Feminine Charm

Abstract

The authors examined feminine charm, an impression management technique available to women that combines friendliness with flirtation. They asked whether feminine charm resolves the impression management dilemma facing women who simultaneously pursue task (i.e., economic) and social goals in negotiations. They compared women's social and economic consequences after using feminine charm versus a neutral interaction style. They hypothesized that feminine charm would create positive impressions of its users, thus partially mitigating the social penalties women negotiators often incur. They also expected that the degree to which females were perceived as flirtatious (signaling a concern for self), rather than merely friendly (signaling a concern for other), would predict better economic deals for females. Hypotheses were supported across a correlational study and three experiments. Feminine charm has costs and benefits spanning economic and social measures. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

Sex as a source of power? Backlash against self-sexualizing women

“…Third, the findings contradict the common belief that sexualization is “empowering” for women; even though it sometimes bestows advantages (Kray & Locke, 2008; Watkins et al, 2013), it can also incur disadvantages (Cahoon & Edmonds, 1989; Glick et al, 2005) that are explained by the SIH. It appears that women are rewarded for sexualized behaviors if they are perceived as gratifying men (Kray & Locke, 2008; Kray et al, 2012; Watkins et al, 2013), whereas backlash is evoked when sexualization is perceived as a strategy for enhancing women’s power (Experiment 3; see also Cahoon & Edmonds, 1989; Watkins et al, 2013). Consequently, the present research is more consistent with arguments that self-sexualization reinforces male dominance rather than “empowering” women (e.g., Gill, 2012; Smolak & Murnen, 2011).…”

“…However, people believe that self-sexualization positively empowers women, for two reasons. First, people learn from the media and their peers that women are rewarded for using their “feminine charms” (Levin & Kilbourne, 2008; Smolak & Murnen, 2011), and these rewards can extend to the workplace (Kray & Locke, 2008; Kray, Locke, & van Zant, 2012; Watkins, Smith, & Aquino, 2013). Second, female self-sexualization has evolved toward agency—a deliberate choice to display assertiveness, independence, and empowerment—rather than submissively yielding to male standards (e.g., Erchull & Liss, 2013; Gill, 2008, 2012; Lamb, Graling, & Wheeler, 2013; Lamb & Peterson, 2012; Liss, Erchull, & Ramsey, 2011).…”

Sizing Up Objects: The Effect of Diminutive Forms on Positive Mood, Value, and Size Judgments

“…Similarly to the use of diminutive forms to refer to objects, these forms can ambiguously refer to size as well as to affection ( Haman, 2003 ; Kray et al, 2012 ). Since physical size has actually been shown to be considered as a cue for social status ( Campbell, 1976 ; Schubert et al, 2013 ), referring to human beings using diminutive forms could generate conflicting representations, which in turn, could be grounded on social dimensions (such as sexism, for example).…”

He, She, “They” at the Bargaining Table… Woman, Man or Just Negotiators? A Critical Review on Gender Ideologies in Mixed-Gender Negotiations

“…The literature on feminine charm would however disagree. Kray, Locke, and Van Zant ( 2012 ), for instance, show that when women negotiators use feminine charm they are perceived as more effective, having greater understanding of their negotiating partner’s interests, and enhancing the positive mood of their interaction partner. Moreover, depending on its balance of friendliness and flirtatiousness, feminine charm has the potential to influence the way partners divide resources in mixed-gender negotiations ( Kray et al, 2012 ).…”