gender stereotypes sociology essay

12.2 Gender and Gender Inequality

Learning objectives.

By the end of this section, you should be able to:

• Explain the influence of socialization on gender roles in the United States
• Explain the stratification of gender in major American institutions
• Provide examples of gender inequality in the United States
• Describe the rise of feminism in the United States
• Describe gender from the view of each sociological perspective

Gender and Socialization

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

Socialization

Children learn at a young age that there are distinct expectations for boys and girls. Cross-cultural studies reveal that children are aware of gender roles by age two or three. At four or five, most children are firmly entrenched in culturally appropriate gender roles (Kane 1996). Children acquire these roles through socialization, a process in which people learn to behave in a particular way as dictated by societal values, beliefs, and attitudes. For example, society often views riding a motorcycle as a masculine activity and, therefore, considers it to be part of the male gender role. Attitudes such as this are typically based on stereotypes, oversimplified notions about members of a group. Gender stereotyping involves overgeneralizing about the attitudes, traits, or behavior patterns of women or men. For example, women may be thought of as too timid or weak to ride a motorcycle.

Gender stereotypes form the basis of sexism. Sexism refers to prejudiced beliefs that value one sex over another. It varies in its level of severity. In parts of the world where women are strongly undervalued, young girls may not be given the same access to nutrition, healthcare, and education as boys. Further, they will grow up believing they deserve to be treated differently from boys (UNICEF 2011; Thorne 1993). While it is illegal in the United States when practiced as discrimination, unequal treatment of women continues to pervade social life. It should be noted that discrimination based on sex occurs at both the micro- and macro-levels. Many sociologists focus on discrimination that is built into the social structure; this type of discrimination is known as institutional discrimination (Pincus 2008).

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

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

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

The reinforcement of gender roles and stereotypes continues once a child reaches school age. Until very recently, schools were rather explicit in their efforts to stratify boys and girls. The first step toward stratification was segregation. Girls were encouraged to take home economics or humanities courses and boys to take math and science.

Studies suggest that gender socialization still occurs in schools today, perhaps in less obvious forms (Lips 2004). Teachers may not even realize they are acting in ways that reproduce gender differentiated behavior patterns. Yet any time they ask students to arrange their seats or line up according to gender, teachers may be asserting that boys and girls should be treated differently (Thorne 1993).

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

Mimicking the actions of significant others is the first step in the development of a separate sense of self (Mead 1934). Like adults, children become agents who actively facilitate and apply normative gender expectations to those around them. When children do not conform to the appropriate gender role, they may face negative sanctions such as being criticized or marginalized by their peers. Though many of these sanctions are informal, they can be quite severe. For example, a girl who wishes to take karate class instead of dance lessons may be called a “tomboy” and face difficulty gaining acceptance from both male and female peer groups (Ready 2001). Boys, especially, are subject to intense ridicule for gender nonconformity (Coltrane and Adams 2004; Kimmel 2000).

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

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

Social Stratification and Inequality

Stratification refers to a system in which groups of people experience unequal access to basic, yet highly valuable, social resources. There is a long history of gender stratification in the United States. When looking to the past, it would appear that society has made great strides in terms of abolishing some of the most blatant forms of gender inequality (see timeline below) but underlying effects of male dominance still permeate many aspects of society.

• Before 1809—Women could not execute a will
• Before 1840—Women were not allowed to own or control property
• Before 1920—Women were not permitted to vote
• Before 1963—Employers could legally pay a woman less than a man for the same work
• Before 1973—Women did not have the right to a safe and legal abortion (Imbornoni 2009)

The Pay Gap

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

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

Part of the gender pay gap can be attributed to unique barriers faced by women regarding work experience and promotion opportunities. A mother of young children is more likely to drop out of the labor force for several years or work on a reduced schedule than is the father. As a result, women in their 30s and 40s are likely, on average, to have less job experience than men. This effect becomes more evident when considering the pay rates of two groups of women: those who did not leave the workforce and those who did: In the United States, childless women with the same education and experience levels as men are typically paid with closer (but not exact) parity to men. However, women with families and children are paid less: Mothers are recommended a 7.9 percent lower starting salary than non-mothers, which is 8.6 percent lower than men (Correll 2007).

This evidence points to levels of discrimination that go beyond behaviors by individual companies or organizations. As discussed earlier in the gender roles section, many of these gaps are rooted in America’s social patterns of discrimination, which involve the roles that different genders play in child-rearing, rather than individual discrimination by employers in hiring and salary decisions. On the other hand, legal and ethical practices demand that organizations do their part to promote more equity among all genders.

The Glass Ceiling

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

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

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

Women in Politics

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

Movements for Change: Feminism

One of the underlying issues that continues to plague women in the United States is misogyny . This is the hatred of or, aversion to, or prejudice against women. Over the years misogyny has evolved as an ideology that men are superior to women in all aspects of life. There have been multiple movements to try and fight this prejudice.

In 1963, writer and feminist Betty Friedan published The Feminine Mystique in which she contested the post-World War II belief that it was women’s sole destiny to marry and bear children. Friedan’s book began to raise the consciousness of many women who agreed that homemaking in the suburbs sapped them of their individualism and left them unsatisfied. In 1966, the National Organization for Women (NOW) formed and proceeded to set an agenda for the feminist movement . Framed by a statement of purpose written by Friedan, the agenda began by proclaiming NOW’s goal to make possible women’s participation in all aspects of American life and to gain for them all the rights enjoyed by men.

Feminists engaged in protests and actions designed to bring awareness and change. For example, the New York Radical Women demonstrated at the 1968 Miss America Pageant in Atlantic City to bring attention to the contest’s—and society’s—exploitation of women. The protestors tossed instruments of women’s oppression, including high-heeled shoes, curlers, girdles, and bras, into a “freedom trash can.” News accounts incorrectly described the protest as a “bra burning,” which at the time was a way to demean and trivialize the issue of women’s rights (Gay 2018).

Other protests gave women a more significant voice in a male-dominated social, political, and entertainment climate. For decades, Ladies Home Journal had been a highly influential women’s magazine, managed and edited almost entirely by men. Men even wrote the advice columns and beauty articles. In 1970, protesters held a sit-in at the magazine’s offices, demanding that the company hire a woman editor-in-chief, add women and non-White writers at fair pay, and expand the publication’s focus.

Feminists were concerned with far more than protests, however. In the 1970s, they opened battered women’s shelters and successfully fought for protection from employment discrimination for pregnant women, reform of rape laws (such as the abolition of laws requiring a witness to corroborate a woman’s report of rape), criminalization of domestic violence, and funding for schools that sought to counter sexist stereotypes of women. In 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade invalidated a number of state laws under which abortions obtained during the first three months of pregnancy were illegal. This made a nontherapeutic abortion a legal medical procedure nationwide.

Gloria Steinem had pushed through gender barriers to take on serious journalism subjects, and had emerged as a prominent advocate for women’s rights. Through her work, Steinem met Dorothy Pittman-Hughes, who had founded New York City’s first shelter for domestic violence victims as well as the city’s Agency for Child Development. Together they founded Ms . Magazine, which avoided articles on homemaking and fashion in favor of pieces on women’s rights and empowerment. Ms . showcased powerful and accomplished women such as Shirley Chisholm and Sissy Farenthold, and was among the first publications to bring domestic violence, sexual harassment, and body image issues to the national conversation (Pogrebrin 2011).

Many advances in women’s rights were the result of women’s greater engagement in politics. For example, Patsy Mink, the first Asian American woman elected to Congress, was the co-author of the Education Amendments Act of 1972, Title IX of which prohibits sex discrimination in education. Mink had been interested in fighting discrimination in education since her youth, when she opposed racial segregation in campus housing while a student at the University of Nebraska. She went to law school after being denied admission to medical school because of her gender. Like Mink, many other women sought and won political office, many with the help of the National Women’s Political Caucus (NWPC). In 1971, the NWPC was formed by Bella Abzug, Gloria Steinem, Shirley Chisholm, and other leading feminists to encourage women’s participation in political parties, elect women to office, and raise money for their campaign.

Shirley Chisholm personally took up the mantle of women’s involvement in politics. Born of immigrant parents, she earned degrees from Brooklyn College and Columbia University, and began a career in early childhood education and advocacy. In the 1950’s she joined various political action groups, worked on election campaigns, and pushed for housing and economic reforms. After leaving one organization over its refusal to involve women in the decision-making process, she sought to increase gender and racial diversity within political and activist organizations throughout New York City. In 1968, she became the first Black woman elected to Congress. Refusing to take the quiet role expected of new Representatives, she immediately began sponsoring bills and initiatives. She spoke out against the Vietnam War, and fought for programs such as Head Start and the national school lunch program, which was eventually signed into law after Chisholm led an effort to override a presidential veto. Chisholm would eventually undertake a groundbreaking presidential run in 1972, and is viewed as paving the way for other women, and especially women of color, achieving political and social prominence (Emmrich 2019).

Theoretical Perspectives on Gender

Sociological theories help sociologists to develop questions and interpret data. For example, a sociologist studying why middle-school girls are more likely than their male counterparts to fall behind grade-level expectations in math and science might use a feminist perspective to frame her research. Another scholar might proceed from the conflict perspective to investigate why women are underrepresented in political office, and an interactionist might examine how the symbols of femininity interact with symbols of political authority to affect how women in Congress are treated by their male counterparts in meetings.

Structural Functionalism

Structural functionalism has provided one of the most important perspectives of sociological research in the twentieth century and has been a major influence on research in the social sciences, including gender studies. Viewing the family as the most integral component of society, assumptions about gender roles within marriage assume a prominent place in this perspective.

Functionalists argue that gender roles were established well before the pre-industrial era when men typically took care of responsibilities outside of the home, such as hunting, and women typically took care of the domestic responsibilities in or around the home. These roles were considered functional because women were often limited by the physical restraints of pregnancy and nursing and unable to leave the home for long periods of time. Once established, these roles were passed on to subsequent generations since they served as an effective means of keeping the family system functioning properly.

When changes occurred in the social and economic climate of the United States during World War II, changes in the family structure also occurred. Many women had to assume the role of breadwinner (or modern hunter-gatherer) alongside their domestic role in order to stabilize a rapidly changing society. When the men returned from war and wanted to reclaim their jobs, society fell back into a state of imbalance, as many women did not want to forfeit their wage-earning positions (Hawke 2007).

Conflict Theory

According to conflict theory, society is a struggle for dominance among social groups (like women versus men) that compete for scarce resources. When sociologists examine gender from this perspective, we can view men as the dominant group and women as the subordinate group. According to conflict theory, social problems are created when dominant groups exploit or oppress subordinate groups. Consider the Women’s Suffrage Movement or the debate over women’s “right to choose” their reproductive futures. It is difficult for women to rise above men, as dominant group members create the rules for success and opportunity in society (Farrington and Chertok 1993).

Friedrich Engels, a German sociologist, studied family structure and gender roles. Engels suggested that the same owner-worker relationship seen in the labor force is also seen in the household, with women assuming the role of the proletariat. This is due to women’s dependence on men for the attainment of wages, which is even worse for women who are entirely dependent upon their spouses for economic support. Contemporary conflict theorists suggest that when women become wage earners, they can gain power in the family structure and create more democratic arrangements in the home, although they may still carry the majority of the domestic burden, as noted earlier (Rismanand and Johnson-Sumerford 1998).

Feminist Theory

Feminist theory is a type of conflict theory that examines inequalities in gender-related issues. It uses the conflict approach to examine the maintenance of gender roles and inequalities. Radical feminism, in particular, considers the role of the family in perpetuating male dominance. In patriarchal societies, men’s contributions are seen as more valuable than those of women. Patriarchal perspectives and arrangements are widespread and taken for granted. As a result, women’s viewpoints tend to be silenced or marginalized to the point of being discredited or considered invalid.

Sanday’s study of the Indonesian Minangkabau (2004) revealed that in societies some consider to be matriarchies (where women comprise the dominant group), women and men tend to work cooperatively rather than competitively regardless of whether a job is considered feminine by U.S. standards. The men, however, do not experience the sense of bifurcated consciousness under this social structure that modern U.S. females encounter (Sanday 2004).

Symbolic Interactionism

Symbolic interactionism aims to understand human behavior by analyzing the critical role of symbols in human interaction. This is certainly relevant to the discussion of masculinity and femininity. Imagine that you walk into a bank hoping to get a small loan for school, a home, or a small business venture. If you meet with a male loan officer, you may state your case logically by listing all the hard numbers that make you a qualified applicant as a means of appealing to the analytical characteristics associated with masculinity. If you meet with a female loan officer, you may make an emotional appeal by stating your good intentions as a means of appealing to the caring characteristics associated with femininity.

Because the meanings attached to symbols are socially created and not natural, and fluid, not static, we act and react to symbols based on the current assigned meaning. The word gay , for example, once meant “cheerful,” but by the 1960s it carried the primary meaning of “homosexual.” In transition, it was even known to mean “careless” or “bright and showing” (Oxford American Dictionary 2010). Furthermore, the word gay (as it refers to a person), carried a somewhat negative and unfavorable meaning fifty years ago, but it has since gained more neutral and even positive connotations. When people perform tasks or possess characteristics based on the gender role assigned to them, they are said to be doing gender . This notion is based on the work of West and Zimmerman (1987). Whether we are expressing our masculinity or femininity, West and Zimmerman argue, we are always "doing gender." Thus, gender is something we do or perform, not something we are.

In other words, both gender and sexuality are socially constructed. The social construction of sexuality refers to the way in which socially created definitions about the cultural appropriateness of sex-linked behavior shape the way people see and experience sexuality. This is in marked contrast to theories of sex, gender, and sexuality that link male and female behavior to biological determinism , or the belief that men and women behave differently due to differences in their biology.

Sociological Research

Being male, being female, and being healthy.

In 1971, Broverman and Broverman conducted a groundbreaking study on the traits mental health workers ascribed to males and females. When asked to name the characteristics of a female, the list featured words such as unaggressive, gentle, emotional, tactful, less logical, not ambitious, dependent, passive, and neat. The list of male characteristics featured words such as aggressive, rough, unemotional, blunt, logical, direct, active, and sloppy (Seem and Clark 2006). Later, when asked to describe the characteristics of a healthy person (not gender specific), the list was nearly identical to that of a male.

This study uncovered the general assumption that being female is associated with being somewhat unhealthy or not of sound mind. This concept seems extremely dated, but in 2006, Seem and Clark replicated the study and found similar results. Again, the characteristics associated with a healthy male were very similar to that of a healthy (genderless) adult. The list of characteristics associated with being female broadened somewhat but did not show significant change from the original study (Seem and Clark 2006). This interpretation of feminine characteristic may help us one day better understand gender disparities in certain illnesses, such as why one in eight women can be expected to develop clinical depression in her lifetime (National Institute of Mental Health 1999). Perhaps these diagnoses are not just a reflection of women’s health, but also a reflection of society’s labeling of female characteristics, or the result of institutionalized sexism.

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This book may not be used in the training of large language models or otherwise be ingested into large language models or generative AI offerings without OpenStax's permission.

Want to cite, share, or modify this book? This book uses the Creative Commons Attribution License and you must attribute OpenStax.

Access for free at https://openstax.org/books/introduction-sociology-3e/pages/1-introduction

• Authors: Tonja R. Conerly, Kathleen Holmes, Asha Lal Tamang
• Publisher/website: OpenStax
• Book title: Introduction to Sociology 3e
• Publication date: Jun 3, 2021
• Location: Houston, Texas
• Book URL: https://openstax.org/books/introduction-sociology-3e/pages/1-introduction
• Section URL: https://openstax.org/books/introduction-sociology-3e/pages/12-2-gender-and-gender-inequality

© Jan 18, 2024 OpenStax. Textbook content produced by OpenStax is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License . The OpenStax name, OpenStax logo, OpenStax book covers, OpenStax CNX name, and OpenStax CNX logo are not subject to the Creative Commons license and may not be reproduced without the prior and express written consent of Rice University.

Gender Stereotypes: What Are They and How Do They Relate to Social Inequality?

• First Online: 26 April 2022

Cite this chapter

• Loes Meeussen 3 , 4 , 5 ,
• Aster Van Rossum 3 ,
• Colette Van Laar 3 &
• Belle Derks 6  

1794 Accesses

3 Citations

Gender stereotypes tell us that women are seen to have more warmth while men are seen to have more competence. This chapter outlines where these stereotypes come from and how they are socially reinforced. We explain why these stereotypes matter for social equality: Ideas of what men and women are like often translate into ideas of what men and women should or should not be like, socialising people into gendered roles, rewarding those who fit in, and punishing those who deviate. Hence, gender stereotypes have consequences for the ways men and women are treated and they restrict people’s choices. We discuss how stereotypes translate into labour market inequalities and in care roles: women may face devaluation and discrimination in paid work, and they need to live up to overly high expectations in care tasks. Conversely, men may face lower opportunities to engage in care tasks and they are expected to prioritise work and be the primary breadwinner. Lastly, we discuss how gender equality can be promoted through training and supporting people to cope with stereotypes, and even more crucially, through societal and organisational changes that reduce (the impact of) gender stereotypes.

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

Access this chapter

• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Aarntzen, L., Derks, B., van Steenbergen, E., & van der Lippe, T. (2020). How individual gender role beliefs, organizational gender norms, and national gender norms predict parents’ work-family guilt in Europe. Community, Work and Family, 24 , 120–142. https://doi.org/10.1080/13668803.2020.1816901

Article   Google Scholar  

Allen, S. M., & Hawkins, A. J. (1999). Maternal gatekeeping: Mothers’ beliefs and behaviors that inhibit greater father involvement in family work. Journal of Marriage and Family, 61 , 199–212. https://doi.org/10.2307/35.3894

Barker, G., Verma, R., Crownover, J., Segundo, M., Fonseca, F., Contreras, J. M., Heilman, B., & Pawlak, P. (2012). Boys and education in the global south: Emerging vulnerabilities and new opportunities for promoting changes in gender norms. Journal of Boyhood Studies, 6 , 137–150. https://doi.org/10.3149/thy.0602.137

Barreto, M., & Ellemers, N. (2005). The burden of benevolent sexism: How it contributes to the maintenance of gender inequalities. European Journal of Social Psychology, 35 , 633–642. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.270

Barreto, M., Ryan, M. K., & Schmitt, M. (Eds.). (2009). The glass ceiling in the 21st century: Understanding barriers to gender equality (APA Division 35 Book Series).

Google Scholar  

Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117 , 497–529.

Begeny, C. T., Ryan, M. K., Moss-Racusin, C. A., & Ravetz, G. (2020). In some professions women have become well-represented, yet gender bias persists – Perpetuated by those who think it is not happening. Science Advances, 6 . https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aba7814

Brescoll, V. L. (2011). Who takes the floor and why. Administrative Science Quarterly, 56 (4), 622–641. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001839212439994

Brescoll, V. L., & Okimoto, T. (2010). The price of power: Powerseeking and backlash against female politicians. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36 , 923–936.

Brown, E. R., & Diekman, A. B. (2010). What will I be? Exploring gender differences in near and distant possible selves. Sex Roles, 63 , 568–579. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-010-9827-x

Butler, A. B., & Skattebo, A. (2004). What is acceptable for women may not be for men: The effect of family conflicts with work on job-performance ratings. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 77 , 553–564. https://doi.org/10.1348/0963179042596478

Casad, B. J., Oyler, D. L., Sullivan, E. T., McClellan, E. M., Tierney, D. N., Anderson, D. A., Greeley, P. A., Fague, M. A., & Flammang, B. J. (2018). Wise psychological interventions to improve gender and racial equality in STEM. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 21 , 767–787. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430218767034

César, F., Fontaine, A. M., & Oliveira, A. (2018). To suffer in paradise: Feelings mothers share on Portuguese Facebook sites. Frontiers in Psychology, 9 , 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01797

Cowdery, R. S., & Knudson-Martin, C. (2005). The construction of motherhood: Tasks, relational connection, and gender equality. Family Relations, 54 , 335–345. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3729.2005.00321.x

Croft, A., Schmader, T., & Block, K. (2015). An underexamined inequality: Cultural and psychological barriers to men’s engagement with communal roles. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 19 , 343–370. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868314564789

Croft, A., Schmader, T., Block, K., & Baron, A. S. (2014). The second shift reflected in the second generation: Do parents’ gender roles at home predict children’s aspirations? Psychological Science, 25 , 1418–1428.

Dardenne, B., Dumont, M., & Bollier, T. (2007). Insidious dangers of benevolent sexism: Consequences for women’s performance. Interpersonal Relations and Group Processes, 93 , 764–779. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.93.5.764

Dennehy, T. C., & Dasgupta, N. (2017). Female peer mentors early in college increase women’s positive academic experiences and retention in engineering. PNAS, 114 , 5964–5969. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1613117114

Diekman, A. B., Brown, E. R., Johnston, A. M., & Clark, E. K. (2010). Seeking congruity between goals and roles: A new look at why women opt out of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics careers. Psychological Science, 21 , 1051–1057. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797610377342

Douglas, S. J., & Michaels, M. W. (2004). The mommy myth: The idealization of motherhood and how it has undermined women . Free Press.

Drury, B. J., & Kaiser, C. R. (2014). Allies against sexism: The role of men in confronting sexism. Journal of Social Issues, 70 , 637–652.

Eagly, A. H., & Wood, W. (2012). Social role theory. In P. van Lange, A. Kruglanski, & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories in social psychology (pp. 458–476). Sage Publications.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Edwards, C. P., Knoche, L., & Kumru, A. (2004). Socialization of boys and girls in natural contexts. In Encyclopedia of sex and gender (pp. 34–41). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-29907-6_4

Ellemers, N. (2014). Women at work: How organizational features impact career development. Policy Insights From the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1 , 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732214549327

European Commission. (2018). Women’s situation in paid work . Retrieved July 24, 2021, from https://ec.europa.eu/info/policies/justice-and-fundamental-rights/gender-equality/women-labour-market-work-life-balance/womens-situation-labour-market_en

European Parliament. (2015). Maternity, paternity and parental leave: Data related to duration and compensation rates in the European Union . Retrieved July 24, 2021, from http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2015/509999/IPOL_STU(2015)509999_EN.pdf

European Parliament. (2020). Understanding the gender pay gap: Definition and causes . Retrieved July 24, 2021, from https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/headlines/society/20200109STO69925/understanding-the-gender-pay-gap-definition-and-causes

European Union. (2016). Strategic engagement for gender equality 2016–2019 . Retrieved July 24, 2021, from https://ec.europa.eu/justice/gender-equality

Fagan, C., & Walthery, P. (2011). Individual working-time adjustments between full-time and part-time working in European firms. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society, 18 , 269–299. https://doi.org/10.1093/sp/jxr011

Gabriel, A. S., Butts, M. M., Yuan, Z., Rosen, R. L., & Sliter, M. T. (2017). Further understanding incivility in the workplace: The effects of gender, agency, and communion. Journal of Applied Psychology, 103 , 362–382. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000289

Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (2011). Ambivalent sexism revisited. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 35 , 550–535. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684311414832

Gonzalez, J. A., & Denisi, A. S. (2009). Cross-level effects of demography and diversity climate on organizational attachment and firm effectiveness. Journal of Organisational Behavior, 30 , 21–40. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.498

Haines, E. L., & Stroessner, S. J. (2019). The role prioritization model: How communal men and agentic women can (sometimes) have it all. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 13 (12), e12504. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12504

Hammer, L. B., Kossek, E. E., Anger, W. K., Bodner, T., & Zimmerman, K. L. (2011). Clarifying work-family intervention processes: The roles of work-family conflict and family-supportive supervisor behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96 , 134–150. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020927

Hays, S. (1996). The cultural contradictions of motherhood . Yale University Press.

Heilman, M. E. (2012). Gender stereotypes and workplace bias. Research in Organizational Behavior, 32 , 113–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2012.11.003

Henderson, A., Harmon, S., & Newman, H. (2016). The price mothers pay, even when they are not buying it: Mental health consequences of idealized motherhood. Sex Roles, 74 , 512–526. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-015-05345

Jackson, D., & Mannix, J. (2004). Giving voice to the burden of blame: A feminist study of mothers’ experiences of mother blaming. International Journal of Nursing Practice, 10 , 150–158. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1440-172X.2004.00474.x

Joshi, A., Son, J., & Roh, H. (2015). When can women close the gap? A meta-analytic test of sex differences in performance and rewards. Academy of Management Journal, 58 , 1516–1545.

Knipfer, K., Shaughnessy, B., Hentschel, T., & Schmid, E. (2017). Unlocking women’s leadership potential: A curricular example for developing female leaders in academia. Journal of Management Education, 41 , 272–302. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562916673863

Lyness, K. S., & Heilman, M. E. (2006). When fit is fundamental: Performance evaluations and promotions of upper-level female and male managers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91 , 777–785.

Martin, C. L., & Ruble, D. N. (2010). Patterns of gender development. Annual Review of Psychology, 61 , 353–381. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.100511

Meeussen, L., & Van Laar, C. (2018). Feeling pressure to be a perfect mother relates to parental burnout and career ambitions. Frontiers in Psychology, 9 , 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02113

Meeussen, L., Van Laar, C., & Van Grootel, S. (2020). How to foster male engagement in traditionally female communal roles and occupations: Insights from research on gender norms and precarious manhood. Social Issues and Policy Review, 14 , 297–328. https://doi.org/10.1111/sipr.12060

Meeussen, L., Van Laar, C., & Verbruggen, M. (2019). Looking for a family man? Norms for men are toppling in heterosexual relationships. Sex Roles, 80 , 429–442. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-018-0946-0

Morgenroth, T., Ryan, M. K., & Peters, K. (2015). The motivational theory of role modeling: How role models influence role aspirants’ goals. Review of General Psychology, 19 , 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1037/gpr0000059

Moss-Racusin, C. A., Phelan, J. E., & Rudman, L. A. (2010). When men break the gender rules: Status incongruity and backlash against modest men. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 11 (2), 140–151. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018093

O’Brien, M. (2009). Fathers, parental leave policies, and infant quality of life: International perspectives and policy impact. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 624 , 190–213. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716209334349

Olshansky, J. (2006). 24/7 DadTM and 24/7 DadTM P.M. Outcome evaluation results 2005–2006 . Retrieved July 24, 2021, from https://www.fatherhood.org

PEW Research Center. (2019). 8 facts about American dads . Retrieved July 24, 2021, from https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/06/12/fathers-day-facts/

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

Rudman, L. A., & Fairchild, K. (2004). Reactions to counterstereotypic behavior: The role of backlash in cultural stereotype maintenance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87 , 157–176. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.87.2.157

Rudman, L. A., & Mescher, K. (2013). Penalizing men who request a family leave: Is flexibility stigma a femininity stigma? Journal of Social Issues, 69 , 322–340.

Rudman, L. A., Moss-Racusin, C. A., Phelan, J. E., & Nauts, S. (2012). Status incongruity and backlash effects: Defending the gender hierarchy motivates prejudice against female leaders. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48 (1), 165–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2011.10.008

Schmader, T., Johns, M., & Forbes, C. (2008). An integrated process model of stereotype threat effects on performance. Psychological Review, 115 , 336–356. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.115.2.336

Schmitt, M. T., Branscombe, N. R., Postmes, T., & Garcia, A. (2014). The consequences of perceived discrimination for psychological well-being: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 140 , 921–948. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035754

Shutts, K., Kenward, B., Falk, H., Ivengran, A., & Fawcett, C. (2017). Early preschool environments and gender: Effects of gender pedagogy in Sweden. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 162 , 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2017.04.014

Van Laar, C., Meeussen, L., Veldman, J., Van Grootel, S., Sterk, N., & Jacobs, C. (2019). Coping with stigma in the workplace: Understanding the role of threat regulation, supportive factors, and potential hidden costs. Frontiers in Psychology, 10 , 3–21. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01879

Vandello, J. A., & Bosson, J. K. (2013). Hard won and easily lost: A review and synthesis of theory and research on precarious manhood. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 14 , 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029826

Vervecken, D., Hannover, B., & Wolter, I. (2013). Changing (S)expectations: How gender fair job descriptions impact children’s perceptions and interest regarding traditionally male occupations. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 82 , 208–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2013.01.008

Williams, J. C., Blair-Loy, M., & Berdahl, J. L. (2013). Cultural schemas, social class, and the flexibility stigma. Journal of Social Issues, 69 , 209–234.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

Loes Meeussen, Aster Van Rossum & Colette Van Laar

Research Foundation Flanders, Brussels, Belgium

Loes Meeussen

Thomas More, Mechelen, Belgium

Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands

Belle Derks

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Loes Meeussen .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Department of Interdisciplinary Social Science, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands

Mara A. Yerkes

Michèlle Bal

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Meeussen, L., Van Rossum, A., Van Laar, C., Derks, B. (2022). Gender Stereotypes: What Are They and How Do They Relate to Social Inequality?. In: Yerkes, M.A., Bal, M. (eds) Solidarity and Social Justice in Contemporary Societies. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-93795-9_7

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-93795-9_7

Published : 26 April 2022

Publisher Name : Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-93794-2

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-93795-9

eBook Packages : Social Sciences Social Sciences (R0)

Share this chapter

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

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

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Gender stereotypes change outcomes: a systematic literature review

Journal of Humanities and Applied Social Sciences

ISSN : 2632-279X

Article publication date: 15 December 2021

Issue publication date: 19 October 2023

Even though researchers have discussed gender stereotype change, only a few studies have specifically projected outcomes or consequences. Hence, the main purpose of this study is to examine the impact of gender stereotype change concerning the different outcomes.

Design/methodology/approach

In achieving the purpose, the authors searched and reviewed current empirical knowledge on the outcomes of gender stereotype change in the Scopus and EBSCOhost databases from 1970 to 2020. The entire process was conducted through a systematic literature review methodology. The article selection criteria were executed using the PRISMA article selection flowchart steps, and 15 articles were included for the review.

The findings reveal that the outcomes from gender stereotype change research can be categorized mainly under the themes of “family and children,” “marriage” and “equality and women's employment.”

Research limitations/implications

The co-occurrence network visualization map reveals gaps in the existing literature. There may be more possible outcomes relating to the current realities, and more cross-cultural research is needed.

Practical implications

These outcomes provide some implications for policymakers.

Originality/value

Even though researchers have discussed gender stereotype change on its various outcomes or consequences, research is less. Hence, this study provides a synthesis of consequences and addresses the gaps in the area.

• Gender stereotypes change
• Systematic literature review

Priyashantha, K.G. , De Alwis, A.C. and Welmilla, I. (2023), "Gender stereotypes change outcomes: a systematic literature review", Journal of Humanities and Applied Social Sciences , Vol. 5 No. 5, pp. 450-466. https://doi.org/10.1108/JHASS-07-2021-0131

Emerald Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2021, K.G. Priyashantha, A. Chamaru De Alwis and Indumathi Welmilla

Published in Journal of Humanities and Applied Social Sciences . Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode

Introduction

A society's beliefs about the appropriate roles for men and women are gender role attitudes, gender ideology ( Davis and Greenstein, 2009 ) or gender stereotypes ( Attanapola, 2004 ; Berridge et al. , 2009 ; Bosak et al. , 2018 ; Charlesworth and Banaji, 2021 ; De Silva and Priyashantha, 2014 ; Eagly et al. , 2020 ; Lopez-Zafra and Garcia-Retamero, 2021 ). Such beliefs are formed from the peoples' observations of the behavior of men and women in different social roles ( Priyashantha et al. , 2021b ). Particularly, when women or men demonstrate certain behavior more typical to different social roles more often than the opposite sex, such behaviors are believed to be the common traits relevant to men or women ( Eagly et al. , 2020 ; Eagly and Karau, 2002 ). Hence, men are believed to be assertive, independent, rational and decisive, while women are believed to be showing concern for others, warmth, helpfulness and nurturance ( Hoyt et al. , 2009 ). These attributes concerning men and women are referred to as agentic (masculine) and communal (feminine), respectively ( Abele, 2003 ). This agency and communion are then perceived as the fundamental motivators in men's and women's behaviors ( Bakan, 1966 ). However, researchers argue that these perceptions have changed in the contemporary world of work, which has been promoted by females' income-generating activities ( Eagly et al. , 2020 ). Social and economic developments took place, and United Nations initiatives (e.g. human rights, gender equality, nondiscrimination against women, women in development programs) ( Benería et al. , 2015 ) have backed this females' income generation in the mid-20th century in most countries ( Attanapola, 2004 ; Boehnke, 2011 ; Zosuls et al. , 2011 ). These female income generation activities have, in turn, resulted in changes in social role distribution where both men and women are now in multiple roles as parents, employees, employers, volunteers, friends, spouses, siblings, etc. ( Najeema, 2010 ; Perrigino et al. , 2021 ). Thus, peoples' various roles include women's work in men's roles and vice versa ( Blau and Kahn, 2006 ; Mergaert, 2012 ) while playing their traditional roles ( Eagly et al. , 2020 ). This trend has evolved the traditional gender role stereotypes into changing gender stereotypes during the last 50 years ( Blau and Kahn, 2006 ; Mergaert, 2012 ; Priyashantha et al. , 2021b ).

Even though it has been almost 50 years for research into changing gender stereotypes, there are scholarly arguments for the prevalence of traditional gender stereotypes ( Haines et al. , 2016 ; Rudman et al. , 2012 ; Rudman and Glick, 2001 ). Some theoretical bases and the prevalence of some cultures that value gender stereotyping further support these scholarly arguments. Meanwhile, there is an opinion that gender stereotyping violates human rights ( Tabassum and Nayak, 2021 ). Such an opinion is justified by the fact that gender stereotyping limits the capacity of women and men to develop their attributes or professional skills and make decisions about their lives and plans ( Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, 2014 ). Therefore, researchers have been highly interested in finding whether gender stereotypes have changed or not in societies ( Bosak et al. , 2018 ; Eagly et al. , 2020 ; Haines et al. , 2016 ; Lopez-Zafra and Garcia-Retamero, 2012 , 2021 ; Twenge, 1997a , b ; Ugwu, 2021 ). Instead, it is reported that there are more gender gaps in employment participation in some countries. If the gender stereotypes have changed, theoretically, there should be no such gender gap. Researching this question, the researchers have also been interested in how gender stereotypes change cross-culturally ( Boehnke, 2011 ; Constantin and Voicu, 2015 ; Diekman et al. , 2005 ; Diekman and Eagly, 2000 ; Lopez-Zafra and Garcia-Retamero, 2011 ). Accordingly, they have found that gender stereotypes have changed in Europe ( Berkery et al. , 2013 ; Boehnke, 2011 ; Garcia-Retamero et al. , 2011 ; Lopez-Zafra and Garcia-Retamero, 2012 ) and America ( Alfieri et al. , 1996 ; Beere et al. , 1984 ; Bem, 1974 ; Broverman et al. , 1970 ; Deaux and Lewis, 1984 ; Gill et al. , 1987 ; Lueptow et al. , 1995 ; Parelius, 1975 ; Spence and Hahn, 2016 ; Twenge, 1997a ; Twenge et al. , 2012 ; Zosuls et al. , 2011 ). In addition to that, researchers have found that the gender stereotype change has taken place in East Asia ( Boehnke, 2011 ), Africa ( Bosak et al. , 2018 ) and the Arab World ( Sikdar and Mitra, 2012 ) as well. Some global level studies also confirm that gender stereotype change has occurred in most countries with minor exceptions ( Brown, 1991 ; Charlesworth and Banaji, 2021 ; Constantin and Voicu, 2015 ; Williams and Best, 1990 ). We know that if something happened, this could have various outcomes related to the incident. Accordingly, as the gender stereotype change has also taken place, there could be multiple outcomes associated with it. However, to the best of our knowledge, there is minimal research on this subject matter ( Priyashantha et al. , 2021c ).

Therefore, with the expectation of finding the outcomes of gender stereotype change, we positioned the central question of the current study as, what is the impact of gender stereotype change? Thus, the present study systematically and quantitatively analyzes selected literature in the last 50 years to identify the outcomes of gender stereotypes and gaps in the prevailing knowledge.

Methodology

This article is positioned as Systematic Literature Review (SLR). The SLRs require a prior protocol to be developed to document the inclusion and exclusion of studies and analysis methods ( Pahlevan-Sharif et al. , 2019 ). We did a comprehensive literature search for this study, and a protocol was designed before the article search. There is a standard way of reporting the SLR known as Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA- Liberati et al. , 2009 ), which is highly recommended in Medicine. However, as there is no such framework in social sciences, authors who intend to conduct the SLR tend to use the narrative and arbitrary guidelines ( Pahlevan-Sharif et al. , 2019 ; Petticrew and Roberts, 2006 ). Instead, in this study, for the article selection process to be objective and systematic, we followed the PRISMA article selection flow chart steps to select the articles.

The PRISMA article selection flow diagram has four steps: identification, screening, eligibility and included, and we followed them in the article selection. The identifications stage includes database, search terms and search criteria. The databases were Scopus and Ebscohost for searching the articles. The search terms were “gender stereotype change” and “outcomes.” The search criteria or algorithm was developed by combining the terms with AND operative, and each search term was given similar words combined with OR operative. Accordingly, we retrieved 56 articles from Scopus and 68 Articles from EBSCOhost databases. Subsequently, the retrieved list containing the title, abstract, keywords, authors' names and affiliations, journal name, cited numbers and year, etc., was exported to a Microsoft Excel sheet. The duplicates were then searched and removed.

The screening stage includes eliminating the articles when their titles and abstracts do not meet the inclusion criteria ( Meline, 2006 ). The inclusion criteria for the current study were the “empirical studies” published in “academic journals” in “English” on “gender stereotype change” during the “1970–2020” period. Thus, the reason for selecting 1970 as the entry point was that gender stereotype change started in 1970, and it was extended to 2020 to include more studies for the review. Each author of the current research independently went through each title and abstract and eliminated the studies that did not meet the inclusion criteria. Notably, if there was any disagreement about elimination was resolved through discussion and consensus. Hence, we excluded 73 articles that were based on “review,” “qualitative,” “books,” “book chapters,” “magazines,” “conference papers,” “non-English” and “non-relevance to the current study's scope.” Then, the remaining 50 articles' full-text versions were retrieved for assessing their eligibility, which is the next step of the PRISMA flow diagram.

Since the articles have already been screened out up to this stage, evaluating their methodological reporting for eligibility checking is much better ( Meline, 2006 ). It is justifiable as we had taken an inclusion criterion as “empirical studies.” Thus, the evaluation areas may be the population, methodology, methods, design, context, etc., and can find the reasons for excluding the articles as “ambiguous methods” and “required original information from the author,” etc. ( Meline, 2006 ). Accordingly, we independently evaluated each article on such grounds. We identified some studies based on qualitative reviews, perspectives, ambiguous methods and some sought original information about the methodology from the authors. They all were excluded through our discussion and consensus. In total, we identified 35 papers as irrelevant at this stage, and finally, we selected 15 articles for the review. They are shown in Table 1 , and the process we followed for article selection is shown in Figure 1 .

The Microsoft Excel sheet was then modified, and the data in it were fed into the VOSviewer Software to run the keyword co-occurrence and term co-occurrence network visualization maps. That was to identify the core themes in the selected studies scientifically. Notably, the keyword co-occurrence is to identify the main areas touched from the keywords of the studies as the keywords of a research article denote its primary content on a particular field of investigation. Moreover, the term co-occurrence analysis is to identify more about studies than the keywords co-occurrence as it searches key terms reflected in the titles and abstracts of each article.

Results and analysis

This section is mainly organized to present the results of the SLR and analyze them. It primarily consists of two sections: descriptive analysis and literature classification.

Descriptive analysis

The year-wise article distribution is shown in Figure 2 . Even the 50 years considered for the review, the empirical studies reported on outcomes of gender stereotype change since 1998. Figure 2 shows that at least one empirical study has been conducted for each year during the 1998–2020 period. Moreover, there is a high frequency of studies in 2005, 2017 and 2018 years. Table 2 shows the methodological reporting of the studies. It reveals that studies have been conducted based on large samples drawn on panel surveys. The information ensures the validity of the selected studies for the review, as we had an inclusion criterion for selecting papers as “empirical studies.” Concerning the context under which studies were conducted ( Figure 3 ), the USA takes the led by having seven empirical studies published (1970–2020). Canada is in the second position having two studies during the period. Australia, China, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain and United Kingdom have conducted one study each.

Literature classification

The classification of results is critical in finding out actual work done on the objective set for the research ( Jabeen et al. , 2020 ; Priyashantha et al. , 2021a ). Since the main research objective of the current study was to identify the outcomes of the gender stereotype change, this section mainly classifies the results relating to that. As the keyword co-occurrence network analysis is suitable for identifying the critical areas on a particular investigation, we used it for our study to answer the study's central question. Figure 4 shows the output of it.

The size of the node denotes the number of occurrences in a keyword co-occurrences visualization map. Hence, the higher the number of occurrences, the larger the node's size. Thus, our analysis of the keyword co-occurrences found that “gender,” “employment” and “longitudinal research” denoted in larger nodes in the map ( Figure 4 ). It reveals that they are the keywords that have frequently occurred in studies. We know that “gender” is highly associated with gender stereotypes. It may be a justifiable reason why it happens so often in studies. “Employment” opportunities are also justifiable since it has been proven that employment opportunities have been a significant cause for gender stereotypes changes ( Eagly et al. , 2020 ). Moreover, as almost all the studies in the sample have adopted the “longitudinal research” design, the keyword “longitudinal research” has also fallen to the frequently occurring category. It demonstrates the methods used by the selected articles and their suitability to the current study.

Additionally, Figure 4 shows four main clusters denoted in different colors containing different keywords in each cluster. More specifically, Table 3 shows the number of terms in each cluster, indicating that changing gender stereotype outcomes varied by different areas of investigations. Grouping the keywords into one cluster is regarded as the keywords' likelihood to reflect similar topics. Hence, clusters one and two (as stated in Table 3 ) have the highest number of keywords and suggest that the topics highlighted in those are the centralized fields in gender stereotype change and outcome research. Thus, the central areas highlighted are “attitudes,” “cohabitation,” “fertility,” “life course,” “living arrangements,” “marriage,” “couples,” “employment,” “family economics,” “gender roles,” “longitudinal research” and “marital quality.”

Moreover, the term co-occurrence network visualization map created by the VOSviewer software ( Figure 5 ) is treated as more detailed than the keyword co-occurrence analysis. It provides an analysis that goes beyond the keywords as it further investigates the areas focused on in the title and abstracts of the studies. Hence, creating this type of map further identified the areas frequently investigated on gender stereotypes change outcomes. Accordingly, Figure 5 categorized the terms into three clusters in Blue, Red and Green. In the Blue cluster, there are two terms as “family” and “child.” A common theme can be formed for them as family and child-related outcomes. As we did a detailed search for the outcomes in each article, we could summarize them in Table 4 . Hence, we could extract different family and children-related outcomes from Table 4 . They are; “Family Role Overload and Stress” ( Duxbury et al. , 2018 ), “Subsequent School Enrollment” ( Cunningham et al. , 2005 ), “Fewer Children” ( Barber and Axinn, 1998 ), “Delay in Marital Parenthood” ( Cunningham et al. , 2005 ) and “Children's Convergence of Egalitarian Attitudes” ( Dawson et al. , 2016 ).

Concerning the family and children-related outcomes, Duxbury et al. (2018) have found that the “family role overload” of both husbands and wives was consequent in changing gender stereotype contexts. The sense of family role overload then becomes a strong predictor of couples' “perceived stress” ( Duxbury et al. , 2018 ). The perceived stress can undermine the health and well-being of people. The literature confirms that “psychological strains” and “disorders” ( Hébert et al. , 2017 ), “adverse impacts on the immune system” ( Barry et al. , 2020 ; Cohen et al. , 1999 ), “low quality of life,” “insomnia,” “burnout” ( Ribeiro et al. , 2018 ) and “family distress” ( Aryee et al. , 1999 ) resultant from the stress. When the stress becomes to distress level, there is a high possibility of causing chronic diseases and mortality ( Barry et al. , 2020 ). Therefore, these findings provide more implications for the policymakers to emphasize reducing those negative outcomes.

Apart from this, young adults' biases toward changing gender role attitudes can cause “subsequent school enrolments” ( Ciabattari, 2001 ; Cunningham et al. , 2005 ). It is severe, particularly among women, as they need to acquire knowledge to upgrade their employment status ( Cunningham et al. , 2005 ) and be independent ( Goldscheider and Goldscheider, 1993 ). However, later school enrollment may hinder performing family roles of adults as intensive time is devoted to education ( Marini, 1978 ). Moreover, women with changing attitudes toward gender roles are “less likely to have children” ( Barber and Axinn, 1998 ) and “delay in marital parenthood” ( Cunningham et al. , 2005 ). As a result, the future society could go into a severe crisis regarding population growth ( Barber and Axinn, 1998 ). It could be challenging to find people for growth prospects in economies. Therefore, the policymakers need to consider this seriously and try to overcome that. In the meantime, scholars need to focus on further research on this outcome to confirm this viewpoint further.

The last outcome of the family and children-related category is the “children's convergence of egalitarian attitudes” ( Dawson et al. , 2016 ). It indicates that gender stereotype changes could evolve over the generations and possibly consequent the different outcomes of gender stereotype change. It implies that more research on this area is required to find more associated outcomes.

The cluster in Red ( Figure 5 ) has categorized the terms as; “Role Attitude,” “Attitudes,” “Cohabitation,” “Marriage” and “Consequences.” Out of them, the “role attitudes,” “attitudes” and “consequences” are the general search terms related to the concept of gender stereotype change outcomes, and hence, we ignored them for review. However, the remaining two terms, “marriage” and “cohabitation,” were considered for the review. Since these terms are related to marriage, we themed them as “marriage-related.” Hence, marriage-related outcomes we found were “Increased Cohabitation, Low Marriage Rate” ( Barber and Axinn, 1998 ), “Delay in Marriage” ( Cunningham et al. , 2005 ), “Low Satisfaction,” “Low Relationship Quality,” “Low Stability in Marital Relationships” ( Blom and Hewitt, 2020 ) and “Attitude Convergence in Marriage” ( Kalmijn, 2005 ).

The “increased cohabitation,” “low marriage rate” ( Barber and Axinn, 1998 ) and “delay in marriage” ( Cunningham et al. , 2005 ) can subsequently impact the population growth negatively ( Barber and Axinn, 1998 ). If such outcomes exist over time, it could be a barrier to the progression of societies. However, another finding reveals that gender stereotype change increases childbirth to single parents in recent decades ( Cunningham et al. , 2005 ). Therefore, it is difficult to directly conclude that such outcomes negatively affect population growth or societal progression. More research is needed to find the associated outcomes of these consequences so that reasonable judgments can be made whether such outcomes generate more negative or positive effects on the population, society or any other.

Moreover, in marital relationships, Australian-related research has found that “low satisfaction,” “low relationship quality” and “low stability” ( Blom and Hewitt, 2020 ) were consequent from the gender stereotype changes. All of which resemble negative outcomes by their surface nature. However, another finding reveals that “attitude convergence in marriage” ( Kalmijn, 2005 ) occurred due to gender stereotype changes. It is contrary to the previous finding, which is a positive outcome by its surface nature.

Most importantly, for these types of outcomes, positivity or negativity is dependent on cultural values. The negative outcomes as “low satisfaction,” “low relationship quality” and “low stability” may be very accurate for the cultures which value male breadwinner family structures ( Blom and Hewitt, 2020 ). However, more opposing consequences, like “attitude convergence in marriage” ( Kalmijn, 2005 ), can be found in cultures with more egalitarian values like Nordic countries ( Vitali and Arpino, 2016 ). Hence, in total, the positivity or negativity of outcomes is a matter of societal and cultural values. Therefore, generalizing interpretations about the positivity or negativity of each outcome is suitable with more cross-cultural research. Similarly, further research is needed regarding the associated outcomes of each of these outcomes.

Finally, the Green cluster has the terms as; “Outcomes,” “Gender Differences,” “Gender Egalitarianism,” “Work” and “Women.” As in other clusters, we had a common search term, “outcome,” in this cluster, and we ignored it. Except that, the terms “gender difference” and “gender egalitarianism” seem to represent a common theme of “equality.” The remaining terms “work” and “women” are merged, and a theme can be given as “women's employment.” Thus, this cluster is then characterized by the theme of “equality and women employments.” Specifically, under this cluster, we found the outcomes of “Reduction of Gender Role Stereotyping” ( Dawson et al. , 2016 ), “Egalitarian Essentialism” ( Cotter et al. , 2011 ), “Non-Difference in Men or Women for Work-Life” ( Lyness and Judiesch, 2014 ) and “Gender Differences in Personality Cross-Culturally” ( Schmitt et al. , 2017 ), and they can be related to the equality. Similarly, the “Women's Full-Time Employment,” “Women's Independent Living” ( Cunningham et al. , 2005 ), “More Working Hours” and “More Income for Women” ( Corrigall and Konrad, 2007 ) and “Increased Entrepreneurial Intention of Women” ( Perez-Quintana et al. , 2017 ) were found, and they can be categorized under the theme of women's employment. Moreover, the outcomes of the “Reduction of the Women's Disadvantage in Entering Male-Dominated Occupations” ( He and Zhou, 2018 ) and “Economic Rationality of Females” ( Onozaka and Hafzi, 2019 ) are also categorized to the theme of “women's employment.”

Thus, the “equality” related outcomes in the “equality and women's employment,” the “reduction of traditional gender role stereotyping” ( Dawson et al. , 2016 ), “egalitarian essentialism” ( Cotter et al. , 2011 ) and “non-difference in men or women for work-life” ( Lyness and Judiesch, 2014 ) may change in different cultural contexts. As we have various cultural contexts that value either traditional gender norms or gender stereotype change, more cross-cultural research is needed to interpret such outcomes. Moreover, one cross-cultural study found that a “gender difference in personality” is consequenced even though people's gender stereotype attitudes have already changed ( Schmitt et al. , 2017 ). Therefore, this finding confirms the overall behavioral diversity of people, including diversity in gender role behaviors, although the equality of gender roles is emphasized.

Concerning women's employment-related outcomes, such as increases in “women's full-time employment opportunities” ( Cunningham et al. , 2005 ), “reduction of women's disadvantage in entering male-dominated occupations” ( He and Zhou, 2018 ), “more working hours and more income for women” ( Corrigall and Konrad, 2007 ) and “their increased entrepreneurial intention” ( Perez-Quintana et al. , 2017 ), women's “economic rationality” ( Onozaka and Hafzi, 2019 ) reveals the women's improved economic status. Moreover, the findings like increased “women's independent living” ( Cunningham et al. , 2005 ) represent their independent decision-making. The positive side of these is that they reduce the gender gap in employment participation and the ultimate contribution to economic growth. However, since we have different cultures worldwide, more cross-cultural research is needed to generalize this. As discussed under “family and children” related outcomes, the negative side of women's employment-related outcomes is the missing family responsibilities or adverse health effects and low reproductivity. Therefore, this provides an implication for policymakers to avoid those harmful effects. In the meantime, as the socialization forces are diverse over time ( Brown and Stone, 2016 ), researchers can further test whether these types of outcomes exist over time.

In the network visualization map in Figure 5 , the circles' size denotes the number of occurrences. It suggests that the higher the number of occurrences, the larger the circle's size. Accordingly, the term “women” is then considered to be the frequently used term. It implies that the women-related outcomes should have been investigated repeatedly. However, even the term “women” has been found to be co-occurred many times in this study, our detailed analysis of each article found that the different women-related outcomes have been investigated only once. Instead, the other outcomes related to terms represented by the nodes in Figure 5 have not been co-occurred or tested frequently in the studies. Hence, overall, more research is needed to be a well-established knowledge on each outcome of stereotype change found in this study.

Gender stereotype change has been given scholarly attention since the 1970s. Traditional gender stereotypes have evolved into gender stereotype change or egalitarian gender stereotypes with females' participation in employment ( Brandth et al. , 2017 ; Mergaert et al. , 2013 ). This gender stereotype change has created various outcomes in various areas. This SLR studied the outcomes of gender stereotype change in the literature during the 1970–2020 period. The literature search was conducted using the Scopus and EBSCOhost databases. Empirical studies were mainly focused on selecting the articles. Initially, we extracted 124 articles for screening. After assessing their eligibility, we finally selected 15 articles for the review. They were subjected to the keyword and term co-occurrence analysis for finding the themes of gender stereotypes change outcomes.

The findings reveal that outcomes of gender stereotypes change are under the main themes of “family and children,” “marriage” and “equality and women's employment.” There are very few studies found relating to the “family and children” related outcomes. They are “Family Role Overload and Stress” ( Duxbury et al. , 2018 ), “Fewer Children” ( Barber and Axinn, 1998 ), “Later School Enrollment” ( Cunningham et al. , 2005 ) and “Children's Convergence of Egalitarian Attitudes” ( Dawson et al. , 2016 ). Of these results, it was found that all other results, except for the convergence of children's egalitarian attitudes ( Dawson et al. , 2016 ), had some adverse effects, such as neglect of family responsibilities and negative effects on health and female fertility. They provide implications to policymakers to ovoid those harmful effects. Moreover, more research is needed to test whether these outcomes exist over time since the socialization forces are diverse ( Brown and Stone, 2016 ).

Compared to the “family and children” related outcomes, more outcomes have found “marriage” associated outcomes. They are “Increase Cohabitation,” “Low Marriage Rate” ( Barber and Axinn, 1998 ), “Delay in Marriage” ( Cunningham et al. , 2005 ), “Attitude Convergence in Marriage” ( Kalmijn, 2005 ), “Low Satisfaction,” “Lower Relationship Quality” and “Low Stability in Marital Relationships” ( Blom and Hewitt, 2020 ). “The Increase in Cohabitation,” “Low Marriage Rate” ( Barber and Axinn, 1998 ) and “Delay in Marriage” ( Cunningham et al. , 2005 ) can further negatively impact the population growth ( Barber and Axinn, 1998 ). However, more research is needed regarding these outcomes and their associated outcomes to generalize whether they generate more positive or negative consequences. Moreover, concerning all the marriage-related outcomes, their positivity or negativity cannot be determined from their surface interpretation. More research is needed to be done on the associated outcomes of each of these outcomes. Moreover, as the marriage-related outcomes are subjected to cultural perspectives on gender roles, we cannot determine the positivity or negativity of such outcomes without doing more cross-cultural studies. Therefore, more cross-cultural research is needed.

Compared to the family and children and marriage-related outcomes, more outcomes were found relating to equality and women's employment-related category. For the analysis purposes, we further categorized them into two sub-themes as equality and women's employment-related. The “equality”-related outcomes found were; “Reduction of Traditional Gender Role Stereotyping” ( Dawson et al. , 2016 ), “Egalitarian Essentialism” ( Cotter et al. , 2011 ), “Non-Difference in Men or Women for Work-Life” ( Lyness and Judiesch, 2014 ), “Gender Difference in Personality” ( Schmitt et al. , 2017 ). We believe that these outcomes may change in different cultural contexts. Hence, more cross-cultural research is needed to make generalizations. Similarly, the women's employment-related outcomes found were: increases in “Women's Full-Time Employment Opportunities” ( Cunningham et al. , 2005 ), “Reduction of Women's Disadvantage in Entering Male-Dominated Occupations” ( He and Zhou, 2018 ), “More Working Hours and More Income for Women” ( Corrigall and Konrad, 2007 ), “Women's Increased Entrepreneurial Intention” ( Perez-Quintana et al. , 2017 ), “Women's Independent Living” ( Cunningham et al. , 2005 ) and their “Economic Rationality” ( Onozaka and Hafzi, 2019 ). These outcomes reveal the improved economic status and independent living of females. These can help reduce the employment gender gap that ultimately contributes to economic growth. For this also, more cross-cultural research is needed to make more generalizations. It is proven in this study that family responsibilities are missed and have adverse effects on health and reproductivity when females are involved in employment opportunities. Therefore, the outcomes provide an implication for the policymakers to ovoid those harmful effects. Moreover, more research is needed to test whether these outcomes exist over time since the socialization forces are diverse ( Brown and Stone, 2016 ).

Practicality and research implications

There are implications for future researchers from the findings of the current research. Although the 50 years considered for reviewing the literature on gender stereotype outcomes, we were able to find very few outcomes from only 15 studies conducted on an empirical basis. Therefore, more research is needed on this area. More specifically, gender stereotyping is coupled with cultural values on gender norms. Mainly, we have cultures on gender role stereotyping and gender role egalitarianism. Therefore, future researches need to focus more research on a cross-cultural basis. Moreover, since the socialization forces are diverse, complex and continuously evolving, more research is essential to have a well-established knowledge of gender stereotype change outcomes.

Additionally, the outcome of “Family Role Overload and Stress” ( Duxbury et al. , 2018 ) has a high possibility to create more health risks to the employees whose gender role attitude changed. Moreover, “Fewer Children” ( Barber and Axinn, 1998 ), “Later School Enrollment” ( Cunningham et al. , 2005 ), “Increase in Cohabitation,” “Low Marriage Rate” ( Barber and Axinn, 1998 ) and “Delay in Marriage” ( Cunningham et al. , 2005 ), and all the outcomes of women employment-related category can negatively impact on population growth. Therefore, they provide implications to policymakers to ovoid those harmful effects.

PRISMA article selection flow diagram

Year-wise research article distribution

Country-wise article publication

Keywords co-occurrence network visualization map

Term co-occurrence network visualization map

Included articles for the review

Source(s): Authors created (2021)

Abele , A.E. ( 2003 ), “ The dynamics of masculine-agentic and feminine-communal traits: findings from a prospective study ”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , Vol. 85 No. 4 , p. 768 .

Alfieri , T. , Ruble , D.N. and Higgins , E.T. ( 1996 ), “ Gender stereotypes during adolescence: developmental changes and the transition to junior high school ”, Developmental Psychology , Vol. 32 No. 6 , pp. 1129 - 1137 , doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.32.6.1129 .

Aryee , S. , Luk , V. , Leung , A. and Lo , S. ( 1999 ), “ Role stressors, interrole conflict, and well-being: the moderating influence of spousal support and coping behaviors among employed parents in Hong Kong ”, Journal of Vocational Behavior , Vol. 54 No. 2 , pp. 259 - 278 , doi: 10.1006/jvbe.1998.1667 .

Attanapola , C. ( 2004 ), “ Changing gender roles and health impacts among female workers in export-processing industries in Sri Lanka ”, Social Science and Medicine , Vol. 58 , pp. 2301 - 2312 , 1982 , doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2003.08.022 .

Bakan , D. ( 1966 ), The Duality of Human Existence , Addison-Wesley , Reading, PA .

Barber , J.S. and Axinn , W.G. ( 1998 ), “ Gender role attitudes and marriage among young women ”, The Sociological Quarterly , Vol. 39 No. 1 , pp. 11 - 31 , doi: 10.1111/j.1533-8525.1998.tb02347.x .

Barry , V. , Stout , M.E. , Lynch , M.E. , Mattis , S. , Tran , D.Q. , Antun , A. , Ribeiro , M.J. , Stein , S.F. and Kempton , C.L. ( 2020 ), “ The effect of psychological distress on health outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies ”, Journal of Health Psychology , Vol. 25 No. 2 , pp. 227 - 239 , doi: 10.1177/1359105319842931 .

Beere , C.A. , King , D.W. , Beere , D.B. and King , L.A. ( 1984 ), “ The Sex-Role Egalitarianism Scale: a measure of attitudes toward equality between the sexes ”, Sex Roles , Vol. 10 Nos 7-8 , pp. 563 - 576 .

Bem , S.L. ( 1974 ), “ The measurement of psychological androgyny ”, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology , Vol. 42 No. 2 , pp. 155 - 162 , doi: 10.1037/h0036215 .

Benería , L. , Berik , G. and Floro , M.S. ( 2015 ), Gender, Development, and Globalization: Economics as if All People Mattered , 2nd ed. , Routledge, New York , doi: 10.4324/9780203107935 .

Berkery , E. , Morley , M. and Tiernan , S. ( 2013 ), “ Beyond gender role stereotypes and requisite managerial characteristics: from communal to androgynous, the changing views of women ”, Gender in Management: An International Journal , Vol. 28 No. 5 , pp. 278 - 298 , doi: 10.1108/GM-12-2012-0098 .

Berridge , D. , Penn , R. and Ganjali , M. ( 2009 ), “ Changing attitudes to gender roles: a longitudinal analysis of ordinal response data from the British household panel study ”, International Sociology , Vol. 24 No. 3 , pp. 346 - 367 , doi: 10.1177/0268580909102912 .

Blau , F.D. and Kahn , L.M. ( 2006 ), “ The US gender pay gap in the 1990s: slowing convergence ”, ILR Review , Vol. 60 No. 1 , pp. 45 - 66 .

Blom , N. and Hewitt , B. ( 2020 ), “ Becoming a female‐breadwinner household in Australia: changes in relationship satisfaction ”, Journal of Marriage and Family , Vol. 82 No. 4 , pp. 1340 - 1357 , doi: 10.1111/jomf.12653 .

Boehnke , M. ( 2011 ), “ Gender role attitudes around the globe: egalitarian vs traditional views ”, Asian Journal of Social Science , Vol. 39 No. 1 , pp. 57 - 74 , doi: 10.1163/156853111X554438 .

Bosak , J. , Eagly , A. , Diekman , A. and Sczesny , S. ( 2018 ), “ Women and men of the past, present, and future: evidence of dynamic gender stereotypes in Ghana ”, Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology , Vol. 49 No. 1 , pp. 115 - 129 , doi: 10.1177/0022022117738750 .

Brandth , B. , Halrynjo , S. and Kvande , E. ( 2017 ), “ Integrating work and family; Changing institutions and competing logics ”, in Brandth , B. , Halrynjo , S. and Kvande , E. (Eds), Work–Family Dynamics: Competing Logics of Regulation, Economy and Morals , 1st ed. , Routledge , doi: 10.4324/9781315716794 .

Broverman , I.K. , Broverman , D.M. , Clarkson , F.E. , Rosenkrantz , P.S. and Vogel , S.R. ( 1970 ), “ Sex-role stereotypes and clinical judgments of mental health ”, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology , Vol. 34 No. 1 , pp. 1 - 7 , doi: 10.1037/h0028797 .

Brown , D.E. ( 1991 ), Human Universals , Temple University Press, Philadelphia, PA .

Brown , C.S. and Stone , E.A. ( 2016 ), “ Gender stereotypes and discrimination ”, Advances in Child Development and Behavior , Elsevier , Vol. 50 , pp. 105 - 133 , doi: 10.1016/bs.acdb.2015.11.001 .

Charlesworth , T.E.S. and Banaji , M.R. ( 2021 ), “ Patterns of implicit and explicit stereotypes III: long-term Change in gender stereotypes ”, Social Psychological and Personality Science , 194855062098842 , doi: 10.1177/1948550620988425 .

Ciabattari , T. ( 2001 ), “ Changes in men's conservative gender ideologies: cohort and period influences ”, Gender and Society , Vol. 15 No. 4 , pp. 574 - 591 , doi: 10.1177/089124301015004005 .

Cohen , F. , Kearney , K.A. , Zegans , L.S. , Kemeny , M.E. , Neuhaus , J.M. and Stites , D.P. ( 1999 ), “ Differential immune system changes with acute and persistent stress for optimists vs pessimists ”, Brain, Behavior, and Immunity , Vol. 13 No. 2 , pp. 155 - 174 , doi: 10.1006/brbi.1998.0531 .

Constantin , A. and Voicu , M. ( 2015 ), “ Attitudes towards gender roles in cross-cultural surveys: content validity and cross-cultural measurement invariance ”, Social Indicators Research , Vol. 123 No. 3 , pp. 733 - 751 , doi: 10.1007/s11205-014-0758-8 .

Corrigall , E.A. and Konrad , A.M. ( 2007 ), “ Gender role attitudes and careers: a longitudinal study ”, Sex Roles , Vol. 56 Nos 11-12 , pp. 847 - 855 , doi: 10.1007/s11199-007-9242-0 .

Cotter , D. , Hermsen , J.M. and Vanneman , R. ( 2011 ), “ The end of the gender revolution? Gender role attitudes from 1977 to 2008 ”, American Journal of Sociology , Vol. 117 No. 1 , pp. 259 - 289 , doi: 10.1086/658853 .

Cunningham , M. , Beutel , A.M. , Barber , J.S. and Thornton , A. ( 2005 ), “ Reciprocal relationships between attitudes about gender and social contexts during young adulthood ”, Social Science Research , Vol. 34 No. 4 , pp. 862 - 892 , doi: 10.1016/j.ssresearch.2005.03.001 .

Davis , S.N. and Greenstein , T.N. ( 2009 ), “ Gender ideology: components, predictors, and consequences ”, Annual Review of Sociology , Vol. 35 , pp. 87 - 105 .

Dawson , A. , Pike , A. and Bird , L. ( 2016 ), “ Associations between parental gendered attitudes and behaviours and children's gender development across middle childhood ”, European Journal of Developmental Psychology , Vol. 13 No. 4 , pp. 452 - 471 , doi: 10.1080/17405629.2015.1109507 .

De Silva , M.T.T. and Priyashantha , K.G. ( 2014 ), “ Changing gender stereotypes: the impact of conflicts in dual career families on turnover intention (with special reference to female professionals in Sri Lanka) ”, International Journal of Arts and Commerce , Vol. 3 No. 5 , available at: https://ijac.org.uk/images/frontImages/gallery/Vol._3_No._5/1.pdf .

Deaux , K. and Lewis , L.L. ( 1984 ), “ Structure of gender stereotypes: interrelationships among components and gender label ”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , Vol. 46 No. 5 , p. 991 .

Diekman , A.B. and Eagly , A.H. ( 2000 ), “ Stereotypes as dynamic constructs: women and men of the past, present, and future ”, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin , Vol. 26 No. 10 , pp. 1171 - 1188 , doi: 10.1177/0146167200262001 .

Diekman , A.B. , Eagly , A.H. , Mladinic , A. and Ferreira , M.C. ( 2005 ), “ Dynamic stereotypes about women and men in Latin America and the United States ”, Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology , Vol. 36 No. 2 , pp. 209 - 226 , doi: 10.1177/0022022104272902 .

Duxbury , L. , Stevenson , M. and Higgins , C. ( 2018 ), “ Too much to do, too little time: role overload and stress in a multi-role environment ”, International Journal of Stress Management , Vol. 25 No. 3 , pp. 250 - 266 , doi: 10.1037/str0000062 .

Eagly , A.H. and Karau , S.J. ( 2002 ), “ Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders ”, Psychological Review , Vol. 109 No. 3 , pp. 573 - 598 , doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.109.3.573 .

Eagly , A.H. , Nater , C. , Miller , D.I. , Kaufmann , M. and Sczesny , S. ( 2020 ), “ Gender stereotypes have changed: a cross-temporal meta-analysis of US public opinion polls from 1946 to 2018 ”, American Psychologist , Vol. 75 No. 3 , pp. 301 - 315 , doi: 10.1037/amp0000494 .

Fong , K. , Mullin , J.B. and Mar , R.A. ( 2015 ), “ How exposure to literary genres relates to attitudes toward gender roles and sexual behavior ”, Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts , Vol. 9 No. 3 , pp. 274 - 285 , doi: 10.1037/a0038864 .

Garcia-Retamero , R. , Müller , S.M. and López-Zafra , E. ( 2011 ), “ The malleability of gender stereotypes: influence of population size on perceptions of men and women in the past, present, and future ”, Journal of Social Psychology , Vol. 151 No. 5 , pp. 635 - 656 , doi: 10.1080/00224545.2010.522616 .

Gill , S. , Stockard , J. , Johnson , M. and Williams , S. ( 1987 ), “ Measuring gender differences: the expressive dimension and critique of androgyny scales ”, Sex Roles , Vol. 17 Nos 7-8 , pp. 375 - 400 , doi: 10.1007/BF00288142 .

Goldscheider , F.K. and Goldscheider , C. ( 1993 ), Leaving Home before Marriage: Ethnicity, Familism, and Generational Relationships , University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, Wisconsin .

Haines , E.L. , Deaux , K. and Lofaro , N. ( 2016 ), “ The times they are a-changing … or are they not? A comparison of gender stereotypes, 1983-2014 ”, Psychology of Women Quarterly , Vol. 40 No. 3 , pp. 353 - 363 , doi: 10.1177/0361684316634081 .

He , G. and Zhou , M. ( 2018 ), “ Gender difference in early occupational attainment: the roles of study field, gender norms, and gender attitudes ”, Chinese Sociological Review , Vol. 50 No. 3 , pp. 339 - 366 , doi: 10.1080/21620555.2018.1430509 .

Hébert , S. , Mazurek , B. and Szczepek , A.J. ( 2017 ), “ Stress-related psychological disorders and tinnitus ”, in Szczepek , A. and Mazurek , B. (Eds), Tinnitus and Stress , Springer International Publishing , pp. 37 - 51 , doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-58397-6_3 .

Hoyt , C.L. , Simon , S. and Reid , L. ( 2009 ), “ Choosing the best (wo) man for the job: the effects of mortality salience, sex, and gender stereotypes on leader evaluations ”, The Leadership Quarterly , Vol. 20 No. 2 , pp. 233 - 246 .

Jabeen , S. , Malik , S. , Khan , S. , Khan , N. , Qureshi , M.I. and Saad , M.S.M. ( 2020 ), “ A comparative systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis on sustainability of renewable energy sources ”, International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy , Vol. 11 No. 1 , pp. 270 - 280 , doi: 10.32479/ijeep.10759 .

Kalmijn , M. ( 2005 ), “ Attitude alignment in marriage and cohabitation: the case of sex-role attitudes ”, Personal Relationships , Vol. 12 No. 4 , pp. 521 - 535 , doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6811.2005.00129.x .

Liberati , A. , Altman , D.G. , Tetzlaff , J. , Mulrow , C. , Gøtzsche , P.C. , Ioannidis , J.P.A. , Clarke , M. , Devereaux , P.J. , Kleijnen , J. and Moher , D. ( 2009 ), “ The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration ”, PLoS Medicine , Vol. 6 No. 7 , e1000100 , doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000100 .

Lopez-Zafra , E. and Garcia-Retamero , R. ( 2011 ), “ The impact of nontraditionalism on the malleability of gender stereotypes in Spain and Germany ”, International Journal of Psychology , Vol. 46 No. 4 , pp. 249 - 258 , doi: 10.1080/00207594.2010.551123 .

Lopez-Zafra , E. and Garcia-Retamero , R. ( 2012 ), “ Do gender stereotypes change? The dynamic of gender stereotypes in Spain ”, Journal of Gender Studies , Vol. 21 No. 2 , pp. 169 - 183 , doi: 10.1080/09589236.2012.661580 .

Lopez-Zafra , E. and Garcia-Retamero , R. ( 2021 ), “ Are gender stereotypes changing over time? A cross-temporal analysis of perceptions about gender stereotypes in Spain ( ¿Están cambiando los estereotipos de género con el tiempo? Un análisis transtemporal de las percepciones sobre los estereotipos de género en España ) ”, International Journal of Social Psychology , Vol. 36 No. 2 , pp. 330 - 354 , doi: 10.1080/02134748.2021.1882227 .

Lueptow , L.B. , Garovich , L. and Lueptow , M.B. ( 1995 ), “ The persistence of gender stereotypes in the face of changing sex roles: evidence contrary to the sociocultural model ”, Ethology and Sociobiology , Vol. 16 No. 6 , pp. 509 - 530 , doi: 10.1016/0162-3095(95)00072-0 .

Lyness , K.S. and Judiesch , M.K. ( 2014 ), “ Gender egalitarianism and work-life balance for managers: multisource perspectives in 36 countries: gender egalitarianism and work-life balance ”, Applied Psychology , Vol. 63 No. 1 , pp. 96 - 129 , doi: 10.1111/apps.12011 .

Marini , M.M. ( 1978 ), “ The transition to adulthood: sex differences in educational attainment and age at marriage ”, American Sociological Review , Vol. 43 No. 4 , p. 483 , doi: 10.2307/2094774 .

Meline , T. ( 2006 ), “ Selecting studies for systemic review: inclusion and exclusion criteria ”, Contemporary Issues in Communication Science and Disorders , Vol. 33 , Spring , pp. 21 - 27 , doi: 10.1044/cicsd_33_S_21 .

Mergaert , L.A.K. ( 2012 ), The Reality of Gender Mainstreaming Implementation. The Case of the EU Research Policy , Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen , Nijmegen .

Mergaert , L. , Heyden , K.V.der , Rimkutė , D. and Duarte , C.A. ( 2013 ), A Study of Collected Narratives on Gender Perceptions in the 27 EU Member States , Europian Institute for Gender Equity , p. 200 , available at: https://eige.europa.eu/publications/study-collected-narratives-gender-perceptions-27-eu-member-states .

Najeema , M., A. ( 2010 ), “ Parental and occupational stress ”, available at: http://archives.dailynews.lk/2001/pix/PrintPage.asp?REF=/2010/01/08/bus26.asp .

Office of the High Commissioner for Human Right ( 2014 ), Gender Stereotypes and Stereotyping and Women's Rights , Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights , available at: https://www.ohchr.org/documents/issues/women/wrgs/onepagers/gender_stereotyping.pdf .

Onozaka , Y. and Hafzi , K. ( 2019 ), “ Household production in an egalitarian society ”, Social Forces , Vol. 97 No. 3 , pp. 1127 - 1154 , doi: 10.1093/sf/soy066 .

Pahlevan-Sharif , S. , Mura , P. and Wijesinghe , S.N.R. ( 2019 ), “ A systematic review of systematic reviews in tourism ”, Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management , Vol. 39 , pp. 158 - 165 , doi: 10.1016/j.jhtm.2019.04.001 .

Parelius , A.P. ( 1975 ), “ Emerging sex-role attitudes, expectations, and strains among college women ”, Journal of Marriage and the Family , Vol. 37 No. 1 , p. 146 , doi: 10.2307/351038 .

Perez-Quintana , A. , Hormiga , E. , Martori , J.C. and Madariaga , R. ( 2017 ), “ The influence of sex and gender-role orientation in the decision to become an entrepreneur ”, International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship , Vol. 9 No. 1 , pp. 8 - 30 , doi: 10.1108/IJGE-12-2015-0047 .

Perrigino , M.B. , Kossek , E.E. , Thompson , R.J. and Bodner , T. ( 2021 ), “ How do changes in family role status impact employees? An empirical investigation ”, Journal of Humanities and Applied Social Sciences , Vol. ahead-of-print No. ahead-of-print , doi: 10.1108/JHASS-04-2021-0075 .

Petticrew , M. and Roberts , H. ( 2006 ), Systematic Reviews in the Social Sciences: A Practical Guide , Blackwell, Malden, MA; Oxford .

Priyashantha , K.G. , De Alwis , A.C. and Welmilla , I. ( 2021a ), “ The facets of gender stereotypes change: a systematic literature review ”, International Conference on Business and Information , Faculty of Commerce and Management Studies, University of Kelaniya, available at: http://repository.kln.ac.lk/handle/123456789/24018 .

Priyashantha , K.G. , De Alwis , A.C. and Welmilla , I. ( 2021b ), “ Three perspectives on changing gender stereotypes ”, FIIB Business Review , 231971452110496 , doi: 10.1177/23197145211049604 .

Priyashantha , K.G. , De Alwis , A.C. and Welmilla , I. ( 2021c ), “ Outcomes of egalitarian gender role attitudes: a systematic literature review ”, 281, available at: http://repository.kln.ac.lk/handle/123456789/23557 .

Ribeiro , Í.J.S. , Pereira , R. , Freire , I.V. , de Oliveira , B.G. , Casotti , C.A. and Boery , E.N. ( 2018 ), “ Stress and quality of life among university students: a systematic literature review ”, Health Professions Education , Vol. 4 No. 2 , pp. 70 - 77 , doi: 10.1016/j.hpe.2017.03.002 .

Rudman , L.A. and Glick , P. ( 2001 ), “ Prescriptive gender stereotypes and backlash toward agentic women ”, Journal of Social Issues , Vol. 57 No. 4 , pp. 743 - 762 , doi: 10.1111/0022-4537.00239 .

Rudman , L.A. , Moss-Racusin , C.A. , Phelan , J.E. and Nauts , S. ( 2012 ), “ Status incongruity and backlash effects: defending the gender hierarchy motivates prejudice against female leaders ”, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology , Vol. 48 No. 1 , pp. 165 - 179 , doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2011.10.008 .

Schmitt , D.P. , Long , A.E. , McPhearson , A. , O'Brien , K. , Remmert , B. and Shah , S.H. ( 2017 ), “ Personality and gender differences in global perspective: gender and personality ”, International Journal of Psychology , Vol. 52 , pp. 45 - 56 , doi: 10.1002/ijop.12265 .

Sikdar , A. and Mitra , S. ( 2012 ), “ Gender‐role stereotypes: perception and practice of leadership in the Middle East ”, Education, Business and Society: Contemporary Middle Eastern Issues , Vol. 5 No. 3 , pp. 146 - 162 , doi: 10.1108/17537981211265534 .

Spence , J.T. and Hahn , E.D. ( 2016 ), “ The attitudes toward women scale and attitude change in college students ”, Psychology of Women Quarterly , Vol. 21 No. 1 , doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.1997.tb00098.x .

Tabassum , N. and Nayak , B.S. ( 2021 ), “ Gender stereotypes and their impact on women's career progressions from a managerial perspective ”, IIM Kozhikode Society and Management Review , Vol. 10 No. 2 , 227797522097551 , doi: 10.1177/2277975220975513 .

Twenge , J.M. ( 1997a ), “ Changes in masculine and feminine traits over time: a meta-analysis ”, Sex Roles: A Journal of Research , Vol. 36 Nos 5-6 , pp. 305 - 325 , doi: 10.1007/BF02766650 .

Twenge , J.M. ( 1997b ), “ Attitudes toward women, 1970-1995: a meta-analysis ”, Psychology of Women Quarterly , Vol. 21 No. 1 , pp. 35 - 51 , doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.1997.tb00099.x .

Twenge , J.M. , Campbell , W.K. and Gentile , B. ( 2012 ), “ Male and female pronoun use in US books reflects women's status, 1900-2008 ”, Sex Roles , Vol. 67 Nos 9-10 , pp. 488 - 493 , doi: 10.1007/s11199-012-0194-7 .

Ugwu , U.T. ( 2021 ), “ Gender and rural economic relations: ethnography of the nrobo of south eastern Nigeria ”, Journal of Humanities and Applied Social Sciences , Vol. ahead-of-print No. ahead-of-print , doi: 10.1108/JHASS-07-2020-0104 .

Vitali , A. and Arpino , B. ( 2016 ), “ Who brings home the bacon? The influence of context on partners' contributions to the household income ”, Demographic Research , Vol. 35 , pp. 1213 - 1244 , doi: 10.4054/DemRes.2016.35.41 .

Williams , J.E. and Best , D.L. ( 1990 ), Sex and Psyche: Gender and Self Viewed Cross-Culturally , Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA .

Wood , R. and Ramirez , M.D. ( 2018 ), “ Exploring the microfoundations of the gender equality peace hypothesis ”, International Studies Review , Vol. 20 No. 3 , pp. 345 - 367 , doi: 10.1093/isr/vix016 .

Zosuls , K.M. , Miller , C.F. , Ruble , D.N. , Martin , C.L. and Fabes , R.A. ( 2011 ), “ Gender development research in sex roles: historical trends and future directions ”, Sex Roles , Vol. 64 Nos 11-12 , pp. 826 - 842 , doi: 10.1007/s11199-010-9902-3 .

Acknowledgements

Funding : No funding was available for this research

Authors Contributions : All authors contributed to the study conception, design, material preparation, data collection and analysis. All versions of drafts of the manuscript were written by Author 1, and other authors commented and revised. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Availability: Data collected during the current study are not publicly available. However, they can be available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Conflicts of Interest : On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Corresponding author

Related articles, we’re listening — tell us what you think, something didn’t work….

Report bugs here

All feedback is valuable

Please share your general feedback

Join us on our journey

Platform update page.

Visit emeraldpublishing.com/platformupdate to discover the latest news and updates

Questions & More Information

Answers to the most commonly asked questions here

• Search Menu
• Browse content in Arts and Humanities
• Browse content in Archaeology
• Anglo-Saxon and Medieval Archaeology
• Archaeological Methodology and Techniques
• Archaeology by Region
• Archaeology of Religion
• Archaeology of Trade and Exchange
• Biblical Archaeology
• Contemporary and Public Archaeology
• Environmental Archaeology
• Historical Archaeology
• History and Theory of Archaeology
• Industrial Archaeology
• Landscape Archaeology
• Mortuary Archaeology
• Prehistoric Archaeology
• Underwater Archaeology
• Urban Archaeology
• Zooarchaeology
• Browse content in Architecture
• Architectural Structure and Design
• History of Architecture
• Residential and Domestic Buildings
• Theory of Architecture
• Browse content in Art
• Art Subjects and Themes
• History of Art
• Industrial and Commercial Art
• Theory of Art
• Biographical Studies
• Byzantine Studies
• Browse content in Classical Studies
• Classical Literature
• Classical Reception
• Classical History
• Classical Philosophy
• Classical Mythology
• Classical Art and Architecture
• Classical Oratory and Rhetoric
• Greek and Roman Papyrology
• Greek and Roman Archaeology
• Greek and Roman Epigraphy
• Greek and Roman Law
• Late Antiquity
• Religion in the Ancient World
• Digital Humanities
• Browse content in History
• Colonialism and Imperialism
• Diplomatic History
• Environmental History
• Genealogy, Heraldry, Names, and Honours
• Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing
• Historical Geography
• History by Period
• History of Emotions
• History of Agriculture
• History of Education
• History of Gender and Sexuality
• Industrial History
• Intellectual History
• International History
• Labour History
• Legal and Constitutional History
• Local and Family History
• Maritime History
• Military History
• National Liberation and Post-Colonialism
• Oral History
• Political History
• Public History
• Regional and National History
• Revolutions and Rebellions
• Slavery and Abolition of Slavery
• Social and Cultural History
• Theory, Methods, and Historiography
• Urban History
• World History
• Browse content in Language Teaching and Learning
• Language Learning (Specific Skills)
• Language Teaching Theory and Methods
• Browse content in Linguistics
• Applied Linguistics
• Cognitive Linguistics
• Computational Linguistics
• Forensic Linguistics
• Grammar, Syntax and Morphology
• Historical and Diachronic Linguistics
• History of English
• Language Evolution
• Language Reference
• Language Variation
• Language Families
• Language Acquisition
• Lexicography
• Linguistic Anthropology
• Linguistic Theories
• Linguistic Typology
• Phonetics and Phonology
• Psycholinguistics
• Sociolinguistics
• Translation and Interpretation
• Writing Systems
• Browse content in Literature
• Bibliography
• Children's Literature Studies
• Literary Studies (Romanticism)
• Literary Studies (American)
• Literary Studies (Modernism)
• Literary Studies (Asian)
• Literary Studies (European)
• Literary Studies (Eco-criticism)
• Literary Studies - World
• Literary Studies (1500 to 1800)
• Literary Studies (19th Century)
• Literary Studies (20th Century onwards)
• Literary Studies (African American Literature)
• Literary Studies (British and Irish)
• Literary Studies (Early and Medieval)
• Literary Studies (Fiction, Novelists, and Prose Writers)
• Literary Studies (Gender Studies)
• Literary Studies (Graphic Novels)
• Literary Studies (History of the Book)
• Literary Studies (Plays and Playwrights)
• Literary Studies (Poetry and Poets)
• Literary Studies (Postcolonial Literature)
• Literary Studies (Queer Studies)
• Literary Studies (Science Fiction)
• Literary Studies (Travel Literature)
• Literary Studies (War Literature)
• Literary Studies (Women's Writing)
• Literary Theory and Cultural Studies
• Mythology and Folklore
• Shakespeare Studies and Criticism
• Browse content in Media Studies
• Browse content in Music
• Applied Music
• Dance and Music
• Ethics in Music
• Ethnomusicology
• Gender and Sexuality in Music
• Medicine and Music
• Music Cultures
• Music and Media
• Music and Culture
• Music and Religion
• Music Education and Pedagogy
• Music Theory and Analysis
• Musical Scores, Lyrics, and Libretti
• Musical Structures, Styles, and Techniques
• Musicology and Music History
• Performance Practice and Studies
• Race and Ethnicity in Music
• Sound Studies
• Browse content in Performing Arts
• Browse content in Philosophy
• Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art
• Epistemology
• Feminist Philosophy
• History of Western Philosophy
• Metaphysics
• Moral Philosophy
• Non-Western Philosophy
• Philosophy of Language
• Philosophy of Mind
• Philosophy of Perception
• Philosophy of Action
• Philosophy of Law
• Philosophy of Religion
• Philosophy of Science
• Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic
• Practical Ethics
• Social and Political Philosophy
• Browse content in Religion
• Biblical Studies
• Christianity
• East Asian Religions
• History of Religion
• Judaism and Jewish Studies
• Qumran Studies
• Religion and Education
• Religion and Health
• Religion and Politics
• Religion and Science
• Religion and Law
• Religion and Art, Literature, and Music
• Religious Studies
• Browse content in Society and Culture
• Cookery, Food, and Drink
• Cultural Studies
• Customs and Traditions
• Ethical Issues and Debates
• Hobbies, Games, Arts and Crafts
• Lifestyle, Home, and Garden
• Natural world, Country Life, and Pets
• Popular Beliefs and Controversial Knowledge
• Sports and Outdoor Recreation
• Technology and Society
• Travel and Holiday
• Visual Culture
• Browse content in Law
• Arbitration
• Browse content in Company and Commercial Law
• Commercial Law
• Company Law
• Browse content in Comparative Law
• Systems of Law
• Competition Law
• Browse content in Constitutional and Administrative Law
• Government Powers
• Judicial Review
• Local Government Law
• Military and Defence Law
• Parliamentary and Legislative Practice
• Construction Law
• Contract Law
• Browse content in Criminal Law
• Criminal Procedure
• Criminal Evidence Law
• Sentencing and Punishment
• Employment and Labour Law
• Environment and Energy Law
• Browse content in Financial Law
• Banking Law
• Insolvency Law
• History of Law
• Human Rights and Immigration
• Intellectual Property Law
• Browse content in International Law
• Private International Law and Conflict of Laws
• Public International Law
• IT and Communications Law
• Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law
• Law and Society
• Law and Politics
• Browse content in Legal System and Practice
• Courts and Procedure
• Legal Skills and Practice
• Primary Sources of Law
• Regulation of Legal Profession
• Medical and Healthcare Law
• Browse content in Policing
• Criminal Investigation and Detection
• Police and Security Services
• Police Procedure and Law
• Police Regional Planning
• Browse content in Property Law
• Personal Property Law
• Study and Revision
• Terrorism and National Security Law
• Browse content in Trusts Law
• Wills and Probate or Succession
• Browse content in Medicine and Health
• Browse content in Allied Health Professions
• Arts Therapies
• Clinical Science
• Dietetics and Nutrition
• Occupational Therapy
• Operating Department Practice
• Physiotherapy
• Radiography
• Speech and Language Therapy
• Browse content in Anaesthetics
• General Anaesthesia
• Neuroanaesthesia
• Clinical Neuroscience
• Browse content in Clinical Medicine
• Acute Medicine
• Cardiovascular Medicine
• Clinical Genetics
• Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
• Dermatology
• Endocrinology and Diabetes
• Gastroenterology
• Genito-urinary Medicine
• Geriatric Medicine
• Infectious Diseases
• Medical Toxicology
• Medical Oncology
• Pain Medicine
• Palliative Medicine
• Rehabilitation Medicine
• Respiratory Medicine and Pulmonology
• Rheumatology
• Sleep Medicine
• Sports and Exercise Medicine
• Community Medical Services
• Critical Care
• Emergency Medicine
• Forensic Medicine
• Haematology
• History of Medicine
• Browse content in Medical Skills
• Clinical Skills
• Communication Skills
• Nursing Skills
• Surgical Skills
• Medical Ethics
• Browse content in Medical Dentistry
• Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
• Paediatric Dentistry
• Restorative Dentistry and Orthodontics
• Surgical Dentistry
• Medical Statistics and Methodology
• Browse content in Neurology
• Clinical Neurophysiology
• Neuropathology
• Nursing Studies
• Browse content in Obstetrics and Gynaecology
• Gynaecology
• Occupational Medicine
• Ophthalmology
• Otolaryngology (ENT)
• Browse content in Paediatrics
• Neonatology
• Browse content in Pathology
• Chemical Pathology
• Clinical Cytogenetics and Molecular Genetics
• Histopathology
• Medical Microbiology and Virology
• Patient Education and Information
• Browse content in Pharmacology
• Psychopharmacology
• Browse content in Popular Health
• Caring for Others
• Complementary and Alternative Medicine
• Self-help and Personal Development
• Browse content in Preclinical Medicine
• Cell Biology
• Molecular Biology and Genetics
• Reproduction, Growth and Development
• Primary Care
• Professional Development in Medicine
• Browse content in Psychiatry
• Addiction Medicine
• Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
• Forensic Psychiatry
• Learning Disabilities
• Old Age Psychiatry
• Psychotherapy
• Browse content in Public Health and Epidemiology
• Epidemiology
• Public Health
• Browse content in Radiology
• Clinical Radiology
• Interventional Radiology
• Nuclear Medicine
• Radiation Oncology
• Reproductive Medicine
• Browse content in Surgery
• Cardiothoracic Surgery
• Gastro-intestinal and Colorectal Surgery
• General Surgery
• Neurosurgery
• Paediatric Surgery
• Peri-operative Care
• Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
• Surgical Oncology
• Transplant Surgery
• Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery
• Vascular Surgery
• Browse content in Science and Mathematics
• Browse content in Biological Sciences
• Aquatic Biology
• Biochemistry
• Bioinformatics and Computational Biology
• Developmental Biology
• Ecology and Conservation
• Evolutionary Biology
• Genetics and Genomics
• Microbiology
• Molecular and Cell Biology
• Natural History
• Plant Sciences and Forestry
• Research Methods in Life Sciences
• Structural Biology
• Systems Biology
• Zoology and Animal Sciences
• Browse content in Chemistry
• Analytical Chemistry
• Computational Chemistry
• Crystallography
• Environmental Chemistry
• Industrial Chemistry
• Inorganic Chemistry
• Materials Chemistry
• Medicinal Chemistry
• Mineralogy and Gems
• Organic Chemistry
• Physical Chemistry
• Polymer Chemistry
• Study and Communication Skills in Chemistry
• Theoretical Chemistry
• Browse content in Computer Science
• Artificial Intelligence
• Computer Architecture and Logic Design
• Game Studies
• Human-Computer Interaction
• Mathematical Theory of Computation
• Programming Languages
• Software Engineering
• Systems Analysis and Design
• Virtual Reality
• Browse content in Computing
• Business Applications
• Computer Games
• Computer Security
• Computer Networking and Communications
• Digital Lifestyle
• Graphical and Digital Media Applications
• Operating Systems
• Browse content in Earth Sciences and Geography
• Atmospheric Sciences
• Environmental Geography
• Geology and the Lithosphere
• Maps and Map-making
• Meteorology and Climatology
• Oceanography and Hydrology
• Palaeontology
• Physical Geography and Topography
• Regional Geography
• Soil Science
• Urban Geography
• Browse content in Engineering and Technology
• Agriculture and Farming
• Biological Engineering
• Civil Engineering, Surveying, and Building
• Electronics and Communications Engineering
• Energy Technology
• Engineering (General)
• Environmental Science, Engineering, and Technology
• History of Engineering and Technology
• Mechanical Engineering and Materials
• Technology of Industrial Chemistry
• Transport Technology and Trades
• Browse content in Environmental Science
• Applied Ecology (Environmental Science)
• Conservation of the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Environmental Sustainability
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Environmental Science)
• Management of Land and Natural Resources (Environmental Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environmental Science)
• Nuclear Issues (Environmental Science)
• Pollution and Threats to the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Environmental Science)
• History of Science and Technology
• Browse content in Materials Science
• Ceramics and Glasses
• Composite Materials
• Metals, Alloying, and Corrosion
• Nanotechnology
• Browse content in Mathematics
• Applied Mathematics
• Biomathematics and Statistics
• History of Mathematics
• Mathematical Education
• Mathematical Finance
• Mathematical Analysis
• Numerical and Computational Mathematics
• Probability and Statistics
• Pure Mathematics
• Browse content in Neuroscience
• Cognition and Behavioural Neuroscience
• Development of the Nervous System
• Disorders of the Nervous System
• History of Neuroscience
• Invertebrate Neurobiology
• Molecular and Cellular Systems
• Neuroendocrinology and Autonomic Nervous System
• Neuroscientific Techniques
• Sensory and Motor Systems
• Browse content in Physics
• Astronomy and Astrophysics
• Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics
• Biological and Medical Physics
• Classical Mechanics
• Computational Physics
• Condensed Matter Physics
• Electromagnetism, Optics, and Acoustics
• History of Physics
• Mathematical and Statistical Physics
• Measurement Science
• Nuclear Physics
• Particles and Fields
• Plasma Physics
• Quantum Physics
• Relativity and Gravitation
• Semiconductor and Mesoscopic Physics
• Browse content in Psychology
• Affective Sciences
• Clinical Psychology
• Cognitive Psychology
• Cognitive Neuroscience
• Criminal and Forensic Psychology
• Developmental Psychology
• Educational Psychology
• Evolutionary Psychology
• Health Psychology
• History and Systems in Psychology
• Music Psychology
• Neuropsychology
• Organizational Psychology
• Psychological Assessment and Testing
• Psychology of Human-Technology Interaction
• Psychology Professional Development and Training
• Research Methods in Psychology
• Social Psychology
• Browse content in Social Sciences
• Browse content in Anthropology
• Anthropology of Religion
• Human Evolution
• Medical Anthropology
• Physical Anthropology
• Regional Anthropology
• Social and Cultural Anthropology
• Theory and Practice of Anthropology
• Browse content in Business and Management
• Business Ethics
• Business History
• Business Strategy
• Business and Technology
• Business and Government
• Business and the Environment
• Comparative Management
• Corporate Governance
• Corporate Social Responsibility
• Entrepreneurship
• Health Management
• Human Resource Management
• Industrial and Employment Relations
• Industry Studies
• Information and Communication Technologies
• International Business
• Knowledge Management
• Management and Management Techniques
• Operations Management
• Organizational Theory and Behaviour
• Pensions and Pension Management
• Public and Nonprofit Management
• Strategic Management
• Supply Chain Management
• Browse content in Criminology and Criminal Justice
• Criminal Justice
• Criminology
• Forms of Crime
• International and Comparative Criminology
• Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice
• Development Studies
• Browse content in Economics
• Agricultural, Environmental, and Natural Resource Economics
• Asian Economics
• Behavioural Finance
• Behavioural Economics and Neuroeconomics
• Econometrics and Mathematical Economics
• Economic History
• Economic Methodology
• Economic Systems
• Economic Development and Growth
• Financial Markets
• Financial Institutions and Services
• General Economics and Teaching
• Health, Education, and Welfare
• History of Economic Thought
• International Economics
• Labour and Demographic Economics
• Law and Economics
• Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics
• Microeconomics
• Public Economics
• Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics
• Welfare Economics
• Browse content in Education
• Adult Education and Continuous Learning
• Care and Counselling of Students
• Early Childhood and Elementary Education
• Educational Equipment and Technology
• Educational Strategies and Policy
• Higher and Further Education
• Organization and Management of Education
• Philosophy and Theory of Education
• Schools Studies
• Secondary Education
• Teaching of a Specific Subject
• Teaching of Specific Groups and Special Educational Needs
• Teaching Skills and Techniques
• Browse content in Environment
• Applied Ecology (Social Science)
• Climate Change
• Conservation of the Environment (Social Science)
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Social Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environment)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Social Science)
• Browse content in Human Geography
• Cultural Geography
• Economic Geography
• Political Geography
• Browse content in Interdisciplinary Studies
• Communication Studies
• Museums, Libraries, and Information Sciences
• Browse content in Politics
• African Politics
• Asian Politics
• Chinese Politics
• Comparative Politics
• Conflict Politics
• Elections and Electoral Studies
• Environmental Politics
• European Union
• Foreign Policy
• Gender and Politics
• Human Rights and Politics
• Indian Politics
• International Relations
• International Organization (Politics)
• International Political Economy
• Irish Politics
• Latin American Politics
• Middle Eastern Politics
• Political Behaviour
• Political Economy
• Political Institutions
• Political Theory
• Political Methodology
• Political Communication
• Political Philosophy
• Political Sociology
• Politics and Law
• Public Policy
• Public Administration
• Quantitative Political Methodology
• Regional Political Studies
• Russian Politics
• Security Studies
• State and Local Government
• UK Politics
• US Politics
• Browse content in Regional and Area Studies
• African Studies
• Asian Studies
• East Asian Studies
• Japanese Studies
• Latin American Studies
• Middle Eastern Studies
• Native American Studies
• Scottish Studies
• Browse content in Research and Information
• Research Methods
• Browse content in Social Work
• Addictions and Substance Misuse
• Adoption and Fostering
• Care of the Elderly
• Child and Adolescent Social Work
• Couple and Family Social Work
• Developmental and Physical Disabilities Social Work
• Direct Practice and Clinical Social Work
• Emergency Services
• Human Behaviour and the Social Environment
• International and Global Issues in Social Work
• Mental and Behavioural Health
• Social Justice and Human Rights
• Social Policy and Advocacy
• Social Work and Crime and Justice
• Social Work Macro Practice
• Social Work Practice Settings
• Social Work Research and Evidence-based Practice
• Welfare and Benefit Systems
• Browse content in Sociology
• Childhood Studies
• Community Development
• Comparative and Historical Sociology
• Economic Sociology
• Gender and Sexuality
• Gerontology and Ageing
• Health, Illness, and Medicine
• Marriage and the Family
• Migration Studies
• Occupations, Professions, and Work
• Organizations
• Population and Demography
• Race and Ethnicity
• Social Theory
• Social Movements and Social Change
• Social Research and Statistics
• Social Stratification, Inequality, and Mobility
• Sociology of Religion
• Sociology of Education
• Sport and Leisure
• Urban and Rural Studies
• Browse content in Warfare and Defence
• Defence Strategy, Planning, and Research
• Land Forces and Warfare
• Military Administration
• Military Life and Institutions
• Naval Forces and Warfare
• Other Warfare and Defence Issues
• Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution
• Weapons and Equipment

• < Previous chapter
• Next chapter >

8 Gender Stereotypes and Stereotyping: A Cognitive Perspective on Gender Bias

• Published: January 2018
• Cite Icon Cite
• Permissions Icon Permissions

This chapter delves into the theoretical and empirical literature on gender stereotypes to describe how gender stereotypes are conceptualized and measured, how these group-level stereotypes affect judgments of and behaviors toward individual women and men, and the implications of those judgments and behaviors for equitable policies and social institutions, such as schools and workplaces. It highlights both the assimilative influence of gender stereotypes, whereby perceivers judge individual women and men consistently with gender stereotypes, and their contrastive influence, whereby stereotypes serving as comparative standards of judgment may produce counterstereotypical outcomes. The importance of context in understanding the effects of stereotypes and the importance of considering gender in combination with other demographic categories are emphasized. The chapter ends with some consideration of self-stereotyping effects.

Signed in as

Institutional accounts.

• Google Scholar Indexing
• GoogleCrawler [DO NOT DELETE]

Personal account

• Sign in with email/username & password
• Get email alerts
• Save searches
• Purchase content
• Activate your purchase/trial code
• Add your ORCID iD

Institutional access

Sign in with a library card.

• Sign in with username/password
• Recommend to your librarian
• Institutional account management
• Get help with access

Access to content on Oxford Academic is often provided through institutional subscriptions and purchases. If you are a member of an institution with an active account, you may be able to access content in one of the following ways:

IP based access

Typically, access is provided across an institutional network to a range of IP addresses. This authentication occurs automatically, and it is not possible to sign out of an IP authenticated account.

Sign in through your institution

Choose this option to get remote access when outside your institution. Shibboleth/Open Athens technology is used to provide single sign-on between your institution’s website and Oxford Academic.

• Click Sign in through your institution.
• Select your institution from the list provided, which will take you to your institution's website to sign in.
• When on the institution site, please use the credentials provided by your institution. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.
• Following successful sign in, you will be returned to Oxford Academic.

If your institution is not listed or you cannot sign in to your institution’s website, please contact your librarian or administrator.

Enter your library card number to sign in. If you cannot sign in, please contact your librarian.

Society Members

Society member access to a journal is achieved in one of the following ways:

Sign in through society site

Many societies offer single sign-on between the society website and Oxford Academic. If you see ‘Sign in through society site’ in the sign in pane within a journal:

• Click Sign in through society site.
• When on the society site, please use the credentials provided by that society. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.

If you do not have a society account or have forgotten your username or password, please contact your society.

Sign in using a personal account

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members. See below.

A personal account can be used to get email alerts, save searches, purchase content, and activate subscriptions.

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members.

Viewing your signed in accounts

Click the account icon in the top right to:

• View your signed in personal account and access account management features.
• View the institutional accounts that are providing access.

Signed in but can't access content

Oxford Academic is home to a wide variety of products. The institutional subscription may not cover the content that you are trying to access. If you believe you should have access to that content, please contact your librarian.

For librarians and administrators, your personal account also provides access to institutional account management. Here you will find options to view and activate subscriptions, manage institutional settings and access options, access usage statistics, and more.

Our books are available by subscription or purchase to libraries and institutions.

• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Rights and permissions
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

• Tools and Resources
• Customer Services
• Affective Science
• Biological Foundations of Psychology
• Clinical Psychology: Disorders and Therapies
• Cognitive Psychology/Neuroscience
• Developmental Psychology
• Educational/School Psychology
• Forensic Psychology
• Health Psychology
• History and Systems of Psychology
• Individual Differences
• Methods and Approaches in Psychology
• Neuropsychology
• Organizational and Institutional Psychology
• Personality
• Psychology and Other Disciplines
• Social Psychology
• Sports Psychology
• Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Article contents

Gender in a social psychology context.

• Thekla Morgenroth Thekla Morgenroth Department of Psychology, University of Exeter
•  and  Michelle K. Ryan Michelle K. Ryan Dean of Postgraduate Research and Director of the Doctoral College, University of Exeter
• https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.309
• Published online: 28 March 2018

Understanding gender and gender differences is a prevalent aim in many psychological subdisciplines. Social psychology has tended to employ a binary understanding of gender and has focused on understanding key gender stereotypes and their impact. While women are seen as warm and communal, men are seen as agentic and competent. These stereotypes are shaped by, and respond to, social contexts, and are both descriptive and prescriptive in nature. The most influential theories argue that these stereotypes develop in response to societal structures, including the roles women and men occupy in society, and status differences between the sexes. Importantly, research clearly demonstrates that these stereotypes have a myriad of effects on individuals’ cognitions, attitudes, and behaviors and contribute to sexism and gender inequality in a range of domains, from the workplace to romantic relationships.

• gender stereotypes
• gender norms
• social psychology
• social role theory
• stereotype content model
• ambivalent sexism
• stereotype threat

Introduction

Gender is omnipresent—it is one of the first categories children learn, and the categorization of people into men and women 1 affects almost every aspect of our lives. Gender is a key determinant of our self-concept and our perceptions of others. It shapes our mental health, our career paths, and our most intimate relationships. It is therefore unsurprising that psychologists invest a great deal of time in understanding gender as a concept, with social psychologists being no exception. However, this has not always been the case. This article begins with “A Brief History of Gender in Psychology,” which gives an overview about gender within psychology more broadly. The remaining sections discuss how gender is examined within social psychology more specifically, with particular attention to how gender stereotypes form and how they affect our sense of self and our evaluations of others.

A Brief History of Gender in Psychology

During the early years of psychology in general, and social psychology in particular, the topic gender was largely absent from psychology, as indeed were women. Male researchers made claims about human nature based on findings that were restricted to a small portion of the population, namely, white, young, able-bodied, middle-class, heterosexual men [see Etaugh, 2016 ; a phenomenon that has been termed androcentrism (Hegarty, & Buechel, 2006 )]. If women and girls were mentioned at all, they were usually seen as inferior to men and boys (e.g., Hall, 1904 ).

This invisibility of women within psychology changed with a rise of the second wave of feminism in the 1960s. Here, more women entered psychology, demanded to be seen, and pushed back against the narrative of women as inferior. They argued that psychology’s androcentrism, and the sexist views of psychologists, had not only biased psychological theory and research, but also contributed to and reinforced gender inequality in society. For example, Weisstein ( 1968 ) argued that most claims about women made by prominent psychologists, such as Freud and Erikson, lacked an evidential grounding and were instead based on these men’s fantasies of what women were like rather than empirical data. A few years later, Maccoby and Jacklin ( 1974 ) published their seminal work, The Psychology of Sex Differences , which synthesized the literature on sex differences and concluded that there were few (but some) sex differences. This led to a growth of interest in the social origins of sex differences, with a shift away from a psychology of sex (i.e., biologically determined male vs. female) and toward a psychology of gender (i.e., socially constructed masculine vs. feminine).

Since then, the psychology of gender has become a respected and widely represented subdiscipline within psychology. In a fascinating analysis of the history of feminism and psychology, Eagly, Eaton, Rose, Riger, and McHugh ( 2012 ) examined publications on sex differences, gender, and women from 1960 to 2009 . In those 50 years, the number of annual publications rose from close to zero to over 6,500. As a proportion of all psychology articles, one can also see a marked rise in popularity in gender articles from 1960 to 2009 , with peak years of interest in the late 1970s and 1990s. In line with the aforementioned shift from sex differences to gender differences, the largest proportion of these articles fall into the topic of “social processes and social issues,” which includes research on gender roles, masculinity, and femininity.

However, as interest in the area has grown, the ways in which gender is studied, and the political views of those studying it, have become more diverse. Eagly and colleagues note:

we believe that this research gained from feminist ideology but has escaped its boundaries. In this garden, many flowers have bloomed, including some flowers not widely admired by some feminist psychologists. (p. 225)

Here, they allude to the fact that some research has shifted away from societal explanations, which feminist psychologists have generally favored, to more complex views of gender difference. Some of these acknowledge the fact that nature and nurture are deeply intertwined, with both biological and social variables being used to understand gender and gender differences (e.g., Wood & Eagly, 2002 ). Others, such as evolutionary approaches (e.g., Baumeister, 2013 ; Buss, 2016 ) and neuroscientific approaches (see Fine, 2010 ), focus more heavily on the biological bases of gender differences, often causing chagrin among feminists. Nevertheless, much of the research in social psychology has, unsurprisingly, focused on social factors and, in particular, on gender stereotypes. Where do they come from and what are their effects?

Origins and Effects of Gender Stereotypes

A stereotype can be defined as a “widely shared and simplified evaluative image of a social group and its members” (Vaughan & Hogg, 2011 , p. 51) and has both descriptive and prescriptive aspects. In other words, gender stereotypes tell us what women and men are like, but also what they should be like (Heilman, 2001 ). Gender stereotypes are not only widely shared, but they are also stubbornly resistant to change (Haines, Deaux, & Lofaro, 2016 ). Both the origin and the consequences of these stereotypes have received much attention in social psychology. So how do stereotypes form? The most widely cited theories on stereotype formation—social role theory (SRT; Eagly, 1987 ; Eagly, Wood, & Diekman, 2000 ) and the stereotype content model (SCM; Fiske, Cuddy, Glick, & Xu, J., 2002 )—answer this question. Both of these models focus on gender as a binary concept (i.e., men and women), as does most psychological research on gender, although they could potentially also be applied to other gender groups. Both theories are considered in turn.

Social Role Theory: Gender Stereotypes Are Determined by Roles

SRT argues that gender stereotypes stem from the distribution of men and women into distinct roles within a given society (Eagly, 1987 ; Eagly et al., 2000 ). The authors note the stability of gender stereotypes across cultures and describe two core dimensions: agency , including traits such as independence, aggression, and assertiveness, and communion , including traits such as caring, altruism, and politeness. While men are generally seen to be high in agency and low in communion, women are generally perceived to be high in communion but low in agency.

According to SRT, these gender stereotypes stem from the fact that women and men are over- and underrepresented in different roles in society. In most societies, even those with higher levels of gender equality, men perform less domestic work compared to women, including childcare, and spend more time in paid employment. Additionally, men disproportionately occupy leadership roles in the workforce (e.g., in politics and management) and are underrepresented in caretaking roles within the workforce (e.g., in elementary education and nursing; see Eagly et al., 2000 ). Eagly and colleagues argue that this gendered division of labor leads to the formation of gender roles and associated stereotypes. More specifically, they propose that different behaviors are seen as necessary to fulfil these social roles, and different skills, abilities, and traits are seen as necessary to execute these behaviors. For example, elementary school teachers are seen to need to care for and interact with children, which is seen to require social skills, empathy, and a caring nature. In contrast, such communal attributes might be seen to be less important—or even detrimental—for a military leader.

To the extent that women and men are differentially represented and visible in certain roles—such as elementary school teachers or military leaders—the behaviors and traits necessary for these roles become part of each respective gender role. In other words, the behaviors and attributes associated with people in caretaking roles, communion, become part of the female gender role, while the behaviors and attributes associated with people in leadership roles, agency, become part of the male gender role.

Building on SRT, Wood and Eagly ( 2002 ) developed a biosocial model of the origins of sex differences which explains the stability of gendered social roles across cultures. The authors argue that, in the past, physical differences between men and women meant that they were better able to perform certain tasks, contributing to the formation of gender roles. More specifically, women had to bear children and nurse them, while men were generally taller and had more upper body strength. In turn, tasks that required upper body strength and long stretches of uninterrupted time (e.g., hunting) were more often carried out by men, while tasks that could be interrupted more easily and be carried out while pregnant or looking after children (e.g., foraging) were more often carried out by women.

Eagly and colleagues further propose that the exact tasks more easily carried out by each sex depended on social and ecological conditions as well as technological and cultural advances. For example, it was only in more advanced, complex societies that the greater size and strength of men led to a division of labor in which men were preferred for activities such as warfare, which also came with higher status and access to resources. Similarly, the development of plough technology led to shifts from hunter–gatherer societies to agricultural societies. This change was often accompanied by a new division of labor in which men owned, farmed, and inherited land while women carried out more domestic tasks. The social structures that arose from these processes in specific contexts in turn affected more proximal causes of gender differences, including gender stereotypes.

It is important to note that this theory focuses on physical differences between the genders, not psychological ones. In other words, the authors do not argue that women and men are inherently different when it comes to their minds, nor that men evolved to be more agentic while women evolved to be more communal.

Stereotype Content Model: Gender Stereotypes Are Determined by Group Relations

The SCM, formulated by Fiske and colleagues ( 2002 ), was not developed specifically for gender, but as an explanation of how stereotypes form more generally. Similar to SRT, the SCM argues that gender stereotypes arise from societal structures. More specifically, the authors suggest that status differences and cooperation versus competition determine group stereotypes—among them, gender stereotypes. This model also suggests two main dimensions to stereotypes, namely, warmth and competence. The concept of warmth is similar to that of communion, previously described, in that it refers to being kind, nice, and caring. Competence refers to attributes such as being intelligent, efficient, and skillful and is thus different from the agency dimension of SRT.

The SCM argues that the dimensions of warmth and competence originate from two fundamental dimensions—status and competition—which characterize the relationships between groups in every culture and society. The degree to which another group is perceived to be warm is determined by whether the group is in cooperation or in competition with one’s own group, which is in turn associated with perceived intentions to help or to harm one’s own group, respectively. While members of cooperating groups are stereotyped as warm, members of competing groups are stereotyped as cold. Evidence suggests that these two dimensions are indeed universal and can be found in many cultures, including collectivist cultures (Cuddy et al., 2009 ). Perceptions of competence, however, are affected by the status and power of the group, which go hand-in-hand with the group’s ability to harm one’s own group. Those groups with high status and power are stereotyped as competent, while those that lack status and power are stereotyped as incompetent.

Groups can thus fall into one of four quadrants of this model. Members of high status groups who cooperate with one’s own group are seen as unequivocally positive—as warm and competent—while those of low status who compete with one’s own group are seen as unequivocally negative—cold and incompetent. More interesting are the two groups that fall into the more ambivalent quadrants—those who are perceived as either warm but incompetent or competent but cold. Applied to gender, this model suggests—and research shows—that typical men are stereotyped as competent but cold, the envious stereotype, while typical women are stereotyped as warm but incompetent, the paternalistic stereotype.

However, these stereotypes do not apply equally to all women and men. Rather, subgroups of men and women come with their own stereotypes. Research demonstrates, for example, that the paternalistic stereotype most strongly applies to traditional women such as housewives, while less traditional women such as feminists and career women are stereotyped as high in competence and low in warmth. For men, there are similar levels of variation—the envious stereotype applies most strongly to men in traditional roles such as managers and career men, while other men are perceived as warm but incompetent (e.g., senior citizens), as cold and incompetent (e.g., punks), or as warm and competent (e.g., professors; Eckes, 2002 ). The section “Gender Stereotypes Affect Emotions, Behavior, and Sexism” discusses the consequences of these stereotypes in more detail.

The Effects of Gender Stereotypes

SRT and the SCM explain how gender stereotypes form. A large body of work in social psychology has focused on the consequences of these stereotypes. These include effects on the gendered perceptions and evaluations of others, as well as effects on the self and one’s own self-image, behavior, and goals.

Gendered Perceptions and Evaluations of Others

Our group-based stereotypes affect how we see members of these groups and how we judge those who do or do not conform to these stereotypes. Gender differs from many other group memberships in several ways (see Fiske & Stevens, 1993 ), which in turn affects consequences of these stereotypes. First, argue Fiske and Stevens, gender stereotypes tend to be more prescriptive than other stereotypes. For example, men may often be told to “man up,” to be tough and dominant, while women may be told to smile, to be nice, and to be sexy (but not too sexy). While stereotypes of other groups also have prescriptive elements, it is probably less common to hear Asians be told to be better at math or African Americans to be told to be more musical. The consequences of these gendered prescriptions are discussed in the section “Gender Stereotypes Affect the Evaluation of Women and Men.” Second, relationships between women and men are characterized by an unusual combination of power differences and close and frequent contact as well as mutual dependence for reproduction and close relationships. The section “Gender Stereotypes Affect Emotions, Behavior, and Sexism” discusses the effects of these factors.

Gender Stereotypes Affect the Evaluation of Women and Men

The evaluation of women and men is affected by both descriptive and prescriptive gender stereotypes. Research on these effects has predominantly focused on those who occupy counterstereotypical roles such as women in leadership or stay-at-home fathers.

Descriptive stereotypes affect the perception and evaluation of women and men in several ways. First, descriptive stereotypes create biased perceptions through expectancy confirming processes (see Fiske, 2000 ) such that individuals, particularly those holding strong stereotypes, seek out information that confirms their stereotypes. This is evident in their tendency to neglect or dismiss ambiguous information and to ask stereotype-confirming questions (Leyens, Yzerbyt, & Schadron, 1994 ; Macrae, Milne, & Bodenhausen, 1994 ). Moreover, people are more likely to recall stereotypical information compared to counterstereotypical information (Rojahn & Pettigrew, 1992 ) Second, descriptive gender stereotypes also bias the extent to which men and women are seen as suitable for different roles, as described in Heilman’s lack of fit model ( 1983 , 1995 ) and Eagly and Karau’s role congruity theory ( 2002 ). These approaches both suggest that the degree of fit between a person’s attributes and the attributes associated with a specific role is positively related to expectations about how successful a person will be in said role. For example, the traits associated with successful managers are generally more similar to those associated with men than those associated with women (Schein, 1973 ; see also Ryan, Haslam, Hersby, & Bongiorno, 2011 ). Thus, all else being equal, a man will be seen as a better fit for a managerial position and in turn as more likely to be a successful manager. These biased evaluations in turn lead to biased decisions, such as in hiring and promotion (see Heilman, 2001 ).

Prescriptive gender stereotypes also affect evaluations, albeit in different ways. They prescribe how women and men should behave, and also how they should not behave. The “shoulds” generally mirror descriptive stereotypes, while the “should nots” often include behaviors associated with the opposite gender. Thus, what is seen as positive and desirable for one gender is often seen as undesirable for the other and can lead to backlash in the form of social and economic penalties (Rudman, 1998 ). For example, women who are seen as agentic are punished with social sanctions because they violate the prescriptive stereotype that women should be nice, even in the absence of information indicating that they are not nice (Rudman & Glick, 2001 ). These processes are particularly problematic in combination with the effects of descriptive stereotypes, as individuals may face a double bind—if women behave in line with gender stereotypes, they lack fit with leadership positions that require agency, but if they behave agentically, they violate gender norms and face backlash in the form of dislike and discrimination (Rudman & Glick, 2001 ). Similar effects have been found for men who violate prescriptive masculine stereotypes, for example, by being modest (Moss-Racusin, Phelan, & Rudman, 2010 ) or by requesting family leave (Rudman & Mescher, 2013 ). Interestingly, however, being communal by itself does not lead to backlash for men (Moss-Racusin et al., 2010 ). In other words, while men can be perceived as highly agentic and highly communal, this is not true for women, who are perceived as lacking communion when being perceived as agentic and as lacking agency when being perceived as communal.

Gender Stereotypes Affect Emotions, Behavior, and Sexism

Stereotypes not only affect how individuals evaluate others, but also their feelings and behaviors toward them. The Behavior from Intergroup Affect and Stereotypes (BIAS) map (Cuddy, Fiske, & Glick, 2007 ), which extends the SCM, describes the relationship between perceptions of warmth and competence of certain groups, emotions directed toward these groups, and behaviors toward them. Cuddy and colleagues argue that bias is comprised of three elements: cognitions (i.e., stereotypes), affect (i.e., emotional prejudice), and behavior (i.e., discrimination), and these are closely linked. Groups perceived as warm and competent elicit admiration while groups perceived as cold and incompetent elicit contempt. Of particular interest to understanding gender are the two ambivalent combinations of warmth and competence: Those perceived as warm, but incompetent—such as typical women—elicit pity, while those perceived as competent, but cold—such as typical men—elicit envy.

Similarly, perceptions of warmth and competence are associated with behavior. Cuddy and colleagues ( 2007 ) argue that the warmth dimension affects behavioral reactions more strongly than competence because it stems from perceptions that a group will help or harm the ingroup. This leads to active facilitation (e.g., helping) when a group is perceived as warm, or active harm (e.g., harassing) when a group is perceived as cold. Competence, however, leads to passive facilitation (e.g., cooperation when it benefits oneself or one’s own group) when the group is perceived as competent, and passive harm (e.g., neglecting to help) when the group is perceived as incompetent.

How these emotional and behavioral reactions affect women and men has received much attention in the literature on ambivalent sexism and ambivalent attitudes toward men (Glick & Fiske, 1996 , 1999 , 2001 ). According to ambivalent sexism theory (AST), sexism is not a uniform, negative attitude toward women or men. Rather, it is comprised of hostile and benevolent elements, which arises from status differences between, and intimate interdependence of, the two genders. While men possess more economic, political, and social power, they depend on women as their mothers and (for heterosexual men) as romantic partners. Thus, while they are likely to be motivated to keep their power, they also need to find ways to foster positive relations with women.

Hostile sexism combines the beliefs that (a) women are inferior to men, (b) men should have more power in society, and (c) women’s sexuality poses a threat to men’s status and power. This form of sexism is mostly directed toward nontraditional women who directly threaten men’s status (e.g., feminists or career women), and women who threaten the heterosexual interdependence of men and women (e.g., lesbians)—in other words, toward women perceived to be competent but cold.

Benevolent sexism is a subtler form of sexism and refers to (a) complementary gender differentiation , the belief that (traditional) women are ultimately the better gender, (b) protective paternalism , where men need to cherish, protect, and provide for women, and (c) heterosexual intimacy , the belief that men and women complement each other such that no man is truly complete without a woman. This form of sexism is directed mainly toward traditional women.

While benevolent sexism may seem less harmful than its hostile counterpart, it ultimately provides an alternative mechanism for the persistence of gender inequality by “keeping women in their place” and discouraging them from seeking out nontraditional roles (see Glick & Fiske, 2001 ). Exposure to benevolent sexism is associated with women’s increased self-stereotyping (Barreto, Ellemers, Piebinga, & Moya, 2010 ), decreased cognitive performance (Dardenne, Dumont, & Bollier, 2007 ), and reduced willingness to take collective action (Becker & Wright, 2011 ), thus reinforcing the status quo.

With perceptions of men, Glick and Fiske ( 1999 ) argue that attitudes are equally ambivalent. Hostile attitudes toward men include (a) resentment of paternalism , stemming from perceptions of unfairness of the disproportionate amounts of power men hold, (b) compensatory gender differentiation , which refers to the application of negative stereotypes to men (e.g., arrogant, unrefined) so that women can positively distinguish themselves from them, and (c) heterosexual hostility , stemming from male sexual aggressiveness and interpersonal dominance. Benevolent attitudes toward men include maternalism , that is, the belief that men are helpless and need to be taken care of at home. Interestingly, while such attitudes portray women as competent in some ways, it still reinforces gender inequality by legitimizing women’s disproportionate amount of domestic work. Benevolent attitudes toward men also include complementary gender differentiation , the belief that men are indeed more competent, and heterosexual attraction , the belief that a woman can only be truly happy when in a romantic relationship with a man.

Cross-cultural research (Glick et al., 2000 , 2004 ) suggests that ambivalent sexism and ambivalent attitudes toward men are similar in many ways and can be found in most cultures. For both constructs, the benevolent and hostile aspects are distinct but positively related, illustrating that attitudes toward women and men are indeed ambivalent, as the mixed nature of stereotypes would suggest. Moreover, ambivalence toward women and men are correlated and national averages of both aspects of sexism and ambivalence toward men are associated with lower gender equality across nations, lending support to the idea that they reinforce the status quo.

Gender Stereotypes Affect the Self

Gender stereotypes not only affect individuals’ reactions toward others, they also play an important part in self-construal, motivation, achievement, and behavior, often without explicit endorsement of the stereotype. This section discusses how gender stereotypes affect observable gender differences and then describes the subtle and insidious effects gender stereotypes can have on performance and achievement through the inducement of stereotype threat (Steele & Aronson, 1995 ).

Gender Stereotypes Affect Gender Differences

Gender stereotypes are a powerful influence on the self-concept, goals, and behaviors. Eagly and colleagues ( 2000 ) argue that girls and boys observe the roles that women and men occupy in society and accommodate accordingly, seeking out different activities and acquiring different skills. They propose two main mechanisms by which gender differences form. First, women and men adjust their behavior to confirm others’ gender-stereotypical expectations. Others communicate their gendered expectations in many, often nonverbal and subtle ways and react positively when expectations are confirmed and negatively when they are not. This subtle communication of expectations reinforces gender-stereotypical behavior as people generally try to elicit positive, and avoid negative, reactions from others. Importantly, the interacting partners need not be aware of these expectations for them to take effect.

The second process by which gender stereotypes translate into gender differences is the self-regulation of behavior based on identity processes and the internalization of stereotypes (e.g., Bem, 1981 ; Markus, 1977 ). Most people form their gender identity based on self-categorization as male or female and subsequently incorporate attributes associated with the respective category into their self-concept (Guimond, Chatard, Martinot, Crisp, & Redersdorff, 2006 ). These gendered differences in the self-concepts of women and men then translate into gender-stereotypical behaviors. The extent to which the self-concept is affected by gender stereotypes—and in turn the extent to which gendered patterns of behavior are displayed—depends on the strength and the salience of this social identity (Hogg & Turner, 1987 ; Onorato & Turner, 2004 ). For example, individuals may be more likely to display gender-stereotypical behavior when they identify more strongly with their gender (e.g., Lorenzi‐Cioldi, 1991 ) or when their gender is more likely to be salient, which is more likely to be the case for women (Cadinu & Galdi, 2012 ).

However, many different subcategories of women exist—housewives, feminists, lesbians—and thus what it means to identify as a woman, and behave like a woman, is likely to be complex and multifaceted (e.g., Fiske et al., 2002 ; van Breen, Spears, Kuppens, & de Lemus, 2017 ). Moreover, research demonstrates that the salience of gender in any given context also determined the degree to which an individual displays gender-stereotypical behavior (e.g., Ryan & David, 2003 ; Ryan, David, & Reynolds, 2004 ). For example, Ryan and colleagues demonstrate that while women and men act in line with gender stereotypes when gender and gender difference are salient, these differences in attitudes and behavior disappear when alternative identities, such as those based on being a student or being an individual, are made salient.

Gender Stereotypes Affect Performance and Achievement

The consequences of stereotypes go beyond the self-concept and behavior. Research in stereotype threat describes the detrimental effects that negative stereotypes can have on performance and achievement. Stereotype threat refers to the phenomenon whereby the awareness of the negative stereotyping of one’s group in a certain domain, and the fear of confirming such stereotypes, can have negative effects on performance, even when the stereotype is not endorsed. The phenomenon was first described by Steele and Aronson ( 1995 ) in the context of African Americans’ intellectual test performance, but has since been found to affect women’s performance and motivation in counterstereotypical domains such as math (Nguyen & Ryan, 2008 ) and leadership (Davies, Spencer, & Steele, 2005 ). This affect holds true even when minority group members’ prior performance and interest in the domain are the same as those of majority group members (Spencer, Steele, & Quinn, 1999 ). Moreover, the effect is particularly pronounced when the minority member’s desire to belong is strong and identity-based devaluation is likely (Steele, Spencer, & Aronson, 2002 ).

Different mechanisms for the effect of stereotype threat have been proposed. Schmader, Johns, and Forbes ( 2008 ) suggest that the inconsistency between one’s self-image as competent and the cultural stereotype about one’s group’s lack of competence leads to a physiological stress response that directly impairs working memory. For example, when made aware of the widely held stereotype that women are bad at math, a female math student is likely to experience an inconsistency. This inconsistency, the authors argue, is not only distressing in itself, but induces uncertainty: Am I actually good at math or am I bad at math as the stereotype would lead me to believe? In an effort to resolve this uncertainty, she is likely to monitor her performance more than others—and more than in a situation in which stereotype threat is absent. This monitoring leads to more conscious, less efficient processing of information—for example, when performing calculations that she would otherwise do more or less automatically—and a stronger focus on detecting potential failure, taking cognitive resources away from the actual task. Moreover, individuals under stereotype threat are more likely to experience negative thoughts and emotions such as fear of failure. In order to avoid the interference of these thoughts, they actively try to suppress them. This suppression, however, takes effort. All of these mechanisms, the authors argue, take working memory space away from the task in question, thereby impairing performance.

The aim of this article is to give an overview of gender research in social psychology, which has focused predominantly on gender stereotypes, their origins, and their consequences, and these are all connected and reinforce each other. Social psychology has produced many fascinating findings regarding gender, and this article has only just touched on these findings. While research into gender has seen a great growth in the past 50 years and has provided us with an unprecedented understanding of women and men and the differences (and similarities) between them, there is still much work to be done.

There are a number of issues that remain largely absent from mainstream social psychological research on gender. First, an interest and acknowledgment of intersectional identities has emerged, such as how gender intersects with race or sexuality. It is thus important to note that many of the theories discussed in this article cannot necessarily be applied directly across intersecting identities (e.g., to women of color or to lesbian women), and indeed the attitudes and behaviors of such women continue to be largely ignored within the field.

Second, almost all social psychological research into gender is conducted using an overly simplistic binary definition of gender in terms of women and men. Social psychological theories and explanations are, for the most part, not taking more complex or more fluid definitions of gender into account and thus are unable to explain gendered attitudes and behavior outside of the gender binary.

Finally, individual perceptions and cognitions are influenced by gendered stereotypes and expectations, and social psychologists are not immune to this influence. How we, as psychologists, ask research questions and how we interpret empirical findings are influenced by gender stereotypes (e.g., Hegarty & Buechel, 2006 ), and we must remain vigilant that we do not inadvertently seek to reinforce our own gendered expectations and reify the gender status quo.

• Barreto, M. , Ellemers, N. , Piebinga, L. , & Moya, M. (2010). How nice of us and how dumb of me: The effect of exposure to benevolent sexism on women’s task and relational self-descriptions. Sex Roles , 62 , 532–544.
• Baumeister, R. F. (2013) Gender differences in motivation shape social interaction patterns, sexual relationships, social inequality, and cultural history. In M. K. Ryan & N. R. Branscombe (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of gender and psychology . Los Angeles, CA: SAGE
• Becker, J. C. , & Wright, S. C. (2011). Yet another dark side of chivalry: Benevolent sexism undermines and hostile sexism motivates collective action for social change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 101 , 62–77.
• Bem, S. L. (1981). Gender schema theory: A cognitive account of sex typing. Psychological Review , 88 , 354–364
• Buss, D. M. (2016). The evolution of desire . In T. K. Shackelford & V. A. Weekes-Shackelford (Eds.), Encyclopedia of evolutionary psychological science . Cham, SZ: Springer.
• Cadinu, M. , & Galdi, S. (2012). Gender differences in implicit gender self‐categorization lead to stronger gender self‐stereotyping by women than by men. European Journal of Social Psychology , 42 , 546–551.
• Cuddy, A. J. C. , Fiske, S. T. , & Glick, P. (2007). The BIAS map: Behaviors from intergroup affect and stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 92 , 631–648.
• Cuddy, A. J. C. , Fiske, S. T. , Kwan, V. S. Y. , Glick, P. , Demoulin, S. , Leyens, J.-P. , . . . & Ziegler, R. (2009). Stereotype content model across cultures: Towards universal similarities and some differences. British Journal of Social Psychology , 48 , 1–33.
• Dardenne, B. , Dumont, M. , & Bollier, T. (2007). Insidious dangers of benevolent sexism: Consequences for women’s performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 93 , 764–779.
• Davies, P. G. , Spencer, S. J. , & Steele, C. M. (2005). Clearing the air: Identity safety moderates the effects of stereotype threat on women’s leadership aspirations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 88 , 276–287.
• Deaux, K. , & Major, B. (1987) Putting gender into context: An interactive model of gender-related behavior. Psychological Review , 94 , 369–389.
• Eagly, A. H. (1987). Sex differences in social behavior: A social role interpretation . Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Eagly, A. H. , Eaton, A. , Rose, S. , Riger, S. , & McHugh, M. (2012). Feminism and psychology: Analysis of a half-century of research on women and gender. American Psychologist , 67 , 211–230.
• Eagly, A. H. , & Karau, S. J. (2002). Role congruity theory of prejudice towards female leaders. Psychological Review , 109 , 573–598.
• Eagly, A. H. , Wood, W. , & Diekman, A. B. (2000). Social role theory of sex differences and similarities: A current appraisal. In T. Eckes & H. M. Trautner (Eds.), The developmental social psychology of gender (pp. 123–174). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Eckes, T. (2002). Paternalistic and envious gender stereotypes: Testing predictions from the stereotype content model. Sex Roles , 47 , 99–114.
• Etaugh, C. (2016). Psychology of gender: History and development of the field. In N. Naples , R. C. Hoogland , M. Wickramasinghe , & W. C. A. Wong (Eds.), The Wiley Blackwell encyclopedia of gender and sexuality studies , (pp. 1–12). Hoboken, (NJ): John Wiley & Sons.
• Fine, C. (2010). Delusions of gender: How our minds, society, and neurosexism create difference . New York: Norton.
• Fiske, S. T. (2000). Stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination at the seam between the centuries: Evolution, culture, mind, and brain. European Journal of Social Psychology , 30 , 299–322.
• Fiske, S. T. , Cuddy, A. J. C. , Glick, P. , & Xu, J. (2002). A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 82 , 878–902.
• Fiske, S. T. , & Stevens, L. E. (1993). What’s so special about sex? Gender stereotyping and discrimination. In S. Oskamp & M. Costanzo (Eds.), Gender issues in contemporary society (pp. 173–196). Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
• Glick, P. , & Fiske, S. T. (1996). The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 70 , 491–512.
• Glick, P. , & Fiske, S. T. (1999). The Ambivalence toward Men Inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent beliefs about men. Psychology of Women Quarterly , 23 , 519–536.
• Glick, P. , & Fiske, S. T. (2001). An ambivalent alliance: Hostile and benevolent sexism as complementary justifications of gender inequality. American Psychologist , 56 , 109–118.
• Glick, P. , Fiske, S. T. , Mladinic, A. , Saiz, J. L. , Abrams, D. , Masser, B. , . . . & López, W. L. (2000). Beyond prejudice as simple antipathy: Hostile and benevolent sexism across cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 79 (5), 763–775.
• Glick, P. , Lameiras, M. , Fiske, S. T. , Eckes, T. , Masser, B. , Volpato, C. , . . . & Wells, R. (2004). Bad but bold: Ambivalent attitudes toward men predict gender inequality in 16 nations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 86 (5), 713–728.
• Guimond, S. , Chatard, A. , Martinot, D. , Crisp, R. J. , & Redersdorff, S. (2006). Social comparison, self-stereotyping, and gender differences in self-construals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 90 , 221.
• Haines, E. L. , Deaux, K. , & Lofaro, N. (2016). The times they are a-changing . . . or are they not? A comparison of gender stereotypes, 1983–2014. Psychology of Women Quarterly , 40 (3), 1–11.
• Hall, G. S. (1904). Adolescence: Its psychology and its relations to physiology, anthropology, sociology, sex, crime, religion, and education . New York: D. Appleton.
• Hegarty, P. , & Buechel, C. (2006). Androcentric reporting of gender differences in APA journals: 1965–2004. Review of General Psychology , 10 (4), 377.
• Heilman, M. E. (1983). Sex bias in work settings: The lack of fit model. In B. Staw & L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 5). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
• Heilman, M. E. (1995). Sex stereotypes and their effects in the workplace: What we know and what we don’t know. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality , 10 , 3–26.
• Heilman, M. E. (2001). Description and prescription: How gender stereotypes prevent women’s ascent up the organizational ladder. Journal of Social Issues , 57 , 657–674.
• Hogg, M. , & Turner, J. C. (1987). Intergroup behaviour, self-stereotyping and the salience of social categories. British Journal of Social Psychology , 26 , 325–340.
• Leyens, J-Ph. , Yzerbyt, V. , & Schadron, G. (1994). Stereotypes, social cognition, and social explanation . London: SAGE.
• Lorenzi-Cioldi, F. (1991). Self‐stereotyping and self‐enhancement in gender groups. European Journal of Social Psychology , 21 (5), 403–417.
• Maccoby, E. E. , & Jacklin, C. N. (1974). The psychology of sex differences . Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
• Macrae, C. N. , Milne, A. B. , & Bodenhausen, G. V. (1994). Stereotypes as energy-saving devices: A peek inside the cognitive toolbox. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 66 , 37–47.
• Markus, H. R. (1977). Self-schemata and processing information about the self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 35 , 63–78.
• Moss-Racusin, C. A. , Phelan, J. E. , & Rudman, L. A. (2010). When men break the gender rules: Status incongruity and backlash toward modest men. Psychology of Men and Masculinity , 11 , 140–151.
• Nguyen, H. D. , & Ryan, A. M. (2008). Does stereotype threat affect test performance of minorities and women? A meta-analysis of experimental evidence. Journal of Applied Psychology , 93 , 1314–1334.
• Onorato, R. S. , & Turner, J. C. (2004). Fluidity in the self‐concept: the shift from personal to social identity. European Journal of Social Psychology , 34 , 257–278.
• Rojahn, K. , & Pettigrew, T. F. (1992). Memory for schema-relevant information: A meta-analytic resolution. British Journal of Social Psychology , 31 , 81–109.
• Rudman, L. A. (1998). Self-promotion as a risk factor for women: The costs and benefits of counterstereotypical impression management. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 74 , 629–645.
• Rudman, L. A. , & Glick, P. (2001). Prescriptive gender stereotypes and backlash toward agentic women. Journal of Social Issues , 57 , 743–762.
• Rudman, L.A. , & Mescher, K. (2013). Penalizing men who request a family leave: Is flexibility stigma a femininity stigma? Journal of Social Issues , 69 , 322–340.
• Ryan, M. K. , & David, B. (2003). Gender differences in ways of knowing: The context dependence of The Attitudes Toward Thinking and Learning Survey. Sex Roles , 49 , 693–699.
• Ryan, M. K. , David, B. , & Reynolds, K. J. (2004). Who cares?: The effect of context on self-concept and moral reasoning. Psychology of Women Quarterly , 28 , 246–255.
• Ryan, M. K. , Haslam, S. A. , Hersby, M. D. , & Bongiorno, R. (2011). Think crisis—think female: The glass cliff and contextual variation in the think manager—think male stereotype. Journal of Applied Psychology , 96 , 470–484.
• Schein, V. E. (1973). The relationship between sex-role stereotypes and requisite management characteristics. Journal of Applied Psychology , 57 , 95–100.
• Schmader, T. , Johns, M. , & Forbes, C. (2008). An integrated process model of stereotype threat effects on performance. Psychological Review , 115 , 336–356.
• Spencer, S. J. , Steele, C. M. , & Quinn, D. M. (1999). Stereotype threat and women’s math performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology , 35 , 4–28.
• Steele, C. M. , & Aronson, J. (1995). Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 69 , 797–811.
• Steele, C. M. , Spencer, S. J. , & Aronson, J. (2002). Contending with group image: The psychology of stereotype and social identity threat. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 34, pp. 379–440). San Diego, CA: Academic Press
• Van Breen, J. A. , Spears, R. , Kuppens, T. , & de Lemus, S. (2017). A multiple identity approach to gender: Identification with women, identification with feminists, and their interaction. Frontiers in Psychology , 8 , 1019.
• Vaughan, G. M. , & Hogg, M. A. , (2011). Introduction to Social Psychology (6th ed.). Sydney: Pearson Australia.
• Weisstein, N. (1968). “Kinder, kuche, kirche” as scientific law: Psychology constructs the female . Boston, MA: New England Free Press.
• Wood, W. , & Eagly, A. H. (2002). A cross-cultural analysis of the behavior of women and men: Implications for the origins of sex differences. Psychological Bulletin , 128 , 699–727.

1. Psychology largely conceptualizes gender as binary. While this is problematic in a number of ways, which we touch upon in the Conclusion section, we largely follow these binary conventions throughout this article, as it is representative of the social psychological literature as a whole.

Related Articles

• Gender and Cultural Diversity in Sport, Exercise, and Performance Psychology
• Social Categorization
• Self and Identity

Printed from Oxford Research Encyclopedias, Psychology. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a single article for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).

date: 15 May 2024

• Cookie Policy
• Privacy Policy
• Legal Notice
• Accessibility
• [66.249.64.20|185.66.14.236]
• 185.66.14.236

Character limit 500 /500

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

11.1 Understanding Sex and Gender

Learning objectives.

• Define sex and gender and femininity and masculinity.
• Critically assess the evidence on biology, culture and socialization, and gender.
• Discuss agents of gender socialization.

Although the terms sex and gender are sometimes used interchangeably and do in fact complement each other, they nonetheless refer to different aspects of what it means to be a woman or man in any society.

Sex refers to the anatomical and other biological differences between females and males that are determined at the moment of conception and develop in the womb and throughout childhood and adolescence. Females, of course, have two X chromosomes, while males have one X chromosome and one Y chromosome. From this basic genetic difference spring other biological differences. The first to appear are the different genitals that boys and girls develop in the womb and that the doctor (or midwife) and parents look for when a baby is born (assuming the baby’s sex is not already known from ultrasound or other techniques) so that the momentous announcement, “It’s a boy!” or “It’s a girl!” can be made. The genitalia are called primary sex characteristics , while the other differences that develop during puberty are called secondary sex characteristics and stem from hormonal differences between the two sexes. In this difficult period of adolescents’ lives, boys generally acquire deeper voices, more body hair, and more muscles from their flowing testosterone. Girls develop breasts and wider hips and begin menstruating as nature prepares them for possible pregnancy and childbirth. For better or worse, these basic biological differences between the sexes affect many people’s perceptions of what it means to be female or male, as we shall soon discuss.

Gender as a Social Construction

If sex is a biological concept, then gender is a social concept. It refers to the social and cultural differences a society assigns to people based on their (biological) sex. A related concept, gender roles , refers to a society’s expectations of people’s behavior and attitudes based on whether they are females or males. Understood in this way, gender, like race as discussed in Chapter 7 “Deviance, Crime, and Social Control” , is a social construction . How we think and behave as females and males is not etched in stone by our biology but rather is a result of how society expects us to think and behave based on what sex we are. As we grow up, we learn these expectations as we develop our gender identity , or our beliefs about ourselves as females or males.

These expectations are called femininity and masculinity . Femininity refers to the cultural expectations we have of girls and women, while masculinity refers to the expectations we have of boys and men. A familiar nursery rhyme nicely summarizes these two sets of traits:

What are little boys made of?

Snips and snails,

And puppy dog tails,

That’s what little boys are made of.

What are little girls made of?

Sugar and spice,

And everything nice,

That’s what little girls are made of.

As this nursery rhyme suggests, our traditional notions of femininity and masculinity indicate that we think females and males are fundamentally different from each other. In effect, we think of them as two sides of the same coin of being human. What we traditionally mean by femininity is captured in the adjectives, both positive and negative, we traditionally ascribe to women: gentle, sensitive, nurturing, delicate, graceful, cooperative, decorative, dependent, emotional, passive, and weak. Thus when we say that a girl or woman is very feminine, we have some combination of these traits, usually the positive ones, in mind: she is soft, dainty, pretty, even a bit flighty. What we traditionally mean by masculinity is captured in the adjectives, again both positive and negative, our society traditionally ascribes to men: strong, assertive, brave, active, independent, intelligent, competitive, insensitive, unemotional, and aggressive. When we say that a boy or man is very masculine, we have some combination of these traits in mind: he is tough, strong, and assertive.

Infant girls traditionally wear pink, while infant boys wear blue. This color difference reflects the different cultural expectations we have for babies based on their (biological) sex.

Abby Bischoff – CC BY-NC-ND 2.0.

These traits might sound like stereotypes of females and males in today’s society, and to some extent they are, but differences between men and women in attitudes and behavior do in fact exist (Aulette, Wittner, & Blakeley, 2009). For example, women cry more often than men do. Men are more physically violent than women. Women take care of children more than men do. Women smile more often than men. Men curse more often than women. When women talk with each other, they are more likely to talk about their personal lives than men are when they talk with each other (Tannen, 2001). The two sexes even differ when they hold a cigarette (not that anyone should smoke). When a woman holds a cigarette, she usually has the palm of her cigarette-holding hand facing upward. When a man holds a cigarette, he usually has his palm facing downward.

Sexual Orientation

Sexual orientation refers to a person’s preference for sexual relationships with individuals of the other sex ( heterosexuality ), one’s own sex ( homosexuality ), or both sexes ( bisexuality ). The term also increasingly refers to transgendered individuals, those whose behavior, appearance, and/or gender identity fails to conform to conventional norms. Transgendered individuals include transvestites (those who dress in the clothing of the opposite sex) and transsexuals (those whose gender identity differs from the physiological sex and who sometimes undergo a sex change).

It is difficult to know precisely how many people are gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgendered. One problem is conceptual. For example, what does it mean to be gay or lesbian? Does one need to actually have sexual relations with a same-sex partner to be considered gay? What if someone is attracted to same-sex partners but does not actually engage in sex with such persons? What if someone identifies as heterosexual but engages in homosexual sex for money (as in certain forms of prostitution) or for power and influence (as in much prison sex)? These conceptual problems make it difficult to determine the extent of homosexuality.

A second problem is empirical. Even if we can settle on a definition of homosexuality, how do we then determine how many people fit this definition? For better or worse, our best evidence of the number of gays and lesbians in the United States comes from surveys of national samples of Americans in which they are asked various questions about their sexuality. Although these are anonymous surveys, obviously at least some individuals may be reluctant to disclose their sexual activity and thoughts to an interviewer. Still, scholars think the estimates from these surveys are fairly accurate but that they probably underestimate by at least a small amount the number of gays and lesbians.

A widely cited survey carried out by researchers at the University of Chicago found that 2.8% of men and 1.4% of women identified themselves as gay/lesbian or bisexual, with greater percentages reporting having had sexual relations with same-sex partners or being attracted to same-sex persons (see Table 11.1 “Prevalence of Homosexuality in the United States” ). In the 2008 General Social Survey, 2.2% of men and 3.5% of women identified themselves as gay/lesbian or bisexual. Among individuals having had any sexual partners since turning 18, 2.2% of men reported having had at least some male partners, while 4.6% of women reported having had at least some female partners. Although precise numbers must remain unknown, it seems fair to say that between about 2% and 5% of Americans are gay/lesbian or bisexual.

Table 11.1 Prevalence of Homosexuality in the United States

Source: Data from Laumann, E. O., Gagnon, J. H., Michael, R. T., & Michaels, S. (1994). The social organization of sexuality . Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

If it is difficult to determine the number of people who are gay/lesbian or bisexual, it is even more difficult to determine why some people have this sexual orientation while most do not have it. Scholars disagree on the “causes” of sexual orientation (Engle, McFalls, Gallagher, & Curtis, 2006; Sheldon, Pfeffer, Jayaratne, Feldbaum, & Petty, 2007). Some scholars attribute it to unknown biological factor(s) over which individuals have no control, just as individuals do not decide whether they are left-handed or right-handed. Supporting this view, many gays say they realized they were gay during adolescence, just as straights would say they realized they were straight during their own adolescence. Other scholars say that sexual orientation is at least partly influenced by cultural norms, so that individuals are more likely to identify as gay or straight depending on the cultural views of sexual orientation into which they are socialized as they grow up. At best, perhaps all we can say is that sexual orientation stems from a complex mix of biological and cultural factors that remain to be determined.

The Development of Gender Differences

What accounts for differences in female and male behavior and attitudes? Do the biological differences between the sexes account for other differences? Or do these latter differences stem, as most sociologists think, from cultural expectations and from differences in the ways in which the sexes are socialized? These are critical questions, for they ask whether the differences between boys and girls and women and men stem more from biology or from society. As Chapter 2 “Eye on Society: Doing Sociological Research” pointed out, biological explanations for human behavior implicitly support the status quo. If we think behavioral and other differences between the sexes are due primarily to their respective biological makeups, we are saying that these differences are inevitable or nearly so and that any attempt to change them goes against biology and will likely fail.

As an example, consider the obvious biological fact that women bear and nurse children and men do not. Couple this with the common view that women are also more gentle and nurturing than men, and we end up with a “biological recipe” for women to be the primary caretakers of children. Many people think this means women are therefore much better suited than men to take care of children once they are born, and that the family might be harmed if mothers work outside the home or if fathers are the primary caretakers. Figure 11.1 “Belief That Women Should Stay at Home” shows that more than one-third of the public agrees that “it is much better for everyone involved if the man is the achiever outside the home and the woman takes care of the home and family.” To the extent this belief exists, women may not want to work outside the home or, if they choose to do so, they face difficulties from employers, family, and friends. Conversely, men may not even think about wanting to stay at home and may themselves face difficulties from employees, family, and friends if they want to do so. A belief in a strong biological basis for differences between women and men implies, then, that there is little we can or should do to change these differences. It implies that “anatomy is destiny,” and destiny is, of course, by definition inevitable.

Figure 11.1 Belief That Women Should Stay at Home

Agreement or disagreement with statement that “it is much better for everyone involved if the man is the achiever outside the home and the woman takes care of the home and family.”

Source: Data from General Social Survey, 2008.

This implication makes it essential to understand the extent to which gender differences do, in fact, stem from biological differences between the sexes or, instead, stem from cultural and social influences. If biology is paramount, then gender differences are perhaps inevitable and the status quo will remain. If culture and social influences matter much more than biology, then gender differences can change and the status quo may give way. With this backdrop in mind, let’s turn to the biological evidence for behavioral and other differences between the sexes and then examine the evidence for their social and cultural roots.

Biology and Gender

Several biological explanations for gender roles exist, and we discuss two of the most important ones here. One explanation is from the related fields of sociobiology (see Chapter 2 “Eye on Society: Doing Sociological Research” ) and evolutionary psychology (Workman & Reader, 2009) and argues an evolutionary basis for traditional gender roles.

Scholars advocating this view reason as follows (Barash, 2007; Thornhill & Palmer, 2000). In prehistoric societies, few social roles existed. A major role centered on relieving hunger by hunting or gathering food. The other major role centered on bearing and nursing children. Because only women could perform this role, they were also the primary caretakers for children for several years after birth. And because women were frequently pregnant, their roles as mothers confined them to the home for most of their adulthood. Meanwhile, men were better suited than women for hunting because they were stronger and quicker than women. In prehistoric societies, then, biology was indeed destiny: for biological reasons, men in effect worked outside the home (hunted), while women stayed at home with their children.

Evolutionary reasons also explain why men are more violent than women. In prehistoric times, men who were more willing to commit violence against and even kill other men would “win out” in the competition for female mates. They thus were more likely than less violent men to produce offspring, who would then carry these males’ genetic violent tendencies. By the same token, men who were prone to rape women were more likely to produce offspring, who would then carry these males’ “rape genes.” This early process guaranteed that rape tendencies would be biologically transmitted and thus provided a biological basis for the amount of rape that occurs today.

If the human race evolved along these lines, sociobiologists and evolutionary psychologists continue, natural selection favored those societies where men were stronger, braver, and more aggressive and where women were more fertile and nurturing. Such traits over the millennia became fairly instinctual, meaning that men’s and women’s biological natures evolved differently. Men became, by nature, more assertive, daring, and violent than women, and women are, by nature, more gentle, nurturing, and maternal than men. To the extent this is true, these scholars add, traditional gender roles for women and men make sense from an evolutionary standpoint, and attempts to change them go against the sexes’ biological natures. This in turn implies that existing gender inequality must continue because it is rooted in biology. As the title of a book presenting the evolutionary psychology argument summarizes this implication, “biology at work: rethinking sexual equality” (Browne, 2002).

According to some sociobiologists and evolutionary psychologists, today’s gender differences in strength and physical aggression are ultimately rooted in certain evolutionary processes that spanned millennia.

Vladimir Pustovit – Couple – CC BY 2.0.

Critics challenge the evolutionary explanation on several grounds (Hurley, 2007; Buller, 2006; Begley, 2009). First, much greater gender variation in behavior and attitudes existed in prehistoric times than the evolutionary explanation assumes. Second, even if biological differences did influence gender roles in prehistoric times, these differences are largely irrelevant in today’s world, in which, for example, physical strength is not necessary for survival. Third, human environments throughout the millennia have simply been too diverse to permit the simple, straightforward biological development that the evolutionary explanation assumes. Fourth, evolutionary arguments implicitly justify existing gender inequality by implying the need to confine women and men to their traditional roles.

Recent anthropological evidence also challenges the evolutionary argument that men’s tendency to commit violence, including rape, was biologically transmitted. This evidence instead finds that violent men have trouble finding female mates who would want them and that the female mates they find and the children they produce are often killed by rivals to the men. The recent evidence also finds those rapists’ children are often abandoned and then die. As one anthropologist summarizes the rape evidence, “The likelihood that rape is an evolved adaptation [is] extremely low. It just wouldn’t have made sense for men in the [prehistoric epoch] to use rape as a reproductive strategy, so the argument that it’s preprogrammed into us doesn’t hold up” (Begley, 2009, p. 54).

A second biological explanation for traditional gender roles centers on hormones and specifically on testosterone, the so-called male hormone. One of the most important differences between boys and girls and men and women in the United States and many other societies is their level of aggression. Simply put, males are much more physically aggressive than females and in the United States commit about 85%–90% of all violent crimes (see Chapter 7 “Deviance, Crime, and Social Control” ). Why is this so? As Chapter 7 “Deviance, Crime, and Social Control” pointed out, this gender difference is often attributed to males’ higher levels of testosterone (Mazur, 2009).

To see whether testosterone does indeed raise aggression, researchers typically assess whether males with higher testosterone levels are more aggressive than those with lower testosterone levels. Several studies find that this is indeed the case. For example, a widely cited study of Vietnam-era male veterans found that those with higher levels of testosterone had engaged in more violent behavior (Booth & Osgood, 1993). However, this correlation does not necessarily mean that their testosterone increased their violence: as has been found in various animal species, it is also possible that their violence increased their testosterone. Because studies of human males can’t for ethical and practical reasons manipulate their testosterone levels, the exact meaning of the results from these testosterone-aggression studies must remain unclear, according to a review sponsored by the National Academy of Sciences (Miczek, Mirsky, Carey, DeBold, & Raine, 1994).

Another line of research on the biological basis for sex differences in aggression involves children, including some as young as ages 1 or 2, in various situations (Card, Stucky, Sawalani, & Little, 2008). They might be playing with each other, interacting with adults, or writing down solutions to hypothetical scenarios given to them by a researcher. In most of these studies, boys are more physically aggressive in thought or deed than girls, even at a very young age. Other studies are more experimental in nature. In one type of study, a toddler will be playing with a toy, only to have it removed by an adult. Boys typically tend to look angry and try to grab the toy back, while girls tend to just sit there and whimper. Because these gender differences in aggression are found at very young ages, researchers often say they must have some biological basis. However, critics of this line of research counter that even young children have already been socialized along gender lines (Begley, 2009; Eliot, 2009), a point to which we return later. To the extent this is true, gender differences in children’s aggression may simply reflect socialization and not biology.

In sum, biological evidence for gender differences certainly exists, but its interpretation remains very controversial. It must be weighed against the evidence, to which we next turn, of cultural variations in the experience of gender and of socialization differences by gender. One thing is clear: to the extent we accept biological explanations for gender, we imply that existing gender differences and gender inequality must continue to exist. This implication prompts many social scientists to be quite critical of the biological viewpoint. As Linda L. Lindsey (2011, p. 52) notes, “Biological arguments are consistently drawn upon to justify gender inequality and the continued oppression of women.” In contrast, cultural and social explanations of gender differences and gender inequality promise some hope for change. Let’s examine the evidence for these explanations.

Culture and Gender

Some of the most compelling evidence against a strong biological determination of gender roles comes from anthropologists, whose work on preindustrial societies demonstrates some striking gender variation from one culture to another. This variation underscores the impact of culture on how females and males think and behave.

Margaret Mead (1935) was one of the first anthropologists to study cultural differences in gender. In New Guinea she found three tribes—the Arapesh, the Mundugumor, and the Tchambuli—whose gender roles differed dramatically. In the Arapesh both sexes were gentle and nurturing. Both women and men spent much time with their children in a loving way and exhibited what we would normally call maternal behavior. In the Arapesh, then, different gender roles did not exist, and in fact, both sexes conformed to what Americans would normally call the female gender role.

Margaret Mead made important contributions to the anthropological study of gender. Her work suggested that culture dramatically influences how females and males behave and that gender is rooted much more in culture than in biology.

U.S. Library of Congress – public domain.

The situation was the reverse among the Mundugumor. Here both men and women were fierce, competitive, and violent. Both sexes seemed to almost dislike children and often physically punished them. In the Mundugumor society, then, different gender roles also did not exist, as both sexes conformed to what we Americans would normally call the male gender role.

In the Tchambuli, Mead finally found a tribe where different gender roles did exist. One sex was the dominant, efficient, assertive one and showed leadership in tribal affairs, while the other sex liked to dress up in frilly clothes, wear makeup, and even giggle a lot. Here, then, Mead found a society with gender roles similar to those found in the United States, but with a surprising twist. In the Tchambuli, women were the dominant, assertive sex that showed leadership in tribal affairs, while men were the ones wearing frilly clothes and makeup.

Mead’s research caused a firestorm in scholarly circles, as it challenged the biological view on gender that was still very popular when she went to New Guinea. In recent years, Mead’s findings have been challenged by other anthropologists. Among other things, they argue that she probably painted an overly simplistic picture of gender roles in her three societies (Scheper-Hughes, 1987). Other anthropologists defend Mead’s work and note that much subsequent research has found that gender-linked attitudes and behavior do differ widely from one culture to another (Morgan, 1989). If so, they say, the impact of culture on what it means to be a female or male cannot be ignored.

Extensive evidence of this impact comes from anthropologist George Murdock, who created the Standard Cross-Cultural Sample of almost 200 preindustrial societies studied by anthropologists. Murdock (1937) found that some tasks in these societies, such as hunting and trapping, are almost always done by men, while other tasks, such as cooking and fetching water, are almost always done by women. These patterns provide evidence for the evolutionary argument presented earlier, as they probably stem from the biological differences between the sexes. Even so there were at least some societies in which women hunted and in which men cooked and fetched water.

More importantly, Murdock found much greater gender variation in several of the other tasks he studied, including planting crops, milking, and generating fires. Men primarily performed these tasks in some societies, women primarily performed them in other societies, and in still other societies both sexes performed them equally. Figure 11.2 “Gender Responsibility for Weaving” shows the gender responsibility for yet another task, weaving. Women are the primary weavers in about 61% of the societies that do weaving, men are the primary weavers in 32%, and both sexes do the weaving in 7% of the societies. Murdock’s findings illustrate how gender roles differ from one culture to another and imply they are not biologically determined.

Figure 11.2 Gender Responsibility for Weaving

Source: Data from Standard Cross-Cultural Sample.

Anthropologists since Mead and Murdock have continued to investigate cultural differences in gender. Some of their most interesting findings concern gender and sexuality (Morgan, 1989; Brettell & Sargent, 2009). Although all societies distinguish “femaleness” and “maleness,” additional gender categories exist in some societies. The Native Americans known as the Mohave, for example, recognize four genders: a woman, a woman who acts like a man, a man, and a man who acts like a woman. In some societies, a third, intermediary gender category is recognized. Anthropologists call this category the berdache , who is usually a man who takes on a woman’s role. This intermediary category combines aspects of both femininity and masculinity of the society in which it is found and is thus considered an androgynous gender. Although some people in this category are born as intersexed individuals (formerly known as hermaphrodites ), meaning they have genitalia of both sexes, many are born biologically as one sex or the other but adopt an androgynous identity.

An example of this intermediary gender category may be found in India, where the hirja role involves males who wear women’s clothing and identify as women (Reddy, 2006). The hirja role is an important part of Hindu mythology, in which androgynous figures play key roles both as humans and as gods. Today people identified by themselves and others as hirjas continue to play an important role in Hindu practices and in Indian cultural life in general. Serena Nanda (1997, pp. 200–201) calls hirjas “human beings who are neither man nor woman” and says they are thought of as “special, sacred beings” even though they are sometimes ridiculed and abused.

Anthropologists have found another androgynous gender composed of women warriors in 33 Native American groups in North America. Walter L. Williams (1997) calls these women “amazons” and notes that they dress like men and sometimes even marry women. In some tribes girls exhibit such “masculine” characteristics from childhood, while in others they may be recruited into “amazonhood.” In the Kaska Indians, for example, a married couple with too many daughters would select one to “be like a man.” When she was about 5 years of age, her parents would begin to dress her like a boy and have her do male tasks. Eventually she would grow up to become a hunter.

The androgynous genders found by anthropologists remind us that gender is a social construction and not just a biological fact. If culture does affect gender roles, socialization is the process through which culture has this effect. What we experience as girls and boys strongly influences how we develop as women and men in terms of behavior and attitudes. To illustrate this important dimension of gender, let’s turn to the evidence on socialization.

Socialization and Gender

Chapter 3 “Culture” identified several agents of socialization, including the family, peers, schools, the mass media, and religion. While that chapter’s discussion focused on these agents’ impact on socialization in general, ample evidence of their impact on gender-role socialization also exists. Such socialization helps boys and girls develop their gender identity (Andersen & Hysock, 2009).

Parents play with their daughters and sons differently. For example, fathers generally roughhouse more with their sons than with their daughters.

Jagrap – Roughhousing – CC BY-NC 2.0.

Socialization into gender roles begins in infancy, as almost from the moment of birth parents begin to socialize their children as boys or girls without even knowing it (Begley, 2009; Eliot, 2009). Many studies document this process (Lindsey, 2011). Parents commonly describe their infant daughters as pretty, soft, and delicate and their infant sons as strong, active, and alert, even though neutral observers find no such gender differences among infants when they do not know the infants’ sex. From infancy on, parents play with and otherwise interact with their daughters and sons differently. They play more roughly with their sons—for example, by throwing them up in the air or by gently wrestling with them—and more quietly with their daughters. When their infant or toddler daughters cry, they warmly comfort them, but they tend to let their sons cry longer and to comfort them less. They give their girls dolls to play with and their boys “action figures” and toy guns. While these gender differences in socialization are probably smaller now than a generation ago, they certainly continue to exist. Go into a large toy store and you will see pink aisles of dolls and cooking sets and blue aisles of action figures, toy guns, and related items.

Peer influences also encourage gender socialization. As they reach school age, children begin to play different games based on their gender (see the “Sociology Making a Difference” box). Boys tend to play sports and other competitive team games governed by inflexible rules and relatively large numbers of roles, while girls tend to play smaller, cooperative games such as hopscotch and jumping rope with fewer and more flexible rules. Although girls are much more involved in sports now than a generation ago, these gender differences in their play as youngsters persist and continue to reinforce gender roles. For example, they encourage competitiveness in boys and cooperation and trust among girls. Boys who are not competitive risk being called “sissy” or other words by their peers. The patterns we see in adult males and females thus have their roots in their play as young children (King, Miles, & Kniska, 1991).

Sociology Making a Difference

Gender Differences in Children’s Play and Games

In considering the debate, discussed in the text, between biology and sociology over the origins of gender roles, some widely cited studies by sociologists over gender differences in children’s play and games provide important evidence for the importance of socialization.

Janet Lever (1978) studied fifth-grade children in three different communities in Connecticut. She watched them play and otherwise interact in school and also had the children keep diaries of their play and games outside school. One of her central aims was to determine how complex the two sexes’ play and games were in terms of such factors as number of rules, specialization of roles, and size of the group playing. In all of these respects, Lever found that boys’ play and games were typically more complex than girls’ play and games. She attributed these differences to socialization by parents, teachers, and other adults and argued that the complexity of boys’ play and games helped them to be better able than girls to learn important social skills such as dealing with rules and coordinating actions to achieve goals.

Meanwhile, Barrie Thorne (1993) spent many months in two different working-class communities in California and Michigan observing fourth and fifth graders sit in class and lunchrooms and play on the school playgrounds. Most children were white, but several were African American or Latino. As you might expect, the girls and boys she observed usually played separately from each other, and the one-sex groups in which they played were very important for the development of their gender identity, with boys tending to play team sports and other competitive games and girls tending to play cooperative games such as jump rope. These differences led Thorne to conclude that gender-role socialization stems not only from practices by adults but also from the children’s own activities without adult involvement. When boys and girls did interact, it was often “girls against the boys” or vice versa in classroom spelling contests and in games such as tag. Thorne concluded that these “us against them” contests helped the children learn that boys and girls are two different and antagonistic sexes and that gender itself is antagonistic, even if there were also moments when both sexes interacted on the playground in more relaxed, noncompetitive situations. Boys also tended to disrupt girls’ games more than the reverse and in this manner both exerted and learned dominance over females. In all of these ways, children were not just the passive recipients of gender-role socialization from adults (their teachers), but they also played an active role in ensuring that such socialization occurred.

The studies by Lever and Thorne were among the first to emphasize the importance of children’s play and peer relationships for gender socialization. They also called attention to the importance of the traits and values learned through such socialization for outcomes later in life. The rise in team sports opportunities for girls in the years since Lever and Thorne did their research is a welcome development that addresses the concerns expressed in their studies, but young children continue to play in the ways that Lever and Thorne found. To the extent children’s play has the consequences just listed, and to the extent these consequences impede full gender inequality, these sociological studies suggest the need for teachers, parents, and other adults to help organize children’s play that is more egalitarian along the lines discussed by Lever, Thorne, and other scholars. In this way, their sociological work has helped to make a difference and promises to continue to do so.

School is yet another agent of gender socialization (Klein, 2007). First of all, school playgrounds provide a location for the gender-linked play activities just described to occur. Second, and perhaps more important, teachers at all levels treat their female and male students differently in subtle ways of which they are probably not aware. They tend to call on boys more often to answer questions in class and to praise them more when they give the right answer. They also give boys more feedback about their assignments and other school work (Sadker & Sadker, 1994). At all grade levels, many textbooks and other books still portray people in gender-stereotyped ways. It is true that the newer books do less of this than older ones, but the newer books still contain some stereotypes, and the older books are still used in many schools, especially those that cannot afford to buy newer volumes.

Women’s magazines reinforce the view that women need to be slender and wear many cosmetics in order to be considered beautiful.

Photo Editing Services Tucia.com – Glamour /Fashion Retouching by Tucia – CC BY 2.0.

Gender socialization also occurs through the mass media (Dow & Wood, 2006). On children’s television shows, the major characters are male. On Nickelodeon, for example, the very popular SpongeBob SquarePants is a male, as are his pet snail, Gary; his best friend, Patrick Star; their neighbor, Squidward Tentacles; and SpongeBob’s employer, Eugene Crabs. Of the major characters in Bikini Bottom, only Sandy Cheeks is a female. For all its virtues, Sesame Street features Bert, Ernie, Cookie Monster, and other male characters. Most of the Muppets are males, and the main female character, Miss Piggy, depicted as vain and jealous, is hardly an admirable female role model. As for adults’ prime-time television, more men than women continue to fill more major roles in weekly shows, despite notable women’s roles in shows such as The Good Wife and Grey’s Anatomy . Women are also often portrayed as unintelligent or frivolous individuals who are there more for their looks than for anything else. Television commercials reinforce this image (Yoder, Christopher, & Holmes, 2008). Cosmetics ads abound, suggesting not only that a major task for women is to look good but also that their sense of self-worth stems from looking good. Other commercials show women becoming ecstatic over achieving a clean floor or sparkling laundry. Judging from the world of television commercials, then, women’s chief goals in life are to look good and to have a clean house. At the same time, men’s chief goals, judging from many commercials, are to drink beer and drive cars.

Women’s and men’s magazines reinforce these gender images (Milillo, 2008). Most of the magazines intended for teenaged girls and adult women are filled with pictures of thin, beautiful models, advice on dieting, cosmetics ads, and articles on how to win and please your man. Conversely, the magazines intended for teenaged boys and men are filled with ads and articles on cars and sports, advice on how to succeed in careers and other endeavors, and pictures of thin, beautiful (and sometimes nude) women. These magazine images again suggest that women’s chief goals are to look good and to please men and that men’s chief goals are to succeed, win over women, and live life in the fast lane.

Another agent of socialization, religion, also contributes to traditional gender stereotypes. Many traditional interpretations of the Bible yield the message that women are subservient to men (Tanenbaum, 2009). This message begins in Genesis, where the first human is Adam, and Eve was made from one of his ribs. The major figures in the rest of the Bible are men, and women are for the most part depicted as wives, mothers, temptresses, and prostitutes; they are praised for their roles as wives and mothers and condemned for their other roles. More generally, women are constantly depicted as the property of men. The Ten Commandments includes a neighbor’s wife with his house, ox, and other objects as things not to be coveted (Exodus 20:17), and many biblical passages say explicitly that women belong to men, such as this one from the New Testament:

Wives be subject to your husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the Church. As the Church is subject to Christ, so let wives also be subject in everything to their husbands. (Ephesians 5:22–24)

Several passages in the Old Testament justify the rape and murder of women and girls. The Koran, the sacred book of Islam, also contains passages asserting the subordinate role of women (Mayer, 2009).

This discussion suggests that religious people should believe in traditional gender views more than less religious people, and research confirms this relationship (Morgan, 1988). To illustrate this, Figure 11.3 “Frequency of Prayer and Acceptance of Traditional Gender Roles in the Family” shows the relationship in the General Social Survey between frequency of prayer and the view (seen first in Figure 11.1 “Belief That Women Should Stay at Home” ) that “it is much better for everyone involved if the man is the achiever outside the home and the woman takes care of the home and family.” People who pray more often are more likely to accept this traditional view of gender roles.

Figure 11.3 Frequency of Prayer and Acceptance of Traditional Gender Roles in the Family

Percentage agreeing that “it is much better for everyone involved if the man is the achiever outside the home and the woman takes care of the home and family.”

A Final Word on the Sources of Gender

Scholars in many fields continue to debate the relative importance of biology and of culture and socialization for how we behave and think as girls and boys and as women and men. The biological differences between females and males lead many scholars and no doubt much of the public to assume that masculinity and femininity are to a large degree biologically determined or at least influenced. In contrast, anthropologists, sociologists, and other social scientists tend to view gender as a social construction. Even if biology does matter for gender, they say, the significance of culture and socialization should not be underestimated. To the extent that gender is indeed shaped by society and culture, it is possible to change gender and to help bring about a society where both men and women have more opportunity to achieve their full potential.

Key Takeaways

• Sex is a biological concept, while gender is a social concept and refers to the social and cultural differences a society assigns to people based on their sex.
• Several biological explanations for gender roles exist, but sociologists think culture and socialization are more important sources of gender roles than biology.
• Families, schools, peers, the mass media, and religion are agents of socialization for the development of gender identity and gender roles.

For Your Review

• Write a short essay about one or two events you recall from your childhood that reflected or reinforced your gender socialization.
• Do you think gender roles are due more to biology or to culture and socialization? Explain your answer.

Andersen, M., & Hysock, D. (2009). Thinking about women: Sociological perspectives on sex and gender (8th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Aulette, J. R., Wittner, J., & Blakeley, K. (2009). Gendered worlds . New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Barash, D. P. (2007). Natural selections: Selfish altruists, honest liars, and other realities of evolution . New York, NY: Bellevue Literary Press.

Begley, S. (2009, June 29). Don’t blame the caveman. Newsweek 52–62.

Begley, S. (2009, September 14). Pink brain, blue brain: Claims of sex differences fall apart. Newsweek 28.

Booth, A., & Osgood, D. W. (1993). The influence of testosterone on deviance in adulthood: Assessing and explaining the relationship. Criminology, 31 (1), 93–117.

Brettell, C. B., & Sargent, C. F. (Eds.). (2009). Gender in cross-cultural perspective (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Browne, K. (2002). Biology at work: Rethinking sexual equality . New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

Buller, D. J. (2006). Adapting minds: Evolutionary psychology and the persistent quest for human nature . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Card, N. A., Stucky, B. D., Sawalani, G. M., & Little, T. D. (2008). Direct and indirect aggression during childhood and adolescence: A meta-analytic review of gender differences, intercorrelations, and relations to maladjustment. Child Development, 79 (5), 1185–1229. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2008.01184.x.

Dow, B. J., & Wood, J. T. (Eds.). (2006). The SAGE handbook of gender and communication . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Eliot, L. (2009). Pink brain, blue brain: How small differences grow into troublesome gaps—and what we can do about it . Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

Engle, M. J., McFalls, J. A., Jr., Gallagher, B. J., III, & Curtis, K. (2006). The attitudes of American sociologists toward causal theories of male homosexuality. The American Sociologist, 37 (1), 68–67.

Hurley, S. (2007). Sex and the social construction of gender: Can feminism and evolutionary psychology be reconciled? In J. Browne (Ed.), The future of gender (pp. 98–115). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

King, W. C., Jr., Miles, E. W., & Kniska, J. (1991). Boys will be boys (and girls will be girls): The attribution of gender role stereotypes in a gaming situation. Sex Roles, 25 , 607–623.

Klein, S. S. (Ed.). (2007). Handbook for achieving gender equity through education (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Lever, J. (1978). Sex differences in the complexity of children’s play and games. American Sociological Review, 43 , 471–483.

Lindsey, L. L. (2011). Gender roles: A sociological perspective (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Mayer, A. E. (2009). Review of “Women, the Koran and international human rights law: The experience of Pakistan” [Book review]. Human Rights Quarterly, 31 (4), 1155–1158.

Mazur, A. (2009). Testosterone and violence among young men. In A. Walsh & K. M. Beaver (Eds.), Biosocial criminology: New directions in theory and research (pp. 190–204). New York, NY: Routledge.

Mead, M. (1935). Sex and temperament in three primitive societies . New York, NY: William Morrow.

Miczek, K. A., Mirsky, A. F., Carey, G., DeBold, J., & Raine, A. (1994). An overview of biological influences on violent behavior. In J. Albert, J. Reiss, K. A. Miczek, & J. A. Roth (Eds.), Understanding and preventing violence: Biobehavioral influences (Vol. 2, pp. 1–20). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Milillo, D. (2008). Sexuality sells: A content analysis of lesbian and heterosexual women’s bodies in magazine advertisements. Journal of Lesbian Studies, 12 (4), 381–392.

Morgan, M. (1988). The impact of religion on gender-role attitudes. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 11 , 301–310.

Morgan, S. (Ed.). (1989). Gender and anthropology: Critical reviews for research and teaching . Washington, DC: American Anthropological Association.

Murdock, G. (1937). Comparative data on the division of labor by sex. Social Forces, 15 , 551–553.

Nanda, S. (1997). Neither man nor woman: The Hirjas of India. In C. B. Brettell & C. F. Sargent (Eds.), Gender in cross-cultural perspective (2nd ed., pp. 198–201). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Reddy, G. (2006). With respect to sex: Negotiating Hirja identity in South India . New Delhi, India: Yoda.

Sadker, M., & Sadker, D. (1994). Failing at fairness: How America’s schools cheat girls . New York, NY: Charles Scribner’s.

Scheper-Hughes, N. (1987). The Margaret Mead controversy: Culture, biology and anthropological inquiry. In H. Applebaum (Ed.), Perspectives in cultural anthropology (pp. 443–454). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

Sheldon, J. P., Pfeffer, C. A., Jayaratne, T. E., Feldbaum, M., & Petty, E. M. (2007). Beliefs about the etiology of homosexuality and about the ramifications of discovering its possible genetic origin. Journal of Homosexuality, 52 (3/4), 111–150.

Tanenbaum, L. (2009). Taking back God: American women rising up for religious equality . New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

Tannen, D. (2001). You just don’t understand: Women and men in conversation . New York, NY: Quill.

Thorne, B. (1993). Gender play: Girls and boys in school . New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

Thornhill, R., & Palmer, C. T. (2000). A natural history of rape: Biological bases of sexual coercion . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Williams, W. L. (1997). Amazons of America: Female gender variance. In C. B. Brettell & C. F. Sargent (Eds.), Gender in cross-cultural perspective (2nd ed., pp. 202–213). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Workman, L., & Reader, W. (2009). Evolutionary psychology (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Yoder, J. D., Christopher, J., & Holmes, J. D. (2008). Are television commercials still achievement scripts for women? Psychology of Women Quarterly, 32 (3), 303–311. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2008.00438.x.

Sociology Copyright © 2016 by University of Minnesota is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

• Type 2 Diabetes
• Heart Disease
• Digestive Health
• Multiple Sclerosis
• Diet & Nutrition
• Supplements
• Health Insurance
• Public Health
• Patient Rights
• Caregivers & Loved Ones
• End of Life Concerns
• Health News
• Thyroid Test Analyzer
• Doctor Discussion Guides
• Hemoglobin A1c Test Analyzer
• Lipid Test Analyzer
• Complete Blood Count (CBC) Analyzer
• What to Buy
• Editorial Process
• Meet Our Medical Expert Board

What Are Gender Stereotypes?

• How They Develop
• How to Combat

Gender stereotypes are preconceived, usually generalized views about how members of a certain gender do or should behave, or which traits they do or should have. They are meant to reinforce gender norms, typically in a binary way ( masculine vs. feminine ).

Gender stereotypes have far-reaching effects on all genders.

Read on to learn about how gender stereotypes develop, the effects of gender stereotypes, and how harmful gender stereotypes can be changed.

Davin G Photography / Getty Images

Meaning of Gender Stereotypes

Gender stereotypes are ideas about how members of a certain gender do or should be or behave. They reflect ingrained biases based on the social norms of that society. Typically, they are considered as binary (male/female and feminine/masculine).

By nature, gender stereotypes are oversimplified and generalized. They are not accurate and often persist even when there is demonstrable evidence that contradict them. They also tend to ignore the fluidity of gender and nonbinary gender identities.

Classification of Gender Stereotypes

Gender stereotypes have two components, which are:

• Descriptive : Beliefs about how people of a certain gender do act, and their attributes
• Prescriptive : Beliefs about how people of a specific gender should act and attributes they should have

Gender stereotypes can be positive or negative. This doesn’t mean good or bad—even stereotypes that seem “flattering” can have harmful consequences.

• Positive gender stereotypes : Describe behaviors or attributes that align with accepted stereotypical ideas for that gender, and that people of that gender are encouraged to display (for example, girls should play with dolls and boys should play with trucks)
• Negative gender stereotypes : Describe behaviors or attributes that are stereotypically undesirable for that gender and that people from that gender are discouraged from displaying (such as women shouldn’t be assertive, or men shouldn’t cry)

The attribute is undesirable for all genders but more accepted in a particular gender than others. For example, arrogance and aggression are unpleasant in all genders but are tolerated more in men and boys than in women, girls, or nonbinary people .

Gender stereotypes tend to be divided into these two generalized themes:

• Communion : This stereotype orients people to others. It includes traits such as compassionate, nurturing, warm, and expressive, which are stereotypically associated with girls/women/femininity.
• Agency : This stereotype orients people to the self and is motivated by goal attainment. It includes traits such as competitiveness, ambition, and assertiveness, which are stereotypically associated with boys/men/masculinity.

Basic types of gender stereotypes include:

• Personality traits : Such as expecting women to be nurturing and men to be ambitious
• Domestic behaviors : Such as expecting women to be responsible for cooking, cleaning, and childcare, while expecting men to do home repairs, pay bills, and fix the car
• Occupations : Associates some occupations such as childcare providers and nurses with women and pilots and engineers with men
• Physical appearance : Associates separate characteristics for women and men, such as women should shave their legs or men shouldn’t wear dresses

Gender stereotypes don’t exist in a vacuum. They can intersect with stereotypes and prejudices surrounding a person’s other identities and be disproportionately harmful to different people. For example, a Black woman experiences sexism and racism , and also experiences unique prejudice from the intersectionality of sexism and racism that a White woman or Black man would not.

Words to Know

• Gender : Gender is a complex system involving roles, identities, expressions, and qualities that have been given meaning by a society. Gender is a social construct separate from sex assigned at birth.
• Gender norms : Gender norms are what a society expects from certain genders.
• Gender roles : These are behaviors, actions, social roles, and responsibilities a society views as appropriate or inappropriate for certain genders.
• Gender stereotyping : This ascribes the stereotypes of a gender group to an individual from that group.
• Self-stereotyping vs. group stereotyping : This is how a person views themselves compared to how they view the gender group they belong to (for example, a woman may hold the belief that women are better caregivers than men, but not see herself as adept in a caregiving role).

How Gender Stereotypes Develop

We all have unconscious biases (assumptions our subconscious makes about people based on groups that person belongs to and our ingrained associations with those groups). Often, we aren’t even aware we have them or how they influence our behavior.

Gender stereotyping comes from unconscious biases we have about gender groups.

We aren’t preprogrammed at birth with these biases and stereotypes. Instead, they are learned through repeated and ongoing messages we receive.

Gender roles, norms, and expectations are learned by watching others in our society, including our families, our teachers and classmates, and the media. These roles and the stereotypes attached to them are reinforced through interactions starting from birth. Consciously or not, adults and often other children will reward behavior or attributes that are in line with expectations for a child’s gender, and discourage behavior and attributes that are not.

Some ways gender stereotypes are learned and reinforced in childhood include:

• How adults dress children
• Toys and play activities offered to children
• Children observing genders in different roles (for example, a child may see that all of the teachers at their daycare are female)
• Praise and criticism children receive for behaviors
• Encouragement to gravitate toward certain subjects in school (such as math for boys and language arts for girls)
• Anything that models and rewards accepted gender norms

Children begin to internalize these stereotypes quite early. Research has shown that as early as elementary school, children reflect similar prescriptive gender stereotypes as adults, especially about physical appearance and behavior.

While all genders face expectations to align with the stereotypes of their gender groups, boys and men tend to face harsher criticism for behavior and attributes that are counterstereotypical than do girls and women. For example, a boy who plays with a doll and wears a princess dress is more likely to be met with a negative reaction than a girl who wears overalls and plays with trucks.

The Hegemonic Myth

The hegemonic myth is the false perception that men are the dominant gender (strong and independent) while women are weaker and need to be protected.

Gender stereotypes propagate this myth.

Effects of Gender Stereotypes

Gender stereotypes negatively impact all genders in a number of ways.

Nonbinary Genders

For people who are transgender / gender nonconforming (TGNC), gender stereotypes can lead to:

• Feelings of confusion and discomfort
• A low view of self-worth and self-respect
• Transphobia (negative feelings, actions, and attitudes toward transgender people or the idea of being transgender, which can be internalized)
• Negative impacts on mental health
• Struggles at school

Unconscious bias plays a part in reinforcing gender stereotypes in the classroom. For example:

• Educators may be more likely to praise girls for being well-behaved, while praising boys for their ideas and comprehension.
• Boys are more likely to be viewed as being highly intelligent, which influences choices. One study found girls as young as 6 avoiding activities that were labeled as being for children who are “really, really smart.”
• Intentional or unintentional steering of children toward certain subjects influences education and future employment.

In the Workforce

While women are in the workforce in large numbers, gender stereotypes are still at play, such as:

• Certain occupations are stereotypically gendered (such as nursing and teaching for women and construction and engineering for men).
• Occupations with more female workers are often lower paid and have fewer opportunities for promotion than ones oriented towards men.
• More women are entering male-dominated occupations, but gender segregation often persists within these spaces with the creation of female-dominated subsets (for example, pediatrics and gynecology in medicine, or human resources and public relations in management).
• Because men face harsher criticism for displaying stereotypically feminine characteristics than women do for displaying stereotypically male characteristics, they may be discouraged from entering female-dominated professions such as early childhood education.

Despite both men and women being in the workforce, women continue to be expected to (and do) perform a disproportionate amount of housework and taking care of children than do men.

Gender-Based Violence

Gender stereotypes can contribute to gender-based violence.

• Men who hold more traditional gender role beliefs are more likely to commit violent acts.
• Men who feel stressed about their ability to meet male gender norms are more likely to commit inter-partner violence .
• Trans people are more likely than their cisgender counterparts to experience discrimination and harassment, and they are twice as likely to engage in suicidal thoughts and actions than cisgender members of the Queer community.

Stereotypes and different ways of socializing genders can affect health in the following ways:

• Adolescent boys are more likely than adolescent girls to engage in violent or risky behavior.
• Mental health issues are more common in girls than boys.
• The perceived “ideal” of feminine slenderness and masculine muscularity can lead to health issues surrounding body image .
• Gender stereotypes can discourage people from seeking medical help or lead to missed diagnosis (such as eating disorders in males ).

Globally, over 575 million girls live in countries where inequitable gender norms contribute to a violation of their rights in areas such as:

• Employment opportunities
• Independence
• Safety from gender-based violence

How to Combat Gender Stereotypes

Some ways to combat gender stereotypes include:

• Examine and confront your own gender biases and how they influence your behavior, including the decisions you make for your children.
• Foster more involvement from men in childcare, both professionally and personally.
• Promote and support counterstereotypical hirings (such as science and technology job fairs aimed at women and campaigns to gain interest in becoming elementary educators for men).
• Confront and address bias in the classroom, including education for teachers on how to minimize gender stereotypes.
• Learn about each child individually, including their preferences.
• Allow children to use their chosen name and pronouns .
• Avoid using gender as a way to group children.
• Be mindful of language (for example, when addressing a group, use “children” instead of “boys and girls” and “families” instead of “moms and dads,”).
• Include books, toys, and other media in the classroom and at home that represent diversity in gender and gender roles.
• View toys as gender neutral, and avoid ones that promote stereotypes (for example, a toy that has a pink version aimed at girls).
• Ensure all children play with toys and games that develop a full set of social and cognitive skills.
• Promote gender neutrality in sports.
• Be mindful of advertising and the messaging marketing sends to children.
• Talk to children about gender, including countering binary thinking and gender stereotypes you come across.
• Take a look at the media your child engages with. Provide media that show all genders in a diversity of roles, different family structures, etc. Discuss any gender stereotyping you see.
• Tell children that it is OK to be themselves, whether that aligns with traditional gender norms or not (for example, it’s OK if a woman wants to be a stay-at-home parent, but it’s not OK to expect her to).
• Give children equal household chores regardless of gender.
• Teach all children how to productively handle their frustration and anger.
• Encourage children to step out of their comfort zone to meet new people and try activities they aren’t automatically drawn to.
• Put gender-neutral bathrooms in schools, workplaces, and businesses.
• Avoid assumptions about a person’s gender, including children.
• Take children to meet people who occupy counterstereotypical roles, such as a female firefighter.
• Speak up and challenge someone who is making sexist jokes or comments.

Movies That Challenge Gender Stereotypes

Not sure where to start? Common Sense Media has compiled a list of movies that defy gender stereotypes .

Gender stereotypes are generalized, preconceived, and usually binary ideas about behaviors and traits specific genders should or should not display. They are based on gender norms and gender roles, and stem from unconscious bias.

Gender stereotypes begin to develop very early in life through socialization. They are formed and strengthened through observations, experiences, and interactions with others.

Gender stereotypes can be harmful to all genders and should be challenged. The best way to start combating gender stereotypes is to examine and confront your own biases and how they affect your behavior.

A Word From Verywell

We all have gender biases, whether we realize it or not. That doesn’t mean we should let gender stereotypes go unchecked. If you see harmful gender stereotyping, point it out.

YWCA Metro Vancouver. Dating safe: how gender stereotypes can impact our relationships .

LGBTQ+ Primary Hub. Gender stereotyping .

Stanford University: Gendered Innovations. Stereotypes .

Koenig AM. Comparing prescriptive and descriptive gender stereotypes about children, adults, and the elderly . Front Psychol . 2018;9:1086. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01086

United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. Gender stereotypes .

Hentschel T, Heilman ME, Peus CV. The multiple dimensions of gender stereotypes: a current look at men’s and women’s characterizations of others and themselves . Front Psychol . 2019;10:11. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00011

Eagly AH, Nater C, Miller DI, Kaufmann M, Sczesny S. Gender stereotypes have changed: a cross-temporal meta-analysis of U.S. public opinion polls from 1946 to 2018 . Am Psychol . 2020;75(3):301-315. doi:10.1037/amp0000494

Planned Parenthood. What are gender roles and stereotypes?

Institute of Physics. Gender stereotypes and their effect on young people .

France Stratégie. Report – Gender stereotypes and how to fight them: new ideas from France .

Bian L, Leslie SJ, Cimpian A. Gender stereotypes about intellectual ability emerge early and influence children’s interests . Science . 2017;355(6323):389-391. doi:10.1126/science.aah6524

Save the Children. Gender roles can create lifelong cycle of inequality .

Girl Scouts. 6 everyday ways to bust gender stereotypes .

UNICEF. How to remove gender stereotypes from playtime .

Save the Children. Tips for talking with children about gender stereoptypes .

By Heather Jones Jones is a freelance writer with a strong focus on health, parenting, disability, and feminism.

Home — Essay Samples — Sociology — Sociology of Gender — Gender Stereotypes

Essays on Gender Stereotypes

Gender stereotypes have been a prevalent issue in society for decades, influencing the way individuals are perceived and treated based on their gender. As such, it's a crucial topic for discussion and analysis in academic settings. When it comes to writing an essay on gender stereotypes, choosing the right topic is essential for producing an impactful piece of work. In this article, we'll explore the importance of the topic, provide advice on selecting a suitable essay topic, and offer a detailed list of recommended topics, divided by category.

The subject of gender stereotypes is significant as it directly impacts individuals' lives, shaping their opportunities, experiences, and self-perception. By addressing gender stereotypes in essays, students can contribute to the ongoing conversation about equality and challenge societal norms. Furthermore, exploring this topic can help individuals develop a deeper understanding of how gender stereotypes manifest in various aspects of life, such as education, the workplace, media, and relationships.

Advice on Choosing a Topic

When selecting a gender stereotypes essay topic, it's essential to consider personal interests, research opportunities, and the potential for making a meaningful impact. It's advisable to choose a topic that aligns with one's passion and allows for in-depth exploration. Additionally, students should assess the availability of scholarly resources and data related to the chosen topic to ensure a well-supported argument.

Recommended Gender Stereotypes Essay Topics Essay Topics

• The impact of gender stereotypes on academic performance
• Gender bias in STEM education
• Exploring the portrayal of gender roles in school textbooks
• The influence of teachers' gender stereotypes on students' learning experiences
• Gender stereotypes and the gender pay gap
• Challenges faced by women in male-dominated industries
• Leadership roles and gender bias in corporate environments
• The effects of gender stereotypes on career progression

Media and Entertainment

• Portrayal of masculinity and femininity in popular media
• Gender stereotypes in advertising
• Impact of social media on perpetuating gender stereotypes
• Representation of LGBTQ+ individuals in mainstream media

Relationships and Family Dynamics

• Gender roles in traditional vs. modern family structures
• The influence of gender stereotypes on dating and romantic relationships
• Parental expectations based on gender
• Effect of gender stereotypes on mental health within relationships

Health and Wellness

• Body image and gender stereotypes
• Gender-specific healthcare disparities
• Stigma surrounding mental health based on gender
• Impact of gender stereotypes on access to reproductive health services

Social and Cultural Gender Stereotypes

• Impact of gender stereotypes on society
• Role of media in perpetuating gender stereotypes
• Gender stereotypes in the workplace
• Gender stereotypes in education
• Effect of gender stereotypes on relationships

Psychological and Emotional Effects of Gender Stereotypes

• How gender stereotypes affect self-esteem
• Impact of gender stereotypes on mental health
• Gender stereotypes and body image
• Psychological effects of gender role expectations
• Gender stereotypes and emotional well-being

Historical and Cross-Cultural Perspectives on Gender Stereotypes

• Evolution of gender stereotypes throughout history
• Comparison of gender stereotypes in different cultures
• Impact of religion on gender role expectations
• Gender stereotypes in literature and art
• Challenges to traditional gender roles in different societies

Legal and Policy Implications of Gender Stereotypes

• Gender stereotypes and discrimination in the legal system
• Effect of gender stereotypes on policy-making
• Gender stereotypes and access to healthcare
• Legal protections against gender-based discrimination
• Impact of gender stereotypes on LGBTQ+ rights

Intersectionality and Gender Stereotypes

• Impact of race on gender stereotypes
• Gender stereotypes and disability
• Intersection of gender and socioeconomic status
• Gender stereotypes and age
• Challenges faced by individuals at the intersection of multiple marginalized identities

By exploring these diverse gender stereotypes essay ideas, students can delve into various facets of the issue and contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of its impact on society. Whether examining gender stereotypes in education, the workplace, media, relationships, or health, each topic offers a unique opportunity for critical analysis and meaningful discourse.

Barbie Doll Should Be Banned

Hip hop negative effects, made-to-order essay as fast as you need it.

Each essay is customized to cater to your unique preferences

+ experts online

Gender Stereotypes in Zootopia

Equality in workplace: sociology and gender stereotypes, gender stereotypes and their effect on children, the impact of society on creating gender stereotypes, let us write you an essay from scratch.

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

A Report on Gender Equality

Literature's portrayal of gender roles in society, gender stereotypes and dilemma faced by female leaders, the meaning of being a man in nowadays culture, get a personalized essay in under 3 hours.

Expert-written essays crafted with your exact needs in mind

Gender Stereotypes in The Workplace: a Research

Gender stereotypes in modern movies: beauty and the beast, gender stereotypes in the usa, gender stereotypes in disney princess movies, gender stereotypes in parenting and family, definitions, development and aftermath of racial and gender stereotypes, representation of negative gender stereotypes in the movie mulan, gender stereotypes: disney princesses are not harmful to young girls, unfavorability and favorability of female boss, the problem of a lack of female leaders, a theme of gender equality in trifles by susan glaspell, women's struggle in fighting gender inequality in the us, gender roles and stereotypes in walt disney's films, representation of stereotypes in the media, gender differences in the education achievements of boys and girls, women in literature: lanyer vs. modern stereotypes, the portrayals of females and males in superhero movies, rape culture: victim blaming and gender stereotyping, the problem of stereotypes in american society, gender roles in asian culture: their reflection in literature.

A gender stereotype is a generalized view or preconception about attributes or characteristics, or the roles that are or ought to be possessed by, or performed by, women and men.

The four basic kinds of gender stereotypes can relate to personality traits, domestic behaviors, occupations, and physical appearance.

Women are natural nurturers; men are natural leaders. Women with children are less devoted to their jobs. Boys and men are expected to use violence and aggression to prove their manliness. Boys should be directed to like blue and green; girls toward red and pink.

1. Ellemers, N. (2018). Gender stereotypes. Annual review of psychology, 69, 275-298. (https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev-psych-122216-011719) 2. Heilman, M. E. (2012). Gender stereotypes and workplace bias. Research in organizational Behavior, 32, 113-135. (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0191308512000093) 3. Haines, E. L., Deaux, K., & Lofaro, N. (2016). The times they are a-changing… or are they not? A comparison of gender stereotypes, 1983–2014. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 40(3), 353-363. (https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0361684316634081?journalCode=pwqa) 4. Deaux, K., & Lewis, L. L. (1984). Structure of gender stereotypes: Interrelationships among components and gender label. Journal of personality and Social Psychology, 46(5), 991. (https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1984-25799-001) 5. Cvencek, D., Meltzoff, A. N., & Greenwald, A. G. (2011). Math–gender stereotypes in elementary school children. Child development, 82(3), 766-779. (https://srcd.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01529.x) 6. Sanbonmatsu, K. (2002). Gender stereotypes and vote choice. american Journal of political Science, 20-34. (https://www.jstor.org/stable/3088412) 7. Bian, L., Leslie, S. J., & Cimpian, A. (2017). Gender stereotypes about intellectual ability emerge early and influence children’s interests. Science, 355(6323), 389-391. (https://www.science.org/doi/full/10.1126/science.aah6524) 8. Deaux, K., Winton, W., Crowley, M., & Lewis, L. L. (1985). Level of categorization and content of gender stereotypes. Social Cognition, 3(2), 145-167. (https://guilfordjournals.com/doi/abs/10.1521/soco.1985.3.2.145) 9. Koch, J. W. (2000). Do citizens apply gender stereotypes to infer candidates' ideological orientations?. The Journal of Politics, 62(2), 414-429. (https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1111/0022-3816.00019)

Relevant topics

• Sex, Gender and Sexuality
• Gender Roles
• Gender Criticism
• Effects of Social Media
• Sociological Imagination
• American Identity
• Social Media

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

No need to pay just yet!

Bibliography

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

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

Gender Roles and Stereotyping in Education Essay

Introduction.

Gender issues have been discussed during many international meetings and forums. The role of both sexes in society has raised many questions while most analysts and researchers have found out that education plays a great role in determining the role of a gender personality. Teachers instructing children should be familiar with methods of effective analysis of gender roles with students since it is a serious problem affecting contemporary society. Stereotypes produce a negative effect on human beings leading to failure in understanding the needs and motivations of another sex. In this essay, the relationship between stereotypes and genuine gender roles is discussed broadly about activities and the effectiveness of performance of individuals.

The academic performance of male and female students differs due to stereotypes producing effects on their self-identification and individual progress. According to researches conducted in most schools worldwide, girls perform better in languages than boys (Pajares and Valiante, 2002) whereas male students are better in exact sciences that require a logical approach and numeric data analysis. Females are found to be better at defining and describing their thoughts because their skills and logic enable them to do it better than, for instance, calculating and solving mathematical problems. Masculine motivation is oriented toward performing challenging and resource-consuming assignments that deal with calculations and scientific innovations. Teachers play an important role in modeling the self-identification of students at school since they spend most of the time with them.

Educators should be trained on methods of explaining gender roles effectively about possible differences and shifts that occur due to technological progress and changes in society. It is necessary to encourage both genders to play active roles in society regardless of their sex though taking into account their skills and competencies (Connolly, 2008). The best way the teachers can do this is by encouraging the students to use their inborn skills.

Recent findings show that stereotyping is harmful to society because it reduces the chances of people searching for information effectively. As information is an integral part of our lives and most work is related to it, individuals should resist the effects of stereotyping. In the USA, the racial stereotyping of youth has led to the increase of antisocial activities such as robbery and murder in the streets (Welch, 2007). Stereotypes are based on a generalization of certain characteristics that are said to be typical for some groups of people leading to the labeling of all people of this group as those possessing such a characteristic.

To sum up, the topic of gender should be introduced in educational institutions to enable the students to learn the differences and peculiar features of gender roles in the community. Though findings show that female and male students do have some differences in academic performance that occur due to their sex, students should be encouraged to shift roles and use their skills regardless of the effects of stereotyping. Teachers should be trained to give clear and useful instruction to students on the issue of gender roles in modern society. Stereotypes help people to manipulate others’ viewpoints by omitting the details and escaping a multifaceted approach in dealing with a particular individual. Therefore, students should learn more about gender roles and the negative effects of stereotyping; besides, students need to avoid those effects.

• Connolly, P. (2008). A critical review of some recent developments in quantitative research on gender and achievement in the United Kingdom. Routledge and Francis Journal , 29(3), 249-260.
• Pajares, F., & Valiante, G. (2002). Gender differences in writing motivation and achievement of middle school students: a function of gender orientation? Apps for Library Journal, 26 (3), 366-381.
• Welch, K. (2007). Black criminal stereotypes and racial profiling. Journal of Contemporary criminal Journal , 23 (3), 575-596.
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2022, January 14). Gender Roles and Stereotyping in Education. https://ivypanda.com/essays/gender-roles-and-stereotyping-in-education/

"Gender Roles and Stereotyping in Education." IvyPanda , 14 Jan. 2022, ivypanda.com/essays/gender-roles-and-stereotyping-in-education/.

IvyPanda . (2022) 'Gender Roles and Stereotyping in Education'. 14 January.

IvyPanda . 2022. "Gender Roles and Stereotyping in Education." January 14, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/gender-roles-and-stereotyping-in-education/.

1. IvyPanda . "Gender Roles and Stereotyping in Education." January 14, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/gender-roles-and-stereotyping-in-education/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Gender Roles and Stereotyping in Education." January 14, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/gender-roles-and-stereotyping-in-education/.

• Stereotyping and Labeling Impact on Human Life
• Mass Media Role in Stereotyping Females in Sports
• Dangers of Stereotyping Students
• Sexuality, Gender, or the Natural History of Sex
• Women in the Moso Community
• Rust’s “Bisexuality: The State of the Union”
• Gender Related Questions in the Jewish War Novel by Tova Reich
• “Are There Differences Between the Brains of Males and Females?” by Doctor Sabattini

An official website of the United States government

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

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

• Publications
• Account settings

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

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

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

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

1. Introduction

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

2.1. Stereotypical Portrayals

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

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

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

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

2.2. Objectifying Portrayals

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

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

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

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

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

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

2.3. Sexualized Portrayals

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

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

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

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

3. Discussion

3.1. critical discussion of evidence.

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

Summary of findings.

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

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

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

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

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

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

3.2. Limitations

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

3.3. Future Directions

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

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

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

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

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

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

4. Conclusions

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

Funding Statement

This research received no external funding.

Author Contributions

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

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

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

Gender Stereotypes Essay

Gender stereotypes are beliefs about the characteristics and behaviors of men and women. These beliefs can be based on biology, social norms, or cultural ideals. Gender roles are the expectations that individuals, groups, and societies have about the behaviors, attitudes, and emotions that men and women should express.

Gender stereotypes often lead to gender discrimination, which is the unequal treatment of individuals based on their gender. Gender discrimination can take many forms, including exclusion from education or employment opportunities, violence, and inequality in pay and promotion.

Despite progress in recent years, gender stereotypes and discrimination are still prevalent in many parts of the world. Efforts to address these issues must begin with an understanding of the origins of these stereotypes and how they are perpetuated. Only then can we begin to challenge and change them.

Throughout the years, society has evolved in many ways. There is always something new to criticize about a person, particularly when it comes to gender stereotypes. Society can have a significant impact on how children are raised and how they behave as adults. Children will learn a lot about the world from Gender roles

It is important to stop these kinds of gender roles so that everyone can have an equal opportunity to succeed. Gender stereotypes are preconceived notions, usually about a group of people, that one holds in their head. People often think of men as being strong and independent while women are nurturing and emotional.

These types of Stereotypes can be hurtful because they limit what people feel they can do. They also promote sexist attitudes and behaviors. For example, if a young girl is told that she can’t play with trucks because “that’s for boys” she may start to believe that she isn’t good at mechanical things.

This could then lead her to not pursue a career in engineering or mechanics. On the other hand, if a boy is told he has to play with trucks because “that’s what boys do” he may start to believe that he isn’t allowed to express his emotions. This could lead him to bottle up his feelings which could have negative consequences later on in life.

It is important to stop these kinds of gender roles so that everyone can have an equal opportunity to succeed. We need to break down the barriers that are preventing people from following their dreams. So instead of telling our children that they can’t do something because of their gender, we should be encouraging them to pursue anything they want. Because at the end of the day, we are all human beings with unlimited potential.

Stereotypes have been with us for a long time. A stereotype is an widely accepted concept or image of a certain sort of individual or object. For everything, from men to sandwiches, society has come up with a list of them. Someone who is obsessed with sex, lazy, messy, in love with automobiles, addicted to video games, a shoe collector

There are many other characteristics that could be added but these are some of the most commonly used. These traits have been ingrained in our society and because of it, they have become part of who we are as people.

The problem with stereotypes is that they’re usually based on very little evidence and they can be incredibly limiting. They stop us from seeing people as individuals and instead see them as a member of a group. This can lead to discrimination and prejudice, which can ultimately result in serious consequences like hate crimes.

So why do we have stereotypes? It’s likely because they offer us a way to simplify a complex world. Instead of having to think about all the individual differences between people, we can just lump them into groups and assume that they all share the same characteristics. It’s an easy way to make sense of our surroundings but it’s also a dangerous one.

If we want to move away from stereotypes, we need to start by acknowledging that they exist. Once we’re aware of them, we can start to question them when we see them being used. Only then can we start to change the way we think about gender and other groups of people.

A youngster has to learn about these things at a young age. Society will urge him to follow the norms of being a guy, and if he doesn’t, he’ll be seen as different from everyone else. female stereotypes are harsher than male stereotypes, given that terms and conditions for women were significantly different in the past.

For example, women were not able to vote or work. They were pretty much just stay at home housewives that had to cook and clean all day. The stereotype of a woman being a housewife still exists today to some extent. Even though times have changed and both genders are now able to do most things, some people are stuck in their ways.

Nowadays, there are still some gender stereotypes in society. Some people believe that men should be the ones working while the women stay at home. This is not always the case though as more and more women are becoming breadwinners for their families. In addition, there are also manysingle mothers who are raising their children on their own.

While it is true that men and women can both do most things, there are still some areas where one gender is typically better than the other. For example, men are generally stronger than women and thus can do jobs that require physical strength. Women, on the other hand, are usually better at multitasking and can often handle more than one thing at a time.

Despite the progress that has been made in recent years, there are still some people who cling to outdated gender stereotypes. This can be a problem as it can limit people’s opportunities and prevent them from reaching their full potential. It is important to remember that everyone is different and that anyone can do anything they set their mind to regardless of their gender.

Children are exposed to a plethora of ideas from all corners of the globe on social media and television. They’ll be talked into looking or acting a certain way, liking or disliking particular things; if they want to be accepted, society will put ideas in their heads about how to live their life. Girls and boys nag on themselves because they don’t meet society’s ideal standard and then grow up believing that something is wrong with them until one day they figure out something really significant: society is trash, so you should not let it influence your decisions.

If you’re a boy, you’re probably expected to like rough sports, be really good at math, and have little to no emotions. If you don’t like any of those things or if you excel in something that isn’t “manly” enough, society will put you down and try to change you. You’ll be called girly, weak, pathetic; anything that could bring your self esteem lower than it already is.

And if heaven forbid you actually have emotions, society will make sure to remind you that “boys don’t cry”. This phrase is one of the most toxic things ever said because it completely strips males of their emotions and teaches them that it’s wrong to have feelings. It’s no wonder that males have such a hard time opening up about their problems; they were never taught that it was okay.

Girls go through a similar process, but instead of being called weak they’re called bossy, dramatic, or attention seeking. If a girl shows any emotion other than happiness, she’s considered overreacting and is told to “calm down”. And if she dares to be good at math or science, she’s either accused of cheating or labeled as a nerd.

Society tells girls that they need to be pretty and skinny and like all the same things as other girls; they need to be put together at all times and they can never show any sort of weakness. This incredibly unrealistic standard that society has set for females is the reason why so many girls have low self esteem and are constantly dieting.

Neither of these gender stereotypes are healthy for anyone. They’re both incredibly harmful and they need to stop. So next time you see a boy crying or a girl being good at math, don’t give them weird looks or make fun of them. Let them know that it’s okay to be themselves and that you accept them for who they are. We need to start teaching children that they don’t have to adhere to society’s standards; they can like whatever they want and be whoever they want. Only then will we start to see a change.

More Essays

• Gender Roles In Media Portrayal Of Gender Stereotypes Research Paper
• Gender Stereotypes In Sports Essay
• Gender Stereotypes In Children Essay
• Gender Stereotypes In Inside Out Essay
• Gender Roles Essay
• Gender Stereotypes In The Film Mulan Essay
• Gender, Class, and Race Stereotypes in American Television
• Gender Stereotypes Affecting People’s Identity Essay
• Gender Stereotypes In Sailormoon Essay
• Gender Stereotypes In Children’s Books Essay

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.