Ambivalent Sexism and Attitudes Toward Wife Abuse in Turkey and Brazil

Abstract

Men and women in Turkey and Brazil completed the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory (Glick & Fiske, 1996) and measures of attitudes about wife abuse. In both nations hostile sexism (HS) and benevolent sexism (BS) positively correlated with attitudes that legitimize abuse. Regression analyses revealed that HS accounted for unique variance, but BS (once HS was controlled) was unrelated to wife abuse attitudes. These results: (a) add to the evidence for the cross-cultural validity of ambivalent sexism, (b) suggest that HS supports the justification of violence against wives, and (c) imply that the ostensible protectiveness of BS is contingent, failing to shield women from abuse if they are deemed to have challenged a husband's authority or violated conventional gender roles.Men who hold favorable attitudes about the use of force and coercion in relationships are more likely to resort to their actual use (Malamuth, 1986). Given the disturbing prevalence of domestic abuse, it is important to understand the precursors of such attitudes, which include sexist beliefs about women. Lonsway and Fitzgerald (1995) have suggested, however, that it is not sexism itself (traditional attitudes about women's rights and roles) that predicts domestic violence, but hostility toward women, which covaries with most measures of sexism. Recently, Fiske (1996, 2001) have developed a measure, the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory (ASI), which distinguishes between sexist beliefs that are subjectively positive versus negative toward women. Benevolent sexism (BS) is a subjectively affectionate and protective attitude that idealizes women in traditional roles, whereas hostile sexism (HS) expresses antagonism toward women who are perceived as violating traditional roles or challenging male dominance.Although research relating HS and BS to attitudes about domestic violence is in its infancy, initial evidence with an undergraduate sample in Turkey suggests that both HS and BS correlate with more favorable attitudes toward the use of physical force, though BS drops out as a predictor once HS is controlled (Sakallı, 2001). The relationship of HS to attitudes that legitimate wife abuse is unsurprising. In contrast, BS might be expected to exert a prophylactic effect because it promises male protectiveness and affection, especially toward women to whom men are romantically attached. This promise of protection, however, may ring hollow. In a large cross-cultural study involving 19 nations, Glick et al. (2000) found that HS and BS tend to be positively correlated, both (to a modest degree) at the individual level and (quite strongly) at the national level of analysis. Furthermore, across nations, both HS and BS scores are inversely related to gender equality. These findings suggest that HS and BS are complementary tools of control, with BS representing the "carrot" women are offered for complying to traditional roles and HS the "stick" that threatens women with punishment should they not defer to men.More specifically, Glick, Diebold, Bailey-Werner, and Zhu (19...

Measuring Acceptability of Intimate Partner Violence Against Women: Development and Validation of the A-IPVAW Scale

“…Our results also revealed that respondents with higher levels of acceptability presented higher scores of ambivalent sexism, in particular in the hostile sexism subscale. Sexism has also been previously related to attitudes justifying IPVAW (e.g., Glick et al, 2002;Herrera, Expósito & Moya, 2012;Herrero et al, 2017;Valor-Segura, Expósito, & Moya, 2011).…”

Generalists versus specialists: Toward a typology of batterers in prison

“…Research on ambivalent sexism has shown that those who are high in hostile sexism are more tolerant of intimate partner violence (Glick, Sakalli-Ugurlu, Ferreira, & Souza, 2002) while benevolent sexism have been related to victim-blaming attitudes (Viki & Abrams, 2002) toward women. These attitudes serve as an anchorage that guides the information interpretation, supporting preconceptions against women (Fariña, Arce, & Novo, 2002), which contributes to sustain offending (Maruna, 2004).…”

Psychometric Properties of the Inventory of Beliefs about Intimate Partner Violence (IBIPV)

“…Regarding sexist beliefs, hostile sexism (legitimisation of violence against women challenging the power of men) supports the justification of IPV, victim blaming and exonerating perpetrators (Glick, Sakalli-Ugurlu, Ferreira, & de Souza, 2002;Sakalli, 2001). So-called benevolent sexism also considers IPV legitimate when women do not fulfil their traditional roles (Glick et al, 2002;Valor-Segura et al, 2008;Valor-Segura et al, 2011).…”