Obstacles to Birth Surname Retention Upon Marriage: How Do Hostile Sexism and System Justification Predict Support for Marital Surname Change Among Women?

Abstract

Despite the ongoing shift in societal norms and gender-discriminatory practices toward more equality, many heterosexual women worldwide, including in many Western societies, choose to replace their birth surname with the family name of their spouse upon marriage. Previous research has demonstrated that the adherence to sexist ideologies (i.e., a system of discriminatory gender-based beliefs) among women is associated with their greater endorsement of practices and policies that maintain gender inequality. By integrating the ideas from the system justification theory and the ambivalent sexism theory, we proposed that the more women adhere to hostile and benevolent sexist beliefs, the more likely they would be to justify existing gender relations in society, which in turn, would positively predict their support for traditional, husband-centered marital surname change. We further argued that hostile (as compared to benevolent) sexism could act as a particularly strong direct predictor of the support for marital surname change among women. We tested these possibilities across three cross-sectional studies conducted among women in Turkey (Study 1, N=118, self-identified feminist women; Study 2, N=131, female students) and the United States (Study 3, N=140, female students). Results of Studies 1 and 3 revealed that higher adherence to hostile (but not benevolent) sexism was associated with higher support for marital surname change indirectly through higher gender-based system justification. In Study 2, the hypothesized full mediation was not observed. Consistent with our predictions, in all three studies, hostile (but not benevolent) sexism was found to be a direct positive predictor of the support for marital surname change among women. We discuss the role of dominant ideologies surrounding marriage and inegalitarian naming conventions in different cultures as obstacles to women’s birth surname retention upon marriage.

Does witnessing gender discrimination predict women's collective action intentions for gender justice? Examining the moderating role of perceived female support

“…This conceptualization, however, might pose some limitations for our understanding of whether (a) participants personally received support when they needed it and (b) significant female others recognized the need and importance of challenging gender inequalities. Future research should also account for the disempowering effects of women's adherence to sexist ideologies and system‐justifying beliefs that were shown to impede a wide range of social and political behaviours (e.g., Chayinska et al, 2021; Jost & Kay, 2005; Radke et al, 2018). Future qualitative studies may be helpful in understanding what female support may entail for women that represent different social and cultural backgrounds.…”

“…As of 2021, Turkey was ranked as having the 133rd largest gender gap among 156 countries (Global Gender Gap Report, 2021). While international observers have documented some progress with respect to gender equality in Turkey in recent decades, the country's conservative religious groups and right‐wing populist parties are committed to restoring the gendered status quo by strengthening patriarchal attitudes and traditional gender roles (see Chayinska, Uluğ, Solak, Kanık, & Çuvaş, 2021; Kabasakal‐Arat, 2020).…”

Why is the lack of support for women’s rights appealing? Considering the roles of dispositional system-justifying motives and ambivalent sexism.

“…In another study by Kaynak Malatyalı et al (2017), hostile sexism was found to mediate the relationship between social dominance orientation and approval of child marriages. Chayinska et al (2021) also reported that hostile sexist attitudes predicted positive attitudes toward changing women's surnames due to marital union through system justification tendencies. Accordingly, we can claim that hostile sexism predicts violation of women's rights, such as approving the rape perpetrator, approving the girl child marriages, violence against women, and supporting women to take their husbands' surnames, and it is negatively related to support for women's rights.…”

A Large-Scale Test of the Reality Constraint and Ingroup Bias Accounts of Women's Support for Male Privilege

“…For example, studies have shown that women sometimes prefer to choose stereotypically female-oriented occupations and training (e.g., Stoet & Geary, 2018) and perceive themselves to be less entitled to stereotypically male-dominated positions (e.g., managers and politicians). Some women also tend to support the claim that it is men's right (a) to earn more than women (Major, 1987, 1994), (b) to engage in more productive work, (c) to do less housework relative to women (Monacelli & Caricati, 2010), and even (d) for women to replace their surnames with their husband's upon marriage (Chayinska et al, 2021). Although there is consensus that people tend to support the prevailing realities in their societies, there is much less agreement on why the disadvantaged sometimes do so, given that it ostensibly undercuts their interests (e.g., the case of women supporting male privilege; for related discussions on the “why” debate see Jost, 2019; Owuamalam et al, 2019a, 2019b; Owuamalam & Spears, 2020; see also Rubin et al, 2023a, 2023b).…”

“…However, other progressive women who are similarly invested in their gender identity (e.g., feminist women) may challenge those arrangements (e.g., Bashi et al, 2018; Hercus, 1999; Radke et al, 2016). 1 So, while gender socialization could account for some instances of gender system justification (Chayinska et al, 2021; Jost & Kay, 2005), it seems insufficient to fully explain why women who are strongly invested in their gender identity (both traditional and feminist women) do not uniformly support a system of gender inequality. Some do, such as women who subscribe to traditional roles, and some do not, such as feminist women who challenge such roles.…”