|
Handwriting and gender cues
Contents
Introduction
A reader recently asked me:
I want a more feminine handwriting. Just like voices, one can usually take a quick glance at a letter and make a pretty good guess as to what gender the writer was. But I just can't put my finger on what it is that makes a handwriting "feminine" or "masculine". What can I do?
As with other forms of gendered expression, handwriting involves stereotypes of what society deems “masculine” or “feminine.” As with voice, the best way to adjust your handwriting is to look at handwriting examples of women who are your age, ethnic background, education level, etc. and try to emulate them. In my own case, I emulated two girls I sat next to in band in middle school. They would write notes to their friends with a very precise, rounded, loopy style that was quite artistic, and they would always make a giant S at the bottom that said “sorry so sloppy,” even though the writing was impressively neat. They also practiced their own signatures a lot, and I would do that at home. However, I am very impatient with longhand writing, as I tend to think faster than I can write. When I am dashing off a note, I usually print instead of writing in cursive, because I find it easier to make this look "feminine" when writing quickly. I also emulated my mother’s handwriting. She has these great flowing flourishes on her letters that I used to practice.
Though computers and wireless technology have greatly reduced the amount of longhand writing most people do, it is a great skill to have for writing cards and notes. It's becoming a lost art, but if you take the time to work on this, it can make a huge difference in how your handwriting is perceived by others.
A note on “graphology” and other pseudoscience
Though there is a scientific field of inquiry that looks into forensic aspects of handwriting analysis, there is also a pseudoscientific field of “graphology,” or personality analysis based on handwriting. I am a member of QuackWatch, and you can read an affiliate’s discussion of graphology there:
http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/Tests/grapho.html
I also recommend Skeptic’s dictionary:
http://skepdic.com/graphol.html
Some scholars have taken a more scientific approach to discerning individual differences in recent years (Beech 2005, Burr 2002). Generally speaking, most studies have shown better than chance success at guessing the gender of a writer by handwriting, with the average success rate at about two out of three.
Academic charlatans (i.e. certain evolutionary psychologists) will try to reify sex and gender through findings like these, but it is too early to tell whether handwriting differences reflect biological differences between people, or whether the differences in handwriting reflect society's expectations for gender roles. The Beech and Macintosh article mentioned above is the best summary to date regarding biological differences. Burr suspects that boys and girls learn early in life how their culture expects them to look and act, even in their handwriting. Several studies have found that the writing of identical twins, while strikingly similar, is nonetheless distinguishable (Newman 1937, Wanscher 1943, Beacom 1960, Gamble 1980). Given that most people can alter their handwriting to appear different with practice, this skill seems largely learned and based on social constructs.
Basic concepts
We will talk about several kinds of writing in longhand, including printing, cursive, and block capitals.
There are also a few terms you'll need to know:
baseline: the line on which most letters rest. Picture a line under the letters in this sentence-- that's the baseline.
x-height: also called the midpoint, it's the height of all letters that are not ascenders and descenders. On the paper kids use for learning handwriting, there is a dotted line at the x-height. Letters that do not go above the x-height are: a c e m n o r s u v w x z
ascender: a letter that goes above the x-height. Letters that go above the x-height are: b d f h k l t and all CAPITAL LETTERS.
ascender line: the line that ascenders go up to. If there were a line across the top of b d f h k l, that would be the ascender line.
descender: a letter that goes below the baseline. Letters that go below the baseline are: g j p q y. The part that goes below the baseline is called the tail.
descender line: the line that descenders go down to. If there were a line across the bottom of g j p q y, that would be the descender line.
upstroke: any movement upward with the writing instrument.
downstroke: any movement downward with the writing instrument.
stem: the vertical line in a letter: B b D d F f g H h I i J j K k L l M m N n P p R r T t u Y
crossbar: the horizontal line through these letters: A E F f G H T t
counter: the white space inside a closed letter like these: A a B b D d e g O o P p Q q
flourish: an ornamental stroke, also called a swash.
hook: a tiny flourish, usually on the end of a letter.
slant: to left or right in comparison to vertical angle, also called gradient.
weight: the thickness of the lines.
Handwriting is affected by several physiological factors, including handedness and age. Children and older people will demonstrate differences in fine motor skills compared to healthy adults. Children's letters tend to be more clumsy until they master the skill, and older people often develop muscle or joint issues that can make their writing look trembly.
Experts who specialize in forensic examination of handwriting have developed a number of methodologies that can assist in making better-than-chance guesses about a writer’s demographic characteristics, including sex. For instance, Huber and Headrick (1999) have identified 21 discriminating elements in handwriting. I will discuss many of these below.
Examining the variant shape of each letter (called an allograph) can be useful, but word formation is equally if not more important for things like gendering a writer based on handwriting, especially with cursive writing. Word formations tend to carry more individuality and patterns than individual letter shapes.
There are three basic categories when examining handwriting:
- gradient (slant to the left or right)
- structure (evenness of letter size)
- concavity (roundedness)
Most English-speaking countries tend to characterize "feminine" handwriting as neat, even, round, small, ornate and symmetrical, while handwriting assumed to be "masculine" often gets described as hurried, uneven, messy, spiky, sloping and bold. One comparative study in another language (Hamid 1996) suggests that some of these stereotypes cross over into other cultures and writing systems.
One early study (Lester 1977) examined "males who write with handwriting judged to be feminine and vice versa" and concluded their handwriting "is not reliably associated in these studies with femininity or with sexual orientation." However, later studies have suggested that most people can discern a writer's sex with better than chance accuracy. One study of handwriting specimens from 73 men and 168 women (Sappington 2003) found a mean handwriting tidiness score for men was 1.8 and 2.8 for women, a significant difference of 1 point on a 5-point scale: "Masculine Gender Role predicted sloppy penmanship and Feminine Gender Role predicted tidy writing, independent of the writers' biological sex." Another study (Hayes 1996) found students were able to discern writer sex at the 75% accuracy level even with small amounts of material, sometimes only a single letter or a single geometric pattern: "It was suggested that sex or gender is present in handwriting in much the same way as it is present in movement of the whole body."
Handwriting samples
I have taken a few examples from the excellent Font Garden website to show characteristics deemed "masculine," "androgynous," and "feminine." These fonts are great for showing allographic characteristics of each letter, and what makes letter formation "masculine" or feminine."
"Masculine" handwriting
Please note that deeming someone or something "masculine" or "feminine" is arbitrary and based on social custom. Not everyone would agree with my arbitrary assessments below.
 |
The dead giveaway here is the g in gas. Note how the tail is made of two straight lines. The other big one is the lack of convexity in the m and n shapes: they are concave instead of arched. They almost look like the w. The backwards slant of all the letters suggests this writer is a left-handed male.
|
 |
In this case, the m and n shapes have sharp corners instead of arches. The h has the same issue. Note how the lowercase letters have different heights and, the letters using circles have different x-heights.
|
 |
Look at the a and e shapes on this sample: the counter of the a and the cramped loop of the e vibe as “masculine.”
|
 |
Writing in block capitals like this (no lowercase letters) is very “masculine.” Pressing hard with the pen gives these letters a weight to avoid. The straight stems and sharp corners add to the feel.
|
 |
Again, look at the m and n shapes for the best example. The inconsistency among letters with vertical lines (a made with two penstrokes, no vertical line on u) makes this stand out.
|
 |
The p and d in this sample are “masculine”: note how the ascender and descender on the stems are looped instead of doubling back more carefully. Note how some letters slant right, like the d, but many slant left, especially the h.
|
 |
Case-mixing is the first thing that jumps out here. Note that the e and r are capitals.
|
 |
Note the flourishes that start the m, n, u, y, and w. Those straight lines give this a “masculine” vibe.
|
 |
The interword space in this sample is one clue, as is the way the k and b slant differently that the other letters.
|
 |
This example of cursive writing has the cramped formation of shapes and tiny counters considered “masculine.” The p and s are also good clues, being open at the baseline.
|
 |
The h is a standout here, looking almost like the d. If you are going to make loops on your ascenders, all letters with them need to be consistent: l, b, k, h, and d. |
 |
The way the e drops below the baseline on this example stands out as “masculine,” as does the way the crossbar on the f slants downward, where the t slants up. Note also on the f how the top arch slants down much further than the other letters with that arch shape, like the r. |
"Androgynous" writing
Please note that deeming someone or something "masculine" or "feminine" is arbitrary and based on social custom. Not everyone would agree with my arbitrary assessments below.
 |
This one is by a girl, but it is so illegible many people would probably rate this as “masculine.”
|
 |
This one would probably be rated “masculine” because of the uneven lengths of the tails on j, g, and y. Note also how the ascenders have uneven vertical heights, and the m has a much lower x-height than the others.
|
 |
Most people would probably say this was “feminine” because so many letters are rounded, but there is some irregularity that might make people guess.
|
 |
This “androgynous” sample is probably by a left-handed writer (note the backward slant). What makes this feel “feminine” is the n and h shapes on the right side of the arch. See how it’s not a straight downstroke? Also, the counters are quite large in most vowels and closed letters.
|
 |
Though the y is very “feminine” here, the backward slant on the l and h, and the lower x-height of the r would weigh this towards “masculine.”
|
 |
This one of the more "androgynous" of the samples here. There is a real consistency in shape and slant of letters, which makes this feel very “feminine.” Note how the arched letters like m, n, and r are not very rounded, but angle up and then turn sharply downward. That's a little more "masculine." |
"Feminine" handwriting
Please note that deeming someone or something "masculine" or "feminine" is arbitrary and based on social custom. Not everyone would agree with my arbitrary assessments below.
 |
This is a great cursive example from a woman who took penmanship classes to heart. Note the graceful shape of the o and s, and the fullness of the counters. See how all the angles are the same, and how each letter ends with a nice upward flourish?
|
 |
Look at the rounded open counters on all the vowels here. Even though some letters slant backwards, the vibe here is “feminine” because of the curves and size.
|
 |
This cursive example is great because of the capital m and i. The r is also very common among women who took second-grade penmanship lessons seriously.
|
 |
Note here how the t and f have the exact same angle on the crossbars. This kind of consistency is a hallmark of “feminine” writing. Look at both the lowercase and capital w as well—the rounded shape instead of sharp angles on the baseline of the w is a strong cue.
|
 |
This is classic young woman writing—high school or college age. Note how all the letters except t are made without lifting the pen from the paper. This is a classic tell of “feminine” writing. Note how open all the counters are, and the gentle hooks on the ends of letters like a, t, and n —this is the writing equivalent of “uptalk.”
|
 |
This is a modified printing style that borders on italic or cursive. Note the crossbar angling consistency in the f and t, which can also be seen in the r and the little flourish at the start of the lowercase i. I imagine she can write pretty quickly and keep this looking consistently good.
|
 |
Look at the f in this example—it is beautifully shaped. Look at the k as well—see how both arms have slight curves? Finally, check out the s—the loop back through below the baseline is very “feminine.” |
 |
This one is interesting—the e and l are so tightly looped that they almost look like an undotted i, but this is still very “feminine.” Why? Because the letters are consistent and carefully formed. |
 |
The rounded shape of the c, a, and g stand out in this one. Great counters. Note the o and r shapes discussed earlier.
|
 |
This is another great example of consistency in size, slant, and counters.
|
 |
Look at the b on this sample, and the loopiness in the capital h. Even though the s is a little unusual, the other letters compensate for that.
|
 |
A classic example of “feminine” writing. Look at the e, formed in a single loop like a cursive l, and the rounded downstroke at the end of the t, k, n, and m. This also has another notable feature of writing that can look “feminine”: i and j dotted with a flourish or a tiny circle instead of a plain old dot. Unless you are in 6th grade or under, please, no dotting your i with a heart!
|
 |
This casual style has a “feminine” feel thanks to the y, g, n and h.
|
 |
Though this is very right-slanted, and the letters are all tall and thin instead of rounded and wide, this feels “feminine” because of the flourishes. Check out the start of the w or the hook at the end of the t. The s is also a very interesting shape.
|
 |
This left-slanting style is very wide, giving it a “feminine” characteristic. Note how the a is formed in a “feminine” way: start above the circle, draw the back, then make a big counter without ever lifting the pen. This is also done in the two samples below.
|
 |
This is a very nice style, in addition to the type of a mentioned above, look at the hook on the k and f downstrokes, the graceful hook on the e, and the way the l is never a straight downstroke.
|
 |
Look at the way the t is crossed with a flourished crossbar, and the matching capital i. The a is the same as the two above, and look how the e and c finish with expressive hooks that are more like flourishes. I especially like the s, g, and j, and note how the j and i are dotted.
|
A note on writing style and vocabulary
Gender appears to be reified through writing style as well as handwriting, according to preliminary statistical analysis.
Recent attempts at creating algorithms that can determine a person’s gender by their writing style have produced some fairly accurate systems (Koppel 2003, Argamon 2003). They were able to guess with 83% accuracy based on a large sample of texts run through their algorithm. Generally speaking, the algorithm assumed men talk more about objects, and women more about relationships. Women tend to use more pronouns (I, you, she, their, myself), and men prefer words that identify or determine nouns (a, the, that) and words that quantify them (one, two, more). See the link in the reference section for the methodology involved.
David Lodge, whose early novel The Picture Goers was among the one out of five texts misgendered by the original algorithm, noted:
"Novels are very problematic texts because they are written in a medley of styles. And more often than not the author is trying to imitate some kind of imagined consciousness male or female. Indeed, writers have always tried to imitate the distinctive characteristics of male and female discourse and we are in the habit of thinking that they have often succeeded. But perhaps these scientists believe they can prove this is an illusion. Still, I’m very surprised that this program is able to discern the gender of the real author. If you were to take ordinary first-person texts letters or diaries then you might, of course, expect a fairly high degree of accuracy. But that it can be done on literary novels intrigues me. This will have fascinating literary, critical and general sociological implications. That said, I’d like to see them apply it to a novelist’s attempt to imitate the opposite sex in a particular passage.” (McGrath 2003)
Some resourceful nerds at bookblog.net created a cruder version of the algorithm used on novels and called it the Gender Genie. It's available online for text analysis.
Elf Sternberg writes:
The Gender Genie algorithm, which first appeared in the NY Times' "science" section, is a poor popularization of the algorithm as it appeared in the original academic literature. I have the original paper and that algorithm is meant to be applied to fiction; applied to non-fiction, the authors admit, the algorithm is no better than random chance at detecting an author's gender. A much better alogrithm, the one that has an "80%" chance of detecting author's gender correctly, needs to be taught on a large sample to generate a massive statistical measure of male vs. female characteristics in text. Even applied to fiction, the popular algorithm is not much better. It seems to think I'm a woman, at least 97% of the time.
You can test a few samples of your fiction writing style with the Gender Genie, a simplified (and less scientific) version of the algorithm used by Koppel:
http://www.bookblog.net/gender/genie.html
The Gender Genie statistics page indicates it only gets about 3 in 5 right, where Koppel's original got 4 in 5 right based on multivariate analysis on a large sample of texts. Like other "gender tests," this is not scientifically rigorous and should not be taken very seriously.
Note that this form of stylometry looks for patterns in common words rather than outliers. It has been used to identify authors ranging from the anonymous author of Primary Colors to the Unabomber. These same techniques can be taken from the individual to group level to ascertain statistical likelihood of an author's demographic characteristics. Those interested in the scientific paper that sparked Gender Genie can find a link to the full text in the references.
General tips for more “feminine” writing
- Stay relaxed!
- Don’t grip the writing instrument too tightly.
- Don’t press too hard.
- Always have a pad of paper, blotter, or other flat surface under the paper. Do not write with a sheet of paper directly on a desk surface.
- Write from the wrist or elbow instead of the fingers.
- Don’t use fine point pens or mechanical pencils.
- Use a medium ball point pen, felt tip marker, or fountain pen with a medium to heavy nib.
- Consistency is key—all letters should be uniform in shape and size.
- All letters should have the same slight amount of slanting.
- Write more slowly than you usually do.
- Write a little larger than you usually do.
- Space your letters out a bit more.
- Avoid sharp angles.
- Think smooth, not spiky.
- Use slightly curved instead of straight lines.
- Make arched letters convex, not concave.
- Make letters with circles more open and loopy.
- Don't lift your pen off the page when forming a letter, except for t and x, and when dotting your i and j.
- Use a very tiny circle to dot any i or j and for commas, periods, exclamation points, and question marks.
- Add slight flourishes to all letters with tails.
- Add a slight hook to all letters that end on a downstroke.
- Double back more on letters that require that movement.
- Printing instead of using cursive may be easier.
- Don’t use block capitals.
- Don’t exchange any letters that should be lowercase for capitals.
Exercises
The key to practice is repetition. Try to do a whole line of a single letter, making each one look as good as the last. Once you have consistency down, try increasing speed. These are like practicing scales on a musical instrument, or vocabulary drills on a foreign language: boring, but necessary if you want to see significant improvement.
Make each letter without lifting the pen off the paper (except i, j, t and x)
a: consider shaping it like the a to the left, then start on the part that goes above the x-height and make a full counter.
b: start on the top of the ascender and make a full counter.
c: should be as round as e and o.
d: start on the top of the ascender (not the circle) and make a full counter.
e: make this a loop like a cursive l.
f: consider going below the baseline with downstroke.
g: full counter, loopy tail.
h: should look very similar to b.
i: tiny circle for dot.
j: nice loopy tail or hook on descender, tiny circle for dot.
k: don't make angled arm and leg straight lines.
l: this should set the slant for all other letters.
m: nice rounded arches, consider a small hook on front and back.
n: nice rounded arches, consider a small hook on front and back.
o: one of the hardest-- a good o with a counter and perhaps a nice flourish is hardest to make consistently, so practice!
p: start at bottom of descender and write up to loop.
q: should look like mirror of p. You may need to start with loop, and give descender a nice flourish. make it similar to, but distinguishable from, your g.
r: nice rounded arch like m and n.
s: make lower curve in s much bigger than top.
t: this should set crossbar for all other letters.
u: should look like upside down n.
v: one place where a sharp angle is good. Consider a curved upstroke.
w: consider rounded at baseline, or curved upstroke at least.
x: consider curved second stroke.
y: rounded at baseline, nice curved tail that matches g.
z: consider curved on horizontal lines.
Capital letters: Add flourishes whenever possible.
Groupings
Practice writing letters in these groupings to give them consistent feel:
a b d h
c e o s
f t
g j p q y
i l k
m n r u
v w x z
Sentences
Try these pangrams (sentences that contain each letter of the alphabet):
http://rinkworks.com/words/pangrams.shtml
below: an example of my handwriting. Kind of androgynous, but works fine for me.
General resources for improving your handwriting
Neater handwriting will almost always appear more "feminine" to a reader. Here are some sites with general tips on improving your handwriting:
Retro style from 1932 American Penman (click on page 134)
http://hans.presto.tripod.com/penman/index.html
Writing paper PDF generator (makes paper for practicing, with x-height)
http://www.incompetech.com/beta/linedGraphPaper/writing.html
Make your handwriting into a font!
http://www.fontifier.com/
Kate Gladstone's handwriting repair (WARNING: annoying crappy music)
http://www.global2000.net/handwritingrepair
Kate's 2005 world handwriting contest (WARNING: annoying crappy music)
http://www.global2000.net/handwritingrepair/WHAC/index.html
Handwriting makeover course
http://www.pendance.us/handwritinghelp.html
James Pickering: amazing formal/artistic handwriting with lots of tips
http://www.jp29.org/catdr.htm
Online penmanship lessons from The Elegant Pen
http://www.theelegantpen.com/PenmanshipLessons.htm
References
originally published 16 September 2005. See bottom of page for last revision date.
Argamon S, Koppel M, Fine J, Shimoni A (2003). Gender, genre, and writing style in formal written texts. Text, 23(3), August 2003.
http://www.cs.biu.ac.il/~koppel/papers/male-female-text-final.pdf
Baird JA (1998). What’s in a name? Experiments with blind marking in A level examinations. Educational Research, 1998.
Ball P (2003). Computer program detects author gender. Nature, July 18, 2003.
Beacom MS (1960). Study of handwriting by twins and other persons of multiple births. Journal of Forensic Sciences 5: 121-31.
Beech JR, Macintosh IC (2005). Do differences in sex hormones affect handwriting style? Evidence from digit ratio and sex role identity as determinants of the sex of handwriting. Personality and Individual Differences 39 (2005) 459-468.
http://www.le.ac.uk/psychology/jrb/PDFs/Beech%20&%20Mackintosh%202005.pdf
Broom ME, Thompson B, et al. (1929). Sex differences in handwriting. Journal of Applied Psychology, 13: 159-66.
Burr V (2002). Judging gender from samples of adult handwriting: accuracy and use of cues. Journal of Social Psychology, 2002 Dec;142(6):691-700.
Gamble DJ (1980). The handwriting of identical twins. Canadian Society of Forensic Science Journal 13: 11-30.
Goodenough F (1945). Sex differences in judging the sex of handwriting. Journal of Social Psychology, 22: 61.
Hamid S, Loewenthal KM (1996). Inferring gender from handwriting in Urdu and English. Journal of Social Psychology, 1996 Dec;136(6):778-82. PMID: 9043207
Hartley J (1991). Sex differences in handwriting: A comment on Spear. British Educational Research Journal, 1991.
Hayes WN (1996). Identifying sex from handwriting. Perceptual and Motor Skills. 1996 Dec;83(3 Pt 1):791-800.
Hodgins, J. (1971). Determination of sex from handwriting. Canadian Society of Forensic Sciences, 4: 124-32.
Huber RA, Headrick AM (1999). Handwriting Identification: Facts and Fundamentals. Boca Raton: CRC Press. ISBN: 084931285X.
James AJ (2005). Handwriting and gender cues. Transsexual Road Map.
http://www.tsroadmap.com/physical/handwriting
Koppel M, Argamon S, Shimoni A (2003). Automatically categorizing written texts by author gender. Literary and Linguistic Computing 17(4), November 2002, pp. 401-412.
http://www.cs.biu.ac.il/~koppel/papers/male-female-llc-final.pdf
Legien J, Widacki M (1979). An attempt to differentiate between male and female handwriting. Archiwum Medycyny Sadowaj I Kriminologii, 29: 43
Legruen A (1959-60). Three adolescent girls: handwriting similarity. Kriminalistik, 14: 161.
Lester D, McLaughlin S, Cohen R, Dunn L. Sex-deviant handwriting, femininity, and homosexuality. Perceptual and Motor Skills 1977;45:1156.
McGrath C (2003). Sexed Texts. New York Times, 10 August 2003, Section 6, Page 11, Column 3.
Newhall SM (1926). Sex differences in handwriting. Journal of Applied Psychology, 10: 151-61.
Newman HH et al. (1937). Twins: A Study of Heredity and Environment. University of Chicago Press. ISBN: 0226577066.
Sappington J, Money M (2003). Sex, gender role, attribution of pathology, and handwriting tidiness. Perceptual and Motor Skills. 2003 Oct;97(2):671-4.
Spear M (1984). The biasing influence of pupil sex in a science marking exercise. Research in Science and Technical Education, 2 (1) 55-60.
Taylor LR, Chandler H (1987). System for handwriting classification. Journal of Forensic Sciences 32: 1775-81.
Tenwolde H (1934). More on sex differences in handwriting. Journal of Applied Psychology, 18: 705-10.
Totty RN, Hardcastle RA, et al. (1983). Dependence of slope of handwriting upon sex and handedness of the writer. Journal of the Forensic Science Society, 23: 237-40.
Wanscher JH (1943). The hereditary background of handwriting: An investigation of the handwritings of mono and dizygotic twins, Acta Psychol. Et Neurology 18:2-4.
Young PT (1931). Sex differences in handwriting. Journal of Applied Psychology, 15: 486-98.
|
