Content area
Full Text
Sex Roles (2010) 62:583601 DOI 10.1007/s11199-010-9770-x
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Ambivalent Sexism in Close Relationships: (Hostile) Power and (Benevolent) Romance Shape Relationship Ideals
Tiane L. Lee & Susan T. Fiske & Peter Glick &
Zhixia Chen
Published online: 30 April 2010# Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010
Abstract Gender-based structural power and heterosexual dependency produce ambivalent gender ideologies, with hostility and benevolence separately shaping close-relationship ideals. The relative importance of romanticized benevolent versus more overtly power-based hostile sexism, however, may be culturally dependent. Testing this, northeast US (N=311) and central Chinese (N=290) undergraduates rated prescriptions and proscriptions (ideals) for partners and completed Ambivalent Sexism and Ambivalence toward Men Inventories (ideologies). Multiple regressions analyses conducted on group-specific relationship ideals revealed that benevolent ideologies predicted partner ideals, in both countries, especially for US cultures romance-oriented relationships. Hostile attitudes predicted mens ideals, both American and Chinese, suggesting both societies dominant-partner advantage.
Keywords Ambivalent sexism . Close relationships . Gender roles . Culture . Power . Romance
Introduction
On the surface, sexism and close relationships do not intersect. Common sense dictates that successful heterosexual relationships are suffused with love and caring, not sexism. The current research confronts this assumption by exploring how sexism not only affects close relationships, but is integral to venerated and subjectively positive cultural ideals about the perfect mate. In common with other sexism theories, ambivalent sexism theory (AST; Glick and Fiske 1996, 1997, 1999) posits that women often face overt and unfriendly prejudices (such as hostility toward women who occupy nontraditional roles), but also that men face reflected hostility, the resentment directed toward those with greater power. Hostile attitudes represent blatant and antagonistic attempts at influencing who male and female partners are supposed to be. In addition, however, ambivalent sexism posits that heterosexual interdependence creates subjectively benevolent, but still sexist, justifications for gender inequality. These benevolent attitudes, which idealize women as nurturing subordinates and men as assertive providers, represent the soft power people use to control their partner. AST suggests that hostility and benevolence work together, reinforcing gender inequality, even in peoples most personal relationships. This study uniquely examines sexism for both genders relationship ideals in the same study.
AST suggests that benevolent gender attitudes exert insidious influences where people least suspect, namely, in close relationships, affecting both...