Gender expression: Difference between revisions
Fix cite date error |
Revert. More WP:Synthesis. And we already mention Yogyakarta Principles; all it needs is a brief mention. |
||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
== Confusion between gender expression and sexuality == |
== Confusion between gender expression and sexuality == |
||
While gender expression does not necessarily connect to sexuality, individuals often are misinterpreted as more masculine if [[lesbian]] and more feminine if [[gay]], regardless of the individual's gender expression. These beliefs can lead to people misinterpreting an individual's gender expression based on their sexuality. Studies on adolescents conducted by Stacey Horn, showed that gay and lesbian individuals who did not express themselves as their assigned gender were seen as less acceptable. Individuals who expressed themselves with their assigned gender typically faced less social harassment and discrimination. On the other hand, [[heterosexual]] males whose gender expression was more feminine than masculine were the most discriminated against.<ref>Horn, Stacey S. “Adolescents’ Acceptance of Same-Sex Peers Based on Sexual Orientation and Gender Expression.” ''Journal of Youth and Adolescence'', vol. 36, no. 3, 2007, pp. 373–373., doi:10.1007/s10964-007-9176-4.</ref> |
While gender expression does not necessarily connect to sexuality, individuals often are misinterpreted as more masculine if [[lesbian]] and more feminine if [[gay]], regardless of the individual's gender expression. These beliefs can lead to people misinterpreting an individual's gender expression based on their sexuality. Studies on adolescents conducted by Stacey Horn, showed that gay and lesbian individuals who did not express themselves as their assigned gender were seen as less acceptable. Individuals who expressed themselves with their assigned gender typically faced less social harassment and discrimination. On the other hand, [[heterosexual]] males whose gender expression was more feminine than masculine were the most discriminated against.<ref>Horn, Stacey S. “Adolescents’ Acceptance of Same-Sex Peers Based on Sexual Orientation and Gender Expression.” ''Journal of Youth and Adolescence'', vol. 36, no. 3, 2007, pp. 373–373., doi:10.1007/s10964-007-9176-4.</ref> |
||
| Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
Epidemiological data suggest that gay men are at particular risk for such crime, comprising over 53 percent of those targeted in bias – motivated offenses. However, it is notable that of those men victimized by the most extreme forms of crime, anti – gay homicide, it has been estimated that 8 percent of this population were heterosexual men who likely deviated from gender role norms of behavior and were targeted on the basis of perpetrator assumptions about their sexual orientation - statistics clearly establish the deviation from heterosexual norms in both gay and heterosexual men as a risk factor for victimization. The ultimate reason that the statistics have been established such a significant victimization between heterosexual men and homosexual men is because of the theory of ‘Exclusively Masculine Identity’. It posits that men strive to achieve and maintain an ideal self that marked by masculine characteristics, and that this masculinized ideal self is accompanied by a strong avoidance of an undesired self, which marked by feminine characteristics. It is true that researchers have long included anti – femininity as a necessary component of the traditional masculine role, which predicts the social expression of masculinity on behavior that reduce any stimuli perceived as feminine. It follows the possession of a masculinized ideal self, and a feminized undesired self, as a part and parcel of traditional or exclusive masculine identity, may largely explain widespread misogynistic and heterosexist attitudes. There are several empirical studies conducted under laboratory condition – in the United States – and shown that the violations of exclusive masculine identity are introduced through the depictions two men kissing (male – male physical and sexual intimacy), which aggression has been measured in terms of shocks administered to ostensible opponents under the guise of a reaction time component. These studies have consistently yielded evidence for men’s increased aggression toward gay men, especially when men’s increased aggression toward gay men and endorse negative attitudes toward male homosexuality. Furthermore, women’s non conforming gender expression communicates gender through behavioral and other over cues, such as attire, hair style, body posture, mannerisms, increase risk of aggressive victimization – either showing less feminine or more feminine would cause the severity of victimization at different level. These data suggest that gender expression may also play an important role in the perpetration of bias motivated aggression against men, an effect that may be overlooked when examined from an anti gay framework.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Sloan|first=Colleen A.|last2=Berke|first2=Danielle S.|last3=Zeichner|first3=Amos|date=February 2015|title=Bias-motivated Aggression against Men: Gender Expression and Sexual Orientation as Risk Factors for Victimization|url=http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11199-014-0443-z|journal=Sex Roles|volume=72|issue=3-4|pages=140–149|doi=10.1007/s11199-014-0443-z|issn=0360-0025}}</ref> |
Epidemiological data suggest that gay men are at particular risk for such crime, comprising over 53 percent of those targeted in bias – motivated offenses. However, it is notable that of those men victimized by the most extreme forms of crime, anti – gay homicide, it has been estimated that 8 percent of this population were heterosexual men who likely deviated from gender role norms of behavior and were targeted on the basis of perpetrator assumptions about their sexual orientation - statistics clearly establish the deviation from heterosexual norms in both gay and heterosexual men as a risk factor for victimization. The ultimate reason that the statistics have been established such a significant victimization between heterosexual men and homosexual men is because of the theory of ‘Exclusively Masculine Identity’. It posits that men strive to achieve and maintain an ideal self that marked by masculine characteristics, and that this masculinized ideal self is accompanied by a strong avoidance of an undesired self, which marked by feminine characteristics. It is true that researchers have long included anti – femininity as a necessary component of the traditional masculine role, which predicts the social expression of masculinity on behavior that reduce any stimuli perceived as feminine. It follows the possession of a masculinized ideal self, and a feminized undesired self, as a part and parcel of traditional or exclusive masculine identity, may largely explain widespread misogynistic and heterosexist attitudes. There are several empirical studies conducted under laboratory condition – in the United States – and shown that the violations of exclusive masculine identity are introduced through the depictions two men kissing (male – male physical and sexual intimacy), which aggression has been measured in terms of shocks administered to ostensible opponents under the guise of a reaction time component. These studies have consistently yielded evidence for men’s increased aggression toward gay men, especially when men’s increased aggression toward gay men and endorse negative attitudes toward male homosexuality. Furthermore, women’s non conforming gender expression communicates gender through behavioral and other over cues, such as attire, hair style, body posture, mannerisms, increase risk of aggressive victimization – either showing less feminine or more feminine would cause the severity of victimization at different level. These data suggest that gender expression may also play an important role in the perpetration of bias motivated aggression against men, an effect that may be overlooked when examined from an anti gay framework.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Sloan|first=Colleen A.|last2=Berke|first2=Danielle S.|last3=Zeichner|first3=Amos|date=February 2015|title=Bias-motivated Aggression against Men: Gender Expression and Sexual Orientation as Risk Factors for Victimization|url=http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11199-014-0443-z|journal=Sex Roles|volume=72|issue=3-4|pages=140–149|doi=10.1007/s11199-014-0443-z|issn=0360-0025}}</ref> |
||
== Gender Expression Movements == |
|||
=== [[Yogyakarta Principles]] === |
|||
The Yogyakarta principles are the first universal principles created to re-establish human rights in the context of sexual orientation and gender identity(SOGI) and therefore the inclusion and representation of all gender expressions.These principals were founded in 2006 by a group of human rights experts<ref>{{Cite journal|date=2009-12-01|title=Conclusions of the Workshop on the Role of National Human Rights Institutions in the Promotion and Implementation of the Yogyakarta Principles|url=https://brill.com/abstract/journals/aphu/10/2/article-p114_6.xml|journal=Asia-Pacific Journal on Human Rights and the Law|volume=10|issue=2|pages=114–120|doi=10.1163/138819010X12647506166636|issn=1388-1906}}</ref> who came together in Yogyakarta, Indonesia to address the history of injustice towards those who vary on the spectrum of SOGI.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Tozzi|first=Piero|date=2007|title=Six Problems with the 'Yogyakarta Principles'|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1551652|journal=SSRN Electronic Journal|doi=10.2139/ssrn.1551652|issn=1556-5068}}</ref> The principles are translated into all six languages of the United nations: English, Spanish French, Russian, Arabic and Chinese<ref>{{Cite journal|date=2009-08-01|title=Yogyakarta Principles on the Application of International Human Rights Law in relation to Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/157181509789025200|journal=Asia-Pacific Journal on Human Rights and the Law|volume=9|issue=2|pages=86–113|doi=10.1163/157181509789025200|issn=1388-1906}}</ref> under the common mission to create a universal law of human rights that promote the equal rights of all gender expressions, identities and sexual orientations. These principles address today's understanding of the diverse population in context of gender and sexuality and is constructed to be changed and revised regularly. The most recent addition to the Principles was added in November 2017 with the addition of ten new principles, making the [[Yogyakarta Principles]] + 10.<ref name="APA2015" /> The addition also added one-hundred and eleven state obligations. In the context of gender expression, these principles are a huge movement towards acceptance, understanding and knowledge of differentiating gender expressions. The principles include and protect the rights of all gender expressions and aims to create a clear understanding of what the differentiating definitions of SOGI are. Gender expression being defined as the expression of one's gender through their physical appearance which is different then their [[gender identity]]. The full text of the Yogyakarta Principles and the Yogyakarta Principles plus 10 are available at: [[www.yogyakartaprinciples.org]] [4/3/2019]. |
|||
=== [[Pride parade|PRIDE]] === |
|||
Pride is a movement that started in 1970 as a response to the [[Stonewall riots]] in New York in 1969,<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Armstrong|first=Elizabeth A.|last2=Crage|first2=Suzanna M.|date=October 2006|title=Movements and Memory: The Making of the Stonewall Myth|url=http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/000312240607100502|journal=American Sociological Review|volume=71|issue=5|pages=724–751|doi=10.1177/000312240607100502|issn=0003-1224}}</ref> which brought together the LGBT+ community to march and fight for against suppression and for equal representation and rights in the United States. These marches have continued since and to this day unify the LGBT+ community and their allies through celebration and promoting social justice and equality. The Pride movement takes form in local organizations and their well-known Pride parade. The [[Pride parade|Pride Parade]]'s were originally held in Los Angeles, New York and Chicago to represent the vulnerable [[LGBT community|LGBT+ community.]] Today there are Pride organizations in almost every major city in the United States such as [[San Francisco Pride|SF Pride]] <ref>{{Cite book|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.18574/nyu/9781479803613.001.0001|title=Pride Parades|last=Bruce|first=Katherine McFarland|date=2016-10-04|publisher=NYU Press|isbn=9781479803613}}</ref> and [[Los Angeles Pride|LA Pride.]] Pride organizations are also held in many progressive countries throughout the world and continue to spread to more countries. For example, Gay Pride France has been held since 1993 to unite and celebrate France's gay community.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.gaypride.fr/|title=GayPride|website=Gaypride|language=fr-FR|access-date=2019-04-03}}</ref> Pride has even made its way into high schools as youth and teachers have created Pride clubs in high schools and colleges across the United States. In the context of gender expression, the Pride movement has and continues to empower the freedom to express the gender one chooses. Furthermore, Pride celebrates the freedom of gender expression and aims to create equality and acceptance of expressions that fall outside of the binary gender constructs. Although, as Pride has become a very popular movement, the parade itself has been questioned for becoming normalized. The parade's continually draw in more participant's with its growing popularity. Many of this population would fall under the category of LGBT+ allies. As the population of participant's are people would fall under the norm of gender and sexual orientation, the parade has been critiqued as a place to party for privileged and educated members of society.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Peterson|first=Abby|last2=Wahlström|first2=Mattias|last3=Wennerhag|first3=Magnus|date=October 2018|title=‘Normalized’ Pride? Pride parade participants in six European countries|url=http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1363460717715032|journal=Sexualities|volume=21|issue=7|pages=1146–1169|doi=10.1177/1363460717715032|issn=1363-4607}}</ref> |
|||
== Prominent Figures == |
|||
In the 1960's the binary gender construction was challenged with unisex fashion that rebelled against traditional dress associated with masculinity and femininity. Prominent figures like [[the Beatles]]<ref>{{Cite book|url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/918940898|title=Dressing for the culture wars : style and the politics of self-presentation in the 1960s and 1970s|last=Luther Hillman, Betty.|isbn=9780803284449|location=Lincoln|oclc=918940898}}</ref> set the tone for boy's having long hair, while other's like [[David Bowie]] brought about the discussion of [[Gender fluidity|Gender Fluidity]]<nowiki/>and freedom of gender expression. Bowie's different persona's he used while performing along with his music challenged the confinements of gender and give a voice to those who lived outside the norm of [[binary gender]] constructs.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Bradley|first=Peri|last2=Page|first2=James|date=2017-07-04|title=David Bowie – the trans who fell to earth: cultural regulation, Bowie and gender fluidity|url=https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10304312.2017.1334389|journal=Continuum|volume=31|issue=4|pages=583–595|doi=10.1080/10304312.2017.1334389|issn=1030-4312}}</ref> |
|||
==See also== |
==See also== |
||
*[[Bem Sex-Role Inventory]] |
*[[Bem Sex-Role Inventory]] |
||
*[[Gender identity|Gender Identity]] |
|||
*[[Gender fluidity|Gender Fluidity]] |
|||
*[[David Bowie]] |
|||
*[[Pride parade|Pride Parade]] |
|||
*[[San Francisco Pride]] |
|||
*[[Los Angeles Pride]] |
|||
*[[LGBT|LGBT+]] |
|||
*[[Yogyakarta Principles]] |
|||
*[[The Beatles]] |
|||
*[[Gender binary|Gender Binary]] |
|||
*[[Stonewall riots]] |
|||
== References == |
== References == |
||
Revision as of 02:23, 4 April 2019
 | It has been suggested that this article be merged into Gender role. (Discuss) Proposed since December 2018. |
A gender expression is a person's behavior, mannerisms, interests, and appearance that are associated with gender in a particular cultural context, specifically with the categories of femininity or masculinity. This also includes gender roles. These categories rely on stereotypes about gender.
Definitions
Gender expression typically reflects a person's gender identity (their internal sense of their own gender), but this is not always the case.[1][2] Gender expression is separate and independent both from sexual orientation and gender assigned at birth. A type of gender expression that is considered atypical for a person's externally perceived gender may be described as gender non-conforming.
In men and boys, typical or masculine gender expression is often described as manly, while atypical or feminine expression is known as effeminate. In girls and young women, atypically masculine expression is called tomboyish. In lesbian and queer women, masculine and feminine expressions are known as butch and femme respectively. A mixture of typical and atypical expression may be described as androgynous. A type of expression that is perceived as neither typically feminine or masculine can be described as gender-neutral or undifferentiated.
The term gender expression is used in the Yogyakarta Principles, which concern the application of international human rights law in relation to sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression and sex characteristics.[3]
Confusion between gender expression and sexuality
While gender expression does not necessarily connect to sexuality, individuals often are misinterpreted as more masculine if lesbian and more feminine if gay, regardless of the individual's gender expression. These beliefs can lead to people misinterpreting an individual's gender expression based on their sexuality. Studies on adolescents conducted by Stacey Horn, showed that gay and lesbian individuals who did not express themselves as their assigned gender were seen as less acceptable. Individuals who expressed themselves with their assigned gender typically faced less social harassment and discrimination. On the other hand, heterosexual males whose gender expression was more feminine than masculine were the most discriminated against.[4]
"The heterosexuality matrix" theory created by gender theorist Judith Butler posits that people often assume someone's sexuality based on their visible gender and sex. Lisa Disch states that it explains why people tend to assume someone's gender expression based on their sex and sexuality.[5]
Victimization
In terms of gender expression, there are various studies have researched and examined the relationship between gender expression and childhood. Simply put, if one’s gender expression is seen as ‘gender non conforming’, it has been related with being bullied, such as childhood harassment, and parental physical abuse among sexual minority men in both the US and Austria. Furthermore, gender nonconformity in adulthood among gay and bisexual men has been associated with parental, maternal, and peer rejection in childhood. Not only males, but in a study that included both male and female youth, LGBs who were gender nonconforming reported more victimization experiences – it is possible that a similar association with adverse childhood experiences holds for sexual minority women who are gender non conforming. Although this issue has not yet been fully examined and researched, a few studies have suggested that gender non conformity among women may be positively associated with their victimization as children. In a survey administered to the U.S. army soldiers, current masculinity among women – seen as macho traits such as arrogance and boastfulness – was significantly associated with both childhood physical and emotional abuse, but childhood sexual abuse was associated with traditionally ‘feminine’ current characteristics.[6]
However, not only sexual minorities are experiencing sexual orientation and gender expression (SOGE) – based victimization, but also heterosexuals as well. SOGE – based victimization is associated with a range of health and academic concerns such as greater depressive and anxiety symptoms, substance use, lower school belonging, and greater truancy. So, SOGE – based victimization highlights the importance of incorporating both individual and contextual factors related to bias and discrimination that contribute to school truancy for sexual minority and heterosexual students; students indirectly related truancy, which gives them to feeling more unsafe at school. Furthermore, over and above student’s own direct experiences of SOGE based victimization, their perceptions of a negative SOGE – based school climate accounted for even higher rates of truancy and associated with bivariate level. Conspicuously, the size of this association did not differ for heterosexual and sexual minority youth. Even though the majority of prior research on SOGE based victimization has been conducted among sexual minority students, more recent studies have shown that heterosexual students also experience this type of victimization, such as bullying or harassment based on students’ actual or perceived sexual orientation and gender expression (SOGE) – and with similar consequences.[7]
Epidemiological data suggest that gay men are at particular risk for such crime, comprising over 53 percent of those targeted in bias – motivated offenses. However, it is notable that of those men victimized by the most extreme forms of crime, anti – gay homicide, it has been estimated that 8 percent of this population were heterosexual men who likely deviated from gender role norms of behavior and were targeted on the basis of perpetrator assumptions about their sexual orientation - statistics clearly establish the deviation from heterosexual norms in both gay and heterosexual men as a risk factor for victimization. The ultimate reason that the statistics have been established such a significant victimization between heterosexual men and homosexual men is because of the theory of ‘Exclusively Masculine Identity’. It posits that men strive to achieve and maintain an ideal self that marked by masculine characteristics, and that this masculinized ideal self is accompanied by a strong avoidance of an undesired self, which marked by feminine characteristics. It is true that researchers have long included anti – femininity as a necessary component of the traditional masculine role, which predicts the social expression of masculinity on behavior that reduce any stimuli perceived as feminine. It follows the possession of a masculinized ideal self, and a feminized undesired self, as a part and parcel of traditional or exclusive masculine identity, may largely explain widespread misogynistic and heterosexist attitudes. There are several empirical studies conducted under laboratory condition – in the United States – and shown that the violations of exclusive masculine identity are introduced through the depictions two men kissing (male – male physical and sexual intimacy), which aggression has been measured in terms of shocks administered to ostensible opponents under the guise of a reaction time component. These studies have consistently yielded evidence for men’s increased aggression toward gay men, especially when men’s increased aggression toward gay men and endorse negative attitudes toward male homosexuality. Furthermore, women’s non conforming gender expression communicates gender through behavioral and other over cues, such as attire, hair style, body posture, mannerisms, increase risk of aggressive victimization – either showing less feminine or more feminine would cause the severity of victimization at different level. These data suggest that gender expression may also play an important role in the perpetration of bias motivated aggression against men, an effect that may be overlooked when examined from an anti gay framework.[8]
See also
References
- ^ Summers, Randal W. (2016). Social Psychology: How Other People Influence Our Thoughts and Actions [2 volumes]. ABC-CLIO. p. 232. ISBN 9781610695923.
- ^ American Psychological Association (December 2015). "Guidelines for Psychological Practice With Transgender and Gender Nonconforming People" (PDF). American Psychologist. 70 (9): 861. doi:10.1037/a0039906.
- ^ Yogyakarta Principles plus 10
- ^ Horn, Stacey S. “Adolescents’ Acceptance of Same-Sex Peers Based on Sexual Orientation and Gender Expression.” Journal of Youth and Adolescence, vol. 36, no. 3, 2007, pp. 373–373., doi:10.1007/s10964-007-9176-4.
- ^ Disch, Lisa. "Judith Butler and the Politics of the Performative." Political Theory, vol. 27, no. 4, 1999, pp. 545–559., doi:10.1177/0090591799027004006.
- ^ Lehavot, Keren; Molina, Yamile; Simoni, Jane M. (September 2012). "Childhood Trauma, Adult Sexual Assault, and Adult Gender Expression among Lesbian and Bisexual Women". Sex Roles. 67 (5–6): 272–284. doi:10.1007/s11199-012-0171-1. ISSN 0360-0025. PMC 3758810. PMID 24003263.
- ^ Poteat, V. Paul; Berger, Christian; Dantas, Julio (2017-10-02). "How victimization, climate, and safety around sexual orientation and gender expression relate to truancy". Journal of LGBT Youth. 14 (4): 424–435. doi:10.1080/19361653.2017.1365037. ISSN 1936-1653.
- ^ Sloan, Colleen A.; Berke, Danielle S.; Zeichner, Amos (February 2015). "Bias-motivated Aggression against Men: Gender Expression and Sexual Orientation as Risk Factors for Victimization". Sex Roles. 72 (3–4): 140–149. doi:10.1007/s11199-014-0443-z. ISSN 0360-0025.
Bibliography
- Serano, Julia (2016). Whipping Girl: A transsexual woman on sexism and the scapegoating of femininity (2nd ed.), Berkeley, CA: Seal Press.