SOCIAL REPRESENTATIONS OF FEMININITY AND MASCULINITY:

1. SOCIAL REPRESENTATIONS OF FEMININITY AND MASCULINITY: DYNAMICS OF PERMANENCE AND CHANGE IN GENDER-SPECIFIC PROFESSIONS Elisabetta CAMUSSI, Chiara COLOMBO, Monica COLOMBO, Lorenzo MONTALI Dipartimento di Psicologia Università degli Studi di Milano-Bicocca elisabetta.camussi@unimib.it

2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK Verbal tasks vs. spatial or math tasks  HORIZONTAL SEGREGATION: jobs for men and jobs for women. BUT: also powerful positions in “typical female” professional contexts are occupied by men  VERTICAL SEGREGATION. Gender stereotypes as psychological and social constructs. Stereotypes as static and unchangeable structures (Lueptow, Garovich, Lueptow, 1995) vs. stereotypes as dynamic and changeable constructs (Diekman & Eagly, 2000)  towards an integration of the two perspectives? Methodological challenge: the role of the collective dimension (Moscovici, 1984; Billig, 1991).

3. AIMS AND HYPOTHESIS Gender roles have partially changed  believes regarding gender-specific professions should be changed as well. Our aim is to explore the content of social representations of masculinity and femininity as they come up during group discussions.

4. SAMPLE AND METHODOLOGY (1/2) 36 students divided into groups according to: Gender (male, female) University Faculty (Education, Engineering) • 6 focus groups: 2 made up of men, 2 made up of women, 2 “mixed gender” groups.

5. SAMPLE AND METHODOLOGY (2/2) Topics of the semi-directive grid for the focus groups: Students’ motivations for choosing the Faculty of Engineering or Education; Their current view of the career they wish to pursue at the end of their university studies; Discussion about statistical data regarding male and female distribution in each sector; Discussion about a collection of ‘non-stereotypical’ stories; Gender differences (existing differences, experience, perception, misconceptions, etc.)

6. RESULTS Analysis of Lexical Correspondence, Elementary Contexts Analysis, both performed using the T-LAB software package (Lancia,2004).

7. Analysis of Lexical Correspondence Factors 1 & 2 Factors 2 & 3

8. Analysis of Lexical Correspondence Factor 1: a close link between the discourse on professional achievements and the discourse of Engineering students (both male and female), as opposed to a close link between the discourse on the need to reconcile professional aspects with family life and the discourse of Education students (both male and female); Factor 2: a close association between lemmas referring to traditional female roles and the discourse of both female subgroups; Factor 3: contrast between students whose choice of University Faculty was in keeping with traditional gender stereotypes and students whose choice was innovative or non-stereotypical.

9. Elementary Contexts Analysis

10. Elementary Contexts Analysis Cluster 1 ‘From University to professional environment’ – typical discourse of male educators; Cluster 2: ‘The difficulty to reconcile professional work and family life’ – typical discourse of women; Cluster 3 ‘Engineering as all time consuming profession” – no specific features; Cluster 4 ‘The importance of being well prepared’ – typical discourse of Engineering students; Cluster 5 ‘The courses that bring about the choices’ – typical discourse of Engineering students.

11. Elementary Contexts Analysis Cluster 1 The relationship to university has positive valence. Even the representation of their future career seems to have positive connotations, in terms of plans, hopes, and wishes. The choice of a typically feminine faculty and profession is not seen as a problem or obstacle. Being a man is rather seen as an advantage: “I heard this not from one person, but rather from many people, even from people who actually manage some of the centers, they say that for certain specific tasks, for certain jobs, men are better suited to doing the work; they are appreciated more than women”. (m, Educ.)

12. Elementary Contexts Analysis Cluster 1 Some innovative elements are fully recognized and integrated into the students’ view of what constitutes a good teacher or educator: competence as opposed to competitiveness, relational and empathic skills, the affirmation of ideals which substitute success or financial gratification. Since many of these characteristics are more traditionally viewed as feminine, such self descriptions point to ‘androgynous’ individuals (Bem, 1981): “I think that in our field competitiveness isn’t really an issue, it’s a secondary thing. Rather, I think what really matters is your competence when dealing with children, for the good of the children, the fact that you work towards the children’s wellbeing”. (m, Educ.)

13. Elementary Contexts Analysis Cluster 1 The matter of how to reconcile professional and personal life emerges here and it is seen as the need to find a partner who will respect and value their life choices and job commitments: “In a situation where I wanted to find someone, I think this person should try to share my lifestyle, it should be a person similar to me, who should in any case understand that if I’m committed to something it’s because I enjoy this commitment”. (m, Educ.)

14. Elementary Contexts Analysis Cluster 2 The stability/change dynamic which is typical of female gender and female professional stereotypes clearly emerges and is manifest in the contradictory nature of the points of view expressed. At one end, a change is being acknowledged in the shared view of women’s role. Change is already in effect and it must be further sustained and accepted: “I believe women have conquered more independence, more freedom, and now you no longer have a situation like 10 years ago or maybe even longer, where it was the father’s role as bread winner and provider to rule and command while the wife had to stay home and take care of the children”. (w, Educ.)

15. Elementary Contexts Analysis Cluster 2 The persistence of traditional ideas shared by both the men and womenresults in a description of women’s professional choices both in terms of effort and of the impossibility to fully achieve their professional potential, whereas men always demand professional fulfilment for themselves. Family needs and childcareseem to be seen as the exclusive responsibility of mothers: “It’s not so much the man or woman factor, it’s more the fact that children need care, so the fact that you might have to travel a lot, the fact that your child might be sick. As a mother, not being able to be there when your child is sick… It’s hard when you know that your child has a 40° fever”. (m, Eng.)

16. Elementary Contexts Analysis Cluster 2 Women themselves sometimes accept a certain amount of discrimination, saying for example that their difficulty in finding a permanent position does not stem from any discriminatory act on the part of company managers, but rather from a system of laws and regulations which give women too much protection and so must be defended against: “They actually ask you if you intend to have a child, if you intend to stay home on maternity leave. Maybe also because Italian laws are so good to women that they allow you to stay home with your child for a very long period, and companies don’t like that because it’s not in their interest”. (w, Eng.)

17. CONCLUSIONS Elements of stability and change within the representations of masculinity and femininity. The relevance of choosing qualitative methodology when analysing gender stereotypes. The conservation vs. change dynamic is evident in all the groups to various degrees. A need to recognise and accept that there are differences within each group, rather than focus only on the differences between men and women. Although women are far from recognising existing differences within their gender, they at least focus on gender issues and reflect on various aspects of equality/difference between men and women. Men don’t seem to think about gender issues at all, and deal with the matter in terms of so-called ‘natural’ differences. The importance of insisting on the notion of gender as a relational issue.

18. BIBLIOGRAPHY Hilton, J.L., von Hippel, W. (1996). Stereotypes. Annual Review of Psychology, 47, 237-271. Lancia, F. (2004). Strumenti per l’analisi dei testi. Introduzione all’uso di T-LAB. Milano: Franco Angeli. Lueptow, L.B., Garovich, L., Lueptow, M.B. (1995). The persistence of gender stereotypes in the face of changing sex role: Evidence contrary to the sociocultural model. Ethology and Sociobiolology, 16, 509-530. Moscovici S. (1976). La psychanalyse: son image et son public. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. Moscovici, S. (1984). Il fenomeno delle rappresentazioni sociali, in Moscovici, S., Farr, R.M. (eds.) Social Representations (pp.23-94), Cambridge, Cambridge University Press (trad. it. Rappesentazioni Sociali. Bologna: Il Mulino, 1989). Moscovici, S. (1988). Notes towards a Description of Social Representations. European Journal of Social Psychology, 18(3), 211-250. Nicholson, L. (1996). Per una interpretazione di “genere”, in Piccone Stella, S., Saraceno, C. (a cura di). Genere. La costruzione sociale del femminile e del maschile (pp.41-65) Bologna: Il Mulino. Sinclair, L. and Kunda, Z. (2000). Motivated stereotyping of women: she’s fine if she praised me but incompetent if she criticized me. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 1329-1342. Spence, J. T., & Buckner, C. E. (2000). Instrumental and expressive traits, traits stereotypes and sexist attitudes: What do they signify? Psychology of Women Quarterly, 24, 44-62. Spence, J. T., Helmreich, R., & Stapp, J. (1975). Rating of self and peers on sex role attributes and their relation to self-esteem and conceptions of masculinity and femininity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 29-39. Amancio, (2000). Gender and psychology. The analysis of an un happy marriage under the light of social representations, paper presented at the 5éme Conférence Internationale sur les Représentations Sociales/Fifth International Conference on Social Representations,CIRADE/ Université du Quebec, Montréal. Archer, J., & Lloyd, B. (2002). Sex and Gender. Cambridge: University Press. Arcuri, L., & Cadinu, M. R. (1998). Gli stereotipi. Bologna: Il Mulino. Bem, S. (1981). Gender schema theory: A cognitive account of sex typing. Psychological Review, 88, 354-364. Billig M. (1991). Ideology and opinions. Studies in rhetorical psychology. London: Sage. Camussi, & Leccardi, C. (2005). Stereotypes of working women: the power of expectations. Social Science Information, 44, 113-140. Cattaneo, Z., Vecchi, T. (2006). Psicologia delle differenze sessuali. Roma: Carocci. Deaux, K., La France, M. (1998). Gender, in Gilbert, D.T., Fiske, S.T., Lindzey, G. (eds.). The handbook of social psychology (4th ed., Vol. 1, pp.788-827), Boston: McGraw-Hill. Diekman, A.B., Eagly, A.H. (2000). Stereotypes as dynamic constructs: women and men of the past, present and future. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 1171-1188. Doise, W. (1982). L'explication en psychologie sociale. Paris: Presses Universitaries de France. Duveen, G. (1993). The development of social representations of gender. Papers on Social Representations, 2(3). Eagly, A.H. (1987). Sex Differences in Social Behavior: A Social Role Interpretation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Heilman, M.E., Block, C.J., Martell, R.F. (1995). Sex stereotypes: Do they influence perceptions of managers? Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 10, 237-253.