Dec 04 2009
Sexism and the Science of Shopping
Is it sexist to observe gender differences in shopping habits? I don’t think so. However, how you talk and write about those differences may cross the line to a smaller degree or larger.
In a news release found over at ScienceDaily, Male and Female Shopping Strategies Show Evolution at Work in the Mall, I encountered this line of reasoning:
In modern terms, women are much more likely than men to know when a specific type of item will go on sale. Women also spend much more time choosing the perfect fabric, color and texture.
Men, on the other hand, often have a specific item in mind and want to get in, get it and get out, Kruger said. It’s critical to get meat home as quickly as possible. Taking young children isn’t safe in a hunt and would likely hinder progress.
Hmm. I wonder. While the above description fits my experience of clothes shopping with my wife, the pattern is nearly perfectly reversed when in a home-improvement mega-store. I could spend an hour in the electrical department alone. My wife, meanwhile, would be grabbing the item on our list and making a bee-line for the check-out. How is that like male hunting and female gathering?
I further wonder whether the perspective expressed in the following paragraph so much explains what has been observed as much as it may manifest a pre-existing sentiment that shaped what was observed and/or guided thinking post-observation.
From an evolutionary perspective, it all harkens back to the skills that women used for gathering plant foods and the skills that men used for hunting meat. The contrast emerges because of the different foraging strategies for hunting and gathering used throughout human evolution.
Although I am a big fan of evolutionary psychology, I think the softly scientific pursuit needs to be done well and presented with due judiciousness.
Personally, I don’t find the above type of science and science writing sexist. It is innocent of any belittling or limiting of one gender type or another. As far as I perceive. However, the discussion does strike me as presenting an over-generalized generalization. Solid science gets specific.
Finally, what most causes me to most doubt the article’s argument is the lack of data. I couldn’t find the source data for the conclusions drawn. How can a critical thinker be confident of any claim lacking a tether to real-world data?
As a female, I find it sexist. I hate shopping. My ex-husband, on the other hand, could spend hours trying on a pair of blue jeans. My sons hated shopping with him so much when they were little that they would rebel at the thought of going into a store. I’d point out that I was not that type of shopper–I’m the go in and get out kind. To me, most “studies” of gender differences, at least until puberty, seem tainted by gender bias.
I don’t think it’s sexist. I don’t think it’s entirely accurate. My area of interest is behavioral genetics, so, I often think of evolutionary psychology as “soft”. Yet, I am a fan and like to read the interpretations of data.
My husband and I like second hand and antique stores equally. Left alone, he would spend more time shopping (window- or otherwise) than I ever would. Of course, this is neither here nor there. :o)
[...] generated. Andrew Bernadin, a former professor of psychology, had a look at the study as well and finds it rather lacking in necessary details. Sometimes scientists don’t always follow the scientific method as strictly as they [...]
I do not necessarily find this to be sexist but I feel like there is information missing on how this conclusion was drawn. The amount of time spent shopping, whether in a mall or appliance store, is all determined on the personality of the shopper. Just because one is a female does not mean they will spend more time at the mall then the appliance store, and vice-versa for a guy shopping at an appliance store, it does not mean he wont spend the same, if not more time at the mall. This world is filled with sexism and gender generalizations but the fact that this situation can be reversed so both sides are in the hot seat shows that its not about whether or not a women really spends more time in a store than the guy, its about the judgements people make towards the situation without considering the reversed situation.