Deprivation and Sexism: Insights from a Cross‑Cultural Study
Researchers from the City University of Hong Kong examined how feelings of disadvantage influence attitudes toward women. The work, published in a respected psychology journal, links deprivation to shifts in sexist beliefs among men and explores how these beliefs interact with both traditional gender roles and social power dynamics.
The study grounds itself in ambivalent sexism theory, which recognizes two coexisting dimensions. Hostile sexism involves overt contempt and domination of women, while benevolent sexism treats women with protective affection that still reinforces traditional roles. Importantly, both forms can operate in a single mind, sometimes in tension and sometimes in tandem. This duality helps explain why seemingly contradictory attitudes can persist within individuals and across groups.
Across two initial experiments, the researchers recruited more than 500 participants from China and the United States. Participants completed a suite of questionnaires that measured psychological well-being, general attitudes toward women, and current social and economic circumstances. The goal was to uncover whether perceptions of deprivation and insecurity correlate with specific sexist beliefs, and whether these patterns differ by gender or context.
Findings indicated that deprivation, defined as the challenge of meeting basic needs, was linked to stronger negative views about women among men. The pattern appeared robust across the diverse samples and remained evident after accounting for other socioeconomic factors. In contrast, women’s attitudes toward the opposite gender did not show the same degree of change under deprivation in these early stages of analysis.
A third study focusing on 284 men extended these observations. It found that rising feelings of deprivation were associated with greater endorsement of hostile sexism. The researchers interpreted this as a possible coping mechanism: when men perceive personal or collective disadvantages, adopting hostile attitudes toward women may appear to restore a sense of control or social standing.
These results raise important questions about the broader social consequences of economic stress. When men turn to hostile scripts as a way to navigate their circumstances, women can bear a disproportionate share of the resulting prejudice and discrimination. At the same time, the persistently benevolent strand of sexism can quietly perpetuate unequal expectations by rewarding women who conform to traditional roles, even as it cloaks these norms in seemingly protective language.
In discussing implications, the researchers emphasized that situational factors like economic strain can intensify gendered stereotypes in ways that are not immediately obvious. They noted that the interplay between deprivation and sexist beliefs is not a universal rule and can be shaped by culture, policy, and individual differences. The work underlines the need for broader awareness of how economic pressures intersect with gender norms in both North American and Asian contexts.
For policymakers and educators, these findings highlight the importance of supporting economic resilience and challenging rigid gender expectations at the same time. When communities reduce material insecurity and promote inclusive norms, they create space for more equitable attitudes across groups. The researchers also pointed out that ongoing studies should explore how these patterns evolve with changing social dynamics, such as shifts in education, labor markets, and media representations.
Ultimately, the research paints a nuanced picture: deprivation tends to push some men toward hostile attitudes, while benevolent beliefs can mask the same underlying tensions by framing traditional gender roles as benign or even protective. Understanding this duality is key to addressing the root causes of sexist thinking and moving toward genuine gender equality in diverse societies across Canada, the United States, and beyond.