Psychodynamic explanations of gender development Flashcards
What is the phallic stage?
The third psychosexual stage that occurs from 3-6 years old where the child’s source of libido/erogenous zone is their penis/clitoris and they experience pleasure from engaging in masturbation
How does a child resolve their gender identity during the phallic stage?
A child’s gender identity is resolved either through the Oedipus complex (in boys) or the Electra complex (in girls)
What is the Oedipus complex?
When a boy harbours a hatred for his father because he sees him as a rival for the mother’s love, however he fears his father will punish him (castration anxiety) for his lust for his mother and thereby represses these feelings and identifies with his father in the process
What is castration anxiety (in boys)?
When boys fear their fathers will punish them by castrating them if they find out about their incestuous desire for their mother
What is the Electra complex?
When a girl blames her mother for her lack of a penis (penis envy), but resolves this through a desire to have a baby and comes to identify with her mother
What is penis envy (in girls)?
When girls experience distress due to the belief they had a penis and they blame their mother for removing it (through castration)
What is identification?
A desire to be associated with a particular person or group
What is internalisation?
Where an individual adopts and accepts the attitudes or behaviour of another
What is the role of identification and internalisation during the Oedipus and Electra Complex?
In order to resolve their unconscious conflicts children will identify with and internalise the gender-related behaviours and attitudes of their same sex parent
What is a case study that supports the psychodynamic explanation for gender development?
Little Hans (1909)
What are the two strengths of the psychodynamic explanation of gender development?
Research support
There is some evidence to suggest that boys whose fathers are absent during the age of 5 (when the Oedipus complex occurs) show less sex-typed/stereotypical behaviour than boys whose fathers were present throughout.
Stevenson and Black (1988) carried out a meta-analysis comparing father-present and father-absent boys. They found that preschool aged father-absent boys made less stereotypical choices of toys and activities compared with father-present boys.
Counter-argument- Macallum and Golombock (2004) Found children of typical parental families do not develop differently than children atypical parental families
The oedipus complex- One strength of Freud’s theory is there is some support for the role of the Oedipus complex in gender development.
Freud’s explanation of gender development means that, for boys, ‘normal’ development depends on being raised by at least one male parent. There is some support for this idea. George Rekers and Shasta Morey (1990) rated the gender identity of 49 boys aged 3-11 years based on interviews with their families and the children themselves. Of those who were judged to be ‘gender disturbed’, 75% had neither their biological father nor a substitute father living with them.
This suggests that being raised with no father may have a negative impact upon gender identity - in line with what Freud’s theory would predict.
Counter argument- Generally though, the relationship between absent fathers and problems of gender identity is not supported. A study by Henny Bos and Theo Sandfort (2010) compared data from 63 children where both parents were lesbians and 68 children from ‘traditional’ families. Children raised by lesbian parents felt less pressure to conform to gender stereotypes and were less likely to assume their own gender was superior, but there were no differences in terms of psychosocial adjustment or gender identity.
This contradicts Freud’s theory as it suggests that fathers are not necessary for healthy gender identity
What are the three limitations of the psychodynamic explanation of gender development?
Use of case study method
Freud’s use of case studies to support the Oedipus complex is based on subjective interpretation. For example, in the case study of Little Hans, it is highly unlikely that any other researcher or psychologist would have drawn the same conclusions regarding Hans’ behaviour.
Although Freud’s observations were detailed and carefully recorded, critics have suggested that it is not possible to make such universal claims about gender identity based on studies of such a small number of individuals who were psychologically abnormal.
Androcentric theory
Freud wrote extensively about the Oedipus complex and admitted that women were a mystery to him. Much of the psychodynamic theory surrounding female/girls’ development (i.e. Electra complex) was undertaken by Carl Jung, one of Freud’s contemporaries.
Karen Horney (a feminist psychoanalyst) criticised Freud’s notion of penis envy. She argued that a more powerful emotion than penis envy is the male experience of ‘womb envy’ – a reaction to women’s ability to nurture and sustain life. She claimed that penis envy (like womb envy) is a cultural concept rather than an innate trait and challenged the idea that female gender development was founded on a desire to want to be like men= an androcentric assumption.
Untestable concepts
The development of gender, according to this theory, is based upon unconscious conflicts that occur during the phallic stage (Oedipus and Electra complexes). This information is not open to empirical testing and therefore lacks falsification.
For example, Freud suggested that Little Hans used defence mechanisms (repressed his hatred for his father and displaced his fear onto horses) during the Oedipus complex, yet these are unconscious mechanisms. Meaning there is no way to objectively verify their existence, as they are not directly observable.
