Freakin brilliant piece! Very exposing, and insightful. We need to raise our daughters better without any of this gender indocrinated bullshit that inhibits their belief in themselves. Its completetly unacceptable.

Sadly, I'm not surprised. When I consider how many times I've been told I can't understand politics because I'm thinking of it from a woman's point of view, I can see how that kind of rhetoric might affect some women into just not talking when there is a camera in front of them to "prove" that they are unaware. And then guys don't have this fear of people thinking they are stupid just for opening their mouths.

Also, Darth Vader was not pure evil! He always had good in him, and he went back to the light side of the force at the end. Jeez, people getting their star wars facts wrong is almost as annoying as misogyny......

Damn, I am so one of those women who doesn't want to look stupid and is unsure of their opinions in public.
I am shy, but is that really any excuse?

I'm not sure how to feel, it reminds me of the number of women I know who hate having their picture taken. I wonder if that has some stake in it, would she get the same result if it were for radio or printed media? Then again, the whole deferring to the friend/boyfriend is troubling--they seem reluctant to espouse any opinion. The one woman who refused to answer the Hillary Clinton question just seemed as though she didn't want to sound stupid for giving an opinion about something she didn't know about which tends to be wiser than going on about Darth Vader and a box of puppies at least.

MLEmac, I think you nailed the fuzzy feeling I had. Men are individualized, so if they say something stupid--that's just them. But they group women in a way so that they can't just speak for themselves, and people will use their words as fuel for their stereotypes.

Plus you have the whole tripe regarding women who talk too much or have too many strong opinions and these women would rather be silent, even if they have something to say, than look silly on the internet. I wish no one had to worry about that sort of thing.

I see this differently -- as an encouraging sign. You know how men always seem to be more willing to do crazy, over-the-top-stupid stuff on camera (Exhibit A: collegehumor)? This is the flip side of that. Many women I know, including myself, are willing to be and have been outspoken on camera if we know it is legit and we are not going to be fodder for unfunny late-night TV shenanigans.

I was encouraged my my parents and my teachers to participate in class and form my own opinions. However, if I am in a situation where I get extremely embarrassed, I will have trouble for the rest of the class saying anything. However, I would rather be embarrassed a few times then say nothing at all.

I see this differently -- as an encouraging sign. Men seem to be more willing to do crazy, over-the-top-stupid stuff on camera (Exhibit A: collegehumor). And to bloviate endlessly on topics they don't know Thing One about. So...this is the flip side of that. Many women I know, including myself, are happy to be (and have been) outspoken on camera if we know it is legit and we are not going to be fodder for unfunny late-night TV shenanigans.

It is a real shame that women tend to not want to voice their opinions and instead defer to male opinions, but I still think it's better to issue "no comment" than to blather on about something you don't know about or be a stooge. I really think the men could take tips from the women on this, if anything.

I'm going to have to blame the patriarchy for this one (shocker, huh?). Look, a man can feel comfortable knowing that the footage of him is probably not going to be used to critique his fashion sense or figure, or as part of a men-are-stupid montage, or taken out of context and sexualized somehow. The web can be a really brutal place for women, and we are justifiably cautious about who we let use our images. Men are also assumed to be clever or witty before they open their mouths (or sometimes despite what comes out when they do), while women have to fight the often-held assumption that they are frivolous. So, it makes women more guarded.

Mmmm. See, the fact that I run the hell away from people when they attempt to approach me with a camera relates more the fact that I've got a bit of social anxiety than the fact that I am a woman. If I'm with someone, and they stop, I'm not going to leave them behind, but I will try to hide and secretly hate at them if someone points the camera at me.

This cannot be accurate. Women run from commenting on politics? I'm a little insulted that this is being taken seriously. There are no numbers or statistics, and only a couple of men are even interviewed- and except for Darth Vader man, only when accompanied by a woman to prove some preconceived notion of women’s apathy. The only thing I agree with is that men are individualized while women are taught to defer, but I don’t think this video drives that point home. Quite the opposite.

I'm a New Yorker. If you put a camera in my face in Central Park I'm going to walk by you or curse you out (depending on the persistence). If I’m in an exceptionally good mood, I might stop and give a thorough explanation of my political positions.

I don’t see this woman as proving a feminist point, but reinforcing gender differences. Give me statistics from the filming, and provide a more comprehensive version of such a case study and I’ll give it credence. Until then I see this as a botched job of encouraging women to be informed on politics. The video could be swiped up by conservatives as it stands to prove women are really just dumb, not disenfranchised.

And to be honest, I don’t believe that women are the apathetic, pacified, pathetic creatures portrayed in this video rather than busy New Yorkers taken out of context.

Hmmmm... when I was growing up in the midwest, I was interviewed "man-on-the-street-style" in a record store... I had no problems expressing my opinion then. However, when I went to college in NYC, I learned very quickly that people who approach you at random on the street are to be Avoided.At.All.Costs. Even if it's a woman with a microphone, being solicited as I walk down the street on my way to wherever was just shy of street harrassment.

But yeah, I think women are a lot more "self-conscious" -- not necessarily in the blushing, giggling way, but in the "I really don't want to look stupid way." There is a lot to what la pobre habladora said -- we KNOW we're going to be judged in the most negative way possible if our image is put out there.

I have two reactions to this:

1) I believe women have become more conscious about their images on the Web and other media for the simple reason that their views and actual physical image could be manipulated later by the people taking their image and comments. Given this situation, why should women stop to comment? Men may not be as worried about how their image or comments will be treated...but then, how often is a man's head cut off of a photo on the Web and plastered onto another naked man's body?

2) The questions asked by this "surveyor" are inane at best, loaded at worst. "Would you agree that Hillary Clinton is a monster?" Who makes this stuff up? Would you answer such a question? I have taught research methods before, including how to create and conduct surveys. I'll have to remember some of this interviewer's questions for when I create homework on how _not_ to write a survey.

Another possible explaination for the reactions the women had is that alot of women are superficial, and probably wouldn't want to stop and be compared to such a beautiful interviewer, however men would love to stop by and talk to her.

This makes me so sad. Not only for the clear lack of interest by the women she tried to interview, but by her questions. Hillary a monster? No wonder that woman didn't want to answer! I'd immediately think I was talking to some right wing "concerned woman for America."

On another thought, maybe women aren't interested in these topics because they are often presented in such a patriarchal manner. They need to visit feministing.com a little :)

As an ex-NYer I agree with T-Monster - people on the street are always trying to importune you with something or other, and New Yorkers have highly-developed strategies for avoiding them.

The interviewer does no kind of introductory set-up to interest someone in offering their opinion - she just accosts them and puts a mic in their face. Female New Yorkers are suspicious of this set-up, and rightly so. What's in it for them? Nothing but potential embarrassment.

As for men, it's a known fact that men like to hear themselves talk on any topic. Look who offers most of the comments on talk radio.

A final point - almost everyone the interviewer approaches is under 30. I bet if she asked older women she'd get more opinions.

I wouldn't say this is limited to New Yorkers. I grew up in Houston, I would say most people there would have the same reaction. The more you feel threatened by people, the less likely you're going to stop for a person.

I don't know why this shocks people. Honestly--I'm going somewhere if I'm walking down the streets, why on earth am I going stop for someone with a mic when I have no idea what they're doing? Confusion and embarrassment (which I think are normal responses to being asked strange unexpected questions in front of a potentially large audience) are going to cause many, if not most post people, to give somewhat confused answers. I don't wonder why people refuse to respond, or only give weird half responses; I wonder why people respond at all.

I'm betting that part of the reason men were more willing to stop and talk to her is because she's conventionally attractive. I say this not to be sexist, but b/c my cousin (a supermodel) was featured in an article were someone basically did a little study (kind of like this woman's) that indicated that attractive people were far more likely to be able to solicit help on the street, especially from the opposite sex.

I bet the pattern she's seeing about women being shyer and less news-savvy is also true though...

umm, should have been
" that indicated that attractive people were far more likely to be able to solicit help on the street, especially from the opposite sex, than were more average-looking people"

Would a camera in my face fluster me? Yes. Would I politely decline to answer about something that I knew nothing about (after explaining that, of course)? Yes.

Would I shy away if I had an opinion? No. But maybe that's just me. I always speak my mind when given the opportunity (hence me making a feminist blog).

nina and 2 and 1/2 men nailed this (and its surprising our intelligent webcaster misses it): men don't mind at all talking to her, about anything, because she is pretty to look at. However, it is deplorable how few women had an opinion, or even knew the subject being discussed. If anything this video tells me our public needs to be made aware of the going-ons in this country.

I just wanted to contextualize our "Is Hillary Clinton a monster?" question.

The week we taped that show, one of Obama's advisers had resigned her position over making the "off the record" comment that Clinton is a "monster". It was in the news around the clock that week and we took that inflammatory question out on the street to find out how people reacted to the word, to the comment, to the story.
If you'd like to see the whole episode, and see several articulate, informed women respond to it, check out this link: http://www.moblogic.tv/video/2008/03/11/hillarys-not-a-monster/

And, one other comment: I DO speak to informed and opinionated women all the time. But the numbers who won't speak, and especially the ones who seem to want to speak but decide against it, inspired the show.

Thanks to all who took the time to watch and comment, and to Feministing for posting and linking.

I would talk if it was something I knew about. The woman who said she didn't care, however - if you have to explain an issue that much to someone, the answer they're going to provide is generally not going to be worth it, no matter who you are.

Agree with lizadilly, anyway - guys would do well to learn when to STFU rather than make idiots of themselves...

i think putting "is hillary a monster?" in context doesn't help the individual episode since people are watching it without seeing the other episodes or maybe watching cable. the host really comes off as catty, very girl-hate style. it's like that whole piece is just inspired me to be upset with whoever created it. i mean she followed up a question to a girl who obviously didn't want to be interviewed with "you don't have to be a citizen to have an opinion do you?" like that's constructive. and if someone was given off like kinda bitchy vibes on the street coming up to me asking questions "i don't care" is totally something i would say to get her to go away.

Ok, I personally am happy to share my opinion with anyone who asks. But if a stranger came up to me on the street with a video camera and a microphone, I don't want a part in it! I don't want my image used in a way that's out of my control or have some stupid prank played on me to make me look dumb. The fact that the person asking the questions is a female would probably make me more inclined to stop, but being a New Yorker, I tend to just ignore anyone who wants to talk to me.

It's actually made me feel bad a couple of times b/c I've accidentally ignored someone asking for directions. :( But sorry, when numerous men are all "hey baby" or "mmmmmm delicious" all the time, ignoring passers by is probably not a bad strategy.

I think what it comes down to is that there are some people who are more willing to share their opinion in that kind of situation, and there those who are less so.

I know that I personally could not respond if I was approached in that manner. Given time to construct an argument, or in an incredibly friendly environment, I would be likely to say something. Thats why I'm able to respond here, despite the flutter of nerves before I hit send--because I am able to look over what I am going to say, because I know I am less likely to be attacked personally. My 'shyness' does not allow me to respond to a more aggressive social situation well and so I am more likely to avoid it.

Therefore, I am disinclined from believing that this shows that women are necessarily less informed or more deferential. All it shows is that some women are less inclined from discussing their opinion in that situation, which is a different issue. And since we don't have the full context of their refusal to answer, I don't think we can judge them for their lack of response.

I left this comment on the MOBLogic blog:

This is all anecdotal evidence, which I take with a grain of salt.

I don't know how large your sample was, but you're definitely not finding the women who speak out in the sort of environment you create for them (see further below). And really, what are the stats? 51% of people you attempted to interview weren't interested and 49% of them were men, therefore there are more women than men not willing to speak out? Showing more clips of women being passive or not speaking their minds than clips of men doing the same thing means little.

Similar to what Tara/T-Monster said, as a big city girl it's automatic reaction to decline when people on the street hold out an empty coffee cup asking for spare change or try to press a pamphlet about the coming of the apocalypse into my hand. And as a journalist who has explored her share of broadcast work, who knows the polite thing to do is stop a person on the street with an "Excuse me", introduction, and explanation of what I'm doing (common sense, no?), of course I'd shake my head "no" and keep walking if some amateur shoved a microphone into my face and demanded what I thought about the anniversary of the Iraq war without preamble.

I think a part of this is that women are often taken to task when one of their sex is ignorant. So if you speak up and you make a fool of yourslef, people often associate that with women in general, and not just you. Men don't have that problem.

Also, maybe this just shows that women are more discerning with their reputations. Too often a small slight against a woman will reverberate for longer than it would with a man.

I have to say I'm more dishearted by the comments to this story then the movie - the majority of posters on a feminist web site all just said they would also not offer an opinion, etc.

I understand the big-city instinct to avoid people, but watching the video many of the people listened to the question, and then refused, etc., so it's more then that.

I absolutely hate that many people made comments about women caring about their reputation more, afraid of making all women look stupid, and worrying about how their appearance will be interpretted.

I know I'm an outspoken person but in 2008 I do not agree that some of these are such valid concerns anymore. Not to me at least. I wish women could have more confidence in themselves and not worry about these things so much. If someone wants to take my picture and plaster it on a fake naked body I could care less - though I don't see why the respondants would think that the women interviewer was going to do that.

I also don't really know any man or women who would see a woman say something stupid and then think that all women were stupid or felt that way. I dunno, maybe I live in a more progressive area then most, but I just don't see that happening.

I think the comment from Destra about "too often a small slight against a women will reverberate for longer then it would with a man" is also troublesome... there is some truth to it, but if makes me feel inferior to think about. We should all have more confidence and maybe learn to let go a little more, because that video and these comments has really freaked me out. How are we supposed to be taken seriously if we don't use our voices?

Ummm, I'm just wondering if she chose to nitpick the clips where women walked away from her or acted avoidant because I'm sure that there were some women that stopped and answered her questions. I just don't believe that every single woman she asked was completely uninformed or walked away or chose to defer to their s.o... I really think she must have cherry picked these clips in order to support her theory. I mean I'm sure I could go around and interview 100 people then nitpick enough clips to prove some theory about how men are this way or women are that way and it would look very convincing. Of course you wouldn't see the other 87 clips where the people interviewed didn't act this way, but never you mind, pay no attention to the person behind the curtain!

I've done a good amount of person-on-the-street interviewing — mostly of college students,but occasionally older people — and I've found the same pattern to bear out with younger people especially, which is not to say that I haven't run across plenty of college women willing to speak their minds on record.

I've never noticed a big gender difference when it comes to older people (As a whole I found both older men and women much more willing to give an opinion than younger ones). Though I should add that this was in a Midwestern college town, and I was usually sans camera.

I disagree with her, though, in that I have found "I don't care" to be a pretty gender-neutral response.

This is so embarrassing for me to admit, and probably part of the problem, but I'd be scared of looking hideous on tv/the internet.

I couldn't help but think maybe some women were afraid of the same...

I didn't get very far into the video before it got all crazy and stopped working. So all I saw was that women don't want to talk about politics on camera in the middle of the street.

I'm very shy and I have a hearing disorder- in a situation like that I couldn't string a coherent sentence together to save my life. Ask me to write 500 words on something, rather than talk about it for 45 seconds, and I don't come across as spastic or dumb at all, and I'd be much more willing to participate.

Then again, I'm pretty shy about putting my politics out there in the first place, because my parents have scoffed at my opinions my whole life. I wouldn't be surprised if that kind of experience was more common to girls than boys.

Mmmm. See, the fact that I run the hell away from people when they attempt to approach me with a camera relates more the fact that I've got a bit of social anxiety than the fact that I am a woman. If I'm with someone, and they stop, I'm not going to leave them behind, but I will try to hide and secretly hate at them if someone points the camera at me.

Posted by: l.short.1230

That's basically me. I'm camera shy. Also, when I'm walking, I generally don't like to be interrupted. I like to get from point A to point B without being bothered. I would be much more comfortable answering questions in a scheduled interview than someone I don't know shoving a mic in my face.

Hmmm, I can't understand this at all. Why would women resist being stopped and interrupted on the street? Why would they NOT want their faces plastered all over the internet?

And by the way, who DOES understand the delegate system? I think many people know much about how it works, and sometimes I wonder if even the delegates themselves know how it works!

Honestly, couldn't this be explained by the fact that this is an attractive woman and guys WANT to talk to her and thus they OVERCOME their apathy?

And I don't mean apathy about the issues, I mean apathy about being approached by a complete stranger.

Maybe if it was a really CUTE guy, more women would come up and answer the questions? And I think if it was a male interviewer, definitely less guys would have stopped to talk.

If they really wanted this to be more than anecdotal, they should have tried that out.

I really don't like the attitude that she takes with this. And I really don't think there's much validity in this "research."
I live in Manhattan. Not only do I run into people who want money/comments/signatures/organs every time I leave my building, I've BEEN the girl that pushes fliers under your nose, asks you to fill out a survey, etc. And when someone approaches me on the street, in general I don't care what they have to say, I just know that it's already happened 5+ times today and it's going to happen at least 10 more before I get to where I'm going. That has nothing to do with me being a woman, or vocal about my opinions, or uninformed.
The deferring to men thing is discouraging, but not exactly conclusive of anything. It seemed like neither person really wanted to talk, both were glancing at one another.
The reporter seems very...cocky about her "results." I think she should take them with a grain of salt considering her approach and where she is

I agree that age and New York City have a lot to do with the reactions. Older women would have talked more, and people in NYC learn to avoid people on the streets who usually have some type of gimmick. That said, I also think that the way girls are raised has definitely contributed to their reactions. Women are taught to be smart in our heads. Even if we're right, even if we're informed, our ideas are constantly passed over for lesser male ideas because of the package they arrive in. So I'm sure many of those women were smart and informed, but they have simply accepted that they are the only people who need to know that.

I agree with a lot of what's been said in this discussion re: the flaws with this. It's not a rigorous study, we're not seeing the whole story, and there may be some logical problems with the conclusions drawn.

But I just want to stand up for a second for the fact that there's something really interesting going on with this story. Maybe the creators of the video haven't quite teased out all the whys and wherefores, but there's clearly something a lot of us are responding to in it. I don't think they totally just made up this phenomenon for the sake of driving traffic (they'd be better off filming some diet coke and mentos). I buy that it's happening often enough to stand out to them, and it's in noticing these unexpected quirks in behavior that we can learn interesting things about a culture (maybe it's NYC, women in a certain neighborhood, or Americans who use the internet).

I have to wonder, how many of these women, if they were in a discussion with their friends, people they feel comfortable with, would have insisted that, if presented with someone asking their opinion they would have no problem standing up for what they believe in?

I absolutely hate that many people made comments about women caring about their reputation more, afraid of making all women look stupid, and worrying about how their appearance will be interpretted.

Three words:

Modern. Editing. Technology.

"Another possible explaination for the reactions the women had is that alot of women are superficial, and probably wouldn't want to stop and be compared to such a beautiful interviewer, however men would love to stop by and talk to her."

Explain that to me again, would you? Being a superficial woman and all, I'm a little confused on how the fact that women won't talk to her and "men would love to stop by and talk to her" means that women are superficial. As, opposed to, I dunno, people being superficial maybe.

But then, even that is giving your idiotic theory more respect that in deserves.

At this blog alone you've got several dozen (probably) women giving their reasons why they, personally, wouldn't talk to Ms. Campbell. On the clip itself, at several women make it very clear that it's the camera that's bothering them. But no, they are all wrong, it's bc we are all just jealous bitches. Two (probably) guys and one (probably) woman says so. After all, that's obviously what the woman who "doesn't follow politics" was reacting to.

Gosh, I wonder why we don't share our opinions more often.

My opinion is that the guys saying that (here and at moblogic) are project far too much. Also, it is my opinion that there is a huge difference between asking someone for directions and sticking a camera in their face and asking them to share what they think. Therefore, studies on the former have very little to do with real life situations of the latter.

There are also reasons other than jealousy for women to be less likely to help women who are supermodel level gorgeous, assuming the study is accurate. As many people have already pointed out, women are more on guard on public than men because they feel/are more vulnerable. It makes sense that this would be more true when women are approached not just by strange men, but by women who would normally have no reason to ask for their help.

If Sarah Jessica Parker approached me for help, I'd react much differently (internally at least) than if someone more average asked for my help. It's not a matter of being jealous, it's a matter of being suspicious and constantly on guard. And since the supermodels in this case didn't actually need help, the women who smelled something amiss would be right.

........

Do you know what dynamic I found interesting? The fact that most of the women - all the ones who were not with men, in fact - didn't just try to walk away, they made sure to say "No, thank you," as they were walking away. Which certainly lends more credence to the theory that women fear being punished for their opinions and much less to the idea that these women were secretly just jealous of the woman they were politely turning down.

I'm subscribing to the attractiveness theory. But even moreso, I'm genuinely wary of Lindsay's motives for creating the site and blogcast. I can't really understand the point besides self-promotion. If she really wants to find out what "everyday people think," she doesn't need to film them--she can instead go to a local town hall meeting, a local college, a bar, a friend's house, any number of other blogs. And what's the point of her "sharing" this information with us, especially via video, unless she has some particularly interesting point to get across (which, even then, what's the point of filming)? I already get bombarded by advertisers, marketers, and opportunists everyday when I walk out on the street. I don't need someone shouting at me and sticking things in my face while I'm just going from one place to the next. The problem isn't the questions, the problem is her belief that anyone has any obligation to her, just because she bought a mic and a camera. It's especially offensive that she's hiding her marketing ploy behind political righteousness. Ugh.

I'm an extremely well informed women, and I would never, ever, ever talk to this chick on the street with a camera. Never. Ever. Ever. Never.

As a journalist, I don't respect anything about this "news survey".
She doesn't introduce herself, her questions are loaded and out of no where, and she's chasing people down the street. And now passing judgment on the women that she's harassing?
Let one woman speak for herself, not for all women.
None of the men in that piece said anything either. But they're just "people", so they don't represent a social pattern.

As a journalist, I don't respect anything about this "news survey".
She doesn't introduce herself, her questions are loaded and out of no where, and she's chasing people down the street. And now passing judgment on the women that she's harassing?
Let one woman speak for herself, not for all women.
None of the men in that piece said anything either. But they're just "people", so they don't represent a social pattern.

I've been approached with a camera by random people in the street before. I told them in French that I hadn't the slightest idea what they were saying. It's not that I don't have plenty to say about whatever the subject is, or that I don't feel adequately informed (I'm rather obsessive about keeping up to date on the issues that matter to me), but that I have no control over what happens with my image once I've given it to them. Even if they don't edit it beyond recognition to make me look ridiculous or to attribute to me a view I was not expressing, they can still frame it in misleading ways with narration and juxtapositions. The point isn't that these particular people WOULD do that, but that I had no way whatsoever of knowing exactly what their intentions were, and I'm certainly not going to have my image out there without at least some reason to believe I'll be fairly represented.

Um, am I the only person who noticed that Lindsay Campbell actually came here and explained herself? She just explained why she asked if Hillary was a monster, and if you actually go to her website, the the title of the episode is Hillary's Not a Monster, and she also just said that she does speak to interview informed women, but more often than not, the women she approaches decline to be interviewed. I'm kind of dismayed that at a feminist website, when a woman comes and explains herself and the (perfectly legitimate) reason behind airing that episode, people are still continuing to pick her apart.

Am I the only one who noticed that Lindsay Campbell actually came here and explained the reasoning behind this episode? She also said...in this same thread, that you're all posting in, that she talks to many informed women all the time and explains the "Is Hillary a Monster" question. If anyone ever bothered to click on the link she provides, you'd see that the title of it is "Hillary is Not a Monster." It really dismays me that at a feminist website, after a woman comes here and provides a (legitimate) reason behind the episode, which is that overwhelming majority of women she approaches don't want to speak, she is still being slammed.

Did anyone else notice the sexism in the Saturn commercial at the end?

"Power, and what it means to be strong" [images of masculine men]
"Beauty, and what it means to interact" [images of feminine women]

Come one, I'm not the only on wondering where the commentary is, right?

Maybe women are just wiser then men. As in, "Those who speak, don't know; Those who know, don't speak."

Maybe women are just wiser than men. As in, "Those who speak, don't know; Those who know, don't speak."