The Science of ‘Gaydar’

[æonpax]

“GAYDAR” colloquially refers to the ability to accurately glean others’ sexual orientation from mere observation. But does gaydar really exist? If so, how does it work?

Our research, published recently in the peer-reviewed journal PLoS ONE, shows that gaydar is indeed real and that its accuracy is driven by sensitivity to individual facial features as well as the spatial relationships among facial features….

…Even when viewing such bare faces so briefly, participants demonstrated an ability to identify sexual orientation: overall, gaydar judgments were about 60 percent accurate. (bold mine) Primary source - http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/03/opinion/sunday/the-science-of-gaydar.html?_r=2&hp=&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1338636226-Fu4we6QaHUgTPf0ermxdjw Secondary source - http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0036671



Observations;

a) Gaydar is also a doubled edged sword. It goes against everything the LGBT decries, such as judging people before you know them and assuming things without evidence. Yet at the same time, this study (secondary source) empirically proves the existence gaydar with the caveat that it “demonstrates gaydar ability — which is far from judgment proficiency.”

b) The article and study bypasses “bidar” which I don’t really think exists anyways. Given the myriad of bisexual dispositions and sexual lifestyles, such a thing would be more like an educated guess and highly inaccurate.

Opinion – I’ve watched people argue as to whether CNN’s Anderson Cooper is gay, based solely on facial features. “He just looks gay” they say. I would be hard pressed to say he doesn’t ”look” gay but he just as easily could be bisexual. The question is, should I care what he is? Does it really matter? For me, No to both.

In social conversation, “gaydar” tends to be an entertaining topic but even as accurate as this study claims it is, (60% is still shacky) it is not nor should ever be the sole determining factor in judging a person’s orientation.

[Long Duck Dong]

in my experience, bi dar and gay dar is more than just facial expression, its also mannerism and in a lot of cases, for me specially, its a form of gut instinct, but its also a ability that I have had for almost all of my life..... some hunters and mothers would understand the basics of sexuality radar, its all the unseen, hidden, things that tell you things......like there is a deer or pig within 100 square meters or that your kids are up to mischief.....

in simple terms, its not really gay or bi dar, but a ability to * detect * sexualities...all sexualities.... its just that the focus is on the gay and bi aspects of it and forgetting that we also * detect * the heteros but cos they are not what we seek, we tend to ignore that aspect of it... besides, i have never heard gay and bi people refer to having hetero dar...lol... but it does exist... in the same way that people have phobic dar and omg I want to shag that person and they want to be shagged dar.....

as for bi dar, it exists, as bisexuality is a aspect of people that has a base point of interest and attraction to both genders, regardless if the person themselves is aware of it in themselves....and its that that can be *detected *, as for the sexual interests and types of attraction, its the same as every other sexuality, some things require getting to know the person a lil better.......

[Gearbox]

I'm sadly still relying on stereotypical signs that someone is gay. Not a clue how to tell who's bi.lol
I've sat there drinking tea with some hookups before I KNOW we're going to have sex, and I'm thinking, "He doesn't look gay to me. Seems keen, but is he sure?".
Massive fail!:oh:

[nutme]

The idea of knowing if someone is bisexual is a load of horse manure. As for seeing a tell for someone being gay.....well, ya think? I may think that the only group that would pass under any radar, are the so called "lipstick lesbians"...then again, someone will post something that they can spot this woman simply by a flag she hangs out of her purse.

[tenni]

The interesting aspects come to realization when you examine the original study and its methodology. The subjects seem to all be female and between 18-25 years old but the numbers do not add up(some subjects may have been male? dunno).

In the discussion section of the study it reports that the women were able to determine the sexual orientation better if the image was also female.

Would men identify facial features better for their own gender and not the opposite gender?

The sexual orientation of the subjects were not identified. That may be a factor to explore.

Would gay or lesbians be better at indentifying the orientation of the face better ? equal? worse than heteros?

I have only read/heard about gay men describing their gaydar. I've never read women making such statements. As drugstore points out, gaydar has been self reported in the gay male community and it involves more that facial identification. Behaviour and other factors seem to be used by gay men.

Bisexuals of both genders were excluded as images. Would bisexuals have different facial measurements than gay or hetero. Would they be the same as gay?

I think that the study is interesting but the original title of the study is better than the newspaper title as far as what it really indicated. " The Roles of Featural and Configural Face Processing in Snap Judgements of Sexual Orientation". That is different than gaydar imo.

I don't think that my gaydar is very good but extreme stereotypes of being gay are identifiable....most are correct judgements but not all.

[pepperjack]

Agree with the OP that an open, questioning & discerning mind is necessary. In my experience, closeted bi's are very adept with their camouflage; I once connected with a guy who came over & admitted to me his cover was gay bashing ( we didn't have sex by the way ). I've also had numerous secretly bi married guys connect with me, admitting their machinations to disguise themselves. I've had my surprises. If it hadn't been for firsthand experience, I probably never would have guessed. My naivete, the result of a busy & distracted lifestyle. But now,I'm so much wiser about the community I live in.

[æonpax]

in my experience, bi dar and gay dar is more than just facial expression, its also mannerism and in a lot of cases, for me specially, its a form of gut instinct, but its also a ability that I have had for almost all of my life..... some hunters and mothers would understand the basics of sexuality radar, its all the unseen, hidden, things that tell you things......like there is a deer or pig within 100 square meters or that your kids are up to mischief.....

in simple terms, its not really gay or bi dar, but a ability to * detect * sexualities...all sexualities.... its just that the focus is on the gay and bi aspects of it and forgetting that we also * detect * the heteros but cos they are not what we seek, we tend to ignore that aspect of it... besides, i have never heard gay and bi people refer to having hetero dar...lol... but it does exist... in the same way that people have phobic dar and omg I want to shag that person and they want to be shagged dar.....

as for bi dar, it exists, as bisexuality is a aspect of people that has a base point of interest and attraction to both genders, regardless if the person themselves is aware of it in themselves....and its that that can be *detected *, as for the sexual interests and types of attraction, its the same as every other sexuality, some things require getting to know the person a lil better.......

1) The research was done was very narrow, specifically in regards to facial qualities. I have no doubt that “gaydar” involves a multitude of using other senses, including the “6th Sense,”

2) As for “bidar”, I just don’t believe it exists and that is merely my opinion. It may or may not exist but just is not an important issue with me. For those who believe it does, more power to them. Since this is a bisexual forum, it would make sense that many would. For shits and giggles I googled “bidar” and got nothing. Then I googled “bisexual and gaydar” and the very first result was this thread here.

3) My real concern would be a dependence on any kind of “dar” that would invite stereotypes and personal bias, be it by hetero or homosexuals, that influence judgment. As I stated, it’s a double-edged sword” Some gays themselves blow off the concept of “gaydar” as being “superficial” and “pseudo-science passed off under a cloak of objectivity”, ( http://thegayrecluse.com/2008/01/23/on-gaydar-research-a-common-sense-rebuttal-to-a-scientific-quandary/ )


The study was interesting and the concept of gay or bidar worth discussing but is also a topic of little importance in the real world.

[pepperjack]

1) The research was done was very narrow, specifically in regards to facial qualities. I have no doubt that “gaydar” involves a multitude of using other senses, including the “6th Sense,”

2) As for “bidar”, I just don’t believe it exists and that is merely my opinion. It may or may not exist but just is not an important issue with me. For those who believe it does, more power to them. Since this is a bisexual forum, it would make sense that many would. For shits and giggles I googled “bidar” and got nothing. Then I googled “bisexual and gaydar” and the very first result was this thread here.

3) My real concern would be a dependence on any kind of “dar” that would invite stereotypes and personal bias, be it by hetero or homosexuals, that influence judgment. As I stated, it’s a double-edged sword” Some gays themselves blow off the concept of “gaydar” as being “superficial” and “pseudo-science passed off under a cloak of objectivity”, ( http://thegayrecluse.com/2008/01/23/on-gaydar-research-a-common-sense-rebuttal-to-a-scientific-quandary/ )


The study was interesting and the concept of gay or bidar worth discussing but is also a topic of little importance in the real world.


This is somewhat confusing;you seem to admit to the existence of gaydar ( citing the existence of a 6th sense ) yet deny bidar which is basically the same thing but maybe involving more deception. " worth discussing but is also a topic of little importance in the real world. " So, you start this thread & dismiss it all as of little import in the same breath? What then is the real world & important? Is this thread then posted out of sheer boredom, deriving entertainment from the responses?

[innaminka]

I have no idea about the science or whatever - but for me it exists.
I can't detect it, but others have told me that I just radiate something that indicated that I was "open" to female advances.
Back in my good old "hedonistic" days, this was something that I was not exactly uncomfortable with :tongue: - and it actually helped in the initial contact with my present partner.:love1:
Those days are over (whew!) but evidently it's still there.

Me ? I have no inbuilt detectors at all. I had to actually ask.

[æonpax]

This is somewhat confusing;you seem to admit to the existence of gaydar ( citing the existence of a 6th sense ) yet deny bidar which is basically the same thing but maybe involving more deception. " worth discussing but is also a topic of little importance in the real world. " So, you start this thread & dismiss it all as of little import in the same breath? What then is the real world & important? Is this thread then posted out of sheer boredom, deriving entertainment from the responses?
`
Yes, you are confused. The thread I started was specifically about “gaydar” In my first post I stated the research did not mention “bidar” to which I anecdotally added, “I don’t believe.” It was others who followed my post commenting that they believe bidar to real and disagree with me. I have no problem with that. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

Had I wanted to discuss “bidar”, I would have started a topic on it. Now apparently, it seems, some people here feel very strongly about bidar…so strongly they dismissed the gaydar topic to pursue their own course…perhaps in part, just to disagree with me. Whatever.

The “real world” has people in it who judge and condemn homosexuals based on stereotypes such as mannerisms, dress, speech and physical articulation. In case you haven’t noticed, anti-gay sentiment is on the rise and those who hate homosexuals identify us by the same stereotypes “gaydar” uses and many gays object to the connotation “gardar” implies. This is a serious issue.

The topic is gaydar. Do you wish to add to it?

[BiDaveDtown]

Agree with the OP that an open, questioning & discerning mind is necessary. In my experience, closeted bi's are very adept with their camouflage; I once connected with a guy who came over & admitted to me his cover was gay bashing ( we didn't have sex by the way ). I've also had numerous secretly bi married guys connect with me, admitting their machinations to disguise themselves. I've had my surprises. If it hadn't been for firsthand experience, I probably never would have guessed. My naivete, the result of a busy & distracted lifestyle. But now,I'm so much wiser about the community I live in. Those of us who have gaydar and bidar can easily tell if someone is bisexual or gay. Aeonpax has no bidar or gaydar. Pepperjack closeted bisexual and gay men are by far the easiest to tell. If they are married or partnered and deeply closeted it's all the more easy IME. I am married and out about my sexuality but I have had tons of closeted married bisexual and gay men hit on me and even proposition me. I can easily tell that they're closeted and I tell them no thanks. Even when I was single and dating men and women if a man was closeted or married I did not have sex with him or date him at all.

[æonpax]

Those of us who have gaydar and bidar can easily tell if someone is bisexual or gay. Aeonpax has no bidar or gaydar. Pepperjack closeted bisexual and gay men are by far the easiest to tell. If they are married or partnered and deeply closeted it's all the more easy IME. I am married and out about my sexuality but I have had tons of closeted married bisexual and gay men hit on me and even proposition me. I can easily tell that they're closeted and I tell them no thanks. Even when I was single and dating men and women if a man was closeted or married I did not have sex with him or date him at all.

Insofar I never mentioned whether I have used "gaydar", I see see you are gifted with the rare ability to see things that don't exist. It is truly a gift you should cherish. I call it "Uninformeddar." Most people, leastways "rational" people, depend on facts and tangible evidence to draw a conclusion. You sir, have a rare gift indeed.

Now, please humor me and tell me how this supposed "bidar" works. Do bisexual people send out invisible vibrations your super-duper, hyper enhanced bidar picks up or can you cleverly deduce they are bisexual because they are wearing a t-shirt that says; "I'm bisexual?"

If a ton of guys, as you illustrated, hits on you out of nowhere, is it your gaydar or bidar (or a combination of both) that tells you; He's bisexual, not gay. ( or vice versa ) How can you tell they are married? Is that "marriagedar?" How did you know they were "closeted?" Do you also have "closetdar?" Simply amazing.

[nutme]

The idea of knowing if someone is bisexual is a load of horse manure. As for seeing a tell for someone being gay.....well, ya think? I may think that the only group that would pass under any radar, are the so called "lipstick lesbians"...then again, someone will post something that they can spot this woman simply by a flag she hangs out of her purse.

After reading bidave dtown's reply, I feel the need to quote myself.

[BiDaveDtown]

It's like others have posted in this thread, bidar is the ability to know if someone's bisexual. No vibrations or tshirts required. You don't have bidar, or gaydar aeon. You're not a man or a man interacting with other men so you're not going to understand how men act towards each other. I know that they're married because they wear wedding rings, or sometimes they were with their wives when they propositioned me when she wasn't near them. It's very easy to tell if a man is closeted. I am using facts and tangible evidence to draw a conclusion. Gaydar and bidar exist. Did you not read the links you posted in your OP?

[æonpax]

It's like others have posted in this thread, bidar is the ability to know if someone's bisexual. –
Of course it is, just by looking at them. However, how such a thing works apparently transcends the mundane into the supernatural and requires the use of sensoria far beyond the powers of mortal men, sort of like having a super power but not knowing how or why it works, eh?


(http://i.imgur.com/3h2S9.jpg)
http://i.imgur.com/3h2S9.jpg



No vibrations or tshirts required.
How about “aura’s” ? Does a bisexual have a special aura or otherwise radiate some unseen force like the one I’ve illustrated below?


http://i.imgur.com/FfKD3.jpg


You don't have bidar, or gaydar aeon.
Whether I do or don’t is irrelevant, however, since you claim to have “bidar”, a perception that quite frankly has been considered a joke, I’m very curious to learn more about this phenomenon.


You're not a man or a man interacting with other men so you're not going to understand how men act towards each other.
I see. I read the study too, quite carefully and they were researching how people make snap decisions based on facial patterns. The male control group scored higher than female in regards to recognizing homosexuals however…they did not conclude anything from this as one singular study would never pass peer review. You, on the other hand, have no problem forming a conclusion from this.


I know that they're married because they wear wedding rings,
Not all married men wear their wedding rings, especially when they are on the prowl. I guess you were lucky that ALL the guys who hit up on you had their rings on....aside from also coincidentally being married with their female partner by their side. No male couples tried to hit on you?


or sometimes they were with their wives when they propositioned me when she wasn't near them.
How convenient….and their wives either were accepting of their husbands bisexuality or the guys had to sneak around them. Fascinating.

It's very easy to tell if a man is closeted.
Pray tell, how?...does he look like a closet or is this something only certain guys know, the ones who are endowed or gifted with the power of “Bidar?”

I am using facts and tangible evidence to draw a conclusion.
You don’t say…where are they?

Gaydar and bidar exist. Did you not read the links you posted in your OP?
Yes indeed. I concur, “gaydar” or at least the ability to instantaneously judge a person to be gay based on the face…at least 60% of time, does exist. However, none of those links mentioned “bidar”.


****


Note - This has been fun and entertaining for me but equally as pointless. If you sincerely believe you have bidar, have at it. Make a group even but the topic was "Gaydar" and in most forums, people try to stick to the topic.

[tenni]

I agree with Aeon that this study was not about bidar and whether it exists or not. It was about making snap judgements about sexual orientation as far as the subject being gay or straight..bisexuality is not part of this study. Bi Invisibility is probably involved in this study. There may be good scientific reasons why bisexuality was not a third choice offered to the participants. Just the same, bisexuality was ignored as a choice for making a snap judgment. Questions should be directed towards the two researchers.

from the discussion section of experiment 2
"it would appear that minority sexual orientation is not the concealed stigma that many argue it is. Indeed, the need to protect gay people from discrimination would seem increasingly urgent to the extent that minority sexual orientation is tacitly inferred from aspects of personal appearance that are routinely available for inspection (e.g., faces)."..."Nonetheless, a relatively unexplored question that is ripe for future research involves the external validity of these effects – do snap judgments of sexual orientation from faces occur in real-life settings? Additionally, what are the downstream consequences of snap judgments of sexual orientation, for example, on the perceiver’s feelings, thoughts, and behaviors towards the target?"

These two questions are worth noting. Snap judgements about bisexuality are not made. Snap judgments are made about straight or gay. This should not surprise us as bisexuals often point out that if a bisexual is seen as "different" from heterosexuals they are seen as gay.

Does this study hold any significance for bisexuals? I would say that it doesn't. It is an interesting point but unless the bisexual has perceived "gay" facial features, it is irrelevant information for bisexuals. A study that examines facial features and being able to detect bi from hetero or gay facial features would need to be done. I agree with Aeon that snap judgments made about sexuality based on facial features is a possibly dangerous Eugenic issue.

Bidave may be able to detect the difference between gay, bi or hetero people. Don't be so snap judgmental Aeon. ;) Are you using bidave's facial features to come to this judgement? :yikes2:lol

[Realist]

I've long wondered about bidar....one's ability to determine if others are bisexual.

I've been cognizant of my bisexuality since before I understood the sexual aspects of being bi, which is a long time. (My first sexual [non-orgasmic] experience was with a female, at an early age. My first orgasmic experience was in 1954, with a male) Regardless of my experiences, I am invariably surprised when friends and acquaintances reveal their bisexuality.

I've known people who claim to have bidar, but demonstrated no concrete proof of their ability. Mostly their bidar appeared, after the fact! As others have written, I also think it's much easier to guess someone's heterosexuality, or homosexuality, than one's bisexuality.

Whether partnered, or not, bisexuals are more apt to be secretive about their true desires, insuring that their actions are covert. Certainly, that would make being identified as a bisexual more difficult. I know that's true in my case, as I've always lived in conservatively moral and political locations, or the military, where being open about my bisexuality could be detrimental to my health and welfare!

[darkeyes]

I am not sure whether gaydar or bidar exist as such.. I don't dismiss them, but with me the jury is out.. I am able very often to assess whether women and girls are likely to bi or gay more so than men, but that is more down to an ability to read their body language, and especially whether or not they were sexually attracted to me. What I have never been able to do is instinctively know whether a woman is lesbian or bisexual.. all I can do is work out whether or not they are likely to be sexually attracted to other women by observation. It isn't infallible by any means and have been wrong fairly often (didn't have a clue 'bout me sister's bisexuality for a start!! She kept that right quiet somehow!!!) but have been right more often than not.. which was handy in the not so dim and distant past.. especially in the much too long a time a certain cuddly flatm8 of mine spent denying 'erself me!!

What I have often wondered however, similarly to yourself, Joan, is that if there is such a thing as a personal sexual radar, is it not possible that it is an instinct which some people have to enable them detect whether or not another person is likely to be physically attracted in a sexual sense to those their own gender rather than have an ability to narrow it down to a specific sexuality?

[darkeyes]

The study was interesting and the concept of gay or bidar worth discussing but is also a topic of little importance in the real world.
I wonder just how true that is, Joan? The subject is a bit more than "of little importance" to a lotta peeps who r hoping to get laid or are in search of a same gender relationship...

[æonpax]

I agree with Aeon that this study was not about bidar and whether it exists or not. It was about making snap judgements about sexual orientation as far as the subject being gay or straight..bisexuality is not part of this study. Bi Invisibility is probably involved in this study. There may be good scientific reasons why bisexuality was not a third choice offered to the participants. Just the same, bisexuality was ignored as a choice for making a snap judgment. Questions should be directed towards the two researchers.

I think something needs to be cleared up here.


a - The study (http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0036671 ) never mentions “gaydar” or “bidar” and never mentions lesbian or bisexual, instead using the phrase “sexual orientation”, to wit;



“People are able to judge men’s and women’s sexual orientation with above-chance accuracy…”


The problem here is the word “gay” is still used colloquially to include all homosexuals as well as “gay males”. The study gives people two options, “gay or straight”. The assumption has to be gay means all homosexuals including bisexual.

The word “snap” as in “snap judgment” is referring to a unit of time. “Instantaneous” or “spontaneous” could have been substituted. The study gave each person “1000 or 40 ms” (milliseconds) to see each image, depending on the experiment.

b - The New York Times article (http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0036671 ) actually makes the claim that the study confirms the existence of “gaydar” and does attempt to qualify that assertion in that article.

With all due respect, if your argument hinges on the exclusion of a third or bisexual alternative, it may be flawed,

a) you left out a forth, “transgender” which is considered part of the Hetero/Homosexual Continuum and
b) your argument at this point is semantical, not empirical or academically logical. You’d have to make the case that beyond just words, bisexuality is distinctly a separate entity unto itself and apart from homosexuality and that the researchers were in error using the colloquial “gay” or even “homosexual”, which is within the scientific nomenclature.

***


from the discussion section of experiment 2 "it would appear that minority sexual orientation is not the concealed stigma that many argue it is. Indeed, the need to protect gay people from discrimination would seem increasingly urgent to the extent that minority sexual orientation is tacitly inferred from aspects of personal appearance that are routinely available for inspection (e.g., faces)."..."Nonetheless, a relatively unexplored question that is ripe for future research involves the external validity of these effects – do snap judgments of sexual orientation from faces occur in real-life settings? Additionally, what are the downstream consequences of snap judgments of sexual orientation, for example, on the perceiver’s feelings, thoughts, and behaviors towards the target?"

These two questions are worth noting. Snap judgements about bisexuality are not made. Snap judgments are made about straight or gay. This should not surprise us as bisexuals often point out that if a bisexual is seen as "different" from heterosexuals they are seen as gay.

Your above statement is only valid if you assume bisexuality is apart from homosexuality. As you pointed out, and for which I agree, “Bi Invisibility” is a problem and is such a problem that outside the bisexual community, we are inadvertently forgotten. Nonetheless, such invisibility, however distasteful, is not a scientific exclusionary factor in regards to this study. We are still part of the continuum and even if we are not mentioned by name, the same results apply to bisexuals as they do with gay males and lesbians.



Does this study hold any significance for bisexuals? I would say that it doesn't. It is an interesting point but unless the bisexual has perceived "gay" facial features, it is irrelevant information for bisexuals. A study that examines facial features and being able to detect bi from hetero or gay facial features would need to be done. I agree with Aeon that snap judgments made about sexuality based on facial features is a possibly dangerous Eugenic issue.
Bidave may be able to detect the difference between gay, bi or hetero people. Don't be so snap judgmental Aeon. ;)Are you using bidave's facial features to come to this judgement? :yikes2:lol

I have deliberately made fun of the “bidar” concept in part because bisexuals take up such a wide eclectic collection of humanity, that unless one taps into a metaphysical explanation, there is no other logical way to explain that concept nor has anyone, other than offering personal experiences, offered proof of its existence.

This misnomered “gaydar” study is at the very least, an attempt to legitimize and empirically understand the factors (in this case one factor) as to how people judge each other merely by glancing at them and therein lays the problem.

The reason I dislike the term “gaydar” is that it assumes only homosexuals posses this supposed skill. Au contraire. Any kind “snap judgment” in regards to people is universal and is easily influenced by our own bias, prejudices and stereotypes. There are also those who supposedly can pick out a homosexual based on facial features, that can and will cause that person harm. As I’ve said from the start, it’s a two-edged sword.

[Gearbox]

There was a reality show that was all about using 'gaydar' to win: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Playing_It_Straight
Not sure if bisexuality screwed that up or not though.lol

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJub5gFNLL4

[tenni]

"a) you left out a forth, “transgender” which is considered part of the Hetero/Homosexual Continuum and
b) your argument at this point is semantical, not empirical or academically logical. You’d have to make the case that beyond just words, bisexuality is distinctly a separate entity unto itself and apart from homosexuality and that the researchers were in error using the colloquial “gay” or even “homosexual”, which is within the scientific nomenclature."

Although transgender is considered part of the GLBT group, I've understood that it is not a sexuality by any "academic" or scientific organization. It is a gender issue and not a sexuality issue.

Rather surprising that Aeon is taking this position on a bisexual website? Denial of bisexuality?

As to whether the exclusion of bisexuality as "semantical" or empirical , that is a bit confusing to me. The same argument may be used by bigots to deny homosexuality and declare it a disease needing "fixing".

Sexuality (sexual orientation) is not an entity though in the sense of a chair or car. It is however real attraction/behaviour. Human sexuality (orientation) is the capacity to have erotic experiences and responses.Human sexuality can also refer to the way someone is sexually attracted to another person.

Including bisexuals with homosexuals is not very progressive and a rather repressive approach being proposed by Aeon (not the study but her extrapolation/interpretation). This is why it is better to refer to "same sex" acts rather than calling them "homosexual acts". This is semantic that is true. Aeon would have bisexuals fighting for our existence and acceptance. Isn't that troll like behaviour? Fortunately, researchers have disproved her position long ago.

[æonpax]

1) Although transgender is considered part of the GLBT group, I've understood that it is not a sexuality by any "academic" or scientific organization. It is a gender issue and not a sexuality issue.

2) Rather surprising that Aeon is taking this position on a bisexual website? Denial of bisexuality?

3) As to whether the exclusion of bisexuality as "semantical" or empirical , that is a bit confusing to me. The same argument may be used by bigots to deny homosexuality and declare it a disease needing "fixing".

4) Sexuality (sexual orientation) is not an entity though in the sense of a chair or car. It is however real attraction/behaviour. Human sexuality (orientation) is the capacity to have erotic experiences and responses.Human sexuality can also refer to the way someone is sexually attracted to another person.

5) Including bisexuals with homosexuals is not very progressive and a rather repressive approach being proposed by Aeon (not the study but her extrapolation/interpretation). This is why it is better to refer to "same sex" acts rather than calling them "homosexual acts". This is semantic that is true. Aeon would have bisexuals fighting for our existence and acceptance. Isn't that troll like behaviour? Fortunately, researchers have disproved her position long ago.
`

1) I agree. I stand corrected.

2) My stand? Please define? Are you referring to the fact that "bidar" doesn't really exist and if it does, it does so only in the minds of those who want to believe it? Are you referring to my statement that you nor anyone else has offered any proof or evidence of such a thing called "bidar"? None of you did. Where did I deny "bisexuality?" Sir, I'm afraid I must accuse you of either lying or irrationally distorting what I say to fit your very strange agenda.

3) It was my polite way of saying you are playing with words so I hope that ends your confusion on at least one of the very many things you are confused about. That being the case, your analogy makes absolutely no sense.

4) That is all very nice but has nothing to do with this topic.

5) I see you set yourself apart and superior to the academics, researchers, psychologists, scientists and other learned people whom have for a century, grouped bisexuality within the homo/heterosexual continuum by claiming they are wrong and you are right, just because you said so. Aside from the fact that you offered not one iota of evidence to substantiate your superior knowledge on this topic, your attitude borders on delusionary and socially dysfunctional.

You had me going there for a minute. Your first post actually approached the subject from rational perspective...then, you blow it all issuing this obtuse reply. Such is life.

[æonpax]

I wonder just how true that is, Joan? The subject is a bit more than "of little importance" to a lotta peeps who r hoping to get laid or are in search of a same gender relationship...

Tenni, and the "usual group of suspects" seem to be the ONLY ones who are making an issue of bidar. I think this has little to do with gaydar or bidar but the old misogynist group here making noise just to be heard.

I'll google the word "bidar" here and check out the results, - http://lmgtfy.com/?q=bidar - These guys are good for a laugh.

[darkeyes]

"
b) your argument at this point is semantical, not empirical or academically logical. You’d have to make the case that beyond just words, bisexuality is distinctly a separate entity unto itself and apart from homosexuality and that the researchers were in error using the colloquial “gay” or even “homosexual”, which is within the scientific nomenclature."


Rather surprising that Aeon is taking this position on a bisexual website? Denial of bisexuality?

As to whether the exclusion of bisexuality as "semantical" or empirical , that is a bit confusing to me. The same argument may be used by bigots to deny homosexuality and declare it a disease needing "fixing".

Sexuality (sexual orientation) is not an entity though in the sense of a chair or car. It is however real attraction/behaviour. Human sexuality (orientation) is the capacity to have erotic experiences and responses.Human sexuality can also refer to the way someone is sexually attracted to another person.

Including bisexuals with homosexuals is not very progressive and a rather repressive approach being proposed by Aeon (not the study but her extrapolation/interpretation). This is why it is better to refer to "same sex" acts rather than calling them "homosexual acts". This is semantic that is true. Aeon would have bisexuals fighting for our existence and acceptance. Isn't that troll like behaviour? Fortunately, researchers have disproved her position long ago.Joan isn't denying the existence of bisexuality at all and u know it...and as to why u object to same gender acts between bisexual people being referred to as homosexual acts I have no idea.. that is just what they are if on a 1 2 1 basis.. just as sex between two opposite gender bisexuals are acts of heterosexual sex (and I include anal sex in such a context as heterosexual sex although I know a number of people who claim quite the opposite). It is arguable that even if an opposite gender person is present in group sex whether acts between those within the group who are same sex can be called bisexual acts.. it is easy to claim that they be referred to as homosexual or heterosexual acts within a bisexual setting.. but it would be churlish of me to refer to them as such for it is certainly bisexual play.... acts between people of the same gender do not begin to be bisexual until a third is introduced and even then only if there is an element of same sex play within the group.. what they are referred isn't important.. what is, is the sexuality and acts of those within the couple or group..and that they all have fun while doing whatever it is they enjoy doing!!

..and neither would she have u fighting for ur existence or acceptance.. sometimes tenni babes.. u are so melodramatic and like so many others read into what Aeon says things she has patently not said... it is who and what bisexuals are which is important, not what they do with one another... she knows that as well as u or I...and I was going to make the same point as aeon did in her last but one post about research.. decided not to then, changed me mind again.. she is right.. you are in error... 'nuff said...

[Gearbox]

5) I see you set yourself apart and superior to the academics, researchers, psychologists, scientists and other learned people whom have for a century, grouped bisexuality within the homo/heterosexual continuum by claiming they are wrong and you are right, just because you said so. Aside from the fact that you offered not one iota of evidence to substantiate your superior knowledge on this topic, your attitude borders on delusionary and socially dysfunctional.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-P6_FwpVo_s
It's seldom a good idea to render a group as 'unquestionable'. Nor is it wise to decry the individual view, especially when it can only contribute to an ongoing theory. Make no mistake! However learned or academic a group professes to be, they have nothing 'done&dusted' where psychology and philosophy are concerned. We are still in the 'dark age' where the mind is concerned, and getting darker where sexuality is concerned IMO.
If we were to take your advice/warning, we'd listen to the clergy and forget about our own thoughts on the matter involved.:eek2: Bugger that!lol

As far as the heterosexual - homosexual continuum suggests, I personally have no polarity and am in a state of perpetual sexuality flux, like a ball on a spinning roulette wheel.lol
Only IF the ball drops into either Hetero or Homo, will I experience polarity (a definitive sexuality). IF the wheel spins again, I shall pop in&out of polarities obtaining parts of each BINARY sexualities.:rolleyes:
How can this be? And why is there no attempt at explaining the 'roulette wheel'?
Because they don't have a clue what drives sexual preferences. We can only guess.:bounce:

[pepperjack]

`
Yes, you are confused. The thread I started was specifically about “gaydar” In my first post I stated the research did not mention “bidar” to which I anecdotally added, “I don’t believe.” It was others who followed my post commenting that they believe bidar to real and disagree with me. I have no problem with that. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

Had I wanted to discuss “bidar”, I would have started a topic on it. Now apparently, it seems, some people here feel very strongly about bidar…so strongly they dismissed the gaydar topic to pursue their own course…perhaps in part, just to disagree with me. Whatever.

The “real world” has people in it who judge and condemn homosexuals based on stereotypes such as mannerisms, dress, speech and physical articulation. In case you haven’t noticed, anti-gay sentiment is on the rise and those who hate homosexuals identify us by the same stereotypes “gaydar” uses and many gays object to the connotation “gardar” implies. This is a serious issue.

The topic is gaydar. Do you wish to add to it?


I feel that I have added to it; I shared some honest experience. And this is a site for bisexuals and gay or bi, it is all homosexual behavior. IMO it overlaps, the word bidar was introduced, I responded. Now all of a sudden I find myself being being wrongfully labeled as a misogynist again. Is that your misodar at work? Sounds as if you're indulging in the biased judgment passing which you claim to decry in this thread. Here's some more input for the "topic" then: whatever became of the reality show, Gay, Straight or Taken? I enjoyed this program briefly; it was a great exercise in testing that gaydar.

[æonpax]

It's seldom a good idea to render a group as 'unquestionable'. Nor is it wise to decry the individual view, especially when it can only contribute to an ongoing theory. Make no mistake! However learned or academic a group professes to be, they have nothing 'done&dusted' where psychology and philosophy are concerned. We are still in the 'dark age' where the mind is concerned, and getting darker where sexuality is concerned IMO.
If we were to take your advice/warning, we'd listen to the clergy and forget about our own thoughts on the matter involved.:eek2: Bugger that!lol

As far as the heterosexual - homosexual continuum suggests, I personally have no polarity and am in a state of perpetual sexuality flux, like a ball on a spinning roulette wheel.lol
Only IF the ball drops into either Hetero or Homo, will I experience polarity (a definitive sexuality). IF the wheel spins again, I shall pop in&out of polarities obtaining parts of each BINARY sexualities.:rolleyes:
How can this be? And why is there no attempt at explaining the 'roulette wheel'?
Because they don't have a clue what drives sexual preferences. We can only guess.


A - The video you provided is excellent. Dr. Jeffrey Schaler really does shake up the psychiatric establishment. However, Dr Schaler has a B.A. from Antioch College and a M.Ed. & Ph.D. from the University of Maryland. That makes him eminently qualified to be critical of his colleagues within their chosen discipline. Moreover, not seen in this video, are the many books and papers he wrote, outlining the proof and evidence he uses to support his claims.

An good analogy would be Albert Einstein who went up against every school of thought and broke apart every rigidly held conviction of Physics in his “General Theory of Relativity” but he did so by proving himself right via empirical evidence.

There is a big difference between educated people using scientific methods to force dramatic shifts in the various academic disciplines and some anonymous guy on the internet giving his questionable opinion.



http://i.imgur.com/cGhMo.jpg


B – Posted above is a chart used to illustrate what the Homo/Heterosexual Continuum is. Were a person to say, “that is wrong” and proceed to outline his or her objections in an intelligent manner, a rational person would have to give weight to such an argument.

Contrast that with a person who says, “that is wrong” but provides no proof or evidence to support such a claim, a rational person would give it zero credence.

C – Then we have “faith”. The existence of God is based on “faith”, which is to say having no proof or evidence. Thomas Aquinas in his treatise, Summa Theologica, (written in 1274) outlined what many consider to be an excellent logical case for the existence of God. While having no empirical evidence, it has still widely regarded and studied.

People also have faith in non-religious ideologies, many political, that are not supported by empirical evidence but on the strength of a person who wants to believe it’s true. This is where it gets rather dicey. So strong is this faith that a person seeks any and all things that conform to or reaffirm that persons belief. “Conformation Bias” in the extreme.

If a person wants to believe something, despite all evidence to the contrary, such as “birthers” then there is a special category for that. However, the question has to be asked, does such a belief cause any harm to the person or those around them? If the answer is no, then let it be. In the case of “birthers”, such a belief is harmless

In the case of “bidar”, which I challenge anyone to offer empirical or logical proof of it’s existence, it again becomes a matter of possible harm. If none exists, then let it be…although it will not stop me from making fun of it, it’s just not important.

[nutme]

You all really need to get a life and mind your own business. How much effort do you spend doing your daily business wondering if someone wants to get in your pants? How many times have you paid extra for being a dimbulb thinking that Mr. Green Jeans wants to blow you? Gaydar, Bidar...........how about youreafuckingretarddar? That "dar" flew right by you.

[Long Duck Dong]

lol aeon..... in all the years that I have been interested in paranormal and extra sensory perception, the one thing that I have noticed, is that there is generally two camps,.... the * its true * and the * its BS * camps.... but the campsite for people that can prove the actual nature of things, is often empty.....

its the same thing with the gay and bidar issue..... I am not sure there is a way to explain and prove how it works beyond being able to show that some people do have a ability to pick up on sexuality in people.... and while studies like the one you posted, do show that somehow some people can correctly pick sexuality beyond a random quess, do show that there is clearly something that stands out, I am not sure that we will ever have a clear answer as to how and why they can do it.....

what stands out to me, is the millisecond glimpse of a persons distorted face and how the study is limiting things to the face, when assuming how gay / bi dar works.... and how much of the argument against your opinion and the study, rests on peoples personal and longer contact with people with full exposure ( talking etc )..... so I would be interested to see if they ever do a study with sight impaired / blind people to see if it could be more than just the face that can be a indication of sexuality......

personally myself, I believe that pics carry a form of energy, in the way that some pics of scenery / people, can provoke a reaction in us about the situation / person, that is very distinct and clear, without any true reasoning as to why we have the reaction.....and I view it in much the same way that we can be attracted to a person or repulsed by them within seconds of meeting a person, without any reason to support our reactions other than we have picked up on something about them...... and while its easier to see that we should not judge on assumptions, often its the assumptions that prove our judgement to be true

[tenni]

Post 24 Aeon wrote about tenni
"Where did I deny "bisexuality?" Sir, I'm afraid I must accuse you of either lying or irrationally distorting what I say to fit your very strange agenda."

response
Post 21 Aeon wrote about tenni
"Your above statement is only valid if you assume bisexuality is apart from homosexuality."

I see from your further post 24 that your position is not to include bisexuality with homosexuality but along the continuum of sexualities. That is not what I understood from your above quote though in post 21. I suppose it may be your writing style and my impatience to work through your post making vague references ("above statement"..I have no idea what statement that you referred to and it seems little patience with your post style).
Thank you for clarifying. I hope that you see that I am not lying nor irritationally distorting. It is more likely poor communication between us.

As far as bidar existing, I don't think that I have written whether I agree or disagree. I don't know. It doesn't happen for me as I can only tell a biguy if he tells me that he is bisexual. I will not judge those who state that they have it. Unlike Aeon, I will not ridicule those who write that they have such skills.

With regard to whether you(Aeon) are making sense to me, you do at times and not others. May I suggest that you not assume that your written style perfectly communicates with others and those that don't get your thoughts are lying or irrational?

As far as gaydar is concerned, I do find it interesting that the word "gaydar" is used in the New York Times but not the actual study. I wonder why and can guess that it may have come from the editor to get a catchy headline?..lol or sensationalize. I didn't think that the NY Times would do sensational journalism?

I found Aeon's statement about men being able to identify the sexuality better than women curious. (post 16) I was going to let it go but since Aeon is being such "une personne qui jette merde" I will ask for clarification.

post 16
"I read the study too, quite carefully and they were researching how people make snap decisions based on facial patterns. The male control group scored higher than female in regards to recognizing homosexuals however…they did not conclude anything from this as one singular study would never pass peer review."


"Male control group". As far as I can tell with my limited post grad education is psychology there is no identified control group in the study let alone a male control group? In fact, I find the researchers vague in identifying all genders of participants. Reference is made to 24 participants with 19 being female in one experiment. Please clarify.

I could find no words supporting her position that the male control group scored higher than females? Perhaps Aeon is re interpreting the statistical information in the Discussion. Would Aeon please refer and quote the exact passage in the original study that supports the statement that men were better able to determine the sexuality of the subjects? (not the New York times glazed more sensationalized writing by the same researchers)

This is what I find for experiment 1
Results and Discussion
As displayed in Figure 2, participants were significantly better than chance at reading women’s sexual orientation (Mean A′f = .64), t(23) = 7.07, p<.001, Cohen’s [38] effect size d = 1.44. Participants also read men’s sexual orientation significantly better than chance (Mean A′m = .57), t(23) = 3.58, p<.002, d = 0.73. This finding indicates that naïve perceivers can, in fact, read sexual orientation from unknown others’ faces.

[æonpax]

lol aeon..... in all the years that I have been interested in paranormal and extra sensory perception, the one thing that I have noticed, is that there is generally two camps,.... the * its true * and the * its BS * camps.... but the campsite for people that can prove the actual nature of things, is often empty.....

its the same thing with the gay and bidar issue..... I am not sure there is a way to explain and prove how it works beyond being able to show that some people do have a ability to pick up on sexuality in people.... and while studies like the one you posted, do show that somehow some people can correctly pick sexuality beyond a random quess, do show that there is clearly something that stands out, I am not sure that we will ever have a clear answer as to how and why they can do it.....

what stands out to me, is the millisecond glimpse of a persons distorted face and how the study is limiting things to the face, when assuming how gay / bi dar works.... and how much of the argument against your opinion and the study, rests on peoples personal and longer contact with people with full exposure ( talking etc )..... so I would be interested to see if they ever do a study with sight impaired / blind people to see if it could be more than just the face that can be a indication of sexuality......

personally myself, I believe that pics carry a form of energy, in the way that some pics of scenery / people, can provoke a reaction in us about the situation / person, that is very distinct and clear, without any true reasoning as to why we have the reaction.....and I view it in much the same way that we can be attracted to a person or repulsed by them within seconds of meeting a person, without any reason to support our reactions other than we have picked up on something about them...... and while its easier to see that we should not judge on assumptions, often its the assumptions that prove our judgement to be true
`

What started me on this “Gaydar” thing was another discussion I was in, in a rather liberal forum, regarding Rep. James Lankford’s (R-OK) comment that it should be legal to fire gays because it’s a “choice issue.” (http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2012/05/14/482200/lankford-fired-gay/?mobile=nc ) Someone posted his picture (see below) and two comments were made that after looking at him, their “gaydar” went off the wall. The conversation got sidetracked as to the legitimacy of “gaydar” and whether or not it was just a conclusion made via sociological stereotypes or some other kind of bias. During that discussion, the link to the NYT article and facial recognition study were offered.


http://i.imgur.com/YNeV7.jpg


As I stated before, I don’t really like the word “gaydar”, partly because it has become cliché and partly because it is misnomer for the ability to “read” a person at a distance. Now such an ability is REAL. For example, Israeli security forces in public areas such as airports and bus terminals, are trained to recognize the characteristics of a possible terrorist. There are also abuses of this such as police engaging in “racial profiling.”

While I am disposed to accept a “preternatural” explanation in regards to a person being able to tell an orientation by glance although that depends on the accuracy. While interesting, the issue is not really compelling.

[Gearbox]

There is a big difference between educated people using scientific methods to force dramatic shifts in the various academic disciplines and some anonymous guy on the internet giving his questionable opinion.
It's some guy on the net stating "It's wrong!", to some other guys&gals on the net.:tongue: Nobody on Youtube thinks their comments&vids will right society as we know it. (Well, I'm probably wrong there.LOL). (OK! That's definitely wrong, but still!lol).

From where I'm sitting, there's a whole lot more to sexuality than M&F/Cock&Vagina. You only have to read the poles here to see that.
The Het-Hom continuum only observes that the attraction to M&F/C&V can change for some. That's basically it.:eek:
There's no attempt at explaining the mechanics, nor how Het&Hom are polarities of sexuality, or how it has any. It's just a way to view sexual orientation. You don't need a degree in philosophy to have a different view.

On 'gaydar' though: That bloke looks HUNG!:tongue:

[pepperjack]

Very interesting to me how there is a demand for empirical scientific proof of such an elusive. intangible quality while subtly acknowledging ESP, the paranormal throughout this thread; but then, human beings are inherently contradictory. "preternatural explanation"...." such an ability is REAL"...... " your ethereal gift" ( a quote from elsewhere in our interchange); I agree, they're stupid words( gaydar & bidar), mere replacements for what used to be referred to as a " come hither look," that spontaneous, highly charged connection between two sets of eyes. But then, we live in the age of texting, where, for the sake of efficiency, words, our language, are changing. I think anyone on this thread can agree that we've experienced " vibes," circumstantial evidence, which has often convicted murderers in a court of law.

[æonpax]

Very interesting to me how there is a demand for empirical scientific proof of such an elusive. intangible quality while subtly acknowledging ESP, the paranormal throughout this thread; but then, human beings are inherently contradictory. "preternatural explanation"...." such an ability is REAL"...... " your ethereal gift" ( a quote from elsewhere in our interchange); I agree, they're stupid words( gaydar & bidar), mere replacements for what used to be referred to as a " come hither look," that spontaneous, highly charged connection between two sets of eyes. But then, we live in the age of texting, where, for the sake of efficiency, words, our language, are changing. I think anyone on this thread can agree that we've experienced " vibes," circumstantial evidence, which has often convicted murderers in a court of law.
`

This is just food for thought;

An unknown person next to you looks at a picture and says, “he’s gay.” How can you tell if he/she;

a) “recognizes” they are gay?
b) “senses” they are gay?
or
c) “assumes” they are gay?



What is the bases from such a statement? Stereotypes? Bias - prejudice? Conditioning; be it religious or ideological? Metaphysical?

Remember “Matthew Shepard?” He “looked” gay, at least to his attackers. No one would dare say his murderers had “gaydar” but these people none the less pegged him as a homosexual by looks. However even to this day, the question remains, was he really gay? (that’s an argument unto itself I’m not entering)

People can call it what they want but without knowing a person first hand, anything you judge a person to be (gay, liberal, religious…whatever) is an “assumption” and going through life depending on that as a certitude, is an extremely poor and false way to live.

[darkeyes]

`

This is just food for thought;

An unknown person next to you looks at a picture and says, “he’s gay.” How can you tell if he/she;

a) “recognizes” they are gay?
b) “senses” they are gay?
or
c) “assumes” they are gay?



What is the bases from such a statement? Stereotypes? Bias - prejudice? Conditioning; be it religious or ideological? Metaphysical?

Remember “Matthew Shepard?” He “looked” gay, at least to his attackers. No one would dare say his murderers had “gaydar” but these people none the less pegged him as a homosexual by looks. However even to this day, the question remains, was he really gay? (that’s an argument unto itself I’m not entering)

People can call it what they want but without knowing a person first hand, anything you judge a person to be (gay, liberal, religious…whatever) is an “assumption” and going through life depending on that as a certitude, is an extremely poor and false way to live.
I think this is fair comment.. one I can identify with at least.. my personal radar about the sexuality of other people is very dodgy, and as I have said before it is through observation and study of others I came to conclusions as to whether they were bi/gay. It is something which I deployed when out and hoping to get laid... yet it is not infallible but a good guide into whether or not I was in with a chance.. rarely could I tell the actual sexuality but more often than not, by studying the body language of others around me, I could tell whether or not they were straight, and in 1 2 1 interaction with me, this was at its most acute.

I do not dismiss "gaydar" or "bidar".. but do question whether or not either exists and whether they are separate "dars".. I don't think what I did, and still do although out of academic rather than a lustful active interest (ok.. the lust is still there.. act and Kate kills me!!) is "gaydar" or any other kind of "dar".. it worked though, and still does. I need a little time to work it out.. time and study of those around.. I cant do it within a microsecond of seeing or meeting. We all make assumptions of people immediately upon introduction or just seeing their face for the very first time.. we decide we like or don't another in a split second very often and are often right.. how much is a "dar" I really can't say, but I long since learned not to make snap judgements on anyone.. far too much shite has hit the fan because I have done that, when over time positive snap judgements were proven very wrong.. and also negative judgements made which have almost lost me a number of people who have become very good and close friends..

..and tbh, we worry too much about why, and often want to get far too deeply into the mechanics of things.. a natural curiosity is a good thing and I have an interest in human sexuality and even the "dars" of which we speak.. but only in passing.. I am what I am and u lot are whatever u lot are... why may very well be interesting and yes, I'd like to know, because I have a huge curiosity about things and people, but why I am gay isn't something which loses me sleep, plays big part in my life, or which I think I have to know.. I just am, and that's what is important....I joy in it, not stress about it and have other more important things to concern me.. like why others who are not gay, or les, or bi or trans are so fascinated by who and what we are and why they wish to know.. Knowing, as Joan has said earlier in the thread can be a double edged sword used to harm rather than help... and is something we should be very careful about..

[Gearbox]

....by studying the body language of others around me, I could tell whether or not they were straight, and in 1 2 1 interaction with me, this was at its most acute.
Spill the beans!! Spill em!:tongue:
How could you tell all this from body language and interaction with you? We might learn something here (God forbid!lol).

Do you catch them having a sly uncontrollable peek at your hot bod? Do they seem to be 'distracted' from your spiel while battling those unintentional thoughts about you?
Come on! We need to know this!lol

I'll kick off some personal experience that *blipped* my 'gaydar', and hope others follow as it's NOT exactly a science, but more of a 'What was that about?' thing:

Well there I was at the post office paying a bill. The bloke who served me (late 40's, handsome, well groomed etc) drew my attention because he seemed intimidated by me: Wouldn't look me in the eye, or hardly at all. He didn't seem to hate my guts for some reason, but acted shy and like he had a 'guilty secret'. THAT *blipped* my 'gaydar'. Thought he might fancy me and be embarrassed amongst his co-workers.lol
Any thoughts on that?:tongue:

What messes up my 'gaydar' is that I notice hetero males check each other out too. Where I check them out for sexual attraction purposes, they IMO do it for non sexual purposes. As far as I can tell any way.
When 'checking out' and I'm not attracted to somebody, the 'checking out' stops after 2.7 secs (roughly). I'd continue if attracted, and that is a good sign in others IMO. When it's blatant, it's a great sign.:tongue:

[NjbiGuy01]

I don't really know.....there are times I feel pretty confident I have someone on my "gaydar" or my "bi-dar", but of course you don't want to be wrong and make a move you might regret. It's funny, I've been with plenty of bi men in MFM situations, and none of them seemed overtly gay, bi or anything but "normal" straight dudes.

Ironically, on one rare occasion, I met a dude through business that stared into my eyes and I literally started to get hard ! My Gaydar was ticking. He was a handsome well spoken latino, and I have to admit being truly smitten. We were standing in the hallway of a building he was the engineer for, and my company was doing work in his building. We talked for a few minutes, and he said "we could discuss it further in my office"....silly me, I got nervous, stammered and said "oh, look at the time, I have another appointment to go to...". Duh. Boy i regret that... He later moved on to another property, and I never knew where he went despite searching... I had some serious wet dreams of us playing in his private basement office, more than a few times..... Oh Javier, where did you go ? :(

[darkeyes]

Spill the beans!! Spill em!:tongue:
How could you tell all this from body language and interaction with you? We might learn something here (God forbid!lol).

Do you catch them having a sly uncontrollable peek at your hot bod? Do they seem to be 'distracted' from your spiel while battling those unintentional thoughts about you?
Come on! We need to know this!lol


Yes essentially, Gear.. a bit more 2 it than that, but essentially u have the picture just fine... and its more fun, imaginative and successful than Edinburgh's (an' Scotland's) Bobby Dazzlers (guys) sauntering up, whirlin' ya round an sayin' "Hullo hen, howzit gaun? Ye fancy a wee knee trembler afore ye get oan yer bus??":eek2: which happened to me once or "Ma wullie is a brammer an huge. ye fancy a wee sook afore ye gan hame?":yikes2: which has happened to me more than 1ce!!! Needless 2 say, knee trembler or sooks never took place.. not with Fran ne ways..:tongue:. Sighhhh.. such romantics Edinburgh's finest...;) There are many such tales which Edinburgh's ladies tell of the suave advances of the city's gadgies... it isn't the reason Fran is lessie but the romantic advances of our menfolk don't exactly encourage me to consider reassessing my sexuality..:tongue:

[Gearbox]

it isn't the reason Fran is lessie but the romantic advances of our menfolk don't exactly encourage me to consider reassessing my sexuality..:tongue:
What if they played 'hard to get'?lol Mind you, if they could do that, they'd prob be in Hollywood by now.:rolleyes:

I've met a few lesbians through a bi female friend in her promiscuous days, and I always had to be told which were lesbians and which were straight friends. (except for one who was the ultimate stereotype.lol).
Could you actually (even try to) asses a woman's sexuality while out shopping, with no interaction?


I don't really know.....there are times I feel pretty confident I have someone on my "gaydar" or my "bi-dar", but of course you don't want to be wrong and make a move you might regret. It's funny, I've been with plenty of bi men in MFM situations, and none of them seemed overtly gay, bi or anything but "normal" straight dudes.
Same here with 1-1 m-m. I've tried to look for signs so I can guess better covertly when out, but nothing.

I've done pretty much the same as you did with the sexy Javier. Although it's disappointing, just look at all the fantasy it got you.:tongue: It's been decades, and mine is still going strong.lol Every cloud has a silver lining.

[darkeyes]

What if they played 'hard to get'?lol Mind you, if they could do that, they'd prob be in Hollywood by now.:rolleyes:

I've met a few lesbians through a bi female friend in her promiscuous days, and I always had to be told which were lesbians and which were straight friends. (except for one who was the ultimate stereotype.lol).
Could you actually (even try to) asses a woman's sexuality while out shopping, with no interaction?


Scottish men play hard to get??? Come on Gear... pull the other one..it has bells on..... but I think u worked that one out!!!

If interacting with another of the same gender, Gear, yes, Maybe not her sexuality, but whether or not she is likely to not be straight...A nod, how they look at each other, touch, smile, how they stand together or even away from each other, how they laugh... with a little practice it isn't a very difficult thing to work out. Sometimes to answer ur question, observing women observing women they don't know it is also possible but much less predictable.. a little longer study is needed to work out whether a woman is observing out of feminine interest in and envy of a rival or feminine interest, longing and lust.. mostly it is the former.. but not always.. what we all know of course is feminine contempt of another's woman's poor taste *laffs*... we don't need to study body language for that.. it hits ya in the face.. show contempt 2 openly an' a hit in the face is the least of ya worries.. *laffs again*

I did say it is not infallible and it isn't. Using the same observation techniques in the street, shops, park or even at work as in a club or pub or at a party it is possible.. tho the situation is very different from social gatherings, it works pretty well although I have to admit that it is usually impossible to confirm what I have worked out, but sometimes confirmation is obtained as two women get off with each other after a first chance meeting right in front of ur eyes. Sometimes mutual sexual attraction is just so powerful between two people it is difficult to mistake whatever their gender.. .It is very rare but it is not unknown... While in clubs, at parties and in pubs often I see the results of my observational assessments confirmed.. but as I say, much less so elsewhere. But having gotten off in the past with quite a few girls and women after a first encounter in a park, cafe or other such venue, I am relatively happy that I am right at least as often as not... I know..I'm a nosey cow:yikes2:.. but I do like people to be happy and have fun...:bigrin:

It has always been more successful with women than men and to some extent this coincides with the findings of the study about gaydar.. whether this is because my interest is in women I don't know.. when I was interested in men I never really looked for tell tale signs of their sexuality except on a few occasions more out of curiosity than real interest.. the vast majority of men in this part of the world are a lot more guarded about their sexuality and also much more macho than some parts of the country (whatever their sexuality) and so I have never been able to read them nearly as well.. and when I was after a man.. unless I thought he was gay, I didn't care one jot about his sexuality and I know not too many of them gave a bugger about mine (except when it came to having the odd lil 3some or moresome with at least one other girl involved although several were somewhat taken aback as the girl and I showed as much interest in each other as in them.. one in fact stormed off in a huff calling us whores and fucking dykes.. nice man...).. mostly, all they cared about was that they and I were going to have a mutually fruitful, beneficial and fun time..

[pepperjack]

`

This is just food for thought;

An unknown person next to you looks at a picture and says, “he’s gay.” How can you tell if he/she;

a) “recognizes” they are gay?
b) “senses” they are gay?
or
c) “assumes” they are gay?



What is the bases from such a statement? Stereotypes? Bias - prejudice? Conditioning; be it religious or ideological? Metaphysical?

Remember “Matthew Shepard?” He “looked” gay, at least to his attackers. No one would dare say his murderers had “gaydar” but these people none the less pegged him as a homosexual by looks. However even to this day, the question remains, was he really gay? (that’s an argument unto itself I’m not entering)

People can call it what they want but without knowing a person first hand, anything you judge a person to be (gay, liberal, religious…whatever) is an “assumption” and going through life depending on that as a certitude, is an extremely poor and false way to live.


Maybe I'm wrong but I perceive a very subtle connection between lookism & the advent of the metrosexual in our society and which goes to the heart of your thread. Seems like nowadays, no one is above suspicion. The latest celebrity I've become aware of, suspected of same-sex behavior,is John Travolta. I recently viewed the movie J. Edgar & was floored by a scene which alluded JFK was bisexual, the beginning of Hoover's blackmail files...at least in this movie. Ironic! Letterman in the background just announced that Green Lantern is gay in his monologue. I've been suspected, accused of being gay but never bi. Funny how that works in other peoples' minds. I'm a very masculine guy; makes me wonder what kind of subconscious vibes I'm emitting. By the way, I've literally experienced the hypothetical scenario you mentioned. It was brought to me on the job one day by the stereotypical jolly fat man, the guy who can't even see his dick when he stands before a urinal. He pointed out some aforementioned metrosexuals on a magazine cover, clad in pastel-colored clothing ( lean, good-looking guys, by the way ) and declared they were gay. I challenged him, demanding, "How do you know that?" He said, " Just look at 'em ."

[IanBorthwick]

I KNOW I am going to be ignored by Aeon and her whirling dervish attempt to keep facts out of the mix in most of her discussions, but I thought I'd share a little tidbit here that will end this stupidity about Gaydar and Aeon's attempt to exclude Bisexuality....FUCKING AGAIN...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaydar

Gaydar (a portmanteau (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portmanteau) of gay (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay) and radar (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radar)) is a colloquialism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colloquialism) referring to the intuitive ability of a person to assess others' sexual orientations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_orientation) as gay (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality), bisexual (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bisexual), or straight (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heterosexuality). Gaydar relies almost exclusively on non-verbal clues and LGBT stereotypes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_stereotypes). These include (but are not limited to) the sensitivity to social behaviors and mannerisms; for instance, acknowledging flamboyant body language, the tone of voice used by a person when speaking, overtly rejecting traditional gender roles (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_role), a person's occupation and grooming habits.The detection of sexual orientation by outward appearance or behavior is frequently challenged by situations in which masculine gay men who do not act in a stereotypically "gay" fashion, or with metrosexual (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metrosexual) men (regardless of sexuality) who exhibit a lifestyle, spending habits, and concern for personal appearance stereotypical of fashionable urban gays

Bolding the Bisexual was my actions, not wikipedia's, to draw greater attention to the sexual orientation.

Now, as this portmanteau word was made to include us, and Aeon's recitation was a rebranding to EXCLUDE us, others threw in Bidar as a possible thing that was and is no more real than Gaydar. Not to mention no more UNreal.

In the definition we see the words "sensitivity to social behaviors and mannerisms" but Aeon seems to think this cannot POSSIBLY extend unto we, the bisexuals, because we have no cues, we give off no vibes or mannerisms that can POSSIBLY be without some kind of fucking ESP to pick up. Could it be that she'd rather think bisexuality is either too uncommon, or far too common as she's said? Or that she is arguing against the MEN who have stood up once more to try and garner a little logical inclusion by hacking through her tangled jungle of dissonance? Only time can tell, but there argument so far, the rude discourse and the inflammatory language, ridiculing, etc, would normally be unacceptable...

Normally, if a man were doing it.

I don't know what you have against including bisexuality in your estimations and interpretations, or why you take the obtuse tactic of running to Google for the answers to the universe by googling Bidar. Tell you what else you can google and not find real answers for, Aeon.

1) God's Address
2) How many atoms on Leonard Nimoy's Butt.
3) Do holy cows make better Hamburgers?

So while you all discuss ESP and what you find, while disparaging the men who say they are able to sense something YOU don't believe in, we see the closed mind is impermeable...your mind. Now front his point on you need to include what you do not WISH to include because it is a part of the question you placed, like it or not.

[æonpax]

Maybe I'm wrong but I perceive a very subtle connection between lookism & the advent of the metrosexual in our society and which goes to the heart of your thread. Seems like nowadays, no one is above suspicion. The latest celebrity I've become aware of, suspected of same-sex behavior,is John Travolta. I recently viewed the movie J. Edgar & was floored by a scene which alluded JFK was bisexual, the beginning of Hoover's blackmail files...at least in this movie. Ironic! Letterman in the background just announced that Green Lantern is gay in his monologue. I've been suspected, accused of being gay but never bi. Funny how that works in other peoples' minds. I'm a very masculine guy; makes me wonder what kind of subconscious vibes I'm emitting. By the way, I've literally experienced the hypothetical scenario you mentioned. It was brought to me on the job one day by the stereotypical jolly fat man, the guy who can't even see his dick when he stands before a urinal. He pointed out some aforementioned metrosexuals on a magazine cover, clad in pastel-colored clothing ( lean, good-looking guys, by the way ) and declared they were gay. I challenged him, demanding, "How do you know that?" He said, " Just look at 'em ."

`
Excellent observations. Now, consider this;


Highest Number Of Anti-Gay Murders Ever Reported In 2011: The National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/02/anti-gay-hate-crimes-murders-national-coalition-of-anti-violence-programs_n_1564885.html


Pretty somber warning but I would suggest people read the actual report, here - http://www.avp.org/documents/NCAVPHVReport2011Finallowres.pdf

Of interest, and pertaining to this topic, check out page 44 of the report. 72% of all these assaults came from “strangers” and note this quote;


“Strategies to reduce stranger based hate violence can be challenging. Much of this is violence is motivated based upon the offender’s perception of survivors or victims having an LGBTQH identity. Since “looking gay or transgender” for many people means not conforming to societal expectations of gender in clothing, mannerisms, or behavior, gender non-conforming people can face increased risk of hate violence because of common societal viewpoints or stereotypes of LGBTQH identities.”

What this report does not say is how many people were mistakenly attacked just because they “looked” gay, unless of course the assailants were not mistaken but 100% correct in judging a person to be gay just by their looks. I personally don’t think so.

“Metrosexual” further complicates this. Metro is almost a heterosexual male inclusive term and has everything to do men breaking out of the traditional societal norms of behavior as opposed to anything to do with a sexual orientation.

Only 9% of all reported attacks were made on bisexuals. This is significant in itself. There is not enough data to conclude as to why bisexuals are not targeted. (not that they should be) Could it be we are harder to identify just by a casual look? It could also just as easily mean that bisexuals don’t trigger as much ire that can be translated into violence. Might it be that many bisexuals are “under the radar” or “off the radar?”

[The Young Pretender]

I think gaydar, as most people use it, is just how well a person can identify stereotypically gay traits. Now, if one really wanted to be perceptive, they'd note how someone reacts (facial expressions and whatnot) to the men and women they encounter. Of course, this takes a fair deal of time.