The stringent requirements that come with being male and female are something we are all well aware of. In almost every household, workplace and relationship there are specific gender roles at play that if strayed from, one will be frowned upon. Whether said roles are typical or atypical, there is a stigma attached to the actions that are expected to be carried out by the person playing that role. It is common for women to be considered as more nurturing, less educated or capable, submissive and gentle. That misconception has, in history, caused women to miss out on opportunities in life solely due to the gender they were born as being considered as inferior. Men are labeled as leaders, more demanding, ambitious, independent and the one in charge. This vantage point is what causes them to be deemed as the preferred gender in the job field and even in life in some countries.
The problem with this gender role misconceptions is that people come in many forms, no personality is the same or holds the same amount of characteristics leading to gender being more fluid than just “girl or boy”, it comes with many intricate pieces that can alter lives positively or negatively (Endendijk, J. J., Groeneveld, M. G., Pol, L. D., et al., 2017). Gender roles are frequently decided based on whether one is male or female without regard to them having characteristics of the other gender. Knowing whether one is male or female is a simple concept, but knowing whether one considers them self as feminine or masculine is a more difficult concept to distinguish.
We all carry masculine and feminine tendencies and characteristics within our personalities and behaviors. But, we still consider our gender identity to follow suit with the gender we consider ourselves as, yet some who hold a good amount of masculinity and femininity within their gender identity consider themselves as androgynous. Studies have shown that both men and women carry feminine and masculine traits, being desirable and undesirable androgyny (Woodhill, B. M., & Samuels, 2004). Knowing that a person can be both feminine with aspects of masculinity is something we are aware of, but the implications that can have in science is where that knowledge is not acknowledged and should be.
Gender’s Role in Who We Become
It is a common mistake for people to believe that one can only possess desirable traits of the opposite gender as well as all the ones that accompany their own. Boys and girls are brought up expected to follow suit of the ideal idea of our gender role. It is even more of an issue to change how you treat a person or raise a child based off of their gender. The implications of treating genders with explicitly dissimilar ways of rearing can lead to detrimental effects in the future. (Endendijk, Groeneveld, Pol, Berkel, Hallers, Bakermans, & Mesman, 2017). Males are especially affected by rearing practices that were more aggressive from their fathers. Many studies have been done to see how rearing changes who people become as adults and what issues can accompany a person.
A recently conducted study on 299 two-parented families to see where their disciplining choices fluctuate in regards to whether their daughter or son is being chastised. It was found that boys were more aggressive not only due to biological effects, but due to treatment of parents that aimed more hostile punishing and rearing choices towards them. Fathers were found to be all around more aggressive in their parenting style with their sons than daughters. Results suggested that fathers with stereotypical attitudes toward gender roles use more physical control with boys than with girls and mothers did so as well. That behavior is believed to be part of why boys are socialized into being more aggressive and dominant than girls are.
The study concluded that the differentiated gender treatment by mothers does not affect children as much as a father’s does in regards to their aggressive behaviors. These findings lead to the conclusion that strong gender role parenting that disregards androgynous characteristics causes more aggression in boys which then can have a high probability of leading to more hostile men (Endendijk, et al., 2017).
The difference held globally on how genders and the roles that accompany them is divisive and misunderstood. The focus of the one woman’s research was on adolescents, in “A Global Perspective on Gender Roles and Identity”(2017), Elizabeth Saewyc points out how the problems that accompany ones gender and the ideas that accompany them distorts their world views and opinions of their self as adolescents up until adulthood. One is expected to change in many circumstances in life, but the most change expected is with gender. One is expected to always fall in line with society’s idea of what their gender should do, rather than allowing for one to choose what they want from masculinity and femininity to create who they want to be.
Gender roles was shown to contribute to how one develops socially, mental health wise, as well as directly affecting opportunities one obtains or goes after. This being a common issue for women than men in the job field with women being discriminated against solely based on misconceptions of their gender and how far their roles can stretch. Gender roles are a bias that aid men due to their expected roles and qualities amounting to them being superior. This leads to a woman that has masculine traits being looked down upon solely because of a gender role rule that should not be imposed. This problematic bias highlights the lack of acceptance of androgynous people and the characteristics of the men and women that label themselves as such.
The underlying negative attributions that accompany the roles that are considered for females and males through qualitative and quantitative research was highlighted throughout the work of Saewyc (2017). It was found that regardless of economic status of a person, gender roles are unequal in some form in their daily life and a topic many lack the disadvantageous information on. Learning how treating one a specific way based off of their sex, something one cannot change is equal to a form of discrimination and detrimental to some people’s self-image is vital and large proponent of Saewyc’s research.
Mental health plays a vital role in who we are, especially in regards to whether we are men or women. Ones gender comes with obstacles and requirements that can be taxing to a person if they do not have the proper coping skills. E.S. Lefkowitz and P.B. Zeldow (2006) identified the benefits that mentally identifying as androgynous can contribute to mental health being in a healthier state. Through observations and self-report data on 154 participants in need of counseling, it was found that the participants had more satisfaction with themselves and were more solid mentally than those who were not considered androgynous. Past research has been done that seemingly disregarded their finding of androgyny aiding in higher satisfaction due to it showing that masculine traits lead to more positive outcomes cognitively with femininity lacking in the area leading to no research being conducted.
But, in contrast with that idea, Lefkowitz and Zeldow’s data highlights a new area of study that is not being worked on as much as the typical gender role studies. The researchers used an observer-by-proxy measure that is not commonly used to measure mental health, but is being suggested by the authors to be used due to its lack leading to us being behind in androgyny mental health research. So, the measurement methods that accompany gender identities needs to be updated and misconceptions that place masculine traits as more desirable must be diminished due to them working together to create unity and higher life satisfaction. Further research will be necessary due to specific limitations, but results create a positive outcome of external validity on the basis of androgynous persons having better mental health than those who do not consider their self to be in that category.
Proper Measurements of Masculinity and Femininity
One of the earliest studies done on sex roles was by Sandra Bem. She developed the Bem Sex Role Inventory Model (BSRI), which measures the degree to which a person’s self-description is characterized. This explanation is characterized as traditionally masculine, traditionally feminine, both which is considered androgynous, or neither which makes one indifferent. Bem (1974) argued that only those who can demonstrate both masculine and feminine characteristics adapt effectively to varied ongoing situational demands. Bem worked to develop a gender scale that did not assume a one-dimensional view which was what was commonly done at her time. Bem’s scale was made to show that masculinity and femininity were opposite ends of a single dimension. Her testing measures incorporated two separate scales, one measuring masculinity and another measuring femininity.
Her scale was based on masculine and feminine traits that were commonly perceived as desirable for men and women. This is due to the scales before hers being gender scales based on the behaviors most frequently observed in men and women, rather than those judged by society to be more desirable. Bem made her scale be composed of a list of personality characteristics or traits. To obtain a gender score, each characteristic was rated on a scale of 1 to 7 indicating the degree to which a participant in her studies believed that a specific trait described them.
The BEM Sex Role Inventory was created to differentiate the characteristics of masculine, feminine, and androgynous individuals by looking at the variance in their scores on the feminine and masculine sections of her scale. In other words, when a person’s feminine trait score is subtracted from his or her masculine trait score, the difference would determine the degree of masculinity, femininity, or androgyny. She let her participants in her study be the guide of what their label was rather than using previous research to make determinants of the situation.
Bem stated in her work that the sex-typed individual is motivated to keep their behavior consistent with an internalized sex-role standard, a goal that they presumably accomplishes by suppressing any behavior that might be considered undesirable or inappropriate for their sex. Therefore, a specifically masculine self-concept might inhibit behaviors that are considered feminine, and a feminine self-concept might prevent behaviors that are labeled as masculine. But, an androgynous self-concept could allow an individual to freely act the way they would like by participating in “masculine” and “feminine” behaviors.
The history of gender roles varies based off of where one is from, especially when it comes to science. It is often disregarded how femininity and masculinity are sociocultural as well as psychological constructs that can change at any time. Rose Marie Hoffman (2001) conducted extensive research on the misconstrued views and measurement tactics of masculinity and femininity. Hoffman highlighted the lack of proper understanding on the two terms and gave information on how they are not only important on a sociocultural basis, but a psychological as well. The measurement mechanisms used to define what masculinity and femininity needs more depth. More information should be added to the labeling of genders in research.
Counseling mechanisms are addressed by Hoffman on the basis of how clinicians need to intertwine gender identity in their sessions and treatment plans to properly assess certain issues that can only be understood through gender analyzation. Lack of information on masculinity and femininity’s aspects has in the past lead to the terms not being used or holding weight in the literature due to being uninformed. Work on gender roles and how growth in the field will aid in better counseling techniques and better served clients and patients. When a patient is needing help, it is important to find what the underlying issues are. So, if a counselor does not understand how to label a person in a way that falls in line with who they present their self as, their struggles can possibly continue.
Androgyny Aiding in Human Relations & Work
The workplace is a place for many diverse people to come together and form relations regardless of differences. Many studies have shown to find that employees with a mixture of feminine and masculine traits have better satisfaction and better relations with coworkers. Strong data has been shown to conclude that identifying as a person that actively operates with a combination of masculine and feminine traits have claimed to have better coping skills, higher self-esteem accompanied by an overall happier sense of self and life.
The college experience is one that creates a new life for students. It can either take a toll on a person or aid them in owning their individuality and entrance into adulthood. Research has shown that having androgynous characteristics made for a better college experience and aided one in having those satisfactory feelings (Xishan Huang, Xiao-Lu Zhu, Juan Zheng, Lin Zhang, & Kunio Shiomi, 2012). The study used 432 male and female students from five universities with varying majors and aged 17-24. The participants were tested using the Bem Sex Role Inventory on their coping abilities, gender roles, self-esteem and personality traits. The participant’s results were placed into four categories where if they were high for male and female they were considered “androgynous” with that group being found to be the largest amongst the four.
Results of the questionnaires lead to androgynous males and females having the best results for all areas of study including more confidence and higher subjective well-being. Xishan and associates (2012) conclusions seemingly considered androgyny as an ideal gender role for college students due to college being when one commonly “finds their self”. It was assumed that androgyny’s characteristics which combine ideal masculine and feminine traits are crucial in making the lifestyle of a student easier. This data brings about questionability as well as a high probability of agreeance solely due to a woman who has masculine traits will be more respected and not looked as down upon in class and during obstacles that accompany the college experience. This can be assumed to be due to the lack of the woman being placed in a demure category. The ideal masculine traits she may possess aid her in being more ambitious and assertive leading to higher confidence which aids in ease of adjusting and coping with complications.
Studies have been done to test how gender roles affect men and women in the workplace. One study conducted by Evgeni L. Nikolaev, Elvira A. Baranova, & Denis V. Hartfelder (2017) honed in on how having androgynous characteristics affected dentists. The study followed how being more androgynous is a promising characteristic in the work field due to it causing for a person to be more diverse and be in good standing psychologically. The focus being on dentists in this article is unique and necessary due to the job being one that serves all types of people. So, being one that can identify with varying gender characteristics is vital. It was found that regardless of gender, 90.7% of dentists have an androgynous gender type within their study of 129 dentists using the BEM Scale and 117 using the Brief Subjective Well-being Questionnaire.
Findings of their research fell into accordance with other research that having a well-balanced gender identity rather than one that is more so masculine or feminine leads to a better work attitude, higher self-esteem and self-contentment. A key proponent was that masculinity in androgynous male dentists was associated with emotional stability, higher marriage satisfaction which leads to better mood, their resistance to stress. A higher amount of masculinity in androgynous female dentists was associated with their vulnerability to stress and their growing confidence in achieving success due to reduced anxiety. Femininity in both genders lead to friendliness as well as higher levels of mental health (Evgeni, et al., 2017).
It is now clear to see from a research standpoint how much of a role gender roles play on our lives and mental health. It may be easy to flow with the norm and stick to what is expected for you to do and be as a man or woman, but that will not bring peace or progression to you nor to science. As time progresses, mental health can falter and cause explosive behaviors all based off of a simple concept that needed just a little flexibility: gender roles. Properly knowing how to identify and measure what characteristics one has to come to an appropriate label has been shown to be critical in advancing how we learn and grow as the human race.
Development comes with acceptance in both oneself of what traits one can hold and in science treating humans as the diversified creatures that they are instead of putting every person under the same type of labels then trying to find out why studies are not going as planned. Androgynous is what majority of people are, in one way or another and adding that label to gender scales and identities is crucial. The labeling system within science in regards to men and women needs to be altered in a way that is inclusive for all. Gender scales are something meant to aid researchers, especially in psychology to what can be an underlying difference within certain aspects of data. The participant’s differences is where the data changes can lie, so including the knowledge of androgyny to these scales will aid in further growth of human mental health knowledge and will allow us to surpass our expectations in understanding issues that arise in psychological counseling sessions.
