• The `equal-opportunity jerk' defense: Ru

    From ScienceDaily@1:317/3 to All on Tue Mar 8 21:30:38 2022
    The `equal-opportunity jerk' defense: Rudeness can obfuscate gender bias


    Date:
    March 8, 2022
    Source:
    Association for Psychological Science
    Summary:
    If you're an 'equal-opportunity jerk,' does that mean you can't
    also be sexist? New research shows that many people think so -- and
    consider men to be gender blind when they're rude, condescending,
    and berating to women and men equally.



    FULL STORY ==========================================================================
    If you're an "equal-opportunity jerk," does that mean you can't also
    be sexist? New research shows that many people think so -- and consider
    men to be gender blind when they're rude, condescending, and berating
    to women and men equally. 

    ==========================================================================
    To highlight the common view that men aren't deemed sexist when they're
    rude to both men and women, researchers asked subjects to share their perceptions of tweets from former President Donald Trump lambasting
    men and women, fictitious stories of managers' treatment of male and
    female employees, and surveys of sexist behavior.  According to
    the study, being a jerk to men creates "an illusion of impartiality,
    giving sexist perpetrators plausible deniability." This can lead people
    to falsely conclude that gender bias doesn't underlie rude behavior,
    making them less likely to recognize sexism.  "We found that a
    man does not seem sexist if he treats everyone -- both men and women
    -- poorly," said Peter Belmi, associate professor of leadership and organizational behavior at the University of Virginia Darden School of
    Business and lead author of the study. "This is problematic because
    sexism and rudeness are not mutually exclusive. Men who are sexist
    can be -- and often are -- rude toward other men." The research shows
    that gender blindness can be exploited to refute accusations of sexism,
    he added. For example, perpetrators may highlight instances in which
    they've been rude to men as evidence that they aren't sexist. 
    A popular understanding of sexism is discrimination toward women based
    solely on their sex. Under this definition, a man would not be sexist
    if he were a jerk to both sexes. The researchers defined sexism more
    broadly, however, as attitudes, beliefs, or behaviors that reflect,
    foster, or promote negative or pejorative stereotypes about women.



    ==========================================================================
    "Men may believe that rather than 'supporting women,' an alternative
    solution to creating gender parity is to 'treat everyone horribly,'"
    Belmi added.  He emphasized that previous research has focused
    on gender blindness's benefit in fostering workplace gender diversity
    and inclusion. The current study highlights the shortcomings of this ideology.  The researchers conducted a series of studies, using
    online participants and students from professional schools, to determine whether sexism is tougher to recognize when men express rudeness to other
    men as well as women.  A two-part survey of about 1,100 employed men measured their self-reported rudeness toward male and female colleagues
    at work and their attitudes and beliefs about women.  Another study
    asked participants to read tweets written by Trump during his presidency
    that contained sexist comments about women; some participants also read
    tweets that berated men.  Next, the researchers asked participants
    to read a series of stories, some about managers making sexist comments
    to female workers and others about managers speaking rudely to male subordinates, too. Participants were also asked to identify whether
    those managers needed gender-bias and anger- management training. 


    ==========================================================================
    In each experiment, participants failed to recognize sexism when the perpetrator was rude or berating to men. However, they identified
    sexist behavior when only women were treated poorly. In other words,
    "equal- opportunity jerks" were viewed as gender blind. Also, the
    more participants perceived an offender being a jerk to other men, the
    more they diminished the need for gender-bias training.  "When
    a sexist manager is rude toward men, it may appear as though he is not
    sexist," Belmi said. "Thus, women victimized by his behavior will have
    a more difficult time proving that he is sexist. Rudeness can therefore
    protect perpetrators." The findings show that rudeness across genders
    creates a barrier to addressing sexism. The researchers suggested that
    future studies should examine whether rudeness can conceal other types
    of discrimination -- for example, by creating illusions of colorblindness
    or authenticity.

    "Blatant, unambiguous, and obvious forms of sexist conduct continue
    to exist," Belmi said. "Our findings suggest that one reason for their persistence is that observers may not recognize that everyday acts of
    rudeness can serve as a convenient mask for bias against women." 

    ========================================================================== Story Source: Materials provided by
    Association_for_Psychological_Science. Note: Content may be edited for
    style and length.


    ========================================================================== Journal Reference:
    1. Peter Belmi, Sora Jun, Gabrielle S. Adams. The "Equal-Opportunity
    Jerk"
    Defense: Rudeness Can Obfuscate Gender Bias. Psychological Science,
    2022; 095679762110404 DOI: 10.1177/09567976211040495 ==========================================================================

    Link to news story: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2022/03/220308155647.htm

    --- up 1 week, 1 day, 10 hours, 50 minutes
    * Origin: -=> Castle Rock BBS <=- Now Husky HPT Powered! (1:317/3)