![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Negative Stereotypes?
Oct. 16th, 2007 07:12 pmMost of the feminist blogs I read have picked up on this story - that there is an article published this month in Sex Roles journal that "proves" that feminists have happier, more stable heterosexual relationships than non-feminists, and that the negative stereotypes are unfounded.
This is a pretty pleasing report, and I planned to put it online for our students to read, mark, and inwardly digest. I got permission, but thought I'd better read the full article first in case there was anything else that I wanted to highlight.
HUH. The abstract talks about "negative feminist stereotypes (i.e., that feminists are single, lesbians, or unattractive)". I was a bit perplexed that they would leave that unchallenged (that any of those things are in fact negative), but figured that you are short of space in an abstract, so have to kind of rely on people knowing that these are the kind of things that get trotted out as negative by anti-feminists.
They never challenge it. Not once. Throughout the whole 13 page article, there is no suggestion whatsoever that being single, or gay, or unattractive is not a problem, that people might conceivably be content with, even proud of, these attributes. The introduction reiterates the so-called negative stereotypes without explaining why they are considered negative, either by the authors (if this is the case), or by those that seek to denigrate feminism. "Feminist stereotypes are also unflattering; feminists tend to be stigmatized as unattractive, sexually unappealing, and likely to be lesbians".
Again, no context whatsoever. It is a psychology journal, so it's mostly about statistics and correlation between the data. Admittedly, I am not particularly interested in quantitative research (which this is), but I don't think it is asking too much for it to be reflective while it is telling us about null hypotheses. I think their methodology is a little strange ("They also rated their popularity with the other gender. The items were, “It is not difficult for me to get a date,” “I am frequently hit on for sex,” “I seem to be very popular with the opposite sex,” and “I was popular (datingwise) in high school"") but kind of fits in with what they're trying to do.
The "negative stereotypes" part lies dormant throughout their first study, which is with students, and then rears its head again in the second study, with older men and women. In the concluding part: "we found no support for the accuracy of stereotypes suggesting that feminist women are likely to be lesbian, single, or sexually unattractive–in fact, they were more likely to be in a romantic relationship than nonfeminist women. Thus, we found no evidence for the accuracy of negative stereotypes that, if true, would likely impinge on women’s relationships with men." I know what they're trying to do - I understand that the research is coming from a pro-feminist place (even if it's not where I would stand), and that they're trying to do their bit to change the anti-feminist backlash. But this is an academic paper, and I don't think it's asking too much that they be more reflexive with their work, and don't propagate misogynist and homophobic attitudes, even if unwittingly.
Heaven fucking forbid that women should be neither straight, sexually attractive nor romantically involved. As a content "none of the above" I'm a bit personally outraged. However, the main thing is that feminism is not about pleasing men*. It is not a bad thing not to want to have sex with men, it is not a bad thing not to be in a relationship with a man, it is not a bad thing not to fit into the conventions of being attractive to men. And pseudo-feminist research that does not acknowledge this, that fails to take up the opportunity to refute the innate negativity of these stereotypes, even while proving them untrue, is failing feminism.
* While feminism is good for everyone (except possibly Ann Coulter and Pat Robertson), and as such is in fact beneficial for men, a large part of feminism is breaking away from the pressures of having to please (an idea of) men the whole time.
This is a pretty pleasing report, and I planned to put it online for our students to read, mark, and inwardly digest. I got permission, but thought I'd better read the full article first in case there was anything else that I wanted to highlight.
HUH. The abstract talks about "negative feminist stereotypes (i.e., that feminists are single, lesbians, or unattractive)". I was a bit perplexed that they would leave that unchallenged (that any of those things are in fact negative), but figured that you are short of space in an abstract, so have to kind of rely on people knowing that these are the kind of things that get trotted out as negative by anti-feminists.
They never challenge it. Not once. Throughout the whole 13 page article, there is no suggestion whatsoever that being single, or gay, or unattractive is not a problem, that people might conceivably be content with, even proud of, these attributes. The introduction reiterates the so-called negative stereotypes without explaining why they are considered negative, either by the authors (if this is the case), or by those that seek to denigrate feminism. "Feminist stereotypes are also unflattering; feminists tend to be stigmatized as unattractive, sexually unappealing, and likely to be lesbians".
Again, no context whatsoever. It is a psychology journal, so it's mostly about statistics and correlation between the data. Admittedly, I am not particularly interested in quantitative research (which this is), but I don't think it is asking too much for it to be reflective while it is telling us about null hypotheses. I think their methodology is a little strange ("They also rated their popularity with the other gender. The items were, “It is not difficult for me to get a date,” “I am frequently hit on for sex,” “I seem to be very popular with the opposite sex,” and “I was popular (datingwise) in high school"") but kind of fits in with what they're trying to do.
The "negative stereotypes" part lies dormant throughout their first study, which is with students, and then rears its head again in the second study, with older men and women. In the concluding part: "we found no support for the accuracy of stereotypes suggesting that feminist women are likely to be lesbian, single, or sexually unattractive–in fact, they were more likely to be in a romantic relationship than nonfeminist women. Thus, we found no evidence for the accuracy of negative stereotypes that, if true, would likely impinge on women’s relationships with men." I know what they're trying to do - I understand that the research is coming from a pro-feminist place (even if it's not where I would stand), and that they're trying to do their bit to change the anti-feminist backlash. But this is an academic paper, and I don't think it's asking too much that they be more reflexive with their work, and don't propagate misogynist and homophobic attitudes, even if unwittingly.
Heaven fucking forbid that women should be neither straight, sexually attractive nor romantically involved. As a content "none of the above" I'm a bit personally outraged. However, the main thing is that feminism is not about pleasing men*. It is not a bad thing not to want to have sex with men, it is not a bad thing not to be in a relationship with a man, it is not a bad thing not to fit into the conventions of being attractive to men. And pseudo-feminist research that does not acknowledge this, that fails to take up the opportunity to refute the innate negativity of these stereotypes, even while proving them untrue, is failing feminism.
* While feminism is good for everyone (except possibly Ann Coulter and Pat Robertson), and as such is in fact beneficial for men, a large part of feminism is breaking away from the pressures of having to please (an idea of) men the whole time.
