Study Shows Males Commonly Mistake Sexual Intent

seattle-pk writes "Males are apparently clueless when it comes to interpreting sexual intent from females, according to a recent study (PDF) from Indiana University's Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences. Men were found commonly to perceive more sexual intent in women's behavior than women were intending to convey. (A campus survey showed that 68% of college females had an experience where a male mistook signs of friendliness for affection.) However, the study also shows that men were quite likely to misperceive sexual interest as friendliness. 'Rather than seeing the world through sex-colored glasses, men seemed just to have blurry vision of sorts, overall,' according to the article. If you're a male who ever mistook the meaning of a barista's smile, looks like you're not alone."

From the No Duh Dept.

Is this from the same study group that found males like beer?

"She slapped me, that means she wants my bod!"
   

wrong

women have blurry behavior

Re:wrong

... and men are simple beigns. It doesn't matter if the woman sends any signals. If she's pretty and witty he's intersted. If she's ugly and witty he ONLY wants to be her friend. If she's ugly and stupid he doesn't know her.

Re:wrong

Didn't you watch "When Harry Met Sally" we want to bang the ugly ones too.

Re:wrong

We do?! Ye gods, i didn't know!

Re:wrong

Wait . . .

Are you saying that the cute bartender, the one who laughs at all my horrible jokes and cleans up after me after I get really drunk and spill my beer everywhere, the one that I constantly tip very well . . . are you trying to tell me that she might not actually be into me?

Or, on the other hand...

The study actually just found that women are unclear about communicating their intentions to men.

Re:Or, on the other hand...

An interesting follow up would be to look at men and womens abilities to communicate their emotional states to others of the same sex, and also broaden the range of "intents" studied towards the opposite sex. It's that men from Mars, women from Venus thingy.

Also, how about looking into this across cultures? Maybe the portrait of women as sexual predators that tend to flourish in the media conditions falsely and desensitizes to the subtelties in non-verbal communication on this, and other, subjects. Anyone remember the episode of Friends where they got free porn? ;)

Re:Or, on the other hand...

An interesting follow up would be to look at men and womens abilities to communicate their emotional states to others of the same sex, and also broaden the range of "intents" studied towards the opposite sex.

That's exactly what I was thinking. If men understand the sexual intentions of other men, and women don't understand the sexual intentions of other women, then it's clearly the women who don't communicate clearly. If women understand each other but men don't, then it's men who are obvlivious. If men understand each other and women understand each other, but men don't understand women and vice versa, then it's the "women from Venus, men from Mars" thing". And if everybody has trouble understanding other people's sexual intentions, then people in general are unclear or oblivious about sexual intentions.

It's that men from Mars, women from Venus thingy.

That depends on the findings of the follow-up study.

Re:Or, on the other hand...

Exactly, and what's even more interesting is that if a man decides to be slightly more subtle than "UGH! ME MAN! YOU WOMAN!" but still way more obvious than women generally are then most women seem to completely miss that the man was hitting on them and I've heard women complain about how a guy should've been "more clear about it" yet they themselves think a smile and twirling their hair between their fingers while looking at a guy for two seconds from across the room somehow is enough effort to be considered "taking the first step".

And then they can't understand why the guys they like never understand that they're attracted to them...

/Mikael

Evolution

Things sure were simpler when we were monkeys.

Re:Evolution

Things sure were simpler when we were monkeys.

Putting one in the Whitehouse certainly didn't simplify things.

-1 Political Troll

         

Re:Evolution

Yeah - I'm still waiting for a woman to fling her faeces at me as a clear sign of her sexual intent.

Humor?

Why's this story in the "Humor" section? What's so funny about a 30-year old virgin?

Oh, wait..... HAW, HAW!

Hogwash...

While the results are likely true the reality is, in my opinion, that women don't make any sense. *nods* "Guys are clueless." The author, of the article at least, is female and many of today's men are so effeminate that we can't tell the difference. It is not that men haven't a clue, it is that women aren't willing (read able but I'm trying to be PC) to send clear signals.

We're MEN... We need CLEAR signals. We've only got enough blood to fill any one of the two organs at a time and most of the time it isn't the brain. Give us a CLEAR yes. You want us to fully comprehend then wear a damned sign - until then? Well... *shrugs*

Bah... Screw it... Until then remember that we've got too many people on the planet already.

Re:Hogwash...

We're MEN... We need CLEAR signals.

If you're trying to address the world's female population right now then I am afraid that you have your soapbox parked in the wrong forum.

Re:Hogwash...

We're MEN... We need CLEAR signals.

We don't just need clear signals, be need explicitly stated intentions. Say "I want sex". Then we understand you.

Fortunately my wife is aware of this and doesn't expect me to pick up on subtle clues. When she wants something from me, she tells me so. I love her very much.

Evolution?

There may be some evolutionary advantage in over-interpreting signals. Even though you may be wrong most of the time, the few times you are right still gets you some bootie. (Although it barely offsets the broken leg from one of the error's boyfriends.)
   

Re:Evolution?

Or, if you are a true alpha male, the error's boyfriend would be the one left behind in the dust. Now that's natural selection for you. Sad principle upon to build a stable, peaceful society thought, so let's raise above that ;) Me being a spindly nerd has nothing to do with this view of course.

Re:Evolution?

Don't forget the evolutionary advantage in "mis-communicating" by the females. More or less, guys who like you do stuff for you. You can sleep with whoever you want (eg, the alpha male) and the other guys (beta males) will still bust a nut trying to score by being nice / doing your bidding. Sending misleading signals is absolutely full of win for the girls (until you meet a psycho).

Genetic link?

Since humans are one of the few species that conceal ovulation [findarticles.com] I am wondering if this has a more genetic basis.

Or, another possible interpretation

Wow. Talk about interpreting the data to fit ones prejudices, instead of exploring all possibilities.

How about this take?: Women can't effectively communicate sexual intent (or lack) to men.

Or maybe we'll decide not to bow to such specious sexist chauvinism?: Study shows people are confused about sexuality. Women don't know how to ask for it, and the men don't know when they're asking. NAAAH!

It may seem trite, but communication is a two way street. Both the speaker and the listener are equally to blame for a failed communication, usually for not setting a clear set of assumptions upon which to base it. You know, language.

I would say that what this shows is that the language of sexual intent, especially primary (non-verbal) language, is sorely lacking. Have you seen the current youth "sexy dance?" They are seriously just out there having fun. Not a thing wrong with it. But if I did that with my wife, she'd know I want to "get down" later.

Don't get me wrong, they're hooking up too, but they're out there grinding like a bunch of feckless bunnies, and it doesn't necessarily mean anyone wants to have sex.

How could anyone not be confused? The only societal basis in the sexual dialogue we have any more is that misinterpretation is the only crime, and that only men misinterpret, because they're so bad at communication.

That's not a basis for relations between the sexes, that's absurd chauvinistic prejudice that makes your right hand seem considerably less risky.

So, in the age of sexy dancing, well past overtly sexualized clothing, trivialized sexual language, and a general dissolving of the entire courting process, how does one communicate, "Hey sailor, wanna fuck?" in a subtle and socially acceptable fashion?

That's not a question worth answering when you can just blame the man for being clueless.

Retitle: Study shows common prejudice that communications problems are always the man's fault. New study sets out to prove that the trivialization of sexual content in American society has left all parties thoroughly rudderless.

--
Toro

I work in a bar

I've worked for a karaoke bar called the 7 Bamboo since 2001. Here's some video clips of the mayhem.

http://uncutvideo.aol.com/users/sevenbamboovideo [aol.com]

Here's a statement from a guy that deals with both sexes at the core of thier honest drunkness when it comes to getting what they want. In this case, it mostly happens when our playlist is so full we cannot take anymore requests.

Guys will typically flash cash, or they'll do a intimidation display (beating thier chest) to get what they want. Girls on the other hand will flirt, pout, or use some other form of sexual display.

So when a slobbering drunk girl is pouting at me, bent over the booth, cleavage showing, saying "PLEASE MR KARAOKE MAN! LET ME HAVE ONE MORE SONG!" You mean to tell me as a male i'm misreading what she's trying to communicate?

She's trying to tell me "I'll fuck your brains out of this world if you let me sing." 99% of the women will pretend this is thier offer, but never deliver. (Yes, there's a small maybe even less than 1% that would deliver. (Cue up the "TOQER PLZ INTRO ME jokes now)

Just because a woman has no intent on fullfilling the message she's projecting, it doesn't diminish the fact that she *IS* trying to get that message across. It could be cleavage, it could me smiling and acting all cute, it could be putting thier arm around you, women have a lot of body language things they can do to convey it.

Not all men can tell the difference either. In fact, I'd say the majority can't. It's not fair to lump all us men together as one chauvenist mass though because women are trying to decieve us. Who's worse? The dumb man that can't tell the difference, or the salacious seductructress using her false (read lying) sexual messages?

And maybe I just don't know WTF i'm talking about because I have a skewed view of the world based on where I work, but I did work in desktop support in corporate enviroments for many years prior (think netware, early .com, NT3.51 days) I used to see women use the very same techniques at work to size new hires up, or get guys to help them on projects, or whatever. I think this is pre-programmed into us from our primate ancestors (ever see female chimps in heat with the swollen red asses? How about the bonobo chimps trading sex for food, etc.)

My wife is a very paranoid lady when it comes to other women. I think deep down inside all women know that all other women use sexual body cues in the same way. I used to think my wife was nuts when she would be all jealous of other girls standing around me, but after 14 years of her giving me cues I can sort of spot what's going on now too.

I believe a lot of this behavior is going to end at my generation. We didn't have this tharn intarnet in the 70's when I was born. I believe that the net, womens sufferage, and globalization has lead to a balancing out of the genders (at least here in the US) We are really on the verge of having a woman president, and that says a lot for how much gender roles have changed in this country. A lot of men (like me) had to take what jobs they could in 2001 between the layoffs and 9/11. I'm not the breadwinner in my household anymore, and i'm OK with that.

I look forward to it. It's got to be better than the message tradition beliefs and pop culture has tried to teach us. Western Christianity has typically conveyed that the man is in a dominant role, and the woman is a sexual toy/servant/baby launcher. I think the best balance is a true partnership, but so many women, men are running around ignorantly trying to assert thier gender role that they don't learn that till many years down the road.

There's also another side to this and that's the pop culture aspect. How many of you have watch Margeret Cho and Andrew Dice Clay?

I've known girls that follow Cho like she's Jesus, and guys follow ADC like he's uhh I dunno, Jesus? I'm sure other folks have seen the same. People allow themselves to be sucked so far into pop culture that they assume the gender role (and sexual messaging) that is implied. Thank god hardly anyone remembers Andrew, and hopefully Cho is heading the same way because nobody should follow thier idiotic advice on how to relate to the opposite sex.

Wrapping this up, I guess I wanted to say I wrote the above couple of paragraphs for a reason. It's all perspective and where you get your influence from. My wife would agree with everything i've written. When I met her, I was ignorantly blissful and never really thought about how girls acted around me. My wife was the first to point it out to me. So according to my own in house survey (me and my wife) we both misread the sexual cues women give off. Wait, I thought men misread them, my wife misreads them too? Study debunked.

Re:thanks

Hey, I think your mother tried to hit on me.

Are you sure there was any on involved?

Re:So what it's saying is ...

We spent significant resources developing a verbal language, and it's about damn time women started using it.

Begin with simple statements:

Put down the 20 sided dice and come have a drink with me.

Your guild can raid without you for a night, lets go see a movie.

We can make out while your program compiles.

I know you enjoy moderating that silly Slashdot forum, but we could be having sex right now!