Read the following passage and answer the three questions that follow.
Most of recorded human history is one big data gap. Starting with the theory of Man the Hunter, the chroniclers of the past have left little space for women’s role in the evolution of humanity, whether cultural or biological. Instead, the lives of men have been taken to represent those of humans overall. When it comes to the lives of the other half of humanity, there is often nothing but silence.
And these silences are everywhere. Our entire culture is riddled with them. Films, news, literature, science, city planning, economics. The stories we tell ourselves about our past, present and future. They are all marked—disfigured—by a female-shaped ‘absent presence’. This is the gender data gap.
The gender data gap isn’t just about silence. These silences, these gaps, have consequences. They impact on women’s lives every day. The impact can be relatively minor. Shivering in offices set to a male temperature norm, for example, or struggling to reach a top shelf set at a male height norm. Irritating, certainly. Unjust, undoubtedly.
But not life-threatening. Not like crashing in a car whose safety measures don’t account for women’s measurements. Not like having your heart attack go undiagnosed because your symptoms are deemed ‘atypical’. For these women, the consequences of living in a world built around male data can be deadly.
One of the most important things to say about the gender data gap is that it is not generally malicious, or even deliberate. Quite the opposite. It is simply the product of a way of thinking that has been around for millennia and is therefore a kind of not thinking. A double not thinking, even: men go without saying, and women don’t get said at all. Because when we say human, on the whole, we mean man.
This is not a new observation. Simone de Beauvoir made it most famously when in 1949 she wrote, ‘humanity is male and man defines woman not in herself, but as relative to him; she is not regarded as an autonomous being. [...] He is the Subject, he is the Absolute—she is the Other.’ What is new is the context in which women continue to be ‘the Other’. And that context is a world increasingly reliant on and in thrall to data. Big Data. Which in turn is panned for Big Truths by Big Algorithms, using Big Computers. But when your big data is corrupted by big silences, the truths you get are half-truths, at best. And often, for women, they aren’t true at all. As computer scientists themselves say: ‘Garbage in, garbage out.’
Based on the passage, which of the following statements BEST explains “absent presence”?
"Instead, the lives of men have been taken to represent those of humans overall. When it comes to the lives of the other half of humanity, there is often nothing but silence.
And these silences are everywhere[...] They are all marked—disfigured—by a female-shaped 'absent presence'. This is the gender data gap."
It can be understood from the above lines that 'absent presence' is used to showcase the value of women as a part of humanity. Although present, they are specifically not recognized as part of it. The presence of the gender data gap shows something is missing; in essence, something is missing (the presence of women in these narratives) is specifically felt as they are currently absent, hence absent presence.
Let's take a look at the options:
Option A: This is exactly what the idea of absent presence means in the context of the passage.
Options B, C and D suffer from the same issue: they focus on the magnitude of absence, whereas the text is focused on the specific nature of absence; it is not that many views were not part, only the part from the perspective of women were missing. This specific nature of the data absence makes it so that it becomes present in the conversation.
Option E: This is too literal and not what the passage is talking about, and hence can be easily eliminated.
Therefore, Option A is the correct answer.
Create a FREE account and get: