apparent as early as age three [ 2 , 3 ]. Approximately at this age, the development of a person’s gender identity begins [ 4 ]—that is, the process through which a person tends to identify as a man, as a woman or as a vast spectrum of other possibilities (i.e., gender non-conforming, agender, genderfluid, etc.). These processes continue steadily throughout individuals’ lives as they receive and elaborate information about women and men and what it means to belong to either category, drawing from direct and indirect observations, social contact, personal elaborations and cultural representations [ 5 , 6 ]. As a result, social and mental representations of gender are extremely widespread, especially as a strictly binary construct, and can be argued to be ubiquitous in individual and social contexts.

Among the many sources of influence on gender representations, media occupies an important space and its relevance can be assessed across many different phenomena [ 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 ]. The ubiquity of media, the chronicity of individuals’ exposure to it and its role in shaping beliefs, attitudes and expectations have made it the subject of scientific attention. In fact, several theories have attempted to explore the mechanisms and psychological processes in which media plays a role, including identity development [ 12 , 13 , 14 ], scripts and schemas [ 15 ], cultivation processes [ 16 , 17 , 18 ] and socialization processes [ 5 , 6 ].

The public interest in the topic of gender has seen a surge in the last 10 years, in part due to social and political movements pushing for gender equality across a number of aspects, including how gender is portrayed in media representations. In the academic field as well, publications mentioning gender in their title, abstract or keywords have more than doubled from 2012 to 2022 [ 19 ], while publications mentioning gender in media representations have registered an even more dramatic increase, tripling in number [ 20 ]. Additionally, the media landscape has had a significant shift in the last decade, with the surge in popularity and subsequent addition of social media websites and apps to most people’s mediatic engagement [ 21 ].

The importance of media use in gender-related aspects, such as beliefs, attitudes, or roles, has been extensively documented. As reported in a recent review of the literature [ 22 ], several meta-analyses [ 17 , 23 , 24 ] showed support for the effects of media use on gender beliefs, finding small but consistent effect sizes. These effects appear to have remained present over the decades [ 25 ].

Particular attention has been given to stereotypical, objectifying and sexualizing representations, as portrayals that paint a restrictive picture of the complexity of human psychology, also producing sociocultural pressures to conform to gender roles and body types.

Gender stereotypes can be defined as an extremely simplified concept of attitudes and behaviors considered normal and appropriate for men and women in a specific culture [ 26 ]. They usually span several different areas of people’s characteristics, such as physical appearance, personality traits, behaviors, social roles and occupations. Stereotypical beliefs about gender may be divided into descriptive (how one perceives a person of a certain gender to be; [ 27 ]), prescriptive (how one perceives a person of a certain gender should be and behave; [ 28 , 29 ]) or proscriptive (how one perceives a person of a certain gender should not be and behave; [ 28 , 29 ]). Their content varies on the individual’s culture of reference [ 30 ], but recurring themes have been observed in western culture, such as stereotypes revolving around communion, agency and competence [ 31 ]. Women have stereotypically been associated with traits revolving around communion (e.g., supportiveness, compassion, expression, warmth), while men have been more stereotypically associated with agency (e.g., ambition, assertiveness, competitiveness, action) or competence (e.g., skill, intelligence). Both men and women may experience social and economic penalties (backlash) if they appear to violate these stereotypes [ 29 , 32 , 33 ].

Objectification can be defined as the viewing or treatment of people as objects. Discussing ways in which people may be objectified, Nussbaum first explored seven dimensions: instrumentality (a tool to be employed for one’s purposes); denial of autonomy (lacking self-determination, or autonomy); inertness (lacking in agency or activity); fungibility (interchangeable with others of the same type); violability (with boundaries lacking integrity and permissible to break into); ownership (possible to own or trade); denial of subjectivity (the person’s feelings or experiences are seen as something that does not need to be considered) [ 34 ].

In its initial definition by Fredrickson and Roberts [ 35 ], objectification theory had been offered as a framework to understand how the pervasive sexual objectification of women’s bodies in the sociocultural context influenced their experiences and posed risks to their mental health—a phenomenon that was believed to have uniquely female connotations. In their model, the authors theorized that a cultural climate of sexual objectification would lead to the internalization of objectification (viewing oneself as a sexual and subordinate object), which would in turn lead to psychological consequences (e.g., body shame, anxiety) and mental health risks (e.g., eating disorders, depression). Due to the pervasiveness of the cultural climate, objectification may be difficult to detect or avoid, and objectification experiences may be perceived as normative.

Sexual objectification, in which a person is reduced to a sexual instrument, can be construed to be a subtype of objectification and, in turn, is often defined as one of the types of sexualization [ 36 ]. As previously discussed by Ward [ 37 ], it should be made clear that the mere presence of sexual content, which may be represented in a positive and healthy way, should not be conflated with sexualized or objectifying representations.

The American Psychological Association’s 2007 report defines sexualization as a series of conditions that stand apart from healthy sexuality, such as when a person’s value is perceived to come mainly from sexual appeal or behavior, when physical attractiveness is equated to sexual attractiveness, when a person is sexually objectified or when sexuality is inappropriately imposed on a person [ 36 ]. Sexualization may involve several different contexts, such as personal, interpersonal, and cultural. Self-sexualization involves treating oneself as a sexual object [ 35 ]. Interpersonal contributions involve being treated as sexual objects by others, such as family or peers [ 38 , 39 ]. Finally, contributions by cultural norms, expectations and values play a part as well, including those spread by media representations [ 36 ]. After this initial definition, sexualization as a term has also been used by some authors (e.g., Zurbriggen & Roberts [ 40 ]) to refer to sexual objectification specifically, while others (e.g., Bigler and colleagues [ 41 ]) stand by the APA report’s broader meaning. In this section, we will explore scientific literature adopting the latter.

These portrayals have been hypothesized to lead to negative effects on people’s well-being on a mental and physical level, as well as bearing partial responsibility for several social issues, such as sexism, gender discrimination and harassment. However, the pathways that lead from an individual’s relationship with media to these detrimental effects can be complex. Furthermore, they seem to involve specificities for men and women, as well as for different sexual orientations. A wealth of publications has been produced on these themes and, to the authors’ knowledge, no recent review has attempted to synthesize their findings.

The present article aims to summarize the state of the art of research on stereotyping, sexualization and objectification in gender and media representations. A focus will be placed on the definitions of these concepts, the media where they occur, and verifying whether any changes over time are detectable or any specificities are present. The possible effects of these representations on people’s well-being will be explored as well.

A search of the literature was conducted on scientific search engines (APA PsycArticles, CINAHL Complete, Education Source, Family Studies Abstracts, Gender Studies Database, MEDLINE, Mental Measurements Yearbook, Sociology Source Ultimate, Violence & Abuse Abstracts, PUBMED, Scopus, Web of Science) to locate the most relevant contributions on the topic of media and gender representation, with a particular focus on stereotypes, objectification and sexualization, their presence in the media and their effects on well-being. Keywords were used to search for literature on the intersection of the main topics: media representation (e.g., media OR representation* OR portrayal*), gender (e.g., gender OR sex OR wom* OR m*n) and stereotypes, objectification and sexualization (e.g., stereotyp*, objectif*, sexualiz*). In some cases, additional keywords were used for the screening of studies on specific media (e.g., television, news, social media). When appropriate, further restrictions were used to screen for studies on effects or consequences (e.g., effect* OR impact* OR consequence* OR influence* OR outcome*). Inclusion criteria were the following: (a) academic articles (b) pertaining to the field of media representations (c) pertaining to gender stereotypes, objectification or sexualization. A dataset of 195 selected relevant papers was created. Thematic analysis was conducted following the guidelines developed by Braun and Clarke [ 42 ], in order to outline patterns of meaning across the reviewed studies. The process was organized into six phases: (1) familiarization with the data; (2) coding; (3) searching for themes; (4) reviewing themes; (5) defining and naming themes; and (6) writing up. After removing duplicates and excluding papers that did not meet the inclusion criteria, a total of 87 articles were included in the results of this review. The findings were discussed among researchers (LR, FS, MNP and TT) until unanimous consensus was reached.

2.1. Stereotypical Portrayals

Gender stereotypes appear to be flexible and responsive to changes in the social environment: consensual beliefs about men’s and women’s attributes have evolved throughout the decades, reflecting changes in women’s participation in the labor force and higher education [ 31 , 43 ]. Perceptions of gender equality in competence and intelligence have sharply risen, and stereotypical perceptions of women show significant changes: perceptions of women’s competence and intelligence have surpassed those relative to men, while the communion aspect appears to have shifted toward being even more polarized on being typical of women. Other aspects, such as perceptions of agency being more typical of men, have remained stable [ 31 ].

Despite these changes, gender representation in the media appears to be frequently skewed toward men’s representation and prominently features gender stereotypes. On a global scale, news coverage appears to mostly feature men, especially when considering representation as expert voices, where women are still underrepresented (24%) despite a rise in coverage in the last 5 years [ 44 ]. Underrepresentation has also been reported in many regional and national contexts, but exact proportions vary significantly in the local context. Male representation has been reported to be greater in several studies, with male characters significantly outnumbering female characters [ 45 ], doing so in male-led and mixed-led shows but not in female-led shows [ 46 ] in children’s television programming—a key source of influence on gender representations. Similar results have been found regarding sports news, whose coverage overwhelmingly focuses on men athletes [ 47 , 48 ] and where women are seldom represented.

Several analyses of television programs have also shown how representations of men and women are very often consistent with gender stereotypes. Girls were often portrayed as focusing more on their appearance [ 45 ], as well as being judged for their appearance [ 49 ]. The same focus on aesthetics was found in sports news coverage, which was starkly different across genders, and tended to focus on women athletes’ appearance, featuring overly simplified descriptions (vs. technical language on coverage of men athletes) [ 48 ]. In addition, coverage of women athletes was more likely in sports perceived to be more feminine or gender-appropriate [ 47 , 48 , 50 ]. Similarly, women in videogames appear to be both underrepresented and less likely to be featured as playable characters, as well as being frequently stereotyped, appearing in the role of someone in need of rescuing, as love interests, or cute and innocent characters [ 51 ]. In advertising as well, gender stereotypes have often been used as a staple technique for creating relatability, but their use may lead to negative cross-gender effects in product marketing [ 52 ] while also possibly furthering social issues. Hust and colleagues found that in alcohol advertisements, belief in gender stereotypes was the most consistent predictor of intentions to sexually coerce, showing significant interaction effects with exposure to highly objectifying portrayals [ 53 ]. Representation in advertising prominently features gender stereotypes, such as depicting men in professional roles more often, while depicting women in non-working, recreational roles, especially in countries that show high gender inequality [ 54 ]. A recent analysis of print ads [ 55 ] confirmed that some stereotypes are still prominent and, in some cases, have shown a resurgence, such as portraying a woman as the queen of the home; the study also found representations of women in positions of empowerment are, however, showing a relative increase in frequency. Public support, combined with market logic, appears to be successfully pushing more progressive portrayals in this field [ 56 ].

Both skewed representation and the presence of stereotypes have been found to lead to several negative effects. Gender-unequal representation has been found to stifle political [ 57 ] and career [ 58 ] ambition, as well as foster organizational discrimination [ 59 ]. Heavy media use may further the belief in gender stereotypes and has been found to be linked to a stronger endorsement of traditional gender roles and norms [ 60 ], which in turn may be linked to a vast number of detrimental health effects. In women, adherence and internalization of traditional gender roles have been linked to greater symptoms of depression and anxiety, a higher likelihood of developing eating disorders, and lower self-esteem and self-efficacy [ 36 , 61 , 62 , 63 ]. In men as well, adherence to traditional masculine norms has been linked to negative mental health outcomes such as depression, psychological distress and substance abuse [ 64 ], while also increasing the perpetration of risky behaviors [ 65 , 66 ] and intimate partner violence [ 65 , 67 ].

2.2. Objectifying Portrayals

Non-sexual objectifying representations appear to have been studied relatively little. They have been found to be common in advertising, where women are often depicted as purely aesthetic models, motionless and decorative [ 68 ]. They may also include using a woman’s body as a supporting object for the advertised product, as a decorative object, as an ornament to draw attention to the ad, or as a prize to be won and associated with the consumption of the advertised product [ 55 ].

The vast majority of the literature has focused on the sexual objectification of women. This type of representation has been reported to be very common in a number of contexts and across different media [ 69 ], and several studies (see Calogero and colleagues’ or Roberts and colleagues’ review [ 69 , 70 ]) have found support for the original model’s pathway [ 35 ]. Following experimental models expanded on the original (e.g., Frederick and colleagues or Roberts and colleagues [ 69 , 71 ]), highlighting the role of factors such as the internalization of lean or muscular ideals of appearance, finding evidence for negative effects on well-being and mental health through the increase in self-objectification and the internalization of cultural ideals of appearance [ 71 , 72 ].

Sexual objectification also appears to be consistently linked to sexism. For both women and men, the perpetration of sexual objectification was significantly associated with hostile and benevolent sexism, as well as the enjoyment of sexualization [ 73 ]. Enjoyment of sexualization, in turn, has been found to be positively associated with hostile sexism in both men and women, positively associated with benevolent sexism in women and negatively in men [ 74 ].

Exposure to objectifying media in men has been found to increase the tendency to engage in sexual coercion and harassment, as well as increasing conformity to gender role norms [ 75 ]. Consistently with the finding that perpetration of objectification may be associated with a greater men’s proclivity for rape and sexual aggression [ 76 ], a study conducted by Hust and colleagues found that exposure to objectifying portrayals of women in alcohol advertising was also a moderator in the relationship between belief in gender stereotypes and intentions to sexually coerce. Specifically, participants who had a stronger belief in gender stereotypes reported stronger intentions to sexually coerce when exposed to slightly objectifying images of women. Highly objectifying images did not yield the same increase—a result interpreted by the authors to mean that highly objectified women were perceived as sexually available and as such less likely to need coercion, while slightly objectified women could be perceived as more likely to need coercion [ 53 ].

Research on objectification has primarily focused on women, in part due to numerous studies suggesting that women are more subject to sexual objectification [ 73 , 77 , 78 , 79 , 80 ], as well as suffering the consequences of sexual objectification more often [ 81 ]. However, sexually objectifying portrayals seem to have a role in producing negative effects on men as well, although with partially different pathways. In men, findings about media appearance pressures on body image appear to be mixed. Previous meta-analyses found either a small average effect [ 82 ] or no significant effect [ 72 ]. A recent study found them to be significantly associated with higher body surveillance, poorer body image quality of life and lower satisfaction with appearance [ 71 ]. Another study, however, found differing relationships regarding sexual objectification: an association was found between experiences of sexual objectification and internalization of cultural standards of appearance, body shame and drive for muscularity, but was not found between experiences of sexual objectification and self-objectification or body surveillance [ 83 ]: in the same study, gender role conflict [ 84 ] was positively associated to the internalization of sociocultural standards of appearance, self-objectification, body shame and drive for muscularity, suggesting the possibility that different pathways may be involved in producing negative effects on men. Men with body-image concerns experiencing gender role conflict may also be less likely to engage in help-seeking behaviors [ 85 , 86 ]. This is possibly due to restrictive emotionality associated with the male gender role leading to more negative attitudes toward help-seeking, as found in a recent study by Nagai, [ 87 ], although this study finds no association with help-seeking behavior, conflicting with previous ones, and more research is needed.

Finally, specificities related to sexual orientation regarding media and objectification appear to be present. A set of recent studies by Frederick and colleagues found that gay men, lesbian women and bisexual people share with heterosexual people many of the pathways that lead from sociocultural pressures to internalization of thin/muscular ideals, higher body surveillance and a lower body image quality of life [ 71 , 88 ], leading the authors to conclude that these factors’ influence applies regardless of sexual orientation. However, their relationship with media and objectification may vary. Gay and bisexual men may face objectification in social media and dating apps rather than in mainstream media and may experience more objectification than heterosexual men [ 89 ]. In Frederick and colleagues’ studies, gay men reported greater media pressures, body surveillance, thin-ideal internalization, and self-objectification compared to heterosexual men; moreover, bisexual men appeared to be more susceptible to ideal internalization, displaying stronger paths from media appearance pressures to muscular-ideal internalization compared to heterosexual men; lesbian women, instead, demonstrated weaker relationships between media pressures and body image outcomes [ 71 , 88 ]. Consistently with previous studies suggesting a heightened susceptibility to social pressures [ 90 ], bisexual women appeared to be more susceptible to media pressures relative to other groups [ 88 ]. Another recent study of lesbian and bisexual women supported previous evidence for the pathway from the internalization of cultural appearance standards to body surveillance, body shame and eating disorder symptoms; however, it found no significant connection between experiences of objectification and eating disorder symptoms [ 91 ].

2.3. Sexualized Portrayals

Several studies have found sexualizing media representations to be commonplace across a number of different media contents and across different target demographics (i.e., children, adolescents or adults) and genres. Reports of common sexualized representations of women are found in contexts such as television programs [ 92 ], movies [ 93 , 94 , 95 , 96 ], music videos [ 97 , 98 ], advertising [ 54 , 55 ], videogames [ 51 , 99 , 100 ], or magazines [ 101 ].

Exposure to sexualized media has been theorized to be an exogenous risk factor in the internalization of sexualized beliefs about women [ 41 ], as well as one of the pathways to the internalization of cultural appearance ideals [ 102 ]. Daily exposition to sexualized media content has been consistently linked to a number of negative effects. Specifically, it has been found to lead to higher levels of body dissatisfaction and distorted attitudes about eating through the internalization of cultural body ideals (e.g., lean or muscular) in both men and women [ 71 ]. It has also been associated with a higher chance of supporting sexist beliefs in boys [ 103 ], and of tolerance toward sexual violence in men [ 104 ]. Furthermore, exposure to sexualized images has been linked to a higher tolerance of sexual harassment and rape myth acceptance [ 76 ]. Exposure to reality TV programs consistently predicted self-sexualization for both women and men, while music videos did so for men only [ 103 ]. Internalized sexualization, in turn, has been linked to a stronger endorsement of sexist attitudes and acceptance of rape myths [ 105 ], while also being linked to higher levels of body surveillance and body shame in girls [ 106 ]. Internalization of media standards of appearance has been linked to body surveillance in both men and women, as well as body surveillance of the partner in men [ 107 ].

As a medium, videogames have been studied relatively little and have produced less definite results. This medium can offer the unique dynamic of embodiment in a virtual avatar, which has been hypothesized to be able to lead to a shift in self-perception (the “Proteus effect”, as formulated by Yee & Bailenson, [ 108 ]). While some studies have partially confirmed this effect, showing that exposure to sexualized videogame representations can increase self-objectification [ 109 , 110 , 111 ], others [ 112 ] have not found the same relationship. Furthermore, while a study has found an association between sexualized representations in videogames, tolerance of sexual abuse of women and rape myth acceptance [ 113 ], and in another, it was linked to a decreased real-life belief in women’s competence [ 114 ], a recent meta-analysis [ 115 ] found no effect of the presence of sexualized content on well-being, sexism or misogyny.

Research on social media has also shown some specificities. Social media offers the unique dynamic of being able to post and disseminate one’s own content and almost always includes built-in mechanisms for user-generated feedback (e.g., likes), as well as often being populated by one’s peers, friends and family rather than strangers. Sites focusing on image- or video-based content (e.g., Instagram, TikTok) may be more prone to eliciting social comparison and fostering the internalization of cultural appearance ideals, resulting in more associations to negative body image when compared to others that have the same capabilities but offer text-based content as well (e.g., Facebook) [ 116 ]. Social media appears to foster social comparison, which may increase appearance-based concerns [ 117 ]. Consistently with previous research, exposure to sexualized beauty ideals on social media appeared to be associated with lower body satisfaction; exposure to more diverse standards of appearance, instead, was associated with increased body satisfaction and positive mood, regardless of image sexualization [ 116 , 118 ].

3. Discussion

3.1. critical discussion of evidence.

The reviewed evidence (summarized in Table 1 ) points to the wide-ranging harmful effects of stereotyping, objectifying and sexualizing media portrayals, which are reported to be still both common and pervasive. The links to possible harms have also been well documented, with a few exceptions.

Summary of findings.

These representations, especially but not exclusively pertaining to women, have been under social scrutiny following women’s rights movements and activism [ 119 ] and can be perceived to be politically incorrect and undesirable, bringing an aspect of social desirability into the frame. Positive attitudes toward gender equality also appear to be at an all-time high across the western world [ 120 , 121 ], a change that has doubtlessly contributed to socio-cultural pressure to reduce harmful representations. Some media contexts (e.g., advertising and television) seem to have begun reflecting this change regarding stereotypes, attempting to either avoid harmful representations or push more progressive portrayals. However, these significant changes in stereotypes (e.g., regarding competence) have not necessarily been reflected in women’s lives, such as their participation in the labor force, leadership or decision-making [ 31 , 122 , 123 ]. Objectifying or sexualizing representations do not seem to be drastically reduced in prevalence. Certainly, many influences other than media representations are in play in this regard, but their effect on well-being has been found to be pervasive and consistent. Despite widespread positive attitudes toward gender equality, the persistence of stereotypical, objectifying and sexualizing representations may hint at the continued existence of an entrenched sexist culture which can translate into biases, discrimination and harm.

Despite some conflicting findings, the literature also hints at the existence of differences in how media pressures appear to affect men and women, as well as gay, lesbian and bisexual people. These may point to the possibility of some factors (e.g., objectification) playing a different role across different people in the examined pathways, an aspect that warrants caution when considering possible interventions and clinical implications. In some cases, the same relationship between exposure to media and well-being may exist, but it may follow different pathways from distal risk factors to proximal risk factors, as in the case of gender role conflict for men or body shame for lesbian and bisexual women. However, more research is needed to explore these recent findings.

Different media also appear to feature specificities for which more research is needed, such as videogames and social media. The more interactive experiences offered by these media may play an important role in determining their effects, and the type of social media needs to be taken into consideration as well (image- or video-based vs. text-based). Moreover, the experiences of exposure may not necessarily be homogenous, due to the presence of algorithms that determine what content is being shown in the case of social media, and due to the possibility of player interaction and avatar embodiment in the case of videogames.

Past findings [ 37 , 69 ] about links with other social issues such as sexism, harassment and violence appear to still be relevant [ 67 , 73 , 103 , 105 ]. The increases in both tolerance and prevalence of sexist and abusive attitudes resulting from exposure to problematic media representations impact the cultural climate in which these phenomena take place. Consequently, victims of discrimination and abuse living in a cultural climate more tolerant of sexist and abusive attitudes may experience lower social support, have a decreased chance of help-seeking and adopt restrictive definitions for what counts as discrimination and abuse, indirectly furthering gender inequalities.

Exploring ways of reducing risks to health, several authors [ 22 , 41 , 75 ] have discussed media literacy interventions—that is, interventions focused on teaching critical engagement with media—as a possible way of reducing the negative effects of problematic media portrayals. As reported in McLean and colleagues’ systematic review [ 124 ], these interventions have been previously shown to be effective at increasing media literacy, while also improving body-related outcomes such as body satisfaction in boys [ 125 ], internalization of the thinness ideal in girls [ 125 ], body size acceptance in girls [ 126 ] and drive for thinness in girls and boys [ 127 ]. More recently, they were also shown to be effective at reducing stereotypical gender role attitudes [ 128 ], as well as fostering unfavorable attitudes toward stereotypical portrayals and lack of realism [ 129 ]. Development and promotion of these interventions should be considered when attempting to reduce negative media-related influences on body image. It should be noted, however, that McLean and colleagues’ review found no effect of media literacy interventions on eating disorder symptomatology [ 124 ], which warrants more careful interventions.

Furthermore, both internal (e.g., new entrants’ attitudes in interpersonal or organizational contexts) and external (e.g., pressure from public opinion) sociocultural pressures appear to have a strong influence in reducing harmful representations [ 55 , 56 ]. Critically examining these representations when they appear, as well as voicing concerns toward examples of possibly harmful representations, may promote more healthy representations in media. As documented by some studies, the promotion of diverse body representations in media may also be effective in reducing negative effects [ 70 , 118 ].

3.2. Limitations

The current review synthesizes the latest evidence on stereotyping, objectifying and sexualizing media representations. However, limitations in its methodology are present and should be taken into consideration. It is not a systematic review and may not be construed to be a complete investigation of all the available evidence. Only articles written in the English language have been considered, which may have excluded potentially interesting findings written in other languages. Furthermore, it is not a meta-analysis, and as such cannot be used to draw statistical conclusions about the surveyed phenomena.

3.3. Future Directions

While this perception is limited by the non-systematic approach of the review, to what we know, very few studies appear to be available on the relationship between media representation and non-sexual objectification, which may provide interesting directions to explore in relation to autonomy, violability or subjectivity, as was attempted in the context of work and organizations [ 130 ].

More cross-cultural studies (e.g., Tartaglia & Rollero [ 54 ]) would also prove useful in exploring differences between cultural contexts, as well as the weight of different sociocultural factors in the relationship between media representation and gender.

More studies focusing on relatively new media (e.g., social media, videogames) would possibly help clear up some of the identified discrepancies and explore new directions for the field that take advantage of their interactivity. This is particularly true for niche but growing media such as virtual reality, in which the perception of embodiment in an avatar with different physical features than one’s own could prove to be important in sexualization and objectification. Only preliminary evidence [ 131 ] has been produced on the topic.

Studies to further explore the relationship between media representations, gender and sexual orientation would also be beneficial. As already highlighted by Frederick and colleagues [ 132 ], gay, lesbian and bisexual people may deal with a significantly different set of appearance norms and expectations [ 133 ], and face minority-related stresses [ 134 ] that can increase susceptibility to poorer body image and disordered eating [ 135 , 136 ]. Additionally, none of the reviewed studies had a particular focus on trans people, who may have different experiences relating to media and body image, as suggested by the differences in pathways found in a recent study [ 137 ]. Sexual orientation and gender identity should be kept into consideration when investigating these relationships, as their specificities may shed light on the different ways societal expectations influence the well-being of sexual minorities.

The examined literature on the topic also appears to feature specificities that need to be taken into account. As previously reported by Ward [ 37 ], the vast majority of the studies continue to be conducted in the United States, often on undergraduates, which limits the generalizability of the results to the global population. Given the abundance and complexity of the constructs, more studies examining the pathways from media exposure to well-being using methodologies such as path analysis and structural equation modeling may help clarify some of the discrepancies found in the literature about the same relationships.

Finally, as previously reported by many authors [ 37 , 69 , 138 ], sexualization, self-sexualization, objectification and self-objectification are sometimes either treated as synonymous or used with different definitions and criteria, which may add a layer of misdirection to studies on the subject. Given the divergences in the use of terminology, clearly stating one’s working definition of sexualization or objectification would possibly benefit academic clarity on the subject.

4. Conclusions

Consistent empirical evidence highlights the importance of media representations as a key part of sociocultural influences that may have consequences on well-being. Despite some notable progress, harmful representations with well-researched links to detrimental effects are still common across a number of different media. Exposure to stereotyping, objectifying and sexualized representations appears to consistently be linked to negative consequences on physical and mental health, as well as fostering sexism, violence and gender inequity. On a clinical level, interventions dealing with body image and body satisfaction should keep their influence into account. The promotion of institutional and organizational interventions, as well as policies aimed at reducing their influence, could also prove to be a protective factor against physical and mental health risks.

Funding Statement

This research received no external funding.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, F.S. and L.R.; methodology, T.T. and M.N.P.; writing—original draft preparation, F.S.; writing—review and editing, T.T. and M.N.P.; supervision, L.R. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Guest Essay

Melinda French Gates: The Enemies of Progress Play Offense. I Want to Help Even the Match.

By Melinda French Gates

Ms. French Gates is a philanthropist and the founder of the charitable organization Pivotal.

Many years ago, I received this piece of advice: “Set your own agenda, or someone else will set it for you.” I’ve carried those words with me ever since.

That’s why, next week, I will leave the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation , of which I was a co-founder almost 25 years ago, to open a new chapter in my philanthropy. To begin, I am announcing $1 billion in new spending over the next two years for people and organizations working on behalf of women and families around the world, including on reproductive rights in the United States.

In nearly 20 years as an advocate for women and girls, I have learned that there will always be people who say it’s not the right time to talk about gender equality. Not if you want to be relevant. Not if you want to be effective with world leaders (most of them men). The second the global agenda gets crowded, women and girls fall off.

It’s frustrating and shortsighted. Decades of research on economics , well-being and governance make it clear that investing in women and girls benefits everyone. We know that economies with women’s full participation have more room to grow. That women’s political participation is associated with decreased corruption. That peace agreements are more durable when women are involved in writing them. That reducing the time women spend in poor health could add as much as $1 trillion to the global economy by 2040.

And yet, around the world, women are seeing a tremendous upsurge in political violence and other threats to their safety, in conflict zones where rape is used as a tool of war, in Afghanistan where the Taliban takeover has erased 20 years of progress for women and girls, in many low-income countries where the number of acutely malnourished pregnant and breastfeeding women is soaring.

In the United States, maternal mortality rates continue to be unconscionable , with Black and Native American mothers at highest risk. Women in 14 states have lost the right to terminate a pregnancy under almost any circumstances. We remain the only advanced economy without any form of national paid family leave. And the number of teenage girls experiencing suicidal thoughts and persistent feelings of sadness and hopelessness is at a decade high.

Despite the pressing need, only about 2 percent of charitable giving in the United States goes to organizations focused on women and girls, and only about half a percentage point goes to organizations focused on women of color specifically.

When we allow this cause to go so chronically underfunded, we all pay the cost. As shocking as it is to contemplate, my 1-year-old granddaughter may grow up with fewer rights than I had.

Over the past few weeks, as part of the $1 billion in new funding I’m committing to these efforts, I have begun directing new grants through my organization, Pivotal, to groups working in the United States to protect the rights of women and advance their power and influence. These include the National Women’s Law Center, the National Domestic Workers Alliance and the Center for Reproductive Rights.

While I have long focused on improving contraceptive access overseas, in the post-Dobbs era, I now feel compelled to support reproductive rights here at home. For too long, a lack of money has forced organizations fighting for women's rights into a defensive posture while the enemies of progress play offense. I want to help even the match.

I’m also experimenting with novel tactics to bring a wider range of perspectives into philanthropy. Recently, I offered 12 people whose work I admire their own $20 million grant-making fund to distribute as he or she sees fit. That group — which includes the former prime minister of New Zealand, Jacinda Ardern, the athlete and maternal-health advocate Allyson Felix, and an Afghan champion of girls’ education, Shabana Basij-Rasikh — represents a wide range of expertise and experience. I’m eager to see the landscape of funding opportunities through their eyes, and the results their approaches unlock.

In the fall, I will introduce a $250 million initiative focused on improving the mental and physical health of women and girls globally. By issuing an open call to grass-roots organizations beyond the reach of major funders, I hope to lift up groups with personal connections to the issues they work on. People on the front lines should get the attention and investment they deserve, including from me.

As a young woman, I could never have imagined that one day I would be part of an effort like this. Because I have been given this extraordinary opportunity, I am determined to do everything I can to seize it and to set an agenda that helps other women and girls set theirs, too.

Melinda French Gates is a philanthropist and the founder of Pivotal, a charitable, investment and advocacy organization.

Source photographs by Bryan Bedder, filipfoto, and Westend61, via Getty Images.

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips . And here’s our email: [email protected] .

Follow the New York Times Opinion section on Facebook , Instagram , TikTok , WhatsApp , X and Threads .

To Do Today: Free Dunder-Mifflin Paint Night

Recreate your favorite office character in watercolor at this artsy event at boston landing.

Who would look best on your wall—Dwight, Stanley, or Phyllis? Paint your favorite character from The Office at this free event. Photo courtesy of the Boston Calendar

Gia Shin (COM’27)

Dunder-Mifflin Paint Night, where participants paint ink and watercolor portraits of their favorite characters from The Office.

Wednesday, May 29, from 6 to 9 pm.

Boston Landing, 123 Guest Street, Brighton, Mass. 

Entry is free, and all supplies are provided. Each participant will take home an 8×8 sketch on watercolor paper.

Why should I go?

The Office went off the air 11 years ago, but it remains one of the most popular shows on streaming. If Michael, Dwight, and Stanley are still three of your favorite people, come to this Dunder-Mifflin Paint Night for an opportunity to express your creativity, meet new friends, and enjoy a fun evening out.

Participants will have the chance to create an ink and watercolor portrait of their favorite character from the Emmy Award–winning mockumentary series, which aired from 2005 to 2013 and followed the lives of employees at Dunder Mifflin, a paper supply company in Scranton, Pa. Each attendee will receive an 8×8 sketch on high-quality watercolor paper and will be guided through the process of outlining and coloring their portrait. All necessary materials are provided, and no prior experience is required.

Characters for painting are available on a first-come, first-served basis, so early arrival is recommended. In addition to free admission, participants will receive an appetizer box courtesy of Broken Records.

And no word if the best portrait takes home a Dundie Award.

Explore Related Topics:

• Share this story
• 0 Comments Add

Gia Shin (COM’27) Profile

Comments & Discussion

Boston University moderates comments to facilitate an informed, substantive, civil conversation. Abusive, profane, self-promotional, misleading, incoherent or off-topic comments will be rejected. Moderators are staffed during regular business hours (EST) and can only accept comments written in English. Statistics or facts must include a citation or a link to the citation.

Post a comment. Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Latest from BU Today

Bu hub turns six—and it’s more important than ever, leading womanist ethicist and theologian named new mlk professor of religion and black studies at sth, can animal organ transplants save thousands of dying people, to do today: knit & crochet night at fenway community center, boston university removes the myles standish name from dorm, pov: remembering charlie pohonich, a final look back at bu’s 151st commencement, how to make the most of memorial day weekend in boston, did you win the free furiosa: a mad max saga tickets for tonight, karen antman stepping down as bu’s medical school dean and medical campus provost, a bu class tackles the massachusetts housing crisis, zesty potato salad, my reflections on the last four years of college: why small life events matter, exploring bu’s vibrant asian student communities for aapi heritage month, photo essay: behind the scenes at a bu commencement, how three class of 2024 grads landed jobs before graduating, protests unfold in and around nickerson field during bu’s 151st commencement, quotes, comments, and cheers from bu’s 151st commencement, sights and sounds from boston university’s 151st commencement.