Within the past few years, claims of reverse discrimination have been on the rise. However, most studies exploring perceived discrimination among the majority have focused on racial and ethnic conflicts. This study addresses the consequences of perceived discrimination among young South Korean men and explores potential methods to reduce anti-female attitudes based on theories of competitive and common victimhood. Across three studies, we reveal that young Korean men believe they suffer more than women and that their competitive victimhood is associated with anti-female attitudes. In addition, men who read a common victimhood narrative express lower anti-female attitudes compared to those who read a female victimhood narrative or a control narrative. Individual differences, such as anti-feminist attitudes, generally did not moderate the effects of reading a common victimhood narrative. The results of these studies broaden the understanding of intergroup conflict by applying theories of victimhood to the underexplored context of gender conflict and suggest that a common victimhood narrative may be a viable method for reducing anti-female attitudes.
AhnS.KimH.AhnM. (2005). 한국형 양가적 성차별주의 척도(K-ASI) 개발 및 타당화 연구 [A study on the development and validation of Korean ambivalent sexism inventory]. Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology, 19(2), 29–66.
BadeaC.BinningK.VerlhiacJ. F.ShermanD. K. (2018). In the aftermath of terrorism: Effects of self versus group affirmation on support for discriminatory policies. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 76, 421–428. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2017.11.004
4.
BadeaC.TavaniJ. L.RubinM.MeyerT. (2017). Self-affirmation, political values congruence, and support for refugees. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 47(7), 355–365. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12441
5.
BarlowF. K.SibleyC. G.HornseyM. J. (2012). Rejection as a call to arms: Inter-racial hostility and support for political action as outcomes of race-based rejection in majority and minority groups. British Journal of Social Psychology, 51(1), 167–177. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.2011.02040.x
BorensteinM.HedgesL. V.HigginsJ. P.RothsteinH. R. (2010). A basic introduction to fixed-effect and random-effects models for meta-analysis. Research Synthesis Methods, 1(2), 97–111. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.12
8.
BranscombeN. R.SchmittM. T.HarveyR. D. (1999). Perceiving pervasive discrimination among African Americans: Implications for group identification and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(1), 135–149. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.77.1.135
9.
CantoJ. M.Vallejo-MartínM.PerlesF.San MartínJ. (2020). The influence of ideological variables in the denial of violence against women: The role of sexism and social dominance orientation in the Spanish context. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(14), 4934. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17144934
10.
CheonG.JeongH. (2019). 20대 남자 – ‘남성 마이너리티’ 자의식의 탄생 [Men in Their 20s: The Birth of ‘Male Minorities’]. Sisa IN Book.
ConnorR. A.FiskeS. T. (2019). Not minding the gap: How hostile sexism encourages choice explanations for the gender income gap. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 43(1), 22–36. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684318815468
13.
CraigM. A.RichesonJ. A. (2012). Coalition or derogation? How perceived discrimination influences intraminority intergroup relations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(4), 759–777. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026481
14.
CraigM. A.RichesonJ. A. (2014). Discrimination divides across identity dimensions: Perceived racism reduces support for gay rights and increases anti-gay bias. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 55, 169–174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2014.07.008
15.
CraigM. A.RichesonJ. A. (2016). Stigma-based solidarity: Understanding the psychological foundations of conflict and coalition among members of different stigmatized groups. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 25(1), 21–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721415611252
16.
CraigM. A.RichesonJ. A. (2017). Information about the US racial demographic shift triggers concerns about anti-White discrimination among the prospective White “minority.”PLoS One, 12(9), e0185389. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0185389
17.
DovidioJ. F.GaertnerS. L.SaguyT. (2007). Another view of “we”: Majority and minority group perspectives on a common ingroup identity. European Review of Social Psychology, 18(1), 296–330. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463280701726132
18.
DovidioJ. F.GaertnerS. L.SaguyT. (2009). Commonality and the complexity of “we”: Social attitudes and social change. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 13(1), 3–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868308326751
19.
DuffyB.MurkinG.SkinnerG.BensonR.GottfriedG.HeskethR.HewlettK.PageB. (2021). Culture wars around the world: How countries perceive divisions. King’s College London. https://doi.org/10.18742/pub01-054
20.
EjelövE.LukeT. J. (2020). “Rarely safe to assume”: Evaluating the use and interpretation of manipulation checks in experimental social psychology. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 87, Article 103937. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2019.103937
FaulF.ErdfelderE.LangA. G.BuchnerA. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146
23.
GaertnerS. L.DovidioJ. F.AnastasioP. A.BachmanB. A.RustM. C. (1993). The common ingroup identity model: Recategorization and the reduction of intergroup bias. European Review of Social Psychology, 4(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/14792779343000004
24.
GothreauC.ArceneauxK.FriesenA. (2022). Hostile, benevolent, implicit: How different shades of sexism impact gendered policy attitudes. Frontiers in Political Science, 4, 817309. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpos.2022.817309
25.
HalabiS.NoorM.TopazS.ZizovA. (2021). Threatened, hence justified: Jewish Israelis’ use of competitive victimhood to justify violence against Palestinians. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 24(2), 244–251. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajsp.12433
26.
JungH. W. (2023). A new variation of modern prejudice: Young Korean men’s anti-feminism and male-victim ideology. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1230577. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1230577
27.
KendeA.NyúlB.LantosN. A.HadaricsM.PetlitskiD.KehlJ.ShnabelN. (2020). A needs-based support for# MeToo: Power and morality needs shape women’s and men’s support of the campaign. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 593. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00593
28.
KimJ. (2021). Factors affecting the attitude of femvertising: Focusing on the differences according to ‘Gender’, ‘Age’, ‘Attitude to Feminism’. Journal of Digital Convergence, 19(5), 415–421. https://doi.org/10.14400/JDC.2021.19.5.415
KimS. (2022). The online male-oriented community and norms of masculinity: Focusing anti-feminism sentiment. Culture and Politics, 9(4), 159–195. https://doi.org/10.22539/culpol.2022.9.4.159
31.
Korean Presidential Commission on Policy Planning. (2018). 2030세대 젠더의식 조사 보고서. [A survey report on 2030 generation’s gender and social consciousness].
32.
KteilyN.HodsonG.BruneauE. (2016). They see us as less than human: Metadehumanization predicts intergroup conflict via reciprocal dehumanization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 110(3), 343–370. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000044
33.
LeachC. W.IyerA.PedersenA. (2007). Angry opposition to government redress: When the structurally advantaged perceive themselves as relatively deprived. British Journal of Social Psychology, 46(1), 191–204. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466606X99360
34.
LisnekJ. A.WilkinsC. L.WilsonM. E.EkstromP. D. (2022). Backlash against the #MeToo movement: How women’s voice causes men to feel victimized. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 25(3), 682–702. https://doi.org/10.1177/13684302211035437
MaricourtC. D.BurrellS. R. (2022). #MeToo or #MenToo? Expressions of backlash and masculinity politics in the #MeToo era. The Journal of Men’s Studies, 30(1), 49–69. https://doi.org/10.1177/10608265211035794
NoorM.BrownR. J.PrenticeG. (2008). Precursors and mediators of intergroup reconciliation in Northern Ireland: A new model. British Journal of Social Psychology, 47(3), 481–495. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466607X238751
39.
NoorM.ShnabelN.HalabiS.DoosjeB. (2015). Peace vision and its socio-emotional antecedents: The role of forgiveness, trust, and inclusive victim perceptions. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 18(5), 644–654. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430215586604
40.
NoorM.ShnabelN.HalabiS.NadlerA. (2012). When suffering begets suffering: The psychology of competitive victimhood between adversarial groups in violent conflicts. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 16(4), 351–374. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868312440048
ParkJ. (2021, June16). 남성차별 존재한다는 ‘이남자’.. ‘남성 우월주의‘오륙남과는 달랐다. [Men in their 20s argue for male discrimination. . . men in 50s and 60s argue for male supremacy]. Hankook Ilbo. https://news.v.daum.net/v/20210616043127451
43.
PhillipsL. T.LoweryB. S. (2015). The hard-knock life? Whites claim hardships in response to racial inequity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 61, 12–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2015.06.008
44.
RuparM.BobowikM.ArnosoM.ArnosoA.VollhardtJ. R. (2022). General inclusive victimhood predicts willingness to engage in intergroup contact: Findings from Bosnia-Herzegovina and the Basque Country. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 52(2), 71–84. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12835
ShermanD. K.CohenG. L. (2006). The psychology of self-defense: Self-affirmation theory. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 183–242. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(06)38004-5
47.
ShnabelN.HalabiS.NoorM. (2013). Overcoming competitive victimhood and facilitating forgiveness through re-categorization into a common victim or perpetrator identity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49(5), 867–877. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2013.04.007
48.
ShnabelN.NadlerA. (2008). A needs-based model of reconciliation: Satisfying the differential emotional needs of victim and perpetrator as a key to promoting reconciliation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94(1), 116–132. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.94.1.116
49.
SimanTov-NachlieliI.ShnabelN.HalabiS. (2015). Winning the victim status can open conflicting groups to reconciliation: Evidence from the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. European Journal of Social Psychology, 45(2), 139–145. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2091
50.
SullivanD.LandauM. J.BranscombeN. R.RothschildZ. K. (2012). Competitive victimhood as a response to accusations of ingroup harm doing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(4), 778–795. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026573
51.
TajfelH.TurnerJ. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In AustinW. G.WorchelS. (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–48). Brooks/Cole.
VollhardtJ. R. (2015). Inclusive victim consciousness in advocacy, social movements, and intergroup relations: Promises and pitfalls. Social Issues and Policy Review, 9(1), 89–120. https://doi.org/10.1111/sipr.12011
ZehnterM. K.ManziF.ShroutP. E.HeilmanM. E. (2021). Belief in sexism shift: Defining a new form of contemporary sexism and introducing the belief in sexism shift scale (BSS scale). PLoS One, 16(3), e0248374. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0248374
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.
