According to Social Role Theory, gender stereotypes are dynamic constructs influenced by actual and perceived changes in what roles women and men occupy (Wood and Eagly, 2011). Sweden is ranked as one of the most egalitarian countries in the world, with a strong national equality discourse and a relatively high number of men engaging in traditionally communal roles such as parenting and domestic tasks. This would imply a perceived change toward higher communion among men. Therefore, we investigated the dynamics of gender stereotype content in Sweden with a primary interest in the male stereotype and perceptions of gender equality. In Study 1, participants (N = 323) estimated descriptive stereotype content of women and men in Sweden in the past, present, or future. They also estimated gender distribution in occupations and domestic roles for each time-point. Results showed that the female stereotype increased in agentic traits from the past to the present, whereas the male stereotype showed no change in either agentic or communal traits. Furthermore, participants estimated no change in gender stereotypes for the future, and they overestimated how often women and men occupy gender non-traditional roles at present. In Study 2, we controlled for participants’ actual knowledge about role change by either describing women’s increased responsibilities on the job market, or men’s increased responsibility at home (or provided no description). Participants (N = 648) were randomized to the three different conditions. Overall, women were perceived to increase in agentic traits, and this change was mediated by perceptions of social role occupation. Men where not perceived to increase in communion but decreased in agency when change focused on women’s increased participation in the labor market. These results indicate that role change among women also influence perceptions of the male stereotype. Altogether, the results indicate that social roles might have stronger influence on perceptions of agency than perceptions of communion, and that communion could be harder to incorporate in the male stereotype.

According to the Stereotype Content Model (SCM), the content of stereotypes differs on two dimensions: communion and agency. Research shows that for stereotypes about the general gender categories of “women” and “men,” there is an ambivalent pattern of communion and agency, where high levels on one dimension are associated with low levels on the other. For sexual minority stereotypes, a gender inversion has been found, whereas homosexual women are seen as more similar to men in general than to women in general, whereas homosexual men are seen as more similar to women in general than to men in general. However, there is limited research on how stereotype content for general groups relate to stereotype content for subgroups with intersecting category memberships. This research addresses this gap by investigating stereotype content at the intersection of gender and sexual orientation, including stereotype content for general gender groups, heterosexual groups, homosexual groups, and bisexual groups. In Study 1, a community sample from Sweden (N= 824) rated perceived communion and agency for women and men in general, as well as hetero-, homo-, and bisexual women and men. In Study 2, a nationally representative Swedish sample (N= 424) performed the same rating task, and in addition completed Single-Category IATs (SC-IATs) for warmth and competence. Results from both studies show that the stereotype content for the general categories “women” and “men” overlap with the stereotype content for heterosexual same-gender targets. Homosexual and bisexual groups were rated as more similar to their non-congruent gender category than same gender heterosexual categories were, but stereotype content for sexual minority groups did not overlap with either general gender categories, thus showing only incomplete gender inversion of stereotype content. Implicit associations between “women” and “warmth” were significantly stronger than associations between “men” and “warmth.” There were no other significant relations between implicit associations to warmth/competence and gender or sexual orientation. Theoretical and methodological implications for future research into intersectional stereotype content are presented, including how the findings inform the co-dependent relationship between a binary gender structure and a heteronormative ideology.

The current research addresses gender trouble (acts that question the naturalness of a binary gender system) in two parts of the recruitment situation: applicant attraction and evaluation. Experiment 1 (N = 1,147) investigated how different Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) statements in an organization description influenced organizational evaluations. The EEO statements emphasized gender as binary (women and men), gender as diverse (multi‐gender), or gender as irrelevant (de‐gender; compared with no EEO statement). Gender minority participants experienced decreased identity threat in response to the multi‐gendered and the de‐gendered EEO statements, which increased organizational attractivity. There was no significant effect of EEO statement for gender majority participants. Multi‐gendered and de‐gendered EEO statements increased perceived gender diversity within the organization. Experiment 2 (N = 214) investigated how applicants with a normative or non‐normative gender expression were evaluated by HR‐specialists. Applicants with a non‐normative gender expression were rated as more suitable for the position and recommended a higher starting salary than applicants with a normative gender expression. Women with a non‐normative gender expression were rated as more likely to be employed than men with a non‐normative gender expression, while women applicants regardless of gender expression were rated as the most likely to acquire the position. This research indicates that gender minorities can be explicitly included in EEO statements without negative impact on gender majority groups and with a positive impact on gender minority groups. Furthermore, a non‐normative gender expression was not found to be a cause for biased evaluations in an initial recruitment situation.

Gender lay theory is a framework of information interpretation related to gender categorisation and can be divided into two general forms: gender essentialism versus gender as socially constructed. The present study investigated how exposure to scientifically framed explanations for gender differences affects individuals’ gender lay theory and if endorsement of an essentialist gender lay theory influences discrimination attribution. The 413 Swedish participants were exposed to scientific explanations of gender differences, with either a biological or a social constructionist perspective, or to no-explanation control. Compared to the control condition, the social constructionist condition showed higher endorsement of a non-essentialist gender lay theory. The biological condition did not differ from the control condition, indicating that an essentialist view of gender might be the prevailing norm in Sweden. Discrimination attribution was indirectly affected by exposure to social constructionist explanations of gender differences through increasing endorsement of a non-essentialist gender lay theory, which predicted a higher degree of discrimination attribution. In other words, exposure to social constructionist explanations of gender differences predicted a greater recognition of discriminatory behaviour as such than did exposure to biological explanations or no explanation. Implications of the current study include the potential for social constructionist theories of gender to be used for educational purposes to increase recognition of discriminatory behaviour.

LGBTIQ+ research acknowledges shared experiences of groups marginalized due to gender identities, sexualities, and sex characteristics. This universalist coalition approach has resulted in much affirmational research and progressive policy development. However, it risks homogenizing the unique experiences and needs of specific groups; a risk lessened by a particularist subgroup approach. In this theoretical paper, we reflect on the challenges of a coalition or subgroup approach by considering interdependencies and boundaries between sex, gender, and sexuality‐based identities. Through tracing the historical development of LGBTIQ+ research and activism and using examples from intersex studies, intersectionality, and political actions, we explore tensions between the collective identities that make up the LGBTIQ+ acronym. We further offer suggestions for reimagining LGBTIQ+ research, advocating for community‐driven approaches that respect the situated knowledge of LGBTIQ+ individuals, and use adaptable and inclusive research practices that bridge academia and activism that aim to improve the lives of the marginalized.

The intersectional invisibility hypothesis (IIH) states that members of multiply marginalized groups experience intersectional invisibility by not being seen as prototypical for either of their constitutive groups due to the influence of heterocentrism and androcentrism. That is, a lesbian woman may not be represented in relation to either the category ‘woman’ or the category ‘homosexual people’. Two online experiments conducted in Sweden and the United Kingdom ( N = 1923) tested predictions from the IIH at different intersections of specific genders (woman and man) and sexual orientations (heterosexuality, homosexuality and bisexuality) using an attribute generation task and direct similarity ratings. Results show strong support for the influence of heterocentrism: Only prototypes for heterosexual women/men match general prototypes for women/men. Androcentrism influenced the prototype for ‘homosexual people’, which had a stronger match with the prototype for gay men compared with lesbian women. In contrast, bisexual women were seen as more prototypical ‘bisexual people’ than bisexual men were. Psychological research conducted on general gender groups may therefore only be applicable to heterosexual individuals, while research on homosexual people in general may be applicable mainly to gay men.