

Women Are Sort Of More Tentative Than Men, Aren't They? - restruct
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/08/090825090749.htm

======
mdasen
It's a poor title for the article since the conclusion of the article is that
both men and women are tentative about subjects that are considered the domain
of the opposite gender while having the same level of tentativeness within
gender-neutral topics. It's interesting research and I hope the follow it up
with how it affects things that have great social impact (like job interviews,
how people work in an office, etc).

~~~
Alex3917
The title is brilliant. Not only is it self-referrential humor, but it sets up
an expectancy violation as well. While this doesn't help people who only read
the headline to understand the conclusion, it helps people who did read the
article to remember it better. (C.f. Made to Stick)

------
dkarl
God, I can't believing that changing a tire is still considered a masculine
topic. No self-respecting American woman under forty would hesitate to pull
out the jack and take care of a flat herself. Feminine helplessness went out
with crew cuts, Jello molds, and green bean casseroles. Men may be generally
more interested in cars, but nobody changes a tire for fun -- they change a
tire when and only when they need to. Men don't have more flat tires than
women, and even the nutty car enthusiasts I know don't rotate their own tires
-- it's really boring, and it's much easier and quicker for a pro.

So I ask again, why is it a masculine topic? (Yeah, I know the answer, but it
depresses me.)

~~~
gamache
Why are you upset that more men than women can change a tire? Does it upset
you that more women than men can knit? Further, why do women over 40 get a
pass on changing tires?

I feel that eliminating gender-based barriers is almost universally a good
thing. But why be bothered when the majority of a gender expresses its
preference _not_ to do something?

EDIT: My aunt Sue makes a damn fine green bean casserole. I look forward to it
every Thanksgiving. She also does a lot of needlepoint embroidery, often
pictures of cats. She is vice president of a bank. Let people do what _they_
want.

~~~
emmett
Why to be bothered:

Because by strongly gendering arbitrary actions, you effectively do constrain
people. You make it difficult for anyone to perform the action and still be
considered masculine/feminine, when that action should have nothing to do with
it.

Not sure I think the gendering of changing car tires is really a terrible
offense (or in need of change at all), but that would be the justification for
why you should be bothered.

~~~
gamache
_Because by strongly gendering arbitrary actions, you effectively do constrain
people._

But what if it isn't me that's "gendering arbitrary actions" -- what if a
majority of the gender itself is doing it?

------
justin_hancock
It's a generally meaningless article. It says that people are tentative when
they are unsure of a subject regardless of gender. Plenty of weasles words in
the article that confirm my point words such as e.g. stereotype, typical.
Making the content of the article a bit vague and woolly.

~~~
dkarl
It's easy to imagine the contrary being true, that women would be more
tentative in all situations, so it's a real finding. It would be even more
interesting to compare results across class and geography.

However, one thing bothers me: Palomares is _so_ smug about knocking down
stereotypical differences between the sexes, but his analysis _depends_ on
stereotypical differences between the sexes. He's just shuffling the
stereotypes around, discarding one by depending on another. It's hardly
something to be self-righteous about.

~~~
ekiru
In fact, some psychology textbooks(at least in high school) affirmatively
claim that females are more tentative than males in all situations. This
research seems to disprove that. It's useful to disprove untrue things that
were formerly believed to be true.

------
anigbrowl
This article is interesting, but I question the broadness of the conclusion.
For example British people are stereotypically reserved, while Americans are
stereotypically brash and direct (of course, numerous counterexamples exist
and may be exploited for comic effect).

I hedge a great deal although I'm male; I'm more assertive and direct online
than in person. This is learned behavior often a handicap, though not without
its uses. It would be interesting to see how this conversational behavior
correlates with something like a Myers-Briggs, or in pairings with different
power levels (eg an undergraduate being told another experimental particiapant
holds a PhD, with both assigned to solve some problem outside of their
academic expertise). Or maybe it wouldn't :-|

------
cschick2317
I don't see why there would be much of a difference. I mean...you either know
something or you aren't sure/don't know it. If I know something I'll talk
without hedging...if I'm not sure then I'll hedge.

Women are going to know more about stereotypically female tasks and men are
going to know more about male stereotyped tasks...otherwise those tasks
wouldn't be stereotyped to begin with.

And it makes sense someone would hedge more when they are talking to the
opposite gender about something they think that gender knows well. If I don't
know something and I think someone else does, I'm not going to talk about it
like I know it.

