Words known by men and women
crr.ugent.be
crr.ugent.be
"A shibboleth is a word or custom whose variations in pronunciation or style can be used to differentiate members of ingroups from those of outgroups.
Gilead then cut Ephraim off from the fords of the Jordan, and whenever Ephraimite fugitives said, 'Let me cross,' the men of Gilead would ask, 'Are you an Ephraimite?' If he said, 'No,' they then said, 'Very well, say "Shibboleth" (שבלת).' If anyone said, "Sibboleth" (סבלת), because he could not pronounce it, then they would seize him and kill him by the fords of the Jordan. Forty-two thousand Ephraimites fell on this occasion.
Today, in American English, a shibboleth also has a wider meaning, referring to any "in-group" word or phrase that can be used to distinguish members of a group from outsiders – even when not used by a hostile other group."
For anyone not familiar with this reference, there is a scene where a German officer realizes that the other officers he is speaking with are actually Americans in disguise. He notices because the American indicated he would like three drinks with his three middle fingers[0]. Germans typically indicate the number three with their thumb, pointer, and middle finger[1].
Because why not.
With her wild flouncing tresses and flouncy taupe colored taffeta bodice, the young woman made quick work whipping her mascarpone to the delicate tune of the peony, bottlebrush, and wisteria inspired Decoupage Florentine style music box remarkably given her elevated progesterone levels.
The first man asks, "What did your wife say when you got home late last night?
The second man replies, "She swore a blue streak"
And the first man asks, "What did you do then?"
And the second man replies, "I turned out the light."
Unless that is funny in a different way when signed of course.
The most memorable one was a story in which a giant is talking to a small person sitting on his hand and the narrator acts it out. The final word of the joke is a pun... it makes sense in the story, but the sign for it is to clap the hands together (thus, in the story, squishing the small person).
Note: English is not my native language and what I use English for is probably not biased towards the kind of words in the female list.
Jay: You'll find out.
Sam Baldwin: Well, what is it?
Jay: You'll see!
Sam Baldwin: Some woman is gonna want me to do it to her and I'm not gonna know what it is!
They also have a pretty interesting vocabulary test. I wonder how they generated pseudowords. They are really tricky and funny.
The problem with stereotypes is that they are a very bad indicators to judge any specific individual now (both because they carry history and bad fit). You might miss important points or assume knowledge that isn't there on a regular basis. Gender stereotypes are especially problematic as they split the whole population into two and assign a lot of attributes purely based on one criterion.
The effects and conditions leading to a certain stereotype are also a fun thing to research.
The problem with public discussion is that people don't want to give open flanks for troll arguments.
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi/10.1371/journal.po...
To wit: men and women vary wildly in their personalities, and it is very likely this is due far more to different (genetic) sexual selection pressures than it is to socialization and acculturation.
But here's the problem with attempting an "in-depth discussion" on this topic: anyone who attempts to bring facts to a feels fight will always lose. Even on supposedly "rational" HN.
So, good luck with that.
How many of us are habitually making decisions based on large masses of people, rather than individuals? We almost all deal with individuals, one after another (sometimes in small groups), all day long.
In that context, the stereotypes we make even based on research are harmful; if you assume the person you're speaking with won't know what a "humvee" is because she's a woman, you'll be wrong 58% of the time, and she'll be insulted. Plus there's a 22% chance the man next to her won't know the word. ...All of this assuming that you're speaking with a random selection of strangers taken from those who took this online vocab quiz; and how likely is that?
That's why people get so worked up about stereotypes; there may be some original kernel of truth underlying them (some of them), but people who then make assumptions while dealing with individuals do a lot of damage in the world.
As far as missing out on great opportunities by using heuristics, it happens all the time, and not just with race/sex/age stereotypes. It happens with food, it happens with color, it happens with sounds and temperatures and fabrics and pets. We require heuristics based on generalizations and abstractions to even function in the world.
There is no easy solution to this, but the saving grace of a semi-free society is that if your particular heuristic excludes a great opportunity, it's very likely someone else's heuristic does not.
The problem is the large amount of bad research and evidence that gets thrown around in such a discussion. Tons of biotruth folks come out of the woodwork and there are quite few people who don't argue in good faith whatsoever. That has nothing to do with "politically correct" slant, which HN does NOT have, btw.
I thought I could detect one that compounded valid English words into a nonsense word, one that added English prefixes and suffixes to nonsense roots, one that created scientific sounding technobabble, and a Markov chain for digraphs.
The "men words" seem to be videogames and war stuff (except codec which, dare I suggest, is an online porn word). Women words are in the fields of decoration, fashion and flowers.
Codec are how your video and audio is encoded over the internet but I enjoy that you defaulted to a male word must be about porn. Flac/G711/g729/h323 are codec's (audio), infact here is a list http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_codecs
I was going to explain to you why boys and girls focus on different words. Its to do with world perceptive that is shaped in early childhood but I really cannot be assed to start a chatter with someone that makes pointless observations, and then proceeds to make random comments based of their interruption of basic internet terminology without even looking something up.
I don't think it's about porn, though, I find the torrented movies explanation more plausible.
"Codec are how your video ... is encoded over the internet"
And video is a format commonly used for pornography, right? Is it so unlikely that someone might have encountered codec issues browsing adult videos online?
Yes. We changed it. (Submitted title was: "Words known only by men or women")
Submitters: as the HN guidelines ask, please use the original title unless it is misleading or linkbait. Please don't rewrite a title to make it more misleading.
The good news is that I can identify wisteria for several weeks every year...
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solenoid [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_Muon_Solenoid
Err, well that's just not true. Also, they'd have to actually use one of these words.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7896864
And a derivative with no discussion:
Is the distribution of scores publicly available anywhere?
Examples: juggins, freeview, jackfish, redbrick
The US equivalents would be bumpkin, superstation (?), northerns, and ivy (as in Ivy League).
I sort of assumed that the nonsense word generator would make nonsense compounds from valid English words, which is why I rejected those last 3, despite that nagging feeling that they were so simple that someone, somewhere might have used them.
But maybe that is what they are doing. The test was on whether the viewer recognized the string as a word. The comparison at the end was probably just what can be found in the latest revision of the unabridged Oxford English Dictionary. They might be using the results to assemble a word corpus that could be used in other research applications. If that's the case, bravo for not requiring a bunch of research assistants to endlessly pore over word lists.
I'm not that surprised that many of the "female" words have to do with clothing that only women wear. Men don't tend to wear anything all that elaborate, and often it's unisex anyway. It's possible that that's an artifact of the fact that women tend to be more interested in fashion than men, though - I guess I don't really know the difference between Oxfords and boat shoes, so maybe the fact that there's no comparable set of fashion terms for men is because even men don't know the terms for the clothes they might wear.
I remember some research doing this on twitter data:
http://www.digitaltrends.com/social-media/researchers-tell-t...
>the more obvious results pointed out that women will normally tend to use emotional language like “sad, love, glad, sick, proud, happy, scared, annoyed, excited, and jealous.” Emoticons, and CMC (computer-mediated communication) terms (lol, omg, brb, for instance) are female markers, “as [are] ellipses, expressive lengthening (e.g., coooooool), exclamation marks, question marks, and backchannel sounds like ah, hmmm, ugh, and grr.”
>Clear male markers include words related to swearing, technology, and sports, and in relation, numbers (as in scores).
You can take the test on the site to try it -- here are some of the non-words I hit that looked real-ish (though I still clicked "no"):
rebrenningly
splaits
mangean
postock
acetylative
struffhold
vs. some of the real words I also clicked "no" for: chrestomathy
fluoxetine
coffle
wedel
afterpiecehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noSOFIJdfwM
I have always found this aspect of human language fascinating.
Here's a link to the clip of us talking about this for those who'd like to listen: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLoGy6FZygA
When it was men's turn, most did, and probably some who didn't raise his hand knew it too, but were ashamed to admit it in front of their girl friends of wifes(this could be the case for some women, too).
If you don't what it means, don't search for it at work.
So, I bet that's a way more discriminative word that any of that list.
Edit: the "live show" was just a monologue show, in case you were wondering.
Do girls play D&D? They didn't with my nerd crew.
But it's an interesting test overall, and I can see where being a well-read individual, a writer, or an English professor could achieve high percentages in "male" and "female" vocabulary.
The test that they run is pretty cool, but this conclusion is super weak.
or Google cache: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:1meGtpl...
My guess is that the respondents were self-selected internet dwellers. Looking at their polling criteria, (an online test?) looks like it may well be the case.
For example, with "mascarpone" I picture all of the ingredients for making tiramisu, which I've prepared a few times in my life. With "claymore" I picture a Scot brandishing a sword as large as he is, even though it can also refer to a modern military weapon.
Most I know well, though -- I have a bottlebrush at home, and I clean bottles with it. My neighbor's house is almost consumed by an enormous wisteria vine (so I know it's "glissine" in French, and my French vocab is pretty limited!).
I suspect a lot of this is a function of age -- as you get older, you come into contact with more vocabulary naturally. I started fixing up my house and that came with a slew of vocab. Having a child did the same; ditto working with medical data for work.
Or if you read widely, you accelerate the process massively, because vicarious lives are rather faster than real ones. I'm less of a bookworm these days, but I did little else for chunks of my life.