Modern Misogyny Part 1

Introduction What is the author’s goal in this book? How does it relate to other books we’ve read this semester? What is feminism? First wave Second wave? Post-feminism? Third-wave feminism? How do the ideas in the book relate to things going on in the world today? Why would threat lead people to endorse more traditional gender roles?

Consumerism and Individualism How are post-feminist ideas spread in the popular media? How can a focus on freedom and personal responsibility backfire? The author writes that “Post-feminism is part of a corporatist and neoliberal political economy…” (p. 7). What does that mean? Do you agree? How do politicians use women to show that women’s issues aren’t an issue?

Hurt et al. (2007) Measures Feminist Self-Labeling (Liss et al., 2001) Conformity to Feminine Norms Inventory (CFNI; Mahalik et al., 2005) 3 subscales: thinness, investment in appearance, importance of romantic relationships Eating Attitudes Test (EAT; Garner et al., 1982) Objectified Body Consciousness Scale (OBCS; McKinley & Hyde, 1996) Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES; Rosenberg, 1965) Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D; Radloff, 1977) Relation between feminist identity and clinical outcomes 282 female participants Mage = 25 (SD = 9.8) Hurt, M. M., Nelson, J. A., Turner, D. L., Haines, M. E., Ramsey, L. R., Erchull, M. J., & Liss, M. (2007). Feminism: What is it good for? Feminine norms and objectification as the link between feminist identity and clinically relevant outcomes. Sex Roles, 57, 355-363.

Hurt et al. (2007) Self-identified feminists rejected feminine norms of thinness, appearance, and involvement in romantic relationships Endorsing feminine norms was positively related to body surveillance and shame Body shame was positively related to negative eating attitudes, depressive symptoms, and self-esteem Endorsing the feminine norm of thinness was positively related to body shame and negative eating attitudes Figure 1. Relationships Among the Variables (Hurt et al., 2007, p. 361).

Sexual objectification and women Sexual objectification is related to several negative outcomes, such as self-objectification (Fredrickson & Roberts, 1997), body shame (Calogero & Pina, 2011), and low self-esteem (Tylka & Sabik, 2010), and, according to Anderson (2015), the sexual objectification of women has only gotten worse. Nevertheless, identifying as a feminist serves as a protective factor against similar outcomes (Hurt et al., 2007). According to this evidence, feminism serves a good purpose, despite post-feminist beliefs. If sexual objectification is only getting worse, and feminism is no longer necessary, how will the negative effects of sexual objectification ever be eliminated or reduced in a post-feminist world? Further, Anderson (2015) states that women are now more accepting of the sexual objectification of the female body. Should women, and society in general, be more accepting of sexual objectification?

9/11 and gender roles How does the author relate 9/11 to gender roles? What is the “center stage problem,” and how is it seen in society? How does Anderson’s discussion of 9/11 relate to what’s happening now in politics (women’s wave)? Anderson cites Perrin & Smolek (2009) as showing that trust in the government increased after 9/11, but went back to pre-event levels about 6 months later. Did gendered attitudes show a similar pattern? If not, why not? (p. 37) Anderson mentions several “retro trends” that occurred after 9/11. Are there others you can think of? If society is, for the most part, complacent with traditional gender roles, how can we find a balance between the feminist empowerment of women to pursue non-traditional roles and humans’ desire to remain complacent with how things traditionally are?

Is post-feminism anything new? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_kzJ-f5C9U Are the recent women’s marches feminist?

Man hating What are stereotypes of feminists? What purposes do those stereotypes serve? Who has more negative attitudes toward men? Glick & Fiske, 1999 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1999.tb00379.x How does language perpetuate sexism? Does feminism create victims? If so, who are they? To what extent are men and women different?

Katz & Farrow (2000) Instrumental women reported greater sexual anxiety and less sexual desire than traditionally expressive feminine or androgynous women Expressive men reported less sexual desire than androgynous men Non-traditional and undifferentiated participants reported similar levels of sexual anxiety and sexual desire and less sexual adjustment than either androgynous or traditional participants Katz, J., & Farrow, S. (2000). Heterosexual adjustment among women and men with non-traditional gender identities: Testing predictions from self-verification theory. Social Behavior and Personality, 28, 613-620. doi:10.2224/sbp.2000.28.6.613 Are these findings context-specific? Can the acceptance and endorsement of non-traditional gender roles have positive implications for other areas of people’s lives?

Theories What theories did you think of with today’s readings?