Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The Precious Vessel: Ambivalent Sexism and Opposition to Elective and Traumatic Abortion

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Sex Roles Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Ambivalent sexism theory highlights the pernicious effects of benevolent sexism on women’s freedoms in society. Because the ideology idealizes women as nurturing mothers, benevolent sexism should be negatively associated with support for women’s reproductive rights. The current study examined this possibility by assessing the relationship between benevolent sexism and support for (a) elective abortion (i.e., abortions pursued, regardless of the reason) and (b) traumatic abortion (i.e., abortions pursued when the woman’s life is endangered) in a national probability sample of New Zealand adults (N = 6,132). As predicted, benevolent sexism was negatively associated with support for both elective and traumatic abortion. In contrast, hostile sexism—the punitive component of ambivalent sexism—was only negatively associated with support for traumatic abortion. These results demonstrate that ambivalent sexism—and particularly benevolent sexism—restricts women’s reproductive rights even in extreme cases where a woman’s life is in danger.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adebayo, A. (1990). Male attitudes toward abortion: An analysis of urban survey data. Social Indicators Research, 22, 213–228. doi:10.1007/BF00354841.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Alvarez, R. M., & Brehm, J. (1995). American ambivalence towards abortion policy: Development of a heteroskedastic probit model of competing values. American Journal of Political Science, 39, 1055–1082. doi:10.2307/2111669.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bahr, S. J., & Marcos, A. C. (2003). Cross-cultural attitudes toward abortion: Greeks versus Americans. Journal of Family Issues, 24, 402–424. doi:10.1177/0192513X02250892.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Barreto, M., & Ellemers, N. (2005). The burden of benevolent sexism: How it contributes to the maintenance of gender inequalities. European Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 633–642. doi:10.1002/ejsp.270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Batson, C. D., Schoenrade, P., & Ventis, W. L. (1993). Religion and the individual: A social-psychological perspective. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benin, M. H. (1985). Determinants of opposition to abortion: An analysis of the hard and soft scales. Sociological Perspectives, 28, 199–216. doi:10.2307/1389057.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bulbulia, J., Osborne, D., & Sibley, C. G. (2013). Moral foundations predict religious orientations in New Zealand. PLoS ONE, 8(12), 1–7. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0080224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlton, C. L., Nelson, E. S., & Coleman, P. K. (2000). College students’ attitudes toward abortion and commitment to the issue. Social Science Journal, 37, 619–625. doi:10.1016/S0362-3319(00)00101-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cook, E. A., Jelen, T. G., & Wilcox, C. (1992). Between two absolutes: Public opinion and the politics of abortion. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Craig, S. C., Kane, J. G., & Martinez, M. D. (2002). Sometimes you feel like a nut, sometimes you don’t: Citizens’ ambivalence about abortion. Political Psychology, 23, 285–301. doi:10.1111/0162-895X.00282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dardenne, B., Dumont, M., & Bollier, T. (2007). Insidious dangers of benevolent sexism: Consequences for women’s performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 764–779. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.93.5.764.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Esposito, C. L., & Basow, S. A. (1995). College students’ attitudes toward abortion: The role of knowledge and demographic variables. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 25, 1996–2017. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1995.tb01828.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finlay, B. A. (1981). Sex differences in correlates of abortion attitudes among college students. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 43, 571–582. doi:10.2307/351758.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fiorina, M. P., Abrams, S. J., & Pope, J. C. (2006). Culture war? The myth of a polarized America (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Pearson Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, A. R. (2006). Women’s benevolent sexism as reaction to hostility. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 30, 410–416. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2006.00316.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forbes, G. B., Adams-Curtis, L. E., Hamm, N. R., & White, K. B. (2003). Perceptions of the woman who breastfeeds: The role of erotophobia, sexism, and attitudinal variables. Sex Roles, 49, 379–388. doi:10.1023/A:1025116305434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaunt, R. (2013). Ambivalent sexism and perceptions of men and women who violate gendered family roles. Community Work and Family, 16, 401–416. doi:10.1080/13668803.2013.779231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1996). The ambivalent sexism inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 491–512. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.70.3.491.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (2001). An ambivalent alliance: Hostile and benevolent sexism as complementary justifications for gender inequality. American Psychologist, 56, 109–118. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.56.2.109.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Glick, P., Diebold, J., Bailey-Werner, B., & Zhu, L. (1997). The two faces of Adam: Ambivalent sexism and polarized attitudes toward women. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 1323–1334. doi:10.1177/01461672972312009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glick, P., Fiske, S. T., Mladinic, A., Saiz, J. L., Abrams, D., Masser, B., & Lopez, W. (2000). Beyond prejudice as simple antipathy: Hostile and benevolent sexism across cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 763–775. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.79.5.763.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gorsuch, R. L., & Aleshire, D. (1974). Christian faith and ethnic prejudice: A review and interpretation of research. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 13, 281–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammond, M. D., & Sibley, C. G. (2011). Why are benevolent sexists happier? Sex Roles, 65, 332–343. doi:10.1007/s11199-011-0017-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammond, M. D., Sibley, C. G., & Overall, N. C. (2014). The allure of sexism: Psychological entitlement fosters women’s endorsement of benevolent sexism over time. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 5, 422–429. doi:10.1177/1948550613506124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hebl, M. R., King, E. B., Glick, P., Singletary, S. L., & Kazama, S. (2007). Hostile and benevolent reactions toward pregnant women: Complementary interpersonal punishments and rewards that maintain traditional roles. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1499–1511. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.92.6.1499.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hess, J. A., & Rueb, J. D. (2005). Attitudes toward abortion, religion, and party affiliation among college students. Current Psychology, 24, 24–42. doi:10.1007/s12144-005-1002-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoverd, W.J., Bulbulia, J., Partow, N., & Sibley, C.G. (2014). Forecasting religious change: A Bayesian model predicting proportional Christian change in New Zealand. Religion, Brain & Behavior. doi: 10.1080/2153599X.2013.824497.

  • Hunsberger, B. (1996). Religious fundamentalism, right-wing authoritarianism, and hostility toward homosexuals in non-Christian religious groups. International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, 6, 39–49. doi:10.1207/s15327582ijpr0601_5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jelen, T. G., Damore, D. F., & Lamatsch, T. (2002). Gender, employment status, and abortion: A longitudinal analysis. Sex Roles, 47, 321–330. doi:10.1023/A:1021427014047.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kilianski, S. E., & Rudman, L. A. (1998). Wanting it both ways: Do women approve of benevolent sexism? Sex Roles, 39, 333–352. doi:10.1023/A:1018814924402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krishnan, V. (1991). Abortion in Canada: Religious and ideological dimensions of women’s attitudes. Biodemography and Social Biology, 38, 249–257. doi:10.1080/19485565.1991.9988792.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malik, K. (2013). The rise of the South: Human progress in a diverse world. Human development report 2013. New York, New York: United Nations Development Programme. Retrieved from http://ssrn.com/abstract=2294673.

  • Moya, M., Glick, P., Expósito, F., de Lemus, S., & Hart, J. (2007). It’s for your own good: Benevolent sexism and women’s reactions to protectively justified restrictions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 1421–1434. doi:10.1177/0146167207304790.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, A. O., Sutton, R. M., Douglas, K. M., & McClellan, L. M. (2011). Ambivalent sexism and the “do”s and “don’t”s of pregnancy: Examining attitudes toward proscriptions and the women who flout them. Personality and Individual Differences, 51, 812–816. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2011.06.031.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muthén, L.K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998–2012). Mplus user's guide. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.

  • Osborne, D., & Davies, P. G. (2009). Social dominance orientation, ambivalent sexism, and abortion: Explaining pro-choice and pro-life attitudes. In L. B. Palcroft & M. V. Lopez (Eds.), Personality assessment: New research (pp. 309–320). New York, NY: Nova Science Publishers, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, D., & Davies, P. G. (2012). When benevolence backfires: Benevolent sexists’ opposition to elective and traumatic abortion. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42, 291–307. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2011.00890.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perry, P., & Trlin, A. (1982). Attitudes toward abortion in a provincial area of New Zealand: Differentials and determinants. Journal of Sociology, 18, 399–416. doi:10.1177/144078338201800307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879–891. doi:10.3758/BRM.40.3.879.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sahar, G., & Karasawa, K. (2005). Is the personal always political? A cross-cultural analysis of abortion attitudes. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 27, 285–296. doi:10.1207/s15324834basp2704_1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sears, D. O. (1986). College sophomores in the laboratory: Influences of a narrow data base on social psychology’s view of human nature. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 515–530. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.3.515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sibley, C. G., & Perry, R. (2010). An opposing process model of benevolent sexism. Sex Roles, 62, 438–452. doi:10.1007/s11199-009-9705-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, T. W., Marsden, P. V., Hout, M., & Kim, J. (2011). General Social Surveys, 1972–2010: Cumulative Codebook. University of Chicago: National Opinion Research Center.

  • Statistics New Zealand. (2006). QuickStats about culture and identity. Wellington, New Zealand: Retrieved from http://www.stats.govt.nz/Census/2006CensusHomePage/QuickStats/quickstats-about-a-subject/culture-and-identity.aspx.

  • Strickler, J., & Danigelis, N. L. (2002). Changing frameworks in attitudes toward abortion. Sociological Forum, 17, 187–201. doi:10.1023/A:1016033012225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sutton, R. M., Douglas, K. M., & McClellan, L. M. (2011). Benevolent sexism, perceived health risks, and the inclination to restrict pregnant women’s freedoms. Sex Roles, 65, 596–605. doi:10.1007/s11199-010-9869-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trlin, A. D. (1975). Abortion in New Zealand: A review. The Australian Journal of Social Issues, 10, 179–196.

  • Turner, N. E. (1998). These is my words: The diary of Sarah Agnes Prine, 1881–1901. New York: HarperCollins Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Viki, G. T., & Abrams, D. (2002). But she was unfaithful: Benevolent sexism and reactions to rape victims who violate traditional gender role expectations. Sex Roles, 47, 289–293. doi:10.1023/A:1021342912248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Viki, G. T., Massey, K., & Masser, B. (2005). When chivalry backfires: Benevolent sexism and attitudes toward Myra Hindley. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 10, 109–120. doi:10.1348/135532504X15277.

  • Walzer, S. (1994). The role of gender in determining abortion attitudes. Social Science Quarterly, 75, 687–693.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, G., & Buffalo, M. D. (2004). Social and cultural determinants of attitudes toward abortion: A test of Reiss’ hypotheses. Social Science Journal, 41, 93–105. doi:10.1016/j.soscij.2003.10.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zucker, G. S. (1999). Attributional and symbolic predictors of abortion attitudes. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29, 1218–1245. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1999.tb02037.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Data collection for Time 3 of the New Zealand Attitudes and Values Study (NZAVS) analyzed here was supported by a University of Auckland FRDF (3700683/9853) grant awarded to Danny Osborne, and Performance Based Research Funds jointly awarded to Chris G. Sibley and Danny Osborne.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Psychology, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, 1142, New Zealand

    Yanshu Huang, Danny Osborne & Chris G. Sibley

  2. Department of Psychology, University of British Columbia, Okanagan, Canada

    Paul G. Davies

Authors
  1. Yanshu Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Danny Osborne
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Chris G. Sibley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Paul G. Davies
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yanshu Huang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Huang, Y., Osborne, D., Sibley, C.G. et al. The Precious Vessel: Ambivalent Sexism and Opposition to Elective and Traumatic Abortion. Sex Roles 71, 436–449 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-014-0423-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-014-0423-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation