Gender Role Conformity

This blog is the first in a series that examines issues around gender roles, gender identity, and the heterosexual community’s response to lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender in general. We will also look at  how gay and lesbian individuals and organizations respond to transgender issues and individuals.

A few months ago, I wrote about an observation that a friend of mine (Dr. Cary Gabriel Costello) made in response to the results of a questionnaire he gave to students in his sociology of gender class. He asked his students to self-assess their gender role conformity, and what he found surprised him, surprised me, and will most likely surprise you, too!

The gay and lesbian students perceived themselves to not be gender conforming. In other words, gay males believed that they weren’t stereotypically male in appearance and behavior while lesbian females believed that they weren’t stereotypically female in appearance and behavior. On the other hand, the heterosexual males and females believed themselves to be gender conforming in appearance and behavior. In and of itself, that represents a pretty predictable situation. Surprisingly, however, on external observation Dr. Costello reported that the student’s perceptions were not accurate. In fact, the gay and lesbian students were more gender conforming that the heterosexual students.

When you consider this information against the truth that homophobic and intolerant individuals tend to persecute, threaten, and assault people who are not gender conforming, several questions arise – but I don’t believe that the questions are of equal importance. For example, why people’s self perception is inaccurate is less important than that it is inaccurate. On the other hand, when it comes to issues of persecution, threats, and assault I believe the most important question is why these things happen. What is it that makes a heterosexual male so threatened by a non-gender conforming individual that he becomes violent?

Dr. Costello points out that even the advertising and promotional material created by the gay and lesbian community is extremely gender identity conforming. The gay men in these materials tend to be extremely masculine and the lesbian women are stereotypically feminine. In doing so they present the homosexual community as monolithic – and no community is monolithic. Within the heterosexual population we find a spectrum of gender conformity. The same is true of the homosexual community, so why doesn’t the material generated by that community reflect its diversity? I would suggest they are sacrificing honesty on the altar of acceptance, and it’s not a good trade. Finally, there is the perception of both the bisexual and transgender communities that LGBT centers and advocates treat them as red-headed step children. It’s an accurate perception, easily verified by even a cursory examination of the materials at your local LGBT center.

Over my next several blogs I will be examining these and other important and related issues. I hope you will participate in the conversation!

2 thoughts on “Gender Role Conformity

  1. I think a part of this gender conformity thing has to do with black-and-white thinking. We have a tendency to want everything to be just-like-us and we tend to fear anything that isn’t. Aside from lesbian and gay gender conformity, transgender-ism and bisexuality to most people is very confusing. Combine that with traditional taboos and the anti-gay and anti-sex rhetoric of institutional religion and we wind up with a very dysfunctional view of society. The tendency to hate what we don’t like or understand in turn leads to violence against those who do not conform to our narrow conception of what we view as supposedly normal, of course our current economic conditions and recession don’t help matters. Then again the stranglehold against sex education by various groups, many of whom of the religious persuasion doesn’t help matters. Other.collegiate types would want to intellectualize the subject, but in my opinion the only way to do away with prejudice is to confront it face-to-face. Psychologically we call this Exposure Therapy or as my American Indian friends would explain simply “walk a mile in my moccasins” Of course this is only my humble opinion.

    1. Gary, I couldn’t agree more. I would add that the Christian religion (as opposed to Christian spirituality and the teachings of Jesus) has served only to make the problem worse. Self-righteous so-called Christians have appointed themselves judge, jury, and executioner of whatever they determine is outside the average. Oddly, that includes those both above the average and below the average. In this model, the simpleton determines that certain behavior is “Christian” and behavior that is different from “Christian” behavior is therefore bad. To add insult to injury, it’s not enough for these fools to declare behavior “bad” they also feel they must extinguish it. The fact that such beliefs and actions are completely inconsistent with the teachings of Jesus doesn’t bother these idiots one bit, because their definition of “Christianity” only uses Jesus as a get out of hell free card and fills in the enormous gaps left by excising Jesus with a conservative social and political agenda. It’s the same mentality that allowed the Nazi party to rise in Germany and the same mentality that allowed Wade Michael Page to walk into the Sikh Temple of Wisconsin last Sunday and start firing shots.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s