The Buffalo Effect
We’ve had a tidy up recently and one of the things
that came to light was a couple of issues of a magazine called “Freelance Informer” from 1999 (primarily for IT contractors).
In one of these there was an article that I remembered reading which I thought was a wonderful explanation of the differences
in thinking between the sexes so I’ve reproduced it here. It was originally titled “Battle of the Sexes” and written by Andy Ellis.
I’ve repeated the theory many times to who ever would listen because I think it’s an accurate account as to why men can see
a cleavage 200 yards away but can’t see their wife’s new hairdo until presented with the bill. My wife christened it the
buffalo effect a few years ago when I couldn’t see a bottle of sauce in a kitchen cupboard. Closing the door and opening it
again magically brought it to the front of the cupboard and the Buffalo Effect was born.
The following text has been entered from the original and there are no intentional changes (bar punctuation). I have not
investigated any of the statements made below but if any are not true then they ought to be.
“It might sound like an obvious statement to make, but men and women are different.
What isn’t obvious is just why they are different, apart from the physical of course, but all this is about to change.
Research carried out by teams of medical scientists over the last ten years (remember that this article is from June 1999)
have at last revealed just why men and women think and react so differently.
Let’s start with the one thing that all men are agreed on, women talk too much. It has been a constant source of amusement
to men for decades and guess what – it’s true. But there are very good reasons for this and it’s not really the bad thing
that men have complained about.
The research showed that, on average, women spoke between 20,000 and 25,000 words per day. This compared to a measly 7,000
to 10,000 for men. More over, the research identified that girls aged three had twice the vocabulary of boys at the same
age. Apparently it’s all down to the good old grey cells.
Women have concentrated areas in their brains dedicated to speech. The main centre is located in the front left hemisphere,
with a smaller speech centre front right. Men though have no specific area dedicated to speech. Indeed when the brain was
scanned while men were talking electrical impulses showed the whole of the brain coming alive as it searched for a centre
of operations. Women though, were able to talk about several subjects at the same time, whilst watching television and
doing the ironing. It’s easy for women because the operation for them is much simpler by virtue of having dedicated speech
centres.
Mens’ brains are ‘compartmentalised’. It means that males are able to store much more information on the same lines as a
computer. At the end of each day a male can store up all of the problems and then file them away to be worked on later.
But, if he’s used up his quota of words, then a male will really have no inclination to talk about them any more. A man’s
brain simply wants to relax (usually up at the pub with other brains). A woman, however, doesn’t have the capacity to
store information in this way and any problems encountered will simply keep rattling around the old noggin. Because a
woman has far superior speech capabilities she’ll simply want to talk out the problem
This can be perceived by men as ‘nagging’ which is where the talking too much fallacy comes from. It isn’t actually nagging
at all but a natural reaction to the way the two different brains work.
The way the two different brain types work can often lead to tension and upset. A stressed man, for example, will talk
inwardly to himself whilst seeking a solution. A man’s highly compartmentalised brain will order and sort the problem and
then search for a solution. Often a man will simply want to retire to his favourite bolt-hole or pastime (reading, fishing,
the garden shed) to enjoy the quiet he craves whilst his brain ponders the solution. Women will want to talk the problem
through and how many times have you heard the phrase “Come on, talk to me. Get it off your chest, it’ll help.” This is simply
because that’s what works for women.
The man is seen to be withdrawn and unhelpful and the women as a nag. The solution lies in a little bit of compromise from
both sides. Women need to set an objective for the man, his compartmentalised brain will set to work finding a solution.
The men need to indicate that they are listening and offer at least something to the conversation so that women see they
are interested.
One of the other great myths, women and driving, is also explained in a similar way. It’s all to do with spatial awareness.
Picture the scene - several million years ago, ancient man spies a herd of buffalo moving through this territory. It’s his
job to hunt and kill the animals to provide for his family. He needs to be able to judge speed and distance accurately if
he is to make a successful kill. This ancient ability developed and stayed with men so they have a much more developed spatial
awareness. Men are simply able to picture shapes, sizes and distance much more accurately than women.
Tests at Iowa university showed that 71% of the males tested were able to park a car in a confined space, in reverse, first
time. The same test showed that only 23% of women were able to do the same manoeuvre. And it’s the same principle when women
are asked to navigate and map read. But men are often unhelpful here too. Having taken that wrong turn, how many men simply
won’t ask for directions?
The same hunting skills that man developed also caused him to develop an intense fear of failure. Ancient man couldn’t be
seen to be afraid or be weak in case it lead to he and his family being attacked. This ‘ego’ is wired into a mans brain from
birth. Stopping to ask directions is an admission of failure and simply runs against his egotistical wiring. The irony is
that men think women won’t love them if they admit to mistakes whereas most women agree they’d love their man more, if only
they would admit to them.
And finally – shopping? Why do most men hate shopping? Again the reason is to do with pre-history programming. It was the
male’s job to identify food, kill it and bring it home. Or to identify shelter, make it safe and get his family in there.
All male actions have a definite point and an objective. The same applies today. If a man is given an objective, preferably
with a list, he’ll tackle the job like a military operation and go out and do it in the shortest time possible.
A women’s brain however isn’t compartmentalised like this and prefers to browse. Because women are able to handle several
jobs at once, and juggle different emotions, the selection of different types of clothes in different styles, colours and
patterns appeals to the female brain. For a woman shopping doesn’t need an objective. For a female brain it’s a relaxing
occupation whilst to a male brain it feels like a pointless exercise.
But women have other advantages too. They have more cone shaped cells in their eyes which give them much better colour
vision. They also have much better peripheral vision than men, women are able to see as wide as 45 degrees on either side
of their nose and the same again up and down. Men are restricted to half of this simply because their eyesight was developed
for distance. Remember stone-age man? He needed to see his prey from miles away and be able to keep his eye on them. It meant
he didn’t want to have his attention forced elsewhere so males literally developed tunnel vision.
The female cave dweller however is keeping her eyes on several siblings all of whom are wandering in different directions.
She’s also on the lookout for her male returning with food and any possible predator entering their lair. Her greater peripheral
vision coupled with greater colour awareness and pattern matching make women better much more accomplished designers and decorators
as well as happier shoppers.
So the next time your man moans “Where are my socks/shirts/car keys?” and they are right under his nose remember he genuinely
can’t see them because of this tunnel vision effect. But if you want a buffalo killed….
And the next time that he moans when he’s forced to go shopping, it’s because he hasn’t been given an objective. Tell him you’ve
got to find what ever it is within a certain price range within a set time limit and he’ll be a lot happier because now you’ve set
objectives. But even as we’ve taken a light hearted at some of the make and female difference there is a serious side.
All of the brain and physical ancestral development has actually gone to show just why some are gradually becoming the more powerful
of the two sexes. Food no longer has to be hunted and killed. Families no longer have to be fended for in terms of finding and securing
shelter or in terms of protection from other predatory males. Many male skills are obsolete whilst female skills have become more highly
prized and effective in modern society.
Young females talk to each other and have a greater vocabulary as well as the brain operation to use that vocabulary more effectively.
This is why girls are out-doing boys in all areas of education.
In fact many males are confused about their role in society but are simply unable to change their brain patterns to cope with the
changes. In 1987 suicide amongst young males reached massive proportions equivalent to eight in every ten thousand and most of them were
directly attributable to the findings in this research.”
That’s all there was in the article and I’ll repeat – I haven’t
validated any of the claims I just think it’s a good explanation of the different mental attitudes between men and women.
And this brings me to another thought (again without validation). I was ill over Christmas, some sort of flu bug knocked me
off my feet for three days and I was barely strong enough to lift a mug of lemsip with both hands. And my wife kept reminding
me (sympathetically) that she would not be able to lie about if she was ill. On reflection she’s probably right, a bug that
put me in bed for three days would normally only slow her down. Now I’m taller, wider and heavier than my wife with, I’d guess, a better
constitution so maybe the caveman example has even more merit. A hunter not at his best is a danger not only to himself but to other hunters
so I reckon that mother nature took steps to protect an ill caveman from himself.
If anybody has anything to add (or argue about) e-mail me on Neil_Adrian_Smith@Yahoo.co.uk and I’ll add it to the page.