Ambivalent sexism and attitudes toward women who engage in premarital sex in Turkey.

This study examined the relationship of ambivalent sexism, political conservatism, demographic variables (age, education, and gender), and prior sexual experience to Turkish men's and women's attitudes toward women who engage in premarital sex. Participants included 124 Turkish undergraduate students and 60 nonstudent Turkish adults. Benevolent but not hostile sexism uniquely predicted more negative views of women who engage in premarital sex once other variables were controlled Regression analyses demonstrated that for both men and women, older, mole politically conservative and less sexually experienced respondents and more educated men (but not women) respondents were more likely to disapprove of women who engage in premarital sex. Similarly, regression analysis revealed that men who were older, politically conservative, and less sexually experienced expressed stronger preferences for marrying a virgin. Both hostile and benevolent sexism predicted men's preference for marrying a virgin after all other Variables were controlled.

Premarital sex may be viewed as acceptable (or even beencouraged) for men but can he stigmatizing for women. Although such traditional attitudes are currently less pronounced in Western nations (where attitudes about premarital sex are generally permissive: Iwawaki & Eysenck, 1978), traditional gender attitudes remain strong in many Asian and Middle Eastern societies, such as Turkey (Kocturk, 1992; Parla, 2001, India (Kanekar & Kolsawalla, 1983), Iran (Shapurian & Hojat, 1985), Morocco (Mernissi, 1982), Indonesia and Taiwan (Buss, 1989, as cited in Widmer, Treas, & Newcomb, 199g), and China (Higgins, Zheng, Liu, & Sun, 2002). The current study explored attitudes toward women who engage in premarital sex in Turkey, a relatively tradi0omd society in which women may still be significantly disrespected and penalized for having sex before marriage.

In gender traditional nations, the consequences of negative attitudes about women who have premarital sex are far from trivial. Women who are known to have engaged in premarital sex are not only disrespected (Kanekar & Kolsawalla, 1983) but may face myriad forms of discrimination, including serious social and family problems (Bekker et al., 1996), involuntary virginity examinations (Parla, 2001), surgical reconstruction of the hymen (Bekker et al., 1996), and physical abuse for failing to "'protect" their virginity (Ayotte. 2000). Additionally, women who have sex before marriage are viewed as less desirable marriage partners (Yeni yiizyd, 1998, as cited in Sakalli, Karakurt, & Ugurlu, 2001) and may be seen as having stained their own honor and the honor of their families (Kogttirk, 1992; Parla, 2001 ; Sever & Yurdakuh 2001).

More specifically, in Turkey, premarital female virginity is still considered an important indicator of a woman's purity and innocence (Kocturk. 1992; Parla. 2001), and although sexuality before marriage is acceptable for men, it is strongly discouraged for women (Kayir, [995). Although recent studies suggest increasing tolerance among Turkish respondents for women having sex before marriage (Erkmen. Dilbaz, Seber. Kaptanoglu. & Tekin. 1990: Sakalh et al., 2001: Ulu & Ugurlu, 1999). gender-traditional attitudes linger, especially in the form of benevolent sexism (Glick & Fiske, 1996). a subtle (though traditional) form of sexism that is strongly endorsed in Turkey (Glick et al., 2000). Theoretically, there is reason to believe that benevolent rather than hostile sexism may be of special importance to understanding the disapproval of and discrimination against women who engage in premarital sex.

Ambivalent sexism theory (Glick & Fiske, 1996, 2001) posits that traditional attitudes toward women have a benevolent as well as a hostile component, which work in concert to reinforce men's power and women's subordination. Benevolent sexism (BS) is a set of beliefs that, though subjectively favorable, reinforce the notion that women are the "'weaker sex" and therefore require men's protection, affection, and provision. BS idealizes women and suggests that they ought to be placed on a pedestal, but only if they conform to the traditional roles men assign them and do not challenge men's authority (Glick, Diebold. Bailey Werner, & Zhu, 1997). Thus, BS is a form of paternalism (Jackman, 19941 that seeks to control women by offering them a deal: conform to a traditional, subordinate role in order to be provided for and protected.

Women who fail to comply but instead challenge men's power--by questioning traditional beliefs (e.g., by expressing feminist attitudes), seeking a prestigious or powerful role (e.g., pursuing a high status job), or using men's sexual attraction to them to gain influence over men (e.g., by being a "temptress")--are subjected instead to hostile sexism (HS). HS is a subjectively negative attitude toward women that casts them as seeking to gain control over men. Despite the opposing emotional valences of BS and HS, cross-cultural work involving 19 diverse nations (including North and South America, Europe, Africa, and the Middle and Far East) has shown the two forms of sex ism to be positively correlated to each other and, across nations, to national indices of gender inequality, suggesting that they are complementary belief systems that legitimize gender hierarchy (Glick et al., 2000). BS acts as the carrot (rewarding women for embracing a conventional female, subordinate role), whereas HS is the stick (punishing women who reject traditional roles).

Theoretically. BS and HS encompass attitudes in three domains: paternalism, gender differentiation (gender roles and stereotypes), and heterosexual relations. Thus, the theory recognizes that sexuality plays an important role when it comes to the maintenance of power relations between the sexes. For instance, BS items emphasize the need for women to be pure and more moral than men and to have a committed relationship to a man. In contrast, some HS items express fears that women may gain power over men within romantic relationships and evince hostility toward women who are perceived as using sexual attraction to gain power over men. In short, both BS and HS are con cerned with the exercise of control over women's sexuality: BS does so by idealizing land therefore rewarding) women who remain "'pure" while HS demonizes women whose sexuality is uncontrolled and therefore dangerous.

A growing body of research supports these contentions. HS has been found to he positively correlated with men's expressed willingness to commit rape (Abrams, Viki, Masser, & Bohner, 2003) and to beat their wives (Glick, Sakalh-Ugurlu, Ferreira, & Aguira de Souza, 2002). More intriguing are findings suggesting that BS's promise of protectiveness toward women is contingent on women's fidelity and sexual purity. Endorsement of BS is positively related to the tendency to blame the victim (and not the perpetrator) of a date rope if she initiated the beginnings of sexual contact (Abrams et al., 2003) or had been engaged in an extramarital affair (Viki & Abrams, 2002). Similarly, BS does not diminish men's approval of physical abuse for wives who are deemed to have done something to deserve this treatment, such us by engaging in an extramarital affair (Glick et al., 2002).

Thus, ambivalent sexism theory and the recent results that support it suggest that HS and BS may be related to negative attitudes toward women who engage in premarital sex. Such women are likely to be viewed by benevolent sexists as violating prescriptions concerning women's purity and by hostile sexists as potentially using their sexuality to exercise control over men. BS may be particularly important in this regard because it assesses a concern that women ought to be "pure." Thus, BS may be a more powerful predictor of men's disapproval of women who have premarital sex as well as their unwillingness to marry a nonvirgin.

Although we are particularly interested in men's attitudes, women who embrace sexist ideologies may likewise exhibit negative attitudes toward women who engage in premarital sex. In general, women (compared to men) are likely to reject HS; however, because of its subjectively positive tone and promise of chivalrous protection and provision, women (especially in relatively gender traditional nations) often accept BS as much or more so than men (Glick et al., 2000). To the extent that women accept BS and the idealized image of women it promotes, they are likely also to express disapproval of women who fail to live up to BS's high standards. For example, Abrams el al. (2003) found that BS predicted blaming the victim of an acquaintance rape just as strongly for female perceivers as it did for men.

Jackman (1994) suggests that paternalistic ideals (such as BS) become prescriptions that are enforced not only by dominants, but by members of the subordinate group who attempt to live up to those ideals, which beet)me an integral and positively valued aspect of subordinates' self-image. Thus, although we expect women generally to be more egalitarian than men and, therefore, to express less disapproval of women who have sex before marriage, we also expect that BS will correlate with women's (as well as men's) disapproval of women who have premarital sex. In contrast, women are unlikely to feel threatened by the hostile sexist notion that women use sexuality to gain control over men since this strategy is specifically directed at the other sex and does not define a positive ideal that women are expected to live up to or that can enhance their self-esteem. Therefore, it is less likely that women's HS scores will predict disapproval of women who engage in premarital sex.

In addition to ambivalent sexism and gender. Turkish citizens' attitudes about women engaging in premarital sex may be related to education, age, political orientation, and an individual's own sexual behavior. Education and past sexual experience are typically predictive of more permissive sexual attitudes, whereas age is typically predictive of less permissive sexual attitudes (Le Gall, Mullet, & Shafighi, 2002; Sakalh et al., 2001). We included these variables in the present study both to determine their individual effects and to control for them to determine whether sexism/HS and BS) adds unique variance to the prediction of attitudes toward women's premarital sexual behavior.

Method

Participants

Participants included 124 Turkish undergraduates and 60 nonstudent Turkish adults. We recruited the student sample on the campus of the Middle Eastern Technical University (METU) in Ankara. Several student research assistants also recruited nonstudent adults (e.g., relatives, coworkers). Of the 184 participants, 92 were female and 92 were male. The mean age for undergraduate students was 21.04 years (SD - 1.53, range = 18-25) and for nonstudents was 29.80 years (SD - 8.83, range = 19-58). Of the nonstudent participants. 42 had graduated from 4-year colleges. 6 had graduated from 2-year colleges, and 12 had only elementary or high school degrees. Most of the respondents (57.3%) were from large metropolitan cities (Istanbul, Ankara, and Izmir); 42.7% were from smaller cities in Turkey. Most participants (82.70%) reported being middle to upper class. Participation was voluntary.

Procedure

We asked participants to complete a survey on attitudes about premarital sex. Participants indicated their gender, age, and whether they had ever had sexual intercourse. along with their political orientation oil a one-item measure using a 7 point scale that varied from radical right to radical left. Additionally, participants completed measures of attitudes toward women who engage in premarital sex (see below) and the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory (ASI; Glick & Fiske, 1996).

Attitudes toward women who have premarital sex. Participants' disapproval of women who engage in premarital sex was assessed by the following items: "I get angry at girls who have sexual relationships before marriage"; "I think that a girl who has sexual relationships before marriage is morally weak"; "Girls should keep their virginity for the person they will marry"; In my opinion, it is normal for a girl to have sex before marriage" (reverse item); "I don't want my sister to have sexual relations before marriage"; "I don't think that a girl who has sexual relations before marriage has 'honor'"; "A nonvirgin girl is not a girl to marry"; "'Girls should experience their first sexual intercourse with their husbands"; "'Girls should not have any sexual relations before marriage"; and "I think that girls should not have a sexual life before marriage." Participants were asked to indicate their agreement or disagreement with each item using a 1 (disagree strongly) to 6 (agree strongly) scale, so that higher scores indicated greater disapproval of women who have premarital sex. A principal components factor analysis with varimax rotation yielded one factor with an eigenvalue greater than 1 (7.81), which accounted for 78.09% of the variance and yielded high factor loadings (from .82 to .95) for all items. Therefore, we averaged all scale items to form a highly reliable measure of disapproval for premarital sex among women (Cronbach's [Alpha] = .97).

Men's willingness to marry a nonvirgin. Men's willingness to marry a nonvirgin woman was measured by the following items: "'I prefer to marry a virgin girl"; "I want to gel married to a girl who has had no prior sexual relationships"; "I might date a nonvirgin, but I wouldn't marry one"; "Because the girl whom I will marry will be the mother of my children, she should be a virgin"; and "It is harder for me to break up with a girl who had her first sexual intercourse with me than a girl who had had sex before with others." Only male participants were asked to indicate their agreement or disagreement on a 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree) scale with higher scores indicating the preference to marry a virgin. A principal components factor analysis with varimax rolation yielded only one factor with an eigenvalue greater than 1.0 (3.60). This factor accounted for 72.01% of the variance and individual items loaded highly (.73 to .92) on it. Therefore, we averaged the items to form a highly reliable scale (Cronbach's [Alpha] = .90) in which higher scores indicated less willingness to marry a woman who has had premarital sex.

Ambivalent Sexism lnventory (ASI). The ASI (Glick & Fiske, 1996) has previously been validated in 19 nations. including Turkey (Glick el al., 2000). More recently, a study involving I,(123 Turkish participants (Sakalli-Ugurlu, 2001) confirmed that the Turkish version of ASI has high reliability and good validity. The ASI consists of two scales. HS and BS. HS items measure sexist hostility (e.g., "Women seek to gain power by getting control over men"; "Feminists are making entirely unreasonable demands of men"), whereas BS items assess a subjectively positive but patronizing attitude toward women (e.g., "A good woman should be set on a pedestal"; "Women have a more refined sense of culture, and taste"; "Men are incomplete without women.") Participants rated each item on a 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree) scale, so Ihat higher scores indicated sexist attitudes. Consistent with past research in Turkey, the HS (Cronbach's [Alpha] = .86) and BS (Cronbach's [Alpha] = .77) scales were reliable.

RESULTS

Descriptive Statistics for Attitudinal and Behavioral Measures

Participants' political views (indicated on a 7-point scale) were generally liberal (61.4% scored from 1 to 3) or centrist (25.5% scored at the midpoint of the scale) rather than conservative (12. 1% scored from 5 to 7); this result is not surprising because METU is considered to be a politically liberal university. There were no sex difffences in participants' political attitudes, t(181) = -.42, ns. Male respondents (76.09%) were significantly more likely than female respondents (47.74%) to report having had sexual intercourse [chi.sup.2](1) = 17.65. p < .001. A 2 (Participant Sex) X 2 (ASI Scale: HS, BS) repeated measures analysis of variance revealed a significant interaction for ASI scale scores, F(1, 177) - 54.07. p < .(001. Specifically, men (M = 3.88) scored higher on HS than women (M = 3.20). t(178) = 5.00, p < .001: in contrast, women (M = 3.76) scored higher on BS than men (M = 3.29). t(181) = 3.59, p <.001. The finding that women relative to men reject HS but endorse BS more strongly is consistent with past results in gender-traditional countries (Glick et al,. 2000). As expected, men (M = 2.80) expressed more disapproving attitudes toward women who have premarital sex than did women (M = 2.07), t (182) - 3.35. p < .01. For the scale that assessed men's willingness to marry a nonvirgin, the average score was 3.10 (close the midpoint of the scale).

Predicting Attitudes Toward Women Who Engage in Premarital Sex

The predictor variables (demographics, political views, sexual experience, ASI scale) were for the most part not significantly correlated with each other, with some important exceptions. As in past research (Glick et al., 2000), HS and BS were positively correlated (r = .32, p < .001 for men; r = .35, p < .001 for women). For women, whether the respondent had had sexual intercourse was positively correlated with age (r = .40, p < .01) and economic status (r = .22, p < .05) and negatively correlated with political conservatism (r = -.22, p < .05). In contrast, for men, sexual experience was significantly correlated only to age (r = .23, p < .05). Political conservatism was significantly related to HS among men (r = .33, p < .01) and to BS among women (r = .43, p < .01)

Did BS and HS predict more negative attitudes toward women who engage in premarital sex? Zero-order correlations for the relationship of BS to negative attitudes toward women who have premarital sex were significant for both women (r = .38, p < .01) and men (r = .29, p < .01), whereas HS predicted negative attitudes among men significantly (r = .31, p < .01) but only marginally significantly among women (r = .18, p < .10). Partial correlations, for which the positive relationship of the BS and HS scales was controlled, revealed similar results: for men. BS (partial r = .21, p < .05) and HS (partial r = .22, p < .05) were still significantly correlated with negative attitudes toward women who have premarital sex; for women, BS (partial r = .38, p < .01) but not HS (partial r = .05, ns) was significantly correlated with negative attitudes toward women who have premarital sex.

Multiple regression provided a more rigorous test of the relative contributions of HS and BS to attitudes toward women who have premarital sex, controlling not only for the relationship of HS and BS to each other but also for the potential confounding factors measured in this study (demographics, political views, sexual experience). We performed hierarchical regression analyses (with attitudes toward women who have premarital sex as the dependent variable) in which all predictor variables other than HS and BS (age, education, economic status, previous sexual experience, and general political views) were entered on the first step. HS and BS were then entered on the second step to see whether, once all other variables were controlled, they made unique contributions to predicting attitudes toward women who have premarital sex. We performed the regression analyses separately for male and female respondents, and the results are reported in Tables 1 and 2, respectively.

Results for the first block revealed that older, more politically conservative, and less sexually experienced respondents (for male and female respondents) and more educated male (but not female) respondents were more likely to disapprove of women who engage in premarital sex. All of these effects remained significant in the second block when HS and BS were added to the equation, with the exception of women's political conservatism, which was reduced to marginal significance.

Did HS or BS account for unique variance once all other variables were controlled? For both men and women, HS did not uniquely predict attitudes toward women who have premarital sex, but BS did add unique variance to the prediction of more negative attitudes toward this behavior, with a significant effect tot men and a marginally significant effect for women. Subsequent analyses showed that it was controlling for general political attitudes that, for male respondents, reduced the correlation of HS and attitudes toward women who have premarital sex to nonsignificance (a similar regression analysis that excluded political attitudes yielded a b of .24, p < .05, for HS in block 2) and, for female respondents, reduced the correlation of BS and attitudes toward women who have premarital sex to marginal significance (a similar regression analysis that excluded political attitudes yielded a b of .26, p < .01, for BS in block 2).

Men's Willingness to Marry a Nonvirgin

Did BS and HS predict men being less willing to marry women who engage in premarital sex? Zero-order correlations for the relationship of HS (r = .35, p < .001) and BS (r - .36. p < .001) to unwillingness to marry women who have premarital sex were both highly significant. Partial correlations, for which the positive relationship of the BS and HS scales was controlled, revealed similar results: for HS, partial r = .25 (p < .05), and for BS, partial r = .28 (p < .01).

We computed a hierarchical multiple regression analysis similar to those reported above with men's unwillingness to marry a woman who engaged in premarital sex as the dependent variable. All predictor variables other than HS and BS (age, education, economic status, previous sexual experience, and general political views) were entered on the first step, with HS and BS entered on the second step. The regression results are reported in Table 3. Results for the first block revealed that older, more politically conservative, and less sexually experienced men reported less willingness to marry a nonvirgin woman. All of these effects remained significant in the second block when HS and BS were added to the equation.

Both HS and BS accounted for unique variance once all other variables were controlled. Entering these variables on the second step significantly increased [R.sup.2], and scores on both HS and BS significantly predicted less willingness to many a nonvirgin.

DISCUSSION

Benevolently sexist attitudes, which endorse a traditional female ideal of women as fragile but purer and more moral than men, consistently predicted (among both male and female Turkish respondents) more negative attitudes toward women who have premarital sex. Even when other predictors (HS, demographics, political views, sexual experience) were controlled, BS made a unique contribution to attitudes toward women who have sex before marriage (although the inclusion of political views did reduce this contribution to marginal significance among female respondents). In contrast, although HS showed a first-order correlation with negative attitudes toward women who have premarital sex (significantly for male respondents and marginally significantly for female respondents), it did not hold up as a predictor once other variables were controlled.

These results add to a growing body of evidence that BS, a subjectively favorable view of women, nevertheless can have negative consequences for women if they fail to live up to the high standards it sets for them. The present results dovetail well with findings that BS predicts victim blame for acquaintance rape scenarios in which the female victim invited the man in her apartment and initiated kissing (Abrams et al., 2003) or was engaged in an extramarital affair (Viki & Abrams, 2002). In both the present study and in the research by Abrams et al., women were penalized by benevolent sexists for violating norms of sexual purity.

BS also accounted for unique variance in men's stated unwillingness to marry a nonvirgin woman. This is not surprising given that BS items particularly idealize women as romantic partners in committed relationships, and it is such partners who are likely to be held up to benevolent sexists' standards of appropriate female conduct. Unwillingness to marry a nonvirgin woman was also significantly predicted by men's HS scores, even once all other variables were controlled. Because HS items characterize women as using sexual relationships to gain control over men, the idea of marrying a sexually experienced woman who presumably might be more adept at using sex to gain power in the relationship may be threatening to men who are high in HS. Alternatively, high HS men may think that women who are sexually experienced before marriage are more likely to challenge traditional roles, rather than to be compliant with a husband.

Other variables also predicted men's and women's attitudes toward women who have premarital sex and men's willingness to marry a nonvirgin. In general, women had less negative attitudes than men did toward women who engage in premarital sex, a finding that is consistent with women's generally greater egalitarianism (e.g., Sidanius & Pratto, 1999). Older, more politically conservative and sexually inexperienced male and female respondents had more negative attitudes about women who have premarital sex. Similarly, these variables also predicted less willingness on the part of men to marry a nonvirgin. The findings concerning age and political orientation are also consistent with past research (Le Gall et al., 2002: Sakalli et al., 2001). Men and women who are not sexually experienced may be more disapproving of women who have premarital sex because they have less permissive attitudes about (their own and others') sexual behavior (cf. Simpson & Gangestad, 1991). Note that the effect for sexual experience remained significant even when political conservatism was controlled for, suggesting that the effect of sexual experience is not due to general political attitudes but to attitudes that are more specific to sexual behavior.

There are some limitations of the present study. The participants were mainly METU undergraduate students and from large cities in Turkey. The homogeneity of the sample in terms of education and political views might not represent people from smaller cities or towns with less education. More specifically, METU students are noted for being relatively more liberal and secular than the Turkish population as a whole (and, indeed, the self-report of political attitudes within the sample suggests that the people surveyed were mostly quite liberal). Thus, some of the more extreme negative attitudes that can be directed at women who have premarital sex in Turkey may not have been evident in the current study (in fact, attitudes toward women who have premarital sex were neutral overall). However, despite the restricted population that may have truncated the range of responses on some of the variables measured here, significant correlations emerged that identify sources of relatively more negative attitudes toward women who have premarital sex. Logically, with a more varied sample, the correlations would only be likely to increase (given that truncated ranges reduce correlations).

Past conceptions of sexism have viewed it as a hostility toward women that, among other things, seeks to restrict their sexuality. Sexism, however, has another component, a subjectively favorable set of apparently benevolent attitudes toward women that, in this study, exhibited stronger and more consistent relationships to negative evaluations of women who have premarital sex than did hostile sexist attitudes. Benevolently sexist beliefs may he more insidiously effective at controlling women's sexual behavior than hostile sexism because BS is often viewed (by women and men alike) as benign. Women may therefore embrace the restrictive, idealized norms that BS directs toward members of their sex. The protection BS promises to women, however, disappears and is replaced by antipathy when women fail to live up to benevolently sexist ideals.

Table 1. Hierarchical Regressions: Prediction of Men's Attitudes Toward
Women Who Have Premarital Sex

Predictors           B      beta   Zero-order r   Partial r   t

                                          Block 1

Age                  -.08    .29    .24            .35         3.35**
Education            -.26   -.18   -.17           -.24        -2.27*
Economic status      -.15   -.12   -.28            .15        -1.36
Political views       .61    .53    .55            .58         6.47**
Sexual experience    -.79   -.21   -.21           -.27        -2.52*

Predictors           Block statistics

Age                  R = .68
Education            [R.sup.2] = .47
Economic status      Adjusted [R.sup.2] = .44
Sexual experience    F(5, 81) = 14.32**

Predictors           B      beta   Zero-order r   Partial r   t

                                          Block 2

Age                   .09   -.31    .24            .38         3.68**
Education            -.24   -.17   -.17           -.23        -2.27*
Economic status      -.13   -.10   -.28           -.13        -1.19
Political views       .54   -.47    .55            .53         5.56**
Sexual experience    -.82   -.22   -.21           -.29        -2.67*
Hostile sexism        .16    .10    .29            .13         1.12
Benevolent sexism     .30    .17    .30            .22         2.02*

Predictors           Block statistics

Age                  R = .72
Education            [R.sup.2] = .52
Economic status      Adusted [R.sup.2] = .47
Sexual experience    F(2,79) = 3.69*
Benevolent sexism    change in [R.sup.2] = .05

* p < .05.

** p < .01.

Table 2. Hierarchical Regressions: Prediction of Women's Attitudes
Toward Women Who Have Premarital Sex

Predictors           B      beta   Zero-order r   Partial r   t

                                          Block 1

Age                  -.01    .40    .32            .40         3.91***
Education            -.16   -.10   -.26           -.12        -1.14
Economic status      -.09   -.12   -.13           -.08        -0.74
Political views       .36    .28    .41            .31         2.94***
Sexual experience    -.96   -.29   -.28           -.35        -3.35***

Predictors           Block statistics

Age                  R = .62
Education            [R.sup.2] = .38
Economic status      Adjusted [R.sup.2] = .34
Sexual experience    F(5, 81) = 9.97***

Predictors           B      beta   Zero-order r   Partial r   t

                                          Block 2

Age                   .08   -.41    .32            .41         4.06***
Education            -.14   -.14   -.26           -.11        -0.99
Economic status      -.06   -.05   -.13           -.06        -0.49
Political views       .23   -.18    .41            .19         1.77*
Sexual experience    -.95   -.35   -.28           -.35        -3.38***
Hostile sexism        .16    .10    .20            .11         1.03
Benevolent sexism     .29    .19    .39            .20         1.83*

Predictors           Block statistics

Age                  R = .65
Education            [R.sup.2] = .42
Economic status      Adusted [R.sup.2] = .37
Sexual experience    F(2,79) = 3.13**
Benevolent sexism    change in [R.sup.2] = .045

* p < .10.

*** p < .01.

Table 3. Hierarchical Regressions: Prediction of Men's Preference To
Marry a Virgin

Predictors           B      beta   Zero-order r   Partial r   t

                                          Block 1

Age                  -.08    .29    .25            .33         3.04**
Education            -.18   -.13   -.13           -.16        -1.43
Economic status      -.14   -.11   -.26           -.13        -1.17
Political views       .49    .43    .44            .46         4.63**
Sexual experience    -.90   -.24   -.22           -.27        -2.48*

Predictors           Block statistics

Age                  R = .60
Education            [R.sup.2] = .36
Economic status      Adjusted [R.sup.2] = .32
Sexual experience    F(5, 81) = 8.68**

Predictors           B      beta   Zero-order r   Partial r   t

                                          Block 2

Age                   .09    .32    .25            .39         3.65**
Education            -.14   -.12   -.12           -.14        -1.18
Economic status      -.11   -.09   -.26           -.11        -0.96
Political views       .38    .33    .44            .40         3.68**
Sexual experience    -.98   -.19   -.35           -.23        -2.92**
Hostile sexism        .32    .15    .35            .23         2.07*
Benevolent sexism     .42    .16    .36            .29         2.61*

Predictors           Block statistics

Age                  R = .68
Education            [R.sup.2] = .47
Economic status      Adusted [R.sup.2] = .42
Sexual experience    F(2,79) = 7.95**
Benevolent sexism    change in [R.sup.2] = .11

* p < .05.

** p < .01.

REFERENCES

Abrams, D., Viki, G. T., Masher, B., & Bohner, G. (2003) Perceptions of stranger and acquaintance rape: The role of benevolent and hostile sexism in victim blame and rape proclivity. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 84, 111-125.

Ayotte, B. L. (2000). State central of female virginity in Turkey: The role of Physicians. Journal of Ambulatory Care Manage, 23, 89-91.

Bekker, M. H. J., Rademakers, J., Mouthaan, I., De Neef, M., Huisman, W. M., Van Zandvoort, H., et al. (1996). Reconstructing hymens or constructing sexual inequality? Service provision to Islamic young women coping with the demand to be a virgin. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 6, 329-334.

Erkmen, H., Dilbaz, N., Solar, G., Kaptasnoglu, C., & Tekin, D. (1990). Sexual attitude, of Turkish university students. Journal of Sex Education and Therapy, 16, 251-261.

Glick, P., Diebold, J., Bailey-Werner, B., & Zhu, L. (1997). The two faces of Adam: Ambivalent sexism and polarized attitudes toward women. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 1323-1334.

Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1996) The ambivalent sexism inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 491-512.

Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (2001). Ambivalent sexism in M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 33, pp. 115-188). Thousand Oaks, CA: Academic Press.

Glick, P., Fiske, S. T., Mladinic, A., Saiz, J, Abrams, D., Masser, B., et al. (2000). Beyond prejudice as, simple antipathy: Hostile and benevolent sexism across cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Pshychology, 79, 763-775.

Glick, P., Sakalli-Urgurlu, N., Ferreira, M. C., & Aguira de Sonza, M. (2002). Ambivalent sexism and attitudes toward wife abuse in Turkey and Brazil. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26, 291-296.

Higgins, L. T., Zheng, M., Liu, Y., & Sun. C. H. (2002). Attitudes to marriage and sexual behaviors: A survey of gender and culture differences in China and United Kingdom. Sex Roles, 46, 75-89.

Iwawaki, S., & Eysenck, H. J. (1978). Sexual attitudes among British and Japanese studcnts. The Journal of Psychology, 98, 289-298.

Jackman, M. R. (1994). The velvet glove: Paternalism and conflict in gender, class, and race relations. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Kanekar, S., & Kolsawalla, M. B. (1983). Sex and respectability: The double standard, Indian style. Personality Study & Group Behavior, 3, 12-15.

Kayir, A. (1995). Women and their sexual problems in Turkey. In S. Tekeli (Ed.), Women in modern Turkish society (pp. 288-305). London: Zed Books Ltd.

Kocturk, T. (1992). A matter of honor: Experience of Turkish women immigrants London: Atlantic Highlands.

Le Gall, A., Mullet, E., & Shafighi, S. R. (2002). Age, religious beliefs, and sexual attitudes. The Journal of Sex Research, 39. 207-216.

Mernissi, F. (1982). Virginity and patriarchy. Women's Studies International Forum, 5, 183-191.

Parla, A. (2001). The 'honor' of the state: Virginity examinations in Turkey. Feminist Studies, 27, 65-88.

Sakalli, N., Karakurt, G., & Ugurlu, O. (2001). Evlilik oncesi yasanan cinsel iliskiye ve kadinlarin evlilik oncesi cinsel iliskide bulunmsina karsi tutumlar [Attitudes toward sexual relationship and females' sexual relationship before marriage]. Tecrubi Psikoloji Calismalari, 22, 15-29.

Sakalli-Ugurlu, N. (2001). Celisik duygulu cinsiyetcilik olcegi: Gecerlik ve guvenirlik cahsmasi [Ambivalent sexism inventory: A study of reliability and validity]. Turk Psikoloji Dergisi, 17, 47-58.

Sever, A., & Yurdakul, G. (2001). Culture of honor, culture of change: A feminist analysis of honor killings in rural Turkey. Violence Against Women, 7, 964-999.

Shapurian, R., & Hojat. M. (1985). Sexual and premarital attitudes of Iranian college students. Psychological Reports, 57, 67-74.

Sidanius, J., & Pratto, E. (1999). Social dominance: An intergroup theory of social hierarchy and oppression. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

Simpson, J. A., & Gangestad, S. W. (1991). Individual differences in socio-sexuality: Evidence for convergent and discriminant validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 870-883.

Ulu, S., & Ugurlu, O. (1999). ODTU ogrencilerinin ilk cinsel iliskileri: Betimsel bir calisma [First sexual relationships of METU students: A descriptive study]. Katarsis, 1, 8-9.

Viki, G. T., & Abrams, D. (2002). But she was unfaithful: Benevolent sexism and reactions to rape victims who violate traditional gender role expectations. Sex Roles, 47, 289-293.

Widmer, E. D., Treaas, J., & Newcomb, R. (1998). Attitudes toward nonmarital sex in 24 countries. The Journal of Sex Research, 35, 349-358.

Manuscript accepted June 2, 2003

Nuray Sakalli-Ugurlu Middle East Technical University

Peter Glick Lawrence University