[soc.feminism] Androgyny Research Abstract part 1

bdelan@apple.com (Brian Delaney) (09/15/90)

Hi;

This is a post I made to alt.sex, in response to a post concerning men
getting in touch with their feminine side. I didn't think it fit in
there, but I had requests that I do so. I think that it fits in far
better here.  Tell me if you think I'm wrong.  For that matter, just
tell me what you think.


Begin (Crosspost)
*****************************************************
Hi, folks.

I mentioned awhile ago that I did a study of the research being done on 
androgyny. I mentioned that if people were interested, I might type the 
thing in and post it.

Well, much to my chagrin, I received mucho E-mail requesting that I do 
just that.  Since the only version I had was hard copy (my softcopy 
having been lost literally in the Oct 17th earthquake that Silicon Valley 
was blessed with),  I had a mondo typing job on my hands. Still, I was 
determined to make good on my word.

About 400 lines later I said screw it.  No way was I going to mess with 
this any longer.  Since OmniPage doesn't work on a Mac FX, I couldn't even 
use my OCR software. Besides, even *I* don't want to read more than a few  
pages of my verbal flatulence. I have no plans of inflicting any more of 
it on the Net.

So, what you see here is what you are going to get.  I've split it into 
two posts, because I've gotten some complaints concerning some hosts 
truncating posts after about 200 lines.  I've tried to include most of the 
relevant bits, and have indicated where I have left large portions out 
with a string of periods.  What I've ommitted is mostly just endless 
quotations of other studies coming to basically similar conclusions. I've 
tried to make this hack job flow, despite the cuts, but the job I've done 
is a reflection of the current hour of the morning. I have a list of 
references at the end of the second half.  I've tried to make sure that I 
pared the references down to only those studies I mention in the body of 
the paper, to reduce confusion, but I may have missed one or two.  The 
citation system I use is the one recognized by the American Psychological 
Association: alphabetical by researchers last name, with date.

tell me what you think.  It's a couple of years old, so some of the 
references may be out-dated. It's bloody long, but the topic is vast, so 
what do you want?  If you must flame, flame gently, I'm tired.

*******************************************************************
Androgyny Research Abstract


Sex roles in the United States are changing.  Behaviors and careers that 
were formerly the exclusive province of one sex or the other are becoming 
less differentiated.  Most of the political administration and media view 
this as a positive change. Much of the public seems to feel this way as 
well, despite occasional resistance on an individual basis. However, the 
basic question, "Are androgynous sex roles preferable to traditional 
ones?", has seldom been attacked directly. Indeed, it is frequently taken 
as a matter of faith. 

The most common definition of androgyny relies on an understanding of 
traditional sex roles.  It states that androgyny is the blending in one 
individual those traits traditionally ascribed to only one sex or the 
other.  What those precise traits are varies from culture to culture.
(Ravinder. 1987 )  To avoid this confusion, and to avoid the cultural bias 
carried in terms such as "masculine" and "feminine", the sociological 
community frequently uses different terminology.  The term used to 
describe traits that are typically assigned to males in the United States 
is "instrumental."  This applies to behaviors and values that are directed 
at the outside world and objective matters.  The term used to describe 
those traits usually assigned to females in this country is "expressive." 
This refers to behavior and values that are directed toward social bonds, 
emotions, and subjective matters.  An androgynous sex role model would 
blend these two sets of behaviors into an individual, irrespective of sex. 
( Orlofsky & O'Heron, 1987 )

The problem with this simple definition is that, by use of these terms, 
people are already androgynous.  Western males clearly hold values and 
exhibit behaviors that inarguably concern social bonds, emotions, and 
subjective matters.  And Western females clearly exhibit significant 
instrumental traits.  Researchers in the field of androgyny maintain that 
"instrumental" and "expressive" are relative terms, and that their 
connection to sex is in the preponderance of the values and behaviors 
exhibited by either gender.  In the United Sates, both male and female 
values include "instrumental" traits, but the male role emphasizes these 
traits.  Likewise, males and females exhibit "expressive" behavior, but the 
traditional American female role places relatively greater emphasis on it 
than does the male role  It is only in comparison to the traditional 
female role that the traditional male role may be termed "instrumental."  
Similarly, traditional female roles are "expressive" only relative to 
traditional male roles. ( Orlofsky & O'Heron, 1987 ). 

In order to avoid certain awkward phrases, for the rest of this paper, the 
term "masculine" will be used to describe that mix of instrumental and 
expressive traits that are usually ascribed to Western males. "Feminine" 
will likewise be used to describe that mix of instrumental and expressive 
traits typically taught to Western females.

. . . . . . . . . . . . .

Similarly, androgyny is a relative term. "Androgyny" could be defined as 
the state where all persons exhibit equal amounts of instrumental and 
expressive traits.  However, it could also be defined as a state where 
there are no observable differences in the values and behaviors taught to 
people of either sex. If a society teaches all of its members the values 
and behaviors typically associated with traditional female roles, has that 
society achieved androgyny?  Relative to itself, it has,  because the 
difference between the male and female roles has disappeared.  However, 
relative to another culture, which may have taught all of its members the 
male role, what it has achieved is not androgyny, but feminization.  And, 
in the eyes of the first culture, the second has achieved not androgyny, 
but masculinization. A culture which taught the full gamut of instrumental 
and expressive traits to all of its members would be viewed as excessively 
masculine or excessively feminine, depending on who was doing the 
observing.

To avoid this cultural relativist quandary,  for the rest of this paper, 
"androgyny" will be used to mean that the traditional American male role 
is expanded to include traditional American female expressive traits, and 
vice versa.

It is also important to distinguish between androgyny and sex role 
transcendence. In sex role transcendence, an individual simply acquires 
the characteristics of the other sex, and largely abandons their own. Thus 
a female executive, in adopting the traditional male role of "leader" 
would not qualify as androgynous unless she also displayed the traditional 
female behavior as well. Something like the difference between 
homosexuality and bisexuality.  There is some evidence to support the 
claim that, contrary to popular belief, it is sex role transcendence, not 
androgyny, that is a product of educated, middle class, Western societies. 
True androgyny is much more prevalent in certain traditional cultures, 
such as India. ( Ravinder, 1987 )

The question that this author will address is this: Is it preferable that 
this society encourage androgyny in place of traditional sex roles? ?

. . . . . . . . . 

It is sometimes argued that androgyny is more natural than traditional 
roles. This view holds that people are naturally androgynous, and that 
traditional roles are the result of repressing half of an individual's 
"natural" personality. Some people cite certain primitive and/or pagan 
cultures as evidence for this view. They point to the existence of 
androgynous behavior in these groups as evidence of "natural" human 
behavior.  This argument is appealing, but it is dangerous to try to draw 
any meaningful conclusions from these tribes. As Morris ( 1969 ) points 
out, the primitive cultures are invariably isolated, poor, stagnant, 
lacking any external competition, and distinctly out of the mainstream of 
cultural development. The examples of pagan cultures used to support this 
view are gone, or maintained only by fringe groups, and the extent to 
which they were truly androgynous can only be guessed at. These cultures 
may be examples, not of the essential nature of humanity, but instead of 
how far wrong a society can go and still survive.  For a more recent 
example, the Victorian Era in England succeeded in creating a society of 
people with a highly repressed attitude toward sex. This success in no way 
demonstrates that such an attitude is "natural."

Never the less, there is some evidence for the notion that androgyny may 
be a natural condition for some individuals. A study done at the 
University of North Carolina ( Baucom, Besch & Callahan; 1985 ) examined 
the correlation between testosterone levels in women and their sex role 
identity and personality. After the subjects completed the California 
Personality Inventory, and the Bem Sex-Role Inventory, their testosterone 
levels were tested from saliva samples. They found that those subjects 
rated as masculine or androgynous showed notably higher testosterone 
levels than those rated as feminine or undifferentiated. When the subjects 
completed the Adjective Check List, it was found that subjects with higher 
testosterone levels described themselves as self-directed, 
action-oriented, and resourceful. Subjects with lower testosterone levels 
described themselves as conventional, socialized individuals, possessing a 
caring attitude coupled with an anxious and dejected mood.  It was also 
found that testosterone level varied by occupation; lawyers having a high 
level of testosterone, and child care workers having very low levels.

It would thus seem that a tendency to androgynous behavior, at least in 
women, is coupled to a hormonal variation. There is no evidence that 
occupation can change the testosterone level in individuals, except for a 
negative coupling for men and stress.  Thus, one may conclude that certain 
people are genetically predisposed toward androgyny. A society that 
attempted to repress this would encounter varying sorts of resistance. 
However, if this hormonal variation is the source of androgynous behavior 
in women, then the strong correlation between testosterone levels and 
androgynous behavior would suggest that those people with such an 
inclination are already behaving in an androgynous fashion. Thus, while a 
practice of tolerance for androgyny would be advised, it would not be 
necessary to encourage it.

. . . . . . . . 

Another perspective might ask, "Who cares if it is natural or not?"  This 
view holds that the important issue is whether people are "happier" or 
"better adjusted" under androgyny.  The critical point to this approach, 
of course, is that we must carefully define what we mean by these terms.

One point of consideration is self-esteem. Most studies find a strong 
correlation between sex role and self-esteem. One study done at the 
University of Waterloo ( Myers & Finn, 1985 ) found that subjects with a 
highly masculine sex role had the highest self-esteem.  Androgynous 
individuals had a somewhat lower self-esteem, while those rated as 
feminine showed still lower, with the undifferentiated group rating lowest 
of all.  Another study done at the University of Santa Clara ( Wilemsen, 
1987 ) duplicated these findings.

The Willemsen study yielded a few other interesting findings. In men, 
sexual self-esteem was enhanced by masculinity and depressed by 
femininity, whereas the reverse was true for women. As might be expected. 
However, on the theory that social bonding was properly part of the 
feminine behavior domain, it was predicted that social self-esteem would 
be positively correlated with femininity. Instead, it was found that 
social self-esteem was best predicted by a high masculinity score. It was 
also found that a need for uniqueness was a very important aspect of 
self-esteem for women, especially androgynous women. It was not a 
significant aspect of male self-esteem. This raises the question of 
whether a need to be unique is a significant factor in androgynous 
behavior for women. On the other hand, its failure to be a significant 
issue in males may be due to the higher social esteem and status 
associated with traditional male roles.

. . . . . . 

Relying as it does upon an element of self-description, the use of 
self-esteem as an indicator may be moderated by a sex-role dependent 
narcissism. At the University of Tennessee, ( Watson, Taylor & Morris; 
1987 ), a study was undertaken to examine this connection between sex role 
and narcissism.  The researchers compared scores on the Bem Sex Role 
Inventory with scores on the Narcissistic Personality Inventory and the 
Narcissistic Personality Disorder Scale, along with measures of 
self-esteem and depression. Contrary to prediction, males and subjects 
rated as masculine were not found to have a higher incidence of 
maladaptive narcissism. They further found that a healthy and adjusted 
narcissism was more obvious in males and masculine subjects. It also 
developed that femininity seemed to inhibit the obvious display, though 
not existence, of an unhealthy exploitative self-concern. Androgyny did 
not appear to be the healthiest sex role, though the researchers 
acknowledged the need for more study.

. . . . . . . . .

Another study at Emory University examined the connection between sex role 
and a tolerance for ambiguity.  ( Heilburn, 1894 ) Defined as the degree 
to which people suspend the attribution of meaning to unclear or ambiguous 
stimulation; it was found that androgynous females were less tolerant of 
ambiguity than were females rating as feminine. Tolerance for ambiguity in 
males was, in general, higher than in females, and showed no difference 
between masculine, and androgynous males.

However, Heilburn also included a Chapin Social Insight Test, a test of 
the ability to read facial expressions, to one of the test groups. It 
found that a combination of a low tolerance for ambiguity, and androgyny, 
correlated to an enhanced ability to read facial expressions and to apply 
this information to social situations. This correlation was particularly 
strong for androgynous women. No mechanism for this correlation was 
suggested. One can easily imagine situations where an enhanced ability to 
read facial expressions would be an advantage. It is less clear how a 
reduced tolerance for ambiguity would be beneficial.

. . . . . . . . . . . . 

One situation where the enhanced ability to read facial expressions would 
be helpful is in the business world. But, this realm is very complex. For 
instance, Kushell and Newton (1986 ) found that the leadership style 
exhibited by androgynous managers produced more satisfied subordinates. 
However, the study simply assumed that happier workers are more 
productive. A study done by Ikhlas Abdalla ( 1987 ) found that androgynous 
leaders do indeed produce the most satisfied sub-ordinates, but only in 
very special industries, such as public service industries, or where the 
majority of the sub-ordinates are female. It was also found that while 
androgynous leaders were better liked in these specific circumstances, the 
average productivity in these groups was somewhat lower than in those 
managed by more masculine managers.

Another study  ( Porter, Geis & Cooper, 1985 ) did not confirm this 
finding.  Instead, it was found that while androgynous managers are about 
equal to more masculine individuals in management skills, it appears that 
androgynous people make poorer followers. It found that a better predictor 
of group productivity was the sex role orientation, not of the manager, 
but of the sub-ordinates. Neither masculine, feminine, not androgynous 
managers were able to get the productivity of largely androgynous work 
groups top match that of more traditionally differentiated groups.

. . . . . . . . . . . 

Given the very high concentration of men in our prisons, it is tempting to 
examine the connection between sex role and crime. A study done at 
Louisiana State University ( Campbell, MacKenzie & Robinson; 1987 ), 
examined 141 incarcerated adult female offenders. It was found that those 
inmates testing as masculine or feminine were more likely to be 
incarcerated for a violent crime, such as murder, than were women rating 
as androgynous. Furthermore, women with a masculine sex role orientation 
were far more likely to be multiple offenders than were feminine or 
androgynous women. However, if the Baucom, Besch, and Callahan study on 
sex role and testosterone level is reliable, then it may develop that this 
behavior is largely hormonal in origin. If this is true, than encouraging 
androgyny may not affect these behaviors.

***************************************
end part 1


***************************************************************************
Brian "High Tech Sex and Affordable Firepower" Delaney
Disclaimer: NOBODY, least of all Apple, thinks the way I do.
***************************************************************************