Gendered Places: The Dimensions of Local Gender Norms across the United States

Abstract

In this study, we explore the dimensions of local gender norms across U.S. commuting zones. Applying hierarchical cluster analysis with four established indicators of gender norms, we find that these local cultural environments are best conceptualized with a multilevel framework. Commuting zones can be differentiated between those that are egalitarian and those that are traditional. Within these general categories, however, exist more complex dimensions. Gender-traditional areas may be distinguished between traditional-breadwinning and traditional-essentialist, while egalitarian areas are separated into those that are liberal-egalitarian and egalitarian-essentialist. Examining the factors sustaining this spatial variation, we test the role of compositional and contextual effects. We find limited support for compositional effects because commuting zone demographic makeup explains little variation in gender norm indicators. Instead, we find evidence that local gender norms are sustained through contextual effects where the experience of living in a particular environment shapes residents’ attitudes and behaviors. Contextual effects are exceptionally strong in areas with traditional gender norms, where residents who would otherwise hold gender-egalitarian perspectives (e.g., the highly educated) have more traditional outlooks than those who share the same characteristics but reside in places with egalitarian gender norms.

Can Regional Gender Ideologies Account for Variation of the Gender Pay Gap? The Case of Germany

“…Their cross-national variation has been shown to be predictive of a broad range of social phenomena, such as the allocation of work within households (Fuwa 2004), the labor force attachment of women (Fortin 2005) and fertility behavior (Arpino et al 2015). Yet, gender ideologies vary not only across countries, but also within countries, such as across federal governmental units (Pessin 2018, Uunk andLersch 2019), commuting zones (Scarborough and Sin 2020) or school classes (Salikutluk and Heyne 2017).…”

“…For instance, if among elderly there is a tendency of holding rather traditional gender beliefs (Brooks andBolzendahl 2004, Perales et al 2019), this likely does not aect only the elderly people; rather, any group with a higher share of elderly people can be expected to constitute a relatively more traditional normative environment. In other words, the aggregate gender ideology of any social group depends partly on the composition of its members (Scarborough and Sin 2020). Thereby, the variation of ideology-predictive characteristics across contexts, such as the age structure or the proliferation of religious beliefs, results in contextual variation of gender ideologies.…”

What You Want Is Not Always What You Get: Gender Differences in Employer-Employee Exchange Relationships during the COVID-19 Pandemic

“…Gender ideologies represent individuals' beliefs about gender-separate spheres in paid and unpaid work (Davis and Greenstein 2009). They vary across country contexts (Grunow et al 2018) and regions within countries (Hamjediers 2020;Scarborough and Sin 2020). In line with RIT, previous research also demonstrates that whether a workforce accepts or opposes the idea of women and men as dual breadwinners varies substantially across workplaces (Peters et al 2020).…”

The Intersection of Racial and Gender Attitudes, 1977 through 2018

“…Providing insight on cohort effects, we explore generational differences between Pre-Baby Boomers (born prior to 1946), Baby Boomers (1946Boomers ( through 1964, Generation-Xers (1965through 1980, and Millennials and Gen-Z respondents (born after 1980). 9 We also report differences by education (college or more, some college, high school degree or equivalent, and less than high school), and region (Northeast, Midwest, South, and West) because both gender and racial attitudes have been found to vary across these components (Hunt 2007;Scarborough and Sin 2020). 10 We next report the relationship of social class and religiosity to attitudinal configurations as these two characteristics have been shown to shape individuals' cultural orientations (Bobo and Kluegel 1993;Schnabel 2016).…”