Gendered Profiles of Classism Toward People in Poverty: Hostile and Paternalistic Manifestations

Ambivalent classist representations shape support for poverty eradication strategies, yet little is known about how these attitudes differ when directed toward women versus men. We address this gap by conducting latent profile analyses to examine the emergence and prevalence of gendered ambivalent classism profiles across five countries ( N = 4,116; Spain, Argentina, Colombia, Chile, and Mexico). Results revealed a consistent range of classism profiles based on hostile and protective paternalistic attitudes toward women and men, including three ambivalent classist profiles (low, moderate, and high), a high generalized classist profile, a low-classist profile, and a paternalist profile. Profile emergence and prevalence varied by country and by the gender of the target. General trends emerged whereby participants were more likely to belong to paternalistic profiles when evaluating women in poverty compared to men in poverty. Further, those perceiving greater gender and economic inequality, and those identifying as feminists, were more likely to be members of low-classist or paternalistic profiles. Paternalistic and low-classist profiles were also less likely to justify existing inequalities and more supportive of collective action to confront them. These findings suggest that anti-poverty policies and interventions should account for gendered perceptions of poverty, as public support and stigma differ depending on whether poverty is associated with women or men.