I took two tests and both results were about what I expected. I do think that one of the issues with these tests is that it is easy to figure out how they work. It is hard to intentionally let your subconscious make the decision, and while I understand that answering quickly helps with that, I still did not get a definitive result. In both instances, my results showed I was slightly predisposed towards what I expected, but I actually feel strongly towards what I expected. I think knowing too much about the test I was taking took some of the effectiveness away, as I really focused on getting the right answers.

I found this reading extremely interesting and prevalent in our society, especially today. The stereotypes that exist between men and women is ingrained in our society more than we know. Additionally, they can either manifest in mostly harmless ways, or in ways that could be damaging to someone’s life and health. The example about the doctor who decided that his female patient didn’t need a routine test to test cholesterol levels (simply because the issue of high cholesterol is statistically more common in men) when in fact she ended up needing medication to control her levels proves this idea and how dangerous it can be. The preconceived notion that certain people are at a higher risk for a certain type of medical issue is understandable, but that doesn’t mean that they should be applied and people should be considered “safe” from these problems (especially in something like the field of medicine). I’ve had family members in the exact same situations, and my female relatives have had to ask for specific tests that doctors overlooked (because the statistical odds of a female having those problems were extremely low) but the test results showed that in fact they did have the issue. To me, this reading solidified the idea that these stereotypes definitely exist in our biases, but in some fields the practical application of them can be very dangerous.

I took the IAT on Gender and career. I was not especially surprised by the results (slightly bias towards men =careers) because this is a common association to have. However, as I was taking it, I realized how many I was getting wrong when I had to associate men with family. This was a little startling. I grew up with both parent working full time, and my mom actually working more than my dad. So, it is interesting to see that I still have this bias, despite having a female role model who works that hard.

I just took the IAT test about weapons/ harmless objects and white/black Americans. My results had little to no automatic response to the association between the four. This result didn’t really surprise me. I understood what the test was trying to research, but it felt more like memorization than bias testing. I thought some of the other tests looked interesting and I am looking forward to trying them. I am also a little bit nervous because like our previous reading talked about, I am sure I have some unconscious biases.

I found this reading fascinating from the get-go. The example of a woman receiving medical treatment feels like a consistent example of gender stereotypes. For my Justice and Civil Society class, we read a black woman’s account of giving birth, where the doctor’s did not believe her when she said she was in labor and did not bother to check in order to be certain. Eventually, it became abundantly apparent and they took her into a delivery room. The baby was stillborn, and the nurse blamed it on the mother because she did not point out to the doctors that she was in labor. I was personally confused by the knowing versus endorsing distinction. I understand that knowing refers to awareness of the traits associated with a stereotype and that endorsing refers to the internalization and belief in a stereotype, but I did not understand how the author was arguing that they are one and the same. I think that idea is almost using consequentialism because the outcome is that the ideas of the stereotype are still floating out there, but I think that Kantianism is a little more relevant here because I think that intentions of a person’s thought process matter. Maybe I’m wrong and just missing the author’s point entirely. Let me know your thoughts.

The reading discussed how to bypass mindbugs and implicit biases. It says that instead of trying to “outsmart” them, it is better to acknowledge the ones that you have, and try to get rid of it. I found the story of the woman who changed her computer screensaver to pictures of various counter-stereotypes especially interesting. This is something that I will try to be mindful of, and do when I catch myself having a bias.It is a challenging thing to come to terms with. We all have biases, whether we want to or not. However, having biases does not make us bad people, as long as we do what we can to counter them when we catch ourselves having a bias.

I also learned about the concept of “double binds” in Dr. Hoyt’s class that she discusses in the reading. It makes me realize how it is possible to have two biases on the same subject, making it impossible to win. Dr. Hoyt gives the example of women being criticized for being strong leaders, and also being criticized for being “overly feminine.” I definitely see this double bind in my life.

These readings made me want to both take more IATs and not take anymore. On the one hand, I don’t want to take anymore because it seems like it will tell me things I do not want to know about myself. I like to consider myself a good person that does not blindly follow stereotypes, but the reading suggests that I do follow those stereotypes much more than I would like to think I do. On the other hand, it would probably be to my benefit to take more IATs to illustrate to myself what/who I am biased against. This would likely help me catch patterns of my thinking that might be leaning into stereotypes. I think it would be beneficial to at least acknowledge when I am listening to stereotypes I should not be.

Both readings made me think about intersectionality. Throughout the readings, we were largely talking about one specific group that faces the negative effects of stereotypes. It seems hard enough to handle the disadvantages of being negatively stereotyped, but when you begin to think about intersectionality it is a whole other ballpark. As a white woman, I understand how challenging it can be to be the only woman or one of a few women in a male-dominated space. In female-dominated I am able to feel comfortable because they are likely to be majority white and I feel comfortable in that space in a way that black women cannot. At least there are frequently spaces that I can go to where I don’t face stereotyping, but for people that fall into more than one stereotyped category, that is far less true.

Throughout the readings, I was also thinking about a unit we did about women in the workplace in my FYS. During this unit, we talked about imposter syndrome, which is when you feel like you are not qualified to do/be something even though you totally are. This seems to me very similar to stereotype threat. One way I felt this in my own life has always been in math classes. Every time I took any sort of calculus throughout high school and college I always got an A even though I would never have called myself good at math. When I was reflecting on that during my FYS it was clear that I never felt good at math because I always had this subconscious understanding that women were not meant to be in STEM and so this is probably not an area I would have thrived in. It always felt like much more of a risk to me to take classes like Calculus because I was telling myself that I probably would not be good at them, even though my past was telling me the opposite. It is frustrating to be able to see that, but also not feel like I can do much to change it because even though I recognize the stereotype I still find myself giving in to it.

I took two implicit association tests. The first one was tested associations between tax breaks or social programs and good or bad. My data from the first test suggested a moderate automatic association between social programs and good. This result did not surprise me because I am definitely very much in favor of social programs. If anything, I would have expected a strong automatic association. I will say that it felt like for a lot of the test I was always having trouble going in between keys, which I understand is part of how they test for association, but I feel like this could be skewed just by slow response times in general. The second test I took was the one Dr. Bezio mentioned in class about a preference for either Gay people or Straight people. On this test, my responses suggested a strong automatic preference for Gay people over Straight people. I am a little bit surprised by the results of this test. I can totally see myself having a preference for Gay people, but as someone that identifies as straight, I would have expected the preference to be more moderate. I feel like I have a preference for Gay people because their political beliefs are frequently in line with mine and they are more tolerant and accepting of others.

I knew I had a implicit bias towards things. We are all raised on the beliefs of our parents and as we grow up, we associate different ideas to different topics. As I grew older, I took notice of what I saw in different situations. This has changed the way I see things and what I associate with different ideas.

Based on our experiences, we can change from what we learned from our childhood. I learned from my implicit bias test, that my views have changed than what I learned growing up. I love how our society is changing to shape the varying ideas and perspectives that we all believe. I think it is impossible to eliminate all implicit biases. We would all love to think we do not carry them, but we do. I hope to take this implicit bias test in the future to see whether what I think I associate towards an idea are the same or not.

I took the implicit bias test for age and I am not really that surprised by the results that I got. I got that I have a moderate automatic preference for young people over old people. This is an implicit bias that is held within American society and, given my age, it makes sense to me that I would also adhere to it. The main thing that I found interesting about the test is the questions that it asked before hand. It asked about what age others perceive you to be, what age you wish you were, and how old you wish to live to (among other things). For how old I wish to live to, I answered truthfully and put 100 years old. Upon getting the results of the test back and realizing that the results did not surprise me, I decided that this is a contradictory belief of mine. I should not wish to live to be 100 years old while also holding this preference for younger people. However, I wonder how much of the preference has to do with my current age and if I were to take this test again at 50 years old if my results would be different.