Abstract

<p>Previous research demonstrate links between men’s and women’s endorsement of benevolent sexism and the provision/acceptance of chivalrous behaviours that increase women’s dependence on men. Research also shows that men who are relatively more anxiously attached also tend to be more endorsing of benevolent sexism as it facilitates dependence and fulfilment of relational needs. Thus, men’s preoccupations with satisfying their relational needs should heighten their tendency to behave chivalrously. This thesis examined whether attachment anxiety moderates the link between individual’s endorsement of benevolent sexism and their provision/acceptance of dependency-oriented support—behaviours that emphasise men’s high status and women’s dependence. This study also tested whether men providing, and women accepting support predicts fulfilment of relational needs. Study 1 and 2 (N = 354) examined links between endorsement of benevolent sexism and dependency-oriented dating behaviours in online samples. Results replicated the existing link between men’s endorsement of benevolent sexism and dependency-oriented support, but did not lend support for the moderating role of attachment anxiety. In Study 3, romantic couples (N = 158) discussed personal goals with one another and coders observed levels of dependency-oriented support provision and acceptance. The relationship between benevolent sexism and dependency-oriented support for men was once again replicated. Novel interactions also emerged which suggests that holding derogatory beliefs about women may also motivate men’s dependency-oriented support giving. Predictions about the role of attachment anxiety and need fulfilment produced unexpected findings demonstrating that it may be a lack of avoidant rather than attachment anxiety that moderates the relationship between benevolent sexism and dependency-oriented support. These studies illustrate that chivalrous, dependency-oriented behaviours cannot be examined in isolation from beliefs about gender roles, relational schemas, and context.</p>

Highlights

  • Previous research demonstrate links between men’s and women’s endorsement of benevolent sexism and the provision/acceptance of chivalrous behaviours that increase women’s dependence on men

  • This is inconsistent with previous research findings, and the current study theorising that men who are more endorsing of benevolent sexism provide partners with more dependency-oriented support (Hammond & Overall, 2015; Shnabel et al, 2016)

  • I predicted that men who more strongly endorsed benevolent sexism would tend to strongly endorse chivalrous dating behaviours which render women dependent upon men (Study 1 and 2), and men who more strongly endorsed benevolent sexism would provide their partners with more dependency-oriented support (Study 3)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Previous research demonstrate links between men’s and women’s endorsement of benevolent sexism and the provision/acceptance of chivalrous behaviours that increase women’s dependence on men. Predictions about the role of attachment anxiety and need fulfilment produced unexpected findings demonstrating that it may be a lack of avoidant rather than attachment anxiety that moderates the relationship between benevolent sexism and dependency-oriented support These studies illustrate that chivalrous, dependency-oriented behaviours cannot be examined in isolation from beliefs about gender roles, relational schemas, and context. The two forms of sexism go hand-inhand as a means to avoid overt conflict between men and women over the unequal access to structural power in society, and for men and women to foster close intimate bonds with one another (Jackman, 1994) Studies support this central tenet of ambivalent sexism theory, by showing that people who endorse hostile sexism will tend to endorse benevolent sexism, a finding that is consistent across many nations and cultures (Glick & Fiske, 1996; Glick et al, 2000; Glick & Fiske, 2001). The endorsement of both hostile and benevolent sexism—while seemingly opposite in tone— perpetuates gender inequality, but functions to facilitate mutual romantic relationships between men and women (Glick & Fiske, 1996)

Methods
Results
Conclusion

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.