It's Just a Joke: Reactions to and Justifications for Gender Role

It’s Just a Joke: Reactions to and Justifications for Gender Role Stereotypes in Advertisements Natalie Peters, Lucie Holmgreen, and Debra Oswald* Marquette University

ABSTRACT. Advertisements are a common venue by which sexist stereotypes are disseminated, and these stereotypes often reinforce the link between women and the domestic role. Gender-based humor is a particular strategy that advertisements may use, allowing for the perpetuation of sexist stereotypes under the mentality that “a joke is just a joke.” The present study provided a content analysis of responses to a pair of trouser care instructions reading, “Give it to your woman, it’s her job.” We aimed to determine the ways in which online commentators responded to this statement. Comments were, foremost, labeled as either endorsement or dissent, and those characterized as endorsement of the joke were categorized by one or more of the following themes: hostile sexism toward women, benevolent sexism toward women, hostile sexism toward men, benevolent sexism toward men, cavalier humor beliefs, denial of sexism, and social dominance orientation. Results indicated that most individuals (68.5%) responded positively to the statement either by expressing perceived humor, affirming the validity of the presented stereotype, or exhibiting hostility toward women who took offense. Furthermore, responses to the label were often characterized by cavalier humor beliefs (25.1%) as well as hostile sexism toward women (10.8%). These justifications likely serve to reaffirm the presence of sexist prejudice in a climate that might otherwise provide sanctions against offensive remarks. In addition, it is likely that many of the comments served to deter men and women who might otherwise attempt to challenge the status quo.

espite women’s economic, social, and (Bem, 1974). Such stereotypes have the potential political gains in recent decades, the to relegate women to domestic roles and constrain Dassociation of women with housekeeping their behavior (Glick & Fiske, 2001). and caretaking responsibilities has stagnated. Gender role stereotyping is prominent in Throughout the world, women continue to report media and advertisements wherein companies spending greater proportions of time on housework rely on socially prescribed expectations to sell than men (Lachance-Grzela & Bouchard, 2010; their products (Infanger, Bosak, & Sczesny, 2011). FALL 2015 Ruppanner, 2010). Because women are often When framed in the context of humor, such stereotyped as communal and nurturing, they are stereotypes may evade criticism and perpetuate PSI CHI JOURNAL OF often believed to have a natural propensity for prejudice (Ford, Boxer, Armstrong, & Edel, 2008). PSYCHOLOGICAL household tasks such as cleaning and doing laundry To date, several studies have examined the content RESEARCH

160 COPYRIGHT 2015 BY PSI CHI, THE INTERNATIONAL HONOR SOCIETY IN PSYCHOLOGY (VOL. 20, NO. 3/ISSN 2164-8204) *Faculty mentor Peters, Holmgreen, and Oswald | It’s Just a Joke of gender-based stereotypes in the media as well (Stankiewicz & Rosseli, 2008). Stereotyped depic- as how these stereotypes influence perceptions tions of women in advertisements are often of both women and men. For example, Eisend’s effective marketing strategies. For instance, (2010) meta-analysis illustrated the ways in which Infanger and colleagues (2011) found that adver- advertisements “mirror” gender role expectations tisements portraying women with communal traits within a particular cultural context, yet provided (e.g., holding an infant) were evaluated more little evidence that stereotyped advertisements positively than were advertisements portraying exacerbate prejudicial values. On the other hand, agentic women (e.g., businesswomen). several researchers have indicated that exposure Another tactic used in advertising is humor, to stereotypes reinforces negative attitudes toward which can increase an individual’s liking of women and prevents advances in their social a product based on positive association. For status (Heilman, 2001; Romero-Sánchez, Durán, instance, Strick, Van Baaren, Holland, and Van Carretero-Dios, Megías, & Moya, 2009; Tiggemann Knippen(2009) found that products linked to a & McGill, 2004). humorous cartoon were evaluated more positively Although some researchers have analyzed in a subsequent assessment. Similarly, Krishnan responses to sexist humor (Ford et al., 2008; Ford, and Chakravarti (2003) found that humor, even Wentzel, & Lorion, 2001; Greenwood & Isbell, when completely irrelevant to the claim made by 2002), there has been a lack of research in the the advertisement, increased later recognition of area of gender-based humor specifically within the the target product. Humor may elicit the atten- context of advertising and product promotion. The tion of the viewer and increase positive emotions, present study attempted to fill this gap, focusing thereby allowing them to look upon the product on responses to humor as a marketing strategy. or company that is being advertised more favor- Specifically, the following questions were taken into ably (Chan, 2011; Eisend, 2011). As Chan (2011) account: Upon hearing gender-based humor, do stipulated, humorous advertisements may have people tend to respond with agreement, dissent, or added persuasive effects, increasing the likelihood indifference? What arguments or rationalizations that a person will purchase a product or solicit a do people draw upon when confronted with gender company’s services. Indeed, the lighthearted aspect role stereotypes? In light of the mirror perspective of humor may allow for successful advertisement (i.e., that advertisements convey the gendered through the elicitation of positive emotions and attitudes of a particular culture), these questions product recognition. were believed to be particularly salient in that they reveal predominant perceptions regarding Derogatory Humor women’s roles in society (Eisend, 2010). Consider- Offensive humor may be used as an attention- ing the evidence that stereotypes may exacerbate grabbing strategy, but often at a great price. In negative attitudes toward women, understanding addition to circumscribing social roles for women, the ways that people respond to this type of humor sexist stereotypes may further hostility and nega- can lead to a greater understanding of the media’s tive attitudes toward women. Indeed, derogatory role in the persistence of sexism. humor may provide a venue in which people can more safely express their prejudices (Ford Stereotypes and Humor in Advertisements et al., 2008). For instance, Greenwood and Isbell Advertisements may rely on stereotypes to com- (2002) found that men who responded positively pensate for a lack of time and space, providing to misogynistic jokes were especially likely to be viewers with the most basic information possible. hostile toward women (Greenwood & Isbell, 2002). Numerous studies have identified advertisements The propensity to find humor in sexist jokes may as a source of gender role stereotypes. In advertise- vary by sex; in their study, Diaconu-Muresan and ments, women are often portrayed as attractive, Stewart (2010) found that women exhibited more young, nurturing, and childlike (Kim & Lowry, negative responses to sexist jokes than did men. 2005). On the other hand, men are often over- Furthermore, participants who endorsed a feminist represented as authority figures and are more identity were less likely to respond positively to sex- likely to be shown using logic (Monk-Turner, Kouts, ist jokes than were those low in feminist identity. FALL 2015 Parris, & Webb, 2007). In addition, men appear in Such results indicated that the propensity to find PSI CHI advertisements more often, and when women are humor in these types of jokes may be mediated by JOURNAL OF portrayed, they are often sexualized or victimized gender and feminist identity. PSYCHOLOGICAL RESEARCH

Sexist humor has the potential to reinforce Hostility toward men reflects women’s and some negative perceptions of women as well as internal- men’s anger that men hold greater power and ized sexism. For instance, Ford et al. (2008) found dominate women. However, this hostility does not that individuals exposed to sexist humor were question the status difference, but rather asserts less likely to contribute financially to a women’s that men possess inherent traits such as aggression organization when exposed to a sexist joke; this that result in their greater power and status. On suggests that exposure to sexist humor may detract the other hand, benevolent sexism toward men from feminist causes. In addition, sexism and sexist upholds expectations that women should take jokes have been linked to rape myth acceptance care of men because men are incapable of caring (e.g., the belief that women who experience sexual for themselves. Both forms of sexism reinforce assault are deserving of their trauma) among those gender inequality, providing justification for who hear them (Romero-Sánchez et al., 2009). such inequality based on what are believed to be As the aforementioned evidence has indicated, inherent differences between men and women sexist humor may reinforce hostility toward women, (Glick & Fiske, 1999). subsequently undermining their status, safety, and Social Dominance Orientation (SDO). Sim- well-being. ilarly, SDO, a theory popularized by Pratto, Sidanius, Stallworth, and Bertram (1994), justifies Justification of Sexism societal inequality by stating that such inequality Of key interest to the present study was an under- is a natural and desirable aspect of social order standing of how people respond to sexist humor and is impossible to avoid. SDO is associated with in advertisements. We were particularly interested attitudes of racism and nationalism. In addition, in the types of justifications and responses that those higher in SDO are less likely to endorse social people draw on when they view a sexist advertise- programs that advocate for the rights of women or ment. Several theories seem particularly useful LGBT-identified individuals. As Pratto et al. (1994) for understanding how sexism can be justified, demonstrated, men tend to score higher on mea- minimized, and supported in current day society. sures of SDO than women, an imbalance that may Ambivalent sexism toward women. Ambivalent reflect the reluctance among high-status group sexism, introduced by Glick and Fiske (2001), members (e.g., men, the wealthy) to relinquish emanates from the fact that men and women are the benefits afforded to their positions of power. believed to be dependent on one another despite Cavalier humor beliefs. Some may claim that the fact that women are believed to be the lesser offensive humor is only intended to evoke benign sex. This form of sexism has two components: hos- laughter. That is, such jokes are not believed to tile and benevolent sexism. Hostile sexism toward reflect nor promote prejudice. Such claims, labeled women follows a pattern of contempt, criticizing by Hodson, Rush, and MacInnis (2010) as cavalier women who defy traditional gender roles. In humor beliefs, deny the potential for racist or sexist contrast, benevolent sexism adopts a seemingly humor to perpetuate social inequality. However, positive perception of women by praising their cavalier humor beliefs are positively correlated communal nature and purity. Nevertheless, benevo- with SDO as well as with racism (Hodson et al., lent sexism reinforces women’s inferior status by 2010). These findings seem to indicate that a joke emphasizing their dependent nature. As Glick and is not “just a joke,” and may allow joke tellers to Fiske (2001) noted, hostile and benevolent sexism disseminate racist and sexist ideas without any are positively correlated, and both correlate with negative ramifications. support for gender inequality. Cross-culturally, The aforementioned theories attempt to char- men tend to endorse hostile sexism to a greater acterize relationships between social groups and extent than do women. However, women are more how individuals attempt to create and reinforce a likely to endorse benevolent sexism than hostile system of inequality. Based on this literature, it is sexism, and the sex differences for endorsement likely that elements of each theory can be found in of benevolent sexism are much smaller. justifications for sexist humor and provide insight Ambivalent sexism toward men. In a comple- into how gender-based inequality is reinforced. FALL 2015 mentary theory to that of ambivalent sexism toward women, Glick and Fiske (1999) proposed Current Study PSI CHI JOURNAL OF that ambivalently sexist attitudes toward men also Previous studies have indicated that advertisements PSYCHOLOGICAL serve to uphold traditional gender role stereotypes. often rely on stereotypes and humor to sell a RESEARCH

162 COPYRIGHT 2015 BY PSI CHI, THE INTERNATIONAL HONOR SOCIETY IN PSYCHOLOGY (VOL. 20, NO. 3/ISSN 2164-8204) Peters, Holmgreen, and Oswald | It’s Just a Joke product (Strick et al., 2009). In addition, research MSN (n = 2,310) and CNN (n = 1,469) each had has indicated that sexist humor is pervasive and large numbers of responders. Thus, 135 MSN prominent among individuals who hold implicitly comments and 184 CNN comments were randomly prejudiced attitudes (Greenwood & Isbell, 2007). selected from larger comment pools. Only the first However, there has been a lack of research pertain- published response was used for each user, and ing to justifications of sexist humor in the context direct responses to other users were eliminated in of advertising and product promotion. The present order to maintain independence of observations. study aimed to determine such factors by evaluating This resulted in the 406 comments used in the responses to a controversial label located within a content analysis. pair of trousers distributed in the United Kingdom. Content analysis coding. Each comment was This pants label included the washing instructions, analyzed and assigned to one or more of the fol- “Give it to your woman . . . it’s her job,” reflecting lowing categories best representing its content: the common gender role stereotype that women hostile sexism toward women, benevolent sexism should be responsible for household chores. Of toward women, hostile sexism toward men, benevo- particular interest was how people responded to lent sexism toward men, cavalier humor beliefs, the stereotype embedded within these instruc- expression of perceived humor, agreement with the tions. To examine reactions to the pants label, we statement’s observation of gender roles, SDO, conducted a content analysis of comments posted denial of sexism altogether, and justification not in response to news stories about the label in order otherwise specified (see Table 1 for summary to understand reactions to and justifications for a of variables). Several comments were lengthy in sexist marketing strategy. response and had multiple components. These Numerous major media sources in the United responses were deemed to fall into multiple cat- States including ABC®, CNN®, MSNBC®, MSN®, egories, and were thus characterized by multiple and AOL News® published a photo of the washing codes. In the final dataset, 23.9% (n = 97) of the instructions on their respective websites, resulting comments contained information that was either in thousands of responses from readers. From irrelevant to the label or too ambiguous to interpret each source, reader comments were examined and and were thus labeled as uninterpretable. coded for their content. In coding for ambivalent sexism toward Three primary questions guided the research women, hostile sexism toward women was inferred process: foremost, to what extent do commentators through hostility toward women, especially through endorse or respond positively to the sexist label, claims that women were attempting to manipulate and to what extent do they dismiss or respond nega- men. Furthermore, comments were labeled as tively to the label? Furthermore, what is the most indicative of hostile sexism when antagonistic common reaction to or justification for the label? remarks appeared to be intended to force women In adopting the mirror perspective of gender role to conform to traditional gender roles. Sample stereotypes in advertising, the present study aimed comments included “Wow, this woman really needs to understand the predominant attitudes regarding some Prozac®” and “There appears to be allot [sic] women, especially with respect to their domesticity, of victimized drama queens posting.” On the other by evaluating responses to and justifications for the hand, comments were classified asbenevolent sexism joke used in this pants label (Eisend, 2010). if they idealized women, upheld claims of inherent sex-based differences, or stressed interdependence Methods between the sexes. Such responses resembled the Procedure following comment: “She washes my laundry all The comments selected for content analysis came the time. She doesn’t want to mow the yard, wash from five mainstream U.S. news sources including the cars, take out the trash, clean the boat or the ABC, CNN, MSNBC, AOL, and MSN. These news fish, etc...” sources were selected because they covered the For ambivalent sexism toward men, comments story of interest, have wide popularity, and most that involved hostile sexism toward men reflected have been rated as relatively politically neutral resentment of men’s superior social status as well 1 (Groseclose & Milyo, 2005) . AOL, ABC, and 1 In the 10 years since Groseclose and Milyo (2005) was FALL 2015 MSNBC each had relatively small numbers of published, some of these news outlets may no longer be seen as politically neutral. Liberal-oriented readers may be more PSI CHI respondents to the story on the article feedback likely to perceive sexism in this particular comment, thereby JOURNAL OF site (AOL n = 19; ABC n = 36; MSNBC n = 31). skewing results. We thank a reviewer for noting this point. PSYCHOLOGICAL RESEARCH

as references to negative male stereotypes (e.g., BS [politically correct bullsh*t] we’re subjected inability to take care of oneself or refusal to ask to when there are real issues to be dealt with” and for directions). Sample comments included “If “Men are men...and women are women. Let’s not you can pull your pants up, then you should be try to be the same!” able to wash them, pig,” and “All it says is that Any comment that expressed resistance to the guys are clueless.” Benevolent sexism toward men statement, for example, by stating that it was offen- was inferred by references to men’s dependent sive or in poor taste, was classified as anobjection nature and women’s maternal duties to care for to the label. For instance, one respondent stated, them (i.e., men’s incompetence in the domain “Apparently it is still OK to make condenscending of clothes-washing). Comments such as “I’ll do [sic] jokes about women, and men’s ignorance and anything for my man” and “Sometimes us women incompetence if that’s how you took it.” are just naturally better at the laundry then men” Some responses did not fit into any of the were categorized in this way. categories listed above, and were thus labeled Comments that were characteristic of cavalier justification not otherwise specified. Finally, comments humor beliefs emphasized the positive aspects of that were irrelevant or indiscernible were deemed joke-telling and minimized the potential social uninterpretable. consequences of stereotyped humor. They tended To ensure coder reliability, a subsample of to express sentiments such as “It’s just a joke” or 40 items was coded by two of the authors with “Lighten up.” a percent agreement of 75% (Cohen’s kappa In contrast, comments coded as reflecting = .69). Because this level of agreement has been a perception of humor in the statement merely determined to be “substantial” in the literature, stated that “It’s funny,” or “LOL [common Internet the remainder of the coding was completed by only shorthand for the phrase ‘laughing out loud’],” but one author (Landis & Koch, 1977). did not explicitly tie the humor to gender-based identity or social disparity. Therefore, perception Results of humor was distinguished from cavalier humor Overall, 7.63% (n = 31) of the comments expressed beliefs when the comment made no attempt to disagreement with or disapproval of the pants justify the perception of humor. label. In contrast, 68.5% (n = 278) of the com- Comments that were coded as agreement ments indicated some type of agreement with or provided a rationale for the accuracy of the pants justification for the label. A further 23.9% (n = 97) label. Such responses were distinguished from of the items were uninterpretable because of lack of other categories such as humor or SDO in that they relevance or because their content was too vague or basically reiterated the content of the label (i.e., “It unintelligible to be interpreted with confidence. A is her job”) without further elaborating on their chi-square test of goodness-of-fit comparing these reasoning for endorsing the stereotype. three code categories (i.e., agreement, disagree- Comments were labeled as a denial of sexism ment, or uninterpretable) indicated that all codes if they attempted to justify the statement by deny- were not equally responded to, X2(2, N = 406) ing the continued existence of sexist prejudice. = 241.70, p < .001. Representative comments included “Women have The most prevalent types of response are it just as good as men these days” and “This isn’t displayed in Table 2. The modal category of com- 1950 anymore.” Such comments differed from ment was cavalier humor beliefs, comprising 25.1% cavalier humor beliefs in that they did not express (n = 102) of the dataset. Hostile sexism toward a perception of humor but rather attempted to women was the second most prevalent type of suppress the controversy surrounding the label by response, constituting 10.8% of comments (n = 44). noting the significant social advances of women. Justification not otherwise specified characterized SDO comments included any sentiment that 10.1% of the comments (n = 41), and an equal attempted to illustrate the inherent nature of sex number of individuals (10.8%) responded with differences. Such comments extended beyond mere humor (n = 31) or disagreement (n = 31). mere agreement by providing explanations of Hostile sexism toward men (n = 10) and denial of FALL 2015 gender roles emerging from biological differences sexism categories (n = 10) each made up 2.5% of or from long-standing, functional divisions of the dataset, respectively, and 2.0% of individuals PSI CHI JOURNAL OF labor. Comments characteristic of SDO included responded with benevolent sexism toward men PSYCHOLOGICAL “Am I the only one getting fed up with all the PC (n = 8). SDO characterized 1.7% of comments RESEARCH

(n = 7), and only 0.5% of comments were character- commentators (7.6%) who expressed objection to ized by benevolent sexism toward women (n = 2). the label might have feared potential social ramifications of expressing displeasure with the joke. Discussion That is, readers who did find the label offensive Results indicated that most respondents (68.5%) might have feared ridicule or name-calling from endorsed the sexist pants label in some way. In part, the vast number of users who promoted the joke or the prevalence of endorsement may be explained alluded to sexist ideals. Consistent with the conclu- by cavalier humor beliefs. As the most common sions of Becker and Wright (2010), the presence of type of response, commenters tended to see the misogyny might have undermined the motivation statement as “just a joke” and not a reflection of for individuals to express distaste for the comment. any greater injustice. There are two potential rea- In other words, the presence of hostile sexism sons why people might have reacted this way. First, might have silenced women who found offense, for the presence of humor may temporarily sanction fear that they might be lambasted by their peers or offensive comments, allowing individuals to express that they might even confirm the stereotype that latent values that might otherwise be rebuked. women are “victimized drama queens.” Indeed, Hodson et al. (2010) found a positive Although not nearly as common (7.6%), the correlation between cavalier humor beliefs and humor category parallels that of cavalier humor in racism, as well as a negative correlation between that it both endorses the joke and reinforces the cavalier humor beliefs and social tolerance. Sec- stereotype by failing to challenge it. General humor ond, individuals who subscribe to cavalier humor was theoretically defined as a mere observation that beliefs may bear a certain degree of prejudice and the joke was funny without further justification. treat offensive humor in a lighthearted manner in In contrast, cavalier humor responses justified the statement by downplaying any potentially negative order to gain or maintain social acceptance. implications of the pants label. However, given On the other hand, the limited number of more time and space, it is possible that individuals who found humor in the pants label might have TABLE 1 elaborated on the lack of negative impact of sexist Summary of Content Analysis Codes humor. The expression of humor may also reflect Code Definition Example(s) the prejudicial values of respondents; as mentioned Hostile sexism Overly hostile attitudes toward “There appears to be allot previously, Greenwood and Isbell (2002) found that toward women women such as claims of [sic] of victimized drama sexist men were more likely to respond positively manipulation or imposition of queens posting.” traditional gender roles to derogatory humor. Given these findings, it is possible that a number of commentators embodied Benevolent sexism Idealization of women, “She washes my laundry toward women insistence on immanence of all the time. She doesn’t sexist values toward women prior to encountering gender roles want to mow the yard, this joke. wash the cars...” As expected, a number of comments (5.7%) Hostile sexism Resentment of men’s superior “Sometimes us women expressed agreement, reflecting beliefs that doing toward men status, allusion to negative are just naturally better male stereotypes at laundry than men.” laundry is an appropriate role for women. Laun- dry is a task that has historically been assigned Cavalier humor Emphasis on positive aspects “Lighten up” or “It’s just a beliefs of joke-telling, downplays joke” to women, and several have indicated little social repercussions change in this area over the past several decades General humor Mere expression of humor “It’s funny” or “LOL” (Lachance-Grzela & Bouchard, 2010; Ruppanner, without qualification 2010). Agreement with the statement reflects an Agreement Insistence on truthfulness of “It is her job.” endorsement of sexist cultural norms and fails to the stereotype provide speculation as to why such norms exist, Denial of sexism Insistence that sexism is not a “Women have it just as thereby potentially reinforcing the association of prominent issue good as men these days.” women with domesticity. Social dominance Rationalization of gendered “Men are men...and We anticipated that sexism directed toward orientation division of labor women are women. Let’s not try to be the same!” both men and women would frequently be drawn upon to justify the sexist label. Interestingly, Objection Expression of offense “Apparently, it is still OK FALL 2015 to make condenscending benevolent sexism toward women was not fre- [sic] jokes about quently expressed in the comments. One might PSI CHI women...” JOURNAL OF have expected this to be a frequent category PSYCHOLOGICAL RESEARCH

because “good traditional women” are revered for of the population based on lack of Internet access. their excellent housekeeping skills. The lack of Those with access to the Internet may be more benevolently sexist comments may reflect reactions privileged, at least in terms of socioeconomic to the controversy inspired by this article; indeed, status, than those without access. Therefore, our the story was brought to the attention of the media results may be inflated in that they largely reflect by a woman who was offended upon finding the the interests of high-status group members. Regard- label in her boyfriend’s pants. According to Glick less, we determined that our dataset was highly and Fiske’s (2001) theory of ambivalent sexism, representative of the population exposed to online a woman’s rejection of the status quo might have media content and therefore generalizable to this been threatening to a sexist audience who per- particular subset of individuals. ceived her outcry as an overreaction. Benevolent The sources of data might have also affected sexism is usually reserved for women who comply the generalizability of these findings. We selected with traditional gender role norms, whereas hostile websites that had been previously identified as fairly sexism is a more typical response to gender role neutral in terms of political affiliation. However, it defiance (Glick & Fiske, 2001). is hard to determine the exact perspective of each A small percentage of individuals (2.5%) news site, and the political affiliations of the readers exhibited SDO. However, it is possible that such would likely influence their reactions and justifica- values were subsumed by the more relevant cat- tions of the story. It would be interesting for future egory of cavalier humor beliefs (given the fact that research to also integrate the political perspective the topic of the story directly involved humor). of the website and commenter. According to Hodson and colleagues (2010), there The present study might have benefited from is a correlation between cavalier humor beliefs and the inclusion of demographic data such as sex of SDO. Therefore, it is possible that individuals who the commenters who participated. Our initial hope responded with cavalier humor beliefs were also was to code comments for the sex of the writers. prone to SDO, although they found expressions Unfortunately, such information was unavail- such as “It’s just a joke” to be more relevant than a able due to the low frequency of individuals who rational and functional explanation of difference expressly stated their sex (n = 29). Future studies in the given situation. may explore the role that multiple intersecting Similarly, few responses (2.5%) were charac- facets of identity play in responses and reactions teristic of the denial of sexism category. One of to sexist humor. the functions of cavalier humor is to diminish the In addition, the fact that there were only two consequences of offensive joke telling. Therefore, coders for the present study is a potential limita- those who responded with cavalier humor might tion. Because the interrater reliability on the initial have been implicitly denying sexism by claiming that the pants label was “just a joke” and not indica- TABLE 2 tive of social inequality (Hodson et al., 2010). Finally, benevolent (2.0%) and hostile sexism Frequencies and Percentages for Codes Into Each of toward men (0.5%) were less frequent responses the Categories in our data. Both types of comments would neces- Code Frequency % sarily have required respondents to make negative Cavalier humor 109 25.1 comments about men despite ambivalent sexism’s Uninterpretable 97 23.9 overriding function of upholding the imbalance of Hostile sexism-women 44 10.8 power between the sexes. Comments that referred Justification not otherwise specified 41 10.1 to men’s incompetence in any domain might, then, General humor 31 7.6 seem unlikely in the context of this story. Alterna- tively, such comments might simply not have been Objection 31 7.6 made because they could have seemed irrelevant Agreement 23 5.7 given the fact that women were the primary targets Hostile sexism-men 10 2.5 of this joke. Denial of sexism 10 2.5 FALL 2015 Benevolent sexism-women 8 2.0 Limitations Social dominance 7 1.7 PSI CHI The generalizability of these results might have JOURNAL OF Benevolent sexism-men 2 0.5 PSYCHOLOGICAL been affected by the exclusion of various members RESEARCH

166 COPYRIGHT 2015 BY PSI CHI, THE INTERNATIONAL HONOR SOCIETY IN PSYCHOLOGY (VOL. 20, NO. 3/ISSN 2164-8204) Peters, Holmgreen, and Oswald | It’s Just a Joke subset of data was determined to be substantial, efforts to counteract these processes. The present one coder proceeded with the coding of the rest study contributed to an understanding of what of the comments. Given the established interrater types of comments may frequently emerge in the reliability, we feel confident in the accuracy of the context of sexist humor, and future studies have subsequent coding and the validity of the catego- the potential to further elucidate why these types ries coded. Regardless, future researchers might of comments are used. consider using multiple independent coders for all comments to further ensure coding accuracy. References Despite the limitations of online-based content Becker, J. C., & Wright, S. C. (2010). Yet another dark side of chivalry: Benevolent sexism undermines and hostile sexism motivates collective analysis, there is certainly value in such data. It is action for social change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, likely that the anonymity provided by such venues 101, 62–77. doi:10.1037/a0022615 allows users to provide candid responses, and dif- Bem, S. L. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42, 155–162. doi:10.1037/ ferent results might be obtained in a laboratory due h0036215 to social desirability demands. Thus, these types Chan, F. Y. (2011). Selling through entertaining: The effect of humour of comments provide a rich source of data that we in television advertising in Hong Kong. Journal of Marketing Communications, 17, 319–336. doi:10.1080/13527261003729220 encourage future researchers to consider using Diaconu-Muresan, A., & Stewart, M. W. (2010). Romanian college students’ for qualitative research. Furthermore, qualitative reactions to sexist humor: Description and predictors. Journal of Gender coding programs such as Linguistic Inquiry and Studies, 19, 279–296. doi:10.1080/09589236.2010.494344 Eisend, M. (2010). A meta-analysis of gender roles in advertising. Journal of Word Count could help to further identify themes the Academy of Marketing Science, 38, 418–440. doi:10.1007/s11747- within the comments. Finally, future research could 009-0181-x utilize experimental methods to determine exactly Eisend, M. (2011). How humor in advertising works: A meta-analytic test of alternative models. Marketing Letters, 22, 115–132. doi:10.1007/ who accepts or rejects sexist humor and by exactly s11002-010-9116-z which mechanisms. Ford, T. E., Boxer, C. F., Armstrong, J., & Edel, J. R. (2008). More than ‘just a joke’: The prejudice-releasing function of sexist humor. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 159–170. doi:10.1177/014616720731002 Conclusion Ford, T. E., Wentzel, E. R., & Lorion, J. (2001). Effects of exposure to sexist Many people claim that “a joke is just a joke,” yet humor on perceptions of normative tolerance of sexism. European evidence has suggested otherwise. As Hodson Journal of Social Psychology, 31, 677–691. doi:10.1002/ejsp.56 Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1999). The ambivalence toward men inventory: and colleagues (2010) indicated, individuals who Differentiating hostile and benevolent beliefs about men. Psychology view offensive humor with cavalier attitudes may, of Women Quarterly, 23, 519–536. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.1999. in fact, bear a certain degree of prejudice. The tb00379.x Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (2001). An ambivalent alliance: Hostile and benevolent positive reaction elicited by this joke provided sexism and complementary justifications for gender inequality. American evidence of an unwillingness to reject the status Psychologist, 56, 109–118. doi:10.1037//0003-066X.56.2.109 quo. Furthermore, if Internet users respond pub- Greenwood, D., & Isbell, L. M. (2002). Ambivalent sexism and the dumb blonde: Men’s and women’s reactions to sexist jokes. Psychology of licly and positively to derogatory humor, this may Women Quarterly, 26, 341–350. doi:10.1111/1471-6402.t01-2-00073 increase the likelihood that companies will use Groseclose, T., & Milyo, J. (2005). A measure of media bias. similar marketing strategies in the future. Previ- The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 120, 1191–1237. doi:10.1162/003355305775097542 ous studies have provided evidence that exposure Heilman, M. E. (2001). Description and prescription: How gender stereotypes to derogatory humor may perpetuate negative prevent women’s ascent up the organizational ladder. Journal of Social attitudes toward historically oppressed groups Issues, 57, 657–674. doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00234 Hodson, G., Rush, J., & MacInnis, C.C. (2010). A joke is just a joke (except (Ford et al., 2008; Greenwood & Isbell, 2002; when it isn’t): Cavalier humor beliefs facilitate the expression of group Romero-Sánchez et al., 2009; Tiggemann & McGill, dominance motives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99, 2004). Exposure to prejudice such as sexism may 660–682. doi:10.1037/a0019627 Infanger, M., Bosak, J., & Sczesny, S. (2011). Communality sells: The impact be psychologically harmful. For example, Swim, of perceivers’ sexism on the evaluation of women’s portrayals in Hyers, Cohen, and Ferguson (2001) found that advertisements. European Journal of Social Psychology, 42, 219–226. women who experienced sexism in their everyday doi:10.1002/ejsp.868 Kim, K., & Lowry, D. T. (2005). Television commercials as a lagging social lives were more likely to report anger, anxiety, indicator: Gender role stereotypes in Korean television advertising. Sex discomfort, depression, and low self-esteem. As this Roles, 12, 901–910. doi:10.1007/s11199-005-8307-1 evidence indicated, a sexist joke may not be “just Krishnan, H. S., & Chakravarti, D. (2003). A process analysis of the effects of humorous advertising executions on brand claims memory. Journal of a joke.” Rather, it holds the potential to provoke Consumer Research, 13, 230–245. doi:10.1207/s15327663jcp1303_05 attitudes of hostility and damage the psychological Lachance-Grzela, M., & Bouchard, G. (2010). Why do women do the lion’s FALL 2015 well-being of women. Determining the dynamics share of housework? A decade of research. Sex Roles, 63, 767–780. doi:10.1007/s11199-010-0707-z PSI CHI by which individuals justify and perpetuate sexist Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. C. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement JOURNAL OF humor is an important first step in establishing for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159–174. doi:10.2307/2529310 PSYCHOLOGICAL RESEARCH

Monk-Turner, E., Kouts, T., Parris, K., & Webb, C. (2007). Gender role of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 15, 35–45. doi:10.1037/a0014812 stereotyping in advertisements on three radio stations: Does musical Swim, J. K., Hyers, L. L., Cohen, L. L., & Ferguson, M. J. (2001). Everyday genre make a difference? Journal of Gender Studies, 16, 173–182. sexism: Evidence for its incidence, nature, and psychological impact from doi:10.1080/09589230701324736 three diary studies. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 31–53. doi:10.1037/ Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., Stallworth, L. M., & Bertram, F. M. (1994). Social a0014812 dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and Tiggemann, M., & McGill, B. (2004). The role of social comparison in the political attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, effect of magazine advertisements on women’s mood and body 741–763. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.67.4.741 dissatisfaction. Social and Clinical Psychology, 23, 23–44. doi:10.1521/ Romero-Sánchez, M., Durán, M., Carretero-Dios H., Megías, J. L., & Moya, jscp.23.1.23.2699 M. (2009). Exposure to sexist humor and rape proclivity: The moderator effect of aversiveness ratings. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 25, 2339–2350. doi:10.1177/0886260509354884 Author Note. Natalie Peters, Lucie Holmgreen, and Debra Ruppanner, L. E. (2010). Cross-national reports of housework: An investigation Oswald, Department of Psychology, Marquette University, WI. of the gender empowerment measure. Social Science Research, 39, Lucie Holmgreen is now at Department of Behavioral 963–975. doi:10.1016/j.ssresearch.2010.04.002 Sciences, Rush University Medical Center. Stankiewicz, J. M., & Rosseli, F. (2008). Women as sex objects and victims This research was supported by a Research Fellowship in print advertisements. Sex Roles, 58, 579–589. doi:10.1007/s11199- from the Women’s and Gender Studies Program at Marquette 007-9359-1 University. Strick, M., Van Baaren, R. B., Holland, R. W., & Van Knippen, A. (2009). Humor Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed in advertisements enhances product liking by mere association. Journal to Natalie Peters, Milwaukee, WI. E-mail: [email protected]

FALL 2015

PSI CHI JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGICAL RESEARCH