The scientific article that will be discussed probes at this question and looks to determine whether children differentiate in their views on features of gender roles that adults believe to be more biologically-attributable and features more socially-attributable.
Author Marianne G. Taylor begins her article, “The Development of Children’s Beliefs about Social and Biological Aspects of Gender Differences”, by introducing some of the current knowledge based on previous studies about children’s beliefs about the origins of aspects of gender roles. She then moves on to discuss two particular studies, which the author believes to answer many outstanding questions left by previous studies that were done on the topic. Previous research suggested
…show more content…
that there are indeed differences and changes in belief that come with age. Findings suggested that young children believed biological causes to be the reason for differences between men and women, and as they grow older, begin to recognize the role that environment plays (Taylor 1556). Amongst different studies, however, there is an inconsistency as to when the shift occurs. One interview study conducted in 1976 indicated that children were not able to discuss gender roles as being unpredictable, variable, and a product of socialization until the age of 12; while another study conducted in 1984 discovered that even by age 15, only 61% of girls and 26% of boys were able to explain gender differences with socialization (Taylor 1556). More evidence from Leahy & Shirk (1984) and Martin (1989), supported that once gender stereotypes were formed, they only became less strict or fixed, and more probabilistic as children grow older (Taylor 1556). Based on such previous experiments and other similar studies, it is unclear how children develop their understanding of biological and social components of gender and gender roles. The study conducted by Taylor to observe age-related differences in “children’s beliefs about the development of gender-stereotyped and biological properties” involved children and adults being told a story about a baby who has been raised on an island of solely opposite sex individuals from birth or, contrastingly, on an island with solely same sex individuals (Taylor 1558).
The children, who were 4-10 years old, and adults were then asked what characteristics the child would have at age 10 in each of the given scenarios (Taylor 1558). This study was different from previous studies in that it does not ask the children to explain the origins of gender differences, but encourages them to view how they picture the outcomes of a scenario where biological and social factors conflict with each other (Taylor 1558). One hundred sixty children participated in this study, where eighty were assigned to the opposite sex environment scenario and eighty were assigned to the same sex environment scenario (Taylor 1559). Additionally, 32 college students participated in the study through completing a questionnaire (Taylor 1559). Children were tested in isolation by a female experimenter, who told two stories, one with a female character and the other with a male character (Taylor 1559). The children were then asked a set of questions about approximately 20 properties of the character, of a gender-neutral name, would have when he or she turned age 10 (Taylor 1559). Twelve properties related to stereotypes, while four questions related to biological properties; and in addition to those, the children were also asked about four “environmental control” items, which evaluated the children’s memory of the stories (Taylor
1559). Results indicated that all the children had high memory retention for the stories. Taylor found that children and adults in the same sex environment group favored feminine qualities more often for the female character than male, and masculine qualities more often for the male character than female (Taylor 1561). Additionally, whether participants thought that a child exposed to an opposite sex environment would have gender-stereotyped qualities largely depended on if they thought the qualities were biologically determined or if they were influenced by environment (Taylor 1561). Overall, results suggested that when children reach age 9 or 10, they begin to understand that environmental factors are influencing the formation of gender roles (Taylor 1564). Before age 9, children did not acknowledge environmental influences and appear to believe that each person belongs to a gender category and will eventually grow to become just like any other member of his or her gender category, such as that a male will row to be like other males even if brought up in a female-only environment (Taylor 1564).
There are many different facets to the nature versus nurture argument that has been going on for decades. One of these, the influence of nature and nurture on gender roles and behaviors, is argued well by both Deborah Blum and Aaron Devor, both of whom believe that society plays a large role in determining gender. I, however, have a tendency to agree with Blum that biology and society both share responsibility for these behaviors. The real question is not whether gender expression is a result of nature or nurture, but how much of a role each of these plays.
In “The Gender Blur: Where Does Biology End and Society Take Over?” Deborah Blum states that “gender roles of our culture reflect an underlying biology” (Blum 679). Maasik and Solomon argue that gender codes and behavior “are not the result of some sort of natural or biological destiny, but are instead politically motivated cultural constructions,” (620) raising the question whether gender behavior begins in culture or genetics. Although one may argue that gender roles begin in either nature or nurture, many believe that both culture and biology have an influence on the behavior.
...socially directed hormonal instructions which specify that females will want to have children and will therefore find themselves relatively helpless and dependent on males for support and protection. The schema claims that males are innately aggressive and competitive and therefore will dominate over females. The social hegemony of this ideology ensures that we are all raised to practice gender roles which will confirm this vision of the nature of the sexes. Fortunately, our training to gender roles is neither complete nor uniform. As a result, it is possible to point to multitudinous exceptions to, and variations on, these themes. Biological evidence is equivocal about the source of gender roles; psychological androgyny is a widely accepted concept. It seems most likely that gender roles are the result of systematic power imbalances based on gender discrimination.9
Recent research on the interaction of gender, ethnicity, and identity has shown that every culture have had some effect on children’s and their awareness of gender bias. For example, studies has shown that eleven and twelve year old girls are more than likely to believe that they are targets of gender bias than boys, while on the other hand, boys are not as concerned with gender bias or stereotypes as girls seem to be and are usually unaware of it’s concept (Brown, Bigler & Chu,2010).
A dominant debate in current psychological research is one on gender development. Psychologists try to understand relative importance of social and cognitive factors. Various theories are brought up in this field and in this essay two of the most standard theory in this field are going to be explained. The theories covered in this essay relate to aspects of children’s thinking that are central to their gender development. This will include, Kohlberg‘s theory of gender development (1966) and Bandura‘s theory of social cognitive development (1986). Theories like these help psychologists understand how and in which way children understand behaviour and which leads them to do so.
1. Using Kohlberg’s model of gender role development, discuss the variability of gender stereotypes for children at different ages. What accounts for children’s learning of these stereotypes? P. 153
For many years society has embraced the idea that the difference between men and women were biologically determined. Others see not only the physical but also the social, emotional and intellectual differences between males and females. Though through traditions, media, and press, we act accordingly to how others view us. Each individual has pressure placed upon them based on their genders. Our sex is determined by genetics while our gender is programmed by social customs. Gender roles by definition are the social norms that dictate what is socially appropriate male and female behavior. Some theories interpret that a woman is tender and a loving mother, while on the other hand men are aggressive and are the dominant one of the family. An individual gender role is modeled through socialization. Individuals learn the ways, traditions, norms, and rules of getting along with others. A person’s environment has a big influence on the roles deemed expectable for men and women.
Gender may be a universal concept, but the meaning of gender differs between societies. The way humans behave, speak, experience, think, and view the world is the final product of socialization. From the moment the sex of a fetus is known, humans are being molded into the person society wants them to be. Different parts of society have different functions in the gender-socialization process. The familial relationships and interactions one has with their immediate surroundings—peers, school, religion, and neighborhood—are the most influential aspects of gender development. Loosely connected societal influences like mass media, politics, and culture are influential as well. Throughout childhood, one’s family and interactions with their immediate surroundings teach and reinforce gender, while the rest of society acts as a reinforcer. During adolescence, the broader society begins to take on a minor instructor role in relation to the family in the further development of gender. Essentially, family always acts as the main gender instructor and reinforcer, while society acts as the secondary gender instructor and reinforcer.
All around the world society has created an ideological perspective for the basis of gender roles. Gender and sex are often times misused and believed to be interchangeable. This is not the case. There are two broad generalization of sexes; female and male, yet there is a vast number of gender roles that each sex should more or less abide by. The routinely cycle of socially acceptable behaviors and practices is what forms the framework of femininity and masculinity. The assigned sex categories given at birth have little to do with the roles that a person takes on. Biological differences within females and males should not be used to construe stereotypes or discriminate within different groups. Social variables such as playing with dolls or
The actual timeframe in which kids discover their genders is open for debate, as not all scientists agree on the ages. Blum states, “some scientists argue for some evidence of gender awareness in infancy, perhaps by the age of 12 months. The consensus seems to be that full-blown “I’m a girl” or “I’m a boy” instincts arrive between the ages of 2 and 3” (Blum 208). Furthermore, the family environment plays a massive role in helping children discover their sex. Children living in a long-established family setting that has a father and a mother might develop their gender identities more closely. In contrast, children in a contemporary family environment might grasp a more diverse view of gender roles, such as everyone participating in cleaning the house and not just mom. As children grow older, they naturally develop behavior patterns of close relations with the kids of the same sex, and prefer to spend their time with them. Blum explains “interviews with children find that 3-year-olds say that about half their friendships are with the opposite sex” (Blum 208). In this stage of life, the boys want to hang out with other boys. Similarly, girls wanted to spend more time with the other girls. As a result, each gender has little or no contact with each other until they approach their teenage years. Overall, the question here is whether our gender roles occur naturally or affected by family and friends. I believe it is a case for both, because I remember growing up in a “traditional” household where I saw the distinctions between my mother and father. My father went to work every day and my mother took care of me and my brother. Furthermore, my understanding of gender carried on into my school years, as I preferred hanging out with other boys and did boy stuff until I started dating. I also understand that gender behaviors and roles do not stop at this point, and we continue to develop other behaviors
Rigidity and flexibility of gender stereotypes in childhood: Developmental or differential?. Infant And Child Development, 14(4), 365-381. doi:10.1002/icd.399 Zosuls, K. M., Ruble, D. N., Tamis-LeMonda, C. S., Shrout, P. E., Bornstein, M. H., & Greulich, F. K. (2009). The acquisition of gender labels in infancy: Implications for gender-typed play. Developmental Psychology, 45(3), 688-701.
Witt, S. D. (n.d.). The Influence of Peers on Children’s Socialization to Gender Roles. Retrieved from University of Akron: http://gozips.uakron.edu/~susan8/artpeers.htm
This essay will argue that children should definitely be raised with gender, and address some key concepts and perspectives used in sociological analysis.
Witt, S. D. (n.d.). Parental influence on children’s socialization to gender roles. Retrieved from http://cla.calpoly.edu/~bmori/syll/311syll/Witt.html
Reese, C. (2000). Biological Differences Establish Gender Roles. Male/female roles: opposing viewpoints (pp. 18-19). San Diego, Calif.: Greenhaven Press.