Androgyny, psychological
From WikEd
Descriptions and Definitions
Androgyny refers to two concepts. The first is the mixing of masculine and feminine characteristics, be it for example in the loud fashion statements of musicians like Ziggy Stardust or the balance of "anima" and "animus" in Jungian psychoanalytic theory. Secondly, it describes something that is neither masculine nor feminine, for example the Hijras of India who are often described as "neither man nor woman" (Wikipedia, 2005). It is important to more clearly define the Hijras from the brief reference above. Hijra is the most common term used to refer to the male to female transgenders and intersexuals of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. There are two ways to become a Hijra: being born as an intersexual or hermaphrodite, or being born with a male body but with a feminine gender identity. The popular reply given by Hijras is that you don't "become" one; you are either born that way and know it from one's earliest memories or not. There is a strong cultural emphasis within this subculture - Hijras often form independent communities and share resources (common behaviors that appear across marginalized groups). Though they often make a living through performance art and street dancing, this is a community that is ridiculed, misunderstood, and poorly defined as well as revered and mysticized.
Androgynous traits are those that either have no gender value, or have some aspects generally attributed to the opposite gender. Physiological androgyny, dealing with physical traits, is distinct from behavioral androgyny which deals with personal and social anomalies in gender, and from psychological androgyny, which is a matter of gender identity. A psychologically androgynous person is commonly known as an androgyne, although there is a politicized version known as gender queer (Wikipedia, 2005).
To say that a culture or relationship is androgynous is to say that it lacks rigid gender roles and that the people involved display characteristics or partake in activities traditionally associated with the other gender. The term androgynous is often used to refer to a person whose look or build make determining their gender difficult but is generally not used as a synonym for actual intersexuality or transgender or two-spirit status of people (Wikipedia, 2005).
As stated above, there are two definitions for androgyny: physical (intersexual)-born with both male and female genitals; and psychological-combining both masculinity and femininity as traits of a unified gender that defies social roles and psychological attributes. The common usage of the term androgyny in society refers to the latter description. As to the sexual orientation, an androgynous person can be heterosexual, homosexual or bisexual (http://uniorb.com, 2005).
Androgyny in Society
In fact, evidence of androgyny being embraced by society appears everywhere including institutionalized in entertainment and fashion cultures, more explicityly in expanding gay and lesbian communities. As trendsetters, entertainment and fashion industries have played an influential role in advancing a challenging perspective on human sexuality for modern times. In the 1980’s, androgynous musicians –Boy George, David Bowie, and Prince- made headlines as they captured the world’s fascination with sexual ambiguity. Perceived as a worldwide idol, Michael Jackson personifies androgyny with his falsetto voice and effeminate manners. Since the 1980’s, Hollywood has produced movies depicting sensuous beatuies -Sharon Stone in Basic Instinct, Milla Jovovich in Resident Evil: Apocalypes, and Uma Thurman in Kill Bill -as intelligent, tough, and strong adversaries in leading roles. Nowadays, female stars are expeected to perform equally well in all the exciting moves and dangerous students as their male counterparts (http://uniorb.com, 2005).
Capitalizing the growing social affinity to androgyny, the fashion industry promoted the meteoric rises of fashion designers –Helmut Lang, Giorgio Armani, Pierre Cardin, to name a few- for their unisex-styled clothes. To this day, glamourous male and female models sporting androgynous garments have often been found strutting down catwalks or posing for the covers of fashion magazines. Recently, the cosmetic companieshave joined in to lure metrosexuals (aesthetically conscientious straight men) to the lucrative markets of beauty products which once were considered exclusively for women. As reports trickled in, cosmetic surgeries have surged for both women and men in North America, Europe and Asia (http://uniorb.com, 2005).
During the ‘counter-culture’ revolution in the 1960’s, music and fashion industries inspired a trend towards self-exploration emphasizing individual freedom and self-realization. The women’s liberation movement of the 1970’s refuted the idea that women were naturally passive, emotional, and weaker than men. The notion of androgyny was not accepted in society until Dr. Sandra Bem introduced the concept of Psychological Androgyny to describe those men and women who did not fit into traditionally defined gender roles. She also forwarded the view that a blending of masculine and feminie dispositions is more adaptive than stereotypic emphasis on either alone. At the heels of Bem’s revelation, the gay liberation movement embraced the idea of androgyny, for it allowed lesbians and gay men to show their gender characteristics openly in society. Subsequently, the prevailing wind for social changes altered the preception of human nature consisting of opposite sex roles to human nature unifying two complimentary sex roles as a legitimate gender (http://uniorb.com, 2005).
The spread of the androgyny movement could also be fueled by the economic transformation of the workforce in developed countries. As nations became more affluent, greater amount of energy was required for production, thus businesses demanded a larger number of workers (men and women) to the workforce. The economic situations of wealthy nations enabled women to work with men as equals due to the current elevated women’s status in male-oriented societies (http://uniorb.com, 2005).
As a result, many rich nations have observed similar findings: a lower childbirth rate because some working women tend not to marry or delay marriages past their prime for childbearing; a higher divorce rate due to many collapsed marriages when working parents do not spend enough time together with their families; and an increase of unmarried people as more singles enjoy their financial independence and individual ffreedom. Perhaps, the metrosexuals have evolved from the economic circumstances in urban areas where those men have to compete not only with other men but also with women for jobs, as well as to appear attractive to the opposite sex. To deal seariously with the negative aspects of family unit erosion, the governments need to provide efficient childcare facilities to help working couples and incentives for women to bear chidren, so to be in step with social climate changes (http://uniorb.com, 2005).
Evidently, the rise of singles and singled-parents in society has led to the emergence of individuals autonomy. Regarded highly in democracy, individual autonomy uphods the pursuant of one’s rights, happiness and freedom in personal choice of living. Individual freedom includes the right to express personal sexual orientation. It seems as lifestyles continue to change, society has accepted human sexuality diversity as manifestations of humanity (http://uniorb.com, 2005).
Historical References to Androgyny
In reality, human sexual diversity had long existed in world civilizations. In fact, bisexuality was institutionalized in ancient Greece and Rome where men practiced homosexuality in the form of pederasty (male mentorship) while maintained hetersexual relations with their wives for procreation. Historically, pederastic relationships were found in writings and arts not only in western cultures but also in non-western cultures as in China, Japan, South Pacific, and Middle East. Even world religions have embraced numerous deities and demi-deities with androgynous qualities, such as Hapi (Egyptian), Dionysos (Greek), Shiva (Hindu), and Obatala (Voudoun religion in Africa, South America and the Caribbean) (http://uniorb.com, 2005).
According to the authors of http://uniorb.com the obsolescence of androgyny was caused by the prominent rise of Christianity which buried the culture of androgyn and drove same-sex relationships underground. In the traditional biblical point of view, God created human beings in His own image. They are not accidental, but essential part in the grand scheme of things. Homosexuality defies the purpose of God in humanity as male and female, and therefore is a perversion against God and Creation (http://uniorb.com, 2005).
The argument for the revival of androgyny offers a contrary perspective in two folds –human is by nature androgynous; and humanity is an accident of evolutionary process. First, androgyny in humanity is natural since all humans are born with both sex hormones. Furthermore, men and women have the same emotions but their gender behaviors are conditioned by social norms varying from culture to culture. By discarding the imposed restrictions and inhibitions, one would discover the natural androgynous self. Second, humanity is an accidental creation of Nature. Evolution underlies the natural process of change in which accidents are created without any divine intervention. Thus, humanity is one of the accidents created in the evolutionalry process of Nature (http://uniorb.com, 2005).
Apparently, the increasing global attraction to androgyny indicates that the modern theory of evolution holds greater sway than the traditional doctrines of Christianity. Some may believe that androgyny is just a passing trend, and others may think that it is part of the evolution of humanity. Whichever it is, one thing seems inevitable –as the world becomes more integrated and complex, society will adapt pervading changes as social norms to move humanity forward in its social evolution.
Application in Classrooms and Similar Settings
Gender roles have sweeping implications in schools. Many children are taught how to read using basil readers which illustrate primarily masculine gender role traits. Then students, through social and cultural influences, are exposed to these gender role traits through interactions with peers and other adults. By the time that teachers get to these kids, they have already been influenced greatly and “bring to the table" many of their own beliefs about their gender role and in turn, influence the other children in the class.
Some educators believe that we should try to create a gender neutral classroom and teach the basic properties of both the masculine and feminine gender roles. Some teachers believe that children should choose for themselves their gender role in society. There are even some teachers that believe that it is not their place to influence the children’s gender roles. These teachers believe that it is up to the parents and community to influence these children’s gender roles.
Evidence of Effectiveness
Dr. Sandra Bem (1974) compiled a list of 200 personality traits that were masculine or feminine, but were neutral in social desirability. Then she asked 100 students to rate these traits by answering the following question format: “In American society, how desirable is it for a man to be … truthful?" Half of the students were asked about men and the other half were asked about women. There were an equal number of men and women in both groups. A Likert scale was used in which 1 = not at all desirable and 7 = extremely desirable. Only items that were judged to be significantly more desirable for one gender than the other were considered for inclusion in this study. Both male and female judges had to agree. Likewise, neutral items were those that were judged to be neither masculine nor feminine, by judges of both genders. The twenty most feminine traits, the twenty most masculine traits, the ten most neutral (for gender) undesirable traits and the ten most neutral desirable traits mad up the Bem Sex Role Inventory (BSRI). This new inventory was given to students who then rated the traits always true, always or almost always true, half true and half untrue, or not true.
As a result, Bem found that although there was a high correlation between masculinity or femininity and social desirability, there was no correlation between androgyny and social desirability. This shows that the inventory is measuring something other than social desirability. The BSRI results were compared against results obtained from the California psychological inventory and the Guilford-Zimmerman temperament survey. There was no correlation between the BSRI and the Guiford-Zimmerman scale and only a moderate correlation between the BSRI and the California psychological inventory. This again suggests that Bem measured something other that personality tests. Because the trait items were thought to be desirable for either men or women, one could say that the face validity was built into the BSRI.
Bem would have had to wait to see whether all of her androgynous people were successful in life. She felt that it was best to be androgynous, as one could be more adaptable to the demands of modern life.
In an article written by Dr. Warren (1999), he explained the origin and purpose of androgyny in accordance to the purpose, pattern and plan of Elohim who is male and female within Himself. Modern science has been unable to explain why this phenomenon exists. The article also shows that androgyny symbolizes a spiritual principle that is three-fold and reflected on three levels: physical, psychological, and spiritual. He continues to say, “that all humans are androgynous with respect to our souls and there is a psychological component of androgyny that we all have to develop if we are to grow on a spiritual level" (Warren, 1999).
Guastello (2002) studied androgyny, gender role behavior, and emotional intelligence among college students and their parents. She wanted to find out the nature and scope of the generation gap in contemporary issues. The study was organized to test the following hypotheses in a sample of college students and their parents.
1.Greater levels of androgyny were expected among the younger
generation as a group than among the older generation as a group. This
hypothesis is based on the reasoning that (a) the androgyny phenomenon
exists, and (b) societal trends have pushed toward the dissolution of
gender-typed rigidity.
2.There were expected to be significant correlations between the students’
levels of gender-typed personality and behavior with that of their
respective parents. Guastello and Peissig (1998) found that, although
there were mean differences in other variables across generations,
correlations still persisted between the parents’ views and those of the
students when student and parent were paired.
3.Emotional intelligence was expected to be greater among women than among
men. Schutte et al. (1998) reported that women scored significantly
higher on emotional intelligence than men in a sample where the mean age
was 30 years. Jung’s theory favored greater emotional accessibility
among women and greater expression of it than among men. It is also
possible that the gender differences are generational effects. If so,
we expect to observe differences in emotional intelligence between the
mothers and fathers, but not between male and female students.
4.Emotional intelligence was expected to be higher in the younger
generation. This hypothesized trend would be the result of (a) greater
opportunities for self-knowledge in the educational curricula to which
the younger generation has been exposed in their lives so far, or (b) a
secondary effect that results from the dissolution of rigid gender-typed
behavior. On the other hand, if emotional intelligence were primarily a
matter of maturity, one would expect higher emotional intelligence
scores from the older generations.
5.There were expected to be significant correlations between the students’
levels of emotional intelligence and those of their parents. The same
reasoning applies here as for Hypothesis 2.
6.There were expected to be significant correlations among the indicators
of androgyny and emotional intelligence that could be observed for both
generations. This hypothesis is base on the premise that emotionally
intelligent people would express a wider range of gender role behavior
and preferences than would people who were not so emotionally
knowledgeable. Gender role stereotype, on the other hand, is partially
the result of society’s expectations regarding the proper expression of
emotion, that is, who should express it, when, and how. Rigid and
simplistic expectations are not conducive to emotional learning or a
flexible repertoire of social actions. Thus, androgyny is more adaptive
than rigidity. We surmise, furthermore, that androgynous personalities
develop to be more complex than stereotypic personalities. In Jungian
terms the integrated personality has a more evolved balance between
anima and animus. Thus high emotionally intelligent men will be more
emotionally expressive and accessibly than stereotypic men, and high
emotionally intelligent women will be able to manage their emotions
better than stereotypic women (Guastello, 2002, p. 5).
Each of the participants was given a questionnaire to determine if these hypotheses were accurate. The results of the study provided support for the central hypotheses with a few minor adjustments. For instance, Hypothesis 1 stated that the younger generation would have a greater incidence of androgyny than the older generation. Male students did show a greater incidence of androgyny than their fathers on both the BSRI (Bem’s androgyny scale) and the SRB (gender role behavior scale). Female students showed no change in the distribution of gender-typing compared to their mothers on the BSRI. Instead they showed a 20% increase in masculine gender typing and a one percent decline in androgyny compared to their mothers on the SRB (Guastello, 2002).
There was some evidence to support Hypothesis 2, that there would be significant correlations between students’ levels of gender-typed behavior and that of their parents. The relationships were small and irregular. Daughter’s responses to the BSRI and SRB were more highly correlated with those of their others than those of their fathers. Sons’ responses were less consistent with those of their parents compared to daughters’ responses, and the consistency with the father was much greater than consistency with the mother. The correlations obtained from that analysis indicated that the parental effects on gender stereotypy were small overall (Guastello, 2002).
Hypothesis 3, which was that women score higher than men on emotional intelligence, was true for the older generation only. The difference dissipated for the younger generation (Guastello, 2002).
Hypothesis 4, that emotional intelligence would be higher in the younger generation than in the older generation was supported overall, although virtually all the shift was between the older and younger men. There was negligible generational change among the women. Results also indicate that emotional intelligence is not simple a matter of maturity that comes with age, because the higher scores came from the younger men (Guastello, 2002).
There was partial support for Hypothesis 5 that students’ emotional intelligence would be positively correlated with the emotional intelligence scores of their parents. The correlation between students’ and mothers’ scores was significant, but the correlation between students’ and fathers’ scores was not (Guastello, 2002).
Hypotheses 6 and 7, that there would be significant correlations between the indicators of androgyny and emotional intelligence that could be observed for both generations, was supported. The BSRI and SRB indicators accounted for 30-35% of the variance in emotional intelligence scores for students, mothers, and fathers. The effect was stronger for BSRI variables, which could have been partially the result of variance overlap between the two pairs of measures (Guastello, 2002).
The results of this study indicate a strong cohort effect and relatively weak familial linkage on emotional intelligence. The familial linkage could be explained as simply the result of mother-child nurturance. The relatively low emotional intelligence found among fathers of sons further suggests that father-son relationships reinforced low emotionally intelligent thinking or behavior. According to the authors, if there were a genetic component to emotional intelligence it would have to be sex-linked (Guastello, 2002).
Norlander & Erixon (2000) studied psychological androgyny and creativity and the dynamics of gender-role and personality traits. This studied described the involvement of gender-role and personality traits in a cluster of tests to ascertain individuals’ creative ability. Two hundred university students were used as participants in this study. Five gender-role types, based on masculinity/femininity scales were derived, namely the androgynic, stereotypic, retrotypic, midmost and undifferentiated types, were selected to be used in a questionnaire presented to the 200 university students. The students were also given the BSRI sex role inventory test. The results indicated that the androgynic group scored higher than the other groups on creativity, creating attitude (trend), and dispositional optimism and graffiti/scrawling – with the exception of the stereotypic group which scored non-significantly higher on optimism. The androgynic group scored significantly higher than the retrotypic group with respect to creativity. The androgynic group also scored significantly higher than the stereotypic group with regards to creativity. Small gender differences were also found on the masculinity/femininity scales.
Witt (1997b) published a study in the Child Study Journal titled Traditional or Androgynous: An analysis to determine gender role orientation of basal readers. According to Witt, children’s ideas about gender roles come to them from a variety of sources including parents, friends, television, and school. Within the school setting, children are exposed to reading materials which contribute to their knowledge of, and attitudes about, gender. In elementary school, children receive reading instruction primarily through the use of basal readers. Through their portrayal of male and female characteristics, these readers are one means of socializing children into gender roles. Because cognitively developing children assimilate information from the environmental influences around them, the overall message received from the basal readers they use in school helps them form ideas about gender role orientation.
In Witt’s study (1997b) a sample of sixteen basal readers from six publishers were analyzed to determine whether the readers could be classified as androgynous or traditional in gender role orientation. A method of measurement based on the traits form the Ben Sex Role Inventory was used in the content analysis of the readers. Gender role orientation of the readers from five of the publishers was found to be masculine for male characters and androgynous for female characters. Male characters outnumbered female characters by a three to two ration for all publishers, biographies of males outnumbered those of females by slightly more than a two to one ration for all publishers, and illustrations of males outnumbered those of females by a slightly less than two to one ration for all publishers.
Results of this study indicate that while female characters in basal readers possess a balance of masculine and feminine traits and are classified as androgynous, male characters possess primarily masculine traits and almost exclusively engage in traditional masculine behaviors. Teachers seeking to use basal readers which have androgynous characters will find that androgyny is a viable gender role orientation for female characters, but not for males (Witt, 1997b).
Witt (1997a) also published a study on the parental influence on children’s socialization to gender roles. “In a society which is rife with gender stereotypes as biases, children regularly learn to adopt gender roles which are not always fair to both sexes", says Witt (p. 1). According to Witt, as children move through childhood and into adolescence, they are exposed to many factors which influence their attitude and behaviors regarding gender roles. These attitudes and behaviors are generally learned first in the home and are then reinforced by the child’s peers, school experience, and television viewing. However, the strongest influence on gender role development seems to occur within the family setting, with parents passing on, both overtly and covertly, to their children their own beliefs about gender. Witt’s study is an overview of the impact of parental influence on gender role development. She suggests that an androgynous gender role orientation may be more beneficial to children than strict adherence to traditional gender roles.
While there may be some benefit to adhering to strict gender role stereotypes there are also costs involved in the maintenance of gender role stereotypes. These costs included limiting opportunities for boys and girls, ignoring talent, and perpetuation unfairness in our society. Parents who espouse an egalitarian attitude regarding gender roles are more likely to foster this attitude in their children. Androgynous individuals have been found to have higher self-esteem (Lundy & Rosenberg, 1987; Shaw, 1983), higher levels of identity achievement (Orlofsky, 1977), and more flexibility in dating and love relationships (DeLucia, 1987).
Families with one or more androgynous parent have been found to be highest on scores of parental warmth and support. These androgynous parents are found to be highly encouraging regarding achievement and developing a sense of self worth in sons and daughters (Sedney, 1987). Because of the strong influence of parents on gender role socialization, the investigator things that those parents who wish to be gender fair and encourage the best in both their sons and their daughters would do well to adopt an androgynous gender role orientation and encourage the same in their children.
Critics and their rationale
According to Woodhill and Samuels (2003) the traditional psychological gender role identities of feminine and masculine are based largely on the child-bearing role of women, the provider role of men, and the assumed psychological differences between them. These traditional stereotypes have allowed for the acceptance of some non-adaptive behavior in men and women. Such notions as “women are not capable of being resourceful and assertive" and “men are neither vulnerable nor capable of compassion" are typical (p. 3). Assumed psychological differences between the sexes have contributed to the hierarchy of gender and have been made the basis of many cultural prohibitions. Gender inequality is blamed on assumed differences between the sexes, and these assumed differences are then used to justify gender inequality.
According to Woodhill and Samuels (2003) Bem’s ideology is aimed to promote an androgynous world where gender distinctions were reduced to a minimum and women and men shard equally the roles and characteristics usually associated with only one sex. Even though androgyny was once called the developmental ideal, empirical support for its outcomes remains ambiguous.
Traditional androgyny is seen as a gender role identity that consists of a balance of positive feminine and positive male traits. Androgyny is thought to be a balanced identity that combines the virtues of both genders. However, gender stereotypes do not include only desirable aspects of femininity and masculinity. Socially undesirable feminine and masculine traits are also important to gender stereotypes and may even be dominant. Logically then, an androgynous gender role identity may also consist of a balance of negative genders and thus creates the possibility of an undesirable or negatively androgynous gender role identity. The presence of significant levels of negative feminine and negative masculine traits in androgynous individuals may have a detrimental effect on the androgynous gender role identity to the extent that such negative behaviors may override any of the positive benefits proposed for the androgynous person (Woodhill & Samuels, 2003).
According to the traditional definition of androgyny (Bem, 1975), an androgynous person is more competent on a wide variety of tasks independent of with what sex the task may usually be associated. Nowhere in the literature has it been suggested that humans never behave in an undesirable fashion, therefore the androgynous personality may also include competence in undesirable behaviors or vices (Woodhill & Samuels, 2003).
Androgynous people are sensitive to both masculine and feminine cues and as such may respond to a wider range of positive or negative stimuli than traditional people. A negatively androgynous person would have a bigger repertoire of undesirable behaviors from which to choose a response. A negatively androgynous person may, for example, react in an undesirable feminine way in one situation and in an undesirable masculine way in another situation. It becomes clear that a single category of androgyny cannot capture these important differences because such a category by definition usually ignores gender associated vices (Woodhill & Samuels, 2003).
According to Nevid and Rathus (2005) one challenge to androgyny is the belief that masculinity, not androgyny, accounts for greater self-esteem. They believe that the relationship between psychological androgyny and self-esteem in both men and women is not based on the combination of masculine and feminine traits, but rather on the presence of masculine traits. These masculine traits included independence and assertiveness and can be found in both genders.
Nevid and Rathus also write that some feminist writers have criticized the androgynous view for other reasons all together. These feminist writers believe that since androgyny is the possession of both masculine and feminine personality traits, there is an implied gender-role stereotype. Feminists would like to see these stereotypes dissolved and people be treated as individuals, not as stereotypes.
Alternative Explanations Due to Diversity Considerations
It is the opinion of the author of this web page that gender roles are greatly influenced by social interaction. Therefore, cultural diversity has a huge impact on the gender role development of children. While there are only three listed gender role categories – feminine, masculine and androgynous – each of these categories is greatly influenced by the social environment of the child. The gender role of a women raised in a middle-class American family is radically different than the gender role of a women raised in a middle-class Iraqi family.
Signed “Life Experiences", testimonies and stories
Please feel free to insert personal testimonies or stories here.
During my undergraduate years I studied to become a band director. Historically all of the famous band directors who hold college, university and even more prestigious positions are male. As a young woman, I faced these obstacles when I started out in my career. I developed more aggressive and autocratic characteristics and became very determined to succeed in my new career. These are all stereotypes of the masculine gender role. I believe that I have taken on even more of an androgynous gender role after college. These characteristics have helped me succeed in the male dominated band world. –Chris Royer-
Although I was very active in very masculine activities, I also participated in many other varying activities like tumbling and dance and music lessons which many people consider to be more feminine. Growing up with a mother, a father and a sister, I had a typical childhood. I was encouraged to do a variety of activities including those that some may not have thought of as being very masculine. I used to care about what people would say concerning my participation in such activities, but that I have grown up a bit, I find that it has helped me related to many more of students than I thought it ever could. -Jeremiah Kramper-
I find that teaching students who (maybe not psychologically androgynous) are certainly more androgynous that others at times more difficult that non- androgynous students. This is particularly true for boys. It is mostly acceptable in sixth grade for a female student to have boyish tendencies. However, the opposite is true for boys. Although they often are better students than their male peers, they tend to have emotional problems that get in the way of their learning. I would assume this is due to the chastising that they might receive from other students. I have also noticed a trend that many (not all) of these boys have come from broken homes and have lived with their mothers for a great deal of time. - Nick Chatterton
I think growing up being extremely competitive in sports was very masculine for me, but I do not think it interfered with my gender role at all. I believe that some roles people think only women should do and things only men should do are so over rated. People should be able to do anything they want without having to be ridiculed.--M.Hicks
References
Bem, S.L. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny. Retrieved July
23, 2005 from http://www.garysturt.free-online.co.uk/
DeLucia, J.L. (1987). Gender role identity and dating behavior: What is the
relationship? Sex Roles, 17, 153-161.
Guastello, D.D., & Peissig, R.M. (1998). Authoritarianism, environmentalism,
and cynicism of college students and their parents. Journal of Research
in Personality, 32, 397-410.
Guastell, D.D. (2002). Androgyny, gender role behavior, and emotional
intelligence among college students and their parents. Retrieved July 24,
2005 from http://www.findarticles.com/
Jung, C.G. (1959). The structure and dynamics of the psyche (collected works,
Vol. 7). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Jung, C.G. (1960). Aion: Researches into the phenomenology of the self
(collected works, Vol. 9). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Lee, D. (2005). Androgyny becoming global? Retrieved July 23, 2005 from
http://uniorb.com/
Lundy, A., & Rosenberg, J.A. (1987). Androgyny, masculinity, and self-esteem.
Social Behavior and Personality, 15, 91-95.
Orlofsky, J.L. (1977). Sex role orientation, identity, formation, and self-
esteem in college men and women. Sex Roles, 3, 561-574.
Nevid, J.S., & Rathus, S. A. (2005). Psychology and the challenges of life:
Adjustment in the new millennium. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Norlander, T., & Erixon, A. (2000). Psychological androgyny and creativity:
Dynamics of gender-role and personality trait. Retrieved July 24, 2005
from www.findarticles.com/
Schutte, N.S., Malouff, J.M., Hall, L.E., Haggerty, D.J., Cooper, J.T.,
Goldent, C.J., et al.(1998). Development and validation of a measure of
emotional intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 25,
167-177.
Sedney, M.A. (1987). Development of androgyny: Parental influences.
Psychology of Women Quarterly, 11, 311-326.
Shaw, J.S. (1983). Psychological androgyny and stressful life
events. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 145-153.
Warren, L. (1999). Male and female androgyny. PLIM Report, 8(3), 1-6.
Witt, S.D. (1997a). Parental influence on children’s socialization to gender
roles, Adolescence, Summer, 1-5.
Witt, S.D. (1997b). Traditional or androgynous: An analysis to determine gender
role orientation of basal readers. Child Study Journal, Spring, 1-11.
Woodhill, B.M., & Samuels, C.A. (2003). Positive and negative androgyny and
their relationship with psychological health and well-being. Journal of
Research, June, 1-5.
Androgyny. Retrieved July 23, 2005 from http://www.wikipedia.org/
Link: Androgyne Online
