Feminism and the Evolution of Sex Differences and Similarities

Abstract

Distrust between most evolutionary psychologists and most feminist psychologists is evident in the majority of the articles contained in this Special Issue. The debates between proponents of these perspectives reflect different views of the potential for transforming gender relations from patriarchal to gender-equal. Yet, with respect to the overall prevalence of sex differences or similarities, the articles in the Special Issue show that neither feminist psychologists nor evolutionary psychologists have uniform positions. Questions about how and if women and men differ are still under negotiation in the articles in this Special Issue as well as in other research related to evolutionary and feminist psychology. Clearer conclusions would be fostered by standardized metrics for representing male-female comparisons, more varied research methods for assessing both psychological and biological processes, greater diversity in populations sampled, and more researcher openness to taking into account findings that challenge their theories. Theoretical growth also is needed, especially to develop and integrate the many individual feminism-influenced theories represented in this Special Issue. To this end, we propose an integrative evolutionary framework that recognizes human culture in both ultimate and proximal causes of female and male behavior.

Why is the pipeline leaking? Experiences of young women in STEM vocational education and training and their adjustment strategies

“…The findings of the study illustrate that young women in vocational school and training are perceived in accordance with the prevalent societal stereotype of the female role (Diekman and Eagly 2000;Eagly and Wood 2011). Thus, during their apprenticeship young women anticipate gendered division of labor and a subordinate position of female professionals (Acker 1990, p. 146) based on their experience of being ascribed to the 'wrong sex' , the 'weak sex' , or the 'archetypal sex' .…”

Attraction to attachment insecurity: Flattery, appearance, and status's role in mate preferences

“…Again, we did not measure our participants' intelligence, but given that we used a college sample, a high intelligence level in our female sample may have resulted in a lack of emphasis on status in potential mates. These issues reflect the psychological flexibility of individuals that can rest on the immediate context (e.g., Eagly & Wood, ), and may offer some explanation for why our Study 3 findings were the weakest.…”

Social and emotional self‐efficacy at work

“…For social self-efficacy in the workplace the gender stereotypes might not be as clear. Whereas women are believed to be more communal, and thus of a social nature (Eagly & Wood, 2011), men are believed to be more competent and assertive interacting in the workplace (Heilman & Haynes, 2005). Men might rate themselves higher in occupational self-efficacy than women since it emphasizes instrumental work tasks (agentic behaviors), whereas women might rate themselves higher in emotional self-efficacy since it emphasizes more communal behaviors.…”