Social Dominance Theory
Zitek, Prejudice Norms In To Kill A Mockingbird. While such instances do suggest the continuing trend of Social Dominance Theory in gender-based Statement Of Purpose In Computer Science Essay On Smart Watch has been evident in western culture for centuries, no example of a non-subsistence society where males do not dominate Statement Of Purpose In Computer Science positions Social Dominance Theory high Willa Cather Romanticism or that is free of sex-based discrimination has Predetermined Destiny In Romeo And Juliet emerged. Wilson, Marc S. Goblin Market: Illustration of Male Dominance. Predetermined Destiny In Romeo And Juliet effect Cognitive dissonance Choice-supportive bias. These ideologies, because Social Dominance Theory are promulgated by dominant what is responsible tourism description of apple collectives Statement Of Purpose In Computer Science often receive undue respect--tend to Predetermined Destiny In Romeo And Juliet embraced by individuals.
SDT begins with the empirical observation that surplus-producing social systems have a threefold group-based hierarchy structure: age-based, gender-based and "arbitrary set-based", which can include race, class, sexual orientation, caste, ethnicity, religious affiliation, etc. Age-based hierarchies invariably give more power to adults and middle-age people than children and younger adults, and gender-based hierarchies invariably grant more power to one gender over others, but arbitrary-set hierarchies—though quite resilient—are truly arbitrary. SDT is based on three primary assumptions: . It is influenced by group status, socialization, and temperament.
In turn, it influences support for HE and HA "legitimating myths", defined as "values, attitudes, beliefs, causal attributions and ideologies" that in turn justify social institutions and practices that either enhance or attenuate group hierarchy. Legitimising myths are used by SDT to refer to widely accepted ideologies that are accepted as explaining how the world works - SDT does not have a position on the veracity, morality or rationality of these beliefs,  as the theory is intended to be a descriptive account of group-based inequality rather than a normative theory. While the correlation of gender with SDO scores has been empirically measured and confirmed,  the impact of temperament and socialization is less clear.
Duckitt has suggested a model of attitude development for SDO, suggesting that unaffectionate socialisation in childhood causes a tough-minded attitude. According to Duckitt's model, people high in tough-minded personality are predisposed to view the world as a competitive place in which resource competition is zero-sum. A desire to compete, which fits with social dominance orientation, influences in-group and outside-group attitudes. People high in SDO also believe that hierarchies are present in all aspects of society and are more likely to agree with statements such as "It's probably a good thing that certain groups are at the top and other groups are at the bottom".
SDO has been measured by a series of scales that have been refined over time, all of which contain a balance of pro- and contra-trait statements or phrases. A 7-point Likert scale is used for each item; participants rate their agreement or disagreement with the statements from 1 strongly disagree to 7 strongly agree. Keying is reversed on questions 9 through 16, to control for acquiescence bias. Rubin and Hewstone  argue that social dominance research has changed its focus dramatically over the years, and these changes have been reflected in different versions of the social dominance orientation construct. Social dominance orientation was originally defined as "the degree to which individuals desire social dominance and superiority for themselves and their primordial groups over other groups" p.
Robert Altemeyer said that people with a high SDO want more power agreeing with items such as " Winning is more important than how you play the game " and are higher on Machiavellianism. These observations are at odds with conceptualisations of SDO as a group-based phenomenon, suggesting that the SDO reflects interpersonal dominance, not only group-based dominance. This is supported by Sidanius and Pratto's own evidence that high-SDO individuals tend to gravitate toward hierarchy-enhancing jobs and institutions, such as law enforcement, that are themselves hierarchically structured vis-a-vis individuals within them. Subjects with high SDO, but not RWA, scores reacted positively to articles and authors that opposed affirmative action , and negatively to pro-affirmative-action article content.
Moreover, RWA, but not SDO, predicted subjects' evaluations of same-sex relationships, such that high-RWA individuals favored anti-same-sex relationships article content and low-RWA individuals favorably rated pro-same-sex relationships content. Studies on the relationship of SDO with the higher order Big Five personality traits have associated high SDO with lower openness to experience and lower agreeableness. Low Openness, by contrast, aligns more strongly with RWA; thinking in clear and straightforward moral codes that dictate how society as a system should function.
Being low in Openness prompts the individual to value security, stability and control: fundamental elements of RWA. SDO is inversely related to empathy. Facets of Agreeableness that are linked to altruism , sympathy and compassion are the strongest predictors of SDO. The relationship between SDO and lack of empathy has been found to be reciprocal  — with equivocal findings. Some studies show that empathy significantly impacts SDO,  whereas other research suggest the opposite effect is more robust; that SDO predicts empathy. It also suggests that those scoring high on SDO proactively avoid scenarios that could prompt them to be more empathetic or tender-minded.
This avoidance decreases concern for other's welfare. Empathy indirectly affects generalized prejudice through its negative relationship with SDO. Some recent research has suggested the relationship between SDO and empathy may be more complex, arguing that people with high levels of SDO are less likely to show empathy towards low status people but more likely to show it towards high status people. Conversely, people with low SDO levels demonstrate the reverse behaviour.
Research suggests that people high in SDO tend to support using violence in intergroup relations while those low in SDO oppose it, however it has also been argued that people low in SDO can also support and those high in it oppose violence in some circumstances, if the violence is seen as a form of counter dominance - for example, Lebanese people low in SDO approved more strongly of terrorism against the West than Lebanese people high in SDO, seemingly because it entailed a low status group Lebanese attacking a high status one Westerners.
Low levels of SDO have been found to result in individuals possessing positive biases towards outgroup members, for example regarding outgroup members as less irrational than ingroup members, the reverse of what is usually found. In the modern day US, research indicates that most people tend to score fairly low on the SDO scale, with an average score of 2. Thus SDO research may actually be discovering the psychology of egalitarianism rather than the reverse. Stanley suggests that true high-SDO scorers are possibly quite rare and that researchers need to make clearer what exactly they are defining high-SDO scores as, as prior studies did not always report the actual level of SDO endorsement from high-scorers.
SDO has been found to be related to color blindess as a racial ideology. For low SDO individuals, color blindness predicts more negative attitudes towards ethnic minorities but for high SDO individuals, it predicts more positive attitudes. SDO has also been found to relate to attitudes towards social class. Subjects who tended to prefer hierarchical social structures and to promote socially dominant behaviors as measured by SDO exhibited stronger responses in the right anterior dorsolateral prefrontal cortex right aDLPFC when facing superior players. Felicia Pratto and her colleagues have found evidence that a high social dominance orientation is strongly correlated with conservative political views, and opposition to programs and policies that aim to promote equality such as affirmative action , laws advocating equal rights for homosexuals , women in combat , etc.
One explanation suggests that opposition to programs that promote equality need not be based on racism or sexism but on a "principled conservatism",  that is, a "concern for equality of opportunity , color-blindness , and genuine conservative values". It shares knowledge of what these individuals think to be right and wrong. I think of it in my own terms as the advertising schemes in America.
As in the movie about Harvey Milk, if you are anything but heterosexual, your whole life and character is put on trial. Anti-gay groups have been around for years and have even caused violence and destroyed lives. There are more heterosexuals in the world which makes them more dominant. When gays started coming out, this sent them into a tail spin.
Look at Harvey, he was just as good as any other candidate that was running for election, but because he was different from the more dominant and acceptable group of society he was torn apart and basically put on trial. Heterosexuals have always been at the top of this so called hierarchy, while gays are at the absolute bottom. Look at where we have come from over the past 25 years with the acceptance of homosexuality. This essay was written by a fellow student. You may use it as a guide or sample for writing your own paper, but remember to cite it correctly. Social Dominance Theory — Hierarchy Structures. It emphasizes deconstruction , a critical questioning and examination of language and meaning. It is also concerned with the relativity of social understanding.
Postmodern feminism argues that "Woman" is not a universal construct and no one can speak for all women. It opposes the imposition of any form of sexual orientation and criticizes the institutionalized heterosexism. Lesbian feminism asserts that heterosexism and patriarchy are equally oppressive and they work together to maintain male supremacy and the oppression of women. It argues that women should identify themselves independently of men and look to other women to understand what it means to be a woman.
Also, it is a threat to the ideological, political, personal, and economic basis of male superiority e. It argues that there is a unique experience that mainstream feminist approaches do not adequately address. It also asserts that feminism must be culturally embedded to be effective. Black Feminism or Womanism further points out that multiple identities comprise the total self and all of them, not just gender, should be recognized. Both social and personal change are important. For Harriet. Another reason feminist theory is important is that most social work is practiced by women.
Nevertheless, most supervisory positions are held by men. Ramblings From An Optimist. Feminism recognizes that there are differences between the lives and experiences of men and women. This is the process of increasing personal, interpersonal, or political power so that individuals can take action to improve their life situations. The traditional patriarchal approach emphasizes the end result and is not concerned with how things are accomplished. Sexism is the result of social and political structures, not just what is experienced by individuals. One of the biggest implications of this principle is that the political environment can be changed and improved through personal actions.
Women can collectively campaign for a candidate and the candidate, once elected, can improve his or her supporters' personal lives. Given that more roles have changed from mom to working woman, women have experienced more stressors e. There are significant mental health issues for women because they are sacrificing more to balance. The superwoman ideal is a construct born out of the s women's movement. It defines women who strive to "do it all and have it all". Research has shown there is a relationship between the superwoman ideal and feminist identity. Feminist identity believes in the social, political and economic equality of the sexes. It is a multidimensional concept that encompasses feminist self identification, feminist consciousness, and gender-role attitudes.Steele, C. NY: Aldine. To illustrate this pattern, we Statement Of Purpose In Computer Science Food Stamp Program Essay Statement Of Purpose In Computer Science personality Statement Of Purpose In Computer Science next. Wiley InterScience.