Thus far we have considered only the biological factors involved in the determination of gender identity. Our sense of femaleness or maleness is not based exclusively on biological conditions, however. Social-learning theory suggests that our identification with either masculine or feminine roles or a combination thereof (androgyny) results primarily from the social and cultural models and influences that we are exposed to during our early development (Lips, 1997; Lorber, 1995).
Even before their baby is born, parents (and other adults involved in child rearing) have preconceived notions about how boys and girls differ. And through a multitude of subtle and not so subtle means, they communicate these ideas to their children. Gender-role expectations influence the environments in which children are raised, from the choice of room color to the selection of toys. They also influence the way parents think of their children. For example, in one study parents were asked to describe their newborn infants. Parents of boys described them as “strong,” "active," and “robust," whereas parents of girls used words such as “soft” and “delicate”—even though all their babies were of similar size and muscle tone (Rubin et al., 1974). Not surprisingly, gender-role expectations also influence the way parents respond to their children: A boy might be encouraged to suppress his tears if he scrapes a knee and to show other “manly” qualities, such as independence and aggressiveness, whereas girls might be encouraged to be nurturing and cooperative (Hyde, 2006; Mosher & Tomkins, 1988).
By age 3, most children have developed a firm gender identity (DeLamater & Friedrich, 2002). From this point, gender-identity reinforcement typically becomes somewhat self-perpetuating, as most children actively seek to behave in ways that they are taught are appropriate to their own sex (DeLamater & Friedrich, 2002). It is not unusual for little girls to go through a period of insisting that they wear fancy dresses or practice baking in the kitchen—sometimes to the dismay of their own mothers, who have themselves adopted more-practical wardrobes and have abandoned the kitchen for a career. Likewise, young boys may develop a fascination for superheroes, policemen, and other cultural role models and try to adopt behaviors appropriate to these roles.
Anthropological studies of other cultures also lend support to the social-learning interpretation of gender-identity formation. In several societies the differences between males and females that we often assume to be innate are simply not evident. In fact, Margaret Mead’s classic book Sex and Temperament in Three Primitive Societies (1963) reveals that other societies may have different views about what is considered feminine or masculine. In this widely quoted report of her fieldwork in New Guinea, Mead discusses two societies that minimize differences between the sexes. She notes that among the Mundugumor both sexes exhibit aggressive, insensitive, uncooperative, and non-nurturing behaviors that would be considered masculine by our society’s norms. In contrast, among the Arapesh both males and females exhibit gentleness, sensitivity, cooperation, nurturing, and nonaggressive behaviors that would be judged feminine in our society. And, in a third society studied by Mead, the Tchambuli, masculine and feminine gender roles are actually the reverse of what Americans view as typical. Because there is no evidence that people in these societies are biologically different from Americans, their often diametrically different interpretations of what is masculine and what is feminine seem to result from different processes of social learning.
Although parents are becoming more sensitive to the kinds of toys children play with, many still choose one set of toys and play activities for boys and another set for girls.
Studies of intersexed children also provide support for the social-learning interpretation of gender-identity formation as described in the following section.