Full text of DOI:10.1111/1471-6402.t01-2-00073

Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26 (2002), 341–350. Blackwell Publishing. Printed in the USA.
ꢀC
Copyright 2002 Division 35, American Psychological Association. 0361-6843/02
AMBIVALENT SEXISM AND THE DUMB BLONDE: MEN’S
AND WOMEN’S REACTIONS TO SEXIST JOKES
Dara Greenwood and Linda M. Isbell
University of Massachusetts at Amherst
This article examines the relationship between gender, hostile sexism, benevolent sexism and reactions to a seemingly
innocuous genre of sexist humor, the dumb blonde joke. After hearing an audiotaped conversation in which two students
swapped dumb blonde jokes, participants high in hostile sexism rated the jokes as more amusing and less offensive than
those low in hostile sexism. Among individuals low in hostile sexism, however, benevolent sexism interacted with gender.
Specifically, men high in benevolent sexism found the jokes significantly more amusing and less offensive than either
women in the same group or men low in both hostile and benevolent sexism. This study replicates and extends previous
research examining the relationship between hostile sexism and the enjoyment of sexist humor, and underscores the
possibility that benevolent sexism may represent qualitatively distinct attitudes for men and women.
The fifties blonde was sold as a sex kitten, but Marilyn Mon-
roe’s perfected dumb act is more childlike than animal. The
Patron Saint of peroxide is the one who set up a new stereo-
type for blondes, a combination of innocence and knowing
sensuality, the pale golden hair of a child . . . in glaring con-
trast to the voluptuous curves of a grown woman, the lisping
baby voice in opposition to the seductive behaviour.
Internet? What are the social psychological underpinnings
of this kind of sexist humor? Who enjoys it and why? The
Ambivalent Sexism Inventory (ASI; Glick & Fiske, 1996)
may provide a few clues.
Ambivalent Sexism
The ASI was designed to tap two seemingly opposing atti-
tudestowardwomenthatarebothprejudicialinnature. The
first, hostile sexism, refers to subjectively negative views to-
ward women (e.g., “women seek to gain power by getting
control over men,” and “women are too easily offended”).
The second, benevolent sexism, refers to subjectively pos-
itive attitudes toward women that are predicated upon pa-
triarchal condescension (e.g., “many women have a quality
of purity that few men possess,” and “a good woman should
be set on a pedestal by her man”). Depending on their score
on each subscale, individuals can be classified into one of
four categories. Those scoring low on both scales, accord-
ing to Glick and Fiske (1996), are nonsexists. Those scoring
high in hostile but low in benevolence are hostile sexists,
while those scoring low in hostile but high in benevolence
are benevolent sexists. Finally, individuals scoring high on
both subscales are ambivalent sexists.
— Kathy Phillips, The Vogue Book of Blondes (2000)
And so, the dumb blonde was born. And with it, a highly
popularized new sexist joke genre featuring a woman who
was easy on the eyes, easy to get into bed, and above all,
easy to ridicule. Lest there be a question about the en-
during value of this icon, we need only turn our atten-
tion to Phoebe, the ditzy blonde on the popular television
show “Friends,” or the summer 2001 blockbuster, Legally
Blonde, starring Reese Witherspoon. Clearly there is some-
thing socially compelling, if disturbing, about this carica-
tured woman that renders her a timeless lead on the sexist
stage. Before exploring the literature on sexist humor, it
is perhaps important to ask: why is this funny? Why has
the “dumb blonde” joke become so embedded in our so-
cial fabric that it merits literal chapters of one-liners on the
As Glick and Fiske (1996) note, sexist views can exist in
both conflicted and unconflicted forms. For example, the
latter can occur when women are subtyped into certain cat-
egories depending on their role. A woman who adheres to
the traditional roles of mother or wife may inspire benevo-
lent sexism, while another woman who violates traditional
roles by being a career woman or a sexual predator may
be a target of hostile sexism. Conflicted ambivalence, on
Dara Greenwood, Department of Psychology; University of
Massachusetts at Amherst; Linda M. Isbell, Department of Psy-
chology; University of Massachusetts at Amherst.
Address correspondence and reprint requests to: Dara Green-
wood, Department of Psychology, University of Massachusetts at
Amherst, Tobin Hall, Amherst, MA 01003. E-mail: dgreenwood@
psych.umass.edu
341

342
GREENWOOD AND ISBELL
the other hand, may manifest when one woman simulta-
neously arouses both hostile and benevolent sentiments.
For example, Glick and Fiske (1996) ask us to consider a
sexist man’s attitudes toward a sexy woman: she is attrac-
tive, but also has the potential to be sexually manipulative
(p. 494).
A Review of Sexist Humor
Recently, researchers have endeavored to explore both cor-
relates and consequences of sexist humor for both men and
women. One notable study (Ryan & Kanjorski, 1998) found
that men who enjoyed sexist humor were also more likely to
endorse Rape Myth Acceptance, Adversarial Sexual Beliefs,
Acceptance of Interpersonal Violence and the self-reported
likelihood of forcing sex. Furthermore, enjoyment of sexist
humor in women was associated with adversarial sexual be-
liefsandtheacceptanceofinterpersonalviolenceinwomen.
Another study (Moore, Griffiths, & Payne, 1987) investi-
gating attitudinal correlates of sexist joke enjoyment found
that men and women with nontraditional views of women
(as measured by the Attitudes Toward Women Scale) were
significantly less likely to report enjoyment of sexist car-
toons than were men and women with traditional views of
women.
Due to the conceptual relevance of ambivalent sexism
to the realm of sexist joking, it is perhaps not surprising
that two recent studies have been conducted to explore
this relationship. LaFrance and Woodzicka (1998) exam-
ined women’s reactions to sexist jokes and their relation-
ship with their scores on the ASI (Glick & Fiske, 1996).
Consistent with their hypotheses, they found that women
who endorsed hostile sexism were significantly less likely
to be offended by sexist jokes than women who endorsed
benevolentsexism. Specifically, “womenclassifiedasbenev-
olent sexists displayed more disgust reactions than did am-
bivalent, hostile, or nonsexist women” (p. 76). This finding
suggests that for women, ironically, benevolent sexism may
enable heightened sensitivity to misogynistic themes. Be-
cause the sample used in this study only included women,
however, we are left wondering whether this sensitivity ef-
fect of benevolent sexism applies to men as well. The only
other study that used the ASI to assess reactions to sexist
humor (Ford, 2000) did sample both men and women. In
this study, the hostile sexism scale was significantly associ-
ated with greater tolerance of sexist joking, but no signif-
icant findings involving the benevolent sexism scale were
reported. Thus, the relationship between gender, ambiva-
lent sexism, and humor appreciation remains unclear.
The dumb blonde may thus be conceptualized as a so-
lution to the dissonance experienced above; an attractive
woman who might otherwise pose a powerful sexual or emo-
tional threat, is reduced to another stereotypic subtype of
female: the attractive, if lobotomized, nymphomaniac. Men
may indulge in a fantasy of sexual intimacy without being
accountable for emotional intimacy; the dumb blonde, con-
veniently, does not know what she is missing; she is too
dumb to figure it out. The dumb blonde characterization
thus helps reconcile the proverbial virgin/whore dichotomy,
allowingmentohavetheirfunandtheirconsciencetoo. The
“blonde bombshell,” who might otherwise provoke con-
flicted heterosexual ambivalence (Glick & Fiske, 1996), is
transformed into an unconflicted “dumb blonde” subtype.
If the persona of the dumb blonde is the substance of social
psychological dissonance reduction, we may then consider
disparagement humor to be the form in which this disso-
nance reduction is most easily expressed.
Disparagement humor, which can be distinguished from
other forms of humor by the dual conditions of diminish-
ment and reinterpretation of its original subject (Wyer &
Collins, 1992) has been associated with reducing social ten-
sions between groups or individuals who experience con-
flict, such as men and women. As noted by Glick and Fiske
(1996), the social relationship between men and women
is particularly complex because “men’s dyadic dependency
on women [heterosexual intimacy] creates an unusual sit-
uation in which members of a more powerful group are
dependent on members of a subordinate group” (p. 493). It
is perhaps not surprising, then, that women have long been
the target of male-male joking. Indeed, in his classic text on
humor, Freud (1960) explains the purpose of an obscene
joke is to sexually expose a target individual for the pleasure
and satisfaction of a third party. He explains that an inter-
change of this sort often involves three people: the male
teller, the male recipient, and the female target. He further
notes that the joke serves as a hostile outlet for the teller
who has presumably been sexually rebuffed by a woman
(p. 100). Similarly, in his case study of fraternity relation-
ships, Peter Lyman (1987) observes the way “[t]he guys
used the joking relationship to negotiate the tension they
felt between sexual interest in the girls and fear of commit-
ment to them . . . and used hostile joking to negotiate their
fear of the ‘loss of control’ implied by intimacy” (p. 151).
The dumb blonde then, may be seen as the diminished
reinterpretation of a sexually attractive and hence, threat-
eningly unavailable woman; due to her striking lack of in-
tellect, integrity, and rational thought, she is transformed
into a willing sex slave who does not discriminate amongst
partners.
The Present Study
The goals of the present study were threefold. First, we
were interested in exploring a particular sexist joke genre:
the dumb blonde. While dumb blonde jokes are overtly
offensive to women, they are nevertheless a widely known
and widely accepted form of disparaging humor. One might
presume that a joke format so familiar to the average col-
lege student would result in widespread desensitization to
its offensive nature. We were interested in whether reac-
tions to dumb blonde jokes would map onto degree of sexist
attitudes held. This leads us to our second goal of assess-
ing the relationship between sexist humor appreciation and
ambivalent sexism. The dumb blonde may represent a

Ambivalent Sexism
343
resolution to conflicted heterosexual ambivalence and,
therefore, hostile and ambivalent sexists may react differ-
ently to the jokes. Specifically, while hostile sexists might
enjoy the jokes more than benevolent sexists, ambivalent
sexists might be most motivated by their bipolar views of
women to find the jokes amusing and inoffensive. An alter-
native, however, is that dumb blonde jokes may tap overtly
hostile attitudes toward women. In this case, participants’
hostile sexism scores may be most strongly associated with
their reactions to the jokes, and any effects of gender and/or
benevolent sexism may be apparent only at low levels of hos-
tile sexism. A third possibility is that because dumb blonde
jokes are so widely heard and told (as indicated by their
popularity on the internet and in the popular media), they
may not reliably distinguish among degrees and kinds of
sexist sentiments.
Finally, in addition to the two goals discussed above, we
were also interested in clarifying conflicting reports on the
relationship among benevolent sexism, gender, and sexist
humor appreciation. Although the ASI can and has been
used to assess sexist attitudes in men and women, women’s
dual status as both the subject and object of inquiry re-
quires that we interpret their responses in the context of in-
group (rather than outgroup) membership. Thus, because
men and women necessarily experience different outgroup
and ingroup status vis-a`-vis women, we have reason to sus-
pect that their respective benevolent sexism scores may in-
dicate qualitatively distinct underlying attitudes. As noted
earlier, whereas one study (LaFrance & Woodzicka, 1998)
found that benevolent sexism predicted disgust responses
to sexist jokes in their female sample, another (Ford, 2000)
did not find any significant association. By studying male
and female benevolent sexism scores in conjunction with
each gender’s amusement ratings of the jokes, we may
better understand any potential interactions that arise.
Additionally, we hoped to overcome limitations of prior
research by embedding the humor stimuli in a “natural
conversation.” Rather than using straight audiotaped recita-
tion of jokes (LaFrance & Woodzicka, 1998), written
vignettes (Ford, 2000) or cartoons (Moore et al., 1987), we
constructed a more subtle and realistic way to present the
jokes.
American (7%) and African American (2%). The remaining
4% of the sample self-identified as being of mixed racial
background or specifically identified their country of origin
(e.g., Colombia).
The study was advertised to potential participants as ex-
amining “College Life and Relationships: Personal Views
and Peer Impressions.” All participants who agreed to com-
plete this study did so in exchange for extra credit in one
of their psychology courses. The majority of the students
signed up to participate in this study through a sign-up
folder in the lobby of the psychology department. Given
that the vast majority of psychology students at our univer-
sity are female, we attempted to obtain an equal number of
male and female participants by recruiting additional males
over the telephone. These participants were drawn from the
same general population (i.e., students enrolled in psychol-
ogy classes that offered extra credit in exchange for exper-
imental participation) as the men and women who signed
up to participate. Phone numbers for these additional par-
ticipants were taken from the psychology prescreening
questionnaire.
Design
All students participated in the same lab situation. The vari-
ables of interest in this study included participants’ (1) gen-
derand(2)scoresonthehostilesexism(HS)andbenevolent
sexism (BS) subscales of the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory
(ASI). The stimulus material was an audiotaped conversa-
tion between two students that included two males swap-
ping dumb blonde jokes. The main dependent variables
were participants’ judgments of the jokes as (1) amusing
and (2) offensive. In addition, participants’ impressions of
the speakers were examined.
Humor Stimuli
Freud (1960) differentiates between hostile and obscene
joking, the former “serving the purpose of aggressiveness,
satire, or defence” and the latter “serving the purpose of
exposure” (p. 97). We found this distinction interesting in
light of the way in which dumb blonde jokes may be cate-
gorized. Specifically, there are dumb blonde jokes in which
the humor is based solely upon the premise of the female as
brainless (e.g., “what do you get when a bunch of blondes
stand ear to ear?” answer: “A wind tunnel”), which might
be construed as the hostile format. There are also jokes in
which the humor would be classified as obscene, in which
the female target is “exposed” as a sexual object (e.g., “How
can you tell if a blonde works in the office?” answer: “A bed
in the stockroom and huge smiles on all the bosses’ faces”).
Finally, there are jokes in which both hostile and obscene
features are combined; in this case, the female target is both
brainless and objectified.
METHOD
Participants
One hundred forty undergraduate students (78 females,
62 males) enrolled at the University of Massachusetts par-
ticipated in this experiment for extra course credit. The
mean age for the sample was 20.2 years, and partici-
pants were almost evenly distributed across the four class
years (approximately 28% were in each of the first three
years, and 15% were in their fourth year). Of the 134 par-
ticipants who reported their race, the vast majority was
Caucasian (87%), while small minorities were Asian
Joke selection. The current study was designed to tap
heterosexual conflicted ambivalence. For this reason, we

344
GREENWOOD AND ISBELL
sought to select jokes that were both hostile (representing
blondes as dumb) and obscenely sexual (representing blon-
des as sexual objects). We also wanted to ensure that the
jokes were neither so offensive nor so amusing that individ-
ual differences in HS and BS scores would be overpowered
by the joke and consequently, would not be related to par-
ticipants’ reactions to the jokes. In order to select two jokes
that fit these criteria, we conducted a preliminary study in
which 17 participants (8 males, 9 females) were exposed to
10 dumb blonde jokes. After reading each joke, participants
were asked to rate the extent to which they found the joke
to be amusing along a scale ranging from 0 (not at all amus-
ing) to 10 (very amusing). In addition, they were asked to
rate the extent to which they found the joke to be offensive
using a scale ranging from 0 (not at all offensive) to 10 (very
offensive). Of the 10 jokes pretested, we selected two that
were rated by both genders to be low to moderate on both
dimensions. The following two jokes were selected for use
in the main study: (1) “What does a blonde do when she
wakes up in the morning?”; response, “Introduces herself”
and (2) “What does the blonde say when you ask her if she’s
sexually active?”; response, “No, I just lie there.” Men found
both jokes to be more amusing than did females (5.75 ver-
sus 3.78 for the first joke and 6.63 versus 4.67 for the second
one), although these differences were nonsignificant, both
p > .20. Women found both jokes to be more offensive than
did the men (5.67 versus 1.75 for the first joke and 5.22
versus 2.13 for the second joke) and this difference was
significant for the first joke, F(1,16) = 7.41, p = .05, and
marginally significant for the second one, F(1,15) = 3.04,
p < .10.
always looked at? Always scoping out from the back
row?
Second Student: Oh, the girl that would always wear
those nice jeans, I remember that girl. I remember
you had a bad thing for her man. I remember you
turning to that new level, that stage you don’t want to
. . . you still with her?
First Student: Well, I don’t know. I started hanging
out with her after a while, we started becoming good
friends . . . .I guess she’s like the typical blonde girl,
she’s kind of bubbly. . .
Second Student: You know about them blondes don’t
you?
At this point in the conversation, the two students ex-
changed blonde jokes and laughed at each other’s joke. The
conversation then turned to other topics (mentioned ear-
lier) and finally concluded.
Procedure
Participants were greeted in the laboratory by one of two
male undergraduate research assistants who were not in-
volved in the audiotaped conversation. Participants were
immediately led into one of four identical rooms; they com-
pleted all parts of the experiment in this private setting.
After reading over and signing an informed consent form,
participants completed the experiment, which consisted of
three parts. Specifically, participants (1) completed a two-
part attitude questionnaire, (2) listened to an audiotaped
conversation, and (3) completed a questionnaire in which
they reported (a) their reactions to the jokes contained in
the conversation, (b) their impressions of the speakers, and
(c) demographic information.
Context for the jokes. In order to simulate a realistic
scenario in which these jokes might be heard, and to re-
duce any demand characteristics that might arise as a result
of explicitly exposing participants to jokes for the purpose
of reacting to them, the selected jokes were embedded in
a semi-scripted conversation. Two male undergraduate re-
search assistants were given a list of topics to discuss and
instructions for when to insert the two dumb blonde jokes.
They were allowed to improvise, drawing on personal ex-
periences, and were told to make the conversation seem as
natural as possible. The overall tone of the conversation was
friendly, joking, and casual. Their final conversation was the
result of multiple “rehearsals” and edits.
Topics of discussion included, but were not limited to:
the school meal plan, skiing, courses, keeping in touch with
friends over e-mail, and dating. The jokes were incorpo-
rated into a part of the conversation about a woman with
blonde hair that one of the students was interested in dat-
ing and eventually dated. For example, the following is an
excerpt from the part of the conversation that focused on
dating, which provided a segue for the jokes:
Attitude questionnaire. Participants first completed a
two-part questionnaire. The first part was labeled “Personal
Views of College Life and Relationships” and the sec-
ond part was labeled “Attitudes about Social and Political
Issues.” At the beginning of each section, we assured par-
ticipants that their responses would be kept confidential. In
the first part, participants were presented with statements
such as, “My primary goal in college is to get good grades”
and “I am probably not going to meet the man/woman of
my dreams in college” and were asked to indicate the extent
to which they agreed with each of these items using a scale
ranging from 0 (disagree strongly) to 5 (agree strongly). Af-
ter completing this part of the questionnaire, participants
completed the second part. The key questions of interest
in this study were embedded in this questionnaire. Specif-
ically, the 22 items that compose the ASI were included,
along with 14 additional items concerning individuals’ at-
titudes toward minorities (including the Modern Racism
Scale; McConahay, 1986).
The majority (50) of the 72 questions that partici-
pants completed in the two-part questionnaire were filler
items that were included to reduce participants’ ability to
First Student: You know Jill, that girl that was in our
bio class freshman year, blonde girl? Like the girl we

Ambivalent Sexism
345
ascertain that sexist attitudes were the main concern of
the present study. In addition, these questions were in-
cluded to strengthen participants’ belief that the study
was in fact concerned with their views of college life and
relationships.
study. Finally, participants responded to a series of demo-
graphic questions regarding their race, gender, and class
year. After completing these questions, participants were
thanked, debriefed, and dismissed.
Scoring
Audiotaped conversation. Immediately after complet-
ing the attitude questionnaires, participants were intro-
duced to an ostensibly separate part of the study concerning
how individuals form impressions of others on the basis of
information obtained in naturally occurring conversations.
Participants were told that in order to study this, we were
using a previously taped conversation between two individ-
uals, taken from a different study that concerned college
students’ friendships. Participants were told to put on a pair
of headphones, listen to the conversation and, while doing
so, to try to form an impression of the speakers. At the end
of the recorded conversation, the tape included instructions
for participants to follow. Specifically, participants were in-
structed to press the stop button on the tape player, remove
their headphones, and complete a final questionnaire that
was located on their desk in a manila envelope. Participants
were further instructed to inform the experimenter when
they completed this questionnaire.
The ASI was scored in accordance with Glick and Fiske
(1996). A hostile sexism (HS) score was computed for each
participant by computing the mean of each participant’s re-
sponses to the 11 items composing this scale. A benevolent
sexism (BS) score was computed in an analogous manner.
An overall ASI score was computed by averaging all of the
items on both the HS and BS scale for each participant.
Consistent with Glick and Fiske’s (1996) suggestion to
categorize individuals based on high and low scores for
each subscale, a median split was performed on partici-
pants’ scores on both the HS and the BS scales. Participants
who scored at or below 2.45 on the BS scale composed the
low BS group (M = 1.86), whereas those scoring above 2.45
composed the high BS group (M = 2.93). Participants who
scored at or below 2.27 on the HS scale composed the low
HS group (M = 1.44), whereas those scoring above 2.27
composed the high HS group (M = 2.88). It is worth not-
ing that both the method and the median and mean values
we obtained are consistent with previous research (Ford,
2000). On the basis of a high or low score on each subscale,
participants were then categorized into one of four groups
for the purpose of analysis: High HS, High BS (ambivalent
sexists); High HS, Low BS (hostile sexists); Low HS, High
BS (benevolent sexists); and Low HS, Low BS (nonsexists).
Final questionnaire. The final questionnaire was de-
signed to tap participants’ reactions to the dumb blonde
jokes. In order to decrease the likelihood that participants
would determine that humor was the primary interest in
this study, the two key questions concerning participants’
reactions to the jokes were embedded in a series of other
questions that were designed to assess participants’ impres-
sions of the speakers, and participants’ reactions to topics
discussed in the conversation that were unrelated to the
jokes (e.g., e-mail, the campus meal plan). This last set of
questions served only as filler items.
Participants reported their reactions to the jokes by re-
sponding to the following two questions: (1) “Did you find
the ‘dumb blonde’ jokes amusing?” and (2) “Did you find
the ‘dumb blonde’ jokes offensive?” Participants reported
their responses along 11-point (0–10) scales ranging from
not at all amusing to very amusing and not at all offensive to
very offensive, respectively. Participants also reported their
impressions of the speakers by responding to the follow-
ing three questions: (1) “Was your overall impression of the
speakers positive or negative?” (2) “How likable did they
seem?” and (3) “Could you imagine being friends with the
speakers?” Responses were reported along 11-point (0–10)
scales ranging from negative to positive, not at all likable to
very likable, and not at all to definitely, respectively.
RESULTS
The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory
Scale characteristics. Reliability coefficients were cal-
culated for the ASI (Cronbach’s alpha = .84), the HS sub-
scale(Cronbach’salpha=.87), andBSsubscale(Cronbach’s
alpha = .69). Consistent with prior research on the ASI
(Glick & Fiske, 1996), the BS scale was less reliable than ei-
ther the HS or combined scales. This may be attributable to
the scale’s “multidimensional nature” (Glick & Fiske, 1996,
p. 499). The correlation between HS and BS for men was
.42, p < .001 and for women it was .27, p < .05.
Mean scores on the ASI and subscales. HS and BS were
analyzed as repeated measures as a function of participant
gender. Participants scored significantly higher on BS than
HS (2.39 versus 2.17), F(1,138) = 5.58, p = .01, and this
was true regardless of whether participants were male (2.42
versus 2.32) or female (2.37 versus 2.06), F(1,138) = 1.73,
p > .10. Although men scored higher on the combined sub-
scales of the ASI than women (2.37 versus 2.21), this dif-
ference was not statistically significant, F(1,138) = 1.89,
p > .10. These means are comparable to those obtained by
Glick and Fiske (1996) in their three student samples.
Aftercompletingthesequestionsandthefillerquestions,
participants were instructed to “Please write any additional
impressions of the dialogue, or clarify any of your above
responses.” Participants were given a blank set of lines to
record their thoughts. This section was designed to help
us identify any skepticism or reactance in response to the

346
GREENWOOD AND ISBELL
Effects of HS, BS, and Gender on Amusement Ratings
than men (4.04 vs. 2.38), although this relationship was only
marginally significant, F(1,132) = 3.42, p = .07.2 Further-
more, men who scored high on BS judged the jokes to be
more amusing than those who scored low on BS (5.18 vs.
2.38), F(1,132) = 6.25, p = .01. The opposite trend was
found for women: Those who scored high on BS judged
the jokes to be less amusing than those who scored low
on BS (2.46 vs. 4.04), although this relationship was only
marginally significant, F(1,132) = 2.68, p = .10.
To investigate the effects of HS, BS, and gender on the
extent to which participants found the dumb blonde jokes
to be amusing, participants’ amusement ratings were an-
alyzed as a function of their HS level (high vs. low), BS
level (high vs. low), and gender (male vs. female). Overall,
participants scoring high in HS found the jokes to be more
amusing than those who scored low (5.27 vs. 3.51), F(1,132)
= 11.89, p = .001. This main effect was qualified, however,
by an interaction involving BS and gender, F(1,132) = 5.40,
p < .05.1 Specifically, as shown in Figure 1 (upper panel),
participants who scored high on HS were similarly amused
by the jokes, regardless of whether they scored high or low
on BS, and this was true for both males (5.65 vs. 5.17), F < 1,
and females (5.57 vs. 4.71), F < 1. Among participants who
scored low on HS, however, gender interacted with partic-
ipants’ level of BS, F(1,132) = 8.78, p < .01. Specifically, as
shown in Figure 1 (lower panel), among benevolent sexists
(low HS, high BS), men found the jokes to be significantly
more amusing than women (5.18 vs. 2.46), F(1,132) = 5.36,
p < .05, whereas among nonsexist participants (low in both
HS and BS), women found the jokes to be more amusing
Effects of HS, BS, and Gender on Offensiveness Ratings
We expected that participants who were the most amused
by the dumb blonde jokes would report being the least of-
fended by them, whereas those who were the least amused
by the jokes would report being the most offended by them.
Consistent with this expectation, a significant negative cor-
relation was found between participants’ reported amuse-
ment and offensiveness ratings, r = −.48, p < .001. An
analysis of participants’ offensiveness ratings as a function
of their HS and BS scores, and gender reveals that partic-
ipants who scored high in HS found the jokes to be sig-
nificantly less offensive than those who scored low in HS
(2.59 vs. 4.68), F(1,132) = 18.04, p < .001. In addition, the
effects of HS, BS, and gender all interacted in the pre-
dicted manner, F(1,132) = 5.48, p < .05. Specifically, as
shown in Figure 2 (upper panel), participants who scored
high in HS were not very offended by the jokes, regardless
of whether they scored high or low on BS, and this was
true for both men (2.65 vs. 1.67), F(1,132) = 1.01, p > .10,
and women (3.26 vs. 2.79), F < 1. Among participants who
scored low on the HS scale, however, gender again inter-
acted with participants’ level of BS, F(1,132) = 8.27, p < .01.
Specifically, as shown in Figure 2 (lower panel), among
benevolent sexists (low HS, high BS), women found the
jokes to be significantly more offensive than men (5.77 vs.
3.27), F(1,132) = 4.89, p < .05. Among nonsexist partici-
pants (low in both HS and BS), women found the jokes to
be less offensive than men (4.04 vs. 5.63), F(1,132) = 3.39,
p = .07, although this difference was only marginally signif-
icant. Additionally, mirroring the amusement analyses, men
who scored high on BS were less offended than men who
scored low on BS (3.27 vs. 5.63), F(1,132) = 4.75, p < .05.
The opposite pattern of data was found for women: Those
who scored high on BS judged the jokes to be marginally
more offensive than those who scored low on this scale (5.77
vs. 4.04), F(1,132) = 3.52, p = .06.
Supplementary Analysis
We expected that participants’ impressions of the speak-
ers would be influenced by their level of HS, BS, and gen-
der. Because participants’ responses to the three impression
questions were all highly related (Cronbach’s alpha = .88), a
composite score was created by averaging each participants’
responses to these three questions. This composite score
was then analyzed as a function of BS level, HS level, and
Fig. 1. Mean amusement as a function of BS, and gender for
participants high (upper panel) and low (lower panel) in HS.

Ambivalent Sexism
347
to dumb blonde jokes. The results of the amusement and
offensiveness analyses demonstrate that high hostile sex-
ism scores were associated with both higher amusement
and lower offensiveness ratings of the jokes. This finding
is consistent with recent work on sexist humor (LaFrance
& Woodzicka, 1997; Ford, 2000) as well as Freud’s (1960)
explanation of the hostile and aggressive function of dis-
paraging humor. The interaction between hostile sexism,
benevolent sexism, and gender shows that gender differ-
ences in perceptions of sexist humor emerge among in-
dividuals low in hostile sexism. Specifically, benevolently
sexist women (those high in benevolent, but low in hostile
attitudes) rated the jokes as less amusing and more offen-
sive than benevolently sexist men. Conversely, benevolently
sexist men rated the jokes as more amusing and less offen-
sive than either female benevolent sexists or nonsexist men
(those low in both hostile and benevolent attitudes). Benev-
olent sexism scores may thus reflect qualitatively different
underlying beliefs for men and women. In the context of
enjoyment of sexist humor, benevolent sexism might op-
erate similarly, if ironically, to feminist beliefs for women,
whereas these same attitudes may be more closely linked
to hostile sexism for men.
It bears mentioning that although the inverse relation-
ship between amusement and offensiveness was expected,
it also may be partially due to a self-presentation strategy in
which participants attempted to appear consistent in their
responses. That is, participants who rated the jokes as amus-
ing may have subsequently been influenced by these ratings
when rating how offensive they found the jokes. This may
not only have resulted from a conscious self-presentation
strategy, but may also be the result of unconscious, disso-
nance reduction. The current study was not designed to
differentiate these two possibilities.3
Supplementary analyses focused on global evaluations
of the speakers and the results complement the above-
reported relationships between gender, ASI scores, and
amusement and offensiveness ratings. It is not surprising
that individuals high in hostile sexism, who found the jokes
to be more amusing and less offensive than those low in
hostile sexism, also found the speakers to be more likable.
In addition, the interaction between BS and gender further
suggests that benevolent sexism may operate differently for
men and women. Women high in BS liked the speakers sig-
nificantly less than men high in BS or women low in BS.
The reverse pattern was obtained for men.
The present study reinforces Glick and Fiske’s (1996)
assertion that, at least for men, a subjectively positive form
of sexist attitudes is nevertheless associated with the same
underlying misogynistic attitudes that characterize subjec-
tively negative attitudes toward women. Specifically, men
low in hostile sexism but high in benevolent sexism, appear
similar to men high in hostile sexism in their appreciation
of sexist humor. Perhaps this is because benevolently sexist
men have the luxury of outgroup subtyping when it comes
to the dumb blonde. They may justify their amusement by
Fig. 2. Mean offensiveness as a function of BS, and gender for
participants high (upper panel) and low (lower panel) in HS.
participant gender. Overall, participants who scored high
in HS reported more favorable impressions of the speakers
than those who scored low in HS (6.91 vs. 6.20), F(1,132)
= 4.59, p < .05. In addition, an interaction between partic-
ipant gender and levels of BS emerged, F(1,132) = 13.01,
p< .001. FemaleparticipantswhoscoredlowinBSreported
more favorable impressions of the targets than those who
scored high in BS (7.09 vs. 6.22), F(1,132) = 3.80, p =
.05, whereas male participants who scored high in BS re-
ported more favorable impressions than those who scored
low (7.21 vs. 5.70), F(1,132) = 9.52, p < .01. Furthermore,
within each level of BS, the gender differences in impres-
sions were significant. For participants low in BS, women
liked the speakers more than men (7.09 vs. 5.71), F(1, 132)
= 8.91, p < .01. The opposite pattern was found for partic-
ipants high in BS; in this case, women liked the speakers
less than men (6.22 vs. 7.21), F(1,132) = 4.48, p < .05.
DISCUSSION
The present study sheds a provocative light on the rela-
tionships among gender, ambivalent sexism, and reactions

348
GREENWOOD AND ISBELL
reasoning that some women (e.g., their mothers, wives,
daughters) deserve to be on a pedestal, while others do
not. In contrast to women, then, benevolently sexist men
may enjoy the derogation of certain “types” of women
(e.g., dumb blondes) without experiencing attitudinal
dissonance.
[making generalizations about blondes is] the same
thing as saying that all Polish are dumb and all Irish
drink a lot.
I liked [the speakers] at the beginning, but then when
they started to insult blondes, I took offense because
I am blonde and from that point, I began to dislike
them.
Unlike women scoring high in hostile sexism, benevo-
lentlysexistwomen, whoendorsesubjectivelypositiveviews
toward women, may be less able to distance themselves
from other “subtypes” of women. They may respond to the
jokes with less amusement and more offense because they
consider the “dumb blonde” target to be an ingroup, rather
than an outgroup member. Moreover, because benevolently
sexist women believe that all women should be protected
and idealized by men, they may be understandably taken
aback by the irreverence and disrespect implied by hostile
and obscene joking. Interestingly, marginally significant dif-
ferences revealed that nonsexist women were less offended
and more amused than both women in the benevolent sexist
category and nonsexist men. One explanation for the first
difference is that nonsexist women may be more wary of
confirming the stereotypical trait of female hypersensitiv-
ity. Believing that women should not be given preferen-
tial treatment may, unfortunately, manifest in a “can’t you
take a joke?” (the way a man would) sentiment. The find-
ing that nonsexist men were marginally more offended and
less amused than nonsexist women may seem counterintu-
itive. However, just as female nonsexists may wish to distin-
guish themselves from more stereotypically female behav-
iors, male nonsexists may be similarly invested in distancing
themselves from stereotypically male behaviors (i.e., sexist
joke swapping). They may thus be more likely to disap-
prove of both the jokes and the joke tellers, on behalf of
more egalitarian-minded men.
These statements must give us pause; there is a pernicious
underbelly to what might at first sound like harmless joking.
Our study suggests that sexist humor behaves like any other
form of discrimination. It may be even more dangerous, in
fact, for its deceptively light, good-natured packaging.
Limitations
A few limitations to generalizing the results of the present
study bear mentioning. First, the dumb blonde stereo-
type that we evoked in our study is implicitly restricted to
Caucasian women. Although women of color may indeed
dye their hair blonde, the prototypical natural blonde is
White. As a result, our findings are necessarily race-based,
in addition to gender-based judgments, and do not general-
ize across all women. Second, we did not examine men’s and
women’s reactions to other sexist joke genres. It is possible
that a sexist joke that demeaned all women, rather than one
particular subtype of women (i.e., [White] blondes) would
have solicited a more negative reaction from females in the
hostile sexism group. Future research should further in-
vestigate the relationship between gender, hostile sexism,
benevolent sexism, and reactions to different genres of sex-
ist humor, including sexist humor that targets men, as well
as women of color.
Third, the current study was not designed to assess the
effects of joke-teller gender on men’s and women’s reac-
tions to sexist humor. Instead, one of our main goals was
to examine reactions to sexist jokes as they might occur in
a naturalistic context (i.e., at school, in the office). Given
this, we reasoned that misogynistic humor (of the sort used
in the present study) would be perceived as most genuine
and spontaneous if the jokes were overheard during an in-
teraction between two men. Of course, it is possible, even
likely, that our results would not generalize to conditions
in which women exchanged similar jokes. Indeed, previous
research has demonstrated that women rate sexist humor
as more amusing when the joke is told by a woman instead
of a man (Mitchell, 1977). This is consistent with the in-
group/outgroup distinction regarding sexist humor appre-
ciation, which we described earlier. A sexist joke told by a
woman may give female listeners a more privileged ingroup
status. Thus, the power dynamic that exists when a sexist
joke is exchanged between two men would plausibly shift if
the tellers were both female.
In addition to underscoring the utility of the ambivalent
sexism construct, our study indicates that the seemingly
benign dumb blonde genre has the power to discriminate
among varying degrees of sexist attitudes. Although, intu-
itively, we might have expected such a widely known and
accepted joke form to be accompanied by a desensitized re-
action to its offensive nature, this was clearly not the case.
In fact, quite the contrary, it seems that disparaging humor
that targets a subtype of women on the basis of a physical
trait such as hair color, provoked eerily similar reactions
to jokes that disparage persons on the basis of race or reli-
gion. Anecdotal data reveals these ominous sentiments; two
self-reported brunette women explained:
I found the blonde jokes not to be that accurate. Even
though I am not a blonde, I have friends that are and
intelligent at the same time . . .
I’mnotblondesoIfounditnotasoffensiveasablonde
person. I still think it’s wrong.
Finally, it should be noted that we obtained our
results under conditions in which all research partici-
pants completed the study with a male experimenter and
While two self-reported blonde women reacted by
noting:

Ambivalent Sexism
349
NOTES
different results may have emerged if women were used as
experimentersinstead. Webelieve, however, thatusingmen
as experimenters provides the strongest test of our hypothe-
ses; using women may have primed a female (or blonde)
stereotype at the outset, which may have stacked the empir-
ical deck in our favor. It is possible that the presence of the
men as research assistants may have affected participants’
responses, but we believe that this is unlikely. The research
assistants had minimal contact with the participants during
the study. They ushered participants into a private room
and reappeared only once to help them turn on the tape
recorder. Thus, there was no interaction between the re-
search assistants and participants between listening to the
audiotaped conversation and completing the set of impres-
sion questions. In fact, participants did not see or interact
with anyone during this time.
1. In addition to examining HS and BS as dichotomous variables,
a regression was conducted in which HS and BS were entered
as continuous variables. An analogous three-way interaction
emerged in this analysis.
2. In addition to the results reported, an interaction between gen-
der and BS level also emerged, F(1,132) = 3.86, p = .05. This
interaction reveals that women were equally amused by the
jokes, regardless of whether they scored high or low in BS (4.01
vs. 4.38), whereas men were more amused if they scored high
in BS than if they scored low (5.42 vs. 3.77). Given that this
effect was qualified by the higher-order interaction involving
HS scores that is discussed in the text, this interaction will not
be further discussed.
3. Another concern related to social desirability is whether par-
ticipants may have reported socially desirable responses when
completing the ASI. Glick and Fiske (1996) found no relation-
ship between Paulus’s (1988) self-deception subscale of the
Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding (BIDR), but did
find a significant but weak relationship with the Impression
Management subscale. Importantly, Glick and Fiske found that
no particular item on the ASI was responsible for this rela-
tionship, but instead the relationship emerged as a result of
the aggregation of weak relationships between individual ASI
items and the Impression Management subscale. Given that
our means for men and women on the ASI were comparable to
those obtained by Glick and Fiske, and given that we obtained
reasonable variance on both the HS and BS subscales of the
ASI, we similarly do not believe that impression management
is a major concern in the present study.
Conclusions
If we are to gain a complete understanding of the relation-
ships between sexism, gender, and men’s and women’s real-
world reactions to sexist humor, it is important to continue
to investigate reactions to jokes presented in natural con-
versations. We hope that other researchers will follow our
lead and embed their humorous stimuli in more meaning-
ful social contexts. For example, one such area that merits
empirical investigation is the role of the Internet as a “so-
cial” medium for transmission of sexist humor. Ultimately,
future research will allow us to understand more fully the
detrimental effects of this type of humor and how it might
be discouraged. We eagerly look forward to additional re-
search on these issues.
REFERENCES
Our research may have widespread implications. Be-
cause benevolent sexism reflects ostensibly positive atti-
tudes toward women, it is likely that men who endorse
these attitudes are unaware of the underlying misogynistic
assumptions upon which their beliefs are based. However,
as we have shown, although some benevolently sexist men
may not subscribe to overtly hostile sexist attitudes, they
may nevertheless enjoy jokes that mock female sexuality
and intelligence. Such men may inadvertently contribute
to an anti-female social atmosphere that has both psycho-
logical and, potentially, legal consequences. When sexist
humor in the workplace is condoned, through something
as subtle as laughter, female employees may be entitled to
sue on the grounds of a hostile work environment (Paludi
& Barickman, 1998). Finally, the finding that benevolently
sexist women were most offended by the dumb blonde jokes
should give those who believe in women’s essential purity
and kindness, pause. The belief that a “good woman should
be set on a pedestal by her man” (Glick & Fiske, 1996; ASI,
item 17) appears inextricably linked to the ease with which
she may be toppled over.
Ford, T. E. (2000). Effects of sexist humor on tolerance of sex-
ist events. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26,
1094–1107.
Freud, S. (1960). Jokes and their relation to the unconscious.
New York: Norton.
Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1996). The ambivalent sexism inventory:
Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 491–512.
LaFrance, M., & Woodzicka, J. A. (1998). No laughing mat-
ter: Women’s verbal and nonverbal reactions to sexist hu-
mor. In J. Swim & C. Stangor (Eds.), Prejudice: The tar-
get’s perspective (pp. 61–80). San Diego, CA: Academic
Press.
Lyman, P. (1987). The fraternal bond as a joking relationship: A
case study of the role of sexist jokes in male group bonding.
In M. S. Kimmel (Ed.), Changing men: New directions
in research on men and masculinity. Sage focus editions,
Vol. 88 (pp. 148–163). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publica-
tions, Inc.
McConahay, J. B. (1986). Modern racism, ambivalence, and the
Modern Racism Scale. In J. F. Dovidio & S. L. Gaertner
(Eds.), Prejudice, discrimination, and racism (pp. 91–125).
San Diego, CA: Academic Press, Inc.
Mitchell, C. (1977). The sexual perspective in the appreciation
and interpretation of jokes. Western Folklore, 36, 303–
329.
Initial submission: October 8, 2001
Initial acceptance: January 8, 2002
Final acceptance: March 28, 2002

350
GREENWOOD AND ISBELL
Moore, T., Griffiths, K., & Payne, B. (1987). Gender, attitudes
towards women, and the appreciation of sexist humor. Sex
Roles, 16, 521–531.
Paludi, M. A., & Barickman, R. B. (1998). Sexual harassment,
work, and education: A resource manual for prevention
(2nd ed.). Albany, NY: State University of New York
Press.
desirable responding. University of British Columbia,
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Phillips, K. (2000). The Vogue book of blondes. New York: Viking
Studio.
Ryan, K., & Kanjorski, J. (1998). The enjoyment of sexist humor,
rape attitudes, and relationship aggression in college stu-
dents. Sex Roles, 38, 743–756.
Paulus, D. L. (1988). Assessing self-deception and impression
management in self-reports: The balanced inventory of
Wyer, R. S., & Collins, J. E. (1992). A theory of humor elicitation.
Psychology Review, 99, 663–688.