Hedging Like a Bush
This post flows a bit from my comrade's post regarding her observation that female graduate students tend to hedge their comments much more frequently than their male counterparts. Well, there's a certain grad girl here that is famous for beginning every comment made in seminar with one of the following:
1) I could be completely wrong here, and someone please tell me I am, but...
2) Perhaps I'm not understanding what (blah) said, and if so, please let me know, but...
3) Just to build off of what (fellow grad student's name here) said...[important note: the following comment never builds off of FGS's comment--this is a way of borrowing credibility for her own comment}
3.5) She finishes every comment with Does that make sense?
Reasons this stings me like a two-tailed bee:
Well, first, word economy is always appreciated in a seminar setting. These intro phrases do not make me more sympathetic to whatever her comment might be, but rather, protract the moment of suffering. Secondly, it makes me uncomfortable. It's such a sign of weakness, and displays such an utter lack of academic confidence. I have to disagree with Dagger Aleph's comment that this encourages discussion, or somehow invites me to disagree with her should I desire to do so. I will debate her comments if I find them incorrect whether or not the invitation is made explicit by these hedgings. That invitation is just assumed in an academic setting.
Finally, these hedges flat-out piss me off because they are used in an attempt to absolve her of any responsbility for an incorrect statement. "Oh, well, I said I didn't know...No one can really take me to task, if I admit this up front." Perhaps. If she used that sort of intro sparingly; however, wrapping every statement she makes with this sort of safety blanket makes me want to smother her with it. It's the academic equivalent of crossing your fingers behind your back while you speak.
I agree that females tend to do this much more frequently than males--and having been in three disciplines, the two which are predominantly male (econ and polsci) seem to encourage this behavior much more frequently than in the less so (anthro). But I find it entirely demeaning--and I believe it encourages a lot of the ego-centric and misogynistic males in academia (and there seem to still be a plenty) to discount all women's comments. And, maybe I'm wrong, and I didn't understand why she is always doing this, but it makes me want to punch her in the neck. Does that make sense?
1) I could be completely wrong here, and someone please tell me I am, but...
2) Perhaps I'm not understanding what (blah) said, and if so, please let me know, but...
3) Just to build off of what (fellow grad student's name here) said...[important note: the following comment never builds off of FGS's comment--this is a way of borrowing credibility for her own comment}
3.5) She finishes every comment with Does that make sense?
Reasons this stings me like a two-tailed bee:
Well, first, word economy is always appreciated in a seminar setting. These intro phrases do not make me more sympathetic to whatever her comment might be, but rather, protract the moment of suffering. Secondly, it makes me uncomfortable. It's such a sign of weakness, and displays such an utter lack of academic confidence. I have to disagree with Dagger Aleph's comment that this encourages discussion, or somehow invites me to disagree with her should I desire to do so. I will debate her comments if I find them incorrect whether or not the invitation is made explicit by these hedgings. That invitation is just assumed in an academic setting.
Finally, these hedges flat-out piss me off because they are used in an attempt to absolve her of any responsbility for an incorrect statement. "Oh, well, I said I didn't know...No one can really take me to task, if I admit this up front." Perhaps. If she used that sort of intro sparingly; however, wrapping every statement she makes with this sort of safety blanket makes me want to smother her with it. It's the academic equivalent of crossing your fingers behind your back while you speak.
I agree that females tend to do this much more frequently than males--and having been in three disciplines, the two which are predominantly male (econ and polsci) seem to encourage this behavior much more frequently than in the less so (anthro). But I find it entirely demeaning--and I believe it encourages a lot of the ego-centric and misogynistic males in academia (and there seem to still be a plenty) to discount all women's comments. And, maybe I'm wrong, and I didn't understand why she is always doing this, but it makes me want to punch her in the neck. Does that make sense?
Labels: Ranting
posted by slickaphonic at 8:58 PM
1 Comments:
Ever since working at the World Bank, I start a little timer in my head when somebody starts talking: how long until they actually present some new content? For some people, it takes about twenty seconds, while they reiterate context, hedge as above, et cetera. For some, it never happens, but that's another story.
Which is to say, yes, the best way to not draw attention to yourself is to ask the darn question or make the darn comment briefly and let other people take it from there, not to repeat "hello, I am unassuming" over and over again.
Though, I am also annoyed by people who state false things as true with full confidence. One should prepend a confidence interval for any given comment, that the listener can use as a prior for Bayesian updating. When certain, give no preface, when mostly certain, begin with "I think that", and when pulling things out of your ass, preface your comment with "I found this in my rectum." Presenting a confidence interval provides valuable context, but takes from zero to two seconds and doesn't draw attention to itself.
Post a Comment
<< Home