Discrimination perpetrated by an “in-group” (those you share similarities with) towards an “out-group” (those you feel are different to you) (Schneider, Gruman, and Coutts, 2012) is widespread issue that affects nearly every aspect of society. In the United States, diversity and its associated challenges–or rather, the challenges that are perpetuated by people in reaction to diversity–are in the forefront of the national consciousness as people push back against and protest discrimination, while others find the protesting to be unnecessary or even offensive. Although literature on the topic points to the existence of discrimination, in modern America it is often “….more sophisticated, convoluted, and subversive…” (Schneider, et al., 2012) and thus may be hard to see unless you are a victim of prejudice or negative stereotyping. This is due to the deeply ingrained nature of prejudice; one only has to look at the Hall of Presidents to see that there is strong historical and political precedence for favoring white men in power. But does systematic discrimination lead to prejudice so strongly reinforced that its victims become its perpetrators? Unfortunately, in many cases it seems to be so. It is hard to avoid discrimination when it is rampant, even essential, in our country’s history and development, and thus is taught and reinforced (albeit less than it used to be) in each generation. I believe there are forms of within-group discrimination that exist in almost every demographic, but as a woman what I have personally grappled with the most is internalized sexism.
Internalized sexism refers to when “…women enact learned sexist behaviors upon themselves and other women” (Bearman, Korbokov, and Thorne, 2009). The first time I ever became aware of the concept was, funnily enough, through the hugely popular 2004 movie Mean Girls. I wouldn’t hear the phrase “internalized misogyny” until my first year at a small liberal arts college (after which I arguably heard it too often), but even at eight years old I recognized what Tina Fey’s character in the movie was referring to when she laments the way girls use sexual slurs against each other, especially when they already have to deal with sexist insults from boys. The way girls my age often tore each other down based on sexist ideas about sexuality or by using female-exclusive demeaning words often bothered me–even though I was often a participant in the behavior myself. It may seem counterintuitive: a group that is targeted with prejudice based on sex should form a camaraderie, ideally be supportive and fight harmful stereotypes together. However, in reality, internalized sexism is quite common. A 2009 study on the topic analyzed conversations between female friends with four criteria of internalized sexism in mind: derogation, accusations of incompetence, competition, and objectification. It was found that there were, on average, 11 instances of the former types of sexism per 10 minutes of conversation (Bearman, et al., 2009). This may even indicate that women are highly likely to display internalized sexism when with other women, which provides an alternative explanation to the results of Doctors Swim and Hyers’ 1999 study indicating that women were less likely to stand up to sexism when other women were around (Schneider, et al., 2012). Rather than their explanation of diffusion of responsibility–the women simply expected one of the other women present to speak up, so no one ended up doing so–perhaps the women felt more strongly that they should stay quiet when another woman was there to make them subconsciously aware of the norm of not causing conflict that is encouraged in females.
In addition to the initially puzzling phenomenon for women acting in cruel ways towards other women, which falls under the category of “hostile sexism”, or sexism that is blatant and derogatory (Schneider, et al., 2012), I think it is possible that some women also internalize benevolent and ambivalent sexism as well. These types of sexism may appear more innocent, but in fact are often more insidious and therefore harder to address. The former refers to the act of stereotyping women as special and delicate, needing protection, and the latter is a combination of hostile and benevolent sexism (Schneider, et al., 2012). I find this to be the case more often in older generations of women, who are more steeped in the common sexism of their time than in the way it manifests in modern times (i.e, treating women as if they need protection and coddling vs. treating women as sexual objects). For example, I have a great aunt in her late 70’s that always avoided driving, although she knows how, because she does not think it is safe for a woman to drive. She would also often complain of feeling nervous and unsafe without her husband around. I sometimes wonder if, because women (especially older generations) are raised valuing qualities like delicacy, grace, and beauty, they are more likely to internalize ambivalent sexism, which in some ways puts women on a pedestal (benevolence), attractive because of its superficially glamorous aspect, and in other ways treats women as though they are not capable of taking care of themselves (hostility), which catalyzes fear. Both are strong emotional pulls, and may keep women from recognizing and disavowing their own sexism.
Of course, the issue is not at all cut and dry, and often thinking about the various motivations for and perceptions of women held by other women can lead to more questions than answers. Recently, both former First Lady Michelle Obama and former presidential candidate Hilary Clinton have implied that women who voted for current president Donald Trump, whom from their perspective displayed sexist qualities, were voting against their own best interests. These comments have sparked a lot of controversy, with some agreeing with this assertion and others ironically finding it sexist in itself. If we assume Trump does in fact represent a sexist candidate, then internalized misogyny may explain the behavior of his female supporters. However, telling a large number of women that they were too ignorant to make the “right” choice appears almost blatantly sexist–which would make the criticism a sexist remark towards women from women. From my personal experience, it seems that the discerning factor between whether women found Trump to be negative for women vs whether they supported him was based not on their perception of whether or not he was sexist–but rather their personal threshold for what I’ll call “acceptable sexism.” This conclusion is based on multiple conversations I’ve had with Trump supporters before the election, with one in particular that stands out.
As a college student working in sales in southwest Florida, I meet and interact with a lot of different kinds of people, and during the election many of them (unprompted) brought up their political views. One such customer, sporting a Trump hat and shirt, told me that she’d started the relatively well-known group “Women for Trump” in an attempt to recruit more female Trump voters. I didn’t ask if she thought that maybe the fact she had to create a group specifically to prove that women did actually support Trump in itself said something about his campaign so far, because I work for commission, but I did ask what she thought of some of his more colorful remarks regarding his take on women. “All men talk like that,” she said, waving her hand dismissively. “He only speaks like that in private conversations…I know my husband wouldn’t want the things he says in private to be publicized. I met Mr. Trump in person and he was very respectful, just shook my hand, didn’t try anything at all.” Her attitude reflected the idea that there are certain types of sexism that are just inherent and must be accepted, and seemed to imply that women should be impressed by a man who has the decency to keep his sexism between his friends and himself (or in the “locker room”, as Trump might say) and not grope a woman upon meeting her for the first time. As far as I could tell, she and I were part of the same demographic (white, middle class, and female), and yet we hold radically different views on what is and isn’t acceptable for a potential leader to say about women. Personally, I think the words of a leader become the beliefs of his or her supporters, which creates the fabric of a social reality shared by that group. If sexism, hostile or benevolent or otherwise, is being communicated by an individual with a lot of social and political influence, the attitude becomes reflected as acceptable or even encouraged in the minds of his/her followers; even those that identify as the targeted sex. It makes it all the more difficult to achieve unity and mitigate the challenges associated with diversity, which halts progress–especially in a country that historically claims to value both unity and diversity. Women in America may still have to deal with sexism, but I hope we can work towards at least not being the ones perpetuating harmful stereotypes ourselves.
References:
This is a very well written and well thought out post. You have done a great job applying the concepts discussed throughout this class to a very interesting and very relevant topic. I have never considered this kind of sexism in this light before and your post really got me thinking. The idea of internalized sexism is thought provoking to say the least, and the way you mesh the psychological research and your own experiences was great! As you mention in your post, the entire idea really seems counterintuitive at first glance, and I think that is part of why it is so important to try and better understand the issue. Given all the historical and modern challenges women have faced and continue to face throughout society, I believe this is an extremely important area for future research. Great job!!