GENDER INEQUALITY REPRESENTED IN ENGLISH TEXTBOOKS: A LITERATURE REVIEW

Ideologies are contested through discourses; thus, textbooks can be a fertile ground for implanting the prevalence of women's marginalization in society, or they can also be used for deconstructing the ideology. The present study aims to provide a general map of how English as a foreign language reflects gendered stereotypes. The study was library research that used the results of previous studies to answer the research questions. Using George's method, the study chose thirty articles published in 2010 - 2021, then critically reviewed. The critical reading was continued with mapping the results of the studies, and their arguments on gender stereotypes included English as Foreign Language textbooks worldwide. The review revealed that there had been prevalent marginalization of women in English textbooks reflected through the depiction of women as less dominant, inferior than men, primarily domestic, generally weak, powerless, voiceless, and passive. Such male prevalence was also found in Indonesian EFL textbooks. Many previous studies admit that male prevalence and women marginalization in EFL textbooks reflect reality in society. Nevertheless, the present study takes the standpoint that calls for the utilization of textbooks to deconstruct gendered binary oppositions that marginalize women by deliberately designing textbooks that impart awareness about gender equity.


INTRODUCTION
Gender-biased treatments and the marginalization of women that they entail is one of the most persistent issues in society.The communication system delivers a code in the forms of sounds, sentences, and words that are affected by several factors, such as gender, culture, class, and race (Aitchison & Wardaugh, 1987).Cultural conditions and social stereotypes control gender roles in communication, as reflected in how men and women use language (Heilman, 2012;Mahmud, 2015;Phillips, 2005).Lakoff (1973) already highlights the difference in language use between men and women and how they are controlled by society and certain cultural values, resulting in language variations that either marginalize women or are internalized by women and further the marginalization (Coates, 2013;Sunderland, 2006).Women prevalently utilized powerless language, showing that language and gender were imparted in the social practice, achieving meaning through their activities (Eckert & McConnell-Ginet, 2003).Women are disempowered by how they were taught to use particular language that later invokes the term women's language (Barr & Atkins, 1980;Lakoff, 1973).Many dictions and sentence constructions in this women's language have been linguistically explained to create a demeaning effect on women.They maintain the false belief that women will never be in equal positions with men politically, professionally, socially, and culturally because women are weaker, less rational, and too emotional (Blangsinga et al., 2021;Faludi, 1992;Friedan, 1979;Gamble, 2014;Heilman, 2012;Millett, 2000;Suwastini, 2013;Tong, 2009).Beauvoir lamented this phenomenon as the system that forces female-born human beings to "become women" and occupy the second position in society (De Beauvoir, 1956).
Efforts have been made to eradicate the systematic marginalization of women.Early in the 18th Century, Mary Wollstonecraft called for a reform in the education system, pleading the equal access to education for girls, including access to subjects that were then considered masculine, such as algebra and calculus (Gamble, 2014;Wollstonecraft, 1976).Since then, gradually, women gained more access to education, politics, and professions, only to be set back by systematic backlashes, highlighting the presence of the glass ceiling that systematically prevents women from advancing to top positions (Faludi, 1992).Jumping to the 21st Century, responding to the imbalance of gender equality across the globe, UNESCO (2012) has released a policy responding to systematic marginalization of women and negative gender stereotypes for women in the endeavors to decrease gender inequalities through education, including teaching material used in all types of education.It means textbooks and other reading material are supposed to raise awareness about gender equalities (Anggawati et al., 2018;Blangsinga et al., 2021;Dewi et al., 2018;Maheswari et al., 2020;Puspawati et al., 2021;Suwastini, Suprianti, et al., 2018;Suwastini, Utami, et al., 2018;Widasuari et al., 2020).Textbooks and what students read affect the students' perception toward gender equality and reflect the society's standpoint about the issue as represented by the texts as the product of the society (Al-Qatawneh & Al Rawashdeh, 2019;Asadullah et al., 2018;Blangsinga et al., 2021;Gebregeorgis, 2016;Gharbavi & Mousavi, 2012;Hameed, 2012;Rachmijati & Cahyati, 2018;Setyono, 2018;Yonata et al., 2017).If girls and women are not equally represented in textbooks, they will internalize their invisibility in society (Taylor, 2003).Likewise, stereotyped characterizations of male and female characters in Luh Shanti Nilayam Mihira, Ni Komang Arie Suwastini, Ni Nyoman Artini, I Gusti Agung Sri Rwa Jayantini, I Wayan Budiarta | Gender Inequality Represented in English Textbooks: A Literature Review textbooks can contribute negatively to the internalizations of gender-biased femininity and masculinity.It could result in the foregrounding of women's marginalization in society, which can be internalized by the students (Blangsinga et al., 2021;Suwastini, Banjar, et al., 2020).Emilia, Moecharam, & Syifa (2017), Islam & Asadullah (2018), Julianti, Ikhsanudin, & Y (2019), and Yang (2011) have expressed concerns that teachers sometimes unintentionally transfer gender-biased concepts into the classroom.They may do so through the language they use or the learning content.Teachers may lack time and awareness about gender equality to reflect on possible gender-biased content in the textbooks.According to Emilia et al. (2017), Islam & Asadullah (2018), Julianti et al. (2019), andYang (2011), such conditions significantly canceling the opportunity for schools to be the fertile ground for students to nurture students' awareness toward gender-biased stereotypes and women's marginalization.Textbooks should be one of the main arenas for teachers to unlearn the gender-biased stereotypes that they have internalized and for students to form politically correct perspectives about gender differences (Blangsinga et al., 2021;Gebregeorgis, 2016).

METHODS
This study was designed as library research, following the model from George (2008).As a preliminary study, the present study was conducted qualitatively, following George's library research ( 2008) adaptation into a qualitative study by Ariantini et al. (2021).Figure 1 below illustrates the step-by-step procedures of the present study, along with the expected results from each step.The first step was identifying the research topic.The researcher focused on the topic of gender bias and gender stereotypes that appeared in the educational field.The second step was designing research questions as the guide in this research, namely how men and women were represented in the English textbooks and what gender stereotypes are depicted in the English textbooks.
The third step was to determine the research's plan by browsing, reading, and selecting the information related to websites, articles, and books and observing previous research analyzing EFL textbooks.The fourth step, deciding the sources of data; firstly, the database was selected as the resources, namely Google scholar, Taylor & Francis (TANDFOLINE), and Science and Technology Index (SINTA).The data resources were determined by articles supported by relevant websites and Google scholar as the main website used to retrieve the articles.The articles were downloaded through an openaccess database due to the independent funding of the researcher.
The fifth step was determining the characterizations of the article used as this study's sources; the reviewed articles in this research were published in 2010-2021 in reputable international journals and accredited national journals accredited by Science and Technology Index (SINTA), indexed SINTA 1, SINTA 2, SINTA 3, and SINTA 4. Those articles were downloaded through an openaccess database with keywords; "gender stereotypes," "gender discrimination," "Gender Bias in English textbooks," "Inequality gender in education," "Gender inequality in EFL textbooks."Forty articles were retrieved and critically read in the sixth step.The limitation was set, in which only analyzing gender stereotypes which still exist in English textbooks.It was decided, this present study would be limited to the gender stereotype and inequality in English textbooks.After reducing the article, thirty articles were gained in representing the limitation of this study.Twenty articles were published in reputable international journals indexed by Scopus and/or Web of Sciences, 1 article was published in international conference proceedings indexed by Scopus.Two articles were published in international conference proceedings indexed by Web of Science articles were published in international journals indexed by Copernicus.In comparison, five articles were published in accredited national journals ranked Sinta 1, Sinta 2, Sinta 3, and Sinta 4.
The thirty articles were then critically read in the seventh step to understand how gender stereotypes or gender inequality were depicted in English textbooks in some countries.The information was summarized and written down in a tabulation classified into title, authors, years, background, theory, research question, and results.In step eight, the insights resulted from critical reading were used to propose the theses which answered the research question.Then, in the ninth step, the information was elaborated into several points based on the argument formation, answering the research questions before.Those points were represented in the form of the outline of the prevalence of male characters over female characters, marginalization of women in domestic roles, representation in activities, narrow range of occupational roles for women, the stereotypical characteristics of femininity and masculinity representations, and the deconstruction of gender stereotypes.The outline was then developed into the present article and revised accordingly, following the suggestion from colleagues and reviewers.

RESULT AND DISCUSSION Prevalence Male Characters over Female characters
A patriarchal society is, by definition, a society that privileges male interests over female ones (Gamble, 2014;Suwastini, 2013).This ideology can be reflected in discourses, including daily activities and spoken or written discourses.Articles reviewed in this study revealed the reproduction of patriarchal ideologies in English textbooks through the prevalence of male characters that marginalize women by limiting their participation, presence, visibility, and presentation.Figure 2 below summarizes the previous studies' arguments regarding the dismission of women over male dominance in English textbooks.
Another dominance identified by these previous research is the more prevalent use of masculine pronouns compared to female ones, such as male titles, citation in indexes, figures, and the consistent use of masculine pronouns when referring to a noun or subject with unknown gender (Barton & Sakwa, 2012;Blumberg, 2008;Lee & Collins, 2010).The generic use of pronouns was frequently used in masculine nouns and masculine pronouns (Bahman & Rahimi, 2010;Barton & Sakwa, 2012;Damayanti, 2014;Yonata et al., 2017).The use of "Mr.," "chairman," "Businessman" was frequently used when the book tried to prefer people in general or unknown gender (Bahman & Rahimi, 2010;Barton & Sakwa, 2012).Additionally, the title of "Ms." was utilized commonly to address women, in which the term "Ms." was introduced as part of "Mr."It showed the evidence of gender bias and inequality that existed in the textbooks, revealing that the textbooks were dominated by male-related nouns and pronouns (Ahmad & Shah, 2019;Lee, 2018;Yonata et al., 2017).
Lack of participation for female characters, when combined with lack of female pronouns, can contribute to the invisibility of the female characters (Barton & Sakwa, 2012;Lee & Collins, 2010).Such lack can create another implication on women' marginalization, where women's invisibility in the textbook diminishes women existence in the book, practically silencing them (Ahmad & Shah, 2019;Ariyanto, 2018;Barton & Sakwa, 2012;Blangsinga et al., 2021;Damayanti, 2014;Emilia et al., 2017;Lee & Mahmoudi-Gahrouei, 2020).Lack of female speakers in the dialogues and reading texts included in the English textbooks is an endorsement of women's invisibility and silencing in the book (Ahmad & Shah, 2019;Bahman & Rahimi, 2010;Gharbavi & Mousavi, 2012;Julianti et al., 2019;Paudel & Khadka, 2019;Sari, 2011).Even though female characters are present in the English textbooks, Hameed (2012), Julianti et al. (2019), Paudel & Khadka (2019), Sari (2011), and Yonata et al. (2017) notice that female speakers pose fewer speeches in dialogues and stories.Blangsinga et al. (2021), for example, noticed that the female characters in the narrative text included in the English textbook for grade 10 in Indonesia rarely speak.When they do speak, it is mainly when they express the need for help or favor or express submissions.Likewise, Abraham (2017) and Ariyanto (2018) identified that the female characters included in dialogues usually answer questions from the male characters instead of taking the active role of asking the questions.Abraham (2017) reveals that male characters usually dominate a story, as they are assigned as the main characters that continuously appear in the story.
The accumulated implication of the three forms of male dominance elaborated above is the underrepresentation of women in English textbooks (Abraham, 2017;Ariyanto, 2018;Barton & Sakwa, 2012;Emilia et al., 2017;Gharbavi & Mousavi, 2012;Lee & Mahmoudi-Gahrouei, 2020;Paudel & Khadka, 2019).Gharbavi & Mousavi (2012) argue that the lack of women representation in English textbooks may reflect the reluctance to depict female bodies.This argument seems closely related to religious and cultural beliefs that women's bodies are sacred (and thus not for show) or reflect profanity that lures men's desires.However, they also admit that textbooks' lack of female representations reflects the reluctance to place women as the center of attention.Thus, including fewer girls or women in the textbooks, assigning fewer female speakers, making the female characters more silent and passive seem to reflect the mainstream ideologies to exclude women from education and other dominant roles.
Predominant male characters over female characters were also found in English textbooks used in Indonesia.Studies have identified that English textbooks used in Indonesia show the dominance of male characters over female ones (Rachmijati & Cahyati, 2018;Sari, 2011;Suhartono & Kristina, 2018;Yonata et al., 2017).As a result, there emerged the possibility of creating gender-stereotyped and gender ideology to students as the reflection of Indonesian culture (Suhartono & Kristina, 2018;Yonata et al., 2017).The main characters were primarily male, while the female characters were placed as the passive ones: they became the receiver of the action, the ones affected by the active characters, or they were simply the listeners to male's speech (Damayanti, 2014;Emilia et al., 2017).This dominance of male characters indicated in the English textbooks may reflect a twofold implication.The first is the possibility of the textbooks to reflect the marginalization of women in Indonesian society, where the society privileges men's interests while casting aside women as less consequential.The other side of the implication is the possibility of reproducing women's marginalization among school children by depicting male dominance in their English textbooks.Thus, the studies strongly call for more conscious efforts to represent more balanced gender equality in textbooks' materials to open more opportunities for female students, increasing their confidence to actively enroll themselves in the nation's development (Blangsinga et al., 2021;Sari, 2011).

Marginalization of Women in Domestic Roles
The higher representation of female characters in domestic roles is closely related to real societies' cultural values.The domestic setting has become the space to perform the stereotypical feminine role, such as nurturing, cooking, or taking care of children (Friedan, 1979;Millett, 2000).Previous research reviewed in this study reveals that English textbooks maintain the gendered stereotypes that assign domestic and passive roles to women.At the same time, men are given more active roles and outdoor settings.Table 1 below summarizes the genderedbiased activities assigned to female and male characters in the English textbooks observed in the previous studies.It can be observed that female characters were identified to be depicted doing nurturing and domestic activities, such as cooking, childrearing, babysitting, cleaning, and washing dishes, while male characters were listed to be doing fishing, playing, doing sports, traveling, climbing and running (Barton & Sakwa, 2012;Curaming & Curaming, 2020;Dabbagh, 2016;Emilia et al., 2017;Gebregeorgis, 2016;Hameed, 2012;Hayik, 2016;Julianti et al., 2019;Lee, 2019;Lee & Mahmoudi-Gahrouei, 2020;Paudel & Khadka, 2019;Setyono, 2018;Suhartono & Kristina, 2018;Yonata et al., 2017).Furthermore, male characters were always depicted as actively taking the roles of lead participants of main course action, while women were depicted as passive and monotonous in their activities (Dabbagh, 2016;Hameed, 2012).Yasin et al. (2012) are particularly concerned with the image of girls in the action of "serving" food to boys in the English textbooks that they observe (Yasin et al., 2012).Gebregeorgis (2016) recognizes the ambiguous equal chance of boys and girls in EFL textbooks to engage in domestic and leisure activities.However, they had different types of activities.When at home, the female characters were depicted cooking, doing housework, fetching water, feeding hen, washing dishes, and cleaning the kitchen.On the other hand, the boys' activities were taking a rest, playing with friends which quite different compared to girls' activities, in which they even did not have time to rest.
Indonesian EFL textbooks are not an exception in showing the inequality of gender through English textbooks.Indonesian ELT textbooks tend to portray male characters as superior to female characters in the form of masculinity traits that showed their power, e.g., leadership, climbing, or doing sports.Those activities strengthened the stereotype that men needed to be strong, brave, powerful, adventurous, risk-taker, rational, and powerful (Ariyanto, 2018;Emilia et al., 2017;Suhartono & Kristina, 2018).In contrast, cooking, nurturing, studying, cleaning, and preparing foods referred to female characters' feminine traits.Those kinds of activities are categorized as feminine traits, emphasizing the characterizations of nurturing women (Blangsinga et al., 2021).It was not only how women or female characters chose to be at home and doing home-care activities, but Damayanti (2014) also reported that English textbooks represented female characters as the goals, meaning that characters who always being affected by male characters.Male characters were described as characters that did the activities independently; female characters were mostly related to social activities, meaning they always did everything with others and needed help.Most activities were stereotyped and contained the cultural values of Indonesian people, where the patriarchal system is dominant.
Patriarchal society assigns masculine activities for their male member, while feminine activities are assigned for the female members (Blangsinga et al., 2021;De Beauvoir, 1956;Faludi, 1992;Friedan, 1979;Gamble, 2014;Millett, 2000;Suwastini, 2013;Suwastini, Banjar, et al., 2020).Assigning domestic activities to women and placing female characters in domestic spaces in EFL textbooks may strengthen the traditional beliefs that women should stay at home and do domestic chores (Barton & Sakwa, 2012;Curaming & Curaming, 2020).Thus, the labor divisions displayed in Table 1 above reflect the binary oppositions Millet (2000) argued and proven by Blangsinga (2021), where traditionally, women are dominantly associated with domestic and feminine activities, and men are assigned outdoor and masculine activities.

Narrow Range of Occupational Roles for Women
One of the awareness raised by feminist movements is the equal opportunities for career advancement and eliminating the "glass ceiling" that has been persistently limiting women in the workplace (Faludi, 1992;Friedan, 1979).This awareness should be conducted informal and informal contexts, especially among students (Anggawati et al., 2018;Blangsinga et al., 2021;Suwastini, Banjar, et al., 2020).Textbooks, as an integral part of education, should also promote gender equality in terms of occupations.However, studies have identified the persistence of a limited range of occupations assigned for women, along with gendered stereotypes of what occupations are suitable for women and what professions are normatively assigned for men.Table 2 below displays the divisions of occupations between men and women, where men are assigned with more varied occupations than women, and the type of occupations assigned to men are generally more masculine than the feminine types of jobs assigned to women.The majority of the books observed by previous research reviewed in this study represent women having fewer occupational choices than men.
And then, the occupations assigned for men are equivocally typical to the traditional roles of women as housemaker and caretaker, while men were assigned with a professional occupation that required a higher educational level (Barton & Sakwa, 2012;Emilia et al., 2017;Gebregeorgis, 2016;Gharbavi & Mousavi, 2012;Julianti et al., 2019;Lee, 2019;Lee & Mahmoudi-Gahrouei, 2020;Paudel & Khadka, 2019;Sulaimani, 2017;Yang, 2016).Barton & Sakwa (2012), Goyal & Rose (2020), Julianti et al. (2019), Paudel & Khadka (2019) recognize that EFL textbooks assigned men with professions of the public sphere, well-paid and high-status jobs, such as a doctor, judge, manager, leader, CEO, engineer, photographer, lawyer, scientist, politician.Additionally, men's occupation was frequently related to their power and physical demands, e.g., police and soldier (Lee, 2019).It represented that male characters will be a center when the story came to crime, success stories, solid national identity, politicians, and government (Lee & Collins, 2010).On the other hand, female characters in the EFL textbooks analyzed by the studies observed in the present review primarily assigned their female characters with domestic and feminine occupational roles, such as wife, mother, teachers, or nurse were mainly imparted to female characters (Julianti et al., 2019;Lee, 2019;Lee & Collins, 2010;Shamsuddin & Hamid, 2017).These professions are closely linked to their traditional "natural" space as women and mothers, the home (Gamble, 2014;Lee, 2019;Shamsuddin & Hamid, 2017).Besides, prestigious jobs, such as reporters, police, doctors for male characters, were illustrated to confined their role as "man" and gave low prestigious jobs; driver, waitress, and salesgirl to female characters (Paudel & Khadka, 2019;Sulaimani, 2017).
Research on Indonesian EFL textbooks also reveals similar gendered occupational roles between the male and female characters included in the textbooks.Suhartono & Kristina (2018) argue that English textbooks used in Indonesian schools illustrated the male characters as successful men with strong leadership, while the female characters were given more inferior professions and weaker leadership.Emilia et al. (2017), Lestariyana et al. (2020), and Setyono (2018) notice that Indonesian EFL textbooks included female characters who do domestic activities, such as caring for children, cooking, doing laundry, cleaning, ironing, and doing groceries.Setyono (2018) recognizes the effort to deconstruct the biased concept that women should not work professionally or pursue their careers by including career-women in Indonesian English textbooks.
However, he was disappointed that the career women were also depicted to do domestic chores, which directly represents what Faludi calls "the feminists' double burden."Lestariyana et al.
(2020), Rachmijati &Cahyati (2018), andSetyono (2018) are concerned that the limited range of occupations assigned to female characters in the EFL textbooks will be internalized by the female students as the only accepted occupations for them to pursue.Moreover, they are apprehensive that the assignment of nurturing, caring, and serving chores for female characters would be read by the female students as the roles that define them as women, without which they may consider themselves inadequate or unacceptable.Emilia et al. (2017) and Suhartono & Kristina (2018) point their concern to another corner.They saw that assigning masculine and decisive occupations requiring strong leadership and high salaries in EFL textbooks would negatively affect male students' perceptions of what society expects from men.Considering that traditionally male descendent become the heirs of the family's fortune and the providers for their female family members, the assignment of well-paid occupations of male characters may emphasize the traditional expectations of men as the breadwinner of the family.

Stereotypical
Femininity and Masculinity Millet (2000) most fervently notices how men and women are characterized with opposing traits that always marginalize women.They end up being the lesser human being, second to men as the unmarked sex (De Beauvoir, 1956).Previous research observed in the present study identified the persistence of these gendered binary oppositions, where the female characters are assigned with the typical feminine traits, and the male characters are assigned with typical masculine traits.Table 3 below summarized these opposing pairings as summarized from the previous studies observed in the present study.(Ariyanto, 2018;Barton & Sakwa, 2012;Blangsinga et al., 2021;Hameed, 2012;Julianti et al., 2019;Lan & Jingxia, 2019;Lee, 2018;Lee & Mahmoudi-Gahrouei, 2020;Paudel & Khadka, 2019;Setyono, 2018;Suhartono & Kristina, 2018;Yang, 2016).From these characterizations, women are generally depicted as the passive sex who are either religious or vain.Religious women are presented in modest clothing in dull-colors clothing (Lee & Mahmoudi-Gahrouei, 2020), while the vain women seem to concern themselves more with how they look with their either bright or soft-colored clothing and long, well-arranged, and neatly accessorized hairs (Setyono, 2018;Yang, 2016).Paudel & Khadka (2019) are apprehensive that the EFL textbooks they observed persistently presented women as passive listeners who waited for men to initiate conversations.For them, internalizations of this passivity can further silence women's voices so often found in society.Bahman & Rahimi (2010), Julianti et al. (2019), Lan & Jingxia (2019), Lee & Collins (2010), and Suhartono & Kristina (2018) are concerned that the assignment of shy, passive, weak, dependent, powerless, and submissive traits on the female characters included in EFL textbooks will confirm the traditional beliefs about the inferiority of the female sex.They are anxious that students will internalize them as the expected traits among girls.Brody (2001) argues that the descriptions of female characters in textbooks as emotional, weak, and passive may reflect women's characters in real life.Nevertheless, Blangsinga et al. (2021) are adamant that textbooks should seek to deconstruct the normative attribution of stereotypically feminine traits to women.They argue that textbooks and educations should be part of the deliberate effort to break the hierarchical dichotomy that limits girls to certain sets of traits to be accepted as standard female members of the society.For Blangsinga et al. ( 2021), negative gender constructions normalized in society should not be part of the characterizations in EFL textbooks.
From Table 3, it can also be observed that male characters are generally depicted as brave, strong, rude, wise, ambiguous, hard-working, controlling, powerful, independent, rational, and bold, dark-colored formal outfits while at ease in their casual outfits, short-haired, progressive (Ariyanto, 2018;Barton & Sakwa, 2012;Hameed, 2012;Julianti et al., 2019;Lee, 2018;Paudel & Khadka, 2019;Suhartono & Kristina, 2018).In general, EFL textbooks have been found to present their male characters as masculine, practical, and forwardthinking.Lee & Mahmoudi-Gahrouei (2020), Paudel &Khadka (2019), andYang (2016) notice that men are predominantly depicted as short-haired with dark-colored outfits that shows their masculinity and the absence of assiduous fashions prevalent among their female counterparts.Bahman & Rahimi (2010) The gendered binary oppositions in the characterizations of male and female characters included in EFL textbooks also persist in the textbooks mandatorily used in Indonesian EFL classrooms.Male characters were depicted to have positive personalities, such as nationalism, full of spirit, skills, hard workers, expressive, active, and good ability in some subjects, such as math and science (Ariyanto, 2018;Suhartono & Kristina, 2018).Blangsinga et al. (2021) and Damayanti (2014) recognize the persistence of strong, diligent, ambiguous, hard worker, brave, independent, rational, healthy, and physically strong males in the Indonesian EFL textbooks, where the female characters are depicted as generally beautiful, weak, passive, and diligent, with only the honest ones get rewarded, while the cheating ones are severely punished.Sari ( 2011) is concerned that the female characters' involvement through passive voice clauses and the male character's involvement through active voice strengthens the message that the male characters were the active, independent, and capable gender.Rachmijati & Cahyati (2018) admit that some of the characterizations do depict the reality of how men, boys, women, and girls look and behave in Indonesia.However, to include these in a textbook would impart students with the systematic binary divisions that burden and limit both men and women (Julianti et al., 2019) but more so for women (Blangsinga et al., 2021;Damayanti, 2014).As Harashima (2005) argues, gender stereotypes in textbooks will significantly promote insensitivity the lack of awareness to the equality between women and men in societies (Harashima, 2005).

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The critical review conducted in the present study revealed that most English textbooks reflected imbalance representation and gender-stereotyped toward female characters in the form of the domination of male characters, marginalization of women in domestic roles, a narrow range of occupational roles for women, and stereotypical characteristics of femininity and masculinity.It was evident that English textbooks presented discrimination and inequality towards women and some unrealistic expectations toward men.Researchers have shown concerns that the representations of gendered binary oppositions and the persistence of male dominance in EFL textbooks across the globe will impart and strengthen the gendered stereotypes.Teachers and students use textbooks as the material resources and the foundation in doing learning activities.Thus, the inclusion of biased gender matrices and marginalization of women in textbooks may result in internalizations of the gender-biased labor divisions, expectations toward how men/boys and women' girls should behave, and what they can or cannot do to be considered normatively acceptable in the society.Since depictions of attributions, labor and space divisions, and stereotypical characteristics between men/boys and women/girls reflect the systematic marginalization toward women in the society, their representations into EFL textbooks will strengthen this marginalization.Following suggestions from previous EFL textbooks reviewed in the present study, it is strongly suggested that EFL textbooks and textbooks, in general, should be written with an awareness of biased gender constructions and deliberate efforts to deconstructs these biased constructions.

Table 2 .
Gender Occupational Division