2 ms·

When I'm excited about something I'm prone to talking over everybody, and after realising this was sometimes squeezing people out of conversations where they co

by mst 9y ago

When I'm excited about something I'm prone to talking over everybody, and after realising this was sometimes squeezing people out of conversations where they could provide valuable input I've done my best to learn to catch myself doing this and try and consciously stop and let them talk. What seems to be the case is that men are more likely to interrupt back, so on a population level this does tend to squeeze a higher percentage of women out - but it doesn't squeeze out the women who're happy to interrupt you back, and it does also squeeze out the quieter men, whose existence and contributions I've also become more aware of as a result. So the mistake may not have been gendered on his part, and I'd suggest you think hard about whether you're engaging in benevolent sexism by believing only women can be quieter and more in danger of interrupted. (note that given your other comment down-thread, it may be he's more likely to interrupt women - but it also may be that men are more likely to interrupt him back - if your watching of the video strongly suggests the former then fair enough, but my point here is "all quieter people gain from us learning to talk over people less" and I think that's worth remembering)

croon 9y ago
> What seems to be the case is that men are more likely to interrupt back, so on a population level this does tend to squeeze a higher percentage of women out - but it doesn't squeeze out the women who're happy to interrupt you back, and it does also squeeze out the quieter men, whose existence and contributions I've also become more aware of as a result. > So the mistake may not have been gendered on his part, and I'd suggest you think hard about whether you're engaging in benevolent sexism by believing only women can be quieter and more in danger of interrupted. Aren't these contradictory if you're first saying that women are less likely to interrupt back and then saying it might be in my head? Either way, your overall point is sound, but she TRIED to interrupt him several time, whereas none of the other panelists had to even try. I'm always questioning myself, but I don't think I'm projecting that interpretation. I do however agree that obviously quieter people will have less airtime than more extrovert people, regardless of gender. I think the question is: Do we believe that this is inherent in gender (nature), nurtured in our culture (women's upbringing), or enforced by sexism after the fact (imposed by men as a result of culture/nurture)? If your hinted statistics are true, then one statement above must be true, unless I excluded an option.
- mst 9y ago
  I've concluded that I don't have enough data to be sure but wouldn't be surprised if it's a mixture of all three - testosterone levels correlating with assertiveness/aggressiveness seems sufficient to suggest biology may play a part, and I've definitely seen the latter two happen. I don't, however, think it's contradictory to say that "women are less likely to interrupt back" does not automatically mean that the person interrupting them is therefore sexist, even though the results of the behaviour end up impacting a higher percentage of women than men - they may simply be oblivious to the consequences, even if from the sounds of it in this case that wasn't it.

by mst 9y ago

croon 9y ago

> What seems to be the case is that men are more likely to interrupt back, so on a population level this does tend to squeeze a higher percentage of women out - but it doesn't squeeze out the women who're happy to interrupt you back, and it does also squeeze out the quieter men, whose existence and contributions I've also become more aware of as a result. > So the mistake may not have been gendered on his part, and I'd suggest you think hard about whether you're engaging in benevolent sexism by believing only women can be quieter and more in danger of interrupted. Aren't these contradictory if you're first saying that women are less likely to interrupt back and then saying it might be in my head? Either way, your overall point is sound, but she TRIED to interrupt him several time, whereas none of the other panelists had to even try. I'm always questioning myself, but I don't think I'm projecting that interpretation. I do however agree that obviously quieter people will have less airtime than more extrovert people, regardless of gender. I think the question is: Do we believe that this is inherent in gender (nature), nurtured in our culture (women's upbringing), or enforced by sexism after the fact (imposed by men as a result of culture/nurture)? If your hinted statistics are true, then one statement above must be true, unless I excluded an option.

mst 9y ago
I've concluded that I don't have enough data to be sure but wouldn't be surprised if it's a mixture of all three - testosterone levels correlating with assertiveness/aggressiveness seems sufficient to suggest biology may play a part, and I've definitely seen the latter two happen. I don't, however, think it's contradictory to say that "women are less likely to interrupt back" does not automatically mean that the person interrupting them is therefore sexist, even though the results of the behaviour end up impacting a higher percentage of women than men - they may simply be oblivious to the consequences, even if from the sounds of it in this case that wasn't it.