A (Political) Battle of the Sexes: Gender Polarization on Gender‐Related Attitudes Across 14 Societies

IF 4.5 3区 综合性期刊 Q1 MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES
Jaime L. Napier, Kodai Kusano
{"title":"A (Political) Battle of the Sexes: Gender Polarization on Gender‐Related Attitudes Across 14 Societies","authors":"Jaime L. Napier, Kodai Kusano","doi":"10.1111/nyas.70373","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although it is well‐established that women typically endorse more progressive gender‐related attitudes compared to men, key questions remain about the magnitude of this gender difference and whether it systematically varies in relation to levels of gender inequality across societies. In the current research, we aim to address these questions by examining endorsement of traditional (overt) and modern (indirect) forms of sexism across 14 countries, including those with relatively low levels of gender equality (e.g., Saudi Arabia, India, and Egypt) and those with relatively high equality (e.g., Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States). Results show that endorsement of old‐fashioned sexism is inversely related to country‐level gender equality for women and men, whereas modern sexism endorsement is inversely related to gender equality for women, but not men. Thus, gender polarization is largest on modern sexist attitudes in relatively high gender‐equal countries, and this is because in such contexts modern forms of sexism are especially likely to be rejected by women.","PeriodicalId":8250,"journal":{"name":"Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences","volume":"5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"103","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.70373","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Although it is well‐established that women typically endorse more progressive gender‐related attitudes compared to men, key questions remain about the magnitude of this gender difference and whether it systematically varies in relation to levels of gender inequality across societies. In the current research, we aim to address these questions by examining endorsement of traditional (overt) and modern (indirect) forms of sexism across 14 countries, including those with relatively low levels of gender equality (e.g., Saudi Arabia, India, and Egypt) and those with relatively high equality (e.g., Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States). Results show that endorsement of old‐fashioned sexism is inversely related to country‐level gender equality for women and men, whereas modern sexism endorsement is inversely related to gender equality for women, but not men. Thus, gender polarization is largest on modern sexist attitudes in relatively high gender‐equal countries, and this is because in such contexts modern forms of sexism are especially likely to be rejected by women.
性别(政治)之战:14个社会性别相关态度的性别两极分化
尽管与男性相比,女性通常支持更进步的与性别相关的态度,但关键问题仍然是这种性别差异的程度,以及它是否随着社会性别不平等的程度而系统性地变化。在当前的研究中,我们旨在通过检查14个国家对传统(公开)和现代(间接)形式的性别歧视的认可来解决这些问题,这些国家包括性别平等水平相对较低的国家(如沙特阿拉伯、印度和埃及)和性别平等水平相对较高的国家(如瑞典、英国和美国)。结果表明,对老式性别歧视的支持与国家层面的男女性别平等成反比,而对现代性别歧视的支持与女性的性别平等成反比,而与男性的性别平等无关。因此,在性别平等程度相对较高的国家,性别两极分化对现代性别歧视态度的影响最大,这是因为在这样的背景下,现代形式的性别歧视尤其可能遭到女性的排斥。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences
Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 综合性期刊-综合性期刊
CiteScore
11.00
自引率
1.90%
发文量
193
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: Published on behalf of the New York Academy of Sciences, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences provides multidisciplinary perspectives on research of current scientific interest with far-reaching implications for the wider scientific community and society at large. Each special issue assembles the best thinking of key contributors to a field of investigation at a time when emerging developments offer the promise of new insight. Individually themed, Annals special issues stimulate new ways to think about science by providing a neutral forum for discourse—within and across many institutions and fields.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书