Benevolent sexism and the "dangerous nature" of "life satisfaction"

Via a recent New York Times debate on reviving chivalry I came across an article with one of the most unusual abstracts I've seen in a while. Here follows the abstract from Why Is Benevolent Sexism Appealing?:

Previous research suggests that benevolent sexism is an ideology that perpetuates gender inequality. But despite its negative consequences, benevolent sexism is a prevalent ideology that some even find attractive. To better understand why women and men alike might be motivated to adopt benevolent sexism, the current study tested system justification theory’s prediction that benevolent sexism might have a positive linkage to life satisfaction through increased diffuse system justification, or the sense that the status quo is fair. A structural equation model revealed that benevolent sexism was positively associated with diffuse system justification within a sample of 274 college women and 111 college men. Additionally, benevolent sexism was indirectly associated with life satisfaction for both women and men through diffuse system justification. In contrast, hostile sexism was not related to diffuse system justification or life satisfaction. The results imply that although benevolent sexism perpetuates inequality at the structural level, it might offer some benefits at the personal level. Thus, our findings reinforce the dangerous nature of benevolent sexism and emphasize the need for interventions to reduce its prevalence.

Basically the article finds that "benevolent sexism" is positively associated with life satisfaction and then goes on to assert it's "dangerous nature". Basically the researchers are arguing that a status quo bias is preventing a better future. However finding positive associations with life satisfaction for BOTH men and women hardly seems proof of its dangerous nature unless you're working with an agenda in mind.

Random links

How Legalizing Prostitution Has Failed
"To operate a mobile snack bar in Germany, one has to be in compliance with the DIN 10500/1 standard for 'Vending Vehicles for Perishable Food,' which states, for example, that soap dispensers and disposable towels are required. A brothel operator is not subject to any such restrictions. All he or she has to do is report to authorities when the brothel is opened." Makes me think a bit of Wendy Davis in Texas and the Gosnell trial.
Single Motherhood: Strongest Predictor of Low Social Mobility
The link in this article is wrong but the actual point seems to be correct based on the analysis - the actual data can be found here.
It’s a girl! Pakistani game show gives away babies as prizes
Strange but I guess it's better for the baby involved than dying on a garbage heap or some such thing if a baby is abandoned.
Growing Up With Two Moms: The Untold Children’s View
The argument of a man who identifies himself as bisexual and raised by women living as lesbians that the opposition to Regnerus's research is in essence discrimination against bisexuals. (For the record, I'm not a fan of Regnerus's research but, if anything, think some of his critics do worse).
Too much Va Va Voom? Renault advert featuring close-ups of burlesque dancers is banned by watchdog because it 'treats women like sexual objects'
Partway through the article: "A similar advert featuring a female driver and a group of bare-chested, gyrating men, has been watched nearly a million times but received no complaints and is therefore free to continue to be aired, the ASA confirmed."

"Who's having the babies"

This was an interesting article. The author starts out by noting a recent study on parenting in Norway which concluded that "a fifth to a quarter of men from the Boom generation and the generation following had no children," a figure which apparently matched that from the author's similar research in the US.

Later he crunches some more number, looking at factors like IQ and political affiliation:

He crunched some more numbers: "fertility is dysgenic for women and roughly neutral for men by IQ. However, here we see that there is finer pattern behind this when you break it down. What is actually happening is that fertility is highly dysgenic by IQ for liberal men (for whom indeed, the smartest category of such men here – roughly IQ 115+ – about 50% leave no descendants); is slightly dysgenic for moderate men; and is slightly eugenic for conservative men.

I wonder how much of a hidden factor religious affiliation might be in explaining the differences between liberal and conservatives. It's also interesting that amongst liberals those with the highest IQs seem the most likely to be childless. The Atlantic had a recent article about childless female academics but it seems that similar figures apply to men as well.

Random links

Top 10 Benefits of Downsizing into a Smaller Home
Probably a bit easier without kids.
Antibiotic Protects Men from Attractive Women
"Men feel more trusting toward women who cause them to be sexually aroused, even if there is no good justification for it ... Is there a way for men to avoid these devilish "honey traps"? ... Yes. They can take an antibiotic. Minocycline is typically used to treat acne, but it can also reduce symptoms associated with mental illnesses, such as schizophrenia and depression, and it can improve decision-making. This latter effect was analyzed further in a study described in Scientific Reports."
Japan’s robot suits now closer to reality with Power Jacket MK3
Ooooh... exoskeleton! Still expensive and not very powerful but interesting nonetheless.
Perfume That Smells Like A Book
Should I spray this on my e-reader?

Pages

Subscribe to Rotundus.com RSS