Women's Gender Consciousness

Gurin, Patricia

doi:10.1086/268911

Cited by 251 publications

(176 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

166

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…nature of the relationships men and women have with each other compared to minorities and Whites (Gurin, 1985). Specifically, women and men are unusually deeply embedded in relationships with each other across a variety of contexts, such as family relations, friendship networks, community environments, and work spheres.…”

Section: Accepted M Manuscriptmentioning

confidence: 99%

It's fair for us: Diversity structures cause women to legitimize discrimination

Brady

Kaiser

Major

et al. 2015

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three experiments tested the hypothesis that the mere presence (vs. absence) of diversity structures makes it more difficult for women to detect sexism. In Experiment 1, even when a company's hiring decisions disadvantaged women, women perceived the company as more procedurally just for women and were less supportive of sexism litigation when the company offered diversity training, compared to when it did not. In Experiment 2, women perceived a company as more procedurally just for women and as less likely to have engaged in sexism when the company offered diversity training, compared to when it did not. This effect was not moderated by women's endorsement of status legitimizing beliefs. In Experiment 3, women perceived a company as more procedurally just and less discriminatory when the company had been recognized for positive gender diversity practices compared to when it had not.Additionally, these effects were most pronounced among women who endorsed benevolent sexist beliefs and mitigated among those who rejected benevolent sexist beliefs. Together, these experiments demonstrate that diversity structures can make it difficult for women to detect and remedy discrimination, especially women who hold benevolent sexist beliefs.Keywords: sexism, diversity, discrimination, legitimacy, procedural justice, benevolent sexism A C C E P T E D M A N U S C R I P T ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT3It's Fair for Us: Diversity Structures Cause Women to Legitimize DiscriminationAs concerns about the treatment of legally protected groups (e.g., women, older employees, and minorities) remain prominent in American workplaces, many corporations have responded by implementing diversity structures (Dobbin, 2009;Kelly & Dobbin, 1998;Paluck, 2006). These structures take various forms such as diversity policies, diversity training programs, and affirmative action initiatives, but all profess to create equal opportunities and treatment for all employees (Edelman, Fuller, & Mara-Drita, 2001;Paluck, 2006). Empirical research, however, suggests that diversity structures often fail to achieve these egalitarian objectives, and many commonly employed diversity structures have little to no impact on increasing diversity (Kalev, Dobbin, & Kelly, 2006). Despite the limited efficacy of many diversity structures, recent research shows that high status group members, such as White men, believe that the presence of diversity structures-even demonstrably ineffective diversity structures-signifies that organizations are indeed fair for underrepresented groups (Kaiser, Major, et al., 2013). That is, diversity structures create an illusion of fairness. Diversity Structures Create an Illusion of Fairness Among High Status GroupsIn a series of studies, Kaiser, Major, and their colleagues (2013) examined whether members of high status groups perceive companies with diversity structures as fairer for members of legally protected groups than companies without such structures, and whether they do so even when there is objective evidence that the companies' proc...

show abstract

Section: Accepted M Manuscriptmentioning

confidence: 99%

It's fair for us: Diversity structures cause women to legitimize discrimination

Brady

Kaiser

Major

et al. 2015

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Other studies also tested the impact of gender consciousness, measured, for example, by the degree of personal importance placed on gender equality and by taking a position on the role of women in politics (Kay 1985;Gurin 1985). The SELECTS 2003 study does not contain these kinds of measures.…”

Section: Political Motivations and Attitudesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gender Gap and Turnout in the 2003 Federal Elections

Engeli

Ballmer-Cao

Giugni

2006

Swiss Political Science Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We examine the gender gap in turnout in Switzerland by analysing the 2003 federal elections. Despite being a standard component in electoral studies, the gender variable is, in most cases, only used as a control variable and its effects and interaction are too often under-analysed. We focus on individual-level factors by looking at three types of explanations for the gender gap: (1) resources, (2) political motivations and attitudes, and (3) social capital and integration. Our analysis, based on binomial logistic regression models, shows that compositional and conditional effects play an important role in explaining the persistent gender gap in Swiss electoral turnout.

show abstract

“…This last variable is defined as "gender consciousness based upon a set of political beliefs about equality of the sexes" (Cook, 1989: 74) which, according to Conover and Sapiro, "includes a commitment to changing women's disadvantaged status" (quoted in Sigel, 1996: 127). In light of theoretical conceptualizations of group consciousness (Gurin, 1985;Miller et al, 1981), feminist consciousness was measured as the product of the interaction between power discontent (the feeling that women are discriminated against or do not have equality with men), system blaming (the rationale for group disadvantage-individual or societal), and collective orientation (recognizing the need for group solutions). For each of these components, a question response congruent with the feminist movement and its ideologies was coded 1; otherwise, it received a code of 0.…”

Section: Independent Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

More Feminists or More Women?

Tremblay

Pelletier

2000

International Political Science Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. The debate about the underrepresentation of women in politics rests on two conceptions of political representation, namely the descriptive and the substantive. The descriptive perspective is that political institutions should reflect the composition of civil society, while the substantive (or feminist) conception argues that, since women offer unique perspectives, their exclusion from political power means that their needs, demands, and interests would currently not be echoed in the political arena. However, a causal link is sometimes too easily established between the number of women elected and its consequences for the female population in general. This article defines, within the context of Canadian parliamentarianism, the scope and limits of this equation between descriptive and substantive representation of women. The conclusion reached is that feminist consciousness has a more significant influence than gender on opinions regarding liberal and gender-related issues. It appears the best feminist strategy to descriptively and substantively represent women is to promote women within political parties, and to elect women who are feminists.

show abstract

Women's Gender Consciousness

Cited by 251 publications

References 16 publications

It's fair for us: Diversity structures cause women to legitimize discrimination

It's fair for us: Diversity structures cause women to legitimize discrimination

Gender Gap and Turnout in the 2003 Federal Elections

More Feminists or More Women?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About