Gender-Blind Sexism and Rape Myth Acceptance

Stoll, Laurie Cooper; Lilley, Terry G.; Pinter, Kelly

doi:10.1177/1077801216636239

Cited by 37 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The most plausible link between organizational culture and GBDH seems to be the endorsement of sexist beliefs and attitudes. This is supported by evidence that sexism endorsement encourages GBDH attitudes and behavior (see Pryor et al, 1993; Fitzgerald et al, 1997; Stockdale et al, 1999; Stoll et al, 2016). The literature on sexism has mainly adopted a binary conception of gender (see Carrotte et al, 2016).…”

Section: Antecedents Of Gbdh In the Workplacementioning

confidence: 88%

“…Modern and neo sexism define the denial of gender inequality in society and resentment against measures that support women as a group (Campbell et al, 1997; Morrison et al, 1999). Gender-blind sexism refers to the denial of the existence of sexism against women (Stoll et al, 2016). Benevolent sexism defines the endorsement of an idealized vision of women that is used to reinforce their submission (Glick et al, 2000).…”

Section: Antecedents Of Gbdh In the Workplacementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Better Together: A Model for Women and LGBTQ Equality in the Workplace

Johnson

Otto

2019

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Much has been achieved in terms of human rights for women and people of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transsexual, and queer (LGBTQ) community. However, human resources management (HRM) initiatives for gender equality in the workplace focus almost exclusively on white, heterosexual, cisgender women, leaving the problems of other gender, and social minorities out of the analysis. This article develops an integrative model of gender equality in the workplace for HRM academics and practitioners. First, it analyzes relevant antecedents and consequences of gender-based discrimination and harassment (GBDH) in the workplace. Second, it incorporates the feminist, queer, and intersectional perspectives in the analysis. Third, it integrates literature findings about women and the LGBTQ at work, making the case for an inclusive HRM. The authors underscore the importance of industry-university collaboration and offer a starters' toolkit that includes suggestions for diagnosis, intervention, and applied research on GBDH. Finally, avenues for future research are identified to explore gendered practices that hinder the career development of women and the LGBTQ in the workplace.

show abstract

Section: Antecedents Of Gbdh In the Workplacementioning

confidence: 88%

Section: Antecedents Of Gbdh In the Workplacementioning

confidence: 99%

Better Together: A Model for Women and LGBTQ Equality in the Workplace

Johnson

Otto

2019

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Akin to racist dog-whistling, bitch-whistling portrays women as bitches without uttering the word. It affords plausible deniability but requires people to have a shared understanding of what “a bitch” is—thus bitch-whistling likely flourishes in cultures marked by overt bitchification (Kleinman et al 2009) and covert “gender-blind sexism” (Stoll, Lilley, and Pinter 2017). We also distinguish definitional bitch-whistling which involves using cultural definitions of “the bitch” (e.g., untrustworthy, manipulative, vindictive) to describe women and narrative bitch-whistling which involves telling stories that portray women as possessing such characteristics.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bitchifying Hillary: Trump Supporters’ Vilification of Clinton during the 2016 Presidential Election

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Based on fieldwork and interviews during the run-up to the 2016 election, we examine how Trump supporters vilified Hillary Clinton as a bitch. We first analyze how Trump rally attendees collaborated to bitchify Clinton (e.g., through displays, chants, speaker–audience exchanges) in ways that fostered emotional bonding, a politically incorrect situational definition, and shared identities as Trump supporters. We then examine how interviewees constructed narratives that more subtly rooted her alleged posturing for power, profiteering, and evading justice in her bitch-like personality. To distinguish between explicit bitchifying—which was common at the rallies—and implicit characterization—which was common during the formal interviews—we develop the concept of “bitch-whistling,” which frames but not names women as bitches. We conclude by exploring how this study contributes to understanding Trump’s 2016 victory, research on gender and politics, and political narratives more generally.

show abstract

“…Sexism. Attitudes that devalue women and assign them inferior roles and status based simply on their gender are expected to influence a person to place more responsibility on sexual assault victims and assign less severe punishments to perpetrators (Stoll, Lilley, & Pinter, 2017).…”

Section: Role Of Attitudes and Beliefs In Deciding Just Sanctionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…. Stoll, Lilley, and Pinter (2017) devised a "gender-blind" sexism inventory based on concepts from several prior sexism scales that included 11 items (e.g., "Men are naturally more aggressive than women.") with a 4-point response format ranging from (Strongly Disagree=1; Strongly Agree=4).…”

Section: Gender-blind Sexism Inventory (Sexism)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Are College Students’ Attitudes Related to Their Application of Sanctions for Campus Sexual Assault Cases?

Chahal

Follingstad

et al. 2020

J Interpers Violence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With growing attention to adjudication of campus sexual assault cases, more is known regarding students’ views of sexual assault, but little the literature focuses on how students perceive “justice” in terms of assigning sanctions or guilt/responsibility for such cases. The present study focused on understanding whether college students’ preformed attitudes and beliefs were associated with the severity of sanctions they applied across a range of sexual assault cases as well as their assignments of guilt and responsibility to the parties involved. To determine students’ attitudes and beliefs mediating effects on sanction choices, five scales (i.e., rape myth acceptance, downplaying the severity of rape, sexism, just world beliefs, and right-wing authoritarianism) were adapted and used for this project. College students ( n = 846) responded to one of four versions of a randomly distributed survey each containing eight vignettes varied to represent levels of 14 factors employed because of their relevance to campus sexual assault cases. Across all versions, sexism was associated with increased responsibility given to the victim. In addition, stronger endorsement of both downplaying significance of rape and rape myth acceptance scales were associated with giving a milder sanction to the perpetrator and increased responsibility and guilt assigned to the victim. Just world beliefs and right-wing authoritarianism associations were inconsistent across the four versions, suggesting these beliefs were situation-specific. Preformed attitudes that are more directly related to the context of sexual assault influenced the designation of sanctions applied to perpetrators and perceptions of guilt and responsibility. Findings are discussed in terms of implications for research and prevention programming.

show abstract

Gender-Blind Sexism and Rape Myth Acceptance

Cited by 37 publications

References 56 publications

Better Together: A Model for Women and LGBTQ Equality in the Workplace

Better Together: A Model for Women and LGBTQ Equality in the Workplace

Bitchifying Hillary: Trump Supporters’ Vilification of Clinton during the 2016 Presidential Election

Are College Students’ Attitudes Related to Their Application of Sanctions for Campus Sexual Assault Cases?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About