Sosyal Hiyerarşi: Cinsel Şiddet Mitlerini Anlamak

Tecavüze ilişkin değer yargıları genellikle kadının erkeği kışkırttığını, yaşanan olayı fazla abarttığını ifade etmekte ve erkeğin kadına yönelik cinsel saldırganlığını inkâr etme ya da meşrulaştırma işlevini görmektedir. Bu çalışmada tecavüze ilişkin yanlış inançların altında yatan dinamikleri anlamak amacıyla kadınlara ve erkeklere yönelik cinsiyetçi eğilimlerin ve sosyal üstünlük yöneliminin, cinsel saldırganlık mitlerinin kabulüne etkisi incelenmiştir. İzmir'in farklı semtlerinde ikamet eden 302 katılımcıyla yapılan çalışmada Cinsel Saldırganlığa İlişkin Mitlerin Kabulü Ölçeği (Gerger, Kley, Bohner ve Siebler, 2007), Sosyal Üstünlük Yönelimi Ölçeği (Pratto, Sidanius, Stallworth ve Malle, 1994), Çelişik Duygulu Cinsiyetçilik Ölçeği (Glick ve Fiske, 1996) ve Erkeklere İlişkin Çelişik Duygular Ölçeği (Glick ve Fiske, 1999) uygulanmıştır. Araştırma sonucunda, cinsel saldırganlığa ilişkin mitlerin kabulü ile sosyal üstünlük yönelimi arasındaki ilişkide kadınlara ve erkeklere yönelik cinsiyetçi tutumların aracı rolünün olduğu bulunmuştur. Bulgular, tecavüz hakkındaki yanlış inançlarla mücadele sürecinde toplumdaki hiyerarşi yapılarının ve bu yapılara ilişkin algıların dikkate alınması gerektiğini göstermektedir.

Social Hierarchy: Understanding of Sexual Aggression Myths

The value judgments about rape usually states that the women provoke men, the issue exaggerated by women and functions as the denial of men's sexual aggression against women or as the legitimating of issue. In this study, in order to understand the underlying dynamics of false beliefs about rape, sexist tendencies against men and women, the effect of social dominance orientation on the acceptance of sexual aggression myths. This study is carried out with 302 participants residing in different districts of Izmir who are applied such scales; Acceptance of Modern Myths about Sexual Aggression Scale (Gerger, Kley, Bohner, & Siebler, 2007), Social Dominance Orientation Scale (Pratto, Sidanius, Stallworth, & Malle, 1994), Ambivalent Sexism Inventory (Glick & Fiske, 1996), and Ambivalence toward Men Inventory (Glick & Fiske, 1999). This study shows that there is the agent role of sexist attitudes towards men and women in the relationship between social dominance orientation and acceptance of myths about sexual aggression. The findings also show that the hierarchical structures of society and perceptions of those structures should be taken into consideration in the process of struggling against the false beliefs about rape.

___

  • Abrams, D., Viki, G. T., Masser, B. ve 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 and Social Psychology, 84, 111-125.
  • Anderson, K. B., Cooper, H. ve Okamura, L. (1997). Individual differences and attitudes toward rape: A meta-analytic review. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 295-315.
  • Aronowitz, T., Lambert C. A. ve Davidoff, S. (2012). The role of rape myth acceptance in the social norms regarding sexual behavior among college students. Journal of Community Health Nursing, 29(3), 173-182.
  • Baron, R. M. ve Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journa of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182.
  • Başbakanlık Kadının Genel Statüsü Müdürlüğü (2008). Türkiye'de kadına yönelik aile içi şiddet araştırması, 22 Şubat 2011, http://www.ksgm.gov.tr/tdvaw/anasayfa. htm.
  • Bates, C. ve Heaven, P. C. L. (2001). Attitudes to women in society: The role of social dominance orientation and social values. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 11, 43-49.
  • Begany, J. J. ve Milburn, M. A. (2002). Psychological predictors of sexual harassment: Authoritarianism, hostile sexism, and rape myths. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 3, 119-126.
  • Bohner, G., Weisbord, C., Raymond, P., Barzvi, A. ve Schwarz, N. (1993). Salience of rape affects self-esteem: The moderating role of gender and rape myth acceptance. European Journal of Personality, 23, 561-579.
  • Bohner, G., Siebler, F. ve Schmelcher, J. (2006). Social norms and the likelihood of raping: Perceived rape myth acceptance of others affects men's rape proclivity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 286-297.
  • Bolak, H. (2000). Cinselliği toplumsal bağlamda anlamak: Sosyal-psikolojik açılımlar. Cinsel Eğitim Tedavi Araştırma Derneği (CETAD) Günleri-II, 24-26 Kasım, İstanbul.
  • Burt, M. (1980). Cultural myths and supports for rape. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 217-230.
  • Brownmiller, S. (1984). Cinsel zorbalık. (S. Öncü, Çev). İstanbul: Cep Kitapları. (Orijinal çalışma basım tarihi 1975).
  • Chapleau, K. M., Oswald, D. B. ve Russell, B. L. (2007). How ambivalent sexism toward women and men support rape myth acceptance. Sex Roles, 57, 131-136.
  • Çoklar, I. (2007). Tecavüz ve kadına yönelik cinsel şiddetin meşrulaştırılması (Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Ege Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İzmir.
  • Durán, M., Moya, M., Megías, J. L. ve Viki, G. T. (2010). Social perception of rape victims in dating and married relationships: The role of perpetrator's benevolent sexism. Sex Roles, 62, 505-519.
  • Eastwick, P. W., Eagly, A. E., Glick, P., Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C., Fiske, S. T., Blum, A. M. B. ve ark. (2006). Is traditional gender ideology associated with sex-typed mate preferences? A test in nine nations. Sex Roles, 54, 603-614.
  • Gerger, H., Kley, H., Bohner, G. ve Siebler, F. (2007). The acceptance of modern myths about sexual aggression scale: Development and validation in German and English. Aggressive Behavior, 33, 1-19.
  • Glick, P. ve Fiske, S. T. (1996). The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 491-512.
  • Glick, P. ve Fiske, S. T. (1997). Hostile and benevolent sexism measuring ambivalent sexist attitudes toward women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 119-135.
  • Glick, P. ve Fiske, S. (1999). The ambivalence toward men inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent beliefs about men. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 23, 519-536.
  • Glick, P., Fiske, S. T., Mladinic, A., Saiz, J., Abrams, D., Masser, B. ve ark. (2000). Beyond prejudice as simple antipathy: Hostile and benevolent sexism across cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 763-775.
  • Glick, P., Lamerias, M., Fiske, S. T., Eckes, T., Masser, B., Volpato, C. ve ark. (2004). Bad but bold: Ambivalent attitudes toward men predict gender inequality in 16 nations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(5), 713-728.
  • Glick, P., Sakallı-Uğurlu, N., Ferreira, M. C. ve De Souza, M. A. (2002). Ambivalent sexism and attitudes toward wife abuse in Turkey and Brazil. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26, 292-297.
  • Godenzi, A. (1992). Cinsel şiddet: Yaşayanların ve yaşatanların anlatımlarıyla. (S. Kurucan ve Y. Coşar, Çev.). İstanbul: Ayrıntı Yayınları. (Orijinal çalışma basım tarihi 1989.)
  • Hayes, R. M., Lorenz, K. ve Bell, K. A. (2013). Victim blaming others: Rape myth acceptance and the just world belief. Feminist Criminology, 8(3), 202-220.
  • Jewkes, R., Sen, P. ve Garcia-Moreno, C. (2002). Sexual violence. E. G. Krug, L. L. Dahlberg, J. A. Mercy, A. B. Zwi ve R. Lozano, (Ed.), World report on violence and health içinde (147-181). Geneva, World Health Organization. Jones, C. ve Aronson, E. (1973). Attribution of fault to a rape victim as a function of respectability of the victim. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 26, 415-419.
  • Kleinke, C. L. ve Meyer, C. (1990). Evaluation of rape victim by men and women with high and low belief in a just world. Psychology of women Quarterly, 14, 343-353.
  • Krahé, B. (1991). Social psychological issues in the study of rape. European Review of Social Psychology, 2, 279-309.
  • Krahé, B. (2000). Sexual scripts and heterosexual aggression. T. Eckes ve H. M. Trautner, (Ed.), The developmental social psychology of gender içinde (273-292). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Lambert, A. J. ve Raichle, K. (2000). The role of political ideology in mediating judgments of blame in rape victims and their assailants: A test of the just world, personal responsibility, and legitimization hypotheses. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 853-863.
  • Lonsway, K. A. ve Fitzgerald, L. F. (1994). Rape myths: In review. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 18, 133-164.
  • Lonsway, K. A. ve Fitzgerald, L. F. (1995). Attitudinal antecedents of rape myth acceptance: A theoretical and empirical reexamination. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 704-711.
  • Masser, B., Lee, K. ve McKimmie, B. M. (2010). Bad woman, bad victim? Disentangling the effects of victim stereotypicality, gender stereotypicality and benevolent sexism on acquaintance rape victim blame. Sex Roles, 62, 494-504.
  • McFarland, S. G. (2005). On the eve of war: Authoritarianism, social dominance, and american students' attitudes toward attackting Iraq. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 360-367.
  • Payne, D., L., Lonsway, K. A. ve Fitzgerald, L. F. (1999). Rape myth acceptance: Exploration of its structure and its measurement using the Illinois rape myth acceptance scale. Journal of Research in Personality, 33, 27-68.
  • Pedersen, S. H. ve Strömwall, L. A. (2013). Victim blame, sexism and just-world beliefs: A cross-cultural comparison. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 20(6), 932-941.
  • Pratto, F., Liu, J. H., Levin, S., Sidanius, J., Shih, M., Bachrach, H. ve Hegarty, P. (2000). Social dominance orientation and the legitimization of inequality across cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 31, 369-409.
  • Pratto, F., Sidanius, L. ve Levin, S. (2006). Social dominance theory and the dynamics of intergroup relations: Taking stock and looking forward. European Review of Social Psychology, 17, 271-320.
  • Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., Stallworth, L. M. ve Malle, B. F. (1994). Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 741-763.
  • Russell, B. L. ve Trigg, K. Y. (2004). Tolerance of sexual ha- rassment: An examination of gender differences, ambivalent sexism, social dominance, and gender roles. Sex Roles, 50, 565-573.
  • Sakallı, N. (2001). Beliefs about wife beating among Turkish college students: The effects of patriarchy, sexism, and sex differences. Sex Roles, 44, 599-610.
  • Sakallı-Uğurlu, N. (2003a). Cinsiyetçilik: Kadınlara ve erkeklere ilişkin tutumlar ve çelişik duygulu cinsiyetçilik kuramı. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 6(11-12), 1-20.
  • Sakallı-Uğurlu, N. (2008). Erkeklere ilişkin çelişik duygular ölçeğinin Türkçeye uyarlanması. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 11(21), 1-11.
  • Sakallı-Uğurlu, N. ve Beydoğan, B. (2002). Turkish college students' attitudes toward women managers: The effects of patriarchy, sexism, and gender differences. The Journal of Psychology, 136, 647-656.
  • Sakallı-Uğurlu, N. ve Glick, P. (2003). Ambivalent sexism and attitudes toward women who engage in premarital sex in Turkey. The Journal of Sex Research, 40, 296-302.
  • Sakallı-Uğurlu, N., Yalçın, Z. S. ve Glick, P. (2007). Ambivalent sexism, belief in a just world, and empathy as predictors of Turkish students' attitudes toward rape victims. Sex Roles, 57(11-12), 889-895.
  • Salman, S. (2007). The predictors of attitudes toward sexual harassment: Locus of control, ambivalent sexism, and gender differences (Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Orta Doğu Teknik Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Ankara.
  • Scully, D. (1994). Tecavüz: Cinsel şiddeti anlamak. (Ş. Tekelli ve L. Aypak, Çev.). İstanbul: Metis Yayıncılık. (Orijinal çalışma basım tarihi 1990).
  • Serin, N. (2001). Eğitim düzeyi ve cinsiyet ile kurbanın durum ve uyruğunun tecavüze ilişkin algılar üzerindeki etkisi (Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Ankara.
  • Sibley, C. G., Wilson, M. S. ve Duckitt, J. (2007). Antecedents of men's hostile and benevolent sexism: The dual roles of social dominance orientation and right-wing authoritarianism. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 160-172.
  • Sidanius, J. ve Pratto, F. (1999). Social dominance: An intergroup theory of social hierarchy and oppression. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Sidanius, J., Pratto, F. ve Bobo, L. (1994). Social dominance orientation and the political psychology of gender: A case of invariance? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 998-1011.
  • Sidanius, J., Pratto, F. ve Bobo, L. (1996). Racism, conservatism, affirmative action, and intellectual sophistication: A matter of principled conservatism or group dominance? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(3), 476-490.
  • Sinclair, H. C. ve Bourne, L. E. (1998). Cycle of blame or just world. effects of legal verdicts on gender patterns in rapemyth acceptance and victim empathy. Psychology of women Quarterly, 22, 575-588.
  • Solmuş, T. (1997). Eğitim düzeyinin, cinsiyetin, giyim tarzının ve sosyal statünün tecavüze ilişkin algılar üzerindeki etkisi (Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Hacettepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Ankara.
  • Turgut, S. (2007). Predictors of attitudes toward sexual harassment: Ambivalent Sexism, ambivalence toward men, and gender differences (Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Orta Doğu Teknik Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Ankara.
  • Uluslararası Af Örgütü (2004). Her şey elimizde: Kadına yönelik şiddete son. 15 Şubat 2008, http://www.amnesty.org. tr/yeni/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&i d=244&Itemid=80.
  • Van Hiel, A. ve Mervielde, I. (2002). Explaining conservative beliefs and political preferences: A comparison of social dominance orientation and authoritarianism. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32, 965-976.
  • Vandiver, D. M. ve Dupalo, J. R. (2012). Factors that affect college students' perceptions of rape: What is the role of gender and other situational factors? International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 57(5), 592-612.
  • Viki, G. T. ve Abrams, D. (2003). Infra-humanization: Ambivalent sexism and the attribution of primary and secondary emotions to women. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 492-499.
  • Viki, G. T., Abrams, D. ve Masser, B. (2004). Evaluating stranger and acquaintance rape: The role of benevolent sexism in perpetrator blame and recommended sentence length. Law and Human Behavior, 28, 295-303.
  • Whitley, Jr. B. E. ve Egisdóttir, S. (2000). The gender belief system, authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, and heterosexuals' attitudes toward lesbians and gay men. Sex Roles, 42, 947-967.
  • Yalçın, Z. S. (2006). Effects of ambivalent sexism, locus of control, empathy, and belief in a just world on attitudes toward rape victims (Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Orta Doğu Teknik Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Ankara.
  • Yamawaki, N., Darby, R. ve Queiroz, A. (2007). The moderating role of ambivalent sexism: The influence of power status on perception of rape victim and rapist. The Journal of Social Psychology, 147, 41-56.
  • Yamawaki, N. (2007). Rape perception and the function of ambivalent sexism and gender-role traditionality. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 22, 406-423.