Gender: Sociological Perspectives [7 ed.] 1138103683, 9781138103689

Citation preview

Gender

A landmark publication in the social sciences, Linda L. Lindsey’s Gender is the most comprehensive textbook to explore gender sociologically, as a critical and fundamental dimension of a person’s identity, interactions, development, and role and status in society. Ranging in scope from the everyday lived experiences of individuals to the complex patterns and structures of gender that are produced by institutions in our global society, the book reveals how understandings of gender vary across time and place and shift along the intersecting lines of race, ethnicity, culture, sexuality, class, and religion. Arriving at a time of enormous social change, the new, seventh edition extends its rigorous, theoretical approach to reflect on recent events and issues with insights that challenge conventional thought about the gender binary and the stereotypes that result. Recent and emerging topics investigated include the #MeToo and LGBTQ-rights movements, gendered trends of COVID-19, political misogyny in the Trump era, norms of masculinity, marriage and family formation, resurgent feminist activism and praxis, the gendered workplace, and profound consequences of neoliberal globalization. Enriching its sociological approach with interdisciplinary insight from feminist, biological, psychological, historical, and anthropological perspectives, the new edition of Gender: Sociological Perspectives provides a balanced and broad approach with readable, dynamic content that furthers student understanding, both of the importance of gender and how it shapes individual trajectories and social processes in the U.S. and around the globe. Linda L. Lindsey is Senior Lecturer at Washington University in St. Louis and Professor Emerita of Sociology at Maryville University. Her teaching and research are under a gender and intersectional umbrella, including courses on diversity, inequality, globalization, and health and society. Publishing outlets include co-edited Women of Asia: Globalization, Development, and Gender Equity Sociological Quarterly, Preventing Ethnic Conflict, and Sociology, third edition. She presented at the UN Conference on Women in Beijing. A longtime volunteer, she works with agencies on behalf of women’s advocacy, health, and development. She is a past president of the Midwest Sociological Society and has been elected to Who’s Who in American Women and Who’s Who in America.

Gender Sociological Perspectives SEVENTH EDITION

Linda L. Lindsey

Seventh edition published 2021 by Routledge 52 Vanderbilt Avenue, New York, NY 10017 and by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon, OX14 4RN Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business © 2021 Linda L. Lindsey The right of Linda L. Lindsey to be identified as author of this work has been asserted by her in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. First edition published by Prentice Hall 1990 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Lindsey, Linda L, author. Title: Gender : sociological perspectives / Linda L. Lindsey. Other titles: Gender roles. Description: 7th Edition. | New York City : Routledge Books, 2020. | Revised edition of the author’s Gender roles, [2015] | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2020023753 (print) | LCCN 2020023754 (ebook) | ISBN 9781138103689 (hardback) | ISBN 9781138103696 (paperback) | ISBN 9781315102023 (ebook) Subjects: LCSH: Sex role. | Sex role—United States. Classification: LCC HQ1075 .L564 2020 (print) | LCC HQ1075 (ebook) | DDC 305.3—dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020023753 LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020023754 ISBN: 978-1-1381-0368-9 (hbk) ISBN: 978-1-1381-0369-6 (pbk) ISBN: 978-1-3151-0202-3 (ebk) Typeset in Berling and Futura by Apex CoVantage, LLC Visit the eResources: www.routledge.com/9781138103689

Contents

Part I Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

1

  1 The Sociology of Gender: Theoretical Perspectives and Feminist Frameworks

3

  2 Gender Development: Biology, Sexuality, and Health

38

Section 1 Biology and Sexuality in Gender Development  38 Section 2 Gender and Health  71

  3 Gender Development: The Socialization Process

97

  4 Gendered Language, Communication, and Socialization

130

  5 Western History and the Construction of Gender

158

  6 Global Perspectives on Gender

197

Section 1 Gendering Global Development  197 Section 2 Glimpses of Our Gendered Globe  206

Part II Gender, Marriage, and Families

257

  7 Gendered Love, Marriage, and Emergent Lifestyles

259

  8 Gender and Families

300

  9 Men and Masculinity

344

Part III Gender and Social Institutions 

385

10 Gender, Work, and the Workplace

387

11 Education and Gender Role Change

431

vi Contents

12 Religion and Patriarchy

467

13 Media

501

14 Power, Politics, and the Law

542

Section 1 Law and Public Policy  543 Section 2 Politics  570

Glossary599 References606 Index720

Detailed Contents

Prefacexxvi Acknowledgementsxxix

Part I Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives 1

1

The Sociology of Gender: Theoretical Perspectives and Feminist Frameworks3 Sociology of Gender  3  Basic Sociological Concepts  4  Key Concepts for the Sociology of Gender  5  Distinguishing Sex and Gender  6  Gender Inclusiveness 7 • Gender Roles  7  Sociological Perspectives on Gender  8  Levels of Analysis  8  Functionalism 8  Preview 9 • Preindustrial Society 9 • Contemporary Society 9 • Critique 10  Conflict Theory  11  Marx, Engels, and Social Class 11 • Contemporary Conflict Theory 11 • Gender and the Family 12 • Critique 12  Symbolic Interaction  13  Social Constructionism  14  Doing Gender 14 • Heteronormativity 15 • Doing Difference 15 • Dancing 16 • Critique 16  Feminist Sociological Theory  17  Intersectionality 18 • Backlash to Intersectionality 19 • Intersectionality and Science 20 • Reprise 20 • Feminist Perspectives on the Family 21 • Critique 21  Feminisms 21  Liberal Feminism  22  Socialist Feminism  23  Radical Feminism  24  Cultural Feminism  25 

viii  Detailed Contents

Ecofeminism 25  Global Feminism  26  Cyberfeminism 27  Emerging Feminisms  28  Feminism, Media, and Politics  29  Portrayals of Feminism  29  Television 30 • Politics 30  Case Study: Feminist for President, Vice President, and FLOUS in Election 2008  30  Hillary Rodham Clinton 31 • Sarah Palin 31 • Critique 32 • Michelle Obama 32  Feminism and the Political Climate  32  Feminist Progress  33  Women’s Movements as Feminist Success Stories  33  Women’s March on Washington 34 • #MeToo 34 • Moms Demand Action 35 • Movements with Feminist Solidarity 36 • Reprise 36  Key Terms  36 

2

Gender Development: Biology, Sexuality, and Health38 Section 1 Biology and Sexuality in Gender Development   38 Nature and Nurture  39  Margaret Mead  39  Critique 40 Evolution, Genetics, and Biology  40 Sociobiology 40 • Primates: Animal and Human 41 • Critique 42 • Cognitive Biology 42 • Male and Female Brains 43 • Critique 43 • Neurosexism 44  The Hormone Puzzle  45  Aggression 45 • Age 46 • Running too Fast 47 • Motherhood 48 • Critique 49  Sigmund Freud: Anatomy Is Destiny  49  Critique 50 • Feminism and Freud 50 • Psychoanalytic Feminism 50 • Nancy Chodorow 51  Gendered Sexuality  51  Ambiguous Sex, Ambiguous Gender  52  Intersex 52 • Sex Reassignment 52 • Transing 53 • Critique 55  Does Nature Rule? A Sex Reassignment Tragedy  56  Essentialist Shortcomings  56  Sexual Orientation  57  Queer Theory 58 • Asexuality 58 • Sex Partners 59  Global Focus: Third-Gender Cultures  59  South Asia 60 • Indonesia 60 • Native Americans 61 • Reprise 62  Sexual Scripts  62  Patterns of Sexual Attitudes and Behavior  62 

Detailed Contents  ix

Gender and Orgasm 63 • Critique 63 • Premarital/Nonmarital Sex 64 • Extramarital Relationships 64  Sexual Double Standard  65  Women and SDS  65  •  Masculinity and SDS  66  •  Sexuality in Later Life 68 • Critique 69  Nature and Nurture Revisited: The Politics of Biology  69  The Female Advantage in Evolution  69  Reframing the Debate  70  Section 2 Gender and Health  71  Revisiting Biology and Culture  71  Measuring Health and Well-Being  71  Till Death Do Us Part: Gender and Mortality  71  Global Patterns  74 In Sickness and in Health: Gender and Morbidity  76  Men and Morbidity 76 • Women and Morbidity 76 • Menstruation 77 •  PMS 77 • Menopause and Hormone Replacement Therapy (HRT) 78 • HRT: Risks and Benefits 79 • Critique 79 • Body Studies 80 • Eating Disorders 81  LGBTQ Morbidity  82  Advocacy 82  Gendered Health Risks: Selected Causes  83  HIV/AIDS 83 • Men and HIV 83 • Women and HIV 84 • Global Focus: Women and HIV in the Developing World  85  •  Drugs and Alcohol  86  •  Study Drugs and Opioids 86 • Smoking 87 • COVID-19 88 • Gender and the Pandemic  88  •  Race, Gender, and COVID-19  89  •  Pandemic in a Pandemic 90 • Critique 91  Explaining Gendered Health Trends  91  Sex and Gender, Biology and Culture  91  Again, Masculinity  92  Challenging Gendered Health Risks: Advocacy  92  The Women’s Health Movement  93  Gender Bias in Research and Health Care  93  Androcentric Medicine 93 • Heart Disease 94  Progress in Women’s and Men’s Health  95  Empowerment for Health  95  Key Terms  96

3

Gender Development: The Socialization Process97 Gender Socialization and Cultural Diversity  97  Culture and Socialization  98  Adaptation 99  Gender Socialization: Intersecting Social Class and Race  99 

x  Detailed Contents

Asian Families 100 • Latino Families 100 • African American Families 100 • Raising Daughters 101 • Raising Sons 101 • Intersectionality 102  Theories of Gender Socialization  102  Social Learning Theory  102  Gender Socialization for Boys  103  •  Gender Socialization for Girls 104 • Critique 104  Cognitive Development Theory  105  Gender Identity 105 • Critique 106  Gender Schema Theory  106  Critique 108  Social Cognitive Theory  108  Critique 109  Reflections 110  Agents of Socialization  110  The Family  111  Do You Want a Boy or a Girl?  111  •  Gender Parity  111  •  Gender-Typed Wombs 112 • Gender Socialization in Early Childhood 113 • Gendered Childhood: Artifacts of Socialization 113 • Clothing 114 • Toys and Dolls 114 •  Barbies 115 • Sexualization and Action Figures 115 • Toys and Gender Scripts 116 • Gender-Neutral Toys 117 • Gendered Parenting 118 • LGBTQ Parenting 118 • Mom, Dad/Sons, Daughters 119  Peers and Preferences  120  Games  120  •  Shifts in Gendered Peer Behavior  122  School 122  Dick and Jane at School  122  •  Sociological Theory  123  Television 123  Television Teaches 123 • Sesame Street 124 • Cartoons 124 • Children’s Programs 125 • Advertising 125  Socialization for Gender Equity  126  Challenging the Binary  126  Androgyny 126 • Critique 127  Gender-Neutral Socialization  127  Raising Baby X 127 • Parents as Innovators 128 • Critique 128  Key Terms  129

4

Gendered Language, Communication, and Socialization The Generic Myth  131  Titles and Occupations  131  What’s in a Name?  133  Children’s Names  133  Linguistic Derogation  134 

130

Detailed Contents  xi

Gendered Language Usage  135  Registers 135  Female Register 136 • Male Register 137  The Language of Friendship  138  Gossip 138  Nonverbal Communication  139  Facial Expressions and Eye Contact  139  Smiling 139 • Anger 140  Touch and Personal Space  141  Space Invasion  141  The Female Advantage  142  Gender Online: Communication and Social Media  143  Men Online  144  Males and Social Media  145  Women Online  146  Females and Social Media  147  Global Focus: The Language of Japanese Women  148  Style and Syntax  148  Women in Business  148  Manga 149  Explaining Gendered Language Patterns  150  Dual-Culture Model  150  Critique 150  Dominance Model  151  Critique 151  Social Constructionist Model  152  Critique 153  The Impact of Linguistic Sexism  153  Cognition and Self-Esteem  154  Resistance to Language Change  155  Formal Change  155  Language Change as Gender Success  155  Key Terms  157

5

Western History and the Construction of Gender Placing Women in History  159  The Intersection of Gender, Race, and Class in History  159  Historical Themes about Women  160  Classical Societies  161  The Glory That Was Greece  161  Partnership 161 • Oppression 162 • Athens 163 • Sparta 164  The Grandeur That Was Rome  165 

158

xii  Detailed Contents

Male Authority 165 • Female Power 165  The Middle Ages  166  Christianity 167  Witch Hunts  168  Feudalism 168  Renaissance 169  Martin Luther and the Reformation  169  •  Critique  170  The American Experience  171  The First American Women  171  Gender Role Balance 171 • Tribal Leadership 172 • Colonization and Christianity 172  Colonial Era  173  Gendered Puritan Life  173  •  Witchcraft  173  •  A Golden Age for Colonial Women? 175  The Victorians: True Womanhood  175  Frontier Life  177  Industrialization 178  Race and Class 179 • Union Movement 180 • The Depression 181  World War II  182  Demand for Women’s Labor  182  •  Women’s Diversity in the Labor Force 183 • What About the Children? 184 • Japanese American Women 184 • Peacetime 185  The Postwar Era to the Millennium  186  The Women’s Movement  186  Early Movement: 1830–1890  188  The Seneca Falls Convention  188  •  Division and Unity  190  The Nineteenth Amendment  190  The Contemporary Movement  191  Second Wave Feminism  191  •  National Organization for Women 191 • Coalitions 192 • Third Wave Feminism 193 • Fourth Wave Feminism 194 • Critique 194  Key Terms  195

6

Global Perspectives on Gender Section 1 Gendering Global Development  197  United Nations (UN) and Development  198  Human Development and Gender Equality  198  Critique 198 • CEDAW 199  United Nations Conferences on Women  199  The Legacy of Beijing: A Personal Perspective  200  •  FWCW for Today  201  Women, Globalization, and Development  201  Rural Families  202  Bangladesh: A Neoliberal Globalization Case Study  202 

197

Detailed Contents  xiii

Critique 204  Women and Development  204  A Sociological WAD Model  204  Global Patterns of Gender (In)Equity  205  Patterns of Diversity and Similarity  205  •  Applying Gendered Patterns  206  Section 2 Glimpses of Our Gendered Globe  206  Russia 206  Central Asia  207  The Soviet Legacy and Contemporary Russia  207  Employment 207 • Collision of Family and Employment 208 • Fertility Politics 209  Marriage and Family  209  Family Values 209 • Independence 210  Masculinist Discourse  210  What is Feminine?  211  •  Sexual Harassment and Gender-Based Violence  211  Feminism in Peril  212  Sexuality 212 • Dangerous Feminists 212 • Russian Feminism 213 • Critique 213  China 214  Reform and the Chinese Family  214  Footbinding 215 • Marriage 215 • Critique 216  The One-Child Policy: Gone But Not Forgotten  216  Son Preference 216 • Caregiving and Security 217 • Critique 217  The Gender Paradox of Neoliberal Globalization in China  218  Women’s Paid Labor  218  •  Women and the State  218  •  State Capitalism  219  India 220  The Religious–Political Heritage  220  The Social Reform Movement  220  The Gandhis and Nehrus  221  The Gender Gap in Human Development  221  Health 222 • Five Year Plans 222 • Gender-Based Violence 223  Feminism in an Indian Context  224  Feminist Strategies against GBV  224  Japan 225  The Occupation  225  Gender Equity and Public Policy  226  Gender Equality Bureau 226 • Demographic Crises 227  Marriage and the Family  228  Motherhood 228 • Critique 228 • Husbands and Fathers 229  Work and Family: A Nondilemma  230  Critique 231  A Japanese Woman’s Profile  231  Feminism 233  Work–Family Balance  233 

xiv  Detailed Contents

Latin America  234  The Gender Divide  234  Family Planning 235 • The Church 236  Latin American Women, Globalization, and Development  236  Feminist Agendas  237  Intersection of Class and Gender  237  Israel 238  Experiments in Equality  238  Kibbutz 238 • Military Conscription 240 • Critique 240  Family, Education, and Jobs Under a Religious Umbrella  241  Family 241 • Education 241 • Employment 242  Jewish Feminism  242  Golda Meir’s Legacy  244  The Muslim World  244  Islamization as Countermodernization  245  Afghanistan: Taliban and War 245 • Critique 246 • Iran: The Shah and Khomeini 247 • Veiling 247 • Toward Reform 248 • Women’s Arab Spring 248  The Arab Middle East  249  To Veil or Not to Veil  250  •  The Issue of Choice  251  North Africa: Female Genital Mutilation (Cutting)  251  FGM 251 • Critique 253  Nordic Nations  253  Norway 254  Sweden 254  The Equality Future  255  Key Terms  255

Part II Gender, Marriage, and Families 7

Gendered Love, Marriage, and Emergent Lifestyles

257 259

Love 260  Linking Love and Marriage  260  Friends and Lovers  261  Defining Love 261 • Distinguishing Love and Friendship 262 • Same-Gender Friends 262 • Other-Gender Friends 263 • Friends with Benefits 264  Gendered Love and Love Myths  264  Gender and Styles of Romance 267 • Men in Love 268 • Critique 268  Selecting Marriage Mates and Partners  269  The Marriage Gradient  269  Emerging Adults 269 • Intersectional Demographics 270 • Socioeconomic Status (SES) 270 • Age 270 • Older Women, Younger Men 272 • Age Gradient

Detailed Contents  xv

Intersections for Older Women 272 • Race 272 • Race, Ethnicity, and Gender 273 • Race and SES 273 • Attractiveness 274 •  Sociological Theory  274  The Marriage Squeeze  275  African American Women 275 • Critique 276  Gender Roles in Marriage and the Family  276  The Marriage Gap  277  Theoretical Perspectives on Gender, Marriage, and Family  279  Functionalism 280 • Critique 280 • Conflict Theory 281 • Critique 281 • Feminist Perspective 281 • Critique 282 • Symbolic Interaction and Social Constructionism 282 • Critique 283  Gender and the Family Values Debate  283  Critique 284  Housewives 285  Housewife Status  285  The Issue of Housework  286  Global Trends 286 • Dual Earners 286 • Multicultural Variations 287 • Shifting Work 288  Extramarital Relationships  288  Gender Differences 289 • Single Women 290  Gender in Emergent Marriages and Alternative Lifestyles  290  Cohabitation 290  Gender Differences  291  Single Life  292  Romance in Later Life 293 • Gender Differences 293 • Critique 294  Long-Distance Relationships and Marriages  294  Commuter Marriage 295 • Military Spouses 295 • Critique 296  Egalitarian Marriage  297  Scandinavia 297 • Partnership 298 • Equity Benefits 298  Key Terms  299 

8

Gender and Families

300

The Parenthood Transition  300  Motherhood 301  The Motherhood Mandate 302 • Functionalism 303 • Conflict Theory 303 • Challenging the Motherhood Mandate 304 • Voluntary Childlessness 304 • Feminism 305 • Critique 305  Fatherhood 306  New Fathers 307 • Children’s Development 307 • A Fatherhood Mandate 308  Parents as Dual Earners  308  Children of Employed Women  308 

xvi  Detailed Contents

The Child Care Crisis  309  •  Children’s Time with Employed Parents 310 • Critique 311  Helicopter Parents  311  Intrusion f/or Autonomy 312 • Hovering Moms 313  Gendered Families in Multicultural Perspective  313  African American Families  314  Ideology of Black Womanhood  316  •  Multiple Risks of Race, Class, and Gender  316  Latino Families  317  Puerto Rican Families 319 • Mexican American Families 320 • Cuban American Families 321  Asian American and Pacific Islander Families  322  Cultural Diversity 322 • Challenging Subordination 323  Native American Families  324  Divorce 325  Gender and Adjustment in Divorce  326  Gender Beliefs and Emotional Well-Being 326 • Age 326 • Employment 327  The Impact of Gendered Law in Divorce  327  Custody 327 • Joint Custody 328 • Gender and Coparenting 328 • What about the Children? 329 • Divorce and Poverty 329 • Dividing Assets 330 • Child Support 330 • Remarriage 331  Single-Parent Families  332  Mothers and the Single-Parent Household  333  Solo Parenting Mothers by Choice  334  Fathers and the Single-Parent Household  334  Gender Patterns in LGBTQ Families  335  Same-Sex Marriage  335  Gendering LGBTQ Families  336  Parenting 337 • Adoption 338  Egalitarianism 338  Lesbian Mothers  339  Gay Fathers  339  Coming Out  340  Emerging LGBTQ Families  341  Trans Families and Parenting  342  Key Terms  343

9

Men and Masculinity Historical Notes and Masculine Markers  345  Patriarchal Historical Standards  345  Between Wars: The Depression  346  War and Soldiering  346 

344

Detailed Contents  xvii

Korea and Vietnam 347 • Kuwait, Iraq, and Afghanistan 347 • Suicide and Soldiering 348  Sports 349  Brutalized Bodies 349 • Sports Violence 350  On Masculinity  351  Hegemonic Masculinity  351  Masculinity’s Norms  352  Antifeminine Norm 352 • Interpersonal Relations 352 • Success Norm 353 • Gendered Occupations 354 • Intellectual Success 354 • Toughness Norm 355 • Aggression Norm 356 • Mass Shootings 356 • Sexual Prowess Norm 357 • Pornography 358 • Tenderness Norm 359 • Images to Reject or Accept? 359  Homophobia 360  Demography of Homophobia  361  Risks of Race and Ethnicity  361  •  Gender  362  Masculinity and Homophobic Labels  362  Gay Men 362 • Gay Rights 363  Masculinity and Fatherhood  363  Images of Fatherhood  364  Socialization 364 • Race and Ethnicity 365  Parents as Partners  365  Men at Childbirth  366  Divorce 366  Men at Middle Age and in Later Life  367  Retirement 367  Masculinity Matters  367  Midlife as Crisis  368  Women at Midlife  368  •  Men at Midlife  369  Widowhood 369  Widows 370 • Widowers 370  Gendered Violence  371  Rape 371  Statistics 371 • Profile of the Rapist 372 • Rape on College Campus 373 • Pornography and Rape 373  Domestic and Intimate Partner Violence  374  Why Doesn’t She Leave?  375  •  Sociological Perspectives on Sexual Violence  376  Men’s Movements in the United States  376  Men’s Movements: Rejecting Feminism  377  Mythopoetic Men 377 • African American Men 378 • Promise Keepers 378 • Men’s Rights Movements 379  Men’s Movements: Supporting Feminism  380 

xviii  Detailed Contents

National Organization for Men Against Sexism  380  •  LGBTQ Movement  381  Men’s Movements: Toward the Future  382  Key Terms  383 

Part III Gender and Social Institutions 10 Gender, Work, and the Workplace

385 387

Historical Overview  387  The Home as Workplace  388  The Industrial Revolution  388  •  Victorian Myths  389  •  War and Jobs  390  Balancing Multiple Work and Family Roles  391  Employment and Well-Being  391  Eldercare 392  Unpaid Work  393  Money and Mental Health 394 • Summary 395  Gendered Institutions in Employment  395  Influence of Family on Workplace  396  Socialization  396  •  The Child Care Crisis  397  •  Married with Children: The Demography of Career Achievement 398 • Career versus Job 398 • Employer Views 399  Economic Trends and the Family  400  Law and Public Policy  401  Family Leave 401 • Equal Pay 402 • Affirmative Action 402 • Comparable Worth 403  Gender and Unemployment  403  Recessions 404 • COVID-19 Recession 404 • Gender Gap 404 • Critique 405  Women in the Labor Force  405  Gender-Typing in Occupational Distribution  406  Men on the Escalator  408  •  Women in the Professions  409  •  Medicine 409 • Law 410 • STEM 410 • Summary 411 •  White-Collar Women 411 • Blue-Collar Women 412 • Blue-Collar Men  412  •  Job Ratios and Gender Beliefs  413  The Wage Gap  413  Triple Jeopardy: Gender, Race, and Social Class  415  •  Sexual Orientation: A Paradox? 415 • Human Capital Model 416 • Sociological Theory 417 • Summary 417  Corporate Women and Executive Leadership  418  Barriers to Corporate Success  418  •  Glass Ceiling  419  •  Advancement and Recruitment 419 • Performance and Profit 420 • Agency and Communion 420 •  Sexual Harassment 421 • Toward Corporate Success 421 • Diversity 422  Women Business Owners  422  Types of Business 423 • Work-Life Balance 424 • Corporate Deserters 425 

Detailed Contents  xix

Gendered Management Styles: The Partnership Alternative  425  Global Focus: Japanese Style Management  426  •  Critique  426  Global Focus: Women and Microenterprise  427  Women’s Entrepreneurship through Microcredit  427  Critique 428 • Neoliberalism and Microcredit 429 • Social Business 430  Key Terms  430

11 Education and Gender Role Change

431

A Brief Lesson in History  432  The Enlightenment  432  Progressive Education  433  The Gendered Educational Journey  433  Kindergarten and Early Childhood Education  434  Jane 434 • Dick 434 • Critique 435  Elementary and Middle School  436  Jane and the Gendered Curriculum  436  •  Dick and the Gendered Curriculum 437 • Critique 437  High School  438  The Paradox of Gender and Mathematics  438  •  Explaining the Paradox 439 • Social Class, Race, and Achievement 441 • Gendered Tracking and Vocational Education  442  •  Gender in the Hidden Curriculum  443  •  Athletics and Masculinity 444  Higher Education  445  The Gendered College Classroom  445  •  Major and Career Paths  446  •  Graduate School 449 • Academic Women 449 • Tenure 450  Gender Issues in Education  451  Shortchanged Students: Girls or Boys in Educational Crisis?  451  What about the Boys?  451  •  Assessing the Boy Crisis  452  •  College Entrance Exams  452  •  College Enrollment: Race, Social Class, and Age  453  •  What a Degree Buys 453 • Critique 455  Single-Gender Education  456  Girls in Single-Gender Classrooms  456  •  Boys in Single-Gender Classrooms 457 • Critique 457 • Social Climate 458  Gender Parity in College  459  College Admissions  459  Sexual Harassment in Schools  460  Bullying 460  Military Schools  461  Sexual Harassment or Bullying?  462  The Lessons of Title IX  462  Politics and Assaults on Title IX  463  Discrimination against Men? 463 • Critique 464  Global Focus: Closing the Gender Gap in Education in the Global South  465 

xx  Detailed Contents

Assessing Success  465  Sustainable Development Goals  466  Key Terms  466

12 Religion and Patriarchy

467

Rediscovering the Feminine Face of God  468  Goddess Images  468  Women’s Religious Roles 469 • Goddess as Creator 470 • Africa 470 • Asia 470  The Principle of Gender Complementarity  471  Critique 472  Islam 472  Feminist Views of Islam  473  Critique 474  Muslim Women in the United States  475  Hinduism 475  The Feminine in Hindu Scripture  475  Sati 476  Judaism 477  Family Life  478  Sexuality and Social Control  478  The Texts of Terror  478  Contemporary Images and Practices  479  Christianity 480  The Bible and Patriarchy  480  Paul’s Writings 481 • Biblical Men 482 • Progressive Views of Biblical Women 483  Gender Roles and American Christians  484  American Protestants 484 • Mormon Women 485 • Christianity and Politics 486  • American Catholics 486 • Scandal and Sexual Abuse 486  Gender, Religiosity, and Leadership  488  Gender and Religious Orientation  488  Sociological Perspectives  488  The Issue of Ordination  489  Confucianism and Islam 490 • Judaism 490 • Christianity 491 •  Catholicism 492 • Protestantism 493  Clergy Women as Leaders  494  Toward Inclusive Theology  495  Language of Religion  495  God Language  496 • Reinterpretation of Scripture 497  Feminist Theology  498  Intersectionality 499  Key Terms  500

Detailed Contents  xxi

13 Media

501

Print Media  502  Magazines 502  Fiction 502 • Articles 503  Advertising 503  Stereotypes 504 • Sexualization 504 • Well-Being 505 • Resisting Magazine Images 505 • Subtlety and Subliminals 506 • Aging and Gender 507 • The Business of Beauty 507 • Critique 507  Film 508  Screen History  508  Good Women and Bad Women 509 • Sexual Violence 509  Pairing Sex and Violence  510  Aging Females, Ageless Males  511  Gender Parity and Film Portrayal  511  Critique 512  Music 513  Rock Music  514  Women of Rock 514 • Challenging Misogyny 515  MTV and Music Videos  516  Gender Ideology 516 • Race and Gender 517 • Critique 518  Television 518  Gendered Violence  519  Boys, Violence, Video Games  519  •  Women and TV Violence  519  Prime Time  520  Gender Profiles in Drama 520 • Invisible Women 521 • Intersecting Gender, Race, and Ethnicity 521 • Comedy 522 • Employed Women 522  Daytime Television  523  Soap Operas 523 • Reality TV 524  TV’s Gendered Exceptions  525  Commercials 526  Children’s Commercials  527  Men’s Images in Media  528  Advertising 528  Film 529  Television 530  Situation Comedies: Men in Families  530  TV’s Gender, Race, and Class Link  531  Middle-Class Men 532 • Working-Class Men 532 • Critique 533  Gender and Mass Media Industries  533  Television 534 

xxii  Detailed Contents

Broadcast Journalism  534  Sports 535 • Weather 535 • Critique 535  Film 536  Directors 536  Media and Social Change  537  Intersectional Media and Women’s Voices  538  Sportswomen 538  Changing for Profit and Social Responsibility  539  #MeToo 539 • Critique 541  Key Terms  541

14 Power, Politics, and the Law

542

Section 1 Law and Public Policy  543  Gendered Law and Policy  543  Employment 544  Bona Fide Occupational Qualification 544 • Disparate Impact 544 • Equal Pay Act 545 • Comparable Worth 545 • Critique 546 • Affirmative Action 547 • Gender–Race Intersection 547 • Courts 548 • Equal Employment Opportunity Commission  549  Education and Title IX  549  Courts 550 • Athletics 550 • Benefits to Females 550 • Critique 551  Sexual Harassment  552  Impact of Sexual Harassment  552  •  Social Construction of Sexual Harassment  553  •  Sexual Harassment and the Supreme Court  554  •  Thomas– Hill 554 • Kavanaugh–Blasey Ford 555 • Critique 555 Domestic Relations  556 Divorce 557 • Family Economics 557 • Domestic Abuse and the Courts 558 • Gendered Rights and Liabilities 559  Reproductive Rights  559  Legal History 560 • Hyde Amendment 560 • Affordable Care Act 561 • SCOUS 562 • Pro-Life 562 • Pro-Choice 564 • Dialogue 564  Crime 565  Gender Socialization  566  Economics 566  Criminal Justice  567  Female Leniency? 567 • Intersecting Race and Gender 568 • Sex Work: A Case Study 568 • Critique 569  Section 2 Politics  570  Gendered Politics  570  The Political Gender Gap  571  Presidential Voting Patterns 572 • Gendered Issues 573 • Intersectional Voting 573 

Detailed Contents  xxiii

Gender and Public Office  574  Political Party 574 • Women in Office 574 • Appointments 575  Barriers and Opportunities for Female Candidates  576  Socialization Factors 577 • Beliefs about Women’s Roles 577 • Motherhood and Husbands 577 • Structural Barriers 578  Election Lessons: 2008 and 2012  578  Election 2008  579  •  The Primary Election  579  •  The General Election 579 • Election 2012 580 • Republican Messages to Women 580 • Democratic Messages to Women 581 • Critique 581  Election 2016: Referendum on Gender  581  Pivotal Intersections  581  •  Revisiting Gender and Electability 582 • Socially Constructing Electability 582 • Hillary Rodham Clinton 583 • Leadership 583 • Donald J. Trump 584 • Masculinity 584 •  Outright Sexism 585 • Racism or Sexism? 585 • Critique 587  Midterm Election 2018  588  Election 2020: Spotlight on Intersectionality  590  Electability 591 • Vice President Pick 592  HRC: The Hillary Factor  592  The Equal Rights Amendment  593  Ratification’s Rocky Path  594  New Christian Right  594  Issues of Interpretation  595  Military Service  595  ERA Coalition  596  Ratification 596  Feminism in the Twenty-First Century  597  Feminist Lessons  597  Support for Feminist Goals  597  Key Terms  598

Glossary599 References606 Index720

Figures

2.1 Life Expectancy by Race, Hispanic (Latino) Origin, and Sex, 2006–2017 2.2 New HIV Diagnoses for Most Affected Subpopulations by Gender, Race, and Sexual Contact, 2018 3.1 Baby Blues 7.1 Why Get Married? 7.2 Same-Sex Couples and Their Children 8.1 Racial and Ethnic Composition by Parent Type (%) 8.2 Percentage of Children Ages 0–17 By Presence of Parents in Household, 1980–2018 8.3 Percentage of Children in Poverty by Family Structure and Race and Hispanic Origin, 2017 10.1 Projected Decrease in Labor Force Participation 10.2 Women and Men in Selected Occupational Categories 10.3 Female Workers in the Tech Industry 10.4 The Gender Earnings Ratio, 1955–2018, Full-Time Workers 10.5 Declining Progress in Raising the Weekly Gender Earnings Ratio 10.6 Median Weekly Earnings of Full-Time Women and Men Workers by Race and Hispanic or Latino Ethnicity 11.1 Actual and Projected Numbers of Master’s and Doctoral Degrees Conferred by Sex, Selected Years and Projected to 2027–2028  11.2 Distribution of BA Degrees in Selected Fields of Study, by Sex: Academic Year 2016–17 11.3 Men and Women in College Major (%) by Pay 11.4 Annual Income by Educational Attainment and Sex, 2017  11.5 Earnings for Full-Time Workers by Education for Men and Women 13.1 Historical Comparison of Percentages of Behind-the-Scenes Women on Top 250 Films 14.1 Gender Gap in Party Identification, 1994–2017 14.2 Gender and Support of Candidate by Political Party of Candidate in Midterm Election 2018

74 84 117 261 278 314 332 332 394 409 411 414 414 415 446 447 448 454 454 537 588 589

Tables

2.1 Leading Causes of Death in the United States by Sex 2.2 Leading Causes of Death by Sex Ratio 2.3 Life Expectancy and Projected Life Expectancy to 2050 by Sex and World Region 4.1 Percent of U.S. Adults Who Use Each Social Media Platform, by Gender 7.1 Median Age at First Marriage by Gender, Selected Years 7.2 Marriage and Divorce Rate, Selected Years 7.3 Marital Status in the United States by Gender 2018 9.1 Myths of Rape 10.1 Projected Decrease in Labor Force Participation by Gender and Year (%) 10.2 Occupations with the Largest Pay Gap by Gender as % of Median Weekly Earnings 14.1 Testimonies to Senate Judiciary Committee, Anita Hill, 1991 and Christine Blasey Ford, 2018 14.2 Gender Gap in Presidential Elections, 1980–2016 14.3 Women in U.S. Congress, Selected Years

72 73 75 144 271 277 278 372 406 407 556 571 575

Preface

Extraordinary social change, made vivid by the global pandemic and Election 2020 in the U.S, continues to influence our personal, and professional, and social well-being. Gender, 7th edition effectively captures the profound gender effects of this change. Nearing the completion of this edition, a gender backdrop of the pandemic was exposed. Framed by intersectionality and relevant interdisciplinary content, the sociological story of gendered social change is narrated. This story unfolds in light of explosive gender-defined events such as the #MeToo and LGBTQ movements, resurging feminist activism (Women’s Marches) sexual assault allegations surrounding media moguls, religious leaders, and Supreme Court justices, the gender politics of Elections 2016, 2018, and 2020, the link between toxic masculinity and gun violence, and stalled or reversal of women’s progress as consequences of politics and globalization. Most gender issues, however, unfold under the radar, often in a community context. Content framed by the dominant sociological theories, the feminist perspective, and cutting-edge interdisciplinary research, takes readers on this more hidden journey, focusing on the unraveling of gender stereotypes. These include issues about paid and unpaid work, gendered leadership in corporations, intersectional risks for single parents, transgender children, and LGBTQ families, and perils associated with the gender binary. With multiple critiques of contentious material, Gender, 7th edition offers a provocative yet balanced accounting of gender in all social institutions. Students can locate themselves in abundant content on diversity and the intersection of gender with other social categories they occupy. Key sociological concepts are introduced early and reinforced throughout, providing the tools for students to tackle the complex gender issues that follow. Advanced students have their sociological expertise bolstered. Instructors in sociology and kindred disciplines will find Gender, 7th edition comprehensive and challenging with content that is readable and meaningful for students. This text offers springboard to delve deeper into gender topics—whether for class projects or research agendas—with hundreds of new scholarly references, media tools, and online resources.

TEXT SECTIONS: NEW AND EXPANDED MATERIAL Every chapter in Gender, 7th edition is updated and expanded. Given that topics overlap, cross-references appear throughout.

Preface  xxvii

Part I Reflecting the wealth of expanding sociological and interdisciplinary scholarship, sections take aim at the consequences of gender binary thinking in childhood development, language, sexuality, and health and well-being. A new section reflects the latest critiques on nature and nurture and the surging field of transgender studies. Trailblazing research unravels paradoxes about the simultaneous backlash and support for feminism and the persistence of, but ardent challenges to, gender stereotyping. Puzzles of sex and gender, parenting, and politics and media are spotlighted. Emerging feminisms in the United States are considered in light of a new section on gender-related flashpoints globally showing stalled progress but also empowering trends in the pursuit of gender equality. Part 1 includes new material on: • • • • • • • • • •

sociology’s fourth theoretical perspective, social constructionism, applied to heteronormativity and the gendered world of dance emerging feminisms and women’s success stories (Women’s March on Washington, #MeToo, Moms Demand Gun Action, LGBTQ rights) sex reassignment and gender affirmation, and the revised definitions and added categories of sexual identity that are altering views of sexuality converging, widening, or unchanging gender trends in death and sickness (opioid crisis, study drugs, heart disease, COVID-19) persistence of gender stereotyping (gender reveals, toys and TV for boys or girls), alongside an increasing number of parents who prefer gender-neutral child raising rapid progress against linguistic sexism (inclusive language, choices in pronouns, abandoning masculine generics) increased gendered social media and cyberfeminism’s challenges to it fourth wave feminists contesting and embracing previous waves an expanded model of women and development and gender consequences of neoliberal globalization, focusing on the Global South backlash to feminism in Putin’s Russia, rise of essentialism in China, upsurge of sexual violence in India, fundamentalist resurgence in Afghanistan and the Middle East, and stalled progress for women in Israel and Japan; feminist successes include women’s voices from the Arab spring, cracking of marianismo-machismo divide in Latin America, and sustaining gender equality in Nordic nations.

Part II Focusing on gender role patterns in partnering and in the families they create, this section offers the latest demographic and multicultural portraits of marriage, cohabitation, divorce, and single parenting in father-only and mother-only families. America’s emergent LGBTQ families, and couples and parents in long-distance relationships share their stories. Gendered dilemmas for egalitarian in dual-earning couples and families are highlighted. Significant new research on masculinity norms throughout social institutions emphasize challenges to traditional definitions of masculinity and how men respond to these challenges. Part II includes new material on: •

emerging gender patterns in selecting partners for marriage or long term relationships (age, SES race, attractiveness) and singlehood by

xxviii Preface

• • • • • •

•

evidence that employed mothers and dual-earning couples benefit a child’s well-being trends in momism and helicopter parenting trends in long distance relationships, including military families with deployed moms and/or dads gender roles in child-focused and egalitarian LGBTQ families couples desiring egalitarian marriages and partnerships but gender obstacles thwarting achieving them masculinity norms in light of toxic masculinity via the pandemic, #MeToo, and gun violence in the U.S. and decreasing homophobia in society but increased homophobic bullying in schools gatherings of men (men’s movements) according to whether they reject or support feminism and how they fare today

Part III Sociological insights on key gendered trends in the economy, education, religion, media, law, and politics frame this section. Given heightened public attention, women’s paid and unpaid work are accented as pivotal influences on how gender unfolds in all social institutions. Stalled progress on women in corporate leadership and in the STEM workforce is dissected. The final chapter on law and politics brings full circle material from the first chapter and topics discussed throughout the text. It provides the most current material on the consequential gendering of policy and politics. The gender–race intersection related to Supreme Court nominees and in Elections 2016 and 2020 is discussed and critiqued. This discussion is framed by the politics of misogyny in the Trump era. Part III includes new material on: • • • •

• •

widespread support to reduce the gender wage gap and to enforce the Equal the Pay Act but reduced support for affirmative action stalled progress on women ascending as corporate leaders stereotypes about women workers and motherhood by employers feminism and the voices of women in conservative religions (Orthodox Judaism, Mormonism, Islam) seeking ordination and leadership roles, and the priest shortage and sex scandals in Catholicism fueling support for women’s ordination the widening gender gap in STEM majors and increased sexual harassment in schools sustaining Title IX that is under political assault

Acknowledgements

The completion of this reshaped 7th edition of Gender relied on the time and talents of many people. Special gratitude goes to Tyler Bay, Sociology Editor for Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, who navigated me through the entire process just as the pandemic cancelled conferences and in-person meetings and our work and personal lives were upended. His support during this difficult time was very much appreciated. Thanks to Taylor & Francis editorial, production, and copyediting staff including Charlotte Taylor, Julia Hanney, and Liz Dittner who ensured the manuscript was clear and over two thousand new references were cross-checked for style and accuracy. I am grateful to my friend Laura Balluff for her attention to the details of additional copyediting and reference checks as the book expanded and deadlines loomed. Maryville University’s library offered outstanding women’s and gender resources, user-friendly material, and rapid access to up-to-date content that make this volume strong and meaningful to readers. I relied on Washington University with library access to its extensive collection throughout the pandemic. Daily links from the extraordinary SWS listserv allowed this edition to be as current as possible. SWS also provided much needed help for self-care during dispiriting pandemic days. This book is dedicated to the memory of Morris David Levin who passed during its writing. His lifelong friendship and emotional upkeep helped sustain me through many, many conversations about manuscript and writing crises (“make sure you save!”). He is sorely missed. I wish to thank my dear friend Nancy English (Fontbonne University) for a myriad of computer-related issues that usually emerged one minute before a deadline. She introduced me to new data techniques and cheerfully read and critiqued various chapter versions. I highly value her thoughtful, ongoing input to my work. My thanks to friends and colleagues who encouraged me through the long writing process. These include Marsha Balluff, Betty Buck, Sandra Christie, Bill Nagel, Mehrangiz Najafidadeh, Bob Ott, Deb Phelps, and Barb Snowadzky. Panera (aka BreadCo) in Kirkwood, Missouri offered respite from textbook fatigue. Even during months of social distancing BreadCo friends helped to reduce writing stress and COVID anxiety. They listened patiently, offered insights on gender from their own lives, and supported me as I finished this edition. These dear ones include Ann Biele, Nancy English, Bill Euwer, Judi Warnecke, and Wendy and Michael Zilm. Linda L. Lindsey St. Louis, Missouri

PART I

Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

CHAPTER 1

The Sociology of Gender Theoretical Perspectives and Feminist Frameworks

All causes, social and natural, combine to make it unlikely that women should be collectively rebellious to the power of men. They are so far in a position different from all other subject classes, that their masters require something more from them than actual service. Men do not want solely the obedience of women, they want their sentiments. —John Stuart Mill, The Subjection of Women, 1869 John Stuart Mill’s insights 150 years ago foreshadowed the explosion of resurgent global activism on behalf of women in the millennium. His comments spotlighted the oppression of women. The next century of sociological research, as well as that in allied disciplines, spotlighted gendered oppression. This transformative research profoundly influences not only our academic understanding of gender, but how it shapes the way advocacy and activism on behalf of women play out in the U.S. and across the globe. Traced to the political and economic maneuverings of powerful men, the last decade witnessed a resurgence of antiwomen sentiment and escalating violence directed at both women and minorities. Decades of progress toward gender equality have not been erased, but John Stuart Mill’s insights cannot be dismissed today. On the other hand, the resurgence of oppression is being met with the resurgence of feminism, bringing more women—and people representing all forms of diversity—into its ranks than at any time in American history. Gendered oppression also harms men. We will see that the revitalized feminist movement benefits men and women. Anthropologist Margaret Mead (Chapter 2), is attributed with saying, “every time we liberate a woman, we liberate a man” (see Mead, 1967). This book echoes that sentiment.

SOCIOLOGY OF GENDER Sociology is interested in how human behavior is shaped by group life. Although group life is ordered (arranged) in a variety of ways, gender is a fundamental component of the ordering. The study of gender emerged as one of the most important trends in sociology in the twentieth century and that legacy continues today. The research and theory associated with studying gender issues propelled the sociology of gender from the margins to become a central feature of the discipline. All social interactions, and the institutions in which the interactions

4  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

occur, are gendered in some manner. Accounting for this gendering has reshaped the theoretical and empirical foundations of sociology. On the theoretical side, gender awareness has modified existing sociological theory and led to the creation of a new feminist paradigm. On the empirical side, gender awareness has led to innovative research strategies and opened up new topics for sociological inquiry. Sociological research aided interdisciplinary initiatives in women’s and men’s studies and spawned a cascade of sexuality studies, much of it focused on gender variant people. This research opened up collaborations with activists across the globe, giving voice to women who were silenced because of gender oppression. Interdisciplinary research on globalization fuels new strategies to deal with its huge economic and social repercussions altering women’s lives (Chapter 6). To understand patterns of globalization and a changing political climate, for example, sociological analysis must account for gender. Other social science and humanities disciplines are following suit. Advocacy organizations and the therapeutic and health communities are incorporating gender trends in service to their clients and patients (Chapter 2). This book documents how sociologists contribute to understanding the influence of gender in shaping our lives, our attitudes, and our behavior. This understanding is enhanced by investigating not only the links between sociology and other disciplines, but by integrating key concepts such as race, social class, and sexuality to clarify gender relations. With this integration in mind, sociology advanced one of the most important thrusts shaping research, theory, and activism in gender since the mid-twentieth century. Intersectionality describes the process that combines risks from multiple positions associated with disadvantage that result in a matrix of domination and oppression. As the opening quote suggests, John Stuart Mill foreshadowed intersectionality in 1869. Intersectionality is pivotal to understanding gender patterns in sociology and will be highlighted throughout the text. Taken together, we will see that the sociology of gender is beholden to intersectionality, interdisciplinary research, and international (global) collaboration. We open with an examination of basic concepts and theories that lay the groundwork for our sociological journey into gender.

Basic Sociological Concepts Societies are structured around relatively stable patterns establishing how social interaction is carried out. One of the most important social structures that organizes social interaction is status—a position a person occupies that is a significant determinant of how she or he will be defined and treated. We acquire statuses by achievement, through our own efforts (graduating from college), or by ascription, being born into them (family name), or attaining them involuntarily (disease or disability). We occupy a number of statuses simultaneously, referred to as a status set, such as mother, daughter, attorney, patient, employee, and passenger. Compared to achieved statuses occurring later in life, ascribed statuses immediately influence virtually every aspect of our lives. The most important ascribed statuses are gender, ethnicity, race, and social class. Social class is also referred to as socioeconomic status (SES). Of course, SES can be altered but its ascription provides initial economic benefits (wealth), or liabilities (poverty), and social capital, resources from our network of social relationships (Chapter 7). Sexual statuses, such as those associated with gender variance, may or may not be ascribed or may or may not be achieved (Chapter 2). A status is a position within a social system and should not be confused with rank or prestige. There are high-prestige statuses as well as low-prestige statuses. In the United States, for example, a physician occupies a status ranked higher in prestige than a nurse. All societies categorize members by status and then

The Sociology of Gender  5

rank these statuses in some fashion, thereby creating a system of social stratification. People whose status sets are comprised of low-ranked ascribed statuses more than high-ranked achieved statuses are near the bottom of the social stratification system and are vulnerable to social stigma, prejudice, and discrimination. When status sets are inconsistent, risks or benefits associated with ranking may vary. How does a female physician compare to a male nurse? There is no known society in which the status of female is consistently ranked higher in all settings than that of male. A role is the expected behavior associated with a status. Roles are performed according to social norms, shared rules that guide people’s behavior in specific situations. Social norms determine the privileges and responsibilities a status possesses. Females and males, mothers and fathers, and daughters and sons are all statuses with different normative role requirements attached to them. The status of mother calls for expected roles involving love, nurturing, self-sacrifice, homemaking, and availability (on call) to her husband and children. The status of father calls for expected roles of breadwinner, disciplinarian, home technology expert, less availability to wife and children, and ultimate household decision maker. Society allows for flexibility in acting out roles, but in times of rapid social change, acceptable role limits are often in a state of flux, producing uncertainty about what appropriate role behavior should be. People may experience anomie—normlessness—because traditional norms have changed but new ones have yet to be developed. For example, for over a century the most important economic trend impacting gender roles in the United States is the massive increase of women in the labor force. Although women from all demographic categories contributed to these numbers, mothers with preschoolers led the trek from unpaid home-based roles, to full-time paid employment roles. As mothers, caregivers of elderly or infirm parents, and employees, women are often put in untenable positions with expectations that they can satisfy the needs of family and workplace simultaneously. Despite legal mandates and substantial evidence that traditional gender norms are harmful to women as mothers and as employees and are a disservice to businesses striving to hire and retain talented women workers, companies largely adhere to these norms. Companies have not meaningfully accounted for social change surrounding women’s expanded roles. As a result, family and workplace roles inevitably collide and compete with one another for the mother–employee’s time and attention.

Key Concepts for the Sociology of Gender Society applauds the statuses and roles that allow people to organize their lives in consistent, predictable ways. Along with accepted norms, these two factors prescribe behavior and ease interaction with diverse people from other social statuses, whether or not we know these people. Yet there is an insidious side to this predictable world: when norms become too rigid and narrowly defined, freedom of action is often compromised. These rigid definitions contribute to the development of stereotypes—oversimplified beliefs that people who occupy given statuses share traits in common. Stereotypes most often center on negative or pejorative views of a given group and are used to justify discrimination against members of that group. The statuses of male and female are routinely stereotyped according to traits assumed to be biologically based. Women are stereotyped as erratic and unreliable because of uncontrollable raging hormones that fuel emotional outbursts. Assigning these negative stereotypes results in sexism, the belief that the status of female is inferior to the status of male. Males are not immune to negative consequences of sexism, but females are more likely to experience

6  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

it. Compared to males, for example, females occupy statuses associated with less power, less prestige, and less pay in the workplace or no pay for work in the home. Sexism is reinforced in systems of patriarchy, male-dominated social structures leading to the oppression of women. Patriarchy, by definition, exhibits androcentrism—male-centered norms throughout social institutions that become the standard to which all persons adhere. Sexism’s most vehement expressions are fueled by beliefs about female inferiority due to natural, unalterable biological forces. For centuries beliefs about women’s capability hinged on childbearing and a home-based domestic life constrained by motherhood and in service to her husband. Domestic servitude reinforced restricted opportunities for education and literacy. These restrictions made men guardians of what has been written, disseminated, and interpreted regarding the social placement (ranking) of men and women. Until quite recently, history was recorded from an androcentric perspective that ignored the other half of humanity (Chapter 5). This perspective sustained beliefs that patriarchy is an inevitable, inescapable fact and struggles for gender equality are doomed to failure. Women’s spectacular educational achievement comes with the power to engage in research offering alternatives to prevailing androcentric views. This scholarship suggests that patriarchal systems may still be the global norm, but they are not inevitable. Gender egalitarianism was a historical fact of life in some cultures and is a contemporary fact of life in others (Chapter 6). With taken-for-granted assumptions that make women and men “naturally” different, sexism is firmly implanted in patriarchal systems. Sexist ideology, therefore, justifies discrimination against females—members of the “inferior” sex (Chapter 2). Patriarchy and its androcentric foundation are further preserved when women are controlled through misogyny, the contempt and disdain of women that propels their oppression. Sexism offers an ideological justification for discrimination of women; misogyny can be said to police and enforce it (Manne, 2018:78). To keep women in their place, therefore, misogyny is used to demean and shame women. In this sense, a person may be a sexist but not necessarily a misogynist.

Distinguishing Sex and Gender As gender issues became mainstreamed in scientific research and media reports, confusion with the terms sex and gender decreased. In sociology, these terms are now fairly standardized to refer to different content areas. Sex refers to the biological characteristics distinguishing male and female. This definition emphasizes male and female biological differences in chromosomes, anatomy, hormones, reproductive systems, and physiology. Gender refers to social, cultural, and psychological differences between males and females that are associated with masculinity and femininity. Sex makes us male or female; gender makes us masculine or feminine. Sex is largely an ascribed status because a person is born with it, but gender is largely an achieved status because it must be learned. This straightforward distinction masks multiple issues associated with usage. It implies that people can be conveniently placed—or place themselves—into unambiguous either-or categories. Certainly, the ascribed status of sex is less likely to be altered than the achieved status of gender. Some people believe, however, that they were born with the “wrong” body and are willing to undergo major surgery to make their gender identity consistent with their biological sex. Sexual orientation, the preference for sexual partners and sexual attraction to one or the other gender (sex) or both, also varies. People who experience sexual pleasure with members of their own sex likely consider themselves masculine or feminine according

The Sociology of Gender  7

to gender norms. Others are born with ambiguous sex characteristics and may be assigned one sex at birth but develop a different identity related to gender. They may be reassigned to the other sex through surgery. Some cultures allow people to move freely between genders, regardless of their biological sex (Chapter 2).

Gender Inclusiveness These examples spotlight those whose identities do not match simplified sex and gender categories. Accounting for this categorical mismatch, LGBTQ is the inclusive term for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer people. Their lives are rejections of a gender binary, that males and females can be classified into two distinct, oppositional, nonoverlapping categories defined as masculine of feminine. Notice that this definition includes biological (male and female) and cultural (masculine and feminine) factors. In public opinion, the terms sex and gender are often conflated, and sex is a proxy for gender when no other information is provided. On the other hand, when sex and gender are measured with more information, such as what “male and female” refer to, compared to what “man and woman” refer to, people largely distinguish the terms. Male/female = biological qualities; man/ woman = sociocultural qualities (Bittner and Goodyear-Grant, 2017). Another significant distinction is that sexual majority (heterosexuals) emphasize more biological content in both sex and gender; LGBTQ people emphasize more sociocultural content. Many people do not identify with the conventional binaries of either sex or gender and perceive the terms through their own sexual identities. Researchers are accounting for non-binary identities by expanding options for people to categorize themselves according to gender (Geist et al., 2017; Schudson et al., 2019). Unless sex is discussed in a specific biological context, gender has steadily become the general, accepted referent in research. People do not like to be “put in boxes.” Scientists, however, need terms to classify people by certain characteristics, but the devised terms must be meaningful for scholarship and acceptable to the people in the categories under discussion. The concepts of sex and gender are fraught with ambiguities. When used as binary categories, not only is scientific understanding distorted, but such usage is a disservice to multitudes of people in the LGBTQ community who identify as “gender variant.”

Gender Roles From a sociological perspective, we are concerned with gender and how it is learned, how it changes over time, and how it varies between and within cultures. Gender is both non-binary and fluid, viewed on a continuum of characteristics people may act on regardless their biological sex. Adding the concept of role to either sex or gender increases confusion. When the sociocultural concept of role is combined with the biological concept of sex, it is difficult to determine what content is being discussed when subsumed under the label of sex role. Today gender role, rather than sex role, is standardized usage in sociology. Gender roles, therefore, are the expected attitudes and behaviors a society associates with each sex. This definition places gender in the sociocultural context. These issues will be detailed in Chapters 2 and 3, but problems of terminology will follow us—haunt us—throughout this book. From a sociological perspective, we are concerned with gender and how it is learned, how it changes over time, and how it varies between and within cultures.

8  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

SOCIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES ON GENDER Sociologists explain gender according to several dominant theoretical perspectives, general ways of understanding social reality that guide research and provide paths for interpreting data. In essence, a theory is an explanation. Formal theories consist of logically interrelated propositions that explain empirical data, information derived from observations or experiences. For instance, data (a plural word) indicate that compared to men, women are more likely to be segregated in lower-paying jobs offering fewer opportunities for professional growth and advancement. Data also indicate that in the United States and globally, the domestic work women perform in or near their homes is valued less than the work men perform outside their homes. Why? Like sociology, the disciplines of biology, psychology, and anthropology offer explanations for gender-related attitudes and behavior. Not only do these explanations differ between disciplines, but scientists in the same discipline offer competing explanations for the same data; sociology is no exception. The best explanations account for the volume and complexities of data. Research on gender issues is rapidly accelerating and the best theories are interdisciplinary and intersectional. Sociological theory frames the book but also accounts for these trends.

Levels of Analysis Sociology’s theoretical perspectives on gender also vary according to level of analysis, the range of data collected and how data are explained. A macro sociological perspective on gender roles directs attention to large-scale social phenomena such as labor force, educational, and political trends that play out according to gender. A micro sociological perspective on gender is largely contextual, directing attention to small groups and the details of gender interaction, for example, between couples, in families, and in peer groups. A mezzo sociological perspective on gender draws attention to definitions of wider cultural norms that configure all social interaction. In this sense, the mezzo level is a bridge between the micro and macro levels. Media-inspired images of genders, for example, are transported to schools and workplaces and influence the activities of students, teachers, and employees. The theoretical perspectives unfolding in all three levels are being successfully combined to advance better explanations for attitudes and behavior related to gender. Early sociological perspectives on gender evolved from scholarship on the sociology of the family. These explanations centered on why the roles women perform in their households (private sphere) and men perform outside their households (public sphere) are associated with varying levels of power depending on if a man or a woman is carrying them out. To a large extent, early work on the family continues to inform sociological thinking on gender. The next sections overview the major sociological (theoretical) perspectives highlighting explanations for the gender–family connection.

Functionalism Dating to the early-nineteenth century, at the advent of sociology as an academic discipline in Europe and the U.S., functionalism rapidly became sociology’s most influential theoretical perspective. Also known as “structural functionalism,” it is a macro sociological perspective based on the premise that society is made up of interdependent parts, each of which

The Sociology of Gender  9

contributes to the functioning of the broader society. A change in one part leads to a change in every other part. Functionalists seek to identify these parts (structure) and determine how each contributes to meeting basic social needs. Social stability—balance and equilibrium—are enhanced when parts work together effectively and efficiently. In the face of social change where accepted norms are disrupted, internal mechanisms—such as measures of social control—are mobilized to restore equilibrium. Both social control and stability are enhanced when people share similar beliefs and values. Functionalists highlight this value consensus as a key factor in maintaining or reestablishing social stability. When values shift too quickly normlessness can follow and social stability is threatened.

Preview These central ideas in functionalism set the stage for understanding how sociological theory frames gender and gender roles in marriage and the family. The central ideas of the theories that follow do the same. Functionalists focus on the family as the critical institution to instill values to children about the “proper place” of men and women in society. When children in all families learn and accept these values, society functions smoothly and any dire effects of social change will be minimized. In turn, the gender status quo is maintained in the family and wider society.

Preindustrial Society Functionalists suggest that social equilibrium in preindustrial societies was sustained by assigning different tasks to men and women. Given the hunting and gathering and subsistence farming activities characterizing most preindustrial societies before the late eighteenth century in Europe and fledgling America, role specialization according to gender was deemed a functional necessity. As hunters, men were frequently away from households for long periods, centering their lives on providing meat to the family. It was functional for women—­ limited by pregnancy, childbirth, and nursing—to shoulder domestic tasks near their homes as gatherers, subsistence farmers, caretakers of children, and guardians of their households. Survival depended on all family members helping with agricultural and domestic activities. Girls continued these activities even as boys reached the age they could hunt with the men. This rather uncomplicated functional division of labor was reproduced in cultures throughout the globe. Women may have been farmers, food gatherers, and producers of household necessities, such as candles, soap, and clothing, but were dependent on men for other food and protection. This dependence established a power and prestige hierarchy by which male activities and roles came to be more valued than female activities and roles.

Contemporary Society Despite being oversimplified, functionalist principles apply to contemporary families. Influential twentieth-century sociologists asserted that disruption is minimized, harmony is maximized, and families benefit when husband and wife assume complementary, specialized, nonoverlapping roles (Parsons and Bales, 1955; Parsons, 1966). When the husband–father takes the (traditional) instrumental role, he is expected to maintain the physical integrity of the family by providing food and shelter through breadwinning and linking the family to the

10  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

world outside the home. When the wife–mother takes the (traditional) expressive role, she is expected to cement relationships and provide emotional support and nurturing activities that ensure a smoothly running household. If there is too much deviation from these roles or there is too much overlap, the family is propelled into a state of imbalance that threatens its survival as a unit. If too many families abandon these traditional roles too quickly, stability is threatened. Supporters of functionalist assumptions argue, for instance, that if gender roles in the family are too ambiguous, the risk of divorce increases. Indeed, there are dire consequences for interfering with established gender roles.

Critique It is apparent that functionalism’s emphasis on social equilibrium—maintaining the status quo at all costs—makes it an inherently conservative theoretical perspective. This image is reinforced by its difficulty in accounting for a variety of existing family systems and a torrent of new family forms (Chapter 8). Functionalism is not keeping pace with rapid social change, moving families to adopt more egalitarian gender roles. To the dismay of scientists, theories and the research on which they are based are routinely distorted in popular culture and used to support a range of ideologies. At its rudimentary level, functionalism has been a justification for straight, white, male dominance and gender stratification harmful to men and women of color and those with gender variant identities. In the United States, functional analyses were popularized in the 1950s when, weary of war, the nation latched onto a traditional, idealized version of family life and attempted to reestablish not just a prewar, but a pre-Depression, existence. Functionalism tends to support a white middle-class family model emphasizing the “different spheres” economic model of male head of household, and his female subordinate. Women function outside the home as a reserve labor force, such as needed labor in wartime. This model does not apply to poor women and single parents who are employed by necessity to maintain household survival. It may not apply to African American women, who by choice are less likely to separate family from employment, and who derive high satisfaction from both. Research also shows that gender specialization of household tasks in contemporary families is more dysfunctional than functional. Women relegated to family roles that they see as restrictive, for example, are unhappier in their marriages and more likely to opt out of them. Despite tension associated with multiple roles and role overlap, couples report high levels of gratification, self-esteem, status security, and personally enriched lives (Chapter 8). Contemporary families do not fit functionalist models. To its credit, functionalism offers a reasonable explanation for the origin of gender roles and the usefulness of assigning tasks on the basis of gender in subsistence economies or in regions in which large families are normative and children are needed for agricultural work. Contemporary functionalists also acknowledge that strain occurs when there is too sharp a divide between the public and the private sphere, particularly for women. They recognize that such a divide is both artificial and dysfunctional, particularly when families must cope with massive social change accompanying globalization (Chapter 6). A globalized economy calls for high achieving career women who also accommodate their families. Although the downside is that a “superwoman” status creates tension due to role overload, it is impossible to dismiss the functional utility of her status inside and outside the home. Finally, neofunctionalism accounts for multiple contexts and interdependence of gender relations—biological,

The Sociology of Gender  11

psychological, social, and cultural. A functionalist examination of these contexts allows us to understand how female subordination and male superiority are reproduced and defended across the globe.

Conflict Theory The macro sociological perspective of conflict theory, also referred to as “social conflict theory,” in important ways reflects opposing assumptions about social order and social change compared to functionalism. Unlike functionalists, who believe that social order is maintained through value consensus, conflict theorists assert that it is preserved through power one social class holds over another.

Marx, Engels, and Social Class Rooted in the writings of Karl Marx (1818–1883), conflict theory argues that society is a stage on which struggles for power and dominance are acted out. The struggles are largely between social classes competing for scarce resources, such as control over the means of production (land, factories, natural resources) and distribution of resources (money, food, material goods). Capitalism thrives on a class-based system that consolidates power in the hands of a few men of the “ruling class” (bourgeoisie) who own the farms and factories that workers (proletariat) depend on for their survival. The dominant class maintains power over the subordinate class by extracting as much profit as possible from their work. Only when the workers recognize their common oppression through class consciousness can they unite and amass the resources necessary to seriously challenge the inequitable system in which they find themselves (Marx and Engels, 1848/1964; Marx, 1867/1976). The first widescale test of Marxian beliefs was in the Soviet Union, formed five years after the 1917 “October Revolution” in Russia led by Vladimir Lenin, eventually propelling Joseph Stalin to power in the 1920s. The Soviet Union enveloped Russia, Eastern Europe, and much of Eurasia, until its demise in 1991. Friedrich Engels (1820–1895) applied Marxian assumptions to the family and, by extension, to its gender roles. He suggested that the master–slave, exploiter–exploited relationships in broader society, between bourgeoisie and proletariat, are translated to the household. So-called “primitive societies” were highly egalitarian because there were no surplus goods— and hence, no private property. People consumed what they produced. With the emergence of private property and the dawn of capitalistic institutions, Engels argued that a woman’s domestic labor is “no longer counted beside the acquisition of the necessities of life by the man; the latter was everything, the former an unimportant extra.” The household is an autocracy, and the supremacy of the husband is unquestioned. “The emancipation of woman will only be possible when women can take part in production on a large social scale, and domestic work no longer claims but an insignificant amount of her time” (Engels, 1884/1942:41–43).

Contemporary Conflict Theory Later conflict theorists refined original Marxian assertions to reflect contemporary patterns and make conflict theory palatable to those seeking social change in the direction of egalitarianism but not through revolution as outlined by classical Marxism (Dahrendorf, 1959;

12  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

Collins, 1975, 1979). These conflict theorists assert that social institutions such as the family, economy, and government are based on the dominance of some groups over others. Conflict is not based simply on class struggle and the tensions between owner and worker or employer and employee; it occurs on a much wider level among almost all groups. These include parents and children, husbands and wives, young and old, sick and healthy, people of color and whites, heterosexual and LGBTQ, and females and males. Any group defined as a “minority” according to their lower levels of resources are subject to exploitation by a “majority group,” those with a higher level of resources. The list is infinite.

Gender and the Family Conflict theory focuses on the social placement function of the family that deposits people at birth into families who possess varying degrees of economic resources and social capital. People fortunate enough to be deposited into wealthier families will work to preserve existing inequality because they clearly benefit from the overall power imbalance. Social class endogamy (marrying within the same class) and inheritance patterns ensure that property and wealth are kept in the hands of a few powerful families. Beliefs about inequality and power imbalance become institutionalized—accepted and persistent over time, thus defined as legitimate by both the privileged and the oppressed. The notion that family wealth is deserved and those born into poor families remain poor because they lack talent and a work ethic is reproduced. The structural conditions that sustain poverty are ignored. When social placement operates through patriarchal and patrilineal systems, wealth is further concentrated in the hands of males, and female subservience, neglect, and poverty expand. Contemporary conflict theorists match Engels’ contention that when women are wage earners, they can leverage power inside their homes. In turn, this leverage leads to more egalitarian marriage and family arrangements. The conflict perspective is supported by research showing that a woman’s household work, especially caregiving, affects her paid work in multiple ways, including work experience, advancement, seniority, location of workplace, and hours worked per week. All of these are linked to the gender gap in earnings (Chapter 10). Those lacking the resources to demand sharing household burdens or purchasing substitutes, perform undesirable work disproportionately. Since household labor is unpaid and associated with lack of power, the homemaker (wife) shoulders the vast majority of domestic tasks. The more powerful spouse performs the least amount of household work, including child care.

Critique Conflict theory is criticized for overemphasis on the economic basis of inequality and assuming inevitable competition between family members. It tends to dismiss consensus between spouses or partners regarding task allocation. More important, paid employment is not the panacea envisioned by Engels to overcome male dominance in and outside the home. The gendered division of household labor does not translate to a reduction in the gender wage gap or reduced in-home responsibilities. The former Soviet Union had the highest percentage of women in paid employment in the world, but more household responsibilities than women in many other countries, and earned two-thirds of the average male income. In post-Communist Russia, there is no change in women’s domestic work, but women now earn less than half of men’s average earnings (Chapter 6). Research is unequivocal that even in cultures

The Sociology of Gender  13

with increased gender equity in the workplace, employed women globally take on second and third shifts of domestic work after returning home (Chapter 8). Conflict theory is associated with the idea that men as a group intentionally organize themselves to keep women in subordinate positions. However, many unorganized or unintended social forces come into play when explaining gender stratification. Functionalism’s bias against social change might be matched with conflict theory’s bias for social change. This bias is less of a problem for conflict theory, however, particularly when stripped of some Marxian baggage. Contemporary conflict theory has made strong inroads in using social class to further clarify the gender–race–class link in intersectional analysis. Class advantages for some people of color may override race disadvantages. Sexism is brought into the mix by conflict theory. Most people are uncomfortable with sexism and patterns of gender inequity that harm both women and men. Women are denied opportunities to expand instrumental roles offering economic parity with men outside the home; men are denied opportunities for expanding expressive and nurturing roles inside the home. At the ideological level, sociological conflict theory has been used by activists to reduce racism, economic-based disparity (classism), sexism, heterosexism, and ableism, and discrimination due to disability or disease (Bericat, 2019; Scambler, 2019; Velez et al. 2019). As conflict theorists move beyond class-based approaches and engage in more intersectional analyses, the perspective is probably the strongest to account for multiple oppressions. Contemporary conflict theory lays the foundation for many, if not most, macro-level analyses in gender studies in the U.S. and globally.

Symbolic Interaction Symbolic interaction (SI), also called the interactionist perspective, is at the heart of the sociological view of social interaction at the micro level. It is a highly contextual explanation for interaction, accounting for details of the setting. With attention to people’s behavior in face-to-face social settings, symbolic interactionists explain social interaction as a dynamic process in which people continually modify their behavior as a result of the interaction itself. Herbert Blumer (1900–1987), who originated the term symbolic interaction, asserted that people do not respond directly to the world around them, but to the meaning they bring to it. Society, its institutions, and its social structure exist—that is, social reality is bestowed— only through human interaction (Blumer, 1969). Reality is what members agree to be reality. People interact according to how they perceive a situation and act accordingly. A key step in the interaction process is how people think others who are there also understand the encounter. Each person’s “definition of the situation” influences others’ definitions. To illustrate symbolic interaction’s emphasis on reasoned, shifting behavior, I developed the concept end point fallacy, asserting that the negotiation of social reality is an ongoing process in which new definitions produce new behavior in a never-ending cycle. The end point fallacy is an excellent way to explain the inconsistencies between people’s behavior as they move from setting to setting. We have latitude in the way we act out our roles. Because the context of the interaction is a key determinant of role performance, the role performance that is appropriate in one context may be inappropriate in another. Cultural norms are modified whenever social interaction occurs because people bring their own definitions about appropriate behavior to the interaction. These definitions shape the way people see and experience their group lives in the daily worlds they occupy.

14  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

Social Constructionism Social interaction is also governed by norms that are largely shaped by culture. Because social constructionism (SC) accounts for “outside” cultural cues that invade interaction, it is wider in scope than symbolic interaction. As a mezzo perspective it bridges the contexts of interaction at the micro level with larger cultural patterns at the macro level. Despite differences in scope, both SC and SI share features that strengthen their explanations. The most important feature is the social construction of reality—the shaping of perception of reality by the subjective meanings brought to any experience or social interaction. Consistent with Herbert Blumer’s view, every time social interaction occurs, people creatively “construct” their own understanding of it—whether “real” or not—and behave accordingly. Concepts such as gender, therefore, must be found in the meanings (constructs) people bring to them (Deutscher and Lindsey, 2005:5). Taking hold during early socialization, these constructions emanate from a variety of sources, such as our families, schools, and media (Chapter 3). Consistent with SC, all these sources provide cultural guidelines for how we carry out our roles. Consistent with SI, they are selectively chosen and acted on in various contexts. Social constructionism is also consistent with the end point fallacy because the definitions are never completely rigid; they are always in a state of flux. Workplace definitions of “gender appropriateness,” for example, are modified when men and women replace one another in jobs that earlier were defined as “gender inappropriate.” Today nursing and elementary school teaching for men and science and soldiering for women are more likely to be socially constructed as normative and gender-appropriate jobs.

Doing Gender This idea of what is appropriate or inappropriate for gender is extended in ways consistent with both social constructionism and symbolic interaction. Concepts used to collectively categorize people—such as race, ethnicity, and gender—do not exist objectively, but unfold through a socially constructed process. Gender emerges not as an individual attribute but is “accomplished” in interaction with others. People, therefore, are doing gender (West and Zimmerman, 1987). In “doing” gender, symbolic interaction takes its lead from Erving Goffman (1922–1982), who developed a dramaturgy approach to social interaction. Goffman maintained that the best way to understand social interaction is to consider it as an enactment in a theatrical performance. People are evaluated according to how well they meet cultural norms and expectations about gender. Doing gender, therefore, is also inherent to social constructionism. Like actors on a stage, we use strategies of “impression management,” providing information and cues to others that present us in a favorable light (Goffman, 1959, 1963, 1971). Think about the heterosexual bar scene where men sit at the counter and operate from a script where they are expected to make the first move. If a woman is with friends, she must disengage herself if she is “selected” by the man. It is probable that the women drove separately. These scripts may be modified by sexual identity but still play out in socially constructed ways. The LGBTQ community learns sexual scripts that account for a wider range of identities that crosscut many sex and gender categories (Chapter 2). Television also illustrates these concepts. Although there are many cultural variations, TV lays out gender-scripted rules for accepting or rejecting hookups that are negotiated and acted upon in bars and meet-ups for singles of all sexual persuasion for viewers across the globe. Early childhood classrooms are gendered by space and the activities in the spaces (Chapter 11).

The Sociology of Gender  15

Despite well-intentioned teachers wanting to bring boys and girls together to enhance learning, children quickly learn which spaces are appropriate for boys and which are appropriate for girls. If a child ventures into the other gender’s space, they adapt their activities according to which gender “owns the space” (Delfin, 2019). Since young children self-segregate in school, teachers may find it easier to allow separate experiences for girls and boys. In doing so, however, gender differences are reproduced and efforts at gender equality are stalled. Gender is structured by one set of scripts designed for males and another designed for females. Although scripts for doing gender permit a range of behaviors, a typical result is that the labels we use for gender promote a pattern of between-sex competition, rejection, and emotional segregation. This pattern is reinforced by routinely referring to the other sex (gender) as the opposite sex. Men and women label each other as opposite to who they are and then behave according to that label. This kind of “doing gender” serves to separate rather than connect the genders.

Heteronormativity Gender and sex are contested categories (Chapter 2). In social interaction, however, people script their behavior, often inadvertently, according to both categories. Heteronormative scripts mark heterosexuality as the proper sexual orientation and sustain power differences between women and men, and between players who may define themselves in one or more LGBTQ categories. Combined with persistent taken-for-granted homonormativity, gender-based binary cultural scripts frame all sexual encounters. Heteronormative is being challenged among young adults who are more accepting of gender non-conforming people, but with media reinforcement its ideology remains dominant (Duncan et al., 2019; Gamble, 2019; Thorne et al., 2019). For sexual scripts to be acted on, “gender” must first be determined. “Determining gender” is achieved by “authenticating another person’s gender identity” (Westbrook and Schilt, 2014:33). This process begins under a heteronormative umbrella (social constructionism) but may be transgressed by those in the interaction who “agree” on who everyone “is” and what is expected to occur (symbolic interaction). Men in all sexual categories are evaluated by other men (and women) according to the degree in which they adhere to masculinity norms (Chapter 9). Although these evaluations may challenge rigid gender norms, they reinforce binary beliefs about gender and disparage attempts to defy heteronormativity.

Doing Difference Men and women in various social networks—formed at school, work, and in volunteer ­activities—further illustrate the doing gender process. From early childhood, gender segregation becomes the standard in social networks. Gendered subcultures emerge, perceptions of gender differences are strengthened, and the common ground that forms intimate, status-equal friendships between the genders is eroded. Differences rather than similarities are more likely to be noticed, defined, and acted on. When cross-gender social interaction occurs, such as in the workplace, it is between men and women who are not likely to be in statuses with similar levels of power and prestige. Once the genders are socially constructed as different, it is easier for those with more power (men) to justify inequality toward those with less power (women). Social difference is constructed into social privilege that reinforces gender norms.

16  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

Dancing On the other hand, the dance floor offers a space for doing difference that challenges and subverts gender norms. Dance is highly gendered. Ballroom dancing, waltzing, tangoing, and ballet, for example, are enacted by prescribed, rigid gender roles. He leads, she follows; he lifts, she is lifted; his movements are sharp, hers are flowy; he is not drab in clothing, but she is definitely more glittery, with a lot of feathers and ruffles. Men’s dominance in these dance genres serves to reduce the femininity that males—and dance audiences—may see as assaults on traditional masculine norms. Dance teachers inadvertently valorize the physical and psychological traits associated with male strength and psychological “coolness” (Christofidou, 2018; Clegg et al., 2018). Girls outnumber boys 20 to 1 in dance classes. These numbers are reflected in the highly competitive ballet world. Males have less competition than females for prized slots, but both are constrained by gender in dance norms. Innovation is less prized than is gender tradition. These traditional dance genres are in flux. Men are performing dance roles that for centuries were assigned to women. Women are showing off their physical prowess by leaping higher and twirling more than ever. Same-gender ballroom dancing and reversed male and female roles in theatrical dance are being ushered into dance settings. Men and women learn to lead and learn to follow (Mainwaring, 2019; Peterson, 2019). In challenging gender norms, however, it is taking more time for ballroom dancing and ballet to catch up to street dance, hip-hop, and dance clubs catering to styles of dance on a rotating basis—the Lindy Hop one night, to swing, Charleston, or jitterbug on other nights. People dance in costumes of the era; cross-dressing is frequent and accepted, drawing spectators and novice dancers. In “performing difference,” dancers and spectators alike take advantage of the excitement and innovation offered in these “third spaces” (Swing, 2018; Anttila et al., 2019). Given that the LGBTQ community is at the forefront in creating third spaces, a form of activism via dance garners support for gender-nonconformity. Gender is not erased, but intentionally doing difference on the dance floor certainly disrupts gender norms for exciting and pleasureful experiences.

Critique Explanations for doing gender framed through symbolic interaction and social constructionism focus on agency in choices of behavior. Symbolic interaction’s highly contextualized approach needs to account for processes that often limit choice of action and prompt people to engage in gendered behavior that counters what they would prefer to do. This focus may undermine fluidity to recast gender norms in ways that benefit both men and women. Divorce can allow for “redoing” gender—housework, parenting, and breadwinning roles are abandoned out of necessity rather than choice. In the lives of former spouses and their children, however, dealing with the trauma of divorce may be easier by adhering to traditional gender roles as much as possible. Divorce, therefore, also offers the option for “undoing” gender but it is often “redone” to match previous gender arrangements in the family. For social constructionism, cultural norms remain significant structural forces that constrain choices of behavior. In some cultures, for example, women and men are directed by both law and custom to work in certain occupations, marry people they would not choose on their own, and be restricted from attending school. Larger social structures also explain family dynamics. Men and women interact as individual family members and according to other social roles. Interaction shifts with the prestige associated with all these roles. For example, a

The Sociology of Gender  17

wealthy white man with a powerful corporate position does not dissolve those roles when he walks into his home. They shape his life at home, in the workplace, and in other social institutions. Race, class, and gender offer privileges bestowed by the broader society that create a power base in his home. Power and privilege can result in a patriarchal family regardless of the couple’s desire for a more egalitarian arrangement. Both symbolic interaction and social constructionism must account for definitions of gendered behavior, appropriate or not, prompting people to believe inequality (patriarchy) is inevitable. Regardless of how fluid it may be on the surface, a gender binary is still set up. Are the men and women on the dance floor “redoing” or “undoing gender?” Are transgender dancers incorporated just for the sake of “edgy politics?” (Schaefer, 2017) In the micro worlds of post-divorce homes or in dance clubs, are traditional scripts modified enough to say that gender is “undone?” Gendered scripts invade dance space even as its boundaries are transgressed. Dancers may be redoing and undoing gender simultaneously. If gender can truly be undone, then it must go beyond choices of individual identity and performing roles in various contexts shaped by gendered cultural norms (micro and mezzo levels). It must also be multi-structural, with efforts at undoing gender in all social institutions (macro level) (Risman, 2018). The best explanations for gendered behavior account for all levels. All sociological theories lead to some final questions. Is doing gender unavoidable? Society’s gender binary sets up social inequality. If we can do, redo, and undo gender, can we— and indeed, should we—deliberately degender our lives? As Judith Lorber (2005:5–6) points out, this does not mean thinking about gender goes away, but it recognizes gender complexity and how gender intersects with other statuses. Regardless of potential benefits, the notion of “degendered” lives at first glance seems impossible and impractical. With revolutionizing sexuality research at the forefront, however, the impossible may become plausible (Chapter 2).

Feminist Sociological Theory By calling attention to the powerful impact of gender in the social ordering of our relationships (micro-level analysis), how they are socially constructed (mezzo-level analysis), and gender patterns in social institutions (macro-level analysis), the feminist theoretical perspective in sociology is a major paradigm significantly reshaping the discipline. The paradigm is shaped by feminist sociologists who identify and critique androcentric patterns in sociology and other social sciences. Indeed, in tracing the development of sociological theory, the voices of dominant white, Western males are heard, and the contributions of non-Western sources and female voices are at best marginalized (Alatas and Sinha, 2017:1). Scholars and activists disagree about elements to include in feminist sociological theory but the consensus is that it must explain gender in relation to power and oppression and use these explanations to challenge a status quo disadvantageous to women. Because power relationships are at the core of the feminist paradigm, it is a strong partner with conflict theory. Both perspectives assert that structured social inequality is preserved by ideologies accepted by both the privileged and the oppressed. Only when oppressed groups gain necessary resources can these ideologies be challenged. In challenging the prevailing system, feminists focus on women and their ability to amass resources in their individual lives and through social and political means. Feminists work as academics, researchers, journalists, and activists to advance women’s empowerment—the ability of women to exert control over their own destinies. Empowerment for women is connected to increased confidence, strength, and resilience.

18  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

Feminist theory also resonates with symbolic interaction and social constructionism. Unequal power relations between men and women can be interrogated from the point of view (definition of the situation) of women who are “ruled” by men in many settings. For example, ambitious corporate women need to practice impression management based on gender norms in their corporate setting, but at the same time need to maintain a sense of personal integrity. Corporate women who are recognized for other roles, such as serving on non-profit boards or in high profile voluntary service, bring these positive portrayals to their office. The feminist perspective accounts for ways to empower these corporate women by clarifying the relationship between the label of “feminine” (symbolic interaction) and how these women are evaluated inside and outside of their workplaces (social constructionism). Overall, feminist sociological theory collaborates well with most other sociological perspectives. A thoughtful reading of all the sociological perspectives should point out why functionalism is the theory which is most mismatched with feminist theory.

Intersectionality A fundamental contribution of the feminist perspective to the humanities and social sciences is its attention to intersectionality, the multiple oppressions of people with distinctive combinations of disadvantages based on gender, race, and social class. Although these three categories were the nodes of intersectionality, it has greatly expanded to account for other risks, such as sexuality, ethnicity, religion, and disability. The initial gender–race–class linkage in analyzing social behavior emerged with African American feminists in the 1960s; they recognized that an understanding of the connection between these multiple oppressions is necessary to determine how women are alike and how they are different. Three decades later, Kimberlé Crenshaw formalized this understanding using the term intersectionality, pointing to a “matrix of oppression” as a centerpiece of feminist theory. Crenshaw originally employed intersectionality in a legal and political context to describe discrimination and injustices of black women rooted in gender and race (Crenshaw, 1989, 1991). Black women’s experiences were obscured, making them legally invisible as well as increasing their vulnerability to racial and sexual violence. Intersectionality was a prism to bring to light dynamics within discrimination law that were disregarded by the courts. Crenshaw may have coined the term intersectionality that went viral three decades later, but black feminists already had it on a on a fast track. Building on the foundation of these earlier African American feminists, seminal work by Patricia Hill Collins (1990, 2000) further elucidated the powerful consequences of intersectionality. The gift of intersectionality is that its roots were in activism and social movements spurred by black women. For decades, they have been in the forefront of challenging social institutions … to create more equitable communities, families, and coalitions … Black women have been absolutely visionary when it comes to democratic participation, restructuring organizations, and resisting racially and gender-oppressive characterizations. (Wingfield, 2019: 346, 359) Feminists today are keenly aware that combined oppressions have multiple, synergistic effects. Identifying these effects opens up paths for activism to serve marginalized groups. Hearing the personal stories of women in these statuses is an important goal.

The Sociology of Gender  19

Intersectionality in feminist theory also explains how overlapping categories define a person’s identity and potential for risk. While some categories come with advantages, such as whiteness, others come with jeopardy, such as poverty. Regardless of risk or benefit, intersectionality accounts for the overlap. For example, when the issue of poverty becomes “feminized,” it is defined primarily by gender—women are at increased risk of being poor compared with men. A focus on the feminization of poverty ignores the links between race, social class, and marital status that puts certain categories of women—such as single parents, women of color, and elderly women living alone—at higher risk than others. To explain poverty, racial and class oppression must be considered along with gender. Attention to these links spotlights the hidden, taken-for-granted power of privilege, the right to benefits or immunity granted to specific people or groups. When white middle-class feminists focus on oppression of women, they may not recognize the privileges that come with their own race and class. Intersectionality launched a seismic shift in feminist theory. It has expanded well beyond any specific configuration of risk to account for why some configurations carry more or less risk than others. Women are better served when interventions can be tailored to groups of women with similar configurations of oppression but also capitalize on any privileged statuses. Feminist activists use intersectional approaches to shape strategies to meet the needs of the constituencies they serve. Intersectionality’s attention to diversity that originated with the gender–race–class link has reverberated throughout sociology and other disciplines, generating a great deal of interdisciplinary research. For example, Collins’ work synthesized ideas from scholars, activists, and writers in the humanities, philosophy, and social sciences. Similar work opened new academic programs in men’s studies, and women, gender and sexuality studies. Feminist scholarship provides opportunities for men to view themselves as gendered beings and to make visible their concerns. Intersectionality’s research reach continues to expand as other sites of oppression are identified.

Backlash to Intersectionality Intersectional feminist theory has reverberated across disciplines with large sex and gender content areas. As intersectionality’s scholarship and activism continue to gain prominence, so do its critics. Some argue that intersectionality has been co-opted by disciplines such as business to justify profit from women’s underpaid labor in the guise of corporate social responsibility (CSR). Gender strategies vary in businesses according to whether CSR is proactive from an employee level or comes from management in a top-down fashion. CSR can be a tool for achieving gender equality at work or for cementing existing gender barriers (Georgeac and Rattan, 2019; Torres et al., 2019). Others battle over the ownership and origins of intersectionality to compete for funding for new programs in corporate universities. Intersectionality may be watered down or passed over by white women, including feminists, who are race-loyal. Some black feminists contend that intersectionality has been stolen and seek to reclaim its original analytic models (Cooper, 2018; Nash, 2019). Within feminist ranks the legacy of intersectionality is contested. In political realms, the right wing learned to fear intersectionality and wanted everyone else to fear it, too. Right-wing politicians and media lambast intersectionality, ironically, as privileging oppression and victimhood, often in the name of funding for dubious projects. As a form of identity politics, they assert that intersectionality applauds people for the number of victims

20  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

groups they claim to belong to. Crenshaw herself is disturbed about “intersectional erasure ” in the Trump era. They focus on downward trajectories of white working class men, and beliefs that race and gender privilege provide better paid jobs for women of color. The fact that women of color are the people most impacted by deindustrialization and the defunding of public sectors these women disproportionally depend on, is ignored. Trump cultivates these messages, appealing to the anger of working class men (Columbia Law School, 2017). Working class men of color are also swayed to accept messages that they are left behind—and falling behind—women of color. The current debate over intersectionality is really three debates: one based on what academics like Crenshaw actually mean by the term, one based on how activists seeking to eliminate disparities between groups have interpreted the term, and a third on how some conservatives are responding to its use by those activists. (Coaston, 2019) Debate is not resolved, nor should it be. Keeping with the spirit of intersectionality, no matter how it is defined, debate will continue to shift directions and nurture feminist progress. My take is that intersectionality is a reunion of research and collaboration that sets a path for feminist advocacy and activism.

Intersectionality and Science Like all science, sociology is served when data can be generalized. Intersectionality offers a powerful theoretical approach to understanding categories of oppression. It is problematic, however, to disentangle the effects of one category compared to the others. The concept is associated with terms such as inclusiveness, diversity, and multiculturalism, but it goes beyond any of these. It is not additive but synergistic in its effects. Intersectionality is valued for this synergy but quantifying it for science is exceedingly difficult. Qualitative analyses of women navigating categories of risk offer riveting narratives that speak to the necessity of an intersectional framework. Intersectionality’s theoretical foundation, however, is not yet matched with empirical work to determine how various statuses in the matrix of oppression/domination are ranked. Taken a step further, can a specific combination of statuses with privilege overcome another combination of statuses with liability? For example, subordinate men report high levels of discrimination from dominant men. Intersectionality would predict that comparable subordinate women would experience an even higher level of discrimination, but this is difficult to confirm. Counselors confront their own stereotypes regarding race, religion, and immigration status of low-income families they strive to serve. How do they navigate the intersections of these statuses to better serve their clients? (Veenstra, 2013; Smith, 2019b). Research is needed to clarify a hierarchy of linkages. If a ranking can be identified and even minimally quantified, strategies to address women’s oppression are improved.

Reprise A key strength of the feminist perspective is providing a bridge between sociological theories accounting for intersectionality—social diversity in all of its forms. By challenging a patriarchal status quo and androcentrism in sociological research and theory, it creates dissent that may limit its acceptance by some sociologists. Alternatively, the feminist perspective plants seeds for building a sociological template that transcends this status quo. Sociology benefits from the intellectual ferment ushered in by the feminist paradigm.

The Sociology of Gender  21

Feminist Perspectives on the Family Feminist scholars in the 1960s and 1970s viewed the traditional patriarchal family as a major site for the oppression of women. They asserted that when the patriarchal family is regarded as beneficial to social stability, as functionalism contends, it hampers egalitarian roles desired by both men and women. Feminist sociologists emphasize that gendered family relations do not occur in a vacuum; people are helped or hurt by resources outside the family that shape what happens inside the family. Intersectional models inform feminist thought on the contemporary family. In addition to gender, for example, single-parent African American, Latino, and Native American women are disadvantaged by race in employment necessary to support their families. Divorced lesbians must deal with a system that represses and disparages samesex relationships when they fight for custody of their children. With an intersectional thrust, feminist theory has pushed the necessity to study families through various vantage points. The family exists in a largely hidden, protected setting. By making gender visible, feminists have changed the way family scholars address power and privilege as played out in this intimate environment. A gender focus reveals social relations in the family and uncovers silences related to troubling parent–child relationships and tragedies of intimate partner violence (Allen, 2016; Jaramillo-Sierra and Allen, 2016). The consensus of feminists is that women may be doubly or triply disadvantaged by their race, class, or sexuality, but they are not helpless victims. They possess agency, the power to adapt and sometimes to succeed in difficult situations. Uncovering stories of women’s oppression in many families is a first step in agency, paving the way for advocacy and activism to attend to their needs and to the needs of women like themselves.

Critique With a view of gender marriage, and the patriarchal family focusing on oppression of women, the feminist perspective, like conflict theory, tends to minimize the practical benefits of marriage. A marriage may be patriarchal, but it includes economic resources and social support that women in these marriages may view as more important in their daily lives than their feelings about patriarchy and whether it flows into subordination. Feminist scholars find it difficult to reconcile research suggesting that women in traditional marriages are as satisfied with their choices as women in egalitarian marriages. Many women support equal rights but reject feminism, believing it disparages the traditional, cultural family roles they value. Latinas, for example, often cannot recognize how their lives are plagued by the intersection of racism and sexism (Liang et al., 2017; Robnett and Anderson, 2017). Detailed in later chapters, feminism’s emphasis on human agency may also marginalize situations in which women’s victimization is condoned by custom and ignored by law. Women’s agency is encouraged and celebrated regardless of circumstances, but it may be overshadowed by victimization.

FEMINISMS Feminist theory and its attention to intersectionality offers a framework for advocates addressing women’s inferior social position and the social, political, and economic discrimination that perpetuates it. Many of these organizations form networks under the umbrella of feminism, an inclusive worldwide movement to end sexism and sexist oppression by empowering women. Although not identical, feminist movement(s) and women’s movement(s) are

22  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

largely interchangeable in the eyes of the public. A century ago, women in the U.S. formed a movement to achieve suffrage. The suffrage movement lacked the diversity that likely prolonged its quest for women’s right to vote. Fifty years later a new movement emerged, referred to as women’s liberation. The revitalized women’s movement faltered because it did not realistically account for intersecting categories of oppression that divided women (Chapter 5). Intersectionality is fraught with tensions but lays a foundation for feminist networks across the globe and helps bridge these divides. Globalization presents ongoing challenges for women, so feminist agendas addressing needs of all women are always in flux. Feminists accept the goal of ending sexism by empowering women but disagree about how to accomplish it. Because the feminist movement seeks diversity and welcomes inclusiveness, full agreement on identifying problems and strategies to address them is unlikely. Though global in scope, the movement unfolds in highly localized and regionalized forms. “The” feminist movement is a misnomer. Feminism fuels worldwide debates leading to creative, practical, and innovative strategies for women’s empowerment. Reflecting the difficulty of adopting one agenda, the movement partitions into various categories or branches according to general philosophical approaches. Categories are fluid; they evolve and are re-created as different waves of feminism flow through society (Chapter 5). Feminist categories, therefore, are neither mutually exclusive nor exhaustive. Women and men who identify with feminism are not likely to place themselves in any category. Feminists, however, generally subscribe to the principles of the following “feminisms.”

Liberal Feminism Liberal feminism, also called egalitarian or mainstream feminism, is based on the general proposition that all people are created equal and should not be denied equality of opportunity because of gender. Rapidly ascending during the women’s liberation movement in the 1960s, liberal feminism is associated with feminism’s second wave (Chapter 5). Since everyone benefits from the elimination of sexism, men and the LGBTQ community are encouraged to join their ranks. Liberal feminism takes its lead from Enlightenment beliefs of rationality, education, and the natural rights that extend to all men and women. This is articulated in John Stuart Mill’s (1869/2002) The Subjection of Women, that “what is now called the nature of women is an eminently artificial thing—the result of forced oppression in some directions, unnatural stimulation in others.” In the name of gender equity, women can mobilize for positive and productive change within pluralistic, multicultural systems. Liberal feminists assert that society can be modified—not completely restructured—to achieve women’s empowerment. They focus on achieving gender equality in the public sphere (workplace, school, political office) through legal approaches to gain, for example, equal pay and reproductive rights. They recognize the powerful interdependence of public and private spheres and that gender inequality in marriage and family impedes feminist progress outside the home. They support marriage as an equal partnership, with men matching women in responsibilities for domestic tasks and child care. This view is favored by professional middle-class women who place a high value on achievement through education allowing for better employment opportunities and making a decent living to provide for their families. Liberal feminism appeals to “mainstream” women who do not necessarily disagree with the overall structure of society, only that it be nonsexist. However, by preferring to work within the system rather than seriously challenge it, liberal feminists may be accused of bending to male values in the patriarchal system they disavow.

The Sociology of Gender  23

By attention to the similarities rather than the difference between women, liberal feminism believes shared values can bring women together regardless of race or (sub) culture. This belief largely explains the overrepresentation of white women in the ranks of liberal feminism. Intersectionality is valued but liberal feminism is often equated as “white feminism.” Since broader gender equality goals are aided by policy initiatives, liberal feminists increasingly focus on political campaigns to mobilize support for women’s causes. They are the linchpins in campaigns for ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA), strengthening workplace protections for sexual harassment, widening reproductive rights in health care, and securing safety for women and children fleeing domestic abuse. They dispute feminisms that reject the politicization of women’s causes. The ballot box is regarded as the key vehicle to serve the interests of all women. The National Organization for Women (NOW) and the American Association of University Women (AAUW) are formal groups in synch with liberal feminism. Both call for an end to restrictive gender roles that diminish opportunities for both women and men (Chapter 14).

Socialist Feminism Often referred to as “Marxist feminism,” socialist feminism adopts a Marx–Engels model linking women’s inferior position to class-based capitalism and its alignment with the patriarchal family in capitalistic societies. Socialist feminism argues that sexism and capitalism are mutually supportive. Women’s unpaid labor in the home and paid labor in a reserve labor force to be called on and discarded as needed serve patriarchy and capitalism. Socialist feminists also contend that economic and emotional dependence go hand in hand. A husband’s power over his wife is absolute because she is fearful of losing the economic security he provides. In repudiating capitalism, socialist principles need to be adapted to both home and workplace. Sexism and classism are mutually reinforcing, so society needs to be structured to accommodate economic redistribution that serve families and all classes. This agenda is revolutionary but does not play out violently. Mass-based protests are preferred strategies to help achieve socialist feminist goals. Socialist feminism appeals to working-class women and those disenfranchised from presumed economic opportunities in capitalism. It has made more headway in Latin America and has served as a powerful rallying point for women in other developing nations. Its most vivid expression occurred in the former Soviet Union, where women continued to carry the heavy burden of unpaid household labor while also functioning in the paid labor force (Chapter 6). Socialist feminists support the work of movements such as Occupy to draw global attention to oppression related to both gender and class. Although socialist feminism is tied to Marxist theory, there are key differences between the two. Whereas Marxist theory focuses on property and economic conditions to build an ideology, socialist feminism focuses on sexuality and gender. Men and women retain interest in their own gender group, so it is unclear whether the socialism being struggled for is the same for both men and women. Some argue, for example, that American socialist feminism has no loyalty to any regime that defines itself as Marxist (Gordon, 2013). A humanistic socialist approach to feminism requires consensus on how the new society would be structured. Once men recognize their hidden privileges, they would voluntarily renounce their privileges as men. Highly unlikely.

24  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

Radical Feminism Liberal and radical feminism surfaced during the tumultuous 1960s women’s liberation decade. Radical feminism is said to have emerged when women who were working with men in the civil rights and anti-Vietnam War movements were not allowed to present their positions on these causes. These women became aware of their own oppression by the treatment they received from their male cohorts, who insulted and ridiculed them for their views. The second wave of feminism leading to the rebirth of the women’s movement in the United States in the mid-twentieth century may be traced to the women who were derided and ignored by those they believed to be allies. History repeated itself. American feminism in the nineteenth century is traced to women who were denied the right to express their views by the men they worked with in the abolitionist (antislavery) movement. The condescending attitudes of the men of that era provided the catalyst for women to recognize gender-based oppression. Then they organized to challenge it (Chapter 5). Both liberal and radical feminists experienced the same life-altering events but took different tracks as a result. Radical feminists contend that sexism is at the core of patriarchal society and that all social institutions reflect it. Whereas liberal feminists focus on policy and legal remedies to address women’s discrimination in social institutions, especially school and workplace, radical feminists focus on the patriarchal family as the key site of oppression. Social institutions are so intertwined that it is virtually impossible to meaningfully attack sexism in a system infused with patriarchy. The radical label bestowed on these feminists—a label they largely accept—draws from their assertion that gender is the underlying form of oppression, cutting across race, class, and culture; today disability, age, and gender variant identity is added. Women’s oppression stems from male domination; if men are the problem, neither capitalism nor socialism nor any other male-dominated system will solve the problem. Unlike the liberal feminist argument that the “system” can be modified to accommodate gender equality, radical feminists call for new, separate women-centered institutions that rely on other women rather than men. Women can chart a variety of paths in these separate institutional spaces created and led by women. Women’s unique needs—distinctly different than men’s—are served. Women are empowered by one another. They envision a society in which the female virtues of nurturance, sharing, and intuition will dominate, but in a woman-identified world. Acknowledging that removing sexism from all institutions is impossible, radical feminists work locally to develop profit and not-for-profit institutions in service to women, such as small businesses, day care and counseling centers, and shelters for women escaping domestic violence. Reflecting a membership that is more diverse than other feminisms, especially related to race and LGBTQ identities, these localized institutions vary considerably in structure, philosophy, and strategies. For example, gender variant youth escaping abuse in coming out or being “discovered” by their families may be directed to a safe space catering to those with either a male or female identity. The blueprint for the women-centered society envisioned by radical feminists is stamped on such activities that are individualized in design and scope. Radical feminism’s disparate elements, however, coalesce with the conviction that male supremacy and female oppression define and structure all of society. Radical feminism in the mid-twentieth century is not so radical today. The alternative institutions created by these feminists continue to evolve as priories of their female clientele shifts. Education for social workers and human services professionals account for these shifts. In this way, radical feminist ideals in women-centered institutions have been mainstreamed

The Sociology of Gender  25

to benefit the communities they serve. The claim that radical feminism grew out of liberal feminism and then laid the foundation for all subsequent feminisms is a valid one. If radical feminists were (are) too conventional, other styles of feminism supplant them.

Cultural Feminism Like radical feminists, early cultural feminists believed that in fighting gender oppression, women are best served by a shared women’s culture. The two groups differed on the values to build this shared culture. To serve women’s empowerment, cultural feminism seeks to re-appropriate undervalued qualities associated with women’s roles, including cooperation, caring, nurturing, openness, and connectedness. Culture needs to be balanced so that masculine values such as competition and aggression are no longer overvalued, and feminine values such as collaboration and kindness are no longer undervalued. These roles should be celebrated rather than ignored, or at worst maligned. Cultural feminists suggest that women’s qualities have biological underpinnings that grant them a unique essence, and make them naturally suited to perform roles such as caregiving and working with women suffering from abuse. Women should be able to provide for their families even if they are in home-based caregiving roles. Cultural feminists partner with other feminists, for example, to create shelters and rape crisis centers. If this sounds like radical feminism, you are correct. The issue of how much women are like other women and how much they are different from men is highlighted in cultural feminism. All feminisms struggle with the degree of gender difference or similarity debate, but cultural feminism’s contention that biology underpins the gender differences separates it from other categories. Lesbians and female-identified members of the queer community are drawn to cultural feminism by the focus on women-centered relationships, whether sexual or not. Although criticized for its biological essentialism argument (Chapter 2), and in line with queer theory, cultural feminists were among the first to challenge the binary concept of “woman” in feminist sociology (McCann, 2016). Cultural feminism was cultivated in radical feminism, and as we see later, queer feminism was cultivated in cultural feminism.

Ecofeminism Women drawn to feminism by environmental activism are the catalysts of ecofeminism. Ecofeminism connects the degradation, domination, and oppression of women with the degradation of the ecosystem. Drawing on earth-based spiritual imagery, ecofeminism suggests that those from all faith communities have an ethical responsibility to challenge a patriarchal system of neoliberal globalization that is deepening the impoverishment of the earth and its people. Appropriating the image of women as icons of nature care, and healing, ecofeminism invigorates interreligious dialogue to work for planetary justice on God’s earth (Kuo, 2017; Phillips, 2016). Ecofeminists and socialist feminists share the understanding that unleashed, unregulated globalization dependent on women’s labor is responsible for the plight of women and the plight of the planet. As ecological responsibility strengthens, predatory capitalism weakens (Caro, 2015). Gender equality and climate justice go hand in hand. Under a gender equality umbrella, “climate justice” is a rallying cry for ecofeminists that serves the planet and women and their families. In Africa, three-fourths of all water is collected by women and girls (Chapter 6).

26  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

There will be a time …when the last well goes dry … and much of the world is already on the brink of a dreadful thirst, a life only more tolerable because women travel great distances to … scoop up water and bring it home. (Zoloth, 2017) Given the dire predictions of climate change and global environmental peril, ecofeminism’s foundational “healing the planet” narrative is strengthened by adding “saving the planet” to the discourse. Like global feminism, ecofeminism develops in localized and regional contexts. Contexts may be different, but political action and networking with NGOs are necessary for funding and support at all levels. Women are the world’s subsistence farmers and agricultural laborers whose livelihood is most imminently threatened by climate change. Decades of evidence suggests that environmental justice and addressing the climate crisis cannot succeed without women’s leadership. To that end, the UN is spearheading a call to action to assure women are in the top ranks of the power structure in their home nations (Di-Meco, 2019). With ecofeminism in mind, women are shaping climate change strategies and goals. There is no single strand of ecofeminism, nor is there one agenda to meet environmental goals. Ecofeminism’s strength is traced to its success in recruiting eager activists from a variety of demographic and cultural categories across the globe. Young women are ecofeminism’s most enthusiastic recruits, representing the globe’s high school and college students. As “climate feminists,” they embrace intersectionality, coalition-building, and justice (Dolan, 2020). Greta Thunberg (born 2003), Time magazine’s Person of the Year in 2019, represents the new face of climate activism—young and female.. She is credited with invigorating the worldwide climate change movement, bringing with her hundreds of thousands of teens and young “Gretas” across the globe (Alter et al., 2019). She may not be identified as an ecofeminist, but her messages and leadership clearly resonate with the movement. Given international attention to ecological crisis centered on climate change, ecofeminist activism continues to increase. With its holistic viewpoint, and strategies linking gender equity, faith, and environmental action, secular women and those in faith-based communities are drawn to ecofeminist ranks. Ecofeminism is poised to ascend as a significant player in the climate justice movement.

Global Feminism Also called transnational feminism, global feminism is a movement of people working for gender equity across national boundaries. Global feminism contends that no woman is free until the conditions that oppress women worldwide are eliminated. Ecofeminism’s emphasis on planetary needs and holism resonates with global feminism’s underscoring that the world is interdependent and is becoming more so. Global feminists organize around highly gendered macro-level issues that crosscut the globe, such as sex trafficking, denial of reproductive services, inadequate or nonexistent legal protection from sexual abuse, human rights violations in the name of culture, and protecting women and children fleeing war. Specific patterns of punishment and sexual enslavement are devised for women who oppose oppressive regimes. Global feminists work to ensure that refugee families are safe in camps and temporary shelters. In efforts to empower women, these feminists disparage cultural relativism when it is used to justify violation of human rights, such as restricting a girl’s access to education on religious grounds. These issues are more visible in the Global South, but women in the developed world are not exempt from negative repercussions (Belec and Benson, 2017; AWID, 2019). For example, they advocate for immigrant women in developed nations who cannot

The Sociology of Gender  27

access health care for their families or employment for themselves. Global feminists partner with the United Nations and NGO networks to uncover and attack lethal gendered patterns affecting all women. The women who come together for the United Nations Conferences on Women (Chapter 6) and for simultaneous global women’s marches represent these views. Global feminism acknowledges critical cultural constraints in working for gender equity. Since all empowerment strategies are necessarily culture bound, strategies that are successful in one culture usually cannot be applied to another (Canetto, 2019). All work on behalf of women must account for the multilayers of culture or it will fail. Whereas intersectionality is woven into all feminisms, its most vivid expression is in global feminism. With the upsurge of feminist activity on ensuring the rights (and protection) of sexual minorities and women speaking out against religious repression, the emblematic gender, race, and class intersectionality has rapidly expanded to account for these categories. Other strands of global feminism extend the “culture” problem, arguing that intersectionality is not realistically interwoven into their work. This strand declares that global feminism is dominated by white, western feminists who falsely homogenize women and fail to disentangle the legacy of western colonialism from their work in the Global South. Global feminism in this context is more about “imperial feminism” than a so-called commonality of commitments that can be applied to all women. Muslim women and devout women in other religions are signaled by imperial feminism as “trapped” by their oppressive religion (Chapter 12). Although this critical perspective on global feminism is valid, many of its claims have been—and continue to be—addressed by feminists working on macro-level global issues. Critiques have opened dialogue, in turn creating new spaces for cross-border feminism. In a religious context, devout and secular feminists are finding common ground (McPhillips, 2016; Deb, 2016). They acknowledge there is no such thing as a single, universal feminism all women accept. Feminism is better thought of as “situated” with women of the globe beholden to “family, community, culture and the state.” Transnational feminist solidarity does not need to be achieved for women to see other women as similarly situated, whether in the Global South or developed North (Gowrinathan, 2019).

Cyberfeminism At its genesis in the 1990s, it was already clear that men exerted control over the Internet and shaped it according to masculinist ideology. Feminist thinkers challenged that control, arguing that the web is a place of “boundless possibilities” to adopt any identity people desire (Varghese, 2019). The Internet’s technological revolution and the powerful gendered effects of social media that swiftly followed fueled feminist energy, spawning the cyberfeminism movement. In simple terms, cyberfeminism seeks to remake cyberspace and create virtual worlds that benefit women. Cyberfeminism defies definition. It is at once a feminist community in cyberspace, a philosophy about how the digital world both marginalizes and empowers women, and it is a series of practices (methodology) to achieve this empowerment. All these tracks show up in various strands of cyberfeminism. Cyberfeminists form virtual kinships and connect with one another in styles that cultural feminists celebrate. In the early Internet days women’s strong sense of connection to other women was appropriated to challenge sexism and racism in the art world. Born in the 1980s, “Guerrilla Girls” (GG) are a group of radical feminist pop artists who don guerrilla masks

28  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

(“go ape with us”) to highlight the failure to tackle the lack of gender and race parity and representation in the art world. With “in your face” website images, like other feminists, they are re-appropriating the f-word to publicize their ideas. Decades later their protests continue. Some progress is noted, but museum directorships, pieces in permanent collections, and academic appointments in art and design are still majority white male. GG are also campaigning against Hollywood’s lackluster efforts to recruit female movie directors. They exist as a virtual community but step into real space, calling out the art world and Hollywood in their iconic guerrilla masks (Adrian-Diaz, 2019; Donnelly, 2019). Another cyberfeminist track is ensuring women are cyberspace leaders rather than marginalized followers. White men and boys with economic resources created the first cyberspace in their own image and for decades owned these creations. Cyberfeminism calls for education and training, encouraging girls to enter computer science and STEM fields to become coders and web designers. With digital tools, females are challenging male-dominated spaces in gaming, existing as a bastion of sexual harassment. Digital competence allows girls more control over gaming narratives (Chapter 4). Entrenched racism in gaming further marginalizes women of color in “marked gender spaces.” Black cyberfeminism offers routes for women of color gamers that disrupts these spaces, serving to empower their digital communities (Richard and Gray, 2018). With heightened media attention to online sexual harassment, shaming, and silencing of women, cyberfeminists have altered the discourse that these behaviors expected in the digital world (Levey, 2018). Until recently, the accepted narrative was: if a female trespasses on “male” cyberspace, she must accept the consequences, however misogynistic they are. This classic approach of blaming the victim no longer holds. Cyberfeminists are at the forefront in dismantling so-called male ownership of the virtual world. They are creating safe cyberspaces for women to be digitally critical without fear of bullying and harassment, whether in online professional articles, blogs, or social media. Cyberfeminism calls for the re-doing of gender to craft gender equitable cyberworlds.

Emerging Feminisms All feminisms pay attention to the intersection of gender with other social categories relevant to their agendas. The categories discussed are best viewed as umbrellas with spokes linked to many emerging subsets and shifting layers. Cultural feminism may host Latina and Asian feminisms, focusing on the family resilience in adversity attributed to strong women’s roles. Native American feminism and indigenous feminism may be aligned with the holistic principles linked to ecofeminism. Queer feminism is rapidly evolving from radical feminist roots of the second wave. Similar to radical and cultural feminism, queer feminism splits into subsets, such as those working for women’s rights overall, and those focusing on LGBTQ rights (Marinucci, 2016). The intellectual ferment generated by queer feminism in the U.S., resounded in Europe, and it is emerging as a distinct category of feminism globally. Other emerging feminisms demonstrate the pattern of solidarity and fracturing. Christian feminisms take several paths. One emphasizes that men and women have different strengths, perspectives, and ideologically based roles, that are complementary in God’s design. Men are not superior to women since both sexes have equal worth and dignity. They believe that complementarity of the sexes does not compromise sexual equality. This style of Christian feminism respects personhood, from conception to (natural) death. Another Christian branch advocates for women’s equality with men in God’s plan, including the right to be ordained,

The Sociology of Gender  29

to preach, and to lead congregations. These Christian tracks can be called “feminisms” since they speak to issues of gender equality crossing a spectrum of Christian faiths. Catholics in the Christian feminism movement may reject personhood at conception. Lutherans in the movement may or may not advocate for woman’s right to be ordained (Chapter 12). For Christian feminists and those in other Western and non-Western religions, devout women form coalitions with secular women—and with one another—to advocate for issues matching their feminist beliefs about God. These emerging feminisms expand diversity and represent feminisms’ next generations. All varieties of feminists negotiate how gender is constructed according to their own needs and priorities. Different feminisms result from these constructions.

FEMINISM, MEDIA, AND POLITICS Is feminism still the “f-word?” Feminism is a movement to end the oppression of women. It uses women’s perceptions and experiences to devise strategies for overcoming oppression. It embraces political goals that offer gender equality. Public support for feminist goals and women’s empowerment are widespread. Support for gender equality continues to increase for both women and men. Over the last 40 years, each birth cohort holds more egalitarian attitudes than the previous one. Gen-Xers and millennials are most likely to be strongly egalitarian. Another significant trend is that traditionalists who opposed equality are being replaced with traditionalists who are ambivalent about it. The shift in these attitudes is most noticeable in relation to politics and workplace (public sphere) compared to family life (private sphere) (Scarborough et al., 2019:173). Most American women accept key beliefs of feminist ideology and agree that feminism has altered their lives for the better. Women affirm other women for being affectionate and caring as well as ambitious and competent, values they see as consistent with feminism. However, women are less likely to identify as feminists if they feel they are “too different” from feminists—either better or worse. Educated young adults support feminist goals but do not think that feminist collective action to end gender discrimination, for example, is necessary to achieve the goals (Meijs et al., 2017; Charter and Mogro-Wilson, 2018; Eagly et al., 2019; Redford et al., 2019). These examples suggest a persistent gap between attitudes about gender equality and how they are revealed in behavior. Women agree with what feminism represents, but many refuse to identify as feminists. Open, necessary, and critical debate, a catalyst for empowerment, is a feminist hallmark. Intersectionality is at the core of most feminisms and fuels much of this debate. Feminists have different priorities and identify with different feminisms They agree to respectfully disagree. Feminists understand these distinctions, but they are presented to the public in highly distorted ways.

Portrayals of Feminism Media are formidable influences in generating and reinforcing gender stereotypes. Feminism is signaled out as a favorite media focus fueling gender stereotypes, sexism, and especially in the political arena, misogyny (Chapter 14). Both feminist agreement and the feminist value of disagreement are ridiculed or demeaned in conservative media and ignored or marginalized in mainstream news and entertainment media.

30  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

Media latch onto disagreements among feminists with sound bites that feminism is split into irreconcilable warring factions, dooming its goals. Women are fleeing its ranks and it is difficult to entice new feminist recruits. This negative attention is reinforced with news-style entertainment suggesting that since we are in a “post-feminist” world, women have achieved occupational, political, and legal parity with men. Because feminists have nothing else to fight for, they fight among themselves. In addition to highlighting disagreement among feminists, media depict feminists as puritanical and man-hating, taking unfair advantage of men in the workplace and controlling men in their homes.

Television Prime-time television series portray feminists in negative and highly stereotyped ways. Jokes deriding feminists about their appearance, sexuality, and love life and how they control their children and husbands are common. Boys who support assertive girls fear homophobic labels casting doubts about their masculinity (Chapter 9). Assertive girls are silenced when they are “accused” of being feminists. Young women and teens are often the targets of sexist jokes. Sexism is reinforced by the contemptuous statements about feminists routinely made by the popular and attractive characters in the shows (Chapter 13). The policing function of misogyny lurks behind many such sexist portrayals. Given the power of media to construct gender, young women and men who may identify with feminism in principle find it difficult to do so in public

Politics In media overall, racist comments are unacceptable; sexist comments are acceptable. In the 2008 Presidential primary, John McCain responded to a female supporter (when asked, “How do we beat the b*ch?” (referring to Hillary Clinton). Momentarily taken aback, but amid the laughter, he smiled and responded, “But that’s an excellent question.” Consider McCain’s probable response if his supporter used a racist slur rather than a sexist one? Although the Trump era unleashed a barrage of racist slurs and comments, and conservative news media ignored or excused them, they were not applauded. Sexism in political reporting appears to have weakened after the first Obama election in 2008, but it has been reignited under the Trump presidency. Mainstream news commentary can be accused of benevolent sexism, appearing to be positive and friendly toward women, but actually negative and damaging. When a female candidate is considered more compassionate (a positive trait) than a male candidate, she is held to a higher standard. She needs to balance compassion with political ambition in campaigning; he does not. Even so-called well-intentioned, benevolent sexism contributes to gender stereotyping and undermines gender equality. In political media, hidden, benevolent sexism and overt, hostile sexism exist side by side. Misogyny plays out in the latter.

Case Study: Feminist for President, Vice President, and FLOUS in Election 2008 Coverage of women candidates is highly gendered whether or not they are identified as feminists (Chapter 14). The remarkable 2008 presidential election serves as a case study in

The Sociology of Gender  31

media views of feminism and politics. Women were viable contenders for the highest offices: New York Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton as potential Democrat nominee for President and Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as Republican nominee for Vice President. With feminism taking center stage, a storm of gender-based commentary was unleashed during the run-up to the election. Public perception of these (and other) candidates was skewed via media rendering of gender and of feminism Both Clinton and Palin self-identified as feminists. However, they were portrayed in media as very different feminists.

Hillary Rodham Clinton Hillary Clinton’s feminist label was intermittently applauded in some news media, suspiciously viewed in mainstream media, and scorned and ridiculed in right-wing media. The Clinton campaign highlighted women’s issues and her feminist label. By extension, her personality was associated with divisiveness, “unlikability,” and media-constructed views of radicalism. Feminism was further diminished when Clinton was couched as an opportunist unsure of how far she was willing to go in support of women. Virtually no mainstream media source countered feminist stereotypes or discussed decades of support for women and by women. Media instead spotlighted women, feminist or not, who endorsed Barack Obama’s candidacy. Messages were that women are their own enemies, that feminism is unraveling, and that the sisterhood is split (Wiener, 2007; Valenti, 2008). Feminists who disagreed with one another and engaged in critical, respectful debates were absent in media discourse. Feminism as applied to Clinton in the media represented a threat to politics as usual.

Sarah Palin Although Sarah Palin and her social conservative supporters disagreed with a feminist political agenda (Chapter 14), in a famous interview Katie Couric asked whether Palin considered herself a feminist. Palin’s response: “I do. A feminist who believes in equal rights, and I believe that women certainly today have every opportunity that a man has to succeed, and to try to do it all, anyway.” Sarah Palin’s feminist label was generally applauded, regardless of the political persuasion of the media source. The McCain–Palin ticket ran a campaign that put Palin in charge of policy reinforcing traditional views of women that resonated with social conservatives. Feminism was benignly to positively portrayed by Palin’s status as an elected official, as a mother with small children, and with a supportive husband. Feminists were largely at odds with the ticket’s policy agenda (or lack of one) to bolster women meaningfully in such roles. However, they supported Palin’s quest for office, especially as a role model for young women and working mothers. In utterly false and astonishing media messages, however, feminists were cast as detractors of a woman’s right to have a career and a family (Young, 2008). Regardless of the feminist label, the McCain–Palin ticket embraced an antifeminist agenda. Palin self-identified as a feminist and enjoyed high support among socially and politically conservative women. Social constructionists argue that the authenticity of any label is determined by self-definition and the ability of the actor to convince others to accept this definition. Social conservatives accepted Palin’s definition of feminism. Her ardent supporters believed women do not experience workplace discrimination (Sharrow et al., 2016). If a

32  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

woman fails in the workplace it is due to her level of individual responsibility and initiative. Any fault is assigned to women, not to any inequality in the workplace. Feminism, as applied to Palin, did not represent a threat to politics as usual.

Critique Feminism is light years advanced, with two centuries of messages supporting employed mothers, equal opportunity for men and women, and equal pay for equal work. The vast majority of Americans approves of these feminist messages. Portrayals of Clinton and Palin for their feminist views, however, cannot be separated from the sexism that mired both their candidacies, particularly related to their appearance and demeanor: Clinton, because she was too masculine; Palin, because she was too feminine. Journalists were suspicious of Clinton’s feminist image, but she was taken seriously as a viable candidate. For Palin, media sexism was evident for failure to seriously engage her on complex issues related to the economic and international challenges facing the United States. Regardless of her feminist assertion, media focus on personal matters rather than on political matters undermined Palin’s credibility (Heflick and Goldenberg, 2011). The McCain–Palin ticket lost credibility by claiming that media were sexist when asking “unfair” questions about Palin’s experience and by pressing John McCain on his abysmal record of advocacy for women. The public agreed that focus on Palin’s family life was sexist; they also believed that claims of sexism for questioning candidates on policies about women were hypocritical (Quindlen, 2008).

Michelle Obama First Lady (FLOTUS) Michelle Obama’s popularity was linked to ensuring that her children smoothly rode the wave of their White House residency. She was socially constructed according to her ability to maintain family normalcy amid the spotlight on her children, especially by conservative media. As FLOTUS, media attention to her “warmer side” buffered stereotypes about feminists being “too strident.” Feminist support was strong whether or not she engaged in a pro-woman agenda outside her family roles. Any support she garnered from social conservatives eroded during the Obama Presidency. To maintain a broad base of support from all ranks of women, she walked a narrow and difficult line. Since vacating the White House, she continues her activism on behalf of civil rights and feminist goals. She is judged as a prominent and effective role model for both, particularly for black women (Haynes and Block, 2019). Feminists were (are) unwavering in her support. For social conservatives and people who are ambivalent about feminism, the current backlash to women will likely corrode even minimal support for her feminist goals. These goals are deemed “too feminist,” even if they benefit this very cohort.

Feminism and the Political Climate Women’s issues are defining elements in the current political climate, but these issues are not usually framed as feminist per se. With so many women seeking and winning office, strategies for both Republican and Democratic women are based on labels defining them as more or less liberal or conservative. Labels of “radical” and “extreme” to assault the other party and widely reported on in the media may substitute for feminist-bashing of earlier campaigns.

The Sociology of Gender  33

Officeholders and candidates in both parties are aware that the feminist label is no longer associated with political doom. It may even offer a glint of political advantage. Today’s feminist candidates embrace race and ethnic diversity that is distinct from second-wave feminism (Chapter 5). Some assert that millennial support for Bernie Sanders’ brand of feminism in 2016 speaks to feminism’s success. Millennials affirm a feminism that does not support a status quo, even if it means electing a man to office (Teitel, 2016). Retaining his millennial support, Sanders’ 2020 campaign run does not appreciably diverge from his 2016 campaign.

Feminist Progress How can feminist strength and productive messages to women be projected positively when feminists dare to disagree with one another in public? Can feminism be reframed more favorably? Several arguments suggest this scenario is likely. First, young women lulled into believing that sexism was in its death throes were severely jolted by the blatant misogyny during the 2016 campaign, clearly demonstrating that feminist goals continue to be illusive. If sexism was benign before the election, it was overt and hostile and transformed to misogyny during the Trump administration. Misogyny served a latent function by raising consciousness that feminist obstacles loom large for women seeking success, whether in the media or in the political and business world. Second, Hillary Clinton’s vocal support for feminist goals resonated with Americans in the 2018 wave that elected a record number of women to Congress and in state and local races (Chapter 14). Third, as media are savvier to definitions of feminisms, they are presenting a variety of feminisms at work. Despite the Trump era backlash, young women are accepting more media-labeled feminist messages than a decade ago. Finally, as noted, feminism may offer a political advantage, especially as shaped by proactive, positive campaign markers rather than a reactive defense to negative media. Although many women do not identify as feminists, a burgeoning number of technologically savvy young men and women are reclaiming and embracing the label to counter sexism and gender stereotypes. The successes of cyberfeminism speak to this reclamation. Sexism in media and on the Internet are swiftly met and condemned via tweets, blogs, and social media instantaneously reverberating across the globe. Mainstream media outlets are quite aware that ignoring sexism translates to loss of viewers and advertising dollars (Chapter 13). As suggested by the varieties of feminisms and the need to counter feminist backlash, women are abandoning the discourse of separation that distanced feminists from one another.

WOMEN’S MOVEMENTS AS FEMINIST SUCCESS STORIES The severe backlash to feminism during the 2012 and 2016 political campaigns (Chapter 14), ironically, is a sign that barriers to feminism are eroding. The pushback of women’s rights igniting resurgence of patriarchy and ensuing violence have set in motion a strong feminist rival that today has more of a media blessing than in the recent past. Media cannot ignore hundreds of thousands of women coming together to protest gender injustice and to advocate for women-identified causes. In mainstream media broadcast time for these events is abundant, and commentary is fair or positive. Appreciated by the media, groups spotlighted here have made remarkable strides in advancing feminist causes.

34  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

Women’s March on Washington The day after Donald Trump’s inauguration millions gathered to protest the offensive, antiwoman sentiment that marked his political campaign. For two years the campaign stoked misogynistic messages about women in general and Hillary Clinton in particular (Chapter 14). Organized by women’s networks and social media postings drawing thousands of independent marchers, protests swiftly re-ignited a feminist movement that may have been faltering. An estimated half a million people converged on Washington, D.C. With “Sister Marches” throughout the U.S., between 4 and 5 million Americans took part in the protests, an astounding 1.0–1.6 percent of the U.S. population. Joined by protest marchers across the globe, about 7 million came together in support of women’s rights, LGBTQ rights, reproductive rights, and human rights. They marched to support immigrants and racial and ethnic minorities. With tens of thousands of male supporters, they also marched against sexual harassment and abuse. Decades of work on behalf of women were set to be undone with Trump’s election. On January 21, 2017, the Women’s March on Washington became the largest single day protest in U.S. history. All stripes of feminists are acutely conscious that misogyny fueled Trump’s political campaign in 2016 and fuel his reelection campaign. The injustices unfolded in the initial years of his Presidency were fodder for sustained global protests. Women organizers pushing harder than ever to mobilize have sustained the movement with subsequent marches, with more on the horizon. However, the focus is now on ensuring that supporters of women’s rights come to the polls. Street protests visibly demonstrate strength in numbers. The less visible work of “strength through voting” is ongoing. As attested by the number of elected and appointed leaders in the U.S. and globally, despite misogyny—or perhaps because of it—the feminist movement is meeting with success.

#MeToo Feminist movements capitalize on the strengths of one another. The current #MeToo movement is born out of social justice activism in 2006 when Tarana Burk, who originated the term, spoke out in empathy and support for victims of sexual harassment (Chapter 13). All feminisms are indebted to the work of cyberfeminism. Soon after the first Women’s March, #MeToo exploded on Twitter, and quickly permeated social media and news outlets across the globe. Empowered by others like themselves, multitudes of women for the first time spoke openly about experiences of sexual abuse. #MeToo grew fast and furious, toppling powerful men in Hollywood, media, industry, and government on charges ranging from inappropriate behavior to criminal sexual abuse, violence, and rape. The movement is sustained through social media and events, such as awards shows for movies, TV, and music, where celebrities speak out in support of courageous women and girls reporting sexual harassment ranging from misconduct to rape. Although opinion about consequences to men is divided— whether too harsh or not hard enough—public consciousness is raised. Women are heard and men are no longer excused. Uncovering allegations of sexual abuse by powerful men, many of whom lost their jobs or are in jail, is an important prong of #MeToo. Its impact reaches far beyond deposing these men, however, by prompting major policy changes on sexual harassment. Many states are banning nondisclosure agreements that cover sexual harassment, essentially

The Sociology of Gender  35

forcing women into silence for the sexual abuse committed by these men. The sister #Time’sUp movement focuses on the workplace, such as helping survivors of sexual misconduct with the cost of legal defense. The press enables the visibility of #MeToo in ways that can support feminism even in ways that draw attention to celebrities rather than the movement at large (De Benedictis et al., 2019; North, 2019a). MeToo and feminism are linked, however, and the linkage is generally affirmed in the eyes of the public. Listening to celebrities is different from listening to ordinary women and girls. Under a feminist umbrella, #MeToo empowers girls who say, “enough is enough,” and tell their “me too” stories.

Moms Demand Action The day after 20 children were gunned down at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, CT, Shannon Watts launched “Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America” (MDA) at her kitchen table to protect children from escalating gun violence. Starting with Watts’ 75 FB friends and joining with “Everytown for Gun Safety,” today MDA boasts 6 million supporters, more than the NRA, and is the largest and most powerful advocacy group for sensible gun control laws. Taking on the gun lobby, MDA activism has led to gun control laws in 20 states—many with Republican governors—and banning firearms in franchises, stores, and businesses (Chozick, 2019). MDA activists overlap with the young people of “March for Our Lives,” the movement spawned by David Hoagland and survivors of the high school mass shooting in Parkland, Florida where 14 students and three staff were murdered. Young women are leaders, spokespersons, and organizers, making up over half of the movement’s activists. It is difficult to ignore the fact that most of the millions of MDA supporters are women. As MDA’s tallies its successes, resistance to its goals will also mount. MDA remains a rightwing target. In turn, more MDA grass roots women are mobilized to march in local parades, organize memorials for victims of gun violence, and attend town halls to voice support for gun control policies. Although Moms Demand Action is not thought of as a women’s movement or feminist movement per se, the labels can apply. It shares the fundamental idea that social justice and activism are interdependent. Echoing sentiments from most all women’s movements, Watts asserts that when women come together, they can change the world. In unleashing the “unique power of women,” leading with empathy, and asking for help, MDA shares #MeToo strategies and parallels aspects of cultural feminism. MDA is successful for mobilizing mothers across political boundaries. Parents—especially mothers— are motivated by the unimaginable fear of not only losing their child, but the murder of their child (Watts, 2019). Men are welcomed into its ranks as partners. MDA refrains from labels such as toxic masculinity as a cause of gun violence, preferring to focus on rallying men and women as a voting bloc for gun control. Led by women’s activism, MDA, Everytown for Gun Safety, and March for Our Lives work to keep the media spotlight on gun control. It is difficult to ignore the fact that most of the millions of MDA supporters are women. As MDA tallies its successes, resistance to its goals will also mount. MDA remains a rightwing target. In turn, more MDA grass roots women are mobilized to march in local parades, organize memorials for victims of gun violence, and attend town halls.

36  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

Movements with Feminist Solidarity Women’s movements are girded by all feminisms. Although they spotlight different goals, all the feminisms described earlier can be thought of as “movements.” Recognizing the menacing pushback of women’s rights and responding to the resurgence of misogyny, they rally their supporters under the “big tent” of gender justice. By the considerable overlap in counting members of their ranks they are allies for the revitalized, powerful feminist movement globally. On the streets or online, grassroots support for gender equality from all generations of women and interest in women’s issues is unparalleled (Keoghan, 2018; Giugni, 2019). The LBTQ movement spotlights discrimination in the workplace and in family law; the movement in women’s health tackles injustices in health and health care, with a focus on reproductive health; ecofeminists join climate activists to demand transition to renewable energy across the globe. Their work supports indigenous families facing loss of sustainable land; they work to educate the public on how to live in balance with the environment (Horseherder, 2019:22). Feminists in the “End It” anti-sex-trafficking movement join with activists protesting human rights violations through the globe. These movements suggest that the umbrella of second wave’s liberal feminism is being reopened and modified. The contemporary understanding is that fourth wavers are more individualistic and highly intersectional, but they speak with a unified voice in pursuit of feminist progress. The word feminism may make some people uncomfortable, but the “strong in-your-face word” is remerging and winning the day as women are drawn in to support commitment for progress of all women (Rampton, 2017:160). Whether referred to as women’s movements or feminist movements, there is reason to celebrate women who are changing the narrative from feminist disdain and failure to feminist respect and success.

Reprise Theories and concepts in this chapter, and the visions of society they suggest, are offered as tools to approach the array of gender issues you will confront. Each theoretical perspective has its own insight and explanation for any given issue. Issues are further refined when theories are used in combination. Consider these theories, too, as we explore fully what the word gender may suggest. Does the title of this book suggest difference, binary, and (inevitable) inequality? Can a blurring of gender and the roles associated with it open fissures that topple gender inequality disadvantageous to everyone? It is expected that by the conclusion of this book, you will have developed a perspective that is most meaningful to your individual and social experiences related to gender.

KEY TERMS Agency Androcentrism Doing gender Dramaturgy Empowerment

End point fallacy Expressive role Feminism Feminist sociological theory Gender

Gender binary Gender roles Instrumental role Intersectionality LGBTQ

The Sociology of Gender  37

Misogyny Norms Patriarchy Role Sex

Sexism Sexual orientation Social construction of reality Social stratification

Status Status set Stereotypes Theory

CHAPTER 2

Gender Development Biology, Sexuality, and Health

(Man attains) … a higher eminence, in whatever he takes up, than can women— whether requiring deep thought, reason, or imagination, or merely the use of the senses and hands. —Charles Darwin, 1871 From The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex

My coach said I run like a girl. And I said if he ran a little faster he could, too. —Mia Hamm, 2017 Two-time Olympic Gold Medalist (1991,1999) and FIFA Women’s World Cup champion (1996, 2004)

SECTION 1 BIOLOGY AND SEXUALITY IN GENDER DEVELOPMENT Mia Hamm’s quote on a handmade sign held by a young girl at the Women’s March in 2017 clearly challenges outmoded ideas about gender. The sign drew over 20,000 shares on Twitter (Huebsch, 2017). Binary views of sex and gender have shaped science and medicine in profound ways. These views are largely biologically based and carry over to how research is conducted and how findings are absorbed by the public. Science may inadvertently perpetuate gendered thinking by taken-for-granted cultural assumptions framing their work. Arguments against gender equality, therefore, are fundamentally biological. Despite abundant data to the contrary, beliefs about women’s inferiority due to biology stubbornly persist. Essentialism is the belief that males and females are inherently different because of their biology and genes. This difference makes men and women “naturally” suited to fulfill certain roles regardless of their intellect, desires, expertise, or experiences. Like sociological functionalism, essentialism does not state explicitly that difference equates to inferiority, but the assumed quality or essence that makes men and women different is consistently drawn on to justify that conclusion. Although men are sometimes its targets, essentialism points to women’s biological and reproductive makeup that refrains them from standing on equal ground with men. The explosion of research on issues of sex and gender globally provides massive evidence refuting essentialist claims. The role of biology in gender development is not discounted,

Gender Development: Biology, Sexuality, and Health  39

but research clearly demonstrates that cultural beliefs are greater barriers to equality than biology. When these beliefs are muted, desire and talent are combined with opportunity and encouragement and people move into non-traditional gender roles. Decades of research make it empirically clear that any blurring of the gender binary is advantageous to males and females who feel restricted by conventional roles as well as those choosing alternative sex and gender identities and lifestyles. In other words, everyone benefits.

NATURE AND NURTURE How much of our gendered behavior is determined by nature (heredity, biology, and genes), and how much is determined by nurture (environment, culture, settings), where we live and learn? Sociological explanations for sex and gender differences are rooted in the nurture side of this question. Certainly males and females are different. We differ not only by physiology, but also according to demographics, attitudes, and behavior, especially related to sexuality. All social institutions are manipulated by sex and gender. Do these differences suggest that patriarchy is inevitable? Do differences outweigh the similarities? What is biology’s role in determining these differences? Examining the research and theory generated by these questions—and the controversy surrounding them—sheds light on the “it’s only natural” argument. This chapter unveils controversy and even tragedy surrounding how these questions are answered. The “only natural” argument is in fact an extension of the nature versus nurture debate. The sex and gender binary haunts this chapter. Binary thinking is challenged and refuted throughout, but scientists must use these very categories to discuss their research. Because this chapter focuses on biological issues, the categories of male and female as the “sexes” are frequently used.

Margaret Mead Famed anthropologist Margaret Mead (1901–1978) was interested in exploring human sex differences, leading her to New Guinea in the 1930s, and living with three different tribes relatively isolated from Western contact. Among the gentle Arapesh, men and women were “peaceful in temperament,” nurturing, and compliant, and enjoyed gardening, hunting, and rearing children. The Arapesh gained immense satisfaction from these tasks, which were eagerly shared by both men and women. Arapesh children mirrored these patterns, growing up to be cooperative and responsive parents, with a willingness to subordinate themselves to the needs of those who were younger and weaker. Personality, Mead concluded, could not be distinguished by sex; “maternal behavior” extended to both men and women. By contrast, the fierce Mundugumor barely tolerated children. Early in life children were taught to be as hostile, competitive, and as suspicious of others as were their parents and elders. Mothers and fathers showed little tenderness toward their children, with harsh physical punishment common. Children quickly learned that tribal success was measured by aggression, with violence as an acceptable, expected solution to many problems. Both men and women were “warlike in temperament.” The Mundugumor, like the Arapesh, did not differentiate personality in terms of sex. The third tribe, the Tchumbuli, consisted of practical, efficient, and unadorned women and passive, vain, and decorated men. The community depended on women’s weaving, fishing, and trading; men remained close to the village, practicing primping, dancing, and

40  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

art. Women enjoyed the company of other women. Men strived for women’s attention and affection, which women took with tolerance and humor (Mead, 1933). Contrary to her original belief that there are natural sex differences, Mead concluded that masculine and feminine are determined by culture rather than biology.

Critique Mead’s work is an anthropological standard on gender differences and was quite controversial when first published. Gender roles she described almost a century ago were undoubtedly as unusual then as they are today across much of the globe. We know now that gender roles vary within a narrower range than suggested by Mead’s research. However, her forerunner message continues as a bulwark against the “it’s ‘only natural’ argument.” No existing theory, specifically those grounded in essentialism, can explain the immense variety of meanings in the human experience attached to being male and female. It is precisely this variation that has led to so much research questioning biologically-based beliefs regarding femininity and masculinity. After Mead, “the word ‘woman’ could never be put in a fixed box again” (Cited in Schiffman, 2018:43). As noted, it is no simple task to identify biological (sex) differences and similarities between female and male, yet how these correspond to gender—masculine and feminine—is even more difficult. The demarcation between sex and gender may be a blurry one but research offers many avenues to explore the boundaries.

Evolution, Genetics, and Biology Debating the influence of nature and nurture on human behavior is often viewed through the lens of evolution. This Darwinian view suggests simply that some identifiable sex differences (such as sexuality, cognition, and parenting behavior) and gender differences (such as toy preferences, dating behavior, and career choice) have adaptive advantages for species survival. Genetics endow females and males with different capacities to allow this advantage to productively unfold. Other biological differences, such as prenatal androgens, reinforce genetic patterns so that girls and boys are led to separate, divergent life paths. Darwin’s theory of evolution reinforced the view that women were intellectually and physically inferior to men.

Sociobiology Rooted in the nature side of the debate, the field of sociobiology addresses questions of sex differences in its examination of the biological roots of social behavior. Using research originally designed by entomologists to study social insects such as ants, wasps, and bees, sociobiologists (Wilson, 1975, 1978) argue that evolutionary theory can draw conclusions about humans from studies of animals. The fundamental assertion of sociobiology is that, like other animals, humans are structured by nature (biology) with an innate drive to ensure that their individual genes are passed on to the next generation. This is the motivating factor in all human behavior. It is as adaptive for a mother to care for her children as it is for men to be promiscuous. Each sex evolved these attributes to increase its reproductive success. Sociobiologists assert that principles of evolution pointing to species survival

Gender Development: Biology, Sexuality, and Health  41

provide the best understanding of how gendered social behaviors developed. For example, aggressiveness not only allowed humans to successfully compete with other humans and animals that shared our primeval environment, it allowed males to compete among themselves for females. The same principles explain promiscuity in men. Whereas women are highly selective in choosing mating partners, men spread their sperm as widely as possible. For sociobiologists, other behaviors rooted in natural selection include mother–infant bonding, female dominance in child care, and male dominance in virtually all positions and activities outside their households. As an evolutionary result of natural selection, the separate, unequal worlds of male and female emerged. Since the pattern is global, sociobiological claims are strengthened. Contemporary gender roles, therefore, reflect this evolutionary heritage.

Primates: Animal and Human Our two closest animal relatives are chimps and bonobos, together belonging to the “chimpanzee” genus. Both share 98 percent of their genome with humans, making them more similar to us than gorillas and any other primates (HPRG, 2019). Attention to humanlike characteristics among primates, including sex differences, exploded with groundbreaking anthropologist Jane Goodall’s remarkable observations of chimps. Decades of research on chimp behavior confirms male dominant social groups, violence outside of their groups, guarding pregnant females, and sexual behavior for reproductive, rather than “pleasureful” purposes. Chimps in the wild can be cannibals and will eat the infants of other chimp groups. It took years of observation for Goodall to document that her peaceful chimps were not as peaceful as originally thought. A female chimp is notoriously promiscuous. Sexual selection in sociobiology emphasizes competition and aggression in male chimps but puts less weight on the behavior of female chimps making choices among males who come courting, often with the cooperation of other females. Female chimps are selective of their mates when interested in conceiving, but promiscuous when conception is unlikely. They are sexually aggressive at times and actively resist the solicitations of males at other times. Male chimps can be nurturing, good fathers and invested in sheltering their offspring. Even alpha males keep order in their social groups and are protective without being abusive, either to males or females. Consequently, other chimps work to assure their own alpha male stays in power (Reichard, 2014; Murray et al., 2016). In chimp society there are always male challengers to the alpha male. Grooming is a way male chimps reconcile conflicts with other males who may be challengers. The male who is most aggressive or violent is unlikely to ascend to the top of the hierarchy. If a male does manage to get there, too much aggressiveness will ultimately topple him. Decades ago, Jane Goodall recognized that in order to stay in power it is better for alpha males to form coalitions with friends (Surbeck et al., 2017; Cohen-Brown, 2018). Our other closest non-human relatives, female dominant bonobos, are the more neglected primates in research than are the chimps. All known colonies of bonobos in captivity and in the wild are led by females (Gross, 2019). Female bonobos are thought to limit aggression, particularly by threatening males, by forming tight bonds with other females. Also thought to limit aggression, encourage consensus, and enhance tolerance, female bonobos engage in frequent, non-reproductive sex with any and all partners, male or female. Primatologist Amy Parrish asserts that living in a “matriarchal hookup culture,” bonobos are known as “the freelove, sexy apes.”

42  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

For the bonobos … male-on-female sexual control isn’t inevitable or natural either … Chimps provide one model; bonobos, which some researchers believe are even more closely related to us than chimps, provide another. (Cited in Martin, 2018) Female-dominated bonobos capture, control, and consume meat similar to male-dominated chimps, often with a show of force against males. Female bonobos can attack males and form bands with other females for safety. Sometimes they attack simply for being annoyed by a male (Hare and Yamamoto, 2017). Despite evidence for alpha male aggressive chimps and alpha female cooperative bonobos, aggressiveness in primates is not often observed. Affiliated, friendly behavior such as grooming and playing is probably a hundred times more frequent. Among many non-human primate species, there is emerging evidence of male–male cooperation and tolerance in humanlike social structures that include norms about sexual relations (Díaz-Muñoz et al., 2014; Morell, 2019; Pisor and Surbeck, 2019). The view that sex is only to reproduce discounts sex for pleasure—in both humans and nonhumans—and disregards an entire range of emotions, personality traits, and sexual strategies that cannot be traced to animals. Sociobiologists offer productive leads for studying similarities between social behavior in humans and animals, especially related to reproductive advantages of mating with the best possible partners (Marzoli et al., 2018). However, leaping from insects and higher order animals to humans is at best tenuous.

Critique Sociobiology has some success in applying evolutionary theory to animal behavior. Evolutionary anthropology traditionally focused on small-scale societies and communities, attempting to find those with as little outside contact as possible (Mattison and Sear, 2016). Such research sites have disappeared. It is virtually impossible today to test natural selection principles on which sociobiology is based, weakening its empirical support for evolutionary links to human behavior. Feminist scientific critiques, including from feminist Darwinian biologists, center on those sociobiological and evolutionary approaches that have androcentric (male-centered) perspectives, are often presented in deterministic ways, make faulty assumptions about human behavior, and disregard well-documented research about animals. Given evidence from animal behavior, specifically primate behavior, it could be argued that human females are more intelligent or more powerful in controlling human males. Countering the conventional “male-dominance-for-species-survival” approach, for instance, evolutionary models also suggest that gender egalitarianism and rejection of male dominance is basic to what makes us “modern humans”—not the other way around. This compelling view suggests that egalitarianism was a necessary phase in human evolution (Power, 2018). Stereotypes about male dominance in animal and human species, and untestable assumptions about the evolution of sex differences, distort an otherwise valid approach to understanding evolution. This is not benign in its effects. Interpretations from evolutionary models are often used to serve androcentric political agendas harmful to women (Chapter 14).

Cognitive Biology Biological explanations for sex differences in humans draw on research about prenatal hormones and brain development. Androgens help determine how our bodies, including our

Gender Development: Biology, Sexuality, and Health  43

brains, become sexually differentiated. Higher levels of androgens predict more male-typical than female-typical behavior. Cognitive sex (male–female) differences showing stronger visual-spatial ability for males and stronger verbal ability for females, higher activity levels for boys, gender-typed object preference, and maternal play behavior for girls, suggest biological roots. Evidence also suggests that infant girls come into the world with an orientation to faces and that infant boys come with an orientation to objects. These differences show up in infancy before powerful environmental influences kick in (Lonsdorf, 2017; Lauer et al., 2018). They are stable distinctions persisting over time regardless of broader social change. Some cognitive biologists assert that these plant seeds for different gender-based life paths, translating to expressive (domestic) roles for women and instrumental (breadwinning) roles for men. Notice the overlap of sex and gender in these assertions. A range of biological explanations for sex-differentiated behavior converge with claims to the public that the male sex drive makes men obsessed with sex and, therefore, sexually aggressive. It is difficult to deny their untamable sexual natures, especially when confronted with uncontrollable stressors causing havoc to their systems. These conclusions are often drawn from original research based on flies, worms, and rats (Gottwald, 2016; Rincón-Cortés et al., 2019). For humans, female-typical and male-typical responses to sex and other gender-specific behavior are influenced by prenatal androgens as well as by postnatal socialization (Hines et al., 2017; Sheldon, 2017). Messages to the public focus on the prenatal side, much of it from animal research, rather than the postnatal side from research on humans. In turn, data are often appropriated to serve a variety of social causes and political agendas.

Male and Female Brains More specific biological explanations for sex differences are gaining traction among neuroscientists. These explanations focus not only on how genes imprint “sex” on the brain but also on new research that “gender” can also allow this imprint. Epigenetics refers to the process of modifying DNA by “switching genes on or off.” Female and male brain cells express imprinted genes differently. Social behavior and expectations vary for males and females as a result of both a sex and a gender imprint. Neuroscience is enthusiastically embracing epigenetics as evidence for gendered brains. Gender and sex interact to shape the “gene expression in the brain.” Explanations for male–female differences in behavior, temperament, and personality are increasingly based on genes, evolution, and the belief in distinct male–female brains (Eme, 2018; Ogawa et al., 2018; Polderman et al., 2018; Cortes et al., 2019). Such explanations suggest that male and female brains are so strikingly different that the sexes may be tracked over their lifespan by brain development corresponding to gender roles. Women’s brains are hard wired to be mothers. Females, for example, have mommy brains. The circuits in a mommy brain are the “most profound and permanent in her life” and will be used to keep track of her children (Brizendine, 2006). Scientific accuracy of these assumptions, however, has not held up to scrutiny.

Critique Accounts of different male and female brains—whether from media or scientific sources— prompt beliefs that humans are largely in the hands of unalterable sex-based genes. Sex-linked brain differences—and those that can be traced to behavioral gender-based

44  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

outcomes—however, “have not materialized with empirical evidence.” Male and female brains are actually not much different from one another. Even before the moment of birth, our brains show incredible plasticity. Different attitudes and experiences of our life journeys amplify existing plasticity (Wheeling, 2015; Rippon, 2019). These all challenge the simple binary proposed by so-called gendered brains. Hormones may account for some sex differences in sexual attraction, for example, but cannot account for gender differences in other roles, including nurturing, love, communication, leadership, and friendship. No reliable biological data suggest that women’s underrepresentation in some sciences and men’s underrepresentation in the caring professions are due to differences in biologically-based cognitive abilities. Sex difference data are presented according to average group differences and tell us nothing about an individual’s aptitude. Research usually does not provide size of the effects, only that correlations may be weak or robust or statistically significant or not. It is difficult to pick up a newspaper today without someone claiming that males and females are fundamentally unlike one another because a tiny bit of male brain tissue seems to work differently than a tiny bit of a female region of brain. Prenatal sex differences driven by hormones in rats and primates, and during fetal brain development in humans, are used to support these contentions. Male–female brain differences are spotlighted, even if any male–female brain similarities far outweigh them (McCarthy, 2019; Sax, 2019; Wheelock, 2019). Very small differences with limited generalizable effects are described as binary, natural, and inevitable—emblazoned and “written in our genes” (Hignett, 2018; Fine et al., 2019). Misinformation is transmitted, beliefs about biological determination for gender roles are further embraced, and gender stereotypes are reinforced. Women and men are, in most ways, more similar than different, but especially in our brains.

Neurosexism These biologically-based debates play out in neurosexism, charting gender differences in personality and social behavior by sex differences in the brain. Like other forms of sexism, this binary view suggests that one or the other sex is suited for certain roles, with male-dominated roles garnering more prestige and power than female-dominated roles. In highly patriarchal societies neurosexism blends easily with gender stereotypes consigning men and women to domestic or job spheres. Gender disparities in STEM careers reflect the power of neurosexism. The belief that science ability is innate lowers future interest in STEM for girls, but not for boys (Donovan et al., 2019). However, it is not too difficult to counter neurosexism using the very brain evidence that justifies it. Women’s brains, for example, appear to be three years younger than men’s brains, a significant, reproducible average difference, detectable even among people in their 20s. Younger brains are associated with better cognitive functioning in women as they age. Females have enhanced information recall early in life, speculated as an evolutionary advantage offering social cues for mate selection (Zentner and Eagly, 2015; Bhandari, 2019; Buss and Schmitt, 2019). In these cases, biology and evolution work to the superiority of females over males. On the other hand, like sociobiology, cognitive biology is plagued by problems with generalizing data on animal–human linkages. The linkages should not be discounted simply because they fit (or do not fit) conventional models of male–female evolutionary paths. Cognitive biologists cannot be held responsible for how these data are used to support neurosexism. Biological data offer important inroads to advance interdisciplinary research on sex differences useful to all the social sciences.

Gender Development: Biology, Sexuality, and Health  45

The Hormone Puzzle The chromosomal basis of sex difference is clearer than the epigenetic distinctions that blur sex and gender. Of the two types of sex chromosomes, X and Y, both sexes have at least one X chromosome. Females possess two X chromosomes, whereas males have one X and one Y chromosome. It is the lack or presence of the Y chromosome that determines whether a baby will be male or female. That the X chromosome has a larger genetic background than the Y chromosome is advantageous to females with their (double) XX chromosomes. The extra X chromosome is associated with a superior immune system and lower female mortality at all stages of the life cycle. All other chromosomes are similar in form, differing only in individual hereditary identities. As noted, when hormones are added to the sex difference equation the boundaries between biology and culture are more blurred. There is a subtle but important interaction between sex hormones and psychosocial factors in gendered behavior. Hormones are internal secretions produced by the endocrine glands that are carried by the blood throughout the body, which affect target cells in other organs. Males and females possess the same hormones, but they differ in amounts. For example, the dominant female hormone, estrogen, is produced in larger quantities by the ovaries but in smaller quantities by the testes. The dominant hormone in males, testosterone, is produced in larger quantities by the testes and smaller quantities by the ovaries. The endocrine differences between males and females are not absolute, but differ along a continuum of variation, with most males being significantly different from most females. Sex hormones have two key functions that must be considered together. First, they shape the development of the brain and sex organs; second, they determine how these organs will be activated. Because hormones provide an organizational function for the body, their effects will be different for the sexes. For example, during fetal development, when certain tissues are highly sensitive to hormones, the secretion of testosterone both masculinizes and defeminizes key cellular structures throughout the brain and reproductive organs. The fetus first starts to develop female organs but later, under the influence of testosterone, masculinizes itself if it possesses a Y chromosome. A male may be viewed as a female transformed by testosterone—the female fetus is the “default” body. Masculinization and the development of sex differences are continuous processes and influence each other by hormones, individual experiences, and social expectations.

Aggression It is on the subject of aggression that debates on the influence of hormones on gendered behavior prove complicated and often polarizing. In most animal species, including primates, males are more aggressive than females. Higher aggression in human males peaks at about age two. Some animal studies link testosterone to increases in aggression, and in other studies androgens can both increase and weaken aggression. In humans, weak correlations are found between testosterone level and violence (Dayton and Malone, 2017; Music, 2017). Girls and boys are about equal in learned aggressiveness. They do not differ significantly in the influence of peers in determining aggressive behavior. Although peers do not “contaminate” boys and girls differently, there are sex differences in how children display aggression (Farrell et al., 2017; Zulauf et al., 2018). Girls are more likely than boys to suppress anger or carry it out verbally. They also use more relational aggression, purposely harming others,

46  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

usually other girls, through manipulating peers, family members, and friends. Girls cause harm when a relationship suffers. Boys and young men are more likely to display aggression openly and carry it out in physical ways. They confront adversaries, usually other males, with pushing and shoving breaking out in fistfights, bullying, and shouting matches using sexually degrading language, often comparing them to weak girls (Chapter 9). Accounting for aggression according to key demographic features (age, race, ethnicity), key features of context (workplace, home, school), and key features of risk (abuse, developmental disability, sexual orientation), research does not show predictable, higher levels of aggressiveness for males. Statistical significance is weak or absent for studies that do suggest some correlation even when controlling for other factors. Endocrinologists and cognitive biologists are veering to the conclusion that the idea of “male and female hormones” as robust pathways to aggression and forms of pathological behavior oversimplifies the complexity of development in humans (Alexander, 2014a; Petersen and Dawes, 2017; Hammes and Levin, 2019). Animal studies, mostly done on rodents, do show a clear connection between androgens (male hormones) and male aggression, but a wealth of research on humans cannot support the same claim. Remember, too, that females possess androgens that are converted to estrogen. Level of testosterone, for example, is not a significant predictor of aggression for either boys or girls (Sato et al., 2008; Fine, 2017; Spencer et al., 2017). Besides the impossibility of designing ethical studies that can make the empirical causal leap from animals to people, we saw that studies on the most intelligent social animals, especially primates, cannot make the leap either. Also as noted, the most damaging argument against the aggression–hormone link is that sex differences in aggression are dependent on the type of aggression, the age of the aggressor, and the situation in which it occurs. Cultural features of the context are powerful forces in determinants of aggression. Despite inconsistencies in animal research, outbursts of aggression and moodiness during adolescence downplay or ignore culture and are blamed on fluctuations in hormones during puberty. Hormones shift constantly as people move in and out of various social situations. Testosterone increases aggression, but aggression increases testosterone. In competitions, levels of testosterone increase in winners and decrease in losers. Even among expectant dads, visualizing their nurturing role lowers their testosterone; when the baby arrives it jumps up. Hormones of teen boys and girls are less significant in aggressive behavior than mood, stressful events, peer and parental relationships, and methods of parental punishment (Oxford et al., 2017; DelPriore et al., 2018; Satish, 2018). These patterns show up in early childhood and follow into adulthood. There are different gender standards regarding the appropriateness of aggressive behavior, and they are learned early in life. As adults, men may feel pressured to act aggressively when publicly challenged. Masculinity scripts allow males more “freedom” than females in acting out aggression in physical ways. Girls shun girls, boys punch boys. Hormones shift constantly as people move in and out of various social situations.

Age Neuroscientists, physicians, and therapists are pivoting toward age as a viable explanation for aggression. Teen boys and teen girls do not have sex-differentiated brains as much as they have age-differentiated brains based on level of development (Siegel, 2015; Jensen, 2016; Damour, 2017). After all, they are teenagers! Sex differences in aggression are evident but

Gender Development: Biology, Sexuality, and Health  47

not very large. Explanations for aggressiveness in males and females, and higher aggressiveness in males, cannot be adequately explained solely by changes in the brain or in hormonal imbalances. Environmental factors determine how a person’s aptitude translates to the real world. When a girl believes that math skills are learned, she does as well as a boy on a difficult math test as if she believes that math is a gift. Feminists struggle with the testosterone links to behavior, including aggression, sexuality and expression of emotion, when they are framed as proof of gendered personalities, male dominance, and inevitable patriarchy. However, they acknowledge it is not productive to dismiss all evidence of these differences. Neuroscientists and sociologists are engaging in interdisciplinary, intersectional research to discover factors accounting for differences that do exist (Davis and Risman, 2015; Ray, 2016). Testosterone is one of many components that influence aggression. It is clear that culture and context of aggression are as important as any biological predisposition of the aggressor. The bottom line: biological sex is not gender destiny.

Running too Fast Notwithstanding level of aggression, relying on selective testosterone-based beliefs about sex differences has huge consequences when the public believes that hormones determine “manly” or “womanly” behavior. Athletes are put under a bodily microscope. All athletes are monitored for steroid use, but international sports organizations target female athletes for tests not required of their male counterparts. Women’s reproductive organs and secondary sex characteristics are examined, and androgen levels are measured. Women report that the exams are humiliating. Runners are singled out. Dutee Chand was disqualified for Olympic trials for “abnormally high testosterone levels.” She could compete only if she took medicine to reduce her testosterone level. In contesting the ruling, witnesses identified over 200 biological anomalies—“from long limbs to fast-twitch muscle fibers”—that advantage male or female athletes. Swimmer Michael Phelps has exceptionally long arms and hands that certainly helped him achieve the record for most Olympic medals of any athlete. Chand won her appeal. The judge ruled that for female athletes to change their bodies to compete was “unjustifiably discriminatory” (Padawer, 2016:39). Caster Semenya was not as fortunate. Her high testosterone level is traced to a (possible) intersex status. Her female competitors argue she is more a man than a woman: she runs too fast for a woman. In Semenya’s case, the judge ruled her discrimination is necessary “to preserve the integrity of female athletics.” If she takes testosterone-reducing meds she may be able to compete against women; if not she may choose to compete against men. Is the ruling legitimate? Yes, otherwise there will never be a “female body on the podium.” No, it fuels misconceptions about trans women competing (Longman and Macur, 2019; North, 2019b). The “testosterone standard” used against female athletes continues to be contested. Unfortunately, testosterone is the stuff of (mythical) urban legend and stands in the way of “accurate understanding” of male and female bodies, much less their athletic bodies. Evidence is convincing—strongly so—that testosterone level does not predict your competitive drive or tendency for violence, your appetite for risk or sex, or your strength or athletic prowess. It is neither the biological essence of manliness nor even “the male sex hormone” (Jordan-Young and Karkazis, 2019).

48  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

Motherhood Animal primate studies focusing on hormones released during pregnancy that allegedly fuel mother–infant bonding are used to suggest the existence of a maternal instinct in human females. This research asserts that female hormones of estrogen, progesterone, and prolactin biologically propel women toward motherhood. Furthermore, because these hormones are elicited in larger amounts during pregnancy and after labor, women are driven to protect, bond with, and nurture their infants from the moment of birth. Women’s desire for babies will always trump any desire men may have to be fathers. Fathering is learned, but evolutionary forces propel mothering. Infertile women who believe motherhood is based on a maternal instinct may view their inability to have children as inadequacy and failure (Chapter 3). Mothers protect, bond with, and nurture their infants in extraordinary ways, but these behaviors cannot be based solely on unlearned responses. Even evolutionary-based research does not support the notion of a maternal instinct. No “inherited” preference to bear children is necessary for reproduction. “Natural selection already favours mechanisms that result in reproduction, most significantly through the sexual urge” (Conversation, 2015). Evolution assures that babies are born because humans want sex. A century ago sociologist Leta Hollingworth (1916) discounted the maternal instinct belief, instead suggesting that “social devices” are the impelling reasons for women to bear and rear children. Socialization of females maximizes attachment to the young, whereas for males it is minimized. A woman suffering from postpartum depression may even reject her child. Infanticide, voluntary abortion, neglect by mothers, and selling children, especially daughters, are all too common globally. The number of voluntarily childless women continues to increase (Chapter 8). A new mother’s nurturing behavior accelerates quickly when she is in immediate contact with her newborn, but parental love emerges through repeated exposure to the infant. The majority of women eagerly respond to their infants and readily take on parenting and caretaking roles. These actions, however, are due to many factors rather than simply evolutionary biology. The birth experience of course creates a mother–child bond that is different than a father–child bond but this does not mean that hormones will make one parent better or more nurturing than the other. Neither does breast milk automatically make a mother a better parent than a father (Truscheit, 2018). When new fathers take part in birthing, measures of infant–father bonding are as high as infant–mother bonding. If gender-typing is low, infant care can be a rewarding joint effort by parents (Chapter 8). Consider Mead’s study of the gentle Arapesh, where men and women, and mothers and fathers enjoyed child care. The intense interest and love fathers have for their newborns and their capacity for nurturance are not based on hormones. Due in a large part to simplistic media accounts and blogs about of the genetic basis of sex differences in human behavior, beliefs about a maternal (motherhood) instinct persist. When a woman holds her baby in her arms for the first time, an amazing connection is born. Before you know it, the new mother’s maternal instinct kicks in. A mother’s love is the most pure and irreplaceable love that exists. It causes women to develop qualities they never knew they possessed. Little by little, they become exemplary mothers. (Youaremom, 2019)

Gender Development: Biology, Sexuality, and Health  49

Wow! What if mothers cannot live up to this standard? Regardless of the maternal instinct as a culturally accepted biological standard, mothers do not live up to it. How our culture expects not only that you will know how to mother, but that you will enjoy it and that it will fulfill some deep need in you. But I hate being a mother. I love my kids deeply, more than I love myself, but I hate being a parent. (Pelley, 2019) Women feel guilty when revealing they do not share the bottomless devotion and selfless love expected of mothers. Indeed, they must be abnormal for not possessing “the” biologically programmed maternal instinct.

Critique The influence of hormones on gendered behavior is puzzling, and some research is equivocal. There is consensus among neuroscientists, biologists, and social and behavioral scientists that sex differences in behavior involve a complex mosaic of nature and nurture (Fausto-Sterling, 2016; Goldman, 2017). There is less scientific equivocation, however, about a maternal instinct. If it exists at all, evidence is negligible about women “innately drawn/uniquely hardwired” to childbearing (Campbell, 2016; Blackstone, 2017; Neal, 2017). This myth produces normative expectations about the “nature” of all women (we all want babies) and the “nature” of all mothers (we all have endless love and devotion for our children). It is harmful to mothers who can never live up to the ideal perpetuated by the maternal instinct myth. It is harmful to fathers pushed out of caregiving roles by beliefs they can never be as competent a parent as a mother. Feminists assert it is harmful to couples when society promotes childbirth but does not assist parents in provisions for childrearing. For the sake of both mothers and children we need to begin detaching the myth of motherhood from the reality. It’s unfair of any society to expect women to be the best mothers they can be without economic or emotional support, just because they should love their children. (Saini, 2017)

Sigmund Freud: Anatomy Is Destiny Sigmund Freud (1856–1939) stands at the nexus of nature and nurture. His influence on medicine and science is profound. There was no systematic psychology before Freud. He was the first to tie a specific theory (psychosexual development) to a therapeutic intervention (psychoanalysis), which he founded. As expected in science, a century of research on the foundations of Freud’s work has produced questions, inconsistencies, and disagreement, demonstrating that he remains a powerful force on the intellectual climate in many disciplines. The fact that a boy possesses a penis and a girl does not is the dominant factor in Freud’s theory of psychosexual development. Of his five stages of psychosexual development (oral, anal, phallic, latency, and genital), the one that has received the most attention is the phallic stage as it relates to gender socialization. At ages 3–5, children recognize the anatomical

50  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

difference between the sexes. They focus gratification on the genitals (the clitoris for the girl and the penis for the boy), and masturbation and sexual curiosity increase for both. Freud argued that girls come to believe that the penis, unlike the barely noticeable clitoris, is a symbol of power denied to them. The result is “penis envy,” which culminates in a girl’s wish that she could be a boy (Freud, 1962). She views her mother as inferior because she, too, does not have a penis. The girl’s libido, or sexual energy, is transferred to the father, who becomes the love object. Neo-Freudian psychologist Carol Jung referred to this experience as the Electra complex. The resolution occurs when the girl’s wish for a penis is replaced by the wish for a child. A male child is even more desirable because he brings the longed-for penis with him. In this way, the female child eventually learns to identify with her mother. Clitoral stimulation is abandoned for vaginal penetration, which is proclaimed as a sign of adult maturity for women. A boy also experiences conflict during the phallic stage, when his libido is focused on his mother, and his father is the rival for his mother’s affections. Freud called this experience the Oedipus complex. When a boy discovers that a girl does not have a penis, he develops “castration anxiety”—the fear that he will be deprived of the prized organ. The psychic turmoil a boy experiences during this stage leads to the development of a strong superego. For Freud, conscience and morality, the very hallmarks of civilization, are produced with strong superegos. Freud believed that girls have weaker superegos because the resolution of the Electra complex occurs with envy rather than fear. Because they experience less psychic conflict than boys, personality development is tarnished. This explains why women are more envious, jealous, narcissistic, and passive than men. A boy eventually overcomes the underlying fear, identifies with his father, reduces incestuous desires for his mother, and is later ushered into psychosexual maturity. Indeed, anatomy is destiny for Freud.

Critique Asserting that women cannot be fully mature unless they experience orgasm through vaginal intercourse, Freud’s beliefs about the biological inadequacy of females ignore the clitoris serving a purely sexual and pleasurable function. Physiologically orgasms are the same regardless of how they are reached. The sexism in Freudian theory is obvious and may have exceeded the intentions of Freud himself. His ideas were conditioned by the Victorian society in which he lived—one that largely embraced strict gender differentiation based on traditional roles for men and women in a taken-for-granted patriarchal world. Freud was initially criticized quite severely for notions about infantile sexuality and the psychosexual stages of development but garnered quiet acceptance for his comments on the biologically inferior design of females.

Feminism and Freud Can feminists be Freudians? Blatant sexism notwithstanding, the answer is “yes.” Feminist scholars and therapists certainly reject sexism but find useful core elements of his theory and therapeutic techniques. It would be counterproductive, for example, to reject psychoanalysis when it is successful for some women patients.

Psychoanalytic Feminism Psychoanalytic feminism emerged to analyze the construction of gender and its effects on women, including women’s subordination and men’s need to dominate and subjugate women.

Gender Development: Biology, Sexuality, and Health  51

Even in Freud’s own time psychoanalytic theorist and physician Karen Horney (1885–1952) rejected Freud’s dogma on women as “distorted and condescending.” Referred to today as a psychoanalytic feminist, she retained the main outlines of his theory but rejected penis envy is favor of what she referred to as womb envy, the psychosexual inadequacy a male endures for being unable to bear children. She believed the Oedipus Complex and personality disorders could be better explained by cultural considerations, social problems, and a patient’s present anxieties rather than instinct and childhood reconstructions (Horney, 1937, 1939). Current feminist (re)interpretation of psychoanalytic theory allows problems of personality and male domination to be viewed from this unique perspective.

Nancy Chodorow Sociologist and leading scholar representing psychoanalytic feminism is Nancy Chodorow (1978, 1994, 2012), who integrates aspects of psychoanalytic and sociological theory. She posits that because in most cultures women do the child care, mothers produce daughters who desire to mother. Mothering thus reproduces itself. They produce sons, who devalue women for these very roles. Penis envy occurs because women, even young girls, recognize the power of males; so it is natural to desire this kind of power. There is nothing inherently biologically superior about this. A girl has the ability to maintain identification with her mother to achieve the desirable traits of empathy and connectedness. This is a positive resolution of the Oedipus complex, which Freud overlooked, ignored, or rejected from his male-biased view. Chodorow has since refined her work to better represent the individual, relational, and social dimensions in psychoanalytic theory and therapeutics. She asks how taken-for-granted sociocultural practices can work well with individuality that is shaped by these very practices? We are all individual subjects but a good route for knowing the mind of a patient is to frame therapy according to relationships, with family, friends, and as well as the therapist, and the social values all these players bring to the therapeutic relationship (Chodorow, 2019). The individual should not be absorbed in the social; nor should the social be ignored in the individual. Notions that Freud’s gender theories should be trashed because of their sexism, and instinct theories viewed with unabashed skepticism, are not helpful when the distrust of some aspects of psychoanalysis is sought when emotional help is needed by men and women. Psychoanalytic feminists and therapists are encouraged to incorporate the realities of gender, sexuality, race, and political economy into their work. They are moving beyond the prejudices and “authoritarian clinical styles” of Freud’s time. It is “not your father’s psychoanalysis” today (Seligman, 2019). Disagreements between psychoanalytic feminists and between feminism and Freudian theory are moving toward reconciliation. A sociological divorce from psychoanalytic theory risks overlooking or marginalizing psychosocial approaches to a wide range of social topics (Chancer and Andrews, 2014). Feminists are adopting theoretical and therapeutic models to replace traditional, Freudian-based, androcentric approaches to the benefit of male and female clients. Freud would be shocked—but not necessarily horrified— by the feminist turn of his work.

GENDERED SEXUALITY Conventional beliefs about sexuality written from biological and neuroscience scripts are undermined by a wealth of interdisciplinary research and scholarship on gendered sexuality.

52  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

Historically, beliefs about males and females in regard to human sexuality were taboo subjects, shrouded in myth and superstition. Like the myth of the maternal instinct, research on gendered sexuality and the ambiguities it reveals dispels many myths, but many others persist.

Ambiguous Sex, Ambiguous Gender Adding to scholarship on gendered sexuality is the blizzard of media reports, anecdotal blogs, and surging social activism shattering binary notions of (both) sex and gender. The principle of sexual dimorphism, the separation of the sexes into two distinct, nonoverlapping categories, reflects biological notions of sex. Most people identify as cisgender, their sex assigned at birth aligns with their gender identity. As children, they become aware of two sexes who behave differently and generally adopt the gendered behavior matching their biological sex (Chapter 3). Cisgender people display established sex and gender binaries. In attitudes and behavior, however, many others do not reflect these binaries. The categories of gender and sex are rooted in cultural definitions; both categories are malleable (Hyde et al., 2019). Transgender is an umbrella term describing those whose gender identity differs from their sex assigned at birth. They do not conform to culturally defined gender roles associated with this assigned sex. Chapter 1 noted the accepted scientific and popular culture usage of the inclusive LGBTQ category (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer). The term also describes people who are gender-variant. Often used interchangeably with sexual minority or gender minority, it signals a context where power differences emerge according to one’s sexual status or gender identity. Like other minorities, these power differences translate to discrimination and threats to overall well-being.

Intersex We can burrow into the links between physiology and behavior to see how nonbinary gendered sexuality unfolds. Infants born with sexual anomalies disrupt sex and gender binaries and shed light on the biological basis of sex differences. Formerly referred to as hermaphrodites, the term intersex describes the approximate 1 in 2000 infants born with both male and female sex organs, who have ambiguous genitalia (such as a clitoris that looks like a penis), or have atypical genetic or hormonal markers for male or female. Intersex people are frequently “diagnosed” with a disorder of sex development (DSD). They violate the principle of sexual dimorphism, the separation of the sexes into two distinct, nonoverlapping categories. Assigned one sex at birth, the child’s genetic sex is discovered later. Genetic markers determined if it was necessary to retain the child’s assigned sex or to surgically alter a child to become an “unambiguous” male or female.

Sex Reassignment Until late in the twentieth century, the principle of sexual dimorphism was rigidly adhered to in medicine. At physician prompting, parents typically chose sex reassignment surgery (SRS) as a viable, appropriate option for their intersex infant The infant may or may not be reassigned to the other sex. In SRS, sexual organs and genitalia are altered so the intersex child will fit the appearance of one sex or the other or will correspond to the child’s male or female “dominant” genetic code. Therapists stress that the timing of SRS is crucial for psychological

Gender Development: Biology, Sexuality, and Health  53

adjustment. Sex reassignment is considered more successful if it occurs before age three, since gender identity and the sense of self is rapidly developing in toddlers (Chapter 3). The belief that the earlier the better for SRS prevailed among therapists for decades. SRS is offered as a solution for infants with DSD that is a moderate-to-severe type genital atypia. Even as recently as the 2010s, almost all infants with this diagnosis were subject to genital surgery. Parents are offered options about type and timing of surgeries, but rarely hear the option of not having any surgery (Nokoff et al., 2017; Sandberg et al., 2017). Genital atypia is the most severe DSD and may explain this high number of surgeries and physician reluctance to tell parents otherwise. Guidelines about SRS for infants and young children have changed dramatically. Newborns are more rigorously screened for a number of conditions, including internally ambiguous genitalia that previously might have been overlooked. Some may be discovered in utero. Parents are much more likely to know their newborn is intersex before leaving the hospital. The decision to surgically alter their child’s mismatched sexual apparatus—whether reassignment or not—to conform to the male or female sex, or to forgo surgery at this time, is agonizing to parents. Up to one-fourth of parents experience psychological distress because of these surgical decisions (Wolfe-Christensen et al., 2017; Emanuel, 2019). SRS is certainly controversial. Parents believe that even if the surgery is medically unnecessary, it will make it easier on their child to grow up “normally.” However, the child has no choice in the decision and the surgery is usually irreversible. Genital altering surgeries on intersex infants and young children today are criticized as akin to human rights violations. California is the first state to condemn the surgeries. A landmark legal settlement in favor of an intersex youth for the harmful outcomes of “genital correction surgery” was decided on the doctrine of informed consent. As a result, a moratorium on SRS for infants is in place (Miller, 2018; Lowry, 2019). These surgeries, however, were already in decline. Physicians and parents are increasingly rejecting “gender normalizing” surgeries. The World Health Organization and many U.S. medical associations are opposing such surgeries unless there is a significant imminent health risk or functional impairment. Evidence against SRS in infancy and early childhood supports the legal conclusions. Genitalia-altering surgery carries higher—not lower—risk of medical and psychological trauma than going without it (Compton, 2018; Knight, 2018). Current advice is to begin integrated mental health support of parents and families as soon as they learn of their child’s intersex status. If necessary, apply reversible non-surgical approaches as first interventions. Provide the child with age-appropriate information and counseling about the intersex condition as soon as feasible and continue parent–child support as the child grows and develops. A mature person decides on what action to take, if any, for surgery. Any irreversible surgery must wait until children are old enough to know and say which sex they prefer and how it is a match to their gender. If chosen, it may not be gender confirmation surgery (GCS) as much as it is gender affirmation surgery (GAS). “Sex reassignment surgery” (SRS) is less used as a term today.

Transing It was thought impossible to delay sex assignment at birth and raise a child without outward identifiable gender markers or until they were ready to decide on which sex they chose to “be.” The impossible has not only become plausible, but it is becoming acceptable. Transgender medicine has exploded. Research on gendered sexuality and the development

54  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

of transgender studies draws on biology, neuroscience, and medicine, as well as psychology, sociology, and anthropology. Findings are used in counseling parents and their trans children. Adults seeking GAS have an abundance of information that was not available to them as children. Collaborative, interdisciplinary efforts on transgender offers parents best practices to navigate a difficult road for their intersex children. This information is vital, too, for another group of children. What about those children who from their earliest memories know they were born in the “wrong” body? These are genetic males or females who do not have the biological anomalies associated with intersex. They say they are members of the other sex. Some gender specialists estimate as many as 1 in 500 children are “gender-nonconforming” and that a portion will choose gender affirmation surgery. Consider Karen’s account of her five-year-old daughter watching a Victoria’s Secret commercial. Her daughter said ‘if she had breasts she would cut them off.’… When asked why, her daughter said ‘They draw so much attention.’ Her daughter came out as a transgender male in high school. After years of comprehensive medical and psychological support, he had a double mastectomy to align his body with his gender identity. (Cited in Remerowski, 2018). Such reports are confirmed by other parents. From the time she could talk, (she) told her parents she is a boy. … She doesn’t say ‘I feel like a boy.’ She says ‘I am a boy.’ (Schwartzapfel, 2013) When Coy was a year and a half old he loved nothing more than playing dress-up. Coy’s fascination [was] with all things sparkly, ruffly and pink … [At three] after not receiving girl pants at Christmas, he asked when [he was] going to the doctor to have me fixed … tears spilling down his cheeks, to get my girl pants? (Erdely, 2013) Skylar is a boy, but he was born a girl, and lived as one until the age of fourteen. Skylar would put it differently … [H]e was a boy all along. (At age 13) after a bout of Internet research, he told [his parents] he was trans. [He had gender surgery at age sixteen.] (Talbot, 2013) Young people transing from one sex to the other are likely to use transgender or simply trans to self-identify. Transsexual, a term originating with the psychiatric community officially diagnosed these people as having a “gender identity disorder.” Offensive to the trans population, both the term and the diagnosis have been abandoned (Arnold, 2017). In 2019 the World Health Organization reclassified “gender identity disorder” to “gender incongruence.” Physicians and therapeutic communities now use gender dysphonia to describe the distress—not mental illness—resulting from feelings that one’s body does not match one’s sense of self. They feel “trapped” in the wrong body and may undergo GAS to “correct” the problem. Only then can their gender identity and their biological sex be consistent. Crossdresser has replaced transvestite as a term referring to mostly males who are sexually aroused when they dress in women’s clothing. Cross-dressers rarely choose GAS. Many are married and prefer to stay married. They may perform as “drag queens” as a livelihood but usually hold other jobs under a male persona. Like many in the LGBTQ community, they report a gender identity that is flexible or fluid. Compatible with symbolic interaction, gender fluidity describes the shifting of gender identity and its presentation according to various contexts.

Gender Development: Biology, Sexuality, and Health  55

Transgender people choosing GAS do not usually self-identify as gay or lesbian. They are newly minted males or females who desire sexual intimacy with the other gender. With biological sex and gender identity now consistent, they ease into their new gender and its associated roles with more confidence. Their ideal lover would be a heterosexual man or woman. The reality, however, is that most heterosexuals would not choose transgender lovers. Most people identifying as transgender do not undergo GAS. Neither do most in the broader LGBTQ population. The choice for GAS is understood first as a monumental gender identity hurdle. Comfort with the identity and maneuvering the unique contexts they live in are hurdles that follow. The intersection of social class and transgender identity also comes into play. The cost of surgery and treatment that must be monitored over a lifetime is staggering and often not covered by insurance. Even if psychological challenges are successfully resolved, the financial costs of the entire transing process are usually out of reach for most people who want GAS. A caution about the timing of GAS is warranted. Advice is to take it slowly. Transgender youth may change their minds about surgery, instead deciding on a nonbinary identity, living a gender fluid lifestyle, or after trying on the other gender for a while, retaining their assigned sex. Symptoms associated with gender dysphoria, such as gender nonconformity, may rapidly unfold in early childhood. But this is only one of a constellation of symptoms needed for its diagnosis. Gender dysphoria is not a phase: it is a serious, ongoing condition, with repeated insistence early in life, that she or he is the other sex. To date, science cannot determine which symptoms will persist. If gender dysphoria is diagnosed and persists past puberty, it is likely to be permanent (Bressert, 2019; Littman, 2019). Most genderquestioning kids are not gender- dysphoric kids. Deciding on GAS too early in life may be predict negative outcomes.

Critique Early research in the United States (1970s) on the success of SRS/GAS showed overall negative results: some believed they made a mistake, and others reported no better adjustment after the surgery. Recent research, however, shows much more successful outcomes in the U.S. and globally (Berli et al., 2017; Lindqvist et al., 2017). GAS on male-to-female report fewer physical complications compared to female-to-male. However, better surgical techniques have reduced complications for both. Female-to-male surgeries are rapidly increasing (Selvaggi et al., 2018). Some reports show satisfaction rates of GAS exceeding 90 percent. Advances in health care and therapy with a better understanding of transgender and a variety services for maneuvering transition are factors in such successes (Hess et al., 2018; Safa et al., 2019; van de Grift, 2018). A key measure of positive GAS outcomes or simply living an improved gender-variant life without surgery, is increased social acceptance of LGBTQ people. Media portrayals of transgender issues today are much more favorable. Overall most people with GAS report it had greatly improved their quality of life and few express regret after the surgery (Barone et al., 2017; Papadopulos et al., 2017; Sandoiu, 2018; Hadj-Moussa, et al., 2019). The success of GAS is well documented for most young adults. Those choosing GAS and parents delaying sex assignment for intersex children—so far at least—describe relatively happy scenarios. The success of GAS is also well documented for young adults. It is the choice factor that attests to these generally happy scenarios for SRS/ GAS. Without this factor, the following case study demonstrates a far different conclusion.

56  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

Does Nature Rule? A Sex Reassignment Tragedy Unraveling the biological and cultural ambiguities surrounding sex and gender is exceedingly difficult. This is clearly demonstrated in the infamous case of SRS performed in 1968 in Canada to one of a pair of identical male twins, Bruce and Brian. During a circumcision at 8 months to correct a minor urination problem, Baby Bruce’s penis was burned off. Physicians concluded that constructing an artificial penis was possible but not promising. The twins’ parents learned that Dr. John Money (1921–2006), one of the world’s experts on gender identity, spoke of encouraging results with SRS for hermaphrodites. According to Money, parents and environment solely shaped gender identity. Although Bruce was not a hermaphrodite (intersex) and was born with normal genitals, Dr. Money agreed to take on his case and work with the family so that he could be “taught to want to be a girl.” At 22 months, Bruce had surgery to remove remaining penile tissue. Bruce was transformed to Brenda. According to Dr. Money, by age five, the twins demonstrated almost stereotypical gender roles. Given girls’ toys and highly feminine clothing, Brenda was being prepared for a domestic life. Brother Brian was introduced to the world outside the home, with preferences for masculine toys (soldiers and trucks) and occupations (firefighter and police officer) (Money and Ehrhardt, 1972; Money and Tucker, 1975). Brenda’s case appeared to be successful. Or was it? Directly countering Money’s positive assessment was a follow-up of Brenda at age 13, when she was seen by a new set of psychiatrists. They reported a far more difficult transformation. She rebelled almost from the start, tearing off dresses, preferring boys’ toys, and fighting with her brother and peers. There was nothing feminine about Brenda. Her gait was masculine, and she was teased by other children; she believed that boys had a better life and that it is easier to be a boy than a girl (Diamond, 1982; Diamond and Sigmundson, 1997). In therapy sessions, she was sullen, angry, and unresponsive. The mere suggestion of vaginal surgery for the next step in her transformation induced explosive panic. When did Brenda learn that she was born Bruce? At age 10, in an embarrassed, fumbled attempt, her father told her that she needed surgery because a doctor “made a mistake down there.” Subconsciously she probably knew she was a boy, but at age 14, she was finally told the truth. Expressing immense relief, she vowed to change back to a boy and took the name David (Bruce was “too geeky”). At age 18, at a relative’s wedding, he made his public debut as a boy and married in 1990. David had a penis and testicles constructed, requiring 18 hospital visits (Colapinto, 2000; Gaetano, 2017). In the media frenzy that followed David’s “coming out” as a boy, the public heard only that gender identity is a natural and inborn process. Nurture’s role is given little credit in the process. Decades after the Bruce-Brenda-David transformations, John Money continued to make a strong case for the social constructionist argument (Money, 1995).

Essentialist Shortcomings Although this case may support the nature side (gender identity is inborn), there are strong counterarguments for the nurture side (gender identity is learned). First, Brenda’s estrogen therapy began at age 12, but it is very doubtful that the effects of her biological sex were altered early enough to make her look—and certainly to make her feel—more like a girl than a boy. Brian was also confused and embarrassed by Brenda’s tomboy behavior. Children such as Brenda who do not physically or behaviorally conform to expectations are vulnerable to rejection and ridicule by peers. Second, with the fear she would revert to masculine

Gender Development: Biology, Sexuality, and Health  57

preferences, unlike most girls today, Brenda was being raised rigidly to conform to stereotyped feminine gender roles. She was being prepared for a domestic life, but if her transformation had been successful, she could never have fulfilled the “ultimate” role of biological motherhood. Third, Brenda was keenly aware that boys had more prestige and a “better life” than girls. Her extraordinary opportunity to revert to the male sex may have been further prompted by these beliefs. Finally, and most important, by age two, children are marked with indelible gender stamps (Chapter 3). They may be altered over time, but never erased. Bruce became a girl nearly two years after everyone, including twin brother Brian, treated her like a boy. Bruce’s life as a toddler boy was written with masculine scripts; these scripts were abruptly changed to highly stereotyped, feminine scripts. Bruce’s gender identity was already unfolding. Fearing that those who knew Bruce for two years before his transformation to Brenda would derail the whole process, the family even moved at one point (Lindsey, 2004: 176–177). Certainly this case does not support John Money’s assertion that a newborn is a blank slate on which gender identity will be written. Money ignored not only the role of biology and genetics (Bruce was born with the normal “sex apparatus”) in attempting to transform Bruce into Brenda, but also ignored his own suppositions about how gender is socially constructed. Social constructionists emphasize the power of the end point fallacy—new definitions create new behaviors in an ongoing cycle (Chapter 1). Earlier definitions and behaviors are never completely lost, regardless of how they are transformed. Bruce was expected to unlearn earlier definitions and behaviors at the core of his emerging gender identity. John Money’s rigid interpretation of David Reimer’s case can be described as cultural essentialism. Just as biological essentialists claim sex differences due to nature, cultural essentialists claim gender differences due to nurture. Whether from biology or culture, essentialist views are unproductive largely because they are deterministic. They cannot deal with the blurring of sex and gender in socialization. Media accounts continue to blur this distinction; most reporting on the Reimer case is in the context of intersex infants. The media never questioned the ability of a host of players to carry out a giant pretense. Everybody was playing a game of science fiction, but the game of social reality was largely ignored (Lindsey, 2004). Despite these criticisms, however, a social constructionist argument is valid. Social constructionist views on gender learning neither reject nor ignore the powerful role of biological sex in socialization (Chapters 1 and 3). Unlike John Money’s version, the sociological view of social constructionism is not essentialist. The final irony is that John Money sends a Freudian-based biological message about David Reimer. Sounding like a biological essentialist, David is defined solely by his penis. At the loss of his penis, he loses both his maleness (biological sex) and his masculinity (gender). The only recourse, therefore, is castration and SRS. Rigid definitions of what males are “supposed” to be (Chapter 9) spelled doom for David Reimer. All these threads weave together in the tragic conclusion of David Reimer’s story. Treated for schizophrenia, twin brother Brian committed suicide with an overdose of antidepressant drugs. Grieving the loss of his brother and a life unraveling by depression, debt, and separation from his wife, two years later David Reimer took his own life by a gunshot to his head.

Sexual Orientation As more people identify as “gender fluid,” estimating the number of people in LGBTQ ranks is difficult. The categories overlap, people report multiple identities, and researchers use

58  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

different measurements. Notwithstanding these difficulties, a variety of rigorous polls are generally consistent in their reports—all showing record numbers of increases. As many as 11 million people are estimated to be in the LGBTQ ranks. A million identify as transgender and 3.5 percent as gay, lesbian, or bisexual. This translates to 4.5 of the U.S. population in the LGBTQ ranks (Fitzsimmons, 2018; Trotta, 2019). LGBTQ numbers continue to increase but are vastly overestimated. by Americans. Less than 5 percent of adults identify as LGBTQ, but Americans think they comprise over 20 percent of the entire U.S. population. Sexual orientation, the preference for sexual partners or sexual attraction to one or the other gender, or both, (Chapter 1) is a large, influential component of the sexual minority population.

Queer Theory Terms describing people according to sexual attraction and preferences are routinely used by the public and media. Depending on how they are used and who uses them, some terms are contentious. As a result, discourse about sexual minorities is being reshaped; new labels are offered by the people they refer to. In reclaiming a term once associated with ridicule and derision, queer theory emerged in the 1990s to examine how all forms of sexuality and sexual identity—from sexual orientation to sexual behavior—are socially constructed. It explores the oppression of dominant sexual norms (heteronormativity) on people’s lives, particularly for sexual minorities (Chapter 9). By transcending taken-for-granted beliefs about sexual boundaries and disrupting the notion of gender binaries, theorists of queer studies examine how sexual identity is built up over time, emerging from the multiple contexts of our lives. Queer theory alerts us to the mismatch between sex, gender, and desire.

Asexuality Terms used here reflect current sociological usage, but they, too, will be altered as this reshaping discourse proceeds. Another sexual identity category, asexual describes someone who does not experience sexual attraction to others. They date and have sex, and can enjoy romantic attachment, but a sexual component is not part of their identity (Przybylo, 2016; Lehmiller, 2018). Why would this be considered a sexual minority category? Asexual people contend that, like other sexual minorities, they experience discrimination in a sexualized world, many preferring to keep their asexuality secret. This secrecy is also linked to their perceptions of gender and sexuality. As expressed by asexual and heteroromantic Frankie, age 18, I don’t have a defined attraction and because of the way that I experience romantic and platonic attraction … for me gender is a lot less important than it might be for others. (Cuthbert, 2019:858) Frankie’s description counters a society rife with assumptions that sexuality and even being human are the same. As an incredulous news host commented during an interview with an asexual man, When you date, the assumption for 99% of humanity, is that you are out there dating, and looking for a mate, in part because you want to, well mate … you’re allowing people to assume you are a vertebrate, because almost all humans are, you have an obligation to disclose that you are actually a jellyfish. (Cited in Gupta, 2015)

Gender Development: Biology, Sexuality, and Health  59

Despite this demeaning interview, asexuality has rapidly emerged as a valid category in the spectrum of people with various sexual preferences. The acceptance of the concept of asexuality is incorporated in LGBTQ(IA), where IA = intersex and asexual. This broadened category is adopted by many advocacy organizations and making its way into research usage.

Sex Partners For those without any sexual attraction, asexuality is included as a new sexual orientation. However, in most Western cultures sexual orientation is usually divided into categories of heterosexual, homosexual, and bisexual. Like gender identity, sexual orientation is not automatically granted by biological sex. Heterosexual is the category of people who have sexual preference for and erotic attraction to those of the other gender. Homosexual is the category of people who have sexual preference for and erotic attraction to those of their own gender. Homosexual males are also referred to as gay men and homosexual females as lesbians. Although the term gay is often used in the media to include both gay men and lesbians, researchers use it to designate men. Like transsexual, the referent “homosexual” is moving out of usage and is considered offensive by many LGBTQ advocacy organizations. Bisexual is the category of people whose sexual orientations may shift and who are sexually responsive to either gender. There is a great deal of variation in how and with whom people experience sexual pleasure. Symbolic interactionists suggest that sexual orientation unfolds and builds over time during sexual interaction in specific contexts with people who share similar sexual desires. Social constructionists contend that this interaction is grounded on cultural meanings and definitions brought to the sexual interaction. Like heterosexuals, men and women who see themselves as gay or lesbian maintain a gender identity consistent with their biological sex. They are socialized into prevailing gender roles except for their sexual orientation. This socialization helps explain why gay men and lesbians prefer sexual partners who fit the standards of masculinity or femininity defined by the culture. Because it is accompanied by gender roles that are defined as masculine or feminine, however, gender identity is more susceptible to change over time than is sexual orientation. In the middle of the nineteenth century, a masculine gender role was associated with employment that included elementary school teaching and clerical work. Today these same jobs are associated with a feminine gender role (Chapter 1). The conceptual distinction between gender identity and sexual orientation is a blurry one, perhaps explaining why transgender is the preferred term to self-identify.

Global Focus: Third-Gender Cultures Across the globe, specific categories of transgender people are singled out for performing important social functions, especially in villages and rural areas in the developing world. Their acceptance depends on the legitimation a community extends to performing these roles, thus allowing their unique subcultures to exist. Paralleling gender fluidity in beliefs and behavior, these trans people go through life with “mixed” gender identities. The xanith of the Arab state of Oman are biological males. They work as homosexual prostitutes and skilled domestic servants. Described as a “third” gender, they have male names but distinctive dress and hairstyles unlike either men or women. Xanith are not men because they can interact openly and informally with women and are not women because they are not restricted by purdah, the system of veiling and secluding women (Chapter 6). Gender boundaries are also transgressed by the ancient mahus of Tahiti. Mahus are usually young boys who adopt female gender roles

60  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

early in life and obtain jobs usually performed by women. They have sexual relations with those of their own sex (males) but not with other mahus. Their preferred sexual partners, however, are females. The blurred gender roles, jobs, and sexual preferences defy descriptions of mahu sexuality. Although Tahitians poke fun at mahus, they are accepted members in society. Mahu semi-sacred status, viewed as naturally evolving from childhood, is bestowed with power and esteem for the traditional and spiritual roles they perform (Law, 2019).

South Asia Claiming to be neither male nor female, the highly studied hijras in South Asia (India, Pakistan, Nepal and Bangladesh) are born male but may “sacrifice” their genitalia to live as women, albeit with a transgender identity. The gender roles they act out as hijra are at the core of their identity and affirm their positive, collective self-image. They are not homosexual and prefer heterosexual men as sexual partners. They are called upon to perform important spiritual and religious functions, such as blessing newborn infants. Others are paid entertainers at weddings and religious festivals. Many others are beggars. Since hijra livelihood is contingent on the legitimization of these roles, hijras are emasculated by choice. Beggars are disdained and begging is illegal in parts of South Asia, for example, but hijra beggars are tolerated. Traced to the eunuchs of the Mogul Courts, India’s hijra communities date to antiquity. Historical legacy of hijras in Hindu India granted them legal rights earlier than in more religiously conservative Muslim Pakistan. After much controversy, Pakistan passed legislation guaranteeing fundamental rights to its transgender citizens in 2018. In rural South Asia where hijras practice their trade, sexual orientation and gender identity do not appear to be concerns. They are not homosexual and prefer heterosexual men as sexual partners. Hijras are ambivalent figures in India. They are teased and mocked but also valued and accepted for the ritual functions they perform. In Pakistan, despite legal protection, this ambivalence extends to disdain, discrimination, and violence. In rapidly urbanizing South Asia, the social acceptance of hijras is diminishing, fewer rituals are performed, and many are relegated to begging in order to survive. Legal rights for all gender-nonconforming persons are being stripped. In affirming heteronormative celebration, the state is advocating SRS for hijras and others like them (Chatterjee, 2018b; Mal, 2018; Saria, 2019). In turn, discrimination and marginalization increase.

Indonesia On the Indonesia island of Sulawesi, five gender identities among the Muslim ethnic Bugis are recognized. In addition to cis men and women, there are calalai (females performing male roles and dressing like men), calabai (males performing female roles and dressing like women, and bissu (transgender people with spiritual powers who can bestow blessings). Three of the five genders Bugi society recognizes can be positioned in the LGBTQ ranks. There is no word for gender in indigenous Bugi language. For Bugis, gender is made up of various understandings about sexuality, biology, and subjectivity. Despite contemporary Islamic discourse branding gender variant people as moral threats, many Bugi rituals and beliefs—such as gender and sexuality existing as a continuum rather than as a binary—are pre-Islamic. Their more isolated existence on Sulawesi may offer limited protection from the wave of vitriolic anti-LGBTQ rhetoric and arrests sweeping across Indonesia (Merigo, 2019).

Gender Development: Biology, Sexuality, and Health  61

Those with mixed gender identities among the Bugi are generally tolerated and accepted for the roles they perform. Among the Bugi, the bissu may be regarded with awe and even reverence. They perform as priests and in weddings as maids of honor. A bissu must possess all gender traits found throughout Bugi society. Intersex infants are thought to possess bissu proclivity, but “normative” male infants can grow up to be female on the inside. Once this “femaleness” is revealed, bissu candidacy can be bestowed. Bissu life is not easy. To maintain respect, they must be celibate, wear conservative clothing as priests, and maintain rigorous ritual standards. Communities monitor their behavior. Respect for the bissu cannot guarantee their survival. They are the smallest of the three gender-variant groups and only a handful of bissu priests exist in some villages. Gradual cultural decline, fewer invitations to perform religious rituals, and village schools infused with LGBTQ hate messages, push the bissu to the verge of extinction (Ibrahim. 2019). The calalai and calabai may hide their gender identity, but bissu cannot. It is difficult to recruit bissu to openly adopt a transgender status. Local leaders may respect bissu identity but keep silent in the wake of heightening antiLGBTQ sentiment.

Native Americans Centuries before early European contact among Native Americans, over 100 types of sex and gender expression existed. Led by missionaries, the European and colonization periods that followed attempted to literally erase Native American culture, including these expressions (Chapter 5). As research uncovered multiple examples of nonbinary identities, they were labeled as berdache, a title conferred on those who did not exhibit conventional gender roles, such as womanly men and manly women. A “womanly man” may have been unable to exhibit masculinity according to Plains Indian warfare and became a berdache. More accepted accounts argue that berdache were revered religious leaders, acting as mediators between men and women and between the physical and the spiritual worlds. In some Plains tribes they were called upon to bestow “masculine ferocity” before war. Evidence for their respected status includes Lakota Chief Crazy Horse counting berdaches among his wives. Criticisms of berdache as a catchall label for such diversity centers on the non-indigenous origin of berdache (a French term for young, male homosexual partners) and the highly diverse role performances played out according to tribe and location. Over 130 North American tribes in all regions exhibited this gender diversity. Many contemporary tribes continue to demonstrate respect for gender fluidity but use two-spirit to identify themselves and others like them. The berdache label may oversimplify that a manly woman is lesbian, and a womanly man is gay. With focus on berdache males, it tends to marginalize the gender variability of those assigned as female (Lang, 2016; Pyle, 2018). Two-spirited people act out multiple cross-gender roles as well as those assigned to one sex or the other. They are skilled in areas usually reserved for either men or women. They should move between these roles seamlessly. Most important, however, they are conferred with special characteristics that neither a man nor a woman possesses. As an Apache two-spirited person explains: Two-spirited people are not LGBTQ, although some two-spirited people are LGBTQ … narrowing the definition. You’re not two-spirit unless you are familiar with your cultural identity and your traditions. (Cited in Hilleary, 2018)

62  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

Reprise The, xanith, mahus, hijras, bissu gender of the Bugi, and Native American berdache (twospirit), perform important social functions. They enact religious and other cultural performances that otherwise might be lost. Anthropological research focuses on their gender-variant statuses, offering profiles depicting respect and acceptance, even if simultaneously mixed with mockery and disdain. They attest to the powerful impact of culture on gender identity and sexual orientation, ultimately challenging the sex and gender binaries in multiple ways. The perils associated with these challenges, however, cannot be dismissed. LGBTQ rights are under assault in places where, for centuries, enactments of accepted gender-variant roles contributed to community betterment and individual survival. Today legal rights awarded to gender variant people do little to guarantee their safety. In many developing world regions, fear of reprisal drives gender minorities underground. Violence is often sanctioned and ignored for third-gender people who breach gender binaries in traditional communities (Jamel, 2018). Eager to affirm and celebrate their work and heritage, we need to be cautious in contributing to a narrative that neglects the often lethal burdens conferred by these roles.

Sexual Scripts Sociologists emphasize how sexuality is based on prescribed roles that are acted out like other socially bestowed roles. Sexual scripts are shared beliefs concerning what society defines as acceptable sexual thoughts, feelings, and behaviors for each gender. All sexual scripts are gendered. Gender roles are connected with different sexual scripts—one considered more appropriate for males and the other considered more appropriate for females Sexual scripts continue to be based on beliefs that for men, sex is for orgasm and physical pleasure and for women, sex is for love and the pleasure that comes from intimacy. Cisgender men more than cisgender women believe in biological essentialism, which itself is a sexual script. Although people may desire more latitude—such as more emotional intimacy for men and more sexual pleasure for women—they often feel constrained by the traditional scripting of their sexuality. When both men and women accept such scripts and carry their expectations into the bedroom, gendered sexuality is socially constructed. Beliefs about gendered sexuality contribute to less sexual pleasure and more sexual dysfunction in the bedroom and risks for sexual abuse of cisgender women increase. Prejudice and violence directed at trans people also escalates (Ching and Xu, 2018; Skewes et al., 2018). Gendered scripting clearly illustrates that biology alone cannot explain human sexuality in even its limited forms. Sexual scripts may provide routes to conventional sexuality but over time paths offering new directions for sexuality can be built. Culturally based gendered sexuality will ever be eliminated. It is likely, however, that as gender roles become more egalitarian, the sexual lives of both men and women will be enhanced.

Patterns of Sexual Attitudes and Behavior Unveiling the myths and superstitions surrounding sexuality took many decades in the U.S. Major assaults on these myths and on the biological determinism embedded in beliefs about sexuality were led by the pioneering work of Alfred Kinsey and his associates (Kinsey, 1948; Kinsey et al., 1953). Just as Freud shocked science with his assertions on psychosexual

Gender Development: Biology, Sexuality, and Health  63

development, Kinsey did the same upon revealing data on sexual behavior. He reported sexual activities far different from the supposed norms.

Gender and Orgasm Orgasm is the presumed standard for sexual pleasure. The original Kinsey data revealed that 92 percent of males and 58 percent of females masturbated (used sexual self-stimulation) to achieve orgasm. Males begin to masturbate during early adolescence. Females begin to masturbate later than men, usually in their twenties and thirties. Women use masturbation to “learn” how to achieve orgasm before they engage in penile–vaginal intercourse (Towne, 2019). Non-partnered masturbation is more frequent as they age. Preference for partnered intercourse, however, far outweighs all other forms to achieve organism for both men and women. During intercourse, men are twice as likely as women to report having an orgasm. Few men but up to one-third of women report that they rarely have one during sex. Sexual arousal is associated more with orgasm, and sexual desire is associated with the need for sex to fulfill an emotional or physical want. Of course, both can occur during intercourse, but in any ranking of factors for women’s sexual desire it is a relationship script, rather than a hookup or one-night stand for recreational sex, that is at the top. Frequency of orgasm for women is a weak measure of satisfaction in a relationship. A woman enjoys sex more—fulfills sexual desire—when her “relationship” partner reaches orgasm. Men rarely turn down opportunities for sex. Sexual enjoyment may be based more on the biology of sexual arousal for males and the psychology of sexual desire and commitment for females. These patterns have not changed substantially since Kinsey’s research. Kinsey found that over one-third of married women never had an orgasm prior to marriage and that one-third of married women never had an orgasm. Later data show that virtually all married women do reach orgasm, although not with every intercourse. Husbands generally like more frequent intercourse than their wives, especially early in the marriage. Later in married life, this trend may reverse; married women report more positive perception of their sexual behavior, and men report a more positive perception of their marital life. For both men and women, marital satisfaction and sexual satisfaction are highly correlated. A “warm interpersonal climate” in marriage prompts more frequent sex, and a higher level of marital satisfaction (Schoenfeld et al., 2017). If sex keeps people happy in their marriages, low sexual satisfaction is a good predictor of divorce.

Critique Nonetheless, the centrality of orgasm as the key measure of sexual desire for women is not warranted. Feminist research in psychology highlights that—regardless of the sexual context—determining sexual fulfillment through orgasm is an androcentric measure that does not capture the complexity of women’s sexual desire. Sexual scripts intervene to lower sexual desire. Emotional commitment looms large for women. Compared to men, women are less likely to feel positive about a casual sex encounter whether they orgasm or not (Fahs and Plante, 2017; Piemonte et al., 2019). Neither does orgasm capture the complexity of men’s sexual desire before orgasm or sexual satisfaction after. Sexual desire in men goes well beyond simplistic notions about biology. Men’s desire is mediated by erotic thoughts and sexual functioning, but also by masculinity norms in sexual scripts. Men may achieve the

64  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

physical pleasure of orgasm, but it is dampened by concerns about how their sexual performance is judged by their partner (Nimbi et al., 2018; Séguin and Blais, 2019). Similar to women, gendered sexual scripts send conflicting messages to men. Also like women, men are happier with an orgasm with a girlfriend, mate, longtime partner, or wife.

Premarital/Nonmarital Sex Because the large majority of people have sexual experiences with those they are unlikely to marry, the term premarital sex is inaccurate. It is more accurate to refer to these experiences as nonmarital sex. The differences between cisgender heterosexual men and women in nonmarital sex have all but disappeared. Gender differences in sexual intercourse among teens (40 percent) and age at first intercourse are statistically insignificant (age 15 for both males and females). However, sexually active adolescent girls have significant decreases in peer acceptance over time compared to sexually active adolescent boys. The most striking gender difference is that 7.6 percent of males have their first sexual intercourse before age 13, double the number for females. These rates are higher for non-Hispanic black males and Hispanic males in metropolitan areas (Kreager et al., 2016; Lindberg et al., 2019). By age 21 virtually all men and women are sexually experienced, with the large majority reporting vaginal intercourse. Perhaps more surprising, gender differences in heterosexual oral and anal sex and number of sex partners are also decreasing (males have marginally higher frequencies in all of these than females). Norms about gendered sexuality, especially among teens, help explain these patterns. Although girls have increased their sexual behavior, they define it within the bounds of a romantic relationship, a perception carried into adulthood. A decade ago a boy was likely to have his first sexual intercourse with a pickup or casual date; today they are likely to say it is with a girlfriend. Girls whose first intercourse occurred before age 16 are more likely to report that it was coercive. Young women aged 18–24 report they were forced to have vaginal intercourse with males against their will; about 6 percent of males aged 18–24 report unwanted sexual intercourse but with a female or male (NSFG, 2018). When factoring in race, Asian Americans—both male and female—have their first sexual experience at a later age than whites, African Americans, and Latinos. The nonmarital norm of sexual intercourse holds for teens who took abstinence pledges and who promised to remain virgins (or not have sex again) until marriage. These programs are ineffective. Pledgers are just as likely to have sex as teens who did not take these pledges. High school males are less likely to receive information on birth control in sex education classes focusing on abstinence. An ironic twist to this trend is that when the abstinent-only pledges do have sex, it is riskier sex—they are less likely to use condoms or other forms of birth control (SAHM, 2017; Santelli et al., 2017; NSFG, 2018). With sexual scripting intact, females of all ages are more vulnerable to these risks than males.

Extramarital Relationships Once called “adultery” but now commonly referred to as “affairs,” this type of nonmarital sex is between a married person and someone other than the person’s spouse. These extramarital relationships take on many forms. They encompass different degrees of openness and include married as well as single people. The extramarital couples are likely to be close

Gender Development: Biology, Sexuality, and Health  65

friends, and contrary to perception, they may not include sexual involvement. The emotional involvement with a partner other than one’s spouse can be more threatening to the marriage than sexual involvement (Chapter 7). Despite the fact that most people disapprove of affairs in any form, Kinsey’s data indicated that 50 percent of males and 26 percent of females engaged in extramarital sex by age 40. Estimates are that 50–60 percent of married men and 45–50 percent of married women have had an extramarital affair. Although most disapprove of affairs, half engage in them. Although later research validated Kinsey’s data, the high percentage of affairs he reported was suspect. It is clear, however, that when respondents report their knowledge of affairs others are having, the numbers are higher. Men report multiple affairs, but women are catching up to men in reporting they have had least one affair. Age and gender intertwine, with infidelity for both men and women increasing significantly during pre-retirement years. Men in their 50s and 60s are about twice as likely to cheat as same-age women, but women’s infidelity rates continue to increase overall (Solomon et al., 2018; Wang, 2018). In addition, divorce rates have risen over time, and although these have plateaued, cohabitation continues to increase. Both divorce and cohabitation increase openness to extramarital relationships. Cohabiters who cheat fall into the infidelity statistic even if they are not legally married (Chapter 7). It is probable that reported figures for extramarital relationships are lower than the actual numbers. Kinsey’s data, therefore, underrepresents today’s infidelity reality.

Sexual Double Standard Sexual scripts set the stage for the sexual double standard (SDS), referring to the idea that men are granted more sexual freedom than women. SDS allows men to express themselves sexually and cushions them from harsh judgments endured by women who engage in the same behavior. Power dynamics help explain SDS. For example, sexually pleasurable hookups in college are endorsed by women and men who profess egalitarianism in and outside the bedroom. Because general levels of nonmarital sexual behavior for males and females are now similar, does a double standard still exist? The answer is more likely no when considering sexual behavior, but more likely yes when considering sexual attitudes. Permissive discourses about casual sexual behavior for women are overridden by traditional discourses. Sexual behavior has changed dramatically. It was long assumed that compared to men, women had weaker sex drives, were more difficult to arouse sexually, and became aroused less frequently. All of these assumptions have been proven false. The clitoris, not the vagina, as Freud insisted, is responsible for the multiple orgasms experienced by women. Prompted by feminist social scientists and a rejection of evolutionary views that sex for women is propelled by reproduction rather than pleasure, new models about female sexuality are emerging. Women may orgasm less frequently than men, but they report intense, satisfying, and “innovative” sexual experiences prompting more frequent sex. They want sex and want it on their own terms (Brotto, 2017; Frederick et al., 2018). In stark contrast to Freudian views, they offer an understanding that sexuality for women is pleasurable, fulfilling, and desired.

Women and SDS Gender differences in the sexual double standard are most apparent in sexual attitudes. Teens fall prey to SDS as they explore their own sexuality and discover that peers police

66  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

what they say and do about sex. Girls quickly learn that female peers who choose sex in high school are evaluated more severely than those who choose abstinence. “Sexting” by adolescent girls is evaluated more negatively than similar sexting by boys. When girls do sexting, they are vulnerable to cyberbullying and physical threats. High school girls are aware of a sexual double standard (Young et al., 2016; Pearson, 2018; Ricciardelli and Adorjan, 2019). Boys largely do not notice that SDS even exists. Adolescence sets up a taken-for-granted sexual double standard in adulthood. Permissive discourses about casual sexual behavior for women are overridden by traditional discourses justifying SDS. Feminists highlight power dynamics to help explain SDS. For example, sexually pleasurable hookups in college are endorsed by women and men who profess egalitarianism. But women give in to sex to please their partners in ways that sustain male privilege in and outside the bedroom. The #MeToo movement and media depictions of male celebrities pressuring women to have sex attest to the blurry line between consent and coercion (MEF, 2018). Male power and privilege come together to reinforce SDS and the cultural politics that lurk within it. Women express the belief that emotional closeness is a prerequisite for sexual intercourse. Females do not want to be perceived as “easy lays” or “sluts” so are more cautious about casual sex. They may define themselves as sexually assertive but are always on the alert for coercive sex and for health risks in sexual encounters. Despite beliefs in sexual autonomy, however, women endorsing SDS engage in riskier behaviors. They may abdicate the agency they believe in, for example, and engage in unprotected sex or abandon relationship scripts for casual sex with acquaintances (Danube et al., 2016; Farvida et al., 2017; Rudman et al., 2017). They absorb conflicted messages about sex that both support and refute SDS. Men report sexual pleasure and conquest as the main motives. They prefer more partners over a shorter period of time than women. Strongly indicative of the classic SDS script, women expressing these same preferences are viewed more negatively than men. For example, women are judged negatively as the number of their sexual partners increases. Number of partners makes little or no difference to how men are judged (Jozkowski et al., 2017; Marks et al., 2019). Women’s sexual behavior is increasingly similar to men’s, but powerful sexual scripts assure an enduring sexual double standard. When considering body shame and nonmarital intercourse, women are more “sex negative” than men and are at risk of negative emotional outcomes of their sexual experiences. Also resonating with SDS, men more than women believe that oral sex is not sex, that cybersex is not cheating, and that women cannot fake orgasms. Oral sex without consent is considered rape in most states (Emmerink et al., 2016; Falconer and Humphreys, 2019; Hills et al., 2020). Although Asian men express more support for SDS than white and Latino men, race, religion, and ethnicity do not override gender in these trends (Guo, 2019). As expected, the most significant SDS gender difference is the persistent gap showing women expressing emotional closeness as a prerequisite for sexual intercourse. Women adopt a more “person-centered” approach to sex; men adopt a more “body-centered” approach. Compared to females, males are less likely to feel guilty about their sexual activities.

Masculinity and SDS On the other hand, sexual dominance for men and a less judgmental SDS come at a price. Men confide to other men that girlfriends offer the best sexual experiences. Men believe

Gender Development: Biology, Sexuality, and Health  67

that women are the true arbitrators of masculine sexual standards. and that women judge men by virility and sexual prowess. A man feels more masculine and experiences enhanced self-esteem when his partner reaches orgasm. This belief is justified given that many women describe their own orgasm as more intense when their partner ejaculates. They also report heightened feelings of sexual attractiveness. Women and men both believe that her orgasm is a sign of his success as a lover (Chadwick and Anders, 2017; Burri et al., 2018). Unwanted sex is usually thought of as a sexual encounter that is coercive to women and can lead to sexual violence. The notion of a man having unwanted sex with a woman is seldom considered. Even men who rarely turn down opportunities for sex sometime feign sexual desire not only to maintain their sense of masculinity, but also “to prevent upsetting their female partners” (Murray, 2018:130). Some men who do not want sex feel pressure from women who do want sex. Once sexual interaction starts they prefer not to confuse or hurt women who may feel rejected if men say no. These narratives are reflected in accounts of unwanted sexual encounters by college men (Ford, 2018:1310, 1314, 1316). … I don’t really like to make people feel bad about themselves … I kinda felt … like I had to go all the way. It was just necessary … It would have felt weird to me (to stop it). (25-year-old senior) Men also rely on masculinity scripts to describe their unwanted sex with women: There is social pressure that men like sex a lot and women can choose yes or no. So I guess it makes you unmanly if you don’t want to have sex. (20-year-old sophomore) I’m think about this girl telling weird stories about me to her friends … guys are supposed to enjoy sexual intercourse under any circumstances … I wanted to stick to the conventional script. (18-year-old first year student) Certainly these attitudes demonstrate that pleasurable sexual activities are highly gendered— conditioned by sexual scripts men and women confront differently. It is also clear that unwanted sex for men in most contexts is vastly different from unwanted sex for women. Remember that sexual scripts and SDS are not the same. Sexual scripts may fuel the sexual double standard, but SDS determines how men and women are evaluated in their sexual behavior. Even with heightened public consciousness regarding SDS, attitudes about sexual scripts have not changed as quickly as sexual behavior. Mainstream media endorse sexual scripts and SDS. Television use is associated with less sexual assertiveness for women, even as nonmarital sex is routine, normative, and celebrated throughout programming (Seabrook et al., 2017). Consider the sexual escapades on the wildly popular Sex in the City (1998–2004) television series and movie franchise (2008 and 2010) that candidly discussed female sexuality and disdained the sexual scripts surrounding SDS. The final TV episodes presented challenges for writers. Sex in the City was about female friendship and loyalty. It was about four assertive women who had recreational sex for pleasure, in hookups, one-night stands, and short-lived romantic encounters. The subtext was not subtle. Yes, they could fall in love, but would not be defined by any man. The show’s creator argued that the message should not be about finding fulfillment with one (man). Alone on the streets of New York would have been fine. Reunited with friends, sure. Why did Mr. Big (Carrie

68  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

Bradshaw’s love interest) have to be such a big part of it? At the end … it became a conventional romantic comedy. (Armstrong, 2018:189–190) Despite viewer complaints that the franchise betrayed its intent, the finale of the television and movie runs had all four women happily married. The disappearance of a sexual double standard is not necessarily desirable. The absence of gender differences in frequency of nonmarital sexual activities, number of partners, or degree of emotional involvement with partners could trigger a lifetime of more sex with more people who are less acquainted with their partners. Given the emotional and physical perils, violence, and unplanned pregnancy, if a sexual double standard vanishes, gendered sexual hazards may increase.

Sexuality in Later Life Cultural barriers and gender norms also apply to sexuality in later life. For the aged, a difficult situation is made worse by a combination of age and gender stereotypes regarding sexuality. Because sexuality is associated with youth and virility, it has been a marginalized or demeaned topic when applied to the aged. They are perceived to be sexless. If elderly males show sexual interest, they are viewed suspiciously. Women are expected to retreat to a sexless existence after childbearing and mothering. Women, however, experience more comfort and less anxiety about sex as they age. Beginning in late midlife—and contrary to sexual scripts—“bodily” sexual practices increase sexual satisfaction for women; relational intimacy increases sexual satisfaction for men. This pattern does not alter the fact that women at midlife and beyond continue to rank emotional intimacy as core to their sex life (Thomas et al., 2017; Miller, 2019). Emotional intimacy enhances sexual pleasure. On the other hand, widows significantly outnumber widowers; options for sexual activity decline for women, despite the fact that sexual desire remains strong. Research by two other pioneers of sexuality, William Masters and Virginia Johnson, shows that when advancing age and physiological changes influence sexual ability for men, performance anxiety increases (Masters and Johnson, 1966, 1970). A man’s wife may believe his “failure” is a sign that he is rejecting her. Men are socialized early to believe that they will be judged by their sexual potency. Intersecting sexuality with race for older people, Asian American males are less likely than white and African American males to rigidly adhere to masculinity scripts. They also have their sexual debuts in their late-teen years. It is not surprising that Asian Americans report lower satisfaction with sexual communication and compromised sexual and relationship well-being in old age. Sexual scripts are ageist as well as gendered. As noted, when a couple accepts cultural and age-related stereotypes, a cycle of less sex, less interest in sex, and increased emotional distance is likely in later life (Muruthi et al., 2018; Lee and Knippen, 2019). It may be easier for older people to cope with sexual myths if society assumes that they are not supposed to be sexually active anyway. Sexual scripts are changing for older people. Positive attitudes about sex and the sexual activity these attitudes prompt, are strongly linked to well-being and enjoyment of life for older people (Smith et al., 2019b). The gender gap in unmet sexual intimacy—which may not include intercourse—is larger for women; the unmet intercourse gap is larger for men (Beier, 2019; Træen et al., 2019). Over two-thirds of men and almost half of women age 65–74

Gender Development: Biology, Sexuality, and Health  69

are sexually active, and between ages 75–85, 38 percent of men and 17 percent of women engage in sexual relationships (Cruz, 2019). Although older women outnumber older men, men continue the pattern of choosing younger women as sex partners. A ten-year difference in age favoring men may be common, but for these women, their sex partners—whether widowed, divorced, or never married—are likely to be in their 60s or 70s. Led by older women, barriers to discussing sex—and engaging in it—are starting to fall for older people.

Critique Men and women are far less sexually different than most people believe. Within-gender variation is larger than between-gender variation in sexual behavior and the gap is decreasing in the sexual attitudes expressed as part of the sexual double standard. With genetics and biology highlighted, however, gender differences are exaggerated in media that report men and women are pitted against one another (think the Mars–Venus trope). As pointed out by Masters and Johnson in the mid-twentieth century and continues to be affirmed today, cultural barriers and messages scripted by gender roles inhibit sexual pleasure and distance men and women from one another (Trinh and Choukas-Bradley, 2018; Rubin et al., 2019). Regardless of whether the couple is married, positive sexual experiences increase well-being and relationship satisfaction. As the end point fallacy asserts, for both women and men, satisfying relationships predict happier sex lives which predict satisfying relationships in an ongoing cycle. Social construction of women as passive sexual beings and men as sexual conquerors can be reconstructed to make them partners in a mutually pleasurable experience.

NATURE AND NURTURE REVISITED: THE POLITICS OF BIOLOGY Biologically, women are definitely not the weaker sex. Drawing from data on human sexuality, developmental biology, animal behavior, and ethnography, anthropologist Ashley Montagu (1905–1999) made the case that women are more valuable than men because they maintain the species during a child’s crucial development stages. From a sociobiological standpoint, Montagu uses the idea of adaptive strategies, asserting that women are superior, too, because they are more necessary than men (Montagu, 1999). As we see in this chapter, Montagu’s claim that the natural superiority of women is a biological fact is convincing. He also contended that this biological superiority is a “social acknowledged reality.” Sexism is based on biological beliefs that can be proven false. Given rampant gender inequality that puts women in harm’s way, women’s biological superiority certainly is not an acknowledged social reality in most of the globe. He may have less convincing evidence to challenge the social constructions of sex and gender, but he literally turned around interpretations of women as passive beings who are sexually and biologically inferior.

The Female Advantage in Evolution Assertions about survival of the fittest favor women. Feminist evolutionary psychologists document ways women’s contributions aided human survival. Sociobiologists must account for data showing that human evolution benefited more from cooperation and the plant-gathering activities favoring women than competition and the hunting activities

70  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

favoring men. DNA evidence suggests that a “make love not war” scenario was probably the most productive, adaptive strategy of the earliest waves of human migration out of Africa. As we saw with primates, conventional Darwinian wisdom about competition and the desire to pass on selfish genes does not conform with newer models suggesting that, like our chimp and bonobo friends, humans are “naturally” predisposed to altruism and cooperation (Tomasello et al., 2012). Attempts by humans to dominate other humans through violence, distrust, and cruelty were uncommon in early humans because they were maladaptive. Contemporary societies that survive and thrive are more altruistic, cooperative, and giving (Shaffer, 2019). Biology and culture intertwined in evolution to enhance generosity in humans. The non-human primate studies sociobiologists are so fond of indicate that competition to gain resources and increase reproduction is a narrow and unrefined view of evolutionary theory. Our chimp and bonobo ancestors suggest alternative evolutionary views. Even long-held beliefs about “male-dominated, chest-thumping” baboon society, are being questioned. The highly affiliated baboons, who went unstudied for decades, show males spending time with females as lovers not fighters and with males in ways that cement social cohesion. Baboons live their lives in close, continuous proximity with friends, family, and opponents (Dal Pesco and Fischer, 2018; Alberts, 2019). Primate societies are built around female choice and male–female affiliation rather than male–male aggression. Newer interpretations of the biology–animal–human link emerge that question conventional wisdom about human evolution and species survival. Biologists today avoid using survival of the fittest to discuss natural selection. Survival is only one of many aspects of selection.

Reframing the Debate There are many clues for our original question on the influences of nature and nurture, of heredity and environment, of biology and culture in explanations for sex and gender differences and similarities. Media accounts frame the debate as one versus the other, usually as nature versus nurture. All evidence points to the mutual collaboration of both in these explanations. Deterministic theories dismissing or failing to account for biology and culture (society) are doomed as useful explanatory models in science. From pop-Darwinism to popFreud, media take hold of the sex difference theme, and soon people believe that men have math, aggression, and promiscuity genes and women have nurturing, mothering, and emotional genes that predestine their gender roles. Despite scientific evidence, such claims can sustain the very sex differences scientists seek to explain. Genes are claiming more and more of our social and individual life when scientific theories are used to serve prevailing ideologies regarding gender. The female sex is the stronger one, but perceived sex and gender differences justify women’s subordination. Natural superiority, if it does exist, should not condone social inequality whether it benefits women or men. Biological and evolutionary-based arguments that exclude culture, nurture, and environment are not empirically sound. While not abandoning promising evolutionary-based arguments, psychologists, anthropologists, and biologists are working together to better understand how nature and nurture weave together to produce sex differences and similarities. The uneasy relationship between feminism and evolutionary psychology is being bridged. Socialization

Gender Development: Biology, Sexuality, and Health  71

exerts massive, profound influence on the differences that do exist (Chapter 3). Sociologists favor explanations for gender development and gender roles rooted in nurture and sociocultural factors. These explanations account for a range of variables implying that women and men have the “human” potential to achieve in whatever directions they desire. A great deal of rapidly emerging interdisciplinary data suggest that the nature versus nurture view is obsolete. The more productive nature and nurture view makes scientific sense. It also advances a social justice agenda.

SECTION 2 GENDER AND HEALTH REVISITING BIOLOGY AND CULTURE Biology and culture intertwine to explain patterns of health and well-being related to sex and gender. On the biological side, the XX pair of robust sex chromosomes offers an advantage to females compared to that offered to males by the less robust XY male sex chromosomes. On the cultural side, women and men’s approaches to health and well-being unfold in strongly gendered ways.

Measuring Health and Well-Being These patterns show up in two key measurements of sickness and death. The mortality rate is expressed as a percentage of the total number of deaths over the population size (×1000) in a given time period, usually a year. Measuring mortality is simpler than determining a morbidity rate, the amount of disease or illness in a population, also specified according to a time period. Even with well-defined symptoms, illnesses are in part subjective. Many people do not recognize their own sickness, or they may recognize it but not alter their behavior, such as taking time off work or school, or seeing a physician, Others prefer to treat themselves. Morbidity patterns are particularly difficult to calculate for mental illness. As a result, morbidity rates rely heavily on treatment data and may underestimate the prevalence of disease (how widespread it is at a point in time) and incidence (proportion of new cases over a specified time period). Despite these cautions, however, a clear and consistent inverse gender pattern exists in mortality and morbidity. Women have higher morbidity rates but live longer than men; men have lower morbidity rates but do not live as long as women.

Till Death Do Us Part: Gender and Mortality Females can expect to outlive males an average of five years in the U.S. Women and men die from the similar leading causes but there are significant gender differences in the rate (Table 2.1). For a few years Alzheimer’s showed a slight female disadvantage in mortality, but that has since changed. Mortality rates for all leading causes of death are higher for males (Table 2.2). This may be predicted since women live longer than men and Alzheimer’s afflicts the oldest in the population. Women had an initial disadvantage for diabetes but have

72  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives TABLE 2.1  Leading

Causes of Death in the United States by Sex

Females

Percent

  1 Heart disease

21.8

  2 Cancer

20.7

   3  Chronic lower respiratory diseases

6.2

  4 Stroke

6.2

  5 Alzheimer's disease

6.1

  6 Unintentional injuries

4.4

  7 Diabetes

2.7

   8  Influenza and pneumonia

2.1

  9 Kidney disease

1.8

10 Septicemia

1.6

Males

Percent

  1 Heart disease

24.2

  2 Cancer

21.9

  3 Unintentional injuries

7.6

   4  Chronic lower respiratory diseases

5.2

  5 Stroke

4.3

  6 Diabetes

3.2

  7 Alzheimer disease

2.6

  8 Suicide

2.6

   9  Influenza and pneumonia

1.8

10  Chronic liver disease

1.8

Note: Includes all ages and races and origins Sources: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. “Leading Causes of Death – Females – All Race and Origins – United States, 2017.” https://www.cdc.gov/women/lcod/2017/all-races-origins/index.htm “Leading Causes of Death – Males – All Race and Origins – United States, 2017.” https://www.cdc.gov/ healthequity/lcod/men/2017/all-races-origins/index.htm

regained their mortality advantage over men. Men have been gaining on women in narrowing the mortality rate, but the age-adjusted mortality rate for men is still about 40 percent higher than that for women. When race is added to the life expectancy rate (LER) profile, white males reached parity with African American females in 2000. This parity was short-lived. The gap reappeared

Gender Development: Biology, Sexuality, and Health  73 TABLE 2.2  Leading

Causes of Death by Sex Ratio Male to Female Ratio

All Causes

1.4

 1 Heart disease

1.6

 2 Cancer

1.4

 3 Unintentional injuries

2.1

 4 Chronic lower respiratory disease

1.2

 5 Stroke

1.0

 6 Alzheimer's disease

0.7

 7 Diabetes

1.6

 8 Influenza and pneumonia

1.3

 9 Kidney disease

1.4

10 Suicide

3.7

Note: Reflects age adjusted ratio Source: Deaths: Final Data for 2017. National Vital Statistics Reports. June 24, 2019. 68(9). Adapted from Table B (p. 6). https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr68/nvsr68_09-508.pdf

within two years and is again widening. Black males have the lowest LER of all racial groups. Asian American men and women have the smallest LER gap. Perhaps surprising is the Latino life expectancy advantage. Latinas have the highest life expectancy for all six Hispanic-origins race-sex groups, including white females. The largest difference is between Latinas and black males (Figure 2.1). The smallest differences are between Asian and white males and Asian and white females, almost at parity. Asian Americans—not including the category of Pacific Islanders—live longer than any other racial group. They report the highest excellence in health of all combined race and gender groups (National Center for Health Statistics, 2018; Office of Minority Health, 2019). For all races and ethnic groups where data are available, women maintain a strong LER advantage and are projected to do well into the middle of the century. When factoring in SES, which has a profound health effect, females still have a more favorable LER than comparable males. Males have higher mortality rates at every stage of life. The first year of life is the most vulnerable time for both sexes, but newborn girls have an advantage in survival over newborn boys. Even in harsh conditions where food, safety, and basic health care are in short supply, girls have higher neonatal survival. By the 1990s, mortality data showed nondisease causes of death (accidents, suicides, and homicides) in the top-15 list. In 2010, homicide dropped from this list for the first time since 1965, but the previous 3.8 male–female ratio remained about the same. For suicide, although women experience more depression than

74  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives 85

84.3

Hispanic female

82.9

Non-Hispanic white female

Age (years)

80 80.6

Hispanic male

77.5 76.4 75 75.7

70

81.0 79.1 78.1

Non-Hispanic black female 76.1 Non-Hispanic white male

Non-Hispanic black male

69.5

71.5

65

0

2006

FIGURE 2.1  Life

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

Expectancy by Race, Hispanic (Latino) Origin, and Sex, 2006–2017

Source: Deaths: Final Data for 2017. Figure 5, p. 9. National Vital Statistics Reports. June 24, 2019. 68(9). https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr68/nvsr68_09-508.pdf

men and attempt suicide about four times more frequently, men commit suicide at the same rate—about four times more than women. In suicide, women choose less lethal means, such as pills, and are less likely to succeed; men choose more lethal means, such as firearms, and are more likely to succeed. Suicide appears in the leading causes of death for men but not for women (Table 2.1). Murder-suicides from mass shootings are perpetrated by men. Males succumb earlier to virtually all causes of mortality, with nondisease causes showing the greatest male–female differences.

Global Patterns The female advantage in LER holds globally. The graying world is a female world. The feminization of aging describes the global pattern of women outliving men and the steady increase of women swelling the ranks of the elderly. Women over age 65 account for 55 percent of the current elderly population globally, and of the oldest old, 80 years and older, 61 percent are female. Average survival rates of men are gradually increasing so that the sex balance of the oldest old is expected to widen even more by mid-century. For the first time in history people age 65 and older outnumber children under age five. The difference is smaller in the developing world, especially Africa and South Asia, but the pattern is intact (Table 2.3). The highest overall life expectancy is in Japan, where men can expect to live to age 81 and women to age 87. In less than a decade, many countries will have only five men to every ten women over the age of 80. In the developed world, the gender gap in mortality is declining slightly as men are gaining in life expectancy. A global caregiving crisis already exists, and women feel its brunt as caregivers to the aged at the same time they are raising children and

Gender Development: Biology, Sexuality, and Health  75 TABLE 2.3  Life

Expectancy and Projected Life Expectancy to 2050 by Sex and World Region 1990

2019

2050

Region

Males Females Both Males Females Both Males Females Both Sexes Sexes Sexes

World

61.9

66.5

64.2 70.2

75.0

72.6 74.8

79.4

77.1

Sub-Saharan Africa

47.7

51.1

49.4

59.3

62.9

61.1

66.3

70.8

68.5

Northern Africa and Western Asia

62.8

67.6

65.1

71.6

76.0

73.8

76.6

80.6

78.5

Central and Southern Asia

57.9

59.2

58.6

68.5

71.3

69.9

73.3

77.1

75.2

Eastern and 66.7 South-Eastern Asia

71.0

68.8

74.0

79.2

76.5

78.8

82.9

80.8

Latin America and 65.0 the Caribbean

71.3

68.1

72.3

78.7

75.5

78.5

83.2

80.9

Australia/New Zealand

73.6

79.7

76.7

81.3

85.2

83.2

85.4

88.7

87.1

Europe and 69.6 Northern America

77.3

73.5

75.7

81.7

78.7

80.9

85.5

83.2

49.8

52.5

51.1 63.3

67.0

65.2 69.5

74.2

71.8

Least Developed Countries

Source: World Population Prospects 2019: Highlights. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division. Adapted from Table 4, p. 29. New York: United Nations. https://population. un.org/wpp/Publications/Files/WPP2019 Highlights.pdf

working outside the home (Chapter 8). Aged women are often caring for their infirm spouses but also for their own parents. Poverty combines with son preference, sex-selective abortion, and neglect and abandonment of female infants and girls in many parts of the world. The average global sex ratio at birth (SRB)—the number of boys born for every 100 girls—is 105 and slightly favors males. This slight difference favoring males dramatically widens in Asia, especially in rural China and South Asia, with estimates that between 117 and 140 boys are born for every 100 girls. If a newborn is a girl, the couple tries again and again for a boy, continually increasing SRB until the desired number of sons is born (Chapter 6). Frequent pregnancy and lack of safe and legal abortion take another toll. Maternal mortality figures are hard to track, but an estimated one million annual maternal deaths occur worldwide; 99 percent of these are in developing countries, and most are preventable. The huge pressure to produce sons increases women’s risk for domestic violence and abuse (United Nations, 2019). Given this reality, the female advantage in mortality is astounding.

76  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

In Sickness and in Health: Gender and Morbidity Many data sources consistently report that women have higher morbidity rates than men. Women’s advantage in mortality may be offset by their disadvantage in morbidity, in part because living longer reflects increased chronic illness and disability. Men, however, are prone to physical and mental illnesses and injury categories in which women tend to be exempt.

Men and Morbidity Overall, men have fewer acute conditions but a higher prevalence of chronic conditions that are life-threatening and associated with long-term disability, such as heart disease, emphysema, and atherosclerosis. Males have the highest rates of cancer at the youngest and oldest ages and are almost twice as likely as females to die from it. They are also afflicted with a range of genetic disorders much less common in females, such as myopia, hemophilia, juvenile glaucoma, and progressive deafness. Unlike women, men cannot draw upon a spare copy of the X chromosome for protection. For mental illness, gender differences do not vary by rate, but they do vary by type. Men are more likely than women to suffer from personality disorders (antisocial behavior or narcissism). As a buffer against mental and physical illness for all people, it is better to be married Although poor relationship quality in marriage predicts negative mental health effects for both men and women, the marriage benefit still holds. For men, it is much better to be married. Single men have the highest mortality and morbidity rates for both physical and mental disorders. Never married, divorced, and single men have higher rates of mental illness when compared with all marital categories of women. Continuously married low-income men who are in high-conflict marriages still have a lower mortality risk compared with their single or divorced counterparts (Bulanda et al., 2016; Whisman et al., 2018). Since men are less likely to seek help for emotional distress—even compared to their already low rates of help-seeking for physical illness—rates of depression may be higher than reported (Smith et al., 2018b). Gender roles also put more men than women in occupations that are hazardous to their health, such as police and fire protection, the military, mining, and construction. Sports-related injuries are much higher for men than women and are associated with chronic illnesses and disabilities. Males in all age groups are more likely than females of comparable age to engage in behaviors that increase their risk of disease, injury, and death.

Women and Morbidity Morbidity gradually emerges in females, especially noticeable in preadolescence, where girls report higher levels of asthma, migraine headaches, and psychological and eating disorders compared to boys. Small gender differences in self-esteem favoring males show up during late adolescence and continue through the life course. As adults, women report more physical and emotional disorders and use health services more than men. Females of all ages report more daily and transient illnesses such as colds and headaches and a higher prevalence of nonfatal chronic conditions such as arthritis, anemia, and sinusitis. Most autoimmune disorders, such as juvenile diabetes and multiple sclerosis, are skewed

Gender Development: Biology, Sexuality, and Health  77

toward women. Employed women and those with less traditional gender role orientation and higher gender equity have better physical and psychological health. Type of work is correlated to health for both women and men. Professional women frequently describe their jobs as stressful, but lower-level workers are more likely to report stress-related illnesses such as insomnia and headaches. With the exception of obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD), women have double the risk carried by men for most anxiety disorders. This pattern is often traced to cultural expectations for women meeting everyone’s needs before their own. As moms, as wives, and as workers, women strive for perfection in carrying out these expectations. For example, mothers are responsible for overseeing their family’s health and struggle to fulfill nutrition and physical activity goals at odds with what their children may want (soda and pizza) and what they need (cauliflower and salad). Family relations are disrupted by not giving in or giving in. Mothers shoulder the emotional brunt of these daily household battles (Baiocchi-Wagner and Olson, 2016). Associated with superwoman syndrome, this pattern is more prevalent in African American women and associated with disabling symptoms that interfere with these very roles. African American girls are socialized for strength and resilience that celebrate and valorize their experiences (Chapter 3). Black women are at heightened risk for depression. At times they have to let themselves off the hook and not feel they are failing others by doing so. While Black women have the benefit of our experiences, the training to cope … with racism and sexism … and the wherewithal to expand our capacity to deal with (them), we are not invincible. (Boylorn, 2017:303)

Menstruation In many cultures, menstruation is viewed as a woman’s affliction, associated with pity, suspicion, scorn, and fear. Religious norms frequently isolate menstruating women who must undergo ritual purification at the conclusion of their periods. As late as the mid-twentieth century in the U.S., medicine considered this normal bodily process as an inherent pathology of women. Physicians dismissed women’s physical pain as inconsequential or fabricated. Myths of menstruation and symptoms women present because of it have not been dispelled by the health care system.

PMS Research on menstruation and premenstrual syndrome (PMS) challenges these myths. Many faces of both are defined by physicians, therapists, researchers, and women themselves. PMS is largely—but erroneously—equated with regular menstruation. Most women experience some physical discomfort and mood changes between two days and two weeks before menstruation. Physical discomfort can include breast tenderness, cramping, and acne; mood changes can include increased anxiety, irritability, and depression. As many as 75 percent of women in their twenties and thirties experience some premenstrual symptoms, but only 2–10 percent experience the often disabling symptoms, which may be defined as premenstrual syndrome. The typical bodily changes of menstruation are included in the symptoms of PMS. However,

78  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

a diagnosis of PMS, without treatment, includes symptoms that restrict a woman’s normal activities and well-being for several weeks a month. The severe form of PMS, Premenstrual Dysphoric Disorder (PMDD), is a serious, chronic physical and psychiatric disorder. A diagnosis of PMS is different from the normal bodily changes associated with menstruation. Research links PMS to fluctuations in hormones such as estrogen that influence anxiety, depression, and other behavioral changes. Changes in hormone concentrations before a woman’s period occur for all women, regardless of a woman’s symptoms. Women are more anxious or irritable because of the physical symptoms, not because of the hormones. PMDD may be an abnormal response to normal hormonal changes. These changes can cause a deficiency of mood-altering serotonin in the brain, in turn increasing anxiety or depression. The exact causes of PMDD are unknown, but risk factors include family history of the disease that may be traced to genetics, lifestyle choices such as cigarette smoking, and sociocultural forces such as lack of education and health knowledge. For PMS and PMDD, it is virtually impossible to separate the physical and psychiatric symptoms from the cultural expectations associated with menstruation. Researchers investigating biological and cultural factors, and medical practice guidelines incorporating both will be more successful in treating women with menstruation-related medical diagnoses. PMS is equivocal, but in affirming the condition, health care professionals help women who experience great physical and psychological difficulty with their periods. The feminine hygiene industry is partnering with patients and physicians to counter stereotypes about menstruation and PMS. They take advertisers to task about perpetuating stigma that menstruation is an embarrassment, and the best period is one that is ignored (Steimer, 2017). Prior to menstruation being reframed as non-shameful, and PMS being “legitimized,” countless women were turned away from a male-dominated health care system with vague, paternalistic assurances that it was all in their heads. On the other hand, PMS is so commonly misused in the media (a staple of comedy shows, for example) and equated with all menstruation, it is a convenient explanation and justification for women’s behavior. If women “have” PMS, it reinforces the myth that up to two weeks a month, adult women are physically and emotionally impaired. Their judgment, therefore, is suspect. Women can be in a double bind if they attribute changes in their behavior to PMS.

Menopause and Hormone Replacement Therapy (HRT) Misinformation and cultural stereotypes surround menopause, when menstruation ceases permanently. Several years before menopause, referred to as perimenopause, women may experience irregular menstrual cycles and report symptoms of irritability, depression, headaches, and hot flashes. Like menstruation, symptoms are usually not disabling. Severe distress accompanying menopause is experienced by about 10 percent of women. Research does not support that physical symptoms associated with menopause cause serious depression in women. Considering physical and psychological factors in combination, compared with puberty, menopause for most women is probably easier. Indeed, many women look forward to the time when menstruation ends. Medicine, however, clings to the notion that menopause is psychologically destructive because it seals off reproduction. Women prepare for motherhood and pregnancy their entire lives. Women may put off pregnancy but decide to freeze their eggs. Fertility clinics are surging Biological clocks have longer fuses in the twenty-first century (Myers, 2017; Waggoner, 2017; Bell, 2019). The reproductive cycle cannot be reversed, but women can alter themselves to

Gender Development: Biology, Sexuality, and Health  79

escape the fate of menopause. Gynecologists often agree with Robert Wilson’s (1966) influential book Feminine Forever, that menopause is a “disease of estrogen deficiency” treatable by hormone replacement therapy (HRT). In this view, menopausal women must finally confront the reality that fertility has ceased; menopause creates unstable, moody women who make poor choices in later life because of their estrogen starvation. Wilson’s assertions and inflammatory language about women have softened but have not disappeared. Estrogen fuels the “feminine engine” in maintaining body attractiveness and sexual desire in women (Haselton, 2019). The good news is that even if fertility ends with menopause, with HRT femininity does not.

HRT: Risks and Benefits For decades HRT was the taken-for-granted “remedy” for menopause, prescribed by gynecologists and accepted by women taking the most commonly prescribed estrogen-progestin HRT. Benefits were thought to include decreased chance of coronary heart disease (CHD), curbing bone loss (osteoporosis), and slowing memory loss and cognitive decline associated with Alzheimer’s disease. However, the Women’s Health Initiative (WHI) spearheaded the largest study ever conducted using a sample of 16,000 women followed up for over five years, which confirmed that estrogen-progestin HRT significantly increased the risks of invasive breast cancer, stroke, and blood clots. Perhaps more stunning, HRT raised, not lowered, CHD risk in healthy postmenopausal women. Because the harm was considered greater than the benefit, women were urged immediately to discuss HRT with their physicians. Potential harm to research subjects and getting information disseminated quickly was so imperative that the study was ended three years early. HRT was dramatically reduced. Later research altered the HRT picture. When accounting for age, perimenopausal women who start HRT may have a lower risk of heart disease than women who start it later. Another surprising finding is that a daily dose of estrogen may help control metastatic breast cancer or its recurrence in some patients. Led by the pharmaceutical industry, these revised findings were reported extensively in the media. Prescription of HRT again increased. Recent research alters HRT even further. In accounting for the benefits of HRT, two specific areas are clear: HRT remains the most effective remedy for those women seeking relief from menopausal symptoms, especially hot flashes; it reduces risk of osteoporosis and fractures that often harken pneumonia and earlier death for those in their 70s and 80s—including men. HRT also lowers risk for colon cancer and diabetes. On the jeopardy side, although not as dramatic as first reported, HRT increases risk of endometrial cancer, blood clots, strokes, and dementia. Both risks and benefits depend on the age of the woman and how long she has been on HRT. Taken together, the practice guidelines suggest that HRT for individual women needs to be carefully evaluated and that the lowest effective dose is recommended for only as long as necessary (Lobo, 2013; Harper-Harrison and Shanahan, 2019; Martin and Barbieri, 2019). As research continues to uncover new evidence, the confusion and uncertainty of the risk–benefit debate of HRT for postmenopausal women is far from resolved.

Critique The HRT debate has no definitive medical outcome to apply to most women. HRT therapy will be a reasoned choice for women in consultation with their physicians. This decision, however, is swayed when HRT plays on the fears of aging women in a youth worshipping society. As mezzo-level social constructionists assert, HRT also reinforces cultural views of menopause as a disease that produces psychologically unstable women. The cultural refusal

80  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

to accept the realities of aging, coupled with the gender stereotypes of women who are revered if they are young and fertile, compromises the health of millions of women. Given the choice, the majority of women would never want a period. New birth control pills with synthetic hormones can suppress a woman’s period for months, a preferred option for women in elite sports such as figure skating and gymnastics. Advances in hormone therapy may allow periods to cease permanently. The long-term effects of these powerful hormone-based birth control pills are unknown for younger women who opt out of menstruation for a lengthy amount of time. Regardless of whether women are pre- or postmenopausal, their cycles of life are defined as disease-producing processes that must be medicalized, medicated, and controlled. If science is doing its job, it will report findings that contradict previous findings. It is also clear from the HRT and CHD stories that science and medicine are not immune to gender bias. Feminist health professionals call for viewing menopause as a normal developmental process and for providing women of all ages with accurate information to make educated choices concerning risks, benefits, and treatment.

Body Studies HRT and sexual scripts are two important prongs linked to the female disadvantage in morbidity. Another prong is that they prime the attractiveness messages women hear about bodies their entire lives. Sociological interest in body studies emerged out of our discipline’s long-standing research tradition in work and occupations (Shilling, 2007, 2011). Body studies in a sociological context include cultural meanings attached to bodies and to the way that bodies shape and are shaped by society. Bodies are manipulated, regulated and controlled in gendered ways that have huge health consequences for both females and males. Body work describes occupations that include ballet dancing, gymnastics, acting, professional sports, modeling, broadcast journalists, hotel cleaning, and physical labor in construction, to name a few. To maintain their livelihood, workers in these body occupations must shape their bodies in rigid ways. All societies issue commands for appearance norms associated with social and economic success or liability. Although both men and women succumb to these commands, women experience more detrimental physical and mental health effects. Teen girls are especially vulnerable to these messages, often succumbing to binge drinking and cigarette smoking to cope with body image issues. Their identity and self-image are compromised when their bodies cannot live up to beauty standards. Sexual well-being is also threatened (Gillen and Markey, 2018; Jones et al., 2018a). Another example of the power of this standard is that women experiencing hair loss through chemotherapy focus on controlling their appearance to meet “cultural norms of gender, femininity, beauty, normality and health” (Dua, 2011). Hair loss violates an appearance norm that takes a psychological toll on many women. All women, however, fall prey to attractiveness norms related to weight. Bridal dresses are typically smaller than average sizes of the brides who will wear them. Plus-size gowns are also more expensive. Shopping for a wedding gown, a young Latina woman, was directed to “plus-size” dresses. As she recalls I also didn’t really like the stigma of being a “plus-size” bride. I have never been a plus size in my life so I didn’t want to start having that label just because of my wedding day. (Bishop et al., 2018:195–196) She vowed to lose weight to fit into a smaller size gown.

Gender Development: Biology, Sexuality, and Health  81

Eating Disorders As the Duchess of Windsor said in the 1930s, “You can never be too rich or too thin.” Such beliefs translate to eating disorders, especially anorexia nervosa, a psychiatric disorder of self-induced severe weight loss primarily in young women. A variant is bulimia, which alternates binge eating and purging. Incidence rates of these “fear of fat” diseases have steadily increased since the 1950s. Today, of the 30 million people with anorexia or bulimia, 85–90 percent are female. Body dissatisfaction is the highest risk factor for developing anorexia. Girls worry about attractiveness at puberty at the same time they gain an average of 20–25 pounds. African American and Latino girls and women have higher rates of obesity than Asian or white women. African American and Asian women, however, are more satisfied with their body weight, and Latino women are less satisfied than white women. Regardless of satisfaction levels, increases in eating disorders with onset in adolescence are reported for females of all racial groups. Self-esteem is fragile during adolescence for girls of all races, and weight issues contribute to their insecurity. Males are not immune to weight obsession. Increasing objectification of the male body in media, combined with excessive competitiveness in sports are key factors in the rapid increase of eating disorders in males, up 50 percent from just a decade ago. The largest increase is among adolescents. Eating disorders for males are associated with abuse of anabolic steroids, and whereas adolescent girls diet for thinness, boys diet to obtain a muscular body image, often to gain weight. As many as 90 percent of teen boys exercise in order to “bulk up” (Smith, 2019a). As for women, men’s psychological well-being is linked to body image messages about masculinity. Mortality rates from eating disorders are associated with organ failure, diabetes, malnutrition, and suicide. Because of co-morbidity it is difficult to determine one cause of death. However, we can say that anorexia has the highest mortality rate of any psychiatric disorder, with over two-thirds of sufferers untreated. Half of females with eating disorders who die commit suicide. Since men are less likely to seek help for both physical and emotional illnesses, the prognosis is worse. Cultural beliefs significantly influence the development of eating disorders. Anorexia is described as a culture-bound syndrome first associated with norms of dieting and thinness ideals in American society. The power of the Western media has extended these norms to other societies. A famous study in Fiji, for example, profiled a culture where “big was beautiful” for girls. Television came to Fiji in 1995, and within three years, a teen’s risk for eating disorders doubled and there was a fivefold increase of vomiting for weight loss (Goodman, 1999). Although other cultures had television before Fiji, Western media-inspired beauty ideals permeated many non-Western cultures. A global surge in eating disorders is also linked to increased cigarette smoking by girls who are concerned about weight gain. Female models and movie stars have gotten progressively thinner. At size 14, today Marilyn Monroe would not easily find a job in movies. Whereas male celebrities have gotten more muscular, female beauty contestants average 20 percent lower than the ideal weight. Chronic dieting and excessive exercise are reinforced by other messages about obesity in the United States. The messages are paradoxical—Americans are obsessed with thinness at the same time as a ravaging obesity epidemic. The health and diet industries bolster these messages. From a conflict theory perspective, obesity requires medical intervention from a powerful health industry. Medicalization, a process that legitimizes medical control over

82  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

parts of a person’s life, increases. Combined with cosmetic surgery and unhealthy body weight norms, the social pressure for thinness is supported by billion-dollar advertising for supplements and for-profit health care, such as plastic and bariatric surgery. Doctors may overlook other serious symptoms when they are confronted with an obese patient. That patient is likely to be female. Motivating female patients to lose weight using “tough love” can be a humiliating and counterproductive “fat shaming” strategy (Lester, 2019; Magane, 2019; Sackett and Dajani, 2019). Medicine sustains a culturally accepted belief that women’s bodies—and increasingly men’s bodies—are unacceptable as they are.

LGBTQ Morbidity Sexual minorities experience the highest morbidity rates compared to their heterosexual and cisgender counterparts. Health disparities for mental illness and depression place those in the LGBTQ ranks at higher risk for substance abuse disorder, physical violence and suicide ideation. Adverse experiences worsens self-esteem. Poor physical and mental health outcomes are predicted by trauma and the shaming they internalize (Bridge et al., 2019; Schulman and Erickson, 2019; Scheer et al., 2019). Those who identify as female are at heightened risk compared to those who identify as male. Within this group, bisexual women have worse mental health outcomes than, for example, lesbians and gay men. They experience a higher level of discrimination and daily microaggression that intensify negative morbidity indicators that, as we have seen, apply to most women (Craney et al., 2018; Salim, 2019). Health disparities of female-identified sexual minorities also show up in the barriers they experience in reproductive and maternal health care (Gregg, 2018; Wingo et al., 2018). Physicians and health care providers can internalize stereotypes about LGBTQ health that carry over to medical treatment. Another likely explanation, I believe, is that the care community lacks the training and understanding to effectively deal with LGBTQ needs. They want the best outcomes for all patients. However, they are hampered by outmoded medical regimens attached to essentialist beliefs about sex and gender.

Advocacy The importance of addressing disparities in LGBTQ morbidity is gaining traction in the health care community. For LGBTQ youth, mental health outcomes are improved with interventions in schools and local communities that address bullying, sexism, and discrimination. All youths benefit when these problems are tackled. With the upsurge of public attention, continuing education for psychiatrists, psychologists, and social workers to address LGBTQ mental health issues rapid is escalating (Safa et al., 2019). Decreases in morbidity are associated with better understanding of how sexual expression and personal identity unfold in sexual minority clients. Support from the LGBTQ community enhances resilience that reverberates to psychological well-being (Painter et al., 2018; Rubinsky and Cooke-Jackson, 2018; Watson et al., 2018). The LGBTQ and health care communities are partnering to provide best practices for communication and counseling for sexual minorities. It is unclear if the Trump Administration’s recent move to redefine gender according to sex organs at birth will withstand widespread public condemnation. People who do not identify with a binary gender category—literally the entire LGBTQ community—are at further legal, emotional, and social risk for not complying.

Gender Development: Biology, Sexuality, and Health  83

Gendered Health Risks: Selected Causes The gender gap in mortality and morbidity has increased in some areas and decreased in others. Intersectionality explains some of this gap. LGBTQ people have higher risk than heterosexual and cisgender people in some areas, and less in others. Women of color are more at risk for selected causes than are men of color. That being said, for selected causes of death and illness reviewed here, gender is a better predictor for health and well-being than is race or ethnicity.

HIV/AIDS In the 1980s, acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) burst into public consciousness with reports of its rapid onset, high contagion, and certain death. It emerged in Africa and then in Europe and the U.S. The global AIDS pandemic spread to South America and Asia. A decade later, with no cure in sight, AIDS focused on the high mortality rate of men. In the United States in 1992, it was the leading cause of death of men between the ages of 25 and 44, with the highest percentage among men having sex with men (MSM). The fear of this deadly disease spurred global initiatives to combat AIDS through drugs and lifestyle changes. The gay community was at the forefront of efforts to stem its spread. Since the 1990s, in the United States and the developed world, major advances in antiretroviral (ART) treatment and large-scale education efforts about sexual behaviors to prevent infection refocused AIDS mortality to HIV (human immunodeficiency virus) morbidity. Globally about 40 million people are HIV infected, with over half living in Africa. The AIDS death sentence has been commuted to a life sentence for people living with HIV who have access to ART treatment. The 1.1 million HIV-infected people in the United States are certainly more likely to have that access compared to their counterparts in the developing world. In the U.S. the incidence rate of HIV began declining in the late 1990s, and by 2013 had leveled off and stabilized. It is the highly gendered pattern of HIV that explains how its intersectional risks by race, SES, sexuality, and substance abuse unfold.

Men and HIV In the U.S., males account for three-fourths of adults and adolescents living with HIV (NCHS, 2019). Over 80 percent of new HIV diagnoses are among men, largely MSM (Figure 2.2). This translates to an estimated 2 percent of the population, but 66 percent of new annual HIV infections. These men are less likely than women to disclose their HIV diagnosis to friends, family or other MSM. Masculinity norms intrude and social support is lost at the time it is most needed and positive quality of life outcomes related to health are severely reduced (Laschober et al., 2019). The cycle of low support, fear of stigma and rejection, and unhealthy coping strategies worsens their diagnosis. Both the causes and effects of HIV are associated with excessive alcohol consumption, needle sharing, often with heroin, and use of crack cocaine, methamphetamines, and inhalants. Compared to women, HIV rises sharply for men who engage in riskier sexual behavior because of substance abuse. Young African American men report a higher number of sex partners than African American women and have more negative attitudes about HIV testing than women. Often overlooked are how regional HIV patterns are linked to race. Black MSM living in the South

84  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

have the highest rates of HIV in the U.S. (Avert, 2019b; Carter and Flores, 2019; Moore and Belgrave, 2019). Regardless of race, however, college education reduces the risk of MSM acquiring HIV and predicts better quality of life outcomes if they do become infected. College educated gay and bisexual men are likely to understand how HIV is transmitted and use preventive measures when they have sex. They are also likely to be employed, have health insurance, and seek medical treatment if (and when) symptoms appear (Rzeszute, 2018). Middle class MSM are not immune to harmful masculinity norms related to sex and stigma all men confront, but their education and income offer some protective buffers from HIV (Chapter 9).

Women and HIV Women account for half of the worldwide HIV-infected population, and about 25 percent of new HIV infections in the United States. Cisgender heterosexual women in urban areas make up nearly one-third of all HIV-positive patients. The HIV burden, however, falls disproportionately on women of color (Almirol et al., 2018; Buckley and Awais, 2019). They account for two-thirds of new infections, with the large majority infected through heterosexual contact (Figure 2.2). About two-thirds of HIV-infected women are African American and 10 percent are Latinas. It is the leading cause of death for African American women between the ages of 25 and 34. The good news is that HIV diagnoses are down for women of color in these age groups, and it has stabilized for white women (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2019). But other intersectional risks continue to magnify

Black/African American, Male-to-Male Sexual Contact Hispanic/Latino, Male-to-Male Sexual Contact White, Male-to-Male Sexual Contact Black/African American Women, Heterosexual Contact Black/African American Men, 1,678 Heterosexual Contact Hispanic Women/Latinas, 1,109 Heterosexual Contact White Women, 999 Heterosexual Contact 0

9,499 7,543 6,423 3,768

2,000

4,000

Blacks/African Americans

6,000

8,000

10,000

Other Races/Ethnicities

FIGURE 2.2  New HIV Diagnoses for Most Affected Subpopulations by Gender, Race, and Sexual Contact, 2018

Source: “Diagnoses of HIV Infection in the United States and Dependent Areas.” Data presented for diagnoses of HIV infection reported to CDC through June 2019. HIV Surveillance Report, 2019. Atlanta: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/group/racialethnic/africanamericans/index.htm

Gender Development: Biology, Sexuality, and Health  85

HIV infections for women. The HIV incidence rate is declining at a slower rate in innercity neighborhoods among poor African American and Latino populations. In rural areas, lack of access to health care, and few sexuality classes in schools for adolescents increase HIV risk. Classes that exist are often abstinence based and do not provide meaningful knowledge about HIV (Chapter 11). Poor men and women living in the South account for a substantial proportion of new cases, the largest increases among women. Many women are unaware they are HIV infected until it reaches a more lethal stage. Once detected, stigma increases reluctance to seek help. Taking all these factors into consideration, poor, heterosexual, minority women are at greatest risk for HIV in the United States. Decades of education, prevention, and intervention show more success for gay men, but these trends tend to bypass many women.

Global Focus: Women and HIV in the Developing World Women globally are infected with HIV at faster rates than men, with the number of annual cases for women now equaling or exceeding those for men in the developing world. Women account for over half of HIV-infected people globally and girls and young women, aged 10–24, are twice as likely to acquire it as their male counterparts. More than half of HIV-infected women live in sub-Saharan Africa. Most are infected through heterosexual contact with a spouse or partner (Leung et al., 2019). Although women in the developing world with HIV are living longer, the diagnosis is still likely to be a death sentence, with life expectancy decreased by 10 to 20 years. Gender patterns on the spread of HIV have transformed it into a women’s and “family” disease; women can transmit HIV to their unborn children during pregnancy and childbirth. One of the most disheartening HIV transmission routes is through breastfeeding, a finding that sent shockwaves to the health care community that was recovering from scandals involving encouraging women to abandon breastfeeding for “modern formula.” If a pregnant woman is known to be HIV infected, she can receive HIV medicines during pregnancy to prevent transmission or babies can receive medicines four to six weeks after birth to reduce the probability of infection. These treatments are highly successful, but women must know they are HIV infected, must have access to the medicines, and must be counseled to not breastfeed their newborns. HIV is the leading cause of death among women of reproductive age in developing regions. Poverty-stricken young girls are vulnerable in cultures where “sugar daddy transactional sex” is normative. Believing that adolescent or younger girls are not likely to be HIV infected, older men seek them as partners. Stigma is reduced since the girls are not viewed as prostitutes, often referred to as “girlfriends,” but they receive material support from the men. They may be abandoned if they become HIV infected by these very men. Women’s lack of empowerment, differential access to services, inability to pay for the huge costs of ART, and victimization due to sexual violence and child marriage increase women’s HIV vulnerability. Countries with the least gender equality have the highest rates of HIV infections overall (Avert, 2019a; UNAIDS, 2019). The death rate from HIV transitioning to full blown AIDS is so alarming that it is linked to the drop in LER after its the two-century increase in life expectancy worldwide. Women’s biological chromosomal advantage does not protect them from a genital track that fuels HIV acquisition at twice the rate of men (Scully, 2018). Because women are infected at higher rates than men, HIV may be the biggest threat to their LER advantage.

86  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

Drugs and Alcohol Most men and women use alcohol and other drugs in responsible, culturally acceptable ways. However, there are marked gender differences relating to these usages. Men engage in more illicit drug use than women and perceive lower health and social risks when using them. Although the gender gap in substance abuse points to its greater prevalence for men, adverse health effects from substance abuse—psychological and medical—are often more severe in women (McHugh et al., 2018:12; Hatchel and Armstrong, 2019). These effects are showing up more frequently for alcohol use disorder (AUD). Compared to women, half as many women report that they do not drink alcohol. More men than women drink excessively, binge drink, and adopt riskier behaviors relative to safety when drinking. About 15–17 percent of men (compared to 5–8 percent of women) meet criteria of alcohol AUD. Gender norms for men and women do not condone AUD, but masculinity norms plainly support high consumption of alcohol by men in recreational settings. AUD looms for men, however, when alcohol is used to cope with stress. Whether defined as AUD or not, the overconsumption of alcohol is linked to suicide rate for men (Chapter 9). Since 2000 the gender gap in drinking shows consistent narrowing. High-risk drinking among women increased 60 percent, and their AUD increased 84 percent (Grant et al., 2017). Women metabolize alcohol differently from men. When men and women drink equal amounts, women have higher blood alcohol levels with effects that show up more quickly and last longer. Estimates are that 10–12 percent of pregnant women drink alcohol, and 4 percent report binge drinking. Conservative estimates suggest that alcohol consumption by pregnant women results in 1.1 to 5 percent of children diagnosed with fetal alcohol spectrum disorders (FASD), linked to congenital heart defects, neurological damage, developmental disability, and low birth weight of infants, all of which impair health over a lifetime. These numbers are staggering. With better measures, FASD is far more prevalent than previously thought (May et al. 2018; Gunter, 2019). Even if it does not reach AUD, alcohol consumption is major factor in rape, domestic violence, and spouse abuse, with homicide a too-frequent outcome. If both men and women are drinking when violence against women occurs, it is difficult to convict the male perpetrator (Chapter 14).

Study Drugs and Opioids In coping with stress, men are more likely to turn to alcohol, illegal drugs and illicit use of prescription stimulants. Men have higher rates than women of non-prescribed meds for pain and much higher illicit use of “study drugs” such as Adderall. Whether prescribed attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) or not, for example, white men attending elite, selective universities are overrepresented in using so-called cognitive enhancing drugs. The acceptability and prevalence of study drugs justify their usage, many believing it to be a lesser form of cheating (Peralta et al., 2016; Prosek et al., 2018; Aikins, 2019). If they cannot get a study drug prescribed, students know where to find it and whom to buy it from on campus. Like the U.S., this pattern is found on college campuses in rich Western and East Asian Nations (Lucke et al., 2018; Song et al., 2018). Despite some moral ambivalence, comments by two male students demonstrate acceptability of study drugs regardless of how they are obtained (Petersen et al., 2015:204, 205). I mean, to be honest though, it’s not like I make up the symptoms, it’s just that the symptoms are so broad that anybody fits into it, so like, I sometimes have trouble focusing, okay, who doesn’t?

Gender Development: Biology, Sexuality, and Health  87

Sometimes it even feels irresponsible to not take a stimulant, I think like, this would be foolish with what’s at stake. (Emphasis added) Women turn to prescription drugs that are “legitimately” prescribed. Prevalence rates for over-the-counter and prescription drugs are double for 18- to 64-year-old women. After age 65, men and women reach parity in their use of prescription drugs, at three or more times per month. Compared to men, women are almost twice as likely to receive a narcotic or antianxiety drug for a psychological problem, receive opioid analgesics for pain and depression, and are twice as likely to abuse or become addicted to them. These prescriptions are often at the heart of the opioid crisis for women. Women report higher prevalence of pain for cancer, lumbar stenosis and other causes of back pain, migraine headaches, and post-surgical pain and are prescribed higher levels of opioids than men. Men are more likely to die from overdose compared to women, but opioid overdoses have greatly increased for women compared to men (Serdarevic et al., 2017; Adogwa et al., 2019). Opioid crisis headlines sensationalize illegal opioid use and death rates for overdoses. Gender differences, however, are neglected in explaining these and other risk factors. Public outcry over the raging opioid crisis prompted a “Fast-Track Action Committee” roadmap to respond to the crisis at the federal level. The White House National Science and Technology Council report notes concerns about the maternal and neonatal exposure to opioids, but overlooks significant, increasing data on sex and gender differences in opioid use that have profound implications for gender-based prevention and treatment (Mazure and Fiellin, 2018; Becker and Mazure, 2019). An action plan is demanded, but if gender issues are not accounted for, any plan will be compromised.

Smoking Smoking continues to decline for Americans, recently hitting a 75-year low. Women have more difficulty achieving smoking cessation, so this decline is greater for men (Stevens et al., 2019). Women’s concern for weight gain plays an important role in the onset of smoking, especially among teen girls, and is an obstacle to smoking cessation. Body image satisfaction is not a significant predictor for cigarette smoking among teen boys (Jones et al., 2018; Thomas et al., 2018). The good news is that when women’s weight issues are addressed therapeutically, smoking cessation is more successful. Gender differences in e-cigarettes are less clear to date. Adolescents—both boys and girls—consider flavor as the most important factor for trying e-cigarettes, followed by nicotine content. Vaping initiates transition to cigarette smoking for males who never smoked, but not for females who never smoked; there are no gender differences in using e-cigarettes as a path to quit smoking regular cigarettes (Zare et al., 2018; Audrain-McGovern et al., 2019). As the negative health consequences of vaping gain attention, the public is calling for regulation of e-cigarettes similar to that for tobacco. Perhaps because women vape somewhat less than men, women support this regulation more than men (Jongenelis, et al., 2019; Lee and Oh, 2019; Saad, 2019). Although gender differences in tobacco use among adolescents are almost at parity, adolescent smoking has spiked. CDC blames the spike in all tobacco use on vaping, especially flavored e-cigarettes (LaVito, 2019). Like tobacco use, gender differences in marijuana use are narrowing. Regardless of gender, marijuana smoking is now as prevalent as cigarette (tobacco) smoking for a cross section of the population who smoke. It is unclear if vaping with cannabis will decrease tobacco

88  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

use or if rising deaths associated with it will increase rates of marijuana use. Similar rates of smoking—whether cigarettes, vaping, or marijuana, do not translate to similar health consequences for males and females. Gender differences for all types of smoking may be declining, but the gender gap in rates of lung cancer and heart disease may also narrow. Women’s mortality from these leading causes of death may approach that of men.

COVID-19 Identified in 2019 by the World Health Organization (WHO), a coronavirus accordingly named COVID-19, reverberated dangerously across the globe. By early 2020 COVID-19 unfurled swiftly as the most menacing pandemic in a century, impacting the health and well-being of people in all areas of the globe and unleashing devastating, long-lasting economic consequences. The virus entered the Top 10 leading cause of death list by midsummer, and is on track to rank third by 2021. Other demographic data are emerging. We know most about age and vulnerability to the virus. This coronavirus strain targets the elderly, particularly those in their 80s who have other age-related health risks such as heart disease and diabetes that make the virus more deadly. Elderly in long-term care are the most vulnerable to COVID-19 mortality. However, younger people in their 20s, 30s, and 40s are the growing percentage of new cases. In Arizona half of all cases are in this younger age group. In Florida the median age of new cases dropped from 65 to 35 (Bosman and Mervosh, 2020). Many new cases are traced to the reopening of bars and restaurants where face masks and social distancing are recommended but not enforced. Preliminary data suggest that most of these younger people are male.

Gender and the Pandemic What are the gender implications of COVID-19? As sex-differentiated data become available from large samples, patterns that have emerged so far fit with known sex and gender patterns of mortality and morbidity. COVID-19 is a global mankiller. Depending on the nation, global patterns show that male mortality is between 10 percent, and frighteningly, 90 percent higher than for women. Data from China and Italy, places hard hit early by COVID-19, indicate that men make up more than half the cases and are significantly more likely than women to die of it (Begley, 2020; Rabin, 2020; Reeves and Ford, 2020). Similar patterns are unfolding in the United States. To date, men are more at risk for mortality due to the virus, but women’s roles and overall gender inequities increase their risks for contracting it. Remember the pattern: women have higher morbidity but may ride out and survive diseases—such as COVID-19—to which men succumb. Remember the explanation: biological, genetic, and sex-based immunological factors (female advantage of XX chromosomes) and cultural factors are acted out in highly gendered ways. Men risk contracting COVID-19 in ways different than women. Compared to women, males smoke, drink, and consume illicit drugs at higher rates, engage in riskier behavior and sexual practices, and are less likely to seek preventive health care. Men go to bars more and practice less social distancing when they are there. Unless mandated, males are much less likely to wear masks than females. Many men believe wearing a mask is a sign of weakness (Capraro and Barcelo, 2020). Despite women’s more “responsible” behavior related to COVID-19 compared to men’s behavior, women’s roles increase their jeopardy for contracting the virus. Regardless of the current status of COVID-19 in our communities “social distancing” is the new normal and will remain on our radar for the foreseeable future. Social distancing is practiced in gendered ways. The large majority of health care providers, teachers, and day

Gender Development: Biology, Sexuality, and Health  89

care workers are women. Women are caregivers in their families and for elders. Schools throughout the U.S. reopened too quickly and closed just as quickly. Teachers are infected and not replaced. Overseen by mothers, virtual leaning from home is the educational norm. In multiple settings, these roles put women in close physical contact with others on an ongoing basis, increasing their exposure to the virus. At its outbreak, protective gear for all workers was in short supply. Supplies for informal caregivers in the home or other settings were never a priority. They were nonexistent for these caregivers at the height of the pandemic. Social distancing must be assessed according to gender norms that put women on the front lines in carrying out ever-demanding roles during the pandemic. COVID-19 sparked the largest global economic crisis since the Great Depression. Women are more likely than men to say they are worried about its negative fallout. The low-wage sectors of the service industry is the port where women’s workers largely dock (Chapter 10). Women express more concern than men for the virus’ repercussions from income loss, inability to afford testing, and increased exposure to the virus because they cannot afford to take time off work, particularly in jobs disallowing work from home. Over half of all women workers are benefit ineligible. If they are fortunate to have benefits such as health insurance, they risk losing it as workplaces shut down. Both men and women with children worry about income and missing work, compared to those without children. Since family caregivers are women, they express greater anxiety overall (Frederiksen et al., 2020). Compared to other economic downturns fueled by health crises, COVID-19 triggered sudden, long-term widespread closures to contain its spread. Deemed as non-essential businesses, bars and restaurants, retail stores, hair salons, and establishments that employ tip-dependent workers, who are disproportionately women, led the closures. Like the health burden, the economic burden of the disease also disproportionally falls on women. Single-parent women facing closed schools without a reopening date must balance earning a living with caring for their children. As paychecks disappear, fragile mental health reserves weaken for everyone, with poor women in the most vulnerable ranks. During the pandemic and recession that followed, long-standing gender inequity in paid and unpaid work translates to women being relegated to a path fraught with hazardous gendered economic and health consequences (Chapter 10).

Race, Gender, and COVID-19 From the outset of the pandemic, the race–gender intersection was also predictable. For all races and locales, African American communities are hardest hit by the virus. Black Americans are dying at three times the rate of white Americans. In Chicago and Louisiana blacks make up about one-third of the population but comprise 70 percent of fatalities from the virus. Michigan reports that blacks account for 40 percent of COVID-19 deaths although they represent only 14 percent of the population. More black men in the U.S. have died due to the virus than any other racial or gender group (Pilkington, 2020; Yancy, 2020). While black men in the U.S. are suffering more fatalities, the deadly combination of racism, sexism, and structural inequality put black women and women of color at risk for the worst of the pandemic’s economic burdens. Over half of black women are in underpaid but essential positions, such as caregivers to the elderly, bus drivers, and grocery clerks. Black women and Latinas disproportionately work in unsafe settings, such as meat packing plants and nursing homes surging with COVID-19. Women of color are even less likely than women overall to have health insurance, and are less likely to seek medical care or testing when the virus is suspected. Gender has been on the back burner in discussions about unequal COVID-19 outcomes. Its impact on women of color, accounting for the overlapping oppressions they face,

90  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

however, is gradually unfolding. The fundamental factor is that, compared with white women, women of color face untenable choices related to working or getting sick (Lindsey, 2020; Wingfield, 2020). Indeed, the notion of “choice” may not be the correct term. To date, there is none.

Pandemic in a Pandemic In the midst of the COVID-19 already roiling in black communities, the murder of George Floyd, an African American man, was videoed while he was in the hands of the police. Coupled with multiple incidents documenting police brutality spanning decades, Floyd’s death triggered massive protests in the U.S. that spread globally also reigniting the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement. Protests continued for months in many cities fueled by police shootings of black men, notably Jacob Blake, and inciting violence by heavily armed counter protesters. These protests uncovered a second pandemic, largely hidden from public consciousness. This is the ongoing pandemic of racial disparities in health that include the consequences of systemic racism resulting in starkly disproportional rates of intimidation, violence and deaths of black and Latino males during policing. The relationship between physical and mental health, and race, gender, and criminal justice is well documented (Chapter 14). Black men (64 percent), for example, are twice as likely as black women (32 percent) to say they have been “unfairly stopped by police.” Black women are more likely than white women or Latinas to say they “had this experience” (Parker et al., 2020). The havoc of fear associated with violent incidents continues throughout a lifetime. Generations of black children are socialized to expect intimidation and learn how to deal with it (Chapter 3). It can be akin to the PTSD experienced by soldiers that may erupt decades after combat (Chapter 9). Spotlighting what divides us by gender and race is more newsworthy than what brings us together. At the height of COVID-19 in the Summer of 2020, the protests were remarkable for the demographic spectrum of protesters, that they were sustained for long periods, and that they were supported by the larger public. Conversations about health, violence, and race emerged. Americans came together to protest systemic racism, calling for reform of a justice system that unfairly targets black men. With a few exceptions, this consensus was suggested by the range of people drawn to the protest movements (Barroso and Minkin, 2020; Hamel et al., 2020; Mitchell et al., 2020; Parker,et al., 2020). • •

• • •

Men and women make up about half of those who attend a protest rally focusing on race, and they do not differ appreciably from the adult population by income or education. Majorities across all racial and ethnic groups, about two-thirds of the American public, express support of protests against police violence and of the reemerged BLM movement. An astonishing 1 in 10 says s/he has participated in the protests in some way. People under 30, many in high school and college, comprise about 40 percent of protesters. Majorities of Americans say news coverage of protests has been good and that Trump’s public message is wrong. Black and white adults do not appreciably differ in their beliefs about the motivations of the protesters. It is the stark political gap that divides the public. About 80 percent of Democrats say Trump has made race relations worse and that the protests address long-standing concerns about the treatment of black people. About 80 percent of Republicans believe the protests are sites for some to purposely engage in criminal behavior.

While the continuing partisan divide is disheartening, support for the protests reveals remarkable consensus of Americans often divided by race, gender, and SES. There is optimism that

Gender Development: Biology, Sexuality, and Health  91

the dire health patterns of the “second pandemic” targeting men of color in the criminal justice system can finally be meaningfully addressed.

Critique During these perilous times, a sociological truism that “we are all in this together” reverberates throughout the media. I was reminded in a Zoom meeting with sociological colleagues on self-care during the pandemic that “physical distancing”—rather than “social distancing”— is the better descriptor for this new normal. Technology is a blessing. We are strengthened by the social contract underlying this message. The sociological story of COVID-19 is still being written. We need to be mindful of the assumptions we make with the limited data we have. As this chapter documents, however, it can be said that the probable gender effects of the virus were already written. “Vulnerability to infection, exposure to pathogens, and treatment received” differ between men and women (Wenham et al., 2020). Exposure to pathogens that include the disproportionate violence leveled at men of color in policing and the criminal justice system is an often overlooked example of gendered racism. Both pandemics speak loudly to lethal consequences driven by ongoing intersectional risks primed by race, gender, SES, and sexuality. The well-known gendered and intersectional patterns reviewed here must be accounted for at all levels of decision-making to curtail mortality and morbidity associated with both the COVID-19 pandemic and the pandemic of violence surrounding policing that put everyone in jeopardy.

EXPLAINING GENDERED HEALTH TRENDS Current patterns of mortality and morbidity in physical and emotional health, show male– female differences as converging (alcohol, smoking, sexuality), widening (suicide, violence) or unchanged (leading causes of death). These trends are also shaped by intersectionality, but as COVID-19 further indicates, the gender patterns still hold. It is the connection between biology and culture—and sex and gender—that explain these trends. Sex and gender are blurry, overlapping terms. Because of binary cautions, how they are used is often contentious (Chapter 1). That being said, in explaining health and illness it is helpful to discuss biological factors as male and female sex differences (or similarities), and to discuss cultural factors as masculine and feminine gender differences (or similarities).

Sex and Gender, Biology and Culture To recap, advantages of females tracked to biology include the extra X chromosome that makes women resilient, offering them increased stamina in health crises. Women must bear and nurse children, often under adverse conditions in unhealthy and unsafe environments. Women can summon reserves of strength to ensure they and their children can survive in conditions of deprivation. Women may have higher morbidity rates, but they are more likely to recover from the same sicknesses that kill or disable men. Cultural factors include significant gender differences favoring women in health knowledge particularly related to sexuality and reproduction. Young girls are taught to be sensitive to and aware of bodily changes. Gender socialization encourages girls to express health concerns to family and friends and seek available health resources. For cancer prevention and

92  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

treatment, women are more likely than men to take advantage of new directions in medicine and self-care. This leads to earlier diagnosis, more treatable stages, and translates to lower mortality rates for breast and ovarian cancer. Gender role flexibility allows women to be less constrained than men in seeking help for illness and psychological distress. They maintain a larger social support network and have higher degrees of connectedness, calling on others for help in stressful times; men do not (Chapter 9). To the benefit of husbands, wives usually keep up social ties that buffer psychological distress in times of crisis. Widowers are more vulnerable than widows for depression and suicide. Along with violence, this is the alarming, widening gender gap harmful to men.

Again, Masculinity Research is convincing that inflexible and toxic masculinity norms prominently explain why men’s health and well-being are compromised. Lack of gender role flexibility for men is lethal. Difficulties of emotional expression, self-stigma, and policing of masculinity by men and boys predict less willingness to seek help (Berke et al., 2018). The usual suspect—fear of femininity—cements a man’s resolve to “go it alone.” However, research showing the perils of masculinity has cascaded, making its way into media and wider audiences. Workplaces are tailoring employee assistance programs for men who confront stressful hyper-competitive business settings daily. Happy (less stressed) employees are good for the bottom line (Chapter 10). Therapists working with positive masculinity show promising ways of overcoming barriers to help-seeking. Men learn skills in emotional regulation: restricting unproductive emotions (outbursts of anger, profanity, physical intimidation and fights) and broadening productive emotions (mindfulness, listening without interruption) (Seidler et al., 2016; Cole et al., 2019; Kaya et al., 2019). For physical health, when men are socialized to believe that seeking help is a sign of masculine weakness, they may not get treatment for life-threatening diseases in time (Chapter 9). For women these very patterns do contribute to higher treatment rates but in turn bolster the claim that women are sicker, weaker, and less emotionally strong than men. Men would do well to adopt the health-beneficial behavior of women. Unlike other gender trends, gender parity in mortality and morbidity does not offer beneficial health outcome for women. As women increasingly adopt the health-aversive behaviors of men (alcohol, smoking, hookups), advantages in women’s well-being may decrease. Biological advantages may not be offset by cultural disadvantages.

Challenging Gendered Health Risks: Advocacy Blatantly sexist attitudes regarding the sexual inferiority of women still run rampant in health care. For example, in the pre-Kinsey, post-Masters and Johnson, and contemporary eras, textbooks and tools for psychiatrists and interventions for psychologists highlight Freud’s anatomy as destiny model. Psychotherapy training for psychiatrists is curtailed in favor of medical training. The Freudian “comeback” with feminism in mind has not made its way into the few resources offered during medical school and residence programs for psychiatrists. With Freud as the foundation these resources encourage new psychiatrists to be familiar with some psychotherapy techniques. Although training is limited, Freudian theories are being reintroduced and embraced. If time is available, it is expected that well-rounded psychiatrists need a “Freud-chip” in their psyches (Antony, 2015; Klemenson, 2017).

Gender Development: Biology, Sexuality, and Health  93

The Women’s Health Movement Emerging as an organized, powerful force by the 1970s, the Women’s Health Movement (WHM) confronted mainstream medicine by challenging androcentric health care, testing, and treatment practices harmful to women (Seaman and Eldridge, 2012). The movement asserted that women must be empowered to take an active role in all phases of their health and health care. Retreating from the traditional male standard that women patients must be directed in “therapeutic compliance,” an empowerment approach offers a “therapeutic alliance” between women patients and health providers. Patients are full partners as they traverse their path to health. The women’s health movement laid the foundation for the mantra of the current generation of physicians and health practitioners: communicate with patients for optimal health outcomes. When women become patients, they are subjects rather than objects. Effective communication rests on the “patients-as-persons” ideal. The WHM helped mainstream partnership, communication, treatment models, and research agendas beneficial to both women and men. It confronted gynecological practices between male and female patient women described as condescending and humiliating. It opened doors for women entering medical school and men entering nursing (Chapter 10). It paved the way for frank discussions about menstruation and challenged the medical profession’s oppressive framing of menstruation as a shameful monthly disability or disease. Since it emerged alongside the larger feminist movement, it heightened awareness about women’s and child health. NGOs advocating for women’s health exploded in the U.S. and globally. New health-related organizations spawned by the WHM were responsible for early investigations of gender, race, SES, and health, today commonly referred to as intersectionality. The WHM has converged in multiple organizations with varying issues and agendas. Although it is no longer considered a separate, distinct movement, its antennae continue to be far-­ reaching and significant for women’s health. Of its successes, the WHM legacy is spotlighted in medical research.

Gender Bias in Research and Health Care An androcentric medical system is harmful to the health and well-being of women. Existing health systems not only bolster conventional gender roles that disempower women but overlook gender-based health inequalities. Until quite recently women were virtually absent as participants in clinical trials involving drugs, medical technology, treatment, and medical care options on which contemporary health and health care are based.

Androcentric Medicine Male-centered medicine reinforces a (sex) binary that biological differences between men and women—some of which are justified—have major, inescapable health consequences. Despite this “sex difference” paradigm, the health care system is permeated with gender bias. It is often blind to disorders considered to be male or female, even if both suffer from them” (Stefanick, 2017:52). Since the advent of modern medicine in the U.S., male was the research and medical norm. A large, infamous, federally funded study examining the effects of diet on breast cancer used only men as sample subjects. Men are diagnosed with about 1 percent of all breast cancers. Although this finding can shed light on cancers overall, the study ignored women’s

94  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

breast cancer symptoms related to diet and weight. Women and men could not be compared, a disservice to both. Therapeutic and scientific objectives were compromised. The breast cancer study with only male subjects added to the growing evidence that gender bias flaws medical research.

Heart Disease Research on coronary heart disease (CHD) is another notable example where exclusion of women in clinical trials is ominous. Done in the 1980s, this major study on the effect of low doses of aspirin and the risk of heart attack used more than 35,000 subjects, all of them men. The reduced heart attack risk was so spectacular that results were available to the public and physicians before findings were published (Steering Committee of the Physician’s Health Study Research Group, 1989). Results could not be generalized to women. The study also ignored the fact that women have a heart attack about ten years later than men and that CHD is the number one cause of death for both men and women. Women with advanced heart failure (HF) remain underrepresented in clinical trials dealing with sex-specific treatment. Research related to gender differences in uses of medical technology for heart patients is woefully limited. They present symptoms later than men and mechanical, interventional therapies that could be useful to them are underutilized in part because less is known about the benefits (or liabilities) of the devices for women. Women receive less aggressive cardiac care and have a greater risk than men of dying from a second heart attack or stroke (Daubert and Douglas, 2019; Habal et al., 2019; Henning, 2019). Despite these well-known facts, lack of women’s participation in research and clinical trials translates to inadequate clinical practice guidelines for women with CHD. The “heart attack gender gap” and misdiagnoses of CHD relative to gender differences continue, and women die needlessly. Physicians are more likely to attribute men’s CHD symptoms as organic and women’s symptoms as psychogenic. Women merely imagine they are having a heart attack (Butterworth, 2019; McGregor, 2019). Women receive fewer CHD diagnoses and fewer cardiologist referrals for the same symptoms men have. Women going to an emergency room (ER) for stroke are over one-third more likely than men to be misdiagnosed. Misdiagnosis, hospital readmission, and compromised treatment increase for women of color, sexual minorities, and those with lower incomes and education (Miller, 2018; Virk et al., 2019; Lett et al., 2020). Gender disparities exist even before women with cardiac arrest get to an ER. Ambulances are significantly less likely to use sirens and lights when women are transported compared to men. Although almost all prehospital patients are resuscitated, women were “significantly less likely” than men to be resuscitated (Lewis et al., 2019:116). This startling finding with unconventional variables speaks to the hidden and often lethal effects of gender bias in health care. On the flip side, women may be more likely than men to be misdiagnosed for CHD. Severe emotional distress can lead to heart muscle failure and symptoms mimicking a heart attack. Takotsubo syndrome, better known as “broken heart syndrome (BHS),” unfolds with unexpected and stressful events. Whether emotional (sudden death of loved one) or physical (cancer diagnosis), BHS can lead to a misdiagnosis of a heart attack. One woman died of BHS after burglars ransacked her home. Even political events such as Brexit may predict the onset of BHS, such as a woman who experienced “Brexit bereavement” (Dolan, 2019; Siddiqi, 2019). Women are overrepresented in BHS. Women and men cope with stress differently,

Gender Development: Biology, Sexuality, and Health  95

and its effects show up differently in the body. It may originate in the brain and reverberate throughout the body, most noticeable with chest pain. Older women present symptoms more frequently. To date, there is no genetic evidence for its cause or for the male–female differences. The focus is the emotional trauma that can trigger symptoms that mimic a heart attack for women. BHS appears to be severe but short-lived and reversible, with most people making a full recovery. It is likely to be misdiagnosed as a heart attack for women, followed with unnecessary tests and follow-ups (Dias et al., 2019; Heart Advisor, 2019). Whether there is too much or too little attention to heart issues, recurring gender bias in health care is evident.

PROGRESS IN WOMEN’S AND MEN’S HEALTH Capitalizing on research and activism spawned by the Women’s Health Movement, new directions for men’s health initiatives, and growing, influential LGBTQ health activism, gender bias in health and health care is being widely challenged. For the first time in history, women comprise half of research subjects in clinical trials for new drugs (Malamut, 2019). Nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) have emerged to publicize and influence health policy. More women are entering health care as gynecologists, hospital administrators, clinical psychologists, and other mental health therapists. Nurses, representing a historically female profession, are assuming more responsibility in decision making; their leadership roles are accepted and respected by physicians. They are at the forefront of team approaches to health care. These approaches are in synch with female patterns of socialization that predict better health outcomes for women—but also for men. Clinical trials in research with female subjects representing a diversity of racial and ethnic groups are rapidly becoming normative. LGBTQ activism extends this diversity to sexual minorities who had long been ignored in health research. Triggered by the panic and misinformation of the AIDS era, the LGBTQ community helped set the agenda to address health care needs of its population (Landers and Kapadia, 2019). Research protocols today account for all forms of intersectionality to make findings applicable to diverse populations.

Empowerment for Health Encouraged by the successful path of the WHM, the gap in men’s health is being addressed on multiple fronts. References to masculinity and its toxic norms are now common in public discourse. It is no longer puzzling to understand that masculine gender roles can be hazardous to men’s physical and mental health. Masculinity’s toxic influence on injury and death related to extreme sports, unnecessary occupational risks, impulsive sexual and alcohol-related behavior, and abuse of women is gaining attention. Parents are more informed that masculinity norms embraced by their adolescent sons can unfold in harmful ways. With toxic masculinity in mind, they are more vigilant in monitoring sexualized social media and violent video games their sons routinely digest (Chapter 9). Issues in men’s mental health are perhaps the most widespread health messages in media. Disheartening suicides of veterans and numbing mass shootings perpetrated by men are gradually being framed according to masculinity and culture rather than simply biology and hormones. Awareness of toxic masculinity on men’s health is only a first step to addressing its lethality. As noted, positive masculinity models are making headway. Male depression is less likely

96  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

to be overlooked and therapists are incorporating these models in diagnosis and treatment. Help-seeking for symptoms related to physical and emotional illness is increasing for men of color, young men, veterans, and sexual minorities (Patil et al., 2018). There are encouraging signs that men are seeking preventive services. Male distress is less likely to be overlooked. Mortality rates for prostate cancer, for example, have decreased with early detection. Men’s health activism may be responsible for small but noticeable reductions on a range of male mortality-related measures. The empowerment of women as patients and health care practitioners is beneficial to men. Men’s rights activists would do well to embrace gender equality. Men live longer and have healthier lives in nations with high gender equality, such as those in Scandinavia (Chapter 6). When women do well, so do men.

KEY TERMS Anorexia nervosa Body studies Bulimia Cisgender Double standard Essentialism Feminization of aging

Gender fluidity Intersex Morbidity rate Mortality rate Neurosexism Psychoanalytic feminism Queer theory

Sex ratio at birth (SRB) Sexual dimorphism Sexual orientation Sexual scripts Sociobiology Transgender

CHAPTER 3

Gender Development The Socialization Process

Blogging throughout social media speaks to the joys and woes of parenthood. Mommy blogging about boys is qualitatively different than mommy blogging about girls. A blogging post for mothers, #Boymom is “massively more popular” than #girlmom, outnumbering its counterpart by 3 to 1 in posts. Moms confess their experiences of raising boys that include photos of toy bikes parked in the middle of a flight of stairs, athletic cups and Hot Wheels abandoned in the unlikeliest of places, and even a photo of a child gazing at a woman in a bikini, with the caption ‘typical.’ (Cills, 2019) These blogs clearly show that the gender binary is alive and well for children and for the parents socializing them. As early as preschool, children have strong ideas about what boys and girls are supposed to do and be. They police one another in gender boundaries even if prompted by an adult to stray outside the boundary. They embrace smaller gender differences, in turn obscuring larger gender similarities. From the moment a girl infant is wrapped in a pink blanket and a boy infant is wrapped in a blue blanket, gender role development begins. The colors of pink and blue are among the first indicators used in American society to distinguish female from male. As these infants grow, other cultural artifacts will ensure that this distinction remains intact. Girls will be given dolls to diaper and tiny stoves on which to cook pretend meals. Boys will construct buildings with miniature tools and wage war with toy guns and tanks. In the teen and young adult years, although both may spend their money on digital music, girls buy cosmetics and clothes and boys buy sports equipment and technical gadgets. Despite rapidly ascending values celebrating gender equality and disdain for gender stereotypes deemed detrimental to children’s well-being, these patterns remain intact. The incredible power of gender socialization is largely responsible for this behavior. Pink and blue begin this lifelong process.

GENDER SOCIALIZATION AND CULTURAL DIVERSITY Socialization is the lifelong process where culture is learned, we develop a sense of self, and become functioning members of society. This simple definition does not do justice to the profound impact of socialization. Through all forms of social interaction each generation

98  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

transmits essential cultural elements to the next generation via socialization. Primary socialization provides children with values and skills to effectively maneuver a variety of social situations. The family is the site of early childhood socialization where children receive their first messages about gender. Socialization never ends. Based on earlier experiences, continuing socialization is the basis for new roles and relationships encountered throughout life. Socialization shapes our personalities and molds our beliefs and behaviors about social groups and the individuals making up those groups. Gender socialization is the process of learning cultural expectations related to femininity or masculinity associated with the biological sex of female or male. The powerful forces of globalization that underlie social change and the expansion of cultural diversity have collided with gender socialization on a massive scale.

Culture and Socialization As a society’s total way of life, culture endows us with social heritage and provides guidelines for appropriate behavior. Socialization, therefore, is embedded in culture. Cultures are organized through interdependent social institutions, structures ensuring that basic social needs are met in established, predictable ways. The family sets the standards for how gender roles in children emerge, but the family itself is shaped by gendered cultural values. P ­ arent–child interactions occur in a broader cultural context in which females have less power and prestige than males. Beginning in infancy, for example, parents socialize sons to express emotions differently from daughters in ways that may not challenge gender differences in power. Institutions overlap in socialization so one can support and carry on the work of another. The primary socialization work begins in the family, and continues when the child enters preschool or kindergarten. Other institutions include the economy, religion, government, and an evolving leisure and recreational institution with a media focus. Like cultures across the globe, social institutions in American culture play out according to expectations and norms about gender roles. These roles are evident in the paid and unpaid jobs men and women perform, their leisure activities, dress, possessions, language, demeanor, reading material, college major, how frequently they engage in sex and the degree of sexual pleasure they derive. The list is endless. Culture provides standards of social control to ensure general conformity to a vast array of norms. Social control guarantees compliance to gender norms in informal but powerful ways. As the default, gender conformity comes with acceptance; gender nonconformity can be met with ridicule, exclusion from peers, and loss of friendship. Both boys and girls ridicule boys who play with dolls or toys designed for girls and shun girls who play too aggressively. Cultures adapt to gender role change. Adults who challenge workplace norms in which gender scripts are changing—such as men choosing to be child care workers or women choosing to be plumbers—also remain vulnerable until new norms are in place. When gender stereotypes are perpetuated through socialization, social control is particularly effective, yet in insidious ways. If women are stereotyped as lacking leadership abilities, an individual woman may be denied promotion to a high profile management job. Her individual ability is not considered due to the stereotype assigned to her entire gender. A man may be denied custody of his child or adopting a child based on stereotypes that men are less capable than women in raising children. Child custody and divorce law are infused with stereotypical thinking about gender (Chapter 8).

Gender Development: The Socialization Process  99

Adaptation It may seem that culturally-based socialization creates little robots who uncritically accept and submit to gender roles. Arguing that the automatons of one generation produce carbon copies in the next ignores three important facts. First, socialization is uneven, taking place on many fronts. We are socialized by parents, siblings, peers, teachers, media, and all other social institutions. We know of achievement-oriented women admired for their leadership and men as successful adoptive parents. Second, we live in diverse, heterogeneous societies made up of numerous subcultures that share common characteristics but are distinguished from the broader culture in gender patterns. Subcultures are also differentiated according to race, ethnicity, social class, age, and attitudes about sexuality norms, all of which overlap with gender norms. Third, subcultural diversity unfolds in gendered patterns that are not merely additive, but multiplicative in effects. Explanations of childhood socialization must account for level of risk or advantage offered by formidable intersectional statuses (positions). Age-based subcultures emerge at points in the life course strongly defined by powerful gendered norms. Elementary school peers decide what counts as prestige, in turn influencing self-esteem, achievement motivation, and academic success. A boy defined as effeminate or a girl defined as a bully have much to lose. At the other end of the spectrum, the aged are not immune to such rankings. Age and gender stereotypes combine to work against divorced or widowed elderly who would like to date or mate. They risk social disapproval through stereotypes that view sexual activity in old age suspiciously. Elderly widows may be regarded as asexual; elderly widowers as “dirty old men.” Gender and age stereotypes collide with race and ethnicity in subcultures where remarriage for women—widowed or divorced—is highly unlikely. In other cultures, failure to marry at any age may relegate them to social exclusion and increased risk of poverty, yet remarriage is shunned.

Gender Socialization: Intersecting Social Class and Race Parental beliefs about gender intersect with social class and race as key determinants in the enactment of gender roles. Overall, middle-class parents emphasize autonomy and working-class parents emphasize conformity in socialization. These values translate to more gender role flexibility in middle-class families than in working-class and low-income families. Boys and girls from middle-class homes are offered less rigid gender role choices in behavioral expectations and career development and hold more egalitarian attitudes. Gender role flexibility and autonomy supportive parenting for both daughters and sons are enhanced in middle-class, dual-earner families with career-oriented mothers. Mothers in these families express higher levels of support for such flexibility and autonomy than fathers. Boys from middle-class homes, however, are more achievement-oriented than girls. Adding race as a factor, college students describe white middle-class women in more stereotypical ways than African American women. Regardless of race, however, upwardly mobile families express more traditional gender attitudes (Chapter 8). For African Americans, mothers’ employment and mobility may be more important than social class (SES) regarding gender. SES itself is multidimensional (income, occupation, education) and determined by these very factors, so it is difficult to sort out the direction of causation.

100  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

Asian Families Asian American children are likely to be socialized into less flexible, traditional beliefs about gender than African American and white children. In these homes gender roles emphasize female subordination to all males and older females in a highly patriarchal family structure. This pattern is most noticeable in Indian (South Asian) American families where long-established ethnic and religious values about gender persist even among highly educated professional parents. Children expect parents to arrange meetings with prospective marriage partners. Although children have latitude in rejecting marriage candidates, girls are more pressured than boys to reject dating non-Indian men. Immigrant women from upper caste Brahmin backgrounds acknowledge the difficulty of navigating their professional and domestic lives. Motherhood is reworked to assure professional work is complementary to their domestic lives. Mothers are the repositories of ethnic socialization and ensure that both sons and daughters receive strong messages about Indian values related to marriage, and American values related to education and upward mobility (Manohar, 2013). Within two to three generations, however, unquestioned female subordination weakens considerably, particularly among Chinese, Korean, and Japanese families. Unlike Indians, gendered ethnic messages about marriage are supplanted more quickly with stronger messages about family mobility, financial independence, and a college education to achieve both. As Asian American children are Americanized, both boys and girls exhibit less traditional gender roles.

Latino Families Data from large U.S. Latino subcultures (Puerto Rican, Cuban American, and Mexican American) report females acting out gender roles in more deferential and subordinate ways compared to other racial and ethnic groups. Despite ethnic diversity, Latino subcultures share a Catholic heritage that fosters female subservience to males and prioritizes motherhood above all life goals. Women are expected to be chaste before marriage and dependent on husbands after marriage. Latino fathers are less involved with their children than mothers, but more involved with sons than daughters. For all racial and ethnic groups, Latinas have the highest teen birth rates. Latino parents, especially mothers, are stricter with messages related to sexual risk for girls than for boys (Killoren and Deutsch, 2013; Varga and Gee, 2017; Derlan et al., 2018). Latino children receive socialization messages promoting familism, a strong value emphasizing the family and its collective needs over personal and individual needs. Familism helps buffer hypermasculinity (machismo) in boys and serves as a source of prestige for girls, who early in life provide valuable care to the young and the old in their extended families (Chapter 8). Latinos face heightened risks for discrimination in these politically turbulent times. Families adapt and change to risks, often in gendered ways. Familism may buffer risks, but boys may break rules and defy parents more than girls (Ponting, 2018). Like other racial and ethnic minorities, immigration status predicts that these gendered patterns decrease, as Americanization increases.

African American Families Compared to other racial and ethnic groups, research on gender socialization in African American families is more extensive and more inconsistent (Jones et al., 2018b). On the one

Gender Development: The Socialization Process  101

hand African American children are socialized into views of gender that are less rigid and less stereotyped. African American girls from homes with nontraditional gender roles have high achievement motivation and self-esteem. Compared to white males, African American males—both older children and adults—participate more in housework and child care. To the benefit of gender equity, binary views of masculinity and femininity are blurred in African American homes (Chapter 8).

Raising Daughters On the other hand, African American women encourage independence and self-reliance in their daughters but at the same time encourage them to accept other parts of a female role that are traditional. Mothers send powerful messages about the value of education to their children and do not accept excuses for poor performance (Ispa et al., 2019). Girls may internalize these messages more than boys. Girls, therefore, are deemed more studious than boys. Educational expectations are high for girls in African American families. In this case, “studiousness” may be associated with a more traditional role for girls but works to their benefit. A traditional gender role for boys perceived to be educationally at risk, however, may work to their disadvantage. Schools are adopting interventions, such as using culturally relevant teaching to boys, to counter these risks (Essien, 2017). In low-income father-absent homes, daughters’ self-reliance is strengthened by adopting more masculine roles; sons adopt roles that are less masculine in these homes. Mothers are less likely to grant freedom for daughters to explore expanded roles related to dating. Daughters report that their mothers are overly protective, and mothers report that their daughters’ behavior needs to be closely monitored, especially in relation to sexuality. Black girls are more likely than white girls to experience teen dating violence. Mother–daughter conflict surrounding issues of independence versus restrictions can lower their acceptance of one another, driving a wedge between them (Ahonen and Loeber, 2016; Simons et al., 2016). Mothers and fathers prepare their daughters more for racial bias than for gender bias.

Raising Sons That being said, however, mothers of sons are more concerned about racial discrimination and mothers of daughters are more concerned about gender discrimination. Fathers send stronger racial socialization messages to their sons. Fathers communicate racial pride and offer strategies for coping with racial discrimination. They underscore the importance of positive male role models for their sons with an emphasis on masculine values of strength and leadership. Associated with a fictive kin network (Chapter 8), African American children have biological fathers and “social fathers” as role models to learn about gender and marriage and family relationships. These father figures are positively invested in the lives of African American boys but may be inconsistent in their gender messaging. They can send messages to their young sons about “toughening up,” to be strong physically and emotionally, but it may be associated with risk in an era of escalating violence to minority men (Howard et al., 2013; Cooper et al., 2014; Hurt et al., 2017). Concerns about racial discrimination generally trump concerns about gender discrimination. It may be difficult for parents to perceive sexism (gender discrimination) for boys. This pattern is not a benign one. Mothers with high unease about racial discrimination have lower expectations for children’s academic success, especially for their sons. Parents’ own experiences of racial discrimination can mediate their

102  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

vigilance in priming their sons, but not their daughters, for racial discrimination (Varner and Mandara, 2013; Varner et el., 2019). The paradoxical effect of these socialization practices is to bolster—yet challenge—traditional gender roles.

Intersectionality The socialization work of black parents in American society is strongly influenced by race and class inequalities that counter beliefs about gender equity. African American children who are facing a rough road because of racial discrimination may find it easier to adopt rather than challenge traditional gender roles if it means one less barrier to overcome. Historical patterns of gender role configurations in African American subcultures help in understanding the contradictions. High regard for the independence and initiative of African American women is normative. In this sense, the “traditional” gender role of women is one of strength and resilience rather than passivity and resignation. Consistent with conventional gender roles, white girls are less assertive than African American girls (Chapter 8). Mothers teach daughters to resist oppression, but also to accommodate African American institutions, such as the church, that does not sharply diverge from the patriarchal standards in the broader culture. Most important, African American children tend to adopt less polarized views of gender. Males and females are not “opposites.” Both men and women are encouraged to be nurturing and assertive. Supporting an intersectional model, the research is inconsistent only when race, class, and gender are separated and when white middle-class standards of masculinity and femininity are the default and applied to all African American experiences.

THEORIES OF GENDER SOCIALIZATION Theories of gender socialization spotlight the primary socialization years and how children acquire gender identity, awareness that the two sexes (male and female) behave differently, and that different gender roles (masculine and feminine) are expected. Like all socialization, gender socialization is mediated through biology, personality, social interaction context, and the social institutions. Different theories give different weight to each element. Freudian psychologists and sociobiologists contend that unconscious motivation and biologically driven evolutionary demands are overriding socialization forces (Chapter 2). Sociologists, social psychologists, and many personality psychologists emphasize social interaction over biology as the key socialization force. The focus on the context of social interaction has prompted significant interdisciplinary work between psychology and sociology in building theories of gender socialization.

Social Learning Theory Unlike Freud’s psychoanalytic approach on the internal conflict in socialization (Chapter 2), social learning theory focuses on observable behavior. For social learning theorists, socialization is based on rewards (reinforcing appropriate behavior) and punishments (extinguishing inappropriate behavior). They are concerned with the ways children model the behaviors

Gender Development: The Socialization Process  103

of others, such as cooperation and sharing or selfishness and aggression. They choose models who are like themselves and avoid those perceived to be different (Bener et al., 2016). Imitation and modeling appear to be spontaneous in children, but through reinforcement, patterns of behavior develop that eventually become habitual. In classic social learning theory, as with other behaviors, gender roles are learned directly through reprimands and rewards and indirectly through observation and imitation (Bandura and Walters, 1963; Mischel, 1966). The logic is simple. In gender socialization, different expectations lead to different strategies of reinforcement from parents, peers, and teachers for doing either “boy” or “girl” things. Boys may be praised by peers for excelling in male sports such as football but derided for excelling in female games such as jump rope. Girls may be praised by peers for embroidering table linens but derided for preferring to play with toy soldiers rather than dolls. Gender identity is developed when children associate the label of “boy” or “girl” with rewards—or punishments—that come with appropriate or inappropriate behavior, then act out gender roles according to that perception. Parents and teachers model gender roles during the critical primary socialization years, and children imitate accordingly. This results in ongoing reinforcement of the valued gender identity. Social learning theory thus assumes that “knowledge about gender roles either precedes or is acquired at the same time as gender identity” (Intons-Peterson, 1988:40).

Gender Socialization for Boys According to social learning theory, boys and girls are not parallel in acquiring gender role knowledge during the primary socialization years. Early research by David Lynn (1969) asserts that boys encounter more difficulty than girls on the socialization path. Since fathers are not as available as mothers during early childhood, boys have limited opportunities to model the same-gender parent. In addition, contact with fathers is qualitatively different than from mothers in terms of emotional intimacy. With adult male role models scarcer in early childhood, boys struggle to put together a definition of masculinity based on incomplete information. They are told what they should not do rather than what they should do. “Don’t be a sissy” and the classic “big boys don’t cry” are examples. Boys must prove that they are boys “by showing that they are not girls” (Chu, 2014). Girls have an easier time because of relative modeling from her mother and the female teachers she will encounter in early childhood education. Lack of male models at an early age prompts stereotyped, inflexible views of masculinity. This gender role inflexibility may explain why males express more insecurity than females about their gender identity. Consequences of this narrow view of masculinity are insidious. Boys’ peer groups encourage the belief that aggression and toughness are virtues. Males exhibit hostility toward females and LGBTQ people. Cross-gender behavior in boys (“sissies”) is viewed more negatively than when it occurs in girls (“tomboys”). Women are more accepting of children who cross gender lines. Fear of ridicule propels males, especially adolescents, to use homophobic and sexist remarks to ensure that their masculinity is protected (Chapter 9). Although modeling is not the sole factor for gender role acquisition, it does suggest that gender-appropriate behavior is strongly associated with social approval. Even if laden with uncertainty and inflexibility, boys adamantly prefer a masculine role. A boy learns that his role is more desirable compared to a girl’s role, and that it brings him self-esteem.

104  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

Gender Socialization for Girls Other social learning theorists counter that it is a mistake to conclude that availability of mothers and female role models in early childhood makes the socialization path for girls easier. Very young children are bombarded with messages suggesting greater worth, prestige, advantages, and rewards are accorded to males compared to females. By enhancing self-­ esteem, boys can readily embrace these gendered messages. In contrast, girls are offered subordinate, less prestigious roles that encourage deference and dependence. They must model behavior that is less socially valued. Feminist social learning theorists suggest that modeling “female appropriate” behavior can come with grave risks for women. Gender equitable attitudes are increasing across the globe but have not eclipsed the far more prevalent attitudes about female subordination and that women should respond to it appropriately—in other words, traditionally. Families in much of the developing world are organized by rigid age–gender hierarchies conferring power on men (husbands, fathers, male kin), especially the oldest men (Chapter 6). Children witness psychological coercion or physical force keeping women subordinate (“to know their place”). Women in these cultures model behavior reinforcing silence rather than recourse to abuse (Yount and Krause, 2017). Subordination messages are modeled in movies for teens often portraying girls in negative, gender stereotypical ways—as socially aggressive, bullying, selfish, and disloyal to female friends; these portrayals override positive portrayals of teen girls (Chapter 13). If modeling and reinforcement are compelling enticements to behavior, as social learning theory suggests, a girl understandably can be quite anxious if encouraged to enact roles or model behavior held in lower esteem. In socialization, girls have the advantage of gender role flexibility, but boys have the advantage of a higher prestige gender role.

Critique Children are not passive recipients of the rewards and punishments that social learning theorists envision. Because children routinely choose gender-inconsistent behavior, the reinforcement and modeling processes are far more complex. First, children may not model same-gender parents, teachers, or peers. Contrary to social learning assertions on masculinity norms, for example, boys who are more susceptible to peer pressure engage in fewer types of delinquency or aggression (Koon-Magnin et al., 2016). Children may also choose other-gender models outside the family who offer alternatives to gender role behavior that enhance self-esteem. A girl may be rewarded for a masculine activity, such as excelling in sports, but she keeps a tight hold on other aspects of her feminine role. Second, social learning theory minimizes the importance of social change, a significant factor in gender socialization. Families are more diverse than the stereotyped “at-home mother and outside-home father” that are used to explain the rocky socialization paths for girls and boys. Dual-earning couples with children are normative. Divorced parents, blended families, LGBTQ families, single parents, and nonresident parents who are mothers instead of fathers have created a wide range of models for gender socialization (Chapter 8). Third, other statuses vie for the attention of child and parent during primary socialization. Birth order and age of child may be as important as gender in determining how parents behave toward their children. Intersectional approaches additionally demonstrate that children experience subcultural family influences in which siblings and adults take on a range of nontraditional roles, such as in single-parent families. Finally, feminists who adopt social learning explanations for socialization point to a

Gender Development: The Socialization Process  105

range of alternative, positive role models that counter, or subdue roles associated with harm or risk. They point out that education for girls has skyrocketed across the globe and provides a multitude of opportunities for productive role modeling. Regardless of the different paths offered to girls and boys, they learn to prefer their own gender and endorse positive qualities and roles associated with it.

Cognitive Development Theory Cognitive development explanations for gender socialization contrast sharply with social learning theory. Jean Piaget’s (1896–1980) interest in how children gradually develop intelligence, thinking, and reasoning laid the foundation for cognitive development theory. His work is consistent with symbolic interaction theory. Cognitive abilities are developed in stages through ongoing social interaction. Piaget’s work has been applied to school, peer, and family settings in ways that support symbolic interaction’s assertion that behavior is adapted to—and is altered—in given contexts. Simply stated, the mind matures through interaction with the environment. Behavior depends on how a person perceives a social situation at each cognitive stage (Piaget, 1950, 1954). Cognitive theory stresses a child’s active role in structuring and interpreting the world.

Gender Identity Building on Piaget’s work, Lawrence Kohlberg (1927–1987) claimed that children learn gender roles according to their level of cognitive development—in essence, their degree of comprehension of the world. One of the first ways a child comprehends the world is by organizing reality through his or her self, the unique sense of identity that distinguishes each individual from all other individuals. As a highly valued part of the child’s existence, the self—and anything associated with the self—also becomes highly valued. By age three, children begin to self-identify by gender and accurately apply gender-related labels to themselves and to others. By age six, gender constancy is in place. Gender is permanent: a girl knows that she is a girl and will remain one. Only then, Kohlberg asserts, is gender identity said to be developed. Gender identity also becomes a central part of self, invested with strong emotional attachment. Children aged three to five use gender identity to search for gender cues to label and guide gender-related behavior. These labels evolve into gender stereotypes. Children’s self-esteem is promoted when they see themselves as like (typical to) same-gender peers. Unless children believe that they have something in common with other-gender peers, negative stereotypes of these peers increase (Perry et al., 2019). Cognitive development theory offers a good explanation for gender-typing during primary socialization: when children figure out what gender means in their lives, they embrace that understanding; it enhances self-esteem but also creates and then reinforces gender stereotypes. Once gender identity is developed, therefore, it forms a core to organize much behavior. Children seek models labeled as “girl” or “boy” and “female” or “male,” and in turn, identification with the same-sex parent can occur. Although children base much behavior on reinforcement, cognitive theorists see a different sequence in gender socialization than do social learning theorists. This sequence is “I am a boy; therefore, I want to do boy things; therefore, the opportunity to do boy things (and to gain approval for doing them) is rewarding” (Kohlberg, 1966:89). Reinforcements are important, but cognitive development theory supports a

106  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

self-socialization process. Children choose whom they want to imitate and how the imitation may be played out (Pauletti et al., 2016; Halim et al., 2018). Inconsistency in gender roles is accounted for by the different experiences of children. There is wide support for cognitive development approaches to gender socialization. Children are gender detectives. Their interests and activities—such as appearance, play, toys, and friendships—are based on their beliefs about gender compatibility, a pattern that cuts across race, ethnicity, and social class (Halim et al., 2017; Carlo et al., 2018). Children value their own gender more and believe theirs is superior to the other.

Critique The contextual nature of development cautions against its generalization. Cognitive development for psychologists is beset with the same criticisms of symbolic interaction for sociologists (Chapter 1). Cognitive development occurs in overlapping stages and in ever shifting contexts. As children shift from family to school, it is difficult to generalize one set of experiences to another. A more important shortcoming, however, is cognitive development’s assertion is that children actively choose gender-typed behavior after they understand gender constancy, the final stage to gender identity. Gender constancy appears by age six, but gender-typed preferences in play and toys are in place by age two or three. For the model to fit neatly with the stages outlined in cognitive development, gender identity must come after understanding gender constancy. Research cannot confirm this sequence. In countering this criticism, cognitive theorists say all that is needed for gender identity is simple, rudimentary knowledge about gender. Gender stability, where the child sees the same gender behavior over and over in a variety of contexts, will suffice. Gender stability allows children to accurately label who is a girl and who is a boy. For children to determine patterns of gender stability, however, they must experience social interaction in many contexts. This interaction is unlikely to be consistent in terms of gender. Understanding gender stability may be as complicated for children as understanding gender constancy.

Gender Schema Theory Rooted in cognitive development theory, gender schema theory (GST) emerged as a major theory to explain gender socialization. Schemas are cognitive structures used to understand the world, interpret perception, and process new information. In its earliest formulations, pioneering work by Sandra Bem (1944–2014), the most prominent gender schema theorist, contends that once a child learns cultural definitions of gender, these schemas are the core around which all other information is organized (Bem, 1981, 1983, 1987). Consistent with cognitive development theory, before a schema can process gender-related information, children must be at the cognitive level to accurately identify gender. Infants as young as nine months can distinguish between male and female, but it is between ages two and three that they make a giant leap associating this identification with knowledge about gender. Schemas tell children what they can and cannot do according to their gender. In malls they largely see girls and women, but not boys and men, in clothing and accessory aisles. On television they see female characters engaging in traditional family activities. They see sexualized girls who are pretty and popular. Even at the zoo, adults send socialization messages attributing masculinity and femininity to animals (Stone et al., 2015; Garner and

Gender Development: The Socialization Process  107

Grazian, 2016; Drentea and Ballard, 2017). Gender schema theory suggests that limited and stereotyped images for girls may disallow them from thinking about different alternatives in life. Schemas affect children’s behavior and influence their self-esteem (self-compassion). A child’s sense of self is linked to how closely his or her behavior matches accepted gender schemas. Gender schemas can direct children’s behavior in ways that assure confidence, competence, and self-esteem (Yang and Merrill, 2016; Yarnell et al., 2019). When a girl learns that her culture prescriptions include being polite and kind, these behaviors are incorporated into her emerging gender schema, and she adjusts her behavior accordingly. Gender schemas are powerful influences in a child’s cognitive development. Cognitions processed via gender schemas direct children to use language according to gender role prescriptions. (Chapter 4). Gender schemas of parents influence how they behave toward their children and how children internalize these messages and act on them. The link between parent and child gender schemas is strong. Parents with traditional gender schemas are more likely to have children with gender-typed cognitions than are parents with nontraditional schemas. By 18 months, children can associate cultural symbols with gender—building blocks and football are associated with males; baby dolls and tea sets are associated with females. The gendered messages parents send to children may be subtle, but children are adept at rooting them out and matching them to their evolving gender schemas (Leaper and Friedman, 2007; Mesman and Groeneveld, 2018). Gender schemas influence memory with a selective bias for information congruent with gender. Children and adults can recall experiences, activities, people, media, and reading material more accurately when information is presented in gender stereotypical ways (Ruble et al., 2006). Gender congruent tasks such as household chores are easier to maneuver and completed more quickly. Girls can set a table more quickly than boys; boys can bring in the trash more quickly than girls. Gender schemas can direct children’s behavior in ways that assure confidence and competence. Children presented with pictures of girls and boys engaged in nontraditional roles, such as a girl sawing wood or a boy sewing, will recall the picture in a gender-consistent way—the boy is sawing, and the girl is sewing (Martin and Ruble, 2004:68). Young children exaggerate or invent male–female differences even if none exists, a pattern carried through to adulthood. These studies support Sandra Bem’s contention that cognitive development proceeds via powerful gender schemas leading children to accept a gender schematic world. The influence of culture on gender is refined via GST. Referred to as cultural lenses, every culture has assumptions about values, beliefs, and norms in its social institutions. Sandra Bem (1993) suggests that in American culture, three gender lenses are most prominent: gender polarization (shared beliefs that females and males are different and opposite beings), biological essentialism (biology produces natural, inevitable gender roles), and androcentrism (males are superior to females). The lenses of gender polarization and biological essentialism set up the justification for androcentrism and the male-centered norms it produces (Chapter 1). Children accept them without recognizing that alternatives are possible. As adults, they cannot envision society organized according to a different set of gender schemas. Cultural lenses provide a good interdisciplinary link to macro-level sociology. Functionalists are interested in core cultural and subcultural gender lenses influencing social order and social change. Monitoring these lenses over time offers insights into the functional and dysfunctional consequences of gender roles. The influence of gender schemas helps explain why it is so difficult to dislodge gender stereotypical thinking once in place during childhood.

108  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

GST offers a productive model for understanding how gender schemas lead to sex-typing and imposes enormous, non-conscious limits on gender equity in all social institutions. Children are motivated to match sex (gender) with what they see in the broader culture. Gender schema theory, however, shows that this path to sex-typing can be altered and gender schemas can be modified. Bem’s work highlights gender role continuity but also how gender role change, fluidity, and flexibility (Kohlman and Krieg, 2017; Starr and Zurbriggen, 2017). The gendered digital divide, for example, may be breached when people discover that gendered beliefs may prevent females from investigating jobs in coding or computer engineering. Until recently, gender schemas about the suitability of STEM jobs for males over females imposed huge barriers for recruiting, training, and retaining women in these fields. The connection between gender and STEM has made its way into public awareness. Media frame STEM’s gender inequality as harmful to employees, businesses, and the economy. When taken-forgranted notions about gender are examined, course work can be adjusted, and businesses can tailor strategies to account for gender schemas in a productive manner. GST offers a rationale to dislodge gender stereotypes by bringing non-conscious beliefs embedded in gender schemas to the surface (Alfrey and Twine, 2017; Yang and Frye, 2018; Wegemer and Eccles, 2019).

Critique Through Bem’s pioneering work and decades of refinement, gender schema theory was at the forefront of challenging androcentrism and a narrow vision of gender flexibility. She “heralded the benefits of greater flexibility and gender equality” (Leaper, 2017:759). These strengths notwithstanding, GST has difficulty explaining inconsistency in the development of some gender-related cognitions (perceptions) and behaviors. It generally views early childhood as rigid in gender stereotyping, setting the path for continued gender intensification. Adolescents, especially girls, however, are more flexible and less stereotyped in many ­gender-related activities and choices. Girls are allowed, and frequently encouraged, to cross gender barriers in behavior. Cues shift as contexts change. Gender is assumed to be the core schema, but it competes with race, ethnicity, sexuality, and age schemas, for example, as children move between settings. These schemas crosscut and intersect with gender schemas as guides to behavior. Primary socialization of childhood masks the continuing socialization throughout life that displaces gender schemas (Causadias and Cicchetti, 2018; Knight et al., 2018; Oleschuk, 2019). Gender stereotypes may be in place by adulthood, but they tend to weaken—not intensify—over time.

Social Cognitive Theory Social cognitive theory (SCT) taps into the other theories to help understand how children actively choose their gender roles (a key element in cognitive development and gender schema theories) and how much imitation and reinforcement are needed for gender roles to be learned (a key element in social learning theory). It also stresses the continuous development of gender learning over time to account for their unique experiences in the life course (Halimi et al., 2016). As articulated by Albert Bandura, a prominent name in social learning theory, a social cognitive approach to gender socialization highlights rapidly expanding knowledge from observations, self-regulation of behavior once knowledge is gained, and the

Gender Development: The Socialization Process  109

reflection of the behavior (Bandura and Bussey, 2004). Like social learning theory, Bandura’s social cognitive theory emphasizes role models as guides to behavior. SCT additionally accounts for a child’s expectations for outcome. Children internalize messages from many sources, perceive the goals they desire, and direct their behavior accordingly. SCT, therefore, highlights active self-socialization in children. Toddlers learn to self-regulate emotional behavior when parents respond to it in sensitive and supportive ways. By preschool, children have grasped emotional, behavioral and cognitive skills when confronted with “emotionally demanding situations” (think meltdowns). Boys and girls discover that fathers respond to failed attempts at self-regulation differently than mothers. Fathers give less latitude to sons rather than daughters; mothers show about the same latitude to both sons and daughters. Over time, both girls and boys appreciate more control from mother and less control from fathers (Perry et al., 2018; Van Lissa et al., 2019). Social cognitive theory is the leading model to understand how physical activities, such as sports, are mediated by gender. It explains the physical activity-gender link according to key socialization concepts: the selection of role models, the evaluation of role models, child’s self-efficacy (Beauchamp et al., 2019; Rhodes et al., 2019). Parents have enormous influence in modeling physical activities and sports. Children receive subtle messages about gender and sports from fathers and mothers and evaluate how their parents act out these messages. Do both parents actively participate in sports for the benefit of physical exercise? When parents encourage both sons and daughters to play outdoors, and join them outdoors, children benefit in health and physical fitness. Do fathers participate more or less than mothers? Social cognitive theory argues that gender stereotypes about physical activities communicated to children early in life make fathers more influential role models than mothers for boys, but mothers as more influential role models than fathers for girls. On the other hand, since children expect—take for granted—their father’s sports interests, physical activities (and sports) by their mother’s may be more influential, especially for girls. When girls see their mother as active, enthusiastic, and successful in physical activities and as a sports competitor, their self-efficacy (I can do it, too!) increases (Muenks et al., 2018; Boxberger and Reimers, 2019). SCT explains these choices according to the image of sports as a male domain. When women enter this domain, they stand out as role models. Peers are the next level of influence as role models for physical activities. Children do not receive encouragement from friends for doing physical activities. The number of boys not participating in sports at school or community leagues is much greater than the number who participate. Girls’ participation in sports is far less. Social cognitive theory offers insights about social norms and peer support networks to intervene on behalf of children’s health (Randazzo and Solmon, 2018). A girl’s perspective on physical activity can be altered with supportive peers, chosen from among her significant others, most likely to be other girls. With the help of teachers, performance and a girl’s self-efficacy are improved (Gill et al., 2018; Laird et al., 2018). In turn, she is motivated to continue physical activities and try for higher performance levels.

Critique Applying a social cognitive framework to understanding the determinants and outcomes of physical activity has been highly successful. Insights from SCT allow for teachers, coaches, school counselors, and health practitioners to promote effective strategies in the pursuit of

110  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

children’s health. SCT also resonates with symbolic interaction’s approach for explaining role-taking in children. Both perspectives can consider how children judge the importance of parents, peers, and teachers as role models and the setting where modeling occurs. This bridge also encourages interdisciplinary work on the importance of context in social interaction. However, social cognitive theory must be further refined to address two questions about primary socialization: first, when does “active self-socialization” occur—before or after the selection of role models? Second, which is more important—the child’s choices or the availability of role models? In other words, can a child internalize and act out beliefs about gender if there are no role models already in place?

Reflections I expect this review of the prominent theories of gender socialization is puzzling. I also expect the review suggests answers to some questions about how children “learn gender,” but raises many more. All the theories offer productive leads. When one lays the foundation for the next, they overlap a great deal, making it difficult to readily distinguish one from another. There is no one integrative model explaining a child’s gender socialization. Such a model should incorporate strengths of all four theories (social learning, cognitive development, gender schema, cognitive development). The model should also integrate psychological and sociological approaches to socialization. Existing theories of gender development come with the strengths and limitations reviewed here. Given this review, new or refined theories should address the following questions: • • • • •

How do theories explain the spectrum of gender-conforming and gender-non conforming behavior? How do theories apply to socialization experiences of LGBTQ children? How can theories challenge the binary without using binary language and expressions to describe gender development? Which categories intersecting with gender—such as race, social class, sexuality, age—are the most influential in primary socialization? Which theories are feminist affirmative?

AGENTS OF SOCIALIZATION Notice that all the theories of socialization incorporated fundamental elements of the child’s world to explain how gender is developed during the primary socialization years. Agents of socialization are the people, groups, and social institutions that provide the critical information needed for children to become fully functioning members of society. Functionalists point out that if these agents do not carry out their socialization tasks properly, social integration may be compromised. Conflict theorists point out that these agents come with varying degrees of power, allowing socialization advantages to some groups and disadvantages to others. These agents are interdependent and are often inconsistent in the gendered messages they send to children. The focus here is on those agents that are the most influential in shaping gender roles during primary socialization.

Gender Development: The Socialization Process  111

The Family The family is by far the most significant agent of socialization. Although globalization-driven social change has increased family diversity in all its forms and created more opportunities for children to be influenced by other social institutions, the family plays the pivotal role in primary socialization. The family shapes a child’s personality, identity, and self-esteem. Children’s values and attitudes are acquired from their family, including powerful messages about gender. Learned first in the family and reinforced by other agents, gender is fundamental to the shaping of social life. Gender messages dominate and are among the best predictors across a spectrum of attitudes and behaviors.

Do You Want a Boy or a Girl? The first answer expectant parents give to this question is “We want a healthy baby.” Then they state a gender preference. Preference for one gender over the other is strong. Among parents and non-parents, son preference is the likely choice, especially for a first or only child, a pattern found globally. This pattern is most prevalent in East and South Asia and is reported in the U.S. among immigrants from these regions (Chapter 2). U.S. couples say they prefer a child of their own gender, but this is stronger for fathers than mothers. Although the son-preference trend held true for almost a century in the U.S., this preference has recently cracked. In the U.S., swathes of urban China, and Northern Europe, including gender-equitable Sweden, college women, first-time pregnant women, and middle-class young adults state a daughter preference or no preference more often than a son preference. Women without children who aspire to graduate education and high-level careers express a daughter preference (Miranda et al., 2018; Allison and Ralston, 2018a; Pinsker 2018). The son-biased sex ratio for Asians in the U.S. is still evident but declining for non-Hispanic white families. These families are in the sex ratio norm for number of children “regardless of the sex composition of previous children” (Almond and Sun, 2017:21). Within one to two generations, immigrant families match the fertility rate of the broader population. In the U.S. small families are normative, with fertility at an all-time low. A life of singlehood, later marriage and childbearing, or marriage without children herald the fertility rate (Chapter 7). These trends suggest that gender preference (son, daughter, no preference), has diminished in determining family composition.

Gender Parity That being said, gender preferences may be weakening but cannot be discounted. Parity is a key factor in understanding parents’ gender preferences. The U.S. ideal is to have two children, one boy and one girl. Couples with two children of the same gender are more likely to try for a third child than those with one son and one daughter. Although this holds true for a subset of U.S. couples and are not enough to alter the overall fertility rate, these choices have huge effects for couples. Families are larger than expected until achieving the desired gender balance. Parity and gender preference meld in adoption strategies; adopted children are more likely to be of the “missing” gender (Larsen and Thomas, 2019). If they have no biological children, once couples make the decision to adopt, they have latitude in gender preferences and composition of siblings. Choices are based on their value set and unique vision of an ideal family. Families with adopted children are larger and more diverse by race and ethnicity.

112  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

Couples who want to raise biological children but cannot conceive have choices other than adoption. Assisted reproductive technology (ART) is used for both medical reasons (infertility, genetic screening) and non-medical reasons (sex selection). Over 90 percent of clinics offering ART report performing sex selection for family balancing (Capelouto et al, 2018:1106). With “sex selection via preimplantation,” ART virtually eliminates the chance of having a child of the “non-preferred” gender. Since ART is so accurate, even for medical reasons, couples will know the sex of even an embryo. With low-cost, non-invasive, and simpler procedures, sex selection for non-medical purposes has skyrocketed in the U.S. Internet sites and social media spawn increased public awareness and bolster its legitimacy. On a self-help site, an author and researcher spoke to a woman who chose ART to give birth to a boy. She casually mentioned that her own children include a girl and a boy. Later … she insisted, which I did not deny, that I could then not possibly understand the longing she and other women had experienced for a child of specific gender, because I had without striving for it what many of them so dearly wanted: the ideal “complete” and “balanced” family. (Bhatia, 2018: 201) Ethical and legal questions proliferate when ART is used for sex selection. On one hand, a woman’s reproductive autonomy is protected. If there is no harm to others, she should be able to select a gender and control the characteristics of that gender. State laws vary, but if she and her partner are the “owners” of an embryo, her choice should be reinforced, not disparaged (Boyd, 2018; Cahill, 2018). On the other hand, sex selection is associated with risk to females in the developing world and, although illegal, abortion of female fetuses is high in countries such as India and rural areas of China where son preference endures (Rinčić, et al., 2018; Kudina, 2019). It is impossible to dismiss the sexism associated with ART. For example, couples using the technology are more likely to try for a boy if they have two girls compared to couples who try for a girl if they have two boys. Unlike in the U.S., Australia’s disapproval of sex selection technology is high and growing. Perhaps surprising, disapproval is higher among young and more educated women (Kippen et al., 2018). Despite the undeniable sexism inherent in ART favoring males in sex selection, there is also undeniable sexism when the autonomy of a woman or couple to make the choice is curtailed or banned legally. Notice the parallels to the abortion debate (Chapter 14). Nonetheless, unlike ongoing media attention swirling around abortion, ART is largely off the public radar.

Gender-Typed Wombs Across the globe, when making childbearing decisions, couples reflect on the gender of their child or children. They have prenatal wishes for their children that are influenced by gender stereotypes (Wittenberg, 2017; Norling, 2018). Gender-typing begins in the womb. When sex of the fetus is known, mothers often modify activities She may continue rigorous, physical activities if she is carrying a male, but curtail them if she is carrying a female. Parents talk and think about the fetus in gendered terms. Males may be described as active and kicking; females, as quiet and calm. If a name is already chosen, mothers use it to talk to their baby and use gendered pronouns in their conversations with it. Mothers-to-be believe they can predict the sex of their baby before the second trimester. Regrettably, although half of mothers profess “fetal intuition,” they are no better at predicting it than flipping a coin (Barnes,

Gender Development: The Socialization Process  113

2015a; McFadzen et al., 2017). Expectant mothers who want to know their baby’s gender compared to those who do not, show interesting psychological correlates. Those who want to know are described as perfectionistic and traditional. Those who do not want to know are described as egalitarian and open to new experiences (Kotila et al., 2014; Science Daily, 2014). Virtually all parents-to-be do know their baby’s gender. Happiness can quickly turn to disappointment and fear by finding out their baby will not be the gender they expected or desired. As one woman describes, the news she was having a boy instead of a girl prompted her to recall an especially close bond with her mother and sisters. She realized … she would not be able to recreate many of her own favorites childhood bonding moments—shopping for a prom dress, for instance, in a house with two boys. (Gibson, 2018) All these womb-related correlates help predict how gender socialization will play out in these families. The trend of expectant parents choosing not to know or to share the gender of the baby appears to have reversed—and rather abruptly. With savvy marketers monitoring popular social media sites and ease of sharing, “gender reveal” videos are exploding. YouTube registered a 60 percent increase in these videos in only a year, with many going viral. Gender reveal events are most common in the U.S. but are escalating globally. Certainly gender reveal parties indicate excitement and pleasure, but they loudly proclaim the perpetuation of gender norms at a time when these very norms are being actively resisted. Gender reveals emphasize distinct, binary, girl or boy stereotypes in themed parties such as guns or glitter, rifles or ruffles, and wheels or heels (Bologna, 2019). Parents struggle to avoid gender stereotyping their children, but patterns of gender socialization demonstrate these attempts are foiled.

Gender Socialization in Early Childhood Gender of the child is one of the strongest predictors of how parents will behave toward their children, a finding that is reported globally and one that crosses racial and ethnic lines in the United States (Carothers and Reis, 2013). Parents describe infant sons as strong, tough, and alert and infant daughters as delicate, gentle, and awkward, regardless of the weight or length of their infants. Fathers are more stereotyped in their assessments than mothers. Socialization by parents encourages gender-appropriate norms allowing separation, independence, and more risk-taking for boys and connection, interdependence, and more cautious behaviors for girls (Kline and Wilcox, 2013). While Dick is allowed to cross the street, use scissors, or go to a friend’s house by himself, Jane must wait until she is older.

Gendered Childhood: Artifacts of Socialization Proud parents deposit their newborns in a home ready to accommodate either a boy or a girl. The baby is also welcomed by greeting cards from friends and family displaying consistent gender-typed messages. Indeed, gender-neutral cards for any age are largely nonexistent. Pink- and pastel-colored cards for darling, sweet, and adorable girls and cards in primary

114  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

colors for strong, handsome, and active boys are standard. The first artifacts acquired by the infant are toys and clothes. If parents-to-be choose not to tell others the child’s sex, friends and relatives choose gifts that are neutral to avoid embarrassing themselves or the expectant parents by colors or toys that suggest the “wrong” gender. Teddy bears and clothing in colors other than pink or blue are safe bets. But within weeks of the baby’s arrival, the genderneutral room vanishes and is easily recognizable as belonging to a girl or a boy. Most expectant parents, however, do know their baby’s sex and decorate the child’s room accordingly.

Clothing Lavender, pink, and light yellow clothing for girls sharply contrast with darker blue and red for boys. Although pants for school and casual settings are normative for girls, they wear pastel clothing with embroidered hearts, baby animals, and flowers. Pants for girls usually do not have pockets, so a purse is a necessity. Boys and girls wear T-shirts and sweatshirts. Boys wear those with superhero and athletic motifs, and girls wear those with female television characters and nature scenes. Pictures of outstanding male athletes are typically represented in nonathletic clothing for boys and sometimes for girls. A recent trend finds recognized female athletes depicted on clothing for girls. Halloween costumes provide a good example of gender-typing in clothing. Gender-neutral costumes are rare at Halloween, with hero and fantasy costumes favored by both boys and girls. Girls are beauty queens and princesses. Boys are warriors and “good guy” superheroes (Luke Skywalker and Spider Man) as well as their villainous counterparts (Darth Vader and Norman Osborn, aka Green Goblin). Halloween costumes are stamped with corporate branding of hegemonic masculinity that carries boys from trick or treating for candy to men drinking at parties for adults (Alexander, 2014b). Social cognitive theory suggests that costumes allow children to try out behavior in the safe, time limited Halloween space. As children get older costumes become more gender typed and children are better at observing reactions of their peers. Halloween models may be gender-typical (princess girl, superhero boy) or gender-atypical (zombie girl, boy dressing up as a girl). A costume for a zombie girl comes with different role behavior than a princess girl (Murnen et al., 2016; Dinella, 2017). If children like what they see (and feel), gender identity may be bolstered, or it may be challenged. Despite shifts to gender egalitarian attitudes, decades of research show widespread color-­ coded and gender-typed rooms, playthings, and clothing for infants, toddlers, primary school students, and adolescents. This pattern is taken for granted and continuing (MacPhee and Prendergast, 2018). Gender-oriented clothing and accessories provide early labels to ensure that others use gendered norms as signals to respond to children. If an infant girl’s gender is not readily identifiable by her clothing, she may have a bow attached to her bald head so that she will not be mistaken for a boy.

Toys and Dolls Gendered playthings for toddlers and young children are easy to spot and retrieve in toy aisles. Manufacturers offer gender lines for almost all their toys, even if the toys have the same function. Girls and boys play with the same building blocks but in different colors; girls’ are pink and purple, and boys’ are in darker primary colors. Infant girls cuddle pink-clad

Gender Development: The Socialization Process  115

teddy bears and dolls, and infant boys cuddle blue-clad teddy bears and dolls. Plush animals are indistinguishable in all features except color. By age two, children begin to reject toys designed for the other gender and select those designed for their own gender. By preschool, children have a firm commitment to own-gender toys and tend to reject other-gender toys as well as the children playing with other-gender toys, especially if a boy is playing with a girl’s toy. By age three, for example, boys’ choice of male gender stereotyped toys gets firmer. Girls, however, increasingly prefer the playthings boys are given (Todd et al., 2017a, 2017b). Girls do not reject toys designed for them, but even at this young age, girls reach out for toys designed with boys in mind.

Barbies A clothing–toy link is a formidable force for socialization, especially for girls who buy “fashions” and accessories for their dolls. Dolls for girls, especially Barbies, “action figures” for boys (advertisers will never call them dolls) are standard gifts to children. Not only are messages about beauty, clothing, and weight sent to girls via dolls, but girls learn about options in life. Recently celebrating her 60th birthday, Barbie is the iconic representation of this socialization globally. An astounding nine out of ten girls own Barbies; most girls own multiple Barbies. Barbie has held a variety of jobs, including astronaut, flight attendant, and rapper. At the height of the women’s movement in the 1970s, she graduated from medical school as a surgeon and joined the army in the 1980s. She ran for president in 1992. Despite these jobs, girls who play with Barbie report fewer career options for themselves than boys (Sherman and Zurbriggen, 2014; Fine and Rush, 2018; Pflum, 2019). Barbie does have nonwhite friends, but except for skin color, they are identical in size to classic white Barbie. Ken dolls are marketed to girls: “shop for a Ken doll to round out your Barbie collection.” Ken has become more masculine over time, broader in the shoulders and more muscular. Recently overhauled to reflect concern for depicting diversity, we have man-bun Ken, mixed-race Ken, and “shorter-but-not-in-a-way-that-makes-him-any-less-of-a-man Ken” (Schwedel, 2017). Mothers fondly recall their own experiences with Barbie but have driven a charge for inclusiveness. Criticisms about Barbie‘s outmoded messages to girls on bodies, appearance, fashion comments (will we ever have enough clothes?), and options for their future life saw a decline in Barbie sales. Barbie and Ken overhauls by Mattel reversed this trend. Barbie is now bought in petite, tall, and curvy forms. Barbie comes in a wheelchair, has a prosthetic limb, has braided hair texture, and a new fourth shape, with smaller bust, less defined waist, and more defined arms (Kahn, 2019). Parents are relieved about Barbie-positivity and inclusiveness, and again feel good about giving Barbie as presents.

Sexualization and Action Figures Dolls for girls are increasingly sexualized. Most Barbies avoided this trend, although “Fashion Barbie” marked her sexually mature body shape with an outfit of black lace, short skirt, and plunging neckline (Sherman and Zurbriggen, 2014:205). Many dolls wear black leather miniskirts, thigh-high boots, and thongs, with the same items found on shelves in clothing stores for tween girls, often under “eye candy” and “wink wink” slogans. Theories of socialization explain the process differently, but all acknowledge the gender detriment associated with childhood sexualization. With its powerful media connection, sexualized dolls and

116  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

clothing for ’tween girls are linked to self-objectification, feelings of powerless, and depression. A girl’s self-efficacy and competency, health, and overall well-being are threatened (Women’s Health, 2018; Forste et al., 2019). Parents dismayed by the grip of Barbie may encourage tween daughters to play with non-sexualized Barbie-type dolls until they are out of the doll stage of childhood. A generation ago the male counterpart of Barbie was G.I. Joe. Although today G.I. Joe is sold mainly to nostalgic adult men, it was the prototype for subsequent action figures. Current action figures for boys have larger body frames and are more muscular than the original figures. These figures can be bent, and their bodies can be manipulated to emphasize movement and complex activities. Except for baby-type dolls, girls play with dolls with few joints and limited options for staging movement. Girls equate beauty and style with Barbie. Boys equate good looks and ruggedness with heroic action figures. Messages about masculine and feminine embodiment ideals are sent to both boys and girls through these toys. G.I Joe has his own franchise, including movies in a military-themed, violent universe. Special operatives of the “G.I. Joe Unit” include live action characters with actors such as Dwayne Johnson, Bruce Willis, and Tatum Channing. A commanding entertainment-based youth culture bolstered by gendered toys is another link to lower self-esteem, damaged notions regarding physical activity, and origins of eating disorders in children. Girls may be more susceptible, but these risks also accrue to boys (Chapter 2).

Toys and Gender Scripts Toys offer an invitation “to play with an identity” (Levinovitz, 2017). Playthings for children allow them to write their own scripts according to how they “relate” to their toys. Nonetheless, toys are designed to direct these scripts in gendered ways. Toys for girls encourage domesticity, interpersonal closeness, and a social orientation. Boys receive more categories of toys, their toys are more complex and expensive, and the toys foster self-reliance and problem solving. Toys for boys are likely to be designed for action (race cars, trains, weapons, building, outdoor play). Toys for girls are likely to be designed for housework (ironing, cooking, sewing, cleaning) and beauty (hairstyling, cosmetics, glamorous clothing for dolls). As they get older, Dick and Jane acquire toys that encourage more imagination, pretense, and role-taking. Pretend play is developed earlier in girls, but by second grade, boys surpass girls in imaginative play. Girls script play and stage activities more realistically, typically having to do with caretaking of dolls and playing house. Girls are little homemakers and boys are the “young men of industry” (Daly, 2017). The major exception to this pattern is the “princess” scenario girls embrace, often to the chagrin of their nontraditional parents. The power of Disney is transferred to toys for girls, and replete with play scenarios about romance and rescue (Heatwole, 2016; Hefner et al., 2017). Soon-to-be princesses cheerfully accept the drudgery of domestic tasks (Cinderella) until rescued by a Disney prince. Disney is making progress in carving out non-traditional spaces for female and male characters. Frozen, the highest grossing Disney film of all time, popular with both girls and boys, depicts an assertive princess and softer male in a lead role (Walsh, 2017). This bodes well for possible changes in gender scripting in movies that defy gender stereotypes (Chapter 13). Boys script play around fantasies related to superheroes, dragons and dinosaurs, wars in space, and aliens. The toys associated with the scripts are oriented to competitiveness,

Gender Development: The Socialization Process  117

FIGURE 3.1  Baby

Blues

Source: © 2003 Baby Blues Partnership, Distributed by King Features Syndicate Inc

violence, physical movement, and danger. Girls have one major advantage over boys in their toy selections: they can cross over and play with toys designed for boys. Even so-called gender-neutral toys still resemble toys for boys in color, such as primary color building blocks and boys pictured on boxes with toy trains. These keep the appeal for boys but allow them to be purchased for girls (Bainbridge, 2018). Playing with male-oriented toys is associated with sports participation and earlier development of manipulative and mechanical skills for boys. Given that boys are discouraged from playing with toys designed for girls (boys shrink from Barbies), if boys are restricted in their play, it is lack of encouragement in scripting suggestive of domestic roles, such as caring for children (no dolls allowed) and doing housework. Parents and children express strong preferences for gender-typed toys. These preferences reinforce persistent gendered messages children receive via their toys. Pictures on the boxes suggest how boys and girls should use toys. Jane uses her tea set to give parties for dolls in her room, whereas same-age Dick is experimenting with sports or racing trucks outside in the mud. Policing by siblings and peers ensures that children play with toys or stage games in gender-specific ways. These gendered messages in turn show up in differences between girls and boys in cognitive and social development in childhood and in gender roles as adults. Feminists argue that toys replicate patriarchal constructions of gender and lead to the oppression of girls (Collins and Rothe, 2017). Since girls enthusiastically consume artifacts such as dolls and toys for household work, they inadvertently narrow their options for life outside the domestic sphere.

Gender-Neutral Toys The gendered grip on playthings for toddlers and young children is loosening, with a steady trend toward less emphasis on gender. Toy aisles are more likely to be divided as “age appropriate”, rather than “gender appropriate.” Ads for toys are labeled for “baby” or “toddler” rather than for “baby boy” or “baby girl” (Garcia, 2018). Toys spark a child’s curiosity and open a gateway to gender flexibility. When boys and girls play with “gender-flexible” toys, they learn about the domain of the other gender. Boys learn comforting with dolls and girls learn competitiveness with balls (Li and Wong, 2016; Spinner et al., 2018). Toy brands are responding to demands from parents for gender-neutral non-stereotyped toys appealing to both boys and girls.

118  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

On the other hand, a counter-trend is unfolding, this time driven by parents who want more complicated, mechanical, and technological toys for their daughters. Brands must design toys for girls that mirror toys for boys and market them in gender-neutral ways. Marketing strategies must be gendered and gender-neutral at the same time. This is a tall order. Boys choose action figures and girls choose Barbie, but marketers are attending to the huge range in between that offer non-gendered tantalizing options for parents and children. These keep the appeal for boys but allow them to be purchased for girls.

Gendered Parenting Non-parents are less traditional about gender appropriateness of toys or clothing or how parents should raise children with any standard of gender appropriateness. The transition to parenthood changes everything. Parents monitor their own parenting and believe its style is positive. As expected, their children do not share this view (Skinner and McHale, 2016; Endendijk et al., 2018). Children are well aware that moms and dads treat them differently. Also as expected, they believe their mothers will respond to them differently than their fathers. Parenting practices vary not only according to the gender of the child, but also according to the gender of the parent. Children as young as three years anticipate parental approval when they play with gender-typed toys. Boys expect more disapproval from their fathers by playing with toys considers to be for girls; mothers are neutral or less disapproving. Children expect mothers to soothe hurt feelings (it will be OK) more than fathers (you’ll get over it). They expect to have more recreational time with their fathers, especially in rough-and-tumble play. Household chores are typically divided by gender, but mothers more than fathers encourage both sons and daughters to take on chores usually assigned to the other gender. These patterns increase as children get older (Chapter 8). Parents have convictions that certain activities are suited to either a boy or girl. Parents perceive that gender is a good indicator of their children’s competencies in areas such as math, reading, and types of sport, even if these influences are independent of any differences in talents of the children. With gender in mind, parents discipline children differently. Aggressive behavior in boys is linked to gendered parenting, giving girls more latitude to “get away with things.” For other parenting styles, child outcomes are poorer if children see their mothers as more authoritarian than their fathers (Tavassolie et al., 2016; Endendijk et al., 2017). Children recognize the inequity in their parents’ behavior (it’s not fair!) but accept it as gender appropriate. Levels of parent–child and parent–parent similarity about gender role attitudes and the gendered behavior it triggers carry into adolescence and can follow into adulthood (Degner and Dalege, 2013; Halpern and Perry-Jenkins, 2016). Accepting gender stereotypes is consistent with cognitive development theory. The development of gender identity is linked to children’s perception of adult (parents’) behaviors.

LGBTQ Parenting Noted earlier, race and class mediate socialization experiences of boys and girls. Other parenting patterns crosscut not only race and class, but also religion, immigration status, and sexuality. Research on parenting and siblings in LGBTQ families show similar patterns. Parental sexual orientation does not predict level of gender conformity (Chapter 8). Like play behavior

Gender Development: The Socialization Process  119

in families overall, children are gender-conforming. Children and siblings in LGBTQ families are less likely to endorse gender stereotypes and children have less gender-differentiated behavior than in other family forms. Over time, however, LGBTQ families drift toward the more stereotyped gender norm. Boys (but not girls) show more masculine behaviors (Goldberg and Garcia, 2016; Olson and Enright, 2018; Spivey et al., 2018). LGBTQ couples may actively resist these gendered norms depending on many factors, including support from family and community (Averett, 2016).

Mom, Dad/Sons, Daughters Gender of parent does not predict the level of responsiveness—both parents respond swiftly and appropriately to the demands of their children (Endendijk et al., 2016; Schinkel et al., 2017). Gender of parent, however, can predict type of response. There are clear differences between men and women in gender role expectations concerning child rearing. Children of all ages spend more time with women than men. Girls do housework with mothers, and boys do yard work with fathers. Fathers spend more time with their sons and focus activities on instrumental learning—how to repair things, how to compete successfully in sports, and how to earn and manage money. Regardless of the child’s gender, mothers talk to their children, are emotionally expressive, and stay closer to them more than fathers. Both mothers and fathers expect riskier behavior from sons. Fathers believe that overprotecting their children, especially their sons, limits opportunities for physical risk-taking that is unproductive. Risk issues show up in messages about sex and sexuality. Both parents find it difficult to talk about sexuality with their young children, but daughters are sent more restrictive sex messages than their sons (Brussoni and Olsen, 2012; Christensen et al., 2017; Lunkenheimer et al., 2017). Today’s parents are more likely to support beliefs about gender equity and feminist values than did their parents. A new generation of feminist parents is socializing the next generation of feminist children. They do not want to impose gender stereotypes on their children but, as forerunners of change, face difficult obstacles. Their less equitable parenting behavior may not accurately reflect their more equitable gender role attitudes. The ideological shift toward equity is more strongly supported by mothers than by fathers. Fathers have less support for gender equity when they have sons only, but more support when they have daughters only. As noted multiple times, a daughter’s cross-gender behavior is tolerated—even ­encouraged—more than such behavior by sons. Girls can now join Cub Scouts and earn the same badges and make the cars for Pinewood Derby that their brothers do, and their fathers did. Boy Scouts of America (BSA) followed suit and as of 2019 girls could join. This is remarkable given that the ban on transgender BSA members was lifted only in 2017 (O’Hara, 2017). Some BSA troops are ignoring the change, continuing to exclude LGBTQ children. Admitting transgender BSA members was expected to doom the organization. The admittance of BSA girls is now a bigger threat, also expected to doom the organization (Hare, 2018). It is clear once again that feminine activities are devalued. Parents (and society) celebrate girls’ achievement when they outperform perform boys or enter all-male bastions like the BSA (Braun and Davidson, 2017; Kollmayer et al., 2018). Celebrating the achievements and successes of girls, the Girl Scouts of America (GSA) is losing members. Consider how fathers, compared to mothers, are likely to react to the changes in BSA. Fathers lag behind mothers because they may tap into gender differences that reflect their own socialization experiences. Social constructionism suggests that beliefs about equity

120  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

cannot fully erase these early family influences. Children from egalitarian households— whether their parents are defined as feminist or not—are exposed to patriarchy outside their homes and through other agents of socialization. Until egalitarian behavior is normative in all social institutions, a cultural lag persists. Socialization powerfully serves both gender role continuity and gender role change. As gender equity is more widespread, the next generation of parents will socialize their children in less traditional ways than they were socialized. Millennials are the leading edge of this charge.

Peers and Preferences Children transfer gender patterns established in the family to emerging friendships with peers. Play dates and birthday parties initiated by parents set the stage for these new relationships, often developing into friendships chosen by the children themselves. Two- and threeyear-olds delight in playing with their same-age companions, and parents are not compelled to separate them by gender at this early age. As school age approaches, however, this situation is altered dramatically. Peer-driven activities, games, and play are strongly related to gender roles. As all theories document, the family-peer connection is at the center of gender socialization. Watching a brother and sister play together illustrates this. When Jane pressures Dick into playing house, she is the mommy and he is the daddy. Or she can convince him to be the student while she is the teacher and relishes the prospect of scolding him for his disruptive classroom behavior. On the other hand, if brother Dick coerces Jane into a game of catch, he bemoans her awkwardness and ridicules her lack of skill. What would social learning theory say about the likelihood of Jane becoming an expert in catch? Games such as these usually are shortlived, dissolve into conflict, and depend on the availability of same-gender peers with whom siblings would rather play.

Games Games boys play are more complex, competitive, and rule-governed and allow for more positions to be played and a larger number of participants than games played by girls. Girls play ordered games such as hopscotch and jump rope in groups of two or three, which take up less space, minimize competitiveness, and tend to enhance cooperation. Both boys and girls play kickball, but boys play it at a younger age than girls and graduate to more competitive, physically demanding sports sooner than girls. There are significant consequences of gender differences in games and play. Girls prefer to socialize at recess rather than do any physical activity, a pattern more pronounced with African American and Latino girls (Kim, 2008; Holmes, 2012). When girls do not engage in physical activities in early childhood, they are less interested in sports and exercising, and stay indoors more than boys. By adolescence, they show some loss in bone density and are at increased risk for obesity (Chapter 2). An important early study of these effects bitterly concluded that girls’ games “teach meaningless mumbo-jumbo—vague generalities or pregame mutual agreements about ‘what we’ll play’—while falsely implying that these blurry self-guides are typical of real world rules” (Harragan, 1977:49–50). Decades later the pattern holds. Jumping rope is a shared activity for girls in smaller spaces on playgrounds that are dominated by boys who play soccer and

Gender Development: The Socialization Process  121

basketball. Boys and girls are proud of these activities and seize opportunities to show off their skills. Boys act out masculinity in their sports skills, and girls act out femininity by friendship and precision in their jump rope skills. These skills are modeled to same-gender peers. Girls may take longer to develop the ability to take on the roles of several people at once—referred to as the generalized other by symbolic interactionists—valuable in developing leadership skills by understanding group dynamics. Effective leaders can anticipate how a group will react to management decisions. Complex games such as team sports require this ability. Games of young boys provide early guidelines helpful for success later in life, such as individual excellence through competition. Boys are at a disadvantage in other ways because it takes them longer than girls to learn values such as consensus building, cooperation, and emotional intimacy, also essential for interpersonal and economic success. Cognitive development and social learning theory highlight the effect of peers in fueling gender segregation during early childhood. With strong gender cognitions about similarity, peer group influence increases throughout the school years, exerting a powerful effect on children. As on playgrounds across the globe, children quickly gravitate toward same-gender peers. When children interact, positive reinforcement for the behavior of same-gender peers is more frequent than with other-gender peers. Young boys have stronger gender-typed preferences in activities when they are with peers than when alone. Boys who do not fit gender-typical norms are set up for peer victimization and emotional distress (Smith et al., 2018a:947). They are mocked by other boys for displaying fear or for crying when they are picked on and applauded when they are aggressive. Even with zero tolerance school policies about bullying when boys taunt other boys, their peers on the sidelines spur them on. Boys are more tenacious in their gender typical behavior and exhibit strong masculine stereotyped preferences through preadolescence. Boys are more likely than girls to be expelled from school for aggressive behavior so must walk a fine line between displaying too much or not enough aggression when other boys are present (Reigeluth and Addis, 2016). Both gender-typical and gender-atypical behavior is risky for boys concerned with keeping and gaining friends. When boys police each other on masculine norms, they either elevate and preserve prestige or risk losing prestige. Children prefer to interact with other children who have the same style of play as their own. Children who frequently play with same-gender peers are liked less by opposite-gender peers and more by same-gender peers. Girls’ preferences for same-gender play decrease in later childhood; boys’ preferences for same-gender peer play remain consistent. Gender segregation is enforced by peers, but high-activity girls gravitate to the games of boys and mixed-gender play without severe consequences. Boys who violate same-gender peer play rules are at risk on multiple physical and emotional fronts (Lindsey, 2016; Choi and Ohm, 2018). Boys interact in larger groups and have more extensive but less communal peer relationships; girls interact in smaller groups and have more intensive and more communal peer relationships. Early intimacy with peers carries over to higher levels of self-disclosure and trust between women, especially best-friend pairs. The trust and openness that enhance same-gender relationships can inhibit later cross-gender friendships. Gender boundaries are strictly monitored and enforced by peers in childhood, and the worlds of male and female are further divided. Because they learn different styles of interaction, when boys and girls meet as teenagers, they may do so as strangers (Chapters 4 and 7).

122  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

Shifts in Gendered Peer Behavior Peer socialization experiences of girls and boys differ depending on type and context of the experience. Peer harassment, social exclusion, taunting, and name-calling are associated with gender-nonconformity. However, children’s engagement with gendered activities shows remarkable shifts for girls. Since girls are often rewarded for masculine activities, they can be more gender atypical in their activities (Braun and Davidson, 2017). As expected, peer harassment of boys predicts fewer feminine activities. For girls, gender non-conformity in later childhood is valued. Gender non-conformity in boys is not. As this chapter documents, boys and girls experience different gender socialization processes. These findings need to be incorporated in theories to explain both similarities and differences.

School The intimacy and spontaneity of the family and early childhood peer groups are replaced when children enter school, a setting where they are evaluated impersonally and rewarded for academic success. The highly gendered school environment is a weighty one for both parents and their student children for the next two decades of their lives (Chapter 11). With its gendered family foundation, primary socialization is relentless in its march to preschool. Regardless of the mission to evaluate children impersonally—by what they do rather than who they are—schools are not immune to gender role stereotyping. Teachers who sincerely believe they treat boys and girls similarly inadvertently perpetuate sexist notions.

Dick and Jane at School When Jane is ignored or not reprimanded for disruptive behavior, is encouraged in reading but not inspired by math, or given textbooks with females presented in a narrow range of roles—or not showing them at all—gender stereotyping is emboldened (Chapter 11). Teachers who consciously work to counter pervasive gender stereotypes reassure girls in their choices and interest in a range of subjects. A girl’s belief that she is good at math, for example, enhances her math achievement (Arens et al., 2016; Master and Meltzoff, 2016). In early school years, the math achievement of girls is heightened by displays of teacher warmth, as is the reading achievement of boys. As children enter middle school and children are being prepared for future roles, teacher warmth declines and gender stereotyping increases (Hughes and Cao, 2018; Valiente et al. 2019). Teachers and school staff strive to present gender equitable messages to Jane about her job choices, and she is more likely than Dick to choose less gender-typical fields of study. However, if these messages are provided in settings that segregate boys from girls, gender disparities may be unintentionally reproduced rather than broken down (Lawson et al., 2018; Trumpy and Elliott, 2019). By middle school, children are further aware that masculinity is rewarded more than femininity. For Jane, self-esteem and achievement motivation decline. Dick discovers his rowdiness gains attention from his female elementary school teacher, he can aspire to any occupation, and he is rewarded for athletic skills at recess. Unlike Jane, who is openly admired by girls, but grudgingly admired by boys when engaged in “tomboy” behavior, Dick is loath to investigate school activities typical for girls, lest he be called a “sissy.” “Fag discourse” disparaging boys by comparing them to girls and suspected LGBTQ children has significant emotional impact. The price boys pay for strict gender conformity is anxiety about transgressing boundaries policed by boys. Boys with lower gender typicality

Gender Development: The Socialization Process  123

(gender nonconformity) correctly fear peer victimization. Whether a boy is gender-typical or gender-atypical, gender salience is significant and is associated with increased depression in adolescence.

Sociological Theory Macro sociological approaches offer insight to gendered school patterns. Functionalists emphasize schools’ responsibility to socialize children to eventually take on positions contributing to an ordered, balanced society. Schools offer academic, social, and technical competence required for future jobs. Children are instilled with appropriate cultural values and norms. American culture places high value on competition, initiative, independence, and individualism, and schools are expected to advocate these. In schools, values are associated more with roles celebrating the masculinity of boys rather than even the newer “quasi-femininity” of girls. Schools are indispensable in bringing together a diverse society through the acceptance of a common value system, but gender equality is often overlooked as part of that system. Conflict theory asserts that gender equality is a value associated with social justice and democracy, but it takes a backseat to individual success. Many schools unwittingly socialize children into acquiring one set of values to the exclusion of the other. Stereotypical thinking assumes that to fill bread-winning roles, boys need to be taught the value of competitiveness and learn to fill domestic roles, girls need to be taught the value of nurturance. Although both are positive, necessary values to instill, only one-half of American children truly accept one or the other. As schools begin to foster gender-fairness in the curriculum and in school culture, gender role socialization harmful to both girls and boys can be altered.

Television Television aimed at young children is by far the most influential mass media source of gender socialization. With streaming options available 24/7 a child may spend up to one-third of the day watching TV or in front of a device with television content. Toddlerhood is a critical time for brain development. Heavy television viewing is significantly associated with traditional and stereotyped views of gender, but even short TV segments influence endorsements about differences between boys and girls in ability, motivation, and personality. Gender stereotypes about emotions prevail in both entertainment and educational programming for children. Boys are stoic and show anger; girls are fearful and show sadness (Martin, 2017; Wille et al., 2018). Children are vulnerable in believing that television images represent truth and reality. Television establishes standards of behavior, provides role models, and communicates expectations about all social life. Children increasingly use messages from television to learn about gender and sexuality—a pattern found for all genders and for children of all races in the United States. When television images are reinforced by social media and movies, magazines, and popular music the impact on socialization is profound (Chapter 13).

Television Teaches Resonating with social learning theory, toddlers copy what they see on TV, with imitation increasing from preschool throughout the elementary school. Television encourages modeling. Children identify with same-gender characters. Boys identify with physically strong

124  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

characters, (athletes, soldiers, superheroes). Girls identify with beautiful models, popular and attractive peers in school, and plain girls who are transformed into lovely and rich princesses.

Sesame Street Gender role portrayals in the shows parents love and encourage their children to watch are highly stereotyped. Celebrating its 50th anniversary, Sesame Street (SS), is the most popular children’s show for preschool children of all time (Guthrie, 2019). However, it significantly underrepresents female characters—human or Muppet—and compared to females, depicts males as dominant, assertive, and in roles of authority. In response to complaints from parents about too many masculine characters, a major diaper brand was rumored it would remove Sesame Street characters from its diapers. Big Bird may be gender-ambiguous, but the diapers were virtually devoid of female characters. Oscar The Grouch, Cookie Monster, and Elmo were the figures mostly depicted on the diapers. The company repudiated the rumors and mentioned the characters of Zoe and Rosita would be more prominent on the diapers, along with generic designs suitable for all babies (Pasquini, 2018). Children and their parents who grew up with Sesame Street have difficulty recalling the female Muppets. Highly stereotyped vain and shrill Miss Piggy is recalled by adults as a Muppet from Sesame Street, but unlike Kermit the Frog, never appeared on Sesame Street. Partnership portrayals between male and female SS characters are rare. The same-gender relationship between Bert and Ernie (B&E) is applauded for its positive portrayal of males as best friends. As more than buddies, they do not hide emotions from one another. When asked if B&E are gay, one creator says he felt “they were” when writing about them (Brammer, 2018). Frank Oz, Bert’s creator, denies they are gay. Oz says he is happy that, regardless of sexual orientation, people can see themselves in B &E. Rare in the culture wars, a generally productive positive conversation ensued about the controversy. As Oz states And I learned something profound. Thanks for those who tweeted with me. Next time I would be very interested to know: If Bert and Ernie were indeed gay, would they be different than they are now? (Rosenblatt, 2018) Sesame Street prides itself on being inclusive and introduced racially and ethnically diverse characters decades ago. By its insistence that B&E are not gay, it may have missed “a teachable moment”, affirming LGBTQ relationships, people or Muppet (Blake, 2018). As Sesame Street celebrates inclusiveness by race, ethnicity, and perhaps by sexuality, it’s gender-stereotyped blind spot remains glaring.

Cartoons In cartoons for children, male characters outnumber female characters ten to one. Female characters are portrayed more in family- and home-based settings and are more physically attractive and sexualized than male characters (The Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast). Cartoons usually have all males or have one or two females, often in helping or little sister relationships. Many may recall from childhood the lone Smurfette among all other male Smurfs. When girls are portrayed with boys in adventurous situations, boys determine the story line and the “code of values” for the group. Boys get the credit for solving a problem

Gender Development: The Socialization Process  125

when a girl does the work (Velma and Shaggy in Scooby Doo). Girls are defined in relation to the boys. If she has a lead or powerful role, she is often mean or evil (Angelica in Rugrats, 1991–2004).

Children’s Programs Television influences self-image. On Saturday morning and after school TV, boys are more significant than girls, if only by the sheer number of male characters in shows. Like Sesame Street, Public Television for children from toddlers to middle school is replete with shows featuring male leading characters (Arthur, Curious George, Wild Kratts, Daniel Tiger’s Neighborhood). Across children’s programming on all channels, television consistently portrays stereotypical female characters, especially teenagers, primarily as add-ons to males (SpongeBob, Phineas and Ferb). Children’s programming deviating from gender stereotypes is not only successful, but hugely popular. Females are lead characters depicted as heroic, smart, and adventurous; male and female characters are partners in adventures (Dora the Explorer, DC Superhero Girls, Odd Squad, Powerpuff Girls). Although these are positive signs, Superhero Girls have a sexualized appearance. Rebooted Powerpuff Girls (2016), alas, are still more puff than powerful, and it is difficult to find boys in roles that show caring and warmth. When girls take the lead in shows such as Odd Squad, boys are depicted as ineffectual at worst and geeks at best. Factoring in race, young white boys are offered the loudest TV messages that in turn are bolsters to their self-esteem.

Advertising Children’s television is supported by commercials and print ads aimed at products for children—mainly toys, fast food, and sugared cereal. In the early days of television, advertising for children’s items was targeted to adults. Today children are more likely than adults to watch the commercials. Despite efforts to control commercials consumed by their children, parents cannot control commercials watched on multiple devices or viewed in magazines outside the home. Parental strategies to counter advertising messages often fail (Nelson et al., 2017). The toy industry markets to the “child consumer” with age- and gender-linked ads designed for a specific niche of children. Advertisers ensure that doing without these toys is an unfortunate hardship. Commercials are blatant in creating desires for toys encouraging domesticity and passivity in girls and activity and movement in boys; girls play cooperatively, and boys play competitively and aggressively. These patterns show no sign of decreasing. In fact, gender stereotypes are intensifying. The entertainment industry has melded toys into television, and the child consumer it caters to is getting younger. Toy manufacturers such as Mattel and Fisher-Price, and producers of children’s programs such as Disney have joined in creating a “baby market” targeting the 0–3 age niche. Parents succumb to industry claims that children can learn while having fun. Industry and parents define toddlers as “early learners” with products marketed as educational, developmental (Baby Einstein, Mega Bloks), and enhancing sensory play, the needed step before the physical play that follows. Better yet are “learning” toys that are gender neutral, attractive to boys and girls alike. Like other toys on TV, however, learning toys remain clearly differentiated by gender. Advertisers must reconcile the trend toward the gender-neutral toys that parents desire, but with a TV industry that stubbornly persists in children’s shows brimming with gender stereotypes.

126  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

Parents may offer gender-neutral toys to their toddlers, but buoyed by the TV-toy link, their offers are resisted. Parents searching for nonstereotyped toy alternatives may feel demoralized when the offer of a baking set to their son or a truck to their daughter is met with resistance. Tantalized by television, the child’s desire is within reach. The desire is likely to be gender role-oriented. The parent stands in between. Who is likely to give up the fight first?

SOCIALIZATION FOR GENDER EQUITY Socialization is neither consistent nor uniform. It occurs via diverse, intersectional agents throughout culture and at all subcultural levels. Yet gender role patterns emerge, and children learn to behave in feminine or masculine ways that reinforce the sex/gender binary. Significant contradictions also arise in this process. Girls climb trees, excel in math, and aspire to be surgeons and astronauts. These same girls are concerned about physical attractiveness, financial success, finding the right husband, and raising a family. Boys enjoy cooking and babysitting and cry when they are hurt or sad. These same boys are concerned about physical attractiveness, financial success, finding the right wife, and raising a family.

Challenging the Binary Theories and research on socialization strongly support the idea that masculinity and femininity need to shift toward gender role flexibility. And indeed, they have shifted. The benefits of flexibility attest to this shift. We know that rigid gender roles are constraining rather than liberating for life in a rapidly changing global society. In addition, socialization toward gender flexibility paves the way to increased gender equity. Critics may say that gender equity is embraced merely for political purposes, but global evidence strongly supports that the higher the level of gender equity, the higher the level of social health, and wealth, and individual well-being (Chapter 6). Regardless of how various theories explain gender socialization, they all agree that masculine and feminine traits are changeable. What socialization options might offer paths to achieving the flexibility that paves the way to gender equity? If gender constrains rather than liberates, perhaps “gender role” is an outmoded concept.

Androgyny The concept of androgyny refers to the integration of traits considered to be feminine with those considered to be masculine. Sizable numbers are identified as androgynous on widely used scales. As measured by these scales, LGBTQ individuals show higher levels of androgyny than the overall population. Both men and women of all genders score high or low on either set of traits or in combination with them. People accept their biological sex (being male or female) and have a strong sense of gender identity but acknowledge benefits of gender role flexibility. Gendered behavior does not disappear, but is adapted to situations and contexts, and simultaneously acted on according to talents and desires. Parents identified as androgynous are less stereotyped about masculinity and femininity and offer a wider range of behavioral and attitudinal possibilities to their children. Many are the forerunner parents to feminist kids.

Gender Development: The Socialization Process  127

Critique Although androgyny is an encouraging concept, it is out of favor as applied to socialization. It suggests that people can be defined according to a range of gendered (masculine/ feminine) behaviors and then classified accordingly. This in itself is stereotypical thinking. Media-inspired conceptions stereotype the “androgynous man” as feminine, often portraying him as inept or weak. Today when a woman exhibits so-called masculine traits, she is more likely to be portrayed positively than she would have been only a few decades ago. Since androgyny is associated with femininity rather than masculinity, it lacks the envisioned positive integration of gender traits. It may be masculine-affirmative for women, but it is not feminine-affirmative for men. According to Sandra Bem, the pioneer in measuring androgyny, even if we define masculine and feminine by our culture, we need to stop projecting gender onto situations “irrelevant to genitalia” (Bem, 1985:222). She later reformulated androgyny to counter its drawbacks and to make it compatible with her gender schema theory. For parents and teachers to enthusiastically embrace a socialization model for gender equity they must believe that feminine traits in boys are as valuable and prestigious as masculine traits in girls. Because of lurking stereotypes and the higher cultural value given to masculinity, an androgyny model for socialization has been less successful.

Gender-Neutral Socialization Given the power of the gender binary generally favoring masculine traits, some parents who want to break its constraints adopt a gender-neutral approach to socialization. It is akin to the “degendered” model that considers outcomes for children not raised according to gender (Chapter 1). Gender-neutral parenting may exist on a continuum, with androgyny as a midpoint on the spectrum.

Raising Baby X The other pole on the spectrum would be raising a “Baby X,” maintaining a genderless existence for the child, even by concealing the child’s gender from others for as long as possible. Lois Gould’s charming children’s story published in Ms. magazine in 1980 represents this pole: Once upon a time, a Baby named X was born. It was named X so that nobody could tell whether it was a boy or a girl. Its parents could tell, of course, but they couldn’t tell anybody else. They couldn’t even tell Baby X—at least not until much, much later. (Gould, 1980: 61) The story revolves around how little X and its parents encountered and eventually overcame resistance from everyone who wanted to know what X was so that X could be treated as a boy or girl. Raising a gender-neutral Baby X seemed impossible only a short time ago. Although representing only a tiny number, parents raising children without a gender designation are growing. Media accounts are surfacing in the U.S., Canada, Sweden, and UK about the joys and challenges of parenting gender-neutral children. Parents choosing this option cannot

128  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

be gender blind as much as gender vigilant. They cannot ignore how gender roles seep into every aspect of their (our) lives. Like the parents of Baby X, they keep the biological sex of their child hidden except on a “need to know basis”—like grandparents. Contrary to gender panic about biology, children learn about and their “body parts” and how they are the same or how they differ from other babies and children. Couples mention they want their “kids to be just kids,” and not force them to a gender mold. They select television and books accordingly. They avoid stereotypes in toys (let toys be toys), clothes, and language and assign chores based on interest and household needs rather than gender. Barbies and guns may not be options from parents, but other selections are child-driven rather than parent-driven. By preschool, parents will often defer to their children in making these toy selections. Moms and dads model non-gendered choices. Blogs connect like-minded parents and expectant couples who attest that gender-neutral parenting is beneficial for their children (Wells, 2017; Herzog, 2018; Tortorello, 2019). These child-driven choices are important, too, for parents who did not choose to raise a gender-neutral Baby X from birth, but gradually became aware that their child was stubbornly gender non-conforming. Evidence for the few children raised as gender neutral from birth shows they do not identify as LGBTQ as they get older. About 15 percent of gender-nonconforming youth overall identify as transgender by adulthood. Rather than imposing gender on a young child who is clearly resisting it, parents may adopt gender-neutral options for subsequent childrearing. The learning curve is certainly different for parents who are exploring these options for a school-age child. Parents who raise LGBTQ children in less gendered homes and in inclusive community settings can offer support for challenges their children will face in maneuvering this identity. The parents of twins raised as “theybies” from birth, for example, reflect on their home as an “ environment of openness where the twins feel loved whether they grow up to identify as LGBTQ or not” (Compton, 2018).

Parents as Innovators Given the obstacles that equity-oriented parents face in gender-neutral parenting, a more pragmatic approach is demonstrated by parents who want to raise their children in less gendered ways but also account for their children’s preferences that may be more traditional. Referred to as “Innovators” in Emily Kane’s (2012) research on gender socialization, these parents promote crossing gender boundaries but also support gender-typical patterns. Sons and daughters are offered a variety of activities, toys, and games that do not assume traditional interests. It is difficult, however, for parents to determine whether they are indirectly gendering. Is a daughter really expressing an interest in dolls, for example, or are parents instilling that interest on her behalf? (Kane, 2012:143). Innovative parents reject biological essentialism but largely accept their children’s preferences, whether traditional or nontraditional.

Critique Research on gender-neutral socialization related to artifacts and peers on gender conformity is abundant. Media reports notwithstanding, research on the results of gender-neutral socialization is scarce. Some developmental psychologists and therapists warn that gender-neutral parenting sets children up for confusion about their identity and sense of self. Without clarity, the “child is not a full person.” Gender-neutral children risk bullying, ridicule, and exclusion

Gender Development: The Socialization Process  129

as they transition from home to a necessarily gendered world. Others voice ethical concerns about such parenting (Cutas and Giordano, 2013; Bracken 2020). Nonetheless, from accounts available, parents and children adopting gender-neutral socialization report satisfaction with their choices and optimism for a more gender-equitable future. Reports from the Sweden and the UK show “rigidly enforced gender stereotypes” are linked to mental health risks and compromised well-being (Hanna, 2019). The U.S. is less gender equitable than Europe, but patterns are predictably similar. Parents recognize gender pitfalls for their children if they are raised traditionally but are reluctant to deny these very traditions to their sons and daughters. They also know that raising children in two nonoverlapping gender roles is not productive in meeting the demands of a rapidly changing society. It will take a generation to see whether these children resurface as adults with the painful or happy stories full of highs and lows of growing up that all children encounter. We can tentatively conclude that gender-neutral socialization is not worse for the well-being of children than its normative gendered counterpart. With broader gender equity in mind, it is the better alternative. Baby X’s parents in 1980 had almost no options for degendering socialization. Seemingly impossible only a short time ago, options for gender-neutral socialization have changed dramatically. Consider the rapid acceptance of gender-neutral pronouns and inclusive titles (Chapter 4), gender-neutral marketing of toys and clothing, and growing support for the rights of LGBTQ parents and children (Chapter 8). Parents with gender-neutral visions compete with gender reveal and boymom celebrations. Powerful agents of gender socialization in families, schools, and media, however, show splinters favoring wider gender-neutral paths that serve gender equity. Baby X had a happy outcome. At the story’s conclusion, Baby X emerges as a well-adjusted and popular child: “X isn’t one bit mixed up! As for being a misfit—ridiculous. X knows perfectly well what it is! Don’t you, X?” The Xperts winked. X winked back … Later that day, all X’s friends put on their red and white checked overalls … and found X, in the backyard, playing with a very tiny baby that none of them had ever seen before. The baby was wearing very tiny red and white checked overalls. “How do you like our new baby?” X asked the Other Children proudly. “It’s got cute dimples,” said Jim. “It’s got husky biceps, too,” said Susie... . What “kind of baby is it? ... Then X broke into a big, mischievous grin … It’s a Y! (Gould, 1980: 64)

KEY TERMS Agents of socialization Androgyny Continuing socialization Culture Gender identity

Gender socialization Primary socialization Schemas Self Social control

Social institutions Socialization Subcultures

CHAPTER 4

Gendered Language, Communication, and Socialization

That’s one small step for (a) man, one giant leap for mankind. —Neil Armstrong, July 20, 1969 When Neil Armstrong first uttered his immortal words as he stepped onto the surface of the moon, it was unclear whether he forgot or flubbed the “a” before “man,” was misquoted, or that the recording could not accurately pick up the full utterance (Wolchover, 2012). Since “man” and “mankind” are redundant in his sentence, it does seem likely that the word was accidentally omitted. A half-century later, however, debate continues about the significance of the simple word “a.” In conjunction with his usage of the word “mankind,” this debate demonstrates that interest in the role of language as it relates to gender has moved from narrower academic arenas to wider public consciousness. Language wields a powerful but taken-for-granted force in socialization. Chapter 3 documents that primary socialization bombards children with mountains of information they must process, including learning both the verbal and nonverbal rules and complexities of their language. Language is multidirectional—it reflects culture and is shaped by it; therefore, it is fundamental to a child’s early understanding of gender. Language tells a child how culture defines and categorizes the genders. Symbolic interaction (SI), in conjunction with social construction (SI) is perhaps the most robust theoretical model for explaining the nuances of gendered language and communication, affirming that language shapes our perceptions and thus our understanding of “reality” (Chapter 1). In learning language, children become aware that the genders are valued differently. However, as the end point fallacy suggests, because socialization is lifelong, we continually modify language in response to situational context at the micro level, and social change at the macro level. It is the taken-for-granted part of language socialization that makes language such a formidable element in determining gender role continuity and change. Linguistic sexism is the normative production of language that subtly, but powerfully, transmits gender stereotypes that in turn perpetuates gender discrimination. Embedded in both language and speech, this discrimination usually plays out in favor of the power and dominance of men over women. For speakers of English, unless stated otherwise, everyone begins as a male. Decades of research on American English suggest that people are male until proven female.

Gendered Language, Communication, and Socialization  131

THE GENERIC MYTH The English language focuses attention on gender. The best example of such attention is when the word man is used to exclude woman and then used generically to include her. This is demonstrated when we speak of culture as man-made or the evolution of mankind, analogous to Neil Armstrong’s “giant leap.” Other examples may be less clear, such as referring to a voter as the typical “man on the street,” or finding “the right man for the job.” Are women included as voters or workers? More often the word is used to distinguish man from woman, such as in the phrases “it’s a man’s world,” “this is man’s work,” or having a “man to man talk.” The word is ambiguous and may be subject to interpretation even within the specific context. Although it is unclear where women “belong,” it does imply that they are “part” of man. Sometimes no interpretation is necessary. Although less frequent today, when in wedding ceremonies a couple is pronounced man and wife, she becomes identified as his. Generic language is not only ambiguous, but also discriminatory. It is awkward to change language to make it more precise. If man is supposed to refer to woman, then he also is supposed to mean she. Because English does not have a neutral singular pronoun, he is considered the generic norm, with she as the exception. An engineer or physicist is he, and a school teacher or secretary is she. Most neutral designations are also “he” words. A consumer, an employee, a patient, or a parent is he, despite the scores of women represented in these categories. Language is ambiguous, discriminatory, and inaccurate. The generic use of he is presumed to include all the shes it linguistically encompasses. It is quite apparent from research, however, that this is not the case. People develop masculine imagery for presumed neutral words, a pattern that is firmly in place by preadolescence. The pattern cuts across race, ethnicity, and social class, but males in all these categories adopt the pattern more quickly and more strongly than females. Generics with male referents are not neutral, since children and adults report primarily male, sex-specific imagery when hearing generic terms (Gygax et al., 2008). People visualize male and interpret the reference as male rather than male and female. We saw in Chapter 3 that a child’s emerging gender identity is strongly connected to the way words are perceived. The belief that the word man is a clear and concise reference to person does persist, even if the mass of evidence is squarely against this view.

Titles and Occupations Linguistic sexism abounds in the use of titles and occupations. When men introduce women in professional settings, the woman’s professional title is less likely to be used (Jane Smith rather than Dr. Jane Smith), than when men are introduced by men (Files et al., 2017:413). Unless otherwise mandated, conventional written communication, whether paper or online, continues usage of “Dear Sir” or “Dear Mr. Jones” even if we are unsure of the gender of the addressee. Businessmen are considered to be the likely occupants of these positions. The same can be said for chairmen, foremen, spokesmen, congressmen, newsmen, and garbagemen. If either gender deviates occupationally, entering the other’s field, we add linguistic markers (male nurse) to designate this surprising fact. Print media are inconsistent in use of generics, as a quick read of your local and neighborhood papers will verify. Women are referred to as “chairmen” or “chairwomen” for charitable events or are referred to as “he” when they are

132  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

business executives and grouped with men who are also executives. The nonsexist designations would be “chair” of the event or “they” to refer to all the executives. Children confront this usage issue in reading material designed for their own age group. They may assign meaning to words quite differently from what the adult assumes the child understands. Consider a child’s shock upon discovering that a cat burglar is not a cat at all. Children also use linguistic markers in referring to females in traditionally male roles (lady spaceman) or males in traditionally female roles (male secretary). Generic language thus prompts occupations to become gender “appropriate” for children. In turn, achievement motivation for pursing the “non-appropriate” occupation can decline (Cimpian, 2010; Vervecken et al., 2013). Coursework in computer science for females and preschool teaching for males may seem out of their reach (Chapter 11). When they find a mismatch between what they see and what they perceive to be true, they opt for the less difficult route. The stereotyped gender role thus remains unscathed. When women enter predominantly male occupations, little attention is given to how they are named. A woman may become an engineer and be referred to as a female engineer lest people mistakenly think most engineers are women. Male occupations are linguistically protected from invasion by females. However, when males begin to enter predominantly female occupations in greater numbers, a language shift occurs rather quickly. Although women are the large majority of elementary teachers and nurses, men are rapidly entering these fields, making the use of she as a generic label a subject of controversy. It is now considered improper to refer to teachers and nurses as she when more than a token number of men enter the occupations. The same can be said for referring to stewardesses as flight attendants and waitresses as servers. Women are reaching the majority of clergy, pharmacists, attorneys, and physicians, but the generic he is likely to be retained for a longer period when referring to them as a group. Another linguistic marker involves adding appendages or suffixes to words to show where women “belong” occupationally. A poet becomes a poetess, an usher becomes an usherette, and an actor becomes an actress. Women are defined as the exceptions to the male-as-norm rule. The linguistic markers are not necessary for men who already own the occupations. Titles of address for women also reinforce the idea that women are part of men. The title “Mr.” conveys the fact that the person addressed is likely an adult male. But for women, marital status is additionally conveyed in forms of address. When a woman fills out a form where she may check “Miss” or “Mrs.,” she is conveying personal information not asked of men. These titles define women according to their relationship with a man. This distinction historically served to provide information about a woman’s availability for marriage and even suitability for employment. To counter this titular sexism, “Ms.” was offered as an alternative to both married and unmarried women who believed that marital status is private information they may or may not choose to convey. Yet language change does not come easily. When first introduced in the 1970s, “Ms.” was ridiculed and maligned as a radical feminist invention used by women to cover up the shame of being divorced or not being married. Editors bemoaned its style while ignoring its precision. These objections have largely disappeared. Although married women and homemakers tend to prefer “Mrs.,” single women and professional women prefer “Ms.” Ms. is now associated positively with female impendence, agency, and fairness (Burns et al., 2016). As a form of address, Miss has moved into linguistic oblivion for adult women; if used at all, it is reserved for young girls. As indicated by its frequent usage throughout most media formats, today “Ms.” is a normative, standard form of address with a high level of acceptance.

Gendered Language, Communication, and Socialization  133

What’s in a Name? A simple one-word answer to this question is “identity.” Whereas a name symbolically links us to our past and provides us with a sense of self-definition, in many cultures girls are socialized early in life to expect the loss of their surnames upon marriage. A woman may also lose her complete name and be called someone different. Jane Smith becomes Mrs. Richard Jones. The new name and title alter her earlier identity legally, socially, and even psychologically. In patrilineal cultures where there are few written records, the trail to determining her kinship lineage may also disappear. Traced to English Common Law on couverture, a woman and all her assets became the possessions of her husband at marriage. Although coverture has been skewered in the United States and Britain, a husband can still linguistically encompass Mrs. Jones. Today legal requirements for a woman to abandon her name at marriage have all but disappeared, but preferences to align naming customs with gender role traditions are deeply rooted in most Western societies (MacEacheron, 2016). Considering the cultural strength of traditional heteronormative marriage and naming practices, the belief that a woman should take her husband’s surname is strong for both men and women. The surname change at marriage has serious implications for women whose accomplishments are recorded under their birth (“maiden”) names. These women can literally lose the professional recognition that impact their income, credit, tenure, notoriety, and careers. Strategies women use to offset such liabilities include retaining their birth name for professional purposes or hyphenating their birth and married surnames. Same-sex married couples or those in civil partnerships must also contend with such heteronormative practices, but whether they have more or less leeway in maneuvering gendered naming pitfalls remains unclear (Jones et al., 2017). However, strategies to salvage a woman’s surname are increasing. College students have positive perceptions of both men and women who choose to hyphenate their names. Compared with other married women, those with hyphenated names are perceived to be friendly, well educated, and intellectually curious. Men with hyphenated names are perceived to be accommodating, nurturing, and more committed to their marriages (Forbes et al., 2002). Women students are more positive about hyphenation than men students, but the generally positive perceptions of both bode well for future shifts to more gender equitable naming. Another linguistic dimension is the ordering and placement of gendered pairs (men and women/boys and girls/he and she), names, and titles. Academic journals, for example, are persistent with use of “male firstness,” where masculine terms are ordered before feminine terms (Willis and Jozkowski, 2018:137). Male firstness exists throughout written and verbal communication. Husband and wife, Mr. and Mrs., and Dr. and Mrs. give prominence to men. If she is a doctor and he is not, Dr. and Mr. would not likely be used, and if they are both doctors, Dr. and Dr. is also a less likely form of address. Men own the province of placement, so their name and title come first. An exception to this ordering rule is bride and groom. Considering that her wedding is treated as the most important event in the life of a woman, this is understandable. Her wedding day, the bridal party, bridesmaids, bridal path, and mother and father of the bride suggest the secondary status of the bridegroom. His status is resurrected, however, by phrases such as “giving the bride away,” usually the prerogative of her father, indicating the groom’s new ownership of her.

Children’s Names Naming traditions for children remain highly gender-typed. Parents typically choose forenames that rigidly align with their child’s biological sex (Robnett, 2017:823). These naming

134  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

choices ensure that people readily distinguish boys from girls. As expected, boys’ names are ripe for the picking as girls’ names but not the reverse. Popular boys’ names for girls include Madison, Morgan, Taylor, Cameron, Dylan, and Bradley. Gender-neutral names are not common, but some have emerged, including Avery, Peyton, Jamie, and Riley. Parents may choose androgynous names for girls in part because names perceived as masculine are associated with success (Kean, 2007). It is also permissible to append a name normally given to a boy to refer to a girl, such as Paul to Paula, Christopher to Christie, and Gene to Jean or Jeanette. A boy’s name is often used to designate girls, especially in shortened form. Pat, Lee, Dale, Chris, and Kelly are examples. But when boys’ names are co-opted by girls, such as Shirley, Jody, Marion (late actor John Wayne’s given name), Ashley, and Beverley, they quickly lose their appeal for boys. This sentiment is expressed by a concerned writer for devastated boys whose names are co-opted by girls. In schoolyards … permanent damage is already inflicted on budding male psyches of defenseless … Taylors and Jodys … It’s not like little guys have names to spare. Even before the young ladies hijacked Bradley and Glenn, there were fewer boys’ names than girls … Girls’ names were more like fanciful baubles for the decorative sex. (Goldman, 2000:22) Written two decades ago, this “naming” dilemma persists today. The obvious sexism in such comments bears out the taken-for-granted assumption that the superiority of boys over girls must be preserved. The equity option is ignored.

Linguistic Derogation English can be very unsympathetic to women. Women are typically referred to in derogatory and debased terms that are highly sexualized. There are several hundred such sexually related terms for women and only a handful for men. A few of the examples for females include broad, chick, doll, bitch, whore, babe, harpy, fleshpot, wench, fox, vixen, tramp, and slut. When men want to insult other men, they often use these same terms. Sexually derogatory terms are used almost exclusively by men and frequently in the context of sexually related jokes. Men who use and hear sexist jokes find them more amusing and less offensive than women, but both men and women judge the object of the jokes or the person who is sexually degraded as foolish, less intelligent, and less moral. Sexist jokes are associated with increased rape myth acceptance, especially in men defined by hostile sexism. Rather than declining, online sexist jokes are finding wider and more receptive audiences (Mallett et al., 2016; Plemenitaš, 2017; Sriwattanakomen, 2017; Cendra et al., 2019). And consider the sexual connotations of mistress and madam and the male counterparts of master and lord. The word girl suggests both child and prostitute. It is insulting for grown men to be called “boys,” but grown women are routinely referred to as “girls.” People take for granted the “guys–girls” distinction so that males do not have to be referred to as boys. Whether it is deemed inclusive or not, “guys” is an informal ubiquitous label to refer to groups of people. Linguistic practice regularly implies that males are complete beings who take on adult qualities and females are childlike and incapable but at the same time seductive and sexual. Females linguistically retain these statuses throughout their lives. Over time, English words for women acquire debased or even obscene references. Words such as lady, dame, madam, and mistress originally were neutral or positive designations

Gendered Language, Communication, and Socialization  135

for women (Henley, 1989:60). The masculine counterparts of lord, baronet, sir, and master escaped becoming pejorative. Another example is the word pair spinster/bachelor. Which word would you select to fill in the blank? “One attractive eligible _____ is always invited to their parties.” When a man chooses to remain unmarried, he is a “confirmed” bachelor. A woman may be a “spinster,” originally designating a woman who spins or sews, but now as old and unmarried, or an “old maid.” Although these words are rarely used today, positive terms for an adult, unmarried, female are unavailable or, if available (for example, bachelorette), are not commonly used. If women occupy a secondary position in society, stereotyped language continues to reinforce this placement. Language frequently trivializes women, casting them into categories associated with childishness, foolishness and being frivolous, a pattern that marginalizes them from other “adult humans.” Idioms, metaphors, and proverbs are linguistic markers reinforcing this marginalization (He and Zhang, 2018; Galer, 2017). Examples include: • • • • • •

weak as a kitten; gentle as lambs A man is as old as he feels, a woman as old as she looks women’s work, women’s place wine, women, and song empty-headed, dizzy blond cupcake, sugar pie, eye candy

If the terms man and woman imply maturity, the term lady minimizes a woman’s adultness. A wife or child may be referred to as “the little lady” of the house, distinct from “man of the house.” The male equivalent term is nonexistent. Trivialization of women evident in sexist language parallels the ideologies granting dominance to men in the larger social system (Douglas and Sutton, 2014). In turn, equitable gender role change in other institutions is thwarted.

GENDERED LANGUAGE USAGE Since we are socialized into the language of our culture and subcultures, as cultural diversity increases, the ways we use language inevitably expand. Both women and men communicate more effectively within their own subcultures, but also when speaking to those of the same gender. It can be argued that sex (gender) is in itself a subculture, and similar to other subcultures, produces marked communication patterns that enhance group solidarity and social identity for the ingroup but deter it for the outgroup (Greenaway et al., 2016). Although overlap between men and women’s communication patterns is more apparent than it was even a decade ago and the linguistic gender binary is waning, it is well documented that “male and female” subcultures continue to be differentiated according to gendered language.

Registers Sociolinguists use the term register to indicate a variety of language defined according to its use in social situations. Registers are gendered in that males and females who share the same formal language, such as English, also exhibit distinctive styles of communication, including

136  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

vocabulary, grammar, sentence structure, and nonverbal communication. They are socialized into overall linguistic systems that are culturally shared but also into speech communities that are subculturally separate.

Female Register The research cited here identifies important aspects of female register that also highlight issues related to gender equity and male/female power differentials (Leaper and Robnett, 2011; Ehrlich et al., 2014; Julé, 2017; Katz and Woodbury, 2017). 1

Women use more qualifiers than men. These words usually hedge or soften evaluative statements: a friend is defined as “sort of” or “kind of” shy rather than simply “shy” to soften the statement. Another qualifier is when the sentence already begins with words that make it doubtful. “This may be wrong, but …” is an example.

2

Women may end a sentence with a tag question. When tags are used, a question follows a statement: “I enjoyed the concert, didn’t you?” or “It’s a beautiful day, isn’t it?” Less assertive than declaratory statements, tag questions appear as if she was asking the other person’s permission to express her opinion or feelings. Use of qualifiers and tag questions may suggest that women are uncertain, tentative, or equivocal in what they are saying. They may be used as defenses against potential criticism. Consider the impact of the following statements that use both qualifiers and tag questions in the same sentence: • • •

It’s everything probably imagined, isn’t it? This sort of makes sense. Does it to you? I kind of liked the movie. What do you think?



Tags and qualifiers, however, enhance closeness between speakers.

3

Women use more intensifiers than men. Many of these words are employed as modifiers— adjectives and adverbs—that make up many word lists used by females: “This is a divine party,” “Such a darling room,” or “I think croissants are absolutely delightful” serve as examples. Men do use intensifiers, but a pattern exclusive to women is literally to intensify the intensifier by heavily emphasizing and elongating the word. In describing a fine dining experience, for example, both men and women may say “It was so wonderful,” but women will draw out and accent the adverb to become “It was so-o-o-o wonderful.” An emotional overtone is added to a simple declarative sentence.

4

When considering the most important roles women perform, vocabulary is more complex and descriptive than word choices for men. Women express a greater range of words for parenting, colors, textures, food, and cooking. They can describe complex interpersonal relationships and emotional characteristics of themselves and others using a greater variety of words and communication styles that are adapted to the setting, a pattern found cross-culturally. Parents talk to daughters more than sons, but compared to those of fathers, mothers’ conversations with both sons and daughters are longer and more detailed, explanatory, and interactive. African American mothers more than fathers talk with their children about sexual matters.

5

Female register includes forms of speaking that are more polite and indirect. By keeping the conversation open, asking for further direction, and not imposing one’s views

Gendered Language, Communication, and Socialization  137

on another, polite requests rather than forced obedience result. When women ask for favors, they do it indirectly. Women will make polite requests to others, including children (“Please answer the phone” or “Will you please answer the phone?”). Men are more likely to use imperatives (“Answer the phone.”). Both men and women share the same view of what is considered polite speech—by what is said and who says it.

Male Register For both men and women, the research overviewed here shows that specialized vocabularies and communicative styles emerge from specialized roles and gendered expectations. Male register, like female register, has important implications for a child’s socialization into beliefs about gender equity (Coates, 2007; Athanases and Comar, 2008; Talbot, 2010; Eckert and McConnell-Ginet, 2013; Robb, 2014; Hellinger and Motschenbacher, 2015). 1

Men use a wider range of words related to mechanics, finance, business, cars, technology, sports, and sex. They choose words related to objects and properties of objects and to topics that are impersonal. Men use sexually related words much more frequently than women. Males in all age groups, but especially at adolescence, direct derogatory sexual slang to females (b*ch, c*nt) and gay men (fag, prick). When boys use homophobic language, it is rarely challenged, especially by other boys who are present.

2 Although profanity in public by both genders is now normative, profanity in general, especially sexual profanity, remains the province of men. Men and boys do not mask profanity. They use it more frequently, use it in more settings, and, compared with women, are not judged harshly—and may be judged more positively—when they use it. 3 Because men are more likely than women to be in positions of authority, features of male register include being direct, succinct, instrumental, and personal. The personal feature may appear contradictory, given a man’s tendency to distance himself emotionally from others. In the male register context, however, personal usage denotes language that is more informal and less precise. Men in leadership positions can be relaxed and friendly and therefore more personal with subordinates of either gender. They can also be more direct and less polite. When men use tag questions, for example, they tend to be more coercive: “Why don’t you just get over it?” 4

Men talk more than women. Contrary to the stereotype of the bored man listening to the talkative woman, in mixed-gender conversations in a variety of contexts, research clearly indicates that men do the bulk of the talking. In classroom interaction at all educational levels, male students talk more and talk for longer periods than female students and are listened to more by teachers. Men talk more than women opponents in arguments, political debate, trials, business negotiations and workplace meetings, whether in person, by phone or in the virtual world. Men are offered extra time to speak and exceed formal and informal time limits more often than women. However, the perception that women are more talkative than men persists. When men outspeak women by large margins, men do not believe they had a fair share of the conversation.

5

Because men dominate women in amount of talking, it is not surprising that communication domination of women by men carries over to what is talked about, how topics are

138  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

switched, and the frequency of interruption. In conversing with women, men interrupt more and use interruption to indicate boredom and impatience and pave the way to a topic change. In conversing with men or with other women, when women interrupt conversations, they do so largely to indicate interest in what is being talked about, to respond, and to show support. Gender role expectations regarding a man’s right to dominate a conversation are taken for granted by both men and women.

The Language of Friendship Gendered registers are important contributors to conversational strategies in building friendships between the genders and within single-gender groups. It is common to see several women in a coffee shop engaged in lengthy conversation long after they have eaten; young girls intently and quietly conversing in their rooms; or teen girls talking on the phone, text-messaging, or on social media with one another for hours. When comparing talk within same-gender groups, women talk more frequently and for longer periods of time, enjoy the conversation more, converse on a wider variety of topics, and consider coming together to “just talk” to be a preferable social activity.

Gossip All of these talk-related activities may suggest that a great deal of gossiping is going on. The term gossip is used almost exclusively to indicate a specific kind of talk engaged in by females—talk that is often viewed as negative, pejorative, and pointless. To the contrary, in all age groups, friendships are cemented between females when experiences are shared and explored and personal information is revealed. In gossip begins friendship. Gossip allows girls and women to talk to one another in their common roles, share secrets, and support the needs of each other as well as themselves. These high-affiliation strategies serve to strengthen their friendships. Conversation strategies of males are frequently defined as low-affiliation ones: using commands, threats, withdrawal, and evasiveness to get their demands met. Adolescent boys, for example, are less concerned with the needs of who they are talking to than getting their own needs met, a pattern that carries through to adulthood (Leaper and Ayres, 2007; Watson, 2012). When men want to encourage or cement friendships with other men, they play golf or tennis, go to football games, fish and hunt, or play poker. These activities tend to discourage lengthy conversations but encourage time together and create possibilities for more intimate discussions. Whereas women use open, free-flowing conversations in bonding and appreciate self-disclosure, men often feel uncomfortable in this regard. Safe topics such as sports and politics deter men from revealing details of their personal lives to one another. Do women gossip more than men? It depends on how gossip is defined. If it is defined as talking about others, then men and women do not differ. If it is defined as talking about others or oneself by revealing personal information, then women may gossip more than men. Men gossip about others and reveal personal information about the people they gossip about. But when men talk about themselves, they do so cautiously and minimize the amount of personal information they reveal. There are no significant gender differences in derogatory tones of gossip although women’s gossip is more positive than men’s gossip (Eckhaus and

Gendered Language, Communication, and Socialization  139

Ben-Hador, 2019). Although men gossip more about acquaintances and celebrities and women gossip more about friends and family, gossip topics are converging. Both genders gossip about dating, sex, celebrities, colleagues, and personal appearance. As topics converge, male self-disclosure will likely increase in gossip with other males. Except for the greater reluctance of men to self-disclose, any gender differences in gossip depend on which aspect of gossip is being investigated. If men “talk” and women “gossip” but are conversing on similar topics in the same manner, what separates the two is largely the social construction of gossip associated with being a woman. No one wants to be perceived as a gossip (Eckhaus and Ben-Hador, 2018). This may be why gossip defines women but not men. In mixed-gender relationships with romance as a goal, conversational strategies differ over time. At the beginning of a male–female relationship, men talk more than women, but once the relationship “takes hold,” communication decreases. Women would like to talk more; men would like to talk less. The more she attempts to draw him out, the more he resists. He often uses silence as a means of control (Tannen, 2001). Women fear that lack of communication indicates that the relationship is failing or that he has lost interest in her. Married women are more likely than married men to identify communication as a marital problem (Chapter 7).

NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION The language we verbalize expresses only one part of ourselves. Communication also occurs nonverbally, often conveying messages in a more forceful manner than if spoken. In addition to bodily movement, posture, and general demeanor, nonverbal communication includes eye contact, use of personal space, and touching. Women are better at communicating nonverbally and more accurate in decoding nonverbal messages, but we will see that men may have an advantage in communication online.

Facial Expressions and Eye Contact In decoding nonverbal cues, females rely more on facial information and exhibit a greater variety of facial expressions than men. The accurate decoding of emotions is associated with better social adjustment, higher emotional intelligence, and stronger interpersonal understanding, a pattern found in many cultures. Females of all ages can accurately identify an emotion more often than comparable males and have less difficulty distinguishing one emotion from another (Thompson and Voyer, 2014; Hutchison and Gerstein, 2016; Wingenbach et al., 2018). Although the context may help explain why males and females display certain facial expressions, the nonverbal expression of smiling is clearly gender differentiated.

Smiling Since smiling is a form of emotion recognition, it is not surprising that women outperform men in determining the authenticity of a smile. Surveys on a century of photographs also show steady increases of both genders smiling, but women are more likely to smile and smile more fully than men. Although cultures vary in display rules and social scripts for

140  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

facial expression, the pattern that females smile more than males is cross-culturally supported (Wondergem and Friedlmeier, 2012; Krys et al., 2015; McDuff et al., 2017). This “gender smiling” pattern shows up at all age levels, peaking in adolescence, and remains relatively constant through adulthood. As a test of this, take a look at your high school yearbook. Smiling increases for females in situations where gender-appropriate behavior is more conspicuous (being in a wedding party) or more ambiguous (entering a mixed-gender classroom for the first time). In candid and posed photographs, females smile more, but also are more rigid in posture, seeming to show a higher level of formality than males (Hall et al., 2001; LaFrance et al., 2003). Gender roles for females appear to offer less latitude for ease in situations where they feel they are “on display.” In these cases, smiling is likely to be staged and less spontaneous. However, although it is culturally mediated, smiling is associated with prosocial behaviors also indicative of women’s gender roles such as friendliness, caring, honesty, competence, and strengthening communal bonds, all of which enhance overall well-being (Krys et al., 2016; Chervonsky and Hunt, 2017). In this sense, with smiling as a key non-verbal marker, gender-appropriate behavior can offer individual and social benefits to women.

Anger Boys are taught to resist displaying emotion and to mask it in facial expressions. Parents and teachers allow girls to display their emotions more openly (Chapter 3). The notable exceptions to this pattern are fear and sadness and anger. Girls are allowed to display fear and sadness but not anger, and boys are allowed to display anger but not fear and sadness (Chaplin, 2013). What happens, then, when girls get angry and boys get sad and fearful? For girls, anger may be masked by crying, an acceptable outcome for young children in some settings. In contexts such as the workplace, when a woman’s anger results in tears, she is judged as weak. If she does not confront the aggressor, she can be exploited. If she counters the anger with a verbal barrage, she is too aggressive. Compared with men, however, women have a greater repertoire of acceptable anger-coping styles and anger diffusion strategies. Women express disgust and men express anger (Lair, 2020). There are few instances where males of any age can express fear and sadness by crying. Parents and teachers frequently use the “big boys don’t cry” reprimand. Peer disapproval for male crying is another effective mechanism of social control. For adult men, the expression of fear and sadness by crying in the workplace can amount to career suicide. Some changes are evident, however. Regardless of gender, the public display of sadness by politicians and media figures is now acceptable and expected in tragic situations, such as expressions of grief by John Stewart in his first broadcast after 9/11, and President Obama’s expression of grief in addressing the nation in the wake of the mass killing of children at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. Similarly, Jimmy Kimmel received high public support when he emotionally weighed in on the near death of his newborn son and subsequent passionate appeal for maintaining the Child Health Insurance Program (CHIP) without which health care is unaffordable for many people, and unlike his son, sounds the death knell for uninsured children in the same catastrophic health circumstances (Shapiro, 2017). For boys, anger is often expressed during sports, physical fights, or barrages of profanity, which are more acceptable in some settings. For adult men, overt aggression in the workplace or in Congressional debates (Nussbaum, 2018) is certainly discouraged, but

Gendered Language, Communication, and Socialization  141

outbursts of anger are often overlooked. Superiors who use verbally aggressive messages in the workplace and whose nonverbals heighten the detrimental effects of these messages are perceived as less credible by subordinates (Lybarger et al., 2017). A boss, more likely to be a male, and one who can effectively manipulate verbal and nonverbal messages to his workplace cohort, is also perceived as a more effective and competent leader to both male and female subordinates (Chapter 10). Regarding research on gender differences in anger and fear, people are usually surprised by data showing that women engage in more eye contact than men. The stereotype is of a woman who modestly averts her eyes from the gaze of an adoring man. In both same-gender and other-gender conversational pairs, females of all ages look at the other person more and retain longer eye contact. Men have more visual dominance than women—a pattern of looking at others when speaking but looking away from them when listening. Direct eye contact increases perceptions of power, competence, and intelligence whether it comes from a man or a woman (Wagner, 2013; Toscano et al., 2018). When men look at one another “eye to eye” (stare down), it is often in an angry, confrontational manner. In countering verbal and nonverbal behaviors that may put women at a disadvantage in certain settings, to gain prestige and power, women may capitalize on their ability to retain eye contact without overtly expressing anger.

Touch and Personal Space Because touch can suggest a range of motives—affection, dominance, aggression, sexual interest, or sexual domination—the context of the touching is extremely important. Men touch women more than women touch men, and women are touched more often than men overall. As examples of appropriate nonverbal immediacy linked to job satisfaction and empowerment, subordinates may be touched by superiors, such as a hand on the shoulder or pat on the back (Kelly and Westerman, 2014). Although these behaviors are largely appropriate and appreciated, touching of the other gender, either peer or a subordinate, in any public setting, has significantly declined. When female flight attendants and bartenders are pinched and poked or when a man nudges and fondles a status equal in the office, sexual overtones cannot be dismissed. The surge in sexual harassment cases calls attention to the fact that women feel threatened, especially if the “toucher” is a boss or superior. The #MeToo movement is only one manifestation of this new and, as many suggest, needed reality (Chapter 9). With the glaring exception of spontaneous displays in sports related to emotional outbursts suggesting happiness or anger (think contact sports), men seldom touch one another. Touching is even more rare when it is associated with emotions such as fear, nervousness, timidity, or sadness. Men may hug one another, but not prolonged, in expressing grief in public.

Space Invasion Men are more protective of their personal space and guard against territorial invasions by others. In his pioneering work on personal space, anthropologist Edward Hall (1966) found that in American culture, there is a sense of personal distance reserved for friends and acquaintances that extends from about 11/2–4 feet, whereas intimate distance for intimate personal contacts extends to 18 inches. Men invade the personal space of women more than the reverse, and this invasion is more tolerated by women. The space privilege

142  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

of males is taken for granted. The next time you are on an airplane or at a movie, note the gender differences in access to the armrests. In walking or standing, women yield their space more readily than men, especially if the person who is approaching is a man—more so if he is an angry man. Men retreat when women come as close to them as they do to women and feel provoked if other men come as close to them as they do to women. With space invasion, men display rank and dominance over women (Miller et al., 2013; Witkower et al., 2020). Men have an implicit entitlement to owning space and owning more of it. This was dramatically witnessed during the second Presidential debate between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump when Trump loomed over Clinton with body language suggestive of “menacingly stalking,” moving back and forth very close to her in the background, in dominating and intimidating ways. In other contexts, it could have warranted a call to the police (Jamieson, 2016). She chose to “ignore” his presence, and continued to address her audience, a decision met with widescale approval especially in a gender context where her “coolness” and lack of intimidation were on display. Clinton successfully maneuvered the nonverbal gender line women routinely face in space invasions by males. Even in their own homes, women’s personal space is more limited. An office, study, or “man cave” used by the husband may be off limits to the rest of the family. Wives and mothers rarely “own” such space.

The Female Advantage The ability to understand nonverbal language accurately for the sender and the recipient in a variety of settings can be of enormous benefit. In the workplace, female managers who accurately perceive emotional expressions of their employees and then use that information to support them receive higher satisfaction ratings. Male managers with a high degree of such accuracy receive higher employee ratings if they use the information to be more persuasive (Byron, 2007:721). A boss, more likely to be male, and one who can effectively manipulate verbal and nonverbal messages to his workplace cohort, is also perceived as a more effective and competent leader to both male and female subordinates (Chapter 10). Men may reap the benefits in and out of the workplace when they adopt selected nonverbal strategies used by women. Female supportiveness and male persuasiveness may suggest gender stereotypes, but accuracy in decoding nonverbal cues that works to women’s advantage is a key element in employee satisfaction. In schools and in dating and romantic contexts, research clearly shows that men markedly misperceive women’s friendliness as sexual intent, regardless of the extent of the couple’s relationship (Humphreys, 2007; Dobson et al., 2018; Treat and Viken, 2018). Male misperception of a woman’s nonverbals is one of the most frequent justifications evoked legally and in the court of public opinion for sexual assault (Chapter 9). A woman who recognizes the misperception via accurate nonverbal decoding can adjust her behavior accordingly, offering a more satisfying, safer dating relationship as well as a better work environment. Couples can learn the verbal and nonverbal cues to enhance their communication, even for topics that are difficult to confront emotionally. In health care settings, patients attended by physicians and nurses who adopt nonverbal behaviors that are supportive and empathic, show better medical and psychological outcomes. The shift to patient-centered, holistically oriented health care, a rapidly emerging medical norm, relies heavily on accurate reading of the nonverbal behavior of patients that

Gendered Language, Communication, and Socialization  143

works to the advantage of female health professionals and all patients. Female physicians who adapt their familiar gender-based nonverbal communication patterns, such as the power of touch patients find to be a sign of caring, also have better patient outcomes (Kelly et al., 2018; Mast and Kadji, 2018). In recognizing this benefit, coursework for health professionals is rapidly incorporating material on communication strategies effectively used by women, including understanding patients’ nonverbal cues.

GENDER ONLINE: COMMUNICATION AND SOCIAL MEDIA The explosion of Internet-based and other computer-mediated communication (CMC), through computerized technology occurring on a variety of electronic devices, offers insight into how language is adapting to technological evolution. Due to its mediated nature, especially with social media, CMC has not only altered the way we communicate, but is fast becoming its most influential mode. Compared with face-to-face communication, CMC provides contexts that are much more difficult to navigate. With an overwhelming array of applications available, the smartphone is the CMC device of choice for young people. Forsaking laptops and notebooks, the majority of teens and young adults prefer smartphones as their main type of communication. With social networking sites (SNS) as the most frequent applications accessed on all devices, these spaces are transformative, allowing users the freedom to maintain anonymity or carefully craft an identity. Given that the dawn of social media is traced to about twenty years ago (1997– 2000), it is astounding that by 2010 there were close to a billion social network users, jumping to 2.77 in 2019 and expected to increase to over 3 billion in 2021. North America, with the United States in the lead, ranks first in social network penetration (Statistica, 2018a). Almost 70 percent of American adults visit multiple online platforms, with YouTube (73 percent), Facebook (68 percent), and Instagram (35 percent) as the most popular, a majority reporting they visit these platforms daily (Perrin and Anderson, 2019). Almost all U.S. teens (95 percent), use smartphones, about half saying they are online “almost constantly” (Anderson and Jiang, 2018). As the heaviest users in all age groups, teens (13–17) and young adults (18–24) are at the vanguard of changing trends in social media use, with Instagram and Snapchat nudging out Facebook as their preferred social media sites (Smith and Anderson, 2018). These formats are not genderless, strongly mirroring gender roles and hierarchies in broader society. Whether CMC occurs via written form, such as email or text-messaging, through speech and visuals on a computer screen, android, or through other virtual worlds, gendered interaction is occurring. Rapidly changing forms of computer-based and phone communication are hybrids of verbal and nonverbal—overlapping what is seen and unseen. Since the advent of social media, adult females in the U.S. were larger users of social media than males, a gap that remains today. Facebook, Pinterest, Instagram, and Snapchat draw significantly more female users with males preferring more text-oriented forms such as Twitter, LinkedIn, and Reddit (Storms, 2017). Even with this male preference, there is now gender parity in LinkedIn, Twitter, and YouTube, as females have been catching up to males (Table 4.1). The largest gender gaps in social media use are in Pinterest, favoring females, and Reddit, favoring males. Despite this relative gender parity on CMC use, how messages are sent and received parallels gendered communication in other contexts.

144  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives TABLE 4.1  Percent

of U.S. Adults Who Use Each Social Media Platform, by Gender

Facebook

Instagram

LinkedIn

Twitter

Total

68%

35%

25%

24%

Men

62%

30%

25%

23%

Women

74%

39%

25%

24%

Pinterest

Snapchat

YouTube

WhatsApp

Total

29%

27%

73%

22%

Men

16%

23%

75%

20%

Women

41%

31%

72%

24%

Source: Adapted from Social Media Fact Sheet. February 5, 2018. Pew Research Center. http://www. pewinternet.org/fact-sheet/social-media/

Men Online Computer-mediated communication is a boon for men. CMC has increased the overall communication of males in all age groups. Men are much less likely than women to keep in contact with friends and family by phone or postage, but they now turn to email, texting, and social media for these purposes. Men’s relationships can be enhanced with more frequent communication, even if its computer-based format is less personal—or perhaps because it is less personal. In online written communication, men prefer to use impersonal style and content. They use authoritative language and are more formal in messages to both friends and colleagues, regardless of the gender of the recipient. Inspect our work and school emails, for example, to demonstrate these patterns. In emails related to answering questions, discussing issues, or planning meetings, men send fewer emails to resolve the issue. Their emails tend to be terse and to end abruptly. Compared with women’s emails, sentences are shorter and more direct (“Meet in the cafeteria at 12:30.”). In online discussion groups, men are less supportive and tend to respond more negatively to interactions, using more assertive language compared with women. They express their opinions more often than women (Johnston et al., 2011; Rollero et al., 2019). In online situations that are more ambiguous because of the lack of visual cues, men are likely to rely on formalized, prescribed language styles. Virtual environments with visuals paint a gendered online picture for males. Men may be more comfortable in virtual worlds, especially through gaming, where they can manipulate the environment, stage events, and determine level of interaction frequency and closeness with gamers and with avatars (Zhao et al., 2010). Gendered space and interpersonal distance (IPD) in the virtual world mirror the nonverbal norms in the physical world. Nonverbal patterns in “Second Life,” a 3D virtual world allowing for control and manipulation of avatars, demonstrate that males avert their gaze when their interpersonal space is invaded, especially when other male avatars invade it. Males as avatars or as “real” people express their discomfort by widening IPD. Males may be less accurate in decoding nonverbal communication

Gendered Language, Communication, and Socialization  145

when compared to females, but when visual cues are present and men have a measure of control over their space, social interaction even in a virtual world appears to offer at least a modicum of “relationship” satisfaction (Bailenson and Yee, 2007; Srivastava and Chandra, 2018).

Males and Social Media Like females, males in all age categories use social media to stay connected and to reconnect with friends. Unlike females, they express their usage in more specific, goal-oriented terms. They may expect social capital to be accrued for use in their personal and professional lives. Men point to SNS benefits in terms of efficiency and convenience, such as the relative ease of finding information, locating people who share similar professional interests, and accessing job and career opportunities, patterns which may explain the gender parity in LinkedIn. On Facebook, men prefer to access information related to business, government, and politics, and to discuss the topics from a more detached, emotionally aloof stance. As would be predicted, however, emotional aloofness falls by the wayside with men’s use of frequent swearing and aggressive language on Facebook and other SNS (Kramer, 2016). Gender norms for men are clearly displayed in photos that serve as strong identifiers of “who they are.” Choice of photos for Facebook profiles, for example, is associated with poses, dress, and activities that remain markedly gender-typed. Males, especially teens, present themselves in a more stereotypical way than females, as active, independent, and dominant in settings highlighting competitiveness, strength, and physical activities (Rose et al., 2012; Oberst et al., 2016). Compared to Facebook, the 140-character limitation imposed by Twitter makes the site an attractive one for men looking for efficiency, simplicity, and ease of managing content. Since its introduction in 2006, men have embraced Twitter more quickly than women, though as noted, it is at gender parity in usage. In conjunction with Twitter’s growing influence, the perceived social capital benefit may explain why men access it less for entertainment and leisure and more for professional and news information (Hughes et al., 2012; Matsa and Shearer, 2018). Research is needed to determine whether content and interest become more or less gender focused. Security and privacy are considered less important issues for men, and thus they are more likely to engage in risky online behavior than women, including willingness to share their location, email address, and personal information, a pattern demonstrated globally (Kuo et al., 2013; Sheldon, 2013; Sasson and Mesch, 2016). These patterns may translate to more online friends, but young men with more online friends and fewer face-to-face friends report greater loneliness and heavier online reliance for sexual outlets, including sexual entertainment, use of pornography, and engaging in cybersex (Yang, 2015; Döring et al. 2017; Hood et al., 2018). Online sexual activities (OSA) offer outlets that are largely not problematic for college men, but compared to women, men are more likely to score in the clinical range for cybersex addiction (Giorfano and Cashwell, 2017). To date, gender role explanations for male and female trends related to security and OSA are robust. However, research is needed to determine whether less restrictive attitudes about women’s sexuality and their ease of access to OSA will mute these patterns (Chapter 2). Given that online men are attracted to social media in goal-oriented ways, they also appear to get burned out or fatigued more quickly than women. The benefits, lure, and excitement of Facebook fade more quickly with

146  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

men in all age groups. By age 25 half of Facebook users say it would not be hard to give up social media overall, increasing to 66 percent for those over age 55 (Smith and Anderson, 2018). Men are more likely to be in these ranks than women. It is unclear if “Twitter fatigue,” will parallel “Facebook fatigue,” particularly for midcareer and older men, or if they can recapture the lure of social media exploration.

Women Online Women decode information and read nonverbal cues more accurately than men. Nevertheless, when the nonverbal environment extends to the virtual environment, women’s advantage appears to diminish. In most virtual worlds, men create the games, the rules, the language, and design websites and blogs with masculine aesthetics in mind (Cho and Hong, 2013; Schultheiss, 2017). Although women access blogs in much larger numbers than men and are gaining ground in video gaming, virtual entertainment is based on masculine gender preferences. CMC for women mirrors their verbal communication. As expected, therefore, emails, text messages, and Facebook posts used by girls and women are frequent, long, supportive, and affiliative. Women use more intensifiers, tentative language choices, and polite requests, and they respond more positively to interactions (“Let’s meet in the back of the cafeteria for lunch, OK?”). Women reference emotions and personal connections more than men, regardless of the gender of the recipient. In both style and content, they are more relational and expressive, especially when communicating with other women (Brody, 2013; Park et al., 2016). An interesting exception to this pattern is that online communication to female college faculty by female students tends to be less polite, more direct, more informal, and more demanding than communication used by male students (Jones et al., 2016; Thomas-Tate et al., 2017). Even with such a clear student-faculty status differential, perceptions about the lesser value of women invades online communication, likely heightening existing internalized sexism. Even as smartphones are the preferred CMC device, females still send more and longer text messages than males that include sharing more about their emotions. In online learning and discussion groups, women post more messages and have significantly higher participation rates than men. Women express satisfaction and enjoyment of CMC interactivity. Because men dominate face-to-face classroom discussion, women may feel more at ease in the online environment and adapt themselves better than males (Tsai et al., 2015; Yang and Shen, 2018). Overall, women are more likely than men to write the way they speak—both in the choice of words and in the way the words are conveyed. CMC, however, lacks important nonverbal cues women rely on to enhance the satisfaction they receive from online interaction. Women’s lack of comfort with the technology and the amount of effort needed to compensate for the nonverbal void in text-based language may explain why, except for SNS, females use computer technology more for education and instruction and less for entertainment and diversion (Wayan, 2018). There is a definite gender gap in how communication is perceived in the virtual world. However, in online teaching communities, compared with males, females more actively and enthusiastically participate in the blogs and chat spaces, offering the positive affirmations that build and sustain the social life of the communities (Morante et al., 2017; Kerr and Schmeichel, 2018). Rapid advancement of accessible, sophisticated, and inexpensive CMC

Gendered Language, Communication, and Socialization  147

visuals on smartphones or through sites such as Zoom, Skype, FaceTime, and YouTube, may allow women to regain their nonverbal advantage.

Females and Social Media For every age category of SNS users, females exceed males in time spent accessing all types of social media. In terms of frequency of Facebook (FB) use, for example, 69 percent of females compared to 54 percent of males access FB at least daily (Statistica, 2018b). Females also exceed males in the number of Facebook friends they report, the feelings of closeness to their friends compared with those who do not participate in Facebook, adding to their friend count, and the importance attached to Facebook in their everyday lives. Adolescent girls, for example, assign great importance to adding to their “friend count” (Metzler and Scheithauer, 2018; Reich et al., 2018). For adult women, social media are not a substitute for face-toface friends but allow them to explore new friendships, express their feelings more openly, strengthen existing relationships, and reconnect with people. These benefits come with a price. Like males, self-selected Facebook profiles for females are gender stereotyped. Although females do not necessarily profile themselves as submissive, their levels of attractiveness, politeness, and friendliness tend to match traditional views of femininity (Rose et al., 2012; Soukup, 2018). Consistent with Erving Goffman’s (1959) pioneering research on impression management, the selection of the Facebook picture and self-presentation is highly important in crafting one’s attractiveness, demeanor, and personality. The concern for attractiveness matches decades of data correlating self-esteem with body image, a more prominent pattern for females than for males (Chapter 2). The “fear of peers” online carries to negative peer attitudes and social adjustment in other settings. More time spent on social media daily and accessing multiple sites is related to depression and anxiety, with teen girls and young women at heightened risk (Lin et al., 2016; Primack et al., 2017). Some young women associate the social interaction with FB friends as better than “real life friends.” They feel anxious if they do not frequently access FB, even in the middle of the night, a pattern associated with sleep deprivation and weight gain (Bergagna and Tartaglia, 2018; Whipps et al., 2018). Facebook “addiction” may be the female counterpart to Facebook fatigue among males. All social media are fraught with issues related to safety and privacy, especially as cyberstalking and online predation outpace legal, law enforcement, and technological remedies to control them. Estimates are that one-fourth of women experience abuse and harassment online, and until very recently, this was considered “business as usual” (Chapter 9). Females of all ages and in various professions, notably those in teaching, journalism, and politics, report bullying, threats, harassment, and cybersexism at higher levels than males, particularly when speaking out on controversial topics, a global pattern and one that has increased in the U.S. in the Trump era (Johnson, 2017; Baccarella et al., 2018; Penza, 2018). Because women and girls are in worse peril for psychological exploitation, sexual threats, physical vulnerability, self-censorship to avoid abuse is common (United Nations Human Rights, 2017). Especially as it relates to Twitter and political debate, their right to expression is silenced in the very medium that is expected to provide a forum for such expression. Women have the right to use Twitter equally, freely and without fear … The silencing and censoring impact of violence and abuse against women on Twitter can have

148  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

far-reaching and harmful repercussions on how younger women, women from marginalized communities, and future generations fully exercise their right to participate in public life and freely express themselves online. (Amnesty International, 2017)

GLOBAL FOCUS: THE LANGUAGE OF JAPANESE WOMEN The language of Japanese women has been recognized as a separate social dialect for a thousand years, with its origins traced to the eighth century. One of the most important novels in all of Japanese literature, The Tale of Genji, was written in 1016 by Lady Murasaki, in women’s language. Although Japanese women’s language today is an expression of language used in women’s quarters for centuries, with young women at the forefront, it is being reconfigured in response to gender role change in Japan.

Style and Syntax Japanese women’s speech is highly formal and polite, much more than the polite gendered varieties of other languages such as English. Japanese women’s speech exceeds the politeness norms in a language system that is already one of the “politest” in the world. Japanese women, for example, rarely use profanity. Politeness is also expressed by their use of honorific and humiliative speech much more frequently than when men use these forms. Compared with men, women use far fewer interrogatives, assertions, and requests and, when they use them, construct them differently from men. Such patterns are demonstrated in the media, in the workplace, at school, and even at home. In addition to style of communication, the Japanese female register has distinctive formal linguistic patterns in vocabulary, topic, grammar (syntax), and phonology (sound and intonation). Unlike English, there are grammatical forms in Japanese that are used exclusively by women and numerous forms for which men and women use entirely different terms. Women speak of different things than men and say things differently when they converse about the same topic. Rules of grammar and syntax may also differ according to the gender of the speaker. For example, the words for “box lunch,” “chopsticks,” and “book” differ depending on whether they are spoken by a female or male. Women are obliged to select verb endings that render their sentences ambiguous, indirect, indecisive, and less assertive. Although age and social status of the speaker are markers in language in Japan, gender is the key identifier in usage. Linguistic femininity is so normative and expected that deviating from these norms risks peer disapproval and shame (Endo and Smith, 2004; Ogi, 2014).

Women in Business When styles of discourse are combined with the formal linguistic features of Japanese women’s language, women may appear to be timid and lacking self-confidence. The consequences of these speech forms are linked to social powerlessness, putting women at a disadvantage when they venture into nontraditional roles outside the home. Japanese women who are in positions of authority may experience linguistic conflict when they use less feminine forms of even the polite speech used by men (Takano, 2005).

Gendered Language, Communication, and Socialization  149

Consider managers in Japanese corporations. If a woman manager displays normative femininity, she may give the impression that she is indecisive or indirect. At the same time, however, she cannot be as authoritative as her male counterparts. She must not be too informal with employees she supervises or with other managers, the majority of whom are male. If she masculinizes her speech too much, she may be perceived as a threat to established business and social norms, which she has already violated by becoming a manager in the first place. Men must maneuver their language to account for the politeness of Japanese language as well, but they have much more linguistic flexibility. Japanese women’s business etiquette training propels them to speak “politely, kindly, and beautifully.” On the other hand, they recognize that this discourse serves larger strategic ends. In the exceedingly polite world of Japanese business, exceedingly more polite linguistic femininity can be advantageous for their businesses. It might be referred to as using the “soft touch,” not only to get what they want in an increasingly competitive, intercultural environment, but to create acceptable “non-traditional femininities” for the next generation of women in a variety of institutional contexts (Dickel, 2013; Okamoto, 2013; Itakura, 2014). For better or worse, Japanese language has a much greater impact on the way Japanese women carry out their professional lives.

Manga Despite these patterns, language change follows social change and Japanese women are adopting linguistic strategies to deal with linguistic conflict. Fueled by media, globalization, and social diversity, women from a variety of social classes and subcultures are using various formats to gradually defeminize traditional language. Research on manga, the hugely popular Japanese comics consumed by Japanese from all backgrounds and across the age spectrum, supports this trend. Manga is niched to serve all varieties of readers. Shojo manga targets elementary through high school girls, and ladies manga targets women in their forties and older who are in more traditional roles, especially home-based mothers whose lives revolve around family, children’s schooling, and accommodating in-laws (Ito, 2002). As expected, shojo manga pushes linguistic limits with discourse that is less traditionally feminine than what is found in ladies manga. Shojo’s characters use language defined as moderately feminine, moderately masculine, or neutral. When angry, they may use strongly masculine forms. Ladies manga reflects stronger feminine forms but this, too, demonstrates that “unconventional” feminine speech linguistic changes are creeping in. Gendered formal linguistics can be readily identified in written Japanese. Manga for all audiences shows less feminization. As indicated below, what is written about, however, is still likely to mesh with traditional roles stereotyped by gender and age (Ueno, 2006:22–23). LADIES MANGA An irritated mother-in-law talking to her son: You just heard it, didn’t you? Isn’t it awful? Your wife yelled at her husband’s very important mother. An irritated mother talking to her daughter: Things like your childhood dreams often change, so for now, just study hard. Understand? SHOJO MANGA Daughter speaking to her friend about her father: He is just a stubborn old man. I wonder why mom married someone like that.

150  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

Manga reinforces other communication styles that are rapidly emerging in subcultures of young women throughout Japan. Online virtual communities have “reappropriated” women’s language in enactments of “gothic/Lolita” displays of fashion and appearance. Referred to as “costume play,” or kosupure, young women create subcultures that are linguistically and role distinctive, but definitely nontraditional (Gagne, 2008). The virtual worlds transfer to the physical world as young women congregate on safe Tokyo street corners in their online “outrageous” costumes and speak a language only they understand. Whether the degree to which women’s language will be enacted as the youthful occupants of the gothic/Lolita subcultures and the readers of shojo manga get older is unclear. Gender roles associated with marriage and the family in Japan remain quite traditional (Chapter 6). On Monday morning, girls return to high school wearing their traditional, conservative uniforms almost indistinguishable from those worn by their mothers and grandmothers.

EXPLAINING GENDERED LANGUAGE PATTERNS Explanations for the gendered language patterns discussed in this chapter are grouped according to conventional models sociolinguists label as dual-culture, dominance, and social constructionist. These models are also generally compatible with the theoretical paradigms in sociology and, as such, associated with corresponding strengths and criticisms of each.

Dual-Culture Model The dual-culture model argues that the interaction styles of males and females are separate but equal. Also referred to as the “difference” or “separate worlds” approach, the dual-culture model emphasizes that because childhood socialization puts boys and girls into separate subcultures, they develop different communication styles. If miscommunication occurs, it is due to lack of cultural (subcultural) understanding rather than male power or deceit (Tannen, 1990; Kendall and Tannen, 2015). Girls learn language to negotiate relationships and establish connections, and boys learn it to maintain independence and enhance status. The dual-culture model avoids women-blaming or female deficit in language. In important ways, the dual-culture model is compatible with functionalism. Functionalists maintain that language serves to enhance consensus that binds people to their culture, and that social equilibrium is helped when one’s language, including its nonverbal elements, is used and accepted by everyone. Functionalists suggest, therefore, that gender differences in language are useful for maintaining this equilibrium and minimizing confusion in communication. As noted, children’s use of linguistic markers (lady caveman) when there is a mismatch between perception and reality suggests this argument. From this perspective, it is better to avoid the confusion than to change the pronoun. It also implies that when people communicate in ways that reinforce traditional gender roles, there is less possibility for disrupting social patterns.

Critique There is support for the separate tenet but not the equal tenet of the dual-culture model. The model overlooks the cultural context of conversation and does not consider that along

Gendered Language, Communication, and Socialization  151

with gender, people bring with them other statuses that offer varied degrees of power that influence communication and perception of the speaker. Intersecting statuses of race and gender, for example, highlight this criticism. Housing agents and employers have the opportunity to discriminate against people of color because they can often determine race if the first contact is from a phone conversation. African American linguistic styles are associated with perceptions about lower academic achievement regardless of the actual achievement. A white woman compared with a man or woman of color is likely to have an advantage in these situations. Whether perceptions of speaker stem from gender or race, they are not value-neutral and can lead to inequity. Overall, stereotyped beliefs about style of speech are stronger for race than gender (Craig et al., 2012; Craft el., 2020). Although these patterns suggest that racism is more prevalent and commands more force than sexism, separate is not equal.

Dominance Model Robin Lakoff’s (1975, 2005) groundbreaking work helped lay the foundation for the dominance model, arguing that gendered language reflects women’s subordinate status. Nancy Henley (1977, 2002) extended this hypothesis to nonverbal behaviors, including facial expressions, body movements, gaze, and interruptions. Compatible with conflict theory, the dominance model explains gendered language use according to the power differences between men and women. The structure and vocabulary of English, such as the acceptability of male generics, have been fashioned by men, and they retain the power to name and to leave unnamed. Data on interruptions provide another example. Interruption is an attempt to dominate and control a conversation by asserting one’s right to speak at the expense of another. The dominance model views men’s interruption of women as the right of a superior to interrupt a subordinate. Female subordination is reinforced through use of hedges, tag questions, and conversational cooperativeness. Gender differences are explained by socialization of girls into less powerful feminine roles that teach them to be demure, attractive, and aiming to please. Girls and women adopt language patterns reinforcing socialization patterns that keep them from acting as independent or nonsubordinate agents. Speaking in the cyberworld offers a good example of the contemporary view of the dominance model. Although supposedly not “owned” by any one group, the Internet is dependent on seemingly undetectable technical language and codes without which all CMC would be impossible. Both in the literal and symbolic sense, code literacy is virtually owned by males. Men who sexually harass online and who use adversarial, combative, and violent and abusive communication styles manifest the dominance model. To have the last and decisive word grants the virtual speaker possession of the field. Instead of facilitating a gender-neutral environment, in terms of communication, cyberspace has magnified a devaluation of female-identified speech. (Herbst, 2009:135)

Critique Contrary to the dominance model, differences in status do not explain larger gender differences in nonverbal behavior and why the gender differences persist even when men and

152  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

women occupy similar statuses. For example, women still smile more than men and talk less than men, even when they share equal statuses as professionals. For verbal behavior, the dominance model’s emphasis on the superiority associated with male speech and the inferiority associated with female speech implies that women are victims of culturally determined speech patterns that they may not be aware of or cannot control. Feminist reinterpretations of the dominance model, however, suggest that women gain power by using gendered communication patterns to their advantage. Throughout the personal and professional contexts they traverse, women recognize and negotiate the troubling constraints and pitfalls of gendered language to achieve the desired speech competency (Mills, 2012:240). A good example is that a greater amount of direct eye contact may be interpreted as assertive, with strength rather than meekness being communicated. Status equals look directly at each other. Status unequals do not. Women who want career advancement can adjust their eye contact so that they appear not quite as watchful but still adequately deferential to their superior. A female executive in the boardroom adjusts her nonverbals—such as amount of eye contact—to the situation according to the image she wants to project. She is practicing impression management to highlight her (superior) executive status and to de-emphasize her (subordinate) gender status. If men dominate women in verbal arguments, women’s visual behavior during the argument may be more dominant. If the language of cooperation is more beneficial than the language of competition in certain contexts, then women’s communication skills honed while developing friendships may offer an advantage. It is sexist to conclude that women’s speech is weak just because a woman is doing the talking. If female register is associated with powerlessness, it occurs in a society that values consensus less than competition and connection less than independence. Finally, social change in the direction of gender equity in other institutions is making its way into language. Female and male communication patterns are becoming more and more similar. Even in the virtual world female users, supporting one another and advocating for inclusion, such as in gaming, are forces behind recent successes of online communities, throwing into question the dominance–power explanation (Choi et al., 2012; Naidoo et al., 2020). This bodes well for the decrease of linguistic sexism in CMC and in larger media outlets, serving as a springboard for such decreases in other institutions.

Social Constructionist Model As used by sociolinguists, the ascending explanation for gendered language is the social constructionist (SC) approach. It is important to note that this usage does not distinguish the newer SC model from narrower symbolic interaction (SI) (see Chapter 1). By highlighting how language as a symbol shapes our perception of reality, how reality is redefined by altering language, and how interpersonal communication is negotiated, SI is embedded in sociolinguistics’ social constructionist model. This chapter highlighted evidence that the use of masculine generics, for example, makes it difficult to “image” women cognitively. Social constructionists emphasize that languages such as English produce genderlects, socially defined linguistic categories, such as male generics, that give more prominence and visibility to males. During the crucial primary socialization years when language learning occurs, children internalize views that contribute to the marginalization of girls and women. In a language framework, the social constructionist model focuses on the setting of the conversation and on the use of impression management in interpreting gendered language. It is clear

Gendered Language, Communication, and Socialization  153

that both women and men organize their talk via gendered norms but alter it to their advantage, such as for gaining dominance or for enhancing connections, as they move between conversational settings. Gender differences in conversational topics are largely determined by speakers’ opportunities to express their interests regardless of the power they bring to the setting. Much research suggests that women leaders in business and politics demonstrate agency in their communication strategies in ways that are both agenic and communal (Chapters 10 and 14). They reframe negotiations to adhere to the expectation of politeness associated with female register and style of communication but they still get what they want out of the negotiations. Japanese women are adept at manipulating linguistic boundaries to their advantage moment by moment in male-dominated contexts (Tench et al., 2017; Sato, 2018). For moderated online courses, the constructionist model offers more support than either the dual-culture or dominance model. Men and women use fine-tuned gendered language that changes as the online context changes. This may explain why women prefer social media as a bonding mechanism that can extend to men as well as women. As we move into more multicultural, diverse contexts of speaking, social constructionists alert us to be attuned not only to gender, but also to the backgrounds and cultural characteristics of all speakers. The flexibility and choice offered by various contexts of conversation distinguish the social constructionist model from competing explanations.

Critique As discussed, there is no definitive distinction between SC as used by sociolinguists and SI as used by sociologists. The very strength of the SI-embedded social constructionist model that relies on the conversational setting and the impression management practiced within it, makes it difficult to generalize explanations for gendered language to other settings. Context is always a moving target for choices in language and speech. Since generalization is a necessary ingredient for science, meaningful (social) scientific explanations are jeopardized. Specific features of various communication contexts to predict how speakers adjust their linguistic strategies as they move between contexts need to be investigated. In addition, the harmful effects of gender stereotypes are not overcome with individual attempts at impression management when language is (purposely) altered. Gendered social structures are ushered into all communication contexts. The mezzo sociological social constructionist paradigm that bridges micro–macro perspectives (Chapter 1) may offer a better model to understand the persistence of these stereotypes. SC is supported by rapidly ascending intersectional explanations for linguistic sexism. These explanations incorporate the reciprocal influences of gender, individual identity (micro), and key social categorizations (macro) that accentuate the power dynamics in relationships, such as race, ethnicity, sexuality, and social class, that are brought to (invade) any speech encounter (Levon, 2015:295). With intersectionality in the forefront, the choice of one explanation over another is directly linked to the effectiveness of feminist strategies for reducing the effects of linguistic sexism (McElhinny, 2014; Abbou and Baider, 2016).

THE IMPACT OF LINGUISTIC SEXISM Language subtly, and not so subtly, transmits sexist notions that are harmful to both men and women in many social milieus. In corporations, for example, the most important discussions

154  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

related to stock forecasts are the quarterly earnings conference calls. Male executives speak over 90 percent of the time during these calls, because they far outnumber women, but also because they “just talk more,” such as giving a five-minute answer to a thirty-second question asked by a female executive. This mezzo-level research suggests that, compared with men, women analysts are bolder and more accurate in their forecasts, but their voice, literally, is drowned out by talkative men, whether in conference calls or in the boardroom. Corporate America, ironically, is aware of the skill differences between men and women (Maranz and Greenfield, 2018:B6). Yet ensuring balanced gender representation among executives, that simultaneously can reduce widespread linguistic sexism in business, remains elusive. The negative effect of linguistic sexism is additionally demonstrated by macro-level research that makes a causal connection between gender-marking in language and wage inequality: nations with a higher level of such marking have a higher gender wage gap and higher overall inequality (Shoham and Lee, 2018).

Cognition and Self-Esteem Language influences our perceptions of what is proper, accepted, and expected. When we hear the words man and he, we conjure up male images. When she is associated with nurses and homemakers, men are linguistically excluded. The use of male pronouns in a century of books is associated with women’s status over time. More female pronouns are used when women’s status is high; fewer when it is low. Since English has “grammatical gender” that is normative in the use of masculine terms and pronouns, women can be relegated to invisibility. Women report lower self-efficacy and goal orientation when reading masculine generics compared with gender-neutral forms (Vainapel et al., 2015; Gabriel and Gygax, 2016). Women’s invisibility is heightened when alternative images remain unexpressed because they remain unimagined. Ambiguous interpretations of masculine generics not only bias cognitions, but also differentially affect the self-esteem of people who read, hear, and use them. Those who use sexist language in written form are also likely to use it in oral form. During primary socialization, boys internalize masculine generics that they apply to their expanding environment, with their sense of well-being linked to that environment. When girls begin to expand their environments, they have no such set of referents. They must adopt symbols that are different and separate from the symbols used to identify people in general. Language learning also produces a double bind for women who are socialized into believing they must speak politely, shun explicit sexually-based humor, and refrain from “man talk.” Women’s language is associated with maintaining both femininity, associated with communion, and civility, associated with lack of confrontation. When female register ignores, deprecates, and stereotypes, women can internalize beliefs that they are lesser persons. Women do appreciate “sexually themed” humor, but not when it suggests violence or aggressiveness toward women (Schiau, 2017). The typical responses to women who express their dislike of being the targets of degrading sexual humor are: “Can’t you take a joke?” and “Don’t take it personally.” As noted from CMC, women are aware of negative repercussions that come with confrontation and may believe silence is justified. Language learning for girls may be the counterpart to the difficulty boys may experience in gaining a sense of identity from incomplete information they are offered during primary socialization (Chapter 3). In either case, the socialization road is not easy.

Gendered Language, Communication, and Socialization  155

Resistance to Language Change The evidence that sexist language creeps into our perceptions and does damage to both men and women is strong. Yet despite this evidence, people who would work fervently on other gender issues, such as issues related to equal pay, domestic violence, or same-sex marriage, are mystified or even angry when issues revolving around language surface, calling to change language to make it more inclusive. Similar to the type of ridicule that surfaced when Ms. was introduced, media reports tell us that he is now a loaded word and that no one dares to show insensitivity to gender-neutral terminology in public, with people preferring to offend against rules of grammar rather than against women’s sensibilities. Women should not be insulted but should remember that gender may be unrelated to sex in language. (The Economist, 2001:20) In this condemnation, rules of grammar are more important than how they are used against people, and women are denied any response, emotional or otherwise, by being told how they are supposed to feel. Those who advocate for gender-inclusive language are often labeled derisively as “politically correct” in the media. The label sarcastically implies that people are required to change terminology on frivolous, inconsequential, and unreasonable grounds.

Formal Change Although people tend to oppose what they perceive as invented language, examples from linguistic history indicate that “artificial” change may not be resisted if gender stereotypes are left untouched. The use of he as the required pronoun for referring to a single human being of indeterminate sex came into usage during the eighteenth century in England and the United States. Formerly, they or he or she were considered proper choices. The use of they as a plural word to identify a single entity was disdained by several powerful educators and self-styled language reformers who were able to establish he as the rightful substitute. An 1850 British Act of Parliament stated that “words importing the masculine gender shall be deemed and taken to include females.” In both instances, language change occurred by fiat, not through “natural” evolution. Although the earlier usage may not have been as grammatically sound, it was certainly more accurate. It also created a great many interpretive problems. As we saw, still in us today, he is presumed to be both generic (he = he and she) and nongeneric (he = he). The quick acceptance of the generic rested on cultural definitions that gave males more worth than females. To make language gender-neutral today, it is necessary to challenge the taken-for-granted belief that males are regarded more highly than females.

Language Change as Gender Success Despite resistance and inconsistent usage, linguistic sexism is on a rapid decline. In formal communication, such as in academic and corporate settings and in broadcast journalism, inclusive language is now normative. Many writers use he/she, she/he, or s/he, or they, to explicitly note that both males and females are being discussed, using forms you will find throughout this book. Of these options, although they is most accepted because writing can be altered, inclusive replacements for outmoded terms also are being ushered in. For instance,

156  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

many use “first-year student” to replace the archaic and noninclusive use of freshman. Such changes offer the least cumbersome, most accurate, and now largely accepted solutions to the generic problem. Preferences notwithstanding, corporate and government offices, health care facilities, and public settings such as courtrooms and police precincts now typically require the use of Ms. when referring to adult females. Recognition of the harm of sexist language, and, in turn, the benefits of gender-neutral language is widespread (Kuhn and Ute, 2014). There is much support for incorporating inclusive language in government settings, schools, and media. Female teachers and young writers are agents of change, selecting reading material, adopting inclusive language, and showing ways to avoid the generic he (Pauwels and Winter, 2006). Prompted by requirements in virtually all style manuals, organizations, professions, and academic disciplines are adopting inclusive language standards in their correspondence, publications, and websites. News media have powerful influences on public perception. Broadcasters now routinely report on the “men and women” in uniform or “service members.” Ironically this neutral designation explicitly calls attention to gender and marks the fact that both men and women are in harm’s way. Written, entertainment, and broadcast media are also less likely than even a decade ago to use the generic he to refer to politicians, journalists, scientists, and world leaders. There are simply too many exceptions to expect audiences to overlook glaring noninclusive language. Masculine generics are on the verge of extinction. Another powerful catalyst against linguistic sexism emerged from the LGBTQ community and is credited with two current trends. Lurking behind the use of generics is the issue of how language challenges or reinforces the gender binary. Ms. or Mr. are largely acceptable, but the titles still indicate gender. Mx (pronounced “mix”) is trending today as a title for those who want to avoid specifying their gender at all. Like the use of Ms. a generation ago, it is contested for where and when it should be used. Some schools allow teachers and students to use it. Some businesses allow employees to use it. Fraught with political tensions, most government offices are reluctant to embrace it. A second trend is the use of “they/them” as a gender-neutral singular pronoun. This usage is found in centuries of writing, including Chaucer, Shakespeare, and Austen. More important, usage is justified as an affirmative way to accommodate those who identify as “gender nonbinary.” Even if it is possible to incorporate the “plural they” by changing sentences, there is still the need for a pronoun for nonbinary people. The big boost for accepting the usage comes from the prestigious “go-to” Associated Press Stylebook, which now considers it proper grammar and word choice (Moore, 2018:A7). Pronouns such as they/them and titles such as Mx. may seem small ways to acknowledge someone’s identity, but they also open the door for dialogue about diversity and inclusion in a binary world. Although gender differences cut across context on many linguistic behaviors, girls and boys and men and women are more alike than different. Differences that do exist, especially in nonverbal communication, are differences in degree—not kind. Gender differences in conversational topics are getting smaller. The language of consensus and cooperation is moving into the workplace. This style of language is being socially reconstructed as beneficial for both employee satisfaction and company profit. Depending on context, men are displaying more self-disclosing nonverbal behaviors such as a quick hug of another man as a greeting rather than using the mechanical handshake of the past. Watch Stephen Colbert, Jimmy Fallon, or Conan O’Brien as confirmation. Such behaviors are approved by both men and women and enhance the rating of the shows and the likability of the male television hosts.

Gendered Language, Communication, and Socialization  157

Reread this chapter’s opening quote. Fifty years of commentary on the simple word “a” is a testimony to the weight, awareness, and decline of linguistic sexism. This is evident, too, in that NASA includes “a man” in every official message documenting this momentous event. Neil Armstrong himself worked tirelessly to rectify his error, if indeed there was one. By highlighting the word “a” over time, he certainly “got the word out” about the importance of gender inclusiveness in language. In his words, I thought I said it. I can’t hear it when I listen on the radio reception here on Earth, so I’ll be happy if you just put it in parentheses. (Associated Press, 2012)

KEY TERMS Computer-Mediated Communication (CMC) Dominance model

Dual-culture model Genderlects Linguistic sexism

Nonverbal communication Register

CHAPTER 5

Western History and the Construction of Gender

Men have had every advantage of us in telling their own story. Education has been theirs in so much higher a degree; the pen has been in their hands. —Jane Austen, Persuasion, 1818 Portending Jane Austen’s sentiments, in 1801 an anonymous author wrote in the Female Advocate, an American publication: “Why ought the one half of mankind, to vault and lord it over the other?” Reflecting an egalitarian model far ahead of its time, both writers identified a critical need to explore the other half of humankind. Distinguished historian Gerda Lerner (1920–2013), also a founding member of the National Organization of Women, extends this message to contemporary scholars. She suggests that the recognition women had been denied in their own history “came to many of us as a staggering flash of insight, which altered our consciousness irretrievably” (Lerner, 1996:8). This insight reverberated throughout the academy, and as a result, the field of women’s history rapidly expanded. Historians increasingly embrace their work as a record that connects the past to give meaning to the present. To explain the differential status of women and men in contemporary society, it is necessary to examine the impact of powerful historical forces constructing gendered attitudes. Scholarly work is scrutinizing the past with the goal of uncovering hidden elements in the lives of women from all ranks. As we will see, these uncovered elements are vastly different from centuries of discourse that highlighted a limited, circumscribed set of “proper” roles for women. These discourses date back to the earliest writings of the Greek philosophers and center on debates about women’s place, women’s souls, and women’s sexuality, and the suitability of women for marriage and procreation. Writings of this type were used, and continue to be used, to justify a patriarchal status quo. What is clear is that the centuries of debate on “women’s themes” do not constitute a women’s history. Another pioneering women’s historian, Mary Ritter Beard (1876–1958), asserted that in the 2,500 years history has been written, most male writers overlooked the histories of females. In historical writing, the whole of human experience has been dominated by the political, economic, and military exploits of an elite, powerful group of men. From the historical glimpses in this chapter, we will find that throughout history, women have assumed a multitude of vital domestic and nondomestic roles, many of which were ignored or relegated to inconsequential historical footnotes.

Western History and the Construction of Gender  159

PLACING WOMEN IN HISTORY With a strong feminist thrust, the revitalized women’s movement of the 1960s provided the catalyst for the independent field of “women’s history” to emerge. In the 1990s, many historians shifted to “gender history.” The distinction is an important one. Historians favoring a gender history approach focus on the power dynamics between men and women. Those favoring a women’s history approach tend to focus on social history, also called the “new social history,” that studies the lives and experiences of ordinary people. Women are the largest category in this history. Although there is general agreement as to what is not included in these categories, scholars do not agree on what the approach, content, and boundaries of the fields should or must include (Dayton and Levenstein, 2012; Gabaccia and Maynes, 2012). There is broad consensus, however, that because women and men experience events and traverse parallel, not necessarily overlapping worlds around them in qualitatively different ways, the starting point must be on those very experiences. Both gender and women’s history ask why women have a profoundly different historical experience from that of men. Since social history employs theories and methods of sociology to understand the interdisciplinary linkage between social and historical patterns, it can be explored from gender and women’s historical perspectives. This chapter includes both. Since women have basically been left out of historical writing, the first attempts at reclaiming their historical place centered on combing the chronicles for “appropriate” figures to demonstrate the existence of female notables of similar authority and ability to male. If there was Peter the Great, there was Katherine the Great. Referred to as compensatory history, this approach chronicles the lives of exceptional women and does not provide much information about the impact of women’s activities to society in general. Another track is contribution history, documenting women’s contributions to specific social and political movements. Their activities, however, are judged not only by their effects on the movement, but also by standards defined by men. Lerner suggests that we can certainly take pride in the achievements of notable women, but these kinds of histories do not describe the experience of the masses of women who remain invisible to the historical record. If females are peripheral in history, then some groups of females are even more peripheral. Both compensatory and contribution history parallel historical standards that, until recently, ignored society’s nonelites—the men and women of classes and races defined as marginal to society. Social history is perhaps the best inclusive approach to the past in account for their lives and cultures. A balanced history makes visible women and other marginalized groups and, in turn, affirms their identity.

The Intersection of Gender, Race, and Class in History Even though the relationship of gender to power is the foundation of women’s history, scholarship from African American and Latino women historians effectively argues that a ­gender-based male/female dichotomy falsely homogenizes women. The critical intersection of gender, race, and class must be in the historical foreground. Women’s history is again being reconceptualized to understand the power dynamics between men and women and how these unfold between women of different races and social classes. Related to this is the

160  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

concern that when the historical experiences of women of color become chronicled, they may be acknowledged according to race, yet within another dichotomy—people of color versus white. Other categories such as sexuality and ethnicity, however, are still missing. A diversity (multicultural) framework should also be incorporated to allow a simultaneous exploration of the interplay of all these categories, providing a way to organize a truly inclusive history of women. With the rapid sophistication and mainstreaming of women’s history, feminist scholars endeavor to account for all these dimensions.

Historical Themes about Women It is impossible to provide a full historical reckoning of women’s and gender history. The intent here is to overview key historical periods important in influencing attitudes and subsequent behavior concerning gender, as well as to offer updates as emerging gender themes augment perspectives on the historical record. The focus is the historical paths in Western society that lead to current thinking about gender roles of American women and men. As mentioned in the first chapter, history illustrates the impact of misogyny, the disdain and contempt of women that propels their oppression. This reflects the first of two important themes to be overviewed. The first stems from gender history and is the theme of patriarchy; it relates to the power of men over women and the subjection and victimization of women. This theme is central to all feminist scholarship on women, regardless of discipline. Countering the implicit woman-as-victim approach, the second theme explores the resistance of women to patriarchy, focusing on stories of courage, survival, and achievement as women throughout history leveraged agency for individual and social benefits. This alternative view indicates that although women’s history is still unfolding, it has issued a formidable challenge to traditional thinking on gender roles. Feminist historical scholarship has challenged gendered dichotomies, for example, related not only to race and class, but also to categories defined in oppositional terms. This scholarship is abandoning “versus” in describing categories related to nature and nurture, work and family, and private and public spheres of men and women. Like feminist scholarship in sociology, this theme reflects the interdisciplinary thrust of social history. Multicultural factors are included in this thrust. This thrust reflects the second theme and considers how gender, race, and class intersect with other cultural components, such as region and religion, and coming later in historical renderings, the component of sexuality. Culture is used in the broadest sense to highlight diversity and to provide for more inclusiveness in a gender and a women’s historical record. Many of these cultural components are explored from a global perspective in Chapter 6. With these thrusts in mind and the inclusiveness they entail, the social history approach provides the framework for this chapter for several reasons. First, this approach scrutinizes the historical record to discover the roots of patriarchy and how this influenced misconceptions about the roles of women and attitudes about these roles. Second, it supports women’s history by borrowing from, and merging scholarship, in different disciplines. This interdisciplinarity challenges the narrow line of political history, that focuses on (white) men who make war, by examining other institutions, their linkages to large-scale social processes, and to the “many dimensions of human experience,” such as the economics of families and households. Third, and most important, it is a history of “most women,” the massive group whose contributions to their societies and whose response to the multiple oppressions they faced in their everyday lives had been ignored. Her-story, developing in tandem with social history, allows for a balance to the historical record (Scott, 2018:21).

Western History and the Construction of Gender  161

CLASSICAL SOCIETIES The foundation of Western culture is most often traced to the Greek and Roman societies of classical antiquity. Western civilization is rooted in the literature, art, philosophy, politics, and religion of a time that extends from the Bronze Age (3000–1200 bce) through the reign of Justinian (565 ce). The period between 800 bce and 600 ce witnessed spectacular achievements for humanity. With the achievements came ideological convictions that persist in modified form today. The dark side of classical societies was laced with war, slavery, deadly competitions, and a brutal existence for much of the population. Inhabiting another portion of this cordoned-off world was democracy, literacy, grace, and beauty. These opposites serve as a framework from which to view the roles of women. Like the societies themselves, the evidence concerning women’s roles is also contradictory. This contradictory evidence must be viewed in light of the fact that it is difficult to find the historical voices of classical woman that survived into the Renaissance. What we know about women and gender relationships in these societies is almost entirely from sources written by men.

The Glory That Was Greece The view of women in classical Greece (between the fifth and fourth centuries bce) varies according to the time, location, and sources examined. Greek literature, legend, and historical accounts are replete with references to the matriarchal society of Amazons, ruled by queens, inhabiting the treacherous terrain north of the Mediterranean world. Although shrouded in mystery, recent archeological evidence suggests the existence of warlike females in the region, buried with their weapons and horses, “that confirm Amazons were not merely figments of Greek imagination” (Mayor, 2016: 969). Greek mythology saw them as female warriors who were capable with a bow and who had little need of men except as sexual partners. Greek heroes, such as Hercules and Achilles, were sent to the distant lands on the border of the barbarian world to test their strength against the Amazons. Because the Amazons invariably lost and were eventually raped by, or married to, the heroes sent to defeat them, some historians suggest that these myths were invented to reinforce beliefs about the inevitability of patriarchy and to insure women remained in domestic and sexual servitude (Man, 2018). Although all legends, by definition, may defy authentication, too much evidence exists to dismiss the Amazon stories outright (Mayor, 2014). We know that throughout Asia Minor and the Mediterranean during this period, there are innumerable references to physically strong women from nomadic societies who were leaders and soldiers, and where men and women shared tasks essential to daily survival.

Partnership Archaeological material from the Neolithic to the Early Bronze Age period immediately predating the birth of Greek civilization provides substantial evidence of matrilineal inheritance, female creator images, the sexual freedom of women, the goddess as supreme deity, and the power of priestesses and queens, lending credence to the existence of a Minoan matriarchy (Joyce, 2008; Younger, 2016). Others contend that these ancient societies show neither matriarchy nor patriarchy as the norm. In this view, the inference that if women had high status, then men inevitably had low status does not necessarily follow. A generally egalitarian or partnership society is also possible.

162  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

The egalitarian zenith was reached in the goddess-worshipping culture of Minoan Crete. Cultural historians define it as a high civilization because of its art, social complexity, peaceful prosperity, and degree of technological sophistication. With art and Christian scripture as key evidentiary linkages, the social structure of Minoan Crete likely conformed to a general partnership model between men and women (Eisler, 1995b). At the birth of civilization, women enjoyed more freedom, including less restraint on modesty, and partnership roles in emerging religions. Interaction and unity rather than separation and isolation may describe the gender norms of the time (Knoblauch, 2007; Spencer, 2013). The mythology of such cultures points to the absence of warfare, private property, class structure, violence, and rape. Referred to as the “Golden Age,” the mythology bolsters the view of a society where stratification based on gender was largely unknown. Evidence from the Amazonian myths through to Minoan Crete does not necessarily suggest that a matriarchal society ruled by women existed, but it does suggest plausible alternatives to patriarchy. Claims about women’s power in prehistory remain contentious, but Minoan civilization represents a society of well-being and prosperity in which women played a dominant role (Grammatikakis, 2011:968). This civilization challenges the claim that patriarchy is inevitable today because it was inevitable throughout history. Images of women in powerful, respected roles and of men and women working together as partners prove empowering to all women. Over time, a matrilineal system tracing descent from the female line was replaced with a patrilineal system. Goddesses who dominated the ancient world and then lost their central position as gods were added to religious imagery (Chapter 12). The mother of the later gods may have been an earlier goddess (Munn, 2006). Maternal religion declined as patriarchal theology was grafted onto it and patriarchy eventually prevailed. Patriarchy, however, did not completely dislodge the revered goddess from later Greek mythology. Religion was the realm where the women of ancient Greece maintained a degree of power and prestige.

Oppression The Amazon legends and goddess images perpetuated the belief that classical Greece revered women. Except for some circumscribed religious practices and important household roles, however, the Greek world saw women as inferior in political, social, and legal realms. Plato called for girls to be educated in the same manner as boys with equal opportunities open to them to become rulers, believing that a superior woman is better than an inferior man. In the Republic, he stated, “There is not one of those pursuits by which the city is ordered which belongs to women as women, or to men as men; but natural aptitudes are equally distributed in both kinds of creatures.” Alongside his supposed enlightened image of women, however, is Plato’s disdain of and antipathy toward women. In championing the democratic state, Plato was a pragmatist as well as a misogynist. He believed an inferior class of uneducated women might work against the principles of democracy, so he appeared to champion the emancipation of women. Greek antiquity marked a clear gender division of labor, but wives were judged on their ability to manage a household, roles acknowledged as vital to family and society (Lion and Michel, 2016:2). Women may “naturally participate in all occupations,” Plato continues, “but in all women are weaker than men.” Women were excluded from his academy, and no woman speaks in his dialogues. Indeed, women’s sexual nature could distract men from reason and pursuit of knowledge, so men and women must exist in separate worlds. Since scholars have difficulty resolving Plato’s position that women are equal but

Western History and the Construction of Gender  163

inferior, his dialectic on women continues to be hotly debated (Blair, 2012; Moore, 2016). In the end, Plato’s emancipated women were likely to be illiterate, isolated, and oppressed. It is Aristotle who is more representative of the Greek view of women. In Politics, Aristotle explicitly states that a husband should rule over his wife and children. Women are higher than slaves, but if slaves are naturally meant to be ruled by free men, then women, as inferior passive beings, are naturally meant to be ruled by men. The male, unless constituted in some respect contrary to nature, is by nature more expert at leading than the female, and the elder and complete than the younger and incomplete … The relation of male to female is by nature a relation of superior to inferior and ruler to ruled. (Aristotle, Politics Book I, cited in Clayton, n.d.) Without this culturally accepted image of women, the natural order would be violated. Given Aristotle’s profound influence on Western philosophical ideals his distinctive biological foundation for male-female differences serves as the foundation for centuries of discourse on the inferiority of women.

Athens The women of Athens could be described as chattels. At one point in Greek history, even a wife’s childbearing responsibilities could be taken over by concubines, further lowering a wife’s already subordinate status. Divorce was rare but possible. As a group, women were classified as minors, along with children and slaves. Aristotle speaks of a man without property who could not afford slaves but who could use his wife or children in their place. Husbands and male kin literally held the power of life and death over women. Some upper-class women enjoyed privileges associated with wealth and were left to their own devices while their husbands were away at war or serving the state. Considering the plight of most women of the time, these women achieved a measure of independence in their households largely because of the absence of their husbands for lengthy periods. But Athenian repression of women was so strong that wealth could not compensate for the disadvantages of gender. From a conflict perspective, the class position of a citizen woman belonging to the highest class was determined by her gender, “by the fact that she belonged to the class of women” (De St. Croix, 1993:148). Her male relatives could be property owners, but she was devoid of property rights. As a woman, therefore, her class position was greatly inferior. In Marxian terms, women were an exploited class regardless of the socioeconomic class to which they belonged. Athenian society did not tolerate women in public places except at funerals and all-female festivals; so, for the most part, they remained secluded in their homes, which were also segregated. Women had special quarters that were designed to restrict freedom of movement and to keep close supervision over their sexual activities. Similar to authoritarian contemporary societies, Athens established a formal police force to monitor and protect the chastity of women (Chapter 6). Mourning was ritualized, and women could not express their grief in public or at the funerals they were allowed to attend. The major exception to this norm was the “Panathenaia,” the most important of all festivals in honor of the patron-goddess Athena, the protector of crops. All Athenian society was involved in the festival—slaves, citizens, and men and women. Less important Athena

164  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

festivals reflected the daily lives of women, and festival rituals initiated girls at puberty to prepare them for marriage (Håland, 2012). During the classical period overall, women performed religious rituals that relaxed rules and offered a level of empowerment for women otherwise living under strict patriarchal control (MacLachlan, 2017). The few successful women in this world of men were in three groups. One group consisted of those women who practiced political intrigue behind the scenes to help elevate their sons or husbands to positions of power. The second group was the hetairai, high-level courtesans whose wit, charm, and talent men admired. When pederasty was in vogue, men sought boys or other young men for their sexual and intellectual pleasure in relationships that also prepared boys for manhood (Cavanaugh, 2017). It was common for a man to change his sexual preference to women after spending his youth loving boys. The uneducated wives could not compete with the social skills and cultural knowledge exhibited by either the hetairai, thoroughly trained for their work from girlhood, or the sexually experienced, educated males they frolicked with earlier in life (Murray, 2000). The third and very tiny group was made up of the highly regarded wives and daughters of literate men. Philosophers such as Pythagoras were esteemed in classical Greece, and wealthier families could afford the luxury of becoming their disciples. They looked upon Pythagoras as divine, with the result that they turned over their wives to him in order that they would learn some of his doctrines. And so they were called “Pythagorean Women.” (From Diogenes Laertius, Life of Pythagoras, cited in Pomeroy, 2013). In Greek mythology, Helen of Troy, also known as Helen of Sparta, was considered to be the most beautiful woman in the world. Like the courtesans of the day, her manipulation of men was her only means of self-preservation (Tsakitopoulou-Summers, 2013). However, throughout much of history—Western and non-western alike—a courtesan had a better life than a wife.

Sparta The subordinate position of Athenian women extended to most of the Greek world. When comparing Athens to Sparta, some notable differences can be ascertained. Sparta practiced male infanticide when newborns were deemed unfit, especially to become warriors. The extent of infanticide and whether girls were killed is unclear (Schrader, 2011). Regardless, it cannot be concluded that male infanticide indicated a higher regard for females in Sparta. It is significant only to the extent that Spartan society was organized around the ever-present threat of war and strongly influenced the roles of Spartan women. If Athenian men were separated from their wives by war, the situation was magnified in Sparta. Spartan men were either at war or preparing for it. Military life effectively separated husband and wife until he reached the age of 30. These years of separation, marked by infrequent visits by their husbands, allowed wives to develop their own talents and capabilities that would have been impossible in Athens. While the men were away, the women enjoyed a certain amount of freedom. Although the woman’s responsibility was to bear male children who would become warriors, girls were also expected to be physically fit. A strong value to promote both fitness and beauty in girls was encouraged through rigorous gymnastic training. Although the value was stronger for males, athletics valorized compliance and subordination of all individuals to the social

Western History and the Construction of Gender  165

order (Christesen, 2012). Compared to women in Athens, young unmarried Spartan women enjoyed a higher degree of freedom. In addition to physical activities, citizen women were expected to manage the household and all the associated properties. Women retained control of their dowries and were able to inherit property. In comparison to Athens, the free women of Sparta had more privileges, if only because they were left alone much of the time. But in the context of the period, the majority of women existed in a legal and social world that viewed them in terms of their fathers, brothers, and husbands (Powell, 2016). Subordination and suppression of women was the rule.

The Grandeur That Was Rome The founding of Rome by Romulus, traditionally dated at 753 bce, led to an empire that lasted until it was overrun by invading Germanic tribes in the fifth century ce. The Roman Empire evolved and adapted to the political, social, and cultural forces of the times and in turn influenced these very forces. Changes in gender roles mirrored the fortunes and woes of the empire. The prerogatives of women in later Rome contrasted sharply with the rights of women in the early days of the republic. It is true that women remained subservient to men and cannot be portrayed separately from the men who dominated and controlled them. But compared with the Greeks, Roman women achieved an astonishing amount of freedom.

Male Authority Early Rome granted the eldest man in a family, the pater familias, absolute power over all family members, male and female alike. His authority could extend to giving death sentences for errant family members and selling his children into slavery to recoup the economic losses of a family. Daughters remained under the authority of a pater familias throughout their lives, but sons could be emancipated after his death. Even after marriage, the father or uncle or brother still held the status of pater familias for women, meaning husbands had a more limited amount of control over wives. The absolute authority of the pater familias may have helped women in the long run. The right of guardianship brought with it a great deal of responsibility. A daughter’s dowry, training, and education had to be considered early in life. If she married into a family with uncertain financial assets, the possibility existed that she and her new family could become a continued economic liability. The pater familias exercised extreme caution in ensuring the appropriate match for the women under his guardianship. This system allowed for total power of the pater familias, but it also caused a great burden for that very power to be maintained. By the first century ce, legislation was passed that allowed a freewoman to be emancipated from a male guardian if she bore three children. The roles of child bearer and mother were primary, but they allowed for a measure of independence later in life. Like Sparta, Rome was always involved in warfare, and a declining birth rate was alarming. The abandonment of the pater familias rule functioned to decrease the economic burden women caused for the family. Emancipation in exchange for babies was an additional latent function.

Female Power Like other women throughout history, Roman women could amass some power without the authority granted to men via law. Compared to the Greeks, Romans recognized a wider role

166  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

for women. In the civic realm, Romans acknowledged women’s productive role in the origins of the state and offered citizenship to select women. Religious life still retained vestiges of goddess worship, and women shared in the supervision of the religious cult of the household. The comparative power of women held in the religious life of the empire is reflected in goddess cults and the revered Vestal Virgins. These mortal women symbolized Rome’s economic and moral well-being. Although vestal virgins were open only to a select few, these women took on roles of great public importance. Recent evidence suggests that in addition to the Vestal Virgins, the larger Roman priesthood was cooperative and gender-inclusive. Women and men worked together to serve the people; this work often elevated women to high roles as priestesses. Roman women, however, knew their lives would be carried out as wives and mothers. Nonetheless, wives also carried out the business of the family while their husbands were on military duty. These roles gradually extended so that it became common for women to buy and sell property as well as inherit it and participate in the broader economic life of the society (Matz, 2012; Diluzio, 2016). Their expertise was both praised and criticized, especially as women amassed fortunes in their own names. The necessity for economic decision making could not be reconciled with a lifestyle of too much seclusion. The Greeks would have been astounded to see women in public roles and at dinner parties seated with men. Although most women remained illiterate, including upper-class women who had the most independence, women had greater opportunities for learning and were taught to cultivate music, art, and dancing. These women challenged a system in which they were otherwise chained to their husbands or fathers. Roman women were eventually granted the right to divorce. Although the emancipated woman was a rarity in Roman times, women could use social norms about virtuousness to their advantage. They were required to be modest and subordinate but also loyal and industrious. The latter allowed for more leadership roles in and outside their households (Hylen, 2014). Freedom is relative. Roman society allowed a few women of higher social standing privileges unheard of in Greek society. Religion was the one area where women exercised much control, but with few exceptions, religious dominance did not expand into other realms. That a sexual double standard existed is unquestionable. Women may have been more visible, but they were definitely not autonomous. Alas, even the revered Vestal Virgins could be condemned to a cruel premature death for slight transgressions deemed unworthy of a daughter of the state (Turney, 2016). When compared to almost any free males in Rome, the most privileged, assertive, independent, and visible women were still in bondage to men.

THE MIDDLE AGES When the Roman emperor Constantine reigned (306–337 ce), the empire was already in the throes of disintegration. Constantine’s decision to wed the empire to Christianity was politically astute because Christianity seemed to offer an integrative force in a period when the empire’s decline was accelerating. Constantine’s foresight on the impact of Christianity was remarkable. He did not envision, however, that the collapse of Rome would be instrumental in allowing Christianity to gain a firm grip on Europe that lasted throughout the Middle Ages. The Renaissance and feudal eras combined did not radically diminish this powerful hold. Christianity profoundly influenced the role of women. Compared to the pre-classical

Western History and the Construction of Gender  167

era, women’s status in the classical era markedly deteriorated. This already bleak situation was considerably worsened when Christianity dominated Europe during the Middle Ages, a time frame most commonly regarded as approximately 500–1500 ce.

Christianity To its credit, the Church, in the form of a few monasteries and abbeys, became the repository of Greek and Roman knowledge that surely would have been lost during the sacking, looting, and general chaos following the disintegration of the Roman Empire. The decline of a literate population left reading, writing, and education in the hands of the Church. The power of literacy and the lack of literate critics permitted the Church to become the irreproachable source of knowledge and interpretation in all realms. The Church’s view of life was absolute. If certain sentiments of the early Church had persisted, Christianity might not have taken on such misogynous overtones. Extending from Jewish tradition, the belief in the spiritual equality of the genders offered new visions of and to women. The ministry of Jesus included women in prominent roles, demonstrating spiritual equality in the steadfastly patriarchal society of the time (Chapter 12). Also, the Church recognized that women provided valuable charitable, evangelistic, and teaching services that were advantageous to the fledgling institution. Some positions of leadership in the Church hierarchy were open to women and served as models for women who might choose a religious life. The convent also served as a useful occupation for some women, particularly of the upper classes, who were deemed unsuited for marriage. It provided a place of education for selected girls and a sacred space for women to worship together without interference. Talented nuns were also poets, composers, and artists. Whereas the convent may have offered opportunities for women, the measure of independence they achieved as nuns was viewed with suspicion. Education for nuns eroded, and with more restrictions put on women’s ownership of land, it was difficult to found new convents. Distrust of the independent woman in Catholic Europe served to strip nuns of their autonomy, and in Protestant Europe, women were left without an acceptable alternative to marriage (Schulenburg, 2008; Madigan, 2015). Misogyny eventually dominated as the Church came to rely heavily on the writings of those who adopted traditional, restrictive views of women. Women were excluded from the few covenant communities teaching reading and writing. Biblical interpretations consistent with a cultural belief of the inferiority of women that placed the blame squarely on Eve for the fall of humanity became the unquestioned norm. As a fifteenth-century minister told his flock, when Eve conversed with Satan’s Eve … told him what God had said to her and her husband about eating the apple; … the fiend understood her feebleness and her unstableness and found a way to bring her to confusion. (Cited in Bardsley, 2007:173) Christianity also altered attitudes about marriage and divorce. Unlike in classical society, marriage could not be dissolved. Perhaps the only grounds for divorce were extreme cruelty to a wife by her husband. In England, husbands were legally allowed to beat their wives, but not “outrageously” or “violently.” A wife who won her case had to prove that the violence was so great that she was in danger of death (Gowing, 2012). Few women sued for separation, but those who did had a good chance of winning their case. Because divorce was

168  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

unobtainable, women may have benefited if only for the fact that they could not be easily abandoned for whatever transgressions, real or imagined, their husbands attributed to them. Whereas childlessness was grounds for marital dissolution throughout history, even this was no longer an acceptable cause. However undesirable the marriage, it was inviolable in the eyes of the Church.

Witch Hunts With the medieval Church as a backdrop, misogyny during the late Middle Ages created an outgrowth for one of the most brutal periods of history concerning women—the time of the witch hunts. The woman who deviated from gendered norms generated the greatest distrust. If she remained unmarried, was married but childless, was regarded as sexually provocative, or was too independent or too powerful, she could be denounced as a witch (Briggs, 2002). Women who were not economically dependent on men—husbands, fathers, or brothers— may have been higher in social class, but like their sisters in classical societies, their gender class dominated all other statuses. Money and power condemned rather than protected them from the witch hunts. The power of the Church was directly related to the poverty of the people. Women who survived economically in their paid roles as healer, midwife, and counselor were particular targets of the witch hunts. Such women were admired for their expertise and sought out by the communities in which they practiced their professions. They were transformed into witches who symbolized evil and the wrath of God. With witches symbolizing disorder and disobedience, female power was on trial but so was the fear of female sexuality, reinforced by Christian theology’s view that sexual passion in women is irrational and potentially chaotic (Garrett, 2013; Elmer, 2016). The majority of victims in the European witch hunts were women. Although the label of “witch” was not reserved exclusively for women, in medieval Italy priests could be accused of “harmful magic” to seduce married women (Wieben, 2017:142). Witch hunts of this period displayed an eruption of misogyny that remains unparalleled in Western history with tens of thousands of women burned as witches, ostensibly to appease God’s anger for their sexual impurity. It was common for women to publicly confess to eating the hearts of unbaptized babies and, the most common condemning confession, having intercourse with the devil. God and the devil are enemies, and the methods of the devil worked well on weak women with evil temperaments; thus burning the witch upheld righteousness and morality and claimed a victory over Satan (Nenonen, 2012; Castell-Grandados, 2014). Smaller Catholic states (for example, present-day Germany) conducted the most witch trials in Europe, in turn culminating in the most executions (Farmer, 2016:9). It cannot be denied that the medieval Church’s attitudes about women’s sexual desires played a prominent role in sanctioning the witch craze. As in classical society, a woman’s uncontrolled sexuality—not a man’s—was instrumental in destroying social order.

Feudalism Built on mutual dependency and duty between lords and serfs, the feudal system’s rigid hierarchy was adapted to the ongoing threat of war and extended to all relationships. Lords, who in turn expected their serfs to fight when called upon, protected serfs and their families. All serfs owed their lives to the lord of the manor, and the wives of serfs owed their lives to their

Western History and the Construction of Gender  169

husbands. The lack of respect for serfs in general, and their wives in particular, is indicated by a custom that allowed the lord to confirm the virginity of the serf’s new bride on their wedding night. Women of noble standing fared somewhat better in their valuable role to forge power of the family lineage through arranged marriages, although here, too, the lord of the manor granted permission for any marriage. However, in this masculine-centered feudal universe, some noble women ascended to queenships, amassing both the power and respect that could be leveraged to extend the economic and political fortunes of their families, especially marriageable daughters (Earenfight, 2013). Queens were astute in dealing with the political intrigue necessary to assure the best match for their daughters. An unmarried noblewoman was a property worth guarding, her virginity a marketable commodity, ensuring the legitimacy of a male heir, uniting two houses, and perpetuating a noble lineage. At marriage, brides from all social classes were given in exchange for a dowry. In families with means dowries of money or jewelry were expected; serf families made do with dowries of cooking pots and clothing. Some customs required a bride to kneel in front of her husband-to-be to symbolize his power over her. As the lord of the estate controlled her husband, she was to be controlled by her lord and husband. Whether serf or noble, feudal wives had much in common.

Renaissance The last 300 years of medieval Europe, which included the Renaissance and Reformation, were years of ferment and change that inevitably encroached on all of women’s domains. In general, the Renaissance had positive effects on women throughout the socioeconomic spectrum. Educated aristocratic women became patrons of literature and art, many of them authors in their own right. Notably the women who emerged as scientists, writers, and artists were literate women largely of noble blood. As such, they were accorded some prestige for their accomplishments. But other forces were at work that kept traditional images of women from being seriously challenged.

Martin Luther and the Reformation With the Reformation came the disquieting notion that the Church hierarchy excluded people from embracing religiosity and deterring them from worship. Preaching a theology of liberation from the Church he indicted as too restrictive, Martin Luther (1483–1546) advocated opening Christianity to everyone based on faith alone. Critical of Aquinas’s view that a woman was imperfect, in essence a botched male, Luther argued that those who accused her of this are in themselves monsters and should recognize that she, too, is a creature made by God. Many women embraced Luther’s justification by faith principle, but some paid a heavy price as a result. For example, Anne Boleyn was beheaded in England not only as a convenience to annul Henry VIII’s marriage to Catherine of Aragon, but in her effort to strengthen Protestantism in England; Jane Grey and Anne Askew, who dared to criticize the Catholic mass, were tortured and executed. The degree to which the first women embraced Protestantism for personal, political, or social justice convictions is unclear. The Reformation did appear to offer an opportunity to present different interpretations of Christianity highlighting men and women’s spiritual equality that could serve to elevate the position of women.

170  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

This was not to be the case. Luther himself presents a paradox. He promoted education for girls and boys, so they might read the Bible for themselves. Most important, his break with Rome centered on the praise of marriage, not simply for convenience and reproduction but also for companionship and spousal love. On the other hand, women might not be “botched males,” he still described the subordination of women as ordained by God, believing a marriage to be hierarchical, with a wife as a helpmate, always inferior to her husband (Kleinhans, 2015; Wiesner-Hanks, 2016). Theological statements of the time abound with themes of superior man and inferior woman. Women bear the greater burden for original sin because of Eve’s seduction by Satan. God’s natural order assigns women functions related to procreation, wifely duties, and companionship to men. Upsetting the natural order, such as a woman’s adultery, justified her being stoned to death, but the sentence did not extend to an unfaithful husband. As the Reformation reverberated throughout the Western world, there were no dramatic changes relative to the image of women under Christianity. The Renaissance generated the rebirth of art, literature, and music in a world that was rapidly being transformed by commerce, communication, and the growth of cities. As a force in people’s lives, Christianity now competed with formal education. Literacy expanded to more men and some women, opening intellectual life that had been closed to most except for clergy and nobility. Women made some economic headway by working in shops or producing products in the home for sale or trade. As money replaced barter systems and manufacturing increased, a new class of citizens emerged who were not dependent on either agriculture or a feudal lord for protection.

Critique Like other periods in history, the Renaissance presents contradictory evidence about women. The question whether women actually “had a Renaissance” depends on the answer to other questions: which women? Where were they located? What was their social class? Historians have scoured the hundred years (1580–1680) of this assumed Golden Age for records of female notables, and hundreds have been discovered or rediscovered (Wiesner-Hanks, 2008). These records provide abundant testimonies to the intellect, talent, and stature of women poets, artists, artisans, and musicians. Although they provide an image of the past that is affirming to women, they remain, as always, witness to extraordinary rather than ordinary women of the day. Social history provides a more inclusive view, and from this, several plausible conclusions can be drawn. The Renaissance witnessed women in more diverse roles. Many women, particularly lower-class poor women, migrated to the expanding cities and were employed as servants, barmaids, fishmongers, textile workers, and peat carriers, to name a few. More educated women not of noble blood established themselves as actresses and midwives. Although a woman was protected from financial destitution by marriage, a surplus of women in some European cities such as Amsterdam may have made marriage unattainable, but less disastrous, if she was employed. Prostitution also burgeoned during this period. Compared to wives and unmarried women (spinsters), widows in England enjoyed the most freedom because they could inherit property and were free to continue their husbands’ businesses. But with a stubborn religious foundation in place, misogyny continued to govern Europe. Women who ventured outside prescribed gender roles found themselves in precarious positions both socially and economically.

Western History and the Construction of Gender  171

THE AMERICAN EXPERIENCE Women’s history and American social history are fundamentally intertwined, a productive association for expansion of scholarship in both areas. Because social history focuses on previously neglected groups such as minorities and the working classes, women are brought in as part of that cohort. Until recently, the interest in women was largely confined to issues related to the attainment of legal rights, such as the suffrage movement. Only since the 1970s as the feminist wave took root have gender and women’s history in the United States come into their own. This new history issues three challenges: to reexamine gendered social relations, to reconstruct historical generalizations, and to reconfigure historical narrative (De Hart and Kerber, 2003). Similar to newer sociological models based on feminist theory (Chapter 1), these challenges from women’s history are laying the foundation for a paradigm shift in the broader discipline of history itself.

The First American Women As a prelude to this paradigm shift, women’s history is bringing to the surface a range of taken-for-granted assumptions about women in America. The first American women were Native American women, but this obvious fact was historically disregarded until recently. In those instances when it was not ignored, stereotyped and inaccurate portrayals based on European, Christian, patriarchal beliefs prevailed. Prior to colonization, in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, at least 2,000 Native American languages existed, indicating the massive tribal diversity of the time. Given such diversity, it is difficult to generalize about the status of Native American women as a group. The archaeological and historical record (the latter based mainly on diaries, letters, and some ethnographic descriptions from the period) does allow some reliable conclusions, especially for coastal and Midwestern tribes such as the Seneca of western New York, the Algonquins distributed along the Atlantic coast, and a number of Iroquoian tribes scattered throughout the territories east of the Mississippi River. Accounts of American Indian women during this period can be interpreted in many ways, and much is dependent on specific tribes and who wrote the accounts. Missionary and European views of Native American women on the Eastern shores during the 1600s saw them as beasts of burden, slaves, and “poor creatures who endure all the misfortunes of life” (Riley, 2007). This led to the stereotypical and derisive “squaw” image, that was perpetuated by zealous missionaries, who generally saw Native Americans as primitive savages (Fischer, 2005). This image contrasts sharply with the historical record.

Gender Role Balance Ancient tribal systems can be described by balance, complementarity, and functional separation of gender roles. In tribal communities as regionally and culturally diverse as the Iroquois, Osage, Pueblo, Nez Perce, and Hopi, men and women were thought to represent two halves of the same environment as necessary pairs (Edwards, 2018). Gender segregation was the norm in many tribes, but it provided women with a great deal of autonomy. The success of the system depended on balanced and harmonious functioning of the whole, with work of both men and women viewed as functionally necessary for survival; even with a tribal

172  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

leadership hierarchy, one group would not be valued or, more importantly, devalued in comparison to the other. In sociology, this would be recognized as the classic functionalist model, void of judgments that define inferiority or superiority based on the tasks performed. Many tribal units were matrilineal and matrilocal, a man living in the home belonging to his wife’s family. Women were farmers and retained control over their agricultural products, feeding hungry settlers with their surpluses and influencing warfare and trade with the settlers through the power to distribute economic resources.

Tribal Leadership Native American women were also tribal leaders, many who represented gynocratic systems based on egalitarianism, reciprocity, and complementarity. In this sense, the leadership is suggestive of the partnership model said to represent some pre-Classical societies. Venerated for their wisdom, women were sought as advisers and as arbitrators in tribal disputes (Macleitch, 2007). As early as 1600, the constitution of the Iroquois Confederation guaranteed women the sole right to regulate war. John Adair referred to the Iroquoian gynocracy as a “petticoat government.” Among Virginia Indians, women often held the highest authority in their tribes and were recognized as such by white colonists. The English, fresh from the reign of Elizabeth I (1558–1603), “knew a queen when they saw one” (Lebsock, 1990). Another significant source of authority and prestige for Native American women was through their roles as religious leaders and healers. When roles of shaman and war leader coincided, women held very powerful positions, and in some tribes, the gods were women. In North American creation myths, women were the mediators between the supernatural and the earthly worlds and both men and women sought spiritual understanding through individual quests for vision. Fasting and seclusion were part of a woman’s spiritual quest. Menstruating women were believed to be so powerful that they could drain the spiritual power men required for hunting. Women would withdraw to menstrual huts outside the villages during this time. Is this interpreted as taboo and banishment? Scholars suggest that women probably welcomed the respite and saw it as an opportunity for meditation, spiritual growth, and the enjoyment of the company of other women (Evans, 2000). Again, although the worlds of men and women were rigidly separated, the balanced and cooperative system represented by these practices would serve to enhance gender solidarity.

Colonization and Christianity Colonization and Christianity were the most disruptive forces of ancient tribal patterns and, by extension, the status of women. The Iroquois Confederacy provided an image to the Europeans of a self-ruling inclusive democracy. But female participation in a democracy that was economically based on matrilineal–matrilocal clans mystified them. With increased European contact, women were gradually stripped of tribal political power and economic assets, becoming more defined, hence confined, by their domestic roles. Seen as a possible threat to the construction of the fledgling American society, Native women’s more equitable gender roles were supplanted by the patriarchal models Europeans took for granted. Conversion narratives effectively silenced the voices of these women and they began to look more and more like their subordinated colonial sisters (Gray, 2013). Christianity further eroded their powerful religious roles. The impact of Christianity on Native American

Western History and the Construction of Gender  173

women continues to be debated among historians. There is evidence from the writings of Father Le Jeune in 1633 about the tribes living on the St. Lawrence River that women were the major obstacles to tribal conversion. They resisted being baptized and would not allow their children to be educated at mission schools run by Catholic Jesuits. The women were accused of being independent and not obeying their husbands, and under Jesuit influence the men believed that the women were the cause of their misfortunes and kept the demons among them (Devens, 1996:25). Women were acutely aware that conversion to Christianity brought severe role restrictions. On the other hand, New England and Puritan missionaries, specifically the Quakers, had greater success in converting women. If change was gradual and the Indians could retain key cultural elements, the belief was that they would willingly accept the Christian message. This Christian Gospel did not obliterate native culture but “offered membership in God’s tribe” and attracted women by “honoring their traditional tasks and rewarding their special abilities” (Rhonda, 1996). Their culture could remain simultaneously Christian and Indian. Although historians disagree on the extent of Native American women’s resistance to Christianity and colonization, but scholars in the rapidly expanding field of American Indian women’s history accept that these women had higher standing in precontact America. (Stone, 2006; Rhea, 2016).

Colonial Era The first white settlers in America were searching for a version of religious freedom that had been denied expression in the Old World. The Puritans sought to practice a brand of Christianity without bureaucratic or doctrinal traditions they viewed as hampering devotion to God. In challenging the old order, however, the Puritans retained traditional beliefs about women.

Gendered Puritan Life Christian assumptions about male superiority carried effortlessly into the New World. Males were subordinate to God as females were subordinate to males. Puritan settlements such as the Massachusetts Bay Colony extracted the high degree of religious conformity considered necessary to the well-being and survival of the community. The Puritan community existed on obedience to the civil and moral law of the Old Testament as defined by the clergy. In the praise of social harmony, deviation from a clergy-sanctioned order was a threat to the social fabric. Nonetheless, Puritanism placed spiritual power in the individual. Cultivating women’s spiritual autonomy and religious development was encouraged, but only within the confines of a rigid patriarchal family structure. In 1637, Anne Hutchinson was banished from Massachusetts Bay for criticizing the minister’s sermons, for holding separate meetings for men and women who were of similar minds, and as documents from her trial indicate, for not fulfilling her ordained womanly role (Kerber et al., 2016:80).

Witchcraft Along with the threat of banishment, the convenient accusation of witchcraft kept potentially ambitious women in tow. An epidemic of witchcraft persecutions ravaged the Puritan

174  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

colonies, fueled by images of independent and disobedient women who defied authority. The infamous Salem witch trials of 1690–1693 occurred when several adolescent girls and young women accused hundreds of older women of bewitching them. Invariably the older women were viewed as aggressive and threatening, out of character with the submissive women who knew their proper place in the Puritan community. With the community’s strict hierarchy at stake, it was not difficult to condemn people who diverged from their expected roles. Family relationships of many accused witches were marked by conflict. Women were accused of witchcraft for criticizing (“railing at”) their husbands, gossiping, or fermenting anger with neighbors (Sicius et al., 2012). There was also a powerful economic rationale to witchcraft. Many women condemned as witches had no male heirs and could potentially inherit larger portions of their fathers’ or husbands’ estates, thus producing more economically independent women. These women were “aberrations in a society designed to keep property in the hands of men” (Karlsen, 2004). Burning a witch was a convenient way to rid the colony of its aberrations, foil challenges to gender norms, and maintain the desired social order. Because religion extended to all areas of life and only men could be citizens, women were denied any public expression of their sentiments. When married, colonial women entered a legal status known as civil death. Based on English Common Law, the marital union meant that she could not vote, own property, sue or be sued, administer estates, sign contracts, or keep her children in the event of divorce. She had some control over property she brought to the marriage and could inherit property at the death of her husband, but she could not sell it. Marriage was sacrosanct, but divorce was rare but possible, mostly in cases of adultery or desertion. Family arrangements and limited divorce options ensured a version of palatable family harmony to the community and prevented destitute women from becoming the community’s responsibility. Puritan society was rigidly divided into public and domestic spheres. Although women had essential tasks in the domestic area, Puritan men still controlled both spheres. The other side of the picture required Puritan men not only to provide for the economic and physical needs of the family, but also to love their wives. The revolutionary idea that love and marriage must be connected was historically unprecedented; until this time, marriage was simply seen as an economic necessity (Chapter 7). If the couple happened to love one another, so much the better. The family was patriarchal, and marriage, although supposedly founded on love, fit into a family power structure that required a wife’s obedience to her husband. Puritan women also were valued because they were scarce. Most settlers were male, and because many colonies were obliterated by disease or starvation, the colonists knew that it was vital to repopulate or see their religious visions doomed. Some male colonists advertised in England for brides. Contrary to the overall derisive constructions of contemporary women, these first American “mail-order brides” were independent, respected, and powerful. Like other colonial women, they enjoyed a fairly high legal and social standing. A 1666 ad from the South Carolina colony promised the following: If any Maid or single Woman have a desire to go over, they will think themselves in the Golden Age, when Men paid a Dowry for their Wives; for if they be but civil and under 50 years of Age, some honest Man or other will purchase them for their Wives. (Zug, 2012:92) It is doubtful however, that potential brides overlooked the mixed messages in such ads related to an ideal life in the colonies but being purchased by a civil man. Women were also

Western History and the Construction of Gender  175

vital for their economic productivity in the family. Family survival, hence community survival, was tied to the efforts of both men and women. Vegetable gardening, weaving, canning, and candle and soap making contributed to the family’s economic fortunes, and these tasks were largely confined to women. Subsistence living was the rule, but surplus products could be bartered or sold. The family was the basic social unit for the colonists, and women were integral to its economic well-being.

A Golden Age for Colonial Women? Historians are at odds about the prestige of women during this period. Because there were far fewer immigrant women than men, and women were considered valuable, this leads some to suggest that the colonial period was a golden age for women. Although the colonists came to the New World with patriarchy strongly in place, adapting to the harshness of the environment required the modification of many beliefs. Strict adherence to gender roles was impossible for survival. Women had to be economically productive and had to have expanded roles. Outside the home, women engaged in merchant, trade, and craft functions. Women had legal rights as persons, not things (Smith, 2010; Witkowski, 2012). English Common Law intruded into the colonies, but it was often circumvented out of pragmatism rather than for religious intent. If a golden age mentioned in 1666 South Carolina existed, it had clearly declined by the late-eighteenth century. The family lost its centrality as the economic unit in society, to be replaced with a wider marketplace dominated by men. Women’s work was once again confined to activities that were not income producing. Colonial women became more dependent on their families for how their lives were defined. The American economy did not allow many opportunities for women to be wage earners. Resistance increased for women who, out of necessity more than desire, sought work outside their homes. The crucial element, however, is that Puritan ideology was based on the unquestioned assumption of female inferiority and subordination. The colonial environment was a modified version of Old World notions about women, discrediting the “golden age” thesis. Although there may not have been an idealized golden age; political participation, legal rights, and education enhanced women’s position and autonomy during the Revolutionary era. These changes kindled public discourse on women’s roles that served as a catalyst for later gender role change serving to benefit women.

The Victorians: True Womanhood The struggle for survival gradually diminished as Americans prospered on farms and in shops. As judged by customary economic contributions to the family, a middle-class woman’s productive role lessened, and her life solely revolved around housekeeping and childrearing. By the nineteenth century, her world had changed considerably. Victorian examples of womanhood made their way into magazines and novels directed toward women. Despite an undercurrent of liberal feminism that was fermenting during this period, periodicals targeted to middle-class women presented them with what is referred to as a “cult” of domestic femininity. Magazines popularized the new feminine ideal as True Womanhood, associated with the cardinal virtues of piety, purity, submissiveness, and domesticity. The Victorian middle-class home was to set a standard for morality; women were glorified in pulpits and in print as “angels of the home.” These became the venerated benchmarks on which society would judge them and on which they would judge themselves.

176  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

Tied completely to her family, the middle-class woman found herself with time on her hands, a luxury not shared by her colonial sisters. Idleness was the reality, but it was transformed into a gentility striven for by many families. Gentility ushered in attitudes that women should be put on pedestals. Women were to be protected from the harshness of the world outside the home. Victorian femininity was equated with sexual, social, and political repression. The doctrine of separate spheres for the activities of women and men became firmly entrenched in the American consciousness. The strength of the True Womanhood cult was generally effective in silencing many voices of feminism that were being heard in Europe and America during the Victorian era. From pulpits throughout America, women were told that their home is the route to happiness and to resist voices calling them to other spheres. Supposedly, a woman did have a choice to define her rights and roles either inside or outside the home, as attested to by the Rev. Mr. Stearns: Yours is to determine whether the beautiful order of society … shall continue as it has been (or whether) society shall break up and become a chaos of disjointed and unsightly elements. (Welter, 1996:122) The Victorian era conjures up images of rigidity and repression, some that cannot be denied. Explorations into social history, however, provide alternative views. Many women traversed outside the bounds of propriety. Women of all classes, many by choice rather than necessity, ventured to the public sphere as paid workers, volunteers, reformers, and even athletes. White-collar occupations were opening for women, drawing America’s first female cadre of journalists, retail, health care, and clerical workers. Those who kept to the private household sphere traversed other boundaries as “scribbling women” novelists and poets. Others corresponded with lovers and male friends in sexually expressive ways, a pattern that flowed from the letters of the early nineteenth century (Lystra, 1989; Halpern, 2013). Courtship letters from African American women, like other Victorian women, reflect adherence to norms of decorum, but these women, most who were already employed, also challenged the separation of spheres doctrine. Rather than disparaging their public sphere life, they suggest self-determination and empowerment outside the bounds of households (Howard, 1996; Good, 2012; Roessner, 2013). Because one’s “actual” self can be disclosed in writing— whether letters, fiction, poetry, or narratives—it can be argued that women gained a sense of mastery not allowed in other parts of their lives. Although the Victorian vision of ideal femininity and ideal women was constructed from a white middle-class urban model, the vision was not lost on those who were virtually excluded from attaining it. Black women living on farms in the South, themselves the children and grandchildren of slaves, and immigrant women from working and lower-class backgrounds, were invited by magazines geared to them to share in the dream (Burt, 2013). The money to purchase the goods and domestic services for middle-class families, however, was unattainable for most women. Simultaneously, voices from the medical community cast non-white women in a category rendering them as distinctly inferior because of their race and their bodies. In childbirth, for example, “primitive” women give birth painlessly, but True Womanhood equated pain with femininity. Childbirth pain was necessary for “civilized” women (white, native-born, middle or upper-class), to solidify the mother–child bond and further reinforce the strict doctrine of womanly purposes of homemaking centered on

Western History and the Construction of Gender  177

childrearing (Rich, 2016:58). It is perhaps ironic that in this “no pain, no gain” analogy, nonwhite women might consider so-called painless childbirth an advantage! Clearly, however, women of all ranks exercised active control in adapting conditions of their domestic, sexual, and intellectual lives to adhere to social norms but also to meet their personal needs. Even under the edicts of True Womanhood, middle-class women had some freedom in working toward the causes they embraced, such as in movements for social justice and legal rights for women and minorities. The patriarchal family remained firmly entrenched and gender inequities intruded into domestic life, but Victorian women were able to achieve a modicum of autonomy. Gender role segregation enabled gender solidarity, which was nurtured by the emotional segregation of men and women. This allowed a female world in which a supportive, intimate network of female friendships and intimacy flourished, serving to empower women. Contemporary functionalism suggests that a focus on the rigidity associated with the Victorian era, particularly True Woman, overlooks the latent functions these very patterns provided for women.

Frontier Life Idleness was impossible on the frontier. Victorian America extolled the gentility and supposed frailness of white, middle-class women. Frontier society was disdainful of these very traits. As in the colonial era, women were vital for any settlement to be successful and were valued for their work both inside and outside the home. Through the hardship and deprivation of frontier life combined with lesser adherence to religious proscriptions concerning gender than in the colonial era, the pioneer woman achieved a degree of freedom and respect unlike previous periods of America’s brief history. The frontier experience began with the grueling trip West, which often took six months to complete. Faced with the deprivation of the trail, surviving the trip meant that the normal gender division of labor was suspended, with both women and older children filling expanded roles. Rather than viewing the situation as an opportunity for male–female equality, diaries from these women suggest that they saw themselves as invaders of a male domain. Although few women who emigrated West on the Oregon or Overland Trails came from the northeastern middle classes where the cult of True Womanhood reached its zenith, they were not immune to it either. In the journey West, women and men maintained separate worlds of existence as much as possible. Women created a specific female culture based on their roles of mother, healer, and nurse. Whereas men used the trip to fulfill dreams of bold achievement, heroism and camaraderie, many women found the experience lonely and isolating (LaSalle, 2011). The action and heroism of the trek west perpetuated by East Coast newspapers and magazines revealed more about the romance of heading West and less about the brutal effort in getting there. Life on the trail and later settlement in the West threw domestic roles in a state of disarray, but women appeared reluctant to redefine their boundaries to create anything but a temporary alteration of affairs. Although women often shared work and had overlapping functions with their fathers and husbands, gender remained the key variable in determining their duties and interests and kept them focused on their domestic lives. Remember, too, that Victorian notions of gender and gentility were fast eroding in this startlingly different environment, but these notions were not dislodged. It is not safe to conclude, however, that frontier women were passive. They exhibited a spirit of nonconformity, adventure, and extraordinary adaptation. Frontier settlements saw

178  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

the necessity of woman’s labor not being confined to the home. The Homestead Act of 1862 propelled women to own and establish farms independently of fathers or husbands or to maintain their farms as widows. Child rearing was often left to siblings as wives worked in the fields. Subsistence farming required that as many goods as possible be produced and consumed within the home, with women taking the major responsibility to accomplish this. Isolated farms, prairie loneliness, and the daily harshness of frontier living generated the understanding that men and women, wives and husbands, depended on one another for physical and emotional survival. Both before and after the Civil War, African American men and women also trekked West, carving out new lives on frontier farms they purchased. In their struggle to eke out new lives on remote farms dotting the Western landscape, African American women and white women had much in common. These experiences served to elevate the status of women. Popular images of women as saints in sunbonnets, Madonnas of the prairies, and pioneer mothers abounded during the era of westward expansion, as did accounts of the deprivation, ardor, and premature aging associated with frontier life. Theodore Roosevelt himself celebrated frontier women. He evoked the frontier myth and elevated women as rugged individuals equal to men and capable of upholding “her civic responsibility to birth a mighty nation” (Dorsey, 2013:423). Diaries, letters, and oral histories of pioneer women demonstrate that ideals of domesticity and compliance existed side by side but with new roles ultimately challenging this very compliance (Halverson, 2013). They speak of women who, with their families, endured prairie fires, locusts, droughts, disease, and the ever-present loneliness. Most did not return to their homes in the East but accepted their new life with stoicism and a hope for making their farms an economic success. Through hundreds of excerpts, writers provide a picture of matter-of-fact women who adapted to and thrived in their frontier existence. The intent is not to idealize the brutal existence that pioneer women confronted. It also depends on which “frontier” women are in the narratives. Racial minorities, especially Chinese immigrants and Native American women, had even fewer choices and certainly much less freedom than their white pioneer counterparts, rendering the ideals of the “American West” meaningless (Woodworth-Ney, 2015). It is better to suggest that adversity was important in bringing these select men and women together more equitably on the frontier, even if the participants themselves did not acknowledge the altered gender roles.

Industrialization It appears incongruous, but as the cult of domesticity ascended, the first mass movement of white women into industrial employment was also occurring. From the founding of the United States, women have always participated in paid labor and were not completely circumscribed by their domestic roles. When teachers or shopkeepers or planters or traders were needed, and men were unavailable, women were encouraged to fill these roles. Industrial expansion during the nineteenth century required an entirely new class of worker. Faced with a shortage of males who continued to farm, industrialists convinced women that, although they were too weak for agriculture, work in the mills could suit their temperaments, was good for them, and was good for the nation. For the less marriageable, factory work saved them from pauperism. The iconic “Lowell Mill Girls” recruited throughout New England in the first half of the nineteenth century paved the way for the next generations of female factory workers. The Civil War and its aftermath accelerated the need for women in industry. Thousands of women and many children answered the call.

Western History and the Construction of Gender  179

Race and Class By the latter part of the century, the shift from an agricultural to an urban industrialized economy rapidly accelerated. The family was no longer the central unit of production, and work was performed for wages at other locations outside home and farm. By the turn of the century, farm labor required less than 10 percent of America’s labor power, with 20 percent of all women in the United States over the age of 16 employed outside the home (Balanoff, 1990:611). These women were young or single or were the wives and daughters of working-class families whose income was necessary to keep the family out of poverty. Married women worked only out of dire necessity, often driven into the labor market by widowhood. With True Womanhood still in evidence, middle-class married women were expected to devote time and talent to the emotional well-being of the family, aided by labor-saving products and appliances rapidly introduced to the home. By 1900, housework and child care were no longer a full-time occupation, leading to more leisure, boredom, and restlessness for women who were, however, discouraged from seeking paid employment outside the home. This situation generated two important results. First, many middle-class women became involved in social reform work, including the growing feminist movement. Second, the already existing schism between working-class and middle-class women widened. As we will see, this schism has not been completely mended. Working-class women were confronted with different issues. Industrial growth increasingly demanded cheap labor and looked to poorer women and immigrants to take on this load. The rapidly urbanizing Eastern states accommodated the flood of immigrants who settled in areas close to the factories, mines, and mills in which they worked. Immigrant women were overrepresented as unskilled laborers in jobs that cut them off from wider society and African American women continued to toil on farms and as domestics because factory labor remained closed to them in the North. In the South, an oversupply of African American female labor made their position worse. In the West, Asian women worked in small ­family-owned businesses. In this era, gender was disregarded as a qualification for factory work; race was not. The working conditions women faced were appalling, even by the standards of the day. Unsanitary conditions, no rest breaks, rules against sitting down, 54-hour and six-day workweeks, and grueling repetitive tasks were characteristic. In combination with an unsafe environment in which machines had no safety guards and buildings were poorly ventilated and lacked fire escapes, it is understandable why job-related injuries and deaths skyrocketed. In 1911, the Triangle Shirtwaist Company in New York caught fire, killing 146 workers, many of them women. Doors were kept locked so that workers could be inspected for theft of company merchandise, and available fire escapes needed repair, buckling under the pressure of those fleeing the fire. The owners of the factory, accused of locking the doors, were tried on manslaughter charges but were acquitted. Civil suits brought by relatives of 23 victims ended with payments of $75 to each family (Getzinger, 2009). A system of subcontracting finishing work to people, primarily immigrant women, became common. Women worked in “sweatshops,” the basements and workrooms of low-rent tenement apartments, thereby saving the company much in the way of production costs. What made an already dismal situation worse was that workers had to purchase their own equipment, which would then require years of arduous labor to pay off. Globally, the contemporary garment industry remains notorious in its treatment of lower-level female workers with factory tragedies an all too common outcome (Chapter 6).

180  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

When men and women were employed in the same factories, women held less prestigious jobs and were paid less. Men resisted being employed with women in the same job. Gender segregation by type of activity led to a stratification system that justified the lower wages paid to women. Because both women and their employers viewed employment as temporary, gender segregation of jobs perpetuated low wages and kept women from training programs and job benefits. The nineteenth-century roots of gender-typing in jobs carry over to current debates about comparable worth (Chapters 10 and 14).

Union Movement The young women of the Lowell Mill era may have been union forerunners since, even under their tightly controlled factory and boarding house lives, they participated in organized protests about poor working conditions. The Triangle fire also ignited massive protests over the scandalous conditions under which people worked, generated much sympathy nationally, and created a ripe atmosphere for unions to flourish. The major growth period occurred from the 1870s through World War I. In 1910, union activist Mary Harris (“Mother”) Jones reported the horrendous plight of women and children in “Girl Slaves of Milwaukee Breweries,” published in 1910 in Miners Magazine. She comments that the workers are condemned to slave daily in the washroom (of breweries) in wet shoes, and wet clothes ... in the vile smell of sour beer, lifting cases … weighing from 100 to 150 pounds. The widely published article riveted public attention on such brutal labor practices. Most attention was on child labor, and not that the adult workers were women. The union movement, however, capitalized on publicity that benefited both women and children. In 1881, the Knights of Labor was opened to women and African Americans calling for equal pay for equal work. In 1885, 2,500 women members of the Knights of Labor endured a six-month strike marked by violence in Yonkers, New York, at a mill where they worked as carpet weavers. The International Ladies’ Garment Workers’ Union (ILGWU) gained recognition in many shops because of a strike that lasted through the winter of 1909, involving 20,000 mostly female shirtwaist workers. In addition to the ILGWU, the support of the Women’s Trade Union League and public outrage from the Triangle fire fueled legislation requiring more stringent safety and inspection codes for factories. Compared to the union movement organized by and for men, women’s attempts to unionize were not nearly as successful. Union efforts were not supported by a broad spectrum of people, including the police and courts. Many unions still refused to admit women, and even with an official policy urging equal pay to women, the most powerful union, the American Federation of Labor (AFL), was unwilling to exert the pressure necessary for its affiliates to conform to the rule. The AFL was also becoming a union of skilled craftworkers made up exclusively of men, and there was fear that the success of the union would be diluted if it took on the numerous women still in the ranks of the unskilled. Originally welcoming women, a period of economic recession saw members of the Knights of Labor competing with one another for scarce jobs. In 1895, only 5 percent of all union members were female, and by 1900, only 3 percent of all women who worked in factories were unionized. The ILGWU had become the third-largest affiliate of the AFL by 1913, and it did capitalize on the power that was being wielded by the AFL (ILGWU, 2015).

Western History and the Construction of Gender  181

But because men and women remained segregated by job, the unions representing women had less success. Unionization was obstructed by men’s fears of job competition and the tenacious belief that women’s place was in the home. By 1900, women represented half the membership of unions in five industries (women’s clothing, gloves, hats, shirtwaist and laundry, and tobacco), and they earned about half of what men earned; African American women earned half of what was earned by white women (Rosenfeld, 2014). The characteristics of the female labor force also made unionization efforts difficult. Work for women was unstable, temporary, and subject to economic ups and downs. In jobs performed by both genders, men were given preference in slack periods and women were laid off. Young women worked until marriage, which was the preferred exit out of the factories into a middle-class lifestyle. Although they did provide opportunities for women to develop leadership skills and agendas representing their own interests, unions of women workers tended to be small, more isolated, and financially weak. Overall, unions were most helpful to women when they were allowed to join with men. Women advanced more in the labor force during periods of growth as well as in periods of war. During the Civil War, women served as nurses, clerks, and copyists and produced uniforms and munitions. The Great War (aka World War I) also saw an expansion of job opportunities both in Britain and the United States. Government campaigns to rally support for war, its supply needs, and women’s labor force participation are evident throughout American history. World War I was also the first war where women in America and Europe were actively recruited for military service. After the war, British women who had worked in engineering (on buses, railways, and trams), in the services, and in government offices were dismissed and expected to return home. Those who persisted in jobs were often labeled “hussies,” or women who stole men’s jobs (Beddoe, 1989:3). Such statements were echoed in the United States. Public support for the war effort made the transition to the labor force easier for women who, if they had a choice, had not considered working outside the home. In most instances, women were summarily dismissed after the war. Women who ventured outside the home were caught in conflicting roles, but both industrialization and war were the catalysts for creating the “new woman” of the 1920s. Lamenting the demise of the True Woman, people both hailed and damned her new counterpart as she strove for equality with men. She “entered the 1920s with high expectations, ready for challenge and for choice” (Brown, 1987: 30–31, 47). The flapper era saw a loosening of sexual and social restraint. The era coincided with the repeal of laws restricting contraceptives that, seemingly incongruous, garnered support from prominent religious organizations (Wilde and Danielsen, 2014). Searching for independence and excitement young working women migrated to cities, and charted terrains for sexuality and freedom in the new living and employment spaces they carved out for themselves and other like-minded women. While retaining a separate political sphere from men, many of these new women worked for social and legal change. Prosperity, hope, and the formation of an identity that included marriage and children as well as volunteer and paid work, led many of these women to pursue feminist causes.

The Depression In less than a decade, much of this hope was shattered. The rule that scarce jobs should go to men first continued through the Depression. Job segregation and the belief that there was

182  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

women’s work and men’s work ironically protected the jobs of women employed as waitresses, domestics, and clerks. Rather than accepting the loss of prestige associated with doing a “woman’s” job, some men abandoned their families because they could no longer be breadwinners. In those instances, in which a job was not defined completely in gender terms, such as teacher, it was rare to see a woman obtain it or keep it if a man could be employed instead. In general, industrialization saw women make steady headway in the world of paid employment. Older attitudes about women’s functions in the family continued to compete with the needs of an expanding economy. But the precedent for women working outside the home gained strength and was nurtured by gradual public acceptance for newer roles. Once the industrial era established this trend, World War II provided the most important catalyst to date for expanding employment options for women.

World War II Throughout history, war is latently functional for productive social change that otherwise might not have occurred or would have occurred at a much slower pace. War suspends notions of what is considered typical or conventional and certainly throws people into unfamiliar terrain in turn sensitizing them to potential never dreamed possible. In addition to the impacts documented here, for example, World War II gave women the only opportunity in U.S. history to play professional baseball. Novel situations occurred both on and off the battlefield. As this chapter documents, by choice and necessity women have consistently taken on expanded roles in wartime. Considering, too, that the history of the world is marked by frequent and prolonged periods of war, the roles women shouldered during wartime were essential for social stability. Usually these newer roles were short-lived, with the prewar social order swiftly reestablished when the men returned home. Although this was indeed the case with World War II, it is also true that this particular war profoundly influenced American women in unprecedented ways. The liberating effects of the war effort not only endured but had powerful consequences for the next generation of women. The impact was largely visible in the realms of employment and family.

Demand for Women’s Labor When America officially entered the war in 1941, there was quick recognition that victory depended on the total commitment of the nation. One task of the Office of War Information (OWI) was to monitor public opinion to determine the degree of commitment and willingness to sacrifice for the war. Accustomed to men taking the lead in both politics and war, compared to men, women were less receptive to military themes and events staged about the war. Within a few months of Pearl Harbor, when patriotism was at its height, a concerted national policy to fully mobilize the civilian population in the war effort was initiated. Much of this policy was focused on women. The powerful War Production Board (WPB) and War Manpower Commission (WMC) were set up to convert the country to a wartime economy, coordinate labor for the various sectors of the economy, and allocate workers for both war and civilian production. The booming wartime economy rapidly ended the Depression. It became apparent that the war machine required uninterrupted production schedules and an increased labor supply.

Western History and the Construction of Gender  183

Women were essential in filling the roles in the war industry as the men were called to military service. An efficient propaganda program was put into effect that prompted women to respond to the employment needs of a nation at war. The battle abroad could be won if women acknowledged and acted on their patriotic duty to be employed on the home front. After the Depression years, many women eagerly sought the higher pay and better working conditions offered in the war industry. When jobs became available, women were first hired in traditionally female positions, as clerks or semiskilled laborers in factories producing uniforms or foodstuff, but women were rebuffed from the defense plants that offered higher pay. Defense industry employers were at first reluctant to hire women, even if it meant paying men overtime or creating shortages in production. If continued, these policies would have had disastrous consequences for the war effort. As labor shortages reached crisis proportions, job training and opportunities for women in almost all phases of defense work soared. Within six months after Pearl Harbor, employers hired women in a variety of semiskilled, professional, and managerial jobs. OWI was responsible for selling the war to women and created images of defense work as exciting, glamorous, and economically rewarding. Campaigns appealed to patriotism and guilt for slacking off when the war effort needed women. “Rosie the Riveter,” popularized through a wartime song, became the new home-front heroine (Santana, 2016). She represented the millions of women who worked at munitions plants, foundries, and quarries as lumberjacks, shipbuilders, welders, and plumbers. OWI was successful in recruiting women for the civilian labor force as well as for the armed services. Women’s corps of all branches of the military were formed during World War II, and by January 1944, over 100,000 women joined. The employment of women reached its wartime peak in July 1944, when 19 million women were employed, an increase of over 5 million from 1941.

Women’s Diversity in the Labor Force Once the gender barrier eroded, women’s opportunities in the war industry flourished, with less concern about age, marital status, and race. However, preferences were still given to women who were white, single, and young. The war allowed African American women access to employment in defense plants, which significantly decreased their reliance on agricultural and domestic labor. Employment prospects for both African American men and women were increased by defense contracts, which contained clauses prohibiting racial discrimination. Nonetheless, some companies refused to hire African American women during the war. Labor shortages did increase their numbers, but they were hired for the lowest level jobs and, unless protected by a union, were paid less than either white women or African American men. An African American woman who worked in a defense plant poignantly expresses the mixed feelings of this situation—patriotism and pride along with disenchantment. I’m not fooling myself about this war. Victory won’t mean victory for Democracy—yet. But that will come later … maybe a hundred years later. But doing my share today, I’m keeping a place for some brown woman tomorrow. (Johnson, 1943/1996) As the war continued and the demand for defense workers grew, the demographic balance of the female labor force shifted considerably; both older and married women were recruited. Some industries reported an even division between single and married workers. Near the end

184  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

of the war, married women outnumbered single women in the labor force. For the first time in U.S. history, African American women found employment in many of the same industries as white women.

What About the Children? The encouragement for married women to enter the labor force challenged a society that firmly believed a mother’s place was at home with her children. (By the close of the war, 32 percent of women who worked in the major defense centers had children under the age of 14.) Day care centers, foster home programs, and other variations of child care were developed throughout the country. By tying defense production to provisions for child care, day care services increased dramatically. The Federal Works Agency administered a program that, at its height in 1944, enrolled 130,000 children in over 3,000 centers. Rather than viewing child care as a menace to children and an indictment for mothers, such options were praised. Mothers with young children could enter the workforce where they were sorely needed, assured that their children would be well looked after. Overall, daycare centers were not that abundant and were used by relatively few employed mothers, with most relying on friends and relatives for child care. Some women remained suspicious of organized day care and preferred to remain unemployed rather than believe the media campaigns. Regardless of whether women took advantage of child care options, when they were needed in the war industry, innovative strategies were developed for daycare, and traditional beliefs about mothering were suspended. An effective government propaganda program allowed the nation to view day care, at least for a time, as the virtuous, safe, acceptable choice. Mothers were working in defense plants in unprecedented numbers, but their children were not regarded as being socially, physically, or psychologically at risk as a result. The view that women could and should shoulder more of the responsibility for the war effort was widely accepted. But a paradox remained. Men on the battlefields were seen as protecting the cherished values of home and family, and yet these very values could be threatened by altered roles of women on the home front. To get around this problem, another propaganda campaign was launched. Women were told that they were employed only “for the duration,” would return home to domestic duties after the war and would gladly give up their jobs to the returning men. Although joblessness for men was to be alleviated, female unemployment, of course, was never an issue. Devotion to country meant temporary employment for women, but the home is where women would and should want to be. Both men and women accepted this belief after the war.

Japanese American Women Within weeks of Pearl Harbor, President Franklin Roosevelt issued infamous Executive Order (EO) 9066 displacing thousands of Japanese Americans from their homes. These citizens were transported to hastily built temporary relocation centers governed by the military and eventually sent to ten permanent camps. Fearing sabotage, camps were located in remote, barren regions throughout the West and Midwest. Of more than 110,000 people of Japanese descent who were eventually interned, two-thirds were American, and most were women and children. Evacuees were met by firearm-wielding soldiers as they were escorted into

Western History and the Construction of Gender  185

their new homes—hastily constructed barracks devoid of all but the bare necessities. Privacy, sanitation, and health were compromised. With minimal supplies, women transformed these grim surroundings into reasonably hospitable living quarters. In a few short months, they cordoned off and decorated tiny barracks spaces for family living units. Like other American women, they planted victory gardens, undertook roles as teachers and nurses, and worked in camp industries manufacturing goods for the war effort. They re-created the best possible family life for their children. Iconic photographs by Ansel Adams of internee life at Manzanar camp in California were widely published. At first glance, photos and articles about camp life depicted women carrying out activities expected of other American women during the war. We see throughout this chapter how gender expectations are blurred during times of war. Expectations for Japanese American women, however, were magnified in how they displayed “Americanness.” Unlike other women, Japanese American women were caught between adhering to traditional gender roles to demonstrate their Americanness and shattering these roles during internment. Communal life with strangers eroded autonomy and loss of connection to family and friends. Displayed as “typical” American women, they appeared to accommodate the dismal and unjust circumstances of internment. If they resisted, they risked being labeled unpatriotic and disloyal. In this sense, an accommodating, polite, traditional, submissive “Japanese” woman also muted the anti-Japanese racial hysteria of the time. During war, we see women as active players in the situations that befall them. Japanese American women were vigorous participants in constructing their lives during internment to benefit their families, their camps, and their nation. Not one Japanese American was convicted of espionage or sabotage. President Gerald Ford officially rescinded EO 9066 in 1976; in 1988 President Ronald Reagan apologized to Japanese American internees, offering $20,000 to each of the survivors of the camps (Lindsey, 2016b).

Peacetime The ideal for which the war was fought—nation and family—remained unshaken. Romantic visions of wives and mothers in resumed postwar lives abounded during the war, alongside the images of capable women working in defense plants. Hovering in the wings during the war years, the cult of the home made a triumphant comeback to entice even the most reluctant women out of the labor force. For some women who remained employed, a return to prewar job segregation caused mobilization and protest. But without a fully articulated class consciousness or feminist movement to bolster them, they had no real basis for a sustained challenge to the system (Milkman, 2003). The conversion to a peacetime economy was accelerated with soaring marriage and birth rates, the earliest of the baby boomer generation. Labor-saving devices and technological innovations were introduced that revolutionized housekeeping but, ironically, did not decrease women’s domestic responsibilities. Whereas wartime media appealed to a woman’s efficiency in the home to keep her productive in the defense plants, propaganda after the war appealed to her homemaking roles. She was also held to a higher standard of excellence for these roles. Wives were deemed responsible for the psychological adjustment of husbands on their return to civilian life. Her needs were to be subordinated to his. Women were cautioned to be sensitive, responsive, and above all feminine, because this was what civilian life meant for men.

186  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

New roles for women created during the war existed alongside traditional beliefs concerning their primary domestic duties. Some suggest that World War II represented a watershed for gender role change; others argue that continuity and persistence of gender roles was the reality (Meyerowitz, 2005; McEuen, 2011; Jaworski, 2014). Women themselves were divided in their postwar plans. Although many enjoyed the work, they saw it as temporary and only for the duration of the war. Many women who gained a sense of independence from their wartime jobs were bitter when postwar cutbacks forced them out of the labor force. Single women, war widows, and those who had to support themselves had no choice but to continue to work in the jobs that were available. The loss of pay and respect during the postwar years weighed heavily on many women.

The Postwar Era to the Millennium Despite the emergence of the “back to the home” ideology, the postwar era represented the massive re-entrance of women into the labor force over the next half century. Due to its huge gendered effects, this labor force trend (through to the continuing effects of the Great Recession) is the foundation for much material in this text. Debates continue about the level of impact, but it is impossible to ignore the liberating effects of World War II on women. The war itself contributed to broad social changes in American society. The seeds of social change were planted during the war and took root in an atmosphere of economic growth. Recovery from the Depression, narrowing of the gender wage gap, and urban expansion profoundly affected both women and men. Home and family remained integral to women’s aspirations, but a doctrine of the spheres that separated women from any other outside existence was doomed after the war. The roots of the sociocultural trends of the 1950 and 1960s can be traced to the war years. World War II was a key catalyst in the emergence of the global economy that profoundly and irrevocably altered gender roles in all social institutions. In later chapters, we see that the global economy in the early millennium is linked to both advantages and disadvantages for women and their families worldwide. Attitudes do not change as quickly as behavior. Efforts to restrict the nondomestic roles and activities of women in the postwar years that relied on beliefs about biology and physical frailty are difficult to dislodge. Throughout history, we have seen scores of women who successfully expanded narrow role definitions. But World War II provided models for gender role change on such a grand scale that women’s accomplishments could not be conveniently relegated to a forgotten footnote in history. Assumptions about essentialism and separate spheres continued to bolster gendered norms and restrict opportunities for both women and men. Attitudes inevitably erode, however, with massive evidence that contradicts these assumptions. The progress made by women during the war, coupled with rapid postwar social and economic changes, provided the framework for the reemergence of the women’s movement in the United States.

THE WOMEN’S MOVEMENT In the new code of laws … I desire you would remember the ladies and be more generous and favorable to them than your ancestors. (Abigail Adams, March 31, 1776)

Western History and the Construction of Gender  187

In writing to her husband John when he was attending the Second Continental Congress, Abigail Adams cautioned him to “remember the ladies” and that if the ladies were ignored and denied the rights for which the Revolutionary War was being fought, they would eventually create a revolution of their own. Laws that they had no hand in creating should not bind women. To John Adams, she also wrote the following: That your sex is naturally tyrannical is a truth so thoroughly established as to admit of no dispute; but such of you as wish to be happy, willingly give up the harsh title of master for the more tender and endearing one of friend. Why then not put it out of the power of the vicious and the lawless to use us with cruelty and indignity and impunity … so whilst you are proclaiming peace and good will to men, emancipation for all nations, you insist on retaining an absolute power over wives. But you must remember that arbitrary power is like most other things which are hard, very liable to be broken (Letters of Abigail Adams to John Adams, March 31, May 7, 1776. Cited in Butterfield et al., 1963). John Adams, to become the nation’s second president, dismissed these warnings while helping to draft humanistic documents that proclaimed that all men are created equal. As he wrote to Abigail, “As to your extraordinary Code of Laws, I cannot but laugh. … We know better than to repeal our masculine system.” For the Founding Fathers, the business at hand was to build the infrastructure for an enduring democracy. That this democracy denied basic rights to females as well as to blacks was largely ignored. The challenges that did emerge, even from such influential women as Abigail Adams, did not provide the momentum for organized protest. Although Abigail Adams accurately predicted that women would foment another revolution, it took another half-century before it happened in America. Two other events helped fuel the rise of feminism and the beginnings of a women’s movement in the United States. First, the French Revolution’s ideals of liberty and equality inspired the Declaration of the Rights of Man in 1789. A reply by French playwright and social reformer Olympe de Gouges came two years later with the Declaration of the Rights of Woman, in which she declared that “woman is born free and her rights are the same as those of man,” that “the law be an expression of the general will,” and “all citizens, men and women alike” should participate formulating such law (Bock, 2002). For the first time, humanistic standards were explicitly applied to both genders. More importantly, the democratic fervor was sweeping France and influencing other parts of Europe and England, creating an atmosphere that at least considered these radical writings. Had such a work appeared first in America, it would have been rejected, dismissed, and buried. Second, in 1792, English writer and activist Mary Wollstonecraft (1759–1797) wrote what was to become the bible of the feminist movement, A Vindication of the Rights of Woman (see Bennett, 2017). In this remarkable work, Wollstonecraft argued that ideals of equality should be applied to both genders and that it is only in bodily strength that a man has a natural superiority over a woman. As she writes, Not only the virtue but the knowledge of the two sexes should be the same in nature, if not in degree, and that women, considered not only as moral, but rational creatures, ought to endeavor to acquire human virtues (or perfections) by the same means as men, instead of being educated like a fanciful kind of half being. She maintained that women must strengthen their minds, become friends to their husbands, and not be dependent on them. When women are kept ignorant and passive, their children

188  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

suffer, but society will be weakened as well. In advocating full partnership with men, Wollstonecraft explicitly called for a “revolution in female manners” to make women part of the human species by reforming themselves and then the world: Let women share the rights and she will emulate the virtues of man; for she must grow more perfect when emancipated. … (Excerpts from Wollstonecraft, 1792/1970)

Early Movement: 1830–1890 The Industrial Revolution radically reorganized the process of production. By the 1830s, employed women worked in factories for low wages under dismal conditions. Manufacturing altered home production of items such as soap, bread, candles, and clothing, and middle-class women lost much economic power. Whereas factory women used unions as vehicles for organized protest, middle-class women believed that higher education and political rights could best serve their aims. These women had different class-based ambitions and used divergent strategies to meet their needs. Unique to American history, they organized into their respective groups, but as women meeting the needs of women. The dire economic condition of women stimulated working-class and middle-class women to first organize. This humanistic catalyst for the early women’s movement also provided middle-class women with an outlet to work for a social cause. It was only during the latter suffrage movement that women from both classes joined for a common goal. Before suffrage, the rallying issue for women was slavery. When Wollstonecraft was calling for the emancipation of women, women were already playing a critical role in the abolitionist movement. It soon became apparent to the women who worked in the antislavery movement that they were not on the same political level as their male counterparts. Women abolitionists were often not allowed to make public speeches, and with the formation of the American Anti-Slavery Society in 1833, they were denied the right to sign its Declaration of Purposes. When the World Anti-Slavery Convention met in London in 1840, women members of the American delegation, including Lucretia Mott and Elizabeth Cady Stanton, had to sit in the galleries and could not participate in any of the proceedings. They became painfully conscious of the fact that slavery had to do with gender as well as race.

The Seneca Falls Convention Women abolitionists began to speak more openly about women’s rights. As progressive as the abolitionist movement was, the inherent sexism of the day served to divide and alienate its members. Men feared that abolitionist goals would weaken by the attention given to women’s rights. While continuing their work for antislavery, women were now more vocal about legislative reforms related to family rights, divorce, women’s property, and temperance issues. Recognizing that the inferior status of women urgently needed to be addressed, in 1848, the Seneca Falls Convention was held in upstate New York, an event hailed as the birth of the women’s movement in the United States. The Seneca Falls Convention approved a Declaration of Sentiments modeled after the Declaration of Independence. It listed the forms of discrimination that women had to endure

Western History and the Construction of Gender  189

and that they vowed to eliminate. Excerpts from the Declaration clearly demonstrate the continuities of past and present concerns of women. 1

We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men and women are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

2

The history of mankind is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations on the part of man toward woman, having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over her.

3

He has compelled her to submit to laws, in the formation of which she has no voice.

4

He has made her, if married, in the eye of the law, civilly dead.

5

He has monopolized nearly all the profitable employments, and from those she is permitted to follow, she receives but a scanty remuneration. He closes against her all the avenues to wealth and distinction that he considers most honorable to himself. As a teacher of theology, medicine or law, she is not known.

6

He has endeavored, in every way he could, to destroy her confidence in her own powers, to lessen her self-respect, and to make her willing to lead a dependent and abject life.

This list of discriminatory practices against women, as well as 11 of the 12 resolutions aimed at ending such practices, was accepted by the Convention. It was agreed that women had to submit to laws they did not help create, but there was no unanimous agreement about whether they should seek the vote. History honors Seneca Falls as originating the suffrage movement, but the suffrage resolution was passed only by a small majority. Although the early women’s movement has become synonymous with suffrage, this was the very issue that initially split its supporters. Perhaps difficult to understand by today’s standards, many women believed that equality was possible without the vote. In the following years, conventions for women’s rights were held throughout the North and West. Since abolition was part of its platform, the movement never spread to the South before the Civil War. During the war, activities on the behalf of women per se were dormant, but they emerged in earnest soon after. Despite the lack of a national agenda and disagreements on strategy, the movement grew under the leadership of a few women who had the strength and time to work for its causes. Several outstanding women with unique talents are credited for this growth: Lucy Stone, the movement’s most gifted orator; Elizabeth Cady Stanton, philosopher and program writer; and Susan B. Anthony, the organizing genius known for her powerful extemporaneous speeches that formed the backbone of arguments about the necessity of women obtaining voting rights (Styer, 2017). These women spoke on social, economic, and legal issues affecting women and pressed for reforms in education, wages, organized labor, child welfare, and inheritance. As the movement grew, so did its opponents. First as abolitionists and then as feminists and always as women, many people despised and ridiculed the movement. Suffrage women, better known as “suffragettes,” were accused of being unnatural, masculine, and female sexual inverts who would doom America to sociobiological disaster (Behling, 2001). By the standards of the day, militant methods fueled opposition. Ever-present verbal abuse and threats of mob violence at rallies caused some supporters to downgrade the importance of the vote. The ranks of the movement were divided, and by the end of the Civil War, it was split into two factions.

190  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

Division and Unity Although both factions agreed that getting the vote was necessary, they were split on ideology and strategy. In 1869, two organizations were formed. Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton founded the National Woman Suffrage Association (NWSA). NWSA did not admit men, was considered militant in tactics, focused on controversial issues such as husband–wife relations, and believed the vote was necessary to achieve other rights for women. Enfranchisement, then, was a means to a greater end. The second organization, the American Woman Suffrage Association (AWSA), led by Lucy Stone and Julia Howe, was more moderate, attracting a core of middle- and upper-class women. To make the suffrage question more mainstream, the AWSA refrained from addressing issues thought to be controversial, such as matters related to marriage, divorce, and religion. AWSA focused its work on state-by-state ways to achieve the vote. In 1869, Wyoming was the first state to grant the vote to women but did so for pragmatic rather than strictly democratic reasons. Women were scarce in the territory, and the right to vote was thought to encourage more migrants. Wyoming was almost not granted statehood because Southern congressmen argued that the states did not have the right to grant suffrage. Because the legislature was elected with women’s votes, supporters for statehood asserted that Wyoming “will remain out of the Union for a hundred years rather than come in without the women.” By a small margin, Wyoming was admitted to the Union in 1890. AWSA strategies succeeded in gaining many advocates, with suffrage gaining the respectability it needed to attract a broader base of support. In the meantime, NWSA increasingly turned its attention to suffrage and campaigned for political and legal rights. In 1890, the two groups merged to form the National American Woman Suffrage Association (NAWSA). A key consequence of the merger and its gain in “respectability” was that the organization generally distanced itself from the plights of black women, immigrant women, and working-class women. African American women worked diligently in the suffrage movement but were aware that a double standard existed for black and white women suffragists. Black suffragists called on their white sisters in the movement to “put aside their prejudices and allow black women, burdened by both sexism and racism, to gain political equality” (Terborg-Penn, 1991:133). Their words were largely unheeded. The exclusion of these potential allies at the turn of the century impacted the movement for the next 50 years. It took another half century before the schism appreciably narrowed.

The Nineteenth Amendment The early history of feminism, both in the United States and in Europe, is now known as first wave feminism, marked by challenging legal discrimination against women with a focus on obtaining the right to vote. Although NAWSA in fact accomplished little, the next 30 years saw renewed energies for passage of a suffrage amendment. Strategies deemed too radical were disavowed, militant members were expelled, conservatism set in, and a crisis in leadership occurred. Some of the expelled faction joined a group founded by militant suffragist Alice Paul in 1913. Embracing the tactics of the more militant English suffrage movement, Paul headed the Congressional Union, later known as the Woman’s Party. To bring the constitutional amendment to America’s public consciousness, the Woman’s Party staged mass demonstrations. In the meantime, as new president of NAWSA, Carrie Chapman Catt began a rigorous suffrage campaign in 1915. NAWSA distributed leaflets, lobbied, and addressed influential organizations. Woman’s Party members held rallies, went on hunger strikes, and

Western History and the Construction of Gender  191

used unorthodox, definitely “unfeminine” means to spotlight suffrage. Although tactics varied, the common goal was passage of a suffrage amendment that had been introduced and defeated in every session of Congress since 1878. By the end of World War, I, women’s right to vote had widespread support. In 1919, the Nineteenth Amendment was passed by margins of 304 to 90 in the House and 56 to 25 in the Senate. The struggle could not be over until two-thirds of the states ratified it. On August 26, 1920, by only two votes, the amendment was ratified in Tennessee, making the Nineteenth Amendment part of the U.S. Constitution.

The Contemporary Movement Once the right to vote was gained, feminism literally died in the United States for the next 40 years. The end of the arduous campaign resulting in ratification of the Nineteenth Amendment found some feminists insisting that broader social reforms, rather than narrower feminist goals, were now necessary because they believed political equality had been achieved. Others, including Alice Paul, called for passage of the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA), which would prohibit all forms of discrimination against women. The ERA was first introduced in Congress in 1923, but even by this time, the unity of support for a specific cause had been dissolved. Coupled with the Depression and a conservative national mood, most activism for women’s issues was abandoned.

Second Wave Feminism It was not until several decades after World War II that the women’s movement re-emerged on a national scale. Referred to as second wave feminism, this phase of the movement (1960– 1980s) sought to raise the consciousness of women about sexist oppression in the power structure of society and about the use of political means to eradicate it. Under the banner “the personal is the political,” second wave feminists focused on ways to counter sexism in employment, education, popular culture and other social institutions. Three major events provided catalysts for this reawakening of feminism. First, President John Kennedy established the Commission on the Status of Women in 1961. The Commission issued a report documenting the inferior position of women in the United States and set up a citizen’s advisory council and state commissions to address problems identified in the report. Second, in 1963, Betty Friedan published her landmark work The Feminine Mystique. Friedan argued that women’s only road to fulfillment is as wife and mother. Referring to it as “the problem with no name,” women had no identity apart from their families (see also Chapter 13). Despite restrictive roles and a society that condoned and applauded such restrictions, women were beginning to voice their unhappiness. “It is no longer possible to ignore that voice, to dismiss the desperation of so many American women” (Friedan, 1963:21). The second-class status of women, which was pointed to in the Kennedy report, was bolstered by Friedan’s assertions and research.

National Organization for Women The third event heralding feminism’s rekindling was the founding of the National Organization for Women (NOW) in 1966, with Betty Friedan serving as its first president. These three events are interdependent. Many of the women first met when they worked on state

192  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

commissions set up after the Kennedy report. They were also unhappy with the progress being made on their recommendations and believed that a separate effort to deal with issues related to women was important. The creation of NOW can be viewed as an indirect result of the Commission on the Status of Women. NOW was formed during the turbulent 1960s, an era of heightened political activism and social consciousness. The drive to organize women occurred during a time when African Americans, Native Americans, Latinos, poor people, students, and anti-Vietnam War activists were also competing for public attention through mass demonstrations for their respective causes. In comparison to many of the organizations spawned from these causes, including other women’s groups, NOW was more moderate in its approach. NOW’s ability to survive as a viable organization is in part tied to its mainstream emphasis. White, college-educated, middle-class women were attracted to NOW and became the base for its original growth. NOW adopted a top-down structure and remains hierarchically organized with a national body and formal constitution, but diversity and growth are enhanced with more autonomous local chapters. In the decades since its founding, NOW’s membership has expanded considerably, bringing in more nonprofessional and younger women, and women of color vital to the success of feminism in America. A feminist consciousness among African American women, for example, can be nurtured only through a framework that addresses the ideology of racism in America (Higginbotham, 2003). In 1967, the first NOW national conference adopted a Bill of Rights that included support for an Equal Rights Amendment to the Constitution, women’s right to work at all types of job, maternity leave rights, and the right of women to control their reproductive lives. As suggested by these goals, NOW has a broad agenda of areas affecting women, but it largely focuses on political tactics to achieve its goals (NOW, 2018).

Coalitions The second path of the feminist reawakening consisted of women representing a wider range of backgrounds who came together in loose coalitions to work on common interests. These groups attracted younger and more racially diverse women, many involved with other social movements of the times, especially the Civil Rights Movement and anti-Vietnam War movement. During the 1960 and 1970s, these women founded many organizations, tending to match NOW’s tactics using mass-based demonstrations, mailings, and media attention for political ends. These included the National Welfare Rights Organization focusing on public assistance to poor women and their families, and the National Women’s Political Caucus (NWPC), promoting women as candidates for public office. Other groups, more radical in orientation, shunned the formal structure of organizations such as NOW, believing that its focus on institutional reforms inhibited members’ individual expression including whether men should be excluded from their ranks. Known for “street theater” and disruptive vocal demonstrations, groups such as the New York Radical Women (NYRW), and Redstockings, for example, called attention to men’s domination of women in all phases of a woman’s life, including financial disparity, reproduction, sexual violence, and interpersonal relationships. NYRW offered labels and messages such as “consciousness-­ raising,” “sisterhood powerful, and the “personal is political,” now largely etched on a public vernacular. And yes, they were often scorned for tactics such as bra burning—bras were trashed, but nary a bra was ever burned. The key message they conveyed in America and

Western History and the Construction of Gender  193

heard around the world, however, was that of women’s oppression. NYRW “arose out of a savagely politized political, moment, much like our current one, in which the frustrations and injustices of life suddenly exploded into eloquent rage” (Press, 2017). Although less viable in the long run, these groups are good examples of not only the plurality of feminisms but of the many divergent paths feminism and the/a women’s movement took and continues to take over time (Chapter 1).

Third Wave Feminism The extraordinary legal and political successes extending women’s rights in the postwar era suggest that the women’s movement accomplished many of its goals. In the 1990s, however, a backlash to feminist initiatives began in earnest and stalled political progress. The mass-based demonstrations of all the postwar social movements were no longer part of the public consciousness. Unlike second wave feminists, young women were introduced to feminism in college course work (positively) or through media depictions (negatively). Young women embracing feminist causes in the 1990s were less likely to identify with concepts such as sisterhood, with its assumptions about women’s homogeneity, and were cautious about identifying openly as feminists. These women were the catalysts for third wave feminism, suggesting that there is no universal feminism and women define for themselves what it is and what it can become. They were likely to embrace identity politics, in which activist strategies are shaped by a configuration of the shared experiences within their own groups rather than on a larger, more encompassing one. Compared to their predecessors, they promoted feminist causes centered on alliances with groups who shared their interests and came from similar backgrounds. They maneuvered discrimination based on those backgrounds, especially when related to race, social class, religion, and sexuality. Activism in pursuit of justice for the health and well-being of unserved indigenous women, for example, was more a rallying cry than activism in pursuit of women’s health and well-being overall. However sympathetic they may have been to wider feminist concerns, activism was shaped by what ignited their passion. Even today, third wave feminism generally incorporates values related to individualism in pursuit of gender justice rather than to values related to collectivism in pursuit it genders justice. At the heart of this activism is the embrace of intersectionality (Chapter 1) that defined third wavers early on, today accepted by feminists of all stripes. Third wavers are given credit for reclaiming and embracing a feminist identity, particularly from the anti-feminist media; adding feminist goals into public discourse; propelling issues of violence to women to the center of public awareness; and for the overall resurgence of a feminist movement that initially prospered in a neoliberal global context (Evans, 2015a). Most important, even during the waning second wave, the notion of multiple categories of oppression were beginning to be addressed. Third wavers demonstrated not only how these categories overlapped but that the intersectional constellation serves as a privilege to mitigate oppression, or to propel the risk. It may be argued, however, that the successes of third wave feminism have been overshadowed by its failures to gauge the profound consequences of another intersection—that of individualism and neoliberalism—that may be unraveling hard won battles for gender equality. Neoliberalism is the economic system favoring free-market capitalist strategies associated with an ideology that the public good is enhanced through individual responsibility rather than public welfare (See also Chapter 6). The wedding of this powerful, hegemonic

194  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

economic system with a foundation on a core American value, set the stage for an excessively conservative political agenda to grip the globe. Clearly symbolized by the Trump Presidency in the United States, by serving capitalist ends, this agenda is unfolding to the detriment of feminist progress. Although third wavers worked to upend the gendered distribution of caregiving and breadwinning roles, for example, the “competitive production of profit in globally integrate economies” undermines equitable role sharing. Individual desires and social well-being are co-opted by conservative neoliberal agendas (Evans, 2015a; Azmanova, 2016:771). Working for feminist causes within the confines of neoliberalism has produced policies that not only perpetuate a gendered division of labor but may be outstripping feminist resources to effectively challenge it.

Fourth Wave Feminism With this backdrop, scholars and activists suggest that feminism has turned to other means to thwart agendas that deter progress toward gender equity. Continuing to be shaped by intersectional ideas at the heart of the third wave, and a better understanding of the perils of neoliberalism for women, fourth wave feminism is said to be born out of digital age technology and social media, especially Twitter and Facebook, spawning activism resonating with women across generations and backgrounds (Chamberlain, 2016; Pruchniewska, 2016; Zimmerman, 2017). Whereas third wavers may have eschewed the second wave’s strategies of mass-based activism, this newest wave is credited with some of the largest feminist-inspired mass events and movements since the 1960s, including the Women’s March and #MeToo movement (see Chapters 1 and 9). As second waver activist and writer Alix Kates Shulman recounts, I think of the #MeToo Movement as a continuation of consciousness-raising, a resurfacing … With Trump’s election the movement has been reborn. Our early movement was full of rage. These women are very angry. It takes another upsurge of anger to get a movement going. (Cited in Heller, 2018) Online activism is catalyzed with flash events, bringing together members of organizations such as NOW and AAUW, with those who may not be members of any formal group. They can be quickly mobilized for rallies protesting gun violence, separating children from immigrant parents, and slashing food stamps and Medicaid in the name of individual responsibility. While not necessarily labeled “feminist,” women are at the center of the protests, and certainly serve the interests of an array of women.

Critique If there is a “distinctly different” fourth wave, it is yet to be cordoned off from previous waves. Certainly, the online activism that propels mass protests marks another approach to feminism even as intersectionality remains a foundation. To differentiate various eras of feminism, a “wave metaphor” took root. Its convenience oversimplifies the complicated historical record of feminist activism and tends to categorize women in more homogeneous ways, especially by age and generation. However, a so-called generation gap, as sociologists suggest, is not a medium for automatic disdain as much as it is a tool for socializing the

Western History and the Construction of Gender  195

next generation of feminists (Foster, 2018; Thorn, 2018). Thinking about waves as points of continuity and points of departure suggests feminist affirmation “between” waves (Evans, 2015b). A related criticism complicated by a wave narrative is that a “feminist” movement and a “woman’s” movement are becoming even more blurred. With certain caveats, the two terms are largely used interchangeably, as in this book. But given the rise of conservativism globally, women are increasingly being recruited for “anti-gender” movements (Kuhar and Paternotte, 2017). As noted, these can overturn earlier successes, especially equity initiatives related to employment, education, legal rights, and sexuality. The anti-abortion coalition, for example, has recruited many more women for campaigns to roll back services for contraception and coverage for women’s health care. They disparage feminism but may herald their activities under a women’s movement banner (see Chapter 14). Is this a “woman’s” wave but not a “feminist” wave? Although such criticisms are valid, a wave narrative is an apt one. It offers a general way to benchmark feminist progress over time and reminds us that, like the feminist movement itself, waves are always in the flux of change, coming undone and redone in points of contact, not of conquest (Helmreich, 2017:44). As feminist historian Linda Nicholson suggests, although the wave metaphor is not a perfect one it is also probably the best tool we have for understanding the history of feminism in the US, where it came from and how it developed. And it’s become a fundamental part of how we talk about feminism—so even if we end up deciding to discard it, it’s worth understanding exactly what we’re discarding. (Cited in Grady, 2018) This should sound familiar (Chapter 1). It highlights a century of feminist discourse about how women are alike and how they differ; how multiple and overlapping intersections and personal identities can be affirmed without sacrificing collectivist solidarity. Feminist waves incorporate the language of feminisms rather than a single feminism. Despite the historical chronical in the U.S. citing feminist discontinuity within and between waves and the lack of a common definition of feminism, there is commonality in areas of interest and goals. All acknowledge the importance of the Equal Rights Amendment to the Constitution (Chapter 14), for example, but may disagree on where to place it on an activist priority list and the strategies to achieve it. For over two centuries, the feminist/women’s movement is extraordinary in diversity and inclusiveness, with forces for both division and unity, patterns found in the United States and globally. Discussed in the next chapter, this diversity may tip the scale for a stronger global movement seeking to embrace women representing all forms of feminisms.

KEY TERMS Compensatory history Contribution history First wave feminism

Fourth wave feminism Gender history

Identity politics Knights of Labor Matrilineal

196  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

National American Woman Suffrage Association (NAWSA) National Organization for Women (NOW)

Neoliberalism Pater familias Second wave feminism Seneca Falls Convention Social history

Third wave feminism True Womanhood

CHAPTER 6

Global Perspectives on Gender

Women’s rights are human rights. —Hillary Rodham Clinton, NGO Forum, UN Conference on Women, Beijing, 1995 Development, if not engendered, is endangered. —United Nations Development Programme

SECTION 1 GENDERING GLOBAL DEVELOPMENT Sociology advanced as a discipline in offering ways to understand the paths to modernity that transformed the world. This chapter explores the profound gender impact of global social change for women. The focus will be on the two commanding change-related processes— globalization and development. It is not redundant to say that the globe is globalized. It also is safe to say that no one is immune to the effects on their lives of a globalized world. The world is globalized because all societies have paths to borrow, learn, cooperate, and compete with one another. How they fare on these paths is largely dependent on the powerful forces of globalization, defined as the removal of barriers to increase the flow of capital between and within nations. Implicit in this definition is that globalization is synonymous with U.S.-style capitalism. In the 1980s neoliberal globalization (NLG) was rapidly ushered in, intensifying deregulation and privatization with unfettered trade openness and market liberalization as its global mantra. With the World Bank as the leader, NLG aligns with political, financial, and corporate interests to adopt free-market solutions for business profit and to solve social problems. Virtually all global players serving diverse constituencies, including the United Nations, must adopt NLG strategies regardless of how they might wish to do otherwise. Neoliberal globalization, therefore, is redundant. Globalization is a highly gendered process; it plays out differently in the lives of males and females. Globalization connects us in a single social and economic space, but it does not unite us. Unlike definitions of globalization, there is more consensus that development focuses on programs designed to upgrade the standard of living of the world’s poor in ways that allow them to sustain themselves The focus of the chapter is on gender issues in the Global South, also referred to as the developing world, the United Nations designation for less developed countries with severe impediments to sustainable development and often with poverty-level

198  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

incomes per capita. Most of these nations are in Africa, Asia, Latin America, and the Caribbean and include small island nations of the South Pacific. The processes of globalization and development go hand in hand and are not benign in their effects. By highlighting gendered consequences of globalization and development, the United Nations offers tools for how many of these issues are assessed.

UNITED NATIONS (UN) AND DEVELOPMENT The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) spearheads efforts to reduce the gender gap in human development. Indices such as the Gender Inequality Index (GII) and the Human Development Index (HDI) capture a nation’s achievement using selected economic, political, education, and health criteria. Although indices include different dimensions, the world is doing better on overall human development compared to overall gender equality. Because gender equality is a factor in the composite and intersects with every other factor, nations gain or lose in ranking depending on where they fall on gender equality.

Human Development and Gender Equality United Nations (UN) efforts to increase human development and decrease gender inequality build on UN conferences and summits. In 2000, eight Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), to be achieved by 2015, targeted development challenges in the world. Goal 1 was to eradicate extreme poverty and Goal 3 was to promote gender equality and empower women. The poverty reduction goal was met five years ahead of the deadline. Other MDG successes include primary school enrollment increases to over 90 percent for both girls and boys in some Global South regions, declines in mortality of under-fives, and a striking maternal mortality decline to 45 percent globally. The bad news is that women’s political representation stagnated and the gender gap in wages and employment increased in many regions. Overall progress toward gender equality was seriously stalled or reversed. MDG targets for 2015 were woefully too optimistic. Acknowledging that work on behalf of women needed be done, and with better understanding of how to do it, in 2015 the UN adopted 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), described as a “universal call to action to end poverty, protect the planet, and ensure that all people enjoy peace and prosperity.” SDG #1 is “no poverty,” and SDG #5 is the call for gender equality, including ending all forms of discrimination against women and girls. The SDG blueprint sets 2030 as the target date to achieve each goal (Sustainable Development Goals, 2020).

Critique It is impossible that any country is on track to achieve gender equality in the next decade and the SDGs, like the MDGs before them, will be unable to reach their targets. The inaugural SDG Gender Index shows that “2.8 billion women and girls are living in countries that are failing to do enough to help their lives.” Despite this gloomy scenario, the report is viewed as a wake-up call to the world. Rather than complacency, the UN and Nongovernmental Organizations (NGOs)—privately funded nonprofit groups mostly concerned with relief and

Global Perspectives on Gender  199

development and advocacy for the poor—are calling on policy makers to locate and assist the women and girls who are left behind because of gendered intersectional risks of race, poverty, religion, and sexual orientation (John, 2019). Gender initiatives are better tackled at the local level. Initiatives underlying the SDGs are strengthened with multilayered views that account for specific community needs.

CEDAW In its Charter of 1945, the United Nations (UN) announced its commitment to the equality of women and men. A pivotal role to forge international consensus on behalf of gender equity was carved out by the United Nations in 1946 with the establishment of the Commission on the Status of Women. A rapidly growing international women’s movement supported the Commission’s work on legal measures to protect the human rights of women, especially in relation to the global divide on women’s role in economic development. UN efforts were amplified in 1979 by the adoption of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) during the UN Decade for Women (1975–1985). Described as an “international bill of rights for women,” CEDAW paved the way for groundbreaking UN Conferences on Women.

United Nations Conferences on Women With delegates representing nations across the globe, the UN convened conferences to work on a global agenda of women’s issues. These were convened in Mexico City in 1975, Copenhagen in 1980, Nairobi in 1985, and Beijing in 1995. Under the banner of “equality, development and peace,” each conference assessed a nation’s progress of commitments made on behalf of women. Alongside each official UN conference ran a parallel one, a forum consisting of hundreds of NGOs that brought together women from around the globe and from all walks of life. These largely grassroots NGOs represented an extraordinary array of opinions and agendas. Inclusiveness assures all voices are heard but, as expected, these voices fuel dissent. Conferences were marked by divisive issues related to politics, religion, ethnicity, and economics. Politically motivated and largely anti-feminist conservative groups strove to discredit and interrupt the proceedings. Although less evident in Mexico City, the NGO Forum in Copenhagen was more politicized. The split between women in the developing and developed world seemed to widen, deterring dialogue about what they shared. They left the forum, however, with better insights on dealing with diverse perspectives and conflicting priorities. Five years later in Nairobi, dissention was less evident and consensus was reached on key issues. A central change from Copenhagen was the acknowledgment that political issues and women’s issues cannot be separated. Whether called a “women’s movement” or a “feminist movement,” when women come together to work on common issues, it is fundamentally a political movement. Gains in political astuteness were unmistakable a decade later. In 1995, the international women’s movement took center stage when Beijing, China, hosted the United Nations Fourth World Conference on Women (FWCW). With 50,000 attendees, the seminal FWCW conference was arguably the most significant global women’s event in history to spotlight a women’s agenda. Its location in Beijing allowed more women in Asia to attend, including

200  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

grassroots leaders from small communities who made the trek to Beijing through NGO fundraising. The 189 nations ratifying the Beijing Platform of Action targeted critical areas of concern related to gender equality. Marking the 25th anniversary of FWCW, the Platform of Action remains the “most visionary agenda for women’s rights and empowerment anywhere” (UNWOMEN, 2020).

The Legacy of Beijing: A Personal Perspective Like past conferences, in covering the largest gathering of women in history, international media focused on controversy and conflict rather than the unity and support that emerged during the conference. The Beijing gathering and the parallel NGO Forum in nearby Huairou represented landmark developments in global understanding and cooperation among women of the world. Discussed in many conference sessions, women are a glaring media blind spot. News sources approach women’s issues with stereotypes, misconceptions, and bias. In reporting to a world thought to relish controversy, the seeds for reinforcing those stereotypes continue to be sown. I believe, however, the truly remarkable events in Beijing helped alter this trend. While attending the conference, many of us were acutely aware that media dwelled on displays of dissent, specifically by religious fundamentalists representing an array of faiths. The Iranian delegation of fully veiled women and their male “escorts,” for example, provided much camera time. Their efforts were met by what I describe as “bemused toleration.” Media toddled behind with cameras and microphones and reported on the daily news around the globe that religious fundamentalism was tearing the conference apart. This was far from the truth. Although religious fundamentalism was one of many controversial topics, the NGO Forum was remarkable in gathering women of all faiths to engage in dialogue on matters that affected their daily lives, including family planning, care of children, gender-based violence, paid and unpaid work, and health and well-being—all which have religious overtones. Workshops brought together women on behalf of disparate religious and spiritual heritages. Politics, religion, and cultural traditions were met head on, for example, between Palestinian and Israeli women living under the specter of war, and between Muslim and non-Muslim women who disagreed about veiling or birth spacing or female genital mutilation (discussed later). Whether practices were accepted or rejected became less important than how they were discussed. Toleration and understanding emerged in an atmosphere where opinions were voiced and everyone could agree to disagree. What was noteworthy is that the die was cast against the rhetoric of any religion that restricted women’s human rights. Religious fundamentalism was recast as liberating, used as a weapon against sexism and for empowerment (Lindsey, 1995a). What is the legacy of Beijing? From attending the gatherings in Copenhagen and Nairobi as well as Beijing, the previous conferences were more divisive, but also smaller and less inclusive, with fewer women in the organizing bodies or as official delegates. Although the Beijing conference was racked with negative media attention, Chinese obstructionism, logistical nightmares, and inadequate facilities, the ability and perseverance of the women who attended and worked to get the Platform of Action adopted were nothing short of spectacular. In other famous words in addressing the NGO Forum, First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton stated, “NGOs are where the action is.” NGOs continue to monitor governments for pledges made to women and their families through the ratified UN document. The Platform

Global Perspectives on Gender  201

addressed 12 critical areas of concern, including education, health, and employment, outlining action steps to implement objectives. The number one issue was women’s poverty. Actions for this issue included creating gender-sensitive development policies, placing economic value on women’s unpaid work, and increasing education, training, and entrepreneurial skills for poor women.

FWCW for Today After you review current gender issues in various nations and regions from a global perspective, it should be clear how Beijing served as a watershed for women’s advocacy and for the global women’s movement. Despite the inevitable backlash, the women’s/feminist movement sent a powerful message around the globe. Women will no longer be ignored, women’s rights are human rights, and nations will be held accountable for their progress (or lack thereof) in ending gender inequality. With NGOs as watchdogs, numerous conferences, seminars, and workshops since Beijing monitor progress and ensure accountability. Monitoring is more effective with the increased numbers of Civil Society Organizations (CSOs), including NGOs and a wide array of groups such as labor unions, professional associations, teacher and scholar networks, community groups, foundations, and faith-based activists. Not all NGOs and CSOs are dedicated to goals of advocacy for women and disenfranchised groups worldwide. Some work against these goals. However, it is virtually impossible to halt debate. The FWCW gathering in Beijing attests to the fact that women’s empowerment benefits everyone.

WOMEN, GLOBALIZATION, AND DEVELOPMENT With sociological understanding at the leading edge, development studies focusing on women and gender in the Global South have cascaded. Research on women and development is rich and robust, offering clues to development planning, policy studies, and interdisciplinary theory building. It is lacking, however, in connecting the widening global economic gap to the women who are in the poorest ranks, and often overlooks women in advanced economies who fall prey to negative development outcomes inspired by neoliberal globalization. Rather than treating gender equity as a determinant of development success, NLG is better used as the independent (causal) measure. Development is more useful as an intervening variable. Disentangling development from NLG offers a clearer inspection of its powerful impact on gender (in)equality. Ester Boserup’s (1970) pioneering study on women in development, arguing that development has adverse effects on women—often leading to further impoverishment, marginalization, and exploitation—is well documented. Despite the progress from the FWCW and over a half-­century of policy studies on women and development in the Global South, this disheartening trend continues and the gap between theory and development practice looms large (Lindsey, 1995b, 1996; Jacquette, 2017; Mawere, 2017). The path to negative development outcomes for women is deceptively simple. In societies characterized by powerful patriarchal institutions, men and women rarely share equally the limited resources available to families, a situation that deteriorates with NLG. The underlying cause of inequality is that women’s roles are primarily domestic (mother, wife, homemaker, subsistence farmer), and although vital to the well-being of their families

202  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

and to society, such roles are undervalued and unpaid. Most of the world’s women work in the informal sector, the economic activities of people who labor as subsistence farmers, landless agricultural laborers, street vendors, or day workers. Much informal sector work is undocumented because services and goods rather than cash are often the exchange basis. Globalization capitalizes on informal sector work of women and reinforces existing gender inequality.

Rural Families The hardest hit are rural women whose domestic work usually includes subsistence farming. Even though they were not landowners, Latin American and African women managed farms and retained control over their produce. Colonialism, agricultural development projects, and technology-based cash crop farming virtually eliminated traditional economic resources available to women through farming. Subsistence farming is vital to the livelihood of a family, but it is considered domestic work with no cash exchanged and no surplus for profit in the marketplace. Development programs typically use international economic definitions excluding the majority of work that women perform, such as child care, household labor, and subsistence farming. Development policies also ignore gender implications of work at the family level where the economic trickle-down model is supposed to operate. Policies are designed to upgrade the economic standards of families by concentrating on the (assumed) male head of household, who is the breadwinner, with his dependent wife as homemaker. Improving the employment prospects of men, therefore, benefits the whole family. This assumption is based on an urban, middle-class model that does not acknowledge the productive roles of women, especially rural women and poor families. Development programs undercount and undervalue women’s work. Men often migrate to cities in search of paid work, leaving women with loss of help in remaining subsistence activities. The employment options available to rural women are in low-paid domestic or commercial farm labor. Women are recruited for work in the transnational corporations’ (TNCs) assembling and light-manufacturing plants dotting urban fringes throughout the Global South. Others migrate across borders, joining the ranks of maids and nannies employed in the households of the world’s wealthy. The massive numbers of Filipino women who are employed in Hong Kong and elsewhere in richer Asian nations, can be dubbed the caretakers of the world. Many servant women free their wealthier female employers to work outside the home.

Bangladesh: A Neoliberal Globalization Case Study Neoliberal globalization as played out in Bangladesh’s massive TNC garment industry documents the plight of its young women laborers. The economy in Bangladesh is driven by 5000 garment factories providing employment for 4 million people, 90 percent of them women, many of whom migrated from rural areas. Although wages hover near the poverty line, they are double the wages women earn (or could earn) as agricultural laborers. The necessity of this work to survive in the city and send money to rural extended families keeps them dependent in jobs in unsafe conditions. Dangerous factories with little oversight of third-party subcontractors by TNCs are the garment industry norm in Bangladesh. Nominal owners rather than the TNCs for whom they were manufacturing were held responsible for 112 deaths of mostly female workers at

Global Perspectives on Gender  203

the Tazreen factory in Bangladesh while making clothes for major brands. When asked to pay slightly higher costs to upgrade factory safety, representatives from Walmart and Gap stated: Specifically, to the issue of any corrections on electrical and fire safety, we are talking about 4,500 factories, and in most cases very extensive and costly modifications would need to be undertaken to some factories. … It is not financially feasible for the brands to make such investments. (Eidelsan, 2012) Hundreds of workers have also been killed in factories in Cambodia and the Philippines over the last decade. The Tazreen disaster was eclipsed the next year. With unions calling it “mass industrial homicide,” 1324 deaths and over 2500 injuries at the Rana factory in the Dhaka District of Bangladesh was the single largest factory disaster in history (Guardian, 2018). Massive safety issues were revealed from locked fire doors, malfunctioning sprinklers, and inadequate weight loads. TNCs preferred to lay blame on the factory owners subcontracted in many complicated layers removed from those who commission the garments (Lindsey, 2014). Tazreen lost global attention in a few months. With international advocacy and ongoing media coverage on Rana, however, policies to address the conditions were enacted. Two international programs, Accord on Fire and Building Safety in Bangladesh and Alliance for Bangladesh Worker Safety, are credited with improved worker safety and the inspection of 2300 large factories. Many have upgraded their safety standards. Six years after the tragedy inspections have faltered, increases in wages have not been forthcoming, and promises of a new hospital and health care to survivors have fallen by the wayside. Over half of Rana survivors cannot find work today because of injuries and mental trauma suffered from the factory collapse (ActionAid, 2019). Factories at most risk for safety hazards are overseen by the government or are hidden in layers of subcontracting and not overseen by anyone. Recent factory fire with injuries attests to ongoing safety gaps. Despite commitments to safe factories and living wages to thousands of young women, the status quo in the garment industry is not challenged (Perraudin, 2019). The TNC garment industry favors teens and young women for their willingness to work for low wages in substandard conditions. A seamstress who survived the collapse of the Rana factory says: “I’d like to find alternative work but I don’t know what I can do.” Her previous informal sector job was as a housemaid paying $20 a month. At the time of the factory collapse Bangladesh guaranteed a minimum wage of $38 a month in factories. The $18 difference literally kept her family from starvation (Al-Mahmood, 2013). Like other women surviving the Rana tragedy, she was anxious to return to work. Determined to avoid media attention and find even lower-wage employees, the garment industry is retreating to urban fringes and then to rural areas. In a step toward rural industrialization encouraged by the state, young women can be recruited from villages near newly built factories. TNCs report that factories are clean, safe, and convenient. Women welcome factory work as a way to escape grinding rural poverty. NLG proponents argue that factory work offers an alternative to a life of labor in the fields and boosts rural economies. TNCs may offer child care and schooling for workers and their families. The NLG track record for women in Bangladesh’s garment industry is tarnished at best. Rural women are positioned as a “new niche for economic exploitation” in the garment industry (Schoen, 2018, 2019a). Factory work opened paid employment to women because they could be paid less than men. The Bangladesh economy was transformed by women’s work and is now dependent on it.

204  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

Nonetheless, neither unions nor international law have been able to seriously nudge TNCs to offer women wages to thrive rather than wages to survive.

Critique The magnitude of the Rana tragedy did document another correlation between globalization, especially its neoliberal thrust, and its perils for women. Public understanding of NLG’s connection to gender inequity and broader social harm has been heightened. Propelled by the international women’s movement, strong women-oriented NGOs, and the FWCW Platform of Action, the gendered impact of NLG is being addressed. Development projects funded through the UN and the World Bank, for example, must prepare a gender analysis at the planning stages to determine how the project differentially affects women and men. Feminists refuse to be complacent about “the current state of affairs” related to women and development. Reporting on negative development outcomes for women tends to normalize them. These trends are not natural, nor should they be accepted as givens (Beck, 2017).

Women and Development Building on sociological and interdisciplinary work on how global pathways are gendered, development studies continue to accelerate. Research on Women in Development (WID) was eventually supplanted by Women and Development (WAD). In acknowledging the power differences between men and women in development practice, Gender and Development (GAD) was ushered in. Embracing one or the other nomenclature is not simply an academic exercise. How terms are used and who uses them have consequences. GAD discourse often marginalizes the voices of non-elite women and silences feminist inspired rights-based approaches to gender equity in development. GAD has also become more aligned with the very neoliberal development policies that WID has been countering for decades (Benería et al., 2016; Narayanswamy, 2016; Carella and Ackerly, 2017). With abundant sociological work supporting neoliberal incursion into development policies harmful to women, I have retreated from my original embrace of GAD discourse, preferring Women and Development (WAD) as the best alternative to date.

A Sociological WAD Model Sociology has much to offer the Women and Development (WAD) discourse. Sifting through plentiful research, a WAD model informed by sociology can be useful for all players in development work. The model should incorporate the following elements. (Lindsey, 1995b, 2006; Deutscher and Lindsey, 2005; Cohn and Hooks, 2016). •

• •

Account for neoliberal globalization as the driver of gender inequality and the power relations between stakeholders, such as the World Bank, TNCs, United Nations, NGOs, and CSOs. Identify intersectional risks of gender with social class, religion, and other statuses that may empower and disempower women in development outcomes. Explain stratification keeping the developing world economically dependent on richer nations. Capitalism and colonialism intertwine to determine the structures shaping women’s subordination.

Global Perspectives on Gender  205

• • •

•

Translate sociological theory for use in development planning and practice as envisioned by sociology’s founders; a “sociology of usefulness” is encouraged. Expand definitions of economic productivity to include women’s unpaid work in their homes, as farmers, and in the informal sector. Incorporate interdisciplinary thrusts. Sociologists, economists, and anthropologists must talk to one another, to practitioners, and to women and communities affected by development decisions. Adopt a feminist perspective emphasizing women’s empowerment. Like conflict theory, feminism challenges a patriarchal status quo (Chapter 1). Women’s empowerment enhances well-being for women, their families, and their communities.

Development projects that neglect gender analysis and ignore NLG are unrealistic and unsuccessful. Gender disparities are being recognized as injustices and obstructions to development.

Global Patterns of Gender (In)Equity The story of women and development is often told through the hopeful eyes of the United Nations and the economic optimism by TNCs and governments embracing NLG. It is also told by critics highlighting women’s peril in NLG-inspired development. It is impossible to capture the global complexity of gender inequality in any one story.

Patterns of Diversity and Similarity Despite women’s diversity and the intersectional risks they face from region or nation, or community, women represent remarkably similar patterns in carrying out their gendered lives. The five patterns below are neither uniform nor consistent, but they offer ways to distill the degree to which women maneuver treacherous gendered terrains. Each pattern asks a question and highlights the disconnect in ways women maneuver the gendered development terrain (Lindsey, 2018; Lindsey and Najafizadeh, 2019; Lindsey, 2019b). 1

De Jure/De Facto: By Law and by Fact. What are the successes and challenges to legal approaches for gender equity? The UN was an early player in explaining the disconnect between policy and law and how they play out in the daily lives of women. Despite laws conferring equal rights and opportunities on women, stereotypes, cultural obstacles, and social conservatism surrounding gender roles inhibit their enforcement.

2

Challenges of Globalization. What are the benefits and liabilities of globalization for gender equity? Whether in political, cultural, or religious contexts, and whether women’s work activities are in the formal or informal sectors, neoliberal globalization sets the stage for how gendered patterns unfold. Although globalization scenarios are strikingly similar, there are clear differences according to level of development in nation and region that help explain how NLG may be better or worse in the service of gender equity.

3

Women’s Global Dilemma: Balancing Family and Work. What is the influence of unpaid family and caregiving on the paid work women perform? Rooted in patriarchy, culturally entrenched gender attitudes are not easily swayed when women are employed. Cultural issues are most intrusive in “work–family balance” discourse in the Global South,

206  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

especially where policy supports employed women. The notion that there is such a thing as a “choice” to balance work and family may be mysterious in much of developing world. 4

Activism, Advocacy, Agency. What strategies and resources are leveraged by advocacybased networks to challenge patriarchy and put women on the road to gender equity? In connection with the international women’s movement, advocacy by NGOs leverages resources to mobilize activism, even in nations with a low level of legal commitment to gender equity. Local advocates serve as conduits for grass-roots leaders learning to navigate political landscapes. NGOs expect to enhance agency and empowerment then retreat when women and communities advocate for themselves.

5

Re-Configured Gendered Lives. How are women’s lives re-configured when globalization alters gender roles and relationships? Intersectionality helps explain why legal (de jure) rights may not translate to desired gender equity outcomes in the context of globalization. Compared to rural women, their urban counterparts are likely to be in paid work, are better off economically, and have more latitude in determining future prospects. As NLG envelops their communities, women’s lives will inevitably be refashioned—for better or worse. New “womanhoods” are emerging that will serve as models for the next generation of the globe’s women.

Applying Gendered Patterns Inspect the gender issues in the nations and regions in the next section to see how the five patterns of gender (in)equity apply. These issues are flashpoints identified by activists, scholars, researchers, and feminists that are culturally defined gender markers for the nations or regions selected for review. Keeping the patterns in mind, the discussion is more organized, and the scope of the review is narrower. Even with this limited focus, however, the task is formidable. Science demands generalizations (macro level), but countless exceptions exist (micro level). The global gender patterns offer a route to account for both. The sociological objective, therefore, is to identify gendered patterns of life and living to illustrate what women share and how they fare as a result of these patterns.

SECTION 2 GLIMPSES OF OUR GENDERED GLOBE RUSSIA The Soviet Union was founded in 1922 and the Cold War ended with its collapse in 1991, ushering in optimistic predictions that democracy would envelop the world. Former Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev’s policies of glasnost (“openness”) combined with perestroika (“restructuring”) were keys in transforming the Soviet Union into a democratic nation with a free-market economy. Gorbachev’s vision of a democratized, capitalistic Soviet Union was not to be. The USSR rapidly crumbled into 15 independent nation states, most of which embraced capitalism but not democracy. With increasing global dominance, Russia is the largest and most economically and politically powerful of the former Soviet republics. It began a rocky path in a transitional economy rebounding from a 1998 financial crisis, then sinking in the global recession, and again between 2014–2017. Growth is expected to be

Global Perspectives on Gender  207

stagnant or modest at best (Aris, 2019). Even before multiple financial crises, the restructured economy deepened poverty and unemployment and slashed or eliminated subsidies for health and welfare. Russia’s economy is in transition but is otherwise like developing world nations in quality-of-life and well-being indicators, particularly in relation to gender. Russian women have been further marginalized or pushed into poverty by the effects of NLG and the transition to a free-market economy.

Central Asia Central Asia can be the testing ground for women’s agency in the region’s post-Soviet transformation. Nations in this region are struggling with maneuvering democracy and its outcomes after independence, while simultaneously adapting to massive repercussions of rapid neo-liberal globalization. Central Asia is home to some of the globe’s most repressive countries, where women continue to confront persistent abusive practices, especially in socially conservative countries such as Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan (Direnberger, 2019; Peshkova, 2019). Throughout the region educational and health care benefits have been slashed and public sector jobs, which disproportionately employ women, eliminated. Loss of paid work propels women into poverty; loss of subsidies for child care and elder care increases caregiving responsibilities. Violence is spiking, and calls for a return to the cultural, religious, and household-based economic traditionalism that shackled women in pre-Soviet eras are growing in Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan (Dergousoff., 2019; Kudaibergenova, 2019). On the positive side, in Azerbaijan, efforts to improve women’s rights, well-being, and “place” are supported by an array of activists, state agencies, and NGOs. Azerbaijan may represent the blend of activism, advocacy, and agency that can serve as a model for policy makers seeking to enhance the lives of women in the context of NLG (Najafizadeh, 2019). To date, however, it is unclear if this optimistic blend of activism can be sustained by women’s advocacy organizations given the gender-based chasm left by the ravages of transition in Central Asia and Eurasia. Russia’s global re-ascendance and powerful non-democratic hold on the country and the region allow it to orchestrate any gender pitfalls associated with economic transition in ways they see fit.

The Soviet Legacy and Contemporary Russia According to the Soviet constitution, “Women and men have equal rights.” In 1917, Lenin’s regime mandated upgrading women’s position by abolishing all forms of discrimination that women endured in tsarist Russia. Women were granted full equality in educational and employment opportunities, family and property rights, and competition for administrative offices. Women secured almost half of the positions as deputies in state legislatures and were well represented in the trade unions. Political positions with the most influence, however, were essentially devoid of women. The rhetoric of equality masked the oppression of women in the former Soviet Union and plays out today in Vladimir Putin’s Russia.

Employment The Soviet Union had the largest percentage of employed women of any society during its rapid expansion, estimated at 80–90 percent by the World Bank. Initially employed in the agricultural sector, in no country in the world did women constitute such a significant part of

208  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

the labor force in so short a time. Despite economic stagnation and a shrinking labor force for both men and women, in today’s Russia about two-thirds of women are employed. Women are urgently needed in the labor force, but this need has done nothing to curb pervasive gender stereotypes about women workers; men remain the preferred employees. Employers view women workers as less profitable. Employers are suspicious of working mothers and women who take advantage of the limited subsidies for child care. Child care reduces time available for training to upgrade a woman’s skills; in turn, she is considered an inferior employee. Russian women are highly credentialed professionals in law, medicine, and engineering, as well as in the skilled trades. Like women globally, however, they are overrepresented in low-paying and menial jobs, underrepresented in managerial jobs, and hold lower ranks as supervisors and in less prestigious specialties as professionals. Despite the official doctrine of equal pay for equal work and regardless of qualifications, gender discrimination in hiring and promotion and in wages is taken for granted. Some gains are evident. Under the communists, the average female worker earned two-thirds of the average male income. In 2005, women made 60 percent of what men made. The wage gap shrank to its lowest level at 26 percent in 2013 but has gradually increased since. Today it hovers at 30 percent. Women are not only in flat career paths compared to men, but if women’s pay accounted for their educational credentials, the gender wage gap would disappear or even reverse for top earners (Atencio and Posadas, 2015; Ebel, 2019). With entrenchment in unskilled jobs, in feminized professional jobs, and within a gender-based system of job segregation, women’s economic losses are predicted to increase. Gender inequity persists in unemployment. Globalization moved workers out of industry into an emerging service sector. New businesses rapidly emerged, and government oversight of these companies virtually disappeared. The decline of government bureaucracy and subsidies exerts a heavy toll on women and their families. Female unemployment is at record highs at the same time as unemployment benefits are slashed. Men and women adapt differently to the stark realities of the rocky labor markets in Russia. Women report lower levels of control but appear to adapt better than men. Given the deep economic divide between men and women, NGOs are supportive of the causes of women but have little power in advocating positions that differ from Putin’s expanding iron-fisted stance about women in the labor force and the preference for patriarchal families.

Collision of Family and Employment The glaring disparity between men and women in the labor force is explained by Russia’s unique combination of ideological and cultural factors. Referred to as a double burden (rather than a second shift) in a Russian context, powerful family barriers hinder women’s career advancement. Compared to men in developed nations and nations undergoing economic transition, Russian men take on the least domestic duties when their wives, sisters, and mothers are also in the paid labor force. On average, husbands have 30 hours more free time per week than wives. Slight decreases in work hours outside the home for both men and women do not match sharp increases in work hours for women inside the home. Women are torn by how to deal with peregruzhenost (overburdening). Heightened by the chaos generated by the collapse of the state-controlled economy, traditional views of family roles have re-emerged in rural areas, coupled with a chronic labor shortage.

Global Perspectives on Gender  209

Fertility Politics The Russian government is alarmed at the falling birth rate (now at 1.6) and the increased preference for smaller families. Nonetheless, the economy depends on the cheaper labor of women who can be hired part-time or as temporary workers. Professional women are being pushed out of the labor force, but manual workers are still in demand. The economy could not withstand a mass exodus of women from the ranks of paid labor, but private enterprises are not offering benefits such as day care and pregnancy leave to entice women to stay in the workforce. Another confounding factor is that Russian couples do not want large families, but available and affordable birth control options are limited. Despite a steady decline in costly abortions, the abortion rate in Russia is believed to be the highest in the world. It peaked in the 1960s during the Soviet era (three abortions for every birth); although it has declined, it is estimated today that the number of births is twice the number of abortions. The UN has not recorded such a high rate of abortion in any single country for which records are available. This rate does not capture the number of illegal abortions, estimated to be between five and eight for every birth (Shabunova and Kalachikova, 2014; Sakevich and Lipman, 2019). In an ironic twist, efforts to bolster fertility in Putin’s Russia targets the “abortion culture,” with nationalist rhetoric (demography is vital or we will not exist) and by rallying conservative allies in the Russian Orthodox Church (pro-life narrative, like in the U.S.). Paradoxically, Putin is committed to legal protection for abortion but looks to the church as an uneasy partner in his pronatalist argument. The pronatalist call using nationalistic rhetoric may be more effective than the religious one. In proposing a ban on abortion, the head of the Russian Orthodox Church couches it in terms of Russia’s lagging population, but with a variation on morality. It stated that the mass murder of children is “worse than the Holocaust” (Moscow Times, 2019). Either call, however, falls on deaf ears. Women are caught in a disheartening paradox. The government is unwilling to subsidize birth control options and employment benefits for new parents. Abortion is prioritized as a birth control option in a Russia largely devoid of “pro-family” subsidies that do not match its rhetoric. Simultaneously Putin’s prochoice Russia is leading the global movement to reassert traditional values that normalize women as inferior to men (Dukhanova, 2018). These values strongly align with religious conservatives and unfold in a stronger patriarchal family structure. Russian women accommodate and resist this alignment.

Marriage and Family Led by young adults, male and female differences on attitudes to marriage and the family and sex and sexuality are shrinking (Borusiak, 2013). Tantalizing images of gender partnership resonate with young couples. Since progressive attitudes have not translated to behavior altering the daily lives of Russian women, these attitudes are in an era of rapid decline. Despite women taking on virtually all household responsibilities, the prospect of marriage and children, albeit a small family, takes precedence, especially among rural women. Women appear to accept the far from egalitarian marital arrangement that inevitably emerges.

Family Values Russian women are much more family oriented than men and place a stronger value on child rearing. Family, children, and social order continue as the highest values for women;

210  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

importance of paid work comes in as a weaker, declining value. These values mirror Putin’s conservative strategy idealizing women as homemakers and promoting the status quo as better for individual women and men and better for national stability. Agendas aimed at transforming families and relationships in the name of egalitarianism threaten such stability. Public opinion in Russia resonates with Putin’s authoritarianism, neoliberal economics, and a leadership style that appeals to a wide swathe of rural Russia. Despite policies that contribute to the economic plight for much of this population, collective interests are prioritized over individual interests (Chiozza and Stoyanov 2018; Mamonova, 2019). Women fall prey to hardships inside and outside the home, yet they embrace stricter, traditional gender roles. Young women express mixed visions about opportunities for good jobs and great families. They do not idealize marriage, nor do they see it as a ticket out of poverty or from the drudgery of unfulfilling paid work. They largely accept patriarchal gender roles and separate spheres as givens, believing that men should be the primary breadwinners. Fatherhood is encapsulated in masculinity norms surrounding breadwinner roles for men. Working class men are further constrained by lack of education and by economic peril disallowing them from alternatives to “successful” masculinity models men of privilege may be offered. Most men in Russia fall under these constraints, but like women’s seeming endorsement of patriarchy, accept them nonetheless (Åberg et al., 2018; Walker, 2018). For men, these norms severely restrict models of active fatherhood and other nontraditional family roles emerging in other societies (Chapter 9). For women, earning money and running a household increases overburdening, so why would women choose such as option? As an employed, married professional woman with two daughters insists: Of course I’m satisfied—a family, children, work, I’ve got it all … The husband should earn money, the wife bring(s) up the children and do(es) the housework. That’s how it is with us—it suits us, everything’s good with us. (Ashwin and Isupova, 2018:455)

Independence Reflecting on such views of marriage and the family, it may be surprising that Russian women define themselves as independent, not needing a husband to support them or their families. They strongly endorse their independence from men, whether married or not. Single motherhood is a normative, culturally accepted role of women in Russia. Despite lack of government subsidies for employed single women with children, conspicuously absent fathers, and the state’s silence about responsible fatherhood, many women assert that raising children is easier without a husband or father (Utrata, 2015). Men are dispensable. Women prefer a household free from the constraints of men who try to dominate. They may be agricultural workers, professionals, or clerks, but their main concern is to raise a family. Men are expendable in this equation.

Masculinist Discourse A powerful masculinization discourse has intensified under Vladimir Putin. This discourse endorses characteristics associated with toxic masculinity that imperil the well-being of men, increases gendered risks for women, and increases social liabilities (Chapter 9). Symbols of hegemonic masculinity dominate the political landscape and are vehicles to garner support for Russian nationalism. In the 2014 Winter Olympics in Moscow, the world watched as

Global Perspectives on Gender  211

President Putin remained stoic and reserved, barely displaying any emotion, even as Russian athletes performed spectacularly. As if the Olympics provided the masculinist springboard, weeks later Russia began expansionist drives in the region. The world witnessed an enactment of masculinist discourse that helped enlarge Russia’s regional and global dominance (Bjarnegård and Murray, 2017; Romanets, 2017). With Putin’s regime bolstered by a thoroughly crafted and orchestrated masculinization, the association of gender and politics cannot be disguised. As with nationalism, masculinist narratives restrict women from running for public office. Women who do manage to gain public office are usually at the behest of the Russian party (Avdeva et al., 2017). Masculinist discourse lays the foundation for Putin’s conservative credibility. It justifies attacks on feminism and a decadent West that displays a “genderless and infertile mortality.” Putin leads the “global charge against debauchery,” offering voice to “conservatives, traditionalists, and nationalists across the globe” (Fish, 2017). Conservative far right media and mainstream political figures in the U.S. have praised Putin for such views (Foer, 2017; Michel, 2019). Under Putinism, gone are the days of economic vulnerability, military fragility, and weak men.

What is Feminine? Putin’s gendered rhetoric is constructed to rediscover the lost femininity of Russian women. Masculinist images include independence, strength, power, sexual prowess, and risk-taking Its feminine (not feminist) opposites (binary) include admiring women for being meek, humble, and dependent. Women are praised (or not) for appearance, attention to their bodies, and as they age, fashion choices accentuating their femininity. Such messages echo neoliberal marketing strategies to Russian women (Kalinina, 2017; Davidenko, 2019a, 2019b). On a visit to a female police officer training facility on International Women’s Day, Putin suggested ways they can maintain their figures (Rahim, 2019). If women lament masculinity that is adrift for contemporary men, and men reproach women for their lack of femininity, tension is eased by masculinist discourse welcoming back traditional gender beliefs for both women and men.

Sexual Harassment and Gender-Based Violence The infusion of masculinist discourse is glaring in policies surrounding sexual harassment and gender-based violence. Sexual harassment in Russia is common and growing. It has no legal definition, nor are their guidelines on how to deal with it (Anyukhlina and Petrova, 2019). Sexual harassment of women is so taken for granted that Russian lawmakers see any legislation to reduce it as excessive and unnecessary, and which could turn Russian women into “overly sensitive Europeans” (Moscow Times, 2018). Despite education credentials superior to men’s, and holding more senior level management positions than women in the West, Russian women have no protection against sexual harassment in their workplaces or schools. Compared to sexual harassment, the line is less blurry for sexual violence. The Russian Criminal Code does outlaw “coercion to commit sexual acts” but the victim’s claims are often dismissed for failure to provide evidence for prosecution. If claims in the workplace are so easily dismissed, it is almost impossible to bring claims of domestic violence to court. Most telling is that domestic violence was recently “partly decriminalized,” resulting in a dramatic fall in incidents reported to police. Since the law was passed in 2013, approximately 50,000

212  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

reported cases of domestic violence against women fell by almost 50 percent. With weak government response to sexual and domestic violence in Russia, it is not surprising that rape is the least-registered crime in Russia. Online activism against sexual assault has increased and media attention to grisly rapes has generated attention to gender-based violence, but female promiscuity and victim blaming are its counterpoints (Aripova and Johnson, 2018; Hendin, 2018). Even with high profile rape and abuse cases, the #MeToo hurricane sweeping the globe has barely made a dent in Russia (Ingurazova, 2019). Gender stereotypes are thriving. Current attitudes suggest that “men must be masculine and strong, and women should be feminine mothers” (Ferris-Rotman, 2018). Men’s strength includes taken-for-granted sexual dominance over women that often translates to gender-based sexual violence both inside and outside the home.

Feminism in Peril Undergirded by masculinist discourse reverberating throughout tightly controlled media, Russians are “creating a positive collective identity” that is popular with Russian voters (Riabov and Riabova, 2014:23). Images that counter this emerging identity are considered to be threatening and divisive. This discourse is designed as a direct assault on feminism. Feminists are portrayed as aggressive and vengeful and harming Russian values, and which, if not curtailed, will lead to a war with men. Women may be needed in the labor force, but they are blamed for men’s job losses. Russian women exist in a culture of male resentment where women’s accomplishments and rewards come at the expense of men.

Sexuality Feminism’s peril multiplies by its alignment with the LGBTQ community and its countercries against hegemonic masculinity that challenges antigay propaganda. Being LGBTQ in Russia is essentially illegal. A 2013 law declares that male homosexual relations, bisexuality, and transgenderism are “contagious,” can enlarge the “diseased” LGBTQ population, and make children queer (Kondakov, 2018). This “gay propaganda law” is directly linked to waves of escalating anti-LGBTQ violence sweeping across Russia and the doubling of hate crimes against this group. Explicit targets are LGBTQ youth (Human Rights Watch, 2018, 2019). With the state turning its back on the law’s victims, Russians in turn regard the LGTBQ community as not only problematic, but disposable. As defenders of LGBTQ rights, feminists walk on exceedingly treacherous ground.

Dangerous Feminists Feminism is more than a dirty word; it is a dangerous word. Members of feminist protest punk rock band Pussy Riot were sentenced to two years in prison in 2012 for singing an anti-Putin protest song. Since then the band’s male performer was hospitalized, suspected of being poisoned by pro-Putin agents (McKirdy and Gigova, 2018). Rap videos on YouTube in Russia offer both pro- and anti-Putin stances, but rather than in synch with feminist views, and like in the U.S., they are suffused with misogyny, violence, acceptance for using drugs on women, and blaming sexual assault on women for the way they dress (Chapter 13). It is safe enough to blog, but rap videos are largely pro-Kremlin in messages, with a heavy reliance on macho politics and unquestioned sexism (Denisova and Herasimenka, 2019). Rap

Global Perspectives on Gender  213

music online may offer spaces for communication and dialogue about politics, but these are subsumed in anti-feminist thrusts. Those who spread feminist memes in Russia go to jail, domestic abusers do not (Denejkina, 2018). Often rapists who kill their victims literally get away with murder. With feminist intent, Pussy Riot started a conversation about corruption in Russia and were imprisoned as result.

Russian Feminism Feminism in early post-communist Russia emerged, rapidly declined, and virtually disappeared in the public sphere by the 2000s with Putin’s unimpeded ascent to the Russian Presidency. In contemporary Russia, feminism has a shadow existence. In addition to the masculinized political umbrella, other key factors help explain the decay of feminism in Russia. First, in light of strict scrutiny, Russian-bred NGOs have failed to become organizationally viable and financially sustainable. Suspicious of civil society, the Kremlin exerts control to curtail NGO activities deemed to rally opposition to Putin (Svetova, 2018). As expected, NGOs advocating for women are monitored closely, especially for social media posts and financial connections to businesses and non-profits aligned with the West. If tainted by feminism, NGOs in Russia have a low survival rate. Russian women, therefore, are more likely to be mobilized outside than inside Russia. Another factor in the decline of Russian feminism is minimal political representation on issues supporting women in their homes and workplaces. Considered to be speaking for all women, female political leaders are notorious for sending contrived and orchestrated messages that legitimate female subordination. Their words resonate with Russian women who believe they can never win any fight for power. Why should they? The home is their refuge. Contrary to Marxian assertions, the life of toil inside the home for no pay is eagerly embraced by women who toil for low pay outside the home. Most important, with this masculinist thrust as a major spoke in (ethno)nationalist conservative rhetoric and the demonization of feminism, calling oneself a feminist or engaging in feminist activities can be a lethal act. In riding out the NLG wave that has engulfed Russia and Putin’s increased authoritarianism, women face difficult issues. The restructured economy intensified sexual inequality. Glasnost briefly opened dialogue on the plight of women and NGOs and universities began publicizing the benefits of a women’s movement and women’s rights. Glasnost rekindled a hidden but viable feminist spirit that the Soviet Union had driven underground. Today, however, it is difficult to find that spirit in public discourse surrounding feminism. The popular view of feminism in Russia is that it doesn’t exist and is not needed anyway. Feminists are confused with lesbians and identified as man-haters, and seen as simply unkempt losers with problems in their personal lives. (Sinelschikova, 2017) Women have not mobilized enough to seriously challenge such openly misogynist images. Any feminist revival since the post-Soviet era is weak and weakening.

Critique Since Russia represents the trend of anti-gender campaigns mounting in nations outside the Global South, women’s issues are detailed at length. Institutions in Russia speak with a unified voice that make no attempt to hide their stance on gender or in anti-equality rhetoric (Moss,

214  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

2017). Women witness these symbols daily and internalize messages about their place in society vis-à-vis men. They are not passive recipients of misogyny and are proud of their autonomy in their homes and refusal to be dependent on men. By choice and circumstance they maneuver their lives to gain the best of what it means to be a Russian woman in the face of Putinism. These discouraging trends notwithstanding, support for civil liberties in Russia is growing among younger Russians, and urbanites, with upsurges in rural areas. Under a civil liberties umbrella NGOs are actively working to draw attention to human rights. Limited dissent is possible on some issues of civil liberty, such as challenges to constitutional changes restricting avenues for protest. Dissent on feminist grounds, however, is driven underground (Gerber, 2017; Orlova, 2018; Trochev and Solomon, 2018). Women online offer the safest places for expressions of feminism in Russia. It is risky for feminists to move from online dissent to places where women gather to talk about feminism—spaces free from men and from the prying eyes of the state. Feminists are heartened by the Occupy Movement and social justice protest events. “Mass sing-alongs and dancing flash mobs” help create and sustain a sense of community (Krznaric, 2017:12). Although barely nascent, such spaces and events are gathering speed in Russia. In a country where the concept of feminism remains at best socially neutral and at worst a “mortal sin,” activists fighting for gender equality under the banner of feminism have to take success where they can get it. And it’s often fleeting. (Ekmanis, 2019)

CHINA Prior to the revolution elevating Mao Tse Tung as head of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) in 1949, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) recognized women as valuable allies in building socialism. For the peasant revolution to maintain momentum during the construction of a new regime, it was believed that women’s issues must be given priority. Because women were inextricably bound to an ancient, oppressive, and seemingly immutable family structure, women’s rights in the home were given highest priority. Priorities, however, were (and are) reconciled with immediate goals in mind, specifically economic growth. For the CCP, if women’s rights and economic development conveniently coincide, they remain a government priority. Similar to the ideology of the former Soviet Union, China’s goal to increase women’s employment is linked to the argument that when women gain economically, they also gain in the family. Whereas Karl Marx articulated the structure of classical social conflict theory, it was Friedrich Engels who applied this approach to the family (Chapter 1). Engels argued that the family is the basic source of women’s oppression. The patriarchal family is a microcosm of a larger, oppressive capitalistic society. By this reasoning, therefore, once women expand their roles outside the family in paid work in the new socialist system, servility to men will cease. Popularized as the “liberation through labor” ideal, women’s improved economic status was the twentieth-century foundation for achieving gender equality. Family reform would inevitably follow.

Reform and the Chinese Family The record of Chinese family reform since the revolution is mixed. The traditional Chinese family was based on Confucian principles, with complete authority to males. The family

Global Perspectives on Gender  215

was patriarchal, patrilineal, and patrilocal. In Confucian classic writings, females are naturally inferior, unintelligent, jealous, indiscreet, narrow-minded, and seductive to innocent males (Chapter 12). Given these views, it is not surprising that women’s lives were severely restricted by custom and law. At marriage, she had to survive under the unquestioned authority of her husband, his father, and his grandfather, as well as other assorted male relatives. A female hierarchy also existed. Her mother-in-law exercised strict control, and she could beat or sell her daughter-in-law for disobedience or for running away. The bride occupied the lowest rung in the domestic hierarchy of the traditional Chinese family.

Footbinding Running at all was impossible for those women who endured footbinding, which could reduce a foot to as small as three inches. Dating to the early part of the twelfth century, this crippling procedure was more extreme for upper-class women who did not have to work in manual labor or in the fields. However, poorer girls in remote areas of China needed to contribute to the economic well-being of their families. Footbinding may have prevented work in the fields but girls were taught how to spin and weave, to produce goods for sale or barter. Besides becoming a status symbol and a prerequisite for marriage among the upper classes, footbinding ensured that all women remained passive and under the control of men. Although the narrative of footbinding largely surrounds cultural beliefs about women’s marriageability, tiny feet led to adept hands. In turn, these skills may have been an asset to a prospective spouse. Footbinding endured in rural areas into the latter half of the twentieth century in rural China (Brown, 2016; Bossen and Gates, 2017). For the family and Confucian-based society to function smoothly, both socially and economically, the subordination of women was required and practices such as footbinding helped ensure it. Spotlighting agency, nonetheless, women held economic leverage with home-based production that allowed for family survival.

Marriage The Marriage Law of 1950 abolished many practices that oppressed women in the traditional Chinese family. The fundamental principle on which the new law was based was free-choice marriage. It was expected that this would lay the foundation for releasing women from their abysmal existence in feudal marriage. Women gained the right to divorce; marriages had to be monogamous; and bigamy and other forms of plural marriage, as well as concubinage, were abolished. Also eliminated were child betrothal, bride prices, and any restrictions placed on the remarriage of widows. With women’s rights in mind, in 1980 a sweeping law was passed to update the older law. The 1980 law specified that husband and wife are legally equal in the home and both have the freedom to engage in paid work, to study, and to participate in social activities. Certainly the 1980 law bolstered the rights of women—especially urban women—in their homes. In rural areas, however, the law was met with less enthusiasm. Enforcement was minimal and progress stalled. Over the next two decades, China witnessed alarming increases in domestic violence, child abandonment, a quadrupled divorce rate, and large increases in poverty rates of divorced women. After years of legislative debate, the law was amended in 2001. Adultery and cohabitation were outlawed, and property division in divorce was extended to include all property gained in a marriage, including salary, profits, and inheritance.

216  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

Critique Nonetheless, when laws collide with ancient traditions enforcement is difficult. Bigamy and forced marriage were already illegal, but ancient concubinage practices continue. It is also difficult to enforce the provision for wealthier men who have second wives and jeopardize the families of all their unions. Thousands of second wives and children of wealthy Hong Kong men live just across the border in Mainland China. Kin customs pervade, and parents of potential partners wield much authority in arranging marriages. A patrilocal extended family structure in rural areas continues to put new brides at a disadvantage and reinforces the preference for sons. Parents know that daughters are only temporary commodities. Ancient Chinese proverbs such as “Raising a daughter is like weeding another man’s field” are quoted and attest to the strength of the preference for sons.

The One-Child Policy: Gone But Not Forgotten Ancient traditions putting a premium on sons took an ominous turn for daughters. Since its founding, PRC policy focused on upgrading the status of women and simultaneously introduced a stringent campaign to reduce population growth. These two goals disastrously collided. In 1979 the one-child policy was initiated, allowing only one child per couple, with harsh penalties for violation. Whereas China had other programs to curb population growth, the one-child policy was unique in that enforcement was stricter and consequences for noncompliance much more severe. For example, couples received one-child certificates entitling them and their child to an annual cash subsidy. For subsequent children, an “excess child levy” was imposed to compensate for the state’s extra burden to feed and educate additional children. Rewards for the single child were returned with the birth of the second child. The policy largely applied to China’s 90 percent Han population; minorities such as Muslim Uighurs and Tibetans were allowed more than one child or were exempt from the policy. It was relaxed for farm families producing their own food in private plots for subsistence and profit; “excess” children could be pressed into agricultural labor. Penalties for excess children for poorer urban couples were more detrimental. Richer couples in Shanghai and the exploding cities in Guangdong Province could skirt the policy. They provided high-quality housing and private schools to several children. Since they did not rely on government subsidies, local authorities often quietly ignored them. When enacted in 1979, the one-child policy was the most unpopular program in contemporary China. Originally announced as short-term, it was expected that couples would reduce family size voluntarily. This has been borne out. Chinese couples increasingly say that they desire only one child, believing the family will be more prosperous as a result. A small family frees women for more education and employment options. In rural China, the centuries-old universal preference for sons is declining (Shi, 2017). For urban families, the educational gender gap in single-girl homes and single-boy homes has vanished. Among college-educated urban couples, females who want one child are now more likely to express a daughter preference.

Son Preference The one-child policy aggravated an existing skewed sex ratio due to son preference. Each birth cohort of women is smaller than the previous one. Because women marry men who are

Global Perspectives on Gender  217

a few years older, fewer brides are available to grooms. Strong vestiges of ancestor worship existing throughout China may explain why mothers of sons are more traditional in gender ideology (Sun and Lai, 2017). A woman gains ancestral status only through her husband and sons. Without male descendants, she could have no afterlife. Chinese women who trace their family trees back 3,000 years do not find any women on them. Dismal indeed were the prospects of a wife who conceived no male children or who remained unmarried or a childless widow. With one child as the option, that child had better be a male. Support for the one-child policy peaked at the millennium with most people believing it was necessary for China’s continued economic development and prosperity. The policy ended in 2016. Couples are now allowed to have two children. Despite the demise of the one-child policy and preferences for smaller families, the disastrous legacy of the one-child policy for females will live on for decades. China has been unable to deal effectively with an artificial gender imbalance harmful to females, including infanticide, sex-selective or coerced abortions, and neglect of female infants. Kidnapping, prostitution, trafficking, and selling girls are frequent, increasing in areas with a shortage of females. As many as 40 million females are estimated “missing” in China.

Caregiving and Security The one-child policy collided with increased life expectancy, which is highlighted as a benefit of neoliberal globalization. Market liberalization, however, reduces subsidies for social services, such as direct assistance to the elderly and support for caregivers. By 2050, the elderly population is projected to increase to 24 percent, with few children available to support them. The looming care crisis is so threatening that China has introduced “filial piety” campaigns to make children aware of their responsibility to their parents. These morality tales have not been successful. Whereas men may take on financial obligations for infirm parents and grandparents, women assume daily caregiving roles, driving them out of the workplace. The unfolding caregiving crisis for China’s burgeoning elderly population provides ammunition for essentialism, nudging women into perceived “natural” and expected caregiving roles. China’s national fertility is below replacement level at 1.5, and the resulting demographic imbalances are massive. In areas with sex ratios as high as 115–140 males per 100 females, security issues are evolving. China’s estimated 150 million “floating population” is comprised mostly of unmarried migrant males. China will soon have over 30 million “leftover men”, many of whom will not be able to find a wife. In rescinding the one-child policy, China appears more concerned about security issues stemming from legions of unmarried, undomesticated men roaming the hinterland than for the dire consequences of the policy for girls.

Critique Chinese women averaged six children in 1970, dropping to 2.7 only nine years later. Despite this steep drop the one-child policy took effect in 1979 (Feng, 2017). China was successful in curbing the population via the one-child policy but are lamenting its very success. Originally China feared a fertility rebound if the policy ended but now may be welcoming a rebound. The two-child option has not spurred more births. Social development driven by female education, in which China has excelled, is a key factor in dampening any rebound.

218  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

Also traced to the unintended consequences of the one-child policy, because there was a lower birth rate in the 1990s, there are fewer childbearing women today. Another twist to ending the one-child policy and welcoming two children is that companies do not want to pay for multiple maternity leaves so are not hiring young women, or are firing them if they get pregnant (Hou, 2017; Economist, 2018; Neuman and Schmitz, 2018). Gender discrimination may be illegal on paper, but the two-child option has deepened it. Damaging repercussions of de jure fertility control continue as a grim reality for females throughout China.

The Gender Paradox of Neoliberal Globalization in China After the disasters of the cultural revolution, in 1978 China unleashed the most sweeping and successful economic transformation in history. Credited to Chinese politician Deng Xiaoping, under the banner of Chinese-style capitalism or market socialism, the slogan “To get rich is glorious” was eagerly embraced throughout China and remains so today.

Women’s Paid Labor On the heels of neoliberal globalization, other economic reform fueled the massive entry of women into paid labor. For decades the consequences of paid labor for women continue to reverberate across China. In rural China, women’s employment was historically low. With relaxed restrictions on migration, however, opportunities for off-farm income accelerated. Women’s employment soared, many finding jobs near their villages and others migrating to the mushrooming global factories in China’s Special Economic Zones (SEZs). As hosts to foreign investment firms, SEZs are a major engine driving capitalism in China—where the profit motive thrives unfettered. Others migrate as couples, the more educated bypassing factories for higher-paying service and technical jobs. The migration of millions of Chinese between village and city constitutes the largest internal migration of any nation today.

Women and the State Economic reform and state policy appear to be mutually supportive, fostering both gender equality and women’s economic integrity. Support for this contention is strong. Women’s new activities in both rural and urban areas significantly increase household income. Rural poverty among women is eroding. Women carry on farm work when husbands and children migrate, but household decision-making power increases. The benefits of education loom large and women postpone marriage and childbearing (Tian, 2017). College graduation rates for women have skyrocketed. Women welcome market-driven reforms that offer flexibility for their on-farm work and opportunities for off-farm employment commensurate with their education. They report more independence and freedom from patriarchal and parental control over their lives. On the other hand, as in other nations, globalization widens gender disparities in state sectors that employ more women, and they are the first to be laid off. On family farms, less-educated women experience sharp increases in domestic responsibilities. Earnings are compromised when family members migrate and additional help is hired; girls often drop

Global Perspectives on Gender  219

out of school to work on the farm. Urban women are employed in gender-segregated jobs and are paid less than men. Women’s employment in poorly paid clothing manufacturing is threatened. China is pricing itself out of garment industry labor with its higher monthly minimum wage that is double that of India and triple that of Bangladesh. NLG initially drives higher wages but they are often lost later by its very process. Prompted by media and either bolstered or ignored by the state, essentialist beliefs about the proper place of women are rapidly re-emerging. If job and family are incompatible for women, any problem of unemployment will be “solved” when women return to hearth and home. At the same time, women hear other messages that they are needed in the labor force. Conservative attitudes about paid work for women continue to go down—but progressive attitudes about gender equity do not go up. Constrained choices for women are summed up as “being successful” or “marrying well” (Wu, 2010). These attitudes reflect essentialism that is embedded in hiring practices. Often overlooked in the gender effects of NLG are the massive social problems spawned by industrial expansion (e.g.: black rivers contaminated by industrial and human waste, grinding rural poverty, and the expanding floating population). Problems are magnified by repressive communism (e.g.: human rights violations, information suppression, ruthless anti-democratization methods) that disproportionately impact women. Women are buffeted by abruptly changing policies founded on NLG that profoundly affect their well-being, but they have little power in how policies will play out.

State Capitalism China does not diverge appreciably from the “classic” model documenting NLG’s negative impact on women. Whether China’s state capitalism will help or hurt women in the long run may depend on China’s ability to orchestrate it on its own terms and commit resources to bolster all economically vulnerable segments of its population. Although it appears to be equity oriented, China’s state capitalism is first and foremost pragmatic. Gender equity is not an objective, but women may be accidental or unintentional beneficiaries. It is unlikely that gendered economics will be mainstreamed in China’s quest for market dominance globally. China is not a democracy, but its enviable position as the world’s largest market allows it to navigate neoliberal globalization with more freedom than its developing world neighbors. China appears to be the puppeteer, pulling its own economic strings. •

•

The collision of gender equity with state capitalism produces a gendered paradox. This paradox has two main thrusts: contradictory and stagnant attitudes about employment and equity persist. Conservative attitudes about paid work for women continue to go down, but progressive attitudes about gender equity do not go up. Market discourse under China’s state capitalism celebrates individualism and personal responsibility but flourishes in a culture that remains highly collectivistic in gendered traditions, inside the home and across other social institutions.

The paradox translates to weak enforcement of government policy. China is officially committed to women’s equality, but legal (de jure) means to enforce it in the workplace are feeble or absent and virtually nonexistent (de facto) in the home (Lindsey, 2019a:59–61). The paradox is far from resolved.

220  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

INDIA India is confronting challenges threatening its economic and political stability. India’s population continues to increase in unstainable ways, projected to surpass China as the globe’s most populous nation within two decades. Considering the staggering problems related to population growth, land and food shortage, unemployment, and growing disparity between poverty and wealth, India looks to all segments of its heterogeneous society for solutions. Opportunities for women are major factors in solutions but planners have barely acknowledged this reality.

The Religious–Political Heritage As in the West, India’s religious heritage reflects inconsistencies regarding the role of women. Goddess images, important female religious occupations, and critical economic roles for women in the pre-Vedic and Vedic eras (2500–300 b.c.e.) demonstrate a modicum of prestige for women. Coupled with technological changes that excluded women, the ascendance of Hinduism gradually eroded this prestige and sent more women into a chattel-like existence (Chapter 12). Indian women share a religious legacy with Western women. Their freedom and status are severely compromised when religion gains an institutional foothold that is difficult to challenge. By the beginning of the first century, India decentralized the authority of the various Indian states. High-caste Brahmin scholars were powerful enough to interpret the ancient Smitris (laws). The Laws of Manu enveloped India and demonstrated how much the position of women had deteriorated. Manu made a woman completely dependent on a man (husband, father, or son). Manu forbade widow remarriage and reduced a widow’s status to such a lowly extreme that the ritual of burning widows (sati) steadily took hold (Chapter 12). The Laws of Manu demonstrated polarized views of male and female and were used to legitimize gender inequality as well as protect the interests of the ruling Brahmin class.

The Social Reform Movement Shaping the roots of a reform movement, new ideas concerning the status of women emerged by the nineteenth century. Glaring examples of the inhumane treatment of women were attacked, including child marriage, lack of property rights, purdah (seclusion of women), and the dismal condition of widows. Reformists were most successful when accounting for religious proscriptions embedded in these customs. They argued that regardless of caste or religion, such customs were responsible for the condition of women. Education and literacy, however, would make women better wives and mothers. Although many women were helped by these strategies, reformists accepted the belief that a woman’s life was restricted to her family life. Today most rural and lower-caste women remain untouched by the reforms. Divorced, widowed, and single women are in peril when they have no source of male support but cannot be employed for pay outside their homes. Hindu and Muslim women fall under the umbrella of male support for survival. For over two centuries Muslim women were bound by triple talaq, Islamic law allowing a husband to divorce his wife by uttering the word “divorce” three times, instantly dissolving a marriage. The blatant injustice of the practice, particularly from a human rights perspective, saw it banned throughout Islamic states.

Global Perspectives on Gender  221

Even after decades of debate, strong opposition by Muslim political leaders and organizations argued that the government was interfering in Islamic beliefs and customs. It held on in India until 2019 when it was declared illegal. Muslim groups are vowing to counteract the law. Regardless of religion, cultural beliefs about women and marriage and the patriarchal organization of the Indian joint (extended) family impose huge economic and social hardships on women.

The Gandhis and Nehrus Serious questioning of women’s roles came with Mahatma Gandhi (1869–1948), who believed that women were essential to India’s quest for independence, but also that social justice demanded their equality. Given the nationalist sentiment and the charisma of Gandhi, women of all castes and regions flocked to the independence movement, assuming leadership roles and participating in all manner of political dissent. Jawaharlal Nehru shared Gandhi’s vision. As India’s first prime minister, against much opposition, Nehru pushed through legislation giving women the right to inherit, divorce, and vote. A strong women’s movement in India worked for gender equality 30 years before independence. But its effectiveness was curtailed by agendas set by British colonialists and Indian nationalists who supported women only when their interests happened to coincide. Patriarchal bias held on in the post-­ independence era, and despite their forgotten contributions, women became victims in further conflicts. Discourse about honor of the nation was intertwined with the honor of Hindu women for their roles of wife and mother. Women served as flagbearers for nationalism in carrying out these roles (Singh, 2016). Challenging the honor-bound roles of women triggers an attack on Hinduism and on the nation itself. Patriarchy, therefore, is left unquestioned and untouched. Like reforms a century before and continuing today, the vast majority of Indian women have not seen the benefits of a women’s movement on their daily lives. The Nehru factor in Indian politics continued to be played out after independence. Nehru’s daughter, Indira Gandhi (1917–1984), succeeded to the post of prime minister in 1966, largely because she was a member of the Nehru dynasty and because her party believed they could control her. Her skill and strength proved them wrong. She was politically astute, using her gender as an asset rather than a liability. She identified herself as a member of the oppressed and astutely drew on powerful mother-goddess images in the Hindu tradition. She capitalized on accepted class and religious narratives to mute potential gender disadvantages as a woman running for the highest office in India. In 1976 Indira Gandhi enacted a mass sterilization drive, largely directed at men. She ruled with an authoritarian hand for 15 years, until her assassination in 1984 by her bodyguards.

The Gender Gap in Human Development Mahatma Gandhi’s vision to elevate the position of women in India is far from realized. Half of females are literate compared to three-quarters of males; about 20 percent more boys continue to secondary school level. Education translates into paid employment. When compared with the masses of unskilled female laborers in India, most of whom work in agriculture, professional women comprise only a tiny minority. Although there has been an expansion of female employment in general, this has not offset the decrease in the employment of unskilled women. The most important statistic related to gender and paid work is

222  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

that virtually all Indian women are engaged in some informal sector work. India ranks 130 on the Human Development Index (healthy life, education, standard of living); 127 on the Gender Inequality Index (health, empowerment, labor market); and 95 out of 129 countries on the Sustainable Development Goals Gender Index. Education, for example, is the most glaring inequality that hurts human development in India. In rural areas, adult illiteracy is improving for both men and women. However, poor people in rural areas have been unable to take advantage of investments in education; the poorest people in India are women and girls living in rural areas. Taken together, these rankings are directly linked to the fact that women and girls represent the largest proportion of the population living in absolute poverty.

Health India has made progress on key indicators of health and development, including increased life expectancy and lowered fertility and maternal mortality in urban areas. Due to the rising inequality that has enveloped India, gains in health have stalled. In the poorest regions, infant mortality has increased and life expectancy has decreased. As in China, the sex ratio at birth in India favors males, an increasing pattern. With men outnumbering women by 70 million, not only will prospective husbands dramatically exceed the number of prospective brides, but the imbalances drive up violent crime, trafficking, and prostitution (Denyer and Gowan, 2018). Son preference contributes to higher mortality rates for females than males, with female infants less likely to receive necessities for survival in poverty-ridden households. The neglect of girls is linked to a strong, continuing dowry tradition in India. In highly stratified societies such as India, dowries, like other properties, are a means of social mobility. Men use rights over women to compete for social status. Males and females are closer to parity in nutrition and healthy life expectancy, but the harmful consequences of dowry and son preference for females continue (Chapter 2). Despite knowledge of family planning and the desire to have fewer children, frequent and excessive childbearing severely compromises the health of women. In addition to strong cultural beliefs about a husband’s right to have frequent and unprotected sex on demand, many women are unacquainted with methods enabling them to space births. A widely used method of contraception is female sterilization; one-fourth of married women are either unaware of or are reluctant to consider male sterilization as a method of contraception. Rural women struggle to access any type of contraception. At 31 million, India has the highest number of women in all developing countries with an “unmet need” for contraception (Green, 2019). For contraception as well as HIV prevention, women cannot insist that their husbands wear condoms, resulting in dire consequences for themselves and their families.

Five Year Plans These disheartening trends from the Human Development Index do not go unnoticed by officials. The central government has taken steps to combat the negative impact of neoliberalism and a restructured economy that extended oppressive gender ideologies to poor, rural women and those who toil in the informal sector (Wilson et al., 2018). Since 1951, policy initiatives are reflected in the Five Year Plans (FYP) targeted to economic development. From inception, a segment of each FYP targets women and their families. Early plans

Global Perspectives on Gender  223

described women as subjects of “welfare” (destitute, disadvantaged, disabled). Through the years, FYPs adopted wording related to women’s equality, development, inclusion, and empowerment (Kaur, 2018). The Twelfth Five Year Plan (2011–2017) targets the gender gap in school enrollment, childhood malnutrition, and access to safe water for the rural population. However, despite ambitious goals for women’s empowerment and the reduction of gender inequality embedded in FYPs, resulting policies have been ineffective at best, with failure at the local level most notable.

Gender-Based Violence Nowhere does the failure of public policy unfold more starkly than in violence toward women. With sexual violence and abuse of women so rampant, India is one of the largest purveyors of human rights violations, ranked as the most dangerous country for women (Goldsmith and Beresford, 2018; Narayan, 2018). India is experiencing an epidemic of gendered-based violence (GBV). The nation’s attention was held by images of girls being gang raped in public places, sexually assaulted on buses, maimed women attempting to escape abuse from husbands, and women beaten by relatives who deem dowries too paltry or failure to produce a son. Dowry murder has jumped to its highest rate in decades. An enraged father beheaded his daughter over her dating a disapproved man considered to bring dishonor to her family. Women of all castes are not immune to GBV. Globalization opened up new channels for democracy and opportunities for education and employment for previously unserved urban women, upwardly mobile migrant women, and young female professionals enjoying opportunities for work and leisure in urban India. These benefits, however, have been overshadowed by the massive, rapid social change ushered in by globalization, that deteriorated long-established cultural norms related to gender, class, and caste, and opened a disheartening channel linked to sexual violence. Escalating violence against women coalesces with class, caste, and gender. Whether professionals or street vendors, women must always be on alert for their safety. Delhi, for example, often cited as the “rape capital of India,” represents GBV in multiple arenas of public life (work, school, leisure, movies theaters) and in the hidden, domestic sphere. Often escalating to violence, women face open harassment on the streets, on buses, and in their homes (Channa, 2019; Sen et al., 2020). Despite the law, husbands are unrepentant, girls are expected to marry rapists, sexually abused women are humiliated, police are sympathetic to the perpetrator, victim claims are ignored, rather than the victim, and media berate girls and women for venturing outside of their homes or schools. Women cope with the threat of sexual violence in ways that suggest avoidance of threatening situations, but that are born out of fear. Women see empowerment and inclusion as coping strategies, but personal safety is always in the forefront as they go about their daily lives (Nieder et al., 2019; Tanu et al., 2019). Sex crimes and GBV inside and outside the home are rarely punished legally or condemned socially. Disheartening to feminists is that patriarchal views of rape and GBV find sympathetic expression in the public sphere. These views filter down to laws that comingle women’s empowerment with unchallenged patriarchy, often making such laws unenforceable locally (Menon and Allen, 2018; Menon, 2019). Until fundamental taken-for-granted cultural practices are altered and perpetrators are penalized, women will be denied the benefits of education and economic development claimed as benefits of globalization.

224  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

Feminism in an Indian Context The women’s movement in India is at the center of effort to combat gendered violence. This renewed feminist movement led by strong NGOs is promoting governmental attention to put beneficial principles of development into practice. The central government has taken steps to combat the negative impact of neoliberalism and a restructured economy that extended oppressive gender ideologies to poor, rural women and those who toil in the informal sector (Wilson et al., 2018). Violence against women, especially dowry-murder, has jumped to the forefront as a priority. The Indian women’s movement has increased public awareness of domestic violence, calling attention to the power differences between men and women that serve to disempower women in their families, in schools, and in the workplace. The movement also acts as watchguard to ensure that laws are passed and enforced rather than passed and ignored. Programs designed to curtail violence have a two-pronged thrust: attacking patriarchy and attacking economic inequality. Through focusing on social and welfare measures, women’s organizations are drawn into the political process. In the world’s largest democracy, political parties are recognizing the importance of the women’s vote. Training is a component of this process as well. With social media’s influence, outreach programs for poor, marginalized women are enhancing their confidence and self-reliance. Family-owned microenterprises in India are more productive when women share decision making with men. At the community level women are participating and influencing decisions in local self-governing bodies and, for the first time, are exerting their voting rights at all levels. As successful as these efforts may be, the feminist movement in India is constrained by many issues that feminism faces worldwide. The movement has not been successful in expanding diversity to attract rural women or to effectively mentor poor women as grassroots leaders, for example in tackling women’s sexual and health risks under India’s tenacious patriarchal domination or risks associated with neoliberal development projects that systematically undermine women’s economic integrity. NGOs that make up the movement continue to be led by women from elite castes. Abundant research by and about women addresses many of these concerns but applying it to the lives of women outside the academy is difficult. Whereas the activists working for independence in the early twentieth century were able to create a sense of sisterhood that transcended caste, religious, and cultural boundaries, the contemporary movement has been unable to replay that achievement. Second-wave feminism retreated from earlier party politics in favor of working with grass root leaders who identify with localized challenges. Feminists acknowledge that India’s extraordinary diversity thwarts effectiveness of policies that do not account for local and regional norms. India is not a monolith and feminists must engage with the state in ways palatable to women across its geographical and socioeconomic spectrum. Muslim women, for example, are doubly marginalized by religious discourse and socioeconomic disadvantages (Chantler et al., 2018; Spary, 2019). Women’s political power base regionally and nationally has been eroded. Strategies that diminished participation in party politics and the electoral arena locally have not served Indian feminism. As the power base erodes women’s issues are further marginalized from the public agenda.

Feminist Strategies against GBV Gender-based violence is centuries old, but the string of recent brutalities has mobilized women. Strong women’s advocacy groups and media outcry have kept the issue in the ­public eye.

Global Perspectives on Gender  225

The diversity of women mobilized in campaigns against GBV is quite remarkable. This spate of violence has brought together women from unlikely ranks, including previously silenced victims of abuse, migrant women living on urban fringes fearing their daughters’ lives when they are working, and women living under the threat of violence and revenge in the households of their in-laws. The protest movement may be organized by professional women, but they have been joined by millions—literally—of women representing all castes, classes, and ethnic groups. The movement was born of their outraged realization that no matter how accomplished they are, women say “that girl could have been one of us” (Mitra, 2018). Feminists are adopting strategies to address everyday experiences of women in all ranks (micro-level analysis) and are accounting for gendered risks of neoliberal globalization (macro-level analysis) on the frontlines of economic development. Whether referred to as a women’s movement or a feminist movement, it is revealing that GBV becomes the rallying cry for feminist revitalization in an Indian context. #MeToo has taken root in India and brought a diversity of women together in ways other issues have not (Pegu, 2019). It offers an optimistic avenue for solidarity and an opening for feminism to achieve the inclusive, gender-equitable social order envisioned by Mahatma Gandhi at India’s independence.

JAPAN When comparing gender role patterns in Japan with other developed nations, we quickly confront a series of contradictions. During World War II, Japanese and American women had much in common—both labored on the “home front” in vital roles, yet after the war both were denied leadership positions in the government and industries that had relied on their services.

The Occupation After Japan’s surrender in 1945, Occupation forces were determined to establish policies supporting the emergence of a democracy compatible with Japanese cultural values. Japan’s remarkable advances in economic growth, health, higher education, and overall prosperity attest to the spectacular success of the experiment in guided social change introduced during the Occupation. Major shifts in attitudes about overall social equality, especially involving women and men, also occurred. It can be argued that the single largest beneficiary of this experiment was the Japanese woman. The provisions of the Potsdam Declaration of July 26, 1945, mandating that democratic tendencies among the Japanese people be strengthened and that freedom of speech, religion, and respect for fundamental human rights be ensured, in part dictated occupation policy. With the enactment of the Showa Constitution on May 3, 1947, five articles provide for rights of women. Included are equality under the law with no discrimination because of race, creed, sex, social status, or family origin; universal adult suffrage; equal education based on ability (women could be admitted to national universities); women granted the right to run for public office; and marriage based on mutual consent. Beate Sirota Gordon (1923– 2012), a remarkable Austrian-American Jewish civilian woman proficient in Japanese who was attached to the army of occupation, literally coauthored the constitution that included

226  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

women’s rights. Japanese women in 1947 had greater rights compared to American women because Article 24 of their new constitution had an unprecedented equal rights clause for women (Gordon, 1997). The clause was inserted after much debate and continues to be attacked, but has withstood over a half-century of criticism. In contrast, the Equal Rights Amendment to the United States Constitution. has yet to be passed (Chapter 14).

Gender Equity and Public Policy Legal assurances of equality had their greatest impact on Japanese employment practices beginning with the Occupation. Laws were enacted guaranteeing women protection from long work hours and providing pregnancy and menstrual leave; the laws emphasized that a new Japan required the strong support of women in socializing the next generation for democracy and entrepreneurship. It is obvious today that such laws also inhibit women’s advancement, stereotyping them as less physically capable than men. It took 30 years, however, before the disparity was acknowledged. The Equal Employment Opportunity Law (EEOL), passed in 1986, calls for equal pay and other improvements in hiring and working conditions. Unfortunately, without viable enforcement provisions, many employers simply do not adhere to the law. Others believe the failure of the law is due to the principle of Japanese gradualism, which companies use to block unpopular initiatives by invoking cultural norms emphasizing social order. Gradualism can take so long that without continued advocacy, a policy will never be enacted. Some changes have occurred. Blatant discrimination has decreased and support for women in the labor force has increased. However, EEOL had a negligible effect on the rate of women’s regular employment, even as they are highly educated and marrying later. The glass ceiling has barely been acknowledged, much less cracked in Japan. The law remains weak and can neither prevent gender-based personnel policies nor tackle the monumental problems of indirect discrimination (Lindsey, 2010; Mun, 2016).

Gender Equality Bureau Lackluster EEOL prompted the creation of the Gender Equality Bureau (GEB), established in 1994. With public receptiveness and feminist thrust, it was upgraded in 2001 to devise long-term plans related to gender equality. It is tasked with implementing the 1999 Basic Law for a Gender Equal Society (BLGES). The GEB research arm provides data on gender norms in households, employment, caregiving, and health to support implementation of BLGES. Like EEOL, however, GEB is hampered by competing views about traditional values related to women’s place in society and by lack of funds to oversee the reforms needed. GEB is directed by exclusive male high-level officials who seek input from the few women holding political office in Japan, a scattering of feminist-oriented NGOs, and through UN initiatives on gender equity. Even GEB acknowledges that these efforts do not come close to realizing goals related to gender equality, especially in the workplace. Men continue to hold virtually all decision-making power about how gender equity will or should play out in Japan. Support for elements of BLGES is evident. Issues related to human rights and violence against women, gender equality training for teachers, and (on the global level) funding programs aiding women in the developing world meet with fairly high levels of public enthusiasm. On the other hand, key provisions related to gender equality at home, at work, and in

Global Perspectives on Gender  227

the community reveal large and persistent attitude gaps between women and men, between married and unmarried, and between homemakers and employed women. Men talk about the economic burden of marriage, and women talk about the difficulty of harmonizing home and family life. Employed women and homemakers report being overburdened with household responsibilities and caregiving for elderly parents-in-law who are increasingly grandparents. Highly educated women serve tea or are secretaries to male superiors with less education, seniority, or training. Despite decades of litigation, gender discrimination in recruitment, employment, and pay remain untouched and lack of opportunities for women outside the home persist. Annual campaigns such as “Gender Equality Week” are designed to raise awareness of gender issues, but awareness of inequality is not matched by behavior to reduce it. Cultural values about the “proper roles” of men and women in Japan remain largely intact.

Demographic Crises These views persist despite demographic changes that are transforming Japanese society. As in Singapore and South Korea, an ominous demographic timebomb is ticking. In the last decade Japan suffered its largest population decline on record. The birth rate is plummeting, and Japan is facing a huge labor shortage. Japan’s total fertility rate is 1.42, showing no sign of bottoming out; in Tokyo, it is much lower, at 1.20. At about 127 million people, the Japanese population is expected to drop below 100 million in less than three decades. Although Japan has one of the world’s lowest fertility rates, it has the happy distinction of having the highest life expectancy rate (LER) among all major countries. An LER of 85.7 in 2019 translates to over 26 percent of the population currently aged 65 and older; by 2050, 40 percent of the population is projected to be over the age of 65. Referred to as a “silver tsunami,” at the junction of demographic and epidemiological factors, Japan will have the largest percent of the oldest old (those 85 and older) in the world. These numbers are fundamentally due to women marrying later and waiting longer to have children. Many women will forgo marriage and childbearing altogether. Among unmarried adults (18–34), 70 percent of men and 60 percent of women say they are not in a relationship. Almost half of men and women in this age group say they are virgins. Unlike in the United States and Europe, single parenting is not a likely option for women. They prefer to embark on university education, offering them higher-paying, satisfying employment opportunities. Government efforts to increase fertility rate to 1.8 have not been successful. Stubborn norms about women’s place in society or offering viable solutions to work–family balance problems faced by women have met with indifference at best, to scorn at worst by potential mothers scared of what it means to be a woman in Japan’s notorious male-centered office culture (Okuda and Takeuchi, 2019). To cope with the foreboding demographic crisis, the government has violated another taboo—allowing large-scale immigration by foreign men to fill Japan’s labor shortage. Like Japan, Singapore and South Korea are in the midst of both a silver tsunami and loss of women in the labor force because they are caregivers for the youngest and the oldest in their families (Huang and Yeoh, 2019; Sung, 2019). Unlike Japan, workers outside their borders are readily available to take caregiving slots. Immigrants are invited to fill vacancies in sectors needing workers; and especially welcome women as lowpaid caregivers. Japan disdains the immigrant option. It is unclear which unpopular option

228  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

will prevail—increasing opportunities in the workplace and for Japanese women or increasing the immigration of foreign men.

Marriage and the Family It is said that Japanese women walk with their feet pointing to the inside, toward uchi (home). The pulls toward home and any perceived incompatibility between home and the roles outside the home are so powerful that the uchi-pointing path is seen as the only realistic one for the large majority of Japanese women. Girls are socialized early in life into traditional gender role values. High school continues to drive their preparation to become full-time homemakers even as they tackle the courses preparing them for the difficult university entrance exams. There is no gender gap in education in Japan, even at the highest levels. Girls are ambivalent about the gendered paths laid out before them and are aware of stereotyped messages they receive, but like women throughout Japan, they expect to spend many years as full-time homemakers.

Motherhood Motherhood rather than marriage propels women into a full-time housewife role. Her family will probably consist of herself, her husband, and one child. The college-educated homemaker/housewife is expected to be selfless and intensive, offering the highest-quality child-centered home environment. For centuries, being a Japanese woman was synonymous with being a mother. Mothers remain revered and the mother–child bond is viewed as inviolable. Children in Japan are reared for more dependence and less autonomy than American or European children. From a functionalist view, the more dependent the child, the more indispensable the mother. Given powerful cultural beliefs that a woman’s life goal is to have children, this trend is not surprising. Motherhood remains the essence of a woman’s social and personal identity. A women’s role is ranked as mother first and wife second. Any work or roles outside the home are deemed inconsequential to identity. This expectation is so strong that it is virtually impossible for employed women with preschoolers to escape social judgment if anything is amiss at home when she is at work. A mother is solely responsible for her child’s well-being—a belief sustained by women themselves and society.

Critique After the war, laws removed blatant language related to women’s incompetency and inferiority. Parental consent was abolished for marriage beyond a certain age; divorce by mutual agreement was possible; and in a divorce, property would be divided between husband and wife. Such laws appeared to bolster a wife’s lowly status in the family. Herein lies the paradox. On the one hand, Japanese women are depicted as powerless, destined to domestic drudgery. Buffeted by the demands of her husband, her child’s school, and her in-laws, she is expected to be humble and submissive. Most of all she is in servitude most of all to her children. However, these stand in opposition to a strong tradition of decision making in the family; Japanese housewives are in full control of domestic life, with virtually unlimited autonomy.

Global Perspectives on Gender  229

Patriarchy exists outside the home, but a husband who does household work deprives his wife of domestic matriarchy. Nowhere is domestic matriarchy more evident than in how household expenses are divided. Although it is expected that the husband is the provider, the wife maintains control over the financial management of the household. Paradoxically, his authority is demonstrated when he hands over “his” paycheck to her. In this sense, patriarchy and matriarchy are reciprocal. Earning the money is his responsibility. Managing the money is hers. To shed light on this paradox, most women fall between a submissiveness and assertiveness continuum; there is gradual, steady movement toward the assertiveness pole. Women are highly specialized in the domestic sphere. They also have lower levels of power, honor, privilege, and authority relative to men in the public sphere. Women as a group are defined by the principles of domesticity, seclusion, and inferiority, although individual women are along a continuum for each element The absence of public power is matched by domestic power (Nae, 2018). Much to the dismay of government, another sign of assertiveness is women resisting pressure by delaying marriage and childbearing into their thirties. Singlehood is being embraced by more and more Japanese women. Access to greater public power is limited but serves as a goal for the next generation of Japanese women. The view of the submissive Japanese woman is challenged. Women are active agents in their families and construct positive identities when choosing alternatives to traditional marriage and family lifestyles.

Husbands and Fathers Delayed marriage for women, who marry at slightly younger ages than men or choose to marry older, more financially secure men, results in a huge number of bachelors. In Tokyo alone over 40 percent of men in their early thirties are bachelors, most living with their parents. Men with university degrees who are employed full-time and live with their parents into their thirties are derisively referred to as “parasite singles” or “spongers” in the media. Ironically these terms first applied to single women living at home. Although men are not expected to possess the domestic skills necessary to survive on their own, today these single males are more disparaged than single females. Men, too, are ambivalent about marriage, perceiving that it brings gender constraints and loss of autonomy (Nemoto et al., 2013). Husbands often maintain a childlike dependence on their wives. It bolsters her freedom of action in the home but diminishes his (Tanaka and Lowry, 2013). Men may lament a bride shortage but they are in no hurry to prove to a potential spouse that they will participate in housework or child care. A generation ago most husbands filled the ranks of “salarymen”—company men with lifetime employment in one firm expected to spend 10–14 hours a day on and off the job with their colleagues. Strong cultural norms about workplace roles for men bolster a salaryman mentality even if it is damaging to family life. He sacrifices his life, and to a large extent even his wife and children, for his boss and his company. As common wisdom among Japanese housewives is “a good husband is healthy and absent” (Lachkar, 2014:30). Traditional salarymen are fast disappearing. Corporations would like employees to continue embracing the salaryman mentality, but without the benefits associated with them, such as guaranteed lifetime employment and generous pensions. More men are resisting the salaryman grip on their lives regardless, and are eager to live a fuller life outside the confines

230  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

of conventional jobs and conventional marriages. Japanese men increasingly say that they want to be more involved fathers and husbands but are constrained by brutal workplace demands that ignore any life outside the job. Whether a salaryman or not, men embrace the obsessive Japanese work ethic that is a proud brand of the Japanese nation (Sherrell, 2018). Companies would do well to translate the work ethic brand for men to a family and fatherhood ethic. Paid parental leave and support programs for working men and women with children are rapidly being introduced. With strong government support, campaigns for Ikumen—a combination of the words “child care” and “hunk”—are waged in media to promote a positive image of men as active fathers with a better work–life balance. Accommodating the needs of fathers produces better employees with less stress (Goldstein-Gidoni, 2019; Powell and Hughes, 2019). Ikumen received a big boost from an image of Japan’s new emperor, Hironomiya Naruhito, as a “symbol of a new definition of fatherhood,” taking turns bathing and feeding his daughter in infancy (Gunia, 2019). If men take advantage of these opportunities, it should filter down to their employed spouses. Although aimed at fathers, a goal is to entice young people to marry and have children and for women to retain their jobs at motherhood. Ultimately, ikumen and life–work balance policies are designed to stem the demographic timebomb creating havoc in the workplace. The success of these programs is very uncertain. Employment of part-time women workers increased but child care leave by fathers did not come near to its projected goal of ten percent, stalling at four percent a decade into the program. Even the eligible fathers who took the leave did so only for five days or less (Nagase, 2018; Usui, 2019). The responsibilities of working mothers have skyrocketed, yet fathers do less housework and child care compared to any of the globe’s richest nations (Rich, 2019). Japanese millennials are named the “enlightened generation,” but compared to their parents, have less interest in prestige, career, marriage, and family. Men may have less interest in prestige and career, but marriage and family hold firm for women. Despite uncertainty about emerging work and family norms and which values to accept and which to reject, it is safe to conclude that the notion of egalitarian partnerships is antithetical to men in their homes or workplaces.

Work and Family: A Nondilemma The cultural belief that women in the labor force are temporary commodities until marriage is so taken for granted that any work–family collision is a “nondilemma.” Japanese couples certainly discuss the issue and often express regrets over how it is played out in their lives. Married women know that their roles as wife and mother will limit employment opportunities, but the issue is resolved in favor of home over workplace. The “balance” option is rarely considered. Like women globally, employed women in Japan are constrained by restrictive, stereotyped gender roles. Although women represent just under half of the workforce, over half of these are part-time or non-regular employees, and are concentrated in lower-level jobs with poorer working conditions and insecure long-term prospects. Easily noticeable among semi-skilled employees in retail, food preparation, and customer service centers, occupational gender segregation is powerful in Japan; very few employees cross over to the jobs of the other gender. Feminized jobs command little respect and much less pay than the few comparable jobs held by men. Japan has the largest wage gap of all developed countries, hovering between 60 and 66 percent for several decades. This holds true for both

Global Perspectives on Gender  231

part-time and full-time regularly employed women. The gender gap in higher education has disappeared, yet women are excluded from management positions in most Japanese firms. Firms define women as part of a peripheral, impermanent labor force, easy to hire and fire. As corporate social responsibility (CSR) takes hold globally, savvy investors are calling for more gender diversity in businesses. To satisfy emerging CSR norms, Japanese firms may add women to visible upper ranks of their corporations. Whereas some women are empowered and are role models for corporate leadership, few women are added to other management streams and remain out of the promotion pipeline (McCarthy, 2017; Mun and Jung, 2018). Women increase company profits not because of superior performance, but because they receive lower wages. The lifetime employment norm is eroding in Japan, but if available, it is reserved for selected male employees. Japanese women are largely reentry employees after they rear children. They are likely to be middle-aged women in part-time or temporary employment who take jobs not commensurate with their education. They face discrimination due to a combination of gender, age, and family status factors locking them into a secondary labor market. Reentry women bolster the belief that women should not be hired or trained for permanent positions because they will leave their jobs when they get married (less likely today) or when they become mothers (highly likely today). This pattern continues, and despite shortages of workers, the gendered division of labor remains universal and unchallenged.

Critique Whether unmarried or not, employed mothers, or the rare salary-women executives, women are creatively walking uncharted territories and new roles. Women executives capitalize on their after-work friendships to bolster support for the underpaid jobs they would otherwise enjoy more. Working mothers creatively modify their households to their advantage. The mothers may deal with caregiving by employing “substitute housewives” or relying on their mothers or mothers-in-law who live with or near them. Mothers, rather than fathers, orchestrate accommodations so they can be regularly employed; men rarely contest these arrangements. Such arrangements provide no assurance that these women will be viewed more seriously as employees, nor does it eradicate role overload. Nonetheless, it allows some measure of occupational success for women who refuse to abandon their roles of mother and wife.

A Japanese Woman’s Profile Given these contradictions, how can contemporary Japanese women be portrayed? Two general portraits emerge. The first is of a woman who values family life and will sacrifice for it; who is unwilling to divorce even in an unsatisfactory marriage; and who believes she is discriminated against by both society and the family, but is proud of her role as decision maker in her family, especially in financial matters. She is more egalitarian and more individualistic in her role values than were women in the 1970s and 1980s, but she does not openly identify with feminism. She probably worked outside the home until her first child was born and then returned to the labor force when the oldest child entered high school. She sees herself as a professional homemaker and enjoys the status of being a “good wife and wise mother.” From almost three decades ago, the portrait of Mariko, a 44-year-old middle-class Tokyo

232  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

suburban woman with three children, two part-time jobs, and a disengaged husband suggests this reality. It was a Japanese life, a woman’s life, no worse and no better than so many others, a life spent largely in reaction to children, to a husband, to sick parents … Mariko knew how hard it was ... to do the few things she wanted to do, to feel a sense of accomplishment ... Her children were getting older and would soon be gone, just in time, it seemed, for her to turn around and be a parent to her parents. (Bumiller, 1995:289) Fast forward to contemporary Japan. What does “being happy” mean to women today? A career will not bring happiness; this can be accomplished only by being married and having children. Japanese women continue to be socialized to embrace the desire for being a bride, housewife, and mother. Women are happy when they live out a “normative life script,” in an orderly, predictable manner. These sentiments are echoed by a woman with two daughters who gave up her job as an “Office Lady” at marriage, and another who grew up in a “typical middle-class family” with a salaryman father and dutiful wife (Goldstein-Gidoni, 2017:286, 288). From a very young age, my dream was to become a cute wife … It wasn’t as though my mother [clearly] told me so, but I was raised in such a family. My mother never worked after graduation. She did her bridal training … without working, and then got married … Since I was a child, I was always told “women should be women, men should be men,” so I just thought this is how things should be. I think that if we have a job and a house we already have everything. … We got married because we wanted to become happy but besides, we wanted to make our parents content. We also were surrounded by an atmosphere that “it is better to get married.” These women do not appear to utter these words with resignation or despair. It is a chosen life plan offering the normative road to happiness for women in a society that also values an orderly existence in and outside the home. Spanning decades, a “normal” life is a happy life for women in Japan. The second portrait reflects the desires of young Japanese women to be much more independent than their mothers. Some want marriage but will be very selective in choice of husband. After centuries of arranged marriages in Japan, by the 1970s love matches were normative. Both young men and young women want to marry for love, but romance is difficult to find. After graduation, they enter a gender-segregated labor force comprised of full-time married men and part-time married women. These highly educated women are financially independent but employed in jobs at lower levels than suggested by their credentials. Some believe they are not feminine enough for Japanese men; others do not want to marry men who only want housewives. Many women value their freedom, saying they have no “need” for motherhood. Friends of unmarried, and childfree women in their thirties may be mystified by these choices. As expressed by an unmarried office clerk: My friends from school are already married and have babies …, they try to comfort me, like I was sick, and say that if I don’t have the maternal feeling, it’s because I’m maturing more slowly, but that someday I’ll feel it. (Mandujano-Salazar, 2019)

Global Perspectives on Gender  233

Her father calls her unpatriotic, and one reason for Japan’s demographic crisis! These women are choosing alternatives offering latitude from traditional gender roles but must contend with fallout for defying their families and questioning centuries-old beliefs about motherhood. It is the perceived incompatibility between employment and family that lowers a woman’s desire to marry and have children (Fuwa, 2014). Dilemmas related to work, children, and marriages are glaring in Japanese firms with vertical sex-segregation that limit a woman’s pay, promotion, and mobility (Nemoto, 2016). Women retreat from an employment path appearing to offer more freedom because of the rampant misogyny and gender stereotyping in Japanese firms. The call to marriage and motherhood is not necessarily a strong one for these women but signals a retreat from the constraints of office culture.

Feminism Women are vital for Japan’s global prominence, in achieving a high standard of living, and in amassing the globe’s best health record. With enticing media images of modernity, legal reform paved the way for challenges to the ancient patriarchal model in Japan. These reforms prompted limited but increased support for gender equity in the home and workplace and more involvement from husbands taking on involved father roles in child rearing. Linking in-country women’s groups with women-centered NGOs outside Japan under a common banner also fuels feminist activism. The movement is energized by conferences on how Japanese women deal with multiple discriminations based on gender, age, marital status, and whether they have children. Compared with the women’s movements in other countries, however, mass-based feminism in Japan is embryonic. Feminists in Japan are less vocal, preferring to orchestrate activism in a manner meshing with Japanese cultural norms of gradual social change. The “gradualness” strategy may be successfully playing out. Powerful patriarchal gender norms about family and workplace are eroding, albeit slowly. Young women assess opportunity costs of marriage, especially early marriage, and motherhood versus singlehood. Single mothering is not an option in these deliberations. Women expect expanded roles and greater autonomy for those roles. Rising expectations provide for reforms aimed at equalizing the positions of women and men, with priority focused on the workplace.

Work–Family Balance Unless the work–family balance issue can be dealt with effectively, however, Japan will face potentially catastrophic demographically-shaped consequences. Government, media, and businesses focus on the opportunities and risks associated with immigrants to “to reignite Japanese economic strength.” Given the anti-immigration rhetoric sweeping the globe, relocating to Japan for work creates other perils for immigrants. Feminists highlight clear data that women are eager and waiting in the wings to be invited as full participants with men in the workforce is ignored. The Japanese public also hear messages encouraging, almost naively, that young Japanese should “date and mate” to reverse the plunging birth rate, but always as married partners. College-educated women working in gender-segregated jobs find it difficult to meet acceptable men to marry. Japan also must address not only lack of support for child care and family issues affecting women, but the brutal corporate and business culture affecting men. Ramped up ikumen

234  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

campaigns and implementation of womenomics, policy initiatives with women as the centerpiece for the revival of the Japanese economy, made some headway. Womenomics offer broad structural reform to support women in employment, leadership, and family roles (Usui, 2019:115). Some women’s advocacy groups, however, contend that womenomics co-opts feminism in a feeble attempt to hastily bridge chronic gender gaps in Japanese workplaces (Dalton, 2017). Despite these bold campaigns for reform, targeting gender equity in the workplace to carry over to the family as a viable means to bolster the birth rate has failed. Nonetheless, public support for reforms bodes well for addressing crises in employment, in population decline, and in child and elder care. With a feminist thrust that helped achieve the Basic Law for a Gender Equal Society, effective strategies to deal with work balance issues in the lives of men and women can be achieved. Ironically, from a social constructionist model, work–family “nondilemma” must be reframed as a “dilemma” for successful interventions to benefit women, families, and Japanese society.

LATIN AMERICA Latin American diversity in ecology, politics, and culture is striking, but important common features can be identified. These include a rigid class structure, pervasive Catholicism, and a colonial heritage from Spain and Portugal that continues to define the region. Latin American women demonstrate diversity and shared features that unite and divide them.

The Gender Divide The socialization of men and women in Latino cultures hinges on the concepts of machismo and marianismo, which are viewed as mutually exclusive beliefs separating the genders (Chapter 8). Because machismo emphasizes virility, sexual prowess, and the ideological and physical control of women, it is associated with legitimating violence against women. as well as compromised physical and mental health among men. Its long-term ideological effect reproduces male privilege throughout all social institutions. Machismo allows for male dominance in the household and is invoked to restrict socioeconomic, sexual, and other lifestyle choices of women. Reinforced by teachings of the Roman Catholic Church, marianismo is associated with glorification and spiritual verification of motherhood, a stoic acceptance of one’s earthly lot, and the endurance of an unhappy marriage. Unlike men, the moral superiority of women maintains that hardship is suffered in silence. It has evolved as a nearly universal model of behavior for Latin American women. These rigid images are more likely to be embraced by mestizos, people of mixed Indian and Spanish descent. Before the Spanish conquest, evidence of some egalitarianism and role complementarity existed between men and women. The conquistadors brought views of women stemming from Old World religious and feudal attitudes that allowed marianismo and machismo to become entrenched in the New World. Over time, women’s behavior was not merely a response to machismo, but also a survival strategy due to their economic dependence on men. Machismo is deeply rooted in Latin America, but machismo as a “global shorthand” for hypermasculinity is being challenged. The culture of machismo unfolds unevenly in Latin America. Prevailing notions of masculinity vary considerably, with region, ethnicity, and

Global Perspectives on Gender  235

social class as important determinants of how it is displayed publicly (workplace, school, recreational settings) or privately (homes, family settings, peer networks). Cracks in the gender divide are evident. Women who achieve higher levels of education and work in well-paying jobs are less likely to embrace marianismo ideology, trends identified in Brazil, Argentina, Costa Rica, and Chile. Indigenous women are challenging racism and exclusion that are antecedents of violence often embedded in machismo. They are organizing chapters in Mexico, Central America, Bolivia and Columbia to take demands to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. Men are increasingly partnering with women to combat gender-based violence in Latin America (Sieder, 2017; Tolman et al., 2019). Venues to reach men and tailor messages about gender-based violence are gaining traction. Men are working together and challenging other men to “unlearn” machismo and improve their own well-being and that of the women in their lives.

Family Planning Changes in family planning and reproduction provide other indications of a shift to a less traditional machismo–marianismo ideology. NGO initiatives traced to FWCW in Beijing include persuading governments to review family planning and birth control issues. Politically and culturally, Latin America remains solidly linked to the Catholic Church. In Guatemala, for example, the close relationship between the state and the Catholic Church has thwarted widespread efforts at family planning. In contrast, Peru has collided with the Vatican in policies to provide birth control information and counseling to women with respect to birth spacing. It is also in response to the doubling of Peru’s population since 1960, about half of whom live in extreme poverty, and a fertility rate of 6.2 among women with little or no education. Despite Church stubbornness, Peru’s family planning policies have been remarkable. In 1990, the fertility rate was 4.1; by 2019, it had dropped to 2.24. Successful family planning efforts are tied to political will. In 2014 Peru began a political reform process to improve women’s political participation. Nonetheless, targets for increasing the number of women candidates were unmet in the 2018 and 2020 elections. Women’s equality issues, however, are not on the back burner. In 2020, by a large majority, Peru’s Congress approved a “gender equality policy” to ensure that an equal number of male and female candidates appear on the primary lists in regional and local elections; at least one woman must be included in the formula that determines the presidential and vice-presidential candidates (Telesur, 2020). Although the political gender gap in Peru has not been breached, women’s appointments to top-level cabinet posts, coupled with this policy, provide clout to implement state-supported family planning efforts. Nicaragua has followed suit with government policy asserting that reproductive health, sex education, and family planning services are available to women. While continuing to condemn abortion as a birth-control measure, Nicaragua recognizes a woman’s right to decide when and how frequently she will have children. Nicaragua’s stunning, rapid rise to fifth place in the Global Gender Gap Index—only behind Scandinavian countries—indicates remarkable progress in closing gender disparities in well-being (World Economic Forum, 2019). Family Planning initiatives in Brazil, Argentina, and Mexico are also heading to fertility rates that match or fall below replacement level. These positions are advocated despite Church policy banning any form of birth control other than the rhythm method. Contraceptive use is increasing at modest rates.

236  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

Political influence for Latin American women occurs mostly within informal settings and through accepted cultural norms that do not seriously challenge gender roles. Feminist NGOs are altering this pattern. Even in more conservative countries such as Chile, Bolivia, and Paraguay, feminist discourse on human rights related to reproductive and sexual rights signals upsurges that are electing more women to office on platforms supporting sexual health. Catholicism offers strong support for social justice issues, but gender issues continue to be framed in centuries old Catholic codes and dogma. Catholicism has joined ranks with conservative Christians in right-wing religiosity sweeping Latin America. It is unclear if decades of progress on reproductive rights will be swept away in Latin America and the Global South.

The Church These trends suggest that the Catholic Church may be losing its power for strict compliance to Vatican policies. Latin American women express high degrees of religiosity, but resist church mandates on contraception. Latin America is transitioning to lower fertility. Educated urban women have fewer children compared to poorer, less educated indigenous women. In Guatemala and Columbia, the Church exerts a great deal of influence in how children learn about family planning through public education. In Chile, with powerful Church influence, the government put in place one of the most restrictive abortion laws in the world. Today, however, support for easing abortion restrictions is increasing among both men and women. More telling is that Chile’s birth rate has fallen to 1.77, one of the lowest in Latin America. In Brazil, the birth rate tumbled from 6 to less than 1.73 in only two generations. Educated urban couples with career-minded women want smaller families. They believe a small family is a prosperous family. Like other Latin American women, however, most identify as Catholic, define themselves as religious, and are reluctant to challenge gender traditions. The once solid political and cultural connection between church and state in Latin America appears to be waning. The Catholic Church is offering modified views on gender roles in marriage and the family to stem the loss of its adherents, many who are exiting to the popular evangelical Protestant megachurches emerging throughout Latin America. A strong passion for religion exists simultaneously with a strong appetite for secularization (Jenkins, 2013). Brazil may be the test case for gender roles and Catholicism. The Church recognizes that family planning is an antipoverty strategy. It works closely with NGOs in Brazil and elsewhere to support development efforts that include literacy, job training, and health awareness. These efforts appear to be successful in keeping adherents in their fold even as those very people disregard teachings about birth control.

Latin American Women, Globalization, and Development Research confirms the link between the erosion of women’s position and neoliberal globalization-based development strategies that harm rather than help women. Structural adjustment programs (SAPs), designed to increase foreign investment, eliminated some jobs in the private sector but many more in the public sector, which employs more women. Poorer women shoulder the brunt of negative SAP effects. In Ecuador, Peru, and Bolivia, for example, SAPs increased levels of female unemployment, malnutrition, poor health, and illiteracy; sexual abuse and violence spiked. Women’s empowerment was severely

Global Perspectives on Gender  237

compromised—impoverishment and disempowerment go hand in hand. Once considered a success story for women’s progress in development, Brazil is in a state of collapse (Ticehurst, 2018; World Bank, 2018). As in other developing nations, NLG removes subsistence farming from women’s income-producing activities. When men migrate to cities for work, women and children are often abandoned on farms. Thus, in addition to religion and the survival of feudal attitudes, economic factors loom large in explaining the inferior position of women in Latin American cultures. Except for certain regions, most notably in Brazil, Costa Rica, and Argentina, Latin America remains underdeveloped after almost 500 years of European colonization, after the establishment of independent republics in the nineteenth century, and after the elimination of dictatorships in the twentieth century. Underdevelopment can be explained by dependency theory, which looks at the unequal relationships between Latin America and world markets and between women and men. Unequal opportunities due to fluctuations in world markets negatively influence the region, but the effects on women are disastrous. Not only are women and children the most vulnerable when the subsistence economy erodes, but in response to debt burdens, governments cut welfare budgets first. State policy and agricultural reform are not gender neutral and indeed serve to diminish the status of rural women.

Feminist Agendas Latin American women are not passive observers of these economic events and engage in collective action to ensure survival. In contrast to women’s movements in other parts of the developing world, the Latin American movement has been more successful in consensus building and in developing a feminist agenda embraced by women from a wide variety of backgrounds and from poorer and richer regions of Latin America. Although the class divide remains wide (Open Democracy, 2018; CGTN America, 2019). Large numbers of peasant and indigenous women, for example, are grassroots leaders, core organizers, and mentors for the next generation of leaders from their villages. In coalition with international NGOs, Latino feminists actively participated in those struggles leading to the establishment of democratic regimes throughout Central and South America. This organizational legacy provided strength in numbers and the political shrewdness to challenge economic and social policies detrimental to women. Feminist voices are heard when states prioritize reforms and when questions about gender-based discrimination are addressed. Unlike women in India, who are hindered in gender equity by peasant reform movements, such tactics by Latin American women allow them to become more politically astute and to develop both class and gender consciousness.

Intersection of Class and Gender The plight of most Latin American women who are in poverty contrasts sharply with upperand middle-class women who are employed professionals or who are part of the elite leisure class. Career women are supported by their husbands, parents, and other institutionalized devices that allow them to combine professional and family roles. The irony is that professional success is to a large extent dependent on the hiring of domestic help. Domestics provide services that help to blunt the impact of a career on the family. Domestic servants in Latin America—many of whom migrate from other countries to these jobs—represent most

238  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

female wage earners. There is disagreement about whether working as a servant or a care giver provides a channel for upward mobility or whether it reinforces a rigid stratification system based on class. Since domestic workers are not protected by meaningful public policy, individual arrangements regarding benefits between worker and employer are negotiated. This scenario suggests that employer benevolence is the deciding factor in whether servants and their families will be able to bridge a class divide. Feminist scholars and political activists in Latin America have yet to resolve the issue of whether class or gender is the overarching issue that serves to perpetuate the low status of women. Several decades ago, consensus emerged among Latin American feminists that both categories are valid. Women’s liberation reinforces class struggle. In sociological terms, this supports a strong conflict theory orientation. It also fits a socialist/Marxist model of feminism asserting that patriarchy influences women to uphold a system that perpetuates their inferior position (Chapter 1). Only when class and gender barriers are simultaneously assaulted can equality for all people be realized.

ISRAEL Issues of gender equality have been salient in Israel since its founding in 1948 as an independent nation. With an eye on securing the existence of the new nation, Israel’s pragmatic embrace of equity initiatives served to rally support for a national agenda that simultaneously challenged traditional forms of gender stratification in the new Jewish state. The rise of Golda Meir (1898–1978), credited with immense influence in Israel’s founding and serving as the fourth Prime Minster of Israel, is often cited as how far women can progress. To date, no woman in the U.S. has ascended to the comparable position of President. Legislatively, women in Israel have achieved what women in the United States continue to fight for, such as paid maternity leave, equal opportunity with men in education and employment options, subsidized day care for children, and paid birth control and abortion services.

Experiments in Equality Israel is most known for bold experiments serving both the state and gender equity: the unique Israeli institution known as the kibbutz and conscription of women in the military. What is the success of these experiments?

Kibbutz Launched in 1909, the kibbutz originated as an Israeli agricultural collective in which all income is pooled, and egalitarian principles extend to family life, education, and labor. In return for hard work to the betterment of the community, kibbutz members received everything they needed. From its founding, gender egalitarian arrangements allowed parents to be full participants in the economic life of the community largely by raising children in separate children’s houses. Ideally the arrangement freed parents, especially mothers, from the extensive demands of child care. Initially designed as a radical departure from the traditional Jewish patriarchal family and its traditional gender division of labor, the kibbutz was an effort at eliminating distinctions between the work of men and the work of women.

Global Perspectives on Gender  239

It is the child-centered approach to cooperative living that distinguishes the kibbutz from other communes worldwide, such as nineteenth-century Shakers in the United States and contemporary communes in Denmark (Brumm, 2008). Until about 1970, kibbutzim (plural form) were characterized by collectivization that minimized gender role differences and maximized instrumental and expressive role sharing for both men and women. In the spirit of communal living, infants moved to a children’s house soon after birth. The Sabbath was reserved for children and their parents to be together, but teachers and nurses were responsible for the daily socialization of children. This lifestyle did not reduce parent–child bonding but extended a child’s world to a broader network of primary relationships. Children identified with parents, deriving security, love, and affection from them. With parenting arrangements as a core component, roles performed by women and men were undifferentiated by gender and existed in a non-hierarchal system valuing the importance of the role itself rather than who performed it. As the kibbutz movement moved into its second and third generation, women’s dissatisfaction of raising children communally increased. To counter this dissatisfaction, kibbutzim gradually replaced the “child-centered” communal approach, to a “family-centered” approach—“nuclear like” in structure—with children living with their parents most of the time. Collective upbringing was thought to reduce burdens parents faced when raising children alone. Children had no such understanding, preferring to be with their parents than in the children’s houses (Aviezer et al., 2017; Palti, 2018; Yaffe, 2018). Despite such accommodations many kibbutz children abandoned kibbutz life in favor of urban living and nuclear families. The communal ideology of the traditional kibbutz was also weakened by the havoc of the 2008–2009 global recession, which disproportionally harmed rural communities. Although subsidies and loans helped sustain kibbutzim in riding out recession, neither were free; both needed to be repaid, further undermining the economic integrity of the collective communities. During recession many small enterprises collapsed, young people left kibbutzim in record numbers in search of employment, and it was difficult to attract the volunteers the communities historically relied on. The inflow of new members could not match the outflow of families, workers, and volunteers. The number of kibbutzim shrank and others were perilously close to collapse. Overrepresented by women, children, and older people, gender segregated jobs accelerated. Women functioned almost exclusively as child care workers, nurses, teachers, and kitchen workers; men functioned as agricultural laborers, in machine shops and technologically oriented community businesses, and as workers who transitioned in and out of the kibbutz according to employment. Men’s jobs brought in the funds to survive that could not be matched by the work women performed. Gender stratification by jobs and money was never a plan in the kibbutz, but evolved, nonetheless. With the recession as the watershed, the change in kibbutzim from relationships based on cooperation, community, and equality is also undermined by the ascent of neoliberalism in Israel and how it filtered down to kibbutzim. Even prior to recession, three decades of relentless neoliberalism bolstered privatization, individualism, and market relationships. As in other countries, the market approach to life in Israel has a gendered effect, eventually spreading to kibbutzim and assailing its equity based ideology. By 2010 recession debt was repaid, serving as the date that marked the end of the decline of the kibbutz movement. A new kibbutz movement is emerging in urban communes and in rural areas. Although agricultural kibbutzim dominate, a spectrum of economic and

240  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

entrepreneurial activities spark community creativity and encourage others to become settlers. Volunteers are returning, almost 70 percent of them non-Jewish (Levi, 2018). Today about 270 relatively prosperous kibbutz communities exist throughout Israel.

Military Conscription It is the conscription of women for military service that is most notable in Israel’s experiment with gender egalitarianism. The Israeli Defense Force (IDF), envisioned as a “people’s army” with compulsory military service for both men and women, was a key strategy to solidify all citizens in the name of national security. During the War of Independence at Israel’s founding, Religious-Zionist women, together with men, rallied around the desire to share Israel’s national struggle. Although conscription of Jewish Israeli women has been mandatory since 1949, virtually all aspects of women’s IDF service continues to be hotly debated. Decades of debate emanating from bitter opposition from religious conservatives about women in the military prompt ever-evolving policies (Gillath, 2017; Rosenberg-Friedman, 2018). Only women are exempt from IDF service if they marry, are parents, or declare that they are religiously observant. Pregnancy alone allows for exemption. Despite these legal exemptions, an increasing pool of enthusiastic IDF recruits are women; more significant, Orthodox women are at the forefront of this pool (Feldman, 2017). Considering the Religious-Zionist women at the advent of Israel, these are the very recruits that may restore the image of the military as an inclusive “people’s army.” Regardless of whether they are mandatory recruits or voluntary, IDF service has mixed benefits for women. Women serving in mixed-gender combat units report a strengthened sense of self-efficacy, even as they experienced negative attitudes from the men in their units. What can be referred to as “military capital,” opportunities to interact with a diversity of people while serving earns expertise and creates social networks women draw on in civilian life. The economic benefits for veterans are lifelong (Braw, 2017; Shahrabani and GarynTal, 2019). IDF service may help mitigate gender liabilities women face in Israel’s social institutions.

Critique Feminists, academics, women’s NGOs, and journalists contend that gender equality in the kibbutz and meaningful women’s agency in the military are illusory. Although kibbutzim and military women enjoy a modicum of gender equitable advantages, these accrue to only a tiny portion of all Israeli women. Notwithstanding egalitarian rhetoric, Israel’s patriarchal systems informally limit the choices of women in all social institutions and remain intact in the kibbutz and in the military. In both image and reality, the traditional kibbutz has passed out of history. The radical experiment of the kibbutz never achieved its lofty egalitarian goals. “The kibbutz’s place in Israeli discourse exceeds its proportional role in society in Israel” (ILM, 2016). Today’s volunteers and prospective settlers will meet a far less than egalitarian kibbutz than they probably expected. Given the unquestionable dominance of the traditional, patriarchal Jewish family, the utopian vison of gender equity in the kibbutz faced insurmountable challenges. The legacy of equalitarianism in the kibbutz, however, has not vanished. Emerging kibbutzim communities are working to incorporate a pragmatic balance of collectivism and capitalism that can build on egalitarian roots as well as assure community survival.

Global Perspectives on Gender  241

The military is likely the most gendered of all social institutions in Israel. Jobs are gender segregated, and women are excluded from many military jobs offering promotion and higher pay. Masculinist values run rampant throughout the military, sending chilling messages to women that constrain choices and the consequences of making non-traditional ones. Multiple risks for women of religious and ethnic minorities are heightened in military settings (Karazi-Presler et al., 2018; Wasserman et al., 2018). IDF women are viewed as interlopers; they are temporary commodities who pose no real threat to upsetting the gendered military regime. Women’s inclusion or lack of inclusion in the military is a huge political issue in Israel. Feminists and women representing the spectrum of bureaucrats, religious leaders, and soldiers do not agree on how gender issues should be represented in the military. The resulting conundrum has yet to be resolved. Gendered military policy shapes public discourse about gender in other social institutions. This thrust extends to the key institutions: family, education, and the economy and the religiosity that overarches them. All of these are intertwined with concerns about national security always hovering.

Family, Education, and Jobs Under a Religious Umbrella Israel is neither a religious nor a secular state. Is it a Jewish state or a state of Jews? Can it be a Jewish state but not sacrifice women’s equality? (Feldman, 2011:110). Regardless of answers, to these questions, “Jewishness” in Israel is played out in the confines of the private sphere of the family.

Family Israeli society is organized around the family as the dominant institution and the family as the cradle of Jewish heritage. As such, the Jewish family is tied to ancient religious traditions, which are unquestionably patriarchal in nature. The family is the litmus test for defining the role of women. Rabbinical courts have jurisdiction over matters of marriage and divorce and tend to favor Judaism’s most traditional branch—that of Orthodox Judaism. Women in all Jewish branches or sects, however, are expected to oversee domestic functions and prepare households for religious observances. These roles free men to study, to teach, to be breadwinners, and to be more fully engaged in the religious life of the community. A woman may contribute to her community’s social and economic life and she may see the division of household tasks as unfair, but religious ideology takes precedence over gender ideology in most Jewish Israeli families.

Education The gender gap in Israeli education has disappeared. Higher education for both men and women is encouraged and normative. Education and religion intertwine, however, to influence beliefs about marriage and the family for Israel’s youth The strong global connection between fertility and education is played out in Israel. Longer schooling delays marriage but the Israeli-Palestinian marriage market swerves to younger women. Postponing the risks of marriage may mean not marrying at all. Marriage traditions can collide with ambitions for higher education (Sabbah-Karkaby and Stier, 2017). In this marriage market, the benefits of a disappearing gender gap in education have yet to be realized.

242  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

Religious schools inculcate a religious-based conception of womanhood that is shaped by interpretations of divine law and beliefs about different male and female worlds. Education is also a powerful factor in moderating the views of Jewish women when women have the authority to interpret scripture. Women have increased their numbers in seminaries and are ordained as rabbis in all branches of Judaism. Orthodox ordinations for women are rapidly increasing, but some interpretations of rabbinic law forbid them. Deemed as an illegitimate Orthodox rabbi, a woman’s call to a congregation is far from realized. Women rabbis in all branches of Judaism in Israel contend with gender barriers, but congregations are more supportive than in the past. Orthodoxy, however, has not fully welcomed women rabbis (Chapter 12).

Employment Israel represents the global pattern related to gender and paid work. Women continue to increase their share of paid employment but face gender gaps in earning, higher rates of unemployment and underemployment, and occupational gender segregation regardless of job level. Additionally, Israel has one of the largest gender wage gaps in the developed world. Older women workers and less educated women over 45 entering the job market after childrearing make less than half of what men earn in comparable business sectors. Older women workers have an increased likelihood of unemployment and a decreased likelihood of being retired (Axelrad et al., 2018; Heruti-Sover, 2019). The benefits of advanced education are reduced for women in Israel. Women lag behind men in professions that are otherwise highly paid. In dual-earner households with full-time professional couples, her education contributes to a rise—not a decline—in income inequality (Stier and Herzberg-Druker, 2017; Hertzberg-Druker, and Stier, 2019). Falling prey to the gender effects of neoliberalism, women’s employment and education can paradoxically serve to impoverish them in the long run. Women lose more public sector jobs, and in existing private sector jobs they are paid less. When conflict arises between family and job, employment is abandoned. Legal means to promote equality are thwarted by gendered problems in both the family and the market (Sa’ar, 2017; Shamir et al., 2018). Despite the Equal Opportunity Law passed by the Knesset in 1988 prohibiting discrimination in advertising, training, promotion, and severance pay (and later provisions prohibiting sexual harassment and unequal fringe benefits), these patterns persist. Laws are ineffective if enforcement is lax, exacerbated by fear of backlash preventing women from challenging the discrimination they routinely experience. Women continue to be viewed—and often view themselves—as wives and mothers first and then, much further down the scale, as secondary breadwinners.

Jewish Feminism Public policy has helped little with the burdens women face in carrying out their roles and the contradictions they face within these roles. To counter ancient traditions hampering gender equity, policy makers must translate the needs of women into effective and culturally acceptable legislation consistent with Judaism. The feminist movement in Israel is clearly the front-runner to do this translation but it continues to be hampered by lack of unity and suspicion among Jewish women based on ethnicity, class, and immigration status. Feminism was imported to Israel from the West in the

Global Perspectives on Gender  243

1970s, and as in the West, the leadership of educated professional women shaped its agenda. For over three decades, the movement was dominated by Ashkenazi women—largely white, European-oriented, and solidly middle class. Feminist conferences in the 1990s were marked by dissent from Jewish women of color and working-class women representing those from Mizrahi, Palestinian, Bedouin, Asian, and Ethiopian backgrounds. Mizrahi women—whose heritage is traced to Arab North Africa, the Middle East, and East Asia—led the rallying cry that signaled hidden, deep divisions within Jewish feminism. They asserted that feminism as constructed by Ashkenazim could not speak for the diversity of women in Israel. It ignored Jewish and non-Jewish women marginalized by poverty, oppressed by ethnic roots and lack of education, and “othering” by their enactment of various strains of Judaism (Yonay, 2018; Remennick, 2018). Israeli women are ideologically and strategically separate from one another. On the positive side, some divides are being breached. Slower to bring into the feminist fold are Orthodox Jewish women struggling to balance gender restrictions of Orthodoxy with the demands of Israeli modernity. These are the very women, however, signaling an emerging feminist brand palatable to a cross-section of women in Israel. They are at the vanguard of accommodating tradition and modernity in the military, high-tech labor markets, and seminaries (Fuchs, 2018; Raz and Tzruya, 2018). They may not yet self-identify as feminist but engage in actions that can readily be described as feminist. Feminists in Israel overall have been less successful than their Western sisters in dealing with the contentious, fundamental connections between race, class, ethnicity, and gender that hinder efforts for feminist progress. Jewish women in America and Israel have a long history of feminist cooperation dating before Israel’s “re-founding” in 1948. Contrary to what would be expected by the gender equity narrative, American Jewish women have influenced their Israeli sisters more than the reverse. Issues surrounding race, ethnicity, and multiple Jewish identities put these American women in the throes of contentious dialogue long before Israeli women began to confront fallout from diversity. Issues are far from resolved among different constituents of Jewish women in America, but strategies for successful dialogue and maintaining organizational viability are offered to their Israeli counterparts (Yaron, 2011; Cohen, 2018). American Jewish women are said to have laid the foundation for the rekindling of an Israeli feminist movement. The peace process, for example, represents a new era for Israeli feminism that is poised to deal with some of these divisive issues. Not only are there more women than men in the peace movement, but Jewish and non-Jewish women represent a diversity of ethnic groups and branches of Judaism in leadership roles. In orchestrating dialogue between Palestinian and Israeli women, these women are raising awareness about issues women face in common, such as living under the threat of terrorism, increasing domestic violence, and ongoing sexual oppression. By embracing issues of social justice, incorporating deeply held perspectives from Judaism, recruiting female rabbis as leaders, and envisioning new ways of dealing with peace and security, the movement is mending diversity fences. A heartening turn is that young Jewish women and Palestinian women are endorsing the self-label “feminist.” Although Jewish students are more likely to subscribe to gender egalitarianism than Palestinian students who are more conservative in gender ideology, this did not prevent them from identifying as feminist (Sa’ar et al., 2017:1026). In turn, it regains the political prominence necessary to be an important player for policies that help all women (Alpert, 2013). Amid the right-wing turn that does not bode well for gender equity, it is said that Israel is undergoing the “greatest

244  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

identity crisis since its inception” (Chazan, 2018). Feminists in Israel, whether Jewish or not Jewish, are leading the socio-political charge to ensure Israeli society remains open, democratic, and guided by social justice initiatives congruent with Jewish heritage. Gender equity will be served well in such initiatives.

Golda Meir’s Legacy The remarkable career of Golda Meir offers insight into the limits and successes of Jewish feminism. As a young activist in pursuit of socialist Zionism, she was introduced to the justice claims of the women’s movement in America that drove its policy agenda. Despite acknowledging the wisdom and of these claims, she never became a feminist activist. Remaining loyal to the patriarchy facilitated her rise to power. This loyalty cemented the views of male leadership in Israeli politics; these views did not change appreciably when she became Prime Minster (Klagsbrun, 2017; Lahav, 2018). Any agenda for gender equity was—and is—­ subsumed under a national security umbrella. Although there is a strong case that gender equity serves the purpose of national security, with seven decades of patriarchal views in place it is unlikely that the case will make any meaningful policy inroad. Securing the existence of the Jewish state overshadows all discourse. The thrust of Israeli public policy thus reinforces traditional gender roles and pressing issues such as gender equality and women’s rights are cast aside. Golda Meir’s astute understanding of maneuvering in the male political world allowed her ascendancy but also set a trajectory limiting the choices of women in contemporary Israel. Nonetheless, despite gender equity shortfalls in the kibbutzim and in Golda Meir’s politics, both offer models of empowerment for Jewish women.

THE MUSLIM WORLD The “Muslim world” represents a range of paradoxes to Westerners. On the one hand, oilrich Muslim majority nations take development efforts seriously, creating better living standards and enhanced educational and job opportunities for their citizens. On the other hand, for Muslim nations declaring Islam as state religion, government is based on Islamic laws or principles. Development occurs within unique cultural frameworks that Westerners often view with curiosity, suspicion, and anger. Existing suspicion heightened with the 9/11 terrorist attacks in 2001. Nowhere do these conflicting images emerge more forcefully than when viewing women in Islamic cultures. The highest level of gender inequality throughout all social institutions is found in Islamic cultures (Sakallı-Uğurlu, 2016:536). Women are at the nexus of debates about how Islam should be revealed in Muslim nations and to the world. Given stereotypes surrounding Islam, many are surprised to discover that Islam developed as a new religion and as a social reform movement aimed at changing the lowly status of women (Chapter 12). Reforms are possible, however, only in the context of a culture’s willingness to undergo change and endure stressful transitions. This has simply not been the case in Arab, South Asian, and African cultures dominated by Islam. Regardless of the position of women in the pre-Islamic world and the form of government in contemporary Muslim nations, the Qur’an continues to be drawn on as a moral rationale for restricting women. Resurgent religious fundamentalism has bolstered Qur’anic interpretations endorsing the

Global Perspectives on Gender  245

inferior status of women. Islamic legal reform has many advocates and scholars repudiating these claims, and they provide evidence from the Qur’an for upgrading rather than degrading the position of women. Reform in the service of women’s rights has barely kept up with powerful fundamentalist resurgence.

Islamization as Countermodernization This resurgence is fueled by re-traditionalism countermodernization, or anti-modernization— a social movement that either resists modernization or promotes ways to neutralize its effects. Throughout much of the Muslim world, countermodernization is shaped by Islamization, also called Islamism, a religious fundamentalist movement seeking a return to an idealized version of Islam as a remedy against corrupt Western values. With Islamization, religion and state are inseparable and all laws governing public and private life have a religious basis. Powerful Islamists, militant supporters of extreme versions of Islamization and interpretations of Islam, are scattered throughout Arab cultures (Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Sudan) as well as in other Islamic societies (Somalia, Pakistan, Bangladesh). People defined as “lesser Muslims” according to their appearance, dress, beliefs, or religious practices are targets of violence by Islamists. Throughout the Muslim world Islamic authorities (“mullahs”) have long played an influential role in all aspects of social life. As an arm of countermodernization, mullahs advocate re-traditionalization to stem the tide of Westernization. This arm is selective in its ideas and the technologies used to convey the ideas. In Post-Soviet Central Asia, information and communication technology (ICT) is used to mold public opinion to defend re-traditionalism regarding women’s roles. Once unleashed, however, ICT cannot be easily controlled. Muslim feminists in Central Asian nations transitioning to democracy rely heavily on social media and advanced ICT to counter efforts at re-traditionalism, network with women globally, and support women’s rights (Lindsey and Najafizadeh, 2019:9–11). Decades of research suggest that re-traditionalism under an Islamic fundamentalist umbrella is masterminded for political power, relying on the subordinate status of women to attain its goals (Lindsey, 1988; Shehadeh, 2007; Mir-Hosseini et al., 2015). Despite Islamization couched as a benefit to women, they are its likely victims.

Afghanistan: Taliban and War While transitioning to a democratic government, the Taliban in Afghanistan re-emerged as a powerful force for re-traditionalism, with narratives of a return to “authentic” culture. Women are visible targets to enforce this return. Initially at the forefront of international advocacy in Afghanistan, women’s issues took a giant step backward in the post-2001 context. Islamic identity in Afghanistan can be restored when women embrace exclusively domestic roles. Islam is invoked to deny reproductive choice, educational opportunity, and paid employment. With “gender apartheid” taking effect, Islamization under the Taliban banned women from paid work and schools for girls and hospitals serving women were closed, lest women encounter men to whom they are not related. Women were executed for adultery and prostitution, sometimes defined as simply being seen with a nonkin male. Beheadings, amputations, shootings, and public beatings occurred for religious infractions such as clothing not sufficiently covering a woman’s entire body, for illegally teaching girls to read and write, and for going out in public alone—even if completely veiled (Lindsey, 2002a,

246  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

2002b). The Taliban decreed out of existence any minimal rights women and girls had gained during the Soviet era. After a respite from its brutality, women are again targets of Taliban violence as it resurged in Afghanistan (and Pakistan) in the political void of ongoing war. In Taliban-controlled areas of Afghanistan, the search for a formula to protect traditions under Islamic law and deal with inevitable social change was resolved in favor of an extreme form of re-traditionalism. Despite the resounding global call to focus on rebuilding Afghanistan’s crumbling infrastructure, war funding is almost 90 percent of the allocation; development efforts get the leftovers. This is not surprising given unrelenting, obsolete beliefs about women. Domestic abuse is normalized and not criminalized. Rape victims are shunned by family in its aftermath. Elections are virtually void of women candidates. Women victims of war have increased sharply as a result of suicide, bombings, and drone attacks. Afghan women struggle to live with dignity as government support erodes and international aid dwindles. Women “used to be championed; now they are all but forgotten” (Bohn, 2018; Chira, 2019).

Critique Given the Taliban’s history of targeted violence to women and conservative views of women’s rights, it may be puzzling that women will be included in the Taliban delegation for talks aimed at ending almost two decades of war in Afghanistan. According to a Taliban spokesperson, these female delegates are normal Afghans, from inside and outside the country, who have been supporters and part of the struggle of the Islamic emirate. (Reuters, 2019) How these talks will play out is “certainly uncertain.” Talks come amid violence surrounding Afghan elections and fear women express if they try to vote (Zucchino, 2019). Women’s rights in most post-Soviet nations and in urban Afghanistan after 9/11 showed rapid gains. These effects cannot be conveniently shoved back into oblivion. On the other hand, women may support a cause that ultimately scales back their rights after the war. Are they empowered to advocate for women’s rights under Islam or are they tokens to be spotlighted and discarded—with rights denied—once the Taliban achieves its political goals? Historical trends globally show both empowerment and re-victimization. On the empowerment side, an infrastructure priority to ensure education for both girls and boys is paying off. NGOs in Afghanistan and in democratizing Muslim-majority countries in Central Asia are also keeping girls’ schools open and safe, training women for entrepreneurship through microenterprise, and offering reproductive health services for women. They are at the vanguard in ensuring that violations of women’s human rights are at the forefront. Women are change agents, advocating for themselves and supporting other women. Media images of Afghan women as victims is countered by activities demonstrating agency and empowerment (Nemat, 2019; Turaeva, 2019). Despite the rhetoric that Afghan women are “saved” by military strategies, it is development-focused education, employment, and safety for families that are more successful in defeating terrorist ideology and ushering in progressive attitudes about women. Afghanistan’s version of Islamization and subsequent reform efforts may offer clues to how it plays out in Iran.

Global Perspectives on Gender  247

Iran: The Shah and Khomeini Compared to Afghanistan, Islamization in Persian Iran was (and is) not as extreme in its treatment of women. Women receive medical care by female physicians and health care workers in facilities designed for them and girls are in gender-segregated schools. Women graduate from college at higher rates than men. However, women in Iran are under the control of their fathers or husbands, are restricted from a variety of paid employment, and answer to Islamic authorities for violations of dress and traditional gender roles (most related to marriage, family, and motherhood). Iran provides a good example of how re-traditionalism can serve to restrict women. As in Afghanistan, a pattern of re-traditionalism repeated itself with the Iranian revolution that propelled the Ayatollah Khomeini to power after the overthrow of the Shah of Iran in 1979. Women were a force in establishing the Islamic regime and propelling Khomeini to power. As exploitation under the Shah grew, women became more politically active and took to the streets in mass anti-Shah demonstrations. At a time when the veil was gradually receding as a remnant of the past, women embraced it as a symbol of solidarity against the Shah. The images of veiled women protesting in mass demonstrations were startling to many Iranians and Muslims around the globe. Veiling seemed to contradict the progressive view of women that was supposedly a hallmark of the Shah’s regime.

Veiling The veil served both pragmatic and symbolic purposes. It prevented identification of the protesters that could target them to the secret police, and it was a symbolic gesture to show resistance to Westernization of Iran. By restoring the veil as a key Islamic marker, broader social identity is also restored. Many women saw the veil as a symbol of solidarity, to be discarded or worn at will after the fall of the Shah. They believed their sacrifices and militancy would be rewarded in a new Iran. Under new religious leadership women would have expanded rights, including educational and employment options and more self-determination in their household roles. Khomeini’s position during the anti-Shah movement increased women’s support for him. He saw a woman as a man’s equal: “She and he are free to choose their lives and their occupations.” He stated that the “Shah’s regime has destroyed the freedom of women as well as men” (cited in Sanasarian, 1982:117). The new Islamic republic would not oppress women, according to Khomeini. Less than a month after the ousting of the Shah, illusions of equality were shattered. Legislation altered gender relations dramatically, so that they would not resemble anything like those existing in the West. The tragic paradox for the women of the Iranian revolution is that they were harmed by their support of it (Moallem, 2005). Gender segregation in all parts of public life deepened. Under shariah-based Iranian law the minimum legal age for girls to marry was lowered from 18 to 13. Examples of loss of freedom included physical brutality and loss of life. Women were executed for adultery and prostitution and beaten for improper dress. No longer was the veil a symbol of militant solidarity. In the eyes of many Iranian women, it became a symbol of oppression. With Khomeini’s blueprint, the next regimes continued to systematically undermine the freedom of women. Religious righteousness originally compelled both men and women to work in overthrowing the Shah. Once this succeeded, women were literally pushed out of

248  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

public life and into the home. Many women would have embraced domestic roles anyway, but successive regimes severely circumscribed all other options.

Toward Reform Reformers have not been silenced. Re-traditionalism under Islamization strengthens and wanes. Its current course is unfolding via globalization in ways that thwart excessive countermodernization. Despite efforts to maintain the fervor of the earlier Islamic revolution and propel re-traditionalism, under President Hassan Rouhani, it takes a backseat to broader anti-Western and anti-American strategies. Amid rising tensions between the U.S. and Iran, how this may play out for women is in limbo. One scenario suggests that issues related to globalization and nuclear capabilities are in the foreground; Islamization and re-traditionalism, especially with respect to women are in the background. However, women continue to be a mainstay of political protest. Despite blackouts, videos showed (literally) tens of thousands of Iranian women protesting the reelection of former President Ahmadinejad, accusing the government of election fraud. Many women protested without traditional veils. Some women allied around Zahra Rahnavard, wife of opposition leader Mir Mousavi and outspoken critic of the regime. Eerily like the anti-Shah movement 30 years before, with cries of “God is great,” she galvanized young women to vote, evoking Islamic principles and the strong women in Mohammed’s family to support her stance. She vocally supported veiling, “arguing that it liberates women,” but stated veiling should be a choice for women. Nonetheless, her role in the female police units enforcing “Islamic behavior” on women was not forgotten. Although her husband did not come to power, the election represented a gender marker of politics in Iran. President Hassan Rouhani has been relatively silent on women’s issues. Women retain the right to run for public office in Iran and they have not been ousted from their offices under the past two regimes. Women use Iranian traditions and Islamic principles and law to speak out in support of women’s rights. Religious intellectuals debate, albeit reluctantly, how the “woman question” can be addressed in Iranian Islamic law. Acceptable economic reasons rather than unacceptable feminist reasons are usually cited, but it is clear that women benefit from debates. Feminists in Iran are divided by degree of support for Islamic principles and how their highly praised roles as wives and mothers can be used to women’s advantage. All feminists highlight the important leadership roles women have held throughout Islamic history. These cannot be denied or explained away. Any feminist divisions do not bode well for seeking reform with a unified voice. However, feminism remains minimally viable in Iran and signals potential reopening of dialogue between women and, hopefully, between women and the state. As in Afghanistan, ongoing instability in Iran makes predictions of which scenario will play out nearly impossible. Will ousting an unpopular president, even one whose policies are orchestrated by more powerful clerics, serve to reignite Islamization in Iran? Women helped topple the Shah over four decades ago and their rights were severely curtailed. Women hear similar messages today.

Women’s Arab Spring With the female voices of the Arab Spring coming to the forefront, Islam itself is being reframed from repressive (as played out in Saudi Arabia and ISIS-controlled Iraq and Syria)

Global Perspectives on Gender  249

to democratic (as in countries outside the Middle East, such as in Indonesia, Malaysia and Senegal). Islamists must reckon with women’s voices. … Arab Spring cleared the way for the Islamists. And even if many Islamists do not share the democratic culture of the demonstrators, the Islamists have to take into account the new playing field the demonstrations created. (Roy, 2019) Regime changes triggered by zeal for political and social reform were led by Arab youth and women. Democracy and Islamic ideology are overlapping with activists who are secular, who are Islamist female activists, and who are Muslim feminists. The Arab Spring spotlighted diversity of opinion on the influence of Islam as oppressor or liberator of women. Islam cannot be equated with one or the other view. Most significant, female voices continue to be heard in debates about democracy and human rights (Ahmad and Rae, 2015; el-Husseini, 2016). Whether the vitality for democratic reform and women’s rights mobilized during the Arab Spring can be sustained in the Middle East and North Africa is debatable. The movement has receded but has not disappeared. It is re-emerging in unforeseen ways. In clinging to the gains earned a decade ago, women are said to be leading the first Muslim feminist revolution. They are mobilizing for women’s rights in Tunisia, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Morocco and in Syria on behalf of Kurdish women (Svetlova, 2019).

The Arab Middle East Iran and Afghanistan are at one end of a continuum regarding Muslim women. Their views of women under Islam are rooted in Persian and South Asian historical and cultural traditions. Arab Muslim nations present their own traditions, beliefs, and interpretations about gender in Islam. Some feminist scholars insist that there are no effective models for women’s rights that resonate with Arab Muslim women. They are either too Western, too secular, or too pre-Islamic. Others say that Arab cultures embrace such rigid definitions of women’s roles in and outside of their homes that tampering with these will create social chaos. Strongly functionalist in orientation, male dominant–female subservient relationships in Arab Islamic nations are not contested (Mernissi,1987; Elboubekri, 2015). These views help explain why the Middle East and North Africa have the lowest gender parity—highest gender inequality—in the world (World Economic Forum, 2019). Despite these views, Islam regards women as formidable and potentially aggressive— images that are empowering to women. In their quest for modernization women are not only embracing traditional norms but also testing them. Women’s rapid advances in education in Arab countries is fueling dissent for patriarchal religious interpretations. Religious discourse is showing more welcoming attitudes to fairness for women working outside the home (Sidani, 2016; Glas et al., 2018). In Saudi Arabia, women run investment firms, manage shops, and are employed in hospitals. Corporations are highly gender segregated but opportunities for women’s employment in reshaped business roles are rapidly increasing. The Saudi government issued a ban on women driving in 1957. With new interpretations of Sharia law, the ban was lifted in 2018. By stretching the limits of male-dominated Saudi society, women endure public criticism, but believe that productive change is inevitable. In lifting the driving ban, however, this “inevitability” took 63 years!

250  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

In Egypt, middle-class professional women have overcome social pressures and religious taboos for success outside the home. Influences on them are both modern—globalization’s imposition of Western style capitalism and socialist egalitarian ideology—and traditional— images of powerful females such as Queen Nefertiti and the Prophet Muhammad’s strongwilled wife (Chapter 12). The latter images bolster interpretations by feminist Islamic scholars that challenge fundamentalist views denying social justice to women. These scholars are leading fruitful interfaith dialogue and are bringing human rights issues related to women in all religions to the forefront. In Arab cultures as diverse as Jordan, Kuwait, and Palestine, women’s gains are apparent in health, literacy, and political reform. Even with the severe separatist policies against women in Saudi Arabia and unresolved turmoil in Syria, media cannot be completely restricted. The Arab Spring was inaugurated through Twitter. Women—both veiled and unveiled—were visible on mobile phones as protests unfolded in many Arab nations. The irony of the wars in Afghanistan, Syria, and Iraq is that the conflicts are easily accessible via social media. Muslims see women as competent, successful, and esteemed in a variety of roles—as soldiers, journalists, diplomats, politicians, and aid workers. The shortage of Muslim women peacekeepers is being addressed by the United Nations. Women are being trained for these roles to serve Muslim nations across the world. Throughout history, despite its horrors and brutality, war is latently functional for altering perceptions of women.

To Veil or Not to Veil Islamic authority is intimately connected to its most visible reminder for women. Clothing choice among Muslim women is considered a barometer of this authority and of gender role change. A half-century of debate allowed for broad consensus on the elimination of FGM. This section ends with another contentious issue—one debated for over two centuries in various contexts—that is far from settled. Veiling (hijab/burqa/abaya) is practiced in many purdah-system gender-segregated societies and in Muslim communities in the West. Veiling practices have produced two general strands of feminist thought on the topic: one strand condemns it as oppressive and a sign of subordination, and the other reframes it as liberating and a sign of resistance. As a sign of oppression, breaches of modesty in dress can be severely punished in Saudi Arabia by the female veil police. As a sign of liberation, women preachers in Egypt don veils in their leadership roles. A middle view suggests that veiling is neither liberating nor oppressive. In a milestone of clothing evolution, Saudi Arabia sent its first ever female athletes, two runners, to the London Olympics in 2012. They competed in outfits ensuring speed on the track. A burkini (head to toe) clad Muslim model appeared in the Swimsuit Edition of Sports Illustrated (Chapter 13). Young Muslim women in Indonesia and Southeast Asia are donning “hijabistas”—a word combining hijab and fashionista—to spotlight ways Islamic dress can be stylish and glamourous but still “covering up” (Maulia, 2019). Designers are catering to office workers and female professionals with clothing lines that take “untraditional” yet modest approaches to dress. Some contend these women are being exploited and objectified by social media armed by Western commercial interests. Others say that young Muslim women have been needlessly shut out from choices in fashion because of outmoded images of pious women. Whether as insult or affirmation of clothing choices for Muslim women, hijab-like fashions are becoming so popular that the fashion industry is test marketing them for non-Muslim women.

Global Perspectives on Gender  251

The Issue of Choice The key issue is whether women have the power to choose among veiling options and whether one option is not to wear a veil at all. Critics of veiling are accused of denying the integrity of Islamic culture and the agency of Muslim women. The debate surfaced in pop culture on Pakistani television. A cartoon schoolteacher dons a form-fitting burqa where only her eyes are exposed and is transformed into action heroine, Burka Avenger, crossing global boundaries as an Emmy nominated TV series (2013–2016). With skills in martial arts and her wits, she defeats Taliban-like villains trying to shut down schools for girls. Is Burka Avenger a role model for girls? One critic argues that making the burqa look “cool” brainwashes girls into thinking that it gives them power rather than takes it away. Given that the UN has tapped Burka Avenger as a symbol for peace and against extremism, this argument is weakened (Masood and Walsh, 2013; Yi, 2017). Power relations emerging from veiling must be considered in the context in which it occurs. An unanswered question is whether a symbol of segregation and oppression is subverted or is reinforced. Veiling customs represents a female piety that is celebrated in Islam and by Muslim women of all ages. Whether as animated TV characters, models, athletes, or office workers, the Muslim women who don a wide variety of veils, burqas, or hijab are not flaunting modesty, but are celebrating it. Western feminists—Muslim and non-Muslim—tend to shy away from celebrating either indicting or praising veiling customs because of charges of cultural interference in Islam or misunderstanding the link between gender, religion, ethnicity, and politics. Even in societies with high levels of gender repression, where veiling is legally enforced, not optional, and associated with negative health effects, there is no consensus in the global community that it is or should be a human rights violation for women.

North Africa: Female Genital Mutilation (Cutting) Islam does not uniformly evolve across Muslim societies. However, many of these societies are linked by cultural practices regarding women swirling around how Islam is practiced in everyday life. Although the veil may be a symbol of oppression or liberation, from a feminist viewpoint, other customs suggest a more frightening reality. It is the practice of female genital mutilation that has stirred global debate.

FGM Also referred to as female or genital cutting, female genital mutilation (FGM) refers to a variety of genital operations designed to reduce or eliminate a girl’s sexual pleasure and ensure her virginity. If she is a virgin, she is marriageable. If not, she can be condemned, living as an outcast. Sometimes she is murdered. FGM is prevalent throughout North Africa, in parts of the Middle East, and in sub-Saharan regions. Banning it does not stop it. It is illegal in countries including Egypt, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sudan, but near universal in its practice. The number of living females who have been cut is estimated at between 140 and 200 million girls. In Africa alone three million girls are at risk every year, including some infants and children as young as four years old. It is outlawed in the U.S. but the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention calculates 500,000 women and girls—mostly Muslim immigrants—have undergone it or are at risk from it (Phillips, 2019). FGM is practiced by the wealthy and the

252  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

poor and in rural and urban areas. Most girls who undergo the procedure are Muslim but it is practiced by Coptic Christians and those who adhere to tribal religions (Batha and Peyton, 2019; OWH, 2019). FGM’s past is untraceable. It predates Islam, although clerics in some Islamic cultures justify it today on religious grounds. For decades FGM was incorrectly referred to as female circumcision. FGM is not at all equivalent to the far less radical procedure of male circumcision largely performed on newborns. FGM ranges from a partial clitoridectomy to full removal of the clitoris, a woman’s most erotically sensitive organ. In its more extreme form, in Egypt, Somalia, Sudan, and some parts of Ethiopia, FGM removes the clitoris, then the vagina is sewn almost completely shut, leaving an opening large enough to release urine and menstrual blood. The effects of these mutilations range from psychological trauma to hemorrhage, blood poisoning, painful intercourse, lack of sexual pleasure, and death from infections or complications during childbirth. The vagina is cut open again on the woman’s wedding night, an experience reflected by the following lines in a poem by a Somalian woman: And if I speak of my wedding night; I had expected caresses. Sweet kisses. Hugging and love. No. Never! Awaiting me was pain. Suffering and sadness. I lay in my wedding bed, groaning like a wounded animal, a victim of feminine pain. At dawn ridicule awaited me. My mother announced: Yes, she is a virgin. (Muse, 2000) As brutal as it is, the practice continues. Sexual pleasure is eliminated, sexual purity (virginity) is ensured before marriage and chastity after marriage. It forms a core cultural identity of many traditional people. Girls who refuse or “deny” the procedure bring shame to their families. Women who were forced to undergo the painful procedure and midwives who know the health consequences are often its strongest advocates. A Muslim and the fourth of 11 children, a Malian woman reports the consequences when she opposed her parents and relatives in refusing to be “excised:” I was beaten and tortured. I was ostracized by the whole village … No women had ever refused … All my grandmothers had been excised … There are many women who have no support, there are many who have died, there is so much pain—all of which I can bear witness to. Only by fleeing to France and filing for refugee status did she resist the procedure. She could never return to her village or to her family. She was accused of heaping more shame on her people by disclosing excising traditions to Europeans (cited in Merry, 2009:137–138). Resistance comes with grave costs. UN Conferences on Women have taken up FGM. In 1980, African delegates argued that FGM was essential to guarantee a girl’s marriage. Delegates from Western cultures, appalled by FGM, were accused of interfering with hallowed cultural traditions. Five years later the issue was discussed with much less confrontation. A decade later at FWCW, under the broad mantle of “violence against women,” cultural boundaries were transcended and consensus was reached that FGM was a human rights violation. Although in jeopardy under the Trump administration, the United States may grant asylum to a girl returning to a country practicing FGM. Women feared that daughters could not be married without being “circumcised.” When entire villages do not allow it, men must look for marriage partners elsewhere or marry uncut women. Women’s empowerment suggests the latter.

Global Perspectives on Gender  253

Critique It is unfair to regard FGM as the defining characteristic of an entire region but it calls attention to the issue of cultural change through women’s empowerment. The controversy also illustrates symbolic interaction’s “definition of the situation” and social constructionist reframing in two ways. First is the relabeling of “female circumcision” to “female genital mutilation” or “female genital cutting.” The former label suggests something mild or benign. The latter labels clearly do not. Second, the movement against FGM has been redefined as a defense of human rights rather than as cultural interference. The new definition of the situation is fast becoming the reality. All major international bodies and nations where it is practiced have committed to its suppression. Rather than “anti-FGM” campaigns, they have more success spotlighting advantages of not doing FGM. Cultural beliefs regarding proper roles for women remain strong, however, and despite laws to the contrary, the practice is widespread and continuing.

NORDIC NATIONS Compared to most of the world, both developed and in the Global South, gender equality in Nordic nations (Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Iceland, and Finland) stands in sharp contrast. Year after year these nations retain top rankings for the lowest gender inequality and highest human development. Iceland is ranked first out of 153 countries on the Gender Gap Index (GGI) with the highest gender parity at 0.87 followed by Norway at 0.84. Norway is ranked highest out of 189 countries on the Human Development Index (HDI), with Switzerland a close second. By comparison, the U.S. ranks 15 on HDI and 51 (0.71) on GGI. Canada is ranked 16 and Mexico ranked 50 on GGI. Despite the stellar performance on gender equality in Nordic nations, it will take another 54 years to achieve gender parity on key indicators in all of Western Europe. In North America it will take another 151 years (UNDP, 2019; World Economic Forum, 2019). It is significant that Nordic nations embrace capitalism and are “highly engaged in global markets” but unlike most of the globe, the neoliberal thrust in Scandinavia is less pervasive. Egalitarianism and generous welfare policies exist side by side and markets are regulated. The successes of these nations undermine the argument that the “ideal capitalist economy is one where markets are unrestrained.” Humane, equitable, and prosperous outcomes are possible with well-regulated markets (Hodgson, 2018). The heartening news is that on all indices of gender equity, human development, well-being, and happiness, Nordic nations consistently lead the pack globally. Gender equality translates to high scores for GDP per capita, economic participation and opportunity, and health, and empowerment for women. Ranking varies only a tiny bit, but Iceland’s position in the top slots for the globe’s most gender-equal society has held for decades. Female empowerment in Iceland is traced to the strong 1970s feminist movement with ideals that have since pervaded all parts of Icelandic society. Finland is ranked as the happiest country in the world, followed by the Scandinavian (Nordic) countries of Denmark, Norway, and Iceland; the Netherlands and Switzerland are close behind (Hetter, 2019; World Economic Forum, 2019). Nordic women hold 35 to 47 percent of national legislative seats and about half at the municipal level. Scandinavian men’s and women’s well-being is enhanced by the gender parity in officeholders.

254  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

Gender equality goals in Nordic nations are pursued through generous child care policies supporting women in the workplace and shared parenting. Spearheaded by women’s advocacy organizations throughout the Nordic countries, these goals have widespread support. There is strong convergence between the state (government) and civil society in the Nordic countries. Norway and Sweden provide the global standard for gender egalitarian models.

Norway Grö Harlem Brundtland ascended to prime minister of Norway, holding the seat at intervals for three terms and 16 years. Under her leadership, Norwegian society became synonymous with social democracy, and elevated gender, health, and environmental issues to the highest levels. In the following two decades, women candidates for prime minister outnumbered men. Elected in 2013, Erna Solberg is the second woman to hold that office. As a fiscal conservative with a strongly humanistic stance emphasizing the needs of the people, she is a powerful voice for human rights and continues Norway’s gender equalitarian legacy. This demonstrates that political power and gender equality are not at odds. Women have clout when other women in the legislative bodies of their nations represent them. Norway represents sociological understanding of how gender floods our lives in countless ways that can be played out productively. Decisions that on the surface appear to be gender neutral have a different impact on women compared to men. Norway mainstreams the gender perspective into all public activities. This does not mean that attention is exclusively directed toward women. The goal is equality and the gender perspective promotes it. The Norwegian government’s long-term objective is that the gender perspective becomes automatic, influencing all important decisions, whether in politics, in employment, or in education. To understand how gender influences social institutions and everyday life all public servants acquire knowledge of the gender perspective. Norway makes no attempt to eliminate gender roles. Women and men have different priorities and organize their lives accordingly, such as by job preferences, childrearing, consumer patterns, and leisure activities. Such differences, however, should not be grounds for unequal access to social benefits and economic resources. The gender perspective ensures that the different behaviors and aspirations of women and men will be equally favored in the organization and governing of Norway. For example, parental leave for new fathers has been in existence for decades. A high priority on the political agenda is to make it easier for parents with young children to combine family with work responsibilities outside the home This priority is being played out with data showing fathers are taking parental leave on the birth of both the first and second child. They are less likely to take parental leave in workplaces where gendered assumptions about active parenting by fathers prevail. Employer attitudes that compromise active fathering may be declining (Brandth and Kvande, 2018; Duvander et al., 2019). Norway serves as model for state and businesses partnerships in the name of family success. Parental leave and its financial and psychological cost of child care are the pivotal issues affecting employed American men and women and their families (Chapters 7 and 8).

Sweden As with Norway, Sweden’s gender equality advances through public policy, fueled by the belief that men and women should share power and influence equally. Sweden’s increase

Global Perspectives on Gender  255

in the number of women in elective office and the generous benefits making it easier for both men and women to balance work and family life demonstrate the policy successes of these beliefs. Sweden is unique in that egalitarian principles emphasize gender role change in males. Sweden has done more than any other nation in stipulating that economic support and daily care and nurturing of children are the equal responsibility of both parents. Like most of the globe, women do more housework and child care than men and are employed more in occupations that are care oriented for children and adults, such as preschool teachers and eldercare. Swedes believe, however, that men have great stakes in gender equality. They want to set examples for children to become gender-equitable partners and to reject gender stereotypes harmful to the partnerships.

The Equality Future Compared to most of the globe—whether in advanced or developing economies of the Global South—gender equity programs in Nordic countries are exceptionally advanced. The costs of these programs are high and therefore contentious. The level of support and resources expended on the social and welfare benefits that Nordic countries provide to their citizens are extraordinary from an American perspective. These benefits have translated to overall well-being and an enhanced quality of life in economies with well-regulated markets. A damaging NLG path in Nordic countries may have been avoided so far, but it is unclear whether such a path can be averted. Like other nations with low fertility and a high proportion of elderly, Scandinavia relies on migrant workers, many of them poor, many of them women, and most of them bringing traditions that counter gender equality. Emerging right-wing populism reinforces anti-feminism. In Finland, populist political parties are “known for viewing the promotion of gender equality as unnecessary or even harmful” (Askola, 2017). Finland may be the earliest example of right-wing populism with an anti-equality thrust. Nordic nations have withstood the negative gender effect of NLG. Whether they can withstand the anti-equality rhetoric of right-wing populism is uncertain. Gender equity initiatives will be scrutinized to determine their cost-effectiveness. It cannot be said that Scandinavia is gender equal. Gender gaps in pay, in the professions, on corporate boards, in caregiving, and unpaid work may have plateaued, with fewer equity advances on the horizon. Robust Nordic equity plans for the next decade are in place, so it is doubtful that there will be retreat from ongoing efforts to reduce gender disparity. Efforts may be scaled back but not abandoned. Evidence is too convincing that as gender equality decreases, costs increase. Nordic nations stand as powerful global role models for gender equality.

KEY TERMS Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW)

Countermodernization Developing world (see Global South) Development Female genital mutilation (FGM)

Global South Globalization Informal sector Islamization Kibbutz

256  Theoretical and Interdisciplinary Perspectives

Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) Neoliberal globalization (NLG)

Nongovernmental Organizations (NGOs) One-Child Policy Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

United Nations Fourth World Conference on Women (FWCW) Womenomics

PART II

Gender, Marriage, and Families

CHAPTER 7

Gendered Love, Marriage, and Emergent Lifestyles

My prince will come. —Cinderella, Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, Rapunzel One should always be in love. That is the reason one should never marry. —Oscar Wilde, A Woman of No Importance, 1893 Princess stories promote love and marriage as an escape from a world of drudgery and lack of fulfillment into one of enchantment and “living happily ever after.” Countering that image is the cultural belief that love cannot be sustained in marriage. Which is more accurate? A Cinderella story symbolizes the lives of those few fortunate (and beautiful) women who ascend from rags to riches when their prince arrives. The 1949 Disney version of Cinderella is alive and well. By the 1990s, we saw Richard Gere carrying Debra Winger and Julia Roberts away from their pre-princess existences as factory worker in An Officer and a Gentleman and as prostitute in Pretty Woman. The millennium saw Cinderella in the Oval Office. In The American President, Cinderella is Annette Bening, the talented (and beautiful) career woman swept off her feet by Michael Douglas, portraying the most powerful man in the world. In the next decade, Julia Roberts emerges again, this time as the Evil Queen in Mirror, Mirror, where lovely, angelic Princess Snow White (Lily Collins) is rescued by the handsome Prince (Armie Hammer). Cartoon or not, movies about teen Cinderellas abound. Through complicated and bizarre plots, ordinary high school girls and young women are transformed into princesses (Princess Diaries, Hallmark Movies) and whisked from mundane existences by teen princes who become kings (Chapter 13). Newer movies suggest themes related to female agency and strength, fractures in norms about female sexuality, alternative lifestyles for men and women, and women’s roles outside the home. At the same time, however, they highlight traditional themes about the power of love to overcome all obstacles and propel women into marriages that are expected to match their dreams. Even if the damsel in distress images fade and girls rescue boys, movies continue to endorse the triumph of romance (Gill, 2017; Hefner, 2018). Movies and television strive to modify twenty-first century Cinderella for empowerment messages palatable to young girls and their parents (Sibelski, 2019). Alas, the feminist veneer dissolves with stronger romance and “happily ever after” messages. These media images join with rampant consumerism producing the global phenomenon of modern “white weddings” extoling the rocky path of romantic love leading to the pinnacle of ideal marriage (Dunak, 2013; Hefner 2016). All genders are encouraged to take this path. Focusing on the American experience,

260  Gender, Marriage, and Families

this chapter examines myth and reality associated with gendered messages of love, committed partnerships, and marriage.

LOVE The powerful connection between love and committed partnering or marriage is so pervasive that many find it surprising that in America they have been paired only since the nineteenth century (Chapter 5). Romantic love as an ideal existed in Europe and throughout Asia centuries ago, but was rarely a basis for marriage. The poets and philosophers who sang the praises of courtly love during the European feudal era elevated love to something unattainable in marriage. The ladies of the court would bestow gifts, blessings, and an occasional kiss on suitors who would do battle or endure hardships for such prizes. Love was feared for the sexual passion it might produce, so was discouraged. Courtly love games were reserved for the aristocracy and excluded the vast majority of the population without the luxury of playing at romance. Personal fulfillment and compatibility of the couple were irrelevant.

Linking Love and Marriage Marriage, on the other hand, was the necessary but mundane alternative to the enchantment of feudal romance. Although the aristocracy glorified romantic ideals, like the ranks beneath them, their own marriage decisions were rational and pragmatic rather than emotional or romantic. Marriage was an economic obligation that affected power, property, and privilege. From a functionalist perspective, without the assurance of marriage and its legitimate heirs the entire social and political system might be threatened. This held true for kings as well as for peasants. Love was not an option for choosing a mate. Long-term partnerships with the mistresses or kings may have been rampant, but children of these liaisons were rarely eligible heirs. Love was not an option for choosing a marriage partner. The Puritan era in the United States ushered in the revolutionary idea that love and marriage should be inextricably tied. This was a radical departure from early European religious strictures, warning men that even lusting after their own wives was sinful. In the new American ideal, if love was not the reason for marriage, it was expected to flourish later. Parental approval of marriage partners remained the norm, but the belief that love should play a vital part in the process became etched in the fledgling American cultural consciousness. Romantic love in the United States today is ranked as the strongest factor in choice of spouse or committed long-term partner (Figure 7.1). Love continues to top the list of reasons to marry (Geiger and Livingston, 2019). Love as the foundation for marriage is fast becoming a global norm. Initially it was uniquely associated with the United States. Dramatic social change kept beliefs about the inseparability love and marriage intact. The leveling effects of the Industrial Revolution decreased class stratification and gender segregation, thus bolstering a social climate receptive to egalitarian attitudes. Consistent with a conflict perspective, as women moved into the world of paid employment, their economic power increased. Social change combined with economic assets enhanced marriage choices for both genders, but women’s choices were expanded considerably. By the 1890s, couples were receptive to the idea of companionate marriages—those based on romantic love—but with an emphasis on balancing individual needs with family needs. Less traditional beliefs

Gendered Love, Marriage, and Emergent Lifestyles  261 % of the general public saying __ is a very important reason to get married 88%

Love Making a lifelong commitment

81% 76%

Companionship 49%

Having children A relationship recognized in a religious ceremony

30%

Financial stability

28%

For legal rights and benefits FIGURE 7.1  Why

23%

Get Married?

“8 Facts about Love and Marriage in America.” Online Poll, May 10, 2013. Pew Research Center. February 13.

about gender in other institutions, especially in education, employment, and leisure, were also bolstered in companionate marriages. Responsibilities formerly under the control of one or the other spouse began to be shared. Love-based marriage is strengthened in societies in which gender equality is fostered and women and men can express sexuality more openly. Women’s improved economic position, opportunities for young people to interact with less surveillance by parents, and more leisure time, allowed romantic love to blossom. By the beginning of the twentieth century, love, marriage, and the belief that a spouse should be freely chosen became inseparable. Even though the rate of marriage continues to decline, the belief that love is the most important reason for marriage remains virtually unchanged

Friends and Lovers Who so loves believes the impossible. —Elizabeth Barrett Browning (1806–1861)

Defining Love Of course love is such a complex emotion, laden with folklore, superstition, and myth, that it seems to defy definition. Love is extolled for its virtue and damned for its jealousy. Euphoria, joy, depression, restlessness, anger, and fear are used to describe love.

262  Gender, Marriage, and Families

The love for a friend, sibling, parent, or child is clearly different from the feelings of romantic, passionate, ardent love. The distinction between romantic love and other varieties of love includes eros, or the physical, sexual component of love; agape, its spiritual and altruistic component; and philos, the love of deep and enduring friendships. Although romantic love ideals are expected to include all these components, agape and philos indicate other varieties of love relationships, such as the love between friends or siblings and between parents and children (Lindberg, 2008; Neto and Wilks, 2017). It is interesting that the sexual dimension of eros is the key component distinguishing romantic love from friendship, but also its most selfish aspect. Does sexual gratification counter the altruism idealized in romance? We will see that males and females answer the question differently.

Distinguishing Love and Friendship As with lovers, the profile for good friends and best friends includes acceptance, trust, respect, open communication, mutual assistance, and understanding. Friends champion one another. Friendship is supported by being loyal and upholding a friend’s integrity and honor when deemed necessary. Self-disclosure and perceived similarity are core for friendship formation and for cementing friendships over time, also vital elements for love relationships (Paludi, 2012; Pillemer and Rothbard, 2018). If these good friends, best friends, or other friends become lovers, the sexual passion dimension is added to the profile, and certainly complicates it.

Same-Gender Friends Under a heterosexual umbrella, when asked who their non-romantic best or close friends are, both men and women usually identify someone of their own gender. Same-gender friends know each other longer, spend more time with each other, and are more committed to the friendship. Early socialization emphasizes patterns of gender segregation that carry through to adulthood (Chapter 3). Compared to males, females report higher levels of intimacy, spontaneity, and openness with their same-gender friends, a pattern that crosscuts race and age. Women are more likely than men to have stricter standards for women who violate perceived friendship norms, such as flirting or making sexual gestures to another woman’s partner or spouse. This does not tap the same dimension as jealousy, but does recognize that women tend to have higher expectations than men for same-gender friendship. On the other hand, pop culture is celebrating the rise of female friendships (BFFs) in movies and television, in real-life, and in the fabricated life of performance. Stories highlight loyalty and forgiveness for transgressing sexual norms regarding the men in their lives. BFF stories among celebrities (Taylor Swift, Beyoncé, Nicki Minaj, Selena Gomez) inquire whether women have betrayed their gender by “preferring the company of men.” In the transient world of pop culture, it is unclear if friendship stories among women “have replaced tales of romantic love” (Witt, 2015:112). From a gender perspective, however, the answer is no. Men are more competitive and less open with their same-gender friends and are more likely than women to identify someone of the other gender as their best or close friends. This is also consistent with gender socialization that promotes instrumental and goal-­ oriented friendships for males and expressive, affiliative, and emotion-centered friendships

Gendered Love, Marriage, and Emergent Lifestyles  263

for females (Frey et al., 2016; Stevanovic et al., 2019). From a symbolic interaction perspective, same-gender friendships are enhanced and stabilized when each party accepts the role definitions attached to gender and carries these definitions to their interactions. Young men, for example, spend conversational time on sex and sexuality topics, frequently talking about their own sexual prowess (Trinh, 2018). Projecting their sexual selves in ways that affirm masculinity may be a friendship enhancer for men as long as their friends do not see them as rivals. Meaningful friendships for both men and women are necessary for emotional and social well-being, but women appear to capitalize on them more than men. Females of all ages who maintain friendships with other women report being less lonely and depressed, yet they also report romantic liaisons with males as simultaneously euphoric and depressive. Women rely on each other for support when navigating relationships with men, especially in crises over sex and infidelity that may signal an end to a relationship (Knickmeyer et al., 2002; Pham et al., 2015). Women’s friendships with other women are at risk if they believe their friends are their romantic rivals. Women are more threatened by the physical attractiveness of rivals; men are more threatened by the status-related characteristics of rivals. Competition between friends depletes self-worth and can have lasting emotional consequences (Watkins et al., 2013; McGuire and Leaper, 2016). From a feminist perspective, beliefs that men have about power in love and choice of partner or spouse, encroach on friendships between women.

Other-Gender Friends Same-gender friends may be more stable and emotionally supportive because the passion dimension lurks behind other-gender friendships. Other-gender close friends are endangered by assumptions that men and women cannot maintain a “just friends” relationship and liking turns into loving. Men perceive sex and sexual overtones with their women friends as not harmful to the friendship; women perceive it as more detrimental, a belief that distorts the friendship balance (Hart et al., 2016; Reeder, 2016). Media images showing other-gender friendships doomed by romance reinforce these patterns. In the classic movie When Harry Met Sally, Billy Crystal (Harry) believes that it is impossible for men and women to be “just friends.” Sally disagrees. Harry is right: he marries Sally at the end of the movie. In the reverse but rarer direction, in hugely popular Seinfeld (1989–1998) Elaine and Jerry move from a romantic to a platonic relationship. After the dissolution of a romantic relationship ex-partners may continue as friends for reasons centering on trust and reliability, but men rate pragmatism and sexual access as more important for continuing it than women (Mogilski and Welling, 2017). It is difficult to return to being friends after having been lovers, particularly if one partner is in another romantic relationship. Consider, too, the friendship–love–friendship–love scenarios in other television shows, of which long-running Friends, How I Met Your Mother, and Big Bang Theory set the standard. These mixed-gender groups of friends included roommates, neighbors, and colleagues who had on and off again romantic and sexual encounters with others in the group, which strained the friendships, but had to remain intact for the series to continue. It was surely difficult for these groups of “friends” to maintain simultaneous platonic and intimate relationships. In series where a gay man and non-gay woman are friends, as in the pioneering and remerged “gay-celebratory” television series Will & Grace, it is his “gayness” that allows them to remain best friends.

264  Gender, Marriage, and Families

Friends with Benefits Moving from a romantic love emphasis to a sexual component in friendships, can other-gender friendships that are initiated with sex, or with sex coming later in the friendship, transition to committed relationships based on a romantic ideal? Referred to as Friends With Benefits Relationships (FWBR), sexual encounters without commitment, usually recurring with the same partner, are normative for unmarried adults of all ages. However, as expected, men are more likely than women to endorse and act on the sexual liaisons of an FWBR and women are more likely than men to desire commitment as the relationship continues. Women may choose sexual liaisons with friends, however, to explore sexuality and in a relationship they consider safe. FWBRs may offer a sense of empowerment for women in challenging gender attitudes about noncommitted sexual relationships men have long taken for granted (Norona et al., 2013; Jovanovic and Williams, 2018). Even as women continue to incur more social costs than men in a FWBR, sex as a pleasurable act for women is much less likely to be viewed negatively today (Chapter 3). Commitment comes in all forms. A formal commitment, such as engagement, is not necessary for young adults if they perceive a strong degree of commitment; this holds true for both men and women. Commitment is the key factor that separates other kinds of sexual encounters such as hook-ups (see below). Women have a stronger preference for commitment and romance relative to sex, but men, too, gain greater sexual satisfaction when an FWBR evolves into a committed relationship. High commitment can lead to “true” romance (Thompson and O’Sullivan, 2012; Galinsky and Sonenstein, 2013). Challenging the romantic love ideal, when an FWBR becomes highly committed, sex leads to romance, not the other way around. Couples who begin a relationship in an FWBR context are unlikely to sustain it over time without such a commitment. Even after the sexual intimacy ends, however, most young adults maintain the friendship (Mongeau, 2013; Owen et al., 2017). Close other-gender friendships can weather the gender storms. Nonetheless, in addition to the loving–liking difficulty, these storms include gender beliefs working against egalitarianism, creating the path not only for the demise of the friendship, but also for difficulties in sustaining other romantic relationships. These beliefs can inflict damage on couples representing all categories of gender. Gender role barriers limit the potential for rewarding and enduring friendships.

Gendered Love and Love Myths It is clear that ideas about love depend on who the object or target of our affection is, whether a spouse, sex partner, sibling, child, best friend, or parent. Friendship and romantic love are distinguished by more than sexual desire. Compared to friends and family members, lovers have heightened enjoyment from each other’s company, are preoccupied with thoughts about the lover, are fascinated by all that the lover says or does, and want to frequently communicate with the lover. According to Robert Sternberg (2008), love is a triangle formed by three interlocking elements: intimacy, passion, and commitment. Through open communication, intimacy brings emotional warmth and bonding. Physiological arousal and sexual desire are part of the passion component, where feelings of romance take precedence. Commitment involves the choice to continue and maintain the love relationship. All relationships undergo change and transformation, so each vertex of the triangle will not be equal, but too much mismatch between the components predicts the relationship will fail. Males

Gendered Love, Marriage, and Emergent Lifestyles  265

and females differ in levels of satisfaction and skill for each of the triangle’s three elements as well as for other ways matching has been studied. Mismatches are associated with loss of passion, unrequited and obsessive love, and depression (Mikulincer and Goodman, 2006; Kito, 2016; Lewis, 2016; Eastwick et al., 2017). “If you don’t have each of intimacy, passion, and commitment in your intimate relationship, you are missing an important ingredient of a successful and happy relationship” (Sternberg, 2016:12). Because gender role socialization makes it difficult to maintain relative balance in these ingredients (vertexes) the joy and awe associated with romantic love may be compromised. Regardless of its definition, romantic love is idealized. Americans are bombarded with a lifetime of romantic messages. These messages in turn produce romantic love myths. To the extent that these myths become standards related to gender roles in marriage and the family, the effect of romanticization is not benign. 1

Love Conquers All. The “all” that is supposedly conquered in this myth are inevitable problems and obstacles of daily living. By idealizing the love-object, problems are even more difficult to solve. Total agreement with another person’s views on life and love is impossible. Romantic love is paradoxical. Idealization requires remoteness (keeping the lover on a pedestal), but intimacy evaporates remoteness (the pedestal collapses). Partners cannot fulfill all the needs of the other, nor can they ensure that all problems disappear.

2

Love is Blind. Confidence in true love comes with the expectation that social boundaries will dissolve. The belief that “it doesn’t matter as long as I love her/him” fuels this myth. Noted later, in selecting a partner or mate the love that it allegedly encompasses is highly structured. We are socialized to fall in love at a specified life stage with specified categories of people. No longer exclusive to Western cultures, the faith in romance is quite high. Love, nonetheless, is conditioned by formidable sociocultural and demographic categories that wield tremendous influence.

3

Love at First Sight. Because falling in love is outlined as a rational process, it contradicts the belief that people fall in love at first sight. Physical attractiveness certainly is the most powerful first impression. Until they speak to each other, information comes indirectly from the person’s overall appearance. The “love at first sight” myth is bolstered by what psychologists refer to as the halo effect—people who are attractive are assumed to possess more desirable qualities than those who are less attractive. Beauty and good looks are associated with other positive characteristics, such as morality, competence, warmth, and sensitivity. Initial attraction based on appearance is more important in chance encounters, such as on airplanes or at one-time events.

  Physical attraction is so important that it overrides intimacy, commitment, and passion (Zsok et al., 2017). This may explain why men are more likely than women to believe in love at first sight. The myth works against women because they are judged more strictly on level of attractiveness, especially related to body weight. Love requires ongoing, sustained interaction, and attractiveness issues tend to fade over time. As a prerequisite to love, interpersonal attraction is enhanced by the mere exposure effect— being frequently in contact with a person increases one’s liking and trust for that person. Couples communicate nonverbal attraction such as in eye contact, smiling, and gestures of intimacy over time (Montoya et al., 2018). Familiarity does not breed contempt; it breeds liking. This explains why college dormitories are major marriage markets where

266  Gender, Marriage, and Families

love can flourish. It also explains why the adage “absence makes the heart grow fonder” is incorrect. Its opposite, “out of sight, out of mind,” is the empirical reality. 4

One and Only Love Forever. Many accept the belief that there is a “one and only” person/soul mate, including people who are divorced or who have ended long-term relationships. Clearly the cycle of love–breakup–love–breakup refutes this. On the other hand, when couples are in the first passionate stage of a relationship, they are more likely to accept the “one, unique soul mate” belief; as the relationship continues, the belief diminishes. The sexual experiences and multiple relationships throughout young adulthood may not comprise a later marriage, but they also belie this myth (Allison and Ralston, 2018b). Men accept this myth more than women, but this is the love myth that is fading fast for both.

5

Women Are the Romantic Sex (Gender). Women are perceived as dreamy, starry-eyed romantics who seize love quickly. Women’s nature, with its embedded emotionality, so it is argued, conditions them to embrace romance and swiftly fall in love. Despite gender role change, decades of research shatter this myth. Men express a higher level of romantic love and fall in love earlier and harder than women. Men, including gay men, are more idealistic, score higher on romantic idealization of love and confess love first. Women are more cautious and pragmatic in attitudes about love and romance and how these attitudes are actually translated into their behavior. Rather than falling in love fast, women describe drifting into relationships (Harrison and Shortall, 2011; Carter, 2013; Mohr et al., 2013; Viner, 2018).   However, when women do decide to fall in love, they exceed men in levels of emotion and euphoria. This holds true for older and younger women and those who are in committed relationships or married. Well-being is enhanced when they perceive romance in many facets of their daily lives, from text messages and phone calls, to frequent encounters, to the romantic memories they recount about their lover (Frisby and Booth-Butterfield, 2012; Holmberg et al., 2018; Ohadi et al., 2018). Women are defined as the experts who will work harder and sacrifice more to maintain the relationship. Women perform the “labor of love” to keep romance alive well into marriage (Cantillon and Lynch, 2017; Sprecher and Hatfield, 2017). In Robert Sternberg’s (2008) theory of love, women attach greater importance to the commitment vertex of the triangle. For women, the rational behavior eventually leads to the romantic idealism characterizing love in America. It is at the passionate first stage of love where men are more romantic.

6

No Sex Without Love Normative FWBRs clearly contradict the belief that love is a prerequisite for sex. Almost everyone engages in nonmarital sex, and many enjoy sex solely for its physical pleasure (Chapter 2). Strong empirical support for nonmartial sex without the assumed love component is a twist on FWBRs. In this scenario, benefits (sex and physical intimacy) are retained, but friends are substituted for casual acquaintances, or at worst, strangers who become sex partners quickly after a meetup. Referred to as hookups, these causal sexual encounters are triggered by sexual excitement—not romance—and do not come with expectation for long term commitment. With college campuses perceived as safer environments and with peers offering varying levels of approval, hooking up is fast becoming a sexual standard among students (Montes et al., 2016; Carpentier, 2017). Today’s casual sex culture is different from the singles bar scene only a few decades ago when sex was not the inevitable result.

Gendered Love, Marriage, and Emergent Lifestyles  267

  Even more than FWBR, heterosexual hookups are not only strongly gendered but are endorsements for an ongoing sexual double standard (Pham, 2017). As noted, women’s self-efficacy is enhanced when choosing sex for pleasure and they are less likely to endorse beliefs about sacrifice and submissiveness in a sexual encounter. However, they choose hookups less than men, take more risks in carrying them out, and are judged more harshly when they do. Aware of the sexual risks involved, parents prepare their daughters with family socialization messages centering on college for career rather than college for romance (Allison, 2016; Kalish, 2018). From a power-based heterosexual masculinity standard, men’s reputations are elevated with hookups, but reputations for women are jeopardized (Kettrey, 2016). Yet, as represented by hookup culture, the myth of love first then sex is shattered.   Research does show, however, that the most satisfying sexual experiences are with spouses and committed partners because attributes associated with other dimensions of love—caring, respect, and commitment—characterize the relationship. For college students, hookups can transition to FWBR and then to long-term relationships, suggesting that both casual and committed relationships play out during college. Neither hookups nor FWBR have replaced romantic relationships. Even as casual sex escalates, most students are in committed monogamous relationships and many are engaged by their senior year (Bible et al., 2018; Netting and Reynolds, 2018). The takeaway from the evidence about “sex without love” is that both men and women engage in casual sex and have multiple romantic relationships, especially in college, but preferences for romance and commitment remain. Experimenting with sex in college does damage eligibility of a future marriage partner. However, women are likely to engage in nonmarital sex (FWBR and hookups) when they hear love messages, even if these are not marriage messages (Lehmiller et al., 2011; Rudman et al., 2017). Although more likely for attitudes rather than behavior, the sexual double standard is largely intact. 7

The Opposite of Love Is Hate Since love is so difficult to define, the final myth is perhaps easier to understand. If there is an opposite to love, it is not hate, but indifference.

Gender and Styles of Romance Notwithstanding the sexual component, the transparency and sharing that are important ingredients of love separate women and men in the later stages of love and marriage. Gender role socialization commands that masculinity is defined by lack of vulnerability. One becomes vulnerable through self-disclosure; therefore, to love fully is to self-disclose fully. Men demonstrate higher levels of openness, communication, and self-disclosure than women at the beginning of a relationship. They use more direct and active strategies to initiate a romantic relationship. As the relationship continues, even into marriage, men tend to retreat in communication and responsiveness, even as women expect more of both. Women become resentful when men are unwilling to express feelings, and thoughts in transparent ways. For men, communication is a less important factor in preserving a marriage or maintaining a relationship (Chapter 4). For heterosexual married couples, cohabitants, and dating partners, it is the man’s behavior that sets the direction for the level of intimacy in the relationship that in turn predicts the level of satisfaction in, and adjustment to, the relationship for both partners.

268  Gender, Marriage, and Families

Men in Love Explanations for this pattern center on a man’s discomfort in opening himself to the emotions and intimacy demanded in ongoing romantic relationships or in other close friendships. Men may be reproached for lack of the emotional expression and self-disclosure that women have honed throughout their lives. Because romantic love is highly identified with the expressive dimension and self-disclosure in which women are more skilled, there is a disregard of the instrumental dimension, including the embedded physical aspects that men prefer. Rather than talking, men demonstrate love when they “do” masculine things for a wife or lover, such as repairing the car or cleaning out the gutters. Men put more emphasis on the eros/sexual component that is the distinctive gender marker of romantic love. Men are more likely to believe that portrayals of sex and sexual desire on “relationship” television, for example, are accurate and represent reality; women believe the same about portrayals of love on television (Punyanunt-Carter, 2006; Gamble and Nelson, 2016). Because love is idealized for its agape/altruistic quality, its key sexual marker is played down. Men, in turn, are viewed as “incompetent” at loving. A male deficit model that defines women as “relationship experts” has led to an incomplete, overly feminized perspective of love (Cancian, 2003).

Critique It is clear that males and females are socialized into different attitudes regarding romantic love. The idealism of romantic love weakens women’s endorsement for its sexual component even as casual sex is normative for young women. But the claim that men do not have the skill for the communication necessary to satisfy both partners in the relationship is not justified. Because gender and sexual scripts continue to call for men to be the initiators of a romantic relationship, they demonstrate these skills at the beginning of a relationship when they need to entice women into dating. Women give high marks to men who talk about goals, reveal otherwise private beliefs and attitudes, and disclose personal weaknesses to their potential partner. If men have good communication at one point, this skill does not suddenly disappear later. According to social constructionism and conflict theory, men hear the messages about romance and learn the skills to communicate it, but the will to do it is constrained by gender scripts allowing them to retain power by determining what is left unsaid rather than said in a relationship. Traditional gender roles jeopardize love and loving and the committed partnerships and marriages on which they are founded. Reinforcing the double standard (Chapter 2), heterosexual dating norms and attitudes about romance continue to conform to highly gendered sociocultural scripts, patterns that crosscut race and ethnicity (Eaton and Rose, 2011; 2012; Paynter and Leaper, 2016). Women who profess gender equality, even those with financial resources, find themselves entangled in a gender courtship script that supports the belief that men should be dominant. I could walk away—I’m not dependent on him. I don’t need anything from him. But I choose not to take that position … I do like a dominant man … [I don’t want] them to be submissive in any way … even if you’re his equal, I still think you should let him feel like a man … (Lamont, 2014:205–206)

Gendered Love, Marriage, and Emergent Lifestyles  269

A woman’s relationship script calls for a more passive role, eventually allowing her to exchange sex for commitment. A man’s relationship script calls for an active role allowing for sexual dominance and conquest (Garcia et al., 2012; Kalish, 2013). Both scripts are in throes of change, and women’s and men’s conceptions of love and sexuality are converging (Chapter 3). The courtship game, however, continues to function according to gender role stereotypes. As stereotypes erode, loving relationships may better endure the reality of shattered love myths.

SELECTING MARRIAGE MATES AND PARTNERS The American embrace of romantic love fueled the global trend linking romance to selecting a spouse or permanent partner. Even in the developing world, where mate selection is often in the hands of marriage brokers, online dating services, parents, or relatives, love is increasingly factored in for sealing the arrangement. Regardless of whether it is in America or India or Brazil, however, the romantic optimism associated with love is modified prior to any marriage commitment. A prospective mate is dissected and evaluated on cultural, economic, and demographic qualifications deemed essential for a marriage. Like the love that propels a couple toward marriage, gender differences abound in the process of choosing a lifelong mate.

The Marriage Gradient Sociological research documents the strong influence of homogamy, becoming attracted to and marrying someone similar to yourself. If romantic love was the sole basis for mate selection, coupling would occur by chance; instead, homogamy results in assortive mating, coupling based on similarity. Assortive mating assumes that people who are socioculturally and demographically similar have more opportunities to meet those similar to themselves than more dissimilar to themselves. Similarity, therefore, sustains a relationship.

Emerging Adults College students are considered a key segment in the rapidly expanding scholarship on emerging adulthood, representing a phase of development between adolescence and early adulthood. Middle-class college students living on campus are privileged to be surrounded by multiple, enticing academic and nonacademic options offering opportunities to hone relationship skills. Whether living on campus or not, college is a powerful marriage market where people meet, date, have sexual experiences, fall in love, and marry. Parents send children to specific colleges with the expectation that an excellent education also allows for meeting potential partners from similar backgrounds; prized are socioeconomic status (SES), race, and religion. The view of college as a marriage market may edge out career priorities for women, especially with media accounts lamenting that suitable partners for women are lacking when they outnumber men on campus. This view is linked to the decline of women’s colleges (Chapter 11). To test predictions about homogamy, count the number of classmates who are engaged or formally committed by senior year.

270  Gender, Marriage, and Families

Intersectional Demographics Demographics such as age, race, social class, and religion are of enormous importance in mate selection. Although considered nonaffective in nature—that is, not tied to the emotional expressiveness and highly charged passion of love—these predict partner selection and marital stability more than the prized notion of romantic love. These nonaffective elements largely determine with whom we will fall in love. When demographic categories are intersected, we see more clearly that romantic love is tempered by a market approach to mate selection. This results in a process—albeit a gendered one—that is radically different from the ideology surrounding it.

Socioeconomic status (SES) Whereas homogamy is the marriage mate selection norm, it is filtered by the marriage gradient, in which women tend to marry men of higher SES, a conventional practice that historically propelled upward mobility for women. Of the factors in SES, education no longer functions as a key assertive mating marker of the marriage gradient. The education gender gap has reversed in the U.S. and throughout Western countries. As a pattern emerging less than two decades ago, wives with more education than their husbands now outnumber husbands with more education than their wives. Women are no longer averse to marrying men with less education; neither are men averse to marrying women with more education than themselves (Qian, 2017; Van Bavel et al., 2018). This pattern, nonetheless, does not translate to a sweeping change in the overall marriage gradient. The marriage gradient is functional for women who prefer well-educated men but, more importantly, who have the earning capacity necessary to support a family. The marriage gradient for SES persists because men outearn women. Even a high education level for women does not offset their gender disadvantage in the workplace (Chapter 10). Compared to men, women place a greater value on the instrumental qualities of a prospective mate and assess men on their suitability as good providers. Decades of research attest to this, even for college-educated women who express high levels of egalitarianism, expect high-paying jobs, and intend to combine career and marriage. Women do want to provide for their families but are uncertain about “how much providing to do.” Decades of research show women have reason to be pragmatic in selecting marriage partners: financial woes are associated with numerous risk factors in a marriage, including work–family conflict, parenting stress, and even sexual dissatisfaction (Melton and Lindsey, 1987; Loscocco and Spitze, 2007; Bjerk, 2009; Hill et al., 2017). Men, too, are more satisfied in a committed relationship if they perceive a sense of financial mutuality with their partners (Mao et al., 2017). Considering gender norms of male dominant breadwinner roles for husbands, however, men are more comfortable if they bring in more money than their wives. Today, “marrying up” for women is only important in how it translates to a family’s economic security. In heteronormative marriages, both men and women accept this gendered outcome.

Age Although largely taken for granted, age is the most powerful attribute in assortive mating for marriage and for committed partnerships. Most people marry others within a few years

Gendered Love, Marriage, and Emergent Lifestyles  271

of their own age. If there is an age difference, the man is usually older than the woman. Traditional gender expectations dictated that men gain the education and job skills necessary to support a family, thus keeping them out of marriage longer than women, who are socialized for domestic roles. Since the 1950s, there has been a gradual increase in the marriage age for both genders. It is expected that in the next decade age at first marriage will be slightly above 30 for both men and women. For women the median age at first marriage is higher than at any time since 1890. The two-year age difference is expected to decline and may be at parity with men also in the next decade (Table 7.1). In later marriages or remarriages, age differences are likely to be greater, but usually favor the same younger woman–older man pattern. People often disparage romantic relationships and marriages with large age differences, usually of a much older man in economic assets and a much younger woman in attractiveness, a

TABLE 7.1  Median

Age at First Marriage by Gender, Selected Years

Year

Men

Women

1890

26.1

22.0

1910

25.1

21.6

1920

24.6

21.2

1930

24.3

21.3

1940

24.3

21.5

1950

22.8

20.3

1960

22.8

20.3

1970

23.2

20.8

1980

24.7

22.0

1990

26.1

23.9

2000

26.8

25.1

2005

27.1

25.3

2010

28.7

26.5

2015

29.2

27.1

2019

29.8

28

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, March and Annual Social and Economic Supplements. Historical Marital Status Tables. Adapted from Table MS-2: Estimated Median Age at First Marriage: 1890 to Present. November 2019 https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/families/marital. html

272  Gender, Marriage, and Families

pattern that shows up cross-culturally. Both get something of value (returns) on the exchange, but her status as a gold digger is more maligned than his status as a sugar daddy, getting a trophy wife, or gaining sex on demand (Gobind and du Plessis, 2015; Sela et al., 2018). Overall this pattern was/is so prevalent that it may be silently mocked but largely ignored.

Older Women, Younger Men A new twist on age-discrepant relationships and marriages shows a pattern generally favoring middle-aged women (40s–60s) with much younger men (mid 20s–30s). As a reverse of the older man–younger woman pattern, these older women are portrayed in pop culture as having the financial and sexual assets that are attractive to younger men. Imbued with agency and self-assurance, such women may be viewed as challenging gendered expectations about women and aging. On the other hand, often referred to as “cougars” and “on the prowl” for sexual fulfillment, Hollywood taps into women’s fear of aging and creates humorous scenarios that contest their apparent empowerment (Ames and Burcon, 2016). Contrary to these stereotypes, a five-year age difference in men and women in their 30s and 40s is the more common scenario. The five-year difference increasingly favors women. Previously married women and, interestingly, women with lower incomes, are likely to marry their younger partners (Alarie and Carmichael, 2015). In these cases, dissimilarity (lack of homogamy) by age, race, SES, and previous marriage predicts that they are divorce-prone.

Age Gradient Intersections for Older Women Compared to middle-aged women in their prime earning and job advancement years, later career women, recently retired women, and women in the 65-plus category who are divorced or widowed are at a greater disadvantage for a homogamous remarriage: men marry younger women at all life stages, and women outlive men by over five years at birth, increasing to seven years after age 65 (Chapter 2). For couples marrying in their 50s and 60s, a typical five-year age difference is the remarriage norm with the typical gender pattern of the man being older holding. Healthy aging, longer life spans, and relaxed norms about remarriage among elders, however, is altering this pattern. A woman’s assumed age disadvantage may be offset by her reluctance to remarry at all. In this life stage it is likely that many women are widows re-entering the romance and dating market after a stressful stint of caregiving for ailing spouses, or recent divorcees who chose divorce after launching the last child. College educated career women of the Gen X era (considered born between 1965 and 1980) and “younger” baby boomers (Boomers II) (born between 1955 and 1965), are also likely to be financially secure compared to their parents’ generation. In altering conventional gender role assumptions, older men are more eager to remarry and often select women who are older than themselves; older women are more interested in pursuing alternatives to marriage. New lifestyles and the SES–age intersect modify the marriage gradient for older couples.

Race Of the demographic variables, homogamy is historically strongest for race, with 90 percent of people marrying someone of their own race. New trends are cracking the racial homogamy pattern. In 1967 the Supreme Court overturned all miscegenation laws and legalized

Gendered Love, Marriage, and Emergent Lifestyles  273

interracial marriage throughout the U.S.; since then these marriages have increased more than fivefold. Accounting for almost one-fifth of intermarriages among newlyweds, ten percent of all married people are now intermarried. Acceptance of interracial marriage has paralleled this trend, with four in ten adults now saying that interracial marriage is good for society, the highest support among college educated young adults (Bialik, 2017). Every state shows an increase in the percentage of marriages to someone of a different race or ethnicity. Hawaii has the distinction of being the state with the largest percentage of interracial marriages, at over half of all marriages. For newlyweds, in Honolulu alone, four out of ten married someone of a different race, the largest percentage of any city in the U.S. (HNN, 2017; Chalabi, 2018). Hawaii’s interracial marriage picture reveals gender patterns that are emerging throughout the U.S. With the U.S. Census now allowing for multiple racial responses, a more accurate but also more complex picture of U.S. diversity has emerged.

Race, Ethnicity, and Gender Led by Asians and Latinos, the fastest-growing category of intermarried couples are newlyweds. About one-third of Asians and slightly fewer Latinos are intermarried; about one-fifth of African Americans and about ten percent of white newlyweds have a spouse of a different race or ethnicity. Among white, Latino, and Native American newlyweds, men and women differ in intermarriage by only two percent; Native American females “marry out” at about seven percent more than comparable males. Among Asian newlyweds, over one-third of women marry out, compared to over one-fifth of Asian men. Asian women of Japanese, Filipino, or Korean descent are most likely to marry white men. Hawaii is America’s only state with a majority of Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders (AAPI) and this Asian-white marriage pattern is predominant. Gender ideology explains these patterns, but in a paradoxical way. College educated Asian American and Latino women born in the U.S. receive gender messages countering those heard by their parents and grandparents. They are likely to seek marriage to men who hold less traditional views of women. Heteronormative white men seek Asian and Latino women for the opposite reason. They often desire a stereotyped Asian or Latino woman—exotic, submissive, and content with domestic roles. Although Asian and Latino men and women succumb to gendered romance, they may get what they want initially, but patterns of assimilation toward egalitarian gender roles predict more marital satisfaction among Asian American and Latino women than among white men. These patterns also suggest that assimilation/acculturation for Asian American women remains both highly gendered and racialized (Nemoto, 2009; Kiang et al., 2016; Lee and Kye, 2016; Muro and Martinez, 2016). The reverse gender pattern occurs for African Americans: black men are twice as likely as black women to marry out, with most marrying white women, but a growing number marrying Asian women (Livingston and Brown, 2017; Wang, 2017). Discussed later, this interracial trend is much scrutinized for explaining gender patterns in African American marriages. Overall, for most intermarried couples these numbers reveal a prestige hierarchy trend in choice of spouse with Asian women the most sought-after by men of other races.

Race and SES The race and class intersection in interracial marriages highlights homogamy in SES. This suggests that social class is the feature bringing these couples together that overcomes the

274  Gender, Marriage, and Families

feature of race separating them. Although interracial couples have higher rates of divorce, as with other couples higher levels of education and SES offer resources that buffer racial barriers and bolster marriage stability. Marriages flourish when quality of life is high, when intimacy, respect and mutuality override race in couple satisfaction, and when couples perceive support from kin, fiends, and community (Bratter and King, 2008; Buggs, 2017; Ludden, 2017; Shiao, 2018). Barack Obama, America’s first biracial President, is the son of a white mother and a black father who was African, not African American. His parents met in graduate school (SES homogamy) in Hawaii.

Attractiveness The importance both men and women attach to physical attractiveness in selecting a serious dating or marriage partner continues to increase, up sharply since the turn of the millennium. Media obsession with celebrities walking the “red carpet”—by how they look and what they wear—and their fairy tale weddings is a global trend. Both genders report that communication skills are important in choosing a partner, and men are now similar to women in that they add a woman’s economic prospects to their marriage partner shopping list. Men, however, continue to place a higher value on good looks, weight, and facial attractiveness compared to women. Attractive men, aware of their own good looks, engage in “mate-poaching” from women who are with less attractive men. Women are well aware of the value men place on attractiveness. Women with lower body esteem express less confidence in their relationships. Mixed-weight couples are perceived as poorer matches compared to matched-weight couples, especially if she is much heavier than he (Ambwani and Strauss, 2007; Collisson et al., 2017; Van Bavel et al., 2018; Hoplock et al., 2019). For a quick confirmation of gender beliefs about attractiveness, go online or pick up any newspaper for ads for dating partners. Men’s ads are more likely to mention that they are looking for “beautiful and slender” women or those who have “weight in proportion to height.” Women are more likely to say that they are looking for a relationship with a man who is financially solvent, dependable, and caring. Older men desire attractive, physically fit women who are younger than themselves. Male preoccupation with physical attractiveness cuts across race, social class, and sexual orientation. The crack in racial homogamy also suggests that there are cultural norms about attractiveness that transcend specific racial variations (Lewis, 2012; McWilliams and Barrett, 2014). To return to the love ideals: because men value it more than women and it is the first trait they notice when checking out possible dating partners, physical attractiveness is an important factor in why men fall in love sooner than women.

Sociological Theory Functionalism suggests that an attractive woman may have more of an advantage in “marrying up,” if she and her new family will benefit and if it contributes to a stable marriage. The feminist perspective, however, suggests that when excluded from power, women become objects of exchange. The marriage gradient in mate selection reduces women to objects based on appearance while disregarding other statuses, such as personal accomplishments and career success. Social constructionism suggests that idealized images of spouses, particularly media inspired ones, are defined by stereotypical gender norms. In line with a feminist

Gendered Love, Marriage, and Emergent Lifestyles  275

view, social constructionism and symbolic interaction assert that the marriage gradient may produce a self-fulfilling prophecy in a dating context. Women come to view themselves the way they are viewed by men—as objects of exchange based on varying degrees of beauty.

The Marriage Squeeze When there is an unbalanced ratio of marriage-age women to marriage-age men, a marriage squeeze exists, in which one gender has a more limited pool of potential marriage partners. Most people marry in their late twenties, and men marry women about two years younger (Table 7.1). The baby boom era after World War II greatly increased the birthrate. More women were born in 1950 than men born in 1940. By the 1980s, there was a shortage of marriageable men. Because of the steep decline in birthrates in the 1960s and 1970s, men in their mid-twenties faced a shortage of women. This has changed again with a marriage squeeze favoring men. There are more eligible women than eligible men, especially for midlife and older women. The trends of women marrying men a few years older than they are, combined with higher male mortality rates and economic independence for women, help explain why. Although the proportion of single women at the prime marrying age is steadily increasing, widows make up a large portion of the single-women-living-alone category. Age is the factor on which the marriage squeeze was based, but with intersectionality in mind, it is expanded to account for key factors of race, education, and income. Women want to marry; however, women today are less likely to marry simply for financial security. This flexibility narrows the range of partners when these women are seriously thinking about marriage. Many may opt to remain single because they do not want to settle or settle down with the single men who are “left.” Men seek attractive women, but good looks have slipped in their ranking, with education, money, and intelligence having higher importance. No longer must educated women conform to a stereotype of playing dumb in the dating game. Today mid-career college educated women are much more likely to marry than less educated women or men. One of the best predictors of marital happiness is not how much a woman looks up to her husband, but his sensitivity to her emotional cues and, discussed later, his willingness to share housework and child care. Globalization and capitalism transformed families. Today women expect more from husbands than financial security and a social position (Coontz, 2018). Men today may shun exclusive instrumental roles and increasingly accept women’s expectations for sharing expressive/household roles in their marriages. The notion of the spurned, highly educated woman is a myth perpetuated by a female marriage squeeze based on age alone. The group most likely squeezed out of the marriage market today is poorly educated, lower-SES men.

African American Women Demographic trends related to race, age, and education, show an acute marriage squeeze for African American women as a subgroup. For both race and sex, life expectancy rates are lowest for African American males (Chapter 2). Approximately 60 percent of interracial marriages for black men are to white women. Already at double digits, educated African American men marrying women of other races continue to increase. For every ten college-educated African American women, there are two comparably educated men. African

276  Gender, Marriage, and Families

American women outnumber employed African American men in every age category by two to one (Black Demographics, 2017). Highly educated African American women are less likely to intermarry racially (as are highly educated white men). These patterns significantly restrict the field of partners African American women consider eligible for marriage. As a result, in comparison to white women, black women are more likely to marry men who are older, are of a lower educational level, and have been previously married. Interestingly, as white women begin to exceed educational levels of white men, they are matching black women in marrying “down” in education. Nonetheless, because of the gender gap in income, for both African American and white women, SES overrides education as the more important factor in mate selection. It is the race-gender– SES intersect that puts black women into more precarious marriages than white women. Viewed through this prism, these are not ideal arrangements for black women; neither are they unreasonable (Johnson and Loscocco, 2015). They may best be explained by the power of a marriage squeeze affecting marital choices of women regardless of race. African American women selecting partners of their own race who are otherwise significantly different from them—lacking homogamy—as it is for all races, predicts less marital stability and happiness.

Critique The marriage squeeze may be responsible for the hard choices people make in today’s marriage market. Demographic trends are strong predictors of these choices. One obvious factor in the choice to marry someone of another race is the size of the pool of partners available (Choi and Tienda, 2017). Demographics help us understand these choices, but they do not tell us why some people are more acceptable partners for marriage or long-term committed partnerships than others, such as why men are more willing to cross interracial boundaries in marriage than women. Eligibility in the marriage market is determined by strong intersectional gender, race, SES, and age norms regarding who are considered “appropriate” to marry—norms that propel us toward some people and away from others. As these norms are altered, the marriage market squeeze also fluctuates. For example, only two decades ago, media inspired portraits of desperate, sorrowful women who were not married by age 40 were said to be squeezed out of marriage forever. Today, never-married comparable age women are in a better position than previously married women not only to marry, but to select highly desirable partners (Qian and Lichter, 2018). Norms about education as a path for women marrying up is also no longer relevant; neither is a marriage squeeze attributed solely to age-based sex ratios. A huge, unbalanced sex ratio explains demographic patterns in China (Chapters 2 and 6). But in the United States, it does not explain the “dramatic, society-wide changes in sexual and relational behavior that have been going on for 50 or more years” (England, 2012:512). The marriage squeeze is not an objectively determined demographic process, but a socially constructed one.

GENDER ROLES IN MARRIAGE AND THE FAMILY Social change impacting the road to marriage and partnering, and the families that result, is enormous. Marriage is both idealized and frightening for Americans. Images of loving couples

Gendered Love, Marriage, and Emergent Lifestyles  277

with contented children coexist with those of abandonment, divorce, and domestic violence. The enchantment of romance has a bleak shelf life. Regardless of perception or reality, shifts in gender roles have altered our views of “traditional” marriage and families and prompted the emergence of a variety of lifestyles for those seeking alternatives to these traditional views. These shifts are also largely responsible for significant demographic changes in marriage trends.

The Marriage Gap Led by young adults who have higher rates of cohabitation and lower rates of marriage, since 1950 the United States has experienced a steady marriage gap. Since 1990, the marriage rate as well as the divorce rate shows consistent declines (Table 7.2). The lower divorce rate is associated with the decline in marriages and an increased rate of cohabitation. Fueled by the share of women who are not married or who stay married, the gap is widening. Over 45 percent of the American adult population is unmarried, including never married, divorced, and widowed, and over half of that group is women. Just since 2010 the percentage of both married men and married women decreased by about 5 percent, a large increase in a short amount of time. Given these trends, it is expected that the 2020 U.S. Census may show decreases in marriage and divorces since the latest data from

TABLE 7.2  Marriage

and Divorce Rate, Selected Years Rate per 1,000 population

Year

Marriage Rate

Divorce Rate

1900

9.3

0.7

1950

11.1

2.6

1960

8.5

2.2

1970

10.6

3.5

1980

10.6

5.2

1990

9.8

4.7

2005

7.6

3.6

2010

6.8

3.6

2015

6.9

3.1

2018

6.5

2.9

Sources: Marriage and Divorces, 1900–2012. https://www.infoplease.com/us/marital-status/marriages-­ and-divorces-1900-2012; Provisional Number of Marriages (Divorces) and Marriage (Divorce) Rate, 2000–2018; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics. National Vital Statistics System. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/dvs/national-marriage-divorce-rates-00-18.pdf

278  Gender, Marriage, and Families

2018 (Table 7.3). More people—especially more women—who are in committed relationships are choosing to remain single. Even with a lower divorce rate, divorced women have lower remarriage rates than divorced men (Chapter 8). Women who delay marriage or remarriage may choose not to marry at all. In addition, life expectancy is increasing, and because women outlive men, widows may find themselves without partners decades after their husbands die. For the first time in American history, more women are living

TABLE 7.3  Marital

Status in the United States by Gender 2018

All Adults

Men (%)

Women (%)

Married*

53.4

50.9

Never married

35.2

29.5

Widowed

2.7

8.7

Divorced

8.7

11.0

*Includes persons who are married with spouse present, married with spouse absent, and separated. Source: U.S. Census Bureau. Adapted from Table A1. Marital Status of People 15 Years and Over, by Age, Sex, and Personal Earnings: 2018. https://www.census.gov/data/tables/2018/demo/families/cps-2018. html

Who Is Living Together? Same-Sex Couples in the United States

543,000 Same-Sex Married Couple Households

FIGURE 7.2  Same-Sex

191,000 Children Living With Same-Sex Parents

469,000 Same-Sex Unmarried Partner Households

Couples and Their Children

Source: Current Population Survey, Annual Social and Economic Supplement, 2019. https://www.census.gov/ library/stories/2019/11/first-time-same-sex-couples-in-current-population-survey-tables.html

Gendered Love, Marriage, and Emergent Lifestyles  279

without a spouse than with one. It is unlikely, therefore, that American women will live most of their adult lives in marriage. The marriage gap is also an economic gap. Regardless of race, poor people are less likely to get married (and stay married) than the nonpoor. Although both men and women who are poor are more likely to be squeezed out of marriage, poor women with children, especially women of color, are even less likely to marry. Although programs to increase economic resources, especially for men, do not increase their likelihood of marrying, economic insufficiency appears to deter both men and women from marrying (Schneider, 2015). Regardless of a marriage gap and the decreased time spent with spouses, marriage is still the preferred choice for couples regardless of race and SES. Marriage is also the preferred route for (samesex) LGBTQ couples, most of whom want to raise children (Figure 7.2). Marriage is emotionally and economically beneficial to both men and women, although gender roles are critical mediators of the benefits.

Theoretical Perspectives on Gender, Marriage, and Family How a family is defined has enormous consequences for economic policy, law, and social values. Sociologists find it easier to describe what families do than what they are. In many regions of the developing world, large families are functional for subsistence agriculture and for the production of goods for family use or for sale or exchange when surpluses are available. As long as it can feed itself, a larger family provides an economic advantage. Because women are responsible for feeding the family, subsistence farming is a domestic role assigned to women throughout the world. In the developed world, the family has been transformed from a unit of production to one of consumption. Extended families—consisting of parents, dependent children, and other relatives, usually of at least three generations living in the same household—are typical in rural areas throughout the developing world. In urban areas, larger families are at an economic disadvantage because families consume but do not produce goods. Thus, nuclear families, consisting of wife, husband, and their dependent children who live apart from other relatives in their own residence, are more typical in urban areas globally. Because the conventional definition is too limited to encompass the structural diversity of households in the United States, especially those without marriage partners, a more inclusive definition is needed. The U.S. Census Bureau uses family to describe a group of two or more persons related by blood, marriage, or adoption who reside together. A subfamily consists of a married couple and their children or one parent with one or more never married children under 18 living in a household. The term subfamily, then, combines the “traditional” nuclear family with other family forms. Notice that all varieties of families are not the same as households. A household is a person or group of people who occupy a housing unit. There are family households, nonfamily households, and households made up of both family and nonfamily members. All these definitions emphasize family structure but tell us nothing about how the family is organized according to functions. Contemporary families have been profoundly altered by several centuries of industrialization and urbanization that have shaped relationships in individual families and society. In this sense, gender role change in families is a by-product of modernization. Family change over the last century was fueled by women entering the labor force, but women entering the labor force was fueled by modernization. The so-called traditional nuclear family is but one

280  Gender, Marriage, and Families

of many variations of family and household structures in contemporary society. At about 40 percent of all family households, the nuclear family (married couple with children living at home) is still the most common form. But the form does not fit the function. Households with homemaker wives, breadwinning husbands, and their at-home children under age 18 represent only 10–12 percent of all married-couple households. When stay-at home-dads are added, the number increases to 18 percent (1 in 5); the overall rate has remained largely unchanged for 25 years (Livingston, 2018a). The Census Bureau translates this to just over one-fourth of all children under age 15 living in married couple households with stay-athome moms. The form and function distinction may seem academic, but how marriage and family are defined is beset with controversy and influences the lives of countless people when definitions are translated into public policy. The controversy centers on gender role change related to family function. All sociological perspectives acknowledge the pivotal importance of families to carry out responsibilities in individual families and for society. There is general agreement that the functions can be carried out within a variety of marital and nonmarital family structures. However, sociologists disagree about benefits and liabilities to family and society that are associated with gender role change.

Functionalism Functionalists argue that marriage and parenting are good for society, individual couples, and their children. Marriage and the family provide social benefits, including regulation of sexual behavior, socialization of the children, economic cooperation, safety and protection, and an environment in which love and commitment can be freely expressed. Married couples benefit from ongoing companionship and ego support that combat depression and bolster emotional well-being. Families provide social capital, consisting of networks of relationships and resources that are beneficial and advantageous for families and individuals. This includes a family’s resources, such as level of education, income, housing, and material goods, and emphasizes the social placement function of families in the larger social stratification system. The functionalist perspective highlights family tasks as vital for social stability. If the institution of the family is ineffective in carrying out requisite social “duties” and other institutions have not picked up the slack, social equilibrium will be compromised. Socialization of children into nonoverlapping, accepted gender roles—instrumental for boys and expressive for girls—is central to social stability and family functioning (Chapter 3). Ambiguity resulting from gender role change disrupts family harmony when one partner takes on roles typically prescribed for the other. If many families are disrupted by these changes, broader social stability is threatened. Functionalists favor a nuclear family model that operates with a wage-earning husband with power over household decisions, and a dependent wife and children; this patriarchal style model is the ideal to which all families should adhere.

Critique The problem with the functionalist view is that change is inevitable, so what is considered to be “traditional” changes over time. Although the traditional model is believed to be the historical and contemporary U.S. norm, it emerged only a century ago and was associated with white, middle-, and upper-class families. Throughout the nineteenth century, poor women,

Gendered Love, Marriage, and Emergent Lifestyles  281

especially immigrants and their children, worked in sweatshops or at home doing piecework. Nostalgia is expressed for a family form that was never the American norm and is far from the norm today (Coontz, 2016). Functionalist snapshots of families taken at different times in history show that the model for the “traditional” family varies over time. The multigenerational family living in the same household was believed to be the U.S. norm in the early twentieth century. This belief was perpetuated by television shows and movie franchises such as The Waltons, depicting a three-generation farm family surviving the Depression by hard work, faith, and devotion to family. A “new” traditional family emerged in the 1950s and has served as the ideal ever since. In its pioneer stage, television gave us Leave It to Beaver (The Cleavers—Ward, June, Wally, and the Beaver) and Father Knows Best. These extremely popular shows portrayed a patriarchal family model with a breadwinning husband, a bread-baking homemaker mother, and their at-home children. The Cleavers have disappeared, and highly diverse alternative families and households are emerging on television and in movies (Chapter 13). These are becoming the “traditional” families.

Conflict Theory Conflict theory focuses on the social placement function of the family in preserving existing inequality and power relations in the broader society. Social capital provided by wealthier families is maximized through marriages that ensure its safekeeping within their own social class. According to conflict theory, when social placement operates through patriarchal and patrilineal systems, wealth is further concentrated in the hands of males, which promotes female subservience, neglect, and poverty. When applied to the household, conflict theory argues that married couples possess different amounts of resources; they will defend their individual interests and use these resources to maximize their power base in the home and in society. A husband’s power base is maximized by the economic leverage that comes with his earnings. When women gain economic strength by wage earning, conflict theorists assert that their power inside the home is strengthened. More egalitarian household arrangements result.

Critique With its focus on control of economic resources in the family and the jealous guarding of family property between and within families, conflict theory has been criticized for disregarding the cooperation and agreement that are also powerful components of family life. Family members are highly altruistic, and kin and nonkin networks offer major sources of support to families in a variety of ways—even when their own well-being is compromised. A paycheck for women does not guarantee egalitarian roles in their homes.

Feminist Perspective Feminist scholars in the 1960s and 1970s viewed the traditional patriarchal family as a major site for the oppression of women. Feminists expressed concern that when the patriarchal family is viewed as beneficial to social stability, it hampers the movement into egalitarian roles desired by both men and women. They also argued that the idealized view of the family did not account for the varied experiences of women whose daily lives were lived out in multiple family forms. Since the 1980s the feminist perspective broadened considerably to

282  Gender, Marriage, and Families

include not only gender, but also race, class, and sexuality as other avenues of oppression to women in the family. Feminists recognize that gendered family relations do not occur in a vacuum and lives are helped or hurt by the resources outside the family that shape what is happening inside the family. Along with gender, for example, single-parent African American, Latino, and Native American women are disadvantaged by race when they seek employment necessary to support their families. Lesbians must deal with a system that represses same-sex relationships when they fight for custody of their children. However, feminists suggest that women may be doubly or triply disadvantaged by their race, class, or sexuality but they are not helpless victims—they possess agency, the power to adapt and often to thrive in difficult situations.

Critique With a view of marriage and the family focusing on oppression of women, feminists tend to minimize the practical benefits of marriage, including economic resources and social support. Feminist scholars also find it difficult to reconcile trends suggesting that women in traditional marriages are as satisfied with their choices as women in egalitarian marriages. Finally, when feminists emphasize a woman’s informal power and human agency regardless of the perils associated with challenges of intersectionality in some diverse family forms (structures) they may disregard situations such as domestic abuse, where law, cultural norms, and family customs sustain women’s victimization.

Symbolic Interaction and Social Constructionism Both these perspectives suggest that multiple subjective meanings are attached to what a family is supposed to be and what its members are supposed to do. In our daily lives, we adapt these beliefs to fit our own definitions and accommodate our own needs. As we saw from the census classifications, the definition of a family is not written in stone. It shifts with the broader social changes going on outside the family. These shifts show up in how people are labeled. Children of unmarried parents are unlikely to be referred to as “illegitimate,” for example. Symbolic interactionists specifically focus on how couples take on family roles that become traditionally gendered, such as housework, even when they desire egalitarian marriages. The definitions of what a man and a woman are supposed to do in the home are powerful and are reinforced every time family roles are carried out. However, because families negotiate these definitions in the context of their own homes, the roles may change to what a couple wants rather than what they currently have. Marital satisfaction is determined by the perception of marriage and family roles. Men and women react to marriage differently according to these roles. Most married couples say that they are happy in their marriages, but males express slightly higher levels of happiness than females. Research using a wider range of diverse samples and measurement techniques, shows this slight difference favoring males in marital satisfaction is declining. Over time marital tension (dissatisfaction) tends to increase for both wives and husbands, but it is higher for husbands (Jackson et al., 2014; Birditt et al., 2017; McCoy, et al., 2017). A key factor in marital satisfaction is the extent to which a couple agrees on expectations regarding traditional gender roles. Marital quality decreases when a couple holds conflicting views, such as how spending decisions should be made or how children should be disciplined. When

Gendered Love, Marriage, and Emergent Lifestyles  283

wives adopt less traditional gender role attitudes (I’ll decide how to spend my own income; women need time away from their families), the couple’s perceived marital quality goes down. When husbands adopt less traditional attitudes (I’ll do the ironing; a woman can be President), it goes up. Marriages with the lowest level of marital satisfaction are those with a traditional husband and a nontraditional wife. Regardless of how traditional or nontraditional they may be, marital satisfaction is highest when gender role attitudes and behavior are congruent, especially related to employment and family (Chapter 8). When a couple brings ideals related to gender roles into their marriage, they continually negotiate these to maximize marital satisfaction for both partners.

Critique Both symbolic interaction and social constructionism tend to minimize the importance of larger social structures in explaining family dynamics. Men and women interact as individual family members, but they also interact according to other social roles and the prestige associated with those roles. Agency and negotiation of the less privileged partner may be compromised when power and rights conferred outside the home invade the home. For example, a wealthy white man who holds a powerful position in a corporation does not dissolve those roles when he walks into his home. They shape his life at home, in the workplace, and in other social institutions in which he takes part. Race, class, and gender offer a range of privileges bestowed by society that also allow for a power base to be established in his home. Power and privilege foster a patriarchal family regardless of the couple’s desire for a more egalitarian arrangement.

Gender and the Family Values Debate Sociological perspectives on gender roles in marriage and the family are embedded in the highly politicized “family values” debate that fluctuates according to media and politics, especially in election year. One side of the debate centers on the argument that new family forms and alternative lifestyles are breaking down the family and creating social havoc—children are neglected, illegitimacy rates soar, marriage is scorned, and divorce is rampant. Propelled by poor women with children who remain unmarried, the marriage gap is regarded as a fundamental reason behind America’s growing income inequality. The underlying message is that a return to the traditional family will solve these social woes. Led by the New Right linkage of conservative politicians and fundamentalist Christian churches, “family restorationists” often use sociological data to support their claims (Chapter 14). In the idealization of the traditional, patriarchal nuclear family, they suggest that males are disempowered in companionate marriages that emphasize equality and a balance of individual needs with family needs. Such marriages and families, they assert, weaken traditional values of self-sacrifice and family commitment, harm children, and undermine American democracy. The family is responsible for shaping “national morality.” The welfare state steps in to take over what should be family responsibilities (Morgan, 2008; Yenor, 2018). Gender role change led by women who sought roles outside their home usurped the dominant positions of the men. When men return to their position as the unchallenged head of the family, families and society will benefit. Arguments in defending the idealized model advocated by family restorationists are pervasive. At the extreme was Phyllis Schlafly (1924–2016), who maintained that feminists are

284  Gender, Marriage, and Families

responsible for social havoc because they encourage women to challenge patriarchy. She argued that feminism, and women who work outside the home, take jobs from males, create male wimps, promote sex outside of marriage, sabotage family stability, and undermine motherhood (Schlafly, 2003). Family restorationists believe that conflicts are resolved when women accept the household responsibilities they abandoned when the workplace took their attention away from their families.

Critique Major shortcomings of the family restorationist model center on several key points. First, the model ignores the reality of social change, especially related to gender roles. Depending on the time frame used, there are all kinds of “new” traditional families. Throughout U.S. history marriages and the families produced by them were validated through a wide range of community standards, some enforced informally, and others enforced by the state (Horwitz and Skwire, 2017). As this chapter documents, how a family is defined has changed and will continue to change over time. The demand of the restorationists is for an idealized family that has never been the norm. The view that women’s employment is the culprit in the so-called family decline is not borne out. Divorce was increasing even before women’s widespread entrance into the labor force. Women with children who may or may not be married or who are third-shift caretakers do not have the full-time homemaker option. If they receive public assistance, they are required to be employed or in training for employment. Women may celebrate feminist progress in the workplace, but their paychecks are needed to support their families. Second, although the class divide in marriage is a demographic fact, it is not the fundamental cause of social inequality either in the U.S. or globally (see Chapter 6). Neither is marriage the panacea for fighting inequality and poverty. Poverty begets poverty for women from the most disadvantaged neighborhoods—whether they are married or whether they are single parents. Yes, marriage partners in all SES categories can nurture love and commitment, but marriages cannot thrive if they are devoid of social and economic opportunity (Randles, 2017). As the Great Recession demonstrated, economic downturn reverberated throughout all social institutions and had a huge impact on both family structure and family function, not the other way around. Job recovery was not uniform, continuing to affect low income families. A low unemployment rate today translates to poorer single people—often single parent women—working several jobs at once, often without minimum wage and usually without benefits such as health insurance (Chapter 10). The unmarried poor are not responsible for widening income inequality; neither will poor people marrying stem its tide. Third, the link between family change and child well-being is far more complex and more positive than the uniform negative effects family restorationists emphasize. Surveys of parents for half a century suggest that mothers today spend at least as much time—and now even more—interacting with their children as mothers did decades ago. To the benefit of children, and despite the increased time mothers devote to the workplace, the amount of time for recreation and child-centered activities has not decreased (Genadek et al., 2016). Although housework is given less time, women are more efficient in juggling home and workplace demands. Finally, American couples increasingly desire egalitarian gender roles in their marriages, in direct opposition to the patriarchal family model advocated by restorationists. Egalitarian

Gendered Love, Marriage, and Emergent Lifestyles  285

marriages and other nontraditional family structures offer lifestyles condemned by family restorationists. We will see that these enhance a marriage and bolster rather than hurt a child’s well-being. Ongoing legal and political challenges in extending the rights of the married to the nonmarried and to kin and nonkin partnerships will keep the issue of “what is a family”—and the gender roles in these families—in the public spotlight.

Housewives A housewife’s image is bombarded with contradictions. The term housewife is used here instead of homemaker to specifically indicate the females rather than the males who carry out the role. The traditional housewife role is associated with fulfillment of the American Dream for women. It is seen as the height of a woman’s aspirations, a deliberate choice that gives her the maximum amount of pride and satisfaction. In overseeing her home, she can be expressive, creative, and autonomous. Women view housework as complex and intellectually challenging. They may believe that their roles as housewives and mothers are less valued than the workplace roles of men and women, but their roles offer paths to build self-confidence, skills, and a sense of well-being.

Housewife Status When housewives suggest that their position is a devalued one, they focus on the intense time demands that are essential for the job but are taken for granted by their husbands, family, and society. A woman is expected to be on call to the needs of her family while her own needs are put on hold or ignored. The more she sacrifices for her family, the more she becomes securely bound to it and the more she is blamed for family-related problems. Despite microwaves, dry cleaners, and fast food, the time demands on a housewife have not decreased. Tasks associated with child care bring an enormous increase in time demands. Baking brownies for an elementary school party involves more time than cooking and cleaning. Time is spent getting to and volunteering at the party. She is thanked for these activities, but not paid for them. Conflict theorists argue that unpaid work is associated with a devalued role. Women receive no remuneration for the vital homemaker services they provide (Chapter 10). The full-time housewife is caught in a struggle to affirm her role positively at a time when women are marrying later, delaying or foregoing childbirth, and entering professional careers at record rates. She takes pride in her domestic work and derives a measure of satisfaction from it. Her well-being is conditioned by how her role is socially defined in and outside her family and how she perceives the fairness of her duties. When spouse and children support her household work, she expresses more satisfaction with housewifery. Homemakers who have a network of family, friends, and organizations, such as a church or volunteer group, counteract the boredom and loneliness they may experience, are also higher in marital satisfaction. A feminist perspective suggests that patriarchy functions to undermine all women, whether they are homemakers or work for pay. The homemaker role may be devalued, but it is the very role women are expected to embrace enthusiastically. An employed woman is held accountable for anything construed as going awry in her family because of her paid work commitments. Patriarchy inserts a wedge of suspicion and accusation between full-time

286  Gender, Marriage, and Families

homemakers and women who work outside the home. Rather than considering the gendered factors that encourage dependency for homemakers and guilt for employed women, feminists are viewed as the causes of the devalued position of housewife. The larger patriarchal economic and marital arrangements that encourage the devaluation are ignored. The housewife role is an ambiguous one. The label of “housewife” is gradually being replaced by the inclusive label of homemaker—the person responsible for the “the making of a home.” From a social constructionist perspective, the newer label plants the seeds for revised definitions affirming the importance of home-based roles for women and men.

The Issue of Housework There is a research boom on the impact of women’s paid work on all social institutions, especially the division of household labor. For American couples, who does what housework and how much each family member does is one of the most contentious issues families face. The way the housework issue is resolved has an enormous impact on family lifestyle, gender socialization of the children, and marital satisfaction of the couple.

Global Trends The gender gap in housework is a global phenomenon. Throughout the world, regardless of whether women are full-time housewives or employed outside the home, they shoulder the primary responsibility for housework. Cross-national comparisons show that in countries with gender-egalitarian attitudes and policies, men take more responsibility for housework, including cleaning, cooking, shopping, and child care. Data show that Slovenian, Belgian, and Danish men do the most housework and Indian, Turkish, and Korean men do the least. In both the developed and developing world, women’s literacy, business ownership, technological training, and paid employment increase the likelihood that men will spend more time and women less time on domestic responsibilities (Statistica, 2016; Treas and Tai, 2016). In the United States, on an average day, 22 percent of men and 50 percent of women report doing housework. American men have increased their share of housework, such as food prep and clean-up, from 16 to 21 minutes on an average day, and women’s decreased from 58 to 52 minutes (Almendrala, 2016; Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2016). The increase in the proportion of his tasks is not offset by the decrease in hers (See Figure 10.1). A woman who works 40 hours a week outside the home is often likely to add another 40 or 50 hours inside. This gives no respite from work, whether paid or unpaid. For households in the United States and globally, the nonessential tasks wives leave uncompleted are not likely to be completed by husbands and children.

Dual Earners Assumptions on dual-earner U.S. couples are that a married woman’s paid work translates to more equitable domestic task sharing with her spouse. Studies conducted since the 1960s report that husbands feel obligated to take on a substantially larger share of housework when their wives are also working outside the home. When these attitudes are matched with actual behavior, however, this has not happened. Both homemakers and employed wives spend about 50 percent more time on household chores than their husbands. For dual-earner

Gendered Love, Marriage, and Emergent Lifestyles  287

couples of all races, over half a century of research finds that a husband’s contribution to domestic work has increased gradually over time but remains small in proportion to that of his wife (Blood and Wolfe, 1960; Press and Townsley, 1998; Cunningham, 2007; Hook, 2016). Like dual-earner couples worldwide, the decline in her household labor is largely accounted for by her increased time in paid work. Other factors contributing to this decline include having increased education, marrying later, having fewer children, and having them later. Any expanded household tasks that husbands are doing favor traditionally masculine chores—such as lawn care, house repairs, plumbing and electrical work, and automobile maintenance. Tasks for men are usually related to time-limited or seasonal projects, such as arranging for car repairs, mowing the lawn, and shoveling snow. These male-centered tasks are nonexistent for urban families without cars or who live in apartments (Quadlin and Doan, 2018). When child care is involved, fathers are increasing their recreational time with children. Nonetheless, wives take on a significantly greater share of a family’s total share of housework. Women do the traditional feminine chores (laundry, cleaning, ironing, child-maintenance) as well as housework that is becoming more gender neutral (cooking, grocery shopping, child care, pet care). These are the ongoing, taken-for-granted daily tasks that consume huge amounts of time and energy for employed wives (Chesley and Flood, 2017). Children share chores but these, too, demonstrate that household labor is gendered. Boys take out the trash (time-limited) and girls do the dishes (daily, ongoing). Daughters are more likely to take on tasks that sons perform than the reverse. Gender socialization in childhood is strongly associated with how household chores are divided. Gendered household tasks are reduced if dual-earner families have only sons or only daughters (Chapter 3).

Multicultural Variations Race, ethnicity, social class, and religion also mediate household task sharing in dual-earner families. Middle-class wives may be able to afford paid help, but they maintain the responsibility for organizing child care, investigating day care options, and hiring and monitoring nannies or other helpers. These ongoing activities may not significantly decrease their total hours of domestic labor. Mothers of all social classes have more difficulty balancing work and family roles, but professional couples have higher incomes and therefore more control over how these roles can be balanced. Working-class, dual-earning couples, both married and cohabiting, also show women doing more household labor than men—significantly more than middle-class women. For cohabiters, when her income is more than his, she may attempt to implement more equitable arrangements. But like their middle-class counterparts, traditional gender roles intrude, and these desired arrangements often collapse (Miller and Carlson, 2016). Adding race and ethnicity to the picture, compared to white men, African American, Mexican American, and Puerto Rican men in dual-earner families take on a greater share of housework and child care tasks; Asian American men take on the least. Dual-earning couples with high degrees of religiosity assign more household and child care tasks to wives. For African American couples, higher religiosity is associated with less likelihood of divorce but also more traditional gender attitudes in how housework is divided. This reflects another mismatch between gendered attitudes and behavior. Abundant research shows African American men in dual-earning households doing more household labor. Interestingly, when these traditional husbands also

288  Gender, Marriage, and Families

engage in traditional household labor, marital quality decreases (Miller and Sassler, 2012; Auspurg et al., 2017; Sun et al., 2017). Regardless of race, women in dual-earning couples perceive the household division of labor as unjust. This belief holds throughout Western societies and is associated with relationship dissatisfaction and breakups (Carriero and Todesco, 2017; Ruppaner at al., 2018; Tai and Baxter, 2018). Wives are less concerned about the total time they spend on housework compared to their husbands than about the types of task that are accomplished. They point out that men do not equitably share the mundane, routine home and child maintenance tasks (not the same as recreational time) that neither partner prefers to do. When leisure and recreational time are factored in, dual-earning women also fare worse than men. Women are clearly aware that when a husband “helps out” his wife with traditionally masculine tasks, it is not the same as true task sharing.

Shifting Work Women employed full-time for pay walk into their homes after work and begin what sociologists refer to as a second shift of unpaid work (Hochschild, 2003). This second shift leads into a third shift of caregiving for employed women who simultaneously care for their children and frail parents, grandparents, or other friends and relatives (Chapter 10). When all the hours of “work” are counted, men and women may be close to parity. A cultural lag exists between liberal attitudes about fairer task sharing in housework and how the housework is accomplished. Many husbands believe that wives have such high standards for housework that whatever they do is not good enough. The perception of unfairness in housework that women harbor decreases marital happiness and increases the likelihood that they will end the marriage (Tang and Curran, 2013). There are many reasons for husbands to get more involved in housework. They have happier marriages, better physical health, less anxiety and depression, and even better sex lives than men who don’t. Husbands may exchange housework for sex (Coltrane and Adams, 2008; Kalmijn and Monden, 2012). More recent research sheds light on this intriguing result: equity makes a difference. Surveys of egalitarian couples show a high level of sexual intimacy and satisfaction, even if gendered housework patterns persist. Since husbands and wives reporting more traditional housework arrangements also report high sexual frequency it may be that egalitarian couples are catching up with their more conventional counterparts (Kornrich et al., 2013; Carlson et al., 2016). The patterns are perceived as fair, even if the housework is gendered. The key point is that the gendered nature of work—paid and unpaid—can compromise egalitarianism for both men and women. Regardless of the shift to less traditional marriages, “chore wars” remain the thorn in the side of dual-earner couples.

Extramarital Relationships Sexual betrayal shatters the commitment that is fundamental to marriage. Americans express high levels of intolerance for sexual infidelity in any relationship that is expected to be monogamous. These levels of intolerance significantly increase when the infidelity occurs between married partners. About three-fourths of Americans report that extramarital sex is always wrong. Since sexual monogamy is at the center of personal life for married couples,

Gendered Love, Marriage, and Emergent Lifestyles  289

with its trust-busting repercussions, infidelity represents a specific threat that a relationship may not overcome (van Hoof, 2017). Committed partners engage in the infidelity they denounce. Over half of married men and married women engage in extramarital relationships (EMR); over two-thirds of young adults in committed, dating, or cohabitation relationships engage in sexual infidelity. These numbers significantly increase when emotional and online infidelity are factored in (Martins et al., 2016; Fincham and May, 2017; Labrecque and Whisman, 2017). Even these large numbers are suspect because single women and men are involved with married women and men, but figures often give only the married estimates. EMRs may still be called “affairs,” but labels of “cheating” and “sexual betrayal” are frequently used and can refer to women or men. Arrangements are extremely varied, involve different degrees of openness, and include married as well as single people. In many extramarital relationships the spouse and other friends are aware of the relationship. In this sense, the label of affair is erroneous, with its implication of secrecy. Job mobility and career-related travel for both men and women, more time away from home, more permissive sexual values, and greater sexual opportunities are linked to the higher likelihood of sexual infidelity among all categories of couples—those who are married, who are cohabiting, and who are in long-term committed relationships. These trends take place in a culture that continues to idealize romantic love. Americans who are more likely to be prompted into an affair are those who originally believed that a spouse can satisfy all sexual and emotional needs.

Gender Differences Like EMRs overall, gender differences in infidelity, including “serial infidelity” are declining (Omarzu et al., 2012; Knopp et al., 2017). Despite this decline, men and women differ as to their desires and expectations for pursuing extramarital relationships. Although both men and women may act on their desire to have an affair, men express a greater willingness to pursue a “spousal alternative.” Women view monogamy more as relationship enhancing; men view monogamy more as a sacrifice. Women emphasize love and fidelity in their committed relationships; men emphasize commitment but not fidelity. Both African American and white men report more distress and less forgiveness when their partners are sexual cheaters; women in these same categories report more distress and less forgiveness when their partners are emotional cheaters (Abraham et al., 2016; Oberle et al., 2017; Ellis and Kleinplatz, 2018). In these examples, there is less of a gap between what men say and actually do compared to what women say and actually do. Sexual excitement is a stronger rationale for men to pursue an EMR. Married women report that their affairs are less for sexual fulfillment and more for love, emotional support, and companionship. Men report the reverse (Frederick and Fales, 2016). Frequent reasons men give for having sex outside marriage is the sexual rejection by their wives or committed partners and the boredom of repeated sex with the same person It is not clear which comes first. Men who talk to friends or counselors about their situations emerge over time with a healthier sense of well-being than those who continue a pattern of interim affairs. Like men, women with support from family and friends fare better in dealing with EMR fallout (Duncombe et al., 2004; Jeanfreau et al., 2014; Mullinax at al., 2016). It is unclear whether EMRs are becoming so normative for both men and women

290  Gender, Marriage, and Families

that what it means to be married or in a committed relationship is focused largely on emotional commitment rather than sexual commitment.

Single Women Affairs between single women and married men continue to demonstrate a strong gendered double standard. Although they are primarily secret relationships that appear to protect both parties, the woman’s reputation is more threatened by exposure of the affair, with fewer penalties accruing for her married counterpart. A single man is also more likely than his married counterpart to be absolved of an affair. Socially and legally, female adulterers are treated more harshly than male adulterers. We have the “other woman,” but where is the “other man?” Single professional women may opt for relationships with married men. Many of these women have no desire to marry their extramarital partner or anyone else. Different from the “other women” and mistresses of the past, these “second” women want to build careers, enjoy sexual and emotional companionship while traveling on business, or explore their sexuality. However, if she eventually wants to marry, her relationship with the married man will keep her out of the marriage market. By having her needs met by him, she misses opportunities to meet other men. This is especially true for younger single women with low-paying, uninteresting jobs who enjoy the material benefits that a successful married man can bring to the relationship. These women end up staying in a relationship that decreases rather than increases their autonomy and independence. If the EMR is discovered, there are huge costs to the single woman and the wife, both of whom bear the larger burden of the infidelity; the men are assigned less responsibility. Certainly the marriage will be threatened. When the affair is not secret and a wife has support from friends and family, the married couple has a better chance to regain marital satisfaction and avoid divorce. The unaware wife may experience stages of grief akin to the death of a loved one. It is likely that there will be more second women in the future, some who are satisfied in their relationships but others who invest too much and end up with pain that is not easily, if ever, overcome. Despite the adventure, sexual freedom, and independence from the entanglements of an exclusive relationship, feminists suggest that affairs lead to distrust between women and reinforce beliefs about male power and privilege.

GENDER IN EMERGENT MARRIAGES AND ALTERNATIVE LIFESTYLES Rapid social change has significantly altered coupling in all its forms. With stronger institutional support, married couples have more latitude in maneuvering these changes than couples choosing rapidly emerging alternative partnering lifestyles. How gender roles are enacted in alternative arrangements is a key feature in explaining why some couples stay committed to each other and why others do not.

Cohabitation Given that cohabitation is a normative, largely acceptable partnering alternative, it is better described as emerged rather than emerging. As recent as the late-twentieth century,

Gendered Love, Marriage, and Emergent Lifestyles  291

cohabitation—an unmarried couple living together—was cause for condemnation. Today it is the modal status for couples as both a prelude to marriage and as a nonmarital permanent alternative. For young adults, it is the preferred and accepted stage between dating and marriage. Cohabitation is now more prevalent for 18- to 34-year-olds than living with a spouse (Gurrentz, 2018). Social support for cohabiting couples does vary, however. Peers and friends, who may be cohabitants themselves, are more accepting than parents and relatives. Although parents may not openly express discomfort with the arrangement, with grandparenting on their minds, they breathe a sigh of relief if their cohabiting child decides to marry. Increased support for cohabitation is approaching that of married couples and can account for the increase in number of cohabitants and the decrease in the marriage rate. The number of other-sex cohabiting couples has soared from about half a million in 1970, 3 million in the 1990s, to 8.5 million couples today. Same-sex unmarried couples who can be counted as cohabitants since they can now legally marry, increase the estimated numbers by another half million to close to a million (Figure 7.2; U.S. Census, 2018a, 2018b). These households are highly varied and include college students, who report it as preparation for marriage; persons over age 65, who cohabit for financial and emotional security; and couples with children present represent about half of cohabitant households. These are probably conservative numbers because people may be reluctant to report themselves as cohabiting and may call themselves roommates. Cohabitation has not replaced marriage as the preferred, permanent lifestyle for most people in the United States, but even as it makes its way as a normative, predictable life course stage, men and women view the stage differently.

Gender Differences Although it would be reasonable to think that cohabitants are more egalitarian than married couples, the striking gender differences in cohabiting couples challenge this logic. Unlike married couples, cohabiting couples are less homogamous. Women tend to be younger, have higher levels of education, and earn more money than their partners. Factoring in SES, middle-class women have more leverage in a cohabitation relationship heading to marriage compared to “service-class” women. Regardless of SES, heterosexual women who cohabit accept the gender convention that it is up to the man to initiate a marriage proposal, but middle-class women can exert pressure to make it happen. This leverage is important since men express less commitment to the relationship and to later marriage. After the partnership dissolves, women less often choose to cohabit again. Women tend to view the relationship as temporary and leading to marriage. Men tend to view it as temporary but not leading to marriage (Poortman and Hewitt, 2015; Miller and Sassler, 2017; Cho et al., 2018). Issues of housework and money also signal the gender divide between cohabitants. Cohabiting women spend less time on housework than married women. But married and cohabiting women do more housework than married and cohabiting males, and like married women in traditional households, cohabiting women tend not only to accept the responsibility, but to do more housework overall. Compared to women in less than equal cohabiting households, women in egalitarian marriages consider the larger housework burden as unfair. In household finances, money is rarely pooled, which offers the advantage of financial independence, but the couple gives precedence to the man’s career and employment over the woman’s career. Relationship satisfaction is compromised by the assumption that employment for a woman

292  Gender, Marriage, and Families

is less important than for a man (Totenhagen, 2018). As in married households, gender norms about housework and finances persist in cohabitant households. Contrary to popular belief, cohabitation is not a good screener for a later successful marriage. When children are born in a cohabitant relationship, marriage is a likely outcome, but having children does not protect the couple from later divorce. Almost 40 percent of couples have children under age the age of 18. Both biological and step children live with these couples, but women are usually biological mothers and fathers are usually the stepfathers. Blended families created via cohabitation or remarriage are divorce prone (Chapter 8). Cohabitants who marry have higher rates of depressive symptoms; lower marital satisfaction, adjustment, and commitment to marriage than noncohabitants; and, perhaps more significant, have divorce rates that are equal to or higher than noncohabitants (Gianesisi and Blair, 2016; Perelli-Harris et al., 2017). Both male and female cohabitants who break up are likely to cohabit again, setting up a cycle in which one failed relationship may predispose them to another (Bae and Wickrama, 2018). Living together lessens total commitment—the door to leave is always open. Considering these findings, it may be surprising to witness the increasing population of cohabitants. Perhaps they are drawn to the idealism that the arrangement, on the surface at least, offers more benefits than liabilities. But benefits appear to erode as cohabiting time increases. It is unclear if the current cohort of young unmarried adults who are most likely to postpone marriage or say they do not want to marry at all will act on it—by remaining single, cohabiting, or choosing another type of living arrangement lifestyle.

Single Life Historically, “failure to marry” was linked to perceptions about personal or social deficiencies. For women, the stigma was, “She was never asked,” and for men, “He’s probably gay.” Bolstered by the women’s movement and LGBTQ activism, these stigmas have largely disappeared. It is also difficult to maintain such negative perceptions considering that unmarried adults in the United States are moving to half of the adult population. Although unmarried does not necessarily identify an “ever single” person, the demographic convention is to count those who were never married, widowed, or divorced. Cohabiting persons are not counted in this group. Regardless of demographics, the fact is that “unmarried and single” represents a huge category who by choice or circumstance are living a single lifestyle. The statistics below for unmarried U.S. residents 18 and older tell part of this story (U.S. Census Bureau, 2017; 2018b). • • • • • • •

Number of unmarried = 110.6 million Percentage of unmarried who are women = 53.2 percent Percentage of unmarried who are men = 46.8 percent Percent who have never been married = 63.5 percent Number of unmarried seniors (65 and older) = 19.5 million Number of unmarried men for every 100 unmarried women = 88 Number of people who live alone = 35.4 (28.1 percent of all households)

The increase of nonfamily households is largely due to the growth of one-person households. Almost one-third of all nonfamily households are one-person, with women living alone representing two-thirds of these households and including widowed, divorced, and single people. Many young people no longer view marriage as the entrance into adulthood

Gendered Love, Marriage, and Emergent Lifestyles  293

and as necessarily better than remaining single. By the time today’s young adults reach age 50, it is likely about 1 in 4 will have never married (DePaulo, 2018). High school seniors and college students say that although they plan to marry, it is not in their near future. Finishing college and getting a good job are more important; so for now they favor a lifestyle free of long-term commitments.

Romance in Later Life Stereotypes abound regarding the aged as passive beings with little interest in intimacy, whether sexual or not. Sexuality patterns (Chapter 2) and the spurt in online dating sites for baby boomers age 55 and older fly in the face of these stereotypes (Ayalon and Gerwirtz-Meydan, 2017). Divorce and, of course, widowhood are surging for this cohort. Older adults without an intimate partner are eager to form new romantic relationships, but marriage or remarriage for boomers is a more attractive option for older men compared to older women. Older women seek intimacy but are wary of a relationship that transitions to caregiving. Many older women are in loving relationships with men who may desire marriage, including women who are at risk of economic hardship, but independence is considered more important than marriage (Fileborn et al., 2015; Kelsey, 2016; Connidis et al., 2017). They are in no hurry to jump back into marriage. Emerging in Europe as a distinct cohort of older adults desiring intimacy but not marriage is rapidly gaining ground in the U.S. Led by women, living-apart-together (LAT) describes a monogamous, committed, intimate relationship between partners living in separate households. Given that LAT relationships are formed toward the end of a life course, they are not age homogamous, the man being typically five to ten years older than the woman. Lasting longer than for younger cohorts, LATs are fast becoming a preference for retired adults over age six (Benson and Coleman, 2016; Pasteels et al., 2017). Age differences notwithstanding, role models such as Oprah Winfrey and Condoleezza Rice (both born in 1954) offer older women images of a singles lifestyles removed from traditional gender roles. From a feminist perspective, this chosen lifestyle may be viewed as “a political act that subverts and transforms the gendered norms of cohabitation” (Upton-Davis, 2015:104). Diane Keaton (born in 1946), the mother of two adopted children, and in LAT relationships with actors including Warren Beatty and Al Pacino, remains single. I remember when I was young I honestly believed in some ridiculous way that you would find someone who would be the person you lived with until you died … I don’t think that because I’m not married it’s made my life any less. (Marusic, 2016) Economically successful women have more lifestyle choices, but the LAT trend is predicted to filter down to retired, working-class women who have raised families. As Gen X closes in on the boomers, with LATs firmly in place, this pattern will likely accelerate for all but the youngest women.

Gender Differences As LAT trends suggest, highly educated, financially independent women often choose to remain single. For every age category, the higher a woman’s income, the lower the rate of

294  Gender, Marriage, and Families

marriage. These women express a sense of control that is provided by remaining single, especially as they navigate their lives in contexts lacking in gender equity (Bellani et al., 2017). The availability of eligible partners and the marriage squeeze do not account for this trend. As suggested earlier, sex ratio changes offering either mate surpluses or deficits will not propel women to marry men who do not offer what they can achieve without being married. Men are also choosing a single life at increasing rates. For men, singlehood frees them from financial and psychological burdens they associate with a demanding breadwinning instrumental role. Gender differences in choice to remain single are shrinking. There are no significant gender or race differences in terms of what is liked or disliked about being single. Both men and women enjoy singlehood’s mobility, freedom, and social options but must also deal with loneliness, uncertainties of dating, and the pressure to marry. However, single men and women are not significantly different in levels of isolation, happiness, or subjective well-being. They are more involved with their families and extended kin network than are their married siblings. Involvement includes caretaking roles for children and elderly relatives. They retain the autonomy they desire but share in the joys and responsibilities of family life. Less gendered that in the past, the connection between well-being and marriage is highly contextual, shaped by peers, family members, and meaningful relationships (Sarkisian and Gerstel, 2016; Wadsworth, 2016). When gender constraints are muted, lifelong singlehood by choice may offer an enticing option for couples, regardless of their sexual orientation. Contemporary singlehood represents opportunities for happiness for a significant subset of the population who may reject marriage and any permanent and/or exclusive sexual relationship.

Critique As the current generation of never-married people age, a demographic prediction is that many will remain unmarried and many women will forgo childbearing, whether or not they cohabit. For women in LAT relationships, agency to avoid male authority is highlighted in their choices, but the LAT remains both “relational and bonded.” Contrary to a feminist perspective, women seldom choose LATs to “purposely or reflexively undo gender” (Duncan, 2014:589). Marriage, however, continues to eclipse singlehood and other more or less permanent nonmarital lifestyle options. Another demographic prediction is that 85 percent of white women and 78 percent of African American women will marry, a smaller racial difference for women than in the past. Marriage postponed or delayed does not mean marriage forgone (Coontz, 2017). It is still uncertain which of the demographic predictions regarding the marriage gap will hold over the next decades.

Long-Distance Relationships and Marriages The dual-location couple is not new. Military deployment, recession, company mergers and buyouts, job loss or job opportunities, and migration for seasonal work, to name a few, continue to foster long distance relationships (LDR) for married couples and increasingly for nonmarried. Historically, what is different is that a globalized job market and advances in communication technology have not only driven an increase in the number of these couples, but also altered the cohort they comprise. Many dual-career couples have evolved into

Gendered Love, Marriage, and Emergent Lifestyles  295

dual-location couples for reasons of the wife’s, rather than the husband’s, career. The newer cohort of LDRs is young, racially diverse, professional, and includes more women than in the past. Couples take advantage of the range of audio, digital, and video formats to maintain and strengthen their commitment and intimacy. As combination formats become cheaper, convenient, and of such high quality, couples report that they make more time to be “with” one another than when they are not commuting (Lindemann, 2017b; Janning et al., 2018). How LDR couples maneuver gender roles is a huge factor in maintaining or ending their marriage, partnership, or romantic relationship.

Commuter Marriage The earlier pattern in commuter marriages was for the woman, literally, to follow her man from city to city as he advanced up the career ladder. Her own career, if she had one, was expected to be secondary to his. Today, many couples firmly committed to their marriages have wives who are unwilling to be “trailing spouses” and abdicate their careers if a move is required. Career subordination, particularly on the part of the wife, can lead to marital dissatisfaction that a commuter marriage may overcome. These marriages generally consist of highly educated, well-paid spouses who are academics, managers, or executives in professional careers, see each other more or less frequently, and may continue these arrangements for years. For commuting wives, despite the inconvenience, logistical problems, travel, and lack of quality time with spouse, these women make their treks because of career satisfaction they find healthy for themselves and their marriages. Couples in commuter marriages experience less stress if they were married longer before the commuter arrangement began. Among earlier commuter marriage cohorts, those who fared better were older, mid- to late-career couples, with already launched children, and had one spouse established and successful in his/her career (Tessina, 2008; Lindemann, 2017a). Fast forward to today’s LDRs. They may consist of emerging adults and young, professional, childless couples where one spouse or partner may be employed full time in a west coast company but works in the Midwest remotely from home and the other is on the road several days a week or commutes home infrequently. Associated with changing norms about marriages and families in the U.S. and Europe, this trending LDR scenario shows satisfaction outcomes similar to couples who live close to one another or where distance is too far for a daily commute. Couples may delay having children but emphasize long-term commitment and a powerful bond even if they do not currently share a home on a daily basis (Kolozsvari, 2015; Kotyrlo, 2016; Liazos, 2016). With careers in mind for childfree couples, gender differences in partner satisfaction with career, family life, social engagement, and health outcomes between earlier and current commuter marriage couples are waning (Anand et al., 2018; Goldsmith and Byer, 2018). Given these similarities and where the primary home is located, it is more difficult to predict which spouse or partner is doing the commuting.

Military Spouses Long distance marriages for female military personnel have a range of challenges other computer wives do not face. The military determines when they see their spouse and how long

296  Gender, Marriage, and Families

they can be together. Women are entering the military at a rapid pace, now representing almost one-fifth of the armed forces. Compared to military men, military women are less likely to be married, but when they do marry they are more likely to marry another service member. Military women are more diverse in race and ethnicity than the civilian population; half of female recruits are women of color, a number continuing to increase. Combining active duty and reserve, dual military marriages are also increasing, representing over 10 percent of all married couples in the military (Reynolds and Shendruk, 2018; Walsh, 2018). Whether married to another service member or not, military men and women have homes, however “permanent” they may be, maintained by a spouse. Almost all “home maintainers” are women, but gender roles in these homes vary according to whether or not the military wife is a civilian. Civilian wives tend to fit more conventional gender role patterns. Deployment often creates havoc in a marriage and has profound consequences on family life (Paul, 2018). Children are frequently uprooted, and a military wife shoulders the responsibility from fallout with children in new schools and living in new locations. On the other hand, the umbrella of military service comes with gender messages that the woman should expect and accept these demands in her domestic role as military wife. Both men and women of military families may be more rigid in adhering to conventional gender roles in unconventional situations, but the roles offer a sense of routine in navigating home life. For the ten percent of military members married to one another, the Pentagon is ramping up resources for families with children, or who want children, with concerns that one or both members will otherwise leave the military. Such resources are particularly important to an overlooked group of military spouses: the five percent of non-military men married to service women, who are most likely to be officers. These men express support for the military, the job their wives are doing, and show a high level of marital satisfaction (Lufkin, 2017). To support these men (and other men married to service women) the military capitalizes on reinforcing instrumental gender roles for men, dominance on the home front, and outside work important for national integrity. Divorce rates have stabilized for military members in the last few years, now generally matching the civilian population. In the case of military marriages, functionalist arguments that traditional gender roles ease the strain of LDR couples, thus contributing to family stability, are strong.

Critique Gender roles in commuter, military marriages, and long distance relationships have been celebrated as ways to upend traditional gender roles. Committed couples can find productive ways to simultaneously maneuver autonomy and interdependence in career and home life rather than retreating to less satisfying career and family arrangements. In other important ways, however, commuter marriages often culminate in reproducing traditional gender roles (Lindemann, 2018). The generally positive portrait of LDR comes with other gendered costs. The career advantages of a commuter marriage may be offset by disadvantages related to the stress of living in two locations with little overall time together. Self-sufficiency and independence are enhanced, but loss of daily emotional support and dissatisfaction with the couple’s marriage and family life increase. Strains include money to maintain

Gendered Love, Marriage, and Emergent Lifestyles  297

two residences that may not be balanced by two incomes. Even if both wife and husband are highly paid, he is likely to be paid more than she, a contentious issue that is a catalyst for ending the commuter part of the marriage—or indeed the marriage itself. In a common gendered scenario, the marriage may not be sustained if the career ascendancy of the husband leads to the career subordination of his wife. They accept two standards that are not easy to reconcile: the standard that career success applies to both husband and wife and the standard that family success applies to wife but not husband. Both standards are based on traditional gender role beliefs that invade even these highly nontraditional forms of marriage. Young adults are fueling the rise of commuter marriages, but their counterparts in military marriages encounter a different set of severe and financially debilitating challenges. Military spouses, the vast majority of whom are non-service member wives, are caregivers to men who suffer a spectrum of physical and psychological damage from combat or other military jobs. Suicides of military men and veterans are at epidemic proportions (Chapter 9). The expectation is that surviving wives of veterans in all age categories may be in demanding caretaking roles for the duration of their husbands’ lives. The divorce rate for military couples has plateaued, but divorces among discharged veterans continue to climb (Borah and Fina, 2017; Bushatz, 2018). Support for employed caregiving wives of veterans, especially in families with young children, is inadequate to meet the logistical, emotional, and financial needs of the family.

Egalitarian Marriage The alternative to the traditional family is one in which the marriage, and hence the family, is egalitarian in both structure and function. There has been a steady trend endorsing gender equality in marriages in the U.S. and breadwinning roles for women for over 50 years (Buddig and Lim, 2016; Pessin, 2018). In an egalitarian marriage, partners share decision making and assign family roles based on talent and choice rather than on traditional beliefs about gender. She may enjoy lawn care, he may enjoy cooking, and together they may do gardening chores they both enjoy. The undesirable chores, such as cleaning or laundry, are equitably distributed. It is the sharing of the domestic chores and child care that creates the most difficulty for the egalitarian couple because they, too, have been socialized into a world of traditional marriage and family patterns in which gender roles continue to intrude.

Scandinavia The Scandinavian countries, specifically Norway and Sweden, consistently rank highest in all measures of human development, including gender egalitarianism and policies designed to translate it to the family (Chapter 6). Parental leave for new fathers and programs to bolster women’s economic status outside the home and men’s child-rearing functions in the home have enhanced egalitarian marriages. As in the United States, Scandinavian men adopt more egalitarian attitudes to the division of household labor and child care than they actually practice, but unlike the United States, public policy supports family-friendly work policies with gender equity objectives (Kaufman and

298  Gender, Marriage, and Families

White, 2015). Egalitarian attitudes about career and child rearing are increasing in both men and women, but for marriages to be truly egalitarian, husbands need to participate fully in housework.

Partnership Instead of ranking husband over wife, egalitarian marriage presumes a partnership pattern, one that is strongly associated with paid employment for wives and an effective work–family balance for the couple. When wives contribute financially to the family, their decision-­making powers are enhanced and traditional assumptions about female duties in the household are challenged. Perceived imbalance in decision making and acceptance of marriage myths about gender lower marital satisfaction for both husband and wife and bolster the patriarchal nature of marriage (Casad et al., 2015). Egalitarian marriage fosters better communication and sharing and builds on a strong, empathic friendship between spouses. Because the couple does not accept gender role beliefs about a husband’s dominance and a wife’s acceptance of it, discussion is open and disagreement is expected. Disagreement is not necessarily a sign of marital weakness—the couple “agrees to disagree”—it may be a sign of strength. A partner unwilling to openly discuss disagreements suggests that s/he fears that doing so will destabilize the marriage. Unlike in egalitarian homes, one partner, therefore, dominates the other. Conflict may be a by-product, but it can be an expected and beneficial cost of the open communication encouraged in egalitarian marriages.

Equity Benefits Children also benefit from egalitarianism because parents share the joy and burden of child rearing more equitably, and the needs of the couple are balanced by the needs of their children. The two sets of needs cannot be separated. This balance is very important to women who are happy in their egalitarian marriages but who must deal with the ongoing concern that their “mothering” is compromised. The egalitarian family helps women talk openly about both the rewards and the turmoil of motherhood that are hidden behind embedded beliefs about motherhood. In judging what is considered best for a child, the child’s needs are inseparable from those of the mother, father, and siblings. Despite the household task overload women face, the trend toward egalitarian marriages is unlikely to slow down. Men are marrying later and living independently for a longer period. These are the men who express egalitarian ideals and believe men should share housework. Even highly traditional marriages and families show more companionate qualities than only a generation ago. They, too, cannot remain isolated from social change. We have seen that marital satisfaction, gender equity, and communication are enhanced when men and women are partners, when women engage in satisfying employment, and when men get involved in housework. As society becomes more gender equitable, marriages should become more egalitarian. Couples endorse egalitarian ideals but, as this chapter and Chapter 8 indicate, tenacious gender roles continue to intrude when translating the ideal to everyday practices in relationships, marriage, and the family.

Gendered Love, Marriage, and Emergent Lifestyles  299

KEY TERMS Assortive mating Companionate marriages Egalitarian marriage Friends With Benefits Relationship (FWBR) Homemaker

Homogamy Hookup Living apart together (LAT) Household Marriage gradient

Marriage squeeze Nuclear family Second shift Social capital Third shift

CHAPTER 8

Gender and Families

Women will have achieved true equality when men share with them the responsibility of bringing up the next generation. —Ruth Bader Ginsburg (1933–2020), Supreme Court Justice Women’s destiny is received through messages about love, marriage, and motherhood. As Simone de Beauvoir declared in one of the most important twentieth-century works on feminist philosophy, The Second Sex (1953), this destiny is difficult “to reconcile with the will to succeed.” Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s twenty-first-century quote clearly echoes this message. Americans are propelled into parenthood by the gendered processes of love, cohabitation, and marriage that prime the couple for their new roles as mothers and fathers. Early socialization imbues children with the belief that parenting is so expected it becomes a moral directive. Parenthood is structured by gender beliefs and produces powerful gendered outcomes. With gender beliefs strongly embedded in family practices, the inequalities they produce are largely taken for granted. Noted through the text, challenges to definitions of the family are highly contentious. These debates have profound consequences when one or another definition is used in public policy on family-related issues, including divorce, child custody, and benefits for single parents, cohabitating couples, and children in LGBTQ families whose parents may or may not be married. Political rhetoric highlights beliefs that altering traditional family structure to accommodate change outside the family, such as women’s massive entry into paid employment, will bring disastrous social consequences. Other views celebrate family diversity, flexibility, and the creation of beneficial roles for families in response to social change. Gender-based parental roles are called into question as alternative definitions of the family emerge. Narrow, binary views of gender severely restrict opportunities for exploring non-traditional family options.

THE PARENTHOOD TRANSITION The transition from couple dyad to family triad is momentous. The first child brings pivotal changes affecting the marriage or partnership and significantly altering the pre-parental lifestyle of the couple. New parents report that the enormous joy of the new little one is tempered with increased marital tension. It is an understatement to say that parenthood is filled with uncertainty. Parenting is based on skills that must be learned but cannot be effectively accomplished, if at all, until the child arrives. Socialization for parenthood is based on family

Gender and Families  301

experiences of the new parents, involvement with others’ children, formal classes, folklore, and child care and parenting manuals. New parents discover that the anticipation of what it means to be a parent is far different from the reality. Gender is a key factor in accounting for this anticipation gap. Parenthood creates different experiences and produces different results for mothers compared to fathers. Early sociological work on the transition to parenthood focused on parenthood as crisis. In this model, first-time parents encounter anxiety, uncertainty, loss of confidence—even shock—during the first days and weeks of parenting. The strains of parenthood can be overwhelming, and the demands alter the marital relationship. Research documents that transition to parenthood is associated with fatigue overload and reduced quality that can have damaging consequences for the couple’s health and psychological well-being (Loutzenhiser at al., 2015; Delicate et al., 2018; Saxbe et al., 2018). More time and energy are spent on children-related issues than on marriage-related ones. When couples nurture their children, but not their marriage, marital satisfaction decreases and risk of divorce increases. Traditional gender roles can drive a wedge between the new parents. While acclimatizing to new roles, women in all household formats do virtually all infant care and shoulder the added housework demands. Men often retreat to the workplace and may find themselves emotionally distanced from wife and newborn. The crisis of parenthood is eased when couples make a determined effort to enhance marital satisfaction by embracing more flexible gender roles. Parenthood as crisis has been largely replaced with the view that parenthood is a normal developmental stage beset with both challenges and opportunities. When the mother–father relationship is nurtured, positive parenting and increased engagement with children emerge. These outcomes do not differ by race, income, or family arrangement (structure), benefits accrue to both parents, and child well-being is enhanced (Baker et al., 2018). Happier couples produce happier children. The disorganization and seeming chaos when the newborn or first child enters the household gradually give way to newly established family norms. Initially fraught with tension, the child’s arrival opens up paths for the joy and gratification new parents experience. Parenthood alters marital roles and creates new family roles. Whether the parenthood transition is seen as a crisis, a stage in normal development, or something in between depends on how a family responds to meet the parenting challenge. This response is largely dependent on taken-for-granted beliefs regarding gender. The labels husband and wife suggest different realities; the same can be said for motherhood and fatherhood.

Motherhood The conviction that a woman’s ultimate fulfillment is as a mother is a powerful socialization message to girls very early in life. The motherhood mandate issues a command to females of all ages, instructing them that motherhood demands selfless devotion to children and subordination of one’s own life to the needs of children and family. Although other activities she finds personally worthwhile are halted, the mandate assumes that a woman willingly submits first to her child-rearing responsibilities. The power of this mandate instills guilt in women who have small children and work outside the home, regardless of whether they are employed because they “want to be” (employment is personally rewarding) or they “have to be” (they need the money). The power of the motherhood mandate to guide the lives of women frames this chapter.

302  Gender, Marriage, and Families

The Motherhood Mandate American culture idealizes motherhood, but the actual support new mothers receive varies considerably. If women are socialized into believing that being a good mother comes easily, they are severely jolted by the reality of parenting. The strain experienced by first-time mothers can be perceived as personal failure, in turn lessening their motivation to seek help. The notion of a maternal instinct is not empirically supported (Chapter 2). However, the view that all females want to become mothers and that a mother’s role “comes naturally” stubbornly persists. Ideal mothers are expected to enjoy the work of mothering and caring for home and family, regardless of how demanding or tedious the work is. Exclusive devotion to mothering is good for her children and promotes a husband’s happiness and marital contentment (Hoffnung, 1995; Buchanan, 2013). Given the social change accompanying women’s march into paid employment, mothers working for pay would be expected to have latitude, support, and sympathy in navigating motherhood roles. Evidence tells us otherwise. In the 1990s women were told to opt out from paid work; opting in was harmful for children. In the 2000s another version of the mandate surfaced, exerting a toll on mothers. Momism is referred to as a mother’s excessive devotion to and domination of her children. Although appearing to be negative for creating dependence rather than autonomy, it is has quietly mutated to expectations of motherhood perfection. This media-driven “new momism” pressures mothers to conform to impossible standards. Women are to seek out the latest information for authoritative guidance to best fulfill their roles as mothers. In parenting magazines mothers are the target audience. These images of moms appear to simultaneously “celebrate” work and family in ways to achieve at work but self-sacrifice at home. The end result, however, is a paradox rather than a celebration, as suggested by Susan Douglas and Meredith Michaels (2009:244): Now here’s the beauty of this contorting contraction … Both working mothers and stay-at-home-mothers get to be failures … intensive mothering has lower status … (stay-at-home-mothers are boring) but occupies a higher moral ground (working mothers are neglectful). Momism continues today. It may explain that for the first time in nearly a century, American women’s labor force participation has plateaued, including women with and without children. This may be temporary but is contrary to trends for increased women’s employment in other OECD countries (Black et al., 2017). With media messages, momism further divides women who work outside the home and those who are stay-at-home-mothers (SAHM) into opposing camps. Both camps adopt stereotypes about a woman’s identity as either a mother or a (paid) worker and fuels “mommy wars” (Moore and Abetz, 2016; Odenweller and Rittenour, 2017). Room mothers and cookie bakers made way for soccer moms and vanpool drivers. It is a no-win situation for mothers. She is blamed for spending too little or too much time with her children. Although she delights in her child’s development, her own development stalls and her sense of self can be diminished. Other versions of momism continue to emerge. The term “mother blame” encompasses and strengthens momism assumptions. American “culture demands that every mother be all in, all the time” (Havrilesky, 2014:SR9). The demands on mothers continue to escalate. In an era of ever-evolving hazards to health and well-being, from environmental toxins to weakened safety nets, it is a mother’s responsibility to assure her children are protected

Gender and Families  303

from all manner of fallout (Fentiman, 2017). In uncertain social and political times, the mother–child relationship is assumed to be the rock to weather the storms children face (Villalobos, 2014). In line with the powerful value of American individualism, macro-level factors are subverted, and personal reasonability ascends as to why children and families are undermined or bolstered.

Functionalism In emphasizing that the motherhood mandate is essential for family stability and social equilibrium, functionalists offer support for momism qualities. Mothers are both biological and social reproducers. As the primary socializer of a child, a mother provides the necessary ingredients for building and maintaining society. If socialization does not instill girls with the motherhood mandate—and the dream and idealism associated with it—society may be compromised. Functionalism assumes that the traditional division of labor of nonoverlapping gender roles within a patriarchal family is the most efficient and least contentious arrangement. It is a mother’s fault if children are flawed. She shoulders the responsibility, the blame, and ultimately the guilt for their failure (Badinter, 2012). Functionalists point to the vital responsibilities associated with motherhood, but rights accrue as well. The motherhood mandate is in tandem with a motherhood mystique, which is a glorification of the role. Child rearing brings joy and pride for a child’s accomplishments, for which mothers take a great deal of credit. It is apparent, nonetheless, that mothers are more likely to share the credit for what goes right but assume the burden of blame for what goes wrong. There is no argument that the family is the critical institution for socialization. Contemporary functionalists recognize that there are social benefits when women, including those with preschoolers, work outside the home. They assert that family stability hinges on the incomes of employed mothers, who, like men, need to pursue work offering the highest income of available jobs. Functionalists agree that equality in the workplace is beneficial to families and to society. However, with the ever-present motherhood mandate lurking, women are always on family alert. Parents and children accept the mandate and take for granted any arrangements permitting men to have less in-home responsibility. Functionalists have difficulty transferring beliefs about gender equity outside the home to gender inequality inside the home. How are women supposed to be equal and different at the same time? Overlooked in this scenario is that the motherhood mandate is relatively recent in the United States. Until the nineteenth century, colonial and frontier economies based on subsistence farming required women to carry out a multitude of economically productive roles. In her role set, a woman’s child-rearing function was less important for family survival than her farm and household-related money-raising activities (Chapter 5). Only since the mid-twentieth century did raising children for purely emotional reasons become ingrained in American consciousness.

Conflict Theory Conflict theorists focus on the motherhood mandate as contributing to the social powerlessness experienced by women in their household and roles outside the home. Because a woman’s earnings from paid employment alter power relations in the family, men will evoke

304  Gender, Marriage, and Families

the motherhood mandate to ensure that women concentrate their energies on domestic roles. Careers and personal growth are impeded when family responsibilities intrude in the workplace. In all household forms, the choices mothers make regarding child rearing weaken their bargaining power at home and on the job and reinforce economic dependence on their husbands or partners. In the workplace, this translates to lower salaries and sagging careers (Chapter 10). At home, it translates to shouldering the bulk of child care and housework tasks. From a conflict perspective, not until as many men as women want to stay home with the children can women hope to achieve meaningful economic parity.

Challenging the Motherhood Mandate Acceptance of the motherhood mandate and momism precludes much individual growth for women. By this definition, motherhood is the worthwhile role overriding all others. The obvious problems and contradictions emanating from the idealized mystique are conveniently overlooked. Can women feel good about themselves as mothers if they also seek demanding roles in the name of personal fulfillment? One answer lies in the demographics of motherhood, which have changed significantly since the 1950s. As women achieved career and educational goals, marriage and motherhood were delayed. Median age at first marriage for both women and men has risen steadily, now hovering at 30 (Chapter 7). The decline of the fertility rate since World War II is linked to higher levels of education, rising wages, and the opportunity costs of child rearing for women. This explains why many women in their thirties and forties are having their first child. It also supports the idea, however, that motherhood remains a fundamental goal. Most women are unwilling to give up biological parenthood but opt for smaller families than their parents’ generation. Because career-oriented women are unwilling to give up either motherhood or professional roles, they are adapting their beliefs about family and parenting accordingly.

Voluntary Childlessness Intentions to remain childless are increasing for men as well as women. Concerns about costs of parenthood—both financial and emotional—influence their fertility decisions, a global pattern in Western nations (Fiori et al., 2017; Matias and Fontaine, 2017). Attitudes vary depending on whether a childfree life is by choice or circumstance. Adoption as a path to parenthood is rife with financial, legal, and emotional obstacles. Miscarriage taints a woman’s emotional resilience to conceive again (Nelson et al. 2015). Childless marriages and committed partnerships are steadily increasing, and more women of childbearing age will not have children. These are often professional women who may be either less confident or more realistic about their ability to successfully carry out roles associated with motherhood and a satisfying career. Voluntarily childless couples express similar levels of marital happiness to couples with children. Their family life cycle is certainly nontraditional, but it offers creative ways to buffer social pressures for parenthood. Whether married or cohabiting, women who are childless do not lead childless lives. They choose not to be mothers, but children are central to their lives. They take on a variety of meaningful child-related responsibilities through their networks of kin, friends, voluntary organizations, and employment.

Gender and Families  305

Feminism The acceptance of feminist values by a growing proportion of women affects notions about motherhood. Women who hold traditional gender role orientations desire larger families compared to less traditional women. Traditional women are also likely to express higher levels of religiosity and have lower levels of education. College women who subjectively identify with feminism are less interested in motherhood or intend to delay marriage and motherhood until after they are established in their careers. Consistent with feminist beliefs, childfree women who decide early in life not to have children score higher on personality traits related to openness to experiences and independence than those who decide later in life (Avison and Furnham, 2015:45). Regardless of media hype, however, feminism and motherhood are not incompatible. Feminist mothers are realistic about the gendered pitfalls of mothering but also believe that motherhood offers opportunities for assertiveness, learning and mastering new skills, and ensuring that feminist principles are passed to the next generation of sons and daughters (Chapter 3). The older view of motherhood is unacceptable because paid work has become so important to the identities of mothers. They recognize that simply staying home all day with preschoolers does not automatically qualify someone as a good mother.

Critique Optimistic views of the waning of the motherhood mandate are challenged by several trends. First, stay-at-home mothers have become more common since the 1990s; today about onethird of married couple households with children under age 18 have stay-at-home mothers (SAHM), a sharp increase of just since 1999. Although 80 percent of mothers with advanced degrees return to work, unlike stay-at-home moms of a generation ago, these millennial women are more likely to have family income allowing them to choose whether or not to return to work (Gale, 2017). Second, there is a burgeoning rate of later motherhood for women who are both financially better off and have archived personal and career goals. A billion dollar fertility industry has mushroomed for women to challenge their biological clocks, and these financially successful women are more likely to make that choice. Third, single-parent women may put motherhood before marriage. Poor women and never-married single parent women often do not have the financial latitude to choose to be an SAHM, but motherhood remains a powerful goal. Contrary to stereotypes, many women, even those with lives surrounded by unsafe neighborhoods and poverty, make a motherhood choice they believe empowers them to provide benefits for themselves and their children that marriage does not. They may desire marriage, but they desire motherhood more (Edin and Kefalas, 2011; Gregory, 2012; Erdmans and Black, 2015). Most important is the persistent view that mothers should be the parent at home when children are young. Noted throughout the text, on key indicators of development, children are not harmed but are enhanced by their mothers’ employment. Men perceive more costs to maternal employment, and women perceive more benefits. Both believe, however, that it is more beneficial for children when mothers retreat from the workplace to be at home with their children. The public believes that mothers cannot be as productive at work as fathers (Chapter 10). For the large majority of mothers who do combine work and family roles, their time with children has increased rather than decreased.

306  Gender, Marriage, and Families

It is true that a motherhood mandate is shifting to viewing motherhood in more flexible ways to fit the lifestyles of contemporary couples. This shift accounts for the well-being of children and the marital satisfaction of parents. The qualities associated with motherhood can be more widely shared by both men and women in a variety of family contexts. This variety is consequential because the cohabitation rate is increasing, and the marriage rate is decreasing, and as more women choose motherhood but not marriage. With greater family diversity, like other gender roles, qualities associated with motherhood will continue to evolve. Whether married or not, financially well off or not, or voluntarily childless or not, women must still contend with the fallout from resisting prochild messages. Parenthood for both men and women has been likened to a moral imperative, and not to pursue it is associated with stigma and “moral outrage,” however subtle these may be (Ashburn-Nardo, 2017). With its gendered backdrop, the motherhood mandate remains embedded in American values.

Fatherhood Ideologically cast into primary breadwinning roles, American fathers are viewed as more peripheral in nurturing and child care compared to mothers. This is a far different picture from the colonial fathers who were expected to provide not only for the economic needs of their children, but also for their moral and spiritual development. In this sense, colonial fathers were nurturers as much as mothers. Public policy and legislation regarding custody of children, child support, definitions of desertion, and child neglect reinforce the emphasis on the father’s role as the economic provider for the family. Increases in divorce and cohabitation have undermined father–child relationships, and nonresident fathers are increasingly absent from their children’s lives. To get women off welfare, public policy focuses on finding unwed, divorced, and married fathers who have abandoned their families (Chapter 9). A father is targeted to meet his financial obligation to the family; his emotional involvement with his children is largely ignored. The fact that fathers take their breadwinning role very seriously does not diminish the interest or love they have for their children. Raising a family is a life goal for men, as it is for women. Fathers today spend more time with their children and report greater overall family satisfaction. Abundant evidence demonstrates that quality family relations and supportive social connections are associated with better psychological health and well-being for fathers and better adjustment for their children. Although this is true across race, ethnicity, and social class, African American children and children in low income families with involved, accessible, and engaged dads may accrue the most benefits from these traits (Bernard et al., 2015; Lewis, 2018a; Serrano et al., 2018). Compared with non-fathers, dads show two general models of fatherhood: the “good-provider model,” encouraging them to work more hours, and the “involved-father model,” encouraging them to work fewer hours. The “forces pulling women out of the home are stronger than the forces pulling men into it” (Gerson, 2009:327). Indeed, the expectation that fathers manage their family’s subsistence needs is so persistent that even if this is a form of “care,” it is not constructed as “caregiving” (Schmidt, 2018). The models pose a dilemma for dads who desire a better work–family balance.

Gender and Families  307

New Fathers As first-time parents, men tend to adapt better to the rigors of fatherhood than women do to motherhood, and husbands can predict with more success than wives what kind of parents they will be. In the transition to parenthood, compared with their wives, husbands’ personal goals are not substantially altered, and they are less ambivalent about parenting responsibilities (Chapter 9). This comparison, however, is not meant to minimize the anxiety and uncertainty experienced by first time fathers (Sockol and Allred, 2018). Fathers see themselves as less competent than mothers in dealing with daily child care. They internalize strong pressure to adhere to their paternal responsibility, but largely surrender actual responsibility for child care to their wives. Even with Gen X and millennial dads taking on more child care tasks, a father’s level of engagement, contribution, and responsibility in these tasks are a fraction of a mother’s. A father’s time is spent more on recreational activities with their children than with the children’s ongoing physical upkeep. Associated with gender role ideology, the gender gap in housework is magnified when the first child arrives and widens with more children. More egalitarian gender roles in dual-earning families predict greater father involvement in child care for the first born after the second child arrives. In these households fathers are more involved in child care than single-earning fathers, but mothers still do the bulk of child care regardless of whether they are employed full time, time, part time or not at all. On nonwork days, fathers engage in more leisure activities than mothers, who continue to outwork their husbands in performing household and child care (Dayton et al., 2016; Kamp Dush et al., 2018; Kuo et al., 2018). Whereas dual-earning spouses agree that housework and child care should be split equally, fathers believe they are doing their fair (equal) share but mothers believe responsibilities are disproportionate. Perceived fairness in the division of household and child care for dual-earning new parents is contentious and can threaten the marriage (Mendiola et al., 2017; Newkirk et al., 2017). New fathers today are gradually embracing the child care tasks that should translate to greater involvement with their children, but gender role ideology intrudes to limit that impact.

Children’s Development Because the prime directive for fathers is to financially provide for their families, the father’s effect on the development of their children can be overlooked. Parental influence on childhood socialization is, of course, vitally important. Mothers accept the major responsibility in socialization of their children, but fathers send important early messages, especially regarding gender roles. These messages are powerful because fathers have less contact and sustained interaction with their children. Compared with mothers, fathers expect their adolescent sons to conform to gender roles much more than their adolescent daughters. Fathers are more likely than mothers to account for gender when delegating chores and privileges, when showing affection, and when disciplining their children. Fathers are likely to use harsher discipline on sons, believing it enhances a son’s masculinity. Fathers who are less traditional and stereotyped in their gender role beliefs have sons who match their fathers’ beliefs (Chapter 3). Traditional fatherhood brings fewer of the profound personal and marital changes that mothers experience, but fathers form strong bonds with their young children and are successfully taking on child care tasks and nurturing roles more than fathers did in the past.

308  Gender, Marriage, and Families

When fathers change, daughters—and especially sons— follow. Egalitarian parenting clearly benefits children and enhances marital satisfaction.

A Fatherhood Mandate Gender role stereotyping severely limits options for fathers to explore new roles. Conflict theory and the feminist perspective argue that the motherhood mandate is a barrier to gender equity; the opposite is true for any potential fatherhood mandate. Young men have not adopted a fatherhood mandate, allowing them to move in the direction of overlapping, nonbinary, flexible gender roles. Functionalists would support a fatherhood mandate that moves beyond the provider role so that fathers can effectively meet the challenges of social change and new family processes. The involved-father model is gaining prominence (Chapter 9), signaling a crack in a masculine ethic that deters men from more meaningful parent–child relationships.

PARENTS AS DUAL EARNERS To emphasize, women’s entry into paid employment significantly altered the structure and function of families in the United States, and continues to do so. Paid employment benefits women socially and emotionally, particularly when they work in jobs they find challenging, rewarding, and personally meaningful. Their marriage and sense of well-being are enhanced; shared decision making increases marital satisfaction for both wife and husband. Dual-earning couples are more likely to have egalitarian marriages than those that have a full-time homemaker wife. The liability cost for women, especially married mothers, involves maintaining responsibilities at home and for children when husbands do not share household and child care chores on anywhere near an equal basis. These women do more housework, have less leisure time, and sleep less than their never married and divorced counterparts. Their time pressure is not reduced (Pepin et al., 2018:107). Mothers, but not fathers, adjust their time use at work and in the home to accommodate these demands. Outsourcing child care narrows the gendered division of household labor but does not reduce household work for women; nor does it reduce gender gaps in all domestic labor (Craig and Baxter, 2016). Multiple roles of employed women also include other caregiving demands, such as caring for frail parents, which may compromise the benefits of employment for life satisfaction (Chapter 10). Liabilities in dual-earner families cannot be discounted, but women are enriched by their paid jobs. The dual-earner family is the normative family. There are more dual-earning nuclear families with children present than one-earner nuclear families with children present; the largest overall increase is in families with preschoolers. Because women are traditionally responsible for child care, particularly in the preschool years, all eyes turn to them when questions arise as to how children are affected when both parents work outside the home. It is the wives rather than their husbands who reap society’s disapproval if children suffer when both parents are in the labor force. How accurate is the “suffering children” theme?

Children of Employed Women If parents are happy and the family is enhanced by a dual-earning family structure, this should logically carry over to the children. Not so, say writers who decry that media depict

Gender and Families  309

SAHMs as menaces and working moms as heroes. They point to statistics that almost half of adults believe working mothers are bad for society, that half of married mothers prefer parttime work, and that another one-fifth prefer not to work at all. With feminism as a major offender, evidence that children are better off when moms do not work outside the home is ignored (Cummins, 2015). Women may be better off, too. Many women may choose to step back from employment after establishing themselves in their careers to have children. They are deciding whether sacrificing a social life or family life for a promotion is a worthwhile commitment (Williams, 2017:49). Studies can be flawed and evidence in support of working mothers is mixed, especially in light of feminist interests that sway one way: Those American women who are fortunate enough to have choices in the messy work/ life struggle need a clear-eyed grasp of the inevitable tradeoffs, not advocacy. (Hymowitz, 2015)

The Child Care Crisis These views about choices of women to work or not are consistent with beliefs that a positive, sustained relationship with a caregiver is essential to healthy emotional childhood development. But a mother must be that caregiver. A person caring for a child out of love will do it better than one doing it for pay. These are the lowest-paid female day care workers (“paid strangers”) to whom parents entrust their children. Worker turnover is high and day care centers struggle to keep adequate staff-child ratios. Day care can foster children’s detachment from mothers, and mothers’ detachment from children (Cassels, 2016; Finlay, 2017). Such messages to parents dismiss possible harm to children of parents who do not have the option of working for pay. Writers courting media markets contend that a generation denied love when they were children will wreak havoc on themselves as adults and do untold damage to the social structure, an argument echoed by “family restorationists” mentioned in Chapter 7. Parents are abandoning their children to day care so they can selfishly pursue their own careers, which in later years will harm the next generation of their children. What evidence warrants this conclusion? Overlooked in debates on this issue is the recruitment of women to work in times of war. Although wartime work for women occurred throughout U.S. history, World War II was the catalyst propelling millions of women into the labor force and over 350,000 to serve in the armed forces. Desperately needed for work in defense plants, thousands of white, middle-class married women with children were recruited through propaganda campaigns designed to alleviate anxiety and guilt about leaving their children with others. Women of color for whom employment was normative took advantage of higher pay and more formal child care options. Creative approaches to day care became the standard and options multiplied quickly. Potential negative, long-term consequences on these children were ignored. After the war, traditional attitudes prevailed and women were expected to return home to roles of full-time housewives and mothers. They were not guilty of being neglectful mothers during the war, but if they chose to continue to work outside the home after the war, the guilt returned. Messages to post-war women also overlooked those in dire financial straits who lost spouses in the war. The script that employed mothers are bad mothers returned with a vengeance.

310  Gender, Marriage, and Families

Today there is near consensus by developmental psychologists, family counselors, and child therapists that surrogate child care is not the major risk factor in the lives of children, especially for dual-earner couples. The key problem is poor quality care. Fortunately for married, professional women, employers may provide benefit packages offering high-quality care options. The same cannot be said for low-income, dual-earning couples and single-parent women who rely on informal, less costly, and less desirable options of lower quality care. On the other hand, an enriched group child care experience can stimulate moral development and prosocial behavior of infants and preschoolers. Poor children or children from troubled families may have resources in their child care centers that are absent in their homes. Low-income mothers with quality subsidized child care can maintain steady employment. One of the greatest challenges to these families is the availability of affordable, safe, accessible child care. Satisfaction with child care of parents carries over to the well-being of their children. It is clear that children with employed mothers gain their strongest sense of well-being and attachment from parents regardless of child care options. “Paid strangers” who are caring and compassionate may supplement primary socialization, but they are not a substitute for it. Fueled by media stereotypes and guilt messages, however, parents agonize over decisions to use surrogate care so that a mother can return to paid employment.

Children’s Time with Employed Parents There are no significant differences in the home environment or development of children in two-parent households with employed mothers than in households whose mothers who are not employed. Compared with homes where mothers are not employed, dual-earners purposely build in “quality” parent–child interaction through activities such as reading, homework, and computer time. Working mothers with a college education spend significantly more time with their children than women who do not work outside the home. Employed mothers also spend more time with children than employed fathers. Mothers who do not— or cannot—shift their paid work time, shift the unpaid work time at home to enrich the time with their children (Stewart, 2010; Minnotte et al., 2016; Lee et al., 2017). Mothers face strong pressure to always put relationships with their children first, despite long and demanding work hours. Even as they calculate the effects on their work lives, they push themselves to be involved in a variety of school, community, and child enrichment activities (Haley-Lock and Posey-Maddox, 2016; Lemmon et al., 2018). Adverse effects of maternal employment would be expected to show up during adolescence, an often stress-filled time for families. Adolescents report that they would like their moms to be available more and at home more. They are concerned about rushed and confused schedules with the demands of job, school, and limited leisure time (French et al., 2016; Roeters and Gracia, 2016). Long-term risk factors for teens are mitigated by an appreciation of their employed mothers’ talents and accomplishments outside the home that grows over time. In turn, mothers report higher overall life satisfaction. Consistent with conflict theory, fathers take on more care for their children—not just child maintenance—when their wives spend more time at work. “Father care” rises when wives contribute a greater share to the household income. Consistent with social constructionism, mothers’ self-evaluation matches broader gendered definitions of what it means to be a “good mother.” Despite its gendering effect, mothers do not reject this standard.

Gender and Families  311

Critique Decades of research on effects of the dual-earner family on children do not support the “suffering child” or “abandoned child” theme. Employed mothers do not neglect their children, nor are the children jeopardized by maternal employment. Daughters want to follow in the professional footsteps of their mothers (Campos et al., 2013). Children and mothers both benefit when mothers’ well-being is enhanced by employment. This reciprocity, for example, is suggested even for employed single mothers, since they “are happier and less sad and stressed when parenting than single mothers who are not employed” (Meier et al., 2016:650). Motherhood and working for pay do not harm children—to the contrary, “the working mother effect” likely improves a child’s development, academic achievement and motivation, and language development. The financial footing is better and the family experiences fewer money woes. To the relief of egalitarian dual-earner couples, evidence of advantages for children of working mothers continues to mount. Children compare favorably to those in families with stay-at-home mothers, and benefits accrue over time. Children learn lessons in planning and family economics and gain in flexibility and independence. Long-term benefits for daughters raised by an employed mother include likelihood to be employed, to supervise others at work, and to receive higher pay. For sons, there is less influence on employment traits since men are more likely to be employed and to receive higher wages than women. However, sons of employed mothers show more care oriented behaviors, such as extra time in attending to family members. Sons hold significantly more egalitarian attitudes, even more than daughters of SAHMs (McGinn et al., 2015; Burby, 2017; McGinn et al., 2018; Turvett, 2019). Kathleen McGinn, lead author of several groundbreaking studies on employed mothers and their families concludes that: There are very few things, that we know of, that have such a clear effect on gender inequality as being raised by a working mother. (Cited in Nobel, 2015) Cultural ideals about mothering and fathering remain strong and influence how parents spend time with their children and how they view themselves as parents (Chesley, 2017; Speights et al., 2017). Moms continue to spend more time than dads spend with their children, but quality time for working parents—both moms and dads—continues to increase. As McGinn asserts, when children are provided with good out-of-home child care options, employed mothers enrich the human capital of their families. When women choose to work, it’s a financial and personal choice. Women should make that choice based on whether they want or need to work, not based on whether they are harming their children—because they are not. (Cited in Gerdeman, 2018)

Helicopter Parents Children are “launched” after high school graduation. Launching is associated with greater independence from parents and beginning a new phase in life, especially for those transitioning to college. An irony of the child care debate is that the majority of current college students were in some form of child care outside the home, attended preschool, and had employed mothers. This cohort takes for granted access to all technological tools making it easier and

312  Gender, Marriage, and Families

faster to communicate. Launching is thwarted by helicopter parents who continue to hover over them in college as they did throughout their precollegiate years. Compared with baby boomers and Generation X, college students and early-career millennials from middle-class homes see their dual-earning parents more frequently, communicate with them more often, and count on parents to intervene when asked. When something goes wrong at school or work, their first reflex is to text their parents (Scheiber, 2017). Parents, especially mothers, have contacted companies to speak to managers about why their sons were not hired and to speak to professors on why daughters received a lower than expected grade. Contrary to media messages that accuse parents of putting job before family, dual-earning helicopter parents are overprotective and overinvolved. During primary socialization parents offer necessary guidance as children take their first tentative steps outside the nest. Parents control these steps to assure appropriate—usually gendered—development outcomes. Social learning theory is at work since “parents model parenting” to their children (Chapter 3). Regardless of whether they have sons or daughters, parents are likely to be praised as indulgent and condemned as neglectful. Parents may control their behavior, but children know parents will support and protect them. Although parents may be reproached for meddling, college students expect parents to run interference for them and prefer they do it more rather than less. From the students’ view, overinvolved parents produce happier students. From the viewpoint of the college and employer, overinvolvement produces poorer students and less productive workers. Problems arise when the line between indulgence and neglect is misunderstood and leads to the negative development outcomes they thought helicoptering would avoid.

Intrusion f/or Autonomy Helicopter parenting is associated with a range of negative outcomes for the “in-between” stage college students enter, including compromised health and well-being, and increased levels of anxiety and depression. Living at home during college increases rather than decreases parental control and intensifies such risks (Reed et al., 2016; Cui et al., 2019). High levels of parental control can lower self-efficacy in these emerging adults, which in turn produces less autonomous adults. Intrusive parenting in the name of school success can foster uncertainty in children who believe they are incompetent students. As asserted by a self-fulfilling prophecy, parents inadvertently promote failure when their children are low achievers. With a sense of entitlement that parents can fix problems, these young adults become so risk averse that they may not be confident enough to make their own decisions (Bradley-Geist and Olson-Buchanan, 2014; Schiffrin and Liss, 2017). Since helicoptering is linked to negatives of overparenting and intrusiveness, another side is that parents are “overinvolved” because of its positive outcomes. In this view, autonomy support promotes rather than impedes independence. Maintaining close relationships with parents during college offers a springboard into self-sufficiency in adulthood (Lindell et al., 2017; Rousseau, 2018). Autonomy-supportive parenting encourages adult children to make their own decisions in college, from budgeting to course selection, to interpersonal concerns, thus cultivating the well-being parents expect. Daughters receive significantly more parental support from mothers than sons throughout college. Helicoptering for control lowers a daughter’s well-being, but helicoptering for autonomy heightens it. Sons receive more autonomy support as they transition to college but age out sooner as more people come into their lives, a pattern that cuts across race and ethnicity (Stein, 2016; Kouros, 2017; Pedersen 2017). It is negotiating the balance between providing autonomy support and encouraging

Gender and Families  313

independence that remains a challenge for parents (Kaye et al., 2019:240). Mothers and fathers approach this balance differently.

Hovering Moms Who hovers more—mothers or fathers? Framed in the motherhood mandate, as we would predict, mothers hover significantly more than fathers (Kelly et al., 2017). They are concerned with their children’s lifestyle on campus—from food, clothing, and health to roommates, relationships, and grades. Fathers hover on issues related to major and career and college costs. Frequent communication is expected, with the large majority of college students in touch with parents several times a week; others on a daily basis. Mothers use cell phones, Facebook, and Instagram and fathers use emails, followed by mobile phones as preferred ways to stay in contact. Texting is used by both. Mothers communicate more frequently than fathers in all formats. Literally on call at all times, a mother’s work as caregiver, nurturer, and vigilant parent does not end at launching. Mothers may be labeled supermom for overzealous hovering, but their college student kids take it for granted. Supermom in the helicopter parent context is more a criticism than an approval of her behavior. Considering the motherhood mandate, overinvolved mothers, whose self-worth is based on the accomplishments of her children, are likely to have a lowered level of self-esteem. Students expect most communication with their mothers but desire more communication with their fathers. High-quality interaction and emotional support from parents, but particularly from fathers, is associated with success in college. When fathers initiate contact, higher closeness and relationship satisfaction are reported. Mothers’ closeness with their children at college is sustained by frequent communication. However, students may perceive mom’s communication behavior as more intrusive and dad’s as more protective (Weintraub and Sax, 2018; Zienty, 2018). Since students regard distancing by fathers as normative, communication that increases emotional bonding is appreciated. The empty-nest syndrome is largely a myth (Chapter 9). But for a variety of financial reasons (paying off student loans, having a low-paying job or no job, bridging to a new career or grad school) and personal reasons (divorce, relationship problems, health issues), young adults are moving in with their parents. These “boomerang kids” are both millennials who graduated a decade ago and mid-career adults. Mothers are more welcoming, and fathers are warier of their return. This may signal a temporary arrangement or herald a distinct, family form on the horizon. If the birds return to the empty nests, will it challenge or sustain a motherhood mandate? Whether they work outside the home or not, mothers cope with mixed messages about expectations for involvement in their children’s lives even as they reach young adulthood. They can be blamed for helicoptering and too much involvement (smothering their children) or not enough involvement (abandoning their children). Definitions of a “good mother” keep a tight reign over mothers.

GENDERED FAMILIES IN MULTICULTURAL PERSPECTIVE The multicultural heritage of the United States is undoubtedly reflected in its families. Because this heritage is linked to race and ethnicity, minority families are impacted by the same disadvantages that affect them outside their homes. To account for gender patterns in

314  Gender, Marriage, and Families

these families, multiple risks, opportunities, and experiences emanating from their unique cultural histories must be considered. Keep in mind, however, that white families of European descent also vary in social class and cultural history. Immigration status especially impacts gender roles in their families. These families are integral to America’s multicolonial mosaic but should not be viewed as its default, normative family.

African American Families Data indicate that, at the turn of the twentieth century (1910), Africa American households were less likely to be nuclear and more likely to be headed by women, a pattern that persists today. Contrary to stereotypes, however, almost half of African American children live in two-parent homes, including parents who are married or cohabiting (Forum on Child and Family Statistics, 2018). However, although cohabitation is increasing, white women with children who cohabit outnumber comparable African American women almost 6 to 1 (Figure 8.1). African American households without two parents present are those headed

Solo

42

28

Cohabiting

55

Married

24 13

61

7

25 21

3 3 9

Among fathers Solo

51

Cohabiting

16 53

Married

15 61

8

25

4

26

2

20

9

24

3

12

23

3

7

21

10

Among mothers Solo

40

Cohabiting

58

Married

61

White FIGURE 8.1  Racial

30

Black

Hispanic

Asian

and Ethnic Composition by Parent Type (%)

Source: “The Changing Profile of Unmarried Parents.” Pew Research Center. April 25, 2018. http://www.pew socialtrends.org/2018/04/25/the-changing-profile-of-unmarried-parents/

Gender and Families  315

by single parents, and about 90 percent of these are single-parent women. Compared with white families, African American family life cycles are marked by less formal marriages, parenthood earlier in marriage, a higher divorce rate, and less likelihood of remarriage. About three-fourths of African American children are likely to live part of their life in a femaleheaded household, often with a female grandparent. African American households are likely to consist of both kin and nonkin. Key factors in the development of these patterns are the legacy of slavery and oppression rooted in job discrimination that led to the underemployment of African American men. These factors profoundly influence gender roles in contemporary African American families. Compared to all other races, African American women have had a much longer history of paid employment essential to family stability and survival. This heritage fueled the variety of family and household structures that African American families exhibit today. Paid employment is central to African American women’s mothering and to their family experience. It is the most important reason for the greater degree of role sharing by wives and husbands and has strengthened these families in several fundamental ways. Highlighting this role sharing is a strong willingness to absorb others into kin structures by creating a network of fictive kin, where friends “become” family. African Americans tend to define the boundaries of their families with more flexibility than families of other races; distant kin become primary kin, and close friends and neighbors become fictive kin. Women fill the fictive kin ranks. Women-centered networks of “bloodmothers” and “other-mothers” who share mothering responsibilities bring an array of exchange and support that benefits all household members (Collins, 2009). In turn, children are offered a diversity of parenting models, enriching children with a more multifaceted form of nurturing. Second, such instrumental role sharing and social support crosses gender lines, with men shouldering domestic responsibilities that in white families are typically assigned to women. Employed mothers who are the family’s breadwinners often turn to these networks for help during illness, for financial support, and for child care needs. Although support from networks of kin and fictive kin is normative, families often report they provide more assistance than they receive (Cross et al., 2018). Family relationships in a gendered context—whether challenging or reinforcing traditional gender roles—can help determine the degree of tension that may result from unbalanced exchanges. The resilience and positive outcomes of fictive kin among African Americans have extended to a law in Missouri, for example, allowing courts to define distant relatives and close friends legally as fictive kin to aid displaced children. By extending the boundaries of guardianship, children can be placed in homes of those they know and who invite them in. These arrangements have much better outcomes than placing children in foster care with no family connection. Third, role sharing is evident when class and race are intersected. African American working-­class and middle-class married couples are in households more likely to be egalitarian than comparable white couples. These families have dual-earning husband and wife in stable employment. Couples share child rearing and domestic responsibilities, although, like white mothers, African American mothers “admit to doing more” (Curenton et al., 2018:868). Egalitarian arrangements are bolstered by middle-class African American women who work outside the home by choice rather than economic necessity. These middle-class women offer mothering models to their children that spotlight egalitarianism. Regardless of SES, however, most African Americans do not view their roles as wife–mother and wage earner as mutually exclusive. Lastly, African American husbands appear more willing than white husbands to take responsibility for child rearing and adapt themselves and the household to the needs of their

316  Gender, Marriage, and Families

employed wives. This work, however, is less satisfying if they hold traditional gender ideology. A paradox of traditional gender attitudes and simultaneous egalitarianism, especially related to housework, often unfolds (Chapter 7). This pattern is interesting because African American working-class and lower SES men tend to hold traditional ideas about gender roles. In white families, traditional attitudes decline with age for girls, but not for boys. But for both African American girls and boys, traditional attitudes decline in adolescence, leveling off by about age 18 (Lam et al., 2017). The intersection of gender with race and social class account for this pattern during childhood socialization (Chapter 3).

Ideology of Black Womanhood The paid work of African American women has been a necessary and constructive adaptation to the reality of economic and social inequality in the United States. Historically, extended family closeness and high levels of religiosity facilitated resilience and were psychologically protective of these women despite the difficulties they faced in their provider roles. As a result, families were able to function with relative stability under extremely adverse conditions. Although taking root during slavery, this historical pattern holds today, especially for single mothers hovering near poverty. Yet this very strength has been viewed as a weakness in these families. Over 50 years ago an influential report by Daniel Moynihan (1965) purporting to explain the poverty of African American families intimated that a “black matriarchy” exists. Decision making and other family powers and responsibilities rest with women rather than men in African American families. By constructing African American women by such an ideological stance, African American men were co-constructed as emasculated, stripped of authority, and driven from the family under an aura of self-defeat. The family is left with fewer defenses against poverty, delinquency, and illegitimacy. The Moynihan Report again reminds us of the powerful connection between sexism and racism. The report was attacked largely because black men were usurped of their rightful place as head of the family. To untangle the pathology surrounding the black family, the father must be returned to his patriarchal position of dominance in the household. Assertive and independent women can wreak havoc on both the family and the race. Black women apparently do not suffer the same humiliation as black men and “neither feel nor need what other human beings do either emotionally or materially” (Smith, 1995:157). The demographic reality of African American households (and the household structures that accommodate ongoing discrimination and economic oppression) challenges the ideology of black womanhood and its embedded notion of black matriarchy. However, the ideology has done untold damage by creating and reinforcing stereotypes of superhuman women and weak and absent men, who are then blamed for the circumstances in which they find themselves. As it became an adaptive cultural belief—in and outside of African American communities—the “strong black woman ideology” is associated with both gender role stress and racial stress (Davis et al., 2018:820). African American men may have internalized assumptions of the ideology, in turn creating tension between men and women.

Multiple Risks of Race, Class, and Gender Despite stellar educational, health, and professional gains, and ongoing career success, African American women have the lowest earnings of both genders and all races. This pattern

Gender and Families  317

was worsened in the 2008–2009 recession and the decade of recovery. With large numbers of African American women in federal jobs, the government shutdown in 2019 further exacerbated earning difficulties. Although esteemed for their strong work ethic and perseverance in maintaining family stability during harsh economic times, African American women carry multiple burdens of intersecting minority statuses. If she is a single parent, the prospects of decent wages to maintain her family above the poverty level are severely reduced. This is intensified by the kinds of job African American women typically have. Although women of all races earn less than men overall, poverty risk is significantly higher for women in occupations dominated by African American women and lower in occupations dominated by white women. This is despite a strong commitment to employment and socialization messages from mothers to their adolescent girls emphasizing self-reliance, independence, and assertiveness. Leadership messages are embedded (Oshin and Milan, 2018). African American men must contend with a double bind of their own. Like other men, they are socialized into instrumental family roles that connect masculinity with being a good provider, husband, and father. As fathers, they want to model husbandhood in ways that demonstrate trust, commitment, teamwork, and partnership. This reinforces much research that challenges myths of uninvolved black fathers and depicting family deficits while ignoring family strengths (Coles and Green, 2010; Coats and McHale, 2018). African American men accept this standard of masculinity. However, in the wake of continuing de facto discrimination, opportunities for carrying it out are severely restricted. In seeking masculinity standards that are available and acceptable in poor neighborhoods, African American teens often turn their attention away from school and home to life on the streets. Coping mechanisms include “compulsive masculinity” that often unfolds with violence in and outside the home (Chapter 9). The African American community is not immune to other stereotypes concerning black male–black female relationships (Jones et al., 2018b). African American men often perceive black women as having more opportunity and hold them accountable for the status of black men. Tension may be heightened because African American women have higher levels of education than black men and are outpacing men in entering professional occupations. The marriage squeeze and the marriage gap are more acute for African American women searching for same-race men of comparable age and educational levels. Increased joblessness, underemployment, incarceration, and higher death rates from violent crime, disease, and poor health care deplete the pool of marriageable black males in absolute numbers and render those who are available less desirable to marry (Chapters 2 and 7). Stereotyping increases during periods of economic uncertainty. The higher unemployment rates of black men may counter the legacy of role flexibility and egalitarianism evident in many African American families. It is the economic position of men that significantly determines the course of many African American families and how gender roles will be enacted.

Latino Families For the first time in U.S. history, more people identify as Latino or Hispanic (18 percent) than identify as black or African American (14 percent), making them the largest racial minority in the nation. By 2060 the Latino population is projected to double; one in three U.S. residents will be Latino (Statistica, 2019a). Latinos are very diverse, and the enactment of gender roles is an indicator of that diversity. There are significant cultural and historical

318  Gender, Marriage, and Families

differences between Latinos, especially economic well-being and immigration status centering on number of generations in the United States, that help explain gender roles in their families. The three largest subgroups are Mexican Americans, Puerto Ricans, and Cuban Americans. Although all three groups are hampered by economic burdens of minority status, poverty is most acute for Puerto Ricans and least acute for Cuban Americans. Mexican Americans hover near the poverty line but there are wide variations in their overall economic status. Latinos share a heritage of Spanish colonialism and a solid connection to the Catholic Church. Several fundamental values related to gender and the family link these diverse groups. Family relations are characterized by respect and honor. Embedded in these relations is the notion of familism (familismo), a strong cultural value emphasizing the family and its collective needs over personal and individual needs and any other groups to which a family member belongs. Familism creates strong bonds between nuclear and extended family members in terms of support, loyalty, and solidarity. Much research links familism to emotional support, resilience, and guidance for Latino youth and a buffer against negative influences outside the home. Specifically, familism is associated with promoting mental health and positive ethnic identity by lessening stress linked to perceived racial and ethnic discrimination for adolescents (Corona et al., 2017; Constante et al., 2018; Kapke et al., 2017; Kulish et al. 2018). These bonds also ensure that family members remain intimately connected to one another throughout their lives. The most important element is that familism is strongly gendered. There is an adherence to patriarchal gender roles in a well-defined system of mutually exclusive beliefs that separate men and women; these roles are found throughout all social classes in Latino/Latino American cultures. Derived from the Spanish word macho (“male”), the man’s role is associated with machismo, seen to include virility, sexual prowess, and the physical and ideological control of women. The woman’s role is associated with marianismo (from the Virgin Mary’s name Maria), including beliefs of spiritual and moral superiority of women over men, the glorification of motherhood, and the acceptance of a difficult marriage. Latinas maintain family honor by virtuous behaviors, especially virginity before marriage. As mothers, they are expected to have an infinite capacity for sacrifice and to be submissive to the demands of the men in their family. For their boundless capacity to self-sacrifice, Latina mothers may be described as hembrismo (superwoman). As recounted by one daughter, this is an apt description. My mom took care of us … took us to school, picked us up, took us to practice, cooked dinner, helped us with homework, did everything that two parents usually do, she did all by herself … mom paid-worked … purchased all the food and paid out anything that we needed for the most part. (Liang et al., 2017:158) Whereas familism enhances overall well-being, “pillars” of marianismo for Latinas—about virtue, chastity, and subordination—central to familism may offset this positive effect. These attitudes are associated with self-silence, limiting communication with parents, and compromised emotional health for women. Latinas navigating the transition between high school and college can find themselves in the stressful terrain between positive regard for familism but it is embedded marianismo that causes stress (Diaz and Bui, 2017; Dillon et al., 2018; Sanchez et al., 2018).

Gender and Families  319

Research on familism is usually on Latinos of Mexica heritage, but results can be applied throughout Latino subcultures. The beliefs that support marianismo and machismo are loosening, evident in changes about once entrenched patriarchal gender roles in the family. Higher education for both males and females in Latino subcultures is associated with more gender role flexibility in the home and a loosening of stereotyped beliefs about humble women and aggressive men. Machismo in the home is being muted with emerging healthier gender expectations for Latino boys (see below). Machismo outside the home remains strong and older Latino males are more likely to resist these changes than are younger Latino females. Latina adolescents and young women entering new careers armed with college degrees are in the forefront of these changes (Lopez et al., 2017; Miville et al., 2017). It is clear that education, SES, and degree of acculturation affect how these values are translated into the home.

Puerto Rican Families Since Puerto Rico is an “unincorporated territory” of the U.S., its citizens are Americans and statistics on families and households are collected by the U.S. Census Bureau. Statistics on Puerto Ricans often do not distinguish between those living on the U.S. mainland and those living on the island. Migration between island and mainland is frequent and statistics may not account for this fluidity. We know, however, that poverty on the island is higher than poverty on the mainland. Puerto Ricans have the lowest income of any Latino group; almost half of all Puerto Ricans are in poverty, translating to one-fourth of all families, the highest rate overall for Latinos (Hispanics). Over 60 percent of Puerto Rican children live in single-parent families, the large majority with female householders. The critical gender–family link largely explains these facts. Women head half of all Puerto Rican households, and one-fourth have no high school diploma or GED. Women are paid better in jobs, such as light manufacturing, but these are quickly disappearing. Coupled with global economic uncertainty, companies are moving operations to Asia where even lower-paid female workers are hired. Servers in fast food restaurants and poorly paid domestic work are jobs of last resort. Compared with white, African American, and Mexican American women (Chicanas), Puerto Rican women have the lowest median income (Toro-Morn and Garcia, 2017). With a disproportionate toll on women, Puerto Rico is mired in poverty and still struggling with the devastation of back-to-back hurricanes, frequent earthquakes, and bracing for the next climate-related threats (Rosado, 2018). Feeling abandoned by their government, migrating to the U.S. mainland to escape the harsh conditions offers a temporary respite even as families are left behind on the island. Fragile families become more fragile. Families are often divided, with children being raised by grandparents in Puerto Rico and husbands migrating back and forth between the island and New York or Florida in search of employment. Marriages are precarious, but marianismo and the stigma of divorce keep many couples legally married but separated. About half of all heterosexual couples form consensual unions, different from cohabitation, that are recognized as informal marriage. Births to unmarried Puerto Rican women have soared, comprising over 60 percent of all their births. Women who are recent migrants to the mainland, especially spouses in middle- and working-class couples, strive to maintain a continuity of family life. These families are more nuclear in structure and are at the forefront of the trend toward fewer consensual unions and more legal marriages.

320  Gender, Marriage, and Families

Consensual unions, however, are not necessarily associated with negative outcomes for children. This definition of family is normative and accepted. It is often the resilient form children depend on for stability, strong family relationships, and cultural connections between Puerto Rico and New York. Being born in a consensual union is socially constructed as being born into a marriage. This construction works to the benefit of a child’s development and may lessen, rather than increase, problem behavior. In navigating the world outside their communities, however, the protection associated with consensual unions may decrease. Better-educated women are likely to value both career and family roles, and this is reflected in their parenting practices. However, girls are often caught between two cultures, that mirror one set of values more than the other. Echoing the marianismo–machismo duality, for example, Latina activist and writer Judith Ortiz Cofer (1952–2016) describes experiences growing up in a Puerto Rican community in New Jersey. As a girl I was kept under strict surveillance, since virtue and modesty were, by cultural equation, the same as family honor... . But it was a conflicting message girls got, since Puerto Rican mothers also encouraged their daughters to look and act like women... . The extended family and church structure could provide a young woman with a circle of safety; if a man “wronged” a girl, everyone would close in to save her family honor. (Cofer, 1995:204–205) Cofer’s words resonate today. Cofer asserts that her education gave her a stronger footing to survive this kind of duality in mainstream culture and saved her from the harsher forms of racial and ethnic prejudice. Familism may buffer girls from the “harshness” of the outside world, but it does not adequately prepare them for the role conflict they will inevitably face when they enter it as wives, mothers, and employed workers.

Mexican American Families Chicanas also confront gender roles tied to ideology surrounding marianismo–machismo and familism, factors that keep divorce rates low and maintain intergenerational ties by passing on cultural traditions and fostering ethnic pride. Machismo may be an outgrowth of these traditions, but in a way that adapted them to Mexican American communities. Early research interpreted machismo as a male defense against racial discrimination and poverty. The belittling daily world faced by Mexican-American laborers is reproduced in the home, so men are bolstered when women are “kept in their place.” Notice how the concepts of machismo and “strong black women ideology” can be used to justify the same conclusion and subsequently used to perpetuate gender inequality. Subordination of women to men in families is evident, but research is challenging the model of the all-dominant and controlling male. Families are not as patriarchal as had been assumed, and caballerismo is trending toward gender equity. This concept depicts men as respectful and nurturing family providers, who are also noble and chivalrous. The latter traits mute machismo but offer palatable images of masculinity that affirms ethnic identity and Mexican culture. The very concept of machismo is being challenged for its pathological foundation of hypermasculinity that became engrained in Latino scholarship and history. Boys are embracing caballerismo (Cowan, 2017; Sanchez et al., 2017). Couples report that the spheres of men and women remain largely separated, but that child care

Gender and Families  321

and household tasks are increasingly shared. Joint decision making is most apparent when women are employed outside the home. Gender roles are less traditional because extended family ties also are weakening. There is a trade-off: families may receive less child care support from older kin, but children are less likely to hear messages about female subordination. When pressures outside the home, such as job loss, a health crisis, or neighborhood deterioration, threaten family cohesion, families rally around traditional cultural values. These values are adapted to fit family needs, even if they counter traditional beliefs about gender. Women may need to enter the world of work, and men may need to be family caretakers. In this sense, it is argued that family stress functions to bolster positive qualities of familism as well as encourage productive gender role change (Hurtado and Sinha, 2016; Knight et al., 2018). While machismo–marianismo ideology has not ruptured, it has clearly cracked. Compared with their immigrant grandparents and parents, even as traditional cultural values offer protection and resilience during adversity, these ideological patterns have been altered significantly for children born in the United States. Poverty significantly decreases by the second generation of immigration, college education for both men and women is encouraged and increasing, and families are moving upward in SES. Latino college students with at least one immigrant parent are more likely to complete college than college students with both native born parents (Piña-Watson et al., 2016; Kirui and Kao, 2018). The benefit is maximized if the immigrant parent is the mother. On the negative side, Chicana women are largely employed in occupations segregated by gender that offer little job mobility—both factors functioning to keep income levels low. Parallel for all American women, teen pregnancy rates are on the decline, but young Chicanas, particularly in rural communities, are entering the single-parent ranks (Raymond-Flesch, et al., 2017). With weakening familism, child care and financial support are less available to these new mothers. Intersectional risks of class, race, ethnicity, and gender will determine whether the economic prosperity of second and third generation Mexican Americans can be sustained (Mollborn, 2017; Teti et al., 2017; Peterson et al., 2018).

Cuban American Families Immigration history explains Cuban American prosperity and enjoying the highest standard of living of all Latino groups. Immigrants in the 1960s were college educated, many drawn from Cuba’s professional ranks. Even though women were not likely to be in the labor force, education for middle- and upper-SES women was encouraged and helped bolster the prestige of the family. Cuban identity in the U.S. is sustained through Cubanidad, beliefs about what it means to be Cuban, that are strongly linked to religion and family and consequently to gender. The effects of traditional gender ideology show negative effects for women in Cuba, patterns that were transferred by immigrants to the U.S. (Diaz, 2018). The double standard of sexual morality, for example, lives on in Cuban American communities. Parents want their daughters to be educated, but also to remain virginal, uncorrupted, and sequestered. Later immigrants were poorer, families more fragile and prone to breakup, and women in the workplace more common. They are doubly marginalized in a system that nominally protects them from racism and sexism outside the home, while inside the home they carry multiple family and household burdens (Hernández-Truyol, 2017). Respite from work— whether paid or unpaid—is often illusory.

322  Gender, Marriage, and Families

Cuban American families are demographically more similar to European Americans. Compared with other Latino subgroups, these families have fewer children, are economically stronger, and are likely to be headed by a married couple. Married couples with higher levels of education are slowly moving toward more gender-equitable family roles. Unlike European Americans, however, Cuban American families are likely to be extended and children are expected to live with their parents until marriage. Elderly in these families offer child care services and in turn expect to be taken care of as they become feeble. The increased number of Cuban American working-class women in the work force is associated with child care by older female kin. Middle-class women can afford to hire paid help so the elderly may be relieved of these responsibilities, but Cubanidad assures eldercare will continue as needed. With fast-paced higher education, egalitarianism in family and work roles is in line with the future expectations of Cuban American girls. As they become more acculturated, younger women are challenging cultural restrictions based on gender.

Asian American and Pacific Islander Families The U.S. Census includes two separate categories of Asian Americans: people with origins in East and Southeast Asia or the Indian subcontinent; and people who are Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islanders. Together they comprise the Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) category. This grouping is contentious as it contains categories that are so diverse by race, ethnicity, and culture that it is difficult to describe. Pacific Islanders and Asian Americans face very different struggles related to immigration, colonization, and economic well-being. These groups have been historically undercounted in the U.S. Census. AAPI replaced API (Asian or Pacific Islander) and advocacy groups are working to endure fair data collection and reporting in the 2020 U.S. Census (Nguyễn, 2020). Despite the striking AAPI diversity, gender is a marker allowing some generalizations about this population, The Asian American and Pacific Islander population is the fastest growing of all racial and ethnic groups, with projections that by 2055 they will represent 38 percent of all U.S. immigrants, surpassing Latinos at 36 percent (López et al., 2017). Their numbers increase by immigration rather than increases in the resident population. Asian Americans—primarily Chinese, Japanese, Indian, and Filipino—have the highest number of married couples and the lowest divorce rate of all other racial minorities, at rates similar to whites. Compared with other racial groups in the United States, there is also a wider spread of income and poverty level. Asian Americans now surpass African Americans as the “most economically divided” group (Kochhar and Cilluffo, 2018). Among AAPI groups, Hmong, Bangladeshi, Cambodians, and Pacific Islanders (Tongan, Samoan, Native Hawaiian) have the highest poverty; Indian, Filipino, Japanese, and Chinese have the highest incomes. Although there is a large disparity in income among AAPI groups, when aggregated their median income surpasses whites and all other racial groups. Asian American women slightly outearn white women. Gender, however, is the factor that shows the largest within-race gender gap. Regardless of national origin, type of job, and education, Asian American women have lower incomes than Asian American men.

Cultural Diversity AAPI income inequality and its large gender gap may be explained by patterns of striking cultural diversity. In religion, for example, Koreans are predominantly Protestant Christian,

Gender and Families  323

Filipinos are Catholic, Japanese are Shinto and Buddhist, Pakistanis are Muslim, and Indians are Hindu. Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islanders embed ancient indigenous spirituality into contemporary religious practices. Religion has a powerful, ongoing influence on beliefs about gender that are carried into the family (Chapter 12). Asian American families share other cultural patterns with gender implications. Gender roles in the originating Asian cultures demonstrate collectivistic kinship traditions in which personal needs are sacrificed for family needs. Extended families are normative, and children are socialized to be obedient in the family and loyal to parents and elders. Conformity to cultural and family traditions is expected in children but much more for girls than boys. Obedience is played out by marriages that are commonly orchestrated by kin rather than left solely to the devices of children. These family traditions emphasize female subordination to all males and older females in a patriarchal family structure. As a key consequence of patriarchal norms, preference and regard for sons over daughters unfolds in families and kin networks (Chapter 6). The strongly gendered principles of family structure have been modified in Asian American families but not dislodged. The extent to which these principles occur is largely explained by length of residence in the United States. Recent arrivals are strongly connected to their ethnic community, for example, which provides social support and jobs in family businesses. Chinese and Koreans in particular appear to benefit from community ties—both males and females have high levels of educations and enjoy relatively fast upward mobility. Although still quite low, the divorce rate and the number of female-headed households are steadily increasing among AAPI Asian American groups. When children become more Americanized, intergenerational conflict increases, with males more likely to challenge restrictions imposed by parents. Daughters have more emotionally burdensome responsibilities, simultaneously challenging but also preserving patriarchal norms and protecting family honor (Chung, 2016). Among Chinese Americans, for instance, children will gladly provide economic help for their parents but resist their parents’ advice on personal matters such as whom they choose as friends or dates. Traditional expectations for marriage are eroding, and emerging norms are now emphasizing choice of partners based on romantic love. A staple of Asian American romance movies, arranged marriages have not disappeared, but have been replaced by advice and not too subtle suggestions from parents and elders about suitable marriage partners. Of all AAPI groups, Indian and Pakistani Americans are the least likely to marry outside of their cultural boundaries. (Chapter 7). And as expected, boys are less likely than girls to take their parents’ suggestions for “investigating” potential marriage partners.

Challenging Subordination Education is the key for Asian American women seeking to challenge subordination inside and outside the home. The expectation for women to attend college—and better if it is an “elite” institution—is a commanding message girls hear throughout their lives. Over half of Asian American women have a BA or higher degree, significantly leading the 38 percent of white women with comparable degrees. Despite these gains, white women are breaking through the glass ceiling in executive positions while Asian women are not (Chapter 10). Asian American women are the “forgotten minority” in otherwise robust gender and race narratives about the glass ceiling. Asian executives, especially women, are perceived to be diligent and competent, but also quiet and less assertive, so are often bypassed for leadership positions (Hassan, 2018). The “model minority” stereotype is exceptionally insidious—praised

324  Gender, Marriage, and Families

for talent, hard work, and achievement orientation—but too weak to be leaders. Shattering cultural gender barriers in the home and maneuvering stereotypes in the workplace take both an emotional toll by disappointing one’s family, and an economic toll by jobs where talent and education are not rewarded.

Native American Families Native Americans, including American Indian and Alaska Native (AIAN) population, comprise two percent of the total U.S. population. The numbers appear small, but they doubled in only a few decades and are projected to grow to 2.5 percent (10 million people) by 2060. AIAN intermarriage rates have soared, about half reporting they are mixed-race. Resurgent cultural pride has fueled a rise in the number of people claiming AIAN heritage. Tribal diversity is prominent and increasing, with 573 federally recognized tribes and others applying for recognition (Jordan, 2018). Diversity is a hallmark of AIAN. Nonetheless, they share patterns that are fundamental to gender roles in tribal and family life. Over one-fourth of AIAN households live in poverty, the highest of all racial categories. Over three-fourths of children live in mother-only households in an era where AIAN women show the largest decline in wages of all women (IWPR, 2016; NCES, 2018; U.S. Census Bureau, 2018c). These statistics translate to dire outcomes for AIAN women and families. Households are at risk for social problems such as unemployment for both men and women, unplanned pregnancy, failure to complete high school or finish college, and domestic violence. Poverty goes hand in hand with escalating violence in tribal communities. An epidemic of violent crime against women led to special provisions in federal legislation allowing Tribal Nations to prosecute both Indians and non-Indians who assault Indian spouses or dating partners (NCAI, 2018). The language is gender neutral, but the vast majority of crimes are against women, including stalking, psychological abuse, and sexual violence. Although it may seem like good news that 8 of 10 women survive serious violence, it means that two did not (Rosay, 2016). Federal funding to address violence against AIAN women is precarious at best, and in these politically tumultuous times, authorized programs are woefully underfunded (U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 2018). Even underfunded programs are under threat if they are raided to fund other programs not authorized by Congress. The current economic plight of Native Americans and its disproportional risk to women is traced to two centuries of devastating policies by the federal government. Colonialism, accompanied by Christianity, altered ancient tribal patterns drastically. Women’s power and prestige varied by tribe, but women’s status precipitously declined with colonialization. Many tribes were matrilineal, the family name traced through the mother’s line, and matrilocal, a couple moving into the bride’s home at marriage. Although gender segregation was the norm, complementarity, balance, and gynocratic (female-centered) egalitarianism also existed both in and outside the home. Women held important political, religious, and other extra-domestic roles. With increased European contact, culminating with the founding of the United States, Native women were gradually stripped of these roles (Chapter 5). To assimilate native people, the U.S. government first sought to obliterate ancient traditions—from seizing homelands to forcibly removing Native American children from their families to be raised and educated in federal run boarding schools, a practice that continued for almost a century (Emery, 2017; Little, 2017). A policy of stamping out culture and being cut off from families—in language, dress, history, religion, identity—is known as “cultural genocide” (Ostler, 2015). Altered family patterns were its first expression and egalitarian family structures changed to patriarchal ones.

Gender and Families  325

Cultural genocide did not succeed. Although ancient customs were altered, they were not eradicated. They continue to reinforce women-centered family strength and stability. The gender complementarity around which tribal communities existed and thrived were visible well into the twentieth century. Features of this pattern persist today (Rhea, 2016). Women on and off the reservation are activists who work to retain spiritual, economic, and leadership roles offering prestige and power in their families and communities. Activism in support of equality takes on many forms, from resilience and resistance, to writing, teaching, and shoring up informal support systems that aid all tribal communities (Bowers, 2017; Burnette and Figley, 2017). The partisan march to undo gender and sexual equality nationally, prompted powerful political activism by Native American women. With coalitions and backing from women’s organizations throughout the U.S., the first Native American women were elected to Congress in 2018, Deb Haaland from New Mexico, and Sharice Davids from Kansas, also making her the first openly LGBTQ member of Congress. These events may mark the reclamation of the pre-colonial tradition of recognizing and celebrating two-spirit and third-gender people (Chapter 2). The “undoing” of some of colonization’s erasures can benefit the collective Indian identity (Pearl and Velte, 2017:461). Unlike other racial ethnic minorities, a return to cultural traditions among Native Americans may signal more, rather than less, sex and gender egalitarianism.

DIVORCE An enduring marriage is not necessarily a successful one. Americans say that romantic love is the primary reason for marriage, so “falling out of love” is a key reason for divorce. Romantic ideals fuel divorce but, as we will see later, fueled the legal right for same-sex marriage. Socialization into the idealism of romance creates expectations that few relationships can meet. Unmet expectations set up a cycle of dissatisfaction, lower commitment, and the search for alternative relationships (Vannier and O’Sullivan, 2018). Lower relationship satisfaction can lead to divorce, but the intersecting demographic factors that most consistently predict divorce—as well as a breakup after cohabitation—are age and social class. Teenage marriages and cohabiting lower-SES couples are most likely to dissolve, probably within five years. For teenage couples who start out with less education, fewer economic resources, and less emotional maturity, the idealization of love quickly fades when confronted with the stark reality of marriage. Whether married or not, teenage males lose the idealization sooner than teenage females. Although subject to historical anomalies such as the Depression and World War II, and the legal ease of getting a divorce, the rate steadily increased throughout the last century, peaking in the 1980s. Since 1990 the divorce rate has steadily decreased, although modestly (Table 7.2). Cohabitation as a preview of marriage does not correlate with less likelihood of divorce—it may be the opposite: cohabitation sets up new marriages that are unstable at the outset, thereby increasing the risk for divorce (Chapter 7). Given that, at least for now, the divorce rate seems to have plateaued, cohabitation is normative. It is difficult to sort out the relationship between cohabitation and divorce. A declining divorce rate is associated with the cohort of baby boomers (“grey divorcees”), less likely to get a divorce. More significant, the cohort of millennials, and older long-term heterosexual cohabitants, are waiting longer to marry or not marrying at all (Hatch, 2017; Wood, 2018). A declining marriage rate is one result (see Table 7.2). Age at first marriage is a better demographic predictor of divorce than are age and gender combined.

326  Gender, Marriage, and Families

It is easier to calculate marriage rates than divorce rates. Depending on which standard for calculating divorce rates is used, the future of marriage in the United States and for its individual couples appears rather bleak. When comparing the number of divorces with the number of new marriages, it is fair to say that half will end in divorce. The problem with this comparison is that it does not account for how long a couple was married, so it may inflate the failure rate of new marriages. It is more revealing to look at annual divorces per 1,000 married women (half of married couples), which is about 20. This indicates a less discouraging fourin-ten marriage failure rate. Cohabitation is not factored into divorce rates, but these couples separate at higher rates than married couples. Despite the (modest) decline of divorce in the U.S., it remains so high that first marriages may be referred to as “starter marriages.”

Gender and Adjustment in Divorce Divorce has profound social, psychological, and economic effects on the divorcing couple and their families. Divorce and separation after lengthy cohabitation are strongly gendered. The gendering of divorce as carried out in the legal process impacts women and men differently. These effects reverberate to their children.

Gender Beliefs and Emotional Well-Being We see later that family finances are central in explaining well-being in the wake of divorce trauma. Although it is difficult to separate economic from noneconomic factors, women tend to adjust moderately better to divorce in the long run than men. However, both men and women who are nontraditional in their gender role orientation adjust better than those who are traditional. Men and women with less traditional gender ideology are better at reconciling themselves to divorce than those who hold more conventional gender role beliefs. Couples subscribing to more egalitarian gender norms predict less likelihood of divorce overall. Regardless of race, women who have higher levels of self-esteem and independence opt out of unsatisfactory marriages at a faster rate and adjust better to their post-divorce lives. Although religiosity may predict more traditional gender role beliefs, spiritual well-­ being predicts better marriage adjustment and divorce outcomes for women. Nontraditional gender role beliefs, however, are less protective for divorced women with young children (Steiner et al., 2011; McDonald et al., 2018). The powerful emotional toll of motherhood ideology works against a woman’s well-being. Men who adjust better to divorce are likely to be connected to a new partner and re-establish their preferred gender pattern, whether or not it is a traditional one. Ex-spouses adjust better when they attribute the cause of the divorce to the relationship rather than to themselves or each other (Lucier-Greer and AdlerBaeder, 2016; Shafer et al., 2016). They leave the marriage with a more intact sense of self that serves as a bolster as they face a post-married future.

Age Younger people are better at rebuilding their lives after a divorce, and the spouse who first sought the divorce adjusts to it more readily. Women are more likely than men to initiate a divorce, and younger women do so at higher rates than both older men and older women. Immediate post-divorce adjustment is perilous, but if it occurs at an earlier age, it can lead to

Gender and Families  327

more growth options and enhance the person’s well-being over the long run. Older women suffer greater psychological trauma and economic strain in divorce and may be more likely to stay in an unhappy marriage until a new partner is on the horizon. Older men are at greater risk of health problems such as stroke after a divorce (Andersen and Olsen, 2018). The connection of age to divorce outcomes is strong, and regardless of gender, predicts increased social, psychological, and health risks for people who divorce later in life.

Employment Although employed women may have the financial latitude to end an unhappy marriage, their income contributes more to marital happiness than marital dissatisfaction. A woman is more reluctant to initiate a divorce when her husband is unemployed. Regardless of gender, when one spouse outearns the other, the one bringing in more income feels better about the financial situation in the household. A husband today is less likely to feel threatened by a wife who matches or outearns him and may celebrate the mismatch. For dual-earner couples, however, it is housework rather than income that fuels marital problems. The most dissatisfied couples are those in which wives want joint decision making and household task sharing by husbands, whereas husbands prefer a more traditional, patriarchal style of family functioning—a pattern that crosscuts race (Offer and Schneider, 2011; Eirich and Robinson, 2017; Tumin and Qian, 2017). With financial latitude, shifts in gender role ideology help explain why today’s women are now more likely than their mothers and grandmothers to initiate divorce.

The Impact of Gendered Law in Divorce Divorce is no longer a legally difficult process. The legal ease of ending a marriage is linked to the no-fault divorce, which allows one spouse to divorce the other without placing blame on either. Divorce is readily available to those who want it and can afford it, such as women in abusive marriages, older men hoping to remarry younger women, and young couples who married quickly and confronted marital conflict just as quickly. “Irreconcilable differences” has become the generic default category used by divorcing couples. No-fault divorces represent the large majority of all divorces in the United States.

Custody Although all states have gender-neutral child custody laws, sole custody is still likely to be granted to the mother, the preferred pattern for mothers and fathers. In decisions for sole custody, mothers gain custody of children about 80 percent of the time, usually without further legal action by fathers or from a court appointed mediator. Both parents agree that the mother is the better custodial parent (Grall, 2020). The belief that children—especially young children—should stay with their mothers is pervasive. This belief has strong cultural consensus and legal support, but it often minimizes gendered fallout to divorced parents and their children. Sole custody for women immediately requires an array of roles that she and her husband previously shared. Even if she is working outside the home, divorce increases financial obligations, child care, and household responsibilities. Women report that coercive and even violent behaviors of their husbands during marriage can transition to post-divorce

328  Gender, Marriage, and Families

lives (Toews and Bermea, 2017:2166). By law and circumstance noncustodial fathers may continue to wield financial and psychological power that control how visitation, child support, and well-being of their ex-wives and children play out. For divorced mothers who do not have the financial capability to adequately provide for their children, the decision may be to give up custody. Unlike a noncustodial father, a mother who voluntarily gives up custody is far more likely to be stigmatized. She may relinquish custody knowing that her ex-husband is in a better financial position to offer them what she cannot. With the backdrop of the motherhood mandate and mystique, divorced mothers without custody of their children are seen as abandoning motherhood. The rate of fathers granted custody has increased rapidly; today about 20 percent of all sole custody decisions grant custody to fathers. Fathers are more likely to gain full custody in contested divorces, their lawyers citing the best-interest-of-the-child standard (BICS). In challenging the maternal preference argument, for example, the standard allows judges a great deal of discretion in interpreting family law. Under a veil of gender neutrality, judges may accept evidence about the present circumstances of fathers and mothers but not delve into the circumstances leading to the divorce (Ryznar, 2017; Huntington, 2018). Fathers can be favored over mothers because fathers are usually financially better off. Financial “maintenance” to women, such as alimony, is rarely awarded to women the court deems capable of employment. Divorce requires women to give up thoughts about remaining a homemaker if that was her predivorce existence. Earning a living—working outside the home—can jeopardize her chances of gaining custody, especially if she has young children. If a father remarries, he has the possibility of another full-time caretaker. Although uncontrollable economic factors are the key reasons most mothers lose custody battles, they are cast into the role of unfit parent. The case for fathers’ rights in custody decisions is often more of a case against mothers, with claims that men are the victims in a family law system that privileges women. Children, in turn, can become the pawns in contested decisions (Dailey and Rosenbury, 2018). Gender-neutral standards are supposedly in effect to ensure parity in divorce and child custody decisions, but gender stereotyping of parents works against this in both principle and practice.

Joint Custody With BICS at the forefront, sole mother-custody as the most common form in non-contested divorces is rapidly being replaced by joint-custody arrangements—where parents share decisions related to their children, including how much time children will spend in the home of each parent. Joint custody now represents over half of court-ordered divorce arrangements and is fast becoming the preferred shared/coparenting arrangement (Meyer et al., 2017). Coparenting occurs in a variety of contexts, from sharing day-to-day decisions about children with their ex-spouses to actually moving children (and sometimes parents) to different homes on a rotating basis.

Gender and Coparenting The quality of the coparenting relationship is the key factor in how a child adjusts to divorce. Gendered beliefs about who is a “good” or “better” parent intrude, however, and often thwart adjustment for parents as well as their children. Fathers express more concern about financial issues than about care issues after a divorce. In turn, they are less likely than mothers

Gender and Families  329

to be available for day-to-day issues about coparenting. An “equal” pattern of care may be imposed, but it disguises the greater contributions of mothers, rather than fathers, to sustain the emotional well-being of their children (Russell et al., 2016; Marinho, 2017). Regardless of whether a mother was employed during marriage, she is the primary caretaker, and divorce does not dislodge that reality. Divorced mothers with children who have chronic disease, for example, report they are responsible for making all arrangements about health care and keeping ex-husbands informed of the child’s health situation (McBroom and Ganong, 2017). In coparenting, it is mothers who keep communication channels open. Decisions about the degree of care and contact need to be determined based on the actual living situations of parents rather than the courts (Fagan and Palkovitz, 2018; Rogers and Standridge, 2019). As equitable as the arrangements may seem on paper, women take on the greater care and economic burdens associated with joint custody.

What about the Children? Joint-custody fathers are more involved in their children’s lives, have increased contact with them, and actively participate in shared decision making regarding their children. Complicated scheduling is a downside, but less strain is reported if one ex-spouse does not carry the full burden of parental responsibilities, whether in housework, paid work, or caregiving (Altindag et al., 2017; Braver et al., 2018). A huge issue is the degree of parental cooperation. To a child’s benefit, parental conflict is reduced when both parents agree about a divorce decree recognizing that both dad and mom are vital for the well-being of their children. If channels of communication remain open and parents have access to informal and formal support networks, a joint custody arrangement is a constructive option. If parental cooperation fails, joint custody serves to increase conflict between parents and cascades into their children’s lives (Drapeau et al., 2017; McIntosh and Tan, 2017). The quality of the coparenting relationship is the key factor in how a child adjusts to divorce. Overall, joint custody arrangements show moderate to good outcomes for children and better adjustment to divorce for parents (Baude et al., 2016; Turunen et al., 2017).

Divorce and Poverty Although women appear to fare better than men in the psychological trauma of divorce, the economic consequences are often disastrous for women in the United States, a pattern that plays out globally (Men, 2017; Leopold, 2018). Adding parenthood to gender, compared with divorced fathers, divorced mothers have a disproportionate share of the economic burden of the divorce. Approximately 40 percent of divorced mothers enter poverty; 30 percent of custodial mothers are in poverty, twice as high as for custodial fathers. For both African American and white women, divorce increases a woman’s financial burdens in two important ways. First, child support payments fall far short of meeting needed family expenses, and second, women are required to be employed to receive welfare benefits. Minority women are often in low-wage jobs, a situation compounded by both race and gender discrimination. Older women, housewives, and those reentering the labor force after a long absence are in an extremely precarious position, especially as welfare and Medicaid benefits continue to be assaulted. These women are at a severe disadvantage in the job market at the exact time they need an adequate income to support the family.

330  Gender, Marriage, and Families

Dividing Assets No-fault divorce makes a bad economic situation worse for women when courts mandate an equal division of assets, such as the family home and savings. Coupled with no-fault divorce, joint custody puts women at great financial risk. Joint custody may be agreed on during a divorce mediation process in which parents meet with an impartial third party to reach mutually acceptable agreements. Feminists contend, however, that mediators may usher in beliefs about gender-neutral standards that are anything but neutral as far as finances are concerned (Mirzaie, 2016). Most women do not have the economic resources to coparent on an equal basis with their ex-husbands. Misconceptions abound about women who are set up for a life of leisure by their wealthy ex-husbands. Court-ordered alimony—“maintenance”—is awarded to only a small percentage of women and in amounts so low that they barely match minimal welfare payments or Social Security. Laws in many states are not kind to the few women who do receive alimony. Regardless of whether she has custody of her children or she is cohabiting, alimony can be reduced or eliminated if she enters into a “new supportive relationship.” If the relationship ends, alimony is unlikely to be reinstated, as much for the legal cost as for the lack of sympathy she will receive from the courts. Divorced and cohabitating women of all races who end long-term relationships are often cast into dire economic straits.

Child Support The issue of what is awarded is related to the issue of what can be collected. Fewer than half of all custodial parents with a child support order received the full amount. Over half of all custodial mothers have agreements and half of these mothers actually receive the full amount from nonresidential fathers. The amount of unpaid child support is staggering. The U.S. Census Bureau reports $34 billion in child support is not paid to the custodial parent who was due support. As noted, fathers are more likely than in the past to be awarded custody, and fathers are less likely to receive the full amount from non-custodial mothers. However, custodial mothers are much worse off financially than single parent custodial fathers; failure to pay child support to mothers forces almost 10 million children into welfare. In half of divorced families, by two years after the divorce there is no contact with the nonresidential parent, usually the father. The emotional loss that noncustodial fathers experience at divorce may help explain the financial distancing from their children (Grall, 2020; Vogel, 2020). The severe economic consequences of divorce are played out for women regardless of race. Although young minority men are not well off economically, their post-divorce financial situation tends to be better than that of their ex-wives. A man’s standard of living tends to show a moderate decrease in the immediate aftermath of a divorce but improves over time. Although declines in post-divorce income are less for women than in years past, decreases and losses remain much greater compared with men’s post-divorce income. In addition, single-parent mothers—but not single-parent fathers—are penalized for having more children (Kramer et al., 2016; Leopold and Kalmijn, 2016). A loss of half the family income is typical. Divorce is a principal reason for the high poverty rate of single-parent women and their dependent children. In addition to the population of never-married women with dependent children, divorce contributes to the feminization of poverty—a global trend showing

Gender and Families  331

an escalation of women in poverty. Women at high risk of poverty globally are single-parent women of color. At highest risk are single-parent indigenous women. To help get divorced women off public assistance, states are more vigilant in enforcing court orders for child support payments. To recoup the cost of collecting the money from fathers, however, states may keep the money rather than passing it on to ex-wives and children. Rather than criminalizing fathers for nonpayment of child support, benefits of getting men to live up to their financial obligations are greater when programs encourage men to maintain active contact with their children and are nurtured in their identities as fathers (Marczak et al., 2015; Chen and Meyer, 2017). Men who have been slipping out of their children’s lives can be brought back, especially poor men of color. Changes in divorce law may also help with a woman’s post-divorce income loss. States could retain the no-fault option while recognizing that men and women enter divorce with very different levels of economic vulnerability.

Remarriage Although the marriage and remarriage rate are both decreasing, the United States has the world’s highest remarriage rate. About 80 percent of divorced people remarry, and one-half of all marriages are remarriages. The marriage–divorce–remarriage pattern is referred to as serial monogamy. Combined with a rising rate of cohabitation, remarriages are the primary reasons for the formation of a blended family, in which children from parents’ prior relationships are brought together in a new family. This now normative form of kinship is representative of over half of children in the United States today; over half of families with children are blended families. First marriages are more homogeneous, with couples generally matching demographically in categories such as education, SES, and race (Chapter7). Remarriages vary considerably in age and race; there are more intermarriages and a greater age difference than the two- to three-year spread in first marriages. Overall, about three-quarters divorced men and twothirds of divorced women remarry. A large majority of men remarry within five years of their divorce. Two-thirds of remarriages involve children. Mothers shoulder the most caregiving in both the first and second family. Since most divorced men with children are free from sole custody and are economically better off than their ex-wives, they have greater latitude in the remarriage market (Schnor et al., 2017; Watkins and Waldron, 2017; Petren et al., 2018). Men have an age advantage with more acceptance of the older man–younger woman remarriage than the reverse. A ten-year age difference favoring men is common in remarriages. Poorly educated women are likely to remarry but remarriage chances decrease if they have dependent children because they represent a financial liability for men. Financially independent women are attractive to men for remarriage, but these women have less to gain in a remarriage. Caring for stepchildren, for example, represents a liability. When adding race to the remarriage picture, African American women are least likely to remarry, and white women are most likely; Latinas fall in between. Whether for a starter marriage or remarriage, these patterns may be explained by the gendered expectations transmitted via subcultures according to race and ethnicity. The meaning of remarriage differs for these women. Women of all races may view remarriage as offering opportunities for economic and family stability in a new supportive relationship. If costs outweigh perceived benefits, they will choose to remain single.

332  Gender, Marriage, and Families

SINGLE-PARENT FAMILIES In 1968 only 7 percent of parents living with their children were unmarried; today it is 40 percent. Over the same time period, the number of parents who cohabit has skyrocketed; today Percent 100 80

Two parents

Two married parents

60 40

Mother only

20 0

Father only 1980

No parent

1985

FIGURE 8.2  Percentage

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015 2018

of Children Ages 0–17 By Presence of Parents in Household, 1980–2018

Source: America’s Children: Key National Indicators of Well-Being, 2019. U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, Annual Social and Economic Supplement. Family and Social Environment Figures: Indicator FAM 1.A. https://www.childstats.gov/americaschildren/fam_fig.asp

48.3% 43.2%

40.7% 32.7%

32%

14.8% 8.4%

All races

10.3%

Non-Hispanic White

Black

Married-Couple families FIGURE 8.3  Percentage

8.6%

5.7%

Hispanic

Asian or Pacific Islander

Single-Mother families

of Children in Poverty by Family Structure and Race and Hispanic Origin, 2017

Source: Children in Poverty. Child Trends Databank, 2019. https://www.childtrends.org/?indicators=children-in-poverty

Gender and Families  333

35 percent of all unmarried parents are cohabitating and almost half of them have children under age 18. The ranks of these cohabiting parents have also changed markedly. In 1968, 88 percent of solo parents were single mothers; today it is 53 percent, with these numbers offset completely by the increasing share of cohabitant men and women with children (Livingston, 2018b). In single-parent homes, 27 percent of children live with their mothers only and 4 percent live with their fathers only; another 4 percent lived with neither parent (Figure 8.2). The racial composition of these single-parent families shows starker divides. Whereas about three-fourths of white children live with two married parents, the number falls to less than two-thirds for Latino children and one-third for African American children. It is difficult to sort out these numbers to account for the increasing variety of households and families. When considering solo parenting overall, however, approximately one-third of all children are currently living with one parent. Factoring in poverty risk, sharp racial divides are also revealed. Poverty for African American children is triple that for white children, with Latino children faring only slightly better (Children’s Defense Fund, 2018). Adding single-parenting, poverty risk increases dramatically in female householder families that are African American or Latino. In the United States, over one-fifth of all children live in poverty, but about half of children in African American and Latino female single-parent homes live in poverty (Figure 8.3). The staggering statistic is that before they are 18, almost two-thirds of U.S. children will live part of their life in a single-parent household or in other households with adults who are not their parents. The majority of these households will be female headed.

Mothers and the Single-Parent Household The birth rate continues to decline, but contrary to popular perception, the decline is sharpest for subsets of unmarried women who formerly had the highest rate of nonmarital births, such as teens, African Americans, Latinas, and women without a college degree. The nonmarital birthrate increased through the 1980s, peaked in 2008, but has been decreasing ever since (Stone, 2018a). This pattern holds despite the drop in the marriage rate and the upsurge of cohabitation. However, the decreased birth rate of unmarried women does not offset the even steeper decline for married women. The net result is that unmarried women have a larger share of overall births. Even with fathers gaining sole custody in contested divorce, the number of never-married poor women with children continues to escalate. About half of all single parents are divorced; the other half have never been married. The divorced half of single-parent mothers appears to fare better than their never-married counterparts—they probably have some college education, live in their own homes, and have higher incomes. If children from divorced homes are living with their fathers, the median family income is over one-third higher than if they live with their mothers. Female-headed families are the fastest-growing type of family in the United States, and the odds that it is in poverty approach one in two. In mother- or grandmother-headed single-parent families, economic vulnerability is a way of life. Gender factors contribute to this situation. We saw that child support, alimony, and joint custody are not the financial salvation for these women. Neither are welfare payments in a restrictive system that contributes to rather than deters the cycle of poverty. If employed, women are more likely than men to be in low-paying jobs with incomes far from adequate to meet the needs of the family (Chapter 10). Regardless of law and public policy, the distinctive character of a single-parent woman’s poverty is that she shoulders the economic responsibility for children. Financial uncertainty heightens the physical and emotional demands on single-parent women. Compared with married couples, they rely more on children for housework, have fewer social supports, and raise children who are also more likely to become single parents.

334  Gender, Marriage, and Families

Single mothers report higher rates of depression and lower levels of self-esteem than married mothers, especially if they were teenage mothers and did not graduate from high school. The good news is that unmarried mothers are entering college at sharply increased rates; the bad news is that they take six years or more to finish, or drop out without completing a degree. In two-year colleges 40 percent say they are likely to drop out of school because of child care issues (IWPR, 2017). Support from kin, an important form of social capital, can moderate but not eliminate these financial risks. Programs to assist single-parent mothers in coparenting are a form of social capital that increases emotional well-being. However, social capital must be expansive enough to challenge the multiple disadvantages of low-income single mothers (Duquaine-Watson, 2017; Stoltz et al., 2017). Financially secure women adjust better to single parenting, feel better about their family and their jobs, and can afford higher quality child care. Their children tend to have better educational outcomes and fewer behavioral problems. Single women perched on the poverty line, however, experience chronic life strain, which impacts their physical, social, and psychological well-being.

Solo Parenting Mothers by Choice For one notable subset of unmarried women, the birth rate recently increased: those aged 35 and older. With more money and better education than their poorer unmarried counterparts, a larger share of women are having babies outside of marriage by choice. Because media focus is on policy issues for never-married mothers, people often forget that single mothers include not only divorced mothers, but also this escalating subset of women who choose motherhood but not marriage or remarriage. These are college-educated—often postgraduate—financially secure women who adopt children or may choose birth through artificial insemination. These risk-averse women often wait until after they turn 30 for their first child, forming support networks with others like themselves to maximize social well-being for themselves and their children. Rather than searching for a husband or male life partner, many prefer to give their children another sibling rather than a father (Golombok, 2015; Wiegers and Chunn, 2017). With careers on track, financial security for their families is better ensured. Millennial women are the leading edge of this cohort. They are ambitious in their entrepreneurial pursuits, and although marriage may or may not be ruled out, they are preparing for parenthood. As expressed by a consultant working with single women navigating the career-motherhood path, I think millennials are waiting because women have more choice than ever before. They are choosing to focus on their careers for a longer period of time and using egg freezing and other technology to “buy time.” (Cited in Hermanson, 2018) Although the number of financially secure unmarried mothers is growing, their percentage in the ranks of single-parent mothers is quite small. That they are better off financially is what separates them from the majority of their single-mother counterparts.

Fathers and the Single-Parent Household As single parent householders, men face a situation far different from that of women. Custodial fathers have more social support and fewer problems adjusting to single parenthood

Gender and Families  335

than do custodial mothers. Never-married custodial single fathers are viewed more positively than comparable mothers. Fathers are usually better educated, occupy higher-level occupations, and continue their careers after becoming single parents. Remember, too, that financial strength is a key reason why fathers are increasingly awarded sole custody when they request it. Like single mothers, single fathers report problems balancing work and family. Single fathers who cope successfully have more flexible work situations and more support networks. Custodial fathers appear to adapt well, perceive themselves as competent, and are more accepting and meaningfully involved with their children compared with noncustodial fathers (Finzi-Dottan and Cohen, 2019). Many set out to learn new tasks and domestic skills, believing that domestic expertise can be learned, rejecting the notion that they are naturally lacking in competence. Fathers who are more involved with housework before the divorce make a smoother transition to their new domestic roles. After divorce, single-parent mothers do less housework; fathers do more. Although single-parent fathers rely on their children to help with housework, it is distributed along the gender lines found in two-parent families. Daughters do more housework and more “feminine” housework than sons. Compared to single mothers, however, single fathers engage less in child care except play, often relying on help from female kin (Kaplan and Kroll, 2019; Lee and Hofferth, 2017). When fathers take on the role of the “primary” parent, they report close ties to their children and high levels of family satisfaction. However, they must still deal with gender role stereotyping and masculinity norms that assume they cannot be as competent parents as women.

GENDER PATTERNS IN LGBTQ FAMILIES As society’s most conservative institution, the family is highly resistant to change. Political debate concerning definitions of marriage and the family is also linked to campaigns focusing on homosexuality as the enemy of the (patriarchal) family and the American way of life. Gay and lesbian families do exhibit characteristics in contrast to the structure and behavior patterns of the traditional patriarchal family. We will see this appears more to the credit of these families than to their detriment. Definitions of marriage are shifting from the center of economic functions that bolster social stability to expand to love and romance. These new definitions became the ammunition for the legal right of same-sex couples to marry in the United States.

Same-Sex Marriage Seeming impossible only a few decades ago, the victory for same-sex marriage rights occurred swiftly. Because many nations, including most of northern Europe, recognized same-sex marriages much earlier than did the U.S., and many developing world countries continue to ban them, reciprocity issues for same-sex marriages are not resolved. In 1995 Utah became the first state to expressly prohibit same-sex marriages. In 1996, Hawaii became the first state to legalize same-sex marriage but the ruling was reversed two years later. In 2004 a San Francisco judge began issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Judges in Massachusetts followed. A firestorm of controversy ensued as other states grappled with how to deal with the influx of same-sex couples demanding marriage licenses. California legalized same-sex

336  Gender, Marriage, and Families

marriage in the summer of 2008, but five months later voters approved Proposition 8, which again banned it. In 2013, by court decision, California reinstated it. The federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman, was passed in 1996 but was declared unconstitutional in 2013. In 2014 the Supreme Court refused to hear cases from five states seeking to retain their same-sex marriage bans. This ruling in effect gave tacit approval for granting same-sex marriages in those states and paved the way for the 2015 Supreme Court decision, Obergefell v. Hodges, legalizing same-sex marriages in the United States. The ruling supported a definition of marriage centering on love and romance, and devotion to family as its logical extension, rather than on its traditional economic role in society. Activists using arguments favoring love and commitment in marriage became the ammunition for the right of same-sex couples to marry in the United States (Cathcart and GabelBrett, 2016). The final paragraph in Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy’s opinion clearly embraces this definition: No union is more profound than marriage, for it embodies the highest ideals of love, fidelity, devotion, sacrifice, and family. In forming a marital union, two people become something greater than once they were. As some of the petitioners in these cases demonstrate, marriage embodies a love that may endure even past death. It would misunderstand these men and women to say they disrespect the idea of marriage. Their plea is that they do respect it, respect it so deeply that they seek to find its fulfillment for themselves. Their hope is not to be condemned to live in loneliness, excluded from one of civilization’s oldest institutions. They ask for equal dignity in the eyes of the law. The Constitution grants them that right. The highly contentious political rhetoric around same-sex marriages has not disappeared with legalization. Legalization itself is threatened with an increasingly conservative Supreme Court (Chapter 9). However, with children in same-sex families spotlighted, it is resurrected in issues that revolve around images of traditional, patriarchal families. Although the courts often uphold these traditional views in cases of custody, they are being challenged in the workplace, in the unions, and in the schools in support of couples choosing nontraditional lifestyles related to sexual orientation, nonpatriarchal parenting, gender roles, or cohabitation. A productive twist to legalizing same-sex marriage is that people who identify themselves as transgender can now ignore issues related to “what sex they claim to be or what sex they became” (Chapter 2) to obtain a marriage license. After legalization, the number of LQBT families quickly multiplied (See Figure 7.2). As early as 2012, the U.S. Census reported that over 600,000 LGBT families were divided almost equally between gay male and lesbian families.

Gendering LGBTQ Families All couples go through courtship rituals that will determine whether long-term partnering is in their future. LGBTQ couples in committed relationships are acutely aware that dating is a preview for the enactment of gender and take time to discuss gender scenarios for later family life. If there is too much of a mismatch in gender expectations, the relationship is likely to fail. These couples are staunch supporters of incorporating egalitarian beliefs in their relationships and marriages but may find it difficult to challenge gender roles in a

Gender and Families  337

heteronormative world that is just as staunch. This dilemma is reflected in excerpts from LGBTQ-identified people in their relationships (Lamont, 2017:638, 639). A lot of people assume that because (my partner) is more masculine presenting that she popped the question and it was a big surprise and there was this big to-do. And it wasn’t like that at all … Even though I’m very feminine and she’s very masculine, we really don’t want to get caught up in gender roles. … I really wanted (a ring), but I was prepared to wait because I’m masculine or whatever … And she was like, “That’s stupid; we’re queers and we write our own scripts.” … And then a couple of weeks later the ring came and she proposed back … I like that it was important to her to propose back. Compared with different-sex families, awareness of gender roles is at the forefront of the families and stepfamilies LGBTQ couples form. In important ways, however, LGBTQ families show a great deal of similarity to many other family forms in the U.S. They tend to incorporate a network of kin and nonkin relationships, including friends, lovers, former lovers, coparents, children, and adopted children. Already at risk for discrimination, plus other intersectional risks by racial and ethnic statuses for many, LGBTQ families are also organized by social support, flexibility, and rational choice. Family resilience in light of stigma is a marker of LGBTQ family strength (Fish and Russell, 2018; Prendergast and MacPhee, 2018). Notice how this structure is similar to the fictive kin and familism evident in African American and Latino families.

Parenting The spotlight is on LGBTQ parents who must maneuver beliefs that children are harmed in a family format that is not heteronormative. This “deficit” approach assumes at the outset that same-sex parenting must be more harmful to a child’s well-being than the default category of different-sex parenting. Although the negative (harm) approach requires a higher standard, some argue that the research is not rigorous enough and produces results that are too optimistic (Schumm, 2016). What can we conclude from research on child development in LGBTQ families? Same-sex families with children, whether biological or through surrogacy or adoption, are highly child-focused. It is children’s gender-typed behavior that same-sex parents closely observe. It is not surprising that parents report less gender-typed behavior in their children overall and that toy choices show the most gender nonconformity. As children get older, girls do not change their gender-typed behavior as much as boys. Boys’ masculine style behavior increases (Goldberg and Garcia, 2016; Farr et al., 2018). These patterns are similar to nonLGBTQ families (Chapter 3). Family life under a microscope translates to gay and lesbian parents closely monitoring their children in all facets of their development, including emotional health, peer influences, and school progress. They are likely to take early notice as problems arise and seek support and counseling services from therapists specializing in lesbian and gay psychology. Some seek out those who adopt a feminist perspective in therapeutic approaches. On the other hand, there is more need than there are available therapists for LGBTQ families (Hartwell et al., 2017; Mallory et al., 2017).

338  Gender, Marriage, and Families

The most important conclusion about adjustment and psychological development of young children and adolescents raised by same-sex couples is that sexual orientation of p ­ arents—whether same sex or different sex—has little influence on a child’s gender ­development. Children with same-sex parents do have different experiences, and parents socialize them for awareness about being in a sexual minority family, but research does not point to glaring problems in childhood development (Patterson, 2017; Battelen et al., 2018). This is despite the huge pressure that couples face to raise children in a heteronormative culture that will produce heteronormative children with no gender identity issues. Sexual minority parents are reluctant to limit expressions of gender-typed or conformity or gender nonconformity. It is the quality of the relationship between parents and that children have two parents rather than one, that are more important for a child’s well-being than is parental sexual orientation (Calzo et al., 2017; Farr, 2017; Sumontha et al., 2017). Research is ongoing, but the bottom line is that “same-sex couples are as good at parenting as their different-sex counterparts” (Gates, 2015:67).

Adoption Research on parenting is pivotal in adoption and custody issues affecting LGBTQ couples. Despite the Obergefell ruling, same-sex parents remain in legal limbo as far as decisions about adopting, custody, and asserting their legal rights even as biological mothers and fathers. Same-sex adoption was legal in many states before same-sex marriage was legal in all states (Montero, 2014; Gash and Raiskin, 2018). Adoption agencies leverage a great deal of power in determining suitability of parents for adoption. With legal blessing, faith-based agencies can refuse service to same-sex couples. Religious factors are strong predictors of opposition to same-sex adoption, and agencies raise religious objections to same-sex marriage as a basis for denying adoption for same-sex married couples (Perry and Whitefield, 2016; Saindon, 2018). Legal ambiguity about same-sex adoption may be a factor in why gay and lesbian couples tend to have smaller families than heterosexual couples (Tate et al., 2018).

Egalitarianism A pioneering review of LGBTQ families, referred to then as gay, lesbian, or homosexual couples, showed more equality in their household arrangements than those of heterosexual couples (Maccoby and Jacklin, 1974). The conclusion of more egalitarianism was confirmed in the first comprehensive study that compared homosexual and heterosexual couples (Blumstein and Schwartz, 1983) as well as in research that followed. In addition to egalitarian ideals in marriage, same-sex couples report high levels of good communication, intimacy and commitment (Duncan and Joos, 2011; Rostosky and Riggle, 2017). The stereotypical image of an LGBTQ relationship with one dominant and one submissive partner is discounted. Although household work is divided by talent and interest, one parent may take on more child care tasks than the other (Feugé et al., 2018). Mothers struggle with ideals about parenting for gender equality but work to achieve it in household routines (Feugé et al., 2018; Engström et al., 2019). The egalitarian pattern generally occurs for both lesbian and gay couples, although lesbians are more successful in maintaining it over the long term.

Gender and Families  339

The monogamy that gay men value is harder to achieve. Mirroring gender role norms in wider society, gay men also value sexual prowess and, like heterosexual men, fall prey to its power as a defining mark of masculinity. And like heterosexual women, lesbians view sexual prowess as less important than emotional commitment, particularly in the early stages of a relationship. Lesbian couples frequently adopt a peer-friendship bond that later culminates in a sexual one as physical closeness grows and the relationship progresses. In housework and in child rearing, LGBT couples tend to act out egalitarian beliefs more than heterosexual couples. The debate about levels of egalitarianism in same-sex couples has implications for same-sex marriage issues overall. If same-sex couples are more egalitarian, would legally recognized marriage make them less so? Overall, since marriages are more likely to be patriarchal than egalitarian, legally married same-sex couples may succumb to patriarchal family lifestyles. Symbolic interactionists suggest that, in turn, household egalitarianism in their daily lives may be compromised.

Lesbian Mothers Legal acceptance does not mean social acceptance. In divorce mothers usually gain custody of children. With lesbians, however, this is less likely. Some women hide their lesbian identity to win custody and live in fear of being exposed and having the courts reverse the decision. Others who are granted custody may endure harassment from ex-husbands or their own relatives. To avoid bitter custody battles that can traumatize children, mothers will often voluntarily accede to their husbands’ demands. Marriage appears to lessen stigma for same-sex couples who raise children, with lesbian mothers perceiving less discrimination than gay fathers. Stigma is diminishing over time, but their “mainstream” motherhood identity exists alongside the lesbian identity they would like to more openly affirm (Gabb, 2018). As buffers to stigma from outside the home, characteristics of lesbian households include high emotional support and equal division of labor with as much absence of traditional gender roles as is feasible (Shenkman, 2018:246). It is quite revealing that lesbian mothers experience personal growth and satisfaction of needs in their relationship with partners, but this trajectory is not reported for heterosexual mothers. Unlike heterosexual mothers, lesbian mothers want to be perceived as typical mothers but also to celebrate their uniqueness and strengths (Gall et al., 2019:58). They walk a fine line between the two.

Gay Fathers Gay fathers can lose the right to raise their children and are less likely than lesbian mothers to be granted custody. About one-third of gay men have been married to a heterosexual woman at least once, and many of these men are biological fathers. With legalization of same-sex marriage, however, it is likely that marriages to heterosexual women will decrease. The family values rhetoric in DOMA lives on despite the upsurge of same-sex marriage for men, since the courts often endorse beliefs about an ideal one-size-fits-all heteronormative family (Brodyn, 2018). Compared with lesbian mothers whose choice to parent is consistent with an overarching motherhood mandate and more traditional gender roles, gay fathers are viewed more negatively for undermining these values. In turn they are perceived as “less capable of parenting well-adjusted children than are lesbians” (Carneiro et al., 2017).

340  Gender, Marriage, and Families

Linking this rhetoric with conservative news that frames wider public opinion, gay fathers are constructed as bad parents and unfit to raise children.

Coming Out Gay men must navigate the treacherous slope of coming out for themselves and their children. Norms of “outness” vary considerably and can be sources of resilience and strength or disadvantage and peril (Carroll, 2018a). Well-being of gay fathers is subject to timing of coming out and the age of their children. Coming out can trigger a domino series of events that reverberate through a family, involving not just separation, divorce, and child custody disputes but also loss of support from family, friends, and community. Identity formation for gay fathers is compromised by needing acceptance from the very groups reluctant to give it. Stigmatized as a result of coming out, internalized homophobia is magnified. Some gay fathers are marginalized more than others, even within the gay fatherhood community, including gay men of color and those with children from a heterosexual relationship (Lassiter et al., 2017; Carroll, 2018b). They worry that their children will be burdened with having a “different family than other children in their community” (Webster and Telingator, 2016:1108). Social constructionism asserts that risk from other minority statuses such as race and ethnicity, and ideology about what a gay father “should be,” are carried into LGBTQ families from public discourse and from the gay community itself. When children remain unaware of their fathers’ gay identity until long after a separation or divorce, they may feel alienated from their fathers and cast blame on their mothers. Many children long suspect their father’s gayness and are relieved when it is finally revealed. However, generally positive verbal reactions—putting on a happy face—can mask a variety of negative emotional reactions that are not shared with their parents during the coming out process (DiVerniero and Breshears, 2017:50). Until they come out, gay fathers can lead compartmentalized existences that compromise their emotional well-being. Like lesbian mothers, they hide their identity in fear their children will be traumatized. Gay fathers may judge themselves and be judged by others as less competent parents if they cannot productively come to terms with their gay identity. All parents shoulder enormous responsibilities of raising children. Gay fathers and lesbian mothers must add ever present stigma lurking around their families. Their decisions about how to parent are shaped by different barriers than encountered by heterosexual parents. Same-sex couples expect to have smaller families, and many say they may not parent at all (Gato et al., 2017; Tate et al., 2018). It remains unclear if an increase in support for coming out at a younger age and a decrease in homophobia will help gay fathers and their children to better deal with repercussions of living in a heterosexist society. Despite this rather bleak picture, the times are definitely changing. Being gay may not be compatible with traditional gender roles in a heteronormative marriage and family, but it is compatible with fathering. Gay men express a strong desire to continue parenting, either their own biological children or through adoption or surrogacy with a male spouse. Recent research confirms a range of positive outcomes for gay fathering. Children of gay men with prior marriages or cohabiting with heterosexual women do reconcile with their fathers and reinstate contact (McKee, 2016). Gay men who adopt children nurture strong emotional connections with their children to help weather the challenges of not having a mother and

Gender and Families  341

or living with gay parents in a heterosexist society (Vinjamuri, 2015). Such connections pay off for a child’s well-being. Children of gay fathers through adopting or surrogacy have lower scores on internalizing behaviors (depression and anxiety) and externalizing behaviors (aggression and rule-breaking) than children of heterosexual parents (Miller et al., 2017; Golombok et al., 2018; Green et al., 2019). Constantly being monitored on their parenting behavior, gay fathers are eager to justify themselves as good parents. A productive path is to actively engage in educational and community opportunities for their children. Such involvement leads to feeling less marginalized as parents and helps create a supportive school environment for their children (Leland, 2017; Goldberg et al., 2017). In their quest for involvement these hovering dads may become over involved and be the equivalent of helicopter moms. The bottom line is that children of gay men are on par with, or function better than, children in the overall population. Children of gay men—who were raised by gay men—do not meaningfully differ from other children in terms of life satisfaction, self-esteem, or sense of well-being. For middle aged and older gay fathers themselves, the bottom line is that their personal growth is higher than that of comparable aged heterosexual fathers. Both purpose in life and personal growth are higher for gay men who are fathers than for gay men who are not fathers (Shenkman, et al., 2018: 2155).

Emerging LGBTQ Families LGBTQ families face hostility and suspicion with stereotypes about sexual orientation; idealized notions about the benefits of patriarchal families and authority of fathers, and the way gender roles should be enacted in their families. Social conservatives wield strong power in the media and in politics. They continue to advocate that same-sex marriages and the families they spawn will end fatherhood, destabilize families, and create social havoc. Despite stubbornly persistent attacks on their legitimacy, families with same-sex parents are fast becoming normalized and accepted. Alternative families consisting of gay men and heterosexual women are also evolving. Some gay men maintain liaisons with heterosexual women with whom they may have children. Women who desire children without the confines of marriage may choose to have a child with a gay man to whom she may or may not be emotionally attached, who provides financial support and help with parenting. There is no legal obligation, they do not live together, and they have legally agreed that the child is “hers.” Desires on both sides are met. Success with such arrangements varies considerably, but it is likely that more couples will choose new family forms to fit distinctive life goals. This form adds another diversity piece to the host of nontraditional family and household arrangements. Research has exploded on same sex-marriage and families and adjustment of children. A close reading of the terms (labels) describing these families reveals an overlooked category. LGBTQ families includes same-sex couples, but couples with one or both trans partners as well as those with trans children are largely underrepresented. In this sense, research on families privileges the biological sex of a couple over the gender of the couple. The LGBTQ label is celebrated for its inclusiveness, but it may unintentionally reinforce a sex and gender binary (Chapter 2). In overviewing LGBTQ families, it is impossible to dissect every emerging family format. However, light of media and new public awareness, “trans” parents and families should not be overlooked.

342  Gender, Marriage, and Families

Trans Families and Parenting Research is scant, but a marriage benefit extends to transgender people. If married, they perceive less discrimination than their cohabiting counterparts (Liu and Wilkinson, 2017). Trans individuals also desire to parent and form families to meet their life goals. Whereas gay fathers and lesbian mothers (those who do not transition from their assigned sex at birth) are burdened by heterosexism and discrimination, stigma and suspicion are further magnified for trans parents. Marriage may confer a degree of social acceptance for trans parents. Pathways to parenting for trans people are similar to others, regardless of sexual orientation; they are biological parents or may choose to parent through adoption or fostering. Men who are assigned as female at birth are more likely to become parents after gender transition. As expected, older people become parents before gender transition (Tornello et al., 2019). In these family forms, same-sex parenting may or may not be same-gender parenting. Compared with children in a larger population, family form does make a difference in adjustment. Although not common, sexual minority parents may find themselves raising trans children. They may choose this parenting pathway through adoption, but in some cases they are raising their own biological (trans) children. For sexual minority mothers, acutely aware of their own childhood experiences, may bring benefits or liabilities when they realize they have a trans child. Consider the following scenarios reported by sexual minority mothers (Kuvalanka et al., 2018:78): Mother allowing her daughter (assigned male at birth) to have a pink purse but not allowing her to wear a dress: I remember getting her this firefighter costume [for Halloween]) … she screamed … I don’t want to be a firefighter, I want to be a princess. Mother thinking child was a tomboy until he said he was a boy: “I don’t really care whether you are a boy or a girl, I just care that you’re good inside” … it all made sense. And from that day on, pretty much, he was a man. I always wanted to have a daughter … He is still the same kid, but … how I relate to him has changed a little bit. I miss that I’m probably not going to have … biological grandkids. These mothers experience swirling emotions, expressing both relief and sadness about parenting, as they challenge and accept gender family norms at the same time. LGTBQ activists continue to challenge binary thinking about sex and gender in ways that affirm a spectrum of alternative family forms. Mothers who identify in an LGBTQ category tend to be more “gender traditional” while simultaneously supporting their children in their non-gendered choices. Fathers in similar categories tend to be less traditional, but are aware that they, too, succumb to gendered parenting (McKee, 2017). Regardless of sexual orientation or where one falls in the LGBTQ spectrum, parenting itself is the catalyst to dampen challenges to heteronormativity in families. Countering stereotypes about same-sex parenting, research in this section reports neutral to positive outcomes for LGBTQ couples and their families on a variety of indicators. Spurred on upbeat media portrayals, “Social approval” of these families shows continuous increases. Idealized versions of LGBTQ families on television (Glee, Modern Family) and now classic movies (The Kids Are All Right, The Birdcage) gloss over the strains of daily living in a heteronormative world. Transgender children are often pushed out of their families but are

Gender and Families  343

subject to abuse when they cannot leave. Bullying of sexual minority youth is widespread (Chapter 9). To reinforce a key point, LGBTQ families live under a microscope in the way they conduct their lives as couples, but particularly as parents.

KEY TERMS Blended family Caballerismo Civil union Familism

Feminization of poverty Fictive kin Machismo Marianismo

Motherhood mandate Serial monogamy

CHAPTER 9

Men and Masculinity

We need to redefine strength in men, not as the power over other people, but as forces for justice. —Jackson Katz, co-founder Mentors in Violence Prevention (MVP) (Cited in Rattigan, 2013) A separate chapter on men and masculinity in a book on gender is not without controversy, centering on two important points. First, placement of provocative content, such as masculinity’s part in sexual violence against women, can stir antagonism so that the chapter signals to readers that all men—rather than some men—are potentially violent. Since research identifies violence on this and other controversial issues in a framework of masculinity, that content, however unsettling, is reviewed in this chapter. Second, comparisons between men and women—how we are alike and how we are different—are explicitly incorporated throughout, but some may argue that men are cast into the default category and marginalized in a book focused on women. Others contend that it reinforces a gender binary that discounts experiences by LGBTQ people. Second, as we saw in Chapter 1, feminists from all disciplines were catalysts for early research on gender and the development of women’s studies. An explosion of scholarship on women and gender followed. This scholarship made clear that scholarship, books, research, law, history, and literature that did not mention women were about men. In this sense, women are the default category and men are the undisputed norm. This argument is less meaningful today because of the parallel explosion of scholarship devoted to the emergent discipline of men’s studies. It is difficult to sort out viewpoints about how much space should be devoted to men and how much to women. Gender studies may be the less contentious default category. The revised title of this edition from Gender Roles to Gender speaks to this issue. Men and masculinity in the context of gender studies, therefore, are made visible. Men’s issues are not excluded; neither are they marginalized. Men continue to be viewed as superior to women. Despite enormous social change coupled with heightened public awareness of power dynamics between men and women, this view persists. Whereas women wage battles for economic, political, and social equality, men wield the power that often determines the outcome of the fights. All roles are made up of rights and responsibilities, but both men and women perceive the rights and privileges of the male role as enviable, desirable, and well worth the responsibilities associated with it. Men have careers; women have jobs. Men are breadwinners; women are bread bakers. Men are sexual conquerors women are sexual followers. A man’s home is his castle. Father knows best. Politics is a man’s game. Or as Abraham Lincoln stated, “if you want to test a man’s character, give him power.” The male mystique is based on a rigid set of expectations that few

Men and Masculinity  345

men can attain. The social and psychological consequences of striving for the impossible plus the impractical can be deadly. We will see that these consequences play out in toxic masculinity, a form of hypermasculinity where acceptance of masculinity norms harms society and causes damage to boys and men themselves. In discovering more about roles men embrace or are involuntarily cast into, we can understand that a men’s liberation movement is not a contradiction in terms.

HISTORICAL NOTES AND MASCULINE MARKERS Images of masculinity are confusing and contradictory. Almost a century of movie heroes show men as courageous, competent, power driven, money hungry, and always in control, such as Orson Wells (Citizen Kane), Clint Eastwood (“Go ahead, make my day”), Tom Cruise (“I could tell you, but then I’d have to kill you”), Russell Crowe (“At my signal, unleash hell”), Brad Pitt (“America is not a country, it’s a business”), and the enduring images of Sylvester Stallone’s Rocky and Rambo. Leonardo DiCaprio’s early movie successes in Romeo and Juliet and Titanic painted him as a romantic, sensitive leading man. Considered to be typecast for “chick flicks” and unfit for “more masculine” roles, he graduated to movies containing extreme violence, such as The Departed, Gangs of New York, and The Revenant. These images exist side by side with male stars playing fallible antiheroes, such as Dustin Hoffman, Jack Nicholson, Tom Hanks, Johnny Depp, and Christian Slater. Women praise the sensitive man who admits to his vulnerability yet admire the toughness of the man who refuses to bend in the face of overwhelming odds. Most men fall short when attempting to satisfy both standards. History provides insights into how this situation arose.

Patriarchal Historical Standards Patriarchy is tied to male dominance, a consistent theme throughout historical accounts in Western and Eastern civilization. It is a taken-for-granted theme that remains accepted and unquestioned. From a Western civilization perspective, male role standards ranging from the Greco-Roman era to the nineteenth century revolved around physical strength, chivalry, and courage in historical periods dominated by feudalism, war, and nation building. These set the stage for the rationality, intellectual superiority, individualism, and business success (making money), as science and industry enveloped Europe and America. Throughout history these standards overlapped considerably and contained brutality and heroism, but the fundamental features of a white, largely Anglo-Saxon male ideal persist. Versions of historical standards are deployed today to justify patriarchy and “antifeminist” masculinity (Zuckerberg, 2018). These attest to the stubborn rigidity of a definition of masculinity that defies even global social change. With patriarchy firmly entrenched, the peculiarities of American history tightened its hold. From the Puritans to the frontier era to the Civil War, the Great War, and World War II, the value of individualism was propelled as the hallmark of the United States. Not only did Americanism and individualism become inseparable as key masculine markers, but the line between nationality and masculinity was also blurred. Virtually unlimited opportunities beckoned men into farming, politics, business, or wherever their imagination and ambition led them. Overlooked in the quest for individual success, men of color and women were largely excluded from these opportunities. The solitary, independent man against the world

346  Gender, Marriage, and Families

was a powerful image throughout the period of preindustrial expansion. Nothing could stand in the way of determined American men to achieve their goals. Initially these related to material success through hard work and physical endurance, with intellectual talent secondary. Success based on acquiring wealth and getting ahead were, and are, integral to American validation of masculinity.

Between Wars: The Depression The American version of masculinity was assaulted during the Great Depression (1929– 1939). The loss of jobs and daily economic uncertainty for those fortunate enough to be employed trampled the self-esteem of men accustomed to defining themselves according to how well they provided for their families. Although men throughout America faced similar circumstances, many blamed themselves for their inability to get or retain a steady job. When their wives were able to find work outside the home, their masculinity was further assaulted. As the Depression worsened and joblessness soared, their emasculation may have been complete. Male self-indictment reverberated throughout the United States. Beyond the economic wreckage of home and nation, the psychological toll was sadly demonstrated. Men became estranged from their families; others coped by deserting them. Alcoholism, mental illness, and suicide increased. Contrary to the idealized American man as invincible, men and women alike recognized his vulnerability.

War and Soldiering Soldiering in wartime is considered the quintessential validation of masculinity. Throughout history war is associated with idealized rhetoric of virtue and glory, while ignoring its destruction and horror. War legalizes and institutionalizes unrestrained masculinity, rescuing it from crises of being too soft and feminine or too savage and brutal. The laws of war may restrain masculine power, but they also allow it to unfold (Mégret, 2018). Functionalism views war as a principal way to integrate society by bringing rivals and other disparate elements together as comrades in arms to confront a common enemy. In World War II military training was the way to rebuild the manhood of the nation after the economic downturns. Women served men (and the nation) as nurses, clerks, or builders of war equipment. Women on the home front were the helpmates to the men who fought the real battles. War and the preparation for war encourage men to perform according to the supreme standard of masculinity. Heroes, for example, emerge in wartime because of violence and risk-taking, which are embedded in this masculine standard. Although women today routinely fill soldier ranks, the underlying masculine ideology associated with war and soldiering has not changed. During World War II military magazines not only bolstered soldiers’ morale but offered visions of masculinity that helped counter anxieties that they were too soft, weak or even effeminate (Poole, 2017). Soldiers may be female, and under President Obama the first openly gay and lesbian troops began serving in the military. We see later that this policy may be rescinded. The military is not, and cannot, be feminized and LGBTQ soldiers—stereotyped as they are—threaten it. Whether war is being waged or not, the military uses misogyny to encourage men to conform to masculinity’s demands. Regardless of gender-neutral rhetoric, the military continues to hold destructive stereotypes that denigrate men for anything associated with “nonmasculine” qualities. Military masculinity, therefore, equals not just nonfemininity, but antifemininity.

Men and Masculinity  347

Korea and Vietnam The Depression offered insights into how impractical masculinity’s ideals had become, but these were largely ignored. World War II (the “good” war) helped bring the nation out of the Depression and revitalized traditional images of masculinity. The harshness of the Depression added luster to these images. Even considering that Korea (the “forgotten” war) and Vietnam (the “flawed” war) were not the victories Americans had learned to expect, beliefs about war as a proving ground for manhood continued. Vietnam divided the nation into two masculinity camps: weak, effeminate, cowardly draft dodgers and antiwar activists, and heroic, patriotic, and tough warriors and enlistees. A cult of toughness emerged to shape the politics of the time and sway public opinion in favor of escalating the war in Vietnam (Cuordileone, 2012). Politicians cultivated this image of toughness, but the battle carnage, the rising body count of young draftees, and the untenable political situation in Asia served to fuel antiwar protest. The first young men who burned draft cards or sought asylum in Canada or Sweden were viewed as cowards and sissies. As the protesters grew in number and the war became increasingly unpopular, more potential draftees and veterans fresh from the battlefront joined the antiwar movement. Comments about bravery and cowardice were not wiped out, merely driven underground.

Kuwait, Iraq, and Afghanistan The Cold War was replaced by the ongoing War on Terror, (the “endless” war), fought on terrains emanating from the September 9, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center. This “complicated” war offered opportunities to challenge what it means to be a man. War as embodied in Korea and Vietnam was not the answer. The cult of toughness reasserted itself in the 1980s. The Reagan era was predicated on a show of toughness and “staying the course” in the Cold War. The administrations of George H. W. Bush and George W. Bush continued the cult of toughness in relation to the Gulf Wars. Like Reagan, they were men’s men. Indeed, popularity for George H. W. Bush spiked with Desert Storm. George W. Bush reinforced the toughness and manliness legacy, bolstering support for the continuing Iraq war that, like Vietnam, became increasingly unpopular. The image of the President in his commander-and-chief role sharply improved sagging approval ratings when he guided an airplane landing on a carrier. Global media covered the staged event, spotlighting Americanized masculinity images of courage, individualism, toughness, and especially independence. The world may not support wars in Iraq, Afghanistan (or Vietnam), but the United States, like its president, will not yield. Politicians believe this image must be maintained at all costs. George W. Bush garnered one of the worst approval ratings of any president in history, but these were due primarily to policies fueling the Great Recession rather than his policies regarding the War on Terror. Although the Obama administration softened the tone considerably, the war in Afghanistan and militancy by the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) were reported according to masculinity images synonymous with toughness. President Obama’s approval rating soared when he reported on the operation that killed Osama bin Laden. The Trump administration, against the advice of the Pentagon, wants to reduce troops in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, and Korea and may pull the U.S. out of NATO. Although earning mixed reviews, these are not reported according to the conventional toughness standards of wars. Rather they are couched in the name of money and taking advantage of America, and as we see below, also in line with masculinity. Soldiers, however, still represent America’s warrior

348  Gender, Marriage, and Families

class and are not tainted with femininity (Smith, 2019c). Women serve with distinction in harrowing situations but are not considered part of this class. Regardless of signals sent about these military policies, the elite special warfare unit of all branches of the of military, the Navy Seals, is the unambiguous masculinity standard for contemporary U.S. soldiering. Women were barred from entering the Navy Seal training pipeline until 2016, fearing that women would water down standards in the physically demanding training where nearly three-quarters of men drop out. Each branch of service is forced to make the case for standards of fitness for men and women and so far the case is made for gender-neutral standards deemed realistic and necessary for “mission success.” A few women have entered the pipeline and may be its first successful candidates (Myers, 2016; Faram, 2018). As seen throughout military history, if they drop out, other women will take their place. When women are eventually certified as Seals, it opens the door to their acceptance into the warrior class. This class, however, must never be tainted by any hint of femininity. Overall, none of these wars altered the image of masculinity. The victory in the first Gulf War victory avenged Vietnam. The media continue to use gendered discourse in reporting the on War on Terror related to toughness and bravery as soldiers face the uncertainties of combat. Media routinely report on the men and women soldiers serving the nation, but there is no hint that the women are any less masculine than the men.

Suicide and Soldiering After periods of assaults on traditional masculine ideals, old definitions reemerge with a greater tenacity and more deadly consequences. An epidemic of suicides is sweeping soldiers, veterans, and recruiters entangled in the convoluted War on Terror and are spiking for older Vietnam war veterans. Regardless of whether they were ever deployed, about 25 percent of all soldier suicides are in the active military or are reservists and veterans. This translates to approximately 20 suicides per day, of whom 16 are veterans and four are on active duty (Wentling, 2018) The military confronts suicide in highly masculinized ways. Even as PTSD (Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder) made its way into a “legitimate” diagnostic category as a suicide marker and related to emotional trauma, PTSD narratives are still engrained with “emasculating concepts.” Historically, “shell shock” was a coded word for weak soldiers (acting like hysterical women) who could not cope with the horrors of war (Collins, 2017). Soldiers are urged to “fight their internal insurgents” (if you expect to suffer you will) and accept war as empowering rather than traumatizing. Men who commit suicide are often blamed for harming their families, their units, and other soldiers. After the initial trauma, families are damaged by what doctors refer to as “survivor’s guilt.” Mental health counseling is translated to warrior resilience and thriving. Active duty soldiers as well as veterans employed in military related occupations often believe that asking for help signals weakness and damages their careers. Associated with male weakness, shame is a major suicide risk factor in a PTSD context for veterans (Rozanova et al., 2016; Cunningham et al., 2019). Given media attention to the military’s mental health crisis, and, not surprising, the escalating economic costs of emotional trauma and suicide for soldiers and their families, the VA is encouraging soldiers to “open up” about their troubles. Since each branch of service is held accountable for suicides of soldiers, not only is the branch tarnished, but recruiting is hampered. Hypermasculine military culture extends to civilian life and poses a barrier to seeking help. Veterans are more likely to obtain “informational” support

Men and Masculinity  349

online, but are reluctant to request, or receive, emotional support in any setting (Pease et al., 2016; Ashley et al., 2017; Stana et al., 2017). There are encouraging signs that the suicide rate of soldiers has plateaued, matching the rate in the civilian population. Other data showing a ten percent increase for younger veterans dampens this (Reiman and Mazuchowski, 2018; Shane, 2018). Notwithstanding military background, gender is a key factor in suicide. In the total population, male suicides outnumber female suicides 4 to 1 (Chapter 2). Compared to all females, women soldiers and veterans have double the suicide rate, but this number triples for male veterans. Besides the fact that female veterans are proficient with guns, risk factors for female veteran suicides are military sexual harassment and sexual assault (Price, 2018; VA, 2018; Andersen and Blais, 2019). Reinforced by broader gender norms, military masculinity carries over to soldiers’ civilian lives. Revealing emotional anguish is viewed as incompatible with masculinity and soldiering. Despite wide-scale acknowledgment that mental health urgently needs to be addressed, concepts of military masculinity intrude on men and women soldiers and veterans seeking the help they need (Amer and Jian, 2018; Khan et al., 2019). It is unclear whether military masculinity norms can shift to support soldiers who need help for trauma that can lead to suicide but feel stigmatized for seeking it.

Sports Men today do not need war for validating masculinity. Whether as athletic competitor or spectator, sports have unquestionably emerged to fill this need. Sports and war metaphors, especially in football (linemen fighting it out in the trenches, kill shots, hand to hand combat) are used in the military to train recruits and by coaches to train athletes. Like the military, sports build character and comradeship, provide heroes and role models, teach about courage and overcoming adversity against all odds. Athletic involvement offers benefits to both young boys and girls but, as a strong hallmark of masculinity, is especially empowering for boys. Team involvement and structured sports, compared to informal sport activities, are related to reduced depression in preteen boys, but not in girls (Everding, 2019). Self-esteem soars for boys who are successful at sports in their school years, cementing masculinity’s sports connection. Boys learn early in life that sports are also associated with risk-taking, dominance, power, physical harm, and even violence. The intellectual aspects of masculinity have not kept up with the physical aspects where sports are concerned. Bill Gates (Microsoft) and Larry Page (Google) may be among the richest men on the globe, but they are less role models than Michael Jordan or Tom Brady. A multibillion-dollar industry flourishes on contests where winning can literally call for the obliteration of the athlete. Boxing, race-car driving, football, hockey, skiing, and gymnastics often brutalize competitors. For unsuccessful athletes, body and mind are injured, but injuries are hidden, ignored, and ultimately legitimated in the name of competition and, of course, winning.

Brutalized Bodies Men are not immune to the issues of weight and body image considered the province of women (Chapter 2). The enormous pressure to achieve athletically is highly correlated to obsession with training, exercise, and risks in competition that brutalize bodies. If brutalization is the price for winning friends and carving out one’s place in the male pecking order,

350  Gender, Marriage, and Families

then so be it. A jock image in high school and college can be both prized and demeaned. Jocks are popular for athletic ability but seen as arrogant when they praise themselves—and expect others to praise them—for this prowess. “True” athletes are expected to be humbler in expressions of athletic competence than jocks. Sports masculinity, paradoxically, is associated with both arrogance and humility. The muscular ideal perceived as necessary for athletic success leads many males down the path of eating disorders, intense over-exercising, and abuse of performance-enhancing drugs, all of which cause bodily harm rather than bodily strength. Huge liabilities accrue to athletes with abrupt career ending injuries. Physical risks in sports are on top of emotional turmoil when boys are sidelined because of injuries. Legal consequences also take a huge toll. Consider the doping scandals toppling athletes such as bicyclist Lance Armstrong, MLB player Alex Rodriguez, and Olympian runner Ben Johnson. Sports injury is framed as a valuable masculinizing experience. Sports that are injury prone are the most prestigious for athletes. As an intense masculine marker, sports offer self-esteem for some but insecurity for others. Sidelined in sports because of injury or failure to make the team opens social media campaigns fraught with negative consequences (Jacobson, 2018). When athletes decide that a sport is not worth the risk of lifetime injury such as concussions in football and hockey, fans express disappointment at best and disapproval at worst. The concession epidemic made its way into public awareness with allegations that the NFL hid dangers and extent of concussions and failed to pay claims or follow concussion protocol (Simpson-Wood and Wood, 2018). Some athletes choose to withdraw from sports and end their careers. Others are praised for returning after concussion injury, and for exceeding their past performance (Thomas, 2019). Men who choose to return but cannot meet expectations are cast as sorrowful characters who hamper team efforts. Not wanting to be pitied or damned, some athletes self-isolate.

Sports Violence Other than the military, sport is the only social institution that condones violence in achieving a goal. Deliberate fouls in basketball, high sticking in hockey, late hits in football, and the taken-for-granted intentional injuries in rugby are routinely overlooked by referees and applauded by spectators. The New Orleans Saints were found to be paying players from a slush fund for intentionally injuring opponents (ESPN, 2013). As social learning theory suggests, if sports violence on the field is associated with admiration, respect, money, and media attention, violence off the field is likely. Much of that violence is directed toward women. College athletes in contact sports are significantly more likely to be involved in all forms of aggressive behavior, but especially sexual assaults (including those involving young male athletes), battering, rape, date rape. Consider, for example, Mike Tyson, O. J. Simpson, and Ray Price. Sexual assaults of young male athletes by coaches such as Jerry Sandusky and the cover-up by iconic football figure Joe Paterno, and sexual abuse of women Olympians in swimming and gymnastics by male coaches esteemed for garnering high medal counts are added to this list As a sports writer asserts, when women are abused by players in football, the NFL remains “clueless.” The league should be ripped over its ongoing hypocrisy involving players who have no problem using deadly and banned UFC moves against women. NCAA welcomes to campus athletes with a history of sexual violence and domestic abuse with no repercussions from raping a woman (Moore, 2018; Armour, 2019). Whether as coaches,

Men and Masculinity  351

managers, or athletes, sports heroes figure prominently in violence toward women. Schools and prosocial media are sending messages to young athletes that male strength does not equate to dominance over women or other men. Sport is one of the most powerful markers of masculinity. Men who are not athletes validate their masculinity through sports, if only in a vicarious manner.

ON MASCULINITY Models and definitions of masculinity include embedded traits remaining remarkably consistent over time. Underlying these models is the notion of taken-for-granted privilege afforded by masculinity that allows men opportunities, rights, and choices not automatically granted to women. All sociological perspectives on masculinity highlight how masculine role ideals embodied in historical standards are adapted to the lives of contemporary men. As a result of these adaptations, masculinity, and the privileges associated with it, are performed in myriad ways.

Hegemonic Masculinity Given the consistent definitions of masculinity, it may seem puzzling that masculinity can be viewed as fragmented and uneven and at the same time inflexible and steadfast. To explain this puzzle, the notion of hegemonic masculinity asserts that a number of competing masculinities are enacted according to particular places (contexts) and particular times. The characteristics of masculinity that become the idealized norm are those acted out by the most powerful men. The taken-for-granted statuses are likely to be those men who are white, middle class, and heterosexual. Other masculinities are rendered deficient and ineffectual. A good example of hegemonic masculinity is its enactment in the gun culture of the United States. In justifying why they carry a concealed firearm, men use discourses of masculinity on the need to defend themselves and their loved ones from dangerous “others,” especially non-white minority men. White privilege is invoked by these “good guys” with guns, who must stand up to the “bad guys” with guns roaming freely in pursuit of mayhem on virtuous others. Class privilege enters the equation; these good guy men can afford a gun and if needed, a license to carry it. By linking concealed firearms to defending women, hegemonic masculinity shapes their motives in gendered ways. Noble and just masculinity is enacted by white men. African American, Latino, and poor men enact a dangerous and stained brand (Stroud, 2016; Allison and Klein, 2019). Hegemonic masculinity harms women because it is positioned in opposition to women. Social constructionists say that women fall prey to hegemonic masculinity. Patriarchy is reinforced when its authenticity is taken for granted and inserted into virtually all interactions. It harms men in subordinate statuses (men of color, poor men, nonheterosexuals) because it narrows their options to choose other enactments of masculinity. White, wealthy men use privilege associated with hegemonic masculinity to wield power. Newer models of hegemonic masculinity account for how masculinity acted out in a local context can challenge the “white powerful men” model. White working-class men use privilege to separate themselves from men of color, thus maintaining “color dominance.” Wealthy African American men, limited by race, may display elements of hegemonic masculinity allowing

352  Gender, Marriage, and Families

them privilege via money. Although privilege is narrowed by both class and race, some groups of men display dominance in circumscribed spaces—and they are almost always perceived as superior in relation to women (Liu, 2017). Trump fueled race and gender resentment among white working-class men, stoking fears about loss of their privilege to the undeserving, that helped propel him to victory in Election 2016 (Chapter 14). A white working-class masculinity emerged that, perhaps temporarily, offered these men a sense of power and dominance. Nonwhite or race-based masculinities are short lived, far from replacing the overriding “traditional” model. We see later that the wealthy white men who may have also supported Trump distanced themselves from their working-class brethren, especially as some of these men moved into the “alt-right” camp. Return to the sports marker as another example of hegemonic masculinity’s hold on all men. Despite the stellar performances of men of color in professional sports, owners determine the latitude of masculine norms these athletes are allowed to act out in their professional and personal lives. The key is to recognize who has the power in a given situation to determine what is a dominant masculinity and what is a subordinate one. Hegemonic masculinity of the white, middle-class, heterosexual variety is not only the dominant form, but particularly in relation to women, is masculinity.

Masculinity’s Norms With hegemonic masculinity as an umbrella, decades of research show that masculinity (manliness) is “successfully” acted out according to a set of culturally ingrained categories. These norms may be acted out in subcultural versions, but “what it means to be a man” serve as virtually universal standards throughout the world (Brannon, 1976; Gilmore, 1990; Edwards, 2006; Keith, 2017). These different enactments can be subsumed under categories that serve as both traditional and emerging norms of masculinity. There is overlap in these categories. They are adapted here to incorporate recent work on a variety of issues concerning masculine gender roles. Most of these categories have become institutionalized norms (also referred to as standards, markers, or themes) that have strengthened over the decades.

Antifeminine Norm In a hierarchy of masculinity’s norms, this is perhaps its most powerful. It stigmatizes all stereotyped feminine characteristics and the qualities associated with them, including openness in expressions suggestive of vulnerability. This chapter reveals that it is so closely tied to every other norm of masculinity that it becomes the overarching norm that literally defines masculinity. Males are socialized to adamantly reject all that is considered feminine. Men dichotomize gender more often and more strenuously than women (Bosson and Michniewicz, 2013). Women, and anything perceived as feminine, are less valued compared to men and anything perceived as masculine. Acceptance of the antifemininity norm and the traditional scripts it includes comes with huge emotional and social costs for men.

Interpersonal Relations Beliefs about feminine behavior disallow men from revealing insecurities and seeking help during crises. Restraints in emotional openness are associated with suicide, Type A behavior, heart disease, and stress-related conditions such as ulcers, stroke, back pain, and tension headaches. Concealing emotions also inhibits development of the repertoire of interpersonal skills

Men and Masculinity  353

essential for successful relationships in all areas of life. Intimate friendships between men are discouraged, and intimate friendships with women are blocked by messages that judge men negatively if they show too much sensitivity (Chapters 2 and 3). They believe emotional expression drives others away rather than bringing them closer. Boys learn quickly that gestures of intimacy to other boys are discouraged and that expressions of femininity, verbally or nonverbally, are not tolerated. Male role models—fathers, teachers, brothers, school athletes, peers—provide the cues and the sanctions to ensure a young boy’s compliance. The “boy code” is monitored carefully by other boys. Anger is an acceptable emotion and sympathy in another’s plight may be tolerated, but displays of “softer” emotion, such as empathy, are swiftly censured. Boys embrace a code that is corrosive for “human development, their virtue, and their well-being” (Reichert, 2019:3). The culturally inbred antifemininity norm keeps teen boys in particular from expressing positive feelings toward other boys on pain of being ridiculed as “sissies” at best or “fags” at worst. To bolster formative masculinity, boys strictly segregate themselves from girls in school. Intimacy with boys, therefore, must be achieved in other culturally acceptable ways. Throughout childhood and into adult life, male camaraderie occurs in male-only secret clubs, fraternal organizations, the military, sports teams, or the neighborhood bar. Although men are taught that too much intimacy among males is forbidden, the human desire for informal interaction is necessary and powerful. The separate groups allow men to act out this human need in safety; otherwise, people could be suspicious of such close male interaction. As expected, men’s endorsement of the antifeminine norm is “one of the strongest predictors of negative attitudes toward homosexuality” (Falomir-Pichastor et al., 2019:1). Men’s deemed superiority over women comes with enormous mental health expense. Pioneering work on psychoanalytic theory related to sex and gender (Chapter 2) by Nancy Chodorow (1994) speaks to the psychological defensiveness and insecurity of men when upholding strong beliefs about male dominance. Males of all ages are more likely to express feelings of uncertainty and anxiety to females, but the healthiest men are those who have an array of male and female friends with whom they feel comfortable in expressing their emotions and concerns. Overall, men’s endorsement of the antifemininity norm’s quest for invulnerability has the opposite effect: it renders them more rather than less vulnerable.

Success Norm This norm asserts that men are driven to succeed, achieve, and accomplish regardless of the cost. Also referred to as the status norm, men’s desire to be looked up to is also associated with the belief that money makes the man. Manliness is tied to career success and ability to provide for a family in his breadwinner role. The positive good provider role is salient in this norm, but it also comes with more than an economic price. Men feel compelled to emulate economically successful men to display this key marker of masculinity. Because they gain prestige from work outside rather than inside the home, competence as a parent is less important than competence as an employee. It is expected that the wives, children, colleagues, peers, and of course bosses, judge these men accordingly. Although the Depression assaulted self-esteem with job loss, conformity to the norm of success is not as significantly related to negative health outcomes as are other masculinity norms (Wong et al., 2017). Men are told that ensuring the family’s financial security is their top priority in life, a message that eclipses other roles. Successfully embracing this role, however, offers many men a productive and prestigious masculinity path.

354  Gender, Marriage, and Families

Gendered Occupations In the workplace, men are threatened by women’s competence and their entry into traditional masculine occupations, thereby kindling controversy about what constitutes a “man’s” job. Blue-collar men express the most hostility, but the resistance also comes from men in the professions. Consistent with both the antifemininity and success norms, they may believe that their jobs will be tainted by any femininity ushered in with too many women employees and regarded as less manly. Men who succeed in so-called feminized jobs are viewed as less competent than those who succeed in masculine jobs. This is despite advantages men hold over women in these very fields (Chapter 10). An influx of women in an occupation dominated by women decreases its attractiveness to men. From symbolic interaction and social constructionist views, labeling produces a self-fulfilling prophecy: the job is “feminized,” men desert it; working conditions deteriorate, and pay decreases. The job is resegregated, going from mostly men to mostly women. Success at a job where women are doing essentially the same work can be demeaning for those men who hold conventional gender roles. Men are bound to a concept of masculinity that assumes occupational dominance over women. They will enact the strong provider/breadwinning role, with their self-esteem tied to both. Women may reinforce these beliefs by viewing men as success objects. In the bleakest 2008 recession years, men flocked to female jobs as nurses, care workers, elementary school and preschool teachers, and even nannies. Despite being in lower ranked jobs, working with children and in caregiving roles, offered flexibility, satisfaction, and reduced stress. Many men believed that they were “making a difference.” Masculinity’s stubborn success norm, however, eroded these beliefs. Viewed as lacking ambition or deficient as good providers, many men jumped back into more prestigious, albeit higher paying, jobs when conditions improved. The enjoyment of working in female jobs cannot compete with the money and prestige of male jobs. Men also face confusion when they are challenged by a new economy that has transformed the traditional provider role for men. As highlighted throughout, dual-earner couples are not the exception but the norm. Although endorsements by men about egalitarianism in the workplace are expressed much more than in the past, a retrenchment favoring the conventional norm of male superiority in terms of the success norm remains. When wives work outside the home, both spouses—but particularly husbands—are reluctant to define her as being on equal footing in the provider role. Conflict theory suggests that a key reason married men readily embrace the breadwinner role is that it entitles them to privileges in the home, including less housework, more time for leisure and recreation, and more services provided to them by wife and children (Chapter 8).

Intellectual Success In addition to economic success, men are expected to demonstrate intellectual superiority over women. The feminist movement ushered in the idea that intellectual companionship between the genders is possible and preferable. Husbands now expect that their wives will be wage earners, and they express admiration for their wives’ careers. But they also believe that the bulk of child care and household responsibilities should rest with a wife and that her career should be interrupted if these responsibilities are jeopardized. Men believe that a husband should outearn his wife and that her career success is less important than his. Men are threatened by women coworkers who are promoted over them, and husbands are threatened by wives who are equal or above them occupationally. Men are appreciative of

Men and Masculinity  355

their wives’ earnings and success, but men’s self-esteem is threatened if they see their wives “winning” over them occupationally. In a conservative turn over the last decade, gender-related attitudes for men are re-emphasizing work roles for men and maternal roles for women. Men’s attitudes are strongly influenced by the social and historical period in which they live as much as they are influenced by personal experiences.

Toughness Norm As embodied in war and sports, the toughness norm of masculinity sends messages to men and boys about strength, confidence, self-reliance, bravery, and independence. Toughness carries with it a façade of bravado that some boys may display but is not necessarily carried out. Psychological toughness rather than physical toughness is in the forefront of these traits. Males of all ages must express confidence in their ability to take on tasks that appear insurmountable. They must do so with a sense of stoicism that shows they are in command of the situation. Leadership is reinforced by toughness. Asking for help or reassurance in the face of adversity, however dire the situation might be, is akin to lack of self-confidence and the antithesis of the toughness norm. Worried about appearing “weak,” even as the pandemic surged and deaths mounted, President Trump refused to wear a face mask, mocked opponents for mask-wearing and social distancing, and then contacted COVID-19, actions that dramatically demonstrate the lethal consequences of the toughness norm. Rodeo cowboys exemplify this norm. The stoic and independent cowboy is iconic in American culture, as is the samurai in Japanese culture. Contemporary cowboys who endorse masculinity norms, especially related to toughness, are less likely to seek help or talk to friends when they are experiencing a major depressive episode (Herbst et al., 2014). Antifeminine elements intrude here by implying that compliance and submissiveness are the negative qualities that the tough male disdains. The opposite of the tough male is the “wimp.” When discussing with his parents about being punched and bullied and knowing he could not stand up physically to these boys, a high school boy reports that My dad kept telling me to fight back. Let them know I was a tough guy … Hit them right back … They would call me “porky” and “wimp” … that I was a “mama’s boy.” I felt like I was a girl … (Messerschmidt, 2016:68–69) Men may also be labeled wimps for crossing boundaries relating to their partners, wives, and children in “sensitive” ways. Indeed, this sensitive man view suggests that a “male” wimp is redundant. Sensitivity may be the opposite of toughness, but like cowboys, in the strongly gendered world of oil rig crews, tough guy behavior can be personally harmful as well as dysfunctional and dangerous. Displays of risk-taking and masculine strength interfere with safety and performance in a potentially deadly environment, especially when men try to prove themselves through toughness. As an oil rig worker explained Even though the men faced the risk of death every day … they never showed any vulnerability. This made the work even more perilous, because the men didn’t ask for help, didn’t admit if they weren’t up to a certain job. (Chen, 2016) When tough guy hypermasculinity is abandoned in favor of working as a team, admitting mistakes, and showing interdependence, improvements in performance, safety, and efficiency follow (Ely and Meyerson, 2008). As explained by symbolic interactionists, by risking a blow

356  Gender, Marriage, and Families

to their image, these men adjust their sense of self to accommodate a different, but nonetheless prized, form of masculinity. Intersecting race with masculinity’s toughness norm provides another perspective. The police shooting of African American teenager Michael Brown, events in Ferguson, Missouri and public attention since on the police shootings of unarmed (or thought to be armed and dangerous) African American men, spotlight the challenge black males especially confront in navigating masculinity norms. Compared to white males, when a toughness norm is enacted by black males, the consequences can be deadly. These shootings also point out how all norms play out in hegemonic masculinity.

Aggression Norm As a key marker of manliness overlapping with the toughness norm, aggression is associated with risk, lack of compromise, and unbending will in the face of adversity. More than toughness and bravado, aggression is much more likely to be played out in actual behavior. Aggressive manliness has been central throughout history, often unfolding in revenge, a theme that endures today. Males who adhere to traditional masculinity norms are more aggressive in the worlds they inhabit—whether in school, workplace, volunteer organizations, or in their ­families—compared to men who adhere less to these norms. Masculinist ideology transitioning to toxic masculinity is a better predictor of aggression than is gender (Chapter 2). Boys learn early that turning the other cheek is less respected than fighting one’s way out of a difficult situation, especially if bullied. Media aim stories at youngsters that glorify violence and revenge in the name of a good cause. The cause may be patriotic, heroic to save lives, or vengeful to right a wrong, but violence is necessary to achieve these honorable goals. In superhero movies, compared to female characters, good guy male characters are five times more likely to be violent (Olympia, 2018). “Hero” is readily bestowed on those who win by using physical force. Diplomats who quietly work behind the scenes hammering out vital peace agreements are less likely than frontline soldiers to command public admiration. President Jimmy Carter, who pursued a diplomatic solution to the Iran hostage situation, was seen as soft for his refusal to intervene through military channels. An ill-fated rescue attempt was a way to escape this pressure. President Obama faced the same challenge related to aggression by ISIS. Bullying of political opponents, women, and journalists thought to be his adversaries is President Trump’s enactment of aggression. Turning the other cheek is rare. Functionalists emphasize that socializing boys into masculinity with the aura of violence and aggression, will make a soldier role, particularly a voluntary one, easier to accept. Aggressive masculinity needed in wartime is latently functional. Such views are linked to the antifemininity norm. Toughness, the repression of empathy, less remorse for “accidental” violence, and less concern for moral issues are deemed essential for winning. The human cost of war is cast aside. On the dysfunctional side, when aggression and masculinity become inextricably linked, they carry over into the nonwar existence of men. Many soldiers express great remorse about killing only under conditions of anonymity. They do not utter these things to other soldiers. A soldiering mentality is maladaptive in a man’s daily life, but he hauls its baggage as surely as his battlefield pack.

Mass Shootings Mass shooting in the United States, sometimes referred to as “rampage” shootings, can be traced to toxic masculinity in its extreme form. There is no one accepted definition of a

Men and Masculinity  357

mass shooting. Some include only fatalities and others include all wounded victims. The FBI defines “mass murder” as a single incident in which a perpetrator kills four or more people, not including the shooter. This definition is inconsistent but generally applied in media accounts. Between 1982 and 2018 there were 103 mass shootings carried out by males acting alone; three by solo females, and one by a male–female pair; most shooters are white males. For school shootings, 99 percent of the shooters were male; the average age of a male student who guns down other students is 17. So far, the deadliest year in history for mass shootings was 2018, with four of the biggest mass shooting in 50 years, and 93 school shooting incidents (Bort, 2018; Miller and McCoy, 2018; Statistica, 2019b). The lethality of three masculinity norms—antifemininity, toughness, and aggression—is plainly evident in how mass shootings are portrayed. Until quite recently, issues related to toxic masculinity have been ignored by most media accounts. Journalists, educators, parents, and police referred to younger perpetrators as isolated adolescents, lonely teenagers, and unhappy students. Perpetrators of all ages are described as emotionally disturbed, not liking their lot in life, not having a girlfriend, let down by women, and thinking of themselves as losers. There is a strong connection to shooters being bullied at school and carrying resentment into adulthood. Making a case for of damaged masculinity, shooters also have high levels of misogyny and revenge fantasies, connections to gun culture, resentment of minorities, and desire for media attention. The 20-year-old killer of 27 people, including 20 Sandy Hook elementary school children in Connecticut in 2012, was fascinated by media coverage of mass shootings at schools, especially the Columbine massacre in 1999 (Langman, 2017; Raitanen et al., 2017; Penny, 2018). Consider, too, that most shooters commit suicide, saving them from both criminal indictment and exposing any psychological vulnerability. With cues from abundant gender research, media attention has moved from psychological and individualist explanations to societal and collectivist ones. Masculinity norms intersect with a culture of gun violence, mental health problems, and “contagion effects” of mass media (Metzl and MacLeish, 2015; Leiner et al., 2017; Rocque and Duwe, 2018). Factoring in race, white and Latino shooters are more likely to have their crimes attributed to mental illness in the media than African Americans, who are cast as violently inclined. Hegemonic masculinity, therefore, is reproduced (Chang, 2018; Duxbury et al., 2018). Examples of contagion effects include violent video games designed with adolescent boys in mind, implicated in the Columbine massacre and other mass shootings since. “First person shooter” games offer gendered spaces for men as intended and ideal gamers. Online misogyny and gendered cyber-hate are rampant and growing (Jane, 2016; Hopp and Fisher, 2017; Condis, 2018). Contagion shows that males also encourage other males to commit these crimes. Prior to a mass shooting in Oregon, the shooter posted on social media: “Don’t go to school tomorrow if you are in the Northwest.” Among the responses, many encouraging him or glorifying mass killing, was the comment “You might want to target a girl’s (sic) school which is safer because there are no beta males throwing themselves for their rescue.” (Chemaly, 2016) With virtually all mass shootings carried out by males it is no longer possible to dismiss “toxic masculinity” as an “outlier” explanation (Kiesel, 2018; Wright, 2018).

Sexual Prowess Norm The theme of sexuality permeates a norm that is popularly referred to as “macho man.” In this image, men are primarily sexual beings with ongoing, heightened interests in sexuality

358  Gender, Marriage, and Families

in all its forms. Men are judged according to sexual ability and sexual conquest in the sexualized world other men expect them to create. Men who are injured or disabled have the same sexual health needs as their non-disabled peers, but without effective mental health intervention must compromise their beliefs about sexual prowess and are candidates for depression and self-neglect. Masculine role ideology, for example, compromises their beliefs, and can be a barrier to effective treatment (Holland-Hall and Quint, 2017). Male sexual identity is experienced as sensation and action. An umbrella of sexual misconduct is a case in point. This identity is so taken for granted that men’s ogling, touching, sexist jokes, or sexual remarks (locker room talk), are dismissed as harmless fun rather than as sexual domination or exploitation. Men may be more wary of displaying such behaviors because of the backlash to celebrities, politicians, and media figures accused of sexual misconduct. They are mystified or angered, however, because they view it as normal gender interaction. This form of sexual identity is reinforced by essentialist beliefs that masculinity is biologically rather than socially constructed. An “impotent” man is cast into a stigmatized, demeaned category because the term is used to describe more than just his penis. Media depictions of a man’s sexual performance confirm his masculinity, with success in sex linked to success in life. Mostly used as a façade, boys develop stories about sexual escapades and successful pickups. As boys mature, they fear the threat of peer exclusion and understand that bonding with male peers is helped by sexual talk laced with aggressive overtones and sexist joking. Cultivating a healthy approach to sexuality for teen boys is a challenge given the sexualized teen culture and ease of access to sexual material on the Internet. Social competence for boys means that they are also expected to be sexually competent (Claster and Blair, 2017; Carter et al., 2018).

Pornography As a staple for preadolescent boys, pornography is usually the initial foray into sexual images of males and females. Parents, peers, and pornography are all important in sexual socialization as boys transition into adulthood. Narrow definitions of sexuality reinforce misogyny, stronger gender stereotypes, and strengthen attitudes about justification of sexual aggression against females. Pornography use is associated with sexual permissiveness and victim blaming for men, but not for women. Males who consume pornography are more likely to engage in porn-like sex (Fox and Bale, 2018; Miller et al., 2018; Hardy et al., 2019). Cultivating a healthy approach to sexuality for teen boys is a challenge. Sexualized teen culture is played out in schools and in all media formats. Gone are the days when younger boys rummaged through their father’s hidden Playboy and Penthouse magazines. The Internet offers fast and easy access to sexual material, especially pornography. Research on attitudes and stereotypes about sexualized men and women is clear, but it is not conclusive that pornography use plays out in sexual aggression (behavior) (Peter and Valkenburg, 2016). Men are well aware of the disastrous consequences if they act on the aggression in their sexual talk. In the pursuit of the illusion of masculinity, one set of vulnerabilities is exchanged for another. When boys and men rely on sexuality as core to their masculinity, vulnerability inevitably increases. They gain a measure of respect for the sexual talk and bravado of the locker room but know that they can never live up to the sexualized selves they present to others. Neither would they want to.

Men and Masculinity  359

Tenderness Norm I add “tenderness masculinity” as an emergent masculinity norm, characterized by men who reject a rigid cultural construction of masculinity disallowing them from displaying warmth, compassion, or tenderness to others. Tenderness masculinity encompasses beliefs that expressions of sensitivity are beneficial to men, both personally and socially, in their relationships with others. Referred to positively as “sensitive guys,” men accepting this norm strive for more emotional openness with men and more egalitarian relationships with women. Because tenderness masculinity allows for less emotional restriction, it is the healthiest of the masculinity norms (Chapter 2). Willingness to forgive, reconcile, and maintain a positive outlook after an episode, for example, is associated with psychological benefits. Although “anger-out” is masculinity’s accepted emotional display, it is not only the least healthy for men, but is also socially unproductive. Men and the people they display anger toward do not “forgive and forget.” As a relational standard, forgiveness is viewed as feminine, and men tend to reject it, a belief that cuts across race and social class. Men in supportive networks that include both genders also are more likely to forgive and to feel good about it. The tenderness norm is emerging, but it competes with more powerful aggression and antifeminine norms. Whereas the sensitive guy image resonates with men and women seeking equitable partnering roles, it is a masculinity image that remains subordinate to all others. When images of tenderness masculinity make their way into the media, they are undermined by the more normative images. Think of classic Arnold Schwarzenegger (True Lies, Kindergarten Cop, Jingle All the Way) to understand how tenderness masculinity is subverted to other types. Heterosexual men are often portrayed as exploitive sexual beings who strive to create pleasure for their partners. The latter, more sensitive view is not particularly progressive or egalitarian if masculinity is still associated with dominance and control. The male takes charge of sexual activity and decides the sequence, the pace, the positions, and the best way to stimulate his partner. Women may want to lead or to communicate other needs. Whenever the crisis of masculinity becomes a media focus, it is usually because women are outperforming men in traditionally male spheres and men are not being assertive enough to retain or regain their positions of dominance. These are usually the powerful white men underlying hegemonic masculinity whose entitlements are slipping away. Tenderness masculinity enacted by men of color is even more inhibited. Black men can talk about loving other men or expressing platonic love for them only in the context of sports. Crying with joy and embracing one’s teammates is allowed in the briefest moment of victory (Boylon, 2017). Their lack of assertiveness is associated with being too nice, too tender, or too sensitive.

Images to Reject or Accept? Masculine images have a contradictory quality that may seem confusing to men. Men are presented with alternative images that challenge the traditional version of a male mystique. In accepting these revised images as legitimate and offering more benefit than liability, men could rally behind new definitions of masculinity. The tenderness option is one that is sought by men and women as individuals. But when men come together in groups, the older images of masculinity surface and the newer images are subverted. All genders adhere to inflexible views of masculinity. Men are threatened by changes in definitions of masculinity, regardless of the virtual impossibility of meeting the traditional standards. Men’s roles have not kept pace with the changes in women’s roles. The evidence is clear that attitudes toward

360  Gender, Marriage, and Families

masculinity have served to hamper those men seeking to free themselves from restrictive male stereotypes. Most men, however, are on no such quest. On an optimistic note, new masculinities such as the tenderness option—however small the breakthrough—emphasize a nontraditional positive masculinity rooted in themes of self-awareness, nurturance, and the development of a deeper awareness of the mutuality of the genders. The style is holistic, therapeutic, and man-friendly, and does not abandon masculinity as courageous and noble, but expands to include hope, help-seeking from other men, and reducing gender role conflict with equity beliefs in mind (Kiselica et al., 2016; Kaplan et al., 2017; McDermott et al., 2018). Stunned by escalating school violence, for example, educators are adopting practices emphasizing nonaggressive means of resolving conflict. Boys learn about forms of masculinity that steer them away from forms that lay a foundation for the toxic masculinity playing out in aggression. By accepting attitudes traditionally labeled as feminine, and therefore less valued by males, the tenderness norm—in partnership with positive masculinity—revalues these traits as necessary for the development of full human potential. Social change has influenced the behavior of men in their masculine roles, whether it is acknowledged or not. But cultural lag remains: attitudes have not caught up with evident behavior change. Positive masculinity is on the upswing just as masculinity norms have gone more toxic. As far as masculinity is concerned, a disheartening overall cliché remains: the more things change, the more they remain the same.

HOMOPHOBIA Since cultures are grounded in taken-for-granted heterosexism—people view relationships only in heterosexual terms—other sexual orientations are denigrated. A heteronormative world view assumes, therefore, that heterosexuality is preferred, proper and normative. Normative can also be read as “normal.” Reflecting these views, at various times in history homosexuality was a sin, disease, psychiatric disorder, crime, mental illness, and immoral choice. Contemporary labels are more sympathetic, such as referring to it as an alternative lifestyle or inescapable tragedy. Although LGBTQ is the more inclusive term preferred by many researchers, homosexuality is the label the public associates with sexual orientation. LGBTQ, however, is making its way into public consciousness. To be masculine is more than being “nonfeminine.” It also denotes “antifeminine.” A heterosexist view fuels homophobia, the fear and intolerance of homosexuals (gay men and lesbians) and homosexuality. LGBTQ people fall prey to homophobia. Researchers identify homophobia as fundamental to heterosexual masculinity. With a heterosexist foundation, hegemonic masculinity spells out to men, that to be a man, one cannot be homosexual. Global research consistently reports that homophobia is learned early in families during primary socialization and reinforced through social media, cyberbullying, religion, peer interaction at school and in the workplace, and interpersonal relationships (Fulcher, 2017; Orue and Calvete, 2018; Legate et al., 2019). Fathers play a significant role in cultivating masculinity through often subtle homophobic messages to sons. In the United States, despite more positive media images of LGBTQ people, the majority of teen boys express moderate to high levels of homophobia (Marasco, 2018; Merrin et al., 2018). Given its consequences, homophobia is another tragic expression of toxic masculinity.

Men and Masculinity  361

Demography of Homophobia Homophobia is declining. Before same-sex marriage was legal, the belief that homosexuals should have the right to marry consistently increased. The acceptance that same-sex adults have the right to sexual relations with same-sex partners increased dramatically over the last three decades (NORC, 2019). Despite these trends, homophobia is endorsed by a large swathe of Americans. People with higher levels of homophobia are also likely to be: heterosexual, elderly, not college educated, living in the South, and religiously, sexually, and politically conservative. They also tend to be right-wing, authoritarian, and hold rigid, highly traditional views of masculinity and femininity. Homophobia is correlated with sexism and racism, especially among teens (Kanamori et al., 2018; Lazar and Hammer, 2018; Austin and Jackson, 2019; McCullough et al., 2019). Homophobia translates to stigma, depression, and fear in the lives of gay men and lesbians and carries to the entire LGBTQ community. Given these correlates, homophobia in a heterosexist context can translate to heterophobia—fear and avoidance of heterosexual men—among LGBTQ people (Parent, 2018, Provence et al., 2018). With homophobic violence aimed at LGBTQ people all too frequent, their heightened heterophobia is perhaps a logical choice.

Risks of Race and Ethnicity When the minority status of homosexuals is added to an already disadvantaged position due to race or ethnicity, stigma for gay men increases. Those disadvantages may be higher within their own subcultures: African American gay and bisexual men, for example, are at greater risk of violence and HIV infection because they need to maintain a façade of heterosexuality. They adhere to heterosexist masculinity norms in subcultures with higher levels of homophobia. Although secrecy may protect them against violence, it does not protect them from HIV. Risky sexual behavior is associated with the sexual prowess masculinity norm that works against all men, but especially gay men and boys of color (Chapter 2). Among Latinos, a similar scenario impacts both homosexual and heterosexual men and women. Throughout Latino cultures in North and South America, Latino males are expected to be dominant, tough, and fiercely competitive with other males. This exaggerated machismo masculinity is displayed more frequently in poor and working-class neighborhoods. Latino men also report that their same-sex partners should not be noticeably gay or effeminate. Unprotected sex with multiple partners is proof of virility and masculinity, and therefore not homosexuality (Sánchez et al., 2016; Surace et al., 2017; Dillon et al., 2019). Latino men are aware of the dangers of unprotected sex with other men, but they retain a heterosexual frontage in the Latino community if the liaisons are discovered. Whether they marry of not, machismo in the larger community tolerates non-marital sexual outlets. In the Latino community, pato describes a gay man. It is either a badge of acceptance and honor and suggestive of agency in the gay community or a badge of dishonor and disdain outside it. In both communities, however, expectations for masculinity of the machismo variety dominate, and negotiating the two cultures is treacherous (Arreola et al., 2013; Rodrigues, 2018). Neither will accept those men with a highly transparent and avowed gay identity. Among Asian Americans, especially in Chinese communities, gender roles and images of masculinity are extremely rigid. Like other men of color, Asian American men must contend with intersectional layers of racism, sexism, and homophobia that accentuate trauma and stress (Choi et al., 2013; Ching et al., 2018). Gay Chinese Americans express high levels of

362  Gender, Marriage, and Families

anguish not only because they were socialized for strong family ties, but also because their families trace their heritage only through male offspring. An only son who is gay dooms a family line.

Gender Other trends about the decline of homophobia support extending the same rights pertaining to employment and military service to all people regardless of sexual orientation. Overall, young adults identify themselves between tolerant and accepting of gay men and lesbians. Media representations of gay men are becoming mainstream and popular, portraying positive, affirmative friendships between gay and straight men (think classic shows and reboots such as Will and Grace and Queer Eye for the Straight Guy, and the movie Brokeback Mountain). The gender difference in level of acceptance of homosexuality is the single most important contradiction of these trends. Males may be less homophobic than in the past, but they have been slower to change than other groups. For adolescent males, the gender gap in homophobia may be widening.

Masculinity and Homophobic Labels The feminine labels that boys use in name-calling denigrate other boys precisely because the word is associated with a devalued group—females. The most popular, taken-for-granted label males use to insult other males is “girl.” When stereotypes about femininity and homosexuality collide, boys combine two devalued groups (females and gay men) when using denigrating labels. These labels range from “sissy,” “wimp,” and “pussy” to “homo,” “fag,” or “cocksucker.” As rap icon Eminem ages, he is replaced by the likes of the rap trio Migos, also routinely using homophobic labels as slurs, less against a man’s sexuality, but more related to his gender (Garcia, 2018). “Fag discourse” is rampant in high school and is a powerful mechanism used to regulate the behavior of boys (Romeo and Horn, 2017; Bailey et al., 2018). Boys distance themselves from any behavior suggestive of these labels. They are reluctant to challenge stereotypes associated with its usage. Just by doing so they may be threatened with a homosexual label. As adults, men continue to fear these labels and subtly use homophobia to control other men. Men who are highly homophobic are likely to enact hypermasculinity to dispel any notion that they may be viewed as feminine—hence homosexual.

Gay Men Homophobia takes its toll on gay men who are socialized to accept heterosexist masculinity standards. Gay relationships, whether sexual or not, unfold in ways that establish masculinity standards and the homophobia of the standards. For example, in gay communities throughout the world, a powerful gay hypermasculinity element is evident. Exaggerated masculinity takes the form of dress (leather, motorcycle regalia, military uniforms), rough language, and risky, sometimes violent sexual encounters. Beliefs about masculinity can propel gay men into precarious behaviors related to drugs, alcohol, and sexual practices (Chapter 2). Risk is increased when gay men seek sex from partners who are highly masculinized, whether they are other gay men or men who do not identify as gay (Grov et al., 2013; Downing and

Men and Masculinity  363

Schrimshaw, 2014; Lewis and Wilson, 2017). A term from Latino culture, gay “machismo” presents an image of masculinity that gay men have been taught as the proper one. Sexual prowess, power, and control are its central characteristics. When gay men adopt the heterosexist masculine standard, however, their reality is distorted. They are still gay and open to the rejection and homophobia existing in the broader society.

Gay Rights The emergence of a strong gay rights (LGBTQ) movement is clearly responsible for the rapid legal victories in defeating the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) that led to legalization of same-sex marriage (Chapter 8). It helped gay men affirm positive identities and the right to sexual self-determination. In this manner, both political and individual agendas are met. Patterned after the women’s movement, one faction is working to escape the bonds of a sexist culture in which they recognize the common oppression and levels of discrimination they share with women. They are working to cast aside restrictive role-playing that distances them from other men and are challenging masculinity norms that are harmful to the well-being of all males. On the other hand, many gay men recognize that because women and gay men are both subordinate, it may be better to capitalize on the advantage of being male—regardless of how it undermines women. Like the general public, the LGBTQ movement in the U.S. and globally is not in accord with how marriage is imaged and defined (Bernstein et al., 2018; Hart-Brinson, 2018). The personal enactment of marriage can collide with a political agenda. For gay men, lurking hegemonic masculinity is ever present. The inclusiveness of the LGBTQ label may be rejected in favor of a gay rights—white male only—agenda sounding suspiciously like the hegemonic masculinity the movement is rallying against. From this white male advantage view, a gay male executive moving up the corporate ladder can wield power over any competing female and any male of color. As conflict theory suggests, white males are higher in the stratification system than are females and racial minority males. All males are socialized into accepting the masculinity norms described earlier, whether they are gay or not.

MASCULINITY AND FATHERHOOD Can men have it all? This question is seldom asked of men. It is addressed to women who want to successfully combine a career with marriage and children. Despite restrictions, femininity norms have been flexible enough to accommodate women with such aspirations. Masculinity norms have not. Under the umbrella of antifemininity, the success norm, associated with competition, winning, and gendered occupations direct men and women into separate spheres. Men take on the responsibilities of parenthood primarily through their breadwinning roles. Like women, men envision the American Dream in terms of successful marriage, satisfying career, no money woes, contented spouse, and happy children. Even as singlehood and cohabitation are readily embraced by both men and women, this standard remains. Idealism notwithstanding, men willingly abdicate daily household and child care responsibilities to their wives. Masculine images of success tied to career priorities do not allow the latitude for the degree of family commitment many men desire. Contrary to common belief, men do not “have it all.”

364  Gender, Marriage, and Families

Images of Fatherhood Fatherhood is more than paternity. The word fathering is associated with sexual and biological. The word mothering is associated with nurturance. The biological father who takes his provider role seriously meets a necessary criterion for successful masculinity. This narrow outlook disregards, even belittles, those men who want to expand parenting roles and choose to be stay-at-home fathers (SAHF). Choice is an operative word. Couples with the economic means have more freedom to allow this choice, and in turn to create more satisfying parenting. Despite beliefs about essentialism and the pervasive norm that men are providers and success objects, SAHF have high levels of psychological well-being, adjustment, and life and relationship satisfaction. SAHF report less traditional gender role attitudes. Complete role reversal is rare and breadwinner wives take on more household and child care than breadwinning men with homemaker wives (Chapter 8). However, the demeaning stereotypes of bumbling men who do not know how to hold a baby, soothe a sobbing child, or buy healthy groceries persevere, serving to reduce the skill level men need to succeed in parenting and domestic roles. Men may belittle their own efforts (I can fix a washing machine but cannot use it; I can buy the right diaper but it falls off when I diaper my kid) and at the same time praise their wives for succeeding where they have failed. This self-effacement also functions to maintain the traditional gendered division of labor in the household. The SAHF role itself may be praised as progressive but reinforces the binary between role of breadwinner and homemaker regardless of who takes on the role (Doucet, 2016). Men who freely choose to take care of their children as SAHF, who take on equal partnering with their dual-earning or homemaker wives, who take care of others’ children, or who are early childhood educators, are suspect in their masculinity. The exclusion of men from more meaningful participation in the lives of their children can devastate fathers who avidly desire these very roles.

Socialization Fathers’ child-nurturing roles are vital. Strong father–infant attachment and involvement of fathers with their young children are linked to a child’s personality adjustment, positive peer relationships, level of self-esteem, and overall sense of well-being (Chapter 3). In homes where fathers are absent much of the time, children are at greater risk for maladaptive psychological, social, and development outcomes. Fathers who are less involved adopt more traditional masculine roles—hence less expressive parenting—and more likely to use harsher discipline with their children, especially their sons. Expectations for fathers are evolving into more father-involvement roles, but these parenting styles bolster hegemonic masculinity in families for the next generation (Klann et al., 2018; Petts et al., 2018). Increases in divorce and cohabitation undermine fragile father–child relationships, reinforce masculinity norms focused on men’s economic roles, and distance fathers from children during primary socialization years. Decades of research on aspirations fathers hold for their children remain remarkably consistent. Regardless of social class, fathers are stricter in gender-typed intentions of their children than mothers, and they give sons less leeway than daughters in experimenting with different gender role definitions. Fathers believe that both their sons and daughters should

Men and Masculinity  365

go to college, but that college provides a different option for sons. Fathers pay close attention to the potential for their sons to be good providers but believe their daughters can use a degree “to fall back on.” They simultaneously encourage daughters to succeed in school but also want to see very good providers as marriage partners. Whereas these patterns are more pronounced among white, working-class men, gender stereotypes surrounding masculinity norms invade socialization practices for all fathers (Chapter 3).

Race and Ethnicity African American fathers must ensure that their children successfully navigate the racialization labyrinth they will inevitably encounter. They know their sons fall under hegemonic masculinity and seek ways to challenge it as well as to normalize it. Like white fathers, these fathers emphasize resilience and independence for their sons while adopting the takenfor-granted cultural standards of masculinity. “Involved” African American fathers, however, must also attend to racialized socialization that may undermine closeness and friendship with their sons. For Asian American sons, racialized messages from their fathers appear less important in socialization than more powerful messages about being a good provider. The focus on breadwinning may be functional for a family’s economic well-being, but it serves to distance Asian American fathers and sons from one another (Allen, 2016; Ide et al., 2018). Regardless of race, a call for relational parenting that develops a path for fathers and sons to accept one another unconditionally is strong (Watson-Phillips, 2016). More and more fathers believe they are limited in this expression by rigid masculinity norms that harm connections with their children. Conventional beliefs about fatherhood may be changing but what will the future hold in replacing them? I am not very fond of Father’s Day. It is over-marketed in a limited masculine way. Ties! Grilling equipment! Golf! It feels dishonoring … because it still asks us to confirm to the essentialist normative version of a father … it oscillates between “work” and the goofy incompetent Homer Simpson’s style. Neither of which is at all appealing. (Elliot, quoted in Stelzer, 2016) These messages ensure that masculinity standards are intact for American fathers.

Parents as Partners To make parenthood a meaningful partnership for a couple, certainly fathers and children need to be brought closer together. This is highly desired by fathers, but it is eroded by images of masculinity that underscore the “good provider” image for success to the neglect of a fledgling “involved-father” model. A father’s participation in family life is enhanced when expanded role definitions are accepted on all fronts. Wives, children, kin, friends, and coworkers can be supportive of men who take on a variety of child-centered roles—not just child maintenance, but also child-rearing. Fathers want to embrace new role definitions that rank nurturing equal to or higher than breadwinning but feel blocked by broader masculinity norms bolstering their advantage in the workplace but disadvantage at home. Family-supportive workplace policies allowing flextime and paternity leave serve partnering and nurturing roles for fathers. However, when paternity leave options are available, few

366  Gender, Marriage, and Families

fathers avail themselves of these opportunities. Because these are rarely paid, many fathers cannot afford the time off work. A more common reason, however, is that employers and coworkers believe that men who take paternity leave are less serious about their careers. This is clear in the comments of a new father who did not extend his two-week leave after the birth of his child. I probably wouldn’t have [taken more extended time off] because of the way it would’ve been viewed ... and I’ve heard executives say this—excuse the language—I can’t f*ing believe that guy took a month off after the birth of his baby. (Rehel, 2014:120) Like the emerging tenderness masculinity norm, these comments suggest that men are in transition to gender role change. Involved fathers, for example, are not yet on a par with provider fathers.

Men at Childbirth Women dominate the moral discourse on childbirth. Expectant mothers are cast into positive, normative roles, but there are no corresponding roles for expectant fathers. Expectant fathers in Lamaze classes are quite aware that women control the class. A man may joke about the classes, but he is frightened for his wife and by the isolation he feels during her pregnancy. Except for his laughable nervousness, his fears are not addressed. Fear of his wife’s death during childbirth, anxiety over what kind of parent he will be, and his new family responsibilities are huge concerns for expectant fathers but are rarely discussed. Only a few decades ago fathers were relegated to waiting rooms, where they nervously paced until the doctor brought news of the birth, upholding older images of men as appendages who get in the way. At childbirth, men are constrained by a double standard built into their role. With attention turned to motherhood, the transition to fatherhood is overlooked. Today the doors are wide open for expectant fathers who had been removed from the birthing process. A powerful partnering tool is a father’s inclusion in the childbirth experience—from labor coach and preparenting classes to the birthing itself. Being present at childbirth offers a new father an incredibly powerful bond to his infant and to his wife or partner. After sharing in the birth of the child, the marriage is likely to be stronger, particularly if the father is highly involved in later child care. Health care communities need to be aware of their own stereotypes in working with expectant fathers. Health professionals are at the forefront in encouraging expectant fathers to speak openly and unashamedly about their natural fears with spouses and partners, as well as with other fathers. Programs offering a safe environment for fathers to express themselves can counter the interpersonal distancing of the antifeminine norm. The relationship with his wife, in turn, is strengthened. It is clear that these strategies are beneficial for the marriage or partnership and for later parenting.

Divorce Divorced fathers who would like to be actively involved with their children must contend with restrictions on parenting tied to masculine gender roles that interfere with responsible parenting. Fathers who feel cut off from their children after a divorce have heightened levels

Men and Masculinity  367

of anxiety, depression, and stress. The bleak statistics on child support payments by fathers is also a common outcome. A father’s income decreases after divorce and is further suppressed when a mother gains sole custody. Income (economic well-being) is a key indicator of a father’s level of contact and involvement with children after divorce (Albert, 2018; Guarin and Meyer, 2018). However, he is still likely to be much better off financially than his ex-wife. Social constructionists suggest that it is perception of his income rather than actual income that is the issue. Joint custody is less economically advantageous for ex-wives, but it increases contact and self-esteem for ex-husbands. Those fathers who absent themselves from their children after divorce and fail to pay child support often report that they were treated unfairly in the divorce settlement. They may view this as a legitimate strategy to maintain control over their former wives who only see them as an ATM machine (Chapin, 2016). Positive coparenting is hindered when men cannot separate their previous role of spouse from their continuing role as parent (Petren et al., 2017; Perry et al., 2017). These regrettable practices and beliefs remind us that fathers may be locked in to a system shaped by gendered ideology that discourages positive postdivorce relationships for the ex-spouses and their children.

MEN AT MIDDLE AGE AND IN LATER LIFE Sociological perspectives on the life course highlight the process of continuing socialization in the roles people play over a lifetime and the ages associated with those roles. The varied paths of the life course are shaped by individual experiences as well as social change, particularly related to gender.

Retirement The transition to retirement requires major adjustments in all segments of life. It restructures and alters daily living, family relationships, and spending patterns. Retirement can generate stress harmful to well-being if it is not offset by relief and joy in prospects for the future. Retirement has become such a part of life’s expectations that if financial security is ensured, workers prefer early retirement.

Masculinity Matters Gender role beliefs are central to retirement adjustment. Men undergo a profound shift in identity and in ideals about masculinity. Standards of masculinity persist, but there is no cultural blueprint older men can turn to for traversing this phase of life (Thompson and Langendoerfer, 2016). Masculinity’s breadwinner and success norms, associated with independence and self-sufficiency, sharpen an already strong American work ethic from which identity and self-esteem are gained. Retirement saps that identity. Psychological investment in the world of paid employment for men predicts the marital stress that comes with decreased income. Depression intensifies for men working part-time who are also caring for a spouse, thrusting them into two non-traditional gender roles. Although part-time work may offer some respite from financial strain, it does not come close to the regard men associate with their previous full-time work life. Nor does it meet income needs related to deteriorating health (Glauber and Day, 2018; Park and Kim, 2018; Rusu et al., 2018).

368  Gender, Marriage, and Families

Satisfaction with family life after retirement is closely tied to men’s identity surrounding masculinity, but satisfaction for both men and women is based on the same factors. Like men, career women anticipate retiring at an earlier age, but they use the resulting free time differently. Women restructure their domestic lives that were constrained because of employment and spend more time with family, do home-related activities, and volunteer. Men take on more activities outside the home, but many of these activities are done with family members rather than friends or former coworkers. Egalitarian men do the same level of routine household work at retirement; egalitarian women invest more time in these tasks. Marital satisfaction increases for men and women as adjustments to a less time-driven life are made. Gender is less of a predictor of life satisfaction at retirement than are income and health, a pattern also holding for Europe (Axelrad and McNamara, 2018; Wang and Matz-Costa, 2019). Both men and women are less satisfied if poor health forced them to retire or if fewer economic resources forced them to remain on the job.

Midlife as Crisis Do men have a midlife crisis? Health professionals continue to debate the question in regard to a configuration of physical and emotional symptoms that may emerge for men in their 40s or 50s. Variously referred to as the “male climacteric” or male menopause, men may present symptoms of night fears, sweats and chills, and depression. The turmoil associated with these symptoms is linked to hormonal changes, such as a sharp drop in testosterone level for a few men and a slow but gradual change, with considerable hormonal variation, including a rise in estrogen for most men. Unlike women who experience noticeable changes heralding the cessation of menses, in normal aging for men the changes are subtle. Older men retain their interest in sex, but sexual performance is less predictable. Gender scripts linking masculinity to sexual prowess, virility, and physical strength remain. Fear of impotence can create impotence not because of hormones, but because of the fear itself (the massive sales of sexual performance may attest to this). Men perceive themselves and are perceived by others as “men” first; their elder status comes second. Men do not drift into sexlessness at old age (Hurd Clarke and Lefkowich, 2018). More overt physical changes, and more hidden biological changes should be seen in light of social and psychological factors embedded in masculinity norms. Many health professionals view these symptoms as normal to the aging process, and although initially alarming, they are not debilitating. The appearance of symptoms prompts many men to engage in a review of their lives, make choices, and alter life paths. Other professionals suggest that this stage is neither normal nor healthy, and that it produces psychological turbulence for men who make unwise decisions that are maladaptive to themselves and their families. This latter view asserts that men at midlife become acutely aware of their own mortality and, in reviewing their accomplishments, focus on what they have not done rather than what they have done. Unmet goals founded on masculinity’s success scripts create turmoil for the midlife man who is said to be in crisis.

Women at Midlife For women, the unhappiness that supposedly occurs when the last child is launched, or moves away from home, is referred to as the empty-nest syndrome. Research shows, however,

Men and Masculinity  369

that the empty nest syndrome, overpopularized in the media in the 1970s, is largely a myth (Newman, 2016; Kumar, 2017). Contrary to the stereotype, women tend to experience an upturn in psychological well-being when children are launched. Marital satisfaction also increases, but too much time with their partners can decrease overall life satisfaction. Like good provider men, women largely identify with the motherhood role and must contend with stereotypes such as the empty nest. Women tend to look to the empty nest stage as offering opportunities to pursue activities they put on hold while raising children. They generally seek expanded roles in a society receptive to women like themselves, who are venturing outside the traditional confines of the home. Since the next generation of these empty nesters were probably employed most of their adult lives, they will have more resources to draw from, such as a wider range of colleagues and friends. These serve to enhance well-being at this stage of life.

Men at Midlife Men may have a more difficult time with the empty nest than women. Men’s increased depression at midlife is associated with regrets about career priorities that distanced themselves from their children. A positive life course path to recapture the lost parenting experience prompts many men to turn to grandchildren. Grandchildren provide a sense of biological continuity and psychological self-fulfillment. Men can be free from the competitions of the workplace that followed them home when their children were young. They strive for the emotional intimacy with grandchildren that deepens mutual affection. Masculinity ideals are not abandoned. They are reframed to make sense of the new, highly desired identity grandparenthood offers (Mann et al., 2016). The stereotype of a grandfather as a stern, aloof family patriarch counters the reality that grandparenting offers men rewarding and emotionally enriching experiences. Men at midlife may begin to integrate the male and female spheres that were separate for most of their lives. Traditional versions of masculinity are tempered by focusing on expanded roles of husband, father, and grandfather. The antifeminine norm and sexual prowess norms, however, continue to lurk in the background. Compared with midlife women, midlife men who have problems with sexual functioning experience less enjoyment of life (Smith et al., 2019b). Women approach midlife differently from men. Men seek greater interdependence at old age; women seek greater autonomy. Men become more nurturing; women, more independent. Her capability of standing apart from him helps reduce the burden of responsibility he carried for the family. It is interesting that the wife who grows in assertiveness and independence provides the best source of support for the husband in this phase of life. Each spouse may begin to loosen the bonds of restrictive gender roles as they make the transition from middle to old age.

Widowhood Although most older adults return to earlier levels of physical and emotional health within two years after the loss of their spouse, social isolation and loneliness are frequent outcomes of widowhood (Collins, 2018). The surviving spouse is at higher risk of physical illness and even death. If a caregiver-spouse dies, the already debilitated surviving spouse is left in an even more dependent and vulnerable position. Suicide rates among the elderly have increased

370  Gender, Marriage, and Families

since the 1980s. The uptick of suicides in midlife men has not dislodged this pattern. Men account for the large majority of all suicides, and white males in their eighties have the highest suicide rates of all races and both genders. Suicide attempts by younger people (those under age 35) are likely to fail; suicide attempts rarely fail for the elderly. The failure rate is smallest for elderly males. The suicide rate of older men, especially non-poor widowers, is a consistent trend since Emile Durkheim’s (1897) analysis of suicide over a century ago.

Widows Compared with widowers, widows are much less likely to remarry; thus, among the elderly, the majority of widows reside alone. The death of a spouse has a profound and devastating effect on the surviving partner, but becoming a widow is a qualitatively different experience from becoming a widower. Older women are more likely to form their identity around marriage, so losing a spouse literally means loss of a central life role. Widows are likely to experience a sudden decrease in standard of living, and for working-class women, widowhood may quickly lead to poverty. Isolation increases and support networks decrease. These are worsened if the couple has moved away from her family for his career advancement. If a widow feels emotionally secure enough to venture into dating, prospects for male companionship and remarriage are limited. On the other hand, many others with whom they can share experiences, memories, and activities guide widows. Due to their numbers alone, a variety of productive roles have been carved out for widows. Like empty nesters, widows who were employed can extract resources outside of traditional martial roles. Married women can expect to outlive their husbands by almost a decade (Chapter 2). They know that widowhood is probable and may begin to mentally rehearse it through anticipatory socialization. Their role choices may not be completely clear, but most widows cope with the crisis reasonably well, adapt as necessary, and productively map out the rest of their lives in ways that contribute to their well-being.

Widowers The role of widower is vaguer than that of widow. At first glance, it seems that adjustment is difficult because men lose a vital source of emotional support and, for many, their only confidante. Wives typically take responsibility for maintaining the couple’s social calendar and network of friendships. Masculinity norms earlier in life prevent interpersonal skill building. Lacking the strategies for either preserving or re-establishing intimate relationships, widowers find themselves with reduced social contacts. Traditional norms of masculinity may intrude again, preventing them from talking out their grief with others. Retirement increases social isolation. Widowhood intensifies it. The net result is a loss of significant personal relationships (Taylor and Taylor, 2018). Older men are also less likely to be prepared for the everyday domestic responsibilities necessary for taking care of themselves. When ongoing relationships and customary responsibilities are shattered, anomie (normlessness) can follow. This pattern helps explain the high suicide rate of elderly males. On the other hand, marriage prospects are bright for widowers. Many are embarrassed by the attention they receive from older women who want to “do” things for them. In addition to the number of women their own age or younger who are available as potential dating and sexual mating partners, men are better off financially to support another spouse. Men

Men and Masculinity  371

may have a stronger need to be remarried, so they quickly move through the dating stage to make remarriage a reality. Overall, adjustment to widowhood may be different for men and women, but it remains unclear as to which gender fares better.

GENDERED VIOLENCE Over the life course males experience more physical violence than females, from schoolyard fistfights to barroom brawls to the violence of war and soldiering. Men’s acceptance of traditional masculine gender roles leads to violence toward other men, and in a patriarchal society, to escalating violence toward women. Virtually all masculinity norms (antifemininity, toughness, self-reliance, aggression, and sexual conquest) reinforce this fact. Some masculinity norms are functional in societies—such as the United States—that value individualism and economic achievement through competition. But in other contexts, these norms are highly maladaptive and dysfunctional. Translating to masculinity’s toxic side, this is vividly documented in overall patterns of male violence against women. When men are granted permission to subordinate women in patriarchal societies, sexual terrorism is a common result. Sexual terrorism includes sexual intimidation, threat of violence, and overt violence (Sheffield, 2007).

Rape The threat of sexual terrorism that zooms into rape is so pervasive that firsthand experience is not needed to instill its fear in women. Representations of rape in the media—both news and entertainment—serve to legitimize male aggression, reinforce gender stereotypes, and perpetuate rape myths (Table 9.1). Rape fear is heightened and women’s freedom of movement is restricted. Media coverage has moved away from reports that exaggerated a woman’s helplessness and her inability to fight back. In light of research that there are four rape attempts for every one completed, women are being taught self-defense tactics and ways to avoid being raped. The burden of responsibility, however, still falls on women to always protect themselves, to always be on the alert, and to always avoid places perceived to increase their vulnerability. Because the general social norm is that male personality, dominance, and prerogative take precedence, the antirape strategy is to change the woman rather than change the situation that creates the problem. Fear of rape shapes women’s lives.

Statistics The staggering statistic is that 20–30 percent of all females are victims of sexual assault involving rape or attempted rape. Women do commit rape, but it is quite rare and is thought to account for less than one-half of 1 percent of cases. When males are raped, the perpetrator is another male. Considering that definitions, perceptions, and legal standards vary considerably between states and between municipalities, between victims and perpetrators, and according to the context of occurrence, official figures on rape are probably underestimated. The reality is that false reports of rape are estimated between 2 and 8 percent, the latter figure conflating all forms of sexual assault (of which rape is a subset) and as a percentage of

372  Gender, Marriage, and Families TABLE 9.1  Myths

of Rape

Myth

Reality

1 Rape is a sexual act.

Rape is an act of violence to show dominance of the rapist and achieve submission by the victim.

2 Rapes are committed by strangers.

8 of 10 rapes are committed by someone who knows their victim. Date rape is an example.

3 Rapes are spontaneous, with the rapist aking advantage of the opportunity to rape.

Rape is likely to be preplanned. If spontaneity occurs, it may be part of another crime such as robbery.

4 Women wear provocative clothing or flirt with men.

This is the classic “blaming victim” myth. Since most rapes are preplanned, the rapist will strike regardless of appearance.

5  Women enjoy being raped.

The pain, violence, degradation, and psychological devastation experienced by the victim are overwhelming. She also can be killed.

6 Most rapists are pathological or sexually abnormal.

It is difficult to distinguish the rapist from other men in terms of personality or ideas about sexuality.

7 When she says “no” to sex, she really means “yes.”

When she says “no,” she really means “no.”

reported rapes. This is much smaller than false reports for other crimes (Spohn et al., 2014; Fielding, 2018; NSVRC, 2019). Sensationalist media coverage on rape involving famous men contributes to a woman’s secondary victimization as she relives the sexual violence. Today most municipalities incorporate counseling and more humane approaches in questioning victims of rape, and many judges no longer allow a victim’s sexual history to be revealed in court. Unfortunately, the victim herself is still often treated like the criminal and subject to a level of interrogation not expected in other criminal cases (Chapter 14). Reporting of rapes, particularly stranger rapes, has steadily increased, but fewer than one-third of all rapes are reported.

Profile of the Rapist Until recently, rape was viewed as a crime committed by a few demented men of lower intelligence who have uncontrollable sexual impulses. These few psychotic men cannot be responsible for these staggering rape statistics. The reality is that there is no consistent personality type that reliably distinguishes rapists from men who commit other crimes and from men who do not commit crimes. Men are not psychotic at the time of the rape. Given the difficulty of compiling accurate statistics on rape, the profile of the so-called typical rapist is a sketchy one. Rape is a crime perpetrated by a wide spectrum of men, but they share key characteristics in patterns that are found globally (Miller, 2014; Bhogal and Corbett, 2016; Fox and Farrington, 2018; Carvalho and Nobre, 2019).

Men and Masculinity  373

• •

• • •

•

He has a higher need for dominance and a lower need for nurturance. He is hostile both actively and passively. He deals with perceived inadequacies by relying on traditional masculinity norms related to aggression and the sexual control of women. He is hypermasculine in his rigid acceptance of these norms. He is socially insecure and interpersonally isolated. He is likely to endorse rape myths and justifies his behavior so that his victim is made to seem culpable (Table 9.2). Sexual violence is used as a means of revenge or punishment, sometimes to specific women but more often to women in general, whom he holds responsible for his sexual problems. He presents rape in what he believes to be socially acceptable terms. His aggression is often followed by expressions of remorse.

When men from all walks of life are presented with information about the motives of a rapist, they express disdain and horror about the victimization and outrage that all men are tainted because a few men rape. Other men remain mystified about the motives of a rapist. This is a sketchy profile and can fit many men.

Rape on College Campus In the United States and Canada, between 25 and 35 percent of college women report a rape or attempted rape. The common pattern reported by college women is that rape and “pressured” intercourse occur through physical force and psychological intimidation, particularly with the presence of drugs and alcohol. Date and acquaintance rape are facts of life on college campuses. About half of college men have engaged in some form of sexual aggression on a date; between one-fourth and one-half of college women report being sexually victimized. Despite these high numbers, when the victim and offender know one another and alcohol is involved, the incident is less likely to be reported to school officials or the police and even less likely to result in a criminal conviction. Date rape is associated with: alcohol and other drug use (for both victim and perpetrator); the belief that men are entitled to sex after initiating and paying for the date; fraternity parties, and length of time the couple has been dating. Social media posts perpetuate such perceptions. Fraternity culture is strongly connected to rape on campus. Greek system norms reinforce male privilege and sexual competition among fraternity brothers. When sexual violence occurs, it is denied or neutralized by assigning blame to the victim. Male college students are more likely than female college students to accept rape myths (Boyle and Walker, 2016; Giraldi and Monk-Turner, 2017; Jozkowski and Wiersma-Mosley, 2017; Martinez et al., 2018). The so-called date rape drugs—colorless, odorless pills slipped into a drink, causing a victim’s sleepiness and vulnerability—are used to plan a rape and are widespread on college campuses.

Pornography and Rape Because it is significantly correlated to sexual aggression, pornography is heavily scrutinized by scientists and legal and public policy professionals. Pornography can be categorized

374  Gender, Marriage, and Families

according to two major factors—degree of depiction of sexual acts and depictions of aggression in these acts. Its use is linked to poor relationship quality, less sexual satisfaction, and riskier sexual behavior. Hard-core pornography usually depicts genitalia openly and shows sex acts that are aggressive and violent. Women are the objects of the violence; it is rare to see men portrayed in this manner. Sexually suggestive nonviolent soft-core pornography appears to have no direct effect on sex crimes or attitudes toward rape. However, the aggressive sexual stimuli in hard-core pornography showing rape scenes heightens sexual arousal and acceptance of rape myths. It desensitizes viewers to violent sexual acts and leads them to see rape victims as less worthy (Wright, 2013; Szymanski and Stewart-Richardson, 2014; Skorska et al., 2018). Women who were sexually abused and/or raped often report that their abuser used pornography that was imitated during the abuse. The issue of what constitutes pornography and whether it should be illegal is hotly debated. One side focuses on pornography as implicitly condoning the victimization of women, arguing that sexual violence against women is increasing and pornography fuels the desensitization to sexual violence and rape. The other side contends that pornography may reduce sex crimes by providing a non-harmful release of sexual tension. Proponents of this view do not deny the association of pornography with women’s degradation. But they assert that campaigns against it obscure more urgent needs of women. Banning it can deny income for women who are pornographic models and actresses. There is concern in both camps that banning pornography amounts to censorship in a free society. All factions agree that child pornography should be censored, and there is some consensus on legally distinguishing pornography according to its degree of violent imagery. People may not agree on the definition of pornography, and findings are mixed about links between pornography and sexual violence (Mellor and Duff, 2019). This lack of agreement, however, does not justify ignoring the social issues surrounding pornography’s role in socialization into masculinity and in reinforcing gender stereotypes. As one man recalled on his first dating experience at age 14: … his dad brought up the topic of sex for the first—and last—time: He rolled up a copy of Playboy magazine and stuffed it in his son’s Christmas stocking. (Bernstein, 2018: A11) Factors surrounding rape and pornography converge in critical ways with masculinity norms. Sexual violence, specifically rape, is a learned behavior consistent with socialization into norms related to antifemininity, toughness, sexual prowess, and aggression. Coupled with patriarchal beliefs about domination, these norms blend insecurity and destructive masculinity with violence and sexuality. Rape, as a result, is the quintessential marker of toxic masculinity.

Domestic and Intimate Partner Violence The increase in domestic violence makes the family home one of the most lethal environments in the United States. Intimate partner violence (IPV) against women comprises about one-fifth of all nonfatal violent crimes experienced by women. Although it cuts across all demographic groups, wife battering is more prevalent in families with low income and unemployment, isolation from kin and community, and alcohol use. When race is factored in, African American women are twice as likely as white women to experience more violence and more severe violence. Privacy of the family, reluctance of the police to get involved in

Men and Masculinity  375

domestic disputes, lack of consistent legal standards, and acceptance of masculinity norms, toxic as they may be, make it difficult to get accurate statistics on all forms of family violence and abuse. Statistics on child abuse are more accurate because hospitals and schools report suspicious injuries to administrators and law enforcement. Under a framework of rigid, heterosexual gender roles, people endorse gender inequality in marriage, believe IPV is a part of “normal” marriage, and blame women for the violence. Young children and teens exposed to IPV are at risk for later behavioral problems (Ahonen and Loeber, 2016; Lombard, 2016; Smagur et al., 2017). These may help explain why wife battering is the most underreported of all crimes. Domestic violence encompasses a wide array of physical, sexual, and emotional abuse. Like rape, IPV is associated less with sexual satisfaction and more with power and control of women (Giordano et al., 2016). Marital rape and wife beating have been common throughout history, but until the mid-twentieth century, a husband’s right to a wife’s body was considered as personal privilege and as amounting to legal right. Standards from English Common Law transported to the United States generally supported a man’s right to beat his wife, even for such infringements as talking back to him. The infamous rule of thumb allowed a husband to beat his wife with a stick no bigger than his thumb. All states have laws against marital rape, but they vary considerably (see Chapter 14). A man may be charged if there is obvious and sustained physical injury, the couple has separated or filed for divorce, or his wife is physically or mentally incapacitated. He may be exempt if she fails to report it to the police within a specified period of time, if the couple is not legally married, or if there is a hint that she consented to intercourse. The vast majority of women raped by their spouses or partners do not report it, especially if no weapon was used or no physical injury was sustained. The extent and lethality of IPV is well documented (O’Neal and Spohn, 2017; NCVS, 2018). • • •

• • •

Over one-third of all women are victims of some type of sexual coercion with a husband or partner in their lifetime. Domestic abuse is the leading cause of injury to women in the United States. Both men and women assault each other in marriage, and mutual assault is more common than either alone. However, a man’s physical domination and strength are much more lethal for a woman. Mutual abuse does not translate to “equal opportunity” in its effects. One-third of all women who are murdered die at the hands of husbands or boyfriends. Half of all homeless women and children are fleeing domestic violence. Family homicides are usually preceded by at least one call to the police for a domestic disturbance, often weeks before the murder.

Why Doesn’t She Leave? When battering is widely covered, the public is sympathetic but also bewildered why women remain in abusive households. Referred to as battered women’s syndrome, abused women often have a poor self-image, which contributes to their feelings of powerlessness and dependence. These women may believe they are responsible for the violence against them and attempt to alter their behavior to conform to their husbands’ expectations. Expressions of remorse by the batterer lead to a short-lived honeymoon period followed by recurrence of

376  Gender, Marriage, and Families

the abuse, with the likelihood of its increasing in severity. A pattern of learned helplessness often emerges for these women: the beatings are endured, they feel guilty about them, and they are unlikely to confide to others about the situation. Battered women with children often remain in the relationship because they are financially strapped and economically dependent. They fear for their lives and the lives of their children if they go to a shelter but are forced to return home. A woman is at risk of increased violence if she threatens to leave, files for divorce, or calls the police, although attacks will most likely continue when she stays (Walker, 2017). To add insult to injury (literally), battered women may be denied health insurance because their lifestyles are considered too dangerous. When abused women retaliate and kill their attackers, the courts are reluctant to use self-defense or battered women’s syndrome as justifications for acquittal. Many women do leave abusive husbands and partners, however, especially when they receive social support and legal help. Antistalking laws enacted to protect celebrities from deranged fans have been used successfully to protect battered women. Enlightened police responses to domestic violence calls, shelters for women and children, crisis hotlines, and self-defense classes help. The murder of Nicole Brown Simpson in 1994 elevated the issue of domestic violence to the public consciousness with clear evidence that she had been battered by her former husband, football star O. J. Simpson. Wife battering has not gained as much attention as child abuse because it remains subtly condoned by a system that is inconsistent in enforcing the law.

Sociological Perspectives on Sexual Violence Feminists and conflict theorists contend that power and patriarchy combine to spur rape and sexual violence. Media representations often legitimize male aggression and reinforce gender stereotypes, especially in college life. Movie classics such as Animal House, Sixteen Candles, and Revenge of the Nerds served to legitimate and dismiss men’s sexual “antics” in high school and college even if the behavior is criminal and clearly abuses women. Patriarchal norms that culturally condone relationships putting men in dominant and aggressive roles and women in passive and submissive ones are widely accepted. Opposition to gender equality also predicts more acceptance of rape myths. Egalitarian families have the lowest rates of domestic violence (Chapter 7). The greater the power gap between partners, the greater the risk of violence against women. On a global scale, violence is most common in societies where men hold power over the women and children in their families and is least common in societies with high levels of gender equity. Beliefs regarding women as the sexual and economic property of men not only dismiss rape, but often have few legal protections for its victims. In the U.S., even if marital rape laws are in place, legal standards still largely treat rape not as a personal crime, but as a property offense. Sex is viewed as part of the marriage agreement, whether the wife wants it or not. Both genders are socialized with these standards in mind. This view allows the victim to be blamed and in turn justifies the crime.

MEN’S MOVEMENTS IN THE UNITED STATES Challenges to male dominance by men themselves take many routes. A decades old “men in crisis” narrative spawned gatherings of like-minded men to confront the crisis in ways

Men and Masculinity  377

men eagerly support and in ways they find unpalatable. Change cannot occur in a vacuum. The crisis theme centers on change for men because of new or expanded roles for women. If men are said to be “in crisis” women must be part of the conversation in confronting the crisis. A variety of men’s movements (MM) emerged to meet the inevitability of gender role change. A half-century of MM can be loosely categorized according to degree of rejection or support of feminism in general and confronting toxic masculinity in particular. Compared to the variety of women’s movements, however, MM demonstrate stark differences.

Men’s Movements: Rejecting Feminism Gatherings of men in the twentieth century were heralded by media as “the” men’s movement, even as they were relatively short-lived and as one replaced another. Although rebuffs of feminism may not have been explicit in these gatherings, feminist ideas were targets. Three of the MMs stand out in garnering the most attention and receiving generally high marks from the media.

Mythopoetic Men Media attention of this MM focused on poet Robert Bly’s (1990) belief that men are caught in toxic masculinity that demands efficiency, competition, and emotional distance that separates them from one another. Rooted in a competitive work environment that keeps fathers absent from their families, Bly contended, boys turn to women to meet emotional needs. Using myths, art, and poetry as vehicles, men must unearth and celebrate their lost natural birthright of righteous anger and primordial masculinity, which can be regained only in communion with other men. Communication between men is encouraged, but the “soft male” who is out of touch with his masculinity and turns to women as authority figures as substitutes for absent or distant fathers is denounced. Through healing rituals at weekend retreats, men become aware of their animal instincts and come to embrace their full masculinity. Media were so swept away with Bly’s ability to bring these men together that it was heralded as the first men’s movement and, as we will see, ignored earlier MM confronting maladies of masculinity but from a different angle. Referred to as a mythopoetic branch of the men’s movement, healing retreats use techniques psychotherapists believe can help men repair the damage caused by father deprivation. The mythopoetic MM is promasculinist and seeks to heal men’s pain by distancing from women. Although the movement asserts it is profeminist, many of its men believe male privilege is a myth and men are victims, especially in divorce and custody battles. It is difficult to reconcile this stance with principles that are in direct opposition to feminism. Reflecting hegemonic masculinity, men attracted to the mythopoetic ranks tend to be powerful, straight, middle class, and white. They seek to change their lives by making success less a priority than emotional values and spiritual well-being (Magnuson, 2007, 2008). In this sense they are rejecting one version of toxic masculinity, but when women are implicitly blamed as a main source of their problems, may be accepting another version. Considering the costly retreats, economically successful men fill mythopoetic ranks. Working-class men and men of color are virtually nonexistent. A precipitous drop in attendance at mythopoetic retreats and diminished interest in the movement by the millennium seemed to sound its death knell for all but a few men. Mythopoetic principles, however, are enjoying somewhat

378  Gender, Marriage, and Families

of a resurgence and are enacted within a loose array of men’s groups, some outside the U.S., that embrace or modify Bly’s principles (MacKenzie, 2017). These groups tend to work more locally and strive to be more inclusive, such as attracting an LGBTQ contingent. Efforts at inclusiveness may determine whether they can recapture the larger national following and media attention of the original group.

African American Men A second MM category focuses on the African American male experience. Feeling blocked in achieving hegemonic masculine goals offered by mainstream society, many African American men attracted to this MM recognize that the dominant masculinity model cannot account for unique race and class configurations these men must confront. The 1995 Million Man March (MMM) in Washington, D.C., organized by controversial Black Muslim leader Louis Farrakhan, was an effort to bring together African American men in support of one another and to offer positive role models to young people and their communities. Media spotlighted positive role models, but the luster was tarnished by its antiwoman thrust and heavy infusion of patriarchy (West, 1999). The Million Man March did not invite women to join the march and Farrakhan later applauded Iran for setting a shining example to the world on behalf of democratic principles. Iran’s unquestionably brutal record regarding both women and democracy intensified any existing schism between men and women. In 2005, another march on Washington, D.C., organized by the “Millions More Movement” marked the earlier MMM. The 2005 march did not receive near the publicity or attention of the 1995 gathering and the Millions More Movement has not been sustained. Marking the twentieth anniversary of the MMM another march was convened in 2015 to highlight ongoing racial discrimination, specifically regarding the police. In spearheading the march again, Louis Farrakhan took the reins in a two-hour speech calling for African American men to work at self-improvement and to pledge their faith in God. Women were invited to join the march this time, but Farrakhan’s message centering on publicity for the Nation of Islam was explicitly marked in media as both patriarchal and homophobic. The march could not separate itself from its leader and overshadowed productive messages to African American men about fatherhood and family (Blow, 2015). MMM was certainly a historic moment, but has not translated to an ongoing, organized movement of African American men. Despite these criticisms, MMM is considered a watershed in bringing African American men together in a unique celebration of strength and resilience (Chandler, 2012). Although not on a sustained, national stage the MMM framework is incorporated in communities throughout the United States for African American men and youth to dialogue on strategies to adopt positive masculinity in their lives.

Promise Keepers Perhaps capitalizing on the attention MM received, the “Promise Keepers” (PK), emerged in the mid-1990s in between mythopoetic and the MMM, drawing men to large events and to small group meetings for over two decades (Promise Keepers, 2020). Founded by Bill McCartney, former head football coach of the University of Colorado, PK is an evangelical Christian organization dedicated to reestablishing male responsibility in the family and overcoming racial divisions. Popularity was sustained by positive media coverage of large

Men and Masculinity  379

stadium events drawing thousands of men to hear PK messages and bond with other men. Like both the mythopoetic and African American MM, PK sees the fatherless home as the source of America’s problems. It is different, however, in that it resonates with more men even as it demands men to pledge commitment to seven “promises,” including honoring Jesus Christ, practicing spiritual and sexual purity, and building strong marriages and families. PK is founded on the goal of reconnecting men to their families and reclaiming family leadership “sissified men” abdicated. Women filled the vacuum. PK urged—not asked— men to take their leadership back (Healey, 2000:221). PK distanced itself from political affiliations but calls for inserting Christianity into home and society which parallels the political wing of the evangelical Christian Right. This thrust served as a barrier for men of other faiths to join PK. PK had rapid growth and rapid decline. Since 2001, numbers dwindled considerably, especially amid accusations related to financial support for an array of male religious leaders. Also, PK could not distance itself from McCartney’s admission that he had been unfaithful to his wife. Like other men’s movements, inclusiveness, particularly among Christians, remains a critical flaw. PK’s racial unification goal under a banner of spirituality has not been met. Women were needed as volunteers and supporters but are not invited to share in its mission as equal partners (Bartkowski, 2003). On the other hand, it continues to hold yearly events and conferences and draws men to stadiums to pledge and repledge their promises. Recognizing that women (even Christian women) needed to be drawn into PK in some fashion, earlier rhetoric bolstering patriarchal gender roles “became less aggressive and more ambivalent” (McKinney, 2015:19). PK may also take advantage of the current political rise of fundamentalist Christianity. It remains to be seen if its less aggressive gendered tone is muted, or such a rise will return PK to its religiously centered patriarchal roots.

Men’s Rights Movements Expanding men’s rights movements (MRM) challenge feminism in the name of men believed to be discriminated against and victimized in the family, workplace, and schools in laws tilted in favor of women. MRM messages scripted to the advantage of “left-behind” men are gaining traction in the U.S. and globally (Boyd and Sheehy, 2016; Palmer and Subramaniam, 2017; Baker, 2019). This rhetoric of men’s rights argues that feminism is a movement that is oppressive to men and “out of control.” If there is misogyny in society, MRM counter that feminism is fraught with misandry, the contempt and loathing of men. Social media are the bulwark driving MRM, with websites and blogs displaying angry messages about women disenfranchising men in all social institutions, denying men not only their legal rights, but also their human rights (Hodapp, 2017:4–5, 9). MRM capitalized on huge media attention centered on rape allegations against Brett Kavanaugh during his Supreme Court confirmation hearing (Chapter 14). These claims helped inspire the #MeToo movement but were countered by the creation of the #HimToo movement, in support of men believed to be falsely accused of rape. In another iteration, it means that men, too, have been sexually harassed. Overall, feminism is a threat to males, and MRM offer strategies to challenge it. The “end stage” of rejection of feminism may be found in the alt-right movement, short for “alternative right, ” actually a collection of far right groups, comprised largely of young white men. This movement supports the principle that white people have been dispossessed and need to reclaim their rightful place in society. Under a white victimization theme, the

380  Gender, Marriage, and Families

alt-right calls for strengthening white identity and white solidarity. The alt-right may be seen as a rebranding of the white nationalism dwelling in neo-Nazis and the Ku Klux Klan (Pitofsky, 2017; Hawley, 2017). Although it is constructed in the media according to a white nationalist mission rather than an anti-feminist one, attributes of toxic masculinity can describe its virtually all male membership. The alt-right fuses misogyny with a denunciation of liberal media and progressive politics creating weak, “sissified” men scripted as left-behind victims. Traditional white masculinity is being assaulted by feminists who urge women to abandon their time-honored homemaker roles. Women need (and want) men to rule over them. Promoted by social media memes, these beliefs are fueled by extreme right-wing figures who attract media coverage to espouse their views (Kelly, 2017; Lyons, 2017). Men must be re-masculinized, and the alt-right is there to help. With its increasingly violent messages, the alt-right movement is weakening. Like trajectories of other MM, it has splintered into factions, mostly surrounding how far to play the white nationalist card. After the death of a counter-protester in Charlottesville, and despite Trump’s infamous assertion that there was “blame on both sides,” the movement is losing political strength (Siegler and Kelly, 2018). Misogyny, however, remains a core attribute. On the other hand, the MRM appears to be gaining support from judges for fathers in divorce and child custody fights and activism from second wives for alimony reform (Crowley, 2018), to sympathetic politicians and a wary public tired of never-ending charges of sexual misconduct leveled at a spectrum of men (Chapter 14).

Men’s Movements: Supporting Feminism The timeline for the rise, fall, and rebooting of various men’s movements is striking. Attention is drawn to new, shorter-lived MM suspicious of feminism rather than existing, longer-lived ones supporting feminism. Although historians of women’s studies trace men’s support for women’s rights in the United States to the early nineteenth century, it was not until the late-twentieth century that the public became aware of this support (Chapter 5).

National Organization for Men Against Sexism The earliest twentieth-century movement, then referred to as “male liberation,” originated on college campuses in the 1970s as a positive response to the woman’s movement. Decades before scholars, activists, and media became conversant with terms to describe masculinity as toxic or hegemonic, these gatherings of men offered agendas to challenge masculinity norms considered harmful to themselves, their families and partners, and to society. Their support for feminist causes and connections to feminist women as husbands, partners, and friends encouraged these men to reflect on how rigid conceptions of masculinity damaged their own self-image and impaired their interaction with other men. They were quite aware, for example, that men who rejected sexual bravado and oppressive behavior toward women were targets for ridicule and exclusion by other men and that definitions of masculinity disallowing expressions of vulnerability, nurturing, and caring undermined well-being. At that point in time, they did not have to contend with social media either to support their feminist beliefs or to be ridiculed for them. The men who began the earliest MM formed the National Organization for Men Against Sexism (NOMAS) and organized annual conferences on themes related to parenting,

Men and Masculinity  381

sexism, violence against women, sexuality, sexual orientation, and friendship. Men’s lives are enhanced by a profeminist, LGBTQ+ affirmative, and anti-racist banner. This MM works on male liberation by consciousness-raising on the negative effects of striving for power and the disabling effects of unyielding masculinity (NOMAS, 2019). In this sense, they target the lethality of the intersection of sexism, racism, homophobia, and heterosexism. A key concern is changing a system in which violence against women is institutionalized. To this end, they support counseling resources such as RAVEN (Rape and Violence End Now) and MVP (Mentors in Violence Prevention) for men dealing with issues of masculinity and violence and for women seeking to escape violent relationships. NOMAS remains a viable presence on college campuses throughout the United States, attracting students, clergy, health care professionals, academics, and K-12 educators. Although inclusiveness is a goal, campus chapters have not attracted working-class men and men of color from outside the student population. Neither has it attracted other professional men, particularly those representing the corporate, legal, or administrative elite. On the other hand, expanding to off-campus sites and offering resources to organizations engaged in violence prevention on all fronts has increased its network. College students will continue to fill its ranks as they cycle through and replace men who have graduated. After college, NOMAS men serve as mentors and leaders for the next generation of young people. Organizations like NOMAS are upheld by a multitude of activist men’s groups and networks in the U.S. and Europe who celebrate positive masculinity norms, but with virtually no media coverage outside their own campuses or communities. They advocate for a “caring” masculinity that resonates with feminism, drawing local attention to the need for productive, sustained social change toward gender equality (Elliott, 2016; Nardini, 2016). Messages from these groups help eclipse the doom and gloom scenarios associated with toxic masculinity.

LGBTQ Movement Partnering with profeminist men’s networks, the LGBTQ movement was the catalyst for the right to same-sex marriage (Chapter 8). The rather swift achievement of this goal was startling, attesting to the movement’s effectiveness in mobilizing an array of organizations in support of its causes. Originating as a “gay rights” MM, it quickly transitioned to inclusiveness needed for political strength. Media coverage offered public assurances that same-sex marriage would not destroy other marriage and families. Solidarity in its ranks and public awareness of the lethality of homophobia was fueled after the 2016 massacre at a gay club in Orlando, resulting in 49 deaths. Inclusiveness is an effective tool to mobilize and was certainly prominent in the march to same-sex marriage legalization. When a goal is met, a movement suffers a demise with narrower agendas that put members on different paths. Given the level of support for LGBTQ issues—unimaginable only a short time ago—new threats arise that should serve to keep unity largely intact. As of this writing, the Trump administration has reinstated a version of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” Clinton era policy with a ban for transgender enlistees in military service and new barriers for those already serving. Challengers say that the ban not only goes against Pentagon evidence confirming that LGBTQ soldiers serve valiantly and effectively, but the plan is based on politics—not policy—and misinformation, bad science, and prejudice. The stark and disturbing anti-feminine, toxic masculinity rhetoric used to back the ban is an anguished blow to the LGBTQ movement and its supporters. Perhaps more

382  Gender, Marriage, and Families

consequential to LGBTQ rights, an increasingly conservative Supreme Court threatens to rescind the Constitutional right to same-sex marriage established in 2015 on the grounds it is an assault on religious freedom. The movement, however, will draw upon lessons learned about masculinity and inclusiveness to challenge these threats.

Men’s Movements: Toward the Future All versions of the men’s movement assert that women will be the beneficiaries of their agendas. Generally, participants in the various MM that reject feminism know little about the other. When they do know about them, they tend to be lukewarm or wary about another group’s motives. Masculinity norms, ironically, prevent groups from overcoming suspicion. There is no sense of unity that brings men together under an accepted banner. All MM categories except NOMAS share a promasculinist stance that celebrates traditional, nonoverlapping gender roles and largely exclude women from their ranks except as volunteers. In general, media have given high approval ratings to PK but have virtually ignored criticisms that the ultimate effect will be to subjugate women. PK leaders say that women need not be threatened because in the kingdom, “there is no male or female.” Feminists point out, however, that patriarchy and not partnership is the outcome. PK would agree. Feminist men and women support men coming together in exclusive male groups for healing and sharing, but the promasculinist themes in all but NOMAS and an array of LGBTQ organizations propose that women are responsible for the problems of men. Blaming serves to undermine dialogue, reinforce sexism, and distance men and women from each other. Do gatherings of men suggest that a mass-based men’s movement—whether profeminist or promasculinist—has occurred? Evidence suggests that it has not. Although they may be referred to as “branches” of a larger movement, there is virtually no overlap in membership, ideology, or goals. With the glaring exception of the alt-right, MM rejecting feminism have received generally positive approval in media outlets. NOMAS remains largely unknown to the public. But for a half-century it is still convening conferences and drawing together men who are supportive of partnering roles with women and who challenge the toxicity of masculinity norms. On college campuses across the country, young men are dialoging with one another, sowing the seeds for a new generation of potential supporters. Latino men are gathering in groups to discuss how “machismo” has harmed them and their relationships with the women in their lives. African American men are drawn together to talk about ways to counter lethal stereotypes portraying them as absent fathers and ineffectual husbands. Groups such as mythopoetic, PK, and MMM men have not been as successful as NOMAS in the long run. Under a big tent, the women’s movement continues to expand, opening channels of expression for girls and women of all stripes and capabilities. Feminism can be used to inspire rather than divide men and boys. To be a girl today is to be the beneficiary of decades of conversation about the complexities of womanhood, its many forms and expressions … No commensurate movement has emerged to help (boys) navigate toward a full expression of their gender … Too many boys are trapped in outdated modes of masculinity … But to even admit (it) is to be reduced, because we don’t have a model of masculinity that allows for fear or grief or tenderness … (Black, 2018)

Men and Masculinity  383

The lives of millions of women in the United States and across the globe have been productively touched by the women’s movements. The same cannot be said for the men’s movements.

KEY TERMS Alt-right movement Battered women’s syndrome Hegemonic masculinity

Heteronormative Heterosexism Homophobia Life course Misandry

National Organization for Men Against Sexism (NOMAS) Rule of thumb Toxic masculinity

PART III

Gender and Social Institutions

CHAPTER 10

Gender, Work, and the Workplace

Ensuring equal pay … is actually good for growth, it’s good for diversification of the economy, it’s good for reducing inequality and … it’s also good for the bottom line of companies… It’s an economic no-brainer. —Christine Lagarde, President, European Central Bank, and former Chair of the International Monetary Fund (Cited in HR ASIA, 2018) Women across the globe specialize in unpaid work, from raising children and caring for elders to feeding their families by farming tiny subsistence plots. This unpaid labor is vital to their families, communities and nations but until recently was not considered economically “productive.” Women’s labor in and outside their homes—both paid and unpaid—has historically been hidden labor. Only since the late-twentieth century has the concept of gendered economy, accounting for the labor of women assessed in economic terms, moved out of the margin in calculating what it means to be productive. From a feminist view, the gender consequences of patriarchy wield massive market power (Hagengruber, 2016). Revealing women’s hidden labor also recognizes that the adage “a woman’s place is in the home” has never applied. Although it may express a nostalgic preference, it was never the norm either in the United States or globally. Women’s unrelenting global march into the labor force is associated with transformational social changes in all institutions, with massive influences in women’s homes and their workplaces. Employed women are measured socially according to how their paid labor outside the home impacts their unpaid labor in the home. Their employers measure them in the reverse—how their home-based labor impacts the manner in which they carry out their jobs. Sociologists are interested in the type of work men and women perform and why it is differentially valued. The standards that women are expected to live up to in the home and the workplace routinely collide. The choices they make relative to these standards are linked to all levels of economic disparity between men and women.

HISTORICAL OVERVIEW Archaeological evidence from prehistory through to written evidence of history clearly discounts the “nonworking” woman or “female frailty” myths to keep women from engaging in

388  Gender and Social Institutions

demanding work. Even today women grow and process over half of the world’s food, and in the developing world, their subsistence farming is considered domestic, home-based work essential for family survival (Chapter 6). To explain the world of work for women, sociologists focus on four major types of production in which women have traditionally engaged: producing goods or services for consumption within the household, producing goods or services at home for sale or exchange elsewhere (cottage industry), caregiving and volunteer work, and working for pay.

The Home as Workplace Women’s work roles traditionally have been closely tied to the home. For two centuries the United States had a family-based agricultural economy that required the services of all family members in a farm household to survive. Older children took care of younger siblings so that men and women could work together in the fields. In addition to cash crops, most family farms had gardens cultivated by women producing the family’s food and allowing surpluses to be packaged for sale or exchange. Women produced cloth from raw material and made soap, shoes, candles, and most other consumable items required for their households. In wealthier homes in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, female slave labor and paid female domestic servants produced the bulk of necessary items for their employers’ households. In nonfarm households and family-owned businesses, colonial women worked as paid and unpaid laborers and as innkeepers, shopkeepers, craftworkers, nurses, midwives, printers, teachers, and child care providers. In more remote areas, women also acted as dentists, physicians, and pharmacists. Married women were more likely to engage in household-related work activities, whereas widows and single women were more likely to work outside the home as paid employees. Regardless of marital status, immigrant girls and women usually worked in poorly paid jobs and were recruited specifically for physically demanding jobs in agriculture. Like other women, however, a day of paid labor overlapped with the unpaid— but economically productive—labor at home (Chapter 5).

The Industrial Revolution The Industrial Revolution revolutionized the work worlds of men and women. First men, and then women flocked from farms to factories as wage laborers in the burgeoning industrializing economy that desperately needed their services. With the advent of the water-powered textile factory in 1789, the Industrial Revolution made remarkable strides. Women and female children continued to be the producers of cloth, but now in the factory rather than at home. As exemplified by the Lowell Mills in Massachusetts, female employment in textile mills also reflected the lack of available male labor, which was still needed on the farm. The iconic “Lowell Mill Girls” were recruited from farm families with assurances to parents that they would live in safe, monitored boarding houses. Factory work was grueling, but the girls found advantages interacting with peers out of the confines of their homes, and pride at being a wage-earner. Letters from a mill girl to her mother illustrate these factory and boarding house issues: At 4:30 in the morning, the factory tower bell wakes us … (we must be) at the factory by 5 o’clock or risk being locked out and losing our day’s wages. There are such a lot

Gender, Work, and the Workplace  389

of rules! We must … never be rude or loud … be in bed by 10 o’clock. One nice surprise is there are some books here …. I know Papa used to think me too bookish for a farm girl but … I am so eager to read them. Mama enclosed you will find my first month’s wages. I earned 14 dollars. They took out 5 dollars for my room and board, and I kept 50 cents for myself … I hope the 8 dollars and a half will help. (Cited in Bix, 2017) Regardless of these circumstances, mill girls were quite aware that it was difficult for factories to find and train alternate workers quickly. The Lowell girls may have been the trailblazers for workers’ rights, sometimes resorting to protests when labor conditions became intolerable. Their stories unfold to the larger public through contemporary playwrights spotlighting their resilience and agency (Shelzi, 2017). In this unique environment the mills girls and thousands of others like them populated factories at the genesis of industrialization in the United States. In addition to wage work for women, industrialization transformed home-based production. Many products women traditionally produced at home gradually switched to being manufactured in factories. The transition of America and Western Europe from agrarian societies to urban industrial societies took about 150 years. When the family was transformed from a unit of production to a unit of consumption, a dramatic shift occurred in attitudes and norms surrounding the work roles of women.

Victorian Myths By the end of the nineteenth century, Victorian norms ascended to define middle-class women as physically and emotionally incapable of working in factories. The consequences of the myth of “feminine frailty” in the workplace that emerged during this era have not been eradicated. Among its negative effects, the myth created a class-based wedge between homemakers and women who either by choice or by necessity worked outside the home. Different from the young women who had a relatively sequestered existence during the Lowell era, later women factory workers were drawn from the ranks of recent immigrants, young girls from rural areas and mining towns who helped support their families, and widows with no other means of support. Their high illiteracy rates and farm backgrounds planted the seeds for stereotypes linking poor women as capable only for the arduous labor required in factories. When paid work was available, these women did have one competitive advantage: they were white. In times of work surplus but worker shortage, women of color were employable in factories at lower wages and less desirable jobs than white women. Except as domestic workers and restaurant help, paid employment for women of color remained limited. Men of color who migrated off farms to mushrooming cities were employable as unskilled laborers in construction, as dockhands, and in other jobs requiring demanding physical labor. White women still had the advantage in factory work, especially textile production, over men of color. Service jobs demanded by an industrializing economy were open for white women with some education. The latter were deemed frailer than the robust factory women, but both groups garnered public disapproval for roles that put them in the public sphere outside the home. Women on farms were valued for their nondomestic work and were expected to engage in it. In larger farm families, older siblings were enlisted for child care. For those living in

390  Gender and Social Institutions

cities who were tied to the home with child care, “homework,” consisting of piecework that women did at home for pay was an option, especially among poor immigrants. Homework was dependent on the whims of bosses and swings of a seasonal market and encouraged the exploitation of its female workers. Women in Britain and the U.S. faced similar trajectories from farm to city at the advent of industrialization. The ideology of the Victorian era was that a woman’s place was at home and, as exploitative as it was, homework allowed the ideology to be bolstered. Through necessity, however, most poor women were working outside the home in “respectable” jobs as servants, or less respectable as factory workers or barmaids catering to the male industrial workforce. During the late-nineteenth century, the middle-class homemaker was the enviable standard to which women aspired. Women who worked outside the home, especially women of color, were often demonized as unfit mothers neglecting their families and raising the next generation of poor, unfit, and unwed mothers who would be burdens on the state (Sheetz-Nguyen, 2012; Hartman, 2019). The statuses of full-time homemaker, mother, and employed woman have shifted considerably over time, but as we have seen, the position of homemaker serves as the standard by which women are judged.

War and Jobs By the nineteenth century, women were established as the majority of workers in several occupations, including nursing and elementary school teaching. Although women began to enter the teaching profession by the beginning of the nineteenth century, the Civil War transformed teaching from a male to a female profession. Women were able to retain their teaching jobs after the war because of the shortage of men, but also because they could be paid less than the men they replaced. Rather than celebrating the care ethic that women brought to the profession—one that contrasted sharply with the physical discipline and harshness of male teachers of the time—teaching swiftly became viewed as an extension of motherhood that required no special skill base. Teaching became a “feminine pursuit,” and despite beliefs about motherhood, girls who did not want to be homemakers or perhaps even mothers, entered teaching. The female takeover of teaching in the nineteenth century and resulting loss of pay and prestige continue to plague the profession today. Secretarial and clerical work, like teaching, was originally a male occupation. The invention of the typewriter in 1873 brought with it an increase in the number of clerical jobs and a large increase in female employment in those jobs. By the late 1920s, over half of all clerical workers were female, and even with upgraded, multiple skills demanded by word processing and a technologically-driven workplace, today 95 percent of secretarial and administrative assistant jobs are held by women. When women increasingly took over the male clerical positions, there was a marked decrease in the prestige and wages of these positions. Women remain concentrated in poorly paid pink-collar jobs, such as lower-wage clerical and phone center jobs and retail sales, associated with high competition, part-time work, lack of benefits, and few opportunities for advancement. Because such jobs continue to severely limit upward mobility both within and between jobs, women are said to be trapped in the “pink collar ghetto.” Over half of employed women are located there today. The shortage of men in the labor force during the two World Wars again set the stage for the next wave of job opportunities open to women. During each war, women replaced men

Gender, Work, and the Workplace  391

in factories and offices. World War I reshuffled existing female workers into new areas rather than increasing overall participation rates, and after the war, women generally retreated back to their homes. The situation was different after World War II. Women were expected to return to hearth and home, but large numbers did not (Chapter 5). They did lose the more lucrative industrial jobs, but a new trend developed—married women began entering the labor force in greater numbers—a trend that heralded major repercussions for all areas of American society.

BALANCING MULTIPLE WORK AND FAMILY ROLES Industrialization, bureaucracy, and specialization of functions inevitably create additional roles for both men and women. Demographic changes account for many of these new or altered roles, such as increased numbers of dual-earner families, later and fewer marriages, fewer children, increased life expectancy, and massive migration shifting employees across a nation and across the globe. For example, men who marry later are bringing a greater range of domestic skills into their marriages than the previous generation of men. Increased life expectancy has created an active and healthy aged population that is staying in the workplace longer and, especially among the poor, taking on more child care responsibilities in service to their children or grandchildren (Harrington, 2014). The rapidly increasing population of the oldest old, those aged 80 years and older, however, is at heightened risk of dependence and economic peril. Jobs that require a change of location for the family add to new role patterns in contemporary families. Whereas multiple roles are increasing for all genders, family responsibilities remain fundamentally women’s tasks, regardless of whether she is a paid employee. However, because the large majority of women are wage earners, compared to men, enacting the multiple roles is substantially different.

Employment and Well-Being Paid employment is a major determinant of good physical and mental health for men and women. In the United States and societies where people are socialized into a strong work ethic, satisfying work enhances health, life satisfaction, and well-being. The impact of work is evident in Sigmund Freud’s answer to the question of what “normal” people should do well. For Freud, it is “to love and to work.” Psychological well-being emphasizes both one’s work and one’s family. The ideal is to create an environment where work and family are not opposed to each other. Achieving this ideal is difficult for a woman, whether she is in a dual-earner marriage or she is a single parent. On the one hand, a rewarding job and—even better—a rewarding career, is beneficial for women’s well-being. Work may not match the brutal emotional jungle often popularized in media. A career offering a measure of autonomy and prestige helps shield a woman from pressures encountered at home. The role enhancement hypothesis, contrary to what we might expect, suggests that multiple roles including marriage, children, and satisfying work are associated with better health, enhanced self-esteem, and lower rates of depression (Guillermo, 2016; Bridges and Owens, 2017; Pickert et al., 2017). Women who

392  Gender and Social Institutions

are caregivers, who work, and who volunteer draw on multiple productive roles allowing them sources of support for social integration and connecting with others. Balance at home and work is also important. Satisfying jobs and careers are optimized when marriages are egalitarian and domestic responsibilities are shared by spouses. Despite multiple roles, employed women report feeling better about themselves than do full-time homemakers, most notably in gender-equitable societies with family-friendly workplace policies. An employed woman’s income represents a huge mental health asset on and off the job (Grönlund and Öun, 2017; Casper et al., 2018; Kar et al., 2019). Disentangling the influence of life course events— parenting, graduation from college, entering the first job, retirement—are challenges to this research. It suggests, however, that women with multiple roles they define as life affirming accrue positive outcomes. On the other hand, the mental health advantages of multiple roles are fewer for women than for men, in part because work and family hold different gendered meanings. Powerful gendered trajectories in work and family explain these differences. Women expect that family roles will spill over to their jobs at various life stages and attempt to build a job path to balance the potential role conflict. Mothers of young children experience more job stress compared with fathers. Women who transition to part-time work, particularly at motherhood, are less satisfied at work and experience more work–family conflict than women who work full time. Role balance may be helped by reducing hours at work, but money concerns escalate, and relationship quality can be harmed. Emotional health, therefore, may be compromised (Carnes, 2017; Lee et al., 2017; Hirschi et at., 2019). The role overload or role strain hypotheses suggest that women experience emotional distress when employment and the second shift work of family and child care roles put women into two full-time jobs (Chapter 7). Employed women with children—whether married or not—report more health problems than women without children. When role overload increases family conflict because of work demands, another spillover is that employees are less effective. Such negative spillover occurs for both men and women, but women experience it more acutely because of the greater salience of the family domain in a woman’s life (Duxbury et al., 2018; Lin and Burgard, 2018; Carlson et al., 2019). Explaining role overload through the lens of gender also provides an understanding of unique stressors that women face in the workplace, including gender discrimination, sexual harassment, and stereotyping.

Eldercare Evaluating the influence of multiple work and family roles must account for the crisis of eldercare and its influence on female caregivers. As baby boomers enter the ranks of the elderly, women “bear the brunt of the gap between need for care and available resources” (Polivka, 2018:29). The second shift of a woman’s unpaid work is rapidly turning into a third shift for many homemakers and employed women who must care for impaired elderly who are part of their lives. Women are much more likely than men to be eldercare providers and to spend more time—and more daily time—in eldercare. Combined with the hours spent on housework, it is eldercare, rather than child care, that is associated with more stress for women. An estimated 66 million caregivers are first-line informal caregivers. A spouse is the first to provide care for his or her ailing partner. Men become physically dependent and need extended care earlier in life than women, so an elderly wife is more

Gender, Work, and the Workplace  393

likely to be her husband’s caregiver. The next level of responsibility falls on adult children. For the poor elderly, the next level is the network of extended family and kin. The final level is nonkin volunteers or paid caretakers who come to the home (Poo and Whitlach, 2017). When financial resources are depleted, elderly are moved to long-term care facilities (nursing homes) often paid for with Medicaid funds. In these facilities, too, caretakers are virtually all female. Although type of care and patterns of caregiving in families vary greatly, daughters are the primary caregivers to elderly parents and grandparents; sons provide less care if they have sisters (Grigoryeva, 2017). Throughout developed Asia the expectation that daughters or daughters-in-law shoulder eldercare responsibilities is such an institutionalized norm that they accept eldercare to be a fundamental part of their life course. This norm is bolstered by religious and cultural beliefs constructing women as natural caregivers. Like the U.S., whether care of the elderly is paid or unpaid, women are the caregivers and provide massive economic benefits to these societies (Huang and Yeoh, 2019; Sung, 2019). Many caregivers are sandwich generation women, caught between caring for the older and younger generations at the same time. Many are in their forties and fifties, are in the workforce in their prime income-earning years, and have children at home. Paid leave for eldercare is rare, work interruption is common, and wage loss is substantial, even with sympathetic employers and flexible work schedules. Role overload is substantial for sandwich generation women and strategies for re-balancing multiple roles are difficult to achieve (Evans et al., 2016; Andersson et al., 2019). Demographic trends spotlight the decrease in fertility rate for women throughout the globe and a simultaneous rapid increase in the aged population, further hampering desirable role-balance options for women. Love, commitment, and responsibility describe caregivers. Other words to describe caregiving are guilt, burden, depression, and strain. Assistance to the elderly correlates with higher levels of caregiver strain and work interference than assistance to younger adults or children. The stress of the eldercare role for women is associated with compromises in physical health and psychological well-being and is worsened for poor women caring for young children and parents with greater impairment at the same time. Employed women report higher levels of job stress as their parents or grandparents become more debilitated and when one elderly parent can no longer take care of the other. Stress increases for daughters when care goals are resisted by parents (Grossman and Webb, 2016; Heid et al., 2016). Although caregiving offers opportunities for adult children and elderly parents to grow closer, the positive psychological outcomes for both are often overshadowed by the demands of too little time to serve the needs of everyone—including the caretaker herself.

Unpaid Work All work makes an economic contribution. Women’s second and third shift unpaid work across the globe offer tangible, measurable productive benefits. Women provide for free: cooking, cleaning, shopping, child care, chauffeuring, repairing, counseling, therapeutic services, informal and formal schooling in the home, sickness care, and in the Global South (developing world), food women grow as part of their domestic responsibilities. All of these can be assessed in the economic rendering of production. Other economic contributions include managing household resources, creating, socializing, and maintaining the future labor force (children) and serving as an auxiliary labor force (Chapters 7 and 8). Unquestionably

394  Gender and Social Institutions 8.8

8.0

7.0 5.9

5.2

4.9 4.1

3.9

3.7

5.6

4.2 3.3

2.7

3.7

4.4 3.5

4.0

1.7

15 to 24

25 to 34

35 to 44 Women

FIGURE 10.1  Projected Decrease

45 to 54 Men

55 to 61

62 and Older

All

in Labor Force Participation

Bureau of Labor Statistics. Adapted from Table 3: Employment Status of the Civilian Noninstitutional Population by Age, Sex, and Race, Current Population Survey (2019). https://iwpr.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/ IWPR-Providing-Unpaid-Household-and-Care-Work-in-the-United-States-Uncovering-Inequality.pdf

men contribute to unpaid work, but nowhere near the total hours expended by women (Figure 10.1). As noted, economists largely ignore the gendered economy’s unpaid work, prompting policymakers to consistently sideline the issue. Goods and services that are unpaid and expenses associated with employees taking time off because of unpaid work have been measured according to common economic indicators and time use surveys. These have a huge spillover effect to economic outcomes for caregivers, for their employers, and for public expenditures. When these measures are applied to costs of intensive caregiving alone, the actual opportunity costs of informal care are woefully underestimated (Pickard et al., 2018; Jacobs et al., 2019). Women’s unpaid work is the backbone of the American economy. Women perform 75 percent of the world’s unpaid work, and for some tasks this translates to 2.6 times unpaid care and domestic tasks; in Asia it translates to four times more work for women. Globally, women’s unpaid work amounts to $28 trillion of output annually, that could account for over one-fourth of global GDP. In the U.S., conservative estimates of uncompensated household work for women amounts to $40,000 per year (Berman, 2018; Hess, 2018; UNWOMEN, 2018; Vogelstein, 2018). When data are moved from the margins to the center of economic debates about “work,” policymakers are offered ways to better assess national productivity to the benefit of women and society. Feminists and development economists are in the vanguard of the trend to measure the economic value of unpaid labor, including caregiving and housework tasks, as well as in the informal sector where trading and bartering without money exchange are common. The informal sector is where women work and reside (Chapter 6).

Money and Mental Health The considerable effort expended by women in unpaid labor can have profound effects on their mental, physical, relational, and economic health (Jung and Obrien, 2017). Paid labor

Gender, Work, and the Workplace  395

helps balance the demands of unpaid work. The better emotional well-being of an employed woman compared to a full-time homemaker is clearly associated with income. Dual-earning couples share spending decisions more equally than single-earner couples. When the husband is the sole wage earner, those wages are distributed in a variety of ways. Some homemaker wives receive their husband’s or partner’s paycheck and determine how the money will be apportioned; other wives receive “allowances” from husbands toward household expenses. Regardless of how couples determine the way the money will be spent, she has not “earned” it in the same way he has. This perception contributes to the burden of dependency experienced by many housewives. A husband’s economic leverage in the household is conducive to his wife’s dependency. To a large extent, his paycheck becomes the controlling factor in her life. Many women who do not work outside the home find themselves in conflict-ridden, emotionally debilitating marriages but see no alternative but to remain where they are. Financial and psychological dependencies go hand in hand. Family dynamics shift when a wife brings home a paycheck or she outearns her husband. The shift to more egalitarian gender roles is traced to the fact that wives’ share of family income is about half the overall income and in one-third of dual-earning marriages, a wife outearns her husband (Cohen, 2018a, 2018b). Even if her income is not dominant, couples rely on it to maintain their standard of living. Initially, husbands may be threatened by their wives’ earnings, but they are gratified when breadwinning (instrumental) roles and financial household burdens are shared. Despite this shift, however, when a wife outearns her husband couples are reluctant to report it. The U.S. Census Bureau statistically accounts for the mismatch of wives and husbands reporting earnings of the other. If she earns more, both husband and wife exaggerate his earnings; but wives underreport and husbands overstate their own earnings (Heggeness, 2018; Holman, 2018). Masculinity norms associated with the man as breadwinner remain firm (Chapter 9).

Summary It is complicated to sort out all these variables to determine specific sources of role enhancement or role overload/role strain for psychological health and well-being. In combination with paid work, why are some care-giving roles more stressful than others? As social constructionists argue, the number of roles may be less stressful than the way women and the culture perceive the roles. Multiple family and work roles are most beneficial for women’s overall well-being when they are supported by partners or spouses at home and from employers and colleagues at work. The conclusion is that for women overall, multiple roles point to benefits associated with the role enhancement hypothesis rather than the liabilities associated with the role overload hypothesis.

GENDERED INSTITUTIONS IN EMPLOYMENT Societies (cultures) are organized via social institutions to ensure that social needs are met in organized, predictable ways (Chapter 3). Separating the influence of various institutions on gender roles related to (paid) employment are needed to account for complicated and powerful interaction effects. Research on the influence of women’s employment on their families is abundant (Chapter 8). The focus here is on the work–family connection in the other direction: the influence of women’s family roles on their employment and workplace roles.

396  Gender and Social Institutions

A key issue in this connection is work–family spillover, also referred to as work–life balance, the largely gendered attitudes and behaviors that carry over from roles in both institutions. The formidable effects of the economy reverberate throughout all other social institutions. Despite this interdependence, sociologists agree that the economy is the key catalyst for shaping changes that all other social institutions experience.

Influence of Family on Workplace The socioeconomic transformation from an agricultural to an industrialized economy profoundly altered the work roles of men and women and enlarged existing gender gaps between home and workplace. The outset of the transition led women from unpaid work on the farm to unpaid work centered in the family. Men were already firmly established in earner roles off the farm when women began to move into the labor force in large numbers. These new female entrants quickly collided with traditional cultural beliefs that viewed women with disdain, suspicion, or hostility when they ventured out of their homes into paid employment. The instrumental–expressive (separate spheres) schism that followed women into the workplace over a century ago has not been eradicated.

Socialization As the central force in gender socialization, a family primes children for later roles, including their choices regarding work. The family is subdivided into two categories that differentially affect these choices. The first category, the family of orientation, is the family of one’s birth and childhood. In this first family, a child gains a sense of self and relative benefits based on the social capital the family offers to a child, such as material resources, housing, and education. Social capital is translated into opportunity structures for children (Chapter 7). Because parents may be unable or unwilling to provide the same opportunity structures for all their children, social capital for boys is leveraged differently from social capital for girls. Children receive gendered messages from parents related to, among others, clothing, toys, chores, dating, autonomy, and education. Children match these messages to ideas about adult job options. When fathers talk to sons about the joys of caring for others and mothers talk to daughters about the wonders of discovery and see dad as a preschool teacher or nurse and mom as an engineer or scientist, the seeds are planted for these job options (Chapter 3). Gender messages in the family of orientation limiting a child’s horizons about work choices are being challenged by the trend toward egalitarian families. Nonetheless, these egalitarian messages are countered by other agents of socialization. Messages for girls are focused on home and family taking precedence over paid work, whereas messages for boys focus on paid work taking precedence over family roles. Because the majority of young women today say that they want to combine family and career roles, the message they hear is how to juggle, balance, and deal with these roles. Young men also expect to carry out both sets of roles, but they do not receive the “juggling” message received by young women. Their message is not how they will balance family and work, but how they will pay for family needs through work. The second category, the family of procreation, is the family established at marriage or in a long-term partnership. Because each partner brings a unique set of socialization experiences

Gender, Work, and the Workplace  397

to this family and each has lived through a generation of social change, this second family is more directly influenced by broader cultural factors regarding gender. As parents, the couple will face a new set of family contingencies that impact roles in and out of the home. The family of procreation focuses on continuing socialization because new parents must become skilled at maneuvering demands of raising children. Although there is little preparation for parenthood roles, it is heavily influenced by the gender models of the family of orientation. Parents must reconcile personal desires for fulfillment and economic obligations to the home, decisions that impact a child’s quality of life. These factors affect parents’ work-related issues, but compared to women, men do not struggle with “to be employed or not be employed.” Over 95 percent of employed fathers work full time compared to 78 percent of employed mothers (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2019a). Most partners opt for dual earning before parenthood, and most women retain some paid work after childbirth. These decisions affect not only what happens to home-based roles, but also what happens to work roles.

The Child Care Crisis About two-thirds of women with children under the age of six are in the labor force. When children are in school, the rate jumps to three-fourths. Although the dual-earner family is the American norm, married women with children are significantly more likely to be employed if they have a college degree and if husbands support their wives’ choice to return to work. These households are likely to be child-centered and egalitarian on attitudes about gender. In egalitarian marriage wives still spend significantly more time than husbands on child care and household tasks (Chapters 7 and 8). Wives take the lead in organizing child care arrangements for preschoolers and after-school activities for older children. When a child is sick, school is dismissed unexpectedly, or a day care crisis arises, women are more likely than men to adjust job schedules to resolve the problem. Care work—especially child care—is the determining factor when and if a woman returns to paid work after the birth of her child. Increased demands for child care come at a time when grandparents, who are probable caretakers, are returning to the labor force; subsidized child care vouchers have been slashed; as has the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (food stamps) for poor families, and funding for preschool and after-school programs parents rely on have been eliminated or, if retained, are unaffordable. As more women with young children join the labor force out of desire and need, the child care crisis is far from being resolved. Mothers in America face inadequate child care polices and one of the highest gender wage gaps in the developed world. It is culturally unacceptable in the U.S. to take subsidies for not working. We valorize mothers for sacrifices they make to pursue jobs and feed their children. Mothers who cannot do both in these “heroic” ways invite blame, self-doubt, and guilt. As sociologist Caitlin Collins argues, mothers in every other part of the developed world rely on robust child care policies to ensure that what is best for their children is also best for their partners and their societies. American mothers are as worthy, but the dismal child care policies in the U.S. suggest otherwise. Blame and guilt need to be transformed to anger and action to produce a subsidized care system worthy of mothers in America (Collins, 2019). This problem looms larger for single parents or women receiving public assistance who are required to work or be in work-training programs to preserve even temporary benefits. The issue affects all working women and their families, regardless of the ability to pay for adequate care. Child care issues have a major spillover to the career achievement of women.

398  Gender and Social Institutions

Married with Children: The Demography of Career Achievement Career achievement is impacted by a host of other family-related variables, including marital status, age at marriage, age at childbirth, and professional status when married. Women who marry after they complete college or post-graduate education and begin to ascend a career ladder bring more resources to their marriages. It reduces the likelihood that their husbands expect them to give up careers. Smaller family size and age of children correlate with paid employment. The percentage of employed mothers decreases rapidly for families with five children or more and with at least two children under age six. Compared to single women, married women have higher rates of interrupted job mobility—often to accommodate a career move for their husbands. Men are less satisfied in their own work when they perform roles in support of their partners’ careers. In addition, men’s satisfaction at work is enhanced with relationship satisfaction; women’s satisfaction at work is enhanced with more egalitarian housework arrangements ... Interruption rates increase significantly for married women who stall careers or forgo them altogether to raise children. Temporarily opting out of employment to care for family has severe penalties for rehiring in a competitive job market (Weisshaar, 2018). Married women are likely to return to paid employment, but in less satisfying, lower-paying work than their previous pre-parenthood employment. Encouraging a daughter’s education has high payoffs in the workplace. The more education a woman attains, the greater the likelihood she will be in paid employment. Conversely, the lower the woman’s educational attainment, the more likely she is a full-time homemaker. This pattern challenges the myth that, given the choice to work, women prefer exclusive domestic roles. By virtue of her education, she is least likely to be financially dependent and most likely to work outside the home. The combination of low education and full-time homemaker role can have devastating financial consequences in the event of divorce or death of a spouse. Women who in the 1950s followed the “June Cleaver” stay-at-home model of marriage and motherhood, financially dependent on husbands, or in sporadic work in lowpaid jobs, are at increased poverty risk in old age.

Career versus Job Although all employed women have jobs, they do not necessarily have meaningful careers. Jobs interfere with family in a different way than careers. A career orientation is associated with men and women in the professions and management who have a high degree of commitment, personal sacrifice, and a planned developmental sequence (career path). In addition to family factors, career orientation for married women is compromised when a wife’s career is viewed as less important than her husband’s. She will relocate to benefit his career, but his relocation for hers is unlikely. When he outearns her, his career takes on more importance and will be nurtured to gain higher income returns. The success stories of women who “have it all”—great marriages, wonderful children, rewarding careers—are abundant. In the early millennium years, women entered a third wave of progress, moving up the corporate ladder or advancing through their own businesses. They find ways to reconcile problems favorably between career and family, such as buying services for household tasks and high-quality child care, working remotely from home, or staying on career tracks through flexible work time options. Advancement is bolstered when their egalitarian husbands are partners as “breadsharers” rather than as dominant breadwinners (Reid, 2018). These women, however, are the exception to the rule. The rule is that

Gender, Work, and the Workplace  399

women may combine work (jobs) and marriage successfully, but they are severely compromised in their quest for upward career mobility by marital and family obligations and traditional gender beliefs about his breadwinning role taking precedence over hers. A husband’s attitudes about work and family, highlighted by his gender role beliefs, influence his wife’s work involvement decisions after childbirth. Progress in workplace equality has increased, but the family–work balance issue facing women is lagging far behind. Younger couples advocate the ideal that career satisfaction is important for both spouses but believe one partner should be home with children (Scarborough and Risman, 2017; Stertz et al., 2017). That partner, of course, is a wife. Women’s careers are put on hold, change directions, or abruptly end.

Employer Views Employers are aware of these trends. Highly educated women have leverage in the workplace because employers view them as more committed to their jobs. It is illegal for employers to overtly use marital status or age of children in hiring, but such decisions are routinely made covertly. Even married women with children who are in professional careers are often considered a liability because employers believe family will be favored over workplace when the inevitable juggling act occurs. Marriage, and certainly pregnancy, may send a signal that women have a different set of priorities. Women who feel pushed out by their organization may opt out of the workplace. As sexist as it is, an employer often interprets marriage and children as making a woman less reliable, dedicated, and permanent (Paustian-Underdahl, et al., 2019). Postponing children increases lifetime earnings for women. A single break in employment has immediate adverse effects, which translates to lower wages and job status. Women in corporate management, for example, may be tracked into two distinct groups: those with a career and family and those with only a career. The former may be the stereotyped “mommy track” women who are not expected to adhere to the same standards as corporate women choosing faster-track career options. Businesses justify this track by arguing that their investment in women managers is lost when careers are interrupted by family concerns. When they return to the corporate world, the dues they pay go beyond catching up on seniority or retooling their skill base. They are treated virtually as beginners. Married men, on the other hand, are considered corporate assets if they are married. The ideal worker norm is a man whose career priority is overarching, with the expectation of long hours, always being on call, and total commitment to a job. Unencumbered by family, the fatherhood premium in wages is enhanced for men in the idealized family—he is a biological father, he is in coresidence with his children, he is married to the children’s mother, and his role of financial provider is salient. The fatherhood premium is reduced but not eliminated if any of these factors is not present. In gender-equitable Netherlands, shared parenting responsibilities by mothers and fathers is encouraged, available, and acceptable. Mothers are applauded when they combine care and work by reducing work hours. Fathers, however, are punished—viewed more negatively—for availing themselves of flexible work arrangements and reduced work hours, a pattern also found in the United States (Vinkenburg et al., 2012; Borgkvist et al., 2018). The marriage with children asset for a male employee can backfire if, in the eye of his employer, his wife’s career is judged to be equal to or more important than his own. Companies hold strong beliefs about what ambition looks like. Caregiving ambitions by men, for example, can thwart workplace success. Companies routinely make employees choose

400  Gender and Social Institutions

between a career priority, indicating ambition, or a family priority, indicating career surrender (Bear, 2019). Reluctance to move because of a wife’s career can shatter a man’s corporate path, as David discovered the day after he turned down a lucrative promotion requiring a move. He explained moving was impossible because his physician wife was finishing her residency. David felt cornered. He had been presented with an untimely, rigid option, and now he was being punished for daring to try to negotiate it … another candidate (was found) for the job. David continued to perform well in his role, but … felt that he was no longer on the top team’s talent radar. … Nine months later David was immediately headhunted by a rival company to lead its largest business … David’s old employer had lost a talented leader … (Petriglieri, 2018) David’s choice was the less likely one in corporations today. Whether penalties accrue for marriage and motherhood or premiums for marriage and fatherhood, stubborn gender ideology persists, resulting in normative discrimination in the workplace harmful to both men and women. Employers view a man as more reliable and committed to his job and job location if he has children in school and his family is involved in community activities. From an employer’s point of view, the success of a male employee is tied to “wifely support” for demanding work roles. Most top corporate executives in the United States are married men who have homemaker wives. In reading these trends, it may appear that an employer is justified in preferring to hire married men with or without children over married women with or without children. There are no significant gender differences, however, in job commitment, loyalty to firm, job effectiveness, or number of jobs over time held by professional men and women. Any reading of the demographics of career achievement must contend with gender stereotypes that lurk behind differential hiring practices and promotion for men and women. For the employer, the ideal worker is not the same as the ideal parent.

Economic Trends and the Family Economic trends reinforce the employment choices of men and women. Women are welcomed into the labor force at times of need, such as war; eras of economic expansion, such as the Industrial Revolution; and transitions to new economic forms, such as the shift from a manufacturing economy to a service economy led by information technology. Since women function as a reserve labor pool at these times, to be called on or discarded as needed, historically they could not rely on stable employment. The postindustrial era, however, requires workers with an education and skill base women are likely to possess. Women are catching up with men in stable employment. Postindustrial societies are also unprecedented in consumption, and target services and products to market niches based on household characteristics. In the United States women do most consumption in carrying out family roles related to household spending. Employed women have less time but more money available for consumption; the American economic system has responded to this reality. The food and retailing sector particularly caters to employed women by grocery shopping services, keeping stores open longer, and by locations near homes and housing developments, and most important, targeting them through the web

Gender, Work, and the Workplace  401

marketplace. The resources offered by stable employment, combined with the traditional role of overseeing the expenses in the home, allow employed women to become a formidable economic force. Conflict theorists suggest that these combined roles offer advantages that translate into more power for women in their families and their workplaces.

Law and Public Policy Propelled by the equality goals of the women’s movement and minority rights movement, an array of legal and political decisions have a major impact on gender patterns of employment and women’s work roles (Chapter 14). This section overviews key legislative actions related to two of the most important gendered economic challenges: the work–family spillover and the wage gap.

Family Leave Both directions of the work–family spillover are addressed in the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), passed in 1993. This act allows eligible employees to take 12 weeks of unpaid leave per year for the birth and care of a newborn or an adopted or foster child and to care for spouse, child, or parent with a serious health condition. In 2015 “spouse” was updated to include same-sex marriage partners. Under the federal law, during most FMLA absences, employers must keep up health insurance coverage and an employee cannot be fired. In 2009, FMLA was expanded to 26 weeks of leave in a single 12-month period to care for a veteran recovering from a serious injury or illness incurred while on active duty. FMLA is intended to be gender neutral but was written with women as caregivers in mind. How successful is FMLA and other workplace benefits that address workplace spillover, especially the crisis in child care? On the positive side, women are more likely than men to take advantage of workplace flexibility and family leave policies and these policies are associated with higher rates of retention for women. Both white women and men and women of color are more likely than white men to take family leave. Regardless of race, men take shorter leaves than women. As noted, men believe that a leave from work harms their careers and that conclusion is justified. Perceived work–life balance is also linked to leave policies that benefit both men and women. No federal law requires private sector employers to offer any kinds of paid leave. At the state level, New York is phasing in the most ambitious and inclusive paid family leave (PFL) policy in the United States, that covers new parents, family caregivers, and families with actively deployed military members. It is described as an insurance program funded by employees through payroll deductions, at a yearly cap of about $108. PFL can fund up to 55 percent of weekly salary for a specified number of weeks once contributions reach a certain level. FMLA is written to ensure gender neutrality. PFL is also ostensibly gender neutral but clearly benefits women in distinct ways. It includes coverage of employees in the private sector and part-time and self-employed workers, who are disproportionately made up of women. More important, given women’s caregiving, it can be of huge benefit to protect their jobs and sustain their families. PFL explicitly protects employees from discrimination and retaliation and serves to encourage men to take the leave (Paid Family Leave, 2020). With other states experimenting with family leave policies, small steps are made to address caregiving—especially the child care crisis—to the benefit of both women and men.

402  Gender and Social Institutions

Regardless of any progress at the state level, FMLA has not meaningfully addressed the child care crisis. Women continue to exit jobs when quality, affordable child care is unavailable. Single parents and poor women use unpaid leave as the final option when their children need care for many reasons, not just for babysitting. Australia put in place a national parental leave scheme in 2011, leaving the U.S. as the only developed nation without paid family leave. The influx of women in paid employment and, increasingly in the military, clearly demonstrates that “separation of sphere” beliefs can no longer be sustained. With such limited scope, however, FMLA may have preserved this separation.

Equal Pay Passed in 1963 the Equal Pay Act (EPA) is the first federal legislation that addressed the issue of equal pay for men and women. It allows for differences in pay based only on a nondiscriminatory seniority system, a merit-based system, or a “piecework” basis. Although originally designed with minority men in mind, the most important legal prohibition against gender discrimination in employment is Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The language is not gender neutral, but the following key provisions affecting women make discrimination and occupational segregation illegal. 1

To fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex or national origin; or

2 To limit, segregate, or classify his employees in any way, which would deprive or tend to deprive any individual of employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affect his status as an employee, because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex or national origin. In 1972, Executive Orders extended the provisions of the Civil Rights Act legislation to all federal contracts. Title IX of the Educational Amendments of 1972 further extended them to all educational programs and activities receiving federal funding. The EPA and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act have allowed the “equal work for equal pay” doctrine to resound throughout the American economy, and it is difficult to circumvent them formally (see Chapter 14). However, both laws are vulnerable not only to partisan politics, but also to the gendering of occupations and the informal systems in the workplace. All workplaces have ever-evolving discretionary, unwritten policies, particularly with respect to promotion and firing, that are based on gender stereotyping. States are moving forward to legally prohibit a prospective employer from asking about prior salary history, a tactic that is especially harmful to women (Nichols, 2019). Despite the law, sex discrimination from informal but powerful practices is rampant and difficult to prove legally.

Affirmative Action Recognizing the realities of a continuing gender and race wage gap, the legal approach was altered from simply barring discrimination to giving “preferential” treatment through affirmative action to women and minorities underrepresented in certain job categories. Programs offer outreach, education, and training to affected groups to enhance their job prospects.

Gender, Work, and the Workplace  403

Affirmative action has had more positive effects for women entering professions (although not for women already there) and management positions. However, with the decline in skilled trade jobs and the limited number of women in these and other blue-collar categories, most employed women have not benefited from the job integration policy. The positive effect of affirmative action has not reached the bulk of women who work in lower-level jobs and has not redressed wage inequalities that still exist over half century after these legislative efforts were launched. Regardless of its original purpose, whether it violates the principle of equal opportunity or gives affected groups unjust privileges, it is hotly debated. Affirmative action is intimately but erroneously linked in the public eye with mandated quotas and reverse discrimination. It is on the political chopping block and may not survive in a viable form (Chapter 14).

Comparable Worth This is another strategy that carves a rocky path through legislative and judicial processes, and like affirmative action, evidence is mixed in terms of its success. Comparable worth aims to upgrade the wage scales for jobs that employ large numbers of women. Equal pay should be given for work of equal value but gender segregation in jobs makes it difficult to evaluate what is “equal.” Comparable worth agreements are mostly through labor union negations in public sector rather than private sector jobs. Because comparable worth arguments were successfully used in Washington and California, when it was documented that women received far less pay than men did in comparable jobs, such as police and fire dispatching, most states have taken some legislative action to deal with broadly based pay inequity. The judicial thrust generally has been the same as the legislative by emphasizing that employers cannot discriminate based on gender if a woman meets the necessary qualifications. Working with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the judiciary oversees the thousands of gender discrimination cases that have arisen since the 1960s. A landmark case demonstrates the importance of these actions. The 1971 unanimous Supreme Court (SCOUS) decision in Reed v. Reed ruled that an Idaho law giving males preference over females in selecting administrators of an estate was in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. This was the first time SCOUS ruled that an arbitrary discrimination law against women was unconstitutional. Political and legal mandates have helped remove barriers that unfairly limit or circumscribe women’s potential employment choices. They cannot focus on the individual decision-making process that is viewed as the personal province of a woman and her family. Fueled by powerful political conservatism, however, any receptive atmosphere for comparable worth has sharply declined.

Gender and Unemployment The employment advocacy of the 1970s gave way to the entrenchment of the 1980s, moderate backlash in the 1990s, and severe backlash today. In tracking unemployment over time in the United States, the Bureau of Labor Statistics gathers data on unemployed job seekers. Only once since World War II—in 1983—has men’s unemployment been higher than that for women.

404  Gender and Social Institutions

Recessions During the bleakest Great Recession years (2007–2009) women briefly made up more than half of the U.S. labor force (Albanesi and Sahin, 2018). Women were able to hold on to lower-paying jobs such as nurses’ aides, cleaners, and servers. Men lost higher-paying jobs such as contractors, builders, architects, and engineers. Those women who were not employed, such as homemakers, rather than those who were unemployed, gained jobs because their husbands were out of work, a pattern similar to the 1930s Depression. As the economy began to recover, men’s job advantages gradually returned. Although men gained back only two-thirds of the jobs they lost, women gained back 95 percent. Women’s share of labor force participation was down from pre-recession levels. Most job gain by women is best explained by the fact that women hold 80 percent of health care jobs—the vast majority in the private sector, and these jobs did not decline but rose during the recession—a continuing pattern. Despite this increase, private sector jobs favoring men increased. Public sector jobs favoring women did not rebound. Most new jobs went to men. As the manufacturing, information, and financial services stabilized, men were more likely than women to find jobs. This pattern remained for the next decade. With the lowest unemployment in decades, men and women were at near parity in unemployment (3.4 percent men to 3.1 percent women) and men got reemployed at faster rates than women (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2019b). Yes, a job is a job. However, both men and women, many working in multiple minimum wage paying jobs, do not earn wages that translate to family solvency.

COVID-19 Recession The Great Recession is likely to pale in significance to the looming COVID-19 Recession (C19-R). Uncertainty during this unprecedented time is linked to the economic effects of the massive global health crisis. We can predict, however, that the gender patterns from earlier recessions will persist as families ride out this enormous threat to their livelihoods.

Gender Gap Before and after recessions, women are at greater risk in unemployment cycles. Gender differences need to account for types of jobs women and men have and the number of hours they work. The boon in women’s employment is due to the health care jobs offering higher pay than previously but also higher health risks (Chapter 2). Given factors such as the wage gap and pink-collar job options, when women are employed or re-employed, the income deficit in their households remains or widens. Post-recession jobs for blue-collar families target those traditionally held by men, such as bridge building, electrical, and mechanical work. Jobs that traditionally employ women are available, but wages are low and kept under the full-time threshold to avoid paying benefits. If day care is available, it is often unaffordable. This is the pattern that continues to deepen financial harm during C19-R for all family forms, but certainly for single-parent women. When re-employed, women disproportionately still hover at poverty level. For married couples, although men increased child caregiving and housework during the pandemic, women who could work from home reduced their work hours by 20 and 50 percent—nearly five times more than men. Mothers of children between ages one and five have the most reduced home-work hours. Reduced time for paid work is also linked to mothers

Gender, Work, and the Workplace  405

shouldering the responsibility for organizing and monitoring homeschooling (Risman, 2020; Collins et al., 2020). K-12 schools are wary of reopening. Even if they reopen, parents are reluctant to send their children to in-person classrooms and may opt to continue homeschooling. This scenario suggests that ongoing time demands for child care will disallow mothers to continue their paid home-work positions. The pandemic can offer opportunities for couples working from home to share child care and household tasks on a more gender-equitable basis. To the contrary, gender inequality in such tasks for these dual-earner couples worsens.

Critique Policy commitment for gender fairness during the so-called “spectacular” unemployment cycle leading up to C19-R was absent. The federal government virtually shut down economic equality and social justice initiatives that could benefit women and families. Despite the massive gendered consequences of COVID-19, there is no hint of a gender-targeted policy under the Trump administration. As of this writing, the dire economic and health consequences from states that reopened too early are clearly visible. Unemployment insurance and health insurance ran out long ago for many workers. K-12 teachers, restaurant workers, and lowwage workers whose jobs rebounded during brief, ill-conceived reopening in many states saw their jobs disappear again with the new wave of lockdowns. As expected, these workers are disproportionately women. As the world has been upended by COVID-19, the stark, economically harmful gender patterns of recessions-past are predictable and being replayed.

WOMEN IN THE LABOR FORCE The consistent increase in labor force participation of all categories of women is the most important economic trend of the twentieth century and into the millennium. The huge significance is reflected in the following statistics: • • • •

•

Approximately 60 percent of women 16 years and over are in the labor force, and the participation rate of married women with children has tripled since 1960. Seventy percent of all mothers are employed, and over half have children under 1 year old. Female single parents (single, divorced, separated, or widowed) participate in even greater proportions—75 percent in 2019, a two-thirds increase since 1965. The percent of middle-age (45–64), college-educated women in their peak earning years gradually increased since 1970, showing a record of stable employment but lower earnings than men with comparable education. As women’s paid work increased, men’s labor force participation shows consistent declines, from a high of about 87 percent in 1950 to just under 70 percent today.

For only the second time in history (the first during World War II), women outnumber men in the labor force. Although it is only by a small margin (50.4 percent), it represents a milestone, with women picking up jobs men have left. Women also graduate from college in higher numbers than men so this has radiated to the job market (Siegel, 2020). Women

406  Gender and Social Institutions TABLE 10.1  Projected Decrease

in Labor Force Participation by Gender and Year (%) 2019

2024

2060

Men

69.1

66.1

62.3

Women

57.1

55.4

51.9

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics. Adapted from Table 3: Employment Status of the Civilian Noninstitutional Population by Age, Sex, and Race, Current Population Survey, 2019. https://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat03. htm

represent just over half the labor force (all employed people) in the United States of all paid workers age 16 or older, however, men still outnumber women. This translates to about 57 percent of all women and just under 70 percent of all men. African American women’s workforce participation continues to edge up at higher rates than women of all other races. That being said, the percent of all women in the labor force, like all men is projected to decline (Table 10.1). Alarm is raised, nonetheless, about the decline in women’s paid work since women are overrepresented in low skilled occupations at higher risk for unemployment. Wages are stagnant, with no boosts in minimum wages on the horizon. Women are losing their jobs to technology. Secretaries and clerical jobs can be automated or outsourced overseas. One-third of Latinas work in these high risk occupations. The gender gap in labor force participation is expected to remain for the foreseeable future (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2019c; IWPR, 2019a; U.S. Department of Labor, 2019). To reiterate, however, bleaker gender consequences of COVID19 related to unemployment, caregiving, home-working, and recession are anticipated. Therefore, women’s labor force participation—and economic well-being—may well diminish.

Gender-Typing in Occupational Distribution As would be expected, women are not equally distributed throughout the occupational structure. Although women make up almost half of top-level managerial and professional occupations and require requisite educational credentials even at the entry level, the jobs they hold are occupationally segregated. An occupation is considered to be male or female dominated if it is comprised of at least 25 percent of one or the other gender. For example, the professional category includes accountants, architects, and engineers, who are largely male, and teachers, nurses, and social workers, who are largely female. All these occupations require high levels of education, but the male dominated occupations are far higher in degree of pay, prestige, authority, and other job-related reward criteria. Women’s earnings shrink relative to men’s earnings for those in male dominated occupations (Table 10.2). Female-dominated occupations, whether professional or not, are associated with high degrees of psychologically exhausting work. Emotional labor describes work that requires providing emotional support to the people the occupation serves. Nursing aides caring for the elderly, day care workers, elementary and middle school teachers, and social workers expend huge amounts of emotional labor in their daily roles. The gendered expectation is that women are more suited to these jobs than men because this labor outside the home is a natural extension of caretaking roles in the home. Occupational segregation by gender bolsters gender-typing—when most of the occupations are those of one gender, it becomes a

Gender, Work, and the Workplace  407 TABLE 10.2  Occupations

Rank

with the Largest Pay Gap by Gender as % of Median Weekly Earnings

Occupation

Women’s Earnings As a Percent of Men’s Earnings

1

Financial advisors

58.90%

2

Administrative services managers

62.19%

3

Securities, commodities and financial services sales agents

64.34%

4

Emergency medical technicians and paramedics

65.50%

5

First-line supervisors of housekeeping and janitorial workers

68.76%

6

Real estate brokers and sales agents

70.58%

7

Financial managers

71.09%

8

First-line supervisors of production and operating workers

71.10%

9

First-line supervisors of retail sales workers

71.72%

10

Credit counselors and loan officers

71.92%

Source: Clifford, Catherine. 2018. “These 10 Jobs Have the Largest and Smallest Pay Gaps between Men and Women.” Adapted from: Occupations with the Largest Pay Gap. April 10. https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/09/ the-10-jobs-with-the-largest-and-smallest-gender-pay-gaps.html

normative expectation. In turn, the job is associated with less pay and prestige. Gender-typing translates to a wage penalty for people working in occupations that are dominated by females. Low-wage females doing carework are especially susceptible to this effect (Pietrykowski, 2017). It also translates to hierarchical segregation, women being subordinate to men who hold the most powerful supervisory and high-paying positions. Gender-typing strategies prevent women from earning equal pay and exercising equal authority with men. Gender-typing extends to the way a job is perceived. Nursing, social work, and teaching are “engendered” as feminine professions linked with caring and nurturing. Nursing contends with another gendered layer of dominance over the profession. As a female-dominated profession, nursing was in virtual servitude to the male-dominated profession of medicine. Shifts in health care and the composition of health care fields has eroded physician power over the profession. Nursing has made steady gains in professional status through successful challenges to the jurisdictional boundaries of medicine. Highly credentialed nurse practitioners are rapidly becoming the first-line caregivers in primary care health settings, garnering respect and high approval from physicians and the public. Nursing capitalizes on both the traditional (feminine) caring orientation and the advanced education needed for these roles. Nurses find allies in both male and female physicians who are adopting care-oriented and team-based approaches rather than compliance-oriented patient strategies. Both men and women are drawn to nursing for similar

408  Gender and Social Institutions

reasons, including respect for their work, flexible schedules, a good labor market, and a strong belief in the generic care orientation. Upgrading the profession has challenged both the gender-based and the occupationally-based hierarchy of medicine and health care.

Men on the Escalator What happens when men enter predominately female occupations? In tracing the trajectories of males in female-dominated occupations, although men face some disadvantages, they have more advantages compared to women in these jobs and hold higher positions with more authority. Men are rapidly entering nursing, today representing about 12 percent of registered nurses, with minority males slightly outnumbering minority females. Men have been lured into nursing by a growing health care sector that pays well. At all nursing levels, male nurses make more money than female nurses, translating to a gender pay gap in nursing at about $6000 per year (Michek, 2018). Despite their higher income and authority relative to females in nursing as well as other health jobs, however, they experience an overall wage penalty for being in a female-dominated profession (Dill et al., 2016; Kimm, 2018). The male–female wage gap increases as more women enter a profession, but it is unclear if the wage gap will decrease as more men enter it. Male nurses differentiate themselves from the perceived devalued female work they do by dominating “that which is female.” Males who cross over into nursing, social work, elementary school teaching, and as librarians may face some stigma from those outside the professions but have clear advantages inside them. Both men and women employed in nontraditional occupations (as defined by gender) face discrimination, but the forms and consequences are different for males in female professions than the reverse. Both genders perceive that men are given fair, even preferential, treatment in hiring and promotion; are accepted by supervisors and colleagues; and are integrated into the subculture of the workplace. The subtle mechanisms that enhance a man’s position in these professions are referred to as the glass escalator, where men take their privileges with them to female occupations. The author of the glass escalator concept, Christine Williams, has since revised it to include intersectionality and how work organizations have responded to rapid neoliberalism (Williams, 2013). Intersectionality is at play when men experience the glass escalator differently depending on the man’s race and the type of female profession he enters. In nursing, for example, African American men must contend with unfriendly interaction from patients regarding suitability in a profession that is viewed as a female job, but also as a white female job. Patients may be reluctant to be treated by any male nurse and white, female patients may flat out refuse treatment from an African American male nurse. White male nurses must routinely explain that they are nurses to patients who assume they are doctors. Racial dynamics unfold in treating black patients, as Russell, a white male nurse treating black patients explains: … when I work with black patients it seems like I have to prove myself … like as a new nurse to them … more than I do to my white patients to win their trust over … once a minority patient becomes comfortable with me, they do open up but it seems like there’s a little bit bigger of a hurdle to go over … (Cited in Cottingham et al., 2017:152) Emotional labor is a fact of life in the caring professions. In this case Russell draws on his reserve of emotional labor to deal with the added turmoil from the intersectional race and gender risks in carrying out his job.

Gender, Work, and the Workplace  409

The glass escalator may be an advantage at the macro level of the nursing profession, but in the micro world of day-to-day interaction with patients, the emotional labor expended to deal with racism and sexism, dampens its positive effects for men. More research is needed to determine how race and gender intersect to buffer any glass escalator effect for men in majority female occupations.

Women in the Professions Women continue to increase their numbers in the professions; there is a higher percentage of women (31 percent) than men (20 percent) in professional and related occupations (Figure 10.2). Women are rapidly moving into elite professions such as law, medicine, and university teaching. About one-third of practicing physicians and lawyers are women and will represent over half of these professions by the next decade. Although these gains are impressive, gender-typing is pervasive. Over two-thirds of women professionals are in two categories, teaching and health care, and command less pay than men in other professional occupations such as engineering and computer science. In the elite professions, women are clustered in overcrowded, less prestigious specialties that are deemed more suitable for women in male-dominated professions.

Medicine For all physicians, women’s earnings are about one-third less than their male colleagues, making medicine one of the largest—and widening—gender pay gaps in male-dominated

Percent of total employment 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Management, business, and financial operations occupations

Professional and related occupations

Service occupations

Sales and related occupations

Women FIGURE 10.2  Women

Office and Natural Production, admnistrative resources, transportation, support construction, and material moving occupations and maintenance occupations occupations Men

and Men in Selected Occupational Categories

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. BLS Reports. “Highlights of Women’s Earnings in 2018.” November, 2019. https://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/womens-earnings/2018/home.htm

410  Gender and Social Institutions

professions. Men make up large proportions of higher-paid surgeons, cardiologists, and emergency medicine physicians; women make up large proportions of lower-paid pediatricians, psychiatrists, and public health physicians. Medicine is a highly paid profession, but in specialties with more women, such as primary care, men get paid about $50,000 more. Salary may be less a factor in satisfaction with medicine. Public health physicians, mostly women, report the highest level of fairness in compensation; surgeons, mostly men, report they feel less fairly compensated. Intersecting gender with race, white male physicians are the highest paid, significantly outearning women and men of color, regardless of specialty (Medscape, 2019). Men choosing female-dominated medical specialties are likely to have completed medical school outside the United States. Physicians in less prestigious specialties are likely to be women and ethnic minority men. Work–life balance is a challenge for all physicians and may contribute to the 44 percent of physicians reporting burnout. Over half of those reporting burnout, however, are women. Female physicians are not immune to unpaid work and report a higher level of it than male counterparts. Surgeons working longer hours than those in other specialties have less burnout. How do men and women deal with it? Women talk to friends and family. Men exercise (Medscape, 2019). Psychiatrists and public health physicians, overrepresented by women, are more likely to seek professional help for burnout and depression.

Law Gender patterns in medicine mirror those in law. Women outnumber men in law schools and the number of practicing women lawyers is at a record high, but women still make only 80 percent of what men make; men are the highest earners throughout all law firms and law specialties (Day, 2018). Women attorneys are more likely to specialize in less lucrative trust, estate, family, and tax law and are more likely to be employed by the government or are in solo practice. Men are more likely to specialize in more lucrative trial, corporate, and international law and to be employed in larger, prestigious law firms. Women attain partnerships at slower rates than men. Women represent about 22 percent of managing partners in the largest law firms. Women of color are virtually invisible as law partners, representing 2 percent of all women partners; less than 11 percent are associates. Of all groups, women of color are most likely to experience exclusion, racial and gender stereotyping, and perceived discrimination relative to promotion. Compared with white women, they are more likely to leave their firms (American Bar Association, 2019; National Association of Women Lawyers, 2019). Gender bias is rampant in law firms. In addition to less pay, fewer promotions, and less access to job enhancing assignments, female lawyers, compared with their male counterparts, report being interrupted and reprimanded more simply for being assertive in a job that requires it. Women of color experience the highest percentage of “prove-it-again bias” than any other group. Female lawyers of color report that they are eight times more likely to be mistaken for a non-lawyer, court reporter, or janitor (American Bar Association, 2018; Elsesser, 2018).

STEM It’s a man’s world in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM). Women make up about one-fourth of STEM employees. Jobs in STEM fields continue to increase, outpacing overall U.S. job growth. Men are the beneficiaries of this STEM growth. The largest, fastest-growing, and highest-paid tech industries are dominated by men. Females represent

Gender, Work, and the Workplace  411 Percentage of female employees in the workforce of major tech companies* 47 47 40

38

38

36

33

30

30

26 17

18

21

22

29 23

32

31

27

26 21

20 20

n/a

Tech Jobs FIGURE 10.3  Female

Leadership Jobs

Total Workforce

Workers in the Tech Industry

Source: Richter, Felix. 2019. “The Tech World Is Still a Man’s World.” Statistica. Mar 8. https://www.statista.com/ chart/4467/female-employees-at-tech-companies/

over one-third of all female employees in major tech companies, but the numbers fall precipitously for those in leadership and tech jobs in those companies (Figure 10.4). Despite high public awareness of the STEM gender gap, except for biology, the percentage of women in these fields is flat. The largest female deficits are in computer science and the physical sciences. Engineering is stagnant at 10 percent (Catalyst 2018a; SWE, 2019). Although the pay gap in engineering specialties is smaller between men and women, it still shows a strong gender pattern. The smallest gap is in biomedical engineering, linked to women’s ascension in biology and medicine; the largest gap is in software, civil, electrical, and aerospace engineering, linked to women’s deficit in math. Women engineers are likely to work in lower paid manufacturing and service firms than higher paid tech firms. Women are gaining math and science educational parity with men (Chapter 11), but the gender gap in the more highly paid STEM tech area specialties is increasing (Figure 10.3).

Summary The increase of women throughout professional and managerial jobs is impressive. But to move from the periphery to the center of their profession, they need access to the networks offering visibility, leadership mentoring, and the highest support for career mobility. The net result of these stubborn trends for professional women is less pay, less prestige, and less authority.

White-Collar Women Women in the elite professions are included in many overlapping categories of white-collar occupations. Although many are college graduates, compared with men, women represent

412  Gender and Social Institutions

the large majority of nonmanagerial jobs clustered in less technical areas, mostly scattered across pink-collar job categories. Office jobs exhibit strong patterns of gender-typing and gender stratification. Lower-level clerical staff are managed by women who are managed by both men and women. Men manage higher-ranked white-collar employees in offices, and at the highest ranks men manage the male executives directly under them. Some change in these patterns is evident. All levels of white-collar women are reaping benefits in companies that promote from within and train workers in tasks that “cross over” to the other gender. Management streams are rapidly diversifying. Pink-collar women may be the last to benefit as these changes filter down, but associated with profit, gendered management hierarchies appear to be eroding. The lines between white-collar, pink-collar, and blue-collar jobs and between professional and nonprofessional jobs are blurry. Even when jobs are separated by pay and level of education, categories overlap a great deal. Common occupations for women include jobs in all categories. In general, the highest paying jobs throughout all occupational categories have the largest gender wage gaps.

Blue-Collar Women Women are most underrepresented in blue-collar, transportation, and nonfarm labor areas. Barriers have been legally lifted for women, such as labor union membership, to pursue the skilled, elite blue-collar trades of plumbers, electricians, machinists, carpenters, and craftspeople. However, they have not done so to any great degree. For those women who do enter the skilled trades, they remain in female-dominant ones, such as dressmakers and electronic equipment assemblers. The resistance to women in the blue-collar trades remains strong. Even among lower-level semiskilled operative jobs, which can be learned quickly, women are underrepresented in those that are unionized. They have made their greatest strides in public sector operative jobs such as letter carrier and bus driver, where their numbers have more than doubled since 1980. Nevertheless, they are virtually invisible in the higher-paying skilled trades. About 90 percent of precision production, craft, and repair occupations are held by men. Women in blue-collar jobs perform those that require few skills, have poor working conditions, have high fluctuations in employment, and command low pay. Representing half of the low-wage labor force, these ranks are likely filled by women of color. Over five times more women than men work in jobs with poverty-level wages (Catalyst, 2018b; Hegewisch and Tesfaselassie, 2019).

Blue-Collar Men The gender wage gap in skilled blue-collar jobs is one of the largest compared to most all occupations and within the blue-collar ranks. Men in the elite trades of machine tool operators, tool and die makers, bricklayers, and electricians, make 20 to 30 percent more than women doing the same job, corresponding to $20,000 more per year. Women were excluded from most unions until the early twentieth century, but union jobs today have smaller wage gaps (Chapter 5). Minority men are also likely to be in the lower-paid blue-collar ranks but are paid more than similar women. The skilled elite trades are reserved for white men, fewer men of color, fewer white women, and even fewer women of color. Occupational segregation persists within and between jobs, however, regardless of race. Auto mechanics earn almost double the annual salary of bank tellers. Educational level does not explain these numbers. The wage gap between blue-collar men and white-collar women with college degrees is

Gender, Work, and the Workplace  413

startling. Earnings for construction workers (97 percent men) are 15 percent higher than for librarians and educational specialists (73 percent women) (PayScale, 2020). Despite the gaps between pink-collar women and blue-collar men, most blue-collar workers hold the lowest paid unskilled or semiskilled jobs. The gendered reality is that blue-collar jobs for women are paid less than those for men.

Job Ratios and Gender Beliefs Gender-typing of occupations is a fundamental part of the U.S. economic system, although it violates one of capitalism’s basic premises—obtaining the best person for the job—especially as it limits or channels women’s choice of jobs. Gender-typing links occupational roles with gender roles and tends to designate female occupations, such as nursing and social work, as those involving nurturing, helping, and empathy. Psychology and counseling have become female-dominated fields. Conversely, occupations associated with detachment, leadership, and outspokenness, such as medicine and politics, are designated as masculine. When women do move into these fields, they tend to adopt behaviors matching masculine traits. Although gender-typing is evident throughout occupations, some jobs have shifted in gender distribution, such as pharmacy and realty, and are now female dominated. As noted, teachers and secretaries transformed from male to female. These patterns counter the argument that gender-typing is based on the “naturalness” of one gender or another being suited for a given occupation. Exposing the flaws of the “women take care” and “men take charge” workplace model will benefit women and their employers.

The Wage Gap As measured by median annual earnings of full-time employees, women earn less than men, a pattern holding across all racial and ethnic groups, across all levels of education, and throughout occupations. The wage gap has profound consequences. If both men and women were paid equally, more than half of low-income households in the United States would be lifted above the poverty line. The gender wage gap has been an economic fact in the United States since records have been available. It unfolds similarly in other rich countries and in the developing world. It accounts for occupational segregation, initial salary, and family obligations. The gender earnings gap in affluent nations such as the United States and Great Britain endures even when powerful demographic variables are added to the picture, including age, type of job, seniority, and region. It holds for marital status and for women who have continuous full-time employment and have no children. The value Americans place on talent and achievement to pay off in the workplace cannot explain why at all educational levels males outearn females and why the gap is largest at the highest education levels (Chapter 11). The wage gap for a fulltime woman worker costs her over $500,000 in her lifetime than equally qualified men. For African American women and Latinas, the gap expands to approximately one million dollars. Women with college degrees can expect to lose between $800,000 and $900,000. For those with post-graduate work, it is about $2 million less than for comparable men (Carnevale et al., 2018; Dickler, 2019; Payscale, 2020). The wage gap starts early in life, widens with age, and follows a woman into retirement. Compared to men, median pension wealth for women will be 25 percent less at age 65 and 38 percent less by age 85. Women between age 70 and 75 are three times more likely than men to be impoverished (Lilleston, 2017; Cheng, 2018).

414  Gender and Social Institutions

09 20 11 20 13 20 15 20 17 20 18

07

20

05

20

03

20

01

20

99

20

97

19

95

19

93

19

91

19

89

19

87

19

85

19

83

19

81

19

75

19

19

19

19

65

100% 95% 90% 85% 80% 75% 70% 65% 60% 55% 50%

55

Gender Earnings Ratio (%)

With historical exceptions such as the Depression, World War II, and the Great Recession, the wage gap gradually narrowed during the twentieth century. Between 1967 and 1974, for example, the gap widened from 62 percent to less than 61 percent. In 1980, a woman employed full-time earned about 65 cents for every dollar a man employed full-time earned; that figure remained stagnant at 75 cents in the 1990s and increased slightly to 77.5 cents in the 2000s. It is between 81 and 62 cents today. Progress has stalled (Figures 10.4 and 10.5). The narrowing of the wage gap in two decades by one to two cents per year over time is certainly debatable as a sign of progress.

Year Gender Earnings Ratio, Annual Earnings FIGURE 10.4  The

Gender Earnings Ratio, Weekly Earnings

Gender Earnings Ratio, 1955–2018, Full-Time Workers

Percentage Point Change in Median Weekly Gender Earnings Ratio

Source: Institute for Women’s Policy Research. Fact Sheet: The Gender Wage Gap: 2018.IWPR #C478 March, 2019. https://iwpr.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/C478_Gender-Wage-Gap-in-2018.pdf

9 8

7.9

7

6.3

6 5

3.4

4 3 2

0.8

1 0

1979–1988

FIGURE 10.5  Declining

1989–1998

1999–2008

2009–2018

Progress in Raising the Weekly Gender Earnings Ratio

Source: Institute for Women’s Policy Research. Fact Sheet: The Gender Wage Gap: 2018.IWPR #C478 March 2019. https://iwpr.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/C478_Gender-Wage-Gap-in-2018.pdf

Gender, Work, and the Workplace  415

Triple Jeopardy: Gender, Race, and Social Class A powerful intersectional approach can explain why occupational distribution of minority women reflects changes in the labor force as well as gender inequality (Rosette et al., 2018). After World War II, large numbers of African American women moved into government white-collar and clerical jobs and the lowest-level private sector jobs, such as data entry and filing clerks. Others remained in the ranks of domestic servants and as caretakers of children, often with living quarters in the homes of their white employers. African American middle-class women moved into the professions earlier than white women. Like white women, they are steered into traditionally female occupations but are concentrated in public sector jobs, such as teaching, social work, and higher-level government data analysists. Although white women are also segregated in female-dominated professions, they are represented throughout the private sector where pay is higher (Krickellas, 2018). Wage levels of minority women continue to be far less than those of men of the same group. African American, Asian American, and white women earn two-thirds to four-fifths of what comparable race men earn, with the most disparity between Asian men and women and the least between Latino men and women (Figure 10.7). These figures suggest that women will reach pay parity in 2059, but Latino women will wait until 2224 and Black women will wait until 2130 (IWPR, 2019b).

Sexual Orientation: A Paradox? Pervasive heterosexism would predict other layers of workplace jeopardy for gay men and lesbians compared to heterosexual men and women. Research in the U.S. and UK sheds

Earnings (in current dollars) 1,500 1,250 1,000 750 500 250 0 Total

White

Black or African American Women

Asian

Hispanic or Latino ethnicity

Men

FIGURE 10.6  Median

Weekly Earnings of Full-Time Women and Men Workers by Race and Hispanic or Latino Ethnicity Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. BLS Reports. “Highlights of Women’s Earnings in 2018.” November 2019. https://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/womens-earnings/2018/home.htm

416  Gender and Social Institutions

doubt on this prediction (Aksoy et al., 2018, 2019; Webster et al., 2019). There is an earnings penalty for gay men relative to heterosexual men but an earnings premium for lesbians relative to heterosexual women. Lesbians are certainly vulnerable to workplace discrimination but are viewed differently and more positively than heterosexual women in terms of career commitment and dependability. They are overrepresented in the highly skilled, better paid jobs typical of gendered occupational categories. Lesbian workers are found in favorable numbers at higher management corporate positions and higher prestige professional specialties dominated by men. Gay men are less likely to be found in these ranks. Prejudice may be softening for gay male workers, but for transgender people with a nonbinary identity, suspicion and hostility thwart success on the job (Buser et al., 2018; Fogarty and Zheng, 2018; Martell et al., 2018). With same-sex marriage as a catalyst, workplace rights for gay men and lesbians are being extended even if victories are in legal flux. These rights are restricted for nonbinary LGBTQ people and asks “what the law would look like if it took nonbinary gender seriously” (Clarke, 2019:894). As for other women, the gender liability for lesbians carries over to wage penalties in comparison to men. But employers, perhaps stereotypically, rank lesbians according to favorable employee traits (assertiveness, reliability, leadership potential) usually assigned to men. These traits may overshadow the heterosexism lurking in their workplaces. As heterosexism is muted, employer interests are served, and equality is enhanced for women and LGBTQ people in the workplace. Lesbian workers appear to be more successful in reconciling conflict between paid work and motherhood that nets a favorable balance. Families headed by both gay men and lesbians are likely to be middle class dual earners, exhibit role flexibility, and even in their child-centered homes, biological parent is not ranked over primary caregiver or wage earner (Chapter 8). Certainly, both lesbian and gay parents struggle with balancing work and family, but from an employer standpoint, these struggles for lesbians are not viewed as detriments to their job. An interesting question remains: will legal marriage skew to disadvantages for lesbian workers if employers perceive it as pulling them from loyalty to workplace to loyalty to family? Marriage cements a relationship that becomes more gendered over time with work-life spillover likely to be resolved in favor of family over job.

Human Capital Model Capitalism is played out in the United States according to strongly held economic convictions related to the human capital model. With the United States as its lead, the model is embraced by the rich, industrialized nations across the globe. According to this view, the gender gap in wages is due to personal, individual choices in matters of education, childbirth, child-rearing decisions, and in preferred occupation. If women choose to interrupt schooling or careers for marriage and family reasons, experience and productivity are compromised and wages are lower. In support of this model, because women now demonstrate less discontinuous work patterns than in the past, their wages have increased and the wage gap is decreased (Grove et al., 2011; Polachek and Xiang, 2014; Magnusson and Nermo, 2017; Moore, 2018). The human capital model is consistent with the law of supply and demand. Women can be paid less because they choose occupations and work schedules offering part-time options and requiring less prior experience. These flexible approaches make fewer demands on women’s family responsibilities and hours spent in home production. The occupations they choose

Gender, Work, and the Workplace  417

that fit best with their schedules are feminized and less competitive. In addition, men’s skills related to numerical (math) competency are highly sought and more competitive, thus they receive higher wages (Busch, 2018). In this supply side argument, these jobs are competitive with an abundance of workers who can be paid less. If there is artificial intervention to make jobs equitable in terms of wages, such as setting quotas for certain jobs for men and women, the law of supply and demand will be compromised.

Sociological Theory The human capital model is compatible with functionalism in two important ways. First, men and women may attach different meanings to work. Masculinity norms propel men to connect self-esteem to provider, breadwinner roles central to their identity. Employers justify pay differences by these masculine qualities. They contend that gender per se is irrelevant: it is not an employer’s responsibility to change attitudes about gender roles or how they may play out differently for men and women workers. Second, and more central to functionalism, the human capital model suggests that if the gender wage gap is damaging to social equilibrium, addressing it must be gradual and unfold in ways that do not disrupt the market. This aligns with capitalism’s tenet that markets function best left unfettered and unregulated. Interference with markets by “artificially” changing wages puts economic equilibrium at risk and, therefore, does more harm than good. Social constructionism and conflict theory combine to offer viable explanations for the wage gap that focus on two factors: the power relationships between men and women in all work settings, and definitions of masculinity and femininity that are carried into the workplace. This view suggests that men exercise power in the workplace that maintains their wage advantage over women. A good example is a protégé system in which an already powerful member serves as a sponsor for entry and upward movement of a novice. An effective “old boy system,” combined with sexism that ranges from subtle to overt, keeps power in the hands of a few men. Until women gain access to networks that include mentoring and sponsorship by high ranking colleagues—especially women managers—advancement that brings higher salaries will be stalled (Helms et al., 2016; Abendroth et al., 2017; Connor and Fiske, 2018). This system is sustained by cultural definitions of masculinity and femininity that often bar women from meaningful participation in informal work groups. Women will not be accepted if they are “too masculine” but are taken less seriously if they are “too feminine.” It is illegal to discriminate by race and gender in pay but legal interpretations tend to support human capital explanations. Perceptions about gender translate to pay inequity for women in all occupations. Human capital theory falls short in explaining the gender pay gap even as it preserves the status quo about women’s lesser status (Blau and Kahn, 2017; Addison et al., 2018; Bornstein, 2018; Watkins, 2018).

Summary Although there are merits to each of these explanations, much evidence and consensus on the evidence point out that the gender gap in pay is clearly linked to the following factors: •

The work women do—regardless of content, skill, or functional necessity—is less valued overall than the work men do.

418  Gender and Social Institutions

•

• • •

The higher the number of women in the occupation, the lower the wages; the converse is true for male-dominated occupations. One-third of the wage gap is correlated with gender segregation. Occupation, seniority and work experience, industry, race, motherhood, and education combined explains less than half of the wage gap. Men and women are comparable on job commitment and job performance. Regardless of the law, gender discrimination and sexism in the workplace endure.

Remember, too, that even given those factors that do account for a portion of the wage gap, these explanations should not substitute as justifications for it. The stereotypes about suitability of a job for men or women are pervasive. Why are women musicians and conductors in symphony orchestras beginning to reach parity with men? For years, the traditional excuse was that women lacked the stamina to play certain instruments or to conduct an orchestra. Today preliminary auditions are “blind,” screening the musician from the evaluator. Gender and race are, of course, less obvious; merit and talent cannot be easily dismissed (Miller, 2014). Research concludes that men are hired more often and paid more than women for what they do largely because they are men (AAUW, 2019a). A disturbing—and disheartening—finding about the gender pay gap is that almost half of American men think it is made up “to serve a political purpose” (Renzulli, 2019). Women’s patterns of employment are different from men’s, but for equal work there is not equal pay.

Corporate Women and Executive Leadership Compared to all other women in the labor force, women grooming themselves for highlevel management in corporations face other gender barriers. Women have made great strides in corporate advancement to middle management positions but have stalled in their ascendance to upper management. Women at the top ranks of management have the education, ambition, commitment, and employment background paralleling those of men, so it should not be difficult to determine who is male or female at similar career stages from these traits. Examining pay and management level, however, this prediction does not hold. This discrepancy is explained by the gendering of the process to advanced leadership in management.

Barriers to Corporate Success Women’s steady increase in share of middle management positions in corporations is not nearly enough to overcome formidable barriers to rising beyond a certain level. To increase female representation in upper management in the 1980s, many businesses adopted a strategy in the addition of one woman over a given time period to their corporate board of directors. The rate of increase has been so slow that parity with men on corporate boards may not be achieved for decades. This quite unambitious strategy has largely been abandoned but the pace of women on boards remains agonizingly slow. Numbers fluctuate by a few percentage points over time, but in the S&P Index of 500 companies, 44 percent of employees are female, yet only 21 percent are board members and a miniscule 4.8 percent are CEOs. In the golden Fortune 500, the number of female CEOs has hovered between 20 and 24 since 2014,

Gender, Work, and the Workplace  419

spiking at 32 in 2017 and then decreasing to 25 the following year (Zarya, 2018; Catalyst, 2019).

Glass Ceiling Women globally report gender discrimination as the most frequent barrier to their advancement. In the elite ranks of the most powerful companies, regardless of law and that women bring to their workplaces human capital comparable to men, traditional and seeming intractable gender bias thwarts a woman’s move up the corporate ladder. This bias converges in the glass ceiling, a pattern describing women’s failure to rise to senior level positions because of invisible and artificial barriers constructed by male management. The glass ceiling is the end result of a combination of powerful gender barriers limiting women’s access to higher management. As Roseabeth Moss Kanter’s (1974) pioneering research concluded, women may be promoted but are tokens—visible yet isolated—in a boardroom resting on gender stereotypes and catering to the most powerful men in a corporation. All ranks of employed women face these barriers, but they are most acute for ambitious women climbing the ladder to the highest levels of corporate structure. The glass ceiling is a good umbrella to understand the host of gender barriers corporate women confront.

Advancement and Recruitment The roots of gender inequality in corporations are foreboding and loom large. Reflecting the bleak numbers of women on corporate boards, businesses are entangled in decades of corporate gendering. The vast majority of business promotion ladders remain gender segregated with few women to draw from. Recruiting externally using firms specializing in highlevel executive hiring, especially for new and fast-growing tech businesses, may offer upward management trajectories for women. The pool of women candidates is increased, and new personnel enter new workplaces with less of an entrenched gendered tradition. A greater number of women in upper management may help reduce the gender pay gap at the top corporate ranks (Fernandez and Campero, 2017; Quintana-García and Elvira, 2017). This strategy, however, does not dislodge gender segregation in existing promotion ladders that thwarts progress of mid-level managerial women already in place. Corporations are enthusiastically embracing mentorship to groom women for advancement internally. Benefits accrue for mid-level women to be mentored by those from higher ranks. Although men and women may mentor one another, organizations are more likely to put two women together with the assumption that it makes for better communication through programs or in networks specifically geared to them. Merits of this approach are often stifled by perceptions that women need a “comfort level” to succeed. It is yet another form of organizational gendering that restricts women from entering upper echelons of management inhabited by men. The gender of the woman’s mentor is less important than the willingness of the mentor to be a strong sponsor and advocate for the mentee. Mentoring is necessary, but insufficient for corporate success. When women find themselves overly mentored but undersponsored, their corporate ascent comes to a standstill. As a woman executive reports, “women are mentored to death.” Unless mentoring comes with strong sponsorship, careers are dead ended (Bentley, 2019; Ghose, 2019). Sponsorship allows entrance into the informal networks they need to

420  Gender and Social Institutions

understand the intricacies of the power structure that are the keys to corporate survival. Encouraged to specialize in a small area of the corporate enterprise, women find themselves in networks that lack diversity, authority, and control. Reflecting reluctance to put attitudes into action, gender bias in corporations remains entrenched.

Performance and Profit Isolation from powerful networks combines with double standards in defining competence and job performance. High-echelon corporate and professional women are likely to be judged differently, and negatively, from men in work performance, even when all characteristics except gender are the same. Men and women do not differ in outcomes in performing their jobs, such as meeting goals effectively and consistently, establishing positive working relationships with peers and subordinates, and degree of innovation in job tasks. There are no significant differences in overall leadership ability. However, men set the standard for evaluating a woman’s performance; in turn they reproduce and elevate their sense of entitlement (Buchanan and Milnes, 2018). Neither does profitability hinge on the gender of a CEO, turnover rate of females compared to males, or women’s leadership in a company, all of which refute the glass cliff hypothesis that women are in leadership positions in companies already struggling or in crisis (Elsaid, 2017).

Agency and Communion Leadership competence for women is biased by what they wear and what they say (Smith et al., 2018c). Executives hire and promote according to a stereotypical masculine model categorizing men as more capable, commanding, aggressive, and objective leaders than women. Women managers must walk a rigid line of interpersonal exchanges in their workplaces that simultaneously demonstrate their agency (ability to act for herself and to translate her choices into effective organizational outcomes) and communion (maintaining feminine interpersonal skills and gender role congruity that garners positive attitudes from subordinates). How executive women resolve the tension between agency and communion can stimulate or stall their careers (Zheng et al., 2018a, 2018b). Gender atypical behavior in leadership style is less accepted than customary gender role behavior adapted to the workplace. Effective delegation of tasks, for example, is a sign of a successful leader, but women delegate less than men. When women do delegate, they have less productive interaction with subordinates carrying out the tasks (Akinola et al., 2018). Women who are astute in balancing a suitable mix of agency and communion can carve a successful path from mid-level to upper-level management. This mix is not an equal one but can be a productive one for women. Today’s workplace has shifted to greater latitude to women who are self-reliant, confident, action oriented, and who delegate responsibly and communicate effectively with workers at all levels (Martin and Phillips, 2017; Schock, 2019). Being competent does not mean being liked as much as it means being respected. Women face far more scrutiny in adapting to male leadership standards. Only a few negative outcomes attributed to her “bad” decisions can derail her management path. In male-dominated workplaces men can make multiple mistakes with less severe consequences (Lublin, 2018). Corporations, nonetheless, are recognizing that “agenic” women make effective leaders.

Gender, Work, and the Workplace  421

The public agrees that there are too few women in top executive business positions and that women are held to higher standards than men in hiring for these positions (Horowitz et al., 2018). Women are making progress in challenging gender stereotypes about leadership. On the other hand, gender atypical behavior that shifts to the “communion” side is less acceptable for male corporate managers. Communication and collaboration for women managers may be assets, but for men they may be liabilities. Men who advocate for others, viewed as a feminine trait, are perceived to be low on agency and competence (Bosak et al., 2018). This is not surprising given that the anti-feminine norm wields the most power in enforcing masculinity’s standards (Chapter 9). It is a double-edged sword for corporate executive women: they can be successful by adapting to the male leadership standard (ideal worker norm) but in doing so they reinforce the norm’s rigidity to the disadvantage of other women who do not—or cannot—conform to it. Whether the gender discrimination inherent in the glass ceiling is intentional, the effect is the same: women are excluded from the ranks of upper management.

Sexual Harassment Under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, sexual harassment in the workplace is illegal, but continues to permeate work settings throughout the U.S. While it may not be apparent, corporate executives say that sexual harassment and the workplace gender gap are “inextricably linked” and a … direct side effect of a workplace that slights women on everything from pay to promotion, especially when the perception is that men run the show and women can’t speak up. (Fuhrmans, 2018:R1) Sexual harassment transitions from school to the workplace, impacting all women workers whether or not they are victims of harassment (AAUW, 2019b). They are acutely aware that it prowls the classrooms, break rooms, and board rooms and could quickly wreak havoc on careers and personal lives depending on how it unfolds (Chapters 11 and 14). Combatting it in schools and other workplaces has been strengthened by the #MeToo movement and media spotlights on its (in)famous perpetrators. Nonetheless, it remains a tenacious barrier for corporate women aspiring to higher executive ranks.

Toward Corporate Success Strategies to overcome barriers have been met with mixed success, often dependent on the willingness of a corporation to put its progressive attitudes about fair and gender equitable workplaces into progressive action plans. Sheryl Sandberg, current Chief Operating Officer of Facebook, ascending to its board in 2012, argues that companies need to assure that action plans are implemented, progress is monitored, and managers held accountable for results. She speaks of a need for better family-friendly corporate policies, strong hiring, retention, and promotion polices for women, training managers to spot gender bias in recruitment and job performance (Sandberg and Thomas, 2018). Her popular books are replete with advice to women to become better negotiators, to speak up in meetings (but not tick off your boss), to embrace “niceness” if it gets you what you want, and to overcome fear of leadership

422  Gender and Social Institutions

and low self-esteem to rise to the top (Sandberg, 2014; Sandberg and Scovell, 2014; Annis, 2016). While holding corporations accountable for progress and offering self-reflective strategies for women to succeed are laudable, the behavior of male colleagues is overlooked and it is up to women to do all the changing. If women change the way they work, pay and promotion will follow. Given that the number of women in upper management is stagnant, the case can be made that Sandberg’s advice is not working (Arad-Neeman, 2016; Chen, 2018; Pavlidis, 2019).

Diversity The path to success for women leaders may be better met with strategies based on increasing corporate diversity. The ideal corporate recruit represents the “image” of those who hired him. Although this model virtually excluded men of color in senior management, this has fast declined in the last decade. The “white male model” is eroding. Although the “male model” is firmly in place in much of corporate America, it is eroding in other places. With attention focused on gender, the intersection of gender and race appears to benefit white corporate women more than women of color (Hirsh and Cha, 2017). It is clear, however, that the thrust of gender in corporate diversity policies is accelerating. California’s recent law on diversity requires public corporations with its “principle executive office” in California to have at least one woman on its board of directors. Since it creates a quota mandate based on gender, it will likely be challenged as unconstitutional for violating both state and federal equal protection clauses (Cohen et al., 2019). Overall, court-ordered and legal mandates for diversity meet with less public acceptance. Nonetheless, the law is in effect the first in the U.S. to enact an ambitious policy for gender diversity in corporate leadership that is intended to benefit all players. Diversity is strongly associated with the bottom line: company profit and productivity. Gender parity in leadership is “not only the right thing to do,” but businesses will see a return on equality initiatives in their bottom line (Turbin et al., 2019; Zalis, 2019). Women represent half the labor force and make the majority of purchasing decisions in their households. To serve this market means to hire and to promote this market. Diversity will not eliminate “old style” gender bias. But as women ascend to executive positions, burdens of the high price of being “a minority of one” or the only person of their gender in the boardroom should be reduced. Gender diversity becomes “substantive” diversity in boardrooms (Sneader and Yee, 2018; Weber, 2018; Nili, 2019). High-level women, single or married, with or without children, who follow their career path as passionately, competitively, and diligently as comparable corporate men, are unable to crack the glass ceiling. Diversity initiatives may provide an opportunity to reduce barriers to advancement so that qualified women will not desert the ranks of corporations to go out on their own.

Women Business Owners And indeed, they are going out on their own. Entrepreneurial women often find business formation as a viable alternative to management positions in large organizations. To reiterate, research consistently demonstrates that the central reason high-achieving corporate women desert firms is that they are denied access to the higher-level management positions and the decision-making power they believe they fully deserve. If they cannot achieve a pivotal role

Gender, Work, and the Workplace  423

in leading a company, they will start their own company. This trend is suggested in the following data (NAWBO, 2018; Guidant, 2019; Esposito, 2019): •

• • • •

Whether as partners with women or men, or as sole proprietors, women-owned business firms represent over one-third of all businesses in the United States, with one-fourth owned by women of color. Women-owned businesses increased by 58 percent between 2007 and 2018; firms owned by women of color grew at almost three times that rate. Over half of all African American businesses are owned by women; 44 percent of Latino businesses and 39 percent of Asian businesses are owned by women. 99.9 percent of women-owned businesses are small businesses with fewer than 50 employees, accounting for 15 percent of employment (9.4 million workers). Women’s sole proprietorships are increasing at double the rate of those owned by men; women own about 40 percent of all sole proprietorships; half of small businesses are home-based firms, most of these are owned by women, and most of these are owned by one woman.

Types of Business Women-owned businesses evolved according to two general categories. The first is a business developed around traditional areas of female work, such as services targeting women and retail trades. For example, women own businesses that do housecleaning, catering, closet organizing, and child care or they have small boutiques and stores offering specialty items and household products geared toward women. Professional women are increasing private practices in counseling, solo law firms, and skilled health care therapeutic services. Women do “body work,” such as massage and yoga, often on a part-time basis (Cohen and Wolkowitz, 2018). They employ fewer than ten people, mostly women working part-time. Half work alone. They are in economic niches that do not compete with more powerful small companies owned by men. Women tend to be in competition with other women in similar businesses rather than in competition with men. When they do compete with men, they encounter rampant gender stereotyping. Competition for customers in male-dominated areas, such as the skilled trades, is fraught with gendered hazards. Women are ten times more likely to have their expertise questioned because of gender, a number that increases significantly for African American women business owners (Business Wire, 2019). Consider, for example, lawn care, carpentry, electrical, and plumbing services where women are gaining a niche. Women-owned businesses may be set up for failure “by gender beliefs that discount women’s leadership” (Yang and del Carmen Triana, 2019:926). It is difficult to discount gender stereotypes in the failure of women-owned businesses when discrimination translates to fewer customers and less profit. Women-owned businesses are concentrated in sectors with low-volume sales that lack access to capital and government contracts. The difficulty of obtaining venture capital is cited as the key menace to a successful business. Women-owned businesses not only have less access to capital but generate less than half the revenue earned by men (Green, 2018; McDermott and Butler, 2018). The gender gap in funding is notorious in determining outcomes for small businesses. Women are advised to break the money taboo by taking

424  Gender and Social Institutions

individual responsibility to change their behavior and to think outside the box (Castrillon, 2019; Lliff, 2019). These strategies, therefore, are expected to accommodate the pitfalls of owning a business for women. Women are less likely to go to banks or financial institutions or seek outside investors for start-up capital. Investors can be suspicious of female entrepreneurs. Women are asked questions about how they will prevent losses; men are asked questions about how they will promote their firms. Entrepreneurs who are asked promotion questions receive more funding (Kanze et al., 2018). Compared with male entrepreneurs, women have less collateral to secure a loan. They may be reluctant to request financial, managerial, or technological assistance from agencies such as the Small Business Association, believing that bureaucratic entanglement will reduce their autonomy. They choose informal routes for such help, such as family and friends, who subsequently may be called on as volunteers to help in the fragile first business phase. Taken together, these suggest that the gender pitfalls in starting a business are acknowledged, but without gender-specific public policy that strategically targets them, individual women business owners shoulder the burden in dealing with them.

Work-Life Balance Despite the negatives, women are starting small businesses in record numbers. New data show that even the marginally higher failure rate of women-owned businesses has been erased, and they are now surviving at the same rate as male entrepreneurs (Business Wire, 2019b). Women consistently report that their small businesses and sole proprietorships offer realistic and satisfying strategies to resolve work–life balance concerns, all in ways that spotlight agency. They have more control in dealing with issues of gender discrimination, business ethics, customer relations, and the pay gap in their own businesses rather than as employees. Self-employment brings decision-making based on needs unique to their businesses and their families (Williamson, 2018). Women do not overlook these difficult issues, but assert more control in the way entrepreneurship is carried out. They view their small businesses as ways to be creative, opening up talents that were hidden or buried in previous workplaces. Giving up pressure to work under someone else’s authority, as well as supervising lower level employees with less authority than themselves, are assets of self-employment. Even with increased time and energy committed to their businesses, reduced pressure is still reported. Reduced pressure in a workplace comes with the loss of communal workplace bonds. Isolation is mitigated by reaching out to other women in formal and informal networks. Women business-owners rely on these networks more than comparable men to enhance interpersonal relationships and communication, and to validate their sense of accomplishment as business owners (Ebbers and Piper, 2017; Kuhn et al., 2017; Warr, 2018). During the pandemic these are the Zooming women making concerted efforts to ensure that physical distancing does not translate to social isolation. The integrity of their businesses is nurtured, as is their own well-being and that of others in their networks. Most important, and as expected, work–family balance is enhanced by the flexibility self-employment offers. Women business-owners can choose to work full-time or parttime, shifting to more or fewer hours according to family and business needs. Self-employed women with families who work full time prefer it over part-time work. Those who work part-time see their businesses as opportunities to advance in a career rather than in a job. Flexibility of work options through self-employment increases job satisfaction and well-being

Gender, Work, and the Workplace  425

(Yucel, 2017; Aycan and Petrescu, 2018). Work and family are inevitably and intimately enmeshed. These women may be described as “mompreneurs,” in navigating the treacherous slopes of work–life balance (Jacocks, 2016). Demands of the business are always present, but self-employment for women offers autonomy in navigating these demands.

Corporate Deserters A second category of women business owners includes middle managers who encounter the glass ceiling and jump into entrepreneurial ventures before their “corporate clock” runs out. They astutely recognize the amount of career time needed to build a successful new business. They are the stockbrokers, banking executives, and financial managers who capitalize on the expertise, insights, and corporate experiences they gained from their previous employer. The message that this group of women sends is that companies will ultimately lose by limiting the talent and ambition of their female employees. If women leave a company to start their own businesses or jump to another company, former employees will become competitors. It is important to note again that corporations must acknowledge that profit, diversity, and inclusion go hand in hand. The human capital model may suggest that it is not the job of corporate boards to create cultural diversity. However, it is their job to create profit for shareholders, and diverse boards generate higher returns. In the organizational sense, the notion of “male corporate America” is redundant. Diversity is no longer a choice. It is a necessity for companies to be successful.

Gendered Management Styles: The Partnership Alternative Explorations of partnership approaches have a long and distinguished research history, demonstrating benefits accruing to workplaces and organizations adopting such models (Eisler and Loye, 1990). Barriers notwithstanding, women’s socialization patterns that typically are more communal in style than those of men, may offer an advantage to modern corporations. In sharp contrast to the traditional, authoritarian corporate hierarchy, women executives tend to develop leadership styles in work settings that nourish creativity through cooperative climates. Innovation is a prized outcome in such climates. Female leaders who describe themselves as communal are perceived by subordinates as more transformational than male leaders. Although common in nonprofits with a social justice orientation, partnering models are visible throughout a range of corporations (Congress et al., 2017; Fritz and van Knippenberg, 2018; Saint-Michel, 2018). Women bring interpersonal skills gained outside the organization into the organization. They form enduring friendships in the workplace. In contrast, masculinity norms admonish men that in traditional business hierarchies, interpersonal success is sacrificed for corporate success. Workers unencumbered by family and personal relationships are valued (Chapter 9). That worker is likely to be male. For companies receptive to alternative visions of corporate life, the distinctive management styles of women are encouraged. Compared to male managers, female managers do not use gender as a factor in performance evaluations, helping to cement non-hierarchical offices that encourage employee cooperation. In cooperative business settings, there is a bonus for male leaders who adopt communality in leadership style. This style carries over to the way goals are implemented. Managers in collaborative partnership organizations emphasize motivation and relational leadership to achieve goals (Hentschel et al., 2018; Boyer et al., 2019).

426  Gender and Social Institutions

Women managers tend to adopt styles compatible with overall gender socialization patterns of females, such as encouraging participation, mentoring, sharing power and information, and “friendly” interaction with all levels of employees.

Global Focus: Japanese Style Management To some extent, these patterns parallel culturally based Japanese Style Management (JSM). This model encourages a sense of employee community, an interest in employees’ lives outside the office, consensus building, socioemotional bonding between employees and between management and labor, and a flattened management structure that is more egalitarian than hierarchical. Principles of JSM correspond to conventional female gender roles in workplaces for decades and in the culture for centuries (Lindsey, 1998; Chen, 2004). JSM fits well in corporations with managers who have participative leadership styles emphasizing teamwork and consensus driven decision-making. With cooperation and collaboration normative in the workplace and in wider society, JSM is a significant marker of Japanese social identity. Firms are struggling with how to survive in a global economy conquered by neoliberalism and the powerful corporate hierarchy it brings without abandoning JSM. In a neoliberal atmosphere corporate profit, hence survival, may be dependent on training employees to be more independent and encouraging firms to be more diverse. It is also dependent on modifying JSM’s bottom-up managerial approach to assure that leaders do not shift blame to followers for mismanagement and company dysfunctions (Fukuhara, 2016; Rear, 2016). Firms incorporating these elements can well serve Japanese women aspiring to corporate leadership. Even with some erosion of JSM companies benefit from cooperative models in which Japanese women excel. Women benefit as they are added to managerial ladders. As women increase their executive ranks, it is expected that gender role latitude in carrying out their leadership roles can also expand. Japanese companies continuing to embrace JSM cannot be separated from the powerful rules of behavior and highly traditional gender roles according to which all Japanese live. Gender roles in Japanese corporations are more rigid than in the border culture and managerial women risk being ineffectual in their jobs by conforming to them or not conforming to them. This helps explain why women executives in Japanese companies are virtually nonexistent (Chapter 6). Paradoxically, successful JSM depends on all ranks of employees embracing skills associated with female gender roles.

Critique Partnership models work best in smaller firms or in situations where close collaboration on projects is necessary and where each employee has an expertise not shared by the others, such as carrying out scientific and technological work. Employee satisfaction is associated more with the type of task and the amount of teamwork required rather than with the gender of the employee. Satisfaction is enhanced when managers adopt a style that embraces agency and communion. Women moving up in corporate ladders draw on reserves of communality as they maneuver agency. Men have more agency but less communality from which to draw. However, the “celebration” of the female advantage in the workplace—good communication, communality, conflict management, interpersonal skills—may lead to increased stereotyping and a reaffirmation of gender differences. The image of women as nurturers who smooth over problems may be as stereotypical as the image of men who create the problems.

Gender, Work, and the Workplace  427

The multicultural, diverse workplace is the emerging norm and businesses today acknowledge that “difference” does not mean better or worse or stronger or weaker. A partnership model is associated with a revision of the standard definition of success, for example, that acknowledges other employee roles, such as parent and caretaker, in the life of any employee. Today’s employees are more willing to trade compensation for quality of work life. When conflicts between work and family are resolved in favor of the job, it is usually—and initially—to the detriment of the worker and his or her family. But the detrimental effect carries over to the employer and to society. Talented women opt out of high-level positions not because of their lack of competitiveness or dedication, but because of ruthlessness associated with the corporate climb that is the antithesis of the partnership model. The door is only cracked open. A paradigm shift for a partnership approach as a workplace norm is far from reality. Companies adopting a partnership approach can benefit by recognizing that employee job satisfaction is critically linked to quality of life—both on and off the job. Translating these attitudes to employer management practices is nonetheless stalled.

GLOBAL FOCUS: WOMEN AND MICROENTERPRISE With the United Nations as an early catalyst, sector NGOs advocating for the world’s poor, propelled the visibility of the global economy’s informal sector (Chapter 6). Since largescale development programs largely ignore the informal sector where the poorest of the poor work, shutting them off from formal financial services, microenterprise programs to address their needs arose and rapidly expanded. These programs consist of core segments of income-earning manufacturing, service, and farm enterprises located in or around the household or community. Microenterprise in the development assistance community translates to microcredit or microenterprise lending, where groups of four or five borrowers receive small (“micro”) loans at commercial interest rates to start or expand small businesses and open their first savings accounts. Since inception, peer lending has been a central feature of microcredit. A group takes responsibility for one another’s loans: if one fails, they all fail. This self-regulation is a key reason for microcredit’s success at minimizing loan default. Microcredit began in the 1970s when economics professor Muhammad Yunus, founder of the Grameen (“village”) bank of Bangladesh, extended credit to people too poor to qualify for loans at other banks. The first microcredit lending came from his own pocket. He lent $27 to a group of 42 workers who bought materials for a day’s work weaving chairs and making pots. At the end of the first day as independent business owners, they sold their wares, made a profit, and soon repaid the loan. The 62 cents per worker from the $27 loan began the microcredit movement. The Grameen program was astonishingly successful: 97 percent of borrowers repaid loans at 20 percent interest, and their microenterprises became sustainable. Almost all the workers in these early microenterprise programs were women. Grameen was largely responsible for the decreasing poverty rate of women and their families in Bangladesh, one of the poorest countries of the world.

Women’s Entrepreneurship through Microcredit Microcredit works better for the very poor because the very poor are typically women. Initially Grameen sought equal numbers of men and women borrowers, but Muhammad

428  Gender and Social Institutions

Yunus found that women were more likely than men to repay their loans. They built their businesses from their microenterprises and used profits to sustain their families, with better food and nutrition, health care, and education. Men’s profits were often spent on electronics, personal goods, leisure activities, and risky business ventures. Abundant research suggests that when women have disposable income, it is leveraged for a family’s long-term needs, with children as the immediate beneficiaries. Because social and economic benefits are much greater when money is loaned to women, Grameen Bank concentrated on them. Grameen’s microcredit initiatives are particularly effective for women in Global South regions with strong collectivistic cultural values. Bolstering such value systems, microcredit capitalizes on gender socialization patterns that build cooperative networks among women early in life. The self-regulated peer lending strategy is compatible with both. Microcredit took off in the 1980s and the number of borrowers globally skyrocketed. With a portfolio well over a billion USD today, microcredit lending is projected to increase 10 to 15 percent throughout the Global South, with higher growth expected in Asia. Microcredit has been adapted in Europe and in the United States. Programs include sustainable farming and packaging produce for local sale in the rural South and training for self-employment in service jobs in poor neighborhoods in the Midwest and Northeast. Over two decades of success for poverty reduction and profit for lenders met with global approval. Success fueled the rapid expansion of microfinance institutions (MFIs) that jumped on the microcredit bandwagon. An estimated ten million borrowers in Bangladesh alone have been pulled out of poverty. Microfinance reduces the overall number of households in extreme poverty, but also “how poor they are.” Under the Grameen model, small loans to women increases decision-making power in their households and helps determine how money is spent (Etsy, 2014; Angelucci et al., 2015; Zhang, 2017). The transformative potential of microcredit for women is associated with empowerment that extends to leadership in their communities.

Critique Success narratives for microcredit have faltered. Assessing microcredit with newer data is largely in the context of its women borrowers and its new lenders. Lending money to women through microcredit is not without downsides. Many NGOs working with banks do not lend money to men but male relatives may control the microloan money even as women are responsible for paying it back. In South Asia men can force women to take out a loan, then use the assets in ways that do not benefit the microbusiness or families. Women come under intense pressure from husbands, extended families, peers, banks, and the community who may harass and threaten public humiliation for late payment or failure to pay. Diversification of income through microcredit offers entrepreneurial women a source of income outside the bartering and exchange of the informal sector. Yet in cultures with restrictive gender roles, informal sector work may be more acceptable than work which generates “real” income. Women’s business ownership challenges powerful cultural and religious gender norms and can increase family tension. Domestic violence is spiking in households in South Asia with these entrepreneurial women and sparking attacks on the business settings. In Andhra Pradesh (southeastern India), MFIs have been shut down from over-indebtedness and suicides of borrowers (Shamit, 2016; Ashrafun, 2018). There is a loss of voice for women from NGOs that traditionally have been their frontline advocates. Women-oriented NGOs are deploying a World Bank, neoliberal discourse,

Gender, Work, and the Workplace  429

becoming co-opted by donors serving corporate and political interests. Programs which have mainstreamed gender in their development goals are not translated to the day-to-day practices of aid organizations. Under an NLG umbrella, agencies marginalize the very women they are expected to serve (Kilby, 2019). Self-employment may be less attractive for young women in Bangladesh since the ready-made garment (RMG) garment industry enveloped the nation. RMGs employ over 4 million workers, 85 percent women. For microcredit, over 25 million borrowers are in Bangladesh, the largest number globally. However, many rural women have only a “vague sense that such programs existed” (Schoen, 2019b:287). Indeed, as MFI’s become wider avenues for commercial banking, women are barely mentioned in their formal reports. Perceived empowerment through microcredit appears less important for women than perceived empowerment through formal factory work.

Neoliberalism and Microcredit The most important factor threatening the promise of microcredit for poverty reduction and entrepreneurship benefiting women and their families is by far neoliberal globalization’s (NLG) economic strategies that have eclipsed its nonprofit business model. Unlike Grameen, from which microcredit was spawned, a neoliberal-based banking industry discounts productive economic activities of the informal sector consisting of the work women perform (Lindsey, 2014:9). NLG sets up microentrepreneurs for insolvency. Competing with international markets for traditional crafts with cheap, low-quality imports, for example, women’s microbusinesses have higher failure rates. To hedge against loss, commercial microcredit lenders target wealthier borrowers for larger loans rather than poorer borrowers for smaller loans (Caserta et al., 2018; DeQuidt and Ghatak, 2018). Poor women seeking loans are left in the dust. The successful educational, literacy, and business training programs are eroding as forprofit banks and lenders enter the microcredit arena. Peer lending strategies are most at risk. With women pledging to one another that loans will be repaid, Grameen allowed peer lending to be a form of collateral. Commercial financial institutions require collateral to secure a microloan, often propelling women to sell household handicrafts, dowry goods, and their most cherished asset, family and wedding jewelry. Annualized interest for nonprofit MFIs is about 20 percent on average; loan sharks and predatory lenders in and outside the commercial microloan industry routinely charge 60 percent and often up to 100 percent. To advance in entrepreneurship women are required to be introduced to formal markets through strong NLG capitalist strategies. From a Marxist view, women are targets of exploitation whether they secure loans from a for-profit or not-for-profit lender (Byatt, 2018; Mohanty, 2018; Wykstra, 2019). As a core financial sector in many developing nations, microfinance lending is not slowing down. The Grameen microcredit revolution hatched a myriad of MFIs across the profit (commercial) and not-for-profit (NGO) spectrum of lenders. Whether microcredit offers opportunities for empowering women to move out of poverty, or is exploiting women, keeping them in debt and in poverty, it is helpful to disentangle the ethics of development (notfor-profit model) from its financial effectiveness (for-profit model) (Lesley, 2016; Zulifiqar, 2017; Hassan and Islam, 2019). These two models appear to be incompatible. … poverty reduction and banking do not mix … Patriarchal norms and structures limit the profitability of women’s businesses; … investors are pressuring microfinance to forgo their social mission to enhance the bottom line. (Medina and Dua, 2019:328)

430  Gender and Social Institutions

Social Business Commercial MFIs acknowledge that their bottom line is also dependent on how they can advance corporate social responsibility (CSR) to the public. CSR highlights that it is good for profit for microcredit lending to poor women who do not have the pedigree of better-off borrowers. When businesses adopt social welfare goals, microlenders can reduce financial risk and enhance profit (Ahamed and Mallick, 2019; Bardsley and Meager, 2019). The problem is how much CSR needs to be leveraged to sustain profit. Offered as a way to balance the two goals, Muhammad Yunus suggests that a “social business” is created for the sole purpose of solving a social problem, such as women’s poverty. Investors recoup money but cannot take additional dividends for personal gain. Like Grameen Bank, a social business is envisioned as in between a for-profit and not-for-profit enterprise. Despite the concept of social business, however, Yunus appears to tilt toward the incompatibility of the poverty reduction model and banking model in business. He advocates for two separate financial systems, one for the rich and one for the poor. He believes Grameen Bank offers this model. It’s a bank for the poor and it doesn’t lend money to the rich. The bank for the rich doesn’t lend money to the poor. That’s a simple division … you have two kinds of business: business to make money and business to solve problems. (Cited in Nelson, 2018) With 12 percent of the world’s population living on less than two dollars per day, it is unfair to single out microcredit as failing to reduce poverty. Microcredit is not a silver bullet. It is one important prong, but nonetheless only one prong. Microcredit needs to be part of a paradigm shift in economics that incorporates a gender-equitable financial model. As highlighted throughout this chapter, this new paradigm needs to account for all productive work, whether paid or unpaid. Although social business is an idealized option appearing to suffocate under NLG, it may be a springboard to reimagine microcredit to the benefit of women and their families. For his efforts to create social and economic development for the world’s poor using bottom-up approaches, Muhammad Yunus was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2006.

KEY TERMS Affirmative action Comparable worth Emotional labor Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) Family of orientation

Family of procreation Gendered economy Gender-typing Glass ceiling Human capital model Microcredit

Microenterprise programs Pink-collar jobs Sandwich generation Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act Work–family spillover

CHAPTER 11

Education and Gender Role Change

Math is hard, Barbie said. Mattel pulled “Teen Talk Barbie” from the shelves over public outrage that the doll’s utterance, “math class is tough,” reinforced gender stereotypes regarding girls and math. Less than a decade after the demise of Teen Talk Barbie in 1992, Mattel unveiled Barbie P.C. (a pink and purple flowered computer for girls) and a blue and gold Hot Wheels P.C. for boys. For the same price, Barbie’s computer was loaded with half of the software of the Hot Wheels computer. Barbie’s computer did not get three-dimensional visualization, and logical thinking games. The boys lost out on fashion and shopping. Mattel claims that Barbie today represents feminist ideals and “girl power” (Howland, 2019). This claim is questionable (Chapter 3). Regardless of Barbie, however, a hallmark of twentieth-century progress toward gender equity is the rapid, perhaps extraordinary, educational achievement of girls and women, a pattern that continues today. This achievement is so spectacular that any gender gap in education is now said to favor girls over boys. This chapter examines varieties of educational gender gaps with an eye to debunking gender myths in education, particularly about the way boys and girls learn. Compared to other social institutions, education is expected to be the most equitable. The United States is oriented to credentialism— qualifications for a job or other positions are based on formal education or training. Functionalism makes a strong argument that education is necessary to ensure children are socialized into acceptance of core American values related to economic success. Schools offer equality of opportunity as the path to that success. A college degree is the minimum credential for the most prestigious and financially rewarding positions to pursue this path. Parents are concerned about quality of teaching, curriculum, information technology, and the range of resources and opportunities schools can provide. Equity for parents often focuses on the amount of public funds reserved for their school district. Regardless of funding, concerned parents would be dismayed to discover that their sons and daughters experience the educational process quite differently—even when seated in the same classroom. Education is a sorting process designed to benefit students and society. Gendered schooling, however, brings benefits for some students and liabilities for others. In the most equitable of America’s social institutions, the gender of the child becomes a key determinant of how his or her educational journey unfolds.

432  Gender and Social Institutions

A BRIEF LESSON IN HISTORY Western history demonstrates that education in general and literacy in particular, was reserved for the elite. Until the eighteenth century, the vast majority of both men and women were excluded from formal learning. During the classical Greek and Roman era (dating from about the first century C.E.), the sons of the wealthy and selected young men in other social classes were taught reading, writing, and mathematics necessary for the economic, political, and military functioning of their homes and society. Certain upper-class women were educated in the arts, learned poetry, and were trained in music to entertain household guests. This tradition continued into the Middle Ages and served to reinforce the image of women as sources of diversion from a tedious world. Christianity enveloped Europe during the Middle Ages, propelling its stronghold in all social institutions. Because literacy was necessary for nuns, convent schools were established. For selected wealthy women who attended convent schools, learning was designed to produce socially and morally proper behavior, simultaneously safeguarding sexual purity. Functionalists suggest that even the mediocre education of this era supported powerful social values that a woman’s duty was to her husband or, for those entering the convent, to the church. With church social and political domination, the family reinforced the religious values of a woman’s piety, purity, and devotion to hearth and home. By the seventeenth century, however, these few educational opportunities for women in convents deteriorated, fueled by the fear that communities of educated, semi-independent women were dangerous to absolute church authority. Whereas many convents worked to preserve their intellectual traditions, nuns were rendered powerless in church decisions affecting them. Despite the rise of universities in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries and the profound impact of the Renaissance, education was aimed at the sons of nobility and the emerging bourgeoisie, who would engage in business, become scholars and clerics, or enter law and medicine.

The Enlightenment Rumblings that education should be available for both genders and all classes came in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries with the Enlightenment. During this period, Jean-Jacques Rousseau published Émile (1762), a book destined to be one of the most influential works in the history of education. In describing a man, Emile, and a woman, Sophie, who would be Emile’s wife, Rousseau suggested that men and women are inherently different in abilities. A man must be schooled or trained according to his natural talents and encouraged to cultivate his mind and spirit without restraint or coercion. A woman is passive and weak and should be humbly submissive, accepting a man’s judgment in all matters. Rousseau would not deny literacy to women, but he believed a woman’s schooling should be practical and sensible, as implied below: intellectual pursuits could wreak havoc on her naturally fragile temperament: Once it is demonstrated that man and woman are not, and should not be constituted the same, either in character or in temperament, it follows that they should not have the same education. (Rousseau, cited in Lewis, 2018c) Education for women, therefore, must correspond to their roles of wife and mother. Rousseau contended that women have power over men because they have power over men’s emotions and hearts, but men have power over women because they provide for their sustenance and

Education and Gender Role Change  433

economic needs. Rousseau’s gendered claim is that women gain more from being dependent on men than from any independence education might offer. Rousseau justified gender inequality because he believed that the patriarchal family was a necessary precondition for modern society, founded on a woman’s acceptance of her subservience to a man.

Progressive Education Considered radical at the time, Rousseau’s discourses on educating boys from all social classes laid the foundation for the twentieth-century Progressive Education movement. His views on women were not as controversial because they reflected widespread convictions about a woman’s nature. Since Progressive Education championed civic egalitarianism, the so-called leveling effects of the Enlightenment were directed at glaring differences in social class. Rousseau’s defense of civic egalitarianism, however, is weaker because he failed to account for the interdependent relationship between gender and class that perpetuates women’s subordination and served to undermine efforts at social class equality. For sociological theory, an interesting contradiction is a result. Sounding like Marx and conflict theorists, Rousseau advocated social change that would increase class equality. But the outcome was decidedly functionalist, in support of a patriarchal family considered to be the moral structure on which social order rests. Education for women, therefore, was not only impractical and unwise, but also harmful to social stability. Other voices heard during the eighteenth century did call for gender equality in education. In France, (female) philosopher and mathematician Marquis de Condorcet (1743– 1794) declared that government should provide education for all people and that it had a duty to instruct both boys and girls in common. Equality and justice demanded it. Madame de Lambert advised women to study Latin, philosophy, and science to bolster their resources because other roads to success were closed to them. She bitterly lamented that women have but “coquetry and the miserable function of pleasing” as their wealth (Greard, 1893). The true spirit of the Enlightenment emerged in the late-nineteenth century in Europe and the United States when policies advocating free and compulsory education for all children were adopted. By the mid-twentieth century these principles were strengthened in the United States during the civil rights movement when equality of opportunity was seriously debated. Americans wholeheartedly embrace the belief that education is the key vehicle for social mobility, economic success, and the gateway to the American Dream. Equality in education is assumed during the school years. Yet when the female kindergarten teacher removes Dick’s mittens and helps Jane take off her coat, by virtue of gender alone, the odyssey of American education will contain fundamental differences.

THE GENDERED EDUCATIONAL JOURNEY When children enter the classroom, already established gender role patterns follow them (Chapter 3). These patterns are reinforced and reproduced throughout all educational levels and in all types of educational institutions. These gendered patterns are grounded in both the formal curriculum—such as textbooks, course requirements, grading scales, and standardized tests—and the powerful hidden curriculum, consisting of all the informal and unwritten norms that serve to control and guide the student. Expectations about gender are hallmarks of the hidden curriculum.

434  Gender and Social Institutions

Kindergarten and Early Childhood Education Preschool is normative, introducing children to their first educational expectations. Gender segregation occurs swiftly in preschool and is reinforced by teacher expectations, gendered play and game activities, types of toys, and desires of the children themselves (Granger et al., 2017; Bluiett, 2018). The transition to more formal learning begins with kindergarten and follows from these preset patterns. Kindergarten classrooms are usually extensions of familiar household surroundings. Classes allow for the gradual structuring of the child’s day so that ample time is set aside for play activities. Both boys and girls enjoy the time reserved for playing with the variety of toys and games available, many of which they have at home or have seen on television.

Jane When play period begins, girls rush off to the mini kitchen reserved for them. Here Jane can pretend to cook, set the table, and clean with miniature household devices that are designed for her small hands. This miniature house comes complete with dolls on which she can hone domestic skills. Because the doll corner is not designed for vibrant, rough-and-tumble play, Jane may be less restricted if she is wearing a dress or sandals. Girls are princesses, brides, models, and mothers in this part of the kindergarten world, fantasies easily acted out in the way the classroom is structured. But Jane also wears jeans and sneakers. This clothing does not prevent her from running with the other children and climbing on equipment in the playground. Girls may envy the boys as they display more power and freedom in their play behavior outdoors, but that envy is tempered by the teacher’s disapproval of the boys’ boisterous when it is brought indoors. Teachers inadvertently influence a child’s motivation for activities because of gender beliefs. Jane enjoys physical activity on the playground but when rowdy boys are nearby, it is suppressed (Reimers et al., 2018; Oppermann et al., 2019). Her playground achievements may be applauded, but Jane’s approval from classmates and teachers is for her quiet demeanor and studiousness. Jane is offered more gender-neutral toys than only a few decades ago, some that the boys also choose to play with. She may occasionally exchange the domestic roles of the doll corner for kickball and action-oriented fantasy games during recess. However, the pull to the doll corner as a representation of home and babies is powerful and reigns supreme throughout kindergarten. Gender is interwoven throughout the physical spaces of the early childhood classroom. Princess fantasies for girls are easily laced into doll corner play (Coyne et al., 2016; Børve and Børve, 2017). Playing house can be quite royal for Jane but not for Dick. Jane rarely plays with the boys and prefers playing with a best friend or alone; when outdoors, she jumps rope with a few friends. Kindergarten continues a process of self-selected gender segregation that increases throughout the school years. Gender of same-age peers is the best predictor of choice of playmates, including race. Gender-segregated play groups during early childhood education have powerful socialization outcomes. Children are acquiring distinctive interaction skills that can hamper cross-gender relationships later in life.

Dick Meanwhile, Dick enters preschool and kindergarten more unprepared for the experience than Jane. His higher level of physical activity is incompatible with the sedate atmosphere

Education and Gender Role Change  435

of school, even in its earliest years. In free play during preschool he chooses to be with other boys, engaging in activities allowing forcefulness and physical contact. This gender-typed play behavior in preschool follows Dick into early adolescence and can evolve into other types of physical aggressiveness (Cordoni et al., 2016; Kung et al., 2018). Notwithstanding his play outside the classroom, Dick is soon aware that his teacher approves of the quieter children— and the quieter children are usually the girls. Rather than gaining the teacher’s attention by copying the girls and being labeled a sissy by the boys, he plays games that are physically vibrant and selects toys—mechanical, digital, propulsive—that reinforce these activities. He likes to be a superhero, even a kind and helpful one (Harris, 2016; Dinella et al., 2017a). When Dick is required to engage in quieter activities such as art, he draws gender-stereotyped pictures, such as outdoor scenes associated with fighting, building, and demolishing. In such activities he plays by himself or with one or two other boys (Schwartz et al., 2016). Dick discovers that the teacher pays attention to the children who are more disruptive—and the more disruptive children are usually the boys. He also may feel that it is better to be reprimanded than ignored. The gendered space in the early childhood classroom is quite evident. Boys rarely venture into areas carved out by the girls to play house. If they do enter it, they use the toys differently than the girls. Boys use household-type toys for fighting and destruction—turning plastic utensils into swords and plates into shields, for example. When boys play with Barbie, they often “sexualize” her or even turn her into a weapon (MacNaughton, 2007:266). Teachers who otherwise encourage imaginative play and boys and girls playing together will not allow disruption and conflict in the classroom, and boys are banished from the area (Parmar and Pinto, 2016; Solomon, 2016). Dick and his friends favor trucks, action figures, and building blocks as toys. These toys are more mechanical, complicated, computerized, and motorized than Jane’s toys. Numerical board games and building blocks that boys prefer offer ways to hone spatial-visual and manipulative skills. When teachers encourage boys but not girls to play with robots and other “complex” toys, they provide boys with scientific information not offered to girls. Gender stereotypes about robotics are even stronger than those about math and science. Dick can have an early edge over Jane in experiences to better understand the intricacies of STEM courses (science, technology, engineering and math) they will later encounter in school (Smith, 2015 Master et al., 2017; Newall et al., 2018). Girls, too, enjoy building things. A girl may wander over to join the louder and seemingly more interesting activities of the boys. Similar to the playground, however, she is discouraged from long-term participation by their rough-andtumble play and the very spiritedness of the activities to which she was originally attracted. In and outside the classroom, these activities reward boys for being independent, active, and assertive and punish them for engaging in behavior defined by their peers as sissy. Beliefs about masculinity are enforced in early childhood education. School norms call for compliance, calmness, and quietness, realms in which girls feel more at ease. It is understandable that boys often find their first school experiences unsettling.

Critique Educators in early childhood classrooms acknowledge that when gender issues intrude on learning, optimal outcomes for both girls and boys are damaged. Through their formal coursework and their own classroom experiences as teachers, they know children will often stifle efforts at inclusiveness—gender desegregation—on the playground and in classroom activities. Gender-neutral toys and exercises are offered to encourage inclusiveness. Boys and

436  Gender and Social Institutions

girls do vary in preferences, but their play does not need to be gender restricted. Teachers are adept at creating opportunities for children to interact with (at least) the other gender, simultaneously offering them exciting new avenues to explore. Creativity and imagination are enhanced when play is enlarged and children are welcomed to it regardless of any gender underpinnings lurking in the background (Barbour, 2016; Stanton-Chapman et al., 2018). For teachers enticing girls to the activities of boys, putting these ideas into practice is relatively simple; but not the reverse. Boys stubbornly resist what they define as feminine or too “girly.” Teachers must navigate a precarious gendered line as young children traverse each stage of their educational journey.

Elementary and Middle School For girls, elementary(primary) school and middle school are sites of achievement. They receive higher grades than boys, and they exceed boys in areas of verbal ability, reading, and contrary to stereotypes, mathematics. Teachers put a premium on being good and being tidy, which may account for fewer negative comments given to girls. High achievement coupled with low criticism appear to be an ideal learning environment. Yet the message communicated to girls early in their education is that they are less important than boys.

Jane and the Gendered Curriculum Compared to boys, girls are called on less, have less overall interaction with teachers, and get less criticism but also receive less instructional time. Girls are wary of being too assertive in classrooms. Young African American girls are penalized more than white girls for assertiveness. Teacher criticism of boys for inadequate work, particularly in math, is attributed to lack of effort rather than intelligence. Girls are less likely to hear that message (Chemaly, 2015; Butler, 2019). Elementary school teaches boys that problems are challenges to overcome; it often teaches girls that failure is beyond their control. Girls have better academic and emotional adjustment to school than boys but worry more about these two very things. Although girls get higher grades in math than boys, their math anxiety is heightened. Even female teachers succumb to math anxiety as they confront their own elementary school classrooms where they will be teaching math. Decades of research spotlight math anxiety and its consequences for girls (English, 1988; Ndum et al., 2018; Brass et al., 2019). As symbolic interactionists suggest, a self-fulfilling prophecy is set in motion if girls internalize the notion that they have less intellectual ability, in turn discouraging them from tackling more difficult courses. Compliance in girls serves to weaken intellectual risk-taking. Although curricular material is more egalitarian today, stereotyped gender portrayals are prevalent. Decades of research on such material demonstrates that girls are depicted much less frequently than boys and, when depicted, are in stereotyped roles promoting traditional femininities. In a book about dogs going to school: Lucy the cocker spaniel is the teacher’s pet (she is always on time to school, behaves, and performs well academically); Simon the pit-bull does math. (Richardson, 2015:91) Girls are more likely than boys to be depicted in marginalized, insignificant positions. Even as main characters, girls are less powerful than boys and girls are in roles promoting

Education and Gender Role Change  437

traditional femininities and stereotypes. Children’s books show brave and adventurous girls as humans and as animals, who are helpful to their fellow creatures even if they get into trouble for it. Gender-typed messages still come through. When girls do exciting things, they must often be rescued by superhero-type human boys or male animals. Girls who are princesses may marry the boys who rescue them. Even if she is strong and determined—not the stereotyped princess of the past—she is nonetheless still a princess. She is probably a white princess (Leland et al., 2013; Dinella et al., 2017b; Aronson et al., 2018; Loewen, 2018). Rarely do stories show gender-egalitarian roles devoid of stereotypes.

Dick and the Gendered Curriculum Boys are experiencing elementary and middle school quite differently. They do not easily adjust to a classroom environment that emphasizes silence and inactivity, with teachers reprimanding them more. Boisterous, competitive boys are more likely to receive lower grades compared to quiet, cooperative girls. When boys learn that more effort and less disruptive behavior increase teacher approval, self-esteem is protected and self-efficacy is increased. Teachers talk to them about math and science and praise them for intellectual competence. Decades of research show that teachers may say they do not treat girls and boys differently. But boys shout out answers to questions, whether right or wrong, and get attention. Girls raise their hands and get ignored (Sadker and Sadker, 1994, 2002; Hintz, 2017; Fredricks et al., 2018; Pinto et al., 2018). Textbooks and readers in elementary school are replete with male main characters doing interesting and exciting things, both in occupational and recreational activities. Boys see males of all ages in front of computer screens filled with numbers, diagrams, and formulas. Boys identify with math more strongly than girls, but girls invest more effort in it than boy. Boys see active, resourceful men in interesting jobs and boys their own age who build, create, and discover as well as protect and rescue girls. Men are scientists, firefighters, and police officers. They are involved in a variety of sports activities. They are also in father roles, but these roles have less coverage and less importance than those depicting breadwinner and career roles. Joint father–children activities are rarely portrayed, including those involving father– son. Newer textbooks show boys in nontraditional roles, such as babysitting and household chores, but the gendered curriculum bias for boys binds Dick to expectations of achieving in a career. The fact that he will be a husband and father is disregarded (Hopkins and Weisberg, 2017; Chatfield, 2019; Høgheim, and Reber, 2019). In all these roles, Dick is taught to be strong and tough. Emotional displays such as fear, hardship, and sorrow are disapproved. Anger is the only emotion that is somewhat tolerated if it does not revert to bullying or fighting. Although Dick may find aspects of elementary school frustrating and confusing, curricular materials confirm his anticipated masculine role and serve to strengthen his identity as eventual wage earner.

Critique Gender stereotyping in education has received national attention. It would be expected, therefore, that current instructional materials reflect more realistic and expanded roles for both genders. The evidence is mixed. Children continue to read books with characters in traditional gender roles. When feminist picture books are offered to boost alternative visions

438  Gender and Social Institutions

of girls and boys, children may find them less appealing and fail to identify with the characters. Encouraging children to read books about the other gender reinforces a gender binary. Androgyny for girls may be celebrated, but not for boys (Chapter 3). Women and girls are portrayed as dependent, cooperative, submissive, and nurturing, whereas men and boys are portrayed as independent, creative, aggressive, competitive, and assertive. Research on textbooks that teach reading, social studies, and even mathematics demonstrates that less importance is attached to girls—especially girls of color—by the number of female characters represented and the stereotyped roles they play. On the other hand, numbers and types of female characters have increased, and less stereotyped portrayals are evident. Girls are now more likely to be shown in the world of paid work. They are more frequently depicted in sports, although in traditional female sports such as gymnastics and ice skating rather than basketball or soccer. Although gender parity has not been reached, strides toward less stereotyped female portrayals are evident in textbooks at all school levels (Bartholomaeus, 2016; Hale, 2018). Overall, research on the impact of gender-typed curricular materials concludes that gender role attitudes of early elementary and middle school students are compromised. Instructional materials that perpetuate gender role stereotyping in turn reinforce gender-typed beliefs, with children in the younger grades being most susceptible.

High School For all children, identification with school and its extracurricular activities is a good predictor of emotional well-being. Well-being may be sustained in high school, but there are clear gender differences in how it plays out. Whereas in elementary school girls are confident and assertive, they experience a drop in self-esteem in middle school, entering high school with a poorer self-image and school burnout symptoms (Coelho et al., 2017; Miller et al., 2018; Herrmann,et al., 2019). As measured by standardized tests and grades, achievement for girls in reading and writing tends to plateau and their middle school advantage in math begins to decline. Boys’ reading scores plateau or show slight declines. For boys, the less they identify with school, the more they engage in risky behaviors, such as truancy and bullying. Sports and extracurricular activities reduce these risks. Nonetheless, boys experience consistent gains in self-confidence, and they believe that they are good at many things, but especially in math and physical science, where they are beginning to excel.

The Paradox of Gender and Mathematics Research on the link between gender and math is abundant, complex, and confusing. The data summarized below suggest this confusion. A high school gender gap in math has disappeared: •

High school girls have caught up with boys in overall math performance. They take as many advanced math courses today as boys. Average scores on most standardized tests have converged, and girls do as well as boys on equally complex questions. The Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) assesses 15-year-olds on knowledge and skills in math, science, and reading. Girls slightly outperform boys in five nations. In Singapore, girls have the highest PISA score for both boys and girls in all the advanced economies assessed; girls in Taiwan come in as a close second. Boys and girls appear to tap into different skill sets to solve math questions. The different paths,

Education and Gender Role Change  439

•

however, lead to similar results: overall they succeed (Hyde, et al., 2008; Gold et al., 2018; OECD, 2018). Girls do as well as or better than boys in advanced classes, in classes when girls equal or outnumber boys, and in classes taught by women. Girls do better when “math-identified” adult female role models are available. Both boys and girls are greatly influenced by peers with good grades. These friends are gauges to whether to take math classes at all and which ones to take. This peer connection is stronger for girls. They retain their preference for advanced classes when in classes with other girls who like STEM and who have good grades. Girls have higher math achievement than boys when they believe they can succeed (have a growth mindset) and can enter STEM-based careers. From early childhood through high school, boys and girls are matched in numerical skills. When social and structural factors are controlled for, gender differences in math performance and STEM vanish (Gundersen et al., 2011; Degol et al., 2018; Hutchison et al., 2018; Raabe et al., 2019; Sansone, 2019).

A high school gender gap in math has not disappeared: •

•

•

When verbal processes are used in math questions, girls outperform boys. Boys do better on multiple-choice items and girls do better on extended response items, although these differences are slight. Males’ advantage in numeracy is smallest at age 10 and widens through high school and college. Boys are more proficient at math when tests require more complex problem solving, such as the SAT taken by high school seniors. In high school and college, boys do better on questions measuring spatial ability. Measures of spatial reasoning and mental rotation favor boys, and are linked to construction, action, and sports video games played by boys. Girls who play these games are similar in results. The SAT is the key standardized test that continues to show a significant—and increasing—gender gap in math favoring boys. For overall math competency, boys enter college with the prerequisites needed for science and math-based majors such as actuarial and computer science and engineering (Borgonovi et al., 2018; Munir and Winter-Ebmer, 2018; Sokolowski et al., 2019).

The pattern showing a slight male edge in math proficiency is seized to conclude that there are genetically/biologically based sex differences in analytic ability, interest, and motivation to pursue math and science. The genetics argument for gender differences in math and physical science uses everything from chromosomes, hormones, brain organization, spatial sex differences, evolutionary mandates, and genetic codes to explain the male edge. Sex differences in rate of development that may favor cognition of girls in early childhood and boys in young adulthood may have a biological link to how math competency evolves (Rutherford et al., 2018; Sokolowski et al., 2019). Whether a mathematics gene exists, “there’s no evidence that it is stronger in one gender rather than the other” (Hacker, 2016:63). Biology cannot be dismissed as a factor in exploring any gender gap in math proficiency, but it is certainly not the factor.

Explaining the Paradox The data confusion may be traced to the difficulty of separating cognitive factors that are more biologically based, with affective factors that are more gender and culturally based

440  Gender and Social Institutions

(Henschel and Roick, 2017; Rodríguez-Planas and Nollenbeger, 2018). Evidence against natural differences favoring boys in math is the cross-cultural research showing that gender parity in math performance continues to decline and that girls continue to outperform boys in five nations. The highest performers did not change (OECD, 2012; OECD, 2018). Gender inequality does not explain this gap. The highest performers are in East Asia, in countries with lower levels of gender equality, and in Northern Europe, with higher levels of gender equality. Of concern to feminists, too, is that in nations with more gender equality, women are less likely to get degrees in STEM and the gender gap favoring boys is not reduced, but may be wider (Gevrek et al., 2018; Shu-Ling et al., 2018; Sossamon, 2018; Tao and Michalopoulos, 2018). To advance gender equality in isolation from other cultural factors, therefore, may not be the optimal approach for a reduced STEM gender gap. The recent widening of the SAT gender gap is explained by revised questions and assessments that appear to favor boys. Fewer high-performing girls receive the highest scores needed for acceptance into the most selective colleges. Evaluators found “egregious” sex bias in the newest version of the SAT. Even though girls have higher grades than boys in high school and the SAT, as well as the ACT, underpredict performance or ability in college for young women, it is a substantial leverage for college admission (Elsesser, 2018b, Rosser, 2018; Johnson, 2019). The more dramatic widening of the gender gap favoring girls in competency on reading and verbal abilities is also measured on standardized tests. Globally girls outperform boys on reading literacy and analytical skills needed to determine nuanced understanding of complicated material (OECD, 2016; Solheim and Lundetrae, 2018; van Hek et al., 2019). The math gender gap favoring boys is considered more important than the reading gender gap favoring girls for college. Changes in the math gender gap—it disappears and reappears—cannot be adequately explained by the “natural” difference argument. The better argument is that sociocultural factors propel boys but deter girls in mathematics and science. Math competence is associated with a myth that it requires raw intellectual talent or “brilliance,” a belief with “far-reaching consequences” for girls who internalize the myth (Chestnut et al., 2018:65). Except for biology, girls are less likely to take courses in high school that allow entrance into high-paying science STEM occupations. Any existing math gender gap is certainly mediated by culture. Despite continued weakening of the innate differences argument, the belief that math ability is grounded in unalterable biological factors remains powerful. Highly motivated girls in advanced physics and math classes encounter teachers and classmates who believe girls are not as “numbers” bright as boys. Girls who accept the stereotype that they are not naturally (biologically) suited for math often track these beliefs to negative outcomes that include heightened math anxiety, poorer performance on timed tests, and avoidance of courses based on numbers. Parents and teachers inadvertently shape girls’ beliefs about math. If girls believe their abilities can be changed, math performance improves; if they believe that “girls can’t do math,” their performance decreases. These beliefs are “powerful drivers” of motivation to pursue STEM classes and aspiring to the careers that follow (Gjersoe, 2018; Thébaud and Charles, 2018). Social constructionism asserts that untold damage is done when girls believe math ability is a genetic gift and they can never be successful regardless of their amount of effort. High-profile accounts reinforce these beliefs. Lawrence Summers, economist and President of Harvard, unleashed an uproar for suggesting that women do not have the same “natural ability” as men for math. These innate sex differences explain the underrepresentation of women in math and science faculty and careers. Although acknowledging that

Education and Gender Role Change  441

discrimination may be a factor, he suggested that behavioral genetics shows that “things people previously attributed to socialization weren’t due to socialization at all” (Pollitt, 2005). He was ultimately unseated for these remarks. Investigators need to carefully monitor how their results are interpreted, especially when stories about connections between genes and math ability are grossly simplified in the media. Lingering gender gap in math competence is better explained by gender factors due to culture rather than sex factors due to biology (See also Chapter 2). A final note is in order about the use of the high stakes SAT in college admissions. Public outcry from cheating scandals, problems of assessment, exam bias tilted to disfavor girls, children of color, and students from poorer homes led some selective schools to abandon the SAT and ACT in college admissions (Shapiro and Goldstein, 2019). It is unclear at this point if this trend will reverberate to other colleges.

Social Class, Race, and Achievement In high school and college, race and social class are better predictors of academic performance, including success in STEM courses, than is gender. White middle-class children of both genders outperform children of other races as well as children from lower- and working-class backgrounds. In academic achievement overall, Britain has been successful in significantly narrowing the gender educational gap, but seemingly insurmountable social class inequalities persist. Like the United States, Britain has lagged in strong educational policy that can address these class issues meaningfully. In Britain race and ethnicity widen class disadvantages in the education gap (Parsons, 2019). In the U.S., African American and Latino high school boys, who are disproportionately from poor families, are particularly vulnerable. Although gender differences in achievement are declining in all racial and ethnic groups, minority males are more likely to be at the academic bottom and to drop out of high school compared with girls of all races and white boys. African American boys tend to be rated less competent academically and socially than African American girls. Symbolic interaction and social constructionism assert that such labels can severely compromise a student’s motivation for academic success as they navigate their high school classrooms. Academic achievement is strongly related to level of self-esteem for high school girls. When a high school girl enjoys tackling difficult courses, she also feels good about herself and her schoolwork, sees herself as important, and feels better about her relationships. Girls of color, however, confront ethnic and racial discrimination that can diminish self-esteem, translating to lower self-efficacy as they contemplate going to college. Compared to African American girls, self-efficacy for Latino girls is weaker, even for those with high GPAs. Perceived lack of family support coupled with unease about ethnic identification, tends to reduce academic motivation. Latino girls enter high school with a high level of academic self-efficacy but, for girls of all races, end up with the highest dropout rates (Berbery and O’Brien, 2018; Taggart, 2018; Vera et al., 2018). African American girls receive the same messages other girls receive in high school—that girls are less important than boys, but they tend to retain a positive sense of self-esteem. Self-esteem is bolstered by affirming education messages from family, especially mothers and school-based social support. African American girls clearly understand the reality of racism and know that education does not translate to the same economic rewards relative to whites with the same credentials. Compared with girls of other races, they are more likely to come from families where women are the sole or dominant wage earners. Despite economic

442  Gender and Social Institutions

racism, the narrative of academic success as a path to financial security for women is powerful in African American homes. This narrative resonates strongly for African American high school girls and is linked to educational achievement, positive self-esteem, and the likelihood of attending college. White girls in high school assess their economic futures in ways that are related to dual privileges of race and social class. High school offers compelling messages about a diploma or degree as the most important route to a good job, but white girls internalize the louder gender message that marriage may be the better bet for economic security. In the richest suburbs and school districts in the U.S., white boys choose advanced STEM classes more than girls of all races and outperform the girls in these classes. The gender gap in math is most extensive in rich white suburban school districts throughout the United States (Miller and Quealy, 2018; Reardon et al., 2018). Middle and upper SES white high school girls with the same academic ability may reject courses that offer the highest earning careers after college in favor of those in which they are more interested. They have the luxury to pursue passions in humanities, arts, and social sciences, for example, with job routes that are less lucrative. Working class white girls may choose nursing and teaching offering fast tracks to jobs with immediate financial returns. Both look to marriage, but college is definitely in the future for middle and upper SES white girls, who often graduate with a higher GPA than comparable boys. Girls make different choices from boys relative to future earnings (Rapoport and Thibout, 2018). For boys, regardless of race and SES, masculinity norms about breadwinning loom large. The choices boys and girls make in high school cement their career trajectories even before they enroll in college.

Gendered Tracking and Vocational Education Historically committed to the less powerful of society, vocational education (VE) serves the noncollege-bound. Although college attendance for racial and ethnic minorities and students from working-class backgrounds has skyrocketed, these are the groups largely enrolled in VE. Vocational education is sharply gender segregated, and contrary to perception, more girls than boys are enrolled. Girls from working-class families represent a large share of its students. Many of these girls do not see college as a realistic option, and marriage looms as the alternative. Obtaining a marketable skill for employment immediately out of high school is needed until they marry and for supplementary household income later. Girls are tracked into clusters of courses related to clerical skills, health assistance, beauty (cosmetology and manicuring), and retail sales. Boys are tracked into courses clustered in mechanical (electrical and plumbing), automotive, and computer and information technology (Zhang and Oymak, 2018). VE options for boys have higher economic returns after high school. Girls are the overwhelming majority in vocational programs that are based on household and caregiving skills. Despite the desire to earn a paycheck, such programs for girls mirror the cultural assumption—but not the economic reality— that working outside the home is optional for women. The myth of female dependence on males for income is not benign. When young women graduate from high school with severely restricted career options, it translates to poor economic outcomes worsened by divorce and single parenthood (Chapter 8). Overall high school VE for girls is geared to the noncollege-bound who marry, and when they do work outside the home, wind up in low-paying, dead-end jobs.

Education and Gender Role Change  443

Federal legislation is opening VE for training in higher-paying fields, offered as explicit options to all genders. Improving gender equity in vocational education empowers all students. But a remaining problem is that gender equity is hampered by high school gender codes that keep boys and girls from venturing too far off traditional paths.

Gender in the Hidden Curriculum The confusion of earlier school years for boys begins to evaporate as they are rewarded more for their independence. Dick’s grades have improved, and he is able to demonstrate his talents in courses (shop and automobile mechanics) and sports (wrestling and football) specifically geared to boys. Boys outnumber girls in STEM classes, offering Dick a bolster to self-esteem. Enrollment by girls in courses traditionally designed for boys is exploding, but boys are less inclined to take courses associated with traditional feminine activities. When course titles do not reflect the so-called feminine content, such as “Bachelor Living” and “Home Mechanics,” boys enroll more freely. Changing the title of a course to entice male enrollment may be pandering and devalues courses girls take, but they provide boys with needed, practical domestic skills, such as cooking, child care, home maintenance, and household organization. Other school mechanisms help perpetuate the gendered high school system. For example, all children take the same academic courses, such as history, but as in elementary and middle school, these courses demonstrate that “boys do” and “girls don’t.” In history books, when women are mentioned, it is usually in the context of a traditional role—Betsy Ross for sewing and Florence Nightingale for nursing—or of becoming notable because of marriage to famous men—from Jackie Kennedy to Princess Di and Kate Middleton. Reflecting a persistent patriarchal view, portrayed women conform to a stereotypical image of what women are supposed to be. Except for the area of women’s rights, textbooks do not promote “a more contemporary view of women’s role in history” (Williams and Bennett, 2016:124). History courses in college are beginning to reflect current ideas about race and gender diversity, but this trend is lagging in high schools. Controversial men are portrayed. Controversial women are omitted. Gender bias in the hidden curriculum extends to college and career counseling in high school. Counselors influence students’ attitudes to career selection, choice of major subjects, or willingness to pursue a college education. Counselors are less likely to recommend a math major to girls even if they believe outstanding female students will be more successful at selective colleges than comparable male students (Welsch and Winden, 2019:112). The gender gap in leadership positions also demonstrates this bias. Role models for students serve as career models. Teaching is a female profession and with women graduating from college in greater numbers, it is increasingly more female. Over three-quarters of all public school teachers are women, nearly 9 in 10 are primary teachers, and two-thirds are high school teachers. Women are gaining leadership roles in education, but staffing patterns demonstrate to students and community alike that males hold most positions of authority. Women and men are at parity as high school principals, but women gain positions at a slower pace than men, often waiting in the wings for years until a male principle retires. Male teachers are sought and groomed for leadership and take advantage of the glass escalator in education (Chapter 10). School leadership at the highest levels is gendered; over three-fourths of school

444  Gender and Social Institutions

superintendents are male (Maranto et al., 2018). A female high school principal reports to the male school superintendent who regularly meets with a predominantly male school board. Even among lower-level school staff, a gender hierarchy exists. In both pay and prestige, for example, female cafeteria workers are ranked lower than male janitors. Women are gaining higher-level administrative positions in education, but not fast enough to change these patterns. Acknowledging the insidious nature of these latent but powerful gendered codes, intervention strategies are widespread. Programs supported by the Gender Equity Education Act of 1995 fund initiatives to raise the gender consciousness of educators, helping them understand the influence of cultural beliefs on their work with students. Programs encourage girls in math and science and boys in reading and home economics. It is in high school athletics, however, where progress is reported, but where formidable obstacles to gender equity remain.

Athletics and Masculinity Achievement on playing fields of high schools across the United States is unmistakably linked to school and community and school. How does this achievement affect those who strive for coveted spots in team sports? Girls who succeed in high school athletics feel good about themselves and are viewed favorably by peers. Attractiveness and popularity with boys, however, remain the best gauges to judge prestige for girls. Athletic success provides the same function for boys. From early childhood, boys hear powerful messages that athletic accomplishment is a key barometer to judging masculinity and a man’s success. This assessment is accurate. The multibillion-dollar sports–media connection ensures that, these messages are in fact stronger than at any other time in history. Boys see money and personal glory associated with sports. They also see athletes who are even more admired for the injuries, fights, and general mayhem that occur on and off the football field, basketball court, or ice rink. Sports demonstrate the importance of the value of competition and allows participants to gain confidence, concentration, and courage, all traits associated with successful American males (Chapter 9). These functions of sports, however, are tempered with a downside: relationships with coaches and teammates socialize boys to defer to a powerful male status hierarchy that supports the acceptance of pain and the denigration of women. Football perpetuates patriarchy and male privilege beyond the gridiron. Today the race-related dominance of coaches and owners is being challenged by athletes themselves (taking the knee). Masculinity norms that take for granted brutalized bodies and scorn any behavior that has the taint of femininity remain intact (Oates, 2017). Boys who gauge themselves by sports and cannot measure up to peers or achieve their personal best in the grueling hierarchy of high school athletics often feel inadequate and unpopular. To compensate, they may exhibit deeper antifemininity attitudes in front of peers. Athletic failure is associated with a loss of self-confidence and poor educational outcomes for boys. Academic achievement is not a substitute for athletic rewards. A masculine gender identity is nurtured and polished by sports. This identity may be tarnished if a boy succeeds in coeducational sports, especially if a girl can outperform a boy in the same athletic competition. Such beliefs not only discourage coed teams, but implicitly deprecate activities where girls can succeed at an equal or better level than boys.

Education and Gender Role Change  445

The prominence of high school athletics is measured by the financial and organizational support given to male compared to female sports. Despite legal mandates to address inequity, boys’ teams have better equipment and facilities, more space for practice and competition, and higher-paid coaches than comparable girls’ teams (Chapter 14). Both boys’ and girls’ teams are likely to be administered by men. Scouts for college and professional teams routinely scrutinize standout players of successful high school teams. It is understandable that athletics is viewed as a road to success for high school males. This is a gilded road for those boys who intend to pursue college on an athletic scholarship.

Higher Education If high school has done its job well, all qualified students will pursue a college education. The average high school graduation rate in the Unites States about 85 percent, an all-time high. Gender gaps favoring males in both high school and college graduation rates largely disappeared by the 1990s. Between 4 and 6 percent more girls than boys earn a diploma. For whites, African Americans, and Latinos, gender gaps favoring females in both high school and college favor females. Only among Asian Americans do males graduate at a (marginally) higher rate than females from high school and college. About 1 to 2 percent more women than men complete four years or more of college and 60 percent of undergraduate degrees are awarded to women. The gender gap favoring women also unfolds in graduate school. Women caught up with men in the 1990s in earning master’s degrees and by the 2000s outpaced men in earning doctorates, patterns that are projected to hold for the next two decades (Figure 11.1). A college degree is basically equivalent to what a high school diploma was merely a few decades ago. Ideally, college should be the key educational stage that evaluates students largely on academic achievement and the potential for success. But the lessons of high school are not easily forgotten.

The Gendered College Classroom Men find that academic life exemplifies a male mode of performance. The values of competition, individualism, and spirited classroom debates are stronger than in high school. College men quickly learn the value of catching the attention of faculty who are instrumental in recommendations necessary for later graduate work. Dick’s self-esteem continues to improve and overtakes that of his women classmates. Women experience a small, but measurable drop in self-esteem. In addition to anxiety about major and career, college women grapple with career–family conflict as they plan their future (Chapter 7). Roberta Hall and Bernice Sandler (1982) were among the first to investigate the everyday, taken for granted gender inequities in college, concluding that self-esteem of women is threatened by a subtle campus climate that is “chillier” for them. Akin to the hidden curriculum of pre-college, this chilly climate stubbornly persists decades later. Women discover early that they receive less faculty encouragement for their work and are listened to less and interrupted more than male classmates. A majority of women report gender discrimination in their treatment in and outside the classroom by instructors, administrators, and classmates. The chilly climate is linked to less choice for STEM fields among undergraduate women and burnout when they do select these fields (Simon et al., 2017; Jensen and Deemer, 2019). The chilly campus climate can negatively affect a woman’s personal and intellectual development.

446  Gender and Social Institutions Master’s Degrees (in thousands) 250

Degrees (in thousands)

Projected 200 Total 150 Females 100 50 Males 0 2002–03

2007–08

2012–13 2017–18 Academic year

2022–23

2027–28

Doctoral Degrees (in thousands) 2,500

Degrees (in thousands)

Projected 2,000 1,500 1,000 Total 500 0 2002–03

Females Males 2007–08

2012–13 2017–18 Academic year

2022–23

2027–28

FIGURE 11.1  Actual

and Projected Numbers of Master’s and Doctoral Degrees Conferred by Sex, Selected Years and Projected to 2027–2028 Source: Hussar, William J., and Tabitha M. Bailey. Projections of Education Statistics to 2027. U.S. Department of Education. Washington, D.C.: National Center for Education Statistics. February,  2019. https://nces.ed.gov/ pubs2019/2019001.pdf

Major and Career Paths Women are rapidly entering male-dominated majors; men entering female-dominated majors are not as evident (Figure 11.2). For over a decade, women earned over half of doctorates in fields other than science and engineering. Biology is the exception: over 60 percent of all undergraduate biology degrees and over half of all M.A. and Ph.Ds are awarded to women.

Education and Gender Role Change  447 Field of study Health professions and related programs

16

Psychology

84

22

Biological and biomedical sciences

78 39

Social sciences and history

61 50

50

53

Business Engineering

47 78

0

10

20

30

40

22 50 60 Percent

Male FIGURE 11.2  Distribution

70

80

90

100

Female

of BA Degrees in Selected Fields of Study, by Sex: Academic Year 2016–17

Source: “Undergraduate Degree Fields.” The Condition of Education. Institute of Education Sciences (IES), National Center for Education Statistics. Last updated May 2019. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cta.asp

Gains in professional degrees have been steady; women are a majority in medicine and other health science professional programs. Opportunities for women to even pursue higher education are relatively recent, so these numbers are quite impressive. Advances notwithstanding, college women find it easier to choose the well-traveled gender road of majoring in the arts and humanities, in teacher education, and in nursing. Since about 2010, the desegregation of majors has stalled not only because of women’s slowdown in making less traditional choices, but because men bring their stereotypes to majors overrepresented by women. Men entering female-dominated majors are likely to switch majors, compared to male peers in other majors. Women in majors dominated by men report higher levels of gender bias and harassment than those with more gender parity (Riegle-Crumb, 2016:436; Dresden et al., 2018). Half of women who enter college with interest in STEM fields switch to other majors in fields that “look like them” and that match their values about what a field represents, both in college and in a career. They report they engage better with females in classes with more women and that are taught by women (Ehrlinger et al., 2018; Astorne-Figari and Speer, 2019; Wegemer and Eccles, 2019). Since 2000 there has been a dramatic (approximately 80 percent) decline in first-year undergraduate women majoring in computer science. However, the number of these women is roughly the same as in the early 1980s (Sax et al., 2016). The projected growth in computer science jobs is 19 percent by 2026, but women earn only 18 percent of computer science bachelor’s degrees (BLS, 2019). Insufficient precollege preparation, gender stereotypes about women’s suitability for math and science, few female role models and mentors, and lack of peers in the field are key factors in these choices. Most majors demonstrate significant levels of gender segregation. Compared to women, men are distributed in a wider variety of majors and dominate the most competitive areas of architecture and STEM fields. The majority of noneducation doctorates and master’s degrees

448  Gender and Social Institutions ESTIMATED MEDIAN BASE PAY $80K Computer Electrical science Mechanical engineering engineering Chemical engineering Civil Statistics engineering

70 Nursing

60

Accounting

50

Marketing

Human resources Anthropology 40 Social work Health care administration

Architecture

Physics

Sports management Criminal Kinesiology justice

30 MORE WOMEN

20 0%

20%

40%

MORE MEN 60%

80%

100%

PERCENTAGE OF MEN IN COLLEGE MAJOR FIGURE 11.3

Men and Women in College Major (%) by Pay

Source: Carmichael, Sarah Green. 2017 “Women Dominate College Majors That Lead to Lower-Paying Work.” Harvard Business Review April. https://hbr.org/2017/04/women-dominate-college-majors-that-lead-to-lower-paying-work

in science are awarded to men. These majors lead to jobs in expanding, lucrative fields such as engineering, biomedical technology, and computer science. The gender gap in starting salary for new college graduates is linked to college major (Figure 11.3). Men dominate the most influential fields where graduate work is required (neuroscience, finance, clinical psychology) and are at the top of the prestige hierarchy within them. Even before they graduate from college, women are less likely than men to have careers aligned with their aspirations in their field of study. Psychology is a field dominated by women. However, male psychology majors are more likely to be clinical psychologists and managers; female psychology majors are more likely to be social workers and counselors. Psychology departments are increasingly becoming affiliated with physical sciences and medical schools and are rebranding themselves as “psychological and brain science.” The focus is shifting away from counseling programs to those based on behavioral genetics. This shift is likely to produce a new gender gap: males will pursue the brain science thrust and females will pursue the counseling thrust. Clinical psychology may be dropped as a separate program in highly selective colleges. Sociology also shows a gender gap. It is an excellent pre-law major, but male majors are more likely to enter law than female majors (Gu, 2018). Undergraduate women are concentrated in nursing, literature, home economics, social work, psychology, education, and library science. Although these majors offer vital, personally rewarding jobs, female-dominated fields garner less pay and more competition for the fewer job slots available. For the behavioral sciences, almost 80 percent of B.A.s

Education and Gender Role Change  449

in psychology are awarded to women, a number that is expected to increase. The gender effects of the college experience, including the chilly classroom climate, largely account for these patterns. The culmination of college or graduate school—whether as holder of a B.A., an M.D., or a Ph.D.— is the end of an educational journey of gendered attitudes and behavior.

Graduate School Gendered roadblocks emerging at the undergraduate level are intensified in graduate and professional education as competition for grades and grants increases. Besides dealing with increasing career–motherhood pressures, women must cope with pervasive patterns of subtle gender bias in graduate departments. Academic careers blossom, for example, through a protégé system that matches a talented graduate student with a recognized, established faculty member. Through the informal networks reverberating among departments, women quickly learn that, compared with their male colleagues, they are not as suitable as protégés. Although not overtly discriminatory, these pervasive patterns keep both faculty and graduate student men in control of the powerful subculture of graduate school. Faculty prefer protégés of their own gender, and both students and faculty prefer mentors of their own gender. The smaller number of available female faculty and the gender segregation of the discipline, however, do not allow for these preferences. Such patterns are even more detrimental to women students of color. Based on both their gender and race, they often feel isolated from informal networks and faculty contact. Restricted opportunities for networking in college and graduate school have a major impact on later careers. Mentoring is a key for women facing gender discrimination, especially for those in male dominated fields and when discrimination is subtle and covert. Even given the lopsided faculty ratio favoring men, plentiful research suggests that mentoring is used to address female graduate students’ and female faculty concerns about gender discrimination (Li, 2018; Allen et al., 2019). Departments with female chairs and with faculty engaged in research on gender- and feminist-related topics are more likely to have mentoring policies in place. Female graduate students mentored by female faculty are more likely to become faculty themselves (Dua, 2008; Gaule and Piacentini, 2018). Gender-friendly departments with mentoring programs are also likely to be diversity-friendly departments, instilling the trust and commitment critical for success in graduate school (Kent et al., 2015). Mentoring can impart gender consciousness plus awareness of faculty and student diversity on campuses.

Academic Women Female faculty serve women students well as role models and mentors. These important tasks, however, are not nearly enough to ensure women’s progress in academia. Fueled by economic and political uncertainty and legal setbacks, progress for academic women is eroding. Where does the academic path lead for women Ph.D.s? Most are in two- and four-year state colleges, usually satellite campuses, with heavy teaching loads and committee responsibilities. Community colleges offer hospitable environments for both female students and faculty; over half of the faculty in community colleges are women. Like their counterparts in other colleges and universities, women are clustered in less powerful, overcrowded disciplines and hold most adjunct and part-time faculty positions in these fields. If full-time, they

450  Gender and Social Institutions

are instructors and assistant professors and may or may not be in slots that enable advancement to tenure. Colleges are taking diversity goals seriously, including hiring more faculty from the cadre of ethnic and racial minorities, especially women of color. However, most of these hires are for adjuncts with contracts offered per course for a semester, and are not tenure track positions. Three-fourths of all faculty are in non-permanent, contingent positions to be hired or released as enrollment fluctuates and programs are expanded or disbanded. Most adjunct faculty are women and they do most of the teaching at all colleges. They comprise the pink-collar, teaching-intensive, low-paid benefit-ineligible academic workforce (AAUP, 2019; June, 2019). The pattern repeats itself throughout academia—the higher the rank, the fewer the women.

Tenure Granting tenure demonstrates a commitment to recognize and retain outstanding faculty as teachers and researchers. The number of postsecondary institutions with a tenure system continues to decline, today at 55 percent. These systems vary considerably by type of school. Virtually all public institutions and elite private institutions conferring doctorates have a tenure system compared to 2 percent of private for-profit institutions. The decline in tenure is in part driven by the rise of for-profit colleges. The tenure gender gap remains large and formidable. Women hold about half of tenure slots as assistant professors but are denied tenure more than men. If granted tenure at the associate level, women are less likely than men to move up to senior level as full professor. Men comprise 20 percent more full professors than women. The numbers increase for men and decrease for women in nonprofit, elite universities with doctoral programs: men hold over one-third more tenure positions than women in these institutions (Kelly, 2019; National Center for Education Statistics, 2019b). Women of color are vastly underrepresented in tenured positions: Asian women hold 3 percent, Latinas hold 2.4 percent, and African American women hold 2.3 percent (Catalyst, 2017). For highly qualified women faculty in STEM disciplines, the tenure gap widens. Although women in these fields are equally competitive with men in research training, are successful grant recipients, and meet similar productivity qualifications, they represent only 10–12 percent of tenured professors in STEM university departments. These numbers have further declined since 2010 (CWSEM, 2019; Rose et al., 2019; Van Miegroet et al., 2019). The powerful influence of gender stereotypes for evaluating faculty performance lurks behind tenure decisions. Both men and women faculty adopt stereotyped gender role images that influence expectations for the job. Faculty women are evaluated differently from faculty men by students and colleagues, for example, in how they carry out faculty and administrative roles. Women devote more of their time to teaching and engage in more unpaid professional service in their schools and communities than their male colleagues. Women faculty are expected to be nice as well as competent; maintain a pleasant classroom atmosphere; be more responsive to students with personal needs; be overly accessible to students online and outside class, and engage students using a variety of learning styles. In student evaluations, women are judged more harshly when they deviate from the gender-imposed model of a caring professor (Mitchell and Martin, 2018; Hanasono et al., 2019; Peterson et al., 2019). Clear gender bias exists as a cause and consequence in student evaluations.

Education and Gender Role Change  451

Besides the clear inequity of such patterns, it is a sad comment on college education that good teaching, where women excel, often is not the basis for the reward of tenure. Women faculty are pulled from career goals by the same challenges that face other bright, ambitious women—the multiple demands of family and university. Given the extremely competitive academic marketplace, Jane must make the difficult decision to uproot her life to seek employment elsewhere or find part-time work at other local colleges. The latter course will be her likely choice, especially if she has children and an employed spouse. She will remain in academia but in a marginal position, often as an academic gypsy migrating between part-time or temporary jobs, with little hope of advancement, influence, or tenure.

GENDER ISSUES IN EDUCATION Gender bias in education is clearly associated with restricted options for both male and female students and faculty. Given limited resources throughout at all educational levels, strategies to address stubborn gender biases are contentious and may succumb to the very stereotypes that originally fueled the gender gap in educational equity.

Shortchanged Students: Girls or Boys in Educational Crisis? Spearheaded by federal and state law and landmark research documenting that the educational needs of girls lagged behind boys, programs related to gender equity in education have been instituted. Public schools have made impressive gains in gender equity.

What about the Boys? Rather than celebrating these achievements, however, a backlash to attention paid to the gender gap in education has been launched, suggesting that the shortchanged group is not girls, but boys. This backlash centers on the belief that advantaging of girls in classrooms led to a “boy crisis” in the U.S. Boys have lost ground to girls on some indicators of achievement. These indicators include grades, standardized test scores in elementary and high school, and high school graduation rates. The rationale for the boy crisis asserts that, under the guise of helping girls, boys are penalized in girl-friendly/boy-unfriendly classrooms. Favoritism for the sedate behavior of girls works against the physical vibrancy of boys. Boys fall prey to feminist pedagogy that is confusing and harmful to a boy’s emerging masculinity. Such pedagogy is associated with consensus-style learning favoring girls rather than competitive-style learning favoring boys. Noted earlier, this contention is bolstered by essentialist beliefs that teachers not only overlook biological factors prompting typical masculine (boy) behavior, but also use cognitive and emotional attributes of girls as the classroom standard. These factors jeopardize academic success for boys at all levels of education. Boys take longer to complete high school and have higher dropout rates than girls. About three-fourths of all girls and two-thirds of all boys who start high school graduate four years later. Compared with boys, girls take more college prep courses in most subject areas and report higher career aspirations. As in high school, men are more likely to drop out of college. Teachers may unwittingly create a classroom environment that is toxic for boys (Glock and Kleen, 2017; Smith and Niemi, 2017; Farrell and Gray, 2018). Another troubling pattern is that boys are

452  Gender and Social Institutions

more likely than girls to be held back, suspended, or expelled from school. Boys exhibit more discipline problems, including belligerence to teachers and classmates. Boys as a group are more likely to be labeled “impaired” and are overrepresented in special education classes; boys of color are significantly overrepresented in these patterns. Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) diagnoses—associated with short attention span, difficulty in concentration, and erratic behavior—are triple for boys (Kvande et al., 2018; Morgan et al., 2018). The boy crisis label has gained media attention and is offered to the public as a win–lose model. Inclusiveness, as a goal of gender equity, is couched in accounts as a cause of boys falling behind girls. The achievement of girls, therefore, comes at the expense of boys. What is the evidence for this contention?

Assessing the Boy Crisis With a boy crisis theme as catalyst, a great deal of research on shortchanged students at all levels of education was launched. Research suggests that in elementary and high school, gender differences in learning styles and teacher concern for a more sedate classroom with less disruption do tend to favor the behavior of girls. On the other hand, teacher favoritism for girls is countered by research consistently showing that girls spend more time than boys studying, doing homework, and reading. Boys spend more time than girls watching television, playing video games, accessing social media, and partying, patterns found in the U.S. and Europe. Pop culture and peers offer more distractions for boys than for girls (Ponte et al., 2018; Blumberg et al., 2019). Empowering boys to succeed in school means tackling the gender stereotypes allowing them greater entitlement outside school. Girls receive higher grades than boys throughout elementary and middle school in most subjects, but by high school boys catch up and match or exceed girls in overall GPA. The data of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)—referred to as the “Nation’s Report Card” taken in grades 4, 8, and 12—on average, show a gender gap favoring girls in reading and writing, a pattern holding for 40 years. A less publicized pattern is that NAEP data before 1980 indicated a gender gap in math favoring girls, but by 1990, the gender gap in math and science on NAEP and other standardized tests favoring boys emerged. Initiatives to address the math and science aptitude of girls have paid off spectacularly. Noted earlier, although the gender gap continues to decrease, boys still maintain a clear (but narrow) advantage in both areas by high school.

College Entrance Exams Other data countering the assertion that education shortchanges males are scores on the critical standardized tests used for college admission and graduate and professional studies (National Center for Education Statistics, 2018a, 2018b). •

•

Boys retain their SAT and ACT advantage in math, science, and composite. This holds for boys of all races and family incomes even as the population of test takers becomes more diverse. White students were three-quarters of test takers in 1987; students of color are now almost half of test takers. Girls began to lose their advantage in the verbal part of the SAT in the 1970s. They have not been able to regain the math advantage despite their success on most standardized tests and advanced math courses in high school.

Education and Gender Role Change  453

•

Boys retain their advantage in tests used for admission to graduate and professional schools, including medicine, law, and business (GRE, MCAT, LSAT, GMAT). Like college entrance exams, the population taking these tests has increased, with women now the majority of test takers.

To understand these patterns, it is important to remember that the larger pool of women test takers includes those of all ability levels compared to the smaller pool of men test takers with higher ability levels. Another key point is that although men outperform women on standardized tests, the larger pool of women still generates a larger qualified pool who will apply to college.

College Enrollment: Race, Social Class, and Age The gender gap favoring women continues to widen in higher education, although at a slower pace since 2010. Women make up 56 percent of total undergraduate enrollment (National Center for Education Statistics, 2019a). It is the pivotal intersection of race, social class, and age that largely explains this gap. Among students aged 18–24, there is a larger female share from low-income white, African American, and Latinas compared to the same categories of males. With fewer lower-income males enrolling in college, the male share—especially among traditional-age, higher-income white males—decreases further. Adding race to the picture, we find the largest gender gap is among African Americans, even as African American males increased their share of college enrollment since 2000. Students of color are more likely to be enrolled in less selective colleges, but women of color have greater gains in enrollment at selective institutions. Latina and African American women are more likely to be enrolled in college than comparable men, regardless of social class (Semuels, 2017; Baker et al., 2018). For Asian Americans, men and women are at parity. Age is another key factor explaining the gender profile of current college students. Women are much more likely to be in the ranks of returning students; women over 25 outnumber men by a 2-to-1 margin, and among African Americans, women account for about 70 percent of nontraditional age students. These women are more likely than men to be enrolled in community colleges; traditional-age men are more likely to be enrolled in fouryear colleges, especially in highly selective elite universities. The number of men enrolled in all colleges is steadily increasing, but not fast enough to narrow women’s majority in total enrollment. The nontraditional age pool of both female and male college students is decreasing. But propelled by a gradual influx of nontraditional-age women who attend community colleges part-time, the percentage of women in all colleges is approximately 70 percent.

What a Degree Buys Another compelling argument against the idea that educational institutions systematically harm boys is that at all education and age levels, men continue to significantly outearn women (Figures 11.4 and 11.5). The higher the education level, the wider the gender gap in pay. Among the educated throughout their careers, the gender gap in earnings widens; women earn 74 cents to every dollar men earn. For undergraduate degrees, compared with those of women, men’s degrees garner work in more highly paid fields, especially engineering, STEM

454  Gender and Social Institutions Earnings $80,000

74,980

70,000 59,680

60,000 50,000 40,000

45,000

46,860

44,840

39,000 29,000

30,000

34,960 23,510

26,980

59,740

32,390

20,000 10,000 0 All levels of education

Some High school high school, completion no completion

Highest level of educational attinment

Associate’s degree

Males

Bachelor’s degree

Master’s or higher degree

Females

Annual Income by Educational Attainment and Sex, 2017. N.B. Includes full-time year-round workers, 25–35 years old

FIGURE 11.4

Source: Digest of Education Statistics, 2018 (Figure 25). Institute of Education Sciences (IES), National Center for Education Statistics. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d18/figures/fig_25.asp?referrer=figures

Bachelor’s degree or higher Men Women

$81,354 $60,069

Less than bachelor’s degree Men

$42,298

Full-time, year-round workers (In thousands of dollars) 100 80 60

Women, bachelor’s degree + Men, no bachelor’s degree

40 20

Women

Men, bachelor’s degree +

Women, no bachelor’s degree

$32,825 0 25–29 30–34 35–39 40–44 45–49 50–54 55–59 60–64 65–69 70–74

FIGURE 11.5

75+

Earnings for Full-Time Workers by Education for Men and Women

Source: Cheeseman, Jennifer D. 2019. “College Degree Widens Gender Earnings Gap: Among the Educated, Women Earn 74 Cents for Every Dollar Men Make.” U.S. Census Bureau. May 29. https://www.infodocket. com/2019/05/29/reference-data-analysis-college-degree-widens-gender-earnings-gap-among-the-educated-women-earn-74-cents-for-every-dollar-men-make/

Education and Gender Role Change  455

and other tech fields (See Figure 10.4). However, there is an unexplainable seven percent gender gap in earnings within one year of graduation. Women employed full-time, working year round, earn on average 80 percent of what a man earns. Ten years out of college, the pay gap widens, most notably for the highest educated women (AAUW, 2019a). This pattern holds true even factoring in major and other characteristics known to affect earnings, including seniority, hours worked, college selectivity, GPA, marital status and motherhood, and all major demographic variables (see also Chapter 10). Girls may perform better at school than boys, but they lose out to boys when they venture into offices (Damour, 2019; Graf et al., 2019).   The student debt crisis is a public lightning rod, but most are not aware of its gender fallout. The gender gap in earnings after graduation increases difficulties with student debt from college loans. Women take on a larger share of student loans than men and have less income to repay it. They take a longer time to repay debt and accrue more interest as a result. Women of color report difficulties with loan repayment at double the rate of comparable men. Almost two-thirds of outstanding student debt in United States is held by women (AAUW, 2017). Failure to repay—or to repay on time—impacts their financial future and immediate emotional well-being. Colleges, lenders, and public policy initiatives show productive steps in tackling the student loan crisis. However, in efforts to maintain a gender-neutral stance, they fall short on meaningfully addressing its disproportional negative consequences for women. If education is the ticket to financial success, the success translates very differently according to gender.

Critique Multiple sources of data do not show boys doing worse in education. Both boys and girls have improved on educational performance. Boys’ test scores have improved alongside those of girls, and the proportion of boys graduating from high school and earning B.A.s is at an alltime high. Media-inspired panic masks the takeaway about the boy crisis: boys are not doing worse even if girls are doing better. Girls have made remarkable progress in narrowing education gaps that previously favored boys. Suggesting that boys as a group are jeopardized by these patterns more than girls as a group is not justified. Implying that boys should be doing better than girls also devalues the achievement of girls. There was quiet public acceptance when boys began outperforming girls in math and for the continuing math gap favoring boys. Only when reports highlighted the gap and focused on strategies to help girls did the “girls versus boys” scenario gain media attention. Although boys are not in educational crisis relative to girls, it is valid to say that some categories of boys are in crisis compared to other categories of boys and most girls. The “real” crisis is that children from poor families, who are disproportionately nonwhite, are less likely to graduate from high school and to attend college or to graduate once admitted. When gender is accounted for in the educational achievement gap, race and class, particularly in poverty-stricken cities, are the culprits to best explain the gap. Despite the clear, pivotal role in educational outcomes social class and race are glossed over in favor of gender to explain the patterns. The race–class link is significant since compared to women, young men from highest income families, regardless of race, are more likely to attend college. Focusing on gender gaps in selected areas of educational attainment is simplistic. Intersectional research will eventually sort out the complexities between race, class, and gender in explaining educational achievement, but we will see that social policy fueled by a political agenda will decide which group, if any, is shortchanged overall.

456  Gender and Social Institutions

Single-Gender Education Until the nineteenth century, females were discouraged from attending high school and young women were virtually denied access to higher education in the United States. Literacy was class-based and middle-class families often hired tutors for daughters to be taught at home or sent them to strict “finishing” schools to prepare them with skills needed for marriage and motherhood. Given that coeducation was nonexistent, educational spaces for women from progressive middle-class families were created with the founding of women’s colleges, many that rivaled male-only institutions in educational excellence. Bringing together unlikely partners who support the “shortchanged girls or boys in crisis” theme, precollegiate single-gender education is offered today as a strategy for dealing with a host of issues related to gender-based issues, including gender gaps in achievement and sexual harassment. If boys and girls learn differently, mature at different paces, and are distracted by one another in classrooms, then perhaps they should be schooled separately. Public schools may offer single-gender courses for boys or girls so long as the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution is upheld. Districts must make available courses that are considered comparable for students of the other gender. This section will assess recent evidence on whether single-gender education—either in separate classrooms or in separate schools—is better or worse than coeducation.

Girls in Single-Gender Classrooms Liabilities for girls decline when they outnumber boys in high school and college classrooms or when female faculty represent a larger proportion of overall faculty, particularly in math and science. Although there is no significant gender difference on STEM performance between high school girls in single-gender and coed schools, single-gender girls marginally outperform coed girls in math. When girls become the sole group of learners, on measures of scholarship, academic aspirations, attitudes toward studies, leadership, and self-confidence, the research is favorable for single-gender education for girls. Among high school students, African American and Latina girls score higher on measures of math achievement as well as leadership and self-esteem. Single-gender high schools can offer a comfortable, safe space to discuss issues about gender, race, and identity that is more difficult in a coed setting (Bowe et al., 2017; Garcia, 2017). Single-gender education for girls is linked to later academic and career success. Girls from single-gender high schools are more likely than those from coed high schools to attend selective colleges and go to graduate or professional school. Females who make a transition the other way—from a single-gender educational environment to a coeducational one—lead to negative academic outcomes. Boys demonstrate a similar pattern but for girls the transition is also an emotional one. They can experience the two-school settings as clashing, and report discomfort and dissatisfaction with the coed format (Dustmann et al., 2018). Young teen years are the discovery years for romantic attractions, and girls worry that friends may become competitors in a coed classroom or school. Because single-gender environments reduce anxiety about speaking up, girls ask and answer questions without (perceived) risk of being labeled as “dumb.” Girls tend to support one another, and classrooms become vehicles for girls to help other girls be successful learners. Single-gender classes are a better match for teaching and learning. Girls know that in coed classes boys get more teacher attention. Boys distract girls—and teachers—from optimal learning outcomes. Girls’ experiences in extracurricular activities and all-female summer

Education and Gender Role Change  457

camps mirror benefits found in the classroom. Gender norms are challenged, respect for others and cultural sensitivity are enhanced, and leadership and self-reliance are promoted. K-12 public schools throughout the U.S. are increasing the number of single-gender classrooms, with girls acknowledged as the greater beneficiaries of the format (Whittington et al., 2017; Benham et al., 2019). A powerful message to girls in single-gender classes is that they are intellectually strong and not limited in their aspirations just because they are girls.

Boys in Single-Gender Classrooms More than the gender gap in STEM that disadvantages girls, the concern that boys are in educational crisis prompted research attention on boys in single-gender classrooms. Boys appear to be as successful as girls in achievement tests, and there is evidence that boys in single-gender classrooms have higher career aspirations than boys in coeducational classrooms. Boys gravitate to literature and humanities that they might otherwise shun in a coed classroom where girls outnumber boys (Grossberg, 2017). When race is factored in, minority males appear to benefit more in academic outcomes than white males. As traits associated with positive masculinity, earning outcomes are enhanced for boys in classrooms encouraging competition, technical skill-building, and mechanical expertise. Plentiful boy-friendly books on topics such as military history, adventures in outer space, pirates, and biographies of famous athletes encourage reading. Male teachers in single-gender classrooms for boys tend to allow for more physical movement. Regardless of the gender of the teacher, however, there are limits to boy “vibrancy” in the classroom. Single-gender classes for boys may foster a disruptive school climate linked to reduced academic performance and increased risk of dropping out (Peguero et al., 2019). It is poignant that believing “boys can’t sit still” imposes stricter discipline and more rigid, formal procedures in single-gender classrooms, like schools of the past. Single-gender education for boys adopts stronger androcentric pedagogy than in either girls’ schools or coeducational schools. Elementary school appears to favor girls’ passivity rather than boys’ activity, but it is based on a male-centered approach to learning, a pattern heightened in high school. Consensus style activities are normative, but pedagogy in coed high school classrooms is structured around hierarchy, domination, and win–lose grading. Masculinity norms are reinforced and rarely questioned in boys’ schools by the formal and hidden curriculum. Since some boys’ schools are content with a masculinist profile, it is difficult to challenge hypermasculine gender norms (Hickey and Mooney, 2018). Girls in single-gender schools hold less rigid gender stereotypes; boys hold more.

Critique In assessing single-gender instruction either in separate classrooms or in separate schools, early studies reported generally positive effects on achievement for both boys and girls in elementary and high school. Recent trends question this conclusion. The marginal benefits of single-gender schooling for some groups of students cannot be discounted. Benefits appear the greatest for students determined at risk for a variety of academic, social, and emotional reasons. These students are likely to be lower-income ethnic minority boys and boys of color. Girls of color fare better than comparable boys in either coed or single-gender settings. For academic performance, the conclusion is that single-gender education is no more—or not

458  Gender and Social Institutions

more—effective than coeducation in academic achievement (Pahlke and Hyde, 2016; Booth et al., 2018; Pennington et al., 2018).

Social Climate Both boys and girls in coeducation settings place high importance on having the other gender in their classes, and not surprisingly report a more appealing social climate. Gender segregation in schools heightens gender salience (student awareness of gender), anxiety in mixed gender situations, and gender stereotyping, a pattern found globally (Harris, 2018; Hei and Wong, 2018; Wong et al., 2018). Schools are the settings offering the best atmosphere for primary contact necessary to reduce both racism and sexism in young people. Offered as a panacea for problems in schools, single-gender schooling discourages understanding between boys and girls, may reproduce damaging gender stereotypes, and diminishes respect for women. In high school and college, single-gender education can reinforce undesirable outcomes in a pervasive gender-segregated society. It heralds retreat from gender inclusiveness to gender re-segregation. As a form of benevolent sexism, single-gender schooling takes us back to the “separate but unequal” classrooms of the past, this time based on gender rather than race (Salomone, 2013; Hopkins-Doyle et al., 2019; Oswald et al., 2019). Single-gender schools for boys can discourage egalitarian beliefs about gender and increases the likelihood of sexual harassment when they come together with girls in other settings. Throughout socialization, within-gender solidarity is enhanced through gender segregation, but between-gender understanding is diminished (Chapter 3). The message boys hear in single-gender classrooms is that they are better than girls. As noted, a compelling challenge to single-gender education is that student success is class-based rather than gender-based. Single-gender schools are likely to be private schools attended by more affluent students, with better facilities, higher-paid teachers, and smaller student–teacher ratios. Private single-gender schools can expel disruptive students who retreat to public coeducational schools that must accept them. It is unlikely that single-gender education will be able to compete with coeducation for all but a small subset of students. Even with the upsurge of single-gender classrooms, mostly with boys in mind, the coeducation norm will not be significantly altered. The premium of coeducation in college is growing. It is also responsible for the difficulty women’s colleges face in attracting students. Coeducation can certainly provide a major channel for reducing gender segregation, and with attention to gender-equitable instruction, gender stereotyping can also be reduced. If there is a problem of male dominance in the coed classroom that is detrimental to girls, an argument can be made that it is also detrimental to boys. Rather than retreating into gender-­ segregated schools, the classroom atmosphere can be improved to reflect a more gender-­ sensitive school culture beneficial to both females and males. As microcosms of the real world, schools need to model that world. The debate on single-gender education may not be resolved, but it offers ample evidence that there are no gender differences in intelligence, competence, and talent. Because educational institutions—like all social institutions—are gendered, the results of the gendering should not be ignored in school policies. Gender needs to be considered, for example, in who gets admitted to and thrives in college—whether as a female cadet or a male nursing student.

Education and Gender Role Change  459

Gender Parity in College An emergent gender issue in education has to do with the very successes girls have achieved throughout their schooling. Women have made remarkable strides, but college admissions offices are dealing with these strides in unexpected ways.

College Admissions There are few meaningful differences between high school males and females on criteria for success in college. Males outperform females on some measures (spatial–visual tests, SAT math), and females outperform males on others (GPA, ACT reading, volunteerism). Women with superior academic credentials continue to ascend in athletics, and colleges are actively recruiting female athletes. The pool of scholar-athletes is increasing for women but shrinking for men. From the end of World War II to the 1970s, most universities had larger acceptable gender imbalances favoring men. Today most universities have increasingly unacceptable gender imbalances favoring women. How are colleges dealing with the ever-increasing pool of highly qualified women applicants compared to a smaller pool of less qualified men? Colleges are admitting less qualified men. Accomplished women face higher rejection rates. Programs with less gender parity may admit more of one gender or the other (men for nursing and teaching and women for engineering and neuroscience). Fewer men flock to programs traditionally attracting women compared to more women flocking to programs traditionally attracting men. A larger pool of women, therefore, compete for fewer slots. To maintain gender balance, some colleges put a thumb on the scale favoring boys (Kowarski 2018). Admissions officers commonly accept a 60/40 ratio of female to male as the “tipping point”: if the numbers favoring women get any more lopsided, it will hurt the coeducational social climate on campus. College women generally prefer a gender-equitable 50/50 split. College men generally prefer a larger ratio of women, seeing it as an advantage in the sexual scripts played out in campus life. It is unlikely that men will continue to find it acceptable if the imbalance tips beyond the 60 percent level, especially at more selective colleges. If a campus is seen as too “feminized” because of the number of women students, men may retreat to other campuses. Although legalities are unclear and rulings are inconsistent, the Supreme Court has endorsed race as one factor of many that can be used in admissions (Chapter 14). Courts have not directly addressed the discrimination of gender-targeting in admissions (Jump, 2017). The higher rejection rate of qualified women is legally questionable, and also implies that they are penalized for their success. Admissions policies are complicated and secretive, especially in highly selective private institutions. Given college admission scandals surrounding payoffs, fabricated applications, and altered test scores, calls for transparency in college entrance policies are mounting. Transparency also serves as a catalyst to examine gender targeting and to challenge legalized gender discrimination in undergraduate admissions in private colleges. The question is how to provide strategies that do not pit males and females against each other and create gender balance without compromising other forms of diversity on campus. In public colleges, gender discrimination in college admissions is illegal under Title IX (discussed later), but it endures in private colleges. To thwart the passage of Title IX in the 1970s, Harvard, Princeton, and Yale argued that women sought a “Mrs. Degree”—attending college only to find a husband. If gender was ignored by admissions officers, too many women

460  Gender and Social Institutions

would enter “these elite private colleges and universities” and “degrade student body quality” (Peterson, 2017). Such objections were rejected and Title IX was passed in 1972.

SEXUAL HARASSMENT IN SCHOOLS Charges of “sexual misconduct” leveled at politicians and celebrities have riveted the public and it is on the radar for how it plays out in schools. Sexual misconduct is largely a cultural umbrella for sexual behaviors that may or may not be sanctioned by law. Sexual harassment falls under the umbrella of, but is grounded in, law and public policy (Chapter 14). Sexual harassment legally includes physical or verbal conduct that is sexual in nature, is unwanted, and creates a hostile environment that interferes with school or work activities. Sexual harassment ranges from pinching, physical contact and groping, demeaning images, negative remarks, and sexist comments to unwanted advances, demands for sexual favors, and sexual aggression and victimization. Under a pretend veil of facelessness or concealment, online sexual harassment and cyberbullying have skyrocketed around the globe (OECD, 2019). Students, faculty, and school staff are opportune targets. Factoring in race, sexual harassment online and in and out of schools is higher for girls and women of color. Sexual harassment is illegal but so widespread in education —from elementary through graduate school—that it is considered a part of everyday life for students. Girls are more likely to experience it, but it is fast increasing among boys. Most harassers have been harassed themselves. Half of teachers and staff harass one another; students who admit to being sexually harassed are likely to repeat it on others. When harassment shifts from being common to being normative, its acceptability increases. Students witness sexual harassment and bullying in politicians who are expected to enforce laws against it. After a lull, these behaviors have spiked.

Bullying The most virulent forms of bullying occur in middle school. For these students, bullying commonly consists of sexualized comments and actions acting as weapons of humiliation. In cross-gender bullying, boys may call girls “sluts,” “pussies,” or “bitches;” girls are humiliated through staring, touching, and body shaming, such as ridiculing breast size or weight. Girls avoid crowded school hallways known as places where boys intentionally brush up against girls, pinching and fondling them as they pass by. Although much less common, girls do harass boys, usually through taunting that mocks assumptions about masculinity (wuss, geek, loser). Girls who bully boys find safe targets, including boys who are bullied by other boys. When students devalue intellectualism, direct bullying of a male “stereotypical nerd” may occur (Lehman, 2014:549). Same-gender bullying behavior is common and growing. Boys are not only more likely to be the perpetrators of bullying but are also more likely than girls to be its victims. Boys fear being scorned with name-calling associated with homosexuality (fag, queer, pervert). Perceived deviation from stereotypical norms about masculinity can trigger such scorn. The power of anti-LGBTQ usage linked to a boy’s masculinity shows up in adolescence in the U.S. and throughout European countries (Weber and Gredig, 2018). Teachers often ignore sexualized bullying between boys. When teachers fail to act on it, consequences can be deadly. For LGBTQ students traversing school hallways where boys are policed by other boys, name calling, isolation, exclusion, and physical assaults are common. As reported by the parent of

Education and Gender Role Change  461

a gender non-conforming son in Utah, school hallways are “like walking through a hailstorm” (Human Rights Watch, 2016). Well-being is compromised and suicide ideation spirals. Although girl-to-girl bullying is less frequent, it is escalating in ways that mimic male-tomale bullying. Like boys, girls use sexually degrading names for other girls (whore, cunt) and harass each other about appearance and their bodies. Lower-income girls have a higher risk of bullying because of what they wear (clothing and jewelry) and what they carry (purse, backpack). Also like boys who do not fit standards of masculinity, psychological warfare perpetrated on girls who do not fit popularity norms about femininity are most vulnerable to bullying. Students are uncomfortable with seeing these behaviors but fear being called a snitch or worse by classmates and branded a troublemaker by teachers, disallowing both boys and girls to report bullying. Bullying decreases with age, but bullies and their allies are often difficult to topple in middle school. The perceived assault on a boy’s gender identity begun in elementary school makes boys reluctant to report bullying at all, especially if they are bullied by girls. Bullying boys entering high school are replaced by boys entering middle school who take over as the gender police in their new hallways. Whether referred to as bullying or not, lack of reporting repeats itself in college. College students do not report sexual harassment, and sexual violence such as date rape is vastly underreported (Chapter 9). Academic women are frequently marked for sexual harassment in their classrooms and in viral online attacks. The faculty work environment has changed dramatically in recent decades as funding sources decrease and schools are more dependent on tuition. Under the guise that universities are curtailing free speech, social media hate messages to faculty are escalating at alarming rates by alt-right perpetrators. Women fear for their personal safety, describing these messages as abusive and traumatic. Trauma increases when universities take a lukewarm approach in condemning the messages (Ferber, 2018). Not only are academic women less likely than men to hold high administrative positions, they also comprise the ranks of less powerful adjunct or nontenured faculty. Therefore, they are disproportionately marked for attacks.

Military Schools College students use gender beliefs as a bonding mechanism in campus organizations such as fraternities. Male students are more likely than females to bond via expectations for withstanding physical toughness that is linked to masculinity norms (Véliz-Calderón and Allan, 2017). In military schools, cadets are subject to various rites of passage, including hazing and training to cement a class and sew obedience to military authority. Hazing includes use of sexualized language and demeaning gender stereotypes. It represents the extreme forms of bullying, but in the case of military schools it is legitimized and encouraged. Bullying is not considered sexual harassment. Both female and male cadets are viewed the “same.” Sameness means that men and women adhere to powerful masculinity norms that include derogatory beliefs about women. Female cadets walk a fine line of supporting cadet bonding without denigrating other women. Male cadets can be accused of sexual ­harassment—and expelled—only if bullying becomes sexualized and the “hidden gender” of female cadets is revealed and acted on in degrading words and deeds. The sameness–difference issue has haunted us throughout this text. Symbolic interactionists maintain that once admitted to “uncontaminated” all-male military schools, new female cadets are tokens and must constantly negotiate gender differences and similarities—always “doing” gender (Chapter 1). Cadets believe that equal means the same, and standards of

462  Gender and Social Institutions

training should reflect that sameness. Recruiting women for the elite Navy Seals reflects this narrative (Chapter 9). Stereotypes of women as incapable of withstanding the rigorous training for military roles are easy to disprove. Men and women cadets achieve higher levels of success in leadership, team diversity, and physical endurance when trained together. Close physical contact between women and men does not distract them from the performance of their military duties. Women have been admitted to West Point and all elite service academies for decades and their presence has not compromised the ability to wage war. The largest class of African American women in history—numbering 34—graduated from West Point in 2019. Their academic and military success unlocks more doors for all talented women interested in pursuing this track. Despite this abundant evidence, incidents of sexual assault on women cadets, from groping to rape, have spiked at military academies, up 50 percent in only one year. Years of zero tolerance policies are seemingly ineffective (Brook, 2019). Sexism relies on notions of one gender being more or less inherently capable than the other. In the military, massive evidence makes it difficult for any public figure—including generals and admirals—to support such an argument today. Women succeed in military schools notwithstanding hazing (relentless but legitimized) and sexual harassment (relentless but illegal). The spike in sexual harassment and assault in military schools centers on women’s success rather than the failure of schools to eradicate these behaviors. As female cadets close the gap with male cadets on performance, academics, and physical demands of military training, harassment is likely to spike. The closer competitors get to a goal, the stronger the resistance keeping them (her) from reaching it. Military school may be the educational glass ceiling for women cadets.

Sexual Harassment or Bullying? Educators are quite aware of the difference between benign teasing and bullying. But the distinction between sexual harassment and bullying is blurry. Bullying behavior among middle school and military school students is clearly harassment, but usually it is not defined as “sexual” harassment unless it involves cross-gender behavior. This is regardless of derogatory language to women and sexualized slurs against LGBTQ students. Sexual harassment involving bullying behavior of boys to girls, although illegal, is largely accepted by the boys, tolerated by the girls, and ignored by the teachers. When teachers and staff hear comments but do not intervene, students believe the behavior is appropriate. Racialized comments are swiftly censured. Unless there is threat of physical harm, sexually harassing comments are dismissed. Educators are calling for a wider definition of sexual harassment that encompasses all forms of bullying, whether it is cross-gender or not. Since bullying includes derogatory behavior demeaning to all genders, the legal power behind the label of “sexual harassment” makes it easier to censure—and hopefully reduce—both sexual harassment and bullying.

THE LESSONS OF TITLE IX Virtually all education issues discussed have legal implications that can be addressed at some level by Title IX of the 1972 Education Amendments Act. The Act prohibits sex (gender) discrimination in any school receiving federal assistance, so most educational institutions fall

Education and Gender Role Change  463

under its mandate. At the overt, formal level, Title IX has ushered in school policies reducing glaring gender discrimination in many areas. Its impact on athletics is huge, for example, and is directly responsible for the surge of sports participation of female students at all school levels (Chapter 14). Title IX is most successful in tackling gender discrimination viewed as detrimental to both females and males. Policies related to single-gender education and sexual harassment are two such issues. Under Title IX, the U.S. Department of Education gave the green light for public schools to offer single-gender alternatives under certain conditions. Title IX forbids sexual harassment of students, and a school is liable if authorities know about it but fail to act on it. Covering up sexual assault can bring both civil and criminal charges. Courts, however, are inconsistent in rulings in lawsuits involving single-gender schooling and sexual harassment and the specific circumstances used to hold a school liable. At the informal level, discriminatory practices already difficult to eradicate, legally persist throughout all school levels. The gender gap in career aspirations has largely disappeared but women are discouraged from the very majors offering the lucrative job options. STEM majors are the academic glass ceiling equivalent for women. Curricular revisions aimed at gender inclusiveness are slow to implement and teachers retreat to gendered beliefs in their classrooms. When children self-select school activities by gender, teachers are reluctant to resist these choices and the gendered hidden curriculum perseveres. Kindergarten girls are princesses and play with dolls; boys are pirates and play with trucks. Girls take home economics in middle school, and boys take shop in high school. In college, men major in physics and women in literature. A male Ph.D. teaches engineering. A female Ph.D. teaches French. He is paid more. Even the progressive world of the university remains gender oriented and gender separated. Despite Title IX and greater transparency, gender discrimination in college admissions is making a comeback.

Politics and Assaults on Title IX Title IX has enormous potential to change practices that restrict educational opportunities because of gender, especially in a receptive political environment. Unfortunately, decades of progress toward gender equity in education have stunningly halted. Gender equity is better served when it overlaps with diversity policies fostering intersectional models that account for racial and ethnic equality. As of this writing, draconian policies undermining educational diversity and gender equity are rapidly being implemented.

Discrimination against Men? Resources offered by women’s programs serving feminist interests on campus are under fire, with claims that it is men who are treated unfairly. Men complain they are not eligible for scholarships available to women and, in line with affirmative action on some campuses, job searches must include female contenders even if there are no qualified women in an applicant pool (Vedder, 2018; Danilova, 2019). A lobbyist against strict provisions on how Title IX handles sexual assault on campus uses a “rape equals regret” strategy on behalf of men accused of rape. The problem is not rape, they contend, but that she regrets unsatisfying casual sex (Ballentine, 2019:A1, A4). Title IX would be revised to amplify rights of the accused believed to make them on par with the victim. Hearings for “sexual misconduct” take a variety of approaches, even under Title IX guidelines. New provisions allow schools

464  Gender and Social Institutions

discretion to determine the weight of evidence necessary to reprimand or expel the accused. Colleges have reduced liabilities and less enforcement in how they investigate complaints. Assuming colleges impartially carry out hearings, the provision serves the interest of the accused for a process deemed fairer. It is difficult to sort out the conflated wording Title IX incorporates to determine “lethality” of a complaint (sexual misconduct, sexual harassment, sexual, assault). Colleges are not courts, but proposed changes to Title IX tend to mirror criminal investigations. The most disturbing provision for victims is that hearings allow cross-examination. To “soften” the emotions, videoconferencing is allowed (Gerson, 2019). While perhaps appropriate for some campus discipline cases, adversarial cross-examination where sexual history may be included, is slanted in favor of the accused. Decades of research show that for sexual assault (rape), the victim not only needs greater evidence to prove her case, but the emotional spillover throughout the entire process is devastating, regardless of whether she “wins.” As legal counsel for the Victim Rights Law Center states: Rape is about power and control and not about sexual desire … Therefore, it is a bad idea to give the person with the power even more power to intimidate and hurt the victim. (Cited in Brown and Mangan, 2018) The victim is victimized in multiple ways. Although three-fourths of all college students live off campus, Title IX provisions apply to assaults on campus or at college programs off campus. The majority of rapes—often acquaintance rapes—occur off campus. Only 20 percent of rapes of college student women are reported, lower than the 32 percent of their nonstudent counterparts (RAINN, 2019). In addition to a $7 billion recommended cut to the U.S. Department of Education (DoED), a dismaying prediction is that these rollbacks to Title IX will gut it beyond its ability to survive in a viable form.

Critique Countering this prediction is that from its beginning, Title IX fueled activism supporting gender equity in education. Activists, educators, college students, and feminist NGOs draw on organizational strengths to safeguard Title IX’s fight against gender discrimination on campus. DoED has been inundated with thousands of comments in opposition to the proposed Title IX changes. Alarmed at the chilling effects of proposed rollbacks, Congressional women reintroduced the Gender Equity in Education Act (GEEA) to ensure schools continue to comply with Title IX. GEEA enlarges resources for Title IX, establishes an Office of Gender Equity in DoED, and supports thousands of Title IX coordinators with updates, training, and technical assistance. It is doubtful, however, that GEEA will be enacted in anytime soon. It will take months to review responses required by law before any Title IX changes go into effect. This timeline is set close to the 2020 election. Advocates argue that “the way to get rid of these regulations, is to get rid of the people who wrote them” (National Public Radio, 2019). As configured by outgoing Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos, the current DoED is an aberration. Moreover, with a Biden presidency, gender equity under Title IX will likely be sustained in support and in policy. There are encouraging signs that gender segregation in education and the stereotypes on which it is founded are gradually being chipped down. As this chapter points out, all students

Education and Gender Role Change  465

benefit from gender equity in schooling. The good news is that gender discrimination may disappear by the time Jane and Dick reach college. The bad news is that gender prejudice will linger for their children and grandchildren.

GLOBAL FOCUS: CLOSING THE GENDER GAP IN EDUCATION IN THE GLOBAL SOUTH One of the greatest returns on development investments is to teach girls to read. The positive multiplier effect of educating girls and women is stunning, unfolding across all areas of development. Children of a literate mother have a better chance of survival than the children living in the same place at the same level of income as a mother who is illiterate. A girl’s education paves the road to increased gender equity and reduced risk for impoverished living conditions in her family (Ekbrand and Halleröd, 2018). Each additional year in school increases a woman’s earnings by 10 to 20 percent. Of all global demographic trends, women’s education level is the strongest predictor of fertility rate. This is true among countries and among women in the same country. Females with more education marry later, want fewer children, and have only the number of children they want. Birth rates and child death rates decline fastest where there is access to family planning, preventive health services, and educational opportunities for girls. The simple correlation between education and fertility masks its enormous impact on the lives of women and their families and on the globe. It is clear that the ripple effect of a girl’s education is both powerful and productive.

Assessing Success As in the United States, girls in the Global South (developing world) are making huge strides in educational attainment. Enrollment rates for girls in many poor countries have doubled in only a few decades. In Southern Asia, the time a girl spends in school tripled between 1970 and the present, outpacing all other regions in scale of the increase. India’s female literacy increased to over 50 percent by the millennium. In Southeast Asia, the Philippines is ranked at the top in gender equity in part due the nation’s eradication of the gender gap in overall education attainment (Wood, 2018; Montoya, 2019). These rates are remarkable because girls carry a heavy workload at home, at school, and in work that includes caregiving to siblings and helping parents farm plots of land. Gender parity in primary education has been achieved in most developing world regions, with Latin America and East Asia leading the pack. Despite these successes, gender disparities in primary education and literacy are distributed unevenly in regions and nations that have done well overall and in others where progress has stalled. India shows increased numbers of girls enrolled in school at all educational levels. But these girls live in India’s wealthiest cities that have an abundance of quality colleges to draw on for teachers and for educational resources. Educational prospects for girls in poor rural areas are starkly different. Lack of enrollment in India’s primary schools explains why boys’ literacy (82 percent) is higher than girls’ (65 percent) in India (Darrah, 2019). Yes, literacy throughout South Asia has risen for both, but so far girls cannot catch up with boys. Most out-of-school children live in sub-Saharan Africa and South and West Asia, most are in poverty, most live in rural areas, and most are girls. Gender disparities in primary education

466  Gender and Social Institutions

in North Africa, Central Asia, and the Middle East persist, largely to the disadvantage of girls. Even with a worldwide drop in illiteracy, two-thirds of the world’s people who cannot read are female. In any part of the world, an illiterate adult is likely to be a woman. China has made spectacular gains in reducing adult illiteracy to under four percent, but rural women are most of this illiterate population. At the secondary and tertiary (college) level, the gender gap in education shows a precipitous widening.

Sustainable Development Goals In 2015, the United Nation set the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), a collection of 17 ambitious, interdependent global goals to be accomplished by 2030 (Chapter 6). SDG4 (ensure inclusive and equitable quality education), and SDG5 (achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls) suggest this interdependence. To track SDG progress, Global Education Monitoring (GEM) issues annual reports. In some developing regions half of girls remain out of school, and dropout rates are higher as they climb in grades. Along with GEM and NGO advocates, UN agencies such as UNESCO and UNICEF closely observe areas where schooling girls is coupled with physical and emotional risk. Global Vison International (GVI, 2019), for example, provides volunteers to SDG programs with women’s empowerment in mind. SDG5 includes the right of women and girls to live free of violence and discrimination. Afghanistan forbids girls to go to school and girls in Syrian refugee camps are subject to harassment for venturing into educational programs. Personal stories of empowerment through education from Afghan and Syrian girls add to statistical evidence about SDG success. Overall, GEM reports slow and uneven progress in achieving these SDGs (UNWOMEN, 2019a, 2019b). Gender disparities in education remain wide in the poorest regions of the world, especially Sub-Saharan Africa and Southern Asia. Investing in women’s education brings high returns globally. Progress in achieving gender-equitable education is in the best interests of both boys and girls (Ridge et al., 2019). Elimination of the gender gap in education is a prerequisite for a thriving global economy. Reducing the gap in the Global South is fraught with centuries of gender inequity swirling around caste, class, religion, and ethnic clashes. Educational progress is mired in the surge of banks and financial interests serving the for-profit sector, demanding that all public subsidies, including those for education, be reduced in order to entice foreign investors (Chapter 6). As conflict theorists remind us, altering gender norms and economic priorities in the name of social change brings both benefits and liabilities depending on how stakeholders are affected. The paradox of the globe’s gender gap in education is that women and girls have not amassed the power to challenge these norms because they lack education.

KEY TERMS Hidden curriculum Sexual harassment Title IX of the 1972 Education Amendments Act

CHAPTER 12

Religion and Patriarchy

Blessed art thou O Lord who has not made me a woman. —Jewish Prayer, Talmud I never fail to reward any worker among you for any work you do, be you male or female— you are equal to one another. —Qur’an, 3:195 Nevertheless, in the Lord woman is not independent of man nor man of woman. —1 Corinthians 11:11, Bible Prayers and scripture in sacred texts found in all world religions paint an ambiguous portrait of gender roles and relationships. Through a gendered lens, religion can be viewed as a spectrum of liberating resources to restrictive barriers for both women and men. Women, however, are more likely than men to navigate religion according to its restrictive side. Religion and its gods were named by men, and until quite recently in history, it was difficult to uncover images that connect women to the divine. Animism, perhaps the earliest form of religion, revolved around spirits inhabiting all things, whether animate or inanimate. Although many spirits were said to possess “gender,” animism did not necessarily bifurcate spirits into rigid male or female categories, and objects or people could possess more than one gender. There is anthropological disagreement on whether animist views of gender paved the way for later goddesses and gods, but there is agreement that animism evolved into polytheism with numerous gods and goddesses inhabiting the ancient world. The original tribes of Israel were also polytheistic, with a long history of worship that included goddesses. Political events and the rise of empires (traced to about 550 bce) prompted the rise of monotheism for the Israelites. Even as monotheism was taking hold, however, Canaanites and Hebrews continued to worship one or more goddesses (Mohl, 2015). First the goddesses faded, followed by the gods, eventually overtaken by a single omniscient god. As the intertwined roots of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam surface, all embraced one God, imbued with undeniably male characteristics. The transformation of ancient spirituality into modern religion came with a heavy price. Religious imagery is used to maintain injustice, suffering, and oppression—of nation against nation, men against men, and men against women. Institutionalized religion—whether pagan, Hebrew, Christian, or Islamic—bolstered existing hierarchies of domination and oppression, but also worked to alleviate part of the suffering caused by these very religions (Eisler, 1995a:203). In many ancient spiritual and religious traditions, and in the societies in which they were practiced, women held influential and esteemed positions, sometimes in overlapping partnership roles and sometimes in separate, complementary roles with men.

468  Gender and Social Institutions

As religions became more formal and moved toward institutionalization, historical and traditional records became text-based written formats, the spirituality and the partnership on which many were based receded into the background. Net gains in overall gender equality in all social institutions are recorded around the globe, but organized religion lags in the amount of religious authority granted to women compared to men. Religion is the institution that should ideally allow for freedom of expression through liberating spirituality, but undeniable sexist interpretations and practices—and human rights violations—in the name of religion seriously impede this goal. Patriarchy’s religious stranglehold is waning as alternative, progressive interpretations of religious texts are ushered in. These open the doors of churches, temples, and mosques to the empowering messages religions offer to both women and men. Such messages, however, are shaped by knowledge. Christ, in His Divine innocence, said to the Woman of Samaria, ‘Ye worship ye know not what’ – being apparently under the impression that it might be desirable, on the whole, to know what one was worshipping. (Van Kuiken, 2017:401) Empowerment traced to religion—from however it evolved—is enabled when worshippers can retrieve messages from the past that resonate with their contemporary lives.

REDISCOVERING THE FEMININE FACE OF GOD The image of God as a woman is probably quite startling to those who identify with any of the major world religions. The explosion of research on the role and status of women reveals that in their earliest stages most religions, and the societies in which they existed, were infused with notions of gender interdependence rather than gender separation. Archaeological evidence from prehistoric and historic societies offers a view of the first civilizations, suggesting they exhibited gynocentrism, with an emphasis on female and feminine interests (Gimbutas, 1991, 2001; Gross, 2009). Whereas androcentrism translated to patriarchy in some ancient societies, gynocentrism did not translate to matriarchy in others. Instead, it may have translated into partnership. As Riane Eisler (1995b) points out in her pioneering work on partnership societies, the terms patriarchy and matriarchy refer to a ranking of one part of humanity over the other. She asserts that partnership is the third overlooked alternative that characterized much of early civilization. Unlike patriarchy or matriarchy, partnership is based on the principle of linking and relating rather than domination and separateness. Males and females may be different, but these differences are not associated with either inferiority or superiority. Given the powerful influence of religion in the structure of ancient civilizations, any evidence for gynocentric societies offers important messages to contemporary theologians and church authorities as they struggle with issues related to gender role change in their respective religions.

Goddess Images The most ancient human image of the divine is a figure of a female. When gynocentrism waned and androcentrism ascended in partnership-oriented societies, the millennia of goddess prehistory and history were relegated to academic oblivion or dismissed by scholars as incidental to the span of humanity. Emile Durkheim (1858–1917), a founder of

Religion and Patriarchy  469

sociology and its functionalist roots (Chapter 1), offered one of the earliest analyses of religion as a social phenomenon. In The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life (1912) he convincingly argues that deities are created by cultures to match the social and spiritual patterns in their own societies. From a functionalist perspective, the essence of religion is found in the “sacred,” and images associated with sacredness provide a society with the values that bind it together, in this case goddess images. From a conflict perspective, when spirituality began the road to institutionalized religion, goddess images were suppressed because their power was threatening to the new religious status quo that was now male dominated. Contrary to the conflict perspective, however, a partnership approach does not create a new hierarchy of religious images that would serve to empower women but disenfranchise men. Ideally, both men and women can share in and celebrate the principles rooted in the goddess heritage and use these principles as standards in the name of religious reform. The emerging picture, then, demonstrates a religious portrait of ancient civilizations in which women played a central role, where female deities were worshipped, and where religious life witnessed women—sometimes in overlapping partnership roles and sometimes in separate, complementary roles—much more than modern institutionalized religion would have us believe. The intent here is to provide a brief chronicle of images of women as they appear in the mythology and religious heritage in the ancient world. Rediscovering the goddess heritage can affirm a sense of religious well-being for contemporary women. We see later that these accounts also help locate origins for attitudes toward women in modern world religions.

Women’s Religious Roles Compelling evidence for a continuous, influential goddess heritage and the significance of women’s ancient religious roles in this heritage abounds (Berger, 2000; Ahearne-Kroll et al., 2010). The cult of the mother-goddess was one of the oldest, most widespread, and longest-surviving religions throughout the Paleolithic to Neolithic periods in sites from Western Europe, through the Mediterranean world, and into India. The cult of the mother-goddess provides images of women in roles as leaders, healers, artists, music makers, and food providers. In an early effort to document women’s dominance of prehistoric civilization, Elizabeth Davis’s (1971:16) then controversial book, The First Sex, states that there is massive evidence for the matriarchal origins of human society. She contends that the “further back one traces man’s history, the larger loomed the figure of woman.” The goddess is synonymous with gynocracy—when the goddess reigned, women ruled. Although debate continues over how much actual power women held in goddess-dominated societies, abundant research on goddess worship suggests gynocentric (rather than matriarchal) origins of civilization. Archaeological evidence attesting to gynocratic religious and artistic traditions has been uncovered in the world’s best-preserved and oldest Neolithic sites in Catal Huyuk, what is now modern Turkey. These traditions span 800 years, from 6500 to 5700 bce, and are vividly represented by numerous goddess figurines, all emphasizing worship of a female deity. The artifacts of prehistoric European peoples demonstrate representations of the goddess as a symbol of life, fertility, creativity, and regeneration. The vast majority of the symbols are associated with life images rather than death images, but they all speak to the veneration and powerful sacredness of women (Gimbutas, 2001).

470  Gender and Social Institutions

Goddess as Creator The goddess image is carried through to the idea of the creator when examining accounts from ancient Native America, Sumer, Babylon, Assyria, Greece, Egypt, India, and China. Nammu is the Sumerian goddess who gives birth to heaven and earth; Tiamat is the Babylonian “Creator of All,” the mother of gods; and in Greek mythology, Metis, loosely translated as the creative power of female intelligence, brings the world into being without a male partner. In the Tao Te Ching (Dao De Jing), creation is the reproduction of all matter from the womb of the Mother. Paleolithic peoples saw the original source of life on earth not as a divine Father, but as a divine Mother, and the creative sexual power of women as a miracle of nature to be revered and blessed. In Chinese Buddhism, the goddess of compassion is Kuan Yin; in Hinduism, the goddess of destruction is Kali, the consort of Siva, who is revered both as a giver and a destroyer of life. There are 21 representations of the female Tibetan deity Tara, all symbolizing compassion, the easing of human suffering, and the guidance to wisdom and salvation. The goddess as the first creator is associated with mythology and religious principles in all corners of the world. Only in later myth does a god replace her (Ruether, 2006; Mabbett and Bapat, 2008). With Babylonian dominance in the emerging urban–agricultural world, the warrior-champion Marduk arises as the god of the new city-state. The Marduk–Tiamet story tells of the defeat of Tiamet and her consort, who represent the power of chaos, by the new god Marduk and his followers, who represent the power of order (Ruether, 1983:50). The emergence of the new gods, however, did not erase female names, images, and memories. Marduk molded the cosmos out of Tiamet’s body, so she retained her place as the creator. Siva in India, Atea in Polynesia, and Ea in Syria are names of goddesses carried over to the male gods who replaced them. Goddess worship was not eradicated but driven underground by later religious persecution (Cleary and Aziz, 2000; Lightfoot, 2003). Perhaps the female names given to male gods were, and still are, the vestiges of such practices.

Africa The oldest record of human habitation is in Africa, and it is arguably where the best examples of the goddess as the “Mother of All” are found. On a continent with an incredible diversity of peoples, customs, and religious symbolism, images of the goddess throughout sub-Saharan Africa vary as well—from Mawu, creator of the world, to the Goddess as the Moon, to the Goddess as “She Who Sends Rain” (Stone, 1993). In Ghana, Nigeria, and regions of west and central Africa, tribal religions recognize a divinity that may be male or female. Other cults have primarily female spirit beings. Even given such diversity, the symbolism that emerges most consistently among African indigenous religions involves the concerns for honesty, courage, sympathy, hope, and humanitarianism, which the goddesses represented, and the peoples who worshipped them revered. Traced through matrilineal descent, the roots of this heritage are expressed in the enduring female-dominated religious cults that give meaning to contemporary African women’s lives.

Asia Ancient texts of China and India speak clearly to the goddess image. Taoism, the indigenous religious tradition of China, is illustrated by the Chuang Tzu, written in the third century

Religion and Patriarchy  471 bce.

Part of this account is a description of the Era of Great Purity, a utopian matrilineal society in which life was characterized by happiness, harmony, and spontaneity, and where women held influential and venerated family and extradomestic roles. Most of the symbols in this and other Taoist (Daoist) works refer to honoring the feminine principle, including fertility and unqualified motherly love, and also the respect accorded to women in religious leadership roles (Despeux and Kohn, 2003; Conway, 2017). It is interesting that women’s spiritual power and social influence found in Taoist societies developed and coexisted in a region dominated by Confucian principles, which were highly patriarchal and hierarchical, and which viewed women as inferior by nature. Although Confucianism remained the dominant religion, Taoist elements could be discovered in other parts of ancient Chinese culture. Contemporary Taoism upholds the positive principles of the feminine and of mutuality in beliefs and rituals. In India, ancient Buddhist traditions supported women’s quest for enlightenment. Compared with many other Eastern and Western traditions, Taoism shares with Buddhism less restrictive and more positive images of women, even to the extent that there are few distinctions made between the status of men and women. In the distinctions that are made, in the Chinese regions where Taoist and Buddhist principles intersected, there is some evidence that women had such high degrees of power that matriarchal societies were said to exist, such as the matrilineal ethnic minority Mosuo near the border of Tibet. Today, younger Mosuo are integrated into the broader Han majority Chinese, yet women maintain the power and prestige, suggesting this is perhaps one of the last “semi-matriarchal” societies in the world (Lindsey, 1999; Genova, 2017). Confirming the existence of matriarchy anywhere in the world is tentative at best, but what is unique about these contemporary women is that, compared to women in other regions of China, they hold esteemed positions because of—not in spite of—religious heritage.

The Principle of Gender Complementarity Beyond the goddess images that dominated many ancient practices and beliefs, certain religious systems also incorporated notions of balance according to which, in principle, neither gender was superior. Most notable among these is the ancient Chinese concept of Yin and Yang. Although Western interpretation often misrepresents the female principle of Yin as being passive and dominated by the active and aggressive male principle of Yang, this is a distortion of the ancient belief, which emphasized equilibrium, complementarity, and a portion of each principle being incorporated into the other. The Yin–Yang ideal of harmonious balance remains central to the Chinese value system. Much of the original intent of balance, however, was lost as patriarchy extended its influence to all social institutions, including religion. Tantric Buddhism in medieval India and Tibet was amenable to both male and female siddhas—accomplished ones—whose gender was considered irrelevant to the ultimate Buddhist goal of enlightenment. Buddha’s disciples included men and women, and spiritual paths to enlightenment were open to both. Women could be ordained as nuns just as men could become monks, practices that continue today. In Native American spiritual traditions, the complementarity of men and women was evident, with the genders performing unique spiritual practices or sharing others. The matrilineal Iroquois tribes of eastern North America participated in religious ceremonies where both the male and the female dimensions were needed, such as rites to encourage the male activity of hunting or the female activity of

472  Gender and Social Institutions

agriculture. It is difficult to generalize about such diverse Native American cultures, but they can be described as holistic and their worldviews were organized according to interdependent natural and human forces. For functionalists, with male and female powers balancing each other, social equilibrium is maintained.

Critique The evolution of spirituality to institutionalized religion and the fading of the goddesses made way for multiple gods and then to one god. In ancient and contemporary societies, religious traditions incorporating notions of male and female complementarity and balance did not inevitably carry over into other realms. If Tantric Buddhism was a path open to women, the Indian and Tibetan cultures made it very difficult for them to pursue such a path, given their restrictions in other institutional settings. Women who wanted to follow the path as nuns had to submit to rigid standards of male control established by the monks, practices which have carried through to today. Buddhism is shifting in response to feminist interpretations and to global politics, and contemporary nuns are challenging the gender hierarchy giving monks predominant power (Hooks et al., 2008; Salgado, 2013). Among Native Americans, the Iroquois also denied public expression of women in a variety of settings. Gender complementarity does not necessarily translate to gender equity. Complementarity assumes that males and females are “designed to make up for one another’s deficiencies, rather than inspiring one another to overcome them” (Webster, 1995:194). Regardless of the inequality that doubtlessly existed, these accounts of goddess images and male–female complementarity in pre-institutionalized religious traditions do provide an alternative, positive view of women. The notion of “a golden age” before patriarchy, as intimated by Eisler for Minoan Crete, and by Gimbutas for the powerful goddess heritage, continues to be hotly debated (Christ and Plaskow, 2016; Christ, 2017). This alternative view, however, is affirming to all women whose spirituality forms a core of their well-being. It can also help offset enduring religious interpretations, often linked to politics, about women’s submissiveness, subordination, and powerlessness, views that impact three-quarters of the world’s six billion people who identify with a world religion.

ISLAM Islam is the second-largest and fastest-growing religion, representing about one-fourth of the world population. The word Islam loosely translates to “submission,” and Muslims, the adherents of Islam, are those who have “submitted” to the will of God, or Allah. Founded at the start of the seventh century ce, Islam is based on the teachings of Muhammad (570– 632), the greatest among God’s prophets whose revelations are recorded in the Qur’an, the holy book of Islam, and the hadith, containing the sayings of the Prophet and practices Muslims turn to for guidance in daily living. Islam emerged in response to unique Arab needs and circumstances, including Muhammad’s desire to aid the poor and provide economic resources for those not under the care and protection of others, including widows, orphans, and unmarried women. Islam introduced changes that were advantageous to women in the areas of marriage, divorce, and inheritance; other Islamic practices served to disempower them. In the pre-Islamic Arab world, women had esteemed roles as soothsayers, priestesses, and queens, but these images were largely swept away once Islam became entrenched

Religion and Patriarchy  473

throughout Arab cultures. By the tenth century, women were more secluded and subordinated than anything known in earlier Islamic decades (Shehadeh, 2007; Al-Hayani, 2010; Zafar, 2014). Muslims vary considerably in how they interpret the Qur’an regarding the roles of contemporary women. Much of what is expected of women is based on short narratives about the sayings and deeds of Muhammad’s many wives that were passed down orally. These stories are part of the commentaries on the Qur’an that have become authoritative sources for Islamic teaching. The accuracy of these thousands of narratives is questionable, and each period interprets them according to prevailing cultural standards. They have been used to validate a wide range of contradictory attitudes and practices concerning Islamic women. Women are ideal, obedient, and gentle as well as jealous, conspiratorial, and having imperfect minds (Ahmed, 2002; Hotaling, 2003; Hammer, 2008). One of the most controversial passages of the Qur’an (4:34) is used to justify corporal discipline of women: As to those women on whose part you fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (next), refuse to share their beds, (and last) beat them (lightly). Although contemporary Islam defines men and women as complementary rather than equal, passages from the Qur’an emphasizing the inequality side are favored, such as another part of the passage above: “men are in charge of women, because God hath made the one of them to excel the other” (Qur’an, 4:34). Since men are superior to and protectors of women, God gives preference and authority to men over women. For centuries, the verse was used to condone women’s oppression and abuse. Islamic law is nurtured by a code of ethics that views a woman’s key role as providing male heirs. This role may be compromised if women are not restricted in their activities, especially during childbearing years. Muhammad himself was awed by woman’s power and what he saw as a mysterious, unlimited sexual drive that, if left unfettered, could wreak social havoc by casting doubt on the legitimacy of the husband’s heirs. From a functionalist perspective, the practices involving purdah (seclusion) arose as a response to these attitudes (Chapter 6). Women have less freedom outside their homes in Islamic states where the law is based on strict interpretations of the Qur’an and where there are high levels of female illiteracy.

Feminist Views of Islam Numerous restrictions on women in the name of the Qur’an—similar to patterns in other world religions—are more likely the result of a nation’s history and politics rather than its religion. When women are educated in Islamic history and empowered to interpret the Qur’an, they not only offer more positive messages, but also balance the distorted ones regarding the role and status of Islamic women. Muslim feminist scholars assert that human rights and equality are the expression of true Islam (Jardim, 2014; Ali, 2019). Consider this thrust in the following passages: And does their Sustainer answer their prayer: I shall not lose sight of the labor of any of you who labor, be it man or women: each of you is an issue of the other. (Qur’an 3:195) It is the (divine being) who has created you (all) out of a single soul, and out of it brought into being its mate, so that one might find rest in the other. (Qur’an 7:189)

474  Gender and Social Institutions

Positive Qur’anic messages to women are strengthened by variations in translation. For example, in the contentious passage related to justification of a husband “to hit” a “disloyal” wife, the word daraba (to hit) has been alternatively translated as “to go away” (Bakhtiar, 2011), a much more benign word. This approach assumes that alternative interpretations of the Qur’an that dispute misogyny and “reclaim pro-woman readings” can be justified without altering the core framework of the Qur’an (Zobair, 2015). Such readings can also transform the women of the holy texts into role models, even feminist ones. Sufism, the mystical school of Islam, is replete with women saints. Alongside other female mystics, their shrines exist throughout North Africa, India, and the Middle East, and are visited by women in search of special needs connected with their family life. Both men and women could follow a religious path and live the life of an itinerant Sufi traveler or as a mystic in their own communities (Azad, 2013; Birshok, 2016; Hill 2018). Another well-known example for Muslims is in regard to Muhammad’s equitable views and treatment of his wives and daughters. These women hold powerful and esteemed places as the “Mothers of Believers”, and were venerated for their household roles during the emergence of Islam. Orphaned at an early age, Muhammad once remarked that “heaven lies at the feet of mothers.” As the father of four daughters in a society that prized sons, he told other fathers that, if their daughters spoke well of them on the Day of Judgment, they would enter paradise. (PBS, 2002)

Critique Reading the Qur’an for alternative, more positive views of women is strongly supported by Muslim women. They agree that Islam is a key mediator that can be more or less beneficial to women depending on how it is interpreted. However, there is much disagreement among Muslim women scholars, activists, and leaders—who may or may not regard themselves as feminists—concerning definitions of Islamic feminism, Western feminism, and feminists who are Islamic. Some activists argue that Islam is not inherently biased against women and work on issues such as securing political, legal, and reproductive rights (Seedat, 2013; Mir-Hosseini, 2019). They use shari’ah (Islamic) law to demand justice for poor and disenfranchised women. These may be the feminists who are Islamic. Teachers at Islamic girls’ schools (madrasahs) who most strongly identify with Islam and work under prescribed Islamic mandates, maneuver within these patriarchal confines to assert authority to the benefit of their female students. As Islamic feminists, they use the authority of Islamic tradition, such as female piety, to get what they want. Others suggest that Islam and feminism cannot meaningfully converge because feminism is too Western and secular. In this sense, non-religious-based (secular) women’s activism in Islamic states has little chance of succeeding (Bahi, 2012; Segran, 2013; Abdullah and Awan, 2017). A newer model suggests that “difference” is valued—and valuable—in any efforts on behalf of women. These differences put Muslim women on dissimilar paths, but they work with rather than against one another when paths and goals converge. Regardless of how Islam is interpreted, women’s agency is apparent. It is likely, therefore, that different streams of feminism and Islam will emerge, converge, and diverge according to specific political and cultural contexts.

Religion and Patriarchy  475

Muslim Women in the United States With the global spotlight on the Taliban after 9/11, attention was riveted on Islamic women in the United States, enlarging the existing dialogue among Muslims regarding women’s contribution to the formation of American Islam (Wadud, 2011). Muslim women are altering as well as affirming the traditional values of their religion. Although women are denied the opportunity to be imams—religious leaders and administrative officers of mosques—there is strong support for the belief that Islam speaks for equal rights and responsibilities for women. Most Muslim women earn or expect to earn college degrees, and most work outside the home. Like women of other faiths, including recent converts to Islam, debate continues on how Muslim women can successfully adapt and reconcile demands of Islam that may be at odds with broader American cultural norms regarding employment, marriage and the family, and civic engagement (Rao, 2015; Read, 2015; Ahmed et al., 2017). Another highly charged, continuing global debate concerns the proper dress of Muslim women in certain settings and how much of a woman’s body should be covered (Chapter 6). Muslim women in America, especially college students on campuses viewed as normatively “sexualized,” for example, walk a fine line in clothing choices that may identify them as too modest or too immodest depending on their “audience.” Those choices are associated not only with their religious identity, but also level of acceptance in their various communities (Mir, 2014; Al Wazni, 2015). Reflecting the rapid gains in higher education and civic engagement among Muslim women, and the unique American stamp on Islam, women are actively engaged in these debates and have more influence than their sisters in the Arab world in resolving them. The best indication of such influence and of the American stamp is, of the historic “firsts” for women in the 2018 Midterm election (Chapter 14), two Muslim women were elected to the 116th Congress, Somali-American Ilhan Omar of Minnesota and Rashjida Tlaib of Michigan, whose parents are from Palestine. Both women won in majority white, and overwhelmingly non-Muslim Democratic districts.

HINDUISM Hinduism emerged between 2300 to 1500 bce, and is the oldest of the world’s living religions, claiming over one billion adherents; 90 percent of all Hindus live in India. As Islam is to Arab cultures, Hinduism is incorporated into the fabric of India in so many intricate ways, it is impossible to envision Indian culture without it. Since Hinduism exists in one of the most ethnically diverse regions in the world, its practices have been adapted to suit a wide variety of cultural circumstances. From antiquity to the present, therefore, complex and contradictory images of women have emerged.

The Feminine in Hindu Scripture The oldest Hindu scriptures, the Vedas and Upanishads (1500–500 bce), provide images of women suggesting these contradictions, hence the texts are interpreted in many ways. Written through the eyes of men, women may be condemned for selfishness, energy, and ambition, especially if they forsake their “higher” level of womanhood and are seen as neglectful in service to their families (Flueckiger, 2013). With a less than heartening message resonating today, an influential mid-twentieth century work describes such women:

476  Gender and Social Institutions

[They] take pride in proving that they never developed a talent for domesticity … [and] society will have to allow for them. Such “masculine” women do not reach the highest of which womanhood is capable. (Radhakrishnan,1947:142) These beliefs are fostered by interpretations of the ancient Ramayana and Mahabharata epics, which describe many Hindu ideals related to expectations for men and women in their families. Combined with Hindu scriptures, these popular epics offer children authoritative messages supporting traditional beliefs about proper and necessary gender roles. Women are often portrayed in deleterious ways, castigating them for evil intentions and jealousy harmful to family, village, and culture (Orr, 2007; Srivastava et al., 2013). Abundant alternative interpretations dating to Hinduism’s pre-institutionalized era are much more positive. Associated with respect for the “feminine principle,” for example, is the cult of the Great Mother, with all sects of contemporary Hinduism honoring her (Doniger, 2014; Kamat, 2017). Contemporary women benefit from images equating women’s motherhood roles with power, grace, and agency. Hinduism has the longest continuous goddess heritage in the world and offers idealized models for men and women. This reverence is generally rendered as gender role balance rather than as female dominance (Spina, 2017). In the Hindu ideal, male and female are balanced, with man as the creator and woman as the lover; a woman’s sexual tendencies are considered as varied and erotic as those of a man. Hindus celebrate female goddesses, saints, and deities, the most prominent of whom are linked to symbols of fertility, creation, and hope. Unlike Muslims in India, where males control religious practice and where virtually all significant religious figures are male, Hindus allow women to serve in temples and lead religious rituals. Even as the strength of the goddess heritage waned, worship to please and serve the goddesses, including the Great Mother, was not eradicated. Goddesses are neither uniformly loving and benevolent nor are they uniformly dangerous and violent. Centered on the goddesses Kali and Durga, in ancient as well as in contemporary India, devotees recognize and appreciate the complexities of the goddesses and esteem them for these very nuances (Oleszkiewicz-Peralba, 2015; Wahid, 2016; Sarkar, 2017). The enormous popularity of Hindu films presenting the goddess as a powerful, protective, and esteemed divine mother, attests to the ongoing expression of the female as divine (Sankaran, 2016). Regardless of how goddess images are translated to ritual practice in local temples and in popular culture today, it is clear that the feminine in Hinduism is venerated. Despite the variety of religious images offered to Hindu women, it is safe to conclude that they practice rituals congruent with their roles as mothers, wives, and homemakers. These customs exemplify the domestic sphere of life, the only one known to most Hindu women. Throughout rural India childbirth involves elaborate rituals centering on protection of the child in the womb until the child ventures outside the home. Observed only by women, although these ceremonies do not require the services of male priests, they reflect the strong patriarchal presence founded on Hindu principles. Some practices involve the direct worship of husbands and brothers to obtain their protection, whereas others offer prayers and supplications for the happy marriages of daughters and for the joys of being blessed with sons.

Sati The belief that the “greatest misfortune that can befall a [Hindu] wife is to survive her husband” is rooted in ancient Hinduism throughout India (Kundra, 2014). Hindu religious

Religion and Patriarchy  477

rituals reinforce women’s roles as mothers, wives, and homemakers and connections to men for their well-being. When women became “unconnected” to men by widowhood, the ideal widow, referred to as a sati, was frequently expected to be buried alive with her dead husband or, more commonly, self-immolated on his funeral pyre. The ritual of widow burning (also known as suttee) originated during the Vedic period (1500–500 bce), when the widow performed a symbolic self-immolation on her husband’s death. In later centuries, the symbol became the reality. The practice and its veneration speak to centuries of women’s subordinate status in India. Literally translated to mean “virtuous woman,” satis were largely confined to the aristocracy and courts. During wartime, however, widow-burning occurred on a massive scale among widows of soldiers who were spared the humiliation of surrendering to the victors. Becoming a sati was considered the most auspicious moment of her existence. She was given the “supreme opportunity for self-sacrifice that consummates her life of dedication to her dead husband.” A sati brought dignity and honor to her family and her community. A living widow was “not only unfortunate but positively inauspicious, an ogress who ate her husband with karmic jaws” (Young, 1987:83). In principle, sati was a voluntary rite on the part of the widow. In practice, her grief at the loss of her husband was often used by relatives to garner honor associated with a sati ceremony. Only faithful wives could be honored as satis, so a widow’s refusal could be taken as an admission of infidelity. Note the similarities to testimonies accusing women of witchcraft in Europe and America. In a culture where widow remarriages were discouraged and women’s identities—as well as how they were identified in their communities—were solely in connection to their husbands, widows occupied the lowest rung on the social hierarchy. Widowhood magnified a woman’s dependence, subservience, and fear of sexual exploitation and abandonment. When Muslim Mughals ruled India, attempts were made to abolish the practice, and the British outlawed it as early as 1829. British lack of success in eliminating it altogether shows the intransigence of Hindu religious beliefs and their intimate connection to the social order. Urban India is rapidly developing, and gender roles are in upheaval (Chapter 6). Many rural areas, however, remain untouched by these trends. It speaks to the extraordinary power of gendered religious socialization that for many Hindu women sati is still associated with virtue. No longer do dying husbands extract oaths to be a sati from grieving wives, but the practice has not completely died out. Cases of sati, both symbolic and actual, continue to be documented (India Today, 2015). Others remain hidden.

JUDAISM The ancient biblical world of Judaism and the powerful patriarchal world in which it was embedded dictated daily life for all inhabitants. The two most important documents governing the conduct of Jewish life for both men and women are the Torah (law), the first five books of the Hebrew Bible, providing the whole of God’s teaching as revealed to the Jewish people, and the Talmud, a collection of rabbinic interpretations of scripture transmitted around the middle of the first century. Because the Hebrew Bible and the Old Testament of the Christian Bible contain these five books, the Torah is the shared heritage of both peoples. Interpretation of scripture is fairly flexible to account for the varying circumstances and cultural challenges faced by the Jewish people, but views of women and their approved roles have remained remarkably stable. Historically, a strict gendered division of labor constituted

478  Gender and Social Institutions

virtually all aspects of family and religious life. Under Judaism’s umbrella, a man’s duty was to lead, teach, and legislate; a woman’s duty was to follow, and to serve home, husband, and family.

Family Life Men’s family responsibilities included breadwinning and instructing children in the history and religious obligations demanded by their faith. Women’s duties were confined to the household, including overseeing domestic religious rituals such as preparing Sabbath meals. A woman required permission from her husband to engage in outside activities, and she could divorce him only if he granted it. Ancient customs prescribed daily rigorous religious duties for men from which women were exempt. If a wife was fulfilling her household responsibilities, including the critical religious functions centered in the household, then her husband was able to concentrate on religious obligations, patterns that continue today among more traditional Jews. Throughout Jewish history, a woman’s life was circumscribed, defined, and judged by her roles as wife and mother (Boyarin, 2013). However, women did venture outside their homes, perhaps as much out of desire rather than necessity, to connect with other women and to engage in important community activities; the image of seclusion and isolation does not present a complete portrait of their lives (Meyers, 2009). Intense prejudice and anti-Semitism, including the Nazi Holocaust, mark most of Judaism’s 4,000-year heritage. Survival of Judaism itself depended on growth; hence motherhood was expected, and a woman individually sacrificed for children and family, for her religious identity, and for the greater Jewish community.

Sexuality and Social Control This concern for stability in family life resulted in excessive control over women’s sexuality. Ancient Hebrews severely punished infidelity on the part of a wife, but a husband was punished for infidelity only if he violated another man’s rights by consorting with his wife (Daly, 1991:139). As his wife was regarded as his property, the husband’s right to own his wife kept her sexuality under control. Biblical justification for this ownership is found in the following verse: I took this woman and … did not find the tokens of virginity … The father of the young woman shall say to the elders … he has made shameful charges against her … these are the tokens of my daughter’s virginity” … then the elders … shall take the man and whip him … But if the thing is true, that the tokens of virginity were not found in the young woman, the … men of the city shall stone her to death. (Deuteronomy, 22:14–21) Women were denied access to the goddess religions coexisting with Judaism during early biblical times. The goddess religions threatened Jewish monotheism, the religiously-based political structure, and the sexual control of women. Patriarchal social order could be threatened if women took advantage of the freedoms associated with pagan religions that clearly revered women.

The Texts of Terror Biblical references were drawn upon to bolster a religiously sanctioned patriarchal order that was (and is) difficult to challenge. The Texts of Terror, parts of four books of the Torah that

Religion and Patriarchy  479

include the Old Testament of the Christian Bible, that document abuse and sexual violence against women, were often used as justifications for restricting women’s lives (Trible, 1984, 2003). These texts (Genesis, 16:1–16 and 21:9–21; II Samuel, 13:1–22; Judges, 19:1–30, and Judges, 11:29–40) testify to rape, murder, human sacrifice, and the widespread abuse of women and girls. In Judges 19:1–30, a concubine flees her Levite master to return to her father’s house, where her master is entertained by her father and then prepares to return with her to his own home. Along the way, he is invited into the home of a man from Ephraim when the home is besieged. In pleading for the safety of the Levite, the Ephraimite host says: Behold, here are my virgin daughter and his concubine; … Ravish them and do with them what seems good to you; but against this man do not do such a vile thing. So the man seized his concubine, and put her out to them; and they knew her and abused her all night … And as the dawn began to break they let her go … then he put her upon the ass … and went away to his home. And when he entered his house, he took a knife, and laying hold of his concubine he divided her, limb by limb, into twelve pieces, and sent her throughout all the territory of Israel. Symbolically or not, virgin daughters and concubines are treated as property to be used at will by fathers or masters to entertain male guests. Overall, the Texts of Terror served as testimonies to justify appalling practices such as virgin rape, abandonment of wives, and sexual violence against slave girls and women prisoners of war.

Contemporary Images and Practices The goddess religions are gone, and though beliefs in the name of social order rooted in tradition continue about sexual control and subordination of women, such images of Jewish women have been in upheaval for at least a century. Throughout Judaism’s religious spectrum, women today are not passive, accepting recipients of these beliefs. Research on Orthodox Jewish Israeli women, for example, orchestrate marital sexuality according to a range of cultural contexts provided by their religion (Avishai, 2008). In this sense, they do not automatically comply with “regulations,” but are agents in acting out their religious identity in marriage and their communities. They may draw upon the powerful, venerated image of “Mother of the Messiah” that is prominent in Jewish myth rooted in the House of David. Embracing the story of the messiah’s mother offers a strong appreciation of women, perhaps “even to their liberation” (Kaniel, 2015:102). Contemporary women engage in innovative ritual practices that serve other women and bolster their spiritual–emotional energies. An emerging practice, for example, is the “amen meal,” bringing together religious and secular Jewish women for food, social interaction, and spiritual connections the meal may provide. The meal offers an inclusive and open space helping to counter religious marginality many Jewish women experience (Shahar, 2015). As rituals created and led by women, these meals are not for women as much as they are by women. Even during the emergence of Judaism women did ventured outside their homes, likely out of desire rather than necessity, to connect with other women and to engage in important community activities; images of seclusion and isolation do reflect an accurate portrait of their lives. With alternative interpretations of texts and uncovering hidden “messages” of Judaism regarding women, all branches of Judaism are engaged in making its religious heritage more palatable to contemporary women. Much of this effort is focused on reinterpreting Talmudic

480  Gender and Social Institutions

edicts and demonstrating the variety of roles Jewish women assumed from antiquity to the present. Positive counter-voices exist throughout scripture that confirm God’s high regard for women. In first-century ce documents, Eve is envisioned as a woman who may have been naive but certainly not wicked—an unselfish woman whose good character Satan abused. The use of the term “daughters of Israel,” is found throughout sources dating back to Jewish antiquity and are now deployed to suggest women’s agency in innovative rituals, signaling that they act as subjects rather than objects in how rituals unfold. Until recently, the designation was considered a justification of hierarchy and patriarchy, with women as “perpetual daughters” under the authority of fathers and husbands (Ahuvia and Gribetz, 2018). New understanding of rabbinic and nonrabbinic passages in conjunction with recently unearthed sources provides a multitude of connotations associated with “daughters of Israel” that largely defy traditional beliefs about women. Alternative views of ritual and prayers are extending to new meanings associated with transgender, challenging the taken-for-granted male–female binary existing throughout Jewish history (Weiman-Jelman, 2018). A “trans” reading of blessings and texts, for example, offers all genders affirmation of their shared heritage, inviting all genders to the center of Jewish life. Throughout the Diaspora, Jewish women lived their lives as wives and mothers and as earners, organizers, and entrepreneurs, patterns similar to today. They sought and gained opportunities to climb to prestigious positions and to assume leadership roles in Jewish communities. We will see how women are following the path to the rabbinate, the most authoritative, respected space for Jewish leaders.

CHRISTIANITY From its origins 2,000 years ago as a Middle Eastern cult rooted in Judaism, Christianity developed because of the life events of its charismatic leader, Jesus of Nazareth, who was born a Jew. Christianity is the largest of the world’s religions, representing about 2.5 billion adherents, about one-third of the world’s population. Christianity grew rapidly, in part due to its early focus on inclusiveness, welcoming the marginalized, and those from all social classes and ethnic backgrounds into its ranks. Gender inclusiveness also highlighted the ministry of Jesus, but this remained unacknowledged for centuries.

The Bible and Patriarchy In both Jewish and Christian traditions, religious socialization of the young often proceeds from the teaching of biblical stories replete with colorful pictures of David confronting Goliath, Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, and Moses parting the sea in the escape from Egypt. These childhood images are nurtured by interpretations that perpetuate gender role stereotypes. The Bible is frequently evoked as the final authority in settling disputes in many areas but in particular those involving dualistic beliefs about women and men. Because the Bible expresses the attitudes of the patriarchal cultures in which it was written, it is logical that its most popular texts would be representative of those cultures. Historically the androcentric passages have been emphasized. Positive views of women and the partnerships forged between men and women exist throughout the Bible, but scripture pointing to the subordination of women is favored—in part because it is more known.

Religion and Patriarchy  481

The following oft-repeated examples from the pulpit demonstrate how androcentric ideology permeates the Bible. It is appropriate to begin with the version of the creation story that is most accepted as representing the traditional view of both Christianity and Judaism. And the rib which the Lord God had taken from man, made the woman and brought her unto the man. And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. (Genesis, 2:20–23) Contrary to all subsequent natural law, woman is made from man. Her status as helpmate and server to man (read “males”) is confirmed. The idea that not only was Eve created out of Adam’s rib, but that she was also created second, is used to justify the domination of man-husband over woman-wife. This view of Eve is stubbornly persistent. The biblical text refers to God’s “curse” of Eve and woman being a “helper” to Adam; Adam dominates Eve sexually and otherwise from the very moment of Eve’s creation (Gellman, 2006:319). The order of creation, however, is not an issue in supremacy considering that animals were created before humans.

Paul’s Writings In supporting this perspective, Paul has the dubious honor of formulating views (or having writings attributed to him) that continue to reinforce contemporary Christian images of subservient women and dominant men. On the one hand, Paul is closely linked with a “Christianity of female subordination,” and his proclamations are used to keep women out of leadership in the ministry and confined to religious roles that are home based or, if outside the home, are largely oriented to charity or community service. Perhaps Paul was concerned about the scandal and ridicule directed at the fledgling Christian sect if women were encouraged to venture into activities that could challenge existing patriarchy and calling attention to a sect already viewed with suspicion. On the other hand, he accepted the beliefs and practices of earlier inclusive charismatic Christianity, “the theology of equivalence of women.” This form of Christianity highlights the invitation to women to join Jesus’ ministry as local leaders, evangelists, and prophets (Ruether, 2001). Paul acknowledged the idea of equality but insisted on the divinely given quality of sexual differences. Paul’s contradictory beliefs about women are evident in the Pauline texts, consisting of those biblical passages attributed to Paul that contain striking misogyny as well as more gender egalitarian treatment. Centuries of interpretation of Paul’s writings speak to these contradictions (Peppiat, 2019). However, it is the former that are best known and most frequently used to justify the subordination of Christian women. For a man ought not to cover his head since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man. For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. Neither was man created for woman but woman for man. (I Corinthians, 11:7–11) Let a woman learn in silence with all submissiveness. I permit no woman to teach or have authority over men; she is to keep silent. (I Timothy, 2:11–12) Wives be subject to your husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the Church. As the Church is subject to Christ, so let wives also be subject in everything to their husbands. (Ephesians, 5:22–24)

482  Gender and Social Institutions

Such verses extol a society in which inequality is sanctioned, and a community is role-differentiated and ordered by class and gender in a top-down fashion (O’Donnell, 2016). Functionalists highlight that when Christians carry out their lives in appropriate non-overlapping roles, social order is established by patriarchal visions of culture reinforced by religious texts and practices. Slaves as well as women are repeatedly viewed in terms of their status as possessions of men. The Ten Commandments list a neighbor’s wife, along with his house, fields, manservant, ox, and ass as property not to be coveted (Exodus, 20:17). Lot offers his daughters to the male guests in his house. Behold, I have two daughters who have not known man. Let me bring them out to you and do to them as you please. (Genesis, 19:8) Contemporary comments on biblical women may remain sexist but are much less misogynistic, offering positive interpretations and challenging long-held assumptions about passive women in patriarchal societies. Strong theological evidence supports these assertions (Fiorenza, 2013; Meyers, 2014). In the nineteenth century, women undertook ambitious scholarly interpretations of the Bible, emphasizing its gender-equitable messages. This included publication of The Women’s Bible, published in two parts in 1895 and 1898, by Elizabeth Cady Stanton and a committee of 26 women. In challenging conventional interpretations of Christianity’s subordination of women, some women contributors feared that the writing would be too controversial and unpopular, thereby upending their reputations and scholarly accomplishments (Marshall, 2017). It took many years before nontraditional views about women became more mainstreamed in seminaries, in the pulpit, in Christian education, and in media. Despite this mainstreaming, a paradigm shift in biblical studies to account for feminist theory in Christian rhetoric is yet to emerge (Punt, 2016). In the current era of transition, narratives continue to be presented that simultaneously praise and disparage women for behavior outside of established gender norms. For example, Jochebed, the mother of Moses, is praised for her role in recognizing exceptional promise in her children. The heroic efforts in carrying out this role are ignored. Selfish and possessive women—like the wife of Potiphar, who was responsible for the unfair imprisonment of Joseph—are admonished for their wickedness and deceit. In the midpoint between more or less acceptable images, it appears that women are different from but not inferior to men and that men and women complement one another in vice and virtues. Eve, for example, has many duties in her mission, one of which is motherhood. She is “God’s last work and deepest mystery” (Juškien, 2010). These images suggest that complementarity and equality exist between men and women. In the end, however, woman’s (Eve’s) “mysterious” femaleness and corruption makes her more problematic than man’s (Adam’s) in interpreting any roles outside of motherhood.

Biblical Men The Christian tradition portrays men as both rational and irrational. They are warriors, leaders, teachers, builders, and cultivators whose minds, talents, and strength are recruited in the service of God. They are also driven by sexual desires and are irrational in their inability to resist the lure of women. Even in their irrational moments, they are portrayed as multifaceted beings adapting and thriving in a variety of roles. In contrast, women are dualistically

Religion and Patriarchy  483

cast with little room for deviation. Eve may be the mother of humanity, but she is also the temptress responsible for the fall of humanity. Because Eve yielded to the serpent, women thereafter are deemed emotionally weak, and therefore incapable of leadership. Adam succumbs to Eve’s feminine wiles but is largely exempt from blame. On the other hand, Mary as the mother of Christ is the idealized image of the perfect woman—a humble, submissive virgin. Joseph is Mary’s husband and Jesus’s earthly father, but compared to Mary, Joseph is relegated to only a few biblical references. Biblical scholars may suggest that his “ordinary” roles as carpenter and supporter of the family do not elevate him to the same biblical importance as Christianity’s political or religious leaders. In this sense, the Bible tends to neglect unexceptional men—those who for better or worse do not deviate from their roles—and to focus attention on exceptional women—those who for better or worse do deviate from their roles.

Progressive Views of Biblical Women Numerous biblical alternatives to traditional views document the stories, images, and metaphors demonstrating a range of interpretive options related to women. Paul embraced a single humanity even as he embraced divine sex differences. Today he might be considered a “cosmopolitan” thinker (Stanley, 2020). Paul’s forceful passage (from the Pauline texts) speaks directly to the idea of equality of the genders under God: There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female, for you are all one in Jesus Christ. (Galatians, 3:28) On the heels of the equality issue is the rediscovery of the nontraditional roles women played in biblical times. Mary Magdalene and the women who went to Jesus’s tomb hold the credibility of Christianity in their hands. Jesus first appeared to them, and they were instructed to share the good news with the disciples. Mary Magdalene can be elevated as the first Prophet and the first Christian of the new religion (Griffith-Jones, 2008). In the book of Judges, Deborah is an arbitrator, a queen, and a commander of the army that she led in the defeat of the Canaanites. In Exodus, it is the women who first disobeyed Pharaoh, with his own daughter adopting Moses as her child. Women are wives and mothers as well as leaders, prophetesses, teachers, and tillers of the soil. Even Mary’s humility and submissiveness are being taken to task. Feminists argue that Mary submitted to God alone and not to Joseph or other men of authority. She was an independent actor when she affirmed the course of her life (Ostling, 1991:64). It is a rereading of the Gospels with an examination of the life and teachings of Jesus that provides the best message in recasting biblical imagery concerning women. Jesus’s open, and rather astonishing, attitude toward women is found throughout the Gospels. His acceptance of women was so uncharacteristic of the times that it could not be anything short of scandalous (Magli, 2003). Women were prominent in Jesus’s ministry from the beginning. They recognized him early on as the Messiah, they witnessed his death and resurrection, they conversed with him on theological topics, and they were faithful followers even through the lethal parts of his ministry. Women of biblical times would have been major beneficiaries of Jesus’s ministry. Examples are numerous: he preached that divorce should be forbidden at a time when only

484  Gender and Social Institutions

husbands had the right of divorce and wives were often abandoned to a life of poverty; he rejected the double standard of sexual morality, helping to absolve women of their temptress image that previously made them solely responsible for sexual misdeeds; and he opened a religious path and monastic life for both men and women. He demonstrated that women could join men in spiritual quests and men and women could interact in radically different ways from those suggested by the patriarchy of the times. Some contend he had female teachers and Mary Magdalene was an apostle. By these standards, Jesus can be counted as feminist (Bethune, 2018; Riley, 2020).

Gender Roles and American Christians Religious pluralism is a hallmark of the United States, with numerous religions, branches of religions, denominations, cults, and new religious movements in various stages of growth, decline, emergence, and re-emergence. Of all the groups that comprise the religious salad bowl in the United States, the largest in number are under the Christian umbrella. Although their numbers have declined in the past decade, over three-fourths of the U.S. population identify themselves as Christian, and of these, about half are Protestant, one-fourth identify with evangelical faiths that may or may not be defined as Protestant, and one-fifth are Catholic. Mormons make up about two percent of this population, numbering over six million, and are usually counted as Christian but not Protestant. American Christians share basic theological beliefs but diverge sharply on key gender-related issues.

American Protestants Protestants are divided into numerous denominations, usually under an organizational umbrella of a broader synod, diocese, or other division of a larger church, and independent churches. While Protestants have multifaceted traditions and varied historical paths that led to their current church structures, some generalizations about attitudes regarding gender roles can be made. Mainline denominations are usually defined according to their stance on gender, connections to other faiths and faith-based organizations, inclusivity, and social justice. These include Methodists, Lutherans of the Evangelical Church in America (ELCA), American Baptists, Presbyterians, and Episcopalians. These denominations accommodate a variety of more liberal theological interpretations that highlight inclusiveness, egalitarianism, and invitation to diversity, whether for gender, race, class, or ethnicity; women are in key leadership roles, including ordained ministers who may now outnumber men as practicing ministers. Women undertake visible, active roles in services and share equitably in church functions with men. Special services spotlighting alternative images of women are conducted. Sunday schools provide children with images of biblical men and women in an array of diverse roles. Conservative mainline denominations, including Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod, Southern Baptists and other smaller Baptist branches, Pentecosts, and small Protestant churches not otherwise affiliated with any specific Protestant groups, are more absolutist in their beliefs, viewing the Bible as the literal, unerring word of God. These Protestants are at the core of fundamentalist religious trends in the United States and are counted with the evangelicals noted above. Bolstered by literal theological interpretations favoring traditional biblical views, male and female adherents hear the message that companionate-style families

Religion and Patriarchy  485

and egalitarian equal gender roles are contrary to God’s plan for the world. Patriarchal families are godly, wise, desirable, and necessary, serving the best interests of family and society. Mal-interpreted religious texts, primarily the Bible, bolster this ideal patriarchal model of the family.

Mormon Women Mormons, members of The Church of Christ of Latter-Day Saints (LDS), may stand in between more conservative and more liberal Christian denominations in terms of women, with a great deal of variation over time. With new scholarship on gender roles in LDS, a fuller more nuanced portrait of women’s issues in this church is emerging. LDS views show acceptance of patriarchal church practices as well as feminist challenges of these practices. Mormon women are neither “deluded, downtrodden slaves or fiercely independent matriarchs” (Brekus, 2016:16). As in other religions, whether Christian or not, LDS women are uncovering texts and documents, some which had been censured by church authorities, attesting to women’s esteem, authority, and agency, and to the gender egalitarianism that existed in their church’s history (Petrey, 2016; Wetzel, 2017; Ulrich, 2018). Historically, on the conservative side of the spectrum, women were identified as supportive of (now outlawed) polygamy that was a powerful reinforcement of patriarchy and male dominance throughout Mormon communities. Contemporary LDS leaders emphasize that in marriage men and women accomplish specific tasks that complement one another—the conventional separate but equal stance—but simultaneously teach that women’s roles should be dependent and supportive (Sumerau and Cragun, 2014). In the misogynistic extreme, although Satan is the culprit, some LDS leaders denounce women who deviate from virtue, turning away from needed advice by fathers, husbands, and church leaders. He (Satan) has convinced many of the lie that they (women) are third-class citizens in the kingdom of God … (leading) some to trade their divinely given femininity for male coarseness … many of our own young women sacrifice their God-given endowment of femininity, deep spirituality, and a caring interest in others on the altar of popular, worldly opinion. (Scott, 2000) Countering such narratives, feminist LDS scholarship has not only re-emerged, but has exploded. Censorship has shifted to transparency, not just in access to previously unavailable texts, but also for women’s writing in feminist theology (see below) and crossing boundaries to participate in activities formerly closed to women, specifically related to ordination of women (Hanks, 2017). Research indicates that Mormon women are similar to those in other conservative religions in that they are more likely to support ordination when arguments are framed to mesh with current church structure and governance (Cragun et al., 2016:124). Mormon feminism is challenging gender stereotypes and beliefs in LDS and calling for moving women into the church’s mainstream. By accounting for a diversity of opinion, more unified LDS vision is created (Brooks et al., 2015). This path suggests that feminists of all faiths can hear one another’s voices to strengthen “gender well-being” in their respective religions. Like many of their sisters in other religions, Mormon women are deeply ambivalent about their church’s official attitudes about gender roles and relations. They maneuver this ambivalence in ways allowing them to maintain religious convictions and validate LDS authority,

486  Gender and Social Institutions

but without sacrificing ideals related to gender equality. In the LDS context they construct gender—do gender—in agenic ways (Chapter 1.)

Christianity and Politics In the United States, religion and politics are so intricately entangled that, despite legal edicts, they are virtually inseparable. Many conservative religions support the agenda of the New Christian Right (NCR), a fundamentalist political movement composed largely of conservative Protestants and evangelicals who promote a specific Christian brand of morality based on the Bible and God’s will as the ultimate source for determining political and social life. In this sense there is no division between religion and other aspects of social existence. In consort with the political rise and strengthening of evangelicals in contemporary politics, issues related to sex and gender are the core of NCR’s agenda in its call for restrictions on sex education, opposition to gay and lesbian rights, abortion rights, and the Equal Rights Amendment (Chapter 14).

American Catholics The most important issues dividing contemporary U.S. Catholics from the authority of the broader Roman Catholic Church are attitudes regarding sex and gender. This division shows up among both clergy and laypeople. For example, various orders of nuns have removed themselves from traditional patterns of Catholic hierarchy and worship; they take a distinctly female-centered view of religion, preferring to pray to “Her” rather than “Him.” Parishes routinely allow altar girls, nuns as campus ministers, and women leading “priestess parishes” in rural areas where there are shortages of male priests. Catholics in the developing world are more conservative on key gender-related issues; American Catholics are more progressive on these same issues. A large majority of American Catholics practice birth control other than the rhythm method (the median number of children in Catholic families is two, the U.S. average is 1.9), support sex education in schools, believe priests should be allowed to marry, do not believe political candidates should be judged solely on the abortion issue, and believe that divorced Catholics should be welcomed back to the Church. Over 80 percent of American Catholics are comfortable with the idea of a female priest and a majority support the ordination of women, and all in direct contradiction to Vatican authority. Although Catholics, especially Latinos, who identify themselves as more religious, are less supportive of these practices, the overall pattern still holds (Shepherd, 2017; Corichi and Evans, 2019). Because so many Catholics have beliefs and practices that directly counter Vatican authority, the Church is reluctant to dismiss them from parish rosters.

Scandal and Sexual Abuse Issues related to women in general, and sexuality of the male priesthood in particular, have been debated in Catholicism for several centuries. Since the mid-twentieth century, however, controversy swirling around the all-male, celibate Catholic priesthood has periodically surfaced in the media, but then usually rather swiftly disappeared. This pattern changed abruptly early in the millennium as widespread sexual child abuse scandals by priests

Religion and Patriarchy  487

erupted in national media, and by 2018 exploded in international media. Not only was the abuse more prevalent than the public had originally believed, but the shock was magnified when it became clear that the “serial, predatory and sexual abuse of minors” was covered up by Roman Catholic officials. For decades bishops knew about abuses and routinely shuffled “problem priests” to other parishes, ignored the problem, or swept it under the rug, a pattern occurring in the U.S. and abroad, especially in Latin America. As some of the early abusers rose in rank, accused abusers today include bishops, an archbishop, and even a Cardinal. These cover-ups were as disturbing to many Catholics—as well as the general public—as the original abuse. Bishops promising to “fix” the problem faced cover-up accusations (Cullinane and Park, 2018; Goodstein, 2018). Through the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), as short-term solutions, the Church offered official apologies, counseling, and monetary compensation for victims, removed perpetrators and filed criminal charges against them. Surveys of Catholic priests and the lay public toward the USCCB response show they believed the media portrayal of the scandals over time, about prevalence of the abuse, and about coverups by bishops. They also believed that the Church’s response was inadequate, designed to satisfy public pressure (Gjelten, 2018; Meyer et al., 2018). Pope Francis directed USCCB to establish a series of recommendations and procedures to deal with the most recent scandals (Keane, 2018). The cost to the Catholic Church of the sex abuse scandals is high. For years surveys showed that the majority of Catholic Americans viewed their church favorably; as recently as 2013, 54 percent viewed it as excellent or good; two years later this figure jumped to 63 percent (McDermid, 2015). Catholic women affirmed that they “were proud of their faith” (Gray and Gautier, 2018). Today the latest sexual abuse scandals top a myriad of gender-related and other problems in the Church, leading to defections of Catholics and undermining the opinion of the Catholic Church overall. Although America is not a “Catholic country,” conservatives in all religions are concerned that the Catholic scandals will spill over to herald an even greater march to secularism. Americans of all faiths hold generally positive views of churches, but over half say they have an unfavorable opinion of the Catholic Church; Catholics now think more poorly of their own church compared to churches overall (Ferré-Sadurní and Alfaro, 2018; McCullough, 2018; Gecewicz, 2019). Papal messages are considered the most important indicators of the Church’s stance on the abuse scandals as well as all contentious and potentially divisive issues. Very early in his papacy Pope Francis garnered high marks and popularity in his retreat from the hardline approaches of his predecessors. He astonished many in his now famous statement: “Who am I to judge a gay person who seeks the Lord?” He opened the door to dialogue about homosexuality among Catholics, priests, and laypeople (Meichtry, 2013; Allen, 2014). Condemning increasing global inequality and strongly embracing social justice narratives as hallmarks of his papacy, his grass roots popularity resonates with people of all faiths. Irrespective of faith or level of religiosity, in many ways the Pope is the face of Christianity and papal messages carry a powerful global impact. Expectations were initially quite high for Pope Francis’s willingness to investigate the re-emerging abuse scandals shortly after he became Pope. Public opinion of the Church’s response to the latest allegations show weakened support for the Church and, in essence, for the Pope. On the other hand, in the latest round of financial and record number of clergy sexual abuse scandals, he is condemning Vatican rigidity that he believes is making Christianity irrelevant to Catholics and non-Catholics alike. His

488  Gender and Social Institutions

progressive-minded papacy faces opposition from the internal Vatican Curia as well as conservative priests and the traditional Catholic parishes they lead (Rice, 2018; Winfield, 2019). Mending distrust between the Church and its flock centers on addressing with transparency the insular nature of Catholic leadership, especially the priesthood. We will see how the sexual abuse scandal has refocused attention on another issue the Catholic Church prefers to discount—the issue of women’s ordination into the Catholic priesthood.

GENDER, RELIGIOSITY, AND LEADERSHIP Despite accelerating secular social trends, religion remains a powerful agent of gender socialization as well as a major source of overall well-being for adherents of all faiths. Higher levels of religiosity translate to less gender egalitarianism and stronger beliefs about essentialism, female submissiveness in marriage, higher fertility rate, lower support for women working outside the home, and restrictions on contraceptive use and reproductive choice, a pattern that cuts across all religions. Level of religiosity is a better predictor of beliefs about gender equality than is religious affiliation. Although measures of religiosity vary, it is safe to conclude that a religious commitment in conservative religions, especially evangelical faiths and fundamentalist Protestantism, predicts a preference for highly traditional gender roles. Freedoms protected under the doctrine of separation of church and state allows religions to be exempt from gender discrimination that would be illegal, or at a minimum not tolerated, in other institutions. Preference for traditional gender roles discourages many women from seeking positions of leadership in those very religious organizations from which they derive their strongest sense of identity.

Gender and Religious Orientation Issues surrounding women as clergy and as lay religious leaders are very significant in light of abundant sociological research suggesting that women have a greater degree of religious orientation than men, a pattern across race and ethnicity in the United States and also straddling the globe (Pew Research Center, 2016; Schnabel, 2018). Women pray and read scripture more than men, have higher rates of church and synagogue attendance, and practice in their home and in the context of their larger religious community. This higher level of religious orientation is reinforced by women’s responsibility for the religious socialization of children. Women ensure that children receive religious instruction, attend services, and learn the rituals important to their religion. This strength of religious orientation of women is translated to larger society; they hold out religion as an answer to contemporary social problems.

Sociological Perspectives All sociological perspectives highlight the link between marriage and the family and religion in explaining gender differences in level of religious orientation. Functionalists maintain that social cohesion is strengthened when families and communities share the same beliefs derived from the moral communities established by their religion. Traditional gender roles in the home are bolstered by parallel messages from the pulpit about expectations religion places on men and women according to gender. Feminists suggest that gendered messages

Religion and Patriarchy  489

are bolstered because church and family are structured according to patriarchal norms in larger society. For feminists, the social cohesion that functionalists highlight reinforces this patriarchy and is a disservice to women adherents. When excluded from religious leadership, women in the pews hear only messages from men in the pulpit. Because traditional gender roles and patriarchy go hand in hand, partnership roles sought by men and women congregants are discouraged. Conflict theorists can use classical Marxism to explain women’s religious orientation in terms of Christianity. Marx argued that religion acts as an “opiate,” in ways that undermine attitudes and deadens activism for social change, thus discouraging people from challenging the religious status quo. An overarching belief in Christianity is that heavenly rewards come to those who lead humble, pious, and self-sacrificing lives, lessons women learn throughout their lives, in turn bolstering acceptance of an “other worldly” ideology. Marx suggested that religion lulls people, especially women, into a sense of false consciousness, the tendency for oppressed people to accept the ideology of the dominant class—in this instance, church patriarchy. With such beliefs transmitted via early religious socialization in families largely unchallenged, oppression, in the name of God, is legitimized. On the other hand, conflict theorists can also advocate for biblical challenges to these beliefs, calling for people to use religion in the active pursuit of social justice. Advanced initially by Catholic clergy in Latin America, liberation theology calls for embracing activism grounded in scripture about God’s concern for the poor and oppressed as paths to reduce economic inequality and the global wealth gap. Liberation theology’s messages about oppression due to economic inequality can also be brought to bear on oppression due to gender inequality. Opening church leadership to women is a key mechanism in contesting gender oppression perpetrated in the name of God and religion.

The Issue of Ordination When mainline Protestant denominations began to ordain women in the 1980s, seminaries flourished in enrollment, with the influx of women largely responsible for the increases. Among all religions that allowed women to be ordained, one-third to one-half of seminary students were women, peaking in 2006. These numbers included women seeking a Master of Divinity (M.Div.) even in religions such as Catholicism and throughout evangelical Christianity that disallow female ordination. Since then, although enrollments have stabilized in recent years at the graduate level, enrollments overall have steadily declined, but at faster rates for women than for men (Shimron, 2018). With 1 in 5 Americans reporting no membership in an organized religion, a record number, the “unchurching” of America appears relentless at this point (Hopfensperger, 2018). The earlier influx of women into divinity schools was led by a generation of mid- to late-career women who could finally fulfill a call to the ministry through ordination. However, they entered the seminary later in life, are rapidly retiring, and have not been replaced by younger women. Fewer men and women now “hear the call,” but issues related to gender help explain dwindling numbers of women. Despite greater availability for leadership opportunities, women hear voices throughout the seminary questioning why they chose a ministerial path and what they expect in this ministry after graduation (Miller, 2017; Stone, 2018b). Men hear these voices less than women. The passion for their calling is dampened when they are viewed as interlopers in a “sacred” male profession.

490  Gender and Social Institutions

On the other hand, the first cadre of ordained women continue to offer alternative views and explanations of gender roles from the Bible and the holy texts from other religions that resonate with congregants in their respective religions. The acceptance of these views is critical when the next generation of women confronts obstacles seeking equal footing with men as leaders in their religious organizations, whether in churches, synagogues, temples, or mosques.

Confucianism and Islam In outlining women’s roles in world religions, the religions that stand out as the most restrictive in terms of women’s leadership roles are Islam, on track to become the world’s largest religion by 2035 (Pew Research Center, 2017), and Confucianism, the smallest of the world religions. Neither religion can be described as largely hierarchical in leadership structure. In Confucianism, better portrayed as an “ethicalist” tradition with religious underpinnings, a variety of men may organize and lead rituals, although women ensure that appropriate rituals are conducted in their households. Men are the arbitrators and interpreters of Confucian texts as they pertain to family, business, and politics. Confucian ideals consign women to their family and homes, with a vocabulary centered around women’s natures, their weaknesses, and their proper roles (Ebrey, 2018). Islam does not have priests, but imams are exceedingly powerful figures, especially in religious states such as Iran and Saudi Arabia, where imams serving large mosques have a great deal of political clout. Their right to choose and interpret passages from the Qur’an is usually in consort with state objectives to align political and religious messages. Since Muslim women are restricted from becoming imams, they are denied an important public opportunity to provide alternative interpretations of the Qur’an.

Judaism When Jews began to migrate West in the late-nineteenth century, attitudes toward women shifted dramatically. Patriarchy was evident, but the flexible, adaptive quality of Jewish beliefs and practices is demonstrated in accommodating women’s greater independence, largely emerging from high levels of education and rates of employment. Increasing numbers of women rabbis reflect these trends. Each of Judaism’s three main branches—Orthodox, Conservative, and Reform—varies according to the degree to which theology is literally interpreted, acted on in daily life, and adapted to current cultural contexts. Orthodox Judaism, for example, has the strictest interpretation, viewing the Torah as the absolutely binding word of God. Those who identify as Conservative are less strict, allowing interpretation of the Torah with a larger emphasis in the context of modern life. Reform Jews, the most liberal and culturally assimilated branch, accept the Torah’s ethical guidelines and general religious precepts, but are open to alternative interpretations of the Torah, particularly related to gender roles. As the least strict branch, Reform Judaism was the first to allow rabbinical ordination, with Sally Priesand becoming the first female rabbi in 1972. A year later ordination was open to women in the Conservative branch, with the first Conservative rabbi ordained in 1985. Orthodox Judaism opened its doors in 2013 for women to pursue a rabbinical path; four years later the door abruptly closed on some Orthodox women. The powerful Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations in America (OU) ruled that women can take on many

Religion and Patriarchy  491

important roles but cannot serve as rabbis in Orthodox Jewish congregations. The ruling set off a flood of protests and widespread support for continuing to ordain Orthodox women rabbis (Ferziger, 2018). The long and contentious road leading to ordination of women as Orthodox rabbis was marked not only by the “usual “ experiences other branches of Judaism encountered on their own roads to a female rabbinate, but also by questions regarding roles the new rabbis would play and their level of acceptance in congregations (Brekus, 2014). Congregations in all branches vary considerably in receptiveness and may be more or less supportive for female rabbis to be in full partnership with male rabbis. Orthodox Judaism treads lightly on naming these new graduates, with many congregations referring to them as maharat (spiritual leader), considered a quasi-equivalent female counterpart of rabbi. This designation was bestowed on the first female Orthodox graduates from seminaries (Oppenheimer, 2013). Despite the OU ruling, women continue to be ordained in the U.S. and abroad without authorization from OU or other influential administrative bodies of Orthodox Judaism. In American Orthodox synagogues it is unlikely that there will be a decrease in this trend. Women are the “most enthusiastic shul-goers,” a presence fueling increased influence of women overall (Imhoff, 2016). Orthodox women seeking the rabbinate can seize opportunities offered by the sheer number of women in the pews and the emerging authority associated with it. As expressed by a rabbi as she takes the reigns of a new synagogue, … there is a hunger for more Orthodox life that is really modern and inclusive … I’m also interested in other pieces that aren’t just about female leadership, like how to make a 21st-century shul vibrant and different and adapt it to the world that we have now. (Cited in Zighelboim, 2018) Women in all branches of Judaism must traverse the difficult ground between feminism and ancient tradition. Women, even as rabbis, are defined by religious authority chained to patriarchy even as they actively challenge that authority in their ascent to the rabbinate.

Christianity Christian faiths with large numbers of adherents that do not ordain women include: Southern Baptist, Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod, Eastern Orthodox, and Roman Catholic. In 1972, after a long and bitter struggle that culminated in a controversial ceremony in 1974 in Philadelphia, 11 women were ordained as Episcopal priests. Only two years later the Episcopal Church gave its legal, institutional blessing for the right of women to become priests. Twelve years later, by a margin of two votes, that right was extended to women in the Church of England. In 1989 an African American woman, Barbara Harris, became the first woman bishop ordained in the Episcopal Church. Joined by the Church of Sweden (Lutheran), Episcopalians and Anglicans show high levels of acceptance for women priests and ordained ministers across the globe (Styhre, 2014; Tammeus, 2014). As close scriptural and historical kin, Catholics, Anglicans, and Episcopalians share much in common. Notwithstanding the warning by the Archbishop of Canterbury (Anglican) that women’s ordination would hurt dialogue with the Roman Catholic Church, the speed of the ordinations after the initial illegal ceremonies is as empowering for Catholic women pursuing the same goal—to gain the institutional right to become priests.

492  Gender and Social Institutions

Catholicism Although the Catholic Church may quietly overlook theological principles in accepting large numbers of divorced Catholics into its parishes, regarding the issue of women in the priesthood, the Church will not budge. The Second Vatican Council (1963–1965), known as Vatican II, monumentally changed the Catholic Church, opening new and expanded roles for men and women to serve the Church. Women’s ordination was not one of them. A pastoral letter addressing issues raised by Catholic women, including their place in the Church, which took nine years to prepare, was rejected by U.S. bishops in 1992. This was the first time in history that a pastoral letter proposed for a final vote was defeated. For every proclamation reasserting the Vatican’s position that women can never be ordained, a worldwide outcry centered in the United States against the position occurs. As noted, undergraduate seminary enrollment overall has stabilized over the last several years, but the number of Catholic undergraduates in seminaries is declining in enrollment at higher rates than in other Christian seminaries. The influx of people in their 30s and racial minorities, both men and women, is helping to stabilize enrollments (after about a decade of eight percent decline) in non-Catholic seminaries (Brown and Meinzer, 2017; Gautier and Du, 2018). Greater declines in Catholic seminaries are also attributed to disallowing women from classes leading to ordination. Even with the Church’s acknowledgment that ordaining women could alleviate the grave shortage of priests, one way the issue is dealt with is by encouraging married men to become deacons and then moving some into the priesthood under certain conditions. Despite Vatican outcry, another way is ordination through organizations such as the Association of Roman Catholic Women Priests and Roman Catholic Womenpriests, the latter ordaining women deacons, priests, and bishops since 2002. These illegal ordinations are accelerating. Pope Francis’s otherwise moderately progressive stances on other issues have come down hard on these ordinations by excommunicating priests who officiated at the ceremonies and any women who claimed to be ordained. As one such women priest states, This sort of blanket excommunication is not even given to priests convicted of child molestation, but it is imposed upon hundreds of faithful women who are brave enough to follow God’s call. (Haider-Winnett, 2018) The global movement to ordain Catholic women continues to gain momentum; the Vatican believes the allegiance of Catholics can be maintained without ordination. This sentiment is expressed by a journalist reflecting on the Pope’s early successes, garnering him much popular support, including confronting “gravely serious issues” such as ensuring child safety in Catholic schools. But this journalist also contends, “Some are silly, such as whether Catholics will ordain women” (Puterbaugh, 2013). Others believe this issue will cause continued polarization and an irrevocable split among Catholics (Hunt, 2014; Harvey, 2018). As a middle approach, reconstructing the definition of an ordained deacon as a pathway to the priesthood is a suggested option. There is very high grassroots support for women as deacons, especially given that women are already performing diaconal roles. A permanent deacon can be married or single, must be ordained and can preach at Mass, perform baptisms, conduct services at funerals, and even witness marriages (Kuruville, 2018). Most important, to date, a permanent deacon must be a male. A noteworthy development is that Pope Francis has called for a commission to study the role of female deacons in the “early church.” With Mary Magdalene as the key figure, there is ample evidence that women in the early

Religion and Patriarchy  493

church until the Middle Ages could be described as founders, apostles, deacons, and priests in the roles and services they performed in the name of the Church (Kubow, 2015; McClain, 2018a). Like centuries of popes before him, Pope Francis has not swayed from opposition to women’s ordination. He does not call the ordination issue “silly,” but sees no possibility of ordaining women as priests anytime soon, so it is a goal “scarcely worth pursuing.” On the other hand, the goal might be revitalized if the Catholic Church “radically reforms the nature of the priesthood to make it less insular” (Crary, 2018a). Disheartening to advocates of women’s ordination, history suggests that studying the deacon option and making the church less insular may take at least another century, further marginalizing Catholic women from the mainstream church. The insular nature of the Roman Catholic Church is at the center of the re-emerging priest sex scandal, providing perhaps the best ammunition for ordaining women (Bourgeois, 2018; Crary, 2018b). Feminists contend that the Church fails to recognize the incredible power held by an all-male priesthood that heightens the potential for abuse in all areas, whether related to sex, love, money, or politics, and also covers up the abuse by rallying around the priestly brotherhood to protect its own interests. Women have no stake in defending or protecting the interests of a corrupt male brotherhood. Lutheran women have the option of shifting to other branches without changing their religion, but for those Catholic women who seek the priesthood, their choices are limited. Some convert to seek ordination in other denominations, with many joining the priesthood through the Episcopalian and Anglican Church. Others assume leadership roles as lay members of the Church; others become nuns. This is not to minimize the leadership roles nuns assume or the vital services they provide. Yet compared to priests, these roles are more restrictive. They are excluded from the position that allows the greatest authority on both doctrinal and parish matters—that of priest. The tradition of nuns as helpmates is also impacting their very livelihood. Unlike priests of a diocese, they are not employees of the local bishop; hence, they receive no pension. In addition, far fewer young women are entering the convent today, forcing some convents to close. Although nuns are better educated than most women and seldom retire from work unless their health fails, they face grim financial prospects in old age because there are fewer younger nuns to support them. Some Catholic women do not seek the illegal ordination route even if they know they will never be officially ordained as priests. These women work in a variety of lay ministry positions, including chaplains, hospice workers, and youth counselors in churches, hospitals, and community organizations. One woman suggests these roles do not dissuade her from the call to serve her faith. She recognizes the challenge of a “vocation in a church that does not ordain women.” Nonetheless, she sees herself as a priest by virtue of her baptism and of the affirming men and women surrounding her. In reflecting on this view of her priesthood: I am one of a multitude of Catholic women stretching conventional models of ministry with the spiritual gifts we bear. (Small, 2018:39)

Protestantism American Protestantism has fared better in terms of women in positions of authority, with many women preachers emerging from the ranks of Quakers during the colonial era. America’s first successful religious commune, the Shakers, was founded by Ann Lee, who preached

494  Gender and Social Institutions

that God is both male and female. Although the Shakers had no formal ordination process, all adherents, regardless of gender, were permitted complete freedom in teaching and preaching. This is also generally true of other religious sects and churches where women are credited as founders or proved to be the dominant influence in their establishment. Included here are the Seventh Day Adventists, the Spiritualist Church, and the Christian Science Church. It is interesting that female charismatic leader Ellen White is credited as key founder of Adventism in 1863, even though the larger church body today does not allow women’s ordination, preferring to “study” the issue, as it has done for over half a century (Vance, 2017; Wilson, 2017). As early as the middle of the twentieth century, most mainstream Protestant denominations, including the Methodist and Presbyterian Churches, the United Church of Christ, and the merged ELCA, granted full ordination rights to women. Ordination allows women to begin the climb to the highest position of leadership and decision making in their religious groups. By 2006 women were elected heads of the Episcopal Church, Presbyterian Church U.S.A., and United Methodist Church.

Clergy Women as Leaders For leaders who are clergy, two questions emerge related to gender. Do women differ in their approach to their ministries compared to men? Do parishioners have different expectations for female clergy compared to male clergy? The answers depend on the type of minister one has in mind and the type of ministry. In general, male and female ministers differ in their willingness to exercise power over congregations, with women more willing to give the congregation the power over its own affairs. Men and women do not differ in desire for positions of formal authority, approach to preaching, and involvement in social issues beyond the congregation (Lehman, 2002). For the second question, however, gender differences are starker in expectations congregations have for male and female clergy—everything from dress and appearance, unsolicited critique about sermons, being called unprofessional for smiling in worship. Outcomes for women compared to men clergy can include sexual harassment and justification for less pay. Differences in expectations can be seen as authority conferred with male privilege. As expressed by a female pastor: I don’t think most men—including and especially younger men—understand that they walk into all the benefits … and that women need to be fighting (a stereotype) and re-creating an image all the time. We as a church accept women. But we accept men more easily. (Phelps and Holste, 2020) Gender socialization encourages women to adopt styles of interaction that are relational, open, nonconfrontational, and consensual. These characteristics can serve congregations well when adopted by both male and female clergy. Women and men have different paths to the ministry, but when they arrive and gain acceptance among their parishioners, the differences are muted. Although women are climbing the leadership ladder within the hierarchy of their religions, other gendered challenges to their roles are far from being overcome. Ordination does not guarantee a call to lead a congregation. Some parishes still refuse to accept female ministers, rabbis, or priests, whether ordained or not, which propels many of them into more peripheral leadership positions. The large majority of ordained women serve as associate

Religion and Patriarchy  495

pastors, youth ministers, or educational directors or in some other institutional capacity. Women clergy are more likely than their male counterparts to be heads of religious coalitions or leaders of campus churches or temples.

TOWARD INCLUSIVE THEOLOGY For clergy women and for women adherents, this account of religious misogyny at worst, to muted sexism at best, might suggest that feminism and the patriarchal vision of the Church cannot be reconciled. Feminists are unwilling to equate religion with oppression (Nyhagen and Halsaa, 2016). They believe it is not real liberation to sever ties with a religion that is one of the most important elements of a woman’s heritage, belief system, and well-being. Feminists choose to work at reform in several areas, especially in providing a historical account of women’s roles in ancient religions and reevaluating scripture according to that account, whether it be in the Qur’an, Talmud, Vedas, or Bible. Even if religious experience is filtered through misogynous cultural traditions, reading scripture through a feminist lens demonstrates that religion can transcend gendered narratives. Alternative messages grounded in feminism see a biblical world inhabited by empowered women and a liberating course for women’s relation to God (Reid, 2016). Every adherent should have the right to participate fully in her or his religion in a manner that best enhances individual well-being and community betterment. Feminists contend that when women become aware of the root causes of their religious status and the sociopolitical nature of religious doctrine, they more fully understand how religion plays out in their daily lives Historical reanalysis of world religions provides meaningful consciousness-raising for women coming to grips with their religious identity.

Language of Religion The crux of gender issues in religion can be traced to interpretations of doctrine embodied in a religion’s sacred texts. Language is a powerful force in socialization (Chapter 4), and nowhere is this more apparent than in the language of religion. Altering the written words of sacred texts to make it more gender inclusive, more palatable, or more understandable to contemporary readers is often accompanied by bitter controversy. Grounded in Genesis, the gospels, and St. Paul, traditional language itself makes the case that men and women are “image-bearers” for God, each in a particular way (Noll, 2019:196). Feminists, for example, are blamed for altering the word of God to suit political correctness. According to this view, God’s word should “speak for itself,” and the generic he has been used for so long that “the average person instinctively senses that the feminist claim is not valid” (emphasis added) (Clason, 2006:28,30). Clearly this criticism ignores the fact that once language is learned via socialization, it may be the most powerful taken-for-granted way we organize our perceptions. The language of religion can be subdivided into religious language, which uses imagery and symbols appealing to spirituality, emotion and imagination and readily incorporates female imagery, and theological language, which uses abstractions evolving out of formal, critical appraisals of religious experience and readily incorporates male imagery. Because theological language is the language of written texts, bestowed with authority, credibility,

496  Gender and Social Institutions

and importance, female imagery is largely excluded. Theological language is viewed as more legitimate but is a “creation of a male specialist group, whether Brahmans, priests, rabbis, or monks” (King, 1993: 44–45). Bringing together the religious (spiritual) language linked to the feminine, with the theological (formal) language linked to the masculine, may be achieved by recovering the women theologians of the past, whether as martyrs, mystics, preachers, or activists. Countless women from ancient times were “thoughtful interpreters” of the word of God, offering powerful theological arguments supporting women’s equality with men in Christianity, especially the Roman Catholic Church (Prevot, 2017:110). These arguments can imbue contemporary women with stronger claims to theological “legitimacy” to challenge gendered religiosity. Catholicism, for example, refers to its entire structure as the Holy Mother Church, and uses “she” and “her” to describe it. These normative, expected female usages are institutionalized descriptions used in all communication throughout the Church hierarchy and can suggest validity of authority granted to women. When such claims are evoked, other difficulties may arise. Christian women have developed theological reasons not to have rights. So we are dedicated to resolving a fundamental problem: how to convince that there is equality with men by means of the Bible whose vision is patriarchal. (Basye, 2005:17) Although claims to legitimacy to satisfy demands from a patriarchal institution are problematic to feminists, claims can be influential in creating alternatives to counter powerful god-as-male symbolism.

God Language The exclusivity of the male image of God throughout sacred texts makes it difficult to see women representing this image. Although theologians uniformly reject the belief that God is a “male being,” centuries of religious patriarchy and institutional sexism linked to linguistic convention make it difficult to overcome this belief. Male imagery is evoked when conceptualizing God and such images are used to support the subordination of women. Christians and adherents of other religions who firmly believe that men and women are equal under God confront a theological language that contradicts this belief. God language is associated with male imagery and masculine traits that have significant sociocultural implications in and outside of churches. Women ordained as pastors in more conservative churches, often majority African American, have the authority to lead and preach in their own right. This does not guarantee, however, that women will preach differently from men. In some churches women preachers choose biblical references highlighting women’s submission, subservience, and sinfulness, using patriarchal and non-inclusive God-language, such as “king” and “master.” Words that image men to the exclusion of women can translate to the silence and invisibility of women in the pews (Davis, 2016). In other black churches, with or without women in positions of authority, male clergy are more likely to encourage gender inclusivity if they embrace womanist theologies, often designated as the African American counterpart of feminism in a religious context. This theology interprets gender inclusivity to mean gender equality. When womanism is discouraged, gender role complementarity is emphasized (Barnes,

Religion and Patriarchy  497

2015b). Another repercussion is the association of god-as-he language with traditional definitions of masculinity and femininity. People embracing gendered god imagery have persistent opposition to mothers in the labor force and are highly unfavorable to same-sex unions (Whitehead, 2014; Shah et al., 2017). For adoptions by same-sex couples, it is not religious affiliation as much as it is strength of religious practice that explains opposition (Whitehead and Perry, 2016). Both men and women can be subordinated and disparaged when biblical imagery is used to affirm traditional gendered roles both in and outside of the church. Some men may not fare well in gendered imagery, but misogyny is exceedingly strong in traditional biblical interpretations. Women are portrayed as distracting men from godliness, as Eve did when she tempted Adam. The language is clear: there are “Sons of God” but “Daughters of Eve.” Theologians agree that the use of the generics man and he impedes our understanding of God’s view of the genders. Yet when congregations begin the arduous task of altering liturgy, hymns, and prayers to conform to nonsexist, inclusive language, resistance runs very high. The old argument reappears: one is tampering not only with tradition, but also, more importantly, with the “language of God.” Supported by trends in ecumenism—promoting practices that bring churches together, such as through joint worship and communion—mainline Christian denominations are making headway incorporating inclusive language in the written material used in religious services. Here is a portion of the Nicene Creed, recited by many Christians, demonstrating that a one-word change suggests a meaningful difference in imagery: Version 1: Who for us men, and for our salvation, came down from heaven … Version 2: For us and for our salvation He came down from heaven … Although it is appropriate to keep He from the second version because it refers directly to Jesus, the word men is deleted. A hymn titled “Good Christian Men, Rejoice and Sing” in older hymnals has been changed in some newer versions to “Good Christian Friends, Rejoice and Sing.” Subtle changes that deviate from assumptions about generic language can have a profound impact on images of men and women.

Reinterpretation of Scripture Reinterpretation of scripture is an important mode of reform, especially when coupled with changes in linguistic reference. When alternative translations of key words are pointed out, introducing nonsexist, inclusive language, and highlighting lesser-known biblical texts and religious writings that demonstrate both gender equity and nontraditional roles of women, a shift in religious awareness regarding gender roles is occurring. In Christianity, for example, because theology and preaching are so strongly oriented to masculine symbols of God—such as king, father, lord, master and shepherd—the feminine corollary of God goes unrecognized. In Matthew 13:31, although it is acknowledged that the man who sowed the mustard seed is God, most miss the parallel image that immediately follows in Matthew 13:33, where God is presented as a woman who hides leaven in meal. We saw that world religions emerged out of spiritual heritages that were more gender egalitarian than what exist today. The esoteric and mystical schools of Christian Gnosticism, Islamic Sufism, and Kabbalah of Judaism show a heritage of men and women in equitable partnership. Elaine Pagels (1979) in her classic work recounting the archaeological discovery

498  Gender and Social Institutions

in Upper Egypt, now referred to as the Gnostic Gospels, offers evidence that the early Christians viewed women in very different terms from what is implied by practices in many contemporary churches. In the Gospel of Mary (Magdalene), for example, we find a view of Mary as an “apostolic leader” and as part of an inclusive ministry that is not divided strictly by gender (McClain, 2018b). For the Vatican, however, there are twelve men officially designated as apostles, and Mary is not one of them. Known as “apostolic succession,” the authority of this all-male group is passed down through an unbroken lineage to the bishops of today. This belief is adapted to Church doctrine that unequivocally denies the priesthood to women. If Mary is constructed, and accepted, as an apostle, then the line of male authority did not exist in the first place, shattering the most tenacious argument disallowing women into the priesthood. Similar to Gnostic writings, biblical texts on which these views are based provide critical alternative perspectives concerning women. Biblical writing can be reevaluated with standards of reform in mind. Consider the lesser quoted of the Judeo-Christian creation stories: So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. (Genesis, 1:27) God is still named as “he,” but this version clearly does not have the implication that God’s image of people is different depending on gender. Even Paul’s most restrictive passages may be reevaluated with the idea that the Gospel liberates people to stand equally before God. Reread Ephesians 5:22–24 considering that the words be subject were not in the original text. This suggests that Paul is calling for mutual submission of husband and wife and not the assumed superiority of the husband. Paul is credited with setting an inclusive foundation in Christianity, opening the institutionalized church to all nationalities and ethnicities, implicitly challenging absoluteness of male authority and inviting men and women to share a common destiny and vision in Christ (Daughrity, 2015; Westfall, 2016). Paul’s writings must be scrutinized with an eye toward historical context and Jesus’s ministry. As noted by one scholar: “If it was the practice of Jesus and Paul to join hands with women in mission and ministry, should not this be our contemporary practice as well?” (Ulrich, 2013:16). Given these innovative directions, Paul’s alleged misogyny continues to fade.

Feminist Theology Religious reform related to gender is best expressed by the explosion of feminist theology, which draws on women’s experience as a basic source of content previously shut out of theological reflection. Feminist theology makes theological knowledge visible, understandable, inclusive, and acceptable to all who believe in the liberating power of religion. It can be an example of liberation theology in that it interprets the Bible from the perspective of an oppressed group. In this sense, female experience is an appropriate metaphor for the divine. Feminist theology is not only a valid perspective, but also a necessary one. Rather than exclusion, women’s experiences become central to theology of formal religious structures. Inclusion is critical when reflecting on the divine and human relationship. All individuals and communities can share religious worldviews (Christ, 2019). Articulating the female experience in any of the world’s major religions, feminist theology is ecumenical from its origins, global, and borrows models from a wide range of disciplines (Ruether, 2012).

Religion and Patriarchy  499

Intersectionality With interdisciplinary academic, and ecumenical religious thrusts, it is not surprising that feminist theology incorporates intersectionality throughout its discourse. From early in its development, feminist theology addressed issues conjoined by race, ethnicity, and class in addressing patriarchy in religions. Women from the global North and South, and women of color and white women, reached out to one another in global networks as they challenged the sexism and misogyny permeating their own religious transitions. In addition, the strong link between liberation theology and feminist theology tying patriarchy to inequality explicitly challenges class oppression resulting from religion (Arora and Elawar, 2016; Vuola, 2017). Another rapidly emerging intersectional element embraced by feminist theology is interrogating the religious texts through transgender perspectives. Like critiques demonstrating the overlap of men and women in sacred traditions, a “trans” perspective accounts for a spectrum of sex and genders, thereby questioning the so-called “hetero-norm” in religiosity (Strassfeld, 2018). As expected from the historical overview of pre-institutionalized religions, transgender perspectives are strengthened when intersected with non-Western religious traditions. Overall, feminist theology not only allows for, but values the diverse perspectives offered by intersectional approaches embraced by women and men from all faiths. Given these characteristics, it is not surprising that feminist theology is now the central thrust of discourse used by scholars in explaining gendered religion, and by activists in challenging it. Although feminist theology offers a needed critique of the god symbolism permeating theology, there is much disagreement on the solutions to the problems resulting from such a critique. It is a tall order to amass all the elements needed to tackle solutions. Three key issues, however, are identified that arise in this debate. First, in alternative biblical interpretations, feminist theology must grapple with how much of religious tradition should be accepted or rejected because it is nonsexist, sexist, or both (Christ, 1987). Certainly religion has been a culprit in reinforcing women’s oppression, but remaking God as a villain does nothing to reconcile differences between women and their faith (Wood, 2015). Second, all religious traditions, Christian or not, must deal with how to open doors to gender equality without sacrificing the “essence” of what it means to be an adherent of a specific religion. It is clear that gendered theology is harmful to both men and women. Yet it is an arduous task to dislodge it from churches and religious traditions that are (were) institutionalized and hierarchical for centuries (Imperatori-Lee, 2016; Vorster, 2017; Dickman, 2018). Although Pope Francis, for example, is calling for radical reform of an insular, inward-looking Church, what will Catholicism “look like” without it? Third, how can feminist theology be translated outside the academy and the (formal) church to resonate with activists in the name of feminism? Feminist theology highlights women’s agency in whatever ways their activism plays out (Avishai, 2016). For fear of repercussions from church leaders and laity alike, activists may reign in their feminist identity; other times it means openly celebrating this identity. Evidence in this chapter suggests that the tide may be turning to the latter, “more open” identity. Interweaving Vatican II and feminist theology, American Catholic feminist activists, especially nuns, are calling on/calling out their Church to fully embrace an agenda of faith-based global social justice amid a “deeply fractured society” (Carbine, 2016:184; Hinsdale, 2016). With its deep sacramental roots, feminism is celebrated and feminist theology is translated to activism. Feminist theology takes on many forms. Regardless of the position held in these debates, it is the major source of new research, scholarship, and critiques on gender and religious

500  Gender and Social Institutions

tradition. Feminist theology serves to infuse institutionalized religion with the inclusive spirituality of its heritage and is the key catalyst reopening religion’s liberating potential for both women and men.

KEY TERMS Feminist theology Gynocentrism

Liberation theology New Christian Right (NCR)

Sati Texts of Terror

CHAPTER 13

Media

You can run, but you can’t hide. When welcoming entertainment media into our lives, we also summon their gendered imprint. With its popular culture backdrop, the influence of mass media on our lives is profound. Movies, for example, are powerful purveyors of gender ideology. We are told who to fantasize about (all those princes will come) … (and) the ostensible necessity of sacrificing love along with careers … They also teach us that showering, babysitting, being in underground parking lots or simply being female might get you killed … (Dargis, 2018) This influence is traced to a lifetime of gendered socialization via media renderings (Chapter 3). The perception that women are interlopers is pervasive in mass media controlled by men. Gender must be explained away to attract male audiences for date night movies and female audiences for “blood and guts” action movies. We are subjected to daily, relentless bombardment from media sights and sounds. Music, news, YouTube and ads invade our office desks, in elevators, and jogging or driving. Advertisements unfold virtually everywhere we locate ourselves—from expected billboards, subways, and smartphones. to uncontrollable pop ups on computers (we use cookies!), to sites on shopping carts, channel guides, online search screens, and video games. They shout the newest, best, dazzling, and efficient products and services necessary for existence. Film and niche television allow for every conceivable programming taste. The extraordinary technology has become ordinary. We can adjust entertainment to our tastes, but we cannot get rid of ads. As Chapter 3 notes, gender socialization occurs via multiple agents. Parents provide the earliest source, but mediated images are potent socializers for children as young as three. We rely more and more on mass media to filter the enormous amount of information we receive. This filtering process has a major impact on our ideas about gender. Indeed, one of the most documented, consistent research findings is that for both male and female categories, heavy use of entertainment media, particularly television-viewing, is strongly associated with adherence to traditional and stereotyped views about gender. No demographic category is left untouched by this trend. All media present gender—and the genders—in stereotyped ways. It is easy to see that, even at an early age, we develop firm beliefs about appropriate behavior for boys and girls, women and men. Although media pundits may argue that what they present merely reflects gendered beliefs (media mirror gender reality), the extent of how they reinforce sexist society (media mold gender reality) cannot be dismissed. After reviewing the record of media’s portrayal of gender, we will return to this question.

502  Gender and Social Institutions

PRINT MEDIA Magazines and newspapers present views about gender in powerful but often subtle ways. Ease of online access has reinvented print media and fueled thousands of new contenders for mass media markets. Traditional magazines and newspapers compete with ezines and blogs serving readers dedicated to a specific topic or content area. Print publishing outlets are smaller but are highly specialized. Niched women’s magazines on the web, for example, number in the thousands. Gender stereotypes persist and thrive in print media across the globe, regardless of how media content is adapted to a culture’s values and norms. Early research on attitudes about women in print media is traced to a founding document of the women’s movement.

Magazines Betty Friedan’s groundbreaking Feminine Mystique in 1963 challenged notions about contented American women in their homebound roles. Friedan was one of the first to look at the influence of print media (in this case popular women’s magazines) in the formation of attitudes about women. Popular periodicals for women emerged in the colonial period, becoming a staple for practical advice about their homes, political news selected for women, and for general reading entertainment. Over the following two centuries, these magazines evoke(d) men and women of the past as guides to the present. Within popular memory, the tension between nostalgia and modernity resulted in stories celebrating men as agents of progress and women as forces of stability (Westkaemper, 2017:6). As models, guides, home economic experts, or advice givers, periodicals and women’s pages in newspapers offered needed products and services to assist women in their daily lives (Golia, 2016; Paulson and Schramm, 2017). By gendering the print media, manufacturers were successfully linked with female consumers in ways deemed beneficial to both, a practice that continues today.

Fiction Concentrating on the fiction that was the staple of women’s magazines, Friedan traced images of women from the emancipated views in the 1930s and 1940s to the happy housewife and glorified mother of the 1950s and 1960s. Her work catapulted innovative research on gender stereotypes in magazines. Data over the next two decades confirmed the earlier patterns, but with new twists: the ideal woman of magazine fiction was a housewife with one or two children (“homemaker” was the less common label). These women may have experienced emotional turmoil raising a family and attending to needs of husbands but were exemplary in carrying out these roles. Employed women were unfeminine and posed threats to otherwise happy marriages. The baby boom accelerated in the 1950s, and so did the birth rate in magazines. Having a baby was a good bet for saving a floundering marriage. Married women who remained childless and spinsters who remained childless and husbandless were pitied for wasteful, unhappy lives. Fiction of this period cheered on heroines who, through virtue and submissiveness, won the hearts of the men they would marry. Widows and divorcees were portrayed as unable to cope without a man. The overall conclusion by the early 1960s: the happy housewife was even happier.

Media  503

Articles By the 1970s, magazine fiction was gradually being replaced with other content targeted to women. Dramatic changes affecting gender roles eventually impacted magazine images as well. The birth rate was leveling off, thousands of women entered paid labor, and the feminist movement was making headlines. Magazines emerged focusing on the challenges facing women working outside the home, some with explicitly feminist orientations, such as Ms. magazine. Older, more traditional magazines such as Ladies Home Journal, Family Circle, and McCall’s began to include articles about educational opportunities, employment options, and women’s rights. Magazines such as Savvy, New Woman, and Working Woman, geared to single women or employed married women, also appeared, offering advice to women coping with demanding new roles and responsibilities. Nonetheless, compared to the social upheaval in the real world of women, the magazine world of women was minimally affected. After flirting with themes related to self-development, carving a new identity, and expanded prospects outside of their homes, the 1980s witnessed a return to more antiquated images. Magazines today continue to promote a traditional motherhood ideology. Homemakers with children may be sympathetically shown as confused and overwhelmed in their household focused lives, but magazines offer products, services, and advice to help these frazzled women. Women may also be employed, but magazines ensure that they are not absolved of homemaking responsibilities. Educated women with children who opt out of careers to reinvent themselves as fulltime homemakers are emerging in magazines to represent the “new” feminine mystique. Reinforced by daytime television (think Dr. Phil), magazines offer advice to women who contemplate repercussions of abandoning careers to become stay-at-home moms. The newly minted homemakers in magazines emphasize their preference is the inward path to home rather than the outward path to career. They are as high achieving at home, as they were in their paid work. Although articles in newspapers portray these women as heralding a returnto-the-hearth revolution, labor force trends do not match media images. Highly educated mothers are more likely to be employed than are less educated mothers, a pattern virtually unchanged for several decades. The reality is that for most women, opting out is neither a simple choice nor indeed a choice at all (Chapter 8). With a century of magazines showing a standard of femininity associated with domestic life, appearance, and romance, it is not surprising that today the two dominant themes in magazines such as Cosmopolitan, Glamour, Vogue, and Essence are how to be more beautiful, and how to entice and maintain a relationship with a man. The subtext in the beauty message is that beauty is tied to health. A beautiful body is a healthy body. The subtext in the relationship message is sexual. To keep their men from straying, women must develop sexual skills. In succumbing to new trends, yes, his needs will be met, but so will hers. Advice about beauty, health, relationships, and sex is found in the same article. Magazine advertisers are happy to oblige women who want all of these.

Advertising Articles on these themes are founded on advertisements testifying to the power of makeovers, weight loss regimens, and the glories of spotless floors, soft toilet tissue, and antiseptic children. Extensive research documents that advertising images of women continue to be based on traditional gender norms.

504  Gender and Social Institutions

Stereotypes An early major study on gender stereotyping in advertising analyzed magazines by number of males and females, the gender of adults according to occupations and activities presented, and the merchandise being promoted (Courtney and Lockeretz, 1971). Despite the explosion of employed women, data showed that women’s place is in the home, they do not make important decisions, and they are dependent on men, who in turn regard them—often explicitly—as sex objects. Women’s interests are on cosmetics and cleaning products. New research quickly followed. Although ads began to depict women in paid work, the large majority of women were pictured exclusively in the home. There was a decline in the blatantly sexist ads, but advertisers continued to be insensitive to women in the real world. Women’s concerns centered on appearance, men, and simple decisions revolving around household roles (Should I cook turkey or beef for dinner?). Advertisements spanning two decades rarely showed women in nontraditional situations, even in magazines oriented to a wider audience, such as Newsweek, Look, and Sports Illustrated (Courtney and Whipple, 1983). Since first published in 1964, the swimsuit edition of Sports Illustrated maintains the same content of ideally beautiful and sexy women who are available to men. This edition catapulted the bikini as legitimate swimwear on beaches and in community pools. Contemporary magazines maintain these images and in reaching out to a racially diverse audience, gender-stereotyped and sexualized portrayals of white, African American, and Asian women have increased in general interest and women’s magazines. With nudity and near-nudity now the norm in mainstream magazines, it is common to see undressed or scantily dressed women and girls selling all kinds of products. Females in sexually provocative poses are used as decorations in ads. Car and boat ads show bikini-clad women draped over fenders and posing on yacht decks. Some hamburger ads are so sexualized that they border on pornographic. Products sold primarily to men, such as tools, hunting regalia, and industrial equipment, use a similar format. In gun magazines, women in lingerie or evening gowns clutch men who are holding handguns and rifles. Advertising campaigns for popular brands of clothing and fragrances routinely show near nude women, or women and men in sexually provocative scenes – but do not show the items they are selling – only the logo of the company. This content often includes messages related to aggression and violence. When sex is used to sell a product, the ad is usually aimed at men. Ads in magazines such as Vogue, Cleo, Elle, GQ, and Esquire typically portray women as being helpless, passive, bound or being maimed and abused by men or animals. Men are shown as independent, rugged, sexually risky, and dominant over women and other men. If men are too sexualized in ads, they are viewed as less masculine.

Sexualization Middle class tweens, teens and young adult females are lucrative markets for ads. All media formats disproportionately project females in highly sexualized ways, a decades-old pattern (Lamb and Koven, 2019). The market is growing for seductive clothing aimed at little girls. Barbie may be at war with Bratz, but advertisers of both tell girls it is never too young to be sexy. Parents struggle with young daughters who want to dress sexy (Shellenbarger, 2017). After all, daughters plead, their sisters are not much older, and they get to wear them. Via cosmetics and clothing, girls are routinely portrayed in sexualized ways in magazines that are

Media  505

ostensibly for adult women but consumed by both tweens and teen girls. Millennial women who graduated from Teen Vogue to Vogue are alerted to youthful and provocative clothing by anti-aging ads. Females of all ages see sexualized depictions where girls are “dressed up” to look like women, and women are “dressed down” to look like girls (Gerding et al., 2018:625). Magazines aimed at tween and teen girls are abundant; tween and teen boys do not have nearly as many magazine choices. Sexualization in magazines have far-reaching consequences for both males and females. For males, images of women as sex objects increase. As trite as this phrase may be today, objectification is associated with riskier sexual behavior for men, including sex on demand. Of course, “demand” may not be distinguished from abuse and rape. Frequent viewing of these images by females reduces self-efficacy and increases self-sexualization (Fasoli et al., 2018; Ward et al., 2018). Clothing to “get laid in” is advertised by manufacturers in magazines and popular websites and blogs directed to young women. Call it a “freakum” dress, or a hook-up outfit—everyone has go-to clothes they wear when they want to get laid … when you want all eyes to be on you … your style and your choice of sexual partner comes down to personal taste: One man’s sexy Jessica Simpson T-shirt is another man’s dating Kryptonite. (Tsjeng, 2016) Choice is embedded in this language but implicit messages to females increase self-sexualization. The messages to men increase their endorsement of sexism and sex on demand. “Choice” has different meanings for males and females.

Well-Being In addition to sexualization, inequality and sexism in popular magazines compromise health and well-being in a myriad of ways. Magazines “feminize” risk for women, admonishing them to take individual responsibility for the treatment and prevention of disease. Pharmaceutical companies capitalize on “it is up to you” narrative in direct-to-consumer (DTC) advertising for women. Prioritizing health as a personal issue is the lesson women learn from mainstream magazines (Women’s Health, Shape, Prevention). Feminist oriented magazines (Bitch, Bust) offer a wider range of options to women, such as collective approaches to health concerns. They also do a better job in accounting for racial and ethnic diversity of readers. Magazines, however, are limited in productive messages to women marginalized by class, color, and by type of health issue. Yoga Journal shows a decrease of ads for healthy diets, nutrition practices, and meditation, and an increase of ads for supplements, food, and clothing. Earlier ads were more diverse in age, race, and bodily appearance (Gonsalves et al., 2017; Jenkins and Johnson, 2017; Vinoski et al., 2017). The feminization of health culture as imaged in women’s magazines provides a model for white, middle-class women to take individual responsibility to prevent and treat selected illnesses.

Resisting Magazine Images Parents lamenting portrayals in print media increasingly shun magazines with sexual, appearance, and health content harmful to their daughters. In seeking more positive messages, they flock to magazines such as Girl’s Life (GL) for teens and tweens and its precursor for younger

506  Gender and Social Institutions

girls, Girl’s World. Narratives are considered empowering (independence, starting a business, taking responsibility for mind and body), but simultaneous messages about beauty and boys are heard (new ways to wear your ponytail, clear skin, smart advice on guys). Versions of femininity in magazines are conflicting. Lifestyle blogs for women and girls leaning toward feminism offer more progressive editorial tone, attempting to discard “conservative representations of femininity” (Roca-Sales and Lopez-Garcia, 2017:186). Others are less successful. One version encourages adhering to traditional norms, another version encourages resisting the norms (Velding, 2017:505). The covers of GL and Teen Vogue (fashion, beauty, entertainment news) show the dawning of sexualization in the magazines girls will soon be reading. Strong, the popular magazine for teen girls in the UK is more diverse in race and appearance standards with content less likely to subvert empowering messages, but it cannot compete with the global reach of GL. Magazines with prosocial, feminist messages to girls have fewer subscribers and less latitude in succumbing to demands of advertisers. The challenge for magazines is to effectively balance positive magazine narratives directed to girls and young women and to ensure advertising dollars. With female teen consumption of these magazines at an all-time high, depictions of sexualized girls and unrealistic beauty and weight images are being challenged. Alternative views. After a 14-year-old girl initiated an online petition garnering nearly 100,000 signatures protesting the flawless females in Seventeen, editors vowed to limit retouching. A decade later, however, it is difficult to find evidence that the vow has been kept. Although Seventeen was singled out, all magazines adhere to these practices. Laws are starting to challenge photoshopping—manipulating images in magazines and mass media—to make female models “impossibly beautiful” (Horwath, 2019). As an industry standard, photoshopping in the billions dollar ad industry is unlikely to be curbed anytime soon.

Subtlety and Subliminals It is not difficult to analyze ads according to general themes and images. Ads also sell products and reinforce attitudes in ways that are unrecognized by the casual reader. Advertisers may embed subliminal messages at a subconscious level to prompt consumers to buy a product. Whether subliminal messages increase sales is debatable, but it is a standard tool in advertising. The pioneering work of Erving Goffman (1979) concentrated on the subtleties of posture and relative size and positioning of hands, eyes, knees, and other parts of the body in ads. A man is pictured taller than a woman unless he is socially inferior to her. Men and boys are shown instructing younger women and girls. A woman’s eye is averted to the man in the picture with her, but a man’s eye is averted only to a superior. She has a faraway look. Women’s hands caress or barely touch; they are rarely shown grasping, manipulating, or “creatively shaping.” In the presence of men, women act like children and are often depicted with children. Subliminal messages are powerful for teens and tweens in influencing intentions to purchase the advertised products (Ambardar, 2017). Of course, this is the intent, however hidden. Factoring in race, women of color are becoming more like white models in appearance (skin tone, body features, weight) and pose (submissive, passive). Like white models, women of color have fairer complexions, longer straight hair, and smaller facial features than their counterparts in the general population. The perfect sexualized body found at a beach (to be gazed upon) amid less attractive bodies is the magazine norm. Women appear in swimwear much more frequently than men (Small, 2017; Boepple and Thompson 2018). Magazine

Media  507

readers are not likely to recall much about the ad other than the product. Goffman’s research a half century ago, however, underscores the sexism embedded in the messages today.

Aging and Gender Age and gender stereotypes combine in ads targeted to older women and play on insecurities related to aging, declining health, and sex appeal. Older women are portrayed much less frequently than men and women in all age groups in general interest magazines. The fear-ofaging theme dramatically increases cosmetics sales for baby boomers. Whereas younger women and aging female stars (still glamorous after all these years) sell lipstick and hair color to older women, when older women are portrayed it is often for products and medications signaling body decline and loss of independence, such as adult diapers, dentures, bone-strengthening drugs, and emergency alert devices. Considering the avalanche of messages on physical appearance women receive in advertising, social constructionism and symbolic interaction correctly predict the self-fulfilling prophecies that follow. Recent increases of elderly women in fashion and beauty ads cement the Western construction of ageism (Jerslev, 2018). An aging face may be more accepted, but it must be altered. Advertising artificially creates images that become the reality. In addition, as predicted by the end point fallacy, new labels about attractiveness will produce new behavior in an ongoing process. Beauty standards will continue to change, and consumers and advertisers will adapt to these standards and change their behavior accordingly in a never-ending cycle.

The Business of Beauty What is remarkable about these findings is that women of all ages, and increasingly men, are highly critical of the images: … women want to see themselves reflected in advertising and other types of media in authentic ways and they’re more likely to buy products from advertisers who use images of women who are a variety of ages. (Myrna Blyth, cited in AARP, 2018) Whether by age or appearance, if the people at whom the ads are directed find them distasteful and irritating, how can a double standard continue? A key issue is that advertisers are the lifeblood of magazines; concessions to advertisers, therefore, are common. Advertisers demand that “complementary copy” appear with their ads. This once shunned practice allows an article about beauty to support or complement an ad about a beauty product often appearing on the same or opposite page. Now standard in print magazines, advertisers exercise a great deal of control over editorial and other content of the entire magazine. Although beauty and fashion products are targets, dietary supplements, cigarettes, athletic gear, and other products that can have a strong gender link are advertised.

Critique Women today are depicted in more diverse occupational, athletic, and non-household roles and are seen more frequently in general interest magazines. The older woman is a huge potential market. Regardless of age, she is active, involved in an array of projects, and enjoys

508  Gender and Social Institutions

her home but is not monopolized by it. Advertisers are beginning to recognize women as diverse, leading successful lives, and balancing home and career. The jury is still out on the impact of these newer images. The caution here is that another artificial creation emerges alongside another set of standards women are expected to adhere to. To sell means to change. The moment a product is “improved,” the earlier product version is abandoned and campaigns sell its virtues. Advertising, however, stubbornly persists in its outdated messages to women. Gender-based ads have not kept up with changes in the real world. Neither have advertisers figured out the best way to counter negative effects of these ads (Eisend, 2019). From a business perspective, sexism is disadvantageous in that a product’s market potential is not realized. Advertisers largely ignore hefty research that consumers react negatively to sexist advertising. Countering this trend, femvertising—female empowerment advertising—has caught brand attention to win over females. Femvertisers market to a woman’s strengths, reminding them that women and men do the same things, even if a bit differently. Ideally, ad effectiveness for a female target audience is linked to “thoughtful” advertising about ways that champion gender equality. The power of femvertising extends to women buying products for males in their lives, since it is she who holds the family purse strings (Champlin et al. 2019; Mamuric, 2019). Savvy marketers publicize the annual #Femvertising Awards, announcing awardees on Equal Pay Day. Whether empowerment can be packaged and sold via femvertising and sustained long term is unclear. Many advertisers remain suspicious and are not proactive in exploring femvertising, preferring to rely on sexism as a less risky bet rather than challenging it (Åkestam et al., 2017). Men have been slower than women to lobby for these changes, but with the rapid increase in print ads and other media showing men as sex objects with unattainable perfect male bodies, men are joining forces with women to protest sexism in society, including advertising. The belief that “sex (and sexism) sells” is strong. Although disheartening, profit from sexist advertising supports this belief.

FILM Compared with other mass media, the film industry has employed women in more central positions as screenwriters, editors, costume designers, critics, and actors. In Hollywood’s early days at the height of the studio system (1930–1948), women dominated the star spotlight (Mary Pickford, Jean Harlow, Greta Garbo, Hedy Lamarr). This was reflected in popularity polls, fan mail, and billings female leads received. Although the contract system allowed studios literally to own actors, women were forceful in determining their careers and the parts they received. Female stars of this era were offered roles depicting them as bright, articulate, and independent. After World War II and the demise of the studio system, a multitude of rising male stars overshadowed female stars. Far fewer women were being groomed for starring roles. With a few exceptions, this continues today. In contrast to the reality of women’s diverse contemporary lives, current film portrayals are sorely lacking in depth and authenticity.

Screen History Reflected in screen images, World War II encouraged women’s independence and initiative. They were portrayed as homemakers who transitioned smoothly from the kitchen to the war

Media  509

industry, without severely disrupting family life. Or they were shown as nurses and in military roles serving overseas, at times as combatants who, like men, died for their country. Movies were a critical part of the war effort, emphasizing self-sacrifice of all Americans to ensure victory. Women on the home front were necessary for this effort. Rosie the Riveter, the iconic home-front heroine, symbolized the double-duty woman who worked in a defense plant. Women on the World War II screen possessed self-confidence and strength, but with some unsettling ambiguity. The taken-for-granted functional balance of home and workplace was upset. Both men and women left home to engage in the unlikely occupations of soldier and defense worker. Commercial and propaganda films blurred to reassure Americans that after the war, women would be as eager as men to return to the gendered natural order of homemaker women and breadwinner men. True to this message, by the 1950s, films reaffirmed the separation of spheres and the domestic subservience of women.

Good Women and Bad Women Whereas the war years presented women as multifaceted and complex, after the war they were portrayed as one-dimensional, as either good or bad. The “good” woman embodied what became the feminine mystique. She remained virtuous throughout courtship. Her premarital virginity was never questioned. She might have a successful career, but Mr. Right would change her priorities and definitions of success. After marriage, she became the ideal wife and mother in suburbanizing, middle-class America. Doris Day, June Allyson, and Debbie Reynolds fit this image. Indeed, Doris Day became the national emblem of the perfect, virtuous, all-American girl next door. The “bad” woman, on the other hand, was the sexpot or duplicitous woman, who could lure a man away from his faithful wife and loving family. Marilyn Monroe, Anne Baxter, and Ava Gardner represented this image. Regardless of the good–bad dichotomy endured by screen actresses, these movies were awash with sexual innuendo and hinted broadly at the enticements of immorality. The difference between this era and decades to follow, however, was that sexual desires were actualized on the functionalist screen only when it was normative to do so. Only in his fantasies did married Tom Ewell succumb to Marilyn Monroe in The Seven Year Itch (1955), and Doris Day would not surrender to Cary Grant in That Touch of Mink (1962) until they were married. Although the films of the 1950s display a concern for domestic righteousness, they also reflected the disenchantment of women in their struggle with narrowly defined gender roles. This period combined both conventional and progressive expressions of the difficulty women faced as they made the transition between domestic roles and newer alternatives. Screen actresses portrayed women torn between desire for security, symbolized by the customary and comfortable lifestyle of home, and desire for adventure and challenge beckoning to them outside the home. These conflicts and contradictions of the transitional women helped set the stage for the next two decades of change.

Sexual Violence If the early days of film romanticized women and put them on a pedestal, the 1960s and 1970s quickly reversed these ideals. Blatant sexuality laced with violence became the staple of the era. The new women of this era were loosened from the constraints of family life, but with broken bonds, an attitude of “they deserve what they get” arose. Women who ventured outside the home were portrayed negatively, suffered, and were usually punished as a result.

510  Gender and Social Institutions

The favorable images of the war years disintegrated, and women were accorded fewer roles than ever before. Male speaking roles outdistanced female by 12 to 1. This period is referred to as the most disheartening in the screen history for women on the screen and the women they represented off the screen. As the women’s liberation movement gained momentum and women were asserting themselves in new realms, a backlash occurred in commercial film (Haskell, 1987, 1997). By the 1970s, explicit sex and sexual violence in films were so prevalent that a rating system was developed to determine suitability of content for children. The system addresses sex more than violence so that love scenes are more apt to get the film a restricted (R) rating than are rape scenes. Rape is considered inconsequential when victims love the rapist or fall in love with him later. In turn, the rapist is portrayed heroically. In half a century of James Bond films, for example, women are depicted as enjoying rape. Bond is the suave, charismatic good guy—the fantasy of every woman and enviable role model of every man. Bond films are a composite of sex, spectacle, heroism, and menace. Once raped, women are ignored, sometimes murdered by Bond and often murdered by someone else. Bond must always be free of women. If he inadvertently falls in love with her, she is doomed to die before the end of the picture.

Pairing Sex and Violence Despite spurts of romantic comedies, dramas about innocent love, often with tragic conclusions (The English Patient, Before We Go, As Good as it Gets, The Fault in Our Stars), and “chick flicks” (not suitable for male audiences), romance in mainstream movies has been replaced with sexuality and violence, and pairing of the two. Romantic movies in earlier Hollywood had bold and capable females paired with males (Humphrey Bogart/Lauren Bacall; Katharine Hepburn/Spencer Tracy). These couples are gone, with prostitutes and girlfriends of uncertain morals filling the void. The typical occupation for women in the last four decades of movies has been prostitute or ex-prostitute. Themes of love and adultery are infused with violence, rape, and murder. Mainstream films are often more violent than pornographic films. Even with the mass killing of children and a PG-13 rating, The Hunger Games franchise remains among the most popular films for teens. Movies with both sex and violence that received an X rating a generation ago (The Exorcist, Midnight Cowboy) would receive an R rating today. The Hustle, a female duo remake of the male duo Dirty Rotten Scoundrels originally received an R rating, because “similar movies with a male case rarely undergo the same level of scrutiny.” Arguing that the movie is no raunchier than comedies starring men, the rating was “upgraded” to the desirable PG-13 (Baila, 2019). “Slasher” movies appealing to adolescent boys regularly send the message that sexual violence is normal and acceptable. Higher exposure to sexually violent media increases viewer acceptance of rape myths. Successful mainstream movies routinely portray graphic violence against passive female victims who make the wrong decisions and find themselves in lethal situations. Her efforts to fight back are futile and she will be rescued by the male hero. Films are infused with overtones of humor and romance serving to normalize the violence (Fatal Attraction, Die Hard, Natural Born Killers, Girl with the Dragon Tattoo). Love and violence coincide. Females are victims in movies of horror, murder, and especially rape, in which film directors seem to have a macabre interest. Films with a central rape theme continue to proliferate. Although women as rape victims are more sympathetically depicted than in the past, moviegoers also are becoming more desensitized to the issue, reinforcing the notion that rape potential is an inescapable burden for women.

Media  511

Aging Females, Ageless Males Unlike men, women must be young and display physical agility to be cast as powerful, sexy, and romantic heroines in action films (Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon; Gravity; Lara Croft: Tomb Raider; Terminator 2; Charlie’s Angels) that appeal to both young men and women. In Hollywood, young translates to under 30. The biggest stars of the 1930s–1960s were women in commanding, multidimensional roles—Bette Davis, Joan Crawford, Kathryn Hepburn, and Rosalind Russell—playing romantic leads well into their forties and fifties. Today women at their age would be consigned to obscure roles or relegated to made-for-TV low-budget cable movies. As James Bond ages, his “girls” do not. Various Bonds were often 30 years older than their leading ladies. After a certain age, women are destined to play shrews, jealous housewives, struggling widows, lonely executives, or eccentric aunts. Younger female faces are sought to replace aging stars. Notable superstar actors such as Faye Dunaway, Goldie Hawn, Shirley MacLaine, Maggie Smith, and Meryl Streep are old; Tom Cruise, Denzel Washington, George Clooney, and Richard Gere are distinguished. Although bankable for now, Sandra Bullock and Helen Hunt are maneuvering the Hollywood age abyss. Harrison Ford’s reprise as Indiana Jones was older than Sean Connery, who played Indy’s father in an earlier Jones movie. Movies are not kind to older men or older women in percentage of speaking characters. In top-grossing films 45 percent of all male characters and 31 percent of all female characters are over 40. However, female characters are younger than male characters. Most female characters are in their 20s and 30s; most male characters are in their 30s and 40s. A twist to the James Bond movie franchise is that in Skyfall, Judi Dench’s character as the powerful, seemingly emotionless “M” and Daniel Craig’s Bond are shown dealing with crises of aging and physical decline. M transgresses age and gender stereotypes in many ways (Krainitzki, 2014). She sends a formidable message to older women. At M’s death (spoiler), the first Bond in history appears to be left physically and emotionally vulnerable. Returning to spydom in No Time to Die as a 50ish Bond, however, any notion of older male vulnerability evaporated as Craig reprised the action, aggressiveness, and sexual escapades Bond audiences demand.

Gender Parity and Film Portrayal Over a half century of films shows the percentage of male and female characters as remarkably stable, with male characters outnumbering female characters more than two to one. Male characters account for 70 percent of sole leads. In the 100 top-grossing films in 2018, women accounted for over one-third of both major characters and for speaking parts Although women are vastly underrepresented, this percentage is a recent historical high. Racial diversity for women is increasing, but 65 percent of all female characters are white, followed by 21 percent African American, 10 percent Asian, and only 4 percent Latina. The spike of Asian female characters from 7 percent the year before was due to one film, Crazy Rich Asians (Lang, 2019). Latinos remain the least represented in Hollywood films. Roma, about the life of an indigenous domestic worker in Mexico City, catapulted to the Oscars in 2019, winning three awards, including directing for Alfonso Cuarón, but passing over Yalitza Aparicio for best actress. Jennifer Lopez reigns as Latina superstar and Selena Gomez may be waiting in the wings, but few other Latinas are known to wide audiences. To date, Asian and Latino men are climbing the Hollywood film ladder faster than Asian women and Latinas. So-called wholesome roles for women, although devoid of sexual content that may demean women, signal doom in Hollywood. As noted, she is an aging bygone. There are a few positive signs suggesting a return of women to movies offering role latitude and countering

512  Gender and Social Institutions

the stock Hollywood gender formula. Although not immune to gender stereotypes and violence, Wonder Woman, Tomb Raider, Atomic Blonde, Annihilation, and Hunger Games: Mockingjay rest on female leads, attracting male and female audiences in all age groups. Resisting the derisive chick-flick label, other movies highlight sensitive issues relating to love, health, family and friendship, and loyalty among women (Beaches, Waiting to Exhale, Mama Mia: Here We Go Again, Black Swan, A League of Their Own, The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants, Frozen). Success for some female friendship movies is bittersweet. Fried Green Tomatoes and Silkwood were criticized for lesbian overtones. The women of the Jurassic Park franchise cannot be considered as leads, but do highlight women who are very smart, formidable in fending off dinosaurs, and fiercely protective of their families. Filmmakers use an injection of violence to make films more palatable to a wider audience and still get the coveted PG-13 rating. Sharon Stone’s portrayal of a bisexual murderer in Basic Instinct drew storms of protest from the LGBTQ community. Film critics, too, subscribe to a gender-stereotyped world suspicious of loving and cooperative relationships between women. It reveals much about the tenacity of gendered society when decades of movies routinely show females who are mutilated, maimed, murdered, and raped film after film, but when a successful, critically acclaimed movie reverses the scenario—the iconic Thelma and Louise—it is charged with man-bashing; the subtext of violence against women is ignored. The issue is not so much that turnabout is fair play, but that violence is acceptable to resolve conflict. With limited roles and limited meaty roles going to women, it is not surprising that male stars and superstars far outnumber their female counterparts. A cursory look at films in your local theaters testifies to the scarcity of female stars—strong, multidimensional, or otherwise. Barbra Streisand was the only bankable female lead for a decade. Julia Roberts, Jennifer Lawrence, Emma Thompson, Sofia Vergara, and Viola Davis may fill that position today. In their 50s, Jennifer Aniston, Angelina Jolie, Nicole Kidman, Demi Moore, Meg Ryan, and Halle Berry count as superstars. As they reach the cusp of their 60s, however, remaining as superstars may be elusive. There is less tolerance for box-office bombs starring women. Jack Nicholson, Matt Damon, or Leonardo DiCaprio may emerge relatively unscathed from bad reviews and bad movies, but studios are reluctant to offer parts to women who fall victim to the critics’ axe. Women are almost hidden among the faces of numerous male actors who endure as superstars. Although complaints abound that women are held hostage by Hollywood, the bottom line is male domination of movie marquees.

Critique There are challenges to these views. Box-office advertising is increasingly directed at women. Filmmakers will continue to focus on the key age demographic (young, between 14 and 24); male and female are almost at parity in the moviegoing public. Movies that ignore or demean half of this audience does not make marketing sense. Decades of Hollywood’s service to teen boys may be matched with offerings geared to teen girls (The Secret of My Success, Pitch Perfect, Juno, Bend It Like Beckham, Whale Rider, Lady Bird). Because these movies also spotlight rebellious teens who succeed in challenges to parents, teachers, and adults, they also attract the necessary number of males to ensure the movies profit. Such movies do not do much to dissuade stereotypes about teenage girls, but they offer young women alternatives from the female-bashing movies they typically see. Film producers concerned with the image of women must successfully combine fantasy and realism to attract audiences in the first place. Mainstream cinema continues to represent

Media  513

women either as idealized sex objects or as threatening objects needing to be kissed or subdued. The limited range of female characters finds them in recurring roles, notably as prostitutes, psychotics, sacrificing wives and mothers, bitches, and bimbos. On the other hand, should women be portrayed as victims of patriarchy, conquerors against mighty odds, or burnt-out employees and soccer moms? Will romance be crushed by realism? Filmmakers are beginning to deal with the struggles facing contemporary women, and a few directors are willing to confront the issues. In turn, movies retreat into an unrealistic stereotyped world. The viewing public believes movies demean women, but gender stereotypes remain an American film staple. Movies may be creations of male fantasies, but women also need to invent and portray their own fantasies.

MUSIC Media cater to a public always demanding innovative sights and sounds to satisfy an unending thirst for entertainment. Music is increasing its already powerful role in gender socialization. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the world of popular music. Whatever niche is defined—country, rock, pop, rap, hip-hop, alternative, or metal—the quest for a musical fanbase continues unabated. Although the music industry is diverse, teens, emerging adults, and millennials control a large portion of the recording market. Producers of contemporary music and television videos are ruthless in competing for their dollars and will cater to whatever musical tastes they desire. Music is always at the vanguard of change. Rock artists take conventional morality to the limits, creating conditions for further change. Because many genres of contemporary music defy social norms, it should be the one medium where traditional gender roles also are challenged. Evidence counters this assumption. Popular music is the most gender stereotyped and misogynistic of all media. A half-century of popular music sings to romance and sex. Whereas songs about romance remain stable in popularity, they have been sharply outdistanced in songs about sexual relationships (Christenson et al., 2019). Songs over time also show a conquest theme of males objectifying women and using sexual violence as a means of control. Once men are in control, women measure their self-worth by the men in their lives. The most popular songs increasingly portray women as commodities to be “owned or consumed” like money and liquor, with lyrics that are “casually graphic and almost solely about women giving men pleasure” (Hays, 2018). On the other hand, beauty and sex appeal are used by women to manipulate unsuspecting, naive men. Country music stereotypes women as temptresses luring lonely truck drivers away from their wives and the wives who wait patiently (“stand by your man”) for their two-timing husbands to return. The women of country music, as Maddie and Tae sing, may lament these very stereotypes: How in the world did it go so wrong? Like all we’re good for is looking good for you … We used to get a little respect. Now we’re lucky if we even get to climb up in your truck, keep our mouth shut and ride along. And be the girl in a country song. (Cited in Rasmussen and Densley, 2017:76) At only 10 percent, the number of country songs by female artists is low and decreasing, only a few showing up in weekly top country charts. What do you tell little girls who want to be country singers? Carrie Underwood calls out sexist comments (female singers are not the

514  Gender and Social Institutions

“lettuce in our salad” like Luke Bryan and Blake Shelton, but merely “tomatoes of our salad”). Male gatekeepers prevent female singers from being seen and heard. Underwood’s desire to challenge the patriarchal country music script brought Maddie and Tae with her on the road (Settembre, 2019). As functionalism suggests, sexist comments spark outrage that inspires, rather than disempowers, female artists.

Rock Music For popular music, rock claims artistic supremacy. Rock remains the dominant creative force that sets the standard for all popular music. This claim to supremacy serves to legitimize whatever musical representation it offers to its public, whether as a vehicle to spawn social movements, such as the anti-Vietnam war movement, or to both challenge and reinforce gender or racial stereotypes. The lines are blurred, and rock niches can include pop, hip-hop, rap, heavy metal, and country crossover. Female instrumentalists remain rare in rock genres, shaped by the gender-segregated friendship networks that follow people through their lifetimes (Chapter 3). Rock bands are geared to “male homosocial” activities that exclude females from other than supporting or marginal roles (Schaap and Berkers, 2014). The niches of rock music are gender stereotyped and gender segregated. Since the 1950s, images of women in rock music are increasingly associated with sexual violence. The misogyny in the lyrics of many categories of music that can be regarded as rock—“cock rock,” heavy metal, rap, R&B, hip-hop—is unconcealed, with little attempt to be subtle. Some images of women in rock are positive, but these exist side by side with overriding, blatant misogyny. Women are cast into rigid categories determined by their perceived gender role characteristics. CD covers depicting women being brutalized by men and animals suggest some of these images. Digital images allow these depictions to be acted out. The love–hate dichotomy is featured, where men are kissing and killing women at the same time. Boycotts of recordings showing violent themes against women on CD covers and online images have generally failed. As rock lyrics have become more sexually explicit, however, some record companies have agreed to put a warning label on their album covers indicating that the words may be “unsuitable for younger audiences.” As in film ratings, sexual themes are considered more offensive than violence against women. As in film, restricted (R) ratings have higher sales.

Women of Rock Before the advent of rock in the 1950s, female singers occupied one-third of the positions on singles charts, but by 1985 that figure had decreased dramatically to 8 percent. Female singers such as Patti Page, Rosemary Clooney, and the Andrews Sisters were popular before World War II and were commercially successful for decades later by combining music and film careers. With the emergence of rock music and its appeal to teenagers, younger male entertainers moved into the spotlight. Only the “girl groups” of the 1960s and 1970s, such as the Supremes, Ronettes, and Shangri-Las, charted any real successes for female singers during this era. In the 1960s, Janis Joplin broke into the rock culture and emerged as a unique, controversial, and often contradictory symbol for young women caught in the middle of a confusing period of history. Not only as the best female rock singer of the 1960s, she is considered one

Media  515

of the foremost rock and blues singer-songwriters of all time. She was viewed as a frivolous floozy and pothead yet emerged as a feminist heroine and as a revolutionary in her music activism. She paved the way for the next generations of women (Stevie Nicks, Joan Jett, Debbie Harry, Melissa Etheridge) destined to enter the sacred realm of the male rock kingdom (Kaplan, 2019). In 1967, Janis was unconventional (the first musician with a visible tattoo) and freakish. Today she would be hip and alternative. Her message to girls: they could be rock stars. Rock bands led by women or that have female and male lead singers and musicians are quickly emerging. Superstars Madonna, Gloria Estefan, Christina Aguilera, Britney Spears, and country crossover Taylor Swift are leading just steps ahead of other women in rock genres (Alicia Keyes, Kelly Clarkson, Shakira, Katy Perry, Rihanna). They have earned music’s prestigious and highest awards. These superstar women of rock and metal bands challenge the idea that a “female fronted band” should be abandoned (Schaffner, 2019). It cannot be said, however, that their songs substantially differ from, or offer challenges to, stereotyped representations of women. The music industry gives awards for songs celebrating sexualization and misogyny.

Challenging Misogyny Female rock artists have had little power in altering sexist material of their bands while remaining commercially successful. Resurgent sexism on the rock scene also counter efforts at change. Women have never rejected rock, but rock rejects them when they attempt to stray from the male-dominated rock path (Fallon, 2017). Song themes and lyrics may challenge misogyny, but sexualization in all rock genres persists. In transitioning from tween idol to independent musician “to be taken more seriously,” Miley Cyrus was roundly criticized for lewd dress and highly sexualized performances. Former teen star Ariana Grande fielded similar charges in the high octane sexual lyrics of her hugely popular songs. With the rise of the female superstars of rock, artists are amassing power to create new identities that challenge male domination in mainstream rock culture. In turn they are gaining control over their own images. Confronting sexualization on their own terms, however, is a double-edged sword. Nicky Minaj and Beyoncé may be reproached for self-objectification, misogynistic rap and pop lyrics, and for (not at all subtle) sexualized concert performances, but they define themselves as feminist and empowered. With the largest fan base and as a savvy, smart media mogul in her own right, Beyoncé can be described as a hip-hop feminist in control of the sexuality she chooses to display (whose body is this anyway?) and modeling it as for aspiring female artists. Hip-hop feminism as embraced by Beyoncé is a site for black girls to assert agency over their bodies and their sexuality (Duan, 2016; Tyree and Williams, 2016; Smith, 2017). Whether feminist in intent or action, the sexualization path for these female artists comes with a commercially successful path. Assuming the path is a chosen one, it is associated with control and empowerment rather than self-reproach and passivity. Madonna may have been the front-runner of this pattern. Originally an enigma, her early music countered traditional feminine ideals of dependency and reserve, presenting a “postmodern” feminist image embraced by third wavers. Others condemned her for sending potent messages to teens about the glamour of sex and pregnancy through a fantasy world she created. An inveterate gender rule breaker, she was judged by different standards from males. In the 1980s some of her videos were banned by MTV and mainstream video networks for sexual and violent content that men would have escaped. Today such videos are

516  Gender and Social Institutions

normalized. But she transitioned successfully into acclaimed film roles, and her multidimensional talents later received high marks. Lady Gaga follows the Madonna legacy. As avantgarde performance artist, musician, and now acclaimed film actress she considers Madonna a role model. Pop singer and songwriter Pink (aka P!nk) controls her music. Reflected in an interview for Honey magazine, she emphatically states: “I am a songwriter and musician … I can’t be a puppet.” Janis Joplin died at age 27. Whether they self-identify as feminist or not, Madonna, Lady Gaga, and Pink proclaim feminist messages. In accepting the “Woman of the Year” at Billboard’s Women in Music awards, Madonna spoke of what she faced in the music industry during her career: blatant misogyny, sexism, constant bullying, and relentless abuse … I stand before you as a doormat. Oh, I mean a female entertainer. (Cited in Casano, 2018) At a recent Grammy awards event, Lady Gaga, like Janis Joplin early in her career, reported she was told she was weird, and her looks and sound wouldn’t work. But her music told her differently (Fekadu, 2019:M1). Despite controversy surrounding “who is the true feminist,” Beyoncé and these three rock stars are arguably feminist role models for young women that might have been Joplin’s destiny.

MTV and Music Videos MTV was introduced to cable subscribers in 1981 and catapulted to become one of the most widely consumed forms of popular culture for teens and young adults in the United States and globally. A wave of programming devoted to niche music videos for various age groups and genres followed on MTV’s successful heels, including VH1 for adult contemporary music, BET geared to African Americans, Nickelodeon for children and tweens, and CMT for country music fans. VEVO, You Tube, and many giant online options offer music videos from all artists and music genres. Under the VIACOM umbrella, MTV is the globe’s premier youth and millennial generation entertainment brand offering 24-hour music videos in the language of any country where they are aired. On these channels males appear twice as often as females. Despite these diverse niches, three patterns are clear: teens and young adults are the largest music video consumers; these two age groups are the target market; and music videos are gendered, sexually violent, and misogynistic.

Gender Ideology “Generic” rock videos, hip-hop, and rap—whether performed by male or female artists— provide a visual extension and support a gender ideology of male power and dominance reinforcing misogyny. Videos depict women as emotional, illogical, deceitful, fearful, dependent, and passive and men as adventuresome, domineering, aggressive, and violent. Male fans of female artists portrayed as self-sexualized in music videos believe “women are sex objects and men are sex driven” (Aubrey et al., 2017). Female music artists are more often sexually objectified than male artists, and male artists sexually objectify others—males and female alike—more than their female counterparts. Sexual imagery has increased steadily in all genres of music videos, and today most music videos depict it (Flynn et al., 2016; Karsay et al., 2019). Most videos combine sexual images with acts of violence; they routinely depict rapes.

Media  517

Heavy metal and rap, now referred to as “rap-metal,” display the most violent and explicitly sexually violent lyrics and images. Pop music may contain an equal amount of violent content, but with more double-entendres and symbolic allusions to sexual acts and male domination of women, it is harder to pinpoint. Eminem and Rihanna’s “Love the Way You Lie,” has themes on domestic abuse and violent retaliation (Riley, 2019). Rap-metal and gangsta rap make acts more graphic and explicit. Typical of those depicting rape and sexual violence are “Stripped, Raped and Strangled” by Cannibal Corpse, “Smack My Bitch Up” by Prodigy, and “Balla Baby” by Chingy. The lyrics in Poison’s “I Want Action” leave no doubt about the message: “I want action tonight. If I can’t have her, I’ll take her and make her.” Routine exposure to such images desensitizes viewers to erotica and sets the stage for more graphic and sexually violent portrayals on “mainstream” television. Consider, too, that these lyrics are from songs over a decade ago. Even more graphic portrayals continue to escalate. Since males, regardless of race, consume more sexualized videos than females and prefer more violent content, they are more likely to view women as sex objects and to accept rape myths. Some of this content is difficult to distinguish from pornography (Rodgers and Hust, 2018; Seabrook et al., 2018). Consistent with social constructionism, gender is shaped by social myths articulated in popular culture. Publicity surrounding the graphic portrayals of sexual themes is exactly what many performers desire. Lawsuits swirling around sexual and violent content fuel CD and streaming sales. Foregrounding free speech and anti-censorship legal rhetoric, the dangerous representations of women on such videos are dismissed or relegated to the background (Hill and Savigny, 2019). Kanye West’s infamous video featuring nude images of celebrities in bed together is described as voyeuristic and predatory. It is the “nonconsensual pornography”—failing to get permission from the celebrities—and the censorship of artistic freedom that received the most publicity (Utset, 2018:920). Controversial videos with explicit sex and violence may be destined for premium channels. Subscribers pay extra for channels with videos that other networks refuse to air.

Race and Gender With misogyny as the backdrop, music videos portray gender in highly racialized ways, especially for African Americans. Even counting videos by black artists, white women outnumber African American women almost three to one. When they are portrayed, however, African American women are increasingly taking on roles white women traditionally have assumed in videos. Only a decade ago black women were shown in active roles, such as dancers or instrumentalists; white women were shown in the background as eye candy. Regardless of race, today women are depicted as more passive and decorative. African American women are, literally, looking more like white women. Similar to magazine ads, music videos show them as thinner, with lighter complexions, longer and straighter hair, and features that are generally Eurocentric. African American girls are succumbing to the white beauty and appearance norms they have long resisted. African American men, whether lead musical artists or in the background, have darker complexions and natural hair. Black gangsta rappers are liberally tattooed with pierced bodies. Male rappers and hip-hop artists are associated with criminality. Videos conceptualize African American masculinity as evolving out of gangs and ghettos. Underground rap videos on YouTube revisit violent events and use violent imagery to hone the mythology of a gang. Violent rap lyric videos in possession of an accused criminal or who consumes such videos may be used as evidence against him (Ebisike, 2018; Lauger and Densley, 2018). Music video content depicting

518  Gender and Social Institutions

African American women as overly sexualized and promiscuous and African American men as criminals remains largely unchallenged in the larger corporate, music culture. Such videos do untold harm in reinforcing gender and race stereotypes.

Critique African American women musical artists do break out of the rock culture mold in which they are embedded. Black female artists are embracing hip-hop, the unique genre that emerged out of African American culture as a tool to affirm their music and their community. Profeminist rap can be used to communicate prosocial themes. In the context of the black church, male Christian hip-hop artists may be more effective in secular style entertainment, but with an “implicit sacred message” (Bowman et al., 2018; Karvelis, 2018; Razzante and Smith, 2018). These rap options can challenge dominant images of violence, rape acceptance myths, and the objectification of women common to music videos. Countering this positive option, African American female musicians and the fans they serve may be in a no-win situation. From a conflict theory perspective, they have a financial stake in maintaining the racialized, misogynistic images they disdain. Only with superstardom or studio ownership can they be somewhat immune from the power of record producers. A female pop star is packaged and defined less by her music than by her body as her core asset. She is a “short term brand” so must earn as much as possible before she burns out or ages out (Lieb, 2018). Regardless of race, few women successfully challenge rock’s misogynous lyrics or sexualized violent videos. With notable exceptions such as Tina Turner (b. 1939), performing in her 80s, who reemerged in rock and catapulted to superstar category, alternative views of women—especially older women—that are both popular and empowering are rarer today than in the 1960s.

TELEVISION Television is by far the most influential of all media, and through multiple platforms, offers any type of content viewers desire. Americans now spend more time accessing entertainment, news, and internet content on smartphones, tablets, and laptops than they do watching TV on conventional sets. A bulk of that content, nonetheless, is still television based. In only a decade, the most influential change altering entertainment choices is the rise in digital streaming for television and films. Overall, homes receiving traditional TV signals via apps, broadcast, cable, or internet connection to a TV are at 95.9 percent. People age 65 and over watch television the most—about 7 hours per day—younger people and millennials between 25 and 44 watch it the least (just over two hours) (Richter, 2018). Preschoolers and young children may spend up to one-fourth of the day in front of the set. As a powerful agent of socialization, television for children is much more gender stereotyped than the shows adults watch. In early identity formation, young American children, regardless of race, use television for role modeling having already consumed a steady diet of gender stereotypes by the time they enter kindergarten (Chapter 3). Children from low-income homes and those with less educated patents watch television more than those from affluent homes with college educated parents. Intersecting race, ethnicity, and income, poorer African Americans and Latino children watch television more than middle-class Asian American and white children. For all these patterns, males watch television at slightly higher rates than females.

Media  519

Gendered Violence Over a half century of research documents a clear and consistent correlation between amount of television viewing and aggression in thought as well as deed (Bender et al., 2018; Schipani, 2018). Viewing violence increases the potential for violence and desensitizes the viewer to subsequent violence. Two out of three TV programs—including situation comedies, dramas, and sports-oriented shows—contain aggression and violence that threaten or actualize hurting and killing. Led by cartoons and shows featuring superheroes, children’s programming is inundated with all forms of verbal, physical, and sexual violence. By eighth grade, the average child has witnessed at least 8,000 TV murders and by age 18 they will have seen 200,000 acts of violence. The more violent the content, the more aggressive the child or adolescent toward siblings, parents, spouses, teachers, and peers. Virtual violence through new technology on multiple screening platforms makes it more intense, graphic, and realistic. The media–television–violence link is a strong risk factor for aggression and raises concerns about its effects on health, development and well-being in children (Howard, 2019). Neither boys nor girls escape these images, but boys are more likely than girls to choose and enjoy programs with aggressive content.

Boys, Violence, Video Games Other forms of media violence consumed much more by boys than girls repeat and exaggerate many of the patterns found on television. For all media, video game violence has the strongest connection to aggressive behavior, particularly in boys, a pattern found globally. Since players can control frequency and length of access and can manipulate characters, violent video games have a stronger connection to aggression in children and adolescents. Attracting 10 million largely male players, “America’s Army” is a collection of sophisticated, realistic, and extremely violent video games developed specifically for the U.S. Army. Players go on virtual missions from basic training to waging war and fighting terrorists, often sending players on special ops missions behind enemy lines. Video game entertainment is used to entice enlistments. The Armed Forces understand just how valuable a tool video games can be in both recruitment and training…..to deliver the Army’s message to potential recruits….soldiers all come from somewhere, so why not gamers? (Thompson, 2019)

Women and TV Violence Violence is a consistent, central feature in television. Although more situation comedies and fewer explicit violent acts in drama decreased overall rates of violence in the 1990s, since the 2000s violence made a “serious comeback,” and is currently at historic highs on television. This comeback is associated with the decline of traditional television watching and competition from multiple screening sources. Producers rely on portrayals of violence to ensure profitability (Dholakia and Reyes, 2018; Signorielli et al., 2018). These portrayals are acted out in gendered ways. Television violence is directed toward women. Men kill men and women get killed. Men also kill more than twice as often as they are killed. White men and boys are more likely to perpetrate violence and to get away with it, with girls and women of color, older women, and foreign women the likely victims. Like music videos, rape is increasingly portrayed on

520  Gender and Social Institutions

television. The brutality, frequency, and graphic violence against women in the hugely popular HBO series Game of Thrones (GOT) prompted charges of misogyny early in the series, even among its reliable viewers. TV plotlines in many series explore consequences of rape on victims, but rape in GOT is so pervasive, routine, and casual that it is taken for granted and normalized. Producers defend the violence as a faithful representation from the books which spawned it. Following the frequent and escalating violent sexual assaults throughout the series, the rape of Sansa Stark in GOT’s fifth season horrified viewers, some vowing never to watch again. Critics contend that the horrific treatment of women will tarnish any legacy GOT could amass for its creativity, action, and complex plots that rivet audiences (Bruney, 2019). Producers may temporarily reduce “gratuitous” rapes and sexual assault when outrage spikes but return to familiar territory to appease the segment of the audience that does not find them objectionable. Sex and violence are profitable. With over 10 million viewers, GOT is HBO’s most lucrative property and in the top three in all TV. Outrage, therefore, is likely to be muted.

Prime Time Most TV is watched at prime time, between 6 and 10 pm. This time period attracts the most viewers and costs the most for advertising. Men and women are near parity in watching prime-time TV, so programming should reflect the interests of this audience. Women’s prime-time presence continues to increase and women account for 40 percent of all characters. Onscreen presence, however, does not predict plot or importance of character. Television prime time revolves around men. Leading male characters outnumber females two to one, a consistent trend since the early days of television. Men not only outnumber women in prime time, but standard programming fare portrays both in unrealistic, stereotyped ways. Dominant men and sexually provocative women persist in prime-time television (Sink and Mastro, 2017). Representing women and men according to stereotypical masculine and feminine characteristics that viewers disdain can subvert the entertainment value in audiences advertisers seek to reach.

Gender Profiles in Drama Men dominate dramatic shows, especially those involving action, adventure, and crime. In lead roles, they play tough and emotionally reserved characters who are unmarried but have beautiful female companions. The profile of prime-time men includes the following: he is 35–45, single, white, handsome, smart, middle class, and sexy. We do not know much about his family, his leisure life, or his interests outside work. He may be attracted to a female coworker but usually fails in his attempts to hide it from her or others. Compared to men, women have far fewer leading roles. Madam Secretary (2014–2020) is a notable exception, earning critical acclaim from reviewers, the public, and advertisers to writers and to lead actress Téa Leoni. Women’s increase in onscreen presence is attributed to minor roles. However, minor roles for women have increased in the number of ongoing characters with speaking parts. Female characters are attractive bystanders in background shots but are less attractive than females who are named as specific characters. The sex appeal of background females cannot outshine women with central roles. The profile of prime-time women includes the following: she is unmarried, under 30, employed outside the home, more likely to be in a professional occupation than in the past, cares for children if she is a single mother, and is not involved in—but is looking for—a romantic relationship. Their lives are more complicated than those of male characters. Marriage rates of prime time women are

Media  521

increasing. They often delay marriage until their mid-30s, with subthemes revolving around their quest for pregnancy before their biological clocks run out.

Invisible Women Older women are invisible in prime time. If seen, they are marginalized and subordinated, lacking prestige and leadership. A few powerful women may have minor roles, but their on-screen presence is minimal. Gone are Jessica Fletcher (Murder She Wrote) and the older, powerful women of Dynasty and Falcon Crest. Often representing the serious side of comedy, shows such as the Golden Girls have disappeared. Netflix’s Grace and Frankie (2015) “divorce comedy” features Lily Tomlin and Jane Fonda coping with divorce after their husbands decide to get married to each other. Adults over age 60 represent less than 10 percent of speaking roles, and most of these go to men. Viewers today are most likely to see characters in their 30s and least likely to see characters in their 60s. Age is also not helpful to older men on prime-time TV, but men still represent almost three-fourths of all characters age 60 and older. Prime time sends powerful messages about aging in general and older women in particular. The stellar exception is Betty White (b. 1922) and her Hot in Cleveland (2010–2015) cable series. Although age and gender stereotypes are juxtaposed with issues surrounding sexuality and physical decline, she is portrayed as wise and witty rather than feeble and vague. The presence of older women on popular daytime talk shows (Oprah Winfrey) and morning news (Gayle King) is growing. The mismatch of age and gender on prime-time television is puzzling. Ageist comments are rampant in television series with seniors in main roles that are popular with younger and older viewers (Esposito, 2017). A woman’s appearance and her memory are often deprecated in prime-time shows senior women watch. These older women are the heaviest viewers of television and the fastest-growing age group in the United States and globally. They remain healthy and active well into old age. Baby boomer women are the first generation with the largest proportion of women working full-time throughout their lives. British television gave American viewers powerful, respected older women characters in Call the Midwife and the wildly popular Downton Abbey. TV producers in the U.S. have yet to match this success. Advertisers fail to recognize the enormous returns by providing more images—and more positive images—of older women on television. To date, however, older women remain invisible.

Intersecting Gender, Race, and Ethnicity Although white males dominate network and cable television, African American characters in prime time are increasing rapidly, with males outpacing females. Compared to their population numbers, African American characters are overrepresented on TV today and Latinos, the largest racial/ethnic group in the United States, are underrepresented. Native Americans are least represented. Representations show both stubborn gender and race stereotypes, and show programs doing a better job in challenging them (Tukachinsky et al., 2017; Butler, 2018). The following trends intersect gender with race and ethnicity. •

African American boys and men are leads, are costars, have white partners, and have an array of major supporting roles. White and African American male characters match in occupational status and job authority. African Americans no longer dominate as criminals and bad guys.

522  Gender and Social Institutions

• •

•

•

African American women are cast as leads and in key partnering roles with men (This is Us, Suits, Blackish, Scandal, and Doctor Who, another gift from British TV). In drama and comedy shows, African American women continue to be cast in unflattering roles as overweight, asexual mothers and aunts, and sexually alluring girlfriends and unmarried temptresses. Asian males have more starring roles than Asian females, but both are depicted as intellectually strong professionals (Magnum P.I., Hawaii Five-O, Grey’s Anatomy, Elementary). Asian women in background roles are becoming less exoticized, retreating from earlier common portrayals as prostitutes. Of all racial and ethnic groups, Latinos are most underrepresented. With the notable exception of The George Lopez Show (2002–2007), few men are in starring roles. Unlike the music industry, Latinas have only recently emerged on television. Rare starring roles are highly stereotyped by race and gender. Although she effectively satirizes the Latina sexpot stereotype, Sofia Vergara plays a trophy wife in Modern Family (2009–2019). Strong and willful Gabrielle of Desperate Housewives (2004–2013) is undermined by Latina stereotypes about sexuality.

The popularity of these long-running shows may signal a trend for prime-time television to become more female friendly, less gender stereotyped. It is the stereotypes in the intersection of race and gender that are the most difficult to dislodge from this coveted time slot.

Comedy In prime time comedies, women appear about as frequently as men. The dependent housewife in early comedy series such as Leave It to Beaver and I Love Lucy have disappeared. The “liberated” women of the 1970s, such as Maude and Rhoda, paved the wave for this trend. The immense popularity of The Mary Tyler Moore Show (1970–1977) is that it was the only show in which a single career woman was depicted without a steady boyfriend or any major story line revolving around her unmarried and non-motherhood status. Ally McBeal (1997– 2002) was heralded as the new Mary Richards, but her ditzy character and obsession with romance countered this view. Dependent homemakers may have disappeared, but there are virtually no comedy or dramas that have the equivalent of a Mary Richards. Comedy shows revolve around the lives of beautiful people. Issues related to appearance and beauty permeate prime time and comedy shows in all time slots. Women and girls are laughed at when they are too heavy—the heavier the woman the more negative the comments. Comments made by males are the most disparaging. These portrayals continue despite increases in shows featuring female leads. Television’s beauty obsession collides with gender and class stereotypes. Younger women are particularly vulnerable to stereotyping and are depicted as empty headed and obsessed with beauty, clothes, shopping, materialism, and dating. Woe to teen girls without the money to keep up these peer-enforced standards. Girls who are heavy as well as poor are the most disparaged in these shows.

Employed Women The explosion of women in the workplace translated to prime time television. In the rush to capture the female 20–50 age audience, television’s depiction of employed women

Media  523

mushroomed. By the millennium, employed women comprised over three-fourths of prime time female characters, 15 percent more than those who worked outside the home in real life. Compared to men in the workplace, women’s roles are more likely to revolve around relationships, marriage, and family than their actual work activities. Female characters are likely to be identified by their marital status; male characters are likely to be identified by their occupation. Compared to men’s occupations, women’s are less prestigious and less powerful. Powerful women often remain in the background with less airtime in a “now you see them, now you don’t” shadow existence. Employed women may be married with children, but any work–family conflicts are minimized. Primetime drama and comedy revolve around what happens at work or after work—but not both. In Parenthood (2010–2015), for example, women have more workto-family spillover than men, but the series takes place in and around the home, not the workplace. Television is moving to more realistic programs about the joys and trials of marriage, family, and jobs, but the lack of attention to the real world experiences of women continues.

Daytime Television Networks struggle to match programming for a diverse daytime audience. Early news and weather for commuters and late-afternoon after-school programs for children leave the middle of the day open for homemakers and older viewers. On cable and network television, the day is filled with talk TV, game, cooking and shopping shows, home-buying and renovation escapades, and movies with hordes of commercials, and reruns of television series’ dating back to the 1970s. Daytime programs largely target women viewers.

Soap Operas Originally designed for a daytime female audience, soap operas aired with homemakers in mind, allowing them escape to a fantasy world of romance and adventure. Producers keep an ear open to soap opera fans to ensure that plots fit expectations of loyal viewers (Harrington and Bielby, 2018). The soap opera is the only television format with more female than male lead characters. Soap operas instruct women on maneuvering treacherous slopes surrounding their children, husbands, ex-spouses, and new and old relationships. Soap opera women are schemers, victims, bed-hoppers, and idealistic romantics. Families suffer because husbands have affairs, but forgiving wives hold a family together until errant husbands return and temporarily make amends. She struggles to maintain her family against staggering career challenges, relationship crises, and overwhelming odds. Money issues prowl in the background. Despite these themes, however, the women of soaps are intelligent, self-reliant, resilient, and articulate, seeking out one another for advice and friendship (Soukup, 2016; Ashifa, 2018). Soap opera women implicitly challenge the gender status quo of a homebased patriarchy. Notice that this section could be written in the past tense. The target soap opera audience has virtually disappeared. The four remaining traditional daytime soap operas may be on the verge of extinction (Bold and the Beautiful, General Hospital, Days of Our Lives, The Young and the Restless). Devoted fans can find soaps online and sometimes in the evening when aired again. Reality TV fills the daytime cavity left by the retreat of soap operas.

524  Gender and Social Institutions

Reality TV Like soaps, reality (unscripted) TV both engages and distances viewers from content while keeping them entertained. Reality TV is ludicrous in distortion of reality but popular because of it. Critics deride reality TV, but its huge success in both daytime and prime-time slots is traced to combining elements of comedy, drama, and ruthless competition This is seen in America’s Next Top Model, Shark Tank, Entertainment News (celebrities maneuvering the red carpet), and Dancing with the Stars. Reality TV in combination with home shopping networks offer instruction from male authority figures to mostly female audiences. When reality TV women are in positions of authority, they often take on characteristics associated with stereotyped masculinity (Survivor, Love it or List it). Women are instructed in romance (The Bachelor/The Bachelorette); how to manage their homes, children, and husbands (Wife Swap, The Real Housewives of Beverly Hills (and other places), and how to please and keep men regardless of loyalty to women (Girls Next Door (2005–2010); Keeping Up with the Kardashians). Adolescent girls with a steady diet of reality TV believe other girls are untrustworthy, mean and lie to get ahead (Behm-Morawitz et al., 2016). Reality TV shows such as 16 and Pregnant and Teen Mom, and numerous spinoffs, may “realistically” delve into the life altering outcomes of early motherhood, but as grim as these are, teen girls are tantalized by the images and the “female feminine stereotypes” portrayed (Hodel, 2016; Hein, 2019). Men also consume reality TV, and are fans of shows revolving around risk, danger, and heroism (Deadliest Catch, Naked and Afraid, American Ninja Warrior). Beauty obsession stands out on reality TV. Consistent with research in body studies, men and women adhere to rigid appearance and size standard in gender-appropriate ways (Chapter 3). Although the unrealistic standard affects both males and females, young women are its most likely prey. Beauty can be bought with cosmetics and clothing (Extreme Makeover (2002–2007), What Not to Wear (2003–2013)), and countless spinoffs. It is the weight standard that requires an even greater investment. Reality television, paradoxically, has capitalized on the obesity epidemic in the United States. Fatness is normalized on reality TV (More to Love) or ignored by obese brides (Say Yes to the Dress). Obese people appear regularly throughout all television formats. Normative, however, does not translate to acceptable. A fat stigma exists, and reality TV helps people— literally—to reduce it (The Biggest Loser, My 600lb Life). Perhaps because of pressure to represent the general population, a “pseudo-fat acceptance” underlies the proliferation of fat people on television (Peltier and Mizock, 2012). The Oscars, Grammys, Emmys, and other award shows also count as reality TV. Acclaimed film and television actress Melissa McCarthy was turned down by top designers for a dress to wear during the Oscar ceremony, even as she was nominated for an Academy Award for Bridesmaids. Bebe Rexha was turned down for a Grammy appearance gown for the same reason—she was considered “too big” at a size 6/8. Although designers ferociously work to showcase their clothing on Oscar or Grammy night, they clearly do not want their fashions to be worn by plus-size women. A mediated fashion industry sends another message, and in this case not a subtle one, that fat women are unacceptable. McCarthy since partnered with a designer to create a fashion line to flatter rather than disparage (and discourage) plus-size women. Turnabout is fair play. Best Supporting Actress Oscars went to Mo’Nique for Precious (2010), and Octavia Spencer for The Help (2011). Spencer celebrated her win with

Media  525

comments about designers making fabulous gowns for larger women. Japanese-American designer Tadashi Shoji scored new fans and clients for “catering to all kinds of figures”, which has won him scores of famous fans, including Mo’Nique and Spencer (Oscars), Britney Young (SAG), and Christina Hendricks (Emmys). Designing gowns for all body types for decades, he asks why everyone is talking about plus sizes now: … women deserve to feel comfortable and confident … Men have always been able to do this—why shouldn’t women? It’s about time. (Fishman, 2019) His gowns continue to be paraded on the red carpet, earning the accolades and publicity other designers shrugged off. Young women are vulnerable to messages revolving around beauty and body. They certainly recognize the importance of appearance as they traverse dating, romance, sports, peer relationships, and the job market. They internalize the belief that changing their appearance depends on individual efforts. With everything reality TV has to offer, if they cannot succeed, it is their own fault.

TV’s Gendered Exceptions Standout exceptions in past and current television programming can serve as cues to predict future trends. Cagney and Lacey (1982–1988) was the first prime time drama featuring two female leads as police partners. Deviating from the prime time television norm, crime plots intertwined sensitively with issues rarely addressed on police shows, including breast cancer, domestic violence, abortion, and child neglect. Police women, like all women, faced career and family conflict, misogyny and prejudice, and ambition and hope at midlife. These compassionate yet entertaining portrayals created a loyal male and female audience for its sixyear and later made-for-television movie run. The closest contemporary version of Cagney and Lacey was Rizzoli and Isles (TNT, 2010–2016), detective and medical examiner crime solvers and good friends on and off the job. A reboot of Cagney and Lacey was abruptly cancelled in 2018. It is unclear if the iconic show will be back on TV. Other exceptions to the stock gender-role television drama formula include 50-ish Detective Superintendent Jane Tennison (Helen Mirren) in the British series Prime Suspect and brilliant forensic anthropologist Dr. Temperance Brennan (Emily Deschanel) in Bones. Created and written by Shonda Rimes and a female led production crew, Grey’s Anatomy (2005), the longest-running medical drama on TV, follows chief of general surgery Dr. Meredith Grey traversing personal and professional challenges in her career path. Critics contend that Grey’s timely stories have inspired “legions of medical students and empowering women” (Goldberg, 2019a). Shonda Rhimes has ascended to icon status. As the first African American woman executive producer with creative control over acclaimed and top-rated TV shows (Scandal, How to Get Away with Murder, The Practice), Shonda Rhimes has ascended to icon status. In The Good Wife (2009–2016), created and produced by Robert and Michelle King, Alicia Florrick (Julianna Margulies) is a respected defense attorney reclaiming her life and identity after her philandering political husband lands in jail. The web-based sequel, The Good Fight (2010), created and produced by Robert and Michelle King, follows her esteemed and resourceful firm partner Diane Lockhart (Christine Baranski) and a strong female cast into new treacherous legal territory. These heroines lead diverse casts of men and

526  Gender and Social Institutions

women who solve complicated crimes, deftly defend their clients, and thoughtfully struggle with issues related to family, friendship, and motherhood. Gender stereotypes do lurk in the background. Their careers offer fulfillment, but their personal lives are often in disarray. The message that women can’t have it all—rewarding career and loving family—remains a compelling subtext. Created by Barbara Hall, Madam Secretary (2014–2020) is another notable exception, earning critical acclaim from reviewers, the public, and advertisers for writers and for lead actress Téa Leoni. For high school girls and young women, the success of Xena: Warrior Princess (1995– 2001) and the run of Buffy the Vampire Slayer (1997–2003) are attributed to the nonstereotyped traits associated with the characters—confidence, strength, and the ability to match and outwit male villains—as well as loyalty and friendship among young women. With the action, fantasy, and adventure of these series, young males crossed over to watch these shows. These strong and heroic female leads attracted a legion of viewers for reruns. The beauty subtext and sexism vestige for female characters in these shows are evident, but may or may not overshadow the shows’ other messages. To date, Buffy and Xena have not been surpassed. Charmed (1998–2006), rebooted in 2018 with the same name, follows three sisters who are powerful witches who help and protect humankind. The cast of the reboot is comprised of ethnically, racially, and sexually diverse women who are assertive, strong, and humane. The original is enjoying a cult following and younger women have been drawn in to the reboot. It is now common to see gender-related social issues on entertainment-focused dramas, on talk shows, and increasingly on comedy series. Despite enduring stereotyped portrayals, women and men are pursuing a range of nontraditional roles in real-world living arrangements and occupations far removed from Beaver Cleaver’s family. Consider Will & Grace (1998–2017) and Designing Women (1986–1993) of the past and more recently The Office (2005–2013), Parks and Recreation (2009–2015), and current sitcom-drama Life in Pieces. These shows demonstrate that class, race, age, sexual orientation, and gender diversity can be successfully portrayed without demeaning stereotypes often associated with these categories. These exceptions need to be considered in overall programming, including cable and streaming TV and reruns dating back over half a century. Even with women in lead roles in a few popular series, they still do not typically include major roles, especially for minority women. Gender role diversity has had minimal impact on the stereotypes embedded within the very programs that are often promoted as representing more realistic gender images. As shows enter the rerun market, earlier gender stereotypes remain. Think of classic Charlie’s Angels (1976–1981) (Whose angels are they?) and Cheers (1982–1993), the bar owned by womanizer Sam Malone. Intent to make programming less gender stereotyped is often countered by reruns. Upcoming TV pilot seasons are likely to reproduce those from two decades ago. There will be male leads and co-leads, females are outnumbered 2 to 1, and gender stereotyped themes will be featured (Goldberg, 2019b; Napoli, 2019).

Commercials Television advertising reinforces print images. Nonverbals in print ads can be effective but are limited compared to television commercials. Lighting, camera angle, tone of voice, body movement, animation, and color, to name a few, can be infinitely manipulated to provide the ideal sales mix for commercials. Racially segregated commercials have disappeared. Families, children, friends, peers, and couples in every conceivable setting are now more likely to be

Media  527

shown interracially in all commercials. These progressive interracial portrayals, however, are embedded with gender stereotypes. Gendered content in television advertising has a long and extensive research history. For network and cable television, the results are similar to print advertisements. Gender stereotypes also far outweigh racial stereotypes. As judged by the setting of the commercial, the single largest occupation for a female is homemaker. She is usually at home testifying to the merits of bathroom and kitchen products. Although she is selling products to other women, a man’s voice in the background tells her what to do. Most voice-overs are male. She is portrayed in dependent, subordinate, and helping roles to her husband, her children, and her male employer if she works outside the home. If she is African American, this pattern is stronger. Consistent with print ads, television commercials emphasize that women must be attractive. About one in three commercials presents a message to women about attractiveness. Her attractiveness is linked to her sexuality, also presented in terms of appearance. Commercials remind women and girls of self-worth with products allowing them to stay beautiful and stay healthy as they age. With the onslaught of direct-to-consumer (DTC) drug ads to women, health and beauty messages coincide (teeth, eyes, breath, weight, bowels); drugs allow for a lifestyle free from bathroom breaks. Even if women are shown, increasing male voiceovers in DTC ads tell them what to do. Women and men are at parity in prime time commercials, but decades of these ads show them in domestic situations as wife, mother or caretaker; when shown with men outside the home, they are portrayed as less assured, passive, and immature (Grover and Nayyar, 2017; Furnham and Lay, 2019). Super Bowl commercials are the most expensive and most watched by the most people at the same time. Many of these are deemed sexist and offensive, especially to women viewers. From casting women as nags to making burger eating nearly a sex act, these spots demonstrate how low Super Bowl advertising can go (Poggi, 2018a, 2018b). These trends are consistent over time, and strikingly similar in sports advertising globally. Despite charges of sexism or images of abuse, even in the #MeToo era advertisers neither apologize, nor do they financially suffer, from the content.

Children’s Commercials Of all television advertising, commercials for children are the most gender stereotyped. Because a child typically views more than about 20,000 commercials annually, the impact on gender attitudes is enormous. Commercials depicting children are strictly gender segregated. Girls are shown in more passive activities and are more dependent on another person or a doll for entertainment. They learn how to help their mothers, assist in household tasks, serve men and boys—especially where food is concerned—and learn to be beautiful or stay cute. Ads focus on passive and quiet play using dreamy content, soft music, and fades or dissolves for sequencing. Commercials do not teach independence or autonomy for young girls. The opposite characteristics are depicted in commercials for boys, focusing on aggression, action, control, completion, and independence, most in scenes outside the home (Chapter 3). Changing these patterns is not encouraging. Females still need males to tell them what to do or buy, even for products such as window cleaner, deodorant, and hair color. Gender stereotypes in children’s commercials have increased. Only a small portion of alternative gender possibilities are imaged in children’s advertisements. Advertisements continue to picture children in unrealistic settings and in nonoverlapping and oppositional roles: boys will

528  Gender and Social Institutions

be boys, and girls will be girls. Regardless of how old the characters are, television advertisers speak in male voices to female consumers.

MEN’S IMAGES IN MEDIA Despite changes in the real world, women do not fare well in media. Men star in more television series, sell more records, make more movies, and are paid more than female counterparts. But men, too, pay a price for power and popularity. From the media’s standpoint, a man is a breadwinner who cheats on his girlfriend or wife, is inept at washing clothes or vacuuming a rug, is manipulated by his children, and uses anger or force to solve problems. How do media contribute to these images?

Advertising Advertisers divide products according to gendered emotional appeal; hence some are masculine, and some are feminine. Ads rely on stereotypical constructs of “what it takes to be a man” (Saz-Rubio and Milagros, 2019:192). Cars, life insurance, and beer are masculine, so men do the selling to other men. Men also sell women’s products, including cosmetics and designer clothing. In fact, men do most of the selling on television, as evidenced by male voice-overs in both daytime and prime time television. Male voice-overs have decreased slightly over time, but a man’s voice is heard over three-fourths of all commercials. Ads put men in positions of power directing what both men and women should buy. Men’s speech is serious, impersonal and directive. Fear appeals are common, so not using a product has grave consequences (Iyanga-Mambo, 2017). A man’s voice is the voice of authority. Commercials shown on television, particularly during sports events, are exclusively male oriented. Often laced with violent images that endorse the sexual objectification of women, men respond positively to these ads, but women do not. Advertisers intensify their marketing of beer to males rather than alter content to make beer ads more palatable to women. Traditional images of masculinity in TV commercials and products in print ads overrepresent males who are camping, are cowboys, or tailgaters in friendly competition and in camaraderie. Beer commercials during male oriented sports events (football and soccer, hockey, wrestling) are largely devoid of women, and if shown, they are exceedingly sexualized (Hall and Kappel, 2018). Men are adventurous good old boys who play hard at sports, exercise vigorously, and have a country spirit. Compared to television commercials print ads with male models deviate sharply from those of a decade ago. Men who read male-directed magazines (GQ, Cigar Aficionado, Men’s Health) are likely to value thinness for women and muscularity for men. The covers of men’s health magazines endorse images of masculinity’s creed of men who are “big, hard, and up.” These images can lead to unhealthy behavior such as reckless sexuality, or fuel anxiety about body dissatisfaction (Van der Watt, 2016). Playgirl centerfolds depict idealized versions of muscular men supposedly desired by women. Capitalizing on men’s concerns about being underweight or undermuscular, advertisers aggressively market dietary supplements, sports equipment, and weight-lifting CDs to men and boys. Eating disorders in men are correlated with the increasing objectification of men’s bodies (Chapter 2). Underweight males on television and in film are often portrayed as insecure, shy, and unappealing as friends and lovers. Overweight males, however, can be

Media  529

portrayed in a range of positive roles (Mike and Molly, King of Queens, Modern Family). In comedy roles, audiences laugh with men but not at them because they tell funny jokes, not because they are fat. Advertisers do not want to alienate male viewers by making fun of male characters. Fat men can have hot or skinny wives and girlfriends (Family Guy, Scorpion, Saturday Night Live (skits), Lost). For other products, in both print ads and television commercials, women are increasingly shown in activities outside the home and men are increasingly shown in family roles. However, men inhabit worlds of workplace, gym, and sports bar and are portrayed as mature, wise, successful, competitive, and powerful. The competent man image shifts greatly when men are shown doing housework and child care. In their homes, they are depicted as more foolish than women, bumbling in the kitchen and inept with infants and children. Audiences are meant to laugh at men who create havoc when doing chores typically performed by women. Men may be doing more in-home work in today’s commercials, but stereotypes persist about his incompetence in a woman’s sphere. The UK is cracking down on gender stereotypes in commercials belittling men for “unmanly” behavior and depicting dads as inept (John, 2018). This is unlikely to happen in the United States. Gillette’s #MeToo razor campaign spotlighting toxic masculinity was met with cheers and jeers. Praise was overshadowed by an angry backlash that the commercials “emasculated men.” It generated counter ads, however, for fake products, known as “woke” ads, to rile men who like their toxic masculinity, such as energy drinks for stay-at-home dads and a watch that buzzes whenever a man talks over a woman. Despite the backlash, or because of it, Gillette products improved on its brand recognition. The huge attention the ads generated suggests others tackling the “modern gender politics” in advertising are on the horizon (Benwell, 2019; Topping et al., 2019). With not quite the publicity, Kleenex bowed to complaints about sexist ads by rebranding its “Mansize” tissues “Extra Large.” Overall, only a small portion of alternative gender possibilities for masculinity are imaged in advertisements directed to men.

Film Fueled by advertisers, films contribute to images of men as invulnerable and decisive, and increasingly as sex objects. Films portray men in two thematic ways. The first is the hero theme. Heroes are adventurous tough guys and superheroes engaged in action–adventure plots. Pure fantasy exists in movies where the hero escapes unscathed from the jaws of death. The twist for some movies is that the hero is reluctant, insisting he is not brave, and avoids getting involved in anything he perceives to be dangerous. He is just doing his job. Circumstances prove otherwise as he rescues the maiden, finds the gold, protects the vulnerable, or saves planets from destruction (I Am Legend, Star Wars (all episodes), Children of Men, The Matrix). Heroes strike back in legitimate revenge, often as nameless heroes (Pale Rider, Mad Max, Batman). Reluctant heroes Antonio Banderas, Will Smith, Brad Pitt, and Matt Damon have replaced John Wayne (The Searchers), Humphrey Bogart (Casablanca) and Gary Cooper (Sgt. York) of the past. Unlike women who appear as leads in either romantic or adventure films, these men maintain their hero qualities well into later life. Men are linked in popular “buddy” movies. Plots cast them as initially suspicious and competitive on the surface; they gradually move toward genuine—if begrudging—respect and camaraderie. Heroes move in and out of relationships. Romance is short-lived, not enough to keep men from carefree lifestyles but dangerous escapades. Heroic buddies, including

530  Gender and Social Institutions

superheroes, learn to admire one another for traits they see lacking in themselves (Die Hard, 48 Hours, Men in Black, X Men, Avengers: Endgame). The men as sex objects subtext of the hero theme transfers to recent action motion pictures increasingly portraying men as leaner and meaner. Gaunt heroes of the past (Clark Gable, James Stuart) are replaced with aggressive, muscular men who achieve positive outcomes, including romance, by the end of the movie. In comic book, animation, or live action films, superheroes are muscular (Captain America, Black Panther), superheroines are (too) thin and/or sexy (Wonder Woman, Black Widow, Catwoman). Superheroes may be sex objects, but they have not caught up to superheroines in sexualized portrayals. Superheroines are in tight costumes emphasizing large breasts and skinny waists. They wield physical attraction to confer the needed power to overcome physically stronger male villains (Schroeder, 2019). Like TV, film allows men to be older and larger and be admired by men and desirable to women. Weight gain by Russell Crowe, John Travolta, and Denzel Washington does not disqualify them as heroes or as romantic leads in adventure movies. The next generation of aging male actors may not be as fortunate, however, if men’s bodies continue to be objectified. The second theme portraying men is violence. Both heroes and villains are violent, and violence is needed to end violence. The kill-and-maim plots of the Friday the 13th, Halloween, Prom Night, Lord of the Rings, and Harry Potter franchises offer a multitude of graphically violent movies toppling drug lords and organized crime, and attest to revenge, killing, and violence in the name of justice and honor. Male characters refusing to abide by this formula are portrayed as unintelligent, egotistical, and cowardly. They routinely die in the movie with the audiences sighing “good riddance.” Violence is normative in all genres of movies, most rapidly in films aimed at younger audiences. Procuring the coveted PG-13 rating, escalation of violence and the graphic display of sexual violence in financially successful action–adventure films are released to international audiences. In the global economy, high-profit films need minimal editing for non-English speakers or for audiences who cannot read subtitles. The next time you watch a film, note the length of time of scenes with no dialogue. Chances are, those scenes are an action–adventure sequence consisting of heroic males in chase scenes with explosions, mayhem, and nonstop exploits related to violence and destruction.

Television Television reinforces images of media masculinity. In prime-time dramas, men are active, independent, less tied to relationships, and in control. Men acknowledge that power is a double-edged sword; it brings adversity as well as rewards, but they are willing to accept the consequences (MacGyver, Blue Bloods, CSI). Less favorable portrayals of men are increasingly connected to use of force to deal with turmoil in their relationships. Whether as heroes or villains, television equates male strength with stoicism and lack of emotion (other than anger), self-reliance, shrewdness, and ability to fight their way out of a difficult spot.

Situation Comedies: Men in Families The key exception to the image of masculine strength and independence is the situation comedy, where husbands take on a childlike dependence on their wives (The Simpsons,

Media  531

Married with Children, Family Guy). Clearly father no longer knows best, but sitcom men are reluctant to accede power in families. Confrontational arguments by men are entrenched in sitcoms. Men argue loudly and long with wives and children. Men “bluff and bluster; women manipulate and whine” because this is what audiences expect (Britt, 2018). Home Improvement (1991–1999) and Last Man Standing (2011–2019), vehicles for Tim Allen, appear to be about men learning to productively navigate egalitarianism in the face of masculinity. But feminist is always constructed as inferior to masculinist. Allen’s characters inevitably apologize to his wife and family for his unintended sexism. She smiles and accepts his apology. It is also rare to find men in loving and nurturing relationships with their television children without a woman hovering in the background. Television refuses to allow men to be shown as competent fathers who are capable of raising young children on their own. In decadesold early TV shows such as the Andy Griffith Show, there was Aunt Bee; in the Courtship of Eddie’s Father there was Mrs. Livingston; and in Family Affair there was Mr. French. Past shows such as Full House and recent shows such as Two and a Half Men portray single dads in amazingly nontraditional living arrangements where other adults are always present. Unlike series featuring women as single parents, almost ludicrous circumstances must be invented to accommodate single fathers. It is virtually impossible to find a father raising an infant or a very young child alone. Twists on men in family relationships and fathers with children are in Modern Family (2009–2019) featuring a clan of families including a gay couple raising a daughter. Two gay fathers rather than one father—gay or not—are surrounded by an army of female friends and kin who aid each other in child rearing. Following on its heels, This is US (2016) is a comedy-drama focusing on a diverse and loving family at various points in time reflecting the real world families and its emerging forms (Chapter 8). These shows are exceptions to stereotyped portrayals of men. Media allow men a wider range of roles than women, but gender stereotypes surrounding masculinity lurk in men’s imagery as well.

TV’s Gender, Race, and Class Link Like Mr. Rogers’ Neighborhood, until the mid-1960s, white middle-class professional and managerial men of generic northern European background inhabited prime-time television. They were married to women of similar backgrounds who were full-time homemakers. When male people of color were seen, they fell into three categories: African American chauffeurs and bodyguards, Asian cooks and gardeners, and Latino desperadoes and drug lords. By the 1980s a marked shift had occurred for people of color in numbers and types of roles, a pattern that continues today. African American and Asian men are increasingly portrayed—however, Latino men remain a distant third. Latino men are largely supporting players and background figures and likely to be stereotypically represented as poor, deviant, or criminal compared to all other racial and ethnic groups. Men are thugs and women are maids or sexpots (Nittle, 2019). The unfounded criminalization of Latino immigrants is mirrored in TV; half of Latino immigrants are represented as criminal. A blurring of racial differences among men is occurring throughout television, in commercials and prime time television. Although racial segregation in TV programs and commercials has largely disappeared, class differences are increasing. Gone are the struggling working-class African American families of 1970s television. The laborers, servants, and junk collectors of the Evans family (Good Times) and Sanford and Son were replaced by the 1980s

532  Gender and Social Institutions

with business owners, attorneys, and other professionals (Jeffersons, Cosby Show). Overdue for a millennium update, Black-ish aired in 2014. Framed as “post-racial,” an affluent African American man with a biracial wife wants to reconnect his “colorblind” children with their cultural heritage. The framing and plot, however, are mired in gender stereotypes and it is difficult to dismiss sexist content that cannot be disguised as satire. It is unlikely that the show can match the Cosby legacy. It is clear, nonetheless, that African American affluence is viewed as normative in these shows. In prime-time drama, leading roles for African American secret agents, doctors, lawyers, and police officers are common. Ordinary guys who become extraordinary are also featured (Criminal Minds, Power, Elementary, God Friended Me).

Middle-Class Men As men and women from all races moved up in social class, they left their working-class counterparts behind. The professionals of How I Met Your Mother and Sex in the City supplanted the struggling waitresses of Alice and assembly-line workers of Laverne and Shirley. Television is a virtual haven for the middle class, with middle- and upper-class men dominating television in number of series, number of roles, and number of starring roles (Bull, Suits, 30 Rock, White Collar). Middle-class men on prime-time television are college educated, lead interesting and productive lives, and have disposable income to travel and buy expensive artifacts for their tastefully decorated homes. Shows spotlighting women parallel these trends (Real (rich) Housewives). Advertisers desiring to show a full range of products used by glamorous people are often catered to. The result is television shows built around affluent characters. The psychiatrist brothers of Frasier represent the middle-class standard of primetime television for males. Racial stereotypes are still apparent, but class stereotypes are on the fast track to overtake them. Gender stereotypes, however, remain largely intact.

Working-Class Men In the real world, people in the working class are those who lift, bend, drive, keyboard, clean, load, unload, provide physical care for others, cook, and serve (Ehrenreich, 1998). They are high school graduates working for a wage rather than a salary and are employed in blue-collar positions, retail sales, and lower-level white-collar clerical jobs. Although they represent over two-thirds of employed Americans and include well-paid workers in the skilled trades and small business owners (Chapter 10), the working class of prime time television is largely unseen. In over half a century of situation comedies, working-class families are the most underrepresented. The working class are relegated to a vague, marginalized category of people living on the edge, portrayed in their homes but not in their workplaces (VanArendonk, 2018). Prime time television’s construction of men from this small group of working-class families is vastly different from television’s middle class. Blue-collar men are depicted as being deficit in understanding finances, make uninformed choices harmful to their families, and needing supervision at work and by their wives at home, in turn justifying their place in society. Working-class characters who have lead roles are often friends or relatives of the main characters in situation comedies or as unsavory characters lurking in the background of police precincts, courtrooms, schools, and hospital waiting rooms in prime time drama. Since the 1980s, drama or comedy series featuring working-class men have decreased.

Media  533

Unlike racial portraits of men, comparable working-class portraits are largely the same throughout television’s history. Homer Simpson has replaced Ralph Cramden, Fred Flintstone, and Archie Bunker. The few shows that portray working-class or even lower SES men in lead roles have prototype characters: now they are men of all races but depicted as wise fools, lovable but incompetent with parochial, poor, or questionable taste in all things. They hide behind a veil of exaggerated masculinity that is easily unwoven by their ever-suffering wives, girlfriends, or co-workers (Everybody Loves Raymond, Tyler Perry’s House of Payne, King of the Hill, Simpsons, Family Guy). Significant holdouts to this pattern were Taxi (1978–1982), Roseanne (1988–1997), and Grace Under Fire (1993–1998). These shows deviated from the working-class norm with men and family members in diverse roles dealing sensitively with a range of difficult, daily challenges families and workers face. Comedy was not sacrificed in these portrayals.

Critique Reality television may be doing a better job portraying working class positively. High-rated shows follow men in their dangerous work as loggers in Oregon, long-haul drivers, and fishers who confront dangerous conditions to carry out their work. Others are the paramedics, firefighters, and police officers who routinely lead risky lives in the service of others. Framing working-class men as capable because of the dangers and the strength needed for their jobs is a double-edged sword. Working-class men are defined by images of masculinity drawing on physical capability that few can attain. Considering that these are “reality” shows, stereotypes equating masculinity with physical strength and action are more difficult to dislodge (Chapter 9). Like media-created women, men cannot be all they are meant to be. Men are increasingly disdainful of media portrayals showing them as sex objects and success objects. They want to be identified for their lives as fathers and husbands and less as sexual exploiters of women and ruthless competitors of men. Tom Hanks and the late Robin Williams demonstrate this; Howard Stern and Kevin Spacey do not. Until we see men consistently portrayed as loving fathers, compassionate husbands, and household experts, attitudes about masculinity will not be significantly altered.

Gender and Mass Media Industries Despite a few but uneven gains, men dominate mass media industries in top leadership and “in every part of news, entertainment and digital media” (Women’s Media Center, 2019). These differences are stark in the film industry. Women make up only 21 percent of behindthe-scenes slots on the top 250 films, with numbers barely shifting for over two decades (Lauzen, 2020). Pervasive gender typing throughout mass media is traced to the scarcity of women in creative and decision-making positions throughout media industries (Chapter 10). As in other industries, aspiring female mass media executives confront gender segregated and gender stratified promotion ladders. However, the glass ceiling, or in this case the celluloid ceiling, for female executives is more pervasive in mass media businesses. The good news in the news world is that women are making news by writing news and broadcasting news. Tongue-in-cheek as this is, news journalism is doing a better job than other mass media industries in retaining and promoting a few female journalists to top positions. Given the celluloid ceiling, it is still the exception rather than the rule.

534  Gender and Social Institutions

When women media professionals attain very senior editorial positions, their achievement continues to make front page news, such is its rare occurrence. (Ross, 2019:16)

Television In television, women account for half of TV characters in all time slots and actors in commercials. Even with more screen time than in the past and a large fan base, these women have limited control in determining how they are portrayed. Men dominate sizably in top-level management positions in every part of news, entertainment, music, advertising, and digital media. Women have made the most gains in network, cable, and streaming television programs. Women comprise approximately one-fourth of TV directors, creators, writers, producers, executive producers, and directors of photography In the last decade, however, progress has stalled (Women and Hollywood, 2019a). The effects of stalled progress in any media format has immediate repercussions in all others. In advertising, for example, women hold the majority of administrative assistant and support posts but are underrepresented in all meaningful positions of authority. Advertising wields extraordinary influence in sustaining or altering persistent gender stereotyping invading all print and television media. An influx of women as advertising directors is the catalyst needed for more realistic gender images of both women and men. Qualifications for entry into these positions include advanced, specialized education and experience. Women match men in educational profiles, but their experience is less favorable than that of their male counterparts. Most women managers in television entered the industry within the last two decades. Until women move into higher ranks and hire and mentor women, gendered occupational segregation in the television industry will be the norm. To date, leadership roles in network and cable production, management, and news remain limited.

Broadcast Journalism Since the 1970s, mass media industries have demonstrated a slow but upward trend in female employment. Print journalism, however, is flatlining. In the past two decades women’s share in newsrooms increased by less than one percent. For women of color, this slight gain is offset by a decreased share, also about one percent for people of color overall. Women dominate journalism schools, but men snag over two-thirds of newswire bylines (69 percent), the largest gender gap by far in all news media (ASNE, 2018; Women’s Media Center, 2019). Paralleling trends in other professions, women who make it to top editorial positions are criticized for leadership styles defined by a gender double standard (women are pushy, men are assertive). When top women leave careers in journalism, the pipeline for those to follow shrinks. Compared to print journalism, women are making the greatest strides in broadcast journalism, including TV news and commentary, gaining more production and writing roles and onscreen visibility. With Barbara Walters as the pioneer, Jane Pauley, Judy Woodruff, Andrea Mitchell, Greta Van Susteren, and Katie Couric paved the way for Rachel Maddow, Joy Reid, Lisa Ling, and the late Gwen Ifill, the first woman of Caribbean-African descent to host a national public affairs show (PBS) and be managing editor of Washington Week. These women demonstrate the professionalism and integrity of women broadcasters.

Media  535

Sports Metropolitan areas have male–female news teams that vie with each other for ratings. Women in other news departments have made inroads, but the sports anchor is likely a white man or, increasingly, a former African American athlete teamed with a white man. In solo sports reporting, even if spotlighting outstanding female athletes or female teams, reporters are exclusively men. Women newscasters are gaining more onscreen visibility but in an industry that is not welcoming overall, they must navigate gendered terrains to maintain their agency as well as their career. Many stations require their female sportscasters, for example, to wear “revealing” clothing. The gender and age double standard in appearance in sports reporting is more pervasive than in other areas of broadcast journalism (Harrison, 2019; Lucht and Batschelet, 2019). These women are ensnared in a particularly onerous double-bind: their credibility is threatened by primarily male audiences who project stereotypes on female sportscasters about beauty and professionalism. One counteracts the other.

Weather In early television, the few women seen during local news programs were billed as “weather girls” and held third-rate positions on the news teams. Today more female weathercasters are responsible for preparing and broadcasting the weather. Like sports, however, in local weathercasting positions, women claim only a small percent of slots. Thirty percent of weathercasters are women, but only 8 percent are chief meteorologists. Women’s lack of representation in weather segments is significant given that weather is chosen as top reason to tune into local news (Cranford, 2018). Even as a credentialed weather professional or meteorologist, women face personality and appearance barriers less likely to be faced by men. The “weather girl” tag is still hard to shake. Attractive women with fewer meteorological credentials are filling slots in reporting—rather than forecasting—the weather on weekend and daytime TV. When weather news is ominous, with hurricanes, tornadoes, and volcanic eruptions on the horizon, a male weathercaster takes over. Regardless of her expertise and as sexist as it is, hiring attractive women to report the weather is a “time-honored global tradition.” Stations may be reluctant to label these women “weather girls,” but they may be making a comeback (Zion, 2017).

Critique Does onscreen visibility in news and information programs mean that gender barriers are eroding? The answer is both yes and no, and a look at morning television news helps explain why. The three major networks produce a morning show described as combining news with entertainment. Currently, male and female teams consisting of three or four “racially diverse” persons host these shows. This format is necessary for success. No longer can a man or a completely male news team expect to carry the show. On the other hand, women are increasing their numbers rapidly as foreign and war correspondents. In 1970, only 6 percent of women were foreign correspondents; today over onethird fill this slot. They have more control over what they report and how they report war and global news. They tend to focus on the human toll of war related to civilian populations

536  Gender and Social Institutions

and highlight issues faced by women and children in war-torn areas. In high-visibility positions reporting from war zones, like journalists throughout the globe, they are in harm’s way. Public acceptance of these women and their reporting is at an all-time high.

Film The golden days of film coincided with the Depression. Ironically, this period was the golden age for women actors but the dark age for women directors. The position of director is the apex of the film industry. In the silent screen and pre-World War I eras, there were over 30 female directors, more than at any other time in film history. The rise of the studio system and its vertical monopoly model consolidated the production, distribution, and exhibition of films in individual companies and forced many independent filmmakers out of work.

Directors In this early era where film norms were still emerging, Dorothy Arzner was the only woman directing for a studio (1927–1943). During the next two decades, Ida Lupino was the only woman directing major feature films, and she established herself even before World War II. Actors including Penny Marshall, Kathy Bates, Sally Field, Jodie Foster, and Barbra Streisand emerged as acclaimed directors by the millennium. Women do better as producers of top films, holding 27 percent of these slots. Yet for the top 250 films, women hold only 12 percent of prized director slots (Figure 13.1). In 90 years of Oscars there have been 13 best picture nominees directed by women, but only five women have received a Best Director nomination. Barbra Streisand was an Oscar-nominated director for The Prince of Tides but was passed over. In 2010 Kathryn Bigelow became the only woman to win an Oscar for Best Director and for Best Picture directed by a woman (The Hurt Locker) also receiving Best Screenplay. The number of female directors is correlated to the number of parts and the significance of those parts for female actors. There are three speaking males for every one speaking female, a consistent trend for 40 years. Whereas the position of director remains a male bastion, the number of women producers, editors, and screenwriters is rapidly increasing. Although less likely by studios producing box-office blockbusters, they are doing creative work in newer cinematic forms. Art, documentary, educational, experimental, and emerging “alternative” cinema are especially hospitable to women eager to demonstrate their talents. Women film critics hold influential positions in the industry, so efforts outside mainstream filmmaking are not ignored. Feminist film theory is emerging from these efforts. Prominent female critics review films from perspectives that male critics usually dismiss, such as how women are portrayed, the quality of their roles, and the degree to which films reflect gender reality. These achievements are impressive, but they generally account for films outside mainstream outlets and in lesser-known studios. Women are thriving in the respected indie and film festival circuits but not the studios producing movies people will line up for on a cold Saturday night. Money and fame are reserved for commercially successful films. Although alternative cinema may provide creative outlets for women filmmakers, a male monopoly in the established film industry makes the switch from one system to the other difficult. Nine years after Bigelow’s win, only one female director, Greta Gerwig for Lady Bird, was even nominated for an Oscar. Women directors snare Golden Globes but so far Oscars are unattainable.

Media  537 13

8 Director

7 9

2019

11

2018

11

2017 2006

19 11 10

Writer

2000

16

1998

14 13 21 21 19

Exec. Producer

16 16 18

Producer

20

16

Editor

2 2 0

Top 250 Films

24 24

23 21

21 19 20

Cinematog.

FIGURE 13.1  Historical

27 26 25

5 4 4 4 10

20

30

Comparison of Percentages of Behind-the-Scenes Women on

Source: Lauzen, Martha. 2020. The Celluloid Ceiling: Behind-the-Scenes Employment of Women on the Top 100, 250, and 500 Films of 2019. Center for the Study of Women in Television and Film. https://womenintvfilm.sdsu. edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/2019_Celluloid_Ceiling_Report.pdf

MEDIA AND SOCIAL CHANGE Entertainment media present views of women and men far removed from reality, an acceptable standard allowing escape from this very reality. Less acceptable, news media present views marginalizing women in their daily lives. Men are portrayed as multidimensional and more positively than women, but still in highly stereotypical ways. Ruled by advertisers,

538  Gender and Social Institutions

media willingness to reduce gender stereotyping is not very encouraging. Advertisers argue that images reflect society and these are images the public wants to see. Yes, advertisers acknowledge that ads may reinforce existing sexism, but they did not create it. From their viewpoint, altering patterns simply to counter sexism risks public acceptance and profit. Moral responsibility for gendered media messages is rarely an issue.

Intersectional Media and Women’s Voices Media are entrenched in a broader social system of normative female subordination. An intersectional stance offers a vantage point to explain how this subordination is both buttressed and challenged in media. On one hand, in dealing with intersectional diversity and equity, mass media industries rank racial and ethnic issues more important than gender issues. Compared to gender stereotyping and misogyny, we see a more rapid decline of racial and ethnic stereotyping, particularly in entertainment media. In print and broadcast journalism, equity is highlighted in support of Gay Pride events globally. Popular appeal and critical acclaim of Oscar winning movies: Brokeback Mountain (2006), The Favorite (2019), Bohemian Rhapsody (2019), and TV shows: Glee (2009–2015), Will and Grace reboot, American Horror Story, Brooklyn 99, Nate and Jeramiah Save My House, and Ellen, attest to steep and swift declines in LGBTQ stereotyped portrayals. As LGBTQ people ascend mass media ladders, like other media figures reviewed here, they can assert control over their own self-image and take charge of how gayness as an identity category is represented (Martin, 2018). Gender issues per se, as binary as they are for women, however, are secondary to race, ethnicity, and LGBTQ issues. One the other hand, intersectionality acknowledges that productive change against racism, misogyny, and heterosexism helps equity in all areas. The voices of women are heard when they, too, ascend to leadership positions in media. Women executives are more likely than comparable men to embrace diversity in all its forms (Chapter 10). In turn, their voices herald the strengthening of equity measures in all areas.

Sportswomen Media representations of women in sports highlight intersectional challenges related to race, gender, and body image. In 1972, Title IX laid the foundation propelling women’s achievements in sports (Chapter 11). Despite this catalyst, a half-century of media representations of sportswomen shows marginalization in some sports (figure skating and gymnastics), and largely gender erasure in others (basketball and soccer). When sportswomen are represented, media norms spotlight sexualization that overlaps with “appropriate” femininity. Athletes are described by their appearance (a hazel-eyed blonde) and are posed nude or in sexually provocative, scanty attire (Bruce, 2016). Since 1964, the Sports Illustrated (SI) swimsuit edition featured models who became supermodels as a result of SI coverage (or literally, lack of coverage). With the nod to SI as a sports magazine, in 1997, female athletes began appearing in the swimsuit edition. The top female athletes across the globe are photographed and clad in pieces of fabric and string for the coveted edition. SI contends that the swimsuit edition celebrates not only race and ethnic diversity, but diversity of bodies. Some athletes are not chosen, however, when editors determine that airbrushing cannot mask faces and bodies deemed too masculine, or at best, not feminine enough. Others may be chosen or remove

Media  539

themselves from contention because they refuse to be portrayed in sexually objectified ways. Supermodels outnumber athletes throughout the edition and set the bar for all athletes in the edition. As for racial diversity, not only do white sportswomen far outnumber women of color, but readers learn about the lives and accomplishments of white athletes. Women of color are marginalized with fewer pictures, and less narrative. With the SI swimsuit edition as the ideal, standards of beauty (femininity) and standards of athleticism (strength) are entangled. Sportswomen may exude physical power but are tarnished in the media for deviating from feminine norms in attractiveness, in style, and in outspokenness. Serena Williams, the top female tennis player in history, and the only black woman to dominate tennis, is lauded for her athleticism and admonished for her anger on and off the court. Appearing in the swimsuit edition in 2017, she no longer meets the SI appearance standard. Nor does she meet the femininity standard regarding bluntness. Angry white men are unscathed, but angry black women are not only antithetical to womanhood, but their athleticism is regarded as natural and primitive in quality (Cooper, 2017; Slatton, 2018). Talent, achievement, and motivation are subordinated to an “instinct for athleticism” to explain success. Somali-American and Muslim model Halima Aden appears in SI in a burkini and hijab, the first woman to do so. Aden asserts the photoshoot was personally empowering, feeling as confident and strong as the women in string bikinis on other pages (Day, 2019:8). As are the representations of sportswomen in other media, the swimsuit edition is planned and produced by almost an entirely female staff. But visibility and female production teams do not automatically confer empowerment, nor does it necessarily reduce conventional sexualized portrayals of sportswomen (Heinecken, 2018; Jafar, 2019). Already the bestselling edition for SI, Aden’s appearance caused sales to skyrocket. What does a burkini-clad woman actually look like? In 2015 SI named Serena Williams “Sportsperson of the Year.” SI described her triumph as “a pinch-me patch” where the exotic became the norm (Price, 2015). Indeed, intersectionality asks: are Williams and Aden exotic because of race, gender, religion, or all the above?

Changing for Profit and Social Responsibility Media contend that altering established patterns simply to counter sexism risks public acceptance and profit. When advertisers are singled out for blatant sexist portrayals they assert they are trend followers, not trend setters. They ignore mountains of research indicating that heavy diets of gender stereotypes in all media forms are associated with higher levels of intolerance and prejudice, lower acceptance of gender and racial equality, and lower self-esteem for both females and males. The issue surfaces when sexual and violent content of media is examined, especially content consumed by children. Little attention is paid to ongoing, taken-for-granted misogyny pervading all media outlets. Only when media misogyny erupts violently in real life does moral responsibility for gendered media messages become an issue.

#MeToo Moral responsibility took center stage as powerful figures throughout media and in other segments of society toppled for sexual misconduct that included harassment, assault, rape, and abuse. Linked to the “contractual prisons” and oppressive nondisclosure agreements women entertainers endured when attempting to quit their jobs, systemic sexual

540  Gender and Social Institutions

victimization in the entertainment industry went unchecked for decades (Breeland, 2018). African American civil rights activist Tarana Burke is credited with first using the phrase Me Too in 2006 to generate awareness of pervasive sexual abuse invading all social institutions. In 2017, the #MeToo hashtag was added after the Harvey Weinstein sexual abuse allegations. Weinstein was one of the most powerful and feared studio bosses in Hollywood. Women throughout the mass media industry began telling their stories and offered support for survivors of sexual victimization. What became the #MeToo movement was quickly fueled by actor, producer, singer and activist Alyssa Milano (Charmed, Who’s the Boss, Melrose Place), by tweeting If you’ve been sexually harassed or assaulted write “me too” as a reply to this tweet. Within 24 hours her post generated thousands of replies … sharing personal stories. Among the celebrities who responded were Lady Gaga (and) Viola Davis … but many women who were not household names spoke out … some opening up for the first time about bring raped. (Pflum, 2018) Now used in 85 counties speaking against sexual harassment, #MeToo brought down some of the most powerful media and other figures across the globe. It has expanded well beyond Hollywood, credited with ousting sexually abusive politicians, clergy, business executives, and administrators in education, health, and government. Criminal actions for many are underway. Reflecting one year and 19 million tweets later, Burke and Milano are working to ensure #MyToo voices are amplified in the years to come. As Burke asserts The way you dismantle those power structures is by truth … that whole idea of speaking truth to power comes from the idea that the more truth that you tell, the less power people have over you. (Cachero, 2018) It is perhaps fitting that #MeToo was fueled by Hollywood. Media cannot be absolved of moral responsibility for sexual content of portrayals, laced with violence or the suggestion of violence. In the wake of Harvey Weinstein and #MeToo, I have been thinking a lot about what movies have asked me to dream, including the image of the forced kiss and all that it signifies about women and film. (Dargis, 2018) Jurors delivered a powerful message and a long-overdue reckoning about the legal system’s failure to prosecute and convict men accused of sexual crimes. During Weinstein’s trial, one of his accusers reported that he said: “You’ll never make it in this (movie) business. This is how this industry works” (Sisak and Hays, 2020:A7). Weinstein was convicted on charges of rape and criminal sexual assault and sentenced to prison. His legal team is appealing. Despite the takedown of Weinstein and the “tectonic shift” fueled by #MeToo, men still pull the strings in Hollywood and the power structure remains intact (Sperling, 2020:B1). As intersectional research documents, attention to sexually violent media can carry over to consciousness-raising about damaging effects of misogyny throughout society. In this sense, we become “resensitized” to the harm of gender stereotypes permeating media forms.

Media  541

Critique Media are formidable socializers and provide images that both reflect and reinforce gender stereotypes. Whether acknowledged or not, media do have the power and the responsibility to alter stereotypes. The public is demanding entertainment, news, and advertising offering positive images that affirm the reality of their gendered lives. We confer an inordinate amount of power to media. They satisfy our unquenchable entertainment thirst and demand for instant news. Media move us from the mundane to a world of fantasy and excitement. Is it possible for media to provide the entertainment and information, maintain public acceptance, increase profits, and simultaneously provide alternatives to the sexist portrayals of men and women? Given that research indicates that less gender stereotyping in media is associated with profit, the answer is affirmative. As noted, the irony of media and its advertising arm is that they thrive on change yet are barely moving from rigid, gendered patterns of portrayals. When convinced that success can be profitable if packaged differently, media change will accelerate. Who writes and who tells stories matter. Women hold a minimum of influential positions in mass media industries. The link between positive female portrayals and the numbers and females creating media content is strong, consistent, and causal. Sexualized violence is reported differently by women journalists and broadcasters. Survivors are approached with care, with dignity, and with respect. Survivors may find it easier to tell their story to a woman. Compassion is a mark of journalistic excellence, enhancing both readability and profit (Smith, 2019b; Wolfe, 2020). Women’s gains in positions of power and prestige in mass media industries will reduce harmful gender-stereotyped images.

KEY TERM #MeToo movement

CHAPTER 14

Power, Politics, and the Law

Little as the public think it, a woman who is now nominated may be elected next year. Less change of opinion than has occurred already will place her in the White House. —Victoria C. Woodhull Candidate for President of the United States, 1872 But while I may be the first woman in this office, I will not be the last. —Kamala Harris’ acceptance speech as Vice President-Elect, November 7 , 2020. In 1872 Victoria Woodhull was the first woman to seek the office of President of the United States. Over 200 women since have sought, been nominated, or have received votes for the presidency (Fitzpatrick, 2016:5, 8). Woodhull’s words from her letter of acceptance to run on the Equal Rights Party ticket eerily resonate today. In conceding the 2016 election, Hillary Clinton offered strikingly similar words, that a woman could win the White House: Now, I know we have still not shattered that highest and hardest glass ceiling, but someday someone will—and hopefully sooner than we might think right now. In the 2008 primary and 2016 general election Hillary Clinton fielded the most successful presidential campaigns for any women candidate in history. Almost two centuries of effort by organizations dedicated to women’s rights opened the door for Clinton’s historic campaign and set the stage for the election of Kamala Harris as Vice President in 2020 (Chapter 5). Riding liberal feminism’s second wave in 1966, the National Organization of Women (NOW) organized with the goal to achieve equality for women in America and a “fully equal partnership of the sexes.” Networking with NGOs globally, and grassroots activists representing all subsequent feminist waves, over half a century later, NOW’s efforts to promote feminist ideals and eliminate gender discrimination continue. Unless equal rights are achieved and protected, all women and girls remain vulnerable to discrimination and abuse. Decades ago, NOW astutely recognized that, with women and girls in mind, human rights abuse in the U.S. and globally was the cause of the times. Current efforts continue to focus on the legal and political interventions to liberate women from oppression, but also to provide them with a true sense of empowerment (Chapter 1). This chapter narrates the successes and challenges in reaching this goal.

Power, Politics, and the Law  543

SECTION 1 LAW AND PUBLIC POLICY Laws reflect the values of any society. The political institution and its legal foundation provide the critical lens through which all gender relations are viewed. The “equal justice for all” principle around which the law functions is embraced as a core American value. This gap between principle and practice, however, is large. Cultural definitions related to gender, race, social class, religion, age, and sexual orientation frequently determine how justice is served. Power is a basic element of the social fabric and is held in varying degrees according to social positions (statuses) people occupy. Max Weber (1864–1920), a key figure in the founding of sociology, defined power as the likelihood a person can achieve personal ends despite resistance from others. Because this definition views power as potentially coercive, Weber considered ways in which power can be achieved through justice. Authority, he contended, is power that people determine to be legitimate rather than coercive. When power becomes encoded into law it is legitimized and translated to the formal structure of society. Weber’s referred to this as rational–legal authority (Weber, 1946). Women as a group are at a distinct legal disadvantage for both power and authority. This disadvantage is stark. We have seen how this is economically true. In virtually all job categories, women are rewarded less than men in money and prestige. Interpersonal power is also compromised, even in the family, where women do have more decision-making weight. Added to this list is the limited political and legal power women wield. Social stratification is based on differential power, which in turn underlies all inequality. Inequality between the genders persists because the power base that women possess is more circumscribed than that of men. Restrictions in terms of political power and legal authority are at the core of inequality.

GENDERED LAW AND POLICY Judges draw assumptions about gender even as it undermines broader ideals about equality under the law. Supposedly neutral laws and public policies are steeped in gender assumptions that play out both subtly and openly in police stations, courtrooms, and legislatures throughout the United States. The law is expected to be a tool to advance gender equality and equal opportunity. But assumptions about gender permeate the law, raising questions about how much the law is living up to social values and its own aspirations (Lacey, 2017). These assumptions also intersect with stereotypes about race, ethnicity, SES, and sexuality. Assurances that equal rights are available to everyone are further compromised. The law does not operate “with an even hand.” Through a gender lens, key assumptions are identified (BenAsher, 2016; Skinner-Thompson, 2018; Chetkovich, 2019; Thomas, 2019). • • • • • • •

Gender is binary, biological, and immutable. Males and females have different capabilities; therefore, differing standards are used to judge their behavior. Men and women inhabit different spheres. Men are financial caretakers of women; women are caretakers of home and children. Women are vulnerable and need to be protected The “normal legal subject” has traits associated with white, middle-class heterosexual men. Husband and wife are legally considered as “one.” The “one” is the husband. Families are comprised of a male and female married couple who are parents of their biological children.

544  Gender and Social Institutions

When assumptions become encased in formal law and subject to a wide range of interpretations, law itself can perpetuate—yet also alter—beliefs about traditional gender roles and their enactment in families. Gender equality can be rebuked or remedied under law. At all levels of government, laws may offer one or other gender advantages or disadvantages. Variation in interpretation determines how the laws are enforced. Even strong, constitutionally based federal legislation is inconsistently applied. What will become clear is that regardless of beliefs about equality and justice, the law is not gender neutral, much less gender equal. Most legal statutes use the word sex and have yet to be rewritten when gender would be more appropriate to use. Since most statutes still use the word “sex,” this chapter generally retains that usage.

Employment One of the most important pieces of legislation to prohibit discrimination in employment based on sex is Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, making it unlawful to refuse to hire, discharge, discriminate against an employee with respect to “compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment” because of “race, color, religion, sex, or national origin” (Chapter 10).

Bona Fide Occupational Qualification The only way Title VII can be legally circumvented is through the bona fide occupational qualification (BFOQ), which allows hiring an employee on the basis of one sex, thereby seeming to discriminate against the other, if it is deemed critical for carrying out the job. For example, a woman can be hired over a man as an actor for a specific part in a movie to establish “authenticity or genuineness” of the role. If characteristics of one sex are necessary for the job, a person of that sex is hired, such as modeling men or women’s clothing. The courts have also rejected “customer preference” arguments to hire women over men as flight attendants and “job preference” beliefs that exclude women from working night shifts. It is telling that until the 1920s only men were hired as airline cabin “stewards.” With few exceptions the BFOQ rule is narrowly interpreted by the courts and is seldom used as a defense for charges of sex discrimination.

Disparate Impact Another accomplishment of Title VII is the elimination of policies that may appear to be neutral but can have a disparate impact on one or the other sex. When employees must be within certain height or weight limits, a large proportion of males or females may be excluded. Women, who on average weigh less than men, have been systematically denied employment opportunities in areas such as law enforcement, security, paramedical fields, mining, and construction by setting such limits. Although women’s smaller hands and better fine motor skills offer advantages in fields such as surgery and machine tooling, they were passed over in hiring. Men, who on average have larger hands than women, however, are less likely to be denied work where small components must be hand-tooled. Employers must demonstrate that such employment practices are business necessities without which the job could not be safely or effectively carried out. A strength test, for example, can determine if an employee is suitable for jobs where a specified amount of (safe) lifting is required. The test could mitigate disparate impact based on sex.

Power, Politics, and the Law  545

Equal Pay Act Because Title VII mandates the elimination of sex as a basis for hiring, the corollary should be an end to wage discrimination on the same basis. In 1963, the Equal Pay Act (EPA), requiring that females and males receive the same pay for the same job, became federal law. Controlling for educational level and occupational classification, the gender earnings gap has only slightly improved over the last three decades. This disparity in pay continues even with EPA because, as we have seen, women and men typically hold different jobs and women’s jobs are undervalued and underpaid in comparison to those held by men, with mothers and women of color the most disadvantaged (Chapter 10). Occupations are gender segregated and become gender stratified. The challenge, then, is how to assess jobs on the basis of skill level, effort, and responsibility. In 2009, President Obama signed into law his first bill, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act (FPA) that expands the statutory limitations to file a discrimination suit based on provisions of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. FPA overturned a 2007 Supreme Court (SCOUS) ruling that employees could not file a pay discrimination suit beyond 180 days after the discrimination first occurred. Employees may now file a suit within 180 days of the last paycheck that showed pay discrimination and can recover up two years of back pay. Although FPA is most known for addressing pay discrimination based on sex, other provisions also address race, religion, national origin, age, and disability. With women in the lead, a coalition of groups worked for the passage of FPA. The act does not guarantee equal pay but enlarges protection from discrimination based on a range of minority statuses. FPA may be the law but its effectiveness rests on accurate data about employee pay and the race, gender, and ethnicity of employees. From 2009 this information was required by companies with more than 100 employees and federal contractors with more than 50 employees. Arguing that the data requirement places an undue burden on employers, the Trump administration has since suspended this Obama-era rule indefinitely. Without such data, pay discrimination can go undetected and can nullify an employee’s ability to file suit against an employer. On the heels of FPA, President Obama reintroduced the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), a bill introduced in all but one Congress since 1994, that prohibits discrimination in hiring based on sexual orientation or gender identity. ENDA is in effect a narrower version of the Equality Act, that amends Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, offering blanket legal protections against discrimination in a wider variety of areas such as education, public accommodations, and housing. It also updates and clarifies terms such as sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity. Passed by the U.S. House of Representative in 2019, and generally supported by business, as of this writing it is unlikely the Equality Act will pass in the Senate and can later withstand a conservative SCOUS review to become law (National Law Review, 2019). Regardless of the White House, states and cities are passing laws requiring pay transparency for contractors receiving federal funds. These would also include LGBTQ people who would otherwise fall under the mandate of the Equality Act. Businesses are recognizing that in an employee-deficit economy, enticing promising workers and retaining seasoned ones depends on public perception of a company’s pay equity stand. Employees also support these initiatives (Khimm, 2017).

Comparable Worth The Equal Pay Act rests on the notion that equal pay should be judged in terms of equal worth. Also interpreted through the provisions of Title VII, comparable worth was initiated

546  Gender and Social Institutions

to deal with a persistent gender pay gap because jobs are in essence gender segregated. The challenge is how to assess jobs on the basis of skill level, effort, education, and responsibility. Comparable worth argues that males are paid more than females in jobs with similar levels of each. Lilly Ledbetter herself worked at a tire company 19 years doing “comparable” shift work, including other supervisory duties, as her male co-workers but was unaware she was underpaid until just before her retirement. In a suit against the state of Washington, a hospital secretary charged that she was being paid much less than men employed by the state even though her job was “worth” much more. The same case brought evidence showing that laundry workers, who are mostly female, earned $150 less per month than truck drivers, who are mostly male. In 1983, a federal court ordered the state of Washington to raise the wages of 15,500 employees in predominantly female occupations, which amounted to almost $1 billion in back pay. Two years later a higher court overturned the decision with the argument that market forces created the inequity and the government has no responsibility to correct them.

Critique Even if objective measurements for comparable worth under the Equal Pay Act can be established, the perception that government should not interfere with perceived supply and demand in a free-market economy is strong. If the wage gap between males and females is a true reflection of market forces, then there must be other reasons for it. The market-driven pay system is perceived to be so neutral that if women get paid less, they must either prefer less demanding jobs or are less productive in the jobs they do get (Chapter 10). This not only justifies the wage gap but also eliminates gender discrimination as another reasonable explanation for it. In this context, comparable worth is seen as a radical departure from conventional economic beliefs. If implemented on a large scale, it would create unnecessary bias in an already fair and neutral system. On the other hand, with more objective standards, comparable worth agreements have been successful especially when strong labor unions do the negotiations in public sector jobs (Lewis, 2019). It issues a challenge to reevaluate all the work that women do and questions the existing gender-based hierarchy that systematically denies comparable earnings to women. Employers typically use gender to assign people to jobs. In the public sector women are assigned to jobs with less pay and shorter career ladders. In the private sector women are assigned to already overcrowded female-dominated jobs, which in turn creates an oversupply of labor. Organizations may hire an abundance of women professionals, for example, and justify paying them less. Recruitment strategies thus limit a woman’s access to positions of authority. Comparable worth can be used to redress not only the gender wage gap, but also the damage to overall market productivity. Although it departs from the conventional model, functionalists would applaud comparable worth if the market system became more efficient and productive. Comparable worth counters a powerful argument supporting an institutional theory of wage discrimination and sex discrimination in employment allowing employers to set wages without recourse. The courts are inconsistent in decisions regarding comparable worth. Title VII and FPA notwithstanding, laws are interpreted according to rigid textbook standards about market economics. The relentless march to embrace more stringent neoliberal economic models (Chapter 6) predicts further weakening of comparable worth.

Power, Politics, and the Law  547

Affirmative Action As discussed in Chapter 10, another bulwark of federal policy is affirmative action, the generic term for an employment policy that takes some kind of voluntary or involuntary (under the compulsion of the law) initiative to increase, maintain, or alter the number or position of people, usually defined by their race or sex. Focusing on those who have been historically excluded in the U.S., affirmative action calls for a fairer distribution of social benefits, a constitutionally accepted principle applied throughout U.S. history. Devised primarily to promote the economic status of African American men, other people of color and ethnic minorities can fall under its scope. In the involuntary situation through the courts, the Civil Rights Act can justify ordering employers found guilty of discrimination to create and implement an affirmative action plan. Public perception and media portrayals notwithstanding, affirmative action policies are not the opposite of policies based on merit; neither are they efforts at “reverse” or “inverse” discrimination.

Gender–Race Intersection As a program also assumed to benefit women, affirmative action has mixed results. In compliance reviews, African American males and other minority males have been advanced more than African American females and significantly more than white females. However, women’s overall economic progress is upgraded by affirmative action. For example, women’s employment has increased in male-dominated occupations that are organized by race as well as gender, such as construction and the highly paid skilled trades. Because women of color have clearly benefited directly, the gender repercussions of affirmative action benefit all women indirectly. Prompted by partisan politics, affirmative action is paraded as a wedge issue during elections. Ideology and perception take precedence over data and experiences in shaping public support for affirmative action. Although preferential treatment and affirmative action are not the same, media perpetuate this belief. Most people believe that affirmative action programs should set objectives but not rigid quotas (the Q-word), to allow opportunities for women and minorities to get hired. It is clear that public opposition increases when affirmative action is associated with quotas and preferential hiring, whether to do with race or gender. As expected, support for affirmative action varies considerably by demographics and how categories intersect. Although support remains generally dependent on a person’s race and gender, age and educational background are also key factors. Whites and men are less supportive than are people of color and women. Whites are more influenced by broader ideological beliefs, and people of color are more influenced by personal experiences. Support from younger people is declining, regardless of race. Minority college students, like their white counterparts, generally oppose racial preference, notably on college campuses with larger numbers of African American and Latino students. There is less opposition when colleges, particularly selective ones, have large Asian and Asian American enrollments. Gender is less of a predictor of level of support for gender-based affirmative action than is race for comparable race-based programs. On the other hand, since women overlap all races, there is a higher proportion of women of color among all students. These women contribute to the racial diversity of campuses. Although it clearly offers opportunities for equality for all women, gender is less salient than race in perceptions about affirmative action.

548  Gender and Social Institutions

Courts Given the history of misperception and contentious debate on affirmative action, two decades of Supreme Court rulings offer confusing and inconsistent messages about it. Rulings generally have not made a clear distinction between equal opportunity and discrimination, but tougher standards for federal affirmative action programs have been enacted. In a high-profile case, the George W. Bush White House filed a brief with SCOUS against the University of Michigan, opposing its affirmative action policy. The university used a points system based on a number of admission factors, including test scores, grade point average, and race. Lower courts previously upheld the admissions policy. SCOUS later ruled that race cannot be an overriding factor in admissions but can still be a “less prominent” factor. In the language that fueled misperceptions, the Bush administration cited the ruling as a victory for “diversity without using racial quotas.” Opponents cited the narrower use of affirmative action as a retreat from progress for equalizing opportunity for people of color, and by extension, for women. The bottom line is that racial quotas are unconstitutional but not racial factors, however limited they may be. Campuses seek an ideal mix of student diversity reflecting what society looks like. Highly selective private schools have the advantage of using affirmative action to fit the college profile they seek (Hartocollis, 2019). These schools acknowledge that affirmative action benefits their campus climate and their students. Women who disagree with affirmative action assert that when women receive special assistance it reinforces stereotypes about gender and stigmatizes those women who gain jobs through it. They are put in a double bind. They may be in a work environment where suspicion abounds because others believe they got the job over more qualified people. When they succeed in the job, preferential treatment at the outset may devalue their performance. Being awarded a privilege overrides being given an opportunity to achieve. Sometimes referred to as “twofers,” women of color are more vulnerable to these messages because they simultaneously fill two minority categories. Level of support for affirmative action over the last two decades is linked to gender resegregation in higher education and loss of gender and ethnic diversity in corporations. Businesses originally opposed to affirmative action find themselves struggling to compete in a global market hit hard first by recession and later by immigration policies severely limiting a pool of qualified applicants by gender, as well as by race and ethnicity. Businesses are keenly aware that profitability of a workforce not only represents diversity, but also values it. They may join with supporters of affirmative action to gain back losses of diversity and equality of opportunity. The Obama administration advocated strengthening affirmative action, using race to diversify student bodies within the limits of the law. The Trump administration not only actively discourages affirmative action overall, but even the very limited constitutionality of race is further being stripped. The Trump administration’s recension of Obama-era guidance policies on school diversity under the law may spell the doom of affirmative action. Trump’s Department of Justice will sue universities for affirmative action policies viewed as discriminatory against whites. Led by highly selective schools, and despite Trump’s pronouncements, however, colleges are not ready to abandon affirmative action. Recruitment based on SES, for example, may be the efficient and effective way to achieve racial diversity. Colleges are not overly transparent in admissions policies but, like businesses, are aware that campus climate and student success are enhanced with student diversity. Black and Latino students are a tiny proportion of students at flagship state universities and selective private ones. Decried by both businesses and academic administrators, colleges are already whiter

Power, Politics, and the Law  549

and less diverse, trends that will accelerate with the demise of affirmative action (Harris, 2018; Wermund, 2018). Race may be more salient in college recruiter motives, but affirmative action policies work to the benefit of all women.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission The viability of law depends on how earnestly it is enforced. Although the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) was created to ensure that Title VII mandates are carried out, enforcement is aimed primarily at protecting minorities, particularly African American men, rather than women. EEOC often ignores the sex provision because of the fear it would dilute enforcement efforts for racial minorities. The National Organization for Women was formed in part to protect women’s rights and directed its initial efforts at changing EEOC guidelines. These efforts were seriously hampered during the Reagan years, when cases of sex discrimination filed by EEOC dropped by over 70 percent. This figure shifted dramatically upward because of sexual harassment allegations against Supreme Court nominees during the Bush and Trump presidencies (discussed later), and the huge influence of the #MeToo movement. EEOC’s fortunes continue to be buffeted by political agendas. The Clinton presidency revived and strengthened EEOC, placing importance on civil rights legislation for minorities and women. Accused of deciding that equalizing the field of opportunity for women and people of color is no longer a priority, the subsequent George W. Bush presidency reduced EEOC’s prominence. Returning to constitutional mandates to ensure equal rights, within weeks of taking office, President Obama strengthened the work of EEOC. Under the Trump administration EEOC is busier than ever, with spikes in claims, the highest in the last decade and up by almost 14 percent in the wake of #MeToo. However, the 2020 EEOC budget has been slashed to historic lows and has the lowest number of employees since 1980 (AFGE, 2019). Rising workloads, a logjam of cases, and less political will to meaningfully address claims predicts EEOC will languish in carrying out its enforcement mission.

Education and Title IX Title IX of the Educational Amendments Act of 1972 was enacted to prohibit sex discrimination in any school receiving federal assistance (Chapter 11). Since all levels of education depend in part on federal support and grants, most schools fall under its mandate. The key provision of Title IX states that: No person in the United States, shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any educational program or activity receiving federal financial assistance. This legislation is comprehensive and altered, and in many instances eliminated, blatant sex discriminatory practices in schools. These include dismantling gender barriers in relation to admissions, promotion, and tenure of faculty. Different standards related to health care, dress codes, counseling, housing, sex-segregated programs, financial aid, and organizational

550  Gender and Social Institutions

membership have also eroded. Policies are devised for equitable treatment compatible with the local conditions and the culture of the educational institutions involved.

Courts Court rulings allow for exceptions to the law. Fraternities and sororities may be gender segregated, as can sex education classes. Housing and living arrangements can be restricted by gender as long as comparable facilities are available for both men and women. The most notable exception concerns educational institutions exempt from Title IX provisions—those that do not receive federal funds and public institutions that have historically always been gender segregated. When considering all schools, those that fall under the Title IX mandate include previously integrated public schools and universities and most vocational, professional, and graduate schools. A number of private, religious, and military schools remain excluded. If by choice or legal mandate any single-sex (gender) school does begin to admit the other sex, and potentially other genders, equal admissions requirements must be followed. Issues involving equity for women are at the forefront of Title IX enforcement, but in Mississippi University v. Hogan, the case related to a violation of men’s rights, SCOUS narrowed the scope of sex-based classifications by holding that an all-female state institution that excluded qualified males from its nursing program was in violation of the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment Men and women have both benefited from gender equity legislation originally formulated for women.

Athletics Title IX has had a huge impact on athletic programs. Until Title IX, money allocated to female athletics had been negligible in comparison to money provided for male athletics. Fearing that an equal redistribution of financial resources would hamper men’s programs, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) strongly opposed any federal intervention under Title IX mandates. In a compromise to the storm of controversy generated by potential interference in untouchable men’s sports, primarily football and basketball, the final regulations did not insist on equal spending. Title IX instead called for both sexes to be offered equitable opportunities to participate in college sports. Schools are not required to offer identical athletic teams for males or females or identical numbers of opportunities for athletic participation. Big-ticket men’s sports remain “protected,” but there were improvements to support women’s athletics and for women to receive athletic scholarships.

Benefits to Females Before Title IX, few colleges offered female athletes adequate facilities or training, and no institution of higher education offered athletic scholarships to women. Participation in athletics is not benign in its effects. It is associated with better grades, higher graduation rates, and enhanced self-esteem for women. These can accrue to male athletes, but masculinity norms may undermine the advantages of participation in sports for some men (Chapter 11). Since 1975, an almost 900 percent increase in female high school sports participants and an almost 500 percent increase among collegiate women are reported. Today, a record number of 500,000 student athletes compete in NCAA championship

Power, Politics, and the Law  551

sports, with women’s teams now outnumbering men’s teams by about 1000. Scholarships are reaching gender parity. As impressive as these figures are, in 1972 women’s athletic programs at 90 percent of all colleges were administered by females, but by 2000, the figure had plummeted to under 20 percent, with most of these in Division II and III programs. Despite many qualified women in the pipeline, top seats (athletic directors) going to women in Division I have never exceeded 12 percent. Administrators doing the hiring and the chancellors and presidents heading the schools athletic directors serve are dominantly male. Gender norms—lack of mentorship, bullying, work–life conflict, and beliefs about women—restrict career mobility of women in college athletics (Smith et al., 2019a; Pape, 2020). The spectacular successes of Title IX that increased the number of female athletes in high school and college have not translated to cracking the glass ceiling for women athletic directors. Title IX may be responsible for eliminating overt discrimination, but beliefs about the place of men and women in athletics and sports organizations prevail. The power behind Title IX lies in potential funding cuts to schools, not in compliance. Many programs that practice some form of gender discrimination, intentional or not, are allowed to continue, even in direct violation of the intent of Title IX. This is particularly true of athletic programs that can exist independently of school budgets because they are supported by revenue from sports events and contributions from parents and alumni. Partisan politics, inconsistent court rulings, and inaccurate media accounts about quotas have hampered Title IX enforcement. Like affirmative action, if a school is found to be discriminator, a formal plan must be submitted to rectify the problem. Until recently most schools ignored this provision. The partisan political pattern is repeated. The situation improved during the Clinton administration, and compliance reviews increased fourfold, with Title IX complaints doubling. The conservative political climate during the Bush administration hampered Title IX enforcement. In the Obama administration Title IX’s enforcement mandate was again prioritized and called for more transparency. This priority was led by the escalating sexual assaults on both male and female athletes rather than by continuing allegations of unfair treatment and inequity in male and female sports programs (Gerstein, 2014). Sexual assaults on campus and among athletes continue to rise. Not unexpectedly, fundamental protections for assault victims under Title IX in the Trump administration are being narrowed. The definition of sexual harassment is further narrowed. In the wake of assault allegations, schools will have reduced liability and expanded religious exemptions. Protections for students accused of sexual assault are widened, but the rights of victims are undermined. Although Title IX rule changes are intended as efforts to restore fairness and ensure due process between accuser and victim, advocates argue that they work against survivors of campus sexual assault. Title IX’s future was more uncertain (Yuen and Ahmed, 2018; Mehta, 2019). Although Title IX under Trump was tied to a weakened EEOC in enforcement and budget, under President Biden, it is likely to survive as a viable program in the current political era.

Critique In replaying the affirmative action backlash theme, critics suggest that Title IX hurts women and is discriminatory to men, specifically minority men. Gender equity is seen as robbing racial equity in sports programs such as basketball and football that have high concentrations of minority participation. Like affirmative action, these criticisms suggest that race is more

552  Gender and Social Institutions

important than gender in athletics. Although some schools are adding women’s teams, such as soccer and tennis, they are eliminating men’s teams, such as gymnastics and swimming. Critics of Title IX use the inflammatory “quota” label, which is associated with public disapproval, whether in employment, education, or sports. They also assert that in women’s sports, hard work and dedication are not rewarded when a federal mandate constrains how talent plays out. This latter argument mysteriously suggests that women are disadvantaged when Title IX is viewed as bolstering female athletic accomplishments. Title IX is the major federal effort dealing with gender inequity in education. Political maneuvering and inaccurate charges of reverse sexism damage consensus building. Given that Title IX is a formal, legal approach, it must also be assessed in light of the informal biases in education. If students are discouraged from pursuing athletics in high school, scholarship opportunities for college athletics are unavailable. There are far fewer women than men in the higher administrative ranks in academic institutions, and even fewer women have decision-making authority in athletics. Despite spectacular performances of women athletes in the Olympics and in professional and college sports, women’s influence as models for aspiring female athletes is limited by the secondary roles they play. Stubborn restrictions based on stereotypes thwart changes in the law. Legal approaches must account for sources of bias from informal sources.

Sexual Harassment Sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination prohibited under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act (Chapter 11). In 1980, the EEOC adopted the definition of sexual harassment as: unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature constitute sexual harassment when 1

submission to such conduct is made either explicitly or implicitly a term of condition of an individual’s employment;

2

submission to or rejection of such conduct by an individual is used as a basis for employment decisions affecting such individuals; or

3

such conduct has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual’s work performance or creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working environment.

Although sexual harassment is pervasive throughout schools, government, and workplaces, until fairly recently it had been an area with a noteworthy lack of interest, reporting, and enforcement.

Impact of Sexual Harassment Research continues to document that sexual harassment—in perception and type—is highly gendered. National prevalence rates show over 80 percent of women and 40 percent of men experience it. These numbers are escalating, whether by increased reporting or better understanding of what it encompasses (Chatterjee, 2018a). Women report sexual harassment related to unwanted sexual contact and sexual coercion escalating to attempted or completed rape (Fedina et al., 2018). Men report it related to taunting and homophobic language, usually by other men (Chapter 9). It is estimated that in workplaces 10 percent

Power, Politics, and the Law  553

of men and between one-third and one-half of women are sexually harassed, usually by the other gender. Eight of ten EEOC cases are filed by women claiming that the harassment came from a male colleague. College campuses—whether elite, private, or public—are the most unsafe settings for women. Women students at all levels of study in college are three times more likely than women in other settings to be sexually harassed by sexual violence, largely from male students (Fedina et al., 2018; Association of American Universities, 2019; Deloe, 2019; Shaw, 2019). It is safe to conclude that in their lifetimes, over three-fourths of all women have experienced it in some form (see Chapters 9, 10, and 11). Sexual harassment is linked to emotional trauma, compromised work productivity, absenteeism from work and school, lower grades, a deterioration in morale, and long-term depression, all of which seriously impact a person’s work and private life. The cumulative effect of sexual harassment on women’s careers is staggering. Over one-third of women report it disrupted career advancement. The short- and long-term economic security of women is threatened. Older women leave jobs because of harassment and face an ageist job market in a new job search (American Association of University Women, 2019). Although its effects are serious, employee men and women do not report sexual harassment, fearing retaliation by employers and coworkers that can amount to career suicide. Considering how sexual harassment allegations play out, these concerns are justified. Court rulings strengthened approaches by schools and workplaces to combat sexual harassment. “Sextual” harassment is on the rise for elementary school girls and college women. #MeToo raised public awareness and court rulings strengthened approaches by schools and workplaces to combat sexual harassment. Trump-era policies mentioned counter these efforts. As a taken-for-granted fact of social life, sexual harassment is considered inescapable by a large swathe of the public and therefore difficult to dislodge. The #MeToo movement and confirmation hearings for SCOUS judges (see below) heightened public awareness. Court rulings strengthened approaches by schools and workplaces to combat sexual harassment, prompting companies to adopt more rigorous policies to protect employees. The turnabout of the courts has been dramatic. Instances of blatant abuses of power by supervisors were previously disregarded, with the belief that a supervisor’s attraction to an employee was natural and unrelated to the job. Today employers’ defenses of sexual harassment are eroding. For example, a woman does not forfeit her right to be free of sexual harassment when she is in a work setting traditionally allowing openly antifemale behavior, vulgar and obscene language, and pornographic material on display. The courts challenged the belief that women at school or in the workplace could expect to be sexually harassed. In a straightforward and unanimous Supreme Court ruling, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor stated that targets of sexual harassment do not need to show that they suffered psychological damage to win their suits. The court upheld the notion that sexual harassment is a form of sexism that violates workplace equality.

Social Construction of Sexual Harassment Despite rulings and public awareness, confusion exists about what is or is not acceptable in behavior that has sexual overtones. Men polled about sexual harassment report sympathy but are often bewildered by sexual harassment claims made by women. A national survey shows one in four men says that exposing yourself is not sexual harassment. Except for “light hearted flirting”, women are 10 to 20 percent more likely than men to say unwanted

554  Gender and Social Institutions

touching and groping count as sexual harassment (Sweeney, 2017). Women are angry and fearful when they are sexually harassed. Men report embarrassment. Men and women talk about and construct sexual harassment differently. Reinforced by institutional sexism, we are all socialized into powerful beliefs that largely define women in terms of sexuality. This type of sexism plays out at school and work regardless of legal mandates. As social constructionism asserts, sexual harassment can be dislodged through socially reconstructing it from an acceptable social condition to an unacceptable social problem. Feminist and conflict theorists assert that institutional sexism will stall the process of reconstruction until women increase their empowerment in schools, workplaces, and families. Sexual harassment is so hard to identify and resolve because of accepted definitions of sexuality that disguise and dismiss sexual domination and exploitation of men over women.

Sexual Harassment and the Supreme Court Until the 1990s sexual harassment was a topic with noteworthy lack of interest, reporting, and enforcement. Today it is a highly visible social and political issue.

Thomas–Hill The event that swiftly and dramatically brought the issue to the attention of the public was the 1991 Senate Judiciary hearings on the confirmation of Clarence Thomas for Supreme Court (SCOUS). The nation was riveted during Professor Anita Hill’s testimony that Clarence Thomas had sexually harassed her on numerous occasions. Hill’s testimony centered on Thomas’s behavior regarding sex and sexual matters, her personal appearance, and pressure for dates when she worked as his assistant at the Department of Education and later—perhaps incongruously—with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. The intensity of this testimony transformed the hearing into a trial where, regardless of confirmation, the public decided who was telling the truth. Clarence Thomas said the hearing was a travesty, accusing racism for those who opposed his confirmation. The race and gender advocates of the Urban league, NAACP, and National Organization for Women opposed his nomination believing it would swing SCOUS to the ideological right, stalling or upending legal advances for African Americans and women (Glass, 2017; Brenan, 2018). Racial and gender polarization spiked in the media wars by pitting anti-feminist African American men against pro-feminist African American women. Anita Hill was seen as betraying the black community and black men, since racism was seen as more important than sexism. Exasperated black women viewing Hill’s anguished testimony said of the male Senate Judiciary Committee, “they just didn’t get it” (Dawson, 1992). Congressional support for Thomas was generally split along party lines but there were defectors on both sides. Republicans at the time argued that if their constituents believed Hill, they would have voted against the confirmation. The public split on whether Anita Hill or Clarence Thomas lied and perjured themselves during the hearings. Polls tended to believe Thomas (about 50 percent) over Hill (about 30 percent), with a sizable percent undecided. Public opinion shifted and a year after the hearing some polls found Americans evenly divided on whom they believed; others showed Hill was more believed. Despite ongoing media pillorying of Hill and the feminists who applauded her, support for Thomas continued to erode. In 1994, over a third more found Hill to be truthful. By 1997, over

Power, Politics, and the Law  555

80 percent of the public believed Anita Hill told the truth (Brownstein, 1991; Rucinski, 1993; Brock, 2001).

Kavanaugh–Blasey Ford Twenty-seven years later the public witnessed an ominous replay of the Thomas–Hill controversy—with similarities but also stark differences. Research psychologist and academic Christine Blasey Ford testified in the confirmation hearing of Brett Kavanaugh for SCOUS, alleging that Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her when they were teenagers. At least three sexual misconduct allegations by other women from Kavanaugh’s high school and college years surfaced. Similar to Thomas, Kavanaugh denounced and denied Blasey Ford’s claims, angrily asserting that the hearing was unfair and an orchestrated political attack. This time, however, Kavanaugh elicited more sympathy than Thomas, even as more people believed Blasey Ford over those who believed Hill. This time more people believed Blasey Ford over Kavanaugh. As expected, women are far more on Blasey Ford’s side. Polls in 2018 asking almost identical questions found some results similar from polls in 1991: if allegations were true, almost 70 percent of the public said Kavanaugh, like Thomas, should not be confirmed (Kirby, 2018; Matthews, 2018; Montanaro, 2018). What changed to explain these confusing findings? First, the gender gap was on Blasey Ford’s side. In 2018, more people believed Blasey Ford than they believed Kavanaugh. Like Anita Hill, Blasey Ford’s testimony was anguished and compelling. Despite hate mail and death threats against her and her family prior to testimony, Blasey Ford’s composure and thoughtful responses added to her credibility. Second, the partisan gap was more glaring than the gender gap. In 1991 Democrats and Republicans defected to support or oppose Thomas. In 2018, party loyalty outweighed all considerations. Defenders of Kavanaugh and 77 percent of the Republican party believed Kavanaugh should be confirmed even if the allegations were true. Third, President George H.W. Bush appointed and supported Thomas “with confidence,” but refrained from making personal statements during the hearing. President Trump, in strong displays of misogyny (Was it as bad as she says? Think of your son) at campaign rallies and on Twitter, directly attacked Blasey Ford, mocking her and ridiculing her testimony (Dawsey and Sonmez, 2018; Malloy et al., 2018; Stolberg and Sullivan, 2018).

Critique The Thomas confirmation hearings allowed a firsthand view of the extent of sexual harassment. The impact of this tumultuous weekend instigated a sea change in awareness and attitudes about sexual harassment. The Kavanaugh confirmation hearings played out to a more socially conscious public, demonstrating a dramatic cultural shift between 1991 and 2018 regarding sexual harassment (Chapters 9, 11, 13). Clarence Thomas was confirmed in 1991 by the narrowest margin ever for SCOUS (52–48); Kavanaugh followed with a narrower one in 2018 (50–48). Anita Hill’s courageous—and extraordinary—testimony fueled conversations that may have planted seeds for #MeToo. The share of people who said sexual harassment was a “big problem” doubled after Hill’s testimony; a few months later 44 percent said sexual harassment in the workplace was a “very serious” problem (Velencia, 2018; Pruitt, 2019). Clearly #MeToo and the Kavanaugh–Blasey Ford testimony indicate that the climate for accusers

556  Gender and Social Institutions TABLE 14.1  Testimonies

to Senate Judiciary Committee, Anita Hill, 1991 and Christine Blasey

Ford, 2018 It is only after a great deal of agonizing consideration and sleepless nights that I am able to talk of these unpleasant matters to anyone but my closest friends. ….Telling the world is the most difficult experience of my life but it is very close to having to live through the experience that occasioned this meeting.…..I felt I had a duty to report. It would have been more comfortable to remain silent. I took no initiative to inform anyone. But when I was asked by a representative of this committee to report my experience, I felt that I had to tell the truth. I could not keep silent.

I am here today not because I want to be. I am terrified. I am here because I believe it is my civic duty to tell you what happened to me while Brett Kavanaugh and I were in high school…… My hope was that providing the information confidentially would be sufficient to allow the Senate to consider Mr. Kavanaugh’s serious misconduct without having to make myself, my family, or anyone’s family vulnerable to the personal attacks and invasions of privacy we have faced since my name became public.

Anita Hill Testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee, October 11, 1991

Christine Blasey Ford Testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee, September 26, 2018

is much better. However, too many survivors of sexual violence keep their stories hidden because they see that politics overrides their claims and they are not taken seriously. Hill and Blasey Ford were pilloried for coming forward (Mundy, 2018). Law professor Anita Hill today says that if the government had treated survivors with dignity almost three decades ago, “it could have had a ripple effect,” with women agitating for change from a position of strength. As the #MeToo revelations laid bare the truth of the overwhelming size of the problem, victims dared hope that our political leaders would take up the challenge confronting it. But that hope was dashed last year … In the long term our leaders need to address the larger inequalities that enable sexual misconduct to flourish. (Hill, 2019) The opening testimonies of Anita Hill and Christine Blasey Ford are strikingly similar (Table 14.1). Despite the onslaught of political backlash, Hill and Blasey Ford assured that when the term sexual harassment is used today, people take notice.

Domestic Relations Assumptions about gender in the law are most evident when applied to marriage and the family. More than all other legal territory, domestic law is where gender inequity is most evident. Legal statutes regarding expected wife–husband marital roles are based on three models (McBride-Stetson, 2004). 1

Unity—husband is dominant, and the wife has few rights and responsibilities.

2 Separate but equal—husband is breadwinner and wife is companion and nurturer of children, but they share similar legal rights. Also known as the reciprocity model, this is the functionalist assumption of nonoverlapping, complementary responsibilities. 3

Shared partnership—husband and wife have equal rights and overlapping responsibilities.

Power, Politics, and the Law  557

Historical circumstances dictate whether one model dominates at any point in time. Because contemporary law is comprised of elements from all models, with each state having its own pattern, reform in family law is an exceedingly complicated task.

Divorce The impact of divorce on women and the legal failure to do much about collecting child support or alimony when it is awarded is well documented. The fact that women gain custody of children who are minimally or not supported by their fathers propels many divorced women into poverty (Chapter 8). Property division at the dissolution of the marriage also contributes to women’s poverty. Although the trend is for individual attorneys work out the details of the divorce, these are in light of overriding state laws. In a community property state, all property acquired during the marriage is jointly owned by the spouses; in the event of divorce, each partner is entitled to half of the said property. Community property recognizes the value of the unpaid and usually full-time homemaker role. Residing in a community property state, however, is not a panacea. Equal division of property originally intended to help women can actually hurt them. A woman is often forced to sell her home, often the couple’s only “real” property, and she and her children find themselves in less than desirable rental property, often in a new location. They are dislocated from home, friends, school, and neighborhood at the very time these are most needed for emotional support. The other states are common law states, with property belonging to the spouse in whose name it is held. Any property acquired during the marriage belongs to each spouse individually. Unless a house or car is also in the wife’s name, the husband can lay claim to it in a divorce. Because the common law system severely restricts and penalizes women economically, most states have passed equitable distribution laws. Rather than viewing property solely on whose name it is in, courts consider a number of factors, including length of the marriage, amount of time each party spends on child care and household tasks, earnings ability, age, health, and resources available from friends and kin. Most important, the laws account for marriage as an economic partnership where both wage-earning and unpaid homemaking and care work can be considered as contributions. It at least attempts to redress past abuses where the legal system puts women at a major disadvantage in divorce. Nonetheless, regardless of more recent equitable distribution laws, women receive well under half of marital property in divorce. Such laws do not cover divorced women who were single parents when their divorces were finalized. Community property states (at only nine) are the exception rather than the rule. Confusion reigns in divorce law. Punitive and sexually biased legislation results in uncertainty over issues such as sale of the family home, rights to the ex-spouse’s future income, and revisions of child-support orders to reflect changes in income and inflation. Returning to court to contest earlier divorce provisions comes with costs that many women cannot afford. Gender bias is entrenched as a major influence in decisions, contributing to an adversarial relationship to men’s and women’s positions. Although changes in family form and functioning add to this confusion, a positive sign is that some shift from patriarchy to partnership is noted.

Family Economics With regard to Social Security, the housewife’s role—a term indicating it is a female role—is an economic liability. Women are unpaid for this role and do not contribute to disability or

558  Gender and Social Institutions

retirement funds for ensuring their future. If a woman is married less than ten years before divorce from or the death of her husband, she is not eligible for his benefits. Social Security policies were originally based on a division of labor and family life that do not exist today. In 1984, the Retirement Equity Act (REA) was passed to deal with some of these issues and to make pension benefits fairer to women. Under REA, an employer is required to get the spouse’s approval before an employee is permitted to waive any spousal benefits offered through the employer, such as pensions or health insurance. Of key importance is that REA allows for pensions to be included as part of property settlements in divorces. Statistics are dismal in indicating how poverty has become feminized, particularly for elderly, Latino, and African American women (Chapter 8). Inequity related to Social Security, the main source of income for unmarried women over 65, is responsible for this trend. Since eligibility for Medicare is based on Social Security, women without the minimum contributions must buy into Medicare or remain employed until they meet eligibility requirements. The “separate but equal” model of the marital relationship, establishing that husbands and wives have reciprocal but not equal rights remains strong in domestic law. A husband is required to support his wife and children, and in return a wife must provide services as companion, housemaker, and mother. The individual couple determines how these requirements are actualized. In some families, the wife controls all household expenses and decides on how one or both salaries are apportioned. In others, husbands provide their wives with allowances to take care of household or personal needs. She may file for divorce if there is evidence of gross financial neglect, or he may do so for unkempt children, a dirty house, or her refusal to have intercourse. As noted, historically spouses were excluded from charges of rape because sexual intercourse traditionally was viewed as “his right and her duty.” All states have eliminated expectations that a spouse—virtually always the wife—must prove she explicitly resisted sexual violence, but evidence of her physical harm is still used to justify the rape allegation. Despite rape law reform, most contemporary statues are gendered, specifically in distinguishing between criminal and noncriminal sexual violence. Twenty states recognize “marital distinctions” that limit accountability for spousal rape. This is not surprising given that jurors in rape trials view an intimate relationship between victim and perpetrator as a factor that can reduce or dismiss a felony rape charge (Levine, 2018:22; Lynch et al., 2019). Limits also include separated, divorced, and cohabiting couples. There are more provisions for prosecution if the couple is legally divorced or separated, but because of questions concerning consent, state laws provide for spousal exemptions.

Domestic Abuse and the Courts Given the doctrine of reciprocity and the huge differences in legal definitions of domestic violence, the courts are inconsistent in efforts to prosecute cases of intimate partner violence (IPV), aka wife abuse. The most disheartening evidence of continuing gender bias in the courts is that “domestic relations” are the most life threatening. We have seen how history reflects the belief that wives are expected to be controlled by their husbands and that physical force is often an acceptable means of control. Feminists have publicized the issue of wife abuse and awareness of its incidence and lethality has grown. This awareness has led to police training programs in family violence and hotlines to provide emergency help and counseling. Although judges are increasingly ensuring that the rights of abused wives and

Power, Politics, and the Law  559

partners are enforced, many remain unwilling to implement newer legislation protecting battered women.

Gendered Rights and Liabilities Justification for this unwillingness is tied to how a judge determines which laws are the more important ones to enforce. Barring a husband from his home through civil protection orders and antistalking laws may be interpreted as his due process rights being more important than his wife’s right to be protected from assault. The abusive husband is protected over the wishes of the victim. Regardless of her dangerous situation, as many as 40 percent of cases of domestic violence are routinely dismissed because protection orders cannot be served against the alleged perpetrator who evades being served (Stoever, 2019). At the police level, mandatory arrests are now likely to include dual arrests of the man and the woman. Police have a limited amount of information available when responding to domestic encounters. Decision-making is often swayed by taken-for-granted beliefs about gender. A wife is penalized by being arrested with her husband, even when charges of her abuse of him are found to be untrue. Notwithstanding obvious physical injury, her credibility is more likely be discounted. Judges frequently rely on gendered stereotypes to sort out cases of “true” domestic violence from “frivolous” ones (Bonner, 2018; Epstein and Goodman, 2019; Kafka, 2019). Both judges and police can implicitly accept the stereotype that it is the wife’s behavior that caused the battering anyway, the classic “blaming the victim” ideology. With powerful constitutional mandates, the criminal justice system in the United States protects the rights of alleged perpetrators; victims’ rights are not legally guaranteed. Domestic abuse legislation is of enormous benefit to women, but its promises are only as viable as its enforcement.

Reproductive Rights From the colonial era to the nineteenth century in the U.S., a woman’s right to an abortion could be legally challenged only if there was “quickening”—when she felt the first movements of the fetus. In 1800, there were no known statutes concerning abortion. By 1900, every state banned abortion except to save the life of the mother. Perhaps surprising, gender is not a good predictor of attitudes to abortion. In the U.S. women and men are about similar in whether or not they favor legal abortion. The large majority of Americans support abortion rights. Three-quarters of Americans want to keep abortion legal but also want some restrictions on the right to an abortion. These restrictions generally include later-term abortions, tax dollars used for abortions, and parental agreement for an adolescent to have an abortion. Some believe a male partner should have the right to restrict an abortion. College educated and people under age 30 say abortion should be legal in most cases compared to just over half of those in their 50s and 60s (Lipka and Gramlich, 2019; Montanaro, 2019; Rye and Underhill, 2019). Support for legal abortion increases in certain circumstances, such as in cases of rape or incest or to save the life of the mother. These numbers mask the complexity of the issue. For example, the oldest women have lower levels of support and adolescent boys have the highest level. Married white women have lower support than single women regardless of race. African American and Latino women have shifted from less support to more support. African Americans, both men and

560  Gender and Social Institutions

women, now express greater approval than whites. The racial wealth gap may contribute to unintended pregnancies and the higher abortion rate for women of color (Su and Addo, 2018). Abortion rates, however, are at the lowest level since the procedure was legalized in 1973 for all women, including teens. As we will see, religion is the key factor dividing those who do or do not support abortion rights. Catholics, for example, are historically likely to oppose abortion rights, but for the first time, a slight majority identify as pro-choice, including a majority of Latinas. When religiosity is coupled with political identification, the divide is even stronger. Americans are deeply ambivalent about abortion. A majority believe that some restrictions should be placed on abortion but do not want it outlawed.

Legal History On January 22, 1973, with two landmark decisions by the Supreme Court—Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton—the Supreme Court voted 7:2 in support of the right to privacy for the women in these abortion cases. The states in question, Texas and Georgia, failed to establish “any compelling interest” that would restrict abortion to the first trimester of pregnancy. Abortion in this instance would be between a woman and her physician. In the second trimester, when an abortion is deemed more dangerous, the state could exert control to protect the health of the mother. Although these cases concluded that women did not have the absolute Constitutional right to abortion on demand, a broadening of the legal right to an abortion was established. The right to an abortion has been challenged ever since. In 1983, the Supreme Court reaffirmed the 1973 decisions by ruling that second-trimester abortions may be performed in places other than hospitals. A city ordinance requiring a physician to inform the woman that “the unborn child is a human life from the moment of conception” was also struck down because Roe v. Wade held that a “state may not adopt one theory of when life begins to justify its regulation of abortion.” The ordinance was also unacceptable because it intruded into the physician–patient relationship.

Hyde Amendment Although this ruling was a victory for reproductive rights, a setback occurred in 1977 with the enactment of the Hyde Amendment, which restricts funding for abortions for women who also receive Medicaid (unless the pregnancy is considered life threatening). Medicaid is a health insurance program jointly funded through state and federal governments for qualifying people of any age who are unable to pay medical expenses. Low-income women and their children are the large majority of Medicaid recipients. Because Medicaid is publicly funded, supporters of the Hyde Amendment argued that the government should not be in the business of funding abortions. In 1980, a federal judge in New York ruled that a denial of Medicaid funds for medically necessary abortions was unconstitutional and violated a woman’s right to privacy. Although he ordered the state government to resume funding, two weeks later SCOUS overturned this ruling, thereby upholding the constitutionality of the Hyde Amendment. In 1989, Roe v. Wade was tested in Webster v. Reproductive Health. The Supreme Court upheld a Missouri law stating that life begins at conception and requires physicians to conduct viability tests on fetuses of 20 weeks or more before an abortion could be performed.

Power, Politics, and the Law  561

But Roe v. Wade was not overturned. Sandra Day O’Connor, a Reagan appointee and the first woman on the Supreme Court, voted with the majority to retain the constitutionality of legal abortions. Three years later SCOUS ruled in Planned Parenthood v. Casey that a state cannot place substantial obstacles in the path of a woman’s right to choose an abortion prior to fetal viability—the ability of the fetus to survive outside the womb. States can still restrict pre-viability abortions as long as the health of the mother and fetus are promoted. Over time, SCOUS shifted from characterizing abortion in a medical context to a “right of decisional autonomy” (Lindgren, 2013:385). Countering this shift, several hundred new antiabortion laws framed in medical language have been enacted throughout the United States, largely in Republican-controlled legislatures. Most laws further restrict or eliminate all agencies that receive any public funding if abortions are performed on their facilitate. Drugs that are viewed as abortion-related (morning after pills) are not publicly funded and states also curtail private health insurers from covering them. Similar drugs are becoming so widespread and available, however, that restricting access for people who can afford them may be moot. Rules for performing abortions have been tightened for health care practitioners and facilities where they are performed are closing. Most women use such clinics for comprehensive health care services rather than abortion. Contrary to SCOUS interpretation of the right of privacy and personal autonomy for women seeking abortions, access is denied under the guise of protecting a woman’s health. As of this writing, legal challenges to much of this legislation are still in process. President Clinton was elected on a platform that included a pro-choice plank. On the twentieth anniversary of Roe v. Wade he issued an executive order rescinding the so-called gag rule that had prohibited the discussion of abortion as an alternative in clinics receiving public funds. The George W. Bush administration reinstituted the gag rule and reversed many of Clinton’s reproductive health and abortion rights initiatives, many previously available to poor women. Taking away a poor woman’s right to an abortion carried over to abortions for other women.

Affordable Care Act President Obama was twice elected on a platform supporting abortion rights. These rights were not extended to the landmark health care law, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA). ACA excludes private and public coverage for abortion services available through the exchanges, even if they are deemed medically necessary. The federal ban on funding for abortions is a key obstacle for women’s reproductive health and may mean even more restrictions on legal abortions for poor women who would otherwise be eligible under current public plans. A blow to contraceptive coverage under ACA was dealt in the landmark Burwell v. Hobby Lobby in 2014. The Supreme Court ruled that “closely held” corporations are exempt from ACA’s contraceptive mandate, if corporate owners claimed religious objection. Although closely held corporations are owned largely by five or fewer individuals, they employ over half the labor force. ACA already exempted churches and religiously affiliated schools and hospitals from the contractive mandate, but for-profits are exempt for violation of their religious beliefs. The ruling fueled fear that corporations could use religious objection to circumvent other federal laws such as LGBTQ discrimination in hiring and firing. Given Trump’s appointments of decidedly conservative justices, however, a rather extraordinary

562  Gender and Social Institutions

ruling disproved this fear. In Bostock v. Clayton County, with a 6:3 decision, SCOUS ruled that the 1964 Civil Rights Act protects gay, lesbian, and transgender employees from discrimination based on sex. This historic decision is considered a “huge victory for the LGBTQ community and a major loss for the Trump administration” (Totenberg, 2020).

SCOUS Although the Supreme Court may be accused of legal moralism, control of women’s bodies by religious and state authorities is not new. Pregnancy continues to be monitored and women are investigated for transgressions from ideal birth norms, whether by law or cultural beliefs. Religion is a driver of abortion policy despite the fact that there is no one religious or moral code accepted by all religious traditions (Stopler, 2016; Billauer, 2017). The Obama administration is credited with passing historic health care legislation that greatly reduced the ranks of the insured and loosened the insurance industry’s stranglehold on determining cost and coverage for health care in the United States. Despite Obama’s pro-choice platform, ironically, the compromises necessary to get any health care reform passed may be the forum that reduces abortion rights for all women, regardless of their ability to pay for these rights. President Trump was elected on a plank that included abortion restrictions and to overturn Roe v. Wade. He not only reinstituted the gag rule but extended it in unprecedented ways. For example, known as the “global gag rule,” any international agency receiving U.S. health assistance cannot discuss, refer, or provide any services for legal abortion, even when the agency uses its own money. Whether the White House blesses or ignores the abortion policies at the state level is debatable. However, state level policies that are inconsistent with federal policies tend to be more brutal. More people agree with Democrats than Republicans on abortion policy (Pew Research Center, 2019). Regardless of who controls the White House, Congress, or state legislatures, SCOUS and lower federal courts are stacked with antiabortion judges. These new judges are also less sympathetic to issues related to gender equality of which reproductive rights is a flashpoint. Some were chosen because of fervent antiabortion stances. Roe may take the trajectory of ACA, gradually being stripped of its vital components without being fully erased. Even if Roe is overturned and the prediction that half of states will disallow all abortions, the procedure will be restricted but still legal (Rovner, 2018; Lemieux, 2019). Religion exerts a powerful influence on beliefs about gender, particularly related to sexuality (Chapter 12). However, following Bostock v. Clayton County, rising public support favoring legal abortions and opposition to overturning Roe v. Wade suggest that the landmark legislation may be spared from its death throes. Reproductive rights is not the issue dividing the public into two opposing camps under pro-life and pro-choice banners but remains on the political burner and on court agendas. Overturning Roe increases the policing of women’s sexual and post-birth practices, from contraception to pregnancy to motherhood.

Pro-Life Bolstered by the dramatic political swing propelling Republicans to adopt powerful religious messages about abortion that resonate with a highly conservative evangelical Christian voting bloc, abortion rights have been effectively challenged. This bloc also supports

Power, Politics, and the Law  563

the reaffirmation of divinely ordained sex and gender differences that justify their work under a broader morality banner. Pro-life women activists tend to view biblical scripture in literal terms and endorse patriarchal views of the family; pro-life men activists tend to be more authoritarian, religious, poorer, and less educated. They contend that God-given natural bonds between a mother and unborn child must be protected; abortion not only kills an unborn child but will stigmatize a woman for life. In these arguments gendered beliefs and religiosity come together to protect a woman from abortion for her own good. Opposing abortion on the ground that “all human life is sacred” is being expanded in the courts and in popular framing that restricting abortion protects women from emotional trauma (Swank and Fahs, 2016:277; Ehrlich, 2018:175; Patev at al., 2019). The association of their moral stance with religion is clear by the term pro-life, adopted as a generic label for this group. As measured by attitudes and behavior, stronger religiosity for the pro-life group is a key element separating them from the general public. In the United States and globally, a higher degree of religious fundamentalism is associated with lower support for reproductive rights (Chapter 12). With religion distinguishing pro-life activists from others, it is understandable that their antiabortion work is viewed as “God’s work.” Antiabortion activists lobby tirelessly against funding for any agency in the U.S. and internationally offering abortion counseling, even if such counseling is only a small part of a broader program of family planning or health care for women. Some activism has transitioned to domestic terrorism, violent acts as a violation of criminal law in the United States to intimidate or coerce civilians or to influence public policy. Since 1993 eleven have been murdered in the name of antiabortion linked to religious rhetoric, including physicians, clinic employees, a volunteer, and a police officer, who ironically was a part-time pastor. Ten years after Dr. George Tiller, a women’s health care physician who also performed abortions, was fatally shot in his church, extreme antiabortion violence and death threats are slightly down. However, other violent acts ranging from vandalism, trespassing, hate mail/intimidating phone calls, Internet harassment and obstructive picketing with name calling are skyrocketing. As extreme restrictions on abortion are debated—from lifetime imprisonment to the death penalty for providers and women who abort—and escalate in state after state, the threat of violence from the pro-life camp also escalates (Heaviside and Mariappuram, 2019; Waterfield, 2019). Responding to alarming media reports, one of the largest pro-life organizations, the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC), states that violence against abortion providers is “explicitly condemned.” NRLC strongly opposes any use of violence as a means of stopping the violence that has killed more than 60 million unborn children since 1973. (Dastagir, 2019) Using the language of violence to curb further violence is largely ineffective and may do just the opposite. Unlike the past, some antiabortion organizations do not keep as wide a distance between themselves and the extremists. After each murder and many public violent acts, national antiabortion organizations quickly reaffirmed legal, nonviolent means to thwart abortions. However, social media are rife with blogs from pro-life extremists who talk about killings of abolitionists as justifiable homicide. One blogger, a known clinic protester, commented: “If one murders, they must pay with their life. If we start doing this, abortion stops” (NAF, 2018).

564  Gender and Social Institutions

The irony of such tactics is that they are successful from the extremist view. As a category of domestic terrorism, health care workers in abortion clinics fear for their lives and the lives of their families. The many antiabortion activists who clearly condemn these tactics are succumbing to extremist rhetoric that is now so mainstream they do not speak out.

Pro-Choice On the other side, just as tireless and perhaps more determined now, are pro-choice activists, who cite public and legislative support for abortion rights by a spectrum of people. As noted, the majority of Americans want to retain Roe v. Wade. Women legislators are more likely than their male counterparts to oppose overturning Roe v. Wade. Pro-choice advocates remind the public that throughout history women sought abortions—and will continue to seek them— whether they are legal or not. The death rate of illegal abortions far exceeds the risk of dying from a legal abortion or dying from complications due to pregnancy and childbirth. Safe abortions are associated with lower maternal mortality globally (WHO, 2019). In line with SCOUS rulings related to privacy and autonomy, the pro-choice camp argues that abortion rights are a referendum on women’s rights to control their own bodies.

Dialogue Although the abortion issue is presented as two intractable sides, there is general agreement that preventing unwanted pregnancy is a desirable alternative to abortion. Calls for dialogue between the two groups to explore common ground are widespread. Pro-life and pro-choice feminists value working with each other (Shah, 2017; Bacon, 2018; Shellnut, 2018; Warner, 2019). Both sides are discussing positive alternatives to abortion, such as sex education, easier access to birth control, better financial support for new parents, and child care services for single-parent women. Adoption is offered as a strategy, albeit one that is least likely to be acted on (Khazan, 2019; Olson, 2019). Theological debates also are yielding common ground. Given that a majority (56 percent) of Catholics are pro-choice, including feminist nuns and church leaders, dialogues in a Catholic context are increasing. Catholics are urged to consider ways to assure that a newborn and mother are nurtured and supported, such as strengthening the social welfare safety net. This frames pro-life as more than pro-birth. Such strategies resonate with Catholics who do not identify as either pro-life or pro-choice or say they are both (Herguth, 2018; Schlumpf, 2019). Emphasis on socioeconomic factors offers a viable opportunity for dialogue on abortion. Even as support for legal abortion (pro-choice) matches a quarter-century high, the U.S. abortion rate is at its lowest level since 1973. However, abortion is concentrated among lower-income women (Boonstra, 2016; Filer, 2019). Women who are the least likely to have economic resources are the most likely to have abortions. The least costly contraceptive options are also the least reliable (abstinence, rhythm method), compared to the more costly most reliable options (pill, IUD) (Moseson et al., 2018; Murshid and Ely, 2018). High abortion rates among disproportionately poor and African American women do not represent reproductive choice as much as they represent reproductive constraint. These women frame their agonizing decision to have an abortion according to the ideal of motherhood promoted by “white, middle-class hegemonic femininity.” “With their social welfare programs and safety nets slashed, new mothers cannot live up to economic or emotional expectations about being

Power, Politics, and the Law  565

a good mother” (Davidson, 2018; Thakkilapati, 2019). Framing the debate by class and race may mitigate the religious rhetoric that surrounds abortion. The success of pro-life and pro-choice camps working together will be gauged by how the intersection of gender, religion, and politics unfolds. With religious grounding, antiabortion activists argue that life begins at conception; they promote abstinence for the unmarried and limited types of contraception for the married. Feminists suggest that sex education and availability of contraception should be expanded and inexpensive for young people, married or not. These are feasible suggestions given that adolescents seeking abortion have limited understanding about contraception, conception, and pregnancy. Lack of family planning services confounds this limited understanding (Ely et al., 2018; Sutton et al., 2019). Partisan rupture of the ACA and the contraceptive and abortion issues it generated continue. Regardless of women’s health initiatives, the fate of ACA is in question. Coupled with the upsurge of antiabortion legislation, inflammatory misinformation from the White House (doctors can execute newborns) and threats of violence, hopeful efforts at pro-life and prochoice consensus-building have stalled. Even the tentative cooperation among moderates of either side dissolved with the acrimony surrounding reproductive rights (Cameron, 2019; Saletan, 2019). The increasing rancor and tribalism of our partisan politics leaves little space for those who do try to hold those two propositions together. (Gehring, 2019) Calls for dialogue to explore common ground are widespread but get muted by stronger voices advocating for one or the other side. Male leaders, particularly in pro-life organizations, exert powerful influences in the abortion narratives. Pro-life and pro-choice feminists value working with one another. Fragile coalitions built on dialogue only a few years ago appear to be stalled. Some fear they will be destroyed.

CRIME Crime is highly gendered, and the criminal justice system reflects this fact. Statistics from official sources, NGOs, and self-reports indicate that about 90 percent of all serious crimes— murder, assault, violent personal crime, and robbery—and virtually all rapes are committed by males, a pattern in the United States and globally. Approximately 10 percent of crimes are committed by females and largely are in the nonserious/nonviolent category. These include minor drug offenses, prostitution, shoplifting, forgery, and petty larceny; for female juvenile offenders, these include status offenses (violations of the law committed by juveniles for which adults would not be charged), such as truancy, violating curfews, and underage drinking. The male–female arrest ratio is approximately four male offenders to one female offender. Both males and females commit substance abuse-related crimes but males are much more likely than females to engage in violence to support a drug habit. Because males dominate criminal rosters, a lack of attention has been paid to issues of female criminality. The increasing rate of female crime changed this situation. Female crime and arrest rates grew slowly in the 1970s, plateaued in the 1980s, and have grown slowly since. For a subset of female offenders, this growth includes more arrests for violent crimes. Women have outdistanced men to become the fastest growing segment of the incarcerated population.

566  Gender and Social Institutions

In explaining gender patterns of crime, criminologists focus on three areas differentiated by gender: socialization, economics, and how the criminal justice system treats offenders.

Gender Socialization In explaining the gender gap in crime and delinquency, social learning and cognitive development theorists focus on family gender socialization patterns (Chapter 3). Boys are allowed to be more autonomous, impulsive, rebellious, and physically aggressive; girls are encouraged to be quiet, nice, compliant, and except for anger, emotionally expressive. Parents monitor daughters more than they do sons. Such traits become part of a gendered core of self-image, reinforced by peers and other agents of socialization later in life. Socialization patterns are linked to a subtle but pervasive “separation of spheres” model preparing girls for lives connected to the home and boys for lives outside the home. The model suggests that autonomy and impulsivity of boys outside the home and protection and monitoring of girls, whether inside or outside the home, offer more or less opportunity for criminal activity. Males and females have gendered trajectories creating pathways to type of criminal offending. Females who co-offend are more likely to act as accomplices; males are likely to “commit” the crime (McNeeley, 2019). For juveniles, gender roles learned early in the family restrain delinquency for girls more than for boys. This may explain why males not only commit more crime than females, but also crimes that are more violent. Other socialization patterns show substance abuse and sexual abuse in the family as predictors of gender differences in crime and recidivism (repeat incarceration). First time male juvenile offenders are less likely to reoffend if parents—especially mothers—have positive attitudes toward the police (Cavanagh and Cauffman, 2018). Drug abuse and addiction in one’s family predict both male and female reoffending. Female inmates challenge gender norms and stereotypes of passivity and are resourceful in resisting the stigma of being jailed. In the prison world, male inmates are likely to do the opposite: masculinity norms are associated with heightened male aggressiveness. These gender-based self-protective behaviors in prison suggest more successful reintegration after release for females compared to males (Bagaric and Bagaric, 2017; Sandoval and Baumgartner, 2017; Solinas-Saunders and Stacer, 2017). In addition to drug abuse, child abuse and other criminality in the home increase risk for females to be incarcerated and to reoffend. Family stability, closeness to parents, employed parents, prosocial peers, and community and school support are clearly associated with less likelihood of criminal activity for girls and young women. If they do engage in crime, these family patterns predict less recidivism for both daughters and sons (Scott and Brown, 2018; Walters, 2018; Wilkinson et al., 2019; Pellerin et al., 2020).

Economics Landmark feminist research highlighting the economic disparity between men and women offers a strong alternative explanation to the socialization model (Adler, 1975; Simon and Ahn-Redding, 2005). This early research asserted that rate of female crime is associated with structural (economic) inequality facing women. Women from lower SES backgrounds share ongoing issues of housing inequality, poverty, a reduced safety net, and fewer community services. Institutionalized structural inequality erodes economic opportunities for women, setting in motion a path for female offending. Identified half a century ago, the pattern holds today (Mallicoat, 2019).

Power, Politics, and the Law  567

The structural inequality argument suggests that women engage in criminal activities to bolster financial security and sustain their family’s livelihood. Since increases in female offending are linked to nonviolent offenses such as property crime (shoplifting, petty theft), white collar crimes (fraud, bad checks), and selling drugs, the economic explanation is compelling. Downward mobility and extreme economic hardship are associated with first-time offending and increased criminal offending for women, but not men. These conditions can trigger changes that lead to a life of crime for women (Nowacki and Windsong, 2019; Roth and King, 2019). If economic hardship predicts criminality, less financial hardship after parole should mitigate it. Job training, obtaining a GED, or college education after prison predicts successful reintegration. These are all associated with crime termination (Brown and Bloom, 2018; Dennison, 2019). Women appear to be more motivated to take the longer road for a better job than men. In the long run, however, when both men and women parolees pursue education for skilled jobs and are in supportive community networks, criminal lifestyles are thwarted.

Criminal Justice The third explanation for the gender gap in criminality focuses on disparities in the criminal justice (CJ) system that may favor females over males. Wide gender differences in all phases of CJ—being arrested, plea bargaining, sentenced to probation or incarceration—may reflect this favoring. Differences show up regardless of parental socialization, social support, and self-reports of past violent behavior for first time of status offenses by juveniles (Beaver and Wright, 2019; Berdejó, 2019).

Female Leniency? The chivalry hypothesis (aka “female leniency effect”) suggests that women are treated with more sympathy and tolerance by CJ officials. Police are reluctant to arrest women, and judges are reluctant to incarcerate women simply because they are female. This sympathy may be warranted: compared with men, women commit less dangerous crimes and express more remorse for crimes they do commit. Sex stereotyping may work to the advantage of women and girls when judges accept cultural beliefs that females are weaker and in less in control of their own criminal behavior. Males are less credible than females in recounting explanations for crime, particularly related to intimate partner violence (Wright, 2018; Russell et al., 2019). Judges take into account pregnancy if there are small children at home and if mothers show a history of involvement with their children before arrest. Since maternal identity is seen to reduce reoffending, accounting for these factors in sentencing can lead to better outcomes (Yamamoto and Maeder, 2017; Cho and Tasca, 2018; Garcia-Hallett, 2018). Media coverage can reinforce sympathy for female offenders. Even for the most violent crimes when homicide is involved, females co-offending with males are less likely to receive the harshest sentences (Liles and Moak, 2018; Fridel, 2019). Plea bargaining works to the advantage of female defendants. For misdemeanors and less serious felonies, females are much more likely than males to have charges dropped or reduced. In support of the chivalry hypothesis, women may be more likely to avoid a felon label and the stigma of a violent crime conviction that comes with it (Bontrager et al., 2013). With the exception of prostitution, females represent only a small portion of arrests. The key category

568  Gender and Social Institutions

where men receive longer sentences than women is with sex offenses. However, sex offenses committed by men are more violent and lethal than those committed by women, especially when committed on other men (Chapter 9). By virtue of gender, women are treated less harshly and are punished less severely than males in the CJ system. Criminologists continue to debate whether this differential treatment serves to mask female criminality. In the era of new federal guidelines to address sentencing disparities, empirical support for the chivalry hypothesis is eroding. Increases in arrest and incarceration rates for the female subset engaged in violent crime are linked to changes in criminal law that impose stiffer penalties and less latitude (“three strikes you’re out”) for all perpetrators. Violent crimes have plummeted by 50 percent since peaking in the early 90s. The violent crime countering this trend is rape, moving up slightly for the several years (Lartey and Li, 2019). Despite the decades-long decreasing crime rate, incarceration rates for females are skyrocketing. Although only 10 percent of the incarcerated are female, the male incarceration rate has leveled off and is decreasing; the rate of increase for females is almost double that for men. The criminal justice system took notice of the devastating statistics that America has the highest incarceration rate on the world, with over two million adults behind bars. Efforts to reverse incarceration growth have met with some success, but more for males than females. Female arrest rates continue to climb. Keeping women out of jail, or getting them released, is more difficult than it is for men (Beall, 2018; Sawyer, 2018; Kann, 2019). This pattern discounts the effect of female leniency.

Intersecting Race and Gender The intersection of gender and race is a much better predictor of sentencing disparity and CJ outcomes than is gender alone. African American and Latino men are less likely to receive probation and receive longer sentences than white men and all women. Women of color may match white males in sentencing for the same or similar crimes. Juvenile girls of color are targets of stiffer penalties and more intensive supervision even in so-called gender-blind programs purporting to address the specific needs of all girls. In counties with larger black populations overall, both black and Latino females receive lengthier sentences. Young minority males receive longer sentences than white youth. Lengthier sentences for juvenile black males in particular are linked to higher rates of recidivism (Gamal, 2018; Lehmann et al., 2019; Warren et al., 2020). White girls are more successful than girls of color when it comes to plea bargains to reduce sentences, even for committing the same status offenses. White, middle class notions of femininity invade criminal justice (Freiburger and Hilinski, 2013; Leiber et al., 2018; Lowery, 2019). Attempts to diminish the effects of gender in criminal justice in the name of fairness often do more harm than good. Implicit and explicit gender factors influence victims, defendants, lawyers, and judges. Powerful symbolic interaction scenarios in the courtroom influence gender stereotyping by officials that predict gendered outcomes (Livingston et al., 2019). These outcomes are neither gender-blind nor gender-just for many offenders.

Sex Work: A Case Study Sex work provides insights into all these explanations. Prostitution, a subset of sex work, providing sexual services for money or goods, is fundamentally a female occupation. Historically, women and girls in abject poverty were sold to brothels or turned to prostitution as a means

Power, Politics, and the Law  569

of survival, a pattern that continues today. Some women derive their total income from prostitution while others work as an aside to their roles as hostesses, adult entertainers, and in the huge illicit massage industry. Globally, an estimated 4 million adults and one million children with an average age of 13–14 are working as prostitutes. Some are nonbinary people, but the International Labour Organization estimates that 99 percent are female; of every three child victims, two are girls and one is a boy. In the United States, the multibillion dollar sex trafficking industry, the trade in humans, most commonly for sexual slavery and forced labor, is growing. Since human trafficking is associated with smuggling foreign women for sexual slavery, the public is often misinformed by how much its tentacles extend into the U.S., ensnaring girls and women of all ages for a myriad of sexually exploitative activities. Misperception that trafficking is not an American problem is associated with weaker enforcement of the landmark Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000, and less demand for partnering with international agencies and NGOs to combat global trafficking (Bonilla and Mo, 2019; Sadulski, 2019). Many homeless and abused girls who venture into the sex industry as children will end their lives as “permanent” prostitutes, with multiple arrests for their activities. In parts of the developing world, owners of brothels dotting sprawling urban slums often abduct girls from their villages. Another pattern is recruiting migrant women for jobs as nannies, maids, or dancers that serve as covers for sex work. The “legitimate” job does not exist, they owe money to the recruiters who paid their way, and they are left stranded in a foreign country with no means of support. Sex work is presented as the solution. Although arrest rates of men who engage the services of prostitutes are increasing, female sex workers are more likely to be arrested than their male clients. In the U.S. women prostitutes are more likely to be arrested for first-time prostitution and serve jail time than first prostitution offenses for male clients. Law enforcement officers typically engage in victim blaming that reduces empathy for sex workers who are assaulted. Repressive policing of sex workers increases risk of violence from clients and access to justice offered to other victims of violence fails (Pfeffer et al., 2018; Platt et al., 2018; Sprankle, et al., 2018). In the sophisticated trafficking pipeline it is also difficult to track down and arrest sex traffickers.

Critique Feminists denounce sex work when women and girls are exploited as sexual objects for the sexual pleasure of men. The reasons women become sex workers are hotly debated. Do they offer their services because of financial desperation or as a freely chosen occupation? One faction argues that sex work, especially prostitution, exists due to male demand and a need to subordinate women to male sexuality. She is vulnerable to rape, sexual violence, and exposure to HIV, especially in war-torn areas with a history of human and civil rights abuses. Sex work survivors attempting to transition to other jobs are stigmatized for life if they try to return to their home villages. If a woman chooses prostitution because of economic needs, then it is not a free choice; child prostitutes have no choice. Sex traffickers and buyers, therefore, should be criminalized and prostitution eliminated. Women need to be retrained for meaningful work offering them a living wage and an enhanced sense of self-worth. Others contend that sex workers are free agents who choose the best job from the gendered work available. Many sex workers telling their own stories say they like their jobs and can make a good living. Tackling the demand for sex work by clients does little to offset the loss of income for prostitutes, male and female alike (Harrington, 2018; Senthilingam, 2019).

570  Gender and Social Institutions

They question the term sex work as equivalent to prostitution—sex work suggests agency; prostitution does not. The sexism in prostitution is no different from sexism in the rest of society. Although the feminization of poverty may be a factor in women’s choice to become a prostitute, denying income from prostitution should not further impoverish women. Like other service industries, prostitution and its traffickers and buyers can be regulated, but laws against prostitution oppress sex workers, disrupt support systems, and decrease their health and safety. Consenting adult women arrested for prostitution carry that record for life, pushing them out of many jobs and educational opportunities (Brown, 2018; Ma et al., 2018; Burnes et al., 2018; Garsd, 2019). Prostitution, therefore, should be decriminalized. All factions condemn sex trafficking and sex slavery where women and girls are abducted, bought, and sold as sex slaves, forced laborers or child brides. The leading cause of death for girls aged 15–19 globally is complications of pregnancy and birth. In Afghanistan, Somaya, at age 13, was sold by her father for $3300 to marry a relative’s son. In Afghanistan she brought value to two families, the one she left and, by her dowry, the one she “joined.” Her value does not translate to her well-being. She asked her in-laws if she could return to school. … both her mother-in-law and husband beat her … If you go to school, who will do the house chores? We bought you. (Voice of America News, 2019) Unlike most child brides, Somaya’s story ends optimistically. With NGO help she obtained a divorce. Although she was sold by her father she was able to return home. Her international story protects her, for now. Sex work as empowerment or disempowerment continues to be contested, but all stakeholders reject beliefs about agency in children. Since sex-trafficked victims attempting to transition to other jobs are stigmatized for trying to return home, advocates focus on other income-generating activities. NGOs in the Global South, for example, offer training to women for jobs in crafts, light manufacturing, as customer service workers in call centers, and start-up entrepreneurs in microfinance schemes (Chapter 6). For poor families throughout developing Asia, former sex workers hope to rejoin their communities and can be welcomed when bringing economic resources to their homes (Najafizadeh, 2019; Tsai, 2019; Witte et al., 2019). Although suspicions lurk, this income goes a long way in reducing stigma, encouraging empowerment, and welcoming back daughters.

SECTION 2 POLITICS GENDERED POLITICS Powerful gendered politics weave their way throughout this book. Enacting public policy and laws to reflect equality and justice regarding gender is linked to two key factors: understanding how gendered perceptions influence voters, and increasing the number of women in office who address women’s concerns through social policy. Once laws are changed, interpretation and enforcement must be consistent with gender equality. This assumes that women in political roles—as office holders, appointees, or volunteers—view gender issues differently

Power, Politics, and the Law  571

from men. Voting behavior, therefore, should mirror such differences. This assumption has been confirmed. Regardless of political party, women legislators influence the extent to which women’s interests are represented in state policy. Compared with their male colleagues, both conservative and progressive women legislators are more supportive of policies providing better access to services for traditionally disadvantaged groups in American society, including women and minorities. They are less likely to vote against restricting policies such as the health care, food assistance, or minimum wages these groups depend on. In global rankings, the United States ranks 76 (three-way tie) out of 190 countries for the percentage of women in national parliaments or legislatures (IPU, 2019). Women are rapidly being elected to public office, but not in numbers necessary to achieve political parity with men.

The Political Gender Gap The political gender gap concept was first used to describe male–female differences in a political context, including votes for candidate, party identification, and policy preferences. When women gained the right to vote in 1920, it was widely believed that women’s political opinions differed considerably from those held by men and that these differences would be evident in voting behavior. For over half a century, this belief remained unfounded; women, like men, tended to vote along class, ethnic, and regional lines. In the 1980s, however, a new political trend emerged. A higher percentage of males voted for Ronald Reagan in 1980 than did females. By 1982, the gap widened, this time accounting for party identification and policy issues: 55 percent of women and 49 percent of men identified themselves as Democrats; 34 percent of women identified themselves as Republican compared to 37 percent of men. Women increasingly opposed Reagan’s policies regarding the economy, foreign relations, environmental protection, and gender equity. More women than men have shifted to the Democratic side. The difference between the proportions of men and women voting for a given candidate persists in every election since 1980. The political gender gap was born (Table 14.2). TABLE 14.2  Gender

Gap* in Presidential Elections, 1980–2016

Year

Presidential Candidates

Women

2016

Donald Trump (R)

41 %

52%

Hillary Clinton (Dr

54%

41 %

Barack Obama ID)

55%

45%

Mitt Romney (R)

44%

52%

Barack Obama ID)

56%

49%

John McCain (R)

43%

48%

2012

2008

Men

Gender Gap (Percentage) 11 pts.

10 pts.

7 pts.

(Continued)

572  Gender and Social Institutions TABLE 14.2 (Continued)

Year

Presidential Candidates

Women

2004

George W. Bush (R)

48%

55%

John Kerry (D)

51%

44%

George W. Bush (R)

44%

54%

Al Gore (D)

54%

43%

2%

3%

Bill Clinton (D)

55%

44%

Bob Dole (R)

38%

45%

7%

10%

45%

41 %

2000

Ralph Nader (Green) 1996

Ross Perot (Reform) 1992

1988

1984

1980

Bill Clinton (D)

Men

George Bush (R)

38%

38%

Ross Perot (Reform)

17%

21 %

George H. W. Bush (R)

50%

57%

Michael Dukakis (D)

49%

41 %

Ronald Reagan (R)

56%

62%

Walter Mondale (D)

44%

37%

Ronald Reagan (R)

47%

55%

Jimmy Carter (D)

45%

36%

John Anderson (I)

7%

7%

Gender Gap (Percentage) 7 pts.

10 pts.

11 pts.

4 pts.

7 pts.

6 pts.

8 pts.

*Gender gap = difference between the percentage of women supporting a candidate from the percentage of men supporting a candidate Source: Adapted from CAWP Fact Sheet. “ The Gender Gap: Voting Choices in Presidential Elections.” ­Center for American Women and Politics, Eagleton Institute of Politics, Rutgers University. January, 2017 https://cawp. rutgers.edu/sites/default/files/resources/ggpresvote.pdf

Presidential Voting Patterns In 1988, George H. W. Bush received 50 percent of women’s votes and 57 percent of those cast by men. The Republican Party clearly recognized the need to address a widening gender gap on issues identified with women’s stronger support, such as parental leave, child care, educational equity, and women’s employment. The military bravado of the Reagan years was substituted for rhetoric focusing on a domestic agenda in a “kinder, gentler” nation. A formidable gender gap favoring Democrats continues, with the largest gender gap in history for the two candidates running in Election 2016. Although the gender gap in Election 2020 was expected to be larger, it was about the same as in 2016, with women voting 56–43 for Biden. Most men continue to identify as Republicans; most women as Democrats. Independents tended to swing to Biden.

Power, Politics, and the Law  573

Republicans, much more divided on gender-based issues, have been slower to respond to the split. A Republican gender deficit in higher public office unfolded to the stance that the party was antiwoman. The Republican Party’s model of the “ideal” family from a white middle-class model may account for this. Republican strategies in subsequent elections addressed these issues. Their successes can be described as mixed.

Gendered Issues Until the 1970s, except for women’s higher opposition to war and capital punishment, it would have been difficult to separate the way men and women viewed social and political issues. Any gender gap before 1980 could be summed up as “men were more likely to be hawks and women more likely to be doves.” This statement holds today, but the gender gap has widened. A significant gap exists in a number of areas, including stronger support by women for women’s rights (Equal Rights Amendment, equal pay, assistance to the poor, minority and gay rights, child care, public options for health insurance), and policies to reduce violence and aggression (gun control, rehabilitation programs in prison) (Carroll, 2010; NORC, 2012).

Intersectional Voting Despite the persistent gender gap, voting is better understood through an intersectional lens. Detailed later, in intersectional combinations with key demographics, party identification is a powerful predictor of voting patterns. Race, SES, education, age and religiosity are as important as gender on some issues. As noted, gender does not predict level of support for abortion rights under Roe v. Wade. Older women and religiously conservative men and women with less education are less supportive of reproductive rights and ERA; both issues have more support among younger men and women with some college education. Older African American women with higher levels of religiosity mirror conservative white women on some of these issues. Black political attitudes, however, are skewed in support of policies congruent with the legacy of the civil rights movement, which falls on the side of Democrats. Any women espousing these values are likely to get the votes of black men and women. If a Republican woman is running, she will get votes from evangelical Protestants and Catholics, who are less likely to support Democratic women (Setzler and Yanus, 2015; McDaniel, 2018). Voters do support women, but party identification predicts which women they will support. Young, first time voters turned out in record numbers to support Democrats. However, young white men preferred Trump by a 6 percent margin; young white women preferred Biden by a 13 percent margin. A problem of intersectionality is to determine what particular combination of categories is the best predictor of voting patterns. In the last decade, party identification rises to near the top of predictions. This partisanship shapes a voter’s choices regardless of the gender of the candidate. The area that may bring women together as a voting bloc is ensuring and strengthening a (social) safety net. Regardless of age and race, women are more likely to support social programs that directly impact them, such as funding for day care and elder care, preserving Medicare, bolstering Social Security benefits, and increasing the minimum wage. Women with high levels of religiosity, regardless of denomination, are also likely to support these issues. They maneuver gendered spheres associated with more family and

574  Gender and Social Institutions

caring responsibilities, but with less power and money. Does this mean that gender is no long a viable predictor of voting?

Gender and Public Office Despite intersectionality, gender remains a powerful influence in voting patterns in the electorate and for those holding political office, whether elected or appointed, or even as volunteers. The gender gap in voting patterns extends to voting patterns of officeholders. However, the gap is narrowing significantly according to certain factors.

Political Party Although the gender gap is smallest at the municipal level and largest at the state level, until quite recently women and men in public office at all levels demonstrated key differences within their own political parties. At the national level, in the George W. Bush administration Republican women appointees were highly conservative, matching the levels of their male colleagues. But Republican women elected to state or national offices expressed more progressive attitudes than comparable Republican men—including some issues that feminists support. With the notable exception of attitudes toward abortion rights, regardless of party, women tend to be more liberal than men. It can be speculated that conservative women officeholders become more sympathetic to feminist issues as they, too, confront the male stronghold of politics. By their gender alone, they find themselves hindered in political effectiveness. Women’s political effectiveness increases with coalition-building. Among officeholders, since both conservative and liberal women agree that the safety net needs to be strengthened, they routinely come together to hammer out the specifics. Voters are generally receptive to election campaigns with ads on bipartisanship and working “across the aisle.” Politicians understand the potential for voting as a bloc if the right mix of issues and circumstances are present. Mobilization around issues of gender may occur. Political strategists cannot afford to ignore existing gender differences and will attempt to leverage them to the benefit of their respective parties. For example, the extreme partisanship in the last decade and seeking women’s votes by “playing the woman card” may be derided rather than applauded. Coalition-building among women in both political parties, however, has come to a grinding halt, disappearing altogether in some cities and states.

Women in Office To influence gender equity, progressive women must increase their numbers at all levels of government—municipal, state, and federal. Between 1979 and 2012, the number of women elected to state legislatures dramatically increased from 10 percent to 24 percent, with the fastest gains between 1980 and 1991. At the Congressional level, except for a slight decline in the 1960s, women have steadily increased their numbers, with the largest increase in history in Midterm 2018 (Table 14.3). Election 2020 continued this trend, with at least 135 Congressional women (103 Democrats and 32 Republicans), for the first time representing over one-quarter (25.2 percent) of all seats, up from from 23.7 percent just two years earlier; 50 are women of color. Bill Clinton’s 1992 election was heralded as the “Year of the Woman,” with sharp increases in numbers of women elected throughout the United States, leading to optimism about women’s continued gains in elected national offices. Women filling Congressional seats in

Power, Politics, and the Law  575 TABLE 14.3  Women

in U.S. Congress, Selected Years Senate

House

Total

1921–22

1

3

4

1941–42

1

9

10

1951–52

1

10

11

1961–62

2

18

20

1971–72

2

13

15

1981–82

2

21

23

1991–92

4

28

32

2001–02

14

60

73

2007–08

16

76

88

2009–10

17

76

90

2011–2012

17

76

96

2013–2014

20

81

102

2015–2016

20

85

105

2017–2018

23

88

111

2019–2020

26

101

127

Note: Voting members and vacancies filled by women are counted here. Source: Women in Congress, 1917–2019. Adapted from Table 3, pp. 108–109. Congressional Research Service. January 15, 2020. https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R43244.pdf

the past were often completing unexpired terms of their late husbands. Today’s senators and representatives are definitely a new breed of Congressional women who carved out stellar professional and political careers in their own right. Because of the seniority system in Congress, however, it will take years before this small group transitions to important committees to exert the influence to see their goals realized. This situation is worsened in states with term limits on elected officials. However, as Midterm 2018 and Election 2020 demonstrate, the current cohort of Congressional women—the youngest and most diverse in history—is challenging the old boy network. The gender “politics as usual” have been assaulted.

Appointments The pattern of women’s appointments to high administrative positions indicates both gains and losses. Reagan was the first president in a decade who failed to appoint more women to high-level federal posts than his immediate predecessor. Nonetheless, Reagan is credited with appointing Sandra Day O’Connor as the first woman Justice to the Supreme Court. Her appointment came long after public willingness to accept a woman in SCOUS. Although

576  Gender and Social Institutions

female appointees under Republican presidents were fewer than under Democratic presidents, women’s number of mid- to high-level appointments increased during the last three decades. Women political appointments during Republican administrations were more likely to represent the New Right, often in return for campaign support and hold positions with limited authority. Compared to the terms in all Bush administrations, Clinton made auspicious moves in countering tokenism that was the hallmark of presidential top-level appointees for women. He appointed four women to cabinet-level positions, including Attorney General Janet Reno and Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, two of the most powerful posts in the nation. Perhaps most significant, he appointed now iconic Ruth Bader Ginsburg (1933–2020), a longtime advocate for women’s rights, to SCOUS. In 1977, Jimmy Carter stressed diversity on the bench, with 34 percent of his judicial appointees being women and minority males. Reflecting the belief that the federal judiciary should mirror the life experiences of a wide spectrum of society, Clinton surpassed Carter in such appointments. During George W. Bush’s first term, women were 19 percent of Senate confirmed appointees to Cabinet or Cabinet-level posts, down sharply from the 32 percent in the first year of the Clinton administration. Bush’s most prominent woman appointee was Condoleezza Rice as National Security Advisor and later as Secretary of State. In Clinton’s second term, 45 percent of these senior positions were held by women, the highest of any president in history (CAWP, 2019). In his first term, Obama appointed four women to Cabinet-level posts, including Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State, the third woman to hold that position; Susan Rice, the U.N. Ambassador; chairs of the Council of Economic Advisers and Securities and Exchange Commission; and perhaps most important, two justices to SCOUS, Sonia Sotomayor, the Court’s first Latino in 2009, and Elena Kagan in 2010. In his second term he appointed Janet Yellen as the first female chair of the U.S. Federal Reserve. By Obama’s second term, women filled 35 percent of his Cabinet or Cabinet-level positions. Early in his administration Trump appointed women to five Cabinet and Cabinet-level positions. Some have stepped down; others were replaced by other women. U.N Ambassador Nikki Haley, for example, was replaced by Kelly Craft. As of this writing the senior level positions include: Secretary of Education, Betsy Devos, Secretary of Transportation Elaine Cho (who was Secretary of Labor under George W. Bush), and CIA Chief Gina Haspel, the first woman to hold the post. Trump has appointed women as top advisors, including Kellyanne Conway, Counselor to the President, and his daughter Ivanka Trump. At 90 percent turnover rate for all senior level staffers by 2020, it is difficult to keep up with shuffling in the Trump administration (Tenpas, 2020). Trump made a good start at appointing women to senior level positions, including “A Team” members of his executive office. Overall, however, Trump’s first Cabinet had more white men than the six previous presidents (Harrington, 2017). By his third year, appointments of women to senior level positions had stalled and many vacated positions remained unfilled. However, six days before Election 2020, Trump nominee Amy Coney Barrett ascended to the SCOUS to fill Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s seat.

Barriers and Opportunities for Female Candidates Public support for qualified women in public office at all levels has skyrocketed. The public considers elected and appointed female officials competent, decisive, and fair in conducting political roles and in issues they confront carrying out these roles. Top-level election of women and their appointments by both Republican and Democratic administrations ensure that women are no longer relegated to behind-the-scenes positions. As clearly demonstrated

Power, Politics, and the Law  577

in recent presidential elections, however, women face hurdles from which men are exempt. In their campaigns and in office, women must do politics differently. Gender is a huge issue in how rules are played and how power is distributed. It may be disguised as benevolent sexism but as we see later, it is sexism nonetheless. Symbolic interaction theory explains that women officeholders must continuously “invent” themselves in adjusting to a male-defined space. Leadership styles are defined by gender expectations. Women are criticized for being too strident or aggressive and for being too ambivalent or tentative. In speaking, women are shrill, emotional, and angry; men are measured, calm, and composed. Both men and women vote for male candidates viewed as assertive in their verbal and nonverbal behavior (Everitt et al., 2016). A woman’s assertiveness can spark annoyance in her listeners. To be politically effective women must maneuver language barriers not faced by men, imposed by gender (Chapter 4).

Socialization Factors Socialization into gendered leadership styles may hurt or help political participation for women. If politics demands a style that is self-serving with a high degree of competitiveness, men have the advantage. Women in public office have higher levels of “public spiritedness,” and tend to be oriented toward broader principles rather than to narrower issues. Although politicians are expected to have higher moral standards than the rest of us, women are expected to be higher than men in this regard. A Democratic female member of Congress in the midst of a bitter divorce resigned over a consensual, sexual relationship with a female staffer. A male colleague running for reelection, despite charges that he used campaign funds for romantic liaisons, refuses to resign. Voters may be more critical of political women in sex scandals; men in sex scandals are taken for granted (Dale, 2019). Unless there are charges of misconduct, men’s consensual sexcapades garner initial media attention and are then often relegated to obscurity. Although both men and women run a minefield countering the rumors and smear campaigns that are unfortunately but routinely associated with political life, these hurdles are more challenging for women. Gender stereotypes can put women at an advantage or a disadvantage for public office. Female politicians are interlopers in a male political arena. However, others believe women will be elected because of disillusionment with morally corrupt male politicians. Assigning essentialist traits to women leaders is a double-edged sword. In the long run it works more to women’s political disadvantage, but the stereotype of the trustworthy woman may help get them elected.

Beliefs about Women’s Roles A barrier to women in politics surrounds cultural meanings about marriage and motherhood. A woman must contend with disapproval if the public believes her home (read children and husband) is neglected in her quest for public office. This is consistent with weighty research that gender equity in the workplace does not translate to gender equity in the home, in task-sharing and child care (Chapter 7).

Motherhood and Husbands Male candidates begin their political ascent earlier than women. Even high-profile women often wait until their youngest children are launched to minimize being labeled a “neglectful

578  Gender and Social Institutions

mother.” By embarking on a political career later in life women are usually at least a decade behind men in seeking higher public office. A woman must be mindful of the relationship with her husband, who may be unprepared to deal with his wife’s candidacy. Husbands play a vital supportive role but cultural beliefs about masculinity may prevent them from enthusiastically promoting their wives’ campaigns. Irrespective of political party, women face questions about their appearance, marital status, and household responsibilities that are rarely asked of men. Journalists reinforce the notion that women are exceptions: How does she balance kids with Congress? How does he deal with her political fame? What keeps them together? Media discourse in politics frames women as different beings from men (Chapter 1). After Sarah Palin became John McCain’s running mate a headline in a major newspaper read: “McCain, new sidekick, a hit” (Schlinkmann and Munz, 2008). Never would a man picked to run for any office, much less the office of Vice President, be labeled a “sidekick.” Regardless of party and perceived political leaning of media outlets, sexist news commentary haunted the 2008 and 2016 campaigns. Major newspapers framed the sexual misconduct of Donald Trump in partisan terms that undermined—“symbolically annihilated”—the voices of the victims (Marr, 2019; Schneider and Hannem, 2019). When Bill Clinton named his first two female candidates for Attorney General, the defining qualification became how they arranged for child care and household help. Male nominees may capitalize on such gaffs but they are not subjected to such questions. Today’s generation of women candidates, however, have honed their psychological skills. Socialization into female gender roles may initially be inhibiting factors for politically ambitious women, but they can be navigated for political success.

Structural Barriers Educational barriers have all but disappeared in women’s quest for public office. Women in office have the same educational credentials as men, or slightly higher. Limits imposed by age, social class, and occupation, nonetheless, remain formidable. With the massive cost of campaigning continuing to escalate, money is considered the most important factor for a political future. Compared with men, women have less personal money and financial support. Review the successful politicians in your home state or nation who are millionaires or who were bankrolled by business empires headed by billionaires. All candidates face money challenges, but women are often denied the foot in the door even to be considered eligible to run. Male candidates are more likely to be financially supported in campaigns by affluent wives. Celebrities in sports (Senator Bill Bradley, Governor Jesse Ventura) and entertainment (President Ronald Reagan, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, and reality TV star and business magnate, President Donald Trump) certainly rose to the highest political offices. Financial and social liabilities of occupational segregation for women emerge politically (Chapter 7). However, women have made significant progress in professions that are key sources of political eligibility, such as journalism, law, academics, and business and public administration.

Election Lessons: 2008 and 2012 Three presidential elections and a recent midterm election offer a good barometer to assess the barriers and opportunities gender presents for successful political outcomes.

Power, Politics, and the Law  579

Election 2008 Spotlighting gender and race, media’s powerful influence in the political process was magnified during this remarkable election between Barack Obama and John McCain for U.S. presidency (Chapter 1). Pundits talked to one another about representations of the candidates; scholars and researchers studying media framing of race and gender were largely absent from the discourse. Hillary Clinton’s primary run and post-primary support of Barack Obama again spotlighted her “woman’s credentials” in comparison to Sarah Palin. Media overrepresented gender and race characteristics related to Clinton, Palin, and Obama; McCain’s white, Irish ancestry was ignored. In the taken-for-granted race and gender profile, John McCain was the presumed “natural” candidate. In line with social constructionism, the media reinforced normative, cultural representations about race and gender by which the candidates were judged. Even as an insurgent, Obama was reframed to fit the media mold allowing beliefs about white, masculine domination of politics to remain unchallenged. Race was nullified and Obama slipped into the “natural” candidate category (Eargle et al., 2008; Walsh, 2009). In another twist, Obama was (and is) referred to as African American rather than biracial, even if the latter label may have speeded up the recasting to benefit his campaign.

The Primary Election Race generally outweighed gender as more salient in the primary battle between Obama and Clinton. Exit polls of Democrats showed Clinton was more favorable for white, female, older voters (age 65 and older); Obama was more favorable for African American women and older African Americans regardless of gender. He also had more support from both African American and white men, people under age 65, and young adults who voted in historically high numbers. Explaining the favorability of males, voters tend to support people they see as similar to themselves, in this case other males. In the primary election, race could be recast in a manner that advantaged Obama; gender could not be recast and worked to the disadvantage of Clinton.

The General Election Race was more salient in the primary, gender was more salient in the general election. Sarah Palin as vice presidential nominee focused on two strategies: to bolster backing from the conservative base of Republican women, and to entice votes from disaffected women who supported Hillary Clinton. For the first strategy, Palin had mixed support from conservative women. She represented their views on advocating for abstinence-based sex education and opposition to abortion rights, gun control, and same-sex marriage. Conservative women, however, criticized Palin for transgressing women’s roles. She was first and foremost a mother. Public service is admirable but could wait until children were grown. The McCain– Palin ticket lost votes from the conservative women they reached out to. The second strategy to gain votes from Clinton voters in the primary was a failure. It is astonishing that McCain–Palin strategists did not account for hefty research showing that women vote on shared issues rather than on gender per se. Conservative and progressive women alike do not want to see gender justice diminished. As explained later, only recently has this pattern shifted. Conservative women generally do not identify as feminists but are

580  Gender and Social Institutions

nonetheless “gender-conscious political actors” when it comes to issues of women and children (Schreiber, 2018:56). Palin’s feminist identification did not alter the way conservative women viewed her. Many moderate Republican women were disillusioned with Palin’s obsolete messages to women and about women. These women criticized McCain for not selecting from an array of conservative female politicians with more substance and more experience. The choice of Sarah Palin to redress the perceived antiwoman bias in the Republican Party failed.

Election 2012 Election 2008 highlighted the gender–race intersection. Election 2012 was a referendum on “women’s issues.” Both parties campaigned aggressively for women’s votes, but strategies differed greatly. The election highlighted a social issues discourse that overshadowed an economic discourse to which it was intimately connected.

Republican Messages to Women Republicans did not offer messages to women uniformly different from those to all voters. Messages highlighted withdrawal or reversal of programs that women disproportionally supported, such as child care subsidies and equal pay initiatives. Issues were presented in steeped religious and morality language. Republicans maintained, and to a large extent doubled down on, long-standing beliefs that women’s sexuality must be monitored and controlled. These beliefs played out dramatically in the campaign. Women were prevented from testifying at hearings on contraceptive coverage required by the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Republicans sought to overturn ACA, arguing that hearings were not about reproductive rights and contraception; it was about Obama’s actions perceived to restrict freedom of religion and undermine morality. Only male conservative religious leaders were permitted to testify at the initial hearing. More damaging to Republicans seeking women’s votes was fallout from comments about abortion, contraception, and pregnancy from male Republican candidates running for Congress. The infamous statement from Todd Aiken, Republican Senate candidate from Missouri, remarked that pregnancy rarely results from rape because “if it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut the whole thing down.” Richard Mourdock, Senate candidate from Indiana, declared that he opposed aborting pregnancies conceived in rape because “it is something that God intended to happen.” Censure by Republicans and conservative media was soon muted. Even with arguably outrageous and ludicrous comments, Republicans believed it was better to have any Republican in the Senate seats than lose them entirely. What was outrageous in 2012 by many Republicans is not so outrageous today. The Romney campaign warned voters not to be “distracted” by these issues, but to concentrate on more critical economic concerns threatening the livelihoods of all Americans. Women heard messages about their bodies, but Republicans were largely silent about sustaining a safety net for families and on programs to make all workers, including women, successful employees and productive citizens. Republicans were deemed insensitive or, at worst, hostile to specific concerns of women (Cohen, 2012; Levenson, 2012; Wyler, 2012). They lost an opportunity to garner more support from women.

Power, Politics, and the Law  581

Democratic Messages to Women Democrats capitalized on their favorable gender gap. It was easier for Democrats to spotlight their record for programs benefiting women and children. Democrats based their strategies on two key points. First, Democrats had a better understanding that social and economic issues are inseparable. Despite culture wars, this understanding could be effectively presented to voters. Second, they understood the power of intersectionality. Women’s votes were segmented according to ethnicity, race, and social class. Democrats spotlighted intersections specifically messaging women about the health and economic perils to themselves and their families if ACA was overturned.

Critique A swathe of Americans saw Republican messages as “a war on women.” Emerging by the 1980s, this narrative is not new. However, Republicans steadily moved to more conservative views on sexuality-related issues, specifically on abortion and contraception. Compared to elections before 1992, it cannot be said that the Democrats outlined a substantially more liberal agenda. Matching views of the electorate, the Democratic Party has also moved to the right on economic issues, including privatization of government services and a stronger neoliberal agenda. The gains of Democrats among women as well as the LGBTQ communities, then and now, have more to do with continuing support for policies related to social issues. Candidates chose to ignore, highlight, reinforce, distance themselves from, or embrace parts of their party’s platforms according to their constituencies. An unprecedented number of women were also elected in 2012. Democrats were able to win over the women and young voters who propelled Obama to a second term. Since Election 2012, both parties are astute that winning means more than “catching up with a demographic.” Intersectional demographic categories are associated with highly salient differences on political and social issues. After Election 2012, Republicans pointed to the large gender gap they saw emerging from extremists in their ranks. The view that Republicans waged a war on women needed to be muted going forward. However, the laments by Republicans about the second loss to Barack Obama due to extremists in their ranks disappeared completely in the 2016 Presidential election.

Election 2016: Referendum on Gender If Election 2008 was a referendum on race, Election 2016 was a referendum on gender. The historic election opened with Hillary Clinton representing the Democratic Party after a rocky primary, and the improbable rise of Donald Trump who secured the nomination from the Republican Party in an even rockier primary. Many factors coalesced to explain the surprising outcome, but gendered expectations played a lead role. These centered on four key factors: intersectional patterns, electability barriers, social construction of the candidates, and outright sexism. Clinton was able to overcome the structural barriers hampering politically ambitious women, but broader barriers related to political gendered expectations favored Trump.

Pivotal Intersections Underscored by intersectionality in politics, men and women are not monolithic. Despite the historic gender gap and Hillary Clinton winning three million more popular votes than

582  Gender and Social Institutions

Donald Trump, her failure to secure the Electoral College propelled Donald Trump to the presidency. Pivotal intersections of voters determined the outcome of the election. Women: 54 percent for Clinton White women: 53 percent for Trump White men: 62 percent for Trump Women of color: 94 percent black women, 68 percent Latino women for Clinton White women with a college degree: 51 percent for Clinton White women without a college degree: 2 to 1 for Trump Young adults: 67 percent for Clinton

Revisiting Gender and Electability Hillary Clinton overcame key electability barriers female candidates confront but she was also overpowered by others. Her socialization trajectory prepared her at a young age for a political life. This path instilled three important ingredients both men and women embrace for a political life: confidence, competence, and competitiveness. She capitalized on the pioneering female politicians who shifted narratives about women in politics. The women’s movement was heating up when Clinton graduated from Wellesley College in 1969, elevating women’s issues to the center of public discourse and opening the door for the surge of women in political positions that followed. (Chapter 1). Beliefs about motherhood also worked in Clinton’s favor. In Election 2008 Hillary Clinton was absolved of the motherhood mandate in the media; Sarah Palin was not. Other structural barriers hindering many female candidates were less prominent in Clinton’s presidential run. She had the education, professional and occupational background, financial means, experiences, and political credentials to field her 2016 campaign. Although Clinton was able to successfully circumvent these gendered electability barriers, other beliefs about women’s roles inhibited her (entire) political life—and inhibited her 2016 campaign. First Ladies (FLOUS) exert a great deal of behind-the-scenes influence. She assumed an unprecedented leadership role in the Bill Clinton administration. Her political past became a gendered flashpoint for her political present. Republican strategies under Trump reignited the media frenzy of her husband’s affairs from 20 years earlier. She was accused of keeping too silent (showing her support for him) and speaking too much (showing her lack of support for him). Trump replayed Bill Clinton’s indiscretions during the campaign, even bringing his accusers to the second presidential debate. With no sex scandals of her own, Hillary Clinton was used by Trump as a stand-in for Bill Clinton. She was culpable for his behavior. The theatrics did not necessarily harm Trump’s reputation but raised trust issues against Clinton that followed her throughout the campaign.

Socially Constructing Electability Entrenched gender constructs embody the American presidency. Elections are collections of symbols voters amass during a campaign and act on in voting (Norton, 2017). Although both Democrats and Republicans did not want to unleash an election as a battle between the sexes, women vote at higher rates than men and the election hinged on their votes. Both candidates needed to assure the votes of women without jeopardizing the votes of men (Lepore, 2016; Meeks, 2018). Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump were starkly different candidates and were socially constructed in starkly different ways.

Power, Politics, and the Law  583

Hillary Rodham Clinton When Clinton stepped across the threshold a second time as presidential contender she crossed a chasm of political and gender boundaries. She was applauded by voters representing all races and genders. Despite decades of political attacks, she garnered high approval ratings as Senator from New York and Secretary of State. Approval plummeted when she entered the 2016 race after a contentious primary campaign. Transgressing “protocols of authentic womanhood,” the torrent of gendered rhetoric unleashed against her during the first presidential run was magnified in Election 2016. The torrent was infused with hatred and bordered on violent threats and imagery. As the campaign progressed, derision for Hillary Clinton grew, with an increased number of Americans viewing her as “strongly unfavorable,” more than any other Democratic nominee since 1980 (Parry-Giles, 2014; Alter, 2016a; 2016b). With media reinforcement, the unfavorable perception became an insurmountable barrier: popularity was linked to how she conformed to women’s roles. Clinton was too ambitious. Her popularity spiked when she conformed to expected women’s roles but declined when she transgressed them. Overt displays of female ambition and leadership are shunned by the American public. Recurring judgements ranged from: she doesn’t look presidential, she is not authentic, and she is unlikeable, to she is crooked, she is a liar, she is untrustworthy, and she should be in jail. Whereas people resent others who are smarter than them, they don’t like those others to be women (Abel, 2016; Knuckley, 2018). For decades she donned a sturdy shield to steady her from attacks. This shield prompted images that she is not warm and fuzzy; nor is she transparent (what about those emails?). Rather astonishing, her political experience was regarded more as a burden rather than as a benefit.

Leadership Resting on the electability barrier about women’s leadership, like other female candidates, Clinton emphasized “masculine” personality traits to make her a suitable candidate while simultaneously emphasizing “feminine” issues that were a focus of her policies. As media framing became more negative, on advice from aides, Clinton accommodated gender role norms by “softening” her image. Clinton asked for support not because she is a woman, but because she is the most qualified, experienced, and ready person to be president (Beinart, 2016). Trump accused her of “playing the woman card,” without which she could not even run for a city council. His tactic angered her supporters and detractors: they vote on a candidate’s substance, not because of a vagina or penis (Kurtzleben, 2016; Sanders, 2016). Clinton threw the accusation back at Trump. Well, if fighting for women’s health care and paid family leave and equal pay is playing the woman card, then deal me in. (Collins, 2016) Reclaimed as a symbol of resistance, her campaign began distributing actual women’s cards to supporters. Sexist media coverage continued. Clinton’s social construction centered on her unpopularity and unlikability. Magazine covers even before her official bid for the presidency depicted her as power hungry and emasculating, warning voters to question her authenticity and her ambition. Amplified by offensive social media memes, Trump’s #Crooked Hillary and “lock her up” rhetoric were common. Over 90 percent of coverage and interviews opened with, or

584  Gender and Social Institutions

prominently mentioned, the private email server she used as Secretary of State. Her policy agenda was secondary. The election, therefore, was about character (Bachmann et al., 2018; Martin, 2016a; Vorst, 2018). The depiction of Clinton’s character was also gender driven. As anti-Hillary America found a solid place in mainstream media, an adviser noted; The underlying thing about Clinton’s candidacy is it’s not normal—normal is a male candidate, a male voice, a male tie. (Reitman, 2016)

Donald J. Trump The social construction of Donald Trump in news and entertainment media matched Clinton in amount of negative content. Media highlighted his short attention span, inability to write coherent sentences in Tweets, stay on task in meetings, and incoherent rambles in speeches. Other coverage played out differently, according to gender. Like Clinton, he was mocked for his appearance, clothing, and age—too old and too feeble to be president. Trump confronted ageism in the campaign; Clinton confronted ageism and sexism (Lytle et al., 2018). Clinton’s magazine coverage emphasized her witchlike status; Trump’s emphasized fear and apocalyptic rhetoric (Goodnow and Payne, 2019). Apocalyptic images are ambiguous; would an apocalypse be unleashed or averted with his win?

Masculinity Narratives and images about masculinity shaped Election 2016 more than any election in U.S. history (Heldman et al., 2018). Trump’s masculine-dominant role was taken for granted; Clinton was an intruder in a male space. He used body language and gendered communication unapologetically. Trump’s accepted masculine offense strategy effectively threw Clinton into a defense mode, imaging her as weaker and ineffectual. Over ten percent of his campaign Tweets were uncivil (Lee and Lim, 2016). As the campaign progressed, Tweets were more insulting and derisive, with name-calling directed to those who criticized him. Through the lens of masculinity theory, Trump’s needed to be ranked (see himself) above most men and all women. Masculine discourse driven by gender stereotypes was used to attack women on their looks or intellect. Carly Fiorina, CEO of Hewlett Packard, was the only woman to compete in the Republican primary. Trump infamously said: “Look at that face. Would anyone vote for that?” He was accused of stalking Clinton during the second debate. Her nonverbal behavior transcended gender norms; his did not. Clinton was judged to have won the debate. However, posts on social media and YouTube after these incidents were supportive of Trump’s campaign style and were derisive of Clinton’s (Guardian, 2018; Purvis, 2019; Wasike, 2019). The irony is that the deluge of misogyny and incessant lies were not only normalized, but unlike Clinton, Trump was seen as more authentic. His attacks on women journalists—representing women and the fake news media—boosted his support. Female journalists were singled out (“I know you’re not thinking, you never do”). He capitalized on masculine narratives cementing his base of white, working class men (Carmines et al., 2016; Hahl et al., 2018). Trump presented himself as a masculine alternative to Clinton and the Democrats. If Democrats are wimpy, equivocal, and emasculated, Trump counters with authoritarianism

Power, Politics, and the Law  585

and combativeness, taking on a toxic masculinity persona thought to resonate with his base. The ideal president embodies masculine traits and with his astute ability to leverage TV to his advantage, the campaign worked to present Trump in that image (Katz, 2016; Morgan and Shanahan, 2017). Trump and his supporters actively celebrated the “successful man” image that embodied business, money, power, dominance, and especially sexual bravado (Wilz, 2016; Dzuback, 2016).

Outright Sexism The social construction of female politicians compared to their male counterparts is clearly gendered. A gendered election, however, is not necessarily a sexist election. Gendering morphs into sexism—when a male (or female) is considered better (or worse) than the other—because of their gender (sex). Males are subject to sexism but patriarchal institutions assure that females are subjected to it much more. All sexism is deleterious to females but it takes many forms. “Hostile sexism,” for example, is overt, unapologetic, and laced with threats defined according to sexual harassment. Men do not want to be labeled sexist, so it is less accepted today. “Modern sexism” is more subtle, communicated through gender microaggressions— everyday forms of sexist discrimination that build over time and affect a woman’s emotional well-being (Lewis, 2018b). Election 2016 may have been another version, such as “ambivalent sexism.” This form is linked to unrecognized, conflicting biases reported by men: I don’t like/trust Clinton, but I respect her; Clinton is not the “right” one. Ambivalent sexism was a strong predictor of voting for Trump over Clinton even after accounting for political party (Bush, 2016; Corrington and Hebl, 2018; Glick and Fiske, 2018; Godbole et al., 2019). Clinton had an ongoing perceived deficit of feminine traits that added to her “unlikable” quotient. This evidence suggests that sexism, and the tolerated gender discrimination it produced, may have cost Clinton the election.

Racism or Sexism? The political force of racism is acknowledged. Racist statements from candidates or their supporters are met swiftly to counter accusations. In Election 2012, John McCain intervened when a supporter used racist rhetoric against Obama. When a supporter called Obama “an Arab” and “I don’t trust him,” McCain responded: we differ on policy but “he’s a decent family man.” When a supporter used a sexist comment against Clinton, McCain was startled but did not censure the comment (Chapter 1). However, McCain engaged in civil discourse, refraining from racist or sexist rhetoric, especially given that Sarah Palin was his running mate. On the other hand, racist comments were used by Trump from early in his campaign. These often surrounded derisive images of non-white immigrants, Puerto Rico, African and Caribbean nations, or poor African American neighborhoods. Media quickly spotlighted the comment, and the Trump campaign worked to neutralize them. Neutralization strategies included: doubling down (the comments are accurate), misperceiving or denying what he said (that’s not what I/he meant), or obscuring them in rhetoric about his other positive qualities. Opponents of Trump, also uncomfortable with such remarks, deflected unease by calling attention to his other perceived flaws. Trump’s penchant for racist remarks at rallies or on Twitter and stoking racism was identified far earlier in his candidacy but continued

586  Gender and Social Institutions

throughout his presidency. Although rarely apologetic and often equivocal, Trump has condemned racism when mass shootings are connected to white supremacy (McGranahan, 2019; Ordoñez, 2019; Silva, 2019). Whether the public exonerates Trump’s racist rhetoric is debatable. However, as racism continued to infiltrate his campaign and administration, damage control was evident. Demonstrated in Election 2016, sexist rhetoric, which is more politically palatable, offered Trump a political advantage. Racism is not underestimated as a political force (Bracic et al., 2019). Trump created a permissible environment for sexism, opening the door to its more virulent forms. Outright hostile sexism transformed into outright misogyny (Chapter 1). As sexual misconduct allegations against Trump grew, he doubled down, denying allegations or calling accusers liars. Even an affair with a porn star paid for her silence, and the infamous “grab them by the p*ssy” tape—defending it as simply “ locker room talk”—cast doubt that women can be trusted. Other lewd and vulgar comments at rallies, on T-shirts and on Trump’s Twitter feed buttressed misogyny as acceptable political behavior (Martin, 2016b). (These are not written here but can easily be found online). Female reporters, especially journalists of color, are admonished and humiliated for their questions (Farhi, 2018; Hafner, 2018). After interrupting Clinton numerous times in the final debate, he eventually called her “a nasty woman,” his insult of choice (Mukhopadhyay and Harding, 2017). He insulted Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen of Denmark, with the “nasty” label after she called his offer to buy Greenland absurd. Others include Carmen Yulín Cruz, Mayor of San Juan (critical of his response after Hurricane Maria), Senator Kamala Harris, (D-CA) (questioning Attorney General William Barr about the Mueller Report), and Meghan Markle, Duchess of Sussex (saying he was divisive). Career diplomat Marie Yovanovitch, former ambassador to Ukraine who testified in the impeachment hearings, is referred to as “the woman”—never by her name (Prasad, 2019). Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, the most powerful woman in America, wielding power that can jeopardize his political future, gets special treatment: “she’s a nasty, vindictive, horrible person” (Benoit, 2017; Stan, 2017; Alaimo, 2019; Jones, 2019). What do these women have in common? They are powerful and do not bend to his will. Hillary Clinton is a nasty woman, but also a liberated one (Rosenberg, 2016). His most misogynistic comments are directed at influential women, sending messages that women need to be kept in their place. Research about sexism and misogyny in the 2016 campaign is now more available. Evidence suggests that campaign strategies allowing for sexism offered Trump political advantages. First, many voters applauded, did not punish Trump, for exercising the right of “free speech,” believing that Democrats and Hillary Clinton would suppress it in the name of political correctness. Second, some believed that mainstream media are too liberal and must be called out for biased reporting about Trump’s negative views on women. He claims he really respects and admires women. Third, the campaign demonstrated that people who watch politically like-minded news develop polarized political attitudes. Factual knowledge is undermined, creating a dynamic that used sexism to mobilize key Trump supporters, particularly white, non-college educated males. Moderate Republicans may have been offended by misogyny, but rather than vote for Clinton, they did not vote or voted third party (CAWP, 2016; Ratliff et al., 2019; Scatamburlo-D’Annibale, 2019). Progressive voters hearing a media diet of sustained misogynistic, antagonistic, views of women, were a liability for Clinton less than for Trump. It is speculated that many Democrats felt disempowered for the same reason, sidelining their political participation (Kim, 2017; Sentell, 2017; Fulton and Gershon, 2018; Jarvis and Han, 2018). Sexism lowered favorability for Clinton and increased it for Trump. Misogyny did not necessarily turn off voters, helping him win the Electoral College.

Power, Politics, and the Law  587

Unlike racism, sexism is underestimated as a political force. The catalyzing power of anger-mobilized sexism, bringing out those identified as sexist who would not have voted at all but voted for Trump. Sexism powerfully predicted voter choice even after controlling for factors such as authoritarianism and partisanship (Bock et al., 2017; Valentino et al., 2018). Whether it is referred to as ambivalent, benign, modern, hostile, or misogynistic, sexism’s traditional attitudes to women predicted voting for Trump.

Critique The gender-based explanations for the Clinton–Trump dynamics in Election 2016 (eligibility, social construction, sexism) must be looked at synergistically with others. Fueling her image as untrustworthy, FBI director James Comey abruptly reopened an investigation into Clinton’s emails, refueling media messages about distrust of Clinton. The investigation closed a few days before the election, but about 25 million had already voted. Russian hacking of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) reportedly showed Bernie Sanders, an Independent Senator from Vermont, undermined in his primary bid by Democrat Hillary Clinton. Some Sanders supporters accepted Trump’s invitation to join him against Clinton, others chose not to vote, nudging a close election to Trump. Russia hacked Facebook (FB) using “bots”—not real people—with millions of anti-Clinton messages, most decidedly sexist and misogynistic. FB hackings reinforced Clinton’s social construction as evil, witchlike, unlikable, and untrustworthy. Unknown to me at the time, my FB was hacked. Viewing hundreds of bots with scathing, contemptuous comments about Clinton, my thought was: OMG! People really hate her! These events may be unique to Election 2016. Some social science researchers contend that the playing field for women candidates is level and they no longer face bias on the campaign trail, that the conventional wisdom that media coverage and voter attitudes put women at a disadvantage is inaccurate. These are detailed as followed: too many women are elected to public office to say that they are disadvantaged by gender. Gender is not a disadvantage for women at the ballot box if a campaign is run well. It is not that voting is “gender neutral,” or that sexism is eliminated, but sexist behavior in campaigns is not the same as “systematic gender bias.” Examples of sexism must be placed in larger context. Women and men are expected to run similar campaigns and either ignore gender barriers or use them to their advantage. Candidates rarely emphasize gender; journalists are also unlikely to do so or risk violating professional norms. Attitudes about candidates are shaped by partisanship, “leaving little room for sex to matter.” Debunking myths about “what happens to most female candidates on the campaign trail’ is important to encourage women’s political representation (Hayes and Lawless, 2016: 5,7, 134). The unexpected failure of white women to vote for Clinton may be better explained by partisanship. Double standards and stereotypes about women exist, but party identification offers a better alternative explanation for the gender gap in voting. Voters are wary of favoritism from female officials that steers resources to women. Female politicians want to be seen as representing all people and are reluctant to be identified with “women’s issues” (Rhode, 2019:49). Voting against female officials is not sexist, but as a way to reduce gender favoritism it plays out along party lines. Voters are also suspicious of media-reported research that has an advocacy or activism bent. Research through a feminist lens is less credible. Perhaps unfairly—and despite its scientific credentials—the research is perceived as advantageous for one side or another (gun rights, reproductive rights, immigration rights). It erodes research credibility and nudges more partisanship (Al-Gharbi, 2018; Goldman, 2018;

588  Gender and Social Institutions % of registered voters who identify as ... Rep

Dem

Ind

Rep/Ln Rep

Dem/Ln Dem

Men

42

35 34 28

'94

28 26

'98

'02

'06

'10

'14

'17

52

48 44

39

'94

'98

'02

'06

'10

'14

'17

Women

37 31 27

'94

39 32 25

'98

FIGURE 14.1  Gender

'02

'06

'10

'14

'17

56

48 42

'94

37

'98

'02

'06

'10

'14

'17

Gap in Party Identification, 1994–2017

Source: Pew Research Center. March 20, 2018. https://www.people-press.org/2018/03/20/1-trends-in-party-affiliation-among-demographic-groups/2_2-14/

Thomson-DeVareaux, 2019). These examples offer a viable argument that in the voting booth, an R or D by a name, irrespective of whether it is a woman’s or man’s name, is the persuasive prompt for voting (Figure 14.1). The partisanship argument for gendered political patterns is strong. It is difficult to make the leap, however, that the playing field has leveled for female candidates. In light of Election 2016, the partisan divide widened, but the unprecedented sexism and normalized misogyny fueled the divide. Notwithstanding party identification, sexism was the consistent driver that lowered favorability for Clinton and increased it for Trump (Blair, 2017; Rhode, 2017; Pahlke et al., 2018; Ukockis, 2019). An intersectional lens that accounts for political party and the multiple prejudices of sexism, racism, and classism offers a productive lead to explain differences in voters, office seekers, and elected officials (Schaffner, 2018). Election 2016 allowed a complicated, intersectional view of the fate that could engulf any politician depending on how the pivotal intersections discussed here evolve. The next two elections increased this complexity.

Midterm Election 2018 Election 2016 and the administration unfolding under Donald Trump set the stage for how Republicans and Democrats—both officeholders and voters—dealt with the pivotal intersections two years later. Regardless of disarray in the White House, Republicans unified in

Power, Politics, and the Law  589

47

43

41

47

35

Total

Men

Women

The Democratic Party candidate FIGURE 14.2  Gender

Election 2018

54

51

47

38

White Men

41

White Women

The Republican Party candidate

and Support of Candidate by Political Party of Candidate in Midterm

Source: Frankovic, Kathy. “The Political Gender Chasm of the 2018 Midterms” https://today.yougov.com/topics/ politics/articles-reports/2018/10/26/political-gender-chasm-2018-midterms

support for virtually all Trump policies. As this chapter documents, policies that disproportionally benefit women were scaled back or rescinded. Fervent partisanship continued unabated. Trump’s approval ratings among Republicans, both male and female, remained high into the second year of his presidency. These early policies were embedded in a sexist web spun by Trump without Republican opposition. Midterm 2018 tells two important stories about women and gendered politics. The first story is told through a better understanding of the intersectionality from Election 2016. With 60 percent of eligible voters casting ballots, Midterm 2018 had the highest turnout of any midterm election since 1914. More women (55 percent) than men (52 percent) voted in 2018. Almost 60 percent of women voted Democratic for the House of Representatives. The midterm showed a record breaking 23 percent gender gap in voting. Women won more seats in Congress than any election in history. Women fueled the Democratic surge taking control of the House of Representatives, and elevating Nancy Pelosi to Speaker of the House for a second time. Democrats held a lead over Republicans in the House popular vote by more than 8.6 million votes. The gender–political party intersection was the Midterm 2018 happening (Figure 14.2). Women of color were at the forefront of the surge, helping to make the 116th Congress the most diverse by gender, but also by race and ethnicity, religion, and age; the number of openly LGBTQ people elected to Congress and to state and local office spiked. The divide in diversity between Democrats and Republicans is stark: 38 percent of House Democrats are white men, compared to 90 percent of House Republicans. Other key intersectional statistics frame the Midterm 2018 story (Congressional Record Service, 2020). •

• • • • •

The 116th Congress has a record 131 women, 105 in the House, including nonvoting members; House women are comprised of 90 Democrats and 15 Republicans; there are 26 women in the Senate, 17 Democrats and 9 Republicans. 52 percent of 67 incoming freshmen (sic) Democrats in the House are women; 4.5 percent—only two—of the 44 incoming Republicans are women. 47 women of color serve in Congress, 4 in the Senate and 43 in the House, including 4 nonvoting members. Two first-time House members are Muslim women. Two first-time House members are Native American women, one openly identifying as lesbian. 9 governors and 300 mayors (27 from the largest cities) are women.

590  Gender and Social Institutions

Comparing the Midterm in 2014 with 2018 offers insights for future trends. The U.S. Census Bureau shows voter turnout higher in 2018 for both men and women, for all voting ages, and for all racial and ethnic groups. The gender gap in voting continues to increase for these groups (Misra, 2019). • •

By age: younger women, 38 percent, younger men, 33 percent; older men, 68 percent, older women 65 percent. By race: Black women, 55 percent; black men 47 percent. Latino women, 43 percent, Latino men 37 percent.

The second story Midterm 2018 tells about women and politics is that, like other midterms, it served as a barometer about views of the president. Midterm 2018, therefore, was a referendum on Donald Trump. The record-breaking number of women elected to Congress is largely the result of pushback against Trump, fueled by his abuses of power and entrenched male privilege deemed harmful to women, such as bragging about sexual assault and supporting politicians with records of sexism and alleged sexual misconduct (Pellegrini, 2018; Hershkoff and Schneider, 2019). The explosion of #MeToo is situated in the wake of Trump’s election. Even as the partisan divide remains high, white college-educated women have been edging away from the Republican fold for several years. Almost three-fourths of voters who said sexual harassment is a “very serious” problem voted Democratic, but more Republicans are reporting it at least as a “somewhat serious” problem (Jacobson, 2019; North 2018; Tyson, 2018; Zhou, 2018). Lawsuits from women alleging sexual abuse from Trump do not go unnoticed. Beliefs about Trump as a moral and trustworthy person plummeted since he took office, fueling Democratic victories advantageous to women candidates. Voters recognize that Trump’s “misogynistic, hostile rhetoric” is a powerful catalyst that keeps sexism alive and allows it to grow (Morreale and Shockley-Zalabak, 2018; Rothe and Collins, 2019). All women are in peril under Trump’s policies and hard-fought gains for women’s rights can quickly be undone. As voters and office holders, women of both parties are subject to an “unimaginable level of sexism” unless people pay attention (Gilmore, 2016). Midterm 2018 showed that voters—especially women—paid attention.

Election 2020: Spotlight on Intersectionality Election 2020 had the most viable female contenders running in the presidential Democratic primaries in history, including Senators Kirsten Gillibrand, Kamala Harris, Amy Klobuchar, and Elizabeth Warren. The early Democratic field included two additional women, an activist author and Congressional House member. The initial male pool included men of all races, a gay married man, and two billionaires (white men). Strong female contenders in Election 2020 initially offered optimism that the presidential glass ceiling could be bridged. In a surprising, unprecedented break with editorial convention, the New York Times (NYT) endorsed two separate candidates, Klobuchar and Warren as Democratic candidates for president. Since neither was “robustly embraced” and cautions about both were replayed, it is uncertain whether this dual endorsement was beneficial or detrimental to their campaigns (Nichols, 2020). The NYT endorsement, Midterm 2018, and Clinton’s political ascension indicate a much more positive public reaction today about women bridging the highest glass ceiling. By the 1990s, a large majority of Americans expressed positive opinions that they could vote for a qualified woman running for president. As late as 2018, two-thirds of women identifying as Democrats hoped to see a woman president in their lifetime. As Election 2016 showed, however,

Power, Politics, and the Law  591

progressive attitudes do not fully translate to voting behavior when it comes to women voters or women candidates. Women will vote for women, but which women? (Simien and Hampson, 2017; Thomas, 2018). Both men and women voters claim, “I will vote for a woman, but just not that woman.” In 2016 this applied to Clinton; similar views were expressed for female candidates in Election 2020. Political baggage, partisanship, and likeability were cited as anti-Clinton factors. The untenable assumption is that favorability has nothing to do with sexism.

Electability For election 2020, striking parallel scenarios unfolded. Early polls showed that three-quarters of voters would be comfortable with a woman president, but one-third think their neighbors would not (Golshan, 2019). Regardless of how laudable it may be to nominate any woman from a field of highly qualified women candidates, the gravity of a second Trump term heightened Democratic concern about “the risk” of a female nominee. With sexism front and center after Clinton’s defeat, they ask themselves whether any woman can “take him on.” Polls hammer voters and journalists hammer women candidates with the question of “women’s electability.” Research on gender and communication suggests that such questions are inherently sexist and undermine a woman’s credibility, whether as a presidential candidate or CEO contender (Chapter 4). Midterm 2018 was a severe rebuke to Trump and the sexism he represents. He faces a historic predicted gender gap in Election 2020: over 60 percent of women say they are unlikely to vote for him. Far more women than men supported impeaching Trump. A 2020 loss will be at the hands of women (Enten, 2019; Sheffield, 2019). He faces a male candidate with a female running mate and it is doubtful whether he can rein in his misogynistic persona. The majority of Americans affirm policies supporting equal rights and gender justice. Even among conservative men and women, however, support for equal rights may not parallel support for equal roles (Greenberg, 2019). As white, blue-collar women are starting to disavow Trump for his views of women and his “sexual privilege,” it is unclear if they will also disavow the Republican party and vote for the Democratic presidential candidate. Women, college graduates, and millennials continued to move toward the Democratic party. For Republicans, white men without a college degree continue to gravitate toward Trump. African Americans and Latinos identify as Democrats over Republicans 2 to 1. Although these powerful intersectional patterns shaped Election 2020, Trump’s handling of the COVID-19 health and economic disaster loomed large. A hegemonic masculinity subtext surrounded his media narrative. Not wanting to appear “weak,” he continued to downplay the severity of the virus, its continued escalation, and as of this writing, close to 300,00 deaths in the United States, most of them male (Chapter 2). Its spread among top aides made the White House a COVID-19 hot spot. Ads ridiculed Biden for social distancing, “in his basement, alone, hiding, diminished.” Most stunning, he exhorted Americans, “Don’t be afraid of the virus.” His dangerous messages sharply decreased his favorability just weeks before the election. It is ironic that these actions speak more to insecurity, loneliness, irresponsibility, and weakness rather than male strength (Chapter 9). Electability was constructed and reconstructed throughout the Democratic primary as contenders were bolstered or toppled. A candidate’s gender, sexual orientation, wealth, experience, age, and progressive attitudes became fair game in who was seen as the most electable. Warren and Klobuchar remained viable, but were eclipsed by the leading white male candidates. Warren’s delegate count could not be sustained and she was the last female contender to drop out, sparking a woman-fueled media uproar about untenable standards female candidates face compared to their male counterparts.

592  Gender and Social Institutions

Vice President Pick With the U.S. primary season in full swing, the world was upended by the COVID-19 pandemic. The spotlight on Election 2020 virtually disappeared for several weeks, but roared back with Joe Biden emerging as the Democratic presidential nominee and his assurance he would select a woman as his running mate. Although his VP pick was politically difficult, it provided an opportunity to spotlight an impressive array of highly qualified women he considered. His choice of Kamala Harris, U.S. Senator and former Attorney General of California, speaks to the intersectional gender and race dimension in political and social life. This powerful dimension surfaced in the media with protests erupting throughout the U.S. over the death of George Floyd and other black men in the hands of the police (Chapter 2). Notwithstanding Harris as his nominee, Biden promised that women would be prominent as senior-level appointees, including his Cabinet. With Geraldine Ferraro in 1984 and Sarah Palin in 2008, for the third time in history a woman is running as a vice-presidential nominee of a major U.S. party. Reflecting Kamala Harris’ South Asian and Caribbean roots, for the first time in history she is a woman of color. The pick for Vice President was pivotal. Democrats were correct that women’s votes and the race–gender intersection would determine the election. As politicized violence stoked by racism escalated prior to the election, Harris was vilified through racist and sexist tropes he reserved for the “angry black woman.” Of course, since Trump is a white male, attacking Biden with sexist and racist slurs could have backfired. However, reminiscent of the bitter lies about Obama and infused with misogyny, he promoted an anti-migrant racist conspiracy theory questioning Harris’ eligibility for the office of Vice President. Within minutes of her nomination he reverted to his favorite placeholder for women, calling Harris “extraordinarily nasty,” and adding “most horrible” and a person who “nobody likes” to the insults (Diamond and Liptak, 2020; Keith, 2020). Perhaps emboldened by Trump’s pervasive misogyny in Election 2016, the intertwining of racism and misogyny became normalized in his 2020 campaign. Also similar to Election 2016, media coverage highlighted Trump’s racist comments more than his sexist comments. Whether leaders or supporters, however, few in the GOP dared to criticize Trump for any of his blatant, stereotypical remarks. During Election 2020 the economic crisis caused by the virus catapulted attention to the struggles of financially fragile families, especially those single-parent women forced to choose between a job and caring for children. Women’s roles as paid health care workers and unpaid caregivers put them at risk of contracting the virus (Chapter 2). With Harris in the lead, these issues were highlighted by Democrats in the campaign. Regardless of partisanship, women propelled the female candidates in 2018 and a “woman’s agenda” was central to Election 2020. Elizabeth Warren’s remarks when exiting the race foreshadows both optimism and pessimism in cracking the presidential glass ceiling, One of the hardest parts of this is … all those little girls who are going to have to wait four more years. Warren’s words echoed Hillary Clinton’s four years earlier. In cracking the VP glass ceiling in 2020, Kamala Harris sent a message of optimism to “every little girl” seeing that “this is a county of possibilities.” Harris’ election as VP signals that positive attitudes about a female president continue to be strengthened. Data points suggest that women are poised to ascend to the presidency (Dittmar, 2020). When these data points will be translated to electing the first female President of the United States, however, remains illusive.

Power, Politics, and the Law  593

HRC: The Hillary Factor Hillary Rodham Clinton challenged gender stereotypes, forging new definitions of women in the political sphere. She ascended politically as Senator from New York (2001–2009), presidential contender in 2008 and 2016, and Secretary of State (2009–2013) in Barack Obama’s Cabinet. With Eleanor Roosevelt as the pioneer, HRC was the first contemporary FLOUS (1990–1996) to break the mold of expected roles for women in this position. She spoke frequently to young women, challenging them to shun gender role stereotypes, aspire to political heights, and become activists. She advocated for poor women globally and sought legislation to benefit women in their career and family roles. Her confidence and ability won her not only high praise, but also severe, relentless criticism about the “proper place” of the First Lady. As honorary head of the U.S. delegation to the United Nations Conference on Women, she received high marks for criticizing China’s record on human rights on its own turf in Beijing (Chapter 6). Political engagement of younger women was increased in her two presidential campaigns. She invoked gender affinity and pride for the women she represented. Young voters are especially receptive to messages resonating with their beliefs that they can “make a difference” in the political landscape. She was (is) a role model for the next generation of women seeking political careers (Muralidharan and Sung, 2016; Simien and Hampson, 2017). HRC was ranked the most admired person in the U.S. 22 times, followed by Eleanor Roosevelt 13 times. On November 9, 2016 HRC accepted her historic role to concede the election. Speaking to the American people and all her supporters, she gave a special nod to women and girls: To all the little girls who are watching this, never doubt that you are valuable and powerful and deserving of every chance and opportunity in the world to pursue and achieve your own dreams.

THE EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT Every Constitution written since the end of World War II included a provision that men and women are citizens of equal status. Ours does not … I’d like (my granddaughters) to take out their Constitution and say “here is a basic premise of our system, that men and women are persons of equal stature.” But it’s not there. —Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg The Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) to the U.S. Constitution was first introduced in Congress in 1923 and proposed yearly after that. After passage by Congress almost half a century later, it was sent to the states to be ratified by 1972. Its deceptively simple language shrouds the complexity of issues surrounding the ERA. The complete text of the Equal Rights Amendment is as follows: Section 1. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex. Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article. Section 3. This Amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification.

594  Gender and Social Institutions

Once ratified, it will become the Twenty-Seventh Amendment to the Constitution. It remains unclear, however, whether the text will be modified so that the word gender replaces the word sex in the final version. Support for the ERA is wide. When it was proposed in 1972 the ERA had broad backing in Washington. It easily passed both houses of Congress (84–8 in the Senate and 354–24 in the House) with bipartisan support. Despite the partisan chasm today, almost 95 percent of Americans believe men and women should have constitutionally affirmed equal rights. This figure cuts across race, ethnicity, religion, education, and region. Republicans and Democrats and Presidents as diverse as Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, and Nixon have supported ERA. As women were elected to state legislatures, support continued to grow. The amendment has proven more popular among Democrats than Republicans in recent years, but some bipartisan support remains (Kurtzleben, 2020). It is acknowledged that an ERA is needed because the Constitution does not guarantee that rights are held equally without regard to sex. The Fourteenth Amendment guarantees equal protection but not equal rights. ERA offers a clear, strict judicial standard for cases of sex discrimination protecting both women and men. Most important, without Constitutional protection, a simple majority vote in Congress can nullify legal rights previously granted to women.

Ratification’s Rocky Path In 1972, the Ninety-Second Congress submitted the ERA to state legislatures for the three-fourths vote needed for ratification. The original deadline for ratification was 1979, but ERA proponents mustered support to extend it until 1982. Despite ratification by 38 states, three additional votes were needed before the 1982 deadline. During the ten-year ratification process, significant factors combined to defeat ratification. It is not simply a matter of saying who is in favor of equality and who is not. Few would argue against the principle of equality, but many are suspicious of how equality is to be implemented. Ratification failure was related to two other key changes occurring in American political attitudes: increased legislative skepticism concerning the U.S. Supreme Court’s authority to review legislation and fear that the Supreme Court would unduly interfere in state efforts to implement it.

New Christian Right The perception that the ERA would interfere with state rights was a rallying cry that fueled the power and organization of the political New Right and its allies in the Christian Coalition. Strong beliefs about supporting and maintaining women’s traditional role and status in the patriarchal family remain at the nucleus of the New Christian Right (NCR) political platform. Similar to religious fundamentalism worldwide, NCR focuses on the traditional role of women, believing that women’s emancipation is a hallmark of modernity and secularization harmful to everyone (Chapter 12). Personal issues related to family, children, sexuality, religion, and women’s roles coalesced with a political agenda resonating with many Americans. Aligned with fundamentalist churches, conservative politicians highlighted rhetoric encouraging traditional homemakers to be sympathetic to the anti-ERA cause. ERA opponents, particularly Phyllis Schlafly, fueled “nonissues” (nonsense issues) such as unisex bathrooms, men being absolved from

Power, Politics, and the Law  595

sex crimes, and an end to alimony. Debate on substantive issues, such as the stagnant gender wage gap, rise in women’s poverty, and gender discrimination in the private sector was curtailed.

Issues of Interpretation The ratification process generated confusion over what ERA would actually change, augment, or accomplish. Anti-ERA groups capitalized on this lack of understanding to help sow the seeds of its defeat; interpretations among supporters were also often inconsistent. What would a Constitutional ERA mean for 22 states that already have equal rights guarantees in their constitutions? For example, although in Texas both parents are required to provide child support, the services of a housewife [sic] are counted in kind. Texas recognizes the value of a mother’s services not just in financial contributions. Pennsylvania has a similar specification under its equal rights amendment, interpreted so that a divorced mother is not required to work outside the home because her value as a homemaker is recognized. Today there is much better understanding of likely legal interpretations with ERA ratification (ERA Coalition, 2020). These include the following: 1 Women will not be deprived of alimony, child custody, or child support. Men will be eligible for alimony and child custody under the same conditions as women, as they are already in most states. 2 Individual circumstances and need will determine domestic relations and community property. ERA does not require spouses to contribute money to the marriage equally. The law will recognize a homemaker’s contribution to the support of the family, whether the homemaker is a man or a woman. 3

ERA will fit into existing constitutional structures regarding privacy. The sexes will continue to be segregated in public restrooms, sleeping quarters at coeducational colleges, prison dormitories, and military barracks.

4

It will be illegal to enact “protective” labor regulations, such as limiting work hours for one sex or the other.

5

ERA will allow meaningful choices to men and women in terms of family and careers. Those who choose to be homemakers will not be economically deprived for this choice.

6

ERA will not invalidate state laws on abortions that are otherwise constitutional.

7

ERA will require that all benefits of publicly supported education be available to women and men on an equal basis.

Military Service A critical issue for the failed effort to ratify ERA had to do with military service and the draft, at a time when the Vietnam War was a painful public specter. Much has changed. Women are entering the military in record numbers, now at 15 percent of all U.S. military personnel. However, without an ERA, women’s equal access to military career ladders and their protection against sex discrimination in their chosen profession are not guaranteed. In 2015 all combat positions opened for women who volunteer for them. ERA would eliminate remaining barriers to women’s full participation in the armed services, including assignments and promotions, and

596  Gender and Social Institutions

women would be entitled to the same benefits as men, such as education and health care, when they leave active duty. Military service remains voluntary for both men and women. The lack of an ERA in the Constitution does not protect women against involuntary military service. Congress has the power to draft women and historically has been prepared to do so. A nurse draft during World War II was halted when the tide turned in the war. The nature of war has also changed dramatically. Today’s soldiers are more likely to be deployed for domestic emergencies such as natural disasters than for foreign wars. Nonetheless, the issue is a key point in ratification. If a male-only reactivated draft was resurrected, it would certainly be found unconstitutional on the basis of sex discrimination with or without an ERA. Exempting women from a potential draft also exempts them from equal rights in the Constitution. Sending a clear message that the United States stands for full equality for all its citizens, ERA invests in women’s progress and the nation’s progress.

ERA Coalition An active ERA campaign coalition is in effect (ERA, 2020). The ERA was ratified by 35 of the necessary 38 states. The campaign used two strategies to achieve ratification. First, the “three state strategy” focused on three of the remaining 15 states with the best chance for ratification. Second, constitutional justification is leveraged for nullifying deadlines that require new referendums from states that already ratified the ERA. Representing a spectrum of NGO networks with thousands of organizations and millions of individuals, the campaign capitalizes on political lessons learned in the first campaign. It highlights the wage gap and the issues faced by employed mothers. It uses NOW’s slogan “every mother is a working mother,” as an affirmation of the valuable work all women perform, whether as homemakers or employed outside the home. The current campaigners are acutely aware that the opposition may match their political learning curve. These include the Christian Right, coalescing with conservative Republicans joining forces against both expanded LGBTQ marriage and parenting rights and the ERA (Chapter 8). Supporters of ERA, however, represent a much wider spectrum of women and men that is unmatched by opponents. The number of women and men who supported a pro-women platform in recent elections suggests that ERA opposition continues to decline. The scars from the earlier ratification battle enhance their political sophistication in dealing with the forces that challenge it today.

Ratification Why now? ERA is on the media radar because of the current political climate. It is thought that it picked up momentum because of Donald Trump’s election, the #MeToo movement, erosion of abortion rights, and the appointment to federal courts and SCOUS of very conservative judges with little sympathy for causes surrounding gender equality (Olmstead, 2019). A new generation of women were elected to state legislatures in numbers that reignited the ERA campaign. The Constitution speaks to the power of states to ratify but not to rescind a ratification. Alabama, South Dakota, and Louisiana rescinded their original votes. The courts will determine whether these recensions are legal or whether the ratification process must start all over. Long legal battles loom but compared to the ERA ratification fight in the 1970s, the current campaign is well prepared legally, politically, and socially to take on this battle. Key

Power, Politics, and the Law  597

evidence for its success is that Americans, including businesses leaders, overwhelmingly support the Equal Rights Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Partisanship remains but 9 in 10 Democrats and 6 in 10 Republicans are in favor of ratification. This translates to roughly 3 in 4 Americans supporting ERA but about the same number incorrectly believe men and women already have equal rights (Dale and Noveck, 2020). The three-state strategy was successful. Nevada ratified ERA in 2017, followed by Illinois in 2018. Led by women, Democrats took control of the Virginia legislature in November and Virginia cast the historic last vote for ratification of the ERA in January 2020.

FEMINISM IN THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY The successful ERA campaign and the sweeping victories of women for state and Congressional offices offer optimism that efforts for gender equality continue in an otherwise disheartening sociopolitical climate. The first failure to ratify ERA was heralded by its opponents as a defeat for feminism, a morality lesson to women, admonishing them about their proper place free of the trials and tribulations of the world of men.

Feminist Lessons Second Wave feminists of the 1960s and 1970s focused on the root causes of gender inequality, but issues surrounding motherhood and family were given less priority. Many women of color felt overlooked in the quest for economic parity with men and the lack of diversity in the movement’s leadership. LGBTQ issues were only a blip on the radar. Women who wanted to escape the shackles of the feminine mystique and gain a new sense of independence spawned the feminist movement. To a great extent, early goals have been accomplished. The challenge ahead is to integrate feminist groups with meaningful intersectional strategies and goals. These goals now clearly recognize and affirm needs to address related issues of marriage, motherhood, parenting, and employment. The early movement was most vulnerable on the family issue and the failure to account for the multiple challenges women face because of class, color, ethnicity, disability, age, or sexual orientation. Feminists in the current ERA campaign and in the movement at large offer new messages to the media and to legislators at all government levels. As we have seen throughout this text, fundamental issues related to employment and family shape women’s experiences. These are at the forefront of a broad feminist agenda in the early twenty-first century. There is no one agenda, and what does exist is ever evolving. Nonetheless, it is an agenda of inclusiveness and embraces the politics of accommodation and intersectionality, which are starkly different from the former politics of separatism.

Support for Feminist Goals The movement clearly understands that women do not have to be in full agreement with one another to work for feminist goals. Feminism plays out in different ways among thousands of overlapping organizations. General feminist principles are accepted, but in a decentralized arena. Local feminist groups target issues most relevant to their communities. They lobby businesses for paid parental leave or day care for employees; they testify in support of expanded, affordable health care; for smoking bans and healthy, safe workplaces for all

598  Gender and Social Institutions

workers; they organize media campaigns spotlighting domestic violence and the need for safe houses and shelters for abused and homeless women and their children. They work with men on violence prevention. The movement today is more politically savvy in dealing with diverse constituencies and is more technologically savvy in social media and communication to the broader public. The backlash to feminism at the end of the twentieth century attempted to thwart the concerns of women and called for outdated solutions that separated the home from outside the home. The winds of political change are ever shifting for a favorable outlook for a feminist agenda. Disheartening sociopolitical trends are matched by heartening trends propelling women to power and leadership roles throughout social institutions. It may be referred to as a woman’s agenda, but a feminist agenda has widespread support (Chapter 1). People no longer question the right of women to achieve their fullest individual potential, whether inside or outside the home. Feminism today is diverse in programs, tactics, and goals. All waves of feminists “agree to disagree” and embrace different tactics but common goals (Chapters 1 and 5). The United Nations Conference on Women in Beijing was a watershed for women. By encouraging open dialogue, inclusiveness, and consensus-building, it attested to the ability of women to work toward goals of, yes, sisterhood, female empowerment, and partnering with men. In traversing this book, it should be apparent that with heightened political sophistication, this very diversity contributes to the strength of the movement in the United States and globally.

KEY TERMS Bona Fide Occupational Qualification (BFOQ) Common law Community property Domestic terrorism

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) Equal Pay Act (EPA) Equal Rights Amendment Gender gap

Medicaid Retirement Equity Act (REA) Roe v. Wade Sex trafficking Sex work Sexual harassment

Glossary

#MeToo movement  fueled by women’s activism in mass media, this powerful movement generates awareness for sexual abuse in all social institutions and supports survivors of sexual violence affirmative action  policies of preferential treatment for women and minorities underrepresented in certain job categories agency  the power to adapt and sometimes to thrive in difficult situations agents of socialization  the people, groups, and social institutions that provide information for children to become functioning members of society alt-right movement  far right groups of largely of young white men who believe white people have been dispossessed and need to reclaim their rightful place in society androcentrism  male-centered norms operating throughout all social institutions that become the standard to which all persons adhere androgyny  the integration of traits considered to be feminine with those considered to be masculine Anorexia nervosa  a psychiatric eating disorder of self-induced severe weight loss primarily in young women assortive mating  coupling based on similarity battered women’s syndrome  the powerless, dependence, and poor self-image of abused women associated with the belief that they are responsible for the violence against them blended family  children from remarriages and parents’ prior relationships who are brought together in a new family body studies  in a sociological context includes cultural meanings attached to bodies and to the way that bodies shape and are shaped by society. bona fide occupational qualification (BFOQ)  legally allows for hiring an employee on the basis of one’s sex under very specific circumstances Bulimia  a psychiatrist eating disorder which alternates binge eating and purging caballerismo depicts Latino men as respectful and nurturing family providers, who are also noble and chivalrous cisgender  sex assigned at birth aligns with gender identity Civil Society Organizations (CSOs)  includes NGOs and a wide array of groups, such as labor unions, professional associations, teacher and scholar networks, community groups, foundations, and faith-based activists. civil union a legal classification entitling same-sex couples to the rights and responsibilities available to married partners common law  those states where property belongs to the spouse in whose name it is held community property  those states where all property acquired during the marriage is jointly owned by the spouses companionate marriage marriage based on romantic love and an emphasis on balancing individual needs with family needs comparable worth  policies designed to upgrade the wages for jobs that employ large numbers of women

600 Glossary compensatory history  chronicles the lives of exceptional women Computer-Mediated Communication (CMC)  human communication through computerized technology occurring on a variety of electronic devices continuing socialization  learning that provides the basis for the varied roles an individual will fill throughout life contribution history  chronicles women’s contributions to specific social movements Convention  on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) adopted by the UN in 1979 a policy described as an international bill of rights for women countermodernization  a social movement that either resists modernization or promotes ways to neutralize its effects culture  a society’s total way of life that provides social heritage and guidelines for appropriate behavior developing world  (see Global South) development  programs designed to upgrade the standard of living of the world’s poor in ways that allow them to sustain themselves doing gender  the notion that gender emerges not as an individual attribute but something that is accomplished through interaction with others domestic terrorism  violent acts as a violation of criminal law in the United States to intimidate or coerce civilians or to influence public policy dominance model  argues that gendered language is a reflection of women’s subordinate status dramaturgy  viewing social interaction as if it were an enactment in a theatrical performance dual-culture model  argues that the interactional styles of males and females are separate but equal egalitarian marriage  a marriage in which spouses share decision making and assign family roles based on talent and choice rather than on traditional beliefs about gender emotional labor  describes work that requires providing emotional support to the people the occupation serves, such as nurse’s aides, day care and eldercare workers. empowerment  the ability for women to control their own destinies end point fallacy  the negotiation of social reality is an ongoing process where new definitions produce new behavior in a never-ending cycle Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)  a federal agency created to ensure that Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act is carried out Equal Pay Act (EPA)  a federal law requiring females and males to receive the same pay for the same job Equal Rights Amendment (ERA)  proposed constitutional amendment stating that equality of rights under the law shall not be denied on account of sex essentialism  the belief that males and females are inherently different because of their biology and genes expressive role  associated with the expectation that the wife–mother maintains the family through child rearing and nurturing familism  a Latino cultural value emphasizing the family and its collective needs over personal and individual needs Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)  federal policy allowing eligible employees to take 12 weeks of unpaid leave for the birth and care of child, spouse, or parent family of orientation  the family in which one grows up family of procreation  the family established when one marries or establishes a long-term partnership female genital mutilation (FGM)  a variety of genital operations designed to reduce or eliminate a girl’s sexual pleasure and ensure her virginity; also referred to as female genital cutting feminism  an inclusive worldwide movement to end sexism and sexist oppression by empowering women feminist sociological theory  explains gender in relation to power and oppression to challenge a status quo disadvantageous to women

Glossary  601 feminist theology  draws on women’s experience as a basic source of content previously shut out of theological reflection feminization of aging  the global pattern of women outliving men and the steady increase of women in the ranks of the elderly feminization of poverty a global trend showing increase in the percentage of women in the poverty population fictive kin  networks among African Americans that absorb friends into kin structures first wave feminism  suggests that there is no universal feminism and women define for themselves what it is and what it can become fourth wave feminism activism born out of digital age technology and social media resonating with women across generations and backgrounds friends with benefits relationships (FWBR)  sexual encounters without commitment, usually recurring with the same partner, and now normative among young adults gender  social, cultural, and psychological traits linked to males and females that define them as masculine or feminine gender binary males and females classified into two distinct, oppositional, nonoverlapping categories usually defined as masculine or feminine gender fluidity  shifting of gender identity and its presentation according to various contexts gender gap  in a political context, male–female differences in political choices, including vote choice, policy, and party preferences gender history  historical approach focusing on the power relations between men and women. gender identity  an awareness that there are two sexes who behave differently gender roles  the expected attitudes and behaviors a society associates with each sex gender socialization  the process by which individuals learn the cultural behavior of femininity or masculinity that is associated with the biological sex of female or male gendered economy  accounting for the labor of women assessed in economic terms genderlects  socially defined linguistic categories, such as male generics, that give more prominence and visibility to males gender-typing  expectation for less pay and prestige when the majority of the occupation are those of one gender, usually female glass ceiling describes women’s failure to rise to senior-level positions because of invisible and artificial barriers constructed by male management Global South  also referred to as the developing world, the United Nations designation for less developed countries with severe impediments to sustainable development, many with poverty-level incomes per capita globalization  removal of barriers to increase the flow of capital between and within nations gynocentrism  an emphasis on female and feminine interests hegemonic masculinity asserts that there are a number of competing masculinities that are enacted according to particular places and times heteronormative  the view that heterosexuality is preferred, proper, and normative heterosexism  viewing the world only in heterosexual terms, thus denigrating other sexual orientations hidden curriculum  the informal and unwritten norms that serve to control students, including expectations about gender homemaker  the person responsible for “the making of a home,” usually a full-time person, mostly women but increasingly men homogamy  becoming attracted to and marrying someone similar to yourself homophobia  the fear and intolerance of homosexuals (gay men and lesbians) and homosexuality hookup  a casual sexual encounter triggered by sexual excitement rather than romance and without expectation for long term commitment household  a person or group of people occupying a housing unit

602 Glossary human capital model  explains the gender wage gap as due to personal choices in matters of education, childbirth, child rearing, and occupation identity politics activist strategies shaped by shared experiences within one’s group rather than on a larger, more encompassing one informal sector  the usually undocumented economic activities of people who work as subsistence farmers, landless agricultural laborers, street vendors, or day workers instrumental role associated with the expectation that the husband–father maintains the family through earning income intersectionality multiple oppressions of people with distinctive combinations of disadvantages such as those based on gender, race, sexuality, ethnicity, and religion intersex  infants born with both male and female sex organs, have ambiguous genitalia, or have atypical genetic markers for male or female; formerly referred to as hermaphrodites Islamization  a religious fundamentalist movement seeking a return to an idealized version of Islam as a remedy against corrupt Western values kibbutz  an Israeli agricultural collective originally organized by gender egalitarian principles to allow all members to be full participants in the community without regard to gender roles Knights of Labor  first major union opened for women and African Americans calling for equal pay for equal work LGBTQ  inclusive term for gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, and queer people liberation theology  calls for redistribution of wealth and economic equality grounded in biblical messages about God’s concern for the poor and oppressed life course  the roles people play over a lifetime and the ages associated with those roles linguistic sexism  normative language that, transmits gender stereotypes that in turn perpetuates gender discrimination living apart together (LAT)  a monogamous, committed, intimate relationship between partners living in separate households machismo among Latinos, associating the male role with virility, sexual prowess, and the physical and ideological control of women matrilineal  tracing descent from the female line marianismo  among Latinos, associating the female role with female over male spiritual and moral superiority, and glorification of motherhood marriage gradient  a pattern in which women tend to marry men of higher socioeconomic status marriage squeeze  an unbalanced ratio of marriage-age women to marriage-age men that limits the pool of potential marriage partners Medicaid  public health insurance program for those unable to pay medical expenses; women and children are majority of recipients MeToo Movement   see #MeToo movement microcredit  a system providing small loans to a group of very poor borrowers to start small businesses and open their first savings accounts; also called microenterprise lending microenterprise programs  provides for income-earning manufacturing or agricultural activities located in or around the households of very poor people Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)  an 8 item UN based call targeting development challenges, including to eradicate extreme poverty and promote gender equality and empower misandry  contempt and loathing for men believed to be infused in feminism misogyny  the disdain and hatred of women morbidity rate  the amount of disease or illness in a population in a given time period mortality rate  the total number of deaths in a population in a given time period motherhood mandate  the belief that motherhood demands selfless devotion to children and a subordination of a mother’s life to the needs of children and family

Glossary  603 National American Women’s Suffrage Association (NAWSA)  organization working for women’s political rights formed in 1890 with the merger of two suffrage groups National Organization for Women (NOW) organization formed in 1966 heralding the return of feminism in the United States National Organization of Men Against Sexism (NOMAS) a male liberation group working to reduce the negative effects of power and unyielding masculinity neoliberal globalization (NLG)  global economic system based on deregulation and privatization with unfettered trade openness and market liberalization neoliberalism  economics favoring free-market capitalism with an ideology that public good is enhanced through individual responsibility rather than public welfare neurosexism  charting gender differences in personality and social behavior by sex differences in the brain, such as the binary view that that one or the other sex is suited for certain roles, with male-dominated roles garnering more prestige and power than female-dominated roles New Christian Right (NCR)  a fundamentalist political movement of conservative, Protestant groups that promotes morality based on the Bible and God’s will as the ultimate source for political and social life nongovernmental organizations (NGOs)  privately funded nonprofit groups concerned with relief and development and advocacy for the poor nonverbal communication  using bodily and situational features in communication, such as posture, eye contact, touching, and personal space norms  shared rules that guide people’s behavior in specific situations nuclear family  consists of wife, husband, and their dependent children who live apart from other relatives in their own residence one-child policy  allowing only one child per couple in China, with severe penalties for violation; associated with negative consequences for girls pater familias the absolute power over all family members granted to the eldest man in the family in ancient Rome patriarchy  male-dominated social structures leading to the oppression of women pink-collar jobs  lower-level white-collar jobs held by women associated with low pay and few opportunities for advancement primary socialization begins in the family and allows the child to acquire necessary skills to fit into society, especially language learning and acceptable behavior to function effectively in a variety of social situations psychoanalytic feminism accounts for the construction of gender and its effects on women, including women’s subordination and men’s need to dominate an subjugate women in theory and practice queer theory  examines how sexuality and sexual identity in all its forms—from sexual orientation to sexual behavior—is socially constructed register  sociolinguistic term for a variety of language defined by its use in social situations, such as female register and male register Retirement Equity Act (REA)  requires employers to get spouse’s approval before an employee waives spousal benefits offered through the employer, such as pensions or health insurance Roe v. Wade  landmark 1973 Supreme Court case establishing the legal right to an abortion role  the expected behavior associated with a status (position) rule of thumb  an English Common Law provision once allowing a husband to beat his wife with a stick no bigger than his thumb sandwich generation  women caught between caring for the older and younger generations at the same time sati  a Hindu widow who until the twentieth century was frequently expected to be buried alive or self-immolated with her dead husband on his funeral pyre schemas  cognitive structures used to understand the world, interpret perception, and process new information

604 Glossary second shift  the shift of unpaid work in the home for women who are also employed full-time for pay second wave feminism  phase of the women’s movement (1960s–1980s) seeking to raise the consciousness of women about sexist oppression in the power structure and using political means to eradicate it self  the unique and highly valued sense of identity that distinguishes each individual from all other individuals Seneca Falls Convention 1848 convention held in Seneca Falls, New York, hailed as the birth of the women’s movement in the United States serial monogamy  a pattern of marriage–divorce–remarriage sex  the biological characteristics distinguishing male and female sex ratio at birth (SRB)  the number of boys born for every hundred girls sex trafficking  the trade in humans, most commonly for sexual slavery and forced labor sex work  a fundamentally female occupation that provides sexual services for money or goods sexism  the belief that the status of female is inferior to the status of male sexual dimorphism  the separation of the sexes into two distinct groups sexual double standard  the idea that men are allowed to express themselves sexually and women are not sexual harassment  legally includes physical or verbal conduct that is sexual in nature, is unwanted, and creates a hostile environment that interferes with school or work activities sexual orientation  a preference for sexual partners of one gender (sex) or the other sexual scripts  shared beliefs concerning what society defines as acceptable sexual thoughts, feelings, and behaviors for each gender social capital  networks of relationships and resources that are beneficial and advantageous to a person and to society social construction of reality  the shaping of perception of reality by the subjective meanings brought to any experience or social interaction social control  measures a society uses to ensure that people generally conform to norms, including those related to gender social history  studies the lives and experiences of ordinary people of which women are its largest category social institutions  organizational structures that ensure the basic needs of society are met in established, predictable ways social stratification  the way a society divides people into ranked categories or statuses (social positions) socialization  the lifelong process by which we learn culture, develop a sense of self, and become functioning members of society sociobiology  a field using evolutionary theory to examine the biological roots of social behavior status  a category or position a person occupies, such as gender, that is a significant determinant of how she or he will be defined and treated status set  statuses that are occupied simultaneously stereotypes oversimplified conception that people who occupy the same status share certain traits in common subcultures  segments of a culture that share characteristics distinguishing it from the broader culture Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)  a 17 item UN based universal call to action to end poverty, protect the planet, and ensure that all people enjoy peace and prosperity. Texts of Terror  parts of four books of the Torah that include the Old Testament of the Christian Bible documenting abuse and sexual violence against women often used as justifications for restricting women theory  an explanation that guides the research process and provides a means for interpreting the data third shift caregiving by employed women who simultaneously care for their children and frail parents, grandparents, or other friends and relatives third wave feminism  emerging in the 1990s—with attention to linking race, class, gender, and sexuality—it suggests there is no universal feminism and women define for themselves what it is and what it can become

Glossary  605 Title IX of the 1972 Educational Amendment Act  prohibits sex (gender) discrimination in any school receiving federal assistance Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act  makes job discrimination and occupational segregation of women illegal toxic masculinity  a form of hypermasculinity where acceptance of masculinity norms harms society and causes damage to boys and men themselves transgender an umbrella term describing those whose gender identity differs from their sex assigned at birth. True Womanhood  the Victorian standard for women to subscribe to the virtues of piety, purity, submissiveness, and domesticity United Nations Fourth World Conference on Women (FWCW)  convened in Beijing, with 50,000 attendees, the most significant global women’s event in history to spotlight a women’s agenda womenomics  policies in Japan to support women in employment, leadership, and family roles in efforts to revive the economy work–family spillover  attitudes and behaviors that carry over from roles in both these social institutions

References

AARP. 2018. American Association of Retired Persons. “AARP Nationwide Survey Finds Disconnect between Images Used in Beauty Product Ads and Women’s Desire for Realistic, Authentic Depictions.” October  22. https://press.aarp.org/2018-10-22-AARP-Nationwide-Survey-Finds-Disconnect-Between-Images-Used-Beauty-Product-Ads-Womens-Desire-Realistic-Authentic-Depictions AAUP. 2019. American Association of University Professors. “Background Facts on Contingent Faculty Positions.” https://www.aaup.org/issues/contingency/background-facts AAUW. 2017. American Association of University Women. “Women’s Debt Crisis in the United States.” Updated from “Deeper in Debt: Women and Student Loans.” https://www.aauw.org/research/ deeper-in-debt/ AAUW. 2019a. American Association of University Women. The Simple Truth about the Gender Pay Gap: 2019 Edition. Washington, DC: AAUW. AAUW. 2019b. American Association of University Women. “Limiting Our Livelihoods: The Cumulative Impact of Sexual Harassment on Women’s Careers.” https://www.aauw.org/files/2019/11/Limiting-our-Livelihoods-Full-Report.pdf Abbou, Julie, and Fabienne H. Baider. 2016. “Intersectional Peripheries.” Pp. 16–19 in Gender, Language and the Periphery: Grammatical and Social Gender from the Margins, edited by J. Abbou and F. Baider. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Abdullah, Muhammad, and Safeer Awan. 2017. “Islamic Post-Feminism and Muslim Chick-Lit: Coexistence of Conflicting Discourses.” Pakistan Journal of Women’s Studies 24(2): 93–105. Abel, Allen. “There’s Only One President Clinton.” 2016. Time. November 14:636–639. Abendroth, Anja-Kristin, Silvia Melzer, Alexandra Kalev, and Donald Tomaskovic-Devey. 2017. “Women at Work: Women’s Access to Power and the Gender Earnings Gap.” Industrial and Labor Relations Review 70(1):190–222. Åberg, Pelle, Joakim Ekman, and Johnny Rodin. 2018. “What Should a Russian Father be Like? Exploring Fatherhood Norms and Identifying Norm Patterns among Inhabitants of Saint Petersburg.” International Political Science Review 39(4):487–502. ActionAid. 2019. “Six Years on from Bangladesh’s Rana Plaza Tragedy, One in Five Survivors’ Health is Deteriorating.” April  24. https://actionaid.org/news/2019/six-years-bangladeshs-rana-plaza-tragedy-onefive-survivors-health-deteriorating Addison, John T., Orguil D. Ozturk, and Si Wang. 2018. “The Occupational Feminization of Wages.” Industrial and Labor Relations Review 71(1):208–241. Adler, Freda. 1975. Sisters in Crime: The Rise of the New Female Criminal. New York: McGraw-Hill. Adogwa, Owoicho, Mark A. Davison, Victoria Vuong et al. 2019. “Sex Differences in Opioid Use in Patients with Symptomatic Lumbar Stenosis or Spondylolisthesis Undergoing Lumbar Decompression and Fusion.” Spine 44(13):e800–e807. Abstract available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31205178

References  607 Adrian-Diaz, Jenna. 2019. “What’s Changed Since the Guerrilla Girls Began Calling Out the Art-World Sexism in 1985?” March 22. https://garage.vice.com/en_us/article/kzdjpa/guerilla-girls-new-exhibition AFGE. 2019. “10 Priorities of Trump’s New EEOC Chair.” American Federation of Government Employees. May 20. https://www.afge.org/article/10-priorities-for-trumps-new-eeoc-chair/ Agha Al-Hayani, Agha. 2010. “Muslims in the Twenty First Century: Between Modern Day Problems and Tenth Century Interpretations.” Pp. 51–91 in Islam in the 21st Century, edited by Gregory H. Franco and Scott L. Cervante. Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science. Ahamed, M. Mostak, and Susanta K. 2019. “Is Financial Inclusion Good for Bank Stability? International Evidence.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 157:403–427. Ahmad, Maryam, and James Deshaw Rae. 2015. “Women, Islam, and Peacemaking in the Arab Spring.” Peace Review: A Journal of Social Justice 27(3):312–319. Ahmed, Akbar S. 2002. “Muhammad.” Pp. 27–40 in Inside Islam: The Faith, the People, and the Conflicts of the World’s Fastest-Growing Religion, edited by John Miller and Aaron Kenedi. New York: Marlowe. Ahmed, Sawssan R., Mona M. Amer, and Amal Killawi. 2017. “The Ecosystems Perspective in Social Work: Implications for Culturally Competent Practice with American Muslims.” Journal of Religion & Spirituality in Social Work 36(1/2):48–72. Ahonen, Lia, and Rolf Loeber. 2016. “Dating Violence in Teenage Girls: Parental Emotional Regulation and Racial Differences.” Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health 26:240–250. Ahuvia, Mika, and Sarit Kattan Gribetz. 2018. “The ‘Daughters of Israel’: An Analysis of the Term in Late Ancient Jewish Sources.” Jewish Quarterly Review 108(1):1–27. Aikins, Ross. 2019. “The White Version of Cheating? Ethical and Social Equity Concerns of Cognitive Enhancing Drug Users in Higher Education.” Journal of Academic Ethics 17(2):111–130. Åkestam, Nina Sara Rosengren, and Michael Dahlen. 2017. “Advertising ‘Like a Girl’: Toward a Better Understanding of ‘Femvertising’ and its Effects.” Psychology & Marketing 34(8):795–806. Akinola, Modupe, Ashley E. Martin, and Katherine W. Phillips. 2018. “To Delegate or Not to Delegate: Gender Differences in Affective Associations and Behavioral Responses to Delegation.” Academy of Management Journal 61(4):1467–1491. Aksoy, Cevat Giray, Christopher, S. Carpenter, and Jeff Frank. 2018. “Sexual Orientation and Earnings: New Evidence from the United Kingdom.” Industrial and Labor Relations Review 71(1):242–272. Aksoy, Cevat Giray, Christopher, S. Carpenter, Jeff Frank, and Matt L. Huffman. 2019. “Gay Glass Ceilings: Sexual Orientation and Workplace Authority in the UK.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 159:167–180. Al Wazni, Anderson Beckmann. 2015. “Muslim Women in America and Hijab: A Study of Empowerment, Feminist Identity and Body Image.” Social Work 60(4):325–333. Alaimo, Kate. 2019. “Why Trump Keeps Calling Women ‘Nasty’.” CNN. August  21. https://www.cnn. com/2019/06/01/opinions/trumps-meghan-markle-nasty-proves-her-point-alaimo/index.html Alarie, Milaine, and Jason T. Carmichael. 2015. “The ‘Cougar’ Phenomenon: An Examination of the Factors that Influence Age-Hypogamous Sexual Relationships among Middle-Aged Women.” Journal of Marriage and Family 77:1250–1265. Alatas, Syed Farid, and Vineeta Sinha. 2017. Sociological Theory: Beyond the Canon. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Albanesi, Stefania, and Aysegul Sahin. 2018. “The Gender Unemployment Gap.” January  3. Vox. CEPR Policy Portal. https://voxeu.org/article/gender-unemployment-gap Albert, Aaron. 2018. “Parental Duties, Labor Market Behavior, and Single Fatherhood in America.” Review of Economics in the Household 16(4):1063–1083. Alberts, Susan C. 2019. “Social Influences on Survival and Reproduction: Insights from a Long-Term Study of Wild Baboons.” Journal of Animal Ecology 88:47–66. https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ epdf/10.1111/1365-2656.12887

608 References Alexander, Gerianne. 2014a. “Postnatal Testosterone Concentrations and Male Social Development.” Frontiers in Endocrinology 5:1–6. Alexander, Susan M. 2014b. “The Corporate Masquerade: Branding Masculinity Through Halloween Costumes.” Journal of Men’s Studies 22(3):180–193. Alfrey, Laure, and France Winddance Twine. 2017. “Gender-Fluid Geek Girls: Negotiating Inequality Regimes in the Tech Industry.” Gender & Society 31(1):28–50. Al-Gharbi, Musa. 2018. “Race and the Race for the White House: On Social Research in the Age of Trump.” American Sociologist 49(4):496–519. Ali, Kecia. 2019. “The Making of the ‘Lady Imam’: An Interview with Amina Wadud.” Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion 35(1):67–79. Allen, B.C.M., N.A. Knobloch, and L.T. Esters. 2019. “An Evaluation of a Mentoring Training Program Focused on Women and Underrepresented Minorities in Ag+STEM Programs: A Case Study.” NACTA Journal 63(1):32–35. Allen, Katherine R. 2016. “Feminist Theory in Family Studies: History, Reflection, and Critique.” Journal of Family Therapy & Review 8(2):207–224. Allen, Quaylan. 2016. “ ‘Tell Your Own Story’: Manhood, Masculinity and Racial Socialization among Black Fathers and their Sons.” Ethnic and Racial Studies 39(10):1831–1848. Allison, Kayla, and Brent R. Klein. 2019. “Pursuing Hegemonic Masculinity Through Violence: An Examination of Anti-Homeless Bias Homicides.” Journal of Interpersonal Violence 34(1): January 2. https://doi. org/10.1177/0886260518821459 Allison, Rachel. 2016. “Family Influences on Hooking Up and Dating among Emerging Adults.” Sexuality & Culture 20:446–463. Allison, Rachel, and Margaret Ralston. 2018a. “Gender, Anticipated Family Formation, and Graduate School Expectations among Undergraduates.” Sociological Forum 33(1):95–117. Allison, Rachel, and Margaret Ralston. 2018b. “Opportune Romance: How College Campuses Shape Students’ Hookups, Dates, and Relationships.” Sociological Quarterly 3:495–518. Al-Mahmood, Syed Zain. 2013. “Bangladesh to Raise Workers’ Pay: After Tragedies Government Says it Will Broker Talks for Higher Garment-Industry Minimum Wage, Now $38 a month.” Wall Street Journal May 13:B4. Almendrala, Anna. 2016. “Most Americans Still Think Women Should do the Bulk of the Housework: It Turns Out that You ARE Doing the Dishes Because of Patriarchy.” Huffington Post. August  30. https://www. huffpost.com/entry/chores-by-gender-women_n_57be3226e4b02673444e5a87 Almirol, Ellen A., Moira C. McNulty, Jessica Schmitt et al. 2018. “Gender Differences in HIV Testing, Diagnosis, and Linkage to Care in Healthcare Settings: Identifying African American Women with HIV in Chicago.” AIDS Patient Care and STDS 329(10):399–407. Almond, Douglas, and Yixin Sun. 2017. “Son-Biased Sex Ratios in 2010 US Census and 2011–2012 US Natality Data.” Social Science & Medicine 176:21–24. Alpert, Rebecca T. 2013. “Jewish Feminist Justice Work: Focus on Israel/Palestine.” Journal of Feminist Studies 29(2):164–169. Alter, Charlotte. 2016a. “Hillary Clinton.” Time (December 19) 188(25–26):92–97. Alter, Charlotte. 2016b. “How Donald Trump Turned 2016 Into a Referendum on Gender.” Time. October 9. https://time.com/4523900/donald-trump-gender/ Alter, Charlotte, Suyin Haynes, and Justin Worland. 2019. “Time 2019 Person of the Year: Greta Thunberg.” Time. December 23–30. https://time.com/person-of-the-year-2019-greta-thunberg/ Altindag, Duha T., John Nunley, and Alan Seals. 2017. “Child Custody Reform and the Division of Labor in the Household.” Review of Economics of the Household 15(3):833–856. Ambardar, Rekha. 2017. “The Effects of Subliminal Communication in Advertising Messages.” World  & I 32(9):1. Ambwani, Suman, and Jaine Strauss. 2007. “Love Thyself before Loving Others? A Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Gender Differences in Body Image and Romantic Love.” Sex Roles 56(1/2):13–21.

References  609 Amer, Sarah, and Guowei. Jian. 2018. “It is a Man’s World: A Qualitative Study on Females in the Military.” Pennsylvania Communication Annual 74: 48–74. American Bar Association. 2018. “Systemic Bias in Legal Profession Confirmed by New Report.” September 6. https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/aba-news-archives/2018/09/new-study-finds-genderand-racial-bias-endemic-in-legal-professi1/ Ames, Melissa, and Sarah Burcon. 2016. How Pop Culture Shapes the Stages of a Woman’s Life. From Toddlers-In-Tiaras to Cougars-On-The Prowl. Basingstoke, Hampshire, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. Amnesty International. 2017. “Toxic Twitter: The Silencing Effect.” https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/ research/2018/03/online-violence-against-women-chapter-5/#topanchor Anand, Leena, Steve N. Du Bois, Tamara G. Sher, and Karolina Grotkowski. 2018. “Defying tradition: Gender Roles in Long Distance Relationships.” Family Journal 26(1):22–30. Andersen, Felicia, and Rebecca K. Blais, 2019. “Higher Self-Stigma is Related to Lower Likelihood of Disclosing Military Sexual Trauma During Screening in Female Veterans.” Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy 11(4):372–378. Andersen, K.K. and T.S. Olsen. 2018. “Married, Unmarried, Divorced, and Widowed and the Risk of Stroke.” Acta Neurologica Scandanavica 138(1):41–46. Anderson, Monica, and Jingjing Jiang. 2018. “Teens, Social Media & Technology.” May 31. Pew Research Center. www.pewinternet.org/2018/05/31/teens-social-media-technology-2018/ Andersson, Matthew A., Mark H. Walker, and Brian P. Kaskie. 2019. “Strapped for Time or Stressed Out? Predictors of Work Interruption and Unmet Need for Workplace Support among Informal Elder Caregivers.” Journal of Aging & Health 31(4):631–651. Angelucci, Manuela, Dean Karlan, and Jonathan Zinman. 2015. “Microcredit Impacts: Evidence from a Randomized Microcredit Program Placement Experiment by Compartamos Banco.” American Economic Journal: Applied Economics 7(1):151–182. Annis, Ashley Hartman. 2016. “Which Way Is Feminism Leaning? A Critique of Sandberg’s ‘Feminist Manifesto’.” Feminist Collections 37(Nos. 1–2):1–5. Antony, James T. 2015. “Psychiatrists Need a Freud-Chip in their Psyche to be Well-Rounded.” Indian Journal of Psychiatry 57(1):4–8. Anttila, Eeva, Rose Martin, and Charlotte Svendler Nielsen. 2019. “Performing Difference In/Through Dance: The Significance of Dialogical, or Third Spaces in Creating Conditions for Learning and Living Together.” Thinking Skills and Creativity 31:209–216. Anyukhlina, Irina, and Anastasia Petrova. 2019. “Russia – How Do the Courts Deal with Workplace Sexual Harassment?” January  15. https://theword.iuslaboris.com/hrlaw/insights/russia-how-do-the-courts-dealwith-workplace-sexual-harassment Arad-Neeman, Daniele. 2016. Reviewed Work: Lean In: Women, Work and the Will to Lead by Sheryl Sandberg. Berkeley Journal of Employment & Labor Law 37(1):157–161. Arens, A. Katrin, Herbert W. Marsh, Rhonda G. Craven et al. 2016. “Math Self-concept in Preschool Children: Structure, Achievement Relations, and Generalizability across Gender.” Early Childhood Research Quarterly 36:391–403. Aripova, Feruza, and Janet Elise Johnson. 2018. “The Ukrainian-Russian Virtual Flashmob against Sexual Assault.” Journal of Social Policy Studies 16(3):487–500. Aris, Ben. 2019. “The Russian Economy is Stagnating.” Moscow Times. May 27. https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2019/05/27/the-russian-economy-is-stagnating-a65760 Armour, Nancy. 2019. “Opinion: NCAA Continues to Drop the Ball by Accepting Athletes Punished for Sexual Assault.” USA Today. April 4. https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/columnist/nancy-armour/2019/04/ 04/ncaa-failures-accepting-athletes-punished-for-sexual-assault/3369687002/ Armstrong, Jennifer Keishin. 2018. Sex and the City and US: How Four Single Women Changed the Way We Think. Live, and Love. New York: Simon & Schuster.

610 References Arnold, J.D. 2017. “Gender Confirmation Surgery and Terminology in Transgender Health.” JAMA Surgery 152(11):1090–1091. Aronson, Krista Maywell, Brenna D. Callahan, and Anne Sibley O’Brien. 2018. “Messages Matter: Investigating the Thematic Content of Picture Books Portraying Underrepresented Racial and Cultural Groups.” Sociological Forum 33(1):165–185. Arora, Alka, and May Elawar. 2015. “Questioning God: A Spiritual Feminist Dialogue.” Crosscurrents 65(4): 457–468. Arreola, Sonya A., George Ayala, Rafael M. Diaz, and Alex H. Kral. 2013. “Structure, Agency, and Sexual Development in Latino Gay Men.” Journal of Sex Research 50(3–4):392–400. Ashburn-Nardo, Leslie. 2017. “Parenthood as a Moral Imperative? Moral Outrage and the Stigmatization of Voluntary Childfree Women and Men.” Sex Roles 76:393–401. Ashifa, K. M. 2018. “Behavior Analysis Matrix for Women Soap Opera Viewers: A  Structural Analysis.” Journal of Management and Marketing Review 3(4):206–212. Ashley, Wendy, Jessica Tapia, Jodi L. Constantine Brown, and Orion Block. 2017. “Don’t Fight Like a Girl.” Journal of Women & Social Work 32(2):230–242. Ashrafun, Laila. 2018. Women and Domestic Violence in Bangladesh: Seeking A  Way Out of the Cage. London and New York: Routledge. Ashwin, Sarah, and Olga Isupova. 2018. “Anatomy of a Stalled Revolution: Processes of Reproduction and Change in Russian Women’s Gender Ideologies.” Gender & Society 32(4):441–468. Askola, Heli. 2017. “Wind from the North, Don’t go forth? Gender Equality and the Rise of Populist Nationalism in Finland.” European Journal of Women’s Studies 26(1):54–69. ASNE. 2018. American Society of News Editors. “The ASNE Newsroom Diversity Survey.” November 15. https://www.asne.org/diversity-survey-2018 Associated Press. 2012. “That’s One Small Step for ‘A’ Man: Armstrong Claimed His Famous Mankind Speech was Misquoted.” Daily Mail. August 25. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2193749/ Neil-Armstrong-speech-Thats-small-step-man-famous-mankind-words-misquoted.html Association of American Universities. 2019. “Report on the AAU Campus Climate Survey on Sexual Assault and Misconduct.” October  15. https://www.aau.edu/key-issues/campus-climate-and-safety/ aau-campus-climate-survey-2019 Astorne-Figari, Carmen, and Jamin D. Speer. 2019. “Are Changes of Major Changes? The Roles of Grades, Gender, and Preferences in College Major Switching.” Economics of Education Review 70:75–93. Atencio, Andrea, and Josefina Posadas. 2015. “Gender Gap in Pay in the Russian Federation: Twenty Years Later, Still a Concern.” World Bank. Policy Research Working Paper 7407. Abstract available at: https:// openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/22663 Athanases, Steven S., and Tess A. Comar. 2008. “The Performance of Homophobia In Early Adolescent’s Everyday Speech.” Journal of LGBT Youth 5(2):9–32. Aubrey, Jennifer Stevens, Hilary Gamble, and Rachel Hahn. 2017. “Empowered Sexual Objects? The Priming Influence of Self-Sexualization on Thoughts and Beliefs Related to Gender, Sex, and Power.” Western Journal of Communication 81(3):362–384. Audrain-McGovern, Janet, Daniel Rodriguez, Stephen Pianin, and Emily Alexander. 2019. “Initial E-Cigarette Flavoring and Nicotine Exposure and E-Cigarette Uptake among Adolescents.” Drug and Alcohol Dependence 202:149–155. Auspurg, Katrin, Maria Iacovou, and Cheti Nicoletti. 2017. “Housework Share between Partners: Experimental Evidence on Gender-Specific Preferences.” Social Science Research 66:118–139. Austin, Darren E.J., and Mervyn Jackson. 2019. “Benevolent and Hostile Sexism Differentially Predicted by Facets of Right-Wing Authoritarianism and Social Dominance Orientation.” Personality and Individual Differences 139:34–38

References  611 Avdeva, Olga A., Dekabrina M. Vinokurova, and Alexandr A. Kugaevsky. 2017. “Gender and Local Executive Office in Regional Russia: The Party of Power as a Vehicle for Women’s Empowerment?” Post-Soviet Affairs 33(6):431–451. Averett, Kate Henley. 2016. “The Gender Buffet.” Gender & Society 30(2):189–212. Avert. 2019a. “Women and Girls, HIV and AIDS.” October  10. https://www.avert.org/professionals/ hiv-social-issues/key-affected-populations/women Avert. 2019b. “HIV and AIDS in the he United States of America (USA).” August 29. https://www.avert.org/ professionals/hiv-around-world/western-central-europe-north-america/usa Aviezer, Ora, Efrat Sher-Censor, and Tahel Stein-Lahad. 2017. “Earliest Memories in Israeli Kibbutz Upbringing: It is Parental Engagement that Makes a Difference.” Memories 25(10):1375–1389. Avishai, Orit. 2008. “ ‘Doing Religion’ in a Secular World: Women in Conservative Religions and the Question of Agency.” Gender & Society 22(4):409–433. Avishai, Orit. 2016. “Theorizing Gendered Activism from Religious Cases: Agency, Feminist Activism, and Masculinity.” Sociology of Religion: A Quarterly Review 77(3):261–279. Avison, Margaret, and Adrian Furnham. 2015. “Personality and Voluntary Childlessness.” Journal of Population Research 32:45–67. AWID. 2019. Association for Women’s Rights in Development. “Who We Are  & What We Do.” https:// www.awid.org/who-we-are Axelrad, Hila, and Tay K. McNamara. 2018. “Gates to Retirement and Gender Differences: Macroeconomic Conditions, Job Satisfaction, and Age.” Journal of Women & Aging 30(6):503–519. Axelrad, Hila, Erika L. Sabbath, and Summer Sherburne Hawkins. 2018. “The 2008–2009 Great Recession and Employment Outcomes among Older Workers.” European Journal of Ageing 15(1):35–45. Ayalon, Liat, and Gewirtz-Meydan. 2017. “Senior, Mature or Single: A Qualitative Analysis of Homepage Advertisements of Dating Sites for Older Adults.” Computers in Human Behavior 75:876–882. Aycan, Kara, and Maria Petrescu. 2018. “Self-Employment and its Relationship to Subjective Well-Being.” International Review of Entrepreneurship 16(1):115–139. Azad, Arezou. 2013. “Female Mystics in Mediaeval Islam: The Quiet Legacy.” Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 56:543–88. Azmanova, Albena. 2016. “Empowerment as Surrender: How Women Lost the Battle for Emancipation as they Won Equality and Inclusion.” Social Research 83(3):749–776. Baccarella, Christian V., Timm F. Wagner, Jan H. Kietzmann, and Ian P. McCarthy. 2018. “Social Media? It’s Serious! Understanding the Dark Side of Social Media.” European Management Journal 36(4):431–438. Bachmann Ingrid, Dustin Harp, and Jamie Loke. 2018. “Covering Clinton (2010–2015): Meaning Making Strategies in U.S. Magazine Covers.” Feminist Media Studies 18(5):793–809. Bacon, Perry. 2018. “The Abortion Debate Isn’t as Partisan as Politicians Make it Seem.” July 10. https:// fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-abortion-debate-isnt-as-partisan-as-politicians-make-it-seem/ Badinter, Elisabeth. 2012. The Conflict: How Modern Motherhood Undermines the Status of Women. New York: Metropolitan/Henry Holt. Bae, Dayoung, and Kandauda A.S. Wickrama. 2018. “Pathways Linking Early Socioeconomic Adversity to Diverging Profiles of Romantic Relationship Dissolution in Young Adulthood.” Journal of Family Psychology 33(1):23–23. Bagaric, Mirko, and Brienna Bagaric. 2017. “Mitigating the Crime that is the Overimprisonment of Women: Why Orange Should Not be the New Black.” Vermont Law Review 41(3):537–602. Bahi, Riham. 2012. “Islamic and Secular Feminisms: Two Discourses Mobilized for Gender Justice.” Contemporary Readings in Law and Social Justice 3(2):138–158. Baila, Morgan. 2019. “Why Anne Hathaway & Rebel Wilson Had to Fight for Dirty Jokes in The Hustle.” April  30. https://www.refinery29.com/en-us/2019/04/231186/the-hustle-movie-rating-sexism-annehathaway-rebel-wilson

612 References Bailenson, Jeremy N., and Nick Yee. 2007. “Virtual Interpersonal Touch and Digital Chameleons.” Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 31:225–242. Bailey, Benjamin M. Heath, Melissa Allen Heath, Aaron P. Jackson et  al. 2019. “The Influence of Group Values and Behavior on Adolescent Male Perceptions of and Use of Homophobic Language.” Journal of Adolescence 69:1–10. Bainbridge, Jason. 2018. “Beyond Pink and Blue: The Quiet Rise of Gender-Neutral Toys.” The Conversation. June 6. https://www.sbs.com.au/topics/life/culture/article/2018/06/06/beyond-pink-and-bluequiet-rise-gender-neutral-toys Baiocchi-Wagner, Elizabeth A., and Loreen N. Olson. 2016. “Motherhood and Family Health Advocacy in Nutrition and Exercise: ‘Doing the Tradition’.” Journal of Family Communication 16(2):128–142. Baker, Elizabeth A., Haylee DeLuca Bishop, Logan A. Stigall, and Manfred H.M. van Dulmen. 2018. “Positive Parental Engagement: Investigating the Role of the Mother–Father Relationship.” Journal of Family Psychology 32(8):1005–1014. Baker, Phyllis L. 2019. “Paranoids, Factoids, and Opioids: The Social Consequences of the Destruction of Cultural Scripts for Left-Behind Men.” Sociological Quarterly 60(1):1–25. Baker, Rachel, Daniel Klasik, and Sean F. Reardon. 2018. “Race and Stratification in College Enrollment Over Time.” AERA Open. 4(1):1–28. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/2332858417751896 Bakhtiar, Laleh. 2011. Concordance of the Sublime Quran. Chicago: Library of Islam, Kazi Publications. Balanoff, Elizabeth. 1990. “The American Woman and the Labor Movement: Bitter Fruit in the Economy of Profit.” In Views of Women’s Lives in Western Tradition: Frontiers of the Past and the Future, edited by Frances Richardson Keller. Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen. Ballentine, Summer. 2019. “Title IX Lobbyist Advanced the Use of ‘Rape Equals Regret’ Strategy.” St. Louis-Post Dispatch. May 2:A1, A4. Bandura, Albert, and Kay Bussey. 2004. “On Broadening the Cognitive, Motivational, and Sociostructural Scope of Theorizing about Gender Development and Functioning: Comment on Martin, Ruble, and Szkrybalo (2002).” Psychological Bulletin 130(5):691–701. Bandura, Albert, and Richard H. Walters. 1963. Social Learning and Personality Development. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Barbour, Ann. 2016. Play Today: Building the Young Brain Through Creative Expression. Lewisville, NC: Gryphon House. Bardsley, Peter, and Rachel Meager. 2019. “Competing Lending Platforms, Endogenous Reputation, and Fragility in Microcredit Markets.” European Economic Review 112:107–126. Bardsley, Sandy. 2007. Women’s Roles in the Middle Ages. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. Barnes, Medora W. 2015a. “Anticipatory Socialization of Pregnant Women: Learning Fetal Sex and Gendered Interactions.” Sociological Perspectives 58(2)187–203. Barnes, Sandra L. 2015b. “Black Megachurches and Gender Inclusivity.” Women, Gender, & Families of Color 3(2):115–143. Barone, M., A. Cogliandro, N. Di Stefano et al. 2017. “A Systematic Review of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Following Transsexual Surgery.” Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 41(3):700–713. Barroso, Amanda, and Rachel Minkin. 2020. “Recent Protest Attendees are More Racially and Ethnically Diverse, Younger than Americans Overall.” Pew Research Center. June  24. https://www.pewresearch. org/fact-tank/2020/06/24/recent-protest-attendees-are-more-racially-and-ethnically-diverse-younger-than-americans-overall/ Bartels, Larry M. 2018. “Partisanship in the Trump Era.” Journal of Politics 80(4):1483–1494. Bartholomaeus, Clare. 2016. “ ‘Girls Can Like Boy Toys’: Junior Primary School Children’s Understandings of Feminist Picture Books.” Gender and Education 28(7):935–950. Bartkowski, John P. 2003. The Promise Keepers: Servants, Soldiers, and Godly Men. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

References  613 Basye, Anne. 2005. “Discovering Bold Women in Blue.” Lutheran Women Today June:16–17. Batha, Emma, and Nellie Peyton. 2019. “Sierra Leone in the Latest Country to Ban FGM.” Reuters. February 6. https://www.one.org/international/blog/fgm-banned-sierra-leone/ Baude, Amandine, Jessica Pearson, and Sylvie Drapeau. 2016. “Child Adjustment in Joint Physical Custody versus Sole Custody: A Meta-Analytic Review.” Journal of Divorce and Remarriage 5(5):338–360. Beall, Spencer K. 2018. “ ‘Lock Her Up’!” How Women Have Become the Fastest-Growing Population in the American Carceral State.” Berkeley Journal of Criminal Law 23(2). https://www.prisonpolicy.org/ reports/women_overtime.html Bear, Julia B. 2019. “The Caregiving Ambition Framework.” Academy of Management Review 44(1):99–125. Beauchamp, Mark R., Kaitlin L. Crawford, and Ben Jackson. 2019. “Social Cognitive Theory and Physical Activity: Mechanisms of Behavior Change, Critique, and Legacy.” Psychology of Sport and Exercise 42:110–117. Beaver, Kevin M., and John Paul Wright. 2018. “Self-Reported Male-Female Differences in Criminal Involvement Do Not Account for Criminal Justice Processing Differences.” American Journal of Criminal Justice 44(6):859–871. Beck, Erin. 2017. “What a Feminist Curiosity Contributes to the Study of Development.” Studies in Comparative International Development 52(2):139–154. Becker, Jill B., and Carolyn M. Mazure. 2019. “The Federal Plan for Health Science and Technology’s Response To The Opioid Crisis: Understanding Sex and Gender Differences as Part of the Solution is Overlooked.” Biology of Sex Differences 10: Article number 3. January  7. https://bsd.biomedcentral.com/ articles/10.1186/s13293-018-0215-5 Beddoe, Deirdre. 1989. Back to Home and Duty: Women Between the Wars, 1918–1939. London: Pandora. Begley, Sharon. 2020. “Who is Getting Sick, and How Sick? A Breakdown of Coronavirus Risk by Demographic Factors.” March  3. https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/03/who-is-getting-sick-and-how-sicka-breakdown-of-coronavirus-risk-by-demographic-factors/ Behling, Laura. 2001. The Masculine Woman in America, 1890–1935. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. Behm-Morawitz, Elizabeth, Jennifer Lewallen, and Brandon Miller. 2016. “Real Mean Girls? Reality Television Viewing, Social Aggression, and Gender-Related Beliefs among Female Emerging Adults.” Psychology of Popular Media Culture 5(4):340–355. Beier, K.M., S. Kossow, Y. Zhou et al. 2019. “The Gap between Desires and Reality in Sexuality of Males and Females Aged 60 and Over: Results from the Berlin Aging Study II (BASE-II).” Sexologies. August 28. Abstract in English available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/sexologies/articles-in-press Beinart, Peter. 2016. “Fear of a Female President.” Atlantic. October:15–17. Belec, Hannah Moulton, and Kathleen Benson. 2017. “Combatting Human Trafficking: The Need for Advocacy.” AAUW Outlook. Winter:13–17. Bell, Ann V. 2019. “ ‘I’m Not Really 100% a Woman If I Can’t Have a Kid’: Infertility and the Intersection of Gender, Identity, and the Body.” Gender & Society 33(4):629–651. Bellani, Daniela, Gøsta Esping-Andersen, and Lesia Nedoluzhko. 2017. “Never Partnered: A Multilevel Analysis of Lifelong Singlehood.” Demographic Research 37 (Article 4):53–99. Bem, Sandra Lipsitz. 1981.”Gender Schema Theory: A  Cognitive Account of Sex-Typing.” Psychological Review 88:354–364. Bem, Sandra Lipsitz. 1983. “Gender Schema Theory and its Implications for Child Development: Raising Gender-Aschematic Children in a Gender-Schematic Society.” Signs 8:598–616. Bem, Sandra Lipsitz. 1985. “Androgyny and Gender-Schema Theory: A Conceptual and Empirical Integration.” Volume 32 pp. 179–226 in Nebraska Symposium on Motivation 1984: Psychology and Gender, edited by T.S. Sonderegger. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press. Bem, Sandra Lipsitz. 1987. “Gender Schema Theory and the Romantic Tradition.” Pp. 251–271 in Sex and Gender, edited Phillip Shaver and Clyde Hendrick. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

614 References Bem, Sandra Lipsitz. 1993. The Lenses of Gender: Transforming the Debate on Sexual Inequality. New Haven, CT: Yale University. Ben-Asher, Noa. 2016. “The Two Laws of Sex Stereotyping.” Boston College Law Review 57(4): Rev. 1187.https://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/bclr/vol57/iss4/4 Bender, Patrick K., Courtney Plante, and Douglas A. Gentile. 2018. “The Effects of Media Content on Aggression.” Current Opinion in Psychology 19:104–108. Bener, Ayşe Başar, Bora Cağlayan, Adam Douglas Henry, and Paweł Prałat. 2016. “Empirical Models of Social Learning in a Large, Evolving Network.” PLOS ONE. October 4:20 pages. Benería, Lourdes, Günseli Berik, and Maria S. Floro (eds.). 2016. Gender, Development and Globalization: Economics as if All People Matter. New York and London: Routledge. Benham, Nicholas, Maya Desai, Madeleine Freeman et al. 2019. “Single-Sex Education.” Georgetown Journal of Gender and the Law 20(2):509–540. Bennett, Jonathan. 2017. A Vindication of the Rights of Woman with Strictures on Political and Moral Subjects. by Mary Wollstonecraft. http://www.earlymoderntexts.com/assets/pdfs/wollstonecraft1792.pdf Benoit, William. 2017. “Image Repair on the Donald Trump ‘Access Hollywood’ Video: ‘Grab Them by the P*ssy’.” Communication Studies 68(3):243–259. Benson, Jacquelyn J., and Marilyn Coleman. 2016. “Older Adults Developing a Preference for Living Apart Together.” Journal of Marriage and Family 78:797–812. Bentley, Liz. 2019. “Why Mentors are Good, but Sponsors are Great.” NBC News. February 27. https:// www.nbcnews.com/know-your-value/feature/why-mentors-are-good-sponsors-are-great-ncna976711 Benwell, Max. 2019. “Move Aside, Gillette: Four Products to Rile Men Who Like Their Toxic Masculinity.” Guardian. January  16. https://www.theguardian.com/media/2019/jan/16/gillette-ad-mens-rights-activistswoke-marketing Berbery, Maria Luz, and Karen M. O’Brien. 2018. “Going to College? Latina/Latino High School Students’ College-Going Self-Efficacy and Educational Goals.” Journal of Career Assessment 26(2):377–392. Berdejó, Carlos. 2019. “Gender Disparities In Plea Bargaining.” Indiana Law Journal 94(4):1247–1303. Bergagna, Elisa, and Stefano Tartaglia. 2018. “Self-Esteem, Social Comparison, and Facebook Use.” Europe’s Journal of Psychology 14(4):831–845. Bericat, Eduardo. 2019. “Part I—Multiple Discrimination: A Social Science Approach.” Report on Multiple Discrimination. Rights, Equality and Citizenship (REC). Programme of the European Union. https://www. ekke.gr/ocd/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/WS1_output%201a%20EN.pdf Berke, Danielle S., Dennis Reidy, and Amos Zeichner. 2018.“Masculinity, Emotion Regulation, and Psychopathology: A Critical Review and Integrated Model.” Clinical Psychology Review 66:106–116. Berkowitz, Bonnie, Denise Lu, and Chris Alcantara. 2019. “The Terrible Numbers that Grow with Each Mass Shooting.” Washington Post. Updated February 16. https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/ national/mass-shootings-in-america/?utm_term=.aab2bae593d7 Berli, Jens U., Gail Knudson, Lin Fraser, et al. 2017. “What Surgeons Need to Know about Gender Confirmation Surgery When Providing Care for Transgender Individuals: A Review.” JAMA Surgery 152(4):394–400. Berman, Jillian. 2018. “Women’s Unpaid Work is the Backbone of the American Economy.” MarketWatch. April  15. https://www.marketwatch.com/story/this-is-how-much-more-unpaid-work-women-dothan-men-2017-03–07 Bernard, Stanley N., Melissa Whitson, and Joy Kaufman. 2015. “The Moderating Effect of Positive Father Engagement and Accessibility on a School-Based System of Care Intervention for Mental Health Outcomes of Children.” Journal of Child and Family Studies 24:2923–2933. Bernstein, Elizabeth. 2018. “The New Father-Son Sex Talk.” Wall Street Journal October 15:A1. Bernstein, Mary, Brenna Harvey, and Nancy A. Naples. 2018. “Marriage, the Final Frontier? Same‐Sex Marriage and the Future of the Lesbian and Gay Movement.” Sociological Forum 33(1):30–52. Bethune, Brian. 2018. “Was Jesus Christ a Feminist? Some Experts Contend the Messiah had Female Teachers, Even Apostles.” Maclean’s 131(3):68–69.

References  615 Bhandari, Tamara. 2019. “Women’s Brains Appear Three years Younger than Men’s.” Source Washington University School of Medicine. The Source. February 4. https://source.wustl.edu/2019/02/womens-brainsappear-three-years-younger-than-mens/ Bhatia, Rajani. 2018. Gender Before Birth: Sex Selection in a Transnational Context. Seattle: University of Washington Press. Bhogal, Manpal Singh, and Stacey Corbett. 2016. “The Influence of Aggressiveness on Rape-Myth Acceptance among University Students.” Psychiatry, Psychology and Law 23(5):709–715. Bialik. Kristen. 2017. “Key Facts about Race and Marriage, 50 Years After Loving v. Virginia.” Pew Research Center. June 12. http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/06/12/key-facts-about-race-and-marriage50-years-after-loving-v-virginia/ Bible, Jacqueline, Brad van Eeden-Moorefield, Soyoung Lee, and Lisa Lieberman. 2018. “The Influence of College Hookups on Future Romantic Relationships: A Review of the Literature.” College Student Journal 52(3):299–308 Billauer, Barbara Pfeffer. 2017. “Abortion, Moral Law, and the First Amendment: The Conflict between Fetal Rights  & Freedom of Religion.” William  & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice 23(2):271–335. Birditt, Kira S. Wylie H. Wan,Terri L. Orbuch, and Toni C. Antonucci. 2017. “The Development of Marital Tension: Implications for Divorce among Married Couples.” Developmental Psychology 55(10):1995–2006. Birshok, Daniel Andrew. 2016. “Women, Genealogical Inheritance and Sufi Authority: The Female Saints of Seunagan, Indonesia.” Asian Studies Review 40(4)583–599. Bishop, Katelynn, Kjerstin Gruys, and Maddie Evans. 2018. “Sized Out: Women, Clothing Size and Inequality.” Gender & Society 33(2):180–203. Bittner, Amanda, and Elizabeth Goodyear-Grant. 2017. “Sex Isn’t Gender: Reforming Concepts and Measurements in the Study of Public Opinion.” Political Behavior 39(4):1019–1041. Bix, Cynthia Overbeck. 2017. “Dear Mama: Letters from a Mill Girl.” Cobblestone 38(6):8–11. Bjarnegård, Elin, and Rainbow Murray. 2018. “Revisiting Forms of Representation by Critically Examining Men.” Politics & Gender 14(2):265–270. Bjerk, David. 2009. “Beauty vs. Earnings: Gender Differences in Earnings and Priorities over Spousal Characteristics in a Matching Model.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 69(3):248–259. Black Demographics. 2017. “Marriage in Black America.” http://blackdemographics.com/households/ marriage-in-black-america/ Black, Michael Ian. 2018. “The Boys are Not All Right.” New York Times. February 21. https://www.nytimes. com/2018/02/21/opinion/boys-violence-shootings-guns.html Black, Sandra E., Diane Whitmore Schanzenbach, and Audrey Beeitwieser. 2017. “The Recent Decline in Women’s Labor Force Participation.” Hamilton Project, Brookings Institution. October. https://www. brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/es_10192017_decline_womens_labor_force_participation_blackschanzenbach.pdf Blackstone, Amy. 2017. “There is No Maternal Instinct.” Huffington Post. May  11. https://www.huffpost. com/entry/there-is-no-maternal-Boylorn instinct_b_59132159e4b0e3bb894d5c46 Blair, Karen L. 2017. “Did Secretary Clinton Lose to a ‘Basket Of Deplorables’? An Examination of Islamophobia, Homophobia, Sexism and Conservative Ideology in the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election.” Psychology & Sexuality 8(4):334–355. Blake, Melissa. 2018. “Sesame Street’ Insists Bert and Ernie Aren’t Gay, But It’s Missing a Teaching Moment.” Washington Post. Sept 20. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/parenting/wp/2018/09/20/ sesame-street-insists-bert-and-ernie-arent-gay-but-theyre-missing-a-teaching-moment/ Blau, Francine, and Lawrence M. Kahn. 2017. “The Gender Wage Gap: Extent, Trends, and Explanations.” Journal of Economic Literature 55(3):789–865. Blood, Robert O., Jr., and Donald M. Wolfe. 1960. Husbands and Wives: The Dynamics of Married Living. New York: Free Press.

616 References Blow, Charles. 2015. “The Million Man’s March, 20 Years On.” New York Times. October 12. https://www. nytimes.com/2015/10/12/opinion/million-man-march-20-years-on.html BLS. 2019. Bureau of Labor Statistics. “Computer and Information Research Scientists,” Occupational Outlook Handbook. April  12. https://www.bls.gov/ooh/computer-and-information-technology/computer-and-information-research-scientists.htm Bluiett, Tarsha E. 2018. “The Language of Play and Gender-Roles Stereotypes.” Education 139(1):38–42. Blumberg, Fran C., Kirby Deater-Deckard, Sandra L. Calvert et al., 2019. “Digital Games as a Context for Children’s Cognitive Development: Research Recommendations and Policy Considerations.” Social Policy Report 32(1):33 pages. Blumer, Herbert. 1969. Symbolic Interactionism: Perspective and Method. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Bock, Jarrod, Jennifer Byrd-Craven, and Melissa Burkley. 2017. “The Role of Sexism in Voting in the 2016 Presidential Election.” Personality and Individual Differences 119:189–193. Boepple, Lean, and J. Kevin Thompson. 2018. “A  Content Analytic Study of Appearance Standards for Women on Color in Magazines.” Psychology of Popular Media Culture 7(3):264–273. Bohn, Lauren. 2018. “ ‘We’re All Handcuffed in This Country.’ Why Afghanistan Is Still the Worst Place in the World to Be a Woman.” Time. December 8. https://time.com/5472411/afghanistan-women-justice-war/ Bologna, Caroline. 2019. “How Gender Reveals Became Such a Thing.” Huffington Post. June 25. https:// www.huffpost.com/entry/how-gender-reveals-became-such-a-thing_n_5b4fa97be4b0b15aba8b3e46 Bonilla, Tabitha, and Cecilia Hyunjung Mo. 2019. “The Evolution of Human Trafficking Messaging in the United States and its Effect on Public Opinion.” Journal of Public Policy 39(2):201–234. Bonner, Heidi S. 2018. “The Decision Process: Police Officers’ Search For Information In Dispute Encounters.” Policing and Society 28(1):90–113. Booth, Alison L., Lina Cardona-Sosa, and Patrick Nolen. 2018. “Do Single-Sex Classes Affect Academic Achievement? An Experiment in a Coeducational University.” Journal of Public Economics 168:109–126. Borah, Elisa, and Brooke Fina. 2017. “Military Spouses Speak Up: A Qualitative Study of Military and Veteran Spouses’ Perspectives.” Journal of Family Social Work 20(2):144–161. Borgkvist, Ashlee, Vivienne Moore, Jaklin Eliott, and Shona Crabb. 2018. “ ‘I Might be a Bit of a Front Runner’: An Analysis of Men’s Uptake of Flexible Work Arrangements and Masculine Identity.” Gender, Work and Organization 25(6):703–717. Borgonovi, Francesca Álvaro Choi, and Marco Paccagnella. 2018. “The Evolution of Gender Gaps in Numeracy and Literacy between Childhood and Adulthood.” October  30. OECD Education Working Paper No. 184. https://doi.org/10.1787/0ff7ae72-en Bornstein, Stephanie. 2018. “Equal Work.” Maryland Law Review 77(3):581–648. Bort, Ryan. 2018. “The Sandy Hook Massacre Was 6 Years Ago Today. This Year had More School Shootings than Ever.” Rolling Stone. https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/american-gun-violencestatistics-768853/ Borusiak, Liubov. 2013. “Love, Sex, and Partnership.” Russian Social Science Review 54(1):4–39. Børve, Hege Eggen, and Elin Børve. 2017. “Rooms with Gender: Physical Environment and Play Culture in Kindergarten.” Early Child Development and Care 187(5/6):1069–1081. Bosak, Janine, Clara Kulich, Laurie Rudman, and Mary Kinahan. 2018. “Be an advocate for Others, Unless You are a Man: Backlash against Gender-Atypical Male Job Candidates.” Psychology of Men & Masculinities 19(1):156–165. Boserup, Ester. 1970. Women’s Role in Economic Development. London: Allen and Unwin. Bosman, Julie, and Sarah Mervosh. 2020. “As Covid-19 Surges, Younger People Account for ‘Disturbing’ Number of Cases.” Chicago Tribune. June  26. https://www.chicagotribune.com/coronavirus/ ct-nw-nyt-coronavirus-younger-cases-surge-20200626-xfymipzlt5fm3dyb3djkifwama-story.html Bossen, Laurel, and Hill Gates. 2017. Bound Feet, Young Hands: Tracking the Demise of Footbinding in Village China. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

References  617 Bosson, Jennifer K., and Kenneth S. Michniewicz. 2013. “Gender Dichotomization at the Level of Ingroup Identity: What it is, and Why Men use it More than Women.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 105(3):425–442. Bourgeois, Roy. 2018. “The All-Male Priesthood Finds Itself in Another Scandal.” National Catholic Reporter. August  25. https://www.ncronline.org/news/opinion/ncr-today/all-male-priesthood-finds-itself-anotherscandal Bowe, Anica G., Desjardins, Christopher D. Desjardins, Lesa M. Covington Clarkson, and Frances Lawrenz. 2017 “Urban Elementary Single-Sex Math Classrooms: Mitigating Stereotype Threat for African American Girls.” Urban Education 52(3):370–398. Bowers, Maggie Ann. 2017. “Literary Activism and Violence against Native North American Women.” Wasafiri 32 (2):48–53. Bowman, Nicholas David, Jennifer Knight, Lea Schlue, Lea, and Elizabeth L. Cohen. 2018. “What if it Happened to Me? Socially Conscious Music Videos Can Address Campus Assault: Narrative Engagement and Rape Myth Acceptance.” Psychology of Popular Media Culture. June 7. Abstract available at: https:// psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2Fppm0000189 Boxberger, Karolina, and Anne Kerstin Reimers. 2019. “Parental Correlates of Outdoor Play in Boys and Girls Aged 0 to 12—A Systematic Review.” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 16(2):19 pages. Boyarin, Jonathan. 2013. Jewish Families. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press. Boyd, Kathryn. 2018. “Reproductive Autonomy and Social Sex Selection: A Chance of a Choice?” Journal of Law and Medicine 25(4):1106–1118. Boyd, Susan B., and Elizabeth Sheehy. 2016. “Men’s Groups: Challenging Feminism.” Canadian Journal of Women and the Law 28(1):5–17. Boyer, Eric J., Aleksey Kolpakov, and Hans Peter Schmitz, 2019. “ Do Executives Approach Leadership Differently When They are Involved in Collaborative Partnerships? A Perspective from International Nongovernmental Organizations (INGOs).” Public Performance & Management Review 42(1):213–240. Boyle, Kaitlin, and Lisa Slattery Walker. 2016. “The Neutralization and Denial of Sexual Violence in College Party Subcultures.” Deviant Behavior 37(12):1392–1410. Boylorn, Robin M. 2017. “Life is Not a Fairly Tale: Back Women and Depression.” Pp. 301–303 in The Crunk Feminist Collection, edited by Brittney C. Cooper, Susana M. Morris, and Robin M. Boylorn. New York: Feminist Press. Boylorn, Robin. 2017. “What Does Black Masculinity Look Like?” Pp. 24–27 in The Crunk Feminist Collection, edited by Brittney C. Cooper, Susana M. Morris, and Robin M. Boylorn. New York: Feminist Press. Bracic, Ana, Mackenzie Israel-Trummel, and Allyson F. Shortle. 2019. “Political Behavior: Is Sexism for White People? Gender Stereotypes, Race, and the 2016 Presidential Election.” Political Behavior 41(2):281–307. Bracken, Alana. 2020. “How to Raise a Gender-Neutral Baby.” Parents. May 27. https://www.parents.com/ parenting/should-you-raise-a-gender-neutral-baby/ Brammer, John Paul 2018. “Are Bert & Ernie Gay or Not? Sesame Street Creators Give Conflicting Information.” September 18. https://www.them.us/story/bert-ernie-sesame-street Brandth, Berit, and Elin Kvande. 2018. “Workplace Support of Fathers’ Parental Leave Use in Norway.” Community, Work, & Family 22(1):43–47. Brannon, Robert. 1976. “The Male Sex Role: Our Culture’s Blueprint of Manhood and What It’s Done for Us Lately.” In The 49% Majority, edited by D. David and Robert Brannon. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Brass, Nicole, Sarah E. McKellar, Elizabeth A. North, and Allison M. Ryan. 2019. “Early Adolescents’ Adjustment at School: A  Fresh Look at Grade and Gender Differences.” Journal of Early Adolescence 39(5):689–716.

618 References Bratter, Jenifer L., and Rosalind B. King. 2008. “But Will it Last? Marital Instability among Interracial and Same-Race Couples.” Family Relations 57(2):160–171. Braun, Summer S., and Alice Davidson. 2017. “Gender (Nonconformity) in Middle Childhood: A  Mixed Methods Approach to Understanding Gender-Typed Behavior, Friendship, and Peer Preference.” Sex Roles 77(1–2):16–29. Braver, Sanford, Michael E. Lamb, and Ned Holstein. 2018. “Factors Associated with Successful Shared Parenting Following Family Dissolution.” Journal of Child Custody 15(1):1–3. Braw, Elisabeth. 2017. “The Benefits of Conscription are Economic as Well as Military: Other Countries Should Follow the Example of Sweden, Finland, and Israel.” Financial Times. September 10. https://www. ft.com/content/66f6fd18-94b9-11e7-83ab-f4624cccbabe Breeland, Nikki R. 2018. “ ‘All the Truth I Could Tell’: A Discussion of Title VII’s Potential Impact on Systemic Entertainment Industry Victimization.” UCLA Women’s Law Journal 25(2):135–178. Brekus, Catherine A. 2014. “The Controversy over Women’s Religious Leadership in the U.S.” Phi Beta Kappa Forum 94(1):4–6. Brekus, Catherine. 2016. “Mormon Women and the Problem of Historical Agency.” Pp. 15–41 in Women and Mormonism: Historical and Contemporary Perspectives, edited by Kate Holbrook and Matthew Bowman. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press. Brenan, Megan. 2018. “Gallup Vault: Anita Hill’s Charges against Clarence Thomas.” September  21. https://news.gallup.com/vault/242417/gallup-vault-anita-hill-charges-against-clarence-thomas.aspx Bressert, Steve. 2019. “Gender Dysphoria Symptoms.” October  11. https://psychcentral.com/disorders/ gender-dysphoria-symptoms/ Bridge, Livia, Patrick Smith, and Katharine Rimes. 2019. “Sexual Orientation Differences in the Self-Esteem of Men and Women: A  Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.” Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity. May 16: 15 pages. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/sgd0000342 Bridges, Sarah, and Trudy Owens. 2017. “Female Job Satisfaction: Can We Explain the Part-time Paradox?” Oxford Economic Papers 69(3):782–808. Briggs, Robin. 2002. Witches and Neighbours: The Social and Cultural Context of European Witchcraft. Oxford, UK: Blackwell. Britt, Ryan. 2018. “How Family Sitcoms Convince Family Men that Fighting at Home is Fine.” August  3. https://www.fatherly.com/play/sitcom-family-fights-love/ Brizendine, Louann. 2006. The Female Brain. New York: Morgan Road. Brock, David. 2001. Blinded by the Right: The Conscience of an Ex-Conservative. New York: Crown. Brody, Samuel. 2013. “Effects of Gender and Tie Strength on Twitter Interactions.” First Monday 18(9):1. Brodyn, Adriana. 2018. “Family Feuds: The Relationships between Legal Changes and Media Framing Concerning the Family.” Sociological Quarterly 59(4):697–718. Brook, Tom Vanden. 2019. “Sexual Assault, Harassment Spikes at Military Academies, Strategies Fail to Stem Crisis.” USA Today. January 31. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/01/31/ sexual-assault-harassment-up-nearly-50-percent-military-academies/2722712002/ Brooks, Joanna, Rachel Hunt Steenblik, and Hannah Wheelwright (eds.). 2015. Mormon Feminism Essential Writings. New York: Oxford University Press. Brotto, Lori A. 2017. “Vaginal versus Clitoral? Or, Vaginal and Clitoral? A Reply to Brody and Costa.” Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality 26(1):5–6. Brown, Dorothy M. 1987. Setting a Course: American Women in the 1920s. Boston: Twayne. Brown, Eliza Smith, and Chris Meinzer. 2017. “New Data Reveal Stable Enrollment but Shifting Trends at ATS Member Schools.” Association of Theological Schools. March. https://www.ats.edu/uploads/resources/ publications-presentations/colloquy-online/new-data-reveal-stable-enrollment.pdf Brown, Elizabeth Nolan. 2018. “The Feds Keep Arresting Sex Workers.” Reason 49(8):16–17. Brown, Marilyn, and Barbara E. Bloom. 2018. “Women’s Desistance from Crime: A Review of Theory and the Role Higher Education Can Play.” Sociology Compass 12(5):e12580. https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12580

References  619 Brown, Melissa J. 2016. “Footbinding, Industrialization, and Evolutionary Explanation: An Empirical Illustration of Niche Construction and Social Inheritance.” Human Nature 27(4):501–532. Brown, Sarah, and Katherine Mangan. 2018. “What You need to Know about the Proposed Title IX Regulations.” Chronicle of Higher Education. November  16. https://www.chronicle.com/article/ What-You-Need-to-Know-About/245118 Brownstein, Ronald. 1991. “A Times Poll: Public Tends to Believe Thomas by 48% to 35%.” Los Angeles Times. October 14. https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1991-10-14-mn-430-story.html Bruce, Toni. 2016. “New Rules for New Times: Sportswomen and Media Representation in the Third Wave.” Sex Roles 74(7–8):361–376. Brumm, Walter. 2008. “Putting Sodus Shaker Village on the Map.” American Communal Societies Quarterly 2(4):153–188. Bruney, Gabrielle. 2019. “Game of Thrones Treatment of Women Will Tarnish its Legacy.” Esquire. April  11. https://www.esquire.com/entertainment/tv/a27099255/game-of-thrones-treatment-of-womencontroversy-legacy/ Brussoni, M., and L. L. Olsen. 2012. “The Perils of Overprotective Parenting: Fathers’ Perspectives Explored.” Child: Care, Health, and Development 39(2):237–245. Buchanan, Tom, and Travis Milnes. 2018. “Pre-Career Perceptions of Gendered Work Performance: The Impact of Same-Gender Referents and Work experiences on Men’s Evaluation Bias.” Gender Issues 36(1):89–112. Buckley, Tamara R., and Yasmine J. Awais. 2019. “Understanding HIV Prevention with College-Going Black Women: An NIMH-Funded Pilot Study.” Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development 47(2):74–89. Budig, Michelle, and Misun Lim. 2016. “Cohort Differences and the Marriage Premium: Emergence of Gender-Neutral Household Specialization Effects.” Journal of Marriage and Family 78(5):1352–1370. Buggs, Shantel Gabrieal. 2017. “Does (Mixed-) Race Matter: The Roles of Race in Interracial Sex, Dating, and Marriage.” Sociology Compass 11(11):13 pages. Bulanda, Jennifer Roebuck, J. Scott Brown, and Takashi Yamashita. 2016. “Marital Quality, Marital Dissolution, and Mortality Risk During the Later Life Course.” Social Science & Medicine 165:119–127. Bumiller, Elisabeth. 1995. The Secrets of Mariko. New York: Times Books. Burby, Liza N. 2017. “10 Surprising Ways Your Child Is Benefiting from Having a Working Mom: Here’s Long-term and Short-term Good News.” Working Mother. January  10. https://www.workingmother. com/10-surprising-ways-your-child-is-benefiting-from-having-working-mom Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2016. “Chart by Topics: Household Activities.” American Time Use Survey. December 20. https://www.bls.gov/tus/charts/household.htm Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2017. BLS Reports. Women in the Labor Force: A Databook. November. https:// www.bls.gov/opub/reports/womens-databook/2017/home.htm Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2019a. “Employment Characteristics of Families Summary—2018.” April  18. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/famee.nr0.htm Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2019b. “Economic News Release: “Employment Situation Summary. “ April. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2019c. “Demographics.” https://www.bls.gov/cps/demographics.htm Burnes, Theodore R., Elizabeth M. Rojas, Irena Delgado, and Tianna E. Watkins. 2018. “ ‘Wear Some Thick Socks If You Walk in My Shoes’: Agency, Resilience, and Well-Being in Communities of North American Sex Workers.” Archives of Sexual Behavior 47(5):1541–1550. Burnette, Catherine Elizabeth and Charles R. Figley. 2017. “Historical Oppression, Resilience, and Transcendence: Can a Holistic Framework Help Explain Violence Experienced by Indigenous People?” Social Work 62(1): 37–44. Burns, Edgar, Ian Tulloch, and Ardel Shamsullah. 2016. “Teaching Gender: Australian First-Year University Student View of ‘Ms’.” International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education. 28(3):404–413. Burri, Andrea, Joceline Buchmeier, and Harmut Porst. 2018. “The Importance of Male Ejaculation for Female Sexual Satisfaction and Function.” Journal of Sexual Medicine 15(11):1600–1608.

620 References Burt, Elizabeth V. 2013. “Class and Social Status in the Lydia Pinkham Illustrated Ads, 1890–1900.” American Journalism 30(1):87–111. Busch, Felix. 2018. “Occupational Devaluation Due to Feminization? Causal Mechanics, Effect Heterogeneity, and Evidence from the United States, 1960 to 2010.” Social Forces 96(3):1351–1376. Buser, Thomas, Lydia Geijtenbeek, and Erik Plug. 2019. “Sexual Orientation, Competitiveness and Income.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 151:191–198. Bush, Daniel. 2016. “Election 2016: The Hidden Sexism that Could Sway the Election.” PBS. http://www. pbs.org/newshour/features/hidden-sexism/ Bushatz, Amy. 2018. “Troop Divorce Rate Unchanged; Marriage Rate Continues Fall.” March 21. https:// www.military.com/daily-news/2018/03/21/troop-divorce-rate-unchanged-marriage-rate-continues-fall. html Business Wire. 2019a. “Women Small Business Owners in Male-Dominated Industries are Ten Times More Likely than Men to Have Their Expertise Questioned Because of Their Gender.” February  26. https:// www.jpmorganchase.com/corporate/news/pr/institute-women-owned-businesses-survive-at-same-rate-asmale-entrepreneurs.htm Business Wire. 2019b. “Despite Lower Revenues and Slower Growth, Women-Owned Businesses Survive at Same Rate as Male Entrepreneurs, According to New JPMorgan Chase Institute Data.” February  7. https://institute.jpmorganchase.com/institute/news-events/institute-women-owned-businesses-surviveat-same-rate-as-male-entrepreneurs Buss, David M., and David P. Schmitt. 2019. “Mate Preferences and their Behavioral Manifestations.” Annual Review of Psychology 70:77–110. Butler, Monica L. 2018. “Guardians of the Indian Image: Controlling Representations of Indigenous Cultures in Television.” American Indian Quarterly 42(1):1–42. Butler, Ruth. 2019. “Gender, Motivation, and Society: New and Continuing Challenges.” Pp. 129–149 in Motivation in Education at a Time of Global Change: Theory, Research, and Implications for Practice, edited by Eleftheria N. Gonida and Marina S. Lemos. Bingley, UK: Emerald Publishing Ltd. Butterfield, Lyman H., Wendell D. Garrett, and Marjorie Sprague (eds). Adams Family Correspondence, Volumes 1 and 2. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Butterworth, Annie. 2019. “Care ‘Bias’ Sees Women Die Needlessly of Heart Attacks, Less Likely to Get Timely Diagnosis’.” Daily Mail. September 30:15. Byatt, Brett. 2018. “The Case of Kiva and Grameen: Towards a Marxist Feminist Critique of ‘Smart Economics’.” Capital and Class 42(3):403–409. Byron, Kristin. 2007. “Male and Female Managers’ Ability to ‘Read’ Emotions: Relationships with Supervisor’s Performance Ratings and Subordinates’ Satisfaction Ratings.” Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 80:713–733. Cachero, Paulina. 2018. “19  Million #MeToo Tweets Later: Alyssa Milano and Tarana Burke Reflect on the Year After #MeToo.” October  15. https://www.makers.com/blog/alyssa-milano-and-tarana-burkereflect-on-year-after-me-too Cahill, Courtney Megan. 2018. “After Sex.” Nebraska Law Review 97(1):1–64. Calzo, Jerel P., Vickie M. Mays, Charlotte Björkenstam et al., 2017. “Parental Sexual Orientation and Children’s Psychological Well-Being: 2013–2015 National Health Interview Survey.” Child Development 90(4):1097–1108 Cameron, Chris. 2019. “Trump Repeats a False Claim That Doctors ‘Execute’ Newborns.” New York Times. April 28. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/28/us/politics/trump-abortion-fact-check.html Campos, Belinda, Shu-wen Wang, and Tatyana Plaksina. 2013. “Positive and Negative Emotion in the Daily Life of Dual-earner Couples with Children.” Journal of Family Psychology 27(1):76–85. Cancian, Francesca M. 2003. “The Feminization of Love.” In The Gendered Society Reader, edited by Michael S. Kimmel. New York: Oxford University Press.

References  621 Canetto, Silvia Sara. 2019. “Teaching about Women and Gender From a Transnational and Intersectional Feminist Perspective.” International Perspectives in Psychology: Research, Practice, Consultation 8(3):144–160. Cantillon, Sara, and Kathleen Lynch. 2017. “Affective Equality: Love Matters.” Hypatia 32(1):169–186. Capelouto, Sarah M., Sydney R. Archer, Jerrine R. Morriset et  al. 2018. “Sex Selection for Non-Medical Indications: A Survey of Current Pre-Implantation Genetic Screening Practices among U.S. ART Clinics.” Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 35:409–416. Capraro, Valerio, and Hélène Barcelo. 2020. “The Effect of Messaging and Gender on Intentions to Wear a Face Covering to Slow Down COVID-19 Transmission.” PsyArXiv. May 11. Preprint available at: https:// doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/tg7vz Carbine, Rosemary P. 2016. “Creating Communities of Justice and Peace: Sacramentality and Public Catholicism in the United States.” Journal for the Academic Study of Religion 29(2):182–202. Carella, Anna, and Brooke Ackerly. 2017. “Ignoring Rights is Wrong: Re-Politicizing Gender Equality and Development with the Rights-Based Approach.” International Feminist Journal of Politics 19(2):137–152. Carlo, Gustavo, Cara Streit, and Lisa Crockett. 2018. “Generalizability of a Traditional Social Cognitive Model of Prosocial Behaviors to U.S. Latino/a Youth.” Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology 24(4):596–604. Carlson, Daniel L., Amanda J. Miller, Sharon Sassler, and Sarah Hanson. 2016. “The Gendered Division of Housework and Couples’ Sexual Relationships: A Reexamination.” Journal of Marriage and Family 78: 975–995. Carlson, Dawn S., Merideth J. Thompson, and K. Michele Kacmar. 2019. “Double Crossed: The Spillover and Crossover Effects of Work Demands on Work Outcomes through the Family.” Journal of Applied Psychology 104(2):214–228. Carmines, Edward G., Michael J. Ensley, and Michael W. Wagner. 2016. “Ideological Heterogeneity and the Rise of Donald Trump.” Forum 14(4):385–397. Carneiro, Francis A., Fiona Tasker, Fernando Salinas-Quiroz et al. 2017. “Are the Fathers Alright? A Systematic and Critical Review of Studies on Gay and Bisexual Fatherhood.” Frontiers in Psychology. September 21. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5613122/ Carnes, Andrew M. 2017. “Bringing Work-Stress Home: The Impact of Role Conflict and Role Overload on Spousal Marital Satisfaction.” Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology 90(2):153–176. Carnevale, Anthony P., Nicole Smith, and Artem Gulish. 2018. Women Can’t Win Despite Making Educational Gains and Pursuing High-Wage Majors, Women Still Earn Less than Men. Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce. https://1gyhoq479ufd3yna29x7ubjn-wpengine.netdna-ssl. com/wp-content/uploads/Women_FR_Web.pdf Caro, Olga Consuela Vélez. 2015. “Ecofeminism: New Liberation Paths for Women and Nature.” Exchange 44(1):64–82. Carothers, Bobbi, and Harry T. Reis. 2013. “Men and Women are from Earth: Examining The Latent Structures of Gender.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 104(2):385–407. Carpentier, Francesca R. Dillman. 2017. “Priming Sexual and Romantic Representations in Two Media Environments: Sex Encourages and Romance Discourages Sexual Permissiveness ... Sometimes.” Journal of Sex Research 54(6): 706–716. Carriero, Renzo, and Lorenzo Todesco. 2017. “The Interplay between Equity and Gender Ideology in Perceived Housework Fairness: Evidence from an Experimental Vignette Design.” Sociological Inquiry 87(4):561–585. Carroll, Megan. 2018b. “Gay Fathers on the Margins: Race, Class, Marital Status, and Pathway to Parenthood.” Family Relations 67:104–117. Carroll, Meghan. 2018a. “Managing Without Moms: Gay Fathers, Incidental Activism, and the Politics of Parental Gender.” Journal of Family Issues 39(13):3410–3435. Carter, Julia. 2013. “The Curious Absence of Love Stories in Women’s Talk.” Sociological Review 61:728–744. Carter, Jarvis W., and Stephen A. Flores. 2019. “Improving the HIV Prevention Landscape to Reduce Disparities for Black MSM in the South.” AIDS and Behavior 23(Suppl3):331–339.

622 References Carter, Rona, Amira Halawah, and Sarah L. Trinh. 2018. “Peer Exclusion During the Pubertal Transition: The Role of Social Competence.” Journal of Youth and Adolescence 47(1):121–134. Carvalho, Joana, and Pedro J. Nobre. 2019. “Five-Factor Model of Personality and Sexual Aggression.” International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology 63(5):797–814. Casad, Bettina J., Marissa M. Salazar, and Veronica Macina. 2015. “The Real versus the Ideal: Predicting Relationship Satisfaction and Well-Being from Endorsement of Marriage Myths and Benevolent Sexism.” Psychology of Women Quarterly 39(1):119–129. Casano, Ann. 2018. “These Women Musicians are Sharing their Tales of Sexism In the Music Industry.” Ranker. June 21. https://www.ranker.com/list/sexism-stories-from-women-musicians/anncasano Casper, Wendy J., Hoda Vaziri, Julie Holliday Wayne et al. 2018. “The Jingle-Jangle of Work–Nonwork Balance: A Comprehensive and Meta-Analytic Review of Its Meaning and Measurement.” Journal of Applied Psychology 103(2):182–214. Cassels, Tracy. 2016. “How Liberal Feminism and Patriarchy Work Together to Create the Detached Mother.” http://evolutionaryparenting.com/liberal-feminism-patriarchy-detached-mother/ Castell-Grandados, Pau. 2014. “’Wine Vat Witches Suffocate Children’: The Mythical Components of the Iberian Witch.” eHumanista 26:170–195. Castrillon, Caroline. 2019. “Why It’s Time for Female Entrepreneurs to Break the Money Taboo.” Forbes. February 17. https://www.forbes.com/sites/carolinecastrillon/2019/02/17/why-its-time-for-female-entrepreneursto-break-the-money-taboo/#224606c46b8a Catalyst. 2017. “Quick Take: Women in Academia.” October  20. https://www.catalyst.org/research/ women-in-academia/ Catalyst. 2018a. “Quick Take: Women in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics.” January 3. https://www.catalyst.org/research/women-in-science-technology-engineering-and-mathematics-stem/ Catalyst. 2018b. “Women if Color in the United States: Quick Take.” November 7. https://www.catalyst. org/research/women-of-color-in-the-united-states/ Catalyst. 2019. “Ask Catalyst Express: Women CEOs.” May 1. https://www.catalyst.org/research/ask-catalystexpress-women-ceos/ Cathcart, Kevin M. and Gabel-Brett. 2016. Love Unites Us: Winning the Freedom to Marry in America. New York: New Press. Causadias, José M, and Dante Cicchetti. 2018. “Cultural Development and Psychopathology.” Cultural Development and Psychopathology 30(5):1549–1555. Cavanagh, Caitlin, and Elizabeth Cauffman. 2018. “The Role of Rearrests in Juvenile Offenders’ and their Mothers’ Attitudes toward Police.” Law and Human Behavior 43(3):220–231. Cavanaugh, Mariah. 2017. “Ancient Greek Pederasty: Education of Exploitation?” StMU History Media. http://www.stmuhistorymedia.org/ancient-greek-pederasty-education-or-exploitation/ CAWP. Center for American Women and Politics. 2019. “Women Appointed to Presidential Cabinets.” April 12. http://www.cawp.rutgers.edu/sites/default/files/resources/womenapptdtoprescabinets.pdf Cendra, Anastasia Nelladia, Teresia Dian Triutami, and Barli Bram. 2019. “Gender Stereotypes Depicted in Online Sexist Jokes.” European Journal of Humour Research 7(2):44–66. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2019. “HIV among Women.” September 26. https://www.cdc. gov/hiv/group/gender/women/index.html CGTN America. 2019. “A Defiant Women’s’ Movement Rises up in Argentina.” February 17. https://america.cgtn.com/2019/02/17/a-defiant-womens-movement-rises-up-in-argentina Chadwick, Sara B, and Sari M. van Anders, 2017. “Do Women’s Orgasms Function as a Masculinity Achievement for Men?” Journal of Sex Research 54(9): 1141–1152. Chalabi, Mona. 2018. “What’s Behind the Rise of Interracial marriage in the US?” Guardian. February 21. https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2018/feb/21/whats-behind-the-rise-of-interracial-marriagein-the-us Chamberlain, Prudence. 2016. “Affective Temporality: Towards a Fourth Wave.” Gender and Education 28(3):458–464.

References  623 Champlin, Sara, Yvette Sterbenk, Kasey Windels, and Madison Poteet. 2019. “How Brand-Cause Fit Shapes Real World Advertising Messages: A Qualitative Exploration of ‘Femvertising’.” International Journal of Advertising May 31. Abstract available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02650487.2019.1615294 Chancer, Lynn, and John Andrews (eds). 2014. The Unhappy Divorce of Sociology and Psychoanalysis: Diverse Perspectives on the Psychosocial. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Chandler, D. L. 2012. “Million Man March Took Place on Washington’s National Mall on this Day in 1995.” NewsOne. October 16. https://newsone.com/2062043/million-man-march/ Chang, Stewart. 2018. “Our National Psychosis: Guns, Terror, and Hegemonic Masculinity.” Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review 53(2):495–532. Channa, Subhadra Mitra. 2019. “Negotiating Gendered Violence in the Public Spaces of Indian Cities: Globalization and Urbanization in Contemporary India.” Pp. 307–318 in Women of Asia: Globalization, Development, and Gender Equity, edited by Mehrangiz Najafizadeh and Linda L. Lindsey. New York and London: Routledge. Chantler, Khatidja, Geetanjali Gangoli, and Ravi K. Thiara. 2018. “Muslim Women and Gender Based Violence in India and the UK.” Critical Social Policy 39(2): 163–183. Chapin, Angelina. 2016. “Dads’ Rights: The Rise of Firms for Fathers Going through Divorce.” Guardian. October 15. https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2016/oct/15/fathers-rights-divorce-lawyers Chaplin, Tara M. 2013. “Gender Differences in emotion expression in Children: A Meta-Analytic Review.” Psychological Bulletin 139(4):735–765. Charter, Mollie Lazar, and Christina Mogro-Wilson. 2018. “Feminist Attitudes and Ideologies: An Examination of a Northeastern US MSW Program.” Social Work Education 37(2):139–156. Chatfield, Georgina. 2019. “How Gender Stereotypes in Children’s Books Shape Career Choices.” March 8. https://www.thersa.org/discover/publications-and-articles/rsa-blogs/2019/03/gender-books Chatterjee, Rhitu. 2018a. “A  New Survey Finds 81  Percent of Women Have Experienced Sexual Harassment.” National Public Radio. February 21. https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/02/21/ 587671849/a-new-survey-finds-eighty-percent-of-women-have-experienced-sexual-harassment Chatterjee, Shraddha. 2018b. “Transgender Shifts: Notes on Resignification of Gender and Sexuality in India.” Transgender Studies Quarterly 5(3): 311–320. Chazan, Naomi. 2018. “Israel at 70: A Gender Perspective.” Israel Studies 23(3):141–151. Chemaly, Soraya. 2015. “ All Teachers Should Be Trained to Overcome Their Hidden Biases.” Time. February 12. http://time.com/3705454/teachers-biases-girls-education/ Chemaly, Soraya. 2016. “Mass Killings in the US: Masculinity, Masculinity, Masculinity.” Huffington Post. October 5. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/mass-killings-in-the-us-w_b_8234322 Chen, Angus. 2016. “Invisibilia: How Learning to Be Vulnerable Can Make Life Safer.” National Public Radio. June 17. https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/06/17/482203447/invisibilia-how-learningto-be-vulnerable-can-make-life-safer Chen, Min. 2004. “Japanese Management Style.” Pp. 151–177 from Asian Management Systems: Chinese, Japanese, and Korean Styles of Business. London: Thompson Learning. Chen, Te-Ping. 2018. “A Corporate Ladder of Attrition for Women.” New York Times October 23:R5. Chen, Yiyu, and Daniel R. Meyer. 2017. “Does Joint Legal Custody Increase Child Support for Nonmarital Children?” Children and Youth Services Review 79:547–557. Cheng, Marguerita. 2018. “The Gender Earnings Gap and Retirement.” Forbes. July 12. https://www.forbes. com/sites/margueritacheng/2018/07/12/the-gender-earnings-gap-and-retirement/#7fd743b87714 Chervonsky, Elizabeth, and Caroline Hunt. 2017. “Suppression and Expression of Emotion in Social and Interpersonal Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis.” Emotion 1(4): 669–683. Chesley, Noelle, and Sarah Flood. 2017. “Signs of Change? At-Home and Breadwinner Parents’ Housework and Child-Care Time.” Journal of Marriage and Family 79(2):511–534. Chesley, Noelle. 2017. “What Does It Mean to Be a ’Breadwinner’ Mother?” Journal of Family Issues 38(18):2594–2619. Chestnut, Eleanor K., Ryan F. Lei, Sarah-Jane Leslie, and Andrei Cimpian. 2018. “The Myth that Only Brilliant People are Good at Math and its Implications for Diversity.” Education Sciences 8(2):65.

624 References Chetkovich, Carol. 2019. “How Non-Binary Gender Definitions Cofound (Already Complex) Thinking about Gender and Public Policy.” Journal of Public Affairs Education 25(2):226–252. Children’s Defense Fund. 2018. “Child Poverty in America 2017: National Analysis.” September 12. https:// www.childrensdefense.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Child-Poverty-in-America-2017-National-FactSheet.pdf Ching, Boby Ho-Hong, and Jason Teng Xu. 2018. “The Effects of Neuroessentialism on Transprejudice: An Experimental Study.” Sex Roles 78(3–4):228–241. Ching, Terence H.W., Sharon Y. Lee, Julia Chen et al. 2018. “A Model of Intersectional Stress and Trauma in Asian American Sexual and Gender Minorities.” Psychology of Violence 8(6):657–668. Chiozza, Giacomo, and Dragomir Stoyanov. 2018. “The Myth of the Strong Leader in Russian Public Opinion.” Problems of Post-Communism 65(6):419–433. Chira, Susan. 2019. “Women Here Are Very, Very Worried.” New York Times. March  22. https://www. nytimes.com/2019/03/22/sunday-review/women-afghanistan-taliban.html Cho, Ahram, and Melinda Tasca. 2019. “Disparities in Women’s Prison Sentences: Exploring the Nexus between Motherhood, Drug Offense, and Sentence Length.” Feminist Criminology 14(4):420–440. Cho, Sook-Hyun, and Se-Joon Hong. 2013. “Blog User Satisfaction: Gender Differences in Preferences and Perception of Visual Design.” Social Behavior and Personality 41(8):1319–1332. Cho, Sung-Bong, Ming Cui, and Amy M. Claridge. 2018. “Cohabiting Parents’ Marriage Plans and Marriage Realization: Gender Differences, Couple Agreement, and Longitudinal Effects.” Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 35(2):137–158. Chodorow, Nancy. 1978. The Reproduction of Mothering: Psychoanalysis and the Sociology of Gender. Berkeley: University of California. Chodorow, Nancy J. 1994. Femininities, Masculinities, Sexualities: Freud and Beyond. Lexington, KY: University Press of Kentucky. Chodorow, Nancy J. 2012. Individualizing Gender and Sexuality: Theory and Practice. New York: Routledge. Chodorow, Nancy J. 2019. The Psychoanalytic Ear and the Sociological Eye. New York: Routledge. Choi, Gilok, Hyewon Chung, and Yoonsook Kim. 2012. “Are Stereotypes Relative to Gender Usage Applicable to the Virtual World?” International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 28(6):399–405. Choi, Jieun, and Jung Ae Ohm. 2018. “Pretend Play and Social Competence in Peer Play Groups of Five-YearOld Boys and Girls.” Social Behavior and Personality 46(8):1255–1270. Choi, Kate, and Marta Tienda. 2017. “Marriage-Market Constraints and Mate-Selection Behavior: Racial, Ethnic, and Gender Differences in Intermarriage.” Journal of Marriage and Family 79(2):301–317. Choi, Kyung-Hee, Jay Paul, George Ayala, Ross Boylan, and Steven Gregorich, 2013. “Experiences of Discrimination and their Impact on the Mental Health among African America, Asian and Pacific Islander, and Latino Men Who have Sex with Men.” Research and Practice. American Journal of Public Health May 1:868–74. Chozick, Amy. 2019. “Shannon Watts’s Work Diary: The Demanding Job of Running Moms Demand Action.” New York Times. June  6. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/06/business/shannon-watts-moms-demand-action-gun-control-work-diary.html?auth=link-dismiss-google1tap Christ, Carol P.  1987. Laughter of Aphrodite: Reflections on a Journey to the Goddess. San Francisco: Harper & Row. Christ, Carol P.  2017. “Was there a ‘Golden Age’ before Patriarchy and War?” Feminism and Religion. May 8. https://feminismandreligion.com/2017/05/08/32585/ Christ, Carol P. 2019. “Theology Matters.” Feminist Theology 28(1):20–34. Christ, Carol P., and Judith Plaskow. 2016. Goddess and God in the World: Conversations in Embodied Theology. Minneapolis: Fortress Press. Christensen, M. Candace, Rachel Wright, and Jodi Dunn. 2017. “ ‘It’s Awkward Stuff’: Conversations about Sexuality with Young Children.” Child & Family Social Work 22(2):711–720.

References  625 Christenson, Peter G., Silvia de Haan-Rietdijk, Donald F. Roberts, and Tom F.M. ter Bogt, 2019. “What has America Been Singing About? Trends in Themes in the U.S. Top-40 Songs: 1960–2010.” Psychology of Music 47(2):194–212. Christesen, Paul. 2012. “Athletics and Social Order in Sparta in the Classical Period.” Classical Antiquity 31(2):193–255. Christofidou, Andria. 2018. “Men of Dance: Negotiating Gender and Sexuality in Dance Institutions.” Journal of Gender Studies 27(8):943–956. Chu, Judy Y. 2014. When Boys Become Boys: Development, Relationships, and Masculinity. New York: New York University Press. Chung, Angie Y. 2016. “Behind the Myth of the Matriarch and the Flagbearer: How Korean and Chinese American Sons and Daughters Negotiate Gender, Family, and Emotions.” Sociological Forum 32(1):28–49. Cills, Hazel. 2019. “Battle Hymn of the #Boymom.” Jezebel. August 15. https://jezebel.com/battle-hymn-ofthe-boymom-1836647103 Cimpian, Andrei. 2010. “The Impact Of Generic Language about Ability on Children’s Achievement Motivation.” Developmental Psychology 46(5):1333–340. Clarke, Jessica L., 2019. “They, Them, and Theirs.” Harvard Law Review 132(3):894–991. Clason, Marmy A. 2006. “Feminism, Generic ‘He,’ and the TNV Bible Translation Debate.” Critical Discourse Studies 3(1):23–35. Clayton, Edward. n.d. “Aristotle: Politics.” The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. ISSN 2161–0002. http://www.iep.utm.edu/ Cleary, Thomas, and Sartaz Aziz. 2000. Twilight Goddess: Spiritual Feminism and Feminine Spirituality. Boston: Shambhala. Clegg, Helen, Helen Owton, and Jacquelyn Allen-Collinson. 2018. “Challenging Conceptions of Gender: UK Dance Teachers’ Perceptions of Boys and Girls in the Ballet Studio.” Research in Dance Education 19(2):128–139. Coaston, Jane. 2019. “The Intersectionality Wars.” Vox. May  28. https://www.vox.com/ the-highlight/2019/5/20/18542843/intersectionality-conservatism-law-race-gender-discrimination Coates, Erica, and James P. McHale. 2018. “Triangular Interactions of Unmarried African American Mothers and Fathers with their 3-Month Old Infants.” Journal of Child & Family Studies 27(10):3096–3106) Coates, Jennifer. 2007. “Men’s language.” Pp. 176–183 in Sociolinguistics: A Resource Book for Students, edited by Peter Stockwell. London: Routledge. Coelho, Vitor Alexandre, Marta Marchante, and Shane R. Jimerson. 2017. “Promoting a Positive Middle School Transition: A Randomized Controlled Treatment Study Examining Self-Concept and Self-Esteem.” Journal of Youth and Adolescence 46(3):558–569. Cofer, Judith Ortiz. 1995. “The Myth of the Latin Woman: I Just Met a Girl Named Maria.” In Race, Class, and Gender in the United States: An Integrated Study, edited by Paula S. Rothenberg. New York: St. Martin’s Press. Cohen, Debra Nussbaum. 2018. “What Women in Israel and the West Have Learned from Seven Decades of Cooperation.” Times of Israel. April  19. https://www.timesofisrael.com/what-women-in-israel-andthe-west-have-learned-from-seven-decades-of-cooperation/ Cohen, Michael C., Jonathan T. Keen, and Joshua A. Bachrach. 2019. “New Calif. Law Requiring Female Directors on Public Company Boards Becomes Effective.” March  29. https://www.law.com/therecorder/2019/03/29/new-calif-law-requiring-female-directors-on-public-company-boards-becomes-effective/?slreturn=20190328140351 Cohen, Philip N. 2018a. Enduring Bonds: Inequality, Marriage, Parenting, and Everything Else That Makes Families Great and Terrible. Oakland, CA: University of California Press. Cohen, Philip N. 2018b. “Wives’ Share of Couple Income Update.” December 10. https://familyinequality. wordpress.com/2018/12/10/wives-share-of-couple-income-update/

626 References Cohen, Rachel Lara, and Carol Wolkowitz. 2018. “The Feminization of Body Work.” Gender, Work,  & Organization 25(1):42–62. Cohen, Tom. 2012. “Romney in a Bind Over ‘Binders of Women’ Comment.” CNN. October 19. https:// www.cnn.com/2012/10/18/politics/campaign-women/index.html Cohen-Brown, Brittany. 2018. “From Top to Bottom, Chimpanzee Social Hierarchy is Amazing!” July  10. https://news.janegoodall.org/2018/07/10/top-bottom-chimpanzee-social-hierarchy-amazing/ Cohn, Samuel, and Gregory Hooks. 2016. “Introduction: A Manifesto for the Sociology of Development.” Pp. 1–18 in The Sociology of Development Handbook, edited by Gregory Hooks, Shushanik Makaryan, and Paul Almeida. Oakland, CA: University of California Press. Colapinto, John. 2000. As Nature Made Him: The Boy Who was Raised as a Girl. New York: HarperCollins. Cole, Brian P., Michael Baglieri, Scott Ploharz et al. 2019. “What’s Right With Men? Gender Role Socialization and Men’s Positive Functioning?” American Journal of Men’s Health 13:12 pages. https://doi. org/10.1177/1557988318806074 Collins, Caitlin. 2019. Making Motherhood Work: How Women Manage Careers and Caregiving. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Collins, Caitlin, Liana Christin Landivar, Leah Ruppanner, and William L. Scarborough. 2020. “COVID-19 and the Gender Gap in Work Hours.” Gender, Work  & Organization. First published online, July  2. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12506 Collins, Gail. 2016. “Trump Deals the Woman Card.” New York Times. April  28. https://www.nytimes. com/2016/04/28/opinion/trump-deals-the-woman-card.html Collins, Patricia Hill. 1990. Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of Empowerment. Boston: Unwin Hyman. Collins, Patricia Hill. 2009. “Bloodmothers and Other-mothers, and Women-centered Networks.” Pp. 318– 324 in Reconstructing Gender: A Multicultural Anthology, edited by Estelle Disch. Boston: McGraw-Hill. Collins, Randall. 1975. Conflict Sociology. New York: Academic Press. Collins, Randall. 1979. The Credential Society: An Historical Sociology of Education and Stratification. New York: Academic Press. Collins, Tara. 2017. “Historical Trajectory of Military PTSD and the Psychosocial Impacts on Families: A Literature Review.” Canadian Social Work 19(1):9–27. Collins, Tracy. 2018. “The Personal communities of Men Experiencing Later Life Widowhood.” Health  & Social Care in the Community 26(3):422–430. Collins, Victoria E., and Dawn L. Rothe. 2017. “The Consumption of Patriarchy: Commodification to Facilitation and Reification.” Contemporary Justice Review 20(2):161–174. Collisson, Brian, Jennifer. Howell, David Rusbasan, and Emily Rosenfeld. 2017. “Date Someone Your Own Size.” Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 34(4):510–440. Coltrane, Scott, and Michele Adams. 2008. Gender and Families. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield. Columbia Law School. 2017. “Kimberlé Crenshaw on Intersectionality, More than Two Decades Later.” June 8. https://www.law.columbia.edu/pt-br/news/2017/06/kimberle-crenshaw-intersectionality Compton, Julie. 2018. “ ‘You Can’t Undo Surgery’: More Parents of Intersex Babies are Rejecting Operations.” NBC News. October  24. https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/09/17/us-medical-association-stands-againstunnecessary-intersex-surgeries Compton, Julie. 2018. NBS News. “ ‘Boy or Girl?’ Parents Raising ‘Theybies’ Let Kids Decide.” July  19. https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/boy-or-girl-parents-raising-theybies-let-kids-decide-n891836 Condis, Meghan. 2018. Gaming Masculinity: Trolls, Fake Geeks, and the Gendered Battle for Online Culture. Iowa City: University of Iowa Press. Congress, Elaine Piller, Allan Luks, and Francis Petit. 2017. Nonprofit Management: A  Social Justice Approach. New York: Springer. Congressional Record Service. 2010. “Women in Congress: Statistics and Brief Overview.” January  15. https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R43244.pdf

References  627 Connidis, Ingrid Arnet, Klas Borell, and Sofie Ghazanfareeon. 2017. “Ambivalence and Living Apart Together in Later Life: A Critical Research Proposal.” Journal of Marriage and Family 79(5):1404–1418. Connor, Rachel A., and Susan T. Fiske. 2019. “Not Minding the Gap: How Hostile Sexism Encourages Choice Explanations for the Gender Income Gap.” Psychology of Women Quarterly 43(1):22–36. Constante, Kevin, Aixa D. Marchand, Fernanda L. Cross, and Deborah Rivas-Drake. 2018. “Understanding the Promotive Role of Familism in the Link between Ethnic-Racial Identity and Latino Youth School Engagement.” Journal of Latinx Psychology 7(3):230–244. Conversation. 2015. “Maternal Instinct and Biology: Evolution Ensures We Want Sex, Not Babies.” October  23. https://theconversation.com/maternal-instinct-and-biology-evolution-ensures-we-want-sex-not-babies-46622 Conway, Timothy. 2017. “Women of Taoism.” Enlightened Spirituality. https://www.enlightened-spirituality. org/Women_of_Spirit_Chapter_Four_Taoism.html Coontz, Stephanie. 2016. The Way We Never Were: American Families and the Nostalgia Trap. (New Introduction and Epilogue to 2016 Edition). New York: Basic Books. Coontz, Stephanie. 2017. “How Unmarried Americans are Changing Everything.” CNN. September  22. https://www.cnn.com/2017/09/21/opinions/how-unmarried-americans-are-changing-the-gamecoontz/index.html Coontz, Stephanie. 2018. “Capitalism and the Family: An Interview with Stephanie Coontz.” Catalyst 1(4):16 pages. https://catalyst-journal.com/vol1/no4/capitalism-and-the-family-an-interview-with-stephanie-coontz Cooper, Brittney C. 2017. “Refereeing Serena: Racism, Anger, and US(Women’s) Tennis.” In The Crunk Feminist Collection, edited by Brittney C. Cooper, Susana M. Morris, and Robin M. Boylorn. New York: Feminist Press of City University of New York. Cooper, Brittney. 2018. Eloquent Rage: A Black Feminist Discovers Her Superpower. New York: St. Martin’s Press. Cooper, Shauna M., Ciara Smalls-Glover, Enrique W. Neblett, and Kira Hudson Banks. 2014. “Racial Socialization Practices among African American Fathers: A Profile-oriented Approach.” Psychology of Men & Masculinity 16(1):11–22. Cordoni, Giada, Elisa Demunu, Enrico Ceccarelli, and Elisabetta. 2016. “Play, Aggressive Conflict and Reconciliation in Pre-School Children: What Matters?” Behavior 153(9–11):1075–1102. Corichi, Manolo, and Jonathan Evans. 2019. “Many Catholics in Latin America—Including a Majority in Brazil—Support Allowing Priests to Marry.” Pew Research Center. December  20. https:// www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/12/20/many-catholics-in-latin-america-including-a-majorityin-brazil-support-allowing-priests-to-marry/ Corona, Karina, Belinda Campos, and Chuansheng Chen. 2017. “Familism is Associated with Psychological Well-Being and Physical Health: Main Effects and Stress-Buffering Effects.” Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences 39(1):46–65. Corrington, Abby, and Michelle Hebl. 2018. “America Clearly is Not Ready for a Female President: Why?” Equality, Diversity, and Inclusion 37(1):31–43. Cortes, Laura R., Carla D. Cisternas, and Nancy G. Forger. 2019. “Does Gender Leave an Epigenetic Imprint on the Brain?” Frontiers in Neuroscience. 13:173. February  27. https://www.frontiersin.org/ articles/10.3389/fnins.2019.00173/full Cottingham, Marci D., Austin H. Johnson, and Rebecca J. Erickson. 2017. “’I Can Never Be Too Comfortable’: Race, Gender, and Emotion at the Hospital Bedside.” Qualitative Health Research 28(1):145–158. Courtney, Alice E., and Sarah Wernick Lockeretz. 1971. “A Woman’s Place: An Analysis of the Roles Portrayed by Women in Magazine Advertisements.” Journal of Marketing Research 8:92. Courtney, Alice E., and Thomas W. Whipple. 1983. Sex Stereotyping in Advertising. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books. Cowan, Benjamin Arthur. 2017. “How Machismo Got Its Spurs—in English: Social Science, Cold War Imperialism, and the Ethnicization of Hypermasculinity.” Latin American Research Review 52(4):606–622.

628 References Coyne, Sarah M., Jennifer Ruh Linder, Eric E. Rasmussen et al. 2016. “Pretty as a Princess: Longitudinal Effects of Engagement with Disney Princesses on Gender Stereotypes, Body Esteem, and Prosocial Behavior.” Child Development 87(6):1909–1925. Craft, Justin T., Kelly E. Wright, Rachel Elizabeth Weissler, and Robin M. Queen. 2020. “Language and Discrimination: Generating Meaning, Perceiving Identities, and Discriminating Outcomes.” Annual Review of Linguistics 6:389–407. Cragun, Ryan T., Stephen M. Merino, Michael Nielsen et al. 2016. “Predictors of Opposition to and Support for the Ordination of Women: Insights from the LDS Church.” Mental Health, Religion  & Culture 19(2):124–137. Craig, Holly K., Jeffrey T. Grogger, Janna Oetting, and Diane Loeb. 2012. “Influence of Social and Style Variables on Adult Usage of African American English Features.” Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research 55(5):1274–1288. Craig, Lyn, and Janeen Baxter. 2016. “Domestic Outsourcing, Housework Shares and Subjective Time Pressure: Gender Differences in the Correlates of Hiring Help.” Social Indicators Research 125(1):271–288. Craney, Raquel D., Laurel B. Watson, Jenna Brownfield, and Mirella J. Flores. 2018. “Bisexual Women’s Discriminatory Experiences and Psychological Distress: Exploring the Roles of Coping and LGBTQ Community Connectedness.” Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity 5(3):324–337. Cranford, Alexandra. 2018. “Women Weathercasters: Their Positions, Education, and Presence in Local TV.” Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 99(2):281–288. Crary, David. 2018a. “Women Priests? Some Catholics Say that after Sex Abuse Scandal, It’s about Time.” August  23. Morning Call. https://www.mcall.com/news/breaking/mc-nws-clergy-sex-abuse-womenpriests-20180823-story.html Crary, David. 2018b. “Advocates of Female Priests Cite Scandals to Make their Case.” August 23. https:// www.nbcconnecticut.com/news/national-international/Advocates-Female-Priests-Scandals-491521071. html Crenshaw, Kimberlé Williams. 1989. “Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics.” University of Chicago Legal Forum 1: Article 8. https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1052&context=uclf Crenshaw, Kimberlé Williams. 1991. “Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence against Women of Color.” Stanford Law Review 43(6);1241–1299. Cross, Christina J., Linda M. Chatters, Robert Joseph Taylor, and Ann W. Nguyễn. 2018. “Instrumental Social Support Exchanges in African American Extended Families.” Journal of Family Issues 39(13):3535–3563. Crowley, Jocelyn Elise. 2018. “Incomplete Role Exit and the Alimony Reform Movement.” Sociological Inquiry 88(1):32–55. Cruz, Jamie Santa. 2019. “Sex and the Older Adult.” Today’s Geriatric Medicine September/October:12–15. Cui, M., C.A. Darling, C. Coccia et al. 2019. “Indulgent Parenting, Helicopter Parenting, and Well-being of Parents and Emerging Adults.” Journal of Child and Family Studies 28(3):860–871. Cullinane, Susannah, and Madison Park. 2018. “Abuse Allegations Have Been Leveled at the Catholic Church for Decades.” CNN. August 21. https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/21/world/catholic-church-abuse-scandal-timeline/index.html Cummins, Denise. 2015. “The Truth about Children of Working Mothers: Media Reports Have Not Told the Whole Story.” Psychology Today. May  19. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/ good-thinking/201505/the-truth-about-children-working-mothers Cunningham, Katherine C., Stephanie T. LoSavio, Paul A. Dennis et al. 2019. “Shame as a Mediator between Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Symptoms and Suicidal Ideation among Veterans.” Journal of Affective Disorders 243:216–219. Cunningham, Mick. 2007. “Influences of Women’s Employment on the Gendered Division of Household Labor over the Life Course: Evidence from a 31 year panel study.” Journal of Family Issues 28(3):422–44.

References  629 Cuordileone, Kyle A. 2012. Manhood and American Political Culture in the Cold War. Hoboken, NJ: Routledge. Curenton, Stephanie M., Jocelyn Elise Crowley, and Dawne M., Mouzon. 2018. “Qualitative Descriptions of Middle-Class, African American Mothers’ Child-Rearing Practices and Values.” Journal of Family Issues 39(4):868–895. Cutas, Daniela E., and Simona Giordano. 2013. “Is it a Boy or a Girl? Who Should (not) Know Children’s Sex and Why?” Journal of Medical Ethics 39(6):474–477. Cuthbert, Karen. 2019. ‘When We Talk about Gender We Talk about Sex’: (A)Sexuality and (A)Gendered Subjectivities.” Gender & Society 33(6):841–864. CWSEM. 2019. “Women in Science and Engineering Statistics.” Committee on Women in Science, Engineering, and Medicine. http://sites.nationalacademies.org/pga/cwsem/PGA_049131 Dahrendorf, Ralf. 1959. Class and Class Conflict in Industrial Society. Stanford, CA: Stanford University. Dailey, Anne C., and Laura A. Rosenbury. 2018. “The New Law of the Child.” Yale Law Journal 127(6):1448–1537. Dal Pesco, Frederica, and Julia Fischer, 2018. “Greetings in Male Guinea Baboons and the Function of Rituals in Complex Social Groups.” Journal of Human Evolution 125:87–98. Dale, Maryclaire, and Joceyln Noveck. 2020. “Poll: Most Support ERA.” St.  Louis Post-Dispatch. February 25:A11. Dale, Maryclaire. 2019. “Congresswoman’s Exit Prompts Question of Equity Amid Scandal.” U.S. News and World Report. October  28. https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2019-10-28/ congresswomans-exit-prompts-question-of-equity-amid-scandal Dalton, Emma. 2017. “Womenomics, ‘Equality’ and Abe’s Neo-liberal Strategy to Make Japanese Women Shine.” Social Science Japan Journal 20 (1):95–105. Daly, Mary. 1991. “I Thank Thee, Lord, That Thou Has Not Created Me A Woman.” In The Gender Reader, edited by Evelyn Ashton-Jones and Gary Olson. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Daly, Natasha. 2017. “Girls, Boys, Gendered Toys.” National Geographic 231(1):17. Damour, Lisa. 2017. Untangled: Guiding Teenage Girls Through the Seven Transitions into Adulthood. New York: Penguin Random House. Damour, Lisa. 2019. “Why Girls Beat Boys at School and Lose to Them at the Office.” New York Times. February 7. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/07/opinion/sunday/girls-school-confidence.html Danilova, Maria. 2019, “Women’s Rights Backlash? Men’s Group Say Colleges Discriminate.” St.  Louis Post-Dispatch. November 19:A1, A4. Danube, Cinnamon L., Jeanette Norris Kelly, Cue Davis et al. 2016. “Partner Type, Sexual Double Standard Endorsement, and Ambivalence Predict Abdication and Unprotected Sex Intentions in a Community Sample of Young Women.” Journal of Sex Research 53(4–5):601–13. Dargis, Manohla. 2018. “What the Movies Taught Me about Being a Woman.” New York Times. November 30. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/11/30/movies/women-in-movies.html Darrah, Petrina. 2019. “Keeping Girls in School: Contributing to Gender Equity in India through Education.” https:// www.gvi.co.uk/blog/keeping-girls-in-school-contributing-to-gender-equality-in-india-through-education/ Dastagir, Alia E. 2019. “10  years after Abortion Doctor George Tiller’s Murder, Advocates Fear Violent Rhetoric.” USA Today. May  31. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/05/31/ george-tillers-murder-abortion-rights-advocates-worry-10-years-later/1300017001/ Daubert, Melissa A., and Pamela S. Douglas. 2019. “Primary Prevention of Heart Failure in Women.” Heart Failure 7(3):181–191. Daughrity, Dyron B. 2015. To Whom Does Christianity Belong? Critical Issues on World Christianity. Minneapolis: Fortress Press. Davidenko, Maria. 2019a. “The Ambiguities of Self-Governance: Russian Middle-Aged Middle-Class Women’s Reflections on Ageing.” Aging & Society 39(3):609–628.

630 References Davidenko, Maria. 2019b. “Searching for Lost Femininity: Russian Middle-Aged Women’s Participation in the Post-Soviet Consumer Culture.” Journal of Consumer Culture 19(2):169–188. Davidson, Maria del Guadalupe. 2018. “Black Women’s Bodies, Ideology, and the Public Curriculum of the Pro- and Anti-Choice Movements in the US.” Gender and Education 30(3):310–321. Davis, Ashlee W., Ronald F. Levant, and Shana Pryor. 2018. “Traditional Femininity versus Strong Black Women Ideologies and Stress among Black Women.” Journal of Black Studies 49(8):820–841. Davis, Deseta, 2016. “The Use of Patriarchal Language in the Church of God of Prophecy: A Case Study.” Black Theology 14(3):252–276. Davis, Elizabeth Gould. 1971. The First Sex. New York: Penguin Books. Davis, Shannon N., and Barbara J. Risman. 2015. “Feminists Wrestle with Testosterone: Hormones, Socialization, and Cultural Interactionism as Predictors of Women’s Gendered Selves.” Social Science Research 49:110–125. Dawsey, Josh, and Felicia Sonmez. 2018. “Trump Mocks Kavanaugh Accuser Christine Blasey Ford.” Washington Post. October 2. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-mocks-kavanaugh-accuser-christine-blasey-ford/2018/10/02/25f6f8aa-c662-11e8-9b1c-a90f1daae309_story.html Dawson, Greg. 1992. “An Overlooked Aspect of Thomas-Hill Drama.” Orlando Sentinel. October  12. https://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/os-xpm-1992-10-12-9210100387-story.html Day, Jennifer Cheeseman. 2018. “Number of Women Lawyers at Record High but Men Still Highest Earners; More than 1 in 3 Lawyers are Women.” U.S. Census Bureau. May 8. https://www.census.gov/library/ stories/2018/05/women-lawyers.html Day, M.J. 2019. “Fresh Looks.” Sports Illustrated 130(11/12):8–9. Dayton, Carolyn Joy, and Johanna C. Malone. 2017. “Development and Socialization of Physical Aggression in Very Young Boys.” Infant Mental health Journal 38(1):150–165. Dayton, Carolyn Joy, Raelynn Buczkowski, Maria Muzik, Jessica Goletz et  al. 2016. “Expectant Fathers’ Beliefs and Expectations about Fathering as They Prepare to Parent a New Infant.” Social Work Research 40(4):225–236. Dayton, Corelia H., and Lisa Levenstein. 2012. “The Big Tent of U.S. Women’s and Gender History: A State of the Field.” Journal of American History 99(3):793–817. de Beauvoir, Simone. 1953. The Second Sex (First U.S. edition). H. M. Parshey (trans.). New York: Knopf De Benedictis, Sara, Shani Orgad, and Catherine Rottenberg. 2019. “#MeToo, Popular Feminism and the News: A  Content Analysis of UK Newspaper Coverage.” European Journal of Cultural Studies 22 (5/6):718–738. De Hart, Jane Sherron, and Linda K. Kerber. 2003. “Introduction: Gender and the New Women’s History.” In Women’s America: Refocusing the Past, edited by Linda K. Kerber and Jane Sherron De Hart. New York: Oxford University Press. De St. Croix, Geoffrey. 1993. “The Class Struggle in the Ancient Greek World.” In Women’s Studies Essential Readings, edited by Stevi Jackson et al. New York: New York University Press. Deb, Basuli. 2016. “Cutting across Imperial Feminisms toward Transnational Feminist Solidarities.” Meridians: Feminism, Race, Transnationalism 13(2):164–188. Degner, Juliane, and Jonas Dalege. 2013. “The Apple Does not Fall Far from the Tree, or Does It? A Meta-analysis of Parent-Child Similarity in Intergroup Attitudes.” Psychological Bulletin 139(6): 1270–1304. Degol, Jessica L., Ming-te Wang, Ya Zhang, and Julie Allerton. 2018. “Do Growth Mindsets in math Benefit Females? Identifying Pathways between Gender, Mindset, and Motivation.” Journal of Youth and Adolescence 47(5):976–990. Delfin, Annabelle Black. 2019. “Subversive Spaces and Gendered Geographies in Early Childhood Classrooms in the American Southwest.” Gender, Place, and Culture 26(6):909–913. Delicate, Amy, Susan Ayers, and Sarah McMullen. 2018. “A Systematic Review and Meta-Synthesis of the Impact of Becoming Parents on the Couple Relationship.” Midwifery 61:88–96.

References  631 Deloe, Michael. 2019. “College is Starting Again, and with it the Threat of Camus Sexual Assault.” NBC News. September 2. https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/college-starting-again-it-threat-campussexual-assault-lawyer-offers-ncna1048511 DelPriore, Danielle J., Randi Proffitt Leyva, Bruce J. Ellis, and Sarah E. Hill. 2018. “The Effects of Paternal Disengagement on Women’s Perceptions of Male Mating Intent.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 114(2):286–302. Denejkina, Anna. 2018. “In Russia, Feminist Memes Buy Jail Time, but Domestic Abuse Doesn’t: A Year After the Country Decriminalized Domestic Violence, Women Feel the Consequences.” Foreign Policy. November 15. https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/11/15/in-russia-feminist-memes-buy-jail-time-but-domesticabuse-doesnt/ Denisova, Anastasia, and Aliaksandr Herasimenka. 2019. “How Russian Rap on YouTube Advances Alternative Political Deliberation: Hegemony, Counter-Hegemony, and Emerging Resistant Publics.” Social Media + Society 5(2):1–11. Dennison, Christopher R. 2019. “Gender Differences in the Criminogenic Consequences Associated with Intergenerational Educational Mobility.” American Journal of Criminal Justice 44(2):248–276. Denyer, Simon, and Annie Gowan. 2018. “Too Many Men.” Washington Post. April 18. https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/world/too-many-men/?utm_term=.dc561648600f DePaulo, Bella. 2018. “There’s Never Been a Better Time to be Single.“ The Cut, CNN. March 9. https:// www.cnn.com/2018/01/05/health/single-people-partner/index.html Dergousoff, Deborah. 2019. “Rural Women’s Encounter with Economic Development in Kyrgyzstan.” Pp. 415–423 in Women of Asia: Globalization, Development and Gender Equity, edited by Mehrangiz Najafizadeh and Linda L. Lindsey. New York and London: Routledge. Derlan, Chelsea L., Adriana J. Umaña-Taylor, Laudan B. Jahromi, and Kimberley A. Updegraff. 2018. “Cultural Socialization Attitudes and Behaviors: Examining Mothers’ Centrality, Discrimination Experiences, and Children’s Effortful Control as Moderators.” Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology 24(2):162–172. Despeux, Catherine, and Livia Kohn. 2003. Women in Daoism. Cambridge, MA: Three Pines. Deutscher, Irwin and Linda Lindsey. 2005. Preventing Ethnic Conflict: Successful Cross-National Strategies. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. Devens, Carol. 1996. “Resistance to Christianity by the native women of New France.” In Major Problems in American Women’s History, edited by Mary Beth Norton and Ruth M. Alexander. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath. Dholakia, Nikhilesh, and Ian Reyes. 2018. “Media, Markets, and Violence.” Journal of Marketing Management 34(11–12):1032–1047. Diamond, Jeremy, and Kevin Liptak. 2020. “Trump Reverts to Stereotypes as Campaign Fumbles to Respond to Harris Pick.” CNN. August 12. https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/11/politics/donald-trump-kamalaharris-2020-campaign/index.html Diamond, Milton. 1982. “Sexual Iidentity, Monozygotic Twins Reared in Discordant Sex Roles and a BBC Follow-up.” Archives of Sexual Behavior 11:181–186. Diamond, Milton, and H.K. Sigmundson. 1997. “Management of Intersexuality: Guidelines for Dealing with People with Ambiguous Genitalia.” Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine 151:1046–1050. Dias, Andrew, Ivan J. Núñez Gil, Francesco Santoro et  al. 2019. “Takotsubo Syndrome: State-of-the-Art Review by an Expert Panel—Part 1.” Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine 20(1):70–79. Diaz, Elena. 2018. “Women in Current Cuba: A Balance between Gains Made and Continuing Challenges’ ” Humanity & Society 43(1):43–55. Diaz, Tanya, and Ngoc H. Bui. 2017. “Subjective Well-Being in Mexican and Mexican American Women: The Role of Acculturation, Ethnic Identity, Gender Roles, and Perceived Social Support.” Journal of Happiness Studies 18:607–624.

632 References Díaz-Muñoz, Samuel L., Emily H. Duval, Alan H. Krakauer, and Eileen A. Lacey. 2014. “Cooperating to Compete: Altruism, Sexual Selection and Causes of Male Reproductive Cooperation.” Animal Behavior 88:67–78. Dickel Dunn, Cynthia. 2013. “Speaking Politely, Kindly, and Beautifully: Ideologies of Politeness in Japanese Business Etiquette Training.” Multilingua 32(2):225–245. Dickler, Jessica. 2019. “Equal Pay Day Highlights a $1 Million Salary Shortfall for Some Women.” CNBC. April 2. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/02/the-gender-pay-gap-can-add-up-to-a-1-million-shortfall.html Dickman, Nathan Eric. 2018. “Feminisms and Challenges to Institutionalized Philosophy of Religion.” Religions 9(4):113–134. Dill, Janette S., Kim Price-Glynn, and Carter Rakovski. 2016. “Does the ‘Glass Escalator’ Compensate for the Devaluation of Care Work Occupations?: The Careers of Men in Low- and Middle-Skill Health Care Jobs.” Gender & Society 30(2):334–360. Dillon, Frank R., Austin Eklund, Ryan Ebersole, Melissa M. Ertl et al. 2019. “Heterosexual Self-Presentation and Other Individual- and Community-Based Correlates of HIV Testing among Latino Men Who Have Sex with Men.” Psychology of Men & Masculinities 20(2):238–251. Dillon, Frank R., Melissa M. Ertl, Michael Verile, Nusrat Siraj et al. 2018. “A Social Ecological Study of Psychological Distress among Recently Immigrated, Latina Young Adults.” Journal of Latinx Psychology 7(1):39–58. Diluzio, Meghan J. 2016. A Place at the Altar: Priestesses in Republican Rome. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Di-Meco, Lucina. 2019. “Why Female Leadership is What the Climate Justice Movement Needs.” Ms. July 19. https://msmagazine.com/2019/07/19/why-female-leadership-is-what-the-climate-justice-movement-needs/ Dinella, Lisa M. 2017. “Halloween Costume Choices: Reflections of Gender Development in Early Childhood.” Journal of Genetic Psychology 178(3):165–178. Dinella, Lisa M., Erica S. Weisgram, and Megan Fulcher. 2017a. “Children’s Gender-Typed Toy Interests: Does Propulsion Matter?” Archives of Sexual Behavior 46(5):1295–1305. Dinella, Lisa M., Juliana M. Claps, and Gary W. Lewandowski Jr. 2017b. “Princesses, Princes, and Superheroes: Children’s Gender Cognitions and Fictional Characters.” Journal of Genetic Psychology 178(5):262–280. Direnberger, Lucia. 2019. “Tradition, Islam, and the State. International Organizations and the Prevention of Violence against Women in Tajikistan.” Pp. 403–414 in Women of Asia: Globalization, Development and Gender Equity, edited by Mehrangiz Najafizadeh and Linda L. Lindsey. New York and London: Routledge. Dittmar, Kelly. 2020. “A  Woman Can Win the Presidency. Here are the Receipts.” Center for American Women in Politics. January 14. https://www.cawp.rutgers.edu/election-analysis/woman-can-win DiVerniero, Rebecca, and Diana Breshears. 2017. “Verbal and Emotional Responses among Children of Lesbian and Gay Parents’ Coming Out.” Qualitative Research Reports in Communication 18(1):45–53. Dobson, Kiersten, Lorne Campbell, and Sarah C.E. Stanton. 2018. “Are You Coming on to Me? Bias and Accuracy in Couples’ Perceptions of Sexual Advances.” Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 35(4): 460–484. Dolan, Andy. 2019. “Widow, 93, Dies of Broken Heart after Burglars Ransack Home.” Daily Mail. August 24. https://www.pressreader.com/uk/daily-mail/20190823/281831465389210 Dolan, Mara. 2020. “How Young Feminists are Re-Imagining the Climate Conversation.” Ms. September 24. https://msmagazine.com/2020/09/24/how-young-feminists-are-re-imagining-the-climate-conversation/ Doniger, Wendy. 2014. On Hinduism. Oxford, NY: Oxford University Press. Donnelly, Matt. 2019. “Guerrilla Girls Return After 20 Years To Remind You Hollywood Is Still Terrible For Women Directors.” Variety. February 5. https://variety.com/2019/film/news/guerrilla-girls-return-womendirectors-1203128263/ Donovan, Brian M., Molly A.M. Stuhlsatz, Daniel C. Edelson et al. 2019. “Gendered Genetics: How Reading about the Genetic Basis of Sex Differences in Biology Textbooks Could Affect Beliefs Associated with Science Gender Disparities.” Science Education 103(4):719–749. Döring N., K. Daneback, K. Shaughnessy, C. Grov, and E.S. Byers. 2017. “Online Sexual Activity Experiences among College Students: A Four-Country Comparison.” Archives of Sexual Behavior 46(6):1641–1652.

References  633 Dorsey, Leroy G. 2013. “Managing Women’s Equality: Theodore Roosevelt, the Frontier Myth and the Modern Woman.” Rhetoric and Public Affairs 16(3):423–56. Doucet, Andrea. 2016. “Is the Stay-At-Home Dads (SAHD) a Feminist Concept? A Genealogical, Relational, and Feminist Critique.” Sex Roles 75:4–14. Douglas, Karen M., and Robbie M. Sutton. 2014. “ ‘A Giant Leap for Mankind,’ but What about Women? The Role of System-Justifying Ideologies in Predicting Attitudes toward Sexist Language.” Journal of Language and Social Psychology 33(6):667–680. Douglas, Susan J, and Meredith W. Michaels. 2009. “The New Momism.” Pp. 235–247 in Reconstructing Gender: A Multicultural Anthology, edited by Estelle Disch. New York: McGraw-Hill. Downing, Martin J., and Eric W. Schrimshaw. 2014. “Self-Presentation, Desired Partner Characteristics, and Sexual Behavior Preferences in Online Personal Advertisements of Men Seeking Non-Gay-Identified Men.” Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity 1(1):30–33. Drapeau, Sylvie, Amandine Baude, Jerôme Ouelletat, Elisabeth Godbout et  al. 2017. “Relations between Postdivorce Custody Arrangements, Family Contexts, and Children’s Adjustment.” Journal of Child Custody 14(1):11–33. Drentea, Patricia, and Sarah Ballard. 2017. “How College Students Perceive Men’s and Women’s Advantages and Disadvantages Surrounding Work and Family Issues.” Advances in Gender Research 23:49–70. Dresden, Brooke E., Alexander Y. Dresden, Robert D. Ridge, and Niwako Yamawaki. 2018. “No Girls Allowed: Women in Male-Dominated Majors Experience Increased Gender Harassment and Bias.” Psychological Reports 12(3):459–474. Dua, Priya. 2008. “The Impact of Gender Characteristics on Mentoring in Graduate Departments of Sociology.” American Sociologist 39(4):307–323. Dua, Priya. 2011. “Petals Falling off A Rose: The Effect of Hair Loss on Women’s Identity Performances.” Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Missouri-Columbia. Duan, Noel Siqi. 2016. “Policing Beyoncé’s Body: ‘Whose Body is this Anyway’?” Pp. 55–74 in The Beyoncé Effect: Essays on Sexuality, Race and Feminism, edited by Adrienne Trier-Bieniek. Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company. Dukhanova, Diana. 2018. “Perspectives: Russia’s Abortion Debate Highlights Limit to Church-State Partnership.” Eurasianet. November  5. https://eurasianet.org/perspectives-russias-abortion-debate-highlightslimit-to-church-state-partnership Dunak, Karen M. 2013. As Long as We Both Shall Love. New York: New York University Press. Duncan, Simon. 2015. “Women’s Agency in Living Apart Together: Constraint, Strategy, and Vulnerability.” Sociological Review 68:589–607. Duncan, Steven G, Gabrielle Aguilar, Cole G. Jensen, and Brianna M. Magnusson. 2019. “Survey of Heteronormative Attitudes and Tolerance toward Gender Non-conformity in Mountain West Undergraduate Students.” Frontiers in Psychology April 11. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00793/full Duncombe, Jean, Kaeren Harrison, Graham Allan, and Dennis Marsden (eds.). 2004. State of Affairs: Explorations in Infidelity and Commitment. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Duquaine-Watson, Jillian M. 2017. Mothering by Degrees: Single Mothers and the Pursuit of Postsecondary Education. New Brunswick NJ: Rutgers University Press. Dustmann, Christian, Hyejin Ku, and Do Won Kwak. 2019. “Why are Single-Sex Schools Successful?” Labour Economics 54:79–99. Duvander, Ann-Zofie, Trude Lappegård, Synøve N. Andersen et al. 2019. “Parental Leave Policies and Continued Childbearing in Iceland, Norway, and Sweden.” Demographic Research 40:1501–1528. Duxbury, Linda, Maggie Stevenson, and Christopher Higgins. 2018. “Too Much to Do, Too Little Time: Role Overload and Stress in a Multi-Role Environment.” International Journal of Stress Management 25(3):250–266. Duxbury, Scott W., Laura C. Frizzell, and Sadé L. Lindsay. 2018. “Mental Illness, the Media, and the Moral Politics of Mass Violence.” Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency 55(6):766–797.

634 References Dzuback, Mary Ann. 2016. “WashU Expert: Gender. Power, and the Presidency: Mary Ann Dzuback on the 2016 Campaign.” Cited in The Source by Liam Otten. Washington University. November 4. https:// source.wustl.edu/2016/11/washu-expert-gender-power-presidency/ Eagly, Alice H. Christa Nater, David I. Miller et al. 2019. “Gender Stereotypes Have Changed: A Cross-Temporal Meta-Analysis of U.S. Public Opinion Polls from 1946 to 2018.” American Psychologist July 18:1– 15. https://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/amp-amp0000494.pdf Earenfight, Theresa. 2013. Queenship in Medieval Europe. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. Eargle, Lisa A., Ashraf M. Esmail, and Jas M. Sullivan. 2008. “Voting the Issues or Voting the Demographics? The Media’s Construction of Political Candidates’ Credibility.” Race, Gender and Class 15(2/4):8–31. Eastwick, Paul W., K. Paige Harden, Jennifer A. Shukusky, Taylor Anne Morgan, and Samantha Joel. 2017. “Consistency and Inconsistency among Romantic Partners Over Time.” Journal of Personality and Group Processes 112(6):838–859. Eaton, Asia A., and Susanne M. Rose. 2011. “Has Dating become More Egalitarian? A  35  year Review Using Sex Roles.” Sex Roles 64(11/12):843–862. Eaton, Asia A., and Susanne M. Rose. 2012. “Scripts for Actual First Date and Hanging-Out Encounters among Young Heterosexual Hispanic Adults.” Sex Roles 67(5/6):285–299. Ebbers, Ilona, and Alan Piper. 2017. “Satisfactions Comparisons: Women with Families, Full-Time and PartTime Self-Employed.” International Journal of Gender & Entrepreneurship 9(2):171–187. Ebel, Francesca. 2019. “In Russia, Gender Equality Still a Long Way Off.” Associated Press. March  8. https://www.apnews.com/70499d77d5bd4ea3b4462d32907420d4 Ebisike, Norbert. 2018. “Control, Crime and Culture: Rap Lyrics and Videos as Criminal Evidence.” Journal of Law and Social Deviance 16:52–92. Ebrey, Patricia. 2018. “Women in Traditional China.” Asia Society. https://asiasociety.org/education/ women-traditional-china Eckert, Penelope, and Sally McConnell-Ginet. 2013. Language and Gender. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Eckhaus, Eyal, and Batia Ben-Hador. 2018. “To Gossip or Not to Gossip: Reactions to a Perceived Request to Gossip: A Qualitative Study.” Trames Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences 22(3):273–288. Eckhaus, Eyal, and Batia Ben-Hador. 2019. “Gossip and Gender Differences: A Content Analysis Approach.” Journal of Gender Studies 28(1):97–108. Economist. 2001. “Third Person Singular: Finding Substitutes for ‘He’ and ‘His.’ ” April 14:20. Economist. 2018. “The Law of Unintended Consequences: Fertility.” July 28. 428(9102):32. Edin, Kathryn, and Maria Kefalas. 2011. Promises I Can Keep: Why Poor Women Put Motherhood Before Marriage. Oakland, CA: University of California Press. Edwards, Tai S. 2018. Osage Women and Empire: Gender and Power. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas. Edwards, Tim. 2006. Cultures of Masculinities. London and New York: Routledge. Ehrlich, J. Shoshanna. 2018. “ ‘Like a Withered Tree, Stripped of its Foliage’: What the Roe Court Missed and Why it Matters.” Columbia Journal of Gender and Law 35(2):175–227. Ehrlich, Susan, Miriam Meyerhoff, and Janel Homes (eds.). 2014. The Handbook of Language, Gender, and Sexuality. Chichester, UK: Wiley Blackwell. Ehrlinger, Joyce, Ashby E. Plant, Marissa K. Hartwig et  al. 2018. “Do Gender Differences in Perceived Prototypical Computer Scientists and Engineers Contribute to Gender Gaps in Computer Science and Engineering?” Sex Roles 78(1–2):40–51. Eidelson, Josh, 2012. “Documents Undermine Walmart Account on Deadly Bangladesh Fire.” Nation. December 6. https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/documents-undermine-walmart-account-deadlybangladesh-fire/ Eirich, Gregory M., and Joan H. Robinson. 2017. “Does Earning More Than Your Spouse Increase Your Financial Satisfaction? A Comparison of Men and Women in the United States, 1982 to 2012.” Journal of Family Issues 38(17):2371–2399.

References  635 Eisend, Martin. 2019. “Gender Roles.” Journal of Advertising 48(1):72–80. Eisler, Riane Tennenhaus. 1995a. The Chalice and the Blade: Our History, Our Future. San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco. Eisler, Riane Tennenhaus. 1995b. Sacred Pleasure: Sex, Myth, and the Politics of the Body. San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco. Ekbrand, Hans, and Björn Halleröd. 2018. The More Gender Equity, The Less Child Poverty? A Multilevel Analysis of Malnutrition and Health Deprivation in 49 Low- And Middle-Income Countries.” World Development 108:221–230. Ekmanis, Indra. “After Decades in the Shadows, Russia’s Feminists Grab their Spotlight.” Public Radio International. June 5. https://www.pri.org/stories/2019-06-05/after-decades-shadows-russias-feminists-grabtheir-spotlight Elboubekri, Abdellah, 2015. “Is Patriarchy an Islamic Legacy? A Reflection on Fatima Mernissi’s Dreams of Trespass and Najat El Hachmi’s The Last Patriarch.” Journal of Multicultural Discourses 10(1):25–48. el-Husseini, Rola. 2016. “Is Gender the Barrier to Democracy? Women, Islamism, and the ‘Arab Spring’.” Contemporary Islam 10(1):53–66. Elliott, Karla. 2016. “Caring Masculinities.” Men & Masculinities 19(3):240–259. Ellis, Myddryn, and Peggy J. Kleinplatz. 2018. “How Contingencies of Self-worth Influence Reactions to Emotional and Sexual Infidelity.” Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality 27(1):43–54. Elmer, Peter. 2016. Witchcraft, Witch-Hunting, and Politics in Early Modern England. New York: Oxford University Press. Elsaid, Eahab. 2017. “Re-examining the Glass Cliff Hypothesis Using Survival Analysis: The Case of Female CEO Tenure.” British Journal of Management 29:156–170. Elsesser, Kim. 2018. “Female Lawyers Face Widespread Gender Bias, According to New Study.” Forbes. October 1. https://www.forbes.com/sites/kimelsesser/2018/10/01/female-lawyers-face-widespreadgender-bias-according-to-new-study/#2154073e4b55 Ely, Gretchen E., Travis W. Hales, D. Lynn Jackson et al., 2018. “Access to Choice: Examining Differences between Adolescent and Adult Abortion Fund Service Recipients.” Health and Social Care in the Community 26(5):695–704. Ely, Robin J, and Debra Meyerson. 2008. “Unmasking Manly Men.” Harvard Business Review July–August:20. Eme, Robert. 2018. “Sex Differences in Temperament: A  Partial Explanation for the Sex Difference in the Prevalence of Serious Antisocial Behaviors.” Aggression and Violent Behavior 40:101–107. Emery, Jacqueline (ed.). 2017. Recovering Native American Writings in the Boarding School Press. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press. Emanuel, Daniella. 2019. “Raising an Intersex Child: This Is Your Body … There’s Nothing to be Ashamed of.” CNN. April 15. https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/13/health/intersex-child-parenting-eprise/index.html Emmerink, Peggy M. J., Regina J. J. M. van den Eijnden, Ine Vanwesenbeeck, and Tom F.M. ter Bogt. 2016. “The Relationship between Endorsement of the Sexual Double Standard and Sexual Cognitions and Emotions.” Sex Roles 75(7–8):363–376. Endendijk, Joyce J., Belle Derks, and Judi Mesman. 2018. “Does Parenthood Change Implicit Gender-Role Stereotypes and Behaviors?” Journal of Marriage and Family 80(1):61–79. Endendijk, Joyce J., Marleen G. Groeneveld, Lotte D. van der Pol et al. 2017. “Gender Differences in Child Aggression: Relations with Gender-Differentiated Parenting and Parents’ Gender-Role Stereotypes.” Child Development 88(1): 299–316. Endendijk, Joyce J., Marleen G. Groeneveld, Marian J. Bakermans-Kranenburg, and Judi Mesman. 2016. “Gender-Differentiated Parenting Revisited: Meta-Analysis Reveals Very Few Differences in Parental Control of Boys and Girls.” PLOS ONE. July 14:33 pages. Endo, Orie, and Janet S. Shibamato Smith. 2004. “Women and Words: The Status f Sexist Language in Japan as Seen Through Contemporary Definitions and Media Discourse.” Pp. 166–186 in Japanese Language, Gender, and Ideology: Cultural Models and Real People, edited by Shigeko Okamato and Janet S. Shibamoto Smith. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

636 References Engels, Friedrich. 1884/1942. The Origin of the Family, Private Property, and the State. Alick West (trans.). New York: International. England, Paula. 2012. “Has the Surplus of Women over Men Driven the Increase in Premarital and Casual Sex among American Young Adults?” Society 49(6):512–514. English, Nancy. 1988. An Assessment of Inservice Elementary Teachers’ Math Anxiety and its Relationship to Teachers’ Attitudes, both Sex-Related and Not, toward the Study and Teaching of Mathematics. PhD Dissertation, St. Louis University. Engström, Heléne Appelgren, Häggström-Nordin Elisabet, Catrin . Borneskog, and Anna-Lena . Almqvist. 2019. “Mothers in Same-Sex Relationships-Striving for Equal Parenthood: A Grounded Theory Study.” Journal of Clinical Nursing 28(19–20):3700–3709. Enten, Harry. “A  Historic Gender Gap is Possible in 2020.” CNN. December  29. https://www.cnn. com/2019/12/27/politics/gender-gap-2020-election/index.html Epstein, Deborah, and Lisa A. Goodman. 2019. “Discounting Women: Doubting Domestic Violence Survivors’ Credibility and Dismissing Their Experiences.” University of Pennsylvania Law Review 167:399–461. ERA. 2020. “Frequently Asked Questions.” Equal Rights Amendment. https://www.equalrightsamendment.org/faq Erdely, Sabrina Rubin. 2013. “About a Girl.” Rolling Stone November 7:58–65. Erdmans, Mary Patrice, and Timothy Black. 2015. On Becoming a Teen Mom: Life Before Pregnancy. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. ESPN. 2013. “Saints Bounty Scandal.” February 26. http://www.espn.com/nfl/topics/_/page/new-orleanssaints-bounty-scandal Esposito, Lisa. 2017. “Ageism in Top TV Shows May Affect Seniors’ Well-Being.” U.S. News and World Report. October 18. https://health.usnews.com/wellness/articles/2017-10-18/ageism-in-top-tv-shows-may-affectseniors-well-being Esposito, Nora. 2019. “Small Business Facts: Spotlight on Women-Owned Employer Businesses.” Small Business Administration. March. https://s3.amazonaws.com/advocacy-prod.sba.fun/wp-content/uploads/2019/ 03/22170128/Small-Business-Facts-Spotlight-on-Women-Owned-Employer-Businesses.pdf Essien, Idara. 2017. “Teaching Black Boys in Early Childhood Education: Promising Practices from Exemplar Teachers.” Journal of African American Males in Education 8(2):5–21. Etsy, Katherine. 2014. “The Impact of Microcredit on Women’s Lives in Bangladesh.” Global Citizen. January 6. https://www.globalcitizen.org/en/content/the-impact-of-microcredit-on-womens-lives-in-bangl/ Evans, Elizabeth. 2015a. The Politics of Third Wave Feminisms: Neoliberalism, Intersectionality, and the State in Britain and the US. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. Evans, Elizabeth. 2015b. “What Makes a Third Wave? How and Why the Third-Wave Narrative Works for Contemporary Feminists.” International Feminist Journal of Politics 18(3):409–428. Evans, Kiah L., Jeannine Millsteed, Janet E. Richmond et al., 2016. “Working Sandwich Generation Women Utilize Strategies within and between Roles to Achieve Role Balance.” PLOS ONE 11(6):e0157469. Evans, Sara. 2000. “The First American Women.” Pp.  30–38 in Women’s America: Refocusing the Past, edited by Linda K. Kerber and Jane Sherron De Hart. New York: Oxford University Press. Everding, Gerry. 2019. “How Team Sports Change a Child’s Brain: Team Sport Associated with Less Depression in Boys as Young as Nine.” Source. March 21. Washington University. https://source.wustl. edu/2019/03/how-team-sports-change-a-childs-brain/ Everitt, Joanna, Lisa A. Best, and Derek Gaudet. 2016. “Candidate Gender, Behavioral Style, and Willingness to Vote: Support for Female Candidates Depends on Conformity to Gender Norms.” American Behavioral Scientist 60(14):1737–1755. Fagan, Jay, and Rob Palkovitz. 2018. “Longitudinal Associations between Mothers’ Perceptions of Nonresidential Fathers’ Investment of Resources and Influence in Decision-Making.” Journal of Family Psychology 32(1):103–113.

References  637 Fahs, Breanne, and Rebecca Plante. 2017. “On ‘Good Sex’ and Other Dangerous Ideas: Women Narrate their Joyous and Happy Sexual Encounters.” Journal of Gender Studies 26(1):33–44. Falconer, Tasha, and Terry P. Humphreys. 2019. “Sexting Outside the Primary Relationship: Prevalence, Relationship Influences, Physical Engagement, and Perceptions of ‘Cheating’.” Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality 28(2):134–142. Fallon, Claire. 2017. “A History of All-Girl Bands and the Rock World that Tried to Keep them Out.” Huffington Post. April 26. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/making-the-girl-band_n_58ed03a7e4b0df7e2045c149 Falomir-Pichastor, J.M., J. Berent, and J. Anderson. 2019. “Perceived Men’s Feminization and Attitudes toward Homosexuality: Heterosexual Men’s Reactions to the Decline of the Anti-Femininity Norm of Masculinity.” Sex Roles. January 5. Faram, Mark D. 2018. “Two Women Could Enter Navy Special Operations Training this Year.” Navy Times. February  16. https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-navy/2018/02/16/two-women-could-enter-navyspecial-operations-training-this-year/ Farhi, Paul. 2018. “Trump Lashes Out at Three Black Female Journalists in Two Days for Asking Questions.” Independent. November  10. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/trump-black-female-journalists-questions-phillips-ryan-alcindor-cnn-jim-acosta-a8627416.html Farmer, Alan. 2016. “The Witchcraze of the 16th and 17th Centuries.” Abingdon, Oxon, UK: Hodder Education. Farr, Rachel H. 2017. “Does Parental Sexual Orientation Matter? A Longitudinal Follow-Up of Adoptive Families with School-Age Children.” Developmental Psychology 53(2):252–264. Farr, Rachel H., Bruun, Samuel T., Kathleen M. Doss, and Charlotte J. Patterson. 2018. “Children’s Gender-Typed Behavior from Early to Middle Childhood in Adoptive Families with Lesbian, Gay, and Heterosexual Parents.” Sex Roles 78(7–8):528–541. Farrell, Albert D., Erin L. Thompson, and Krista R. Mehari. 2017. “Dimensions of Peer Influences and Their Relationship to Adolescents’ Aggression, Other Problem Behaviors and Prosocial Behavior.” Journal of Youth and Adolescence 46(6):1351–1369. Farrell, Warren, and John Gray. 2018. The Boy Crisis: Why Our Boys Are Struggling and What We Can Do About It. Dallas, TX: BenBella Books. Farvida, Panteá, Virginia Braun, and Casey Rowney. 2017. “’No Girl Wants to be Called a Slut!’ Women, Heterosexual Causal Sex and the Sexual Double Standard.” Journal of Gender Studies 26(5):544–560. Fasoli, Fabio, Federica Durante, Silvia Mari et  al. 2018. “Shades of Sexualization: When Sexualization Becomes Sexual Objectification.” Sex Roles 78(5):338–351. Fausto-Sterling, Anne. 2016. “How Else Can We Study Sex Differences in Early Infancy?” Developmental Psychobiology 58(1):5–16. Fedina, Lisa, Jennifer Lynne Holmes, and Bethany L. Backes. 2018. “Campus Sexual Assault: A Systematic Review of Prevalence Research from 2000 to 2015.” Trauma, Violence, & Abuse 19(1):76–93. Fekadu, Mesfin. 2019. “A Historic Night for Hip-Hop, Gambino.” St. Louis Post-Dispatch February 11:M1. Feldman, Jan L. 2011. Gender, Faith, and Feminism: Jewish and Muslim Women Reclaim Their Rights. Waltham, MA: Brandeis University. Feldman, Jan L. 2017. “ ‘Point Men’: How Religious Women Soldiers May Restore Israel’s ‘Citizens’ Army’.” Journal of the Middle East and Africa 8(4):325–351. Feng, Wang. 2017. “Policy Response to Low Fertility in China: Too Little, Too Late?” AsiaPacific Issues. EastWest Center No. 130. Fentiman, Linda C. 2017. Blaming Mothers: American Law and the Risks to Children’s Health. New York: New York University Press. Ferber, Abby L. 2018. “’Are You Willing to Die for this Work?’ Public Targeted Online Harassment in Higher Education.” Gender & Society 32(3)301–320. Fernandez, Roberto M., and Santiago Campero. 2017. “Gender Sorting and the Glass Ceiling in High-Tech Firms.” Industrial and Labor Relations Review 70(1):73–104.

638 References Ferré-Sadurní, Luis, and Mariana Alfaro. 2018. “Why They Stay. Why They Can’t: NY Catholics Wrestle with their Faith over Abuse Allegations.“ New York Times. October 23. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/10/21/nyregion/new-york-city-catholics.html Ferris-Rotman, Amie. 2018. “Putin’s War on Women: Why #MeToo Skipped Russia.” Foreign Policy 228:28–31. Ferziger, Adam S. 2018. “Sanctuary for the Specialist: Gender the Reconceptualization of the American Orthodox Rabbinate.” Jewish Social Studies: History, Culture, Society 23(3):1–37. Feugé, Éric Alain, Louise Cossette, Chantal Cyr, and Danielle Julien. 2019. “Parental Involvement among Adoptive Gay Fathers: Associations with Resources, Time Constraints, Gender Role, and Child Adjustment.” Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity 6(1):1–10. Fielding, Jackie. 2018. “Men Fear False Allegations. Women Fear Sexual Misconduct, Assault and Rape.” Minnesota Law Review. November  25. http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/2018/11/men-fear-falseallegations-women-fear-sexual-misconduct-assault-and-rape/ Fileborn, Bianca, Rachel Thorpe, Gail Hawkes, Victor Minichiello, and Marian Pitts. 2015. “Sex and the (Older) Single Girl: Experiences of Sex and Dating in Later Life.” Journal of Aging Studies 33:67–75. Filer, Christine. 2019. “Support for Legal Abortion Matches its 24-year High: Poll.” ABC News. July  10. https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/support-legal-abortion-matches-24-year-high-poll/story?id=64221457 Files, Julia A., Anita P. Mayer, Marcia G. Ko, Patricia Friedrich et al. 2017. “Speaker Introductions at Internal Medicine Grand Rounds: Forms of Address Reveal Gender Bias.” Journal of Women’s Health 26(5):413–419. Fincham, Frank D., and Ross W. May. 2017. “Infidelity in Romantic Relationships.” Current Opinion in Psychology 13:70–74. Fine, Cordelia, and Emma Rush. 2018. “ ‘Why Does All the Girls Have to Buy Pink Stuff?’ The Ethics and Science of the Gendered Toy Marketing Debate.” Journal of Business Ethics 149(4):769–784. Fine, Cordelia, John Dupré, and Joel Daphna. 2017. “Sex-Linked Behavior: Evolution, Stability, and Variability.” Trends in Cognitive Sciences 21(9):666–673. Fine, Cordelia. 2017. Testosterone Rex: Myths of Sex, Science, and Society. New York: W.W. Norton. Finlay, Liza. 2017. “10 Things Your Daycare May Not tell You.” Today’s Parent. March  8. https://www. todaysparent.com/kids/preschool/10-things-your-daycare-may-not-tell-you/ Finzi-Dottan, Ricky, and Orna Cohen. 2019. “Involvement and Acceptance of Custodial Fathers: The Role of Narcissism and Caregiving.” Psychology of Men & Masculinities 20(1):82–92. Fiorenza, Elisabeth Schüssler. 2013. “To Set the Record Straight: Biblical Women’s Studies.” Pp. 171–180 in Changing Horizons: Explorations in Feminist Interpretations. Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress. Fiori, Francesca, Francesca Rinesi, and Elspeth Graham. 2017. “Choosing to Remain Childless? A  Comparative Study of Fertility Intentions among Women and Men in Italy and Britain.” European Journal of Population 33(3):319–350. Fischer, Kirsten. 2005. “The Imperial Gaze: Native American, African American, and Colonial Women in European Eyes.” In Companion to American Women’s History, edited by Nancy A. Hewitt. Oxford, UK: Blackwell. Fish, Jessica N., and Stephen T. Russell. 2018. “Queering Methodologies to Understand Queer Families.” Family Relations. 67(1):12–25. Fish, M. Steven. 2017. “The Kremlin Emboldened: What is Putinism?” Journal of Democracy 28(4):61–75. Fishman, Elana. 2019. “Before there was Christian Siriano, there was Tadashi Shoji.” February 12. https:// pagesix.com/2019/02/12/before-there-was-christian-siriano-there-was-tadashi-shoji/ Fitzpatrick, Ellen. 2016. The Highest Glass Ceiling: Women’s Quest for the American Presidency. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Fitzsimmons, Tim. 2018. “A  Record 4.5  percent of U.S. Adults Identify as LGBT, Gallup Estimates.” NBC News. May  25. https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/record-4-5-percent-u-s-adults-identify-lgbtgallup-n877486 Flueckiger, Joyce Burkhalter. 2013. When the World Becomes Female: Guises of a South Indian Goddess. Bloomington, IN: University of Indiana.

References  639 Flynn, Mark A., Clay M. Craig, Christina N. Anderson, and Kyle J. Holody. 2016. “Objectification in Popular Music Lyrics: An Examination of Gender and Genre Differences.” Sex Roles 75(3–4):164–176. Foer, Franklin. 2017. “It’s Putin’s World: How the Russian President Became the Ideological Hero of Nationalists Everywhere.” Atlantic. March. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/03/its-putinsworld/513848/ Fogarty, Alison Ash, and Lily Zheng. 2018. Gender Ambiguity in the Workplace: Transgender and Gender-Diverse Discrimination. Santa Barbara CA: Praeger. Forbes, Gordon B., Leah E. Adams-Curtis, Kay B. White, and Nicole R. Hamm. 2002. “Perceptions of Married Women and Married Men with Hyphenated Surnames.” Sex Roles 46(5/6):167–175. Ford, Jessie V. 2018. “Going with the Flow”: How College Men’s Experiences of Unwanted Sex Are Produced by Gendered Interactional Pressures.” Social Forces 96 (3):1303–1324. Forste, Renata, Marina Potter, and Lance Erickson. 2019. “Sad and Lonely: Body Dissatisfaction among Adolescent Girls.” International Journal of Adolescent Medicine & Health 31 (2):9 pages. Forum on Child and Family Statistics. 2018. America’s Children in Brief: Key National Indicators of Well-Being, 2018. “Fam1.B: Family Structure and Children’s Living Arrangements: Detailed Living Arrangements of Children by Gender, Race and Hispanic Origin, Age, Parent’s Education, and Poverty Status.” https:// www.childstats.gov/americaschildren/tables/fam1b.asp Foster, Johanna E. 2018. “In Keeping with Family Tradition: American Second-Wave Feminists and the Social Construction of Political Legacies.” Qualitative Sociology Review 14(1):6–28. Fox, Bryanna, and David P. Farrington. 2018. “What Have We Learned from Offender Profiling? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 40 Years of Research.” Psychological Bulletin 144(12):1247–1274. Fox, Nick J., and Clare Bale. 2018. “Bodies, Pornography and The Circumscription of Sexuality: A  New Materialist Study of Young People’s Sexual Practices.” Sexualities 21(3):393–409. Frederick, David A., and Melissa R. Fales. 2016. “Upset Over Sexual versus Emotional Infidelity Among Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Heterosexual Adults.” Archives of Sexual Behavior 45:175–191. Frederick, David A., H. Kate St. John, Justin R. Garcia, and Elisabeth A. Lloyd. 2018. “Differences in Orgasm Frequency among Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Heterosexual Men and Women in a U.S. National Sample.” Archives of Sexual Behavior 47(1):273–288. Frederiksen, Brittni, Ivette Gomez, Alina Salganicoff, and Usha Ranji. 2020. “Coronavirus: A Look at Gender Differences in Awareness and Actions.” Kaiser Family Foundation. March 20. https://www.kff.org/ womens-health-policy/issue-brief/coronavirus-a-look-at-gender-differences-in-awareness-and-actions/ Fredricks, Jennifer A., Tara Hofkens, Ming-Te Wang et al. 2018. “Supporting Girls’ and Boys’ Engagement in Math and Science Learning: A Mixed Methods Study.” Journal of Research in Science Teaching 55(2):271–298. Freiburger, Tina L., and Carly M. Hilinski. 2013. “An Examination of the Interactions of Race and Gender on Sentencing Decisions Using a Trichotomous Dependent Variable.” Crime & Delinquency 59(1):59–86. French, Kimberly, Marcus Butts, and Tammy Allen. 2016. “Parent Work Conditions and Adolescent Core Self-Evaluations: Examining the Effects of Work Resource Drain and Parent Gender.” Journal of Business and Psychology 31(4):553–568. Freud, Sigmund. 1962. Three Contributions to the Theory of Sex. A.A. Brill (trans.). New York: E. P. Dutton. Fridel, Emma E. 2019. “Leniency for Lethal Ladies: Using the Actor–Partner Interdependence Model to Examine Gender-Based Sentencing Disparities.” Homicide Studies 23(4):319–343. Friedan, Betty. 1963. The Feminine Mystique. New York: W.W. Norton. Frisby, Brandi, and Melanie Booth-Butterfield. 2012. “The ‘How’ and ‘Why’ of Flirtatious Communication between Marital Partners.” Communication Quarterly 60(4):465–480. Fritz, Claudia, and Daan van Knippenberg. 2018. “Gender and Leadership Aspiration: The Impact of WorkLife Initiatives.” Human Resource Management 57(4):855–868. Fuchs, Ilan. 2018. How to Create Aa Stay-At-Home Revolutionary: Rabbinic Discourse on Women’s Education in the Haredi-Leumi Community.” Nashim: A Journal of Jewish Women’s Studies and Gender Issues Fall (33):121–136.

640 References Fuhrmans, Vanessa. 2018. “What #MeToo Has to Do with the Workplace Gender Gap.” New York Times October 23:R1, R2. Fukuhara, Yasushi. 2016. “A Critical Interpretation of Bottom-Up Management and Leadership Styles Within Japanese Companies: A Focus on Empowerment and Trust.” Ai & Society 31(1):85–93. Fulcher, Karyn. 2017. “That’s So Homophobic? Australian Young People’s Perspectives on Homophobic Language Use in Secondary Schools.” Sex Education 17(3):290–301. Furnham, Adrian, and Alixe Lay. 2019. “The Universality of the Portrayal of Gender in Television Advertisements: A  Review of the Studies this Century.” Psychology of Popular Media Culture 8(2): 109–124. Fuwa, Makiko. 2014. “Work-family conflict and attitudes toward marriage.” Journal of Family Issues 35(6):731–54. Gabaccia, Donna R., and Mary Jo Maynes. 2012. “Introduction: Gender History across Epistemologies.” Gender & History 24(3):521–39. Gabb, Jacqui. 2018. “Unsettling Lesbian Motherhood: Critical Reflections over a Generation (1990–2015).” Sexualities 21(7):1002–1020. Gabriel, Ute, and Pascal Gygax. 2016. “Gender and Linguistic Sexism.” Pp. 177–192 in Advances in Intergroup Communication, edited by Howard Giles and Anne Maass. New York: Peter Lang. Gaetano, Phil. 2017. “David Reimer and John Money Gender Reassignment Controversy: The John/Joan Case”. Embryo Project Encyclopedia. November 15. http://embryo.asu.edu/handle/10776/13009 Gagne, Isaac. 2008. “Urban Princesses: Performance and ‘Women’s Language’ in Japan’s Gothic/Lolita Subculture.” Journal of Linguistic Anthropology 18(1):130–150. Gale, Rebecca. 2017. “How Millennials do Stay-At-Home Motherhood.” October  10. https://www.refinery29.com/en-us/2017/10/175528/stay-at-home-moms-modern Galer, Sophia Smith. 2017. “How Metaphors Shape Women’s Lives.” BBC Future. July 18. https://www.bbc. com/future/article/20170718-the-metaphors-that-shape-womens-lives Galinsky, Adena, and Freya Sonenstein. 2013. “Relationship Commitment, Perceived Equity, and Sexual Enjoyment among Young Adults in the United States.” Archives of Sexual Behavior 42(1): 93–104. Gall, Rachel T., Lia Softas-Nall, and Kiersten M. Eberle. 2019. “All Families are Special: Experiences of Lesbian-Parented Families.” Family Journal 27(1)58–66. Gamal, Fanna. 2018. “Good Girls: Gender-Specific Interventions in Juvenile Court.” Columbia Journal of Gender and Law 35(2):228–263. Gamble, Hilary. 2019. “Acquiescing to the Script: A Panel Study on College Students’ Sexual Media Habits, Endorsement of Heteronormative Scripts, and their Hesitance toward Resisting Unwanted Hookups.” Sex Roles (11–12):707–723. Gamble, Hilary, and Leslie R. Nelson. 2016. “Sex in College Relationships: The Role Television Plays in Emerging Adults’ Sexual Expectations in Relationships.” Communication Monographs 83(1):145–161. García, Johnson, Carolina Pía, and Otto, Kathleen. 2019. “Better Together: A Model for Women and LGBTQ Equality in the Workplace.” Frontiers in Psychology February 20:17 pages: https://www.frontiersin.org/ articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00272/full Garcia, Justin R., Chris Reiber, Sean G. Massey, and Ann M. Merriwether. 2012. “Sexual Hookup Culture: A Review.” Review of General Psychology 16(2):161–176. Garcia, Marcelo. 2018. “From Eminem to Offset, an Analysis of Hip-hop’s History of Homophobia”. The Highlander. University of California, Riverside. January 28. https://www.highlandernews.org/31887/ eminem-offset-analysis-hip-hops-history-homophobia/ Garcia, Monica G. 2017. “Creating a Homeplace: Young Latinas Constructing Feminista Identities in the Context of a Single-Sex Catholic School.” High School Journal 101(1):27–48. Garcia, Tonya. 2018. “Pink And Blue are Out as Millennial Parents Show Growing Preference for Gender-Neutral Toys.” December 11. https://www.marketwatch.com/story/pink-and-blue-are-out-as-millennial-parentsshow-growing-preference-for-gender-neutral-toys-2018–12–10

References  641 Garcia-Hallett, Janet. 2019. “Maternal Identities and Narratives of Motherhood: A  Qualitative Exploration of Women’s Pathways Into and Out of Offending.” Criminology and Criminal Justice 14(2): 214–240. Garner, Betsie, and David Grazian. 2016. “Naturalizing Gender through Childhood Socialization Messages in a Zoo.” Social Psychology Quarterly 79(3):181–198. Garrett, Julia M. 2013. “Witchcraft and Sexual Knowledge in Early Modern England.” Journal for Early Modern Cultural Studies 13(1):32–72. Garsd, Jasmine. 2019. “Should Sex Work Be Decriminalized? Some Activists Say It’s Time.” National Public Radio. March 22. https://www.npr.org/2019/03/22/705354179/should-sex-work-be-decriminalizedsome-activists-say-its-time Gash, Alison, and Judith Raiskin. 2018. “Parenting without Protection: How Legal Status Ambiguity Affects Lesbian and Gay Parenthood.” Law & Social Inquiry 43(1):82–118. Gates, Gary J. 2015. “Marriage and Family: LGBT Individuals and Same-Sex Couples.” Future of Children 25(2):67–87. Gato, Jorge, Sara Santos, and Anne Fontaine. 2017. “Parental Decisions among Lesbians and Gay Men.” Sexuality Research & Social Policy 14(3):310–323. Gaule, Patrick, and Mario Piacentini. 2018. “An Advisor Like Me? Advisor Gender and Post-Graduate Careers in Science.” Research Policy 47(4):805–813. Gautier, Mary L., and Thu T. Do. 2018. “Catholic Ministry Formation Enrollment: Statistical Overview for 2017–2018.” Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate (CARA). Georgetown University. March. https://cara.georgetown.edu/Overview201718.pdf Gecewicz, Claire. 2019. “Key Takeaways about how Americans View the sexual Abuse Scandal in the Catholic Church.” Pew Research Center. June  11. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/06/11/ key-takeaways-about-how-americans-view-the-sexual-abuse-scandal-in-the-catholic-church/ Gehring, John. 2019. “Farther than Ever from Common Ground?: Absolutism & Abortion Politics.” Commonweal. May 23. https://www.commonwealmagazine.org/farther-ever-common-ground Geiger, A.W., and Gretchen Livingston. 2019. “8 Facts about Love and Marriage in America.” Pew Research Center. February 13. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/02/13/8-facts-about-love-and-marriage/ Geist, Claudia, Megan M. Reynolds, and Marie S. Gaytán. 2017. “Unfinished Business: Disentangling Sex, Gender, and Sexuality in Sociological Research on Gender Stratification.” Sociology Compass 11(4):16 pages. Gellman, Jerome. 2006. “Gender and Sexuality in the Garden of Eden.” Theology and Sexuality 12(3):319–336. Genadek, Katie R., Sarah M. Flood, and Joan Garcia Roman. 2016. “Trends in Spouses’ Shared Time in the United States, 1965–2012.” Demography 53:1801–1820. Genova, Alexandra. 2017. “Where Women Reign: An Intimate Look Inside a Rare Kingdom.” National Geographic. August 14. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/photography/proof/2017/08/portraits-ofchinese-Mosuo-matriarchs/ Georgeac, Oriane, and Aneeta Rattan. 2019. “Progress in Women’s Representation in Top Leadership Weakens People’s Disturbance with Gender Inequality in Other Domains.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 148(8):1435–1453. Gerber, Theodore P. 2017. “Public Opinion on Human Rights in Putin-era Russia: Continuities, Changes, and Sources of Variation.” Journal of Human Rights 16(3):314–331. Gerdeman, Dina. 2018. “Kids of Working Moms Grow into Happy Adults.” Working Knowledge, Harvard Business School. July 16. https://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/kids-of-working-moms-grow-into-happy-adults Gerding, Speno, Ashton Stevens, and Jennifer Aubrey. 2018. “Sexualization, Youthification, and Adultification: A Content Analysis of Images of Girls and Women in Popular Magazines.” Journalism & Mass Communication 95(3):625–646. Gerson, Jeannie Suk. “Assessing Betsy DeVos’s Proposed Rules on Title IX and Sexual Assault.” New Yorker. February  1. https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/assessing-betsy-devos-proposedrules-on-title-ix-and-sexual-assault

642 References Gerson, Kathleen. 2009. “Dilemmas of Involved Fatherhood.” Pp. 325–334 in Reconstructing Gender: A Multicultural Anthology, edited by Estelle Disch. New York: McGraw-Hill. Getzinger, Donna. 2009. The Triangle Shirtwaist Factory Fire. Greensboro, NC: Morgan Reynolds. Gevrek, Z. Eylem, Christian Neumeier, and Deniz Gevrek. 2018. “Explaining the Gender Test Score Gap in Mathematics: The Role of Gender Inequality.” IZA Institute of Labor Economics. Discussion Paper Series. January. http://ftp.iza.org/dp11260.pdf Ghose, Carrie. 2019. “Promoting Women to Leadership roles: A Little Less Conversation, a Little More Action.” Columbus Business First. March  28. https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2019/03/28/promoting-women-to-leadership-roles-a-little-less.html Gianesisi, Giovanna, and Sampson Lee Blair. 2016. Divorce, Separation, and Remarriage: The Transformation of Family. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Ltd. Gibson, Caitlin. 2018. “It’s a boy! It’s a girl! For some Parents, Learning their Baby’s Sex is a Disappointment.” Washington Post. December 12. https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/its-a-boy-its-a-girl-forsome-parents-learning-their-babys-sex-is-a-disappointment/2018/12/12/8aef32c0-f8be-11e8–8d64– 4e79db33382f_story.html Gill, Isabelle. 2017. “Feminist Figures or Damsels in Distress? The Media’s Gendered Misrepresentation of Disney Princesses.” Young Scholars in Writing 13:96–111. Gill, Monique, Alec M., Chan-Golston, Lindsay N. Rice. et al. 2018. “Correlates of Social Support and its Association with Physical Activity among Young Adolescents.” Health Education & Behavior 45(2): 207–216. Gillath, Nurit. 2017. “Avoiding Conscription in Israel.” Pp. 226–256 in Comparative Perspectives on Civil Religion, Nationalism, and Political Influence. Hershey, PA: IGI-Global. Gillen, Meghan M., and Charlotte H. Markey. 2018. “A  Review of Research Linking Body Image and Sexual Well-Being.” Body Image. December  21. Abstract available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. bodyim.2018.12.004 Gilmore, David D. 1990. Manhood in the Making: Cultural Concepts of Masculinity. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Gilmore, Scott. 2016. “Why Clinton’s Candidacy May Not Spur Gender Equality.” Maclean’s. June 7. https:// www.macleans.ca/politics/washington/why-hillary-clintons-candidacy-may-not-spur-more-gender-equality/ Gimbutas, Marija. 1991. The Civilization of the Goddess: The World of Old Europe. San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco. Gimbutas, Marija. 2001. The Language of the Goddess: Unearthing the Hidden Symbols of Western Civilization. London: Thames & Hudson. Giordano, Amanda L., and Craig S. Cashwell. 2017. “Cybersex Addiction among College Students: A Prevalence Study.” Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity 24(1/2):47–57. Giordano, Peggy C., Jennifer E. Copp, Monica A. Longmore, Monica, and Wendy D. Manning. 2016. “Anger, Control, and Intimate Partner Violence in Young Adulthood.” Journal of Family Violence 31(1):1–3. Giraldi, Ashley, and Elizabeth and Monk-Turner. 2017. “Perception of Rape Culture on a College Campus: A Look at Social Media Posts.” Women’s Studies International Forum 62:116–124. Giugni, Lilia. 2019. “Women’s Rights Backlash and Feminist Revival: Gender Equality in 2019.” GlobePost. April 12. https://theglobepost.com/2019/04/12/gender-equality-2019/ Gjelten, Tom 2018. “Catholic Sexual Abuse Crisis Deepens as Authorities Lag in Response.” National Public Radio. August 15. https://www.npr.org/2018/08/15/638690110/catholic-sexual-abuse-crisis-deepensas-authorities-lag-in-response Gjersoe, Nathalia. 2018. “Bridging the Gender Gap: Why Do So Few Girls Study Stem Subjects?” Guardian. March 8. https://www.theguardian.com/science/head-quarters/2018/mar/08/bridging-the-gender-gapwhy-do-so-few-girls-study-stem-subjects Glas, Saskia, Niels Spierings, and Peer Scheepers. 2018. “Re-Understanding Religion and Support for Gender Equality in Arab Countries.” Gender & Society 32(5): 686–712.

References  643 Glass, Andrew. 2017. “President Bush Defends Clarence Thomas, Oct. 9, 1991.” October 9. https://www. politico.com/story/2017/10/09/president-bush-defends-clarence-thomas-oct-9-1991-243573 Glick, Peter, and Susan Fiske. 2018. “The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory.” Chapter  6 in Social Cognition, edited by Susan Fiske. London: Routledge. Glock, Sabine, and Hannah Kleen. 2017. “Gender and Student Misbehavior: Evidence from Implicit and Explicit Measures.” Teaching and Teacher Education 67:93–103. Gobind, Jenni, and Graham du Plessis. 2015. “Sugar Daddy: The Student Attraction.” Gender & Behavior 13(2):6720–6729. Godbole, Maya A., Noelle A. Malvar, and Virginia V. Valian. 2019. “Gender, Modern Sexism and the 2016 Election.” Politics, Groups, and Identities 7(3):700–712. Goffman, Erving. 1959. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Anchor Books. Goffman, Erving. 1963. Behavior in Public Places. New York: Free Press. Goffman, Erving. 1971. Relations in Public. New York: Basic Books. Goffman, Erving. 1979. Gender Advertisements. New York: Harper & Row. Gold, Anne U., Philip M. Pendergast, Carol J. Ormand et al., 2018. “Spatial Skills in Undergraduate Students— Influence of Gender, Motivation, Academic Training, and Childhood Play.” Geosphere 14(2):668–683. Goldberg, Abbie E., and Randi L. Garcia. 2016. “Gender-Typed Behavior Over Time in Children with Lesbian, Gay, and Heterosexual Parents.” Journal of Family Psychology 30(7):854–865. Goldberg, Abbie E., Kaitlin A. Black, Melissa H. Manley and Reihonna Frost. 2017. “ ‘We Told them that We are both Really Involved Parents’: Sexual Minority and Heterosexual Adoptive Parents’ Engagement in School Communities.” Gender and Education 29(5):614–631. Goldberg, Abbie, and Randi L. Garcia. 2016. “Gender-Typed Behavior Over Time in Children With Lesbian, Gay, and Heterosexual Parents.” Journal of Family Psychology 30(7):854–865. Goldberg, Lesley. 2019a. “Grey’s Anatomy’ Makes History: How the Shonda Rimes Hit Surpassed ER.” Hollywood Reporter. February 27. https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/greys-anatomy-makes-historyhow-shonda-rhimes-hit-surpassed-er-1190616 Goldberg, Lesley. 2019b. “TV Pilots 2019: The Complete Guide.” Hollywood Reporter. January 4. https:// www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/tv-pilots-2019-complete-guide-1172633 Goldman, Bruce. 2017. “Two Minds: The Cognitive Differences between Men and Women.” https://stanmed. stanford.edu/2017spring/how-mens-and-womens-brains-are-different.html Goldman, Debra. 2000. “Consumer Republic: Boys’ Names Have Become the Province of Girls.” AdWeek Midwest 61(47):22. Goldman, Seth. 2018. “Fear of Gender Favoritism and Vote Choice during the 2008 Presidential Primaries.” Journal of Politics 80(3):786–799. Goldsmith, Belinda, and Merka Beresford. 2018. “Exclusive: India most Dangerous Country for Women with Sexual Violence Rife—Global Poll.” Reuters. June  25. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-women-dangerous-poll-exclusive/exclusive-india-most-dangerous-country-for-women-with-sexual-violence-rife-global-poll-idUSKBN1JM01X Goldsmith, Kaitlyn, M., and E. Sandra Byers. 2018. “Perceived and Reported Romantic and Sexual Outcomes in Long-Distance and Geographically Close Relationships.” Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality 27(2):144–156. Goldstein-Gidoni, Ofra. 2017. “The Joy of Normal Living” as the Promise of Happiness for Japanese Women and their Families.” Asian Studies Review 41(1):281–298. Goldstein-Gidoni, Ofra. 2019. “The Japanese Corporate Family: The Marital Gender Contract Facing New Challenges.” Journal of Family Issues 40(7):835–864. Golia, Julie. A. 2016. “Courting Women, Courting Advertisers: The Woman’s Page and the Transformation of the American Newspaper, 1895–1935.” Journal of American History 103(3):606–628. Golombok, Susan. Modern Families: Parents and Children in New Family Forms. 2015. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

644 References Golombok, Susan, Laura Mellish, Sarah Jennings, Polly Casey et al. 2014. “Adoptive Gay Father Families: Parent–Child Relationships and Children’s Psychological Adjustment.” Child Development 85(2):456–468. Golombok, Susan, Lucy Blake, Jenna Slutsky et al. 2018. “Parenting and the Adjustment of Children Born to Gay Fathers Through Surrogacy.” Child Development 89(4):1223–1233. Golshan, Tara. 2019. “A New Poll Shows How Sexism and Electability Collide in 2020.” Vox. June 17. https:// www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/6/17/18681964/poll-sexism-electability-2020-warren-trump-harris Gonsalves, Christine A., Kerry R. McGannon, Robert J. Schinke, and Ann Pegoraro. 2017. “Mass Media Narratives of Women’s Cardiovascular Disease: A Qualitative Meta-Analysis.” Health Psychology Review 11(2):164–178. Good, Cassandra A. 2012. “Friendly Relations: Situating Friendships Between Men and Women in the Early American Republic, 1780–1830.” Gender and History 24(1):18–34. Goodman, Ellen. 1999. “TV Gives Fiji New Look at Self.” St. Louis Post-Dispatch June 1. Goodnow, Trischa, and Gregory Payne. 2019. “Signs of the Apocalypse: An Analysis of Trump Magazine Covers During the 2016 Presidential Campaign.” American Behavioral Scientist 63(7):826–835. Goodstein, Lauri. 2018. “Catholic Bishops Promising to Fix Sex Abuse Problem Face Cover-Up Accusations.” New York Times. October 18. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/19/us/catholic-church-sex-abuse-scandal.html Gordon, Beate Sirota. 1997. The Only Woman in the Room: A Memoir of Japan, Human Rights, and the Arts. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Gordon, Linda. 2013. “Socialist Feminism: The Legacy of the ‘Second Wave.’ ” New Labor Forum 22(3):20–28 Gottwald, Julia. 2016. “Unexpected Similarities between Male and Female Brains.” June 2. https://medicalxpress.com/news/2016-06-unexpected-similarities-male-female-brains.html Gould, Lois. 1980. “X: A Fabulous Child’s Story.” Ms. May:61–64. Gowing, Laura. 2012. Gender Relations in Early Modern England. Harlow, UK: Pearson. Gowrinathan, Nimmi. 2019. “Gender Identities in Conflict.” Journal of International Affairs 72(2):115–118. Grady, Constance. 2018. “The Waves of Feminism, and Why People Keep Fighting Over Them, Explained.” Vox. June 1. https://www.vox.com/2018/3/20/16955588/feminism-waves-explained-first-second-third-fourth Graf, Nikki, Anna Brown, and Eileen Patten. 2019. “The Narrowing, but Persistent, Gender Gap in Pay.” Pew Research Center. March 22. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/03/22/gender-pay-gap-facts/ Grall, Timothy.2020. “Custodial Mothers and Fathers and Their Child Support: 2015.” Current Population Reports. Revised January. P60–262. U.S. Census Bureau. https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2020/demo/p60-262.pdf Grammatikakis, Ioannis Emm. 2011. “The Woman in Minoic Crete.” Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine 24(7):968–972. Granger, Kristen. 2017. “Preschool Teachers’ Facilitation of Gender-Typed and Gender-Neutral Activities During Free Play.” Sex Roles 76(7–8):498–510. Grant, Bridget F., S. Patricia Chou, and Tulshi D. Saha, 2017. “Prevalence of 12-Month Alcohol Use, HighRisk Drinking, and DSM-IV Alcohol Use Disorder in the United States, 2001–2002 to 2012–2013.” JAMA Psychiatry 74(8):911–923. Gray, Kathryn N. 2013. John Eliot and the Praying Indians of Massachusetts Bay: Communities and Connections in Puritan New England. Lewisburg, PA: Bucknell University Press. Gray, Mark M., and Mary L. Gautier. 2018. “Proud to be a Catholic? A Groundbreaking Survey Asks Women about their Lives in the Church.” America: The Jesuit Review. January 16. https://www.americamagazine. org/faith/2018/01/16/proud-be-catholic-groundbreaking-america-survey-asks-women-about-their-lives Greard, Octavia. 1893. L’Education des Femmes par les Femmes. Paris: Librairie Hachette. Green, Hannah Harris. 2019. “Rural Women in India Struggle to Access Contraception. These People are Trying to Change That.” Public Radio International. February 1. https://www.pri.org/stories/2019-02-01/ rural-women-india-struggle-access-contraception-these-people-are-trying-change Green, Robert-Jay, Ritchie J. Rubio, Esther D. Rothblum, Kim Bergman, and Katie E. Katuzny. 2019. “Gay Fathers by Surrogacy: Prejudice, Parenting, and Well-Being of Female and Male Children.” Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity 6(3):269–283.

References  645 Green, Susan. 2018. “Women Owned Businesses: Growing But Still Fare Too Rare.” Institute for Women’s Policy Research. August 14. https://iwpr.org/women-owned-businesses-innovation/ Greenaway, Katharine, Kim Peters, S. Alexander Haslam, and William Bingley. 2016. “Shared Identity and the Intergroup Dynamics of Communication.” Pp. 19–33 in Advances in Intergroup Communication, edited by Howard Giles and Anne Maass. New York: Peter Lang. Greenberg, Anna. 2019. “Winning the Gender Wars.” American Prospect 30(1):23–26. Gregg, Isabel. 2018. “The Health Care Experiences of Lesbian Women Becoming Mothers.” Nursing for Women’s Health 22(1):40–50. Gregory, Elizabeth. 2012. Why Women Are Embracing the New Later Motherhood. New York: Basic Books. Griffith-Jones, Robin. 2008. Beloved Disciple: The Misunderstood Legacy of Mary Magdalene, the Woman Closest to Jesus. New York: HarperOne. Grigoryeva, Angelina. 2017. “Own Gender, Sibling’s Gender, Parent’s Gender: The Division of Elderly Parent Care among Adult Children.” American Sociological Review 82(1):116–146. Grönlund, Ann, and Ida Öun. 2017. “The Gender-Job Satisfaction Paradox and the Dual-Earner Society: Are Women (Still) Making Work-Family Trade-Offs?” Work 59:535–545. Gross, Terry. 2019. “Sex, Empathy, Jealousy: How Emotions and Behavior of Other Primates Mirror Our Own.” National Public Radio. https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2019/03/19/704763681/ sex-empathy-jealousy-how-emotions-and-behavior-of-other-primates-mirror-our-own Grossberg, Blythe. 2017. “4 Advantages of Single-Sex Schools.” June  10. https://www.thoughtco.com/ advantages-of-single-sex-schools-2774613 Grossman, Brian R., and Catherine E. Webb. 2016. “Family Support in Late Life: A Review of the Literature on Aging, Disability, and Family Caregiving.” Journal of Family Social Work 19(4):348–395. Grov, Christian, Sabina Hirshfield, Robert Remien, Mike Humberstone, and Mary Ann Chiasson. 2013. “Exploring the Venue’s Role in Risky Sexual Behavior among Gay and Bisexual Men: An Event-Level Analysis from a National Online Survey in the U.S.” Archives of Sexual Behavior 42(2):291–302. Grove, Wayne A., Andrew Hussey and Michael Jetter. 2011. “The Gender Pay Gap Beyond Human Capital: Heterogeneity in Noncognitive Skills and in Labor Market Tastes.” Journal of Human Resources 46 (4):827–874. Grover, Saurabh, and Suman Nayyar. 2017. “Portrayal Of Women in Television Advertisements: Perception of Male and Female Viewers.” NICE Journal of Business 12(2):101–114. Gu, Jackie. 2018. “Women Lose Out to Men Even before They Graduate from College.” March 15. https:// www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2018-women-professional-inequality-college/ Guarin, Angela, and Daniel R. Meyer. 2018. “Are Low Earnings of Nonresidential Fathers A Barrier to their Involvement with Children?” Children and Youth Services Review 91:304–318. Guidant. 2019. “2019 Trends: Women in Business: Current Trends and Statistics for Women in Business.” https://www.guidantfinancial.com/small-business-trends/women-in-business/ Guillermo, Torres. 2016. Life Satisfaction: Determinants, Psychological Implications and Impact on Quality-of-Life. New York: Nova. Gunderson, Elizabeth, Gerardo Ramirez, Susan Levine, and Sian Beilock. 2011. “The Role of Parents and Teachers in the Development of Gender-Related Math Attitudes.” Sex Roles 66(3/4):153–166. Gunia, Amy. 2019. “Japan is Getting a New Emperor: Here’s what you Need to Know about Him.” Time. April 30. https://time.com/5561852/japan-new-emperor-naruhito-reiwa/ Gunter, Jen. 2019. “Drinking While Pregnant: An Inconvenient Truth.” New York Times. February 5. https:// www.nytimes.com/2019/02/05/style/drinking-while-pregnant.html# Guo, Yu. 2019. “Sexual Double Standards in White and Asian Americans: Ethnicity, Gender, and Acculturation.” Sexuality & Culture 23(1):57–95. Gupta, Kristina. 2015. “Compulsory Sexuality: Evaluating an Emerging Concept.” Signs 41(11):131–154. Gurrentz, Benjamin. 2018. “Living with an Unmarried Partner Now Common for Young Adults.” U.S. Census Bureau. November  15. https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2018/11/cohabitaiton-is-up-marriageis-down-for-young-adults.html

646 References Guthrie, Marisa. 2019.“50 Years of Sunny Days on ‘Sesame Street’: Behind the Scenes of TV’s Most Influential Show Ever.” https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/features/sesame-street-turns-50-how-a-childrensshow-revolutionized-television-1183031 GVI. 2019. Global Vision International. https://www.gvi.co.uk/about-us/ Gygax, Pascal, Ute Gabriel, Oriane Sarrasin, Jane Oakhill, and Alan Garnham. 2008. “Generically Intended, But Specifically Interpreted: When Beauticians, Musicians, and Mechanics are all Men.” Language and Cognitive Processes 23(3):464–485. Habal, Marlena V., Kelly Axsom, and Maryjane Farr. 2019. “Advanced Therapies for Heart Failure in Women.” Heart Failure in Women 15(1):97–107. Hacker, Andrew. 2016. The Math Myth and Other STEM Delusions. New York: New Press. Hadj-Moussa, M., S. Agarwal, D.A. Ohl, and W.M. Kuzon Jr. 2019. “Masculinizing Genital Gender Confirmation Surgery.” Sexual Medicine Reviews 7(1):141–155. Hafner, Josh. 2018. “Trump Insults Female Reporter: ‘You’re Not Thinking. You Never Do’.” USA Today. October  1. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2018/10/01/trump-insults-abcreporter-cecilia-vega-you-never-think/1493105002/ Hagengruber, Ruth. 2016. “Measuring the Value of Women: A Feminist Analysis of Economic Categories and Thought.” Pp. 171–183 in Meta-Philosophical Reflection on Feminist Philosophies of Science, edited by Maria Cristina Amoretti. Cham, SZ: Springer. Hahl, Oliver, Minjae Kim, and Ezra W. Zuckerman. 2018. “The Authentic Appeal of the Lying Demagogue: Proclaiming the Deeper Truth about Political Illegitimacy.” American Sociological Review 83(1):1–33. Haider-Winnett, Christine, 2018. “No One Can Take My Faith from Me. Not Even the Pope.” July 12. https:// theestablishment.co/this-is-my-body-my-journey-to-ordination-as-a-roman-catholic-woman-priest/ Håland, Evy Johanne. 2012. “The Ritual Year of Athena: The Agricultural Cycle of the Olive, Girls’ Rites of Passage, and Official Ideology.” Journal of Religious History 36(2):256–284. Haley-Lock, A., and L. Posey-Maddox. 2016. “Fitting it All In: How Mothers’ Employment Shapes their School Engagement.” Community, Work & Family 19(3):302–321. Halim, May Ling D., Abigail S. Walsh, Catherine S. Tamis-LeMonda et al. 2018. “The Roles of Self-Socialization and Parent Socialization in Toddlers’ Gender-Typed Appearance.” Archives of Sexual Behavior 47(8):2277–2285. Halim, May Ling D., Diane N. Ruble, Catherine S. Tamis-LeMonda et al. 2017. “Gender Attitudes in Early Childhood: Behavioral Consequences and Cognitive Antecedents.” Child Development 88(3): 882–899. Halimi, Myriam, Els Consuegra, Katrien Stuyven, and Nadine Engels. 2016. “The Relationship between Youngsters’ Gender Roles Attitudes and Individual, Home, and School Characteristics.” SAGE Open 6(3):1–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244016656230 Hall, Edward T. 1966. The Hidden Dimension. Garden City, NY: Doubleday. Hall, Gregory, and Robert Kappel. 2018. “Gender, Alcohol, and the Media: The Portrayal of Men and Women in Alcohol Commercials.” Sociological Quarterly 59(4):571–583. Hall, Judith A., Lavonia Smith LeBeau, Jeannette Gordon Reinoso, and Frank Thayer. 2001. “Status, Gender, and Nonverbal Behavior in Candid and Posed Photographs: A Study of Conversations between University Employees.” Sex Roles 44(11/12):677–692. Hall, Roberta M., and Bernice R. Sandler. 1982. “The Classroom Climate: A Chilly One for Women?” ERIC. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED215628.pdf Halpern, Faye. 2013. Sentimental Readers: The Rise, Fall, and Revival of a Disparaged Rhetoric. Iowa City: University of Iowa Press. Halpern, Hillary Paul, and Maureen Perry-Jenkins. 2016. “Parents’ Gender Ideology and Gendered Behavior as Predictors of Children’s Gender-Role Attitudes: A  Longitudinal Exploration.” Sex Roles 74(11–12):527–542. Halverson, Cathryn. 2013. Playing House in the American West: Western Women’s Life Narratives, 1839–1987. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.

References  647 Hamel, Liz, Audrey Kearney, Ashley Kirzinger et  al. 2020. “KFF Tracking Poll -June  2020.” Kaiser Family Foundation. June  26. https://www.kff.org/report-section/kff-health-tracking-poll-june-2020-racismprotests-and-racial-disparities/ Hammer, Juliane. 2008. “Identity, Authority, and Activism: American Muslim Women Approach the Qur’an.” Muslim World 98(4):443–464. Hammes, Stephen R., and Ellis R. Levin. 2019. “Impact of Estrogens in Males and Androgens in Females.” Journal of Clinical Investigation 129(5):1818–1827. Hanasono, Lisa K., Ellen M. Broido, Margaret M. Yacobucci et al., 2019. “Secret Service: Revealing Gender Biases in the Visibility and Value of Faculty Service.” Journal of Diversity in Higher Education 12(1): 85–98. Hanks, Maxine. 2017. Shifting Boundaries of Feminist Theology.” Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought Spring: 167–181. Hanna, Bo. 2019. “What It’s Like to Be Raised Gender Neutral.” Vice. February 5. https://www.vice.com/ en_us/article/43zvkn/what-its-like-to-be-raised-gender-neutral Hardy, Sam A., Jeffrey L. Hurst, Joseph Price, and Melinda L. Denton. 2019. “The Socialization of Attitudes about Sex and their Role in Adolescent Pornography Use.” Journal of Adolescence 72:70–82. Hare, Brian, and Shinya Yamamoto (eds.). 2017. Bonobos: Unique in Mind, Brain, and Behavior. New York: Oxford University Press. Hare, Emmett. 2018. “Destroying the Boy Scouts.” City Journal. May 31. https://www.city-journal.org/html/ destroying-boy-scouts-15945.html Harper-Harrison, Gina, and Meaghan M. Shanahan. 2019. “Hormone Replacement Therapy.” National Center for Biotechnology Information. May 30. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK493191/ Harragan, Betty Lehan. 1977. Games Mother never Taught You: Corporate Gamesmanship for Women. New York: Warner Books. Harrington, C. Lee, and Denise Bielby. 2018. “Soap Fans Revisited.” Pp. 77–90 in A Companion to Media Fandom and Fan Studies, edited by Paul Booth. New York: John Wiley & Sons. https://onlinelibrary.wiley. com/doi/book/10.1002/9781119237211 Harrington, Carol. 2018. “Gender Policy Models and Calls to ‘Tackle Demand’ for Sex Workers.” Sexuality Research and Social Policy 1(3):249–258. Harrington, Madonna. 2014. Grandmothers at Work: Juggling Families and Jobs. New York: New York University Press. Harrington, Rebecca. 2017. “Here’s how Trump’s Cabinet Compares to Obama’s.” Business Insider. May 11. https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-cabinet-compared-to-obama-diversity-women-minorities-2017-5 Harris, Adam. 2018. “The Era of Affirmative Action May Not Last Much Longer.” Atlantic. July 3. https://www. theatlantic.com/education/archive/2018/07/the-era-of-affirmative-action-may-not-last-much-longer/564416/ Harris, Amanda. 2018. “The Problem with All-Girls Schools.” Irish Times. February 27. https://www.irishtimes.com/news/education/the-problem-with-all-girls-schools-1.3399028 Harris, Kathleen I. 2016. “Heroes of Resiliency and Reciprocity: Teachers’ Supporting Role for Reconceptualizing Superhero Play in Early Childhood Settings.” Pastoral Care in Education 34(4):202–217. Harrison, Guy. 2019. “ ‘We Want to See You Sex It Up and Be Slutty’: Post-Feminism and Sports Media’s Appearance Double Standard.” Critical Studies in Media Communication 36(2):140–146. Harrison, Marissa A., and Jennifer C. Shortall. 2011. “Women and Men in Love: Who Really Feels It and Says It First.” Journal of Social Psychology 151(6):727–736. Hart, William, John Adams, and Alexa Tullett. 2016. “’It’s Complicated’: Sex Differences in Perceptions of Cross-Sex Friendships.” Journal of Social Psychology 156(2):190–201. Hart-Brinson, Peter. 2018. The Gay Marriage Generation: How the LGBTQ Movement Transformed American Culture. New York: New York University Press. Hartman, Saidiya V. 2019. Wayward Lives, Beautiful Experiments: Intimate Histories of Social Upheaval. New York: W.W. Norton.

648 References Hartocollis, Anemona. 2019. “50 Years of Affirmative Action: What Went Right, and What it Got Wrong.” New York Times. March  30. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/30/us/affirmative-action-50-years. html Hartwell, Erica E., Julianne M. Serovich, Sandra J. Reed et al. 2017. “A Systematic Review of Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual Research Samples in Couple and Family Therapy Journals.” Journal of Marital and Family Therapy 43(3): 482–501. Harvey, Peter Francis. 2018. “It’s a Total Way of Life? Catholic Priests, Women’s Ordination, and Identity Work.” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 57(3):547–566. Haselton, Martie. 2019. Hormonal: The Hidden Intelligence of Hormones. New York: Little, Brown and Company. Haskell, Molly. 1987. From Reverence to Rape: The Treatment of Women in the Movies. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Haskell, Molly. 1997. Holding My Own in No Man’s Land: Women and Men and Film about Feminists. New York: Oxford University Press. Hassan, Adeel. 2018. “Confronting Asian-American Stereotypes.” Race/Related Newsletter. New York Times. June 23. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/23/us/confronting-asian-american-stereotypes.html Hatch, Alison. 2017. “Saying ‘I Don’t’ to Matrimony: An Investigation of Why Long-Term Heterosexual Cohabitors Choose Not to Marry.” Journal of Family Issues 38(12):1651–1674. Hatchel, Joanna C. and Kevin J. Armstrong. 2019. “Illicit Use of Prescription Stimulants: Gender Differences in Perceptions of Risk.” Substance Use & Misuse 54(10):1654–1662. Havrilesky, Heather. 2014. “Our ‘Mommy’ Problem.” New York Times November 9: SR1, 9. https://www. nytimes.com/2014/11/09/opinion/sunday/our-mommy-problem.html Hawley, George. 2018. “The Demography of the Alt-Right.” Institute for Family Studies. August 9. https:// ifstudies.org/blog/the-demography-of-the-alt-right Hayes, Danny, and Jennifer L. Lawless. 2016. Women on the Run: Gender, Media, and Political Campaigns in a Polarized Era. New York: Cambridge University Press. https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/culture/ gabriel-hays/2018/04/12/hateful-hip-hop-top-us-rbhip-hop-songs-objectify-women-55 Haynes, Christina S., and Ray Block. 2019. “Role-Model-In-Chief: Understanding a Michelle Obama Effect.” Politics & Gender 15(Special issue 2):365–402. Hays, Gabriel. 2018. “Hateful Hip-Hop: Top U.S. R&B/Hip-Hop Songs Objectify Women 55 Times.” April 12. https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/culture/gabriel-hays/2018/04/12/hateful-hip-hop-top-us-rbhiphop-songs-objectify-women-55 He, Ali and Zhang Yang. 2018. “Sexism in English Proverbs and Idioms.” Journal of Language Teaching and Research 9(2):424–429. Healey, Kevin. 2000. “The Irresolvable Tension: Agape and Masculinity in the Promise Keepers Movement.” Pp. 215–225 in The Promise Keepers: Essays on Masculinity and Christianity, edited by Dane S. Claussen. Jefferson, NC: McFarland. Heart Advisor. 2019. “ ‘Broken Heart Syndrome’ Is Real: How Your Body Copes With a Stressful Event May Cause You to Suddenly Develop The Symptoms of a Heart Attack.” Women’s Heart Advisor Supplement July:1–2. Heatwole, Alexandra. 2016. “Disney Girlhood: Princess Generations and Once Upon a Time.” Studies in the Humanities 43(1):1–19. Heaviside, Jill, and Rosann Mariappuram. 2019. “The Escalation of Anti-Abortion Violence Ten Years After Dr. George Tiller’s Murder: Violence is not just in the Anti-Abortion Movement’s Past.” Rewire News May 31. https://rewire.news/article/2019/05/31/the-escalation-of-anti-abortion-violence-ten-years-afterdr-george-tillers-murder/ Heflick, Nathan, and Jamie Goldenberg. 2011. “Reply to Comments on ‘Sarah Palin, a Nation Object(Ifie) s.’ ” Sex Roles 65(2/4):173–176. Hefner, Veronica, Rachel-Jean Firchau, Katie Norton, and Gabriella Shevel. 2017. “Happily Ever After? A Content Analysis of Romantic Ideals in Disney Princess Films.” Communication Studies 68(5):511–532. Hefner, Veronica. 2016. “Tuning Into Fantasy: Motivations to View Wedding Television and Associated Romantic Beliefs.” Psychology of Popular Media Culture 5(4):307–323.

References  649 Hefner, Veronica. 2018. “Does Love Conquer All? An Experiment Testing the Association between Types of Romantic Comedy Content and Reports of Romantic Beliefs and Life Satisfaction.” Psychology of Popular Media Culture. August 16. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2018-40446-001 Hegewisch, Ariane, and Adiam Tesfaselassie. 2019. “The Gender Wage Gap by Occupation. 2018.” Institute for Women’s Policy Research. April 2. https://iwpr.org/publications/gender-wage-gap-occupation-2018/ Heggeness, Misty. 2018. “Shhhh … I Make More than My Husband: Spouses Report Feeling Differently When Wives Earn More.” U.S. Census Bureau. July  16. https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2018/07/ wives-earning-more-than-husbands.html Heid, Allison R., Steven H. Zait, and Kimberly Van Haitsma. 2016. “Older Adults’ Influence in Family Care: How Do Daughters and Aging Parents Navigate Differences in Care Goals?” Aging  & Mental Health 20(1):46–55. Hein, Michael. 2019. “ ‘Teen Mom’: Every ’16 and Pregnant’ Spinoff Ever.” February 18. https://popculture. com/reality-tv/2019/02/17/teen-mom-every-16-and-pregnant-spinoff-ever/ Heinecken, Dawn. 2018. “For Us ALL? Nine for IX and the Representation of Women in Sport.” Women in Sport and Physical Activity Journal 26(1):23–32. Heldman, Caroline, Meredith Conroy, and Alissa R. Ackerman. 2018. Sex and Gender in the 2016 Presidential Election. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO. Heller, Karen. 2018. “The Year Women Refused to Stay Silent, Tossed their Bras and Redefined Politics; They Learned to Make a Difference, They Had to Make a Splash.” Washington Post. May 23. https://www. washingtonpost.com/national/the-year-women-refused-to-stay-silent-tossed-their-bras-and-redefined-politics/2018/05/23/bf37606e-495c-11e8–827e-190efaf1f1ee_story.html Hellinger, M., and H. Motschenbacher (eds.). 2015. Gender Across Languages: The Linguistic Representation of Women and Men, Volume IV. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Helmreich, Stefan. 2017. “The Gender of Waves.” Women’s Studies Quarterly 45(1&2):29–51. Helms, Marilyn M., Deborah Elwell Arfken, and Stephanie Bellar. 2016. “The Importance of Mentoring and Sponsorship in Women’s Career Development.” SAM Advanced Management Journal 81(3):4–16. Hendin, Rebecca. 2018. “I Could Kill You and No One Would Stop Me: Weak State Response to Domestic Violence in Russia.” Human Rights Watch. https://www.hrw.org/report/2018/10/25/i-could-kill-you-and-noone-would-stop-me/weak-state-response-domestic-violence Henley, Nancy M. 1977. Body Politics: Power, Sex and Nonverbal Communication. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Henley, Nancy M. 1989. “Molehill or Mountain: What We Know and Don’t Know about Sex Bias in Language.” In Gender and Thought: Psychological Perspectives, edited by Mary Crawford and Margaret Gentry. New York: Springer-Verlag. Henley, Nancy M. 2002. “Body Politics and Beyond.” Feminism & Psychology 12(3):295–310. Henning, Robert J. 2019. “Recognition and Treatment of Ischemic Heart Diseases in Women.” Future Cardiology 15(3):197–225. Henschel, Sofie, and Thorsten Roick 2017. “Relationships of Mathematics Performance, Control and Value Beliefs with Cognitive and Affective Math Anxiety.” Learning and Individual Differences 55:97–107. Hentschel, Tanja, Susanne Braun, Claudia Peus, and Dieter Frey. 2018. “The Communality-Bonus Effect for Male Transformational Leaders—Leadership Style, Gender, and Promotability.” European Journal of Work & Organizational Psychology 27(1):112–125. Herbst, Claudia. 2009. “Masters of the House: Literacy and the Claiming of Space on the Internet.” Pp. 135– 152 in Webbing Cyberfeminist Practice: Communities, Pedagogies, and Social Action, edited by Kristine Blair, Radhika Gajjala, and Christine Tulley. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press. Herguth, Robert. “Decade after Dust-up, Nun Firm on Abortion: ‘Choice is the Woman’s’.” Chicago SunTimes. March 7. https://chicago.suntimes.com/2018/3/7/18378234/decade-after-dust-up-nun-firm-onabortion-choice-is-the-woman-s Hermanson, Marissa. 2018. “How Millennials are Redefining Marriage.” Gottman Institute. July 3. https:// www.gottman.com/blog/millennials-redefining-marriage/

650 References Hernández-Truyol, Berta Esperanza. 2017. “The Culture of Gender/The Gender of Culture: Cuban Women, Culture, and Change – The Island and the Diaspora.” Florida Journal of International Law 29(1):181–195. Hershkoff, Helen, and Elizabeth M., Schneider. 2019. “Sex, Trump, and Constitutional Change.” Constitutional Commentary 34(1):43–131. Heruti-Sover, Tali. 2019. “Report Finds Wide but Varying Pay Gaps by Gender, Religion and Background.” February  19. https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/business/report-finds-wide-but-varying-pay-gaps-bygender-religion-and-background-1.6953271 Herzberg-Druker, Efrat, and Haya Stier. 2019. “Family Matter: The Contribution of Households’ Educational and Employment Composition to Income Inequality.” Social Science Research 82:221–239. Herzog, Katie. 2018. “Hipster Parents Reject Gender Norms by Raising Kids Without Pronouns.” April 4. https://www.thestranger.com/slog/2018/04/04/26001767/hipster-parent-rejects-gender-normsby-raising-kids-without-pronouns Hess, Abigail. 2018. “Here’s How Much More Women Could Earn If Household Chores Were Compensated.” CNBC. April  11. https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/10/heres-what-women-could-earn-if-household-chores-were-compensated.html Hess, J., A. Henkel, J. Bohr et  al. 2018. “Sexuality after Male-to-Female Gender Affirmation Surgery.” Biomed Research International. May  2. Abstract available at: https://www.hindawi.com/journals/ bmri/2018/9037979/abs/ Hetter, Katia. 2019. “This is the World’s Happiest Country in 2019.” CNN. March 26. https://www.cnn. com/travel/article/worlds-happiest-countries-united-nations-2019/index.html Hickey, Chris, and Amanda Mooney. 2018. “Challenging the Pervasiveness of Hypermasculinity and Heteronormativity in an All-Boys’ School.” Australian Educational Researcher 45(2):237–253. Higginbotham, Evelyn Brooks. 2003. “African American Women in History.” In Major Problems in American Women’s History, edited by Mary Beth Norton and Ruth M. Alexander. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Hignett, Katherine. 2018. “Everything ‘The Female Brain’ Gets Wrong about the Female Brain.” Newsweek. February 10. https://www.newsweek.com/science-behind-female-brain-802319 Hill, Anita. 2019. “Anita Hill: Let’s Talk about How to End Sexual Violence.” New York Times. May 9. https:// www.nytimes.com/2019/05/09/opinion/anita-hill-sexual-violence.html Hill, E. Jeffrey, David B. Allsop, Ashley B. LeBaron, and Roy A. Bean. 2017. “How Do Money, Sex, and Stress Influence Martial Instability?” Journal of Financial Therapy 8(1):Article 3. Hill, Joseph. 2018. Wrapping Authority: Women Islamic leaders in a Sufi Movement in Dakar, Senegal. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Hill, Rosemary Lucy, and Heather Savigny. 2019. “Sexual Violence and Free Speech in Popular Music.” Popular Music 38(2):237–251. Hilleary, Cecily. 2018. “Native American Two-Spirits Look to Reclaim Lost Heritage.” VOA News. June 15. https://www.voanews.com/usa/native-american-two-spirits-look-reclaim-lost-heritage Hills, Peter J., Elisabeth Seib, Megan Pleva et al. 2020. ”Consent, Wantedness, and Pleasure: Three Dimensions Affecting the Perceived Stress of and Judgements of Rape in Sexual Encounters.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 26(1):171–197. Hines, Melissa, Vickie Pasterski, Debra Spencer et  al. 2016. “Prenatal Androgen Exposure Alters Girls’ Responses to Information Indicating Gender-Appropriate Behaviour.” Philosophical Transactions 371(1688). Royal Society of London. February 19. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4785908/ Hinsdale, Mary Ann. 2016. “Vatican II and Feminism: Recovered Memories and Refreshed Hopes.” Toronto Journal of Theology 32(2):251–272. Hirschi, Andreas, Kristen M. Shockley, and Hannes Zacher. 2019. “Achieving Work-Family Balance: An Action Regulation Model.” Academy of Management Review 44(1):150–171. Hirsh, Elizabeth, and Youngjoo Cha. 2017. “Mandating Change: The Impact of Court-Ordered Policy Changes on Managerial Diversity.” Industrial and Labor Relations Review 70(1):42–72.

References  651 HNN. 2017. “Study: Nearly Half of all Hawaii Marriages Involve Interracial Couples.” May  18. Hawaii News Now. http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/35467132/study-nearly-half-of-hawaii-marriagesinvolve-interracial-couples/ Hodapp, Christa. 2017. Men’s Rights, Gender, and Social Media. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. Hodel, Christina. 2016. “Negotiating Genre Boundaries and Mediating Gender Stereotypes on MTV’s 16 and Pregnant and Teen Mom.” Studies in Humanities 43(1/2):20–37. Hodgson, Geoffrey M. 2018. “What the World Can Learn about Equality from the Nordics.” World Economic Forum. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/08/what-the-world-can-learn-about-equality-from-thenordic-model Hoffnung, Michele. 1995. “Motherhood: Contemporary Conflict for Women.” In Women: A Feminist Perspective, edited by Jo Freeman. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield. Høgheim, Sigve and Rolf Reber. 2019. “Interesting, but Less Interested: Gender Differences and Similarities in Mathematics Interest.” Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research 63(2):285–299. Holland-Hall, Cynthia, and Elisabeth H. 2017. “Sexuality and Disability in Adolescents.” Adolescent Sexuality 64(2):435–449. Hollingworth, Leta S. 1916. “Social Devices for Impelling Women to Bear and Rear Children.” American Journal of Sociology 22(1):19–29. Holman, Jordyn. 2018. “Married Couples Don’t Want to Admit when Wives Outearn Husbands.” Bloomberg. July  17. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-07-17/married-couples-don-t-want-to-admitwhen-wives-outearn-husbands Holmberg, Diane, Tabatha M. Thibault, and Jennifer D. Pringle. 2018. “Gender Differences in Romantic Relationship Memories: Who Remembers? Who Cares?” Memory 26(6):816–830. Holmes, Robyn M. 2012. “The Outdoor Recess Activities of Children at an Urban School: Longitudinal and Intraperiod Patterns.” American Journal of Play Winter:327–351,390. Hood, Michelle, Peter A. Creed, and Bianca J. Mills. 2018. “Loneliness and Online Friendships in Emerging Adults.” Personality and Individual Differences 133:96–102. Hook Jennifer L. 2016. “Women’s Housework: New Tests of Time and Money.” Journal of Marriage and Family 79:179–198. Hopfensperger, Jean. 2018. “Test of Faith: The Unchurching of America.” StarTribune. August 18. http:// www.startribune.com/fewer-men-and-women-are-entering-the-seminary/490381681/ Hopkins, Emily J., and Deena Skolnick Weisberg. 2017. “The Youngest Readers’ Dilemma: A Review of Children’s Learning from Fictional Sources.” Developmental Review 43:48–70. Hopkins-Doyle, Aife, Robbie M. Sutton, Karen M. Douglas, Rachel M. Calogero. 2019. “Flattering to Deceive: Why People Misunderstand Benevolent Sexism.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 116(2):167–192. Hoplock, Lisa B., D.A. Stinson, and Chantele T. Joordens. 2019. “ ‘Is She really Going Out with Him’?” Attractiveness Exchange and Commitment Scripts for Romantic Relationships.” Personality and Individual Differences 139:181–190. Hopp, Toby, and Jolene Fisher. 2017. “Examination of the Relationship between Gender, Performance, and Enjoyment of a First-Person Shooter Game.” Simulation & Gaming 48(3):338–362. Horney, Karen. 1937. The Neurotic Personality of Our Time. New York: W.W. Norton. Horney, Karen. 1939. New Ways in Psychoanalysis. New York: W.W. Norton. Horowitz, Juliana Menasce, Ruth Igielnik and Kim Parker. 2018. “Women and Leadership 2018.” Pew Research Center. September 20. https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2018/09/20/women-and-leadership-2018/ Horseherder, Nicole. 2019. “Beautiful Water Speaks.” Sierra November/December:21. Horwath, Aaron. 2019. “Photoshop, Models, and the Law: How Far is too Far?” March 11. https://www. pixelz.com/blog/photoshop-models-laws/ Horwitz, Steven, and Sarah Skwire. 2017. Getting the States Out of Marriage: A  Brief History of Love, Money, and Power.” Reason 49(6):56–61.

652 References Hotaling, Edward. 2003. Islam without Illusions: Its Past, its Present, and its Challenge for the Future. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press. Hou, Angela. 2017. “The Two-Child Policy and Maternity Leave in China: At the Crossroad of Demography and Female Empowerment.” Synergy: The Journal of Contemporary Asian Studies. January 16. http:// utsynergyjournal.org/2017/01/16/the-two-child-policy-and-maternity-leave-in-china-at-the-crossroad-ofdemography-and-female-empowerment/ Howard, Jacqueline. 2019. “More Screen Time for Toddlers Is Tied to Poorer Development a Few Years Later, Study Says.” CNN. January 28. https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/28/health/screen-time-child-development-study/index.html Howard, Lionel C., Jason C. Rose, and Oscar A. Barbarin. 2013. “Raising African American Boys: An Exploration of Gender and Racial Socialization Practices.” American Journal of Orthopsychiatry 83(23):218–230. Howland, Daphne. 2019. “Mattel Faces Lawsuit over Barbie, Hot Wheels Sales.” March 11. https://www. retaildive.com/news/mattel-faces-lawsuit-over-barbie-hot-wheels-sales/550165/ HPRG. 2019. Hominoid Psychology Research Group. “What is a Bonobo?” Duke University, Evolutionary Anthropology. https://evolutionaryanthropology.duke.edu/research/3chimps/chimps-bonobos HR Asia. 2018. IMF Chief: “Equal Pay for Men and Women Boosts Growth.” January 23. https://hrasiamedia.com/top-news/2018/imf-chief-equal-pay-for-men-and-women-boosts-growth/ Huang, Shirlena, and Brenda S. A. Yeoh. 2019. “Women as Natural Caregivers?: Migration, Healthcare Workers, and Eldercare in Singapore.” Pp. 184–197 in Women of Asia: Globalization, Development, and Gender Equity, edited by Mehrangiz Najafizadeh and Linda L. Lindsey. New York and London: Routledge. Huang, Shirlena, and Brenda S. A. Yeoh. 2019. “Women as Natural Caregivers?: Migration, Healthcare Workers, and Eldercare in Singapore.” Pp. 198–211 in Women of Asia: Globalization, Development, and Gender Equity, edited by Mehrangiz Najafizadeh and Linda L. Lindsey. New York and London: Routledge Huebsch, Tim. 2017. “This Running Sign Sums Up a Young Girl’s Willpower and Tenacity.” Canadian Running. January 25. https://runningmagazine.ca/the-scene/running-sign-goes-viral-on-social-media/ Hughes, David John, Moss Rowe, Mark Batey, and Andrew Lee. 2012. “A  Tale of Two Sites: Twitter vs. Facebook and the Personality Predictors of Social Media Usage.” Computers in Human Behavior 28(2):561–69. Hughes, Jan N., and Qian Cao. 2018. “Trajectories of Teacher-Student Warmth and Conflict at the Transition to Middle School: Effects on Academic Engagement and Achievement.” Journal of School Psychology 67:148–162. Human Rights Watch. 2016. “Like Walking through a Hailstorm.” https://www.hrw.org/report/2016/12/07/ walking-through-hailstorm/discrimination-against-lgbt-youth-us-schools Human Rights Watch. 2018. “No Support: Russia’s ‘Gay Propaganda’ Law Imperils LGBT Youth.” https:// www.hrw.org/report/2018/12/11/no-support/russias-gay-propaganda-law-imperils-lgbt-youth Human Rights Watch. 2019. “Russia: New Wave of Anti-LGBT Persecution: Authorities Fail to Address Threats against Rights Defenders.” https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/02/15/russia-new-wave-anti-lgbtpersecution Humphreys, T. 2007. “Perceptions of Sexual Consent: The Impact of Relationship History and Gender.” Journal of Sex Research 44(4):307–315. Hunt, Mary E. 2014. “The Trouble with Francis: Three Things that Worry Me.” SWS Network News February 2:5–9. Huntington, Clare. 2018. “The Empirical Turn in Family Law.” Columbia Law Review 118(227). Fordham Law Legal Studies Research Paper No. 32106866. January 23. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers. cfm?abstract_id=3106866 Hurd Clarke, Laura, and Maya Lefokowitz. 2018. “I Don’t Really Have Any Issue with Masculinity: Older Canadian Men’s Perceptions and Experiences of Embodied Masculinity.” Journal of Aging Studies 45:18–24.

References  653 Hurt, Tera R., Jeffrey K. Shears, Margaret C. O’Connor, and Sharon B. Hodge. 2017. “Married Black Men’s Observations of Fathers’ Teachings about Husbandhood.” Personal Relationships 24:84–101. Hurtado, Aida, and Mrinal Sinha. 2016. Beyond Machismo: Intersectional Latino Masculinities. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press. Hutchison, Ashley N., and Lawrence H. Gerstein. 2016. “The Impact of Gender and Intercultural Experiences on Emotion Recognition.” Revista de Cercetare si Intervenie Sociala 54:125–141. Hutchison, Jane E., Ian M. Lyons, and Daniel Ansari. 2019. “More Similar than Different: Gender Differences in Children’s Basic Numerical Skills are the Exception not the Rule.” Child Development 90(1):e66–e79. Hyde, Janet Shibley, Sara M. Linder, Marcia C. Linn, Amy B. Ellis, and Caroline C. Williams. 2008. “Gender Similarities Characterize Math Performance.” Science 321(July 25):494–495. Hyde, Janet Shibley, Rebecca S. Bigler, Daphna Joel et al. 2019. “The Future of Sex and Gender in Psychology: Five Challenges to the Gender Binary.” American Psychologist 74(2):171–193. Hylen, Susan E. 2014. “Modest, Industrious, and Loyal: Reinterpreting Conflicting Evidence for Women’s Roles.” Biblical Theology Bulletin 44(1):3–12. Hymowitz, Kay. 2015. “What the ‘Mounting Evidence’ on Working Moms Really Shows.” Institute for Family Studies. https://ifstudies.org/blog/what-the-mounting-evidence-on-working-moms-really-shows Ibrahim, Farid. 2019. “Homophobia and Rising Islamic Intolerance Push Indonesia’s Intersex Bissu Priests on the Brink.” ABC News. February 26. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-02-27/indonesia-fifth-gendermight-soon-disappear/10846570 Ide, Michael Enku, Blair Harrington, Yolanda Wiggins et al. 2018. “Emerging Adult Sons and Their Fathers: Race and the Construction of Masculinity.” Gender & Society 32(1):5–33. IIM. 2016. “Exploring Kibbutz Roots.” Gender in Israel. Israel Institute Magazine Spring/Summer:4–6. ILGWU. 2015. International Ladies Garment Workers Union. “History of the ILGWU.” http://ilgwu.ilr.cornell. edu/history/riseOfImports.html Imhoff, Sarah. 2016. “The Myth of Jewish Feminization.” Jewish Social Studies: History, Culture, Society 21(3):126–152. Imperatori-Lee, Natalia. 2016. “Women Priests or Not: Gendered Theology is Hurting the Church in America.” America: The Jesuit Review. November 6. https://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2016/11/06/ women-priests-or-not-gendered-theology-hurting-church India Today. 2015. “The Abolished ‘Sati Pratha’: Lesser Known Facts on the Banned Practice.” December 4 https://www.indiatoday.in/education-today/gk-current-affairs/story/sati-pratha-275586-2015-12-04 Ingurazova, Olga.2019. “The ‘#MeToo Hurricane’: Rape Case Divides a Russian City and Stirs Rare Debate on Feminism and Justice.” Washington Post. May 29. https://pressfrom.info/uk/news/world/us-news/339208-the-metoo-hurricane-rape-case-divides-a-russian-city-and-stirs-rare-debate-on-feminism-and-justice. html Intons-Peterson, Margaret Jean. 1988. Children’s Concepts of Gender. Norwood, NJ:Ablex. IPU. 2019. “Women in National Parliaments.” Inter-Parliamentary Union. February 1. http://archive.ipu.org/ wmn-e/classif.htm Ispa, Jean M., Chang Su-Russell, and Jihee Im. 2019. “Conversations between African American Mothers and Children about School and Education.” Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology 26(1):92–101. Itakura, Hiroko. 2014. “Femininity in Mixed-Talk and Intercultural Communication: Are Japanese Women Polite and Submissive?” Pragmatics and Society 5(3):455–483. Ito, Kinko. 2002. “The World of Japanese Ladies’ Comics: From Romantic Fantasy to Lustful Perversion.” Journal of Popular Culture 36(1):68–85. IWPR. 2016. Institute for Women’s Policy Research. “Native American Women Saw the Largest Declines in Wages over the Last Decade among All Women.” IWPR #Q055 September. https://iwpr.org/wp-content/uploads/wpallimport/files/iwpr-export/publications/Q055.pdf IWPR. 2017. Institute for Women’s Policy Research. “Single Mothers in College: Growing Enrollment, Financial Challenges, and the Benefits of Attainment.” IWPR #C460. September. https://iwpr.org/wp-content/ uploads/2017/09/C460_8.21.17_Single-Mothers-Briefing-Paper-FINAL-2.pdf

654 References IWPR. 2019a. Institute for Women’s Policy Research. “Women, Automation and the Future of Work” (Executive Summary). March 13. https://iwpr.org/publications/women-automation-future-work-exec-summary/ IWPR. 2019b. Institute for Women’s Policy Research. “Pay Equity and Discrimination.” https://iwpr.org/ issue/employment-education-economic-change/pay-equity-discrimination/ Iyanga-Mambo, Ester. 2017. “Gender-Based Verbal and Nonverbal Communication: A Case Study of Spokespeople in British TV Advertisement Testimonials.” Southern Journal of Communication 41(2):95–118. Jackson, Jeffrey, Richard B. Miller, Megan Oka, and Ryan G. Henry. 2014. “Gender Differences in Marital Satisfaction: A Meta-analysis.” Journal of Marriage and Family 76:105–129. Jacobs, Josephine C., Courtney H. Van Houtven, Terri Tanielian, and Rajeev Ramchand. 2019. “Economic Spillover Effects of Intensive Unpaid Caregiving.” PharmacoEconomics 37(4):553–562. Jacobson, Etrk. 2018. “Performing and Resisting Toxic Masculinities on Sports News Comment Boards.” In Literacies, Sexualities, and Gender: Understanding Identities from Preschool to Adulthood, edited by Barbara J. Guzzetti, Thomas W. Bean, and Judith Dunkerly-Bean. New York: Routledge. Jacobson, Gary C. 2019. “Extreme Referendum: Donald Trump and the 2018 Midterm Elections.” Political Science Quarterly 134(1):9–38. Jacquette, Jane. 2017. “Women/Gender and Development: The Growing Gap between Theory and Practice.” Comparative International Development 52(2):242–262. Jafar, Afshan. 2019. “Should We Celebrate Sport’s Illustrated Burkini Cover?” May  28. https://blog.lareviewofbooks.org/essays/celebrate-sports-illustrateds-burkini-cover/ Jamel, Joanna. 2018. “Trans People and their Experiences of Transphobia in Indigenous Cultures.” Chapter 1, pp. 1–19 in Transphobia Hate Crime. Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave MacMillan. Jamieson, Alastair. 2016. “2016 Presidential Debate: Trump Accused of ‘Stalking’ Clinton on Stage.” NBC News. October  10. https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/2016-presidential-debates/presidential-debate-trumpaccused-stalking-clinton-stage-n663516 Jane, Emma A. 2016. “Online Misogyny and Feminist Digitalism.” Continuum: Journal of Media & Cultural Studies 30(3):284–297. Janning, Michelle, Wenjun Gao, and Emma Snyder. 2018. “Constructing Shared ‘Space’: Meaningfulness in Long-Distance Romantic Relationship Communication Formats.” Journal of Family Issues 39(5):1281–1303. Jaramillo-Sierra, Ana L., and Katherine R. Allen. 2016. “Feminist Perspectives on Family Relationships: Part 2.” Sex Roles 74(1–2):477–479. Jardim, Georgina L. 2014. Recovering the Female Voice in Islamic Scripture: Women and Silence. Farnham, Surrey, UK: Ashgate Publishing. Jarvis, Sharon E., and Soo-Hye Han. 2018. Votes That Count and Voters Who Don’t: How Journalists Sideline Electoral Participation (Without Even Knowing It). University Park, PA: Penn State University Press. Jaworski, Taylor. 2014. “You’re in the Army Now: The Impact of World War II on Women’s Education, Work, and Family.” Journal of Economic History 74(1):169–195. Jeanfreau, Michelle M., Anthony P. Jurich, and Michael D. Mong. 2014. “An Examination of Potential Attractions of Women’s Marital Infidelity.” American Journal of Family Therapy 42:14–28. Jenkins, Joy Michelle, and Erika Katherine Johnson. 2017. “Body Politics: Coverage of Health Topics and Policy in U.S. Feminist Magazines.” Mass Communication and Society 20(2):260–280. Jenkins, Philip. 2013. “A Secular Latin America?” Christian Century. March 12. www.christiancentury.org/ article/2013-02/secular-latin-america Jensen, Frances E., with Amy Ellis Nutt. 2016. The Teenage Brain: A Neuroscientist’s Survival Guide to Raising Adolescents and Young Adults. New York: Harper. Jensen, Laura E., and Eric D. Deemer. 2019. “Identity, Campus Climate, and Burnout among Undergraduate Women in STEM Fields.” Career Development Quarterly 67(2): 96–109. Jerslev, Anne. 2018. “The Elderly Female in Beauty and Fashion Ads: Joan Didion for Céline.” European Journal of Cultural Studies 21(3):349–362. John, Tara. 2018. “Crackdown on Sexist Ads Outlaws Bad Female Drivers and Inept Dad Commercials.” CNN. December 14. https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/14/health/gender-stereotype-ad-ban-gbr-scli-intl/index.html

References  655 John, Tara. 2019. “No Country Will Achieve Gender Equality by 2030.” CNN. June 3. https://www.cnn. com/2019/06/03/world/gender-equality-report-intl/index.html Johnson, Helen. 2019. “Gender Bias In Tests: Numbers Themselves Prove Sexist.” April 25. https://miscellanynews.org/2019/04/25/opinions/gender-bias-in-tests-numbers-themselves-prove-sexist/ Johnson, Hortense. 1943/1996. “Hortense Johnson on Black Women and the War Effort, 1943.” In Major Problems in American Women’s History, edited by Mary Beth Norton and Ruth M. Alexander. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath. Johnson, Kecia R., and Karyn Loscocco. 2015. “Black Marriage through the Prism of Gender, Race, and Class.” Journal of Black Studies 46(2):142–171. Johnson, Maureen. 2017. “Trickle-Down Bullying and the Truly Great American Response: Can Responsible Rhetoric in Judicial Advocacy and Decision-Making Help Heal the Divisiveness of the Rump Presidency?” American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law 25(4):445–507. Johnson, Paula A., Sheila E. Widnall, and Frazier F. Benya (eds.). 2018. Sexual Harassment of Women: Climate, Culture, and Consequences in Academic Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Washington (DC): National Academies Press. Johnston, Anne., Barbara Friedman, and Sara Peach. 2011. “Standpoint in Political Blogs: Voice, Authority, and Issues.” Women’s Studies 40:269–298. Jones, Aubrey, Virginia Ramseyer Winter, Emily Pekarek, and Jayme Walters. 2018a. “Binge Drinking and Cigarette Smoking among Teens: Does Body Image Play a Role?” Children and Youth Services Review 91:232–236. Jones, Ja’han. 2019. “Here’s A Running List of the Women Trump Has Demeaned Using the Word ‘Nasty’: The President of the United States Deploys the Insult to Tar Women Who Don’t Bend to His Will.” Huffington Post. August 23. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/donald-trump-nasty-women_n_5d5eaf1ae4b0dfcbd48983bc Jones, Janet S., Shelley R. Tapp, Barry W. Evans, and Ralph J. Palumbo. 2016. “Gender Differences in Online Communication in Higher Education.” Academy of Business Research Journal 4:45–52. Jones, Lucy, Sara Mills, Laura L. Paterson, Georgina Turner, and Laura Coffey-Glover. 2017. “Identity and Naming Practices in British Marriage and Civil Partnerships.” Gender and Language 11(3):309–335. Jones, Martinque K., Mariel Bugue, and Mari Miville L. 2018. “African American Gender Roles: A Content Analysis of Empirical Research From 1981 to 2017.” Journal of Black Psychology 44(5):450–486. Jongenelis, Michelle I, Caitlin Kameron, Daniel Rudaizky, and Simone Pettigrew. 2019. “Support for E-Cigarette Regulations among Australian Young Adults.” BMC Public Health 19(67):9 pages. Jordan, Jewel. 2018. Profile America Facts for Features: Cb18-Ff.09. “American Indian and Alaska Native Heritage Month: November  2018.” October  25 https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/newsroom/facts-for-features/2018/cb18ff09-aian.pdf Jordan-Young, Rebecca M., and Katrina Karkazis. 2019. Testosterone: An Unauthorized Biography. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Jovanovic, Jasna, and Jean Calterone Williams. 2018. “Gender, Sexual Agency, and Friends with Benefits Relationships.” Sexuality & Culture 22(2):555–576. Joyce, Rosemary A. 2008. Ancient Bodies, Ancient Lives: Sex, Gender, and Archaeology. New York: Thames and Hudson. Jozkowski, Kristen N., and Jacquelyn D. Wiersma-Mosley. 2017. “The Greek System: How Gender Inequality and Class Privilege Perpetuate Rape Culture.” Family Relations 66:89–103. Jozkowski, Kristen N., Tiffany L. Marcantonio, and Mary E. Hunt. 2017. “College Students’ Sexual Consent Communication and Perceptions of Sexual Double Standards: A Qualitative Investigation.” Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health 49(4):237–244. Juan, Mary Joyce D., Sarah E. Nunnink, Ebony O. Butler, and Carolyn B. Allard. 2017. “Gender Role Stress Mediates Depression among Veteran Men with Military Sexual Trauma.” Psychology of Men & Masculinities 18(3): 243–250. Julé, Allyson. 2017. A Beginner’s Guide to Language and Gender. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. Jump, Jim. “Ethical College Admissions: Affirmative Action for Men.” Inside Higher Ed. December 11. https:// www.insidehighered.com/admissions/views/2017/12/11/essay-affirmative-action-male-students

656 References June, Audrey Williams. 2019. “3 Things a Faculty-Pay Survey Shows about Academic Jobs.” Chronicle of Higher Education. April 10. https://www.chronicle.com/article/3-Things-a-Faculty-Pay-Survey/246092 Jung, Ae-Kyung, and Karen M. OBrien. 2017. “The Profound Influence of Unpaid Work on Women’s Lives: An Overview and Future Directions.” Journal of Career Development 46(2)October 3. Abstract available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/0894845317734648. Juškienė, Vaineta. 2010. “Female Image in the Biblical Text: Aspect of Creationism.” Bridges/Tiltai 52(3):115–121. Kafka, Julie M., Kathryn E. Moracco, Clare Barrington, and Afsaneh L. Mortazavi. 2019. “Judging Domestic Violence From the Bench: A Narrative Analysis of Judicial Anecdotes about Domestic Violence Protective Order Cases.” Qualitative Health Research 29(9):1132–1144. Kalinina, Ekaterina. 2017. “Becoming Patriots in Russia: Biopolitics, Fashion, and Nostalgia.” Nationalities Papers 45(1):8–24. Kalish, Rachel. 2013. “Masculinities and Hooking Up: Sexual Decision-making at College.” Culture, Society, & Masculinities 5(2):147–65. Kalish, Rachel. 2018. “The Gendered Meaning of Trust and its Role in Sexual Decision-Making Within American Collegiate Hookup Culture.” College Student Journal 52(3): 410–420. Kalmijn, Matthijs, and Christiaan W. S. Monden. 2012. “The Division of Labor and Depressive Symptoms at the Couple Level: Effects of Equity or Specialization?” Journal of Social  & Personal Relationships 29(3):358–374. Kamat, Padmaja. 2017. “Representations of the Hindu Divine Feminine: Implications for Female Empowerment in India.” International Journal of Arts & Sciences 10(1):535–541. Kamp Dush, Claire M., Jill E. Yavorsky, and Sarah J. Schoppe-Sullivan. 2017. Sex Roles 78(11–12):715–730. Kanamori, Yasuko, Teresa K. Pegors, Jada Hall, and Rebekah Guerra. 2018. “Christian Religiosity and Attitudes toward the Human Value of Transgender Individuals.” Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity 6(1):42–53. Kane, Emily W. 2012. The Gender Trap: Parents and the Pitfalls of Raising Boys and Girls. New York: New York University Press. Kaniel, Ruth Kara-Ivanov. 2015. “The Myth of the Messianic Mother in Jewish and Christian Traditions: Psychoanalytic and Gender Perspectives.” Journal of the American Academy of Religion 83(1):72–119. Kann, Drew. 2019. “5 Facts Behind America’s High Incarceration Rate.” CNN. April 21. https://www.cnn. com/2018/06/28/us/mass-incarceration-five-key-facts/index.html Kanter, Roseabeth Moss. 1974. The Problems of Tokenism. Wellesley, MA: Wellesley College Center for Research on Higher Education and the Professions. Kanze, Dana, Laura Huang, Mark A. Conley, and E. Tory Higgins. 2018. “We Ask Men to Win and Women Not to Lose: Closing the Gender Gap in Startup Funding.” Academy of Management Journal 61(2):586–614. Kapke, Theresa L., Margaret A. Grace, Alyson C. Gerdes, and Kathryn E. Lawton. 2017. “Latino Early Adolescent Mental Health: Examining the Impact of Family Functioning, Familism, and Global Self-Worth.” Journal of Latina/o Psychology 5(1):27–44. Kaplan, Danny, Amir Rosenmann, and Sara Shuhendler. 2017. “What about Nontraditional Masculinities? Toward a Quantitative Model of Therapeutic New Masculinity Ideology.” Men  & Masculinities 20(1):393–426. Kaplan, Danny, and Efrat Krol. 2019. “A  Cultural Model of Parenthood as Engineering: How Caregiving Fathers Construct a Gender-Neutral View of the Parent Role.” Journal of Family Issues 40(3):363–389. Kaplan, Ilana. 2019. “Best Female Rock Singers: An Essential Top 30 Countdown.” Udiscovermusic. March 11. https://www.udiscovermusic.com/stories/best-female-rock-singers/ Kar, Brajaballav, Madhu Chhanda Panda, and Mallika Devi Pathak. 2019. “Women’s Work-Life Balance: Compensation is the Key.” Journal of Management Research 19(1):29–40. Karazi-Presler, Tair, Orna Sasson-Levy, and Edna Lomsky-Feder. 2018. “Gender, Emotions Management, and Power in Organizations: The Case of Israeli Women Junior Military Officers.” Sex Roles 78(7–8):573–586.

References  657 Karlsen, Carol F. 2004. “The Devil in the Shape of a Woman: The Economic Basis of Witchcraft.” In Women’s America: Refocusing the Past, edited by Linda K. Kerber and Jane Sherron De Hart. New York: Oxford University Press. Karsay, Kathrin, Jörg, Matthes, Lisa Buchsteiner, and Veronika Grosser.2019. “Increasingly Sexy? Sexuality and Sexual Objectification In Popular Music Videos, 1995–2016.” Psychology of Popular Media Culture 8(4):346–357. Karvelis, Noah. 2018. “Race, Class, Gender, and Rhymes: Hip-Hop as Critical Pedagogy.” Educators Journal 105(1):46–50. Katz, Albert N., and Jonathan A. R. Woodbury. 2017. “Gender Differences in Being Thanked for Performing a Favor.” Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 46:481–498. Katz, Jackson. 2016. Man Enough? Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton, and the Politics of Presidential Masculinity. Northampton, MA: Interlink Books. Kaufman, Gayle, and Damian White. 2015. “What Makes a ‘Good Job’? Gender Role Attitudes and Job Preferences in Sweden.” Gender Issues 32(4):279–294. Kaur, Raminder. 2018. “Women Empowerment Through Five Year Plans in India.” International Journal of Advanced Educational Research 3(1): 42–45. Kaya, Aylin, Derek K. Iwamoto, Jennifer Brady et al. 2019. “The Role of Masculine Norms and Gender Role Conflict on Prospective Well-Being among Men.” Psychology of Men and Masculinities 20(1):142–147. Kaye, M. P., K. Lowe, K., and T.E. Dorsch, T. E. 2019. “Dyadic Examination of Parental Support, Basic Needs Satisfaction, and Student–Athlete Development During Emerging Adulthood.” Journal of Family Issues, 40(2), 240–263. Kean, Sam. 2007. “What’s in a Name?” New York Times Magazine. October 28:25. https://www.nytimes. com/2007/10/28/magazine/28wwln-idealab-t.html Keane, 2018. “U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Administrative Committee Statement on Sex Abuse Scandals: Committee Release Actions to be Taken within its Authority.” September 19. http://www.usccb. org/news/2018/18-152.cfm Keith, Thomas. 2017. Masculinities in Contemporary American Culture: An Intersectional Approach to the Complexities and Challenges of Male Identity. New York: Routledge. Keith, Tamara. 2020. “Trump Campaign Uses Racist and Sexist Tropes to Attack Kamala Harris.” National Public Radio. August 14. https://www.npr.org/2020/08/14/902659744/trump-campaign-uses-racist-andsexist-tropes-to-attack-kamala-harris Kelly, Annie. 2017. “The Alt-Right: Reactionary Rehabilitation for White Masculinity.” Soundings: A Journal of Politics and Culture Summer 66:68–78. https://www.lwbooks.co.uk/sites/default/files/s66_06kelly.pdf Kelly, Lynne, Robert D. Duran, and Aimee E. Miller-Ott. 2017. “Helicopter Parenting and Cell-Phone Contact between Parents and Children in College.” Southern Communication Quarterly 82(2):102–114. Kelly, Martina Ann, Lara Nixon, Caitlin McClurg, Albert Scherpbier et  al. 2018. “Experience of Touch in Health Care: A  Meta-Ethnography across the Health Care Professions.” Qualitative Health Research 28(2):200–212. Kelly, S., and Westerman, C. Y. K. 2014. “Immediacy as an Influence on Supervisor-Subordinate Communication.” Communication Research Reports 31:252–261. Kelsey, Linda 2016. “Why Older Women have Fallen Out of Love with Remarriage.” Telegraph. May 20. https:// www.telegraph.co.uk/family/relationships/i-dont-why-older-women-have-fallen-out-of-love-with-remarriage/ Kendall, Shari, and Deborah Tannnen. 2015. Pp. 639–660 in The Handbook of Discourse Analysis, Volume I, edited by Deborah Tannen, Heidi E. Hamilton, and Deborah Schiffrin. Chichester, UK: Wiley Blackwell. Kerr, Stacey, and Mardi J. Schmeichel. 2018. “Teacher Twitter Chats: Gender Differences in Participants’ Contributions.” Journal of Research on Technology and Education 57(2):266–293. Kent, Andrea M., Andre M. Green, and Phillip Feldman. 2015. “The Road less Traveled-Crossing Gender and Racial Lines in Comprehensive Mentoring.” International Journal of Educational Research 72:116–128. Keoghan, Sarah. 2018. “#New Feminism.” Daily Telegraph, Saturday Extra Edition. (Sydney). January 20:34.

658 References Kerber, Linda K., Jane Sherron De Hart, Cornelia Hughes Dayton, and Judy Tzu-Chun Wu. 2016. “The Trial of Anne Hutchinson, 1637.” P. 80 in Women’s America: Refocusing the Past, edited by L. Kerber, S. De Hart, C. Dayton, and J. Wu. New York: Oxford University Press. Kettrey, Heather Hensman. 2016. “What’s Gender Got to Do With It? Sexual Double Standards and Power in Heterosexual College Hookups.” Journal of Sex Research 53 (7):754–65. Khan, A.J., Y. Li, J.V. Dinh et al. 2019. “Examining the Impact of Different Types of Military Trauma on Suicidality in Women Veterans.” Psychiatry Research 274 (April):7–11. Khazan, Olga. 2019. “Why So Many Women Choose Abortion Over Adoption.” Atlantic. May 20. https:// www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2019/05/why-more-women-dont-choose-adoption/589759/ Khimm, Suzy. 2017. “Trump Halted Obama’s Equal Pay Rule. What it Means for Working Women.” NBC News. August  31. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/trump-killed-obama-s-equal-pay-rulewhat-it-means-n797941 Kiang, Lisa, Charissa S. L. Cheah, Virginia W. Huynh, Northridge Yijie Wang Hirokazu Yoshikawa. 2016. “Annual Review of Asian American Psychology, 2015.” Asian American Journal of Psychology 7(4): 219–255. Kiesel, Laura. 2018. “Don’t Blame Mental Illness for Mass Shootings; Blame Men.” Politico Magazine. January 17. https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/01/17/gun-violence-masculinity-216321 Kilby, Patrick. 2019. “Gendering Aid and Development Policy: Official Understanding of Gender Issues in Foreign Aid Programs in Asia.” Pp. 33–43 in Women of Asia: Globalization, Development and Gender Equity, edited by Mehrangiz Najafizadeh and Linda L. Lindsey. New York and London: Routledge. Killoren, Sarah E., and Arielle R. Deutsch. 2013. “A Longitudinal Examination of Parenting Processes and Latino Youth’s Risky Sexual Behaviors.” Journal of Youth and Adolescence 42(12):1982–1993. Kim, Sonja de Groot. 2008. “Girls on the Sidelines: ‘Gendered’ Development in Early Childhood Classrooms.” In The Transformation of Learning: Advances in Cultural-History Activity, edited by Bert van Oers, Wim Wardekker et al. New York: Cambridge University Press. Kim, Yonghwan. 2017 “Knowledge versus Beliefs: How Knowledge and Beliefs Mediate The Influence of Likeminded Media Use on Political Polarization and Participation.” Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 61(4):658–681. Kim, Young-Mi. 2018. “Gendered Outcomes of the Gender Composition of Jobs and Organizations: A Multilevel Analysis Using Employer–Employee Data.” International Sociology 33(6):692–714. King, Ursula. 1993. Women and Spirituality: Voices of Protest and Promise. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Kinsey, Alfred E., Wardell B. Pomeroy, and Clyde E. Martin. 1948. Sexual Behavior in the Human Male. Philadelphia: Saunders. Kippen, Rebecca, Edith Gray, and Ann Evans. 2018. “High and Growing Disapproval of Sex-Selection Technology in Australia.” Reproductive Health 15(1):9 pages. Kirby, Jen. 2018. “Read: Brett Kavanaugh’s Angry, Emotional Opening Statement: This Confirmation Process has Become a National Disgrace, Kavanaugh Said.” Vox. September  27. https://www.vox. com/2018/9/27/17911256/brett-kavanaugh-christine-blasey-ford-senate-hearing Kirui, David, and Grace Kao. 2018. “Does Generational Status Matter in College? Expectations and Academic Performance among Second-Generation College Students in the US.” Ethnicities 18(4):571–602. Kiselica, Mark S., Sheila Benton-Wright, and Matt Englar-Carlson. 2016. “Accentuating Positive Masculinity: A New Foundation for the Psychology of Boys, Men, and Masculinity.” Pp. 123–143 in APA Handbook of Men and Masculinity, edited by Y. Joel Wong and Stephen R. Wester. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Kito, Mie. 2016. “Shared and Unique Prototype Features of Relationship Quality Concepts.” Personal Relationships 23:759–786. Klagsbrun, Francine. 2017. Lioness: Golda Meir and the Nation of Israel. New York: Schocken Books. Klann, Elyssa M., Y. Joel Wong, and Robert J. Rydell. 2018. “Firm Father Figures: A  Moderated Mediation Model of Perceived Authoritarianism and the Intergenerational Transition of Gender Messages from Fathers to Sons.” Journal of Counseling Psychology 65(4):500–511.

References  659 Kleinhans, Kathryn. 2015. “Women and the Reformation: Then  & Now.” Living Lutheran. September  24. https://www.livinglutheran.org/2015/09/women-reformation-now/ Klemenson, Lawrence. 2017. “Freud: The First Anti-Psychiatrist.” Mad In America: Science, Psychiatry and Social Justice. December 15. https://www.madinamerica.com/2017/12/freud-first-anti-psychiatrist/ Kline, Kathy Kovner, and William Bradford Wilcox. 2013. Gender and Parenthood: Biological and Social Scientific Perspectives. New York: Columbia University Press. Knickmeyer, Nicole, Kim Sexton, and Nancy Nishimura. 2002. “The Impact of Same-Sex Friendships on the Well-Being of Women: A Review of the Literature.” Women & Therapy 25(1):37–59. Knight, George P., Gina L. Mazza, and Gustavo Carlo. 2018. “Trajectories of Familism Values and the Prosocial Tendencies of Mexican American Adolescents.” Developmental Psychology 54(2):378–384. Knight, George P., M. Dalal Safa, and Rebecca M.B. White. 2018. “Advancing the Assessment of Cultural Orientation: A Developmental and Contextual Framework of Multiple Psychological Dimensions and Social Identities.” Development and Psychopathology 30(5):1867–1888. Knight, Kyle. 2018. “US Medical Association Stands against Unnecessary Intersex Surgeries.” Human Rights Watch. https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/09/17/us-medical-association-stands-against-unnecessary-intersex-surgeries Knoblauch, Ann-Marie. 2007. “Promiscuous or Proper? Nymphs as Female Role Models in Ancient Greece.” Pp. 47–62 in Religion, Gender, and Culture in the Pre-Modern World, edited by Alexandra Cuffel and Brian Britt. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Knopp, Kayla, Scott Shelby, Ritchie Lane, Galena Rhoades et al., 2017. “Once a Cheater, Always a Cheater? Serial Infidelity across Subsequent Relationships.” Archives of Sexual Behavior 46(8):2301–2311. Knuckley, Jonathan. 2018. “ ‘I Just Don’t Think She Has a Presidential Look’: Sexism and Vote Choice in the 2016 Election.” Social Science Quarterly 100(1):342–358. Kochhar, Rakesh, and Anthony Cilluffo. 2018. “Income Inequality in the U.S. Is Rising Most Rapidly among Asians.” Pew Research Center. July  12. http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2018/07/12/ income-inequality-in-the-u-s-is-rising-most-rapidly-among-asians/ Kohlberg, Lawrence. 1966. “A Cognitive-Developmental Analysis of Children’s Sex Role Concepts and Attitudes.” In Eleanor Maccoby (ed.), The Development of Sex Differences, edited by Eleanor Maccoby. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Kohlman, Marla H., and Dana B. Krieg, 2017. “Gendered Institutions and Cultural Practices: Still Chasing The Legacy of Sandra Bem.” Pp. xi–xx in Discourses on Gender and Sexual Inequality: The Legacy of Sandra L. Bem, edited by Marla H. Kohlman and Dana B. Krieg. Bingley, UK: Emerald Publishing Ltd. Kollmayer, Marlene, Marie-Therese Schultes, and Barbara Schober. 2018. “Parents’ Judgments about the Desirability of Toys for Their Children: Associations with Gender Role Attitudes, Gender-typing of Toys, and Demographics.” Sex Roles 79(5–6):329–341. Kolozsvari, Orsolya. 2015. “’Physically We are Apart, Mentally We are Not’ Creating a Shared Space and a Sense of Belonging in Long-Distance Relationships.” Qualitative Sociology Review 11(4):102–115. Kondakov, Alexander. 2018. “Crip Kinship: A Political Strategy of People Who are Deemed Contagious by the Shirtless Putin.” Feminist Fomations 30(1):71–90. Koon-Magnin, Sarah, David Bowers, Jennifer Langhinrichsen-Rohlinga, and Catalina Aratab. 2016. “Social Learning, Self-Control, Gender, and Variety of Violent Delinquency.” Deviant Behavior 37(7):824–836. Kornrich, Sabino, Julie Brines, and Katrina Leupp. 2013. “Equalitarianism, Housework, and Sexual Frequency in Marriage.” American Sociological Review 78(1):26–50. Kotila, Letitia E., Sarah J. Schoppe-Sullivan, and Claire Kamp Dush. 2014. “Boy or Girl? Maternal Psychological Correlates of Knowing Fetal Sex.” Personality and Individual Differences 68:195–198. Kotyrlo, Elena. 2016. “Fertility and Commuting: Evidence Based on First-Birth Rates of Young Working Women.” Journal of Population Research 34:135–163. Kouros, Chrystyna, Megan Pruitt, Naomi Ekas et al. 2017. “Helicopter Parenting, Autonomy Support, and College Students’ Mental Health and Well-being: The Moderating Role of Sex and Ethnicity.” Journal of Child and Family Studies 26(3):939–949.

660 References Kowarski, Ilana. 2018. “How Gender Influences College Admissions.” U.S. News and World Report. November  2. https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/2018-11-02/how-gender-influencescollege-admissions Krainitzki, Eva. 2014. “Judi Dench’s Age-inappropriateness and the Role of M: Challenging Normative Temporality.” Journal of Aging Studies 29:32–40. Kramer, Karen Z., Laurelle L. Myhra, Virginia S. Zuiker, and Jean W. Bauer. 2016. “Comparison of Poverty and Income Disparity of Single Mothers and Fathers across Three Decades: 1990–2010.” Gender Issues 33:22–41. Kramer, Sarah. 2016. “There is an Interesting Difference in the Way Men and Women Communicate on Facebook.” Business Insider. June  9. https://www.businessinsider.com/men-women-facebookcommunication-styles-2016-6 Kreager, Derek A., Jeremy Staff, Robin Gauthier et al. 2016. “The Double Standard at Sexual Debut: Gender, Sexual Behavior and Adolescent Peer Acceptance.” Sex Roles 75(7–8):377–392. Krickellas, Joan. 2018. “Recognizing African-American Women in the Labor System.” Democracy Chronicles. February 3. https://democracychronicles.org/african-american-women/ Krys, Kuba, Karolina Hansen, Cai Xing, Alejandra Domínguez et al. 2015. “It is Better to Smile to Women: Gender Modifies Perception of Honesty of Smiling Individuals across Cultures.” International Journal of Psychology 50(2):150–154. Krys, Kuba, Melanie Vauclair, Colin A. Capaldi, Vivian Miu-Chi Lun et al. 2016. “Be Careful Where You Smile: Culture Shapes Judgments of Intelligence and Honesty of Smiling Individuals.” Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 40:101–116. Krznaric, Roman. 2017. “Carpe Diem Politics: Do More than Just Resist.” YES! Magazine 83:12. Kubow, Magdalena. 2015. “Women in the Church? A Historical Survey.” Magistra 27(2):51–80. Kudaibergenova, Diana T. 2019. “Project ‘Kelin’: Marriage, Women, and Re-Traditionalization in Post-Soviet Kazakhstan.” Pp.379–390 in Women of Asia: Globalization, Development, and Gender Equity, edited by Mehrangiz Najafizadeh and Linda L. Lindsey. New York and London: Routledge. Kudina, Olya. 2019. “Accounting for the Moral Significance of Technology: Revisiting the Case of Non-Medical Sex Selection” Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 16(1)75–85. Kuhar, Roman, and David Paternott. 2017. Anti-Gender Campaigns in Europe: Mobilizing against Equality. London and New York: Roman & Littlefield. Kuhn, Elisabeth A., and Gabriel Ute. 2014. “Actual and Potential Gender-Fair Language Use: The Role of Language Competence and the Motivation to Use Accurate Language.” Journal of Language and Social Psychology 33(2):214–225. Kuhn, Kristine, Tera L. Galloway, and Maureen Collins-Williams. 2017. “Simply the Best: An Exploration of Advice Small Business Owners Value.” Journal of Business Venturing Insights 8:33–40. Kulish, Andrea L., Alyson M. Cavanaugh, Gabriela L. Stein, Lisa Kiang et al. 2018. “Ethnic–Racial Socialization in Latino Families: The Influence of Mothers’ Socialization Practices on Adolescent Private Regard, Familism, and Perceived Ethnic–Racial Discrimination.” Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology 25(2):199–209. Kumar, Anu. 2017. “Brain Rules: The Empty Nest Syndrome Myth.” Daily Beacon. August 25. http://www. utdailybeacon.com/opinion/columns/brain-rules-the-empty-nest-syndrome-myth/article_b028ee94-881e11e7-982c-e763692fa1cb.html Kundra, Sakul. 2014. “Widow Immolation in Mughal India: Perceptions of French Travellers and Adventurers in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries.” Social Scientist 42(9/10):63–84. Kung, Karson T.F., Gu Li, Jean Golding, and Melissa Hines. 2018. “Preschool Gender-Typed Play Behavior at Age 3.5 Years Predicts Physical Aggression at Age 13 Years.” Archives of Sexual Behavior 47(4):905–914. Kuo, Chia-wen. 2017. “The Fetus as an Icon of Nature: Ecofeminist Treatment of the Unborn in the Age of the Anthropocene.” Global Studies Journal 10(1):15 pages.

References  661 Kuo, Feng-Yang, Chih-Yi Tseng, Fan-Chusan Tseng, and Cathy S. Lin. 2013. “A Study of Social Information Control Affordances and Gender Difference in Facebook Self-presentation.” CyberPsychology, Behavior and Social Networking 16(9):635–644. Kuo, Patty X., Brenda L. Volling, and Richard Gonzalez. 2018. “Gender Role Beliefs, Work-Family Conflict, and Father Involvement After the Birth of a Second Child.” Psychology of Men  & Masculinity 19(2):2434–256. Kurtzleben, Danielle. 2016. “Is It OK to Vote for Hillary Clinton Because She’s a Woman?” National Public Radio. April 11. https://www.npr.org/2016/04/11/473792646/is-it-ok-to-vote-for-clinton-because-shes-a-woman-an-8-year-old-weighs-in Kurtzleben, Danielle. 2020. “Virginia May Ratify The Equal Rights Amendment. What Would Come Next Is Murky.” National Public Radio. https://www.npr.org/2020/01/08/794418122/virginia-may-ratify-theequal-rights-amendment-what-would-come-next-is-murky Kuvalanka, Katherine A., Samuel H. Allen, Cat Monroe, Abbie E. Goldberg, and Judith L. Weiner. 2018. “The Experiences of Sexual Minority Mothers with Trans Children.” Family Relations 67:70–87. Kvande, Marianne Nilsen, Jay Belsky, and Lars Wichstrøm. 2018. “Selection for Special Education Services: The Role of Gender and Socio-Economic Status.” European Journal of Special Needs Education 33(4):510–524. Labrecque, Lindsay T., and Mark A. Whisman. 2017. “Attitudes toward and Prevalence of Extramarital Sex and Descriptions of Extramarital Partners in the 21st Century.” Journal of Family Psychology 31(7):952–957. Lacey, Nicola. 2017. “To Understand Women’s Rights We Must Look at Gendered Laws.” January  24. https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/openjustice/gender-and-la/ Lachkar, Joan. 2014. “The Rising Power of Japanese Women: A Pop Culture Revolution.” Journal of Psychohistory 41(4):301–308. LaFrance, Marianne, Marvin A. Hecht, and Elizabeth Levy Paluck. 2003. “The Contingent Smile: A Meta-analysis of Sex Differences in Smiling.” Psychological Bulletin 129(2):305–334. Lahav, Pnina. 2018. “A Great Episode in the History of Jewish Womanhood: Golda Meir, the Women Workers’ Council, Pioneer Women, and the Struggle for Gender Equality.” Israel Studies 23(1):1–5. Lair, Elicia C. 2020. “Gender Influences the Feedback Anger and Disgust Provide about Construal Use in Likelihood Judgment.” Psychology of Men & Masculinities 21(3):401–415. Laird, Yvonne, Samantha Fawkner, and Ailsa Niven. 2018. “A  Grounded theory of How Social Support Influences Physical Activity in Adolescent Girls.” International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-Being 13(1):1–14. Lakoff, Robin. 1975. Language and Woman’s Place. New York: Colophon. Lakoff, Robin. 2005. “Language, Gender, and Politics: Putting ‘Women’ and ‘Power’ in the Same Sentence.” In The Handbook of Language and Gender, edited by Janet Holmes and Miriam Meyerhoff. Malden, MA: Blackwell. Lam, Chun Bun, Christine Stanik, and Susan M. McHale. 2017. “The Development and Correlates of Gender Role Attitudes in African American Youth.” British Journal of Developmental Psychology 35: 406–419. Lamb, Sharon, and Julie Koven. 2019. “The Sexualization of Girls: An Update.” Culture Reframed: Building Resilience to Hypersexualized Media  & Porn. https://www.culturereframed.org/wp-content/ uploads/2019/01/CultureReframed-SexualizationOfGirlsReport-2019.pdf Lamont, Ellen. ‘ “We Can Write the Scripts Ourselves’: Queer Challenges to Heteronormative Courtship Practices.” Gender & Society 31(5):624–646. Landers, Stewart, and Farzana Kapadia. 2019. “50  Years After Stonewall, the LGBTQ Health Movement Embodies Empowerment, Expertise, and Energy.” American Journal of Public Health 109(6):849–850. Lang, Brent. 2019. “Movies Featured More Female Protagonists in 2018, but It’s Not All Good News (Study).” https://variety.com/2019/film/news/movies-female-protagonists-study-1203142498/ Lang, Sabine. 2016. “Native American Men-Women, Lesbians, Two-Spirits: Contemporary and Historical Perspectives.” Journal of Lesbian Studies 20(3-):299–323.

662 References Langman, Peter. 2017. “A Bio-Psycho-Social Model of School Shooters.” Journal of Campus Behavioral Intervention 5:27–34. Larsen Gibby, Ashley, and Kevin J. Thomas. 2019. “Adoption: A Strategy to Fulfill Sex Preferences of U.S. Parents.” Journal of Marriage and Family 8(2):531–541. Lartey, Jamiles, and Weihua Li. 2019. “New FBI Data: Violent Crime Still Falling.” September 30. https:// www.themarshallproject.org/2019/09/30/new-fbi-data-violent-crime-still-falling LaSalle, Michael. 2011. Emigrants on the Overland Trail: The Wagon Trains of 1848. Kirksville, MO: Truman State University. Laschober, T.C., J.M. Serovich, M.J. Brown et al. 2019. “Mediator and Moderator Effects on the Relationship between HIV-Positive Status Disclosure Concerns and Health-Related Quality of Life.” AIDS Care 31(8):994–1000. Lassiter, Pamela S., Daniel Gutierrez, Brian J. Dew, and Lyndon P. Abrams. 2017. “Gay and Lesbian Parents.” Family Journal 25(4): 327–335. Lauer, Jillian E., Sibel D. Ilksoy, and Stella F. Lourenco. 2018. “Developmental Stability in Gender-Typed Preferences between Infancy and Preschool Age.” Developmental Psychology 54(4):613–620. Lauger, Timothy P. and James A. Densley. 2018. “Broadcasting Badness: Violence, Identity, and Performance in Online Gang Rap Scene.” Justice Quarterly 35(5):816–841. Lauzen, Martha M. 2020. “The Celluloid Ceiling: Behind-the-Scenes Employment of Women on the Top 100, 250, and 500 Films of 2019.” https://womenintvfilm.sdsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/2019_ Celluloid_Ceiling_Report.pdf LaVito, Angelica. 2019. “CDC Says Teen Vaping Surges to more than 1 in 4 High School Students.” CNBC. September 12. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/12/cdc-says-teen-vaping-surges-to-more-than-1-in-4-highschool-students.html Law, Sophie. 2019. “Tahiti’s ‘Third Sex’ Uncovered: Fascinating Photographs Reveal a Rare Glimpse into the Ancient ‘Mahu’ Community Who Identify as Neither Male nor Female on Polynesian Island.” Daily Mail. October  9. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7555849/Fascinating-photographs-reveal-rareglimpse-ancient-mahu-community.html Lawson, Katie M., Bora Lee, Ann C. Crouter, and Susan M. McHale. 2018. “Correlates of Gendered Vocational Development from Middle Childhood to Young Adulthood.” Journal of Vocational Behavior 107:209–221. Lazar, Aryeh and Joseph H. Hammer. 2018. “Religiousness and Anti-Gay/Lesbian Attitudes: The Mediating Function of Intratextual Religious Fundamentalism.” Psychology of Violence 8(6):763–771. Leaper, Campbell, and Melanie M. Ayres. 2007. “A Meta-analytic Review of Gender Variations in Adults’ Language Use: Talkativeness, Affiliative Speech, and Assertive Speech.” Personality and Social Psychology Review 11(4):328–363. Leaper, Campbell, and Rachael D. Robnett. 2011. “Women are More Likely han Men to Use Tentative Language, Aren’t They? A  Meta-Analysis Testing for Gendert Differences and Moderators.” Psychology of Women Quarterly 35(1): 129–142. Leaper, Campbell. 2017. “Further Reflections on Sandra Lipsitz Bem’s Impact.” Sex Roles 76(1):759–765 Leaper, Campbell, and Carly K. Friedman. 2007. “The Socialization of Gender.” Pp. 561–587 in The Handbook of Socialization, edited by Joan E. Grusec and Paul D. Hastings. New York: Guilford Press. Lee, Hee Soo, and Kerri L. Knippen. 2019. “Does Sexual Communication Promote Partner Relationship among Older Adults? A Cross-Cultural Analysis.” International Journal of Developmental Science 13(1/2):67–75. Lee, Jayeon, and Young-shin Lim. 2016. “Gendered Campaign Tweets: The Cases of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.” Public Relations Review 42(5):849–855. Lee, Jennifer C., and Samuel Kye. 2016. “Racialized Assimilation of Asian Americans.” Annual Review of Sociology 42:253–273. Lee, Jusung, and Mihyun Oh. 2019. “The Moderating Effect of Gender on the Association between E-cigarette Use and Smoking Status: A Cross-Sectional Study.” Addictive Behaviors 93:108–114.

References  663 Lee, Soomi, Susan M. McHale, Ann C. Crouter et  al. 2017. “Finding Time Over Time: Longitudinal Links between Employed Mothers’ Work–Family Conflict and Time Profiles.” Journal of Family Psychology 31(5):604–615. Lee, Yoonjoo, and Sandra L. Hofferth. 2017. “Gender Differences in Single Parents’ Living Arrangements and Child Care Time.” Journal of Child & Family Studies 26(12):3439–3451. Lee, Yun-Suk, and Linda J. Waiter. 2010. “How Appreciated Do Wives Feel for the Housework they Do?” Social Science Quarterly 91(2):476–492. Legate, Nicole, Netta Weinstein, William S. Ryan, and Cody R. DeHaan. 2019. “Parental Autonomy Support Predicts Lower Internalized Homophobia and Better Psychological Health Indirectly through Lower Shame in Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Adults.” Stigma and Health 4(4):367–376. Lehman, Brett. 2014, “Gender Differences in Bullying Victimization: The Roles of Academics and School Context.” Sociological Spectrum 34:549–570. Lehman, Edward C.. 2002. Women’s Path into Ministry: Six Major Studies. Durham, NC: Duke Divinity School. Lehmann, Peter S., Ryan C. Meldrum, and Mark A. Greenwald. 2019. “Upward Departures from Structured Recommendations in Juvenile Court Dispositions: The Intersection of Race, Ethnicity, and Gender.” Justice Quarterly 37(3):514–540. Lehmiller, Justin J., Laura E. Vanderdrift, and Janice R. Kelly. 2011. “Sex differences in Approaching Friends With Benefits Relationships.” Journal of Sex Research 48(2/3):275–284. Lehmiller, Justin. 2018. “Asexuality Isn’t A Mental Disorder Or Sexual Dysfunction—It’s A Sexual Orientation.” Kinsey Institute. https://blogs.iu.edu/kinseyinstitute/2018/04/13/asexuality-sexual-orientation/ Leiber, Michael J., Maude Beaudry-Cyr, Jennifer H. Peck, and Kristin Y. Mack. 2018. “Sentencing Recommendations by Probation Officers and Judges: An Examination of Adult Offenders across Gender.” Women & Criminal Justice 28(2):100–124. Leiner, Marie, Izul De la Vega, and Bert Johansson. 2018. “Deadly Mass Shootings, Mental Health, and Policies and Regulations: What We Are Obligated to Do!” Frontiers in Pediatrics 6:99. Leland, Andrew S. 2017. “Navigating Gay Fatherhood: The Experiences of Four Sets of Gay Fathers with their Children’s Education.” Gender and Education 29(5):632–647. Leland, Christine H., Jerome Harste, and Lisa Clouse. 2013. “Talking Back to Stereotypes.” Journal of Reading Education 38(2):5–9. Lemieux, Scott. 2019. “Supreme Court’s New Abortion Case Shows Roe v. Wade’s End Will Come Slowly: But It’ll Come.” October 7. https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/supreme-court-s-new-abortion-caseshows-roe-v-wade-ncna1063361 Lemmon, Megan, Sarah E. Patterson, and Molly A. Martin. ‘ “Mothers’ Time and Relationship with Their Adolescent Children: The Intersecting Influence of Family Structure and Maternal Labor Force Participation.” Journal of Family Issues 39(9): 2709–2731. Leopold, Thomas, and Matthijs Kalmijn. 2016. “Is Divorce More Painful When Couples Have Children? Evidence from Long-Term Panel Data on Multiple Domains of Well-being.” Demography 53(6):1717–1742. Leopold, Thomas. 2018. “Gender Differences in the Consequences of Divorce: A  Study of Multiple Outcomes.” Demography 55:769–797. Lepore, Jill. 2016. “The Woman Card: How Feminism and Antifeminism Created Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.” New Yorker. June  20. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/06/27/hillary-clintonand-the-history-of-women-in-american-politics Lerner, Gerda. 1996. “Placing Women in History.” In Major Problems in American Women’s History, edited by Mary Beth Norton and Ruth M. Alexander. Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath. Lester, Rebecca. 2019. Famished: Eating Disorders and Failed Care in America. Oakland, CA: University of California Press. https://www.amazon.com/Famished-Eating-Disorders-Failed-America/dp/0520303938 Lett, Elle, Nadia L. Dowshen, and Kellan E. Baker. 2020. “Intersectionality and Health Inequities for Gender Minority Blacks in the U.S.” American Journal of Preventive Medicine. Online August 10. Abstract available at: DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2020.04.013

664 References Leung, Janni, Amy Peacock, Samantha Colledge et al. 2019. “A Global Meta-analysis of the Prevalence of HIV, Hepatitis C Virus, and Hepatitis B Virus among People Who Inject Drugs—Do Gender-Based Differences Vary by Country-Level Indicators?” Journal of Infectious Diseases 220(1):78–90. Levenson, Michael. 2012. “Romney, Obama vie for Female Support; Economy, Health are Dueling Topics. Globe Newspapers. March  27. http://archive.boston.com/news/politics/articles/2012/03/27/ president_obama_mitt_romney_court_women_with_different_issues/ Levey, Tania G. 2018. Sexual Harassment Online: Shaming and Silencing Women in the Digital Age. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner. Levi, Sarah. 2018. “The Revival of the Kibbutz: A  Uniquely Israeli Institution.” Jerusalem Post. March  10. https://www.jpost.com/Magazine/A-uniquely-Israeli-institution-543296 Levine, Ethan Czuy. 2018. “Sexual Scripts and Criminal Statutes: Gender Restrictions, Spousal Allowances, and Victim Accountability after Rape Law Reform.” Violence Against Women 24(3):322–349. Levinovitz, Alan. 2017. “Towards a Theory of Toys and Toy-Play.” Human Studies 40(2):267–284. Levon, Erez. 2015. “Integrating Intersectionality in Language, Gender, and Sexuality Research.” Language and Linguistics Compass 9(7):295–308. Lewis, Ericka A. 2018a. “No Father Left Behind: Exploring Positive Father Involvement as a Protective Factor in the Prevention of Neglect and Promotion of Child Well-Being.” Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences 78(9-A). Lewis, Janet F., Scott L. Zeger, Ximin Li et al. 2019. “Gender Differences in the Quality of EMS Care Nationwide for Chest Pain and Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest.” Women’s Health Issues 29(2):116–124. Lewis, Jioni A. 2018b. “From Modern Sexism to Gender Microaggression: Understanding Contemporary Forms of Sexism and their Influence on Diverse Women.” Pp. 381–397 in APA Handbook of the Psychology of Women: History, Theory, and Battleground, edited by C.B. Travis, J.W. White, A. Rutherford et al. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Lewis, Jone Johnson. 2018c. “Rousseau on Women and Education.” https://www.thoughtco.com/ rousseau-on-women-and-education-3528799 Lewis, Jone Johnson. 2019. “Comparable Worth: Equal Pay for Work of Equal Value.” July 24. https://www. thoughtco.com/comparable-worth-pay-equity-3529471 Lewis, Kevin. 2016. “Consistency and Inconsistency among Romantic Partners Over Time.” Social Forces 95(1):283–320. Lewis, Nathaniel M., and Kathi Wilson. 2017. “HIV Risk Behaviours among Immigrant and Ethnic Minority Gay and Bisexual Men in North America and Europe: A Systematic Review.” Social Science & Medicine 189:115–128. Li, Hsueh-Hsiang. 2018. “Do Mentoring, Information, and Nudge Reduce the Gender Gap in Economics Majors?” Educational Economics 64:165–183. Li, Rebecca Y. Hei, and Wang Ivy Wong. 2016. “Gender-Typed Play and Social Abilities in Boys and Girls: Are they Related?” Sex Roles 74(9–10):399–410. Liang, Christopher T. H., Elisabeth A. Knauer-Turner, Carin M. Molenaar, and Errin Price. 2017. “A Qualitative Examination of the Gendered and Racialized Lives of Latina College Student.” Gender Issues 34:149–170. Liang, Christopher T.H., Elisabeth A. Knauer-Turner, Carin M. Molenaar, and Erin Price. 2017. “A  Qualitative Examination of the Gendered and Racialized Lives of Latina College Students.” Gender Issues 34(2):149–170. Liazos, Alex. 2016. Families: Joys, Conflicts, and Changes. New York: Routledge. Lieb, Kristin. 2018. Gender, Branding, and the Modern Music Industry. New York: Routledge. Lightfoot, J.L. (trans.) 2003. Lucian: On the Syrian Goddess. New York: Oxford University Press. Liles, Alesa, and Stacy Moak. 2018. “Feminist Pathways and Female Homicide Offenders.” Pp. 43–60 in Homicide and Violent Crime, edited by Mathieu Deflem. Bingley, UK: Emerald Publishing.

References  665 Lilleston, Randy. 2017. “Another Gender Gap: Money at an Older Age.” American Association of Retired Persons. October 23. https://www.aarp.org/money/investing/info-2017/retirement-gender-gap-fd.html Lin, Katherine Y., and Sarah A. Burgard. 2018. “Working, Parenting and Work-Home Spillover: Gender Differences in the Work-Home Interface across the Life Course.” Advances in Life Course Research 35:24–36. Lin, Liu Yi., Jaime E., Sidani, Ariel Shensa, and Ana Radovic et al. 2016. “Association Between Social Media Use and Depression among U.S. Young Adults.” Depression and Anxiety 33 (4):323–331. Lindberg, Carter. 2008. Love: A Brief History through Western Christianity. Malden, MA: Blackwell. Lindberg, Laura D., Isaac Maddow-Zimet, and Arik V. Marcell. 2019. “Prevalence of Sexual Initiation before Age 13 Years among Male Adolescents and Young Adults in the United States.” JAMA Pediatrics 173(6):553–560. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/2730066 Lindell, Anna K., Nicole Campione-Barr, and Sarah E. Killoren. 2017. “Implications of Parent-Child Relationships for Emerging Adults’ Subjective Feelings about Adulthood.” Journal of Family Psychology 31(7):810–820. Lindemann, Danielle J. 2017a. “Going the Distance: Individualism and Interdependence in the Commuter Marriage.” Journal of Marriage and Family 79:1419–1434. Lindemann, Danielle J. 2017b. “Commuter Spouses and the Changing American Family.” Contexts 16(4):26–31. Lindemann, Danielle J. 2018. “Doing and Undoing Gender in Commuter Marriages.” Sex Roles 79(1–2):36–49. Lindgren, Yvonne. 2013. “The Rhetoric of Choice: Restoring Healthcare to the Abortion Right.” Hastings Law Journal 64(2):385–423. Lindqvist, Ebba, Hannes Siguirjonsson, Caroline Möllermark et  al. 2017. “Quality of Life Improves Early after Gender Reassignment Surgery in Transgender Women.” European Journal of Plastic Surgery 40(3):223–226. Lindsey, Eric W. 2016. “Same-Gender Peer Interaction and Preschoolers’ Gender-Typed Emotional Expressiveness.” Sex Roles 75(5–6):231–242. Lindsey, Linda L. 1988. “The Health Status of Women in Pakistan: The Impact of Islamization.” Midwest Sociological Society, Minneapolis. Lindsey, Linda L. 1995a. “Religious Fundamentalism and the Quality of Life.” NGO Forum. U.N. Conference on Women, September. Beijing. Lindsey, Linda L. 1995b. “Women, Development, and the Quality of Life.” NGO Forum. U.N. Conference on women, September. Beijing. Lindsey, Linda L. 1996. “Gender Equity and Development: A Perspective on the U.N. Conference on Women.” Midwest Sociological Society, March. Chicago. Lindsey, Linda L. 1998. “Gender Issues in Japanese Style Management: Implications for American Corporations.” Asian Studies Development Program National Conference, March. Baltimore. Lindsey, Linda L. 1999. “The Politics of Cultural Identity and Minority Women in China.” MidAtlantic Region for Asian Studies, March. Gettysburg, PA. Lindsey, Linda L. 2002a. “Gender Segregation in a Global Context: Focus on Afghan Women.” Midwest Sociological Society, April. Milwaukee. Lindsey, Linda L. 2002b. “Globalization and Human Rights: Focus on Afghan Women.” Pp. 62–67 in September 11 and Beyond. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Lindsey, Linda L. 2004. Chapter 7, Sexuality. In Sociology, by Linda L. Lindsey and Stephen Beach. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. Lindsey, Linda L. 2006. “Globalization and Development: Focus on Women in China.” East-West Center Association, September. Hanoi. Lindsey, Linda L. 2010. “Glimpses of Gender in Japan: Equity Issues at the Millennium.” Japan Studies Association, June. Honolulu. Lindsey, Linda L. 2014. “Sharp Right Turn: Globalization and Gender Equity.” Sociological Quarterly 55(1):1–22.

666 References Lindsey, Linda L. 2016b. “Japanese American Experiences of Internment: From Citizen to Enemy.” Missouri History Museum, May 1. St. Louis. Lindsey, Linda L. 2018. “Globalization and Gender Equity Patterns for Women of Asia.” East-West Center Association International Conference, August 23. Seoul. Lindsey, Linda L. 2019a. “Globalization and Gender Equity in China.” Pp. 47–55 in Women of Asia: Globalization, Development, and Gender Equity, edited by Mehrangiz Najafizadeh and Linda L. Lindsey. New York and London: Routledge. Lindsey, Linda L. 2019b. “Globalization and Gender Equity Patterns in Asia.” Asian Studies Development Program National Conference, March 8. Nashville. Lindsey, Linda L., and Mehrangiz Najafizadeh. 2019. “Globalization, Development, and Gender Equity: A Thematic Perspective on Women of Asia.” Pp. 3–15 in Women of Asia: Globalization, Development and Gender Equity, edited by Mehrangiz Najafizadeh and Linda L. Lindsey. New York and London: Routledge. Lindsey, Treva. 2020. “Why COVID-19 is Hitting Black Women So Hard. “ Women’s Media Centre. April 17. https://womensmediacenter.com/news-features/why-covid-19-is-hitting-black-women-so-hard Lion, Brigitte, and Cécile Michel. 2016. “Women and Work in the Near East: An Introduction.” Pp. 1–7 in The Role of Women in Work in Society in the Ancient Near East, edited by Brigitte Lion and Cécile Michel. Boston and Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Lipka, Michael, and John Gramlich. 2019. Pew Research Center. “5 Facts about the Abortion Debate in America.” August 30. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/08/30/facts-about-abortion-debate-in-america/ Littman, Lisa. 2019. “Correction: Parent Reports of Adolescents and Young Adults Perceived to Show Signs of a Rapid Onset of Gender Dysphoria.” PLOS ONE March 19. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0214157 Liu, Hui, and Lindsey Wilkinson. 2017. “Marital Status and Perceived Discrimination among Transgendered People.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 79:1295–1313. Liu, William Ming. 2017. “White Male Power and Privilege: The Relationship between White Supremacy and Social Class.” Journal of Counseling Psychology 64(4):349–358. Livingston, Gretchen, and Amanda Brown. 2017. “Intermarriage in the U.S. 50  Years After Loving v. Virginia.” Pew Research Center May  18. http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2017/05/18/intermarriagein-the-u-s-50-years-after-loving-v-virginia/ Livingston, Gretchen. 2018a. Stay-At-Home Moms and Dads Account for about One-In-Five U.S. Parents.” Pew Research Center. September  24. http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/09/24/stay-at-homemoms-and-dads-account-for-about-one-in-five-u-s-parents/ Livingston, Gretchen. 2018b. “The Changing Profile of Unmarried Parents.” Pew Research Center. April 25. http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2018/04/25/the-changing-profile-of-unmarried-parents/ Livingston, Tyler N., Peter O. Rerick, and Monica K. Miller. 2019. “Psychological Explanations of How Gender Relates to Perceptions and Outcomes at Trial.” Pp. 137–173 in Advances in Psychology and Law (Vol. 4), edited by B. Borstein and M. Miller. Cham, SZ: Springer. Lliff, Rebecca. 2018. “What Women-Owned Businesses Want and Need in 2019.” Inc. December  12. https://www.inc.com/rebekah-iliff/what-women-owned-business-wants-in-2019.html Lobo, Roger A. 2013. “Where are we 10 Years after the Women’s Health Initiative?” Journal of Endocrinology & Metabolism 98(5):1771–1780. Loewen, Mark. 2018. What Does a Princess Really Look Like? BQB Publishing (Independent book publisher). https://bqbpublishing.com/ Lombard, Nancy. 2016. “ ‘Because They’re a Couple She Should Do What He Says’: Young People’s Justifications of Violence: Heterosexuality, Gender and Adulthood.” Journal of Gender Studies 25(3):241–253. Longman, Jeré, and Juliet Macur. 2019. “Caster Semenya Loses Case to Compete as a Woman in All Races.” New York Times. May 1. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/01/sports/caster-semenya-loses.html

References  667 Lonsdorf, Elizabeth V. 2017. “Sex Differences in Nonhuman Primate Behavioral Development.” Journal of Neurosciences Research 95:213–221. Lopez, German. 2019. “Trump’s Ban on Transgender Troops, Explained.” Vox. January 22. https://www. vox.com/identities/2017/7/26/16034366/trump-transgender-military-banLyons, López, Gustavo, Neil G. Ruiz, and Eileen Patten. 2017. “Key Facts about Asian Americans, a Diverse and Growing Population.” Pew Research Center. September 8. http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/ 2017/09/08/key-facts-about-asian-americans Lopez, Mark Hugo, Ana Gonzalez-Barrera, and Gustavo López. 2017. “Hispanic Identity Fades across Generations as Immigrant Connections Fall Away.” Pew Research Center. December 20. http://www.pewhispanic.org/2017/12/20/hispanic-identity-fades-across-generations-as-immigrant-connections-fall-away/ Lorber, Judith. 2005. Breaking the Bowls: Degendering and Feminist Change. New York: W. W. Norton. Lord, Carnes. 2013. Aristotle’s Politics. Chicago: University Chicago Press. Loscocco, Karyn, and Glenna Spitze. 2007. “Gender Patterns in Provider Role Attitude and Behavior.” Journal of Family Issues 28(7):934–954. Loutzenhiser, Lynn, Pamela McAuslan, and Donald P. Sharpe. 2015. “The Trajectory of Maternal and Paternal Fatigue and Factors Associated with Fatigue across the Transition to Parenthood.” Clinical Psychologist 19:15–27. Lowery, Patrick G. 2019. “Plea Bargains among Serious and Violent Girls: An Intersectional Approach Exploring Race in the Juvenile Court.” Feminist Criminology 14(1):115–139. Lowry, Caroline. 2019. “Intersex in 2018: Evaluating the Limitations of Informed Consent in Medical Malpractice Claims as a Vehicle for Gender Justice.” Columbia Journal of Law and Social Problems 52(2):321–356. Lublin, Joann. 2018. “Women Have Little Room for Error.” New York Times, October 23:R9. Lucht, Tracy and Kelsey Batschelet. 2019. “ ‘That Was What I Had to Use’: Social and Cultural Capital in the Careers of Women Broadcasters.” Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 96(1):194–214. Lucke, Jayne, Charmaine Jensen, Matthew Dunn et  al. 2018. “Non-medical Prescription Stimulant Use to Improve Academic Performance among Australian University Students: Prevalence and Correlates Of Use.” BMC Public Health 18(1):1270–1276. Ludden, David. 2017. “Fact and Fiction in Mixed-Race Marriages: The Issues Aren’t Just Black and White.” Psychology Today. July  30. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/talking-apes/201707/ fact-and-fiction-in-mixed-race-marriages Lufkin, Kate P. 2017. “An Exploratory Study of Marital and Quality of Life Ratings among Male Spouses of Military Members.” Contemporary Family Therapy 39:162–171. Lunkenheimer, Erika, Nilam Ram, Elizabeth A. Skowron, and Peifeng Yin. 2017. “Harsh Parenting, Child Behavior Problems, and the Dynamic Coupling of Parents’ and Children’s Positive Behaviors.” Journal of Family Psychology 31(6):689–698. Lybarger, Joseph E., Andrew S. Rancer, and Yang Lin. 2017. “Superior-Subordinate Communication in the Workplace: Verbal Aggression, Nonverbal Immediacy, and their Joint Effects on Perceived Superior Credibility.” Communication Research Reports 34(2):124–133. Lynch, Kellie R., Jonathan M. Golding, Jenna A. Jewell et al. 2019. “ ‘She is His Girlfriend—I Believe this is a Different Situation’: Gender Differences in Perceptions of the Legality of Intimate Partner Rape.” Journal of Family Violence 34(3):213–230. Lynn, David B. 1969. Parental and Sex Role Identification: A Theoretical Formulation. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan. Lyons, Matthew N. 2017. “Ctrl-Alt-Delete: An Antifascist Report on the Alternative Right” (The Origins and Ideology of the Alternative Right). Political Research Associates. January 20. https://www.politicalresearch. org/2017/01/20/ctrl-alt-delete-report-on-the-alternative-right/ Lystra, Karen. 1989. Searching the Heart: Women, Men and Romantic Love in Nineteenth Century America. New York: Oxford University Press.

668 References Lytle, Ashley, Jamie Macdonald, Christina Dyar, and Sheri R. Levy. 2018. “Ageism and Sexism in the 2016 United States Presidential Election.” Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy 18(1):81–104. Ma, Polly H.X., Zenobia C. Y. Chan, and Alice Yuen Loke. 2018. “A Systematic Review of the Attitudes of Different Stakeholders towards Prostitution and Their Implications.” Sexuality Research and Social Policy 15(3):231–241. Mabbett, Ian, and Jayant Bhalchandra Bapat. 2008. “Contextualising the Goddess.” In The Iconic Female: Goddesses of India, Nepal, and Tibet, edited by J. Bapat and I. Mabbett. Clayton (Victoria), AS: Monash University. MacEacheron, Melanie. 2016. “North American Women’s Marital Surname Change: Practices, Law, and Patrilineal Descent Reckoning.” Evolutionary Psychological Science 2(2):149–161. MacKenzie, Ian. 2017. “The Trouble with Gender in the Mythopoetic Men’s Movement.” March 28. https:// goodmenproject.com/featured-content/the-trouble-with-gender-in-the-mythopoetic-mens-movement-wcz/ MacLachlan, Bonnie. 2017. “Inhabiting/Subverting the Norms: Women’s Ritual Agency in the Greek West.” Pp.  182–196 in Women’s Ritual Competence in the Greco-Roman Mediterranean, edited by Matthew Dillon, Esther Eidinow, and Lisa Maurizio. London and New York: Routledge. Macleitch, Gail D. 2007. “Native American Women: Gender and Early American History.” Pp. 30–49 in The Practice of U.S. Women’s History: Narratives, Intersections, and Dialogues, edited by S. Jay Kleinberg and Vicki L. Ruiz. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press. MacNaughton, Glenda. 2007. “Early childhood education.” Pp.  263–267 in Gender and Education; Volume I, edited by Barbara J. Bank. Westport, CT: Praeger. MacPhee, David, and Sarah Prendergast. 2018. “Room for Improvement: Girls’ and Boys’ Homes Environments are Still Gendered.” Sex Roles 80(5–6):332–346. Madigan, Kevin J. 2015. Pp. 149–173, Ch. 9, “Religion: Monks and Nuns in the Monastic Centuries.” Medieval Christianity: A New History. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Magane, Azmia. 2019. “Fat-Shaming Doctors Mean People Don’t Get Diagnoses that they Need.” August 8. Bustle. https://www.bustle.com/p/fat-shaming-doctors-mean-people-dont-get-diagnoses-that-they-need-18554238 Magli, Ida. 2003. Women and Self Sacrifice in the Christian Church: A Cultural History from the First to the Nineteenth Century. Janet Sethre (trans.). Jefferson, NC: McFarland. Magnuson, Eric. 2007. Changing Men, Transforming Culture: Inside the Men’s Movement. Boulder, CO: Paradigm. Magnuson, Eric. 2008. “Rejecting the American Dream.” Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 37(3): 255–90. Magnusson, Charlotta, and Magnus Nermo. 2017. “Gender, Parenthood and Wage Differences: The Importance of Time-Consuming Job Characteristics.” Social Indicators Research 131(2):797–816. Mainwaring, Madison. 2019. “The Place to Challenge Ballet’s Gender Stereotypes? In Daily Class.” New York Times. January 25. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/25/arts/the-place-to-challenge-ballets-gender-stereotypes-in-daily-class.html Mal, Sibsankar. 2018. “The Hijras of India: A Marginal Community with Paradox Sexual Identity.” Indian Journal of Social Psychiatry 34(1):79–85 Malamut, Melissa. 2019. “Medicine Ignored Women’s Health for Years — That’s Finally Changing.” New York Post August 5. https://nypost.com/2019/08/05/medicine-ignored-womens-health-for-years-thats-finally-changing/ Mallett, Robyn K., Thomas E. Ford, and Julie A. Woodzicka. 2016. “What Did He Mean by that? Humor Decreases Attributions of Sexism and Confrontation of Sexist Jokes.” Sex Roles 75:272–284. Mallicoat, Stacy L. 2019. Women, Gender, and Crime. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Mallory, Allen, Jennifer Brown, Stacy Conner, and Una Kenry. 2017. “Finding What Works: New Clinicians’ Use of Standards of Care with Transgender Clients.” American Journal of Family Therapy 45(1):27–36. Malloy, Allie, Kate Sullivan, and Jeff Zeleny. 2018. “Trump Mocks Christine Blasey Ford’s Testimony, Tells people to ‘Think of Your Son’.” CNN. October 3. https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/02/politics/trumpmocks-christine-blasey-ford-kavanaugh-supreme-court/index.html

References  669 Mamonova, Natalia. 2019. “Understanding the Silent Majority in Authoritarian Populism: What Can we Learn from Popular Support for Putin in Rural Russia?” Journal of Peasant Studies 46(3):561–585. Mamuric, Nikki. 2019. “Femvertising: Advertising Taking Social Responsibility to Sell Brands.” Journal of Brand Strategy 7(4):318–325. Man, John. 2018. Searching for the Amazons: The Real Warrior Women of the Ancient World. New York: Pegasus Books. Mandujano-Salazar, Yunuen Ysela. 2019. “Exploring the Construction of Adulthood and Gender Identity among Single Childfree People in Mexico and Japan.” SAGE Open 9(2)April–June12 pages. https:// journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/2158244019855844 Mann, Robin, Anna Tarrant, and George W. Leeson. 2016. “Grandfatherhood: Shifting Masculinities in Later Life.” Sociology 50(3):594–610. Manne, Kate. 2018. Down Girl: The Logic of Misogyny. New York: Oxford University Press. Manohar, Namita N. 2013. “Mothering for Class and ethnicity: The Case of Indian Professional Immigrants in the United States.” Advances in Gender Research 17:159–185. Mao, Dung Minh, Sharon M. Danes, Joyce Serido, and Soyeon Shim. 2017. “Financial Influences Impacting Young Adults’ Relationship Satisfaction: Personal Management Quality, Perceived Partner Behavior and Perceived Financial Mutuality.” Journal of Financial Therapy 8(2):Article 3. Maranto, Robert, Kristen Carroll, Albert Change, and Manuel P. Teodoro. 2018. “Boys Will be Superintendents: School Leadership as a Gendered Profession.” Phi Delta Kappan 100(2):12–15. Maranz, Felice, and Rebecca Greenfield. 2018. “Men are the Ruling Voice on Earnings Calls.” St.  Louis Post-Dispatch. September 14:B6. Marasco, Vincent. 2018. “Addressing Hegemonic Masculinity with Adolescent Boys within the Counseling Relationship.” Journal of Child and Adolescent Counseling 4(3):226–238. Marczak, Mary S., Emily H. Becher, Alisha M. Hardman et al.. 2015. “Strengthening the Role of Unmarried Fathers: Findings from the Co-Parent Court Project.” Family Process 54(4):630–638. Marinho, Sofia. 2017. “Separate Mothering and Fathering: The Plurality of Parenting Within the Framework of Postdivorce Shared Parenting Norms.” Journal of Divorce & Remarriage 58(4):288–309. Marinucci, Mimi. 2016. Feminism is Queer: The Intimate Connection Between Queer and Feminist Theory (2/e). London: Zed. Marks, Michael J., Tara M. Young, and Yuliana Zaikman. 2019. “The Sexual Double Standard in the Real World Evaluations of Sexually Active Friends and Acquaintances.” Social Psychology 50(2): 67–79. Marr, Drue. 2019. “Three Networks, Two Candidates, One Problem: Sexist News Commentary During Hillary Clinton’s Presidential and Sarah Palin’s Vice-Presidential Campaigns.” Young Scholars in Writing 16:39–50. Marshall, Jill E. 2017. “The Recovery of Paul’s Female Colleagues in Nineteenth Century Feminist Biblical Interpretation.” Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion 33(2):21–36. Martell, Michael E. 2018. “Identity Management: Worker Independence and Discrimination against Gay Men.” Contemporary Economic Policy. 36(1):136–148. Martin, Alfred L. Jr. 2018. “The Queer Business of Casting Gay Characters on U.S. Television.” Communication, Culture & Critique. 11(2):282–297. Martin, Ashley E., and Katherine W. Phillips. 2017. “What ‘Blindness’ to Gender Differences Helps Women See and Do: Implications for Confidence, Agency, and Action in Male-Dominated Environments.” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 142:28–44. Martin, Carol Lynn, and Diane N. Ruble. 2004. “Children’s Search for Gender Cues: Cognitive Perspectives on Gender Development.” Current Directions in Psychological Science 13:67–70. Martin, Kathryn A., and Robert L. Barbieri. 2019. “Menopausal Hormone Therapy: Benefits and Risks.” September. https://www.uptodate.com/contents/menopausal-hormone-therapy-benefits-and-risks#H74906167 Martin, Rachel. 2016a. “The Making of Clinton: Character in the 2016 Election.” National Public Radio. September 4. https://www.npr.org/2016/09/04/492599386/the-making-of-clinton-character-in-the-2016-election

670 References Martin, Rachel. 2016b. “Sexism is Out in the Open in the 2016 Campaign: That May Have Been Inevitable.” National Public Radio. October  23. https://www.npr.org/2016/10/23/498878356/ sexism-is-out-in-the-open-in-the-2016-campaign-that-may-have-been-inevitable Martin, Rebecca. 2017. “Gender and Emotion Stereotypes in Children’s Television.” Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media 61(3):499–517. Martin, Wednesday. 2018. “What Bonobos Can Teach Us about Sexual Assault.” Atlantic. October 3. https://www. theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/10/are-men-wired-dominate-women-bonobos-suggest-not/571957/ Martinez, Taylor, Jacquelyn D. Wiersma-Mosley, Kristen N. Jozkowski, and Jennifer Becnel. “Good Guys Don’t Rape”: Greek and Non-Greek College Student Perpetrator Rape Myths.” Behavioral Sciences 8(7):60. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6070995/ Martins, Alexandra, Marco Pereira, Rita Andrade, Frank M. Dattilio et al. 2016. “Infidelity in Dating Relationships: Gender-Specific Correlates of Face-to-Face and Online Extradyadic Involvement.” Archives of Sexual Behavior 45:193–205. Marx, Karl. 1867/1976. Das Kapital (Vol. I). Ben Fowles (trans.). London: Penguin Books. Marx, Karl, and Friederich Engels. 1848/1964. The Communist Manifesto. Samuel Moore (trans.). New York: Washington Square. Marzoli, Daniele, Jan Havlíček, and S. Craig Roberts. 2018. “Human Mating Strategies: From Past Causes to Present Consequences.” Cognitive Science 9(2):18 pages. Masood, Salman, and Declan Walsh. 2013. “This Heroine Wears Burqa to Fight Evil.” New York Times July 28. www.nytimes. com/2013/07/29/world/asia/this-heroine-wears-burqa-in-battleagainst-evil.html?_r=0 Mast, Marianne Schmid, and Keou Kamiwa Kadji. 2018. “How Female and Male Physicians’ Communication is Perceived Differently.” Patient Education and Counseling 101(9):1697–1701. Master, Allison, and Andrew N. Meltzoff. 2016. “Building Bridges between Psychological Science and Education: Cultural Stereotypes, STEM, and Equity.” Prospects 46(2):215–234. Master, Allison, Sapna Cheryan, Adriana Moscatelli, and Andrew N. Meltzoff. 2017. “Programming Experience Promotes Higher STEM Motivation among First-Grade Girls.” Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 16:92–106. Masters, William H., and Virginia Johnson. 1966. Human Sexual Response. Boston: Little, Brown. Masters, William H., and Virginia Johnson. 1970. Human Sexual Inadequacy. Boston: Little, Brown. Matias, Marisa, and Anne Marie Fontaine. 2017. “Intentions to Have a Child: A  Couple-Based Process.” Family Relations 66(2):231–243. Matsa, Katerina, and Elisa Shearer. 2018. “News Use across Social Media Platforms, 2018.” Pew Research Center. September 10. http://www.journalism.org/2018/09/10/news-use-across-social-media-platforms-2018/ Matthews, Dylan. 2018. “Exclusive: We Re-Ran Polls form 1991 about Anita Hill, this Time about Christine Blasey Ford.” Vox. October 4. https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/10/4/17924900/ poll-anita-hill-clarence-thomas-christine-blasey-ford-brett-kavanaugh Mattison, Siobhán M., and Rebecca Sear. 2016. “Modernizing Evolutionary Anthropology: Introduction to the Special Issue.” Human Nature 27:335–350. Matz, David. 2012. Voices of Ancient Greece and Rome: Contemporary Accounts of Daily Life. Santa Barbara, CA: Greenwood Press. Maulia, Erwida. 2019. “Young Women are Injecting New Glamour into Modest Wear.” Nikkei Asian Review. July 17. https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Cover-Story/Young-Muslims-are-injecting-new-glamour-into-modest-wear Mawere, Munyaradzi. 2017. Theorising Development in Africa: Towards Building an African Framework of Development. Bamenda, Cameroon: Langaa RPCIG. May, Philip A., Christina D. Chambers, Wendy O. Kalberg et al. 2018. “Prevalence of Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders in 4 US Communities.” JAMA 319(5):474–482. Mayor, Adrienne. 2014. The Amazons: Lives and Legends of Warrior Women across the Ancient World. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

References  671 Mayor, Adrienne. 2016. “Warrior Women: The Archeology of Amazons.” Pp. 969–985 in Women in Antiquity: Real Women across the Ancient World, edited by Stephanie Lynn Budin and Jean Macintosh Turfa. Oxon. UK and New York: Routledge. Mazure, Carolyn M., and David A. Fiellin. 2018. “Women and Opioids: Something Different is Happening Here.” Lancet 392(1041):9–11. McBride-Stetson, Dorothy E. 2004. Women’s Rights in the U.S.A: Policy Debates and Gender Roles. New York: Routledge. McBroom, Leesa A., and Lawrence Ganong. 2017. “Mothers’ Parenting Responsibility after Divorce.” Pediatric Nursing 43(6):283–287. McCann, Hannah. 2016. “Epistemology of the Subject: Queer Theory’s Challenge to Feminist Sociology.” Women’s Studies Quarterly 44(3&4):224–243. McCarthy, Lauren. 2017. “Empowering Women Through Corporate Social Responsibility: A  Feminist Foucauldian Critique.” Business Ethics Quarterly 27(4):603–631. McCarthy, Margaret M. 2019. “Is Sexual Differentiation of Brain and Behavior Epigenetic?” Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences 25:83–88. McClain, Lisa. 2018a. “Pope Francis Won’t Support Women in the Priesthood, but Here’s What He Could Do.” The Conversation. March  5. https://theconversation.com/pope-francis-wont-support-women-in-thepriesthood-but-heres-what-he-could-do-91555 McClain, Lisa. 2018b. Divided Loyalties? Pushing the Boundaries of Gender and Lay Roles in the Catholic Church, 1534–1829. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. McCoy, Alexandra, Amy Rauer, and Allen Sabey. 2017. “The Meta Marriage: Links between Older Couples’ Relationship Narratives and Marital Satisfaction.” Family Process 56(4):900–914. McCullough, J.J. 2018. “The Catholic Church Scandal Hits American Conservatives Hard.” National Review. September 8. https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/09/catholic-abuse-scandal-challenge-foramerican-conservatives/ McCullough. Rafe, Franco Dispenza, Catharina Y. Chang, and Melissa R. Zeligman. 2019. “Correlates and Predictors of Anti-Transgender Prejudice.” Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity 6(3):359–368. McDermid, Brendan. 2015. CBS News/NYT Poll: Majority of U.S Catholics Positive about Church.” CBS News. September 20. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cbs-news-poll-majority-of-u-s-catholics-positiveabout-church/ McDermott, Martin J., and David H. Butler. 2018. “Women Entrepreneurs and the Influence of Gender on Successful Franchising.” Global Journal of Entrepreneurship 2(1):1–11. McDermott, Ryon C., Kipp R. Pietranonio, Brandon R. Browning et al. 2018. “In Search of Positive Masculine Role Norms: Testing the Positive Psychology Positive Masculinity Paradigm.” Psychology of Men & Masculinities 20(1):12–22. McDonald, James E., Jonathan R. Olson, Ann H. Lanning, H. Wallace Goddard, and James P. Marshall 2018. “Effects of Religiosity, Forgiveness, and Spousal Empathy on Marital Adjustment.” Marriage  & Family Review 54(4):393–416. McDuff, Daniel, Jeffrey M. Girard, and Rana el Kaliouby. 2016. “Large-Scale Evidence of Cross-Cultural Differences in Facial Behavior.” Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 41:1–19. McElhinny, Bonnie. 2014. “Theorizing Gender in Sociolinguistics and Linguistic Anthropology.” Pp. 48–67 in The Handbook of Language, Gender, and Sexuality, edited by Susan Ehrlich, Miriam Meyerhoff, and Janel Homes. Chichester, UK: Wiley Blackwell. McEuen, Melissa A. 2011. Making War, Making Women: Femininity and Duty on the American Home Front. Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press. McFadzen, Michael, David P. Dielentheis, Ronda Kasten et al. 2017. “Maternal Intuition of Fetal Gender.” Journal of Patient-Centered Research and Reviews 4(3):125–30.

672 References McGinn, Kathleen L., Mayra Ruiz Castro, and Elizabeth Long Lingo. 2015. “Mums the Word! Cross-National Effects of Maternal Employment on Gender Inequalities at Work and at Home.” Working Papers. Harvard Business School Division of Research. https://www.hbs.edu/news/releases/pages/growing-caregiving-crisis. aspx McGinn, Kathleen L., Mayra Ruiz Castro, and Elizabeth Long Lingo. 2018. “Learning from Mum: Cross-National Evidence Linking Maternal Employment and Adult Children’s Outcomes.” Work, Employment and Society. Harvard Business School. April 30. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017018760167 McGranahan, Carole. 2019. “A Presidential Archive of Lies: Racism, Twitter, and a History of the Present.” International Journal of Communication 13: 3164–3182. McGregor, Alyson J. 2019. “Are Women More Likely to Exhibit Psychogenesis … Or Just More Likely to be Diagnosed that Way?” Rhode Island Medical Journal April:1011. McGuire, Jessica, and Campbell Leaper. 2016. “Competition, Coping, and Closeness in Young Heterosexual Adults’ Same-Gender Friendships.” Sex Roles 74(9/10:422–435. McHugh, R. Kathryn, Victoria R. Votaw, Dawn E, Sugarman, and Shelly F. Greenfield. 2018. “Sex and Gender Differences in Substance Use Disorders.” Gender and Mental Health 66(December):12–23. McIntosh, Jennifer E., and Evelyn S. Tan. 2017. “Young Children in Divorce and Separation: Pilot Study of a Mediation-Based Co-Parenting Intervention.” Family Court Review 55(3):329–344. McKinney, Jennifer. 2015. “Sects and Gender: Reaction and Resistance to Cultural Change.” Priscilla Papers 29(4):15–23. McKirdy, Euan, and Ridana Gigova, 2018. “Pussy Riot Activist Hospitalized, Band Members Suspect Poisoning.” CNN. September 13. https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/13/europe/pussy-riot-member-hospitalized-poison-claim-intl/index.html McNeeley, Susan. 2019. “Gendered Pathways Into Co-Offending among a Sample of Adult Burglary and Robbery Offenders.” Crime and Delinquency 65(2):1711–1739. McPhillips, Kathleen. 2016. “Contested Feminisms: Women’s Religious Leadership and the Politics of Contemporary Western Feminism.” Journal for the Academic Study of Religion 29(2):134–149. Mead, Margaret. 1933. Sex and Temperament in Three Primitive Societies. New York: William Morrow. Mead, Margaret. 1967. Attributed to Mead in La Abogada Newsletter. Vol. 3. International Federation of Women Lawyers. en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Margaret_Mead Medina, Veronica E., and Priya Dua. 2019. “The Promises and Pitfalls of Microfinance in Pakistani Women’s Lives.” Pp. 349–364 in Women of Asia: Globalization, Development and Gender Equity, edited by Mehrangiz Najafizadeh and Linda L. Lindsey. New York and London: Routledge. Medscape. 2019. “Medscape Physician Compensation Report 2019.” April  10. https://www.medscape. com/slideshow/2019-compensation-overview-6011286 Meeks, Lindsey. 2018. “Appealing to the 52%: Exploring Clinton’s and Trump’s Appeals to Women Voters During the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election.” International Journal of Communication June:2527–2545. MEF. 2018. Media Education Foundation “Beyond Grace  & Aziz Ansari: How Gender Norms Shape Our Ideas about Consent, Coercion  & Sexual Pleasure.” February  1. https://www.mediaed.org/ beyond-grace-aziz-ansari/ Mégret, Frédéric. 2018. “The Laws of War and the Structure of Masculine Power.” Melbourne Journal of International Law 19(1): 200–226. Mehta, Sonali. 2019. “The Uncertain Future of Title IX.” February  16. https://kenan.ethics.duke.edu/ the-uncertain-future-of-title-ix/ Meichtry, Stacy. 2013. “Pope Marks Shift in Tone with Defense of Gay Priests.” Wall Street Journal July 30:A1,A2. Meijs, Maartje H.J., Kate A. Ratliff, and Joris Lammers. 2017. “The Discrepancy between How Women See Themselves and Feminists Predicts Identification with Feminism.” Sex Roles 77(5–6):293–308. Melton, Willie, and Linda L. Lindsey. 1987. “Instrumental and Expressive Values in Mate Selection among College Students Revisited: Feminism, Love and Economic Necessity.” Midwest Sociological Society, April. Chicago.

References  673 Men, Fei. 2017. “Mothers’ Within-Marriage Economic Prospects and Later Food Security: Does Marital Outcome Matter?” Journal of Consumer Affairs Fall:682–702. Mendiola, Melanie, Julia Mull, Kristy L. Archuleta, Bradley Klontz, and F. Torabi. 2017. “Does She Think It Matters Who Makes More? Perceived Differences in Types of Relationship Arguments among Female Breadwinners and Non-Breadwinners.” Journal of Financial Therapy 8(2):Article 4. Menon, Suvarna V. 2019. “Sexual Violence and the Law in India.” Pp.  184–212 in Research Handbook on Feminist Jurisprudence, edited by Robin West and Cynthia Grant Bowman. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar. Menon, Suvarna V., and Nicole E. Allen. 2018. “The Formal Systems Response to Violence against Women in India: A Cultural Lens.” American Journal of Community Psychology 62(1–2):51.61. Merigo, Eduard. 2019. “In Indonesia, LGBT Communities Viewed as a Moral Threat—Condemned by Religion and, Increasingly, by Law.” Post Magazine. April 7. https://www.scmp.com/magazines/post-magazine/ long-reads/article/3004634/indonesia-lgbt-community-viewed-moral-threat Mernissi, Fatima. 1987. Beyond the Veil: Male-Female Dynamics in Modern Muslim Society. Bloomington: Indiana University. Merrin, Gabriel J., Kayla de la Haye, Dorothy L. Espelage et al. 2018. “The Co-evolution of Bullying Perpetration, Homophobic Teasing, and a School Friendship Network.” Journal of Youth and Adolescence 47:601–618. Merry, Sally Engle. 2009. Gender Violence: A Cultural Perspective. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell. Mesman, Judi, and Marleen G. Groeneveld. 2018. “Gendered Parenting in Early Childhood: Subtle but Unmistakable if You Know Where to Look.” Child Development Perspectives 12(1):22–27. Messerschmidt, James W. 2016. Masculinities in the Making: From the Local to the Global. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. Metzl, Jonathan M., and Kenneth T. MacLeish. 2015. “Mental Illness, Mass Shootings, and the Politics of American Firearms.” American Journal of Public Health 105(2):240–249. Metzler, Anna, and Herbert Scheithauer. 2018. “Association of Self-Presentational Strategies on Facebook and Positive Feedback in Adolescence: A Two-Study Approach.” International Journal of Developmental Science 12(3–4):189–206. Meyer, Daniel R., Maria Cancian, and Steven T. Cook. 2017. “The Growth in Shared Custody in the United States: Patterns and Implications.” Family Court Review 55(4):500–512. Meyer, Holly, Xerxes Wilson, and Ed Mehon. 2018. “Why the Roman Catholic Church Still Struggles with Sexual Abuse Scandals.” USA Today August 17. www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2018/08/17/ roman-catholic-church-sex-abuse-scandals-struggle/1024427002/ Meyerowitz, Joanne. 2005. “Rewriting Postwar Women’s History, 1945–69.” In A Companion to American Women’s History, edited by Nancy Hewitt. Oxford, UK: Blackwell. Meyers, Carol L. 2009. “In the Household and Beyond.” Studia Theologica 63(1):19–41. Meyers, Carol L. 2014. “Was Ancient Israel a Patriarchal Society?” Journal of Biblical Literature 133(1):8–27. Michek, Kenneth. 2018. “Nurses Not Immune to Gender Wage Gap.” June 20. https://www.healthleadersmedia.com/nursing/nurses-not-immune-gender-wage-gap Michel, Casey. 2019. “Putin Declared Liberalism Dead. Now His Backers in The West are Lining Up to Dance On Its Grave. From Anti-Semitic Outlets to Pat Buchanan, Fascistic Voices Race to Support Putin’s Claim.” July 6. https://thinkprogress.org/after-putin-declares-liberalism-dead-backers-on-far-right-rally-to-his-support26ace5c5ca31/ Mikulincer, Mario, and Gail S. Goodman (eds.). 2006. Dynamics of Romantic Love: Attachment, Caregiving, and Sex. New York: Guilford Press. Milkman, Ruth. 2003. “Gender at Work: The Sexual Division of Labor During World War II.” In Women’s America: Refocusing the Past, edited by Linda K. Kerber and Jane Sherron De Hart. New York: Oxford University Press.

674 References Mill, John Stuart. 1869/2002. The Basic Writings of John Stuart Mill: On Liberty, The Subjection of Women and Utilitarianism. New York: Modern Library. Miller, Amanda Jayne, and Daniel L. Carlson. 2016. “Great Expectations? Working- and Middle-Class Cohabitors’ Expected and Actual Divisions of Housework.” Journal of Marriage and Family 789(2):346–363. Miller, Amanda Jayne, and Sharon Sassler. 2012. “The Construction of Gender among Working-Class Couples.” Qualitative Sociology 35(4):427–446. Miller, Amanda Jayne, and Sharon Sassler. 2017. Cohabitation Nation: Gender, Class, and the Remaking of Relationships. Oakland, CA: University of California Press. Miller, Benjamin Graham, Kors, Stephanie Kors, and Jenny Macfie. 2017. “No Differences? Meta-Analytic Comparisons of Psychological Adjustment in Children of Gay Fathers and Heterosexual Parents.” Family Journal 27(1):58–66. Miller, Claire Cain, and Kevin Quealy. 2018. “Math’s Variable: Boys Outperform Girls in Rich, white Suburbs.” New York Times June 17:A15. Miller, Dan J., Kerry Anne McBain, and Peter T.F. Raggatt. 2016. “An Experimental Investigation into Pornography’s Effect on Men’s Perceptions of the Likelihood of Women Engaging in Porn-Like Sex.” Psychology of Popular Media Culture 8(4):365–375. Miller, Holly C., Anne-Sophie Chabriac, and Mikael Molet. 2013. The Impact of Facial Emotional Expressions and Sex on Interpersonal Distancing as Evaluated in a Computerized Stop-distance Task.” Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology 67(3):188–194. Miller, Kenneth. 2018. “How Health Care Fails Women.” Prevention 70(6):46–53. Miller, Kirsty, Juliet Wakefield, And Fabio Sani. 2018. “Identification with The School Predicts Better Mental Health Amongst High School Students Over Time.” Educational and Child Psychology 35(2):21–30. Miller, Laurence. 2014. “Rape: Sex Crimes, Act of Violence, or Naturalistic Adaptation?” Aggression and Violent Behavior 19(1):67–81. Miller, Lisa. 2019. “The Perils and Pleasures of Aging: How Women’s Sexualities Change across the Life Course.” Sociological Quarterly 60(3):371–396. Miller, Sharon Hodde. 2017. “The Surprising Reason Women Go to Seminary. Christianity Today.” June  29. https://www.christianitytoday.com/women-leaders/2017/june/surprising-reason-women-go-to-seminary.html Miller, Susan. 2018. “California becomes first state to condemn intersex surgeries on children.” USA Today. August  28. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2018/08/28/intersex-surgeries-childrencalifornia-first-state-condemn/1126185002/ Miller, Susan, and Kevin McCoy. 2018. “Thousand Oaks Makes 307 Mass Shootings in 311 Days.” USA Today. November 8. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2018/11/08/thousand-oaks-california-barshooting-307th-mass-shooting/1928574002/ Mills, Sara. 2012. Gender Matters: Feminist Linguistic Analysis. London: Equinox Publishing Ltd. Minnotte, Krista Lynn, Michael C. Minnotte, and Krista Thompson. 2016. “The Life Satisfaction of DualEarner Mothers and Fathers: Does Flexible Scheduling Matter?” Journal of Happiness Studies 17(6):2365– 2388. Mir, Shabana. 2014. Muslim American Women on Campus: Undergraduate Social Life and Identity. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press. Miranda, Vitor, Johan Dahlberg, and Gunnar Andersson. 2018. “Parents’ Preferences for Sex of Children in Sweden: Attitudes and Outcomes.” Population Research and Policy Review 37(3): 443–459. Mir-Hosseini, Ziba. 2019. “The Challenges of Islamic Feminism.” Gender a Výzkum 20(2): 108–122. Mir-Hosseini, Ziba, Mulki Al-Sharmani, and Jana Rumminger (eds.). 2014. Men in Charge: Rethinking Authority in Muslim Legal Tradition. London: Oneworld Publications. Mirzaie, Rose. 2016. “Divorce Mediation For Women: An Examination of Feminist Critiques.” Dispute Resolution Journal 71(3): 161–170. Mischel, W.A. 1966. “A Social learning View of Sex Differences in Behavior.” Pp. 56–81 in The Development of Sex Differences, edited by Eleanor E. Maccoby. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

References  675 Misra, Jordan. 2019. “Voter Turnout Rates among All Voting Age and Major Racial and Ethnic Groups were Higher than in 2014.” U.S. Census Bureau. April 23. https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2019/04/ behind-2018-united-states-midterm-election-turnout.html Mitchell, Amy, Mark Jurkowitz, J. Baxter Oliphant, and Elisa Shearer. 2020. “Majorities of Americans Say News Coverage of George Floyd Protests Has Been Good, Trump’s Public Message Wrong.” Pew Research Center. June 12. https://www.journalism.org/2020/06/12/majorities-of-americans-say-newscoverage-of-george-floyd-protests-has-been-good-trumps-public-message-wrong/ Mitchell, Kristina M. W., and Jonathan Martin. 2018. “Gender Bias in Student Evaluations.” Political Science & Politics 51(3):648–652. Mitra, Mili. 2018. “More than Five years after the Delhi Gang-Rape, India is Still No County for Women.” Washington Post. July  2. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/global-opinions/wp/2018/07/02/morethan-five-years-after-the-delhi-gang-rape-india-is-still-no-country-for-women/?utm_term=.6c791f2e0ad9 Miville, Marie L., Narolyn Mendez, and Mark Louie. 2017. “Latina/o Gender Roles: A Content Analysis of Empirical Research from 1982 to 2013.” Journal of Latina/o Psychology 5(3):173–194. Moallem, Minoo. 2005. Between Warrior Brother and Veiled Sister: Islamic Fundamentalism and the Politics of Patriarchy. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Mogilski, Justin K., and Lisa L.M. Welling. 2017. “Staying Friends with An Ex: Sex and Dark Personality Traits Predict Motivations for Post-Relationship Friendship.” Personality and Individual Differences 115:114–119. Mohanty, Bidyuit. 2018. “Assessing Microcredit’s Success in Poverty Alleviation and Women’s Empowerment.” Global-e 11(57). December 13. https://www.21global.ucsb.edu/global-e/december-2018/ assessing-microcredits-success-poverty-alleviation-and-women-s-empowerment Mohl, Allan S. 2015. “Monotheism: Influence on Patriarchy and Misogyny.” Journal of Psychohistory 43(1):2–20. Mohr, Jonathan, Dylan Selterman, and Ruth E. Fassinger. 2013. “Romantic Attachment and Relationship Functioning in Same-sex Couples.” Journal of Counseling Psychology 60(1):72–82. Molborn, Stepfanie. 2017. “Teenage Mothers Today: What We Know and How It Matters.” Child Development Perspectives 11(1):63–69. Money, John. 1995. Gendermaps: Social Constructionism, Feminism and Sexosophical History. New York: Continuum. Money, John, and Anke A. Ehrhardt. 1972. Man and Woman, Boy and Girl. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University. Money, John, and P. Tucker. 1975. Sexual Signatures. Boston: Little, Brown. Mongeau, Paul A., Kendra Knight, Jade Williams, Jennifer Eden, and Christina Shaw. 2013. “Identifying and Explicating Variation in Friends with Benefits Relationships.” Journal of Sex Research 50(1):37–47. Montagu, Ashley. 1999. The Natural Superiority of Women. Lanham. MD: Altamira. Montanaro, Domenico. 2018. “ Poll: More Believe Ford Than Kavanaugh, A  Cultural Shift From 1991.” National Public Radio. October 3. https://www.npr.org/2018/10/03/654054108/poll-more-believeford-than-kavanaugh-a-cultural-shift-from-1991 Montanaro, Domenico. 2019. “Poll: Majority Want to Keep Abortion Legal, But They Also Want Restrictions.” June  7. https://www.npr.org/2019/06/07/730183531/poll-majority-want-to-keep-abortion-legal-butthey-also-want-restrictions Montero, Darrel M. 2014. “America’s Progress in Achieving the Legalization of Same-Gender Adoption: Analysis of Public Opinion, 1994–2012.” Social Work 59(4): 321–328. Montes, Kevin S., Lyzette Blanco, and Joseph W. LaBrie. 2017. “The Relationship between Perceived Hookup Attitudes and Negative Hookup Consequences: Do Perceived Attitudes of Close Friends Matter?” Journal of Sex Research 54(9):1128–1140. Montoya, R. Matthew, Christine Kershaw, and Julie L. Prosser. 2018. “A  Meta-Analytic Investigation of the Relation between Interpersonal Attraction and Enacted Behavior.” Psychological Bulletin 144(7): 673–709. Montoya, Silvia. 2019. “Data to Celebrate 50 Years of Progress on Girls’ Education.” UNESCO. March 7. http://uis.unesco.org/en/blog/data-celebrate-50-years-progress-girls-education

676 References Moore, Doug. 2018. “When ‘He’ or ‘She’ Does Not Fit.” St. Louis Post-Dispatch. June 20: A1, A7. Moore, Julia, and Jenna Abetz. 2016. “ ‘Uh Oh. Cue the [New] Mommy Wars’: The Ideology of Combative Mothering in Popular U.S. Newspaper Articles about Attachment Parenting.” Southern Communication Journal 81(1):49–62. Moore, Kenneth Royce. 2016. Sex and the Second-Best City: Sex and Society in the Laws of Plato. Abington, Oxon, UK: Routledge. Moore, M.P., and F. Belgrave. 2019. “Gender Differences in Predictors of HIV Testing among African American Young Adults.” Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities 6(1):189–196. Moore, Terence. 2018. “NFL Still Clueless When it Comes to Players’ Abuse of Women.” Forbes. December 1. https://www.forbes.com/sites/terencemoore/2018/12/01/nfl-still-clueless-involving-players-abusingwomen/#7c619d7e503a Moore, Thomas S. 2018. ”Occupational Career Change and Gender Wage Inequality.” Work and Occupations 45(1):82–121. Morante, Annette, Valerie Djenidi, Helene Clark, and Susan West, 2017. “Gender Differences in Online Participation: Examining a History and Mathematics Open Foundation and Online Course.” Australian Journal of Adult Learning 57(2):266–293. Morell, Virginia. 2019. “Gorillas Have Developed Humanlike Social Structure, Controversial Study Suggests.” Science. July 17. https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/07/gorillas-have-developed-humanlike-socialstructure-controversial-study-suggests Morgan, Michael, and James Shanahan. 2017. “Television and the Cultivation of Authoritarianism: A Return Visit From an Unexpected Friend.” Journal of Communication 67(3):424–444. Morgan, Paul L., George Farkas, Michael Cook et al., 2018. “Are Hispanic, Asian, Native American, or Language-Minority Children Overrepresented in Special Education?” Exceptional Children 84(3):261–279. Morreale, Sherwyn, and Pamela S. Shockley-Zalabak. 2018. “The Role of Trust in the 2016 Presidential Campaign: An Analysis of Five Trust Drivers in Clinton and Trump’s Acceptance Speeches and Three Debates.” American Communication Journal 20(1):46–92. Moscow Times. 2018. “Russian Lawmaker Says Sexual Harassment Legislation Would Be ‘Excessive’.” March  9. https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2018/03/09/russian-lawmaker-says-sexual-harassmentlegislation-would-be-excessive-a60759 Moscow Times. 2019. “Orthodox Official Compares Abortion Numbers in Russia to WWII Losses.” February  28. https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2019/02/28/orthodox-official-compares-abortion-numbersin-russia-to-wwii-losses-a64661 Moseson, Heidi, Diana Greene Foster, Ushma D. Upadhyay, et al. 2018. “Contraceptive Use over Five Years After Receipt or Denial of Abortion Services.” Perspectives on Sexual & Reproductive Health 50(1):7–14. Moss, Kevin. 2017. “Russia as the Saviour of European Civilization: Gender and the Geopolitics of Traditional Values.” Pp. 195–214 in Anti-Gender Campaigns in Europe: Mobilizing Against Equality, edited by Roman Kuhar and David Paternotte. London and New York: Rowman & Littlefield. Moynihan, Daniel P. 1965. The Negro Family: The Case for National Action. Office of Policy Planning and Research, U.S. Department of Labor. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Muenks, Katherine, Allan Wigfield, and Jacquelynne S. Eccles. 2018. “I Can Do This! The Development and Calibration of Children’s Expectations for Success and Competence Beliefs.” Development Review 48:24–39. Mukhopadhyay, Samhita, and Kate Harding (eds). 2017. Nasty Women: Feminism, Resistance, and Revolution in Trump’s America. New York: Picador. Mullinax, Margo, Katie Jo Barnhart, Kristen Mark and Debby Herbenick. 2016.“Women’s Experiences with Feelings and Attractions for Someone Outside their Primary Relationship.” Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy 42(5):431–447. Mun, Eunmi. 2016. “Why the Equal Employment Opportunity Law Failed in Japan.” Work in Progress. August 10. https://workinprogress.oowsection.org/2016/08/10/why-the-equal-employment-opportunitylaw-failed-in-japan/

References  677 Mun, Eunmi, and Jiwook Jung. 2018. “Change above the Glass Ceiling: Corporate Social Responsibility and Gender Diversity in Japanese Firms.” Administrative Science Quarterly 63(2):409–440. Mundy, Liza. 2018. “I Rewatched Anita Hill’s Testimony. So Much has Changed, So Much Hasn’t.” Politico. September 23. https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/09/23/rewatched-anita-hill-testimonykavanaugh-metoo-220526 Munir Farzana, and Rudolf Winter-Ebmer. 2018. “Decomposing International Gender Test Score Differences.” Journal for Labour Market Research 52(12). November  19. https://doi.org/10.1186/ s12651-018-0246-8 Munn, Mark Henderson. 2006. The Mother of the Gods, Athens, and the Tyranny of Asia: A Study of Sovereignty in Ancient Religion. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Muralidharan, Sidharth, and Yongjun Sung. 2016. “Direct and Mediating Effects of Information Efficacy on Voting Behavior: Political Socialization of Young Adults in the 2012 U.S. Presidential Election.” Communication Reports 29(2):100–114. Murnen, Sarah K., Claire Greenfield, Abigail Younger, and Hope Boyd. 2016. “Boys Act and Girls Appear: A Content Analysis of Gender Stereotypes Associated with Characters in Children’s Popular Culture.” Sex Roles 74(1–2:)78–91. Muro, Jazmín A., and Lisa M. Martinez. 2016. “Constrained Desires: The Romantic Partner Preferences of College-Educated Latinas.” Latino Studies 14(2):171–191. Murray, Carson M., Margaret A. Stanton, Elizabeth V. Lonsdorf et al. 2016. “Chimpanzee Fathers Bias their Behaviour towards their Offspring.” Royal Society Open Science 3(11):160441. https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsos.160441 Murray, Sarah Hunter. 2018. “Heterosexual Men’s Sexual Desire: Supported by, or Deviating from, Traditional Masculinity Norms and Sexual Scripts?” Sex Roles 78(1–2):130–141. Murray, Stephen O. 2000. Homosexualities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Murshid, Nadine S., and Gretchen E. Ely. 2018. “Does the Use of Unreliable Contraceptive Methods Increase the Number of Abortions? Results from a National Survey of Women in the United States.” Social Work in Public Health 33(2): 96–113. Muruthi, Bertranna, Megan McCoy, Jessica Chou, and Andrea Farnham. 2018. “Sexual Scripts and Narrative Therapy with Older Couples.” American Journal of Family Therapy 46(1):81–95. Muse, Dahabo Ali. 2000. “Feminine Pain.” Cited in “Female Genital Mutilation, Also Known as Female Circumcision” by Comfort Momoh. Pamphlet from the African Well Women’s Clinic of the Guy’s & St. Thomas Hospital Trust. London. Music, Graham. 2017. Nurturing Natures: Attachment and Children’s Emotional, Sociocultural and Brain Development. East Sussex, UK: Psychology Press. Myers, Kit. 2017. “ ‘If I’m Going to Do It, I’m Going to Do It Right’: Intensive Mothering Ideologies among Childless Women Who Elect Egg Freezing.” Gender & Society 31(6):777–803. Myers, Meghann. 2016. “The Navy SEALs are Now Open to Women But No One Has Stepped Forward.” Navy Times. April  19. https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-navy/2016/04/19/the-navy-seals-are-now-opento-women-but-no-one-has-stepped-forward/ Nae, Niculina. 2017. “The More They Change, The More They Stay the Same: Japanese Millennials and their Attitudes toward Work and Family.” Euromentor 8(4):53–70. Nae, Niculina. 2018. “Domestic vs. Public Power: Japanese Women Three Decades after Equal Employment Opportunity Law.” Euromentor 9(2):41–54. NAF. 2018. “2018 Violence and Disruption Statistics.” National Abortion Federation. https://prochoice. org/wp-content/uploads/2018-Anti-Abortion-Violence-and-Disruption.pdf Nagase, Nobuko. 2018. “Has Abe’s Womanomics Worked?” Asian Economic Policy Review January. https://doi.org/10.1111/aepr.12202 Naidoo, Rennie, Kalley Coleman, and Cordelia Guyo. 2020. “Exploring Discursive Struggles about Social Inclusion in an Online Gaming Community.” Information Technology & People 33(2):576–601.

678 References Najafizadeh, Mehrangiz. 2019. “Women in Azerbaijan: Change and Chalenges.” Pp. 349–364 in Women of Asia: Globalization, Development, and Gender Equity, edited by Mehrangiz Najafizadeh and Linda L. Lindsey. New York and London: Routledge. Napoli, Jessica. 2019. “TV Pilots: All of the New Series in the Works.” April  2. https://www.tvinsider. com/739503/tv-pilots-2019-nbc-abc-fox-cbs/ Narayan, Deepa. 2018. “India’s Abuse of Women is the Biggest Human Rights Violation on Earth.” Guardian. April 27. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/27/india-abuse-women-human-rights-rape-girls Narayanaswamy, Lata. 2016. “Whose Feminism Counts? Gender(ed) Knowledge and Professionalisation in Development.” Third World Quarterly 37(12):2156–2175. Nardini, Krizia. 2016. “Men’s Networking for Gender Justice.” Journal of Men’s Studies 24(3):241–258. Nash, Jennifer C. 2019. Black Feminism Reimagined after Intersectionality. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. National Association of Women Lawyers. 2019. Survey on Retention and Promotion of Women in Law Firms. NAWL. https://www.nawl.org/page/2018survey National Center for Education Statistics. 2018a. Digest of Education Statistics, 2017. “Elementary and Secondary School: Student Performance.” https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d17/ National Center for Education Statistics. 2018b. Digest of Education Statistics, 2017. Table 103.10: Enrollment in School by Sex, Race/ethnicity, and Age Group: Selected Years. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/ digest/d18/tables/dt18_103.10.asp?current=yes National Center for Education Statistics. 2019a. “Undergraduate Enrollment.” The Condition of Education. May. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cha.asp National Center for Education Statistics, 2019b. “Characteristics of Postsecondary Faculty.” The Condition of Education. May. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_csc.asp National Center for Health Statistics. 2018. “Health Status of the Asian Population.” Summary of Health Statistics: Table P-1a. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/asian-health.htm and https://ftp.cdc.gov/pub/ Health_Statistics/NCHS/NHIS/SHS/2018_SHS_Table_P-1.pdf National Law Review. 2019. “5 FAQs on the Equality Act and Employment Nondiscrimination.” May 22. https://www.natlawreview.com/article/5-faqs-equality-act-and-employment-nondiscrimination National Public Radio. 2019. “Trump Administration Gets an Earful on New Campus Sexual Assault Rules.” Morning Edition. January 30. https://www.npr.org/2019/01/30/689879689/education-department-gathersfeedback-on-new-campus-sexual-assault-rules NAWBO. 2018. National Association of Small Business Owners. “Women Business Owners Statistics.” https://www.nawbo.org/resources/women-business-owner-statistics NCAI. 2018. National Congress of American Indians. VAWA 2013’s Special Domestic Violence Criminal Jurisdiction Five-Year Report. March  20. http://www.ncai.org/resources/ncai-publications/SDVCJ_5_ Year_Report.pdf NCES. 2018. National Center for Education Statistics. “Characteristics of Children’s Families.” Last updates May 2. Figure 2. Percentage of Children under Age 18, by Child’s Race/Ethnicity and Family Structure: 2016.” https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cce.asp NCVS. 2018. National Center for Victims of Crime. “Intimate Partner Violence.” Resource Guide: Intimate Partner Violence Fact Sheet. https://ovc.ncjrs.gov/ncvrw2018/info_flyers/fact_sheets/2018NCVRW_IPV_ 508_QC.pdf Ndum, Edwin, Jeff Allen, Jason Way, and Alex Casillas. 2018. “Explaining Gender Gaps in English Composition and College Algebra in College: The Mediating Role of Psychosocial Factors.” Journal of Advanced Academics 29(1):56–88. Neal, Jennifer. 2017. “The Maternal Instinct is a Myth and We’ve Got the Science to Prove It.” November 20. https://medium.com/@jenniferneal_39017/the-maternal-instinct-is-a-myth-and-weve-got-the-scienceto-prove-it-de435786adbf Nelson, Eshe. 2018. “Nobel winner Muhammad Yunus Wants Two Financial Systems—One for the Rich and One for the Poor.” October  20. https://qz.com/1430076/nobel-winner-muhammad-yunus-wants-twofinancial-systems-one-for-the-rich-and-one-for-the-poor/

References  679 Nelson, Michelle R., Lucy Atkinson, Mark A. Rademacher, and Regina Ahn. 2017. “How Media and Family Build Children’s Persuasion Knowledge.” Journal of Current Issues  & Research in Advertising 38(2):165–183. Nelson, S. Katherine, Megan L. Robbins, Sara E. Andrews, and Kate Sweeny. 2015. “Disrupted Transition to Parenthood: Gender Moderates the Association between Miscarriage and Uncertainty about Conception.” Sex Roles 76:380–392. Nemat, Orzala. 2019. “Afghan Women: The Politics of Empowerment in the Post-2001 Era.” Pp. 333–346 in Women of Asia: Globalization, Development, and Gender Equity, edited by Mehrangiz Najafizadeh and Linda L. Lindsey. New York and London: Routledge. Nemoto, Kumiko. 2009. Racing Romance: Love, Power, and Desire Among Asian American/White Couples. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press. Nemoto, Kumiko. 2016. Too Few Women at the Top: The Persistence of Inequality in Japan. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Nemoto, Kumiko, Makiko Fuwa, and Kuniko Ishiguro. 2013. “Never-Married Employed Men’s Gender Beliefs and Ambivalence toward Matrimony in Japan.” Journal of Family Issues 34(12):1673–695. Nenonen, Marko. 2012. “Who Bears the Guilt for the Persecution of Witches?” Studia Neophilologica 84(1):70–87. Neto, Félix, and Daniela C. Wilks. 2017. “Compassionate Love for a Romantic Partner across the Adult Life Span.” Europe’s Journal of Psychology 13(4):606–617. Netting, Nancy S., and Meredith K. Reynolds. 2018. “Thirty Years of Sexual Behaviour at a Canadian University: Romantic Relationships, Hooking Up, and Sexual Choices.” The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality 27(1):55–68. Neuman, Scott. and Rob Schmitz. 2018. “Despite the End of China’s One-Child Policy, Births are Still Lagging.” National Public Radio. July  16. https://www.npr.org/2018/07/16/629361870/despite-theend-of-chinas-one-child-policy-births-are-still-lagging Newall, Carol, Karen Gonsalkorale, Ellen Walker et  al. 2018. “Science Education: Adult Biases because of the Child’s Gender and Gender Stereotypicality.” Contemporary Educational Psychology 55:30–41. Newkirk, Katie, Maureen Perry-Jenkins, and Aline G. Sayers. 2017. “Division of Household and Childcare Labor and Relationship Conflict among Low-Income New Parents.” Sex Roles 76(5–6):319–333. Newman, Susan. 2016. “Is Empty Nest a Myth?” Psychology Today. August 16. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/singletons/201608/is-empty-nest-myth Nguyễn, Ann Thúy. 2020. “By the Numbers: Who Gets Counted in the 2020 Census?” Center for the Study of Social Policy. January 22. https://cssp.org/2020/01/aahpi-2020-census/ Nichols, John. 2020. “The ‘New York Times’ ‘Endorsement’ Fails Us All.” Nation. January 21. https://www. thenation.com/article/politics/ny-times-endorsement-fail/ Nichols, Timothy J. 2019. “Closing the Wage Gap: Cities’ and States’ Prohibitions against Prior Salary History Inquires and the Implications and Moving Forward.” Seton Hall Law Review 49(2):411–439. Nieder, Christina, Christoph Muck, and Joscha Kärtner. 2019. “Sexual Violence against Women in India: Daily Life and Coping Strategies of Young Women in Delhi.” Violence Against Women 25(14):1717–1738. Nili, Yaron. 2019. “Beyond the Numbers: Substantive Gender Diversity in Boardrooms.” Indiana law Journal 94(1):145–202. Nimbi, Filippo Maria, Francesca Tripodi, Roberta Rossi, and Chiara Simonelli. 2018. “Testing a Conceptual Model for Men’s Sexual Desire Referring to Automatic Thoughts, Emotions, Sexual Function, and Sexism.” Journal of Sexual Medicine 15(11):1518–1526. Nittle, Nadra Kareem. 2019. “Five Common Latino Stereotypes in Television and Film.” January 10. https:// www.thoughtco.com/latino-stereotypes-in-television-and-film-2834654 Nobel, Carmen. 2015. “Children Benefit from Having a Working Mom.” Harvard Business School Newsroom. May 15. https://www.hbs.edu/news/articles/Pages/mcginn-working-mom.aspx Nokoff, N.J., B. Palmer, A.J. Mullins et al. 2017. “Prospective Assessment of Cosmesis Before and After Genital Surgery.” Journal of Pediatric Urology 13(1):28 pages.

680 References Noll, Stephen. “Image-Bearers for God: Does Biblical Language for Man Matter?” Evangelical Review of Theology 43(3):196–204. NOMAS. 2019. National Organization for Men Against Sexism. http://nomas.org/ NORC. 2019. National Opinion Research Center. GSS Data Explorer. “Key Trends: Gender & Marriage, Sex & Sexual Orientation.” https://gssdataexplorer.norc.org/trends Norling, Johannes. 2018. “Measuring Heterogeneity in Preferences over the Sex of Children.” Journal of Development Economics 135:199–221. Norona, Jerika, Avril Thorne, Madeleine Kerrick, Halley Farwood, and Neill Korobov. 2013. “Patterns of Intimacy and Distancing as Young Women (and Men) Friends Exchange Stories of Romantic Relationships.” Sex Roles 68(7/8):439–453. North, Anna. 2018. “The Midterm Election Shows White Women are Finally Starting to Abandon Trump.” Vox. November 7. https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/11/7/18064260/midterm-elections-turnoutwomen-trump-exit-polls North, Anna. 2019a. “7 Positive Changes that Have Come from the #MeToo Movement.” Vox. October 4. https://www.vox.com/identities/2019/10/4/20852639/me-too-movement-sexual-harassment-law-2019 North, Anna. 2019b. “ ‘I Am a Woman and I Am Fast’: What Caster Semenya’s Story Says about Gender and Race in Sports.” Vox. May 3. https://www.vox.com/identities/2019/5/3/18526723/caster-semenya800-gender-race-intersex-athletes NOW, 2018. National Organization for Women. “About.” https://now.org/about/history Nowacki, Jeffrey S., and Elena A. Windsong. 2019. “Structural Gender Equality and Federal Sentencing Outcomes: A  Test of the Ameliorative and Backlash Hypotheses.” Feminist Criminology 14(1):45–64. NSFG. 2018. National Survey of Family Growth. “Key Statistics from the National Survey of Family Growth - S Listing.” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nsfg/key_statistics/s. htm#sexualactivity NSVRC. 2019. National Sexual Violence Resource Center. “Sexual Assault in the United States.” https:// www.nsvrc.org/statistics Nussbaum, Martha. 2018. “The Roots of Male Rage on Show at the Kavanaugh Hearing.” Washington Post. September  29. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/democracy-post/wp/2018/09/29/the-roots-ofmale-rage-on-show-at-the-kavanaugh-hearing/?utm_term=.480565f10e7d Nyhagen, Line, and Beatrice Halsaa (eds.). 2016. Religion, Gender and Citizenship: Women of Faith, Gender Equality and Feminism. Basingstoke, Hampshire, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. O’Donnell, Tim 2017. “The Rhetorical Strategy of 1 Timothy.” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 79(3):455–475. O’Hara, Mary Emily. 2017. “LGBTQ Advocates Applaud Boy Scouts for Lifting Transgender Ban.” NBC News. January  31. https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/lgbtq-advocates-applaud-boy-scouts-lifting-trans gender-ban-n714926 O’Neal, Eryn Nicole, and Cassia Spohn. 2017. “When the Perpetrator is a Partner.” Violence Against Women 23(6): 707–729. Oates, Thomas Patrick. 2017. Football and Manliness: An Unauthorized Feminist Account of the NFL. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press. Oberle, Chrystal D., Andrea A. Dooley, and Alexander J. Nagurney. 2017. “Predicting Perceived Infidelity from Gender and Interpersonal Traits.” Sexual and Relationship Therapy 32(1): 89–101. Oberst, Ursula, Andres Chamarro, Vanessa Renau, and Xavier Carbonell. 2016. “Gender Stereotypes in Facebook Profiles: Are Women more Female Online?” Computers in Human Behavior 60:559–564. Odenweller, Kelly G., and Christine E. Rittenour. 2017. “Stereotypes of Stay-at-Home and Working Mothers.” Southern Communication Journal 82(2):57–72. OECD. 2018. Key Charts on Education: Mathematic Performance (PISA). Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. https://www.oecd.org/gender/data/education/#d.en.387789

References  681 Offer, Shira, and Barbara Schneider. 2011. “Revisiting the Gender Gap in Time-use Patterns: Multitasking and Well-being among Mothers and Fathers in Dual-earner Families.” American Sociological Review 76(6):809–833. Office of Minority Health. 2019. “Profile: Asian Americans.” U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. https://minorityhealth.hhs.gov/omh/browse.aspx?lvl=3&lvlid=63 Ogawa, Sonoko, Shinji Tsukahara, Elena Choleris, and Nandini Vasudevan. 2018. “Estrogenic Regulation of Social Behavior and Sexually Dimorphic Brain Function.” Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews. October 27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2018.10.012 Ogi, Naomi. 2014. “Language and an expression of identities: Japanese sentence-final particles ne and na.” Journal of Pragmatics 64:72–84. Ohadi. Jonathan, Brandon Brown, Leora Trub, and Lisa Rosenthal. 2018. “I Just Text to Say I Love You: Partner Similarity in Texting and Relationship Satisfaction.” Computers in Human Behavior 78:126–132. Okamoto, Shigeko. 2013. “Variability in Societal Norms for Japanese Women’s Speech: Implications for Linguistic Politeness.” Multilingua 32(2):203–223. Okuda, Koji, and Yasuo Takeuchi. 2019. “Japan Drifts Away from Fertility Goal as Efforts Fail to Stick.” Nikkei Asian Review. June 7. https://asia.nikkei.com/Economy/Japan-drifts-away-from-fertility-goal-as-efforts-fail-to-stick Oleschuk, Merin. 2019. “Gender, Cultural Schemas, and Learning to Cook.” Gender & Society 33(4):607–628. Oleszkiewicz-Peralba, Małgorzata. 2015. Fierce Feminine Divinities of Eurasia and Latin America: Baba Yaga, Kali, Pombagira, and Santa Muerte. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Olmstead, Molly. 2019. “Why Virginia’s Election Results Mean the Equal Rights Amendment Could Finally Pass.” Slate. November 6. https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/11/equal-rights-amendment-virginia-election.html Olson, Kristina R., and Elizabeth A. Enright. 2018. “Do Transgender Children (Gender) Stereotype Less than their Peers and Siblings?” Developmental Science 21(1):1–13. Olympia, Robert. 2018. “Violence Depicted in Superhero-Based Films Stratified by Protagonist/antagonist and Gender.” American Academy of Pediatrics National Conference. November 2. https://www.ncbi. nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7053689/ Omarzu, Julia, Alexis N. Miller, Chenelle Schultz, and Ashlee Timmerman. 2012. “Motivations and Emotional Consequences Related to Engaging in Extramarital Relationships.” International Journal of Sexual Health 24:154–62. Open Democracy. 2018. “#2018: Victories and Defeats of the Latin American Feminist Movement.” December  20. https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/democraciaabierta/2018-victories-and-defeats-of-latin-american-feminist-movement/ Oppermann, Elisa, Martin Brunner, and Yvonne Anders. 2019. “The Interplay between Preschool Teachers’ Science Self-Efficacy Beliefs, Their Teaching Practices, and Girls’ and Boys’ Early Science Motivation.” Learning and Individual Differences 70:86–99. Ordoñez, Franco. 2019. “Trump Condemns Racism and White Supremacy Following 2 Deadly Shootings.” National Public Radio. August  5. https://www.npr.org/2019/08/05/748387272/trump-condemnsracism-and-white-supremacy-following-2-deadly-shootings Orlova, Alexandra V. 2018. “Russian Politics of Masculinity and the Decay of Feminism: The Roles of Dissent in Creating New Local Norms.” William  & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice (Special Issue) 25(1): 59–86. Orr, Leslie C. 2007. “Beyond Domesticity: Domesticity and Difference/Women and Men: Religious Life in Medieval Tamilnadu.” Pp. 109–130 in Women’s Lives, Women’s Rituals in the Hindu Tradition, edited by Tracey Pintchman. Oxford, NY: Oxford University Press. Orue, Izaskun, and Esther Calvete. 2018. “Homophobic Bullying in Schools: The Role of Homophobic Attitudes and Exposure to Homophobic Aggression.” School Psychology Review 47(1):95–105. Oshin, Linda A., and Stephanie Milan. 2018. “My Strong, Black Daughter: Racial/Ethnic Differences in the Attributes Mothers Value for Their Daughters.” Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology 25(2):179–187.

682 References Ostler, Jeffrey. 2015. “Genocide and American Indian History.” Oxford Research Encyclopedias. http:// oxfordre.com/americanhistory/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780199329175.001.0001/acrefore9780199329175-e-3 Ostling, Richard N. 1991. “The Search for Mary: Handmaid or Feminist?” Time. December 30:62–66. Oswald, Debra L., Maha Baalbaki, and Mackenzie Kirkman. 2019. “Experiences with Benevolent Sexism: Scale Development and Associations with Women’s Well-Being.” Sex Roles 80(5–6):362–380. Owen, Jesse, Frank D. Fincham, and Geneva Polser. 2017. “Couple Identity, Sacrifice, and Availability of Alternative Partners: Dedication in Friends With Benefits Relationships.” Archives of Sexual Behavior 46:1785–1791. OWH. 2019. Office of Women’s Health. “Female Genital Mutilation or Cutting.” U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. April 1. https://www.womenshealth.gov/a-z-topics/female-genital-cutting Oxford, Jon K., Johanna M. Tiedtke, Anna Ossman et  al. 2017. “Endocrine and Aggressive Responses to Competition are Moderated by Contest Outcome, Gender, Individual versus Team Competition, and Implicit Motives.” PLOS ONE 12(7):e0181610. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/ journal.pone.0181610 Padawer, Ruth. 2016. “The Humiliating Practice of Sex-Testing Female Athletes: Too Fast to Be Female.” New York Times Magazine. June  28. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/03/magazine/the-humiliating-practice-of-sex-testing-female-athletes.html Pagels, Elaine. 1979. The Gnostic Gospels. New York: Random House. Pahlke, Erin, Rebecca S. Bigler, and Meagan M. Patterson. 2018. “Gender-Related Attitudes and Beliefs Predict White Women’s Views of Candidates in the 2016 United States Presidential Election.” Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy 18(1):34–60. Pahlke, Erin., and Janet S. Hyde. 2016. “The Debate Over Single-Sex Schooling.” Child Development Perspectives 10(2):81–86. Paid Family Leave. 2020. New York Paid Family Leave Updates for 2020. July 20. https://paidfamilyleave. ny.gov/2020 Painter, Kirstin R., Maria Scannapieco, Gary Blau et al. 2018. “Improving the Mental Health Outcomes of LGBTQ Youth and Young Adults: A Longitudinal Study.” Journal of Social Services Research 44(2):223–235. Palmer, Zachary D., and Mangala Subramaniam. 2017. “Abstract Egalitarianism and Men as Victims: Strategic Choice of Frames by Men’s Rights Organisations.” International Social Science Journal 67(225/226): 97–108. Palti, Gali. 2017. “Emotional Restraint, Family Patterns and Gender Dynamics in the Second and Third Generation in the Kibbutzim.” In Dynamics of Gender Borders: Women in Israel’s Cooperative Settlements, edited by Silvie Fogiel-Bijaoui and Rachel Sharabi. Berlin: De Gruyter Oldenbourg. Paludi, Michelle A. (ed.). 2012. The Psychology of Love, Vol. 1: The Many Forms and Rewards. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger. Papadopulos, Nikolaos, Dmitry Zavlin, Jean-Daniel Lellé et  al. 2017. “Male-to-Female Sex Reassignment Surgery Using the Combined Technique Leads to Increased Quality of Life in a Prospective Study.” Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery 140(2):286–294. Pape, Madeleine, 2020.”Gender Segregation and Trajectories of Organizational Change: The Underrepresentation of Women in Sports Leadership.” Gender & Society 34(1):81–105. Parent, Mike C., Aaron B. Rochlen, and Lexie Willie. 2019. “Precursors to Heterophobia: An Examination of Temporal Sequence among A Sample of Gay Men.” Psychology of Men & Masculinities 20(4):647–653. Park, Gregory, David Bryce, H. Yaden, Andrew Schwartz, Margaret L. Kern et al. 2016. “Women are Warmer but No Less Assertive than Men: Gender and Language on Facebook.” PLOS ONE 11(5). https://journals. plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0155885 Parker, Kim M., Juliana Menasce Horowitz, and Monica Anderson. 2020. “Amid Protests, Majorities across Racial and Ethnic Groups Express Support for the Black Lives Matter Movement.” Pew Research Center. June  12. https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2020/06/12/amid-protests-majorities-across-racial-and-ethnic-groups-express-support-for-the-black-lives-matter-movement/

References  683 Parmar, Sheila, and Laura Pinto. 2016. “Kindergarten Cop: Gender Policing in the Elementary School as Unconscious Social Surveillance.” Our Schools/Our Selves 25(3):75–82. Parry-Giles, Shawn J. 2014. Hillary Clinton in the News: Gender and Authenticity in American Politics. Champaign, IL: University of Illinois Press. Parsons, Carl. 2019. “Social Justice, Race and Class in Education in England: Competing Perspectives.” Cambridge Journal of Education 49(3):309–327. Parsons, Talcott. 1966. Societies: Evolutionary and Comparative Perspectives. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Parsons, Talcott, and Robert F. Bales (eds.). 1955. Family, Socialization, and Interaction Process. Glencoe, IL: Free Press. Pasquini, Maria. 2018. “Pampers Denies They’re Getting Rid of Sesame Street Diapers over Concerns they’re too Masculine.” People. September 17. https://people.com/parents/pampers-denies-report-sesamestreet-diapers-too-masculine/ Pasteels, Inge, Lyssens-Dannebbom, Vicky, and Dimitri Mortelmans. 2017. “A Life Course Perspective on Living Apart Together: Meaning and Incidence across Europe.” Social Indicators Research 130(2):799–817. Patev, Alison J., Kristina B. Hood, and Calvin J. Hal. 2019. “The Interacting Roles of Abortion Stigma and Gender on Attitudes toward Abortion Legality.” Personality and Individual Differences 16(1):87–92. Patil, Pratima A., Michelle V. Porche, Nellie A. Shippen et al. 2018. “Which Girls, Which Boys? The Intersectional Risk for Depression by Race and Ethnicity, and Gender in the U.S.” Clinical Psychology Review 66:51–68. Patterson, Charlotte. 2017. “Parents’ Sexual Orientation and Children’s Development.” Child Development Perspectives 11(1):45–49. Paul, Kari. 2018. “Americans in this Field Have the Highest Rate of Divorce by Age 30.” February  25. https://www.marketwatch.com/story/employees-in-this-field-have-the-highest-rate-of-divorce-2017-07-13 Pauletti, Rachel E., Patrick J. Cooper, Christopher D. Aults et al. 2016. “Sex Differences in Preadolescents’ Attachment Strategies: Products of Harsh Environments or of Gender Identity?” Social Development 25(2): 390–404. Paulson, Erika L., and Mary E. Schramm. 2017. “Electric Appliance Advertising: The Role of the Good Housekeeping Institute.” Journal of Historical Research in Marketing 9(1):41–65. Paustian-Underdahl, Samantha C., Asia A. Eaton, Ashley Mandeville, and Laura M. Little. 2019. “Pushed Out or Opting Out? Integrating Perspectives on Gender Differences in Withdrawal Attitudes During Pregnancy.” Journal of Applied Psychology 104(8):985–1002. Pauwels, Anne, and Joanne Winter. 2006. “Gender Inclusivity or ‘Grammar Rules, OK’? Linguistic Prescriptivism vs. Linguistic Discrimination in the Classroom.” Language and Education 20(2):128–140. Pavlidis, Anita. 2019. “Review: Lean In: Women, Work, and the Will to Lead by Sheryl Sandberg with Nell Scovell.” New Hampshire Nursing News March–May:18. Paynter, Alexa, and Campbell Leaper. 2016. “Heterosexual Dating Double Standards in Undergraduate Women and Men.” Sex Roles 75:393–406. PayScale. 2020. The State of the Gender Pay Gap 2020. https://www.payscale.com/data/gender-pay-gap PBS. 2002. “Muhammad and Women.” From Muhammad: Legacy of a Prophet. https://www.pbs.org/ muhammad/ma_women.shtml Pearl, M. Alexander and Kyle Velte. 2017. “Indigenizing Equality” Yale Law  & Policy Review. 35 (22): 461–497. Pearson, Jennifer. 2018. “High School Context, Heterosexual Scripts, and Young Women’s Sexual Development.” Journal of Youth and Adolescence 47(7):1469–1485. Pease, James L., Melodi Billera, and Georgia Gerard. 2016. “Military Culture and the Transition to Civilian Life: Suicide Risk and other Considerations.” Social Work 61(1):83–86. Pederson, Daphne E. 2017. “Parental Autonomy Support and College Student Academic Outcomes.” Journal of Child and Family Studies 26:2589–2601. Pegu, Sanjana. 2019. “MeToo in India: Building Revolutions from Solidarities.” Decision 46(2):151–168.

684 References Peguero, Anthony A., Gabriel J, Merrin, Jun Sung Hong, and Kecia R. Johnson. 019. “School Disorder and Dropping Out: The Intersection of Gender, Race, and Ethnicity.” Youth & Society 51(2):193–218. Pellegrini, Ann. 2018. “#MeToo: Before and After.” Studies in Gender and Sexuality 19(4):262–264. Pellerin, Mylène, Geneviève Parent, and Nadine Lanctôt. 2020. “Perception of Social Climate by Welfare/ Justice-Involved Girls in Out-of-Home Placement Centers.” Children and Youth Services Review 108 (Article 104554):8 pages. Pelley, Virginia. 2019. “Maternal Instinct Isn’t Real, but the Myth Makes Parenting Harder.” June 27. https:// www.fatherly.com/love-money/maternal-instinct-isnt-real-but-the-myth-makes-parenting-harder/ Peltier, MacKenzie, and Lauren Mizock. 2012. “Fox’s More to Love: Pseudo-fat Acceptance in Reality Television.” Somatechnics 2(1):93–106. Pennington, Charlotte R., Linda K. Kaye, Adam W. Quershi, and Derek Heim. 2018. “Controlling for Prior Attainment Reduces the Positive Influence that Single-Gender Classroom Initiatives Exert on High School Students’ Scholastic Achievements.” Sex Roles 78(5–6):385–393. Penny, Laurie. 2018. “Mass Shootings Show Why We Must Stop Pandering to White Male Fragility: The Killing of Five Journalists at the Capital Gazette in Maryland is Merely the Latest Massacre Driven by Misogyny.” Guardian. June  29. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jun/29/ mass-shootings-white-male-fragility-capital-gazette-maryland-misogyny Penza, Dylan. 2018. “The Unstoppable Intrusion: The Unique Effect of Online Harassment and What the United States Can Ascertain from Other Countries’ Attempts to Prevent It.” Cornell International Law Journal 51(1):297–318. Pepin, Joanna R., Liana C. Sayer, and Lynne M. Casper. 2018. “Marital Status and Mothers’ Time Use: Childcare, Housework, Leisure, and Sleep.” Demography 55:107–133. Peppiat, Lucy. 2019. “Man as the Image and Glory of God, and Woman as the Glory of Man: Perspicuity or Ambiguity?” Priscilla Papers 33(3):12–18. Peralta, Robert L., Breanna C. Stewart, Jennifer L. Steele, and Fernando A. Wagner. 2016. “Nonmedical Use of Prescription Drugs in Emerging Adulthood: Differentiating Sex from Gender.” Addiction Research & Theory 24(5):389–397. Perelli-Harris, Brienna, Ann Berrington, Nora Sánchez Gassen, Paulina Galezewska, and Jennifer A. Holland. 2017. The Rise in Divorce and Cohabitation: Is There a Link?” Population and Development Review 43(2): 303–329. Perraudin, Francis. 2019. “Low Pay in the Garment Industry Still a Reality Despite Pledges—Study.” Guardian. May  30. https://www.theguardian.com/fashion/2019/may/30/despite-fashion-living-wage-pledgeslow-pay-still-a-reality-study-says Perrin, Andrew, and Monica Anderson. 2019. “Share of U.S. Adults Using Social Media, Including Facebook, is Mostly Unchanged Since 2018.” Pew Research Center. April 10. https://www.pewresearch.org/ fact-tank/2019/04/10/share-of-u-s-adults-using-social-media-including-facebook-is-mostly-unchangedsince-2018/ Perry, Armon R., Susan Nicole Lewis, and Cheri Langley. 2017. “Never Married, Nonresident Fathers.” Chapter 6 in Fatherhood in America: Social Work Perspectives on a Changing Society, edited by Carl Mazza and Armon R. Perry. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas. Perry, David G., Rachel E. Pauletti, Patrick J. Cooper et al., 2019. “Gender Identity in Childhood: A Review of the Literature.” International Journal of Behavioral Development 43(4):289–304. Perry, Nicole B., Jessica M. Dollar, Susan D. Calkins et al. 2018. “Childhood Self-Regulation as a Mechanism through which Early Overcontrolling Parenting is Associated with Adjustment in Preadolescence.” Developmental Psychology 54(8): 1542–1554. Perry, Samuel L., and Andrew L. Whitehead. 2016. “Religion and Public Opinion toward Same-Sex Relations, Marriage, and Adoption: Does the Type of Practice Matter?” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 55(3):637–651.

References  685 Peshkova, Svetlana. 2019. “Female Religious Leaders in Uzbekistan: Recalibrating Desires and Effecting Social Change.” Pp.  365–378 in Women of Asia: Globalization, Development, and Gender Equity, edited by Mehrangiz Najafizadeh and Linda L. Lindsey. New York and London: Routledge. Pessin, Léa. 2018. “Changing Gender Norms and Marriage Dynamics in the United States.” Journal of Marriage and Family 80 (1): 25–42. Peter, Jochen, and Patti M. Valkenburg. 2016. “Adolescents and Pornography: A  Review of 20  Years of Research.” Journal of Sex Research 53(4–5):509–531. Petersen, Margit Anne, Lotte Stig Nørgaard, and Janine Marie Traulsen. 2015. “Going to the Doctor With Enhancement In Mind—An Ethnographic Study of University Students’ Use of Prescription Stimulants and their Moral Ambivalence.” Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy 22(3): 201–207. Petersen, Michael Bang, and Christopher T. Dawes. 2017. “Assessing Causal Pathways between Physical Formidability and Aggression in Human Males.” Personality and Individual Differences 113:161–166. Peterson, Britt. 2019. “Can a Waltz be a Form of Activism? Ask these Same-Gender Ballroom Dancers.” Washington Post. July 1. https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/magazine/can-a-waltz-be-a-form-ofactivism-ask-these-same-gender-ballroom-dancers/2019/07/05/04dfed7a-9448–11e9-aadb-74e6b2b46f6a_story.html Peterson, David A. M., Lori A. Biedeman, David Andersen et al., 2019. “Mitigating Gender Bias in Student Evaluations of Teaching.” PLOS ONE. May 15, 14(5):e0216–241. Peterson, Jaime, Janine Bruce, Neel Patel, and Lisa J. Chamberlain. 2018. “Parental Attitudes, Behaviors, and Barriers to School Readiness among Parents of Low-Income Latino Children.” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 15(2):188. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5857047/ Peterson, Joel A. 2017. “The Surprising Secret of Legalized Discrimination in College Admissions.” Huffington Post. December  9. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/the-surprising-secret-of-legalized-genderdiscrimination_b_5a11b570e4b023121e0e93db Petren, Raymond E. Anthony J. Ferraro, Taylor R. Davis, and Kay Pasley. 2017. “Factors Linked with Coparenting Support and Conflict After Divorce.” Journal of Divorce & Remarriage 58(3):145–160. Petren, Raymond E., Chelsea L. Garneau-Rosner, and Elif D. Yildrim. 2018. “Union Stability among Mothers and Stepfathers: Contributions of Stepfathers and Biological Fathers.” Journal of Family Psychology 32(8):1142–1151. Petriglieri, Jennifer. 2018. “Talent Management and the Dual Career Couple.” Harvard Business Review. May–June issue. https://hbr.org/2018/05/talent-management-and-the-dual-career-couple Petts, Richard J., Kevin M. Shafer, and Lee Essig. 2018. “Does Adherence to Masculine Norms shape Fathering Behavior?” Journal of Marriage and the Family 80(3):704–720. Pew Research Center. 2016. “The Gender Gap in Religion Around the World.” March  22. http://www. pewforum.org/2016/03/22/the-gender-gap-in-religion-around-the-world/ Pew Research Center. 2017. “The Changing Global Religious Landscape.” Pew Research Center. April 5. http://www.pewforum.org/2017/04/05/the-changing-global-religious-landscape/ Pew Research Center. 2019. “U.S. Public Continues to Favor Legal Abortion, Oppose Overturning Roe v. Wade: More agree with Democrats than Republicans on Abortion Policy. Pew Research Center. August 29. https://www.people-press.org/2019/08/29/u-s-public-continues-to-favor-legal-abortion-opposeoverturning-roe-v-wade/ Pfeffer, Rebecca, Pablo Ormachea, and David Eagleman. 2018. “Gendered Outcomes in Prostitution Arrests in Houston, Texas.” Crime & Delinquency 64 (12):1538–1567. Pflum, Mary. 2018. October 15. “A Year Ago, Alyssa Milano Started a Conversation about #MeToo: These Women Replied.” NBC News. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/year-ago-alyssa-milano-startedconversation-about-metoo-these-women-n920246 Pflum, Mary. 2019. “Barbie Turns 60—and Continues to Perform.” NBC News. March 8. https://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/barbie-turns-60-continues-perform-n981251

686 References Pham, Janelle M. 2017. “Beyond Hookup Culture: Current Trends in the Study of College Student Sex and Where to Next.” Sociology Compass 11(8):11 pages Pham, Michael N., Nicole Barbaro, Justin K. Mogilski, and Todd K. Shackelford. 2015. “Coalitional Mate Retention is Correlated Positively with Friendship Quality Involving Women, but Negatively with Male– Male Friendship Quality.” Personality and Individual Differences 79:87–90. Phelps, Deborah L., and Penny Holste. 2020. “Insights into Leadership among Female Clergy in the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America.” ELCA. Unpublished manuscript. Available upon request from: dphelps@ fontbonne.edu Phillips, Adam. 2019. “Female Genital Mutilation Occurs in the United States.” Voice of America. February 6. https://www.voanews.com/usa/female-genital-mutilation-occurs-united-states Phillips, Mary. 2016. “Embodied Care and Planet Earth: Ecofeminism, Maternalism and Postmaternalism.” Australian Feminist Studies 3(90): 468–485. Piaget Jean. 1954. The Construction of Reality in the Child. New York: Basic Books. Piaget, Jean. 1950. The Psychology of Intelligence. London: Routledge Pickard, Linda, Derek King, Nicola Brimblecombe, and Martin Knapp. 2018. “Public Expenditure Costs of Carers Leaving Employment in England, 2015/2016.” Health  & Social Care in the Community 26(1):e-132-e142. Pickert, Gabriele, Fiona Kay, and John Hagan. 2017. “Depressive Symptoms and the Salience of Job Satisfaction over the Life Course of Professionals.” Advances in Life Course Research 31:22–33. Piemonte, Jennifer L., Terri D. Conley, and Staci Gusakova, 2019. “Orgasm, Gender, and Responses to Heterosexual Casual Sex.” Personality and Individual Differences 51:December 1. Abstract available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2019.06.030 Pietrykowski, Bruce. 2017. “The Return to Caring Skills: Gender, Class, and Occupational Wages in the US.” Feminist Economics 23(4):32–61. Pilkington, Ed. 2020. “Black Americans Dying of Covid-19 at Three Times the Rate of White People.” Guardian. May  20. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/20/black-americans-death-ratecovid-19-coronavirus Pillemer, Julianna, and Nancy P. Rothbard. 2018. “Friends Without Benefits: Understanding the Dark Sides of Workplace Friendship.” Academy of Management Review 43(4):635–660. Piña-Watson, Brandy, Elma I. Lorenzo-Blanco, Marianela Dornhecker, Ashley J. Martinez, and Julie L. Nagoshi. 2016. “Moving Away from a Cultural Deficit to a Holistic Perspective: Traditional Gender Role Values, Academic Attitudes, and Educational Goals for Mexican Descent Adolescents.” Journal of Counseling Psychology 63(3): 307–318. Pinsker, Joe. 2018. “Dads Prefer Sons, Moms Prefer Daughters.” Atlantic. November 29. https://www.theatlantic.com/family/archive/2018/11/parent-disappointed-child-gender-sex-preference/576907/ Pinto, Giuliana, Lucia Bigozzi, Giulia Vettori, and Claudio Vezzani. 2018. “The Relationship between Conceptions of Learning and Academic Outcomes in Middle School Students According to Gender Differences.” Learning, Culture and Social Interaction 16:45–54. Pisor, Anne C., and Martin Surbeck. 2019. “The Evolution of Intergroup Tolerance in Non-human Primates and Humans.” Evolutionary Anthropology 28:210–233. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ evan.21793 Pitofsky, Marina. 2018. What Is the Alt-Right? And How Is It Using Social Media to Spread Its Message? USA Today. July  23. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/07/23/alt-right-philosophy-whiteidentity-civil-rights/800232002/ Platt, Lucy, Pippa Grenfell, Rebecca Meiksin et al., 2018. “Associations between Sex Work Laws and Sex Workers’ Health: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Quantitative and Qualitative Studies.” PLOS MEDICINE 15(12):1–54. Plemenitaš, Katja. 2017. “Metaphorical Elements in Gendered Slurs.” BAS-British and American Studies 23:207–217.

References  687 Poggi, Jeannie. 2018a. “6 Sexist Superbowl Ads (and One Honorable Mention).” Ad Age. January  12. https://adage.com/article/special-report-super-bowl/most-sexist-super-bowl-ads/311835 Poggi, Jeannie. 2018b. “Where are the Women? Superbowl Ads Face Scrutiny amid #MeToo Movement.” Ad Age. January 12. https://adage.com/article/special-report-super-bowl/super-bowl-wherewomen-ads-metoo/311907 Polachek, Solomon W., and Jun Xiang. 2014. “The Gender Pay Gap across Countries: A Human Capital Approach.” Discussion Paper No. 8603. October. IZA Research. http://ftp.iza.org/dp8603.pdf Polderman, Tinca J.C., Baudewijntje P.C. Kreukels, Michael S. Irwig et  al. 2018. “The Biological Contributions to Gender Identity and Gender Diversity: Bringing Data to the Table.” Behavior Genetics 48(2):95–108. Polivka, Larry. 2017/2018. “Women and the Crisis of Care in the United States.” Generations 41(4):29–35. Pollitt, Katha. 2005. “Summers of Our Discontent.” Nation. February 21. 280(7):10. Pomeroy, Sarah B. 2013. Pythagorean Women: A Social History. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University. Ponte, Cristina, Anca Velicu, José Alberto Simões and Claudia Lampert. 2018. Pp. 41–53 in Smartphone Cultures, edited by Leslie Haddon and Jane Vincent. London: Routledge. Ponting, Carolyn, Steve S. Lee, Amy M. Rapp et al. 2018. “Family Factors Mediate Discrimination Related Stress and Externalizing Symptoms in Rural Latino Adolescents.” Journal of Adolescence 69:11–21. Poo, Ai-jen, and Carol Whitlatch. 2016/2017. “Caregiving in America: Supporting Families, Strengthening the Workforce.” Generations 40(4):87–93. Poole, Alex H. 2017. “ ‘As Popular as Pin-Up Girls’: The Armed Services Editions, Masculinity, and Middlebrow Print Culture in the Mid-Twentieth-Century United States.” Information & Culture: A Journal of History 52 (4):462–486. Poortman, Anne-Rigit, and Belinda Hewitt. 2015. “Gender Differences in Relationship Preferences After Union Dissolution.” Advances in Life Course Research 26:11–21. Potter, Ned. 2013. “Neil Armstrong: How ‘One Small Step’ Became First Words on Moon.” ABC News. January 2. https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/neil-armstrong-small-step-words-moon-apollo-11/story?id=18115402. Powell, Anton. 2016. Athens and Sparta: Constructing Greek Political and Social History from 476bc. Abingdon, Oxon, UK: Routledge. Powell, Catherine, and Rebecca Hughes. 2019. “Womenomics is Flipping the Script on Men in Japan.” Fortune. March 6. https://fortune.com/2019/03/06/japan-economic-empowerment-gender-equality/ Power, Camilla. 2018. “Gender Egalitarianism Made Us Human: The ‘Feminist Turn’ In Human Origins.” October 1. https://www.3quarksdaily.com/3quarksdaily/2018/10/gender-egalitarianism-made-us-human-thefeminist-turn-in-human-origins.html Prasad, Ritu. 2019. “How Trump Talks about Women—and Does it Matter?” BBC News. November  29. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50563106 Prendergast, Sarah, and David MacPhee. 2018. “Family Resilience Amid Stigma and Discrimination: A Conceptual Model for Families Headed by Same-Sex Parents.” Family Relations 6: 26–40. Press, Joyce. 2017. “The Life and Death of a Radical Sisterhood: Fifty years Ago a Group of Women Convened in New York with One Clear Goal; Dismantle the Patriarchy. Their Struggle Feels All Too Contemporary.” New York Magazine. November 15. https://www.thecut.com/2017/11/an-oral-history-of-feminist-group-new-york-radical-women.html Press, Julie E., and Eleanor Townsley. 1998. “Wives’ and Husbands’ Housework Reporting: Gender, Class, and Social Desirability.” Gender & Society 12(2):188–218. Prevot, Andrew. 2017. “No Mere Spirituality: Recovering a Tradition of Female Theologians.” Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion 33(1):107–117. Price, Jay. 2018. “Battling Depression and Suicide among Female Veterans.” National Public Radio. May 29. https://www.npr.org/2018/05/29/614011243/battling-depression-and-suicide-among-female-veterans Price, S.L. 2015. “Serena Williams is Sports Illustrated 2015 Sportsperson of the Year.” December 21. Sports Illustrated https://www.si.com/sportsperson/2015/12/14/serena-williams-si-sportsperson-year

688 References Primack, Brian A, Ariel Shensa, César G Escobar-Viera, Erica L. Barrett, Erica L. et al. 2016. “Use of Multiple social Media Platforms and Symptoms of Depression and Anxiety: A  Nationally-Representative Study among U.S. Adults.” Computers in Human Behavior 69:1–9. Promise Keepers. 2020. “Building on the Past to Redefine the Future.” https://promisekeepers.org/ promise-keepers/about-us-2/ Prosek, Elizabeth A., Amanda L. Giordano, Kri D. Turner et al. 2018. “Prevalence and Correlates of Stimulant Medication Misuse among the Collegiate Population.” Journal of College Student Psychotherapy 32(1):10–22. Provence, Markus M., Mike C. Parent, Aaron B. Rochlen, and Matthew R. Chester. 2018. “Development of the Gay Male Heterophobia Scale.” Psychology of Men & Masculinities 29(1):44–54. Pruchniewska, Urszula Maria. 2016. “Working across Difference in the Digital Era: Riding the Waves to Feminist Solidarity.” Feminist Media Studies 16(4):737–741 Pruitt, Sarah. 2019. “How Anita Hill’s Testimony Made America Cringe—And Change.” September  26. https://www.history.com/news/anita-hill-confirmation-hearings-impact Przybylo, Ela. 2016. “Introducing Asexuality, Unthinking of Sex.” Pp. 181–191 in Introducing the New Sexuality Studies (Vol. 3), edited by N.L. Fischer. New York: Routledge. Punt, Jeremy. 2016. “A Cultural Turn in New Testament Studies?” HTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies 72(4):1–7. Punyanunt-Carter, Narissa Maria. 2006. “Love on Television: Reality Perception Differences between Men and Women.” North American Journal of Psychology 8(2):269–76. Purvis, Dara E. 2019. “Trump, Gender Rebels, and Masculinities.” Wake Forest Law Review 54(2):423–450. Pyle, Kai. 2018. “Naming and Claiming: Recovering Ojibwe and Plains Cree Two-Spirit Language.” Transgender Studies Quarterly 5(4):574–588. Qian, Yue. 2017. “Gender Asymmetry in Educational and Income Assortive Marriage.” Journal of Marriage and Family 79(2):318–336. Qian, Zhenchao, and Daniel T. Lichter. 2017. “Marriage Markets and Intermarriage: Exchange in First Marriages and Remarriages.” Demography 55(3):849–875. Quadlin, Natasha, and Long Doan. 2018. “Sex-typed Chores and the City: Gender, Urbanicity, and Housework.” Gender & Society 32(6):789–813. Quindlen, Anna. 2008. “Can you Say Sexist?” Newsweek. September 15:104. Quintana-García, Cristina, and Martha M Elvira. 2018. “The Effect of the External Labor Market on the Gender Pay Gap among Executives.” Industrial and Labor Relations Review 70(1):132–159. Raabe, Isabel J Zsófia Boda, and Christoph Stadtfeld. 2019. “The Social Pipeline: How Friend Influences and Peer Exposure Widen the STEM Gender Gap.” Sociology of Education 92(2):105–123. Rabin, Roni Caryn. 2020. “In Italy, Coronavirus Takes a Higher Toll on Men.” New York Times. March 20. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/20/health/coronavirus-italy-men-risk.html Radhakrishnan, Sarvepalli. 1947. Religion and Society. London: Allen and Unwin. Rahim, Zamira. 2019. “Putin Advises Women on How to Maintain their Figures During International Women’s Day Event.” The Independent. March 9. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/putin-russia-international-womens-day-advice-a8815246.html RAINN. 2019. Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network. “Campus Sexual Violence: Statistics.” https://www. rainn.org/statistics/campus-sexual-violence Raitanen, Jenni, Sveinung Sandberg, and Atte Oksanen. 2017. “The Bullying-School Shooting Nexus: Bridging Master Narratives of Mass Violence with Personal Narratives of Social Exclusion.” Deviant Behavior 40(1):96–109. Rampton, Marsha. 2017. “Feminism: Where We’ve Been and Where We’re Going.” Pp. 156–161 in Sex and Gender: A Reference Handbook, edited by David E. Newton. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO. Randazzo, Keith David, and Melinda Solmon. 2018. “Exploring Social Norms as a Framework to Understand Decisions to be Physically Active.” Quest 70(1):64–80.

References  689 Randles, Jennifer. 2017. Proposing Prosperity? Marriage Education Policy and Inequality in America. New York: Columbia University Press. Rao, Aliya Hamid. 2015. “Gender and Cultivating the Moral Self in Islam: Muslim Converts in an American Mosque.” Sociology of Religion 76(4):413–435. Rapoport, Benoît, and Claire Thibout. 2018. “Why Do Boys and Girls Make Different Educational Choices? The Influence of Expected Earnings and Test Scores.” Economics of Education Review 62:205–229. Rasmussen, Eric E., and Rebecca L. Densley. 2017. “Girl in a Country Song: Gender Roles and Objectification of Women in Popular Country Music across 1990 to 2014.” Sex Roles 76:188–201. Ratliff, Kate A. Redford, Liz Conway, John Smith, Colin Tucker. 2019. “Engendering Support: Hostile Sexism Predicts Voting for Donald Trump Over Hillary Clinton in the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election.” Group Processes and Intergroup Relations 22(4):578–593. Rattigan, Kaitlin. 2013. “The Elephant in the Gender Equality Room: Masculinity. “ August  1. https:// www.taketheleadwomen.com/blog/propel-take-the-lead-drives-change/parity/the-elephant-in-thegender-equality-room-masculinity Ray, Larry. 2016. “Explaining Violence—Towards a Critical Friendship with Neuroscience.” Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 46:(3):335–356. Raymond-Flesch, Marissa, Colette Auerswald, Linda McGlon et al. 2017. “Building Social Capital to Promote Adolescent Wellbeing: A Qualitative Study with Teens in a Latino Agricultural Community.” BMC Public Health 17(1):1–9. Raz, Aviad, and Gavan Tzruya. 2018. “Doing Gender in Segregated and Assimilative Organizations: Ultra-Orthodox Jewish Women in the Israeli High-Tech Labour Market.” Work & Organization 25(4):361–378. Razzante, Robert, and J.W. Smith. 2018. “Rhetorical Re-Framing and Counter Narratives: An Ideological Critique of the Christian Hip-Hop Artist Lecrae Moore.” Ohio Communication Journal 56:59–68. Read, Ghazal Jen’nan. 2015. “Gender, Religious Identity, and Civic Engagement among Arab Muslims in the United States.” Sociology of Religion 76(1):30–48. Rear, David. 2016. “Reforming Japanese-style Management: Destabilizing Hegemony through Discourse Intervention.” Contemporary Japan—Journal of the German Institute for Japanese Studies 28(2):209–228. Reardon, Sean F., Erin M. Fahle, Demetra Kalogrides et al., 2018. “Gender Achievement Gaps in U.S. School Districts.” CEPA Working Paper No.  18–23. Stanford Center for Education and Policy Analysis. June. https://cepa.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/wp18-13-v201806_0.pdf Redford, Liz, Howell, Jennifer L. Howell, Maartje H.J. Meijs, and Kate A. Ratliff. 2019. “Implicit and Explicit Evaluations of Feminist Prototypes Predict Feminist Identity and Behavior.” Group Processes & Intergroup Relations 21(1):3–18. Reed, Kayla, James M. Duncan, Mallory Lucier-Greer et  al. 2016. “Helicopter Parenting and Emerging Adult Self-Efficacy: Implications for Mental and Physical Health.” Journal of Child and Family Studies 25(10):3136–3149. Reeder, Heidi. 2016. “ ‘He’s Like a Brother’: The Social Construction of Satisfying Cross-Sex Friendship Roles.” Sexuality & Culture 21:142–162. Reeves, Ricard V., and Tiffany Ford. 2020. “COVID-10 Much More Fatal for Men, Especially Taking Age into Account.” Brookings. May  15. https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2020/05/15/ covid-19-much-more-fatal-for-men-especially-taking-age-into-account/ Rehel, Erin M. 2014. “When Dad Stays Home Too: Paternity Leave, Gender, and Parenting.” Gender  & Society 28(1):110–32. Reich, Sabine, Frank M. Schneider, and Leonie Heling. 2018. “Zero Likes—Symbolic Interactions and Need Satisfaction Online.” Computers in Human Behavior 80:97–102. Reichard, Ulrich H. 2014. “The Graceful Asian Ape.” Pp.  118–130 in Primate Ethnographies., edited by Karen B. Strier. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. Reichert, Michael C. 2019. How to Raise A Boy: The Power of Connection to Build Good Men. New York: Tarcher Perigee.

690 References Reid, Barbara E. 2016. Wisdom’s Feast: An Invitation to Feminist Interpretation of the Scripture. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans. Reid, Erin M. 2018. “Straying from Breadwinning: Status and Money in Men’s Interpretations of their Wives’ Work Arrangements.” Gender, Work, & Organization 25(6):718–733. Reigeluth, Christopher, and Michael E. Addis. 2016. “Adolescent Boys’ Experiences With Policing of Masculinity: Forms, Functions, and Consequences.” Psychology of Men & Masculinities 17(1):74–83. Reiman, Carolyn A., and Edward L. Mazuchowski. 2018. “Suicide Rates among Active Duty Service Members Compared with Civilian Counterparts, 2005–2014.” Military Medicine 183(Issue suppl 1):396–402. Reimers, Anne Kerstin, Stephanie Schoeppe, Yolanda Demetriou, and Guido Knapp. 2018. “Physical Activity and Outdoor Play of Children in Public Playgrounds—Do Gender and Social Environment Matter?” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 15(7):15pages. Reitman, Janet. 2016. “Hillary Vs. the Hate Machine: How Clinton Became a Vessel for America’s Fury.” Rolling Stone. September  6. https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/hillary-vs-the-hatemachine-how-clinton-became-a-vessel-for-americas-fury-103997/ Remennick, Larissa. 2018. “Silent Mothers, Articulate Daughters: Two Generations of Russian Israeli Women Doing Jewishness and Gender.” Nashim: A Journal of Jewish Women’s Studies and Gender Issues Spring (32):58–77. Remerowski, Gaia. 2018. “Growing Up Transgender: Navigating the Complex World of Gender Identity.” Outlook Autumn:14–20. Washington University School of Medicine. Renzulli, Kerri Anne. 2019. “46% of American Men Think the Gender Pay Gap is ‘Made Up to Serve a Political Purpose’.” https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/04/46percent-of-american-men-think-the-genderpay-gap-is-made-up.html Reuters. 2019. “Women to Join Taliban Delegation for First Time in Afghan Peace Talks.” Guardian. https:// www.theguardian.com/world/2019/apr/15/women-join-taliban-delegation-first-time-afghan-peace-talks Reynolds, George M., and Amanda Shendruk. 2018. “Demographics of the U.S. Military.” April 24. Council of Foreign Relations. https://www.cfr.org/article/demographics-us-military Rhea, John M., 2016. A Field of Their Own: Women and American Indian History. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press. Rhode, Deborah L. 2017. Women and Leadership. New York: Oxford University Press. Rhodes, Ryan E., Desmond McEwan, and Amanda L. Rebar. 2019. “Theories of Physical Activity Behaviour Change: A History and Synthesis of Approaches.” Psychology of Sport 42:100–109. Rhonda, James P. 1996. “The Attractions of Christianity for the Native Women of Martha’s Vineyard.” In Major Problems in American Women’s History, edited by Mary Beth Norton and Ruth M. Alexander. Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath. Riabov, Oleg, and Tatiana Riabova. 2014. “The Remasculinization of Russia? Gender, Nationalism, and the Legitimation of Power under Vladimir Putin.” Problems of Post-Communism 61(2):23–35. Ricciardelli, Rosemary, and Michael Adorjan. 2019. “If a Girl’s Photo Gets Sent Around, That’s a Way Bigger Deal Than If a Guy’s Photo Gets Sent Around’: Gender, Sexting, and the Teenage Years.” Journal of Gender Studies 28(5): 563–577 Rice, Charles, 2018. “Catholics, Keep Your Wallets Closed until the Church Reforms from the Vatican on Down.” USA Today. September 13. https://amp.usatoday.com/amp/1266858002 Rich, Miriam. 2016. “The Curse of the Civilised Woman: Race, Gender and the Pain of Childbirth in Nineteenth Century American Medicine.” Gender & History 28(1): 57–76. Rich, Motoko. 2019. “Japan’s Working Mothers: Record Responsibilities, Little Help from Dads.” New York Times. February 2. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/02/world/asia/japan-working-mothers.html Richard, Gabriela T., and Kishonna L. Gray.2018. “Gendered Play, Racialized Reality: Black Cyberfeminism, Inclusive Communities of Practice, and the Intersections of Learning, Socialization, and Resilience in Online Gaming.” Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies 39(1):112–148. Richardson, Scott. 2015. Gender Lessons: Patriarchy, Sextyping & Schools. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. Richter, Felix. 2018. “The Generation Gap in TV Consumption.” August  27. https://www.statista.com/ chart/15224/daily-tv-consumption-by-us-adults/

References  691 Ridge, Natasha, Susan Kippels, Alejandra Cardini, and Joannes Paulus Yimbesalu. 2019. “2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development: Developing National Agendas in Order to Achieve Gender Equality in Education (SDG 4).” March 31. https://t20japan.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/t20-japan-tf1-4-nationalagendas-achieve-gender-equality-education.pdf Riegle-Crum, Catherine, Barbara King, and Chelsea Moore. 2016. “Do They Stay or Do They Go? The Switching Decisions of Individuals Who Enter Gender Atypical College Majors.” Sex Roles 74(9–10): 436–449. Riley, Cailin. 2019. “Even Bubbly Pop Music Contains Lots of Violence.” March 7. https://www.futurity.org/ pop-music-violence-lyrics-2001742-2/ Riley, Charlotte. 2020. “Jesus the Medieval Feminist.” History Today 70(1):18–20. Riley, Glenda. 2007. Inventing the American Woman: An Inclusive History. Volume I: To 1877. Wheeling, IL: Harlan Davidson. Rinčić, Iva, Amir Muzur, and Stephen O. Sodeke. 2018. “Sex Selection, Gender Selection, and Sexism.” Pp. 113–130 in Clinical Ethics at the Crossroads of Genetic and Reproductive Technologies, edited by Sorin Hostiuc. London: Academic Press. Rincón-Cortés, Millie, James P. Herman, Sonia Lupien, et al. 2019. “Stress: Influence of Sex, Reproductive Status and Gender.” Neurobiology of Stress 10:100155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ynstr.2019.100155 Rippon, Gina. 2019. The Gendered Brain: The New Neuroscience That Shatters the Myth of The Female Brain. London: Bodley Head. Risman, Barbara. 2018. Where the Millennials Will Take US: A New Generation Wrestles with the Gender Structure. New York: Oxford University Press. Risman, Barbara. 2020. “Will COVID-19 Push Women Out of the Labor force?” Psychology Today. July 2. https:// www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/gender-questions/202007/will-covid-19-push-women-out-the-labor-force Robb, Alice. 2014. “Women Get Interrupted More-Even by other Women.” New Republic. May 14. https:// newrepublic.com/article/117757/gender-language-differences-women-get-interrupted-more Robnett, Rachael D. 2017. “Overcoming Functional Fixedness in Naming Traditions: A  Commentary of Pilcher’s Names and ‘Doing Gender’.” Sex Roles 77:823–828. Robnett, Rachel D., and Kristin J. Anderson. 2017. “Feminist Identity among Women and Men From Four Ethnic Groups.” Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology 23(1):134–142. Roca-Sales, Meritxell, and Guillermo Lopez-Garcia. 2017. “Contemporary Portrayals of Women and Femininity: A Case Study of Lifestyle Blogs in the U.S.” Journal of Research in Gender Studies 7(2):186–210. Rocque, Michael, and Grant Duwe. 2018. “Rampage Shootings: An Historical, Empirical, and Theoretical Overview.” Aggression and Violence 19:28–33. Rodgers, Kathleen Boyce, and Stacey J.T. Hust. 2018. “Sexual Objectification in Music Videos and Acceptance of Potentially Offensive Sexual Behaviors.” Psychology of Popular Media Culture 7(4): 413–428. Rodriguez, Joe. 2018. “How 3 Gay Latinos Learned to Navigate Their Queerness in a Machista Culture.” http:// remezcla.com/lists/culture/how-3-gay-latinos-learned-to-navigate-their-queerness-in-a-machista-culture/ Rodríguez-Planas, Núria and Natalia Nollenberger, Natalia. 2018. “Let the Girls Learn! It Is Not Only about Math … It’s about Gender Social Norms.” Economics of Education Review 62:230–253. Roessner, Amber. 2013. “The ‘Ladies’ and the ‘Tramps’.” Journalism History 39(3):134–44. Roeters, Anne, and Pablo Gracia. 2016. “Child Care Time, Parents’ Well-Being, and Gender: Evidence from the American Time Use Survey.” Journal of Child & Family Studies 25(8):2469–2479. Rogers, Mark R., and David A. Standridge. 2019. “Child Support Cost Tables: The Case for Second Household Adjustment.” New Mexico Law Review 49(2):256–282. Rollero, Chiara, Adriano Daniele, and Stefano Tartaglia. 2019. “Do Men Post and Women View? The Role of Gender, Personality and Emotions in Online Social Activity.” Cyberpsychology 13(1):16 pages. Romanets, Maryna. 2017. “Virtual Warfare: Masculinit6y, Sexuality, and Propaganda in the Russo-Ukrainian War.” East/West Journal of Ukrainian Studies 4(1):159–177. Romeo, Katherine, and Stacey S. Horn. 2017. “Adolescents’ Judgments of Homophobic Harassment toward Male and Female Victims: The Role of Gender Stereotypes.” Journal of Moral Education 46(2):145–157.

692 References Rosado, Tania Tamara. 2018. “Puerto Rico’s Children Mired in Poverty: Alarming Conditions May Get Worse by Impact of Hurricane Maria.” Instituto Desarrollo Juventud. June 27. https://www.aecf.org/m/ databook/2018KC_newsrelease_PR.pdf Rosay, André B. 2016. “Violence against American Indian and Alaska Native Women and Men.” National Institute of Justice Journal June 1 (No. 277):8 pages. https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/249822.pdf; https://nij.gov/journals/277/pages/violence-against-american-indians-alaska-natives.aspx Rose, Jessica, Susan Mackey-Kallis, Len Shyles et al. 2012. “Face It: The Impact of Gender on Social Media Images.” Communication Quarterly 60(5):588–607. Rose, Suzanna M., Yesim Darici, and Sanaz Farhangi. 2019. “Strategic Career Development for STEM Women Faculty.” In Handbook of Research on Faculty Development for Digital Teaching and Learning, edited by Pamela A. Lemoine, Sharon Seneca, and Michael D. Richardson. https://www.igi-global.com/ chapter/strategic-career-development-for-stem-women-faculty/228385 Rosenberg, Alyssa. 2016. “If Hillary Clinton is ‘Such a Nasty Woman,’ She’s also a Liberated One.” Washington Post. Oct 20. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/act-four/wp/2016/10/20/if-hillary-clintonis-such-a-nasty-woman-shes-also-a-liberated-one/ Rosenberg-Friedman, Lilach. 2018. “Religious-Zionism and Gender: 70  Years of Redefining the Identity of Women in the Military, Religious, and Public Spheres.” Israel Studies 23(3):152–163. Rosenblatt, Kahlan. 2018. “Frank Oz Weighs in on ‘Sesame Street’ Writer Saying Bert and Ernie are Gay.” NBC News. September 19. https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/frank-oz-weighs-sesamestreet-writer-saying-bert-ernie-are-n910946 Rosenfeld, Jake. 2014. What Unions No Longer Do. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Rosette, Ashleigh Shelby, Rebecca Ponce de Leon, Christy Zhou Koval, and David A. Harrison. 2018. “Intersectionality: Connecting Experiences of Gender with Race at Work.” Research in Organizational Behavior 31:1–22. Ross, Karen. 2016. “A Hard Ladder to Climb: Women and Power in Media Industries.” Media Development Issue 1:16–18. Rosser, Phyllis. 2018. “The Highest-Performing Women Are (Still) Scoring Lower Than Men on the SAT.” Ms. February  15. https://msmagazine.com/2018/02/15/highest-performing-women-still-scoring-lowermen-sat/ Rostosky, Sharon S., and Ellen D.B. Riggle. 2017. “Same-Sex Couple Relationship Strengths: A Review and Synthesis of the Empirical Literature (2000–2016).” Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity 4(1):1–13. Roth, Jeff, and Laura L. King. 2019. “Sex-Based Predictors of Male and Female Property Crime Arrest Rates: Disadvantage and Drug Use.” Women & Criminal Justice 29(2):112–127. Rothe, Dawn L., and Victoria E. Collins. 2019. “Turning Back the Clock? Violence against Women and the Trump Administration.” Victims & Offenders 14(8):965–978. Rousseau, Sofie, and Miri Scharf. 2018. “Why People Helicopter Parent? An Actor–Partner Interdependence Study of Maternal and Paternal Prevention/Promotion Focus and Interpersonal/Self-Regret.” Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 35(7):919–935. Rovner, Julie. “If High Court Reverse Roe v. Wade, 22 States Likely to Ban Abortion.” National Public Radio. July 10. https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2018/07/10/627666535/if-high-court-reverses-roe-vwade-22-states-likely-to-ban-abortion Roy, Olivier. 2019. “Islam: The Democracy Dilemma.” Wilson Center. https://www.wilsoncenter.org/ islam-the-democracy-dilemma-0 Rozanova, Julia, Paraskevi Noulas, Kathleen Smart et al. 2016. “Mental Health Treatment of Iraq and Afghanistan War Veterans.” Psychiatric Quarterly 87(3):427–443. Rubin, Jennifer D., Terri D. Conley, Verena Klein et  al. 2019. “A  Cross-National Examination of Sexual Desire: The Roles of ‘Gendered Cultural Scripts’ and ‘Sexual Pleasure’ in Predicting Heterosexual Women’s

References  693 Desire for Sex.” Personality and Individual Differences 151: December. Abstract available at: https://doi. org/10.1016/j.paid.2019.07.012 Rubinsky, Valerie, and Angela Cooke-Jackson. 2018. “Sex as an Intergroup Arena: How Women and Gender Minorities Conceptualize Sex, Sexuality, and Sexual Health.” Communication Studies 69(2):213–-234. Ruble, Diane N., Carol Lynn Martin, and Sheri A. Berenbaum. 2006. “Gender Development.” Pp. 358–392 in Handbook of Child Psychology, Volume 3: Social, Emotional, and Personality Development, edited by Nancy Eisenberg, William Damon, and Richard M. Lerner. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Rucinski, Diane. 1993. “A Review: Rush to Judgment? Fast Reaction Polls in the Anita Hill–Clarence Thomas Controversy.” Public Opinion Quarterly 57(4):575–592. Rudman, Laura A., Peter Glick, Tahnee Marquardt and Janell C. Fetterolf. 2017. “When Women are Urged to Have Casual Sex More than Men Are: Perceived Risk Moderates the Sexual Advice Double Standard.” Sex Roles 77(5–6):409–418. Ruether, Rosemary Radford. 1983. Sexism and Godtalk: Toward a Feminist Theology. Boston: Beacon Ruether, Rosemary Radford. 2001. “Christian feminist theology: History and Future.” Pp. 65–80 in Daughters of Abraham: Feminist Thought in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, edited by Yvonne Yazbeck and John L. Esposito. Gainesville: University Press of Florida. Ruether, Rosemary Radford. 2006. Goddesses and the Divine Feminine: A Western Religious History. Berkeley: University of California Press. Ruether, Rosemary Radford. 2012. “The Development of Feminist Theology: Becoming Increasingly Global and Interfaith.” Feminist Theology 20(3):185–189. Ruppaner, Leah, Maria Brandén, and Jani Turunen. 2018. “Does Unequal Housework Lead to Divorce? Evidence from Sweden.” Sociology 52(1):75–94. Russell, Brenda, Shane W. Kraus, Kristine Chapleau, and Debra Oswald. 2019. “Perceptions of Blame in Intimate Partner Violence: The Role of the Perpetrator’s Ability to Arouse Fear of Injury in the Victim.” Journal of Interpersonal Violence 34(5):1089–1097. Russell, Luke T., Marilyn Coleman, and Lawrence Ganong. 2016. “Perceived Barriers to Postdivorce Coparenting: Differences between Men and Women and Associations with Coparenting Behaviors.” Family Relations 65(3):450–461. Rutherford, Teomara, Sarah M. Karamarkovich, and David S. Lee. 2018. “Is the Spatial/Math Connection Unique? Associations between Mental Rotation sand Elementary Mathematics and English Achievement.” Learning and Individual Differences 62:180–199. Rye, B.J., and Angela Underhill. 2019. “Contraceptive Context, Conservatism, Sexual Liberalism, and Gender-Role Attitudes as Predictors of Abortion Attitudes.” Women’s Reproductive Health 6(1):34–51. Ryon, Stephanie Bontrager.. 2013. “Gender as Social Threat: A Study of Offender Sex, Situational Factors, Gender Dynamics and Social Control.” Journal of Criminal Justice 41(6):426–437. Ryznar, Margaret. 2017. “The Empirics of Child Custody.” Cleveland State Law Review May  1. https:// engagedscholarship.csuhio.edu/clevstlrev/vol65/iss2/7 Rzeszute, Marcin. 2018. “Health-Related Quality of Life and Coping Strategies among People Living With HIV: The Moderating Role of Gender.” Archives of Women’s Mental Health 21:247–257. Sa’ar, Amalia. 2017. “The Gender Contract under Neoliberalism: Palestinian-Israeli Women’s Labor Force Participation.” Feminist Economics 23(1):54–76. Sa’ar, Amalia, Alisa C. Lewin, and Dalit Simchai, 2017. “Feminist Identifications across the Ethnic-National Divide: Jewish and Palestinian Students in Israel.” Ethnic and Racial Studies 40 (6):1026–1104. Saad, Lydia. 2019. “Marijuana Use Similar to New Lower Rate of Cigarette Smoking.” Gallup News Service. July  25. https://news.gallup.com/poll/261569/marijuana-similar-new-lower-rate-cigarette-smoking.aspx Sabbah-Karkaby, M., and Haya Stier. 2017. “Links between Education and Age at Marriage among Palestinian Women in Israel: Changes over Time.” Studies in Family Planning 48(1):23–38.

694 References Sackett, Denise R., and Tala Dajani. 2019. “Fat Shaming in Medicine: Overview of Alternative Patient Strategies.” Osteopathic Family Physician 11(4):July/August. Sadker, David M., and Myra Sadker. 2002. “The Miseducation of Boys.” Pp. 182–203 in The Jossey-Bass Reader on Gender and Education, edited by Susan M. Bailey. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Sadker, Myra, and David Sadker. 1994. Failing at Fairness: How America’s Schools Cheat Girls. New York: Charles Scribner’s. Sadulski, Jarrod. 2019. “Recognizing Human Trafficking in the United States.” https://inpublicsafety. com/2019/12/recognizing-human-trafficking-in-the-united-states/ Safa B., W.C. Linn, A.M. Salim et al., 2019. “Current Concepts in Feminizing Gender Surgery.” Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery 143(5): 1081e–1091e. SAHM. 2017. “Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine. “Abstinence-Only-Until-Marriage Policies and Programs: An Updated Position Paper of the Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine.” Journal of Adolescent Health 61:400–403. https://www.jahonline.org/article/S1054-139X(17)30297-5/pdf Saindon, Kimberly. 2018. “Religious Freedom Legislation in Texas Takes Aim at Same-Sex Marriage” Texas Journal on Civil Liberties & Civil Rights 23(2):165–184. Saini, Angela. 2017. “We Need to Detach the Myth of Motherhood from the Reality.” Guardian. May. 30. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/may/30/detach-myth-motherhood-from-reality-futuregenerations Saint-Michel, S.E. 2018. “Leader Gender Stereotypes and Transformational Leadership: Does Leader Sex Make the Difference?” M@n@gement 21(3):944–966. Sakallı-Uğurlu, Nuray. 2016. “Quantitative Empirical Studies on Women’s Issues in Islamic Cultures: Introduction to Special Issue.” Sex Roles 75(11–12):535–542. Sakevich, Victoria, and Maria Lipman. 2019. “Abortion in Russia: How Has the Situation Changed Since the Soviet Era? February 12. http://www.ponarseurasia.org/point-counter/article/abortion-russia-how-has-situationchanged-soviet-era Saletan, William. 2019. “The Least Pro-Life President Ever.” Slate. February 9. https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/02/trump-is-not-pro-life.html Salgado, Nirmala. 2013. Buddhist Nuns and Gendered Practice: In Search of the Female Renunciant. New York: Oxford University Press. Salim, Selime. 2019. “Bisexual Women’s Experiences of Microaggressions and Microaffirmations and their Relation to Mental Health.” Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity 6(3):336–346. Sanasarian, Eliz (ed.). 1982. The Women’s Rights Movement in Iran: Mutiny, Appeasement and Repression from 1900 to Khomeni. Westport, CT: Greenwood. Sanchez, Delida, Leann V. Smith, and Whitney Adams. 2018. “The Relationships among Perceived Discrimination, Marianismo Gender Role Attitudes, Racial-Ethnic Socialization, Coping Styles, and Mental Health Outcomes in Latina College Students.” Journal of Latina/o Psychology 6(1):1–15. Sanchez, Delida, Tiffany A. Whittaker, Emma Hamilton, and Sarah Arango. 2017. “Familial Ethnic Socialization, Gender Role Attitudes, and Ethnic Identity Development in Mexican-Origin Early Adolescents.” Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology 23(3):335–347. Sánchez, Francisco J., F. Javier Blas-Lopez, María José Martínez-Patiño, and Eric Vilain. 2016. “Masculine Consciousness and Anti-Effeminacy among Latino and White Gay Men.” Psychology of Men & Masculinities 17(1):54–63. Sandberg, David E., Vickie Pasterski, and Nina Callens. 2017. “Introduction to the Special Section: Disorders of Sex Development.” Journal of Pediatric Psychology 42(5):487–495. Sandberg, Sheryl. 2014. Lean In for Graduates. New York: Alfred A. Knopf. Sandberg, Sheryl, and Rachel Thomas. 2018. “Women are Leaning In: Now Companies Need to Lean In, Too.” New York Times. October 23:R2. Sandberg, Sheryl, with Nell Scovell. 2014. Lean In: Women, Work, and the Will to Lead. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

References  695 Sanders, Sam. 2016. “#Meme of the Week: The Woman(‘s) Card.” National Public Radio. April 29. https:// www.npr.org/2016/04/29/476175806/-memeoftheweek-the-woman-s-card Sandoiu, Ana. 2018. “Transgender Surgery Can Improve Life for Most, Study Confirms.” Medical News Today. March 19. https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/321258.php Sandoval, Carolyn L., and Lisa M. Baumgartner. 2017. “Counterstories of Agency in the Lives of Women Offenders.” Journal of Ethnographic & Qualitative Research 112(3):15–228. Sankaran, Chitra. 2016. “Materiality, Devotion and Compromise: A  Study of the Goddess Films of South India.” Material Religion 11(4):443–464. Sansone, Dario. 2019. “Teacher Characteristics, Student Beliefs and the gender Gap in STEM Fields.” Educational evaluation and Policy Analysis 41(2):127–144. Santana, María Cristina. 2016. “From Empowerment to Domesticity: The Case of Rosie the Riveter and the WWII Campaign.” Frontiers in Sociology. December 23 https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/ fsoc.2016.00016/full Santelli, John S., Leslie Kantor, Stephanie A. Grilo et al. 2017. “Abstinence-Only-Until-Marriage: An Updated Review of U.S. Policies and Programs and their Impact.” Journal of Adolescent Health 61(3):273–280. Saria, Vaibhav. 2019. ‘Begging for Change: Hijras, Law, and Nationalism.” Contributions to Indian Sociology 53(1):133–157. Sarkar, Bihani. 2017. Heroic Shāktism: The Cult of Durgā in Ancient Indian Kingship. Oxford, NY: Oxford University Press. Sarkisian, Natalia, and Naomi Gerstel. 2016. “Does Singlehood Isolate or Integrate? Examining the Link between Marital Status and Ties to Kin, Friends, and Neighbors.” Journal of Social & Personal Relationships 33(3):361–384. Sasson, Hagit, and Gustavo Mesch. 2016. “Gender Differences in the Factors Explaining Risky Behavior Online.” Journal of Youth and Adolescence 45(5):973–985. Satish, Sripriya. 2018. “Fatherhood Seen through Scientific Glasses! A Fascinating Insight.” Women’s Era 45(1079): 110–111. Sato, Eriko. 2018. “Constructing Women’s Language and Shifting Gender Identity through Translanguaging.” Theory and Practice in Language Studies 8(10):1261–1269. Sawyer, Wendy. 2018. “The Gender Divide: Tracking Women’s State Prison Growth.” January 9. https:// www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/women_overtime.html Sax, Leonard. 2019. “A New Study Blows Up Old Ideas about Girls and Boys.” Psychology Today. March 27. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/sax-sex/201903/new-study-blows-old-ideas-aboutgirls-and-boys Sax, Linda J., M. Allison Kanny, Jerry A. Jacobs et al., 2016. “Understanding the Changing Dynamics of the Gender Gap in Undergraduate Engineering Majors: 1971–2011.” Research in Higher Education 57(5):570–600. Saxbe, Darby, Maya Rossin-Slater, and Diane Goldenberg. 2018. “The Transition to Parenthood as a Critical Window for Adult Health.” American Psychologist 73(9):1190–1200. Saz-Rubio, Del, and Maria Milagros. 2019. “The Pragmatic-Semiotic Construction of Male Identities in Contemporary Advertising of Male Grooming Products.” Discourse  & Communication 13(2):192–227. Scambler, Graham. 2019. “Sociology, Social Class, Health Inequalities, and the Avoidance of ‘Classism’.” Frontiers in Sociology. July 5. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fsoc.2019.00056/full Scarborough, William J., Ray Sin, and Barbara Risman. 2019. “Attitudes and the Stalled Gender Revolution: Egalitarianism, Traditionalism, and Ambivalence from 1977 through 2016.” Gender & Society 33(2):173–200. Scarborough, William, and Barbara J. Risman. 2017. “Changes in the Gender Structure: Inequality at The Individual, Interactional, and Macro Dimensions.” Sociology Compass 11(10):16 pages. Scatamburlo-D’Annibale, Valerie. 2019. “The ‘Culture Wars’ Reloaded: Trump, Anti-Political Correctness and the Right’s ‘Free Speech’ Hypocrisy.” Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies 17(1):69–119.

696 References Schaap, J., and P. Berkers. 2014. “Grunting Alone? Online Gender Inequality in Extreme Metal Music.” Journal of the International Association for the Study of Popular Music 4(1):101–102. Schaefer, Brian. 2017. “What Does it Take to Challenge Dance’s Gender Norms?” Dance Magazine. April 10. https://www.dancemagazine.com/what-does-it-take-to-challenge-dances-gender-norms-2353809360.html Schaffner, Brian F., Matthew Macwilliams, and Tatishe Nteta, 2018. “Understanding White Polarization in the 2016 Vote for President: The Sobering Role of Racism and Sexism.” Political Science Quarterly 133 (1): 9–34. Schaffner, Lauryn. 2019. “R.I.P. ‘Female-Fronted’.” Loudwire. March  8. https://loudwire.com/ international-womens-day-female-fronted-bands/ Scheer, Jillian R., Patricia Harney, Jessica E Esposito, and Julie M. Woulfe. 2019. “Self-Reported Mental and Physical Health Symptoms and Potentially Traumatic Events among Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Individuals: The Role of Shame.” Psychology of Violence May  6:12 pages. http://dx.doi. org/10.1037/vio0000241 Scheiber, Noam. 2017. “When Helicopter Parents Hover Even at Work.” New York Times. June 21. https:// www.nytimes.com/2017/06/21/business/millennial-work-parent-lavar-lonzo-ball.html Schiau, Ioana. 2017. “Women Gossip and Men Brag: Perceived Gender Differences in the Use of Humor by Romanian Older Women.” Romanian Journal of Communication and Public Relations 19(1):69–76. Schiffman, Richard. 2018. “The Original Social Justice Warrior.” New Scientist 238(3175):42–43. Schiffrin, Holly and Miriam Liss. 2017. “The Effects of Helicopter Parenting on Academic Motivation.” Journal of Child and Family Studies 26(5):1472–1480. Schinkel, Meghan G., Christine T. Chambers, Line Caes, and Erin C. Moon. 2017. “A Comparison of Maternal versus Paternal Nonverbal Behavior During Child Pain.” Pain Practice 17(1):41–51. Schipani, Vanessa. 2018. “The Facts of Media Violence.” March 8. https://www.factcheck.org/2018/03/ facts-media-violence/ Schlafly, Phyllis. 2003. Feminist Fantasies. Dallas, TX: Spence. Schlinkmann, Mark, and Michele Munz. 2008. (Photographer) “McCain, New Sidekick a Hit at O’Fallon Rally.” St. Louis Post-Dispatch. September 1:A1. Schlumpf, Heidi. 2019. “Sr. Joan Chittister’s 2004 Quote on ‘Pro-life’ versus ‘Pro-birth’ Goes Viral.” National Catholic Reporter. May  23. https://www.ncronline.org/news/politics/sr-joan-chittisters-2004quote-pro-life-versus-pro-birth-goes-viral Schmidt, Eva-Maria. 2018. “Breadwinning as Care: The Meaning of Paid Work in Mothers’ and Fathers’ Construction of Parenting.” Community, Work & Family 21(4):445–462. Schnabel, Landon. 2018. “More Religious, Less Dogmatic: Toward a General Framework for Gender Differences in Religion.” Social Science Research 75:58–72. Schneider, Christopher J., and Stacey Hannem. 2019. “Politicization of Sexual Misconduct as Symbolic Annihilation: An Analysis of News Media Coverage of the 2016 ‘Rape Election’.” Sexuality & Culture 23(3):737–759. Schneider, Daniel. 2015. “Lessons learned from Non-Marriage Experiments.” The Future of Children 25(2):155–178. Schnor, Christine, and Jan Van Bavel. 2017. “Sole Physical Custody and Mothers’ Repartnering After Divorce.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 79:879–890. Schock, Anne-Kathrin, Freya M. Gruber, Thomas Scherndl, and Tuulia M. Ortner. 2019. “Tempering Agency with Communion Increases Women’s Leadership Emergence in All-Women Groups: Evidence for Role Congruity Theory in a Field Setting.” Leadership Quarterly 30(2):189–198. Schoen, Roslyn. 2018. “Garments Come to the Village: Geographies of Gender and Regulatory Performativity in a Bangladesh Garment Factory.” East-West Center/EWC Association International Conference, August 23. Seoul. Schoen, Roslyn. 2019a. “Women and Rural Industrialization: Garment Production Reaches Old Land and New Labor In Bangladesh.” Women’s Studies International Forum 25(July-August).

References  697 Schoen, Roslyn Fraser. 2019b. “Young Women’s Situation and Patriarchal Bargains: The Story of a Son-Less Family in Rural Bangladesh.” Pp. 283–293 in Women of Asia: Globalization, Development and Gender Equity, edited by Mehrangiz Najafizadeh and Linda L. Lindsey. New York and London: Routledge. Schoenfeld, Elizabeth A., Timothy J. Loving, Mark T. Pope et al. 2017. “Does Sex Really Matter? Examining the Connections between Spouses’ Nonsexual Behaviors, Sexual Frequency, Sexual Satisfaction, and Marital Satisfaction.” Archives of Sexual Behavior 46(2):489–501. Schrader, Helen P. 2011. “Sparta Reconsidered.” http://spartareconsidered.blogspot.com Schreiber, Ronnee. 2018. “Is There a Conservative Feminism? An Empirical Account.” Politics and Gender 14(01):56–79. Schroeder, Kalen. 2019. “Sexualizing Female Superheroes.” Northern Star. April 18. https://oshkoshnorthstar.org/1494/entertainment/sexualizing-female-superheros/ Schudson, Zach C., Will J. Beischel, and Sari van Anders. 2019. “Individual Variation in Gender/Sex Category Definitions.” Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity. July 25:26 pages. Schulenburg, Jane Tibbetts. 2008. “Women’s Monasteries and Sacred Space: The Promotion of Saints’ Cults and Miracles.” In Gender and Christianity in Medieval Europe, edited by Lisa M. Bitel and Felice Lifshitz. New Perspectives. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Schulman, Julie K., and Laura K. Erickson. 2019. “Mental Health in Sexual Minority and Transgender Women.” Women’s Mental Health 103(4):723–733. Schultheiss, Daniel. 2017. “From the Weaker Sex to Hardcore Gaming: Female Gaming Patterns on the Internet.” Computers in Entertainment 15(2): Article 5. Schumm, Walter R. 2016. “A Review and Critique of Research on Same-Sex Parenting and Adoption.” Psychological Reports 119(3):641–760. Schwartzapfel, Beth. 2013. “Little Boxes.” American Prospect 24(2):March/April:36–47. Schwedel, Heather. 2017. “You Can Draw a Direct Line From the “Dadbod” Phenomenon to the New Ken Dolls.” Slate. https://slate.com/human-interest/2017/06/the-new-ken-doll-body-types-give-us-a-momentto-consider-society-s-weird-expectations-on-men-s-bodies.html Science Daily. 2014. “What Finding Out a Child’s Sex before Birth Says about a Mother.” June 2. https:// www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/06/140602095118.htm Scott, Joan Wallach. 2018. Gender and the Politics of History (30th Anniversary Edition). New York: Columbia University Press. Scott, Richard G. 2000. “The Sanctity of Womanhood.” The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints General Conference. April. https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2000/04/the-sanctity-of-womanhood?lang=eng Scott, Terri, and Shelly L. Brown. 2018. “Risks, Strengths, Gender, and Recidivism among Justice-Involved Youth: A Meta-Analysis.” Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 86(11): 931–945. Scully, Eileen P. 2018. “Sex Differences in HIV Infection.” Current HIV/AIDS Reports 15(2):135–146. Seabrook, Rita C., Monique L. Ward, and Soraya Giaccardi. 2018. “Less than Human? Media Use, Objectification of Women, and Men’s Acceptance of Sexual Aggression.” Psychology of Violence May  21. Abstract available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/vio0000198 Seabrook, Rita C., Ward, L. Monique L. Ward, Lilia M. Cortina et al. 2017. “Girl Power or Powerless Girl? Television, Sexual Scripts, and Sexual Agency in Sexually Active Young Women.” Psychology of Women’s Quarterly 41(2):240–253. Seaman, Barbara, and Laura Eldridge (eds.). 2012. Voices of the Women’s Health Movement. New York: Seven Stories. Seedat, Fatima. 2013. “Islam, Feminism, and Islamic Feminism: Between Inadequacy and Inevitability.” Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion 29(2):25–45. Segran, Elizabeth. 2013. “The Rise of the Islamic Feminists.” Nation 297(25):12–18. Séguin Léa, and Martin Blais. 2019. “Pleasure is just the tip of the iceberg: Social representations, personal beliefs, and attributed meanings to partnered orgasm.” Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality August:1–15.

698 References Seidler, Zac E., Alexei J. Dawes, Simon M. Rice. 2016. “The Role of Masculinity in Men’s Help-seeking for Depression: A Systematic Review.” Clinical Psychology Review November 2016 49:106–118. Sela, Yael, Michael N. Pham, Justin K. Mogilski, Guilherme Lopes S. et al. 2018. “Why Do People Disparage May-December Romances? Condemnation of Age-Discrepant Romantic Relationships as Strategic Moralization.” Personality and Individual Differences 130:6–10. Seligman, Stephen. 2019. “The New Psychoanalysis.” Dissent. https://www.dissentmagazine.org/article/ the-return-of-psychoanalysis Selvaggi, Gennaro, Christopher J. Salgado, Stan Monstrey, and Miroslav Djordevic. 2018. “Gender Affirmation Surgery.” BioMed Research International Article ID 1768414: 2 pages. https://doi.org/10.1155/ 2018/1768414 Semuels, Alana. 2017. “Poor Girls are Leaving their Brothers Behind.” The Atlantic. November 27. https:// www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2017/11/gender-education-gap/546677/ Sen, Atreyee, Raminder Kaur, and Emilija Zabiliūtė. 2020. “ (En)countering Sexual Violence in the Indian City.” Gender, Place & Culture 27(1):1–12. Sentell, Eric. 2017. “The Art of Polarizing Ethos: An Analysis of Donald Trump’s Campaign Rhetoric.” Relevant Rhetoric 8:1–21. Senthilingam, Meera. 2019. “I Love Sex. I Like to Make Money: What Sex Workers Really Want.” CNN. February  8. https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/08/health/sex-workers-human-rights-netherlands-globallaws-intl/index.html Serdarevic, Mirsada, Catherine W. Striley, and Linda B. Cottler. 2017. “Gender Differences in Prescription Opioid Use.” Current Opinion in Psychiatry 30(4):238–246. Serrano, Verenea J., Sadie Hasbrouck, Alexandra M. Alfonso, Bethany Ashby et  al. 2018. “Focusing on Fathers: Recognizing the Role of Paternal Mental Health in Family Well-Being During the Postpartum Period.” Zero to Three 38(6):13–19. Settembre, Jeanette. 2018. “The ‘Blown Away’ Singer Says Female Country Singers are ‘Not Getting the Same Opportunities’ as Men.” September  4. https://www.marketwatch.com/story/carrie-underwoodis-fed-up-with-sexism-in-country-music-2018-09-04–1088260 Setzler, Mark, and Alexandra B. Yanus. 2015. “ The Impact of Religion on Voting For Female Congressional Candidates.” Politics and Religion 8(4):679–698. Shabunova, A. A., and O. N. Kalachikova. 2014. “Characteristics of the Reproductive Behavior of the Population.” Sociological Research 53(1):22–34. Shafer, Kevin, Spencer L. James, and Jeffry H. Larson. 2016. “Relationship Self-Regulation and Relationship Quality: The Moderating Influence of Gender.” Journal of Child and Family Studies 25(4): 1145–1154. Shaffer, Leah. 2019. “Is a More Generous Society Possible.” Scientific American. February 23. https://www. scientificamerican.com/article/is-a-more-generous-society-possible/ Shah, Ankoor Y. 2017. “Finding Common Ground between Pro-life and Pro-choice Movements.” The Hill. January 26. https://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/healthcare/316209-finding-common-ground-betweenpro-life-and-pro-choice Shah, Sarah, John P. Bartkowski, and Xiaohe Xu. 2017. “Gendered God Imagery and Attitudes toward Mothers’ Labor Force Participation: Examining the Transposable Character of Religious Schemes.” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 55(3):540–557. Shahar, Rivka Neriya-Ben. 2015. “At ‘Amen Meals, It’s Me and God, Religion and Gender: A New Jewish Women’s Ritual.” Contemporary Jewry 35:153–172. Shahrabani, Shosh, and Sharon Garyn-Tal. 2019. “The Impact of Prior Combat Military Service on Israeli Women’s Self-Efficacy and Risk Attitudes.” Women’s Studies International Forum 74:143–153. Shamir, Hila, Tsilly Dagan, and Ayelet Carmeli. 2018. “Questioning Market Aversion in Gender Equality Strategies: Designing Legal Mechanisms for the Promotion of Gender Equality in the Family and the Market.” Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy 27(3): 717–744.

References  699 Shamit, Mehran. 2016. “Rethinking Microcredit in Bangladesh: Does Grameen Bank Serve the Neoliberal Agenda?” InquiriesJournal8(9):1–2.http://www.inquiriesjournal.com/articles/1451/rethinking-microcredit-in-bangladeshdoes-grameen-bank-serve-the-neoliberal-agenda Shane, Leo. 2018. “VA: Suicide rate for Younger Veterans Increased by More Than 10 Percent.” Military Times. September  26. https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2018/09/26/suicide-rate-spikesamong-younger-veterans/ Shapiro, Eliza, and Dana Goldstein. 2019. “Is the College Cheating Scandal the ‘Final Straw’ for Standardized Tests?” New York Times. March 14. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/14/us/sat-act-cheating-college-admissions.html Shapiro, Rebecca. 2017. “Kimmel Makes Emotional Another Plea for Children’s Health Care.” Huffington Post. December 12. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/jimmy-kimmel-chip_n_5a2f684ce4b0789502831b84 Sharrow, Elizabeth A., Dara Z. Strolovitch, Michael T. Heaney et  al. 2016. “Gender Attitudes, Gendered Partisanship: Feminism and Support for Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton among Party Activists.” Journal of Women, Politics, & Policy 37(4):394–416. Shaw, Jonathan. 2019. “Campus Survey: Sexual Assault, Harassment Remain Serious Problems.” Harvard Magazine. October 15. https://harvardmagazine.com/2019/10/2019-sexual-assault-survey Sheetz-Nguyen, Jessica. 2012. Victorian Women, Unwed Mothers and the London Foundling Hospital. New York: Continuum. Sheffield, Carole J. 2007. “Sexual Terrorism.” Pp. 111–320 in Gender Violence: Interdisciplinary Perspectives, edited by Laura O’Toole, Jessica R. Schiffman, and Margie L. Kiter Edwards. New York: NYU Press. Sheffield, Matthew. 2019. “Trump’s Giant Gender Gap: 62 Percent Of Women Say They are Unlikely to Vote for Him.” The Hill. June 6. https://thehill.com/hilltv/what-americas-thinking/447308-trumps-giant-gendergap-62-percent-of-women-say-they-are Shehadeh, Lamia Rustum. 2007. The Idea of Women in Fundamentalist Islam. Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida. Sheldon, Myrna Perez. 2017. “Wild at Heart: How Sociobiology and Evolutionary Psychology Helped Influence the Construction of Heterosexual Masculinity in American Evangelicalism.” Signs 42(4):977–988. Sheldon, Pavica. 2013. “Examining Gender Differences in Self-disclosure on Facebook versus Face-to-face.” Journal of Social Media in Society 2(1):88–102. Shellenbarger, Sue. “When Your Young Daughter Wants to Act Like a Teen.” Wall Street Journal. January 10. https://www.wsj.com/articles/when-your-young-daughter-wants-to-act-like-a-teen-1484060814 Shellnutt, Kate. 2018. “Are Pro-Life and Pro-Choice Women Any Closer to Finding Common Ground?” January 1. https://www.christianitytoday.com/women/2018/january/pro-life-pro-choice-women-womens-marchcommon-ground.html Shelzi, “Girls Who Trailblazed Workers’ Rights Take Center Stage.” Unwire. October 12:1. Shenkman, Geva, Kfir Ifrah, and Dov Shmotkin. 2018. “Meaning in Life among Middle-Aged and Older Gay and Heterosexual Fathers.” Journal of Family Issues 39(7):2155–2173. Shenkman, Geva. 2018. “The Association between Basic Need Satisfaction in Relationship and Personal Growth among Lesbian and Heterosexual Mothers.” Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 35(2):246–262. Shepherd, Ken. 2017. “80 Percent of Catholics are ‘Comfortable’ with Idea of Women Priests.” Washington Times. March 15. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/mar/15/eighty-percent-catholicscomfortable-idea-women-pr/ Sherman, Aurora, and Eileen L. Zurbriggen. 2014. “’Boys Can Be Anything’: Effect of Barbie Play on Girls’ Career Cognitions.” Sex Roles 70(5–6):195–208. Sherrell, Marshall. 2018. “Obsession or Dedication? The Japanese Work Ethic as a Nation Brand.” Economy, Culture & History: Japan Spotlight Bimonthly 37(5):59–61. Shi, Lihong. 2017. Choosing Daughters: Family Chang in Rural China. Redwood City, CA: Stanford University Press.

700 References Shiao, Jiannbin Lee. 2018. “It Starts Early: Toward a Longitudinal Analysis of Interracial Intimacy.” Sociology of Race and Ethnicity 4(4):508–526. Shimron, Yonat. 2018. “More Seminary Students Leave the Master of Divinity Behind.” Religious News Service. May 11. https://religionnews.com/2018/05/11/more-seminary-students-leave-the-master-of-divinity-behind/ Shilling, Chris. 2007. “Sociology and the Body: Classical Traditions and New Agendas.” Sociological Review Monograph 55(1):1–18. Shilling, Chris. 2011. “Afterword: Body Work and Sociological Tradition.” Sociology of Health & Illness 33(2):336–40. Shoham, Amir, and Sang Mook Lee. 2018. “The Causal Impact of Grammatical Gender Marking on Gender Wage Inequality and Country Income Inequality.” Business and Society 57(6):1216–1251. Sibelski, Rosalind. 2019. “Reviving Cinderella: Contested Feminism and Conflicting Models of Female Empowerment in 21st-Century Film and Television Adaptations of ‘Cinderella’.” Quarterly Review of Film and Video 36(7):584–610. Sicius, Francis J., Jolyon P. Girard, Randall M. Miller, and Theodore J. Zeman. 2012. Daily Life through American History in Primary Documents. Santa Barbara, CA: Greenwood Press. Sidani, Yusuf M. 2016. “Working Women in Arab Countries: A Case for Cautious Optimism.” Pp. 689–701 in Handbook on Well-Being of Working Women, edited by Mary L. Connerley. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer. Siddiqi, Nishat. 2019. “Health Matters: Rachel thought She had a Heart Attack. Could Brexit be to Blame for Her ‘Broken Heart Syndrome’?” New Statesman 148(5455):59. Sieder, Rachel (ed.). 2017. Demanding Justice and Security: Indigenous Women and Legal Pluralities in Latin America. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press. Siegel, Daniel J. 2015. Brainstorm: The Power and Purpose of the Teenage Brain. New York: Penguin Random House. Siegel, Rachel. 2020. “Women Outnumber Men in the American Workforce for Only the Second Time.” Washington Post. January 10. https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/01/10/january-2020jobs-report/ Siegler, Kirk, and Amita Kelly. 2018. “Alt-Right Groups Splinter, Distance from White Supremacy.” National Public Radio. August  11. https://www.npr.org/2018/08/11/637320471/after-charlottesville-alt-rightgroups-splinter-distance-from-white-supremacy Signorielli, Nancy, Michael Morgan, and James Shanahan. 2018. “The Violence Profile: Five Decades of Cultural Indicators Research.” Mass Communication and Society 22(1):1–28. Silva, Erik O. 2019. “Accounting for Trump: The Neutralization of Claims of Racism In The Early Stages of the 2016 Presidential Campaign.” Studies in Symbolic Interaction 50(197–216). Simien, Evelyn, and Sarah Cote Hampson. 2017. “Hillary Clinton and the Women Who Supported Her.” Du Bois Review: Social Science Research on Race 14(1): 93–116. Simon, Richard M., Ashley Wagner, and Brooke Killon. 2017. “Gender and Choosing a STEM Major in College: Femininity, Masculinity, Chilly Climate, and Occupational Values.” Journal of Research in Science Teaching 54(3):299–323. Simon, Rita James, and Heather Ahn-Redding. 2005. The Crimes Women Commit: The Punishments They Receive. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books. Simons, Leslie Gordon, Tara E. Sutton, Ronald L. Simons et  al. 2016. “Mechanisms That Link Parenting Practices to Adolescents’ Risky Sexual Behavior: A Test of Six Competing Theories.” Journal of Youth and Adolescence 45(2):255–270. Simpson-Wood, Taylor, and Robert H. Wood. 2018. “When Popular Culture and the NFL Collide: Fan Responsibility in Ending the Concussion Crisis.” Marquette Sports Law Review 29(1):13–136. Sinelschikova, Yekaterina. 2017. “Women’s Rights, or a Lack of: What’s with Russian Feminism? November 23. Russia Beyond. https://www.rbth.com/lifestyle/326815-womens-rights-russia-feminism Singh, M. K. Chanderdeep. 2016. “In the Service of Nationalism: Women in the Hindu Nationalist Paradigm.” Fudan Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences 9(3):493–515.

References  701 Sink, Alexander, and Dana Mastro. 2017. “Depictions of Gender on Primetime Television: A  Quantitative Content Analysis.” Mass Communication and Society 20:3–22. Sisak, Michael R., and Tom Hays. 2020. “Weinstein Convicted: Ex-Mogul Heads to Prison after Jury Delivers ‘Powerful Message’.” St. Louis Post-Dispatch. February 25:A1, A7. Skewes, Lea, Cordelia Fine, and Nick Haslam. 2018. “Beyond Mars and Venus: The Role of Gender Essentialism in Support for Gender Inequality and Backlash.” PLOS ONE 13(7): e0200921. https://journals. plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0200921 Skinner, Olivenne D., and Susan M. McHale. 2016. “Parent–Adolescent Conflict in African American Families.” Journal of Youth and Adolescence 45(10):2080–2093. Skinner-Thompson, Scott. 2018. “Privacy’s Double Standards.” Washington Law Review 93(4):2051–2106. Skorska, Malvina, Gordon Hodson, and Mark R. Hoffarth. 2018. “Experimental Effects of Degrading versus Erotic Pornography Exposure in Men on Reactions toward Women (Objectification, Sexism, Discrimination).” Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality 27(3): 261–276. Slatton, Brittany C. 2018. “Framing Black Women: The Utility of Knowledge.” Sociology Compass 12(5):1–11. Smagur, Katheryn E., G. Anne Bogat, and Alytia A. Levendosky. 2017. “Gender Role and Gender as Predictors of Behavior Problems in Children Exposed to Intimate Partner Violence.” Journal of Family Violence 32(2):157–168. Small, Jennie. 2017. “Women’s ‘Beach Body’ in Australian Women’s Magazines.” Annals of Tourism Research 62:23–33. Small, Nancy. 2018. “A Catholic Woman Discovers Her Priesthood.” America Magazine 218(2):37–39. Smith, Aaron, and Monica Anderson. 2018. “Social Media Use in 2018.” Pew Research Center. March 1. http://www.pewinternet.org/2018/03/01/social-media-use-in-2018/ Smith, Allison B., Elizabeth A. Taylor, Jessica A. Siegele, and Robin Hardin. 2019a. “NCAA Division I Senior Woman Administrators’ Perceptions of Barriers to Career Mobility.” Journal of Issues in Intercollegiate Athletics 12: 479–504. Smith, Barbara. 1995. “Myths to Divert Black Women from Freedom.” In Issues in Feminism: An Introduction to Women’s Studies, edited by Sheila Ruth. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield. Smith, Danielle Sayre, Hanna L. Schacter, Craig Enders, and Jaana Juvonen. 2018a. “Gender Norm Salience across Middle Schools: Contextual Variations in Associations between Gender Typicality and Socioemotional Distress.” Journal of Youth and Adolescence 47(5):947–960. Smith, Dena T., Dawne M. Mouzon, and Marta Elliott. 2018b. “Reviewing the Assumptions about Men’s Mental Health: An Exploration of the Gender Binary.” American Journal of Men’s Health 12(1):78–89. Smith, Julia B., and Nancy Niemi. 2017. “Otherwise Occupied: The Complex Relationships between Gender and College Attendance in Late Adolescence.” Gender Issues 34(2):105–128. Smith, Julia K., Miriam Liss, Mindy J. Erchull et al. 2018c. “The Relationship between Sexualized Appearance and Perception of Women’s Competence and Electability.” Sex Roles 79(11–12):671–682. Smith, Kathleen. 2019a. “Eating Disorders in Men.” Psycom. September  4. https://www.psycom.net/ eating-disorders-men Smith, Laura. 2019b. “Economic Disadvantage at the Intersections: Contemporary Stereotypes in the Headlines.” Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development 47(3):190–206. Smith, Lee, Lin Yang, Nicola Veronese et al. 2019b. “Sexual Activity is Associated with Greater Enjoyment of Life in Older Adults.” Sexual Medicine 7(1):11–18. Smith, Marquita R. 2017. “Beyoncé: Hip-Hop Feminism and the Embodiment of Black Feminism.” Pp. 229– 241 in Popular Culture and Gender, edited by Stan Hawkins. London and New York: Routledge. Smith, Merril D. 2010. Women’s Roles in Eighteenth Century America. Santa Barbara, CA: Greenwood Press. Smith, Nareissa L. 2015. “Built for Boyhood?: A Proposal for Reducing the Amount of Gender Bias in the Advertising of Children’s Toys on Television.” Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment and Technology Law 17(4):991–1049. Smith, Sophia. 2017. “How Metaphors Shape Women’s Lives.” BBC Future. July 18. https://www.bbc.com/ future/article/20170718-the-metaphors-that-shape-womens-lives

702 References Smith, Stew. 2019c. “Fitness in Special Operations—Women’s Standards.” Military.com. https://www.military.com/military-fitness/navy-special-operations/fitness-in-special-operations-womens-standards Sneader, Kevin, and Lareina Yee. 2018. “Let’s Say No to ‘Onliness’.” New York Times October 23:R6. Sockol, Laura E., and Kelly M. Allred. 2018. “Correlates of Symptoms of Depression and Anxiety among Expectant and New Fathers.” Psychology of Men and Masculinity 19(3):362–372. Sokolowski, H. Moriah, Zachary Hawes, and Ian M. Lyons. 2019. “What Explains Sex Differences in Math Anxiety? A Closer Look at the Role of Spatial Processing.” Cognition 182:193–212. Solheim, Oddny Judith, and Kjersti Lundetrae. 2018. “Can Test Construction Account for Varying Gender Differences in International Reading Achievement Tests of Children, Adolescents and Young Adults?—A Study Based on Nordic Results in PIRLS, PISA and PIAAC.” Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy, & Practice 25(1):107–126. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2016.1239612 Solinas-Saunders, Monica, and Melissa J. Stacer. 2017. “A Retrospective Analysis of Repeated Incarceration Using a National Sample: What Makes Female Inmates Different From Male Inmates?” Victims & Offenders 12(1):138–173. Solomon, Jamie. 2016. “Gender Identity and Expression in the Early Childhood Classroom.” Voices of Practitioners 11(1):14–24. Song, Inmyung, Mo Se Lee, Eui-Kyung Lee, and Ju-Young Shin. 2018. “Patient and Provider Characteristics Related with Prescribing of ADHD Medication: Nationwide Health Insurance Claims Database Study in Korea.” Asia-Pacific Psychiatry 10(1):7 pages. Sossamon, Jeff. 2018. “In Countries with Higher Gender Equality, Women Are Less Likely to Get STEM Degrees.” World Economic Forum. February  20. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/02/ does-gender-equality-result-in-fewer-female-stem-grads Soukup, Paul A. 2016. “Studying Soap Operas.” Communication Research Trends 35(3).3–4. Soukup, Paul A. 2018. “Facebook: Changing the Face of Communication Research.” Communication Research Trends 37(1):1–42. Spary, Carole. 2019. Gender, Development, and the State in India. London: Routledge. Speights, Sabrina L., Samuel J. Grubbs, and Beth A. Rubin. 2017. “Bad Jobs, Bad Parents? How Job Characteristics Relate to Time with Children and Self-Evaluations of Parents.” International Journal of Child, Youth and Family Studies 8(1):20–41. Spencer, Aída Besançon. 2013. “Leadership of Women in Crete and Macedonia as a Model for the Church.” Priscilla Papers 27(4):5–15. https://www.cbeinternational.org/sites/default/files/Leadership_ spencer.pdf Spencer, Debra, Vickie Pasterski, Sharon Neufeld et al. 2017. “Prenatal Androgen Exposure and Children’s Aggressive Behavior and Activity Level.” Hormones and Behavior 96:156–165. Sperling, Nicole. 2020. “Weinstein is Gone, but Men Still Pull the Big Strings in Hollywood.” New York Times. February 26:B1, B4. Spina, Nanette R. 2017. Women’s Authority and Leadership in a Hindu Goddess Tradition. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Spinner, Lauren, Lindsey Cameron, and Rachel Calogero. 2018. “Peer Toy Play as a Gateway to Children’s Gender Flexibility: The Effect of (Counter)Stereotypic Portrayals of Peers in Children’s Magazines.” Sex Roles 79(5–6):314–328. Spivey, Leigh A., David M. Huebner, and Lisa M. Diamond. 2018. “Parent Responses to Childhood Gender Nonconformity: Effects of Parent and Child Characteristics.” Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity 5(3):360–370. Spohn, Cassia, Clair White, and Katharine Tellis. 2014. “Unfounding Sexual Assault: Examining the Decision to Unfound and Identifying False Reports.” Law & Society Review 48(1):161–92. Sprankle, Eric, Katie Bloomquist, Cody Butcher et al. 2018. “The Role of Sex Work Stigma in Victim Blaming and Empathy of Sexual Assault Survivors.” Sexuality Research and Social Policy 15(3):242–248.

References  703 Sprecher, Susan, and Elaine Hatfield. 2017. “The Importance of Love as a Basis of Marriage: Revisiting Kephart (1967).” Journal of Family Issues 38(3):312–335. Srivastava, Chhitij, Vishal Dhingra, Anupam Bhardwaj, and Alka Srivastava. 2013. “Morality and Moral Development: Traditional Hindu Concepts.” Indian Journal of Psychiatry 55(Suppl 2):S283–287. Srivastava, Shirish C., and Shalini Chandra. 2018. Social Presence in Virtual World Collaboration: An Uncertainty Reduction Perspective Using a Mixed Methods Approach.” MIS Quarterly 42(3):770–803. Sriwattanakomen, Nalyn. 2017. “Who’s Laughing Now? The Effects of Sexist and Rape Humor.” Psi Chi Journal of Psychological Research 22(2):85–97. Stan, Adele M. 2017. It’s the Misogyny, Stupid!” January  20. American Prospect. https://prospect.org/ power/misogyny-stupid/ Stana, Alexandru, Mark A. Flynn, and Eugenie Almeida 2017. “Battling the Stigma: Combat Veterans’ Use of Social Support in an Online PTSD Forum.” International Journal of Men’s Health 16(1):20–36. Stanley, Christopher D. 2020. “Paul the Cosmopolitan?” New Testament Studies 66(1):144–163. Stanton-Chapman, Tina L., Sinem Toraman, Audra Morrison et al. 2018. “An Observational Study of Children’s Behaviors across Two Playgrounds: Similarities and Differences.” Early Childhood Research Quarterly 44:114–123. Starr, Christine R., and Eileen L. Zurbriggen. 2017. “Sandra Bem’s Gender Schema Theory After 34 Years: A Review of its Reach and Impact.” Sex Roles 76(9–10):566–578. Statistica. 2016. “Average Minutes Per Day Spent on Routine Housework in OECD Countries Plus China, India and South Africa, by Gender, as of 2016.” https://www.Statista.Com/Statistics/521919/ Time-Spent-Housework-Countries/ Statistica. 2018a. “Number of Social Network Users Worldwide from 2010 to 2021 (in Billions).” www. statista.com/statistics/278414/number-of-worldwide-social-network-users/ Statistica. 2018b. “Frequency of Facebook Use in the United States as of February  2018, by Gender.” https://www.statista.com/statistics/653014/frequency-usage-facebook-usa-gender/ Statistica, 2019a. “Percentage Distribution of Population in the United States in 2015 and 2060, by Race and Hispanic Origin.” https://www.statista.com/statistics/270272/percentage-of-us-population-by-ethnicities/ Statistica. 2019b. “Number of Mass Shootings in the United States between 1982 and November 2018, by Shooter’s Gender.” https://www.statista.com/statistics/476445/mass-shootings-in-the-us-by-shooter-sgender/ Steering Committee of the Physicians Health Study Research Group. 1989. “Final Report of the Aspirin Component of the Ongoing Physician’s Health Study.” New England Journal of Medicine 321(3):129–35. Stefanick, Marcia L. 2017. “Not Just for Men: Researchers and Doctors Must Dig Deeper into Gender Differences before they can Provide Women with Better Treatments” Scientific American 317(3):52–57. Steimer, Sarah. 2017. “Kotex Gives its Consumers what they Want: A Frank Discussion on Periods.” Marketing News. 51(8):28–33. September 1. https://www.ama.org/marketing-news/kotex-gives-its-consumers-whatthey-want-a-frank-discussion-on-periods/ Stein, C.H., L.A. Osborn, And S.C. Greenberg. 2016. “Understanding Young Adults’ Reports of Contact with their Parents in a Digital World: Psychological and Familial Relationship Factors.” Journal of Child and Family Studies 25:1802–1814. Steiner, Lisa M., Elisabeth C. Suarez, James N. Sells, and Scott D. Wykes. 2011. “Effect of Age, Imitator Status, and Infidelity on Women’s Divorce Adjustment.” Journal of Divorce & Remarriage 52(1):33–47. Stelzer, Andrew. 2016. “Rad Dads: Politics, Parenting, and Evolving Notions of Fatherhood.” Truthout. June 19. https://truthout.org/audio/rad-dads-politics-parenting-and-evolving-notions-of-fatherhood/ Sternberg, Robert J. 2008. “Triangulating Love.” In The Altruism Reader: Selections from Writings on Love, Religion, and Science, edited by Thomas J. Oord. West Conshohoken, PA: Templeton Foundation. Sternberg, Robert J. 2016. “Wisdom Applied: The Secret Sauce That Has Allowed Me Already to Have Achieved Immortality.” Education Review 23:1–25.

704 References Stertz, Anna M., Thorana Grether, and Bettina S. Wise. 2017. “Gender-Role Attitudes and Parental Work Decisions after Childbirth: A Longitudinal Dyadic Perspective with Dual-Earner Couples.” Journal of Vocational Behavior 101:104–118. Stevanovic, Melisa, Pentti Henttonen, Mikko Kahri, and Sonja Koski. 2019. “Affiliation and Dominance in Female and Male Dyads: When Discoordination Makes Happy.” Gender Issues 36:201–235. Stevens, Elise M., David Frank, Maurizio Codispoti et al. 2019. “The Late Positive Potentials Evoked by Cigarette-Related and Emotional Images Show No Gender Differences in Smokers.” Scientific Reports 9(1):1. Stier, Haya, and Efrat Herzberg-Druker. 2017. “Running Ahead or Running in Place? Educational Expansion and Gender Inequality in the Labor Market.” Social Indicators Research 130(3):1187–1206. Still, Todd D. 2013. “Jesus and Paul on Women: Incomparable or Compatible?” Priscilla Papers 27(3):16–19. Stoever, Jane K. 2019. “Access to Safety and Justice: Service of Process in Domestic Violence Cases.” Washington Law Review 94(1):333–400. Stolberg, Sheryl Gay, and Eileen Sullivan. 2018. “With a Tweet, Trump Doubts Accuser’s Story.” New York Times. September 22:A1, A12. Stoltz, Heidi E., Kayla M. Sizemore, Meagan J. Shiedler et al., 2017. “Parenting Together: Evaluation of a Parenting Program for Never-Married Parents.” Journal of Divorce & Remarriage 58(5):358–370. Stone, Ellen A., Christia Spears Brown, and Jennifer A. Jewell. 2015. “The Sexualized Girl: A Within-Gender Stereotype among Elementary School Children.” Child Development 86(5):1604–1622. Stone, Kim. 2006. “Native American Women and Christianity.” In Encyclopedia of Women and Religion in North America, edited by Rosemary Skinner Keller and Rosemary Radford Ruether. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. Stone, Lyman. 2018a. “Baby Bust: Fertility is Declining the Most among Minority Women.” Institute for Family Studies. May 16. https://ifstudies.org/blog/baby-bust-fertility-is-declining-the-most-among-minority-women Stone, Meredith. 2018b. “Voices: A Female Seminary Professor’s Response to John Piper: ‘Is There a Place for Female Professors at Seminary’?” January 24. www.baptiststandard.com/opinion/voices/voices-femaleseminary-professors-response-john-piper/ Stone, Merlin. 1993. When God was a Woman. New York: Barnes and Noble. Stopler, Gila. 2016. “Hobby Lobby, S.A.S., and the resolution of religion-based conflicts in liberal states.” International Journal of Constitutional Law 14(4):941–960. Storms, Helen. 2017. “How Men and Women use Social Media Differently.” Odyssey. April  19. https:// www.theodysseyonline.com/gender-differences-social-media Strassfeld, Max. 2018. “Roundtable: Toward Transfeminist Religious Studies.” Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion 34(1):37–53. Stroud, Angela. 2016. Good Guys with Guns: The Appeal and Consequences of Concealed Carry. Charlotte, NC: University of North Carolina Press. Styer, Meredith. 2017. “Susan B. Anthony’s Extemporaneous Speaking for Women’s Suffrage.” Women’s Studies in Communication 40(4):401–418. Styhre, Alexander. 2014. “Gender Equality in Institutional Work: The Case of the Church of Sweden.” Gender, Work, & Organization 21(2):105–120. Su, Jessica Houston, and Fenaba R. Addo. 2018. “Born Without a Silver Spoon: Race, Wealth, and Unintended Childbearing.” Journal of Family and Economic Issues 39(4):600–615. Sumerau, J.E., and Ryan T. Cragun. 2014. “The Hallmarks of Righteous Women: Gendered Background Expectations in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.” Sociology of Religion 76(1), 49–71. Sumontha, Jason, Rachel H. Farr, and Charlotte J. Patterson. 2017. “Children’s Gender Development: Associations With Parental Sexual Orientation, Division of Labor, and Gender Ideology.” Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity 4(4):438–450.

References  705 Sun, Xiaodong, and Kaisheng Lai. 2017. “Are Mothers of Sons More Traditional? The Influence of Having Son(s) and Daughter(s) on Parents’ Gender Ideology.” Journal of Chinese Sociology 4(1):1–19. Sun, Xiaoran, Susan M. McHale, Ann C. Crouter, and Damon E. Jones. 2017. “Longitudinal Links between Work Experiences and Marital Satisfaction in African American Dual-Earner Couples.” Journal of Family Psychology 31(8):1029–1039. Sung, Sirin. 2019. “Women’s Experiences of Balancing Work and Family in South Korea: Continuity and Change.” Pp.  98–110 in Women of Asia: Globalization, Development, and Gender Equity, edited by Mehrangiz Najafizadeh and Linda L. Lindsey. New York and London: Routledge. Surace, Francisco I., Heidi M. Levitt, and Sharon G. Horne, 2017. “The Relation between Cultural Values and Condom Use among Latino Gay Men.” Journal of Gay & Lesbian Social Services 29(3):252–272. Surbeck, Martin, Christophe Boesch, and Cédric Girard-Buttoz. 2017. “Comparison of Male Conflict Behavior in Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and Bonobos (Pan paniscus), with Specific Regard to Coalition and Post-Conflict Behavior.” American Journal of Primatology 79(e2264):11 pages. Sustainable Development Goals. 2020. “17 Goals to Transform Our World.” United Nations. https://www. un.org/sustainabledevelopment/ Sutton, April, Daniel T. Lichter, and Sharon Sassler. 2019. “Rural–Urban Disparities in Pregnancy Intentions, Births, and Abortions among U.S. Adolescent and Young Women, 1995–2017.” American Journal of Public Health 109 (12):1762–1769. Svetlova, Ksenia. 2019. “Rising from Ashes of Arab Spring, Women Lead a First Muslim Feminist Revolution. Times of Israel. July 28. https://www.timesofisrael.com/rising-from-ashes-of-arab-spring-women-leada-first-muslim-feminist-revolution/ Svetova, Zoya. 2018. “NGOs in Russia: Do they Still Stand a Chance? The Kremlin is Ramping Up its Control over Civil Society.” Moscow Times. February 12. https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2018/02/12/ ngos-do-they-still-stand-a-chance-russia-svetova-a60471 Swank, Eric, and Breanne Fahs. 2016. “Resources, Masculinities, and Gender Differences among Pro-life Activists.” Sexuality & Culture 20(2):277–294. SWE. 2019. Society of Women Engineers. “2019 Research Update: Percentage of Female engineers Broken Down by State.” February 27. https://alltogether.swe.org/2019/02/2019-research-update-percentageof-female-engineers-and-college-graduates-broken-down-by-state/ Sweeney, Don. 2017. “One in four U.S. men say exposing yourself isn’t sexual harassment, survey finds.” Sacramento Bee. December  1. https://www.sacbee.com/news/nation-world/national/article187512098. html Swing. 2018. “Gender Roles, Dance Roles, and the LGBT Swing Community.” April 5. Boulder Swing Dance. https://www.boulderswingdance.com/news/2018/4/4/gender-roles-lgbt-swing-community Taggart, Amanda. 2018. “Latina/o Students in K-12 Schools: A Synthesis of Empirical Research on Factors Influencing Academic Achievement.” Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences 40(4):448–471. Tai, Tsui-o, and Janeen Baxter. 2018. “Perceptions of Fairness and Housework Disagreement: A Comparative Analysis.” Journal of Family issues 39(8):2461–2485. Takano, Shoji. 2005. “Re-examining Linguistic Power: Strategic Uses of Directives by Professional Japanese Women in Positions of Authority and Leadership.” Journal of Pragmatics 37(5):633–666. Talbot, Mary M. 2010. Language and Gender. Malden, MA: Polity. Talbot, Margaret. 2013. “About a Boy: Transgender Surgery at 16.” New Yorker. March 18 https://www. newyorker.com/magazine/2013/03/18/about-a-boy-2 Tammeus, Bill. 2014. “Episcopal Church Celebrates 40 Years of Women in the Priesthood.” National Catholic Reporter. July 28. https://www.ncronline.org/news/parish/episcopal-church-celebrates-40-years-womenpriesthood Tanaka, Kimiko, and Deborah Lowry. 2013. “Mental Well-Being of Mothers with Preschool Children in Japan: The Importance of Spousal Involvement in Childrearing.” Journal of Family Studies 19(2):185–95.

706 References Tang, Chiung-Ya, and Melissa A. Curran. 2013. “Marital Commitment and Perceptions of Tannen, Deborah. 1990. You Just Don’t Understand: Women and Men in Conversation. New York: Ballantine. Tannen, Deborah. 2001. I Only Say this Because I Love You: Talking to Your Parents, Partners, Sibs, and Kids When You’re All Adults. New York: Random House. Tanu, Priya, Uteng Yamini, Jain Singh, and Tiffany Lam. 2019. “Safety and Daily Mobilities of Urban Women— Methodologies to Confront the Policy of ‘Invisibility’.” Pp. 187–202 in Measuring Transport Equity, edited by Karen Lucas, Karel Martens, Floridea Di Ciommo, and Ariane Dupont-Kieffer. Amsterdam: Elsevier. Tao, Hung-Lin, and Christos Michalopoulos. 2018. “Gender Inequality and the Gender Gap In Mathematics.” Journal of Biosocial Science 50(2):227–243. Tavassolie, T., S. Dudding, A. L. Madigan et  al. 2016. “Differences in Perceived Parenting Style between Mothers and Fathers: Implications for Child Outcomes and Marital Conflict.” Journal of Child & Family Studies 25(6):2055–2068. Taylor, Harry Owen, and Robert Joseph Taylor. 2018. “Social Isolation, Loneliness, and Health among Older Men.” Annual Review of Gerontology & Geriatrics 39(1): 107–124. Teitel, Emma. 2016. “Millennials’ Support for Sanders is Evidence of Feminism’s Success.” Toronto Star. February 10. https://www.pressreader.com/canada/toronto-star/20160210/281741268466329 Telesur. 2020. “Peru: Congress Approves Gender Equality Policy for Elections.” June 26. https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/peru-congress-approves-gender-equality-policy-for-election-lists-20200626-0010.html Tench, Ralph, Martina Topić, and Angeles Moreno. 2017. “Male and Female Communication, Leadership Styles and the Position of Women in Public Relations.” Interactions: Studies in Communication & Culture 8(2&3):231–248. Tenpas, Kathryn Dunn. 2020. “Tracing Turnover in the Trump Administration.” Brookings Institution. July. https://www.brookings.edu/research/tracking-turnover-in-the-trump-administration/ Terborg-Penn, Rosalyn. 1991. “Discontented Black Feminists: Prelude and Postscript to the Passage of the Nineteenth Amendment.” In Women and Power in American History: A Reader, Volume II from 1870, edited by Kathryn Kish Sklar and Thomas Dublin. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Tessina, Tina B. 2008. The Commuter Marriage: Keeping Your Relationship Close while You’re Far Apart. Avon, MA: Adams Media. Teti, Douglas M., Pamela M. Cole, Natasha Cabrera, Scherryl H. Goodman, and Vonnie C. McLoyd. 2017. “Supporting Parents: How Six Decades of Parenting Research Can Inform Policy and Best Practice.” Research-Practice Partnerships: Building Two-Way Streets of Engagement 30(5):1–35. Thakkilapati, Sri Devi. 2019. “Better Mothers, Good Daughters, and Blessed Women: Multiple Femininities and Intersectionality in Abortion Narratives.” Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies 40(1): 63–94. Thébaud, Sarah, and Maria Charles. 2018. “Segregation, Stereotypes, and STEM.” Social Sciences 7(7):111. https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/7/7/111/htm Thomas, Deja. 2019. “In 2018, Two-thirds of Democratic Women Hoped to See a Woman President in their Lifetime.” Pew Research Center. July  26. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/07/26/ in-2018-two-thirds-of-democratic-women-hoped-to-see-a-woman-president-in-their-lifetime/ Thomas, Holly N., Megan Hamm, Rachel Hess et  al. 2017. “Patient-Centered Outcomes and Treatment Preferences Regarding Sexual Problems: A Qualitative Study among Midlife Women.” Journal of Sexual Medicine 14(8):1011–1017. Thomas, Jim. 2019. “Back with a Bang: After Concussion Recovery, Perron Starts Contributing Right Away.” St. Louis Post-Dispatch March 21:B1, B6. Thomas, Rebekah L., Adrian B. Kelly, Gary C. K. Chan et al. 2018. “An Examination of Gender Differences in the Association of Adolescent Substance Use with Eating and Weight Loss Attitudes.” Substance Use & Misuse 53(13):2125–2131. Thomas, Tracy A. 2019. “Leveling Down Gender Equality.” Harvard Journal of Law & Gender 42(1):177–218. Thomas-Tate, Shurita, Timothy K. Daugherty, and Timothy J. Bartkoski. 2017. “Experimental Study of Gender Effects on Language Use in College Student Email to Faculty.” College Student Journal 51(2):222–226.

References  707 Thompson, Ashley E., and Daniel Voyer, 2014. “Sex Differences in the Ability to Recognise Nonverbal Displays of Emotion: A Meta-Analysis. Cognition and Emotion 28(7):1164–1195. Thompson, Ashley, and Lucia O’Sullivan. 2012. “Gender Differences in Associations of Sexual and Romantic Stimuli: Do Young Men Really Prefer Sex over Romance?” Archives of Sexual Behavior 41(4):949–57. Thompson, Edward H., and Kaitlyn Barnes Langendoerfer. 2016. “Older Men’s Blueprint for ‘Being a Man’.” Men & Masculinities 19(2): 2119–2147. Thompson, Mike. 2019. “Killing in the Name of: The US Army and Video Games.” January 1. https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2019/01/army-video-games/ Thomson-DeVareaux, Amelia. 2019. “Americans Say they Would Vote for a Woman … But.” July 15. https:// fivethirtyeight.com/features/americans-say-they-would-vote-for-a-woman-but/ Thorn, Tracey. 2018, “We Seventies Feminists have a Lot to Learn from the Fourth Wave, but the Generation Gap is Nothing New.” New Statesman. February:57. Thorne, Sapphira R., Peter Hegarty, and Erica G. Hepper. 2019. “Equality in Theory: From a Heteronormative to an Inclusive Psychology of Romantic Love.” Theory & Psychology 29(2):240–257. Tian, Felicia F. 2017. “Global Interactions and Family Formation Pathways in Reform-Era Urban China.” Chinese Sociological Review 493:183–211. Ticehurst, Simon. 2018. “Why is Latin America Going Backwards?” Oxfam. July 26. https://oxfamblogs. org/fp2p/why-is-latin-america-going-backwards/ Todd, Brenda K., John A. Barry, and Sara A. O. Thommessen. 2017a. “Preferences for ‘Gender-typed’ Toys in Boys and Girls Aged 9 to 32 Months.” Infant and Child Development 26(3):14 pages. Todd, Brenda K., Rico A. Fischer, and Steven Di Costa. 2017b. “Sex Differences in Children’s Toy Preferences: A  Systematic Review, Meta-Regression, and Meta-Analysis.” Infant and Child Development 27(2):29 pages. Toews, Michelle L., and Autumn M. Bermea. 2017. “I Was Naive in Thinking, ‘I Divorced This Man, He Is Out of My Life’: A Qualitative Exploration of Post-Separation Power and Control Tactics Experienced by Women.” Journal of Interpersonal Violence 32(14):2166–2189. Tolman, Richard M., Erin A. Casey, Christopher T. Allen et al., 2019. “A Global Exploratory Analysis of Men Participating in Gender-Based Violence Prevention.” Journal of Interpersonal Violence 34(1):3438–3465. Tomasello, Michael, Alicia P. Melis, Claudio Tennie, Emily Wyman, and Esther Herrmann. 2012. “Two Key Steps in the Evolution of Human Cooperation.” Current Anthropology 53(6):673–692. Tonn, Jenna. 2018. “Radical Science, Feminism, and the Biology of Determinism.” New Inquiry. December 20. https://thenewinquiry.com/blog/radical-science-feminism-and-the-biology-of-determinism/ Topping, Alexandra, Kate Lyons, and Matthew Weaver. 2019. “Gillette #MeToo Razors Ad on ’Toxic Masculinity’ Gets Praise—and Abuse.” Guardian. January 15. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/ jan/15/gillette-metoo-ad-on-toxic-masculinity-cuts-deep-with-mens-rights-activists Tornello, Samantha L., Rachel G. Riskind, and Aleks Babić, 2019. “Transgender and Gender Non-Binary Parents’ Pathways to Parenthood.” Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity 6(2):232–241. Toro-Morn, and Ivis Garcia. 2017. “Gendered Fault Lines: A Demographic Profile of Puerto Rican Women in the United States.” Centro Journal 24(3):10–37. Torres, Luis D., Aditya Jain, and Staveoula. 2019. “(Undoing) Gender for Achieving Equality at Work: The Role of Corporate Social Responsibility.” Business Strategy & Development 2(1):32–39. Tortorello, Michael. 2019. “How to Raise a Child Without Imposing Gender.” New York Times. March 7. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/07/style/gender-neutral-design-child.html Toscano, Hugo, Thomas W. Schubert, and Steffen R. Giessner. 2018. “Eye Gaze and Head Posture Jointly Influence Judgements of Dominance, Physical Strength, and Anger.” Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 42(3):285–309. Totenberg, Nina. 2020. “Supreme Court Delivers Major Victory to LGBTQ Employees.” National Public Radio. June  15. https://www.npr.org/2020/06/15/863498848/supreme-court-delivers-major-victoryto-lgbtq-employees

708 References Totenhagen, Casey J., Melissa J. Wilmarth, Joyce Serido, and Alejandra E. Betancourt. 2018. “Do Day-to-Day Finances Play a Role in Relationship Satisfaction? A Dyadic Investigation.” Journal of Family Psychology 32(4):528–537. Towne, Angela. 2019. “Clitoral Stimulation During Penile-Vaginal Intercourse: A  Phenomenological Study Exploring Sexual Experiences in Support of Female Orgasm.” Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality 28(1):68–80. Træen, Bente, Ana Alexandra Carvalheira, Gert Martin Hald et  al. 2019. “Attitudes towards Sexuality in Older Men and Women across Europe: Similarities, Differences, and Associations with Their Sex Lives.” Sexuality & Culture 23(1):1–25. Treas, Judith, and Tsuio Tai. 2016. “Gender Inequality in Housework across 20 European Nations: Lessons from Gender Stratification Theories.” Sex Roles 74:495–511. Treat, Teresa A., and Richard J. Viken. 2018. “Sexual-Perception Processes in Acquaintance-Targeted Sexual Aggression.” Aggressive Behavior 44(3):316–326. Trible, Phyllis. 2003. Texts of Terror: Literary Feminist Readings of Biblical Narratives. London: SCM Press. Trible, Phyllis. 1984. The Texts of Terror: Literary-Feminist Readings of Biblical Narratives. Philadelphia: Fortress Press. Trinh, Sarah L. 2018. “’No Messages Needed—Just Pats on the Back’: Exploring Young Men’s Reports of Male and Female Friends’ Sexual Communications.” Psychology of Men & Masculinity 19(3):430–438. Trinh, Sarah L., and Sophia Choukas-Bradley. 2018. “No Messages Needed—Just Pats on the Back”: Exploring Young Men’s Reports of Male and Female Friends’ Sexual Communications.” Psychology of Men & Masculinity 19(3):430–438. Trochev, Alexei, and Peter H. Solomon, Jr. 2018. “Authoritarian Constitutionalism In Putin’s Russia: A Pragmatic Constitutional Court in a Dual State.” Communist and Post-Communist Studies 51(3):201–214. Trotta, Daniel. 2019. “Some 4.5 percent of U.S. Adults Identify as LGBT: Study.” Reuters. March 5. https://www. reuters.com/article/us-usa-lgbt/some-4-5-percent-of-u-s-adults-identify-as-lgbt-study-idUSKCN1QM2L6 Trumpy, Alexa J., and Marissa Elliott. 2019. “You Lead Like a Girl: Gender and Children’s Leadership Development.” Sociological Perspective 62(3):346–365. Truscheit, Tori. 2018. “The Maternal Instinct Myth.” May  10. https://www.shondaland.com/live/family/ a20639326/maternal-instinct-myth-queer-parenthood/ Tsai, Laura Cordisco. 2019. “Experiences of Financial Vulnerability and Empowerment among Women who were Trafficked in the Philippines.” Pp. 170–183 in Women of Asia: Globalization, Development, and Gender Equity, edited by Mehrangiz Najafizadeh and Linda L. Lindsey. New York and London: Routledge. Tsai, Meng-Jung, Jyh-Chong Liang, Huei-Tse Hou and Chin-Chung Tsai. 2015. “Males are Not as Active as Females in Online Discussion: Gender Differences in Face-to-Face and Online Discussion Strategies.” Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 31(3). Tsakitopoulou-Summers, Tatiana. 2013. “Helen of Troy: At the Crossroads between Ancient Patriarchy and Modern Feminism.” Interdisciplinary Humanities 30(2):47–56. Tsjeng, Zing. 2016. “People Show Us the Outfits they Wear to Get Laid.” Vice. September 1. https://www. vice.com/en_us/article/qvddkb/people-show-us-the-outfits-they-wear-to-get-laid Tukachinsky, Riva, Dana Mastro, and Moran Yarchi. 2017. “The Effect of Prime Time Television Ethnic/Racial Stenotypes om Latin and Black Americans: A Longitudinal National Level Study.” Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 61(3):538–556. Tumin, Dmitry, and Zhenchao Qian. 2017. “Unemployment bd the Transition from Separation to Divorce.” Journal of Family Issues 38(10):1389–1413. Turaeva, Rano.  2019. “Women as Change Agents: Gender in Post-Soviet Central Asia.” Pp.  424–436 in Women of Asia: Globalization, Development, and Gender Equity, edited by Mehrangiz Najafizadeh and Linda L. Lindsey. New York and London: Routledge. Turbin, Stephen, Dan Wu, and Leitian (LT) Zhang. 2019. “Research: When Gender Diversity Makes Firms More Productive.” Harvard Business Review. February 11:2–16.

References  709 Turney, Alexandra. 2016. “Privilege, Punishment and Social Role of the Vestal Virgins in Ancient Rome.” February 9. https://www.througheternity.com/en/blog/history/vestal-virgins-in-ancient-rome.html Turunen, J., E. Fransson, and M. Bergström, M. 2017. “Self-esteem in Children in Joint Physical Custody and Other Living Arrangements.” Public Health 149:106–112. Turvett, Barbara. 2019. “Working Moms’ Adult Kids Do Better at Work and at Home, Says New Harvard Study.” Working Mother. February  1. https://www.workingmother.com/blogs/workmom-news/ working-moms039-adult-kids-do-better-work-and-home-says-new-harvard-study Tyree, Tia C.M., and Melvin L. Williams. 2016. “Flawless Feminist or Fallible Freak? An Analysis of Feminism, Empowerment and Gender in Beyoncé’s Lyrics. Pp. 124–142 in The Beyoncé Effect: Essays on Sexuality, Race and Feminism, edited by Adrienne Trier-Bieniek. Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company. Tyson, Alec. 2018. “The 2018 Midterm Vote: Divisions By Race, Gender, Education.” Pew Research Center. November  8. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/11/08/the-2018-midterm-vote-divisionsby-race-gender-education/ U.S. Census Bureau. 2017. “Unmarried and Single Americans Week: Sept. 17–23, 2017.” August  16. https://www.census.gov/newsroom/facts-for-features/2017/single-americans-week.html U.S. Census Bureau. 2018a. “U.S. Census Bureau Releases 2018 Families and Living Arrangements Tables.” November 14. https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2018/families.html U.S. Census Bureau. 2018b. “Characteristics of Same-Sex Couple Households Table Package.” February 15. https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2018/same-sex.html U.S. Census Bureau. 2018c. “American Indian and Alaska Native Heritage Month: November 2018.” October  25. https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/newsroom/facts-for-features/2018/cb18ff09aian.pdf U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. 2018. Broken Promises: Continuing Federal Funding Shortfall for Native Americans. Briefing Report. December. https://www.usccr.gov/press/2018/12-20-PR-Broken-Promises. pdf U.S. Department of Labor. 2019. “Data and Statistics.” https://www.dol.gov/wb/stats/stats_data.htm Ueno, Junko. 2006. “Shojo and Adult Women: A Linguistic Analysis of Gender Identity in Manga (Japanese Comics).” Women and Language 29(1):16–25. Ukockis, Gail. 2019. Misogyny: The New Activism. New York: Oxford University Press. Ulrich, Laurel Thatcher. 2018. A House Full of Females: Plural Marriage n Women’s Rights in Early Mormonism, 1835–1870. New York: Penguin Random House. UNAIDS. 2019. United Nations. “Gender Equality: UNAIDS Still ahead in Implementing UN-SWAP.” September 10. https://www.unaids.org/en/keywords/gender-equality UNDP. 2019. Human Development Report 2019: Beyond income, Beyond Averages Beyond Today: Inequalities in Human Development in the 21st Century. New York: United Nations Development Programme. http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/hdr2019.pdf United Nations. 2019. Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division. World Population Prospects 2019: Highlights. New York: United Nations. https://population.un.org/wpp/Publications/ Files/WPP2019_Highlights.pdf United Nations Human Rights. 2017. Office of the High Commissioner. “UN Experts Urge States and Companies to Address Online Gender-based Abuse but Warn against Censorship.” March 8. https://www. ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=21317&LangID=E UNWOMEN. 2018. Turning Promises into Action: Gender Equality in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. https://www.unwomen.org/en/digital-library/publications/2018/2/gender-equality-in-the-2030agenda-for-sustainable-development-2018 UNWOMEN. 2019a. “SDG 4: Ensure Inclusive and Equitable Quality Education and Promote Lifelong Learning Opportunities for All.” http://www.unwomen.org/en/news/in-focus/women-and-the-sdgs/sdg-4quality-education UNWOMEN. 2019b. “SDG5: Achieve Gender Equality and Empower All Women and Girls.” http://www. unwomen.org/en/news/in-focus/women-and-the-sdgs/sdg-5-gender-equality

710 References UNWOMEN. 2020. Women, “Generation Equality: Realizing Women’s Rights for an Equal Future.” https:// www.unwomen.org/en/get-involved/beijing-plus-25 Upton-Davis, Karen. 2015. “Subverting Gendered Norms of Cohabitation: Living Apart Together for Women Over 45.” Journal of Gender Studies 24(1):104–116. Usui, Chikako. 2019. “Gender Equality in the Japanese Workplace: What Has Changed Since 1985.” Pp. 111–123 in Women of Asia: Globalization, Development, and Gender Equity, edited by Mehrangiz Najafizadeh and Linda L. Lindsey. New York and London: Routledge. Utrata, Jennifer. 2015. Women without Men: Single Mothers and Family Change in the New Russia. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. https://www.unwomen.org/en/get-involved/beijing-plus-25 Utset, Karla. 2018. “Drawing the Line: The Jurisprudence of Non-Consensual Pornography and the Implications of Kanye West’s Famous Music Video.” University of Miami Law Review 72(3):920–971. VA. 2018. U.S. Department of Veteran Affairs. “Suicide among Women Veterans: Facts, Prevention Strategies, and Resources.” September  2018. https://www.mentalhealth.va.gov/suicide_prevention/docs/ Women_Veterans_Fact_Sheet_508.pdf Vainapel, Sigal, Opher Y. Shamir, and Yulie Tenenbaum. 2015. “The Dark Side of Gendered Language: The Masculine-Generic Form as a Cause for Self-Report Bias.” Psychological Assessment 27(4): 1513–1519. Valenti, Jessica. 2008. “The Sisterhood Split.” The Nation. March 24. www.thenation.com/dod/20080324/ valenti Valentino, Nicholas A., Carly Wayne, and Marzia Oceno.  2018. “Mobilizing Sexism: The Interaction of Emotion and Gender Attitudes in the 2016 Us Presidential Election.” Public Opinion Quarterly 82(2):213–235. Valiente, Carlos, Julia H. Parker, Jodi Swanson et al. 2019. “Early Elementary Student-Teacher Relationship Trajectories Predict Girls’ Math and Boys’ Reading Achievement.” Early Childhood Research Quarterly 49:109–121. Van Bavel, Jan, Christine R. Schwartz, and Albert Esteve. 2018. “The Reversal of the Gender Gap in Education and Its Consequences for Family Life.” Annual Review of Sociology 44:341–360. van de Grift, Tim C., Els Elaut, Susanne C. Cerwenka et al. 2018. “Surgical Satisfaction, Quality of Life, and Their Association After Gender-Affirming Surgery: A Follow-up Study.” Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy 44 (2): 138–148. Van der Watt. 2016. “’Big, Hard and Up!’ A Healthy Creed for Men to Live By?” HTS: Theological Studies 72(2):1–9. van Hek, Margriet, Claudia Buchmann, and Gerbert Kraaykamp. 2019. “Educational Systems and Gender Differences in Reading: A  Comparative Multilevel Analysis.” European Sociological Review 35(2): 169–186. van Hoof, Jenny. 2017. “An Everyday Affair: Deciphering the Sociological Significance of Women’s Attitudes towards Infidelity.” Sociological Review 65(4):850–864. Van Kuiken, E. Jerome. 2017. “ ‘Ye Worship Ye Know Not What’? The Apophatic Turn and the Trinity.” International Journal of Systematic Theology 19(4):401–420. Van Lissa, Caspar J., Renske Keizer, Pol A.C. Van Lier et  al. 2019. “The Role of Fathers’ versus Mothers’ Parenting in Emotion-Regulation Development from Mid–Late Adolescence: Disentangling between-Family Differences from Within-Family Effects.” Developmental Psychology 55(2):377–389. Van Miegroet, Helga, Christy Glass, Ronda Roberts, and Callister, Kimberly Sullivan. Callister. 2019. “Unclogging the Pipeline: Advancement to Full Professor in Academic STEM.” Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal 38(2):246–264. VanArendonk, Kathryn. 2018. “A Timeline of TV’s Working-Class Sitcoms.” May 18. https://www.vulture. com/2018/05/working-class-sitcoms-timeline.html Vance, Laura. 2017. “Field Notes Rejecting Women’s Ordination: The 60th General Conference Session of the Seventh-Day Adventist World Church.” Nova Religio: The Journal of Alternative and Emergent Religion 21(1):85–99.

References  711 Vannier, Sarah A., and Lucia F. O’Sullivan. 2018. “Great Expectations.” Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 35(8):1045–1066. Varga, Colleen M, and Christina B. Gee. 2017. “Co-parenting, Relationship Quality, and Father Involvement in African American and Latino Adolescents.” Merrill-Palmer Quarterly 63(2):210–236. Varghese, Sanjana. 2019. “Why the Internet Needs Cyberfeminists more than Ever.” NewStatesman America. September 27. https://www.newstatesman.com/science-tech/internet/2019/09/why-internet-needscyberfeminists-more-ever Varner, Fatima, and Jelani Mandara. 2013. “Discrimination Concerns as Explanations for Gendered Socialization in African American Families.” Child Development 84(3):875–890. Varner, Fatima, Yang Hou, Latisha Ross et al. 2019. “Dealing with Discrimination: Parents’ and Adolescents’ Racial Discrimination Experiences and Parenting in African American Families.” Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology 26(2):215–220. Vedder, Richard. 2018. “Are Males Being Discriminated against on College Campuses?” Forbes. November 12. https://www.forbes.com/sites/richardvedder/2018/11/12/are-males-being-discriminated-against-oncollege-campuses/#74ebd3bbbfa1 Veenstra, Gerry. 2013. “The Gendered Nature of Discriminatory Experiences By Race, Class, and Sexuality: A  Comparison of Intersectionality Theory and the Subordinate Male Target Hypothesis.” Sex Roles 68:646–659. Velding, Victoria. 2017. “Depicting Femininity.” Youth & Society 49(4):505–527. Velencia, Janie. 2018. ““Americans Didn’t Believe Anita Hill. How Will They Respond to Kavanaugh’s Accuser?” September  17. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/americans-didnt-believe-anita-hill-how-willthey-respond-to-kavanaughs-accuser/ Velez, Brandon L., Charles J. Polihronakis, Laurel B. Watson, and Robert Cox, Jr. 2019. “Heterosexism, Racism, and the Mental Health of Sexual Minority People of Color.” Counseling Psychologist 47(1):129–159. Véliz-Calderón, Daniela, and Elizabeth J. Allan. 2017. “Defining Hazing: Gender Differences.” Oracle: The Research Journal of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors 12(2):12. Vera, Elizabeth K., Joshua R. Polanin, Megan Polanin, and Andrea L. Carr. 2018. “Keeping Latina/o Students in School: Factors Related to Academic Intentions of Students at Risk for School Dropout.” Journal of Latina/o Psychology 6(1):34–48. Vervecken, Dries, Bettina Hannover, and Ilka Wolter. 2013. “Changing (S)expectations: How Gender Fair Job Descriptions Impact Children’s Perceptions and Interest Regarding Traditionally Male Occupations.” Journal of Vocational Behavior 82(3):208–220. Villalobos, Ana. 2014. Motherload: Making It All Better in Insecure Times. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Viner, Brian. 2018. “Take it from Me, Women are NOT the Romantic Sex.” Daily Mail. February 13. https:// www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-5388723/Women-not-romantic-sex-says-Brian-Viner.html Vinjamuri, Mohan. 2015. “ ‘It’s So Important to Talk and Talk’: How Gay Adoptive Fathers Respond to Their Children’s Encounters with Heteronormativity.” Fathering: A Journal of Theory, Research & Practice about Men as Fathers 13(3): 245–270. Vinkenburg, Claartje J., Marloes L. van Engen, Jennifer Coffeng, and Josje S. E. Dikkers. 2012. “Bias In Employment Decisions about Mothers and Fathers: The (Dis)advantages of Sharing Care Responsibilities.” Journal of Social Issues 68(4):725–741. Vinoski, Erin, Jennifer B. Webb, Jan Warren-Findlo et al. 2017. “Got Yoga?: A Longitudinal Analysis of Thematic Content and Models’ Appearance-Related Attributes in Advertisements Spanning Four Decades of Yoga Journal.” Body Image 21:1–5. Virk, Hafeez Ul Hassan, Byomesh Tripathi, Varun Kumar et  al. 2019. “Causes, Trends, and Predictors of 90-Day Readmissions after Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection (from a Nationwide Readmission Database).” American Journal of Cardiology 124(9):1333–1339.

712 References Vogel, Lisa Klein. 2020. “Barriers to Meeting Formal Child Support Obligations: Noncustodial Father Perspectives”. Children and Youth Services Review 110: March. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth. 2020.104764 Vogelstein, Rachel B. 2018. “Time to Count Women’s Work.” Council on Foreign Relations. February  1. https://www.cfr.org/blog/time-count-womens-work Voice of America News. 2019. “The Worth of a Girl.” https://projects.voanews.com/child-marriage/ Vorst, Eric. 2018. “#CrookedHillary: An Analysis of Social Media Discourse During the 2016 Election.” Pp. 131–151 in Sex and Gender in the 2016 Presidential Election, by Caroline Heldman, Meredith Conroy, and Alissa R. Ackerman. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO. Vorster, Nico. 2017. “John Calvin on the Status of the Church.” Journal of Theological Studies 68 (1,Pt.1):178–211. Vuola, Elina. 2017. “Religion, Intersectionality, and Epistemic Habits of Academic Feminism: Perspectives from Global Feminist Theology.” Feminist Encounters: A Journal of Critical Studies in Culture and Politics 1(1). Wadsworth, Tim. 2016. “Marriage and Subjective Well-Being: How and Why Context Matters.” Social Indicators Research 126(3):1025–1048. Wadud, Amina. 2011. “American by Force, Muslim by Choice.” Political Theology 12(5):699–705. Waggoner, Miranda R. 2017. The Zero Trimester: Pre-Pregnancy Care and the Politics of Reproductive Risk. Oakland, CA: University of California Press. Wagner, Thomas R. 2013. “The Effects of Speaker Eye Contact and Gender on Receiver’s Assessments of the Speaker and Speech.” Ohio Communication Journal 51:217–235. Wahid, Marianne Pasty- Abdul. 2016. “ ‘Our Dēvi is Like That’: An Ethnological Insight into the Image of the Hindu Goddess Bhadrakāļi in Popular South Indian Belief and Temple Practice.” Journal of Hindu Studies 9(3):329–361. Walker, Charlie. 2018. “ ‘I Just Don’t Want to Connect My Life with This Occupation’: Working-Class Young Men, Manual Labour, and Social Mobility in Contemporary Russia.” British Journal of Sociology 69(1):207–225. Walker, Lenore E. 2017. The Battered Woman Syndrome (4/e). New York: Springer. Walsh, Abigail. 2017. “Men Matter: Changes in How Male Love Interests are Portrayed in Disney Films.” FemPop. February  13. http://fempopculture.blogspot.com/2017/02/men-matter-changes-in-how-malelove.html Walsh, Eileen. 2009. “Representations of Race and Gender in Mainstream Media Coverage of the 2008 Democratic Primary.” Journal of African American Studies 13(2):121–130. Walsh, Steve. 2018. “Troops Are Marrying Each Other More Often, Creating New Challenges for the Pentagon.” July  6. The American Homefront Project. http://americanhomefront.wunc.org/post/troopsare-marrying-each-other-more-often-creating-new-challenges-pentagon Walters, Glenn D. 2018. “Beyond Peer Influence and Selection: A Gendered Pathways Analysis of Social Environmental Predictors of Change in Child and Peer Delinquency.” Criminology and Criminal Justice 15(1):3–23. Wang, Hansi Lo. 2017. “Steep Rise in Interracial Marriages among Newlyweds 50  Years After They Became Legal.” National Public Radio. Code Switch Newsletter May  18. https://www.npr. org/sections/codeswitch/2017/05/18/528939766/five-fold-increase-in-interracial-marriages50-years-after-they-became-legal Wang, Wendy. 2018. “Who Cheats More? The Demographics of Infidelity in America.” Institute for Family Studies. January 10. https://ifstudies.org/blog/who-cheats-more-the-demographics-of-cheating-in-america Wang, Yihan, and Christina Matz-Costa. 2019. “Gender Differences in the Effect of Social Resources and Social Status on the Retirement Satisfaction and Health of Retirees.” Journal of Gerontological Social Work 62(1):86–107.

References  713 Ward, L. Monique, Rita C. Seabrook, Petal Grower et al. 2018. “Sexual Object or Sexual Subject? Media Use, Self-Sexualization, and Sexual Agency among Undergraduate Women.” Psychology of Women Quarterly 42(1):29–43. Warner, Dan. 2019. “Pro-choice or Pro-life, All Must be Pro-dialogue: Talking is the First Step.” Boston Herald. June 8. https://www.bostonherald.com/2019/06/08/pro-choice-or-pro-life-all-must-be-pro-dialogue/ Warr, Peter. 2018. “Self-employment, Personal Values, and Varieties of Happiness-Unhappiness.” Journal of Occupational Health Psychology 23(3):388–401. Warren, Patricia Y., Joshua Cochran, Joshua, Ryan T. Shields et al. 2020. “Sentencing Departures and Female Defendants: Assessing the Effects of Racial and Ethnic Threat.” Crime & Delinquency 66(1):59–92. Wasike, Ben. 2019. “Gender, Nonverbal Communication, and Televised Debates: A Case Study Analysis of Clinton and Trump’s Nonverbal Language During the 2016 Town Hall Debate.” International Journal of Communication 13:251–276. Wasserman, Varda, Ilan Dayan, and Ben-Ari Eyal. 2018. “Upgraded Masculinity: A gendered Analysis of the Debriefing in the Israeli Air Force.” Gender & Society 32(2):228–251. Waterfield, Sophia. 2019. “10  Years Ago Dr.  George Tiller Was Murdered for Providing Abortions: Has there Been a Rise In Anti-Abortion Violence Since?” Newsweek. May 31. https://www.newsweek.com/ shooting-dr-george-tiller-10-years-has-there-been-rise-anti-abortion-violence-1439578 Watkins, C. D., Debruine, L. M., Feinberg, D. R., & Jones, B. C. 2013. “A Sex Difference in the Context-Sensitivity of Dominance Perceptions.” Evolution and Human Behavior 34: 366–372. Watkins, Nicole E., and Mary Waldron. 2017. “Timing of Remarriage among Divorced and Widowed Parents.” Journal of Remarriage & Divorce 58(4):244–262. Watkins, Torie Abbott. 2018. “The Ghost of Salary Past: Why Salary History Inquiries Perpetuate the Gender Pay Gap and Should be Ousted as a Factor other than Sex.” Minnesota Law Review 103(2):1041–1088. Watson, David. 2012. “Gender Differences in Gossip and Friendship.” Sex Roles 67(9/10):494–502. Watson, Laurel B., Sydney K. Morgan, and Raquel Craney. 2018. “Bisexual Women’s Discrimination and Mental Health Outcomes: The Roles of Resilience and Collective Action.” Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity (2):182–193. Watson-Phillips, Carol. 2016. “Relational Fathering: Sons Liberate Dads.” Journal of Men’s Studies 24(3):277–293. Watts, Shannon. 2019. Fight Like a Mother: How a Grassroots Movement Took on the Gun Lobby and Why Women Will Change the World. New York: HarperCollins. Wayan, Suana. 2018. “Students’ Internet Access, Internet Self-Efficacy, and Internet for Learning Physics: Gender and Grade Differences.” Journal of Technology & Science Education 8(4):281–290. Weber, Lauren. 2018. “The High Price of Being a Minority of One.” New York Times October 23:R4. Weber, Max. 1946. From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology, edited by H.H. Gerth and C.W. Mills (trans.). New York: Oxford University Press. Weber, Patrick, and Daniel Gredig. 2018. “Prevalence and Predictors of Homophobic Behavior among High School Students in Switzerland.” Journal of Gay & Lesbian Social Services 30(2):128–153. Webster, Alison R. 1995. Found Wanting: Women, Christianity and Sexuality. London: Cassell. Webster, Jennica R., Gary A. Adams, Cheryl L. Maranto et  al. 2018. “Contextual Supports for LGBT Employees: A Review, Meta-Analysis, and Agenda for Future Research.” Human Resource Management 57(1):193–210. Wegemer, Christopher M., and Jacquelynne S. Eccles. 2019. “Gendered STEM Career Choices: Altruistic Values, Beliefs, and Identity.” Journal of Vocational Education February (Part A):28–42. Weiman-Jelman, Zohar. 2018. “Transing Back the Texts, Queering Jewish Prayer.” Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion 34(1):80–84. Weintraub, Dayna S., and Linda J. Sax. 2018. “The Relationship between Student–Parent Communication and First-Year Academic Performance.” NACADA Journal 38(1):61–76.

714 References Weisshaar, Katherine. 2018. “From Opt Out to Blocked Out: The Challenges for Labor Market Re-entry after Family Related Employment Lapses.” American Sociological Review 83(1):34–60. Wells, Ashlee Dean. 2017. “Because ‘I’m A Human:’ Non-Binary Parenting.” December 19. https://ravishly. com/non-binary-parenting. Welsch, David M., and Matthew Winden. 2019.”Student Gender, Counselor Gender, and College Advice.” Education Economics 27(2):112–131. Welter, Barbara. 1996. “The Cult of True Womanhood, 1820–1860.” In Major Problems in American Women’s History, edited by Mary Beth Norton and Ruth M. Alexander. Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath. Wenham, Clare, Julia Smith, and Rosemary Morgan. 2020. “COVID 19: The Gendered Impacts of the Outbreak.” Lancet 395(10227):846–848. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS01406736(20)30526-2/fulltext Wentling, Nikki. 2018. “VA Reveals its Veteran Suicide Statistic Included Active-Duty Troops.” Stars and Stripes. June 20. https://www.stripes.com/news/us/va-reveals-its-veteran-suicide-statistic-included-activeduty-troops-1.533992 Wermund, Benjamin. 2018. “Affirmative Action Guidelines Dropped by Trump Administration.” Politico. July 3. https://www.politico.com/story/2018/07/03/trump-end-obama-affirmative-action-692610 West, Candice, and Don H. Zimmerman. 1987. “Doing Gender.” Gender & Society 1(2):125–151. West, Michael O. 1999. “Like a River: The Million Man March and the Black Nationalist Tradition in the United States.” Journal of Historical Sociology 12(1):81–100. Westbrook, Laurel, and Kristen Schilt. 2014. “Doing Gender, Determining Gender: Transgender People, Gender Panics, and the Maintenance of the Sex/Gender/Sexuality System.” Gender  & Society 28(1):32–57. Westfall, Cynthia Long. 2016. Paul and Gender: Reclaiming the Apostle’s Vision for Men and Women in Christ. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic. Westkaemper, Emily. 2017. Selling Women’s History: Packaging Feminism in Twentieth-Century American Popular Culture. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press. Wetzel, Benjamin J. 2017. “Polygamy, Women’s Rights, and Mormonism: A Seminar with Laurel Thatcher Ulrich.” University of Notre Dame, Cushwa Center for the Study of American Catholicism. November 7. https://cushwa.nd.edu/news/a-seminar-with-laurel-thatcher-ulrich/ Wheeling, Kate. 2015. “The Brains of Men and Women Aren’t Really That Different, Study Finds.” Science Magazine. November  30. http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/11/brains-men-and-women-aren-treally-different-study-finds Wheelock, M.D., J.L. Hect, E. Hernandez-Andrade et  al. 2019. “Sex Differences in Functional Connectivity During Fetal Brain Development.” Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience 36(April):100632.https:// www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1878929318301245?via%3Dihub Whipps, Jonathon, Mark Byra, Kenneth G. Gerow, and Emily Hill Guseman. 2018. “Evaluation of Nighttime Media Uses and Sleep Patterns in First-Semester College Students.” American Journal of Health Behavior 42(3):47–55. Whisman, Mark A., Anna L. Gilmour, and Julia M. Salinger. 2018. “Marital Satisfaction and Mortality in the United States Adult Population.” Health Psychology 37(11):1041–1044. Whitehead, Andrew L. 2014. “Male and Female He Created Them: Gender Traditionalism, Masculine Images of God, and Attitudes to Same-Sex Unions.” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 53(3):479–496. Whitehead, Andrew L., and Samuel L. Perry. 2016. “Religion and Support for Adoption by Same-Sex Couples.” Journal of Family Issues 37(6):789–813. Whittington, Anja, Barry A. Garst, Ran J. Gagnon, and Sarah Baughman. 2017. “Living Without Boys: A Retrospective Analysis of the Benefits and Skills Gained at All-Female Camps.” Journal of Experiential Education 40(2):97–113. WHO. 2019. World Health Organization. “Maternal Mortality.” September  19. https://www.who.int/ news-room/fact-sheets/detail/maternal-mortality

References  715 Wieben, Corinne. 2017. “The Charms of Women and Priests: Sex, Magic, Gender and Public Order in Late Medieval Italy.” Gender & History 29(1):141–157. Wiegers, Wanda A., and Dorothy E. Chunn. 2017. “Choice and Sole Motherhood in Canada 1965–2010: An Interview Study.” Women’s Studies International Forum 61:38–47. Wiener, Jon. 2007. “Feminist Leaders Oppose Hilary, Endorse Obama.” Huffington Post. February 3. www. huffingtonpost.com/jon-wiener Wiesner-Hanks, Merry E. 2008. Women and Gender in Early Modern Europe. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Wiesner-Hanks, Merry. E. 2016. “Martin Luther on Marriage and the Family.” Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Religion. http://religion.oxfordre.com/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780199340378.001.0001/ acrefore-9780199340378-e-365 Wilde, Melissa J., and Sabrina Danielsen. 2014. “Fewer and Better Children: Race, Class, Religion, and Birth Control Reform in America.” American Journal of Sociology 1196):1710–1760. Wilkinson, Andra, Hannah Lantos, Tyler McDaniel, and Hannah Winslow. 2019. “Disrupting the Link between Maltreatment and Delinquency: How School, Family, and Community Factors an be Protective.” BMC Public Health 19 (1):1–15. Williams, Christine L. 2013. “The Glass Escalator, Revisited: Gender Inequality in Neoliberal Times, SWS Feminist Lecturer.” Gender & Society 27(5):609–629. Williams, Frances Janeene, and Linda B. Bennett. 2016. “The Progressive Era: How American History Textbooks’ Visuals Represent Women.” Social Studies Research and Practice 11(1):124–135. Williams, Joanna. 2017. Women vs Feminism: Why We All Need Liberating from the Gender Wars. Bingley, UK: Emerald Publishing Ltd. Williamson, Stan, Eugenie Ardoin, Kenneth E. Clow, and Henry S. Cole. 2018. “An Exploratory Study of the Relationships of Small Business Owners’ Ethical Orientation and Customer Orientation.” Journal of Ethics & Entrepreneurship 8(2):80–94. Willis, Malachi, and Kristen N. Jozkowski. 2018.” “Ladies First? Not So Fast: Linguistic Sexism in Peer-Reviewed research.” Journal of Sex Research 55(2):137–145. Wilson, Edward O. 1975. Sociobiology: The New Synthesis. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Wilson, Edward O. 1978. On Human Nature. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Wilson, Kalpana, Jennifer Ung Loh, and Navtej Purewal. 2018. “Gender, Violence and the Neoliberal State in India.” Feminist Review 119(1):1–6. Wilson, Ted C. 2017. “Has General Conference Session Approved Ordained Female Church Elders?” News, Videos and Sermons from the Seventh Day-Day Adventist Church President. November 17. http://perspectives.adventist.org/en/questions-answers/questions/go/2017-11-17/has-general-conference-sessionapproved-ordained-female-church-elders/ Wilz, Kelly. 2016. “Bernie Bros and Women Cards: Rhetoric of Sexism, Misogyny, and Constructed Masculinity in the 2016 election.” Women’s Studies in Communication 39(4):357–360. Winfield, Nicole. 2019. “Pope Denounces ‘Rigidity’ as he Warns of Christian Decline.” St. Louis Post-Dispatch December 22:A11. Wingenbach, Tanja S., Chris Ashwin, and Mark Brosnan. 2018. “Sex Differences in Facial Emotion Recognition across Varying Expression Intensity Levels from Videos.” PLOS ONE. January  2. https://doi. org/10.1371/journal.pone.0190634 Wingfield, Adia Harvey. 2019. “Reclaiming Our Time: Black Women, Resistance, and Rising Inequality: SWS Presidential Lecture.” Gender & Society 33(3):345–362. Wingfield, Adia Harvey. 2020. “The Disproportionate Impact of Covid-19 on Black Health Care Workers in the U.S.” Harvard Business Review. May  14. https://hbr.org/2020/05/the-disproportionate-impact-of-covid-19on-black-health-care-workers-in-the-u-s Wingo, Erin, Natalie Ingraham, Natalie, and Sarah C.M. Roberts. 2018. “Reproductive Health Care Priorities and Barriers to Effective Care for LGBTQ People Assigned Female at Birth: A Qualitative Study.” Women’s Health Issues 28(4):350–357.

716 References Witkower, Zachary, Jessica L. Tracy, and Joey T. Cheng. 2020. “Two Signals of Social Rank: Prestige and Dominance are Associated with Distinct Nonverbal Displays.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 118(1):89–120. Witkowski, Monica C. 2012. Women at Law in Early Colonial Maryland. El Paso, TX: LFB Scholarly Publications. Witt, Emily. 2015. “ “Female BFFs: The New Power Couples.” New York Times Style Magazine August 21. https://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/21/t-magazine/female-bffs-power-couples.html Witte, Susan S., Aira Toivgoo, and Laura Cordsico Tsai. 2019. “Addressing Women’s ’ Health through Economic Opportunity: Lessons from Women Engaged in Sex Work in Mongolia.” Pp. 124–136 in Women of Asia: Globalization, Development, and Gender Equity, edited by Mehrangiz Najafizadeh and Linda L. Lindsey. New York and London: Routledge. Wittenberg, Brittany M., Lauren Beverung, Arya Ansari et  al. 2017. “Gender Differences in Parents’ Prenatal Wishes for their Children’s Future: A  Mixed-Methods Study.” Journal of Child  & Family Studies 26(7):1865–1874. Wolchover, Natalie. 2012. “ ‘One Small Step for Man’: Was Neil Armstrong Misquoted?” https://www. space.com/17307-neil-armstrong-one-small-step-quote.html Wolfe, Lauren. 2020. “How to Report on Sexualized Violence in the #MeToo Era: 10 Do’s and Don’ts.” January 3. Women Media Center Reports. https://womensmediacenter.com/reports/how-to-report-on-sexualizedviolence-in-the-metoo-era-10-dos-and-donts Wolfe-Christensen, C., A.B. Wisniewski, A.J. Mullins et al. 2017. “Changes in Levels of Parental Distress after Their Child with Atypical Genitalia Undergoes Genitoplasty.” Journal of Pediatric Urology 13(1):e1–32. e6. Wollstonecraft, Mary. 1792/1970. The Vindication of the Rights of Woman. Farnborough, UK: Gregg. Women and Hollywood. 2019a. “TV Statistics.” 2017–2018 Season. https://womenandhollywood.com/ resources/statistics/tv-statistics/ Women and Hollywood. 2019b. “Women Onscreen.” 2018 Statistics. https://womenandhollywood.com/ resources/statistics/2018-statistics/ Women’s Health. 2018. “Advertising (In)Equality: The Impacts Of Sexist Advertising On Women’s Health and Wellbeing.” Women’s Health Issues Paper December (14):1–40. Women’s Media Center. 2019. WMC Reports. “The Status of Women in the U.S. Media 2019.” February 21. https://womensmediacenter.com/reports/the-status-of-women-in-u-s-media-2019 Wondergem, Taylor, and Mihaela Friedlmeier. 2012. “Gender and Ethnic Differences in Smiling: A Yearbook Photographs Analysis from Kindergarten through 12th Grade.” Sex Roles 67(7/8):403–411. Wong, Alia. 2019. “The U.S. Teaching Population Is Getting Bigger, and More Female.” Atlantic February 19. https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2019/02/the-explosion-of-women-teachers/582622/ Wong, Wang Ivy, Sylvia Yun Shi, and Zhansheng. 2018. “Students from Single-Sex Schools are More Gender-Salient and more Anxious in Mixed-Gender Situations: Results from High School and College Samples.” PLOS ONE 13(12):1–23. Wong, Y. Joel, Moon-Ho Ringo Ho, Shi-Yi Wang, and I.S. Keino Miller. 2017. “Meta-Analysis of the Relationship between Conformity to Masculine Norms and Mental Health-Related Outcomes.” Journal of Counseling Psychology 64(1):80–93. Wood, Hannelie. 2015. “Revisiting Mary Daly: Towards a Quadripartite Theological and Philosophical Paradigm.” HTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies 71(1):Art. 2911, 10 pages. https://hts.org.za/index. php/hts/article/view/2911/5764 Wood, Johnny. 2018. “Asia’s 10 Most Gender Equal Countries.” World Economic Forum. September  4. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/09/asia-gender-equal-countries/ Wood, Johnny. 2018. “The United States Divorce Rate is Dropping, Thanks to Millennials.” World Economic Forum. October  5. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/10/divorce-united-states-droppingbecause-millennials/

References  717 Woodworth-Ney, Laura. 2015. “It Depends on Which Women, and Where.” From Women and the Myth of the American West. Zócalo Public Square: Magazine of Ideas. Arizona State University Knowledge Enterprise. January 11. http://time.com/3662361/women-american-west/ World Bank. 2018. “A ‘Stalled Revolution’ for Latin American Women.” https://www.worldbank.org/en/ news/feature/2018/03/08/una-revolucion-estancada-para-la-mujer-latinoamericana World Economic Forum. 2019. The Global Gender Gap Report 2020. Geneva, Switzerland: World Economic Forum. http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GGGR_2020.pdf World Population Prospects 2019: Highlights. New York: United Nations. https://population.un.org/wpp/ Publications/Files/WPP2019_Highlights.pdf Wright, Jennifer, 2018. “Men are Responsible for Mass Shootings: How Toxic Masculinity is Killing Us.” Harper’s Bazaar. February  16. https://www.harpersbazaar.com/culture/politics/a18207600/massshootings-male-entitlement-toxic-masculinity/ Wright, Paul. 2013. “U.S. Males and Pornography, 1973–2010: Consumption, Predictors, Correlates.” Journal of Sex Research 50(1):60–71. Wright, Peter. 2018. “Bastardized Chivalry: From Concern for Weakness to Sexual Exploitation.” New Male Studies 7(2):43–59. Wu, Xiaoying. 2010. “From State Dominance to Market Orientation: The Composition and Evolution of Gender Discourse.” Social Sciences in China, special issue “Social Change and Chinese Women,” 31(2):150–164. www.pollingreport.com/abortion.htm Wykstra, Stephanie. 2019. “Microcredit as a Hugely Hyped Solution to Global Poverty. What Happened?” Vox. January  15. https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2019/1/15/18182167/microcredit-microfinancepoverty-grameen-bank-yunus Wyler, Grace. 2012. “Romney has a Major Problem among Women—And there’s Not Much He Can Do about It.” Business Insider. October 2. https://www.businessinsider.com/obama-romney-women-abortionpolls-republicans-2012-10 Xiaodong, and Kaisheng Lai. 2017. “Are Mothers of Sons More Traditional? The Influence of Having Son(s) and Daughter(s) on Parents’ Gender Ideology.” Journal of Chinese Sociology 4(1):1–19. Yaffe, Alva. 218. The Kibbutz: It Takes a Village to Raise a Child, But Kids Should Sleep at Home.” Times of Israel. August  8. https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/the-kibbutz-it-takes-a-village-to-raise-a-child-but-kidsshould-sleep-at-home/ Yamamoto, Susan, and Evelyn M. Maeder. 2017. “A Case of Culture: Defendant Gender and Juror Decision-making.” Journal of Interpersonal Violence 32(2):3090–3110. Yancy, Clyde W. 2020. “COVID-19 and African Americans.” JAMA 323(19):1891–1892. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2764789 Yang, Fan, and Douglas Frye. 2018. “When Preferences Are in the Way: Children’s Predictions of Goal-Directed Behaviors.” Developmental Psychology 54(6):1051–1062. Yang, Fan, and Fuyuan Shen. 2018. “Effects of Interactivity: A  Meta-Analysis.” Communication Research 45(5):635–658. Yang, Tiantian, and Maria del Carmen Triana. 2019. “Set Up to Fail: Explaining Why Women-Led Businesses are More Likely to Fail.” Journal of Management 45(3):926–954. Yang, Xiaozhao. 2015. “Is Social Status Related to Internet Pornography Use? Evidence from the Early 2000s in the United States.” Archives of Sexual Behavior 45 (4): 997–1009. Yang, Yingying, and Edward C. Merrill. 2016. “Cognitive and Personality Characteristics of Masculinity and Femininity Predict Wayfinding Competence and Strategies of Men and Women.” Sex Roles 76(11–12):747–758. Yaron, Joanne. 2011. “Th Rise of Feminism in Israel.” Palestine-Israel Journal of Politics, Economic, and Culture 17(3/4):88–91. Yenor, Scott. 2018. “The Form and Function of the American Family.” National Affairs 36: 81–95.

718 References Yi, Beh Lih. 2017. “Move Over Superman: U.N. Taps Superheroine Burka Avenger to Fight Extremism.” Reuters. September 24. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-pakistan-entertainment-extremism/move-over-superman-un-taps-superheroine-burka-avenger-to-fight-extremism-idUSKCN1C0005 Yonay, Yuval, and Vered Kraus. 2017. “The Role of the State and the Pliability of Tradition: Israeli Palestinian and Middle-Eastern Jewish Women in the Labor Force.” Research in Social Stratification and Mobility 50:29–39. Youaremom. 2019. “What Does Maternal Instinct Mean?” February  8. https://youaremom.com/babies/ maternal-instinct/ Young, Cathy. 2008. “Why Feminists Hate Sarah Palin.” Wall Street Journal. September 15:A21. Young, Katherine K. 1987. “Introduction.” In Women in World Religions, edited by Arvind Sharma. Albany: State University of New York Press. Young, Michael, Susan Cardenas, Joseph Donnelly et al. 2016. “Perceptions of Peer Sexual Behavior: Do Adolescents Believe in a Sexual Double Standard?” Journal of School Health 86(12): 855–863. Younger, John. 2016. “Minoan Women,” Pp.  573–504 in Stephanie Lynn Budin and Jean Macintosh Turfa (eds). Women in Antiquity: Real Women across the Ancient World. Oxon, UK and New York: Routledge. Yount, Kathryn M., and Kathleen H. Krause. 2017. “Gendered Social Learning, Nonfamily Institutions, and Attitudes about Recourse after Partner Violence.” Psychology of Violence 7(1):128–139. Yucel, Deniz. 2017. “Work-to-Family Conflict and Life Satisfaction: The Moderating Role of Type of Employment.” Applied Research in Quality of Life 12(3):577–591. Yuen, Victoria, and Osub Ahmed. 2018. “4 Ways Secretary DeVos’ Proposed Title IX Rule Will Fail Survivors of Campus Sexual Assault.” Center for American Progress. November 16. https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/education-postsecondary/news/2018/11/16/461181/4-ways-secretary-devos-proposed-title-ix-rule-will-fail-survivors-campus-sexual-assault/ Zafar, Harris. 2014 “Demystifying Women’s Rights in Islam.” Chapter 7, Pp. 115–140 in Demystifying Islam: Tackling the Tough Questions. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. Zalis, Shelley. 2019. “6 Equality Trends to Watch in 2019.” Forbes. January 4. https://www.forbes.com/ sites/shelleyzalis/2019/01/04/6-equality-trends-to-watch-in-2019/#6603f87e4ad4 Zare, Samane, Mehdi Nemati, and Yuqing. 2018. “A Systematic Review of Consumer Preference for E-Cigarette Attributes: Flavor, Nicotine Strength, and Type.” PLOS ONE 13(3):1–18. Zarya, Valentina. 2018. “The Share of Female CEOs in the Fortune 500 Dropped by 25% in 2018.” Fortune. May 21. http://fortune.com/2018/05/21/women-fortune-500-2018/ Zentner, Marcel, and Alice Eagly. 2015. “A Sociocultural Framework for Understanding Partner Preferences of Women and Men: Integration of Concepts and Evidence.” European Review of Social Psychology 26(1):328–373. Zhang, Jizhi, and Ceylan Oymak. 2018. “Participants in Subbaccalaureate Occupational Education: 2012. “Stats in Brief, June 2018.” NCES 2018–149. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2018/2018149.pdf Zhang, Quanda. 2017. “Does Microfinance Reduce Poverty? Some International Evidence.” B.E. Journal of Economics 17(2):1–13. Zhao, Yi., Weiquan. Wang, and Yan Zhu. 2010. “Antecedents of the Closeness of Human–Avatar Relationships in a Virtual World.” Journal of Database Management 21(2):41–68. Zheng, Wei, Olca Surgevil, and Ronit Kark. 2018b. “Dancing on the Razor’s Edge: How Top-Level Women Leaders Manage the Paradoxical Tensions between Agency and Communion.” Sex Roles 79(11–12):633–650. Zheng, Wei, Ronit Kark, and Alyson L. Meister. 2018a. “Paradox versus Dilemma Mindset: A  Theory of How Women Leaders Navigate the Tensions between Agency and Communion.” Leadership Quarterly 29(5):584–596.

References  719 Zhou, Li. 2018. “It’s Official: A Record-Breaking Number of Women Have Won Seats in Congress.” Vox. November 7. https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/11/7/18024742/midterm-results-recordwomen-win Zienty, Livy and Jamie Nordling. 2018. “Fathers are Helping, Mothers are Hovering: Differential Effects of Helicopter Parenting in College First-Year Students.” Augustana Celebration of Learning, Augustana College. https://digitalcommons.augustana.edu/celebrationoflearning/2018/posters/19 Zighelboim, Selah Maya. 2018. “Rabbanit to Start Orthodox Synagogue in Philadelphia.” Jewish Exponent. August 18. http://jewishexponent.com/2018/08/08/rabbanit-to-start-orthodox-synagogue-in-philadelphia/ Zimmerman, Tegan. 2017. “#Intersectionality: The Fourth Wave Feminist Twitter Community.” Atlantis: Critical Studies in Gender, Culture & Social Justice 38(1):54–70. Zion, Lawrie. 2017. The Weather Obsession. Melbourne, AU: Melbourne University Press. Zobair, Jennifer. 2015. “The Depth and Weight of Feminist Studies in Islam: A Response to ‘The Evolution of Feminist Studies in Religion’.” Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion 21(2):149–154. Zoloth, Laurie. 2017. Roundtable: “At the Last Well on Earth: Climate Change Is a Feminist Issue.” Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion 33(2):139–151. Zsok, Florian, Matthias Haucke, Cornelia Y. De Wit and Dick P.H. Barfelds. 2017. “What Kind of Love is Love at First Sight? An Empirical Investigation.” Personal Relationships 24:869–885. Zucchino, David. 2019. “Amid Rising Violence and Taliban Peace Talks, Afghan Campaign Begins.” July 28. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/28/world/asia/afghanistan-election.html Zuckerberg, Donna. 2018. Not All Dead White Men: Classics and Misogyny in the Digital Age. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Zug, Marcia. 2012. “Lonely Colonist Seeks Wife: The Forgotten History of America’s First Mail Order Brides.” Duke Journal of Gender Law and Policy 20:85. Zulauf, Courtney A., Alexander W. Sokolovsky, Adam S. Grabell, and Sheryl L. Olson. 2018. “Early Risk Pathways to Physical versus Relational Peer Aggression: The Interplay of Externalizing Behavior and Corporal Punishment varies by Child Sex.” Aggressive Behavior 44(2):209–220. Zulfiqar, Chazal. 2017. “Does Microfinance Enhance Gender Equity in Access to Finance? Evidence from Pakistan.” Feminist Economics 23(1):160–185.

Index

A Abortion, 209, 563, 564 see also reproductive rights American Catholics and, 486 debate, 562 – 564 dialogue, 564 – 565 Latin America, Vatican, 235 – 236 Russia, 209 Supreme Court, 562 Academic women, 449 – 450 Action figures, 115 – 116 Adam and Eve, 480 Adams, Abigail, 186 – 187 Adams, John, 187 Adoption, 111, 112, 304, 338 and LGBTQ families, 337, 338, 340, 497 Adultery see extramarital relationships (EMR) Advertising, 125 – 126 direct-to-consumer, 505, 527 print media, 503 – 508 stereotypes, 504 Advocacy and activism feminism, 20 – 21, 32, 92, 201, 224, 234, 245, 254 LGBTQ, 82 NGOs, 206 – 207 Affirmative action, 402 – 403, 547 Affordable Care Act (ACA), 561 – 562, 565, 580 Afghanistan, 245, 246, 248, 347 – 348 Afghan women, 246 Africa female genital mutilation (FGM) in North Africa, 251 – 253 goddesses, images, 470 Islam, 244 African Americans, 18, 101, 151, 314, 333 see also marriage and family

black womanhood, ideology of, 316 boys’ games, 120 class–race intersection, 99 domestic and intimate partner violence, 374 education, 436, 456 achievement, intersectional, 441 – 442 male–female gender gap, 453 employment, 183, 287, 415 multiple risks, race and gender, 316 – 317 unions, 180 families, 314 – 316 fictive kin, 315 intermarriage, 273 selecting mates and partners, 275 – 276 single parent households, 333 female historians, 159 gender socialization, 100 – 101 men and HIV, 83 – 84 Million Man March, 378 and music, 517 – 518 racial discrimination intersectional, 102 and television, 11, 518, 521 Age, and aging see also retirement and college enrollment, 453 divorce, 326 – 327 feminization of aging, 74 and media, 521 men at middle age and in later life, 367 – 371 romance in later life, 293 selecting mates and partners, 270 – 272 subcultures, 99 Ageism, 507, 584 Agency, 21, 282, 420 – 421 Agents of socialization, 110 – 126 family, 111 – 120 peers, 120

Index  721 school, 122 – 123

fathers and sons, 465

self-esteem, 111, 116, 125

gender socialization, 100

television, 123 – 126

intermarriage, 273

Aggression, 45 – 46 see also violence

model minority, 323

school, 460

Assisted reproductive technology (ART), 112

and toxic masculinity, 356, 360

Associated Press Stylebook, 156

Albright, Madeleine, 576

Association of Roman Catholic Women Priests, 492

Alcoholic use disorder (AUD), 86

Assortive mating, 269, 270

Alt-right movement, 379 – 380

Athena (goddess), 163

Alzheimer’s disease, 71, 79

Athens see Greece, classical

American Anti-Slavery Society (1833) Declaration

Athletics

of Purposes, 188

and masculinity, 444 – 445

American Association of University Women

testosterone levels in female athletes, 47

(AAUW), 23, 194 American Christians, 484 – 488

Title IX, 550 Austen, Jane, 158

American Dream, 363, 433 American Federation of Labor (AFL), 180

B

American Indian and Alaska Native (AIAN),

Baby boomer generation, 185, 275, 312, 325 see also Generation X; millennials

324 – 325 American Woman Suffrage Association (AWSA), 190 Anatomy is destiny, Freud, 49 – 50

Baby X, 127, 128 – 129 Bandura, Albert, 108, 109 Bangladesh

Androcentric medicine, 93 – 94

factory fires, 203 – 204

Androcentrism, 6, 42, 107

garment industry, 202 – 204, 429

Androgens, 42 – 43, 46

Grameen Bank, 427

Androgyny, 126 – 127

neoliberal globalization case study, 202 – 204

Anger, 140 – 141 see also aggression

Barbie doll, 115 – 116, 118, 431, 435, 504

Anglican Church, 493

Basic Instinct (film), 512

Animal studies, 41 – 42, 46

Battered women’s syndrome, 375, 376

Animism, 467

Beard, Mary Ritter, 158

Anorexia nervosa, 81

Beauty

Anthony, Susan B., 189, 190

business of, 507

Antiretroviral (ART) treatment, 83, 85

commercials, 526 – 528

Antislavery movement, 188

messages in magazines, 503 – 504

Arab Middle East, 249 – 251 Arab Spring, 248 – 250 Arapesh tribe, New Guinea, 39, 48 Argentina, 235, 237

television, 524 – 525, 535 – 536, 539 Beijing, Fourth World Conference on Women (FWCW), 199 – 202, 204, 235, 252 and Beijing Platform of Action, 200

Aristotle, Politics, 163

Bem, Sandra, 107, 108

Arzner, Dorothy, 536

Benevolent sexism, 30, 458, 577

Asexuality, 58 – 59

Best-interest-of-the-child (BICS) standard, 328

Asia see also Bangladesh; China; India; Indonesia;

Beyoncé, 262, 515

Japan; Vietnam

Biden, Joe, 591 – 592

gender gap, education, 465 – 466

Bigelow, Kathryn, 536

women and religion, 470 – 471

Bisexual, 7, 59, 212, 361

Asian American and Pacific Islanders (AAPI), 273, 322 – 324, 361 – 362

Black Lives Matter movement, 90 Black womanhood, ideology of, 316

cultural diversity, 322 – 323

Blended family, 292, 331

education, challenging subordination, 323 – 324

Blue-collar men, 412 – 413

722 Index Blue-collar women, 412 Blumer, Herbert, 13, 14 Bly, Robert, 377 Body studies, 80, 524 Bona Fide Occupational qualification (BFOQ), 544 Bonobos, female, 41, 42, 70 “Boomerang kids,” 313 Boserup, Ester, 201 Bostock v. Clayton County, 562 Bourgeoisie, 11, 432 Boy Scouts of America (BSA), 119 Boys see also masculinity adolescence, 63, 121, 137 aggression, 45 – 46 attention deficit attention disorder (ADHD), 452 educational crisis, 451 – 452 elementary and middle school, 437 games, 120 – 121 gender socialization, 103 interpersonal relations, 353 kindergarten and early childhood education, 434 – 435 and mathematics, 438 – 439 names, 134 in single-gender classrooms, 457 social cognitive theory, 109 violence on television, 519 Brain, sex and gender differences, 43 – 44 Brazil, 235, 236, 237 Brexit, 94 Broadcast journalism, 534 Broken heart syndrome (BHS), 94 Browning, Elizabeth Barrett, 261 Brundtland, Grö Harlem, 254 Buddhism, 469, 471 – 472 Bugis of Indonesia, 60 – 61 Bulimia, 81 Bullying, 437 – 438, 460 – 462 Burk, Tarana, 34, 540 Burka Avenger (TV series), 251 Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, 561 Bush, George H.W., 347, 555, 572 Bush, George W., 347, 548 – 549, 561, 574, 576 Business, women in, 422 – 425 corporate deserters, 425 – 426 Japan, 148 social business, 430 types of business, 423 – 424 work-life balance, 424 – 425

C Caballerismo, 320 Cagney and Lacey (TV drama), 525 Capitalism, 11, 23, 240, 253, 275 Chinese-style state capitalism, 218, 219 human capital model, 416 – 417 and neoliberal globalization, 201, 218, 225 Caregiving see also Affordable Care Act (ACA); employment; labor force, women in; unpaid work; women; work–life balance child care issues, 184, 309 – 310, 329, 397 China, 217 – 218 eldercare, 392 – 393 Carter, Jimmy, 356, 576 Cartoons, 124 – 125 Catholicism, 169, 492 – 493 see also Roman Catholic Church and abortion, 236, 486 in Latin America, 234, 235, 236 nuns, 493, 486, 493 Second Vatican Council (1963–1965), 492 sexual abuse and priests, 486 – 487 women’s ordination, 488, 491 – 494 Catt, Carrie Chapman, 190 CEDAW (Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women), 199 Census Bureau, U.S., 279, 280, 292, 319, 330, 395, 590 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 251 Central Asia, 207, 245 – 246, 486 Chand, Dutee, 47 Child care issues, 309 – 310, 329, 397 World War II, 184, 309 Child Health Insurance Program (CHIP), 140 Child support, 329 – 331, 367, 594 Childbirth, men at, 366 Children see also child care issues; education; schools and adoption, 338 best-interest-of-the-child (BICS) standard, 328 career achievement for married women with children, 398 childcare arrangements see child care issues and childlessness, 304 commercials aimed at, 527 – 528 custody, 327 – 328 employed women, children of, 308 – 311 gender socialization, 113 kindergarten and early childhood education, 434 – 436

Index  723 names, 133 – 134 “suffering child” myth, 308, 311 time with employed parents, 310 TV programs, 125 and U.S. history, 184 Chimpanzees, 41, 70 China Beijing, Fourth World Conference on Women (FWCW), 199 – 202, 204, 235, 252 FWCW, Platform of Action, 200 – 201 Buddhism, 469 caregiving and security, 217 – 218 Chinese Communist Party (CCP), 214 Confucianism, 214, 215, 471, 490 footbinding, 215 legacy of Beijing, personal perspective, 200 – 201 Marriage Law (1950), 215 neoliberal globalization, gender paradox, 218 – 219 one-child policy, 216 – 218 reform and Chinese family, 214 – 216 son preference, 216 – 218 state capitalism, 219 women and the state, 218 – 219 women’s paid labor, 218 Chivalry hypothesis, 567 Chodorow, Nancy, 51, 353 Christian feminism, 28 – 29 Christian Science Church, 494 Christianity, 480 – 488 American Catholics, 486 American Christians, 484 – 488 American Protestants, 484 Bible and patriarchy, 480 – 484 biblical men, 482 biblical women, progressive views, 483 – 484

Chromosomes, 45 Chuang Tzu, 470 – 471 Cinderella story, 259 Cisgender, 52, 62, 64, 82 – 84 Civil death, 174 Civil Rights Movement, 192 Civil Society Organizations (CSOs), 201 Civil War, 178, 181, 189 Classical societies education, 432 Greece, 161 – 165 Rome, 165 – 166 Clerical workers, 170, 390 Climate change, 26 Clinton, Bill, 574 – 575, 576, 579, 583 Clinton, Hillary Rodham, 31 – 33, 34, 142, 197, 200, 542, 576, 579, 581 – 582, 583, 587, 592 – 593 Clothing, 114, 505 sexualization, 115 – 116 Coeducation, 458 Cofer, Judith Ortiz, 320 Cognitive biology, 42 – 43, 44 Cognitive development theory, 105 – 108 Cohabitation, 65, 215, 277, 289 – 293, 306, 319 African Americans, 314 and divorce, 325, 326, 331 and masculinity, 363, 364 same sex marriage, 336 single-parent households, 333 Colleges see also higher education admissions, 459 – 460 enrollment in, 453 entrance exams, 452 – 453 gender parity, 459 – 460

Paul’s writings, 481 Catholicism, 169, 492 – 493 clergy women as leaders, 494 – 495 and colonization, 172 – 173 gender roles and American Christians, 484 – 488 Gospels, 173, 483 Middle Ages, 167 – 168 Mormon women, 485 – 486 New Christian Right (NCR), 594 and politics, 486 Protestantism, 169, 493 – 494 roots, 467 scandal and sexual abuse, Catholic priests, 486 – 488

gendered classrooms, 445 major, 448 – 449 public, 459 – 460 Collins, Patricia Hill, 18, 19, 315 Colonialism, 27, 202, 204, 208, 210 Comedy, television, 522 – 523 Commercials, television, 526 – 528 Commission on the Status of Women United Nations, 199 United States, 191, 192 Common law states, 557 see also English Common Law Community property, 557, 595 Commuter marriage, 295 see also military spouses

724 Index Companionate marriage, 260, 261, 283 Comparable worth, 403, 545 – 546 Comparative gender research see global perspectives Compensatory history, 159 Computer-Mediated Communication (CMC), 143, 144, 146, 154 Conflict theory, 11 – 13 contemporary, 11 – 12 marriage and family, 281 and motherhood, 303 – 304 oppression, 13 sociological theory, 417 Confucianism, 214, 215, 471, 490 Consensual unions, 319, 320 Continuing socialization, 98, 108, 367, 397 Contribution history, 159 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), 199 Coontz, Stephanie, 281, 294 Coronary heart disease (CHD), 79, 80, 94 Corporate social responsibility (CSR), 19, 231, 430 Corporate women, 399, 418 – 419, 421 Costa Rica, 235, 237 Countermodernization, Islamization as, 245 – 249 Courts, 548 – 549, 550 and domestic abuse, 558 – 559 COVID-19 pandemic, 86, 88 – 91 and election 2020, 591 and gender, 88 – 89 and protest movements, 90 – 91 race and gender, 89 – 90 recession, 404 social (physical) distancing and COVID-19, 88 – 89, 91

Cubanidad, 321, 322 Cultural diversity adaptation, 99 Asian American and Pacific Islander families, 322 – 323 and gender socialization, 97 – 102 social class and race, intersecting, 99 – 102 Cultural feminism, 25 Cultural genocide, 324, 325 Cultural lenses, 107 – 108 Culture and aggression, 46 – 47 biology and culture, 70, 71, 91 casual sex culture, 266, 267 cultural feminism, 25 – 27 dual-culture model, language patterns, 150 – 151 femininity and masculinity standards, 59, 98 fraternity, 373 gender schemas, 107 – 108 gender socialization and cultural diversity, 97 – 102 health, 505 hypermasculinity, 348, 351, 357 Islamic culture, 251 Latin America culture, 234 motherhood, 302 office culture, 227, 233 popular culture, 262, 272, 452, 501, 516, 517 rock culture, 515, 518 and socialization, 98 – 99 teen culture, 358 Western culture, 161 Culture-bound syndromes, 81 Cyberfeminism, 27 – 28 Cyrus, Miley, 515

Cowboys and toughness norm, 355 Credentialism, 431 Crenshaw, Kimberlé, 18, 20 Crete, Minoan, 162, 472 Crime, 565 – 570 economics, 566 – 567 female leniency view, 567 – 568 gender socialization, 566 intersection of race and gender, 568 sex work, 568 – 569 Criminal justice, 567 – 570 Cuban American families, 321 – 322

D Dancing, 16 and gendered scrips, 17 Darwin, Charles, 38, 40 feminist Darwinians, 42 Date rape, 373, 461 Daughters gender socialization, 119 – 120 and preference for sons, 111, 216 raising, 101 Davids, Sharice, 325 Davis, Elizabeth, The First Sex, 469

Index  725 Daytime television, 523 – 528 De Beauvoir, Simone, The Second Sex, 300 De Condorcet, Marquis, 433 De Gouges, Olympe, 187 De Lambert, Madame, 433 Declaration of Sentiments (Seneca Falls Convention), 188 – 189 Declaration of the Rights of Man (1789), 187 Declaration of the Rights of Woman (1791), 187 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), 336, 339, 363 Democratic National Committee (DNC), 587 Democratic Party, 572, 581, 582 Demographic crises, Japan, 227 – 228 Demographics, demography, 270 see also intersectionality career achievement for married women with children, 398, 400 COVID-19, 88, 404 divorce, 405 education gap, developing world, 441 female labor force, 183, 226, 404 – 406, 412, 422 health, 73, 88 homophobia, 361 – 362 intersectionality, 270, 573 love, 260 – 261 marriage, 276, 292 motherhood, 304 selecting mates and partners, 260 voting, 571, 589 wage gap, 397, 404, 413, 414 Denmark, 253 Dependency, housewives, 286, 395, 515 Desert Storm, 347 Developing world, 85, 197 see also Global South Development, gender age, 46 biology, sexuality, and health, 38 – 96 brain, 43, 44 cognitive development theory, 105 – 107, 118 hormones, 45 parenthood, 301, 302, 307, 310, 311, 337 – 338 psychosexual development, 49, 50, 62 Social Cognitive Theory, 108 social development, 117 socialization process, 97 – 129 Development, global, 197 – 206

China, 217 development programs, 197 gender gap in human development, India, 221 – 222 and globalization, 198, 201 – 206 globalization and women, 201 – 206 India, 222 Latin America, 236 – 237 Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), 198 Muslim world, 244 Nordic nations, 253, 297 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), 198, 466 and UN initiatives, 198 – 201 underdevelopment, in Latin America, 237 and women see Women and Development (WAD) Different spheres, 5, 543 Direct-to-consumer (DTC) advertising, 505, 527 Discrimination see also intersectionality African American, 317 against men in education, alleged, 463 – 464 discrimination against women, 24, 188, 190 – 191, 198, 199 dominant men, 20 feminism, 237 gender discrimination, 101, 130, 329, 392, 403, 419, 423 – 424, 445, 449 Latinos, 100 LGBTQ, 58, 82, 337, 339, 363 racial discrimination, 101 – 102, 183, 320, 378, 410, 441 South Asia, 60 workplace and employment, 226, 227, 242, 401 – 402, 544 Disorder of sex development (DSD), 52 Divorce, 325 – 331 age factors, 326 – 327 child support, 330 – 331 and children, 98, 284, 330, 366 child care, 329 coparenting, 328 – 329 custody, 327 – 328 joint custody, 328 common law states, 557 community property states, 558 division of assets, 330 employment status, 327 and fatherhood, 366 – 367

726 Index gender and adjustment in, 326 – 327 gender beliefs and emotional well-being, 326 impact of gendered law on, 327 – 331 law and public policy, 557 mediation, 330 and poverty, 329 and remarriage, 331 DNA, 43, 70 Doe v. Bolton, 560 Doing difference, 15 Doing gender, 14 – 15 social constructionism (SC), 16 – 17 symbolic interaction (SI), 16 Dolls, 114 – 116 see also Barbie doll Domestic and intimate partner violence, 374 – 375, 428 Domestic matriarchy, Japan, 229 Domestic relations and law, 556 – 559 Domestic servitude, 6 Domestic terrorism, 563, 564 Dominance model, language patterns, 151 – 152, 153 Double standard advertising, 507 affairs, 290 men at childbirth, 366 romantic relationships, 268 sexual double standard (SDS), 65 – 68 suffrage movement, 190 Douglas, Susan, 302 Drama, gender profiles in, 520 – 521 Dramaturgy, 14 study drugs, 86 Drugs and alcohol, 86 and rape, 373 study drugs, and opioids, 86 – 87 Dual earners, 104, 286 – 287, 308 – 313 children of employed women, 308 – 311 primary socialization, 310, 312 work–life balance, 391 Dual-culture model, language patterns, 150 – 151, 153 Durkheim, Emile, 370 The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life, 468 – 469 E Eating disorders, 81 – 82 Ecofeminism, 25 – 26 Economic factors 566 – 567 see also social class

capitalism, 23, 193, 219, 416 conflict theory, 281 COVID-19, 89, 404 divorce, 326 – 332, 557 economic trends and the family, 400 education, 431, 433, 441 – 442 Election 2012, 580 – 581 Election 2020, 591 – 592 fatherhood, 364 – 365 housewives, 557 Great Depression, 346, 404 marriage, 336 marriage gap, 274 – 275, 279 rural life, 202 single-parent household, 333 success, 354, 377 unpaid work, 393 – 394 wage gap, 413 women in the labor force, 405 Ecumenism, 497 Education see also schools closing gender gap in the Global South, 465 – 466 crisis in, comparison of genders, 451 – 455 assessing boys, 452 gender discrimination, 445–446, 449, 464, 465 college admissions, 459 – 460, 463 legalized, 459 gender gap, 270, 431 closing, 465, 466 global perspectives, 216, 223, 228, 231, 241 high school, 440, 445 higher education, 448, 451, 452, 453, 455, 456 mathematics see gender gap and STEM and policy, 180 SAT, 440 STEM subjects see gender gap and STEM tenure, 450 gender issues, 451 – 460 educational crisis, 451 – 455 educational journey, 433 – 451 hidden curriculum, 443 – 444 tracking, gendered, 442 – 443 hidden curriculum, gender in, 443 higher see higher education Israel, 241 – 242 kindergarten and early childhood education, 434 – 436 Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), 438

Index  727 Progressive Education, 433 religious schools, 242 shortchanged students, 451 – 455 single-gender, 456 – 458 social climate and single-gender education, 458 stereotypes, 437 – 438 success, assessing, 465 – 466 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), 466 Title IX of Education Amendments Act 1972, 462 – 465 athletics, 550 benefits to females, 550 – 552 courts, 550 and politics, 463 – 465 vocational, 442 – 443 women’s achievement, 6 Egalitarianism attitudes, 29 and conflict theory, 281 LGBTQ families 338 – 339 marriage and family, 297 – 298 sociobiology, 42 Scandinavia, 297 Egypt, 251 Eisler, Riane, 162, 425, 467, 468, 472 Eldercare, 392 – 393 Elections, U.S., 578 – 581 election 2008, 30 – 31 Clinton, Hillary, 579 McCain, John, 579 Obama, Barack, 579 Palin, Sarah, 579 primary election, 579 election 2012, 580 Democratic messages to women, 581 Obama, Barack, 580 Republican messages to women, 580 Romney, Mitt, 580 election 2016, 581 – 588 Clinton, Hillary, 581, 582, 583 gender and electability, 582 outright sexism, 585 pivotal intersections, 581 referendum on gender, 581 – 588 socially constructed electability, 582 Trump, Donald, 581, 582, 584 election 2018, midterm, 588 – 590 election of 2020, 590 – 592 Biden, Joe, 592 choice of Vice President, 591 – 592

electability, 591 Harris, Kamala, 590, 592 and intersectionality, 591 – 592 Trump, Donald, 592 gender and electability, 582 socially constructing electability, 582 Electra complex, 50 Elementary and middle school, 436 – 437 Elite professions, 409 Emotional labor, 406, 408, 409 Emotions and masculinity norms, 355 – 359 nonverbal communication, 139 – 141 Empirical data, 8 Employment see also labor force, women in; unpaid work; wage gap blue-collar jobs, 354, 403, 404, 532 men, 512 – 513, 532 women, 412, 413, 591 Bona Fide Occupational Qualification (BFOQ), 544 children of employed women, 308 – 311 conflict theory, 211 – 212 and divorce, 327 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 549 and family, 208, 284, 396, 398 child care, 301, 308, 310 domestic duties, 208 economic trends, 400 feminism, 597 rural families, 202 World War II, 184 family-supportive policies, 365 – 366 gender and unemployment, 403 – 405 COVID-19, 404 gender appropriate, 14 gender discrimination, 392, 402, 403, 418, 419, 421, 424 gender gap, 198, 234, 242, 276, 396, 406, 416, 417, 421, 455 earnings, 12, 453, 455 gendered institutions, 395 – 405 gendered occupations, 354 gender-typing in occupational distribution, 406 – 418 glass escalator, 408 – 409 ideal worker norm, 399 influence of family on workplace, 396 – 400 pink-collar jobs, 390, 404, 412, 413, 450 time with employed parents, 310

728 Index unpaid work, 89, 201, 205, 255, 285, 288, 310, 387, 392, 393 – 395, 396, 410 Victorian myths, 389 – 390 vocational education, 442 – 443 war and jobs, 390 – 391 white-collar jobs, 176, 411 – 412, 415, 532 work–family spillover, 401, 416 Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), 545 Empowerment and feminism, 17, 29 for health, 95 – 96 microcredit, 428 – 429 Empty-nest syndrome, 313, 368 End point fallacy, 13, 57, 130 Engels, Friedrich, 11, 214 England and Christianity, 167, 169 English Common Law, 133, 174, 175, 375 Renaissance, 169 – 170 suffrage movement, 187 – 188, 190 Enlightenment, 432 – 433 Entertainment industry, 125 Entrepreneurs, women as, 427 – 429 Epigenetics, 43 Episcopal Church, 491, 493 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), 403, 549 Equal Employment Opportunity Law (EEOL), 226 Equal pay, 402 Equal Pay Act (EPA), 545, 546 Equal Rights Amendment (ERA), 191, 195, 226, 593 – 596 ERA coalition, 595 – 597 interpretation issues, 594 – 595 military service, 595 – 596 New Christian Right (NCR), 594 ratification, 23, 594, 596 Equitable distribution laws, 557 ERA see Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) Essentialism, 25, 56 – 57 Estrogen, 45 – 46, 48, 56, 78 – 79 Ethnicity see also intersectionality; race and gender selecting marriage mates and partners 273 on television, 521 – 522 Eurocentrism, 517 Evolutionary theory, 40, 42 see also nature and nurture debate Expressive role, 10, 239 Extramarital relationships (EMR), 288 – 290 Eye contact, 139 – 141

F Facial expressions and eye contact, 139 – 141 Fair Pay Act (FPA), 545 False consciousness, 489 Family see also fatherhood; housewives; husbands; marriage; motherhood; parenthood and parenting; wives African Americans, 314 – 316 educational expectations, 101 female independence, 101 intersectionality, 102 racial pride, 101 as agents of socialization, 111 – 120 Asian Americans, 100 arranged marriages, 100 gender roles, 100 blended, 292, 331 career achievement, 398 conflict theory, 12, 281 Cuban American, 321 – 322 defined, 279 dual earner, 286, 416 economic trends, impact of, 400 – 401 extended, 279 family decline, alleged, 284 family of orientation, 396, 397 family of procreation, 396 – 397 family values debate, 283 – 285 feminist perspectives, 21, 281 – 282 functionalism, 303 gender parity, 111 – 112 gender preferences for children, 111 gender roles, 276 – 290 gender-typing prior to birth, 112 – 113 global perspectives China, 214 – 218 India, 222 Israel, 241 Japan, 230 – 234 Latin America, 235 Russia, 208 – 210 homemaker see homemaker housewives see housewives housework see housework influence of family on workplace, 396 – 400 in Judaism, 478 Latino/as, 100 Catholicism, 100 familism, 100 LGBTQ, 335 – 343

Index  729 adoption, 338 egalitarianism, 338 – 339 emerging families, 341 gay fathers, 339 – 341 gendering, 336 – 338 lesbian mothers, 339 trans families, 342 parenting, 337 Mexican Americans, 287, 319 – 321 and multiculturalism see multiculturalism and families Native Americans, 324 – 325 nuclear family, 279 – 280, 283, 308 Puerto Rican, 319 – 320 shifting work, 288 and single life, 292 – 293 single-parent see single-parent families social constructionism (SC), 282 – 283 subfamilies, 279 symbolic interaction (SI), 282 – 283 theoretical perspectives, 279 – 285 voluntary childlessness, 304 Familism, 100, 318 – 321, 337 Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), 401 Family economics, 557 – 558 Farrakhan, Louis, 378 Fatherhood, 306 – 308 see also American Association of University Women (AAUW); motherhood breadwinner role, 306 and children’s development, 307 – 308 and divorce, 366 – 367 father–child bond, 48 gay fathers, 339 – 341 images of, 364 – 365 “involved-father” model, 365 Japan, 229 – 230 and masculinity, 363 – 367 men at childbirth, 366 new fathers, 307 race and ethnicity, 365 and single-parent household, 334 – 335 socialization, 364 – 365 traditional, 307 – 308 Fatherhood mandate, 308 Federal Works Agency, 184 Female advantage in evolution, 69 – 70 nonverbal communication, 142 – 143 Female genital mutilation (FGM), North Africa, 251 – 253

Female power, Rome, 165 – 166 Female register, 136 – 137 Females see also daughters, raising; femininity; feminism; girls; males; motherhood; wives; women Feminist sociological theory, 17 – 18 Femininity, feminine see also daughters; feminism; masculinity acting out, 121 African Americans, 101 antifeminine norm, 352 – 353, 355, 356 – 357, 444 biologically-based beliefs, 40 and bullying, 461 and Hillary Clinton, 31 and crime, 568 cultural standards, 59, 98 and dance, 16 and distinguishing sex and gender, 6 – 7 domestic, 175 fear of, 92 ideal, 176 linguistic, 148, 149, 154 media representations, 503, 506, 538, 539 and menopause, 79 and military service, 348 in Mormon women, 485 normative, 149 norms, 363, 371 “quasi-femininity” of girls, 123 and schools, 122 in sport, 538 traditional views/stereotypes, 147, 361, 362, 363, 497 see also stereotypes challenging, 126 – 127 Victorian, 176 white middle-class standards, 102 Feminism, 21 – 29 see also women’s movements Christian, 28 – 29 cultural, 25 cyberfeminism, 27 – 28 defined, 21, 31 ecofeminism, 25 – 26 emerging feminisms, 27 – 28 family, feminist perspectives, 21 fourth wave, 194 – 195 and Freud, 50 global, 26 – 27 individual countries India, 224

730 Index Israel, 242 – 244 Japan, 233 – 234 Latin America, 237 – 238 Russia, 212 – 214 and Islam, 473 – 474 liberal, 22 – 23, 24, 36 marriage and family, 21, 281 – 282, 305 “matrix of oppression” in feminist theory, 18 movements with feminist solidarity, 36 and political climate, 32 – 33 portrayals of, 29 – 30 postmodern images, 515 progress, 33 psychoanalytic, 50 – 51 radical, 24 – 25 rejection of, by men’s movements, 377 – 380 second wave, 24, 36, 191 socialist, 23, 25 sociological theory, 17 – 18 support for goals, 21st century, 596 – 597 support by men’s movements, 380 – 382 third wave, 193 – 194 values, 305 white, liberal feminism seen as, 23 and women’s movements, 21 – 22, 24, 191, 193 – 195 as feminist success stories, 33 – 36 Feminist theology, 498 – 500 Feminization of aging, 74 Feminization of poverty, 19, 330, 570 Femvertising, 508 Ferraro, Geraldine, 592 Fetal alcohol spectrum disorders (FASD), 86 Feudalism, 166, 168 – 169 FGM see female genital mutilation (FGM) Fictive kin, 101, 315 Film, 508 – 513

First wave feminism, 190 Five Year Plans (FYPs), India, 222 – 223 Floyd, George, 592 Footbinding, 215 Fourteenth Amendment, 403 Equal Protection Clause, 456 Fourth World Conference on Women (FWCW), Beijing, 199 – 200, 201, 204, 235, 252 Fraternity culture, 373 French Revolution, 187 Freud, Sigmund, 49 – 51, 65, 92, 102 Friedan, Betty, The Feminine Mystique, 191, 502 Friends with Benefits Relationships (FWBRs), 264, 267 Friendship, 261 – 264 distinguishing from love, 262 language of, 138 – 139 and lovers, 261 – 264 other-gender friends, 264 same-gender friends, 263 Functionalism and conflict theory, 11 and education, 431 and human capital model, 417 marriage and family, 280, 281, 303 social change, bias against, 13 sociological perspectives, 8 – 9, 10 and war, 346 FWCW (Fourth World Conference on Women), 199 – 200, 201, 204, 235

aging females and ageless males, 511 gender parity and film portrayal, 511 – 512 good and bad women, 509 James Bond, 511 masculinity, images of, 345 pairing sex and violence, 510 romantic storylines and myths, 259 – 260 screen history, 508 – 509 sexual violence, 376, 509 – 510 on television, 536 – 537 Finland, 253

Gates, Bill, Microsoft, 349 Gay men, 59, 339, 362 – 363 see also sexual orientation as fathers, 339 – 341 men having sex with men (MSM), 83 – 84 Gay rights, 363, 381, 573 Gender see also gender development; gender inclusiveness; gender roles ambiguous, 52 and class see social class (SES) cohabitation, 290 – 292

G Game of Thrones (GoT) (TV), 520 Games, 120 – 122 Gandhi, Indira, 221 Gandhi, Mahatma, 221 Garment industry, Bangladesh, 202 – 204

Index  731 comparative research, 208, 218, 227 defined, 6 distinguished from sex, 6 and divorce, 326 – 327 doing, 14 – 15 differences, 289, 291, 293 discrimination, 29, 101, 130, 329, 488, 551, 585, 594 against men, 463 – 464 education, 445–446, 449, 464, 465 college admissions, 459 – 460, 463 legalized, 459 employment, 392, 402, 403, 418, 419, 421, 424 law and politics, 542, 546 e-cigarettes, 87 emergent marriages and alternative lifestyles, 293 – 294 marriage and family, 289 – 290 and family values debate, 283 – 285 and health, 71 – 96 and intersexuality, 52 and mortality, 71 – 75 and race see race and gender and sex, 6 – 7, 91 – 92 socialization see gender socialization sociology of see sociology of gender and unemployment, 403 – 405 Gender affirmation surgery (GAS), 53, 54, 55 Gender bias corporate success, 421 in divorce law, 557 domestic abuse, 558 education, 410, 443, 447, 450, 451 in law firms, 410 “old-style,” 422 in politics, 587 in research and health care, 93 – 95

Gender equality see also egalitarianism in college, 459 – 460 equal pay, 402 film portrayal and gender parity, 511 – 512 the future, 255 global patterns of inequity, 205 – 206 global perspectives, 255 and human development, 198 – 199 and love, 268 patterns of diversity and similarity, 205 – 206 spiritual, 167 Gender Equality Bureau (GEB), Japan, 226 – 227 Gender Equity in Education Act, 444, 464 Gender fluidity, 57, 59, 61 Gender gap communication, 146 – 147 crime, 566, 567 disease, 88, 94 education, 270, 431 closing, in Global South, 465, 466 global perspectives, 216, 223, 228, 231, 241 high school, 440, 445 higher education, 448, 451, 452, 453, 455, 456 mathematics see below SAT, 440 STEM see below tenure, 450 employment, 198, 234, 242, 276, 396, 406, 416, 417, 421, 455 earnings, 12, 453, 455 homophobia, 362 housework, 286, 307, 308 human development, 198 leadership, 443 morbidity, 83 mortality, 74, 83 politics, 235, 555, 571 – 573, 581, 591

Gender binary, 39, 126 Gender complementarity principle, 471 – 472 Native American, 325 Gender confirmation surgery (GCS), 53 Gender constancy, 105 Gender development, 38 – 96 biology and sexuality in, 38 – 71 nature and nurture debate, 39 – 51 sexuality, 51 – 69 socialization process, 97 – 129

voting behavior, 574, 587, 589 psychological distress, 92 social media use, 143 STEM, 411, 440, 457 mathematics, 438 – 442 substance abuse, 86 within-race, 322 women in business, 423 – 424 Gender Gap Index (GGI), 253 Gender history, 159, 160

732 Index Gender identity, 6, 15, 118, 126, 131, 338, 545 gender affirmation surgery (GAS), 53 – 55 gendered sexuality, 52 – 56, 59, 61, 62 masculine, 444, 461 socialization, 102, 103, 105 – 106 transgender identity, 55, 60 Gender inclusiveness, 7, 458, 463 language, 155, 157 Gender Inequality Index (GII), 198, 222 Gender neutral, neutrality divorce, 327, 330 education, 434 military, 346 socialization, 113, 127 – 129 toys, 117 – 118, 125 Gender parity see gender equality Gender–race–class linkage, 13, 18 – 19 Gender reveal, 113 Gender roles, 7, 276 – 290 and American Christians, 484 – 488 breadwinner, 306 changing through education, 431 – 466 economic trends influencing, 5 and love, 268 and Mead’s work, 40 families, 321 African American, 314 – 317 Asian American and Pacific Islander, 322 Cuban American, 321 – 322 Latino, 317 Mexican American, 320 – 321 Native American, 324 – 325 Puerto Rican, 319 role enhancement hypothesis, 391 theoretical perspectives on gender, marriage and family, 279 – 285 United States, 171 Victorian period, 176 Gender schema theory (GST), 106 – 108 and sex-typing, 108 Gender segregation, 15, 121 and education, 434, 447, 449, 458, 464 in employment, 181 – 182, 403, 419 global perspectives, 230, 242, 247 hierarchical, 407 historical perspectives, 171, 180 marriage and family, 260, 262, 324 Gender socialization

adaptation, 99 African American families, 100 – 101 Asian/Asian American families, 100 boys, 103 clergy women, benefits, 494 cognitive development theory, 105 – 108 colors, 97 crime, 566 culture and socialization, 98 – 99 in early childhood, 113 games, 120 – 122 gender identity, 105 – 106 gender schema theory (GST), 106 – 108 girls, 104 – 105 intersecting race and social class, 99 – 102 Latino families, 100 LGBTQ families, 360 mothers, fathers, sons and daughters, 119 – 120 Native American families, 324 – 325 parents as innovators, 128 peers and preferences, 120 – 122 raising daughters, 101 raising sons, 101 – 102 social cognitive theory, 108 – 110 social learning theory, 102 – 105 Gender stereotypes see stereotypes Gender-based violence (GBV), 371 – 376 domestic abuse, 374 – 375, 558 – 559 in film, 376, 509 – 510 India, 223, 224 – 225 intimate partner violence, 374 – 375 Latin America, 235 learned helplessness, 376 NGO Forum, Beijing, 200 rape, 371 – 374 reasons for victim remaining, 375 – 376 Russia, 211 – 212 sociological perspectives, 376 Gendered brains, 44 Gendered economy, 387, 394 Genderlects, 152 see also gender; intersectionality; race and gender; social class college enrollment, 453 conflict theory, 13 gender socialization, 99 – 102 high school, 441 – 442 historical perspectives, 159 – 160, 179 – 180 origins, 18

Index  733 on television, 531 – 532 women in employment, 415 Gender-typing, 48, 105 see also stereotypes clothing, 114 in employment, 406 – 418 historical perspectives, 180 in media, 533 and motherhood, 48 prior to birth, 112 – 113 socialization, 364 Gender-variance, 52 Generation gap, 194 Generation X, 29, 272, 293, 307, 312 see also baby boomer generation; millennials Genital altering surgeries, 53 G.I. Joe, 116 Gillibrand, Kirsten, 590 Ginsburg, Ruth Bader, 300, 576, 593 Girl Scouts of America (GSA), 119 Girls see also femininity; feminism; women elementary and middle school, 436 – 437 games, 121 gender socialization, 104 – 105 kindergarten and early childhood education, 434 learned aggressiveness, 45 – 46 libido, 50 names, 134 oppression of, 117 paradox of gender and mathematics, 438 – 439 “quasi-femininity” of, 123 in single-gender classrooms, 456 – 457 social cognitive theory, 109 vocational education, 442 Girl’s Life (GL) magazine, 505 – 506 Glass ceiling, 419 Glass cliff hypothesis, 420 Glass escalator, 408 – 409 Global Global Global Global

Education Monitoring (GEM), 466 feminism, 26 – 27 Gender Gap Index, Nicaragua, 235 perspectives, 197 – 255 see also Afghanistan; China; India; Iran; Israel; Japan; Latin America; Norway; Russia; Sweden development, 197 – 206 gender roles see gender roles global mortality patterns, 74 – 75 global patterns of inequity, 205 – 206

globalization and women, 201 – 206 and UN initiatives, 198 – 201 housework, 286 – 288 marriage see marriage and family Muslim world, 244 – 253 Nordic nations, 253 – 255 women and microenterprise, 427 – 430 Global South, 197, 201, 202, 205 – 206, 255 see also developing world gender gap, closing, 465 – 466 and global feminism, 26 – 27 microcredit, 428 unpaid work, 393 Global Vision International, 466 Globalization, 197, 275 see also Neoliberal Globalization (NLG) Bangladesh case study, 202 – 204 challenges of, 205 and development, 201 – 206 Latin America, 236 – 237 rural families, 202 and women see Women and Development (WAD) Gnosticism, 497 God goddess images, 468 – 469 language of, 496 – 498 rediscovering feminine face of, 468 – 472 Goffman, Erving, 14, 147, 506 Goodall, Jane, 41 Gorbachev, Mikhail, 206 Gordon, Beate Sirota, 225 – 226 Gospels, 173, 483 see also scripture Gnostic, 498 Gossip, 138 – 139 Gould, Lois, 127 Graduate school, 449 Grameen Bank, 427 – 428, 429 Grande, Ariana, 515 Great Depression (1929–1939), 181 – 182, 346, 353 Great Recession (2007–2009), 347, 354, 404 Greece, classical Athens, 163 – 164 oppression, 162 – 163 partnership, 161 – 162 Sparta, 164 – 165 GST see gender schema theory (GST)

734 Index Guerrilla Girls (GGs), 27 – 28 Gulf Wars, 347, 348 Gynocentrism, 468 Gynocratic egalitarianism, 324 H Haaland, Deb, 325 Hall, Edward, 141 Hall, Roberta, 445 Halo effect, 265 Hamm, Mia, 38 Harris, Barbara, 491 Harris, Kamala, 590, 592 Health and well-being, 71 – 96 see also COVID-19 pandemic androcentric medicine, 93 – 94 challenging gendered health risks, 92 emotional well-being and divorce, 326 employment of women, 391 – 392 empowerment, 95 – 96 feminization of health culture, 505 and gender beliefs, 326 gender bias in research and health care, 93 – 95 gendered health risks, 83 – 91 COVID-19, 88 – 91 drugs and alcohol, 86 HIV/AIDS, 83 – 85 smoking, 87 study drugs and opioids, 86 health trends, gendered, 91 – 95 heart disease, 94 – 95 India, 222 masculinity, 66 – 68, 92 measuring, 71 money and mental health, 394 – 395 morbidity figures and gender, 76 – 82 mortality figures and gender, 71 – 75 progress in women’s and men’s health, 95 – 96 women’s health movement, 93 Heart disease, 94 – 95 Hegemonic masculinity, 351 – 352 Helicopter parents, 311 – 313 Henley, Nancy, 151 Hermaphrodites, 52, 56 Heteronormativity, 15, 58, 360 Heterophobia, 361 Heterosexism, 342, 360, 381, 538 and women in employment, 415, 416 Hidden curriculum, gender in, 433, 443 – 444

Hierarchical segregation, women’s subordination in occupations, 407 High school, 438 – 445 athletics and masculinity, 444 – 445 gendered tracking, 442 – 443 hidden curriculum, gender in, 443 – 444 paradox of gender and mathematics, 438 – 441 social class, race and achievement, 441 – 442 vocational education, 442 – 443 Higher education, 445 – 451 academic women, 449 – 450 benefits of degree, 453, 454f, 455 college admissions, 459 – 460 college enrollment, 453 college entrance exams, 452 – 453 gender parity in college, 459 – 460 gendered college classrooms, 445 graduate school, 449 intersection of race, class and age, 453 majors and career paths, 446 – 449 student debt crisis, 455 tenure, 450 – 451 Hijra communities, India, 60 #HimToo movement, 379 Hinduism, 220, 469, 475 – 477 Vedic period, 477 Historical perspectives Bronze Age, 161 Civil War, 178, 181, 189 classical societies, 161 – 170 Greece, 161 – 165 Rome, 165 – 166 compensatory history, 159 contribution history, 159 the Enlightenment, 432 – 433 her-story, 160 intersection of gender, race and class, 159 – 160 masculinity, 345 – 351 inter-war years, 346 patriarchal standards, 345 – 346 Middle Ages, 166 – 170 placing women in history, 159 – 160 preindustrial society, 9 themes about women, 160 United States, 171 – 186 and children, 184 colonization and Christianity, Native Americans, 172 – 175 first American women, 171 – 173

Index  735 frontier life, 177 – 178 gender role balance, 171 Great Depression, 181 – 182 industrialization, 178 – 186 Japanese American women, 184 peacetime, 185 – 186 postwar era to the millennium, 186 – 195 Puritans, colonial era. 173 – 175 race and class, 179 – 180 tribal leadership, 172 union movement, 180 – 181 Victorians, 175 – 177 World War II, diversity and women’s labor, 182 – 186 woman-as-victim approach, 160 HIV/AIDS, 83 – 85 Hoagland, David, 35 Hollingworth, Leta, 48 Home, as workplace, 388 – 391 Homemaker, 12, 116 see also housewives; housework and employment patterns, 389, 390, 392, 395, 398, 404 and gendered language, 132, 154 globalization and women, 202, 210, 227, 228, 231 law and public policy, 557, 594, 595, 596 marriage and family, 280, 285, 286, 308, 328 and masculinity, 364, 380 and media, 502, 503, 508 – 509, 522, 523, 531 and religion, 476, 477 Homestead Act (1862), 178 Homogamy, 269, 270, 272 – 274, 276 racial, 272, 274 Homophobia, 360 – 363 demography, 361 – 362 gay men, 362 – 363 gay rights, 363 labels, 362 – 363 race, ethnicity and gender risks, 361 – 362 and toxic masculinity, 360 Homosexuality see also gay men; gay rights; LGBTQ; queer feminism; queer theory; sexual orientation race and ethnicity risks, 361 – 362 sex partners, 59 Hookups, 14, 63, 65, 66, 266, 267 Hormone replacement therapy (HRT), 78 – 79

risks and benefits, 79 – 80 Hormones, 5, 6, 42, 44 – 49, 78, 80, 95, 368, 439 Horney, Karen, 51 Household, defined, 279 see also homemaker; unpaid work conflict theory, 12 Housewives, 285 – 286 see also unpaid work dependency, 286, 395, 515 Housework, 286 – 288 conflict theory, 12 Human capital model, 416 – 417 Human development and gender equality, 198 – 199 Human Development Index (HDI), 198, 222, 253 Hurt Locker (film), 536 Husbands see also fatherhood; males; masculinity; men instrumental role, 9 – 10 Japan, 229 – 230 Hutchinson, Anne, 173 Hypermasculinity, 100, 234, 320, 345, 362 see also masculinity gender norms in education, 457 military culture, 348 tough guy, 355 – 356 I Iceland, 253 Identity politics, 193 Impression management, 14, 152 India, 220 – 225 feminism in, 224 Five Year Plans (FYPs), 222 – 223 Gandhis and Nehrus, 221 gender-based violence (GBV), 223, 224 – 225 gender gap in human development, 221 – 222 health and well-being, 222 hijra communities, 60 microfinance institutions (MFIs), 428 religious–political heritage, 220 social reform movement, 220 – 221 Individualism, 123, 193, 219, 345 American, 303, 371 Indonesia, 249, 250 multiple gender-identities, 60 – 61 Industrial Revolution, 188, 260 and employment patterns, 388 – 389 Industrialization, 178 – 186, 279 Great Depression, 181 – 182

736 Index race and class, 179 – 180 unions, 180 – 181 Infertility, 48 Informal sector, 222, 224, 394 see also unpaid work globalization, women and development, 202, 203, 205 and microcredit, 427 – 429 Instrumental role, 9 Intermarriage, 273 International Labour Organization, 569 International Ladies’ Garment Workers’ Union (ILGWU), 180 Interpersonal distance (IPD), 144 Intersectionality see also gender–race–class linkage backlash to, 19 – 20 defined, 4 demographics, 270 in feminist theory, 19 gender socialization, 102 higher education, 453 inclusive theology, 499 intersectional media and women’s voices, 538 – 539 race and gender backlash to, 19 – 20 and science, 20 shift in feminist theory, 19 third wave feminism, 193 voting, 573 – 574 Intersex, 52, 53, 54, 57 Intimate partner violence (IPV), 374 – 375 Iran, 247 Iraq, 347 – 348 Iroquois Confederation, 172, 471 Islam see also Muslim world Afghanistan, 245, 246, 248, 347 – 348 Arab Middle East, 249 – 251 female genital mutilation in North Africa, 251 – 253 feminist perspectives, 473 – 474 Iran, 247 Islamization as countermodernization, 245 – 249 media images of women as victims, 246 Qur’an, 244 – 245, 472, 473 reform, 248 roots of Islam, 467 Sharia law, 249 stereotypes, 244 – 245 veiling, 247 – 248, 250, 251

women and, 220, 224, 247 – 248, 250, 475 in women’s Arab Spring, 248 – 249 Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), 347 Islamism, 245 Islamization, 245 – 248 Israel, 238 – 244 see also Judaism ancient tribes, 467 education, 241 – 242 employment, 242 Equal Opportunity Law, 242 equality experiments, 238 – 241 families, 241 feminism, 242 – 244 kibbutzim, 238, 239, 240, 244 military conscription, 240 – 241 neoliberalism, 239 peace process, 243 – 244 J Japan, 225 – 234 Basic Law for a Gender Equal Society (BLGES), 226 demographic crises, 227 – 228 families and marriage, 228 – 230 and work, 230 – 231 work–family balance, 233 – 234 feminism, 233 – 234 Gender Equality Bureau, 226 – 227 gender equity and public policy, 226 – 228 language of Japanese women, 148 – 150 style and syntax, 148 management style, 425 – 426 manga, 149 – 150 marriage and family, 228 – 230 the occupation, 225 – 226 profile of Japanese woman, 231 – 233 Showa Constitution, 225 women in business, 148 – 149 work and family “nondilemma,” 230 – 231 Japanese American women, 184 – 186 Japanese Style Management (JSM), 426 Jesus Christ, 167, 379, 480 – 481, 483 – 484 Johnson, Virginia, 68 Jones, Mary Harris, 180 Joplin, Janis, 516 Judaism, 477 – 480 see also Israel anti-Semitism, 478 Conservative, 490

Index  737 contemporary images and practices, 479 – 480 family, 478 Hebrew Bible, 477 Orthodox, 241, 242, 479, 490 – 491 Reform, 490 religiosity, gender and leadership, 490 roots, 467 sexuality and social control, 478 spiritual equality of the genders, 167 Talmud, 467, 477, 495 Texts of Terror, 478 – 479 Torah, 479 Jung, Carl, 50 K Kabbalah, 497 Kane, Emily, 128 Kagan, Elena, 576 Kanter, Roseabeth Moss, 419 Katz, Jackson, 344 Kavanaugh–Blasey Ford controversy, 555 Kazakhstan, 207 Kennedy, John, 191 Khomeini, Ayatollah, 247 – 248 Kibbutzim, 238 – 240, 244 see also Israel agricultural, 239 child-centred approach, 239 Kimmel, Jimmy, 140 Kindergarten and early childhood education, 434 – 436 Kinsey, Alfred, 62 – 63, 65 Klobuchar, Amy, 590 Knights of Labor, 180 Ku Klux Klan, 380 Kuwait, 347 – 348 Kyrgyzstan, 207 L Labor force, women in, 405 – 427 see also employment; unpaid work affirmative action, 402 – 403 African Americans, 179, 315, 415 Asian women, 179 balancing multiple work and family roles, 391 – 395 blue-collar jobs, 412 career achievement for married women with children, 398

career versus job, 398 – 399 child care crisis, 397 China, 218 comparable worth, 403 corporate women and executive leadership, 418 – 422 demand for women’s labor, World War II, 182 – 183 economic trends, 400 – 401 and eldercare, 392 – 393 employer views, 399 – 400 equal pay, 402 family leave, 401 – 402 farm work, 389 – 390 feminine professions, 390, 407 men in, 408 – 409 functionalism, 10 gender gap, 404 – 405 gender-typing in occupational distribution, 406 – 418 heterosexism, 415, 416 home as workplace, 388 – 391 job ratios and gender beliefs, 413 Latinas, 406, 413 law and public policy, 401 – 403, 544 – 552 legal profession, 410 maternal employment, 308 – 311 medicine, 409 – 410 men in predominantly female professions, 408 – 409 microenterprise, 427 – 430 money and mental health, 394 – 395 professions, 409 – 411 race, 183 – 184, 415 socialization effects, 396 – 397 sociological theory, 417 sponsorship, 419 – 420 “suffering child” myth, 308, 311 and television, 522 – 523 titles and occupations, 131 – 132 unemployment, 403 – 405 COVID unemployment, 404, 405, 406 unpaid work, 393 – 395 wage gap, 413 – 418 and well-being, 391 – 392 white-collar women, 411 – 412 Lady Gaga, 516 Lagarde, Christine, 387

738 Index Language, 130 – 157 communication and social media, 143 – 148 dominance model, 151 – 152 dual-culture model, 150 – 151 of friendship, 138 – 139 gendered language patterns, 150 – 153 gendered usage, 135 – 139 generic myth, 131 – 135 of God, 496 – 498 gossip, 138 – 139 of Japanese women, 148 – 150 linguistic derogation, 134 – 135 linguistic markers, 150 linguistic sexism, 153 – 157 names, 133 – 134 nonverbal communication, 139 – 143 primary socialization, 152, 154 registers, 135 – 136 of religion, 495 – 496 social constructionist model, 152 – 153 style, 148 subcultures, 135, 149, 150 syntax, 148 titles and occupations, 131 – 132 Latin America, 234 – 238 see also Latina/o church, 236 family planning, 235 – 236 feminism, 237 – 238 gender divide, 234 – 236 globalization and development, 236 – 237 marianismo-machismo duality, 235 socialist feminism, 23 structural adjustment programs (SAPs), 236 underdevelopment, 237 Latina/o see also Latin America; machismo; marianismo boys’ games, 120 and COVID-19, 90 female historians, 159 feminisms, 28 gender socialization, 100 homophobia, 361 intermarriage, 273 marianismo-machismo duality, 320, 321 multiculturalism, 317 – 319 subcultures, 100, 319 Latter-Day Saints (LDS), 485 – 486 Law, 542 – 570 see also politics

affirmative action, 547 Affordable Care Act, 561 – 562 Bona Fide Occupational Qualification (BFOQ), 544 China, 215 comparable worth, 545 – 546 courts, 548 – 549, 550 crime, 565 – 570 disparate impact, 544 divorce, 98, 327 – 330, 557 domestic and intimate partner violence, 374 – 375 domestic relations, 556 – 559 employment, 401 – 403, 544 – 552 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 549 Equal Pay Act, 545 family economics, 557 – 558 gender discrimination, 542, 546 gendered rights and liabilities, 559 gender–race intersection, 547 gun control, 35 India, 220, 221, 223 Israel, 242 Japan, 225 Latin America, 236 Muslim world, 244, 247, 473, 474 reproductive rights, 559 – 565 Russia, 208, 211, 212 sexual harassment, 552 – 556 war, 346 Le Jeune, Father, 173 Leadership, executive, 418 – 422 see also business, women in; employment; labor force, women in advancement and recruitment, 419 – 420 agency and communion, 420 – 421 barriers to success, 418 business ownership, 422 – 425 clergy women as leaders, 494 – 495 corporate women, 418 – 422 diversity, 422 glass ceiling, 419 management styles, 425 – 426 performance and profit, 420 sexual harassment, 421 success factors, 421 – 422 “white male” model, eroding of, 422 Learned helplessness, 376 Lee, Ann, 493 – 494

Index  739 Law, women in, 410 Lerner, Gerda, 158 Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer community see LGBTQ Lesbians, 25, 59, 282, 338, 339, 416 see also gay men; homosexuality; homophobia; LGBTQ; sexual orientation LGBTQ (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer) 7, 14, 15, 28, 36, 52, 62, 82, 95, 122, 126, 129 bullying of, 460, 462 coming out, 340 – 341 and dance, 16 families, 279, 300, 335 – 343 adoption, 338 egalitarianism, 338 – 339 emerging, 341 fathers, 339 – 341 gendering, 336 – 338 mothers, 339 parenting, 118, 337, 339 – 343 gay rights, 363, 381 – 382, 573 and heterophobia, 361 and homophobia, 360 intersectional media and women’s voices, 538 Native Americans, 325 in Russia, 212 same-sex marriage, 335 – 336 Liberal feminism, 22 – 23, 24, 36 Liberation theology, 489, 498, 499 Life course, 76, 99, 108, 367 alternative lifestyles, 291, 293 balancing work and family, 392, 393 men and women at mid and later life, 368 – 371 Life expectancy rate (LER), 72 – 73 Lifestyle blogs, 506 Lincoln, Abraham, 344 Lindsey, Linda. L, 245, 270 China, 219, 471 globalization, gender equity, development, 201 – 206, 429 Japan, Japanese Americans 185, 226, 426 theory, 24, 57 Linguistic derogation, 134 – 135 Linguistic sexism, 130, 131, 153 – 157 cognition and self-esteem, 154 language change formal, 155

as gender success, 155 – 157 resistance to, 155 Living-apart-together (LAT), 293, 294 Long-distance relationships (LDR), 294 – 297 see also commuter marriage Lorber, Judith, 17 Love, 260 – 269 see also romantic relationships as blind, 265 defined, 261 – 262 at first sight, 265 and friendship, 261 – 264 distinguishing, 262 Friends with Benefits Relationships (FWBRs), 264, 267 and lovers, 261 – 264 same-gender friends, 263 gendered love and myths, 264 – 269 and hate, 267 linking with marriage, 260 – 261 selecting marriage mates and partners see marriage and family and gender roles, 268 Lowell Mill Girls, New England, 178, 180, 388 – 389 Luther, Martin, 169 – 170 Lutherans, 484, 491,493 – 494 Lutheran women, 493 Lynn, David, 103 M McCain, John, 579, 585 McCarthy, Melissa, 524 McCartney, Bill, 378 McGinn, Kathleen L., 311 Machismo, 234, 235, 318 – 321, 361, 363, 382 see also Latin America; marianismo Macro sociological perspective, 8 Madam Secretary (drama), 520 Madonna, 515 – 516 Magazines, 502 – 503 feminist oriented, 505 resisting images, 505 – 506 Mahus. of Tahiti, 59 – 60 Mail-order brides, 174 Male liberation, 380 Male register, 137 – 138 Males see boys; fatherhood; husbands; masculinity; men; sons

740 Index Management styles, gendered, 425 – 426 Manga, 149 – 150 Mao Tse Tung, 214 Marianismo, 234, 235, 318 – 321 see also Latin America; machismo Marriage see also daughters; divorce; family; fatherhood; husbands; love; motherhood; parenthood and parenting; sons African Americans, 275 – 276 class divide, 284 cohabitation, 289 – 292 commuter marriage, 295 companionate marriage, 260, 261, 283 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), 336 dual earners, 286 – 287 egalitarian marriage, 297 – 298 Scandinavia, 297 – 298 emergent marriages and alternative lifestyles, 290 – 298 extramarital relationships, 288 – 290 functionalism, 280 gap, 277 – 279 gender differences, infidelity 289 – 290 gender roles, 276 – 290 global perspectives China, 215 – 216 Japan, 228 – 230 Russia, 209 – 210 gradient, 269 – 275 homemaker see homemaker housewives see housewives housework see housework intermarriage, 273 interracial, 273 LGBTQ 335 – 343 same sex marriage, 335 – 336 linking marriage with love, 260 – 261 long-distance relationships (LDR), 294 – 297 linking love and marriage, 260 – 261 marital rape, 375 marital satisfaction, 63, 273, 282 – 283, 285, 286, 290, 296, 298, 301, 306, 308, 369 marriage squeeze, 275 – 276 military spouses, 295 multicultural variations, 287 – 288 reasons, 261 selecting mates and partners age factors, 270 – 272

attractiveness, 274 demographics, 270 ethnicity and gender, 273 older women and younger men, 272 race, 272 – 273 socioeconomic status (SES), 270, 273 – 274 sociological theory, 274 – 275 young adults, 269 social constructionism (SC), 282 – 283 shared partnership, 556 surname change at marriage, 133 symbolic interaction (SI), 282 – 283 theoretical perspectives on gender roles, 279 – 285 widowers, prospects for, 370 – 371 Marriage gradient, 269 – 275 Marx, Karl, 11, 214 Marxist theory, and socialist feminism, 23 Mary Magdalene, 483, 484 Mary Tyler Moore Show, 522 Masculine norms, 352 – 360, 371 aggression, 356 androcentrism, 6 antifeminine, 352 in education, 457 gendered occupations, 354 images to reject or accept, 359 – 360 intellectual success, 354 – 355 interpersonal relations, 352 – 353 mass shootings, 356 – 357 pornography, 358 sexual prowess, 357 – 358 and social media, 145 success, 353 – 354 tenderness, 359 toughness, 355 – 356 traditional, 370 Masculinity, 351 – 360 advertising 529 African Americans, 101 brutalized bodies, 349 – 350 challenging rigid gender roles, 126 – 127 cultural standards, 59, 98 distinguishing sex from gender, 6 – 7 election 2016, 584 and fatherhood, 363 – 367 health trends, 92 hegemonic, 351 – 352

Index  741 historical perspectives, 345 – 351 patriarchal standards, 345 – 346 and homophobic labels, 362 – 363 hypermasculinity, 100, 234, 320, 345, 355, 362 images of, 345 masculinist discourse, in Russia, 210 – 212 men at middle age and in later life, 367 – 371 men’s health, 92, 95 norms see masculine norms and primary socialization, 360, 364 retirement, effects of, 367 – 368 and schools, 122 sexual double standard (SDS), 66 – 68 sports, 349 – 351, 444 – 445 toxic, 380 – 381 Trump, 585 and violence see also gender-based violence (GBV) mass shootings, 356 – 357 war and soldiering, 346 – 349 war and soldiering, 346 – 349 white middle-class standards, 102 see also femininity; homophobia; machismo; men; sons Mass shootings, 356 – 357, 586 gun culture, 351 Masters, William, 68 Maternal instinct, 48 – 49, 52, 302 Mathematics, and gender, paradox of, 438 – 441 Matriarchy, 468 Matrilineal systems, 162, 324 Matrilocal systems, 324 MDA (Moms Demand Action), 35 Mead, Margaret, 3, 39 – 40, 48 Media, 501 – 541 changing for profit and social responsibility, 539 – 541 film, 508 – 513 intersectional media and women’s voices, 538 – 539 mass media industries, 533 – 534 men’s images in, 528 – 530 and portrayals of feminism, 29 – 30 music, 513 – 518 print, 502 – 508 representations of femininity, 503, 506, 538, 539 and sexism, 30, 33 and social change, 537 – 541 television, 518 – 528

Medicaid, 194, 329, 393, 560 Medicalization, 81 – 82 Medicine, women in, 409 – 410 Meir, Golda, 238, 244 Men see also boys; fathers; husbands; masculinity; men’s movements; sons African Americans, 378 alleged discrimination against, 463 – 464 Asian American, 68, 287, 361, 365 blue-collar jobs, 412 – 413 at childbirth, 366 of color, 20 and conflict theory, 13 and dance, 16 gay see gay men health and well-being HIV/AIDS, 83 and morbidity, 76 progress, 95 – 96 images in media, 528 – 530 in later life, 367 – 371 in love, 268 at midlife, 367 – 371 mythopoetic, 377 – 378 online, 144 – 145 perceptions of superiority, 344 – 345, 353 in predominantly female professions, 408 – 409 and social media, 145 – 146 widowers, 370 – 371 Menopause and HRT, 78 – 80 Men’s movements, 376 – 382 African American men, Million Man March, 378 future trends, 382 LGBTQ, 381 – 382 men’s rights movements (MRM), 379 – 380 mythopoetic men, 377 National Organization for Men Against Sexism, 380 – 381 Promise Keepers (PK), 378 – 379 rejection of feminism, 377 – 380 supportive of feminism, 380 – 382 and toxic masculinity issues, 380, 381 Menstruation, 77 #MeToo movement, 34 – 35, 66, 141, 194, 379, 421, 540, 553 Mexico City, U.N. Conference of Women, 199 Mexican American families, 320 – 321 Mezzo sociological perspective, 8, 14

742 Index Michaels, Meredith, 302 Micro sociological perspective, 8 Microcredit, 427 – 429 Microenterprise programs, 224, 246, 427 – 430 Microfinance institutions (MFIs), 428, 429, 430 Middle Ages, 166 – 170, 432 Christianity, 167 – 168 feudalism, 168 – 169 Reformation, 169 – 170 Renaissance, 169 – 170 witch hunts, 168 Midlife crisis, 368 – 369 Military femininity and service, 348 marriage and family, 295 schools, 461 – 462 spouses, 295 suicide, 246, 346, 348 – 349 Military spouses, 295 Mill, John Stuart, 4 The Subjection of Women, 3, 22 Millennials, 29, 33, 313 Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), 198 Million Man March (MMM), Washington (1995), 378 Minaj, Nicky, 515 Misandry, 379 Miscarriage, 304 Misogyny, 6, 29, 30, 33 – 35, 214, 233, 586 election campaign of 2016, 33, 34, 586, 588 in history, 160, 167, 168, 170 and masculinity, 357 and media, 538 and men’s rights movements, 379, 380 military forces, 346 and music, 514, 515 normalizing, 588 online, 357 of Plato, 162 and pornography, 358 race and gender, 517 and religion, 167, 474, 481, 495, 497, 498, 499 Mississippi University v. Hogan, 550 Modernization, 279 Momism, 302 – 303 Moms Demand Action (MDA), 35 Money, John, 56, 57

Monroe, Marilyn, 81 Montagu, Ashley, 69 Morbidity see also under men; women eating disorders, 81 – 82 and gender, 76 – 82 LGBTQ community, advocacy, 82 men’s issues, 76 morbidity rate, 71, 76, 82, 91 women’s issues, 76 – 80 Mormons, 485 – 486 Mortality and gender, 71 – 75 mortality rate, 71 – 73, 81, 83, 88, 92, 96, 222, 275 Mother-goddess, 469 Motherhood, 301 – 306 see also fatherhood conflict theory, 303 – 304 feminist perspectives, 305 functionalism, 303 gender socialization, 119 – 120 gendered politics, 577 – 578 hovering moms, 313 Japan, 228 lesbian mothers, 339 marriage and family, 287 – 288 “mother blame,” 302 – 303 mother–child bond, 48 nature and nurture debate, 48 – 49 and single-parent household, 333 – 334 stay-at-home mothers (SAHM), 302, 305, 309, 311 Motherhood mandate, 301, 302 – 303 challenging, 304 Motherhood mystique, 303 Mott, Lucretia, 188 Moynihan, Daniel/Moynihan Report, 316 Muhammad, Prophet, 250 Multiculturalism and families, 287 – 288, 313 – 325 African Americans, 314 – 316 Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) families, 322 – 324 Cuban Americans, 321 – 322 cultural diversity, 322 – 323 ideology of black womanhood, 316 Latino, 317 – 319 Mexican American, 320 – 321 Native American, 324 – 325 Puerto Rican, 319 – 320 risk factors, 316 – 317

Index  743 Mundugumor tribe, New Guinea, 39 Music, 513 – 518 gender ideology, 516 – 517 heavy metal, 517 MTV and music videos, 516 – 518 rap, 517 rock music, 514 Muslim world see also Islam Afghanistan, 245, 246, 248, 347 – 348 Arab Middle East, 249 – 251 North Africa Mythopoetic men, 377 – 378 N Nairobi, U.N. Conference on Women, 199 Najafizadeh, Mehrangiz, 205, 245, 570 and Azerbaijan, 207 Names, children’s, 133 – 134 Nammu (Sumerian goddess), 469 National American Women’s Suffrage Association, 190 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 452 National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), 550 – 551 National Organization for Men Against Sexism (NOMAS), 380 – 381, 382 National Organization of Women (NOW), 23, 191 – 192, 194, 542 National Right to Life Committee (NRLC), 563 National Welfare Rights Organization, 192 National Woman Suffrage Association (NWSA), 190 National Women’s Political Caucus (NWPC), 192 Native Americans feminisms, 28 gendered families, 324 – 325

personality traits, 39 politics of biology, 69 – 71 primates, 41 – 42 reframing the debate, 70 – 71 sociobiology, 40 – 41 Navy Seals, 348 Nefertiti, Queen, 250 Nehru, Jawaharlal, 221 Neoliberal Globalization (NLG), 197, 201, 203, 204, 255, 429, 430 gender paradox of, 218 – 219 Neoliberalism gender effects, 242 in Israel, 239 and microcredit, 429 and restructured economy, 222, 224 third wave feminism, 193 – 194 Neo-Nazis, 380 Netherlands, 253 Neurosexism, 44 New Christian Right (NCR), 486, 594 New Orleans Saints, 350 New York Radical Women (NYRW), 192, 193 NGO see nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) Nicaragua, 235 Nicholson, Linda, 195 Nineteenth Amendment, 190 – 191 NLG see Neoliberal Globalization (NLG) Nongovernmental organizations (NGOS), 26, 27, 93, 95, 542 see also Fourth World Conference on Women (FWCW), Beijing advocacy and activism, 198 – 204 in Afghanistan, 246 Copenhagen, U.N. Conference on Women, 199, 200 and development, 198 – 199

intermarriage, 273 two-spirit, 61 – 62 Natural selection, 41, 48 Nature and nurture debate, 39 – 51 age, 46 – 47 aggression, 45 – 46 cognitive biology, 42 – 43 female advantage in evolution, 69 – 70 hormones, 45 – 49 male and female brains, 43 – 44 motherhood, 48 – 49 neurosexism, 44

ERA coalition, 595 – 596 feminist, 464 in Latin America, 236 in Russia, 213 women and microenterprise, 427 women-centered, 233, 428 – 429 Nonverbal communication, 139 – 143 emotions, 139 – 141 facial expressions and eye contact, 139 – 141 female advantage, 142 – 143 touch and personal space, 141 – 142 Nordic nations, 253 – 255

744 Index Normlessness (anomie), 5 Norway, 253, 254, 297 NOW see National Organization of Women (NOW) Nuclear family, 279 – 280, 283 dual earners, 308 Nursing, 407, 408 O Obama, Barack, 30, 31, 32, 140, 347, 545, 548 – 549, 576, 579, 593 Obama, Michelle, 32 Obesity, in the U.S., 81 – 82 O’Connor, Sandra Day, 575 Oedipus complex, 50, 51 Office of War Information (OWI), 182, 183 Old Testament, 173, 479 Omar, Ilhan, 475 One-child policy, China 216, 217 – 218 Online sexual harassment, 28, 460 Opioids, 86 – 87 Oppression see also gender–race–class linkage; intersectionality categories of, 20, 21, 193 class, 11, 19, 23 conflict theory, 13 economic, 316 and feminism, 22, 24 of gay men, 363 gendered, 3, 4, 23 – 25 of girls, 117 and intersectionality, 102 in Iran, 247 in Islam, 250, 251, 473 in Marxism, 11 matrix of, 18, 20 multiple oppressions, 13, 18, 160 overlapping, 89 queer theory, 58 sexist, 21, 191 symbols or signs, 247, 250, 251 global perspectives, 207, 214 historical perspectives, 160 love and marriage, 281, 282 sociology of gender, 3, 6, 19, 21, 24, 25, 29 Orthodox Jewish Congregations in America, 490 – 491 P Page, Larry, Google, 349 Pagels, Elaine, 497 – 498 Paid family leave (PFL), 401

Pakistan, 60 Palin, Sarah, 31 – 32, 579, 592 Parenthood, film 523 Parenthood and parenting, 300 – 343 see also fatherhood; marriage and family; motherhood as crisis 301 dual earners, 308 – 313 employed parents, time with, 310 helicopter parents, 311 – 313 intrusion for autonomy, 312 – 313 LGBTQ, 118, 337 – 338 men 364, 366, 369 parents as innovators, 128 – 129 parents as partners, 365 – 366 race and, 364 – 365 relational, 365 single-parent families, 332 – 335 trans families, 342 – 343 transition, parenthood, 300 – 308 Partnerships, 59, 298 see also family; marriage and management styles, 425 – 426 in Minoan Crete 161 – 162 parents as partners, 365 – 366 and religion, 468 Pater familias, classical Rome, 165 Patriarchy see also religion in China, 214 defined, 6 and the family, 21 and history, 160 and housewife status, 285 – 286 patriarchal standards, 345 – 346 and radical feminism, 24 and rape, 223 and religion, 468 and sexism, 6 Paul, Alice, 190, 191 Pelosi, Nancy, 586 Perimenopause, 78 Personal space, 141 – 142 Personality traits, 39, 51 Peru, 235 Phelps, Michael, 47 Piaget, Jean, 105 Pink-collar jobs, 390, 404, 412, 413, 450 Plato, 163 The Republic, 162 Police shootings, 356 Politics see also law appointments, 575 – 576

Index  745 of biology, 69 – 71 and Christianity, 486 elections see elections, U.S. Equal Rights Amendment see Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) and feminism, 30 feminism and the political climate, 32 – 33 fertility, 209 gender gap, 235, 555, 571 – 573, 581, 591 voting behavior, 574, 587, 589 gendered, 570 – 593 appointments, 575 – 576 barriers and opportunities for female candidates, 576 – 578 beliefs about women’s roles, 577 issues, 573 motherhood and husbands, 577 – 578 political gender gap, 571, 572 – 573t political parties, 574 presidential voting patterns, 572 – 573 public office, 574 – 576 socialization factors, 577 structural barriers, 578 women’s electability, 583, 591 women in office, 574 – 575 identity politics, 193 intersectional voting, 573 – 574 parties, 574 Title IX of Education Amendments Act 1972, 463 – 465 Pope Francis, 487 Pornography, 358, 373 – 374 hard- and soft-core, 374 Postindustrial societies, 400 – 401 Potsdam Declaration (1945), 225 Poverty feminization of, 19, 330, 570 and neoliberal globalization (NLG), 197 – 198, 202 – 203 Preindustrial society, 9 Premarital/nonmarital sex, 64 see Friends with Benefits Relationships (FWBRs) and love, 266 Premenstrual Dysphoric Disorder (PMDD), 78 Premenstrual syndrome (PMS), 77 – 78 Primary socialization, 98, 110, 111, 122, 130 dual earners, 310, 312 language, 152, 154 and masculinity, 360, 364 theories of gender socialization, 102 – 105, 108 Primates (animal and human), 41 – 42, 48

Print media, 502 – 508 advertising, 503 – 508 articles, 503 beauty business, 507 fiction, 502 sexualization, 504 subliminal messages, 506 – 507 well-being, 505 Privilege, 19 Professions, women in, 22, 409 – 411 Proletariat, 11 Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), 438 Progressive Education, 433 Promise Keepers (PK), 378 – 379 Protestantism, 169, 493 – 494 Psychoanalysis, 49 – 51 psychoanalytic feminism, 50 – 51 Puerto Rican families, 319 – 320 Puritanism, 173, 259 Putin, Vladimir, 207, 209, 210, 211 Pythagoras, 163 Q Quakers, 493 Queer feminism, 28 Queer theory, 25, 58 Qur’an, 244 – 245, 467, 472 – 474, 490, 495 R Race and gender see also gender–race–class linkage black womanhood ideology, 316 COVID-19 pandemic, 89 – 90 crime, 568 fatherhood, 365 homophobia, 361 – 362 intersexuality black womanhood ideology, 316 law and public policy, 547 multiculturalism and family life, 316 – 317 music, 517 – 518 racial homogamy, 272, 274 selecting marriage mates and partners, 273 television, 521 – 522 white privilege, 351, 352 Racial discrimination see discrimination Racial quotas, 548 Racism, 13, 27, 30, 151, 192, 585, 586 challenging, 235 gendered, 91 and sexism, 190, 316, 321, 361, 409, 458, 554, 585 – 586, 587

746 Index systemic, 90 Radical feminism, 24 – 25 Rampage shootings see mass shootings; police shootings Rape and alcohol, 86 on college campus, 373 date rape, 373, 461 marital, 375 myths, 371 – 373 and pornography, 373 – 374 profile of rapist, 372 – 373 statistics, 371 – 372 Rational-legal authority, 543 RAVEN (Rape and Violence End Now), 381 Reagan, Ronald, 347, 423, 549, 571 – 572, 575, 578 Recessions, 404 see also Great Depression Recidivism, 566 Reformation, 169 – 170 Registers, 135 – 136 Reimer, David, 56, 57 Relational aggression, 45 – 46 Religion, 467 – 500 Africa, 470 Asia, 470 – 471 Buddhism see Buddhism Christianity see Christianity Confucianism, 490 feminine face of God, 468 – 472 fundamentalism, 200, 244 – 245 gender and religious orientation, 488 – 489 gender complementarity principle, 471 – 472 goddess as creator, 470 Hinduism see Hinduism inclusive theology, 495 – 500 Islam see Islam; Muslim world Judaism see Judaism language of, 495 – 496 liberation theology, 489, 498, 499 ordination, 489 – 494 and patriarchy, 468 sociological perspectives, 488 – 489 women’s religious roles, 469 Remarriage, 99, 271, 334, 370, 371, 477 marriage–divorce–remarriage pattern, 331 and race, 331 rates of, 278, 331 widows, 215, 220

Renaissance, 166, 169 – 170 Reno, Janet, 576 Reproductive rights, 559 – 565 see abortion dialogue, 564 – 565 Hyde Amendment, 560 – 561 legal history, 560 pro-choice, 564 pro-life, 562 – 564 Roe v. Wade, 560 – 562 Republican Party, 572, 573, 582 Retirement, 367 – 368 Retirement Equity Act (REA), 558 Rice, Condoleezza, 293, 576 Rice, Susan, 576 Rimes, Shonda, 525 Roberts, Julia, 259, 512 Rock music, 514 misogyny, 516 – 517 women of rock, 514 – 515 Roe v. Wade, 560 – 561, 562, 564, 573 Role, definition, 5 see also gender roles; status Role enhancement hypothesis, 391 Role overload/strain hypothesis, 392, 393 Roman Catholic Church, 234, 486, 491, 493, 496 see also Catholicism Romantic relationships, 259 see also love American embrace of romantic love, 269 idealization of, 265 – 266, 268 love myths, 264 – 266 men in love, 268 and physical attraction, 265 – 266 and sex, 266 styles, gendered, 267, 293 women perceived as romantic sex, 266 Rome, classical education, 432 female power, 165 – 166 male authority, 165 Roosevelt, Eleanor, 592 Roosevelt, Franklin D., 184 Rouhani, President Hassan, 248 Rousseau, Jean-Jacques, 433 Emile, 432 Rule of thumb, 375 Rural families, 202 Russia and Central Asia, 207 collision of family and employment, as double burden, 208

Index  747 conflict theory and female employment, 12 – 13 contemporary, and Soviet legacy, 207 – 209 Criminal Code, 211 – 212 defining feminine, 211 feminism, 212 – 214 marriage and family, 209 – 210 masculinist discourse, 210 – 212 sexual harassment and gender-based violence, 211 – 212 Soviet legacy and contemporary Russia see Soviet Union, legacy of S SAHMs see stay-at-home mothers (SAHM) Salarymen, Japan, 229 – 230 Salem witch trials (1690–1693), 174 Sandberg, Sheryl, 421, 422 Sanders, Bernie, 33 Sandler, Bernice, 445 Sandwich generation, women, 393 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting (2012), Newtown, Connecticut, 35 Sati, 476 – 477 Saudi Arabia, 249, 250 SC see social constructionism (SC) Scandinavia, marriage and family life, 297 see also Denmark; Finland; Norway; Sweden Schemas, 106 Schlafly, Phyllis, 283 Schoen, Roslyn, 203, 429 Schools bullying, 460 – 462 elementary and middle school, 436 – 437 hidden curriculum, gender in, 443 – 444 high school, 438 – 445 athletics and masculinity, 444 – 445 gendered tracking, 442 – 443 hidden curriculum, gender in, 443 – 444 paradox of gender and mathematics, 438 – 441 social class, race and achievement, 441 – 442 vocational education, 442 – 443 kindergarten and early childhood education, 434 – 436 military, 461 – 462 religious, 242 sexual harassment, 460 – 462 single-gender classrooms, 456 – 458 and socialization, 122 – 123 Schwarzenegger, Arnold, 359, 578

Science, and intersectionality, 20 Scripture, 467 Bible, 480 Hindu, feminine in, 475 – 476 reinterpretation, 480, 497 – 498 Talmud, 477 SDS see sexual double standard (SDS) Second shift, 208, 288, 392 see also third shift; unpaid work Second wave feminism, 24, 36, 191 Secretarial work, 390 Segregation see gender segregation Self-esteem, 67, 147, 154, 313, 539, 550 agents of socialization, 111, 116, 125 and biology, 76, 81, 82 and education, 438, 441, 442, 443, 445, 456 and employment, 391, 417, 422 gender socialization theories, 101, 103, 104, 105, 107 and masculinity, 346, 349, 350, 355, 364, 367 and physical attractiveness, 274 Semenya, Caster, 47 Seneca Falls Convention, 1848, 188 – 189 Serial infidelity, 289 Serial monogamy, 331 Sesame Street (children’s TV), 124, 125 Seventeen (magazine), 506 Seventh Day Adventists, 494 Sex in the City (TV series, films), 67, 532 Sex ratio, 75, 111, 216, 217, 276, 294 sex ratio at birth (SRB), 75, 222 Sex reassignment surgery (SRS), 52 – 53, 55 Bruce-Brenda-David case, 56 Sex selection, 112 Sex trafficking, 26, 36, 569, 570 Sex work, 568 – 569 Sexism ambivalent, 585 benevolent, 30, 458, 577 biology, 69 and capitalism, 23 defined, 5 Freudian theory, 50 hostile, 585 linguistic, 130, 131, 153 – 157 and media, 30, 33 modern, 585 National Organization for Men Against Sexism, 380 – 381

748 Index outright, 585 and patriarchy, 6 in prostitution, 570 and racism, 190, 316, 321, 361, 409, 458, 554, 585 – 586, 587 on television, 30 U.S. elections, 585 Sexual dimorphism, 52 Sexual double standard (SDS), 65 – 68 and masculinity, 66 – 68 and women, 65 – 66 Sexual harassment and bullying, 461, 462 in corporate world, 421 and gender-based violence, in Russia, 211 – 212 impact, 552 – 553 Kavanaugh–Blasey Ford, 555 law and public policy, 552 – 556 and #MeToo, 34 – 35, 141, 194, 421, 539 – 540 in schools, 460 – 462 social construction of, 553 – 554 and Supreme Court, 554 – 555 Thomas–Hill, 554 – 555 Sexual orientation, 57 – 59 see also homosexuality; lesbians; LGBTQ; transgender distinguishing sex and gender, 6 – 7 and sexual identity, 59 in workplace, 415 – 416 Sexual scripts, 15, 62, 68 – 69 Sexuality, 51 – 69 see also sex reassignment surgery (SRS); sexual double standard (SDS); sexual orientation ambiguous, 7, 52 arousal, 63 asexuality, 58 body shame, 66 clitoral stimulation versus vaginal penetration, 50, 65 desire, 63 essentialism, 56 – 57 gender and sex, 6 – 7, 91 – 92 intersex, 52 in later life, 68 – 69 male sexual prowess norm, 357 – 358 orgasm, 63 partners, 59 patterns of sexual attitudes and behavior, 62 – 63 premarital/nonmarital sex, 64

psychosexual development, 49 – 50 queer theory, 58 sexual behavior see sexuality sexual scripts, 62 and social control, in Judaism, 478 third gender cultures, 59 – 62 transing, 53 – 55 Sexualization and action figures, 115 – 116 clothing, 114 in magazine ads, 505 – 506 music, 514 – 516 sportswomen, 538 and well-being, 505 Shah of Iran, overthrow (1979), 247, 248 Shakers, 239, 493 – 494 Sheetz-Nguyen, Jessica, 390 Shulman, Alix Kates, 194 SI see symbolic interaction (SI) Sierra Leone, 251 Singapore, 227 Single life, 292 – 293 Single-gender education, 456 – 458 Single-parent families, 332 – 335 by choice, 334 fathers, 334 mothers, 333 – 334 Smiling, 139 – 140 Soap operas, 523 Social business, 430 Social capital, 4, 12, 145, 280, 281, 334, 396 Social class (SES) see also gender–race–class linkage; intersectionality class consciousness, 11 classism, 13, 23, 588 and conflict theory, 11 intersecting with gender or race college enrollment, 453 health and well-being, 99 – 102 High School, 441 – 442 historical perspectives, 159 – 160 Latin America, 237 – 238 multiculturalism and families, 316 – 317 on television, 531 – 532 women in employment, 415 oppression, 11, 19, 23 selecting mates and partners, 270, 273 – 274 socioeconomic status (SES) as, 4

Index  749 Social class endogamy, 12 Social cognitive theory, 108 – 110 Social conflict theory see conflict theory Social construction of reality, 14 Social constructionism (SC), 14 – 17 and coming out, 340 doing gender, 16 – 17 and feminist theory, 18 language, 130, 152 – 153 marriage and family, 282 – 283 sociological theory, 417 undoing gender, 16 – 17 Social control, 9, 98, 140, 478 Social institutions, 6, 24, 39, 186, 379, 395 agents of socialization, 111, 120 culture and socialization, 98, 99 education and gender role change, 431, 432, 458 and employment, 395 and gender roles, 283, 284, 286 and gender socialization theories, 102, 107, 108, 110 global perspectives, 234, 240, 241, 244, 254 and media, 540, 541 and religion, 468, 471 sociological perspectives, 12, 17, 18 Social learning theory, 102 – 105, 123 Social media fourth wave feminism, 194 and gender gap in usage, 143 homophobia, 360 men online, 144 – 145 and #MeToo, 34, 194, 540 women online, 146 – 147 Social networking sites (SNS), 143 Social stratification, 5 Social work, 407, 408 Socialist feminism, 23, 25 Socialization see also agents of socialization; gender socialization artifacts of, 113 – 114 clothing, 114 continuing, 98, 108, 367, 397 families, 111 – 120 and fatherhood, 364 – 365 for gender equity, 126 – 129 homosexuality, 59 parents as innovators, 128 – 129

primary see primary socialization raising baby X, 127 – 128, 129 school, 122 – 123 sexualization, and action figures, 115 – 116 shifts in gendered peer behavior, 122 social constructionism (SC), 14 sociological theory, 123 television, 123 – 126 toys and dolls, 114 – 118 women in employment, 396 – 397 Sociobiology, 40 – 41 Socioeconomic status (SES) see social class Sociological WAD (women and development) model, 204 – 205 Sociology of gender basic sociological concepts, 4 – 5 conflict theory, 11 – 13 contemporary society, 9 – 10 distinguishing sex and gender, 6 – 7 doing difference, 15 doing gender, 14 – 15 feminist sociological theory, 17 – 18, 160 functionalism, 8 – 9, 10 gender-based violence (GBV), 376 heteronormativity, 15 intersectionality, 18 – 19 key concepts for, 5 – 6 levels of analysis, 8 macro sociological perspective, 8 mezzo sociological perspective, 8, 14 micro sociological perspective, 8 private and public spheres, 8 and religion, 488 – 489 social constructionism, 14 – 17 sociological theory, 123, 274 – 275, 417 symbolic interaction (SI), 13 Solberg, Erna, Norway, 254 Soldiering, 346 – 349 Somalia, 251 Sons gender socialization, 119 – 120 preference for, 111 preference for, in China, 216 raising, 101 – 102 Sotomayor, Sonia, 576 South Asia see Asia; China; India; Indonesia; Japan; Vietnam South Korea, 227

750 Index Soviet Union, legacy of, 2017 Sparta, 164 – 165 Special Economic Zones (SEZs), 218 Spiritualist Church, 494 Sports, 349 – 351 see also athletics athletics and masculinity, 444 – 445 injuries, 350 sportswomen, 538 – 539 on television, 534 violence, 350 – 351 Stanton, Elizabeth Cady, 188, 189, 190, 482 Status acquiring, 4 definition, 4 employment, 327 high- and low-prestige, 4 – 5 housewife, 285 – 286 “superwoman,” 10 Status set, 4, 5 Stay-at-home fathers (SAHF), 364 Stay-at-home mothers (SAHM), 302, 305, 309, 311 STEM (science, technology, engineering, math) academic women, 450 college classrooms, 445 and cyberfeminism, 28 degrees, 453, 455 early childhood education, 435 female employment, 410 – 411 gender gap, 411, 440, 457 mathematics, 438 – 439, 440, 441, 442 and gender schema theory, 108 hidden curriculum, gender in, 443 majors and career paths, 447 paradox of gender and mathematics, 438 – 441 social class and race, intersecting, 441 Stereotypes see also gender identity; gender roles; gender-typing advertising, 504 African Americans, 314 Asian Americans, 323 – 324 and benevolent sexism, 30 challenging the binary, 39, 126 and child custody, 98 country music, 513 education, 122, 437 – 438 femininity, 147, 361, 362, 363, 497 challenging, 126 – 127 films, 511 – 512

and gender identity, 105 of health care communities, 366 language, 135 military schools, 462 motherhood, 305 Muslim world, 244 – 245 and pornography, 374 and portrayals of feminism, 29 print media, 502 UN Conferences on Women, 200 Sternberg, Robert, 264 Stone, Lucy, 189 Streisand, Barbra, 536 Structural adjustment programs (SAPs), Latin America, 236 Structural functionalism see functionalism Subcultures African American, 102, 361 age-based, 99 defined, 99 gendered, 15, 150, 331 graduate school, 449 language, 135, 149, 150 Latinos, 100, 319 workplace, 408 Subliminal messages, 506 – 507 Subordination of women see also discrimination; oppression and biology, 70 challenging, for Asia Americans, 323 – 324 in Christianity, 481 and conflict theory, 13 mass media industries, 538 Subsistence farming, 178, 202, 388 Success norm, for men, 353 – 354 Sudan, 251 Suffrage movement, 171, 189 England, 187 – 188, 190 Suffragettes, 189 Sufism, 497 Suicidal ideation, 82, 461 Suicide in eating disorders, 81 failure rates, 370 financial debt, 428 Great Depression, 346 LGBTQ, 82 in men, 74, 86, 349

Index  751 older men, 370 shootings, 357 soldiers, 348 – 349 Summers, Lawrence, 440 Superego, 50 Supreme Court, U.S. (SCOUS), 403, 545, 548, 562 sexual harassment, 554 – 555 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), 466 Gender Index, 198, 222 Sweatshops, 179 Sweden, 254 – 255, 297 Swift, Taylor, 262, 515 Switzerland, 253 Symbolic interaction (SI), 13 doing gender, 16 and feminist theory, 18 games, 121 language, 130 LGBTQ, 339 marriage and family, 282 – 283 sociology of gender, 13, 14 undoing gender, 16 – 17 T Tag questions, 136 Takotsubo syndrome, 94 Taliban, 245 – 246, 475 Talmud, 477, 479 – 480 Tantric Buddhism, 471 – 472 Taoism, 469 Tchumbuli tribe, New Guinea, 39 Teaching profession, 390, 407, 408 Television, 518 – 528, 530 – 537 advertising, 125 – 126 broadcast journalism, 534 cartoons, 124 – 125 children’s programs, 125 comedy, 522, 530 – 531 commercials, 526 – 528 daytime, 523 – 528 directors, 536 – 537 film on, 536 – 537 friendships on, 263 and gender drama, gender profiles in, 520 – 521 gender–race–class linkages, 531 – 532 gendered exceptions, 525 – 526 mass media industries, 533 – 534

men portrayed in and families, 530 – 531 middle-class men, 532 working-class men, 532 and portrayals of feminism, 30 prime time, 30, 520 reality TV, 524 – 525 situation comedies, 530 – 531 soap operas, 523 socialization, 123 – 126 sports coverage, 535 violence, gendered, 519 – 523 weather, 535 Ten Commandments, 482 Tenderness norm, for men, 359 Terrorism 9/11 attacks, 140, 244, 246, 475 Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), 347 Taliban, 245 – 246 Testosterone, 46, 47 Texts of Terror, 478 – 479 Theology, inclusive, 495 – 500 Scripture, reinterpretation, 497 – 498 Theory/theoretical perspectives, 8 Third-gender cultures, 59 – 62 Third shift, 13, 284, 288, 392, 393 see also second shift; unpaid work Third wave feminism, 193 – 194 Thomas–Hill controversy, 554 – 555 Thunberg, Greta, 26 #Time’s Up movement,35 Tlaib, Rashjida, 475 Title IX of the 1972 Education Amendments Act, 462 – 465 athletics, 550 benefits to females, 550 – 552 courts, 550 law and public policy, 549 – 552 and politics, 463 – 465 Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, 402, 421, 544, 545, 546, 549, 552 Titles and occupations, 131 – 132 Torah, 477 – 479, 490 Touch, 141 – 142 Toughness norm, for men, 355 – 356 Toxic masculinity, 35, 92, 95, 210, 345, 371, 377, 529, 585 and aggression, 356, 360

752 Index extreme form, 356 homophobia, 360 and mass shootings, 357 men’s rights movements, 380, 381 mythopoetic men, 377 rape, 374 Toys, 114 – 118 advertising and marketing, 125, 129 gender neutral, 117 – 118, 129 and gender scripts, 116 – 117 socialization, 118, 126, 128, 396 Transsexuality see LGBTQ Transgender 52, 55 families and parenting, 342 – 343 studies, 54 transing, 53 – 55 Transnational corporations (TNCs), 202, 203, 205 Transsexuals, 54, 59 True Womanhood, 175 – 177, 179, 181 Trump, Donald, 20, 33, 34, 90, 142, 147, 194, 252, 352, 381 elections, 581 – 591, 596 masculinity issues, 583, 584 – 587 Turkmenistan, 207 U Underwood, Carrie, 513 – 514 Undoing gender, 16 – 17 UNDP see United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Unemployment cycles of, 404, 405 and gender, 403 – 405 recessions, 404 Unions, 180 – 181 United Nations Conferences on Women, 27, 598 Fourth World Conference on Women (FWCW), Beijing 199 – 202, 204, 235, 252 United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), 198 United Nations (UN) and conferences on women, 201 – 203 see also Fourth World Conference on Women, Beijing Decade for Women, 199 gender initiatives, 198 – 201 human development and gender equality, 198 – 199 United States

Civil War, 178, 181, 189 Christianity and Native Americans, 172 – 173 colonial era, 173 – 175 puritan life, gendered, 173 whether Golden Age for women, 175 witchcraft, 173 – 175 gun culture, 351 history, 171 – 186 Depression, 181 – 182 first American women, 171 – 173 frontier life, 177 – 178 gender role balance, 171 individualism, 303 industrialization, 178 – 186 men’s movements, 376 – 382 postwar era to the millennium, 186 – 195 race and class, 179 – 180 Supreme Court, 554 – 555, 562 tribal leadership, 172 union movement, 180 – 181 Victorians, 175 – 177 women’s diversity in the labor force, 183 – 184 World War II child care 182 – 186 Japanese American women, 184 peacetime, 185 – 186 women’s labor, 182 – 184 United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), 487 Unpaid work, 89, 255, 310, 387, 410 see also employment; homemaker; housewives; housework; labor force, women in balancing work and family, 392, 393 – 395, 396 gender roles in marriage and the family, 285, 288 globalization, women and development, 201, 205 Uzbekistan, 207 V Value consensus, 9 Vatican, 235 – 236, 486 – 488 see also Catholicism and ordaining women 492, 498 Vedas, 475, 495 Veiling Muslim countries, 247 – 248, 250 Beijing, FWCW, 200 choice issue, 248, 250 – 251 Vestal Virgins, classical Rome, 166

Index  753 Victim, victimization, 28 see also gender-based violence (GBV) and men’s rights, 379 film industry, 540 and rape, 373 – 374 women-as-victim theme in history, 160 Victorian period, 175 – 177 Video games, 439, 452 and violence, 357, 519 Vietnam, 347, 348 Vindication of the Rights of Woman (Wollstonecraft), 187 – 188 Violence see also aggression gender-based see gender-based violence (GBV) gendered, 519 – 523 gun culture, 351 sexualized, 541 sports, 350 – 351 on television, 519 – 520 video games, 357, 519 Vocational education, 442 – 443 Voting intersectional, 573 – 574 presidential voting patterns, 572 – 573 W WAD see Women and Development (WAD) Wage gap, 208, 412 – 418 gender, race and class, 415 human capital model, 416 – 417 sexual orientation, 415 – 416 sociological theory, 417 Walters, Barbara, 534 War Manpower Commission (WMC), 182 War on Terror, 347, 348 War Production Board (WPB), 182 Warren, Elizabeth, 590, 592 War, 346 – 349 see also military; World War I (Great War); World War II Civil War, 178, 181, 189 effects on employment, 390 – 391 Gulf Wars, 347, 348 Korea and Vietnam, 347 Kuwait, Iraq and Afghanistan, 347 – 348 and masculinity, 346 suicide and soldiering, 348 – 349 Weber, Max, 543 Webster v. Reproductive Health, 560 – 561

Weinstein, Harvey, 540 West, Kanye, 517 White, Betty, 521 White feminism, 23 White privilege, 351 White-collar jobs, 176, 415, 532 women, 411 – 412 Widowhood, 369 – 371 Williams, Christine, 408 Williams, Serena, 539 Wilson, Robert, Feminine Forever, 79 Winfrey, Oprah, 293 Winter Olympics, Moscow (2014), 210 – 211 Witch hunts, Middle Ages, 168 Witchcraft, in the U.S., 173 – 175 Wives, expressive role, 10, 239 see also femininity; housewives; housework; husbands; motherhood; women Wollstonecraft, Mary, 187 – 188 Woman’s Party (previously Congressional Union), 190 – 191 Women see also daughters, raising; femininity; feminism; girls; males; women’s movements academic, 449 – 450 Arab Spring, 248 – 249 in business see business, women in of color, 20 and development, 204 – 205 eldercare by, 392 – 393 as entrepreneurs, 427 – 429 goddess images, 468 – 469 health and well-being body studies, 80, 424 eating disorders, 81 – 82 HIV/AIDS, 84 – 85 menopause and HRT, 78 – 80 menstruation, 77 and morbidity, 76 – 77 premenstrual syndrome (PMS), 77 – 78 progress, 95 – 96 women’s health movement, 93 historical themes, 160 invisible, 521 at midlife, 368 as objects of exchange, 274 older women and marriage, 272 online, 146 – 147 oppression of

754 Index families, 315 global perspectives, 207, 214 historical perspectives, 160 love and marriage, 281, 282 sociology of gender, 3, 6, 19, 21, 24, 25, 29 placing in history, 159 – 160 religious roles, 469 sexism suffered by, 5 – 6 and sexual double standard, 65 – 66 and social media, 147 – 148 and the state, in China, 218 – 219 subordination of see subordination of women “superwoman” status, 10 and TV violence, 519 – 520 unpaid work, 393 – 395 voluntary childlessness, 304 widows, 369 – 371 witch hunts, in Middle Ages, 168 witchcraft, in the U.S., 173 – 175 in the workforce see labor force, women in Women and Development (WAD), 201 – 206 see development, gender sociological model, 204 – 205 Women in Development (WID), 204 Womenomics, 234 Women’s Health Initiative (WHI), 79 Women’s Health Movement (WHM), 93, 95 Women’s March on Washington (2017), 34, 38, Fourth Wave feminism, 194 #MeToo, 194 Women’s movements see also feminism; women contemporary, 191 – 196 division and unity, 190

early movement (1830–1890), 188 – 190 and feminism, 21 – 22, 35 – 36 first wave, 190 fourth wave, 194 – 195 global, 26 – 27 movements as feminist success stories, 33 – 36 second wave, 24, 191 third wave, 193 – 194 health and well-being, 93 Nineteenth Amendment, 190 – 191 Seneca Falls Convention, 1848, 188 – 189 and UN Conferences on Women, 199 women’s liberation, 22 Work–life balance, 309, 396, 401, 427, 523 business, women in, 424 – 425 Japan, 230 – 231, 233 – 234 professions, women in, 410 Workplace, women in see labor force, women in World Anti-Slavery Convention, 188 World Bank, 197, 204, 428 World Health Organization (WHO), 53, 88 World War I (Great War), 181, 391 World War II, 182 – 186 child care issues, 184, 309 Executive Order (EO) 9066, 184 and gender role change, 186 Japanese American women, 184 – 186 and peacetime, 185 – 186 women in labor force, 183 – 184 Y Yellen, Janet, 576 Yunus, Muhammad, 427 – 428, 430