@RaindropSweetie: You're right—it's probably being agender that slowed me down when it came to figuring gender stuff out.
How have I had my mental wiring tested? Well, assuming certain behaviors are the result of neural wiring, we can look at those behaviors and deduce wiring, no? Here's some of the behaviors and characteristics given in your first article:
I preferred toys with wheels over plush toys as a kid. My long-term memory isn't that hot, but I have excellent working memory.
I'm so good at visualizing what happens when a complicated two- or three-dimensional shape is rotating in space and correctly determining angles from the horizontal that I mend and build watches. I suck at finding my way around with landmarks—dead reckoning helps me find my way home when I'd otherwise be lost. I'm so lousy at recognizing faces that I practically qualify as face-blind, but I'm great with objects.
I've never in my life been depressed (despite coming from a family prone to it), but I have been professionally diagnosed with autism. I recall some emotional memories, but it takes a lot of thought and they're not all that vivid. I tend to compartmentalize.
TL;DR Straight-up male.
Second article:
I'm not super empathetic. The psychologists I've talked to all worried about my likelihood of committing homicide (I kept telling them they didn't need to—sure, I'm aggressive and a bit murderously-tempered, but I also have this thing called "self-control" and an awareness of consequences).
As previously remarked, I'm great at mentally rotating 2- and 3-dimensional objects. I also suck at stuff like "Where's Waldo?" and remembering where things are on maps.
I'm not interested in marriage, but now that this article mentions it, I do have a history of encouraging my siblings to marry people younger than them.
I am pretty dang short, but that's not an indicator of female brain... right?
Running on down to the lists: I don't conform, I do have plenty of verbal ability, I'm more prone to direct aggression than the indirect type, I don't really trust people, I actually enjoy negative emotions in others, my spacial location ability sucks, I don't often smile, I'm fairly cynical, I can't cook, I hit puberty late, I'm frequently criticized for lacking empathy, I'm more interested in people as things, I preferred male-typical toys as a kid, sex doesn't bother me either way, and I don't get depressed.
On the male side of things, I think I've got a handle on my impulsivity, I've only experienced intense sexual jealousy once (which was weird), I've got great 3-D geometry ability, I'm... keeping an eye on the blood pressure thing, I'm better at accurately assessing risk than I used to be (I don't leap before looking very often anymore), and of course if I'm leading people it's about the task.
My mental rotation ability's excellent, I try not to be physically aggressive (I mean, come on: I'm tiny, I'd lose), but I really love sparring—and a couple of psychologists have called me a psychopath (which is, let's face it, not a valid psychological diagnosis, and I really don't think I'm charming enough to qualify anyway).
TL;DR Way more male than female.
Article three makes for a stupid-long analysis, so: next comment.
Article three.
According to Truity, my Big Five results are: O - 56% C - 69% E - 19% A - 12% N - 23%
This means I'm much less agreeable than your average person (male or female), and also a fair bit less neurotic. I consistently score lower than pretty much everybody on these two traits.
...Should I note that these are the two traits on which "females consistently score higher than males"?
Looking at the Leary Circumplex, I can identify with everything from "dictatorial" at the top to (moving counterclockwise) "cruel and unkind" on the left. Everything from "spoils people with kindness" to (moving clockwise) "spineless" is entirely not me. I can hardly manage "cooperative," never mind "agrees with everyone."
In short, I'm far more "assured-dominant" and "cold-hearted" than "insecure-submissive" and "warm-agreeable."
According to Open Psychometrics' 16 PF test, my sensitivity is 2 (on a scale of 0 to 4), warmth is 1.2, apprehension is 0.6, dominance is 2.7, and emotional stability is 3.7.
...I suspect the "sensitivity" factor is a little higher than it should be because a number of the questions ask you to agree or disagree with statements like "I can be easily hurt," which, for an autistic, is a bit.... Well, it's easy to cause me all sorts of physical pain. My body's stinkin' fragile. It's annoying.
In any case:
I'm more dominant than average, more assertive than most, not terribly risk-prone anymore, generally tough-minded, notably cold-hearted, exceedingly emotionally stable, quite utilitarian, and open to abstract ideas. I'm not the nurturing type, far from warm, never altruistic (I'd argue that no one is, really), not at all submissive, fairly risk-averse, rarely if ever tender-minded, and not terribly open to feelings (though I do like me a nice aesthetic experience).
Moving on to the cooperation and competition bit, I'd have to say I don't really cooperate or compete with anybody IRL. I don't share activities with others, so how would I make friends or enemies? Okay, I go to work and so on—but I don't hang out with my coworkers at bars or anything.
In the "Aggression" section—I like direct verbal aggression. I'm good at it. I do it for fun. Direct physical aggression's fun too, it's just I'm not as good at it....
Indirect aggression isn't a thing I do. (Not consciously, anyway.)
My favorite game as a kid was Cops and Robbers. Nobody could beat me—I could vault the backyard fence. When my sisters insisted on playing house, I got bored. Sure, I could hang around trying to make things interesting, but somehow they never appreciated my ideas. Sure, magic unicorns—that try to stab you to death with the vicious lances mounted on their heads! Nope. They just weren't into it.
I suck at nonverbal communication. Facial expression, body language, tones of voice... nope, forget it. And that's not even getting into the whole subtext thing. But my verbal ability's great!
I started reading at age four and never stopped. I can produce words for basically ever and not get sick of it.
...In case you hadn't already noticed.
As far as my conversational style goes, well, you tell me: given the contextual factors involved here, do I talk more like a man or more like a woman?
I'm terrible at expressing emotions with my facial expression or posture. I am, in fact, so bad at it that I deliberately suppress my natural body language and facial expressions because they're invariably misread. I'm also pretty sucky at figuring out what other people feel based on what their faces are doing (unless they're feeling fear, in which case you'd better believe I spot it right off).
TL;DR Just about as male as it gets, with the exception of my awesome verbal ability (which is apparently not a thing most dudes get—sorry, dudes).
The fourth article you linked to gave us a bunch of studies done on rats, mice, chickens, etc., which makes reasoning from behavior to cause a little trickier. There are some human behaviors listed, but they've already been covered in the other three links, so why bother going over them again? This reply's already two comments long.
If certain behaviors and characteristics are the result of specific mental wiring, having the behaviors and characteristics means you have the wiring. Yes?
So it's safe to say my neural wiring is (at the very least) extremely unlikely to be female.
Everyone chooses their companions based on a belief that companioning with that person will get them more positives than negatives. Different people consider different things positive. But the methodology's the same. You don't choose as a companion someone who isn't available, or who gets on your nerves too much, or who doesn't provide anything you value.
Everyone, when choosing a companion, first considers the available options.
Sometimes a companionship is started purely based on availability: you're both in the same place/s at the same time/s, you see each other a lot, so you strike up an acquaintance. Why not?
Well, if they get on your nerves too much, or if there's someone equally available who provides better conversation/emotional support/whatever, you'll pick that other person instead (or even no one at all, to avoid being annoyed). You said women are in an entirely different head space from men when they choose companions, but how different is a head space that uses all the same things—availability, few negatives, many positives—and only changes what's considered positive or negative... how is that "an entirely different head space"?
Everyone has a different set of ideas about what's good in a companion. If just changing which positives you're looking for creates an entirely different head space, there are a good seven or eight billion entirely different head spaces out there.
Or do men consistently tend to look for a great many of the same things, most of which your average woman doesn't value?
Regarding insults about appearance: I hold that the average woman's strong negative reaction to the suggestion that she isn't entirely stunning is the terrible, terrible result of living in a society that tells women their appearance is the most valuable, most important thing about them.
I know right? Like makeup for instance. When did that start, exactly? I mean, everyone now days is so conditioned that it's completely normal but **when did it start???****** There was a time before the first woman shaved her legs, or put on a foundation, or tweezed hairs on her face. I'd just love to go back in time and witness the first person making these suggestions. Probably a descendent of Estee Lauder or one of those companies. And we fell for it.
@Fairbutfirm: ...Did Charlotte steal Dumbo's magic feather for Wilbur?
Descendant/ancestor confusion aside, I think this is the first time I've wholeheartedly agreed with you. Sure, painting your face and decorating your nails and sticking on fake eyelashes and what-have-you is fun on Halloween, but year-round? Who decided this was a requirement?
Or maybe everyone who paints does it because they genuinely like it, idk. It'd drive me nuts, so I'm glad no one gets on my case for not wearing lipstick or whatever.
I'm just glad that s isn't expected of me!!! Shaving my face is bad enough
@Fairbutfirm: Tell me about it. I wonder how many women would mostly drop the paints and powders if makeup (and natural body hair) stopped affecting the way people looked at them?
...Poll.
Hmm... I disagree with the idea that people choose companions based on the belief that they would get more positives than negatives. Drug addiction counselors are going to be let down a lot, but they choose to be around people who will cause great heartache. A battered spouse may stay with their partner knowing the partner can kill them. Why? It's not because they think it will be a good thing. I couldn't be bothered to finish reading the series related to 'A Child Called It', because the second book was all about the adult son groveling to the mother who hates him and abused him for years. He just kept chasing a love he never had and never would have rather than choose to go in a more positive direction.
Women are much pickier about companions than men.... I think this is made very clear by the dynamics on every social media site such as this. Men are much more lenient.
It's not just about who is available for everyone, although it is for some.
I don't expect you to take my opinion on the matter, that's why I posted links to the experts stating very clearly that there are many pronounced differences. There are thousands of peer reviewed, published, scientific papers on the matter. There are billion dollar industries profiting every moment from targeting these differences.
Some people value the good feeling they get from helping others so highly that the benefit outweighs the negatives of heartache. Some people consider staying with an abusive spouse safer than trying to leave. No one's so inhuman that they deliberately choose actions they know will result in negatives that outweigh positives for them—even if the positive in question is the vicious satisfaction of destroying their own life.
I think the articles you linked to were fascinating. "X brain structure leads to Y behaviors and characteristics" is a neat thing to learn.
It's also neat that it implies "Y behaviors and characteristics indicate the presence of X brain structure." Assuming the experts have got it right, it seems I'm either physically male or an extremely masculine female or intersex person. I think that's nifty. Theories are always at their best when they make verifiable predictions.
Wow this is too my much lol
@DarrenWalker What? You missed my joke?? I was suggesting that a tradition like women wearing makeup could have been started by a makeup company. (Estee Lauder, Maybelline, yeah that's all I got)
I don't know how many times this is going to have to be addressed here. Discussion after discussion, we have seen endless infighting on whether it's okay for a man to cuddle another man.
Here's a bulletin! If you as a man would cuddle another man, that's perfectly okay and your stance is to be respected. If you as a man would not cuddle another man, that is also perfectly okay and your stance is to be respected. Attacking a man based on whether or not he would cuddle another man is getting old and unnecessary, to say the least.
Closed. 08 AUG 2019 10:37 EDT