{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03856502242152467, 'fraction_numerical': 0.014349775784753363, 'mean_word_length': 4.782383419689119, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 1, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Masculinity and femininity as factors in feminism.

The relationship between feminism and sex roles was explored in two studies. In female college students, sex-role types were measured by Baucom's (1976) MSC and FMN scales and by Bem's Sex-Role Inventory (Bem, 1974). Feminism was measured by the Attitude Toward Women Scale (AWS, Short Form) (Spence & Helmreich, 1972) and the Women's Liberation Scale (WLS) (Goldberg, 1976). Two groups of women were predicted to be more profeminist than others. (a) those scoring high on both masculinity and femininity and (b) those scoring high on masculinity and low on femininity. Results of the study supported both hypotheses using the AWS but not the WLS. In the second study, MSC and FMN served as the basis for forming sex-role types, and feminism was measured by participation in NOW. Again, a large number of women high on masculinity and low on femininity were feminists: however, women high on both masculinity and femininity were underrepresented in NOW. Different results in the two studies are discussed in terms of the different ways that feminism was measured.