The Marriage Files

"Dear Webmistress@themarriagefiles.com:

I think you're really a man."

So began an email I received from a male reader recently. Seeing a way to make a quick buck, I wrote him back and asked, "Are you a betting man?" For the right kind of money, I was prepared to provide some proof that I am and always have been a woman. Alas, I didn’t hear back from him, so you’ll just have to take my word for it.

But I have to admit that my reader might have picked up on something. You see, I have somewhat of a fascination for so-called "gender tests." There are dozens of them online. It all started when a friend told me about the infamous gender test at thespark.com. 1 I took it, and the test, which boasts 100% accuracy, squarely pegged me as a male. I then sought out more gender tests, all of them claiming to have stupendous accuracy, and one by one, they all labelled me a man.

Evidently, this is because the tests assume that only men can a) read a map; b) fix anything; and c) exhibit curiosity. The same tests assume that women a) cry at the drop of a hat; b) live to nurture children; and c) like to shop. It's true that crying is sometimes a problem, but since I can read a map and fix things and I’m curious, plus I’m childless by choice and I hate to shop, the tests say I must be a man.

Not only that, but I’m more "male" than most males! One of the tests 2 I took consists of two parts. On the part that supposedly tests for "femaleness" (the empathy quotient, or EQ), I scored not only lower than the average woman, but also lower than the average man. On the part that supposedly tests for "maleness" (the systemizing quotient, or SQ), I scored not only higher than the average woman and man, but in a range so high that the test came just shy of calling me a freak. I wouldn’t have minded if it did, however, because the test at thespark.com actually did call me a freak. That was part of its ineffable charm.

When I asked my husband K— how he felt about being married to a woman who is, by all accounts, a gentleman’s gentleman, a real guy’s guy, he wisely had no comment other than to say that he would not be taking the test himself. I think he’s afraid that it would label him more "female" than me. I can’t imagine anything more embarrassing for a man except maybe having his girlfriend outperform him on one of those carnival midway strength games. As a joke, I might start to walk around the house singing, "I’m a lumberjack and that’s okay..." 3

These tests, fun as they are to take, are all fatally flawed. I could write a tome about the faults that lead them to mistake a reasonably womanly brunette for a masculine role model, but in the interest of brevity, one or two points will suffice. For instance, here’s a sample question from the EQ/SQ test that sized me up as the Ultimate Male:

If there was a problem with the electrical wiring in my home, I would be able to fix it.

It’s clear from the test that answering "yes" to this gets you points in the "male" column and answering "no" gets you points in the "female" column. But one problem with the question is that respondents are on the honor system when answering. What’s so bad about that, you might ask? Well, any woman can tell you that even in the privacy of his own home, taking the test anonymously online, a man will, in all likelihood, assert terrific competence at wiring even if he’d fry himself beyond recognition trying to change a light bulb.

This kind of question is what sociologists call a "sensitive behavior" question, and any sociologist (go ahead—ask one) can tell you that you can’t rely on self-assessment when querying people about sensitive behaviors. In the same vein, there’s this question:

I am not very meticulous when I carry out D.I.Y.

Ask yourself how many men you know who would answer "yes" to this. Now ask yourself what proportion of the reluctant "stars" of the TV show "In a Fix"—you know, the ones who have to wear the tee-shirts that say "It’s All My Fault"—are men. Hmmm? This is what you call an inversely proportional relationship, and a good example of how unreliable self-assessment is.

Then there’s the problem of subject matter. Noticeably absent from the test were questions like:

I can thread a sewing machine from memory.

Threading a sewing machine is a skill that takes considerable spatial visualization ability—a supposedly male trait—but how many men could honestly answer "yes" to this?

Similarly, these questions were on the test:

If I were buying a computer, I would want to know exact details about its hard drive capacity and processor speed.

I find it easy to grasp how odds work in betting.

…but not these:

If I were buying a range, I would want to know exact details about its oven capacity and cooking times.

When following a recipe, I can convert cups and ounces into liters and grams.

Ultimately, problem questions like the ones I’ve cited here yield a test that can accurately predict the gender of only those respondents who fit the conventional male and female stereotypes, and the test designer is making judgments about all men and women based on what amounts to a shrinking minority of the population. The test of a gender test, if you will, is its ability to predict the gender of outliers like me, and the tests all fail.

Besides, how hard could it be to guess the gender of macho men and bimbo babes? The EQ/SQ test had 160 questions. You’d think that with all those opportunities to get it right, it would have nearly perfect accuracy. But because the test is designed so poorly, you could probably attain the same accuracy with one question along the lines of:

I drink more than 16 ounces of beer in one sitting on a regular basis.

Yes: you’re a guy. No: you’re a broad. I’d guesstimate it’ll yield 85% accuracy.

Or, alternatively:

When I walk down the toiletries aisle of the supermarket, I know what every product is for.

Just reverse the answers, and you'll probably get 100% accuracy!

I’m just glad I discovered all these gender tests after getting married. If I’d come across them when I was single, they’d only have confused me. After having all of them label me a man, if I had to write a singles ad, I wouldn’t know how to describe myself or what I was looking for. SWHSQPOCG 4 seeks SLEQM(IT) for mutual appliance assembly and long walks through science museum exhibits?

True story: Last winter my husband K— and I hired a carpenter, Frank, to work on one of our (what else?) remodeling projects. Frank had never worked doing carpentry with a woman before. One day, the three of us were working together when Frank pointed to me and asked K—, "What do you call that?" K— (a little perplexed as to why Frank would be asking him what he calls his own wife) answered, "I don’t know." "That," said Frank, "is what you call ‘lucky.’"

Frank will get more work from us, but that’s beside the point. I hope K— thinks he’s lucky. I, too, count myself lucky—lucky to have married a guy who can let me be me (a WHSQF)—and not make me feel like a freak.

1 Infamous mostly on account of being rather bizarre and sometimes insulting to test takers. If you haven’t taken it by now, forget it. It used to be easy to access, but finding it and getting it to work is now so cumbersome and irksome it’s not worth it. Take my word for it, it was interesting.

2 http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/news/page/0,12983,937443,00.html

3 Monty Python, and you should know that.

4 Single white high-systemizing-quotient person of confused gender; single low-empathy-quotient male (I think).

TMF is a collective, ongoing work that is protected by relevant copyrights and registrations. You are invited to share the URL of this website for non-profit entertainment purposes, but in no other way can The Marriage Files (TMF) be used, reproduced, copied, developed, adapted, altered, or distributed without the express written permission of the author.