Researcher: Gay Men Behave Like Women

Talks about guys that are nellie.

Moderators: selective_soldier, Lesley R. Charles, batty

Researcher: Gay Men Behave Like Women

Postby Gaydudelaf » Thu Jan 03, 2008 5:53 pm

Researcher: Gay Men Behave Like Women
by 365Gay.com Newscenter Staff

Posted: January 3, 2008 - 5:00 pm ET

(London) Gay men navigate in a similar way to women, according to a new study from researchers at Queen Mary, University of London.

In a new study published this week in the journal Hippocampus, Dr Qazi Rahman, from Queen Mary’s School of Biological and Chemical Sciences used virtual reality scenarios to investigate if spatial learning and memory in humans can be linked to sexual orientation.

Differences in spatial learning and memory - our ability to record and recall information about our environment - are common between men and women. It has been shown that men consistently outperform women on tasks requiring navigation and discovering hidden objects; whereas women are more successful at tests which require them to remember where those objects lie in a particular space.

This is the first study to investigate if those differences are also true for gay, lesbian and straight individuals.

Dr Rahman used virtual reality stimulations of two common tests of spatial learning and memory, designed by researchers at Yale University. In the Morris Water Maze test (MWM), participants found themselves in a virtual pool and had to escape as quickly as possible using spatial clues in the virtual room to find a hidden platform. In the Radial Arm Maze test (RAM), participants had to traverse eight ‘arms’ from a circular junction to find hidden rewards. Four of the arms contained a reward, four did not.

Dr Rahman and his research assistant, Johanna Koerting, found that during the MWM test gay men and straight women took longer to find the hidden platform than did straight men. However, both gay and straight men spent more of their “dwelling time” in the area where the hidden platform actually was, compared to straight and lesbian women.

Dr Rahman explains: “Not only did straight men get started on the MWM test more quickly than gay men and the two female groups, they also maintained that advantage throughout the test. This might mean that sexual orientation affects the speed at which you acquire spatial information, but not necessarily your eventual memory for that spatial information.

“In previous studies we have also found that gay men tend to use similar navigation strategies to women, like using land-marks, and we now want to explore whether navigation strategies on these virtual navigation tasks are also the same for gay men and women. In particular, we are interested in whether heterosexual men are using a unique strategy from their first attempt at traversing a new environment, which accounts for why they are so quick off the mark.”

The researchers also found that gay and straight men were similar in their performance on the Radial Arm Maze. “This suggests that sexual variation in spatial cognition is not straightforward – gay people appear to show a ‘mosaic’ of performance, parts of which are male-like and other parts of which are female-like,” adds Rahman.

Dr Rahman also commented that it would be interesting to see if these sexual differences change with age. “We know that spatial ability declines more rapidly in men with age than in women, and this might be related to changing hormone profiles. This may have some relevance to sex differences in ageing-related diseases of cognitive functioning, such as dementia.

“If we can understand more about how people of different sexes and sexualities differ in spatial performance, we might be able to tailor cognitive remediation therapies more effectively to specific groups within an ageing population.”

©365Gay.com 2008
------------------------------------------------------
Chip
http://www.myspace.com/chip_council
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id= ... ef=profile
"Bring back the Frozen Chicken Position (FCP)"
User avatar
Gaydudelaf
Member
 
Posts: 427
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 9:21 am
Location: Yuma, AZ

Postby Laiku » Sat Jan 26, 2008 5:10 am

:shock: oh my gosh, I must be straight...
I can navigate much better than most women I ever met :lol:

Just kidding, I wonder if these guys considered the cultural differences between women and men and straight and gay. Lets face it, if it suits them, gay people are more likely to use new ways of getting along. At whats so bad about using landmarks?
By the way, my own mother always navigated much better than my sister did, simply out of experience and practioce. I haven't read anything if the study took that in account.
Laiku
Newbie
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 11:00 am

Postby gvtire » Sat Jan 26, 2008 11:58 am

Il knew it I'm a lesbian in a mans body
FIGHT ON
BEAT THE BRUINS
gvtire
Moderator
 
Posts: 156
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 11:44 am
Location: Nashville Tennessee

Postby JakeMIke » Mon Jan 28, 2008 8:20 am

I have no sense of direction, and neither does my Mom. However, I read in Dear Abby where this is a genetic thing, and not a gay thing. Regardless, I still get lost a lot.
JakeMIke
Veteran Member
 
Posts: 514
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2005 2:27 pm

Postby devilnuts » Mon Jan 28, 2008 6:55 pm

In a human sexuality class the professor demonstrated this by asking the class which direction was north. The room had no windows and the maze of hallways to the classroom make it somewhat confusing. However, 5 of the 6 guys immediately pointed in the right direction while only about 2 of the 15 or so girls did.

I really have to say that I think it's just something you learn. It's paying attention to your surroundings and visually mapping things in your mind for later use. You can train someone to have better spatial abilities...you don't exactly train to be gay. :P
Supporting the troops shouldn't stop at the battlefield.
User avatar
devilnuts
Moderator
 
Posts: 1367
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 3:01 pm
Location: Tucson, AZ

Postby Laiku » Fri Feb 01, 2008 11:01 am

it's partly based on genes but that doesn't say much. It's an ability and as such has to be trained
Laiku
Newbie
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 11:00 am

Postby Frizzurd » Wed Oct 01, 2008 2:56 am

This is the kind of crud i am agreement with masculinity on. Generalizing all gay men as effeminate. Of course, he would call straight-acting gay men simply straight because you know women have been in power for thousands of years!
User avatar
Frizzurd
Newbie
 
Posts: 43
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2006 1:13 am

Postby GX » Wed Oct 01, 2008 12:59 pm

What did he do...round up a bunch of drag queens and bottoms. :lol:
User avatar
GX
Member
 
Posts: 153
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 9:16 pm
Location: Florida

Postby Pazuzu P. Sasquatch » Wed Oct 01, 2008 1:16 pm

I wonder what a good phrenologist or astrologer could tell us about this?

:roll:
When I was driving once, I saw this painted on a bridge: "I don't want the world. I just want your half."
Pazuzu P. Sasquatch
Veteran Member
 
Posts: 615
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 10:58 am
Location: Troy, Ohio

Postby dracuscalico » Wed Oct 01, 2008 8:38 pm

There was something on the discovery channel a long time ago, The Anatomy of love or something and it said Testosterone is responsible for spatial awareness and estrogen was reponsible for verbal skills. That would explain why men lose their spatial awareness as they get older, BECAUSE THEIR TESTOSTERONE IS DROPPING OFF due to andropause.

As far as the gay men are concerned, WHAT type of gay men did they use? If the guys were gay guys "in touch with their feminine side" or socially feminized, as a matter of ENVIRONMENT they would behave like women in many ways.

Did the testers know the orientations of the people they were scoring before they scored them? Or was it done "blind" without them aware of the purpose of the study.

And of course women are socialized to be dependent and assume that it is always someone else's job to help and assist them if they need it. So they, like children. are allowed to be careless because help is only a few short sobs away. As a result they have no need to develop the same abilities as a male whose job it is to protect them.

Have you EVER called a business and tried to get directions to drive there from a woman on the phone?!! Forget it. They either say, "I know how I get here but I don't know how to explain it.". OR they try to give you directions and you have to correct them about where the freeways are, or that the street they are talking about runs a different direction, in a different part of town. I just cut to the chase and say, "Can I speak with one of the guys please?" And then the guy gives me directions short and sweet. 95% of the time when women have given me directions, themselves, they have been wrong.

The only spatial awareness that I am aware of women having, is knowing how to put themselves directly in the line of fire of any male in the vicinity, to force an interaction, so he has to pay attention to her. As an experiment try going to the grocery store and count how many times females step right in front of you, getting in your way, versus males.

I have to say that if I am dealing with sissy gay guys, they tend to be very much like women when you ask them for things like measurements of something they need and they can't even give a guestimate. How can these guys be any kind of designers if they can't count and measure materials that they need to get the job done?
dracuscalico
Veteran Member
 
Posts: 1202
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2008 9:48 pm

Postby dracuscalico » Wed Oct 01, 2008 8:44 pm

devilnuts wrote:In a human sexuality class the professor demonstrated this by asking the class which direction was north. The room had no windows and the maze of hallways to the classroom make it somewhat confusing. However, 5 of the 6 guys immediately pointed in the right direction while only about 2 of the 15 or so girls did.

I really have to say that I think it's just something you learn. It's paying attention to your surroundings and visually mapping things in your mind for later use. You can train someone to have better spatial abilities...you don't exactly train to be gay. :P


In self defense classes, usually for women who have been victims of crimes, they have to TEACH women to be aware of their surroundings! Women do stupid things that GUYS would never do, even though we are stronger and more capable of defending ourselves. No wonder in the old days males had multiple wives...without someone watching over them, some were just too stupid to live.
Last edited by dracuscalico on Thu Oct 02, 2008 9:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
dracuscalico
Veteran Member
 
Posts: 1202
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2008 9:48 pm

Postby Screamer » Thu Oct 02, 2008 9:23 pm

Researchers Behave Like Twits?
"I'm in the mood for love, simply because you're near me"
Screamer
Member
 
Posts: 247
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 8:55 pm
Location: Iowa

Postby foxeyes2 » Fri Oct 03, 2008 7:06 am

dracuscalico wrote:
devilnuts wrote:In a human sexuality class the professor demonstrated this by asking the class which direction was north. The room had no windows and the maze of hallways to the classroom make it somewhat confusing. However, 5 of the 6 guys immediately pointed in the right direction while only about 2 of the 15 or so girls did.

I really have to say that I think it's just something you learn. It's paying attention to your surroundings and visually mapping things in your mind for later use. You can train someone to have better spatial abilities...you don't exactly train to be gay. :P


In self defense classes, usually for women who have been victims of crimes, they have to TEACH women to be aware of their surroundings! Women do stupid things that GUYS would never do, even though we are stronger and more capable of defending ourselves. No wonder in the old days males had multiple wives...without someone watching over them, some were just too stupid to live.


So what you seem to be saying is that if a woman is out walking alone and gets attacked it is her fault for being stupid. That is the biggest load of BS I have read in a long time. It is also extremely misogynistic. The stupid people are the ones usually men who rob, attack and rape victims.
It is their responsibility to not commit crimes. So you need to stop with the women bashing and realize that nothing is more dumb or more stupid than blaming the victim and saying it is because of their gender.
We are all one tribe. We are all one people.
Reduce Reuse Recycle
foxeyes2
Moderator
 
Posts: 829
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 6:51 am
Location: Nashville, TN

Postby Pazuzu P. Sasquatch » Fri Oct 03, 2008 7:19 am

Not that anyone asked me, but:

I think there are some shades of gray here. Let me wax a little Socratic . . . .

Question: Assume that I drive my car to a high-crime area, park outside a store and leave my windows down and my keys in the igniton. If someone steals my car while I'm in the store, do I not bear at least part of the blame for being such a dumbass?

Men should not attack women, nor should people steal cars. But since we live in a world where these things happen, doesn't it behoove us to take them into account?
When I was driving once, I saw this painted on a bridge: "I don't want the world. I just want your half."
Pazuzu P. Sasquatch
Veteran Member
 
Posts: 615
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 10:58 am
Location: Troy, Ohio

Postby nimby » Fri Oct 03, 2008 12:51 pm

I think the study is a little to simplistic.

Gay man vs. woman? How about ...

gay man vs. gay woman, or
gay man vs. straight woman, or
masculine gay man vs. feminine lesbian woman, or
effiminate straight man vs. masculine gay woman

Not a fair comparison at all.
User avatar
nimby
Veteran Member
 
Posts: 2908
Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 3:35 pm
Location: Toronto, ON

Postby dracuscalico » Fri Oct 03, 2008 1:49 pm

foxeyes2 wrote:
So what you seem to be saying is that if a woman is out walking alone and gets attacked it is her fault for being stupid. That is the biggest load of BS I have read in a long time. It is also extremely misogynistic. The stupid people are the ones usually men who rob, attack and rape victims.
It is their responsibility to not commit crimes. So you need to stop with the women bashing and realize that nothing is more dumb or more stupid than blaming the victim and saying it is because of their gender.


It is her fault if IS her fault. Meaning walking down a dark alley alone instead of sticking to the sidewalk that is brightly lit is stupid, and if ANYONE does that and gets mugged, it's their fault.

Testosterone has been proven to be responsible for spatial awareness, WHOMEVER has lower testosterone will have less spatial awareness and do what would be considered STUPID or careless things because they were unaware of their surroundings.

Here is an example. At my gym, which is in a questionable neighborhood, women keep leaving their purses on the passenger seat, wide open yet, while they are inside working out. Then when their window gets smashed and their purse stolen, they are at the front desk crying and blaming everyone when there are signs posted everywhere, Do Not Leave Valuables in Your Car. This happens 3 or 4 times a month, but the women keep leaving their purses on their passenger seats at all hours day and night.

Guys don't leave open briefcases on their passenger seats when they are inside. All the breakins have been women's cars, because they are the ones leaving stuff out in the open.

There was also a woman who got her car stolen, amongst other things, because late at night 2 guys asked her for a ride to the Impound Lot , which was only a few blocks away from the gym. She let them in her car and before they got there, they beat, robbed, raped her and stole the car. SHE was at the front desk crying and blaming the business. It's not like the guys forced themselves into her vehicle, due to poor lighting. She voluntarily gave them a ride.

Guys would not let 2 male strangers get into their car even in broad daylight, much less late at night, (unless he was armed) and especially not when the place they want to go is only 3 blocks away.

Am I blaming the victim? Absolutely! Is it because of her gender that she did something that stupid? You decide. It is because of their BEHAVIOR that many people become victims unnecessarily, when they could have made wiser choices. If women take risks that strong able bodied men wouldn't even dare to take, they are either a police decoy or __________________________ (fill in the blank).
dracuscalico
Veteran Member
 
Posts: 1202
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2008 9:48 pm

Postby foxeyes2 » Fri Oct 03, 2008 2:24 pm

Wow you must really hate women to have so much anger towards them that you blame them when they get robbed, mugged and raped. Yet you give the so called "men" who do such cowardly actions a pass. I call it utter bull sh*t. If a man attacks a woman even if she is walking down an alley it is his fault. If two men ask for a ride and end up beating, robbing, raping her and stealing the car then again that is the result of their actions not hers. You are saying that woman deserve this crap. That is utter bullshit. When a man chooses to commit a crime it is no one else's fault, no one else's responsiblity but their own. Woman aren't asking for it, they aren't forcing these pathetic pieces of sh*t to act violently towards them.
Get this straight no woman should ever be robbed, mugged, beaten, raped, attacked or whatever because of where they are. If you think they do then you should immediately run do not walk but run to your nearest mental health provider to seek help because that is some pretty sick sh*t.
So stop with the misognystic postings and put the blame where it belongs.
We are all one tribe. We are all one people.
Reduce Reuse Recycle
foxeyes2
Moderator
 
Posts: 829
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 6:51 am
Location: Nashville, TN

Postby nimby » Fri Oct 03, 2008 3:23 pm

Wow Drac, you are way off base here. Absolutely not their fault. I'll agree that these women could take better steps tp prevent a crime, but they are ABSOLUTELY NOT the cause of it. Lets say...

If a person was depositing money into their bank and it just happened to violently robbed at that point in time, with that customer robbed or killed, would you blame the person for causing the robbery by depositing money in that branch, thus causing the temptation for the robbers?

That's exactly what you are saying. Sorry but you're way off base. Besides, rape is not really a sex crime, it is more of a power/controll thing. Ask any therapist.
User avatar
nimby
Veteran Member
 
Posts: 2908
Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 3:35 pm
Location: Toronto, ON

Postby dracuscalico » Fri Oct 03, 2008 9:14 pm

nimby wrote:Wow Drac, you are way off base here. Absolutely not their fault. I'll agree that these women could take better steps tp prevent a crime, but they are ABSOLUTELY NOT the cause of it. Lets say...

If a person was depositing money into their bank and it just happened to violently robbed at that point in time, with that customer robbed or killed, would you blame the person for causing the robbery by depositing money in that branch, thus causing the temptation for the robbers?

That's exactly what you are saying. Sorry but you're way off base. Besides, rape is not really a sex crime, it is more of a power/controll thing. Ask any therapist.




I know rape is a power/control thing.

(unless the guy is so hot and enticing you can't control your animal instincts :wink: )

Seriously, if the ONLY cars that are getting broken into are the ones where people leave valuables in plain view on the passenger seats, THEY are the ones responsible for the crime happenning TO THEM, because they left out the bait.


If it was only the criminals at fault, they'd at least break into a few SUV's or hatchbacks with no real trunks, to see what's hidden in back, or at least some other cars with nothing visible, but that has never happenned.


All the cars that got broken in to belonged to people who left valuables visible, and all of the people who made that mistake were FEMALE.

In your example of a customer depositing money at the bank the NORMAL sensible way that anyone else would, of course it would not be their fault if they got robbed.

[b]However if they walk down the street COUNTING THEIR MONEY OUT IN THE OPEN where everyone can see it, and someone robs them, before they even make it to the bank, then it WOULD be their fault.

We're talking about common sense behavior versus careless risks. Women take careless risks because they are used to the idea that someone is always going to be there to look out for them and the rest of us can't be there 24/7 protecting them and reminding them to be careful.

It's not like they are puppies or toddlers or mentally challenged. They are functional adults who need to be aware of their surroundings and take responsibility for their actions and their own well being like anybody else.
dracuscalico
Veteran Member
 
Posts: 1202
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2008 9:48 pm

Postby DerWanderer » Fri Oct 03, 2008 10:53 pm

While I would stop short of saying that women are more prone to setting themselves up to be victims of crime since I don't have necessary data, I'd point out that crime is often about opportunity.

I don't have any statistics on this, but I would suspect that women are more frequently the victims of robbery, mugging, and yes, even rape. Why? The perceived opportunity. Men are generally bigger and stronger than women. A criminal is far more likely to chose targets they think they will have success against.

If I were taking up robbery as a sideline, I would probably avoid the 6'4" 250lb guy that looks like he can snap me like a twig without trying very hard, or at least seems likely to be willing and able to put up a fight.

Leaving valuables on a car seat. Lets apply basic logic. Does it make more sense to smash the window of a car with obvious spoils in sight, or the car that may or may not have something stashed in the glove box or under the seat?

While my sympathies would be with the victim, on the flip side it would be hard not to say, "You did WHAT?"
DerWanderer
Member
 
Posts: 153
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2004 1:03 am
Location: Michigan

Postby dracuscalico » Fri Oct 03, 2008 11:58 pm

How to get some data. If you decide to try this of course. :)

When you are out and about. Keep a tally of how many times women get in your way because they weren't paying attention versus men.

Somewhere like the grocery store for example. Or drivers that are holding up traffic. Or any type of situation, that is 50-50 male to female ratio, where people potentially place themselves in the line of fire, and let us know what your findings are.
dracuscalico
Veteran Member
 
Posts: 1202
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2008 9:48 pm

Postby furface » Sat Oct 04, 2008 3:09 pm

Administrator's Note:

Gents, this is drifting way off topic. Bring it back to the study cited in the originating post.

If y'all really wan to discuss responsibility, culpability, and fault as gender based problems; start a thread on that; and keep it civil.

End Administrator's Note
"Do not ascribe malice to that which can be reasonably explained by ignorance ... or incompetence."
Isaac Asimov
User avatar
furface
Site Admin
 
Posts: 1175
Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2004 7:35 pm
Location: The Colony, TX

Postby dracuscalico » Sat Oct 04, 2008 11:44 pm

As far as the study and spatial awareness, it does seem in real life that the more effeminate gay guys tend to have some the same difficulties as women at certain tasks. Some of it could be higher estrogen levels or some of it could be "socialization".

If you hang with women eventually you behave like them, perhaps like a male hairdresser, much in the same way a female auto mechanic takes on male characteristics if she hangs with the guys at the garage all the time.

It would be good if we knew WHAT kind of gay guys they used for the study.

It would have been even better if they catgegorized the TYPES of gay males into maybe feminine, mainstream, and hypermasculine(straight appearing) categories.
dracuscalico
Veteran Member
 
Posts: 1202
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2008 9:48 pm

Postby DerWanderer » Sat Oct 11, 2008 7:12 pm

Update:

Having nothing better to do with my time, I decided to start actually paying attention to this sort of thing, and found some of the results rather interesting. Specifically, I was keeping track of the number of people who either positioned themselves in manner that impeded access for other people or showed a distinct lack of consideration/concern when their repositioning caused the same.

A local supermarket (not terribly busy)

1 man
3 women (One realized what she had done and reoriented herself)

The same local supermarket (earlier today)

Three presumably married couples were engaged in conversation, (well, the wives were....the men were all standing there looking bored) and had positioned themselves not in the big open space by the crackers about 10 feet away, but right at the head of the dairy aisle, making it impossible to get by.

Costco: (Jam packed)

1 man
6 women

Local Deli: (Not busy at all)

A group of five ladies came in, all talking to each other, cutting off the guy placing an order, proceeded to park themselves right at the counter, also managing to effectively cut off access to the entrance/exit in the process (despite there being a ton of space in the seating area 3 feet away) and in the 10 minutes I was there waiting for my order to be prepared had not only failed to order anything, but had to be asked multiple times to allow people of either gender to get by.

Another trend observed. People who were wandering around while talking on their mobile phones were consistantly oblivious to anyone and everything...no gender-based differences there. There must be some truth to that whole cellphone while driving thing...
DerWanderer
Member
 
Posts: 153
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2004 1:03 am
Location: Michigan

Postby GX » Mon Oct 13, 2008 1:45 pm

My boyfriend has a better sense of direction than most straight guys I know. He's never gotten us lost...never needs to use a map or other navigational tools. I on the other hand can get lost just going out of the house, so I leave the driving to him.
User avatar
GX
Member
 
Posts: 153
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 9:16 pm
Location: Florida

Next

Return to Effeminate Men

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron