Journal of Personalityand SocialPsychology Copyright2000 by the AmericanPsychological Association, Inc. 2000, Vol. 79, No. 5, 763-775 0022-3514/00/$5.00 DOI: 10.1037//0022-3514.79.5.763 Beyond Prejudice as Simple Antipathy: Hostile and Benevolent Sexism Across Cultures Peter Glick, Susan T. Fiske, Antonio Mladinic, Jos6 L. Saiz, Dominic Abrams, Barbara Masser, Bolanle Adetoun, Johnstone E. Osagie, Adebowale Akande, Amos Alao, Annetje Brunner, Tineke M. Willemsen, Kettie Chipeta, Benoit Dardenne, Ap Dijksterhuis, Daniel Wigboldus, Thomas Eckes, Iris Six-Materna, Francisca Exp6sito, Miguel Moya, Margaret Foddy, Hyun-Jeong Kim, Mafia Lameiras, Mafia Jos6 Sotelo, Angelica Mucchi-Faina, Myrna Romani, Nuray Sakalh, Bola Udegbe, Mafiko Yamamoto, Miyoko Ui, Mafia Cristina Ferreira, and Wilson L6pez L6pez The authors argue that complementary hostile and benevolent components of sexism exist across cultures. Male dominance creates hostile sexism (HS), but men's dependence on women fosters benevolent sexism (BS)--subjectively positive attitudes that put women on a pedestal but reinforce their subordination. Research with 15,000 men and women in 19 nations showed that (a) HS and BS are coherent constructs that correlate positively across nations, but (b) HS predicts the ascription of negative and BS the ascription of positive traits to women, (c) relative to men, women are more likely to reject HS than BS, especially when overall levels of sexism in a culture are high, and (d) national averages on BS and HS predict gender inequality across nations. These results challenge prevailing notions of prejudice as an antipathy in that BS (an affectionate, patronizing ideology) reflects inequality and is a cross-culturally pervasive complement to HS. The idea that "prejudice is an antipathy" (Allport, 1954, p. 9) is Fiske, 1996). Whereas HS is likely to elicit women's outrage, BS the bedrock on which virtually all prejudice theories are built. This may often obtain their acquiescence, as it works effectively and assumption has blinded social psychologists to the true nature of invisibly to promote gender inequality. sexism (and perhaps other prejudices as well; see Fiske, Xu, We present evidence that (a) HS and BS are pervasive across Cuddy, & Glick, 1999; Glick & Fiske, in press; Jackman, 1994), cultures, supporting the contention that they originate in social and which encompasses not just hostile sexism (HS) but also benevo- biological factors common among human groups, (b) HS and BS lent sexism (BS), a subjectively positive orientation of protection, are complementary ideologies, such that nations in which HS is idealization, and affection directed toward women that, like HS, strongly endorsed are those in which BS is strongly endorsed, (c) serves to justify women's subordinate status to men (Glick & HS and BS predict opposing valences in attitudes toward women, Peter Glick, Department of Psychology, Lawrence University; Susan T. versity of Perugia, Italy; Nuray Sakalh, Department of Psychology, Middle Fiske, Department of Psychology, Princeton University; Antonio Mladinic, East Technical University, Turkey; Bola Udegbe, Department of Psychol- Department of Psychology, Pontificia Universidad Cat61ica de Chile, ogy, University of Ibadan, Nigeria; Mariko Yamamoto and Miyoko Ui, Chile; Jos4 L. Saiz, Department of Psychology, Universidad de La Fron- Department of Psychology, University of Tsukuba, Japan; Maria Cristina tera, Chile; Dominic Abrams and Barbara Masser, Department of Psychol- Ferreira, Instituto de Psicologia, Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro; ogy, University of Kent at Canterbury, England; Bolanle Adetoun, Depart- Wilson L6pez L6pez, Department of Psychology, Universidad Konrad ment of Counselling, Centre for Sustainable Development and Gender Lorenz, Bogat,-t, Colombia. Issues, Nigeria; Johnstone E. Osagie, School of Business, Alcorn State Barbara Masser is now at the School of Psychology, University of University; Adebowale Akande, School of Behavioral Science, Potchef- Queensland, Australia; Thomas Eckes is now at the Department of Psy- stroom University, South Africa; Amos Alao, Department of Counselling, chology, University of Dresden, Germany; and Angelica Mucchi-Faina is University of Botswana, Botswana; Annetje Brunner and Tineke M. Wil- now at the Department of Sociology, University of Rome "La Sapienza." lemsen, Depamnent of Women's Studies, Tilburg University, the Nether- We are grateful to Alice Eagly, Wendy Wood, and Laura Mourino-Casas lands; Kettie Chipeta, KC Consultancy, Botswana; Benoit Dardenne, De- (of the United Nations Development Programme) for their advice on the partment of Psychology, University of Liege, Belgium; Ap Dijksterhuis use of the United Nations indices of gender equality (and to Tony Man- and Daniel Wigboldus, Department of Social Psychology, University of Nijmegen, the Netherlands; Thomas Eckes, Department of Psychology, stead for originally pointing us in this direction); Felicia Pratto for her University of Wuppertal, Germany; Iris Six-Materna, Department of Psy- comments on the manuscript; Paul Norris, for help retrieving previously chology, University of Kiel, Germany; Francisca Exp6sito and Miguel collected ASI data; and Maggie Thomas, Dara Rakun, Kunal Saigal, Moya, Department of Psychology, Universidad de Granada, Spain; Mar- Vibhuthi Hate, Tetteh Otuteye, Rob Reff, and Cindy Prochnow for their garet Foddy, School of Psychology, La Trobe University, Australia; Hyun- help coding data. Jeong Kim, Department of Psychology, Ewha Womans University, South Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Peter Korea; Mafia Lameiras and Mafia Jos6 Sotelo, Department of Psychosocial Glick, Department of Psychology, Lawrence University, Appleton, Wis- and Educational Analysis and Intervention, Universidad de Vigo, Spain; consin 54912-0599. Electronic mail may be sent to peter.s.glick@ Angelica Mucchi-Falna and Myrna Romani, Institute of Pedagogy, Uni- lawrence.edu. 763 764 GLICK ET AL. (d) women, as compared with men, reject HS but often accept BS, ments and increasing gender equality threaten traditional male a tendency most pronounced in more sexist cultures, where women dominance, HS may be directed most strongly at women who may experience heightened needs for the protection, idealization, challenge men's power (e.g., feminists) and status (e.g., career and affection BS promises, and (e) national HS and BS averages women), as well as toward women who are perceived as using predict variation in gender inequality across nations. their sexual allure to gain power over men (e.g., temptresses). However, sexual reproduction and men's dependence on women Hostile and Benevolent Sexism to fulfill domestic roles create a dependency and intimacy between the sexes that counterbalances sexist hostility with a subjectively Cross-culturally, women, relative to men, are a disadvantaged benevolent view of women, BS. Although men dominate cross- group, as indicated by, for example, differences in earnings and the culturally, they rely on women to produce and to nurture offspring, low percentage of women in the most powerful roles in business for domestic labor, and to fulfill sexual and intimacy needs, and government (United Nations Development Programme, 1998). lending women power in intimate relationships (Guttentag & Sec- Nevertheless, Eagly and Mladinic (1994) found that women are ord, 1983). This dependence, Glick and Fiske (1996) argued, actually stereotyped more positively than men are, with men as precipitates subjectively benevolent but paternalistic attitudes to- well as women attributing highly favorable traits (e.g., warmth and ward women, as men "can't live without them." BS is sexist in that nurturance) to women. For an antipathy model of prejudice, the it presumes women's inferiority (it recognizes and reinforces pa- coexistence of women's general subordination and Eagly and triarchy by portraying women as needing men to protect and Mladinic's "women are wonderful" effect is a paradox. One alter- provide for them) hut is subjectively positive (from the perspective native is that women are viewed positively on some dimensions, of the sexist perceiver) in that it characterizes (at least some) such as warmth, and negatively on others, such as competence women as wonderful, pure creatures whose love is required to (Eagly & Mladinic~ 1994; Fiske, 1998; Fiske et al., 1999; Glick & make a man whole. Like I-IS, BS encompasses attitudes related to Fiske, in press). Another related alternative is that subjectively power, gender differentiation, and heterosexuality. favorable attitudes toward women can themselves be a form of The 22-item Ambivalent Sexism Inventory (ASI; Glick & Fiske, prejudice in that they s~erve to justify and maintain women's 1996), initially developed and validated in six studies (involving subordination. both college students and older adults) in the United States (Glick Glick and Fiske (1996) hypothesized that hostile and benevolent & Fiske, 1996), is a self-report measure of sexist attitudes com- attitudes toward women are complementary components of sexism posed of separate 11-item I-IS and BS subscales (see Appendix). common among past and present human societies. Apart from HS is evidenced by an adversarial view of gender relations in anecdotal evidence that polarized attitudes toward women (e.g., which women are perceived as seeking to control men, whether the virgin-whore dichotomy; Tavris & Wade, 1984) have existed through sexuality or feminist ideology.