- Email: [email protected]
Playroom toy preferences of fifteen masculine and fifteen feminine boys
BEHAVIORTHERAPY ( 1972 ) 3, 425-429
Playroom Toy Preferences of Fifteen Masculine and Fifteen Feminine Boys1 RICHARD GREEN', 2 MARIELLEFULLER, BRIAN R. tlUTLEY, ANn JARED HENDLEP,
University of California, Los Angeles School o/ Medicine This study explored the hypothesis that young boys described by parents as showing feminine behavior prefer the playthings of girls when given access to girls' and boy's toys. Fifteen boys, aged 4-10, described as frequently cross-dressing, preferring female playmates, showing feminine gestures, and playing a female in games were compared with 15 boys described as nmsculine. Boys were placed in a room with masculine and feminine toys and observed for 15 rain through a one-way mirror. Masculine boys played more with masculine toys and feminine boys more with feminine toys. Toys which best separated the groups were a doll and a truck. Introduction of a parent did not significantly alter these patterns. This procedure may allow for manipulation of parental reaction to the child's toy selection in an effort to modify feminine preferences. INTRODUCTION One diagnostic criterion of boyhood effeminacy is toy preference. Additional criteria include a preference for dressing in girl's or women's clothes, a preference for the companionship of girls, a preference for taking the role of a female in fantasy games, and an avoidance of roughand-tumble activity (Green, 1968, 1971, 1972). To substantiate a parental report that a boy prefers the playthings of girls, the investigator m a y visit the family home for naturalistic observation of game and toy preferences. However, more economical time utilization would call for observation in a seminaturalistic laboratory setting. As one component of our research and treatment evaluation of femininely described young boys, we observe the toy preferences shown by these children in an experinaental playroom. Preferences are contrasted with those of boys not referred for evaluation of feminine i This research was supported by National Institute of Mental Health Research Scientist Development Award K1, MH 31,739 and Foundations' Fund for Research in Psychiatry Grant G69-471 to the first author. Requests for reprints should be addressed to Richard Green, M.D., Gender Identity Research and Treatment Program, UCLA School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA 90024. 425 © 1972 by Acadenaic Press, Inc. All rights of reproduction in any form reselwed.
426
RICHARD GREEN ET AL.
behavior. This report describes findings for 15 feminine and 15 masculine boys. METHOD Behavioral evaluation took place in an observation room, equipped with a oneway mirror and furnished with masculine and feminine toys matched for size, quality, and esthetie attraetiveness. Feminine articles were: a doll with costume changes, a plastic tea set, a wool embroidery kit, a doll carriage, a handbag with vanity mirror, comb and brush. Masculine articles were: a plastie rapid-fire hand-gun, a pull-wagon, an 8-in. basketball, a space-rocket, a battery-operated truck, and a stand-up punch-dummy. Children were led into the room and told, "This is a playroom with some toys. I will leave you here for about fifteen minutes while I meet with somebody else. You can play with anything you like." During the 15-min observation period the duration spent with each toy was recorded through the oneway mirror. One boy guessed that the mirror was an observation device; his play preferences are omitted from analysis. At the end of the 15-min period, the boy's mother or father was introduced into the room. Parents were told prior to entering: "Your son is having an opportunity to play with a variety of toys. Please keep a mental note of which toys he is playing with and behave with him in a manner which would be typical for you at home." Mean age for the 15 feminine boys was 7 5 / 1 2 years (range 4 - 1 0 ) and for the 15 masculine boys 7 0 / 1 2 years (range 4 - 1 0 ) . RESULTS
There was a significant interaction between the parentally described gender-role preference of the boys (masculine or feminine) and amount of time masculine or feminine toys were played with (F(1,g8) = 140, p < .01). Feminine toys were played with more by both groups (F(1,28) = 44, p < .01). These data are illustrated in Fig. 1. Individual toys which showed a difference in amount of time played with by the two groups were doll (played with more by feminine boys,
S~
ol_
FEMININE TOYS
MASCULINE TOYS
FIG. 1. Mean n u m b e r of minutes spent by masculine boys ( N = 15) and feminine boys ( N = 15 ) playing with masculine and feminine toys during 15-min observation period.
PLAYROOIVf
427
T O Y PREFERENCES
TABLE 1 Time Spent (Minutes) In Toy Play Per 15-Min Play Period
Feminine boys (N = 15) Toy Doll Embroidery Carriage Handbag Tea set Truck Gun Rocket Wagon Ball Punching dummy
6.8 1.9 0.2 0.1 1.1 1.3 0.9 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.5
± ± ± i ± i ± ± ± ± ±
1.4"* 1.2 0.1 0.1 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3
Masculine boys (N = 15) 1.6 0. S 0.0 0.0 0.1 4.0 1.4 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.6
+ 1.0"* ± 0.6 ± ± ± ± ± ± ±
0.1 1.0" 0.4 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2
*p < .05. ** p < .01. F(1,28) = 9.0, p < .01) and truck (played with more by masculine boys, F(1,28) = 6.1, p < .05). These data are tabulated in Table 1. Presence of a parent had little influence on toy preference. Feminine boys' time spent in doll play tended to drop when either parent entered the room. Time spent with the truck and ball tended to increase when mother entered. Masculine boys' doll play tended to drop further when father entered, while truck, rocket and ball play tended to increase. None of these differences is statistically significant. DISCUSSION T h e above data confirm parental reports that, if given a choice of masculine and feminine items, boys designated feminine on the basis of cross-dressing, female playmate preference and female role-taking in fantasy games will select toys culturally typical of girlhood play. Parental influence on toy preference was not great. It may be argued that the slight changes which accompanied parent introduction into the playroom setting reflect a satiation effect from the previous 15 min of play, rather than parental influence. While this is possible, it should be noted that, by the time the families of feminine boys present themselves for evaluation, most have begun to convey to their children disapproval of the feminine behavior, albeit after years of a neutral or even positive attitude. By the time of evaluation many boys have begun to engage in feminine activities in secret. During the period of observation, transition from doll play to a masculine activity was frequently
428
RICHARD GREEN E T AL.
precipitous upon entrance of the parent. Thus, a boy playing with a doll with great enthusiasm, costuming and recostuming it, would suddenly drop the doll and grab the truck upon parental entrance. An additional point concerns the relation of toy and activity preference to other tests of gender identity. Sears, Ran and Alpert (1966) found a poor correlation between nursery school play area preference (masculine vs feminine, based on available activities) and It-Scale (Brown, 1956) scores in a group of girls and boys not selected for gender identity anomalies. Mean It-Scale score for the 15 feminine-diagnosed boys reported in the present paper was 38.3 + 6.1, within the range of normal scores for girls. Mean It-Scale score for the 15 masculine boys was (68.9 __ 4.5), within the normal range for boys. Thus, It-Scale scores may correlate with activity preference when a population of feminine vs maseuline boys is compared. It may be that It-Scale and activity preferences are not subtle enough discriminators within the normal range of behaviors but that, when given a population manifesting markedly anomalous gender identity, they are highly correlated and valid diagnostie indicators. Alternative interpretations are that toy and play area preferences are not positively correlated or that differences reflect the somewhat older age of the subjects in this s t u d y . A final point concerns the significance of this study with respect to behavior modifieation. Nearly all adult males who wish to change sex (transsexuals) and a third of adult male homosexuals retrospectively describe their childhood as similar to the feminine boys reported here. (Green & Money, 1969, Bieber, 1962). Difficulties encountered in the treatment of these adult behavioral phenomena point to the potential advantage of treatment instituted during childhood. Gender identity development, or sex-typing, has been viewed as a socially learned phenomenon with the parents being the primary reinforcers of culturally typical gender-related behavior (Mischel, 1968). Cross-gender behavior, or a feminine identity in a young male, has also been seen as emerging, in part, from selective reinforcement of feminine behavior coupled with discouragement of masculine activities (Green & Money, 1960, 1961; Green, 1968; Green, Newman & Stoller, 1971; Green & Stoller,
1971). Parents observed in this study generally did not attempt to discourage feminine play, and were not directed to do so. This may partly explain why no significant change took place when parents were present, though trends did appear. It should be possible, however, to manipulate parental reaction to play with specific toys so as to encourage masculine toy preference and discourage feminine play. Once this degree of parental influence is demonstrated to parents in a laboratory setting,
PLAYROOM
TOY PREFERENCES
429
it should be possible to e n c o u r a g e t h e m to extend such reactions to m o r e naturalistic settings. REFERENCES BEmER, I. Homosexuality. New York: Basic Books, 1962. BROWN, D. Sex role preference in young children. Psychological Monographs, 1956, 70, No. 14 (Whole No. 421). GREEN, R. Childhood cross-gender identification. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 1968, 147, 500-09. GREEN, R. Diagnosis and treatment of gender identity disorders during childhood. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 1971, 1, 167-74. GREEn, R. Twenty-five boys with deviant gender identity: A behavioral summary: In Critical Issues in Contemporary Sexual Behavior, Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1972. GREEN, R., & MONEY, J. Incongruous gender role: Nongenital manifestations in prepubertal l~oys. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 1970, 130, 160-68. GREEn, R., & MONEY, J. Effeminacy in prepubertal boys. Pediatrics, 1961, 27, 286-91. G~EE~, R., & MONEY, J. (Eds.), Transsexualism and Sex Rvasslgnment. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1969. GREEN, R., NEWMAN, L., & STOLLER, R. Treatment of boyhood transsexualism. Archives of General Psychiatry, 1972. In press. GREEN, R., & STOLLER, R. Monozygotie (identical) twins discordant for gender identity. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 1972. In press. MTSCHEL, W. A social-learning view of sex differences. In: E. Maccoby (Ed.), The Development of Sex Differences. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1966. Pp. 56-81.
Playroom Toy Preferences of Fifteen Masculine and Fifteen Feminine Boys1 RICHARD GREEN', 2 MARIELLEFULLER, BRIAN R. tlUTLEY, ANn JARED HENDLEP,
University of California, Los Angeles School o/ Medicine This study explored the hypothesis that young boys described by parents as showing feminine behavior prefer the playthings of girls when given access to girls' and boy's toys. Fifteen boys, aged 4-10, described as frequently cross-dressing, preferring female playmates, showing feminine gestures, and playing a female in games were compared with 15 boys described as nmsculine. Boys were placed in a room with masculine and feminine toys and observed for 15 rain through a one-way mirror. Masculine boys played more with masculine toys and feminine boys more with feminine toys. Toys which best separated the groups were a doll and a truck. Introduction of a parent did not significantly alter these patterns. This procedure may allow for manipulation of parental reaction to the child's toy selection in an effort to modify feminine preferences. INTRODUCTION One diagnostic criterion of boyhood effeminacy is toy preference. Additional criteria include a preference for dressing in girl's or women's clothes, a preference for the companionship of girls, a preference for taking the role of a female in fantasy games, and an avoidance of roughand-tumble activity (Green, 1968, 1971, 1972). To substantiate a parental report that a boy prefers the playthings of girls, the investigator m a y visit the family home for naturalistic observation of game and toy preferences. However, more economical time utilization would call for observation in a seminaturalistic laboratory setting. As one component of our research and treatment evaluation of femininely described young boys, we observe the toy preferences shown by these children in an experinaental playroom. Preferences are contrasted with those of boys not referred for evaluation of feminine i This research was supported by National Institute of Mental Health Research Scientist Development Award K1, MH 31,739 and Foundations' Fund for Research in Psychiatry Grant G69-471 to the first author. Requests for reprints should be addressed to Richard Green, M.D., Gender Identity Research and Treatment Program, UCLA School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA 90024. 425 © 1972 by Acadenaic Press, Inc. All rights of reproduction in any form reselwed.
426
RICHARD GREEN ET AL.
behavior. This report describes findings for 15 feminine and 15 masculine boys. METHOD Behavioral evaluation took place in an observation room, equipped with a oneway mirror and furnished with masculine and feminine toys matched for size, quality, and esthetie attraetiveness. Feminine articles were: a doll with costume changes, a plastic tea set, a wool embroidery kit, a doll carriage, a handbag with vanity mirror, comb and brush. Masculine articles were: a plastie rapid-fire hand-gun, a pull-wagon, an 8-in. basketball, a space-rocket, a battery-operated truck, and a stand-up punch-dummy. Children were led into the room and told, "This is a playroom with some toys. I will leave you here for about fifteen minutes while I meet with somebody else. You can play with anything you like." During the 15-min observation period the duration spent with each toy was recorded through the oneway mirror. One boy guessed that the mirror was an observation device; his play preferences are omitted from analysis. At the end of the 15-min period, the boy's mother or father was introduced into the room. Parents were told prior to entering: "Your son is having an opportunity to play with a variety of toys. Please keep a mental note of which toys he is playing with and behave with him in a manner which would be typical for you at home." Mean age for the 15 feminine boys was 7 5 / 1 2 years (range 4 - 1 0 ) and for the 15 masculine boys 7 0 / 1 2 years (range 4 - 1 0 ) . RESULTS
There was a significant interaction between the parentally described gender-role preference of the boys (masculine or feminine) and amount of time masculine or feminine toys were played with (F(1,g8) = 140, p < .01). Feminine toys were played with more by both groups (F(1,28) = 44, p < .01). These data are illustrated in Fig. 1. Individual toys which showed a difference in amount of time played with by the two groups were doll (played with more by feminine boys,
S~
ol_
FEMININE TOYS
MASCULINE TOYS
FIG. 1. Mean n u m b e r of minutes spent by masculine boys ( N = 15) and feminine boys ( N = 15 ) playing with masculine and feminine toys during 15-min observation period.
PLAYROOIVf
427
T O Y PREFERENCES
TABLE 1 Time Spent (Minutes) In Toy Play Per 15-Min Play Period
Feminine boys (N = 15) Toy Doll Embroidery Carriage Handbag Tea set Truck Gun Rocket Wagon Ball Punching dummy
6.8 1.9 0.2 0.1 1.1 1.3 0.9 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.5
± ± ± i ± i ± ± ± ± ±
1.4"* 1.2 0.1 0.1 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3
Masculine boys (N = 15) 1.6 0. S 0.0 0.0 0.1 4.0 1.4 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.6
+ 1.0"* ± 0.6 ± ± ± ± ± ± ±
0.1 1.0" 0.4 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2
*p < .05. ** p < .01. F(1,28) = 9.0, p < .01) and truck (played with more by masculine boys, F(1,28) = 6.1, p < .05). These data are tabulated in Table 1. Presence of a parent had little influence on toy preference. Feminine boys' time spent in doll play tended to drop when either parent entered the room. Time spent with the truck and ball tended to increase when mother entered. Masculine boys' doll play tended to drop further when father entered, while truck, rocket and ball play tended to increase. None of these differences is statistically significant. DISCUSSION T h e above data confirm parental reports that, if given a choice of masculine and feminine items, boys designated feminine on the basis of cross-dressing, female playmate preference and female role-taking in fantasy games will select toys culturally typical of girlhood play. Parental influence on toy preference was not great. It may be argued that the slight changes which accompanied parent introduction into the playroom setting reflect a satiation effect from the previous 15 min of play, rather than parental influence. While this is possible, it should be noted that, by the time the families of feminine boys present themselves for evaluation, most have begun to convey to their children disapproval of the feminine behavior, albeit after years of a neutral or even positive attitude. By the time of evaluation many boys have begun to engage in feminine activities in secret. During the period of observation, transition from doll play to a masculine activity was frequently
428
RICHARD GREEN E T AL.
precipitous upon entrance of the parent. Thus, a boy playing with a doll with great enthusiasm, costuming and recostuming it, would suddenly drop the doll and grab the truck upon parental entrance. An additional point concerns the relation of toy and activity preference to other tests of gender identity. Sears, Ran and Alpert (1966) found a poor correlation between nursery school play area preference (masculine vs feminine, based on available activities) and It-Scale (Brown, 1956) scores in a group of girls and boys not selected for gender identity anomalies. Mean It-Scale score for the 15 feminine-diagnosed boys reported in the present paper was 38.3 + 6.1, within the range of normal scores for girls. Mean It-Scale score for the 15 masculine boys was (68.9 __ 4.5), within the normal range for boys. Thus, It-Scale scores may correlate with activity preference when a population of feminine vs maseuline boys is compared. It may be that It-Scale and activity preferences are not subtle enough discriminators within the normal range of behaviors but that, when given a population manifesting markedly anomalous gender identity, they are highly correlated and valid diagnostie indicators. Alternative interpretations are that toy and play area preferences are not positively correlated or that differences reflect the somewhat older age of the subjects in this s t u d y . A final point concerns the significance of this study with respect to behavior modifieation. Nearly all adult males who wish to change sex (transsexuals) and a third of adult male homosexuals retrospectively describe their childhood as similar to the feminine boys reported here. (Green & Money, 1969, Bieber, 1962). Difficulties encountered in the treatment of these adult behavioral phenomena point to the potential advantage of treatment instituted during childhood. Gender identity development, or sex-typing, has been viewed as a socially learned phenomenon with the parents being the primary reinforcers of culturally typical gender-related behavior (Mischel, 1968). Cross-gender behavior, or a feminine identity in a young male, has also been seen as emerging, in part, from selective reinforcement of feminine behavior coupled with discouragement of masculine activities (Green & Money, 1960, 1961; Green, 1968; Green, Newman & Stoller, 1971; Green & Stoller,
1971). Parents observed in this study generally did not attempt to discourage feminine play, and were not directed to do so. This may partly explain why no significant change took place when parents were present, though trends did appear. It should be possible, however, to manipulate parental reaction to play with specific toys so as to encourage masculine toy preference and discourage feminine play. Once this degree of parental influence is demonstrated to parents in a laboratory setting,
PLAYROOM
TOY PREFERENCES
429
it should be possible to e n c o u r a g e t h e m to extend such reactions to m o r e naturalistic settings. REFERENCES BEmER, I. Homosexuality. New York: Basic Books, 1962. BROWN, D. Sex role preference in young children. Psychological Monographs, 1956, 70, No. 14 (Whole No. 421). GREEN, R. Childhood cross-gender identification. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 1968, 147, 500-09. GREEN, R. Diagnosis and treatment of gender identity disorders during childhood. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 1971, 1, 167-74. GREEn, R. Twenty-five boys with deviant gender identity: A behavioral summary: In Critical Issues in Contemporary Sexual Behavior, Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1972. GREEN, R., & MONEY, J. Incongruous gender role: Nongenital manifestations in prepubertal l~oys. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 1970, 130, 160-68. GREEn, R., & MONEY, J. Effeminacy in prepubertal boys. Pediatrics, 1961, 27, 286-91. G~EE~, R., & MONEY, J. (Eds.), Transsexualism and Sex Rvasslgnment. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1969. GREEN, R., NEWMAN, L., & STOLLER, R. Treatment of boyhood transsexualism. Archives of General Psychiatry, 1972. In press. GREEN, R., & STOLLER, R. Monozygotie (identical) twins discordant for gender identity. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 1972. In press. MTSCHEL, W. A social-learning view of sex differences. In: E. Maccoby (Ed.), The Development of Sex Differences. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1966. Pp. 56-81.