Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-mwwwr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-08T01:17:50.488Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Stereotype Threat and Attributional Ambiguity for Trans Women

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2020

Rachel McKinnon
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this paper I discuss the interrelated topics of stereotype threat and attributional ambiguity as they relate to gender and gender identity. The former has become an emerging topic in feminist philosophy and has spawned a tremendous amount of research in social psychology and elsewhere. But the discussion, at least in how it connects to gender, is incomplete: the focus is only on cisgender women and their experiences. By considering trans women's experiences of stereotype threat and attributional ambiguity, we gain a deeper understanding of the phenomena and their problematic effects.1

Information

Type
Open Issue Content
Information
Hypatia , Volume 29 , Issue 4 , Fall 2014 , pp. 857 - 872
Copyright
Copyright © 2014 by Hypatia, Inc.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

My thanks to Christine Logel, Samantha Brennan, and all the members of the Southwest Ontario Feminist Philosophers Workshop, the Sheffield Bias Conference, Society for the Philosophy of Sex and Love meeting at the Pacific APA, the Dayton Diversity in Philosophy Conference, and Richard Nunan. This research was supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council.

References

Antony, L. 2012. Different voices or perfect storm: Why are there so few women in philosophy? Journal of Social Philosophy 43 (3): 227–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aronson, J., and Inzlicht, M. 2004. The ups and downs of attributional ambiguity: Stereotype vulnerability and the academic self‐knowledge of African‐American students. Psychological Science 15 (12): 829–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bastian, B., and Haslam, N. 2005. Psychological essentialism and stereotype endorsement. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 42 (2): 228–35.Google Scholar
Blum, L. 2004. Stereotypes and stereotyping: A moral analysis. Philosophical Papers 33 (3): 251–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crocker, J., and Major, B. 1989. Social stigma and self‐esteem: The self‐protective properties of stigma. Psychological Review 96 (4): 608–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crocker, J., Voelkl, K., Testa, M., and Major, B. 1991. Social stigma: The affective consequences of attributional ambiguity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 60 (2): 218–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, P. G., Spencer, S. J., Quinn, D. M., and Gerhardstein, R. 2002. Consuming images: How television commercials that elicit stereotype threat can restrain women academically and professionally. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 28 (12): 1615–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, P. G., Spencer, S. J., and Steele, C. M. 2005. Clearing the air: Identity safety moderates the effects of stereotype threat on women's leadership aspirations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 88 (2): 276–87.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
del Priore, G., Saso, S., Meslin, E., Tzakis, A., Brannstrom, M., Clarke, A., Vianna, R., Sawyer, R., and Smith, J. R. 2013. Uterine transplantation—a real possibility? The Indianapolis consensus. Human Reproduction 28 (2): 288–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eckert, P., and McConnell‐Ginet, S. 2003. Language and gender. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fausto‐Sterling, A. 2000. Sexing the body: Gender politics and the construction of sexuality. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Frye, M. 1983. The politics of reality: Essays in feminist theory. Trumansburg, NY: Crossing Press.Google Scholar
Haslam, N., and Levy, S. R. 2006. Essentialist beliefs about homosexuality: Structure and implications for prejudice. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 32 (4): 471–85.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Haslanger, S. 2008. Changing the ideology and culture of philosophy: Not by reason (alone). Hypatia 23 (2): 210–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karkazis, K., Jordan‐Young, J., Davis, G., and Camporesi, S. 2012. Out of bounds: A critique of the new policies on hyperandrogenism in elite female athletes. American Journal of Bioethics 12 (7): 3–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kessler, S., and McKenna, W. 1985. Gender: An ethnomethodological approach. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lefkowitz, A., Edwards, M., and Balayla, J. 2013. Ethical considerations in the era of the uterine transplant: An update of the Montreal Criteria for the Ethical Feasibility of Uterine Transplantation. Fertility and Sterility. http://fertstertforum.com/lefkowitza-montreal-criteria-ethics-uterine-transplant/ (accessed June 12, 2013).Google Scholar
Levy, S. R., Stroessner, S. J., and Dweck, C. S. 1998. Stereotype formation and endorsement: The role of implicit theories. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 74 (6): 1421–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLeod, C. 2010. Harm or mere inconvenience? Denying women emergency contraception. Hypatia 25 (1): 11–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Major, B., Spencer, S., Schmader, T., Wolfe, C., and Crocker, J. 1998. Coping with negative stereotypes about intellectual performance: The role of psychological disengagement. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 24 (1): 34–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moran, C. 2011. How to be a woman. Chatham, UK: Ebury Press.Google Scholar
Norlock, K. 2012. Gender perception as a habit of moral perception: Implications for philosophical methodology and introductory curriculum. Journal of Social Philosophy 43 (3): 347–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pittinsky, T. L., Shih, M., and Ambady, N. 1999. Identity adaptiveness: Affect across multiple identities. Journal of Social Issues 55 (3): 503–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pittinsky, T. L., Shih, M., and Ambady, N. 2000. Will a category cue affect you? Category cues, positive stereotypes, and reviewer recall for applicants. Social Psychology of Education 4 (1): 53–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raymond, J. 1979. The transsexual empire: The making of the she‐male. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Rhodes, M., Leslie, S.‐J., and Tworek, C. M. 2012. Cultural transmission of social essentialism. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 109 (34): 13526–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Saul, J. Forthcoming. Implicit bias, stereotype threat, and women in philosophy. In Women in Philosophy: What Needs to Change?, ed. Jenkins, Fiona and Hutchison, Katrina. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Serano, J. 2007. Whipping girl. Berkeley, CA: Seal Press.Google Scholar
Shih, M., Pittinsky, T. L., and Ambady, N. 1999. Stereotype susceptibility: Identity salience and shifts in quantitative performance. Psychological Science 10 (1): 80–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spencer, S. J., Steele, C. M., and Quinn, D. M. 1999. Stereotype threat and women's math performance. Journal of Experimental and Social Psychology 35: 4–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steele, C. M., Spencer, S. J., and Aronson, J. 2002. Contending with group image: The psychology of stereotype and social identity threat. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 34: 379–440.Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, L. 2001. Philosophical investigations. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar