An Introduction to

Gender Issues UNIT 4 GENDER SOCIALIZATION AND

CULTURAL DIFFERENCES IN THE
CONSTRUCT OF GENDER*
Structure
4.0 Introduction
4.1 Gender Socialization
4.1.1 Family
4.1.2 School
4.1.3 Peers
4.1 Culture and Religion
4.2 Sexual Scripts
4.3 Heterosexual Aggression
4.4 Cultural Differences in the Construct of Gender
4.5 Summary
4.6 Keywords
4.7 Review Questions
4.8 References and Further Reading
4.8 Additional Online Resources

LEARNING OBJECTIVES
After having read this Unit, you will be able to:
• Acquire comprehensive understanding of the construct of gender and how
it is different from sex
• Explain socialization of gender
• Elucidate the influence of family, school and peers
• Explain the sexual script theory in the contemporary world
• Explore gender differences in heterosexual aggression, and
• Discuss the importance of culture and religion in shaping gender identity.

4.0 INTRODUCTION
By now it must be clear that sex and gender which are used as synonyms, have
distinct meanings. Sex refers to the biological aspects of a person arising out of
one’s anatomy. This includes the interaction of hormones, chromosomes and
body parts (sexual organs). On the other hand, gender is socially constructed and
includes the labels like masculinity, femininity and other related behaviour. Thus,
people who call themselves as a man or woman, that may fall on the continuum
somewhere between man or woman or maybe without any gender. Thus, gender
is a complex interaction between the dimensions like, body, identity and social.
In this Unit, an attempt has been made to answer questions like when do we begin
to label oneself as a girl or a boy? What is the role of environmental, social or

80 * Sabeen H. Rizvi, Department of Psychology, Gargi College, University of Delhi, New Delhi
cultural factors in the process of gender socialization? Is it same across countries Gender Socialization and
Cultural Differences in the
or cultures? Let us explore and find out the answers to such questions. Construct of Gender

4.1 GENDER SOCIALIZATION

Defining gender has been a debatableissue in the realms of social scientific research
due to the theoretical positions of the researchers in the field. Connell (2002)
defines gender as the structure of social relations centered on the reproductive
arena and practices that bring reproductive distinctions between bodies into
social processes. Ridgeway and Corell (2004) have taken a broader definition
and define it as a multilevel system of difference and inequality which involves
cultural beliefs, distribution of resources, patterns of behaviour, organizational
practices, and selves and identities. They also define gender beliefs as universal
stereotypes about gender that serve to exacerbate the difference between
men and women. An associated
Sex or Gender OR Sex and Gender?
concept that we shall keep using
is gender identity, that refers to
When filling up your Adhaar card
one’s sense of oneself as a male,
application, your admission form, your
female or transgender (American
driving license form, your bank account
Psychological Association, 2011).
form, you must have been asked to
Sex is the biological aspect of
furnish details about you name, age,
human existence and gender is
sex/ gender. Have you ever been asked
the social and cultural aspect of
to fill in the details about your sex and
that existence. Gender identity
gender? Have you ever considered that
is the psychological aspect of
these are two distinct components of
this embodied experience.Another
your identity that may or may not be in
related concept that all of us have
congruence?
lived and practiced ever since we
were born is gender socialization.
As evident, gender socialization is a lifelong developmental process by which
individual learn the customs and social behaviours within their societal and
cultural fabric. Gender socialization is a “process by which individuals develop,
refine and learn to ‘do’ gender through internalizing gender norms and roles as
they interact with key agents of socialization, such as their family, social networks
and other social institutions” (John et al. 2017, p.6).
Gender socialization pertains to acquiring social learning around gender. It’s a
multi-dimensional and multi-faceted process through which individual learns
about gender norms and rules of their culture and eventually learn about the
appropriate or inappropriateness of a behaviour and internalize the ways in which
they are expected to behave in the society (Ryle,2011). These gender norms leadto
the development of an internalized sense of gender identity. It is important to
understand that gender identity is an experience that may not be consistent with
the assigned sex at birth but gender socialization always promotes the idea of
cisgender. Cisgender is the conventional idea of being male and female that is
embedded in the assigned sex at birth.
There has been a consistent growth in the scholarship in the area from contributions
by feminists, queer affirmative activists, intersectional movements, sociologists,
psychologists, and accumulated theoretical advancements in the fieldthat has
challenged the conventional notions around gender and its development. Thus,
within the contemporary world, the questions pertaining to gender, experiences
of sexuality, inequality and gaps around the gender spectrum are being raised by
psychologists, activists, feminists, sociologists (not necessarily in the same order) 81
An Introduction to and these questions are shifting the quantum of debate to issues that define these
Gender Issues
inequalities across the gender spectrum. These gaps may be deeply embedded
in the process of socialization to start with.
Some scholars maintain that gender can be best understood in terms of looking at
the actors assuming and playing roles in the society. This is a social constructionist
lens of understanding gender. Tasks and roles are gender segregated and actors
fulfilling these scripts are “doing gender” (West & Zimmerman, 1987). Thus,
gender is not static but rather fluid and identities are shaped in social interactions
at several levels (Fenstermaker& West, 2002; West & Zimmerman, 1987). Gender
identity defines our felt or experienced sense of female-ness, male-ness or other
gendered-ness (within the gender diversity spectrum) and is situated within a
historically, socially and culturally specified context that is more often than
not mediated by socially, obligatory norms defined by the society (American
Psychiatric Association (APA), 2013; Butler, 2004).While children are actively
participative in shaping their gender identities, their own understanding about
gender identity is consolidated by various social agencies like family, peers and
schools.
4.1.1 Family
From the moment that an infant arrives in the world it is besieged with codes
and symbols that forms its ideations of gender roles and gender stereotypes.
Family is the smallest and first and foremost unit of socialization and children
primarily learn about gender roles from the other members, especially primary
care givers(Blakemore & Hill 2008; Bandura & Bussey 2004).Some scholars
have defined the categories of socializing agents that play a vital part for the
internalization of gender specific norms.
Some scholars profess that
Personal Reflection: The Colour Pink!
girls and boys mostly take on
different identities as feminine and
When the author was expecting her little
masculine because their parents
one, she was visiting a private hospital
treat them differently at home
in a metropolitan city. When they were
(Emolu 2014; Leaper & Farkas
looking at the birth options and room set-
2014; Blakemore and Hill 2008).
ups, they realized that it’s a whole new
Gender scripts and norms are
commercial market. If one has a baby
fortified culturally, socially, and
girl, the hospital will decorate the room
institutionally at several levels.
pink and if it will be a boy then it would
These are primary groups (family),
be of course blue! A lot many parents felt
secondary groups (school and
very pampered by these ‘acts’ of care,
peer groups) and reference groups
whereas to be as a gender gap warrior,
(media, political parties). Based
it may seem as adding to unnecessary
on diverse experiences from these
stereotyping and increasing the divide!
agencies the child understands
congruence?
the gender socialization process
and organization. The role of
these agencies is as important as the process of gender socialization itself
(Chattopadhyay,2018).
Gender identities are also shaped through homophily.Homophily is the inclination
to connect with same-sex rather than cross-sex and it starts as soon as the children
start choosing their playmates (Ridgeway & Lynn, 1999; Block, 1979; Lever,1978;
Donna, & Hallinan 1978). Literature on homophily provides converging and
informative insights as to how boys and girls self-segregate into homogenous
82 groups and these are sustained and promoted by family environment (Carter,
2014).
Patriarchy is a social way of life where men dominate women in all sectors of Gender Socialization and
Cultural Differences in the
power and decision making and always end up having an upper hand. In cultures Construct of Gender
like ours where hegemonic patriarchal social order dominates the developmental
discourse, young boys learn to exercise authority over girls, whereas girls learn
to submit (Ram et al., 2014) .Walby (1997), an avid scholar of patriarchy defines
patriarchy as ‘a system of social structures and practices in which men dominate,
oppress and exploit women’. She talks about six different levels at which
patriarchy operates:the patriarchal mode of production, patriarchal relations in
paid work, patriarchal relations in the state, male violence, patriarchal relations in
sexuality, and patriarchal relations in cultural institutions. Many a times parents
intentionally or maybe even unintentionally reinforce gender stereotypes when
they differentiate between the toys that they deem fit for their girls and boys or
in their head run a “gender script” that describes a general pattern about gender
stereotypical behaviors. For instance, girls should play with dollhouses and boys
with cars and footballs.
A closer look, gives us many examples of how these structures elaborated by
Walby (1997), interplay at home. The first structure, talks about how women’s
household labour is confiscated by their husbands or other people the women grow
up with. The second structure contends that women are methodically excluded
from opportunities and access to paid and skilled work. In the third structure,
according to Walby (1997)‘the state has a systematic bias towards patriarchal
interests in its policies and actions’ and the fourth structure ‘male violence against
women is systematically condoned and legitimated … through the practices of
rape, wife-beating, sexual harassment, etc.’ The fifth structure talks about how
heterosexuality is compulsorily imposed and women’s sexuality is dictated by
the men in a patriarchal society. The last structure talks about how women are
objectified and represented in derogatory forms through cultural representations
of religion, education and media. By the interplaying of all these structures,
patriarchy denigrates the agency and position of women in societies. As evident
gender socialization is the manifestation of the patriarchal modes of behaviours,
thought processes and action that end up empowering the gender stereotypes that
strengthen the notions and existence of such hierarchy. Given that background,
gender-based socialization essentially includes acquiring behaviours that are
consistent with one’s gender.Individuals are held accountable for these behaviours
and deviance warrants some form of social sanction(West & Zimmerman, 2009).
India has always struggled with gender gaps due to multifaceted reasons.
Households are the primary sites where children learn hegemonic practices that
widen the gender gaps. Selective sex-based abortions have been banned since
1994, yet selective abortions are common and female mortality among children
under age 5 years is higher than male mortality in all parts of the country (Ram,
et.al.,2013). Families control all aspects of a daughter’s life. From an early age,
she is trained into domestic chores and has a subservient role as compared to
her male counterparts (Ram, et al., 2014). Many scholars have explored the
role of early family experiences in gender development. Mc.Hale et al., (2003)
reviewed the pivotal role of family in gender development during childhood
and adolescence and concluded that early family life experiences including the
relationship with parents and gendered marital dynamicsbetween them have a
very a very pertinent role in gender development. In India, gender discrimination
is deeply embedded in the societal structure in and remains a threat to the well-
being of families (Chowdhury, 2007) andgender inequalities are very commonly
witnessed in families and gender discrimination is a challenging obstacle to the
well-being of Indian families (Chowdhury, 2007). Unfortunately, the personhood 83
An Introduction to is evaluated by the position in the hierarchy and is rooted in the upbringing in the
Gender Issues
early years of life (Kakar&Kakar, 2009). In a study of youths in Goa, the authors
reported that frequent verbal or physical abuse by parents, low parental support
from home and gender discrimination are significant predictors of mental health
problems. Gender discriminatory practices were evaluated by asking whether
the youth were treated differently by virtue of their gender and whether they
were restrained from certain activities (Fernandes et.al., 2013).Ram et al (2014)
studies gender socialization in India by using the data from the Youth in India:
Situation and Needs Study(International Institute for Population Sciences (IIPS)
and Population Council, 2010) that utilized data from 44, 769 youths from India.
One of the largest studies done in India, it provides evidence of discriminatory
practices and the extent to which female youths are at a disadvantage due to their
gender. They are given less freedom and independence to exercise their choices
and are poorly prepared to enter adult roles and skills to manage their life better.
4.1.2 School
Gender is endlessly constructed and imposed upon each of us from the time
we are born. The fixation around gender has also resulted in categorization
of colors, clothes, toys, games as being more female than male or vice versa.
The heteronormative cultural script is wrapped around new born children from
the very start and their experiences in their social world mostly validate these
norms. Schools are institutionsthat build an environment that provide the initial
institutional glimpse to their social world after their homes. Education systems and
institutions are intended to transfer the values, behaviour patterns and normative
standards to children through interaction with teachers, peers, and curriculum
(Wentzel 2014; Witt 2000). Teachers help they form and challenge identities when
they use different toys and activities for girls and boys (Leaper & Farkas, 2004).
It is interesting to note that teachers have very different behaviours and attitudes
towards their students, based on their gender. These may be explained by their
stereotyped expectations about the abilities and needs of boys and girls (Leaper
& Farkas, 2014). Additionally, textbooks include gendered texts, symbols and
characters that may strengthen the gender stereotypes elaborated in the books
(Taylor 2003).
Schools facilitate the conventional gendering process and strengthen the binary
(female/male) to a very large extent. Institutionalization of gender roles starts
here in a formal setting, and challenging the boundaries may not be easy, given
our cultural taboos and biases. Schools become a hub for heterosexualized
grooming practices. For instance, in an all-girls school,to discipline the students,
the teacher’s comment that girls should only be seen, not heard!These practices
contaminate the intellectual space and create a burden on the child to keep living
the script she/he/they have been assigned to. Even in co-educational spaces, gender
segregation especially in middle and high school are fairly common, emerging
from concerns related to adolescents manifesting the otherwise age-appropriate
behaviors (such as the ones emerging from physical attraction) with the other
‘gender’!
Gender stereotypes give rise to sexism. Sexism refers to prejudiced beliefs that
look at one sex over the other more favourably. Sexism varies in degree and
visibility across cultures. In many cultures and parts of the world where women
are strongly undervalued, young girls may receive the same opportunities or
access to nutrition, health care and education as boys. They grow up believing that
they deserve to be treated inferiorly than boys (Thorne, 1993; UNICEF, 2007).
84
Gender egalitarian practices need to be strengthened and encouraged at the level Gender Socialization and
Cultural Differences in the
of schools to help in creating an intellectual space that is conducive to the growth Construct of Gender
and optimal development of children’s potential irrespective of their gender or
orientation.
4.1.3 Peers
Once the school starts, peers play an extremely influential role in socialization
and helping the child understand the gender schema.Peers are very influential
in forming gender identity and stereotypes through interactions, friendships and
group norms (Leaper & Friedman 2007; Witt 2000). Gender segregation, the
tendency for boys and girls to largely form friendships and associate with the
same gender is more or less predominant in friendship formation in childhood
and strengthened by societal norms. This gender-based segregation strengthens
gender roles and stereotypes (Leaper & Farkas, 2014; Witt, 2000). Most of their
play, games and activities are rooted in a gendered environment.
“When children are playing together, it may seem as if they are engaged in aimless,
unstructured behavior, but there is something much deeper than that going on,
as indicated by these functions. The first function suggests that behaviors are
“tried out” on friends, and if they are rewarded, they will continue; if not, they
will cease. Thus, the little boy who enjoys having tea parties with his teddy bears
and is jeered at or otherwise discouraged from this activity by friends who call it
“sissy” behavior, will probably stop engaging in this type of play”(Witt, 2000, p. 3)
Researchers have investigated and explored the relationship between gender
segregation and gender identity in childhood (Martin et al., 2013). Gender
appropriate behaviours are invigorated through norms that are strengthened from
the household and carried forward when interacting with the social world. Playing
‘gender congruent’ games is encouraged and this leads to further widening the
gender- gap. Girls who have been taught be to be subservient and boys who are
taught to be controlling in
the hegemonic domestic Maya’s plight!
framework, carry the ideas
and design their interactions Maya, an 8-year-old grew up in conventional,
and play in accordance heteronormative, conservative family. As part
w i t h t h e n o r m a t i v e of growing up she always enjoyed playing with
gender rules.Childhood cars, blocks and toy guns. She liked to play out
researchers have proposed in the field with her brothers but her father would
that gender segregation scold her every time he would see her playing
is so universal that boys’ out! He would also yell at her mother for not
and girls’ participation having taught her the right values. Maya didnot
in same gender groups enjoy playing the conventional ‘domestic’
is alike across cultures games that her family would encourage her to
(Mehta, 2016; Baines & play. She would sneak out in the afternoon to
Blatchford 2009; Maccoby the field and enjoy playing with the boys. She
1998; Underwood & Rosen even liked dressing up in pants and tees and
2009). Interestingly, within avoidedwearing dresses and skirts as it restricted
these separate groups, her movement. Maya’s best friend was Ali and
children learn attitudes, they would play for hours together. Maya was
v a l u e s , a n d s o c i a l heartbroken when her father put her in an all-
interaction styles that are girls school! She found herself out of place and
different (Maccoby 1990, could not adjust with her peers. Her peers made
1998; Underwood 2007) fun of her choices and she felt suffocated at
and also learn to maintain school. 85
An Introduction to same gender friendships (Werkings, 1997b). This comfort in same gender
Gender Issues
friendships perpetuates the process of homophily.
It is also pertinent to recognize the pressures that gender non-conforming children
and adolescents experience. The minority stress model (Levitt & Ippolito,
2014) proposes that the cumulative effects of stigma, discrimination, stress has
adverse effects on the overall wellbeing of the stigmatized minority group. This
discrimination has differential impact of power and oppression on the identities
of gender diverse young people. There is supportive research evidence that
demonstrates that gender diverse young people experience higher levels of
bullying, social ostracism and societal intolerance than their gender confirming
peers (de Vries, et al, 2016; Di Ceglie, 2017; Steensma et al., 2014). With more
accessible data from transgender youth, more evidence has started emerging
for the role of peer relationships and social ostracism(de Graaf et al., 2018; de
Vries et al., 2016). Converging research evidence shows that individuals with
subordinate identities are more vulnerable to discrimination and racism and
this holds particularly true for individuals with multiple subordinated identities
(Balsam et al., 2011; Grollman, 2014; Khan et al., 2017; Seaton et al., 2010).
Studies also demonstrate higher levels of prejudice and depression among both
gay and straight individuals of marginalized racial/ethnic groups (Balsam et al.,
2011; Casey et al., 2019; Shangani et al., 2020).

Check Your Progress 1

1) What are the differences between sex and gender?
..................................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................
2) Explain gender socialization with an appropriate example.
..................................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................
3) What is the influence of family in gender socialization? Explain with a
relevant example.
..................................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................
4) Elucidating with an example from your own life, expand on the role of
school and peers in gender socialization.
..................................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................

4.2 CULTURE AND RELIGION

The definition of culture as per APA (2007) is “the distinctive customs, values,
86 beliefs, knowledge, art, and language of a society or a community. These values
and concepts are passed on from generation to generation, and they are the basis Gender Socialization and
Cultural Differences in the
for everyday behaviors and practices”. Culture is a socially constructed dynamic Construct of Gender
interaction of intersectionality based on gender, religion, race, ethnicity, caste,
class. It results in a structural framework, primarily a system of knowledge,
behaviour and beliefs that are shared by a relatively large group of people. Since
its dynamic in nature, it is fluid and gets impacted by people, historical events
and social agencies, politics and economic vibes of the land.
Gender is also socially constructed and is immensely shaped by the societal
expectations and cultural norms. Roles and expectations socially constructed and
are culturally demarcated for all members. It also is defined by the power dynamics
between women and men and the prevailing norms regarding ‘feminine’ and
‘masculine’ roles. The collective expectations and beliefs about the ‘typical male’
and ‘typical female’ may many a times contribute to creation and strengthening
of stereotypes that may end up limiting opportunities for women and men within
the cultural framework (UNESCO,2014). Different levels of sexism in the cultural
framework creates profound gaps and inequality between men and women at
several stages (Hesmondhalgh& Baker,2015) as people’s lives are intrinsically
embedded in the cultural fabric that is designed around the asymmetrical gender
roles. People can navigate these roles, though it can be a challenging process. As
a scholar puts it, ‘culture and tradition can enable or obstruct, and be oppressive
or liberating for different people at different times. There is nothing sacred about
culture, and value judgements need to be made about which aspects of culture
to hold on to, and which to let go of’(Jolly,2014). It is interesting to note that
the perception of gender is likely to be conceptualized in different ways cross-
culturally (Isajiw, 1993; Nanda, 2014). Cross cultural researches throw light on
the fact that children are aware of normative gender roles by age two or three.
At four or five, most children are firmly entrenched in culturally appropriate
gender roles
(Kane, 1996). The notions around gender identity may differ across Western and
Eastern cultures. For instance, Western cultures tend to emphasize on self-esteem
(Fernando, 2012; Wekker, l999), thereby placing the individual in the center of
the narrative plot. Alternatively, Eastern cultural perspectives tend to be more
emphasizing on the ‘other’ and focus on balance, harmony and stability of the
outer social world of relationships (Fernando, 2012).
Our gender identity and ethnicity significantly contribute to our selfhood,
personhood and shape our sensibilities around our experiences in the social world.
Religion adds another layer or nuance to this embodied experience.Gender is
pivotal to most religious orders. As well as religions have a substantial impact
on gendered relations.All religions perpetuate the existing gender schemas and
strengthen the ideas related with the expected gender roles as per the religious
cultural scripts.Be it Hinduism, Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Sikhism- all the
religious texts are embedded in tall ideals set by perfect examples of a ‘model
man’ or a ‘woman’. How decent and chivalrous men should behave, how girls
should behave in order to find a perfect match, and such other notios are deeply
embedded. The theological texts are full of exemplary behaviours by Gods and
Goddesses that set a benchmark for its followers to adhere to. Rigid adherence to
such role models and notions may create a lot of pressure and perfectionistic traits
that may get difficult to follow through in the longer run. Patriarchal gendered
relations are followed in most religious spaces. The heads of almost all temples,
mosques, imambadas, gurudwaras, churches are traditionally men. Although
patriarchal relations are fundamental across global religions, this may not be
universally true. Some religious orders lay emphasis on respecting women over 87
An Introduction to and above the heteronormative structural framework. This defines their agency
Gender Issues
and empowers them to practice their own agency in the given space.

4.3 SEXUAL SCRIPTS

In continuation to the idea
Challenging your script!
of gender development,
sexual scripts also play
Moni an MBA student, feels hugely attracted
a very important role.
to her classmate Surya. However, she feels
Ever since its introduction
immensely hesitant in starting a conversation
in the early 1970s, the
with him. Their common friends keep teasing
sexual script theory has
her when they spot her looking at Surya during
gained popularity as a
class lectures. Moni wants to date Surya but
conceptual framework in
keeps waiting for him to initiate the process.
social science research to
Surya on the other hand feels that Moni is out
examine sexuality and its
of league for him! He deliberately tries to stay
manifestation in the society.
away. Why is it that Moni finds it so difficult
Scripts are indispensable
to approach Surya? What is stopping Moni in
for us to make sense of
giving this relationship a chance? What would
the experience around the
you have done if you were in Moni’s shoes?
world. To borrow from the
originators, scripts are a
metaphor for conceptualizing behavior within social life. In the social life, most
of the time is under the guidance of an operating syntax, much as language is a
precondition for speech. For behavior to occur, something resembling to scripting
must occur on three distinct levels: cultural scenarios, interpersonal scripts, and
intrapsychic scripts(Simon and Gagnon 1984, p. 53).
Further, sexual scripts are commonly shared gender and culture specific guides
for normative sexual behaviour (Frith & Kitzinger, 2001). The proponents
of sexual script theory, proposed that sexual behaviour is influenced at three
different levels: cultural scenarios, interpersonal scripts and intrapsychic scripts
(Simon & Gagnon, 1984). The cultural scenarios reflect culturally shared social
norms and values that influence the other scripts and are communicated through
mass media, gender norms, etc. An example might be gender norms educating
boys to initiate sexual activities or seeing women being objectified in popular
Bollywood songs and indulging in similar behaviours. Sexual cultural scripts are
very pertinent to manifesting of sexual behaviours, yet they are not synonymous
with sexual behaviour (Wiederman, 2015). To quote Simon & Gagnon, 1984,
p53): the enactment of virtually all roles must either directly or indirectly reflect
the contents of appropriate cultural scenarios. These cultural scenarios are rarely
entirely predictive of actual behavior, and they are generally too abstract to
be applied in all circumstances. In this framework individuals are not passive
receptors of cultural scenarios. The originators of Sexual Script theory, Simon
and Gagnon (1984) categorized people as “partial scriptwriters” who created
and adapted cultural scenarios into scripts for sexual behaviour across a diverse
context. Cultural scenarios create the basic structure for the enactment of the roles
and the relationship among them, however, they do not provide specific direction
to propel the actual behaviours in specific situation. To help here, interpersonal
scripts begin to interplay between the characters (Weiderman, 2015).
Interpersonal scripts inform sexual interactions with regard to how two people
interpret cultural scenarios, for instance using alcohol or drugs before initiating
88 sexual acts. Interpersonal scripts provide “the organization of mutually shared
conventions that allows two or more actors to participate in a complex act Gender Socialization and
Cultural Differences in the
involving mutual dependence” (Gagnon and Simon 1973, p. 18). When actors Construct of Gender
share similar script, the interactions in the social interpersonal world are
harmonious.Intrapsychic scripts echo the individuals’ sexual motives, such as
sexual pleasure, sexual conquest, passion, and/or emotional intimacy, for instance
having sexual relationship with many partners to feel powerful(Seal et.al, 2008).
Intrapsychic scripts are representative of each individual’s unique sexuality,
fantasies and other aspects that may be difficult to articulate but are nevertheless
underlying the sexual interactions.
Some other researchers have focused on traditional interpersonal sexual scripts
for heterosexual interactions (Seal et al., 2008). Traditional cultural scenarios
and interpersonal heterosexual scripts encourage heterosexual gender roles like
men being forever ready to initiate sex, be always willing and ready to have sex
and to control all aspects of sexuality (Bowleg, 2004; Campbell, 1995; Dworkin
& O’Sullivan, 2005; Ku et al, 1993; Masters et al, 2012; Seal et al., 2008).
Traditional intrapsychic heterosexual scripts for cis men suggest that men are
mostly motivated for sex for the intrinsic pleasure, sexual conquest and emotional
intimacy (Seal & Ehrhardt, 2003).
In accordance with the traditional sexual script, men are encouraged and
socialized to initiate and arrange sexual interactions, where as women are
encouraged and socialized to be coy, restrictors or responders, matching their
partners needs (Gagnon, 1990; O'Sullivan & Byers, 1992; Schwartz & Rutter,
1998). Interestingly, research also demonstrates the universal dual presence of
norms that give men greater sexual freedom than women (Blanc, 2001; Gupta,
2001; Gupta & Weiss, 1993; Seal & Ehrhardt, 2003). Such restrictive paradigms
around masculinity lead to phallocentrism, self- objectification during sex, and
feeling pressure to be in the performance mode all the time for sex (Brod, 1995;
Fracher& Kimmel, 1995; Seal et al., 2000). Such straight-jacketed definitions
of conventional heterosexual masculinity and femineity constrains heterosexual
interactions and restricts the expression of freedom. However, contemporary
researchers suggest that heterosexual scripts are becoming more egalitarian in
nature with women being as participative as men (Dworkin & O’Sullivan, 2005;
Masters et al., 2012; Seal & Ehrhardt, 2003).

Check Your Progress 2

1) What is a sexual script?
..................................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................
2) With an appropriate example explain the cultural script.
..................................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................
3) What is an interpersonal script?Explain with a relevant example.
..................................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................
89
An Introduction to
Gender Issues ..................................................................................................................
4) With is an intrapsychic script?
..................................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................

4.4 HETEROSEXUAL AGGRESSION

Of all the areas that are open to debate, the area of heterosexual aggression is
difficult to conceptualize, define and report as these research findings impact the
social, legal and institutional context within which individuals set their boundaries
of intimacy and sexual interaction (Anderson & Savage, 2015).
Aggression is the type of behavioural action that is intended to harm the
other person or target (Baron & Richardson 1994). In the context of intimate
relationships, people can harm each other in several ways; psychologically and
physically. The insights into the destructiveness of psychological and physical
aggression in intimate relationships are moderated by gender of perpetrator
and victim likewise. Aggressive acts are perceived more serious when directed
to female than to male targets (Harris 1991; Harris & Knight-Bohnhoff 1996;
Herzberger &Tennen 1985). Male perpetrators are judged more harshly than
female perpetrators (Arias & Johnson 1989; Straus et al., 1997).
There are by and large two conflicting views when it comes to defining
heterosexual aggression and violence. One viewpoint is embedded in the
research of family conflict (Straus, 1990) and other is rooted in the feminist lens
of violence emanating from patriarchy and largely involves male perpetrators
(Dobash&Dobash, 1980; Pagelow, 1984; Walker, 1990). A study in Bangladesh,
close home, reported that 19 to 38 percent of women respondents had been beaten
up by their partners during the previous year (Schuler et al., 1996). In patriarchal
society like ours, severe violence and homicide by male partners towards their
female partners is associated with the prevalence of dowry system (Shamim,
1992). These research reports have implications for the moderating effect of
culture, suggesting that men’s physical aggression toward their partners may
be of greater intensity, and women’s agency may be compromised as traditions
inhibiting men from hitting women may be non-existent and patriarchy may thus
define the gender roles and permissiveness for the existence of such violence.
As reported by researchers, aggression by men towards women (both physical
and sexual) is more common where female alliances are weak and women do
not have the support of their natal kin (Glazer, 1992; Kuschel, 1992; Schuster,
1983, 1985). Furthermore, it is accentuated by stronger male alliances where
women are primarily dependent on men for resources (Glazer, 1992; Mines &
Fry, 1994; Schuler et al., 1996)
However, researchers in developed countries like in North America, have studied
women’s role in being an actor of such violence as well. The relative rates of
aggression reported in research studies vary depending on whether men or women
are surveyed about women’s sexual aggression, the source of the sample, the
ethnicity of the respondent, the outcome of aggression, the tactics used, with
physical force universally being endorsed as the least used tactic (Anderson, 1998;
Anderson et al., 2002; Anderson & Sorensen, 1999; Feibert& Tucci, 1998). Like
women, men who received sexual coercion do not always take it seriously or
90 see themselves as being victimized (O’Sullivan et al., 1998; Zweig et al.,1997).
 Gender Socialization and
Many feel embarrassed to share it publicly even when they are suffering from Cultural Differences in the
coercive sexual experiences (Johnson &Shrier, 1987; Sarrel& Masters, 1982; C. Construct of Gender
J. Struckman-Johnson, 1991).Sometimes, men who have received aggression,
analogous to their female counterparts, report psychological and physical
symptoms that range from mild low moods to long term depression(Larimer et
al., 1999; O’Sullivan et al., 1998; C. J. Struckman-Johnson &Struckman-Johnson,
1998; Zweig et al., 1997).

4.5 CULTURAL DIFFERENCE IN THE

CONSTRUCT OF GENDER
Culture is defined as a set of characteristics that includes the “beliefs, practices,
values, norms, and behaviors that are shared by members of a group” (Sullivan
&Rumptz, 1994, p. 567).Cultural diversity has been a much talked about
area in social and political psychology and other social sciences. Culture is
indistinguishably related with individuals in a group, and its varied dimensionality
reveals itself in the ways and manners in which people perceive and interpret
their world (Taylor et al., 2001; Tuck, 1997).This development of world view
isnot random but is passed among generations and might include traditions and
learnings about a shared heritage, language, dressing style, or food choices
(Yoshihama, 2000). Culture may be looked at as a dynamic phenomenon; an
interactive process between the individuals and environment where the collective
narrative is challenged and redefined.Culture researcher Hofstede (2012) makes
a distinction between the masculinity and femineity dimension of a culture, thus,
"a society is considered a masculine one if the gender emotional roles differ
clearly: men should be authoritarian, harsh and focused on material success,
while women should be modest, gentle and concerned with quality of life. A
society is considered a feminine one if the gender emotional roles overlap: both
men and women must prove modesty, gentleness and concern for quality of life"
(Hofstede et al., 2012, p. 141). The normative assignment of social roles based
on gender is a result of cultural-religious interpretations and the historical and
environmental factors (Hofstede et al., 2012).
Many researchers have also focused on gender-role beliefs and found that
women in some cultures report less traditional and more egalitarian gender role
beliefs than men (Berkel 2004; Locke and Richman 1999; Tang and Dion 1999).
Research in Western and non-Western societies have revealed that education is
major mechanism by which women favor gender equality. Similar results have
been obtained from countries like Egypt (Yount, 2005) and in USA, researchers
have reported that educated and employed women have the most egalitarian
beliefs (Mason et al., 1976).Some gender researchers also draw a link between
gender and heterosexual aggression and abuse and claim that battering is a result
of “cultural values, rules, and practices that afford men more status and power
than women” (Torres, 1991, p. 115).

Check Your Progress 3

1) What is a heterosexual aggression?
..................................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................
91
An Introduction to
Gender Issues 2) With an appropriate example explain the role of cultural script in
increasing heterosexual aggression.
..................................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................
3) What is the role of religion in shaping gender identity, explain with a
relevant example?
..................................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................
4) How do gender roles differ across culture?
..................................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................

When we look at human behaviour and how we define gender in its context,
it becomes evident that culture plays a major role. The gender differences that
we see are visible in our communication, practices and behaviours. The gender
binary thought process is encouraged by most cultures and we keep focusing on
the differences to the disadvantage of women as gender gap keeps widening and
equality is far from achieved.Gender socialization can be better understood if we
use the framework of intersectionality as proposed by Crenshaw (1991) and many
other researchers in the postmodern era. The theory of intersectionality elaborates
on how an individual can navigate between privileges and discrimination. It
proposes that the convergence of multiple identities can result in embodied
experiences of oppression, privilege or power. Our consolidated identity such
as gender, sexuality, ethnicity, class, race, religion is overlapping and link our
experiences of privilege, power and discrimination and influence our experiences
of being a woman or a man and also determine our attitude towards other gendered
people.

4.6 SUMMARY
To sum up what we have learnt in this unit, here is a quick recap:
• Sex and gender are two different and distinct attributes and may and may
not overlap for an individual.
• Gendered roles are mostly learned through the process of socialization
that involves various agencies like family, school and peers that shape the
sensibilities of an individual around gender roles.
• Children learn gender segregation and homophily as an outcome of
socialization. The norms and identity help them making these choices.
• Religion and cultural factors also shape and influence the gender norms and
expectations around gender roles.
• Culture also defines the sexual scripts for individual that are helpful in
interacting with other people in the context of cultural scenarios, interpersonal
92 scripts and intrapsychic scripts.
• Heterosexual aggression is also influenced by the cultural values and impacts Gender Socialization and
Cultural Differences in the
all genders. Construct of Gender

4.7 KEYWORDS
Cultural Scenarios Create the basic structure for the enactment of the roles and
the relationship among them
Gender The social and cultural aspect of ‘sex’, that may not necessarily be the
same as the biological sex
Gender Socialization The process of learning gender roles and expectations
from societal and cultural influences and models
Heterosexual Aggression Aggressive acts in a heterosexual relationship
Homophily The tendency of people to seek out and be close to those who are
similar to themselves
Homophobia Fear of or dislike for LGBTQIA+ identifying people
Interpersonal Script Interpersonal scripts provide the context for interaction
for two or more actors and involves mutual dependence
Intersectionality The theoretical orientation that recognizes that everyone has
unique experiences based on the privileges, power and oppression dynamics
they go through, thereby explaining the relative experiences of marginalization
Intrapsychic Script Capture the person’s uniqueness in terms of their fantasies,
sexual desires and goals
LGBTQIA+ Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Intersex, Asexual- All
alternate identities within the gender spectrum
Sex Binary categorization into male and female based on the biological attributes
related with one’s reproductive ability
Sexism Prejudiced and discriminatory practices around members of one sex
mostly women
Sexual script Human sexual behaviour follows a social script that is embedded
in the societal expectations and norms. Culture influences the adherence to the
sexual script.

4.8 REVIEW QUESTIONS

1. What is gender-based socialization? Explain with relevant examples.
2. Explain the role of family in gender socialization with examples from your
own life.
3. Discuss the role of school and peers in gender socialization in a country like
ours.
4. What are sexual scripts? How do they define our interaction with prospective
partners?
5. Discuss the role of gender in heterosexual aggression.

4.9 REFERENCES AND FURTHER READING

American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual
of mental disorders (5th ed.). Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing.
Anderson, P. B. (1998). Variations in college women’s self reported sexual 93
An Introduction to aggression. Sexual Abuse: Journal of Research and Treatment, 10(4), 283-292.
Gender Issues
Anderson, P. B., & Savage, J. S. (2005). Social, Legal, and Institutional Context
of Heterosexual Aggression by College Women. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse,
6(2), 130–140. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838005275091
Anderson, P. B., & Sorensen, W. (1999). Male and female differences in reports
of women’s heterosexual initiation and aggression. Archives of Sexual Behavior,
28 (3), 243-253.
Anderson, P. B., Kontos, A., &Tanogoshi, H. (2002, November 8). Acomparison
of heterosexual initiation strategies used by samples of rural vs. urban university
women. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society of the Scientific
Study of Sexuality, Montreal, Canada.
Arias, I., & Johnson, P. (1989). Evaluations of physical aggression among intimate
dyads. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 4, 298–307.
Baines, E., & Blatchford, P. (2009). Sex differences in the structure and
stability of children’s playground social networks and their overlap with
friendship relations. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 27, 743–760.
doi:10.1348/026151008X371114.
Balsam, K. F., Molina, Y., Beadnell, B., Simoni, J., & Walters, K. (2011).
Measuring multiple minority stress: The LGBTQ people of color macroaggression
scale. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 17(2), 163–174. https://
doi.org/10.1037/a0023244
Bandura, A., & Bussey, K. (2004) On broadening the cognitive, motivational, and
sociostructurally scope of theorizing about gender development and functioning:
comment on Martin, Ruble, and Szkrybalo (2002). Psychol Bull 130:691–701
Baron, R. A., & Richardson, D. R. (1994). Human aggression. New York: Plenum.
Berkel, L. A. (2004). A psychometric evaluation of the sex-role egalitarianism
scale with African Americans. Sex Roles, 50, 737–742.
Blakemore, J.E.O., & Hill, C.A. (2008) The child gender socialization scale: a
measure to compare traditional and feminist parents. Sex Roles 58(3–4):192–207.
https:// doi.org/10.1007/s11199-007-9333-y
Blanc, A. (2001). The effect of power in sexual relationships on reproductive
and sexual health: An examination of the evidence. In The Population Council.
Conference Proceedings, Power in Sexual Relationships: An opening dialogue
among reproductive health professionals.
Block, J. H.(1979) Socialization influences on personality development in males
and females. In APA Master Lecture Series on Issues of Sex and Gender in
Psychology. Edited by Marjorie M. Parks. Washington: American Psychological
Association.
Bowleg, L .(2004).Love, sex, and masculinity in sociocultural context: HIV concerns
and condom use among African American men in heterosexual relationships. Men
and Masculinities, 7, 166–186. doi:10.1177/ 1097184X03257523.
Brod, H. (1995). Pornography and the alienation of male sexuality. In M. Kimmel
& M. A. Messner (Eds.), Men's Lives (pp. 393^04). Boston: Allyn & Bacon
Butler, J. (2004). Undoing gender. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
Campbell, C. A. (1995). Male gender roles and sexuality: Implications for
women’s AIDS risk and prevention. Social Science and Medicine, 41, 197–210.
doi:10.1016/0277-9536(94)00322-K.
94
Carter, M. J. (2014). Gender socialization and identity theory. Social Sciences, Gender Socialization and
Cultural Differences in the
3(2), 242-263. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/socsci3020242 Construct of Gender
Casey, L. S., Reisner, S. L., Findling, M. G., Blendon, R. J., Benson, J. M., Sayde,
J. M., & Miller, C. (2019). Discrimination in the United States: Experiences
of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer Americans. Health Services
Research, 54, 1454–1466. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475- 6773.13229
Chattopadhyay, S. (2018). Role of family. In Gender socialization and the making
of gender in the Indian context (pp. 90-120). SAGE Publications, Inc., https://
www-doi-org.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/10.4135/9789353280628.n4
Chattopadhyay, S. (2018). Role of peer group. In Gender socialization and the
making of gender in the Indian context (pp. 121-152). SAGE Publications, Inc.,
https://www-doi-org.libproxy.lib.unc.edu/10.4135/9789353280628.n5
Choudhury, R. (2007). Gender Issues in Family Life. In David K. Carson, Cecyle
Carson and Aparajita Chowdhury (Eds.) Indian Families at Crossroad: Preparing
Families for New Millennium – Gyan Books PVT, New Delhi, pp. 47-56.
Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics,
and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43, 1241–1299
d, J. (1978) Sex differences in the complexity of children’s play and games.
American Sociological Review 43, 471–83.
de Graaf, N. M., Cohen-Kettenis, P. T., Carmichael, P., de Vries, A. L., Dhondt, K.,
Laridaen, J., & Steensma, T. D. (2018). Psychological functioning in adolescents
referred to specialist gender identity clinics across Europe: A clinical comparison
study between four clinics. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 27, 909–919.
de Vries, A. L., Steensma, T. D., Cohen-Kettenis, P. T., VanderLaan, D. P.,
& Zucker, K. J. (2016). Poor peer relations predict parent-and self-reported
behavioral and emotional problems of adolescents with gender dysphoria: A
cross-national, cross-clinic comparative analysis. European Child & Adolescent
Psychiatry, 25, 579–588.
Di Ceglie, D. (2017). Gender variant role expression in childhood. In K. L.
Nadal (Ed.), The SAGE encyclopedia of psychology and gender (pp. 767–768).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Dobash, R. E., &Dobash, R. P. (1980). Violence against wives: A case against
the patriarchy. London: Open Books.
Donna, E., & Hallinan, M.T. (1978). “Sex differences in children’s friendships.”
American Sociological Review 43, 237–50
Dworkin, S. L., & O’Sullivan, L. (2005). Actual versus Desired Initiation Patterns
among a Sample of College Men: Tapping Disjunctures within Traditional Male
Sexual Scripts. The Journal of Sex Research, 42(2), 150–158. http://www.jstor.
org/stable/3813151
Emolu, E. (2014) Play, toys and gender socialization. J Plus Educ XI(2):22–30.
Feibert, M. C., & Tucci, L. M. (1998). Sexual coercion: Men victimized by
women. Journal of Men’s Studies, 6(2), 127- 133.
Fenstermaker, S. & West, C. (2002) Doing Gender, Doing Difference: Inequality,
Power, and Institutional Change. New York: Routledge
Fernandes, A.C. Hayes, R.D. &Patel,V. (2013) Abuse and other common
correlates of mental disorders in youth: a crosssectional study in Goa, India.
Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, vol. 48, pp. 515–523.
95
An Introduction to Fernando, S. (2012). Race and culture issues in mental health and some thoughts
Gender Issues
on ethnic identity. Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 25, 113–123.
Fracher, J., & Kimmel, M. S. (1995). Hard issues and soft spots: Counseling
men about sexuality. In M. Kimmel & M. A. Messner (Eds.), Men's Lives (pp.
365-374). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Frith, H., & Kitzinger, C. (2001). Reformulating sexual script theory: Developing
a discursive psychology of sexual negotiation. Theory & Psychology, 11, 209–232.
Gagnon, J. H. (1990). The explicit and implicit use of the scripting perspective in
sex research. In J. Bancroft, C. M. Davis, & D. Weinstein (Eds.), Annual Review of
Sex Research, Vol. 1. (pp. 1^3). The Society for the Scientific Study of Sexuality.
Gagnon, J. H., & Simon, W. (1973). Sexual conduct: The social sources of human
sexuality. Chicago: Aldine.
Gagnon, J. H., & Simon, W. (1987). The sexual scripting of oral genital contacts.
Archives of Sexual Behavior, 16, 1–25.
Glazer, I. M. (1992). Interfemale aggression and resource scarcity in a cross-
cultural perspective. In K. Bjorkqvist& P. Niemela (Eds.), Of mice and women:
Aspects of female aggression (pp. 89-97). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Grollman, E. A. (2014). Multiple disadvantaged statuses and health: The role of
multiple forms of discrimination. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 55(1),
3–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022146514521215
Gupta, G. R. (2001). Gender, sexuality and HIV/AIDS: The what, the why and
the how. SIECUS Report, 29, 6-12. Gupta, G. R., & Weiss, E. (1993). Women's
lives and sex: Implications for HIV prevention. Culture and Medical Psychiatry,
17, 399-412.
Harris, M. B. (1991). Effects of sex of perpetrator, sex of target, and relationship on
evaluations of physical aggression. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 6, 174–186.
Harris, M. B., & Knight-Bohnhoff, K. (1996). Gender and aggression: I.
perceptions of aggression. Sex Roles, 35, 1–26.
Herzberger, S. D., &Tennen, H. (1985). “Snips and snails and puppy dog tails”:
gender of agent, recipient, and observer as determinants of perceptions of
discipline. Sex Roles, 12, 853–865.
Hesmondhalgh, D.,& Baker, S.,(2015) Sex, gender and work segregation in the
cultural industries, The Sociological Review, Vol. 63, Suppl. 1, pp. 23-36, http://
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4497598/.
Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G.J., Monkov, M. (2012). Culturişiorganizaţii. Softul
mental [Cultures and Organizations. Mental Software]. Humanitas: Bucureşti
International Institute for Population Sciences (IIPS) and Population Council
(2010) Youth in India: Situation and Needs Study 2006- 2007, IIPS, Mumbai,
India.
Isajiw, W. W. (1993). Definition and dimensions of ethnicity: A theoretical
framework. In G. Goldmann et al. (Eds.), Challenges of Measuring an Ethnic
World: Science, Politics and Reality: Proceedings of the Joint Canada-United
States Conference on the Measurement of Ethnicity, April 1–3, 1992 (pp. 407–
430). Ottawa, Ontario: Statistics Canada.
John, N.A., Stoebenau, K., Ritter, S., Edmeades, J., &Balvin, N. (2017). Gender
Socialization during Adolescence in Low- and Middle-Income Countries:
Conceptualization, influences and outcomes, Innocenti Discussion Papers no.
96
IDP_2017_01, UNICEF Office of Research Innocenti, Florence Gender Socialization and
Cultural Differences in the
Johnson, R. L., &Shrier, D. (1987). Past sexual victimization by females of Construct of Gender
male patients in an adolescent medicine clinic population. American Journal of
Psychiatry, 144, 650-652.
Jolly, S.(2002), Gender and cultural change: Overview report, Institute of
Development Studies, Brighton, UK.
Kakar, S., &Kakar, K. (2007). The Indians: Portrait of a People.Penguin Books,
New Delhi.
Kane, E. (1996). Gender, culture, and learning. Washington, DC: Academy for
Educational Development.
Khan, M., Ilcisin, M., & Saxton, K. (2017). Multifactorial discrimination as a
fundamental cause of mental health inequities. International Journal for Equity
in Health, 16(1), 43. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-017-0532-z
Ku, L., Sonenstein, F. L., &Pleck, J. H. (1993). Young men’s risk behaviors for
HIV infection and sexually transmitted diseases, 1988 through 1991. American
Journal of Public Health, 83, 1609–1615.
Kuschel, R. (1992). "Women are women and men are men": How Bellonese
women get even. In K. Bjorkqvist& P. Niemela (Eds.), Of mice and women:
Aspects of female aggression (pp. 173-185). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Larimer, M. E., Lydum, A. R., Anderson, B. R., & Turner, A. P. (1999). Male
and women recipients of unwanted sexual contact in a college student sample:
Prevalence rates, alcohol use, and depressive symptoms. Sex Roles, 40(3/4),
295-308.
Leaper, C., & Farkas, T. (2014) The socialization of gender during childhood
and adolescence. In: Grusec JE, Hastings PD (eds) Handbook of socialization.
Theory and research, 2nd edn. Guilford Publications, New York, pp 541–566.
Retrieved from https:// ebookcentral.proquest.com
Levitt, H. M., & Ippolito, M. R. (2014). Being transgender: Navigating minority
stressors and developing authentic self-presentation. Psychology of Women
Quarterly, 38, 46–64.
Locke, L. M., & Richman, C. L. (1999). Attitudes toward domestic violence:
Race and gender issues. Sex Roles, 40, 227–247
Maccoby, E. E. (1990). Gender and relationships: A developmental account.
American Psychologist, 45, 513–520. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.45.4.513.
Maccoby, E. E. (1998). The two sexes: Growing up apart, coming together.
Cambridge: Belknap Press/Harvard University Press.
Maccoby, E. E., & Jacklin, C. (1987). Sex segregation in childhood. In H. W.
Reese (Ed.), Advances in child development and behavior (Vol. 20, pp. 239–287).
San Diego, CA: Academic Press. doi:10.1016/S0065-2407(08)60404-8.
Masters, N. T., Casey, E., Wells, E. A., & Morrison, D. M. (2012). Sexual scripts
among young heterosexually active men and women: Continuity and change.
Journal of Sex Research, 50, 409–420. doi:10.1080/ 00224499.2012.661102
McHale, S.M., Crouter, A.C., & Whiteman S.D. (2003), The family contexts of
gender development in childhood and adolescence, Social Development, vol.
12, no. 1, pp. 125–148
Mehta, C.M., Hojjat, M., Smith, K.R. et al.(2017) Associations Between Gender
Segregation and Gender Identity in College Students. Sex Roles 76, 694–704.
97
An Introduction to https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-016-0685-z
Gender Issues
Nanda, S. (2014). Gender diversity: Cross-cultural variations. Long Grove, IL:
Waveland Press.
O’Sullivan, L. F., Byers, E. S., &Finkleman, L. (1998). A comparison of male and
female college student’s experiences of sexual coercion. Psychology of Women
Quarterly, 22, 177-195.
O'Sullivan, L. R, & Byers, E. S. (1992). College students' incorporation of initiator
and restrictor roles in sexual dating interactions. Journal of Sex Research, 29(4),
435^146
Pagelow, M. D. (1984). Family violence. New York: Praeger
Paludi, M. (2004). Praeger guide to the psychology of gender. ProQuest Ebook
Central https://ebookcentral.proquest.com
Ram, U., Jha, P. & Ram, F. et al. (2013). Neonatal, 1–59 month, and under
5 mortality in 597 Indian districts, 2001 to 2012: estimates from national
demographic and mortality surveys. The Lancet Global Health, vol. 1, pp.
219–226,
Ram, U., Strohschein, L., & Gaur, K. (2014). Gender Socialization: Differences
between Male and Female Youth in India and Associations with Mental Health.
International Journal of Population Research (3).
Ridgeway, C. L., & Lynn, S.L. (1999). The gender system and interaction. Annual
Review of Sociology 25: 191–216. 26.
Ryle, R. (2011). How Do We Learn Gender? In Questioning Gender (119-). Sage
Publications.
Schuster, I. (1983). Women's aggression: An African case study. Aggressive
Behavior, 9, 319-331.
Schuster, I. (1985). Female aggression and resource scarcity: A crosscultural
perspective. In M. Haug, D. Benton, P. R Brain, B. Olivier, & J. Mos (Eds.), The
aggressive female (pp. 185-207). Montreal, Canada: Eden Press.
Schwartz. P., & Rutter, V. (1998). The gender of sexuality. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Pine Forge Press.
Seal, D. W., & Ehrhardt, A. A. (2003). Masculinity and urban men: Perceived
scripts for courtship, romantic, and sexual interactions with women. Culture
Health and Sexuality, 5, 295-319.
Seal, D. W., Smith, M., Coley, B., Perry, J., &Gamez, M. (2008). Urban
heterosexual couples’ sexual scripts for three shared sexual experiences. Sex
Roles, 58, 626–638. doi:10.1007/s11199-007-9369-z
Seal, D., Wagner-Raphael, L. I., & Ehrhardt, A. A. (2000). Sex, intimacy, and
HIV: An ethnographic study of a Puerto Rican social group in New York City.
The Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality, 11(4), 51-9.
Seaton, E. K., Caldwell, C. H., Sellers, R. M., & Jackson, J. S. (2010). An
intersectional approach for understanding perceived discrimination and
psychological well-being among African American and Caribbean Black youth.
Developmental Psychology, 46(5), 1372–1379. https://doi.org/10 .1037/a0019869
Sender, S. R., Hashemi, S. M., Riley, A. P., & Akhter, S. (1996). Credit programs,
patriarchy and men's violence in rural Bangladesh. Social Science and Medicine,
43, 1729-1742.
98 Shamim, I (1992). Dowry and women's status: A study of court cases in Dhaka
and Delhi. In E. C. Viano (Ed.), Intimate violence: Interdisciplinary perspectives Gender Socialization and
Cultural Differences in the
(pp. 265-275). Washington, DC: Hemisphere. Construct of Gender
Shangani, S., Gamarel, K. E., Ogunbajo, A., Cai, J., &Operario, D. (2020).
Intersectional minority stress disparities among sexual minority adults in the
USA: The role of race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status. Culture, Health &
Sexuality, 22(4), 398–412. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691058.2019 .1604994
Simon, W., & Gagnon, J.H. (1984). Sexual scripts. Society 22, 53–60 https://
doi.org/10.1007/BF02701260
Steensma, T. D., Zucker, K. J., Kreukels, B. P. C., Vander-Laan, D. P., Wood, H.,
Fuentes, A., & Cohen-Kettenis, P. T. (2014). Behavioral and emotional problems
on the Teacher’s Report Form: A crossnational, cross-clinic comparative analysis
of gender dysphoric children and adolescents. Journal of Abnormal Child
Psychology, 42, 635–647.
Straus, M. A. (1990). The Conflict Tactics Scales and its critics: An evaluation
and new data on validity and reliability. In M. A. Straus & R. J. Gelles (Eds.),
Physical violence in American societies: Risk factors and adaptations to violence
in 8,145 families (pp. 49-73). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publications
Straus, M. A., Kantor, G. K., & Moore, D. W. (1997). Change in cultural norms
approving marital violence from 1968 to 1994. In G. K. Kantor & J. L. Jasinski
(Eds.), Out of darkness: Contemporary perspectives on family violence (pp.
3–16). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Struckman-Johnson, C. J., &Struckman-Johnson, D. L. (1998). The dynamics
and impact of sexual coercion of men by women. In P. B. Anderson & C. J.
StruckmanJohnson (Eds.), Sexually aggressive women: Current perspectives
and controversies (pp. 121-143). New York: Guilford.
Sullivan, C. M., &Rumptz, M. H. (1994). Adjustment and needs of African-
American women who utilized a domestic violence shelter. Violence & Victims,
9(3), 275- 286.
Sullivan, C. M., &Rumptz, M. H. (1994). Adjustment and needs of African-
American women who utilized a domestic violence shelter. Violence & Victims,
9(3), 275- 286.
Tang, T. N., & Dion, K. L. (1999). Gender and acculturation in relation to
traditionalism: Perception of self and parents among Chinese students. Sex Roles,
41, 17–29.
Taylor, W. K., Magnussen, L., & Amundson, M. J. (2001). The lived experience
of battered women. Violence Against Women, 7(5), 563-585.
Thorne, B. (1993). Gender Play: Girls and Boys in School. New Brunswick, NJ:
Rutgers University Press.
Torres, S. (1991). A comparison of wife abuse between two cultures: Perceptions,
attitudes, nature, and extent. Issues in Mental Health Nursing, 12(1), 113-131.
Tuck, I. (1997). The cultural context of mental health nursing. Issues in Mental
Health Nursing, 18(3), 269-281.
Underwood, M. K. (2007). Girlfriends and boyfriends diverging in middle
childhood and coming together in romantic relationships. Merrill-Palmer
Quarterly, 53, 520–526. doi:10.1353/mpq.2007.0024.
Underwood, M. K., & Rosen, L. H. (2009). Gender, peer relations, and challenges
for girlfriends and boyfriends coming together in adolescence. Psychology of
Women Quarterly, 33, 16–20. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2008.01468.x. 99
An Introduction to Unesco, Gender Equality: Heritage And Creativity, (2014), http://www.unesco.
Gender Issues
org/culture/Gender-Equality-and-Culture/flipbook/en/.
UNICEF. (2007). Early Gender Socialization. Unicef.org. August 29. Retrieved
January 10, 2022, from (http://www.unicef.org/earlychildhood/index_40749.
html).
VandenBos, G. R., & American Psychological Association. (2007). APA dictionary
of psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Walby, S. (1997). Gender Transformations (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.
org/10.4324/9780203431153
Walker, L. E. A. (1990). Response to Mills and Mould. American Psychologist,
45, 676-677.
Wekker, G. (l999). Women, the environment and sustainable development
(Bibliography with Nancy Jouwe and RosiBraidotti). Utrecht, The Netherlands:
Utrecht University.
Wentzel, K.R. (2014) Socialization in school settings. In: Grusec JE, Hastings
PD (eds) Handbook of socialization. Theory and research, 2nd edn. Guilford
Publications, New York, pp 251–276. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral.
proquest.com
Werking, K. (1997b). We’re just good friends: Women and men in nonromantic
relationships. New York: Guilford Press.
West, C., & Zimmerman, D. H. (1987) Doing gender. Gender and Society. 1,
125–51.
West.C., & Zimmerman, D.H. (2009) Accounting for doing gender. Gender and
Society, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 112–122.
Wiederman, M. W. (2015). Sexual script theory: Past, present, and future.
Handbook of the sociology of sexualities (pp. 7-22). Springer International
Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17341-2_2
Witt, S.D. (2000) The influence of peers on children’s socialization to gender roles.
Early Child Dev Care 162(1):1–7. https://doi.org/10.1080/0300443001 620101
Yoshihama, M. (2000). Reinterpreting strength and safety in a socio-cultural
context: Dynamics of domestic violence and experiences of women of Japanese
descent. Children & Youth Services Review, 22(3-4), 207-229.
Yount, K. M. (2005). Women’s family power and gender preference in Minya,
Egypt. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 67, 410–428.
Zweig, J. M., Barber, B. L., & Eccles, J. S. (1997). Sexual coercion and well-
being in young adulthood: Comparisons by gender and college status. Journal
of Interpersonal Violence, 12(2), 291-308.

4.9 ADDITIONAL ONLINE RESOURCES

• To know more about gender socialization:
https://www.unicef-irc.org/publications/pdf/IDP_2017_01.pdf
• To know more about LGBTQIA+ issues:
https://lgbtqindiaresource.in/lbgtq-ngos-and-collectives/
https://indiaculturelab.org/lgbtq
https://www.ted.com/talks/karissa_sanbonmatsu_the_biology_of_gender_
100
 from_dna_to_the_brain?language=en Gender Socialization and
Cultural Differences in the
• To know more about gender gaps: Construct of Gender
https://www.ted.com/talks/safeena_husain_a_bold_plan_to_empower_1_6_
million_out_of_school_girls_in_india
https://en.unesco.org/themes/education-and-gender-equality/resources
• To read more about intersectionality research:
https://www.vox.com/the-highlight/2019/5/20/18542843/intersectionality-
conservatism-law-race-gender-discrimination

101