Green exotic women vs. Red hot men

1. Alex
   December 10th, 2008 at 4:06 am

   Doesn't race kind of make this sort of thing moot?

2. los tacos
   December 10th, 2008 at 9:59 am

   Actually GENDER makes this study obsolete.

   One out of Six men is color blind.

   That means that 18% of men were NOT studied for this test.

   If 18% of women were eliminated for a test it would be invalidated just like this one should.

3. Gauldar
   December 10th, 2008 at 10:01 am

   That's a good point, ethnic background would make a difference as far as complextion goes. I wonder if artificial light has skewed our perception of how we see eachother, but it is interesting about how for all these years we have associated blue with boys and pink with girls. Maybe all these years we had it wrong... or did we?

4. Lamonstrous
   December 10th, 2008 at 10:27 am

   Does this confirm that men are from mars and women are from venus?
   And what about Hellboy?

5. Colleen OReilly
   December 10th, 2008 at 10:41 am

   Actually, genetics is super-complicated. It is possible that the green/red undertone gene is carried on the same chromosome pair with other sexual characteristics, which would make the finding consistent across races and ethnic groups. Red or green undertones are not affected by ethnicity, anyway. As you must have noticed, people of the same race and even the same family have very different skin tones.

   Eliminating subjects who are unable to differentiate color does not void the study. Using subjects who couldn't tell the difference between the pictures they were seeing would skew the results, however. It's like this: A certain percent of the population is unable to run, for whatever reason. Eliminating these subjects form a study on running shoes would just make sense, right?

6. tona b.
   December 10th, 2008 at 12:25 pm

   Gauldar: the boy-blue/girl-pink association is a only recent, and Western, cultural association. It used to be reversed, as pink was merely a gentler shade of red, which was associated with strong masculinity.

7. Gail Pink
   December 10th, 2008 at 12:49 pm

   "Green Exotic Women vs. Red Hot Men" would be a great name for an independent film!

8. Ben B.
   December 10th, 2008 at 1:57 pm

   That's been known since antiquity. Anyone who's had a class in ancient art can tell you that artists in the ancient Mediterranean conventionally used red pigments for men and lighter, paler pigments for women, though they tended to exaggerate the natural difference. The reddish bias of male skin tone is almost common knowledge among artists and anyone who's ever had anything to do with measuring skin tone. It's just due to the gender difference in heme concentration in the blood.

9. Monica
   December 10th, 2008 at 3:01 pm

   I wish, for once, a study would be done thoroughly, with all that is necessary to avoid confusion and holes. All options and sides taken into consideration and implemented seems to be of no significance, and anyone can have a half hazard "study" published and call it research.

10. liphttam1
    December 10th, 2008 at 3:12 pm

    Ha ha! My grandma hates the coler green. Oh well.

11. Maggie Molloy
    December 10th, 2008 at 5:52 pm

    That's very interesting. So if I wear makeup with green undertones I'll look more femenine?

12. mike a
    December 10th, 2008 at 8:58 pm

    I hope only about 0.02 cents was spent on that color stuff its not even worth thar much

13. Scarlette Maschelienne Atlanta, Ga.
    December 10th, 2008 at 9:47 pm

    This was very unusual. I find that the people who wrote the article was wonderful.

14. kimera
    December 11th, 2008 at 6:14 am

    Actually the pink for girls and red for boys is a recent development.

    http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=238733

    Red was traditionally a male color, and as it faded to pink it was handed down to younger and younger males until infant boys were swaddled in the cloths.

    Blue, considered a more delicate color was a preferred choice for women.

    Go figure.

15. sparkplug13
    December 11th, 2008 at 12:35 pm

    that's great. now i can give the guys i work with more crap when they get on me about wearing pink

16. chris rocket
    December 11th, 2008 at 6:18 pm

    If being red was the case then native american men would be in demand, not extinct.

17. ...
    December 12th, 2008 at 12:51 am

    chis rocket, you sir, fail at logic.

18. blackthorne
    December 12th, 2008 at 3:36 am

    So! This means the Wicked Witch of the West is the very essence of femininity!

    And this also begs the question... if your undertone is actually neither green nor red, but bronze... well, does that make me a hermaphrodite? 'Cuz last time I looked, I didn't have any extra... er, appendages.

19. Capt Ardy
    December 12th, 2008 at 7:17 pm

    How come the Incredible Hulk is green? And what about Red Ridding Hood, I've got olive toned skin, I really think this study is a bit off.

20. kimera
    December 13th, 2008 at 5:58 am

    An undertone is just that, its not the main skintones you have.

    Think about it, traditionally women did less outdoor work, got less exposure to the sun, and therefore had less of the reddish color that that would impart.

    Also until recently men would do more physically intensive labor (hunter) while women would do less (gatherer) also increasing the males' reddish skin tones because of the flush associated with heavy physical labor. (I am not saying women did less work, just that the type women did was less likely to make a woman flush for all you trollies out there.)

    So is it really any wonder that reddish undertones are more recognized as 'male', we've had centuries of conditioning for it.

21. Jerry
    December 13th, 2008 at 7:42 am

    I always prefer my women pink on the inside, brown on the outside, hate fat white creatures.

22. speedy
    December 13th, 2008 at 9:35 am

    jerry, grow up

23. Jeffo
    December 13th, 2008 at 11:37 pm

    Sorry, Monica ("I wish, for once, a study would be done thoroughly, with all that is necessary to avoid confusion and holes"). Doing a thorough study accounting for all variables is something the Psych Dep't at Brown doesn't have the stomach, budget, or math ability for. I worked in the computer center there, and only the Sociologists and Physicists used sophisticated statistics. The psychologists were way too interested in extrapolating what they could "determine" by looking at infants' sucking rates (whoa! they have some cognitive ability! Well, many species' newborns can gallop!) or else being politically correct to "bother" with making their work too close to actual science; there's no profit in that! (Please excuse my rather tortured sentence structure; no time to edit.)

PLEASE LEAVE A COMMENT