When I was in early childhood, I was addicted to the color pink. I still have a funny photo in which I am giggling wearing a pink t-shirt, pink pants, a pink backpack and pink sneakers. I might have thought that pink is girls’ color and I am a girl, so I should choose pink not sky blue. Like this, in early childhood, children have their own gender identity and construct a gender stereotype based on environmental information. This gender stereotype causes them to build gender roles. In child care center observation, even though most of 6 children could answer about the gender based on the gender stereotype, they tended to be so indulged in their rigid gender stereotype due to cognitive limitation that it was hard for them to accept the other
…show more content…
However, after dressing a doll, half of the children answered that it was a boy doll and the others answered it was a girl doll. Interestingly, each group had a same reason among them. 3.9 female, 5.0 female, 3.8 female changed the answer, after dressing the doll, and the reason they thought this was all about the dress, which symbolizes the woman. On the other hand, 4.7 male, 4.9 female, 3.9 female maintained their answers because they thought the doll had a short hair which is opposite to a girls’ long hair. All of them cognized the difference between girl and boy by a symbolic trait of the gender based on gender stereotype. In short, the children who didn’t change the answer “boy doll” seemed that they develop gender constancy as well as recognize the permanence of sex. However, this result can’t be convinced that they cognized the sex doesn’t change despite the changing of hair, clothing, and nail since they answered it depending on a gender characteristic such as boys’ short …show more content…
This indicates that they were not able to think the gender roles or behaviors can be performed by the other gender. If a child answered “sports is for boy” and “no”, it means he or she thought girls are not accepted to do sports which is for boy. This result is caused by children’s cognitive limitation that is related to theory of mind. It is hard for them to understand that other’s thoughts can be different from their own thoughts. So they have difficulty accepting the other gender performs a gender role or behave, which is different from children’s
However, after dressing a doll, half of the children answered that it was a boy doll and the others answered it was a girl doll. Interestingly, each group had a same reason among them. 3.9 female, 5.0 female, 3.8 female changed the answer, after dressing the doll, and the reason they thought this was all about the dress, which symbolizes the woman. On the other hand, 4.7 male, 4.9 female, 3.9 female maintained their answers because they thought the doll had a short hair which is opposite to a girls’ long hair. All of them cognized the difference between girl and boy by a symbolic trait of the gender based on gender stereotype. In short, the children who didn’t change the answer “boy doll” seemed that they develop gender constancy as well as recognize the permanence of sex. However, this result can’t be convinced that they cognized the sex doesn’t change despite the changing of hair, clothing, and nail since they answered it depending on a gender characteristic such as boys’ short …show more content…
This indicates that they were not able to think the gender roles or behaviors can be performed by the other gender. If a child answered “sports is for boy” and “no”, it means he or she thought girls are not accepted to do sports which is for boy. This result is caused by children’s cognitive limitation that is related to theory of mind. It is hard for them to understand that other’s thoughts can be different from their own thoughts. So they have difficulty accepting the other gender performs a gender role or behave, which is different from children’s