Advertisement

Sex Roles

, Volume 37, Issue 11–12, pp 885–904 | Cite as

“I’m not a feminist, but…”: factors contributing to the discrepancy between pro-feminist orientation and feminist social identity

  • Rachel Williams
  • Michele Andrisin WittigEmail author
Article

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.

Keywords

Collective Action Social Identity Feminist Movement Intergroup Relation Feminist Identity 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 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.Google Scholar
  2. Bargad, A., & Hyde, J.S. (1991). A study of feminist identity development in women.Psychology of Women Quarterly, 15, 181–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cowan, G., Mestlin, M., & Masek, J. (1992). Predictors of feminist self-labeling.Sex Roles, 27, 321–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cross, W E. (1971). Negro-to-Black conversion experience.Black World, 20, 13–27.Google Scholar
  7. Dabrowski, I. (1985). Liberating the “deviant” feminist image through education.Social Behavior and Personality, 13, 73–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 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.Google Scholar
  9. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 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.Google Scholar
  11. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hogeland, L. M. (1994, November-December). Fear of feminism,Ms., pp. 18–21.Google Scholar
  13. Hovland, C. I., Janis, I. L., & Kelley, H. H. (1953)Communication and persuasion. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Jacobson, M. B., & Koch, W. (1978) Attributed reasons for support of the feminist movement as a function of attractiveness.Sex Roles, 4, 169–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kirkpatrick, C. (1936). The construction of a belief-pattern scale for measuring attitudes toward feminism.Journal of Social Psychology, 7, 421–437.Google Scholar
  16. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. McConahay, J. B., & Hough, J. C. (1976). Symbolic racism.Journal of Social Issues, 32, 23–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Myaskovsky, L., & Wittig, M. A. (1997).Predictors of feminist social identity among college women.Sex Roles, 37, 861–883.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Nunnally, J. C. (1970)Introduction to psychological measurement. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  21. 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.Google Scholar
  22. Reid, P. T. (1984). Feminism versus minority group identity: Not for Black women only.Sex Roles 10, 247–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Renzetti, C. M. (1987). New Wave or second stage? Attitudes of college women toward feminism.Sex Roles, 16, 265–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rickard, K. M. (1990). The effect of feminist identity level on gender prejudice toward artists’ illustrations.Journal of Research in Personality, 24, 145–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Singleton, R., & Christianson, J. B. (1977). The construct validation of a shortform attitudes toward feminism scale.Sociology and Social Research, 61, 294–303.Google Scholar
  28. 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.Google Scholar
  29. Smith, M. D., & Self, G. D. (1981). Feminists and traditionalists: An attitudinal comparison.Sex Roles, 7, 183–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sommers, C. H. (1994).Who stole feminism? How women have betrayed women. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  31. SPSS, Inc. (1988).SPSS-X User’s Guide (ed. 3). Chicago, IL: SPSS.Google Scholar
  32. 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.Google Scholar
  33. Tajfel, H. (1978) Social categorization, social identity, and social comparison. In H. Tajfel (ed.),Differentiation between social groups. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  34. Tajfel, H. (ed.). (1982a).Social identity and intergroup relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Tajfel, H. (1982b). Social psychology of intergroup relations.Annual Review of Psychology, 33, 1–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Taylor, D. M., & McKirnan, D. J. (1984). A five-stage model of intergroup relations.British Journal of Social Psychology, 23, 291–300.Google Scholar
  37. 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.Google Scholar
  38. 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.Google Scholar
  39. 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.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Claremont Graduate SchoolNorthridge
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyCalifornia State University, NorthridgeNorthridge

Personalised recommendations