Comprehensive Notes on Gender Identity and Androgyny

Gender Identity and Androgyny

Introduction

  • Exploration of gender identity beyond the binary of male and female.
  • Reference: Bem, S. L. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42, 155–162.
  • Initial questions to prompt self-reflection on gender.

Understanding Sex vs. Gender

  • Sex: Biological determination based on chromosomes, hormones, and anatomy.
  • Gender Identity: An individual's perception of their maleness or femaleness, typically established by age four.
  • Gender: A dimension reflecting varying amounts of masculinity and femininity. It is explained on a spectrum, with individuals ranging from masculine to androgynous to feminine.

Traditional vs. Two-Dimensional View of Gender

  • Traditional View (Pre-1970s):
    • Masculinity and femininity were seen as mutually exclusive.
    • Represented as opposite ends of a one-dimensional scale.
    • Psychological adjustment was thought to be optimal when individuals strongly identified with their biological sex (masculine men, feminine women).
  • Two-Dimensional View (Challenged by Anne Constantinople in 1973):
    • Masculinity and femininity are separate dimensions.
    • Individuals can be high or low in both masculinity and femininity simultaneously.

Bem's Concept of Androgyny

  • Sandra Bem challenged the idea that healthy gender identity requires conforming to societal expectations based on biological sex.
  • Androgyny: Embracing both masculine and feminine characteristics.
    • Offers greater behavioral flexibility across situations.
    • A balanced person can incorporate both masculine and feminine behaviors, potentially leading to greater happiness and well-being.
  • The concept of androgyny came from "andro" meaning male, and "gyn" referring to female.
  • Individuals with narrowly defined self-concepts tend to suppress behaviors not considered appropriate for their sex.

Theoretical Propositions for Measuring Androgyny

  • Bem aimed to develop a scale to measure androgyny, differing from previous masculinity-femininity scales.
  • Innovations in Bem's Scale:
    • Two Separate Scales: Measures masculinity and femininity independently.
    • Desirable Traits: Based on traits considered desirable for each sex in American society, rather than commonly observed behaviors.
    • Differentiation: Distinguishes among masculine, feminine, and androgynous individuals by analyzing the difference between scores on the feminine and masculine sections.
    • Bem explains a characteristic was considered masculine if it was more desirable for men than women in American society. The opposite was true for identifying feminine characteristics.

Method: Bem Sex-Role Inventory (BSRI) Development

  • Item Selection:
    • Initial lists of positively valued masculine, feminine, and gender-neutral characteristics.
    • 100 Stanford University undergraduates (50 male, 50 female) rated the desirability of traits for men and women on a 7-point scale.
    • Top 20 highest-rated characteristics were selected for the masculinity and femininity scales.
    • 10 positive and 10 negative gender-neutral items were included to avoid response bias.
    • The final scale consists of 60 items in random order.

Scoring the BSRI

  • Respondents rate each item on a 7-point scale (1 = Never or almost never true, 7 = Always or almost always true).
  • Three scores are calculated:
    • Masculinity Score: Average rating on masculine items.
    • Femininity Score: Average rating on feminine items.
    • Androgyny Score: Femininity score minus masculinity score.

Interpretation of Androgyny Scores

  • Scores range from -6 to +6.
  • Scores near zero indicate androgyny.
  • Positive scores indicate greater femininity.
  • Negative scores indicate greater masculinity.
  • Examples:
    • Jennifer: Masculinity = 1.5, Femininity = 6.4, Androgyny = 4.9
    • Richard: Masculinity = 5.8, Femininity = 2.1, Androgyny = -3.7
    • Dana: Masculinity = 3.9, Femininity = 4.3, Androgyny = 0.4

Results: Reliability and Validity of the BSRI

  • Reliability:
    • High internal consistency for both masculinity and femininity scales.
    • High test-retest reliability over a four-week period.
  • Validity:
    • Masculinity and femininity scales were unrelated, confirming they measure independent dimensions.
    • Men scored higher on masculine items, and women scored higher on feminine items, as expected.
    • A significant number of respondents were categorized as androgynous.
  • Table 2 shows the percentages of masculine, feminine, and androgynous respondents in Bem's study.

Discussion: Impact of Bem's Research

  • Bem's work challenged the traditional assumption that sex-typed individuals typify mental health.
  • The study encouraged a focus on the consequences of flexible sex-role self-concepts.
  • Bem stated that in a society where rigid sex-role differentiation has already outlived its utility, perhaps the androgynous person will come to define a more human standard of psychological health.
  • Western cultures have become more accepting of androgyny.
  • Social changes in gender roles and expectations are evident in various aspects of life.
  • However, sex-role expectations still exert powerful influences, and gender-based discrimination persists.

Criticisms and Subsequent Research

  • Androgynous individuals tend to have higher self-esteem and adaptability.
  • They may also experience greater success in intimate relationships.
  • Some researchers suggest that the advantages of androgyny may be primarily due to masculine traits.
  • Refinement of the androgyny concept to include four dimensions:
    • Desirable Femininity
    • Undesirable Femininity
    • Desirable Masculinity
    • Undesirable Masculinity

Recent Applications and Validity of BSRI

  • One study reexamined BSRI items and found most still distinguished masculinity and femininity (Holt & Ellis, 1998).
  • Another study found conflicting results, with fewer items rated as more desirable for one sex over the other (Konrad & Harris, 2002).
  • Possible explanations for discrepancies:
    • Geographic variations in gender views.
    • Participants guessing the study's purpose and providing egalitarian responses.
  • The BSRI continues to be used in studies on sexuality and gender, including:
    • Effects of sexually explicit films on men's attitudes toward women.
    • Changes in gender behaviors depending on the sex of the person being interacted with.
    • Cross-cultural variations in gender roles.
    • The effect of gender identity on eating disorders.

Conclusion

  • Bem's research has broadened the view of gender identity.
  • It has allowed individuals to expand their range of activities, choices, and life goals.
  • Reference:
    • Bem, S. L. (1993). The Lenses of Gender: Transforming the Debate on Sexual Inequality. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
    • Bem, S. L. (1998). An Unconventional Family. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
    • Constantinople, A. (1973). Masculinity-femininity: An exception to a famous dictum? Psychological Bulletin, 80, 389-407.
    • Holt, C., & Ellis, J. (1998). Assessing the current validity of the Bem Sex Role Inventory. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 39, 929–941.
    • Klingenspor, B. (2002). Gender-related self-discrepancies and bulimic eating behavior. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 24, 51-64.
    • Konrad, A., & Harris, C. (2002). Desirability of the Bem Sex-Role Inventory for women and men: A comparison between African Americans and European Americans. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 47, 259–271.
    • Mulac, A., Jansma, L., & Linz, D. (2002). Men's behavior toward women after viewing sexually-explicit films: Degradation makes a difference. Communication Monographs, 69, 311-328.
    • Pickard, J., & Strough, J. (2003). The effects of same-sex and other-sex contexts on masculinity and femininity. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 48, 421-432.
    • Ricciardelli, L., & Williams, R. (1995). Desirable and undesirable gender traits in three behavioral domains. Sex Roles, 33, 637-655
    • Sugihara, Y., & Katsurada, E. (2000). Gender-role personality traits in Japanese culture. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 24, 309-318.
    • Taylor, M., & Hall, J. (1982). Psychological androgyny: Theories, methods and conclusions. Psychological Bulletin, 92, 347-366.
    • Whitley, B. (1983). Sex role orientation and self esteem: A critical meta-analytic review. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 773–786.
    • Woodhill, B., & Samuels, C. (2003). Positive and negative androgyny and their relationship with psychological health and well-being. Sex Roles, 48, 555-565.