Thursday, January 28, 2010

The Verdict is Out


H0: Men do not realize when they are being stared at intensely, even if for more than 2 minutes

H1: Women realize the same in less than 10 seconds

Testing Methodology:

Identify a sample set and stare (what else)

In order to give leeway to starees:

Ensure that more than one tester stares at the man or the woman so as to increase the intensity of the stare and help them notice

Procedure and Findings:

  • Pick up a sample (in our case – 4 men and 1 woman) which is happily standing and chattering away to glory.
  • Identify the first bhakra (Manage), who is standing slightly sideways such that the corner of his left eye can actually notice anyone staring at him. Stare intensely at him from a distance of 10 feet for more than 2 minutes.
  • Next, identify the second bhakra and repeat exercise. This time choose the guy who is standing such that the corner of his right eye can notice anyone staring at him (Katrix), and stare, for more than 2 minutes, of course.
Neither of them notices the stare

  • Now, stare at the only girl in the group (Tuls) who is standing right opposite the testers, at a distance of 12 feet. Keep in mind the fact that the girl is not having direct eye contact with the testers but is actually doing some hyper animated conversation with the rest of the sample. In 10 seconds, the girl turns behind her to check whether there is anything else worthwhile to stare at, and then gives us a questioning glance.

She has been standing bang opposite the testers. So, to make it fairer

  • Observe the guy who is standing opposite the testers (Samba). Stare right in to his sun glass worn eyes for 1 minute, then 1 more minute, then even more for a minute (that's totally 3 friggin' minutes!)

He looks right in to the testers' sun glass 'unworn' eyes but does not see the stares!


  1. Men cannot multi task; that is, if they are talking, they can do just that and do not have the capacity to notice if anyone stares at them
  2. Men are not as used to being stared at as women are


If this was not just two nut-cases testing their hypotheses, this sample of men would have lost out on some major opportunities. Implications enough?


Rohini – For conceiving these brilliant hypotheses

Tuls – For assisting in execution (by not bursting in to hopeless giggles when she was told about why she had been stared at)


Shrutz said...

:D. Hence proved.

Sambaditya Siddhanta said...


AP said...

You make those spelling mistakes of hindi words deliberately, don't you? Bhakra is actually a tasty snack, while bakra (the proverbial sacrificial lamb) is probably what you intended to write. :-)

Funny post, btw!!

Archana Kumar said...

I've observed myself...not just the stares...we generally go abt observing some n^2 no. of things around us which guys generally do not seem to notice...

Kavity said...

@ Shrutz: Totally :D

@ Samba: Exactly what I am asking :)

@ AP: Thanks :) And, no, never do I make deliberate spelling mistakes, just happens with the flow ;)

@ Archu: Guess you do have a point there, I have noticed this phenomenon too1

Anonymous said...

There you go generalizing again... You atleast have one exception to that rule :).. I hereby accuse u of selective analysis, using a very faulty sample set and deriving a biased and faulty hypothesis :)..

Kavity said...

We do not consider outliers as part of sample sets. And, we all along knew that if at all anyone in that group finds out, it would be you!

Ramya said...

appreciate ur hypothesis... it is so damn true :P.. poor bakras who became samples though :P

Kavity said...

Will never ever make the mistake of pitying those chaps :D and stop testing my many other hypotheses on them :P

Madhurjya (Banjo) said...

No wonder!!! Sigh

Kavity said...

@ Banjo: There is still time, you know :)

Shreya said...

Haha. Worth thinking about - if your sample set had not been too painfully aware of the fact that none of the women who had so kindly agreed to accompany them to the North and the East had the slightest interest in staring at them, or even if staring was incidental, would then follow it up with anything substantial, they may have been more tuned in to such mating calls, which undoubtedly, would have been the interpretation of a stare had it emanated from the eyes of a stranger woman ;)

Kavity said...

@ Shreya: How can one assume such "painful awareness"es? :P

Shreya said...

That's true. I forgot the Katrix angle :P

Kavity said...

< embarrassed look and all that>
But, then, I should never have replied to your previous comment in the first place!
Dangerous lady you are :D

Anonymous said...

You dint know that the guy in coolers was actually ogling around ;-).

Its not guys arent multitasking ;-).

J a G z said...

curious to know who this anonymous soul is... adding more to the existing scandals :D

Kavity said...

@ Jags: Totally! Am intrigued too, as to who this could be now :D

Ashes_of_roses said...

Wierd but True !! :))