Introduction
Androcentrism is the evaluation of individuals and cultures based on male perspectives, standards, and values. The term refers to a male-centered worldview which does not necessarily present explicitly negative views of women and girls, but positions men and boys as representative of the human condition or experience and women and girls as diverging from the human condition. It is a complex, subtle, and often unacknowledged form of sexism, existing on a continuum which includes misogyny and patriarchal attitudes, but it is also informed by patriarchal cultures in which men are granted more power and influence, and thus the right to evaluate and interpret individuals and cultures. Androcentrism exists in all fields of study and cultural expressions, including the arts, sciences, medicine, law, fine arts, and media.
Definition
Androcentrism literally means male-centered. Androcentrism results from and perpetuates a worldview that is persistently male, as a result of...
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
American Psychological Association. (2010). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association. Washington, DC: Author.
Bem, S. L. (1981). Bem sex-role inventory: Professional manual. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Bem, S. L. (1993). The lenses of gender: Transforming the debate on sexual inequality. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Blaubergs, M. S. (1980). An analysis of classic arguments against changing sexist language. Women’s Studies International Quarterly, 3(2–3), 135–147.
Bohan, J. S. (1993). Essentialism, constructionism, and feminist psychology. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 17(1), 5–21.
Broverman, I. K., Broverman, D. M., Clarkson, F. E., Rosenkrantz, P. S., & Vogel, S. R. (1970). Sex-role stereotypes and clinical judgments of mental health. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 34(1), 1–7.
Calkins, M. W. (1900). Psychology as science of selves. Philosophical Review, 9, 490–501.
Connell, R. W., & Messerschmidt, J. W. (2005). Hegemonic masculinity. Gender and Society, 19(6), 829–859.
Cosgrove, L. (2003). Feminism, postmodernism, and psychological research. Hypatia, 18(3), 85–112.
Daly, M. (1973). Beyond God the father: Toward a philosophy of women’s liberation. Boston: Beacon Press.
de Beauvoir, Simone. (2011). The second sex. (C. Borde & S. Malovany-Chevallier, Trans.). New York, NY: Vintage.
Fausto-Sterling, A. (1985). Myths of gender: Biological theories about women and men. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Fine, C. (2010). Delusions of gender: How our minds, society, and neurosexism create difference. New York, NY: W. W. Norton.
Flynn, E. A., & Schweickart, P. P. (Eds.). (1986). Gender and reading: Essays on readers, texts, and contexts. Baltimore, MA: John Hopkins University Press.
Freud, S. (1961). Some psychical consequences of the anatomical distinction between the sexes. In J. Stratchey (Ed.), The standard edition of the complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. 19, pp. 243–258). London, England: Hogarth Press.
Furumoto, L. (1987). On the margins: Women and the professionalization of psychology in the United States, 1890–1940. In M. G. Ash & W. R. Woodward (Eds.), Psychology in twentieth-century thought and society. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Furumoto, L. (1998). Gender and the history of psychology. In B. Clinchy & J. K. Norem (Eds.), The gender and psychology reader. New York, NY: New York University Press.
Gilman, C. P. (1911). The man-made world; or, our androcentric culture. New York, NY: Charlton.
Hamilton, M. C. (1991). Masculine bias in the attribution of personhood: People = male, male = people. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 15, 393–402.
Harding, S. G. (2004). The feminist standpoint theory reader: Intellectual and political controversies. New York, NY: Routledge.
Hegarty, P., & Buechel, C. (2006). Androcentric reporting of gender differences in APA journals: 1965–2004. Review of General Psychology, 10(4), 377–383.
Hollingworth, L. S. (1913). The frequency of amentia as related to sex. Medical Record, 84, 753–756.
Hollingworth, L. S. (1914). Variability as related to sex differences in achievement. The American Journal of Sociology, 19, 510–530.
Hollingworth, L. S. (1916). Social devices for impelling women to bear and rear children. The American Journal of Sociology, 22, 19–29.
Hyde, J. S. (2004). Half the human experience: The psychology of women (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Houghton, Mifflin and Company.
Knouse, J. (2005). Intersexuality and the social construction of anatomical sex. Cardozo Journal of Law & Gender, 12(1), 135–154.
Mason, A. S. (2010). Plato. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
McClintock, A. (1995). Imperial leather: Race, gender, and sexuality in the colonial contest. New York, NY: Routledge.
Mednick, M. T. S., & Weissman, H. J. (1975). The psychology of women – Selected topics. American Review of Psychology, 26, 1–18.
Mernissi, F. (1991). The veil and the male elite: A feminist interpretation of women’s rights in Islam. (M. J. Lakeland, Trans.). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Minton, H. L. (2000). Psychology and gender at the turn of the century. American Psychologist, History of Psychology 1900–2000, 55(6), 613–615.
Parlee, M. B. (1975). Psychology. Signs, 1(1), 119–138.
Riley, D. (1988). “Am I that name?”: Feminism and the category of “women” in history. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minneapolis.
Silveira, J. (1980). Generic masculine words and thinking. Women’s Studies International Quarterly, 3(2–3), 165–178.
Stewart, A. J., & Dottolo, A. L. (2006). Feminist psychology. Signs, 31(2), 493–509.
Tobach, E., & Rosoff, B. (1994). Challenging racism and sexism: Alternatives to genetic explanations. New York, NY: Feminist Press at the City University of New York.
Ward, L. F. (1903). Pure sociology: A treatise on the origin and spontaneous development of society. New York, NY: Macmillan.
Woolley, H. T. (1910). Psychological literature: A review of the recent literature on the psychology of sex. Psychological Bulletin, 7, 335–342.
Online Resources
American Psychological Association. (2005 October 20). Men and women: No big difference. Retrieved February 14, 2013, from http://www.apa.org/research/action/difference.aspx
Rutherford, A., et al. Psychology’s feminist voices. Retrieved November 1, 2012, from http://www.feministvoices.com/
Society for the Psychology of Women. (2012). Retrieved November 1, 2012, from http://www.apadivisions.org/division-35/
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this entry
Cite this entry
Hibbs, C. (2014). Androcentrism. In: Teo, T. (eds) Encyclopedia of Critical Psychology. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5583-7_16
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5583-7_16
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-5582-0
Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-5583-7
eBook Packages: Behavioral Science