5. DISCUSSION
5.1 The Association between Autonomy and Gender (and Race)
5.1.1 Autonomy and Gender
Women scored significantly higher than men on the Relation subscale of the Relational Being Scale (RBS). This result lends support to the hypothesis that women have a more relational sense of autonomy than do men. This study drew on theories from the Stone Center and others (Baker- Miller, 1984 in McChrystal, 1994; Jordan, 1984 in McChrystal, 1994; Surrey, 1985 in
McChrystal, 1994) that women differ from men in fundamental ways and, specifically, that they value relatedness more than autonomy. The significant gender difference on Relation is
consistent with other studies that have found significant gender differences in autonomy (Bekker, 1993; Chodorow, 1978; Miller, 1986, 1990; Surrey, 1991), with women exhibiting a more
relational sense of autonomy than men.
However, the lack of significant differences between men and women on the Autonomy subscale of the RBS, as discussed below, suggests that women have a greater tendency towards
conventional autonomy than current feminist theory implies. It seems likely that gender
differences in the experience of autonomy are less pronounced than previously thought, and that women‟s stronger tendency towards the relational continuum of this autonomy scale (RBS) lends more support to women‟s relational sense of self than to a significant difference between men and women‟s experience of autonomy, particularly given the similarity between women and men‟s scores on the measure of conventional autonomy. This significant difference in
relatedness between men and women is paralleled by the significant difference between men and women in the experience of a relational interdependent self, and is discussed in further detail in section 5.2.1 below.
Non-significant findings
No significant differences were found between men and women on the Autonomy subscale. The difference between men and women was in the direction anticipated (men higher than women) but was not statistically significant. No conclusions can thus be drawn in support of the
hypothesis that men would exhibit greater levels of conventional autonomy than women. This finding adds to a body of research that has also found no evidence in support of differences between men and women in the experience of autonomy (Anderson et al., 1994; McChrystal, 1994). This may be, in part, due to the considerable variation in the way that autonomy has been defined from study to study (Steinberg & Silverberg, 1986).
However, it should be noted that the non-significant results of this study do not necessarily imply that a difference in men‟s and women‟s experiences of autonomy does not exist. It could be that men and women do differ in their experience of autonomy, but not as much as posited by some feminist theorists. These differences may have changed in the years since these theories were posited, or it could be that a tertiary education sample of men and women may be more
androgynous. Differences between men and women may not be as extreme or distinct as some theories propose, with both men and women experiencing both independent and relational aspects of autonomy. Furthermore, differences between groups may have been previously
overestimated, and there may in fact be greater variation within groups (for example, women) than between groups (Ewing, 1990; Killen, 1997; Turiel & Wainryb, 1994).
While acknowledging the important contribution that relational theories have made to expanding the understanding of the self for women in particular, Berlin and Johnson (1989) argue that, by acknowledging that women have relational capabilities, it seems to be simultaneously concluded that they lack the capacity for or interest in autonomous ability. They attribute the emphasis on difference between the sexes with respect to autonomy to the masculinist connotations that the concept is encumbered with – isolation, hierarchy, self-sufficiency and isolation – making it the opposite what women reportedly value. This could lead to an assumption of homogeneity within groups that plays down the differences within genders. The exaggeration of difference has also been highlighted by Stewart and McDermott (2004). Hare-Mustin and Marecek (1986, p. 210) note that the “construction of gender emphasizes difference, polarity, and hierarchy, rather than similarity and equality of the sexes. Because autonomy and relatedness are viewed as gendered, they come to be seen as opposites, and their similarities are overlooked.” This may explain why women scored high on both the Relation and Autonomy subscales of the RBS, indicating high levels of both autonomy and relatedness.
The fact that the results of the current study do not seem to be consistent with previous research that has both found and not found gender differences in autonomy and relatedness may be partially explained by the presence of alpha bias and beta bias (Hare-Mustin & Marecek, 1987) in the theories that focus on gender. Alpha bias is the tendency to exaggerate gender differences, as is apparent in psychodynamic theories, sex role theory, and feminist psychodynamic theories;
beta bias is the tendency to over-generalize psychological research done on men, to women, and is evident some systems approaches to family therapy, and in theories that view male and female roles as complementary (Hare-Mustin & Marecek, 1987). The lack of significant differences between men and women on Autonomy in this study may be in part due to greater similarities between the sexes, and greater differences within the sexes. Furthermore, while interpersonal connection has been shown to be particularly important to women, as demonstrated by women‟s significantly higher scores on Relation in this study than men, autonomy and its connotations of freedom and agency may actually contribute to the probability of satisfying connections (Berlin
& Johnson, 1989). This could account for women‟s higher than expected scores on the Autonomy subscale of the RBS, whilst still scoring significantly high on Relation.
That the men and women in the current study did not differ significantly on the Autonomy subscale could also be a reflection of the changing times, and of changing gender-role
perceptions and expectations. Fleming (2005) also found only marginal gender differences with regard to desire for autonomy. Conversely, significant differences were found between men and women regarding their achievement of autonomy, suggesting that girls do not exhibit the same tendency to struggle for independence as boys, relying more on parental norms. An important implication of Fleming‟s (2005) study is that girls appear to value autonomy and personal agency as much as boys. Fleming (2005) suggests that studies that have found marked gender
differences in autonomy may have been focusing on the achievement of, rather than the desire for, autonomy. These implications lend support to the Autonomy results of this study, and are supported by previous research (Steinberg & Silverberg, 1986).
Similarly, Lamborn and Steinberg (1993) found that girls were more likely than boys to demonstrate emotional autonomy in the context of a supportive parental relationship. Their results call into question the conventional view that the development of autonomy is more developed in males than in females. However, they also found that greater emotional autonomy tended to be associated with more negative outcomes for girls, particularly for girls from certain ethnic backgrounds, which they attribute partially to the cultural pressure on girls to remain less autonomous. This may also explain why the Autonomy scores of women in the current study were higher than expected – but not as high as the scores of men. Women who desire and/or are experiencing greater autonomy may simultaneously be experiencing negative consequences as a result of their increased autonomy, and hence may be placing a limit on the amount of autonomy they achieve or exhibit. Indeed, it has been pointed out that females in societies that value
autonomy, assertiveness and individuation, learn to value autonomy and separation and thereby devalue their gender identity, which tends towards affiliation and involvement (Gilligan, 1990;
Orbach, 1986). This theory could also account for why women‟s Relation scores in the current study were significantly higher than men‟s Relation scores, but, simultaneously, women and men‟s scores on Autonomy did not differ significantly.
The differences that appear to have existed between men and women in terms of autonomy and relatedness may have narrowed in recent years, with women becoming more autonomous and men more relational. Studies that have found differences between men and women in the opposite direction to what has previously been put forward – i.e., women being more autonomous than men - support this argument (Lamborn & Steinberg, 1993; Steinberg &
Silverberg, 1986). Anderson et al. (1994) also suggest that the lack of significant differences may
be, at least in part, because the women‟s movement has altered past gender discrepancies in levels of autonomy. This may also have resulted in a degree of conflict for women, as they negotiate the discrepancy between their previously relational roles and desires, with their new desire for and levels of autonomy (Gerson, 2002).
Some suggest that women are experiencing a „splitting‟ in terms of their gender roles, expectations, and identities (Catina et al., 1996; Layton, 2004). Layton (2004) notes that the psychological position of women is moving away from the relational psyche, towards defensive autonomy – a transition stage, characterized by splitting, between the submissive relational female and the defensively autonomous male. She suggests that since women have moved into the workplace and are doing the same work as men do, they also have the same difficulty with finding time for relationships as men do. Incongruity between women‟s relational values and the individualistic values of society may lead to identification with an ideal (autonomy) that
contradicts gender identity, and is associated with a range of negative outcomes and maladaptive responses for women, such as the development of eating disorders (Mensinger, 2005; Steiner- Adair, 1990). This seems consistent with the conflicting findings on the RBS in this study, where women showed a significantly greater tendency towards relational autonomy than men, but, equally, a tendency towards conventional autonomy that did not differ significantly from men.
In summary, there is evidence to suggest that the differences between men and women with respect to autonomy may not be as pronounced as previously suggested. There has been both alpha – exaggerating difference - and beta – underplaying difference - bias in gender difference research., conversely, that women value autonomy as much as men. It also seems that the gap
between men and women in terms of autonomy has narrowed, although this may have resulted in some conflict for women as they negotiate contradictory gender roles and expectations within themselves and in society. This also suggests that autonomy and relation might not be binary concepts, which is particularly evident in the current study‟s finding that women scored high on measures of Relation as well as Autonomy.
5.1.2 Autonomy and Race