9 pointsby milchek7 hours ago6 comments
  • kaikai5 hours ago
    I wonder if this is due to relative vigilance of men and women. This study observed that women tend to scan their environment much more than men: https://news.byu.edu/intellect/study-visually-captures-hard-...

    I’ve observed that animals are pretty good at reading body language and can tell when they’re actually being seen by, rather than just sharing space with, a human.

    • apothegm3 hours ago
      Birds also tend to be reactive to forward facing pairs of eyes (because raptors, especially owls), so that would make sense.

      Beyond that, women are on average more likely to wear clothing or hair that flaps around. Or heels that make loud noises when they walk.

    • aaron6955 hours ago
      [dead]
  • recursivecaveat3 hours ago
    I wonder if spreading breadcrumbs is a more popular hobby among men than women?
  • AuthAuth2 hours ago
    me to urban birds, me to
  • nephihaha6 hours ago
    I'm wondering if there is some other variable in here. Is it clothing or hair length? Would men with long hair be more intimidating than women with short hair for example? How about certain types of clothing or footwear. Very odd.

    The seagulls near me can recognise school children. They know they are more likely to pick up dropped food.

    • Rury5 hours ago
      They did control for obvious appearance differences (e.g. color & type of clothing, hair length) and morphology (e.g. height/body size), even people's approach. But not more subtle traits such as gait, waist-hip ratio, odor...

      One hypothesis suggested that in early history, women may have more commonly caught smaller prey (birds) than men did, and this fear could be evolutionarily ingrained.

    • cindyllm5 hours ago
      [dead]
  • adampunk4 hours ago
    It’s cats lol.
  • lobito256 hours ago
    They know...
    • postflopclarity6 hours ago
      do they? if there's some insinuation here I'm not understanding it.