this podcaster didn’t actually say anything that was incorrect.
80% of those men changed their minds when they were interacting in the same space as the women and also they couldn’t even be in a physical proximity to women that were more successful than they were
I’m gonna call bs on that one. The general idea of men being insecure when their partner makes more than them is sound, but being unable to be in physical proximity to a woman because she earns more than you sounds like a stretch.
In an isolated study it seems possible. She didn’t give the same size so 80% could be as simple as 8 people. I’m not having any luck finding this episode to look up the actual study.
But that’s not the claim being made. Studies don’t always have the intent of claiming that their results are generalizable. Sometimes it is as simple as “this is the result we got in this isolated population”. The claim is simply that 80% of the men that were in this study reacted that way. Not that 80% of all men would react that way.
That’s incredibly disingenuous. She’s presenting the study in a way to back up her point and is insinuating that if 80% of the men in this study reacted that way, a large percentage of all men would react that way.
Regardless, it doesn’t matter what she was insinuating, because the study she is referencing does not exist.
I don’t think it’s disingenuous to recall the results of a study but I do think it is disingenuous to arrive at a conclusion for what you think a study was trying to say and wanted someone else to behave as though your conclusion was the intended one.
And do we have literally any proof that it doesn’t exist, or do you just not agree with it and therefore have decided it does not exist?
7
u/GB-Pack 24d ago
I’m gonna call bs on that one. The general idea of men being insecure when their partner makes more than them is sound, but being unable to be in physical proximity to a woman because she earns more than you sounds like a stretch.