Published: Monday, September 8, 2008, 14:14
Women get finicky over typical male chauvinists, goes
the common notion. But not knowing a man is far more unnerving for the
ladies than his overtly sexist views, according to a new study.
In fact, the ignorance of a man's views can even make the women perform
worse in exams.
During the study, Rodolfo Mendoza-Denton at the university of
California, Berkeley, gave a written test to 170 female undergraduates.
Prior to the test, the students were assigned to one of three empty
offices, which they were told belonged to their male examiner. The
offices were furnished in one of three ways to allow the students to
infer the examiner's view of women- having a "progressive" decor such as
a breast-cancer awareness banner, overtly sexist posters of women, or
neutral objects such as a stack of papers.
After the test, it was found that students, who were sensitive to
sexism, as measured by a separate questionnaire, did not score well in
the supposedly neutral office.
However, there wasn't any effect on the students' performance, when they
had to go into the chauvinist office. In fact, they scored better than
less-sensitive peers
"Ironically, if you 'know thy enemy', you've got a better chance of
dealing with it than if you are constantly wondering if you will be
judged unfairly," New Scientist magazine quoted Mendoza-Denton as
saying.
Earlier studies have shown that black people prefer dealing with overtly
racist whites rather than those behaving ambiguously.
The researchers say that this is because overt racism and sexism are
considered socially unacceptable, and prejudice has become subtler.
Read more at: http://news.oneindia.in/2008/09/08/ambiguous-unnerve-women-male-chauvinists-1220864700.html
Women get finicky over typical male chauvinists, goes
the common notion. But not knowing a man is far more unnerving for the
ladies than his overtly sexist views, according to a new study.
In fact, the ignorance of a man's views can even make the women perform
worse in exams.
During the study, Rodolfo Mendoza-Denton at the university of
California, Berkeley, gave a written test to 170 female undergraduates.
Prior to the test, the students were assigned to one of three empty
offices, which they were told belonged to their male examiner. The
offices were furnished in one of three ways to allow the students to
infer the examiner's view of women- having a "progressive" decor such as
a breast-cancer awareness banner, overtly sexist posters of women, or
neutral objects such as a stack of papers.
After the test, it was found that students, who were sensitive to
sexism, as measured by a separate questionnaire, did not score well in
the supposedly neutral office.
However, there wasn't any effect on the students' performance, when they
had to go into the chauvinist office. In fact, they scored better than
less-sensitive peers
"Ironically, if you 'know thy enemy', you've got a better chance of
dealing with it than if you are constantly wondering if you will be
judged unfairly," New Scientist magazine quoted Mendoza-Denton as
saying.
Earlier studies have shown that black people prefer dealing with overtly
racist whites rather than those behaving ambiguously.
The researchers say that this is because overt racism and sexism are
considered socially unacceptable, and prejudice has become subtler.
Read more at: http://news.oneindia.in/2008/09/08/ambiguous-unnerve-women-male-chauvinists-1220864700.html
