Relational Inconveniences

I’ve been feeling like I should write a blog post, but I’m not sure what to write about. Let’s go with that pointer and ring finger thing.

So, this topic was inspired by a video by The Game Theorists on YouTube entitled “Game Theory: The TF2 Pyro…Male or Female?” In which MatPat tries to determine what gender the seemingly gender-less Pyro from Team Fortress 2 is. One of his arguments is that Pyro’s pointer finger and ring finger are the same length, which has been linked to homosexuality in males. Incidentally, my pointer finger is also the same length as my ring finger.

Now, I am by no means gay, and that link is a statistical link that he brought up without mentioning some of the other links that exist between the digit length ratio, which are also statistical and by no means a sure sign of anything. You can look up the various implications; I won’t be going over them much here.

Instead, I am more going to talk about what that set of statistics inspired in my thoughts.

First, I lied; I am going to tell you one of the implications, which is that the shorter a male’s index finger is compared to his ring finger, the nicer he is likely to be to women. Second, I identify with a lot of values that are more stereotypically associated with women.

Some examples from my Communication textbook, Understanding Human Communication, are: 1) Women tend to consider their conversations, which consist of deeper, more emotional topics, as being a kind of contact that they need, as opposed to men who simply like it. I’ve noticed this lately in that I have been craving deep conversations with my friends. Fortunately, I have found friends who also enjoy such conversations.

2) “female speech is often somewhat powerless and tentative. Saying, ‘This is just my opinion…'” This is pretty simple. I tend to put a whole lot of limiting speech on anything I say that is not an objective fact or me being silly.

3) While “Men . . . are more likely to discuss recreational topics such as sports, technology use, and nightlife” could be used to describe myself, if you swap out those topics with theology, writing, and theoretical physics, I also find myself desiring conversations like the following, “Female friends spend more time discussing relational issues such as family, friends, and emotions.” This one is the most complicated. I don’t talk about the set associated with women very much because the implication is that that just isn’t discussed with guys, and as a guy talking to a girl, it feels (There’s #2) like those things are only discussed if you are romantically involved with each other.

Simply the fact that women value deeper, or more personal, conversations more makes me want to be around them more, but I don’t want to send the wrong message, especially with those that I’ve recategorized (and who know that–I’ll explain later).

No real conclusion. Life isn’t tied up in a pretty bow; sorry to burst your bubble. Do remind me to talk about recategorization, though. That would make for a good and easy post.


4 thoughts on “Relational Inconveniences”

      1. I wonder how much of this is a result of the fact that 1. we’re a bunch of deep thinkers who 2. are often careful and interested in and aware of nuance and 3. spend a lot of time talking about people’s psyches. Also, we’re introverts, so we tend to prefer deeper conversations, particularly over chit-chat.

        Relatedly: are these categories based on statistics or stereotypes? How do men v. women statistically trend on MBTI? The stereotypes, at least I think, are: M: ESTJ F: ENFP which fits the above categorizations.

        And, “too much”?

        And the ability to communicate with different sorts of people is kind of essential to life…

        OK, I’ll go do homework now.

      2. Likely so, and it certainly didn’t help that we were not very good at encouraging each other/taking initiative to develop that I.

        These are the categories put forward as fact according to studies by my Communications textbook. I don’t know about the MBTI trend, but how people behave is separate from who they are. Either 1) because of the MBTI sterotypes (M: ESTJ F: ENFP), we are raised in a certain fashion so that we behave in accordance with the stated categories, or 2) the categories are biological and MBTI does trend towards certain things in different sexes. As it is, I don’t feel like looking up the trends at the moment, what with finals making life busy.

        Too much is the best way I could think to explain it at the time. I do not believe I would have been friends with her had she not been my sister, simply because of our vastly different interests and personalities. I am much more likely to be friends with an N than an S, in my experience.

        The ability to communicate is not in question. I can certainly communicate with either sex. However, the ability to make strong and lasting friendships is what I am talking about here. I have a group of friends with whom I do stuff with, but it is difficult for me to call them friends. For some reason I didn’t mention it, but another difference is “unlike women, who value personal talk, men grow close to one another by doing things together.” So while we do things together, and while that is good for them, I do not value such things as highly. I enjoy it, but I don’t feel much closer to them as a result.

        Ok, I’ll go to class now.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s