sexism definition essay

What Is Sexism? Defining a Key Feminist Term

Compassionate Eye Foundation / Monashee Frantz / Getty Images

• History Of Feminism
• Important Figures
• Women's Suffrage
• Women & War
• Laws & Womens Rights
• Feminist Texts
• American History
• African American History
• African History
• Ancient History and Culture
• Asian History
• European History
• Latin American History
• Medieval & Renaissance History
• Military History
• The 20th Century
• J.D., Hofstra University
• B.A., English and Print Journalism, University of Southern California

Sexism means discrimination based on sex or gender, or the belief that because men are superior to women, discrimination is justified. Such a belief can be conscious or unconscious . In sexism, as in racism, the differences between two (or more) groups are viewed as indications that one group is superior or inferior. Sexist discrimination against girls and women is a means of maintaining male domination and power. The oppression or discrimination can be economic, political, social, or cultural.

Elements of Sexism

• Sexism includes attitudes or ideology, including beliefs, theories, and ideas that hold one group (usually male) as deservedly superior to the other (usually female), and that justify oppressing members of the other group on the basis of their sex or gender.
• Sexism involves practices and institutions and the ways in which oppression is carried out. These need not be done with a conscious sexist attitude but may be unconscious cooperation in a system that has been in place already in which one sex (usually female) has less power and fewer goods in the society.

Oppression and Domination

Sexism is a form of oppression and domination. As author Octavia Butler put it:

"Simple peck-order bullying is only the beginning of the kind of hierarchical behavior that can lead to racism, sexism, ethnocentrism, classism, and all the other 'isms' that cause so much suffering in the world."

Some feminists have argued that sexism is the primal, or first, form of oppression in humanity and that other oppressions are built on the foundation of oppression of women. Feminist Andrea Dworkin holds that position, stating:

"Sexism is the foundation on which all tyranny is built. Every social form of hierarchy and abuse is modeled on male-over-female domination."

Feminist Origins of the Word

The word "sexism" became widely known during the women's liberation movement of the 1960s. At that time, feminist theorists explained that the oppression of women was widespread in nearly all human society, and they began to speak of sexism instead of male chauvinism. Whereas male chauvinists were usually individual men who expressed the belief that they were superior to women, sexism referred to collective behavior that reflected society as a whole.

Australian writer Dale Spender noted that she was:

"...old enough to have lived in a world without sexism and sexual harassment. Not because they weren’t everyday occurrences in my life but because THESE WORDS DIDN’T EXIST. It was not until the feminist writers of the 1970s made them up, and used them publicly and defined their meanings—an opportunity that men had enjoyed for centuries—that women could name these experiences of their daily life."

Many women in the feminist movement of the 1960s and 1970s (the so-called second wave of feminism) came to their consciousness of sexism via their work in social justice movements. Social philosopher  Bell Hooks  argues:

"Individual heterosexual women came to the movement from relationships where men were cruel, unkind, violent, unfaithful. Many of these men were radical thinkers who participated in movements for social justice, speaking out on behalf of the workers, the poor, speaking out on behalf of racial justice. However, when it came to the issue of gender they were as sexist as their conservative cohorts."

How Sexism Works

Systemic sexism, like systemic racism, is the perpetuation of the oppression and discrimination without necessarily any conscious intention. The disparities between men and women are simply taken as givens and are reinforced by practices, rules, policies, and laws that often seem neutral on the surface but in fact disadvantage women.

Sexism interacts with racism, classism, heterosexism, and other oppressions to shape the experience of individuals. This is called  intersectionality .  Compulsory heterosexuality  is the prevailing belief that heterosexuality is the only "normal" relationship between the sexes, which, in a sexist society, benefits men.

Women as Sexists

Women can be conscious or unconscious collaborators in their own oppression if they accept the basic premises of sexism: that men have more power than women because they deserve more power than women. Sexism by women against men would only be possible in a system in which the balance of social, political, cultural, and economic power was measurably in the hands of women, a situation which does not exist today.

Men May Be Oppressed by Sexism

Some feminists have argued that men should be allies in the fight against sexism because men, too, are not whole in a system of enforced male hierarchies. In a patriarchal society , men are themselves in a hierarchical relationship to each other, with more benefits to the males at the top of the power pyramid.

Others have argued that the benefit males derive from sexism—even if that benefit is not consciously experienced or sought—is more weighty than whatever negative effects those with more power may experience. Feminist Robin Morgan put it this way:

"And let's put one lie to rest for all time: the lie that men are oppressed, too, by sexism—the lie that there can be such a thing as 'men's liberation groups.' Oppression is something that one group of people commits against another group specifically because of a 'threatening' characteristic shared by the latter group—skin color or sex or age, etc."

Quotes on Sexism

Bell Hooks : "Simply put, feminism is a movement to end sexism, sexist exploitation, and oppression... I liked this definition because it did not imply that men were the enemy. By naming sexism as the problem it went directly to the heart of the matter. Practically, it is a definition that implies that all sexist thinking and action is the problem, whether those who perpetuate it are female or male, child, or adult. It is also broad enough to include an understanding of systemic institutionalized sexism. As a definition it is open-ended. To understand feminism it implies one has to necessarily understand sexism."

Caitlin Moran : “I have a rule for working out if the root problem of something is, in fact, sexism. And it is this: asking 'Are the boys doing it? Are the boys having to worry about this stuff? Are the boys the center of a gigantic global debate on this subject?”

Erica Jong : "Sexism kind of predisposes us to see men's work as more important than women's, and it is a problem, I guess, as writers, we have to change."

Kate Millett : "It is interesting that many women do not recognize themselves as discriminated against; no better proof could be found of the totality of their conditioning."

• Feminist Theory in Sociology
• 12 Types of Social Oppression
• Patriarchal Society According to Feminism
• Womanist: Definition and Examples
• Combahee River Collective in the 1970s
• The Core Ideas and Beliefs of Feminism
• What Is Radical Feminism?
• What Is Compulsory Heterosexuality?
• Socialist Feminism vs. Other Types of Feminism
• Cultural Feminism
• The Women's Liberation Movement
• Socialist Feminism Definition and Comparisons
• 10 Important Feminist Beliefs
• Top 20 Influential Modern Feminist Theorists
• Oppression and Women's History
• Definition of Intersectionality

Sexism at work: how can we stop it?

What is sexism.

Sexism is linked to beliefs around the fundamental nature of women and men and the roles they should play in society. Sexist assumptions about women and men, which manifest themselves as gender stereotypes , can rank one gender as superior to another. Such hierarchical thinking can be conscious and hostile, or it can be unconscious, manifesting itself as unconscious bias . Sexism can touch everyone, but women are particularly affected.

Despite legal frameworks set up across the EU to prevent discrimination and promote equality, women are still under-represented in decision-making roles, left out of certain sectors of the economy, primarily responsible for unpaid care work, paid less than men and disproportionately subject to gender-based violence [1] . Sexist attitudes, practices and behaviour contribute to these inequalities.

Within the European institutions there is no specific definition of sexism. Sexist behaviour is partly covered under Article 12a of the Staff Regulations on psychological and sexual harassment, where sexual harassment is defined as:

… conduct relating to sex which is unwanted by the person to whom it is directed and which has the purpose or effect of offending that person or creating an intimidating, hostile, offensive or disturbing environment [2] .

Sexist practices are prohibited under Article 1(d) of the Staff Regulations, which prohibits discrimination based on sex (among other forms of discrimination), as well as under Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU.

However, while some sexist behaviour may breach these anti-harassment and anti-discrimination rules, some does not reach that threshold . Additionally, the European Court of Auditors has found that while the ethical frameworks of the European Parliament, the European Council, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission are largely adequate and staff rate their own ethical knowledge highly, less than a quarter believe their colleagues would not hesitate to report unethical behaviour [3] .

Definition: sexism

Sexism is linked to power in that those with power are typically treated with favour and those without power are typically discriminated against. Sexism is also related to stereotypes since discriminatory actions or attitudes are frequently based on false beliefs or generalisations about gender, and on considering gender as relevant where it is not.

Source: EIGE [4]

[1] Directive 2006/54/EC on the implementation of the principle of equal opportunities and equal treatment of men and women in matters of employment and occupation outlines provisions Member States are obligated to take to stop sexual harassment in the workplace, as well as direct and indirect discrimination

[2] Regulation No 31 (EEC), 11 (EAEC), laying down the Staff Regulations of Officials and the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the European Economic Community and the European Atomic Energy Community ( https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A01962R0031-20140501 ).

[3] European Court of Auditors, Special Report – The ethical frameworks of the audited EU institutions: scope for improvement, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2019 ( https://www.eca.europa.eu/Lists/ECADocuments/SR19_13/SR_ethical_frameworks_EN.pdf ).

[4] https://eige.europa.eu/thesaurus/terms/1367

The Effects of Sexism on American Women: The Role of Norms vs. Discrimination

Based on bfi working paper no. 2018-56, “the effects of sexism on american women: the role of norms vs. discrimination,” by kerwin kofi charles, professor, uchicago’s harris school of public policy; jonathan guryan, professor, northwestern university; and jessica pan, associate professor, national university singapore.

• Sexism experienced during formative years stays with girls into adulthood
• These background norms can influence choices that women make and affect their life outcomes
• In addition, women face different levels of sexism and discrimination in the states where they live as adults
• Sexism varies across states and can have a significant impact on a woman’s wages and labor market participation, and can also influence her marriage and fertility rates

What type of life experiences will these women have in terms of the work they do and the wages they earn? Will they get married and, if so, how young? If they have children, when will they start to raise a family? How many children will they have? According to the authors of the new BFI working paper, “The Effects of Sexism on American Women: The Role of Norms vs. Discrimination,” the answers to those questions depend crucially on where women are born and where they choose to live their adult lives.

Kerwin Kofi Charles, professor at the Harris School of Public Policy, and his colleagues employ a novel approach that examines how prevailing sexist beliefs shape life outcomes for women. Essentially, they find that sexism affects women through two channels: one is their own preferences that are shaped by where they grow up, and the other is the sexism they experience in the place they choose to live as adults.

On average, not all states are average The average American woman’s socioeconomic outcomes have improved dramatically over the past 50 years. Her wages and probability of employment, relative to the average man’s, have risen steadily over that time. She is also marrying later and bearing children later, as well as having fewer total children. However, these are national averages and these phenomena do not hold in all states across America. Indeed, the gap between men and women that existed in a particular state 50 years ago is largely the same size today. In other words, if a state exhibited less gender discrimination 50 years ago, it retains that narrower gap today; a state that exhibited more discrimination in 1970 has a similarly wide gap today. Much research over the years has focused on broad national trends when measuring sexism and its effect on women’s lives. A primary contribution of this paper is that it documents cross-state differences in women’s outcomes and incorporates non-market factors, like cultural norms. The focus of the authors’ analysis are the four outcomes described above: wages, employment, marriage, and fertility. Of the many forms sexism might take, the authors focus on negative or stereotypical beliefs about whether women should enter the workplace or remain at home. Specifically, sexism prevails in a market when residents believe that:

• women’s capacities are inferior to men;

• families are hurt when women work;

• and men and women should adhere to strict roles in society.

These cultural norms are not only forces that occur to women from external sources, but they are forces that also exist within women, and are strongly affected by where a woman is raised. For example, a girl may grow up within a culture that prizes stay-at-home mothers over working moms, as well as early marriages and large families. These are what the authors describe as background norms, and they are able to estimate the influence of these background norms throughout adulthood by comparing women who were born in one place and moved to different places, and those who were born in different places and moved to the same place. Once a woman reaches adulthood and chooses a place to live, she is then influenced by discrimination in the labor market and by what the authors term residential sexism, or those current norms that they experience in their new hometown. On the question of who engages in sexist behavior, men and/ or women, the authors are clear: men are the purveyors of discrimination in the market (whether women are hired for or promoted to certain jobs), and women determine norms (or residential sexism) that influence such outcomes as marriage and fertility.

The authors conduct a number of rigorous tests based on a broad array of data to reach their conclusions about women’s wages, their labor force participation relative to men, and the ages at which women aged 20-40 married and had their first child. For example, their information on sexism comes from the General Social Survey (GSS), which is a nationally representative survey that asks respondents various questions, among others, about their attitudes or beliefs about women’s place in society.

Sexism affects women through two channels: one is their own preferences that are shaped by where they grow up, and the other is the sexism they experience in the place they choose to live as adults.

The authors reveal how prevailing sexist beliefs about women’s abilities and appropriate roles affect US women’s socioeconomic outcomes. Studying adults who live in one state but who were born in another, they show that sexism in a woman’s state of birth and in her current state of residence both lower her wages and likelihood of labor force participation, and lead her to marry and bear her first child sooner. The sexism a woman experiences where she was raised, or background sexism, affects a woman’s outcomes even after she is an adult living in another place through the influence of norms that she internalized during her formative years. Further, the sexism present where a woman lives (residential sexism) affects her non-labor market outcomes through the influence of prevailing sexist beliefs of other women where she lives. By contrast, residential sexism’s effects on her labor market outcomes seem to operate chiefly through the mechanism of market discrimination by sexist men. Finally, and importantly, the authors find sound evidence that prejudice-based discrimination, undergirded by prevailing sexist beliefs that vary across space, may be an important driver of women’s outcomes in the US.

CLOSING TAKEAWAY By studying adults who were born in one place but live in another, the authors reveal the effects of sexism on women’s outcomes in the market through discrimination (wages and jobs), as well as in non-market settings through cultural norms (marriage and fertility).

• More from M-W
• To save this word, you'll need to log in. Log In

Definition of sexism

Examples of sexism in a sentence.

These examples are programmatically compiled from various online sources to illustrate current usage of the word 'sexism.' Any opinions expressed in the examples do not represent those of Merriam-Webster or its editors. Send us feedback about these examples.

Word History

sex entry 1 + -ism (as in racism )

1963, in the meaning defined at sense 1

Dictionary Entries Near sexism

sex-intergrade

Cite this Entry

“Sexism.” Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary , Merriam-Webster, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sexism. Accessed 27 May. 2024.

Kids Definition

Kids definition of sexism, more from merriam-webster on sexism.

Nglish: Translation of sexism for Spanish Speakers

Britannica English: Translation of sexism for Arabic Speakers

Britannica.com: Encyclopedia article about sexism

Subscribe to America's largest dictionary and get thousands more definitions and advanced search—ad free!

Can you solve 4 words at once?

Word of the day.

See Definitions and Examples »

Get Word of the Day daily email!

Popular in Grammar & Usage

More commonly misspelled words, commonly misspelled words, how to use em dashes (—), en dashes (–) , and hyphens (-), absent letters that are heard anyway, how to use accents and diacritical marks, popular in wordplay, the words of the week - may 24, flower etymologies for your spring garden, 9 superb owl words, 'gaslighting,' 'woke,' 'democracy,' and other top lookups, 10 words for lesser-known games and sports, games & quizzes.

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

11.2 Feminism and Sexism

Learning objectives.

• Define feminism, sexism, and patriarchy.
• Discuss evidence for a decline in sexism.
• Understand some correlates of feminism.

Recall that more than one-third of the public (as measured in the General Social Survey) agrees with the statement, “It is much better for everyone involved if the man is the achiever outside the home and the woman takes care of the home and family.” Do you agree or disagree with this statement? If you are like the majority of college students, you disagree.

Today a lot of women, and some men, will say, “I’m not a feminist, but…,” and then go on to add that they hold certain beliefs about women’s equality and traditional gender roles that actually fall into a feminist framework. Their reluctance to self-identify as feminists underscores the negative image that feminists and feminism hold but also suggests that the actual meaning of feminism may be unclear.

Feminism and sexism are generally two sides of the same coin. Feminism refers to the belief that women and men should have equal opportunities in economic, political, and social life, while sexism refers to a belief in traditional gender role stereotypes and in the inherent inequality between men and women. Sexism thus parallels the concept of racial and ethnic prejudice discussed in Chapter 7 “Deviance, Crime, and Social Control” . Both women and people of color are said, for biological and/or cultural reasons, to lack certain qualities for success in today’s world.

Feminism as a social movement began in the United States during the abolitionist period before the Civil War. Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Lucretia Mott were outspoken abolitionists who made connections between slavery and the oppression of women.

The US Library of Congress – public domain; The US Library of Congress – public domain.

In the United States, feminism as a social movement began during the abolitionist period preceding the Civil War, as such women as Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Lucretia Mott, both active abolitionists, began to see similarities between slavery and the oppression of women. This new women’s movement focused on many issues but especially on the right to vote. As it quickly grew, critics charged that it would ruin the family and wreak havoc on society in other ways. They added that women were not smart enough to vote and should just concentrate on being good wives and mothers (Behling, 2001).

One of the most dramatic events in the women’s suffrage movement occurred in 1872, when Susan B. Anthony was arrested because she voted. At her trial a year later in Canandaigua, New York, the judge refused to let her say anything in her defense and ordered the jury to convict her. Anthony’s statement at sentencing won wide acclaim and ended with words that ring to this day: “I shall earnestly and persistently continue to urge all women to the practical recognition of the old revolutionary maxim, ‘Resistance to tyranny is obedience to God’” (Barry, 1988).

After women won the right to vote in 1920, the women’s movement became less active but began anew in the late 1960s and early 1970s, as women active in the Southern civil rights movement turned their attention to women’s rights, and it is still active today. To a profound degree, it has changed public thinking and social and economic institutions, but, as we will see coming up, much gender inequality remains. Because the women’s movement challenged strongly held traditional views about gender, it has prompted the same kind of controversy that its 19th-century predecessor did. Feminists quickly acquired a bra-burning image, even though there is no documented instance of a bra being burned in a public protest, and the movement led to a backlash as conservative elements echoed the concerns heard a century earlier (Faludi, 1991).

Several varieties of feminism exist. Although they all share the basic idea that women and men should be equal in their opportunities in all spheres of life, they differ in other ways (Lindsey, 2011). Liberal feminism believes that the equality of women can be achieved within our existing society by passing laws and reforming social, economic, and political institutions. In contrast, socialist feminism blames capitalism for women’s inequality and says that true gender equality can result only if fundamental changes in social institutions, and even a socialist revolution, are achieved. Radical feminism , on the other hand, says that patriarchy (male domination) lies at the root of women’s oppression and that women are oppressed even in noncapitalist societies. Patriarchy itself must be abolished, they say, if women are to become equal to men. Finally, an emerging multicultural feminism emphasizes that women of color are oppressed not only because of their gender but also because of their race and class (Andersen & Collins, 2010). They thus face a triple burden that goes beyond their gender. By focusing their attention on women of color in the United States and other nations, multicultural feminists remind us that the lives of these women differ in many ways from those of the middle-class women who historically have led U.S. feminist movements.

The Growth of Feminism and the Decline of Sexism

What evidence is there for the impact of the women’s movement on public thinking? The General Social Survey, the Gallup Poll, and other national surveys show that the public has moved away from traditional views of gender toward more modern ones. Another way of saying this is that the public has moved toward feminism.

To illustrate this, let’s return to the General Social Survey statement that it is much better for the man to achieve outside the home and for the woman to take care of home and family. Figure 11.4 “Change in Acceptance of Traditional Gender Roles in the Family, 1977–2008” shows that agreement with this statement dropped sharply during the 1970s and 1980s before leveling off afterward to slightly more than one-third of the public.

Figure 11.4 Change in Acceptance of Traditional Gender Roles in the Family, 1977–2008

Percentage agreeing that “it is much better for everyone involved if the man is the achiever outside the home and the woman takes care of the home and family.”

Source: Data from General Social Survey.

Another General Social Survey question over the years has asked whether respondents would be willing to vote for a qualified woman for president of the United States. As Figure 11.5 “Change in Willingness to Vote for a Qualified Woman for President” illustrates, this percentage rose from 74% in the early 1970s to a high of 94.1% in 2008. Although we have not yet had a woman president, despite Hillary Rodham Clinton’s historic presidential primary campaign in 2007 and 2008 and Sarah Palin’s presence on the Republican ticket in 2008, the survey evidence indicates the public is willing to vote for one. As demonstrated by the responses to the survey questions on women’s home roles and on a woman president, traditional gender views have indeed declined.

Figure 11.5 Change in Willingness to Vote for a Qualified Woman for President

Correlates of Feminism

Because of the feminist movement’s importance, scholars have investigated why some people are more likely than others to support feminist beliefs. Their research uncovers several correlates of feminism (Dauphinais, Barkan, & Cohn, 1992). We have already seen one of these when we noted that religiosity is associated with support for traditional gender roles. To turn that around, lower levels of religiosity are associated with feminist beliefs and are thus a correlate of feminism.

Several other such correlates exist. One of the strongest is education: the lower the education, the lower the support for feminist beliefs. Figure 11.6 “Education and Acceptance of Traditional Gender Roles in the Family” shows the strength of this correlation by using our familiar General Social Survey statement that men should achieve outside the home and women should take care of home and family. People without a high school degree are almost 5 times as likely as those with a graduate degree to agree with this statement.

Figure 11.6 Education and Acceptance of Traditional Gender Roles in the Family

Source: Data from General Social Survey, 2008.

Age is another correlate, as older people are more likely than younger people to believe in traditional gender roles. Again using our familiar statement about traditional gender roles, we see an example of this relationship in Figure 11.7 “Age and Acceptance of Traditional Gender Roles in the Family” , which shows that older people are more likely than younger people to accept traditional gender roles as measured by this statement.

Figure 11.7 Age and Acceptance of Traditional Gender Roles in the Family

Key Takeaways

• Feminism refers to the belief that women and men should have equal opportunities in economic, political, and social life, while sexism refers to a belief in traditional gender role stereotypes and in the inherent inequality between men and women.
• Sexist beliefs have declined in the United States since the early 1970s.
• Several correlates of feminist beliefs exist. In particular, people with higher levels of education are more likely to hold beliefs consistent with feminism.

For Your Review

• Do you consider yourself a feminist? Why or why not?
• Think about one of your parents or of another adult much older than you. Does this person hold more traditional views about gender than you do? Explain your answer.

Andersen, M. L., & Collins, P. H. (Eds.). (2010). Race, class, and gender: An anthology (7th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Barry, K. L. (1988). Susan B. Anthony: Biography of a singular feminist . New York, NY: New York University Press.

Behling, L. L. (2001). The masculine woman in America, 1890–1935 . Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

Dauphinais, P. D., Barkan, S. E., & Cohn, S. F. (1992). Predictors of rank-and-file feminist activism: Evidence from the 1983 General Social Survey. Social Problems, 39 , 332–344.

Faludi, S. (1991). Backlash: The undeclared war against American women . New York, NY: Crown.

Lindsey, L. L. (2011). Gender roles: A sociological perspective (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Sociology Copyright © 2016 by University of Minnesota is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

• Share full article

Advertisement

This Is How Everyday Sexism Could Stop You From Getting That Promotion

By Jessica Nordell and Yaryna Serkez Oct. 14, 2021

By Jessica Nordell Graphics by Yaryna Serkez

Jessica Nordell is a science and culture journalist. Yaryna Serkez is a writer and a graphics editor for Opinion.

When the computer scientist and mathematician Lenore Blum announced her resignation from Carnegie Mellon University in 2018, the community was jolted. A distinguished professor, she’d helped found the Association for Women in Mathematics, and made seminal contributions to the field. But she said she found herself steadily marginalized from a center she’d help create — blocked from important decisions, dismissed and ignored. She explained at the time : “Subtle biases and microaggressions pile up, few of which on their own rise to the level of ‘let’s take action,’ but are insidious nonetheless.”

It’s an experience many women can relate to. But how much does everyday sexism at work matter? Most would agree that outright discrimination when it comes to hiring and advancement is a bad thing, but what about the small indignities that women experience day after day? The expectation that they be unfailingly helpful ; the golf rounds and networking opportunities they’re not invited to ; the siphoning off of credit for their work by others; unfair performance reviews that penalize them for the same behavior that’s applauded in men; the “ manterrupting ”?

When I was researching my book “The End of Bias: A Beginning” I wanted to understand the collective impact of these less visible forms of bias, but data were hard to come by. Bias doesn’t happen once or twice; it happens day after day, week after week. To explore the aggregate impact of routine gender bias over time, I teamed up with Kenny Joseph, a computer science professor at the University at Buffalo, and a graduate student there, Yuhao Du, to create a computer simulation of a workplace. We call our simulated workplace “NormCorp.” Here’s how it works.

NormCorp is a simple company. Employees do projects, either alone or in pairs. These succeed or fail, which affects a score we call “promotability.” Twice a year, employees go through performance reviews, and the top scorers at each level are promoted to the next level.

NormCorp employees are affected by the kinds of gender bias that are endemic in the workplace. Women’s successful solo projects are valued slightly less than men’s , and their successful joint projects with men accrue them less credit . They are also penalized slightly more when they fail . Occasional “stretch” projects have outsize rewards, but as in the real world, women’s potential is underrecognized compared with men’s, so they must have a greater record of past successes to be assigned these projects. A fraction of women point out the unfairness and are then penalized for the perception that they are “self-promoting.” And as the proportion of women decreases, those that are left face more stereotyping .

We simulated 10 years of promotion cycles happening at NormCorp based on these rules, and here is how women’s representation changed over time.

Simulation of Normcorp promotions over 10 years, with female performance undervalued by 3 percent

Simulation results over time

These biases have all been demonstrated across various professional fields. One working paper study of over 500,000 physician referrals showed that women surgeons receive fewer referrals after successful outcomes than male surgeons. Women economists are less likely to receive tenure the more they co-author papers with men. An analysis at a large company found that women’s, as well as minority men’s, performance was effectively “discounted” compared with that of white men.

And women are penalized for straying from “feminine” personality traits. An analysis of real-world workplace performance evaluations found that more than three-quarters of women’s critical evaluations contained negative comments about their personalities, compared with 2 percent of men’s. If a woman whose contributions are overlooked speaks up, she may be labeled a self-promoter, and consequently face further obstacles to success . She may also become less motivated and committed to the organization . The American Bar Association found that 70 percent of women lawyers of color considered leaving or had left the legal profession entirely, citing being undervalued at work and facing barriers to advancement.

Our model does not take into account women, such as Lenore Blum, who quit their jobs after experiencing an unmanageable amount of bias. But it visualizes how these penalties add up over time for women who stay, so that by the time you reach more senior levels of management, there are fewer women left to promote. These factors not only prevent women from reaching the top ranks in their company but for those who do, it also makes the career path longer and more demanding.

Small change, big difference

Even a tiny increase in the amount of gender bias could lead to dramatic underrepresentation of women in leadership roles over time..

Women’s performance is valued 3 percent less

Women’s performance is valued 5 percent less

Half as many women at level 7 and

only 2 percent of women at C-suite.

Half as many women at level 7 and only 2 percent of women at C-suite.

Women’s performance is valued 3% less

Women’s performance is valued 5% less

When we dig into the trajectory of individual people in our simulation, stories begin to emerge. With just 3 percent bias, one employee — let’s call her Jenelle — starts in an entry-level position, and makes it to the executive level, but it takes her 17 performance review cycles (eight and a half years) to get there, and she needs 208 successful projects to make it. “William” starts at the same level but he gets to executive level much faster — after only eight performance reviews and half Jenelle’s successes at the time she becomes an executive.

Our model shows how large organizational disparities can emerge from many small, even unintentional biases happening frequently over a long period of time. Laws are often designed to address large events that happen infrequently and can be easily attributed to a single actor—for example, overt sexual harassment by a manager — or “pattern and practice” problems, such as discriminatory policies. But women’s progress is hindered even without one egregious incident, or an official policy that is discriminatory.

Women’s path to success might be longer and more demanding

Career paths for employees that reached level 7 by the end of the simulation..

successful projects

“William”

started at the entry-level and reached level 7 in 4 years.

It took “Jenelle”

8.5 years to get

to the same level.

Entry level

1 year of promotions

started at the entry-

level and reached level 7 in 4 years.

8.5 years to get to the same level.

It took “Jenelle” 8.5 years to get to the same level.

Gender bias takes on different dimensions depending on other intersecting aspects of a person’s identity, such as race, religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation, disability and more. Another American Bar Association study found that white women and men of color face similar hurdles to being seen as competent, but women of color face more than either group.

Backlash, too, plays out differently for women of different racial groups, points out Erika Hall, an Emory University management professor. A survey of hundreds of women scientists she helped conduct found that Asian American women reported the highest amount of backlash for self-promotion and assertive behavior. An experimental study by the social psychologist Robert Livingston and colleagues, meanwhile, found that white women are more penalized for demonstrating dominant behavior than Black women. Our model does not account for the important variations in bias that women of different races experience.

So what’s to be done? Diversity trainings are common in companies, educational institutions and health care settings, but these may not have much effect when it comes to employees’ career advancement. The sociologists Frank Dobbin and Alexandra Kalev found that after mandatory diversity trainings, the likelihood that women and men of color became managers either stayed the same or decreased , possibly because of backlash. Some anti-bias trainings have been shown to change behavior, but any approach needs to be evaluated, as psychologist Betsy Levy Paluck has said, “on the level of rigorous testing of medical interventions.”

We also explored a paradox. Research shows that in many fields, a greater proportion of men correlates with more bias against women . At the same time, in fields or organizations where women make up the majority, men can still experience a “glass escalator,” being fast-tracked to senior leadership roles. School superintendents, who work in the women-dominated field of education but are more likely to be men, are one example. To make sense of this, we conceptualized bias at work as a combination of both organizational biases that can be influenced by organizational makeup and larger societal biases.

What we found was that if societal biases are strong compared with those in the organization, a powerful but brief intervention may have only a short-term impact. In our simulation, we tested this by introducing quotas — requiring that the majority of promotions go to women — in the context of low, moderate, or no societal bias. We made the quotas time-limited, as real world efforts to combat bias often take the form of short-term interventions.

Our quotas changed the number of women at upper levels of the corporate hierarchy in the short term, and in turn decreased the gender biases against women rising through the company ranks. But when societal biases were still a persistent force, disparities eventually returned, and the impact of the intervention was short-lived.

Quotas may not be enough

In the presence of societal biases, the effect of a short-term program of quotas disappears over time..

Societal bias has moderate effect

100% of executives

Quotas are introduced. 70% of all promotions go to women.

Majority of executives are men

YEARS OF PROMOTIONS

Societal bias has no effect

Equal representation

representation

What works? Having managers directly mentor and sponsor women improves their chance to rise. Insisting on fair, transparent and objective criteria for promotions and assignments is essential, so that decisions are not ambiguous and subjective, and goal posts aren’t shifting and unwritten. But the effect of standardizing criteria, too, can be limited, because decision-makers can always override these decisions and choose their favored candidates.

Ultimately, I found in my research for the book, the mindset of leaders plays an enormous role. Interventions make a difference, but only if leaders commit to them. One law firm I profiled achieved 50 percent women equity partners through a series of dramatic moves, from overhauling and standardizing promotion criteria, to active sponsorship of women, to a zero-tolerance policy for biased behavior. In this case, the chief executive understood that bias was blocking the company from capturing all the available talent. Leaders who believe that the elimination of bias is essential to the functioning of the organization are more likely to take the kind of active, aggressive, and long-term steps needed to root out bias wherever it may creep into decision making.

Sexism: Gender, Class and Power Essay

Introduction.

Sexism is one of the challenges that most societies in the contemporary world have struggled to address without any meaningful progress. It refers to discriminatory or abusive behavior towards members of the opposite sex. Although anybody is vulnerable to sexism, it is majorly documented as a problem faced by women and girls. According to psychologists, the challenge of sexism is necessitated by factors such as gender roles and stereotypes across various societies (Dawson, 2018).

Over the years, various human rights groups have made an effort to create awareness about sexism and the probable dangers the victims might be exposed to if effective management strategies are not put in place. Research has established that in societies where sexism is highly rooted, victims are often vulnerable to rape and sexual harassment (Brewington, 2013). Cases of sexism against women are very common in the workplace.

Women are very vulnerable to sexual harassment in the workplace as their male colleagues and bosses often ask for sexual favors in exchange for promotions and salary reviews (Tulshyan, 2016). Women also argue that they are often overlooked in leadership positions because men are considered to have a better chance of succeeding. Sexism is a deep-rooted societal vice that ought to be eliminated in order to promote the value of humanity.

Since the turn of the century, people are more vocal with regard to the danger of sexism. Social networking sites are one of the platforms that people have used to highlight the challenges faced by victims of sexism and offer solutions to the problem. In 2012, the infamous Everyday Sexism project was launched with an aim to expose the numerous acts of sexism across the United Kingdom. The project quickly got the attention of the world as people gave shocking reactions to the degree to which the vice was rampant, especially in the streets (Brewington, 2013).

According to research, social media, as well as print and electronic media, have contributed greatly to the advancement of sexism regardless of the fact that they are also being used to fight the vice. For example, the contemporary hip-hop music industry in the United States has been accused of promoting sexism through their music videos. The genre has led to women being viewed more from a sexual angle because of the way they appear in the music videos.

These videos are aired across major television channels and readily available for consumption by the global audience through YouTube. Fashion magazines have also contributed to the growing challenge of sexism, especially towards women, because the artistic presentation of the female body is angled in a sexual manner (Brewington, 2013).

Apart from the inappropriate portrayal of human bodies by media, sexism is highly prevalent in modern society in several other ways. In the workplace, women often complain of the general assumption that men are more qualified and knowledgeable compared to women (Tulshyan, 2016). It is frustrating for women when a colleague seeks advice or clarification from a male peer when they know that they are in a better position to do the same. Women also consider the inability of an employer to allocate a certain task to them simply because they are physically demanding as an act of sexism (Dawson, 2018).

Women go to the gym and participate in various sports just as men do. Thus, it is wrong to assume they cannot meet the physical demands of a task. Psychologists argue that sexism is a relative concept with regard to the way various societies explain and comprehend it. This is evidenced in the different actions or elements that are considered as being sexist. In some societies, the fact that women are made to change their surname when they get married is considered sexism. Women feel that it is not necessary for them to give up their last name because of a process that even men undergo, yet they get to retain theirs (Brewington, 2013).

Another common form of sexism is sexist language. Studies have established that men are less vulnerable compared to women when it comes to sexual objectification when being addressed. It is important for people to use gender-sensitive language, especially in situations where both men and women are involved. For example, it is wrong to use masculine generics such as “Chairman” when referring to a female leader. Instead, one should use a gender-sensitive term such as chairperson (Lipman, 2018).

It is also an act of sexism to refer to a group of people with both men and women as “Guys” because it creates an impression that women are a category below men as human beings. It is also a common occurrence to hear men referring to adult women as girls. This often infantilizes a woman because it makes one feel like the person addressing her is giving an indication that they are not mature.

The most unfortunate thing about sexist language is the casual manner in which it has been used over the years, to the extent that it has become part of the conventional glossary. This is one of the major challenges facing the fight against sexism. Objectification of women through sexist language is rooted in the stereotypes the society develops from the way girls are raised and theories about their beauty (Evans, 2016). Over the years, women have been used to market products through various forms of advertisements. This has influenced girls to believe that they are as valuable as they look. Therefore, any woman whose beauty fails to meet societal standards tends to feel less valuable.

Sexism has robbed women of their safety, comfort, and voice. Many women who have been a victim of street harassment from men argue that such experiences act as an affirmation that their bodies are owned by the society (Brewington, 2013). Due to laxity within the society, women are made to unwillingly take street harassment as intended compliments rather than abuse. Domestic violence is a form of sexism that has taken away the voice of women.

In many societies, many cases of domestic violence against men and women end up unreported because the victims know they will not get any help with ease. It’s a human rights violation that often demeans the victim because the violator perceives the victim as being weak (Evans, 2016). Unfortunately, domestic violence is legal in places such as the United Arab Emirates, where husbands are allowed to discipline their wives as long as they do not inflict visible injuries.

South Asia is common for practicing a form of sexism called Gendercide. It involves the killing of children of a specific gender. It is close to gender-selective-abortion, where women are forced to terminate their pregnancies depending on the sex of the unborn child. In these practices, girls are targeted more than boys. The same case applies to female genital mutilation, which human rights groups consider as the gravest form of sexism (Evans, 2016).

In contemporary society, technology is widely abused to advance sexist agendas. Women always complain of suffering rape anxiety because people use phone calls and social media posts to deliver threats. No one chooses to be a victim of sexism; thus, avoiding walking in the streets unaccompanied or with people of the same gender is not enough. Cyberbullying is a strategy widely used by sexist people to harass their targets. The internet has turned the world into a global village.

Thus cultural interaction has been greatly heightened (Brewington, 2013). This effect is manifested a lot in the fashion industry, where the dres’ codes for men and women have undergone a huge transformation. Psychologists argue that dres’ codes are sexist in nature. They often limit the power and confidence of women, depending on the societal perception of a certain trend. The style of women wearing pants started in the developed countries as a way of helping women address the threat of rape. Several decades later, it has become a global trend. Some women argue that their lies in wearing dresses, but they are often forced to wear pants for safety purposes (Evans, 2016).

The concept of sexism is very broad and cannot be explained exhaustively. However, it is common knowledge that there is an urgent need to address this global challenge in order to achieve the common good. Gender equality and sensitivity is a right of every human being, thus the need to ensure that we create a more inclusive society. In order to achieve this feat, a change in attitude with regard to the way different genders perceive each other is very important. Men need to understand that they are not biologically programmed to harass women or objectify them.

Brewington, C. (2013). The sacred place of exile: Pioneering women and the need for a new women’s missionary movement . New York, NY: Wipf and Stock Publishers.

Dawson, T. (2018). Gender, class and power: An analysis of pay inequalities in the workplace . New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

Evans, M. (2016). The persistence of gender inequality . New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.

Lipman, J. (2018). That’s what she said: What men need to know and women need to tell them about working together . New York, NY: Harper Collins.

Tulshyan, R. (2016). The diversity advantage: Fixing gender inequality in the workplace . New York, NY: Create Space Independent Publishing Platform.

• When Men Experience Sexism Article by Berlatsky
• Canadian Society: Sexism and the Persistent Woman Question
• Misogyny and Sexism in Policing
• The Restricted Status of Women in Pakistan
• Diversity Organizations and Gender Issues in the US
• Gender Discrimination in the United States
• Gender Inequality Index 2013 in the Gulf Countries
• Feminist Perspective: “The Gender Pay Gap Explained”
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2021, May 7). Sexism: Gender, Class and Power. https://ivypanda.com/essays/sexism-gender-class-and-power/

"Sexism: Gender, Class and Power." IvyPanda , 7 May 2021, ivypanda.com/essays/sexism-gender-class-and-power/.

IvyPanda . (2021) 'Sexism: Gender, Class and Power'. 7 May.

IvyPanda . 2021. "Sexism: Gender, Class and Power." May 7, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/sexism-gender-class-and-power/.

1. IvyPanda . "Sexism: Gender, Class and Power." May 7, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/sexism-gender-class-and-power/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Sexism: Gender, Class and Power." May 7, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/sexism-gender-class-and-power/.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List

Belief in sexism shift: Defining a new form of contemporary sexism and introducing the belief in sexism shift scale (BSS scale)

Miriam k. zehnter.

1 Department of Work, Economic, and Social Psychology, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria

Francesca Manzi

2 Department of Social, Health, and Organisational Psychology, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands

Patrick E. Shrout

3 Department of Psychology, New York University, New York, New York, United States of America

Madeline E. Heilman

Associated data.

All data, analyses, and R code are available on the Open Science Framework via https://www.doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/2DGTE

The belief that the target of sexism has shifted from women to men is gaining popularity. Yet despite its potential theoretical and practical importance, the belief that men are now the primary target of sexism has not been systematically defined nor has it been reliably measured. In this paper, we define the belief in sexism shift (BSS) and introduce a scale to measure it. We contend that BSS constitutes a new form of contemporary sexism characterized by the perception that anti-male discrimination is pervasive, that it now exceeds anti-female discrimination, and that it is caused by women’s societal advancement. In four studies (N = 666), we develop and test a concise, one-dimensional, 15-item measure of BSS: the BSS scale. Our findings demonstrate that BSS is related to, yet distinct from other forms of sexism (traditional, modern, and ambivalent sexism). Moreover, our results show that the BSS scale is a stable and reliable measure of BSS across different samples, time, and participant gender. The BSS scale is also less susceptible to social desirability concerns than other sexism measures. In sum, the BSS scale can be a valuable tool to help understand a new and potentially growing type of sexism that may hinder women in unprecedented ways.

Introduction

“Man has been the dominant sex since , well , the dawn of mankind . But for the first time in human history , that is changing–and with shocking speed . ” [ 1 ].

In 2016, two former Yahoo employees filed independent lawsuits alleging that the company had discriminated against them because of their gender [ 2 ]. These were not isolated cases. Several large corporations and educational institutions (e.g., Google, Yale University) were recently confronted with similar claims of gender discrimination [ 3 , 4 ]. These allegations were surprising not because of the nature of the complaint–thousands of gender-based discrimination suits are filed each year in the US alone [ 5 ]–but because of the gender of the complainants: All of the plaintiffs were men. Notably, many of these lawsuits were filed in domains that remain heavily male-dominated.

The belief that men are now the disadvantaged gender has gained traction, sparking debates both in popular culture and academia [ 6 – 8 ]. Data indicate that men, in particular, believe that they are more likely than ever before to suffer gender-based discrimination [ 9 , 10 ]. About two thirds of men claim to have faced at least some discrimination due to their gender [ 11 ]. Even some women share these beliefs. In the United States, 9% women (and 15% men) believe that women have better job opportunities than men [ 12 ], and 5% of women (and 14% of men) think that it is now easier to be a woman than a man [ 13 ].

Taken together, these data suggest that there is an increasing number of men and women who believe that “the tables have turned”–that is, that the target of sexism has shifted from women to men, and that anti-male discrimination is now a pervasive social issue. Recent efforts have been made to begin to understand this emerging belief as well as its potential causes and consequences [ 14 – 16 ]. However, the literature to date has not yet offered a systematic definition of what this belief entails, nor have researchers provided a reliable way to measure it.

The aim of this paper is to introduce and formally define the belief in sexism shift (BSS) and to develop a scale to measure it: the BSS scale. We first provide a definition of BSS and place it in the broader context of contemporary anti-female sexism. We then present research on the development and validation of the BSS scale, a 15-item self-report measure reflecting the perceptions of anti-male discrimination that comprise BSS. Finally, we discuss how the BSS scale may help advance our understanding of sexism, in general, and enable future research on BSS, in particular.

Defining belief in sexism shift

The belief in sexism shift centers around the victimization of men. It is characterized by the belief that men have become the primary victims of sexism, that male victimization is pervasive, and that this new form of discrimination is the result of women’s societal advancement.

As its name suggests, those who endorse BSS perceive a shift or transition from anti-female sexism to anti-male sexism. This shift is thought to have occurred recently and to have increased to a point where men now suffer more discrimination than women [ 9 , 10 ]. Men are not merely seen as additional victims of rigid gender norms alongside women; but rather, as the primary target of gender discrimination.

Importantly, male victimization is not limited to contexts where men may actually be discriminated against, such as female-dominated professions or traditionally feminine roles [ 17 ]. Rather, individuals who endorse BSS perceive anti-male discrimination to be ubiquitous, manifesting in multiple settings (e.g., the workplace, politics), through multiple perpetrators (e.g., the media, feminists), and in multiple ways (e.g., political correctness, devaluation of masculinity; [ 18 – 20 ]).

In addition, BSS entails that it is women’s societal advancement that has, to a great extent, led to anti-male discrimination. Instead of viewing women’s progress as a step towards greater gender equality for both women and men, those endorsing BSS assume that women’s gains entail losses for men [ 9 , 14 , 21 ]. This zero-sum perspective on gender discrimination is important: it differentiates individuals who endorse BSS from those who perceive that all genders may suffer from some form of discrimination [ 22 – 24 ].

Belief in sexism shift as a contemporary form of anti-female sexism

On the surface, the focus of BSS is on men and not on women. Thus, the idea that BSS constitutes a new form of anti-female sexism may seem counterintuitive. We argue, however, that BSS is consistent with both the definition and function of anti-female sexism.

Sexism has been defined as discriminatory and prejudicial attitudes, beliefs and practices directed against a person based on their sex and/or gender [ 25 ]. In the case of BSS, negative attitudes towards women are concealed through a narrative of male victimization where men’s disadvantages are the product of a system that has relentlessly favored women. By implying that women’s progress has been attained through favoritism, BSS subtly discounts women’s abilities and downplays their merits in their own advancement.

Further, like other forms of anti-female sexism, the function of BSS is to sustain a gender hierarchy that places men over women [ 26 ]. However, BSS fulfills this function in new and specific ways. Namely, BSS diverts attention from ongoing discrimination against women by redirecting the focus, placing men as the targets of an ostensibly anti-male system. Not only does BSS obscure anti-female discrimination, but it also goes a step further, positing that women now have an unjust advantage over men. This implies that any measure to further advance women is unnecessary and effectively hurts men.

In sum, BSS serves to uphold men’s higher social status by providing an unprecedented rationale for prioritizing men’s rights over women’s rights. From the perspective of those who endorse BSS, efforts to attain gender equality should effectively move away from women’s issues to instead focus solely on the protection of men’s rights.

Differences between belief in sexism shift and other forms sexism

BSS, although a manifestation of sexism against women, differs from the most well-studied forms of anti-female sexism in critical ways.

Traditional sexism

Traditional or “old-fashioned” sexism focuses on the social roles that women and men should fulfill [ 27 , 28 ]: While intellectual and leadership roles are ascribed to men, housekeeping and caregiving roles are ascribed to women. Thus, traditional sexism serves to justify the unequal treatment of women and men by overtly upholding conventional gender roles [ 27 , 28 ]. Unlike traditional sexism, upholding BSS does not require a traditional view of gender. Instead, the outward focus of BSS is on gender equality–albeit to advance men. In this way, BSS provides a more modern and socially acceptable narrative to justify placing men over women and is thus a much more subtle form of sexism than traditional sexism.

Ambivalent sexism

Ambivalent sexism assigns both negative (hostile sexism) and positive (benevolent sexism) attributes to women. While blatant hostility is directed towards non-traditional and feminist women, traditional women are seen as needing and worthy of protection [ 29 ]. BSS does not explicitly address any particular subgroup of women–all women are seen as benefitting from anti-male discrimination. Like hostile sexists, those who endorse BSS hold negative views of women. However, BSS is much less blatant: it conceals negative attitudes towards women behind a narrative of male victimhood. Thus, unlike hostile sexism, BSS may not be readily recognized as anti-female, making it a more insidious form of contemporary sexism. In addition, although both benevolent sexism and BSS are subtle forms of sexism, they each obscure anti-female attitudes in markedly different ways. While the former uses paternalism and praise, the latter achieves this goal by shifting the focus towards the victimization of men.

Modern sexism

Rather than focusing on women’s roles or attributes, modern sexism centers around the current state of gender discrimination. Indeed, modern sexism is defined by the denial of structural discrimination against women [ 28 ]. Although modern sexists do not explicitly belittle women, denying anti-female discrimination allows them to subtly trace back the causes for women’s social stagnation to women’s own shortcomings, rendering further measures for the advancement of women obsolete. BSS, also, focuses on the state of gender discrimination. But unlike modern sexists, those endorsing BSS posit that gender discrimination is an ongoing societal issue, albeit with different victims. Moreover, if the current victims of discrimination are now men, measures to ensure women’s advancement are not only seen as obsolete, but also as a barrier to attaining true gender equality. Thus, those who uphold BSS see measures to promote men (over women) as both legitimate and necessary.

Overview of the present research

The goal of this research is to provide a reliable self-report measure of the tendency to endorse the belief in sexism shift and to build a case for its validity. This is a first and essential step for future research on BSS, its psychological underpinnings, and its downstream consequences. In the following sections, we present four studies designed to develop and test a concise, one-dimensional, 15-item measure–the BSS scale. In a pilot study, we use principal component analysis (PCA) to assess the plausibility of a one-dimensional structure of BSS in an initial pool of 75 items. We also begin to reduce the item pool. In Study 1, we use exploratory factor analysis (EFA) to identify the items that are related to the core construct. After selecting 15 items that balance conceptual relevance and psychometric credentials, we use confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) for a preliminary examination of the fit of a one-dimensional psychometric model. In Study 2, we use CFA to assess the factor structure of the BSS scale with a new sample. Then, we assess the BSS scale’s convergent and discriminant validity. In addition, we examine the test-retest reliability of the BSS scale over a time span of two weeks. Finally, in Study 3, we perform analyses of measurement invariance (AMI) to assess whether the BSS items have the same psychometric structure among women and men. An overview of the four studies’ aims and statistical analyses is provided in Table 1 .

General method

Before presenting our results, we will identify methodological aspects that were consistent across all studies.

Research participants

Six hundred and sixty-six adults were involved in the studies reported here. Of these participants, 288 (43%) identified as women, 376 (56%) identified as men, and two (<1%) identified as non-binary. All participants were recruited via Amazon’s Mechanical Turk (MTurk) and paid between 0.75 and 2.00 US Dollars. Given the language and wording of some of the scale items (e.g., “In the US, discrimination against men is on the rise”), participants were also required to reside in the United States and to be at least 18 years of age.

Identification of careless responses

Although MTurk generally produces high-quality data [ 30 ], we took additional steps to identify careless responses. Following recommendations [ 31 ] we included one instructed-response item per 50 to 100 items (e.g., “Reading the items carefully is critical, if you are paying attention please choose ‘ I strongly agree’ ”). We also computed a psychometric antonym index by correlating item pairs with opposite content (e.g., “Feminism is about favoring women over men” and “Feminism does not discriminate against men” ) . Since such items are expected to correlate negatively, positive indices indicate careless response [ 31 ]. In addition, we screened the responses of participants who completed the questionnaire suspiciously fast, that is, those with an average response time of under two seconds per item [ 32 ]. Individuals were excluded from data analysis either for incorrect response(s) to the instructed response item(s), or for rushed response times in combination with a psychometric antonym index above .30.

Table 2 provides a summary of the sample characteristics, including socio-demographic information, by study.

1 Note. The retest response rate was 65 percent.

2 Note. This sample was obtained by collapsing responses from the Pilot Study, Study 1, and Study 2.

3 Note. Two additional participants indicating non-binary gender were excluded from analysis of measurement invariance.

The research presented here was approved by New York University’s Internal Review Board (NYU IRB). All studies were conducted on MTurk and introduced as a study on “people’s opinions about current issues”. Upon providing informed consent, participants were asked to complete one or more questionnaires and to provide basic demographic information (gender, race/ethnicity, and age). The order of the items and questionnaires (when applicable) was randomized in every study. After completing the study, participants were fully debriefed.

Item generation

We used various approaches to develop items for the BSS scale. First, we invited a group of experts on gender and intergroup relations to brainstorm items that could reflect potential manifestations of BSS. Our second approach involved the examination of relevant websites (e.g., avoiceformen.com), online forums (e.g., reddit), and recent media articles and debates [ 33 , 34 ] for “real-world” examples of BSS. In a third and final approach, we turned to the literature on sexism and related constructs. Several items were inspired by recent work on current perceptions of gender discrimination [ 10 ]. We also rephrased items from previous sexism scales, such as the Modern Sexism Scale [ 28 ] and the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory [ 29 ], to reflect BSS. For example, the modern sexism item “Women often miss out on good jobs due to sexual discrimination” was adapted to read “Men often miss out on good jobs due to affirmative action for women”.

This process resulted in an initial list of 75 items reflecting male victimization, the central characteristic of BSS. The items were created to describe beliefs about anti-male discrimination on a general level (e.g., “In the US, discrimination against men is on the rise”) as well as specific examples of its multiple manifestations, perpetrators, and expressions (e.g., “Nowadays, men don’t have the same chances in the job market as women”). They also included statements reflecting zero-sum beliefs about gender discrimination (e.g., “Giving women more rights often requires taking away men’s rights”). All items were worded as statements, and responses were coded using a 7-point Likert scale (1 = I strongly disagree , 7 = I strongly agree ). 16 items were reverse-coded to provide within-scale attention checks.

The goal of the pilot study was to assess the plausibility of a one-dimensional structure of BSS in the initial item pool of 75 items. We also sought to select a subset of items that were strongly related to the dominant dimension.

Participants and procedure

We analyzed the responses of one hundred and twelve participants (for detailed sample characteristics, see Table 2 ). The sample size was chosen to provide an initial check on how highly correlated the item-responses were. With this sample size, the 95% confidence bound on a sample correlation of zero was ±.19 (and narrower for positive correlations), giving us the ability to identify the items that were clearly uncorrelated with the first principle component of the item set. The structure of the selected items was verified in subsequent studies with larger sample sizes.

Data analysis

Because the sample size was relatively small, we analyzed the item correlation matrix using principal components analysis (PCA) rather than factor analysis. The pattern of eigenvalues from PCA reveals the extent to which the items reflect overlapping variance. Corresponding to the first eigenvalue is an eigenvector, which gives an approximation to factor loadings from a one-factor model. We computed the eigenvalues of the 75 by 75 item matrix and determined the number of components by examining the scree plot of the eigenvalues and using Horn’s parallel analysis [ 35 ]. Then, we performed PCA on a one-component and a two-component solution. Adhering to a theory-driven approach, we checked to see if items that are key markers of the BSS construct had high loadings on the first eigenvector. Specifically, we examined whether the items reflecting male victimization on a general level loaded highly on the first component. We then selected a subset of items that balanced conceptual relevance and psychometric credentials. Of the items that reflected male victimization on a general level, we selected the items with the highest component loadings. Then we selected items representing specific manifestations of male victimization, including different settings, perpetrators, and expressions. For each manifestation (e.g., male victimization in the media, male victimization by feminists), we again selected the items with the highest component loadings. We also selected the highest loading items illustrating zero-sum beliefs about gender discrimination. Lastly, we selected the reverse-coded items with the highest component loadings to provide within-scale attention checks. All analyses were conducted in R using the psych package [ 36 ].

The analysis of the eigenvalues and the scree plot ( Fig 1 ) supported a one-dimensional structure of the proposed latent construct (i.e., BSS), with the first eigenvalue being considerably larger than the subsequent eigenvalues. As Horn’s parallel analysis suggested that a second component might be evident, we examined a one-component and a two-component solution. However, while the first component explained 57% of variance, a second component explained merely 4.3% of additional variance. In addition, 67 items (89.3%) loaded highly on the first component (i.e., loadings > |.60|; [ 37 , 38 ]), indicating that one component was a good representation of the BSS construct. We then reduced the list of 75 items to 28 items. We selected 3 items reflecting male victimization on a general level, 22 items describing specific manifestations of anti-male discrimination, and 3 items reflecting zero-sum beliefs about gender discrimination. Six of the 28 selected items were reverse-coded. See S1 Table for the component loadings of the 75 items included in the Pilot Study.

Note: The number of components shown here was limited to 20. The real maximum number of components was 75.

In Study 1, we assessed the psychometric properties of the reduced subset of 28 items identified in the pilot study and selected a subset of 15 items that represented the BSS construct. We then examined the plausibility of a one-dimensional structure of the final set of items.

We analyzed the responses of two hundred and nineteen participants (see Table 2 for sample characteristics). To determine sample size, we conducted power analyses based on the results from the pilot study. Specifically, we selected the item with the lowest factor loading, the item with the highest factor loading, and one item with an average factor loading. We then estimated the power that each of these items had achieved in the pilot study. The selected items had high test power (>.80) despite the small sample size. We thus felt confident that a similarly sized sample (n ≥ 112) would be sufficiently well-powered. We initially recruited 120 individuals for Study 1. However, after making slight changes to the wording of one item, we recruited 120 additional participants to ensure that rewording did not change the perceived meaning of the item. Given that the means of the reworded item were not significantly different across the two samples, we decided to collapse the two samples for subsequent analyses, t (217) = -1.72, p = .09.

We used a maximum likelihood EFA to examine the psychometric properties of the 28 items selected using pilot study results. We computed the eigenvalues of the 28 by 28 item matrix and again determined the number of factors by examining the scree plot of the eigenvalues and conducting a parallel analysis. Then, we performed EFA on a one-factor and a two-factor solution. In the two-factor EFA, we used Promax to rotate the solution (an oblique rotation that allows factors to be correlated). EFA was performed in R using the fa function in the psych package [ 36 ].

Fifteen of the 28 items were selected to represent the BSS scale based on conceptual and statistical considerations. Specifically, we chose the items with the highest factor loadings within three conceptual domains, male victimization on a general level, specific manifestations of male victimization (e.g., specific contexts, perpetrators, and expressions), and zero-sum beliefs about gender discrimination. Finally, we selected the reverse-coded items with the highest factor loadings.

As a preliminary analysis of the psychometric structure of the final sets of items, we performed maximum likelihood CFA on a one-factor model. Model fit was assessed through chi-square, root-mean-square error of approximation (RMSEA), comparative fit index (CFI), Tucker-Lewis index (TLI), and standardized root mean square residuals (SRMR). We expected that a well-fitting model would meet most of the following criteria: RMSEA < .06, CFI > .95, TLI > .95, and SRMR < .08 [ 39 ]. CFA was performed in R using the lavaan package for latent variable analyses [ 40 ].

Consistent with the results from the pilot study, the scree plot suggested a one-dimensional solution ( Fig 2 ). Also in line with the pilot study, parallel analysis suggested that a second or third factor might be evident. To explore that possibility, we examined both the one- and two-factor EFA solutions. The one-factor solution explained 58%, and the two-factor solution explained merely 2% of additional variance. For the one-factor solution, the fit indices were, RMSR = .05, TLI = .89, RMSEA = .09, 90% CI [.08, .09], whereas for the two-factor solution they were RMSR = .04, TLI = .92, RMSEA = .08, 90% CI [.06, .08]. The LR chi square for the one-factor model was LR (350) = 867.33 and for the two-factor model it was LR (323) = 686.51. The difference between them was LR (72) = 180.82, p < .0001.

Note: The number of factors shown here was limited to 20. The real maximum number of factors was 28.

All item loadings from the one factor solution were in the expected direction, ranging in magnitude from .91 to .33, with a median loading of .79. The loadings in the Promax-rotated two-factor solution were also in the expected direction, with seventeen items loading highest on a factor reflecting male victimization on a general level and ten items loading on a factor marked by zero-sum beliefs about gender discrimination. A final item was weakly related to both factors. However, the two Promax-rotated factors correlated strongly in a positive direction, r = .82, supporting the notion that these two specific dimensions are aspects of the more general BSS dimension.

We therefore selected the final set of 15 items based on the one-factor solution. Three items described male victimization on a general level, ten items reflected specific manifestations of male victimization, and two items reflected zero-sum beliefs about gender discrimination. Three of these items were reverse-coded.

As expected, the dominant one-dimensional structure of the BSS scale was again found with the 15 items selected for the final BSS scale. The fit indices for the one factor solution suggested good fit, CFI = .95, TLI = .95, RMSEA = .08, 90% CI [.07, .10], SRMR = .04. The internal consistency of the BSS scale was very high, Cronbach α = .96, 95% CI [.95, .97]. See S1 Table for the factor loadings of all 28 items included in Study 1.

In study 2, we sought to assess the factor structure of the final 15-item BSS scale with a different sample. We also began to test the conceptual and statistical validity of the BSS construct. We proposed that BSS is a subtle form of contemporary anti-female sexism that, unlike previous forms of sexism, masks negative attitudes towards women through a narrative of male victimhood. Accordingly, we expected BSS to be related to, yet distinct from, other forms of sexism. To support convergent validity, we examined the descriptive statistics (e.g., means, standard deviations) and expected that BSS would show a pattern of gender differences that is typical for contemporary sexism. Namely, men should have significantly higher BSS mean scores than women [ 41 , 42 ]. In addition, we examined the associations between BSS, traditional sexism, modern sexism, hostile sexism, and benevolent sexism. As a form of subtle, contemporary sexism, BSS should show strong associations with modern sexism and only weak to moderate associations with traditional sexism. BSS is also thought to conceal negative attitudes towards women. Thus, we expected strong associations of BSS with hostile sexism and weak associations with benevolent sexism.

We also began to assess discriminant validity by testing whether in factor analyses, BSS emerged as a distinct construct when analyzed alongside other forms of sexism. Further, if BSS is a subtle form of sexism, as we have proposed, it should not be readily recognized as such. Therefore, we expected the BSS scale to show less susceptibility to social desirability considerations than other forms of sexism.

Finally, to examine the test-retest reliability of the BSS, we contacted participants to complete the BSS scale again after two weeks.

The sample for this study included three hundred and thirty-five participants (see Table 2 for the full sample characteristics). In addition to completing the BSS scale, participants were randomly assigned to complete two of the three most widely used sexism scales [ 41 , 43 ]. The sexism scales were presented on separate pages and randomized in order. All participants were asked to complete a social desirability measure [ 44 ].

The sample size was determined with consideration to sufficient numbers of participants for the correlations of the BSS scale with other sexism scales. We assumed high internal consistency of the BSS scale and each of the other sexism scales (Cronbach α < .80), and we expected strong correlations (r < |.60|) between the BSS scale and contemporary forms of sexism (i.e., modern and hostile sexism). Based on these expectations, we determined that a sample size of at least 200 participation per correlation of the BSS scale with any other scale was sufficient [ 45 ].

To examine test-retest reliability, all participants were contacted two weeks after their initial participation. The responses of two hundred and six individuals who completed the BSS scale a second time were analyzed (see Table 2 for sample characteristics).

In addition to the BSS scale, research material included three sexism measures: the 25-item Attitudes towards Women Scale to measure traditional sexism ( α = .94; [ 27 ]), the 8-item Modern Sexism Scale ( α = .94; [ 28 ]). and the 22-item Ambivalent Sexism Inventory, including the 11-item Hostile Sexism Scale ( α = .95) and the 11-item Benevolent Sexism Scale ( α = .91; [ 29 ]). For consistency, all scales were measured on 7-point scales (1 = I strongly disagree , 7 = I strongly agree ). Higher scores indicated higher levels of sexism.

Social desirability was assessed using the 10-item short form of the Marlow-Crowne Social Desirability Scale ( α = .72; [ 44 ]). Participants were asked to give True-False answers to statements such as “I have never intensely disliked anyone”. Scores could range from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating higher levels of socially desirable response behavior.

Confirmatory factor analyses

After inspecting item means and standard deviations by gender, we performed maximum likelihood CFA on a one-factor model to replicate the psychometric structure of the BSS scale in this new sample. Model fit was assessed through the criteria described in Study 1.

Convergent validity

We analyzed the descriptive statistics and examined gender differences in BSS mean scores. Then, we estimated Pearson product-moment correlations of the BSS scale with traditional, modern, hostile, and benevolent sexism. Based on previous studies examining the correlations of sexism scales [ 29 , 43 ], we determined that strong associations would be indicated by correlations > .60, moderate associations by correlations between .30 and .60, and weak associations by correlations < .30. To systematically assess the strength of the respective correlation coefficients and test whether BSS correlated more strongly with modern sexism than traditional sexism, and with hostile than benevolent sexism, we conducted coefficient comparisons [ 46 , 47 ]. Coefficient comparison analyses were performed in R using the “cocor” package [ 48 ].

Discriminant validity

To assess whether the psychometric structure of the BSS scale was related, but statistically distinct from other sexism measures, we performed a series of maximum likelihood CFAs. Each CFA included the BSS scale and one other sexism measure. In each analysis, we compared a two-factor model (i.e., a model where the BSS scale and the other sexism measure were correlated, but distinct factors), to a one-factor model (i.e., a model where the BSS scale and the other sexism measure converged on one common factor). We expected that the two-factor models would show better fit than the one-factor models, indicating that BSS was statistically distinct from the other scales. CFA model fit criteria [ 39 ] and Chi-square difference tests [ 49 ] were computed for model comparisons.

In addition, we calculated Pearson product-moment correlations between the social desirability scale and each sexism scale and compared these correlations. These analyses were performed separately for women and men as there is conflicting evidence about gender differences in the ability to recognize sexism as such [ 41 , 50 ].

Test-retest reliability

To investigate the test-retest reliability of the BSS scale, we calculated Pearson product-moment correlations between participants’ mean scores at time one and time two.

The maximum likelihood CFA on a one-factor model yielded acceptable model fit: CFI = .93, TLI = .92, RMSEA = .10, 90% CI [.09, .11], SRMR = .04. However, these fit indices were below the model fit criteria that we had initially defined. We examined the possibility that a secondary factor might be detracting from the fit and found in a two-factor EFA that the three negatively worded items were more correlated with each other than with the positively worded items. We therefore repeated the CFA with a bi-factor model that accounted for item keying effects that were uncorrelated with the general BSS factor. This model yielded very good model fit, with most of the fit indices conforming to the defined fit criteria, CFI = .97, TLI = .95, RMSEA = .08, 90% CI [.07, .09], SRMR = .03. This indicates that the lack of fit of the one-factor model was based on response bias associated with the reverse-coded items, and not on a different theoretical structure of the BSS construct [ 51 ]. The internal consistency of the BSS scale was, again, very high, Cronbach α = .96, 95% CI [.96, .97].

In sum, these results verified the one-dimensional psychometric structure of the BSS scale. Table 3 summarizes item means and standard deviations by gender. Table 4 summarizes the standardized component and factor loadings of the final 15 items for each study (Pilot Study, Study 1, Study 2). The final BSS scale, including instructions for its administration, is presented in Appendix A.

Note. * signifies reverse-coded items.

The BSS scale’s mean scores–like the scores of the other sexism measures–were significantly higher among men ( M = 3.45, SD = 1.50) than among women ( M = 2.57, SD = 1.52; t (333) = -5.30, p < .0001). Although the BSS scale correlated strongly with both modern sexism, r (219) = .79, 95% CI [.73, .83], p < .0001, and traditional sexism, r (223) = .69, 95% CI [.61, .75], p < .0001, coefficient comparison analyses confirmed that the association between BSS and modern sexism was significantly stronger than the association between BSS and traditional sexism, z = 2.20, p = .028. Also in line with our expectations, the BSS scale correlated more strongly with hostile sexism, r (222) = .87, 95% CI [.84, .90], p < .0001, than with benevolent sexism, r (222) = .43, 95% CI [.31, 53], p < .0001; coefficient comparison confirmed that these correlations were significantly different, z = 10.80, p < .0001. See Fig 3 for the distribution of BSS scores by gender and Table 5 for the means, standard deviations, and correlations of all sexism scales.

CFAs including the BSS scale and each of the other sexism measures provided support for the discriminant validity of the BSS scale. The model fit criteria and the chi-square difference tests consistently supported two-factor models over one-factor models, indicating that BSS is related to, but distinct from other forms of sexism. See Table 6 for all model comparisons.

*** p < .0001.

Social desirability was moderate among women ( M = 3.84, SD = 2.47) and men ( M = 3.78, SD = 2.55), t (333) = 0.21, p = .836. An analysis of the correlations between each of the sexism measures and social desirability further supported the discriminant validity of BSS. As expected, the BBS scale did not correlate significantly with social desirability among women, r (143) = .07, 95% CI [-.10, .23], p = .440, or among men, r (186) = -.10, 95% CI [-.23, .05], p = .193. In contrast, all other sexism scales showed correlations with social desirability, either among women or among men ( Table 7 ; note that among men, one outlier was excluded from the correlation between hostile sexism and social desirability).

*p < .05.

Finally, BSS scores at time one correlated strongly with mean scores at time two, r (203) = .92, 95% CI [.89, .94], providing support for the test-retest reliability of the BSS scale.

Given the content of the BSS scale and gender differences in mean BSS scores, as a final step, we sought to assess whether the underlying construct had similar meaning for women and men. Analysis of measurement invariance (AMI) is an important, yet often neglected aspect in the development and validation of new measurement scales. Measurement invariance across groups allows researchers to conclude that mean differences in group scores reflect differences in the latent construct, and are not the result of a third, unknown factor [ 52 , 53 ].

Participants

To obtain a large sample for analysis, we collapsed the samples from the previous studies (Pilot Study, Study 1, and Study 2). The collapsed sample included 664 individuals (see Table 2 for the sample characteristics).

We performed AMI within a structural equation modelling framework using the R “semTools” package [ 54 ]. AMI is a stepwise process and requires a sequence of model tests where each model is tested against its predecessor. The first step is the assessment of configural invariance, which indicates equivalence in model form across groups (e.g., similar number of factors, similar pattern in free and fixed loadings). The second step is the assessment of metric invariance, which indicates equivalence in factor loadings across groups. The third step is the assessment of scalar invariance, which indicates equivalence of item intercepts across groups. We examined configural, metric, and scalar measurement invariance of the BSS scale for women and men. First, we computed a maximum likelihood one-factor CFA on the full sample to gain estimates for the baseline model fit criteria. Then, we compared a sequence of three invariance models. The fundamental structure of all models was the one-factor solution. In Model 1, we assessed configural invariance, which was indicated by model fit criteria similar to the baseline criteria, CFI = .95, and RMSEA = .08. In Model 2, we constrained the factor loadings to be equivalent for women and men. Then, we compared the fit of Model 1 and Model 2. The criteria to assume metric invariance are a non-significant change in Chi-square, ΔX 2 , ΔCFI > -.02, and ΔRMSEA < .03 [ 55 ]. In Model 3, we constrained the item intercepts to be equivalent for women and men and compared the fit of Model 2 and Model 3. Criteria for scalar invariance are a non-significant change in Chi square, ΔX 2 , ΔCFI > -.01, and ΔRMSEA < .01 [ 55 ].

Results indicated measurement invariance of the BSS scale across participant gender. Model 1 supported configural invariance across gender, X 2 (180) = 631.27, CFI = .95, and RMSEA = .09. The comparison of Model 1 and Model 2 supported the notion of metric invariance; the chi-square values were not statistically different, ΔX 2 (14) = 17.53, p = .229. The observed changes ΔCFI < .0001 and ΔRMSEA = .003 were consistent with the criteria for metric invariance described above. The comparison of Model 2 and Model 3 supported the notion of scalar invariance. The chi-square values were not statistically different, ΔX 2 (14) = 13.76, p = .468; changes in ΔCFI < .0001 and ΔRMSEA = .003 were in line with the criteria for scalar invariance described above (AMI performed with a bi-factor model that accounted for item keying effects produced similar results).

We can thus conclude that BSS has similar meaning for women and men and that mean gender differences in BSS can be interpreted as mean differences in the latent construct. See Table 8 for the results of AMI.

In this paper, we defined belief in sexism shift as a new manifestation of anti-female sexism and introduced a scale to measure it. Consistent with our definition, BSS emerged as a unidimensional construct including assertions about the current victimization of men, the multitude of ways in which male victimization is manifested, and the belief that male victimization is the result of women’s recent advancement.

Our findings further indicate that the BSS scale measures a new, distinct form of sexism. Past definitions of sexism have been built around people’s attitudes towards women and/or their opinions on the state of discrimination against women. In contrast, BSS focuses on men and male victimhood. In line with our predictions, BSS consistently emerged as a distinct construct in our analyses. In addition, our results demonstrated that the BSS scale was a stable and reliable measure of BSS across different samples, time, and participant gender.

BSS as contemporary sexism

Supporting our claim that BSS is a new form of sexism, gender differences in BSS mean scores were similar to those of other sexism measures, with men showing higher mean levels of BSS than women. Moreover, the BSS scale was positively associated with previous anti-female sexism measures, albeit to different extents. In line with the idea that BSS constitutes a type of subtle, contemporary sexism, the BSS scale was more strongly correlated with modern than traditional sexism. Also supporting our notion that BSS upholds negative attitudes towards women, there was a stronger association with hostile than benevolent sexism.

BSS as subtle sexism

Endorsing sexist beliefs is generally considered reprehensible [ 41 ]. As such, sexism measures are often susceptible to social desirability. Compared to previous sexism measures, the BSS scale was less sensitive to social desirability concerns. Given its focus on the victimization of men and the acknowledgment of ongoing gender discrimination, it is possible that BSS is not readily seen as anti-female sexism. Thus, BSS may be a particularly subtle form of sexism, a characteristic that may make the BSS scale a uniquely useful tool for studying sexism and its downstream consequences in the current social landscape.

Future directions

The BSS scale is the first to concisely capture an attitude that appears to have gained momentum in recent years [ 7 , 11 , 34 ]. As such, it can be used to advance our understanding of contemporary sexism and help explain emerging gender issues. This new scale can help shed light on whether the prevalence of BSS is growing in the general population, as survey data have suggested [ 11 , 56 ], as well as to identify important social, cultural, and psychological phenomena associated with BSS.

Like other forms of sexism, BSS may reflect relatively stable differences between individuals. In future research, the BSS scale can be used to map the consequences of this individual difference on a variety of outcomes. However, BSS may also be the result of recent societal changes regarding the status of women and men. Thus, future research can also use the BSS scale to examine the antecedents of this belief.

Potential consequences of BSS

Sexism has been associated with a wide array of negative consequences that disproportionally affect women [ 57 , 58 ]. Like other forms of anti-female sexism, BSS should also predict negative outcomes for women. Previous research has shown that priming men with anti-male bias increases discrimination against female candidates for a job [ 15 ]. We expect that higher BSS endorsement should have a similar effect, leading to more negative evaluations of women than men in the workplace and beyond. However, the BSS scale may be more useful than previous sexism measures in predicting not only negative outcomes for women, but also an active motivation to obtain positive outcomes for men. Future research could use the BSS scale to explore the role of BSS in people’s opposition to diversity measures when they help women, but their support for such measures when they favor men [ 59 ].

The BSS scale can also be used to examine whether BSS has had an influence, over and above other forms of sexism (e.g., hostile sexism; [ 60 ]), on current ideological shifts and the rise of extremist beliefs across the globe. For example, the portrayal of historically privileged groups as victims, an idea that is consistent with BSS, has been associated with support for populist Right-wing parties [ 61 , 62 ].

Potential causes of BSS

The BSS scale will be a valuable tool in determining whether and how different gender-relevant contextual factors have contributed to the emergence and endorsement of BSS. Perceptions of male victimization may stem, in part, from recent changes regarding the status of women and men [ 21 ]. For example, women’s greater academic achievement [ 63 ] and steady influx into the labor force [ 64 ] may be perceived as costing men educational opportunities and jobs. Likewise, diversity initiatives and public policy aimed at improving conditions for women–but not men (e.g., women quotas)–may be seen as disadvantaging men.

The BSS scale can also be used to explore the extent to which self-enhancement motivations are associated with higher BSS endorsement among men. Past research has shown, for example, that claiming victimhood may protect self-esteem by allowing people to attribute negative outcomes (e.g., unemployment, poor performance) to unfair external conditions or discrimination [ 65 ]. Moreover, BSS may be a consequence of competitive victimhood, that is, men may be more likely to see themselves as victims of discrimination when confronted with continuing discrimination against women [ 66 , 67 ].

Importantly, BSS is likely part of a more pervasive phenomenon where members of historically advantaged groups come to see themselves as the new victims of discrimination. For example, the advancement of Black Americans has recently led to perceptions of anti-White bias and “reverse racism” [ 68 , 69 ]. Paralleling beliefs about changes in gender discrimination over time [ 10 ], studies in the U.S. show that Whites see racism against Black Americans as decreasing and racism against White Americans as increasing [ 70 ]. This suggests that, as with gender, there may be a belief in racism shift, and the BSS scale may serve as a model for similar measures of contemporary racism.

Limitations

Although our samples were relatively small, statistical simulation studies suggest that the sample sizes were appropriate given the concise nature of our construct and data (e.g., one-dimensional factor structure, high factor-to-items-ratio, high communalities; [ 37 , 38 ]). However, our samples consisted mostly of White/ European Americans and the relatively small numbers of Asian, Black/African, and Hispanic/Latin Americans did not allow us to assess whether the BSS construct was similar for different ethnic groups. Previous research has indicated that sexism measures may have different meanings for ethnic minorities [ 43 ]. Thus, future research should analyze the reliability and validity of the BSS scale for different ethnic and racial groups, both within and outside of the U.S.

Despite a clear theoretical and psychometric distinction between the BSS scale and previous sexism measures, the strong correlation between this new scale and the hostile sexism scale should be addressed. It is possible that those who endorse BSS blame women for the hardships of today’s men. Likewise, hostile sexists may be more likely to view the world as a place that systematically victimizes men. Whether and when BSS leads to hostility towards women or hostility toward women leads to BSS should be examined in future research.

In addition to the strong association between the BSS scale and hostile sexism, the correlations between previous sexism measures were also stronger in our data than what has previously been reported [ 29 , 43 ]. It is possible that our design contributed to an overall overestimation of the correlations between different sexism scales, including the BSS scale. Although all sexism measures were counterbalanced and presented on separate questionnaire pages, they were presented sequentially. This may have led to similar response patterns across scales and, consequently, stronger correlations. Future research should continue testing the associations between the BSS scale and other forms of sexism, including, but not limited to the ones examined in the present research.

In the present research, we introduced and defined the belief in sexism shift (BSS) as a new, contemporary form of sexism and developed a scale to measure it: the BSS scale. As expected, the BSS scale was related to, yet distinct from, traditional sexism, modern sexism, and ambivalent sexism. It also was stable across samples, time, and participant gender. In addition, the BSS scale was less susceptible to social desirability concerns than other sexism measures, suggesting that BSS may be a particularly subtle form of anti-female sexism. As the first concise, reliable measure of BSS, the BSS scale will be a valuable tool to enhance our understanding of an emerging and potentially growing belief that may have unprecedented consequences for women.

Appendix A. The Belief in sexism shift scale

Note 1. * signifies reverse-coded items.

Note2. We recommend administering the items in a randomized order.

Supporting information

S2 table. a. study material for the pilot study. b. study material for study 1. c. study material for study 2, funding statement.

This research was funded by the Marietta Blau-Stipendium of the Austrian Agency for International Cooperation in Education and Research (OeAD) under the Austrian Federal Ministry of Education, Science, and Research (Project number: ICM-2015-03097), and by the Förderstipendium of the University of Vienna. The publication of this manuscript was funded through the Open Access Publication Fund of the University of Vienna. The funding agencies had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Data Availability

• PLoS One. 2021; 16(3): e0248374.

Decision Letter 0

PONE-D-20-30781

Belief in Sexism Shift: Defining a new form of contemporary sexism and introducing the belief in sexism shift scale (BSS scale)

Dear Dr. Zehnter,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please make the paper clearer following reviewer #2 suggestions, moving significant part of theory in the introduction section and making a clearer description of the method.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Feb 20 2021 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at gro.solp@enosolp . When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

• A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.
• A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.
• An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see:  http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Marta Panzeri, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Thank you for including your ethics statement: 

"Review Board: NYU WSQ

Approval number: IRB-FY2017-783

Informed consent was obtained written by checking a box in the online survey.".   

a. Please amend your current ethics statement to include the full name of the ethics committee/institutional review board(s) that approved your specific study.

b. Once you have amended this/these statement(s) in the Methods section of the manuscript, please add the same text to the “Ethics Statement” field of the submission form (via “Edit Submission”).

For additional information about PLOS ONE ethical requirements for human subjects research, please refer to http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-human-subjects-research

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: I would like to see this article published in this journal. It makes an original contribution to the psychosocial literature, offering an adequate and well scrutinized discussion about an important and current topic. The methodology is well described, the analyses have been conducted rigorously, and the discussion section is clearly discussed.

Reviewer #2: The paper presents a new form of sexism, called Belief in sexism shift (BSS), a form of sexism that is main connected to anti-female sexism. Authors provide the development of a new promising scale measuring the BSS which could be useful in the study of the new forms of subtle sexism in our society. The statistical plan and the analysis are very rigorous and well conducted in my opinion. Overall, an interesting manuscript with some new important insights.

My main concern is about the readability of the paper. The introduction about BSS is well written, but quite long, dispersive and hard to follow. At the beginning it feels like BSS is a legitimate and motivated behavior but then, through the introduction and the discussion, it seems that authors condamned BSS. I feel that authors should just describe this behaviors, the features and how it is different from other forms of sexism and why it is important, which they actually do, but in a very long and confusing way. Also some aspects of the discussion (potential causes of of BSS and potential consequences of BSS) should be moved in the Introduction section, because they feel very important, and are not really a consequence of the work results. Authors should explain their results in the light of these consideration, not vice versa.

Finally, the three studies are promising and really well conducted from a methodological point of view. But, it's really hard to follow the description of participants and data analysis for all the studies (they are reported like 4 times..). Authors should find another easier and clearer way to present the study, for example to present participants description only in table, and to create a statistical analysis plan section with the methods for each study presented divided in bulletpoints.

Besides these aspects, a very interesting and useful papers for gender studies scholars and researchers.

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article ( what does this mean? ). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy .

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool,  https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/ . PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at  gro.solp@serugif . Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Author response to Decision Letter 0

19 Feb 2021

Editor’s comments:

Authors’ response

Dear Dr. Panzeri,

Thank you for considering our manuscript “Belief in Sexism Shift: Defining a new form of contemporary sexism and introducing the belief in sexism shift scale (BSS scale)”. We are very happy to hear that the reviewers found the paper interesting and that they see our scale as an important contribution to the literature. Please find enclosed a new version of our manuscript, which we have carefully revised based on your comments and those of the reviewers (in particular, reviewer #2). As requested, we have also included a version of the manuscript with tracked changes. Finally, to ensure that our manuscript meets PLOS ONE’s style requirements, we have amended our ethics statement to include the full name of the ethics committee that approved our studies.

Below we provide a response to each comment made by reviewers.

Reviewer #1 comments:

I would like to see this article published in this journal. It makes an original contribution to the psychosocial literature, offering an adequate and well scrutinized discussion about an important and current topic. The methodology is well described, the analyses have been conducted rigorously, and the discussion section is clearly discussed.

Thank you very much for endorsing our manuscript and supporting our work. We, too, believe that the belief in sexism shift is an important and timely topic of research. We hope that the BSS scale will be a valuable tool for more reliably investigating the causes and consequences of this new belief.

Reviewer #2 comments:

The paper presents a new form of sexism, called Belief in sexism shift (BSS), a form of sexism that is main connected to anti-female sexism. Authors provide the development of a new promising scale measuring the BSS which could be useful in the study of the new forms of subtle sexism in our society. The statistical plan and the analysis are very rigorous and well conducted in my opinion. Overall, an interesting manuscript with some new important insights.

Thank you very much for your encouraging words and helpful feedback. As you will see in the revised manuscript, we have considered your comments carefully and made several important changes. Below, we describe the main revisions to our manuscript based on your suggestions:

1) We have now revised the entire manuscript for clarity and conciseness. We agree that the introduction was lengthy and, at times, repetitive. Thus, we have made an effort to shorten it (from 7 to 6 pages) and to ensure that the structure is more cohesive (avoiding unnecessary reiterations of ideas). We also have revised our language throughout to exclude words or phrases that could be perceived as condemning, rather than describing, the belief in sexism shift (BSS).

2) We have carefully considered your suggestion to relocate parts of the discussion of potential causes and consequences of BSS to the introduction. While we agree that these aspects are important, we have decided not to move these sections for several reasons. First, in light of your suggestions, we have sought to be as clear as possible about the goals of this research in the introduction – that is, to define BSS and to develop a new scale to measure it. Consequently, we thought that describing potential causes and consequences of BSS in the introduction would not only add confusion, but it might also be misleading, as readers could expect that the research we present will also examine the causes and consequences of BSS (which it does not). Importantly, given that these ideas were not directly tested in our paper, the causes and consequences of BSS remain speculative. Indeed, in the discussion we mention several potential causes (e.g., self-enhancement motivation, competitive victimhood) and consequences (e.g., political extremity, increased discrimination of women) of BSS, but we do not yet know whether they are in fact related. We hope that the BSS scale will be a valuable tool in determining the extent to which the factors we describe (and/or other factors) are associated with BSS and, as such, we think that the most appropriate place to discuss these possibilities is in the “Future Directions” section of the discussion. Nevertheless, considering your comments and those of the editor, we have revised the manuscript to describe more explicitly how we think future research can use the BSS scale developed in this research to study the causes and consequences of this belief. We would like to point out that if, after reading our revised manuscript, you are not fully convinced of our reasoning, we are happy to reconsider this point.

3) We have made important revisions to the methods section for clarity. In particular, we have updated Table 2 to also include the full information of each sample. As you will see, in-text descriptions of research participants have been reduced to a minimum. In addition, we have included a new table (Table 1) that provides an overview of the four studies included in this manuscript, their aims, and the statistical analyses conducted.

We would like to thank the editor and reviewers for offering us the opportunity to revise our manuscript. We hope to have addressed your concerns in the revised version of this paper. We strongly believe your suggestions have significantly improved the quality and potential impact of our research.

Miriam Zehnter, Francesca Manzi, Patrick Shrout, and Madeline Heilman

Submitted filename: Response to reviewers.docx

Decision Letter 1

25 Feb 2021

PONE-D-20-30781R1

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ , click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at gro.solp@gnillibrohtua .

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact gro.solp@sserpeno .

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

6. Review Comments to the Author

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article ( what does this mean? ). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

Reviewer #2:  Yes:  Lilybeth Fontanesi

Acceptance letter

Belief in Sexism Shift:Defining a new form of contemporary sexism and introducing the belief in sexism shift scale (BSS scale)

Dear Dr. Zehnter:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact gro.solp@sserpeno .

If we can help with anything else, please email us at gro.solp@enosolp .

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Marta Panzeri

Sexism: Discrimination against women and girls

Every day in every country, women and girls are discriminated against because of their gender. 

Gender-specific discrimination and breaches of human rights have fatal consequences for the health, education, income and safety of women and children. In spite of numerous treaties and laws intended to help ensure equal rights and protection for women and girls, the part of the world’s population seen by others to be female still frequently experiences discrimination, abasement and violence.  

Sometimes discrimination is not immediately obvious. Examples are a lack of promotions for women, or an education for girls which leads them to believe they are no good at mathematics. In contrast, discrimination is sometimes very obvious and easily measurable: How high is the proportion of women in parliament? How many girls are completing secondary education? Further, women and girls are also frequently affected by several different forms of discrimination at the same time: due to their ethnicity, their sexual orientation, their age and/or their migration background, for example. 

Definition: What is discrimination? 

Discrimination is a breach of human rights. People are unjustly disadvantaged, abased and/or treated as inferior because they belong to a group that has particular characteristics or features. These characteristics could include, for example, gender, ethnicity or religion. Discrimination generally occurs because of particular value judgments, unreflected or even subconscious attitudes, and prejudices.  

Definition: What is sexism? 

Sexism is a synonym for gender-based discrimination. If a person’s biological sex or gender is the reason for someone else discriminating against them, then this is sexism. In general, sexism happens because of underlying attitudes that consider women to have less value than men, so this form of discrimination is usually directed against people who are seen as female or feminine. Of course, sexism can affect males as well. Closely connected to sexist discrimination are the notions of specific social activities and characteristics being more suitable for either males or females (‘gender roles’) and other stereotypes which are attributed to a person on the basis of sex or gender. Sexualised violence is one form of gender-based violence and is one way that sexist discrimination manifests. The term sexism was coined by the American women’s movement in the 1960s, combining the word ‘sex’, to refer to the biological sex, with the ending ‘-ism’ from another common form of discrimination: racism. 

What are the causes of sexism? 

Various studies show: The main causes for gender-specific discrimination are to be found in

• misogynist attitudes, values and role models, 
• norms shaped by patriarchy , and
• cultural and religious practices.

There is a systematic nature to the disadvantages put in the way of women and girls in their access to food, healthcare, education and income. It is anchored within societal structures. 

What is gender?

In English, the two terms gender and sex are sometimes used interchangeably, but sex often refers specifically to biological differences, while gender more often refers to cultural and social differences. Gender therefore refers to socially constructed norms, assignments and roles which can be different from one society to another. Where someone assumes a gender role which is visibly different from their biological sex, this can also trigger discrimination.

FAQ: What forms does this discrimination take?

Structural discrimination is a term used when the discrimination against individual groups is caused by the way that a society is organised. For example, a patriarchal society will have patriarchal gender structures that lead to discrimination against women. Structural discrimination frequently culminates in violence: for women and girls between 15 and 44, the risk of experiencing rape and violence within their family is higher than risk of becoming a victim of a traffic accident, war, cancer or malaria.  

Direct discrimination is generally easy to recognise, especially in the form of laws and regulations. One example was in 2015 in Sierra Leone, where a law was introduced which prohibited pregnant girls from attending school. 

Indirect discrimination is often more difficult to recognise. One example would be at a workplace where the company does not offer any chance of promotion to part-time employees: if part-time employees are overwhelmingly female, then this discriminates indirectly against women. 

Intersectional or multiple discrimination is present when a person is affected by different forms of discrimination at the same time. One form can impact on another and they can even amplify each other. For example, refugee women frequently suffer both sexism and racism. 

Discrimination is extremely closely related to both the abuse of power and the retention of power. This is often combined with humiliation, such as in the cases of bullying and mobbing. Another example is sexualised harassment, which is a consequence of structural discrimination in the context of patriarchal power relationships. Suggestive looks, undesired touches, or sexualised comments are used by one person in front of others to demonstrate their superiority and power over women or people who deviate from prevailing gender norms, to humiliate them, and to devalue them . Violence is also a means to preserve power. 

The term patriarchy is derived from Greek and literally translated it means “rule of the fathers”. 

Patriarchal power extends well beyond the immediate family. It includes a social order which gives men a privileged position of power in all spheres of life. From this position of power, men then determine the values and norms of the society and lay down the laws governing the behaviour of women and other marginalised groups, such as LGBTIQ*, people with disabilities, or people of colour.

From a feminist perspective, patriarchy refers to the totality of the exploitation and oppression of women. This oppression is systemic. At its core is the sexual control exercised by men over women. 

Efforts to adopt gender-neutral or gender-inclusive language include, for example, the avoidance of a generic masculine ‘he’ when referring to humans in general. In some languages, nouns and terms for professions, for example, have an inherent gender indicated by a particular word-ending. So efforts need to be made not to exclude women and non-binary people. One example could be using the term police officer instead of the term policeman. This is important because language influences how we think and feel. For example, references to “manned spaceflight” might lead to the subconscious association of astronauts as being typically male, whereas the conscious use of “crewed spaceflight” would be inclusive because the word “crew” covers all possible genders. 

Definition: Gender equality 

The equal rights of the genders is a fundamental human right. Equal rights means that all humans have the same rights. The term is based on Articles 1 and 2 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights , which state that all humans are “born free and equal in dignity and rights”, so should not be discriminated against due to their gender or other reasons. Often, equal rights is talked about in connection with equal opportunities. Equal rights does not mean that all humans are the same or should be the same.  

What is the difference between equality and equal rights?

The principle of equal rights emphasises the same rights to be enjoyed by all people, regardless of their gender. In contrast, the principle of equality aims to overcome structural discrimination to such an extent that women and men not only receive the same rights and opportunities, but also achieve the same results from these. Examples here would include equal proportions of the genders among members of parliament or on the boards of leading companies. One way of achieving this could be setting quotas. 

”In order to finally achieve gender justice, there can no longer be any tolerance for sexualised violence against women and girls! This violence suggests that the female body is something anyone can do anything with, but this is not true. False attitudes and messages such as this are passed on to girls and boys, creating stereotypical gender images that persist from generation to generation. Society’s power relations will not change unless there is a fundamental shift in these attitudes, messages and images.“ Monika Hauser, founder of the international women’s rights organisation medica mondiale

How equal rights would benefit everyone

Gender justice is more than merely a question of human rights: the equal participation of women in all aspects of life is also a prerequisite for a peaceful, just and sustainable world. Some figures:

• An increase of 30% would be seen in agricultural yields if all women had fair access to the means of production.
• Where women are involved in peace negotiations , the chance of these agreements being upheld increases by 20 per cent.
• Violence against women and girls is widespread around the world in all cultures, religions and societies. It is rooted in the power imbalance between the genders. Actual equal rights and the dismantling of these power imbalances would take away the basis for this violence.
• Studies have shown that the nourishment, health and education of children all improve when their mothers have more income available.
• According to McKinsey management consultancy, companies with higher proportions of female staff are more likely to be successful.
• Data from 90 countries indicates that countries with higher female parliamentary representation are more likely to set aside protected land areas. Another study in 130 countries showed that women are more willing to ratify international environmental treaties . 

Equal rights – on the statute books or in practice?

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights in Article 1 states that all people are equal. Article Two of this proclamation by the United Nations (UN) goes into more detail: “Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.” However, the rights that the UN General Assembly agreed in 1948 are still being violated decades later, are still not enshrined in national laws, are still not being upheld by political means, and are therefore still not a lived experience for many.  

The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women 

In 1979, the General Assembly of the United Nations passed the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). Known as the Women’s Rights Convention, this Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women obliges the states ratifying it to take active steps to eliminate the discrimination against women in the areas of culture, society, education, politics and legislation. 

Examples: Discrimination against women and girls around the world 

Right to social welfare 

Nutrition : Where food becomes scarce, it is the women and girls who suffer most from hunger. With regard to those suffering moderate or severe food insecurity, the difference between men and women increased further during the Covid-19 pandemic. In 2021, food insecurity affected 150 million more women than men in the world. 

Poverty: During the Covid-19 pandemic, millions of women lost their jobs and livelihood . Sectors with higher proportions of women workers were most severely affected by the consequences of the pandemic.

Right to own property

It is women who frequently lose out on access to land: less than 20 per cent of landowners worldwide are women. However, it is the women who perform the major share of the work in the fields.   

Right to education

First, the good news: Looked at globally, the rates of schooling for both primary and secondary levels are increasing for girls and boys. However, in the countries affected by insecurity, conflicts and violence, girls are 2.5 times more likely than boys to be prevented from going to school. At secondary level, this probability is 90% higher. Almost two thirds of all adult illiterates are women . 

Right to life, liberty and security of person

Forced marriage: Estimates are that 12 million underage girls are forced into marriage each year.

Physical self-determination: Globally, pregnant people do not have easy access to safe and legal pregnancy termination . Abortions are often not even possible for women who were raped during wars and become pregnant as a consequence. This is not only because of the lack of medical possibilities, but mainly because pregnancy termination is forbidden by the provisions of international funders or restrictive laws and interpretations of faith. For example, since 2021 abortions have been either illegal or very difficult to access in Poland, Hungary and the USA. As a consequence 45 per cent of all pregnancy terminations around the world take place in unsafe conditions – sometimes with fatal consequences for the women: unsafe abortions are one of the most frequent causes of maternal mortality. 

Violence: Almost one in three women will be subjected to violence during her lifetime. Globally, each year some 50,000 women are killed by their partner or a relative. Female genital cutting (also known as female genital mutilation, FGM) is a violation of human rights. In spite of international condemnation and national laws, more than 200 million women and girls have been subjected to FGM. In one out of every four cases, the girl dies from the consequences. Most of these were not older than 15 years when the violent cutting occurred. 

Human trafficking: 72 per cent of all victims of human trafficking are women or girls. Most of these (77 per cent) are exploited sexually and/or forced into prostitution.

Wars and conflicts: In almost every conflict, warring parties use sexualised violence as an instrument of power to terrorise their enemies. Violence and sexualised attacks are also faced by women and girls as they flee their homes seeking refuge or after being displaced by advancing forces. 

Humanitarian aid: In emergency situations, the stress and pressure on women and girls grow because they are the ones who usually look after children and sick relatives, find and cook food, and take care of the home. However, humanitarian aid projects are often designed with too little consideration for this. For example, in refugee camps there may be no access to or space for gynaecological and obstetric healthcare, or even gender-separate toilets and washing facilities. Registration for aid generally occurs in the name of the male head of household, which denies wives, mothers and daughters any independent access to assistance. 

Climate change: In many rural areas of Africa and Asia, it is still usual for women to work near their home. This means they often receive life-saving information about disasters or severe weather later than men or not at all. This is one reason for the higher female fatalities in the wake of natural disasters. Additionally, in emergency accommodation there is an increased risk of sexual harassment.  

Political representation

Worldwide, 26 per cent of members of parliament are female. In most of the countries where the proportion of women in parliament is above 30 per cent a quota ruling had been introduced in order to strengthen political participation of women. With success: In Rwanda the figure of 61 per cent (as of April 2022) is the highest proportion of women in parliament in the world. In Cuba it is more than 53 per cent and in Mexico 50 per cent. In 28 of 193 countries , women are head of state or government, including , Bangladesh, New Zealand and Tanzania.  

”Although all humans have a right to self-determination this is regularly denied to women and girls.. Unfortunately, this is a global phenomenon which we see in, for example, Serbia, Liberia, Afghanistan or Germany. In Europe, there is currently a trend to further restrict women’s rights.“ Jessica Mosbahi, Advocacy and Human Rights Officer

Discrimination against women in Germany – some examples 

Women face discrimination in Germany. Four examples: 

Politics: 34.7 per cent of the Members of the Bundestag are women (after the election in 2021). Twelve federal states are governed by men, only four by women. At a local level, the differences are even more severe: In 2021, 80 per cent of German mayors were male. 

Economy: Female staff earn on average 18 per cent less than their male colleagues. The income gap has reduced a little in recent years, but in comparison to the European average (13 per cent), the gender pay gap in Germany is still high. Furthermore, women face professional disadvantages due to pregnancy and maternal leave, and are less likely to be selected for promotion.

Legislation: §218 of the German Penal Code violates the right to self-determination. Women who want to terminate their pregnancy, and all of those involved in carrying out abortions, are being criminalised. This is the case despite access to legal and safe abortions being a human right.

At home: Statistically speaking, once every 2.5 days in Germany, a woman is killed by her partner or ex-partner. In 2021, 161,000 survived what is euphemistically called ‘domestic violence’ – two thirds of them were women. 

From the practical experience of our partner organisations: Against sexism 

Ensuring the right to healthcare

Violence against women is a worldwide problem, but in war and post-war countries the rates are particularly high. Compared with the great need, there is very little provision of assistance for those affected. The staff of healthcare clinics have generally not received appropriate training. Frequently, healthcare professionals exhibit prejudices and discriminatory behaviour when treating survivors, leading to stigmatisation and feelings of shame. Our partner organisations train doctors, midwives and nursing staff locally. They learn how to offer beneficial support to women affected by violence. In a second step, these specialist staff then learn how to pass on the training to their colleagues. In this way, the knowledge about trauma-sensitive support can be anchored in their community for the long term.

Appeal against a ban on pregnant girls attending school

In Sierra Leone, a law was passed in 2015 that prohibits pregnant girls from attending school. The law is unconstitutional. This affects a large number of girls since the pregnancy rate for under-18s is one in three. A group of activists took legal action against this – successfully. One of the plaintiffs was the organisation WAVES (Women Against Violence and Exploitation Society), which medica mondiale has been cooperating with since 2019. 

More on sexism and discrimination 

• Choose language
• Azərbaycanca
• Nedersassisch

Sexism is any expression (act, word, image, gesture) based on the idea that some persons, most often women, are inferior because of their sex.

Sexism is harmful . It produces feelings of worthlessness, self-censorship, changes in behaviour, and a deterioration in health. Sexism lies at the root of gender inequality. It affects women and girls disproportionately.

Sexism is present in all areas of life.

63% of women journalists have been confronted with verbal abuse

Women spend almost twice as much time as men on unpaid housework (OECD countries)

80% of women stated that they have been confronted with the phenomenon of “mansplaining” and “manterrupting” at work

Men represent 75% of news sources and subjects in Europe

In the UK, 66% of 16-18-year-old girls surveyed experienced or witnessed the use of sexist language at school

59% of women in Amsterdam reported some form of street harassment

In France, 50% of young women surveyed recently experienced injustice or humiliation because they are women

In Serbia, research indicates that 76% of women in business are not taken as seriously as men

Violence sometimes starts with a joke

Individual acts of sexism may seem benign, but they create a climate of intimidation, fear and insecurity. this leads to the acceptance of violence , mostly against women and girls..

This is why the Council of Europe has decided to act by adopting a Recommendation to prevent and combat sexism .

Sexism affects mostly women. It can also affect men and boys when they don’t conform to stereotyped gender roles.

The harmful impact of sexism can be worse for some women and men due to their ethnicity, age, disability, social origin, religion, gender identity, sexual orientation or other factors.

Some groups of women, for example young women, politicians, journalists or public figures, are particular targets of sexism

of women elected to Parliament have been the target of sexist attacks on social networks

See it. Name it. Stop it.

Language and communication.

Examples of sexism in language and communications:

The generic use of the masculine gender by a speaker (“he/his/him” to refer to an unspecific person). The cover of a publication depicting men only . The naming of a woman by the masculine term for her profession. A communication campaign including gratuitous nudity . An advertisement with a man showing a woman how to use a washing machine.

Why should it be addressed?

Language and communication matter because they make people visible or invisible and recognise or demean their contribution to society. Our language shapes our thought , and the way we think influences our actions. Gender-blind or discriminatory language reinforces sexist attitudes and behaviour.

How to prevent it?

Use both the feminine and the masculine when addressing a mixed audience. Review public communication to make sure it uses gender-sensitive language and imagery. Produce manuals on gender-sensitive communication for different audiences. Promote research in this area.

Media, Internet and social media

Examples of sexism in the media:

A sexualised depiction of women in the media. An all-male TV show. Media reporting on violence against women which blames the victim . Journalists, most often women, receiving comments on social media based on their appearance instead of the issues they discuss. Internet applications sending some job adverts to men only because algorithms are built in a discriminatory way.

Children and others are bombarded with sexist media messages and influenced by them. Such messages limit their own choices in life. They give the impression that men are the keepers of knowledge and power and that women are objects and it’s ok to comment freely on their appearance. Online sexism pushes women out of online spaces . Online sexism can cause very real harm. Abusing or mocking someone online creates a permanent digital record that can be further disseminated and is difficult to erase.

Implement legislation on gender equality in media . Train media and communication professionals on gender equality. Ensure that women and men are represented in a balanced way and in diverse, non-stereotypical roles in the media . Promote advertisements that play with, and raise awareness of, gender stereotypes rather than reinforce them. Provide digital literacy training especially for young people and children. Legally define and criminalise (online) sexist hate speech . Put in place specialised services to provide advice on how to deal with online sexism .

Examples of sexism at the workplace:

The practice of unofficially excluding women who have children from career opportunities. In meetings, ignoring women , appropriating their contributions or silencing them. Favouring a man rather than a woman for a managerial position by presuming her lack of authority . Gratuitous comments about physical appearance or dress (which undermine women as professionals). Derogatory comments to men taking on caring roles. “ Mansplaining ”.

Workplace sexism undermines the efficiency of victims and their sense of belonging. Silencing through sexism means that ideas or talents are ignored or under-used. Belittling comments create an intimidating/oppressive atmosphere for those confronted with them and can degenerate in violence/harassment . Victims may develop higher anxiety levels , be more prone to outbursts and depression. More generally, sexism leads to lower salaries and fewer opportunities for those confronted with it.

Adopt and implement codes of conduct defining sexist behaviour and prevent it through training. Put in place complaint mechanisms , disciplinary measures and support services. Managers must state and show their commitment to act against sexism .

Public sector

Examples of sexism in the public sector:

Sexualised comments or comments about the appearance or family situation of politicians, most often women, including within parliaments. Comments about the sexual orientation or appearance of users by staff of public services. Sexist representations / posting of images of naked women in public workplaces (e.g. hospital staff rooms). Comments on women’s appearance in public spaces, including public transport.

The public sector has a duty to lead by example . Sexism in parliaments is very common but it limits the opportunities and freedom of women in parliaments, be they elected or staff. Sexism undermines equal access to public services . Sexism in public spaces limits women’s freedom of movement. Sexism can lead to violence and creates an oppressive environment preventing mostly women from fully participating in public life.

Training of staff. Put in place codes of conduct , complaint mechanisms, disciplinary measures and support services.  Implement awareness raising campaigns , such as toolkits or posters in public space explaining what sexism is. Promote gender balance in decision-making . Promote research and the gathering of data on the issue.

Examples of sexism in the justice system:

A judge implying to a victim of sexual violence that she was ‘asking for it’ . A law professional commenting on the appearance of a woman who is a colleague. A police officer not taking an allegation of violence against women seriously or trivialising it.

Such behaviour can lead to victims dropping cases . They create distrust in the justice system. They can lead to misinformed judgments . They demean women and can push them out of legal professions .

Implement policies on women’s equal access to justice . Train legal and law enforcement professionals. Deconstruct judicial stereotyping through awareness-raising campaigns. Ensure professionals base their judgments on facts , on the behaviour of the perpetrator and the context of the case rather than the victim’s clothing, for example.

Examples of sexism in education:

Textbooks containing stereotypical images of women/men, boys/girls. The absence of women as writers, historical or cultural figures in textbooks . Career and education counselling discouraging non-stereotypical career or study choices . Teachers making comments about the appearance of pupils/students/fellow teachers. Sexualised comments to girls. Bullying of non-conforming pupils /students by fellow pupils /students or education professionals. The absence of awareness /procedures / reactions to address such sexist behaviour.

The content of education and behaviour of education professionals heavily influences perceptions and behaviour . A climate of sexism in learning establishments negatively affects the achievements of pupils/students. Sexism in education can limit future individual career and lifestyle choices .

Implement policies and legislation on gender equality in education . Review textbooks to ensure that they are free of sexism and that they depict women as well as men in non-stereotypical roles. Ensure the representation of women as scientists, artists, athletes, leaders, politicians in textbooks and programmes . Teach women’s history . Ensure the availability of complaint mechanisms. Teach gender equality issues as well as sexuality education (including consent and personal boundaries). Train education professionals on unconscious bias .

Culture and sport

Examples of sexism in culture and sport:

Sportswomen depicted in the media according to their family role and not their skills and strengths. Trivialising women’s sporting achievements . Demeaning men who play “feminine” sports. Women in sexy outfits as “decoration” in cultural or sporting events. Absence of women’s work in art exhibitions. Scarcity of meaningful roles for women in cinema and the virtual absence of roles for older actresses. Scarcity of funding for film production in which women have a leadership role. Under-resourcing of women’s art.

Both culture and sport are shapers of attitudes . If women and men are depicted in stereotyped ways, this will feed into gender stereotyping. When mostly men are visible in these areas, this influences the way women are seen as potential artists or athletes and narrows the range of role models for children and young people. Gender stereotypes limit the choice of women/men girls/boys to practice sports that are not considered “feminine” or “masculine” ; this leads to self-censorship . In both areas, sexism leads to lower salaries and fewer opportunities for those confronted with it.

Measures to encourage creative work by women and gender mainstreaming in cultural and sport policies (scholarships, exhibitions, training, provision of space/workshops). Ensure better and more media coverage of women’s sports and art. Encourage sponsors to support women’s arts and sports. Adopt codes of conduct to prevent sexist behaviour, including provision for disciplinary action in sports federations. Encourage leading sport and cultural figures to speak up against sexism and implement campaigns to denounce violence in sport and sexist hate speech.

Private sphere

Examples of sexism in the private sphere:

Women performing more unpaid (care and household) work than men, for example only women helping to wash dishes at a dinner party. Sexist jokes between friends. Systematically offering “feminine” or “masculine” toys to girls/boys. Boys being encouraged to run and take risks and girls to be docile and compliant. The use of expressions like “running like a girl” or “boys will be boys”.

Unpaid work weighs on women’s participation in the labour market, on their economic independence as well as on their participation in sport and leisure activities. Toys (e.g. a mini kitchen or a construction game) influence gender roles, but also future study or career choices. Sexist jokes can intimidate and silence people and they trivialise sexist behaviour.

Awareness-raising measures and research on the impact and the sharing of unpaid work between women and men. Measures for reconciling private and working life for all . Promotion of non-gendered toys . Encouraging boys as well as girls to participate in household tasks. Giving girls , too, the space and freedom to play, explore and be themselves.

Sexism and Misogyny: Unpacking Patriarchy and Its Handmaids

Challenging the sexism and misogyny that hurts women's health and wellness..

Posted May 5, 2022 | Reviewed by Vanessa Lancaster

• Gender, sexism, and misogyny profoundly affect the quality of lives of women and people along a continuum of gender identities.
• Sexism is stereotyping, discrimination, prejudice, devaluation, and marginalization targeting women, more feminine gender identities.
• Misogyny is the control, punishment, and policing of people and systems which threaten male dominance.
• All genders must check their internalized sexism that makes them prone to judge, retaliate, or keep women and gender minorities silenced.

Although gender equity continues to gain broad interest and attention , particularly with MeToo, Times Up, and other social movements, attacks on women's health, safety, and autonomy are evident with the Supreme Court's efforts to overturn Roe V. Wade .

The patriarchy remains paramount. Patriarchal oppression is the tendency for people to undervalue women (and associated traits and activities) while affording men the highest status, power, and privilege. As such, males (particularly white males) are depicted as superior to other groups.

Women with intersecting identities are more likely to become submerged in the disproportionately greater demands than their male counterparts related to caregiving and household responsibilities , structural inequalities , violence , trauma , devaluation, underpayment, and invisibility.

These experiences of sexism, violence, unequal employment, harassment, devaluation, and overburden drive health inequities and mental health problems . Because internalized sexism is so prevalent, the weight of the heavier load placed upon women is often normalized, unspoken, and implicit. It can be taboo to even speak about sexism and other 'isms,' as bringing up legitimate forms of structural oppression threatens the patriarchal structures and those that benefit from them.

Gender, sexism, and misogyny profoundly affect the quality of lives of women and people along a continuum of diverse sexes, sexual orientations, and gender identities. The effects of sexism tend to be even more acute for women of color and gender minorities. Violence against women globally affects at least 30 percent of women, and when psychological abuse is included, this extends to almost 90 percent.

The cumulative trauma of sexism drives mental distress, such as anxiety and depression , which are experienced between 1.5- and 1.3-times the rates of male counterparts . Sex differences in distress disappear when accounting for the impact of sexism, which accounts for almost 40 percent of the psychological distress among some women .

Despite sexism accounting for and driving much of the distress women and gender minorities experience, misogyny is normalized, internalized, and tends to be relegated invisible. If patriarchy is the tool, then sexism and misogyny are its handmaids. Sexism is stereotyping, discrimination , prejudice, devaluation, and marginalization targeting women, more feminine gender identities, and sexual minorities based on sex.

Misogyny is the control, punishment , and policing of people and systems which threaten male dominance.

The pandemic exacerbated already existing gender disparities. Stressors have been particularly acute during thin times (times of lowered internal and external resources and supports) such as the pandemic, which has tested the functioning of all systems immediately and directly. The COVID-19 pandemic has proven to be acutely and chronically stressful , particularly for families, children, and women .

The rates of depression and anxiety increased twofold among women in comparison with men during the pandemic; the odds of experiencing depression, anxiety, and posttraumatic stress were 2–3 times higher for women who experienced health-related socioeconomic risks, such as food insecurity, inadequate housing, violence, transportation difficulties, etc. Indeed, the pandemic and other thin times tend to exacerbate already overburdened women, who are left to juggle multiple, often conflicting roles.

Struggles to challenge patriarchal power structures are not coincidental; they are a result of misogyny—misogynistic forms of social control cast women who speak up as villains. Women and gender minorities' understandable grievances are often dismissed as “complaints” in their own families and social circles when they acknowledge the systematic forces that keep them down.

When the endemic of implicit and normalized sexism is made explicit, it threatens patriarchal structures and associated privileges. Challenging gender inequities causes discomfort for 1.) those who benefit from privilege; 2.) for those who rely on their adherence to patriarchal social structures for their livelihood and relationships; and 3.) for vast the majority of people who have been socialized into internalizing sexism.

Women may be shunned for stating the truth about gender inequities, despite experiencing the consequences of the truth every day. Subtle or overt silencing of women who speak up is misogynistic. The message is that if women would only just stay silent and “get along,” all would be well. Sure, all would be well—for those already set up to be well by the structures.

When women step out of misogynistic gender norms, internalized sexism causes all sorts of alarms, warnings, and red alerts may go off—for both women and men. People may think they are responding to some personality trait–they just weren’t “likable,” or there is just something "about them."

However, these perceptions are often smokescreens for internalized sexism and misogyny that target women who step out of gendered stereotypes–those who are leaders, assertive , or advocate for human rights. When women state hard truths and discuss topics people find unsettling, they may be stigmatized, dismissed, or vilified as “angry women.”

Paulo Freire (2008) states that people can commonly fear change. When women are seen as breaking the rules or retaliated against, they may escape to the familiar gender congruent roles of agreeableness and acquiesce to powers to “be liked,” which may provide a false sense of security. These alert buttons have been socialized and installed for all genders and by the sexist systems that socialize people into the patriarchal societies—which the majority of people in the world find themselves in.

To make progress, all genders must take risks, speak up when experiencing or witnessing injustice, stop being complicit in misogynistic social controls and support, make space, and be allies and accomplices seeking gender equity.

All genders must check their internalized sexism that makes them particularly prone to judge, retaliate, or keep down women who try to advocate for human rights of safety, security, autonomy, and liberation. On social media , are you only “liking” when women and girls post things in line with traditional gender norms, or are you also supportive of when women are strong, assertive, confident, and advocate?

Do you appreciate girls for their intelligence and physicality, or dress them up as dolls in pretty dresses, placing them in boxes where they gain acceptance only when they conform to suffocating gender and overburdened gender roles? This subtle preference, social control, and misogyny continue to damage women and girls, limiting their horizons and what they can dream and contribute to the broader world.

Challenging patriarchal social systems is a difficult yet necessary skill for liberation and transcendence from sexism. Sexism hurts men, too, as very few men are aligned with the toxic masculinity they may be socialized into. Men can use their privilege to challenge sexism and misogyny with less risk of backlash.

Postponing liberation causes symptoms to come out sideways, in the greater mental, physical, and social health consequences that affect women and gender minorities. Making explicit the gendered challenges and realities of life while being honest about the consequences is necessary to have a quality life more closely aligned with one's authentic self.

Borrell, C., Artazcoz, L., Gil-González, D., Perez, K., Perez, G., Vives-Cases, C., & Rohlfs, I. (2011). Determinants of perceived sexism and their role on the association of sexism with mental health. Women & Health, 51(6), 583-603. https://doi.org/10.1080/03630242.2011.608416

Freire, P. (2008) Pedagogy of the Oppressed (30th Anniversary Edition), New York, Continuum.

Klonoff, E. A., Landrine, H., & Campbell, R. (2000). Sexist discrimination may account for well-known gender differences in psychiatric symptoms. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 24(1), 93-99. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.2000.tb01025.x

Landry, L. J., & Mercurio, A. E. (2009). Discrimination and women’s mental health: The mediating role of control. Sex Roles, 61(3), 192-203. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-009-9624-6

Leonard, J. (2021). What are the psychological effects of gender inequality? https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/psychological-effects-of-gend…

World Health Organization. (2021b). Gender and health. https://www.who.int/news-room/questions-and-answers/item/gender-and-hea…

Lindau, S. T., Makelarski, J. A., Boyd, K., Doyle, K. E., Haider, S., Kumar, S., ... & Lengyel, E. (2021). Change in Health-Related Socioeconomic Risk Factors and Mental Health During the Early Phase of the COVID-19 Pandemic: A National Survey of you Women. Journal of Women's Health. https://doi.org/10.1089/jwh.2020.8879

Manne, K. (2017). Down girl: The logic of misogyny. Oxford University Press.

Mays, V. M., & Cochran, S. D. (2001). Mental health correlates of perceived discrimination among lesbian, gay, and bisexual adults in the United States. American journal of public health, 91(11), 1869-1876. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.91.11.1869

World Health Organization.(2021a). Violence against women. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/violence-against-women

Catherine McKinley, Ph.D., LMSW, is an associate professor at the Tulane University School of Social Work.

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Online Therapy
• United States
• Brooklyn, NY
• Chicago, IL
• Houston, TX
• Los Angeles, CA
• New York, NY
• Portland, OR
• San Diego, CA
• San Francisco, CA
• Seattle, WA
• Washington, DC
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Self Tests NEW
• Therapy Center
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

At any moment, someone’s aggravating behavior or our own bad luck can set us off on an emotional spiral that threatens to derail our entire day. Here’s how we can face our triggers with less reactivity so that we can get on with our lives.

• Emotional Intelligence
• Gaslighting
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser or activate Google Chrome Frame to improve your experience.

Thanks for signing up as a global citizen. In order to create your account we need you to provide your email address. You can check out our Privacy Policy to see how we safeguard and use the information you provide us with. If your Facebook account does not have an attached e-mail address, you'll need to add that before you can sign up.

This account has been deactivated.

Please contact us at [email protected] if you would like to re-activate your account.

Europe’s leading human rights organisation has just adopted the first-ever international legal instrument to stop sexism. 

The Council of Europe — which includes 47 member states, 28 of which are members of the European Union — has officially recognised that sexism is “widespread and prevalent in all sectors and all societies,” and is now calling on states to stop it. 

The council adopated a recommendation to prevent and combat sexism last week.

These recommendations are essentially a list of guidelines for member states to be exploring within their own societies. They are intended as a springboard to identify and define an issue, and lay out some ideas about how member states can now be tackling those issues.

A very significant part of the recent recommendation includes what is reportedly the first-ever internationally agreed upon definition of the term "sexism."

Take action: Tell World Leaders to Redouble Their Efforts by Amending Laws to Prevent Sexual Violence

And here it is! Sexism is defined as: “Any act, gesture, visual representation, spoken or written words, practice, or behaviour based upon the idea that a person or a group of persons is inferior because of their sex, which occurs in the public or private sphere, whether online or offline.” 

The recommendation also stressed that sexism is a manifestation of “historically unequal power relations” between men and women — which leads to discrimination and prevents the full advancement of women in society. 

It adds that sexism is “widespread and prevalent in all sectors and all societies and … sexism and sexist behaviours are rooted in and reinforce gender stereotypes.” 

A particularly interesting point — especially for anyone who’s been accused of being “too sensitive” when it comes to calling out everyday sexism — is that the recommendation makes the link between sexism and violence against women and girls. 

Acts of everyday sexism, it says, are “part of a continuum of violence that create a climate of intimidation, fear, discrimination, exclusion, and insecurity which limits opportunities and freedom.” 

It seems a bit unbelievable that we’ve managed to get to 2019 without an internationally recognised definition of sexism. So we asked Jacqui Hunt, the European director of Equality Now , an NGO that works to protect the rights of women and girls, why a definition is so important. 

“What’s important is that this resolution recognises the issue [of sexism] is a problem in all walks of life, blocking women and girls from achieving their potential,” Hunt said. “The definition indicates some of the impact this has on women and girls, why this is a problem, and that this has to be addressed.” 

One significant advantage of having a clear definition of sexism is that it forces more general recognition that sexism is a problem, and helps explain exactly what that problem is, what causes it, and how it can be addressed. 

“I think it’s because we’re all victims of sexism and we’re all blinded by sexism,” said Hunt. “We’re all influenced by the environments in which we’re brought up and if you think about it and examine it closely there’s sexism all over, and you don’t even realise that you’re subjected.” 

“We’re living through these stereotypes so you don’t examine how rife it is,” she added. “So I think there has to be general recognition that this is a problem, and how stereotypes and sexism fit into that.” 

“But the devil is in the detail, and until you know what it [sexism] looks like, where misogyny and sexism is all pervasive, it’s difficult to understand where you could have that real focus,” added Hunt. 

This is, of course, not the first time that international efforts have been made to tackle sexism and sexist behaviours. The UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) are a great example of a global front in the fight. 

SDG No.5 exists to tackle gender inequalities, and other issues that stem from stereotypes, lack of empowerment, and lack of inclusion, added Hunt. 

“There has been growing recognition that this is an issue, and to encapsulate it and remind people [through defining the problem] is a very good way of starting to take it seriously,” continued Hunt. “Once you recognise it and see it, it’s a good springboard to take it seriously and look at how you are going to address it.” 

The recommendations adopted by the Council of Europe come as a direct result of movements like #MeToo and #TimesUp, which have really shone a light on the fact that sexism is persistent and all-encompassing. 

The council’s Committee of Ministers have been very careful to highlight that sexism is rife in all different walks of life — from education, to advertising and media, the justice sector, culture, and sport, to name a few.  

Among some of the actions included in the recommendation  are legislative reforms to condemn sexism; define and criminalise sexist hate speech; and provide appropriate remedies for people who have experienced sexist behaviour. 

It’s not just women and girls who are negatively impacted by sexism either, of course. For example, one of the many issues highlighted in the recommendations, according to Hunt, are the unequal roles child-raising and child caring roles we have in our society. 

“Sexism is very obvious in a lot of laws, for example, that child marriage is possible. That’s pretty obvious” she said. “But then you look at things like the fact only women can claim maternity pay when they have a child. Great that they can get that, but why only women?” 

“The resolution has pointed out the unequal child-raising roles and child caring roles, and so it’s looking also at the family and seeing how we can balance those roles to give all parents the equal right to spend time with their children,” she continued. 

Perhaps most importantly, however, is the fact that the Council of Europe represents dozens of governments, and those governments had to come together to discuss the resolution. The idea is that each of those governments will now be able to take their learnings home with them, and start addressing sexism in their own countries. 

The recommendation also calls on member states to monitor their progress in implementing the guidelines, and to tell the Council of Europe’s Gender Equality Commission about the measures they have taken and the progress they have achieved. 

Hunt added: “It’s a growing realisation that actually our societies are embedded in sexism, and it’s a very good beginning on how to address it, to then take action to move forward.” 

Demand Equity

Most Popular

13 days ago

Inspiration vs Plagiarism

10 days ago

How To Write a Synthesis Essay

Openai prepares to launch web search feature for chatgpt, rivaling google and perplexity.

12 days ago

OpenAI Has Launched A New Voice Assistant, And Here’s What You Need to Know

11 days ago

How To Write An Opinion Essay

Sexism essay sample, example.

By Johannes Helmold

The term “sexism” was coined on November 18, 1965 by Pauline M. Leet at Franklin and Marshall College during a student-teacher forum. Leet gave a speech called “Women and the Undergraduate” in which she compared prejudice against sexes to racism. The key part of the speech by Leet was that, “When you argue … that since fewer women write good poetry this justifies their total exclusion, you are taking a position analogous to that of the racist—I might call you in this case a ‘sexist’ … Both the racist and the sexist are acting as if all that has happened had never happened, and both of them are making decisions and coming to conclusions about someone’s value by referring to factors which are in both cases irrelevant” (Finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com). However, it was not until three years later, on November 15, 1968, that the word “sexism” was seen in print. It was another speech, put in print in Vital Speeches of the Day, called “On Being Born Female” Caroline Bird. Another definition was given of sexism by Bird: “There is recognition abroad that we are in many ways a sexist country. Sexism is judging people by their sex when sex doesn’t matter. Sexism is intended to rhyme with racism” (Finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com).

Sexism is a broad term, and has been defined based on various disciplines. Generally, sexism is nowadays defined as the belief that one gender is superior to another. It is also stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination based on gender. Most often, sexism is referring to thinking of women and girls as lesser than their male counterparts (Schaefer, Richard T.). Within sociology, sexisim is delienated into an individual and institutional levels. Besides at the usual one-to-one level of sexism between people, sexism is said to be perpetuated by social institutions such as colleges, government services, and customs (Schaefer, Richard T.). On the other hand, within psychology, sexisim is seen as negative attitudes and values about certain genders. Psychology also recognizes that there is negative and benevolent stereotypes about different genders (Crawford, Mary). Turning to feminism, sexisim is commonly defined as being a systematic oppression of women that ends in women being disadvantaged. In addition, feminism states that sexism is a complex of male supremacy, misogyny, and chauvinism (Marilyn., Frye). According to ThoughtCo, “Some feminists have argued that sexism is the primal, or first, form of oppression in humanity, and that other oppressions are built on the foundation of oppression of women. Andrea Dworkin, a radical feminist, argued that position: “Sexism is the foundation on which all tyranny is built. Every social form of hierarchy and abuse is modeled on male-over-female domination”’ (Napikoski, Linda). However, feminism is often cited as having a more extreme view on sexism than from sociological and psychological points of perspective.

Sexism is a hot topic in many international forums and between people in their day-to-day lives. And there is a good reason for this: sexism has permeated our societal, psychological, and intellectual understanding of genders. Though sexism is generally defined as prejudice against a certain gender, it has many other implications in terms of history, societal impact, and psychological peculiarities.

Feminism Friday: The origins of the word “sexism.” Finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com . October 19, 2007.

Schaefer, Richard T. (2009). Sociology: A Brief Introduction (8th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. pp. 274–275. ISBN 9780073404264. OCLC 243941681.

Crawford, Mary (Mary (2004). Women and gender : a feminist psychology . Unger, Rhoda Kesler. (4th ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill. p. 9. ISBN 0072821078. OCLC 52706293.

Marilyn., Frye. The politics of reality : essays in feminist theory (First ed.). Trumansburg, New York. p. 41. ISBN 089594099X. OCLC 9323470.

Napikoski, Linda. “What Is Sexism? What’s the Definition and Feminist Origins of the Term?” ThoughtCo , ThoughtCo, www.thoughtco.com/what-is-sexism-3529186.

Follow us on Reddit for more insights and updates.

Comments (0)

Welcome to A*Help comments!

We’re all about debate and discussion at A*Help.

We value the diverse opinions of users, so you may find points of view that you don’t agree with. And that’s cool. However, there are certain things we’re not OK with: attempts to manipulate our data in any way, for example, or the posting of discriminative, offensive, hateful, or disparaging material.

Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

More from Definition Essay Examples and Samples

Oct 23 2023

What Is Respect? Definition Essay Example

Oct 18 2023

What Is Family? Definition Essay Samples

Oct 17 2023

What Is Integrity? Essay Definition Example

Related writing guides, writing a definition essay.

Remember Me

What is your profession ? Student Teacher Writer Other

Forgotten Password?

Username or Email

Home — Essay Samples — Literature — The Color Purple — Gender Roles and Sexism

The Theme of Sexism and Gender Roles in The Color Purple

• Categories: Alice Walker The Color Purple

About this sample

Words: 3620 |

19 min read

Published: Jun 29, 2018

Words: 3620 | Pages: 8 | 19 min read

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Verified writer

• Expert in: Literature

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

3.5 pages / 2123 words

7 pages / 3276 words

4.5 pages / 1980 words

2 pages / 887 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on The Color Purple

Alice Walker's "The Color Purple" is a poignant novel that explores the themes of racism, sexism, and misogyny prevalent in the early 20th century American South. Through the transformation of the central character, Celie, the [...]

Celie has been a victim of female oppression throughout her life, never believing in herself, and living in fear of men. However, when Shug Avery enters her life, Celie’s quality of life starts to improve on the whole, and her [...]

If asked, most people would say women are strong, passionate, loving, but not all of these positive traits truly define who they are. Their nature is deemed the most difficult to define because they have negative aspects that [...]

"It all I can do not to cry. I make myself wood. I say to myself, Celie, you a tree. That's how I know trees fear man," (23) uttered the protagonist of Alice Walker's The Color Purple. Such words of meekness were characteristic [...]

In this essay the feminist theories of Virginia Woolf are examined and analysed, as well as connected to the famous novel The Color Purple by Alice Walker. Woolf introduces the theories of women’s economic and social freedom [...]

The title year of George Orwell's most famous novel is nineteen years past, but the dystopian vision it draws has retained its ability to grip readers with a haunting sense of foreboding about the future. At the heart of many of [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free