Gender and National Collective Narcissism: Gender Asymmetries and Obstacles to Gender Equality 4
Gender and National Collective Narcissism: Gender Asymmetries and Obstacles to Gender Equality
Link: https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11199-024-01443-8.pdf
Pasteable Citation
Golec de Zavala, A., & Keenan, O. (2024). Gender and national collective narcissism: Gender asymmetries and obstacles to gender equality. Sex Roles, 90(4), 565-586.
Egalitarianism was measured with a 3-item critical consciousness scale
Egalitarianism was measured with a 3-item critical consciousness scale used in past research (Rapa et al., 2020). Items were: “We would have fewer problems if we treated people more equally”; “It is important to correct social inequalities”; and “All social groups should have equal chances
Political conservatism was posed using a 5 point scale
Political conservatism was assessed through self-placement on a 5-point scale from 1 (conservative) to 5 (liberal). To match the remaining measurements, this item was rescaled to range from 1 to 7 7 using the scales package (Wickham & Seidel, 2022). Higher scores indicated more conservative political outlook
Legitimization of Gender Inequality
Statements from a piece on class fairness were changed to fit both Poland and Gender criteria from Complementary Justice: Effects of “Poor but Happy” and “Poor but Honest” Stereotype Exemplars on System Justification and Implicit Activation of the Justice Motive.“In general, you find society to be fair,” “In general, the American political system operates as it should,” “American society needs to be radically restructured” (reverse-scored), “The United States is the best country in the world to live in,” “Most policies serve the greater good,” “Everyone has a fair shot at wealth and happiness,” “Our society is getting worse every year” (reverse-scored), and “Society is set up so that people usually get what they deserve.”
Male collective narcissism predicted legitimation of gender inequality, political conservatism, and trying to erase/negate inconvenient egalitarianism. In contrast, female collective narcissism had similar legitimation but did not violate the principles it needed to receive justice like the male collective narcissists who had now discarded it after having successfully received justice at its hand (this might even extend to actively sabotaging it (corrupting the court system) to service the fact they were also found to have high gender inequality legitimation scores).
Gender collective narcissism (but not gender ingroup satisfaction) predicted egalitarianism and rejection of political conservatism and beliefs legitimizing gender inequality among women. In contrast, among men, it predicted political conservatism, support for beliefs legitimizing gender inequality and rejection of egalitarianism.
National narcissism was positively associated with political conservatism, legitimation of gender inequality, and lower egalitarianism meaning those with national narcissism identified as the ruling class no matter how ironic or unfitting that actually was
National narcissism (but not national ingroup satisfaction) was positively associated with political conservatism, legitimization of gender inequality and lower egalitarianism. The last two associations were stronger among women than among men. Consistent with H3, the association between gender collective narcissism and national narcissism was significantly stronger among men than among women.
Those who did not show solidarity or support for the All-Poland Women’s Strike for abortion also were found to be high in gender inequality legitimation, showing sexual choice is a particularly poignant threat to gender inequality legitimation (women are no longer passive vessels, but active selectors. Incel rhetoric is especially terrified of this.).
Consistent with H2, among men and women, national narcissism is associated with a refusal to engage in collective action led by the All-Poland Women’s Strike, political conservatism, legitimization of gender inequality and antiegalitarian outlook.
Women with high national narcissism are more likely to destroy their own rights.
At low levels of national narcissism women are more egalitarian than men, but at high levels of national narcissism, women report weaker egalitarian views than men. At low levels of national narcissism, women reject beliefs legitimizing gender inequality more strongly than men, but at high levels of national narcissism, women report similar levels of endorsement of beliefs legitimizing gender inequality.
Narcissistic men and women may both expect resentment at the lack of appropriate recognition of the superiority over the gender ingroup but this seems particularly disturbing when they are clearly in the privileged group and now just need it to be recognized to excess as well.
Narcissistic resentment for the lack of appropriate recognition of the superiority of the gender ingroup may seem delusional among men who enjoy power and privilege. However, the same resentment may seem less detached from reality among women who objectively experience discrimination from more powerful men. Nevertheless, results of Study 1 indicate that gender collective narcissism is the same variable among men and women. In both gender groups, we can differentiate gender collective narcissism from gender ingroup satisfaction and establish the expected positive association between them.
Both groups showed signs of trying to fight with and dominate the other group, but had different opinions about egalitarianism according to whether they were fighting keep a privileged position (low egalitarianism, men) or whether they were fighting for a more justiciable position (high egalitarianism, women).
Gender collective narcissists among men and women alike believed that the gender outgroup threatens the interests of the gender ingroup and should be fought with and dominated even if that meant resorting to violence. Thus, the present results help clarify that gender collective narcissism represents the same narcissistic desire for the gender ingroup to be recognized as better and more special, more important, and more worthy of privileged treatment than the gender outgroup. Yet, for men as the advantaged gender group, this desire aligns with weaker support for gender equality, whereas for women as the disadvantaged gender group, this desire aligns with stronger support for gender equality.
Men high in gender satisfaction as opposed to gender collective narcissism were willing to lose privileges in order for gender equality to be achieved. Male collective narcissists were not.
These findings also help to clarify that at low levels of gender collective narcissism, men may support gender equality even though this means their gender ingroup may lose benefits and privileges
Symptoms of collective narcissism like retaliatory hostility and hypersensitivity are clearly part of the narcissistic behavior spectrum but overall harm the group.
The frequent consequences of collective narcissism – intergroup retaliatory hostility (Golec de Zavala & Lantos, 2020; Hase et al., 2021) and hypersensitivity to insult and intergroup threat (Golec de Zavala et al., 2016) – may potentially undermine the effectiveness of collective action for gender equality.
Vehement and intense mannerisms can result when a narcissistic collective becomes exceptionally narcissistic, to tune it down a communal narrative may be posed that suits the pursuit of equality.
Other research has also shown that while collective narcissistic intergroup antagonism motivates members of disadvantaged groups to challenge inequality sometimes in vehement and intense manners, the typical collective narcissistic hostility may be neutralized by a communal normative context that accompanies pursuit of social equality (Golec de Zavala et al., 2024). Future studies should explore these possibilities.
Disturbingly, overpowering of women may be an actual part of identity in the narcissistic male collective. They actually premise their maleness on overpowering women. This goes hand in hand why they don’t want abortion rights, again females being selectors and not empty vessels deeply scares their identity in terms of being someone who overpowers the choices of women, even to the point it may be clearly rape trying to make a woman have a child they don’t want.
. This greater overlap also suggests that overpowering women may become a matter of national importance for some men (Graff & Korolczuk, 2022). Overt hostility of the Polish ultraconservative populist government that uses the state power against the Polish women’s pursuit of equal rights is in line with this interpretation (Human Rights Watch, 2021). It is also in line with the argument that national narcissism that excludes women and sexual minorities is at the heart of the ideological success of the current wave of ultraconservative populism worldwide (Golec de Zavala & Keenan, 2021; Golec de Zavala et al., 2021)
Narcissistic women when pulled to the narcissistic female collective or the national collective who then chose the national collective then often show they are willing to lose rights just to side with the national collective narcissism, which has more male collective narcissists who premise their identity on the violation of their rights in the most disturbing cases.
Women who endorse collective narcissism but solve this conflict by embracing their national rather than gender identity may compensate by stronger adherence to the patriarchal norms. The present results are consistent with system justification theory (Jost, 2019), which proposes that members of disadvantaged groups may be motivated to legitimize inequality even more than members of advantaged group. However, the present results suggest that this prediction may need to be specified as limited to those members of disadvantaged group who endorse national narcissism (or collective narcissism with reference to the superordinate category within which the disadvantaged ingroup is nested).
Male ingroup collective narcissism posed the strongest barrier to gender equality movements. Inside their own movements, suggestions that the groups move from national identity into solidarity, communal narratives, and interdependence decreased group narcissism that prevented the whole nation from moving forward constructively and without it attacking itself in a particularly unfit manner (men vs. women)
The social change towards gender equality may be enhanced by efforts to change the prevailing discourse about national identity away from a narcissistic desire for its external recognition and toward a non-narcissistic discourse emphasizing internal solidarity, communal values, and interdependence of all co-nationals. Gender collective narcissism among men is another obstacle to pursuit of gender equality. Efforts to de-emphasize narcissistic discourse about male gender identity could focus on non-narcissistic appreciation of inherent value of this social identity independent of intergroup comparisons or external recognition.
In some contexts, narcissism has a place and time, usually mainly when a certain group or person is trying to beat down another group unduly and from a position of severe injustice and the narcissistic fire in the beat down group is required for it to survive this severe abuse. This often reflects the very environments where narcissism develops and it is useful toward that point. Again, it only becomes pathological when they achieve the goals of equality they needed that passion and entitlement for and then dismantle the very principles, justice, egalitarianism, dignity, that they called to secure their own justice but then destroy to prevent the perceived outgroup from doing the same.
High gender collective narcissism is needed for women to contest unequal system that harm them, but low gender collective narcissism is needed for men to support gender equality. National narcissism is an obstacle to the pursuit of gender equality among men, but also for women who endorse legitimizing beliefs in support of gender inequality. Studies that do not differentiate gender collective narcissism and national narcissism may produce inconsistent findings regarding the role of ingroup identification in system legitimization and collective action among members of disadvantaged groups.