Previous research suggests that benevolent sexism is an ideology that perpetuates gender inequality. But despite its negative consequences, benevolent sexism is a prevalent ideology that some even find attractive. To better understand why women and men alike might be motivated to adopt benevolent sexism, the current study tested system justification theory’s prediction that benevolent sexism might have a positive linkage to life satisfaction through increased diffuse system justification, or the sense that the status quo is fair. A structural equation model revealed that benevolent sexism was positively associated with diffuse system justification within a sample of 274 college women and 111 college men. Additionally, benevolent sexism was indirectly associated with life satisfaction for both women and men through diffuse system justification. In contrast, hostile sexism was not related to diffuse system justification or life satisfaction. The results imply that although benevolent sexism perpetuates inequality at the structural level, it might offer some benefits at the personal level. Thus, our findings reinforce the dangerous nature of benevolent sexism and emphasize the need for interventions to reduce its prevalence.
AbramsD.VikiG. T.MasserB.BohnerG. (2003). Perceptions of stranger and acquaintance rape: The role of benevolent and hostile sexism in victim blame and rape proclivity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 111–125. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.84.1.111
2.
BaronR. M.KennyD. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173
3.
BarretoM.EllemersN. (2005). The burden of benevolent sexism: How it contributes to the maintenance of gender inequalities. European Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 633–642. doi:10.1002/ejsp.270
4.
BeardsleyM.(Producer). (2010, February 27). Good Morning! Arizona[Television broadcast]. Phoenix, AZ: KTVK-3TV.
5.
BeckerJ. C.SwimJ. K. (2011). Seeing the unseen: Attention to daily encounters with sexism as way to reduce sexist beliefs. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 35, 227–242. doi:10.1177/0361684310397509
6.
BeckerJ. C.WrightS. C. (2011). Yet another dark side of chivalry: Benevolent sexism undermines and hostile sexism motivates collective action for social change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 62–77. doi:10.1037/a0022615
7.
BemS. L.BemD. J. (1970). Case study of a nonconscious ideology: Training the woman to know her place. In BemD. J. (Ed.), Beliefs, attitudes, and human affairs (pp. 89–99). Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.
8.
BohnerG.AhlbornK.SteinerR. (2010). How sexy are sexist men? Women’s perception of male response profiles in the ambivalent sexism inventory. Sex Roles, 62, 568–582. doi:10.1007/s11199-009-9665-x
9.
ByrneB. M. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
10.
CalogeroR. M.JostJ. T. (2011). Self-subjugation among women: Exposure to sexist ideology, self-objectification, and the protective function of the need to avoid closure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 211–228. doi:10.1037/a0021864
11.
DardenneB.DumontM.BollierT. (2007). Insidious dangers of benevolent sexism: Consequences for women’s performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 764–779. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.93.5.764
12.
DienerE.EmmonsR. A.LarsenR.GriffinS. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71–75. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13
13.
DumontM.SarletM.DardenneB. (2010). Be too kind to a woman, she’ll feel incompetent: Benevolent sexism shifts self-construal and autobiographical memories toward incompetence. Sex Roles, 62, 545–553. doi:10.1007/s11199-008-9582-4
14.
ExpósitoF.HerreraM. C.MoyaM.GlickP. (2010). Don’t rock the boat: Women’s benevolent sexism predicts fears of marital violence. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 34, 36–42. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2009.01539.x
15.
FischerA. R. (2006). Women’s benevolent sexism as reaction to hostility. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 30, 410–416. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2006.00316.x
16.
FischerA. R.GoodG. E. (2004). Women’s feminist consciousness, anger, and psychological distress. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 51, 437–446. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.51.4.437
17.
FiskeS. T.GlickP. (1995). Ambivalence and stereotypes cause sexual harassment: A theory with implications for organizational change. Journal of Social Issues, 51, 97–115. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.1995.tb01311.x
18.
GlickP.DieboldJ.Bailey-WernerB.ZhuL. (1997). The two faces of Adam: Ambivalent sexism and polarized attitudes toward women. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 1323–1334. doi:10.1177/01461672972312009
19.
GlickP.FiskeS. T. (1996). The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 491–512. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.70.3.491
20.
GlickP.FiskeS. T. (2001). An ambivalent alliance. American Psychologist, 56, 109–118. doi:10.1037//0003-066X.56.2.109
21.
GlickP.FiskeS. T. (2011). Ambivalent sexism revisited. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 35, 530–535. doi:10.1177/0361684311414832
22.
GlickP.FiskeS. T.MladinicA.SaizJ. L.AbramsD.MasserB.LopezW. L. (2000). Beyond prejudice as simple antipathy: Hostile and benevolent sexism across cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 763–775. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.79.5.763
23.
GlickP.Sakalli-UgurluN.FerreiraM. C.Aguiar de SouzaM. (2002). Ambivalent sexism and attitudes toward wife abuse in Turkey and Brazil. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26, 292–297. doi:10.1111/1471-6402.t01-1-00068
24.
GlickP.WhiteheadJ. (2010). Hostility toward men and the perceived stability of male dominance. Social Psychology, 41, 177–185. doi:10.1027/1864-9335/a000025
25.
HammondM. D.SibleyC. G. (2011). Why are benevolent sexists happier?Sex Roles, 65, 332–343. doi:10.1007/s11199-011-0017-2
26.
HuL. T.BentlerP. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 8, 205–223. doi:10.1080/10705519909540118
27.
JostJ. T.BanajiM. R. (1994). The role of stereotyping in system justification and the production of false consciousness. British Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 1–27. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8309.1994.tb01008.x
28.
JostJ. T.BanajiM. R.NosekB. A. (2004). A decade of system justification theory: Accumulated evidence of conscious and unconscious bolstering of the status quo. Political Psychology, 25, 881–919. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2004.00402.x
29.
JostJ. T.HunyadyO. (2003). The psychology of system justification and the palliative function of ideology. European Review of Social Psychology, 13, 111–153. doi:10.1080/10463280240000046
30.
JostJ. T.HunyadyO. (2005). Antecedents and consequences of system-justifying ideologies. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 260–265. doi:10.1111/j.0963-7214.2005.00377.x
31.
JostJ. T.KayA. C. (2005). Exposure to benevolent sexism and complementary gender stereotypes: Consequences for specific and diffuse forms of system justification. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 498–509. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.88.3.498
32.
KayA. C.JostJ. T. (2003). Complementary justice: Effects of “poor but happy” and “poor but honest” stereotype exemplars on system justification and implicit activation of the justice motive. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 823–837. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.85.5.823
33.
KayA. C.JostJ. T.YoungS. (2005). Victim derogation and victim enhancement as alternate routes to system justification. Psychological Science, 16, 240–246. doi:10.1111/j.0956-7976.2005.00810.x
KilianskiS. E.RudmanL. A. (1998). Wanting it both ways: Do women approve of benevolent sexism?Sex Roles, 39, 333–352. doi:10.1023/A:1018814924402
36.
LipkusI. (1991). The construction and preliminary validation of a Global Belief in a Just World scale and the exploratory analysis of the Multidimensional Belief in a Just World scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 12, 1171–1178. doi:10.1016/0191-8869(91) 90081-L
37.
LittleT. D.CunninghamW. A.ShaharG.WidamanK. F. (2002). To parcel or not to parcel: Exploring the question, weighing the merits. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 9, 151–173. doi:10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_1
38.
LucasR. E.DienerE.SuhE. (1996). Discriminant validity of well-being measures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 616–628. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.71.3.616
39.
MallinckrodtB.AbrahamW. T.WeiM.RussellD. W. (2006). Advances in testing the statistical significance of mediation effects. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53, 372–378. doi:10.1037/00220167.53.3.372
40.
McDonaldR. P.HoM. R. (2002). Principles and practice in reporting structural equation analyses. Psychological Methods, 7, 64–82. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.7.1.64
41.
MoradiB.SubichL. M. (2002a). Feminist identity development measures: Comparing the psychometrics of three instruments. The Counseling Psychologist, 30, 66–86. doi:10.1177/0011000002301004
42.
MoradiB.SubichL. M. (2002b). Perceived sexist events and feminist identity development attitudes: Links to women’s psychological distress. The Counseling Psychologist, 30, 44–65. doi:10.1177/0011000002301003
43.
MoyaM.GlickP.ExpósitoF.de LemusS.HartJ. (2007). It’s for your own good: Benevolent sexism and women’s reactions to protectively justified restrictions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 1421–1434. doi:10.1177/0146167207304790
44.
MuthénB.KaplanD. (1985). A comparison of some methodologies for the factor analysis of non-normal Likert variables. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 38, 171–189. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8317.1985.tb00832.x
45.
NapierJ. L.ThorisdottirH.JostJ. T. (2010). The joy of sexism? A multinational investigation of hostile and benevolent justifications for gender inequality and their relations to subjective well-being. Sex Roles, 62, 405–419. doi:10.1007/s11199-009-9712-7
PreacherK. J.HayesA. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 717–731. doi:10.3758/BF03206553
48.
PryorJ. B.GeiddJ. L.WilliamsK. B. (1995). A social psychological model for predicting sexual harassment. Journal of Social Issues, 51, 69–84. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.1995.tb01309.x
49.
QuinnD. M.CrockerJ. (1999). When ideology hurts: Effects of belief in the Protestant ethic and feeling overweight on the psychological well-being of women. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 402–414. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.77.2.402
50.
SaundersK. J.Kashubeck-WestS. (2006). The relations among feminist identity development, gender-role orientation, and psychological well-being in women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 30, 199–211. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2006.00282.x
51.
ShepherdM.ErchullM. J.RosnerA.TaubenbergerL.Forsyth QueenE.McKeeJ. (2010). “I’ll get that for you”: The relationship between benevolent sexism and body self-perceptions. Sex Roles, 64, 1–8. doi:10.1007/s11199-010-9859-2
52.
ShroutP. E.BolgerN. (2002). Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, 7, 422–445. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.7.4.422
53.
SpenceJ. T.HelmreichR. (1972). The Attitudes Toward Women Scale: An objective instrument to measure attitudes toward the rights and roles of women in contemporary society. JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 2, 66–67.
54.
SwimJ. K.AikenK. J.HallW. S.HunterB. A. (1995). Sexism and racism: Old-fashioned and modern prejudices. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 199–214. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.68.2.199
55.
SwimJ. K.MallettR.Russo-DevosaY.StangorC. (2005). Judgments of sexism: A comparison of the subtlety of sexism measures and sources of variability in judgments of sexism. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 29, 406–411. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2005.00240.x
56.
TabachnickB. G.FidellL. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
57.
TajfelH. (1981). Human groups and social categories. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
58.
VikiG. T.AbramsD. (2002). But she was unfaithful: Benevolent sexism and reactions to rape victims who violate traditional gender role expectations. Sex Roles, 47, 289–293. doi:10.1023/A:1021342912248
59.
WestonR.GoreP. A. (2006). A brief guide to structural equation modeling. The Counseling Psychologist, 34, 719–751. doi:10.1177/0011000006286345
60.
YakushkoO. (2007). Do feminist women feel better about their lives? Examining patterns of feminist identity development and women’s subjective well-being. Sex Roles, 57, 223–234. doi:10.1007/s11199-007-9249-6
61.
YoderJ. D. (2012). Finding optimal functioning in a sexist world: A social justice challenge. The Counseling Psychologist, 40, 1172–1180.
62.
YoderJ. D.SnellA. F.TobiasA. (2012). Balancing multicultural competence with social justice: Feminist beliefs and optimal psychological functioning. The Counseling Psychologist, 40, 1101–1132.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
