Letters to the Editor
-
This test's baloney
I fail to see the purpose of conducting a test relating map-reading to rotational ability when, as the scientists themselves state, the link between the two "is not backed up with empirical evidence." So on what basis, exactly, are they making this "intuitive" connection? (Maybe the researchers are all female.)
As a gay male, and one who scored spectacularly low on the rotational-abilities test (although I did fine with angles), I should evidently be a terrible map-reader. In reality, the opposite is the case: I took a cross-country trip with a straight male friend, who (I know from experience) is excellent at the whole rotating thing – it's what makes him good with mechanics, and other tasks that for me are completely baffling. But the man can't read a map to save his life, and if I'd left him alone we would've ended up in Alaska. I, on the other hand, am an excellent map-reader, and got us from New York to California almost without mishap.
To study the relationship between gender and certain performative abilities can be interesting; to make groundless connections with unrelated tasks is frankly dumb, and in complete violation of the scientific spirit. I was interested to learn that I have a more typically "feminine" brain (but also, like other males, am more attracted to feminine features, in this case in other men), but fail to see any connection with map-reading... nor do the researchers put forth any arguments in favor of this connection. What a stupid study.