Introduction to Gender Role Conflict and Gender Role Journey Web Page – How to use the Web page

 

Gender Role Conflict, Theory and Research

Important Caveats and Cautions About GRC

I want to be clear on numerous controversial points that must be highlighted.

The GRC research program does not blame men, negatively stereotype men, or criticize them for patriarchal sexism that contributes to their internalized oppression as some have implied in the past. From the beginning my goal has been different: to expose GRC so that men and women can become responsible for their problems and consequently liberate themselves from restricted gender roles and sexism.

To individuals who have suggested that documenting men’s GRC is negatively critiquing men and doing them a disservice, I say this. Researching men’s GRC is different from negatively critiquing men, blaming them, or being anti-male. The research program is not about blame but finding solutions to these complex human problems.

Additionally, women, feminists, and LBGTQ people are not blamed or scapegoated for men’s GRC. Furthermore, this web page has nothing to do with men’s rights propaganda that has blamed women and feminists for men’s problems. If anything, I seek to correct their distortions and promote a pro-feminist, gay affirmative, and positive masculinity and human perspective.

The research program has a feminist foundation and endorses equity between the sexes. Furthermore, the GRC research program is grounded in human rights, that every person should have the freedom to be whoever they are, with their gender roles and gender role identities free from patriarchal, sexist, and racist ideologies and institutional structures.

No Panacea Here: Only Contexts To Understand Changing Gender Roles & GRC

GRC is a context for understanding the complexity of gender roles in people’s lives. Many people, either consciously or unconsciously, are conflicted by changing gender roles and do not understand how GRC interacts with their gender role beliefs, identities, and sexual orientations. For some people, if not many, non-heterosexual/non binary-queer identities are disturbing because these sexual and gender lifestyles conflict with their religious, familial, or ethnic values. Therefore, all of this can stimulate intense passions about gender roles expressed in the cultural /political wars dynamics of our society that create division, polarization, hate, and violence.

Furthermore, many people are slow (or resistant) to evaluate how gender roles affect their psychological functioning and interpersonal dynamics.

GRC is one portal (i.e, opening) to help men and women explore how conceptions of sex, gender roles, and gender identity, affects their lives. Discussing how to journey with GRC can help normalize the confusion, polarization, and felt threat from changing gender roles and at the same time, help people reflect and act on their values and beliefs in ways that empower them and others. I have seen this empowerment happen with my students who have journeyed with their gender roles in my classes and workshops (Kilmartin, Addis, Mahalik, & O’Neil, 2013; O’Neil & Roberts Carroll, 1988; O’Neil 1996, 2001; Goldberg & O’Neil, 1997; O’Neil, Challenger, Renzulli, Crapser, Webster, 2013).

I do not consider GRC to be a panacea for explaining the complexity of gender roles in our society. There are many gaps in our knowledge about how human gender roles affect psychosocial development, psychopathology, and people’s everyday lives. For example, how gender role identity and sexual bonding patterns relate to GRC, and ideologies of masculinity and femininity are in their early stages of development.

Nonetheless, I do believe that GRC concepts do provide opportunities for people to explore their gender roles using an informed, evidence and data-based approach that promotes exploration and dialogue about how restrictive gender roles and sexism negatively affect people’s psychological lives.

GRC theory discusses the complexity of restrictive gender roles in psychological, situational, developmental, multicultural, and political contexts. Theoretical models show these contexts; assumptions and hypotheses about GRC are enumerated on this web page. Both the macro-societal and micro-interpersonal contexts of GRC are discussed.

GRC has been theoretically connected to the macro-societal problems that cause societal injustices and oppression of women, sexual minorities, and people of color. The macro-societal and socio-political perspectives conceptualize human discrimination, oppression and social injustices due to patriarchal norms and institutional structures  that cause  GRC in most societies worldwide.

Serious social-political problems at the macro-societal-patriarchal level related to GRC include: fascism, societal violence, personal and sexual violence toward women and sexual minorities, police brutality, oppression, racism, sexism, classism, ethnocentrism, heterosexism, all forms of discrimination, poverty, famine and hunger, social injustice, conflict between nations, war, and genocide. There is considerable evidence in human history and from research that many of these problems relate to men’s gender roles and patriarchal structures that continue to oppress humans at great cost and with much suffering.  Therefore, there is a lot at stake.

On a personal level, the web page is about men and women who are oppressed by restrictive gender roles and patriarchal structures. From this perspective, oppressed people are individuals who are devalued, restricted, and violated because they deviate from or conform to expected gender roles. They are discriminated against because of their: sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, race, class, ethnicity, national origin or any other diversity index. Frequently, the oppressed are those who are not part of the status quo, defined as white, male, heterosexual, middle class, Christian, Eurocentric, and American. Even this status quo patriarchal majority can be oppressed by sexism and patriarchal values because with human discrimination and oppression, psychological costs exist for both the victim and the oppressor. Moreover, the dominant white majority reap economic benefits from oppressive sexist-racist systems causing destructive capitalism and poverty. Few people, whether victims or victimizers are spared from patriarchal abuses and violence in our capitalist society. It conrcerns competition, power, control, money, greed, and destructive capitalism.

For more on GRC Theory, Models, Definitions, go to the GRC theory, models, definitions, & contexts by clicking here or using the left navigation menu.

The Gender Role Journey Paradigm, described on this web page, encourages both men and women to live more humanly, free from the shackles of sexist gender role stereotypes and GRC.

The gender role journey is one way for people to discuss (deconstruct) sexist stereotypes and gender roles that limit their human potential and satisfaction in life. Expand here

The research program’s ultimate goal is to empower men and women regardless of how they “identify” with their sex, gender roles, gender role identity, sexual orientation, or any other difference or deviation from white, traditional and heterosexual norms.

The research program is grounded in social science methodology including psychological, quantitative, qualitative, and evidence based strategies to understand men’s problems and potentials. The Gender Role Conflict Scale (GRCS, O’Neil, Helms, Gable, David, & Wrightman, 1986)) and the Gender Role Journey Measure (GRJM, O’Neil, Egan, Owen, & Murray, 1993) assess GRC and help people resolve it. The psychometrics of the GRCS are summarized on this web page and moderators and mediators studies of GRC are reported. Preliminary research models to assess GRC are shown on this web page.

Defining GRC theoretically is important because misunderstanding, confusion, and conflict exist about how sex, gender, gender roles, sexual orientation, and gender role identities are understood in our society.

One of the greatest dilemmas we face is that the public lacks definitions of gender roles and how masculinity and femininity interact with their gender role identities, sexual orientations, and interpersonal processes with others. Ambiguity about gender roles and a lack of operational definitions make dialogue difficult resulting many times in avoidance, defensiveness, conflict, or denial that there is a problem at all.

Definitions of GRC and the gender role journey have evolved from a series of theoretical and research manuscripts published over 35 years (O’Neil, 1981a, 1981b, 1982, 1990, 2008, 2015; O’Neil, Wester, Heesacker, & Snowden, 2017; O’Neil et al., 1986; O’Neil et al., 1995; O’Neil & Denke, 2017; O’Neil & Egan, 1993; O’Neil & Nadeau, 1999). GRC is measured by the Gender Role Conflict Scale (GRCS; O’Neil, Helms, Gable, David, & Wrightsman, 1986)  and the phases of the gender role journey are assessed by the  Gender Role Journey Measure (GRJM; O’Neil. Egan, Owen, & Murry McBride, 1993).

GRC is defined as a psychological state in which socialized gender roles have negative consequences for the person or others. GRC occurs when rigid, sexist, or restrictive gender roles result in personal restriction, devaluation, or violation of others or oneself (O’Neil, 1981, 2008, 2015 ). The ultimate outcome of this kind of conflict is the restriction of the human potential of the person experiencing it or a restriction of another person’s potential. GRC has been operationally defined by four psychological domains, three situational contexts, and three personal and interpersonal experiences.

For more on GRC Theory, Models, and Definitions, go to the GRC theory, models, definitions, & contexts by clicking here or use the left menu to navigate.

Table 1 shows the number of studies completed on GRC using the GRCS. Empirical studies that have used the Gender Role Conflict Scale (GRCS) total 585, and 263 of these studies have been published in the psychological literature. Dissertations or master theses have been completed in 322 studies. Over 160 papers have been presented at the annual APA convention meetings. Internationally, 130 empirical studies have been completed on men outside the United States; 51 have been published in the psychological literature. The GRCS has been used in over 25 different countries and translated into 20 languages.

Table 1 also shows the number of GRC studies in the following cluster categories: Overall Demographics; Diversity, Intersectionality, and Multicultural Studies; Psychological Correlates; Physical and Psychological Health;  GRC Special Topics;  GRC Special Groups, including vulnerable men.

From O’Neil et al., 1986

You are referred to five summaries of GRC research over the years for a full answer to this question (O’Neil 2008, 2013, 2015; O’Neil & Denke, 2017; O’Neil, Holmes, & Good, 1995).

Overall, the research completed indicates that men's gender role conflict is associated with a host of salient psychological problems that negatively affect both men's and women's lives. The results of the studies reviewed indicate a rather convincing case that masculinity ideology and GRC have significant relationships to psychological problems for both boys and men. The results across many studies point to significant relationships between masculinity ideology and GRC and negative psychological outcomes for both men and others. GRC and masculine ideology have been significantly correlated with negative attitudes toward women and gays; violent attitudes toward women; dangerous risk taking with sex and health issues; substance use and abuse; psychological stress and strain; negative attitudes toward help seeking; delinquent behavior; low self-esteem; hostility and aggression; higher blood pressure levels; depression; anxiety; and marital and family problems just to name a few.

A consistent pattern of significant findings suggests that GRC is related to negative interpersonal problems for men and others. The overall results indicate that GRC significantly relates to dysfunctional patterns in men’s relationships, including interpersonal restrictions, attachment problems, and marital dissatisfaction. Furthermore, couples’ dynamics, family interaction patterns, and problems with intimacy and self-disclosure have all been significantly related to GRC.

Moreover, the studies indicate that GRC is related to restrictive and negative attitudes towards women, gays, and in one study, racial minorities. Even more striking and disturbing is that GRC has been significantly correlated with positive attitudes towards sexual harassment, rape myths, hostile sexism, and self-reported sexual and dating violence towards women. The results suggest that GRC significantly relates to dysfunctional and dangerous interpersonal outcomes for men and others. The research supports what feminists have communicated for years about how restrictive gender roles are potential mental health issues for both men and women.

The web page summarizes these past studies so researchers can access the database, evaluate the studies, and create their own research or interventions.

Services for boys and men are needed and mandated by the research evidence that GRC relates to men’s psychological and interpersonal problems. There are few, if any, national or state wide strategic plans to meet men’s needs as they encounter changing gender roles. The lack of service delivery for men and boys perpetuates serious problems in families, schools, and our campuses. The jury is still out on whether public schools and Higher Education professionals will address boy’s and men’s problems. Telling the truth about boys and men requires a paradigm shift and higher consciousness about the effects of sexism on them. The real challenge is fully accepting that boys and men are a special group that need help and support.  Whether education can change its service delivery to help vulnerable boys and men who are negatively affected by socialized sexism is unclear. How many more school shootings, acts of campus violence, rapes, male suspensions and dropouts, and gay boy suicides will it take to understand that masculinity ideologies and GRC are directly relevant to these serious problems? Is our inaction in this vital area part of our denial and backlash against men and boys? When will we fully understand that sexism has negative consequences for everyone? Can we acknowledge this without creating a zero sum game that pits men and women against each other?

I address these issues in the video “A Call to Action for More Programs and Services to Help Men and Boys."
Video link: Call to Action for Boys and Men.

How Can the Web Page Help You?

The 25 separate web files described below can be useful to researchers and clinicians in numerous ways. Each file is briefly discussed to explain what it comprises. You can find the full information for each category in the navigation menu to the left.

This file has overall information on GRC and includes a position paper on why GRC is important and two videos presentations on GRC. The first video summarizes the first chapter in O’Neil (2015), and the second one is a call for action for more programs and services to help men and boys.

Next, four published books on GRC are summarized including the first book on women’s GRC (Pommper, 2017). A published interview at UConn on GRC is also in this file and three publications that summarize GRC’s history over the years.

The citations in this section identify references to the published GRC theory. GRC definitions, domains, experiences, and situational contexts are presented.

The early models and theory about GRC in the 1970s and 1980s are discussed, and the evolution of the different conceptualizations over the decades.

The references and models are relevant when theorizing how gender roles and GRC relates to men’s intrapsychic, intrapersonal, interpersonal, and situational dynamics.

Click here to jump to this page.

The most recently published journal articles and dissertations on GRC are listed in this file. The references represent the most current topics being researched empirically. I want to identify current researchers who may be helpful to you in networking and showcase their research.

Click here to jump to this page.

All the published journal studies (n=263) using the Gender Role Conflict Scale (GRCS) are presented in this file. The references should be useful to researchers and clinicians conducting critical literature reviews, seeking documentation on GRC, or citing evidence that GRC is related to negative consequences for men and women.

Click here to jump to this page.

All the dissertations/theses (n=322) completed using the Gender Role Conflict Scale (GRCS) are presented in this file. The references should be useful to any researcher or clinician conducting critical literature reviews, seeking documentation on GRC, or citing evidence that GRC is related to negative consequences for men and women.

Click here to jump to this page.

The past APA symposia presented on GRC at the American Psychological Association conventions from 1980- 2015 are in this file.  The citations of these symposia, the presenters, and their papers are listed. Other theoretical and empirical papers on GRC presented at the APA convention over the years are also summarized. These listings provide a partial summary of the many researchers who were actively involved in empirical research on men’s GRC over the years.

Click here to jump to this page.

GRC has been studied in 32 countries and the GRCS has been translated into 15 different languages. The 130 international publications in this file are valuable to researchers internationally and investigators making GRC cross cultural comparisons. This file also has two manuscripts on my GRC collaboration with Russian psychologists during my Fulbright experience in 1992 and a PowerPoint summary of international studies from 1986-2011.Translations of the GRCS in various languages are available for download. See the “Receiving International Translations of the GRCS” on this web page.

Click here to jump to this page.

This file provides GRC references on diversity including indices of race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, various aspects of identity, age, class, women, and men outside the United States. Topical clusters were created to manage these many indices. Table 2 shows the diversity clusters for 14 groups of men or relevant demographics related to intersectionality.

The diversity file is useful to multicultural researchers and practitioners because GRC has been documented in many diverse samples of American men as well as men in other countries.  This file also summarizes the correlates, moderator, and mediators of GRC for minority men.

Additionally, in the cluster file “Physical and Psychological Health Correlates of GRC” section of this web page is additional research on how GRC relates to discrimination, racial and sexual bias, oppression, and violence against both men and women.

This file contains three video presentations on diversity, multiculturalism, and social-political issues. One explains the multicultural psychology of men model (O’Neil, 2015) and the second video addresses the importance of diversity and multiculturalism.

The third video discusses transnational feminism as another way to understand how masculinity issues interact with a host of socio-political and international problems that go unresolved in our world. The content in this third video is quite preliminary; therefore, the ideas about transnational feminism will require more thought and reflection.

Click here to jump to this page.

The psychometric file provides the construct validity evidence on the GRCS for researchers seeking reliability and validity information. This file has a complete listing of all the confirmatory factor analyses completed on the GRCS with diverse men, including men in countries outside the United States. Additionally, GRC norms and reliability data across various diverse samples are also summarized in this file. A summary of the dependent variables correlated with the GRC in 200 studies from 1986-2006 is presented in this file. All the moderators and mediator studies related to GRC are presented with research citations.

Click this link to jump to the first page on Psychometrics of GRCS. Note there are 9 pages in total to visit.

This part of the web page guides future researchers in conceptualizing research hypotheses using a contextual perspective. Thirty-two research questions related to GRC are presented to stimulate more predictive, moderating, mediating, and situational studies.  Additionally, to generate new hypotheses, six generative contexts are discussed including these topics: macros-societal, psycho-social-developmental, multicultural & situational, gender related, research, and therapeutic/psychoeducational.

Click here to jump to this page.

Situational research on GRC is needed and this file has been prepared to shed light on how GRC develops and is acted out in men’s real-life experiences.  The question is, “How, when, and why does GRC occur in men’s lives?” Past criticism is reviewed that suggests that GRC research has been mainly using correlational data. A rationale for situational research is presented, and conceptual research models are shown to generate more studies. Abstracts of eight empirical studies that assessed situational GRC are presented.

Click here to jump to this page.

This file addresses 7 research questions about men’s GRC by citing correlational, moderation, and mediation studies.

The first research questions relate to masculinity ideology and GRC statistical relationship to men’s psychological and interpersonal  problems. Two other questions focus on whether both minority men and non-minority  men’s GRC relates to gender role devaluations, restrictions, and violations. Another question addresses whether diversity and multicultural indices correlate, moderate, or mediate men’s GRC. The final question addresses situational research and GRC.

For researchers' easy access to specific studies in assessing these 7 questions. References are also listed.

Click here to jump to this page.

Many GRC studies are now clustered into specific topic areas related to GRC. The clusters are helpful to researchers because they compile similar studies on many variables that have been significantly correlated with GRC in one place.

The four clusters are: a) Psychological Correlates of GRC, b) Physical and Psychological Health Correlates of GRC, c) Special Groups and GRC, and d) Special Topics & GRC. The arrows pointing to GRC (See Figure 1) establish that clusters of GRC empirical research studies exist on each topic. The file lists the references  in each topic area for quick access to the many studies on the same dependent variable.

Psychological Correlates of GRC

This file has references to the 15 psychological correlates of GRC from published empirical studies from 1986-2013. Overall, the research provides evidence that these factors significantly correlate with GRC, with only a few studies finding non-significant results. More recent studies on these correlates are found in the published research and dissertation section of this web page.

Click here to jump to this page.

Men’s Physical and Psychological Health Correlates of GRC

This file lists references tomen’s physical and psychological health problems and GRC including: violence, discrimination, gendered racism, anti-gay attitudes, internalized homophobia/heterosexism/ homonegativity, trauma, suicide, stigma and substance abuse. Many of these studies indicate that GRC is empirically related to these problem areas for men.

Click here to jump to this page.

This file is also useful to researchers and clinicians studying how societal discrimination, violence, trauma, and human oppression (racism, sexism, classism, heterosexism, ethnocentrism) relate to patriarchal sexism, GRC, and people’s real pain.

The current turmoil with societal violence, racism, heterosexism, ethnocentrism, sexual orientation, and gender identity makes this file timely because the empirical evidence indicates that GRC relates to men’s health in the context of personal and interpersonal problems.

Special Groups & GRC

This file lists references for 13 groups of men, many being from vulnerable populations.

References to the couple’s GRC are also listed. Major special groups are presented in this file but not all groups of men who experience GRC.

Click here to jump to this page.

Special Topics & GRC

This file enumerates references to five important topics in men’s lives including relationships with women, children, & family; career and spiritual life; muscularity and body image; and men’s psychodynamics. These previously researched topics vary from a few studies to many.

Click here to jump to this page.

This file shows GRC research models and the narratives and references that describe them. Hypotheses about GRC are enumerated, and the assessment of moderator, mediator, and situational variables is discussed. These research models and hypotheses are in evolution and promote more complex research designs, specifically studies focusing on how GRC develops psychosocially and situationally in men’s lives.

Click here to jump to this page.

This file is useful to researchers who want critical summaries of the GRC Research Program across the many empirical studies. Seven journal publications or book chapters from 1995 to 2017 provide critical summaries of past empirical research.

A video presentation “40 Years of the Gender Role Conflict Research Program,” is available with a special focus on empirical research from 2013-2016. I also provide some memories about developing the research program in this video.

Click here to jump to this page.

This file summarizes references to the past criticism of GRC and the GRCS. GRC has been of interest to researchers and is sometimes controversial and misunderstood. Over 20 critiques of GRC have been published in the literature and are listed in this file.  I comment on the critiques and correct some reactions and misconceptions about GRC over the years.

Click here to jump to this page.

This file provides references on clients with GRC and the role of therapists in helping them.

A conceptual model is shown for therapists to use when assessing men’s GRC during therapy or psychoeducational interventions.

Additionally, a nine-cell diagnostic schema to assess men’s experience of GRC is discussed. Two models to assess the father’s GRC during therapy are also presented.

The file closes with journal publications and dissertations on helping men with GRC in therapy and during the therapeutic process.

Also, see the file “Gender Role Journey Theory, Therapy & Research” for more information on using GRC in a psychotherapeutic and psychoeducational context.

Click here to jump to this page.

In this file, psychoeducational GRC programs and their evaluations are referenced. Examples of these programs are provided and references on how to help men and women with their GRC using psychoeducational methods are listed.

A video presentation about psychoeducation, (what it is and how you do it), is available for download as well as a video on how I use psychoeducation in my psychology of men class (EPSY 6304) at UConn.

Click here to jump to this page.

This file provides definitions and theory about the gender role journey. The gender role journey, gender role transitions, and gender role schemas are defined.  A developmental model of masculinity is presented, and 50 gender role transitions across the lifespan are enumerated.  The gender role deconstruction and the gender role transformational processes are defined.  The published research on the Gender Role Journey Measure (GRJM, O’Neil et al., 1993) is listed.

Furthermore, the principles and parameters of Gender Role Journey Therapy are presented and include therapeutic strategies to resolve GRC patterns using the gender role journey metaphor.

The gender role journey workshop, implemented each year from 1984 to 2006, is described and the evaluations of this intervention are reported (O’Neil & Roberts Carroll, 1988).

Click here to jump to this page.

The different forms of the GRCS (short, long, adolescent, female, etc.) are in the file. They are available for download after filling out a release form and sending it to me.

Click here to jump to this page.

The international translations of the GRCS into languages other than English (n = 20) are available for download after filling out a release form and sending it to me.

Click here to jump to this page.

This file lists references on teaching the psychology of men and how GRC and masculinity ideology can be taught in academic classes and community settings. Seven journal articles from a special issue in the Psychology of Men and Masculinities on teaching the psychology of men are listed (O’Neil, Renzulli, & Liu 2013).  Links to the Teaching the Psychology of Men Web page are found here and the work of the Committee on Teaching the Psychology of Men of SPSMM from 2003 to 2011 is discussed. Education in public schools and Higher Education on GRC and masculinity ideology is recommended to help students understand how restrictive gender roles can be psychologically and interpersonally dysfunctional.

Click here to jump to this page.

In this section the video lectures and curriculum used to educate people about the Gender Role Journey are found. The curriculum and videos used in my course: EPSY 6304 – Psychology of Men & Boys In Counseling and Education and are available for download. Click here for the syllabus for EPSY 6304. Visit this page for videos.

Final Thoughts

Below, please see important final thoughts related to GRC.

A number of important truths emerged when revising the web page over the years. One is that human qualities are, without question, healthier and more functional than those assigned to men and women by stereotypes of masculinity and femininity that emanate from patriarchal values. Restrictive stereotypes have outlived their utility; they serve no function nor offer any survival value they might have had (assuming they ever had any) over the centuries. Restricted gender roles impede human development, dehumanize both men and women, and, under many circumstances, victimize men, women, and children.

Unfortunately, political, economic, and religious factions that want to control human behavior and set society’s priorities according to repressive ideologies that endorse restricted gender roles are active in their antifeminism and endorsing sexism. Before feminism, no collective consciousness existed about the perils of sexist stereotypes that cause GRC . There has been some progress over the years, but even now public awareness of the peril of sexism appears to ebb and flow based on social and political dynamics in our society. Only a persistent and critical deconstruction of these damaging stereotypes in patriarchal societies can reverse the negative effects of sexism, GRC, and restrictive gender roles in people’s lives.

My position is that gender role conflict is dehumanizing to both men and women. GRC is one way to explain the dehumanization and promote social and political change.

The greatest obstacle to the change in gender roles is a failure to see men (and women) as full human beings. In psychology, men have been studied not as gendered human beings, but as generic persons based on stereotypes (Kimmel, 2011; Smiler 2006). The study of men as gendered human beings is a relatively new phenomenon in psychology. Men’s GRC has gone unexplored because men’s lived experiences with gender roles have not been theoretically and  empirically studied.

At the end of this introduction, I want to be clear about what is at stake in researching GRC.

Sexist, restrictive, and oppressive stereotypes of masculinity and femininity no longer sustain the human race. Patriarchal sexism and stereotypes are outdated, dangerous, and potentially violent. The evidence is everywhere whether it be: the epidemic violence against women and men; bombs destroying a whole nation in Europe and the Middle East; famines in Africa; addiction and sexual violence; climate change denial; and the mass shooting every day in America.

At the macro-societal and the micro-interpersonal levels, GRC needs to be understood as part of the societal violence, social injustices, and polarization in our society.

Some or maybe much of the violence is about patriarchal sexism and the male gender role. My analysis of the data and my clinical experience support this categorical statement but everyone needs to determine their own position on these issues.

What can we do? Certainly, more research on men and more effective programs to help them are critically needed.

The patriarchy is unlikely to be dismantled without factual knowledge about gender roles from the social sciences. Documented GRC needs to be part of the discussion. Furthermore, consciousness raising about gender roles need to be an educational priority and translated into action plans if gender justice is to occur in our democracy.

Moreover, we need to listen to each other more and find common ground to dialogue about gender roles. The factual knowledge about gender roles from the social sciences must be part of this dialogue.

Without question, talking about gender roles is highly controversial and politically polarizing in 2024.

In some states of our country legislation is being passed to prohibit the very discussion and study of gender roles recommended with this web page.

Books are being banned and teachers are being threatened for what they teach.  This kind of censorship is the antithesis of our democratic principles and a real masculine threat.

For these reasons, I invite you to get involved in any way you can. Let me know if I can help.

I hope this introduction to the web page is useful to you in planning research studies, doing therapy, or psychoeducationa programming.  I want to thank the hundreds of friends, colleagues, researchers, and their mentors for the many contributions to this research database. I take credit for starting this research program. However, the success of the gender role conflict research program surely belongs to the hundreds of graduate students and researchers who conducted the research over the last 40 years. I want to thank each and every person who believed that we could assess men’s gender role conflict through the Gender Role Conflict Scale.