this post was submitted on 10 Sep 2024
387 points (92.7% liked)

Today I Learned

17919 readers
296 users here now

What did you learn today? Share it with us!

We learn something new every day. This is a community dedicated to informing each other and helping to spread knowledge.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must begin with TIL. Linking to a source of info is optional, but highly recommended as it helps to spark discussion.

** Posts must be about an actual fact that you have learned, but it doesn't matter if you learned it today. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.**



Rule 2- Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding non-TIL posts.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-TIL posts using the [META] tag on your post title.



Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.

If you vocally harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.

For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.

Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.



Partnered Communities

You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.

Community Moderation

For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The eyes have it: Men do see things differently to women

The way that the visual centers of men and women's brains works is different, finds new research published in BioMed Central's open access journal Biology of Sex Differences. Men have greater sensitivity to fine detail and rapidly moving stimuli, but women are better at discriminating between colors.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 28 points 2 months ago (2 children)

ok so, here's my theory. The obvious answer here is that this is obviously "for hunting" or something. But evolution doesn't really work that way.

So my take on this is that this is actually an evolutionary adaptation to the different structure of the male body, as well as it's general abilities, and how they have been used throughout humanity. If men are generally stronger, taller, and faster runners, wouldn't it make sense that the visual processing would be adapted to be more responsive to these use cases?

this seems like the only realistic answer to me. Something about men must be different enough, or at the very least, have been used differently enough at some point in time for a long enough period of time, that it has to have been an evolutionary adaptation.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Not sure what your mean by it doesn't work that way

If men were predominantly doing the hunting, women would be more likely to choose a more successful hunter (more likely to pass on their genes if they have a better mate)

Also in general the ones who were better at hunting and their mates would be more likely to survive long enough to have children

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

it's essentially an excessive over simplification of something that's not perfectly accurate, that's the problem.

While it would apply to hunting, when you're talking about something like visual acuity, it's super broad in the applications that it's useful in. Even things such as not falling over would be beneficially influenced by better visual acuity. You could argue that men just stopped falling over and dying as frequently, leading to evolutionary selection over time, but that's probably not super accurate lol.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I would argue there that there's a limit to how much better eyesight would affect things like that though, falling over and dying

Using that example if someone's vision is like an old CRT they might not see a root or something, trip over and die. If they have 1920x1080 they might see it if they have 4k they definitely see it.

Hunting however can benefit limitlessly, the further away you can see the better you can track

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I would argue there that there’s a limit to how much better eyesight would affect things like that though, falling over and dying

that specific example was a little bit hyperbolic, but i think there is likely a general improvement with the ability to sight vision and small discrepancies in things.

Also you're talking about visual clarity, this is specifically about being able to detect motion better.

as for why this matters for shit like not falling over and dying? Well cool little story, sometimes humans like to move around. Things around us move in relation to ourselves, so it could be expected to see some benefit in that regard as well.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I'm not arguing good vision is not important for general survival, but I think hunting has a higher ceiling of usefulness for good vision than anything else humans did in that period

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

that's certainly a possibility. It's likely to be a significant part of it, that's for sure.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

I was thinking it was more to do with dancing, possibly even music. It could even be something really weird.

Usually the way to identify if its about hunting/war or not is to find the exceptions and links: do hunters that perform really, really well have 3x the visual cortex neurons? Is it a socialization thing where doing certain tasks results in higher brain differentiation?

There's a lot of questions

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I was thinking it was more to do with dancing

You're thinking of Homo Groovensis, the famous hunter dancerers.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

hell yeah those guys fucking ripped shit up

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

hmm, that's definitely interesting.

Usually the way to identify if its about hunting/war or not is to find the exceptions and links: do hunters that perform really, really well have 3x the visual cortex neurons? Is it a socialization thing where doing certain tasks results in higher brain differentiation?

yeah, this is why i think it's more of a secondary adaptation, as opposed to something directly evolving from the needs of hunting for example. Something like this is generally broad, and generally applied, usually. So i would think the cause would as well.

One thing that i thought of was a nightwatch position, the heightened visual acuity would be highly valuable in a low visibility environment. So maybe it's something like co-evolution? Where females developed more accurate color perception, while males developed more accurate movement perception.

we're probably thinking too hard about it, and it's probably just evolution trolling us and giving us the best of both worlds because we are in fact a socialized species. So this could stem from our social aspect, not directly, but the benefit of it in a social aspect is vastly more impactful, leading to more socialization, and further development of this adaptation.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Women do prefer men who show attention to detail. It's why men's attire meant to look good, often contains buckles, buttons and pins that give it a slight touch of detail.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

It's why men's attire meant to look good

Oh so that's where I fuck up.