Clausell tend to “shape” their male and

Published by admin on

Clausell 1
It has been prevalently believed, by professional and laypersons alike, that boys and girls in our society are socialized differently and in ways that encourage behavior consistent with our cultural definitions of appropriate sex role behaviors. Sex differences in the socialization differences of parents (mostly mothers) have been described and discussed by many researchers over the years. Maccoby and Jacklin (1974) offered the summary evaluation that the two sexes has revealed to our surprise little differentiation in parent behavior according to the sex of the children (Maccoby and Jacklin, 1966).

Despite these negative conclusions, however, the authors did find evidence that parents tend to “shape” their male and female children in sex-appropriate ways, by dressing them differently, by encouraging sex typed interests, by providing sex-appropriate toys, and by assigning sex-differentiated toys ( Hartley, 1964).

Parental sex-typing behaviors, however, even narrowly defined when viewed in the context of self and sex role development, may be important. For example, Whiting and Edwards (1975) described one process by which sex assigned chores may contribute to later behavioral differences noted between boys and girls. Citing data obtained from field studies in six cultures, noted that girls, more frequently than boys, are assigned domestic and childcare chores (looking after young children, cooking, cleaning, food preparation, grinding) and that girls are assigned responsibilities at an earlier age than boys. Boys, in contrast, are assigned chores that take them from the immediate vicinity of the house, and are given responsibility for feeding, posturing, and herding animals. For boys and girls, these sex differences in assigned work are associated with different frequencies of interactions with various categories of people. Girls interact more often with both adults and infants, whereas boys interact significantly more often with peers. Whiting and Edwards suggest that to some extent the observed behavioral differences between boys and girls in the sample might be a function of sex distinctions in assigned chores. Younger girls in all cultures were found to be significantly more nurturing (offering help and giving support) and significantly more responsible than boys.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

Viewed from another, quite different perspective, these parental shaping behaviors urge the child toward sex-appropriate interests, activities, tasks, and the like may be seen as labeling behaviors. According to the cognitive developmental theory of sex typing as explicated by Kohlberg (1966) and endorsed by Maccoby and Jacklin (1974), sex typing is initiated by the very early labeling of the child with respect to gender. The gender labeling becomes an organizing becomes rubric around which the child actively, selectively, and with increasing complexity constructs a personal sex role definition. Through experience with parents, siblings, and peers, with the outside world, with the media, and with books, the child learns through a variety of techniques including enviornmental manipulation, tutoring and reinforcement; those responses, interests, activities, clothes, play materials, and tasks that are deemed consistent with sex categorization (Whicker and Kronenfeld , 1986).

Sex differentiated parental socialization practices, many of which are reinforced by other socializing agents, contribute to the divergent strategies developed by boys and boys to cope with discrepant experiences. The data from several sources agree that socialization behaviors manifest more frequently by parents of females who tend to foster proximity, discourage independent problem solving, restrict exploration, minimize contingency experiences, and discourage active play and experimentation in the physical world. Because females are provided fewer opportunities for independent exploration and experimentation, because their toys encourage imitative play, because their play activities are more structured, and because proximity to mothers facilitates imitative behaviors, females are more likely to rely on existing structures in processing new inputs.

In contrast, the socialization experiences of males appear to be less constraining of activity and more encouraging of exploration. Because boys are given greater freedom to venture into the outside world, they are more often in a position to encounter situations that must be dealt with independently. These early experiences of males, which demand reexamination of premises, restructuring of understandings, and the construction of new schemata, many serve to prepare males for the less predictable, less structured world that will inhabit in their adult lives (Block, 1984).

Another active area of research on female achievement grows out of cognitive and social psychology and is known as the attribution theory.

Gender lot of work you knowWe also

Published by admin on

Gender Roles
Children learn from their parents and society the conception of
“feminine” and “masculine.” Much about these conceptions is not biological at
all but cultural. The way we tend to think about men and women and their gender
roles in society constitute the prevailing paradigm that influences out thinking.

Riane Eisler points out that the prevailing paradigm makes it difficult for us
to analyze properly the roles of men and women in prehistory “we have a cultural
bias that we bring to the effort and that colors our decision-making processes.”
Sexism is the result of that bias imposed by our process of acculturation.


Gender roles in Western societies have been changing rapidly in recent
years, with the changes created both by evolutionary changes in society,
including economic shifts which have altered the way people work and indeed
which people work as more and more women enter the workforce, and by perhaps
pressure brought to make changes because of the perception that the traditional
social structure was inequitable. Gender relations are a part of the
socialization process, the initiation given the young by society, teaching them
certain values and creating in them certain behavior patterns acceptable to
their social roles. These roles have been in a state of flux in American
society in recent years, and men and women today can be seen as having expanded
their roles in society, with women entering formerly male dominions and men
finding new ways to relate to and function in the family unit.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now


When I was growing up a woman was never heard of having a job other than
a school teacher or seamstress. Our(women’s)job was to take care
of the house. We had a big garden out back from which we got most
of our vegetablesA garden is a lot of work you knowWe also had to
make clothes when there were none to be had(hand-me- downs)
Gender can be defined as a social identity consisting of the role a
person is to play because of his or her sex. There is a diversity in male and
female roles, making it impossible to define gender in terms of narrow male and
female roles. Gender is culturally defined, with significant differences from
culture to culture. These differences are studied by anthropologists to
ascertain the range of behaviors that have developed to define gender and on the
forces at work in the creation of these roles. The role of women in American
society was conditioned by religious attitudes and by the conditions of life
that prevailed through much of American history. The culture of Europe and
America was based for centuries on a patriarchal system in which exclusive
ownership of the female by a given male was considered important, with the
result that women were regulated to the role of property with no voice in their
own fate. The girl-child was trained from birth to fit the role awaiting her,
and as long as compensations were adequate, women were relatively content:
“For Example, if in return for being a man’s property a woman receives
economic security, a full emotional life centering around husband and children,
and an opportunity to express her capacities in the management of her home, she
has little cause for discontent.”
While this statement is arguable in the way it assumes that women are
not discontented under such circumstances, it is clear that for most of history
women were expected to be content with this sort of life and were trained for
that purpose. Clearly, circumstances of family life have changed in the modern
era. Industry has been taken out of the home, and large families are no longer
economically possible or socially desired. The home is no longer the center of
the husband’s life, and for the traditional wife there is only a narrowing of
interests and possibilities for development: “Increasingly, the woman finds
herself without an occupation and with an unsatisfactory emotional life.” The
change in sex roles that can be discerned in society is closely tied with
changes in the structure of the family. Changes in both family structure and
sex roles over the last century have produced the ferment we still see today,
and one of the problems with the changing role of women is the degree to which
society perceives this is causing unwanted changes in the family, though it is
just as true that changes in the family have altered the roles of women.

As women entered the early 1990s, they faced a number of problems.

Most of these problems have been around for some time, and women have challenged
them and even alleviated them without solving them completely. They are
encountered in the workplace, in the home, in every facet of life. Women have
made advances toward the equality they seek only to encounter a backlash in the
form of religious fundamentalism, claims of reverse discrimination by males, and
hostility from a public that thinks the women’s movement has won everything it
wanted and should thus now be silent. Both the needs of women today and the
backlash that has developed derive from the changes in social and sexual roles
that have taken place in the period since World War II. These changes involve
the new ability of women to break out of the gender roles created for them by a
patriarchal society.


The desperation women feel has been fed throughout history by the
practice of keeping women in their place by limiting their options. This was
accomplished on one level by preventing women from gaining their the sort of
education offered to men, and while this has changed to a great extent, there
are still inequalities in the opportunities offered to men as opposed to women.

Susan Brownmiller writes:
The sad history of prohibitions on women’s learning is too well known to
be recorded here. . . In much of the world women are barred from advanced
knowledge and technical training
Yet opening the world of business with new opportunities for women does not
dissipate much of this frustration because both men and women continue to be
ruled by their early training, by the acculturation process which decides for
them what sort of existence they will have. This can result in feelings of
guilt when their reality and the image they have been taught from childhood do
not mesh.


It would be a mistake to see changing gender roles in society as
threatening only to males who dominate that society. Such changes also threaten
many women who have accepted more traditional roles and see change as a threat.

“I don’t know how your mother does it all. . . I think time are harder for women
these days. . . so many choices.” This response is not new. When women first
united for the right to vote at the beginning of this century, they were opposed
by women’s groups who wanted things to remain as they were. Many of these women
were ladies of means and social position in society:
The main burden of their argument was that woman suffrage placed an
additional and unbearable burden on women, whose place was in the home. . .

These arguments are heard today from religious fundamentalists who believe that
the women’s movement is a threat to the family. The fact is that the family has
changed and that the traditional family structure of homemaker, husband as
breadwinner, and children bow constitutes only 10 percent of families. The role
for women has expanded with more women in the workplace and with a variety of
family structures with new roles for all members of the family. Business has
been slow to change and to acknowledge the new family, and for all the
complaints about the women’s movement as anti-family, the movement has instead
followed the trend of placing the family in the forefront of addressing family
issues as vital to women.


There is much evidence that boys and girls are treated differently form
birth, and this fact has been noted in every world culture:
It may never be possible to separate out the precise effects of
physiology and cultural conditioning on human beings. Not only do they
individually influence people but they interact with each other and with each
person’s unique essence to affect human behavior. To accord with the reality of
this complex interplay of factors, and to accord with an increasingly complex
external world, feminists ask simply for options in life styles.


Those stuck in sexism, however, cannot grant even the simple request to ask why
women are inferior. The reason sexism exists at all is because of an
acculturation process which subtly creates it, and it is perpetuated in part for
that reason and also because perceived changes in the roles and status of women
create a backlash based on fear of change.


Surveys have shown that identical resumes or scholarly articles are
rated lower if the applicant is though to be a woman rather than a man: “Man’s
success is more likely to be attributed to ability and woman’s to luck.” While
advances have been made over the last decade, the challenge remains for the next,
and “as long as women constitute small minorities in nontraditional employment
contexts, substantial obstacles will remain.” The women in the workplace must
work harder to succeed than their male counterparts, and once they have
succeeded they have to deal with the envy and anxiety this arouses. Women who
do not advance only confirm the stereotype for others:
The perception remains that women can’t make it by conventional
standards, or are less committed to doing so. In either event, they do
not seem to warrant the same investment in training, assistance,
and promotion opportunities as their male counterparts.


Feminist theorists have been calling for some time for a change in the
political climate. They want more than just more women in office and the
political arena; they want a new type of political thinking, one that empowers
people rather than government and that addresses the issues that are of
importance to men and women:
If we can eliminate the false polarities and appreciate the limits and
true potential of women’s power, we will be able to join with men
–follow or leadin the new human politics that must emerge beyond
reaction. This new human liberation will enable us to take back the
day and the night, and use the precious and limited resources of our
earth and the limitless resources of our human capital to erect new kinds of
homes for all our dreams. . .


The perception the public has had on the role of men and women is
outdated and has been for some time, but public attitudes change slowly even in
the face of overwhelming evidence. More than 40 years ago, anthropologist
Margaret Mead noted the way the West had developed its concept of male and
female:
There has long been a habit in Western civilization of men to have
a picture of womanhood to which women reluctantly conformed,
and for women to make demands on man to which men adjusted
even more reluctantly. This has been a accurate picture of the way in
which we have structured our society, with women as keepers of the
house who insist that the man wipe their feet on the door-mat, and men
as keepers of women in the house who insist that their wives
should stay modestly indoors.


Today, people are far less willing to accept these artificial roles even
reluctantly, and this includes the provision keeping women in the home and out
of the public arena. To have more women in office it is necessary to have more
women run.


As noted, public views change more slowly than the reality of gender
roles. They will continue to change slowly as long as we continue acculturating
children with the same sexual stereotypes that have so long prevailed. It is
necessary that we address this issue from early childhood, with parents
demonstrating a different view of gender and sexual roles just as the school and
church should take a part in eliminating the old stereotypes in favor of a more
reasonable and equitable way to view both men and women.

Categories: Industry

Gender my parents had me engage in

Published by admin on

Gender Roles
While I was growing up, gender roles were highly defined by my parents and teachers as well as all other societal influences. Boys were taught to do “boy” things and girls were taught to do “girly” things. The toys that children play with and the activities that are encouraged by adults demonstrate the influence of gender roles on today’s youth. In my formative years, the masculine traits that I learned came out because of the activities that my parents had me engage in and the things that they expected from me. The expectations that my parents held for my sister, on the other hand, varied from those that they had for me, and this was made apparent through the different activities that occupied her time. My parents treated us in completely different regard. We had different toys, different friends, and we were supposed to like different things. When I got hurt my parents would say things like “shake it off,” or “that didn’t hurt that much,” but when my sister would cry, they would give her attention and pull her aside to take care of her. I got into a lot more trouble throughout my life than my sister and this was, in part, overlooked as the boy’s mischievous nature.
I played with GI Joes and He-Man action figures, while my sister played with Barbie Dolls. I remember when she and I would play together and the GI Joes would be married to the Barbie Dolls. When I made the action figures fight over the Barbie Dolls, my sister would always get mad. She was more interested in the wedding ceremony. My parents always encouraged me to do things like skateboard, ride my bike, or take karate classes. My sister would jump rope or hullahoop. I remember when my sister wanted to skateboard because I was doing it and my parents would not let her because they said she would get hurt. My mother would cook with my sister, but never with me. My dad would take me to basketball and soccer games.
When you’re young enough that your parents still make all of your fashion decisions, they dress you according to gender roles. I would never wear colors like pink or orange. I wore blue, black, and green. Little girls’ clothes had flowers and ladybugs on them. My mother used to care what my sister left the house wearing, while it made no difference to her what I had on.
When I was ten years old, I specifically remember a few double standards that existed. I was allowed to call girls, but my sister was not allowed to call boys. This one lasted until the end of high school. I was allowed to stay out later than she was, too.


There was no place, where gender roles were more prevalent than in sports while I was growing up. Coaches, parents, and peers had a large influence in this context. Coaches have a tremendous influence on kids, and gender roles are driven into young athletes’ heads. There were always those girls who would play like boys and they were referred to as “tomboys.” The girls who did not conform to the gender roles were looked at negatively. Boys who did not play hard or weren’t good athletes were called “girls” and “wussies.” Behaving under the ideal ideological standards of the opposite gender was viewed very negatively by society. Girls were not supposed to act masculine and it was nearly forbidden for boys to show traditionally feminine characteristics.
When I was in high school, a very macho attitude and behavior was expected of male athletes. This was reinforced by coaches and peers alike. Male athletes were praised for acting tough and ridiculed or punished for being weak, soft, or feminine. My soccer team carried out a ritual at practice when we would wrestle to determine who was the toughest athlete. In a way, it reminds me of some type of tribal manhood challenge. My coach would select two people to fight and they were forced to do so or they would be mocked by teammates. This would never occur at one of the girls’ practices.
In regard to the influences that affected my attitudes and behaviors, I believe that they were and are healthy. My personal perception of what constitutes a feminine woman has been highly influenced by society norms. When I was young, my parents, by encouraging male activities and behavior, gave me some identity. I believe that gender roles are necessary to give children a template for their lives as to where they fit in, whether they conform or not.
I think that today people are more likely not to conform to gender roles and this is a positive thing. There is a little more leeway when it comes to what is acceptable Many women are successfully breaking these molds and participating in occupations and activities that had, up until now, been dominated by men. Although the traditional mold of a girl who wears dresses, cooks, cleans, and stays home with the kids seems to be fading, gender roles will always exist.

Categories: Fashion

x

Hi!
I'm Iren!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out