Expectations of gender roles are detrimental to our society - Essay Example

?Expectations of Gender Roles are Detrimental to our Society Introduction Girls play with Barbie Dolls and boys play with G.I. Joe. These are just some of the many cliches and gender expectations pervading our society. Such expectations are said to be a part of our physiological make-up, with women built to be motherly, to be soft, to be womanly, to be nurturers, and to be emotional beings. Men on the other hand seem to be built with sturdier frames – to have strong muscles meant for physical labor, to be providers, to be protectors, and basically to be “manly.” Based on physical disparities alone, the roles of men and women are differentiated from each other. Society has learned to recognize these roles and have accepted them to be norms upon which all behaviors must be based. Roles played outside these norms are considered to be unacceptable. These gender expectations however may not portray accurate leanings and predispositions for all people of both genders. In effect, expecting all women to be “weepy” and men to not cry at all are unfair expectations. Expectations in gender roles can have both negative and positive effects to our society. This paper shall now discuss how gender roles and accompanying expectations can be detrimental to our society, starting from childhood to adulthood. It shall discuss both sides of the issue in order to establish a balanced discussion on the subject matter and to ensure a comprehensive and thorough discussion on the issue topic. Discussion Childhood gender role expectations From man’s early childhood years, gender role expectations already dominate both genders. The pretty pink colors are for girls, and the “boyish” shade of blue are for boys. As they progress in their physical development, their toys are gradually differentiated from each other. According to the Pan Health Organization (PAHO), a regional office of the World Health Organization (p. 1), by age five, most children already know how to be boys and how to be girls. They know which toys to play with, which clothes to wear, which colors to choose, and whether or not they should cry or hit back (PAHO, p. 1). These gender roles and expectations assigned to children have serious implications on their future—most of them negative. Their access to food and education, participation in the workforce, their relationships, as well as their physical and psychological health are all impacted by these gender expectations and stereotypes. In a study by the WHO (PAHO, p. 1), the agency points out that gender role expectations impact on people’s access to food. The study pointed out that in many countries, girls manifest with lower nutritional health and a decreased access to food as compared to their male counterparts (PAHO, p. 1). Such limited access for girls is highly detrimental to their health and their future development. Girls’ nutritional deficiencies also contribute to their vulnerabilities to childhood illnesses. Their vulnerability also exposes them to physical and sexual abuse (PAHO, p. 1). They also become vulnerable to decreased access to health services. Based on various reports, more often than not, girls’ health conditions turn worse before they are actually brought to the hospital or to a doctor for medical attention. In some developing nations, the mortality rate for girls are higher as compared to boys’ (Elsa). In terms of education, girls are often less likely to be sent to school. They are mostly kept at home to assist in the household chores and other duties. In effect, they are also learning from their mothers how to take care of the male family members – how to cook, mend clothes, clean house, do laundry, and other household duties (PAHO, p. 2). As a result, these girls would likely be stuck in the same pattern in which their mothers and other women before them have been stuck in – unable to have careers and other less domestic possibilities in their lives. In some areas like Africa where the HIV/AIDS afflicts a large number of the population, these girls are often made to stay behind in their homes or to leave school to take care of an HIV-ailing family member. Some of those who have acquired education and successful careers are also often urged to leave their work, to opt for jobs closer to home, or to look for jobs with more flexible working hours in order to attend to their ailing family member (PAHO, p. 2). The task of being a caregiver and nurturer is, more often than not, a burden and a responsibility placed on girls, not so much on boys. This is a dangerous trend because it reduces the productivity of women, and eventually of society. Based on how children are raised, girls, being the more vulnerable and more subservient gender are also prone to be victims of physical and sexual abuse from family members, friends, teachers, and strangers (PAHO, p. 2). Boys are often expected and are taught to fight back, to hit back, and to generally be physically domineering. This makes them less vulnerable to physical and sexual abuses from other people. This makes them the “attacker.” The way gender roles are portrayed by the media is also a contributory factor to children’s expected roles. The media portrays girls as dainty, feminine, domestic, and sexual objects; whereas boys are often portrayed in strong, heroic, and sometimes, violent roles (PAHO, p. 2). As a result, girls are often pressured to look and be feminine and dainty; they see their future self and perceive generous breasts and homely maternal roles. And the boys perceive their future to be a future filled with instances wherein they have to defend themselves physically, to build muscles, and to generally be physically aggressive (PAHO, p. 2). In terms of self-esteem and confidence, there also seems to be an issue with how boys and girls are treated and regarded. In families, boys seem to be given more value and importance. They are considered to be possible long-term investments because they would potentially earn money for the family; whereas girls would likely marry and “belong” to another family (PAHO, p. 2). The fact that boys also go on to carry the family name and girls change their names when they get married also contributes to the decreased value attributed to girls. As a result, these girls are not given the same opportunities as boys and are expected to fulfill more subservient and less important roles in the family and in society. Using symbolisms in interpreting interactions, individuals often seek to understand the world and all the things going on around them by utilizing meanings which members of society have come to share (Dietz, p. 427). They understand that individuals are meant to perform and to occupy certain roles and they should perform these roles according to societal norms and expectations. For children, they often learn to perform roles through childhood play. Play is an important aspect of socialization because through socialization, boys and girls are taught to develop and to manifest masculine and feminine qualities (Dietz, p. 427). Many of these games, however, hardly encourage favorable views of women as they are presented as sexual figures and victims. Television programs also portray gender-based depictions which further lend support to gender role expectations. Video games also hardly present women in a favorable light. These games often support the traditional and negative portrayal of women as victims or sexual objects (Dietz, p. 427). These gender expectations which are seen by both males and females are detrimental to society because they pressures women to perceive themselves and to perceive beauty in terms of physical attributes and qualities. They believe that in order to gain notice from other people, they would either have to be victims or be objects of sexual fascination and attraction (Dietz, p. 427). And for boys, they may see their roles as protectors of women or as heroes. And they may view women as their possession – as their entitlement for a job well done and as a prize they have to win. Subsequent interactions between both genders are therefore extensions of these roles, roles which are expected and traditionally accepted. These expectations have negative implications for society because they portray chauvinist ideals which can only serve to open further abuses against women. Adolescent expected gender roles Among adolescents, gender expectations seem to be based on peer pressure and peer expectations (Daigle, p. 14). Masculine qualities however seem to be expected more on young boys; whereas girls seem to be impacted more by the fact that they are expected to have close relationships with other girls. Boys tend to be solitary and consequently they are less dependent on other people for feelings of belongingness (Daigle, p. 15). Adolescent girls are usually more social than their male counterparts and they are often expected by their parents to be more responsible in terms of decision-making. This is based on the belief that girls usually mature faster than boys. Boys are often seen as immature and childish and impulsive in their decisions (Daigle, p. 15). For which reason, these gender expectations often dictate the reaction and the treatment of parents and teachers to the actions of these adolescents. When boys misbehave and are immature, parents and teachers tend to dismiss it as “boys being boys.” When girls exemplify mature and grown-up behavior, their behavior is approved of as “girls being girls.” In effect, the spontaneity in girls actions are lost in the process and the immaturity in boys behavior are further nurtured down the line with expected disastrous consequences and signs of future trends. Adulthood expected gender roles The trend seen during childhood and adolescence often eventually translates to expected gender roles during adulthood. This trend is mostly manifest in occupational systems. Occupational activities make up a majority of any person’s adult life and for most people, it is considered a source of their identity. Gendered practices seen in families, educational systems, peers, and the media are often replicated in the workplaces. These practices are seen in the segregation of jobs based on gender lines with a large concentration of women seen in lower paying jobs and with limited opportunities in upper level, higher paying, and managerial jobs (Eccles and Hoffman, p. 135). Based on the patterns which imply efficacy for various work pursuits, women seem to gravitate more towards jobs dominated by other females and avoid those dominated by men (Lent, et.al., p. 79). The demands of personal and socio-cultural ideals seem to dictate the differences in the distribution of men and women in jobs which offer prestige and profitable monetary returns. For the most part, such women’s work and their jobs are often given lower value and their skills are considered only for feminine occupations (Bussey and Bandura, p. 704). In instances when husbands and wives both work, the work of the wife is often considered a “back-up,” a supplemental source of income. When family concerns come about – the birth of a child, the sickness of a child, her work is expected to be put “on hold” and she is expected to stay home and care for the sick child or to take care of the baby. The husband is expected to be the provider – the one who will bring home the income to support the family (Bussey and Bandura, p. 70). These expectations do not seem to bode well for both genders because the women sacrifice their careers for their families and the men are burdened with putting food on the table. In recent years, with the economic crisis taking its toll in the global economy, changes in this way of working have been seen with lower birth rates, with women educating themselves extensively, and with women joining the workforce for financial as well as personal reasons (Bussey and Bandura, p. 70). However, even as these changes have been manifest in recent years, these women still face the same difficulties in gaining entry into higher level work because they are still expected to work within jobs which fit their expected roles. Social changes in different institutions are difficult to implement because most of these institutions have built their establishments on traditions and on their usual practices (Bandura, p. 589). These traditions are still founded on the fact that boys and girls are different from each other and that it is more apt for women to pursue activities fit for women, and for men to pursue activities fit for men. Women’s efforts to regain acceptance in high-level workplaces have met with fierce resistance from both genders. Males view these women as competition and sometimes as unfair competition because they believe that these women can use their female “charms” and other feminine and sexual qualities as leverage for their loftier work pursuits (Pfost and Fiore, p. 15). Moreover, women occupying traditionally male roles in the workplaces are perceived negatively; and this negative perception is even more biased than the perception attributed to men performing roles traditionally occupied by women. The competence of these women is also not given as much credit as when the role would have been occupied by a man (Alban-Metcalf and West, p. 154). Consequently, they do not receive as much support from their friends, colleagues, and even their mentors, in the same way as the support lent to male employees. They are even exempted from the more informal exchanges and networks within the workplace (Kanter, p. 55). They also are subjected to more impediments to higher positions and to managerial jobs. In some instances, women have to resort to legal action in order to gain equal treatment in the workplace (Bandura and Bussey, p. 70). These difficulties in the workplace are very much based on the expected gender roles which have pervaded our society for many years. Since women are not expected to occupy higher level positions, it is difficult for them to gain access to these positions and if they eventually gain access, they are not taken seriously (Bandura and Bussey, p. 70). With these difficulties in front of them, many women are often placed in low-level and low-paying jobs with traditional female undertones. This leaves them vulnerable to high-handed and abusive treatment from superior males within and beyond the workplace. The challenge of implementing changes in gender roles is based on the challenge of having to balance family and work demands for women entering the workforce. The impact of performing dual roles is perceived negatively because managing two roles with equal competence is likely to cause stress in the woman (Bandura and Bussey, p. 70). As a result, the woman’s work is perceived as compromised by the juggling process and the risk of having one aspect of her life spillover to the other. This perception seems to be well received and acknowledged, and the benefits that the woman brings to the family are hardly recognized (Ozer, p. 315). In a paper by Ozer, (p. 315) the author discussed a study wherein married women who sought professional and managerial roles were tested before the birth of their first child for their ability to efficaciously perform their dual roles. They were evaluated in terms of their physical and psychological competence and the difficulties they are subjected to in their dual roles after they were able to return to work (Ozer, p. 315). The study revealed that the respondents’ family income, workload, division of child-care responsibility did not directly impact on women’s well-being or emotional health. These elements did impact on her well-being and emotional health, but they were seen more in terms of perceived self-efficacy (Ozer, p. 315). Women who had strong coping abilities and a strong sense of perceived efficacy were able to experience lower levels of emotional strain in the performance of their dual roles. The respondents contributed about half to the family income and they also performed most of the child-care duties as well as household chores (Ozer, p. 315). Gender differentiation seems to dictate the trends for research in relation to the management of dual roles. Various studies seem to consider the role of social support in reducing the impact of work stress on working fathers; however, there seems to be limited studies on how fathers manage their dual roles in their workplace and their families (Ozer, p. 315). There seems to be a bias against men in this regard because the implication is that these men are expected to perform dual roles competently and without any hitches. This is a dangerous notion because it sets forth lofty demands on men; it makes them out to be “supermen” when they actually have the same vulnerabilities as women in terms of work stress and burnout. The expected gender roles also have a negative impact on families who are perceived negatively by other members of society for not complying with their traditional roles. In families with parents sharing family responsibilities, criticism being directed towards them is based on the fact that they break the mold of traditional family life (Bandura and Bussey, p. 71). Mothers are especially vulnerable to such criticism because of their reduced involvement in the household chores and responsibilities and for their increased involvement in their work commitments. But for fathers, the criticism they receive is often based on the fact that they have too little involvement in their work (Deutsch and Saxon, p. 665). Such criticisms based on expected gender roles often discourage parents from working with each other for their family. In the end, it is often the woman or the mother who is prompted to make the sacrifice for her career and instead, look after her family. This situation does not bode well for many families who are having financial difficulties and who cannot flourish well in one-income households. It keeps them stunted in terms of economic advancement (Bandura and Bussey, p. 71). Ultimately, it reduces contributions to the workforce and it affects the overall income earned by corporations. In the bigger setting, it increases rates of poverty in our society. In order to establish equitable systems, social, as well as cultural changes have to be implemented. For one, the expected gender role for men does not include the performance of domestic duties and the performance of such roles often earns them negative sanctions. For which reason, men avoid such household tasks and other domestic contributions to their home life. This creates a trend of behavior among males who cannot actually manage dual roles – as fathers and as workers (Stickel and Bonett, p. 297). Most of them often end up avoiding the dilemma of having to juggle their family and work life by simply staying away from child care and from housework. This pattern of behavior further supports the trends and practices pervading in the traditional gender-based setting. The more society perceives these traditions and expectations to be true, the more that these patterns of behavior persist and the more that they would dominate the workplace, the family life, and society in general. Conclusion The discussion above exemplifies the fact that gender role expectations are detrimental to society. These expectations pigeonhole males and females into traditional roles which limit their personal and professional growth. Consequently, such limited growth also translates in the bigger economic setting, where companies and corporations have a lower production yield from their workforce, thereby causing higher poverty rates. These gender expectations also place women in a vulnerable position for sexual and physical abuse from male family members, from teachers, from strangers, and from their colleagues. In effect, these expected gender roles make for a dangerous trend in our society as it brings forth negative effects to our social as well as our economic activities. Works Cited Alban-Metcalfe, B., & West, M. A. “Women managers. In J. Firth-Cozens & M. A. West (Eds.), Women at work: Psychological and organizational perspectives (pp. 154-171)”. Milton Keynes, UK: Open University Press. 1991 Bandura, A. “Self-efficacy: The exercise of control”. New York: Freeman. 1987 Bandura, A. & Bussey, K. “Social Cognitive Theory of Gender Development and Differentiation”. Psychological Review. 1999, volume 106(4), pp. 676-713 Daigle, S. “What influence do gender roles have on adolescent development.” Florida Atlantic University. 2004. 03 May 2011 from http://www.premiercollegeadvisor.com/newsletter/Educational%20Psychology%20-%20Gender%20Roles.pdf Deutsch, F. M., & Saxon, S. E. “The double standard of praise and criticism for mothers and fathers”. Psychology of Women Quarterly. 1998, volume 22, pp. 665-683. Dietz, T. “An Examination of Violence and Gender Role Portrayals in Video Games: Implications for Gender Socialization and Aggressive Behavior.” Sex Roles, vol. 38(5/6), 1998. Eccles, J. S. “Gender roles and women's achievement-related decisions”. Psychology of Women Quarterly. 1987, volume 11, pp. 135-172 Kanter, R. M. “Men and women of the organization”. New York: Basic Books. 1997. Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. “Toward a unifying social cognitive theory of career and academic interest, choice, and performance”. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 1994, volume 45, pp. 79-122 Ozer, E. M. “The impact of childcare responsibility and self-efficacy on the psychological health of working mothers”. Psychology of Women Quarterly. 1995, volume 19, pp. 315-336. Pan American Health Organization. “Gender and Child Development”. World Health Organization. (n.d). 03 May 2011 from http://www.paho.org/english/ad/ge/childdevelopment.PDF Pfost, K. S., & Fiore, M. “Pursuit of nontraditional occupations: Fear of success or fear of not being chosen?” Sex Roles. 1990, volume 23, pp. 15-24. Stickel, S. A., & Bonett, R. M. “Gender differences in career self-efficacy: Combining a career with home and family”. Journal of College Student Development. 1991. volume 32, pp. 297-301. Read More