Worse for Women, Bad for All: A 62-Nation Study Confirms and Extends Ambivalent Sexism Principles to Reveal Greater Social Dysfunction in Sexist Nations

Magdalena Zawisza, Natasza Kosakowska-Berezecka, Peter Glick, Michal Olech, Tomasz Besta, Paweł Jurek, Jurand Sobiecki, Deborah L. Best, Jennifer K. Bosson, Joseph A. Vandello, Saba Safdar, Anna Włodarczyk, Magdalena Żadkowska

Social Psychological and Personality Science11/1/2025·DOI·Read paper

Abstract

We retested core ambivalent sexism theory tenets and explored novel correlations with national outcomes in 62 nations. Replicating Glick et al., cross-national analyses supported (a) hostile sexism (HS) and benevolent sexism (BS) as cross-culturally recognizable, complementary ideologies associated with gender inequality; (b) women appearing to be influenced by, but also resisting men’s HS and embracing BS to counter men’s HS (outscoring men in some highly sexist nations). Novel cross-national comparisons showed (a) men’s HS and both genders’ BS correlated with fewer women in paid work, whereas only BS correlated with domestic labor inequity, (b) both HS and BS correlated with accepting intimate partner violence toward women. Finally, HS and BS correlated with generally dysfunctional national outcomes: antidemocratic tendencies, less productivity, more collective violence, and lower healthy lifespan for both genders. Results reinforce that BS harms women and suggest men also have a stake in reducing sexist ideologies.

Make this part of your paper trail

Save this paper to a shelf, write a review, and keep your own notes.

Community Reviews

No reviews yet. Be the first to review this paper!