Playing doctor

Cleary et al (1982) examined why women go the the doctor more frequently than men. Contrary to the (almost comically outdated) suggestion that women had more flexibility of schedule (not having to take time off from work) during which to go to the doctor, or the possibility that women would seek help more readily than men, Cleary et al's analysis found that women had more health concerns, with chronic disease and childbirth explaining 80% of the gender difference. However, Pope and Green (1999) found that even controlling for social and health concerns, and excluding sex-specific treatments, gender was still a significant predictor of physician visits. Xu and Borders (2002) found that women were more affected by financial barriers to health care than men were. The Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (2005) found that 19.3% of men were uninsured, compared to 15.2% of women, but that more men than women were covered by private insurance.

The data that women go to the doctor more often than men are irrefutable, but the reasons are obviously multifaceted. Women may be more likely to seek help, but men tend to have more money. Another explanation may be tied to women's increased likelihood of being a child's caregiver. Women may have increased exposure by being around children (their own, and others) more often than men.

---

I certainly seem to go to the doctor more often since my transition than before, but that's largely related to my transition. Being on testosterone, I have to be more careful about the health of my liver and watch my cholesterol levels more carefully. I also have an entire system of organs (reproductive) that are currently shut down, and must be monitored to make sure that nothing goes wrong before I have the financial means to remove them. On the other hand, I had already developed the habit of seeing a doctor, and it appears to me that the habit is the biggest issue (after financial restraints). I think men are creatures of routine, and once the habit of getting a checkup is established, it's fairly easy to maintain.

livejournal version

Boys don't cry

According to the National Institute for Mental Health, twice as many women as men experience depression. However, this difference does not appear until puberty. In fact, Hankin et al. (1998, pdf) suggest that preadolescent boys are more likely to experience depression than preadolescent girls. Nolen-Hoeksema and Girgus (1994) suspect that girls are more likely to carry risk factors for depression than boys, and that these risk factors are only activated into depression with the challenges that increase with age.

Avison and McAlpine (1992) suspect that the main contributor may be differences in self-esteem. Hankin et al. found that gender differentiation in depression rates began to emerge between the ages of 11-13, and approached adult levels (twice as many women as men) between ages 15-18. However, Kling et al. (1999) found that the gender difference in self-esteem, although it did increase through adolescence, was small.

If the difference in self-esteem is small, why is the difference in depression rates so severe? The difference may be hormonal. Seidman, Miyazaki, and Roose (2005) found that testosterone injections were associated with mood improvement in men who had resisted other anti-depression treatments, although Seidman and Orr (2006) did not find evidence that exogenous androgens were antidepressant. However, in women, both high and low levels of testosterone may be associated with depression.

---

In talking to other female-to-male (FTM) transsexuals about their reactions to testosterone therapy, mood is nearly always mentioned. I personally found testosterone incredibly stabilizing, but it's hard to tell whether that is an effect of the hormone itself or of my greater satisfaction with life in general post-transition. Other FTMs have mentioned to me that they felt less than before hormones. They have felt cut off from emotional responses that they would have had otherwise. It is difficult to compare mood changes because dosing for FTMs can vary so widely. Every FTM works out a dosing plan that works for them with their doctor. Some FTMs dose daily with a topical cream or gel. Others inject every 7, 10, or 14 days. I myself dose every 7 days, because the mood swings on a 2-week cycle are too severe for me to cope with. When my testosterone levels get too low, I feel fatigued, depressed, and easily upset. However, the physical effects that I have experienced (voice change, hair growth, and fat redistribution) could easily be a source of major distress to a woman, and they are irreversible. Still, I often find myself disappointed at the narrow scope of research relating to depression and testosterone.

livejournal version

Are boys dumb?

While it is true that boys outscore girls in math and science, according to the New Hampshire Commission on the Status of Men's First Biennal Report (2005, pdf), the gender gap in reading and writing is even higher, and girls are in the lead. The NHCSM 2001 report (pdf) quotes Dr. Michael Gurian, author of The Wonder of Boys, who claimed that boys in special education outnumber girls two to one, and that for ADD diagnoses, the figure jumps to six to one.

Gaub and Carlson's 1997 review suggests that girls with ADD/ADHD show fewer behavioral problems than boys with ADD/ADHD. This difference may partially explain the diagnosis rates, but only from a fairly cynical (if realistic) view of special education as a holding pen for problem students. A well-behaved but struggling student will be allowed to continue to soldier on in the regular classroom a lot longer than a disruptive but struggling student.

---

The behavioral differences between the special education kids in my own high school and the kids in the standard classrooms was severe, but it always felt like these kids had been given up for lost. My aunt, a special education teacher in another state, let me visit her classroom once, and I spent the next several years terrified of the students in special education. Even now, as an adult, when I recognize the same erratic, boisterous behavior in kids on the street, I cross the street to avoid them. I end up hating myself because they are almost always boys. The girls I admired in high school were tough, even violent, and I assume these girls still exist. But I never recognize them as dangerous on the street, because I automatically profile energetic young men as dangerous, and not the women.

livejournal version

Shooting for the stars

An Ohio State University survey (2006) found that body dissatisfaction manifests differently in men and women. Specifically, they found that women who accepted their bodies tended to eat healthier diets than those who did not. They also found that men were more likely to be concerned with putting on weight than taking it off. The survey reinforces results from a 2002 survey also performed by Ohio State. The new survey compared male athletes in "lean" sports (such as gymnastics and swimming) with those in other sports where leanness is less valued.

Body dysmorphic disorder in men was brought into the public eye with Pope, Phillips and Olivardia's The Adonis Complex (2000). Reviewers such as Handelsman criticized the book's scientific approach, and Bryson and Bardigan questioned the authors' conclusions about the role of feminism in increased insecurity in males.

The deepest question raised by the 2006 Ohio University study is whether there is any utility to insecurity. Conventional wisdom holds that a certain amount of insecurity will keep women interested in taking care of their bodies, but the results of the survey were directly in opposition to this assertion. However, as discussed in "Beaten by a Girl", insecurity does seem to have performance-enhancing effects on men. This may be where the difference in body images comes into play. The idea behind the "Adonis Complex" is that increased performance may not be worthwhile. Perhaps the solution is not to make men more secure, but to make them less short-sighted.

---

I always have to hide a smile during discussions of steroid use. Testosterone injections are the largest part of my treatment, and I will spend the rest of my life taking them. Although my dose is significantly lower than would be used for performance enhancement, it has been enough to significantly change my body shape and many of my emotional reactions. Testosterone is a fantastic antidepressant, so I'm not surprised that the treatment recommended in "The Adonis Complex" involves the use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). Even in weeks where I am just late in receiving my injection, I can feel the dark edges of depression creeping up on me. I feel anxious and unstable. I can only imagine the effects of stopping testosterone injections at a higher dosage, but I would be more worried about someone in the throes of testosterone withdrawal than I am worried about "roid rage."

livejournal version

Beaten by a girl

In 2003 Gneezy, Niederle, and Rustichini (pdf) examined a possible explanation for the gender gap in high-ranking positions. They compared the performance of men and women in non-competitive environments, in same-sex competitive environments, and in mixed-sex competitive environments. Performance in both the same-sex competitive and non-competitive environments was not significantly different for men and women, but in the mixed-sex competitive environment, the gender gap appeared. However, it is notable that the women's performance did not significantly decrease. The men's performance increased when they were pitted against women.

Shakib and Dunbar (2003) performed a series of interviews with high-school athletes that may explain some of this. The boys mentioned repeatedly how traumatizing it could be to lose to a girl. One boy described how a friend who was beaten by a girl gave up playing basketball forever, because of the subsequent teasing. So while competition with women can increase the overall performance of men, the social consequences of losing can be devastating. Note that the boy described by Shakib and Dunbar did not attribute his friend giving up basketball to the girl beating him, but to his friends' response.

It appears that competition with women can encourage men to work harder to meet their potential. But is the benefit of that work worth the social cost of the disdain for women and those they defeat?

---

Occasionally I have moments that illustrate the difference between my perceived gender and my socialized reactions very clearly. The most recent was at a party. A young man was demonstrating some martial arts holds that he taught his students, and how easily they could make someone bend. The other men at the party were lining up to have this hold demonstrated, and one by one, they found themselves bent back at a disadvantage. I thought this looked interesting, and took a turn myself. When I felt the pressure on my wrist, I followed through with the non-verbal "hint" and bent back, as if I were following the lead of a dancer.

The profound effect this had on the man demonstrating the hold, and the other men watching, was remarkable. "Wow," the demonstrator said, "you went right down." I had not realized that the point of the experiment was to see who could resist the hold the best. I had not fought the hold, and my failure to do so obviously made everyone a little uncomfortable. My own failure to treat it like a competition seemed to turn the entire exercise into something else, something different from the posturing they had been participating in. The conversation awkwardly changed, and no one asked any more questions about martial arts in my presence that evening.

livejournal version

The Perfect Boss

A UK survey of 3,000 working adults (2006) found that women are more likely to trust that telecommuters are actually working, as are older workers. Males and managers under 29 are more likely to be suspicious. This may relate to women's tendency to be more generous in expensive situations. An MIT study of altruism (2001) found that men were more responsive to price changes in regards to the cost of kindness.

However, a more likely explanation may rest with the behavior of these groups. A German study (1998) suggests that women may embrace the work ethic more strongly than men. A female boss may be more likely to assume that a telecommuter will be productive (as she would be) as opposed to a male supervisor assuming that their employees are slacking off (as he would tend to do in their place).

---

When I was a child, a family friend explained gender differences in terms of "burst strength" vs. "stamina." She said that women tended to be able to maintain exertion for longer than men whereas men were able to manage greater feats of exertion for brief periods. It was only in my teenage years that I realized she might have been talking about sex as much as athleticism. One of the major differences I have noticed in my lifestyle adjustments since transition is the need for more "down-time." I have to spend a lot more time just relaxing and resting than I had to before my transition. As has been previously mentioned, I'm not sure how much of this is just due to getting older, but I do seem to be more interested in physical activity in general, but the idea of doing anything "all day" is completely overwhelming.

I've also noticed that the leisure activities of my female friends tend to be more productive than those of my male friends. The women I know tend to spend more hours per day making things or writing, whereas it seems like the men spend more time playing games or watching television. Both groups regard their activities as necessary relaxation, but the males have a much more profound ability to "do nothing" than any women I know.

livejournal version

The five second rule

An Ohio University poll (2006) examined behavioral differences between 1,010 men and women. One reported difference: "60 percent of male respondents said they would eat food that had fallen on the floor while less than half the women surveyed said they would do so."

While the actual meaning of the results is a matter of debate, it does call into question the differences between the eating habits of men and women. According to the American Obesity Association, while men are more likely to be overweight than women, women are more likely to be obese or severely obese than men. In addition, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services states that 90% of people with eating disorders are women.

Can the female fastidiousness reported by the Ohio University poll shed any light on these differences? Are women more concerned with or aware of what they eat? Reporting errors seem like a more likely culprit. It seems reasonable to assume that (despite efforts to answer honestly) both men and women are likely to respond that their behavior conforms to their idealized norm of behavior.

---

In my own experience, I have never found women to be tidier than men, but I have found both genders will repeat this stereotype over and over. I can't count how many times I've seen people walk into a messy apartment and remark "you can tell that guys live here," but walking into an apartment in a similar state inhabited by women, no remarks are made. Certainly the stereotype makes any comment on housekeeping a greater attack on a woman than on a man; you are not only calling into question her hygiene, but her worth as a woman as well. My own level of squalor has remained fairly constant throughout my transition. I have never been a good housekeeper. However, in terms of social pressures, it is actually my identity as a queer man that has made me feel most inadequate in how I keep my home. I constantly find myself making gender-stereotyped excuses -- saying that because I am bisexual, I am not required to live up to the "gay" standard. The degree to which I buy into this stereotype puzzles and intrigues me.

livejournal version

Mother, may I?

The Gallup Independent reports a woman candidate has made it past the primaries for the first time in the history of the Navajo Nation presidential elections. While opponents express concern that the entire purpose of the Navajo nation is to preserve traditions, Sararesa Begay, Navajo Nation liaison for Congressional Candidate Ellen Simon protests that traditional Navajo culture was matriarchal, and that the dominance of men is a product of cultural pollution.

However, historians have spent years searching for a matriarchal culture, with little success. In a 2002 article, Pam Kosty reported that most historians conclude that a genuine matriarchy does not exist, perhaps may never have existed. This appears to be largely a question of definitions. The lack of a clear picture of what a matriarchy would consist of makes it easy to argue that any society is not matriarchal. Heide Göttner-Abendroth gives a reasonable social, economic, and cultural definition to work from. She describes an extended clan in an agricultural economy, usually with no elaborate structured religion. It seems that many societies develop into a more patriarchal model when the group moves from being a "family" to being a "city." Why would women give up their control over political decisions? Perhaps it is because they never demanded it. Göttner-Abendroth describes a "society of consensus" wherein no one has particular power.

However, this model does not appear to be sustainable in a competitive climate. Outside of an agricultural clan, the consensus model seems to fall apart. The simplest answer to this is one of interest; women may tend to be less interested in increasing their power and influence. The competition may not be enough motivation, in and of itself, for most women to want participate in it.

---

In my own experience, I have noticed a distinct difference in my reaction to competition since starting testosterone therapy, although it's hard to tie down any change to a specific cause. Winning is far more important to me, in any competition, than it was before (and it was pretty important before). However, I've also noticed that losing is less traumatic. I recover from loss of face much more easily than I did when I was living as a woman. I still count my own worth based on my internal, neurotic count of wins and losses, but I see that worth as more dynamic and mutable than I did before.

How much of this change in attitude can be credited to hormones, how much to the change in how I'm treated in daily life and on the street, and how much can be credited to simply growing up a bit is hard to say. However, in myself and in others, a gender difference that catches my attention nearly every day is this: boys play. We play to win, but even if we lose, we're still playing. The game is fun in itself.

livejournal version

The science of sexism

The discussion of gender differences often boils down to a question of nature vs. nurture, although the assertion that we cannot (or should not?) change "nature" is in itself under debate. Jake Young writes a decent lay-person friendly review of some of the basic theories of the neurological differences between men and women. Specifically, he reviews Simon Baron-Cohen's systematizing vs. empathizing theory in contrast with Janet Hyde's "similarities hypothesis," which is basically the theory that the physical differences between men's and women's abilities are non-existent or small.

My own understanding of the distribution of ability is largely informed by a theory I first saw quoted (from Steven Pinker) on Patri Friedman's blog in May of 2005, namely that there is greater variation in males than in females, leading to greater differences at the extremes.

If Baron-Cohen's systemizating vs. empathizing model is correct, perhaps some of the differences are based in the metric used to measure intelligence. If intelligence is defined strictly as being tied to pattern recognition, then a systemizing brain will tend to test higher than an empathizing one. However, using Robert Sternberg's model of "analytical or crystallized, practical and creative" intelligences seems to weigh non-analytical intelligence too heavily on education. It seems clear that a person can be intelligent without being educated, but only pattern-recognition test seem capable of measuring this ability.

Tel Aviv University's Hagit Messer-Yaron, a professor of electrical engineering and anti-sexism activist, says "Men tend to look at technology. Women's perspective tends to be wider, more multidisciplinary." This, of course, is the argument used for all types of diversity, not only in the sciences, but in all fields. People of different backgrounds will necessarily approach problems from different perspectives.

The danger of these arguments is in the seductive nature of statistics. It is always tempting to apply the aggregate to the individual. This is the cruel science of the insurance company, the odds-maker, and one-size-fits-most. The predictions are a precise fit for no one and laughably or tragically wrong for some. The moral issue becomes this: should society discard the models (and what utility they offer) entirely or should those who exceed the models be responsible for finding their own fit?

---

My personal experience with sexism can be defined as "oblivious." I've never actually noticed sexism applied to me in the moment. I've certainly noticed differences in the ways I am treated when people respond to me as a man compared to when they responded to me as a woman, but the differences never seem to correspond to a lack of respect of regard. My time in the sciences as a woman was very brief and superficial. I spent three months as a math major in college, and changed majors because it failed to hold my interest. I never felt any pressure to leave the Math Department; in fact, my decision to leave was met with resistance at home, at school, and in my social circle.

In all of the -isms that I could easily apply to myself, I generally find it is my own reaction that is the problem, and not the attitudes of those around me. I can certainly find discrimination if I look for it, but I don't see how looking for it is useful. Generally someone insulting me on the basis of gender, sexual orientation, or even something as superficial as height (I'm pretty short) isn't really concerned with those factors at all. They're looking for a way to get under my skin. Applying their insults to the entire class of men, bisexuals, or short people isn't a useful way to figure out what they mean.

I'm not arguing that sexism doesn't exist. I'm just arguing that looking for it is equivalent to chasing your tail. It doesn't do anything but tire you out.

livejournal version

Luck be a Lady

In Women & Men, Venus & Mars: Poker Profits and Sexual Politics, Steve Badger makes the unsubstantiated claim that "women as a group play poker more successfully than men do" -- not that women don't lose, but that they tend to lose less. His argument that women are less likely to take stupid risks holds up to common wisdom, but I wondered if any research had been done into gender differences in gambling habits. Engwall, Hunter, and Steinberg (2004, pdf) found that 18.3% of surveyed college men met the criteria for problem or pathological gambling, vs. only 4.4% of women. Laplante et al (2005) cite casino studies that show gender differences in gaming selection. Men tend to prefer table games and track betting whereas women are more likely to play bingo or slots. Laplante's study of 2256 gamblers in treatment found that gender was not as big an influence on problem gambling as demographic, economic, or health factors -- however, their sample was made entirely of people with an admitted gambling problem. Lindgren et al (2005) used a more representative sample of the population to examine gender role attitudes in comparison with gambling attitudes.

The Lindgren et al. study posited three gender-role attitudes that would relate to gambling: "a double standard of morality, a guardian of the hearth role for women, and a dualism of orientations [i.e. difference in interests/knowledge]" The differences found along these three attitudes were small-to-statistically-insignificant, but the differences in gambling habits of the sample population were much larger. Clearly, this suggests that (whether socialized or innate) the explanation for the gender differences in gambling choices are not explained by these attitudes.

An alternate explanation may be in the different reactions to unpleasant results. As discussed yesterday in "Crime and Gender", it is thought that women and men respond differently to the same stimulus. Men may respond more aggressively to perceived punishment whereas women may withdraw. This would seem to fit with a pattern of men increasing their betting in response to losses vs. women decreasing or stopping play when losing. This does not necessarily explain the difference in game choice, but may be a step in the right direction towards understanding strategy differences.

livejournal version

Crime and Gender

The U.S. Department of Justice states that 22% of all persons arrested in 1998 were female. Darrell Steffensmeier (1996) calls the gender gap in crime "universal": men are more likely to commit criminal acts than men. There are several hypotheses as to the reasons behind this disparity, however they largely boil down to whether the difference is genetic or sociological. Atavistic theories of the 19th century describe female criminals as having male tendencies. The "gender equality" hypothesis suggests that as men's and women's roles in society become more similar, the rates of criminal activity will also become more equal. Mears, Ploeger, and Warr (1998) suggest that men and women may react differently to the same influencing factors. Katherine Ramsland (2005) suggests that most crimes committed by women may be acts of defense.

Why do women seem to be less aggressive than men? How much of the difference can be attributed to the relative size of men and women? If this is the case, woman-on-woman crime would seem to be more common than woman-on-man crime, but these statistics aren't easy to find. Do woman have a more developed moral sense or are they more fearful of consequences? Is there a substantial difference between the two? The study of female criminals is usually approached with a certain sense of titillation and novelty. See Jane Hit, James Garbarino tends toward the theory that greater social equality leads to more crime committed by women, but focuses on ways to serve just this population. It seems that if the cause is more social equality, and the influencing factors are similar, society would be better served by reducing these factors for men and women, rather than spending energy wondering how to make women harmless again.

livejournal version

Can you hear me now?

Angus Loten reviews an Accenture survery (2006) released earlier this month that shows differences in the ways men and women handle customer service. The online survey of 1,000 people found that women would tend to ask to speak to a manager, while men would rather hang up and call back later. Women were also found to be more likely to complain about having to repeat information or about a CSR's tone or manner.

This finding is not particularly surprising. Lacohee and Anderson's survey (2001) found that women say that they enjoy being on the phone more and that they spend more time on the phone. Lacohee and Andersen also found that women were more proactive and men were more reactive in their interactions with the telephone. Therefore, it should not be surprising that women will complain about having to repeat information to several people when they are staying on the phone to speak to several people. The Accenture reports do not specify whether there was any correlation between asking to speak to a manager and complaining about repeating information, but it seems like a safe bet.

No one likes poor customer service, and there are often cases where switching providers for a particular product or service is not a viable option. An article by Marek Korczynski argues that front line customer service professionals are undergoing constant verbal assault by "abusive" customers. Perhaps a more useful survey would be to test the efficacy of the two approaches: hanging up and trying again vs. talking up the chain of command. Unfortunately, companies that provide customer service can not control which method callers use. Like men on the telephone, they can only react.

livejournal version

How big is the wage gap?

The statistic that women earn only 76% of what men do, while accurate, doesn't tell the whole story. The difference in wages between men and women is due to more than different pay for the same work, although a Helsinki University study(2006) suggests that this is a large part of the puzzle.The Helsinki study also suggests that different assessed values of "women's" and "men's" jobs may be largely responsible for the wage gap. Hanson and Pratt (1991) suggest that women search for jobs differently than men do, leading to the "occupational segregation" into certain careers.

The National Center for Policy Analysis (2002) claimed that "when women behave in the workplace as men do, the wage gap between them is small." The conclusion drawn by the NCPA was that the main culprit behind the wage gap was the different priorities held by women. Women tend to prefer to take less pay in exchange for more flexibility or more time off. Jenny Anderson of the New York Times suggests that many businesses claim to be trying to fit these priorities, but with limited effect.

Warren Farrell listed 39 jobs where women make more money than their male counterparts, but suggests that the real way that women are winners is by living more balanced lives. But if the priorities held by men and women are innately different, as is often suggested, perhaps "balance" isn't an appropriate goal for men. Equal pay for equal work is obviously the appropriate goal. Equal work, however, doesn't seem to be the way to make the most people satisfied.

livejournal version

Hunters and gatherers unite

Dittmar, Beatty, and Friese (1995) examined the differences in impulse buying between men and women. They found a much smaller gender effect than anticipated, and instead found that the greatest predictor was self-esteem at time of purchase. A 2006 report on internet buying habits reported by Lynn Russo found much larger differences in the way that men and women shop, as have Brunel University's Charles Dennis and Tamira King (2005). Both studies draw the hunter/gatherer parallel, but using opposing arguements.

The Resource Interactive study examined by Russo reported that men prefer to make deeper comparisons and prefer to read about the specifications of an item. Drs. Dennis and King found that women are more likely to comparison shop, whereas men will favor a trusted store or brand. How could these contradictory results both lend themselves to a hunter/gatherer metaphor?

The easy answer is that this was the easy answer. By tying in different buying habits to an accepted evolutionary model, the researchers were able to validate their hypothesis without deeper examination. The hunter/gatherer roles are so vaguely defined that any behavior could be matched to either role. Both studies seem to make valid suggestions as to the correct way to take advantage of the gender differences (based in their results), but the apparently irresistible urge to match the results to a caveman metaphor weakens, rather than reinforces, their credibility.

livejournal version

All the girls are doing it

As recently as Ono and Zovodny's review of internet surveys in 2001, it was believed that women's involvement in the internet would continue to be less than men's. However, whether this has changed is certainly worth examining. Trends with younger groups seem to be reversing. A 2005 report by Pew/Internet concluded that women under 30 were more involved in the internet than their male peers. The focus on IM, blogs, and Myspace as a form of conversation has harnessed the social insatiability of young women and pulled the internet gender gap closed.

However, these numbers might easily lie. Women may be more likely than men to maintain multiple accounts. Traditional marketing wisdom holds that men are more loyal to a brand -- it's unknown whether this translates to loyalty to a particular website. Finally, there is the question of how many of the "women" in any internet environment are actually women. In the chat rooms of the 1990s, it seemed like 90% of the people on the internet were female, 18, and surprisingly blonde and large-chested.

The really interesting part is how the internet has, in many ways, ceased to be technology. The assumption that women would be less interested in the internet was based on the conceptualization of the internet as a technological phenomenon. However, the internet is no more "technology" at this point than is the telephone. The internet is a social phenomenon. A study by Venkatesh, Morris, and Ackerman (2000) suggests that social factors play a bigger role for women in the adoption of new technologies, whereas men are affected most by their personal attitudes towards new technologies. In other words, gadget-loving men will try out a new technology because it is new, but a woman will use it because her friends do.

livejournal version

HerSpace

In July, the second annual BlogHER conference was held in San Jose. BlogHer.org aspires to be "where the women bloggers are." However, it's questionable whether women bloggers need to be anywhere in particular. For example, 67% of Livejournal account holders identify themselves as female, and one source claims that Myspace is split 50.2% male-49.8% female.

Women's spaces are not hard to find on the internet. From iVillage.com to Playgirltv.com(NSFW), some female-focused version of almost every internet staple is available, with a Livejournal Community, Myspace page, and Yahoo Group -- or three -- panning and/or promoting each of them. There are even gynocentric search engines. But what do these women's sites accomplish? Kathy Sierra, in in "I am not a woman blogger", suggests that women focusing on their achievements as women may be counterproductive The relabeling, she says, diminishes both "my gender and the labeled thing".

Do separate websites provide a needed comfort zone for women? Do they provide increased visibility? Is increased visibility needed? At least two of the top five Technorati ranked blogs are female-authored. It seems that there are a lot of women who manage just fine in coed cyberspace. Perhaps another gender classification is needed for the people who frequent the women's online spaces: lonely men?

livejournal version

The difference between competence and confidence:

What do men exaggerate and women downplay? Their computer skills.

Eszter Hargittai and Steven Shafer put 51 women and 49 men through internet-use skill test, and found that the women consistently rated their skill lower than comparably skilled men. The skills test gave participants a number of subjects to research, and allowed them to search for the information however they saw fit (with the researcher watching over their shoulder).

Hargittai and Shafer found no statistically significant difference between actual skill levels for men and women. However, "not one woman thought of herself as an `expert' user, and not one man thought of himself as a complete novice." The sex of the researcher administering the survey and observing the web use was not mentioned, and that seems like an oversight. The survey about web use was administered orally to "establish rapport." It would be interesting to see how results differed with less face-to-face interaction with researchers, or with an interviewer of a different sex. As was demonstrated by research done by BMW, directions from a man and from a woman can be met with very different responses. A similar experiment, with male and female researchers and an incentive to perform well would likely yield different results.

livejournal version

Oxygen's "Girls Gone Wired"

Oxygen study finds gender gap all but gone in consumer electronics.

A study commissioned by Oprah's Oxygen network suggests that the gender gap in consumer electronics has dwindled. The study surveyed preferences among 1,400 women and 700 men, and found that women would choose tech gadgets over jewelry or vacations.

This turn of events shouldn't be a surprise. Advertisers have long since realized that the women of America control the family budgets. Coverage of the study suggests that tech is replacing bling in the hearts of female consumers. This is true only in as much as tech is bling. The pink Razr, the pink iPod, the Nintendo "GameGirl" (aka the DS) have all been marketed heavily as female-friendly gadgets. Another factor may be the focus in consumer electronics towards consumer-level connectivity. It's no longer the case that only businesses expect to be connected in real-time. Results from the "Girls Gone Wired" study suggest that women expect to be more active in Instant Messaging, Text Messaging, and digital photo sharing -- the electronic equivalent of going to the bathroom in droves.

Rather than expecting to see more advertising to women electronics consumers (suggesting a mind-numbing level of advertising saturation), I would expect to see the electronics industry re-masculinizing certain products, such as we've already seen with skin care products. The tag line: "this is not your girlfriend's cell phone" is just around the corner.

livejournal version