You must log in or # to comment.
that location at BYU specifically is informally known as Rape Hill, so of course the women aren’t looking straight ahead
i know i’m very glib and i joke a lot, but i’m deadly serious right now.
Makes sense for the school that expels women for being assaulted. As if I needed another reason to hate BYU
They call it nonconsensual immorality
https://apnews.com/general-news-domestic-news-domestic-news-6b3c434ba4ab476f904fa5652fad01ee
He said rape is bad, but also any sex outside of marriage is bad.
So, by his logic, raping someone is no worse than getting consent if you aren’t married.
Rape is often treated lighter than consensual sex
Human rights in the mena countries still a millennium behind
Mormons are in Utah 🫣
What the actual fuck
i can give you good reasons or bad reasons i got them all. one of the worst mistakes i made was attending there.
In your defense, there’s a lot of social pressure to go to BYU within the Mormon church, and most high school kids don’t have the experience and knowledge to navigate the official and unofficial propaganda. I just happened to luck out that my parents pushed me not to go to BYU
i like your parents
Broad conclusions for a study conducted on a population of ~500 undergrad students at a single religious university in one city of one state of one country.
Noted. Attack men from the side, women from the front 😎
Doesn’t the Jurassic Park power-restore scene align with this, too? Muldoon gets wrecked by a raptor on his side, while Ellie immediately notices/dodges the one that pokes through the wiring.
I’m male but when I was a kid, my mom talked about stranger danger a lot and warned me about the supposed widespread kidnappings (was in China) and warned of “strangers following me home” I constantly just look around and glance back behind me every 30 seconds or so and check if someone is following me… and same thing when in the US too
This habit just stuck with me…
I probably look weird af lol
I tend to turn it into a “casual sweep” of the scene. I’m looking at leaves, architecture, license plates! Well, and also getting a glimpse of whoever’s around me. From being bullied in grade school, to learning to fly in college, with growing up as a young women between the two eras, situational awareness has become baked into my existence. But it’s not a bad thing, it’s a skill.
Tangentially, I wonder how much of this increased situational awareness plays into our famous “women’s intuition”? If we’re taking in more of our surroundings, it makes sense our unconscious minds will notice more readily when something’s “off.”
As well, I’ve often considered my “luck” to come down to increased awareness. When retrospectively thinking about a sequence of events, I can sometimes put together how noticing A led to me doing B, even if I didn’t consciously think about it at the time. Like unconsciously noticing that a car in front of you is somewhat lopsided and getting the urge to switch lanes and pass them. You’re not thinking about it. But later on when that car spins out on a flat tire, you’re well past them - a safe distance away.
Or a situation that undoubtly makes people think I’m lucky - finding four-leaf clovers. A split-second scan of the ground and I can notice a four-leafer in a patch. Just a few months ago I was pumpkin-picking with my girlfriend and it happened again. We were standing outside and I was telling her about this exact phenomenon when I stopped, laughed, crouched down, plucked one particular clover, and handed it to her. “See?! It just happens!” I then proceeded to find two more, and at that point I knew I had to stop myself.
So yeah, it’s not all bad. :)
I feel like you should probably do this study again outside of BYU and more generally outside of Utah, Mormon culture especially Utah Mormon culture is weird and could definitely fuck with a study like this.
Though fun bit of personal experience with this exact scenario, my grandmother has better general visual awareness while my non visual awareness is a lot better overall. This means I subconsciously avoid things around me due to feel, sound, and smell but can be looking directly at something and not see it. Probably has something to do with the fact my eyesight is naturally fucked though, so my edge vision is basically useless for everything outside of movement since it’s basically just a blurry blob.
I don’t trust Mormon findings until they are peer reviewed.
Guess I’m a woman now. Thanks PTSD. Didn’t even get the boobs.
I’m in the same boat. My wife is oblivious most of the time while my head is on a swivel.
TIL i’m a woman
Even if this was a conclusive study (sounds like there’s some issues there with selection and methodology,)….
This is probably because women are more likely to be harassed/assaulted/raped/mugged/etc.
Other vulnerable groups (trans, immigrants, etc) are probably are also scanning and maintaining better situational awareness.
It’d be nice to be able to walk down a street without making other people uncomfortable because men in general are less assholish than bears.
It’d be nice to be able to walk down a street without making other people uncomfortable because men in general are less assholish than bears.
A part of it is large numbers bias. Very few people encounter bears, so very few people experience bear attacks. Even if every bear was predisposed to attacking people, there would still be very few bear attacks. But virtually everyone encounters men on a near daily basis. So even if the likelihood of an attack is extremely low on a case-by-case basis, the overall number of incidents is much higher simply because there are more cases of people encountering men.
That’s why the go-to response to “it’s not every man” essentially boils down to “sure, it’s not every man. But it’s enough of them…”
I wouldn’t be looking at any of that, where’s the smartphone showing dumb memes?
Men are better at detecting motion. I would bet men are better at detecting motion in their perephiral vision too.
Right… peripheral vision in general is better at motion, but shit for details. It’s why sacchads happen seemingly at random; often something is signalled in the periphery, so the individual glances in that direction.
Also, another thing to consider is whether there’s other people around and what their gender is. Consider the scenario of me (a man) walking down the street at night and there’s one person around that I need to pass by to get where I’m going.
If I’m constantly moving my head to look around at everything, I’m going to look really shady and make other people worried. I’m just trying to get somewhere, so I’d rather not bother people, which means it’s better to just look ahead and kinda ignore them, and trust that my peripheral vision will pick up any actual threats.
That all being said, this experiment wasn’t set up to consider that at all. Especially since the study is from Brigham Young University (ew), and at a spot on campus referred to as “Rape Hill”. So thinking this much about the study is probably a waste of ti.e
Alright yall, experiment time.
Go bird watching. Or squirrels. Something hard to spot that moves quickly.
Scan the treeline, or instead fixate on a point straight ahead. Do what comes naturally first, then the opposite. What method “spots” the motion first?
See what method works better for you. Hope it helps!
I ride a motorcycle… When I was doing the MSF training (after riding illegally for years), I kept getting dinged for not turning my head to look into a turn. Thing is, I have excellent peripheral vision. I can see 90° to either side when I’m looking straight ahead - so I tend to keep my gaze straight ahead regardless of where my attention is…
yeah, i got dinged on my driver’s test for not turning my head to look. because my eyes can rotate in their sockets, something the examiner did not consider.
Its been years since I took the course, but I believe one of the reasons for turning your head into a turn is “balance”. It basically recenters yourself into the turn.
The other is not all helmets are made the same. Some are going to restrict your vision more than others.
This is what peripheral vision is for.
Yeah, peripheral is better to detect subtle movement in low contrast areas.
Leaves me wondering if this indicates some kind of biochemical/neurological difference, or just like sociological differences. Like are women processing vision differently from men, or is this happening just because women are more worried about getting attacked.
Women tend to also process visuals differently. I do think I’ve seen data that show men’s eyes tend to be more sensitive to movement while women tend to have better color recognition on average. Movement is often also detectable in the periphery.
So when women look at dark areas they may see more things there in color, this may create a sort of feedback loop for night time visual behavior in addition to obvious sociological concerns.
The way to test for a visual feedback loop would probably be to evaluate night time driving (or other safer conditions) differences to see if women tend to look more at low light areas.
Alternately you could put men and women out in the woods and see if their behavior aligns.
Would need to compare it to the same data sampled from different places.
