Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Framing Gender

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Handbook of the Sociology of Gender

Part of the book series: Handbooks of Sociology and Social Research ((HSSR))

Abstract

In this chapter, we give a micro-level, social psychological account of how the gender beliefs evoked by sex categorization reinforce and recreate gender inequality. We argue that social interactions are framed by gender because people instantaneously and unconsciously sex categorize each other, evoking cultural beliefs about men and women. While these cultural beliefs help actors navigate social interaction, using gender as a primary frame for making sense of others brings cultural understandings of gender into all social interactions. This causes men to have more status and influence in small, goal-oriented groups, thereby advantaging them and recreating existing gender inequality in settings that vary from the workplace to the home. Because of our reliance on gender as a primary frame for understanding others, cultural beliefs about gender are rewritten on to new activities, causing gender inequality to persist in the face of societal change. Despite the increasing number of social interactions that occur online and mounting challenges to the gender binary, we argue that these processes will continue in the future unless conscious effort is made to disrupt them. We conclude with suggestions on how future research can illuminate tools to interrupt the effects of the gender frame.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    However, it is important to note that there may be some intersectional exceptions to this under very specific circumstances.

References

  • Allum, J. R., & Okahana, H. (2015). Graduate enrollment and degrees: 2004 to 2014. Washington, DC: Council of Graduate Schools. http://cgsnet.org/ckfinder/userfiles/files/E_and_D_2014_report_final.pdf. Accessed January 16, 2017.

  • Amanatullah, E. T., & Morris, M. W. (2010). Negotiating gender roles: Gender differences in assertive negotiating are mediated by women’s fear of backlash and attenuated when negotiating on behalf of others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 256–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • American Civil Liberties Union. (2017). Non-discrimination laws: State by state information. https://www.aclu.org/map/non-discrimination-laws-state-state-information-map. Accessed January 16, 2017.

  • Anderson, C., & Willer, R. (2014). Do status hierarchies benefit groups? A bounded functionalist account of status. In J. T. Cheng, J. L. Tracy, & Cameron Anderson (Eds.), The psychology of social status (pp. 47–70). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anti Violence Project. (2013). Hate violence against transgender communities. http://www.avp.org/storage/documents/ncavp_transhvfactsheet.pdf. Accessed January 17, 2017.

  • Berger, J., & Webster, M., Jr. (2006). Expectations, status, and behavior. In P. J. Burke (Ed.), Contemporary social psychological theories (pp. 268–300). Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bianchi, S. M., Sayer, L. C., Milkie, M. A., & Robinson, J. P. (2012). Housework: Who did, does or will do it, and how much does it matter? Social Forces, 91, 55–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blair, I. V., & Banaji, M. R. (1996). Automatic and controlled processes in stereotype priming. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 1142–1163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boring, A., Ottoboni, K., & Stark, P. B. (2016). Student evaluations of teaching (mostly) do not measure teaching effectiveness. Science Open. http://dx.doi.org/10.14293/S2199-1006.1.SOR-EDU.AETBZC.v1.

  • Brewer, M. B., & Lui, L. N. (1989). The primacy of age and sex in the structure of person categories. Social Cognition, 7, 262–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bursztyn, L., Fujiwara, T., & Pallais, A. (2017). ‘Acting wife’: Marriage market incentives and labor market investments. NBER Working Paper No. 23043. http://www.nber.org/papers/w23043. Accessed January 16, 2017.

  • Cech, E. A. (2013). The self-expressive edge of occupational sex segregation. American Journal of Sociology, 119, 747–789.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cejka, M. A., & Eagly, A. H. (1999). Gender-stereotypic images of occupations correspond to the sex segregation of employment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 413–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charles, M., & Grusky, D. (2004). Occupational ghettos: The worldwide segregation of women and men. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chwe, M. S. (2001). Rational ritual: Culture, coordination, and common knowledge. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Correll, S. J. (2001). Gender and the career choice process: The role of biased self-assessments. American Journal of Sociology, 106, 1691–1730.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Correll, S. J. (2004). Constraints into preferences: Gender, status, and emerging career aspirations. American Sociological Review, 69, 93–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cuddy, A. J., Fiske, S. T., & Click, P. (2007). The BIAS map: Behaviors from Intergroup affect and stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 631–648.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahl, G. B., Løken, K. V., & Mogstad, M. (2014). Peer effects in program participation. American Economic Review, 104, 2049–2074.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dwyer, R. (2013). The care economy? Gender, economic restructuring, and job polarization in the U. S. labor market. American Sociological Review, 78, 390–416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., & Carli, L. L. (2007). Through the labyrinth: The truth about how women become leaders. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • England, P. (2010). The gender revolution: Uneven and stalled. Gender & Society, 24, 149–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • England, P., Budig, M., & Folbre, N. (2002). Wages of virtue: The relative pay of care work. Social Problems, 49, 455–473.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Espenshade, T. J., & Radford, A. W. (2009). No longer separate, not yet equal: Race and class in elite college admission and campus life. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fiske, S. T., Lin, M., & Neuberg, S. (1999). The continuum model: Ten years later. In S. Chaiken & Y. Trope (Eds.), Dual process theories in social psychology (pp. 231–254). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fogarty, A. C. K. (2015). Gender ambiguity in the workplace: Trans and genderqueer discrimination (Ph.D. dissertation). Stanford University, Stanford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galinksy, A., Hall, E. V., & Cuddy, A. (2013). Gendered races: Implications for interracial marriage, leadership selection, and athletic participation. Psychological Science, 24, 498–506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gee, B., Peck, D., & Wong, J. (2015). Hidden in plain sight: Asian American leaders in Silicon Valley. Charleston, SC: The Ascend Foundation. http://c.ymcdn.com/sites/ascendleadership.site-ym.com/resource/resmgr/Research/HiddenInPlainSight_Paper_042.pdf. Accessed February 28, 2017.

  • Glick, P., Lameiras, M., Fiske, S. T., Eckes, T., Masser, B., Volpato, C., et al. (2004). Bad but bold: Ambivalent attitudes toward men predict gender inequality in 16 nations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 713–728.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, E., Galinsky, A., & Phillips, K. (2015). Gender profiling: A gendered race perspective on person-position fit. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41, 853–868.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harkness, S. K. (2016). Discrimination in lending markets: Status and the intersections of gender and race. Social Psychology Quarterly, 79, 81–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hegewisch, A., & Hartmann, H. (2014). Occupational segregation and the gender wage gap: A job half done. Washington, DC: Institute for Women’s Policy Research. http://www.iwpr.org/publications/pubs/occupational-segregation-and-the-gender-wage-gap-a-job-half-done. Accessed January 16, 2017.

  • Hogg, M. A. (2003). Intergroup relations. In J. D. DeLamater (Ed.), Handbook of social psychology (pp. 479–502). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huber, J. (2007). On the origins of gender inequality. Boulder: Paradigm Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Human Rights Campaign. (2017). Workplace discrimination laws and policies. http://www.hrc.org/resources/Workplace-Discrimination-Policies-Laws-and-Legislation. Accessed January 16, 2017.

  • Ito, T. A., & Urland, G. R. (2003). Race and gender on the brain: Electrocortical measures of attention to the race and gender of multiply categorizable individuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 616–626.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jiminéz, T. R., & Horowitz, A. L. (2013). When white is just alright: How immigrants redefine achievement and reconfigure the ethnoracial hierarchy. American Sociological Review, 78, 849–871.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kricheli-Katz, T., & Regev, T. (2016). How many cents on the dollar? Women and men in product markets. Science Advances, 2(2), e1500599.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kunda, Z., & Spencer, S. J. (2003). When do stereotypes come to mind and when do they color judgment? A goal-based theoretical framework for stereotype activation and application. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 522–554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leslie, S., Cimpian, A., Meyer, M., & Freeland, E. (2015). Expectations of brilliance underlie gender distributions across academic disciplines. Science, 347, 262–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levanon, A., England, P., & Allison, P. (2009). Occupational feminization and pay: Assessing causal dynamics using 1950–2000 U.S. census data. Social Forces, 88, 865–891.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, M. H., Kwan, V. S. Y., Cheung, A., & Fiske, S. T. (2005). Stereotype content model explains prejudice for an envied outgroup: Scale of anti-Asian American stereotypes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 34–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linza, N., & Neljesjö, C. (2012, November 30). M/M interview with Kent Bergsma. Manner of Man Magazine. http://mannerofman.blogspot.com/2012/11/mm-interview-with-kent-bergsma.html. Accessed January 16, 2017.

  • Livingston, R. W., Rosette, A. S., & Washington, E. F. (2012). Can an agentic black woman get ahead? The impact of race and interpersonal dominance on perceptions of female leaders. Psychological Science, 23, 354–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lopez, M. H., & Gonzalez-Barrera, A. (2014). Women’s college enrollment gains leave men behind. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center. http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/03/06/womens-college-enrollment-gains-leave-men-behind/. Accessed January 16, 2017.

  • Magee, J. C., & Galinsky, A. D. (2008). Social hierarchy: The self-reinforcing nature of power and status. The Academy of Management Annals, 2, 351–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McBee, T. P. (2015, October 29). Caitlyn Jenner, trans champion: “Maybe this is why God put me on earth”. Glamour. http://www.glamour.com/story/caitlyn-jenner. Accessed January 16, 2017.

  • Milkie, M. A. (1999). Social comparisons, reflected appraisals, and mass media: The impact of pervasive beauty images on black and white girls’ self-concepts. Social Psychology Quarterly, 62, 190–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moss-Racusin, C. A., Dovidio, J. F., Brescoll, V. L., Graham, M. J., & Handelsman, J. (2012). Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109, 16474–16479.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Center for Education Statistics. (2017). Fast facts. https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=27. Accessed January 16, 2017.

  • Newman, G. (2016, April 13). Why my videogame chooses your character’s race and gender for you. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/apr/13/videogame-chooses-character-race-gender-rust. Accessed January 16, 2017.

  • Pager, D. (2007). Marked: Race, crime, and finding work in an era of mass incarceration. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Perrin, A. (2015). Social media usage: 2005–2015. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center. http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/10/08/social-networking-usage-2005-2015/. Accessed January 16, 2017.

  • Powell, G. N., Butterfield, D. A., & Parent, J. D. (2002). Gender and managerial stereotypes: Have the times changed? Journal of Management, 28, 177–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rashotte, L. S., & Webster, M. (2005). Gender status beliefs. Social Science Research, 34, 618–633.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reuben, E., Sapienza, P., & Zingales, L. (2014). How stereotypes impair women’s careers in science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111, 4403–4408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ridgeway, C. L. (2011). Framed by gender: How gender inequality persists in the modern world. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ridgeway, C. L., Boyle, E. H., Kuipers, K., & Robinson, D. T. (1998). How do status beliefs develop? The role of resources and interactional experience. American Sociological Review, 63, 331–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ridgeway, C. L., & Correll, S. J. (2004). Unpacking the gender system: A theoretical perspective on cultural beliefs and social relations. Gender and Society, 18, 510–531.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ridgeway, C. L., & Fisk, S. R. (2012). Class rules, status dynamics, and “gateway” interactions. In S. T. Fiske & H. R. Markus (Eds.), Facing social class: How societal rank influences interaction (pp. 131–151). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ridgeway, C. L., & Kricheli-Katz, T. (2013). Intersecting cultural beliefs in social relations: Gender, race, and class binds and freedoms. Gender and Society, 27, 294–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ridgeway, C. L., & Nakagawa, S. (2014). Status. In J. D. McLeod, E. J. Lawler, & M. Schwalbe (Eds.), Handbook of the social psychology of inequality (pp. 3–25). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rinallo, D. (2011). Metro/fashion/tribes of men: Negotiating the boundaries of men’s legitimate consumption. In B. Cova, R. Kozinets, & A. Shankar (Eds.), Consumer tribes (pp. 76–92). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Risman, B. J. (2004). Gender as a social structure: Theory wrestling with activism. Gender & Society, 18, 429–450.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rudman, L. A., Moss-Racusin, C. A., Phelan, J. E., & Nauts, S. (2012). Status incongruity and backlash effects: Defending the gender hierarchy motivates prejudice against female leaders. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 165–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, D. J. (2004). The psychology of stereotyping. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schilt, K. (2010). Just one of the guys? Transgender men and the persistence of gender inequality. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Spence, J. T., & Buckner, C. E. (2000). Instrumental and expressive traits, trait stereotypes, and sexist attitudes: What do they signify? Psychology of Women Quarterly, 24, 44–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stangor, C., Lynch, L., Duan, C., & Glass, B. (1992). Categorization of individuals on the basis of multiple social features. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 207–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stryker, S., & Vryan, K. D. (2003). The symbolic interactionist frame. In J. DeLamater (Ed.), The handbook of social psychology (pp. 3–28). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7–24). Chicago: Nelson-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trytten, D. A., Lowe, A. W., & Walden, S. E. (2012). “Asians are good at math. What an awful stereotype”: The model minority stereotype’s impact on Asian American engineering students. Journal of Engineering Education, 101, 439–468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Twenge, J. M. (2001). Changes in women’s assertiveness in response to status and roles: A cross-temporal meta-analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 133–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, D. G., & Berger, J. (1997). Gender and interpersonal task behaviors: Status expectation accounts. Sociological Perspectives, 40, 1–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, L. S., Doerer, S., & Webster, M. (2014). Status, participation, and influence in task groups. Sociological Perspectives, 57, 364–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • West, C., & Zimmerman, D. H. (1987). Doing gender. Gender and Society, 1, 125–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Jon Overton for his diligent and thorough work as a research assistant.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Kent State University, 215 Merrill Hall, Kent, OH, 44242, USA

    Susan R. Fisk

  2. Stanford University, 450 Serra Mall—Bldg. 120, Stanford, CA, 94305, USA

    Cecilia L. Ridgeway

Authors
  1. Susan R. Fisk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Cecilia L. Ridgeway
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Susan R. Fisk .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA

    Barbara J. Risman

  2. University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, Iowa, USA

    Carissa M. Froyum

  3. University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA

    William J. Scarborough

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Fisk, S.R., Ridgeway, C.L. (2018). Framing Gender. In: Risman, B., Froyum, C., Scarborough, W. (eds) Handbook of the Sociology of Gender. Handbooks of Sociology and Social Research. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76333-0_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76333-0_12

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-76332-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-76333-0

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation