Benevolent Sexism: The Double-Edged Sword Chivalry - Research Paper Example

Benevolent Sexism: The Double-Edged Sword Chivalry Introduction Current studies have placed emphasis on the impact of benevolent sexism on gender discrimination or inequality. Benevolent sexism is seen as an individually positive, encouraging kind of chivalrous philosophy that manifests protection, care, and fondness to women who accept or espouse traditional female roles. On the other hand, hostile sexism is regarded to be an antagonistic perspective of gender relations wherein women are seen to be in quest of manipulating or controlling men through feminist philosophy or sexuality (Becker & Wright, 2011). Within the point of view of benevolent sexism, women may be seen as loveable, delightful pure beings that have to be looked after or cared for and whose affection is needed to fulfill a man’s life. Certain women may even embrace this idea of ‘protection’ as valuing instead of controlling (Viki, Abrams, & Hutchison, 2003). This essay discusses how benevolent sexism and hostile sexism work together to maintain and reinforce existing gender status quo. The Boon and Bane of Chivalry Benevolent sexism—even though similarly limiting to women as hostile sexism—works to appease women’s opposition to deeply embedded gender inequality due to its appealing principle. By portraying women in a positive way and guaranteeing benefits to women who are capable of associating themselves with a strong, influential, powerful male defender, benevolent sexism melts down women’s opposition into patriarchy. Women who rely on men for their security, happiness, and comfort are less able to question or defy men’s authority or to seek their own individuality and freedom. Generally, women who embrace and support long-established gender relations become romantic objects, mothers, and wives. As a consequence, they experience benevolent sexism outlooks, behavior, and treatment. On the contrary, women who are seen as defying or robbing men’s control become objects of hostile sexism (Viki et al., 2003). Although dividing women’s images into separate female categories, hostile and benevolent sexism integrate reward and punishment mechanisms and could work in balancing ways to sustain and perpetuate gender inequality. Classifying women into categories also directly results in seclusion among females, making them more fragile and divided rather than strong and unified (Viki et al., 2005). Glick and Fiske (2001) stated that benevolent and hostile sexism are an “interlocking set of beliefs that reflects a system of rewards (benevolent sexism) and punishment (hostile sexism)” (as cited in Becker & Wright, 2011, 63) and “complementary tools of control, the stick and the carrot, that motivate women to accept a sexist system” (Becker & Wright, 2011, 63). The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory (ASI) is an instrument that was created to evaluate or measure the extent of benevolent and hostile sexism. By means of this tool, researchers have found out that hostile sexism and benevolent sexism is directly correlated (Viki et al., 2003, 533). Thus, people who exhibit high levels of hostile sexism are also prone to manifest high levels of benevolent sexism. In spite of these contradictory evidences, Glick and Fiske (1996) argue that hostile sexism and benevolent sexism have “… opposing evaluative implications, fulfilling the literal meaning of ambivalence” (as cited in Viki et al., 2003, 533). According to them, those who embrace ambivalent sexism resolve their indecision or uncertainty by categorizing women into ‘bad’ and ‘good’ subtypes (Viki et al., 2003, 533). The study of Viki and colleagues (2003) contributes to knowledge about ambivalent sexism by presenting reliable and valid proof that benevolent sexism is associated with traditional views of how women must act or conduct themselves during courtship or dating. Their findings also substantiate the findings of Glick and colleagues that benevolent sexism is associated with favorable assessments of women in conventional gender roles and also confirm the assumption of Glick and Fiske that even though benevolent sexism is personally favorable in terms of feelings or emotions, it is limiting or constraining toward women (Viki et al., 2003). Simply put, empirical evidence confirms the oppressive and restrictive impact of benevolent sexism to women, despite its captivating appeal. Consistent with such description of benevolent sexism as possibly rewarding, researchers have discovered that benevolent sexism is generally not identified by women or men as a manifestation of gender inequality or discrimination (Becker & Wright, 2011). In fact, even though women persistently oppose hostile sexism more firmly than their male counterparts, they frequently express more intense validation or acceptance of benevolent sexism in comparison with men. Women also promote or accept benevolent sexism more intensely when it is aimed at themselves than when it is aimed at an unfavorably labeled subcategory of women. Moreover, women prefer a benevolent sexist male over a hostile sexist male or even over a nonsexist male (Becker & Wright, 2011, 63). Benevolent sexism may not just offer individual gains through chivalry but also seem to have gains for females as a social group. According to Jost and Kay (2005), benevolent sexism joins forces with hostile sexism to reinforce system defense intentions because it raises an image of every gender as having advantages and strong points that compensate for its disadvantages and weak points (as cited in Becker & Wright, 2011, 63). Hence, according to Becker and Wright (2011), benevolent sexism works as a form of reassuring, calming, and comforting mechanism, encouraging women to feel or think more favorably about a group environment that would under other conditions result merely in unfavorable feelings and thoughts. In the meantime, Viki and colleagues (2005) stated that the patriarchal approach to crime indicates that societal acceptance of gender stereotypes and consequent chauvinist outlooks could significantly influence people’s assessment of women offenders. Even though earlier researchers have a tendency to identify sexism as antagonistic approaches toward women, Glick and Fiske (1996) suggested that hostile sexism could be in harmony or exist together with individually favorable sexist outlooks toward women. In a chain of studies exploring assessments of victims of sexual violence, Abrams and colleagues reported that benevolent sexism is directly correlated with greater blame or condemnation of the associate rape victim for her victimization (Viki et al., 2005, 111). The research showed that this phenomenon is motivated by the belief of benevolent sexists that the associate rape victim had conducted herself unbecomingly. Conclusions In summary, in spite of the obviously demeaning, denigrating implication of benevolent sexism, they also can be viewed as communicating or manifesting favorable, encouraging impact on women, can be viewed by both sexes as conferring group and individual gains for women, and hence can empower or encourage women to be open or agreeable to the perpetuation of the prevailing gender relations. References Becker, J. & Wright, S. (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(1), 62-77. Viki, G.T., Abrams, D., & Hutchison, P. (2003). The ‘True’ Romantic: Benevolent Sexism and Paternalistic Chivalry. Sex Roles, 9(10), 533-537. Viki, G.T., Massey, K., & Masser, B. (2005). When chivalry backfires: benevolent sexism and attitudes toward Myra Hindley. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 10, 109-120. Read More