What do men, women space and comfort have in common?

Malcolm Gladwell wrote an interesting article which you can find on his website called listening to khakis:
Not long ago, two psychologists at York University, in Toronto-Irwin Silverman and Marion Eals-conducted an experiment in which they had men and women sit in an office for two minutes, without any reading material or distraction, while they ostensibly waited to take part in some kind of academic study. Then they were taken from the office and given the real reason for the experiment: to find out how many of the objects in the office they could remember. This was not a test of memory so much as it was a test of awareness-of the kind and quality of unconscious attention that people pay to the particulars of their environment. If you think about it, it was really a test of fashion sense, because, at its root, this is what fashion sense really is-the ability to register and appreciate and remember the details of the way those around you look and dress, and then reinterpret those details and memories yourself.
This idea-that men eliminate and women integrate-is called by Meyers-Levy the “selectivity hypothesis.” Men are looking for a way to simplify the route to a conclusion, so they seize on the most obvious evidence and ignore the rest, while women, by contrast, try to process information comprehensively.”

Meyers-Levy notes that:

“Females generally attempt to engage in a rather effortful, comprehensive, piecemeal analysis of all available information. On the other hand, men are more selective processors of information, who tend to pick up on single, highly salient or personally relevant pieces of information that are quickly and easily processed. They disregard the rest.”

I think this is an interesting idea, especially when you think about sexualizing space, dividing it into male or female space. At this presentation by  Andres Duany the discussion is about the de-sexualization of space. 

“Family rooms instead of dens. Clean garages. Women in cigar bars and boxing clubs. American females have commandeered, or at least infiltrated, nearly every part of the private and public realm. After the terrible centuries when interior space was overwhelmingly male, a balance was gradually achieved, culminating with the house plans of the first half of the 20th century. Now has the balance tipped too far? If the New Urbanism provides a place for everyone, should it also program specifically for male activity, however abhorrent? Are sheds and rear alleys enough?”