Tyler misstates one of the conclusions of Burgoon and Hiscox's work on female protectionism. Contrary to Tyler, B&H don't find that educated women are more anti-foreign than other women. Instead, they find that educated women are more anti-foreign than educated men. Less educated women are the most protectionist; then less educated men; then educated women; and finally, educated men.
To see this, take a look at B&H's Table 3. "Female" and "Highly Educated" are both "dummy variables" (variables equal to either 0 or 1). The positive coefficent on "Highly Educated" always substantially exceeds the negative coefficient on "Female."
I actually have a paper that builds on B&H. In it, I find that B&H's result holds not just for protectionism, but for economic beliefs in general. Education makes both men and women think more like economists, but it has a larger effect on men's beliefs than women's. In fact, the effect of education on economic beliefs seems to be about 50% larger for men than women.