4 ms·

Oh, of course. Again, I don't think it was sexism. But something that, under other circumstances, would look very very much like blatant sexism—might not be. Wh

Oh, of course. Again, I don't think it was sexism. But something that, under other circumstances, would look very very much like blatant sexism—might not be. Which causes problems for lots of women (I've heard) because they'll hesitate to act on actual sexism, due to all the second-guessing. This is relevant for the study, because "experienced a thing that, viewed through a certain lens, looks a ton like sexism" is something that I could answer "yes" to (more than once, actually! That was just the one that would have most-looked-like sexism if our positions had been reversed)... but I'm pretty sure it wasn't. Without some kind of baseline rate for this stuff, it's hard to tell what's actually going on. Further, as men and women might interpret the exact same events differently, you'd really need an observational study to begin to suss out the reality—a survey's not going to cut it, beyond maybe providing guidance on areas for further research.

altairprime 4y ago
Men don’t need more studies to tell them it’s unethical behavior. They’ll just ignore those studies, same as they’ve ignored the past few decades of them. Men need other men to tell them it’s unacceptable behavior. No further studies are needed to confirm that poppy-cutting behaviors are unethical. Ending support for those behaviors has no downsides. If men, and women, stop tolerating these behaviors, then the world will improve: either the behaviors will stop being perceived (success!), and/or the true underlying cause of the misperceptions of those behaviors will be revealed (success!). This survey indicates that three quarters of women surveyed reported perceiving these behaviors occurring without censure or punishment, so there’s a lot of work left to do by those in power - so, mostly, men - to stop tolerating them. (Women will need to stop as well, but their motivations as the underclass are considerably different from men. That’s no excuse for inaction by men.)
- yamtaddle 4y ago
  Of course, as I posted elsewhere in this thread: > (Nb. this doesn't necessarily mean that the proposed reforms aren't a good idea) The study just seems to be... kinda useless, due to how poorly it's designed, and the study's what's linked (well, a press-release-type story about the study, anyway). But yes, reducing shitty behavior is nice for ~everyone even if 0% of it turns out to be driven by sexism (which I doubt is the case, but taking the extreme emphasizes that it's good absolutely). However, the most-effective approaches to reducing it may well differ depending on how much of it's driven by sexism, about which this study seems to tell us nothing, despite that sure looking like the angle they're going for.
  - altairprime 4y ago
    Yeah, I wish there was more data on why people do this — but I’d rather see people stop it when they see it, because that works regardless of motivations.

altairprime 4y ago

Men don’t need more studies to tell them it’s unethical behavior. They’ll just ignore those studies, same as they’ve ignored the past few decades of them. Men need other men to tell them it’s unacceptable behavior. No further studies are needed to confirm that poppy-cutting behaviors are unethical. Ending support for those behaviors has no downsides. If men, and women, stop tolerating these behaviors, then the world will improve: either the behaviors will stop being perceived (success!), and/or the true underlying cause of the misperceptions of those behaviors will be revealed (success!). This survey indicates that three quarters of women surveyed reported perceiving these behaviors occurring without censure or punishment, so there’s a lot of work left to do by those in power - so, mostly, men - to stop tolerating them. (Women will need to stop as well, but their motivations as the underclass are considerably different from men. That’s no excuse for inaction by men.)

yamtaddle 4y ago
Of course, as I posted elsewhere in this thread: > (Nb. this doesn't necessarily mean that the proposed reforms aren't a good idea) The study just seems to be... kinda useless, due to how poorly it's designed, and the study's what's linked (well, a press-release-type story about the study, anyway). But yes, reducing shitty behavior is nice for ~everyone even if 0% of it turns out to be driven by sexism (which I doubt is the case, but taking the extreme emphasizes that it's good absolutely). However, the most-effective approaches to reducing it may well differ depending on how much of it's driven by sexism, about which this study seems to tell us nothing, despite that sure looking like the angle they're going for.
- altairprime 4y ago
  Yeah, I wish there was more data on why people do this — but I’d rather see people stop it when they see it, because that works regardless of motivations.