If during a discussion, a woman is required to describe someone to her audience, her description of that person will greatly change depending on whether the audience is a man or a woman.For example, when she is describing a woman to a man, she might say:
"Tall, blonde, purple sweater, big boobs."
When she is describing that same woman to another woman, she is more apt to say:
"Tall, blonde, bad teeth, tacky stilettos that she couldn't walk in, but nice purple off-the-shoulder sweater. Was trying to pick up John with her big boobs."
When triggering the memory of a man, she will use the markers a man is more apt to retain - and she will use less specific detail.
Also, knowing that a woman will be far more observant and critical of other women, she-who-describes will know exactly which markers women are more apt to retain - and she will use far more detail.
It's all about knowing how perception differs between the sexes. It's certainly not a general rule, and the description would be different still for a gay man, but if you hover around the edges of conversations like I do, you'll start to notice the differences too.
Who's going to back me up?
---------
En passant, over the last few days I've had numerous discussions about why I should be a huge Radiohead fan and why that never happened. As a conciliatory measure, I am throwing in a video for one of the Radiohead songs I can appreciate. Enjoy the flashback.
Posts
2 comments:
I was once married to a Radiohead junkie, and only now (7 years later) can I listen to them and not cringe. I even like them.
Their fans are obnoxious and everywhere. You need to divorce yourself (both literally and figuratively) from that scene to even have a chance at appreciation.
Wings, I thank you for your support. As always.
Post a Comment