Letters to the Editor
-
Male gaze necessary?
Is it just me who caught the male gaze perspective to this commentary, i.e., "stunningly beautiful woman" as a reason why men were more willing to be interviewed than women?
Not to discredit Ms. Campbell's attractiveness (sort of a thinner Racheal Ray type) but once again - is this male perspective in this context necessary/relevant?
Just sayin' ...
-
Let's not blame Campbell
Lindsay Campbell is asking us to take her word for the statistical validity of the findings she excerpts. Okay, fine. Maybe it is and maybe it isn't — surely in the middle of the day in Manhattan she must get lots of "thank you, not todays" from men, too, that she chooses not to show us.
But whether or not her excerpts represent a trend in her work, or her approach or appearance somehow constitutes observer bias (did anyone else get bristly at Thomas Rogers' implication that Campbell is too beautiful to do her job right?), the fact remains that some of the behavior she documents is tragically stereotypical.
I mean... Take "Is Hillary Clinton a monster?" — in most contexts that would be a deliberate attempt to throw your subject a softball. Only if one is paralyzed with anxiety over answering "correctly" in accordance with expectations (which, yes, Campbell does not articulate — deliberately) would one find a lob like that so insurmountable that one should beg out by reason of "not being informed."
If she had been asked to write her answer down she would have fretted about her penmanship not being good enough. That's how we raise girls. The obvious response — "What the hell kind of question is that?" — is not one that teacher would approve of.
Maybe there's a reason nobody ever asks me for my comment.
-
Women and Q&A
Men are more vocal on radio call up shows. Males are definately not afraid to answer wrongly in classroom situations. That is something I both noticed and experienced.
The reason women are afraid of appearing stupid if they answer a question wrong in majority male classrooms is BECAUSE there is usually some jerk in there that will turn your wrong answer into a gender thing - especially in math and engineering.
On the street Q&A? I am sure a lot of women have seen Leno's (wo)man on the street segments. Yeah - I probably would not participate in some random Q&A with a camera aimed on me either.
-
An encounter with a random, attractive, interested female?
Golly gosh, who would say no to that?
-
Bad Proffered Reasons for non-participation
Like the fact that Campbell is a stunningly beautiful woman -- which probably doesn't hurt her ability to attract male subjects -- or that her questions are as subtle as: "Is Hillary Clinton a monster?"
Neither is a very good explanation, really. Well, the first one is missing further evidence. It might make sense to explain high participation rates amongst men, but why low participation rates (if true) amongst women?
The second one however is just off considering that the complaint is that women don't want to talk to begin with, not that they talk and then leave. There is little reason to suspect that the women saying "no thank you" and moving on already know that they'll be asked about Hillary Clinton being a monster. (Moreover, considering that Samantha Power's did say that Clinton wa a monster, the question doesn't seem as totally off base and crazy as one might think. Perhaps not as deep as many, many other questions one could ask, but at least somewhat topicacl).
Or maybe, growing up watching American television and advertising, women are just more conscious of the way their image can be exploited: concerns that are pretty well proven by the video itself. Despite these women's obvious desire not to be on camera, footage of them was cut together to make a point about their alleged inferiority. It's exactly the kind of thing that makes you want to run away from camera crews.
Perhaps. It's far more likely that this is a statistical fluke.
-
Maybe they just communicate differently?
Men's conversations tend to center around displays of opinion. In most groups of men, the conversation is a series of statements. Questions tend to be of the "what's your evidence for that?" variety. Women's conversations tend to be explorations of the relationships among the things being discussed.
This kind of man-on-the-street interview works well for men because this is how they talk to each other. If you want to engage women on the street, present a problem about a relationship. Not "Is Hillary Clinton a monster," but "I saw that Chelsea's been campaigning for her mom. I wonder whether she feels torn between defending her dad or backing her mom."
Finally, it takes a certain kind of arrogance to think that a random passer-by is interested in your opinion.
-
Similar in corportate America
I work for a major company. A few months ago, I attended a meeting of the 1000 or so most senior people in our large division. The audience was made up of 20% women -- so women were clearly outnumbered. At one point during the day we had a q/a session with the executive management team. Probably 20 people asked questions. All -- except me -- were men. I was not pleased that more women were not willing to put themselves out there and take the opportunity to directly question the executive management team.
-
of course they are less willing to speak their minds because speaking your mind can offend someone
everyone wants to be loved by everyone (they don't want to reciprocate necessarily) but men if they want to be loved by women have to prove themselves by doing and saying things to demonstrate their superior quality over other men and one of the things they have to do is stand out and be right, and be able to prove it and make it stick, in addition to being good looking, successfully, sensitive, etc, etc. Women have no need to do any of this except when they want to so it makes sense that they would be more restrained. Of course we are talking about inclinations and behavior which are to a significant degree innate biological adaptions to biological necessity, not something which is entirely a product of individual learning.