The Comprehension of Femininity in Private and Public Realms by 3 to 6-Year-Old Children in Mashhad

علوم اجتماعی دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد

Article 10, Volume 15, Issue 2 - Serial Number 32, March 2019, Pages 305-343   

Document Type: Scientific-Research

DOI: 10.22067/jss.v15i2.74235

Authors

Aghileh Sadat Moussavi Jahanabadi¹; Zahra Tabibi^{* 1}; Behrooz Mahram¹; Morteza Modares Gharavi²

¹Ferdowsi University of Mashhad

²Mashhad University of Medical Sciences

Abstract

Extended Abstract1. IntroductionFemininity refers to an identity imposing a set of rules on females. When children become aware of their sexual identity as a male or female, they need to acquire the requisites of this role in order to complete their identity. In other words, they figure out that they should learn about the definitions and parameters of femininity and masculinity to accomplish their gender role.These definitions affect the way people function in different situations of life. Therefore, addressing women's roles in the family and society is a way of understanding the definition of femininity, since femininity is an image that is realized in individuals' roles. It is important to note that the literature has given little attention to this concept from the children's perspective.The patterns of male and female roles are not universal; in this regard, femininity and masculinity vary according to each culture. As such, the conceptualization of feminine and masculine concepts from a child's perspective would facilitate the comprehension of social structures and bring about the possibility of modifying these structures. The adoption of a qualitative and phenomenological approach is also a facilitative way toward obtaining a richer understanding of the concept of femininity. In the literature, little attention has been given to individuals' thoughts, feelings, and knowledge about belonging to a particular gender group or femininity and masculinity.2. Theoretical FrameworkGender is a concept describing the cultural meanings assigned to each of the social classes of males and females. When individuals integrate these cultural meanings into their mental state, gender becomes part of their identity. Individuals perceive their gender identity based on the cultural meanings of femininity and masculinity. Thereafter, they think and act in accordance with their given gender role. These cultural meanings of gender show themselves as gender schemas. Gender schemas provide a framework to define gender for a person and to act accordingly. Sandra Bem believes that the child has an active role in the development of the concept of gender. The child comes to mental associations based on the gender through social interactions.According to different studies conducted in various cultures, femininity can be primarily defined at the public and private domains. This concept is largely affected by the sociological perspective regarding the issue of women and capitalist system. The public domain related to femininity determines the social roles, such as occupation and education, while the private domain considers the family and household environment rather than social activities.3. MethodThis study was conducted on 83 children (i.e., 43 females and 40 males) within the age range of 3-6 selected from 12 kindergartens of Mashhad, Iran, using a qualitative approach and an interpretive phenomenological analysis. Phenomenological investigation reveals the meaning of the lived experiences of individuals with regard to a concept or phenomenon and emphasizes the participants' shared experience of that phenomenon.Phenomenology is not only a description, but also an interpretative process in which the researcher interprets the meaning of lived experiences. The study population was selected using purposive sampling method, combining maximum variation and homogeneous sampling techniques. The main research instrument was a semi-structured interview entailing painting, ready-made images, games, and e-book fitting the children's knowledge, competence, interest, and the place they live in. The data were analyzed using the method put forward by Dickelman et al. (as cited in Abedi, 2010).4. Results and DiscussionIn the present study, the woman was described as someone who functions at home and cooks for the family; she deals with housework, such as cleaning, dishwashing, vacuum cleaning, and doing the laundry, in addition to caring for, feeding, and playing with children. She pays attention to the needs of others and, if someone gets sick, she takes care of him/her. For this woman, children and home affairs are always important. In the eyes of the children, the social status of the women is described as follows: when the woman leaves the house for work, she usually goes to school and teaches or works as a doctor or a nurse at a hospital. The children assume that females cannot perform many jobs such as firefighting, butchery, presidential roles, managing, police service, and being a pilot. Furthermore, girls' games, the kind of the toys they chose to play with (e.g., dolls, kitchen utensils, and cosmetics), the kind of the games they opted for (e.g., playing a grown up to take the role of a mother with who is cooking and caring for other or playing the role of a teacher or a doctor), and their wishes to be teachers, mothers, or nurses in the future, are all in line with the activities defined as feminine in adulthood.Children express reasons for their answers. They connect specific attributes to each gender by observing the environment, receiving environmental messages, and conforming to the femininity recommended at home, kindergarten, and community. Some of the attributes assigned to females included caregiving, cowardice, and disability in financial, physical, cognitive, and functional fields. This caregiving was especially observed at home and in relation to people in need of attention and care.In the same vein, regarding the workplace, the types of occupation attributed to women (e.g., teacher, nurse, and doctor) can be considered as activities entailing caring for children and people who are injured and in need of help. In the eyes of children, fear and disability of women are associated with the out-of-home tasks and the activities that require high courage, intelligence, strength, money, and safety. Although women are capable of caring for others, they fail to adequately protect themselves and their surrounding environment and cannot control and manage situations. 5. ConclusionThe feminine image in the current culture depicts the female as a caring entity in the private sphere and an incapable being in the public domain. This image of female is one that has been challenged by biological, psychological, sociological, political, philosophical, and especially feminist perspectives from the past to the present with little if any changes. The scientists have tried to give an explanation for this image. The image ultimately constitutes the patterns of communication between the two genders.

Keywords

femininity; child; qualitative research; private and public realm

References

1. آبوت، پ.، و والاس، ک. (1395). جامعه‌شناسی زنان. ترجمة منیژه نجم‌عراقی. تهران: نی.

2. اکبری، م. (1397). اعتبارسنجی و سنجش کیفیت در پژوهش‌های کمّی، کیفی و آمیخته. روش‌شناسی علوم انسانی، 24(94)، 23-45.

3. ایمان، م.، و نوشادی، م. (1390). تحلیل محتوای کیفی. پژوهش، 3(2)، 15-44.

4. بووار، س. (1380). جنس دوم. ترجمة قاسم صنعوی. تهران: توس.

5. جلالی، ر. (1391). نمونه‌گیری در پژوهش های کیفی. مجله تحقیقات کیفی در علوم سلامت، 1(4)، 310–320.

6. حیدری، م. (1392). تحولات بازنمایی زنان در برنامة خاةه فیروزه‌ای صدا و سیما. پایان‌نامة کارشناسی ارشد، دانشگاه الزهرا (س).

7. خمسه، ا. (1386). بررسی نقش عوامل فرهنگی‌اجتماعی بر طرحواره‌های نقش جنسیتی در دو گروه قومی از دانشجویان در ایران. مطالعات روان‌شناختی، 3(2)، 129-146.

8. ذکایی، م.، و قاراخانی، م. (1385). دختران جوان و تجربة زنانگی. پژوهش زنان، 5(1)، 59-82.

9. رنجبر، ه.، حق‌دوست، ع.، صلصالی، م.، خوشدل، ع.، سلیمانی، م.، و بهرامی، ن. (1391). نمونه‌گیری در پژوهش های کیفی: راهنمایی برای شروع. مجله علمی پژوهش دانشگاه علوم پزشکی ارتش جمهوری اسلامی ایران، 10(3)، 238-250.

10. سامانی، س.، و خیر، م. (1380). بررسی فرایند تحول مراحل مختلف هویت جنسی در کودکان 2 تا 7 سال. مجله روان‌شناسی و علوم تربیتی، 31(2)، 157-173.

11. سلطانی جیحون‌آبادی، م. (1388). بررسی روایت های زنانگی در میان دختران دانشجوی دانشگاه گیلان. پایان‌نامة کارشناسی ارشد، دانشگاه گیلان.

12. عابدی، ح. (1389). کاربرد روش تحقیق پدیده‌شناسی در علوم بالینی. فصلنامه راهبرد، 19(54)، 207-224.

13. علی‌پور، و.، و افضل‌خانی، م. (1389). فرهنگ آموزش عاملی اجتماعی‌فرهنگی و نقش آن بر توسعة آموزش مجازی ایران. فصلنامة رهبری و مدیریت آموزشی، 4(4)، 145-164.

14. فتوحی کندلجی، ا. (1393). بازنمایی زنان در آگهی های بازرگانی تلویزیون. مقاله ارایه‌شده در کنفرانس بین‌المللی و آنلاین اقتصاد سبز، شرکت پژوهشی طرود شمال، بابلسر.

15. کرسول، ج. (1391). پویش کیفی و طرح پژوهش. ترجمة حسن دانایی‌فرد و حسین کاظمی. تهران: صفار- اشراقی.

16. کلالی، ح. (1388). نظریة بنیادی به مثابه روش نظریه‌پردازی. پژوهش‌نامةه فرهنگی، ۱۰(3-6)، 119-140.

17. ملاابراهیمی، ع.، تارودی ممقانی، ی.، و هنردوست، ع. (1392). جایگاه ایران در میان کشورهای منطقة خاورمیانه و آسیای مرکزی در افق سال 2015 بر اساس شاخص های توانمدسازی زنان. زن در فرهنگ و هنر، 5(3)، 345-372.

18. یوسفی، ع. (1388). تأملی برمرزبندی اجتماعی فضای شهری مشهد: طبقه‌بندی منزلتی نواحی شهر. مجلة علوم اجتماعی، ۶(۲)، 69-91.

19. Auspurg, K., Iacovou, M., & Nicoletti, C. (2017). Housework share between partners: Experimental evidence on gender-specific preferences. Social Science Research, 66, 118-139.

20. Bem, S.L. (1981). Gender schema theory: A cognitive account of sex typing. Psychological Review, 88(4), 354-364.

21. Bian, L., Leslie, S. J., & Cimpian, A. (2017). Gender stereotypes about intellectual ability emerge early and influence children’s interests. Science, 355(6323), 389-391.

22. Bieri Buschor, C., Kappler, C., Keck Frei, A., & Berweger, S. (2014). I want to be a scientist/a teacher: Students’ perceptions of career decision-making in gender-typed, non-traditional areas of work. Gender and Education, 26(7), 743-758.

23. Bottorff, J. L., Oliffe, J. L., & Kelly, M. (2012). The Gender(s) in the room. Qualitative Health Research, 22(4), 435–440.

24. Carlone, H. B., Johnson, A., & Scott, C. M. (2015). Agency amidst formidable structures: How girls perform gender in science class. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(4), 474-488.

25. Cejka, M. A., & Eagly, A. H. (1999). Gender-stereotypic images of occupations correspond to the sex segregation of employment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25(4), 413-423.

26. Chapman, R. (2016). A case study of gendered play in preschools: how early childhood educators’ perceptions of gender influence children’s play. Early Child Development and Care, 186(8), 1271-1284.

27. Chen, F., Bao, L., Lin, Z., Zimmer, Z., Gultiano, S., & Borja, J. B. (2017). Double burden for women in mid-and later life: evidence from time-use profiles in Cebu, the Philippines. Ageing and Society, 38(11), 2325-2355.

28. Cherney, I. D., & Dempsey, J. (2010). Young children’s classification, stereotyping and play behavior for gender neutral and ambiguous toys. Educational Psychology, 30(6), 651-669.

29. Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method approaches. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications.

30. Dinella, L. M., Fulcher, M., & Weisgram, E. S. (2014). Sex-typed personality traits and gender identity as predictors of young adults’ career interests. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 43(3), 493-504.

31. Dittmar, H., Halliwell, E., & Ive, S. (2006). Does Barbie make girls want to be thin? The effect of experimental exposure to images of dolls on the body image of 5-to 8-year-old girls. Developmental Psychology, 42(2), 283-301.

32. Donnelly, K., & Twenge, J. M. (2017). Masculine and feminine traits on the Bem Sex-Role Inventory, 1993–2012: A cross-temporal meta-analysis. Sex Roles, 76(9-10), 556-565.

33. Einarsdottir, J. (2007). Research with children: Methodological and ethical challenges. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 15(2), 198-211.

34. Fletcher, K. (2007). Image: changing how women nurses think about themselves: Literature review. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 58(3), 207-215.

35. Fulcher, M. (2011). Individual differences in children’s occupational aspirations as a function of parental traditionality. Sex Roles, 64(1-2), 117-131.

36. Glesne, C. (2015). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (5th ed.). New York: Longman.

37. Halim, M. L. D., Ruble, D. N., TamisLeMonda, C. S., Shrout, P. E., & Amodio, D. M. (2017). Gender attitudes in early childhood: Behavioral consequences and cognitive antecedents. Child Development, 88(3), 882-899.

38. Hofstede, G. H. (1998). Masculinity and femininity: The taboo dimension of national cultures (Vol. 3). London, United Kingdom: Sage.

39. Hofstede, G., & Bond, M. H. (1984). Hofstede’s culture dimensions: An independent validation using Rokeach’s value survey. Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology, 15(4), 417-433.

40. Hook, J. L. (2010). Gender inequality in the welfare state: Sex segregation in housework, 1965–2003. American Journal of Sociology, 115(5), 1480-1523.

41. Horne, R. M., Johnson, M. D., Galambos, N. L., & Krahn, H. J. (2018). Time, money, or gender? Predictors of the division of household labour across life stages. Sex Roles, 78(11-12), 731-743.

42. Jung, A. K., & O’Brien, K. M. (2017). The profound influence of unpaid work on women’s lives: An overview and future directions. Journal of Career Development, 46(2), 184–200. 10.1177/0894845317734648.

43. Kaufman, G., & White, D. (2015). What Makes a “Good Job”? Gender Role Attitudes and Job Preferences in Sweden. Gender Issues, 32(4), 279-294.

44. Lachance-Grzela, M., & Bouchard, G. (2010). Why do women do the lion’s share of housework? A decade of research. Sex roles, 63(11-12), 767-780.

45. LaPointe, K. (2013). Heroic career changers? Gendered identity work in career transitions. Gender, Work and Organization, 20(2), 133-146.

46. Lips, H. M. (2017). Sandra Bem: Naming the impact of gendered categories and identities. Sex Roles, 76(9-10), 627-632.

47. McLaughlin, K., Muldoon, O. T., & Moutray, M. (2010). Gender, gender roles and completion of nursing education: A longitudinal study. Nurse Education Today, 30(4), 303-307.

48. Murnen, S. K., Greenfield, C., Younger, A., & Boyd, H. (2016). Boys act and girls appear: A content analysis of gender stereotypes associated with characters in children’s popular culture. Sex Roles, 74(1-2), 78-91.

49. Nollert, M., & Gasser, M. (2017). Gender time-use gap and task segregation in unpaid work: evidence from Switzerland. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 37(3/4), 148-165.

50. Perales, F., Baxter, J., & Tai, T. O. (2015). Gender, justice and work: A distributive approach to perceptions of housework fairness. Social Science Research, 51, 51-63.

51. Peshkin, A. (1988). In search of subjectivity – One’s own. Educational Researcher, 17(7), 17-22.

52. Ponte, E. (2012). ‘Wow, this is where I'm supposed to be!’, Rethinking gender construction in teacher recruitment. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 40(1), 43-53.

53. Punch, S. (2002). Research with children: the same or different from research with adults?. Childhood, 9(3), 321-341.

54. Ryle, R. (2012). Questioning gender: A sociological exploration, London, United Kingdom: Pine Forge Press an imprint of Sage publications, Inc.

55. Scott, J. W. (2011). The fantasy of feminist history. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

56. Simon, R. M., Wagner, A., & Killion, B. (2017). Gender and choosing a STEM major in college: Femininity, masculinity, chilly climate, and occupational values. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54(3), 299-323.

57. Skelton, C. (2012). Men teachers and the “feminised” primary school: A review of the literature. Educational Review, 64(1), 1-19.

58. Spinner, L., Cameron, L., & Calogero, R. (2017). Peer toy play as a gateway to children’s gender flexibility: The effect of (counter) stereotypic portrayals of peers in children’s magazines. Sex Roles, (70), 314-328.

59. Stets, J., & Burke, P. (2000). Femininity/masculinity. In Encyclopedia of Sociology (pp. 997-1005), Revised Edition. New York: Macmillan.

60. Stubbe, M. (1994). What’s the score? Qualitative analysis in gender research. International Journal of Language and Applied Linguistics, 4(1), 3-18.

61. Tashakkori, A. & Teddlie, C. (2010). Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research. London, United Kingdom: Sage Publication.

62. Twenge, J. (1997). Changes in masculine and feminine traits over time: A meta-analysis. Sex Roles, 36(5-6), 305 - 325.

63. Weisgram, E. S., Bigler, R. S., & Liben, L. S. (2010). Gender, values, and occupational interests among children, adolescents, and adults. Child Development, 81(3), 778-796.

64. West, A.(2015). A brief review of cognitive theories in gender development. Behavioural Sciences Undergraduate Journal, 2(1), 59-66.

65. Wood, W. & Eagly, A. H. (2015). Two traditions of research on gender identity. Sex Roles, 73(11-12), 461-473.

66. Zosuls, K., Miller, C., Ruble, D., Martin, C., & Fabes, R. (2011). Gender development research in Sex Roles: Historical trends and future directions. Sex Roles, 64(11-12), 826–842.