Maurice Chevalier said, "Vive la difference" and most people agree. Yet the greatest mystery about the differences between the sexes is that most businesses market to them so poorly. The information about their differences abounds: how they conceptualize and internalize information differently (i.e., how they "think" differently), how they express themselves differently, how they make and keep friends differently, the list is next to endless.
For example, tell a male a joke -- even a harmless joke -- before a relationship has been agreed to and that joke will be interpreted as either a sign of weakness or as a warning that the joke teller is dangerous.
On the other hand, a male can see a group of physically homogeneous males -- males of the same body size, type, color, etc. -- and will feel threatened because they might not fit in. Even if they do fit in, they will demonstrate a need to determine their hierarchical position in that group.
These two elements can be used to attract and keep men on websites in some very obvious ways:
Text-based jokes should be reserved for sites that are clearly defined as humor sites. The exceptions are sites that require some kind of signup (an assignment of relationship or an agreement defining a relationship). These sites can quite easily show one face to the casual observer and a completely different face to those who've accepted some kind of defined relationship. Think of this as whether or not you're allowed entrance into the "club." NextStage refers to such things as: "You have to be this tall to get on this ride".
Visual jokes (slapstick especially) can appear before a relationship is clearly defined, provided the humor is target-specific or in cartoon form. The latter must be cartoonish in the sense of classic Warner Bros. or Disney. Make the characters too human or too real and you've torn the veil. Also, visual humor is acceptable if it is so commonly understood within a given demographic that the joke, its predicates and antecedents, are lingua franca with the given audience.
Portraying groups of men. Males are more likely to be drawn into conversation with a heterogeneous group of unknowns than with a homogeneous group of unknowns, unless the homogeneous group is of the same demographic as the target male. This research element is one of the clear taxonomies that maps one-to-one between physical- and cyber-realities and has been documented as far back as the Peloponnesian War.
In other words, males are more likely to engage with an unknown site's offerings if the images on the site are of a mixed (age, physical characteristics, ethnic origin, etc.) group of males rather than a single male demographic.
As the male's time on a site increases (either in a single session spanning several hours or in several sessions over several days or weeks) the introduction of a demographically homogeneous group matching the male's demographic will increase their comfort level and willingness to interact on the site.
However, one big exception is if a site's target audience is a specific demographic: for example, 35-55-year-old white males. In that case, heterogeneity can be shown by differences in height, weight, dress, ornamentation, accessories, facial tonus and features, skin color shadings, etc. Note that these same elements can be used in any cultural or ethnic setting to demonstrate heterogeneity. Homogeneity can be demonstrated by having the same height, weight, build, facial tonus and features, skin color shadings, ornamentation, dress, accessories, as well.
Here is an excellent example of heterogeneous males demonstrating continuity and acceptance: different clothing, hairstyles, facial features and body postures:
In contrast, this example is not as good:
The clothing styles are too similar and there isn't enough difference in hairstyles to create a true sense of comfort for the initiate male. However, if a site were to use this picture after someone has "signed up" and for a more obvious demographic -- getting into the use of homogeneity upon acceptance into a group -- it would be a killer.
No comments:
Post a Comment