Slashdot Mirror
Boys with Longer Ring Fingers are Better at Math
slashthedot writes "While it is well known that boys have longer ring fingers as compared to index fingers, now some researchers say that the longer the ring finger ratio to index finger, the better boys are at math. In girls, the shorter the ring finger to index finger ratio, the better is their verbal skills. 'The link, according to the researchers, is that testosterone levels in the womb influence both finger length and brain development.'"
OK, so they found a correlation. But it was a correlation they weren't looking for, correct? If I check for the existence of 20 different correlations with a 95% confidence interval, wouldn't I be likely to find one even if none exist? Somebody else would have to confirm this finding for me to give it any credence.
SAT Scores, aggression and penis size
The only thing these studies ever seem to accomplish is to piss off certain groups of people.
Black people get angry because there is a supposedly a correlation between being black and athletic prowess or being black and affinity for violent crime.
Women get angry because there is supposedly a correlation between sex and mathematical skills.
White males get angry because there is supposedly a correlation between being a white male and having an affinity for pedophilia. The list goes on and on and on.
Do these studies have any purpose other than to get PHDs published and make people angry or are they actually useful? I'd love for someone to explain the usefulness of this study and others.
I think the invisible hand of the market has its middle finger extended
--A wise old fart named SC0RN
Not only have we heard of this just last week (haven't we? My memory's really bad these days ;_;), but also in 2004. Unfortunately, that study claims almost the opposite of this one: researchers, programmers and men teaching mathematics and physics tend to have longer index fingers. So, WTF?
The study itself can have merit. The problem is with people who take the study and seek to use it for other purposes.
For example, a study like this could help explain why some people seem to be "better" at certain areas of study (not because they have longer ring fingers, or because they are a different skin color, but because of certain chemicals being present in certain amounts during development). In turn, such a discovery could potentially lead to a cure for dyslexia for example, or any other learning disabilities. At the same time, someone could try to take this research and say that it means we should not allow certain races to breed with each other.
At what point does the power of a few idiots to use something for bad make it so that we ignore the potential benefits of research?
What?
Humans are fairly interesting in how their social development probably has more impact on their abilities than their biological potential.
In other words, the person with the best "brain" in the world could still end up as a druggy working at McD dropping out of school after failing, if they met the wrong people and made the wrong choices.
In a similar way, I pick up maths lightyears faster than my girlfriend: except I gave up on applied maths after graduating, while she continued in that field: result, she's a lot better than me at it. My "body" is still better at maths than hers, but I'm not using it, thus the result. Simple as that.
Homosexuality has already been correlated with the ring finger - index finger ratio:
Only gay men with several older brothers had an unusually "masculine" finger ratio - in other words, they had significantly shorter index fingers.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/695142.stm
Actually having a huge male sex organs could lead to great difficulty making sex with most women. It may not enter fully, and requires significantly more foreplay than average to average-big organs. Also statistics show that girls normally don't enjoy pushing their ovaries in their throat during sex.
That's the truth. I have a 9" cock that is 6 1/2" around. Really. Sure, it isn't porn star big but bigger than average.
Quick sex is out. Anal sex is out (don't even bring up the subject). The majority of the time sex requires either I go down on her first so she is naturally lubricated enough or break out the KY and that sucks for me because it really really reduces friction.
A girl brags she can deep throat? Not going to happen. Quite a few girls get migraines the day after blowing me because they has to open their mouth so much and keep it open. And what do you think happens when I date a girl that has mild TMJ? Right, no blowjobs.
Don't get me wrong, I like my cock. And it is always cool the first time I whip it out and see that look in her eyes. Especially if she is a skank. It is that same look I have when a girl reveals a great set of tits or turns around and has a great ass. I wouldn't trade my cock for anything.
But it isn't always the greatest thing.
Oh, and I could blow myself when I was a teenager. That was cool.
Hi, I'm a prime number nerd [adjusts glasses]. Actually having a huge male sex organs could lead to great difficulty making sex with most women. It may not enter fully, and requires significantly more foreplay than average to average-big organs.
;-) Trust me. I'm over 6' tall and have ... big hands.
There is no difficulty, and they really don't mind.
My ring finger, by contrast, suffers from being in the short category. The news of this study (or one identical to it) came out 6 months to a year ago, so I'm surprised to read about it here now. It caught my attention because I've studied and played classical guitar (that finger-picking style for those unfamiliar with it) for most of my life. When you play with "10 fingers", the ring finger is in the unenviable position of having to reach the string that's farthest away. The longer the ring finger, I assumed, the easier it was to play and by extension, the better the guitarist.
It turns it out it's not much of an indicator of anything. Since first hearing about the study, I embarked on a study of my own, starting with guitarists, and then extending to just about everyone I met or saw. It's easy to examine someone's hands without being obtrusive, so don't get the idea that I carried around a notebook and measuring instruments. My own observations from a sample set of what I guess would be at least a thousand individuals (most in person, but some on TV, video, pictures, etc.) was the following.
Guitarists, even wickedly fast flamenco guitarists, don't typically have longer index fingers. I was surprised to note that many have hands that appear better suited to construction. The abilities we tend to associated with the male side of the brain (math, logical thinking, spatial perception) don't correspond either. Women that I know to have close to zero of those skills, often have longer ringer fingers. In fact, I've seen more women with longer ring fingers than than men. Men trained in computer science, engineering, or in the architectural fields likewise don't exhibit any similarities, aside from a frequent and obvious unfamiliarity with physical labour.
There's been similar studies that suggest that too much or too little testosterone in the womb is related to sexuality, not enough testorone being associated with an exaggerated interest the performing arts, particularly Broadway show tunes. If that's the case, the athletes I know or have met must all be closet cases because I found few cases where any one of them had a longer ringer finger. Flaming queers, by contrast, typically don't have shorter ones. Go figure.
I would like to believe there is a relationship; that would allow me play victim and say that I never became a concert guitarist because my hands were the wrong shape or size. My opinion is that this kind of "science" can be fun to read about and sometimes helps to make sense of the world around us, but in the end, it's a distraction and has no value at all.
My ring finger is exactly the same length as my index finger. My ratio is a flat 1.
I was always good at math. Head of the class. I was a member of the Kappa Mu Epsilon mathematics honor society at college before graduating with my CS degree. I very easily could have gone with a math degree instead, but it seemed like there was more money in Computer Science (one might say I "did the math").
Nature vs nurture?
*shrug*
Actually Freud's "penis envy" doesn't mean what you think it means, but we managed to attach the label to something else! Bonus points to Freud for a catchy name.
It originally meant the supposed reaction of a girl when she finds out she does not have a penis. I don't see what the big fuss is, though, most girls get penises later on in their lives, if only part-time. Mod me interesting for starting this post with psychology and ending with porn!
Send email from the afterlife! Write your e-will at Dead Man's Switch.
All I have to say is that my ring finger is only about 1cm longer than my index, even shorter, and I'm the best kid in my school when it comes to math. And yes, I am a boy. Not only that, but my verbal skills are just fine.
"The quickest way to end a war is to lose it" -Orwell