Gender, Sexuality, and Intimacy: A Contexts Reader

Jodi O'Brien, Arlene Stein, Jodi O′Brien, Jodi O'Brien, Arlene Stein

• Publisher: SAGE Publications, Inc
• Year: 2017
• Print ISBN: 9781506352312
• eBook ISBN: 9781506352336
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Social Sciences
• Subtopic: Gender Studies
• Index: Social Sciences

This new anthology from SAGE brings together over 90 recent readings on gender, sexuality, and intimate relationships from Contexts, the award-winning magazine published by the American Sociological Association. Each contributor is a contemporary sociologist writing in the clear, concise, and jargon-free style that has made Contexts the "public face" of sociology. Jodi O'Brien and Arlene Stein, former Contexts Editors, have chosen pieces that are timely, thought-provoking, and especially suitable for classroom use; written introductions that frame each of the books three main sections; and provided questions for discussion.

1 Boys vs. Girls

Debra Rigney

Fall 2011

If you have children or work with them, you’ve probably heard statements like “Dolls are for girls” or “A fire truck is a boy’s toy.” At just three years old, how do children know if they are girls or boys? How do they find out their gender? The answer to this question is in some ways simple: gender socialization. In my introduction to sociology course, I learned to approach this concept first by splitting up the term.

So, sociologist Joan Ferrante describes gender as a social distinction based on culturally conceived and learned ideals about appropriate appearance, behavior, and mental and emotional characteristics for male and female. This differs from sex, because sex is a biological distinction, whereas gender is a social characteristic. Socialization, Ferrante writes, is the process by which people develop a sense of self and learn the ways of society in which they live. Therefore, gender socialization is the process of learning the norms of your specific gender.

This concept was on my mind when I recently started a new job at a daycare, and, in the past few weeks, I have been observing the children’s gender socialization to see what they say to others and how they react to what others tell them about gender. The first day I observed, I was with the three- to four-year-old class. Damarion, a younger boy who doesn’t attend preschool, wanted to wear a tutu. A four-year-old preschooler, Rhys, came up to him and politely said, “Damarion, skirts are for girls,” just before he went to the kitchen area to play with the dolls. When I followed to ask Rhys where he had learned the “skirt rule,” he simply said, “My teacher only allows the girls at school to play dress up with skirts. She tells us that they are for girls,” What was I supposed to say to that? I didn’t know how to explain to Rhys that it was okay to wear a skirt as a boy without messing up what his preschool teacher had been teaching him. So, I only aksed, “So, if you think skirts are for girls, then don’t you think that dolls are for girls, too?” Rhys corrected me, saying, ”NO! Boys can be daddies and the girls can be the mommies.” He then went on with his day. What I took from this interaction was that Ryhs has been learning at school that skirts are for girls, and Damarion hasn’t. Therefore, Damarion, since he hasn’t been told otherwise, thinks wearing skirts is perfectly normal for a young boy.

Barbie shows girls what they should look like and what they can grow up to be, just as action figures do for boys.

Another aspect of this interaction that stuck out to me is who had taught Rhys the “skirt rule.” His teacher clearly isn’t just teaching counting and the alphabet, she is acting as an agent of socialization. Ferrante defines agents of socialization as significant others, primary groups, in-groups and out groups, and institutions that shape our sense of self or social identity, teach us about the groups to which we do and do not belong, help us to realize our human capacities, and help us negotiate the social and physical environment we have inherited. In these ways, Rhys’s teacher is socializing him to know the social norms of his gender. She is essentially teaching him how to “be” a boy.

On my second day of observation in the daycare center, I was with the five- to six-year-old group on the playground. During “free-play” I noticed Ethan, a kindergartener with four older sisters, crying. I went over to ask him if everything was alright. That was when I overheard another child, Dylan, saying “Ethan plays with Barbies. He must be a girl!” As Ethan began to cry harder, he tried to explain to Dylan that his sisters made him play with Barbies but he wasn’t a girl. Dylan just laughed and walked away. I calmed Ethan down and put Dylan in time out. Dylan protested, “I shouldn’t be here. I was just letting him know that he can’t play with dolls or everyone will think he is a funny bunny.” Dylan then explained that this is what his father said if he caught Dylan playing with Barbie dolls. “I was mainly looking out for him. If he keeps this up, everyone will think he’s a girl, and he doesn’t want that.” When older children like Dylan do things that seem out of the social norm, like playing with dolls when they’ve been told that only girls do that, they can be made fun of. I believe that kids think this is the only distinction between girls and boys—what they play with or how they dress.

It seems that, above and beyond teachers, the most influential people in a child’s gender socialization process are their parents. I know from experience that my parents influenced me and my brothers in many ways. My dad once told me “Sis, you can’t be fighting with these boys, you will end up getting hurt.” The sad thing is, I could keep up with them. And my mom used to ask, “Don’t you want to stay home and practice your cheers instead of going with those dirty boys?” But then she would say things like “Black his eye!” or “Do a wheelie!” to my brother. I remember being about seven years old and beating up a little boy in the neighborhood because he was picking on my brother. My mom and dad were proud of me . . . and mad at the same time. My dad could only say, “Girls don’t act like this.” My response was “Well, Dad, if Bubby [my brother] didn’t act like a girl, he could have beaten him up hisself. Is he even a boy?” In these situations and others, my parents taught me the social norms of being a girl.

As a daycare teacher, I, too, am an agent of socialization. We at the center are supposed to show all of the children the same amount of attention and console them in the same ways. During observation, though, I realized that this was not the case, even for me. I observed how differently all of the teachers reacted to similar cases. One of my first times in the toddler room, a little girl smacked another little boy, and the little boy hit her back. I went to the little girl to make sure she was okay and to calm her down. I then put the little boy in time out, and scolded him without even asking if he was okay. Why? Because most people believe that girls are more “sensitive,” but if you ”coddle” boys, they will grow up to be mama’s boys (and nobody wants that).

Between the influences of parents, teachers and other kids, gender socialization takes hold early.

One other big part of socialization deals with mass media and children’s toys. Think about it: have you ever seen a boy dressed like a girl on television? The primary characters on television—intentional or unintentional role models—are gender-specific. If you turn on the Disney channel, you’re going to see Disney princesses and princess merchandise targeted to female viewers, and it’s effective. All of the girls at daycare want to grow up and be princesses. When I asked a group of three-year-olds what they wanted for Christmas, the girls wanted things like Barbies, various princess dolls, and “big girl make-up.” Why? Because Barbie shows little girls what it’s like to be grown up, and princess dolls are presented as the perfect portrayal of what a little girl wants to grow up to be. Have you ever seen a Barbie that dressed as a tomboy? Have you ever seen a fire fighter doll depicting what it’s like to be a “girl”? Barbie shows and teaches girls what they should look like and what they can grow up to be, just as action figures do with boys. The problem is, action figures like those on the Power Rangers are often more imaginative and show boys that they can grow up to be big and strong, they can fight for what they believe in (or just to fight).

Between the influences of mass media, parents, teachers, and other kids, gender socialization takes hold early. These are just a few reasons why the children I observed “know” their gender and its appropriate social norms at such a young age.

2 The Hearts of Boys

Niobe Way

C.J. Pascoe

Mark Mccormack

Amy Schalet

Freeden Oeur

Winter 2013

Boys are interesting creatures in the American public imagination. They start off all “slugs and snails and puppy-dogs’ tails”—cute!—but then they hit puberty and become lazy, sexual, carefree, violent, detached, and irresponsible. They become scary. We fear teenage boys, in part because they are in-between—neither children, nor adults—and they seem to be beyond our control.

boys as human

by niobe way

The popular stereotype is that boys are emotionally illiterate and shallow, they don’t want intimate relationships or close friendships. In my research with boys over the past two decades, however, I have discovered that not only are these stereotypes false, they are actively hurting boys and leading them to engage in self destructive behaviors. The African American, Latino, Asian American and White teenage boys in my studies indicate that what they want and need most are close relationships—friendships, in particular—in which they can share their “deep secrets.” These friendships, they tell us, are critical for their mental health. But, according to the boys, they live in a culture that considers such intimacy “girly” and “gay” and thus they are discouraged from having the very relationships that are critical for their wellbeing.

A central dilemma for boys growing up in the United States is how to get the intimacy they want while still maintaining their manliness.

My longitudinal studies of hundreds of boys from early to late adolescence indicate that a central dilemma for boys growing up in the United States is how to get the intimacy they want while still maintaining their manliness. Boys want to be able to freely express their emotions, including their feelings of vulnerability; they want others to be sensitive to their feelings without being teased or harassed for having such desires. They want genuine friendships in which they are free to be themselves rather than conform to rigid masculine stereotypes. As Carlos said: “It might be nice to be a girl because then you wouldn’t have to be emotionless.”

During early and middle adolescence most boys, according to my research, do have close male friendships in which they can share their “deep secrets.” It is only in late adolescence—a time when, according to national data, suicides and violence among boys soar—that boys disconnect from other boys. The boys in my studies begin, in late adolescence, to use the phrase “no homo” when discussing their male friendships, expressing the fear that if they seek out close friendships, they will be perceived as “gay” or “girly.” As a consequence, they pull away from their male peers and experience sadness over the loss of their formerly close friends.

Michael, a participant in one of our studies, told his interviewer that friendships are important because, “if you don’t have friends, you have no one to tell your secrets to. Then it’s like, I always think bad stuff in my brain ‘cause like no one’s helping me and I just need to keep all the secrets to myself.” Asked why friends are important, Danny said to his interviewer, “you need someone to talk to, like you have problems with something, you go talk to him. You know, if you keep it all to yourself, you will go crazy. Try to take it out on someone else.” Kai implicitly concurred in his interview: “without friends you will go crazy or mad or you’ll be lonely all of the time, be depressed. . . . You would go wacko.” Asked by the interviewer why his friends are important, Justin said, “‘cause you need a friend or else, you would be depressed, you won’t be happy, you would try to kill yourself, ‘cause then you’ll be all alone and no one to talk to.’ Faced with the prospect of having no close friends, Anthony said to his interviewer, “who you gonna talk to? Might as well be dead or something. I don’t mean to put it in a negative way, but I am just saying—it’s like not a good feeling to be alone.”

Over the past three decades, studies, such as those done by epidemiologists Wilkinson and Pickett, have found that adults without close friendships are more likely to experience poor mental and physical health and live shorter lives than those with close friendships. Despite the growing body of data that underscores the importance of close friendships for everyone, harmful stereotypes that ignore boys’ social and emotional needs and capacities abound. According to the boys themselves, these stereotypes significantly contribute to their isolation, loneliness, and depression. As they get older, boys get stripped of their humanity. They learn that they are not supposed to have hearts, except in relation to a girl, and then it should be a stoic heart and not too vulnerable.

We must allow boys to be boys in the most human sense of the word, nurture their natural emotional and social capacities, and foster their close friendships. We need to make relational and emotionally literacy an inherent part of being human, rather than only a “girl thing” or a “gay thing.” The boys and young men in my studies know that what makes us human is our ability to deeply connect with each other. We must figure out how to help boys and young men strengthen rather than lose these critical life skills. Only then we will be able to address the psychological and sociological ...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Publisher Note
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Contents
• Preface
• Section I Gender
• Introduction Where is Gender?
• Learning to Parent Transgender Children
• Locating Gender
• 1 Boys vs. Girls
• 2 The Hearts of Boys
• 3 Jeremy Lin’s Model Minority Problem
• 4 Transitioning Out Loud and Online
• 5 A 21st Century Gender Revolution
• 6 The Feminization of American Immigration
• Scripting Gender Media and Culture
• 7 Celebrity Drug Scandals, Media Double Standards
• 8 Selling Feminism, Consuming Femininity
• 9 Beauty Beyond a Size 16
• 10 Enduring Dilemmas of Female Celebrity
• 11 #Callmecaitlyn and Contemporary Trans* Visibility
• 12 Dancing the Body Beautiful
• 13 Discrimination and Dress Codes in Urban Nightlife
• Scripting Gender Sport
• 14 Tiger Girls on the Soccer Field
• 15 Ritual Violence in a Two-Car Garage
• 16 The Sanctity of Sunday Football Why Men Love Sports
• 17 Playing but Losing Women’s Sports After Title ix
• 18 Muslim Female Athletes and the Hijab
• Violence and Transgression
• 19 Ruling Out Rape
• 20 walking like a man?
• 21 Carrying Guns, Contesting Gender
• 22 Stealing a Bag of Potato Chips and Other Crimes of Resistance
• 23 Changing Men in South Africa
• Gendered Institutions
• 24 The Not-So-Pink Ivory Tower
• 25 What Gender is Science?
• 26 Women of God
• 27 Bathroom Battlegrounds and Penis Panics
• 28 Suffering in an Age of Personal Responsibility
• 29 A Feminist’s Work is Never Done
• 30 Got Power?
• Section II Sexuality
• Introduction Navigating Sexuality
• Slut-Shaming Romance Writers
• Navigating Sexuality
• 31 Mixed Messages About Teen Sex
• 32 Sex, Love, and Autonomy in the Teenage Sleepover
• 33 Is Hooking Up Bad for Young Women?
• 34 Straight Girls Kissing
• 35 Hooking Up and Dating are Two Sides of a Coin
• 36 Sexuality has No Expiration Date
• Sexual Knowledge
• 37 Can’t Ask, Can’t Tell How Institutional Review Boards Keep Sex in the Closet
• 38 Learning from Drag Queens
• 39 The Sex Lives of Sex Researchers
• 40 Being Straight in a Post-Closeted Culture
• 41 U.S. Attitudes Toward Lesbian and Gay People are Better than Ever
• 42 Sexual Orientation versus Behavior—Different for Men and Women?
• Mapping Sexual Commerce and Politics
• 43 Sex Entrepreneurs in the New China
• 44 Transnational Gender Vertigo
• 45 Pride and Prejudice and Professionalism
• 46 Lesbian Geographies
• 47 There Goes the Gayborhood?
• Section III Intimacy
• Introduction Mapping Intimacy
• An Unexpected Box of Love Research
• Locating Intimacy
• 48 Loving Across Racial Divides
• 49 We are Family
• 50 Unmarried with Children
• 51 Good Grief Bouncing Back from a Spouse’s Death in Later Life
• 52 Measuring Same-Sex Relationships
• Marriage
• 53 The Changing Landscape of Love and Marriage
• 54 Marriage Goes to School
• 55 Marrying Across Class Lines
• 56 For Better—and—For Worse
• 57 Korean Multiculturalism and the Marriage Squeeze
• 58 A Silent Revolution in the Korean Family
• Reproduction
• 59 India’s Reproductive Assembly Line
• 60 “Children” Having Children
• 61 The Single Mother by Choice Myth
• 62 Reproducing the Nation
• 63 What Happened to the “War on Women”?
• 64 The Poetry of Politics
• Family Portraits
• 65 The Joy of Cooking?
• 66 Eating Military Base Stew
• 67 The Superstrong Black Mother
• 68 Families Facing Untenable Choices
• 69 mothering while disabled
• 70 Stay-At-Home Fatherhood
• 71 Picturing the Self My Mother’s Family Photo Albums
• About the Editors