Dr. Stuart Schneiderman reports on the study.
Excerpt:
With heavy heart we turn to Kathleen Connelly and Martin Heesacker’s article, entitled: “Why Is Benevolent Sexism Appealing?” Co-authored by a graduate student and a professor at the University of Florida, is has been published by a scholarly Journal called the Psychology of Women Quarterly.
Here is how the PWQ describes itself:
Psychology of Women Quarterly (PWQ) is a feminist, scientific, peer-reviewed journal that publishes empirical research, critical reviews and theoretical articles that advance a field of inquiry, brief reports on timely topics, teaching briefs, and invited book reviews related to the psychology of women and gender.
Here is a snip from the abstract of the study:
Previous research suggests that benevolent sexism is an ideology that perpetuates gender inequality.
[...]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.
Got that? Treating men and women differently in good ways is “dangerous” even though it has good effects. So no more giving women flowers, and no more giving men respect.
Dr. Schneiderman comments:
Connelly/Heesacker have discovered that when men behave like gentlemen toward women it produces “life satisfaction” for both parties.
They conclude that gentlemanly behavior is “dangerous” and that we must intervene “to reduce its prevalence.”
By their pseudo-reasoning, the positive benefits that accrue to men and women when men act like gentlemen provide a false sense of satisfaction that undermines the feminist revolution.
Since I did not spring for the $25.00 fee to read the article, I can only surmise that by benevolent sexism the authors mean such simple courtesies as asking a woman out on a date, paying for her, holding the door for her, helping her with her coat, accompanying her home and so on.
This argument is not new. It came in with second wave feminism. It was intended to assert women’s independence and autonomy. It resulted in more men treating more women discourteously and disrespectfully.
From a feminist perspective, if a man acted like a gentleman, a woman was expected to act like a lady. This was a bad thing, a betrayal of a woman’s allegiance to the feminist cult.
Feminists believed that gentlemanly behavior signified that women were the weaker sex, needing male protection.
They also believed that when a man paid for dinner and a show a woman felt obligated to repay the favor with her “favors.”
From a feminist perspective it’s better for women to give it away for free because then she will not feel that she is being bought.
As I say, feminists have been rebelling against “benevolent sexism” for around four decades now.
As a result, women are more likely to be abused. They are more likely to be used for sex. They are less likely to be involved in sustained relationships.
Men have been excoriated for acting courteously and politely, lest they be accused of being patronizing, so they have concluded that they need to act badly toward women.
Men concluded that they could further the revolutionary feminist cause by being revolting.
When feminism decided that courtship and even dating was a relic of a bygone age, all the rude, lewd, crude dudes rejoiced.
Today, Connelly and Heesacker have their backs.
Here’s a nice video showing a traditional marriage:
See those traditional sex roles? Feminists think we should intervene to reduce its prevalence because it’s “dangerous”.
I’ve written before about how feminists push women into premarital recreational sex because they want to undermine sexist notions like chivalry, courtship, marriage and stay-at-home motherhood. Their number one target is the traditional family, where the husband works and the wife stays home and raises the children. They know that if they can get women to binge-drink and hook-up with a bunch of men, then marriage will die. And that’s their goal. That’s what it means to be a feminist – act promiscuously and depend on the government for free condoms, free abortions and single mother welfare. Government replaces men.
Related posts
- Why do about 70% of single / divorced / unmarried women vote Democrat?
- New study: brain of child neglected by mother is smaller and underdeveloped
- Traditional marriage is a threat to the values of single women
- What do radical feminists want women to want?
- Can recreational sex turn a selfish, irresponsible man into a marriage-minded provider?
- New study finds that cohabitation damages children
- New peer-reviewed paper highlights the benefits of pre-marital chastity/abstinence
- Does being a virgin before marriage affect marital stability?
- How important are biological fathers for healthy child development?
- What causes women to become single mothers, and how are children affected?
- New study shows that children of working mothers live unhealthier lives
- New Scientist article shows why fathers are necessary for children’s well-being
- New study finds that women choose mates based on appearance
- Men should prefer women who allow moral judging and spiritual leading
- Where have all the good men gone, and why aren’t men marrying?
- Why do some women tolerate jerks as boyfriends?
- The dangers of sentimentality in relationships
- Is Mark Driscoll afraid to hold a woman accountable for her own choices?
- How feminism made women unsuitable for marriage and parenting
- Study: 80% of single evangelicals aged 18-29 are no longer virigins
- Should Christian men marry? What’s the worst that could happen?
- For women under 30, most births occur outside of marriage
- How feminist pastors like Mark Driscoll and Kevin DeYoung undermine marriage
- In the UK welfare state, single motherhood is passed from mother to daughter
- New study finds that teens who lose their virginity are more likely to divorce
- How more compassion and less moral judgments increases teen pregnancy
- Can a person be a feminist and still believe in marriage?
- What happens when the government pays people to have babies out-of-wedlock?
- New survey finds women more sexually active than men in high school
- Research to help you understand the “hook-up” culture on campus
- How feminist academics think that feminism has empowered women
- Who is responsible for the abolition of marriage? Men or feminists?
- Who is to blame for the hook-up culture?
- How the feminist welfare state causes generations of fatherlessness
- How feminism’s war against men ends up hurting women
- Less than half of 7 to 21 year old women think marriage precedes child-bearing
Filed under: News, Abortion, Binge Drinking, Campus, Chivalry, College, Condoms, Contraceptives, Courting, Courtship, Divorce, Feminism, Feminist, Feminist Theory, Gender, Hook-Up, Marriage, Premarital Sex, Promiscuity, Recreational Sex, Sex, Sex Education, Sex Roles, Single-Motherhood, University, Women



05/29/2013 • 6:00 PM 12
Study explains why college women abandon courtship for hook-ups
This study is from the Institute for American Values. It was done by Elizabeth Marquardt.
The PDF of study is here.
If you download the 88 page PDF, the first few pages are an executive summary.
I’d been exposed to this research before when I read Dr. Miriam Grossmann’s book “Unprotected”. (Boundless review here) I just got Dr. Miriam Grossmann’s new book “You’re Teaching My Child What?” and I also got Elizabeth Marquardt’s new book “Between Two Worlds: The Inner Lives of Children of Divorce”. I don’t think either of them is conservative, but I like their research anyway.
There are a couple of things that really struck me about this IAV study on hooking-up.
First, this one from p. 15:
And this one from p. 30 on the effects of hooking-up on their future commitments:
And on p. 42, we learn what women think marriage is and isn’t for:
And on p. 44, we learn that they like co-habitation, which increases the risk of divorce by about 50% (but they don’t know that):
But let’s get back to the drinking and the hook-up sex…
Once a woman abandons femininity for feminism, then sex is all that she can use to get noticed by a man. Men are like hiring managers, and courting is like a job interview for the job of marriage and mothering. If a woman tries to get the job by having sex with the interviewer, he isn’t going to hire her since sex has nothing to do with the job. There are children involved, you know – he has to think of them when he makes the hiring decision. But women have been taught to think bad things about men (they’re rapists) and marriage (it’s slavery) by feminists – so they don’t even try to understand men, or to respect men, or prepare their character for being a wife and mother. Feminists just don’t understand that hard work is needed to understand men and prepare for marriage.
In a previous post, I explained how feminists wanted to get women to drink like men, have sex like men, and to abolish courtship and marriage. Under the influence of feminism and Hollywood celebrities, women began to choose men to have sex with without any consideration of morality, religion, marriage, etc. They thought that sex was an easy way to trick a man into committing to them without having to treat him like a real person, or to take the demands of marriage and parenting seriously. (They have been taught to value education and careers over husbands and children, you understand). This results in a cycle of binge-drinking, one-night-stands, cheating, co-habitating, breaking-up, stalking, aborting, etc., until the woman’s ability to trust and love anyone but herself is completely destroyed. And yet these college women somehow believe this is “adventurous”, that it makes them feel “sexy”, and that the experience of being selfish and seeing the worst kind of men acting in the worst possible ways, point blank, somehow prepares them for marriage and motherhood.
Often, a young unmarried woman’s biological father was NOT selected by her mother based on his ability to make commitments and moral judgments. Many feminists prefer men who do not judge women morally, nor impose his religion on her. But those very things that young unmarried women today seem to dislike most about men, because they fear rejection on moral and religious grounds, are exactly the things that make men good husbands and fathers. They don’t want to be judged or led spiritually, so they choose immoral, non-religious men. Men who are not firm on morality and religion cannot be counted on to act morally and self-sacrificially. And when they fail, and the marriages break up, the children grow up fatherless and may develop negative views of men.
Every young unmarried woman who chooses a bad man, and then has a bad experience with him is pushing away marriage with both hands. The more she destroys her ability to trust, love and care for others, the less she is able to be happy and effective in a marriage.
Share this:
Like this:
Filed under: Commentary, Alcohol, Binge Drinking, Campus, Chastity, College, Commitment, Courting, Courtship, Date, Dating, Drinking, Drug Abuse, Drunk, Elizabeth Marquardt, Father, Fatherlessness, Feminism, Feminist, Girls, Hook-Up, Hookup, Husband, IAV, Marriage, Men, Modesty, Mother, Paper, Promiscuity, Relationship, Research, School, Sex, Student, Study, University, Wife, Women