http://www.omg-facts.com/view/Facts/17863  

This is why I insist my female employees wear loose-fitting, vaguely Middle Eastern clothing at the office. New research has shown that women who are sexually objectified in work situations perform more poorly, yet interact more with their objectifiers.

A paper to be published in the February issue of the journal Psychology of Women Quarterly (I’m a subscriber) reveals that when men stare at women’s chests, those women have more difficulty with math questions.

Dr. Sarah Gervais heads the Subtle Prejudice Lab at the University of Nebraska’s psychology department.  She recruited a group of male and female volunteers to participate in a study they were told was about teamwork. Volunteers were given a brief interview by either same- or opposite-sex research assistants. The opposite-sex research assistants were instructed to give the volunteers a head-to-waist evaluating look, then settle their gaze on the volunteers’ chests. The volunteers then took a math test.

The results were a little shocking. While the male volunteers’ test scores were not affected by blatant objectification, the ogled females’ scores were about 17% worse. Women who were not objectified answered 6 of 12 math questions correctly. Those whose frontal projections were stared at got fewer than 5 questions right. Dr. Gervais believes she knows why. Something called “stereotype threat”.

This psychological phenomenon refers to members of a group with negative stereotypes attached to it subconsciously conforming to and confirming the stereotype, by performing less well at a task than they would otherwise.

One example would be the stereotype that women are bad at math – a stereotype, I might add, that the female Nebraska volunteers really didn’t help to fight, thank you very much. ‘Way to let down your side, ladies!

Even more shocking, however, was the reaction of the ladies whose parabolas were peered at. They were more motivated to interact with the male research assistants who leered at them.

“It creates this vicious cycle for women in which they're under-performing in math or at work, but they're continuing to want to interact with the person who's making them underperform in the first place,” Dr. Gervais told the UK’s Daily Mail.

What’s going on here? Well, Dr. Gervais, being an honest psychologist, can’t say for sure, but she has a few theories. Women might seek out the gawker because: 

·         They may want a chance to show men they’re not a sex object

·         They may be making an effort to fit in, in a male-dominated environment

·         They may have felt flattered

·         They may have taken the looks as a form of flirtation, and wished to return the flirtation

Now, I find these theories very frustrating, partly because they each seem somewhat plausible, but mostly because they offer precisely zero support to the stereotype of feminist academics as angry man-haters. 

Still, the research results clearly offer ammunition for feminists to militate for tough new laws to prohibit this impolite, uninvited behavior as sexual harassment, right? 

Dr. Gervais says that if additional research shows this kind of ogling consistently interferes with job performance, then it will be time to take the issue more seriously. But then she qualifies the point with more of her insidious logic and temperateness.   

 http://newsroom.unl.edu/releases/2010/11/23/Confronting+prejudice+may+be+'antidote'+for+workplace+distress

Dr. Sarah Gervais

“When it comes to something subtle like this, it's very difficult to combat,” she told the Mail. “It's almost expected that men are going to do this to women, and that really it's not that harmful.” 

Here are my takeaways from this interesting research study: 

1.    I’ll be watching my male employees like a hawk for ogling at the office. I want my female staff working productively and making me money.

2.    The University of Nebraska psychology department should recruit female volunteers who are better at math. Those test results were horrible!

3.    I’ve never met this feminist academic Dr. Sarah Gervais, but she’s ruining a perfectly good stereotype. She’s committed, smart, curious, methodical, insightful, and even-handed. And God help me… she’s really pretty, too, damn it. 

Note to Dr. Gervais if by chance she reads this: I’m only flirting a little bit, and I always keep my eyes where they’re supposed to be. 

Now saying odd things on Twitter: http://twitter.com/#!/ManTalkNow