Sex bias in pareidolia

[ArabellaScott]

Male gaze/default male and seeing Jesus in a piece of toast:

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/seeing-tricky-dicky-in-a-pepper-its-sex-bias-m7zpczjxg

'It is as if our brain treats male as the default category and then needs extra information to change its mind and see a basic facial representation as female.

The big question, said Wardle, is why would this be? She and her colleagues are looking to repeat the work on children, to see if they respond differently — indicating part of the effect may be explained by social conditioning. There is also a suggestion that it could be hardwired.'

I suppose it could be hardwired because males are more likely to be a threat so for survival it’s safest to assume male until shown otherwise. You would have to test very young children to avoid the result of social conditioning.

That was the vaguely suggested theory, Countess - that it would be based on threat level.

But I don't know - for babies to recognise a mother's face, for example, that's a very strong instinct and one of the first to be activated (obvs I don't know the right terms). So recognising a caregiver would come before recognising a threat.

I think it's probably more likely to be socially conditioned.

It could be that there are simply more famous men than women.

But I don't know - for babies to recognise a mother's face, for example, that's a very strong instinct and one of the first to be activated (obvs I don't know the right terms). So recognising a caregiver would come before recognising a threat.

Agree, but recognising a caregiver likely involves other senses, smell for sure.

There are probably various factors in play, Corgi. It's a little bit vague, as an article!

I've tried very hard to not have a 'default male' with my kids. My daughter seems to have a 'default female' - at least when it comes to teddies, etc. But there are so many influences to consider and unpick.

@RoyalCorgi

It could be that there are simply more famous men than women.

That's what I thought. As Invisible Women details, men are default humans, but if this burnt toast looks like President Lincoln, another will look like Trump, until the collection is complete. No burnt toast can be declared to look like a woman President.

I just think it is just because it is easier to caricature men, because of their generally larger features. Not many women have the faces of a Trump or a Nixon! And Jesus is mainly recognisable by his beard, otherwise who knows what he looked like.... :)

This is where all the evolutionary based psychology falls apart, or gets shredded, because we suddenly realise that it was not being a man that made males a hunter. It was being pregnant that stopped young females attending hunts.

So much if the cave painting art suggests women hunter and fought alongside men... until being pregnant, a mother, made that less doable.

Modern psychology is based in modern societal norms. Where a man is a man and a woman is a homemaker.

I absolutely hated teaching that claptrap to students, was very glad when it was dropped from various syllabuses.

Pity it isn't as easily dropped from those societal norms.

I agree that larger features is an answer for vegetables. Like that green pepper, any ‘person-like’ vegetable usually has large, bulgy features that make the ‘face’. Men are more likely than women to have those.

Famous women don’t tend to have such large features, or noticeable features like beards. In popular media eg cartoons, most characters seem to be male so seeing a face on toast, etc, means that the library of possible famous faces in your brain is more likely to include men.

If you do see the Virgin Mary on your toast though, you could earn a crust…..

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4034787.stm

That face looks like an old Hollywood actress to me, but I doubt that would have sold so well.

I found a 'nun on a bun'! Mother Teresa.

I suspect there's a lot of 'famous women must be pretty'. I know that's not the case in politics, though I find it hard to believe that someone like Nadine Dorries would have got quite as far if she didn't look how she does - she'd have had to tone it down a bit first and be more considered.

And most pretty women are pretty in the same sort of way and become just a cloud of 'people who like this.......... ' so there's not much to differentiate them.

Men are more likely to be allowed to be different. Like Derek Jacobi is different from Benedict Cumberbatch is different from Charles Dance.

Hey ho, I'm probably suffering from some sort of bias here.,

I agree with you, Jux. I sometimes can't tell the difference between the pretty female celebs on the red carpet....
Also, who would recognise Hitler without his Hitler moustache?... women don't generally have distinctive facial hair (or perhaps they do these days...)