Advertisement

Sex Roles

, Volume 37, Issue 3–4, pp 227–249 | Cite as

Power, Empowerment, and Equality: Evidence for the Motives of Feminists, Nonfeminists, and Antifeminists

  • Lori J. Nelson
  • Sandra B. Shanahan
  • Jennifer Olivetti
Article

Abstract

Both feminists and antifeminists claim they do not seek to dominate others, and accuse their ideological opponents of an insidious desire for power. The purpose of this study was to examine the motives of feminists, nonfeminists, and antifeminists by assessing their values in a context in which they would not feel that their motives regarding feminism were being scrutinized. Participants were 126 mostly European-American students. Antifeminist men placed more emphasis on their own power than did other men; but antifeminist, nonfeminist, and feminist women did not differ in emphasis placed on power. Among both men and women, antifeminists placed little importance on equality. Feminist women placed more importance on equality than did nonfeminist women, who in turn placed more importance on equality than did antifeminist women.

Keywords

Social Psychology Feminist Woman Ideological Opponent 
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. Bailey, W. T. (1993). College students' attitudes toward abortion. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 8, 749-756.Google Scholar
  2. Basow, S. A., & Campanile, F. (1990). Attitudes toward prostitution as a function of attitudes toward feminism in college students. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 14, 135-141.Google Scholar
  3. Bernard, J. (1981). The female world. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  4. Burris, V. (1983). Who opposed the ERA? An analysis of the social bases of antifeminism. Social Science Quarterly, 64, 305-317.Google Scholar
  5. Carlson, E. R. (1956). Attitude change through modification of attitude structure. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 52, 256-261.Google Scholar
  6. Chafetz, J. S., & Dworkin, A. G. (1987). In the face of threat: Organized antifeminism in comparative perspective. Gender and Society, 1, 33-60.Google Scholar
  7. Costain, A. N. (1992). Inviting women's rebellion. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Cott, N. F. (1986). Feminist theory and feminist movements: The past before us. In J. Mitchell & A. Oakley (Eds.), What is feminism? New York: Pantheon.Google Scholar
  9. Crosby, F. J., Pufall, A., Snyder, R. C., O'Connell, M., & Whalen, P. (1989). The denial of personal disadvantage among you, me, and all the other ostriches. In M. Crawford & M. Gentry (Eds.), Gender and thought: Psychological perspectives. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  10. Delmar, R. (1994). What is feminism? In A. C. Herrmann & A. J. Stewart (Eds.), Theorizing feminism: Parallel trends in the humanities and social sciences. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  11. Downing, N. E., & Roush, K. L. (1985). From passive acceptance to active commitment: A model of feminist identity development for women. Counseling Psychologist, 13, 695-709.Google Scholar
  12. English, D. (1983). The fear that feminism will free men first. In A. Snitow, C. S. Tansell, & S. Thompson (Eds.), Powers of desire: The politics of sexuality. New York: Monthly Review Press.Google Scholar
  13. Faludi, S. (1991). Backlash: The undeclared war against American women. New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
  14. Ferree, M. M. (1983). The women's movement in the working class. Sex Roles, 9, 493-505.Google Scholar
  15. French, M. (1992). The war against women. New York: Ballantine.Google Scholar
  16. French, J. R. P, & Raven, B. (1959). The bases of social power. In D. Cartwright (Ed.), Studies in social power. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  17. 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.Google Scholar
  18. Hall, C. M. (1992). Women and empowerment: Strategies for increasing autonomy. Washington, DC: Hemisphere.Google Scholar
  19. Homer, P. M., & Kahle, L. R. (1988). A structural equation test of the value-attitude-behavior hierarchy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 638-646.Google Scholar
  20. Horney, K. (1931/1967). The distrust between the sexes. In K. Horney (Ed.), Feminine psychology. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
  21. Jaggar, A. M. (1993). Prostitution. In M. Pearsall (Ed.), Women and values: Readings in recent feminist philosophy. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  22. Kelley, J., Evans, M. D. R., & Headey, B. (1993). Moral reasoning and political conflict: The abortion controversy. British Journal of Sociology, 44, 589-612.Google Scholar
  23. Kimmel, M. S. (1987). Men's responses to feminism at the turn of the century. Gender and Society, 1, 261-283.Google Scholar
  24. Kitzinger, S. (1991). Feminism, psychology and the paradox of power. Feminism and Psychology, 1, 111-129.Google Scholar
  25. Klatch, R. E. (1987). Women of the new right. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Korman, S. K. (1983). The feminist: Familial influences on adherence to ideology and commitment to a self-perception. Family Relations, 32, 431-439.Google Scholar
  27. Kristiansen, C. M., & Zanna, M. P. (1994). the rhetorical use of values to justify social and intergroup attitudes. Journal of Social Issues, 50, 47-65.Google Scholar
  28. Lerner, G. (1993). The creation of feminist consciousness. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Lips, H. (1991). Women, men, and power. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield Publishing.Google Scholar
  30. Markus, M. (1977). Self-schemata and processing information about the self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 63-78.Google Scholar
  31. McGuire, W. J. (1960). A syllogistic analysis of cognitive relationships. In M. J. Rosenberg, C. I. Hovland, W. J. McGuire, R. P. Abelson, & J. W. Brehm (Eds.), Attitude organization and change: An analysis of consistency among attitudes. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Miller, D. T., Taylor, B., & Buck, M. (1991). Gender gaps: Who needs to be explained? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 5-12.Google Scholar
  33. Mitchell, J. (1987). Women and equality. In A. Phillips (Ed.), Feminism and equality. Washington Square: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Olivetti, J., Nelson, L. J., Shanahan, S., & Belew, M. (1997). “I'm not a feminist, but...”: Construction of a Feminist Attitudes Scale. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
  35. Ozer, E. M., & Bandura, A. (1990). Mechanisms governing empowerment effects: A self-efficacy analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 472-486.Google Scholar
  36. Phillips, A. (1987). Introduction. In A. Phillips (Ed.), Feminism and equality. Washington Square: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Quindlen, A. (1993). Thinking out loud: On the personal, the political, the public and the private. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  38. Quindlen, A. (1994, January 19). And now, babe feminism. New York Times, p. A19.Google Scholar
  39. Renzetti, C. M. (1987). New wave or second stage? Attitudes of college women toward feminism. Sex Roles, 16, 265-277.Google Scholar
  40. Riger, S. (1993). What's wrong with empowerment? American Journal of Community Psychology, 21, 279-292.Google Scholar
  41. Rowbotham, S. (1991). The past is before us: Feminism in action since the 1960s. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  42. Schwartz, S. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, (Vol. 25). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  43. Schwartz, S. (1994). Are there universal aspects in the structure and contents of human values? Journal of Social Issues, 50, 19-45.Google Scholar
  44. Sidanius, J. (1993). The psychology of group conflict and the dynamics of oppression: A social dominance perspective. In S. Iyengar & W. J. McGuire (Eds.), Explorations in political psychology. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Sidanius, J., Pratto, F., & Rabinowitz, J. L. (1994). Gender, ethnic status, and ideological asymmetry: A social dominance interpretation. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 25, 194-216.Google Scholar
  46. Stacey, J. (1986). Are feminists afraid to leave home? The challenge of conservative pro-family feminism. In J. Mitchell & A. Oakley (Eds.), What is feminism? New York: Pantheon.Google Scholar
  47. Tavris, C. (1992). The mismeasure of woman. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  48. Thomas, S. (1986). Mass media and the social order. In G. Gumpert & R. Cathcart (Eds.), Inter/media: Interpersonal communication in a media world (3rd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  49. Wyer, R. S., & Goldberg, L. (1970). A probabilistic analysis of the relationships among beliefs and attitudes. Psychological Review, 77, 100-120.Google Scholar
  50. Yoder, J. D., & Kahn, A. S. (1992). Toward a feminist understanding of women and power. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 16, 381-388.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lori J. Nelson
    • 1
  • Sandra B. Shanahan
    • 2
  • Jennifer Olivetti
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyShippensburg UniversityShippensburg
  2. 2.Shippensburg UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations