Hey! Look me in the eye...and only the eye.

When you look at a full body photograph of another person, what about them draws your eye first, or most?

While you think about your answer, try this on: According to world-renowned "usability" expert Jakob Nielson, if you're a woman you tend to focus on the subject's face. If you're a man, however, you're likely to hone in on the face and the crotch...regardless of whether the picture subject is a woman or another man.

Hey, don't kill the messenger. I'm just sharing here.

In a demonstration for online news editors studying the best news page layout designs, reported on by the Online Journalism Review earlier this year, Nielson conducted an eye-tracking test on 255 New Yorkers - 58% of them female, 42% male. No scientific explanation was given as to why men seem drawn to nether regions in pics, and women seem content to keep their eyes above the shoulders.

Among the different photographs studied during the one- to two-hour-long test, was one of Major League Baseball legend George Brett, bat in hand, mid swing.

This picture, from the OJR Web site, shows where "on" Brett male test subjects looked, and where female test subjects looked.


Hmmm. Fellas, I can't speak for you, but I'm pretty sure I don't spend any time ogling goodie bags. I can't give you scientific proof. You'll just have to take my word for it.

When I think about all the people I encounter every day, I admit I tend to give most of them the once over at first sight - you know, the quick head to toe glance. But focusing on the nether regions? Nah. I'd like to know a little more about the guys who took this eye-tracking test.

At any rate, if the test results weren't unsettling already, according to OJR men don't just eyeball crotches in photographs of other humans. "We" do it with pictures of animals too. Again, I'm just the messenger here. But OJR says "Men tend to fixate more on areas of private anatomy on animals as well, as evidenced when users were directed to browse the American Kennel Club site."

What!!!!!

Just what I needed: something else to feel self conscious about. Already I'll be spending a little less time studying photographs of male athletes on news Web sites - note to self, from now on skip pictures of cyclists, football players, swimmers, and track & field types, and any other men who wear tights or grape smugglers. Now, next time I see my dog licking himself, I think I'll leave the room and give him some privacy. Wouldn't want him to think I was staring. Nor would I want to think, if he could talk, that he'd stop and tell me "Why don't you take a picture already? It lasts longer."

Liar, liar!

Show of hands - both hands, how many of us have ever lied about a romantic conquest?

Now, I have to imagine that there are more male hands than female in the air right now.

And I base that opinion on nothing more than the experience that most women I've known don't consider it a badge of honor to claim to have bedded a guy, any guy, unless he's a Pitt, or a Clooney, or some other stereotype.

Most guys I've known, however, will tell you that at some point they have lied about hookin' up. Most I know say those lies were most prevalent in their teens and early 20s.

All this leads me to a very interesting article from New York Times science writer Gina Kolata. Ms. Kolata reported that men claim a median of seven female sexual partners, while women claim a median of four male partners. Scientists and mathematicians cited by Ms. Kolata concluded the guys must be lying. Men interviewed in a recent British study claimed 12.7 female partners. And women in that study claimed 6.5 male partners.

So. Somebody's lyin', lyin' like a rug. Or maybe not.

Math was not always my strong suit, but I know that when you measure these sorts of things using a strict group of subjects in strict parameters - say 100 men and 100 women who are known to socialize in the same circle in the same areas, the numbers of partners each can legitimately claim will be close to even. And I know that when it comes to "romance" you can't apply those types of parameters. It won't work.

Consider this:

• As of the 2000 Census the female to male population in the U.S. was almost 51% to 49%. There are more women than men, so it stands to reason guys will have a shot at a greater number of women than women have at guys.
• It's a completely non-scientific theory, but women are pickier than guys. A straight guy - my buddies, anyway - would have jumped into the sack with any woman who was born a woman and had two breasts and appropriate plumbing when they were younger. Women seem to be able to "do without" easier than guys. And so I don't think it's a stretch to think the average woman is hooking up with one out of umpteen guys who take a shot at her.
• In terms of pure effort, guys, who seem to have an inherent need to "spread" themselves around when they're younger, just try harder to hook up. Guys of a certain age are desperate to make things happen. It is logical that if I try to hook up with 20 women, and 80% of them shoot me down, that still leaves four women who caved in. If my female counterpart, without breaking a sweat, entertains pitches from just 10 guys and shoots down 90% of 'em, well that's just one hookup for her.

On the other hand, guys do lie about this stuff. I haven't for some time, 'cause I haven't had anything to prove and my ego has lost weight over the years thus needing less support. But back in the day, in my late teens and very early 20s - I'd say 17ish to 21ish - I lied like gangbusters about how many young women I hooked up with. It wasn't that I never hooked up with any. It was just that I always claimed more. If the actual number was one in a month, I claimed two. If the number was two in three months, I claimed four. My guys did it too. I think we knew we were all lying to each other, but we got some humor in trying to out tall-tale each other. Claiming another partner was like bragging about getting an "A" on a test for us. And we were eggheads. We were getting "A's" on tests. Probably part of the reason we felt compelled to lie so much about the hookups.

You know what? I think I just changed my own mind. Scratch my skepticism of the article. I think the studies cited in the Times are right. The guys probably are lying...just not for the statistical and scientific reasons given in the Times article.