Ambivalence Toward Men: Comparing Sexism Among Polish, South African and British University Students

Abstract

This study extends the literature on attitudes toward gender roles by exploring whether the nature of sexism (i.e., benevolence and hostility directed at men) differs among university students from two under-researched countries, Poland (n = 190) and South Africa (n = 188), in a comparison with students in the United Kingdom (n = 166). Based on empirical literature applying Ambivalent Sexism Theory, and in the light of the socio-political context, it was hypothesized that: (1) both hostile and benevolent attitudes toward men in Poland would be more liberal than in South Africa and more conservative than in the United Kingdom, and (2), women would exhibit more hostile but less benevolent attitudes than men in relatively more conservative South Africa. The Ambivalence to Men Inventory was used to measure the two types of sexist attitudes about men. Findings supported the first hypothesis for hostile attitudes and partially for benevolent attitudes. South African and Polish students were more benevolent and hostile to men than British students, and students from South Africa were more hostile than those from Poland. Moreover, as predicted, a significant country-by-gender interaction revealed that South African women had more hostile and less benevolent attitudes to men than South African men. No such gender gap was present in the case of hostile attitudes in Poland and benevolent attitudes in the United Kingdom. Findings are discussed in terms of Ambivalent Sexism Theory and the countries’ socio-cultural context.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  1. Becker, J. C. (2010). Why do women endorse hostile and benevolent sexism? The role of salient female subtypes and internalization of sexist contents. Sex Roles, 62, 453–467. doi:10.1007/s11199-009-9707-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Ben-Porath, Y. S. (1990). Cross-cultural assessment of personality: The case for replicatory factor analysis. In J. N. Butcher & C. D. Spielberger (Eds.), Advances in personality assessment (Vol. 8, pp. 27–48). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bhana, A., Zimmerman, R., & Cupp, P. (2008). Gender role attitudes and sexual risk among adolescents in South Africa. Vulnerable Children and Youth Studies, 3, 112–119. doi:10.1080/17450120701867546.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Blau, F. D., Brinton, M. C., & Grusky, D. B. (2006). The declining significance of gender? New York: Russell Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Boski, P., Chojnowska, M., & Koziej, J. (2007). Kultura i tożsamość rodzaju: porównania polsko-włoskie i polsko-niemieckie [Culture and gender identity: Polish-Italian and Polish-German comparison]. Psychological Studies, 45(2), 5–20.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Braun, M., & Scott, J. (2009). Gender-role egalitarianism—is the trend reversal real? International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 21, 362–367. doi:10.1093/ijpor/edp032.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Crompton, R., Brockmann, M., & Lyonette, C. (2005). Attitudes, women’s employment and the domestic division of labour: A cross-national analysis of two waves. Work, Employment & Society, 19, 213–233. doi:10.1177/0950017005053168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Dodoo, F. N., & Frost, A. E. (2008). Gender in African population research: The fertility/reproductive health example. Annual Review of Sociology, 34, 431–451. doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.34.040507.134552.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Dorius, S. F., & Alwin, D. F. (2010). The global development of egalitarian beliefs—a decomposition of trends in the nature and structure of gender ideology. Ann Arbor: Population Studies Centre Research Report, University of Michigan, Institute for Social Research.

    Google Scholar 

  10. England, P. (2006). Toward gender equality: Progress and bottlenecks. In F. D. Blau, M. C. Brinton, & D. B. Grusky (Eds.), The declining significance of gender? (pp. 245–264). New York: Russell Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Forbes, G. B., Doroszewicz, K., Card, K., & Adams-Curtis, L. (2004). Association of the thin body ideal, ambivalent sexism, and self-esteem with body acceptance and the preferred body size of college women in Poland and the United States. Sex Roles, 50, 331–345. doi:10.1023/B:SERS.0000018889.14714.20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Frieze, I. H., Ferligoj, A., Kogovsek, T., Rener, T., Horvat, J., & Sarlija, N. (2003). Gender-role attitudes in university students in the United States, Slovenia, and Croatia. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 27, 256–261. doi:10.1111/1471-6402.00105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Gibbons, L. J., Stiles, D. A., & Shokodriani, G. M. (1991). Adolescents” attitudes toward family and gender roles: An international comparison. Sex Roles, 25, 625–643. doi:10.1007/BF00289568.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Glick, P. (2004). The other side of the coin: Ambivalence toward men and gender inequality. A comment on Viki (2004). Social Psychological Review, 6(2), 89–92.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Glick, P., & Fiske, S. 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1999). The ambivalence toward men inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent beliefs about men. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 23, 519–536. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.1999.tb00379.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (2001a). An ambivalent alliance: Hostile and benevolent sexism as complementary justifications for gender inequality. American Psychologist, 56(2), 109–118. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.56.2.109.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (2001b). Ambivalent sexism. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology. Vol.33 (pp. 115–188). San Diego: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Glick, P., Fiske, S. T., Mladinic, A., Saiz, J. L., Abrams, D., & Masser, B. (2000). Beyond prejudice as simple antipathy: Hostile and benevolent sexism across cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 765–775. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.79.5.763.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Glick, P., Lameiras, M., & Castro, Y. R. (2002). Education and Catholic religiosity as predictors of hostile and benevolent sexism toward women and men. Sex Roles, 47, 433–441. doi:10.1023/A:1021696209949.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Glick, P., Fiske, S. T., Masser, B., Manganelli, A. M., Huang, L., Castro, Y. R., et al. (2004). Bad but bold: Ambivalent attitudes toward men predict gender inequality in 16 nations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 713–728. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.86.5.713.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Greenwald, A. G., & Banaji, M. R. (1995). Implicit social cognition: Attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes. Psychological Review, 102, 4–27. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.102.1.4.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Hassim, S. (2002). “A conspiracy of women”: The women’s movement in South Africa’s transition to democracy. Social Research, 69, 693–732.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Hassim, S. (2005). Nationalism displaced: Citizenship discourses in transition. In A. Gouws (Ed.), (Un)thinking citizenship: Feminist debates in contemporary South Africa (pp. 55–69). Cape Town: University of Cape Town Press.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Inglehart, R., & Norris, P. (2003). Introduction: Explaining the rising tide of gender equality. In R. Inglehart & P. Norris (Eds.), Rising tide: Gender equality and cultural change around the world (pp. 1–28). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Ksiniewicz, M. (2004). Specyfika polskiego feminizmu. [Specificity of Polish feminism]. Kultura i Historia, 6, 90–100.

    Google Scholar 

  27. LaFont, S. (2001). One step forward, two steps back: Women in the post-communist states. Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 34, 203–220. doi:10.1016/S0967-067X(01)00006-X.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Lane, K. A., Banaji, M. R., Nosek, B. A., & Gereenwald, A. G. (2007). Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: IV. In B. Wittenbrink & N. Schwartz (Eds.), Implicit measures of attitudes (pp. 59–102). London: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Levant, R. F., Richmond, K., Sellers, A., Mitina, O., Cuthbert, A., Mateveev, A., et al. (2003). Masculinity ideology among Russian and U.S. young men and women and its relationship to unhealthy lifestyle habits among young Russian men. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 4, 26–36. doi:10.1037/1524-9220.4.1.26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Lewicka, M. (2005). Polacy są wielkim i dumnym narodem, czyli nasz portret (wielce) zróżnicowany. [Poles are a great and proud nation, i.e., a (very) diverse portrayal of ours]. In M. Drogosz (Ed.), Jak Polacy Przegrywają Jak Polacy Wygrywają? (pp. 5–35). Gdańsk: Gdańskie Wydawnictwo Psychologiczne.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Luyt, R. (2005). The Male Attitude Norms Inventory-II: A measure of masculinity ideology in South Africa. Men & Masculinities, 8, 208–229. doi:10.1177/1097184X04264631.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Luyt, R. (2011). Representation of gender in South African Television Advertising: A content analysis. Sex Roles, 65, 356–370. doi:10.1007/s11199-011-0027-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Mantell, J. E., Needham, S. L., Smit, J. A., Hoffman, S., Cebekhulu, Q., Adams-Skinner, J., et al. (2009). Gender norms in South Africa: Implications for HIV and pregnancy prevention among African and Indian women students at a South African tertiary institution. Culture, Health & Sexuality, 11, 139–157. doi:10.1080/13691050802521155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. McDaniel, A. E. (2008). Measuring gender egalitarianism: The attitudinal differences between men and women. International Journal of Sociology, 38(1), 58–80. doi:10.2753/IJS0020-7659380103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Nelson, T. D. (2002). The psychology of prejudice. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Office for National Statistics. (2011). Patterns of pay: Results of the Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings, 1997 to 2010. Retrieved from http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/index.html.

  37. Olson, J., Frieze, I., Wall, S., Zdaniuk, B., Ferligoj, A., Kogovšek, T., et al. (2007). Beliefs in equality for women and men as related to economic factors in Central and Eastern Europe and the United States. Sex Roles, 56, 297–308. doi:10.1007/s11199-006-9171-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Pollert, A. (2003). Women, work and equal opportunities in post-communist transition. Work, Employment & Society, 17, 331–357. doi:10.1177/0950017003017002006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Robila, M., & Krishnakumar, A. (2004). The role of children in Eastern European families. Children & Society Volume, 18, 30–41. doi:10.1002/chi.773.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Rosner, K. (1997). Czy istnieje w Polsce ruch feministyczny? [Does the feminist movement exist in Poland?]. Pelnym Glosem, 5, 13–27.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Rudman, L. A., & Kilianski, S. E. (2000). Implicit and explicit attitudes towards female authority. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 1315–1328. doi:10.1177/0146167200263001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Scott, J. (2006, September). Family and gender roles: How attitudes are changing (GeNet Working Paper No. 21). Cambridge, UK.

  43. Seguino, S. (2007). PlusÇa change? Evidence on global trends in gender norms and stereotypes. Feminist Economics, 13(2), 1–28. doi:10.1080/13545700601184880.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Shafiro, M. V., Himelein, M. J., & Best, D. L. (2003). Ukrainian and U.S. American females: Differences in individualism/collectivism and gender attitudes. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 34, 297–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Shefer, T., Crawford, M., Strebel, A., Simbayi, L. C., Dwadwa-Henda, N., Cloete, A., et al. (2008). Gender, power and resistance to change among two communities in the Western Cape, South Africa. Feminism & Psychology, 18, 157–182. doi:10.1177/0959353507088265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. 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. doi:10.1007/s11199-004-0718-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Sibley, C. G., Overall, N. C., & Duckitt, J. (2007). When women become more hostilely sexist toward their gender: The system-justifying effect of benevolent sexism. Sex Roles, 57, 743–754. doi:10.1007/s11199-007-9306-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Swim, J. K., Aikin, K. J., Hall, W. S., & Hunter, B. 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Swim, J. K., Mallet, R., Russo-Devosa, Y., & Stangor, C. (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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Tougas, F., Brown, R., Beaton, A. M., & Joly, S. (1995). Neosexism: Plus ça change, plus c’est pareil. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 842–849. doi:10.1177/0146167295218007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Tucker, L. R. (1951). A method for synthesis of factor analysis studies. Washington: Department of the Army.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Twenge, J. M. (2001). Changes in women’s assertiveness in response to status and roles: A cross-temporal meta-analysis, 1931-1933. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 133–145. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.81.1.133.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  53. United Nations Development Programme (2009) HDR 2009. Overcoming Barriers: Human Mobility and Development. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

  54. Van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Poortinga, Y. H. (1994). Methodological issues in cross-cultural studies on parental rearing behavior and psychopathology. In C. Perris, W. A. Arrindell, & M. Eisemann (Eds.), Parenting and psychopathology (pp. 173–197). Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Viki, G., & Abrams, D. (2004). Hostile and benevolent sexism: Complementary system justifying ideologies. Social Psychological Review, 6(2), 76–88.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Walter, N. (2010). Living dolls, the return of sexism. London: Virago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Waylen, G. (2004). What can the South African transition tell us about gender and democratization? Unpublished manuscript, Queens University Belfast.

  58. Williams, J. E., & Best, D. L. (1982). Measuring sex stereotypes: A thirty-nation study. Beverly Hills: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Williams, J. E., & Best, D. L. (1990). Measuring sex stereotypes: A multination study. Beverly Hills: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Williams, J. E., Satterwhite, R. C., & Best, D. L. (1999). Pancultural gender stereotypes revisited: The Five Factor Model. Sex Roles, 40, 513–525. doi:10.1023/A:1018831928829.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Yakushko, O. (2005). Ambivalent sexism and relationship patterns among women and men in Ukraine. Sex Roles, 52, 586–596. doi:10.1007/s11199-005-3727-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Zahidi, S., & Ibarra, H. (2010). The corporate gender gap report 2010. Paper presented at the World Economic Forum, Genf.

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Prof. Irene Frieze, four anonymous reviewers, and Dr David Giles for their insightful and useful comments on earlier versions of this manuscript. We would also like to thank the University of Winchester for sponsoring this research through a Research and Knowledge Transfer Grant.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Magdalena Zawisza.

Appendix

Appendix

Table 4 Translation of Glick and Fiske’s (1999) Ambivalence to Men Inventory into Polish and back-translation into English

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Zawisza, M., Luyt, R. & Zawadzka, A.M. Ambivalence Toward Men: Comparing Sexism Among Polish, South African and British University Students. Sex Roles 66, 453–467 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-011-0112-4

Download citation

Keywords

  • Ambivalent sexism
  • Gender attitudes
  • Poland
  • United Kingdom
  • South Africa