Thoughts on this video

AaronStack91 · 2025-01-30T12:40:52+00:00

I don't get this either, in all my years of working in a office setting, anger is sign a failure of leadership. If my male boss shouted at me or berated me, I would be looking for a new job. I wouldn't hum and haw at how masculine and "boss" like he is.

Present_League9106 · 2025-01-30T14:27:42+00:00

I didn't listen long. She's citing things from over 20 years ago that have been redone since, guaranteed. She's cherry picking which is why this doesn't make sense.

Upper-Divide-7842 · 2025-01-31T12:24:35+00:00

Didn't watch the video because of it's annoying pastel aesthetic but I did skim over the studies.

It seems entirely plausible that something like this is happening. That said I don't exactly trust that this person would cite studies that go against her narrative so how much if a consensus there is on this subject it's hard to know.

Even the limited selection of studies presented here contradict eachother to some degree. For example Rudman and Gluck found that:

"Agentic female job applicants were viewed as less socially skilled than agentic males, but this perception only resulted in hiring discrimination for the feminized, not the masculine, job."

While Hielman Et Al found:

"these negative reactions occur only when the success is in an arena that is distinctly male in character"

Both agree that the discrimination exists but these are directly opposite conclusions.

Also; while the methodology of these studies seems fine there are some things that can't be controlled for.

If it were true, and I'm not saying it is but IF IT WERE true that the so called "agentic" women that people are likely to encounter actually are somewhat more likely to be tyrannical and disagreeable then that would be the reason for this stereotype.

Women are more agreeable on average and so it is assumed that this sets the baseline, deviation from whitch is punished to some extent by a subconscious process whereby the mismatch of expectation to reality causes this behaviour to be more harshly perceived.

That's entirely possible.

However it is also entirely possible that you give me an application with a man who has A B and C positive qualities and a woman who has A B and C positive qualities my subconscious is telling me the last 3 times you hired women with A B and C positive qualities you also got X Y and Z negative qualities and that didn"t happen with the men. And thus I project X Y and Z onto the female application.

But if course all of this research is done with the presumption that nothing negative about women that people generally perceive CAN be true. And of course we know that there is a bias in science (social science specifically) towards research that shows women good man bad it would not surprise me, given the current state of the social sciences, to find that there is also a bias towards research that shows women = victims.

So there could be a wealth of contradictory data that either doesn't get reported or even doesn't get published because doing so is deemed "socially irresponsible".

That said there does at least apear to be a general consensus on this being a thing that is (or at least was, some of these studies are 20 years old) happening and it does not really contradict anything that I believe already so I would generally assume this to be true until and unless I encounter compelling evidence that contradicts it.

Comments