PASSIONATE MEN, EMOTIONAL WOMEN

Psychology Constructs Gender Difference in the Late 19th Century

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

33 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The author examines British and American scientific psychology's portrayal of natural and ideal masculinity and femininity in the late 19th century to show how purported differences in emotion and reason were critical to explaining the evolutionary foundation of existing social hierarchies. Strong emotion was identified with heterosexual manliness and men's purportedly better capacity to harness the power of emotion in the service of reason. "Feminine" emotion was portrayed as a comparatively ineffectual emotionality, a by-product of female reproductive physiology and evolutionary need to be attractive to men. The author argues that constructions of emotion by psychology served an important power maintenance function. A concluding section addresses the relevance of this history to the politics of emotion in everyday life, especially assertions of emotional legitimacy.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)92-110
Number of pages19
JournalHistory of Psychology
Volume10
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - May 1 2007

Fingerprint

Emotions
Psychology
Social Hierarchy
Femininity
Masculinity
Illegitimacy
Heterosexuality
Politics
Gender Differences
Emotion
History
Maintenance
Power (Psychology)
Evolutionary

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • History
  • Psychology(all)

Cite this

@article{7e6477eac3c04d75b1f81a9e51528849,
title = "PASSIONATE MEN, EMOTIONAL WOMEN: Psychology Constructs Gender Difference in the Late 19th Century",
abstract = "The author examines British and American scientific psychology's portrayal of natural and ideal masculinity and femininity in the late 19th century to show how purported differences in emotion and reason were critical to explaining the evolutionary foundation of existing social hierarchies. Strong emotion was identified with heterosexual manliness and men's purportedly better capacity to harness the power of emotion in the service of reason. {"}Feminine{"} emotion was portrayed as a comparatively ineffectual emotionality, a by-product of female reproductive physiology and evolutionary need to be attractive to men. The author argues that constructions of emotion by psychology served an important power maintenance function. A concluding section addresses the relevance of this history to the politics of emotion in everyday life, especially assertions of emotional legitimacy.",
author = "Stephanie Shields",
year = "2007",
month = "5",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1037/1093-4510.10.2.92",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "10",
pages = "92--110",
journal = "History of Psychology",
issn = "1093-4510",
publisher = "American Psychological Association Inc.",
number = "2",

}

PASSIONATE MEN, EMOTIONAL WOMEN : Psychology Constructs Gender Difference in the Late 19th Century. / Shields, Stephanie.

In: History of Psychology, Vol. 10, No. 2, 01.05.2007, p. 92-110.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - PASSIONATE MEN, EMOTIONAL WOMEN

T2 - Psychology Constructs Gender Difference in the Late 19th Century

AU - Shields, Stephanie

PY - 2007/5/1

Y1 - 2007/5/1

N2 - The author examines British and American scientific psychology's portrayal of natural and ideal masculinity and femininity in the late 19th century to show how purported differences in emotion and reason were critical to explaining the evolutionary foundation of existing social hierarchies. Strong emotion was identified with heterosexual manliness and men's purportedly better capacity to harness the power of emotion in the service of reason. "Feminine" emotion was portrayed as a comparatively ineffectual emotionality, a by-product of female reproductive physiology and evolutionary need to be attractive to men. The author argues that constructions of emotion by psychology served an important power maintenance function. A concluding section addresses the relevance of this history to the politics of emotion in everyday life, especially assertions of emotional legitimacy.

AB - The author examines British and American scientific psychology's portrayal of natural and ideal masculinity and femininity in the late 19th century to show how purported differences in emotion and reason were critical to explaining the evolutionary foundation of existing social hierarchies. Strong emotion was identified with heterosexual manliness and men's purportedly better capacity to harness the power of emotion in the service of reason. "Feminine" emotion was portrayed as a comparatively ineffectual emotionality, a by-product of female reproductive physiology and evolutionary need to be attractive to men. The author argues that constructions of emotion by psychology served an important power maintenance function. A concluding section addresses the relevance of this history to the politics of emotion in everyday life, especially assertions of emotional legitimacy.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34548026796&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34548026796&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1037/1093-4510.10.2.92

DO - 10.1037/1093-4510.10.2.92

M3 - Article

VL - 10

SP - 92

EP - 110

JO - History of Psychology

JF - History of Psychology

SN - 1093-4510

IS - 2

ER -