Ambivalent sexism theory (Glick & Fiske, 1996) distinguishes between two interrelated forms of sexism: Hostile and benevolent. Although this theory motivated a large body of work examining how endorsement of these views impacts on social interactions and women’s performance, no research has yet examined what these forms of sexism are seen to communicate about men and women. We report three studies examining the image that benevolent and hostile sexist messages are seen to describe (Studies 1 and 2) and prescribe for men and women (Study 3). Results show that both benevolent and hostile sexism were seen to convey that women are and should be less competent than men. Additionally, benevolent sexism was seen as describing and prescribing women to be warmer than did hostile sexism. Across all studies men and women agreed about what the messages communicate about men and women. We discuss the implications of these results for the understanding of how stereotypical beliefs are perpetuated.
BarretoM.EllemersN. (2005a). 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
2.
BarretoM.EllemersN. (2005b). The perils of political correctness: Men’s and women’s responses to old-fashioned and modern sexist views. Social Psychology Quarterly, 68, 633–642. doi:10.1177/019027250506800106
3.
BarretoM.EllemersN. (2013). Subtle sexism. In RyanM.BranscombeN. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of gender and psychology (pp. 288–305). SAGE.
4.
BarretoM.EllemersN.PiebingaL.MoyaM. (2010). How nice of us and how dumb of me: The effect of exposure to benevolent sexism on women’s task and relational self-descriptions. Sex Roles, 62, 532–544. doi:10.1007/s11199–009–9699–0
5.
BeckerJ.WrightS. (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
6.
BiernatM.VescioT.BillingsL. (1999). Black sheep and expectancy violation: Integrating two models of social judgment. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 523–542. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099–0992(199906)29:4<523::AID-EJSP944>3.0.CO;2-J
7.
BohnerG.AhlbornK.SteinerR. (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
CohenJ. (1990). Things I have learned (so far). American Psychologist, 45, 1304–1312. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.45.12.1304
10.
CuddyA.FiskeS.GlickP. (2008). Warmth and competence as universal dimensions of social perception: The stereotype content model and the BIAS map. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 61–149. doi:10.1016/S0065–2601(07)00002–0
11.
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
12.
EllemersN.BarretoM. (2009). Collective action in modern times: How modern expressions of prejudice prevent collective action. Journal of Social Issues, 65, 735–754. doi:10.1111/j.1540–4560.2009.01621.x
13.
FiskeS.CuddyA.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
14.
FiskeS.GlickP. (1995). Ambivalence and stereotypes cause sexual harassment: A theory with implications for organizational change. Journal of Social Issues, 51, 97–115. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.1995.tb01311.x
15.
GillM. J. (2004). When information does not deter stereotyping: Prescriptive stereotyping can foster bias under conditions that deter descriptive stereotyping. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 619–632. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2003.12.001
16.
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
17.
GlickP.FiskeS. (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
18.
GlickP.FiskeS. (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
19.
GlickP.FiskeS. (2011). Ambivalent sexism revisited. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 35, 530–535. doi:10.1177/0361684311414832
20.
GlickP.FiskeS. T.MladinicA.SaizJ. L.AbramsD.MasserB.. . . LópezW. 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
21.
GlickP.LameirasM.FiskeS. T.EckesT.MasserB.VolpatoC.. . . CastroY. R. (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
22.
GlickP.Sakalli-UgurluN.FerreiraM. C.SouzaM. A. (2002). Ambivalent sexism and attitudes toward wife abuse in Turkey and Brazil. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26, 292–297. doi:10.1111/1471–6402.t01–1–00068
23.
HegartyP.PrattoF. (2001). The effects of social category norms and stereotypes on explanations for intergroup differences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 723–735. doi:10.1037/0022–3514.80.5.723
24.
JostJ.KayA. (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
25.
KayA.DayM.ZannaM.NussbaumA. (2013). The insidious (and ironic) effects of positive stereotypes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49, 287–291. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2012.11.003
26.
KervynN.BergsiekerH.FiskeS. (2012). The innuendo effect: Hearing the positive but inferring the negative. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 77–85. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2011.08.001
27.
KilianskiS.RudmanL. (1998). Wanting it both ways: Do women approve of benevolent sexism?Sex Roles, 39, 333–352. doi:10.1023/A:1018814924402
28.
LammersJ.GalinskyA. D.GordijnE. H.OttenS. (2008). Illegitimacy moderates the effects of power on approach. Psychological Science, 19, 558–564. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02123.x
29.
LeachC.EllemersN.BarretoM. (2007). Group virtue: The importance of morality (vs. competence and sociability) in the positive evaluation of in-groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 234–249. doi:10.1037/0022–3514.93.2.234
30.
MasserB.AbramsD. (1999). Contemporary sexism. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 23, 503–517. doi:10.1111/j.1471–6402.1999.tb00378.x
31.
MoyaM.GlickP.ExpósitoF.de LemusS.HartJ. (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
32.
PrenticeD. A.CarranzaE. (2002). What women and men should be, shouldn’t be, are allowed to be, and don’t have to be: The contents of prescriptive gender stereotypes. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26, 269–281. doi:10.1111/1471-6402.t01-1-00066
33.
PryorJ.GieddJ.WilliamsK. (1995). A social psychological model for predicting sexual harassment. Journal of Social Issues, 51, 69–84. doi:10.1111/j.1540–4560.1995.tb01309.x
34.
RudmanL.GlickP. (2008). The social psychology of gender: How power and intimacy shape gender relations. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
35.
RudmanL.HeppenJ. (2003). Implicit romantic fantasies and women’s interest in personal power: A glass slipper effect?Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 1357–1370. doi:10.1177/0146167203256906
36.
SignorellaM. L.BiglerR. S.LibenL. S. (1993). Developmental differences in children’s gender schemata about others: A meta-analytic review. Developmental Review, 13, 147–183. doi:10.1006/drev.1993.1007
37.
SwimJ.MallettR.Russo-DevosaY.StangorC. (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
38.
VikiG.AbramsD. (2002). But she was unfaithful: Benevolent sexism and reactions to rape victims who violate traditional gender role expectations. Sex Roles, 47, 289–293. doi:10.1023/A:1021342912248
39.
ZaikmanY.MarksM. (2014). Ambivalent sexism and the sexual double standard. Sex Roles, 71, 333–344. doi:10.1007/s11199-014-0417-1
