I found the results of Laurie Rudman’s study on how the “presence of implicit gender stereotypes about romance and home, achievement and career, has consequences for the women who hold them” to be intriguing (116). The first finding was that women are less likely to aspire to achieve individual power and status in society if they associate their ideal significant other in life to be a “Prince Charming” (116). The other finding from this study revealed that these self-defeating stereotypes were a contributing factor for why women would forego professional opportunities that could establish their authority and status in society if it meant that they would have to compete for such opportunities with men. Altogether, both conclusions connect back to the idea of dissociation mentioned earlier in the text. Dissociation is essentially the idea that one can hold two mutually inconsistent ideas. Still, while one idea is reflective, the other idea is more automatic and more susceptible to being endorsed without us being aware.

After pondering over Rudman’s study, I wonder how different the results would be if the study subjects remained women. Yet, instead of imagining a life with a Prince Charming, they imagined an ideal life with a Princess Charming? How would this study’s results be different if there were both heterosexual and queer men who participated in this study and were asked to imagine a life with an ideal Prince Charming or an individual of different gender and sexual orientation who possessed the associations of royalty? Questions like these cause me to wonder how the roles of race, gender, and sexuality impact group and power dynamics in the context of leadership- both professionally and socially.