The burden of benevolent sexism: how it contributes to the maintenance of gender inequalities

This study (N = 235) examines the responses of male and female participants to information about the alleged endorsement of either hostile or benevolent sexist beliefs by a sample of either men or women. We predicted that people endorsing benevolent sexist statements would be less likely to be perceived as sexist than those endorsing hostile sexist views, and examined the judgmental process through which people fail to recognize benevolent sexism as a form of prejudice. We argue that benevolent sexists do not match the mental prototype of sexist perpetrators, because they are seen as likeable. Our results confirm that because benevolent sexists are evaluated more positively than hostile sexists, they are less likely to be seen as sexists. This judgmental process occurs relatively independently of emotional responses to hostile vs. benevolent sexism. These results are discussed in terms of their relevance to the maintenance of gender inequalities. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

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.     

Ambivalent Sexism and Attitudes Toward Wife Abuse in Turkey and Brazil

Men and women in Turkey and Brazil completed the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory (Glick & Fiske, 1996) and measures of attitudes about wife abuse. In both nations hostile sexism (HS) and benevolent sexism (BS) positively correlated with attitudes that legitimize abuse. Regression analyses revealed that HS accounted for unique variance, but BS (once HS was controlled) was unrelated to wife abuse attitudes. These results: (a) add to the evidence for the cross–cultural validity of ambivalent sexism, (b) suggest that HS supports the justification of violence against wives, and (c) imply that the ostensible protectiveness of BS is contingent, failing to shield women from abuse if they are deemed to have challenged a husband's authority or violated conventional gender roles.     

“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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

The Relationships between Ambivalent Sexism and Religiosity among Turkish University Students

This study explored the relationships among hostile sexism (HS), benevolent sexism (BS), and religiosity for men and women in Turkey, where Islam is the predominant religion. 73 male and 93 female university students completed measures of ambivalent sexism and religiosity. Replicating previous work with Christians, religiosity was a significant correlate of BS when HS was controlled, for both men and women. As predicted, and in contrast to previous research with Christians, partial correlations indicated that Muslim religiosity was a significant correlate of HS for men, when BS was controlled, but not for women. Women but not men showed a significant difference between religiosity’s partial correlations with HS and BS. The results were discussed in the light of relevant literature.     

Another Test of Gender Differences in Assignments to Precarious Leadership Positions: Examining the Moderating Role of Ambivalent Sexism

Women face significant hurdles in the attainment of leadership positions. When they do attain them such positions tend to be riskier than those attained by men, a form of bias called glass cliff. This study investigates ambivalent sexism as an individual difference that influences the occurrence of glass cliff. Little research examines individual differences contributing to glass cliff. It is proposed that individuals with high hostile and benevolent sexism are more likely to perceive women to be suitable for leadership of a poorly‐performing organization and men to be suitable for leadership of a well‐performing organization. The sample of our experimental study consisted of 378 students who rated either a female or a male candidate under a poor or good performance condition. We tested our hypotheses using a moderated regression analysis. Both components of sexism impacted how individuals evaluated male and female leaders under different organizational performance conditions. Hostile sexism was the dimension that led to glass cliff. Benevolent sexism had an unexpected effect on leadership choice. The differences between the two types of sexism and the different role each type plays in preference for masculine and feminine leadership are discussed. Leader gender and perceiver's sexist attitudes influence evaluations for leadership positions.     

The Intersection of Gender and Sexuality: Sexism Shapes Men’s Same-Sex Sexuality in Terms of Self-Label Identification and Partner Choice in China

We examined how sexism related to gay and bisexual men’s preferences for same-sex top (dominant) or bottom (submissive) sexuality in China. Specifically, we determined the impacts of sexism on sexual self-label identification and requirements for a romantic partner’s sexual role among 507 Chinese gay and bisexual men. Sexism was found to significantly predict top/bottom sexual self-label: gay and bisexual men endorsing benevolent sexism (BS; ideation of women who conform to traditional gender roles) were more likely to identify as tops than as bottoms. We also noted a significant prediction of hostile sexism (HS; hostility toward women who oppose traditional roles) on partner choice: Tops and bottoms endorsing HS were more likely to require a complementary partner rather than to have no requirements. Moreover, sexism was related to sexual role prejudice, a concept derived from sexism that we defined as holding attitudes toward the gender roles of “bottoms” among gay and bisexual men that indicate inequality of sexual self-labels. In a mediation analysis of these relationships, we noted significant indirect effects of BS and HS on sexual self-label via both benevolent and hostile sexual role prejudice, as well as on requirements for a romantic partner’s sexual role via benevolent (but not hostile) sexual role prejudice. Our results suggest that traditional gender beliefs may influence negative beliefs toward other sexual roles and that both sets of beliefs, although not always consistent with each other, relate to gay and bisexual men’s sexual self-labels and requirements for a romantic partner’s sexual role.     

Flirting With Disaster: Short‐Term Mating Orientation and Hostile Sexism Predict Different Types of Sexual Harassment

We combine evolutionary and sociocultural accounts of sexual harassment, proposing that sexuality‐related and hostility‐related motives lead to different types of harassment. Specifically, men's short‐term mating orientation (STMO) was hypothesized to predict only unwanted sexual attention but not gender harassment, whereas men's hostile sexism (HS) was hypothesized to predict both unwanted sexual attention and gender harassment. As part of an alleged computer‐chat task, 100 male students could send sexualized personal remarks (representing unwanted sexual attention), sexist jokes (representing gender harassment), or nonharassing material to an attractive female target. Independently, participants’ STMO, HS, and sexual harassment myth acceptance (SHMA) were assessed. Correlational and path analyses revealed that STMO specifically predicted unwanted sexual attention, whereas HS predicted both unwanted sexual attention and gender harassment. Furthermore, SHMA fully mediated the effect of HS on gender harassment, but did not mediate effects of STMO or HS on unwanted sexual attention. Results are discussed in relation to motivational explanations for sexual harassment and antiharassment interventions. Aggr. Behav. 38:521‐531, 2012. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

The social nature of benevolent sexism and the antisocial nature of hostile sexism: Is benevolent sexism more likely to manifest in public contexts and hostile sexism in private contexts?

Previous research converges on demonstrating that benevolent sexism (BS) is socially approved, whereas hostile sexism (HS) is socially disapproved. We postulated that a sample of married women would be likely to report that their husbands express hostile sexist attitudes and engage in related actions towards them more in private than public contexts, where they lie concealed from public censure. By contrast, the women would report that their husbands would be likely to express benevolent sexist attitudes and engage in related actions more in public than private contexts, where they are reinforced not only by their target (i.e. wife), but also by significant others and the society at large. We tested these hypotheses with a sample of Black, heterosexually married Zimbabwean women (n = 109, mean age = 31.83). Results supported our hypotheses: the women reported hostile sexist attitudes and actions to be more likely to occur in private than public contexts; on the other hand, they reported benevolent sexist attitudes and actions to be more likely in public than private contexts. We conclude that differences in social approval of BS and HS account for these results.     

Exposure to sexism can decrease implicit gender stereotype bias

Two studies examined the effect of exposure to sexism on implicit gender bias, focusing specifically on stereotypes of men as competent and women as warm. Male and female participants were exposed to sexism or no sexism. In both Experiment 1 (Implicit Association Task; N = 115) and Experiment 2 (Go/No‐go Association Task; N = 167), women who had been exposed to sexist beliefs demonstrated less implicit gender stereotype bias relative to women who were not exposed to sexism. In contrast, exposure to sexism did not influence men's implicit gender stereotype bias. In Experiment 2, process modelling revealed that women's reduction in bias in response to sexism was related to increased accuracy orientation and a tendency to make warmth versus competence judgments. The implications of these findings for current understandings of sexism and its effects on gender stereotypes are discussed.     

Views of individuals with gender dysphoria and disorders of sex development on sexism: An Iranian study

ABSTRACT

Background: Ambivalent sexist attitudes have been previously measured regarding several factors such as sex, race and religion.

Aims: In this study, we evaluated the ambivalent sexism among Iranian individuals with gender dysphoria with or without disorders of sex development (DSD).

Methods: Attitudes towards gender stereotypes were investigated using Ambivalent Sexism Inventory (ASI) among three groups of participants with varying psychosexual outcome. These groups were transpeople (N = 152, M = 25.44, SD = 6.52), people with DSD (N = 40, M = 21.2, SD = 2.24) and cisgender people (N = 195, M = 25.9, SD = 5.59).

Results: Significant differences in both types of sexism, benevolent (F (2,383) = 134.217, p < .001) and hostile (F (2,383) = 93.765, p < .001), were found between transpeople, participants with DSD and controls. While scores of transpeople and people with DSD were not significantly different from each other (p = 0.191, Cohen's d = 0.38), both groups were significantly more sexist than controls on hostile sexism (p < 0.001, Cohen's d = 1.4 and 1.1). In benevolent sexism, there were significant differences between the scores of the trans, DSD and control groups, with individuals with DSD being most sexist followed by transgender people (p < 0.001) and controls showing the least degree of sexism (p < 0.001).

Conclusion: Using the Gender Self-Socialization Model (GSSM), we propose that increased scores of ASI among individuals whose gender identity is incongruent with all or some of their physical features are attempts to attain gender typicality. This may lead to a higher degree of sexist beliefs than when all sex and gender characteristics are congruent.     

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.     

Doing gender differently—The interplay of strength of gender identification and content of gender identity in predicting women's endorsement of sexist beliefs

To explain differences in women's endorsement of sexist beliefs, we introduce the gender identity model (GIM). Based on social identity theory (SIT) and social role theory (SRT), we combine strength of gender identification and identity content and propose that different types of gender identity can be distinguished, which are predicted to relate to different levels of women's endorsement of sexist beliefs and engagement in collective action. Results of a correlational study and two experiments support the assumptions of the model: women reject Benevolent (BS), Hostile (HS), and Modern Sexisms (MS) and participate in collective action in particular when they are highly identified with the category women and have, at the same time, internalized progressive identity contents. In contrast, gender role preference has weaker or no effects on sexist beliefs and collective action when women are low identified with their gender in‐group. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Intergenerational connection of sexism: influence of family variables

The purpose of this study is three-fold: 1) to analyze the relations between parents' hostile sexism (HS), benevolent sexism (BS), and ambivalent sexism (AS) and that of their sons-daughters; 2) to study the relation between the mothers' and the fathers' sexism; and 3) to appraise whether the family socio-economic level-cultural is related to sexism. The sample included 2,867 participants, 1,455 adolescents (768 girls, 687 boys) and their parents (764 mothers, 648 fathers). The results revealed positive correlations between the mothers' sexism (HS-BS-AS) and the BS of their sons, and with the HS, BS, and AS of their daughters. Positive correlations were found between the fathers' sexism (BS-AS) and their sons' sexism (HS-BS-AS-Neosexism); however, no relation was found with their daughters' sexism. The intergenerational connection of sexism in the family was confirmed: from mothers to sons and daughters and from fathers to sons. The mother emerged as a very influential figure, although a higher connection was confirmed between the mothers' and the daughters' sexism and between the fathers' and the sons' sexism. Positive correlations were also found between both parents' sexism, and negative correlations between the socio-economic-cultural level of the family and sexism in the parents and in the adolescents.     

Relationships between Ambivalent Sexism and the Five Moral Foundations in Domestic Violence: Is it a Matter of Fairness and Authority?

Ambivalent sexism has served to justify and maintain patriarchy and traditional gender roles characterized by inequality and male domination in the intimate partner violence (IPV) literature; according to the Moral Foundation Theory (MFT) there are two specific moral foundations related to inequality and domination: fairness and authority. We connect these separate fields arguing that sexist attitudes can be related to specific patterns of endorsement of the five moral foundations. Our hypothesis is that ambivalent sexism in men convicted of violence against the partner may be rooted in at least these two moral foundations, and that at least these two moral foundations may also serve to predict intention to change the violent behavior against the partner. Controlling for political orientation, the results show that benevolent sexism correlates positively with the authority foundation; and hostile sexism correlates negatively with the fairness foundation. Both foundations contribute to explaining the two dimensions of ambivalent sexism (benevolent and hostile) and only the fairness foundation predict intention to change the violent behavior against the partner. New treatment approaches could be designed to increase moral concerns about fairness and to reduce moral concerns about authority in people who, at least, have once used violence against their partners.