Abstract
Using constructs from theories of social identity and collective action, hypotheses were developed concerning variables that predict pro-feminist orientation among those who resist the feminist label, as compared to variables that predict willingness to identify as a feminist. Predictors that were expected to be important to the latter, but not the former group, included (1) positive evaluation of feminists, (2) belief in collective action, (3) recognition of discrimination, and (4) previous exposure to feminist thought. The sample consisted of 47 male and 94 female college students (60% Anglo, 16% Asian-American, 7% African-American, 9% Hispanic, and 7% “Other”), aged 17–50 years. Using separate multiple regressions, support for the differential inclusion of all but the third variable was found. Also as predicted, the genders did not differ in pro-feminist orientation, although college women were more willing than college men to identify as feminist. Results are discussed as potentially important to understanding willingness to engage in collective advocacy.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abrams, D., & Hoggs, M. A. (1990). An introduction to the social identity approach. Chapter in Abrams, D., & Hoggs, M. A. (eds),Social identity. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Bargad, A., & Hyde, J.S. (1991). A study of feminist identity development in women.Psychology of Women Quarterly, 15, 181–201.
Beaman, A. L., & Klentz, B. (1983). A meta-analysis of the supposed physical attractiveness bias against supporters of the women’s movement.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 9, 544–550.
Berryman-Fink, C., & Verderber, K. S. (1985). Attributions of the term feminist: A factoranalytic development of a measuring instrument.Psychology of Women Quarterly, 9, 51–64.
Cowan, G., Mestlin, M., & Masek, J. (1992). Predictors of feminist self-labeling.Sex Roles, 27, 321–330.
Cross, W E. (1971). Negro-to-Black conversion experience.Black World, 20, 13–27.
Dabrowski, I. (1985). Liberating the “deviant” feminist image through education.Social Behavior and Personality, 13, 73–81.
Del Baca, F. K., Ashmore, R. D., & McManus, M. A. (1986). In R. D. Ashmore & F. K. Del Baca (eds.),The social psychology of female-male relations. New York: Academic Press.
Downing, N. E., & Roush, K. L. (1985). From passive acceptance to active commitment: A model of feminist identity development for women.The Counseling Psychologist, 13, 695–709.
Fleming, J. (1988). Public opinion on change in women’s rights and roles. In S. M. Dornbusch & M. H. Strober (Eds.),Feminism, children and the new families. New York: Guilford Press.
Goldberg, P. A., Gottesdiener, M., & Abramson, P. R. (1975). Another put down of women? Perceived attractiveness as a function of support of the feminist movement.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 113–115.
Hogeland, L. M. (1994, November-December). Fear of feminism,Ms., pp. 18–21.
Hovland, C. I., Janis, I. L., & Kelley, H. H. (1953)Communication and persuasion. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Jacobson, M. B., & Koch, W. (1978) Attributed reasons for support of the feminist movement as a function of attractiveness.Sex Roles, 4, 169–174.
Kirkpatrick, C. (1936). The construction of a belief-pattern scale for measuring attitudes toward feminism.Journal of Social Psychology, 7, 421–437.
Klentz, B., Beaman, A. L., Mapelli, S. D., & Ullrich, J. R. (1988) Perceived physical attractiveness of supporters and non-supporters of the women’s movement: An attitude similarity mediated error (AS-ME).Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 13, 513–523.
McConahay, J. B., & Hough, J. C. (1976). Symbolic racism.Journal of Social Issues, 32, 23–45.
Morgan, B. L. (1996). Putting the feminism into feminism scales. Introduction of a liberal feminist attitude and ideology scale (LFAIS).Sex Roles 34, 359–390.
Myaskovsky, L., & Wittig, M. A. (1997).Predictors of feminist social identity among college women.Sex Roles, 37, 861–883.
Nunnally, J. C. (1970)Introduction to psychological measurement. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Pesci, M., & Wittig, M. A. (1996).Covert and overt feminist self-identification and belief in collective action as predictors of feminist activism. Unpublished manuscript, California State University, Northridge.
Reid, P. T. (1984). Feminism versus minority group identity: Not for Black women only.Sex Roles 10, 247–255.
Renzetti, C. M. (1987). New Wave or second stage? Attitudes of college women toward feminism.Sex Roles, 16, 265–277.
Rickard, K. M. (1989). The relationship between self-monitored dating behaviors and level of feminist identity on the feminist identity scale.Sex Roles, 20, 213–226.
Rickard, K. M. (1990). The effect of feminist identity level on gender prejudice toward artists’ illustrations.Journal of Research in Personality, 24, 145–162.
Rowland, R. (1986). Women who do and women who don’t join the women’s movement: Issues for conflict and collaboration.Sex Roles, 14, 679–692.
Singleton, R., & Christianson, J. B. (1977). The construct validation of a shortform attitudes toward feminism scale.Sociology and Social Research, 61, 294–303.
Smith, E. R., Feree, M. M., & Miller, F. D. (1975). A short scale of attitudes toward feminism.Representative Research in Social Psychology, 6, 51–56.
Smith, M. D., & Self, G. D. (1981). Feminists and traditionalists: An attitudinal comparison.Sex Roles, 7, 183–188.
Sommers, C. H. (1994).Who stole feminism? How women have betrayed women. New York: Simon & Schuster.
SPSS, Inc. (1988).SPSS-X User’s Guide (ed. 3). Chicago, IL: SPSS.
Spence, J. T., & Helmreich, R. (1972). The attitudes toward women scale: an objective instrument to measure attitudes toward the rights and roles of women in contemporary society.Journal Supplement Abstract Service Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 2, 66.
Tajfel, H. (1978) Social categorization, social identity, and social comparison. In H. Tajfel (ed.),Differentiation between social groups. New York: Academic Press.
Tajfel, H. (ed.). (1982a).Social identity and intergroup relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tajfel, H. (1982b). Social psychology of intergroup relations.Annual Review of Psychology, 33, 1–39.
Taylor, D. M., & McKirnan, D. J. (1984). A five-stage model of intergroup relations.British Journal of Social Psychology, 23, 291–300.
Turner, J. C. (1982). Towards a cognitive redefinition of the social group. In H. Tajfel (ed.),Social identity and intergroup relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Williams, J., & Giles, H. (1978). The changing status of women in society: an intergroup perspective. In H. Tajfel (ed.),Differentiation between social groups. New York: Academic Press.
Wittig, M. A. (1995, March).Developmental and social psychological determinants of social identity, intergroup relations, and collective action. Unpublished manuscript, Henry A. Murray Research Center, Radcliffe College, Cambridge, MA.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This research was conducted in partial fulfillment of requirements for the first author’s M. A. degree at Claremont Graduate School, under the supervision of the second author. Preparation of this article was supported in part by a grant to the second author from the Henry A. Murray Center, Radcliffe College. We thank Dale Berger for statistical advice, and instructors and students at the Claremont Colleges and at Chaffey Community College for their cooperation
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Williams, R., Wittig, M.A. “I’m not a feminist, but…”: factors contributing to the discrepancy between pro-feminist orientation and feminist social identity. Sex Roles 37, 885–904 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02936345
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02936345