When Biological Sex and Gender Identity Don't Align: Policing Practices

In the 1970s, feminist scholars challenged the assumption that masculine behaviors were the sole and most desirable traits in men and feminine attributes aligned solely with womanhood. In particular, Bem (1974), a feminist psychologist, argued that masculinity and femininity can be understood as socially constructed, multiple, and changeable, rather than viewed as fixed biological essences.

Feminists such as Brownmiller (1975) and Morgan (1970) questioned the patriarchal nature of Western culture, where women were paid lower wages, had fewer chances at career advancement, and lacked access to political office and leadership positions. They explored ways in which gender roles are “policed” in our culture. Indeed, tremendous social consequences await those who do not conform to gender roles in Western culture (Gagne, Tewksbury, & McGaughey, 1997; Skidmore, Linsenmeier, & Bailey, 2006; Witten & Eyler, 1999). “There is not a single word for people who don’t fit gender norms that is positive, affirming, and complimentary” (Wilchins, 2004, p. 38).

Girls/women who exhibit masculine behavioral traits are sometimes labeled “tomboys” and boys/men who exhibit feminine traits are labeled “sissies” or “girlyboys.” But “tomboy” is often used as an indulgent, amused term, indicating “she’ll grow out of it,” whereas the policing practices are far harsher for boys. Quite simply, men and masculine traits are more highly valued in Western culture than are women and feminine traits (Bowers & Bieschke, 2005; Morrow, 2000; Skidmore et al., 2006). Gender-nonconforming boys more than girls tend to suffer rejection by peers and parents, particularly by their fathers (LaMar & Kite, 1998; Landolt, Bartholomew, Saffrey, Oram, & Perlman, 2004; Skidmore et al., 2006). Hatred of feminine attributes in men is considered to be the cornerstone of masculinity in our culture (Herek, 1989, 2002a; Herek & Capitanio, 1996; Kimmel & Mahler, 2003).