19 February 2009

pet peeve #324.7: obvious research disguised as important

don't you love those research studies that, upon publication, have everyone saying "duh" and wondering what the research funding could have been spent on? prime example:

CNN.com: Men see bikini-clad women as objects, psychologists say

...and this just in! the sky is blue.

as a psych major in college, i totally support psychological research. but Princeton -- really? can we please study something that might actually help us learn something useful? i especially like the researchers potential next step:

"Another avenue to explore would be showing images of men's wives and girlfriends in bikinis, Raison said. He predicts the objectifying effect would not happen in this context."

oh good. i hope your prediction is right, or you will spend a whole lot of unsuspecting IV-leaguers' tuition money providing wives and girlfriends with more fodder to attack their husbands and boyfriends. and if you are correct, then what? you can conclude males can overcome objectification of women, but only *their* women? wow, the irony might just make my head explode.

...back to studying repro for my LAST FINAL OF 2ND YEAR TOMORROW! yippee.

No comments: