The Interpersonal Power of Feminism: Is Feminism Good for Romantic Relationships?
Purchase on Springer.com
$39.95 / €34.95 / £29.95*
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.
Past research suggests that women and men alike perceive feminism and romance to be in conflict (Rudman and Fairchild, Psychol Women Q, 31:125–136, 2007). A survey of US undergraduates (N = 242) and an online survey of older US adults (N = 289) examined the accuracy of this perception. Using self-reported feminism and perceived partners’ feminism as predictors of relationship health, results revealed that having a feminist partner was linked to healthier relationships for women. Additionally, men with feminist partners reported greater relationship stability and sexual satisfaction in the online survey. Finally, there was no support for negative feminist stereotypes (i.e., that feminists are single, lesbians, or unattractive). In concert, the findings reveal that beliefs regarding the incompatibility of feminism and romance are inaccurate.
- Aronson, P. (2003). Feminists or “postfeminists”? Young women’s attitudes toward feminism and gender relations. Gender & Society, 17, 903–922. CrossRef
- Attridge, M., Berscheid, E., & Simpson, J. A. (1995). Predicting relationship stability from both partners versus one. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 254–268. CrossRef
- Bell, D., & Klein, R. (1996). Radically speaking: Feminism reclaimed. Victoria, Australia: Spinifex.
- Buschman, J. K., & Lenart, S. (1996). “I am not a feminist, but…”: College women, feminism, and negative experiences. Political Psychology, 17, 59–75. CrossRef
- Byrne, D. (1971). The attraction paradigm. NY: Academic.
- Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
- Darlington, R. B. (1968). Multiple regression in psychological research and practice. Psychological Bulletin, 69, 161–182. CrossRef
- De Beauvoir, S. (1952). The second sex. NY: Alfred A. Knopf.
- Eagly, A. H. (1987). Sex differences in social behavior: A social role interpretation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
- Faludi, S. (1991). The undeclared war against American women. New York: Crown.
- Firestone, S. (1970). The dialectic of sex: The case for a feminist revolution. NY: Farrar, Straus, & Giroux.
- Fiske, S. T., & Stevens, L. E. (1993). What’s so special about sex? Gender stereotyping and discrimination. In S. Oskamp, & M. Costanzo (Eds.) Gender issues in contemporary society (pp. 173–196). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
- Frieze, I. H., Sales, E., & Smith, C. (1991). Considering the social context in gender research: The impact of college students’ life stage. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 15, 371–392. CrossRef
- Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1996). The ambivalent sexism inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 491–512. CrossRef
- Goldberg, P. A., Gottesdiener, M., & Abramson, P. R. (1975). Another put-down of women? Perceived attractiveness as a function of support for the feminist movement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 113–115. CrossRef
- Haddock, G., & Zanna, M. P. (1994). Preferring housewives to feminists: Categorization and the favorability of attitudes toward women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 18, 25–52. CrossRef
- Henik, A., & Tzelgov, J. (1985). Control of halo error: A multiple regression approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70, 577–580. CrossRef
- Holland, D. C. (1992). How cultural systems become desire: A case study of American romance. In R. G. D’Andrade, & C. Strauss (Eds.) Human motives and cultural models (pp. 61–89). New York: Cambridge University Press.
- Holland, D. C., & Eisenhart, M. A. (1990). Educated in romance: Women, achievement, and college culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Impett, E. A., & Peplau, L. A. (2003). Sexual compliance: Gender, motivational, and relationship perspectives. Journal of Sex Research, 40, 87–100.
- Johnson, P. (1976). Women and power: Toward a theory of effectiveness. Journal of Social Issues, 32, 99–110. CrossRef
- Levy, A. (2005). Female chauvinist pigs: Women and the rise of raunch culture. New York: Free Press.
- McNulty, J. K., & Karney, B. R. (2004). Positive expectations in the early years of marriage: Should couples expect the best or brace for the worst? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 729–743. CrossRef
- Millet, K. (1970). Sexual politics. NY: Doubleday.
- Misciagno, P. S. (1997). Rethinking feminist identification: The case for de facto feminism. Westport, CT: Praeger.
- Pedhazur, E. J. (1982). Multiple regression in behavioral research: Explanation and prediction (2nd ed.). Fort Worth, TX: Holt, Rhinhart, & Winston.
- Renzetti, C. M. (1987). New wave or second stage? Attitudes of college women toward feminism. Sex Roles, 16, 265–277. CrossRef
- Rich, E. (2005). Young women, feminist identities and neo-liberalism. Women’s Studies International Forum, 28, 495–508.
- Riger, S. (1993). What’s wrong with empowerment? American Journal of Community Psychology, 21, 279–292. CrossRef
- Rudman, L. A., & Fairchild, K. (2007). The F word: Is feminism incompatible with beauty and romance? Psychology of Women Quarterly, 31, 125–136. CrossRef
- Rudman, L. A., & Heppen, J. (2003). Implicit romantic fantasies and women’s interest in personal power: A glass slipper effect? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 1357–1370. CrossRef
- Sanchez, D., Crocker, J., & Boike, K. R. (2005). Doing gender in the bedroom: Investing in gender norms and the sexual experience. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 1445–1455. CrossRef
- Schneider, B. (1988). Political generations and the contemporary women’s movement. Sociological Inquiry, 58, 4–21. CrossRef
- Sedikides, C., Oliver, M. B., & Campbell, W. K. (1994). Perceived benefits and costs of romantic relationships for women and men: Implications for exchange theory. Personal Relationships, 1, 5–21. CrossRef
- Sigel, R. (1996). Ambition and accommodation: How women view gender relations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Smith, E. R., Becker, M. A., Byrne, D., & Przybyla, D. P. (1993). Sexual attitudes of males and females as predictors of interpersonal attraction and marital compatibility. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 23, 1011–1034. CrossRef
- Smith, E. R., Byrne, D., & Fielding, P. J. (1995). Interpersonal attraction as a function of extreme gender role adherence. Personal Relationships, 2, 161–172. CrossRef
- Swim, J. K., Ferguson, M. J., & Hyers, L. L. (1999). Avoiding stigma by association: Subtle prejudice against lesbians in the form of social distancing. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 21, 61–68.
- Taylor, J. K. (1992). Reclaiming the mainstream: Individualist feminism rediscovered. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.
- Unger, R. K., Hilderbrand, M., & Madar, T. (1982). Physical attractiveness and assumptions about social deviance: Some sex-by-sex comparisons. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 8, 293–301. CrossRef
- Valian, V. (1999). Why so slow? The advancement of women. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
- Vangelisti, A. L., & Daly, J. A. (1997). Gender differences in standards for romantic relationships. Personal Relationships, 4, 203–219. CrossRef
- Williams, R., & Wittig, M. A. (1997). “I’m not a feminist, but…”: Factors contributing to the discrepancy between pro-feminist orientation and feminist social identity. Sex Roles, 37, 885–904. CrossRef
- Zucker, A. N. (2004). Disavowing social identities: What it means when women say, “I’m not a feminist but…”. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 28, 423–435. CrossRef
- The Interpersonal Power of Feminism: Is Feminism Good for Romantic Relationships?
Volume 57, Issue 11-12 , pp 787-799
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer US
- Additional Links
- Close relationships
- Feminist stereotypes
- Intergroup relations
- Gender attitudes