Changing Versus Protecting the Status Quo: Why Men and Women Engage in Different Types of Action on Behalf of Women
- 612 Downloads
We investigate women’s and men’s willingness to engage in action on behalf of women, and we identify two distinct categories of behavior: action that aims to challenge gender inequality (feminist action) and action that aims to protect women from violence (protective action). Three online studies were conducted. For each study, a U.S. community sample was recruited. In Study 1 (n = 602), women reported greater intentions to engage in feminist action than men did. Men, however, were just as willing as women to participate in protective action. In Study 2 (n = 726), we replicated these gender differences and found that protective action was positively predicted by benevolent sexism among men. In Study 3 (N = 582), we investigated why women reported greater intentions to engage in feminist action compared to men. We found that women were more aware of gender inequality, which was associated with identification as a feminist, and through this, intentions to engage in feminist action. Awareness of gender inequality also predicted intentions to engage in protective action among women. Men, however, were less aware of gender inequality, which was associated with the belief that feminist action leads to women having more rights than men do and subsequently greater willingness to participate in protective action. Our results can assist social policymakers and activists to develop appropriate campaigns for gender equality if their goal is to challenge, rather than protect women from, the status quo.
KeywordsSexism Gender Feminism Collective action Feminist consciousness Zero-sum
The third author (Fiona Kate Barlow) is funded by an Australian Research Council Future Fellowship (FT150100147).
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interests
There are no financial or non-financial conflict of interests for this project.
Informed consent was received from human participants for this project.
- Abrams, D., Viki, G. T., Masser, B., & Bohner, G. (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. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3522.214.171.124.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Becker, J. C., Glick, P., Ilic, M., & Bohner, G. (2011). Damned if she does, damned if she doesn’t: Consequences of accepting versus confronting patronizing help for the female target and male actor. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41, 761–773. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.823.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Duncan, L. E. (2012). The psychology of collective action. In K. Deaux & M. Snyder (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of personality and social psychology (pp. 781–803). New York: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195398991.001.0001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Eagly, A. H., Wood, W., & Diekman, A. B. (2000). Social role theory of sex differences and similarities: A current appraisal. In T. Eckes & H. M. Trautner (Eds.), The developmental social psychology of gender (pp. 123–174). New York: Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410605245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Gough, D. (2012, December 7). Gym and tonic: Women fight back. The age. Retrieved from http://www.theage.com.au.
- Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York: Guildford Press.Google Scholar
- Lallo, M. (2012, October 20). Thousands march to reclaim the night. The Age. Retrieved from http://www.theage.com.au.
- Shnabel, N., Bar-Anan, Y., Kende, A., Bareket, O., & Lazar, Y. (2016). Help to perpetrate traditional gender roles: Benevolent sexism increases engagement in dependency-oriented cross-grender helping. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 110, 55–75. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000037.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- van Zomeren, M., Postmes, T., & Spears, R. (2008). Toward an integrative social identity model of collective action: A quantitative research synthesis of three socio-psychological perspectives. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 504–535. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.134.4.504.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar