Tipps & Tools
Der Einfluss von Genderstereotypen auf Bildungsverläufe
Das European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE) hat 2011 über 500 Lebensgeschichten von Menschen aus 27 EU-Staaten zusammentragen und auswerten lassen. Die Publikation zeigt, wie stark die Bildungskarrieren in Europa immer noch von tradierten Geschlechterrollen bestimmt werden.
Auch heute noch bekommen Frauen und Männer in Familie, Schule und ihren jeweiligen Peer-Gruppen Werte und Bilder vermittelt, wie eine „richtige“ Frau oder ein „richtiger“ Mann zu sein haben. Je nach sozioökonomischen Hintergrund, Wohnort oder Nationalität sind diese Normen mehr oder weniger rigide und bekommen diejenigen die Konsequenzen zu spüren, wenn sie dem Weiblichkeits- oder Männlichkeitsbild nicht entsprechen.
Je jünger die Betroffenen sind, desto strenger sind bei Normabweichungen die Sanktionen. Dies trifft insbesondere für Jungen zu – beispielsweise, wenn sie Tränen vergießen oder körperlichen Auseinandersetzungen aus dem Weg gehen. Eine klassische Erwartung an Frauen ist es, dass sie „später mal“ Kinder bekommen und dass sie empathischer und ausgleichender im Umgang mit anderen sind.
Diese Stereotype führen dazu, dass nach wie vor Chancen ungleich verteilt sind: Bei Frauen zeigt sich das darin, dass sie Probleme haben, im Berufsleben „voranzukommen“, während Männer Schwierigkeiten haben, Kindererziehung und Karriere zu vereinbaren.
Wie wirkmächtig Geschlechterstereotype sind, zeigen die über 500 persönlichen Lebensgeschichten von Menschen aus 27 EU-Staaten, die von Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftlern im Auftrag des European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE) 2011 zusammengetragen wurden.
Interview mit einer 22 jährigen Studentin aus Dänemark:
Well, when you are studying at (name university) then you do work a lot in groups. If you are in a boy’s group there is always competition to get one or two girls in. And then in the second term we got two girls in the group, all together we were five persons. And for these girls, their intended role was to take on all the formalistic work. They had to be in charge of all of that, something which the rest of us didn’t care much about. Not because they are not talented, they are very talented at an analytical level. But these things about the size of a project, how to do your references, how to do your bibliography, when to hand it in, how it should look like. Layout, everything, all those things.
Maybe you can tell me a bit more about how it went? Because there was a change in roles?
There was a change in roles. That often happens when you get to know each other more closely. Then you have finished some work and you know what each person is capable of. So there is a difference between the initial impression and perhaps the prejudices you have and until the persons actually prove their capabilities. And then the differences more or less stop because it just turned out that one was very skilled in keeping a good overview of everything and then she also proved to be very skilled in the analytic work. I also took on some of the more general work, including correcting commas and those sorts of things. Also and then the analytic parts – roles changed as we went along and one of the boys he didn’t do this or didn’t do that simply because we believed he wasn’t good enough. And it wasn’t because he’s a boy, it was because of his capabilities which just didn’t match.
Well, one thing is the division of labour but what about the dynamics in the group – did it mean something that you got other individuals in the group or?
Yes, it did. It always means something. Especially when these individuals adopt a different role than was originally intended. Then something dynamic happens in the group. Initially you don’t really know each other but at least you have an idea of where you are and then you work your way into those roles where you would naturally be part of a group. In this respect, the girls then belonged to totally different categories.
Are there any concrete examples you can think of? Based on the combination of persons?
Well, one of the girls who has intended to take on this role of doing all the practical things, she was very good at that and of course she should be taking on all of that. One of the boys had also been intended to take on that role because he was good at writing all the general parts and keep an overview of things. And maybe not get so involved with all the analytical work but rather stand on the sideline in relation to the analytical work, he also got that role. And the one who was sidelined he was slowly pushed out, particularly because we would often gather all the work we had done and read through the work of the others in the group. Then we realised that he wasn’t just careless but that we were forced to constantly rewrite his work – it simply wasn’t good enough. And there was this girl, this other girl, she was really good, and the two of us teamed up when I realised she was very good at exactly the analytical parts. Particularly by taking a critical look on our own writings, right. And then it ended up being more the two of us who would be sort of leading the groups and taking us in the direction we wanted to go. In relation to (name fellow student) – he and I were meant to have done this. At least what was initially the plan.“
Die Interviews können hier nachgelesen werden.