Affiliation:
1. Siberian Law Institute of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation; Krasnoyarsk State Pedagogical University
Abstract
The system of gender relations, conservative as it may seem, is currently undergoing some major changes. This research addressed the differences in social interaction in groups of people with different levels of masculinity and femininity. It relied on authentic questionnaires of gender attitudes and social interaction for different gender types. Interaction parameters included competition vs. support, hostility vs. sympathy, material vs. non-material priorities, values, control, dependence, and frequency/time of relationships. The results were subjected to ANOVA and T-test (IBM SPSS 27.0). The experiment involved 388 respondents (43% men, 57% women) aged 18–70 y.o. The gender type appeared to affect such aspects of relationships as time, sympathy, competitiveness, forced interaction, dependence on oneself and partner, control, friendly support, and mutual assistance. The largest number of statistically significant features belonged to the interaction between masculine and feminine types. They neither shared the same values nor sympathized with each other, had competitive and unequal relationships, expressed self-dependence, avoided nonmaterial resources, etc. Masculinity and femininity proved to play different roles in the organization of social interaction. The effect of masculinity was more prominent in relationships, making masculine-type people pickier in their choice of partners. The participants with prevailing femininity tended to adapt to their partner’s character profile.
Publisher
Kemerovo State University
Reference29 articles.
1. Baleva M. V. The effects of ingroup self-identity on the social perception of different groups. Sibirskiy Psikhologicheskiy Zhurnal, 2018, (68): 109–130. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17223/17267080/68/7
2. Baleva M. V. The other person, similar to me: particularities of intragroup perception of young men and women with different levels of negative personality traits. Sibirskiy Psikhologicheskiy Zhurnal, 2019, (74): 64–87. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17223/17267080/74/4
3. Borisova I. V., Biryakina V. I. The gender issues of aggression of boys and girls. Kazan Pedagogical Journal, 2016, (1): 192–198. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/vhnqdj
4. Butkevich A. Yu. Gender differences in the principles of mediative relations. Vestnik Kemerovskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, 2022, 24(4): 482–492. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21603/2078-8975-2022-24-4-482-492
5. Voropai E. V. Masculinity and femininity in the views of modern youth. Psikhologiya. Istoriko-kriticheskie obzory i sovremennye issledovaniya, 2018, 7(6A): 5–15. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/zahmip