Homo Consumericus

The Nature and Nurture of Consumption

Dr. Gad Saad is an Associate Professor of Marketing at the John Molson School of Business (Concordia University) and author of The Evolutionary Bases of Consumption. See full bio

January 8, 2009, Evolutionary Psychology

Comments on "Exploring the Items Used to Measure Benevolent Sexism."

Exploring the Items Used to Measure Benevolent Sexism.

By Gad Saad, Ph.D. on January 8, 2009 in Homo Consumericus

Several comments were posted in response to my critique of benevolent sexism. Those who disagreed with my position seemed to suggest that I did not have a full grasp of the meaning of the term. In today's post, I provide the exact set of psychometric items that are used to measure benevolent sexism. I trust that the readers can accordingly decide for themselves whether benevolent sexism is indeed a problem worthy of our collective intervention. Read More

Two things

Submitted by Anonymous on January 8, 2009 - 1:59pm.

Dear Dr. Saad,

I first want to apologize for posting such a long comment on your previous entry. It's just that it was in response to Dr. Grewal's comment, not to her blog, so I wasn't sure where to put it.

Second, in this entry, you criticize Cindy for her ad hominem attack. But in your previous post, you essentially say in the title that BS is BS. I definitely would classify that as an ad homonym attack.

Ho ho ho!

Anonymous

Many thanks for your thoughtful response. One small correction.

Submitted by Gad Saad, Ph.D. on January 8, 2009 - 2:36pm.

Dear Anonymous, By definition, an ad hominem attack is targeted at an individual. Cindy's comment was targeted at me. When I wrote that benevolent sexism is BS, I was attacking the validity of the scale. Hence, this is hardly an attack on an individual unless psychometric scales are construed as animate objects possessing feelings! At no point, did I attack Dr. Grewal personally. As a matter of fact, I started off my previous post by stating that my critique would be of the construct and not of the individual (i.e., Dr. Grewal). I incorporated some levity (via the play with the acronym) to make my criticism more colorful. That's all. I wish you a good evening. GS P.S. Dear readers: My next post will deal with a "softer" issue...why is Stephen Colbert so sexy?! I will be off my blog until the middle of next week. Ciao for now.

ahem...

Submitted by Cindy on January 8, 2009 - 7:38pm.

Dear Dr. Saad and viewers,

I just want to make clear that I am not attacking you, as a man. Only your irresponsible journalism. Your unfortunate pablum of an argument was much too lame to warrant the time it would take to even consider writing a criticism. You are obviously just grasping at straws to protect your flailing pride: this is not a reprehensible act, however, it would still be wise for you to take my previous advice.

Cindy

As far as I know Dr. Saad

Submitted by Anonymous on January 8, 2009 - 9:03pm.

As far as I know Dr. Saad has backed up all of his claims with evidence. Just because you disagree with his arguments because of your own stubborn beliefs does not mean that his journalism is irresponsible.

BS detecting

Submitted by Nando on January 8, 2009 - 9:09pm.

Dear Dr. Saad,

As a fan of your posts, I want to encourage you to continue to have fun gently but firmly showing the myriad biases and confusions in standard social "science."

The clarity of your thinking comes through even if the current fuzzy academic party-line about Benevolent Sexism is the new dogma.

I concur

Submitted by AcidMonkey on January 9, 2009 - 7:30am.

I agree with Nando above. This was a great post.

women & children first

Submitted by jan on January 15, 2009 - 2:44pm.

NBC News reports that the flight crew on the plane that crashed in the Hudson today (1-15-09) evacuated women and children first. What an insult to all the strong, independent women on the flight! I'm sure we'll hear them voice their disapproval!

Concerning the study

Submitted by Joe on February 3, 2009 - 8:58pm.

Just wanted to clarify about one of your "evidences"

The study you mention about women's superior morality is one looking at business practices only. Also the "studies" are from surveys. That is that they rely on the subjects to being truthful for the data to be accurate. I would tend to believe that women are more moral but there really aren't any studies that show this conclusively as it one thing to take people on what they say and another to know what they truly think or believe.

I found the article amusing but it looks more like you were writing it to justify your point of view rather then really critiquing the the validity of the scale.

Not to say there aren't problems and you shouldn't point them out. But then you can do that with many "scales" in psychology. There is always another angle that can ruin any scale. We are a sexist society. plain simple. We treat women differently than men. Period. No and ifs or buts. As pointed out some with good reason but just because there is good reason doesn't make them non-sexist. I think that is the point BS is making. You do a better job of questioning whether we want a truly sexist society in this article, than addressing its validity.

Correction

Submitted by Joe on February 3, 2009 - 9:01pm.

You do a better job of questioning whether we want a truly non-sexist....

Joe, how is treating women

Submitted by Anonymous on February 5, 2009 - 4:10am.

Joe, how is treating women differently than men sexism?

"Sexism, a term coined in the late 20th century, refers to the belief or attitude that one gender or sex is inferior to or less valuable than the other." (wikipedia)

Just because Dr. Saad considers that men and women are different (which many few disagree with), doesn't mean he, or anyone else with that view, is saying that men are superior to women. Many sociologists and feminists don't understand this simple point.

Tone is important

Submitted by Elle on April 14, 2009 - 1:30am.

This was interesting, but maybe you should work on the tone of your writing. You sounded distinctly... what's the word... pissy, in this article. No matter how well articulated you are, if you sound like you're literally (wait, I mean, 'doing something through literature', if there is such a phrase) stamping your foot angrily as you speak, the words have less effect. That, the constant repetition of the point. Yes. Sexism is complicated and sometimes stupid. Yes. We understand. Please stop talking. Please. Yes. I see.

Men and women are the same.

Submitted by drug rehab on April 14, 2009 - 1:56am.

Men and women are the same. They should be equally treated. I don't believe in the term called sexism. But in some point there are times that women should go first but its case to case basis.

Defining Sexism

Submitted by toomanynouns on November 29, 2009 - 11:43am.

'Joe, how is treating women differently than men sexism?

"Sexism, a term coined in the late 20th century, refers to the belief or attitude that one gender or sex is inferior to or less valuable than the other." (wikipedia)'

Anonymous: You neglect to mention that sexism is also commonly defined as "discrimination based on sex" and that discrimination can be for or against someone. By this definition, treating women differently than men IS sexism.