Abstract
Social attitudes have a considerable impact on how people behave towards gender. During the growing up years of children, their attitude towards gender are shaped largely by how parents relate to them. By mere assigning household chores, young boys and girls learn to associate the meaning of their gender with their roles. It was through the modelling and encouragement of parents and other members of the family that young people learn to act according to their gender. Accordingly, the stereotypical attitude towards gender have a detrimental effect in the development of both girls and boys. Girls tend to abide by the notion that they are caring and nurturing, thus they are fit only for the profession that require such trait; this eventually limits them from pursuing professions in other fields. On the other hand, male are considered to exude masculinity and strength which are the traits expected of leaders. Accordingly, there is a need to change this societal expectation towards gender to achieve a harmonious and more productive relationship between men and women at home and at work.
Keywords: Children, attitudes, development, gender roles
Introduction
Many sociology and psychology literature discussed how societal attitudes impact gender and gender behavior. Accordingly, each society differ in their set of beliefs about the fitting behavior for each gender. This paper aims to discuss the attitudes and ideals in specific societies and how they impact the psychology and behavior towards gender. Specifically, this study revolves around the theory that society and culture play an important role in shaping the societal attitude towards gender.
The Family Pattern of Gender Roles
The early development of an individual is largely impacted by the family; and children learn about gender roles by the modelling and encouragement of members of the family. In an article entitled Parent’s Socialization of Gender in Children, the gender-typed expectations on personality traits was pointed out, such as the expectation on boys’ aggressiveness and girls’ good manners. However, the struggle for gender equality in the past decades resulted in the reinforcement of egalitarian attitude towards gender (Leaper, 2014). Thus, there are some families and parents that held the traditional attitude towards gender, while there are those that expressed egalitarian standpoint. In some instances, parents held traditional views in some aspects, yet are egalitarian in other domains. It was also noted that parents tend to hold a more rigid expectations for male children.
The change in the family's expectation of gender role patterns is attributed to fast-paced industrialization in the past decades. In the last fifty years, women found an increased opportunity to become part of the labor force, especially in industrialized societies where even women with children found employment outside the home (Leaper, 2014). On the other hand, the last few decades saw the greater involvement of men in childcare and home responsibilities, though women remain to handle most of the household work. While the research showed a negative correlation of the father’s involvement in childcare to that of gender stereotyping, it was theorized that his role “demonstrate that the adult male role may include nurturing as well as instrumental activities” (Leaper, 2014). Further, it was also found that children raised by heterosexual parents tend to uphold a stereotypical attitude towards gender roles, compared to children who were raised by same-gender parents.
Parent’s Preferences Over a Male or Female Child
In the United States and most European countries, it was posited that gender egalitarianism was evident based on the findings that most families from these regions prefer to have a girl and a boy. Eventually, there was a change in gender attitude in the United States, as it was found that families during the early part of the 20th century tend to “proceed to a third birth if they had children of the same sex” (Raley & Bianchi, 2006). This attitude towards gender changed in recent decades as indicated by the weakened occurrence of third birth, and it was theorized that American parents are now less concerned about gender.
However, another study showed that fathers in the United States remain to prefer sons. This interpretation comes from the findings that parents with two girls tend to proceed to a third birth in the hope of having a baby boy, compared to parents that have two boys (Raley & Bianchi, 2006). It was also found that a third birth was common in families with two boys inn Findland. These findings were taken to mean that the families prefer boys than girls. Further, a study to examine the gender preference of parents was conducted, and the participants were asked to answer the question, “Suppose you could only have one child, would you prefer it to be a boy or a girl?” The result showed that only 19% of the men preferred a girl while 48% indicated a preference for a boy, in contrast, the women have a slightly higher preference for girls at 35% compared to 30% for boys (Raley & Bianchi, 2006).
Impact of Societal Attitudes on Girls
Household Chores. One aspect where boys and girls tend to be differentiated in the family was on the parent’s reinforcement of gender-based houseworks. Research showed how assigning housework supports inequality between genders, as it was found that despite reports that parents assign household chores in an equal basis, girls tend to do more works overall (Raley & Bianchi, 2006). In addition to that, there was also an indication that most of the assigned chores are ‘gendered’, such as assigning the cleaning for girls and outdoor duties for boys. These forms of reinforcement in the early development of the child can have a limiting impact on girls, such as failing to develop their full potential because of the gender imposed rules.
Education and Academic Achievement. Even within the academic setting, gender stereotyping is still prevalent. For instance, it was a common notion that girls are better in reading and boys are better in mathematics. While boys self-concept with respect to reading remains to be as high as that with the girls, it was found that the lower achievement of girls in mathematics has a negative effect on their self-concept in terms of their mathematical abilities (Endepohls-Ulpe, 2012). The negative self-concept in the field of mathematics may hinder women from pursuing this study.
In an article entitled How Gender Stereotyping Impacts Women in STEM, it was reported that women once dominated the world of computer. This was validated by the fact that the first software business in the Unite States was founded by a woman, who also employed female programmers. Women are considered to have a natural knack on computer programming; in 1987 it was found that about 42% of software developers in the United States were women (Coe, 2015). However, current statistics showed the decline of women in computer science which is now largely dominated by men, this is in addition to the fact that women are underrepresented in the fields of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (Coe, 2015). Studies suggest that the underrepresentation of women in these fields can be attributed to gender stereotyping.
How it Can Hinder their Development
Gender stereotyping can have a detrimental effect on girls, for example, the common notion that girls are not good in mathematics may deter women to pursue a career in this field despite their abilities. It was postulated that girls tend to slack in their performance “if they have been confronted with a negative stereotype towards their group with respect to achievement in certain activities” (Endepohls-Ulpe, 2012). Further, assigned gender roles usually puts women in situations where they have to face different forms of sexism. For example, there are instances when women have to face hostile sexism which occur as an antagonistic attitude towards women who were perceived to challenge male dominance. There is also the benevolent sexism, which is referred to as a form of understated prejudice where women were perceived as weak and sensitive individuals who needed the protection of men.
Impact of Societal Attitudes on Boys
There is the traditional notion that occupations and other activities associated with men are more valuable and esteemed than women’s roles. Accordingly, men are thought to exude confidence, strength and reliability, thus there is a common expectation that men always perform excellently in their assigned roles. This can have a positive impact on them because the high expectation allows them to “get more opportunities to show off their achievements and can initiate more actions to do so” (Endepohls-Ulpe, 2012). Moreover, men are given the initiative to do better in their task because of the societal expectations.
How it can Hinder their Development
Traditional stereotypes do not only hurt girls, they can also be as damaging to the personal development of boys. For example, the common expectation that males are the epitome of strength can be detrimental to the overall development of boys who do not fit the description. It can also be damaging to the male’s self-esteem to be regarded as the pillar of support and strength, when he has to face events that challenge that notion such as cases of unemployment or in cases when women do better than them in a particular field. Some males feel threatened by not being able to come up with the stereotyped expectation of their performance, and this can eventually lead to resentment and reduced self-concept. Moreover, even men who were able to conform to the male gender role identity may face other difficulties such as having poor ability to adjust to situations because they are expected to perform according to a specific ideal.
In Europe, most people think that inequality between men and women is still prevalent. An analysis of six population groups in the European Union indicated that 3 of these groups believed that women are more likely to experience inequality than men. For instance, the respondents from Sweden mentioned that women have a greater chance to face inequality in any of the age group from young, elderly, migrants and the working parents (European, 2015).
Despite the negative impact of stereotypical attitude towards gender, there are also positive aspects that can be associated with it. For example, the designation of women as caring and nurturing individual is beneficial for the family, especially in the role of women as mothers. The nurturing attitude also makes them fit to pursue a career in nursing which is an important profession in the health are industry. For men, it would allow them to develop their leadership skills and become a pillar of support for the family and the community as a whole.
Conclusion
Gender inequality has been around for centuries, and it is fortunate that a large number of women from all over the world were able to stand up to it. However, there is still much to be done because gender inequality, despite its reduced state, is still prevalent even in an advanced country such as the United States. In some organizations, women are considered as a threat to the masculine power, thus subjecting them to prejudicial acts that hinders them from contributing valuable talent. Several scholars pointed out that the eradication of gender inequality will lead to better relations between men and women at home, in the workplace and the society as a whole.
References
Coe, I. (2015). How gender stereotyping impacts women in STEM. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/dr-imogen-coe/gender-stereotyping-stem_b_7423048.html
Endepohls-Ulpe, M. (2012). Gender stereotypes and their gender-specific impact on academic acheivement. Folia Sociologica, 43.
European Union. (2015). Special Eurobarometer 428: Gender equality. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/justice/gender-equality/files/documents/eurobarometer_report_2015_en.pdf
Leaper, C. (2014). Parent's socialization of gender in children. In Encyclopedia on early childhood development. Sta Cruz, CA.
Raley, S., & Bianchi, S. (2006). Sons, daughters, and family processes: Does gender of children matter? Annual Review Sociology Journal, 32, 401-21. doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.32.061604.123106
