Female named hurricanes kill nearly twice as many people because they aren't taken as seriously due to being perceived as feminine. Yep. Hurricanes, because of the gender of their name, are treated differently.
I think this may be terrific evidence that sexists are idiots, but meh.
The thing I don't understand is why, even if you're a sexist, you would act differently towards a hurricane because of what it was named. It's not as if hurricanes have aspects of genders or they name hurricanes differently gendered names based on their severity. Is it that subconscious that they automatically associate feminine = weak = not a threat?
Sorry for the double post. Was distracted earlier and didn't address Moon's post.
Well let's hope people actually know what Feminism is.
I recently had an in depth discussion about the topic. I've concluded that the term "Feminism" is as telling of a person's beliefs as the word "Christian." In other words, not very, as it changes extremely from one person to the next. Talking about Feminism like it's one cohesive thing or that any feminist's views have any bearing whatsoever on anyone else's or that there's an overriding way to look at feminism just leads to the same place doing that to a Christian does - the "Not all x are like that" and "I don't believe that."
Doesn't heat kill more people than the rest of the other natural disasters?
Natural disasters don't kill all that many people really. The bad ones make it seem like they do, but overall, they don't count for much.
The thing I don't understand is why, even if you're a sexist, you would act differently towards a hurricane because of what it was named. It's not as if hurricanes have aspects of genders or they name hurricanes differently gendered names based on their severity. Is it that subconscious that they automatically associate feminine = weak = not a threat?
Could it be because they think it's not as dangerous as tornadoes?
The fact that news groups post the category (and the size and path of the hurricane) along with it seems to indicate that the people who didn't leave are idiots who are possibly unaware that they are sexist.
Did you watch the link? They stated that researchers both examined all deaths from hurricanes and excluded outliers, finding that on average female named hurricanes cause twice as many deaths. They additionally did studies where they provided people with "information" about a fake hurricane and asked how likely they were to evacuate in the hypothetical, only switching the names between each, and found the same evidence. What else would it be except sexism?
I think this may be terrific evidence that sexists are idiots, but meh.
In fact, it isn't, or likely isn't. I've read about this study; they also took into consideration whether the persons claimed to support gender equality or not. There was no difference. It just means that we all, subconsciously, perceive hurricanes with female names as less threatening than hurricanes with male names. It seems to bear no relevance about how you consciously consider males and females.
It does show however that we should definitely stop giving human names to hurricanes. Numbers should suffice. In the light of this study, keeping the status quo is highly irresponsible and can be considered criminal as it costs human lives.
It does show however that we should definitely stop giving human names to hurricanes. Numbers should suffice. In the light of this study, keeping the status quo is highly irresponsible and can be considered criminal as it costs human lives.
Maybe we should name them deliberately threateningly? Such as Hurricane Vortex of Death?
Maybe we should name them deliberately threateningly? Such as Hurricane Vortex of Death?
Do they even need names? I personally find that the term "hurricane" should already catch your attention, especially when I see what they do to American settlements.
Does anyone know why they are given names to begin with?
. I've read about this study; they also took into consideration whether the persons claimed to support gender equality or not. There was no difference.
That doesn't mean it isn't sexism. People can say they're something they're not, or still have beliefs contradictory to what they think they are. Racists can say they aren't racist. Same goes for sexists. And people can have sexist/racist beliefs without recognizing what those beliefs actually are.
Does anyone know why they are given names to begin with?
According to the video I linked, it's to improve recall of facts/details about that particular hurricane.
True. But this is still no "terrific evidence that sexists are idiots", because in this case we are all concerned, so that makes us all idiots? To avoid misunderstandings, I am not defending sexistic behaviour. I am just saying that you (and all the people and media bellowing about this study) are making a fuss about nothing. So we are all slightly sexistic in our subconscious; other studies already showed that a female name on an application letter has an impact on the judging irrelevant of who actually wrote it; it's the same thing. But should we all be condemned for this even if we consciously try to stand out for equality? I am far more concerned by wages still being so different between men and women, for example.
So we are all slightly sexistic in our subconscious
But it's not everyone. They only found the rate of people who wouldn't leave to be twice as high when it was a female name. Say 5% wouldn't leave no matter what. Then another 5% wouldn't leave because they perceived the hurricane to be less threatening simply because it had a feminine name. That additional 5% are idiots.
other studies already showed that a female name on an application letter has an impact on the judging irrelevant of who actually wrote it;
Different. You're dealing with an actual person then at the very least. I'm sure they find the same goes for names associated with ethnicity too.
But should we all be condemned for this even if we consciously try to stand out for equality?
I never said everyone, and I still hold that anyone who doesn't evacuate because of a hurricane (especially if you only aren't because it has a girl's name) is an idiot regardless.
I am far more concerned by wages still being so different between men and women, for example.
Except they aren't all that different. Men and women, for the most part, get paid the same amount for the same job. What they don't get are equal opportunities to advance. The bogus 77 cents to a man's dollar statistic comes from averaging all men's earnings vs all women's earnings and doesn't take into account the actual jobs they are performing or how long they are working.
The sad thing is there's so much disinformation out there even the author of this article is mistaken, despite having a quote from an expert in the article which directly contradicts it.
"The gender gap in pay would be considerably reduced and might vanish altogether if firms did not have an incentive to disproportionately reward individuals who labored long hours and worked particular hours,â she wrote in a paper published this month in The American Economic Review."
I never said everyone, and I still hold that anyone who doesn't evacuate because of a hurricane (especially if you only aren't because it has a girl's name) is an idiot regardless.
There are always those that are too attached to their homes, and will rather go with their homes. But that's their problem.
Different. You're dealing with an actual person then at the very least. I'm sure they find the same goes for names associated with ethnicity too.
But it shows the clear difference as one infers things about the person, until they see them face to face.
Yes, but hurricanes aren't people, so what exactly are they inferring?
"Oh, it's Hurricane Bertha. It must be nice and feminine. I don't need to worry or leave my house."
*2 days later*
"OH ****! It's a hurricane and doesn't have any gender traits!"
(Laughing) Well give it an asexual name if you want to name it, otherwise let those people be. There's always going to be that 1 person unless you want to make a compulsory evacuation.
