These are the default gender stereotypes for men and women. Men are more agentic, while women are more communal. What's interesting is sexuality can play factor in context and change this viewpoint. Women who identify as lesbian tend to be associated with masculinity. Would this indicate that people would assume a more agentic stereotype onto these types of women? Same thing for gay men, because some people like to say 'they're the woman' of their relationships, would that consider them more communal?

This section can go back to the question of why men are resistant of women taking on agentic roles. It's the independence which goes against the societal expectation of women depending on a male spouse. Gender stereotypes have always had more benefits for men than women, but with women in modern day beginning to let go of these aspects of what separates men and women in terms of agency and communality, it reaches a new kind of role/view completely.

The researchers in this study used age and education as the independent variables to conduct if there were differences in results when it came to measuring agentic and communal traits. Unfortunately, because there weren't enough answers about race or ethnicity, it is hard to determine answers for cultural beliefs. Questions such as 'Do certain cultures take expectation over expression' or 'Are communal traits more of a men's associated role in ___ culture?' could be observed and reported.

Masculinity has been used as the synonym of agency. Men for thousands of years have been the dominate beings of humanity across many cultures. Conservative views preserve these traditional roles of men are the powerful leaders with strength and wits, while women were viewed as less capable and more suited for nurturing roles. It is why the United States has yet to have a female president, many believe a women would send the U.S.A. into destruction, showing that these gender stereotypes still play a foul role in running a society. When women start to show their capability in being able to hold agentic positions in the work field, it goes against the tradition of what men and women are, which is evolutionary, but scary for men who believe society will fall apart due to the disruption of social order.

Despite people of both sexes typically having the awareness that they have qualities and traits that fit outside their own gender expectations, they still stereotype gender. Is it just a simple way to identify what makes a 'man/woman' instead of diving deeper into the complicity of it? A man might describe himself as empathetic and kind, but according to gender roles, he'd be described as feminine, but what is feminine about that?

In personality psychology, a topic discussed is the questioning of how accurate self-observing tests are. In these results that have measured men and women's self-report of their agency and communality, could it be questioned if people pick traits they want to be associated with, rather than the traits they do reside with? Depending especially on how the question is presented, could this be a reason multiple of these communality and agency tests have different results?

As stated above, there are still gender stereotypes in job positions. Due to women being associated with communal traits in general, society believes they're best suited for nurturing roles despite individual traits. After all, those are nurturing jobs. Though it may seem positive that women are associated with warmth and care, that does not at all represent women as a whole. It is factual that women can be more agentic than nurturing, while men can be more nurturing than agentic. But because these descriptive stereotypes are generally recognized, people tend to believe anyway that women suit more communal jobs.

This section is an example of going against the western prescriptive stereotypes, in which women 'should' be the caretakers, whilst men 'should' be the providers. However in modern day, these stereotypes are falling out of fashion as decades of feminist protest and movements resulted in women being able to have more equal opportunities as men. Though it is still a stereotype recognized through most Americans that women are 'more nurturing', we at the same time have begun to normalize their positions in higher fields unlike in the past where it seemed 'pointless' and 'risky'.

I found this interesting because it makes a good point. In America, people tend to say the female sex qualifications involve the identification of breasts. However, young adolescents do not have breasts until puberty, and even then, breasts don't always form for all females. Does that make them less female for lacking a certain quality that ties them to their sex?

This part of the passage is almost, if not exactly criticizing the viewpoint of this concept. It states the fact that the sex-gender binary and nature-nuture/culture binary isn't considering the outside viewpoints of what sex and gender are across different cultures and enviorments. That they aren't considering that there might not be a definite universal way of viewing gender.

Though I'm not sure this counts as a valid bias annotation; I can identify that two biases are being addressed. It is talking about two concepts of sex and gender. One group believes in a more conservative way of viewing the topic, in which there are only two possible sexes and that male qualities are valued over females. While the other view explores a more open-viewed way of seeing the concept of sex and gender across different variations.