Summary
Society changes its ideas about masculinity and femininity over time, sometimes even giving rise to new concepts. In this regard, sociologists and specialists in gender studies may ask a logical question about measuring masculinity and femininity with their modified properties. BSRI usually captures society’s characteristics (60 pieces) of men and women. This organization describes masculine behavior and feminine behavior. In these descriptions, society is guided by current and popular stereotypes, which are also dynamic and need to be measured. In addition, BSRI allows you to find out the current social desirability for men and women, that is, the presence of welcome character traits. New research in this area will allow BSRI to become the most flexible tool.
The authors rely on the works of Bem S.L., written from 1974 to 1998. Bem is the developer of the BSRI, who created the framework of the BSRI, its short version, and various forms. For example, Bem (1993) shows readers that they must “resist the lenses of gender that structure our perception of the world in female and male categories, thereby imposing severe limitations on both sexes.” p 42.
Hypothesis 1: So-called masculine traits and feminine traits are mutually exclusive.
This can be seen in comparative studies in the 20th century and in the 21st century with the help of BSRI.
Hypothesis 2: There are relationships that are suggested to exist between ‘masculine,’ ‘feminine,’ ‘androgynous,’ or ‘undifferentiated’ individuals and various other traits, roles, or behaviors.
Method
273 women, 98 men; 17 to 46 years (M = 20.45, SD = 4.12, Mdn = 19).
Students completed the BSRI as a self-report, and after finishing it, the researchers asked them to carefully consider each of the 60 items. The students were asked to divide 60 items into three groups: men’s, women’s, and neutral. Student participation was voluntary, and their results were immediately recorded and calculated by one of the researchers, R. M. Hoffman.
Results
a) The authors found significant discrepancies between students’ results if they filled out different survey forms: full or abbreviated. In addition, the percentage results could vary depending on the scoring model. b) Students showed 75% agreement, which is considered a very high result for public acceptability. It shows that the survey students are primarily free from bone stereotypes and are not so strict in their judgments about gender and habits.
The authors did not confirm hypothesis 1, and investigators found that students are not inclined to hang strict labels associated with femininity and masculinity. No traits were identified that could only be valid for women but not for men, or vice versa. Hypothesis 2 was also not confirmed but was not wholly refuted either. The authors did not find a clear and close connection between the concepts, and people now tend to avoid dichotomy in the definition of male and female. The authors did not confirm the hypotheses because the BSRI is a somewhat restrictive tool, and it is impossible to use it to identify precise and global results. In addition, the interviewed people tended not to refer to the phenomena of femininity and masculinity with stereotypes.
Discussion
Possible implications are a better understanding of how the BSRI works and what samples this particular species of piglet might fit. The study showed that previous authors of similar experiments unfairly globalized the results obtained using BSRI. This study demonstrates what mistakes can be made when using BSRI. The authors give recommendations and explanations on how to avoid these errors.
The authors could conduct several studies within one so that the results obtained would be more credible, as they would be received in different places. It is also possible that surveys among students make sense to find out exactly how young people feel about specific issues. Still, within the framework of gender studies, it would be interesting to find out the opinion of older people in contrast. Within the framework of this particular study, it would be appropriate to propose parallel studies among a group or groups of students and their teachers. Limitations include a monotonous sample and too low representation of men in the selection. The last limitation is possibly related to the low-level stereotyping recorded by the survey.
References
Hoffman, R. M., & Borders, L. D. (2001). Twenty-five years after the bem sex-Role inventory: A reassessment and new issues regarding classification variability. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 34(1), 39–55.