The 'Benevolent Sexism' at Christian Colleges
The 'Benevolent Sexism' at Christian Colleges
Women at an evangelical college face a wider gender gap than their counterparts at a secular institution, according to a new study published in Religion and Education. But they're also more satisfied in their jobs than women at secular schools.
Biola University professors Brad Christerson, M. Elizabeth Lewis Hall, and Shelly Cunningham, authors of "Women Faculty at an Evangelical University: The Paradox of Religiously Driven Gender Inequalities and High Job Satisfaction" attribute this paradox to "benevolent sexism" and the high value evangelicals place on personal relationships. Karen Swallow Prior, chair of the department of English and Modern Languages at Liberty University and a regular contributor to Her.meneutics, interviewed the scholars about their findings.
Explain "benevolent sexism" and its role in the study's findings.
Benevolent sexism refers to sexism that is not overtly hostile. In fact, it is often in the context of warm, friendly personal relationships between men and women. This type of sexism undermines opportunities for women through emphasizing the nurturing role of women (particularly in raising children) and the male role as protector of and provider for women.
Many women faculty on the evangelical campus in the study reported feeling undermined at work by implicit assumptions that they should be home with their children, or that the qualities that are valued in academia—intelligence, assertiveness, and confidence—are not traits appropriate for Christian women.
So while women at this university generally report warm friendly relationships with male faculty and students, they also feel limited support for their professional achievement because of traditional gender assumptions.
What did your study find to be the greatest sources of perceived gender inequality among the female faculty members of the evangelical university?
The greatest disparity was in the extent to which faculty members felt informed about various aspects of their job, including expectations for advancement, negotiating for resources, and opportunities for research. This may explain why there is such a disparity between men and women within the evangelical university in promotion to full professor and access to resources such as housing allowances, sabbaticals, funding, and course release for research.
You note that female faculty felt excluded from male social groups. As the study points out, evangelicals are more guarded about cross-gender relationships. Is "separate but equal" as applied to gendered socialization possible or desirable in an institutional environment?
As is the case with racial segregation, "separate but equal" is a fallacy. Since males have disproportionate access to resources and power, segregating women from men, even informally, means that women will continue to have less access to information and resources that are important for advancement in their profession.
How did the inequality perceived by female faculty at the evangelical institution compare to the female faculty at the secular institution studied?
The gender inequality on all measures was greater at the evangelical university when compared to the secular university.
The 'Handicap Icon' Gets New Life
Sidelining the Stigma of Mental Illness
Not part of the community? Subscribe now, or register for a free account.
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
Newsletters
Google
Join the Conversation
Displaying 1–5 of 35 comments
See all comments
Stephanie Wong
This notion of 'benevolent sexism' is ridiculous... Sexism is always wrong, and painting it in rosy hues only serves to mask and justify the sin of discrimination.
MATTHEW PITRUCHA
Thanks Rick Dalbey. You nailed the problem with this article right on the head.
Rick Dalbey
Joanne, thanks. I am a father of a very bright daughter and i fight for her right in acadamia and the body of Christ. Women are 50% of the human race and to the extent that they are discriminated against we all are diminished. Guys like Ricker are an embarrassment with an ethos that belongs in Pakistan.
Joanne Marshall
This is a great interview summarizing an interesting article. Thank you, Dr. Prior and authors. The comments are just as interesting, about women's 'place' and the 'objectivity' of research. The research questions of the original article from _Religion and Education_ were, "‘To what extent do women faculty at evangelical universities experience religiously driven gender inequalities? And if so, why do women academics involve themselves in these conservative religious educational institutions that treat them unequally?’’ Those are important questions. I don't know what 'objective' evidence Mr. Ricker might want from women about their experiences, but I don't think he understands mixed methods research, or the power of qualitative methods in particular, to discover and analyze phenomena that can't be quantifiably measured - like feelings or experiences. And to my evangelical sisters, I issue a invitation to work the secular academy, which at least espouses equity.
Jim Ricker
Jennie and Rick, Slavery was an objective fact, not subjective feelings. It mattered none if slaves were happy or not, they were still slaves. The article author (and the study authors)uses the subjective (feelings) in order to prove the case but offer nothing objective and fact-based to prove the feelings are correct. Specifically to Rick, your opinion is appreciated but far from accurate or a refutation of the points I made. When you decide to address the issues raised, then a discussion (as much as one can have with limited character space and doing it electronically), I'll take your words more seriously. Jennie, as to your desire to be seen by a world that has not the commands and direction from the Maker of the world is sad. Your case might be stronger if you offered more than excitability with no substance. Grace and Peace,