# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Abstract: It is important to understand the content of media, as media can promote stereotypes that communicate what gender roles, appearances, and acts of violence are acceptable in society. This content analysis of 147 superheroes in 80 movies found that male heroes appeared much more frequently than female heroes. Females were more likely to work in a group while males were more likely to work alone. Males were more powerful, muscular, violent, and evil while women were more attractive, thin, sexy/seductive, innocent, afraid, and helpless. Compared to males', females' clothes (both costumes and non-costumes) were more revealing on both the upper and lower bodies. Although both genders frequently have special abilities and use weapons, male characters are more likely than female characters to have more than one special ability and use more than one weapon. Males more often had super strength and resistance to injury, while female characters more often were able to manipulate elements (e.g., fire). Males were significantly more likely to use fighting skills, fire/flame weapons, and guns than females. The messages portrayed through superhero movies are discussed, with emphasis on implications of gender differences in portrayals of characters in movies.
The portrayal of movie superheroes may influence gender-related attitudes and behaviors, and reify socially constructed gender norms. Media portrayals communicate behavioral norms for both males and females (Paek, Nelson, & Vilela, 2011) and have potential to affect behaviors and attitudes. For instance, individuals who watch large amounts of television typically have more stereotypical beliefs about gender than people who watch less (Signorielli, 1989) and viewing superhero programs has been positively related to male stereotyped play for boys and playing with weapons for both genders (Coyne, Linder, Rasmussen, Nelson, & Collier, 2014). Both adults and children imitate characters' actions or appearance (e.g., Coyne et al., 2014; Dittmar, 2009).

Content analyses of movies (and other media) are one method of understanding messages related to gender norms (e.g., Schultz, Moore, & Spitzberg, 2014). The purpose of this content analysis is to analyze superhero movies and identify gender differences in superheroes' roles, appearance, and violence.
The Importance of Studying Superhero Movies
Superhero movies have grown in popularity, especially in recent years, and attract a large number of viewers ). As of 2016, six of the top 30 grossing films of all time are superhero movies ( BoxOfficeMojo.com ). Superhero films are action-oriented and often depict individuals with extraordinary powers, technology, or skills who combat often equally extraordinary evildoers. Essentially, superheroes serve as exemplars and their depiction may communicate ideas about a wide range of societal norms and values, including those relating to masculinity and femininity.

Children view superheroes as role models because of traits (e.g., appearance) or skills (e.g., weapons, violence) the characters possess (Anderson & Cavallaro, 2002;), which contribute to expectations and perceptions of gender roles (Jaffe & Berger, 1994). Messages about gender are communicated in both the quantity and qualities of male and female characters. For instance, male characters often outnumber female characters in video games (Dietz, 1998; Ivory, 2006; Miller & Summers, 2007; Scharrer, 2004), television shows (including cartoons; Aubrey & Harrison, 2004; Baker & Raney, 2007), and advertising (Paek et al., 2011) perhaps because boy viewers outnumber girl viewers (Thompson & Zerbinos, 1997) or because boys are considered less likely to watch programs that have female lead characters than those that have male leads (Thompson & Zerbinos, 1997). Further, male and female characters are portrayed differently. Male heroes are more often highly aggressive (Milkie, 1994) while female heroes are more often compassionate, nurturing, and understanding (Calvert, Kondla, Ertel, & Meisel, 2001). Underrepresentation may extend beyond gender. For example, many superheroes appear to be White males. The lack of diversity in superhero renditions may add to socially constructed views about race/ethnicity, gender, and their intersection. Also, gender norms might be racialized, such that White superheroes might be depicted with different qualities than Black superheroes. Considering their popularity, it is important to analyze the messages superhero films convey.
Content of Media: Roles, Appearance, and Violence
Previous studies evaluated gender roles in video games (Dietz, 1998; Ivory, 2006; Miller & Summers, 2007), cartoons (Baker & Raney, 2007; Calvert et al., 2001), and TV advertising (Paek et al., 2011), but have not specifically focused on superhero characters. This content analysis expands on previous research by analyzing superhero movies and reveals how superhero movies portray men and women in terms of their roles, appearance, and the type/quantity of violence they commit. Furthermore, although the researchers recognize the importance of examining race as it relates to gender, as will be demonstrated, in order to achieve adequate sample sizes, the current project focuses on gender. We encourage future research to focus on the intersections of race and gender in studying media with larger samples.
Gender Differences in Roles
When females are shown in media, they are sometimes portrayed as non-essential or passive characters (Dietz, 1998; Haninger & Thompson, 2004; Ivory, 2006). Female characters are more likely than males to have a mentor (Baker & Raney, 2007) and majority of female characters work in a team rather than alone (Baker & Raney, 2007). Collectively, these results may suggest to viewers that women are less important, knowledgeable, and capable than men - and less likely to be a hero (Miller & Summers, 2007; Signorielli, 1989; Thompson & Zerbinos, 1997). Further, these portrayals may suggest that males do not need to consult others or require help. In sum, media research suggests that there might be important gender differences in the roles of male and female superhero characters. Prior research has also examined gender differences in appearance (e.g., Ivory, 2006; Miller & Summers, 2007).
Gender Differences in Appearance
Previous content analyses of media characters have revealed that women are shown primarily as sex objects (Miller & Summers, 2007). Females are more likely than males to be portrayed in a sexualized fashion (Ivory, 2006) or as engaging in sexually suggestive behavior (Haninger & Thompson, 2004). In doing so, women typically wear less and more provocative clothing than men (Dietz, 1998; Thompson & Haninger, 2001; Scharrer, 2004). Generally, females are portrayed as attractive, sexy, and feminine (Baker & Raney, 2007; Dietz, 1998; Ivory, 2006; Miller & Summers, 2007; Scharrer, 2004), while males are portrayed as rugged, tough, masculine, and muscular (Baker & Raney, 2007; Miller & Summers, 2007; Scharrer, 2004). Females are more often portrayed as helpless or as victims than males (Aubrey & Harrison, 2004; Dietz, 1998; Miller & Summers, 2007; Thompson & Zerbinos, 1997). Also, in cartoons, females are depicted as more emotional and superficial or more likely to get overexcited in a crisis than males (Baker & Raney, 2007). Such results indicate that men and women are portrayed very differently in terms of appearance and behaviors, including behaviors associated with power or aggression.
Gender Differences in Violence
Past content analyses have indicated that male characters are frequently violent (Scharrer, 2004), use more weapons, and have more abilities (i.e., invisibility, super speed, martial arts, flying, or using magic) than female characters (Miller & Summers, 2007). Females' victories are achieved through wit, nurturing, compassion, and persuasion rather than the weaponry, physical strength, and aggression of their male counterparts (Calvert et al., 2001). Thompson and Zerbinos (1997) found that both male and female children perceived male cartoon characters as more violent than female characters. In contrast, Baker and Raney (2004) found no significant differences in aggression between male and female characters in cartoons. These studies indicate that, in some contexts, the media portrays men and women differently in terms of violence and conflict resolution. This could reinforce gender stereotypes that women are less powerful or have fewer abilities than men and that men are not capable of nurturing or compassion. The current study finds similar gender differences.
Overview of Study
This study examined full-length superhero movies to determine if there are gender differences in characters' roles, appearances, and violence.

A general research question and several hypotheses were developed based on past content analyses. The general research question asks how characters are portrayed in superhero movies. Specifically, what roles do the superhero characters play (e.g., hero, supplemental character)? Are they portrayed as muscular, attractive, powerful, or sexy? Are they violent, do they have special powers, and do they use weapons?
Hypotheses:
Male characters will have different general roles (e.g., less likely to work in a group) than females (Hypothesis 1a) and different specific roles (e.g., soldier, detective) than females (Hypothesis 1b).

¥ Males will appear more muscular and powerful than females, who will be more attractive, sexy, and thin (Hypothesis 2a) and wear more revealing clothing than male characters (Hypothesis 2b).

¥ Males will have more special powers/abilities (e.g., super strength) (Hypothesis 3a) and will use weapons more often than females (Hypothesis 3b).
Methods
Movies were selected from a list of "comic book /superhero" movies categorized by Blockbuster.com. The list contained 146 movies released between 1978 (starting with Superman: The Movie) and 2009. Eighty full-length motion pictures (listed in Appendix A) or cartoons available for rent in the English language were selected for analysis from this list. The remainder were excluded due to a lack of availability (not available for rent) or because they were offered in only a foreign language. Researchers selected the two main male superheroes (if two were available; if more than two were available, two were selected randomly) and all female superheroes. A total of 147 hero characters were evaluated. Despite over sampling of female heroes, there were only 47 female heroes and 100 male heroes, a rate of 1 female for every 2.13 male characters.

A codebook was developed based on past content analyses and a literature review. Researchers watched one movie in order to operationalize study definitions (e.g., societal standards of size, attractiveness, behavior). Facial expressions (e.g., angry, happy) were assessed with an explicit smile or frown for both male and female characters. Assessments of other characteristics, such as muscularity, were gendered. For example, female characters were rated on muscularity relative to other females. Changes to the codebook were made based on discussion between researchers.

Next, inter-rater reliability analysis ensured that researchers had a common understanding of the questions and operational definitions of variables. Two researchers watched the same movie and completed their codebooks individually. They then compared responses and settled disagreements through discussion. Sixteen movies were included in the inter-rater reliability analysis. Holsti's coefficient revealed an overall inter-rater reliability rate of .90, indicating that coders had a high level of overall agreement (see Table 1). Coefficients for individual variables ranged from 0.66 for the sexy/seductive variable to 0.97 on other variables. One researcher coded the remaining 64 movies.

Table 1: Holsti's coefficient of reliability for all factors
Measures
The codebook included variables measuring gender, appearance, special abilities, and weapons. Appearance and attire variables were rated using a Likert scale of 0 (not at all) to 4 (extreme). Special abilities and weapon usage variables were scored as "yes" (present) or "no" (not present). "Yes/no" questions assessed characters' roles (e.g., does hero work in a group?).
Results
Difference of proportions tests determined the variation between male and female superheroes in regard to roles, weapon usage, and special abilities. Difference of means tests (t-tests) assessed significant differences between male and female superhero appearance and attire.
Research Question: General Portrayal of Characters
The research question asks how characters are portrayed in superhero movies. For example, what abilities do they have? What roles do they play? Are they muscular, attractive, powerful, or sexy? Males were rated an average of 2.83 (out of 4) on the powerful scale, with 84% of characters scoring above the scale midpoint. Similarly, males scored 2.42 on the muscular scale, with 77% scoring above the scale's midpoint. Females averaged 2.36 on the sexy/seductive scale, with 74.5% scoring above the midpoint. Similarly, females scored 2.66 on a scale measuring thinness, with 78.8% scoring above the scale's midpoint. They also averaged 3.15 in attractiveness, with 100% scoring above the midpoint. Thus, the majority of male characters were portrayed as powerful and muscular, while the majority of females were portrayed as sexy, thin, and attractive.

Twenty of 47 (42.6%) female characters and 75 of 100 (75%) male characters had more than one special ability, indicating 1 female for every 3.75 male characters. Twelve of 47 female characters (25.5%) and 58 of 100 male characters (58%) had more than one weapon, indicating 1 female for every 4.83 male characters.

Hypothesis 1 investigated gender differences in superheroes' roles.

Hypothesis 1a was partially supported: male characters had different general roles than females. Most (71.9%) male characters did not work in a group while 66% did so; further, 46.8% of women were supplemental characters.

Hypothesis 1b was partially supported: males and females have different specific roles. The only significant gender difference was that men were more likely to be detectives or secret agents (see Table 2).

Table 2: Difference of proportions: Gender differences of character roles

Hypothesis 2 determined whether there were gender differences in characters' appearance and attire.

Hypothesis 2a was mostly supported: there were gender differences in the appearance of characters. Table 3 indicates means for males were significantly higher than means for females on the items measuring power, muscularity, violence, and evil. In comparison, means for females were significantly higher than means for males on attractiveness, thinness, sexiness/seductiveness, innocence, fear, and helplessness.

Table 3: Difference of means: Gender differences in character appearance

Hypothesis 2b was mostly supported: female characters wore more sexy and revealing clothing than males. Table 4 indicates means for female characters were significantly higher than means for male characters on variables measuring the revealing nature of non-costume clothing (e.g., clothes the character wore when not acting as the superhero) and costume clothing (e.g., superhero costume). This result held for both the upper body and the lower body. Similarly, females' non-costume clothing was significantly tighter than males'. The only category not significant was the overall tightness of the costume clothing, which may be confounded by the tight clothing inherent to the genre.

Table 4: Difference of means: Gender differences of character attire

**Note that the n varies because some characters wore only costumes, some only wore non-costumes, and some wore both.

Hypothesis 3 determined whether there were gender differences in characters' special abilities and weapons.

Hypothesis 3a was partially supported: there were differences in special abilities of male and female characters. Table 5 indicates males have significantly more special abilities. Males more often had super strength and resistance to injury, while female characters more often were able to manipulate elements (e.g., fire, water,).

Table 5: Difference of proportions: Gender differences of character special abilities

Hypothesis 3b was partially supported: male characters used more weapons than females. Table 6 indicates males were significantly more likely to use fighting skills, fire or flame weapons, and guns.

Table 6: Difference of proportions: Gender differences of character weapon usage
Additional Observations
Although not a major focus of the research, we noted some interesting patterns regarding the race of the female characters.For instance, they often were stereotyped, masked, and/or non-humans in movies targeted toward a non-White audience (e.g., homogeneous group of actors of color).In the entire sample, 101 characters were White, 17 were Black, 4 were Latino, and 4 were Asian. The race of the others was unidentifiable (e.g., they wore a costume, were non-human).Because of the very small sample of characters of color, it is not statistically meaningful to do quantitative comparisons of interactions between genders.However, a few notes can be made about the intersections of race and gender. While a detailed qualitative analysis is beyond the scope of this paper, there are some notable observations about the portrayal of female characters of color.

Of the 47 female characters, only 11 were characters of color. Five female characters were Black-but this is misleading because three of them were the same character appearing in three different movies ( X-Men's Storm who is a mutant). One is Patience (a very stereotypical feminine name) Phillips, who plays Catwoman. Of interest, both Storm and Catwoman characters are played by Halle Berry whose mother is White and father is Black (although she identifies as Black). The final Black character is Vanessa from Blade, who is a vampire. Notably, of these three characters, none is a "normal human"; they are mutants or vampires, and wear costumes to hide their identity.

Four female characters were Asian. Silver Hawk is a Hong Kong movie with a female masked hero whose stereotypical expertise is martial arts. Two movies were part of a Hong Kong produced trilogy in which all the characters are Asian (e.g., Thief Catcher, the Heroic Trio). The fourth was a female martial artist in the Japanese film Red Shadow. All of these are likely marketed for Asian audience, and all three portray Asian women in a stereotypical way.

Only 2 were Latina, including one that was a stereotypical role: Maria from Zorro. The other is the Pink Power Ranger who wears a costume when fighting crime. Note that they have stereotypically Latina names (Maria) or wear femininized colors (Pink). Given the large (and growing) Latino population in the U.S., the lack of Latino characters is especially problematic. We hope that future research will investigate issues of race, gender, and superheroes further.
Discussion
This content analysis revealed significant gender differences in the portrayal of superhero characters' roles, appearance, and violence. Supporting earlier findings of video games characters (e.g., Miller & Summers, 2007), television shows (including cartoons; e.g., Baker & Raney, 2007), and advertising (Paek et al., 2011), female characters are less represented than male characters. Researchers selected and analyzed only two male heroes and all female heroes per movie, yet there were still twice as many males. Also similar to past studies (e.g., Baker & Raney, 2007), males were portrayed more often as individual heroes rather than teams working in groups.

Current findings replicated previous studies, which found males were portrayed as more powerful and muscular (e.g., Scharrer, 2004) and females as more sexy and attractive (e.g., Ivory, 2006). Female characters wore significantly more revealing clothing, in both non-costume and costume (e.g., Miller & Summers, 2007) and were portrayed as more helpless than males (e.g., Aubrey & Harrison, 2004).

Finally, male characters were more likely to have more than one special ability and use more than one weapon.

Results have implications for superhero movie viewers, and society more broadly. If media frequently and consistently underrepresent female characters and portray them as supplemental characters who need the help of others, then viewers might believe that these depictions apply to women in general (Aubrey & Harrison, 2004). Gender differences in media role portrayals are influential because these portrayals can perpetuate stereotypes about behavioral norms for males and females (Paek et al., 2011). For example, when media portray females as helpless and passive, males might expect females to act accordingly, and females might underestimate their ability to protect themselves.

Results of this study correspond with previous research (e.g., Ivory, 2006): media portray men as powerful and muscular and women as attractive, sexy, and thin. Such portrayals might have effects on self-esteem and body image. Females might feel compelled to participate in more sexualized behavior by wearing more revealing clothing in order to gain acceptance from males. Females might also adopt unhealthy eating habits to be thin like their media role models. Similarly, men might feel inferior after comparing themselves to unrealistically muscular and powerful male superhero characters. This could result in negative self-esteem, steroid usage, or other drastic attempts to create a muscular physique. According to Dittmar (2009), body image contributes to mental and physical well-being. Depression and social anxiety can result from dissatisfaction with one's physical appearance when comparisons are made to fictional or real people,

Finally, the study has implications for viewers of violent media. This content analysis confirms that male heroes more frequently used violence to resolve conflict (e.g., more use of abilities and weapons) as compared to females (who were portrayed as significantly more helpless and afraid). Viewers might infer that it is not acceptable for a man to be compassionate; instead, he must be violent. These media portrayals might relate to aggressive or uncooperative behavior (Anderson, Gentile, & Buckley, 2007) or bullying (American Academy of Pediatrics, 2009). Viewers may perceive that because there is so much violence (e.g., usage of weapons) in the media that violence in real life is an acceptable solution to resolving conflict.
Limitations
One limitation of this study is that not all movies on the list were evaluated. This content analysis examined approximately 55% of the movies provided on the full list from Blockbuster. Due to the lack of availability or because of a foreign language, researchers were unable to determine if there are systematic differences in gender roles, appearance, and violence presented in those movies that were excluded. Further, it is possible that some superhero movies were left off the Blockbuster.com list and not considered in this study.

Another limitation is that not all superhero characters were analyzed. Researchers chose all females, but only two main male characters. Male characters who appeared only briefly in the movie may differ from main characters. This procedure also means that main male characters were compared to all female characters. A comparison of only main male and main female characters would be a more direct evaluation.

Finally, tests of interrater reliability measured whether the researchers were coding similarly to each other, however this does not address the validity of the coding. Both researchers could have the same bias (e.g., perceiving females as more angry than males), but this is difficult to assess.
Future Directions
As mentioned previously, future research may benefit from an examination of race/ethnicity in addition to gender as they relate to superheroes and they ways in which they are portrayed. A quick perusal of contemporary popular superhero movies (e.g., Batman vs. Superman, Iron Man 3, Spider-man) indicates that most leading characters are White males. On the rare occasion that a female is a leading superhero character (e.g., , ) or the most powerful character (e.g., X-Men's Jean Grey/Phoenix), the character is also White.

Media portrayals can perpetuate sexist social norms and the objectification of women. Furthermore, mainstream media commonly trivialize or hypersexualize women of color (Guzmán & Valdivia, 2004; Manatu, 2002; Martinez, 2004) and promote impossible standards of beauty (Perry, 2003). Also, women of color are often seen as characters that assimilate to a White, Westernized culture and are repeatedly dominated or defined by men (Brooks & Hérbet, 2004; Guzmán & Valdivia, 2004). In the brief review of our sample, we noted that characters of color were often masked, given stereotypical names, or portrayed as characters that were not human. Interestingly, Halle Berry (who is biracial) was chosen to play the Black character-epitomizing the need for Blacks to be "as White" as possible.

The current content analysis confirmed that women were underrepresented in superhero movies. Future research could examine the frequency with which members of marginalized groups are represented in superhero movies and the degree to which their roles, appearance, and tendency for violence may differ, especially in terms of gender.

Future research should identify the impacts of these gender differences on movie viewers. Also, more research needs to be conducted in order to determine the impact media, specifically superhero movies, have regarding gender role expectations and stereotypes.
Conclusion
The current study revealed significant gender differences in the portrayal of superhero characters in movies. Male superheroes outnumbered females and more often did not work in a group. At the same time, females were more likely to work in groups, and were often supplemental characters. These portrayals might signify to viewers that females are of a lower status and less capable of fending for themselves than males. Females wore more revealing clothing than men, which comports with other studies that find women objectified in media. Male characters were more muscular and powerful while female characters were more attractive, sexy, thin, afraid, and helpless. Lastly, males used special abilities and weapons more often than females, while females were more likely to manipulate natural elements. Collectively, these depictions may communicate ideas about women as nurturing and fertile, passive non-agentic background characters and (White) men as powerful masters of reason who operate in the foreground (Plumwood, 1993).

Media influences gender roles (Signorielli, 1989), appearances (Anderson & Cavallaro, 2002), and the propensity for violence (American Academy of Pediatrics, 2009). Gender inequality may be harmful because it limits socially accepted roles and reinforces stereotypes within society, which might affect how people judge and treat others (Paek et al., 2011).
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Mariah Evans for her help in preparing the analysis of this article.
References
American Academy of Pediatrics (2009). Policy statement - media violence. American Academy of Pediatrics, 124(5), 1495-1503. doi:10.1542/peds.2009-2146

Anderson, K. J. & Cavallaro, D. (2002). Parents or pop culture? Children's heroes and role models. Childhood Education, 78(3), 161-168.

Anderson, C. A., Gentile, D. A., & Buckley, K. E. (2007). Violent video game effects on children and adolescents: Theory, research, and public policy. New York: Oxford University Press.

Aubrey, J. S., & Harrison K. (2004). The gender-role content of children's favorite television programs and its links to their gender-related perceptions. Media Psychology, 6(2), 111-146.

Baker, K., & Raney, A. A. (2007). Equally Super?: Gender-role stereotyping of superheroes I children's animated programs. Mass Communication & Society, 10(1), 25-41. doi:10.1080/15205430701229626

Bartholow, B. D., & Anderson, C. A. (2002). Effects of violent video games on aggressive behavior: Potential sex differences. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38(3),283-290. doi:10.1006/jesp.2001.1502

Blockbuster (2010, February 1). Comic book & superhero movies. Blockbuster, LLC. Retrieved from http://www.blockbuster.com/outlet/categories/actionAdventure/comicBookSuperh ero

Box Office Mojo (2016).Domestic Grosses. Box Office Mojo (An IMDb company).Retrieved from http://boxofficemojo.com/alltime/domestic.htm

Brooks, D. E., & Hébert, L. P. (2004). Lessons learned or bamboozled? Gender in a Spike Lee film. Unpublished manuscript.

Calvert, S. L., Kondla, T. A., Ertel, K. A., & Meisel, D. S. (2001). Young adults' perceptions and memories of a televised woman hero. Sex Roles, 45(1/2),31-52.

Coyne, S. M., Linder, J. R., Rasmussen, E. E., Nelson, D. A., Collier, K. M. (2014). It's a bird! It's a plane! It's a gender stereotype!: Longitudinal associations between superhero viewing and gender stereotyped play. Sex Roles, 70, 416-430.

Dietz, T. L. (1998). An examination of violence and gender role portrayals in video games: Implications for gender socialization and aggressive behavior. Sex Roles, 38(5/6), 425-442.

Dittmar, H. (2009). How do "body perfect" ideals in the media have a negative impact on body image and behaviors? Factors and processes related to self and identity. Journal of Social & Clinical Psychology, 28(1), 1-8.

Dodds, E. (2014). How superhero movies are saving Hollywood. Time Magazine. Retrieved from http://time.com/79410/justice-league-superhero-universe/

Guzmán, I. M., & Valdivia, A. N. (2004). Brain, brow, and booty: Latina iconicity in US popular culture. The Communication Review, 7(2), 205-221.

Haninger, K., & Thompson, K. M. (2004). Content and ratings of teen-rated video games. Journal of the American Medical Association, 291(7), 856-865.

Hogrobrooks, H. A. (1993). Prime time crime: The role of television in the denigration and dehumanization of the AfricanAmerican male. In J. W. Ward (Ed.), African American communications: An anthology in traditional and contemporary studies (pp. 165-172). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/ Hunt.

Ivory, J. (2006). Still a man's game: Gender representation in online reviews of video games. Mass Communication and Society, 9(1), 103-114 doi:10.1207/s15327825mcs0901_6

Jaffe, L. J., & Berger, P. D. (1994). The effect of modern female sex role portrayals on advertising effectiveness. Journal of Advertising Research, 34(4), 32-42. Retrieved from http://www.warc.com/fulltext/jar/6312.htm

Kort-Butler, L. A. (2013). Justice League?: Depictions of justice in children's superhero cartoons. Criminal Justice Review, 38, 50-69. Doi:10.1177/0734016812467201

Kort-Butler, L. A. (2012). Rotten, vile and depraved! Depictions of criminality in superhero cartoons. Deviant Behavior, 7, 566-581. doi: 10.1080/01639625.2011.636718

Manatu, N. (2002). African American women and sexuality in the cinema. North Carolina, United States: McFarland & Company, Inc.

Martinez, K. (2004). Latina magazine and the invocation of a panethnic family: Latino identity as it is informed by celebrities and Papis Chulos. Communication Review, 7, 155-174

Milkie, M. (1994). Social world approach to cultural studies: Mass media and gender in the adolescent peer group. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 23(3),354-380.

Miller, M. K., & Summers, A. (2007). Gender differences in video game characters' roles, appearances, and attire as portrayed in video game magazines. Sex Roles, 57(9/10), 733-42. doi:10.1007/s11199-007-9307-0

Paek, H-J., Nelson, M. R., & Vilela, A. M. (2011). Examination of gender-role portrayals in television advertising across seven countries. Sex Roles, 64(3/4), 192-207. doi:10.1007/s11199-010-9850-y

Perry, I. (2003). Who(se) am I? The identity and image of women in hip-hop. In G. Dines & J. Humez (Eds.), Gender, race, and class in media: A text-reader (2nd ed., pp. 136-148). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Plumwood, V. (1993). Feminism and the mastery of nature. London: Routledge.

Scharrer, E. (2004). Media and youth: Gender and aggression in video game advertisements. Mass Communication and Society, 7(4), 393-412.

Schultz, A. S., Moore, J., & Spitzberg, B. H. (2014). Once upon a midnight stalker: A content analysis of stalking in films. Western Journal of Communication, 78, 612-635.doi: 10.1080/10570314.2013.809475

Signorielli, N. (1989). Television and conceptions about sex roles: Maintaining conventionality and the status quo. Sex Roles, 21(5/6), 341-360. doi:10.1007/BF00289596

Thompson, K. M., & Haninger, K. (2001). Violence in E-rated video games. Journal of the American Medical Association, 286(5), 591-920.

Thompson, T. L., & Zerbinos, E. (1997). Television cartoons: Do children notice
It's a boy's world? Sex Roles, 37(4/5),415-432.

Appendix A

Films Included in Analyses

-CITATION-
Miller, M. K., Rauch, J. A. & Kaplan, T. (2016) Gender Differences in Movie Superheroes' Roles, Appearances, and Violence. Ada: A Journal of Gender, New Media, and Technology, No. 10. doi:10.7264/N3HX19ZK

This article has been openly peer reviewed at Ada Review.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Gender Differences in Movie Superheroes' Roles, Appearances, and Violence

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Abstract: It is important to understand the content of media, as media can promote stereotypes that communicate what gender roles, appearances, and acts of violence are acceptable in society. This content analysis of 147 superheroes in 80 movies found that male heroes appeared much more frequently than female heroes.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Video games have long been known as a male-dominated media, including in the terms of market audience, player base, and character representation in game. Research concerning gender representation in video games often focuses on a few key points of how men and women are depicted differently: frequency and playability (ability to play a male character versus a female character), physical abilities, role in the game, and physical representation (in terms of body, attire, etc) (Williams, Martins, Consalvo, & Ivory, 2009; Robinson, Callister, Clark, & Phillips, 2008; Miller, & Summers, 2007; Jansz, & Martis, 2007; Burgess, Stermer, & Burgess, 2007; Ivory, 2006). Content analysis concerning video games and gender is performed based on a variety of aspects, including magazine reviews (Miller & Summers, 2007), video game covers (Burgess, et al., 2007), online reviews and official game websites (Ivory, 2006; Robinson et al., 2008), introductory films in video games (Jansz & Martis, 2007), and video game play itself (Williams et al., 2009). Some studies focused on games solely for console platforms (Playstation, Xbox, etc.) (Miller & Summers, 2007; Burgess et al., 2007; Jansz & Martis, 2007), while others included both console and PC games (Williams et. al., 2009; Ivory, 2006). A common system used to determine sampling is to find the most popular games on the market, either through market research, game store offerings, or through well-known game review websites such as Gamespot.com (Williams et. al, 2009; Robinson et. al, 2008; Burgess et al., 2007; Ivory, 2006). Miller and Summers' (2007) study chose their sample of magazines (Xbox, Playstation, and Nintendo Power) because they were actually published by console companies and may generally be considered as "authorities", while Jansz and Martis (2007) excluded sports games, racing games, and fighting games due to their lack of character development and developed selection criteria based on character representation (male, female, minority) and story line.

Findings for gender representation in video games generally support past findings in that males are significantly more represented than females (Williams et al., 2009; Robinson et al., 2008; Miller & Summers, 2007; Burgess et al., 2007; Ivory, 2006). Ivory's (2006) research on video game reviews found that, while "75%...of the reviews mentioned male characters, only 42%...mentioned female characters in any capacity" (p. 109). Miller and Summers (2007) found that, "Of the 49 games included in the analysis, 282 male humans and 53 female human characters appeared, indicating 1 female for every 5.3 male characters" (p. 737). Along the same lines, Burgess et al. (2007) found that "[m]ales were twice as likely to appear on covers as females were" (p. 423); following that, their sample examined 381 male characters compared to only 104 female characters. Robinson et al.'s (2008) study on video game websites also supported this trend, finding that "male characters outnumbered female characters 3 to 1 (577 male characters to 196 female characters)." More recently, Williams et al. (2009) found that "male characters are vastly more likely to appear than female character [sic] in general. The overall difference of 85.23/14.77 percent is also a large contrast with the 50.9/49.1 percent distribution in the actual population" (p. 824). While the trend seems that men are continuing to outnumber women in character representation in game, Jansz and Martis' (2007) results "seem to indicate that the number of female characters in recent games is far larger than it was in earlier games" (p. 146). Their results may have been biased "toward a higher prevalence of female characters", however, "because [they] did not draw a random sample but deliberately selected popular games with a diverse cast of characters" (p. 146).

Studies also found that males were often more playable than female characters, with research focusing on "[a]gency...as a function of character role: was the character considered the primary character and central to the game or simply an ancillary character without a clear cut contribution to the game? " (Burgess et al., 2007, p. 424) or another similar form. Ivory (2006) found that "65%...of the reviews indicated male playable characters, whereas only 22%...mentioned female playable characters" (p. 110). Burgess et al. (2007) found that "[m]ales were almost five times more likely to be portrayed as the primary character...than females" (p. 424-425). Miller and Summers (2007) found that "males were heroes 58.1% of the time, significantly more than females (34.6%)" (p. 738). In addition, of games where the gender of characters was known, "in 51% of the games, men were playable, in 26.5% of the games females were playable and 10.2% of the games allowed the player to choose to play as either the male or female" (Miller & Summers, 2007, p. 738). Robinson et al. (2008) make an important note about games that provide the ability to choose character gender representation, "[e]ven for games where players could pick the character's gender (e.g., The Sims 2 and Guild Wars), there were still more male characters (60%) than female characters (40%) on the Web site." Recently, Williams et al. (2009) also support the higher frequency of male playability,

This difference is heightened among the primary 'doer' characters, where males are even more likely to appear. As a general rule then, males appear more frequently in games than females, and even more so as drivers of the action. When females do appear, they are more likely to be in secondary roles than primary ones. (p. 824)

Concerning men and women in passive roles, conclusions are mixed. Studies have found little difference in men and women as passive characters (8% versus 9%, respectively) (Ivory, 2006), males being "four times more likely to be portrayed as ancillary characters" (Burgess et al., 2007, p. 425), and that "14.5% of males were supplemental characters, a significantly lower amount than females (30.8%)" (Miller & Summers, 2007, p. 738).

Burgess et al. (2007) made an interesting hypothesis, that

females would be more likely to share their primary status with a primary male. Even with a primary female character, the presence of a primary male implied that the female was only allowed to be an important part of the game because the male was there with her. The male could serve as protector, guide, or actually perform most of the action while the female serves as a sidekick. (p. 425)

Their research supported this, finding that the amount of primary female characters paired with a male primary character was significantly higher than the proportion of primary males paired with primary females. Concerning characters sharing the primary spotlight, "20 games had more than one primary male while only one game had more than one primary female" (p. 425). Furthermore, "while only one primary male was portrayed sharing the spotlight with two primary females, 20%...of the primary females were portrayed with two primary males" (p. 425).

Differing from typical results, Jansz and Martis (2007) found that "[w]omen and men were distributed equally in the class of leading characters (six women and six men) and women occupied a dominant position as often as men did" (p. 147). Their results also found "no submissive female characters at all. Women in [their] set of 12 games were equal to men, or they dominated them. This contrasts with the presence of submissive female characters in all other studies" (p. 147). A prime example in their research of this strong, competent, dominant female (they term it the 'Lara phenomenon'), is "Jennifer in Primal, who must embark on a journey to rescue her boyfriend Lewis, [who] illustrates that men in contemporary video games can be victims who must be saved by a female character" (p. 146).

Regardless of primary or supporting role, research continues to support previous findings that women are portrayed in a sexualized manner more often than men. Ivory (2006) notes that, "Though female characters were underrepresented overall, their attractiveness and sexuality were mentioned in proportionally more reviews than that of males" (p. 110). Further support was found in males being represented as more muscular, while women were more sexy (Miller & Summers, 2007; Jansz & Martis, 2007). Sexiness was generally illustrated via physical build and attire. Females' clothing was more revealing (either by less or tighter clothing) overall (Miller & Summers, 2007; Jansz & Martis, 2007; Robinson et al., 2008). Burgess et al. (2008) make an interesting observation in that, when character bodies were portrayed as pieces, "84% of female characters...were fragmented using artificial means (e.g., just drawing the legs and buttocks) as opposed to environmental factors (e.g., legs being unobservable when riding in a car) compared to 55% of male characters" (p. 425). Robinson et al. (2008) noted that, "Fifteen percent of (M)ature games also included characters that were coded as being naked or having exposed breasts, buttocks, or genitals. Of the characters coded as 'naked,' 88% were female." Females are also often portrayed with large breasts (Jansz & Martis, 2007; Burgess et al., 2008). Jansz and Martis (2007) noted that, "Buttocks also were difficult to ignore. They were particularly emphasized among female characters...(77%), but about 25% of the male characters also appeared with eye catching behinds" (p. 146). Another observation in Jansz and Martis' (2007) study was that there are exceptions to the feminine standard of sexy attire: "The male figure Dante ( Devil May Cry 2), for example, was presented in an explicit, sexy, and seductive outfit" (p. 146).

A content analysis of female bodies by Martins, Williams, Harrison, & Ratan, (2009) revealed that video game depictions in general all feature larger heads than in reality. Their results suggest that the more realistic the imagery in a game, the smaller the female characters' chest, waist, and hips, and the more they conform to the "thin-ideal seen in other media" (p. 830).

A study I found of particular interest was Ewan Kirkland's (2005) analysis of the game series Silent Hill ( SH). Kirkland's introduction to the game in regards to gender, sexuality, and race cites a common formula that includes "the sexualized depiction of female characters, the overwhelming masculinity of the implied game player, and the recurring structure of male heroes rescuing helpless females" (p. 173). Following lines I've mentioned previously of female characters depicted sexually regardless of type of role, Kirkland provides the example of Princess Toadstool from the popular Super Mario Bros. series. She has the ability to float, which her accompanying characters do not; this "compatibility of Princess' abilities with traditional constructions of femininity as dainty, ethereal and light/slender deserves acknowledgement" (p. 173). Moving onto the analysis of Silent Hill itself, Kirkland describes how the series "both conforms to and complicates this formula (cited above)" (p. 173). Another example that parallels that of Princess Toadstool is the SH character Eileen. She is paired with a male character, Henry, and, "[w]hile undeniably a rescue-figure, Eileen does join in combat, although her chosen weapons of handbag and riding crop to Henry's revolver and baseball bat are as markedly feminine as Princess' graceful gliding" (p. 173-174). Silent Hill's characters continue to complicate the formula of the sexualized female through "Heather, SH3 's central character, [who] also differs from video games' predominantly fetishized femininity in her androgynous appearance and narrative centrality" (p. 174); the formula of the masculine male is complicated as well: "Harry's fatherhood, James' husband-hood, and Henry's imprisonment within his apartment, domesticate, feminize and distinguish these male characters from other more hyper-masculine video game heroes" (p.174).

What may be considered another complication, or perhaps extension, of the sexualized female in the formula mentioned by Kirkland is an observation made by Burgess et al. (2007). Not every game portrays characters with an observable gender, nor is every game character human, though they may be humanoid in nature. One example of a game that portrays humanoid characters is Conker: Reloaded, where characters are squirrels playing the role of soldiers (Burgess et al., 2007). On the cover of the game was a "male squirrel straddling a large, smoking cannon and holding additional weapons clearly indicating an active role. The female squirrel is shown stroking the cannon in a suggestive way; although she is holding a bloody weapon, her fighting role was minimized relative to that as a sexy, supportive cheerleader" (Burgess et al., 2007, p. 423). This observation is particularly important, as noted by Burgess et al. (2007): "Perhaps one of the most bizarre aspects of this cover, and others like it, was the notion of sexy squirrels; the blatant hyper sexuality of female characters was so prevalent that it even spread to small rodents" (p. 423).

One question that may arise concerning the portrayals of gender roles in video games is that of ethical responsibility. As mentioned in Williams et al.'s (2009) virtual census, video game character representations do not accurately reflect American society today; instead there is a mix of over- and under- representation in gender, race, and age. An article by Mike Doolittle of GameCritics.com (2009) asks the question, "Are game developers ethically responsible for gender roles in games?" This is quite obviously a heated topic, especially considering the 30 pages of comments. Another question found in Doolittle's (2009) article and its subsequent comments is: Is the representation of genders in video games artistic expression, or is it driven by company executives and bottom lines?

In my research, I have found that gender representations are simply analyzed and there is little to no mention of game developers' reasons for their portrayals of gender. Per this, I have sent out an e-mail to Blizzard Entertainment asking why they portray their characters as they do. Their games include a range of gender portrayals, from the female protagonist-turned-antagonist Kerrigan in Starcraft; the male protagonist-turned-antagonist Arthas in the Warcraft series and its massively multiplayer online (MMO) offspring, World of Warcraft ( WoW); and the character choice between multiple strong, competent males and females in Diablo. WoW also features a host of other male authority figures, with two female counterparts (one is strong-willed, while the other is shown as powerful but emotional and dainty in comparison). One of the stronger appeals found in WoW, that may also be true of other role-playing games, is the player's choice regarding their avatar (character); WoW allows players equal choice in gender, race, and physical features. Another popular MMO, Age of Conan, offers similar choices, though all their characters are humans ( WoW has multiple humanoid races). While I may receive no response during the time of this writing, or at all, looking at why developers portray characters as they do may be as important as the effects of these representations.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Video Games and Gender: Game Representation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Video games have long been known as a male-dominated media, including in the terms of market audience, player base, and character representation in game.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
TUM School of Management, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany

Amsterdam Business School, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands

Department of Psychology, New York University, New York, NY, United States

We used a multi-dimensional framework to assess current stereotypes of men and women. Specifically, we sought to determine (1) how men and women are characterized by male and female raters, (2) how men and women characterize themselves, and (3) the degree of convergence between self-characterizations and charcterizations of one's gender group. In an experimental study, 628 U.S. male and female raters described men, women, or themselves on scales representing multiple dimensions of the two defining features of gender stereotypes, agency and communality: assertiveness, independence, instrumental competence, leadership competence (agency dimensions), and concern for others, sociability and emotional sensitivity (communality dimensions). Results indicated that stereotypes about communality persist and were equally prevalent for male and female raters, but agency characterizations were more complex. Male raters generally descibed women as being less agentic than men and as less agentic than female raters described them. However, female raters differentiated among agency dimensions and described women as less assertive than men but as equally independent and leadership competent. Both male and female raters rated men and women equally high on instrumental competence. Gender stereotypes were also evident in self-characterizations, with female raters rating themselves as less agentic than male raters and male raters rating themselves as less communal than female raters, although there were exceptions (no differences in instrumental competence, independence, and sociability self-ratings for men and women). Comparisons of self-ratings and ratings of men and women in general indicated that women tended to characterize themselves in more stereotypic terms - as less assertive and less competent in leadership - than they characterized others in their gender group. Men, in contrast, characterized themselves in less stereotypic terms - as more communal. Overall, our results show that a focus on facets of agency and communality can provide deeper insights about stereotype content than a focus on overall agency and communality.

Introduction

There is no question that a great deal of progress has been made toward gender equality, and this progress is particularly evident in the workplace. There also is no question that the goal of full gender equality has not yet been achieved - not in pay ( AAUW, 2016) or position level ( Catalyst, 2016). In a recent interview study with female managers the majority of barriers for women's advancement that were identified were consequences of gender stereotypes ( Peus et al., 2015). There is a long history of research in psychology that corroborates this finding (for reviews see Eagly and Sczesny, 2009; Heilman, 2012). These investigations support the idea that gender stereotypes can be impediments to women's career advancement, promoting both gender bias in employment decisions and women's self-limiting behavior ( Heilman, 1983).

Gender stereotypes often are internalized by men and women, and we therefore focus both on how men and women are seen by others and how they see themselves with respect to stereotyped attributes. We also plan to compare and contrast charcterizations of men or women as a group with charcterizations of self, something not typically possible because these two types of characterizations are rarely measured in the same study. In sum, we have multiple objectives: We aim to develop a multi-dimensional framework for assessing current conceptions of men's and women's characteristics and then use it to consider how men and women are seen by male and female others, how men and women see themselves, and how these perceptions of self and others in their gender group coincide or differ. In doing so, we hope to demonstrate the benefits of viewing agency and communality as multidimensional constructs in the study of gender stereotypes.

Gender Stereotypes

Gender stereotypes are generalizations about what men and women are like, and there typically is a great deal of consensus about them. According to social role theory, gender stereotypes derive from the discrepant distribution of men and women into social roles both in the home and at work ( Eagly, 1987, 1997; Koenig and Eagly, 2014). There has long been a gendered division of labor, and it has existed both in foraging societies and in more socioeconomically complex societies ( Wood and Eagly, 2012). In the domestic sphere women have performed the majority of routine domestic work and played the major caretaker role. In the workplace, women have tended to be employed in people-oriented, service occupations rather than things-oriented, competitive occupations, which have traditionally been occupied by men (e.g., Lippa et al., 2014). This contrasting distribution of men and women into social roles, and the inferences it prompts about what women and men are like, give rise to gender stereotypical conceptions ( Koenig and Eagly, 2014).

Accordingly, men are characterized as more agentic than women, taking charge and being in control, and women are characterized as more communal than men, being attuned to others and building relationships (e.g., Broverman et al., 1972; Eagly and Steffen, 1984). These two concepts were first introduced by Bakan (1966) as fundamental motivators of human behavior. During the last decades, agency (also referred to as "masculinity," "instrumentality" or "competence") and communality (also referred to as "communion," "femininity," "expressiveness," or "warmth") have consistently been the focus of research (e.g., Spence and Buckner, 2000; Fiske et al., 2007; Cuddy et al., 2008; Abele and Wojciszke, 2014). These dual tenets of social perception have been considered fundamental to gender stereotypes.

Stereotypes can serve an adaptive function allowing people to categorize and simplify what they observe and to make predictions about others (e.g., Devine and Sharp, 2009; Fiske and Taylor, 2013). However, stereotypes also can induce faulty assessments of people - i.e., assessments based on generalization from beliefs about a group that do not correspond to a person's unique qualities. These faulty assessments can negatively or positively affect expectations about performance, and bias consequent decisions that impact opportunities and work outcomes for both men and women (e.g., Heilman, 2012; Heilman et al., 2015; Hentschel et al., 2018). Stereotypes about gender are especially influential because gender is an aspect of a person that is readily noticed and remembered ( Fiske et al., 1991). In other words, gender is a commonly occurring cue for stereotypic thinking ( Blair and Banaji, 1996).

Gender stereotypes are used not only to characterize others but also to characterize oneself ( Bem, 1974). The process of self-stereotyping can influence people's identities in stereotype-congruent directions. Stereotyped characteristics can thereby be internalized and become part of a person's gender identity - a critical aspect of the self-concept ( Ruble and Martin, 1998; Wood and Eagly, 2015). Young boys and girls learn about gender stereotypes from their immediate environment and the media, and they learn how to behave in gender-appropriate ways ( Deaux and LaFrance, 1998). These socialization experiences no doubt continue to exert influence later in life and, indeed, research has shown that men's and women's self-characterizations differ in ways that are stereotype-consistent ( Bem, 1974; Spence and Buckner, 2000).

Measurement of Gender Stereotypes

Gender stereotypes, and their defining features of agency and communality, have been measured in a variety of ways ( Kite et al., 2008). Researchers have investigated people's stereotypical assumptions about how men and women differ in terms of, for example, ascribed traits (e.g., Williams and Best, 1990), role behaviors (e.g., Haines et al., 2016), occupations (e.g., Deaux and Lewis, 1984), or emotions (e.g., Plant et al., 2000). Researchers also have distinguished personality, physical, and cognitive components of gender stereotypes ( Diekman and Eagly, 2000). In addition, they have investigated how men' and women's self-characterizations differ in stereotype-consistent ways ( Spence and Buckner, 2000).

Contemporary Gender Stereotypes

The answer to this question is not straightforward; the degree to which there has been a true shift in social roles is unclear. On the one hand, there are more women in the workforce than ever before. In 1967, 36% of U.S. households with married couples were made up of a male provider working outside the home and a female caregiver working inside the home, but now only 19% of U.S. households concur with this division ( Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2017). Moreover, women increasingly pursue traditionally male careers, and there are more women in roles of power and authority. For example, today women hold almost 40% of management positions in the United States ( Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2017). In addition, more men are taking on a family's main caretaker role ( Ladge et al., 2015). Though families with only the mother working are still rare (5% in 2016 compared to 2% in 1970), the average number of hours fathers spent on child care per week increased from 2.5 to 8 h in the last 40 years ( Pew Research Center, 2018). In addition, the majority of fathers perceive parenting as extremely important to their identity ( Pew Research Center, 2018).

On the other hand, role segregation, while somewhat abated, has by no means been eliminated. Despite their increased numbers in the labor force, women still are concentrated in occupations that are perceived to require communal, but not agentic attributes. For example, the three most common occupations for women in the U.S. involve care for others (elementary and middle school teacher, registered nurse, and secretary and administrative assistant; U.S. Department of Labor, 2015), while men more than women tend to work in occupations requiring agentic attributes (e.g., senior management positions, construction, or engineering; Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2016b). Sociological research shows that women are underrepresented in occupations that are highly competitive, inflexible, and require high levels of physical skill, while they are overrepresented in occupations that place emphasis on social contributions and require interpersonal skills ( Cortes and Pan, 2017). Moreover, though men's home and family responsibilities have increased, women continue to perform a disproportionate amount of domestic work ( Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2016a), have greater childcare responsibilities ( Craig and Mullan, 2010; Kan et al., 2011), and continue to be expected to do so ( Park et al., 2008).

There also have been conflicting findings concerning self-charcterizations, especially in women's self-views of their agency. Findings by Abele (2003) suggest that self-perceived agency increases with career success. Indeed, there has been indication that women's self-perceived deficit in agency has abated over time ( Twenge, 1997) or that it has abated in some respects but not others ( Spence and Buckner, 2000). However, a recent meta-analysis has found that whereas women's self-perceptions of communality have decreased over time, their self-perceptions of agency have remained stable since the 1990s ( Donnelly and Twenge, 2017). Yet another study found almost no change in men's and women's self-characterizations of their agency and communality since the 1970s ( Powell and Butterfield, 2015).

There are many possible explanations for these conflicting results. A compelling one concerns the conceptualization of the agency and communality constructs and the resulting difference in the traits and behaviors used to measure them. In much of the gender stereotypes literature, agency and communality have been loosely used to denote a set of varied attributes, and different studies have operationalized agency and communality in different ways. We propose that agency and communality are not unitary constructs but rather are comprised of multiple dimensions, each distinguishable from one another. We also propose that considering these dimensions separately will enhance the clarity of our understanding of current differences in the characterization of women and men, and provide a more definitive picture of gender stereotypes today.

Dimensions of Communality and Agency

There has been great variety in how the agency construct has been operationalized, and the specific terms used to measure agency often differ from study to study (e.g., McAdams et al., 1996; Rudman and Glick, 2001; Abele et al., 2008; Schaumberg and Flynn, 2017). Furthermore, distinctions between elements of agency have been identified: In a number of studies competence has been shown to be distinct from agency as a separate factor ( Carrier et al., 2014; Koenig and Eagly, 2014; Abele et al., 2016; Rosette et al., 2016), and in others, the agency construct has been subdivided into self-reliance and dominance ( Schaumberg and Flynn, 2017). There also has been great variety in how the communality construct has been operationalized ( Hoffman and Hurst, 1990; Fiske et al., 2007; Abele et al., 2008; Brosi et al., 2016; Hentschel et al., 2018). Although there have been few efforts to pinpoint specific components of communality, recent work focused on self-judgments in cross-cultural contexts has subdivided it into facets of warmth and morality ( Abele et al., 2016).

The multiplicity of items used to represent agency and communality in research studies involving stereotyping is highly suggestive that agentic and communal content can be decomposed into different facets. In this research we seek to distinguish dimensions underlying both the agency and the communality constructs. Our aim is to lend further credence to the idea that the fundamental constructs of agency and communality are multifaceted, and to supply researchers with dimensions of each that may be useful for study of stereotype evaluation and change.

While we are proposing that agency and communality can be broken down into components, we are not claiming that the use of these overarching constructs in earlier research has been an error. In the vast majority of studies in which communality or agency has been measured the scale reliabilities have been high and the items highly correlated. However, internal consistency does not necessarily indicate that the individual items included are unidimensional ( Schmitt, 1996; Sijtsma, 2008), or that the entirety of the construct is being captured in a particular measure. Moreover, there are multiple meanings included in these constructs as they have been discussed and operationalized in gender research. Therefore, we propose that breaking them down into separate dimensions will provide finer distinctions about contemporary characterizations of men and women.

Perceiver Sex

Findings often demonstrate that male and female raters are equally likely to characterize women and men in stereotypic terms ( Heilman, 2001, 2012). This suggests that stereotypes outweigh the effects of evaluators' gender identities and, because men and women live in the same world, they see the world similarly. However, the steady shift of women's societal roles and its different implications for men and women may affect the degree to which men and women adhere to traditional gender stereotypes.

On the face of it, one would expect women to hold traditional gender stereotypes less than men. The increase of women in the workforce generally, and particularly in domains typically reserved for men, is likely to be very salient to women. Such changes have distinct implications for them - implications that can impact their expectations, aspirations, and actual experiences. As a result, women may be more attentive than men to shifts in workplace and domestic roles, and more accepting of these roles as the new status quo. They consequently may be more amenable to incorporating updated gender roles into their understanding of the world, diminishing stereotypic beliefs.

Unlike women, who may be likely to embrace recent societal changes, men may be prone to reject or dismiss them. The same societal changes that present new opportunities for women can present threats to men, who may see themselves as losing their rightful place in the social order (see also Sidanius and Pratto, 1999; Knowles and Lowery, 2012). Thus, men may be less willing to accept modern-day changes in social roles or to see these changes as definitive. There may be little impetus for them to relinquish stereotypic beliefs and much impetus for them to retain these beliefs. If this is the case, then men would be expected to adhere more vigorously to traditional gender stereotypes than women.

Self-Stereotyping Versus Stereotyping of One's Gender Group

Although gender stereotypes impact charcterizations of both self and others, there may be a difference in the degree to which stereotypes dominate in self- and other-characterizations. That is, women may see themselves differently than they see women in general and men may see themselves differently than they see men in general; although they hold stereotypes about their gender groups, they may not apply them to themselves. Indeed, attribution theory ( Jones and Nisbett, 1987), which suggests that people are more prone to attribute behavior to stable personality traits when viewing someone else than when viewing oneself, gives reason to argue that stereotypes are more likely to be used when characterizing others in one's gender group than when characterizing oneself. A similar case can be made for construal level theory ( Trope and Liberman, 2010), which suggests that psychological distance promotes abstraction rather than attention to individuating information. Moreover, the impact of societal changes that affect adherence to gender stereotypes is apt to have greater immediacy and personal impact for self, and therefore be more reflected in self-characterizations than in characterizations of others.

There is reason to think that some dimensions of gender stereotypes are more likely than others to be differentially subscribed to when characterizing self than when characterizing others. For example, there is a tendency to boost self-esteem and adopt descriptors that are self-enhancing when describing oneself ( Swann, 1990), and this may have conseqences whether these descriptors are consistent or inconsistent with gender stereotypes. If this is so, gender may be an important factor; there are likely particular aspects of gender stereotypes that are more (or less) acceptable to women and men, affecting the degree to which they are reflected in men's and women's self-descriptions as compared to their description of their gender group. However, there also is reason to believe that individuals will embrace positive stereotypes and reject negative stereotypes as descriptive not only of themselves but also of their close in-groups ( Biernat et al., 1996), suggesting that there will be little difference between characterizations of oneself and one's gender group. Therefore, to obtain a full picture of the current state of gender stereotypes and their impact on perceptions, we believe it important to compare self-characterizations and characterizations of one's gender group on specific dimensions of gender stereotypes.

Overview of the Research

In this study, we develop a multidimensional framework for measuring different elements of agency and communality to provide an assessment of contemporary gender stereotypes and their impact on charcterizations about others and self. Using the multidimensional framework, we sought to determine (1) if men and women differ in their gender stereotypes; (2) if men and women differ in their self-characterizations; and (3) if men's and women's self-characterizations differ from their characterizations of their gender groups. In each instance we compare the results using the traditional unidimensional framework for measuring agency and communality with the results using the newly formulated multidimensional framework.

Materials and Methods

Participants

Six hundred and twenty-nine participants (61% female, all U.S. residents) were recruited online via Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk), providing a more representative sample of the U.S. population than student samples. MTurk samples tend to be slightly more diverse than and similarly reliable as other types of internet samples used in psychological research ( Paolacci et al., 2010; Buhrmester et al., 2011), but nonetheless are convenience samples rather than true representative samples based on demographic data (see e.g., Pew Research Center, 2017). In our sample, ages ranged from 19 to 83, with a mean age of 34.5 years ( SD = 13.1). In addition, education ranged from those who had not attended college (17%), had some college education (33%), had graduated from college (37%), to those who had graduate degrees (13%). 77.6% self-identified as White, 8.4% Asian, 7.0% African American, 4.8% Hispanic, and 2.2% other. The survey link was visible only to U.S. residents who had a greater than 95% acceptance rate of previous MTurk work, an indication that their earlier work had been handled responsibly. In addition, we included a question asking participants to indicate whether they filled out the questionnaire honestly (we assured them that their answer on this question would not have any consequences for their payment). One person indicated that he had not filled out the survey honestly and was excluded from the analyses.

Design

We conducted an experiment with two independent variables: rater gender (male or female) and target group (men in general, women in general, or self). The target group manipulation was randomly assigned to male and female raters. Subsets of this overall design were used to address our specific research questions.

Procedure

Participants were told that we were interested in people perception, and they were asked either to rate men in general ( N = 215) women in general ( N = 208) or themselves ( N = 205) on an attribute inventory representing various dimensions of agency and communality. The attributes were presented in differing orders to participants, randomized by the survey tool we used. Ratings were made using a 7-point scale with responses ranging from 1 ("not at all") to 7 ("very much").

Scale Construction

Using an inductive procedure, scale development proceeded in four steps. In the first step, we identified a set of 74 attributes, representative of how agency and communality have been measured by researchers in the past (consisting of adjectives, traits, and descriptors; see Appendix Tables A, B for the full list). The attributes were chosen from earlier investigations of gender stereotypes, including those of Broverman et al. (1972), Schein (1973), Spence and Helmreich (1978), Heilman et al. (1995), Fiske et al. (1999), Diekman and Eagly (2000), and Oswald and Lindstedt (2006). They were selected to represent a broad array of agentic and communal attributes with a minimal amount of redundancy.

In the second step, three judges (the first two authors and another independent researcher) sorted the descriptive attributes into categories based on their conceptual similarity. The total set of attributes measured was included in the sorting task, and there was no limit placed on the number of categories to be created and no requirements for the number of attributes to be included within each created category. Specifically, the instructions were to use as many categories as needed to sort the attributes into conceptually distinct groupings. The sorting results were then discussed by the judges and two additional researchers. During the discussion, agreement was reached about the number of categories necessary to best capture the distinct dimensions of the sorted attributes. Attributes for which no consensus was reached about category placement were omitted. Then decisions were made about how each of the categories should be labeled. Seven categories were identified, four of which represented dimensions of agency - instrumental competence, leadership competence, assertiveness, independence - and three of which represented dimensions of communality - concern for others, sociability, emotional sensitivity.

In the third step, we had a different set of three independent judges (all graduate students in a psychology program) do a sorting of the retained attributes into the labeled categories. This was done to make sure that their sorting conformed to the identified categories; items that were misclassified by any of the judges were eliminated from the item set.

Finally, in a fourth step, we used confirmatory factor analysis procedures to further hone our categories. Following standard procedures on increasing model fit (e.g., Byrne, 2010), we eliminated all items that showed a low fit to the created categories. We later conducted a conclusive confirmatory factor analysis, for which the results are reported in the next section.

As a result of these steps, we created seven scales, each composed of the attributes remaining in one of the seven designated categories. The scales ranged from 3 to 4 items, the coefficient alphas all surpassed 0.75, and all corrected item-scale correlations surpassed 0.40 ( Field, 2006). Table 1 presents the attributes comprising each of the scales as well as the Cronbach alphas and corrected-item-scale correlations.

The four scales composed of agentic attributes and denoting dimensions of agency were: instrumental competence, leadership competence, assertiveness, and independence. Thus, the sorting process not only distinguished between competence and other elements of agency (as has been suggested by others like Carrier et al., 2014), but further decomposed the non-competence elements of agency into dimensions of assertiveness and independence. Assertiveness concerns acting on the world and taking charge. Independence connotes self-reliance and acting on one's own, free of the influence of others. Furthermore, competence was subdivided into two separate dimensions - one focused on performance execution (instrumental competence), and the other focused on capability to perform as a leader (leadership competence). Both leadership competence and assertiveness imply high social power whereas instrumental competence and independence are not typically associated with power relations.

The three scales composed of communal attributes and denoting dimensions of communality were: concern for others, sociability, and emotional sensitivity. Concern for others and sociability both entail a focus on others, but the former involves a one-way relationship of giving and nurturance while the latter involves a transactional relationship focused on relationship building. Emotional sensitivity implies an orientation that focuses on feelings as an antecedent or consequence of interactions with others.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis

We conducted a confirmatory factor analysis using the R package lavaan ( Rosseel, 2012) to test the factor structure of the four final agency scales and the three final communality scales. Results revealed that for agency, the theoretically assumed four-factor model (i.e., instrumental competence, leadership competence, assertiveness, and independence as first-order factors) provided adequate fit (χ ² = 370.224, df = 84, p < 0.001, χ ²/df = 4.41, CFI = 0.947, RMSEA = 0.076, SRMR = 0.045) and also was more suitable than a one-factor model in which all agency items loaded on a single factor (χ ² = 813.318, df = 90, p < 0.001, χ ²/df = 9.04, CFI = 0.866, RMSEA = 0.116, SRMR = 0.068). A comparison of the two models showed that the four-factor agency model differed significantly from the one-factor model and was thus preferable (Δχ ² = 443.09, df = 6, p < 0.001). Similarly, for communality the theoretically posited three-factor model (i.e., concern for others, sociability, and emotional sensitivity as first-order factors) provided acceptable fit (χ ² = 326.000, df = 41, p < 0.001, χ ²/df = 7.95, CFI = 0.931, RMSEA = 0.108, SRMR = 0.048) and was more suitable than the one-factor model in which all communality items loaded on a single factor (χ ² = 359.803, df = 44, p < 0.001, χ ²/df = 7.95, CFI = 0.924, RMSEA = 0.110, SRMR = 0.048). A comparison of the two models showed that the three-factor communality model differed significantly from the one-factor model and was therefore preferable (Δχ ² = 33.80, df = 3, p < 0.001). Overall, these results indicated that even though there were high correlations among the agency scales and also among the communality scales (as we would expect given our idea that in each case the multiple scales are part of the same construct; see Table 2), the four scales for agency and the three scales for communality represent different dimensions of these constructs.

Overall Measures

To provide a point of comparison for our multi-dimensional framework, we also determined scales for overall agency and overall communality. In other words, the 15 agency items were combined into one overall agency scale (α = 0.93) and the 11 communality items were combined into one overall communality scale (α = 0.93).

Results

Preliminary Analyses: Rater Age and Education Level

Because of potential consequences of raters' age and education level on the use of gender stereotypes (younger and more educated people might be less likely to adhere to them), we conducted initial analyses to identify their independent and interactive effects. We did not have the opportunity to do the same for race because our subsamples of Asian, African American, and Hispanic participants were not large enough. To determine whether there were differences in the pattern of responses depending upon the age of the rater, we chose the age of 40 as a midlife indicator, divided our sample into two age groups (39 years and younger, 40 years and older), and included age as an additional independent variable in our analyses. Results indicated no main effects or interactions involving age in the ANOVAs conducted. We also divided our sample into two education level groups (those who had graduated from college or had advanced degrees and those who had not graduated from college), and included educational level as an additional independent variable in our analyses. We found no main effects or interactions involving educational level in the ANOVAs. As a consequence we combined data from both younger and older participants and from those who were and were not college educated in the analyses reported below.

Main Analyses

To address our research questions, we conducted a series of ANOVAs on subsets of our participant sample. For each question, we first conducted ANOVAs on the overall agency scale and the overall communality scale. Then, to determine whether the results differed for different agency and communality dimensions, we conducted mixed-model ANOVAs that included either agency dimension (instrumental competence, leadership competence, assertiveness, independence) or communality dimension as a within-subjects factor (concern for others, sociability, and emotional sensitivity). Fisher's least significant difference (LSD) method was used to test the question-relevant planned comparisons.

Do Men and Women Differ in Their Gender Stereotypes?

We used a 2 × 2 ANOVA, with rater gender (male, female) and target group (men in genereal, women in general) to assess differences in men's and women's gender stereotypes. We first analyzed the overall agency and communality ratings, and then conducted a 2 × 2 × 4 mixed-model ANOVA including the agency dimensions, and a 2 × 2 × 3 mixed-model ANOVA including the communality dimensions. The mixed-model ANOVA results are presented in Table 3. We followed up with LSD comparisons (see Table 4).

Agency

The 2 × 2 ANOVA results for the overall agency ratings indicated a main effect for both rater gender, F(1,418) = 15.10, p < 0.001, = 0.04, and target group, F(1,418) = 5.52, p = 0.019, = 0.01. The results of the 2 × 2 × 4 mixed-model ANOVA, including the four agency dimensions as a within-subject factor, repeated the main effects for rater gender and target group and also indicated a main effect for agency dimension and an interaction between agency dimension and target group (see Table 3), suggesting that there were differences in ratings depending on the agency dimension.

Differences in ratings of men in general and women in general

LSD comparisons (see Table 4) of the overall agency ratings indicated that male raters rated women in general as lower in overall agency than men in general. They further indicated that female raters rated women in general and men in general as equally agentic. LSD comparisons of the individual agency scales indicated that this result held true for most of the agency dimensions. With the exception of the instrumental competence dimension (on which there were no differences in ratings of women and men in general whether the rater was male or female), male raters rated women in general lower than men in general on the agency dimensions (leaderhip competence, assertiveness, and independence). In contrast to the ratings of male raters but in line with the overall agency result, female raters rated women in general no differently than they rated men in general in leadership competence and independence. Yet, in contrast to the results of the overall agency ratings, female raters differentiated between women and men in ratings of assertiveness. That is, much like male raters, female raters rated women in general as less assertive than men in general. Figure 1 displays the results for the agency dimensions.

Rater gender differences in target group characterizations

Additional LSD comparisons (again see Table 4) lent further insight into the source of the gender discrepancy in the comparative ratings of women and men in general. Comparisons of the overall agency ratings indicated that ratings of men in general did not differ as a result of rater gender, but women in general were rated lower by male as compared to female raters. LSD comparisons of the agency dimensions were in line with the overall agency result in ratings of women in general - they were rated lower by male raters as compared to female raters on all four agency dimensions. However, comparisons of the agency dimensions in ratings of men in general were not uniform and deviated from the overall agency results. Although men in general were rated no differently by male and female raters on the instrumental competence, assertiveness, or independence dimensions, female as compared to male raters rated men in general higher in leadership competence (again see Figure 1).

Communality

A 2 (rater gender: male, female) × 2 (target group: men in general, women in general) ANOVA of the overall communality ratings indicated only a main effect for target group, F(1,418) = 88.68, p < 0.001, = 0.18. The 2 × 2 × 3 mixed-model ANOVA (see Table 3), including the three communality dimensions as a within-subject factor, indicated main effects for target group, rater gender, and communality dimension as well as significant interactions between target group and rater gender, between communality dimension and target group, between communality dimension and rater type, and a three-way interaction.

Differences in ratings of men in general and women in general

LSD comparisons (see Table 4) for overall communality indicated that men in general were rated lower in communality than women in general by both male and female raters. In line with this overall finding, results of the LSD comparisons indicated that both female and male raters rated men in general as lower than women in general on all three communality dimensions: concern for others, sociability, and emotional sensitivity. Thus, using the overall measure yielded the same information as did the multidimensional measure.

Rater gender differences in target group characterizations

Additional LSD comparisons (again see Table 4) of the communality ratings indicated that both male and female raters rated men in general similarly in communality, but female raters rated women in general higher in communality than male raters did. LSD comparisons of male and female raters rating men in general using the three communality dimensions were aligned with the overall communality result: male and female raters did not differ in ratings of concern for others, sociability, or emotional sensitivity. However, when rating women in general, results of the LSD comparisons of male and female raters were aligned with the overall measure result for only two of the communality dimensions: Female raters rated women in general higher in concern for others and emotional sensitivity than male raters did. On the dimension of sociability, male and female raters did not differ in their ratings of women in general.

Do Men and Women Differ in Their Self-Characterizations?

We used a one-way ANOVA to assess differences in men's and women's self-characterizations. We first analyzed the overall agency and communality ratings, and then conducted a mixed-model 2 × 4 ANOVA including the agency dimensions, and a 2 × 3 mixed-model ANOVA including the communality dimensions as a within-subject variable (see Table 5). We again followed up with LSD comparisons (see Table 6).

Agency

ANOVA results of the self-ratings of male and female raters on the overall measure of agency indicated no significant effect for rater gender, F(1,204) = 1.67, p = 0.198, = 0.01. However, results of the 2 × 4 mixed model ANOVA, with agency dimensions as the within-subject factor, indicated a main effect for agency dimension and an interaction between agency dimension and rater gender, suggesting that self-ratings differed depending on the agency dimension in question (see Table 5). LSD comparisons (see Table 6) of overall agency showed that, as was indicated by the non-significant gender main effects, women rated themselves as equally agentic as men. Yet, the results for the analyses including the four agency dimensions indicated that only findings for instrumental competence and independence were consisent with the pattern of results for the overall agency ratings (there were no differences in the self-ratings of female and male raters). There were, however, significant differences in ratings of leadership competence and in ratings of assertiveness. For both of these dimensions of agency, women rated themselves lower than men did (see Figure 2).

Communality

Results of the ANOVA of the self-ratings of male and female raters indicated a rater gender main effect, F(1,204) = 5.42, p = 0.021, = 0.03. Results of a 2 × 3 mixed-model ANOVA (again see Table 5) with communality dimension as the within-subjects factor, indicated significant main effects for rater gender and communality dimensions. LSD comparisons (again see Table 6), in line with the main effect for rater gender, indicated that men rated themselves lower on overall communality than women. LSD comparisons on the dimension scales indicated that, consistent with the overall communality results, men rated themselves as less concerned for others and less emotionally sensitive than women. However, in contrast to the results for overall communality, there was no difference in how men and women characterized themselves in terms of sociability (see Figure 3).

Do Men's and Women's Self-Characterizations Differ From Their Characterizations of Their Gender Groups?

We used a 2 × 2 ANOVA, with rater gender (male, female) and target group (self, men in general when rater was male or women in general when rater was female) to assess differences in men's and women's self characterizations and same-sex others' characterizations of their gender groups. We first analyzed the overall agency and communality ratings, and then again conducted a 2 × 2 × 4 mixed-model ANOVA including our agency dimensions, and a 2 × 2 × 3 mixed-model ANOVA including our communality dimensions (see Table 7) and once more followed up with LSD comparisons (see Table 8).

Agency

The 2 × 2 ANOVA results for the overall agency measure indicated no significant main effect for rater gender, F(1,397) = 2.19, p = 0.139, = 0.00, or target group, F(1,397) = 0.013, p = 0.909, = 0.00, but a marginally signicant interaction between them, F(1,397) = 2.77, p = 0.097, = 0.01. The 2 × 2 × 4 mixed-model ANOVA including the agency dimensions as a within-subjects factor also indicated no significant main effects for rater gender or for target group and again a marginally significant interaction between them. It also indicated a significant main effect for agency dimension and significant interactions of dimension with both rater gender and target group, as well as a three-way interaction between rater gender, target group, and agency dimension (see Table 7).

Men's self-ratings versus ratings of men in general

Women's self-ratings versus ratings of women in general

Communality

The 2 × 2 ANOVA results for the overall communality measure indicated a main effect for rater gender, F(1,397) = 19.03, p < 0.001, = 0.01, and target group, F(1,397) = 42.92, p < 0.001, = 0.10 as well as a significant interaction, F(1,397) = 10.51, p = 0.001, = 0.03. The 2 × 2 × 3 mixed-model ANOVA including the communality dimensions as a within-subjects factor indicated significant main effects for rater gender, for target group, and communality dimension as well as a significant interaction between rater gender and target group, between rater gender and communality dimension, and between target group and communality dimension (see Table 7).

Men's self-ratings versus ratings of men in general

Women's Self-Ratings Versus Ratings of Women in General

Discussion

It was the objective of this research to investigate gender stereotyping of others and self. To do so, we aimed to take into account multiple dimensions of the agency and communality constructs. It was our contention that perceptions on some of these dimensions of agency and communality would differ from one another, and that there would be a benefit in viewing them separately. Our results support this idea. While there were overall findings for agency and communality, analyses of individual aspects of them were not always consistent with these findings. What often appeared to be a general effect when using the overall measures of agency and communality in fact proved to be more textured and differentiated when the multidimensional framework was used. These results support the idea that distinguishing between different agency and communality facets can offer a deeper, more nuanced understanding of gender stereotypes today. Indeed, some important information appears to get lost by only focusing on the overall constructs.

Answers to Our Research Questions

Current Stereotypes

Our results clearly indicate that gender stereotypes persist. They also indicate that stereotypes about agency were more prevalent for male than for female raters. Specifically, male raters described women in general as lower in most aspects of agency than men in general, and also rated women in general lower on each of the agency dimensions than female raters did. Nonetheless, female raters were not stereotype-free with respect to agency: they described women in general as less assertive than men in general and rated men in general as more leadership competent than male raters did. These findings were masked by the overall measure of agency, which indicated no differences in agency ratings.

Stereotypes about communality also were strongly indicated by our data, but their strength did not tend to differ greatly between male and female raters. All participants rated women higher than men on the three communality dimensions.

Self-Stereotyping

Our results showed that men's and women's self-characterizations differed in line with gender stereotypes. Despite the overall agency measure indicating no difference in self-ratings of agency, the analyses incorporating dimensions of agency painted a different picture. Whereas there was no difference in the self-characterizations of men and women in instrumental competence or independence, women rated themselves lower than men in leadership competence and assertiveness. There also were differences in communality self-ratings. Though men tended to rate themselves as generally less communal than women did (as less concerned for others and less emotionally sensitive), their ratings of sociability did not differ from women's.

Self-Characterizations Versus Characterizations of One's Gender Group

Self-characterizations were often found to differ from characterizations of one's gender group. Male raters rated themselves as higher in independence and instrumental competence, but no different in assertiveness or leadership competence than they rated men in general. Female raters rated themselves higher in instrumental competence but lower in assertiveness and leadership competence than they rated women in general. These findings are at odds with the results of the overall agency ratings, which imply that male raters consistently rated themselves higher in agency, and that female raters consistently rated themselves no differently than they rated their gender group.

There also were differences between self-ratings and characterizations of one's gender group on the communality dimensions. While female raters only rated themselves higher than they rated women in general in concern for others, male raters rated themselves as higher than they rated men in general on all three dimensions of communality.

Implications

What does our analysis of current stereotypes tell us? On the one hand, our results indicate that despite dramatic societal changes many aspects of traditional gender stereotypes endure. Both male and female respondents viewed men in general as being more assertive than women in general, and also viewed women in general as more concerned about others, sociable and emotionally sensitive than men in general. On the other hand, our results indicate important departures from traditional views. This can be seen in the findings that unlike male respondents, female respondents indicated no gender deficit in how independent or how competent in leadership they perceived other women to be.

Self-descriptions also tended to conform to traditional gender stereotypes, with men describing themselves as more assertive and more competent in leadership than women did, and women describing themselves as more concerned about others and more emotional than men did. However, there were aspects of agency and communality for which self-characterizations of men and women did not differ. Women's self-ratings of independence and instrumental competence were as high as men's self-ratings, and men's self-ratings of sociability were as high as women's self-ratings. Together with the findings about characterizations of men and women in general, these results attest not only to the possible changing face of stereotypes, but also highlight the importance of considering specific dimensions of both agency and communality in stereotype assessment.

It should be noted that our results suggest a greater differentiation between the multidimensional results for agency characterizations than for communality characterizations. That is, the multidmenstional results more often aligned with the results of the overall measure when the focus of measurement was communality than when it was agency. It is not clear at this point whether this is because of the particular items included in our scales or because communality is a more coherent construct. But, based on our results, it would appear that the use of a multidimensional framework is of particular value when the measurement of agency is the focus - something that should be noted by those involved in studying stereotype assessment and change.

Competence Perceptions

The lack of similarity in the pattern of results for the two competence dimensions (instrumental competence and leadership competence) is interesting. Although there were differences in ratings on the leadership competence dimension, ratings on the instrumental competence dimension did not differ when comparing ratings of men and women in general or when comparing male and female raters' self-characterizations. It thus appears that there is an aspect of competence on which women are rated as highly as men - the wherewithal to get the work done. However, caution is urged in interpreting this finding. The attributes comprising the instrumental competence scale can be seen as indicative of conscientiousness and willingness to work hard, attributes often associated with women as well as men. Thus there is a question about whether instrumental competence is really a component of the agency construct, a question also prompted by its pattern of correlations with the other dependent measure scales (see also Carrier et al., 2014).

The leadership competence ratings paint a different picture. The consistent perception by men that leadership competence was more prevalent in men than in women suggests that, at least as far as men are concerned, women still are not seen as "having what it takes" to adequately handle traditionally male roles and positions. Whatever the interpretation, however, the different pattern of results found for these two scales indicates that we as researchers have to be very precise in designating what we are measuring and how we are measuring it. It also indicates that we have to keep close to the construct we actually have measured when drawing conclusions from our data.

Women and Contemporary Gender Stereotypes

Our results show that women do not entirely embrace the stereotypic view of women as less agentic than men. They did not make distinctions between men and women in general when rating their independence and instrumental competence, nor were their self-ratings on the independence and instrumental competence scales lower than the self-ratings made by men. These findings are noteworthy: one of the key aspects of agency is independence, and it appears that women do not see themselves or other women to be lacking it more than men. Women also did not make distinctions between men and women in general when rating their leadership competence, another key component of agency. These findings suggest that, for modern day women, some important aspects of the agency stereotype no longer apply.

However, our results suggest that women have not moved as far along as one would hope in separating themselves from gender stereotypic constraints. In particular, their self-perceptions of assertiveness and leadership competence - dimensions of agency associated with social power - do not seem to deviate from traditional gender conceptions. Our findings indicate that women not only characterized themselves as less assertive and less competent in leadership than men characterized themselves, but they also described themselves significantly more negatively on these two scales than they described women in general. This means that women rated themselves as more deficient in several central aspects of agency than they rated women as a group, adhering more strongly to traditional gender stereotypes when describing themselves than when describing others. These results seem inconsistent with attribution theory ( Jones and Nisbett, 1987) and construal level theory ( Trope and Liberman, 2010), and challenge the idea that because people differentiate more when viewing themselves as compared to others they are less apt to use stereotypes in self-description. They also raise questions about differences in aspects of agency that do and do not involve power relations. These findings are in need of further exploration.

Men and Contemporary Gender Stereotypes

Our results indicate that men continue to accept the stereotyped conception of men lacking communal qualities. They, along with women, rated men in general lower than women in general on all three communality dimensions. It therefore is particularly interesting that in their self-ratings on one dimension of communality - sociability - they did not differ from women. This finding suggests that men conceive of sociability differently when they characterize themselves than when they charcterize others. Other research suggests that whereas women are more social than men in close relationships, men are more social than women in group contexts ( Baumeister and Sommer, 1997; Gabriel and Gardner, 1999). Thus, men might have rated themselves as equally sociable as women rated themselves, but for a different reason: because they conceptualized sociability with regard to their groups (rather than close relationships). If so, then clarification is needed about why this potentially different conception of sociability takes hold for men only when they characterize themselves.

Furtherore, it is of note that when comparing themselves with men in general, men's ratings of themselves were significantly higher on all communal dimensions. This finding suggests that although they strongly adhere to traditional stereotypes in their characterizations of men as a group, there is a tendency for men to be less stereotype-bound when they characterize themselves. It also suggests that they are more self-aggrandizing when rating themselves than when rating other men - ascribing to themselves more of the "wonderful" traits traditionally associated with women ( Eagly and Mladinic, 1989). This result contrasts with that found for women, for whom traditional gender stereotypes often appeared to exert more influence in self-characterizations than in characterizations of others, even when the result was self-deprecating rather than self-enhancing. Why there are differences in discrepancies in self-ratings versus other-ratings of women and men raises interesting questions for future research - questions about whether these differential effects are due to the gender of the rater or to the nature of the particular descriptors involved.

Limitations

Our results indicate that breaking down agency and communality into dimensions was often of benefit when assessing stereotyped perceptions. Though many of our scales were highly correlated, the confirmatory factor analyses provided support that they were distinct facets. Our choice to analyze the scales separately despite high correlations is in line with other researchers, who argue that doing so can enhance results interpretation ( Luthar, 1996; Tabachnik and Fidell, 2007). However, we do not claim that the dimensions we derived are the only way to differentiate among the elements of communality and agency, nor do we claim that our scales are the best way to measure them. Indeed, we chose a top-down procedure, using expert judges to derive our scales. This had the advantage that the judges knew about gender research and could effectively represent the literature on gender stereotypes. Nevertheless, if non-experts had done the initial sorting, they may have come to different conclusions about the number or content of items in the different scales or may have generated different scales altogether, ones that perhaps would have been more representative of everyday categories that are consensual in our culture.

Furthermore, our scale construction may have been constrained because our initial pool of items relied exclusively on existing items from past scales, which, although broadly selected, may have been limited by particular ways of thinking about stereotypes. Recent findings by Abele et al. (2016), for example, included a morality facet in their breakdown of communality, and found it to be a robust facet of communality in ratings within and between a large number of countries in both Eastern and Western cultures. We, however, did not include many items that measured morality in our original list of attributes. Whereas we scoured the gender stereotyping literature focused on social perception to compile the most frequently used items for our initial item pool, Abele and colleagues went through a similar process, but with literature focused primarily on self-perception. Items focusing on the morality component of communality should no doubt be incorporated in future research. In addition, there might also be additional items relating to other facets of agency, such as a cognitive agency facet (e.g., being rational). Moreover, and more generally, a process by which the attributes comprising the scales are generated in a free-form manner and the categorization tasks are performed by a broad-ranging set of judges would serve as a check on our measures and provide guidance about how to modify and improve them.

There are other methodological limitations that are suggestive of follow-up research. We found no differences as a result of the rater's age and education, attesting to the generality of the effects we uncovered, but there no doubt are other possible moderating factors to be explored, such as race and socio-economic level. Moreover, although we were able to tap into a wide-ranging population, it is important to replicate our study with a more representative U.S. sample to assess the full scope of our findings. In addition, our study was restricted to a sample of U.S. citizens, and it would be interesting to replicate this research with samples that are not exclusively from the U.S. Such cross-cultural replications would help not only to assess generalizability to other cultures, but also to assess the extent to which the nature and degree of change in social roles influences the way people currently conceive of men and women, and men and women conceive of themselves. Finally, it would be useful to conduct research using our measure to describe more differentiated targets to determine whether our results would be similar or different when intersectionality is taken into account and when particular subtypes of women and men are the focus.

Going Forward

Our findings stimulate several questions for future research. Not only would it be useful to further investigate the competence component of agency, clarifying what it does and does not entail, but also to consider another aspect of competence that has recently been identified as being strongly male gender-typed - intellectual brilliance ( Leslie et al., 2015). Exploring the effects of the apparently contradictory view women have of themselves in terms of agency (self-views of their independence and instrumental competence versus self-views of their assertiveness and leadership competence) on women's attitudes and behavior in a variety of spheres also would be valuable. In addition, it would be advantageous to determine whether the greater communality men ascribe to themselves than to other men reflects actual beliefs or is merely self-enhancing, and if it has implications for men's approach to traditionally female roles and positions.

Finally, it is important that in future research attempts are made to demonstrate the usefulness of distinguishing among the dimensions of agency and communality we have identified, and to do so for both self and other characterizations. While for some research questions an overall agency and overall communality measure will likely be sufficient, there no doubt are instances in which finer distinctions will be beneficial. It is possible, for example, that different dimensions of gender stereotypes are more strongly associated with selection decisions, performance evaluations, or reward distributions. Indeed, other researchers have already begun to demonstrate the value of considering distinct facets of agency in assessing gender differences in leader evaluations, but with a less differentiated set of dimensions including only self-reliance and dominance ( Schaumberg and Flynn, 2017). It also is possible that different dimensions of self-stereotypes are more strongly associated with career aspirations and choices, or support for gender-related organizational policies. Demonstrating that different dimensions of agency and communality predict different outcomes would add support to our multidimensional framework. In addition to increasing our understanding, such discoveries could provide valuable information about leverage points for intervention to ease the negative consequences of gender stereotyping and the bias they promote.

Conclusion

In this study we have demonstrated the value of subdividing the agency and communality construct in the study of gender stereotypes, and shown that making global statements about agency and communality runs the risk of distorting rather than clarifying our understanding.

Our goal with this paper was to further the conversation in the field about different aspects of both agency and communality and their potentially different effects on self and other characterizations. An underlying theme is that we may be losing information by generalizing to two super constructs and not attending to their components. Our findings demonstrate the complexity of the agency and communality constructs and the potential benefits of thinking about them with greater specificity. This can have consequences not only for understanding stereotypes and gender bias, but also for intervention and change efforts.

What are the implications of our findings for understanding the persistence of gender inequality? Although the results signal easing in some dimensions of traditional gender stereotypes, they make clear that in many ways they persist. Of particular importance is men's unrelenting image of women as deficient in attributes considered to be essential for success in many traditionally male fields - an image that forms the basis of gender bias in many evaluative decisions. But women are not exempt from the influence of gender stereotypes; even though they view women as equal to men in several key agentic qualities, they see themselves as more deficient than men do in both leadership competence and assertiveness, and more deficient in these agency dimensions than women in general. These findings, which result from consideration of multiple aspects of the agency construct, augur ill for the tempering of women's tendency to limit their opportunities. Evidently we still have a way to go before all the components of traditional gender stereotypes fully dissipate and recede, allowing men and women to be judged, and to judge themselves, on the basis of their merits, not their gender.

Ethics Statement

This study was carried out in accordance with the recommendations of the Institutional Review Board, University Committee on Activities Involving Human Subjects, New York University. The protocol was approved by the University Committee on Activities Involving Human Subjects, New York University.

Author Contributions

All authors listed have made a substantial, direct and intellectual contribution to the work, and approved it for publication.

Funding

This project was supported in part by an ADVANCE Diversity Science Research Grant awarded to the second author funded by the National Science Foundation ADVANCE-PAID award (HRD-0820202). This project was further supported by the Research Grant "Selection and Evaluation of Leaders in Business and Academia" awarded to the third author and funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) and the European Social Fund (ESF) (FKZ 01FP1070/71). This publication was supported by the German Research Foundation (DFG) and the Technical University of Munich (TUM) in the framework of the Open Access Publishing Program.

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Acknowledgments

We thank Suzette Caleo, Francesca Manzi, Susanne Braun, and Jennifer Ray for their insights and feedback in the development of this study. We thank Armin Pircher Verdorfer for his support in calculting the CFA. Portions of this study were presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology.

Footnotes

1. The median age of the U.S. population is 37.9 years (United States Census Bureau, 2017c); Levels of education of the U.S. population 25 years and older in 2017: 39.2% did not attend college, 16.3% had some college, 31.6% had graduated college, 12.9% have graduate degrees (United States Census Bureau, 2017a); Race/ethnicity percentages in the general U.S. population are as follows: 60.7% White, 18.1% Hispanic, 13.4% African American, 5.8% Asian, 2% other (United States Census Bureau, 2017b).

2. The attributes in the inventory included the communal and agentic attributes of interest as well as a group of attributes measuring other constructs that were included for exploratory purposes but not used in this study.

3. The relatively large RMSEA is likely due to violation of multivariate normality assumptions (joint multivariate kurtosis = 76.55 with a critical ratio of 55.30). The most important implication of non-normality is that chi-square values are inflated, whereas parameter estimates are still fairly accurate (Kline, 2011).

References

Appendix

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Multiple Dimensions of Gender Stereotypes: A Current Look at Men's and Women's Characterizations of Others and Themselves

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We used a multi-dimensional framework to assess current stereotypes of men and women. Specifically, we sought to determine (1) how men and women are characterized by male and female raters, (2) how men and women characterize themselves, and (3) the degree of convergence between self-characterizations and charcterizations of one's gender group.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
It's no secret that gender stereotypes are an omnipresent aspect of today's society. A trip to a toy store, visit to a playground, or afternoon watching children's television programs reveal that from an early age, girls are expected to be vulnerable and in need of protection while boys are supposed to be adventurous and independent. These harsh norms are often ingrained into children before the time they reach age 10.

Something worth noting about these stereotypes is that they also seem to be universal. A 2016 study looked at children ages 10-14 years from 15 countries globally and found that the way in which children are gendered from early on is socially based, not biologically.

The consequences of imposing these roles onto young children are less known but just as powerful. A new study by the Journal of Adolescent Health revealed that girls conforming to traditional female stereotypes can result in depression, child marriage, leaving school early, and increased exposure to violence. Boys also feel the consequences of conforming, which can include engaging in physical violence, dying more frequently as a result of unintentional injuries, becoming more prone to substance abuse and suicide, and having a life expectancy that is shorter than that of women.

Knowing that children are pressured to conform to the gender binary at such a young age, it is important to begin modeling healthy behaviors for children early on. Here are three ways to start:

1. Model and live gender equality

Teach boys that they are allowed to play dress up and let girls know they can also learn how to fix cars. Have open conversations with them about gender inequality and how that is not okay. Most importantly, let them know their gender does not and will not determine their future.

2. Have a value system based on internal values rather than external ones

Help children understand the importance of equating personal worth with care for others, loyalty, confidence, ambition, fairness, etc. instead of surface level qualities.

3. Encourage children to talk openly (and listen!)

Letting children have a voice from the time they can use theirs will teach them that what they have to say matters. This will show them that they are loved and unique individuals and do not have to conform to societal expectations.
Olivia Clancy is a sophomore at New York University studying applied psychology and child and adolescent mental health studies. She plans on using her own experiences with mental illness to help others in her future career as a clinical psychologist.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Research Shows That Gender Stereotypes Are Deadly

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It's no secret that gender stereotypes are an omnipresent aspect of today's society. A trip to a toy store, visit to a playground, or afternoon watching children's television programs reveal that from an early age, girls are expected to be vulnerable and in need of protection while boys are supposed to be adventurous and independent.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
32 Flavors cover version. Originally sung by Ani DiFranco.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
THE CURE - Boys Don't Cry (1980 original music)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Written by Writer's Corps member Karina Sumano

In recent years, designers like Thom Browne and Vivienne Westwood have premiered gender fluid designs that push the envelope and reflect our evolving ideas about gender and self-identity. Much like the styles we see on the runway, gender norms have undergone a major shift in the last decade. Celebs like Jaden Smith and Miley Cyrus have ditched conventional style and embraced gender fluid clothing that allows them to express themselves just as they are.

Seeing celebs embrace gender fluid style choices suggests that society has progressed past outdated gender stereotypes. Or, has it? While it's just as normal for women to bring home the bacon, as it is for men to take on domestic tasks such as child rearing, cooking, and cleaning, in many ways, harmful gender norms persist and influence our relationships.

Not only do gender norms push outdated dating rules that are almost only applied to heterosexual relationships but they perpetuate gender-specific behaviors that do more harm than good to people of all genders.

Have you had enough of problematic gender norms? Us too. Below, we've highlighted 4 common gender norms that perpetuate unhealthy behaviors for both women and men.

Real Men Don't Cry
Expectation:
Men grow up with the belief that crying is a sign of weakness.

While adults will often say soothing things to a crying child to get them to calm down, boys are more likely to be told by parents, teachers and their peers that they shouldn't cry and that they should suck it up instead. This leads boys to bottle up their emotions and keeps them from overcoming them effectively. And since it's perfectly acceptable for girls to cry, many men associate crying with femininity and weakness.
Reality:
The bottom line is crying is a normal human emotion that doesn't need to be associated with a weakness for any gender or gender non-conforming person. As Jack Fisch points out in his article " 7 Positive Phrases We Should Be Teaching America's Boys About Masculinity, "Despite this cultural stereotype, science shows that crying helps regulate emotional stress and is widely considered a healthy outlet."

Real Men Are the Breadwinner
Expectation:
Though two-income households are normal, unfortunately, the expectation that men should make more money than their partner still exists. This expectation leads many men to feel resentful of their partner if they earn more than they do. For example, Alan, a successful accountant at a small firm was embarrassed by his high earning wife. He told ,"There was just something about it that made me feel inadequate. I knew it was illogical." His insecurity led him to act out his frustration in unhealthy ways. When asked by a family member why he and his wife had opted not to have children he replied that she was too busy wearing the pants to be a mom.
Reality:
Attaching a man's worth to his paycheck is not only outdated but completely unfair. A study from the Pew Research Center found a striking 40% of American families' primary breadwinners are mothers, and 37% of those breadwinners-an estimated 5.1 million-are wives who make more than their husbands. Since our labor market has changed as more women have entered the workforce, "we may need to tweak our family model to mirror those realities," says Rachel Lu in her article Why It's Wrong to Equate A Man's Worth With His Career."

Women Are Quiet and Passive
Expectation:
I think we can all agree that girls and boys should be raised to be smart, strong, and confident individuals. However, I've noticed my female cousins and nieces, in particular, have changed from vibrant, talkative kids to quiet and timid adolescents. Some child psychologists claim that including low self-esteem. Kristin Mmari, an associate professor at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health told girls become less vocal as they grow up for various reasons USA Today "There seems to be a shift as soon as girls and boys enter [adolescence], where their attitudes and beliefs about the opposite sex change dramatically." Once girls become teens they are seen as vulnerable and in need of protection leading many teens (and later women) to hide their assertiveness in order conform to society's beliefs.
Reality
Gender norms that say women should be polite and quiet lead many women to suppress their feelings in their relationships. It's also apart of the reason why women survivors of sexual assault or sexual harassment don't speak out about their experiences until later in life. However, there are things parents can do to encourage their child to challenge these stereotypes such as encouraging free thought and independence as well as having discussions about stereotypes perpetuated by the media.

Women Should Look Flawless
Expectation
Just like men are expected to have a fit, muscular body, women face immense pressure from society to look pretty almost 24/7. Women are inundated with advertisements about beauty products, usually promoted by gorgeous models through television and magazines. These images are internalized and send the message to women that their worth is tied to their appearance.
Reality
The pressure to look flawless affects women from all walks of life. According to the Daily Mail, a revealed that 58% of women said they look better with their makeup, and 12% said they wouldn't be desired as much without it. Women shouldn't have to feel like they need to look perfect all the time, especially for their partners.
Source: ABCNews
Gender Stereotypes and the Media

Movies, television shows, music, and even pop culture are tremendous influences when it comes to gendered expectations of masculinity and femininity.

In the film the female protagonist Anastasia Steele is portrayed as a quiet, reserved college student who becomes the love interest of Christian Grey, a powerful businessman. Both characters display tired gender norms that could potentially be harmful to men and women. For example, Christian Grey is portrayed as the ideal man, he's rich, stoic but handsome, and fit. And Ana is a young, beautiful and timid woman who is willing to do anything to please him sexually. Though it's only a movie, the relationship dynamics of Christian and Ana are problematic. Since Christian holds most of the power in their relationship it leads him to do some really unhealthy things such as stalking Ana at work and showing up to apartment unannounced. As for Ana, her codependency and need for approval from Christian is portrayed as romantic and endearing.

We should be critical of the way we are taught to expect men and women to behave based on their gender. We live in a more progressive time compared to the past when it comes to some issues regarding gender, but we need to remember that gendered expectations are still ingrained into our culture and it is so subtle that we hardly even notice. There are some really simple ways we can help stop its influence such as creating safe spaces for men to express the full range of their emotions and letting women know that their voices matter. No matter what gender someone self-identify's as there's no difference in our ability to make a change.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How Gender Stereotypes Impact Behavior - One Love Foundation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Written by Writer's Corps member Karina Sumano In recent years, designers like Thom Browne and Vivienne Westwood have premiered gender fluid designs that push the envelope and reflect our evolving ideas about gender and self-identity. Much like the styles we see on the runway, gender norms have undergone a major shift in the last decade.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
People all over the world are confronting traditional norms around gender and sexuality that are difficult to break. Despite opposition and discrimination from their communities, these people are armed with the courage to truly be themselves. The small steps people take to assert their role in society, can result in major leaps for future generations.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
E6: Breaking Gender Stereotypes | Trust Docs

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
People all over the world are confronting traditional norms around gender and sexuality that are difficult to break. Despite opposition and discrimination from their communities, these people are armed with the courage to truly be themselves. The small steps people take to assert their role in society, can result in major leaps for future generations.

# data[].attributes.body
By June Jordan

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Oughta Be a Woman - Washing the floors to send you to college

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Our society has a set of ideas about how we expect men and women to dress, behave, and present themselves.

What are gender roles?

Gender roles in society means how we're expected to act, speak, dress, groom, and conduct ourselves based upon our assigned sex. For example, girls and women are generally expected to dress in typically feminine ways and be polite, accommodating, and nurturing. Men are generally expected to be strong, aggressive, and bold.

Every society, ethnic group, and culture has gender role expectations, but they can be very different from group to group. They can also change in the same society over time. For example, pink used to be considered a masculine color in the U.S. while blue was considered feminine.

How do gender stereotypes affect people?

A stereotype is a widely accepted judgment or bias about a person or group - even though it's overly simplified and not always accurate. Stereotypes about gender can cause unequal and unfair treatment because of a person's gender. This is called sexism.

There are four basic kinds of gender stereotypes:

Personality traits - For example, women are often expected to be accommodating and emotional, while men are usually expected to be self-confident and aggressive.

Domestic behaviors - For example, some people expect that women will take care of the children, cook, and clean the home, while men take care of finances, work on the car, and do the home repairs.

Occupations - Some people are quick to assume that teachers and nurses are women, and that pilots, doctors, and engineers are men.

Physical appearance - For example, women are expected to be thin and graceful, while men are expected to be tall and muscular. Men and women are also expected to dress and groom in ways that are stereotypical to their gender (men wearing pants and short hairstyles, women wearing dresses and make-up.

Hyperfemininity is the exaggeration of stereotyped behavior that's believed to be feminine. Hyperfeminine folks exaggerate the qualities they believe to be feminine. This may include being passive, naive, sexually inexperienced, soft, flirtatious, graceful, nurturing, and accepting.

Hypermasculinity is the exaggeration of stereotyped behavior that's believed to be masculine. Hypermasculine folks exaggerate the qualities they believe to be masculine. They believe they're supposed to compete with other men and dominate feminine folks by being aggressive, worldly, sexually experienced, insensitive, physically imposing, ambitious, and demanding.

These exaggerated gender stereotypes can make relationships between people difficult. Hyperfeminine folks are more likely to endure physical and emotional abuse from their partners. Hypermasculine folks are more likely to be physically and emotionally abusive to their partners.

Extreme gender stereotypes are harmful because they don't allow people to fully express themselves and their emotions. For example, it's harmful to masculine folks to feel that they're not allowed to cry or express sensitive emotions. And it's harmful to feminine folks to feel that they're not allowed to be independent, smart or assertive. Breaking down gender stereotypes allows everyone to be their best selves.

How can I fight gender stereotypes?

You probably see gender stereotypes all around you. You might also have seen or experienced sexism, or discrimination based on gender. There are ways to challenge these stereotypes to help everyone - no matter their gender or gender identity - feel equal and valued as people.

Point it out - Magazines, TV, film, and the Internet are full of negative gender stereotypes. Sometimes these stereotypes are hard for people to see unless they're pointed out. Be that person! Talk with friends and family members about the stereotypes you see and help others understand how sexism and gender stereotypes can be hurtful.

Be a living example - Be a role model for your friends and family. Respect people regardless of their gender identity. Create a safe space for people to express themselves and their true qualities regardless of what society's gender stereotypes and expectations are.

Speak up - If someone is making sexist jokes and comments, whether online or in person, challenge them.

Give it a try - If you want to do something that's not normally associated with your gender, think about whether you'll be safe doing it. If you think you will, give it a try. People will learn from your example.

If you've been struggling with gender or gender identity and expectations, you're not alone. It may help you to talk to a trusted parent, friend, family member, teacher, or counselor.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Gender Identity & Roles | Feminine Traits & Stereotypes

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Our society has a set of ideas about how we expect men and women to dress, behave, and present themselves. Gender roles in society means how we're expected to act, speak, dress, groom, and conduct ourselves based upon our assigned sex.