In honor of International Women’s Day, celebrated on March 8, I would like to discuss two types of sexism. (Note: this discussion is limited to heterosexual relationships and sexism by men toward women.)
Consider the claim that X is sexist. X could be anything: a personal question, social behavior, company policy, country song, Shakespearean play, fairy tale, burger commercial, or a beer advertisement.
For instance, a few years ago, some people began pressing Oxford University to change the definition of “woman” in its dictionaries because the definition, they argued, is sexist (e.g., it contained the synonym “bitch”).
Another example is the overuse of air conditioning in the offices, which some have suggested is sexist and discriminatory because it is based on what men prefer.
In these and other examples, to decide whether something is sexist, we need to be clear on definitions.
Let me begin with a general definition of sexism and other related terms:
Sexism means sex- or gender-based prejudice and discrimination (usually directed at women).
Male chauvinism refers to the belief that women are inferior to men; it is generally synonymous with sexism.
Misogyny, despite overlapping with sexism, differs from it. One common way of differentiating sexism from misogyny is illustrated in a passage in Hillary Clinton’s What Happened. A man who loves his wife, she says, but still does not want her to make more money than him is being sexist. Misogyny, she adds, is “darker” and characterized by hatred and disgust toward women.1
Feminist philosopher Louise Richardson-Self offers another approach to distinguishing misogyny from sexism:
Sexism compels “behavior in accordance with patriarchal standards by appeal to people’s beliefs, theories, and values.” Whereas sexism “does not coerce,” misogyny “directs implicit and explicit hostility toward women because they are perceived...to subvert patriarchal norms” (p. 261).2
Hence, misogyny is more concerned with obedience and compliance.
In summary, sexism is linked with appeals to patriarchal norms and gendered roles (e.g., man being the breadwinner), whereas misogyny is associated with seeing women as a threat to the patriarchal system. Misogynists demand compliance and treat women with hatred and hostility.
It is important to note that sexist justifications can become misogynistic, such as when they are used to force women to behave in a certain way. And this brings us to the discussion of two major types of sexism.
Some definitions of sexism go beyond prejudice and discrimination, emphasizing hostility toward women. This view of sexism, which is closer in meaning to misogyny, is called hostile sexism.
Now, you may think hostility should be an integral part of our definition anyway. If so, you may feel that the seemingly opposite view of women—as fragile flowers, beautiful angels, or the embodiment of love—could not possibly be sexist. Yet, this view is potentially sexist, too, according to another way of defining sexism, as described below.
This second view, called benevolent sexism, is less concerned with the nature of men’s attitudes and behaviors toward women (e.g., hostile versus friendly) and more with the resultant status inequality between men and women. If this view is correct, then even the behavior of men who have good intentions and claim to cherish women could be considered sexist if such behaviors reinforce inequality.
But how might these seemingly positive views of women reinforce inequality?
To see how, first consider the common male and female stereotypes: Female stereotypes hold that women possess communal traits—that they are caring, nurturing, cooperative, and warm. In contrast, male stereotypes link masculinity with agency and portray men as assertive, decisive, individualistic, and competent.3
Thus defined, men and women are assumed to be fundamentally different but complementary.
Since our society values traits associated with masculinity (e.g., assertiveness) more highly than those linked with femininity (e.g., warmth), this assumed complementarity of men and women—as romantic as it may sound—does not translate into equality between genders.
Research shows that some behaviors associated with benevolent sexism (e.g., men giving up their seats, paying for meals) can appear attractive to women; perhaps because these chivalrous acts show a man’s willingness to invest in a relationship or his ability to provide.
Nevertheless, a benevolently sexist attitude combines a narrow or idealized view of women with the assumption of women’s incompetence in traditionally masculine domains such as work or business (which are valued by society).
So, although they often mean well and care about women, benevolently sexist men end up behaving in ways that indirectly control and dominate women. Of course, benevolently sexist men believe they are controlling women for women’s own good.
As a strategy of legitimizing patriarchy, benevolent sexism works better than hostile sexism because controlling and coercive tactics (e.g., threats, use of violence), which attempt to control the person or the situation directly, can be costly; indeed, they might push women to unite and stand up against the male power structure. In contrast, benevolent sexism is associated with the use of softer influence tactics (e.g., patronizing praise) that tend to be less costly and more effective in the long run.
Hostile sexism is fairly easy to identify. To illustrate, it describes the behavior or attitude of a person who employs misogynistic and sexist language or engages in physical violence against women.
Benevolent sexism, however, is more subtle. It tends to describe seemingly kind and considerate attitudes and behaviors that are, in reality, paternalistic.
To be clear, this is not to suggest men who behave this way have a hidden agenda. Nevertheless, caring and protective paternalism does not promote female empowerment.
To reduce sexism, education and understanding are necessary. The blame game and the assumption that female empowerment means male disempowerment only encourage sexism. Equality is not a zero-sum game: Empowerment is possible for everyone, regardless of sex/gender, and can benefit us all.
References
1. Clinton, H. R. (2017). What happened. Simon & Schuster.
2. Richardson-Self, L. (2017). Woman-hating: On misogyny, sexism, and hate speech, Hypatia, 33, 256-272.
3. Eagly, A. H., & Steffen, V. J. (1984). Gender stereotypes stem from the distribution of women and men into social roles. Journal or Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 735-754.
login
who are we?
contact us
qosheapp
Toi Staff
Gideon Levy
Belen Fernandez
Andrew Mitrovica
Mort Laitner
Nikkei Editorial
Rami G Khouri
Ali Fathollah-Nejad
visit website
