Damn scientists and their blasted research!
It seems men are more stupid than once believed. Well, maybe not stupid so much as insecure. Yes, that’s the sweeping generalization I think can be made after reading this New York Times report.
A two-year Columbia University study of speed daters found that “men avoided women whom they perceived to be smarter than themselves. The same held true for measures of career ambition — a woman could be ambitious, just not more ambitious than the man considering her for a date.”
Researcher Ray Fisman (an economist) didn’t hide his disappointment in the results. “I guess I had hoped that they had evolved beyond this…So, yes, the stereotypes appear to be true: We males are a gender of fragile egos in search of a pretty face and are threatened by brains or success that exceeds our own.”
While this is somewhat amusing on the surface it has huge repercussions in the real world (okay, maybe speed dating is the real world). How does this play out in the workplace? What does this mean for heterosexual couples in which the woman is attaining greater success in her career? How should an ambitious, intelligent, single heterosexual woman who is also invested in finding a partner present herself in dating situations? Are we really still asking woman to play dumb if they want to find romance?
Well, I’m depressed. If only I had an unsuccessful partner to make me feel like a real man.
Digg
Facebook
del.icio.us
four comments
Maybe we can flip it around? The men who are avoiding you are the ones you don't want to be with anyways, so they're self-selecting themselves out of contention.
The workplace implications are possibly quite separate. But in terms of dating -- it depends on what we mean by romance. An ambitious, intelligent, single heterosexual woman should present herself as who she is. There are men who are attracted to those qualities. Maybe that study shows you should play dumb if you're looking to appeal to the lowest common denominator, but if you're looking for quality...
Posted by Catherine
November 22, 2007, 11:41 AM
I'm always surprised by these studies about how "men want unsuccessful partners" because, at least as an adult, I've dated men who see achievement as attractive, and have no problem with women who achieve as much or more than them. Did I just happen to win the dating lottery a few times over, or do I live in a bizarre parallel universe?
I have a lot of trouble imagining how two people can share a life with each other while trying to hide their smartness or non-smartness from each other. The thought of living like that makes me sad, and in part brings home why feminism is so important - because people need love to be liberated from these sicko gender expectations, dammit!
Posted by Thea
November 22, 2007, 2:57 PM
When you're dealing with research, there are findings on both side.Last valentines day, Bust magazine published an article with studies that would appear to contradict these findings. Christine B. Whelan did a huge study, interviewing successful women and men in the U.S. According to her 90% of men search for women who are as intelligent or more so than they are. Bella DePaulo, another researcher, also concluded from her extensive studies that single women usually chose to be single and were plenty happy ,perhaps more so than other groups. I wrote this to the Toronto Star on May 7, after they published an article about the dating scene which sounded equally bleak to what I read here. I believed those statistics strongly and drew great hope from them, as with other statistic about women's issues, but lately I'm just not sure. Whenever I seek the truth about the state of such important issues for women's confidence and general knowledge, I find that what I hear in difforent publications, womens' studies textbooks and newspapers are contradictory. What use is thus science? I don't know what to believe. As a straight woman, I would just like to know the truth about this. And about the heath risks, or lack thereof of gaining weight. And about . . . The list is endless. If anybody has anything to say to this, please speak up. Science is supposed to be the ultimate source of knowledge nowadays, but I sometimes feel it only leads to a yo-yoing of fear-mungering and relief for women. I'm fed up and confused. For now I'm taking nothing at face value.
Posted by Myra
November 25, 2007, 10:19 PM
As someone who has earned university degrees in both women's studies and nutrition, I can tell you that the findings and knowledge of both disciplines are grossly misrepresented in the so-called media (and often in their own academic writing as well).
In a previous post I had mentioned a univeristy class where the sole focus was on learning how to critically evaluate scientific research papers. The very first thing our professor told us was not to believe anything that you read and hear. Rather, you examine the totality of the evidence available, as well as the track record of the author and the publication the findings are presented in. Unfortunately, it is quite rare for a scientist, author, or publication not to have a political agenda of some sort.
In the case of the so-called media, virtually everything that is presented promotes the political agenda of those in control, i.e white men and big business.
The greatest gift of education and intelligence is the ability to seek one's own answers and not have to rely on someone else's version of reality. Personally, I cannot imagine an intelligent woman belittling herself by trying to appease a stupid man.
And by the way, the majority of research on women's weight and health show that women are healthiest, live longest (and look their best, I think) at a BMI of 26-28, which is higher than the recommended BMI of 19-25.
Posted by John
November 26, 2007, 11:31 AM
Leave a comment
This blog post is older than 90 days old. All comments submitted regarding this post will be automatically held for review by the editors before posting. Your comment will not appear on the site until it has been approved.
Our comment policy
Shameless prides itself on the diversity of opinions expressed by our writers, and we encourage and appreciate different points of view. Our intention at Shameless is to foster community and to maintain a safe and positive blogging environment; we do not consider it our duty to give a voice to anybody with an opinion.
Discussion on this site is moderated. We will delete comments that:
(We get to decide what's discriminatory, hateful, attacking, or inflammatory).
In some cases, we will cap off comments on a discussion when we feel they are spiralling out of control and fostering an unwelcoming space for bloggers and readers. Comments will be closed by the Web Editor, unless the post is by the Web Editor, in which case the Editor in Chief will close them.
If your comments repeatedly make the same point, they may be deleted. This also applies to comments made by multiple members of the same organization.
Your comments should be about the topic of the post, not its writer—although we certainly encourage praise for our writers, if you want to say something nice.