Stereotypes of single and married women and men in Turkish culture
While it is natural for stereotypes of social groups to change over time and across various social contexts, there has been a lack of research investigating how marriage impacts specifically gender-based stereotypes. In Turkish culture, social status, roles, and stereotypes are highly dependent on marital status, and more so for women, who are labeled as “girls” until marriage. The present research seeks to examine how people picture men and women before and after marriage through free response. Specifically, undergraduates (N = 206) wrote down adjectives for single men, married men, single women, and married women. Adjectives were categorized using thematic analysis into stereotypes of appearance, personality traits, gender roles, and power. Single men were predominantly described with negative personality traits (e.g., womanizer, irresponsible, self-indulgent, and immature) whereas stereotypes of married men aligned more with traditional gender roles (e.g., father, breadwinner, and householder). However, participants stereotyped single and married men within similar power domains (dominant, masculine, and independent). On the other hand, single women were mainly stereotyped by their personality traits (e.g., fragile/pure) while married women were mainly described with their gender roles (e.g., self-sacrificing, mothering/nurturing) and positive personality traits (e.g., warm, mature). Additionally, participants described both single and married women as dominated, dependent, and resistant to power. Results are discussed considering sexism theory, system justification theory, and honor. Findings can be applied to understandings of how marriage may shape gender stereotypes in highly gendered, honor cultures.
KeywordsGender roles Stereotypes Single women/men Married women/men Turkish culture
Compliance with Ethical Standards
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- Arnett, J. J. (2004). Emerging adulthood: The winding road from the late teens through the twenties. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Ashmore, R. D., & Del Boca, F. K. (1979). Sex stereotypes and implicit personality theory: Toward a cognitive—Social psychological conceptualization. Sex Roles, 5(2), 219–248. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00287932.
- Balkır, A. (1989). Women’s perception of themselves. (Unpublished Master’s thesis). Ankara University, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Turkey.Google Scholar
- Bolak-Boratav, H., Okman-Fişek, G., & Eslen-Ziya, H. (2017). Erkekliğin Türkiye halleri [manhood in Turkey]. İstanbul: İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları.Google Scholar
- Carpenter, S., & Trentham, S. (1999). Subtypes of women and men: A new taxonomy and an exploratory categorical analysis. Society, 13(4), 679–696.Google Scholar
- Ceylan, S. (2016). Social psychological predictors of violence against women in honor cultures. (Unpublished Doctoral Thesis). Ankara: Middle East Technical University, Turkey.Google Scholar
- Cohen, D., & Vandello, J. A. (2001). Honor and “faking” honorability. In R. Nesse (Ed.), Evolution and the capacity for commitment (pp. 163–185). New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
- Connell, R. W. (1995). Masculinities. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
- Deaux, K., & Kite, M. E. (1993). Gender stereotypes. In F. Denmark & M. Paludi (Eds.), Handbook on the psychology of women (pp. 107–139). Westpot: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
- Dedeoğlu, S. (2000). Family and women’s labor in terms of gender in Turkey. Toplum ve Bilim, 86, 139–170.Google Scholar
- Dökmen, Z. Y. (1997). Relationship between working, gender, and gender roles with houseworks and depression. Turkish Journal of Psychology, 12(39), 39–56.Google Scholar
- Dökmen, Z. (2003). Mental health, locus of control, and gender roles in three groups of women differing in employment status. Turkish Journal of Psychology, 18(51), 125–127.Google Scholar
- Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., Glick, P., & Xu, J. (2002). A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 878–902. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-35188.8.131.528.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Gillespie, B. L., & Eisler, R. M. (1992). Development of the feminine gender role stress scale: A cognitive-behavioral measure of stress, appraisal, and coping for women. Behavior Modification, 16(3), 426–438. https://doi.org/10.1177/01454455920163008.
- Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (2001). An ambivalent alliance: Hostile and benevolent sexism as complementary justifications for gender inequality. American Psychologist, 56(2), 109–118. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.56.2.109.
- İlkkaracan, İ. (1998). Women in cities and work life. In A. B. Hacımirzaoğlu (Ed.), Women and men in 75 years (pp. 285–302). İstanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yayınları.Google Scholar
- Jost, J., & Banaji, M. (1994). The role of stereotyping in system-justification and the production of false consciousness. British Journal of Social Psychology, 33(1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.1994.tb01008.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Jost, J. T., & Kay, A. C. (2005). Exposure to benevolent sexism and complementary gender stereotypes: Consequences for specific and diffuse forms of system justification. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88(3), 498–509. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-35184.108.40.2068.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Kandiyoti, D. (1978). Dimensions of psycho-social change in women: A comparison between genders and generations. (Unpublished associate professorship thesis). Istanbul: Boğaziçi University, Turkey.Google Scholar
- Kandiyoti, D. (1995). Patterns of patriarchy: Notes for an analysis of male dominance in Turkish society. In S. Tekeli (Ed.), Women in modern Turkish society (pp. 306–318). London: Zed Books.Google Scholar
- Kay, A., & Jost, J. (2003). Complementary justice: Effects of "poor but happy" and "poor but honest" stereotype exemplars on system justification and implicit activation of the justice motive. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(5), 823–837. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-35220.127.116.113.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Kocacık, F., & Gökkaya, V. B. (2005). The problems of working women in Turkey. C.Ü. İktisadi İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 6(1), 195–219.Google Scholar
- Özkan, B., & Gündoğdu, A. E. (2011). Turkish proverbs and idioms in gender context. Turkish Studies, 6(3), 1133–1147.Google Scholar
- Park, B., & Banchefsky, S. (2018). Leveraging the social role of dad to change gender stereotypes of men. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167218768794.
- Rudman, L. A., Moss-Racusin, C. A., Phelan, J. E., & Nauts, S. (2012). Status incongruity and backlash effects: Defending the gender hierarchy motivates prejudice against female leaders. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(1), 165–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2011.10.008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Sakallı, N., & Curun, F. (2001). Attitudes toward stereotypes about romantic relationship. Tecrübi Psikoloji Çalışmaları, 22, 31–45.Google Scholar
- Sakallı-Uğurlu, N., & Akbaş, G. (2013). “Honor” and “violence against women in the name of honor” in honor cultures. Turkish Psychological Articles, 16(32), 76–91.Google Scholar
- Sancar, S. (2009). Erkeklik imkansız iktidar: Ailede, piyasada ve sokakta erkekler [manhood as impossible power: Men in the family, market, and the street]. İstanbul: Metis Yayınları.Google Scholar
- Sancar, S. (2012). Türk modernleşmesinin cinsiyeti: Erkekler devlet, kadınlar aile kurar [gender of Turkish modernization: Men establish state, women start family]. İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları.Google Scholar
- Sapiro, V. (2003). Theorizing gender in political psychology. In D. O. Sears, L. Huddy, & R. Jewis (Eds.), Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology (pp. 601–634). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Spence, J. T., & Helmrich, R. L. (1978). Masculinity and femininity: Their psychological dimensions, correlates, and antecedents. Austin: University of Texsas Press.Google Scholar
- Stangor, C., & Schaller, M. (1996). Stereotypes as individual and collective representations. In C. N. Macrae, C. Stangor, & M. Hewstone (Eds.), Stereotypes and stereotyping (pp. 3–37). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- Sunar, D. (2002). Change and continuity in the Turkish middle class family. In E. Özdalga & R. Liljestrom (Eds.), Autonomy and dependence in family: Turkey and Sweden in critical perspective (pp. 217–237). Istanbul: Swedish Research Institute.Google Scholar
- Türkoğlu, B. (2013). Fay hattında erkeklikler: Çalışma ve işsizlik ekseninde erkekliğe bakış [Manhood on the fault line: Examining manhood under the frame of working and unemployment]. Mülkiye Dergisi, 37(4), 33–61.Google Scholar