Gender stereotypes and anachronism in 21st century textbooks

I lived the time of the communist alphabets books, with images and texts that clearly referred to the segregation of professions and household chores. „My mother prepares the meal, my father reads the newspaper, the girls clean the table and do the cleaning, the boys fix something around the house. Girls must play with dolls, boys with cars. Of course, at that time, all stereotypes seemed absolutely unshakable, in the absence of other aspirations. You couldn’t dream of alternative jobs or roles, it was an unrealistic hope to imagine that you could overcome the barriers of a world where most of the dreams were “imposed”.

Even after the post-revolutionary years, the reality of study textbooks has been preserved for a long time. Parents sometimes noticed anachronism and stereotypical clichés, but the inertia lasted for some time. Fortunately, there have always been exceptions – teachers who, more directly or more diplomatically, “tricked” many gender stereotypes. Some even had the courage to point them, to ridicule them and to warn their students not to fall into the trap of such very discreet manipulations.

The work of gender equality NGOs has been very important in the way many textbooks have been revised and brought closer to the standards in which we live. At the very least, we see fewer forks, stitches and sprinklers, or disk phones in children’s books … And mothers can be anything but teachers, nurses, or housewives, as we used to be. Associations such as ALEG have conducted numerous studies in middle and high schools to identify gender stereotypes – not just in textbooks, but in the most mundane everyday conversations that take place at school. For example, the harmless “mate-info is for boys, philology is for girls”, to the toxic influence of some scenes of domestic violence in novels considered reference points in Romanian literature.

Social Media has brought to public attention many such sideslips that parents or even teachers have noticed and “told” in the digital agora.

A major work, “Alice in the Land of Textbooks. An exploration of the characters that inspire children in school” is a research report written by Cosima RUGHINIȘ, Laura GRÜNBERG, Raluca POPESCU (coord.), very useful for teachers, but also for parents.

At the time of its publication in 2015, the paper exposed a wide range of anachronisms and gender stereotypes that abound in textbooks. Here are just a few, just to give you an idea of ​​how important all those “little” harmless details that still escape through children’s textbooks:

• “Occupational stereotypes persist: in all digital alphabets I found a single explicit verbal mention of a mother’s profession: a teacher. Otherwise, mothers excel in the kitchen, with a variety of illustrations of how they cook and serve food.”

• “Through characters and technologies, the world of textbooks remains anchored in the past, during the communist period or even the nineteenth century.”
• In old textbooks, “characters often work with sprinklers, blackboard with chalk, disk phones as well as needles or spindle – technologies of previous centuries.”
• “All the characters in the third and fourth grade civics textbooks who have professions related to science, philosophy, literature, or art are men (except for Isadora Duncan, a dancer).”
• “In a deep contrast to the current clothing symbols of femininity and masculinity, only 5% of female characters in the alphabet wear pants – creating an anachronistic visual portrait of girls and women.
• Romanian literature is represented by male authors and stops somewhere in the 60s and 70s – with few exceptions.
• “In fourth grade civics textbooks, the lesson on ‘Group Leader’ is often dominated by male characters – children having a choice as a class leader, in the texts presented, even between three boys.
• “State authorities are predominantly represented by male characters; as well as the prominent figures in the history of Romania. The female characters seem to have authority and prestige only in the family and in the classroom.”
• “Grandmothers become characters in the world of stories and memories – when they are not crocheting. Grandparents are wise and often read the newspaper. Neither grandmothers nor grandparents have professions, hobbies, being defined exclusively by their family status. Grandparents are usually sedentary, wear glasses and often do not hear well. Overall, there are very few representations of grandparents living active lives. “
• “The characters in the textbooks are strongly stereotyped: grandparents are sedentary and can’t hear well, women are mostly mothers who prepare meals, teachers or doctors – while men appear in a variety of occupations, but too few as fathers.”
• The girls’ frequent activity is watering flowers – creating a typical portrait of a ‘good girl’.

Since then, the percentage of discriminatory concepts and images has decreased, the illustrations have been updated with the increasingly digital reality, but there are still things to do with the modernization of programs.

A useful initiative comes from the EGALIS Association, which is working on a guide for teaching gender equality in pre-university education. The purpose of this guide is to be a support for teachers and educators, but also for interested parents, in understanding the impact they have on growing and educating an inclusive society, as well as to offer suggestions for gender mainstreaming in the classroom.

If from your experience as a parent or educator, you want to point out such gender stereotypes – still „alive” in textbooks or in student-teacher discussions – write to us to debate on them and to find solutions to correct them.

Foto:Pixabay