Male Acceptance of Affirmative Action Programs for Women: The Results of Altruistic or Egoistical Motives?

Abstract

It has been argued in the past that self-interest plays an important role in the reaction of men to affirmative action programs that are designed to promote women in non-traditional jobs. In the main, this hypothesis has received limited support apparently because the conception of self-interest was understood in terms of one's private well-being. It is clear, however, that self-interest also refers to group status or position in society. In this study self-interest was measured through the concept of collective relative deprivation. The effects of relative deprivation on behalf of others, and the procedure employed to implement affirmative action programs on men's attitudes toward these programs were also assessed. One hundred and forty-five male managers or professionals participated in the study. According to predictions, results show that collective relative deprivation and preferential treatment for women have negative effects on affirmative action attitudes. Findings are thus supportive of the broader conception of self-interest and relative deprivation arguments. Finally, the positive link between relative deprivation on behalf of others and affirmative action indicates that men who disapprove of sex inequalities support these programs.

Are Men Always Picked Over Women? The Effects of Employment Equity Directives on Selection Decisions

“…Research has also shown that support for employment equity programs is strongest when it involves elimination of discrimination (i.e., extending fair treatment to others, Beaton and Tougas, 2001;Veilleux and Tougas, 1989), less support when it emphasized recruitment and training (Kravitz and Platania, 1993), and clear opposition when it involves preferential treatment (Bobocel et al, 1998;Son Hing et al, 2002). Kravitz and Klineberg (2000) have shown that people react to different types of affirmative action policies, depending on the perceived fairness of the affirmative action practices.…”

“…For example, Tougas and colleagues (Tougas et al, 1991;Veilleux and Tougas, 1989) found support for affirmative action on gender inequalities from both women and men. On the other hand, Fletcher and Chalmers (1991) found low levels of support for employment equity among Canadian citizens, organizational decision makers, and lawmakers.…”

Why do citizens want to keep refugees out? Threats, fairness and hostile norms in the treatment of asylum seekers

“…Members of advantaged groups who feel that their status position is insecure may perceive that exclusionary measures are more fair than group members who feel secure (Platow, Wenzel, & Nolan, 2003;Tyler & Smith, 1999;Veilleux & Tougas, 1989). Advantaged group members may also selectively perceive fairness to legitimize their status, either consciously (e.g.…”

Justice and power: when will justice concerns encourage the advantaged to support policies which redistribute economic resources and the disadvantaged to willingly obey the law?

“…Just as feelings of injustice may motivate participation in collective rebellion and riots (Crawford and Naditch, 1970;Gurr, 1970;Sears and McConahay, 1970), feelings of injustice also may motivate support for constructive and pro-active political attitudes and behaviours (Veilleux and Tougas, 1989). In fact, the recognition of injustice might motivate the advantaged to support policies designed to achieve justice before the disadvantaged pursue the often devastating alternative of collective violence or rebellion, just as, in experiments, it leads people to forego advantages they could obtain Spitzer, 1982, 1985;Kahneman, Knetsch and Thaler, 1986).…”