Sex Roles

, Volume 49, Issue 9–10, pp 533–537 | Cite as

The “True” Romantic: Benevolent Sexism and Paternalistic Chivalry

Article

Abstract

Previous research has shown that individuals high in benevolent sexism positively evaluate women who conform to traditional gender roles (e.g., Glick, Diebold, Bailey-Warner, & Zhu, 1997). In the current study, male and female participants completed the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory (Glick & Fiske, 1996) and a new measure of paternalistic chivalry, that is, attitudes that are both courteous and considerate to women but place restrictions on behavior considered appropriate for women during courtship. Consistent with our hypotheses, benevolent sexism was significantly positively related to paternalistic chivalry. Hostile sexism and participant sex were unrelated to paternalistic chivalry.

benevolent hostile sexism paternalism chivalry 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abrams, D., Viki, G. T., Masser, B., & Bohner, G. (2003). Perceptions of stranger and acquaintance and stranger rape: The role of benevolent and hostile sexism in victim blame and rape proclivity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 111–125.Google Scholar
  2. Eagly, A. H., & Crowley, M. (1986). Gender and helping behavior: A meta-analytic review of social psychological literature. Psychological Bulletin, 100, 283–308.Google Scholar
  3. Eagly, A. H., Mladinic, A., & Otto, S. (1991). Are women evaluated more favorably than men? Psychology of Women Quarterly, 15, 203–216.Google Scholar
  4. Fletcher, G. (2002). The new science of intimate relationships. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  5. Glick, P., Diebold, J., Bailey-Werner, B., & Zhu, L. (1997). The two faces of Adam: Ambivalent sexism and polarized attitudes toward women. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 1323–1334.Google Scholar
  6. Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1996). The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: Differentiating and hostile benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 491–512.Google Scholar
  7. Glick, P., Fiske, S. T., Mlandinic, A., Saiz, J. L., Abrams, D., Masser, B., et al., (2000). Beyond prejudice as a simple antipathy:Hostile and benevolent sexism across cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 763–775.Google Scholar
  8. Jaccard, J., Turrisi, R., & Wan, C. K. (1990). Interaction effects in multiple regression. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  9. Jost, J. T., & Banaji, M. R. (1994). The role of stereotyping in system-justification and the production of false-consciousness. British Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 1–27.Google Scholar
  10. Kilianski, S. E., & Rudman, L. A. (1998). Wanting it both ways: Do women approve of benevolent sexism? Sex Roles, 39, 333–352.Google Scholar
  11. Masser, B., & Abrams, D. (1999). Contemporary sexism: Therelationships among hostility, benevolence, and neosexism. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 23, 503–517.Google Scholar
  12. Spence, J. T., & Helmreich, R. (1972). The Attitudes Toward Women Scale. JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 2, 1–52.Google Scholar
  13. 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.Google Scholar
  14. Vrugt, A., & Nauta, M. C. (1995). Subtle prejudice against women in the Netherlands. Journal of Social Psychology, 135, 601–606.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. Tendayi Viki
    • 1
  • Dominic Abrams
    • 1
  • Paul Hutchison
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of Kent at CanterburyCanterburyUnited Kingdom

Personalised recommendations