Heteronormativity in Engineering

Heteronormativity in engineering describes the experience in which workers in the field of engineering feel that only heterosexuality is accepted and normal. For lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and/or queer (LGBTQ) individuals, the heteronormative environment in engineering can lead to challenging experiences. Within the past decade, LGBTQ rights have increased. For instance, the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy was ended and the US Supreme Court ruled that the federal government is required to acknowledge same-sex marriage.^[1] Federal agencies also have policies that protect sexual minorities since 1998 and transgender individuals since 2012.^[2]

Fewer women are in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) fields, which contributes to the male-dominated culture in STEM. Even fewer women from marginalized ethnic groups are in STEM fields, which have led scientists to refer to the situation as "double bind." In the field of sociology, gender is conceptualized as a social construct that is ubiquitous in interactions and institutions. It is common for people to misconstrue gender identity with expression and that can lead to misunderstandings in professional and academic environments. Additionally, though gender and sex are often used interchangeably, scientists generally agree that the former is associated with the societal norms that are imposed on certain identities. Furthermore, scientists have begun to recognize how individuals can occupy multiple identities at once and how these various identities can interact and impact someone's experience. Sex hormones and socialization are two main factors that have been examined to study identity. Studies have shown how vocational decisions are influenced by interests, which are generally understood to be effected by socialization.

Previous studies have shown that cultural and binary sexual expectations place pressure on LGBTQ individuals and can hinder their ability to thrive compared to non-LGBTQ individuals. LGBTQ people can use coping methods, which can be incredibly draining emotionally and academically. Other studies have shown that people are happier in their jobs and experience less anxiety when they feel comfortable disclosing their identities in their professional environments.

Culture

The culture of an institution can establish the environment in which the employees operate. In an organization dominated by masculine gender expectations, there can be hostility towards non-conforming identities and expressions. Scientists argue that these sorts of behaviors are reactionary to what is considered traditional roles of gender and sexuality. Hostile environments include discrimination, harassment, and marginalization, where heterosexuality is the hegemonic sexuality. Erin Cech conducted a study on workplace culture using 30,000 employees from the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Transportation, NASA, The National Science Foundation, the Department of Energy, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. She uses a survey to understand whether the differences in experiences between LGBTQ workers and their non-LGBTQ peers are different based on gender, company position, or age. One limitation of Cech's study is that the data source, the Office of Personnel Management, did not gather information related to education attainment and occupation. Overall, Cech's study finds that LGBTQ employees experience more negative interactions within their organizations compared to their non-LGBTQ colleagues.

In classroom culture, one study found that LGBTQ students saw the typical engineer as a white heterosexual male. In Kathryn Trenshaw et al.'s (2013) research, the scientists discovered that the engineers that participated in the study viewed engineering as heteronormative because of the absence of diversity and discussion in their academic settings. Another study found that the white male researcher is the dominant stereotype of engineers. Other scientists have argued that the field of engineering values technological over communication skills. Trenshaw et al.'s study participants indicated that such an emphasis on technical expertise neglected the social and personal aspects of communication. Thus, the engineering students indicated that their experiences were not viewed with the same respect as the experiences as heterosexual engineers. Copious research has shown that LGBTQ faculty can face intimidation, discrimination, and exclusion within their respective communities. Cech's literature search also reveals that studies conducted in academic environments show that LGBTQ students and faculty in STEM are more likely than LGBTQ individuals in other majors to be uncomfortable with the climate of the campus and be the target of harassment and violence.

Some research has indicated that biases that sustain injustices within the field of engineering are called "chilly climates." Scientists have asserted that even if there is not an openly discriminate environment, LGBTQ engineering students still operate in a setting where their sexuality is seen as irregular. Cech has also conducted studies that examine educational environments. In one particular study, to protect the identity of the students and university, Cech refers to the school as "Gold University" and does not specify its location. Based on the small sample size, the study cannot be generalized; however, Cech's study provides perspectives on the experience of LGBTQ engineering students in the classroom. For instance, some engineering students identified the difference between a "tolerant" environment and being "tolerated" by their engineering peers within that setting. Cech's findings indicate that some students believe they must employ various coping methods to conceal their stigmatized identity. Trenshaw et al. also argues that the engineering culture, which involves a male-dominated environment and unwavering competition create a non-inclusive environment for LGBTQ students.

Dualism

Wendy Faulkner asserts that there is a culture of dualism between technical and social skills in engineering. More specifically, Faulkner argues that engineering culture is divided between a preference for technical skills such as science and math over social skills such as communication. This sort of discrepancy is exacerbated when the experiences of LGBTQ students are framed within the "social" aspect of dualism. Some students have expressed that any acknowledgement of their issues is unwarranted or unacceptable in engineering culture because of the emphasis on technical topics. Additionally, Faulkner addresses the gender dualism that associates social aspects with feminine characteristics and technological factors with masculine characteristics.

In her study, Erin A. Cech considers the intersectionality of gender and sexuality, as well as its implications within technical and social dualism. For instance, engineers who operate within the confines of masculine and feminine expectations can misconstrue their sense of identity within engineering. Cech insists that the propensity to associate gender binaries compounds the issues with dualism in engineering. Additionally, Cech asserts that these associations form the foundation for heteronormativity, which is dependent on the binary construction of gender to determine heterosexuality. These associations are further complicated when there are stereotypes embedded in society that portray gay men as feminine and lesbian women as masculine.

Explanations for Minority Identities

Biological

Studies have been conducted to understand how biological factors can influence engineers' occupational choices and constructs of gender. More specifically, levels of androgen and testosterone have been used to understand how sex hormones impact development. These brain developments are associated with changes in behavior.

Brain organization theory asserts that prenatal hormones impact brain development. More specifically, higher levels of androgens are associated with more male sex-orientated behavior. More specifically, high levels of testosterone and androgen are associated with male-associated behavior related to gender and sexual identity and physically aggressive actions. People have associated these sorts of biological markers with occupational interests.

Since brains and hormones can change and vary throughout the course of a person's life, tests measuring brain organization theory cannot be conducted on living individuals. These biological factors are related to the underrepresentation of certain groups, including sexual and racial minorities, in STEM because it can point to vocational choices. At the same time, researchers acknowledge how biological factors can be impacted by social and cultural structures. However, researchers do recognize how occupations are not only dependent on hormone exposure, but also impacted by socialization.

Sociological

There are situational, cultural, and social influences that can impact differences in engineers' gender expression and identity. This can have an effect on LGBTQ individuals who are interested in engineering. According to the gender-schema theory, every person becomes a part of society by conforming to cultural expectations that define their sense of identity. For instance, parental expectations related to gender predicted their children's occupation in Jacobs et al. (2006). Sex-related expectations can impact how people are treated and how they interact with the world around them. These behaviors create a positive feedback loop, where these actions contribute to the stereotypes and expectations.

In the "doing gender" framework, gender is considered the outcome of interactions that form institutions that impose expectations on the sexes. Additionally, these interactions are constantly changing and lead to the malleability of feminine and masculine roles of men and women. Ridgeway asserts that gender is a ubiquitous institution, which influences behavior at all times. Based on the social and cultural standards that are imposed on women on a daily basis, scientists believe that these interactions will influence the kinds of gendered expression they have. Some scientists have argued that such expectations are why women feel unwelcome in engineering classrooms and workplaces. Additionally, gender labels deemed for certain items can influence how LGBTQ engineers engage and interact with other items that are deemed normal to interact with.

Biological and Sociological

Engineers' gender-related behavior can be impacted by both biological and sociological factors, including androgen exposure and socialization. One study examines the interactions between biological, social, and cognitive factors and how they influence engineers' gendered behavior. Effects of androgen could be impacted by socialization. Prenatal androgen exposure is associated with male toy and play inclinations. Other studies have been conducted on mammals and show how prenatal androgen exposure influence play and reproductive activities. In humans, it has been shown that cognitive and social factors can impact gender-related actions. In a study conducted by Agnieszka Lipinska-Grobelny, she discovers that the differences in engineers' coping methods indicate how biological, societal, and sociological factors interact and impact coping resources.

Coping Methods for LGBTQ Engineers

Previous studies have shown that men focus on problem-solving coping methods, whereas women utilize their emotions to cope with difficult scenarios. However, few studies have been conducted on the differences of coping methods for engineers' that associate with other identities or the intersectionality of multiple identities. Lipinska-Grobelny discovered in her study that there are discrepancies in coping methods between sex and gender roles. Intersectionality, also commonly understood as the interrelatedness of various marginalizing factors, also impacts the experience of LGBTQ individuals in engineering.

The pressure of heteronormativity can force members of the LGBTQ engineering community to isolate themselves academically, professionally, and socially. Additionally, research studies have identified how certain groups that are intended to support LGBTQ engineering students and engineering workplace employees can burden marginalized populations. Some engineers engage in compartmentalization, which means separating their personal and professional lives. Another coping method that LGBTQ engineers engage in is passing to avoid disclosing their stigmatized sexual identity. Lastly, Erving Goffman argues that covering is used to diminish the factors closely associated with the LGBTQ community, such as same-sex attraction and affection.

Such coping methods, though they are used to conceal stigmatized identities, can be incredibly taxing emotionally, mentally, and academically for LGBTQ engineering students and workers. Previous studies have shown that actively hiding a sexual identity can lead to increased levels of stress, depression, anxiety, and other adverse health experiences.

Minority Stress Theory, as discussed in Trenshaw et al.'s paper, explores how engineers in minority groups face overlapping levels of stress from the conflict between their identity and the hegemonic culture expectations that surround them. For LGBTQ engineers, this means that the students feel less involved in their academic environments, which leads to the absence of overall inclusion in academic activities and can influence an engineering student to drop out of school.

References

This article "Heteronormativity in Engineering" is from Wikipedia. The list of its authors can be seen in its historical and/or the page Edithistory:Heteronormativity in Engineering. Articles copied from Draft Namespace on Wikipedia could be seen on the Draft Namespace of Wikipedia and not main one.

📰 Article(s) of the same category(ies)

• Cultural dimensions
• Fluidi Plus Engineering
• Origin and disparities in technological advancements & infrastructure compared to automobile safety sector
• Ideal final result
• Mafaz (Editor)
• Leo Rover
• Glossary of sociology

---