Uneven Change in Gender Equality
The following article was written by Pelin Gul, Associate Lecturer and Postgraduate Researcher in the School of Psychology.
Despite the widespread gender discrimination that still exists in various forms all around the globe today, there is no doubt that sweeping changes have taken place in the last half century which have helped to raise women’s position and status in society. Many forms of sexism in institutions have become illegal, women’s employment, educational attainment and political involvement have dramatically increased, and women have entered traditionally male domains as well as top-level managerial and leadership positions.
While all these revolutionary changes have taken place regarding women’s status, what has been happening regarding men? One would think that gender disparities in society could be minimized if similar changes have occurred regarding men’s entry into traditionally female domains. In fact, the change regarding men’s involvement in typically female domains (e.g., housework, childcare, nursing, teaching, etc.) has been much slower compared to women’s (see Croft, Schmader, & Block, 2015 for a review). This uneven change in the gender system has been well-documented by sociologists and economists, and various explanations for the reasons behind this uneven change have been put forward (England, 2010). A plausible argument is the financial incentive standpoint. It is not financially beneficial for men to move into typically female occupations because female-typical jobs are associated with low status and low pay rate in comparison to typically male jobs. While this can partly explain the nature of the asymmetrical change in the gender system, it tells us little about the social psychological processes that are preventing men from taking on female-typical roles.
The precariousness of manhood hypothesis offers an important social psychological perspective on this issue (Bosson & Vandello, 2011). According to this hypothesis, manhood (relative to womanhood which is obtained through biological maturation and thus cannot be lost easily) is an unstable and tenuous social status which can be lost easily and thus needs constant validation and affirmation. The fear of losing manhood and failing to be a real man makes men more sensitive about potential threats to their masculinity. Because of this, men demonstrate their manhood to others through acts that signal masculinity such as aggressive displays, toughness and risk-taking. Affirming manhood can even take the form of derogating and socially distancing oneself from effeminate/gay men (Carnagi, Maass & Fasoli, 2011). Such internalized notions of manhood can clearly pose barriers to men’s move into occupations and activities that are stereotypically feminine.
Even though the precariousness of manhood is a universal phenomenon, certain cultures can bring masculine identity concerns into sharp relief (Brown & Osterman, 2012). In cultures where manhood is intimately linked to honour (honour cultures), people are socialized with the idea that attaining traditional notions of manhood (toughness, strength, courage, capacities to protect and provide) are required in order for men to earn status in society. Men who are socialized with honour ideals may be even more resistant to moving away from masculine domains and embracing feminine roles.
In my research, I have been examining the self-presentations and preferences of men and women who are socialized to have precarious and honourable manhood beliefs. I have found that men who strongly hold honour ideals present themselves in more masculine traits and make more gender-normative activity preferences, while disavowing feminine ones. Such a strong link between gender-normativity and honour beliefs did not appear among women.
Research into the structure of masculinity, such as its precariousness and associations with honour, can help explain men’s relatively higher resistance to internalizing typically feminine traits, values and roles into their self-concepts. It can also extend our understanding of why it is harder to crack gender inequalities in certain arenas of life, and why men and women react to gender-related changes in society (e.g., feminism) in different ways.
References
Bosson, J. K., & Vandello, J. A. (2011). Precarious manhood and its links to action and aggression. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20(2), 82-86.
Brown, R. P., & Osterman, L. L. (2012). Culture of honor, violence and homicide. In T. K. Shackelford & V. A. Weekes-Shackelford (Eds.). The Oxford handbook of evolutionary perspectives on violence, homicide, and war. Oxford University Press.
Carnaghi, A., Maass, A., & Fasoli, F. (2011). Enhancing masculinity by slandering homosexuals: The role of homophobic epithets in heterosexual gender identity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37, 1655-1665. doi:10.1177/0146167211424167
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, 1-28. doi: 10.1177/1088868314564789
England, P. (2010). The gender revolution: Uneven and stalled. Gender & Society, 24(2), 149-166.
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder