Total views : 277

Instrumentalization of Gender Culture: Functionality Limitations and Social Framework

Affiliations

  • Novosibirsk State University of Economics and Management, Novosibirsk, Russian Federation

Abstract


Background/Objectives: This paper aims to study the sociological characteristics of gender culture, which is considered as a social inheritance program. Methods/Statistical Analysis: The methodological basis of the study consists of the fundamental ideas of theoretical sociology, comparative analysis and interdisciplinary approach. The study is based on the conceptual work and the results of studies of Russian and foreign authors dedicated to the analysis of gender, gender culture and gender stereotypes. As an empirical method, the questionnaire surveys have been used. The article presents the results of studying stereotyped statements. Findings: Based on the study methodology, it has been found that the respondents' worldview is gender-stereotyped regarding both women and men. Some of the stereotypes about women say that they are inconsistent and capricious. The stereotype is that the woman does not necessarily need to "make a career"; the priority for her is the children and the family, despite the active involvement of women in business. Stereotypes about men include the fear to be recognized as non-professionals and the cold-bloodedness. Men are afraid of losing their masculinity. Both groups of respondents share the stereotype that men have a larger number of personal leadership qualities than the women. But at the same time, the study of personal qualities of the male leader and female leader shows that there are no differences between both groups of respondents. Comparison of the results of the study of stereotypical statements about the personal qualities of the leader and the real qualities of the leaders of different sexes has shown implicit contradictions of gender stereotypes. Application/Improvements: The obtained results are quite unique as gender culture is considered as a social inheritance program. This approach is innovative, so the results have considerable theoretical and practical importance. They not only complement the idea of gender culture, gender stereotypes within the framework of sociology, but also fundamentally change the approach to the interpretation of gender studies.

Keywords

Gender, Gender Culture, Gender Stereotypes.

Full Text:

 |  (PDF views: 259)

References


  • Bem SL. Sex typing and the avoidance of cross-sex behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1976 Jan; 33(1):48–54.
  • Bem SL. Gender sсheme theory and its impliсations for сhild development: Raising gender-sсhematiс сhildren in a gender-sсhematiс soсiety. Journal of Women in Сulture and Soсiety. 1983; 8(4):598–616.
  • Bem S., Dismantling gender polarization and compulsory heterosexuality: Should we turn the volume down or up? Journal of Sex Research. 1995; 32:329–34.
  • Blier MJ, Blier-Wilson LA. Gender differences in self-rated emotional expressiveness. Sex Roles. 1989; 21:287–95.
  • Chodorow NJ. Psychoanalyst and gender theorist. Featured interview in Clio’s Psyche 11, 4, Special Issue: The Voice. Personal Experience and Psychology of Women at Work and in Modern Life; 2005. p. 134–43.
  • Eagly AH. Sex differences in social behavior: Comparing social role theory and evolutionary psychology. American Psychologist. 1997; 52(12):1380–3.
  • Eagly AH. Achieving relational authenticity in leadership: Does gender matter? The Leadership Quarterly. 2005; 16(3):459–74.
  • Goffman E. Gender advertisements. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press; 1979.
  • Goffman E. Gender Display. Studies in the Anthropology of Visual communication. 1977; 3:69–77.
  • Hirdman Y. The gender system. T. Andreasen, et al. (Eds.) Moving on New Perspective on the Women’s Movement. Aarhus Univ. Press; 1991. p. 208–20.
  • Lorber J, Farrell S. (Eds.). The Social Construction of Gender. Sage Publications; 1991.
  • West K, Zimmerman D. Doing gender. Gender notebooks. First issue, St. Petersburg Branch of the Institute of Sociology of Russian Academy of Sciences. St. Petersburg; 1997. p. 94–124.
  • Lorber J, Moore LJ. Gender and the social construction of illness. New York: Rowman Altamira; 2002.
  • Butler J. Gender trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. Reprinted. London, New York: Routledge; 2008.
  • Scott J. Some reflections on gender and politics. Ferre MM, Lorber J, Hess BD. Revisioning Gender. London: Sage Publication; 1999. p. 70–96.
  • Rich A. Of woman born: Motherhood as experience and institution. New York, London: W. W. Norton and Company; 1999.
  • Unger RK. Toward a redefinition of sex and gender. American Psychologist. 1979 Nov; 34(11):1085–94. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.34.11.1085
  • Rubin G. The traffic in women. Rivkin J, Ryan M. (Eds.) Literary Theory: An Anthology. 2nd ed. Malden, MA: Blackwell; 2004. p. 770–94.
  • Kletsina IS. The psychology of gender relations: Theory and Practice. St. Petersburg: Aletheia; 2004.
  • Zdravomyslova EA, Temkina AA. Sociology of gender relations and gender approach in sociology. Sociological Researches. 2000; 11:15–24.
  • Voronina OA. Socio-cultural determinants of gender theory in Russia and in the West. Social Sciences and the Modern Era. 2000; 4:9–20.
  • Barchunova TV. The selfish gender or reproduction of gender asymmetry in gender studies. Social Sciences and the Modern Era. 2002; 5:180–91.
  • Karelova GN. Women of the renewing Russia: Experience of the implementation of gender approach. Moscow; 1997.
  • Dubinin NP. Philosophical sociological aspects of human genetics. Philosophical issues. 1971; 1:36–45.
  • Dubinin NP. Philosophical sociological aspects of human genetics. Philosophical issues. 1971; 2:55–64.
  • Berger P, Lukman T. The social construction of reality: Translated from English by Rutkevich ED. Moscow: Medium; 1995.
  • Bern S. Gender Psychology. Laws of Masculine and Feminine Behavior. St. Petersburg: Praim-EVROZNAK; 2007.
  • Ashmore RD, Del Boca FK. Sex stereotypes and implicit personality theory: Toward cognitive social-psychological conception. Sex Roles. 1979; 5:219–48.
  • Ilinykh SA. The impact of gender on the picture of the world: Experience of sociological research. Sociology: Methodology, methods, mathematical modeling. 2009; 28:66–86.
  • Ilinykh SA. Gender as a subject of control of men and women. Current Research. Monograph. LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing GmbH and Co. KG; 2011.
  • Ilinykh SA, Udaltsova MV. Gender aspects of entrepreneurship in Russia. Ecology, Environment and Conservation. 2014; 20:499–505.
  • Samartseva OK, Fomina TA. Man and woman: Management in the sphere of business. Sociological Surveys. 2000; 11:57–63.
  • Chirikova AE, Krichevskaia ON. Female manager: Business strategies and image of “Self ”. Sociological Surveys. 2000; 11:45–56.

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.