Citation
The lagging ideology of sexism

Material Information

Title:
The lagging ideology of sexism
Creator:
Ducolon, Anita Lynn
Place of Publication:
Denver, CO
Publisher:
University of Colorado Denver
Publication Date:
Language:
English
Physical Description:
vi, 55 leaves : ; 29 cm.

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Pay equity -- United States ( lcsh )
Pay equity ( fast )
United States ( fast )
Genre:
bibliography ( marcgt )
theses ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )

Notes

Thesis:
Thesis (M.A.)--University of Colorado at Denver, 1993. Sociology
Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references.
General Note:
Submited in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree, Master of Arts, Sociology.
General Note:
Department of Sociology
Statement of Responsibility:
by Anita Lynn Ducolon.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Colorado Denver
Holding Location:
Auraria Library
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
29195094 ( OCLC )
ocm29195094

Downloads

This item is only available as the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

THE LAGGING IDEOLOGY OF SEXISM by Anita Lynn Ducolon B.A., University of Puget Sound, 1976 A thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Colorado at Denver in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Sociology 1993

PAGE 2

This thesis for the Master of Arts degree by Anita Lynn Ducolon has been approved for the Department of Sociology by '( f H. Anderson Gtiry S. Stern Date

PAGE 3

Ducolon, Anita Lynn (M.A., Sociology) The Lagging Ideology of Sexism Thesis directed by Professor Richard H. Anderson ABSTRACT The shifts in attitudes to more liberal views toward women are slow. Legislative changes have not produced results of equality. The Reagan administration and the media declared that women had achieved equality, and that no more needed to be done (Faludi, Susan. 1991. Backlash.). Some peoples attitudes seem to have been affected by this policy. Data from the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago (Davis, James A., and Smith, Tom W. 1989. General Social Surveys 1972-1989. [machine-readable data file.] Principle Investigator, Davis, James A.; Director and Co-Principal Investigator, Smith, Tom W. NORC ed. Chicago: National Opinion Research Center, producer, 1989; Storrs, CT: The Roper Center for Public Opinion Research, University of Connecticut, distributor. 1 data file [24,893 logical records] and 1 codebook iii

PAGE 4

[861p.].) showed that attitudes toward women shifted to more liberal positions, from 1977 to 1986. That is, respondents in 1986 displayed attitudes of equality toward women more than respondents in 1977. Men usually demonstrated a continued liberal shift in attitudes toward women when asked about biological capabilities of women. (Answers displayed attitudes of more equality toward. women.) However, for some questions concerning economic equality of women, men demonstrated no further shift to liberalism, and sometimes, there was even a shift toward more conservatism (answers displayed attitudes of less equality toward women), from 1986 to 1989. This abstract accurately represents the content of the candidates thesis. iv

PAGE 5

CONTENTS CHAPTER 1. LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES 1 The Problem -Introduction Discrimination Based on Biology Stereotypes Sex-Role Conformity Tradi tiona! Roles and the Economics Discrimination Economic Ideology Deviation from the Male-Defined Norm And the Need to Control, Structurally and Situationally Economic Role Discrimination Summary 2. ANALYSIS Introduction About the NORC GSS Data Methodology Economic Questions Biological Questions Findings Attitudes by Race Attitudes by Sex Attitudes by Sex and Race v 1 5 5 6 of 10 . . 10 12 15 19 21 21 22 24 25 25 27 27 30 32

PAGE 6

Economic questions Biological questions Discussion Conclusions APPENDIX 34 39 41 45 NORC GSS Questions. 47 Response Rates 49 REFERENCES 50 vi

PAGE 7

CHAPTER 1 LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES The Problem -Introduction It has been suggested that women are meant for different social roles than men because of basic biological differences (Eysenck, 1991). Vet others contend that a division of labor that keeps women at home, or in low paying jobs, is inherent in our economic system (Tucker, 1978). But, with an increase in the number of female-headed households (Faludi, 1991), this differential in roles and wages is no longer appropriate. Since men hold the balance of power, and thereby constitute the power majority (Horney, 1967), and since men and women learn gender-specific roles so well (Eagly, 1983; Eagly and Carli, 1981; Eagly and Chrvala, 1986; Gerard et al., 1968; Hansson et al., 1980; Janis et al., 1959; Rapoport, 1981; Ridgeway, 1978; Tuthill and Forsyth, 1982), it is doubtful that men would want the economic structure to change to include women as equal competitors. It is possible that the government and the media have put fear of losing economic harmony into men. But, women who realize that they are at a disadvantage in 1

PAGE 8

providing for themselves and their children most likely would like to see economic equality. As the number of women in the work force increases, it becomes more and more obvious that their work is not inferior, but that they continue to be assigned different roles (Stockard and Johnson, 1992). It is also less politically correct than in the past to make sexist remarks. Therefore, it seems less likely that people would rely as much on the argument of the biological inferiority of women. There is a belief expressed in popular literature, and accepted by many people, that great gains in the advancement of the status of women have been made recently (Faludi, 1991). On the other hand, Faludi (1991) and Jackson (1992) contend that there is currently a backlash or a resurgence of sexism in America. However, this may simply be a transient (or surface) feature of the ideology of the basic underlying economic structure, which is sexist and remains unchanged. Some might claim that women do not face discrimination any longer, that women are allowed freely into the workplace, for example. However, women are still up against more obstacles than men, such as 2

PAGE 9

remaining responsible for the domestic scene when working (Stockard and Johnson, 1992). People still do not perceive women as equals (Candib, 1990; Collins, 1986; Collinson et al., 1990; Falbo, 1977; Faludi, 1991; Glick, 1991; Jackson, 1992; 1988; Meeker and Weitzel O"Neill, 1977; Russ and McNeilly, 1988; Ware and CooperStudebaker, 1989), and this may affect their behavior toward women. It might appear that women have reached a level of equality, that there is no longer any discrimination against them. But, anti-discrimination legislation has not had the assumedly desired effect of equality for women. Could prejudice and discrimination be alive and well on an individual level and in uncontrolled institutional settings? If attitudes have changed so much, why do behaviors seem to remain old-fashioned, as evidenced by the fact that with the same experience and education, women do not achieve equal job status and pay? Men still hold most middle-and upper-management positions and most positions of power in the government, even though women have been allowed to further their education, and have been in the work force for several years. Since men hold most positions of economic power, 3

PAGE 10

and therefore political power, they define and impose a system of the distribution of goods, and even a system of morality. These are based on their needs, and often are to the detriment of women. It is assumed that women can and will rely on men economically; that women will marry, have children, and leave the work force to stay home. This leads employers to believe that women are better at the role of housewife than at that of higher positions at work. Consequently, these higher-paying, higher-status jobs are reserved for men, who are thought to be more reliable and more suitable intellectually. This is an example of how power majorities stereotype power minorities and perceive them as inferior or different (Jelen, 1988:353). Power minorities are exploited inherently in capitalist systems (Anderson, 1974:290, 31b). "Women have indeed been exploited in a variety of ways by men, and sex roles have been established which tend to undermine the dignity and status of the female" (Anderson, 1974:315). Our system is still very much patriarchal, and women still suffer from exploitation. As Susan Faludi (1991) points out, there are twice as many women at or below the poverty level as men in this country. 4

PAGE 11

Discrimination Based on Biology Steregtypes Biologically-based discrimination has played an important role in the history of our culture (Jongeward and Scott, 1977). But, there is a considerable amount of evidence to support a socialization rather than a biological basis for the difference in behavior between sexes (Block, 1973; Eagly, 1983; Eagly and Carli, 1981; Eagly and Chrvala, 1986; Falbo, 1977; Gerard et al., 1968; Hansson et al., 1980; Janis et al., 1959; Meeker and Weitzel-O.Neill, 1977; Rapoport, 1981; Ridgeway, 1978; Tuthill and Forsyth, 1982). Women are up against stereotyping in our society. In order to deny equal treatment to members of an outgroup, those who would deny such treatment typically hold overgeneralized (and therefore erroneous) beliefs about outgroup members. Thus, discriminators often believe the victims deserve unequal treatment (Jelen, 1988:353). Stockard and Johnson (1992) cite studi.es to show that people perceive men to be more effective than women, and effectiveness is considered very valuable in our culture. Therefore, men are valued over women (Anderson, 1974).

PAGE 12

Jelen contends that women are stereotyped, and so people have over-generalized views of them, and think they deserve unequal treatment. "Some people believe that women are inferior to men, whereas others believe that the sexes are merely different" (Jelen, 1988:353). However,this "differentness" category is still sexist, in that it maintains the belief in rigid sex roles. According to Jelen, a person who is low on the scale of perception of gender difference, and low on the scale of perception of inferiority, is an androgynist. He says John Stuart Mill was one of these, and Jelen (1988) dilutes his own hypothesis by paraphrasing him as saying that women seem different from men simply because men, who hold power and rewards in Western society, expect women to behave in a certain manner. Given a choice between rebellion and compliance, women tend to choose the latter (Jelen, 1988:356). Sex-Role Conformity Maybe this is why so many conformity studies show that women conform more than men. "Control theory," as explained by Stark (1989:188-189), says that people conform more to norms when they have more "attachments," such as family and friends, and women appear to be more

PAGE 13

"attached" to their groups than are men. Many conformity studies conclude that we have certain expectations about gender roles, and that we live up to them in our social interactions (Eagly, 1983; Eagly and Carli, 1981; Eagly and Chrvala, 1986; Gerard et al., 1968; Hansson et al., 1980; Janis et al., 1959; Rapoport, 1981; Ridgeway, 1978; Tuthill and Forsyth, 1982). Some studies point to the need for social approval as a reason for conformity (Falbo, 1977). Women seek social approval more than men. This appears to be due to the fact that men typically hold higher-status positions than women (Collinson et al., 1990; Faludi, 1991; Glick, 1991; Jongeward and Scott, 1977; Sullivan and Thompson, 1991). Men and women, both, have learned so well to fit into these sex-defined roles, with men dominating, and women conforming. With this as basic to our social structure, it is problematic for women to try to gain an equal footing. One study (Maslach et al., 1987) found considerable deviance when the subjects and the topics were masculine, and there was more conformity when the subjects and the topics were feminine. Santee and Jackson (1982) found that males were stronger in their attributions of 7

PAGE 14

instrumentality to subjects who dissented from the majority's position. In contrast, females tended to link instrumentality to conforming behavior" (1982:123). Some say that one reason that women on the average have lower-paying jobs than men is that women are more concerned with "people-oriented than with making a lot of money. But, sex roles may be seen as the result of status processes. Since men have higher status than women, men are expected to be more competent than women, and it is expected that competitive or dominating behavior is legitimate for men but not for women" (Meeker and Weitzel-O'Neil!, 1977:91). Meeker and Weitzel-O'Neil! (1977) think that the tendency for women to conform more is related to this lack of confidence. The lack of confidence may be a reason for the preoccupation of women with social approval. This may be seen as a trait which can interfere with productivity. However, the maladaptation of gender role playing can work both ways: "Research also shows instances in which, while groups of women had difficulty with a task because no one wanted to take the lead in coordinating activities, groups of men had difficulty with the same task because everyone tried to 8

PAGE 15

take the lead (Meeker and Weitzel-oNeill, 1977). Eysenck (1991) suggests that women are naturally selected for conformity and different roles from men. He believes that there are great biological differences between the sexes that dictate different roles in our society. It is as if these differences were attributable to nature, and that if women try to deviate from their roles, nature will be disturbed. Women will also be disturbed, and racked with guilt, especially when it comes to forsaking their children to make something of themselves in the business world. Prejudice and discrimination based on biological differences can therefore be very emotionally charged. However, Block (1973) found differences in "child-rearing attitudes and behaviors" between sexes. find significant differences in socialization .. we emphases Children manifesting extreme sex-role typing are handicapped intellectually because hyperpassivity (the supposedly feminine mode) interferes with concept formation and manipulation while hyperactivity (the supposedly masculine mode) mitigates against sustained and concentrated analysis" (Block, 1973:518). In addition, these gender roles are usually much more 9

PAGE 16

defined when one grows up (Eagly and Chrvala, 1986). Indeed, women do retain the burden of bearing children. But, beyond that, gender-role playing is arbitrarily imposed. Women have been condemned to a position of secondary importance. Women have been taught to think differently than men, because of their traditional roles. Women and men have been rewarded for different, often polarly opposite, behavioral characteristics. Functional theorists see biological differences as determining traditional economic roles. Conflict theorists see the mechanics of our economy as determining role differentiation along biological lines. But, at any rate, the prejudiced attitudes toward women become part of our psychological constitution, and some people think there are great biological differences between the sexes. Traditional Roles and the Economics of Discrimination Economic Ideology The differentiation in treatment of the sexes is a manifestation of a basic underlying ideology. Karen 10

PAGE 17

Horney defines hegemony as it pertains to power minorities (those not holding power): At any given time, the more powerful side will create an ideology suitable to help maintain its position and to make this position acceptable to the weaker one. In this ideology the differentness of the weaker one will be interpreted as inferiority, and it will be proven that these differences are unchangeable, basic, or Gods will. It is the function of such an ideology to deny or conceal the existence of a struggle (Horney, 1967:116). So, many women, as well as men, believe that women are inferior, due to the hegemonic nature of the popular ideology. This is analogous to blaming alcoholism for the evils of society, when there is a basic underlying problem predisposing persons to this "disease," situationally, or structurally. So, when our laws change to make illegal the discrimination against power minorities, the underlying ideology predisposing the power majorities to discriminate does not necessarily get treated. The structure of our system, itself, is responsible for sexism: The capitalist system relies in many ways upon sexual inequality and sexism for maximum appropriation of surplus value. It relies upon, for example, the unpaid labor of housewives, the underpaid labor of unskilled 11

PAGE 18

females, the lowered wage and salary expectations of educated and skilled females, the inability of female labor to assert itself through unionization and militance, and sexism in advertising and marketing on almost every conceivable item of personal consumption (Anderson, 1974:316). Anderson (1974:317) points out that one reason women have trouble coming together to form a sort of class consciousness is that women have more in common with the men in their social class, as far as expropriation of surplus value, than they do with women outside their class. This seems to be so for women of different races as well (Reid, 1972; Wallace, 1990). We are out-growing our current system. It is lagging behind our needs. Although women are in the labor market, and are supposedly accorded equal rights, they are still stymied by a cultural lag. This lag is in the ideology which has not caught up with the technology (Cuzzort and King, 1969:192). Hegemony serves to perpetuate the old ideology. Deviation from the Male-Defined Norm And the Need tg Cgntrgl, Structurally and Situationally In order to retain economic control, controls over behavior are also imposed. Because of the economic 12

PAGE 19

history of black women (starting with slavery, and the subsequent, and even modern, necessity to work outside the home, mostly as domestic help), they have not conformed to the power-majoritys ideology of complacency of women. So, they are accused of being rude and aggressive, and unsupportive of their men, for example (Myers, 1980; Reid, 1972; Wallace, 1990; Watkins and David, 1971). Patricia Hill Collins explains how hegemony works against the black woman in particular, from an outsider-within perspective Black womens assertiveness in resisting the multifaceted oppression they experience has been a consistent threat to the status As punishment, Black women have been assaulted with a variety of externallydefined negative images designed to control assertive Black female behavior (Collins, 1986:517). Blaming victims of intimate violence (Candib, 1990; Gelles and Straus, 1989; Ryan, 1971; Strube, 1988; Summers, 1991) also serves to reinforce the perception of control. In addition, the government and the media have proclaimed that feminism has destroyed family values; and that rape victims only have themselves to blame (Faludi, 1991:xii). Males attitudes toward women have been found to 13

PAGE 20

affect the degree to which they blame female victims (Kristiansen and Guilietti, 1990). Summers (1991) concluded that men were more likely than women to blame victims of sexual harassment, and that "when there was competition between the victim and the perpetrator for a promotion," males blamed women with strong feminist ideals for causing a misunderstanding. Women are not only up against sexual harassment in the workplace, but are also not likely to be believed when their ideals do not conform to the prevailing ideology. An abuser feels a need to control his victim, often because of perceived lack of control in other dimensions of his life, such as at work. So, even though many malefemale relationships do not involve actual physical violence (they may not resort to biological superiority), men still often feel the need to have control economically and psychologically. This is manifest at home and at work. Women have difficulty leaving abusive situations because of economic dependence and learned helplessness (Gelles and Straus, 1989; Schutte, Malouff, and Doyle, 1988; Strube, 1988; Sullivan, 1991). 14

PAGE 21

Men are taught to think that they must hold power over others, economically, psychologically, and physically. So, women (unlike men) are told that they have responsibilities for their children and spouses, and a responsibility to behave in a prescribed manner. Adherence to the norm inherently leaves women powerless; and moreover, deviance from the norm only brings deserved punishments (such as being raped for not staying at home). Economic Role Discrimination A woman might lose career opportunities because she does not think like "one of the boys," and cannot expect to be part of the "good-old-boy" network: As more women enter the labor force, women s work continues. to be defined as both different from and less important than mens it is not women's inferior performance that causes an occupation held predominantly by women to be less rewarded, but rather the fact that it is a woman's occupation Obviously there are other group inequities in societies besides sex-based ones, most notably in the United States those based on class and race. Yet, because families include both sex groups, inequities based on sex occur within both class and racial groups (Stockard and Johnson, 1992:3-4). Russ and McNeilly (1988) claim that sex role stereotyping still exists in sales. However, the authors 15

PAGE 22

did find that individuals were more liberal (favorable in their attitudes toward women in business) if they had a working mother or had a female boss" (1988:46). Women tend to choose different career paths than men (Gottfredson, 1981), but this is influenced by discrimination in hiring practices. With the same amount of education plus the same amount of experience, men fare better than women in the workplace (Bunch, 1986; Collinson et al., 1990; Glick, 1991; Hartmann, 1981; Killingsworth and Hill, 1989; Mies, 1986). Glick (1991) demonstrated a "significantly stronger relationship of the masculinity of jobs to occupational prestige (over four times the strength of the association between feminine traits and prestige) and to salary It seems that part of the differential in pay between men's and women's jobs may be due to a tendency to pay men more money not because they are believed to have valued masculine personality traits, but simply because they are men" (Glick, 1991:374-375). Women tend to show more stress over the "work-family conflict" than men (Davidson and Cooper, 1985; Jick and Mitz, 1985; Zappert and Weinstein, 1985). It has been 16

PAGE 23

demonstrated that men and women both blame this conflict as a major cause of poor performance on the job for women but not for men (Wiley and Eskilson, 1988). Covin and Brush (1991) showed that men, more than women, were more likely to believe that non-work issues limited work effectiveness. But women are still taking care of the majority of home and family needs (Barnett and Baruch, 1987; Berk, 1985; Gutek, Nakamura, and Nieva, 1983; Shelton and Firestone, 1988). Women have the added difficulty of not making as much money as men. While early protective labor laws ameliorated working conditions in general, they also set the groundwork for discrimination against women. Men were established as the principle bread winners, the heads of families. Men fought for a decent family wage for themselves, so that the women could stay home with the children and the domestic chores. So, while industry was no longer allowed to exploit women and children through poor working conditions (with low pay and long hours), this system would not work for a woman outside these parameters (Hartmann, 1981). Stockard and Johnson say that another reason for inequities between men and women stems from the fact that 17

PAGE 24

interpretations of laws are based on a "male-dominant culture [and] affect men and women differently [even though] laws, court decisions, and regulations from the 1960s to the 1980s have accomplished most of the legal goals of those who advocated the ERA" (1992:25,27). Today, women are still saddled with family and home responsibilities (including helping their husbands' careers), and have to carry this to the work-place with them. Unmarried mothers on the average make much less money than men. Men are not made to feel guilty about the time spent at work, away from the children, as women are. Women's income goes down when they divorce, but men's income goes up, and women across the board make less money than men (Faludi, 1991). People still do not perceive women as equals, and men have an unfair advantage. Women are blamed for not being successful, or even for not being "good mothers," when the system will not let them (Ryan, 1971). They are laden with all the responsibility for the children and domestic chores, and then determined as being incapable of competing with men in the working world. Traditional roles dictated by the mechanisms of our economy are seen as quite arbitrarily defined, and 18

PAGE 25

attributable to nurture by conflict theorists. Functional theorists see differentiation along gender lines in economic roles as based on innate biological differences. To them, traditional roles are merely an extension of biological dictates; and the gender role differentiation is a necessary part of well-working economic system. Discrimination against women is socially acceptable, even socially defined behavior, dictated by economic assignment of roles. Summary Our society remains divided in a biologically-based economic system. When the sexes are treated so differently, it is difficult for people to see women as equal to men. Women are thought to be suited to assigned roles (physically, intellectually, and emotionally), and to be incapable of taking on non-traditional ones. This makes it difficult for women to achieve equality in the work-place and at home. The institutional changes that have occurred in the last few years have not significantly affected attitudes toward women. 19

PAGE 26

Women suffer from being blamed as victims, from being considered biologically inferior or fundamentally different (both physically and mentally). These conditions are not likely to improve without major changes in the patriarchal ideology. The ideology of sexism is an integral part of our social structure. Even though, on the surface, our society appears to have become more liberal toward women, in the past few years, along with the advancement in technology, the ideology of sexism is lagging behind, perhaps even gaining new ground. 20

PAGE 27

CHAPTER 2 ANALYSIS Introduction Have the institutional changes from legislation against the discrimination of women really produced significant differences in attitudes toward women (Stockard and Johnson, 1992)? One might expect that attitudes and behavior toward women are steadily becoming more liberal over the years, because of changing conditions. Yet, could these be made more conservative by the proclamations of the Reagan Administration and the media that women had reached a level of equality, and that the gains of feminist movements only made women's situations worse (Faludi, 1991)? Indeed economic conditions for women have changed some since 1977. However, men seem apprehensive about losing their superior economic positions, and to have regressed to a slightly more conservative perspective in 1989 compared to 1986. The years 1977, 1986, and 1989 were chosen because 21

PAGE 28

of the availability of data for these years. Also, some would say that great advancements have been made for women recently, while others would argue that during this recent time period, there has been a resurgence of sexism in America (Faludi, 1991; Jackson, 1992), and that a "backlash" (Faludi, 1991) against womens advancement is manifesting itself. This study attempts to show that there have been no changes in the basic ideology. About the NORC GSS Data Data from the General Social Surveys (GSS) from the National Opinion Research Center (NORC) at the University of Chicago (Davis and Smith, 1989) is a useful tool for studying shifts in reported attitudes over time. Are there differences in shifts of attitudes between people of different sexes and races? Using NORC data, a secondary data source, saves time and money. It is recognized as a good source, and is readily available. The NORC questions are tried-andtrue, and the administration of the questionnaires followed standard practice. "The National Data Program for the Social Sciences 22

PAGE 29

is as a data diffusion project and a program of social indicator research. The data come form the General Social Surveys, interviews administered to NORC national samples using a standard questionnaire some 105 sociologists and social scientists reviewed drafts of the questionnaire (Davis and Smith, 1989). The National Science Foundation has provided support for this endeavor. "Each survey is an independently drawn sample of English-speaking persons 18 years of age or over, living in non-institutional arrangements within the United States. Full probability sampling was employed in 19BO (and in] 1989 surveys" (Davis and Smith, 1989). The NORC data came from a multi-stage area probability sample. The NORC data set is a good tool for this comparison. It offers repeated measures of responses to established questions over several years, from sample populations approaching normal. Therefore, the differences over the years should reflect actual attitude shifts. 23

PAGE 30

Methodology Answers to NORC questions in 1977, 1986, and 1989 were analyzed. The independent variables were sex and race. Historical processes (such as the enactment of anti-discrimination legislation, and the policy of discontinued support for the furtherance of women's rights) were conditions expected to affect the year of the samples. There were only three demarcations for race: "white," "black," and "other." The "other" category was receded to missing values, since often the numbers were so small as to make the analyses insignificant. There is some literature to suggest that there is a difference in attitudes toward women between blacks and whites (Myers, 1980; Reid, 1972; Wallace, 1990; Watkins and David, 1971; Wilcox, 1990). Questions about the equality of women with men were used as a measure of the dependent variable, attitudes toward women. The questions are divided into two basically different categories: economic questions and biological questions. 24

PAGE 31

Economic Questions These attempt to measure attitudes toward traditional roles, which have been defined as mechanisms of a smoothly-working economy. These include duty, serving the husband, and can be attributed to nurture, or learned behavior, or as an offshoot of biological differences. This area involves the exclusivity of men's careers. The economic questions are: Should women take care of running their homes and leave running the country up to men? Do you approve or disapprove of a married woman earning money in business or industry if she has a husband capable of supporting her? If your party nominated a woman for President, would you vote for her if she were qualified for the job? Is it more important for a wife to help her husband's career than to have one herself? Biological Questions These elicit responses about biological superiority and biologically-based roles, things often attributed to nature. These refer to guilt and emotions relating to children, and assume women's sole responsibility for the children. Questions of a biological nature are: Are most men better suited emotionally for politics than 25

PAGE 32

most women? Can a working mother establish just as warm and secure a relationship with her children as a mother who does not work? Is a preschool child likely to suffer if his or her mother works? Is it much better for everyone involved if the man is the achiever outside the home and the woman takes care of the home and family? The latter question, "Man--achiever, woman--home & family," appears to have elements of both aforementioned categories. However, in all respects, it behaves as a biological question, and for simplification, it is referred to as such. The responses to the dependent variable questions were judged to be liberal if they favored equal status for women. They were considered conservative if they advocated differential status for women. Responses deemed to be of a liberal viewpoint were indicated in the following DISAGREE APPROVE YES DISAGREE AGREE DISAGREE DISAGREE DISAGREE manner: WOMEN RUN HOMES, MEN RUN COUNTRY WOMAN WORK IF HUSBAND CAN SUPPORT VOTE FOR WOMAN PRESIDENT MEN BETTER EMOTIONALLY FOR POLITICS WORKING MOM EQUALLY WARM & SECURE MORE IMPORTANT HELP HUSBAND"S CAREER PRESCHOOL CHILD SUFFERS IF MOM WORKS MAN--ACHIEVER, WOMAN--HOME & FAMILY 2b

PAGE 33

Findings The shifts in attitudes toward women as equal to men are more slow than one might think. Overall, shifts toward more liberal attitudes were found from 1977 to 1986. However, certain groups of respondents showed no difference, or even shifts toward more conservative positions for the 1986-to-1989 time period. The questions that elicited the least liberal shift in attitudes, from 1986 to 1999, for all respondents, were voting for a woman president and approving of a woman working if her husband could support her. These are both economic questions. The question next least likely to show such a shift was a biological question dealing specifically with children. This asks if a working mother can be equally warm and secure as a non-working mother. (See Table 2.1.) Attitudes by Race The race variable appears to have an effect. In the data set, race was divided into the categories of "White," "Black," and "Other." Overall, Whites and 27

PAGE 34

TABLE 2.1 ATTITUDES TOWARD WO"EN BY YEAR BY RACE BY SEX PART 1: ECONO"IC OUESTIONS 1977 1986 1989 SIGNt 1 DISAGREE: MO"EN RUN HOftES, "EN RUN COUNTRY ALL RESPONDENTStt 61.8 75.8 80.0 v IIALES 62.4 78.6 77.0 v IIHJTE 63.7 80.6 79.7 y BLACK 50.8 66.7 51.6 N FERALES 61.3 73.8 92.2 v IIHITE 61.9 74.2 83.2 v BLACK 57.7 70.3 81.2 v X APRROVE: IIOftAN IIORK IF HUSBAND CAN SUPPORT ALL RESPONDENTStt 66.3 77.9 78.8 v ftALES 67.7 79.0 78.5 v WHITE 68,3 79.6 79.0 v BLACK 62.7 79.4 74.2 N FEftALES 65.2 17.0 79.0 v IIHITE 65.5 76.5 80.0 v BLACK 64.2 81.0 78.6 y 1 YES: VOTE FOR IIOftAN PRESIDENT ALL RESPONDENTS'' 79.3 86.3 86.5 y ftALES 82.1 89.0 84.5 y WHITE 83.2 89.2 86.1 v BLACK 75.0 92.2 70.0 v FERALES 77.0 84.4 87.9 y IIHITE 76.7 83.8 87.6 v BLACK BO.O 86.2 89.7 N X DISAGREE: ftORE IftPORTANT HELP HUSBAND'S CAREER ALL RESPONDENTStt 42.9 64.1 72.0 v ftALES 47.3 65.8 72.9 y IIHITE 47.9 66.5 73.7 v BLACK 46.3 62.5 66.7 N FE"ALES 39.3 62.8 71.4 y IIHJTE 38.7 61.6 70.1 y BLACK 45.1 70.8 84.5 y tSIGNIFICANCE OF CHI SOUARE ACROSS YEARS AT THE .05 LEVEL ttBLACKS AND WHITES ONLY 28

PAGE 35

TABLE 2.1 ATTITUDES TOMARO MOifEN BY YEAR BY RACE BY SEX PART 2: BIOLO&ICAL DUESTIONS 1977 1986 1989 SI&Nt 1 DISA&REE: "EN BETTER ElfOTIONAllY FOR POLITICS All RESPONDENTStS 50.7 62.6 69.6 y "ALES 50.3 65.1 66.5 y IIHITE 51.3 65.7 70.4 y BLACK 42.9 62.3 37.0 y FEifALES 51.0 60.8 71.9 y MHITE 50.2 60.5 72.5 y BLACK 56.9 61.4 72.1 N X AGREE: IIORKIN& "0" EQUALLY liAR" l SECURE ALL RESPONDENTSas 49.0 62.5 64.0 y "ALES 41.6 56.0 58.4 y IIHITE 41.3 55.9 58.0 y BLACK 43.5 60.3 66.7 y FEitALES 55.1 67.1 68.3 y IIHITE 53.9 65.8 67.3 y BLACK 63.6 75.2 73.2 N 1 DISAGREE: PRESCHOOL_ CHILD SUFFERS IF ItO" MORKS All RESPONDENTSSS 32.7 48.8 52.0 y lfALES 26.9 42.4 44.7 y IIHITE 25.5 41.0 43.6 y BLACK 35.8 56.3 58.1 y FEifALES 37.5 53.5 57.3 y WHITE 35.2 51.1 56.2 y BLACK 53.8 67.8 64.8 N 1 DISAGREE: "AN--ACHIEYER, WO"AN--HO"E l FAftiLY All RESPONDENTSat 34.2 52.3 59.1 y KALES 31.0 52.0 56,9 y MHITE 30.7 52.8 58.0 y BLACK 31.9 49.2 54.8 y FEftALES 36.8 52.5 60.6 y WHITE 36.2 51.8 61.1 y BLACK 41.7 53.4 61.8 y aSI&NIFICANCE OF CHI SQUARE ACROSS YEARS AT THE .05lEYEl SSBLACKS AND WHITES ONLY 29

PAGE 36

Blacks tied for being most liberal in responses to all questions for all years. "Others" were most conservative. Blacks and "Others" were most likely to show no shift or a conservative shift from 1986 to 1989. ( See Tab 1 e 2 2 ) Unfortunately, there were not many significant findings for the "others" group, and it was not included in further analysis. This seems to be due to the small number of respondents in this category, which can greatly affect the significance of a Chi Square test. Attitudes by Sex Women were slightly more liberal than men throughout the years and throughout all the questions together. Womens opinions were more likely to shift toward more liberalism each year. Mens opinions are more liberal in 1986 than in 1977 on all questions. They show a liberal shift from 1986 to 1989 on biological items, but demonstrate a conservative shift from 1986 to 1989 on most economic items. 2.1.) 30 (See Table

PAGE 37

TABLE 2.2 ATTITUDES TOWARD WOKEN BY YEAR BY RACE ECONOftiC QUESTIONS 1977 1986 1989 SI&Na I DISAGREE: WO"EN RUN HO"ES, "EN RUN COUNTRY WHITE 62.7 77.0 81.7 y BLACK ss.o 69.0 72.0 y OTHER 60.0 63.9 N I APPROVE: WOKAN WORK IF HUSBAND CAN SUPPORT WHITE 66.8 77.8 79.5 y BLACK 63.6 80.4 77.2 y OTHER 60.0 67.6 66.7 N I YES: VOTE FOR NOftAN PRESIDENT MHITE 79.7 86.1 86.9 y BLACK 78.0 BB. l 93.7 y OTHER 60.0 83.8 83.3 N X DISAGREE: "ORE IftPORTANT HELP HUSBAND'S CAREER WHITE 63.6 71.7 y BLACK 45.6 67.8 79.2 y OTHER 13.3 60.0 60.5 y BIOLOGICAL QUESTIONS 1977 1986 1989 SI&NI X DISAGREE: KEN BETTER E"OTIONALLY FOR POLITICS MHITE 50.7 62.7 71.6 y BLACK 51.5 61.7 62.1 N OTHER 40.0 64.7 45.7 N I AGREE: WORKING "0" EQUALLY WAR" & SECURE. MHITE 48.1 61.5 63.2 y BLACK 55.7 70.0 71.3 y OTHER 42.9 56.8 63.2 N X DISAGREE: PRESCHOOL CHILD SUFFERS IF MD" WORKS MHITE 30.8 46.8 50.7 y BLACK 46.8 63.7 62.7 y OTHER 40.0 43.2 51.4 N I DISAGREE: MAN--ACHIEVER, WO"AN--HO"E & FAKILY WHITE 33.7 52.2 59.8 y BLACK 37.8 52.0 59.6 y OTHER 35.7 56.8 42.1 N ISISNIFICANCE OF CHI SQUARE ACROSS YEARS AT THE ,05 LEVEL 31

PAGE 38

Attitudes by SeM and Race There were more significant findings for whites than for blacks, and this could be due to the fact that there were more white respondents. The questions that elicited the least shift in liberalism, or a shift toward conservatism over all groups of respondents were economic ones. The differences of responses by year by the sample population as a whole were significant for every question. Such differences between males and females were significant for every question (Table 2.1). The sex and race variables were intriguing, and deserved further analysis. This was only workable by putting the race category of "other" in with missing values. These variables were analysed by year, for all three years; then by year, using only 1986 and 1989, to see if the statistical differences were from the latter time span (Table 2.3). Then attitudes by sex by race by year were compared to detect differences between white males and females, and between black males and 32

PAGE 39

TABLE 2.3 ATTITUDES TOWARD NOIIEN BY YEAR BY RACE BY SEX FOR 86 l 89 ECONOIIIC QUESTIONS 1986 1989 SIGHt X DISAGREE: WOllEN RUN HOliES, liEN RUN COUNTRY IIALS: WHITE 80.6 79.7 N BLACK 66.7 51.6 N FEIIALES: WHITE 74.2 83.2 y BLACK 70.3 81.2 N l APPROVE: WOIIAN WORK IF HUSBAND CAN SUPPORT IIALES: WHITE 79.6 79.0 N BLACK 79.4 74.2 N FEIIALES: NHITE 76.5 80,0 N BLACK 81.0 78.6 N I YES: VOTE FOR NOIIAN PRESIDENT IIALS: NHITE 89.2 86.1 N BLACK 92.2 70.0 y FEIIALES: NHITE 83.8 87.6 N BLACK 86.2 89.7 N I DISAGREE: IIORE IIIPORTANT HELP HUSBAND'S CAREER IIALES: WHITE 66.5 73.7 y BLACK 62.5 66.7 N FEIIALES: WHITE 61.6 70.1 y BLACK 70.8 84.5 y BIOLOGICAL QUESTIONS l DISAGREE: liEN BETTER EIIDTIONALLY FOR POLITICS IIALES: WHITE 65.7 70.4 N BLACK 62.3 37.0 y FEIIALES: WHITE 60.5 72.5 y BLACK 61.4 72.1 N I AGREE: WORKING 11011 EQUALLY NARII & SECURE IIALES: WHITE 55.9 58.0 N BLACK 60.3 66.7 N FEIIALES: WHITE 65.8 67.3 N BLACK 75.2 73.2 N I DISAGREE: PRESCHOOL CHILD SUFFERS IF 11011 WORKS IIALES: WHITE 41.0 43.6 N BLACK 56.3 58.1 N FEIIALES: WHITE 51.1 56.2 N BLACK 67.8 64.8 N X DISAGREE: IIAN--ACHIEYER, NOIIAN--HOIIE l FAIIILY IIALES: WHITE 52.8 58.0 N BLACK 49.2 54.8 N FEIIALES: NHITE 51.8 61.1 y BLACK 53.4 61.8 N siGNIFICANCE OF CHI SQUARE BETWEEN YEARS AT THE .05 LEVEL 33

PAGE 40

females (Table 2.4). Attitudes by race by sex by year were compared to see differences between white and black males, and between white and black females (Table 2.5). Economic questions. Usually, white males were more liberal than white females in 77 and 86, in this category, but then white females were more liberal than white males in 89. Black females were usually more liberal than black males on all economic questions, in all years (Table 2.4). Black males' differences across the years were insignificant on economic questions except for the question about voting for a woman president. However, this was the only economic question that was insignificant for black females (Tables 2.1 and 2.3). White and black males often showed a liberal shift from 77 to 86, but then showed no shift in attitudes from 86 to 89, and sometimes showed a conservative shift, on these economic questions. For this type of question, white and black females usually displayed a 34

PAGE 41

TABLE 2.4 ATTITUDES TOMARO WOKEN BY SEX BY RACE BY YEAR PART 1: ECONOKIC QUESTIONS X DISA6REE: WOKEN RUN HOKES, liEN RUN COUNTRY 1977 II ALES FEIIALES SI6NI WHITE 63.7 61.9 N BLACK 50.8 57.7 N 1986 IIHITE 80.6 74.2 y BLACK 66.7 70.3 N 1989 "NHITE 79.7 83.2 N BLACK 51.6 81.2 y X APPROVE: IIOIIAN IIDRK IF HUSBAND CAN SUPPORT 1977 KALES FEKALES SI6NI WHITE 68.3 65.5 N BLACK 62.7 64.2 N 1986 WHITE 79.6 76.5 N BLACK 79.4 81.0 N 1989 NHITE 79.0 80.0 N BLACK 74.2 78.6 N % YES: VOTE FOR WDIIAN PRESIDENT 1977 KALES FEIIALES SI6NI WHITE 83.2 76.7 y BLACK 75.0 80.0 N 1986 IIHITE 89.2 83.8 y BLACK 92.2 86.2 N 1989 NHITE 86.1 87.6 N BLACK 70.0 89.7 y % IJISA6REE: IIORE IIIPDRTANT HELP HUSBAND' S CAREER 1977 IIALES FEIIALES Sl&NI IIHITE 47.9 38.7 y BLACK 46.3 45.1 N 1986 IIHITE 66.5 61.6 H BLACK 62.5 70.8 N 1989 IIHITE 73.7 70.1 N BLACK 66.7 84.5 y tSI&NIFICANCE OF CHI SQUARE BETIIEEN SEIES AT THE .05 LEVEL 35

PAGE 42

TABLE 2.4 ATTITUDES TOWARD NOftEN BY SEX BY RACE BY YEAR PART 2: BIOLOGICAL QUESTIONS X DISAGREE: MEN BETTER EIIOTIONAllY FOR POLITICS 1977 IIALES FEIIALES SIGN I WHITE 51.3 50.2 N BLACK 42.9 56.9 N 1986 WHITE 65.7 60.5 N BLACK 62.3 61.4 N 1989 WHITE 70.4 72.5 N BLACK 37.0 72.1 y % AGREE: NORKIN& 11011 EOUALLY WARII & SECURE 1977 II ALES FEIIALES Sl&NI WHITE 41.3 53.9 y BLACK 43.5 63.6 y 1986 lfHITE 55.9 65.8 v BLACK 60.3 75.2 y 1989 WHITE 58.0 67.3 y BLACK 66.7 73.2 N % DISAGREE: PRESCHOOL CHILD SUFFERS IF 11011 WORKS 1977 IIALES FEIIALES Sl&NI WHITE 25.5 35.2 y BLACK 35.8 53.8 y 1986 lfHJTE 41.0 51.1 y BLACK 56.3 67.8 N 1989 WHITE 43.6 56.2 y BLACK 58.1 64.8 N X DISAGREE: !IAN--ACHIEVER, lfOIIAN--HOIIE l FAIIILY 1977 IIALES FEIIALES SI&NI WHITE 30.7 36.2 y BLACK 31.9 41.7 N 1986 lfHITE 52.8 51.8. N BLACK 49.2 53.4 N 1989 IIHITE 58.0 61.1 N BLACK 54.8 61.8 N ISI&NIFICANCE OF CHI SQUARE BETWEEN SEXES AT THE .05 LEVEL 36

PAGE 43

TABLE 2.5 ATTITUDES TOMARO NOIIEN BY RACE BY SEX BY YEAR PART 1: ECONOIIIC QUESTIONS WHITE BLACK Sl&Nt l DISAGREE: NOIIEN RUN HOliES, liEN RUN COUNTRY 1977J II ALES 63.7 50.8 y FEJIALES 61.9 57.7 N 1986: II ALES 80.6 66.7 y FEIIALES 74.2 70.3 N 1989: II ALES 79.7 51.6 y FEIIALES 83.2 81.2 N 1 APPROVE: NOIIAN NORK IF HUSBAND CAN SUPPORT 1977: IIALES 68.3 62.7 N FEIIALES 65.5 64.2 N 1986: IIALES 79.6 79.4 N FEIIALES 76.5 81.0 N 1989: IIALES 79.0 74.2 N FEMLES 8o.o 78.6 N l YES: VOTE FOR NOIIAN PRESIDENT 1977: IIALES 83.2 75.0 N FEIIALES 76.7 BO.O N 19861 IIALES 89.2 92.2 N FElt ALES 83.8 86.2 N 1989: II ALES 86.1 70.0 y FEIIALES 87.6 89.7 N l DISAGREE: IIORE IIIPDRTANT HELP HUSBAND'S CAREER 1977: IIALES 47.9 46.3 N FEll ALES 38.7 45.1 N 1986: II ALES 66.5 62.5 H FEll ALES 61.6 70.8 N 1989: IIALES 73.7 66.7 N FEIIALES 70.1 84.5 y tSIGNIFICANCE OF CHI SOUARE BETWEEN RACES AT THE .05 LEVEL 37

PAGE 44

TABLE 2.5 ATTITUDES TDNARD NDKEN BY RACE BY SEX BY YEAR PART 2: BIOLOGICAL OUESTIONS NHITE BLACK SISNt % DISAGREE: KEN BETTER EfiOTIONALLY FOR POLITICS 1977: KALES 51.3 42.9 N FEfiALES. 50.2 56.9 H 1986: KALES 65.7 62.3' N FEMALES 60,5 61.4 N 1989: fiALES 70.4 37.0 y FEMALES 72.5 72.1 N 1 A&REEt NORliNG ftOft EDUALLY NARK & SECURE 1977: KALES 41.3 43.5 N FEKALES 53.9 63.6 N 1986: KALES 55.9 60.3 N FEMALES 65.8 75.2 y 1989: KALES 58.0 66.7 N FEKALES 67.3 73.2 N % DISA6RE: PRESCHOOL CHILD SUFFERS IF fiOft IIORKS 1977: fiALES 25.5 35.8 N FEftALES 35.2 53.8 y 1986: fiALES 41.0 56.3 y FEKALES 51.1 67.8 y 1989: fiALES 43.6 58.1 N FEKALES 56,2 64.8 N 1 DISAGREE: flAM--ACHIEVER, NDfiAN--HDftE & FAfiiLY 1977: IIALES 30.7 31.9 N FEtiALES 36.2 41.7 N 1986: KALES 52.8 49.2 N FEKALES 51.8 53.4 N 1989: KALES 58.0 54.8 N FEKALES 61.1 61.8 N ISISNIFICANCE OF CHI SDUARE BETWEEN RACES AT THE .05 LEVEL 38

PAGE 45

steady increase in liberalism over the years (Table 2.1). Concerning economic questions, white males were usually more liberal than black males. White females were more liberal than black females when asked if women should run homes, and men should run the country, and if they approved of 'a married woman working if her husband can support her. Black females were more liberal than white females about voting for a woman president (but this was statistically insignificant) and on their responses to whether it is more important to help husbands' careers. Almost always, both black and white females showed a shift to more liberal views each year. (See Table 2.5.) Biological questions. Table 2.4 shows that black and white females were usually more liberal than black and white males each year in response to this type of question. White and black males usually shifted to a more liberal stance each year. Differences across years on biological questions were only significant for black females when asked if the man should be the 39

PAGE 46

achiever, and the woman should take care of the home and family (Table 2.1). Black males responses were more liberal than white males when questioned about whether a working mother is equally warm and secure, and if a preschool child suffers if his mother works. White males were more liberal than black males when asked if men are better emotionally for politics; and if the man should be the achiever, and the woman should take care of the home and family. (See Table 2.5.) But, as Table 2.1 demonstrates, both black and white males showed a steady shift toward more liberal views each year, with the exception of black males becoming much more conservative from 1986 to 1989 when asked if men are better suited emotionally for politics. Black females were more liberal on biological questions each year than white females. The exception to this was in 1989, when black and white women's responses were about the same for the biological questions not dealing specifically with children (Table 2.5). White females showed a more liberal shift each year. Black females displayed a liberal shift from '77 40

PAGE 47

to but then showed a more conservative stance in than for the questions dealing with children. The latter was, however, insignificant. Table 2.1.) Discussion (Refer to Shifts in attitudes toward women as equals to men have been slow, and sometimes appear to have been affected by a trend in policy away from affirmative action. This could be due to a "backlash" (Faludi, 1991). However, it could be that the basic underlying sexist ideology has remained the same, that reported opinions have been influenced by peoples perceptions of the status quo. For race, blacks and "others" seemed to stay at their 1986 position in 1989, or even to shift to a more conservative position. "Others" were the most conservative over all the years and questions. Blacks and "others" have less income than whites overall. Maybe there is some kind of link to the income of respondents. Black and white women appear to be more and more 41

PAGE 48

liberal in their attitudes toward women all the time. Men, white and black, seem more liberal over time only on biological questions, but stagnate, or even seem to be more conservative on economic questions. Perhaps they are starting to realize that women need not be bound to certain roles for biological reasons. However, it seems that they may resent equality in the workplace. Perhaps they would rather not deal with the competition, and would rather have someone waiting at home for them. The differences between the responses of black and white females seem representative of differences in ideologies. Literature (although of a very limited nature) shows that black and white women have trouble coming together in feminist movements because of different ideologies, and it is often suggested that some black women see racial equality as a more important issue than equality of the sexes (Reid, 1972; Wallace, 1990). It is interesting that white women become as liberal as black women in 1989 on the biological questions which do not directly mention children, and 42

PAGE 49

that black women become more conservative in 1989 when asked specifically about children (even though the latter is insignificant statistically). Women do not appear to have any doubts about their capabilities, but still seem to have a conflict with working and guilt and responsibilities for the children. Another conservative shift of note, even though statistically insignificant, is that of black women in 1989 when asked if they approved of a married woman earning money if she has a husband capable of supporting her. Perhaps they feel that women should not have to work if there is. no economic necessity. Historically, most black women have had to work to support their families, whereas most white women have not (Myers, 1980; Reid, 1972; Wallace, 1990; Watkins and David, 1971; Wilcox, 1990). This, along with their conservative shift regarding children, also statistically insignificant, may reflect a desire for a position in society, in the old tradition, that many feel they have never been granted. One reason that white males were almost always more liberal than black males on economic questions 43

PAGE 50

could be that the black male-to-female earning differential has not been as great as that for whites (Reid, 1972; Wallace, 1990; Wilcox, 1990). Black men might feel even more strongly about retaining (or even attaining) a superior position over women in the marketplace than do white men. The differences between black and white men on the biological questions show black men to be more concerned with biological capabilities for roles. White men showed more concern for the perceived suffering of children. Black men may want the old traditional family arrangement more; whereas white men, who are more accustomed to this, worry more about what effects a change will have on the children. Black men are more used to seeing women work, and children in the care of others. But some believe that black men have seen black women as taking too much control and not knowing how to use it (Wallace, 1990; Watkins and David, 1971). This perception may stem from the assertiveness for which black women are known. This ability to behave assertively seems to come from their relative 44

PAGE 51

economic independence from men, as compared to white women's. Conclusions NORC data shows that many respondents's answers to questions about women still reflect attitudes of inequality. Indeed, after a liberal trend from 1977 to 1986, there has been, in some cases, a tendency to regress to a more conservative point of view from 1986 to 1989. This study helped to show what groups of people are more likely to perceive women as inferior or different from men. Sex and race variables show quite different trends, possibly reflecting dissimilar ideologies. The Republican administrations conservative policies toward power minorities reflected in the media, seem to have had quite an effect on men. This is manifest in attitudes toward economic equality between the sexes. Access to economic equality is open for women, according to various agencies of the federal government (Faludi, 1991). Men seem to be reluctant to let women 45

PAGE 52

achieve this economic equality, even though they no longer argue that biological differences are an impediment. Perhaps overcoming the latter barrier is a good first step. But, the prejudice in economic areas measured by these questions most probably is leading to some discrimination toward women. Our society is still male-oriented, maledominated, and male-defined. Our economic system still relies on gender-role stratification. This is no longer appropriate. More women are entering the labor force due to divorce and economic need. They retain the responsibilities for the children, and yet are not allowed to compete with men. With the same education and experience, women make less money than men. Hopefully, government will live by more liberal ideologies. Obviously, more must be done to ensure economic equality than to simply remove legal barriers. Further research on the combined effects of age, education, sex, race, and income would tell us more about prejudice and discrimination toward women. At this point, it seems that men are slow to give up their superior economic position. 46

PAGE 53

NORC GSS QUESTIONS p 52 q 20 (SEX) R"s sex p 53 q 21 (RACE) "What race do you consider yourself?" white, black, other (specify) p 243 q 198 CFEHOME) "Do you agree or disagree with this statement? Women should take care of running their homes and leave running the country up to men." p 243 q 199 (FEWORK) "Do you approve or disapprove of a married woman earning money in business or industry if she has a husband capable of supporting her?" p 244 q 200 CFEPRES) "If your party nominated a woman for President, would you vote for her if she were qualified for the job?" p 244 q 201a (FEPOL) "Tell me if you agree or disagree with this statement: Most men are better suited emotionally for politics than are most women." p 278 & 279 q 252 "Now I"m going to read several more statements. As I read each one, please tell me whether you strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree with it. For example, here is the statement: a. (FECHLD) A working mother can establish just as warm and secure a relationship with her children as a mother who does not work. b. CFEHELP) It is more important for a wife to help her husband"s career than to have one herself. c. (FEPRESCH) A preschool child is likely to suffer if 47

PAGE 54

his or her mother works. d. (FEFAM) 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." 48

PAGE 55

RESPONSE RATES 1977 Eligibility Rate .863 .887 .884 Response Rate .765 .756 .776 Refusal Rate .173 .188 .175 Unavailability Rate .040 .018 .017 "Other" Rate .022 .038 .030 49

PAGE 56

REFERENCES Anderson, Charles H. 1974. The Political Economy of Social Class. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall. Barnett, R., and Baruch, G. 1987. "Determinants of Fathers' Participation in Family Work." Journal of Marriage and the Family 49:29-40. Berk, S. 1985. The Gender Factory: The Apportionment of Work in Amerjcan Households. New York: Plenum. Block, Jeanne H. 1973. "Conceptions of Sex Role. Some Cross-Cultural and Longitudinal Perspectives." American Psychologist 28:512-526. Bunch, Charlott. 1986. Passionate Politics. New York: St. Martin's. Candib, Lucy M. 1990. "Naming the Contradiction: Family Medicine's Failure to Face Violence Against Women." Family and Community Health 13, No. 3:47-57. Collins, Patricia H. 1986. "Learning from the Outsider Within: The Sociological Significance of Black Feminist Thought." Social Problems 33: No. 6, 514-531. Collinson, David L., Knights, David, and Collinson, Margaret. 1990. Managing to Discriminate New York: Routledge. Covin, Joyce C., and Brush, Christina C. 1991. "An Examination of Male and Female Attitudes Toward Carreer and Family Issues." Sex Rgles 25: Nos. 7/8,393-415. Cuzzort, R. P., and King, E. Century Socjal Thought. Chicago: Winston. 50 1969. Twentieth Holt, Rinehart, and

PAGE 57

Davidson, M., and Cooper, C. Work, Stress and Marriage." Sgcial Economics 12:17-25. 1985. "Women Managers: International Journal for Davis, James A., and Smith, Tom W. 1989. General Social Surveys 1972-1989, [machine-readable data file.] Principal Investigator, Davis, James A; Director and Co-Principal Investigator, Smith, Tom W. NORC ed. Chicago: National Opinion Research Center, producer, 1989; Storrs, CT: The Roper Center for Public Opinion Research, University of Connecticut, distributor. 1 data file (24,893 logical records) and 1 codebook (861p.). Eagly, Alice H. 1983. "Gender and Social Influence. A Social Psychological Analysis." American Psychologist 38:971-981. Eagly, Alice H., and Carli, Linda L. 1981. "Sex of Researchers and Sex-Typed Communications as Determinants of Sex Differences in Influenceability: A of Social Influence Studies." Psychological Bulletin 90:1-20. Eagly, Alice H., and Chrvala, Carole. 1986. "Sex Differences in Conformity: Status and Gender Role Interpretations." Psychology of WomenGuarterly 10:203-220. Eysenck, Hans. 1991. "Science, Racism, and Sexism." Journal of Social, Political & Ecomomic Studies 16: No.2, 217-250. Falbo, Toni. 1977. "Relationships between Sex, Sex Role, and Social Influence." Psychology of Women Qyarterly 2:62-72. Faludi, Susan. 1991. Backlash. New York: Crown. Gelles, Richard J., and Straus, Murray A. 1989. Intimate Viglence. New York: Simon and Schuster. 51

PAGE 58

Gerard, Harold B., Wilhelmy, Roland A., and Conolley, Edward S. 1968. "Conformity and Group Size." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 8:79-82. Glick, Peter. 1991. "Trait-Based and Sex-Based Discrimination in Occupational Prestige, Occupational Salary, and Hiring." Sex Roles 25: Nos.5/6,351-378. Gottfredson, L. S. 1981. "Circumscription and Compromise: A Developmental Theory of Occupational Aspirations." Journal of Counseling Psychology Monograph 28:545-579. Gutek, B., Nakamura, C., and Nieva, V. Independence of Work and Family Roles." Occupational Behavior 2:1-6. 1983. "The Journal of Hansson, Robert 0., Allen, Madalyne M., and Jones, Warren H. 1980. ''Sex Differences in Conformity: Instrumental or Communal Response?" Sex Roles 6:207-212. Hartmann, Heidi I. [1981] 1989. In An Anthology of Western Marxism, edited by R. S. Gottlieb. New York: Oxford. Horney, Karen. [1967] 1989. In An Anthology of Western Marxism, edited by R. S. Gottlieb. New York: Oxford. Jackson, Donna. 1992. Woman Jan:80-85. "The Return of Sexism." New Janis, Irving L., Hovland, Carl I., Field, Peter B., Linton, Harriet, Graham, Elaine, Cohen, Arthur R., Rife, Donald, Abelson, Robert P., Lesser, Gerald S., and King, Bert T. 1959. Personality and Persuasibility. Pp. 55-68 in Sex Differences and Personality Factors Related to Persuasjbility, edited by C. I. Hovland and I. L. Janis. New Haven: Yale. Jelen, Ted G. 1988. "The Effects of Gender Role Stereotypes on Political Attitudes." The Social Science Journal 25, n.3:353-365. 52

PAGE 59

Jick, T. D., and Mitz, L. F. 1985. "Sex Difference in Work Stress." Academy of Management Review 10:408-420. Jongeward, Dorothy, and Scott, Dru. 1977. Affirmative Action for Women. Reading: Addison-Wesley. Killingsworth, Mark R., and Hill, M. Anne. 1989. Introduction in Comparable Worth: Analyses and Evidence, edited by Killingsworth and Hill. Ithaca: Cornell. Kristiansen, Connie M., and Giulietti, Rita. 1990. "Perceptions of Wife Abuse." Psychology of Women Quarterly 14:177-189. Maslach, Christina, Santee, Richard T., and Wade, Cheryl. 1987. "Individuation, Gender Role, and Dissent: Personality Mediators of Situational Forces." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 53:1088-1093. Meeker, B. F., and Weitzel-O"Neill, P. A. 1977. "Sex Roles and Interpersonal Behavior in Task-Oriented Groups." American Sociological Review 42:91-105. Mies, Maria. World Scale. 1986. Patriarchy and Accumulation on a Atlantic Highlands: Zed. Myers, Lena W. 1980. Black Women--Do thev Cope Better? Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall. Rapoport, Ronald B. 1981. "The Sex Gap in Political Persuading: Where the structuring Principle" Works." American Journal of Political Science 25:32-47. Reid, Inez S. 1972. York: Emerson Hall. "Together" Black Women. New Ridgeway, Cecilia L. 1978. 11Conformity, Group Oriented Motivation, and Status Attainment in Small Groups." Social Psychology 41:175-188. 53

PAGE 60

Russ, Frederick A., and McNeilly, Kevin M. 1988. "Has Sex Stereotyping Disappeared? A Study of Perceptions of Women and Men in Sales." Journal of Selling & Sales Management 8:43-54. Ryan, William. 1971. Blaming the Victim. New York: Vintage. Santee, RichardT., and Jackson, Susan E. "Identity Implications of Conformity: Six in Normative and Attributional Judgments." Psycholggy Quarterly 45:121-125. 1982. Differences Social Schutte, Nicolas., Malouff, John M., and Doyle, Johnna S. 1988. "The Relationship Between Characteristics of the Victim, Persuasive Techniques of the Batterer, and Returning to a Battering Relationship." The Journal of Social Psychology 128, no. 5:605-610. Shelton, B. A., and Firestone, J. 1988. "Time Constraints on Men and Women: Linking Household Labor to Paid Labor." Sociology and Social Research 72:102-105. Stark, Rodney. 1989. Sociology. Belmont: Wadsworth. Stockard, Jean, and Johnson, M. Gender in Society. Englewood Cliffs: 1992. Sex and Prentice Hall. Strube, Michael J. 1988. "The Decision to Leave an Abusive Relationship: Empirical Evidence and Theoretical Issues." Psychological Bulletin 104, No. 2:236-250. Sullivan, Cris M. 1991. "The Provision of Advocacy Services to Women Leaving Abusive Partners: An Exploratory Study." Journal of Interpersonal Violence 6, no. 1:41-54. Sullivan, Thomas J., and Thompson, Kenrick S. 1991. Introduction to Social Problems. New York: Macmillan. 54

PAGE 61

Summers, Russel J. 1991. "Determinants of Judgements of and Responses to a Complaint of Sexual Harassment." Sex Roles 25: Nos. 7/8, 379-393. Tucker, Robert C. 1978. The Marx-Engels Reader. New York: Norton. Tuthill, Douglas M., and Forsyth, Donelson R. 1982. "Sex Differences in Opinion Conformity and Dissent." The Journal of Social Psychology 116:205-210. Wallace, Michele. 1990. Black Macho and the Myth of the Superwoman. New York: Verso. Ware, Roger, and Cooper-Studebaker, Jerilyn J. 1989. "Attitudes toward Women as Managers with Regard to Sex, Education, Work, and Marital Status." Psychological Repgrts 65:347-350. Watkins, M., and David, J. 1971. To be a Black Woman. New York: Morrow. Wilcox, Clyde. 1990. Support for Feminism." No.1, 113-121. "Race, Gender Role Attitudes and Western Political Quarterly 43: Wiley, M. G., and Eskilson, A. 1988. "Gender and Family/Career Conflict: Reaction of Bosses." Sex Roles 19:445-465. Zappert, L. T., and Weinstein, H. M. 1985. "Sex Differences in The Impact of Work on Physical and Psychological Health." American Journal of Psychiatry 14:1174-1178. 55