School textbooks are SEXIST, woke scientists say - so, would you take offence to these descriptions of men and women?

From 'Charlie and the Chocolate Factory' to 'The Tiger Who Came To Tea', woke campaigners have taken offence to many beloved books.

Now, scientists claim that even our school textbooks are sexist.

Researchers from the UK's Center for Global Development analysed the contents of 1,255 textbooks from 34 countries around the world.

They found that the textbooks mentioned women half as often as men and were far less likely to describe their careers and achievements.

So, would you take offence to these descriptions of men and women?

The textbooks analysed in the study were drawn from subjects ranging from economics to agriculture and covered years four to 13 (ages eight to 18). 

The researchers then compared each textbook's content with a list of gendered names and pronouns - like 'he', 'she', or 'aunty' - and looked at what kind of phrases these words were used with.

Lead researcher Lee Crawfurd told MailOnline: 'Our study shows that girls are systematically under-represented in school books around the world, and depicted in traditional stereotypical roles.'

The researchers also found that the terms used to describe men and women usually reflected traditional gender stereotypes.

The most common adjectives used to describe female characters included 'married', 'beautiful', 'aged' and 'quiet'.

Men, on the other hand, were most often described as 'rich', 'wise', and 'certain'.

For verbs, the most common words associated with women included 'bake', 'cook', and 'sang'.

The verbs most commonly used to describe men were 'rule', 'guide', 'sign', and 'order'.

However, Mr Crawfurd says: 'It's less about particular egregious examples or sentences, and more about these consistent patterns of representation.'

For example, the study found that female words were much less frequently associated with terms involving achievement and work and more likely to be associated with terms referring to personal appearance and the home.

Where women's jobs are mentioned, the most common form of employment was 'domestic help', 'nurse', and 'religious official'.

By contrast, the jobs which most often occurred alongside male-gendered words were 'physicist', 'mathematician', and 'salesperson'.

Across all the countries studied, men were mentioned more than twice as often as women.

In Afghanistan, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, and South Sudan where women were least represented, less than one in three gendered words referred to a woman or girl.

The country which mentioned women most frequently was Zimbabwe, where textbooks use more female terms than male terms.

This was followed by Kiribati and Kenya which skewed slightly towards using more female terms.

However, as the researchers point out, the seven countries which mention women most all receive a large proportion of their textbooks through donor projects.

Excluding countries with donor-provided textbooks, the UK was the nation which mentions women and men most equally - although male terms are still more common.

Generally, countries with textbooks that contained more female characters had a stronger GDP and more legal rights for women - although the researchers could not say whether this was just a correlation. 

The researchers also found a difference between subjects in terms of how often women or men were mentioned.

Home economics was the subject which mentioned women the most, with some textbooks using female terms up to 70 per cent of the time.

This was closely followed by physical education which used male and female terms almost equally.

Religion, humanities, science, and business, meanwhile, were the subjects which mentioned men the most.

While these differences might seem inconsequential, Mr Crawfurd argues that the presence of these subtle biases has a real impact on students' lives.

'Millions of girls and boys around the world are denied opportunities because of regressive gender norms and rigid stereotypes,' said Mr Crawfurd.

'Obviously there are many influences on norms besides school books, but this is one simple adjustment that can be made and might be of some benefit.'

Around the world, educational materials and children's books have become an increasingly contentious topic for campaigners on either side of the political spectrum.

Some groups have taken offence to classic works such as The Tiger Who Came for Tea on the grounds that it perpetuates gender stereotypes.

Meanwhile, Florida school boards have banned several textbooks for mentioning 'critical race theory' or 'social justice issues'.

Although their goals are different, both groups are motivated by a concern that exposure to content in the classroom can influence young people's life choices.

In response to these findings, Mr Crawford and his co-authors are calling on policymakers and educators to address the gender disparities found in textbooks.

In their paper, published in PLOS ONE, they argue that this would remove 'outdated gender stereotypes' from the classroom and help broaden students' horizons.

Mr Crawfurd concludes: 'The changes that could be made are simple; ensuring that the stories and illustrations used in books show boys and girls in a range of different roles.'