Turkish College Students' Attitudes Toward Women Managers: The Effects of Patriarchy,Sexism, and Gender Differences

The authors examined how patriarchy, sexism, and gender influence Turkish college students' attitudes toward women managers. Turkish undergraduate students (N = 183) from Middle East Technical University completed questionnaires measuring attitudes toward women managers as well as attitudes toward the concepts of hostile and benevolent sexism and support for patriarchy. Participants were of upper- or middle-class Turkish backgrounds. The results showed that male participants exhibited less positive attitudes toward women managers than did female participants. In addition, participants who held more favorable attitudes toward patriarchy and who scored high on hostile sexism also held less positive attitudes toward women managers than those who held less favorable attitudes toward patriarchy and who scored low on hostile sexism. A regression analysis showed that support for patriarchy and hostile sexism was more important for explaining less favorable attitudes toward women managers than was benevolent sexism.     

“Blessed Is He Who Has Not Made Me a Woman”: Ambivalent Sexism and Jewish Religiosity

This study explored the relationships between Jewish religiosity and ambivalent sexist attitudes toward men and women. Drawing on ambivalent sexism theory and Judaism’s views of gender relations, it was hypothesized that religiosity would be positively related to benevolent sexism and benevolent attitudes toward men. The hypotheses were tested in a convenience sample of 854 Israeli Jews (471 women, 355 men) who completed measures of ambivalent sexism, ambivalence toward men and religiosity. Controlling for the effects of age, education and marital status, religiosity predicted more benevolent sexist attitudes for both men and women. The findings also revealed negative associations between Jewish religiosity and hostile attitudes, mainly among men. That is, more religious men were less likely to express hostile attitudes toward men and women. These findings attest to the complex relationships between religiosity and sexist attitudes, and underscore the importance of investigating the impact of diverse religious traditions on gender attitudes.     

The Role of Ambivalent Sexism and Religiosity in Predicting Attitudes Toward Childlessness in Muslim Undergraduate Students

The aim of the current study was to investigate the relationship between ambivalent sexism, specifically hostile sexism (HS) and benevolent sexism (BS), religiosity, and attitudes toward childlessness in Muslim undergraduate students. The sample consisted of 157 (79 women, 78 men) Turkish Islamic undergraduate students studying in North Cyprus, aged between 17 and 30 years-old and originating from various regions in Turkey. Participants completed measures of ambivalent sexism and attitudes toward childlessness as well as rated their level of religiosity. It was expected that due to its emphasis of traditional gender roles, benevolent sexism and high Islamic religiosity would predict negative attitudes toward childlessness in the Turkish sample. Results showed that in women, higher levels of religiosity and benevolent sexism predicted negative attitudes toward childlessness, whereas in men, benevolent sexism alone was predictive of negative attitudes toward childlessness. The results are discussed in accordance with literature on ambivalent sexism and the religion of Islam.     

Your Sexism Predicts My Sexism: Perceptions of Men’s (but not Women’s) Sexism Affects One’s Own Sexism Over Time

The effects of perceived normative (societal) levels of benevolent (BS) and hostile sexism (HS) on one’s own sexist attitudes were examined over a four-month period in an undergraduate New Zealand sample (76 women, 26 men). Perceptions of normative levels of men’s BS produced longitudinal change in one’s own BS, and this effect was invariant across gender. However, contrary to previous research suggesting that women endorse BS when men are high in HS for its protective benefits, women instead expressed subjectively positive paternalistic attitudes toward their gender to the extent that they perceived BS as normative in men. The transmission of patriarchical-defined ideologies is tempered by the degree to which such ideologies espouse benevolent versus more overtly hostile attitudes toward women.     

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.     

When Women Become More Hostilely Sexist toward their Gender: The System-Justifying Effect of Benevolent Sexism

Two longitudinal studies examined the system-justifying effect of women’s benevolent sexist ideology in New Zealand female undergraduate samples. Women’s endorsement of benevolent sexism predicted longitudinal changes in hostile sexist attitudes toward their gender over 6-month (study 1; n?=?117) and 12-month (study 2; n?=?76) periods. Consistent with Ambivalent Sexism Theory, these findings indicate that women’s endorsement of benevolent sexism disarms resistance to, and increases their endorsement of, more hostile forms of sexism directed toward their gender. However, the disarming effect of benevolent sexism occurred only for women high in Right-Wing Authoritarianism (study 2), suggesting that threat-driven authoritarian motivations for collective security and social cohesion cause women to actively participate in an ideological system that perpetuates gender inequality.     

Is Sexism a Gender Issue? A Motivated Social Cognition Perspective on Men's and Women's Sexist Attitudes Toward Own and Other Gender

The present research investigated the antecedents of ambivalent sexism (i.e., hostile and benevolent forms) in both men and women toward own and other gender. In two heterogeneous adult samples (Study 1: N = 179 and Study 2: N = 222), it was revealed that gender itself was only a minor predictor of sexist attitudes compared with the substantial impact of individual differences in general motivated cognition (i.e., need for closure). Analyses further showed that the relationship between need for closure and sexism was mediated by social attitudes (i.e., right‐wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation), which were differently related to benevolent and hostile forms of sexism. In the discussion, it is argued that sexism primarily stems from individual differences in motivated cognitive style, which relates to peoples' perspective on the social world, rather than from group differences between men and women. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Explicit but not implicit sexist beliefs predict benevolent and hostile sexist behavior

Much work has been carried out on sexist attitudes, but only little on sexist behaviors. The goal of the present research was to close this gap by testing how a variety of benevolent and hostile sexist behaviors correlate with implicit and explicit sexist attitudes. In Study 1 (N = 126), we developed implicit association tests for benevolent sexism and hostile sexism and illustrated that implicit and explicit benevolent sexist beliefs, as well as implicit and explicit hostile sexist beliefs, were positively correlated. In Study 2 (N = 83 of Study 1), we tested whether implicit and explicit benevolent and hostile sexist attitudes correlate with benevolent and hostile sexist behaviors. As expected, explicit benevolent (but not hostile) sexist attitudes predicted benevolent sexist behavior, whereas explicit hostile (but not benevolent) sexist attitudes predicted hostile sexist behavior. Implicit sexist attitudes did not predict sexist behavior. The implications of these findings are discussed.     

Turkish college students' attitudes toward women managers: the effects of patriarchy,sexism, and gender differences

The authors examined how patriarchy, sexism, and gender influence Turkish college students' attitudes toward women managers. Turkish undergraduate students (N = 183) from Middle East Technical University completed questionnaires measuring attitudes toward women managers as well as attitudes toward the concepts of hostile and benevolent sexism and support for patriarchy. Participants were of upper- or middle-class Turkish backgrounds. The results showed that male participants exhibited less positive attitudes toward women managers than did female participants. In addition, participants who held more favorable attitudes toward patriarchy and who scored high on hostile sexism also held less positive attitudes toward women managers than those who held less favorable attitudes toward patriarchy and who scored low on hostile sexism. A regression analysis showed that support for patriarchy and hostile sexism was more important for explaining less favorable attitudes toward women managers than was benevolent sexism.     

Ambivalent Sexism, Gender, and Major as Predictors of Turkish College Students’ Attitudes Toward Women and Men’s Atypical Educational Choices

The aim of the study was to investigate how ambivalent gender attitudes (hostile/benevolent sexism; hostility/benevolence toward men), plus gender and major predict attitudes toward men studying social sciences and women studying natural sciences in Turkey, where gender attitudes are relatively traditional. Undergraduates (N?=?215, mean age?=?21.16) completed scales of Ambivalent Sexism, Ambivalence toward Men, Attitudes toward Men in Social Sciences (AMSS), and Attitudes toward Women in Natural Sciences (AWNS). Although AMSS and AWNS were positive, men and natural-science majors had less positive AMSS and AWNS. Men in social sciences were perceived more negatively than women in natural sciences. Gender and hostile sexism predicted AWNS; gender, major, and benevolence toward men predicted AMSS. Implications for status relations are discussed.     

Endorsement of sexist ideology in Taiwan and the United States: Social dominance orientation,right‐wing authoritarianism,and deferential family norms

Despite close relationships between men and women in daily lives, gender inequality is ubiquitous and often supported by sexist ideology. The understanding of potential bases of sexist ideology is thus important. According to Duckitt's dual‐process model (2001), different worldviews may explain different types of sexist ideology. Individuals who hold a “competitive world” worldview tend to endorse group‐based dominance. This lends itself to the endorsement of hostile sexism, because hostile sexism is an obvious form of male dominance. Conversely, individuals who hold a “dangerous world” worldview tend to adhere to social cohesion, collective security, and social traditions. This lends itself to the endorsement of benevolent sexism, because benevolent sexism values women who conform to gender norms. As predicted by Duckitt's model, research has shown that social dominance orientation, a general orientation towards the endorsement of group‐based dominance, is closely associated with hostile sexism. Furthermore, right‐wing authoritarianism, which measures adherence to social traditions, is closely associated with benevolent sexism. Due to the interdependent nature of gender relationships, the current research proposed that a relationship‐based belief in hierarchy, deferential family norms, and norms depicting proper manners among family members should predict the endorsement of hostile and benevolent sexism, after controlling for social dominance orientation and right‐wing authoritarianism. As predicted, according to student samples collected in Taiwan and the US, the endorsement of deferential family norms predicted the endorsement of hostile sexism and of benevolent sexism, respectively. In addition, among men and women, social dominance orientation predicted hostile sexism more strongly (as opposed to benevolent sexism), whereas right‐wing authoritarianism predicted benevolent sexism more strongly (as opposed to hostile sexism). Implications regarding relationship norms, social dominance orientation, right‐wing authoritarianism, and sexist ideology are discussed.     

Differentiating Hostile and Benevolent Sexist Attitudes Toward Positive and Negative Sexual Female Subtypes

Expressions of hostile and benevolent sexism toward a female character whose behavior was consistent with either a positive (i.e., chaste) or negative (i.e., promiscuous) sexual female subtype were examined. Consistent with the theory that benevolent and hostile sexism form complementary ideologies that serve to maintain and legitimize gender-based social hierarchies, men expressed increased hostile, but decreased benevolent,sexism toward a female character who fit a negative subtype, whereas they expressed increased benevolent, but decreased hostile, sexism toward a female character who fit a positive subtype that was consistent with traditional gender roles. Furthermore, men’s sexual self-schema moderated expressions of hostile sexism across subtypes, whichsuggests that men who think of themselves in sexual terms (i.e., those who are sexuallyschematic) may be predisposed to (a) interpret information about women in sexual terms and categorize women into positive or negative sexual female subtypes on the basis of limited information, which leads to (b) increased hostile sexist attributions when womenare perceived as fitting a negative sexual subtype. These findings emphasize the role of both social dominance motives and the more subtle sociocognitive processes underlyinggender stereotyping in the expression of ambivalent sexism.     

Ambivalent Sexism, Belief in a Just World, and Empathy as Predictors of Turkish Students’ Attitudes Toward Rape Victims

The present study investigated whether hostile sexism, benevolent sexism, belief in a just world and empathy predict attitudes toward rape victims in a Turkish sample. Turkish college students (N = 425, mean age = 22) completed scales assessing Ambivalent Sexism, Belief in a Just World and Rape Victim Empathy as predictors of a general measure of attitudes toward rape victims. Male (as compared to female) participants had significantly less positive attitudes toward rape victims. Correlational analyses showed that, for both male and female participants, benevolent as well as hostile sexism, and belief in a just world each predicted less positive attitudes toward rape victims, but empathy predicted more positive attitudes.     

An ambivalent alliance. Hostile and benevolent sexism as complementary justifications for gender inequality

The equation of prejudice with antipathy is challenged by recent research on sexism. Benevolent sexism (a subjectively favorable, chivalrous ideology that offers protection and affection to women who embrace conventional roles) coexists with hostile sexism (antipathy toward women who are viewed as usurping men's power). The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory, first validated in U.S. samples, has been administered to over 15,000 men and women in 19 nations. Hostile and benevolent sexism are complementary, cross-culturally prevalent ideologies, both of which predict gender inequality. Women, as compared with men, consistently reject hostile sexism but often endorse benevolent sexism (especially in the most sexist cultures). By rewarding women for conforming to a patriarchal status quo, benevolent sexism inhibits gender equality. More generally, affect toward minority groups is often ambivalent, but subjectively positive stereotypes are not necessarily benign.     

Beliefs About Wife Beating Among Turkish College Students: The Effects of Patriarchy,Sexism, and Sex Differences

This paper describes how patriarchy, hostile sexism, benevolent sexism, and sex of participants influence Turkish College students' attitudes toward wife beating. Two hundred twenty-one Turkish undergraduate students from Middle East Technical University filled out questionnaires measuring attitudes toward wife beating, hostile and benevolent sexism, and support for patriarchy. Participants were from middle or high social classes, and from various region of Turkey. Results demonstrated that male participants exhibited more approval of wife beating than did female participants. Further, male participants who had more favorable attitudes toward patriarchy and who were high on hostile sexism viewed wife beating as more acceptable and blamed women for eliciting the violence. Regression analysis showed that patriarchy and hostile sexism predicted attitudes toward wife beating the best.     

Predictors of Turkish Women’s and Men’s Attitudes toward Sexual Harassment: Ambivalent Sexism, and Ambivalence Toward Men

This study examined the relationships among ambivalent sexism (hostile/benevolent), ambivalence toward men (hostility/benevolence) and Turkish women/men’s attitudes toward sexual harassment, including attitudes toward viewing sexual harassment as a result of provocative behaviors of women (ASHPBW) and attitudes toward viewing sexual harassment as a trivial matter (ASHTM). Participants included 220 Turkish undergraduates (136 female; M_age?=?20.00). They tended to blame women for the incidents of sexual harassment whereas they viewed sexual harassment as a very important social problem. As compared to women, men scored higher in both ASHPBW and ASHTM, suggesting that men are more tolerant of sexual harassment. For both genders, hostile sexism and benevolence toward men predicted ASHPBW. However, for only men, hostile and benevolent sexism predicted ASHTM.     

WOMEN'S BENEVOLENT SEXISM AS REACTION TO HOSTILITY

Grounded in the theory of ambivalent sexism, this study tested the speculation that women's benevolent sexist attitudes may be, in part, a self-protective response to environments they perceive as hostile to women. Data that have indirectly supported this conjecture thus far have been correlational. The current study involved a more powerful, experimental test of the hypothesis. Women ( N = 105) were randomly assigned to one of three conditions, which differed only in what participants were told about research findings on men's attitudes toward women (negative or positive attitudes, or no information). As predicted, benevolent sexist attitudes—but not hostile sexist attitudes—were strongest for women told that men hold negative attitudes toward women. This effect is consistent with a benevolent sexism-as-protest explanation and was statistically significant even while controlling for attitudes toward feminism. The differential effect of beliefs about men's attitudes on these two types of sexism lends further support to the idea that, although hostile and benevolent sexism are related, they may serve different functions.     

Antiwomen But Proquota: Disaggregating Sexism and Support for Gender Quota Policies

Previous research on support for gender quotas focuses on attitudes toward gender equality and government intervention as explanations. We argue the role of attitudes toward women in understanding support for policies aiming to increase the presence of women in politics is ambivalent—both hostile and benevolent forms of sexism contribute in understanding support, albeit in different ways. Using original data from a survey conducted on a probability-based sample of Australian respondents, our findings demonstrate that hostile sexists are more likely to oppose increasing of women's presence in politics through the adoption of gender quotas. Benevolent sexists, on the other hand, are more likely to support these policies than respondents exhibiting low levels of benevolent sexism. We argue this is because benevolent sexism holds that women are pure and need protection; they do not have what it takes to succeed in politics without the assistance of quotas. Finally, we show that while women are more likely to support quotas, ambivalent sexism has the same relationship with support among both women and men. These findings suggest that aggregate levels of public support for gender quotas do not necessarily represent greater acceptance of gender equality generally.