Benevolent Sexism and Mate Preferences: Why Do Women Prefer Benevolent Men Despite Recognizing That They Can Be Undermining?

Abstract

Benevolent sexism (BS) has detrimental effects on women, yet women prefer men with BS attitudes over those without. The predominant explanation for this paradox is that women respond to the superficially positive appearance of BS without being aware of its subtly harmful effects. We propose an alternative explanation drawn from evolutionary and sociocultural theories on mate preferences: Women find BS men attractive because BS attitudes and behaviors signal that a man is willing to invest. Five studies showed that women prefer men with BS attitudes (Studies 1a, 1b, and 3) and behaviors (Studies 2a and 2b), especially in mating contexts, because BS mates are perceived as willing to invest (protect, provide, and commit). Women preferred BS men despite also perceiving them as patronizing and undermining. These findings extend understanding of women’s motives for endorsing BS and suggest that women prefer BS men despite having awareness of the harmful consequences.

Keywords

benevolent sexism mate preferences romantic relationships social role theory parental investment theory

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Acevedo

B. P.

Aron

(2009). Does a long-term relationship kill romantic love? Review of General Psychology, 13, 59-65. doi:10.1037/a0014226

Barreto

Ellemers

(2005). The burden of benevolent sexism: How it contributes to the maintenance of gender inequalities. European Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 633-642. doi:10.1002/ejsp.270

Baumard

Boyer

(2013). Religious beliefs as reflective elaborations on intuitions: A modified dual-process model. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 22, 295-300. doi:10.1177/0963721413478610

Becker

J. C.

Swim

J. K.

(2011). Seeing the unseen: Attention to daily encounters with sexism as way to reduce sexist beliefs. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 35, 227-242. doi:10.1177/0361684310397509

Becker

J. C.

Wright

S. C.

(2011). Yet another dark side of chivalry: Benevolent sexism undermines and hostile sexism motivates collective action for social change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 62-77. doi:10.1037/a0022615

Bohner

Ahlborn

Steiner

(2010). How sexy are sexist men? Women’s perception of male response profiles in the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory. Sex Roles, 62, 568-582. doi:10.1007/s11199-009-9665-x

Botwin

M. D.

Buss

D. M.

Shackelford

T. K.

(1997). Personality and mate preferences: Five factors in mate selection and marital satisfaction. Journal of Personality, 65, 107-136. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.1997.tb00531.x

Buss

D. M.

(1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 12, 1-49. doi:10.1017/S0140525X00023992

Calogero

R. M.

Jost

J. T.

(2011). Self-subjugation among women: Exposure to sexist ideology, self-objectification, and the protective function of the need to avoid closure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 211-228. doi:10.1037/a0021864

10.

Cross

C. P.

Campbell

(2017). Integrating approaches requires more than a division of labor. Psychological Science, 28, 248-250. doi:10.1177/0956797616652100

11.

Cross

E. J.

Overall

N. C.

Hammond

M. D.

(2016). Perceiving partners to endorse benevolent sexism attenuates highly anxious women’s negative reactions to conflict. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 42, 923-940. doi:10.1177/0146167216647933

12.

Dardenne

Dumont

Bollier

(2007). Insidious dangers of benevolent sexism: Consequences for women’s performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 764-779. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.93.5.764

13.

Dumont

Sarlet

Dardenne

(2010). Be too kind to a woman, she’ll feel incompetent: Benevolent sexism shifts self-construal and autobiographical memories toward incompetence. Sex Roles, 62, 545-553. doi:10.1007/s11199-008-9582-4

14.

Eagly

A. H.

Eastwick

P. W.

Johannesen-Schmidt

(2009). Possible selves in marital roles: The impact of the anticipated division of labor on the mate preferences of women and men. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35, 403-414. doi:10.1177/0146167208329696

15.

Eagly

A. H.

Wood

(1999). The origins of sex differences in human behavior: Evolved dispositions versus social roles. American Psychologist, 54, 208-423. doi:10.1037/0003-066x.54.6.408

16.

Eagly

A. H.

Wood

(2013). The nature–nurture debates: 25 years of challenges in understanding the psychology of gender. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8, 340-357. doi:10.1177/1745691613484767

17.

Eastwick

P. W.

Eagly

A. H.

Glick

Johannesen-Schmidt

M. C.

Fiske

S. T.

Blum

A. M. B.

. . . Volpato

(2006). Is traditional gender ideology associated with sex-typed mate preferences? A test in nine nations. Sex Roles, 54, 603-614. doi:10.1007/s11199-006-9027-x

18.

Feather

N. T.

(2004). Value correlates of ambivalent attitudes toward gender relations. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 3-12. doi:10.1177/0146167203258825

19.

Fischer

A. R.

(2006). Women’s benevolent sexism as reaction to hostility. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 30, 410-416. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2006.00316.x

20.

Gangestad

Haselton

Buss

(2006). Evolutionary foundations of cultural variation: Evoked culture and mate preferences. Psychological Inquiry, 17, 75-95. doi:10.1207/s15327965pli1702_1

21.

Geary

D. C.

(2000). Evolution and proximate expression of human paternal investment. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 55-77. doi:10.1037//0033-2909.126.1.55

22.

Glick

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

23.

Glick

Fiske

S. T.

(2001). An ambivalent alliance: Hostile and benevolent sexism as complementary justifications for gender inequality. American Psychologist, 56, 109-118. doi:10.1037//0003-066x.56.2.109

24.

Glick

Fiske

S. T.

Mladinic

Saiz

J. L.

Abrams

Masser

. . . López

W. L.

(2000). Beyond prejudice as simple antipathy: Hostile and benevolent sexism across cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 763-775. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.79.5.763

25.

Glick

Lameiras

Fiske

S. T.

Eckes

Masser

Volpato

. . . Wells

(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

26.

Goh

J. X.

Hall

J. A.

(2015). Nonverbal and verbal expressions of men’s sexism in mixed-gender interactions. Sex Roles, 72, 252-261. doi:10.1007/s11199-015-0451-7

27.

Gurven

Hill

(2009). Why do men hunt? A reevaluation of “man the hunter” and the sexual division of labor. Current Anthropology, 50, 51-74. doi:10.1086/595620

28.

Hakim

(2002). Lifestyle preferences as determinants of women’s differentiated labor market careers. Work and Occupations, 29, 428-459. doi:10.1177/0730888402029004003

29.

Hammond

M. D.

Overall

N. C.

(2013). When relationships do not live up to benevolent ideals: Women’s benevolent sexism and sensitivity to relationship problems. European Journal of Social Psychology, 43, 212-223. doi:10.1002/ejsp.1939

30.

Hammond

M. D.

Overall

N. C.

Cross

E. J.

(2016). Internalizing sexism within close relationships: Perceptions of intimate partners’ benevolent sexism promote women’s endorsement of benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 110, 214-238. doi:10.1037/pspi0000043

31.

Hammond

M. D.

Sibley

C. G.

Overall

N. C.

(2014). The allure of sexism: Psychological entitlement fosters women’s endorsement of benevolent sexism over time. Social Psychological & Personality Science, 5, 422-429. doi:10.1177/1948550613506124

32.

Hawkes

O’Connell

J. F.

Jones

N. B.

(2001). Hadza meat sharing. Evolution & Human Behavior, 22, 113-142. doi:10.1016/s1090-5138(00)00066-0

33.

Hayes

A. F.

(2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

34.

Johannesen-Schmidt

M. C.

Eagly

A. H.

(2002). Another look at sex differences in preferred mate characteristics: The effects of endorsing the traditional female gender role. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26, 322-328. doi:10.1111/1471-6402.t01-2-00071

35.

Kenrick

D. T.

N. P.

Butner

(2003). Dynamical evolutionary psychology: Individual decision rules and emergent social norms. Psychological Review, 110, 3-28. doi:10.1037/0033-295x.110.1.3

36.

Kilianski

S. E.

Rudman

L. A.

(1998). Wanting it both ways: Do women approve of benevolent sexism? Sex Roles, 39, 333-352. doi:10.1023/A:1018814924402

37.

Koyama

McGain

Hill

(2004). Self-reported mate preferences and “feminist” attitudes regarding marital relations. Evolution & Human Behavior, 25, 327-335. doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2004.06.004

38.

Lamont

(2014). Negotiating courtship: Reconciling egalitarian ideals with traditional gender norms. Gender & Society, 28, 189-211. doi:10.1177/0891243213503899

39.

Lever

Frederick

D. A.

Hertz

(2015). Who pays for dates? Following versus challenging gender norms. SAGE Open, 5, 1-14. doi:10.1177/2158244015613107

40.

N. P.

Bailey

J. M.

Kenrick

D. T.

Linsenmeier

J. A.

(2002). The necessities and luxuries of mate preferences: Testing the tradeoffs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 947-955. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.82.6.947

41.

Marlowe

F. W.

(2004). Mate preferences among Hadza hunter-gatherers. Human Nature, 15, 365-376. doi:10.1007/s12110-004-1014-8

42.

Mesoudi

(2009). How cultural evolutionary theory can inform social psychology and vice versa. Psychological Review, 116, 929-952. doi:10.1037/a0017062

43.

Montoya

A. K.

Hayes

A. F.

(2017). Two-condition within-participant statistical mediation analysis: A path-analytic framework. Psychological Methods, 22, 6-27. doi:10.1037/met0000086

44.

Morgan

(2017, January 23). Bomb threats don’t Trump hate: Piers Morgan on the day Madonna and a bunch of famous, foul-mouthed nasty women let down ladies everywhere [Newspaper story]. Daily Mail. Retrieved from http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4148206/PIERS-MORGAN-Madonna-Bomb-threats-don-t-Trump-hate.html

45.

Moya

Glick

Expósito

de Lemus

Hart

(2007). It’s for your own good: Benevolent sexism and women’s reactions to protectively justified restrictions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 1421-1434. doi:10.1177/0146167207304790

46.

Norenzayan

Schaller

Heine

S. J.

(2006). Evolution and culture. In Schaller

Simpson

J. A.

Kenrick

D. T.

(Eds.), Evolution and social psychology (pp. 343-366). New York, NY: Psychology Press.

47.

Paternoster

Brame

Mazerolle

Piquero

(1998). Using the correct statistical test for the equality of regression coefficients. Criminology, 36, 859-866. doi:10.1111/j.1745-9125.1998.tb01268.x

48.

Phelan

J. E.

Sanchez

D. T.

Broccoli

T. L.

(2010). The danger in sexism: The links among fears of crime, benevolent sexism, and well-being. Sex Roles, 62, 35-47. doi:10.1007/s11199-009-9711-8

49.

Preacher

K. J.

Hayes

A. F.

(2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879-891. doi:10.3758/brm.40.3.879

50.

Ramos

Barreto

Ellemers

Moya

Ferreira

(2018). What hostile and benevolent sexism communicate about men’s and women’s warmth and competence. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 21, 159-177. doi:10.1177/1368430216656921

51.

Sarlet

Dumont

Delacollette

Dardenne

(2012). Prescription of protective paternalism for men in romantic and work contexts. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 36, 444-457. doi:10.1177/0361684312454842

52.

Shnabel

Bar-Anan

Kende

Bareket

Lazar

(2016). Help to perpetuate traditional gender roles: Benevolent sexism increases engagement in dependency-oriented cross-gender helping. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 110, 55-75. doi:10.1037/pspi0000037

53.

Sibley

C. G.

Overall

N. C.

Duckitt

Perry

Milfont

T. L.

Khan

S. S.

. . . Robertson

(2009). Your sexism predicts my sexism: Perceptions of men’s (but not women’s) sexism affects one’s own sexism over time. Sex Roles, 60, 682-693. doi:10.1007/s11199-008-9554-8

54.

Sperber

Hirschfeld

L. A.

(2004). The cognitive foundations of cultural stability and diversity. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 40-46. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2003.11.002

55.

Trivers

R. L.

(1972). Parental investment and sexual selection. In Campbell

(Ed.), Sexual selection and the descent of man, 1871-1971 (pp. 136-179). Chicago, IL: Aldine.

56.

Viki

G. T.

Abrams

Hutchison

(2003). The “true” romantic: Benevolent sexism and paternalistic chivalry. Sex Roles, 49, 533-537. doi:10.1023/A:1025888824749

57.

Wood

Eagly

A. H.

(2002). A cross-cultural analysis of the behavior of women and men: Implications for the origins of sex differences. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 699-727. doi:10.1037//0033-2909.128.5.699

58.

Zentner

Eagly

A. H.

(2015). A sociocultural framework for understanding partner preferences of women and men: Integration of concepts and evidence. European Review of Social Psychology, 26, 328-373. doi:10.1080/10463283.2015.1111599

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.11 MB

0.08 MB