Previous Measures : How can we improve?

DorothyNeufeld, Sexual behaviour/mate selection and evolutionary theory is an area I'd really like to discuss re: future research, but wasn't sure how to integrate it with our GD findings. If you have any ideas you'd like to like to discuss, I'm completely open to starting a new thread for this on the discussion board!

Not entirely sure if I'm going in the right direction, but I'm just going to throw out some ideas. I'd love to hear your thoughts. - In terms of Attraction: Hyper-masculine and hyper-feminine (the extremes) faces are regarded as more attractive than faces that are more androgynous. Would "hyper-feminine activities" predict the degree of an woman's attractiveness? (Eg. would a woman who enjoys putting on makeup be rated more physically attractive than a woman who enjoys modifying cars?) - Are the "extremes" also "extremes" in terms of masculinity/femininity? (eg. does a hyper-masculine-looking man have a hyper-masculine profile?) - Gender-based scripts in terms of dating - Gender differences in commitment/fidelity - Fluidity of sexual orientation - Successfulness of a relationship in heterosexual couples (gender as a barrier to communication)

Hi Schuolee,

Thanks, I wasn't entirely sure where exactly to reply, I agree it is somewhat unrelated! I found that the behaviours, like wearing-make up and carrying a purse were more gender-typical behaviours, as opposed to what each found attractive. More like a distinction between personal behaviours and personal interests in others. I see where you're going, does wearing makeup assume hyper-femininity in a woman? Not necessarily, I would think, does this behaviour span across males who identify as women- I feel like it doesn't happen as often, despite expressing some other behaviours and interests which appear very feminine. I still feel like wearing make-up specifically, is still socially constrained to women (unfortunately), with exceptions of some violating this social norm (as Jamie Veale pointed out in an earlier thread I believe). I feel like there is a distinction between gender-typical sexual behaviours, which may be more deeply rooted in a male or female nature as opposed to behaviours or occupational preferences which tend to be defined as feminine or masculine at a given time. Sexual behaviours, for adaptive purposes (maybe) may have a longer-lasting imprint on our identified gender. This may be a leap, but it could be interesting. I wasn't sure what you meant in fluidity of sexual-orientation- Successfulness of a relationship in heterosexual couples (gender as a barrier to communication)?

Hi again Schoulee,

I did some further research suggestions on vocational preferences, as an area this study could further examine as it isnt consistent with previous studies that do show a significant relationship between GD and occupational preferences. Added some suggestions in how our study could add new dimensions perhaps to find more in depth correlations between the two.

I like where you're going with the idea sexual behaviour is more deeply engrained in our identified gender. At least, definitely more so than activities such as putting on makeup.

Regarding fluidity of sexual orientation, I was getting at whether or not GD could be predictive of increased likelihood bisexual behaviour. Studies have shown that women, more than men, are more fluid in their sexuality (More women report bisexual experiences than men), but there are more reported homosexual men than homosexual women.

Regarding relationship success, I was considering the possibility that gender differences in communication may affect relationships, but I realized earlier that there is a section on marital status in this posting.

Great work on the Occupational Interests section! Really well-written.

Thanks, actually the areas of bisexuality and its fluidity interests really interests me too, I heard similar things about it being more fluid among women, I wonder why this is. I had no idea there were differences in more reports of homosexual men than women. Great topic. Would be interesting to examine. I appreciate the editing! It looks clear.

I agree with DorothyNeufeld, that a lot of the questions on our scale are socially constructed to be masculine or feminine. There is nothing inherently feminine about make-up or a purse - it's just what our society makes of it. As Schoulee rightly points out, some of the other sexuality-related variables may have some biological explanation - although I still believe these will be influenced by psychological and social factors.

From an evolutionary perspective though, it seems there is diversity in gender-related personality traits within genders (we know from the sexual orientation studies). The textbook discussion on the evolutionary reasons for the differences in the Big-5 traits is relevant here - is it adaptive to as a society have different levels of gender-typed personality. Perhaps from an evolutionary perspective it is adaptive to have a minority of people who are gender atypical to help "bridge the divide" among the sexes and help with a society to have more harmony.