It’s been proven that women actually have an acute ability to pick up subtle differences in colors
In response to that last comment^^
Yes. It comes from the Hunter-Gatherer days.
Women were the gatherers. They had to be able to discern between the different shades of colors to know which plants were poisonous and which were not.
Men were out hunting, so they didn’t have to worry about that.
Which is why women see “Blood orange” and “crimson” and “scarlet” etc while guys just see “red”.
I’M A COLORBLIND WOMAN HALF OF THESE LOOK THE SAME AS THE ONE NEXT TO THEM THIS IS INFURIATING
The hunter-gatherer explanation is total bullshit FYI. You think gatherers (women or not) relied on close color differentiation over the shape of the leaves/flowers/etc.? You think hunters (men or not) didn’t rely on close color differentiation to spot camouflaged prey?
It’s not even that men aren’t always able to tell that two similar colors are different in shade or hue. It’s just that men, unlike women, generally aren’t exposed to thousands of beauty products every year/month/week, each with a UNIQUE color name.
How many times have you seen a man ridiculed for wearing colors or shades that don’t match well enough? How many men have had to stand in an aisle at Walmart and make a conscious choice between orchid and amethyst?
If you think for a second that women being able to differentiate and assign names to varying hues is due to some pseudoscientific ancient human adaptation bullshit and not due to the fact that women have to survive being bogged down daily and from childhood by ridiculous beauty standards and expectations and products, then I will personally papercut your shins until you can tell me whether your sexist blood is crimson, scarlet, or ruby.