Sex Roles

, Volume 73, Issue 11–12, pp 481–489 | Cite as

The Complexity of Gender: It Is All That and More….In sum, It Is Complicated

Feminist Forum Commentary
First Online:

Abstract

This commentary responds to “Two Traditions of Research on Gender Identity,” where Wood and Eagly (2015) discussed two traditions of research on gender identity: gender self-categorization and gender-typed traits. This commentary replies, with a focus on research and theory from the U.S., by noting the importance of each approach, but more importantly, by noting the areas of gender identity not addressed by Wood and Eagly. Issues of complexity discussed include the multidimensional nature of gender, the limitations of the gender binary system, intersectionality, and the developmental context. Also, this commentary provides advice for incorporating the developmental context in research on gender identity. The commentary concludes by discussing the usefulness of qualitative research methodologies for incorporating other complexities in research, but also notes the need for innovation in methodology to better reflect the complex nature of gender in research.

Keywords

Gender roles Gender identity Gender expression Gender binary system Intersectionality Developmental context 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Baltes, P. B. (1987). Theoretical propositions of life-span developmental psychology: On the dynamics between growth and decline. Developmental Psychology, 23, 611–626. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.23.5.611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bem, S. L. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42, 155–162. doi: 10.1037/h0036215.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Bem, S. L. (1981). Gender schema theory: A cognitive account of sex typing. Psychological Review, 88, 354–364. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.88.4.354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bem, S. L. (1993). The lenses of gender: Transforming the debate on sexual inequality. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Carstensen, L. L. (1992). Social and emotional patterns in adulthood: Support for socioemotional selectivity theory. Psychology and Aging, 7, 331–338. doi: 10.1037/0882-7974.7.3.331.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Carstensen, L. L. (2006). The influence of a sense of time on human development. Science, 312, 1913–1915. doi: 10.1126/science.1127488.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Deaux, K., & Stewart, A. J. (2001). Framing gendered identities. In R. K. Unger (Ed.), Handbook of the psychology of women and gender (pp. 84–97). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc.Google Scholar
  8. Diekman, A. B., & Eagly, A. H. (2000). Stereotypes as dynamic constructs: women and men of the past, present, and future. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 1171–1188. doi: 10.1177/0146167200262001.
  9. Eckes, T., & Trautner, H. M. (2000). The developmental social psychology of gender. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.Google Scholar
  10. Egan, S. K., & Perry, D. G. (2001). Gender identity: A multidimensional analysis with implications for psychosocial adjustment. Developmental Psychology, 37, 451–463. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.37.4.451.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Eliot, L. (2012). Pink brain, blue brain: How small differences grow into troublesome gaps-and what we can do about it. London: Oneworld Publications.Google Scholar
  12. Forbes, A. (2014). A (short) primer on lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) culture in America. Jury Expert, 26(1), 1–9. Retrieved from http://www.thejuryexpert.comGoogle Scholar
  13. Hartup, W. W., & Stevens, N. (1997). Friendships and adaptation in the life course. Psychological Bulletin, 121, 355–370. doi: 10.1111/1467-8721.00018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hartup, W. W., & Stevens, N. (1999). Friendships and adaptation across the life span. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 8, 76–79. doi: 10.1111/1467-8721.00018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Killermann, S. (2015). The Genderbread Person v3. Retrieved from http://itspronouncedmetrosexual.com/2015/03/the-genderbread-person-v3/
  16. Killermann, S. (n.d.) What does the asterisk in “trans*” stand for? | It’s pronounced metrosexual. Retrieved from http://itspronouncedmetrosexual.com/2012/05/what-does-the-asterisk-in-trans-stand-for/
  17. Kohlberg, L. (1966). A cognitive-developmental analysis of children’s sex-role concepts and attitudes. In E. E. Maccoby (Ed.), The development of sex differences (pp. 82–173). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Lehavot, K., King, K. M., & Simoni, J. M. (2011). Development and validation of a gender expression measure among sexual minority women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 35, 381–400. doi: 10.1177/0361684311413554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lemaster, P., Strough, J., Stoiko, R., & DiDonato, L. (2015). To have and to do: Masculine facets of gender predict men’s and women’s attitudes about gender equality among college students. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 16, 195–205. doi: 10.1037/a0036429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Liben, L. S., & Bigler, R. S. (2002). The developmental course of gender differentiation: Conceptualizing, measuring, and evaluating constructs and pathways. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 67, vii–147. doi: 10.1111/1540-5834.t01-1-00187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lips, H. M. (2006). A new psychology of women: Gender, culture, and ethnicity, 3rd edn. Boston: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  22. Lips, H. (2014). Gender: The basics. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  23. Luhtanen, R., & Crocker, J. (1992). A collective self-esteem scale: Self-evaluation of one’s social identity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 302–318. doi: 10.1177/0146167292183006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Parker, J. G., & Gottman, J. M. (1989). Social and emotional development in a relational context: Friendship interaction from early childhood to adolescence. In T. J. Berndt & G. W. Ladd (Eds.), Peer relationships in child development (pp. 95–131). Oxford, England: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  25. Ruble, D. N., & Martin, C. L. (2002). Conceptualizing, measuring, and evaluating the developmental course of gender differentiation: Compliments, queries, and quandaries: Commentary. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 67, 148–166. doi: 10.1111/1540-5834.00200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Shields, S. A. (2008). Gender: An intersectionality perspective. Sex Roles, 59, 301–311. doi: 10.1007/s11199-008-9501-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Slaby, R. G., & Frey, K. S. (1975). Development of gender constancy and selective attention to same-sex models. Child Development, 46, 849–856. doi: 10.2307/1128389.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Smith, T. E., & Leaper, C. (2006). Self-perceived gender typicality and the peer context during adolescence. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 16, 91–103. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-7795.2006.00123.x.
  29. Spence, J. T., & Buckner, C. (1995). Masculinity and femininity: Defining the undefinable. In P. J. Kalbfleisch & J. Cody (Eds.), Gender, power, and communication in human relationships (pp. 105–138). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum associates Inc.Google Scholar
  30. Spence, J. T., Helmreich, R., & Stapp, J. (1975). Ratings of self and peers on sex role attributes and their relation to self-esteem and conceptions of masculinity and femininity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 29–39. doi: 10.1037/h0076857.
  31. Strough, J., & Keener, E. J. (2014). Goals and strategies for solving interpersonal everyday problems across the lifespan. In P. Verhaeghen & C. Hertzog (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of emotion, social cognition, and problem solving in adulthood (pp. 190–205). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199899463.013.002.
  32. Tobin, D. D., Menon, M., Menon, M., Spatta, B. C., Hodges, E. V., & Perry, D. G. (2010). The intrapsychics of gender: A model of self-socialization. Psychological Review, 117, 601–622. doi: 10.1037/a0018936.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Wood, W., & Eagly, A. H. (2015). Two traditions of research on gender identity. Sex Roles, this issue. doi: 10.1007/s11199-015-0480-2.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Slippery Rock UniversitySlippery RockUSA

Personalised recommendations