Introduction
Gender roles are one of the most relevant and debated areas in modern social and humanities. They are considered not only to be based on biological sex, but also as a social construct that is shaped and changed by cultural norms, social expectations, and institutions. In the context of globalization and value transformation, traditional and egalitarian orientations coexist, changing the content and perception of gender roles.
Several theoretical approaches to explaining gender roles have been developed in the literature: structural-functionalism — connects the division of roles with the social order; social constructivism — explains gender as a phenomenon that is «made» in everyday practice; feminist and intersectional theories — analyze them in the context of power, inequality and stratification. In Kazakhstani and post-Soviet studies, this issue is often considered in the context of tradition, religion and regional features.
The object of the study is foreign and domestic theoretical and methodological concepts related to gender roles; the subject is their conceptual apparatus and methodological features. The goal is to identify the main theoretical directions, methodological models and research gaps through comparative analysis.
Main Section
In gender studies, the clarity of concepts determines the quality of theoretical and empirical analysis. Therefore, it is important to clarify the concepts of «gender», «gender role», «gender norm», «gender ideology» and «gender regime».
«Gender» refers to a system of roles and statuses that are socially and culturally constructed, apart from biological sex; it is reproduced through institutions and everyday interaction [1]. J. Butler describes gender as a process that is performatively formed in discourse [2].
«Gender role» is a set of social expectations and functions for women and men. Role theory links them to the division of labor and family structure, while the constructivist approach argues that roles are «made» in everyday practice [3].
«Gender norms» are standards of behavior that are considered «normal» in society; they are reinforced by education, family, religion, and media, and regulated by social sanctions [4].
«Gender ideology» is a system of value orientations regarding the place of men and women in society. It varies between traditional and egalitarian models. The transformation of values is associated with the growth of support for gender equality [5]. «Gender regime» describes how power and institutions in society organize gender inequality.
Traditional roles are usually measured by supporting the primacy of men as breadwinners, the role of women focused on the family, and the dominance of men in positions of power; egalitarian roles are defined by supporting equal opportunities in work, family, and decision-making [6]. In international studies, these positions are measured using Likert scales and combined into indices [7].
The international theoretical tradition consists of several directions. Structural-functionalism links gender roles to institutional stability, but does not sufficiently analyze inequality. Constructivism shows that gender is formed in everyday practice, but can weaken macrostructural factors [8]. Feminist theories interpret roles as structures of power and inequality, reveal gendered order at the organizational level, but sometimes do not fully capture cultural diversity. Intersectional and postcolonial approaches argue that gender roles are formed at the intersection of ethnicity, class, religion and region, although empirical measurement is increasingly difficult.
Domestic and post-Soviet studies are developing with the logic of adapting international theories to local contexts. Gender roles are often considered in relation to family, labor market, youth values, religion and regional differences [9]. However, there is an inconsistency in the operationalization of concepts, a lack of comparative design, and limited intersectional analysis.
Methodologically, gender roles are measured at three levels: attitudes, role expectations, and practices. Quantitative methods allow for comparisons but are subject to social desirability bias and cultural differences [10]. Qualitative approaches reveal the logic of role formation, and mixed-method designs are effective in explaining the gap between public opinion and actual practice. In general, it is necessary to integrate institutional, constructivist, and intersectional approaches in theory; future research should focus on standardizing measures, expanding cross-regional comparisons, and identifying hybrid role models.
Conclusion
The analysis showed that it is impossible to fully explain gender roles with a single theory. Structural-functionalism describes institutional foundations, but does not sufficiently reveal power and inequality. Social constructivism explains the everyday «making» of gender, but weakens the macrostructure. Feminist and intersectional theories deeply analyze power and intersecting inequalities. The value transformation model explains the dynamics of traditional and egalitarian orientations. Therefore, the most effective is an integrative approach that combines institutional, cultural, and power dimensions.
From a methodological point of view, a mixed methods design is optimal for Kazakhstan. Quantitative surveys measure public opinion, but do not fully reveal the difference with practice; qualitative methods deepen the content, but have limited generalization. Therefore, a mixed model that combines representative surveys and qualitative analysis, as well as the systematic introduction of intersectional indicators, is effective.
From a practical perspective, the research findings serve to reduce stereotypes in the education system, strengthen equal opportunities in family and youth policies, substantiate gender equality in the labor market, and formulate policies that are sensitive to cultural context. Integrative theory and mixed methods allow for an evidence-based analysis of gender relations in Kazakhstan.
Funding
This research has been funded by the Science Committee of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Grant AP26101317. The influence of cultural values on the formation of gender roles of the inhabitants of the southern regions of Kazakhstan: traditional and innovative approaches
References:
- Parsons T., Bales R. F. Family, Socialization and Interaction Process. — Glencoe: Free Press, 1955. — 422 p.
- Butler J. Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. — New York: Routledge, 1990. — 172 p.
- Merton R. K. Social Theory and Social Structure. — New York: Free Press, 1968. — 702 p.
- Eagly A. H. Sex Differences in Social Behavior: A Social-Role Interpretation. — Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1987. — 256 p.
- Walby S. Theorizing Patriarchy. — Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1990. — 256 p.
- Friedan B. The Feminine Mystique. — New York: W. W. Norton, 1963. — 592 p.
- Crenshaw K. Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics // University of Chicago Legal Forum. — 1989. — Vol. 1989. — P. 139–167.
- Mohanty C. T. Under Western Eyes: Feminist Scholarship and Colonial Discourses // Feminist Review. — 1988. — № 30. — P. 61–88.
- Davis S. N., Greenstein T. N. Gender Ideology: Components, Predictors, and Consequences // Annual Review of Sociology. — 2009. — Vol. 35. — P. 87–105.
- Inglehart R., Norris P. Rising Tide: Gender Equality and Cultural Change Around the World. — Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003. — 22 p.
