In this study, the extent to which the self-esteem and self-efficacy of Hispanic high school girls has been affected by their respective expectations will be measured, recorded, and analyzed in respect to impact and how much this impact differs from that of Hispanic high school boys.
Additionally, by incorporating and narrowing the ethnicity of participants to Hispanics, the extent to which perceived expectations and standards are prevalent amongst them can be contrasted with that of the general population and utilized for future research. Nuances between the aforementioned factors will lead towards discernment between self-esteem and self-efficacy levels of Hispanic high school girls compared to those of Hispanic high school boys. This study holds value and significance as results could indicate a difference in the extremity of the standards held for women and those held for men. It could also provide
insight pertaining to the way that each gender thinks about the standards they are expected to uphold and explain why they think that way.
The Implications of Hegemonic Gender Standards on the Self-Esteem of Hispanic Adolescents: A Descriptive Analysis
Introduction
Hegemonic femininity standards consist of both physical and behavioral expectations of women which can impact how they view themselves and their ability to accomplish various objectives. Within our evolving society, there is still a rigid structure in place which negatively alters the interpretations that women have as to what is expected of and accepted from them. In a normalized context, as mentioned by Bernd Six and Thomas Eckes (1991), “social stereotypes are treated as products of normal everyday cognitive processes of social categorization, social inference, and social judgment” (p.58).
While hegemonic femininity can be defined in different ways, the ultimate consensus regarding the exact definition loosely resembles a statement mentioned in Hannah McCann’s research pertaining to emphasized femininity. McCann (2020) mentions that “Connell (1987) offers an account of femininity in terms of emphasized femininity described as ‘compliance with...[gender] subordination and is oriented to accommodating the interests and desires of men’” (p. 6).
Hegemonic standards do hold influence over men (often referred to as hegemonic masculinity standards), and the exact results of this influence can hold significant implications when related to those of hegemonic femininity standards. In a 2007 paper published by Mimi Schippers, she mentions that “gender hegemony operates not just through the subordination of femininity to hegemonic masculinity, but also through the subordination and marginalization of other masculinity” (p.87). In a general sense, therefore, there is a correlation between the stereotypes held for men and those held for women.
A gap in current research remains regarding the investigation of Hispanic gender standards and expectations. In this study, the extent to which the self-esteem and self-efficacy of Hispanic high school girls has been affected by their respective expectations will be measured, recorded, and analyzed in respect to impact and how much this impact differs from that of Hispanic high school boys. Additionally, by incorporating and narrowing the ethnicity of participants to Hispanics, the extent to which perceived expectations and standards are prevalent amongst them can be contrasted with that of the general population and utilized for future research. Nuances between the aforementioned factors will lead towards discernment between self-esteem and self-efficacy levels of Hispanic high school girls compared to those of Hispanic high school boys. This study holds value and significance as results could indicate a difference in the extremity of the standards held for women and those held for men. It could also provide insight pertaining to the way that each gender thinks about the standards they are expected to uphold and explain why they think that way.
Origins of Hegemonic Femininity
There are many differing stereotypes or standards pertaining to women which exist and are upheld by the modern world. While many believe that some of these expectations are concepts of the past, the observations of the behaviors and mindsets of women in our current society suggest otherwise. It is important to consider the idea that “gender stereotypes may differ from context to context” (Constantinou, et al., 2009, p.6). This means that certain standards or expectations for gender may differentiate as a result of various factors such as age, region, and culture among others. However, in most contexts’ women are often perceived as being in subordination to men. According to Barton and Huebner, “This is not surprising when we consider the messages that Western, patriarchal cultures create and disseminate about femininity: that it is weak, passive, deceitful, and manipulative” (2022, p. 1). These ideas are emphasized when the actions and statements made by women are compared to the same actions and statements made by men. While they may be the same, they are, in essence, distinguished and discerned as different because of gender influence. As stated by Judith Lorber, “In the social construction of gender, it does not matter what men and women actually do; it does not even matter if they do exactly the same thing. The social institution of gender insists only that what they do is perceived as different” (1994, p. 26). Essentially, distinctions and separations which exist between women and men, in the context of interpretations regarding actions/statements, are contrived societally.
Impacts of Hegemonic Femininity
The impacts of hegemonic femininity are perpetually misunderstood, particularly in the context of its influence on women. There is a rigid structure to “be a woman” intended to shame women for any extent to which they may stray from this narrative, but there is also a shaming in fitting into the standard in which women are repudiated for being “like every other woman.” This can be observed in a study conducted by Carrie Paechter (2010) to evaluate the amount of “tomboys” and “girly-girls” in a primary school setting and analyze why this might be. Throughout research and interviews with primary school girls who self-identified as “tomboys,” Paechter found that “self-identified tomboys often constructed girly-girls very much as Other to themselves: the girly-girl image was used as a container in which to place aspects of femininity that they wanted explicitly to reject” (p.7). Through the depiction that women should all look and act in the same way, detestation and aversion towards femininity is instilled in young girls at as young as the primary school level. In fact, resentment towards femininity can be observed in some forms of contemporary feminism in which fitting into any stereotypes regarding women is automatically interpreted as seeking validation from the patriarchy. For example, “Practices which produced conventional femininity such as beautification, fashion and domesticity and their association with passivity, submissiveness and superficiality made femininity an object of feminist suspicion and denunciation” (Budgeon, 2013, p. 4). The stance that any “generic” feminine nature such as fashion and domesticity should not be considered as an acceptable form of femininity acts counterintuitively against the feminist disposition of equality for all women. This has negative impacts on the reliability of modern feminism and warps the messages which it attempts to send to young girls.
In a study conducted by Alexandra Jane Allan (2009) pertaining to the expectations of girls in an all-girls private school, it was found that many girls believed that “‘girl power” did not mean that the girls could be anything that they wanted to be, but rather that they could be powerful only in ways that enhance and maintained heteronormative (upper-middle-class) femininity” (p. 12-13). Despite the prominence of feminism, because of its multifaceted nature it, most prevalently, negatively impacts girls.
Impacts of Hegemonic Masculinity
However, hegemonic masculinity also exists and holds significance in society, and though its implications may not be as drastic, detrimental masculinity standards are oftentimes overlooked and should therefore be addressed. Similarly, to hegemonic femininity, “The behaviours and attitudes characteristic of hegemonic masculinity may influence other people’s perceptions of, and their willingness to associate with, those individuals displaying these characteristics” (Van Doors and March, 2020, p.2). The attributes and mannerisms which are expected of men differ greatly from those which are expected of women, however, it is important to note that both genders have and experience their own limitations and freedoms within these expectations. For example, some characteristics traditionally expected of men are acting “as a leader, aggressive, ambitious, analytical, assertive, athletic, competitive, defends own beliefs, dominant, forceful, has leadership abilities, independent, individualistic, makes decisions easily, masculine, self-reliant, self-sufficient, strong personality, willing to take a stand, and willing to take risks” ( Prentice and Carranza, 2002, p.1-2). Evidently, these are qualities which are quite distinct from the quietness and submissiveness traditionally expected of women. However, the expectation of these traits still proves to be destructive as “rigid definitions of what it is to ‘be a man’ may have deleterious consequences for individual men, individual women, and society as a whole” (Steinberg and Diekman, 2016, p.1).
In the same way that they affect women, the stereotypes and standards which men are expected to uphold can cause a myriad of mental health complications. In some cases, this can significantly impact the anticipation for a stereotype to be expected, which was found to be much higher concerning leadership in men than in women (Cohen and Swim, 1995, p.7). This can be attributed, to some extent, to the endurance and proliferation of stereotypes regarding gender and traditional normalities. In fact, in a study conducted by Leit and other researchers (2000), they found that cultural norms of the ideal male body are growing increasingly muscular (p.1) signifying that standards are leaning more and more into the conventional within recent years. This can also be seen within certain stereotypes of men which are expected of them, but still frowned upon such as being “egoistical, hostile, cynical, arrogant, boastful, greedy, dictatorial, unprincipled” (Eagly and Mladinic, 1989, p.5).
Ethnicity and Age
Focusing the sample population of the study on Hispanic adolescents has certain repercussions on the results of the study. There is a set of cultural standards present and reinforced in varying societies from different countries. As this study is based in the United States of America, Hispanics are considered a minority population. Being of a minority group often has significant psychological and social impacts on the interpretations and perceptions of an individual. Such observations were made in a 2020 study on Japanese American men and the hegemonic masculinity standards which they felt they were held to in America. The study reported that Japanese American men oftentimes attempted to internalize ideas held by white men and exhibit qualities they felt were typical of white men. The investigator states that “Many of the Japanese American men I interviewed seemed to feel inadequate and inferior because they could not live up to the hegemonic masculine ideal they felt were epitomised by white men in the U.S.” (Tsuda, p.7). Traits like excessive manliness are some characteristics which men in minority groups may attempt to replicate to feel as though they fit in.
Similar tendencies were observed in girl minority groups who live in the United States, except the majority of pressures were prevalent in the field of beauty standards. According to a study conducted on the lives of young girls in America, results indicated that “young girls. . . grow up in a culture where the ‘norm’ is represented as being white, slim, helpless, young, feminine, and submissive” (Carneiro, et al., 2013, p.3). Pressures on young girls to imitate American standards such as those aforementioned is most prominently observed in the benchmarks of beauty indicated by African American and Latino American women. In a 2002 study by Maya Poran, an investigation pertaining to the conceptions of beauty expressed by Latina, Black, and White women was conducted. Poran found that many Latina and Black women identified beauty as being mostly composed of traits like having blond, straight hair, blue eyes, and a slim body figure (p.10). This depicts that a popular ideology amongst minority groups, like Hispanics, in America is the notion of hegemonic gender standards.
Methods
Research Approach
To determine the prevalence and consequences of hegemonic gender standards, it is crucial to also examine any expectations, misconceptions, and bias, as these components ultimately contribute to experienced hegemony standards. Effectively measuring the impacts that these aspects have on the self-esteem of Hispanic high school students (ages 14-18) requires a mixed-method approach which allows for a more balanced, accurate, and complex interpretation. Research pertaining to an inclusion of both quantitative and qualitative approaches, particularly the practice of interviews, can be observed in multiple research papers pertaining to the perceptions of gender iniquities (Barnard, et al., 2012, p.2).
Instruments and Measures
The current research method consists of two phases. For the first phase of the method, conducted primarily to obtain firsthand experiences and encounters with stereotypes and expectations, participants engaged in a structured set of interview questions (see Appendix A). A conceptual framework was used to create this instrument and served as an effective tool in both measuring the rates of experienced hegemony and the collection of incidents and common factors which are related to what they have experienced or believe to be true. Interview questions ultimately pertained to any expectations, misconceptions, bias, or standards participants experienced and the impact that these concepts had on the self-esteem and self-efficacy (see Appendix B). Basing these results on the foundation of personal experience and belief can be observed in various other bodies of literature concerning gender, such as a 2009 cognitive interview study conducted on gender expectations (McCabe, et al., p.10). The questionnaire consisted of 18 questions, which was varied by Likert scale, multiple-choice, and open-ended questions. While there are 18 questions in the instrument, 6 of the questions were only prompted to participants if they responded “Yes” to the question prior to it.
To guarantee the validity and reliability of the interview instrument used, a pilot test was conducted over the span of a week. Two individuals were selected to participate in a practice run of the 18 questions. After going through the questions, participants were asked if any of the questions prompted any confusion and needed to be clearer. Then, a few days later, the same participants answered the questions once again, to ensure the same responses were provided, thus granting the instrument reliability.
In the second phase, once participants concluded the interview, they were provided with the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale, which can be found in the public domain. The scale consists of 10 questions following the Likert scale question format (see Appendix C). Its purpose serves to estimate the ranges of self-esteem an individual exhibits, such as low self-esteem, normal self-esteem, and high self-esteem. According to a study conducted on the reliability and validity of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale, “the RSES is readily deployable... both as a one unified and global construct and a two-dimensional construct” (Bouih, et al., 2022, p. 12).
Ethical Considerations
Once participants completed both phases, they successfully completed the study and were dismissed. It is crucial to clarify that all participants were interviewed and responded to the questions on the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES) with only myself in attendance. Both females and males were interviewed with the same exact questions, provided with the RSES, and treated without any bias or predisposition. All portions of the study were consented to by any and all participants involved and participants were notified an additional time if one of their open-ended responses was included in the research to ensure clarity and authenticity. Participants were instructed clearly that they had the right, at any time in the interview or scale, to refuse a response to a question and void their previous responses. This study was conducted under the approval of an Institutional Review Board which approved the aforementioned guidelines and protocols.
Procedure
All collection of data and conduction of questionnaires and interviews took place at which narrowed down the sample of the population to teenagers between the ages of 14 and 18. Regulating the research at also aided in the process of collecting data as the population of participants was more easily accessible and they could therefore be conveniently sampled. Participants were invited to engage in the study through flyers which explained the premise of the study, including the purpose and any requirements. A walkthrough of every step that participants would be taking part in was provided, as well as criteria like being a high school student and of Hispanic ethnicity. To ensure that the sample selected was representative of a larger population, students were selected from all grade levels (9-12), all ranges of academic performance, and a variety of classes. At the inception of the study, the intended sample size was 25 Hispanic high school teenage girls and 25 Hispanic high school teenage boys. As the study continued, the sample size was reduced to 15 Hispanic high school teenage girls and 15 Hispanic high school teenage boys due to the available pool of participants. However, as a result of a loss of data (due to human error), many responses were lost. This reduces the sample size once again to 6 Hispanic high school teenage girls and 6 Hispanic high school teenage boys.
All participant responses to interview questions were voice-recorded. Select responses deemed relevant to significant results of the study were later transcribed to be included in the discussion of the study. All data was recorded and saved with the use of technological devices such as an iPhone and MacBook Air. Responses to the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale were conducted on and saved using Google Forms. Collection of data also took place over the time period of January 12 and March 14 of the year 2024. To limit bias concerning the responses chosen to be included in the study, any responses which significantly challenge the results of the study will be mentioned and emphasized. Results were analyzed and interpreted, at the end of the data collection, by cross-examining trends within the responses in the interview compared to the scale and responses received by Hispanic participants in comparison to a broader average. Questions on the interview portion of the study which could be answered with either a “Yes” or “No” response were compiled alongside the responses from the scale and charted to properly and effectively view aggregated statistics concerning the implications of standards on Hispanic teenage girls and boys.
Centering the method of receiving data around the experiences of Hispanic high school adolescents and their inferences on expectations and stereotypes pertaining to their own selves was incorporated into the study design as a result of investigating for common methodology. When research papers also pertaining to gender roles and expectations were examined and analyzed, a descriptive analysis and phenomenological approach was observed. For example, a questionnaire and multiple interviews, which analyzed the inferences that boys and girls had towards gender expectations and stereotypes, were conducted in a previously mentioned study by Carrie Paechter (Paechter, 2010, p.3). Therefore, a design related to such methods was executed.
Findings
At the conclusion of data collection, 12 responses were accumulated between both males and females combined together. These responses include all participants who engaged in the entirety of the interview portion of the study and the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale. Due to the structure of my methodology, both quantitative results, which include multiple-choice questions and Likert scale questions, and qualitative results, which include free-response questions and their findings, were received and analyzed. Both sections of the method had findings which were relevant and addressed the research question being dealt with.
Quantitative Findings
As observed in Figure 1 and 2 below, there seems to be a significant difference between the quantitative results received from females and those received by males. This can be quantified through the “Yes” or “No” responses given for each of the questions referenced in the chart with “Q” standing for “Question” and the number beside it indicating which number question it corresponds to in the interview instrument (see Appendix A).
Illustrations are not included in the reading sample
Figure 1. Bar Graph 1
Illustrations are not included in the reading sample
Figure 2. Bar Graph 2
Figures 1 and 2, which can be understood with reference to Appendix A, indicate that on average, females were more likely to respond with the “Yes” option than males were. The opposite remains true (that males were more likely to respond with the “No” option). While the interview instrument had 7 multiple choice questions, it also had 2 Likert scale questions for participants to respond to. These questions will be portrayed differently than the responses of the Likert scale questions represented from the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (see Appendix C). The Likert questions results for the interview instrument can be found below.
Illustrations are not included in the reading sample
Figure 3. Bar Graph 3
Illustrations are not included in the reading sample
Figure 4. Bar Graph 4
Figures 3 and 4 may not seem to indicate a major difference between females and males, but will be more thoroughly analyzed in the Discussion section of this paper. The Likert questions in the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale were quantified to calculate self-esteem per participant of the study. The self-esteem ranges of females and males in the study can be found below.
Illustrations are not included in the reading sample
Figure 5. Bar Graph 5
Low self-esteem ranges were categorized by scores between 0-14, normal self-esteem ranges were categorized by scores between 15-25, and high self-esteem ranges were categorized by scores between 26-30. For items 1, 2, 4, 6, and 7 on the scale, “Strongly Agree” options were worth 3 points, “Agree” was worth 2, “Disagree” was worth 1, and “Strongly Disagree” was worth 0. The inverse is true for items 3, 5, 8, 9, and 10. For Figure 5, the self-esteem range mean for females is about 17.2 (normal range) and the self-esteem range mean for males is about 20.5 (normal range).
Qualitative Findings
Concerning the tendency to provide additional information, male participants in the study expressed much more reluctance and hesitancy to communicate personal experiences compared to female participants. This trend expressed resilience for the entirety of the study, as females continuously provided further explanation, and males did not. For female participants who gave personal statements pertaining to the questions, many responses seemed to overlap in one area or another, and so only select responses from select questions will be represented. Italicized and bolded sections of statements serve as emphasis.
When prompted to explain which expectations female participants experienced due to gender (Q4), responses mostly included themes such as:
“Things men aren't expected to do, especially when it comes to our bodies. Things like shaving our body hair.. . men are allowed to just exist ”.
Other responses resembled responses such as:
“It is expected that I should either be the ultimate feminist or a housewife. ”
When prompted to explain which misconceptions female participants experienced due to gender (Q6), the majority of responses were based on the idea that females were seen as extremely emotional in comparison to men, such as:
“Sometimes people say ‘She must be on her period’ when I am simply expressing emotion at something.”
When prompted to explain any biases female participants experienced due to gender (Q8), those who responded based their answers on bias experienced in an educational setting, such as:
“In places where you need physical exertion like when teachers ask for someone to carry tables or books, men are picked and not females”.
When prompted to explain which standards female participants experienced due to gender (Q11), there was a profusion of responses that, whether directly or indirectly, mentioned beauty standards. If responses did not explicitly state the words “beauty standards,” responses resembled one such as:
“ Women are compared to each other a lot, which affected how I viewed myself ”.
When prompted to explain which standards female participants experienced due to gender that they felt impacted their future (Q14), the majority of responses resemble one such as:
“As women, it is harder to be taken seriously in careers which are a part of a male-dominated industry”.
When prompted to explain how female participants experienced gender standards in relation to standards associated with being Hispanic (Q16), responses, for the most part, were more personal in experience. One such response is as follows:
“In middle school, I felt like I would not grow to have the ‘ideal body’ for a man to want .
My mom is Columbian, and it's a big stereotype that Columbian girls have nice bodies
and I felt like I didn't”.
Finally, when prompted to provide any additional experiences (Q18), responses exhibited the most range pertaining to the topic than any previous question. Some responses dealt with themes such as:
“ Men are allowed to be boys and that is their excuse for any misconduct . Women are expected to behave and mature at a very young age . They are expected to be quiet and meek , especially in Latino households where there is a lot of hypermasculinity ”.
On the other hand, some responses dealt with topics such as:
“I grew up with the belief that I was ugly because I didn't look like everybody else did . In my middle school, everyone was getting lash extensions and dying their hair while I had long dark hair and wasn't allowed to shave my legs or do any ‘normal girl’ stuff ”.
Discussion
Ultimately, the results from both instruments used were analyzed to gauge the extent to which hegemonic gender standards impacted self-esteem and self-efficacy in Hispanic females compared to Hispanic males. Many of the questions in the interview instrument utilized served to evaluate the amount and/or extent of hegemonic gender standards experienced by both female and male participants. Meanwhile, questions on the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale served to measure self-esteem present amongst participants. Once both of these segments were analyzed separately, multivariate analysis was engaged, in which examination for correlation, and possibly causation, took place.
In the quantitative set of data from the interview instrument, it is evident that the rates of experienced hegemonic gender standards were much stronger and more prevalent in females than they were in men. This can be exemplified by the prominence of “Yes” options selected by females and the prominence of “No” options selected by males. Since questions on this section asked participants whether or not they have experienced certain contributors to hegemonic gender standards, a “Yes” response would indicate a higher level of experienced hegemony. While female responses do imply that hegemonic standards may be stronger for females than they are for males, they do not disqualify or invalidate experienced hegemony amongst males. In the quantitative data from the interview instrument, it can still be observed that there were many male responses that still indicated “Yes” at certain questions instead of “No”. In other words, concerning male responses to the interview instrument, they were never entirely unanimous. Therefore, it can be established that hegemonic gender standards are also experienced amongst males, although perhaps not to the extent of that which is experienced by females.
In the qualitative set of data from the interview instrument, the series of female responses which comprises personal experiences bolsters the claims surmised from the quantitative set of data. Such results are similar to that of studies in the literature (Paechter 2010). Additionally, the lack of male responses pertaining to personal experiences also contributes to the claim that hegemonic standards, although experienced by males, is not as prevailing amongst them as it is for females. This portion of the results from the study also addresses, in part, the research gap of the study by including personal experiences pertaining to hegemonic gender standards, some of which also deal with their relation to being Hispanic. For example, in responses which reference being Columbian and living in Latino households, it is evident that to some degree, there is a set of hegemonic gender standards which exclusively apply to females of Hispanic descent. This being true, it suggests that hegemonic gender standards are stronger amongst Hispanic females than they possibly would be for other ethnicities. However, it is important to consider that this study only concentrates on one ethnicity, making it impossible to quantify how much gender hegemony is stronger or weaker among Hispanics in comparison to other ethnicities.
In the quantitative set of data from the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale, there is more room for varying interpretation. Self-esteem scores for females had a mean of 17.2 out of 30 and scores for males had a mean of 20.5 out of 30. While self-esteem is reportedly higher amongst males in the study than females in the study, both means (17.2 and 20.5) still classify as being in the normal range of self-esteem scores. On one hand, the point could be made that the mean score for self-esteem in females is much closer to being classified as low than that of the mean score for males. The female mean is 3.4 points closer than the male mean, and 3.2 points away, to being grouped into a low self-esteem category. However, it could also be argued that since both means fall into the normal range there is little to no difference between the self-esteem of females and the self-esteem of males. To refute this point, it is essential to analyze the data from the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale in all aspects. Male responses indicate that male Hispanic adolescents are not only more likely to have a normal self-esteem than a low one, but also they depict that those adolescents are more likely to have a higher than average self-esteem compared to female Hispanic adolescents. This may be expressed by the total lack of high self-esteem responses amongst female participants and the presence of them amongst them male participants. Hence, this information combined with the statistic of female participants experiencing low self-esteem compared to male participants experiencing low self-esteem indicates that there is, in fact, a significant difference between the self-esteem tendencies of female participants and male participants.
Once results from both phases of the study were thoroughly examined, as previously discussed, it became clear that there was an evident correlation between experienced levels of gender hegemony and level of self-esteem among participants. In female participants, there were more instances of experienced gender hegemony standards and overall lower self-esteem compared to male participants. Moreover, the inverse remains apparent as well (that male participants have less instances of experienced gender hegemony standards and an overall higher self-esteem).
However, while there is a correlation between experienced hegemony and self-esteem, it is vital to consider that correlation does not equate to causation. In other words, the relationship observed between these two factors does not necessarily indicate that experienced hegemony is the root cause of higher or lower self-esteem. Rather, these findings suggest that hegemonic gender standards are one of infinitely many possible factors which have the potential to elevate or lower an individual’s self-esteem. It is also crucial to consider that the population for this study (Hispanic adolescents between the ages of 14-18) alters the extent of its application in the real world. While results may remain true for other members of the population outside of participants, they may not for those who do not fit the listed criteria.
It must be noted that all records of data may have also, at any point during calculations or transcriptions, been subject to human error. To ensure authenticity and reliability of data further, this study should be replicated and conducted with more participants. Trends should be observed and represented in similar methods.
Conclusion
The results of this study indicate that Hispanic female adolescents experience more hegemonic gender standards on average than Hispanic male adolescents do. The study also demonstrates that these female adolescents have a lower average self-esteem and that, inversely, male adolescents have a higher average self-esteem. The significance of these results may be found within the fact that understanding how hegemonic gender standards impact individuals from different genders, ethnicities, and ages could grant new methods in trying to minimize the effects that these standards may have on self-esteem. While information derived from this study may not apply to all those who experience hegemonic gender standards, this does not undermine its importance. Despite exclusivity within the criteria of the study, personal experiences shared within the interview instrument range from general application to specific application. Participant responses indicate a presence of gender hegemony, and a relation from these hegemonic standards to self-esteem, regardless of ethnicity or age in certain cases. Due to this, there is a demand for future studies which may investigate the prevalence of hegemonic gender standards in different age brackets and nationalities or even find methods to subside gender hegemony societally. Overall, the implications of hegemonic gender standards on Hispanic adolescents’ self-esteem should be taken with gravity and as a way to henceforth consistently enhance the society which reinforces such standards.
References
Allan, A. J. (2009). The importance of being a ‘lady’: Hyper - femininity and heterosexuality in the private, single - Sex Primary School. Gender and Education, 21 (2), 145-158.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09540250802213172
Barnard, S., Hassan, T., Bagilhole, B., Dainty, A. (2012). ‘They’re not girly girls’: An exploration of quantitative and qualitative data on engineering and Gender in Higher Education. European Journal of Engineering Education, 37(2), 193-204.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2012.661702
Barton, B., & Huebner, L. (2020). Feminine power: A new articulation. Psychology & Sexuality, 13 (1), 23-32. https://doi.org/10.1080/19419899.2020.1771408
Bouih, A., Benattabou, D., Nadif, B., Benhima, M., & Benfilali, I. (2022). The Rosenberg self-esteem scale: A confirmatory factor analysis study. European Journal of Psychology and Educational Research, 5(2), 143-160. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejper.5.2.143
Budgeon, S. (2013). The dynamics of Gender Hegemony: Femininities, masculinities and Social Change. Sociology, 48 (2), 317-334. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038513490358
Carneiro, R., Zeytinoglu, S., Hort, F., & Wilkins, E. (2013). Culture, beauty, and therapeutic alliance. Journal of Feminist Family Therapy, 25(2), 80-92.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08952833.2013.777873
Cohen, L. L., & Swim, J. K. (1995). The differential impact of gender ratios on women and men: Tokenism, self-confidence, and expectations. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21 (9), 876-884. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167295219001
Constantinou, P., Manson, M., & Silverman, S. (2009). Female students’ perceptions about gender-role stereotypes and their Influence on attitude toward physical education. Physical Educator, 66 (2), 85-96.
Eagly, A. H., & Mladinic, A. (1989). Gender stereotypes and attitudes toward women and men. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 15 (4), 543-558.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167289154008
Leit, R. A., Pope, H. G., & Gray, J. J. (2000). Cultural expectations of muscularity in men: The evolution of playgirl centerfolds. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 29 (1), 90-93. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-108x(200101)29
Lorber, J. (2017). Paradoxes of Gender. Yale University Press.
https://doi.org/10.12987/9780300153446
McCabe, J., Tanner, A. E., & Heiman, J. R. (2009). The impact of gender expectations on meanings of sex and sexuality: Results from a cognitive interview study. Sex Roles, 62(3-4), 252-263. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-009-9723-4
McCann, H. (2020). Is there anything “toxic” about femininity? the rigid femininities that keep us locked in. Psychology & Sexuality, 13 (1), 9-22.
https://doi.org/10.1080/19419899.2020.1785534
Paechter, C. (2010). Tomboys and girly-girls: Embodied femininities in primary schools. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 31 (2), 221-235.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01596301003679743
Poran, M. A. (2002). Denying Diversity: Perceptions of Beauty and Social Comparison Processes Among Latina, Black, and White Women. Sex Roles, 47(1/2), 65-81. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1020683720636
Prentice, D. A., & Carranza, E. (2002). What women and men should be, shouldn’t be, are allowed to be, and don’t have to be: The contents of prescriptive gender stereotypes. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26 (4), 269-281.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-6402.t01-1-00066
Schippers, M. (2007). Recovering the feminine other: Masculinity, femininity, and Gender Hegemony. Theory and Society, 36(1), 85-102.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-007-9022-4
Six, B., & Eckes, T. (1991). A closer look at the complex structure of gender stereotypes. Sex Roles, 24(1-2), 57-71. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00288703
Steinberg, M., & Diekman, A. B. (2016). The double-edged sword of stereotypes of men. In Y.J. Wong & S.R. Wester (Eds.), APA Handbook of Men and Masculinities, 433-456.
https://doi.org/10.1037/14594-020
Tsuda, T. (Gaku). (2020). What makes hegemonic masculinity so hegemonic? Japanese American men and masculine aspirations. Identities, 29(5), 671-690.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1070289x.2020.1851005
Van Doorn, G., & March, E. (2020). Hegemonic masculinity, gender, and social distance: The mediating role of perceived dangerousness. Journal of Gender Studies, 30(3), 306-316. https://doi.org/10.1080/09589236.2020.1844000
Appendix A
Gender Hegemony Gauge
What is your gender?
What is your grade level?
Do you believe that there are certain expectations of you because of your gender?
Yes No
If yes, would you like to expand on what these expectations are?
Do you believe that there are any misconceptions that people assume of you because of your gender?
Yes No
If yes, would you like to expand on what these misconceptions are?
Have you ever experienced bias because of your gender?
Yes No
If yes, was this bias favorable or unfavorable? Would you like to expand on the biases you’ve experienced?
How strongly do you agree with the following statement: I consider myself to be confident.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree
Have standards from your gender impacted this?
Yes No
If yes, would you like to expand on what standards? How is this correlated to your self-esteem?
How strongly do you agree with the following statement: I can do anything that I want to do or be anyone I want to be in life.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree
Do you believe that standards from your gender have impacted whether or not you can do anything you want to do or be anyone you want to be?
Yes No
If yes, would you like to expand on what standards, and how they have interfered with this?
Do you think that there are any standards associated with your gender and being Hispanic that have altered your self-esteem?
Yes No
If yes, would you like to expand on how being Hispanic has altered your self-esteem?
Are there any specific experiences from your life in which you have experienced any expectations, misconceptions, bias, or standards?
Yes No
Would you like to expand on or share these experiences?
Appendix B
Conceptual Framework
Self-Esteem and Self-Efficacy in High School Students
Illustrations are not included in the reading sample
Appendix C
Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale
1. On the whole, I am satisfied with myself.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree
2. At times I think I am no good at all.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree
3. I feel that I have a number of good qualities.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree
4. I am able to do things as well as most other people.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree
5. I feel I do not have much to be proud of.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree
6. I certainly feel useless at times.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree
7. I feel that I’m a person of worth, at least on an equal plane with others.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree
8. I wish I could have more respect for myself.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree
9. All in all, I am inclined to feel that I am a failure.
Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree
10. I take a positive attitude toward myself.
Frequently asked questions
What is the title of the research?
The title of the research is "The Implications of Hegemonic Gender Standards on the Self-Esteem of Hispanic Adolescents: A Descriptive Analysis."
What is the research about?
The research investigates the impact of hegemonic gender standards on the self-esteem and self-efficacy of Hispanic high school students (ages 14-18) in the United States. It explores the prevalence of these standards and how they affect Hispanic girls compared to Hispanic boys.
What are hegemonic gender standards?
Hegemonic gender standards refer to the societal expectations and stereotypes associated with being male or female. They influence how individuals perceive themselves and their roles in society. In the context of this research, it focuses on hegemonic femininity and hegemonic masculinity.
What are the origins of hegemonic femininity standards?
Hegemonic femininity standards have their origins in Western, patriarchal cultures that often portray femininity as weak, passive, deceitful, and manipulative. These stereotypes are reinforced through various societal messages and institutions.
How does hegemonic femininity affect women?
Hegemonic femininity can negatively impact women by creating a rigid structure of expectations. Women may face shaming for deviating from these standards or for conforming to them, leading to feelings of inadequacy and aversion towards femininity.
Does hegemonic masculinity exist?
Yes, hegemonic masculinity also exists and significantly influences society. It involves the attributes and mannerisms expected of men, which often differ greatly from those expected of women. These standards can lead to mental health complications and limitations for men.
How do the impacts of hegemonic masculinity differ from those of hegemonic femininity?
Although there is a difference in the extremity of standards held for women and those held for men, The characteristics and mannerisms expected of men differ greatly from those expected of women, It is important to note that both genders have and experience their own limitations and freedoms within these expectations.
How does ethnicity affect the perception of hegemonic gender standards?
Being a member of a minority group, such as Hispanics in the United States, can significantly influence the interpretation and perception of hegemonic gender standards. Minority individuals may internalize ideals held by the dominant group and feel pressure to conform to those standards, impacting their self-esteem.
What methods were used in the research?
The research employed a mixed-method approach, combining quantitative and qualitative data collection. Participants engaged in structured interviews and completed the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale. This allowed for a balanced interpretation of the experienced hegemony and its impact on self-esteem.
What does the interview instrument contain?
The interview instrument has 18 questions, which vary with a Likert scale format, multiple choice format, and open-ended questions. Six of the questions are only prompted if participants respond "Yes" to the question that immediately precedes it.
What is the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale?
The Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale is a 10-question survey used to assess an individual's level of self-esteem. It utilizes a Likert scale question format to measure self-esteem ranges, such as low, normal, and high self-esteem.
What were the ethical considerations of the study?
All participants provided consent, were informed of their right to refuse questions, and were treated without bias. The study was conducted under the approval of an Institutional Review Board.
What was the procedure for data collection?
Data was collected through questionnaires and interviews at a high school. Participants were recruited through flyers explaining the study's premise and requirements. The sample included Hispanic high school students from various grade levels and academic backgrounds.
What were the key quantitative findings of the research?
Quantitative results showed that females were more likely to respond "Yes" to questions indicating experiences with hegemonic gender standards, while males were more likely to respond "No." Females' scores on the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale had a lower mean (17.2) than males' scores (20.5), although both fell in the normal range.
What were the key qualitative findings of the research?
Female participants shared experiences related to expectations about body image, emotional expression, biases in education, and difficulties in male-dominated industries. Male participants were more reluctant to share personal experiences.
What is the relationship between experienced gender hegemony and levels of self-esteem?
There is a correlation between experienced levels of gender hegemony and level of self-esteem among participants. In female participants, there were more instances of experienced gender hegemony standards and overall lower self-esteem compared to male participants. Moreover, the inverse remains apparent as well (that male participants have less instances of experienced gender hegemony standards and an overall higher self-esteem.
What conclusions can be drawn from the research?
The study concludes that Hispanic female adolescents experience more hegemonic gender standards on average than Hispanic male adolescents. These standards are correlated with lower self-esteem among females and higher self-esteem among males. The research suggests the need for future studies to explore the prevalence of hegemonic gender standards across different age groups and ethnicities and to develop methods to mitigate their negative effects.
- Quote paper
- Julia Corvea (Author), 2024, The Implications of Hegemonic Gender Standards on the Self-Esteem of Hispanic Adolescents, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/1494517
