PSY5130Chapter12.pdf

Learning Objectives

After completing this chapter, you should be able to:

Outline the biological and cognitive contributions in the emergence of gender identity.

Describe the effect of various social in�luences on gender development.

Account for gender differences in physical activity and play in childhood and
adolescence.

Compare and contrast school achievement and learning among males and females.

Discuss the physical and psychological consequences of puberty.

12Gender and Sexuality

iStock/Thinkstock

Evaluate demographic differences in sexual activity among adolescents; explain the
consequences of teenage pregnancy.

Explain how romantic relationships and sexual orientation contribute to identity
formation.

Detail the changes in sexuality that occur during adulthood.

Explain how research has helped identify important elements of romantic relationships.

Prologue

Bruce Jenner won the gold medal in the 1976 Olympic decathlon, and with it he attained the title of
“World’s Greatest Athlete.” Four decades later, in 2015, Jenner surprisingly disclosed lifelong struggles
with gender identity, and at age 66, the desire to transition to a woman. Initial Hollywood sensationalism
of the story shifted to Caitlyn Jenner becoming the face of the transgendered community, speaking
poignantly, and perhaps unexpectedly, to those younger than she who struggle on an everyday basis with
their sexual identity. Sexuality, a broad term that can refer to a capacity for sexual attraction and interest,
gender identity, or sexual orientation, has been spotlighted like perhaps no other time in our history.
Other stories have led to renewed discussion about sex and gender in society. Sasha Laxton from Great
Britain, Storm Stocker from Toronto, Canada, and Pop from Sweden have all made headlines as their
parents were determined to raise them without regard to gender. The children’s rooms were painted in
neutral colors; hairstyles, Halloween costumes, and clothing were chosen without perceived regard for
gender standards; exposure to toys and other activities were not limited by what was considered
“normal” for a boy or a girl. As much as their parents tried, however, it is virtually impossible to remove
all traces of gender from society, which would include limiting exposure to media, avoiding certain store
shelves, and restricting access to preschool and other social activities. Further, it is apparent that biology
pulls in its own direction, regardless of how we try to promote neutrality.

For most of us, sex and gender are inescapably connected. It is extremely rare for a person to be born
with undifferentiated sex organs. Even when someone is born with ambiguous genitalia, they still
generally have either XX or XY genes. Biological sex is therefore not particularly variable. By contrast,
regardless of biological sex, gender is much more continuous. Some individuals are drawn quite strongly
to the behaviors and activities of one gender over another, while others engage freely in more varied
activities. Like Caitlyn Jenner, sometimes it takes many years for us to recognize how sex and gender
integrate with identity development. This chapter explores these issues, as well as concerns related to sex
and romantic relationships and their developmental consequences.

12.1 The Development of Gender: Biology and the Brain

Recall the many different factors involved in the development of the self and the formation of personality.
Gender is another key component in the development of the self, which is the focus of Chapter 11. In
psychology, gender refers to the meanings societies and individuals give to female and male
characteristics, unlike sex, which is biological. How much of gender is dependent on biological sex is a
matter of great debate. Although overwhelming neuroscienti�ic evidence indicates that males and females
are born different, reinforcement of gender through socialization is robust and begins early. Messages
from parents, media, school, and peers strongly shape ideas about gender-speci�ic behavior.

The way people de�ine their own gender has a great deal to do with their later behavior. We construct
gender roles based on sociocultural norms of what is considered acceptable sex-typed behavior.
Individual experiences and societal expectations play strong roles in their development. How individuals
integrate the various behaviors related to gender contributes to individual personality and gender
identity. Our gender identify is a sense of the gendered self, in�luenced by social expectations and
situational contexts, that is developed over time. For instance, boys and girls are socialized to dress and
ornament themselves in a particular manner, play with certain kinds of toys, and assist in speci�ic kinds of
chores. Culture is closely tied to this process as well. Some cultures emphasize one role or activity over
another. For example, in some parts of Asia, it is not unusual for boys and men to wear a kind of skirt that
would be unusual in Europe or North America. These factors and more contribute to how gender is
constructed.

Biological In�luences

Few areas in social and developmental psychology provoke as much controversy as the relative in�luences
of nature and nurture on gender identity. Biological intersex variations discussed in Chapter 3 further
complicate the discussion. Studies show that newborn male and female infant brains are quite different
physically, before the environment has had a substantial impact (Moir & Jessel, 1992). Subsequent
research has con�irmed their �indings (e.g., Achiron, Lipitz, Hering-Hanit, & Achiron, 2001). Structures like
the corpus callosum (the bundle of nerves that connects the two brain hemispheres) and, at the cellular
level, the length and function of certain chromosomes are indeed distinct (Hammer, Mendez, Cox,
Woerner, & Wall, 2008). Relative size differences also exist in structures related to memory, vision, and
language processing (e.g., see Cahill, 2005). Speci�ic anatomical brain differences suggest that gender is at
�irst biologically and genetically driven; sex in�luences speci�ic kinds of gender development and behavior.
Just like bats have relatively large brain centers devoted to hearing, rats rely on smell and have relatively
large olfactory centers, and humans rely on sight and have a sophisticated visual cortex, differences in the
brains of humans imply relative strengths.

In females, the limbic system is larger and parts of the frontal cortex related to decision making are
denser. In males, it is well established that the amygdala—involved in the �ight-or-�light response and
other emotionally laden stimuli—is larger (Goldstein, Kennedy, & Caviness, 1999; Ruigrok et al., 2014). It
is possible that the disparities may re�lect differences in emotionality and different responses to stress.
Furthermore, areas of the brain that are linked to activity, emotion, and self-regulation appear different in
male and female brains, beginning at birth. As such, the distinctions in brain organization may contribute
to sex differences seen in infant temperament, since the average male infant is more active and fussier
than the average female (Baron-Cohen, 2003; Eagly & Wood, 2013; Hines, 2005; Karaismailoğl & Erdem,
2013). Regardless of any brain differences between the sexes, variability within each sex is signi�icantly
greater than the differences between them (see the feature box, “Psychology in Action: Understanding
Within-Group and Between-Group Differences in Social Statistics.”)

Psychology in Action: Understanding Within-Group and Between-Group
Differences in Social Statistics

It is essential to understand what is meant by within-group differences as opposed to between-
group (sometimes referred to as across-group) differences. Figure 12.1 expresses the hypothetical
distribution of height for 14-year-old boys and girls. At this age, on average, boys are taller than
girls by approximately 1.5 inches (3.8 cm). Typical girls can be anywhere from 60 to 68 inches tall
(152–173 cm); typical boys range from 60.5 to 69 inches tall (154–175 cm). Therefore, the average
difference between boys and girls of 1.5 inches is relatively small, whereas the range of heights
within the group of all girls (Figure 12.1a) and the range of heights within the group of all boys
(Figure 12.1b) is relatively large. The difference between boys and girls is still signi�icant, but not
nearly as dramatic as the differences within each group. The effect size refers to the magnitude of
the difference (Figure 12.1c). When the difference between groups is small, there is considerable
overlap and the effect size is small; when the difference between groups is large, there is little
overlap and the effect size is large. These distinctions are especially important when investigating
developmental differences between boys and girls.

Figure 12.1: Within-group versus between-group differences

Between-group sex differences are not nearly as strong as within-group differences.

In a widely publicized new brain study, researchers found striking physical evidence of differences in how
male and female brains are organized (Ingalhalikar et al., 2014). This information appears to con�irm
behavioral differences (such as verbal and math ability) that are often only observed. Brain imaging of
521 females and 428 males aged 8 to 22 years showed that male neural networks formed superior
connections from front to back in each of the brain hemispheres (see Figure 12.2). According to the
researchers, there is some indication that males have greater potential to connect perception with
coordinated action, like learning the single task of riding a bicycle. In contrast, female brains have more
neural communication between the two hemispheres, coinciding with a stronger connection between
analyses and intuition. This pattern indicates that females might be better equipped for multitasking and
working toward solutions that focus on group outcomes. The clear differences provide additional
evidence that males and females may be prewired to excel at different tasks.

Figure 12.2: Neural connectivity

These “connectome” maps show relatively more interhemispheric connections among
females (orange) and relatively more intrahemispheric connections in male brains (blue).

Source: Ingalhalikar, M., Smith, A., Parker, D., Satterthwaite, T. D., Elliott, M. A., Ruparel, K., & Verma, R. (2014).
Sex differences in the structural connectome of the human brain. Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences of the United States of America, 111(2), 823–828.

Perhaps the strongest evidence for a biological in�luence on gender development is the �inding that
androgens, the hormones responsible for male growth and development, have a signi�icant effect on
gender-typed behaviors. Girls who are exposed prenatally to abnormally high concentrations of
androgens are more likely to later engage in male-type play behaviors, compared to their sisters who had
less exposure. In general, higher levels of androgens are associated with more active, rougher play.
Conversely, males who are exposed to higher than normal levels of the female hormone estrogen are
more likely to display relatively high levels of stereotypically female behaviors (Hines, 2013; Karaismailoğl
& Erdem, 2013). In fact, early exposure to male hormones has been linked to male-typical behavior across
the animal kingdom. Researchers have discovered that sex-based hormonal in�luences contribute to
changes in brain structure, gene expression, and, ultimately, behavior throughout the animal kingdom
(Arnold, 2009; Hines, 2011). Because of these �indings, it has been said that the multitude of biological

differences between the sexes “pervade all clinical experience” (Federman, 2006, p. 1514). Nevertheless,
hormonal variations that produce anatomical modi�ications cannot account for the many gender
differences we see in society.

Evolutionary In�luences

Some observers approach the biological contributions to gender from an evolutionary perspective. Brains
may have evolved differently due to a developmental advantage. For instance, males may show masculine
qualities because our male ancestors needed to protect their families from harm. Females may be
attracted to males’ activity and perceived strength in leadership. Similarly, it is argued that women
propagate the species by showing nurturance, which begins with gentler childhood play (Meredith, 2015;
Murray & Murray, 2011). Through natural selection and the imperative to maximize �itness, separate
masculine and feminine traits became more valuable to the species.

Now, instead of genes being expressed strictly for the purpose of survival, perhaps they contribute to
differences in activity levels and social preferences. For instance, on average, boys prefer more action toys
and rougher activities. In contrast, girls engage in more role-playing and quieter activities. These
preferences begin in early infancy and exist across cultures (Aydt & Corsaro, 2003; Braza et al., 2012;
Campbell, Shirley, & Candy, 2004). Evolution suggests they may have been at least partially due to natural
selection.

Cognitive In�luences

From a cognitive perspective, children begin to construct gender-type in the same way Piaget would say
they construct knowledge about the physical world. That is, according to cognitive theorists, we interpret
environmental clues that teach us how to act. Gender identity (or a schema for gender) is initially acquired
in the second year (Campbell et al., 2004). Beginning at this age, children acquire beliefs and expectations
about gender and are usually able to identify the differences between boys and girls based on outward
appearances. As a result, a gender schema guides the way we view the world beginning at an early age.
Because of cognitive limitations, however, preoperational children have rigid ideas about gender. For
instance, a preschooler may think it is inappropriate or silly for women to wear a tie simply because “only
men do that.”

At around 4 years of age, we acquire gender stability. Now we understand that boys become men and
girls become women, but only so long as they act in a particular manner. If a boy dresses like a girl, he can
become a girl. Finally, a year or two later, children develop an understanding that gender is permanent.
This is called gender constancy. Depending on cultural norms, this is the stage at which children may
begin to give up hopes of achieving success in an area that is usually reserved for a gender other than the
one with which they identify (Karniol, 2009; Ruble et al., 2007). If children aspire to behave in a way that
is inconsistent with gender, self-concept and self-esteem may suffer.

Section Review

Summarize the biological and cognitive factors that in�luence how gender identity develops.

Critical Thinking

If the type of parent dyad (lesbian,
gay, or heterosexual) has an effect on
children’s behavior, what does this
evidence tell us about the origins and
development of gender-related
behaviors? What if the reverse is true?
That is, if type of parent has little
effect on overall behavior, what does
that tell us about the origins and
development of gender-related
behaviors?

12.2 Social In�luences on Gender Development

The biosocial perspective suggests that physical differences between males and females lead to
distinctions in personality and social behavior. Males are stronger, and therefore they play more
physically. Traditionally, women have done much of the caring, feeding, and nurturing, so they also engage
in those activities through play and work. There is a presumption that an interaction exists between sex
and gender identity development, but it also acknowledges that we are not destined to be limited by it
(Eagly & Wood, 2013; Fisher, 2006). In modern society, there is more �lexibility. For instance, neither
physical strength nor nurturance is necessarily required to become a successful engineer, artist, or
accountant. Men and women are not limited to pursuing activities and careers according to their physical
types.

Therefore, each individual has a broad range of potential outcomes
based on life experiences. For instance, we know that sex differences
affect how adults respond to infant behavior. Psychosocial factors
continue to operate in ways that turn boys and girls into masculine
and feminine adults, depending on attitudes and culture. Beginning
at an early age, when children (and adults) do not behave in ways
that are representative of their sex, they are often rejected or
rebuked, and laws of reinforcement and punishment operate to
shape gender identity. Alternatively, evolving attitudes have
contributed to substantial changes in gender roles over recent
decades. These mechanisms operate across cultures and
nationalities (Pavlova, Weber, Simoes, & Sokolov, 2014; Ruble,
Martin, & Berenbaum, 2006).

Home and School

Furthermore, the principal mechanism behind social learning theory is the role of imitation. Fathers and
mothers each model different types of behaviors. Fathers more typically engage in rough-and-tumble play
and mothers tend to participate in more nurturing, softer kinds of activities. According to social learning
theory, these behaviors either mimic or prescribe the same tendencies in young children. Regardless, the
behaviors are reinforced. Even among children exposed to the “wrong” hormones, as discussed earlier,
there is evidence that parents reinforce atypical sex play. That is, girls who were exposed to (male)
androgens have been found to engage in more boy-typical play and are reinforced for doing so (Wong,
Pasterski, Hindmarsh, Geffner, & Hines, 2013).

Although boys as young as 9 months old spend more time engaged with traditional boys’ toys than with
those labeled appropriate for girls—implying a biological beginning for gender—boys and girls are
typically offered different kinds of toys and levels of stimulation—pointing to the importance of learning
factors (La�lamme, Pomerleaui, & Malcuit, 2002). Girls more than boys are reinforced for engaging in
gender-speci�ic behavior like dress-up. And when girls play more actively, they are met with more
disapproval than are boys (Campbell et al., 2000; Lytton & Romney, 1991). In a comparison of lesbian, gay,
and heterosexual parents, it was found that children who have same-gender parents have less
stereotypical behavior. Their children are less inclined to follow typical gender roles. Sons of heterosexual
parents demonstrate the most masculine characteristics, followed by sons of gay fathers; sons of lesbian
mothers show the least amount of masculinity (Goldberg, Kashy, & Smith, 2012).

In addition, male and female babies tend to be spoken to and attended to differently (Clear�ield & Nelson,
2006; Lovas, 2005). In one well-known experiment, 204 adults were shown the same videotape of an
infant. Half of the participants were told they were witnessing a boy and half were told it was a girl. When
adult raters assessed the infant’s emotional responses, signi�icant differences emerged depending on
whether adults thought the baby was a boy or a girl. The “boy” was seen as less fearful and experiencing
more pleasure than the “girl.” The same behavior that was labeled “anger” when the adults thought they
were observing a boy was more often labeled “fear” when adults thought it was a girl (Condry & Condry,
1976). Although subsequent behaviors of the children were not measured, it is reasonable to assume that
different speech patterns and levels of attentiveness result in diverse behaviors. A study that placed
parents with a 10-month-old infant with whom they were playing for the �irst time produced similar
results. Mothers and fathers could choose between a football, a doll, and a neutral teething ring when
introduced to the infant. When parents were told the baby was a boy, the majority of parents opted to
play with the football; when parents were told the baby was a girl, most initiated play with the doll. These
types of gender-typed activities occur with both women and men and across cultures (Sidorowicz &
Lunney, 1980).

Photodisc/Thinkstock; Blend Images/Thinkstock

Sociocultural messages about how men and women should behave persist
into adulthood.

Differences in adults’ responses persist when children enter school. When there is a potential classroom
con�lict, kindergarten teachers are likely to treat girls in a gentler manner than boys. From elementary
school until the end of high school, boys are more often called on in class, even when they do not initiate
the interaction (one of the reasons that some adults advocate for all-girl schools). Boys are both praised
and criticized more, yet teachers believe they are teaching from a gender-neutral position (Duffy, Warren,
& Walsh, 2001; Garrahy, 2001; Jones & Dindia, 2004; Sax, Arms, Woodruff, Riggers, & Eagan, 2011). These
different responses affect self-concept and self-esteem and reinforce how children should behave; though
we may not consciously notice, it may eventually in�luence the kinds of careers we think we ought to
pursue (Ledin, Bornmann, Gannon, & Wallon, 2007). Normative messages are also incorporated into
moral development, as examined in Chapter 7, and have life-long associations.

Media

The media are often held up as fundamental agents of gender stereotypes. Although certainly the
demeanor, dress, and behavior of television characters have changed dramatically over the past couple of
generations, media of all types are instrumental in prescribing models of behavior. Regardless of the

models that parents project, the effect of media is inescapable. From billboards to movies, we are all
exposed to models that reinforce gender roles.

Analyses of children’s television programming has consistently discovered differences in male and female
characters. Compared to males, females show higher amounts of non-physical aggression and are more
concerned about their appearance; male characters display more physical aggression. Male characters in
general, and superheroes in particular, outnumber females by two to one. This proportion has remained
fairly steady for a number of years, despite more progressive attitudes. In one newer study, though,
researchers concluded that the portrayals of male and female gender stereotypes in one of the three
studied television networks (Disney Channel) had disappeared (Baker & Raney, 2007; Hentges & Case,
2013; Luther & Legg, 2007).

In other research, exposure to male superheroes was found to be associated with both boys’ and girls’
use of weapons during free play. In spite of the increased use of weapons, superheroes were associated
with higher levels of male-stereotyped play behavior among boys, but not girls. Furthermore, parents
were largely unsuccessful when they attempted to discourage the use of weapons during play, especially
when addressing their daughters (Coyne, Linder, Rasmussen, Nelson, & Collier, 2014).

Activity

Consider again the Coyne et al. (2014) study cited in the nearby text. Which conclusion do you
think is more accurate? (1) Boys view programs with superheroes more frequently than girls
because boys have a stronger innate identi�ication with the characters or (2) Higher levels of
stereotyped play are the result of relatively more exposure among boys to superheroes. That is, do
boys watch superheroes because they identify with the masculinity of the characters, or do they
�irst watch superheroes (perhaps due to encouragement by peers and family) and then begin to
imitate the behavior?

As children move into adolescence, there continue to be strong stereotypes on television. Programs
geared speci�ically toward emerging adolescents (“tweens”) showcase distinctive and stereotypical
portrayals of personality characteristics, behaviors, and concern for appearance (Gerding & Signorielli,
2014). As noted in Chapter 11, adolescence is a particularly important stage of identity development.
These messages no doubt contribute to the shaping of identity (Steensma, Kreukels, de Vries, & Cohen-
Kettenis, 2013).

Adults continue to absorb gender messages in the media. For better or worse, companies market
differently to men and women. Many examples exist of tobacco, pharmaceutical, cosmetics, and other
industries speci�ically creating not only images designed to appeal to one gender or the other, but also
distinctly female or male brands for products that are clearly gender neutral. For instance, Coke Zero and
Dr Pepper TEN were speci�ically created so that men would not have to a “diet” soda. Certain
automobile styles depict only one gender in their advertising (e.g., “muscle cars” for men and cute
subcompacts for women). Not surprisingly, these practices are pervasive throughout the world (e.g., Khan,
Khalid, Khan, Jabeen, 2011; Lou et al., 2012; Toll & Ling, 2005). It is unknown whether men learn to enjoy
video games and sports in the media more than women because of their greater propensity for activity or
because they have been socialized to behave that way. Similarly, images of men and women seeking

certain professions are alternatively either a re�lection of true aspirations or an extension of early gender
stereotyping. These career issues will be addressed further in Chapter 14.

Section Review

Summarize the various environmental factors that in�luence the development of gender identity.

iStock/Thinkstock

Play styles tend to differ between
genders. When playing with blocks,
boys are more likely to build tall
structures that may crash.

Critical Thinking

12.3 Gender Differences in Physical Activity and Play in Childhood and
Adolescence

One area of great interest in examining gender development
is the nature of activities in which children engage, especially
physical activity, a topic we �irst considered in Chapter 6. A
number of cross-cultural studies have shown that physical
activity in general contributes to an increase in overall
attention and greater cognitive development throughout
childhood. For instance, one longitudinal study equipped
4,755 students with an accelerometer (a device for
measuring acceleration that is the central feature of �itness
bands that track movement) and assessed participants at
ages 11, 13, and 16. The researchers were especially
interested in separating moderate or vigorous movement
from light activity, which the accelerometer allowed them to
do (Booth et al., 2014). At every year of measurement,
amount of moderate to vigorous activity predicted higher
math, English, and science scores. Furthermore, researchers
found a signi�icant “dose response effect.” That is, even
among students with high activity levels, more activity predicted higher scores on academic measures.
Statistical associations were especially strong for activity among girls and later science scores. This
information is particularly important in light of increased emphasis on encouraging females to pursue
science education and careers.

This information can also be used to help us understand how certain interactions during play are
associated with strength of gender type. Individual and cultural differences have a signi�icant role in this
area as well. That is, some parents and cultures are more free-spirited in allowing children to play
energetically, whereas others are more restrictive. In general, both boys and girls enjoy a variety of
activities. Once again, greater variation is observed within groups than between groups. So the question
remains, is there more gender-stereotyped play because children are biologically drawn to one type of
play, or do they become more strongly socialized for that type of play? This section considers more
closely what research tells us about differences in physical activity.

There is evidence that childhood activity levels are associated with temperament and level of activity
during infancy, suggesting a genetic basis for differences in motor activity (Allan, Mikolajewski, Lonigan,
Hart, & Taylor, 2013; Strelau & Zawadzki, 2012; Wood, Saudino, Rogers, Asherson, & Kuntsi, 2007). Early
on, comparatively more boys are interested in movement, manipulation, larger play spaces, and more
vigorous play. When playing with blocks, boys prefer tall structures that may crash, as opposed to the
lower, more balanced creations that girls prefer.

By 4 years of age, the majority of children segregate themselves by sex and style of play. There are
interesting differences in the nature of play at this time, too. Play is more purposeful for boys. For
instance, when a newcomer enters a playgroup, personality is less important than whether or not the boy
is useful in play. Girls, by contrast, look to other girls with curiosity and friendship. Re�lecting this
difference, girls remember names of playmates better than boys do (Moir & Jessel, 1992; Sumaroka &
Bornstein, 2009).

As children move on to high school and college, providing
opportunities for physical activity continues to reap bene�its. Since