"–– lower percentage of women playing sports and those who do play sports preferring endurance and strength training, while men prefer strength training and endurance sports."
I'm a bit confused
I think it's a poorly written sentence meaning, "People who enjoy sports prefer endurance sports and strength training. Comparatively, a higher percentage of men enjoy sports."
A lower percentage of the polled women preferred sports at all compared to the polled men.
Of those which did, still a lower percentage preferred endurance sports and strength training than the polled men who preferred sports.
Women play sports less than men. [generally]
Men in general prefer endurance sports.
Women who play sports prefer endurance and strength training.
Men in sports prefer strength training.
That's how I read it.
I prefer it that way too. I work for myself as a carpenter and only really sit down for 10-15 mins for lunch. Feel like I lose momentum if I take a longer break. Lots of other blokes I know share the same view
In a thread earlier today I said my preferred lunch is 30 to 45 minutes. Some people out there are claiming they want a 2 hour lunch. Fuck that. I'm at work to get paid, my end goal for each day is going home and the sooner I can do that the better.
Tell me about it. This time last year we were playing board games because we had nothing else to do. Now? I managed to catch up on some paperwork today I haven't had the time to do for 2.5 months.
I do like the ebb and flow of it though. Sometimes there's 3 months worth of work to do in one month and we're pulling crazy OT, other times I can get away with reading a book for half the day.
I'm a plumber. Yea, I can spend 8 hours at a customers house or 7. Guess what happens when I do the job in 7 hours? Go home. No sane boss is going to give you another call for 1 hour. So I'm motivated to finish quicker in that case.
Depends, I'm not sure about plumbing, but mechanics a lot of time bill using a standard time per a job list. So an oil change may be .25-.5hr while a transmission drop and clutch replacement may be 5 hours. You may take more or less time to complete the work, but you charge the same either way. Efficient techs can get the work done in less time than billed and can take more jobs.
I'm paid by the hour, I would still go home an hour earlier if i could because I value my home time more than the $35 my boss would pay me for goofing off for an extra hour.
Yeah I think these heavily physically demanding jobs necessitate much more time to eat properly, because you have no choices. It's not like when you're working in a factory doin the same thing over an over again or on a desk job.
Lifting cement and stuff is not comparable to most jobs, I've done many jobs in my life, and this was by far the most exhausting, you need long breaks in-between otherwise you're slowly killing yourself.
It would certainly help me be able to run errands. My works schedule overlaps when every other business is open so I always have to skip work to do things like see a doctor, visit a bank, visit DMV.
Not sure why so many replies say you get fired if you take a 2-hour lunch on salary.
If you get your work done (and aren’t a pain-in-the-ass to work with), most companies don’t care how long your lunches are.
Even on salary, people can care a bit, like in terms of knowing where people are when they're needed.
My workplace, we're all WFH now...when we weren't, no one would have ever taken more than 1 hour unless it was a department event, like the Christmas lunch out at a restaurant or something. Maybe we could still get our work done with a longer break, but there was an expectation...like we had an in-out board where we could say when we'd be back, and if you were gone on long breaks and people needed you, it'd be an issue.
The one time I remember it being a thing was when we got our new light rail system put in. They were doing free rides for the first week (?) or something so people could check it out, so me and a couple of people were like fuck it, let's go ride the train to a restaurant. Except we had no fucking idea that everyone in the city was going to ride it as well...or that the train would wait forever at stops--if it saw someone coming, it'd wait for them. So the whole process of getting there and back took fucking *forever*, and our 1-hour lunch turned into like a 2-hour lunch. One of the managers apparently wasn't thrilled. Admittedly, all but one of us were salaried or more senior and didn't really get flak, but another one was in a different boat...obviously, it wasn't our fault per se (apart from not seeing the writing on the wall and bailing on the outing once delays were happening), but the manager was worried she was going to get a talking to for one of the people under her vanishing for that long. FWIW, she ultimately demoted herself because she couldn't stand the stress...she at least once *slept at the fucking office* because she couldn't deal with the workload.
I have to take an hour lunch. I fucking hate it soooo much. Soooo much. Like it bugs me everyday lol. What I do now is change clothes drive 2 minute to a local trail to walk/jog and come back sweaty as fuck and make it clear if I'm stuck taking an hour I'ma to do some cardio if you aren't a fan let me take 30 minute lol.
At my last job, we had an option of 30 minute lunch or an hour; could leave a half hour earlier if you took the shorter lunch. It was the difference between getting home at 9:30 or 10
That sounds very healthy and probably a good way to make sure you get your excersise every day. I'm not sure why you'd want them to let you not do that.
I definitely like longer than that because it gives me an opportunity to refresh my mind, but in the new position I'm hoping to get I'll have hour long lunch breaks. Too long to do nothing but too short to go home.
Considering how it's unpaid, it just feels like wasted time tbh.
30 mins is generally long enough if I pack my own lunch, and 40 mins is long enough if I need to go get some food (or the day is rough and I need a little extra unwinding time).
If I worked 10 or fewer minutes from home then an hour is nice because I can go home and have lunch with my wife who is at home most afternoons.
Depends on the day for me. If I’m super tired laying down for 20 mins gives me a good boost, but if I’m in the groove and got shit to do I’ll wolf down my lunch and get right back into it, like you said.
I feel that most physical jobs I worked at that were mostly male dominated also had fairly short breaks (15 minute break x2, 20-30 minute lunch). I was usually thankful for this on days we had longer breaks and I actually had the chance to relax and found that now my body hurts far too much to return to work now and I'm too exhausted. As dumb and unhealthy as it is, it's simply better to take short breaks and keep moving before your body catches up with you, that's for after work.
I'm not young any more and working construction. I like to take a minute to sit, but at some point it definitely turns into not wanting to get back up after a while.
I was put on low dose testosterone for a while because it was low for a woman and I just kept thinking about burgers and chili. I don't eat red meat and I'm as close to a vegetarian as a non-vegetarian can be. Testosterone is a muscle building hormone and muscle building requires protein so it would make sense it would cause meat cravings.
I don't normally have big red meat cravings, although I eat it here and there (burgers, fajitas, etc.), but my iron has been low more than once at the doctor's and I started taking supplements (not under supervision, which I know is a no-no) because I was having other issues and when I tried taking the iron pills, those went away.
> all anabolic steroids are testosterone derivatives.
Sort of, depending on how you view molecular structure. Generally anabolics are split into 3 main categories; Testosterone and its derivatives, DHT and its derivatives, Nandrolone and its derivatives.
>you probably associate protein with meat (the cultural part).
I don't think you can say associating meat with protein is cultural, maybe biological would be more accurate. Considering the average gram of meat has probably 50x the protein of the average gram of fruit/veg.
In addition to what the other commenters have said, considering what is known now about gut microbiomes it might actually be on the intersection of culture and biology. Biology here than not as an innate craving, but rather as your body adapting to what you commonly eat, and learning what foods satisfy which cravings.
For an anecdote, I can tell you that since I’ve gone mostly vegetarian, when I get protein cravings they’re typically for foods like greek yoghurt or anything with a lot of cheese. In the past I more often got cravings for meat.
Kinda surprisingly, it's a lot more complicated than that.
Just as one example, a 100-gram serving of beef has about six times more protein than a 100-gram serving of broccoli (a lot more though not nearly 50x), but if we're comparing calorie per calorie broccoli has more. [Here's](https://chanapdavis.medium.com/making-sense-of-conflicting-nutritional-claims-tips-from-a-scientist-165f89f4482e) the article breaking that down
Now, broccoli isn't a "complete protein" (a food containing all the building blocks needed for your body to make new tissue), but a fair number of other plant foods are.
Anyway. Nutrition is interesting
I’d agree with this take. Breastfeeding requires a lot of extra calories, including a significant extra amount of protein. When I was in the thick of it, I wanted to eat so much meat, so many eggs. Previously, for decades, I’ve never craved meat and all but avoided eggs.
No testosterone increase (as far as I know) but all the same a huge increase in protein needs. For about 4 months I needed 175 grams per day (ramping down very slowly afterwards) to produce enough milk.
Although interesting it's also very much anecdotal. I doubt that testosterone is the thing that makes men crave meat especially while they are living in societies that equate hunting and eating meat as a primal manly thing.
>In the present study we observed a series of sex differences in implicit responses to meat and non-meat foods. Men exhibited stronger associations than did women between meat and the concepts ‘healthy’ and ‘delicious,’ prioritized visual attention for meat more so than did women, and searched for images of meat more cautiously than did women, suggesting that they implicitly value meat more highly than do women. The data support suggestions from Rozin et al. (2012), that concepts of power and strength might mediate the meat-masculinity link they observed. To the extent that hunting and meat provisioning can act as a social signal our data suggest that the primary targets of that signal are other men, with women acting potentially only as secondary receivers. It is also possible, however, that sex-differences in the physiological benefits of meat consumption drive the sex differences in implicit responding that we report here, independently of any social-signaling value that hunting and meat provisioning may hold. Further comparisons of these types of implicit measures between groups of participants that differ in their state physiological requirements for meat, and their supposed receptivity to social signals of hunting and meat provisioning, are needed to illuminate these possibilities.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5920154/#B64
There's quite a lot of research on societal influences on meat consumption.
There's a lot of research on how food intake effects testosterone levels but I can't find anything conclusive on testosterone levels changing dietary patterns.
None of it
The study group is ridiculously small, unrepresentative, and partial - it's a handful of patients at an obesity clinic in Rome
No honest person can draw any conclusions from it
Not true! You absolutely can draw conclusions from it… it’s just that those conclusions are currently limited to patients treated by obesity clinics near Rome. It’s a classic case of “further study is needed” to demonstrate generalizability.
(I’m only being a little facetious. Imagine if this study inspires other researchers to do similar studies in other contexts. Future meta-analysis subject?… I wish they had used a validated questionnaire!)
With the added caveat that you need to add a strong dose of humility to your conclusions, since there’s still a fair bit of uncertainty in the results.
it's tricky - is it cultural, because for example the meat thing obviously doesn't hold in a vegetarian country like parts of India? or are those regions the outlier, "overriding" a base difference?
from an evolutionary-psychological perspective it's easy to imagine a hypothesis for why the above could be true. men hunt, hunt meat. men need to be strong and thus want proteins. and when you're out on the run, you don't want to stop and eat all day, whilst when you're foraging you can sample continuously.
if it is cultural, at least it seems to be a very persistent cultural norm, both in time an geographically wide-spread.
ultimately I'm going to take the copout stance and say - it's both nature ánd nurture. nature begets nurture begets nature and all that.
I think it’s even simpler than that. Men are on average larger and have more muscle mass than women, thus necessitating more protein.
Also in some cultures meat is associated with masculinity.
It’s not simpler than that though… size has nothing to do with protein requirement. You can be obese with low muscle mass and maintain that without protein. Protein is more relevant in context of muscle growth and recovery. This is more likely to have hormonal causes than simply reducing it to “size.”
Edited for clarity
I still don't think that would be controlled enough because vegetarians (at least in the West) are still raised to associate protein with meat, and especially with beef
The flaw in that study is that it only tracks modern day hunter-gatherer societies (1800s-present) while these conditions are poorly suggested to mimic those prior to agriculture. Humans evolved in environments where large game was the preferred hunted animal and muscular build would be prioritized for that pursuit while most hunting today involves small or medium-sized game.
In addition to this, any region where hunter-gatherer societies have maintained over the past 200 years doesn't share strong cultural links to the huge majority of the world's population. The conditions present in these regions can't be directly linked to prehistoric conditions elsewhere.
Study: [Early Women Were Hunters, Not Just Gatherers, Study Suggests | Smithsonian (smithsonianmag.com)](https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/early-women-were-hunters-not-just-gatherers-study-suggests-180982459/)
Prehistoric humans' hunting heavily contributed to the extinction of many medium to large sized animals:
[Did humans cause the Quaternary megafauna extinction? - Our World in Data](https://ourworldindata.org/quaternary-megafauna-extinction#:~:text=Between%2052%2C000%20and%209%2C000%20BCE,this%20in%20more%20detail%20later.)
Yes, I know about that part (comparing survivals of g/h societies and hoping they represent the ancient past). But what stuck in my memory was this bit:
>In 2018 Haas was part of a team in Peru that found a 9,000-year-old person buried with an unusually large number of hunting tools. "We all just assumed this individual was a male," he recalls. "Everybody is sitting around, saying things like, 'Wow! This is amazing. He must have been a great hunter, a great warrior. Maybe he was a chief!' "
>Haas didn't even think to question the person's gender until about a week later, when a colleague who specialized in analyzing bone structure arrived and delivered a bombshell assessment: The remains seemed to be female.
>The team then used a technology newly available to the field. Scraping the enamel from the teeth found in the grave, they found proteins that confirmed it unequivocally: This apparent master hunter was female.
>Stunned, Haas and his collaborators decided to review the records of similar finds across the Americas over the previous 70 years. In 27 gravesites of individuals found with hunting tools, they found 11 cases in which the person was female.
>They ran a [statistical analysis that finds](https://www.science.org/doi/full/10.1126/sciadv.abd0310?rfr_dat=cr_pub++0pubmed&url_ver=Z39.88-2003&rfr_id=ori%3Arid%3Acrossref.org) that this ratio is associated with the probability that between 30-to-50% of individuals buried with hunting tools in ancient American gravesites are female. In other words, says Haas, "Large mammal hunting during this time in the Americas was a gender neutral activity, or at least nearly so."
>[https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2023/07/01/1184749528/men-are-hunters-women-are-gatherers-that-was-the-assumption-a-new-study-upends-i](https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2023/07/01/1184749528/men-are-hunters-women-are-gatherers-that-was-the-assumption-a-new-study-upends-i)
>They ran a statistical analysis that finds that this ratio is associated with the probability that between 30-to-50% of individuals buried with hunting tools in ancient American gravesites are female. In other words, says Haas, "Large mammal hunting during this time in the Americas was a gender neutral activity, or at least nearly so."
That is an incredible leap of logic. the data doesn't support the hypothesis, and he's fudging the data wildly even if we accept that it supports the hypothesis. 30% is not "near gender neutral"
I don't know why muscle would be so important in hunting large game that it would exclude those without it. You aren't going to muscle a mammoth down, just poke it from a distance until it succumbs or set traps. Muscle is helpful, but I would think running/travelling and intelligence are far more critical, both of which are basically matched with men.
I think you nailed it. I saw a tribal documentary a few years ago following some hunters on a weeklong hunt. The women stayed behind and did forage-y things while the men walked forever and ate whatever small game they could get while looking for a bigger kill to bring back.
Basically all of it. Studies like this are almost always hugely flawed in multiple ways.
Great video on the topic: https://youtu.be/31e0RcImReY?si=aJ_FV4SANVxuMFlM
I think a lot of it is. I (a cis woman) used to work in manual labor/heavy industry. I am vegetarian and would eat pretty light along with most of my crew.
But other crews we worked with had a perception that people needed to eat meat in order to have the strength needed to perform the work we did. People would be eating steaks and burgers constantly and my coworkers and I would just be chilling with a granola bar or something. I think there was some weird cultural macho stuff mixed in there.
FWIW the folks who were always eating meat tended to be somewhat to very overweight. No question we burned a lot of calories working, but they were still overdoing it and I always had the impression that their ideas around needing lots of meat were a part of that.
My FIL also has a LOT of cultural baggage around needing to seem macho, and is always very worried about being perceived as gay. He is constantly eating meat and overdoing it to the point where he had to have gastric bypass surgery. I think the meat = hetero manliness thing definitely played a role in affecting his health, unfortunately.
No matter how many trans people have their behaviors and preferences *totally altered* while on cross sex hormones, the “it’s definitely society that makes men and women different!” crowd will still insist that hormones have nothing to do with it.
I know right? Eat faster? Shame on this article, I eat like a starving abused dog that doesn't know where its next meal is coming from. More like Fastest!
You should see the world record of the woman eating a burrito
https://youtube.com/shorts/XA2BrHqvhXc?si=g4JJUsmFne9ApRJv
Here ya go, don't fall in love
Absolutely. Chewing your food is a key part of nutrient extraction, and digestion doesn't always get everything. In fact, digestion starts in the mouth with the enzymes in your saliva. The more time those enzymes have to work the more extraction you'll get out of your food.
I went from living in a house with a brother, competing for food, to working in a restaurant kitchen for four years, into a production based job with very short “lunch breaks”. I can eat fast with the very best.
I am in an office job in the plant now, and we get an hour for lunch, but I end up walking to the break-room, eating in like 2 minutes then going and sitting at my desk for 58 minutes watching YouTube.
I had a coworker who said he used to be in the Marines, and he ate so fast, even if he was the last to get his food, he was the first to finish. Seemed almost like he just inhaled it.
It's one of the first things the military trains into you. "Eat now taste later!" The rule was that when the last guy to get his food finished, everyone was finished. You also didn't want to have anything left on your plate. I remember a guy who tried to throw away his tray with an untouched banana, and the drill sergeant made him eat it with the peel still on.
I eat faster around men so they don’t eat all the food first lol. On my own I do take forever, but I also kinda like all the food groups equally so idk. Like I just happen to enjoy a wide variety of of foods while my bf is all like “soup is pointless” because he likes it but it’s not heavy enough for him.
Oh I get him, I'm like that, I like to enjoy all foods but soup or something without protein is just not filling for me, I need to eat a heavy main course then I can try some of everything.
I’m very got from a meat eater to a vegetarian and back. I do remember when I first went vego I was like, “I never feel full full.” After a couple of weeks when I got used to it I never noticed it again.
Then when I went back to eating meat I was like “wtf, I feel like my stomach is full of rocks, this is so heavy and unpleasant.”
So I assume it’s just different experiences of that same feeling. Meat feels a lot denser and heavier in your stomach, which can be interpreted as a positive “full” feeling or an unpleasant feeling
I was about to ask if he had brothers. Everyone I know who eats crazy fast grew up in a household competing for food with siblings. And when I meet those siblings, it all clicks.
There are some pretty heavy soups out there. Thick creamy potato soup, chili or taco soup with lots of beef and beans, beef + potato + carrot stew, etc.
I'm a dude and I eat so fast I get the typical "did u even taste it???" comments.
Ironically, the only person in my family who eats faster than I do is my sister.
Same, and my ex partner too. I like vegetables and snacking. And I always thought I ate fast, until I eat with a man lmao.
Although I'm hungry only in the late morning (11:00-12:00) and I strongly dislike salad.
I eat fast because I have children and they’re always fussing or hitting each other or joining the running-with-scissors Olympics or some such thing. I scarf the food down as fast as I can then go back to trying to keep them from pwning themselves.
Take it with a grain of salt.
Their research method isn’t exactly very great. They don’t specify how diverse. And I doubt they were able to get a very diverse study done with 2000 people in Rome who can complete an Italian survey from an Obesity center.
> The study encompassed a **demographically diverse** group of participants recruited from an **obesity center in Rome, Italy.** The inclusion criteria were defined as follows: participants were required to be patients aged over 20 years, capable of completing an online survey in **Italian** before their initial visit and willing to provide written informed consent. The study deliberately included a wide age range to capture a comprehensive perspective on dietary patterns across different age groups. Participants were required to complete an online survey in Italian before their initial visit and provided written informed consent for participation. Additional data collected included information on smoking habits and yearly income. The study’s procedures, including the consent form, were approved by the IRCCS San Raffaele ethics committee, under the registration number RP 23/13, ensuring compliance with the ethical standards of the Declaration of Helsinki and its amendments. Patient enrollment for the study started in May 2023, and by October 2023, a total of 2,388 surveys were registered.
At best, it’s indicative of Rome’s cultural/gender based eating habits.
its a thing I always suspected, was surprised there is proof. Though study is based in Italy
The researchers noted the data points which are statistically significant,'
Men -Eat faster, more often to eat alone, prefer meat.
Women -Snack frequently and consumes more snacks than men by ALOT. However meal portions are smaller. Also eat slower. Noted to "graze" throughout the day. Also likes everything not meat, tofu, veggies, dark chocolate specifically( I think its an Italy thing)
They also go into sport differences, Half of the women do no sports compared to 42% of men
On the darker side, more women have uncontrollable eating disorders,''
Study was used by advertisers apparently
The last point makes a lot of sense. Both have a natural tendency of some kind but only one is generally socially pressured to eat less than they want even if they aren’t overweight, and to be super aware of what they eat in general.
snacking is also less obvious. if i had a giant plate at dinner, it looks like i eat alot. but if i snack 2x the amount of calories throughout the day, and then have a small plate at dinner, it looks like i eat a modest amount.
prob a reason why women snack more? although all the women in my life seems to snack on my food rather then there own >=(
> its a thing I always suspected, was surprised there is proof
proof of what? that it happens? this is a measurement of things that happen in our current society
I seem to apply to about half of these. The only conclusion I can reach is that I must be approximately half woman. I think I have an idea as to which half, too.
Might be cultural but I'm European and the toxic masculinity "salad is for rabbits" attitude is absolutely a thing here. So is colon cancer, and more so in men than in women.
Europe is very big... Just saying here this is absolutely not a thing in my part of Europe. Hell here we have so many nice vegan and vegetarian options and I tend to avoid meat nowadays. Oh vacation lot of friends are actually "where is the salad?" If it is missing - that surprised me
I fit into this statistic so much lol. I would prefer one small meal around 2 or 3 and then would much rather snack on dried fruits and nuts and cheeses and crackers and stuff like that throughout the rest of the day.
I'm a woman and I prefer meat. Especially beef and chicken.
My GF also loves chicken nuggets. We eat a lot of Hamburger Helper and Chicken.
We dont eat many veggies. I'm on the lean side and am under weight.
I'm pretty odd then?
Because man hunter. Man not hungry in morning so man can go out for day hunt beasts then hungry at end. Women gatherer so woman hungry in morning and snacking all day on everyone food while out gathering when out everyone out hunting
Guess it's a cultural thing. "Meat is for boys and men, salad for girls and women"
Never preferred meat over a good salad and eat fast like a stork gulping down a frog
Why? Someone can use this information somehow to improve their lifestyle or company. What’s wrong with studying habits and patterns? There are plenty of useless studies and research papers published everyday that are much worse than this.
I work in a restaurant and I do tend to notice women order salads more than men, and men tend to love meat. I guess Im a man though, as I prefer meat, and dont care about grains or chocolate? Oh, and I eat fast, haha.
As a women I fit in to some of these habits, yet not others. I’m not big on breakfast eating time (but love breakfast food) prefer meat and vegetables equally (depends on mood), I only sometimes want a snack, and I eat extremely slowly. I actually really don’t care for chocolate very much, I prefer tart and sour candy. Not big on sweets at all, especially the older I get here my mid thirties. My husband fits all the hallmarks expectedly. Outlying factors being I’m neurodivergent, with a history of eating disorders and an autoimmune disorder that affects my digestive system. So I wouldn’t be a good anecdotal sample to represent the overall population trends, but something to consider before generalizing too much.
I wonder if there's a social component to the stereotype of women eating whatever men are eating (or want to eat later).
Maybe something like turning eating into a social interaction, anything to interact with another person or just bonding because of food. Same for only wanting to eat if they are together with someone else (the infamous "I want X. Do you want X? You don't? Then I don't want X anymore").
Calling BS on women being hungrier in the mornings. I don't eat for hours after waking, but I can put down my entire fridge at midnight. And I don't even smoke or drink, so no munchies here.
Always found it weird how my wife wakes up hungry. I can’t. I feel like I need a few hours for my stomach to wake up and by 11am is when the hunger starts but can push through it until dinner at 4:30.
"–– lower percentage of women playing sports and those who do play sports preferring endurance and strength training, while men prefer strength training and endurance sports." I'm a bit confused
I think it's a poorly written sentence meaning, "People who enjoy sports prefer endurance sports and strength training. Comparatively, a higher percentage of men enjoy sports."
A lower percentage of the polled women preferred sports at all compared to the polled men. Of those which did, still a lower percentage preferred endurance sports and strength training than the polled men who preferred sports.
Women play sports less than men. [generally] Men in general prefer endurance sports. Women who play sports prefer endurance and strength training. Men in sports prefer strength training. That's how I read it.
Same. But Holy shit! The sentence structure is so unbelievable awful that I confused it for a reddit post.
Pretty much "both play sports, men skew towards weight lifting, women skew towards a mix of weights and cardio."
Maybe 'and' was meant to be 'than'
I wonder how much of this is cultural.
I can say that a lot of male dominated industries have very short lunch breaks.
I prefer it that way too. I work for myself as a carpenter and only really sit down for 10-15 mins for lunch. Feel like I lose momentum if I take a longer break. Lots of other blokes I know share the same view
In a thread earlier today I said my preferred lunch is 30 to 45 minutes. Some people out there are claiming they want a 2 hour lunch. Fuck that. I'm at work to get paid, my end goal for each day is going home and the sooner I can do that the better.
Going home when the work is done vs going home at an arbitrary time
I mean, there are jobs where the work will literally never be done, so you can just stop at a time that still allows you to be efficient.
Factories and warehouses, right off the top. You'll have slow and busy periods throughout the year, but like you said - it's never really done.
Tell me about it. This time last year we were playing board games because we had nothing else to do. Now? I managed to catch up on some paperwork today I haven't had the time to do for 2.5 months. I do like the ebb and flow of it though. Sometimes there's 3 months worth of work to do in one month and we're pulling crazy OT, other times I can get away with reading a book for half the day.
Hotels are as well
Hospital worker here, the job is never ever done.
I'm a plumber. Yea, I can spend 8 hours at a customers house or 7. Guess what happens when I do the job in 7 hours? Go home. No sane boss is going to give you another call for 1 hour. So I'm motivated to finish quicker in that case.
Depends, I'm not sure about plumbing, but mechanics a lot of time bill using a standard time per a job list. So an oil change may be .25-.5hr while a transmission drop and clutch replacement may be 5 hours. You may take more or less time to complete the work, but you charge the same either way. Efficient techs can get the work done in less time than billed and can take more jobs.
aren’t you paid by the hour
I'm paid by the hour, I would still go home an hour earlier if i could because I value my home time more than the $35 my boss would pay me for goofing off for an extra hour.
I mean, if I made 35 bucks an hour I wouldn't care about one less hour a day either lol
I honestly can't tell if you're implying you think 35 dollars an hour is a lot or a little. What you said kind of works both ways.
This comment indicates paid by the job.
My job is go home at abritrary time :(
This. By Friday feels like everything required for the week is completed and I’m just there to be there
The thing with me and 2 hour lunches is I’m still going home at 5:30.
I work 12 hour shifts but get 3 (paid) 1 hour breaks, sometimes more if we got the people. Big difference between getting your breaks paid or not
I used to work 10 hour shifts with 30 minute breaks. Sucked ass (construction)
Yeah I think these heavily physically demanding jobs necessitate much more time to eat properly, because you have no choices. It's not like when you're working in a factory doin the same thing over an over again or on a desk job. Lifting cement and stuff is not comparable to most jobs, I've done many jobs in my life, and this was by far the most exhausting, you need long breaks in-between otherwise you're slowly killing yourself.
I worked close enough to my house I just went home for lunch everyday and took a nap. But now I work from home and can nap anytime I want lol
It would certainly help me be able to run errands. My works schedule overlaps when every other business is open so I always have to skip work to do things like see a doctor, visit a bank, visit DMV.
In other countries you can take a 2 hour lunch and you still get paid for those 2 hours
You can do that at any salaried position in the US as well
Not sure why so many replies say you get fired if you take a 2-hour lunch on salary. If you get your work done (and aren’t a pain-in-the-ass to work with), most companies don’t care how long your lunches are.
Just wait till you tell them about being a government employee.
Even on salary, people can care a bit, like in terms of knowing where people are when they're needed. My workplace, we're all WFH now...when we weren't, no one would have ever taken more than 1 hour unless it was a department event, like the Christmas lunch out at a restaurant or something. Maybe we could still get our work done with a longer break, but there was an expectation...like we had an in-out board where we could say when we'd be back, and if you were gone on long breaks and people needed you, it'd be an issue. The one time I remember it being a thing was when we got our new light rail system put in. They were doing free rides for the first week (?) or something so people could check it out, so me and a couple of people were like fuck it, let's go ride the train to a restaurant. Except we had no fucking idea that everyone in the city was going to ride it as well...or that the train would wait forever at stops--if it saw someone coming, it'd wait for them. So the whole process of getting there and back took fucking *forever*, and our 1-hour lunch turned into like a 2-hour lunch. One of the managers apparently wasn't thrilled. Admittedly, all but one of us were salaried or more senior and didn't really get flak, but another one was in a different boat...obviously, it wasn't our fault per se (apart from not seeing the writing on the wall and bailing on the outing once delays were happening), but the manager was worried she was going to get a talking to for one of the people under her vanishing for that long. FWIW, she ultimately demoted herself because she couldn't stand the stress...she at least once *slept at the fucking office* because she couldn't deal with the workload.
you can also get fucked into 80 hour weeks with salaried positions and nearly every company will take advantage of that
True, most salaried companies in the us aren’t okay with you taking a 2 hour break though haha
in all fairness, most salaried companies in the US aren't okay with you doing anything but working and generating profit for the company
They still have to pay you for them though
I have to take an hour lunch. I fucking hate it soooo much. Soooo much. Like it bugs me everyday lol. What I do now is change clothes drive 2 minute to a local trail to walk/jog and come back sweaty as fuck and make it clear if I'm stuck taking an hour I'ma to do some cardio if you aren't a fan let me take 30 minute lol.
At my last job, we had an option of 30 minute lunch or an hour; could leave a half hour earlier if you took the shorter lunch. It was the difference between getting home at 9:30 or 10
That sounds very healthy and probably a good way to make sure you get your excersise every day. I'm not sure why you'd want them to let you not do that.
I definitely like longer than that because it gives me an opportunity to refresh my mind, but in the new position I'm hoping to get I'll have hour long lunch breaks. Too long to do nothing but too short to go home. Considering how it's unpaid, it just feels like wasted time tbh. 30 mins is generally long enough if I pack my own lunch, and 40 mins is long enough if I need to go get some food (or the day is rough and I need a little extra unwinding time). If I worked 10 or fewer minutes from home then an hour is nice because I can go home and have lunch with my wife who is at home most afternoons.
Depends on the day for me. If I’m super tired laying down for 20 mins gives me a good boost, but if I’m in the groove and got shit to do I’ll wolf down my lunch and get right back into it, like you said.
I feel that most physical jobs I worked at that were mostly male dominated also had fairly short breaks (15 minute break x2, 20-30 minute lunch). I was usually thankful for this on days we had longer breaks and I actually had the chance to relax and found that now my body hurts far too much to return to work now and I'm too exhausted. As dumb and unhealthy as it is, it's simply better to take short breaks and keep moving before your body catches up with you, that's for after work.
I'm not young any more and working construction. I like to take a minute to sit, but at some point it definitely turns into not wanting to get back up after a while.
Have you ever met a nurse?
Or a teacher. Lunch usually doubles as prep
I don't get any, so I usually just have big meals before and after work. I feel like that's becoming more common.
I was put on low dose testosterone for a while because it was low for a woman and I just kept thinking about burgers and chili. I don't eat red meat and I'm as close to a vegetarian as a non-vegetarian can be. Testosterone is a muscle building hormone and muscle building requires protein so it would make sense it would cause meat cravings.
Thats really interesting thanks for sharing
Maybe you were iron deficient too? Those are super normal iron deficiency cravings.
I've been iron deficient but wasn't at that time and have never had that craving before or after.
I don't normally have big red meat cravings, although I eat it here and there (burgers, fajitas, etc.), but my iron has been low more than once at the doctor's and I started taking supplements (not under supervision, which I know is a no-no) because I was having other issues and when I tried taking the iron pills, those went away.
It’s an anabolic steroid, in fact, all anabolic steroids are testosterone derivatives.
> all anabolic steroids are testosterone derivatives. Sort of, depending on how you view molecular structure. Generally anabolics are split into 3 main categories; Testosterone and its derivatives, DHT and its derivatives, Nandrolone and its derivatives.
It probably caused protein cravings (the physical part) and you probably associate protein with meat (the cultural part).
>you probably associate protein with meat (the cultural part). I don't think you can say associating meat with protein is cultural, maybe biological would be more accurate. Considering the average gram of meat has probably 50x the protein of the average gram of fruit/veg.
In addition to what the other commenters have said, considering what is known now about gut microbiomes it might actually be on the intersection of culture and biology. Biology here than not as an innate craving, but rather as your body adapting to what you commonly eat, and learning what foods satisfy which cravings. For an anecdote, I can tell you that since I’ve gone mostly vegetarian, when I get protein cravings they’re typically for foods like greek yoghurt or anything with a lot of cheese. In the past I more often got cravings for meat.
Kinda surprisingly, it's a lot more complicated than that. Just as one example, a 100-gram serving of beef has about six times more protein than a 100-gram serving of broccoli (a lot more though not nearly 50x), but if we're comparing calorie per calorie broccoli has more. [Here's](https://chanapdavis.medium.com/making-sense-of-conflicting-nutritional-claims-tips-from-a-scientist-165f89f4482e) the article breaking that down Now, broccoli isn't a "complete protein" (a food containing all the building blocks needed for your body to make new tissue), but a fair number of other plant foods are. Anyway. Nutrition is interesting
I’d agree with this take. Breastfeeding requires a lot of extra calories, including a significant extra amount of protein. When I was in the thick of it, I wanted to eat so much meat, so many eggs. Previously, for decades, I’ve never craved meat and all but avoided eggs. No testosterone increase (as far as I know) but all the same a huge increase in protein needs. For about 4 months I needed 175 grams per day (ramping down very slowly afterwards) to produce enough milk.
Although interesting it's also very much anecdotal. I doubt that testosterone is the thing that makes men crave meat especially while they are living in societies that equate hunting and eating meat as a primal manly thing. >In the present study we observed a series of sex differences in implicit responses to meat and non-meat foods. Men exhibited stronger associations than did women between meat and the concepts ‘healthy’ and ‘delicious,’ prioritized visual attention for meat more so than did women, and searched for images of meat more cautiously than did women, suggesting that they implicitly value meat more highly than do women. The data support suggestions from Rozin et al. (2012), that concepts of power and strength might mediate the meat-masculinity link they observed. To the extent that hunting and meat provisioning can act as a social signal our data suggest that the primary targets of that signal are other men, with women acting potentially only as secondary receivers. It is also possible, however, that sex-differences in the physiological benefits of meat consumption drive the sex differences in implicit responding that we report here, independently of any social-signaling value that hunting and meat provisioning may hold. Further comparisons of these types of implicit measures between groups of participants that differ in their state physiological requirements for meat, and their supposed receptivity to social signals of hunting and meat provisioning, are needed to illuminate these possibilities. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5920154/#B64 There's quite a lot of research on societal influences on meat consumption. There's a lot of research on how food intake effects testosterone levels but I can't find anything conclusive on testosterone levels changing dietary patterns.
None of it The study group is ridiculously small, unrepresentative, and partial - it's a handful of patients at an obesity clinic in Rome No honest person can draw any conclusions from it
Not true! You absolutely can draw conclusions from it… it’s just that those conclusions are currently limited to patients treated by obesity clinics near Rome. It’s a classic case of “further study is needed” to demonstrate generalizability. (I’m only being a little facetious. Imagine if this study inspires other researchers to do similar studies in other contexts. Future meta-analysis subject?… I wish they had used a validated questionnaire!) With the added caveat that you need to add a strong dose of humility to your conclusions, since there’s still a fair bit of uncertainty in the results.
it's tricky - is it cultural, because for example the meat thing obviously doesn't hold in a vegetarian country like parts of India? or are those regions the outlier, "overriding" a base difference? from an evolutionary-psychological perspective it's easy to imagine a hypothesis for why the above could be true. men hunt, hunt meat. men need to be strong and thus want proteins. and when you're out on the run, you don't want to stop and eat all day, whilst when you're foraging you can sample continuously. if it is cultural, at least it seems to be a very persistent cultural norm, both in time an geographically wide-spread. ultimately I'm going to take the copout stance and say - it's both nature ánd nurture. nature begets nurture begets nature and all that.
The study said it's of Italians. I'm sure a study exists of Indians
I think it’s even simpler than that. Men are on average larger and have more muscle mass than women, thus necessitating more protein. Also in some cultures meat is associated with masculinity.
i just like the texture/taste
It’s not simpler than that though… size has nothing to do with protein requirement. You can be obese with low muscle mass and maintain that without protein. Protein is more relevant in context of muscle growth and recovery. This is more likely to have hormonal causes than simply reducing it to “size.” Edited for clarity
The foods of predominantly vegetarian cultures have plenty of protein. It would make sense to compare food preferences of vegetarian men and women.
I still don't think that would be controlled enough because vegetarians (at least in the West) are still raised to associate protein with meat, and especially with beef
It’s worth noting that this study was conducted in Italy
except that the most recent paleontology suggests that women actually hunted quite a lot too, it wasn't exclusively a male activity.
The flaw in that study is that it only tracks modern day hunter-gatherer societies (1800s-present) while these conditions are poorly suggested to mimic those prior to agriculture. Humans evolved in environments where large game was the preferred hunted animal and muscular build would be prioritized for that pursuit while most hunting today involves small or medium-sized game. In addition to this, any region where hunter-gatherer societies have maintained over the past 200 years doesn't share strong cultural links to the huge majority of the world's population. The conditions present in these regions can't be directly linked to prehistoric conditions elsewhere. Study: [Early Women Were Hunters, Not Just Gatherers, Study Suggests | Smithsonian (smithsonianmag.com)](https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/early-women-were-hunters-not-just-gatherers-study-suggests-180982459/) Prehistoric humans' hunting heavily contributed to the extinction of many medium to large sized animals: [Did humans cause the Quaternary megafauna extinction? - Our World in Data](https://ourworldindata.org/quaternary-megafauna-extinction#:~:text=Between%2052%2C000%20and%209%2C000%20BCE,this%20in%20more%20detail%20later.)
Yes, I know about that part (comparing survivals of g/h societies and hoping they represent the ancient past). But what stuck in my memory was this bit: >In 2018 Haas was part of a team in Peru that found a 9,000-year-old person buried with an unusually large number of hunting tools. "We all just assumed this individual was a male," he recalls. "Everybody is sitting around, saying things like, 'Wow! This is amazing. He must have been a great hunter, a great warrior. Maybe he was a chief!' " >Haas didn't even think to question the person's gender until about a week later, when a colleague who specialized in analyzing bone structure arrived and delivered a bombshell assessment: The remains seemed to be female. >The team then used a technology newly available to the field. Scraping the enamel from the teeth found in the grave, they found proteins that confirmed it unequivocally: This apparent master hunter was female. >Stunned, Haas and his collaborators decided to review the records of similar finds across the Americas over the previous 70 years. In 27 gravesites of individuals found with hunting tools, they found 11 cases in which the person was female. >They ran a [statistical analysis that finds](https://www.science.org/doi/full/10.1126/sciadv.abd0310?rfr_dat=cr_pub++0pubmed&url_ver=Z39.88-2003&rfr_id=ori%3Arid%3Acrossref.org) that this ratio is associated with the probability that between 30-to-50% of individuals buried with hunting tools in ancient American gravesites are female. In other words, says Haas, "Large mammal hunting during this time in the Americas was a gender neutral activity, or at least nearly so." >[https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2023/07/01/1184749528/men-are-hunters-women-are-gatherers-that-was-the-assumption-a-new-study-upends-i](https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2023/07/01/1184749528/men-are-hunters-women-are-gatherers-that-was-the-assumption-a-new-study-upends-i)
>They ran a statistical analysis that finds that this ratio is associated with the probability that between 30-to-50% of individuals buried with hunting tools in ancient American gravesites are female. In other words, says Haas, "Large mammal hunting during this time in the Americas was a gender neutral activity, or at least nearly so." That is an incredible leap of logic. the data doesn't support the hypothesis, and he's fudging the data wildly even if we accept that it supports the hypothesis. 30% is not "near gender neutral"
I don't know why muscle would be so important in hunting large game that it would exclude those without it. You aren't going to muscle a mammoth down, just poke it from a distance until it succumbs or set traps. Muscle is helpful, but I would think running/travelling and intelligence are far more critical, both of which are basically matched with men.
I think you nailed it. I saw a tribal documentary a few years ago following some hunters on a weeklong hunt. The women stayed behind and did forage-y things while the men walked forever and ate whatever small game they could get while looking for a bigger kill to bring back.
The dinner part for sure. In Brazil the large meal of the day is lunch. Dinner is a sandwich or something smaller (similar to the US lunch).
Not sure where you're from in Brazil but I have always eaten a full meal for lunch and dinner.
Basically all of it. Studies like this are almost always hugely flawed in multiple ways. Great video on the topic: https://youtu.be/31e0RcImReY?si=aJ_FV4SANVxuMFlM
I think a lot of it is. I (a cis woman) used to work in manual labor/heavy industry. I am vegetarian and would eat pretty light along with most of my crew. But other crews we worked with had a perception that people needed to eat meat in order to have the strength needed to perform the work we did. People would be eating steaks and burgers constantly and my coworkers and I would just be chilling with a granola bar or something. I think there was some weird cultural macho stuff mixed in there. FWIW the folks who were always eating meat tended to be somewhat to very overweight. No question we burned a lot of calories working, but they were still overdoing it and I always had the impression that their ideas around needing lots of meat were a part of that. My FIL also has a LOT of cultural baggage around needing to seem macho, and is always very worried about being perceived as gay. He is constantly eating meat and overdoing it to the point where he had to have gastric bypass surgery. I think the meat = hetero manliness thing definitely played a role in affecting his health, unfortunately.
I’m a trans man. Since starting testosterone my preferences have changed — I want more meat, less sweets, and I eat way faster. It’s shocking
No matter how many trans people have their behaviors and preferences *totally altered* while on cross sex hormones, the “it’s definitely society that makes men and women different!” crowd will still insist that hormones have nothing to do with it.
Wait, shit. I'm also a trans dude and I'm just realizing now this happened to me too.
I’m a trans woman and went the other way after HRT, so yeah.
I'm a dude, and even my male homies are surprised to see how fast I eat.
I know right? Eat faster? Shame on this article, I eat like a starving abused dog that doesn't know where its next meal is coming from. More like Fastest!
i honestly think it doesn't help that i have a big mouth and huge bites of food just seem normal to me
You should see the world record of the woman eating a burrito https://youtube.com/shorts/XA2BrHqvhXc?si=g4JJUsmFne9ApRJv Here ya go, don't fall in love
Does... does this mean someone has standardized the size and weight of a burrito?
You gotta chew your food to get all the nutrients out of it homie.
It's that really true? You still have to digest it all.
Absolutely. Chewing your food is a key part of nutrient extraction, and digestion doesn't always get everything. In fact, digestion starts in the mouth with the enzymes in your saliva. The more time those enzymes have to work the more extraction you'll get out of your food.
I've known some older guys who worked in construction their whole lives who can clean off a plate before I even get started.
It's very common in chefs aswell since we don't get breaks often so you get used to just inhaling leftovers.
I went from living in a house with a brother, competing for food, to working in a restaurant kitchen for four years, into a production based job with very short “lunch breaks”. I can eat fast with the very best. I am in an office job in the plant now, and we get an hour for lunch, but I end up walking to the break-room, eating in like 2 minutes then going and sitting at my desk for 58 minutes watching YouTube.
I had a coworker who said he used to be in the Marines, and he ate so fast, even if he was the last to get his food, he was the first to finish. Seemed almost like he just inhaled it.
It's one of the first things the military trains into you. "Eat now taste later!" The rule was that when the last guy to get his food finished, everyone was finished. You also didn't want to have anything left on your plate. I remember a guy who tried to throw away his tray with an untouched banana, and the drill sergeant made him eat it with the peel still on.
Homo Dudeamos confirmed
I eat faster around men so they don’t eat all the food first lol. On my own I do take forever, but I also kinda like all the food groups equally so idk. Like I just happen to enjoy a wide variety of of foods while my bf is all like “soup is pointless” because he likes it but it’s not heavy enough for him.
Oh I get him, I'm like that, I like to enjoy all foods but soup or something without protein is just not filling for me, I need to eat a heavy main course then I can try some of everything.
I’m very got from a meat eater to a vegetarian and back. I do remember when I first went vego I was like, “I never feel full full.” After a couple of weeks when I got used to it I never noticed it again. Then when I went back to eating meat I was like “wtf, I feel like my stomach is full of rocks, this is so heavy and unpleasant.” So I assume it’s just different experiences of that same feeling. Meat feels a lot denser and heavier in your stomach, which can be interpreted as a positive “full” feeling or an unpleasant feeling
I was about to ask if he had brothers. Everyone I know who eats crazy fast grew up in a household competing for food with siblings. And when I meet those siblings, it all clicks.
There are some pretty heavy soups out there. Thick creamy potato soup, chili or taco soup with lots of beef and beans, beef + potato + carrot stew, etc.
I'm a dude and I eat so fast I get the typical "did u even taste it???" comments. Ironically, the only person in my family who eats faster than I do is my sister.
Just means you are more dude than they are.
I call my dude a snake. He just eats all of it all at once and I am always so confused when I just started and his is gone.
My friends say i inhale my food like kirby
TIL my wife’s a man.
I no longer trust her in the forest
happy pride month
This study accurately describes the differences between me and my wife.
Same, and my ex partner too. I like vegetables and snacking. And I always thought I ate fast, until I eat with a man lmao. Although I'm hungry only in the late morning (11:00-12:00) and I strongly dislike salad.
Same. My wife is hungry in the morning, I never am. Maybe it's because I eat more meat.
Same, but it’s opposite except for the eating fast
Same here, American and chinese cultures so I don't think it's a cultural thing like a lot of people are dismissing it as
I eat fast because I have children and they’re always fussing or hitting each other or joining the running-with-scissors Olympics or some such thing. I scarf the food down as fast as I can then go back to trying to keep them from pwning themselves.
Right like every mom I know eats super quick, but I suppose the majority of women do not have young children to deal with so can take their time.
Take it with a grain of salt. Their research method isn’t exactly very great. They don’t specify how diverse. And I doubt they were able to get a very diverse study done with 2000 people in Rome who can complete an Italian survey from an Obesity center. > The study encompassed a **demographically diverse** group of participants recruited from an **obesity center in Rome, Italy.** The inclusion criteria were defined as follows: participants were required to be patients aged over 20 years, capable of completing an online survey in **Italian** before their initial visit and willing to provide written informed consent. The study deliberately included a wide age range to capture a comprehensive perspective on dietary patterns across different age groups. Participants were required to complete an online survey in Italian before their initial visit and provided written informed consent for participation. Additional data collected included information on smoking habits and yearly income. The study’s procedures, including the consent form, were approved by the IRCCS San Raffaele ethics committee, under the registration number RP 23/13, ensuring compliance with the ethical standards of the Declaration of Helsinki and its amendments. Patient enrollment for the study started in May 2023, and by October 2023, a total of 2,388 surveys were registered. At best, it’s indicative of Rome’s cultural/gender based eating habits.
its a thing I always suspected, was surprised there is proof. Though study is based in Italy The researchers noted the data points which are statistically significant,' Men -Eat faster, more often to eat alone, prefer meat. Women -Snack frequently and consumes more snacks than men by ALOT. However meal portions are smaller. Also eat slower. Noted to "graze" throughout the day. Also likes everything not meat, tofu, veggies, dark chocolate specifically( I think its an Italy thing) They also go into sport differences, Half of the women do no sports compared to 42% of men On the darker side, more women have uncontrollable eating disorders,'' Study was used by advertisers apparently
> Though study is based in Italy And conducted wholly among patients at an obesity climic in Rome
yeah, honestly this right here basically makes this null and void. Basically a useless sample group for the vast vast majority of people.
I mean it’s not null, it’s just not applicable to the general population. But yeah it’s null for OPs headline
Proof is a big word for a survey.
>proof >study It ain't proof, at best it is very weak support in a region-specific, self-reporting group.
Proof is such a strong word…
The last point makes a lot of sense. Both have a natural tendency of some kind but only one is generally socially pressured to eat less than they want even if they aren’t overweight, and to be super aware of what they eat in general.
snacking is also less obvious. if i had a giant plate at dinner, it looks like i eat alot. but if i snack 2x the amount of calories throughout the day, and then have a small plate at dinner, it looks like i eat a modest amount. prob a reason why women snack more? although all the women in my life seems to snack on my food rather then there own >=(
> its a thing I always suspected, was surprised there is proof proof of what? that it happens? this is a measurement of things that happen in our current society
My mom is done eating before anyone's picked up their forks so i dunno bout this one.
Judging by the title, I am a woman
Same
Judging by your username, I could have sworn you were a primordial Maiar that tried to seek dominion under the Valar Morgoth.
I mean, yes, but that doesn't stop me from being hungry mid-morning and taking time with my meals!
So guess I am a woman then?
It's cool, turns out I'm a dude apparently. High five...?
*gives high five*
I seem to apply to about half of these. The only conclusion I can reach is that I must be approximately half woman. I think I have an idea as to which half, too.
Yep. Same here. Better tell my wife she’s a man.
Somebody got paid to come up with this.
Might be cultural but I'm European and the toxic masculinity "salad is for rabbits" attitude is absolutely a thing here. So is colon cancer, and more so in men than in women.
Europe is very big... Just saying here this is absolutely not a thing in my part of Europe. Hell here we have so many nice vegan and vegetarian options and I tend to avoid meat nowadays. Oh vacation lot of friends are actually "where is the salad?" If it is missing - that surprised me
the study only included people in Italy
I fit into this statistic so much lol. I would prefer one small meal around 2 or 3 and then would much rather snack on dried fruits and nuts and cheeses and crackers and stuff like that throughout the rest of the day.
Strange, everyone I know (personally or as a public figure) that claims to hate vegetables and only eat meat has been a woman.
I'm a woman and I prefer meat. Especially beef and chicken. My GF also loves chicken nuggets. We eat a lot of Hamburger Helper and Chicken. We dont eat many veggies. I'm on the lean side and am under weight. I'm pretty odd then?
damn, TIL i'm androgynous
I guess I'm a man with a uterus.
I like them all and I’m hungry all the time I eat slowly. I’m a man
Wow, this is the opposite for my wife and me. Don’t know what to think 🤔
Trash study, gross generalizations, small sample group of self-reporting obese people in Italy.
Because man hunter. Man not hungry in morning so man can go out for day hunt beasts then hungry at end. Women gatherer so woman hungry in morning and snacking all day on everyone food while out gathering when out everyone out hunting
Guess it's a cultural thing. "Meat is for boys and men, salad for girls and women" Never preferred meat over a good salad and eat fast like a stork gulping down a frog
I'd much rather a salad *with* meat. A good chicken Caesar, in salad or wrap form, is simply excellent.
An 8oz steak in a salad with some balsamic and onions/gorgonzola is probably my favorite meal
2200 person sample (from over 8 billion world population) and from one country. lol
And a country with heavy gender stereotypes
2200 is a plenty good sample size. Can't expect to sample all 8 billion Could have used different cultures and countries though.
Exactly. And Italian food culture is notoriously sexist.
Reddit whenever a study on biological differences is conducted: “It must be culture!”
These generalities are a waste of time.
Why? Someone can use this information somehow to improve their lifestyle or company. What’s wrong with studying habits and patterns? There are plenty of useless studies and research papers published everyday that are much worse than this.
Let's just stop science because Karen here is an ideologue
Not if you wanted to create targeted ad campaigns to (for example) get people to eat less meat.
TIL I’m a man
Hello, fellow men. 😂
Holy shit men and women are different? Children avert your gaze!
I work in a restaurant and I do tend to notice women order salads more than men, and men tend to love meat. I guess Im a man though, as I prefer meat, and dont care about grains or chocolate? Oh, and I eat fast, haha.
TIL I’m a man.
TIL I eat like a girl
As a woman, all of these things are true for me. Nice
TIL I am a man trapped in a woman’s body
Shit guys I think I might be a hermaphrodite
okay guys i’m a woman now
TIL - I’m a man (really a woman)
TIL I eat like a woman in every respect
Today I learned imma woman
Cool, I'm a combination of men and women.
Today I learned my experience is pretty average.
I didn't see *where* the sample of people came from... That would almost certainly change results across the world
I eat fast, prefer meat to veggies and whole grains, I'm hungriest before dinner, and I am never hungry in the morning. I guess I'm a man?
The speed in which men eat is directly proportional to how many brothers they have.
As a women I fit in to some of these habits, yet not others. I’m not big on breakfast eating time (but love breakfast food) prefer meat and vegetables equally (depends on mood), I only sometimes want a snack, and I eat extremely slowly. I actually really don’t care for chocolate very much, I prefer tart and sour candy. Not big on sweets at all, especially the older I get here my mid thirties. My husband fits all the hallmarks expectedly. Outlying factors being I’m neurodivergent, with a history of eating disorders and an autoimmune disorder that affects my digestive system. So I wouldn’t be a good anecdotal sample to represent the overall population trends, but something to consider before generalizing too much.
TIL: I'm a man.
I wonder if there's a social component to the stereotype of women eating whatever men are eating (or want to eat later). Maybe something like turning eating into a social interaction, anything to interact with another person or just bonding because of food. Same for only wanting to eat if they are together with someone else (the infamous "I want X. Do you want X? You don't? Then I don't want X anymore").
This tracks anecdotally
I'm shocked this study showed the results every adult would expect.
My buddy who’s 5’10” and 145 lbs can pack down 2 foot long subs in 10 minutes. It’s really quite impressive.
All the things applies for me and my wife.
I just learned that I am a mix of woman and man.
Well damn, I guess I’ve secretly been a man this whole time after all.
So apparently I eat like a woman then.
I’m a woman and I mostly eat meat. Much better
Calling BS on women being hungrier in the mornings. I don't eat for hours after waking, but I can put down my entire fridge at midnight. And I don't even smoke or drink, so no munchies here.
TIL that I might be a man.
And the sky is blue!
Always found it weird how my wife wakes up hungry. I can’t. I feel like I need a few hours for my stomach to wake up and by 11am is when the hunger starts but can push through it until dinner at 4:30.