Revista de Psicología Social
International Journal of Social Psychology
ISSN: 0213-4748 (Print) 1579-3680 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rrps20
Masculine and feminine honor codes
Patricia M. Rodriguez Mosquera
To cite this article: Patricia M. Rodriguez Mosquera (2011) Masculine and feminine honor
codes, Revista de Psicología Social, 26:1, 63-72, DOI: 10.1174/021347411794078499
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1174/021347411794078499
Published online: 23 Jan 2014.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 49
View related articles
Citing articles: 4 View citing articles
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rrps20
Download by: [University of Crete]
Date: 06 April 2016, At: 02:50
06. RODRIGUEZ MOSQUERA
30/11/10
14:48
Página 63
Masculine and feminine honor codes
PATRICIA M. RODRIGUEZ MOSQUERA
Wesleyan University
Downloaded by [University of Crete] at 02:50 06 April 2016
Abstract
We present a study on the importance of masculine and feminine honor and attitudes towards sex roles in Spain and
the Netherlands. Honor is more important in Spanish than in Dutch culture. Participants were asked to rate the extent
to which gender-neutral (e.g., caring for reputation) and gendered (e.g., assertiveness, modesty) honor attributes were
desirable in their culture for each sex. We also measured attitudes towards sex-roles in different domains (e.g., work,
marriage). The Spanish participants rated gender-neutral honor attributes as more desirable than the Dutch
participants did. Both Spanish and Dutch participants rated masculine honor attributes as more desirable for men, and
feminine honor attributes as more desirable for women. Participant’s sex emerged as the most important predictor of
attitudes towards sex roles, with males expressing more traditional attitudes than females. Taken together, the results
indicate that masculine and feminine honor are expressions of pan-cultural ideals of masculinity and femininity.
Keywords: Attitudes toward sex roles, femininity, honor attributes, masculinity.
Códigos de honor masculinos y femeninos
Resumen
En este artículo presentamos un estudio sobre la importancia del honor masculino y femenino, así como sobre las actitudes hacia los roles sexuales en España y Holanda. El honor es más importante en la cultura Española que en la Holandesa. A los participantes se les pidió que evaluaran hasta qué punto eran deseables en su cultura características de género
relacionadas con el honor (e.g., asertividad, modestia) o neutrales (e.g., preocuparse por la reputación) para cada sexo.
Asimismo, medimos actitudes hacia los roles sexuales en distintos ámbitos (e.g., trabajo, pareja). Los participantes españoles consideraron las características de género neutras, respecto al honor, más deseables que los participantes holandeses.
Tanto los participantes españoles como los holandeses valoraron las características de honor masculino como más deseables
para los hombres, y el honor femenino como más deseables para las mujeres. El sexo del participante fue el predictor más
importante de las actitudes hacia los roles sexuales, siendo los hombres los que expresan actitudes más tradicionales que las
mujeres. En conjunto, los resultados indican que el honor masculino y femenino son expresiones de los ideales pan-culturales de la masculinidad y la feminidad.
Palabras clave: Actitudes hacia los roles sexuales, características de honor, feminidad, masculinidad.
Author’s Address: Patricia M. Rodriguez Mosquera, Department of Psychology, Wesleyan University, 207 High Street,
Middletown, CT 06459-0408 (USA). E-mail: [email protected]
Original recibido: septiembre, 2010. Aceptado: septiembre, 2010.
© 2011 by Fundación Infancia y Aprendizaje, ISSN: 0213-4748
Revista de Psicología Social, 2011, 26 (1), 63-72
06. RODRIGUEZ MOSQUERA
64
30/11/10
14:48
Página 64
Revista de Psicología Social, 2011, 26 (1), pp. 63-72
Downloaded by [University of Crete] at 02:50 06 April 2016
Masculine honor requires strength, toughness, and assertiveness. Feminine
honor requires modesty, restraint, and obedience to authority. Some ethnographers
have suggested that these gendered honor codes are characteristic of Mediterranean
honor cultures (e.g., Brandes, 1980; Murphy, 1983; Peristiany, 1965; Pitt-Rivers,
1977). However, there is no cross-cultural research showing that these gendered
honor codes are absent in less honor-oriented, non-Mediterranean cultures. In fact,
masculine and feminine honor are likely to be expressions of pan-cultural ideals of
masculinity and femininity.
We present a study that compared the importance of masculine and feminine
honor in a Mediterranean country, Spain, and a non-Mediterranean country, the
Netherlands. We also compared attitudes towards sex-roles in the two countries.
Honor is a more important value in Spanish than in Dutch culture (Rodriguez
Mosquera, Manstead & Fischer, 2000, 2002a, 2002b; Rodriguez Mosquera,
Fischer, Manstead, & Zaalberg, 2008).
The Nature of Masculine and Feminine Honor Codes
Ethnographic research has defined the honor code as a set of values, norms, and
social practices (Abu-Lughod, 1999; Adamopoulos, 1977; Gilmore, 1987;
Jakubowska, 1989; Nisbett & Cohen, 1996; Peristiany, 1965; Pitt-Rivers, 1977;
Schneider, 1971; Stewart, 1994; Vassiliou & Vassiliou, 1973; Wikan, 1982, 1984).
Some of the values, norms, and social practices of the honor code are important for
the maintenance of men’s as well as women’s honor. Thus, they are not seen as more
important or appropriate for either women or men. In particular, both women and
men are expected to protect their own reputation and the reputation of their
families. Furthermore, women as well as men are expected to have moral integrity
(e.g., be honest and sincere) and are expected to express social interdependence by,
for example, being hospitable and cooperative.
However, some of the values, norms, and social practices of the honor code are
seen as more important and appropriate for men. Indeed, men are responsible for
the physical protection of the family and its property. Thus, men’s honor depends
on appearing strong and capable of providing this physical protection. These tasks
are thought to require toughness, assertiveness, and authority over one’s family.
Furthermore, some of the values, norms, and social practices of the honor code are
seen as more important and appropriate for women. In particular, modesty, sexual
restraint, and subordination to male authority are the core of feminine honor.
Masculine and feminine honor are therefore gendered honor codes (Brandes, 1980;
Gilmore, 1987; Gilmore & Gwynne, 1985; Murphy, 1983; Peristiany, 1965; PittRivers, 1977).
Gendered Honor Codes and Attitudes towards Sex-roles
Masculine and feminine honor define a pattern of family and inter-sex relations
that has implications for attitudes towards sex-roles. Men are responsible for the
physical protection of the family. This implies that men are expected to be the
protectors of, and the providers for, the family. This association of the protector
and provider roles with men should lead to a stronger association of domestic tasks
with women. Moreover, a man’s ability to protect and provide for his family builds
a reputation for being tough (Gilmore, 1987). Such a reputation brings respect and
security to his family.
In contrast, modesty and sexual restraint should be seen as more desirable
attributes for women than for men. This is because the feminine honor code is the
polar opposite of the masculine honor code. Because men are expected to be
assertive, women are expected to be modest. Because men are responsible for the
06. RODRIGUEZ MOSQUERA
30/11/10
14:48
Página 65
Masculine and femenine honor codes / P. M. Rodriguez Mosquera
physical protection of the family, women are expected to conform to male
authority within the family. Because men are expected to be sexually active,
women are expected to restrain their sexuality.
In sum, the ethnographic literature on Mediterranean honor suggests that
attitudes towards sex-roles should be more traditional in Mediterranean honor
cultures than in less-honor oriented, non-Mediterranean cultures.
Downloaded by [University of Crete] at 02:50 06 April 2016
Present Study
We present a cross-cultural study between Spain and the Netherlands. The study
had three major goals. First, we compared attitudes towards sex-roles. Second, we
compared desirability ratings of masculine honor (e.g., assertiveness) and feminine
honor (e.g., modesty) attributes in the two cultures. Participants were asked to rate the
desirability of each attribute for women as well as for men. Third, we examined
whether these desirability ratings predicted attitudes towards sex-roles.
In line with previous research on honor (Rodriguez Mosquera et al., 2002a,
2002b), gender-neutral honor attributes (i.e., caring for reputation, moral
integrity, and social interdependence) should be rated as more desirable by Spanish
than by Dutch participants. The Spanish participants should rate gender-neutral
honor attributes as equally desirable for men and women. As for gendered honor
attributes (i.e., attributes related to the masculine and the feminine honor codes),
we had two different sets of expectations about the desirability of these attributes.
On the basis of the literature on Mediterranean honor, we would expect Spanish
participants to express more traditional attitudes towards sex-roles than Dutch
participants. In addition, masculine honor attributes should be rated as more
desirable for men by Spanish than by Dutch participants. In contrast, feminine
honor attributes should be rated as more desirable for women by Spanish than by
Dutch participants. Moreover, rating masculine honor attributes as more desirable
for men and feminine honor attributes as more desirable for women should be
associated with traditional attitudes towards sex roles. In other words, greater
perceived desirability of the gendered honor attributes should be associated with
more traditional attitudes towards sex-roles.
However, masculine and feminine honor are likely to be expressions of pancultural ideals of masculinity and femininity. This expectation is based on
ethnographic research on masculinity (Gilmore, 1990) and on cross-cultural
research on gender stereotypes (Williams & Best, 1982). Gilmore carried out a
comprehensive analysis of manhood ideals and practices across cultures. His
analysis revealed that the roles of provider and protector are pan-cultural ideals of
masculinity. Williams and Best’s study supported Gilmore’s conclusions (Williams
& Best, 1982). Williams and Best’s study also showed that adjectives related to
modesty, restraint, and subordination are more strongly associated with women
than with men across cultures.
If masculine and feminine honor are expressions of pan-cultural ideals of
masculinity and femininity, there should be no cultural differences between Spain
and the Netherlands in desirability ratings of gendered honor attributes. Both
Spanish and Dutch participants should rate masculine honor attributes as more
important for men, and feminine honor attributes as more important for women.
Furthermore, there should be no cultural differences in attitudes towards sex-roles.
Sex of participant should be the most important predictor of attitudes towards sexroles. In line with previous research (Nelson, 1988; Parry, 1983; Willemsen,
1992), male participants should express more traditional attitudes towards sexroles than female participants. Finally, there should be a weak relationship between
65
06. RODRIGUEZ MOSQUERA
66
30/11/10
14:48
Página 66
Revista de Psicología Social, 2011, 26 (1), pp. 63-72
the perceived desirability of gendered honor attributes and attitudes towards sexroles.
Method
Participants
Downloaded by [University of Crete] at 02:50 06 April 2016
One hundred and twenty-one Spanish (64 females, 57 males) and 146 Dutch
respondents (71 females, 75 males) participated in the study. The Spanish participants
were university students attending the Autónoma University of Madrid. Spanish
participants’ average age was 22.55 years old. Dutch participants were university
students at the University of Amsterdam. Dutch participants’ average age was 21.83
years old. Spanish participants’ parents were born and raised in Spain. Dutch
participants’ parents were born and raised in the Netherlands.
Questionnaire
Participants were presented with two measures: an honor attributes scale and an
attitudes- towards-sex-roles scale. The honor attributes scale included 22 attributes (see
Appendix A). Participants made two ratings in relation to each of these attributes, one
with reference to women and the other with reference to men. Thus, participants were
asked to rate the extent to which each attribute was desirable in their culture for each
sex, i.e., “To what extent is modesty desirable in Spanish [Dutch] culture for women
[men]?” Participants made their ratings on 5-point scales from 1 (not at all desirable) to
5 (extremely desirable).
The attitudes-towards-sex-role scale (ASRS) was based on the Dutch version
(Willemsen, 1992) of Nelson’s (1988) AWS-S. The AWS-S is a simplified version
of the Spence-Helmreich attitudes towards women scale (AWS; Spence &
Helmreich, 1972). The AWS-S has been shown to have acceptable internal
consistency and construct validity (Nelson, 1988)1. The Dutch version of the
AWS-S contained 20 statements describing attitudes towards women’s roles. As
the present study aimed to measure attitudes towards women’s as well as men’s
roles, 10 items were added to the scale. These items described attitudes toward
men’s roles.
The ASRS measured attitudes towards sex-roles in three domains: work and
public behavior, sexuality and marriage, and the family (see Appendix B). The
work and public behavior domain included statements referring to the roles of
women and men in public spaces (e.g., “Men should not behave emotionally in
public”) and to opportunities in education and at work (e.g., “Women and men
should have equal opportunities in getting a job, or a promotion”). The sexuality
and marriage domain included statements describing sex-roles in the context of
sexual relations and marriage (e.g., “Men should take the initiative in sexuality;”
“Marriage is for a woman much more important than for a man”). The family
domain included statements referring to sex-roles within the family (e.g., “In
general, the father should have more authority than the mother in bringing up
children;” “Men should have equal opportunities as women to take care of their
children and develop an emotional bond with them”).
The ASRS presented participants statements about women and men’s roles.
Participants were asked to rate how much they disagree or agree with each statement
of the ASRS. Participants gave their ratings on 5-point scales ranging from 1 (in total
disagreement) to 5 (in total agreement).
The questionnaires were prepared in Dutch and then translated into Spanish by a
native speaker. The linguistic and conceptual equivalence of the Spanish and Dutch
06. RODRIGUEZ MOSQUERA
30/11/10
14:48
Página 67
Masculine and femenine honor codes / P. M. Rodriguez Mosquera
questionnaires was assessed by a process of back-translation carried out by a linguistic
expert in both languages.
Procedure
Order of presentation of the honor attributes scale and the ASRS was
counterbalanced across participants. The participants filled in the questionnaire
individually. Participants did not receive any reward for their participation in the
study.
Results
Downloaded by [University of Crete] at 02:50 06 April 2016
Honor Attributes Scale
We computed reliabilities (i.e., Cronbach alpha) for each set of attributes (i.e.,
gender-neutral, masculine honor, and feminine honor), and each sample. All alphas
were higher than .60, and equivalent across the two samples. Three composite scores
were created: a score on gender-neutral honor attributes, a score on masculine honor
attributes, and a score on feminine honor attributes. These composite scores were
created by averaging the participants’ scores on the items that belonged to each set of
attributes (i.e., gender-neutral, masculine honor, or feminine honor). These composite
scores were entered as dependent variables in an analysis of variance. Cultural group,
participant’s sex, and sex of target served as the independent, between-subjects factors.
Sex of target was a within-participant factor.
The multivariate main effect of cultural group was significant, F(3, 249) = 18.35,
p < .001. In univariate terms, cultural group only influenced gender-neutral, F(1, 251)
= 13.21, p < .001, and masculine honor attributes, F(1, 251) = 33.85, p < .001. As
expected, Spanish participants rated gender-neutral honor attributes (M = 4.09, SD =
.47) as more desirable than Dutch participants did (M = 3.87, SD = .52). Spanish
participants (M = 3.51, SD = .48) also rated masculine honor attributes as more
desirable than Dutch participants did (M = 3.17, SD = .48).
The multivariate main effect of sex of target was also significant, F(3, 249) =
201.58, p < .001. As expected, participants rated feminine honor attributes as more
desirable for women (M = 3.22, SD = .51) than for men (M = 2.83, SD = .49), F(1,
251) = 215.71, p < .001. Also as expected, participants rated masculine honor
attributes as more desirable for men (M = 3.68, SD = .57) than for women (M = 2.97,
SD = .57), F(1, 251) = 494.33, p < .001. Interestingly, gender-neutral honor attributes
were rated as more desirable for women (M = 3.61, SD = .50) than for men (M = 3.45,
SD = .45), F(1, 251) = 81.09, p < .001.
These main effects were qualified by a significant interaction between cultural
group and sex of target, F(3, 249) = 7.38, p < .001. The means and standard
deviation for this interaction are presented in Table I. The univariate interaction
was significant for gender-neutral honor attributes, F(1, 251) = 15.20, p < .001,
and for feminine honor attributes, F(1, 251) = 5.19, p < .03. Analyses of simple
main effects revealed that both Spanish and Dutch participants rated the genderneutral honor attributes as more desirable for women than for men, all p < .05 (see
Table I). Interestingly, analyses of simple main effects also revealed that the Dutch
participants rated feminine honor attributes as more desirable for men than the
Spanish participants did, p < .02 (see Table I)2.
Attitudes towards Sex-Roles
Items that expressed non-traditional attitudes were reverse-scored, such that higher
scores always reflected a more traditional attitude towards sex-roles. Cronbach alphas
were computed to assess the reliability of the ASRS scale. The alphas for the Spanish
67
06. RODRIGUEZ MOSQUERA
68
30/11/10
14:48
Página 68
Revista de Psicología Social, 2011, 26 (1), pp. 63-72
TABLE I
Means and Standard Deviations for the Interaction between Cultural Group and Sex of Target
Honor Attributes
Downloaded by [University of Crete] at 02:50 06 April 2016
Gender-neutral
Female targets
Male targets
Feminine Honor
Female targets
Male targets
Masculine Honor
Female targets
Male targets
Spanish
________________
M
SD
Dutch
________________
M
SD
3.75
3.52
.45
.43
3.49
3.39
.51
.45
3.21
2.75
.52
.46
3.23
2.89
.50
.50
3.17
3.84
.53
.56
2.80
3.55
.55
.54
and Dutch samples were .92 and .91, respectively. A total score was computed for each
participant. This total score was entered in an analysis of variance as a dependent
variable, with cultural group and participant’s sex as independent factors. The main
effect of participant’s sex was significant, F(1, 253) = 40.70, p < .001. Consistent with
predictions, male participants (M = 1.94, SD = .53) expressed more traditional
attitudes towards sex-roles than female participants did (M = 1.58, SD = .35). The
main effect of cultural group and the interaction between cultural group and
participant’s sex were not significant.
We also examined culture and sex differences for each domain of the ASRS: work
and public behavior, sexuality and marriage, and the family. Reliabilities for each ASRS
domain, and separately for each sample, were computed. The alphas were all greater
than .70, and were typically greater than .80. Next, average scores on the items of each
domain were entered as dependent variables in an analysis of variance, with cultural
group and participant’s sex as independent factors.
The multivariate main effect of cultural group was significant, F(3, 248) = 8.11, p
< .001. However, the univariate effect was only significant for the sexuality and
marriage domain, F(1, 250) = 4.94, p < .03. Table II presents the means and standard
deviations of scores for each sex-role domain as a function of cultural group. Spanish
participants expressed more traditional attitudes towards sex-roles in relation to sexual
behavior and marriage than Dutch participants did (see Table II).
TABLE II
Means and Standard Deviations for Attitudes towards Sex-Roles in Three Domains by Cultural Group
Sex-role Domains
Spanish
________________
M
SD
Dutch
________________
M
SD
Work and public behavior
Sexuality and marriage
The family
1.83
1.83
1.49
1.91
1.67
1.56
.52
.63
.56
.48
.49
.53
The multivariate main effect of participant’s sex was also significant, F(3, 248)
= 22.70, p < .001. The univariate effect was significant for work and public
behavior, F(1, 250) = 42.19, p < .001; sexuality and marriage, F(1, 250) = 10.49,
p = .001; and the family, F(1, 250) = 52.13, p < .001. Table III presents the means
and standard deviations of scores for each sex-role domain as a function of
participant’s sex. Males held more traditional attitudes than did females with
06. RODRIGUEZ MOSQUERA
30/11/10
14:48
Página 69
Masculine and femenine honor codes / P. M. Rodriguez Mosquera
TABLE III
Means and Standard Deviations for Attitudes towards Sex-Roles in Three Domains by Participant’s Sex
Sex-role Domains
Female
________________
M
SD
Male
________________
M
SD
Work and public behavior
Sexuality and marriage
The family
1.69
1.63
1.30
2.06
1.86
1.76
.38
.50
.34
.53
.61
.62
Downloaded by [University of Crete] at 02:50 06 April 2016
regards to sex-roles in work contexts and public places, sexual behavior and
marriage, and the family (see Table III).
Predictors of Attitudes Towards Sex-Roles
We examined whether cultural group, participant’s sex, and desirability scores on
honor attributes predicted attitudes towards sex-roles. We derived two sets of honor
attributes scores. One was based on the desirability ratings of feminine honor attributes
for women and the desirability ratings of masculine honor attributes for men. Averaged
ratings of these attributes formed a new variable or score: the gendered-honor attributes
score. Higher scores on this variable indicate that feminine honor attributes are rated as
desirable for women, while masculine honor attributes are rated as desirable for men.
Furthermore, we averaged the desirability ratings of gender-neutral honor attributes for
both women and men targets. Higher scores on this variable indicate greater
desirability of gender-neutral honor attributes. This variable will be referred to as the
gender-neutral honor attributes score.
These two desirability scores were used as predictors, together with cultural group
(1 = Spain, 2 = the Netherlands) and participant’s sex (1 = female participants, 2 =
male participants), in a series of hierarchical regression analyses. We carried out a
regression analysis for each of the following outcomes: the total ASRS score; the average
score on the work and public behavior items of the ASRS; the average score on the
sexuality and marriage items of the ASRS; and the average score on the family items of
the ASRS. Cultural group, participant’s sex, and the gender-neutral honor attributes
score were always entered first in all regression analyses. Next, the gendered-honor
attributes score was entered into the equation. Table IV presents the significant β’s for
all regression analyses.
Sex of participant was the strongest and most important predictor of traditional
sex-role attitudes: Total ASRS scores as well as the scores on all three sex-role
domains were significantly predicted by participant’s sex. Participant’s sex
typically explained between 13% and 18% of the variance in attitudes towards
sex-roles. Being a male was associated with more traditional attitudes towards sexroles (see Table IV).
Cultural group was only a significant predictor for ASRS scores in the sexuality
and marriage domain: Spanish participants held more traditional attitudes towards
the role of women and men in sexual relations and in marriage than Dutch
participants did. Albeit a significant predictor, cultural group only accounted for
2% of the variance in attitudes towards sex-roles in sexuality and marriage (see
Table IV).
Finally, the gendered-honor attributes score emerged as a significant predictor
in all regression analyses. However, this variable only explained between 1% and
2% of the variance in attitudes towards sex roles. The gender-neutral honor
attributes score was not a significant predictor of attitudes towards sex-roles (see
Table IV).
69
06. RODRIGUEZ MOSQUERA
70
30/11/10
14:48
Página 70
Revista de Psicología Social, 2011, 26 (1), pp. 63-72
TABLE IV
Results of Hierarchical Regression Analyses
Downloaded by [University of Crete] at 02:50 06 April 2016
Predictors
Outcomes
CG
SP
Gender-neutral HAS
Gendered HAS
Total ASRS score
Work and public
behavior score
Sexuality and
marriage score
The family score
ns
.37**
ns
.12*
ns
.37**
ns
.08*
-.14*
ns
.18*
.42**
ns
ns
.15*
.11*
Note. Only significant β’s are reported in table (i.e., p < .05). CG = Cultural group (1 = Spain; 2 = the
Netherlands); SP = Sex of participant (1 = female participants; 2 = male participants); Gender-neutral
HAS = Gender-neutral honor attributes score; Gendered HAS = Gendered-honor attributes score.
Cultural group, sex of participant, and the gender-neutral honor attributes score were always entered first
in the regression equation. The gendered-honor attributes score was entered second in the regression
equation. * p < .05; ** p < .001; ns = the β value associated with predictor is not statistically significant.
Discussion
As expected, the Spanish participants rated gender-neutral honor attributes as more
desirable than the Dutch participants did. This means that the Spanish participants
rated attributes related to the maintenance of reputation (e.g., “protecting one’s family
reputation”), moral integrity (e.g., “being honest”), and social interdependence (e.g.,
“being hospitable”) as more desirable in their culture. Moreover, the Spanish
participants rated these attributes as equally desirable for women and men.
Interestingly, the results indicated that masculine and feminine honor are
expressions of pan-cultural ideals of masculinity and femininity. All participants rated
masculine honor attributes as more desirable for men, and feminine honor attributes as
more desirable for women. Thus, both Dutch and Spanish participants rated sexual
restraint, modesty, and obedience as more desirable for women than for men. And, both
Dutch and Spanish participants rated strength, toughness, and authority as more
desirable for men than for women.
These results have important implications for the role given to masculine and
feminine honor as defining features of Mediterranean honor cultures. The personal
attributes and expectations of the masculine and feminine honor codes are not
particular to Mediterranean honor cultures. They were also a part of the Dutch
participants’ gender stereotypes. Thus, the personal attributes and expectations of the
masculine and feminine honor codes were equally endorsed by those who belong to an
honor-oriented culture (the Spanish) than by those who belong to a less honor-oriented,
individualistic culture (the Dutch). These findings are in line with Gilmore’s (1990)
and Williams & Best’s (1982) cross-cultural research on masculinity and femininity.
In relation to attitudes towards sex-roles, sex was the most important predictor of
participants’ attitudes towards the roles of women and men in different domains. As
expected, men endorsed more traditional attitudes towards sex roles in all domains of
the ASRS: work and public behavior, sexuality and marriage, and the family. Thus, the
Spanish and the Dutch male participants were more likely than their female
counterparts to endorse the following beliefs: home-related tasks are more appropriate
for women than for men; the role of bread-winner is more appropriate for men than for
women; men are better able to fulfill higher social positions than women are; men
ought to be more assertive than women; men ought to have a more active role in sexual
relations; and men should have more authority over the family.
Taken together, we believe the results of the present study make a useful contribution
to our understanding of the nature of masculine and feminine honor. Although the study
06. RODRIGUEZ MOSQUERA
30/11/10
14:48
Página 71
Masculine and femenine honor codes / P. M. Rodriguez Mosquera
was only carried out among university students, the results support the idea that
masculine and feminine honor are expressions of pan-cultural ideals of masculinity and
femininity. It is likely that these ideals are maintained or protected differently across
cultures. It is the task of future research to examine how these pan-cultural ideals of
masculinity and femininity are performed and practiced differently across cultures.
Notes
1
Downloaded by [University of Crete] at 02:50 06 April 2016
The AWS-S was translated into Dutch by Willemsen (1992) and slightly adapted: two items that did not apply to Dutch
culture were eliminated.
2
The multivariate interaction between participant’s sex and sex of target was also significant, F(3, 249) = 3.59, p < .02. The
univariate interaction was only significant for masculine honor attributes, F(1, 251) = 9.56, p < .01. Analyses of simple
main effects revealed that both female and male participants rated masculine honor attributes as more desirable for men
than for women, all p’s < .05.
References
ABU-LUGHOD, L. (1999). Veiled sentiments. Honor and poetry in a Bedouin society. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
ADAMOPOULOS, J. (1977). The dimensions of the Greek concept of philotimo. The Journal of Social Psychology, 102, 313-314.
BRANDES, S. (1980). Metaphors of masculinity: Sex and status in Andalusian folklore. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania
Press.
GILMORE, D. D. (1987). Honor and shame and the unity of the Mediterranean. Washington, DC: American Anthropological
Association.
GILMORE, D. D. (1990). Manhood in the making. Cultural concepts of masculinity. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
GILMORE, D. D., & GWYNNE G. (Eds.) (1985). Sex and gender in Southern Europe [Special Issue]. Anthropology, 9.
JAKUBOWSKA, L. (1989). A matter of honor. The world and I, April, 670-677.
MURPHY, M. (1983). Emotional confrontations between Sevillano fathers and sons. American Ethnologist, 10, 650-664.
NELSON, M. C. (1988). Reliability, validity, and cross-cultural comparisons for the simplified attitudes toward women scale.
Sex Roles, 18, 289-296.
NISBETT, R. E., & COHEN, D. (1996). Culture of honor: The psychology of violence in the South. Boulder, CO: Westview.
PARRY, G. (1983). A British version of the Attitudes toward Women Scale (AWS-B). British Journal of Social Psychology, 22,
261-263.
PERISTIANY, J. G. (Ed.). (1965). Honour and shame: The values of Mediterranean society. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.
PITT-RIVERS, J. (1977). The fate of Shechem or the politics of sex: Essays in the anthropology of the Mediterranean. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
RODRIGUEZ MOSQUERA, P. M., MANSTEAD, A. S. R., & FISCHER, A. H. (2000). The role of honor-related values in the
elicitation, experience and communication of pride, shame and anger: Spain and the Netherlands compared. Personality
and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 833-844.
RODRIGUEZ MOSQUERA, P. M., MANSTEAD, A. S. R., & FISCHER, A. H. (2002a). The role of honor concerns in emotional
reactions to offenses. Cognition and Emotion, 16, 143-163.
RODRIGUEZ MOSQUERA, P. M., MANSTEAD, A. S. R., & FISCHER, A. H. (2002b). Honor in the Mediterranean and Northern
Europe. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 33, 16-36.
RODRIGUEZ MOSQUERA, P. M., FISCHER, A. H., MANSTEAD, A. S. R., & ZAALBERG, R. (2008). Attack, disapproval, or
withdrawal? The role of honor in anger and shame responses to being insulted. Cognition and Emotion, 22, 1471-1498.
SCHNEIDER, J. (1971). Of vigilance and virgins. Ethnology, 9, 1-24.
SPENCE, J. T., & HELMREICH, R. (1972). The Attitudes toward Women Scale: An objective instrument to measure attitudes
towards the rights and roles of women in contemporary society. Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 2, 1-52.
STEWART, F. H. (1994). Honor. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.
VASSILIOU, V. G., & VASSILIOU, G. (1973). The implicative meaning of the Greek concept of philotimo. Journal of CrossCultural Psychology, 4, 326-341.
WIKAN, U. (1982). Behind the veil in Arabia. Women in Oman. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
WIKAN, U. (1984). Shame and honour: A contestable pair. Man, 19, 635-652.
WILLEMSEN, T. (1992). Sekse als cognitieve categorie. In T. Top & J. Heesink (Eds.), Psychologie en sekse (pp. 60-79). Houten:
Bohn Stafleu Van Loghum.
WILLIAMS, J. E., & BEST, D. L. (1982). Measuring sex stereotypes: a thirty-nation study. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
Appendix A
Honor Attributes Scale
Gender-neutral Attributes
“Accepting social norms,” “honesty,” “hospitality,” “marrying somebody with a good
reputation,” “one’s family having a good reputation,” “one’s own good reputation,”
“protecting one’s family’s reputation,” “being respected by others,” “satisfying one’s
parents’ expectations.”
71
06. RODRIGUEZ MOSQUERA
72
30/11/10
14:48
Página 72
Revista de Psicología Social, 2011, 26 (1), pp. 63-72
Feminine Honor Attributes
“Controlling sexual desires,” “discretion,” “modesty,” “respecting the head of the
family,” “virginity before marriage,” “discreet clothing,” “loyalty to one’s partner,”
“shyness.”
Masculine Honor Attributes
“Authority over one’s family,” “physical strength,” “having pride,” “sexual adventures,”
“high socio-economic status,” “precedence,” “protecting one’s family’s well-being and
property.”
Appendix B
Downloaded by [University of Crete] at 02:50 06 April 2016
Attitudes-towards-sex-role scale (ASRS)
1. It sounds worse when a woman swears than when a man does.
2. There should be more women leaders in important jobs, such as in politics.
3. It is worse when a woman tells dirty jokes than when a man does.
4. If a woman goes out to work her husband should help with the housework, such as
washing dishes, cleaning, and cooking.
5. Women and men should have equal opportunities in getting a job, or a promotion.
6. A woman should be free as a man to propose marriage.
7. Men who have most of the responsibility for taking care of the children in a family
are “softies.”
8. A drunken woman is worse than a drunken man.
9. Women should worry less about having equal rights as men and more about
becoming good wives and mothers.
10. A woman who earns as much as her date should pay for herself.
11. Marriage is for a woman much more important than for a man.
12. Important jobs in business and industry should be filled by men.
13. Women should be able to go everywhere men do, or do the same things men do,
such as going into bars alone.
14. Sons in a family should be more encouraged to go to college than daughters.
15. It is ridiculous for a woman to drive a train.
16. It is insulting for a man when a woman pays for him.
17. In general, the father should have more authority than the mother in bringing up
children.
18. The task of a woman is to stay at home and care for the family rather than pursuing
a career of her own.
19. Women are not better off when being treated like a “lady” in the old-fashioned way.
20. It is ridiculous for a man to be a nursery school teacher.
21. Men should take the initiative in sexuality.
22. Women have less to offer than men in the world of commerce and industry.
23. It is worse if a woman begins an extramarital affair than when a man does.
24. Men should be the breadwinners of the family.
25. Women should retain virginity till marriage.
26. Women should have equal opportunities as men to do apprenticeships and learn a
trade.
27. Girls nowadays should have the same freedom as boys, such as being allowed to stay
out late.
28. Men should not behave emotionally in public.
29. A divorced woman is more a failure than a divorced man.
30. Men should have equal opportunities as women to take care of their children and
develop an emotional bond with them.