Advertisement

Sex Roles

, Volume 80, Issue 7–8, pp 429–442 | Cite as

Looking for a Family Man? Norms for Men Are Toppling in Heterosexual Relationships

  • Loes MeeussenEmail author
  • Colette Van Laar
  • Marijke Verbruggen
Original Article

Abstract

Gender norms indicate that men should be agentic and work-oriented rather than communal and family-oriented. Yet, this traditional expectation conflicts with findings that communion is highly valued in romantic partners. Moreover, because more women in industrialized countries are pursuing careers, they may increasingly seek family-oriented partners to share the second shift of family tasks. Investigating the attractiveness of communal, family-oriented men, we show that 87 female college students in Belgium evaluate more family-oriented men as generally more attractive (Study 1) and that especially college women in Belgium with high work ambitions seek communion and family orientation in ideal partners (Study 2, n = 224). Lastly, women in 198 Belgian heterosexual dual-earning couples are more satisfied with their lives and experience less work and family conflict the more their partner indicates that he is oriented toward his close family (Study 3). Together, our findings outline the contextualized nature of norms and add to knowledge on norm change, showing how gender equality may be fed through romantic relationships. Moreover, our findings suggest the importance of exploring men’s family orientations in couples therapy, and they call for counselors, as well as policymakers and Human Resources practitioners, to guide men in times of norm change to enable men to be family-oriented and to offer family-friendly work policies.

Keywords

Gender equality Social norms Psychology of men Marriage and family measures Work-life balance Heterosexual couples 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank Ilka Wolter for her contribution to Study 1 and Tess Schooreel for her contribution to Study 3. This research was funded by Research Foundation Flanders Grants G.0630.14 N; G.O.E66.14 N; 12X4718N

Compliance with Ethical Standards

The protocols in Studies 1 and 2 were approved by the University of Leuven Social and Societal Ethics Committee. Study 3 (2013–2014) was carried out before this committee was founded (April 2014) but complies with the guidelines of this later committee, with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards, and with the privacy laws.

Supplementary material

11199_2018_946_MOESM1_ESM.docx (55 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 54 kb)

References

  1. Abrams, J. A., Maxwell, M. L., & Belgrave, F. Z. (2017). Circumstances beyond their control: Black women’s perceptions of black manhood. Sex Roles. Advance online publication.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-017-0870-8.
  2. Allen, T. D., Herst, D. E., Bruck, C. S., & Sutton, M. (2000). Consequences associated with work to-family conflict: A review and agenda for future research. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5, 278–308.  https://doi.org/10.1037//1076-8998.5.2.278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2013). The spillover-crossover model. In J. Grzywacz & E. Demerouti (Eds.), New frontiers in work and family research (pp. 54–70). Hove, UK: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bartley, S. J., Blanton, P. W., & Gilliard, J. L. (2005). Husbands and wives in dual-earner marriages: Decision-making, gender role attitudes, division of household labor, and equity. Marriage & Family Review, 37, 69–94.  https://doi.org/10.1300/J002v37n04_05.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brown, E. R., & Diekman, A. B. (2010). What will I be? Exploring gender differences in near and distant possible selves. Sex Roles, 63, 568–579.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-010-9827-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Carlson, D. S., Kacmar, K. M., & Williams, L. J. (2000). Construction and initial validation of a multidimensional measure of work–family conflict. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 56, 249–276.  https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1999.1713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cialdini, R. B., & Trost, M. R. (1998). Social influence: Social norms, conformity, and compliance. In D. Gilbert, S. Fiske, & G. Lindzy (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 151–192). Boston: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  8. Coleman, J. M., & Franiuk, R. (2011). Perceptions of mothers and fathers who take temporary work leave. Sex Roles, 64, 311–323.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-010-9918-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cotter, D. A., Hermsen, J. M., & England, P. (2008). Moms and jobs: Trends in mothers’ employment and which mothers stay home. In S. Coontz, M. Parson, & G. Ralay (Eds.), American families: A multicultural reader (2nd ed., pp. 379–386). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. Croft, A., Schmader, T., & Block, K. (2015). An unexamined inequality; cultural and psychological barriers to men’s engagement with communal roles. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 19, 343–370.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868314564789.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cuddy, A. J. C., Fiske, S. T., & Glick, P. (2004). When professionals become mothers, warmth doesn’t cut the ice. Journal of Social Issues, 60, 701–718.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0022-4537.2004.00381.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. De Hauw, Y., Grow, A., & Van Bavel, J. (2016). The reversed gender gap in education and assortative mating in Europe. European Journal of Population, 10, 1–39.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10680-016-9407-z.Google Scholar
  13. 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.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167200262001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71–75.  https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Eagly, A. H. (1987). Sex differences in social behavior: A social-role interpretation. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  16. Eagly, A. H., Wood, W., & Diekman, A. (2000). Social role theory of sex differences and similarities: A current appraisal. In T. Eckes & H. M. Trautner (Eds.), The developmental social psychology of gender (pp. 123–174). New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  17. Eagly, A. H., Eastwick, P. W., & Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C. (2009). Possible selves in marital roles: The impact of the anticipated division of labor on the mate preferences of women and men. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35, 403–414.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167208329696.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Eastwick, P. W., Eagly, A. H., Glick, P., Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C., Fiske, S. T., Blum, A. M. B., … Volpato, C. (2006). Is traditional gender ideology associated with sex-typed mate preferences? A test in nine nations. Sex Roles, 54, 603–614.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-006-9027-x.
  19. Elder, G. H. (1998). The life course as developmental theory. Child Development, 69, 1–12.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1998.tb06128.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. England, P. (2010). The gender revolution: Uneven and stalled. Gender & Society, 24, 149–166.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243210361475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. European Institute for Gender Equality. (2017). Gender Equality Index 2017 − Measuring gender equality in the European Union 2005–2015. Retrieved from http://eige.europa.eu/gender-statistics/gender-equality-index.
  22. Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J., Glick, P., & Xu, J. (2002). A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 878–902.  https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.82.6.878.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fitzsimons, G. M., & Finkel, E. J. (2010). Interpersonal influences on self-regulation. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19, 101–105.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721410364499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fitzsimons, G. M., & Finkel, E. J. (2011). The effects of self-regulation on social relationships. In K. D. Vohs & R. F. Baumeister (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation: Research, theory, and applications (2nd ed., pp. 407–421). New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  25. Fox, G. L., & Bruce, C. (2001). Conditional fatherhood: Identity theory and parental investment theory as alternative sources of explanation of fathering. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63, 394–403.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2001.00394.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Frisco, M. L., & Williams, K. (2003). Perceived housework equity, marital happiness, and divorce in dual-earner households. Journal of Family Issues, 24, 51–73.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X02238520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Goodin, H. J. (2003). The nursing shortage in the United States of America: An integrative review of the literature. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 43, 335–343.  https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-648.2003.02722_1.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Haines, E. L., Deaux, K., & Lofaro, N. (2016). The times they are a-changing… or are they not? A comparison of gender stereotypes 1983-2014. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 40, 353–363.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684316634081.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hayes, A. F. (2009). Beyond Baron and Kenny: Statistical mediation analysis in the new millennium. Communication Monographs, 76, 408–420.  https://doi.org/10.1080/03637750903310360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hays, S. (1996). Cultural contradictions of motherhood. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Hill, E. J., Hawkins, A. J., Ferris, M., & Weitzman, M. (2001). Finding an extra day a week: The positive influence of perceived job flexibility on work and family life balance. Family Relations, 50, 49–58.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3729.2001.00049.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hochschild, A., & Machung, A. (2012). The second shift: Working families and the revolution at home. New York: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  33. Hofmann, W., Finkel, E. J., & Fitzsimons, G. M. (2015). Close relationships and self-regulation: How relationship satisfaction facilitates momentary goal pursuit. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109, 434–452.  https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000020.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C., & Eagly, A. H. (2002). Another look at sex differences in referred mate characteristics: The effects of endorsing the traditional female gender role. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26, 322–328.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-6402.t01-2-00071.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kemkes-Grottenthaler, A. (2003). Postponing or rejecting parenthood? Results of a survey among female academic professionals. Journal of Biosocial Science, 35, 213–226.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S002193200300213X.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kitterød, R. H., & Rønsen, M. (2017). Does involved fathering produce a larger total workload for fathers than for mothers? Evidence from Norway. Family Relations, 66, 468–483.  https://doi.org/10.1111/fare.12264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Knoester, C., Petts, R. J., & Eggebeen, D. J. (2007). Commitments to fathering and the well-being and social participation of new, disadvantaged fathers. Journal of Marriage and Family, 69, 991–1004.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2007.00426.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Koenig, A. M., & Eagly, A. H. (2014). Evidence for the social role theory of stereotype content: Observations of groups’ roles shape stereotypes. Attitudes and Social Cognition, 107, 371–392.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037215.Google Scholar
  39. Lennon, M. C., & Rosenfield, S. (1994). Relative fairness and the division of housework: The importance of options. American Journal of Sociology, 100, 506–531.  https://doi.org/10.1086/230545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Mahalik, J. R., Locke, B. D., Ludlow, L. H., Diemer, M. A., Scott, R. P. J., Gottfried, M., … Freitas, G. (2003). Development of the conformity to masculine norms inventory. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 4, 3–25.  https://doi.org/10.1037/1524-9220.4.1.3.
  41. Martin, C. L., & Ruble, D. N. (2010). Patterns of gender development. Annual Review of Psychology, 61, 353–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 397–422.  https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Mathews, T. J., & Hamilton, B. E. (2009). Delayed childbearing: More women are having their first child later in life. NCHS Data Brief, 21, 1–8.Google Scholar
  44. Meeussen, L., Veldman, J., & Van Laar, C. (2016). Combining gender, work, and family identities: The cross-over and spill-over of gender norms into young adults’ work and family aspirations. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1–11.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01781.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Nakamura, M., & Akiyoshi, M. (2015). What determines the perception of fairness regarding household division of labor between spouses? PLoS One, 10, e0132608.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0132608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Prentice, D. A., & Carranza, E. (2002). What women and men should be, shouldn’t be, are allowed to be, and don’t have to be: The contents of prescriptive gender stereotypes. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26, 269–281.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-6402.t01-1-00066.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Quinn, D. M., & Earnshaw, V. A. (2013). Concealable stigmatized identities and psychological well-being. Social and Personality Compass, 7, 40–51.  https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Regan, P. C., & Berscheid, E. (1997). Gender differences in characteristics desired in a potential sexual and marriage partner. Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality, 9, 25–37.  https://doi.org/10.1300/J056v09n01_02.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Regan, P. C., & Joshi, A. (2003). Ideal partner preferences among adolescents. Social Behavior and Personality, 31, 13–20.  https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2003.31.1.13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Ridgeway, C. L. (2011). Framed by gender: How gender inequality persists in the modern world. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Riggs, J. M. (1997). Mandates for mothers and fathers: Perceptions of breadwinners and care givers. Sex Roles, 37, 565–580.  https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025611119822.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Roskam, I., Raes, M., & Mikolajczak, M. (2017). Exhausted parents: Development and preliminary validation of the parental burnout inventory. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 163.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Rudman, L. A., & Mescher, K. (2013). Penalizing men who request a family leave: Is flexibility stigma a femininity stigma? Journal of Social Issues, 69, 322–340.  https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Schooreel, T., & Verbruggen, M. (2016). Use of family-friendly work arrangements and work-family conflict: Crossover effects in dual-earner couples. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 21, 119–132.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Snir, R., & Harpaz, I. (2005). Test-retest reliability of the relative work centrality measure. Psychological Reports, 97, 559–562.  https://doi.org/10.2466/PR0.97.6.559-562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Stryker, S., & Burke, P. J. (2000). The past, present, and future of an identity theory. Social Psychology Quarterly, 63, 284–297.  https://doi.org/10.2307/2695840.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Theunissen, G., Verbruggen, M., Forrier, A., & Sels, L. (2011). Career sidestep, wage setback? The impact of different types of employment interruptions on wages. Gender, Work & Organization, 18, E110–E131.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0432.2009.00471.x.Google Scholar
  58. Vandello, J. A., & Bosson, J. K. (2013). Hard won and easily lost: A review and synthesis of theory and research on precarious manhood. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 14, 101–113.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029826.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Wayne, J. H., & Cordeiro, B. L. (2003). Who is a good organizational citizen? Social perception of male and female employees who use family leave. Sex Roles, 49, 233–246.  https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024600323316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Wilkie, J. R., Ferree, M. M., & Ratcliff, K. S. (1998). Gender and fairness: Marital satisfaction in two earner couples. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 60, 577–594.  https://doi.org/10.2307/353530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Zentner, M., & Mitura, K. (2012). Stepping out of the caveman’s shadow: Nations’ gender gap predicts degree of sex differentiation in mate preferences. Psychological Science, 23, 1176–1185.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612441004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Zimmerman, T. S. (2000). Marital equality and satisfaction in stay-at-home mother and stay-at-home father families. Contemporary Family Therapy, 22, 337–354.  https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007816725358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center for Social and Cultural Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Educational SciencesUniversity of LeuvenLeuvenBelgium
  2. 2.Research Foundation–FlandersBrusselsBelgium
  3. 3.Research Centre for Work and Organisation Studies, Faculty of Economics and BusinessUniversity of LeuvenLeuvenBelgium

Personalised recommendations