Sick of sexism? Ambivalent sexism, work-family conflicts, and physical health of working mothers

Working mothers encounter persistent sexism in the workplace. This study draws on ambivalent sexism theory to examine the mediated relationships of supervisors’ hostile and benevolent sexist behaviors and working mothers’ physical health via conflicts in the work-family interface. Given the ambivalent nature of hostile and benevolent sexism, we hypothesize two distinct pathways: (1) a congruent pathway, in which hostile sexism, via work-to-family and family-to-work conflicts, is positively related to poor physical health, and (2) an opposing pathway, in which benevolent sexism, via work-to-family and family-to-work conflicts, is respectively positively and negatively related to poor physical health. Because both hostile and ambivalent sexism are rooted in assumptions of traditional gender roles, we further hypothesize that working mothers’ gender role orientation moderates the relationships between ambivalent sexism and conflicts in the work-family interface. Our findings from a three-wave, time-lagged study of 719 working mothers with young children under the age of five provide general support for these hypotheses. This study contributes to the literature by demonstrating how and why ambivalent sexism can simultaneously mitigate and exacerbate conflicts in the work-family interface, affecting mothers’ physical health and the perpetuation of workplace gender inequality.