|
June 15, 2010
Isn't risky behavior supposed to be a guy thing?
While I don't like stereotypes and hate to sound like some kind of bigoted crackpot, occasionally I notice things which force me to ask basic "why" questions. And because this one simply doesn't make sense, I thought I would share it with the readers, who can hopefully fill me in on what I am missing. I run every other day, I take a lot of long walks with the dogs, and I also drive around Ann Arbor. Now that there are a lot of runners outside, I have been noticing that the runners who run while wearing headphones (presumably because they are listening to music), are overwhelmingly female. I am not just talking about them being more likely than men to run while wearing headphones. There is a huge difference. The vast majority of women runners (more than 70%) wear headphones, and the vast majority of men (again, more than 70%) do not. It's really like a 10 to 1 headphone ratio, and there are a lot of men running, but they rarely wear headphones. Women almost always do. (At least, they do around here.) My question, simply, is what could be behind this? Whether it goes to a basic difference between the sexes, I do not know. Since running with headphones is a dangerous activity and one which constitutes risk-taking behavior (runners are less likely to hear cars), and since the stereotype is that men are more likely to engage in risky behavior than women, I would expect running with headphones to correlate with maleness. I can't figure this out and it's driving me nuts because I want to understand, so at the risk of seeming like a bigot, I thought I'd run it past the readers. Any ideas? Hopefully, this is only an Ann Arbor thing and not a general trend. The difference does not seem grounded in women liking music more than men, because from what I've seen, both sexes are equally likely to wear headphones while walking. Perhaps it was sexist of me to think that risky behavior was a guy thing. The problem is, whether it's sexist or not, that stereotype seems to have considerable scientific confirmation. Sexist or not, I'm stumped. posted by Eric on 06.15.10 at 06:02 PM
Comments
Consider two types of runners. One type is out there because they want to run. To them, running is an end in of itself. They concentrate on their running, and headphones would be an unwanted distraction. The other type sees running as a means to an end. Perhaps they want to lose or maintain weight or get in shape. To them, running is work, a boring or unpleasant chore, and headphones provide a desired distraction.
SteveBrooklineMA · June 15, 2010 06:52 PM Your warning is falling on deaf ears; habitual headphones give away those who do not listen to anybody. Brett · June 15, 2010 06:58 PM Sexism is never wrong! You just need a different angle. Headphoned runners are pre-rejecting suitors—and creeps, I suppose, but women think of all rejectable men as creeps, and actual creeps are undeterred by disinterest. Male runners are a-courtin', so they keep all their senses ready. guy on internet · June 15, 2010 07:00 PM I would suggest it's because people don't understand risk. Women more than men, because men have to try to find dangerous things to do (often egged on by women) while women are protected by their parents. You live in some craphole, you expect bad things, you live in some comfortable enclave of happy people, like oh, say Ann Arbor, you have a different view of the world. I would bet not a lot of women wear headphones if they jog around Detroit. Veeshir · June 15, 2010 08:21 PM The riskiness from headphones depends on the volume. At low volume, there's no effect on situational awareness. rhhardin · June 15, 2010 09:52 PM Guy on the Internet beat me to it. Headphones are the modern "Do not talk to me" sign. Phelps · June 16, 2010 12:37 AM Meh. However, you should write this up for the NYT as a bogus hand-wringing trend story. hanmeng · June 16, 2010 05:31 AM I have noticed the same thing on the ski slopes. One of my female friends always skied listening to her IPod while skiing. To me that is almost suicidal behavior given the need to be aware of other skiers and snowboarders in your vicinity. JY · June 16, 2010 02:33 PM Based on casual observation, women are also much more likely to be engaged in cell phone conversations while shopping at the supermarket....which probably does *not* count as risky behavior unless the checkout clerk gets mad at the rudeness and strangles her with a plastic bag.... david foster · June 16, 2010 07:09 PM Actually, even at low volume they decrease awareness for most; it's not just volume drowning out other sounds, it's the distraction: if you're paying attention to the music, you aren't paying attention to traffic/somebody following/whatever, at least not as much as you otherwise would. I'm guessing a lot of women just have a blanket "Nothing can happen" attitude so they listen and run. Firehand · June 16, 2010 10:44 PM You can't hear cars anymore, so why try? I mean, seriously. That gentle "whoosh" sounds like a bicycle. People on bicycles never warn you. You may as well go eyes only. Maureen · June 16, 2010 10:53 PM Women are more likely to multi-task. This makes sense, evolutionarilly, because of the need to keep an eye out for the kids. Ear too. There may be other reasons. Sarah · June 18, 2010 01:48 PM I vote with the other two above. Some of these women are filtering out unwanted advances and comments. RT · June 18, 2010 03:46 PM Post a comment
You may use basic HTML for formatting.
|
|
June 2010
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
June 2010
May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 AB 1634 MBAPBSAAGOP Skepticism See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
Vandalism, naturally?
Making history disappear? In school? Whiny Little Bitch The Narrative turns 38. But as to the facts, just shut up! Tea? Party "Now watch this drive" An intergenerational con game of Orwellian proportions Isn't risky behavior supposed to be a guy thing? The Lobby The Gulf - It Is Worse Than We Thought
Links
Site Credits
|
|
The "risks" that males are more likely to take have to do with finding a mate. Challenge the alpha male for females, risking death if you lose. Attempt to acquire lots of wealth, probably with risk involved. From a female's perspective risk usually isn't necessary to acquire a mate.
Evolution has not yet had time to give us genes that say "wearing headphones near autos is dangerous."