Tags: benevolent sexism

The Difference Blog

What's your major?

Morgan et al (2001) found both men and women ranked "interesting work" as a high priority when determining their career choices, as determined by college major. However, the two groups seemed to find different things interesting: men were more likely to be enrolled in math or physical science programs, whereas women were more likely to choose education or arts/humanities. No difference was found in the fields of health care, social sciences, or business. Morgan et al also found that women listed interpersonal goals as more important, and status goals as less important, than their male counterparts.

Fernandez et al (2006) suggest that sexism is related to college program choice. They found in undergraduates at the University of Vigo (Spain) that both men and women in technical programs expressed more sexist attitudes than those in other programs. Nadya Fouad's 2006 review on vocational psychology calls gender and sexual orientation "contextual influences" on career choice, but notes that little research has been done on sexual orientation. More discussion of sexual orientation's influence on career development will follow tomorrow.


My college career was just as mixed up as the rest of my life has been. When the application asked for my "first choice" major, I answered "mathematics." My second-choice major was listed as "theatre." Unsurprisingly, I got my first choice, although I ended up changing majors from math to theatre a mere three months into my college career. Two years into that program, I switched my concentration from "performance" to "technical" (although my course load was so mixed up by this point that I ended up graduating with a "generalist" degree -- a "Bachelor of Science in Theatre Generalism", actually). A decade later, I find myself two years into a psychology program, but increasingly drawn to (and intimidated by) biology.
The Difference Blog

B.S.: Benevolent Sexism

Glick and Fiske (1996) propose that sexism can largely be differentiated into three types: benevolent, ambivalent, and hostile. Benevolent sexism tends to be complementary or protective. Jost and Kay (2005) found that complementary sexist stereotypes (stereotypes that suggest that women and men have complementary strengths and weaknesses) tend to lead to a sense that the status quo is more fair. In a cross-cultural study, Glick and Fiske (2001) found that both hostile and benevolent sexism were predictors of gender inequality, and usually both attitudes existed within the same person. However, Killianski and Rudman (1998) found that most people found it difficult to believe that benevolent and hostile sexist statements could come from the same person.

Glick and Fiske looked specifically at protective benevolent sexism in their 2001 study (which they associated with chivalry). Although Glick and Fiske found that these attitudes were usually found in conjunction with hostile sexism in their cross-cultural 2001 sample, Viki et al (2003) did not find that chivalrous attitudes correlated with hostile sexism in their group of British university students.


It's possible that this entire blog is an exercise in Benevolent Sexism (hereafter BS). I do make a distinct point of attempting to cover strengths and weaknesses about both men and women. I know that certain parts of a BS system are pretty deeply ingrained in me. While my father was one of the most staunch feminists (of any gender) that I've ever known, I find myself cringing at imagined criticism from him if I allow a woman to suffer, but not a man. The chivalrous instinct is ingrained. I also find myself buying into a complementary BS model: I constantly find myself comparing women and men using a independence/interdependence dichotomy, and only rarely do I question its inherent worth. However, the BS attitudes held by other women was one of the main launching points for my exploration of my own gender -- the BS seems to be a huge part of women's communal identity. Who am I to question it?