Hostile and benevolent sexism

Ambivalent attitudes toward women originate in beliefs surrounding men’s historical domination over women (i.e., patriarchal control) and their simultaneous dependency on women for survival (i.e., female dyadic power; Glick & Fiske, Reference Glick and Fiske1996, Reference Glick and Fiske1997). Thus, ambivalent sexism theory (Glick & Fiske, Reference Glick and Fiske1996, Reference Glick and Fiske2001) holds that sexism encompasses hostile and benevolent feelings and/or attitudes toward women. Perhaps aligning with typical perceptions surrounding harassment, hostile sexism refers to overtly antagonistic attitudes toward women (Dardenne, Dumont, & Bollier, Reference Dardenne, Dumont and Bollier2007) that justify male superiority by characterizing women in derogatory ways (e.g., incompetent; Glick & Fiske, Reference Glick and Fiske1997). In the workplace, hostile sexism can range from negative evaluations of women who violate traditional gender roles to fewer recommendations for leadership positions. In line with this, decades of work (e.g., Eagly & Karau, Reference Eagly and Karau2002; Heilman & Okimoto, Reference Heilman and Okimoto2007) and popular press articles (e.g., Hsu, Reference Hsu2018; Levin, Reference Levin2017) have attested to the fact that hostile sexism is alive and (unfortunately) thriving at work. Indeed, women are punished for engaging in behaviors contradicting female stereotypic prescriptions (e.g., self-promoting; Rudman & Glick, Reference Rudman and Glick2001) and succeeding in traditionally male roles (e.g., Heilman & Okimoto, Reference Heilman and Okimoto2007), ultimately reinforcing the glass ceiling in organizations (Masser & Abrams, Reference Masser and Abrams2004).

Conversely, benevolent sexism—albeit accompanied by positive views of women—hinges on the belief that women are warm but incompetent and/or weak, necessitating protection by men. Benevolent sexism is more subtle, taking the form of seemingly “benign” behaviors, such as suggesting that certain tasks are too “tough” for women, calling women “sweetheart,” noting how “cute” a female coworker looks, or complimenting a woman on her caring abilities (e.g., Dardenne et al., Reference Dardenne, Dumont and Bollier2007; Glick & Fiske, Reference Glick and Fiske1996; Good & Rudman, Reference Good and Rudman2010). Because “benevolent sexism is often disguised as chivalrous or even well-mannered behavior” (Good & Rudman, Reference Good and Rudman2010, p. 482), it often goes unrecognized as sexism (Barreto & Ellemers, Reference Barreto and Ellemers2005a, Reference Barreto and Ellemers2005b), making its role in contributing to discrimination and prejudice against women pernicious. Nevertheless, such patronizing interactions undermine women’s intelligence (Dardenne et al., Reference Dardenne, Dumont and Bollier2007; Good & Rudman, Reference Good and Rudman2010), providing rationale for confining women to traditional gender roles (Glick & Fiske, Reference Glick and Fiske1996). Indeed, benevolent sexism can hinder women’s careers, as such benevolent views can result in women being assigned fewer challenging experiences and receiving less developmental feedback (King et al., Reference King, Botsford, Hebl, Kazama, Dawson and Perkins2012).

Importantly, a typical needs analysis as described by Medeiros and Griffith (Reference Medeiros and Griffith2019) may capture hostile sexism but may not necessarily capture benevolent sexism due to its covert nature. However, capturing both forms is essential because they have different implications for women’s workplace experiences. For example, Dardenne et al. (Reference Dardenne, Dumont and Bollier2007) found that exposure to benevolent sexism, but not hostile sexism, relates to increased self-doubt in women, resulting in lower cognitive performance. Subsequent studies report similar findings (e.g., Dumont, Sarlet, & Dardenne, Reference Dumont, Sarlet and Dardenne2010; Jones et al., Reference Jones, Stewart, King, Botsford Morgan, Gilrane and Hylton2014), noting that benevolent sexism decreases self-efficacy and increases perceptions of incompetence, negatively impacting performance. Given these findings, it is possible that the well-being implications associated with these different forms of sexism may also differ and warrant careful attention.

Gendered incivility

With greater scrutiny of and reprimands for overt sexism, discrimination and prejudice against women often manifests in low-level mistreatment through selective or gendered incivility (Cortina, Reference Cortina2008; Cortina et al., Reference Cortina, Lonsway, Magley, Freeman, Collinsworth, Hunter and Fitzgerald2002; Gabriel et al., Reference Gabriel, Butts, Yuan, Rosen and Sliter2018). Although similar in terms of its low intensity and ambiguous nature surrounding intent to harm, gendered incivility differs from more generalized forms of incivility as the former is linked to the target’s gender. Specifically, gendered incivility encompasses behaviors such as interrupting, being condescending toward, and/or doubting the judgments of a female employee. The inconspicuous nature of these behaviors alongside the ambiguous intent allows perpetrators of gendered incivility to rationalize these behaviors as unrelated to inherent prejudice against women (Cortina, Reference Cortina2008). To this end, gendered incivility is largely overlooked when considering workplace harassment.

Yet, despite it being “low level,” gendered incivility has harmful effects. Indeed, research has demonstrated that gendered incivility exposure impacts employees’ psychological well-being and work withdrawal (e.g., Miner, Pesonen, Smittick, Seigel, & Clark, Reference Miner, Pesonen, Smittick, Seigel and Clark2014). Given the negative ramifications associated with gendered incivility, organizations should not dismiss such acts as innocuous; rather, organizations should begin capturing this form of mistreatment as well when conducting a thorough needs analysis. Doing so also presents an opportunity for organizations to design more targeted interventions aimed at preventing behaviors that fall in the “gray” zone surrounding misconduct at work. For instance, organizations can implement interventions about civility in the workplace and can explicitly address issues surrounding incivility that is targeted toward women but not necessarily men (Leiter, Laschinger, Day, & Oore, Reference Leiter, Laschinger, Day and Oore2011).

Ambient sexism

In addition to including an examination of the prevalence of subtle forms of harassment, organizations should also assess observed harassment when conducting a needs analysis. In contrast to direct sexism experienced by the target, ambient sexism is experienced indirectly through observing harassment of others. Increasing awareness regarding experiences of ambient sexism is crucial in light of the fact that the negative impact of ambient sexism parallels that inflicted through direct acts of sexual harassment (Glomb et al., Reference Glomb, Richman, Hulin, Drasgow, Schneider and Fitzgerald1997). Indeed, seeing or hearing about sexual harassment relates to increased stress, decreased job satisfaction, and decreased productivity (Miner-Rubino & Cortina, Reference Miner-Rubino and Cortina2007; Schneider, Reference Schneider1996). Observing hostile sexism can also reduce performance-based self-esteem and career aspirations among women (Bradley-Geist, Rivera, & Geringer, Reference Bradley-Geist, Rivera and Geringer2015). As with direct experiences of harassment, the negative consequences associated with observing sexism toward others extend beyond the workplace, as prior work has found that ambient sexism relates to lower health satisfaction (Miner-Rubino & Cortina, Reference Miner-Rubino and Cortina2004).

Aside from its direct experiences on the observer, experiences of ambient sexism may also have negative implications for future interactions. Indeed, similar to work on the contagion effect of incivility (Rosen, Koopman, Gabriel, & Johnson, Reference Rosen, Koopman, Gabriel and Johnson2016), experiencing ambient sexism may result in increases in instigated sexism (either hostile or benevolent) toward other women. Thus, assessing the prevalence of ambient sexism at work may provide insights surrounding why, and how, a culture of harassment is perpetuated within a particular organization.