Just Think About It: Mindfulness, Sexism, and Prejudice Toward Feminists

This study examined the relation between mindfulness, sexist motivations and beliefs, and prejudice toward women who violate traditional gender roles—namely feminists. In a preliminary study, 672 (251 men, 421 women) undergraduates from a United States Midwestern university completed a measure of mindfulness and warmth toward feminists and consistent with hypotheses, more mindfulness was associated with more warmth toward feminists. Extending this initial finding to the main study, 653 (273 men, 380 women) undergraduates from a U.S. Midwestern university completed measures of mindfulness, motivation to respond without sexism, ambivalent sexism, and warmth toward feminists. Consistent with hypotheses, compared to women participants, men participants were lower on internal motivation to respond without sexism, higher on hostile and benevolent sexism and less warm toward feminists. Also consistent with hypotheses, for men participants, more mindfulness was associated with higher internal motivation to respond without sexism, less benevolent sexism, and more warmth toward feminists. In contrast, for women participants, more mindfulness was only associated with less hostile sexism. Finally, a path analysis revealed that the positive relation between mindfulness and warmth toward feminists for men participants was partially mediated by more internal motivation to respond without sexism (i.e., a significant indirect effect), but not by less sexist beliefs. Implications for mindfulness, sexism, and prejudice more generally are discussed.     

Predicting Feminist Identity: Associations Between Gender-Traditional Attitudes, Feminist Stereotyping, and Ethnicity

The connection between holding gender-traditional attitudes and the reluctance to identify as a feminist is well established, yet little is known about factors that might underlie this association. One factor that may serve this function is the tendency to hold negative stereotypes about feminists. Indeed, the constructs of ambivalent sexism (Glick and Fiske 1996) and ambivalence toward men (Glick and Fiske 1999) provide a strong theoretical basis for the prediction that traditional attitudes toward women and men are related to the derogation of women who do not conform to the feminine-stereotyped gender role. Therefore, the present study utilized path analysis to test a mediational model in which traditional attitudes toward women and men predict the tendency to stereotype feminists, which in turn predicts feminist identity. The present study also examined whether the relations between the variables in the model differed for African American, European American, and Latina women. Participants consisted of 544 women from the southern United States who, despite being undergraduates, were in their mid-to-late twenties on average. As expected, participant ethnicity moderated the paths in the model. Among African American and Latina women, hostility toward men and hostile sexism predicted the tendency to stereotype feminists, which then predicted feminist identity. Support for the mediational model was not obtained among European American women; instead, the model for European American women was characterized by direct paths from traditional attitudes toward women and men to feminist identity. Discussion focuses on the importance of considering participants’ ethnic background when assessing predictors of feminist identity.     

ARE WOMEN EVALUATED MORE FAVORABLY THAN MEN?

In an experiment in which male and female respondents evaluated the social category of women or men on several types of measures, analysis of respondents' attitudes toward the sexes and of the evaluative content of their beliefs established that they evaluated women more favorably than men. In addition, analysis of respondents' emotional reactions toward women and men did not yield evidence of negativity toward women at the emotional level. Nor did it appear that respondents' very positive evaluations of women masked ambivalence toward them. This research, therefore, provides strong evidence that women are evaluated quite favorably—in fact, more favorably than men.     

Open or close the door to the outgroup? Diversity beliefs moderate the impact of group boundary permeability on attitudes toward the outgroup

The present research investigated the moderating role of diversity beliefs with the aim of reconciling inconsistent findings regarding the impact of group boundary permeability on attitudes toward outgroup. In Study 1, all variables were measured with self‐report scales completed by Chinese participants. In Study 2, diversity beliefs were manipulated by randomly assigning Chinese participants to a high or low diversity belief condition. In Study 3, we replicated the moderating model with American participants. Results of all three studies indicated that diversity beliefs moderated the relationship between group boundary permeability and attitudes toward outgroup. Individuals with high diversity beliefs held more positive attitudes toward the outgroup when the group boundary was permeable (vs. impermeable). Conversely, individuals with low diversity beliefs held more negative attitudes toward the outgroup when the group boundary was permeable (vs. impermeable). These findings suggest that when the inflow of the outgroup members is inevitable, attitudes toward the outgroup may be effectively improved by increasing diversity beliefs.     

Gender Role Beliefs and Attitudes toward Lesbians and Gay Men in Chile and the U.S.

We compared the relationship between gender role beliefs and antigay prejudice in Chile and the United States. Participants were Chilean and American university students. In Study 1, Chileans were more prejudiced than Americans, and men were more prejudiced than women. In Study 2, gender role beliefs mediated cultural and sex differences in prejudice. Chileans held more traditional gender role beliefs and were more antigay than Americans. Men were more prejudiced than women, particularly in their attitudes toward gay men. Further, sex differences in attitudes toward lesbians and gay men were completely mediated by gender role beliefs. Nationality differences in attitudes toward lesbians were completely mediated, and nationality differences in attitudes toward gay men were partially mediated, by gender role beliefs.     

Implicit and explicit measures of sexual orientation attitudes: in group preferences and related behaviors and beliefs among gay and straight men

The relations among implicit and explicit measures of sexual orientation attitudes and sexual-orientation-related behavior and beliefs among gay men (Study 1) and straight men (Studies 1 and 2) were explored. Study 1 found relations between implicit and explicit measures of sexual orientation attitudes, large differences between gay and straight men on both implicit and explicit measures, and that these measures predicted sexual-orientation-related behaviors among gay men. Also, only straight men exhibited a negative relation between their attitudes toward homosexuality and heterosexuality. Study 2 found that as straight men held more negative attitudes toward homosexuality, they more strongly endorsed the importance of heterosexual identity and of traditional masculine gender roles. These endorsements mediated the negative relation between their attitudes toward heterosexuality and homosexuality. Implications for assessing attitudes toward sexual orientation and their relations for sexual orientation identity are discussed.     

Can values moderate the attitudes of right-wing authoritarians?

This investigation explored how right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) and endorsement of egalitarian beliefs may interact to determine attitudes toward immigrants, homosexuals, and African Americans. Study 1 (N = 239) found that RWA was negatively related to evaluations of immigrants for those who weakly endorsed egalitarian beliefs. In contrast, endorsement of egalitarian beliefs was associated with positive evaluations of immigrants for both low and high RWAs. RWA did not interact with egalitarianism to determine attitudes toward homosexuals or African Americans. Study 2 analyzed data from the 1992 National Election Study and replicated these effects in a young adult (age < or = 24) sample (n = 102) using moral traditionalism as a proxy for RWA. Partial support for the hypotheses also was found in the adult (age > or = 25) sample (n = 1,257). It is concluded that when tradition and/or social norms offer unclear positions, endorsement of egalitarian beliefs influences the attitudes of authoritarians.     

Humility attenuates negative attitudes and behaviors toward religious out-group members

Humility is marked by the regulation of selfish impulses for the sake of others, including holding a modest view of one’s beliefs (and their relative strengths and weaknesses). In three studies, we evaluated the extent to which humility attenuates negative attitudes, behavioral intentions, and behaviors toward religious out-group members. In Study 1 (N = 159), humility regarding religious beliefs was associated with positive attitudes toward religiously different individuals. In Study 2 (N = 149), relational and intellectual humility were associated with less aggressive behavioral intentions in a hypothetical situation in which their cherished beliefs were criticized. In Study 3 (N = 62), participants implicitly primed with humility administered significantly less hot sauce (a behavioral measure of aggression) to a religious out-group member who criticized their cherished views relative to participants in the neutral prime condition. We highlight the importance of humility in promoting positive attitudes and behaviors toward religious out-group members.     

What Predicts Attitudes toward Transgender and Nonbinary People? An Exploration of Gender,Authoritarianism, Social Dominance,and Gender Ideology

Transgender and nonbinary (TGNB) people face discrimination based on negative societal attitudes toward TGNB identities. Our study explored factors contributing to negative TGNB attitudes, including participants’ gender, age, religion, right-wing authoritarianism (RWA), social dominance orientation (SDO), and adherence to traditional gender ideologies. Our sample of 808 U.S. Mechanical Turk participants completed measures of RWA, SDO, traditional masculinity and femininity, and transgender attitudes and beliefs. Because TGNB people have diverse identities, we modified the transgender attitudes and beliefs scale to measure attitudes toward trans man, trans woman, and nonbinary targets instead of the single “transgender” umbrella. Results of multiple regression analyses indicated that gender was a significant predictor of attitudes toward trans men and trans women. Higher levels of RWA, traditional masculinity, and anti-egalitarianism (a domain of SDO) predicted negative attitudes toward all TGNB identities, with RWA generally being the strongest predictor. Traditional femininity and the dominance domain of SDO did not significantly contribute to our predictive model for most groups, although we were surprised to find that for nonbinary people, higher levels of traditional femininity predicted positive attitudes. These results can inform targeted interventions aimed at reducing transprejudice.

     

THE INFLUENCE OF SEXUALLY VIOLENT RAP MUSIC ON ATTITUDES OF MEN WITH LITTLE PRIOR EXPOSURE

This article is among the first to focus on commercially available, sexually violent rap music, so-called "gangsta" rap (GR) and its influence on attitudes toward women. Collegiate males with little experience with GR were exposed to GR music, lyrics, both, or neither. Thus the effect of GR music and lyrics were isolated from each other and from acculturation to GR. Collapsing across all attitude measures, neither lyrics alone nor lyrics with music resulted in significantly more negative attitudes toward women than music-only or no-treatment control conditions. Participants in the lyrics conditions had significantly greater adversarial sexual beliefs than no-lyrics participants, however.     

Gender-Role Variables and Attitudes Toward Homosexuality

Two studies examined the relationships of gender-role variables to attitudes toward homosexuality. Study 1, a meta-analysis, found that endorsement of traditional gender-role beliefs, modern sexism, and hypermasculinity were related to attitudes, but that gender-role self-concept was not. Study 2 examined the relationships of endorsement of male role norms, attitudes toward women, hostile sexism, benevolent sexism, modern sexism, hypermasculinity, and hyperfemininity to attitudes toward homosexuality and self-reported antigay behaviors in a college student sample. The best predictors of attitudes were participant gender, endorsement of male role norms, attitudes toward women, benevolent sexism, and modern sexism. The best predictors of antigay behavior were participant gender and hyper-gender-role orientation; attitudes toward women and modern sexism were also predictors for men but not for women.     

Correlates of negative attitudes toward homosexuals in heterosexual college students

Negative attitudes toward homosexuals were assessed in 103 heterosexual college students. On the average, 17% of the sample agreed or strongly agreed with each of 40 negative statements about homosexuals. Cronbach's alpha and a principal components analysis indicated that the attitude scale was unidimensional. Methodological improvements were made in the assessment of the correlates of negative attitudes toward homosexuals. Such attitudes were inversely related to age, academic performance, and the use of principled moral reasoning. They were positively related to traditional attitudes toward men, women, and the equality of men and women. Compared to females, males' attitudes toward homosexuals were more negative, and their attitudes toward men, women, and the equality of men and women were more traditional. However, the correlates of negative attitudes toward homosexuals were similar for males and for females. It was concluded that negative attitudes toward homosexuals are part of a larger belief system regarding conventional social order.     

Why Do Women Endorse Hostile and Benevolent Sexism? The Role of Salient Female Subtypes and Internalization of Sexist Contents

The present research aims to explain women’s endorsement of hostile and benevolent sexist beliefs. Based on a convenience sample of N?=?92 women in the general public in Germany, Study 1 demonstrated that women endorse hostile sexist beliefs when they do not think about themselves when completing the hostile sexism scale but about non-traditional female subtypes (feminists or career women). In contrast, women were more likely to agree with benevolent sexist beliefs the more they internalize these beliefs and the more they think about traditional subtypes (housewives) while completing the scale. A follow-up experimental study using a convenience sample of N?=?123 German women further demonstrated that these results depend on women’s identification with the respective subtypes.     

Feminism and Attachment Parenting: Attitudes, Stereotypes, and Misperceptions

This paper investigated attitudes and stereotypes about what feminist women, primarily from the United States, believed about a number of practices associated with attachment parenting which is theorized to be both feminist and non-feminist. The goals of this study were to determine whether feminists endorsed attachment parenting and whether stereotypes of feminists’ beliefs corresponded to actual feminists’ attitudes. Women were recruited online, primarily through blogs, to complete an online survey about feminism and mothering. Four hundred and thirty one women comprised the sample for the current investigation and included heterosexual-identified feminist mothers (n?=?147), feminist non-mothers (n?=?75), non-feminist mothers (n?=?143), and non-feminist non-mothers (n?=?66). Participants were asked to rate their own attitudes towards specific practices associated with attachment parenting and to indicate their perceptions of the beliefs of the typical feminist. Results indicated that feminists were more supportive of attachment parenting practices than were non-feminists. Non-feminists, particularly mothers, held misperceptions about the typical feminist, seeing them as largely uninterested in the time-intensive and hands-on practices associated with attachment parenting. Feminist mothers also held stereotypes about feminists and saw themselves as somewhat atypical feminists who were more interested in attachment parenting than they thought was typical of feminists. Our data indicated that feminists did endorse attachment parenting and that stereotypes of feminists related to attachment parenting are untrue. Furthermore, the role of feminism in the identity of feminist mothers and whether attachment parenting is truly a feminist way to parent are discussed.     

Feminism as a predictor of mass media use

The mass media habits of men and women who hold discrepant attitudes toward traditional female sex-role expectations were assessed. From a random sample of more than 500 citizens of Santa Barbara, California, high feminists (respondents who agreed with women's movement ideals) were found to differ significantly in several respects in their uses of media from low feminists (individuals who did not agree with movement ideals). Feminism differentially predicted the amount of television viewing for highly educated audience members. Significant differences were also found between high and low feminists for television program and radio format preferences, but not for newspaper reading habits.     

Status legitimizing beliefs predict positivity toward Whites who claim anti-White bias

Although Whites are increasingly likely to perceive themselves as victims of racial bias, research provides little insight into how anti-White bias claimants are perceived. Two studies examined whether Whites' endorsement of status legitimizing beliefs (SLBs) moderates their reactions toward White discrimination claimants. In Study 1, Whites who rejected SLBs reacted less favorably to an anti-White bias claimant relative to one who made a nondiscriminatory external claim, whereas Whites who endorsed SLBs expressed equally positive attitudes toward an anti-White bias claimant and a non-claimant. In Study 2, Whites who were not primed with status legitimizing beliefs displayed negative reactions toward an anti-White bias claimant compared to a non-claimant, whereas those primed with SLBs expressed more positive attitudes and a desire to help the anti-White bias claimant. Implications for affirmative action litigation are discussed.     

Promiscuous or Confident? Attitudinal Ambivalence Toward Condom Purchase1

This research examined attitudes toward condom purchase. Recent evidence is mixed. While some studies show attitudes have become more positive, other studies suggest that negative attitudes still dominate. Our own research examined the possibility that such attitudes may be ambivalent, meaning that the same individuals may simultaneously hold both positive and negative beliefs about condom purchase. The results confirmed this prediction. Study 1 showed that condom purchase evoked a combination of both negative beliefs about lifestyles and positive beliefs concerning the personal confidence of the consumer. These beliefs had competing effects on more global attitudes toward condom purchase. Specific beliefs about condoms were shown to provide the best indication of. whether participants actually used condoms. Study 2 employed standard measures of attitudinal ambivalence. The results conceptually replicated the finding that ambivalence was greater for those who purchased condoms compared to controls.     

ARE FEMINISTS MAN HATERS? FEMINISTS' AND NONFEMINISTS' ATTITUDES TOWARD MEN

Despite the popular belief that feminists dislike men, few studies have actually examined the empirical accuracy of this stereotype. The present study examined self-identified feminists' and nonfeminists' attitudes toward men. An ethnically diverse sample ( N  = 488) of college students responded to statements from the Ambivalence toward Men Inventory (AMI; Glick & Fiske, 1999 ). Contrary to popular beliefs, feminists reported lower levels of hostility toward men than did nonfeminists. The persistence of the myth of the man-hating feminist is explored.     

Inferring sexual interest from behavioral cues: Effects of gender and sexually relevant attitudes

Research has found that men impute more sexual meaning to others' behavior than do women. However, little research has examined the possibility that men and women share perceptions of the sexual connotativeness of certain behaviors but diverge in their perceptions of other behaviors. In Study 1, 162 male and 186 female undergraduates, predominantly Caucasian, rated the degree to which each of 27 behaviors of male and female targets connoted a desire for sexual intercourse. Multivariate analyses of variance revealed that, whereas men perceived all but two of the female target behaviors more sexually than women, men and women differed in their perceptions of the sexual connotativeness of only about half of the male target behaviors. A factor analysis revealed three factors for both male and female target behaviors, reflecting mundane dating behaviors, romantic behaviors, and sexual behaviors. Relative to women, men perceived only the mundane dating behaviors more sexually, although regression analyses showed these effects to be moderated by subjects' attitudes toward women. Study 2 examined the extent to which sexually relevant attitudes (e.g., sex role stereotyping, adversarial sexual beliefs, and rape myth acceptance) moderate subjects' perceptions of the sexual connotativeness of the behaviors. Men, particularly those who endorsed traditional, sexually relevant attitudes, were more likely than women to impute sexual meaning to the behaviors. The implications of this for dating situations are discussed.The author wishes to thank Mark Leary and two anonymous reviewers for their comments and suggestions on earlier versions of this article.