Gender role

A gender role, also known as a sex role,[1] is a social role encompassing a range of behaviors and attitudes that are generally considered acceptable, appropriate, or desirable for people based on their biological or perceived sex.[2][3] Gender roles are usually centered on conceptions of masculinity and femininity,[2] although there are exceptions and variations. The specifics regarding these gendered expectations may vary substantially among cultures, while other characteristics may be common throughout a range of cultures. There is ongoing debate as to what extent gender roles and their variations are biologically determined, and to what extent they are socially constructed.

Men and women in non-traditional gendered occupations, from top left to bottom right, or top to bottom (mobile): a male midwife in Oslo, Norway; women being sworn into the Afghan National Police; a woman doing construction work in the Solomon Islands; a male kindergarten teacher in Colorado Springs, U.S. playing the ukulele

Various groups, most notably the feminist movements, have led efforts to change aspects of prevailing gender roles that they believe are oppressive or inaccurate.

The term gender role was first used by John Money and colleagues in 1954, during the course of his study of intersex individuals, to describe the manners in which these individuals expressed their status as a male or female in a situation where no clear biological assignment existed.[4]


The World Health Organization (WHO) defines gender roles as "socially constructed roles, behaviors, activities and attributes that a given society considers appropriate for men and women".[5] Debate continues as to what extent gender and gender roles are socially constructed (i.e. non-biologically influenced), and to what extent "socially constructed" may be considered synonymous with "arbitrary" or "malleable".[6][7][8][9][10] Therefore, a concise authoritative definition of gender roles or gender itself is elusive.

In the sociology of gender, the process whereby an individual learns and acquires a gender role in society is termed gender socialization.[11][12][13]

Gender roles are culturally specific, and while most cultures distinguish only two (boy and girl or man and woman), others recognize more. Androgyny, for example, has been proposed as a third gender.[14] Androgynous is simply a person with qualities pertaining to both the male and female gender. Other societies have claimed to identify more than five genders,[15][16] and some non-Western societies have three genders – man, woman, and third gender.[17] Some individuals (not necessarily being from such a culture) identify with no gender at all.[18]

Many transgender people reject the idea that they are a separate third gender, and identify simply as men or women.[19] However, biological differences between (some) trans women and cisgender women have historically been treated as relevant in certain contexts, especially those where biological traits may yield an unfair advantage such as sport.[20]

Gender role, which refers to the cultural expectations as understood by gender classification, is not the same thing as gender identity, which refers to the internal sense of one's own gender, whether or not it aligns with categories offered by societal norms. The point at which these internalized gender identities become externalized into a set of expectations is the genesis of a gender role.[21][22]

Theories of gender as a social construct

Some theories – which are collectively termed social construction theories – claim that gender behavior is mostly due to social conventions, although opposing theories disagree, such as theories in evolutionary psychology.

Most children learn to categorize themselves by gender by the age of three.[23] From birth, in the course of gender socialization, children learn gender stereotypes and roles from their parents and environment. In a traditional view, males learn to manipulate their physical and social environment through physical strength or dexterity, while girls learn to present themselves as objects to be viewed.[24] Social constructionists state, for example, that gender-segregated children's activities create the appearance that gender differences in behavior reflect an essential nature of male and female behavior.[25]

As an aspect of role theory, gender role theory "treats these differing distributions of women and men into roles as the primary origin of sex-differentiated social behavior, their impact on behavior is mediated by psychological and social processes."[26] According to Gilbert Herdt, gender roles arose from correspondent inference, meaning that general labour division was extended to gender roles.{{[27]}}

Gender roles are considered by social constructionists to be hierarchical, and are characterized as a male-advantaged gender hierarchy.[28] The term patriarchy, according to researcher Andrew Cherlin, defines "a social order based on the domination of women by men, especially in agricultural societies".[29]

According to Eagly et al., the consequences of gender roles and stereotypes are sex-typed social behavior because roles and stereotypes are both socially shared descriptive norms and prescriptive norms.[30]

Judith Butler,[31] in works such as Gender Trouble and Undoing Gender,[32] contends that being female is not "natural" and that it appears natural only through repeated performances of gender; these performances in turn, reproduce and define the traditional categories of sex and/or gender.

Major theorists

Talcott Parsons

Working in the United States, Talcott Parsons[33] developed a model of the nuclear family in 1955, which at that place and time was the prevalent family structure. It compared a strictly traditional view of gender roles (from an industrial-age American perspective) with a more liberal view. The Parsons model was used to contrast and illustrate extreme positions on gender roles. Model A describes total separation of male and female roles, while Model B describes the complete dissolution of gender roles.[34] (The examples are based on the context of the culture and infrastructure of the United States.)

Model A – Total role segregationModel B – Total integration of roles
Education Gender-specific education; high professional qualification is important only for the man Co-educative schools, same content of classes for girls and boys, same qualification for men and women.
Profession The workplace is not the primary area of women; career and professional advancement is deemed unimportant for women For women, career is just as important as for men; equal professional opportunities for men and women are necessary.
Housework Housekeeping and child care are the primary functions of the woman; participation of the man in these functions is only partially wanted. All housework is done by both parties to the marriage in equal shares.
Decision making In case of conflict, man has the last say, for example in choosing the place to live, choice of school for children, buying decisions Neither partner dominates; solutions do not always follow the principle of finding a concerted decision; status quo is maintained if disagreement occurs.
Child care and education Woman takes care of the largest part of these functions; she educates children and cares for them in every way Man and woman share these functions equally.

However, these structured positions become less a liberal-individualist society, and the actual behavior of individuals is usually somewhere between these poles. According to the interactionist approach, roles (including gender roles) are not fixed but are constantly negotiated between individuals.[35] In North America and southern South America, this is the most common approach among families whose business is agriculture.

Gender roles can influence all kinds of behaviors, such as choice of clothing, choice of work and personal relationships, e.g., parental status (See also Sociology of fatherhood).

Geert Hofstede

Geert Hofstede, a Dutch researcher and social psychologist who dedicated himself to the study of culture, sees culture as "broad patterns of thinking, feeling and acting" in a society[36] In Hofstede's view, masculinity and femininity differ in the social roles that are associated with the biological fact of the existence of the two sexes: masculinity and femininity refer to the dominant sex role pattern in the vast majority of both traditional and modern societies, males being more assertive and females more nurturing.[37]

Femininity creates a society of overlapping gender roles, where "both men and women are supposed to be modest, tender, and concerned with the quality of life."[38]

Masculinity creates a society of clearly distinct gender roles, where men should "be assertive, tough, and focused on material success," while women should "be more modest, tender, and concerned with the quality of life."[38]

Hofstede's Feminine and Masculine Culture Dimensions states:

Masculine cultures expect men to be assertive, ambitious and competitive, to strive for material success, and to respect whatever is big, strong, and fast. Masculine cultures expect women to serve and care for the non-material quality of life, for children and for the weak. Feminine cultures, on the other hand, define relatively overlapping social roles for the sexes, in which, in particular, men need not be ambitious or competitive but may go for a different quality of life than material success; men may respect whatever is small, weak, and slow.[39]

In feminine cultures, modesty and relationships are important characteristics.[40] This differs from in masculine cultures, where self-enhancement leads to self-esteem. Masculine cultures are individualistic, and feminine cultures are more collective because of the significance of personal relationships.

'The dominant values in a masculine society are achievement and success; the dominant values in a feminine society are caring for others and quality of life'.[41]

Albert Ellis

In the 1940s, Albert Ellis studied eighty-four cases of mixed births and concluded that 'while the power of the human sex drive may possibly be largely dependent on physiological factors... the direction of this drive does not seem to be directly dependent on constitutional element'.[42] In the development of masculinity, femininity, and inclinations towards homosexuality or heterosexuality, nurture matters a great deal more than nature.[42]

John Money

"In the 1950s, John Money, along with colleagues took up the study of intersex individuals, who, Money realized 'would provide invaluable material for the comparative study for bodily form and physiology, rearing, and psychosexual orientation'."[43] "Money and his colleagues used their own studies to state in the extreme what these days seems extraordinary for its complete denial of the notion of natural inclination."[43]

They concluded that gonads, hormones, and chromosomes did not automatically determine a child's gender role.[42] Among the many terms he coined was gender role which he defined in a seminal 1955 paper as "all those things that a person says or does to disclose himself or herself as having the status of boy or man, girl or woman."[44]

In recent years, the majority of Money's theories regarding the importance of socialization in the determination of gender have come under intense criticism, especially in connection with the false reporting of success in the "John/Joan" case, later revealed to be David Reimer.[45][46][47]

Candace West and Don H. Zimmerman

West and Zimmerman developed an interactionist perspective on gender beyond its construction as "roles." For them, gender is "the product of social doings of some sort...undertaken by men and women whose competence as members of society is hostage to its production".[48] They argue that the use of "role" to describe gender expectations conceals the production of gender through everyday activities. Furthermore, roles are situated identities, such as "nurse" and "student," developed as the situation demands while gender is a master identity with no specific site or organizational context. For them, "conceptualizing gender as a role makes it difficult to assess its influence on other roles and reduces its explanatory usefulness in discussions of power and inequality".[48] West and Zimmerman consider gender an individual production that reflects and constructs interactional and institutional gender expectations.

Biological factors

Because of the influence of Simone de Beauvoir's feminist works and Michel Foucault's reflections on sexuality (among others), the idea that gender was unrelated to sex gained ground during the 1980s, especially in sociology and cultural anthropology.[49] This view asserts that the relationship between gender and sex (presence of genitals/gonads) is not causally determinate. That is, that one may have the genitals of one sex while having the gender of another.[50]

There continues to be debate on the subject. Simon Baron-Cohen, a Cambridge University professor of psychology and psychiatry claims 'the female brain is predominantly "hard-wired" for empathy, while the male brain is predominantly "hard-wired" for understanding and building systems'.[51][52] However, Nash and Grossi describe his study of newborns as "fraught with methodological problems".[53]

Several studies have been conducted looking at the gender roles of intersex children.

One such study looked at female infants with adrenal hyperplasia, and who had excess male hormone levels, but were thought to be females and raised as such by their parents. These girls were more likely to express masculine traits.[54][55]

Another study looked at 18 infants with the intersex condition 5-alpha reductase deficiency, and XY chromosomes, assigned female at birth. At adult age only one individual maintained a female role, all the others being stereotypically male.[56]

In a third study, 14 male children born with cloacal exstrophy and assigned female at birth, including through intersex medical interventions. Upon follow-up between the ages of 5 to 12, eight of them identified as boys, and all of the subjects had at least moderately male-typical attitudes and interests.[57]

Dr. Sandra Lipsitz Bem is a psychologist who developed the gender schema theory, based on the combination of aspects of the social learning theory and the cognitive-development theory of sex role acquisition, to explain how individuals come to use gender as an organizing category in all aspects of their life. In 1971, she created the Bem Sex-Role Inventory to measure how well an individual conformed to a traditional gender role, characterizing those tested as having masculine, feminine, androgynous, or undifferentiated personality. She believed that through gender-schematic processing, a person spontaneously sorts attributes and behaviors into masculine and feminine categories, and that therefore individuals processes information and regulate their behavior based on whatever definitions of femininity and masculinity their culture provides.[58]

While there are differences in average capabilities of various kinds (E.g. better average balance in females or greater average physical size and endurance in males) between the sexes[59] the capabilities of some members of one sex will fall within the range of capabilities needed for tasks conventionally assigned to the other sex. Eve Shapiro, author of Gender Circuits, explains that "gender, like other social categories, is both a personal identity and a culture set of behaviors, beliefs and values."[60]

Research at the Yerkes National Primate Research Center has also shown that gender roles may be biological among primates. Yerkes researchers studied the interactions of 11 male and 23 female Rhesus monkeys with human toys, both wheeled and plush. The males played mostly with the wheeled toys while the females played with both types equally.[61] Study co-author Kim Wallen has, however, warned against overinterpreting the results as the color and size of the toys may also have been factors.[62]


Ideas of appropriate behavior according to gender vary among cultures and era, although some aspects receive more widespread attention than others. R.W. Connell in Men, Masculinities and Feminism[63] claims:

There are cultures where it has been normal, not exceptional, for men to have homosexual relations. There have been periods in 'Western' history when the modern convention that men suppress displays of emotion did not apply at all, when men were demonstrative about their feeling for their friends. Mateship in the Australian outback last century is a case in point.

There are huge areal differences in attitudes towards appropriate gender roles. In the World Values Survey, responders were asked if they thought that wage work should be restricted to only men in the case of shortage in jobs: in Iceland the proportion that agreed with the proposition was 3.6%; while in Egypt it was 94.9%.[64]

Attitudes have also varied historically, for example, in Europe, during the Middle Ages, women were commonly associated with roles related to medicine and healing.[65] Because of the rise of witch-hunts across Europe and the institutionalization of medicine, these roles became exclusively associated with men[65] but in the last few decades these roles have become largely gender-neutral in Western society.[66]

Vern Bullough stated that homosexual communities are generally more tolerant of switching gender roles.[67] For instance, someone with a masculine voice, a five o'clock shadow (or a fuller beard), an Adam's apple, wearing a woman's dress and high heels, carrying a purse would most likely draw ridicule or other unfriendly attention in ordinary social contexts.[68][69][70]

Because the dominant class sees this form of gender expression as unacceptable, inappropriate, or perhaps threatening, these individuals are significantly more likely to experience discrimination and harassment both in their personal lives and from their employer, according to a 2011 report from the Center for American Progress.[71]

Gender roles may be a means through which one expresses their gender identity, but they may also be employed as a means of exerting social control, and individuals may experience negative social consequences for violating them.[72]


Different religious and cultural groups within one country may have different norms that they attempt to "police" within their own group, including gender norms.


I Corinthians, 11:14 and 15 indicates that it is inappropriate for a man to wear his hair long, and good for a woman to wear her hair long.

The roles of women in Christianity can vary considerably today as they have varied historically since the first century New Testament church. This is especially true in marriage and in formal ministry positions within certain Christian denominations, churches, and parachurch organizations.

Many leadership roles in the organized church have been restricted to males. In the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches, only men may serve as priests or deacons; only males serve in senior leadership positions such as pope, patriarch, and bishop. Women may serve as abbesses. Most mainstream Protestant denominations are beginning to relax their longstanding constraints on ordaining women to be ministers, though some large groups are tightening their constraints in reaction. Charismatic and Pentecostal churches have embraced the ordination of women since their founding.

Christian traditions that officially recognize "saints", as persons of exceptional holiness of life having attained the beatific vision (heaven), do list women in that group. Most prominent is Mary, mother of Jesus who is highly revered throughout Christianity, particularly in the Catholic and Orthodox churches where she is considered the "Theotokos", i.e. "Mother of God", the son born of her, Jesus, being God Incarnate, that is, both God and Man. Women prominent in Christianity have included contemporaries of Jesus, subsequent theologians, abbesses, mystics, doctors of the church, founders of religious orders, military leaders, monarchs and martyrs, evidencing the variety of roles played by women within the life of Christianity. Paul the Apostle held women in high regard and worthy of prominent positions in the church, though he was careful not to encourage disregard for the New Testament household codes, also known as New Testament Domestic Codes or Haustafelen, of Greco-Roman law in the first century.


According to Dhami and Sheikh, gender roles in Muslim countries are centered on the importance of the family unit, which is viewed as the basis of a balanced and healthy society.[73] Islamic views on gender roles and family are traditionally conservative.

Many Muslim-majority countries, most prominently Saudi Arabia, have interpretations of religious doctrine regarding gender roles embedded in their laws.[74] In the United Arab Emirates, non-Muslim Western women can wear crop tops, whereas Muslim women are expected to dress much more modestly, due to the injunction on women in Islam to dress modestly at all times when in public. In some Muslim countries, these differences are sometimes even codified in law.

In some Muslim-majority countries, however, even non-Muslim women are expected to follow Muslim female gender norms and Islamic law to a certain extent, such as by covering their hair. This norm may sometimes be objected to by women visiting from other countries - but they may nevertheless decide to comply on pragmatic grounds, in the interests of their own safety. For example, in Egypt, women who do not dress "modestly" - whether they are Muslims or not - may be perceived to be akin to prostitutes by men.

Muhammad described the high status of mothers in both of the major hadith Collections (Bukhari and Muslim). One famous account is:

"A man asked the Prophet: 'Whom should I honor most?' The Prophet replied: 'Your mother'. 'And who comes next?' asked the man. The Prophet replied: 'Your mother'. 'And who comes next?' asked the man. The Prophet replied: 'Your mother!'. 'And who comes next?' asked the man. The Prophet replied: 'Your father'"

In Muslim culture, women are seen as having a similar status to men, however, men are seen as a degree above women according to the qur'an.[75] How gender roles are honored is largely cultural. While some cultures encourage men and women to take on the same roles, others promote a more traditional, less dominant role for the women.[76]


Hindu deities are more ambiguously gendered than deities of other world religions, such as Christianity, Islam, and others. This informs female and males relations, and informs how the differences between males and females are understood[77]

However, in a religious cosmology like Hinduism, which prominently features female and androgynous deities, some gender transgression is allowed. This group is known as the hijras, and has a long tradition of performing in important rituals, such as the birth of sons and weddings. Despite this allowance for transgression, Hindu cultural traditions portray women in contradictory ways. On one hand, women's fertility is given great value, and on the other, female sexuality is depicted as potentially dangerous and destructive.[78]

Studies on marriage in the U.S.

Marriage is an institution that influences gender roles, inequality, and change.[79] In the United States, gender roles are communicated by the media, social interaction, and language. Through these platforms society has influenced individuals to fulfill the stereotypical gender roles within a heterosexual marriage starting out at a young age. Although traditionally, society claims that roles within a heterosexual marriage should be decided based on one's biological sex, today individuals are determining their own roles for themselves, ultimately creating equal partnerships.

Communication of gender roles in the United States

In the U.S., marriage roles are generally decided based on gender. For approximately the past seven decades, heterosexual marriage roles have been defined for men and women based on society's expectations and the influence of the media.[80] Men and women are typically associated with certain social roles dependent upon the personality traits associated with those roles.[81] Traditionally, the role of the homemaker is associated with a woman and the role of a breadwinner is associated with a male.[81]

In the U.S., single men are outnumbered by single women at a ratio of 100 single women to 86 single men,[82] though never-married men over the age of 15 outnumber women by a 5:4 ratio (33.9% to 27.3%) according to the 2006 U.S. Census American Community Survey. The results are varied between age groups, with 118 single men per 100 single women in their 20s, versus 33 single men to 100 single women over 65.[83]

The numbers also vary between countries. For example, China has many more young men than young women, and this disparity is expected to increase.[84] In regions with recent conflict such as Chechnya, women greatly outnumber men.[85]

In a cross-cultural study by David Buss, men and women were asked to rank the importance of certain traits in a long term partner. Both men and women ranked "kindness" and "intelligence" as the two most important factors. Men valued beauty and youth more highly than women, while women valued financial and social status more highly than men.


In today's society, media saturates nearly every aspect of one's life. It seems inevitable for society to be influenced by the media and what it is portraying.[80] Roles are gendered, meaning that both males and females are viewed and treated differently according to their biological sex, and because gendered roles are learned, the media has a direct impact on individuals. Thinking about the way in which couples act on romantic television shows or movies and the way women are portrayed as passive in magazine ads, reveals a lot about how gender roles are viewed in society and in heterosexual marriages.[80] Traditional gendered roles view the man as a “pro-creator, a protector, and a provider,” and the woman as “pretty and polite but not too aggressive, not too outspoken and not too smart.” [86] Media aids in society conforming to these traditional gendered views. People learn through imitation and social-interaction both in the physical world and through the media; television, magazines, advertisements, newspapers, the Internet, etc.[86] Michael Messner argues that "gendered interactions, structure, and cultural meanings are intertwined, in both mutually reinforcing and contradictory ways."[87]

Television's influence on society, specifically the influence of television advertisements, is shown in studies such as that of Jörg Matthes, Michael Prieler, and Karoline Adam. Their study into television advertising has shown that women are much more likely to be shown in a setting in the home compared to men. The study also shows that women are shown much less in work-like settings. This underrepresentation in television advertising is seen in many countries around the world but is very present in developed countries.[88] In another study in the Journal of Social Psychology, many television advertisements in countries around the world are seen targeting women at different times of the day than men. Advertisements for products directed towards female viewers are shown during the day on weekdays, while products for men are shown during weekends. The same article shows that a study on adults and television media has also seen that the more television adults watch, the more likely they are to believe or support the gender roles that are illustrated. The support of the presented gender stereotypes can lead to a negative view of feminism or sexual aggression.[89]

It has been presented in the journal article by Emerald Group Publishing Limited that adolescent girls have been effected by the stereotypical view of women in media. Girls feel pressured and stressed to achieve a particular appearance and there have been highly worrying consequences for the young girls if they fail to achieve this look. These consequences have ranged from anxiety to eating disorders. Young girls in an experiment of this journal article describe pictures on women in advertisements as unrealistic and fake. They are dressed in little and revealing clothing which sexualised the women and expose their thin figures, that are gazed upon by the public, creating an issue with stereotyping in the media.

It has also been presented that children are affected by gender roles in the media. Children's preferences in television characters are most likely to be to characters of the same gender. Because children favor characters of the same gender, the characteristics of the character are also looked to by children.[90] In another journal article by Emerald Group Publishing Limited, the underrepresentation of women in children's television shows between 1930 and 1960 is examined. While studies between 1960 and 1990 show an increase in the representation of women in television, studies conducted between 1990 and 2005, a time when women were considered to be equal to men by some, show no change in the representation of women in children's television shows. Women, being underrepresented in children's television shows, are also often portrayed as married or in a relationship, while men are more likely to be single. This reoccurring theme in relationship status can be reflected in the ideals of children that only see this type of representation.[91]

Social Interaction

Gendered roles in heterosexual marriages are learned through imitation. People learn what society views as appropriate gender behaviors from imitating the repetition of actions by one's role-model or parent of the same biological sex.[86] Imitation in the physical world that impacts one's gendered roles often comes from role-modeling parents, peers, teachers, and other significant figures in one's life. In a marriage, oftentimes each person's gendered roles are determined by their parents. If the wife grew up imitating the actions of traditional parents, and the husband non-traditional parents, their views on marital roles would be different.[86] One way people can acquire these stereotypical roles through a reward and punishment system. When a little girl imitates her mother by performing the traditional domestic duties she is often rewarded by being told she is doing a good job. Nontraditionally, if a little boy was performing the same tasks he would more likely be punished due to acting feminine.[86] Because society holds these expected roles for men and women within a marriage, it creates a mold for children to follow.[92]

Changing gender roles in marriage

Over the years, gender roles have continued to change and have a significant impact on the institution of marriage. Gender roles can be defined as the behaviors, values, and attitudes that a society considers appropriate for both male and female.[79] Traditionally, men and women had completely opposing roles, men were seen as the provider for the family and women were seen as the caretakers of both the home and the family.[79] However, in today's society the division of roles are starting to blur. More and more individuals are adapting non-traditional gender roles into their marriage in order to share responsibilities. This revolutionary view on gender roles seeks out equality between sexes. In today's society it is more likely that a man and woman are both providers for their family. More and more women are entering the workforce while more men are contributing to household duties.[79]

After around the year 1980, divorce rates in the United States stabilized.[93] Scholars in the area of sociology explain that this stabilization was due to several factors including, but not limited to, the shift in gender roles,. The attitude concerning the shift in gender roles can be classified into two perspectives: traditional and egalitarian. Traditional attitudes uphold designated responsibilities for the sexes- wives raise the children and keep the home nice, and men are the breadwinners. Egalitarian attitudes uphold responsibilities being carried out equally by both sexes- wives and husbands are both breadwinners and they both take part in raising the children and keeping the home nice[94]. Over the past 40 years, attitudes in marriages have become more egalitarian.[95] Two studies carried out in the early 2000's have shown strong correlation between egalitarian attitudes and happiness and satisfaction in marriage, which scholars believe lead to stabilization in divorce rates. The results of a 2006 study performed by Gayle Kaufman, a professor of sociology, indicated that those who hold egalitarian attitudes report significantly higher levels of marital happiness than those with more traditional attitudes[96]. Another study executed by Will Marshall in 2008 had results showing that relationships with better quality involve people with more egalitarian beliefs[97]. It has been assumed by Danielle J. Lindemann, a sociologist who studies gender, sexuality, the family, and culture, that the shift in gender roles and egalitarian attitudes have resulted in marriage stability due to tasks being carried out by both partners, such as working late-nights and picking up ill children from school[98]. Although the gap in gender roles still exists, roles have become less gendered and more equal in marriages compared to how they were traditionally.

Changing roles

Throughout history spouses have been charged with certain societal functions.[99] With the rise of the New World came the expected roles that each spouse was to carry out specifically. Husbands were typically working farmers - the providers. Wives typically cared for the home and the children. However, the roles are now changing, and even reversing.[100]

Societies can change such that the gender roles rapidly change. The 21st century has seen a shift in gender roles due to multiple factors such as new family structures, education, media, and several others. A 2003 survey by the Bureau of Labor Statistics indicated that about 1/3 of wives earn more than their husbands.[101]

With the importance of education emphasized nationwide, and the access of college degrees (online, for example), women have begun furthering their education. Women have also started to get more involved in recreation activities such as sports, which in the past were regarded to be for men.[102] Family structures are changing, and the number of single-mother or single-father households is increasing. Fathers are also becoming more involved with raising their children, instead of the responsibility resting solely with the mother.

According to the Pew Research Center, the number of stay-at-home fathers in the US nearly doubled in the period from 1989 to 2012, from 1.1 million to 2.0 million.[103] This trend appears to be mirrored in a number of countries including the UK, Canada and Sweden.[104][105][106] However, Pew also found that, at least in the US, public opinion in general appears to show a substantial bias toward favoring a mother as a care-taker versus a father, regardless of any shift in actual roles each plays.[107]

Gender equality allows gender roles to become less distinct and according to Donnalyn Pompper, is the reason "men no longer own breadwinning identities and, like women, their bodies are objectified in mass media images."[108] The LGBT rights movement has played a role increasing pro-gay attitudes, which according to Brian McNair, are expressed by many metrosexual men.[109]

Besides North America and Europe, there are other regions whose gender roles are also changing. In Asia, Hong Kong is very close to the USA because the female surgeons in these societies are focused heavily on home life, whereas Japan is focused more on work life. After a female surgeon gives birth in Hong Kong, she wants to cut her work schedule down, but keeps working full time (60-80 hours per week)[110]. Similar to Hong Kong, Japanese surgeons still work long hours, but they try to rearrange their schedule so they can be at home more (end up working less than 60 hours)[110]. Although all three places have women working advanced jobs, the female surgeons in the USA and Hong Kong feel more gender equality at home where they have equal, if not more control of their families, and Japanese surgeons feel the men are still in control[110]. A big change was seen in Hong Kong because the wives used to deal with a bad marriage. Now, Chinese wives have been divorcing their husbands when they feel unhappy with their marriage, and are stable financially. This makes the wife seem more in control of her own life, instead of letting her husband control her[111]. Other places, such as Singapore and Taipei are also seeing changes in gender roles. In many societies, but especially Singapore and Taipei, women have more jobs that have a leadership position (ie. A doctor or manager), and fewer jobs as a regular worker (ie. A clerk or salesperson)[111]. The males in Singapore also have more leadership roles, but they have more lower level jobs too. In the past, the women would get the lower level jobs, and the men would get all the leadership positions[111]. There is an increase of male unemployment in Singapore, Taipei, and Hong Kong, so the women are having to work more in order to support their families[111]. In the past, the males were usually the ones supporting the family. In India, the women are married young, and are expected to run the household, even if they did not finish school[112]. It is seen as shameful if a woman has to work outside of the house in order to help support the family[112]. Many women are starting jewelry businesses inside their house and have their own bank account because of it. Middle aged women are now able to work without being shameful because they are no longer child bearing[112].

Gender stereotype differences in cultures: East and West

According to Professor Lei Chang, gender attitudes within the domains of work and domestic roles, can be measured using a cross-cultural gender role attitudes test. Psychological processes of the East have historically been analysed using Western models (or instruments) that have been translated, which potentially, is a more far-reaching process than linguistic translation. Some North American instruments for assessing gender role attitudes include:

  • Attitudes Towards Women Scale,
  • Sex-Role Egalitarian Scale, and
  • Sex-Role Ideology Scale.

Through such tests, it is known that American southerners exhibit less egalitarian gender views than their northern counterparts, demonstrating that gender views are inevitably affected by an individual's culture. This also may differ among compatriots whose 'cultures' are a few hundred miles apart.[113]

Although existing studies have generally focused on gender views or attitudes that are work-related, there has so far not been a study on specific domestic roles. Supporting Hofstede's 1980 findings, that "high masculinity cultures are associated with low percentages of women holding professional and technical employment", test values for work-related egalitarianism were lower for Chinese than for Americans.[114] This is supported by the proportion of women that held professional jobs in China (far less than that of America), the data clearly indicating the limitations on opportunities open to women in contemporary Eastern society. In contrast, there was no difference between the viewpoint of Chinese and Americans regarding domestic gender roles.

A study by Richard Bagozzi, Nancy Wong and Youjae Yi, examines the interaction between culture and gender that produces distinct patterns of association between positive and negative emotions.[115] The United States was considered a more 'independence-based culture', while China was considered 'interdependence-based'. In the US people tend to experience emotions in terms of opposition whereas in China, they do so in dialectical terms (i.e., those of logical argumentation and contradictory forces). The study continued with sets of psychological tests among university students in Beijing and in Michigan. The fundamental goals of the research were to show that "gender differences in emotions are adaptive for the differing roles that males and females play in the culture". The evidence for differences in gender role was found during the socialization in work experiment, proving that "women are socialized to be more expressive of their feelings and to show this to a greater extent in facial expressions and gestures, as well as by verbal means".[115] The study extended to the biological characteristics of both gender groups — for a higher association between PA and NA hormones in memory for women, the cultural patterns became more evident for women than for men.


Gender communication is viewed as a form of intercultural communication; and gender is both an influence on and a product of communication.

Communication plays a large role in the process in which people become male or female because each gender is taught different linguistic practices. Gender is dictated by society through expectations of behavior and appearances, and then is shared from one person to another, by the process of communication.[116] Gender does not create communication, communication creates gender.[117]

For example, females are often more expressive and intuitive in their communication, but males tend to be instrumental and competitive. In addition, there are differences in accepted communication behaviors for males and females. To improve communication between genders, people who identify as either male or female must understand the differences between each gender.[118]

As found by Cara Tigue (McMaster University in Hamilton, Canada) the importance of powerful vocal delivery for women could not be underestimated, as famously described in accounts of Margaret Thatcher's years in power.)

Nonverbal communication

Hall published an observational study on nonverbal gender differences and discussed the cultural reasons for these differences.[119] In her study, she noted women smile and laugh more and have a better understanding of nonverbal cues. She believed women were encouraged to be more emotionally expressive in their language, causing them to be more developed in nonverbal communication.

Men, on the other hand, were taught to be less expressive, to suppress their emotions, and to be less nonverbally active in communication and more sporadic in their use of nonverbal cues. Most studies researching nonverbal communication described women as being more expressively and judgmentally accurate in nonverbal communication when it was linked to emotional expression; other nonverbal expressions were similar or the same for both genders.[120]

McQuiston and Morris also noted a major difference in men and women's nonverbal communication. They found that men tend to show body language linked to dominance, like eye contact and interpersonal distance, more than women.[121]

Communication and gender cultures

According to author Julia Wood, there are distinct communication 'cultures' for women and men in the US.[122] She believes that in addition to female and male communication cultures, there are also specific communication cultures for African Americans, older people, Native Americans, gay men, lesbians, and people with disabilities. According to Wood, it is generally thought that biological sex is behind the distinct ways of communicating, but in her opinion the root of these differences is "gender".[123]

Maltz and Broker's research suggested that the games children play may contribute to socializing children into masculine and feminine gender roles:[124] for example, girls being encouraged to play "house" may promotes stereotypically feminine traits, and may promote interpersonal relationships as playing house does not necessarily have fixed rules or objectives; boys tended to play more competitive and adversarial team sports with structured, predetermined goals and a range of confined strategies.

Communication and sexual desire

Metts, et al.[125] explain that sexual desire is linked to emotions and communicative expression. Communication is central in expressing sexual desire and 'complicated emotional states', and is also the 'mechanism for negotiating the relationship implications of sexual activity and emotional meanings'.

Gender differences appear to exist in communicating sexual desire, for example, masculine people are generally perceived to be more interested in sex than feminine people, and research suggests that masculine people are more likely than feminine people to express their sexual interest.[126]

This may be greatly affected by masculine people being less inhibited by social norms for expressing their desire, being more aware of their sexual desire or succumbing to the expectation of their gender culture.[127] When feminine people employ tactics to show their sexual desire, they are typically more indirect in nature. On the other hand, it is known masculinity is associated with aggressive behavior in all mammals, and most likely explains at least part of the fact that masculine people are more likely to express their sexual interest. This is known as the Challenge hypothesis.

Various studies show different communication strategies with a feminine person refusing a masculine person's sexual interest. Some research, like that of Murnen,[128] show that when feminine people offer refusals, the refusals are verbal and typically direct. When masculine people do not comply with this refusal, feminine people offer stronger and more direct refusals. However, research from Perper and Weis[129] showed that rejection includes acts of avoidance, creating distractions, making excuses, departure, hinting, arguments to delay, etc. These differences in refusal communication techniques are just one example of the importance of communicative competence for both masculine and feminine gender cultures.

Gender stereotypes

A 1992 study tested gender stereotypes and labeling within young children in the United States.[130]

Fagot et al. divided this into two different studies, the first investigated how children identified the differences between gender labels of boys and girls, the second study looked at both gender labeling and stereotyping in the relationship of mother and child.

Within the first study, 23 children between the ages of 2 and 7 underwent a series of gender labelling and gender stereotyping tests consisting of showing the children either pictures of males and females or objects such as a hammer or a broom then identifying or labeling those to a certain gender. The results of these tests showed that children under 3 years could make gender-stereotypic associations.[130]

The second study looked at gender labelling and stereotyping in the relationship of mother and child using three separate methods. The first consisted of identifying gender labeling and stereotyping, essentially the same method as the first study. The second consisted of behavioral observations, which looked at ten-minute play sessions with mother and child using gender specific toys.

The third was a series of questionnaires such as an "Attitude Toward Women Scale", "Personal Attributes Questionnaire", and "Schaefer and Edgerton Scale" which looked at the family values of the mother.[130]

The results of these studies showed the same as the first study with regards to labelling and stereotyping.

They also identified in the second method that the mothers positive reactions and responses to same-sex or opposite-sex toys played a role in how children identified them. Within the third method the results found that the mothers of the children who passed the “Gender Labeling Test”, had more traditional family values. These two studies, conducted by Beverly I. Fagot, Mar D. Leinbach and Cherie O'Boyle, showed that gender stereotyping and labeling is acquired at a very young age, and that social interactions and associations play a large role in how genders are identified.[130]

Virginia Woolf, in the 1920s, made the point: 'It is obvious that the values of women differ very often from the values which have been made by the other sex. Yet it is the masculine values that prevail'[131] remade sixty years later by psychologist Carol Gilligan who used it to show that psychological tests of maturity have generally been based on masculine parameters, and so tended to show that women were less 'mature'. Gilligan countered this in her ground-breaking work, In a Different Voice, holding that maturity in women is shown in terms of different, but equally important, human values.[132]

Gender stereotypes are extremely common in society.[134][135] One of the reasons this may be is simply because it is easier on the brain to stereotype (see Heuristics).

The brain has limited perceptual and memory systems, so it categorizes information into fewer and simpler units which allows for more efficient information processing.[136] Gender stereotypes appear to have an effect at an early age. In one study, the effects of gender stereotypes on children's mathematical abilities were tested. In this study of American children between the ages of six and ten, it was found that the children, as early as the second grade, demonstrated the gender stereotype that mathematics is a 'boy's subject'. This may show that the mathematical self-belief is influenced before the age in which there are discernible differences in mathematical achievement.[137]

According to the 1972 study by Jean Lipman-Blumen, women who grew up following traditional gender roles from childhood were less likely to want to be highly educated while women brought up with the view that men and women are equal were more likely to want higher education. This result indicates that gender roles that have been passed down traditionally can influence stereotypes about gender.[138][139]

In a later study, Deaux and her colleagues (1984) found that most people think women are more nurturant, but less self-assertive than men. and that this belief is indicated universally, but that this awareness is related to women's role. To put it another way, women do not have an inherently nurturant personality, rather that a nurturing personality is acquired by whoever happens to be doing the housework.[140]

In a study of gender stereotypes by Jacobs (1991) it was found that parents' stereotypes interact with the sex of their child to directly influence the parents' beliefs about the child's abilities. In turn, parents' beliefs about their child directly influence their child's self-perceptions, and both the parents' stereotypes and the child's self-perceptions influence the child's performance.[141]

Stereotype threat is being at risk of confirming, as self-characteristic, a negative stereotype about one's group.[142] In the case of gender it is the implicit belief in gender stereotype that women perform worse than men in mathematics, which is proposed to lead to lower performance by women.[143]

A review article of stereotype threat research (2012) relating to the relationship between gender and mathematical abilities concluded "that although stereotype threat may affect some women, the existing state of knowledge does not support the current level of enthusiasm for this [as a] mechanism underlying the gender gap in mathematics".[144]

In 2018 Jolien A. van Breen and colleagues conducted research into subliminal gender stereotyping. Researchers took participants through a fictional Moral Choice Dilemma Task, which consisted of eight scenarios "in which sacrificing one person can save several others of unspecified gender... In four scenarios, participants are asked to sacrifice a man to save several others (of unspecified gender), and in four other scenarios they are asked to sacrifice a woman." The results showed that women who identified as feminists were more willing to 'sacrifice' men than women who did not identify as feminists.[145] "If a person wanted to counteract that and ‘level the playing field’, that can be done either by boosting women or by downgrading men”, said van Breen. “So I think that this effect on evaluations of men arises because our participants are trying to achieve an underlying aim: counteracting gender stereotypes."[146]

Gender stereotypes and issues in the workplace

Gender stereotypes are frequently brought up as one disadvantage to women during the hiring process,[147] and as one explanation of the lack of women in key organizational positions.[148] Management and similar leader positions are often perceived to be "masculine" in type, meaning they are assumed to require aggressiveness, competitiveness, strength and independence. These traits do not line up with the perceived traditional female gender role stereotype.[149] (This is often referred to as the "lack of fit" model which describes the dynamics of the gender bias.[150]) Therefore, the perception that women do not possess these "masculine" qualities, limits their ability to be hired or promoted into managerial positions.

One's performance at work is also evaluated based on one's gender. If a female and a male worker show the same performance, the implications of that performance vary depending on the person's gender and on who observes the performance; if a man performs exceedingly well he is perceived as driven or goal-oriented and generally seen in a positive light while a woman showing a similar performance is often described using adjectives with negative connotations.[151] Female performance is therefore not evaluated neutrally or unbiased and stereotyped in ways to deem their equivalent levels and quality of work as instead of lesser value.

Consequently, that gender stereotype filter leads to a lack of fair evaluation and, in turn, to fewer women occupying higher paying positions. Gender stereotypes contain women at certain, lower levels; getting trapped within the glass ceiling. While the number of women in the workforce occupying management positions is slowly increasing,[152] women currently fill only 2.5% of the higher managerial positions in the United States.[153] The fact that most women are being allocated to occupations that pay less, is often cited as a contributor to the existing gender pay gap.[154][155]

In relation to white women, women of color are disproportionally affected by the negative influence their gender has on their chances in the labor market.[156] In 2005, women held only 14.7% of Fortune 500 board seats with 79% of them being white and 21% being women of color.[153] This difference is understood through intersectionality, a term describing the multiple and intersecting oppressions and individual might experience. Activists during second-wave feminism have also used the term "horizontal oppressions" to describe this phenomenon.[157] It has also been suggested that women of color in addition to the glass ceiling, face a "concrete wall" or a "sticky floor" to better visualize the barriers.[153]

Liberal feminist theory states that due to these systemic factors of oppression and discrimination, women are often deprived of equal work experiences because they are not provided equal opportunities on the basis of legal rights. Liberal feminists further propose that an end needs to be put to discrimination based on gender through legal means, leading to equality and major economic redistributions.[158][159]

While activists have tried calling on Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to provide an equal hiring and promotional process, that practice has had limited success.[160] The pay gap between men and women is slowly closing. Women make approximately 21% less than her male counterpart according to the Department of Labor.[161] This number varies by age, race, and other perceived attributes of hiring agents. A proposed step towards solving the problem of the gender pay gap and the unequal work opportunities is the ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment which would constitutionally guarantee equal rights for women.[162][163][164][165] This is hoped to end gender-based discrimination and provide equal opportunities for women.

Economic and social consequences

If a woman does act according to female stereotypes, she is likely to receive backlash for not being competent enough; if she does not act according to the stereotypes connected to her gender and behaves more androgynous, or even masculine, it is likely to cause backlash through third-party punishment or further job discrimination.[166] Therefore, women are expected to behave in a way that aligns with female gender stereotypes while these stereotypes are simultaneously used to justify their lack of success in an economic context, putting women in the workforce in a precarious, "double bind" situation.[167] A proposed step to relieve women from this issue is the above-mentioned ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment, as it would legally further gender equality and prohibit gender-based discrimination[168] regardless if a woman is acting according to female gender stereotypes or in defiance of them.

Rosabeth Moss Kanter identified four types of stereotypes given to professional women via the media. The four stereotypes are, iron maiden, pet, mother, and seductress/sex object.[169] Iron maiden refers to women who are deemed to display too many masculine traits and not enough feminine traits according to her audience. This leads audiences to question the trustworthiness of an iron maiden, because she is seen as strategically playing the field to appease voters. The pet stereotype is given to women who are identified as helpmates, cheerleaders, or mascots, which then leads the audience to see these women as naive or weak and unable to lead without a man's help. If a professional woman is seen as a mother, she is more likely to be seen as compassionate and caring, but also has the capacity to be shrew, punishing, and scolding. Additionally, it is possible for her leadership abilities to be called into question due to perceived conflicts with her maternal responsibilities. The fourth stereotype, seductress, is assigned to women who speak and act rather femininely, or have been victims of sexual harassment. The media tends to focus on the seductress woman's sex appeal and physical appearance in opposition to her policy stances and rhetoric.[170]

A proposed step to relieve women from that double bind is the above-mentioned ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment, as it would further legal gender equality and prohibit gender-based discrimination,[171] regardless if a woman is acting according to female gender stereotypes or in defiance of them.

Implicit gender stereotypes

Gender stereotypes and roles can also be supported implicitly. Implicit stereotypes are the unconscious influence of attitudes a person may or may not be aware that they hold. A person is influenced by these attitudes even though they are not aware. Gender stereotypes can also be held in this manner.

These implicit stereotypes can often be demonstrated by the Implicit-association test (IAT).

One example of an implicit gender stereotype is that males are seen as better at mathematics than females. It has been found that men have stronger positive associations with mathematics than women, while women have stronger negative associations with mathematics and the more strongly a woman associates herself with the female gender identity, the more negative her association with mathematics.[172]

These associations have been disputed for their biological connection to gender and have been attributed to social forces that perpetuate stereotypes such as aforementioned stereotype that men are better at mathematics than women.[173]

This particular stereotype has been found in American children as early as second grade.[137]

The same test with Singaporean children found that the strength of their mathematics-gender stereotype and their gender identity predicted the association between individuals and mathematical ability.[174]

It has been shown that this stereotype also reflects mathematical performance: a study was done on the worldwide scale and it was found that the strength of this mathematics-gender stereotype in varying countries correlates with 8th graders' scores on the TIMSS, a standardized math and science achievement test that is given worldwide. The results were controlled for general gender inequality and yet were still significant.[175]

Gender inequality online

An example of gender stereotypes assumes those of the male gender are more 'tech savvy' and happier working online, however, a study done by Hargittai & Shafer,[176] shows that many women also typically have lower self-perceived abilities when it comes to use of the World Wide Web and online navigation skills. Because this stereotype is so well known many women assume they lack such technical skills when in reality, the gap in technological skill level between men and women is significantly less than many women assume.

In the journal article written by Elizabeth Behm-Morawitz video games have been guilty of using sexualised female characters, who wear revealing clothing with an 'ideal' figure. It has been shown, female gamers can experience lower self-efficacy when playing a game with a sexualized female character. Women have been stereotyped in online games and have shown to be quite sexist in their appearance. It has been shown these kind of character appearances have influenced peoples' beliefs about gender capabilities by assigning certain qualities to the male and female characters in different games.[177]

The concept of gender inequality is often perceived as something that is non-existent within the online community, because of the anonymity possible online. Remote or home-working greatly reduces the volume of information one individual gives another compared to face-to-face encounters,[178] providing fewer opportunities for unequal treatment but it seems real-world notions of power and privilege are being duplicated: people who choose to take up different identities (avatars) in the online world are (still) routinely discriminated against, evident in online gaming where users are able to create their own characters. This freedom allows the user to create characters and identities with a different appearance than their own in reality, essentially allowing them to create a new identity, confirming regardless of actual gender those who are perceived to be female are treated differently because of their on-line gender identity.

In marked contrast to the traditional male-dominated stereotype a study shows that 52% of the gaming audience is made up of women and a minority of gaming characters are women. Only 12% of game designers in Britain and 3% of all programmers are women.[179]

Despite the growing number of women who partake in online communities, and the anonymous space provided by the Internet, issues such as gender inequality, the issue has simply been transplanted into the online world.

Politics and gender issues

In political office

Even though the number of women running for elected office has increased over the last decades, they still only make up 20% of U.S. senators, 19.4% of U.S. congressional representatives and 24% of statewide executives.[180] Additionally, many of these political campaigns appear to focus on the aggressiveness of the female candidate which is often still perceived as a masculine trait.[181] Therefore, female candidates are running based on gender-opposing stereotypes because that predicts higher likelihood of success than appearing to be a stereotypical woman.

Elections of increasing numbers of women into office serves as a basis for many scholars to claim that voters are not biased towards a candidate's gender. However, it has been shown that female politicians are perceived as only being superior when it comes to handling women's rights and poverty, whereas male politicians are perceived to be better at dealing with crime and foreign affairs.[182] That view lines up with the most common gender stereotypes.

It has also been predicted that gender does only highly matter for female candidates that have not been politically established. These predictions apply further to established candidates, stating that gender would not be a defining factor for their campaign or the focal point of media coverage. This has been disproven by multiple scholars, often based on Hillary Clinton's multiple campaigns for the office of President of the United States.[183][184][185]

Additionally, when voters don't have a lot of information about a female candidate, they are likely to view her as being a stereotypical woman which they often take as a basis for not electing her because they consider typical male qualities as being crucial for someone holding a political office.[186]

Feminism and women's rights

Throughout the 20th century, women in the United States saw a dramatic shift in social and professional aspirations and norms. Following the Women's Suffrage Movement of the late-nineteenth century, which resulted in the passage of the Nineteenth Amendment allowing women to vote, and in combination with conflicts in Europe, WWI and WWII, women found themselves shifted into the industrial workforce. During this time, women were expected to take up industrial jobs and support the troops abroad through the means of domestic industry. Moving from "homemakers" and "caregivers", women were now factory workers and "breadwinners" for the family.

However, after the war, men returned home to the United States and women, again, saw a shift in social and professional dynamics. With the reuniting of the nuclear family, the ideals of American Suburbia boomed. Throughout the 1950s and 1960s, middle-class families moved in droves from urban living into newly developed single-family homes on former farmland just outside major cities. Thus established what many modern critics describe as the "private sphere".[187] Though frequently sold and idealized as “perfect living”,[188] many women had difficulty adjusting to the new “private sphere.” Writer Betty Friedan described this discontent as “the feminine mystique.” The “mystique” was derived from women equipped with the knowledge, skills, and aspirations of the workforce, the “public sphere”, who felt compelled whether socially or morally to devote themselves to the home and family.[189]

One major concern of feminism, is that women occupy lower-ranking job positions than men, and do most of the housework.[190] A recent (October 2009) report from the Center for American Progress, "The Shriver Report: A Woman's Nation Changes Everything" tells us that women now make up 48% of the US workforce and "mothers are breadwinners or co-breadwinners in a majority of families" (63.3%, see figure 2, page 19 of the Executive Summary of The Shriver Report).[191]

Another recent article in The New York Times indicates that young women today are closing the pay gap. Luisita Lopez Torregrosa has noted, "Women are ahead of men in education (last year, 55 percent of U.S. college graduates were female). And a study shows that in most U.S. cities, single, childless women under 30 are making an average of 8 percent more money than their male counterparts, with Atlanta and Miami in the lead at 20 percent.".[192] While this study concerned American cities, a global trend is developing, and has now been termed "the reverse gender gap."

Feminist theory generally defines gender as a social construct that includes ideologies governing feminine/masculine (female/male) appearances, actions, and behaviors. An example of these gender roles would be that males were supposed to be the educated breadwinners of the family, and occupiers of the public sphere whereas, the female's duty was to be a homemaker, take care of her husband and children, and occupy the private sphere. According to contemporary gender role ideology, gender roles are continuously changing. This can be seen in Londa Schiebinger's Has Feminism Changed Science, in which she states, "Gendered characteristics - typically masculine or feminine behaviors, interests, or values-are not innate, nor are they arbitrary. They are formed by historical circumstances. They can also change with historical circumstances."[193]

One example of the contemporary definition of gender was depicted in Sally Shuttleworth’s Female Circulation in which the, “abasement of the woman, reducing her from an active participant in the labor market to the passive bodily existence to be controlled by male expertise is indicative of the ways in which the ideological deployment of gender roles operated to facilitate and sustain the changing structure of familial and market relations in Victorian England.”[194] In other words, this shows what it meant to grow up into the roles (gender roles) of a female in Victorian England, which transitioned from being a homemaker to being a working woman and then back to being passive and inferior to males. In conclusion, gender roles in the contemporary sex gender model are socially constructed, always changing, and do not really exist since, they are ideologies that society constructs in order for various benefits at various times in history.

Men's rights

The men's rights movement (MRM) is a part of the larger men's movement. It branched off from the men's liberation movement in the early-1970s. The men's rights movement is made up of a variety of groups and individuals who are concerned about what they consider to be issues of male disadvantage, discrimination and oppression.[195][196] The movement focuses on issues in numerous areas of society (including family law, parenting, reproduction, domestic violence) and government services (including education, compulsory military service, social safety nets, and health policies) that they believe discriminate against men.

Scholars consider the men's rights movement or parts of the movement to be a backlash to feminism.[197] The men's rights movement denies that men are privileged relative to women.[198] The movement is divided into two camps: those who consider men and women to be harmed equally by sexism, and those who view society as endorsing the degradation of men and upholding female privilege.[198]

Men's rights groups have called for male-focused governmental structures to address issues specific to men and boys including education, health, work and marriage.[199][200][201] Men's rights groups in India have called for the creation of a Men's Welfare Ministry and a National Commission for Men, as well as the abolition of the National Commission for Women.[199][202][203] In the United Kingdom, the creation of a Minister for Men analogous to the existing Minister for Women, have been proposed by David Amess, MP and Lord Northbourne, but were rejected by the government of Tony Blair.[200][204][205] In the United States, Warren Farrell heads a commission focused on the creation of a "White House Council on Boys and Men" as a counterpart to the "White House Council on Women and Girls" which was formed in March 2009.[201][206]

Related to this is the Father's Rights Movement, whose members seek social and political reforms that affect fathers and their children.[207] These individuals contest that societal institutions such as family courts, and laws relating to child custody and child support payments, are gender biased in favor of mothers as the default caregiver. They therefore are systemically discriminatory against males regardless of their actual caregiving ability, because males are typically seen as the bread-winner, and females as the care-giver.[208]

Gender neutrality

Gender neutrality is the movement to end discrimination of gender altogether in society through means of gender neutral language, the end of sex segregation and other means.

Transgender and cross-dressing

Transgender is the state of one's gender identity or gender expression not matching one's assigned sex.[209] Transgender is independent of sexual orientation; transgender people may identify as heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, etc.; some may consider conventional sexual orientation labels inadequate or inapplicable to them. The definition of transgender includes:

  • "Denoting or relating to a person whose sense of personal identity and gender does not correspond with their birth sex."[210]
  • "People who were assigned a sex, usually at birth and based on their genitals, but who feel that this is a false or incomplete description of themselves."[211]
  • "Non-identification with, or non-presentation as, the sex (and assumed gender) one was assigned at birth."[212]

While people self-identify as transgender, the transgender identity umbrella includes sometimes-overlapping categories. These include transsexual; transvestite or cross-dresser; genderqueer; androgyne; and bigender.[213] Usually not included are transvestic fetishists (because it is considered to be a paraphilia rather than gender identification), and drag kings and drag queens, who are performers who cross-dress for the purpose of entertaining. In an interview, celebrity drag queen RuPaul talked about society's ambivalence to the differences in the people who embody these terms. "A friend of mine recently did the Oprah show about transgender youth", said RuPaul. "It was obvious that we, as a culture, have a hard time trying to understand the difference between a drag queen, transsexual, and a transgender, yet we find it very easy to know the difference between the American baseball league and the National baseball league, when they are both so similar."[214]

Sexual orientation

Sexual orientation is defined by the interplay between a person's emotional and physical attraction toward others.[215] Generally, sexual orientation is broken into the three categories: heterosexual, homosexual and bisexual. By basic definition, the term heterosexual is typically used in reference to someone who is attracted to people of the opposite sex, the term homosexual is used to classify people who are attracted to those of the same sex, and the term bisexual is used to identify those who are attracted to both the same and opposite sexes.[216] Sexual orientation can be variously defined based on sexual identity, sexual behavior and sexual attraction. People can fall anywhere on a spectrum from strictly heterosexual to strictly homosexual.[217]

Scientists do not know the exact cause of sexual orientation, but they theorize that it is caused by a complex interplay of genetic, hormonal, and environmental influences,[218][219][220] and do not view it as a choice.[218][219][221] Although no single theory on the cause of sexual orientation has yet gained widespread support, scientists favor biologically-based theories.[218] There is considerably more evidence supporting nonsocial, biological causes of sexual orientation than social ones, especially for males.[222][223][224] There is no substantive evidence which suggests parenting or early childhood experiences play a role with regard to sexual orientation.[225]

An active conflict over the cultural acceptability of non-heterosexuality rages worldwide.[226][227][228][229][230] The belief or assumption that heterosexual relationships and acts are "normal" is described as heterosexism or in queer theory, heteronormativity. Gender identity and sexual orientation are two separate aspects of individual identity, although they are often mistaken in the media.[231]

Perhaps it is an attempt to reconcile this conflict that leads to a common assumption that one same-sex partner assumes a pseudo-male gender role and the other assumes a pseudo-female role. For a gay male relationship, this might lead to the assumption that the "wife" handled domestic chores, was the receptive sexual partner, adopted effeminate mannerisms, and perhaps even dressed in women's clothing.[232] This assumption is flawed because homosexual couples tend to have more equal roles, and the effeminate behavior of some gay men is usually not adopted consciously, and is often more subtle.[233]

Cohabitating same-sex partners are typically egalitarian when they assign domestic chores.[234] Sometimes these couples assign traditional female responsibilities to one partner and traditional male responsibilities to the other. Same-sex domestic partners challenge traditional gender roles in their division of household responsibilities, and gender roles within homosexual relationships are flexible.[235] For instance, cleaning and cooking, traditionally regarded by many as both female responsibilities, might be assigned to different people. Carrington observed the daily home lives of 52 gay and lesbian couples and found that the length of the work week and level of earning power substantially affected the assignment of housework, regardless of gender or sexuality.[236][237]

In many cultures, gender roles, especially for men, simultaneously act as an indicator for heterosexuality, and as a boundary of acceptable behavior for straight people. Therefore, lesbians, gay men and bisexual people may be viewed as exempt from some or all components of gender roles or as having different "rules" they are expected to follow by society.

These modified "rules" for lesbian, gay and bisexual people may also be oppressive. Morgan examines the plight of homosexuals seeking asylum from homophobic persecution who have been turned away by US customs for "not being gay enough"; not conforming sufficiently to standard (Western) conceptions of the gender roles occupied by gays and lesbians.[238]

Conversely, heterosexual men and women who are not perceived as being sufficiently masculine or feminine, respectively, may be assumed to be, or suspected to be, homosexual, and persecuted for their perceived homosexuality.

Criminal justice

A number of studies conducted since the mid-90s have found direct correlation between a female criminal's ability to conform to gender role stereotypes, particularly murder, and the severity of their sentencing.[239][240][241][242] "...In terms of the social realities of justice in America, the experiences of diverse groups of people in society have contributed to the shaping of the types of criminals and victims that we have had. Like Andersen and Hill Collins (1998: 4) in their discussion of what they refer to as a 'matrix of domination,' we too conceive that class, race, and gender represent "multiple, interlocking levels of domination that stem from the societal configurations of these structural relationships. These patterned actions, in turn, affect [ing] individual consciousness, group interaction, and individual and group access to institutional power and privileges.'"[243] "Patterns of offending by men and by women are notable both for their similarities and for their differences. Both men and women are more heavily involved in minor property and substance abuse offenses than in serious crimes like robbery or murder. However, men offend at much higher rates than women for all crime categories except prostitution. This gender gap in crime is greatest for serious crime and least for mild forms of lawbreaking such as minor property crimes." [244]

Gender roles in family violence

The ‘Family Violence Framework’ applies gender dynamics to family violence.[245][246] “Families are constructed around relationships that involve obligations and responsibilities, but also status and power”.[245] According to Hattery and Smith, when “masculinity and femininity are constructed…to generate these rigid and narrow gender roles, it contributes to a culture of violence against women”[247] “People with more resources are more likely to be abusive towards those without resources”, meaning that the stronger member of the relationship abuses their weaker partner or family member to exert their powerful roles.[245] However, the fight for power and equality remains – “Intimate partner violence in same-sex couples reveals that the rates are similar to those in the heterosexual community”.[248]

See also


  1. Levesque R.J.R. (2011) Sex Roles and Gender Roles. In: Levesque R.J.R. (eds) Encyclopedia of Adolescence. Springer, New York, NY. ISBN 978-1-4419-1695-2. Retrieved January 22, 2018.
  2. Alters, Sandra; Schiff, Wendy (2009). Essential Concepts for Healthy Living. Jones & Bartlett Publishers. p. 143. ISBN 978-0763756413. Retrieved 3 January 2018.
  3. David S. Gochman (2013). Handbook of Health Behavior Research II: Provider Determinants. Springer Science & Business Media. p. 424. ISBN 978-1489917607. Retrieved 3 January 2018.
  4. Janssen, D.F. (2018). "Know Thy Gender: Etymological Primer". Archives of Sexual Behavior. 47 (8): 2149–2154. doi:10.1007/s10508-018-1300-x. ISSN 0004-0002. PMID 30182204.
  5. "What do we mean by "sex" and "gender"?". World Health Organization. 2015. Archived from the original on 18 August 2015. Retrieved 18 August 2015.
  6. The social construction of race. The Atlantic.
  7. Henry, S. (2009) Social construction of crime. In J. Miller (Ed.), 21st Century criminology: A reference handbook. (pp. 296-306). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, Inc. doi:10.4135/9781412971997.n34
  8. Hacking, I (1999) The social construction of what?. Harvard University Press.
  10. Francis, B. (2000) Is gender a social construct or a biological imperative? Family Futures : Issues in Research and Policy 7th Australian Institute of Family Studies Conference
  11. Adler, Patricia A.; Kless, Steven J.; Adler, Peter (July 1992). "Socialization to Gender Roles: Popularity among Elementary School Boys and Girls". Sociology of Education. 65 (3): 169–187. doi:10.2307/2112807. JSTOR 2112807.
  12. Dill, Karen E.; Thill, Kathryn P. (December 2007). "Video Game Characters and the Socialization of Gender Roles: Young People's Perceptions Mirror Sexist Media Depictions". Sex Roles. 57 (11–12): 851–864. doi:10.1007/s11199-007-9278-1.
  13. Dietz, Tracy L. (March 1998). "An Examination of Violence and Gender Role Portrayals in Video Games: Implications for Gender Socialization and Aggressive Behavior". Sex Roles. 38 (5–6): 425–442. doi:10.1023/A:1018709905920.
  14. Eleanor Emmons, Maccoby (1966). "Sex differences in intellectual functioning". The Development of Sex Differences. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press. pp. 25–55. ISBN 978-0-8047-0308-6.
  15. Richards, Christina; Bouman, Walter Pierre; Barker, Meg-John (2017). Genderqueer and non-binary genders. United Kingdom: Macmillan. p. 306. ISBN 978-1137510532.
  16. Graham, Sharyn (2001), Sulawesi's fifth gender, Inside Indonesia, April–June 2001.
  17. Roscoe, Will (2000). Changing Ones: Third and Fourth Genders in Native North America. Palgrave Macmillan (17 June 2000) ISBN 0-312-22479-6
    See also: Trumbach, Randolph (1994). London’s Sapphists: From Three Sexes to Four Genders in the Making of Modern Culture. In Third Sex, Third Gender: Beyond Sexual Dimorphism in Culture and History, edited by Gilbert Herdt, 111-36. New York: Zone (MIT). ISBN 978-0-942299-82-3
  18. "LGBTQ Needs Assessment" (PDF). Encompass Network. April 2013. pp. 52–53. Retrieved 6 March 2015. "Archived copy" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 24 October 2014. Retrieved 18 October 2014.CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
  19. Lopez, German (18 April 2016). "9 questions about gender identity and being transgender you were too embarrassed to ask". Vox. Retrieved 31 July 2016. Transitioning can be made much more difficult by persistent misconceptions, including the myth that transgender people belong to a third gender.
  20. Sykes, Heather (2006). "Transsexual and Transgender Policies in Sport". Women in Sport & Physical Activity Journal. 15 (1): 3–13. doi:10.1123/wspaj.15.1.3. Retrieved 31 July 2016.
  21. Adler, P.; Kless, S.; Adler, P (1992). "Socialization to gender roles: Popularity among elementary school boys and girls". Sociology of Education. 65 (3): 169–087. doi:10.2307/2112807. JSTOR 2112807.
  22. Acker, J (1992). "From sex roles to gendered institutions". Contemporary Sociology: A Journal of Reviews. 21 (5): 565–569. doi:10.2307/2075528. JSTOR 2075528.
  23. Pate, J. s.d. "What everyone should know about gender and sexuality". Archived from the original on 19 November 2012.
  24. Cahill, S. E. (1986) Language practices and self definition: The case of gender identity acquisition. The Sociological Quarterly vol. 27, issue 3, pp 295-311
  25. Fenstermaker, Sarah (2002). Doing Gender, Doing Difference: Inequality, Power, and Institutional Change. New York: Routledge. p. 8. ISBN 978-0-415-93179-3.
  26. Eagly, A.H. (1997). Sex differences in social behavior: Comparing social role theory and evolutionary psychology. American Psychologist, December, 1380-1383.
  27. Trumbach, Randolph (1994). Herdt, Gilbert (ed.). London's Sapphists: From Three Sexes to Four Genders in the Making of Modern Culture. In Third Sex, Third Gender: Beyond Sexual Dimorphism in Culture and History. New York: Zone (MIT). pp. 111–36. ISBN 978-0-942299-82-3.
  28. Wood, W.; Eagly, A. H. (2002). "A cross-cultural analysis of the behavior of women and men: Implications for the origins of sex difference". Psychological Bulletin. 128 (5): 699–727. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.128.5.699. PMID 12206191.
  29. Cherlin, Andrew J. (2010). Public and private families : an introduction (6th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill Higher Education. p. 93. ISBN 9780073404356.
  30. Eagly, A. H. (2004). Prejudice: Toward a more inclusive understanding. In A. H. Eagly, R. M. Baron, & V. L. Hamilton (Eds.), The social psychology of group identity and social conflict: Theory, application, and practice (pp. 45–64). Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/10683-003
  31. Butler, J. (1990). ‘’Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity.’’ New York; Routledge.
  32. Butler, Judith. Undoing Gender. New York: Routledge, 2004.
  33. Franco-German TV Station ARTE, Karambolage, August 2004.
  34. Brockhaus: Enzyklopädie der Psychologie, 2001.
  35. Dvorsky, George (2008). "Postgenderism: Beyond the Gender Binary" (PDF). Retrieved 3 May 2019.
  36. Hoststede, Geert. 1998. Masculinity and Femininity: The Taboo Dimension of National Cultures. page 5
  37. Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s consequences: international differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
  38. Hofstede (2001), Culture’s Consequences, 2nd ed. p. 297.
  39. Hofstede, G (1986). "Cultural differences in teaching and learning". International Journal of Intercultural Relations. 10 (3): 308. doi:10.1016/0147-1767(86)90015-5.
  40. Hofstede, Geert (2002). "Consensus Societies with Their Own Character: National Cultures in Japan and the Netherlands". Comparative Sociology. 1: 1–16. doi:10.1163/156913202317346728.
  41. Hofstede, Geert; de Mooij, Marickc (2010). "The Hofstede model Applications to global branding and advertising strategy and research". International Journal of Advertising. 29 (1): 89. doi:10.2501/S026504870920104X.
  42. Fausto-Sterling, Anne (2000). Sexing the body: gender politics and the construction of sexuality. New York: Basic Books. ISBN 0-465-07714-5.
  43. Fausto-Sterling, Anne (4 August 2008) [1st pub. 2000]. Sexing the Body: Gender Politics and the Construction of Sexuality. New York: Basic Books. p. 46. ISBN 978-0-7867-2433-8. OCLC 818855499.
  44. Money, John; Hampson, Joan G; Hampson, John (October 1955). "An Examination of Some Basic Sexual Concepts: The Evidence of Human Hermaphroditism". Bull. Johns Hopkins Hosp. 97 (4): 301–19. PMID 13260820. By the term, gender role, we mean all those things that a person says or does to disclose himself or herself as having the status of boy or man, girl or woman, respectively. It includes, but is not restricted to sexuality in the sense of eroticism. Gender role is appraised in relation to the following: general mannerisms, deportment and demeanor, play preferences and recreational interests; spontaneous topics of talk in unprompted conversation and casual comment; content of dreams, daydreams, and fantasies; replies to oblique inquiries and projective tests; evidence of erotic practices and, finally, the person's own replies to direct inquiry.
  45. Colapinto, J. (11 December 1997). "The True Story of John/Joan". The Rolling Stone. pp. 54–97.
  46. Colapinto, J. (2000). As nature made him: The boy who was raised as a girl. NY: HarperCollins.
  47. Diamond, M.; Sigmundson, H. K. (1997). "Sex reassignment at birth: Long-term review and clinical implications". Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine. 151 (3): 298–304. doi:10.1001/archpedi.1997.02170400084015. PMID 9080940.
  48. West, Candace; Zimmerman, Don H. (June 1987). "Doing Gender". Gender and Society. 1 (2): 129.
  49. Bergoffen, Debra, "Simone de Beauvoir", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2010 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.).
  50. Connell, Robert William: Gender and Power, Cambridge: University Press 1987.
  51. Baron-Cohen, S (2003) The Essential Difference: men, women and the extreme male brain. Penguin/Basic Books. ISBN 978-0-7139-9671-5
  52. Connellan, Jennifer; Baron-Cohen, Simon; Wheelwright, Sally; Batkia, Anna; Ahluwaliab, Jag (January 2000). "Sex differences in human neonatal social perception". Infant Behavior and Development. 23 (1): 113–119. CiteSeerX doi:10.1016/S0163-6383(00)00032-1.
  53. Nash, Alison; Grossi, Giordana (2007). "Picking Barbie™'s brain: inherent sex differences in scientific ability?". Journal of Interdisciplinary Feminist Thought. 2 (1): 5. Pdf.
  54. Berenbaum, Sheri A.; Hines, Melissa (1992). Early androgens are related to childhood sex-typed toy preferences. Psychological Science 3. pp. 203–206.
  55. Sven Design. "Gorman Lab" (PDF). Retrieved 14 June 2015.
  56. Imperato-McGinley, J; Peterson, RE; Gautier, T; Sturla, E (31 May 1979). "Androgens and the evolution of male-gender identity among male pseudohermaphrodites with 5alpha-reductase deficiency". The New England Journal of Medicine. 300 (22): 1233–7. doi:10.1056/NEJM197905313002201. PMID 431680.
  57. "Reiner & Gearhart's NEJM Study on Cloacal Exstrophy - Review by Vernon Rosario, M.D., Ph.D". Retrieved 14 March 2013.
  58. Bem, Sandra L. (July 1981). "Gender schema theory: A cognitive account of sex typing". Psychological Review. 88 (4): 354–364. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.88.4.354.
  59. Medicine, Institute of; Board, Food and Nutrition; Environment, Committee on Physical Activity and Physical Education in the School; Cook, Heather D.; Harold W. Kohl, I. I. I. (30 October 2013). Physical Activity and Physical Education: Relationship to Growth, Development, and Health. National Academies Press (US).
  60. Shapiro, Eve (2010). Gender circuits : bodies and identities in a technological age (1. ed.). New York, NY: Routledge. p. 9. ISBN 9780415996952. Retrieved 6 February 2017.
  61. "Yerkes Researchers Find Sex Differences in Monkey Toy Preferences Similar to Humans". Yerkes National Primate Research Center. 10 April 2008. Retrieved 29 September 2012.
  62. Hassett, Janice M. (2008). "Male monkeys prefer boys' toys". Hormones and Behavior. 54 (3): 359–364. doi:10.1016/j.yhbeh.2008.03.008. PMC 2583786. PMID 18452921. Retrieved 17 April 2010.
  63. Connell, Raewyn, Ph.D. "Men, Masculinities and Feminism." Social Alternatives July 1997: 7-10. Print.
  64. Fortin, Nicole (2005). "Gender Role Attitudes and the Labour Market Outcomes of Women Across OECD Countries". Oxford Review of Economic Policy. 21 (3): 416–438. doi:10.1093/oxrep/gri024.
  65. Ehrenreich, Barbara; Deirdre English (2010). Witches, Midwives and Nurses: A History of Women Healers (2nd ed.). The Feminist Press. pp. 44–87. ISBN 978-0-912670-13-3.
  66. Boulis, Ann K.; Jacobs, Jerry A. (2010). The changing face of medicine: women doctors and the evolution of health care in America. Ithaca, N.Y.: ILR. ISBN 978-0-8014-7662-4. Encouraging one's daughter to pursue a career in medicine is no longer an unusual idea… Americans are now more likely to report that they feel comfortable recommending a career in medicine for a young woman than for a young man.
  67. Bullough, Vern L.; Bonnie Bullough (1993). Crossdressing, Sex, and Gender (1st ed.). University of Pennsylvania Press. 1993. p. 390. ISBN 978-0-8122-1431-4.
  68. Butler, Judith, Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity, Routledge, New York, 2008
  69. Halberstam, Judith, Female Masculinity, Duke University Press, Durham and London, 1998
  70. Epstein, Julia, Straub, Kristina; Eds, Body Guards: The Cultural Politics of Gender Ambiguity, Routledge, London, 1991
  72. Hackman, J.R. (1992). "Group influences on individuals in organizations". In M.D. Dunnette & L.M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 3). Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press, 234-245.
  73. Dhami, Sangeeta (November 2000). "The Muslim family". West J Med. 173 (5): 352–356. doi:10.1136/ewjm.173.5.352. PMC 1071164. PMID 11069879.
  74. Offenhauer, P. "Women in Islamic Societies: A selected review of social scientific literature" (PDF).
  75. "Surah Al-Baqarah [2:228]". Surah Al-Baqarah [2:228]. Retrieved 15 November 2018.
  76. "Global Connections . Roles of Women | PBS". Retrieved 5 February 2016.
  77. Gopal, Madan (1990). K.S. Gautam, ed. India through the ages. Publication Division, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India. p. 69.
  78. Peletz, Michael Gates. Gender, Sexuality, and Body Politics in Modern Asia. Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Asian Studies, 2011. Print.
  79. Jackson, C (2012). "Introduction: Marriage, gender relations and social change". Journal of Development Studies. 48 (1): 1–9. doi:10.1080/00220388.2011.629653.
  80. Gauntlett, D. (2008). Media, gender and identity: An introduction. Routledge.
  81. Gerber, G. L. (1988). "Leadership roles and the gender stereotype traits". Sex Roles. 18 (11–12): 649–668. doi:10.1007/BF00288051.
  82. Pritchard, Justin (21 October 2003). "Men hold the edge on gender gap odds". Oakland Tribune. Archived from the original on 10 May 2013.
  83. Facts for features: Valentine's Day U.S. Census Bureau Report 7 February 2006
  84. McCurry, Justin; Allison, Rebecca (8 March 2004). "40m bachelors and no women ... the birth of a new problem for China". The Guardian. London.
  85. "Polygamy proposal for Chechen men". BBC News. 13 January 2006.
  86. Benokraits, Nijole (2002). Marriage and Families: Changes, Choices, and Constrains. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. ISBN 978-0-13-034177-8.
  87. Messner, Michael A. (December 2000). "Barbie girls vs. sea monsters: children constructing gender" (PDF). Gender & Society. 14 (6): 765–784. doi:10.1177/089124300014006004.
  88. Matthes, Jörg; Prieler, Michael; Adam, Karoline (October 2016). "Gender-Role Portrayals in Television Advertising Across the Globe". Sex Roles. 75 (7–8): 314–327. doi:10.1007/s11199-016-0617-y. PMC 5023740. PMID 27688526.
  89. Rubie-Davies, Christine M.; Liu, Sabrina; Lee, Kai-Chi Katie (March 2013). "Watching Each Other: Portrayals of Gender and Ethnicity in Television Advertisements". Journal of Social Psychology. 153 (2): 179–180. doi:10.1080/00224545.2012.717974. PMID 23484346.
  90. Aubrey, Jennifer Stevens; Harrison, Kristen (May 2004). "The Gender-Role Content of Children's Favorite Television Programs and Its Links to Their Gender-Related Perceptions". Media Psychology. 6 (2): 141–142. doi:10.1207/s1532785xmep0602_1.
  91. Steyer, Isabella (2014). "Gender representations in children's media and their influence". Campus-Wide Information Systems. 31 (2/3): 171–180. doi:10.1108/CWIS-11-2013-0065.
  92. Lindsey, L. L. (2015). Gender roles: A sociological perspective. Routledge.
  93. Greenstein, Theodore N. “Gender Ideology, Marital Disruption, and the Employment of Married Women.” Journal of Marriage and Family, vol. 57, no. 1, 1995, pp. 31–42.
  94. Lucier-Greer, M., & Adler-Baeder, F. (2016). Gender role attitude malleability in the context of divorce and remarriage: A longitudinal growth curve perspective. Journal of Adult Development, 23(3), 150-162. doi:10.1007/s10804-016-9231-z
  95. Davis, Shannon N, and Theodore N Greenstein. “Interactive Effects of Gender Ideology and Age at First Marriage on Women’s Marital Disruption.” Journal of Family Issues, vol. 25, no. 5, 2004, pp. 658–682.
  96. Kaufman, G., & Taniguchi, H. (2006). Gender and marital happiness in later life. Journal of Family Issues, 27(6), 735-757.
  97. .Perry, Samuel L, and Andrew L Whitehead. “For Better or for Worse? Gender Ideology, Religious Commitment, and Relationship Quality.” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, vol. 55, no. 4, 2016, pp. 737–755., doi:10.1111/jssr.12308.
  98. Lindemann, D. (2018). Doing and undoing gender in commuter marriages. Sex Roles : A Journal of Research, 79(1-2), 36-49. doi:10.1007/s11199-017-0852-x
  99. Espenshade, Thomas J. (1 January 1985). "Marriage Trends in America: Estimates, Implications, and Underlying Causes". Population and Development Review. 11 (2): 193–245. doi:10.2307/1973487. JSTOR 1973487.
  100. Hawke, Lucy (2007). "Gender Roles Within the American Marriage: Are They Really Changing?". ESSAI.
  101. Dunleavey, M.P. (27 January 2007). "A Breadwinner Rethinks Gender Roles". The New York Times.
  102. McNiel, Jamie N.; Harris, Deborah A.; Fondren, Kristi M. (7 November 2012). "Women and the Wild: Gender Socialization in Wilderness Recreation Advertising". Gender Issues. 29 (1–4): 39–55. doi:10.1007/s12147-012-9111-1.
  103. "Growing Number of Stay-at-Home Dads - Pew Research Center". Pew Research Center’s Social & Demographic Trends Project. 5 June 2014. Retrieved 14 June 2015.
  104. Louisa Peacock; Sam Marsden (23 January 2013). "Rise in stay-at-home fathers fuelled by growing numbers of female breadwinners". London. Retrieved 14 June 2015.
  105. "Stay-at-home dads on the rise – increasingly because they want to be". The Globe and Mail. Toronto. 5 June 2014. Retrieved 14 June 2015.
  106. "Sweden sees boom in stay-at-home dads". 4 June 2013. Retrieved 14 June 2015.
  107. "Breadwinner Moms". Pew Research Center’s Social & Demographic Trends Project. 29 May 2013. Retrieved 14 June 2015.
  108. Pompper, Donnalyn (2010). "Masculinities, The Metrosexual, And Media Images: Across Dimensions Of Age And Ethnicity". Sex Roles. 63 (9/10): 682–696. doi:10.1007/s11199-010-9870-7.
  109. McNair, Brian. Striptease culture: Sex, media and the democratization of desire. London: Routledge, 2002.Print.
  110. Kawase, Kazumi, et al. “The Attitude and Perceptions of Work-Life Balance: A Comparison Among Women Surgeons in Japan, USA, and Hong Kong China.” World Journal of Surgery, vol. 37, no. 1, Jan. 2013, pp. 2–11. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1007/s00268-012-1784-9.
  111. Tai, Po-Fen. “Gender Matters in Social Polarisation: Comparing Singapore, Hong Kong and Taipei.” Urban Studies (Sage Publications, Ltd.), vol. 50, no. 6, May 2013, pp. 1148–1164. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1177/0042098012460734.
  112. Rao, Nitya. “Male ‘Providers’ and Female ‘Housewives’: A Gendered Co-Performance in Rural North India.” Development & Change, vol. 43, no. 5, Sept. 2012, pp. 1025–1048. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1111/j.1467-7660.2012.01789.x.
  113. Chang, Lei (1999). "Gender Role Egalitarian Attitudes in Beijing, Hong Kong, Florida, and Michigan". Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. 30 (6): 722–41. doi:10.1177/0022022199030006004.
  114. Hofstede
  115. Bagozzi, Richard P.; Wong, Nancy; Yi, Youjae (1999). "The Role of Culture and Gender in the Relationship between Positive and Negative Affect". Cognition & Emotion. 13 (6): 641–72. doi:10.1080/026999399379023.
  116. Gender in Communication, A Critical Introduction. SAGE Publications. 2014. p. 3. ISBN 978-1-4522-2009-3.
  117. DeFrancisco, Victoria L., Catherine Helen Palczewski, and Danielle Dick McGeough. Gender in communication a critical introduction. Los Angeles: Sage, 2014. Print.
  118. "Gender Differences in Communication." Intercultural Communication: A Global Reader. Ed. Fred E. Jandt. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2004. 221–29. Print.
  119. Hall, J. A. (1990). Nonverbal sex differences: Accuracy of communication and expressive style. Baltimore, MD, US: Johns Hopkins University Press.
  120. Fischer, A. H. (2000). Gender and emotion: Social psychological perspectives. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
  121. McQuiston, D.; Morris, K. A. (2009). "Gender differences in communication: Implications for salespeople". Journal of Selling & Major Account Management. 9 (4): 54–64.
  122. Wood, J (2010) Gendered lives: Communication, gender and culture. Cengage Learning.
  123. Wood, J (2010) Gendered lives: Communication, gender and culture. Cengage Learning. p. 37
  124. Maltz, D., & Borker, R. (1982). A cultural approach to male-female miscommunication. In J. Gumperz (Ed.), Language and social identity (pp. 196–216). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  125. Metts, S., Sprecher, S., & Regan, P. C. (1998). Communication and sexual desire. In P. A. Andersen & L. K. Guerrero (Eds.) Handbook of communication and emotion. (pp. 354–377). San Diego: Academic Press.
  126. Baumeister, R; Catanese, K; Vohs, K (2001). "Is there a gender difference in strength of sex drive? Theoretical views, conceptual distinctions, and a review of relevant evidence". Personality and Social Psychology Review. 5 (3): 242–273. CiteSeerX doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr0503_5.
  127. Seal, D; Ehrhardt, A (2003). "Masculinity and urban men: Perceived scripts for courtship, romantic, and sexual interactions with women". Culture, Health & Sexuality: An International Journal for Research, Intervention and Care. 5 (4): 295–319. doi:10.1080/136910501171698.
  128. Perot; Byrne Murnen, SK; Perot, A; Byrne, D (1989). "Coping with unwanted sexual activity: Normative responses, situational determinants, and individual differences". Journal of Sex Research. 26 (1): 85–106. doi:10.1080/00224498909551493.
  129. Perper, T.; Weis, D. L. (1987). "Proceptive and rejective strategies of U.S. and Canadian college women". The Journal of Sex Research. 23 (4): 455–480. doi:10.1080/00224498709551385.
  130. Fagot, Beverly I.; Leinbach, Mary D.; O'Boyle, Cherie (March 1992). "Gender labeling, gender stereotyping, and parenting behaviors". Developmental Psychology. 28 (2): 225–230. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.28.2.225.
  131. Woolf, Virginia (1929). A room of one's own. New York: Hogarth Press. p. 76. OCLC 31499943.
  132. Gilligan, Carol (2009). In a different voice. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. ISBN 9780674445444.
  133. Fiske, Susan T.; Cuddy, Amy J.C.; Glick, Peter; Xu, Jun (June 2002). "A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition" (PDF). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 82 (6): 878–902. CiteSeerX doi:10.1037/0022-3514.82.6.878. PMID 12051578.
  134. Brewer, Holly (2012). "List of gender stereotypes".
  135. "Gender and gender identity at a glance". Planned Parenthood Federation of America Inc. 2012.
  136. Martin, Carol Lynn; Halverson Jr., Charles F. (December 1981). "A schematic processing model of sex typing and stereotyping in children". Child Development. 52 (4): 1119–1134. doi:10.2307/1129498. JSTOR 1129498.
  137. Cvencek, Dario; Meltzoff, Andrew N.; Greenwald, Anthony G. (May–June 2011). "Math–gender stereotypes in elementary school children". Child Development. 82 (3): 766–779. CiteSeerX doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01529.x. PMID 21410915.
  138. Lipman-Blumen, Jean (January 1972). "How ideology shapes women's lives". Scientific American. 226 (1): 34–42. Bibcode:1972SciAm.226a..34L. doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0172-34.
  139. Goodmark, Leigh; Flores, Juanita; Goldscheid, Julie; Ritchie, Andrea; SpearIt (9 July 2015). "Plenary 2—Redefining Gender Violence". University of Miami Race & Social Justice Law Review. 5: 289. SSRN 2628984.
  140. Deaux, Kay; Lewis, Laurie L. (May 1984). "Structure of gender stereotypes: interrelationships among components and gender label". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 46 (5): 991–1004. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.46.5.991.
  141. Jacobs, Janis E. (December 1991). "Influence of gender stereotypes on parent and child mathematics attitudes". Journal of Educational Psychology. 83 (4): 518–527. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.83.4.518.
  142. Steele, Claude M.; Aronson, Joshua (November 1995). "Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 69 (5): 797–811. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.69.5.797. PMID 7473032. Pdf.
  143. Spencer, Steven J.; Steele, Claude M.; Quinn, Diane M. (January 1999). "Stereotype threat and women's math performance". Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 35 (1): 4–28. CiteSeerX doi:10.1006/jesp.1998.1373. Pdf. Archived 8 January 2016 at the Wayback Machine
  144. Stoet, Gijsbert; Geary, David C. (March 2012). "Can stereotype threat explain the gender gap in mathematics performance and achievement?". Review of General Psychology. 16 (1): 93–102. doi:10.1037/a0026617.
  145. Jolien A., van Breen; Spears, Russell; Kuppens, Toon; de Lemus, Soledad (May 2018). "Subliminal gender stereotypes: who can resist?". Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 44 (12): 1648–1663. doi:10.1177/0146167218771895. PMID 29781373. [Epub ahead of print]
  146. Airaksinen, Toni (5 June 2018). "STUDY: Feminists more willing to 'sacrifice' men". Campus Reform. Leadership Institute. Retrieved 11 June 2018.
  147. Gorman, Elizabeth H. (August 2005). "Gender Stereotypes, Same-Gender Preferences, and Organizational Variation in the Hiring of Women: Evidence from Law Firms". American Sociological Review. 70 (4): 702–728. doi:10.1177/000312240507000408.
  148. Heilman, Madeline E. (2001). "Description and Prescription: How Gender Stereotypes Prevent Women's Ascent Up the Organizational Ladder". Journal of Social Issues. 57 (4): 657–674. doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00234.
  149. Heilman, Madeline E.; Eagly, Alice H. (2008). "Gender Stereotypes Are Alive, Well, and Busy Producing Workplace Discrimination". Industrial and Organizational Psychology. 1.
  150. Heilman, Madeline E. (1983). "Sex Bias in Work Settings: The Lack of Fit Model". Research in Organizational Behavior.
  151. Taylor, Shelley E.; Fiske, Susan T.; Etcoff, Nancy L.; Ruderman, Audrey J. (1978). "Categorical and Contextual Bases of Person Memory and Stereotyping". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 36 (7): 778. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.36.7.778.
  152. Kalysh, Kateryina; Kulik, Carol T.; Perera, Sanjeewa (2016). "Help or hindrance? Work-life practices and women in management". The Leadership Quarterly. 27 (3): 504. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2015.12.009.
  153. Sanchez-Huckles, Janis V.; Davis, Donald D. (2010). "Women and Women of Color in Leadership: Complexity, Identity, and Intersectionality". American Psychologist. 65 (3): 171–181. doi:10.1037/a0017459. PMID 20350016.
  154. Blau, Francine D.; Kahn, Lawrence M. (2000). "Differences in Pay". The Journal of Economic Perspectives. 14 (4): 75–99. doi:10.1257/jep.14.4.75.
  155. Petersen, Trond; Morgan, Laurie A. (1995). "Separate and Unequal: Occupation-Establishment Sex Segregation and the Gender Wage Gap". The American Journal of Sociology. 101 (2): 329–365. doi:10.1086/230727.
  156. Browne, Irene; Misra, Joya (2003). "The Intersection of Gender and Race in the Labor Market". Annual Review of Sociology. 29 (1): 487–513. doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.29.010202.100016.
  157. Mann, Susan Archer (2012). Doing Feminist Theory: From Modernity to Postmodernity. Oxford University Press. p. 172.
  158. Ahl, Helene (2004). The Scientific Reproduction of Gender Inequality: A Discourse Analysis of Research Texts on Women's Entrepreneurship. Copenhagen Business School Press. p. 14.
  159. Wendell, Susan (1987). "A (Qualified) Defense of Liberal Feminism". Hypatia. 2 (2): 65–93. doi:10.1111/j.1527-2001.1987.tb01066.x.
  160. Abrams, Kathryn (1989). "Gender Discrimination and the Transformation of Workplace Norms". Vand. L. Rev. 42.
  162. Soule, Sarah A.; Olzak, Susan (2004). "When do Movements Matter? The Politics of Contingency and the Equal Rights Amendment". American Sociological Review. 69 (4): 473–497. doi:10.1177/000312240406900401.
  163. Brown, Barbara A.; Emerson, Thomas I.; Falk, Gail; Freedman, Ann E. (1971). "The Equal Rights Amendment: A Constitutional Basis for Equal Rights for Women". The Yale Law Journal. 89 (5): 871–985.
  164. Ginsburg, Ruth Bader (1973). "The Need for the Equal Rights Amendment". American Bar Association Journal. 59 (9).
  165. Emerson, Thomas I. (1970). "In Support of the Equal Rights Amendment". Harv. CR-CLL Rev. 6.
  166. Rudman, Laurie A.; Glick, Peter (2001). "Prescriptive Gender Stereotypes and Backlash Toward Agentic Women". Journal of Social Issues. 57 (4): 743–762. doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00239.
  167. Williams, Joan C. (2009). "Reconstructive Feminism: Changing the Way We Talk About Gender and Work Thirty Years After the PDA". 21 Yale J.L. & Feminism. 79: 104.
  168. Kilgarlin, William Wayne; Tarver, Banks (1989). "Equal Rights Amendment: Governmental Action and Individual Liberty". Tex. L. Rev. 68.
  169. Kanter, Rosabeth Moss (1993). Men and Women of the Corporation. New York: Basic Books Inc. pp. 233–236. ISBN 9780465044542.
  170. Carlin, Diana B. (Fall 2009). "Have You Come a Long Way, Baby? Hillary Clinton, Sarah Palin, and Sexism in 2008 Campaign Coverage" (PDF). Communication Studies. 60 (4): 326–343. doi:10.1080/10510970903109904.
  171. Kilgarlin, William Wayne; Tarver, Banks (1989). "Equal Rights Amendment: Governmental Action and Individual Liberty". Tex. L. Rev. 68.
  172. Nosek, Brian A.; Banaji, Mahzarin R.; Greenwald, Anthony G. (July 2002). "Math = male, me = female, therefore math ≠ me". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 83 (1): 44–59. CiteSeerX doi:10.1037/0022-3514.83.1.44.
  173. Fausto-Sterling, Anne (4 August 2008). Myths Of Gender: Biological Theories About Women And Men, Revised Edition. Basic Books. ISBN 9780786723904. Retrieved 22 October 2017 via Google Books.
  174. Cvencek, Dario; Meltzoff, Andrew N.; Kapur, Manu (January 2014). "Cognitive consistency and math–gender stereotypes in Singaporean children". Journal of Experimental Child Psychology. 117: 73–91. doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2013.07.018. PMID 24141205.
  175. Nosek, B. A.; Smyth, F. L.; Sriram, N.; Lindner, N. M.; Devos, T.; Ayala, A.; BarAnan, Y.; Bergh, R.; Cai, H.; Gonsalkorale, K.; Kesebir, S.; Maliszewski, N.; Neto, F.; Olli, E.; Park, J.; Schnabel, K.; Shiomura, K.; Tulbure, B.; Wiers, R. W.; Somogyi, M.; Akrami, N.; Ekehammar, B.; Vianello, M.; Banaji, M. R.; Greenwald, A. G. (30 June 2009). "National differences in gender–science stereotypes predict national sex differences in science and math achievement". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 106 (26): 10593–10597. Bibcode:2009PNAS..10610593N. doi:10.1073/pnas.0809921106. PMC 2705538. PMID 19549876.
  176. Hargittai, Eszter; Shafer, Steven (1 June 2006). "Differences in Actual and Perceived Online Skills: The Role of Gender*". Social Science Quarterly. 87 (2): 432–448. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6237.2006.00389.x. ISSN 1540-6237.
  177. Behm-Morawitz, Elizabeth; Mastro, Dana (1 December 2009). "The Effects of the Sexualization of Female Video Game Characters on Gender Stereotyping and Female Self-Concept". Sex Roles. 61 (11–12): 808–823. doi:10.1007/s11199-009-9683-8.
  178. Postmes, Tom; Spears, Russell (2002). "Behavior Online: Does Anonymous Computer Communication Reduce Gender Inequality?". Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 28 (8): 1073–1083. doi:10.1177/01461672022811006.
  179. Jayanth, Meg (18 September 2014). "52% of gamers are women – but the industry doesn't know it | Meg Jayanth". the Guardian. Retrieved 10 December 2015.
  180. "Current Numbers". Center for American Women and Politics. 12 June 2015. Retrieved 6 February 2017. This page contains current numbers of women officeholders serving in 2017 with links on the right to basic fact sheets for each level of office.
  181. Huddy, Leonie; Terkildsen, Nayda (February 1993). "Gender Stereotypes and the Perception of Male and Female Candidates". American Journal of Political Science. 37 (1): 119–147. doi:10.2307/2111526. JSTOR 2111526.
  182. Sanbonmatsu, Kira (January 2002). "Stereotypes and Vote Choice". American Journal of Political Science. 46 (1): 20–34. doi:10.2307/3088412. JSTOR 3088412.
  183. Carroll, Susan J. (2009). "Reflections on Gender and Hillary Clinton's Presidential Campaign: The Good, the Bad, and the Misogynistic". Politics & Gender. 5: 1–20. doi:10.1017/s1743923x09000014.
  184. Carlin, Diana B.; Winfrey, Kelly L. (2009). "Have You Come A Long Way, Baby? Hillary Clinton, Sarah Palin, and Sexism in 2008 Campaign Coverage". Communication Studies. 60 (4).
  185. McGinley, Ann C. (2009). "Hillary Clinton, Sarah Palin, and Michelle Obama: Performing Gender, Race, and Class on the Campaign Trail". Denver University Law Review. 86.
  186. Huddy, Leonie; Terkildsen, Nadya (1993). "The Consequences of Gender Stereotypes for Women Candidates at Different Levels and Types of Office". Political Research Quarterly. 46 (3).
  187. Rotman, Deborah L. (2006). "Separate Spheres? Beyond the Dichotomies of Domesticity". Current Anthology. 47 (4): 666–674. doi:10.1086/506286.
  188. Dodson, Dan W. (1958). "Suburbanism and Education". Journal of Educational Sociology. 32 (1): 2–7. doi:10.2307/2264228. JSTOR 2264228.
  189. Friedan, Betty. "The Feminine Mystique". New York:W.W. Norton, 1963.
  190. Kiger, Kiger; Riley, Pamela J. (1 July 1996). "Gender differences in perceptions of household labor". The Journal of Psychology. Retrieved 23 October 2009.
  191. Maria Shriver and the Center for American Progress (19 October 2009). "The Shriver Report: A Woman's Nation Changes Everything". Center for American Progress. Retrieved 23 October 2009.
  192. Torregrosa, Luisita (13 December 2011). "They Call It the Reverse Gender Gap". New York Times. Retrieved 30 November 2012.
  193. Has Feminism Changed Science?, Cambridge: Harvard University Press 2001, ISBN 978-0-674-00544-0
  194. Shuttleworth, Sally. "Female Circulation: Medical Discourse and Popular Advertising in the Mid-Victorian Era." Body/Politics: Women and the Discourses of Science. Eds. Mary Jacobus, Evelyn Fox Keller and Sally Shuttleworth. New York: Routledge, 1990. 47–70
  195. Gavanas, Anna (2004). Fatherhood Politics in the United States: Masculinity, Sexuality, Race, and Marriage. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. p. 11. ISBN 978-0-252-02884-7. All these cases of perceived discrimination make up the men's rights view that men are considered, by government and society, to be more expendable than women.
  196. Boyd, Stephen Blake; Longwood, W. Merle; Muesse, Mark William, eds. (1996). Redeeming men: religion and masculinities. Westminster John Knox Press. p. 17. ISBN 978-0-664-25544-2. In contradistinction to pro-feminism, however, the men's rights perspective addresses specific legal and cultural factors that put men at a disadvantage. The movement is made up of a variety of formal and informal groups that differ in their approaches and issues; Men's rights advocates, for example, target sex-specific military conscription and judicial practices that discriminate against men in child custody cases.
  197. See, for example:
  198. Clatterbaugh, Kenneth (1996). Contemporary perspectives on masculinity: Men, women, and politics in modern society (Reissued 2nd. ed.). Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press. p. 11. ISBN 978-0813327013. Indeed the premise of all men's rights literature is that men are not privileged relative to women... Having denied that men are privileged relative to women, this movement divides into those who believe that men and women are equally harmed by sexism and those who believe that society has become a bastion of female privilege and male degradation.
  199. "What about tax, and father's custody rights?". The Times of India. 17 May 2011. Retrieved 22 December 2011.
  200. "FHM: For Him Minister?". BBC News. 3 March 2004. Retrieved 22 December 2011.
  201. Cheryl, Wetzstein. "Guys got it made? Think again, say advocates". Washington Times. Retrieved 22 December 2011.
  202. "Indian husbands want protection from nagging wives". Reuters. 20 November 2009. Retrieved 22 December 2011.
  203. Manigandan KR (9 August 2009). "Boys fight for freedom!". Times of India. Retrieved 22 December 2011.
  204. Kallenbach, Michael (16 June 2000). "Yesterday in Parliament". The Daily Telegraph. London. Retrieved 5 May 2010.
  205. Minister for Men. Hansard, UK Parliament. Retrieved 24 November 2011.
  206. Rahim Kanani (9 May 2011). "The Need to Create a White House Council on Boys to Men". Forbes. Retrieved 22 December 2011.
  207. Crowley, Jocelyn E. (2008). Defiant Dads: Fathers' Rights Activists in America. Cornell University Press. ISBN 978-0-8014-4690-0.
  208. Baskerville, S (2007). Taken into Custody: The War Against Fatherhood, Marriage, and the Family. Cumberland House Publishing. ISBN 1-58182-594-3.
  209. Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation. "GLAAD Media Reference Guide - Transgender glossary of terms", "GLAAD", USA, May 2010. Retrieved 24 February 2011.
  210. "Definition of transgender in English by Oxford Dictionaries". Oxford Dictionaries. Retrieved 18 June 2018.
  211. "USI LGBT Campaign - Transgender Campaign". Retrieved 11 January 2012.
  212. Stroud District Council "Gender Equality SCHEME AND ACTION PLAN 2007" Archived 27 February 2008 at the Wayback Machine
  213. Ryan, Caitlin C; Futterman, Donna (1998). Lesbian and Gay Youth: Care and Counseling. Columbia University Press. p. 49. ISBN 978-0-231-11191-1.
  214. Interview with RuPaul, David Shankbone, Wikinews, 6 October 2007.
  215. Issues in Society : Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity. (2014). Thirroul, AU: The Spinney Press. Retrieved from
  216. Lindley, Lisa; Walsemann, Katrina; Carter, Jarvis (2012). "The Association of Sexual Orientation Measures With Young Adults' Health-Related Outcomes". American Journal of Public Health. 102 (6): 1177–1178. doi:10.2105/ajph.2011.300262. PMC 3483939. PMID 22021310.
  217. Epstein, Robert; McKinney, Paul; Fox, Shannon; Garcia, Carlos (2013). "Support for a Fluid-Continuum Model or Sexual Orientation: A Large-Scale Internet Study". Journal of Homosexuality. 59 (10): 1356–1358. doi:10.1080/00918369.2012.724634. PMID 23153024.
  218. Frankowski BL; American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Adolescence (June 2004). "Sexual orientation and adolescents". Pediatrics. 113 (6): 1827–32. doi:10.1542/peds.113.6.1827. PMID 15173519.
  219. Lamanna, Mary Ann; Riedmann, Agnes; Stewart, Susan D (2014). Marriages, Families, and Relationships: Making Choices in a Diverse Society. Cengage Learning. p. 82. ISBN 978-1-305-17689-8. Retrieved 11 February 2016. The reason some individuals develop a gay sexual identity has not been definitively established  – nor do we yet understand the development of heterosexuality. The American Psychological Association (APA) takes the position that a variety of factors impact a person's sexuality. The most recent literature from the APA says that sexual orientation is not a choice that can be changed at will, and that sexual orientation is most likely the result of a complex interaction of environmental, cognitive and biological shaped at an early age...[and evidence suggests] biological, including genetic or inborn hormonal factors, play a significant role in a person's sexuality (American Psychological Association 2010).
  220. Gail Wiscarz Stuart (2014). Principles and Practice of Psychiatric Nursing. Elsevier Health Sciences. p. 502. ISBN 978-0-323-29412-6. Retrieved 11 February 2016. No conclusive evidence supports any one specific cause of homosexuality; however, most researchers agree that biological and social factors influence the development of sexual orientation.
  221. Gloria Kersey-Matusiak (2012). Delivering Culturally Competent Nursing Care. Springer Publishing Company. p. 169. ISBN 978-0-8261-9381-0. Retrieved 10 February 2016. Most health and mental health organizations do not view sexual orientation as a 'choice.'
  222. Bailey, J. Michael; Vasey, Paul; Diamond, Lisa; Breedlove, S. Marc; Vilain, Eric; Epprecht, Marc (2016). "Sexual Orientation, Controversy, and Science". Psychological Science in the Public Interest. 17 (2): 45–101. doi:10.1177/1529100616637616. PMID 27113562.
  223. LeVay, Simon (2017). Gay, Straight, and the Reason Why: The Science of Sexual Orientation. Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780199752966.
  224. Balthazart, Jacques (2012). The Biology of Homosexuality. Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780199838820.
  225. "Submission to the Church of England's Listening Exercise on Human Sexuality". The Royal College of Psychiatrists. Retrieved 13 June 2013.
  226. Maurianne Adams, Lee Anne Bell, Pat Griffin (2007). Teaching for Diversity and Social Justice. Routledge. pp. 198–199. ISBN 1135928509. Retrieved 27 December 2014. "Because of the complicated interplay among gender identity, gender roles, and sexual identity, transgender people are often assumed to be lesbian or gay (See Overview: Sexism, Heterosexism, and Transgender Oppression). ... Because transgender identity challenges a binary conception of sexuality and gender, educators must clarify their own understanding of these concepts. ... Facilitators must be able to help participants understand the connections among sexism, heterosexism, and transgender oppression and the ways in which gender roles are maintained, in part, through homophobia."
  227. Claire M. Renzetti, Jeffrey L. Edleson (2008). Encyclopedia of Interpersonal Violence. SAGE Publications. p. 338. ISBN 1452265917. Retrieved 27 December 2014. "In a culture of homophobia (an irrational fear of gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender [GLBT] people), GLBT people often face a heightened risk of violence specific to their sexual identities."
  228. 2014 Report on State Sponsored Homophobia Retrieved 04 Mar 15 from "Archived copy" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 20 October 2016. Retrieved 12 May 2016.CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
  229. Bruce-Jones, Eddie; Itaborahy, Lucas Paoli (May 2011). "State-sponsored Homophobia". Retrieved 15 October 2011.
  230. West, D.J. Homosexuality re-examined. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1977. ISBN 0-8166-0812-1
  231. Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation. ‘’GLAAD Media Reference Guide, 8th Edition. Transgender Glossary of Terms", ‘’GLAAD’’, USA, May 2010. Retrieved 20 November 2011.
  232. Mager, Don (1985). "Gay Theories of Gender Role Deviance". SubStance. 14 (1): 32–48. doi:10.2307/3684953. JSTOR 3684953.
  233. Dwyer, D. (2000). Interpersonal Relationships [e-book] (2nd ed.). Routledge. p. 104. ISBN 978-0-203-01971-9.
  234. Cherlin, Andrew (2010). Public and Private Families, an introduction. McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. p. 234.
  235. Crook, Robert (2011). Our Sexuality. Wadsworth Cengage Learning. p. 271.
  236. Carrington, C. (1999) No place like home: Relationships and family life among lesbians and gay men. The University of Chicago Press.
  237. Cherlin, Andrew (2010). Public and Private Families, an Introduction. McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. p. 234.
  238. Morgan, D. (2006) Not gay enough for the government: Racial and sexual stereotypes in sexual orientation asylum cases. Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Legal Issues
  239. Chan, W. (2001). Women, Murder and Justice. Hampshire: Palgrave.
  240. Hart, L. (1994). Fatal Women: Lesbian Sexuality and the Mark of Aggression. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
  241. Ballinger, A. (1996.) The Guilt of the Innocent and the Innocence of the Guilty: The Cases of Marie Fahmy and Ruth Ellis. In Wight, S. & Myers, A. (Eds.) No Angels: Women Who Commit Violence. London: Pandora.
  242. Filetti, J. S. (2001). "From Lizzie Borden to Lorena Bobbitt: Violent Women and Gendered Justice". Journal of American Culture. 35 (3): 471–484. doi:10.1017/s0021875801006673.
  243. Barak, Gregg (15 March 2009). "Class, Race, and Gender in Criminology and Criminal Justice: Ways of Seeing Difference". American Society of Criminology. Retrieved 22 November 2013.
  244. Steffensmeier, Darrell; Emilie Allan (1996). "Gender and Crime: Toward a Gendered Theory of Female Offending". Annual Review of Sociology. 22 (1): 459–487. doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.22.1.459.
  245. Hattery, Angela; Smith, Earl (2012). The Social Dynamics of Family Violence. Westview Press. p. 7. ISBN 9780813344638. Retrieved 1 June 2017.
  246. Straus, M & Gelles, R (1995) Physical violence in American families. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
  247. Hattery, Angela; Smith, Earl (2016). The Social Dynamics of Family Violence (Second ed.). Boulder: Westview Press. ISBN 9780813349992.
  248. Hattery & Smith 2012, p. 291.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.