“I’ll Get That for You”: The Relationship Between Benevolent Sexism and Body Self-Perceptions

Abstract

Benevolent sexism has been shown to have negative consequences for women. In the present study, we investigated whether there were differences in reports of body self-perceptions between 93 college women in the southeastern United States who either witnessed or did not witness a staged act of benevolent sexism. Because we believed that benevolent sexism could make beauty norms more salient, we hypothesized that women who witnessed benevolent sexism would report higher levels of self-objectification, body surveillance, and body shame. Women who witnessed benevolent sexism did report higher levels of surveillance and shame, constructs associated with self-objectification, but not higher general levels of self-objectification. This research provides more evidence of the negative effects benevolent sexism has on women.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. American Psychological Association, Task Force on the Sexualization of Girls (2007). Report of the APA Task Force on the Sexualization of Girls. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/pi/wpo/sexualization.html

  2. Barreto, M., & Ellemers, N. (2005). The burden of benevolent sexism: How it contributes to the maintenance of gender inequalities. European Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 633–642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Byrne, D., London, O., & Reeves, K. (2006). The effects of physical attractiveness, sex, and attitude similarity on interaction attraction. Journal of Personality, 36, 259–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Calogero, R. (2004). A test of objectification theory: The effect of the male gaze on appearance concerns in college women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 28, 16–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Dardenne, B., Dumont, M., & Bollier, T. (2007). Insidious dangers of benevolent sexism: Consequences for women’s performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 764–779.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Daubenmier, J. J. (2005). The relationship of yoga, body awareness, and body responsiveness to self-objectification and disordered eating. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 29, 207–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Deutsch, M., & Gerard, H. G. (1955). A study of normative and informational social influence upon individual judgment. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51, 629–636.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Forbes, G. B., Collinsworth, L. L., Jobe, R. L., Braun, K. D., & Wise, L. M. (2007). Sexism, hostility toward women, and endorsement of beauty ideals and practices: Are beauty ideals associated with oppressive beliefs? Sex Roles, 56, 265–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Franzoi, S. L. (2001). Is female body esteem shaped by benevolent sexism? Sex Roles, 44, 177–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Fredrickson, B. L., & Roberts, T.-A. (1997). Objectification theory: Toward understanding women’s lived experiences and mental health risks. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 173–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Fredrickson, B. L., Roberts, T.-A., Noll, S. M., Quinn, D. M., & Twenge, J. M. (1998). That swimsuit becomes you: Sex differences in self-objectification, restrained eating, and math performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 269–284.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1996). The ambivalent sexism inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 491–512.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (2001). An ambivalent alliance: Hostile and benevolent sexism as complimentary justifications for gender inequality. American Psychologist, 56, 109–118.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Glick, P., Fiske, S. T., Mladinic, A., Sainz, J. L., Abrams, D., Masser, B., et al. (2000). Beyond prejudice as simple antipathy: Hostile and benevolent sexism across cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 763–775.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Hurt, M. M., Nelson, J. A., Turner, D. L., Haines, M. E., Ramsey, L. R., Erchull, M. J., et al. (2007). Feminism: What is it good for? Feminine norms and objectification as the link between feminist identity and clinically relevant outcomes. Sex Roles, 57, 355–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Johnston-Robledo, I., & Fred, V. (2008). Self-objectification and lower income pregnant women’s breastfeeding attitudes. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 38, 1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Johnston-Robledo, I., Sheffield, K., Voight, J., & Wilcox-Constantine, J. (2007). Reproductive shame: Self-objectification and young women’s attitude towards their reproductive functioning. Women & Health, 46, 25–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Kelley, H. H. (1955). The two functions of reference groups. In G. E. Swanson, T. M. Newcomb, & E. L. Hartley (Eds.), Readings in social psychology (2nd ed., pp. 410–414). New York: Henry Holt.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Kilianski, S. E., & Rudman, L. A. (1998). Wanting it both ways: Do women approve of benevolent sexism? Sex Roles, 39, 333–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Mahalik, J. R., Morray, E. B., Coonerty-Femiano, A., Ludlow, L. H., Slattery, S. M., & Smiler, A. (2005). Development of the conformity to feminine norms inventory. Sex Roles, 52, 417–435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. McKinley, N. M., & Hyde, J. S. (1996). The objectified body consciousness scale: Development and validation. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 20, 181–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Noll, S. M., & Fredrickson, B. L. (1998). A mediational model linking self-objectification, body shame, and disorder eating. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 22, 623–636.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Roberts, T.-A. (2004). Female trouble: The menstrual self-evaluation scale and women’s self-objectification. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 22, 22–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Rose, E., & Felton, W. (1955). Experimental histories of culture. American Sociological Review, 20, 383–392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Sherif, M. (1936). The psychology of social norms. Oxford: Harper.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Sibley, C. G., & Wilson, M. S. (2004). Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexist attitudes toward positive and negative sexual female subtypes. Sex Roles, 51, 687–696.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Smolak, L., & Murnen, S. K. (2008). Drive for leanness: Assessment and relationship to gender, gender role and objectification. Body Image, 5, 251–260.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. World Health Organization (n.d.). BMI classification. Retrieved from http://apps.who.int/bmi/index.jsp?introPage=intro_3.html

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mindy J. Erchull.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Shepherd, M., Erchull, M.J., Rosner, A. et al. “I’ll Get That for You”: The Relationship Between Benevolent Sexism and Body Self-Perceptions. Sex Roles 64, 1–8 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-010-9859-2

Download citation

Keywords

  • Benevolent sexism
  • Self-objectification
  • Body surveillance
  • Body shame