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.     

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.     

Sex–related self–concepts, cognitive styles and cultural values of traditionality–modernity as predictors of general and domain–specific sexism

Previous studies have determined that masculinity, femininity, need for closure and authoritarianism are significant predictors of sexism. The present study attempted to integrate these variables in order to better understand the nature of general ambivalent sexism and workplace–specific sexism in Singapore. Chinese traditionality and Chinese modernity were specifically examined as potential predictors of sexism. Robust results from hierarchical regressions indicated that these indigenous cultural variables were highly important in predicting general and workplace–specific sexism. Although masculinity and need for closure were unrelated to sexism, participant sex, femininity and authoritarianism significantly predicted sexist attitudes towards women. Most important, Chinese values were found to add significant incremental validity in predicting sexist attitudes beyond what was accounted by the aforementioned predictors. Chinese traditionality significantly predicted sexist attitudes towards women, but Chinese modernity was unrelated to sexism. Implications of these findings were discussed.     

“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.     

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.     

“Wonderful but Weak”: Children’s Ambivalent Attitudes Toward Women

Sex Roles - According to ambivalent sexism theory, prejudice toward women has two forms: hostile (i.e., antipathy toward women) and benevolent (i.e., patronizing and paternalistic attitudes toward...     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Social Norms and Egalitarian Values Mitigate Authoritarian Intolerance Toward Sexual Minorities

In the United States, acceptance of sexual minorities (e.g., gay men and lesbians) has increased substantially since the early 1990s. This study examined whether authoritarians' attitudes have been influenced by the societal shift toward greater acceptance of sexual minorities. Using data from the American National Election Studies (ANES) collected between 1992 and 2012, we tested a model in which authoritarianism, endorsement of egalitarian values, and social norms shifting in the direction of tolerance predict individual attitudes toward sexual minorities and LGBT rights issues. Results indicated that (1) there was a subset of authoritarians who endorsed egalitarian values, (2) authoritarians in general became more tolerant (i.e., held less negative attitudes) toward sexual minorities between 1992 and 2012, and (3) “egalitarian authoritarians” held more positive attitudes toward sexual minorities than other authoritarians. The findings contribute to contemporary theory and research on authoritarianism, which is moving from a monolithic view of authoritarianism to one in which culture and core values activate and shape manifestations of authoritarian tendencies.     

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.     

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.     

Animalizing women and feminizing (vegan) men: The psychological intersections of sexism,speciesism, meat,and masculinity

Images of sexualized women depicted as animals or alongside meat are routinely used in advertising in Western culture. Philosophers and feminist scholars have long theorized that such imagery reflects the lower status of both women and animals (vs. men) in society and argued that prejudiced attitudes towards women (i.e., sexism) and animals (i.e., speciesism) are interconnected, with meat-eating as a core symbol of masculinity. Addressing these key ideas from ecofeminist theory, we review the psychological evidence on the associations between sexism, speciesism, meat, and masculinity. Research on the animalistic dehumanization of women provides evidence that sexism and speciesism are psychologically entangled and rooted in desires for group-based dominance and inequality. Furthermore, research on the symbolic value of meat corroborates its masculine value expressing dominance and power, and suggests that men who abstain from meat consumption (e.g., vegans) are feminized and devalued, particularly by those higher in sexism. We conclude that a greater recognition of the interconnected nature of patriarchal gender relations and practices of animal exploitation, including meat-eating, can help in efforts to improve the status of both women and animals.     

Sexism and the Effectiveness of Femvertising in China: A Corporate Social Responsibility Perspective

The present study draws on theories and prior research on corporate social responsibility (CSR) and gender attitudes (i.e., sexism) to understand young Chinese peoples’ responses toward women-empowering advertising (i.e., femvertising). We conducted two experiments in which male and female Chinese college students (232 in Study 1 and 231 in Study 2) were exposed to either women-empowering or control advertisements (traditional ad in Study 1 and gender-irrelevant ad in Study 2) and reported their attitudes about the ads as well as their purchase intentions toward the advertised products (shampoo and smartphone, respectively). In line with our predictions, both experiments showed that messaging about women’s empowerment in advertising can induce perceptions of CSR, thereby increasing favorable responses such as enhanced positive ad attitudes and increased purchase intentions toward the advertised products. Moreover, hostile sexism was negatively associated with consumer responses toward femvertising such that the lower participants’ hostile sexism, the more positive ad attitudes and stronger purchase intent participants they reported. However, benevolent sexism was not predictive of consumer responses toward femvertising. These results offer insights into people’s responses toward women-empowering advertisements and also have practical implications for advertisers and marketers who are interested in using such an advertising tactic to promote products and services.

     

Gender Differences in Correlates of Homophobia and Transphobia

A scale of prejudice against transgender individuals was developed, validated, and contrasted with a homophobia measure in 153 female and 157 male US college undergraduates. For both sexes, transphobia and homophobia were highly correlated with each other and with right-wing authoritarianism, religious fundamentalism, and hostile sexism, but aggression proneness was predictive of transphobia and homophobia only in men. Benevolent sexism and rape myth acceptance were more predictive of transphobia and homophobia in women than men. With homophobia partialled out, authoritarianism, fundamentalism, and aggression proneness no longer predicted transphobia for men, but authoritarianism, fundamentalism, benevolent sexism, and rape myth acceptance continued to predict transphobia in women. Discussion focused on gender differences in issues that drive prejudice against transgender and homosexual individuals.     

Ambivalence Toward Men: Comparing Sexism Among Polish, South African and British University Students

This study extends the literature on attitudes toward gender roles by exploring whether the nature of sexism (i.e., benevolence and hostility directed at men) differs among university students from two under-researched countries, Poland (n?=?190) and South Africa (n?=?188), in a comparison with students in the United Kingdom (n?=?166). Based on empirical literature applying Ambivalent Sexism Theory, and in the light of the socio-political context, it was hypothesized that: (1) both hostile and benevolent attitudes toward men in Poland would be more liberal than in South Africa and more conservative than in the United Kingdom, and (2), women would exhibit more hostile but less benevolent attitudes than men in relatively more conservative South Africa. The Ambivalence to Men Inventory was used to measure the two types of sexist attitudes about men. Findings supported the first hypothesis for hostile attitudes and partially for benevolent attitudes. South African and Polish students were more benevolent and hostile to men than British students, and students from South Africa were more hostile than those from Poland. Moreover, as predicted, a significant country-by-gender interaction revealed that South African women had more hostile and less benevolent attitudes to men than South African men. No such gender gap was present in the case of hostile attitudes in Poland and benevolent attitudes in the United Kingdom. Findings are discussed in terms of Ambivalent Sexism Theory and the countries’ socio-cultural context.     

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.     

Do Scales Measuring Sexist Attitudes have Equivalent Meaning for Sexual Minorities and Majorities?

Ambivalent Sexism Theory (Glick & Fiske, 1996) has revolutionised understanding of sexism and generated a new way of examining sexist attitudes using the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory (ASI). One key goal in sexism research is to compare sexist attitudes across different groups, including people with different genders and sexual identities. Before doing so, researchers must be confident that the construct(s) they are comparing are invariant across groups. Given assumptions of heterosexuality, and the central role of heterosexual interdependence, we expected the ASI would be variant across people with different genders and sexual orientations. We conducted multigroup measurement invariance tests between heterosexual women, heterosexual men, lesbian women, and gay men (total N?=?1614). Results indicated that hostile sexism and benevolent sexism emerged as separate, related, forms of sexism across groups (i.e., configural invariance was met), but item loadings and intercepts were not equivalent (i.e., loading and intercept invariance was not met). Accordingly, the ASI is not a suitable measurement tool to compare sexist attitudes across sexual minorities (lesbian women and gay men) and majorities (heterosexual women and men). We discuss implications for the centrality of heterosexual interdependence in ambivalent sexism, practical implications for the use of ASI, and we encourage researchers to develop new scales to assess sexism across diverse gender and sexual identities.