Two studies investigated whether benevolent sexism is differentially applied based on a woman’s race. Study 1 demonstrated that participants expressed more benevolent sexism to White females than Black females when given no other information besides race. Study 2 introduced positive (chaste) and negative (promiscuous) sexually subtyped behaviors in addition to female race. Under these conditions, participants directed more benevolent sexism at chaste Black women rather than chaste White women, consistent with shifting standards theory. Despite receiving more benevolent sexism, chaste Black women did not receive more positive evaluations overall. Across both studies, expressions of hostile sexism did not differ by race. Results suggest that race may function as a subtype to elicit benevolent sexism contingent on behavior. Black women who follow traditional gender norms may be overcompensated for their conformity with benevolent sexism, but not receive more positive benefits.
AbramsD.VikiG. T.MasserB.BohnerG. (2003). Perceptions of stranger and acquaintance rape: The role of benevolent and hostile sexism in victim blame and rape proclivity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 111–125. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.84.1.111
2.
BeckerJ. C.WrightS. 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
3.
BertrandM.MullainathanS. (2004). Are Emily and Greg more employable than Lakisha and Jamal? A field experiment on labor market discrimination. American Economic Review, 94, 991–1013. doi:10.3386/w9873
4.
BiernatM. (2003). Toward a broader view of social stereotyping. American Psychologist, 58, 1019–1027. doi:10.1037/0003–066X.58.12.1019
5.
BiernatM.KobrynowiczD. (1997). Gender- and race-based standards of competence: Lower minimum standards but higher ability standards for devalued groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 544–557. doi:10.1037/0022–3514.72.3.544
6.
BiernatM.ManisM.NelsonT. F. (1991). Comparison and expectancy processes in human judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 203–211. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.61.2.203
7.
BiernatM.VescioT. K. (2002). She swings, she hits, she’s great, she’s benched: Implications of gender-based shifting standards for judgment and behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 66–77. doi:10.1177/0146167202281006
8.
BleeK. M. (2002). Inside organized racism: Women in the hate movement. Berkeley: University of California Press.
9.
Chesney-LindM.PaskoL. (Eds.). (2012). The female offender: Girls, women, and crime (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
10.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
11.
DanielJ. E.DanielJ. L. (1998). Preschool children’s selection of race-related personal names. Journal of Black Studies, 28, 471–490. doi:10.1177/002193479802800403
12.
DardenneB.DumontM.BollierT. (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.
DavisA. Y. (1983). Women, race, and class. New York, NY: Vintage
14.
DavisG. L.CrossH. J. (1979). Sexual stereotyping of Black males in interracial sex. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 8, 269–279. doi:10.1007/BF01541243
15.
EaglyA. H.AshmoreR. D.MakhijaniM. G.LongoL. C. (1991). What is beautiful is good, but…: A meta-analytic review of research on the physical attractiveness stereotype. Psychological Bulletin, 110, 109–128. doi:10.1037/0033–2909.110.1.109
16.
EhrenreichB.EnglishD. (1978). For her own good: One hundred and fifty years of the experts’ advice to women. Garden City, NY: Anchor/Doubleday.
17.
EsquedaC. W.HarrisonL. A. (2005). The influence of gender role stereotypes, the woman’s race, and level of provocation and resistance on domestic violence culpability attributions. Sex Roles, 53, 821–834. doi:10.1007/11199s-005–8295–1
18.
FerraroK. J. (1989). Policing woman battering. Social Problems, 36, 61–74. doi:10.2307/800550
19.
FiskeS. T.CuddyA. J.GlickP.XuJ. (2002). A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 878–902. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.82.6.878
20.
FitzC. C.ZuckerA. N. (2014). Feminist with benefits: College women’s feminist beliefs buffer sexual well-being amid hostile (not benevolent) sexism. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 38, 7–19. doi:10.1177/0361684313504736
21.
GlickP.DieboldJ.Bailey-WernerB.ZhuL. (1997). The two faces of Adam: Ambivalent sexism and polarized attitudes toward women. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 1323–1334. doi:10.1177/01461672972312009
22.
GlickP.FiskeS. 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.
GlickP.FiskeS. 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.
GlickP.FiskeS. T.MladinicA.SaizJ. L.AbramsD.MasserB.…LopezW. (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.
GoffP. A.EberhardtJ. L.WilliamsM. J.JacksonM. C. (2008). Not yet human: Historical dehumanization and contemporary consequences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 292–306. doi:10.1037/0022–3514.94.2.292
26.
GoffP. A.KahnK. B. (2013). How psychological science impedes intersectional thinking. Du Bois Review: Social Science Research on Race, 10, 365–384. doi:10.1017/S1742058X13000313
27.
GoffP. A.ThomasM. A.JacksonM. C. (2008). “Ain’t I a woman?”: Towards an intersectional approach to person perception and group-based harms. Sex Roles, 59, 392–403. doi:10.1007/s11199–008–9505–4
28.
GreenwaldA. G.McGheeD. E.SchwartzJ. L. K. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The Implicit Association Test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1464–1480. doi:10.1037/0022–3514.74.6.1464
29.
GreenwaldA. G.PoehlmanT. A.UhlmannE. L.BanajiM. R. (2009). Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: III. Meta-analysis of predictive validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 17–41. doi:10.1037/a0015575
30.
GuptaN.JenkinsG. D.Jr.BeehrT. A. (1983). Employee gender, gender similarity, and supervisor–subordinate cross-evaluations. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 8, 174–184. doi:10.1111/j.1471–6402.1984.tb00627.x
31.
HallR. E. (1995). Dark skin and the cultural ideal of masculinity. Journal of African American Men, 1, 37–62. doi:10.1007/BF02692070
32.
HassR. G.KatzI.RizzoN.BaileyJ.EisenstadtD. (1991). Cross-racial appraisal as related to attitude ambivalence and cognitive complexity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 83–92. doi:10.1177/0146167291171013
33.
HodesM. (1993). The sexualization of reconstruction politics: White women and Black men in the South after the Civil War. Journal of the History of Sexuality, 3, 402–417. doi:1043–4070/93/0303–0003
34.
hooksb. (1981). Ain’t I a woman: Black women and feminism. New York, NY: South End.
35.
HullG. T.Bell ScottP.SmithB. (1982). But some of us are brave: All the women are White, all the Blacks are men: Black women’s studies. New York, NY: Feminist.
36.
JewellK. S. (1993). From mammy to Miss America and beyond: Cultural images and the shaping of U.S. social policy. New York, NY: Routledge.
37.
JostJ. T.KayA. C. (2005). Exposure to benevolent sexism and complementary gender stereotypes: Consequences for specific and diffuse forms of system justification. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 498–509. doi:10.1037/0022–3514.88.3.498
38.
McConahayJ. B. (1986). Modern racism, ambivalence, and the modern racism scale. In DovidioJ. D.GaertnerS. L. (Eds.), Prejudice, discrimination, and racism (pp. 91–125). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
39.
MinearM.ParkD. C. (2004). A lifespan database of adult facial stimuli. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 630–633. doi:10.3758/BF03206543
40.
MortonD. (1991). Disfigured images: The historical assault on Afro-American women. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
41.
NiemannY. F.JenningsL.RozelleR. M.BaxterJ. C.SullivanE. (1994). Use of free responses and cluster analysis to determine stereotypes of eight groups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 379–390. doi:10.1177/0146167294204005
42.
OsborneD.DaviesP. G. (2012). When benevolence backfires: Benevolent sexists’ opposition to elective and traumatic abortion. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42, 291–307. doi:10.1111/j.1559–1816.2011.00890.x
PrenticeD. A.MillerD. T. (1992). When small effects are impressive. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 160–164. doi:10.1037/0033–2909.112.1.160
45.
Purdie-VaughnsV.EibachR. P. (2008). Intersectional invisibility: The distinctive advantages and disadvantages of multiple subordinate-group identities. Sex Roles, 59, 377–391. doi:10.1007/s11199–008–9424–4
46.
RosenblattA.GreenbergJ.SolomonS.PyszczynskiT.LyonD. (1989). Evidence for terror management theory: I. The effects of mortality salience on reactions to those who violate or uphold cultural values. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 681–690. doi:10.1037/0022–3514.57.4.681
47.
Sakalh-UğurluN.GlickP. (2003). Ambivalent sexism and attitudes toward women who engage in premarital sex in Turkey. Journal of Sex Research, 40, 296–302. doi:10.1080/00224490309552194
48.
ShepherdM.ErchullM. J.RosnerA.TaubenbergerL.QueenE. F.McKeeJ. (2011). “I’ll get that for you”: The relationship between benevolent sexism and body self-perceptions. Sex Roles, 64, 1–8. doi:10.1007/s11199–010–9859–2
49.
SibleyC. G.WilsonM. 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
50.
SidaniusJ.PrattoF. (1999). Social dominance: An intergroup theory of social hierarchy and oppression. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
51.
StantonE. C.AnthonyS. B.GageM. J. (Eds.). (1881). History of woman suffrage. New York, NY: Fowler & Wells.
52.
SueD. W. (2010). Microaggressions in everyday life: Race, gender, and sexual orientation. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
53.
SueD. W.CapodilupoC. M.HolderA. (2008). Racial microaggressions in the life experience of Black Americans. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 39, 329–336. doi:10.1037/0735–7028.39.3.329
ValentiJ. (2009). The purity myth: How America’s obsession with virginity is hurting young women. Berkeley, CA: Seal Press.
57.
VikiG. T.MasseyK.MasserB. (2005). When chivalry backfires: Benevolent sexism and attitudes toward Myra Hindley. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 10, 109–120. doi:10.1348/135532504X15277
58.
VisherC. A. (1983). Gender, police arrest decisions, and notions of chivalry. Criminology, 21, 5–28. doi:10.1111/j.1745–9125.1983.tb00248.x
59.
WeitzR.GordonL. (1993). Images of Black women among Anglo college students. Sex Roles, 28, 19–34. doi:10.1007/BF00289745
60.
WyattJ. (2008). Patricia Hill Collins’s Black sexual politics and the genealogy of the strong Black woman. Studies in Gender and Sexuality, 9, 52–67. doi:10.1080/15240650701759516
61.
YoungI. M. (2003). The logic of masculinist protection: Reflections on the current security state. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 29, 1–25. doi:10.1086/375708
62.
YoungV. D. (1986). Gender expectations and their impact on Black female offenders and victims. Justice Quarterly, 3, 305–327. doi:10.1080/07418828600088961
