I read a similar study a few decades ago that was done by the advertising industry, and it’s when I quit wearing trousers and converted to skirts and dresses. If men look at George Brett’s crotch (and animal’s privates), then…
Men look at crotches
Among the many interesting things in Online Journalism Review’s article about using eyetracking to increase the effectiveness of news article design is this odd result:
This image of George Brett was part of a larger page with his biographical information. All users tested looked the image, but there was a distinct difference in focus between men and women.
Although both men and women look at the image of George Brett when directed to find out information about his sport and position, men tend to focus on private anatomy as well as the face. For the women, the face is the only place they viewed. Coyne adds that this difference doesn’t just occur with images of people. Men tend to fixate more on areas of private anatomy on animals as well, as evidenced when users were directed to browse the American Kennel Club site.
That is absolutely fascinating. I’d love to hear an evolutionary biologist’s take on why that is.
I’m also heartened by the article’s first featured finding: that tighter writing, more white space, and jettisoning unnecessary imagery helps readers read faster and retain more of what they’ve read.
Full story at Kottke.
Other also read:
O.K. Colleen… lol… This picture is not really fair… Every man knows that a baseball player is wearing a cup, and we (some) look in pity… Women would not think that automatically… However, that does not explain the animal watching… lol.
I am sure there are people, such as yourself, that could better explain the situation, but men are generally far more sexually motivated than women; so anything in that realm can be a curiosity. It does not, however, translate to being a “sexual” glance… merely interest.
Perhaps this means that men and animals should wear skirts as well, so as not to arouse men’s sexual interest. Kind redolent of how table legs were covered for the same reason by tablecloths in Victorian times.
An innocent glance can very quickly become a sexual one…
Very true, Melissa…
If you’ve every played sports, you know that you look at the hips to know where your opponent is going to go, because the head fake is just all too easy. Seems God programmed men to use this skill in sports, war, and work.
As much as females base how they dress on trying to keep unwanted male attention at bay, I find it odd how they will opt for pants, which actually do MORE to attract attention than repel it(I’d be all day mentioning songs where male singers praise how some gal looks in pants, including shorts). If females want to repel, as opposed to attract, unwanted male attention, they should get rid of every pair of pants(including shorts, cullotes, leggings, and anything else that comes to mind).
Thanks again for the article post.Thanks Again. Much obliged.
Regina’s comment is way out of line, and she strikes me as the very type of female who sees little, if any, wrong with females wearing pants(or other masculine garb), even exclusively, but woe to him who so much as dresses for Halloween or what have you once in a blue moon in the least bit of minor-league feminine stuff. True, there is no excuse for EITHER sex to do drag, no matter what! However, we seem to have a different set of rules for the sexes. We act like it’s okay, even admirable, for gals to do drag(even to the point of not seeing it as drag, California, if it’s the only state in the nation where this is true, has laws REQUIRING employers to allow females to wear pants to work), but we suddenly have morals when MALES are the ones doing drag. Dt.22:5 speaks out against the SEXES dressing alike, not giving a free pass to one sex only to make the other stay on the straight and narrow!