I didn’t think so either, but I went ahead and read the article, because I assume if anyone needs to read an article like this one it’s probably me. For it is without a doubt that I have the worst skills at reading signs.
“Signs” feel like part of a game, and I don’t care to be a playa.
Anyways the article said:
In the study, researchers tested 280 heterosexual male and female students at Indiana University in 2006 and 2007, asking them to sort 280 photos of women (all pictures were full-length shots of fully clothed subjects) into one of one of four categories -- friendly, sexually interested, sad or rejecting.
Men who viewed images of women misidentified 12 percent of the images as sexually interested, the study found, while women mistook 8.7 percent of images.
Researchers chalk it up to women's more developed ability to read others' signals, and men's tendency to oversexualize social situations or miss the message entirely.
My immediate reaction was, “oh”.
Actually I was curious about how the photo session went for the photos used in the . The camera man telling some schlub, “show me [click] your ‘sexually interested’ [click click] look…[click] that’s [click] it [click click]…whoa now…[click] pull it back now [click]…little less [click] horny cave [click] man…perfect [click]”
I have never once in my life thought, when chatting with a lady, “time to put on your sexually interested face”.