Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Mother Jones)   Who's better at their gaydar, liberals or conservatives? Guess, go on, guess. You might be surprised   (motherjones.com ) divider line
    More: Interesting, Journal of Personality, liberals  
•       •       •

4190 clicks; posted to Politics » on 22 Mar 2013 at 2:09 PM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



172 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-03-22 01:30:58 PM  
Shouldn't this be on TFD?
 
2013-03-22 01:34:23 PM  
Not info on the pictures. Considering the facts presented, both groups fare as well, just that liberals don't care that much.
 
2013-03-22 01:34:33 PM  

Soup4Bonnie: Shouldn't this be on TFD?


Shhhhhhh - liters shouldn't know about the content of the lofty and often elitist discussion on TFD.
 
2013-03-22 01:35:45 PM  
Maybe it's just that increasingly, Lefties don't really give a $#!+ what your sexual orientation is, because it doesn't really define you.
 
2013-03-22 01:36:36 PM  
...so, remembering secure passwords could be making liberals (fail to) think more like conservatives?
 
2013-03-22 01:37:41 PM  
"When the researchers ran the study again with one key modification, they were able to come up with an intriguing answer to this question. This time around, roughly half of the test subjects were required to remember a bit of gibberish-"7T4$RF%"-and type it in after every five faces that they saw. Obviously, this exercise is highly distracting-and that's precisely the point. It took up thinking bandwidth-and when thus distracted, liberals behaved just as the conservatives had in the first study. Now, they too relied on gender stereotypes to decide whether individuals were gay or straight.

In other words, it appears that liberals and conservatives alike snap to initial, stereotypical judgments about a person's sexual persuasion based on facial features. But liberals then engage in a more elaborate thinking process and often adjust their views away from the stereotype-at least when they're not distracted."


Now THAT is interesting.
 
2013-03-22 01:43:09 PM  

make me some tea: "When the researchers ran the study again with one key modification, they were able to come up with an intriguing answer to this question. This time around, roughly half of the test subjects were required to remember a bit of gibberish-"7T4$RF%"-and type it in after every five faces that they saw. Obviously, this exercise is highly distracting-and that's precisely the point. It took up thinking bandwidth-and when thus distracted, liberals behaved just as the conservatives had in the first study. Now, they too relied on gender stereotypes to decide whether individuals were gay or straight.

In other words, it appears that liberals and conservatives alike snap to initial, stereotypical judgments about a person's sexual persuasion based on facial features. But liberals then engage in a more elaborate thinking process and often adjust their views away from the stereotype-at least when they're not distracted."

Now THAT is interesting.


ok
can I get a simul-post for posting exactly the same thing-same time on FB?

but seriously
this adjusting of views is exactly what we liberals claim is the difference between us and the gops. this adjusting views, or critical thinking is also why we turn away from religion and conservatism. we want re-evaluate the world and make changes and improvements. they dont want to think.

would be interesting to rerun the test, and ask the respondents to go back and think again about their choices, trying not to stereotype this time.
 
2013-03-22 01:52:44 PM  

MaxxLarge: Maybe it's just that increasingly, Lefties don't really give a $#!+ what your sexual orientation is, because it doesn't really define you.


This.  I'm married and faithful (not on the prowl).  I could really care less what anyone's sexuality is.
 
2013-03-22 01:56:54 PM  
 
2013-03-22 01:57:49 PM  

namatad: make me some tea: "When the researchers ran the study again with one key modification, they were able to come up with an intriguing answer to this question. This time around, roughly half of the test subjects were required to remember a bit of gibberish-"7T4$RF%"-and type it in after every five faces that they saw. Obviously, this exercise is highly distracting-and that's precisely the point. It took up thinking bandwidth-and when thus distracted, liberals behaved just as the conservatives had in the first study. Now, they too relied on gender stereotypes to decide whether individuals were gay or straight.

In other words, it appears that liberals and conservatives alike snap to initial, stereotypical judgments about a person's sexual persuasion based on facial features. But liberals then engage in a more elaborate thinking process and often adjust their views away from the stereotype-at least when they're not distracted."

Now THAT is interesting.

ok
can I get a simul-post for posting exactly the same thing-same time on FB?

but seriously
this adjusting of views is exactly what we liberals claim is the difference between us and the gops. this adjusting views, or critical thinking is also why we turn away from religion and conservatism. we want re-evaluate the world and make changes and improvements. they dont want to think.

would be interesting to rerun the test, and ask the respondents to go back and think again about their choices, trying not to stereotype this time.


Typical.

There you go trying to empathize and relate.

God-fearing conservatives call a spade a spade - no need to second guess. I'll bet you dream all day and night about those rigid, glistening cocks as they ram away relentlessly on some poor fool's asshole.
 
2013-03-22 01:59:52 PM  
Location, location, location

/if you're talking airport men's rooms, cons win in a foot tap
 
2013-03-22 02:01:10 PM  
I would guess conservatives, since they're constantly looking for gay guys for various reasons.
 
2013-03-22 02:11:32 PM  
My gaydar detects gays 100% of the time.  I do this by assuming that everyone is gay.
 
2013-03-22 02:12:15 PM  

Mugato: I would guess conservatives, since they're constantly looking for gay guys for various reasons.


Yep.

Conservatives know their own.
 
2013-03-22 02:12:56 PM  

MaxxLarge: Maybe it's just that increasingly, Lefties don't really give a $#!+ what your sexual orientation is, because it doesn't really define you.


This.
 
2013-03-22 02:13:31 PM  
based on pictures alone? That's pretty hard.
 
2013-03-22 02:14:19 PM  
Since all gay people emit a distinct odor I never have a problem picking them out of a crowd.
 
2013-03-22 02:15:02 PM  

MaxxLarge: Maybe it's just that increasingly, Lefties don't really give a $#!+ what your sexual orientation is, because it doesn't really define you.


What you are is all the left cares about. It defines every single thing they do.
 
2013-03-22 02:18:19 PM  

barneyfifesbullet: What you are is all the left cares about. It defines every single thing they do.


Is this one of those "you're a racist for noticing my racism" sorts of things or something? Because otherwise it doesn't seem to make a lick of sense.
 
2013-03-22 02:18:27 PM  

skullkrusher: based on pictures alone? That's pretty hard.


That's what she said!

Or he, if you'd prefer.
 
2013-03-22 02:18:47 PM  

MaxxLarge: Maybe it's just that increasingly, Lefties don't really give a $#!+ what your sexual orientation is, because it doesn't really define you.

 
2013-03-22 02:19:04 PM  

Uzzah: skullkrusher: based on pictures alone? That's pretty hard.

That's what she said!

Or he, if you'd prefer.


or both, bigot
 
2013-03-22 02:21:19 PM  

barneyfifesbullet: MaxxLarge: Maybe it's just that increasingly, Lefties don't really give a $#!+ what your sexual orientation is, because it doesn't really define you.

What you are is all the left cares about. It defines every single thing they do.


True, if I have interpreted you statement correctly ("what you are" = "what you are")
 
2013-03-22 02:21:34 PM  

skullkrusher: based on pictures alone? That's pretty hard.


I would think it'd be nearly impossible. It's a lot easier to determine if someone is gay by their demeanor than their physical attributes, but even that's not an accurate measurement.

The study was apparently crafted to determine the mental process which each person uses to arrive at their decision.
 
2013-03-22 02:23:20 PM  

Mugato: I would guess conservatives, since they're constantly looking for gay guys for various reasons.


Pretty much what I was thinking. When you suspect everyone you meet, you're going to get it right once in a while.
 
2013-03-22 02:24:40 PM  
People who have the worst gaydar: People who are gay themselves.

I can usually tell gay and bi males, and I'm about 90% accurate. Gay and bi women, however, baffle me. Sucks too, because I'd love to get the fiance and me a girlfriend. *sigh*

/been functionally monogamous for three and a half years, but not really complaining, just miss the female parts
 
2013-03-22 02:25:55 PM  
More likely that Conservatives like to identify gays so that they can approach them in bathrooms.
 
2013-03-22 02:26:59 PM  

make me some tea: skullkrusher: based on pictures alone? That's pretty hard.

I would think it'd be nearly impossible. It's a lot easier to determine if someone is gay by their demeanor than their physical attributes, but even that's not an accurate measurement.

The study was apparently crafted to determine the mental process which each person uses to arrive at their decision.


upload.wikimedia.org
Looks straight, not

www.metalinsider.net

on the other hand...

CSB: My grandmother somehow saw this album cover at my house one day and exclaimed "Dear Jesus, that's a motley crew." My mother found this absolutely hysterical.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-03-22 02:27:34 PM  
 Portman says he struggled deeply with the issue-and finally pulled a Dick

That's some unfortunate formating there.
 
2013-03-22 02:27:49 PM  

skullkrusher: based on pictures alone? That's pretty hard.


encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com

It depends on the picture.
 
2013-03-22 02:29:17 PM  
Conservatives go with their gut.

www.bilerico.com
 
2013-03-22 02:29:44 PM  
namatad: this adjusting of views is exactly what we liberals claim is the difference between us and the gops. this adjusting views, or critical thinking is also why we turn away from religion and conservatism. we want re-evaluate the world and make changes and improvements. they dont want to think.

so you're saying that liberals are better critical thinkers than conservatives because you don't stereotype. and then you proceed to stereotype conservatives. brilliant.
 
2013-03-22 02:30:08 PM  
skullkrusher:
CSB: My grandmother somehow saw this album cover at my house one day and exclaimed "Dear Jesus, that's a motley crew." My mother found this absolutely hysterical.

Did you then get into the "Who? Yes. The Band!" debate from Aimaniacs?
 
2013-03-22 02:30:10 PM  

vernonFL: skullkrusher: based on pictures alone? That's pretty hard.

[encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com image 185x273]

It depends on the picture.


not sure why Rob came as the surprise that it did. Dude is basically responsible for the metal-leather connection and he just wanted an excuse to dress the way he did when he was old trolling for strange.
 
2013-03-22 02:30:25 PM  

barneyfifesbullet: MaxxLarge: Maybe it's just that increasingly, Lefties don't really give a $#!+ what your sexual orientation is, because it doesn't really define you.

What you are is all the left cares about. It defines every single thing they do.


As opposed to Conservatives who don't give a crap about anyone else.
 
2013-03-22 02:30:51 PM  

FirstNationalBastard: skullkrusher:
CSB: My grandmother somehow saw this album cover at my house one day and exclaimed "Dear Jesus, that's a motley crew." My mother found this absolutely hysterical.

Did you then get into the "Who? Yes. The Band!" debate from Aimaniacs?


hehe
 
2013-03-22 02:31:37 PM  

Peki: /been functionally monogamous for three and a half years, but not really complaining, just miss the female parts


Not bad, you'll get some hits with that bait

Soup4Bonnie: Shouldn't this be on TFD?


And this

Elzar: Shhhhhhh - liters shouldn't know about the content of the lofty and often elitist discussion on TFD.


Say what you will, I miss the fake threads. Where else would we have gotten gangbang baby from for instance?
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-03-22 02:32:15 PM  
the_dude_abides:

so you're saying that liberals are better critical thinkers than conservatives because you don't stereotype. and then you proceed to stereotype conservatives. brilliant.

It's like someone stereotyping racists by claiming that they are all bigots.
 
2013-03-22 02:34:26 PM  
Conservatives make snap judgements, liberals assume there is more than meets the eye.

// same as it ever was
 
Bf+
2013-03-22 02:35:33 PM  
1.bp.blogspot.com
Lemme guess...
 
2013-03-22 02:36:08 PM  

Dr Dreidel: Conservatives make snap judgements, liberals assume there is more than meets the eye.


curiosidadesnanet.com

GAY TRANSFORMERS!

ROBOTS IN DISGUISE IN THE CLOSET!
 
2013-03-22 02:36:23 PM  

Dr Dreidel: Conservatives make snap judgements, liberals assume there is more than meets the eye.

// same as it ever was


right...
 
2013-03-22 02:36:50 PM  
Gay, gay, gay, gay for pay, gayer, gayest, Gaylord Perry, Gay Divorcee, limp-wristed pantywaist, butch powerdom, gay, did him, did me, 50 Shades of Gay, twink, Slurpee Jones of Manlord Mountain,...
 
2013-03-22 02:36:53 PM  

Rapmaster2000: My gaydar detects gays 100% of the time.  I do this by assuming that everyone is gay.


Your false positives must run very high.
 
2013-03-22 02:38:37 PM  
My gaydar is pretty good: "hey, are you gay?'

Because...I don't give a fark.
 
2013-03-22 02:40:33 PM  
FTA: "Having learned two years earlier that his son, a college junior, is gay, Portman says he struggled deeply with the issue-and finally pulled a Dick Cheney, coming out politically in favor of the same-sex marriages that many grassroots conservatives find viscerally abhorrent."
 
2013-03-22 02:41:34 PM  

the_dude_abides: so you're saying that liberals are better critical thinkers than conservatives because you don't stereotype. and then you proceed to stereotype conservatives. brilliant.


It's not a stereotype if it really is broadly true. Multiple studies now have concluded that conservative thinking is dominated by low effort, fear, low IQ and now stereotyping.

The evidence increasingly suggests that conservatism, social conservatism in particular, may simply be the result of inferior brain structure.
 
2013-03-22 02:42:41 PM  

barneyfifesbullet: MaxxLarge: Maybe it's just that increasingly, Lefties don't really give a $#!+ what your sexual orientation is, because it doesn't really define you.

What you are is all the left cares about. It defines every single thing they do.


barneyfifesbullet must be a liberal. Being a troll defines every single thing it posts.
 
2013-03-22 02:43:15 PM  

Ego edo infantia cattus: FTA: "Having learned two years earlier that his son, a college junior, is gay, Portman says he struggled deeply with the issue-and finally pulled a Dick Cheney, coming out politically in favor of the same-sex marriages that many grassroots conservatives find viscerally abhorrent."


Fark ate my trollface pic.

wallpoper.com
 
2013-03-22 02:43:28 PM  

rufus-t-firefly: barneyfifesbullet: MaxxLarge: Maybe it's just that increasingly, Lefties don't really give a $#!+ what your sexual orientation is, because it doesn't really define you.

What you are is all the left cares about. It defines every single thing they do.

barneyfifesbullet must be a liberal. Being a troll defines every single thing it posts.


I always assumed he was because he's an idiot

/jk
 
2013-03-22 02:44:11 PM  

FirstNationalBastard: Dr Dreidel: Conservatives make snap judgements, liberals assume there is more than meets the eye.

[curiosidadesnanet.com image 700x545]

GAY TRANSFORMERS!

ROBOTS IN DISGUISE IN THE CLOSET!


That's a gay gundam.
 
2013-03-22 02:44:20 PM  

Dr Dreidel: Conservatives make snap judgements, liberals assume there is more than meets the eye.

// same as it ever was


lol look a few headlines down and read about cuomo's magazine ban in ny. they're having to alter the legislation because democrats crafted a law based on snap judgments that won't work in the real world.
 
2013-03-22 02:48:08 PM  

skullkrusher: vernonFL: skullkrusher: based on pictures alone? That's pretty hard.

[encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com image 185x273]

It depends on the picture.

not sure why Rob came as the surprise that it did. Dude is basically responsible for the metal-leather connection and he just wanted an excuse to dress the way he did when he was old trolling for strange.


I thought he said in an interview that he started dressing that way to hint that he was gay.. but most people didn't get it, and even his straight fans started dressing like him.

(was just listening to some 2008 Judas Priest while I was out driving)
 
2013-03-22 02:48:19 PM  

skullkrusher: make me some tea: skullkrusher: based on pictures alone? That's pretty hard.

I would think it'd be nearly impossible. It's a lot easier to determine if someone is gay by their demeanor than their physical attributes, but even that's not an accurate measurement.

The study was apparently crafted to determine the mental process which each person uses to arrive at their decision.

[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x297]
Looks straight, not

[www.metalinsider.net image 850x854]

on the other hand...

CSB: My grandmother somehow saw this album cover at my house one day and exclaimed "Dear Jesus, that's a motley crew." My mother found this absolutely hysterical.


Heh, I can see my dad finding that in my room as a teenager and asking me why I'm listening to fag music.
 
2013-03-22 02:49:01 PM  
I found out one of my co-workers was gay after knowing her for months and had no idea.  It's funny in retrospect, she wore rainbow earrings all the time, I even commented on them once.  She attended and participated in drag shows, was a member of some gay pride club, and we'd chat about gay issues and shiat all the time.  So yeah, my gaydar is farking terrible but it's probably because I don't care.
 
2013-03-22 02:50:33 PM  

Alphax: skullkrusher: vernonFL: skullkrusher: based on pictures alone? That's pretty hard.

[encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com image 185x273]

It depends on the picture.

not sure why Rob came as the surprise that it did. Dude is basically responsible for the metal-leather connection and he just wanted an excuse to dress the way he did when he was old trolling for strange.

I thought he said in an interview that he started dressing that way to hint that he was gay.. but most people didn't get it, and even his straight fans started dressing like him.

(was just listening to some 2008 Judas Priest while I was out driving)


can't find the quote. I thought I remember something about being able to get away with it because of the subversive nature of metal or something like that.
I dunno, anyway, lots of old timey metallers were dressed like they were going to gay clubs without really knowing it and that is funny
 
2013-03-22 02:51:08 PM  

brap: Gay, gay, gay, gay for pay, gayer, gayest, Gaylord Perry, Gay Divorcee, limp-wristed pantywaist, butch powerdom, gay, did him, did me, 50 Shades of Gay, twink, Slurpee Jones of Manlord Mountain,...


LEONARD BERNSTEIN
 
2013-03-22 02:51:41 PM  

vernonFL: skullkrusher: based on pictures alone? That's pretty hard.

[encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com image 185x273]

It depends on the picture.


That is hilarious because when I was a kid all the toughest kids loved Judas Priest and wore the band's T-shirts.  They were considered very badass.  If you said the guys in that band were gay they would think you were on drugs and you would probably get a beating for suggesting it.  Donny Osmond, Rod Steward and Rene Simard (Quebec) were considered to be homosexual even though (I believe) are actually straight.

I remember thinking George Michael was straight.  That is how farked up my gaydar was.
 
2013-03-22 02:51:52 PM  

make me some tea: skullkrusher: make me some tea: skullkrusher: based on pictures alone? That's pretty hard.

I would think it'd be nearly impossible. It's a lot easier to determine if someone is gay by their demeanor than their physical attributes, but even that's not an accurate measurement.

The study was apparently crafted to determine the mental process which each person uses to arrive at their decision.

[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x297]
Looks straight, not

[www.metalinsider.net image 850x854]

on the other hand...

CSB: My grandmother somehow saw this album cover at my house one day and exclaimed "Dear Jesus, that's a motley crew." My mother found this absolutely hysterical.

Heh, I can see my dad finding that in my room as a teenager and asking me why I'm listening to fag music.


my Catholic mom was more troubled by Slayer but that came a little bit later
 
2013-03-22 02:52:25 PM  

skozlaw: It's not a stereotype if it really is broadly true.


worst. rationalization. ever.

Multiple studies now have concluded that conservative thinking is dominated by low effort, fear, low IQ and now stereotyping.

ah yes, here comes the pseudo-science. 100 years ago it was phrenology and eugenics, now it's liberals ratfarking the scientific method for their own retarded political gains.
 
2013-03-22 02:52:35 PM  

MaxxLarge: Maybe it's just that increasingly, Lefties don't really give a $#!+ what your sexual orientation is, because it doesn't really define you.


BS.  You can't be a Rapeublican leader without being in the closet.  Why do you think they use closed door meetings?  They're not about to let out their shoe choices to just anybody
 
2013-03-22 02:52:36 PM  
Conservatives seem to elect a lot of gay-bashers who turn out to be secretly gay.  I'd say their "gaydar" is completely broken.
 
2013-03-22 02:53:12 PM  

mrshowrules: vernonFL: skullkrusher: based on pictures alone? That's pretty hard.

[encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com image 185x273]

It depends on the picture.

That is hilarious because when I was a kid all the toughest kids loved Judas Priest and wore the band's T-shirts.  They were considered very badass.  If you said the guys in that band were gay they would think you were on drugs and you would probably get a beating for suggesting it.  Donny Osmond, Rod Steward and Rene Simard (Quebec) were considered to be homosexual even though (I believe) are actually straight.

I remember thinking George Michael was straight.  That is how farked up my gaydar was.


I think everyone thought GM was straight.
I remember thinking that Justin Bieber was gay. Turns out he's a lesbian so I was right, just in the wrong direction.
 
2013-03-22 02:53:15 PM  
This follows the idea that everyone is racist, to an extent, but you're only defined as racist if you actually use these preconceived notions in your dealings with people.
 
2013-03-22 02:53:49 PM  

MaxxLarge: Maybe it's just that increasingly, Lefties don't really give a $#!+ what your sexual orientation is, because it doesn't really define you.


I hate to say this, but sadly, there are people who let their sexual orientation define them. Not so much me (it's like number 30 of the terms I'd use to define myself), but it is frustrating and kind of sad to see people who really do define themselves by their sexuality. That said, there are plenty of gays who you'd never pick out of a line up because we're 8-6 workers, hockey loving, beer drinking, not giving a f*ck about fashion, snowboarding, mountain biking gays... it was kind of weird the other day I was having a conversation about CO's civil unions bill with a friend of mine and he said "I don't really care one way or the other, I mean, I don't even know anyone who is gay... not because I don't like gays, but because here in the mountains I guess it just doesn't appeal to them or whatever." Of course, he's saying this to me... and I've been with the same guy for a couple years now, so the civil unions bill very much effects me. There are times where I know I shouldn't really share every aspect about me (not relevant to the conversations), but there are also times where I just want people to know that not all gay people are in parades, watching project runway, or club kids.
 
2013-03-22 02:56:13 PM  

the_dude_abides: ah yes, here comes the pseudo-science. 100 years ago it was phrenology and eugenics, now it's liberals ratfarking the scientific method for their own retarded political gains.


Yes because republicans are so good at things like math and science
 
2013-03-22 02:57:29 PM  

brap: Gay, gay, gay, gay for pay, gayer, gayest, Gaylord Perry, Gay Divorcee, limp-wristed pantywaist, butch powerdom, gay, did him, did me, 50 Shades of Gay, twink, Slurpee Jones of Manlord Mountain,...


i221.photobucket.com
 
2013-03-22 02:57:55 PM  

mrshowrules: MaxxLarge: Maybe it's just that increasingly, Lefties don't really give a $#!+ what your sexual orientation is, because it doesn't really define you.

This.  I'm married and faithful (not on the prowl).  I could really care less what anyone's sexuality is.


How much less could you care, pray tell?
 
2013-03-22 02:59:10 PM  
As a woman, I can't pick out a lesbian to save my life. I don't care if women are gay...at all.  As for men, my capacity for caring extends only insomuch as I feel guilty when i find out i am lusting after a gay man.
 
2013-03-22 03:00:18 PM  

skullkrusher: based on pictures alone? That's pretty hard.


The point wasn't really to see if gaydar is real.  They were actually investigating differences in cognitive biases between liberals and conservatives.  Ambiguous categories was a requirement, gay/straight was an easy one to pick.  Otherwise, you're right, identifying sexuality using just a picture is kind of hard (or impossible).

Cheers.

//lousy science reporting continues to be the norm.  At least they try, so there's that.
 
2013-03-22 03:04:05 PM  

FirstNationalBastard: Dr Dreidel: Conservatives make snap judgements, liberals assume there is more than meets the eye.

[curiosidadesnanet.com image 700x545]

GAY TRANSFORMERS!

ROBOTS IN DISGUISE IN THE CLOSET!


That's Gundam, lets not go there on this topic..... to many Fangirls with Fanfics....
 
2013-03-22 03:04:19 PM  

Brian_of_Nazareth: skullkrusher: based on pictures alone? That's pretty hard.

The point wasn't really to see if gaydar is real.  They were actually investigating differences in cognitive biases between liberals and conservatives.  Ambiguous categories was a requirement, gay/straight was an easy one to pick.  Otherwise, you're right, identifying sexuality using just a picture is kind of hard (or impossible).

Cheers.

//lousy science reporting continues to be the norm.  At least they try, so there's that.


headline says gaydar. headline on TFA says gaydar.  gaydar requires more than just looking at someone's face so it really isn't about gaydar at all
 
2013-03-22 03:05:59 PM  
So basically when liberals stop thinking they become conservative?
 
2013-03-22 03:06:59 PM  
Gaydar is what people used back in the 80's.


These days we use Homometers (Ho-mom-iter).  It will give you a much more accurate reading.
 
2013-03-22 03:07:07 PM  
FTFA: Overall, in the study as in the real world, there was indeed a moderate correlation between more "feminine" male faces and being gay. That doesn't mean this relationship holds up in all individuals, but it's true as a statistical average across large numbers of people.

I wonder if that's because the "feminine" male faces have less social factors repressing them.
 
2013-03-22 03:07:39 PM  

Rapmaster2000: My gaydar detects gays 100% of the time.  I do this by assuming that everyone is gay.


Pretty much this.  If the GOP things that every guy is gay, then they'll identify the gays 100% of the time.
 
2013-03-22 03:09:21 PM  

TheBigJerk: FTFA: Overall, in the study as in the real world, there was indeed a moderate correlation between more "feminine" male faces and being gay. That doesn't mean this relationship holds up in all individuals, but it's true as a statistical average across large numbers of people.

I wonder if that's because the "feminine" male faces have less social factors repressing them.


como?
 
2013-03-22 03:11:59 PM  

Ambivalence: As a woman, I can't pick out a lesbian to save my life. I don't care if women are gay...at all.  As for men, my capacity for caring extends only insomuch as I feel guilty when i find out i am lusting after a gay man.


In college, it became a running joke with a friend and I - I'd be chatting up some cute girl at a party, my friend would come up to me later and say "You know she's gay, right? Yep, big ol' dyke." More often than not, my friend had also already hooked up/slept with her.

Don't feel guilty. Feel angry because they inadvertently wasted your time.

// not really, I just kept complaining that I had no gaydar
// might also have hurt the numbers that I went to lots of Rocky Horror parties
 
2013-03-22 03:12:28 PM  

skullkrusher: make me some tea: skullkrusher: make me some tea: skullkrusher: based on pictures alone? That's pretty hard.

I would think it'd be nearly impossible. It's a lot easier to determine if someone is gay by their demeanor than their physical attributes, but even that's not an accurate measurement.

The study was apparently crafted to determine the mental process which each person uses to arrive at their decision.

[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x297]
Looks straight, not

[www.metalinsider.net image 850x854]

on the other hand...

CSB: My grandmother somehow saw this album cover at my house one day and exclaimed "Dear Jesus, that's a motley crew." My mother found this absolutely hysterical.

Heh, I can see my dad finding that in my room as a teenager and asking me why I'm listening to fag music.

my Catholic mom was more troubled by Slayer but that came a little bit later


My mother was really disturbed by finding a Skid Row CD box in the dumpster. She must've thought I was getting into devil worship.
 
2013-03-22 03:13:01 PM  

skullkrusher: Brian_of_Nazareth: skullkrusher: based on pictures alone? That's pretty hard.

The point wasn't really to see if gaydar is real.  They were actually investigating differences in cognitive biases between liberals and conservatives.  Ambiguous categories was a requirement, gay/straight was an easy one to pick.  Otherwise, you're right, identifying sexuality using just a picture is kind of hard (or impossible).

Cheers.

//lousy science reporting continues to be the norm.  At least they try, so there's that.

headline says gaydar. headline on TFA says gaydar.  gaydar requires more than just looking at someone's face so it really isn't about gaydar at all


I understand that, just thought you might find a bit more meat discussing the fact that the science underlying the article actually suggests simply that conservatives use a lazier method of thinking.  That's got to be worth a bag of popcorn on the politics tab.

Cheers.

//Getting bored with the same old topics, trying to see what else we got
 
2013-03-22 03:13:21 PM  

make me some tea: skullkrusher: make me some tea: skullkrusher: make me some tea: skullkrusher: based on pictures alone? That's pretty hard.

I would think it'd be nearly impossible. It's a lot easier to determine if someone is gay by their demeanor than their physical attributes, but even that's not an accurate measurement.

The study was apparently crafted to determine the mental process which each person uses to arrive at their decision.

[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x297]
Looks straight, not

[www.metalinsider.net image 850x854]

on the other hand...

CSB: My grandmother somehow saw this album cover at my house one day and exclaimed "Dear Jesus, that's a motley crew." My mother found this absolutely hysterical.

Heh, I can see my dad finding that in my room as a teenager and asking me why I'm listening to fag music.

my Catholic mom was more troubled by Slayer but that came a little bit later

My mother was really disturbed by finding a Skid Row CD box in the dumpster. She must've thought I was getting into devil worship.


when in reality you were just worshipping shiatty music :)

/I keed
//guilty myself... to this day actually
///Skid Row was one of the better hair metal bands of the day
 
2013-03-22 03:13:34 PM  

firefly212: MaxxLarge: Maybe it's just that increasingly, Lefties don't really give a $#!+ what your sexual orientation is, because it doesn't really define you.

I hate to say this, but sadly, there are people who let their sexual orientation define them. Not so much me (it's like number 30 of the terms I'd use to define myself), but it is frustrating and kind of sad to see people who really do define themselves by their sexuality. That said, there are plenty of gays who you'd never pick out of a line up because we're 8-6 workers, hockey loving, beer drinking, not giving a f*ck about fashion, snowboarding, mountain biking gays... it was kind of weird the other day I was having a conversation about CO's civil unions bill with a friend of mine and he said "I don't really care one way or the other, I mean, I don't even know anyone who is gay... not because I don't like gays, but because here in the mountains I guess it just doesn't appeal to them or whatever." Of course, he's saying this to me... and I've been with the same guy for a couple years now, so the civil unions bill very much effects me. There are times where I know I shouldn't really share every aspect about me (not relevant to the conversations), but there are also times where I just want people to know that not all gay people are in parades, watching project runway, or club kids.


I really don't understand this mindset you express here.  Anyone I meet that seems worth cultivating any kind of social relationship with is going to find out that I am gay, sooner rather than later.  If someone is going to have an issue with it, I'd rather find out immediately than to waste time and energy on a bigot.

How much a friend of yours could he possibly be if he doesn't know that about you?   Do you seriously never talk about anything that might possibly hint that you have someone you have been with for a couple years?  Or do you lie about it?  I get not wanting your sexuality defining yourself, but I would think who you lovewould make up a large enough chunk, that hiding it or lying about it is just too damned much work.   At least with someone that you define as a friend.
 
2013-03-22 03:13:54 PM  
I was surprised that some of my military friends seem to have no gaydar at all, at least when looking at fellow service men and women. I spent a year in a service school recently where we had a number of gay/lesbian airmen and one gay civilian. They didn't  advertise (DADT still). Interestingly, the most anti-gay guys seemed to be the most oblivious.

Years later, with DADT dead, one of my classmates is adamant there were no gays in our section. I'm not sure how you explain it but likely in his mind it was all the symbols and trappings of the military, sort a manly man's world, all those visuals overrode other stimuli.
 
2013-03-22 03:14:09 PM  

Brian_of_Nazareth: skullkrusher: Brian_of_Nazareth: skullkrusher: based on pictures alone? That's pretty hard.

The point wasn't really to see if gaydar is real.  They were actually investigating differences in cognitive biases between liberals and conservatives.  Ambiguous categories was a requirement, gay/straight was an easy one to pick.  Otherwise, you're right, identifying sexuality using just a picture is kind of hard (or impossible).

Cheers.

//lousy science reporting continues to be the norm.  At least they try, so there's that.

headline says gaydar. headline on TFA says gaydar.  gaydar requires more than just looking at someone's face so it really isn't about gaydar at all

I understand that, just thought you might find a bit more meat discussing the fact that the science underlying the article actually suggests simply that conservatives use a lazier method of thinking.  That's got to be worth a bag of popcorn on the politics tab.

Cheers.

//Getting bored with the same old topics, trying to see what else we got


I think we've exhausted the "conservatives and intellectually lazy and stupid" angle
 
2013-03-22 03:16:38 PM  

James F. Campbell: mrshowrules: MaxxLarge: Maybe it's just that increasingly, Lefties don't really give a $#!+ what your sexual orientation is, because it doesn't really define you.

This.  I'm married and faithful (not on the prowl).  I could really care less what anyone's sexuality is.

How much less could you care, pray tell?


I'm just overly preoccupied with it and I think it would be healthier if I cared less.
 
2013-03-22 03:18:04 PM  

Rav Tokomi: So basically when liberals stop thinking they become conservative?


Exhibit A: those wild college friends who marry and have kids and now tolerate nothing in the way of sex, drugs, alcohol, or rap videos.
 
2013-03-22 03:20:37 PM  

edmo: Rav Tokomi: So basically when liberals stop thinking they become conservative?

Exhibit A: those wild college friends who marry and have kids and now tolerate nothing in the way of sex, drugs, alcohol, or rap videos.


Parenthood makes people stupid. It's true.
 
2013-03-22 03:26:00 PM  

Alphakronik: Gaydar is what people used back in the 80's.


These days we use Homometers (Ho-mom-iter).  It will give you a much more accurate reading.


I believe there is a smart phone app for that.
 
2013-03-22 03:27:10 PM  

FirstNationalBastard: edmo: Rav Tokomi: So basically when liberals stop thinking they become conservative?

Exhibit A: those wild college friends who marry and have kids and now tolerate nothing in the way of sex, drugs, alcohol, or rap videos.

Parenthood makes people stupid. It's true.


really? that's your take? that when they were in college and drinking and having sex and doing drugs they were smart? and now that they're trying to act responsibly because they have a family, they're stupid?
 
2013-03-22 03:27:36 PM  

skullkrusher: make me some tea: skullkrusher: based on pictures alone? That's pretty hard.

I would think it'd be nearly impossible. It's a lot easier to determine if someone is gay by their demeanor than their physical attributes, but even that's not an accurate measurement.

The study was apparently crafted to determine the mental process which each person uses to arrive at their decision.

[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x297]
Looks straight, not

[www.metalinsider.net image 850x854]

on the other hand...

CSB: My grandmother somehow saw this album cover at my house one day and exclaimed "Dear Jesus, that's a motley crew." My mother found this absolutely hysterical.


I find that absolutely hilarious too.
 
2013-03-22 03:28:38 PM  
My guess is that a brain that leans conservative is also hardwired to separate people in neat, cut-and-dry us-and-them categories.
 
2013-03-22 03:29:42 PM  
Pictures of just faces = Fail
50/50 sample = Fail

Make the sample 10% gay like the population and show people in a common interaction like walking up to a counter and ordering coffee or fast food.
 
2013-03-22 03:30:17 PM  
There is a certain look about the samers. Most of the Obama administration and the people he promoted are queer. Just sayin. But that is part of the reason he was pretending to be against the samer weddings for the first few years. When you are all about homo, like Obama, you need some policy to disguise the fact.
 
2013-03-22 03:30:41 PM  

make me some tea: "When the researchers ran the study again with one key modification, they were able to come up with an intriguing answer to this question. This time around, roughly half of the test subjects were required to remember a bit of gibberish-"7T4$RF%"-and type it in after every five faces that they saw. Obviously, this exercise is highly distracting-and that's precisely the point. It took up thinking bandwidth-and when thus distracted, liberals behaved just as the conservatives had in the first study. Now, they too relied on gender stereotypes to decide whether individuals were gay or straight.

In other words, it appears that liberals and conservatives alike snap to initial, stereotypical judgments about a person's sexual persuasion based on facial features. But liberals then engage in a more elaborate thinking process and often adjust their views away from the stereotype-at least when they're not distracted."

Now THAT is interesting.


I'll say. I thought that subby was gay while I was figuring out my taxes, but now I think I'll introduce him to my sister.
 
2013-03-22 03:31:18 PM  

skullkrusher: when in reality you were just worshipping shiatty music :)

/I keed
//guilty myself... to this day actually
///Skid Row was one of the better hair metal bands of the day


lulz

I still find it listenable, even though I haven't listened to it in a long time.
 
2013-03-22 03:32:52 PM  

the_dude_abides: FirstNationalBastard: edmo: Rav Tokomi: So basically when liberals stop thinking they become conservative?

Exhibit A: those wild college friends who marry and have kids and now tolerate nothing in the way of sex, drugs, alcohol, or rap videos.

Parenthood makes people stupid. It's true.

really? that's your take? that when they were in college and drinking and having sex and doing drugs they were smart? and now that they're trying to act responsibly because they have a family, they're stupid?


No, because they've turned 180 degrees and decided that everything they were doing and had no problems with before spitting out a dependent or two should now be banned for the safety of their crotch droppings... that doesn't make them responsible, it makes them shiatty parents who don't want to parent, and stupid.

/and what's so dumb about drinking, sex, and recreational drugs, especially in college?
 
2013-03-22 03:33:31 PM  

AliceBToklasLives: barneyfifesbullet: MaxxLarge: Maybe it's just that increasingly, Lefties don't really give a $#!+ what your sexual orientation is, because it doesn't really define you.

What you are is all the left cares about. It defines every single thing they do.

True, if I have interpreted you statement correctly ("what you are" = "what you are")


www.math.pitt.edu

Agrees.
 
2013-03-22 03:34:37 PM  

Selena Luna: skullkrusher: make me some tea: skullkrusher: based on pictures alone? That's pretty hard.

I would think it'd be nearly impossible. It's a lot easier to determine if someone is gay by their demeanor than their physical attributes, but even that's not an accurate measurement.

The study was apparently crafted to determine the mental process which each person uses to arrive at their decision.

[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x297]
Looks straight, not

[www.metalinsider.net image 850x854]

on the other hand...

CSB: My grandmother somehow saw this album cover at my house one day and exclaimed "Dear Jesus, that's a motley crew." My mother found this absolutely hysterical.

I find that absolutely hilarious too.


my mom pissed her pants for about 2 minutes and in between laughs managed a "THAT'S ANOTHER ONE HE LISTENS TO!"
Then my grandma told my mom that she'd pray for me.
 
2013-03-22 03:36:21 PM  

pdee: Pictures of just faces = Fail
50/50 sample = Fail

Make the sample 10% gay like the population and show people in a common interaction like walking up to a counter and ordering coffee or fast food.


Something simple like getting a coffee would make more sense.
 
2013-03-22 03:37:42 PM  

the_dude_abides: namatad: this adjusting of views is exactly what we liberals claim is the difference between us and the gops. this adjusting views, or critical thinking is also why we turn away from religion and conservatism. we want re-evaluate the world and make changes and improvements. they dont want to think.

so you're saying that liberals are better critical thinkers than conservatives because you don't stereotype. and then you proceed to stereotype conservatives. brilliant.


No, the study basically found that if you cause liberals to do additional mental tasks above what a republican has to then they think at about the same level.  So in other words:  Republicans are as dumb normally as a liberally that is already thinking about something + what the Republican is thinking about.

Funny how a test about Gaydar proves previous assertions that Republicans on average are dumber than liberals.
 
2013-03-22 03:38:45 PM  
DRTFA: takes one to know one?
 
2013-03-22 03:39:14 PM  
Speaking as a conservative democrat, I was pretty good at telling when I was significantly more sexually active and it actually had some sort of impact on my lifestyle whether someone was a potential partner or not.  Now that I've cooled down considerably and become a square, my gaydar has kind of atrophied due to a severe paucity of farks given (pun accidental I swear).

Basically, my anecdotal theory is that right-wingers could probably tell better than I could because it makes them angry as opposed to my yawning indifference.  For me it's like being able to tell one brand of dirt bike from another at a glance: I don't care, why would I maintain that skillset?

//Still not sure why my female friends like the gay clubs so much, on a side note.  Drinks is drinks.  Maybe they feel less insulted when no one hits on them?  If I don't want to get picked up, I usually just go to a local bar where the patrons don't hit on each other in general, like  every non-college bar that's not obviously a dive.

edmo: Rav Tokomi: So basically when liberals stop thinking they become conservative?

Exhibit A: those wild college friends who marry and have kids and now tolerate nothing in the way of sex, drugs, alcohol, or rap videos.


All the people of my generation have kids that are, like, eight at most so I can't really tell whether they're clean for real or just until the wee buggers are past the "everything seen goes in the mouth" stage.  Actually kind of assuming it'll wear off, I don't typically drink with my parents but since I turned 16 or so they sort of quit making a big deal of keeping booze out of the house and wine and beer show up with meals and so on.

And in all fairness most rap videos do int damage to _me_ and I know what they're going for.
 
2013-03-22 03:39:39 PM  
cdn-premiere.ladmedia.fr
 
2013-03-22 03:41:55 PM  

Kazrath: the_dude_abides: namatad: this adjusting of views is exactly what we liberals claim is the difference between us and the gops. this adjusting views, or critical thinking is also why we turn away from religion and conservatism. we want re-evaluate the world and make changes and improvements. they dont want to think.

so you're saying that liberals are better critical thinkers than conservatives because you don't stereotype. and then you proceed to stereotype conservatives. brilliant.

No, the study basically found that if you cause liberals to do additional mental tasks above what a republican has to then they think at about the same level.  So in other words:  Republicans are as dumb normally as a liberally that is already thinking about something + what the Republican is thinking about.

Funny how a test about Gaydar proves previous assertions that Republicans on average are dumber than liberals.


this post might've made more sense if it were written by a liberal... if I'm reading it right. Which I cannot be sure that I am.
 
2013-03-22 03:43:32 PM  
way off subject, but i need help.  Can someone pass me a link to the benghazi outrage image. 
the one that lists the numbers of people killed in past years and no one cared, but then benghazi is a scandal??

Thanks, carry on
 
2013-03-22 03:52:14 PM  
The cons just pick out the gays by judging who they'd like to fark.

/projection
 
2013-03-22 03:57:05 PM  

FirstNationalBastard: No, because they've turned 180 degrees and decided that everything they were doing and had no problems with before spitting out a dependent or two should now be banned for the safety of their crotch droppings... that doesn't make them responsible, it makes them shiatty parents who don't want to parent, and stupid.

/and what's so dumb about drinking, sex, and recreational drugs, especially in college?


nothing... i'm 28, i'm single, and i lead a pretty hedonistic lifestyle. but I have plenty of friends who got married and put the partying behind them for the sake of a stability family life. on one hand, yeah, it sucks because they don't have time for anything else. on the other hand, i admire their devotion and discipline and selflessness.

 
also, who the eff said anything about banning stuff???
 
2013-03-22 04:01:50 PM  

the_dude_abides: FirstNationalBastard: No, because they've turned 180 degrees and decided that everything they were doing and had no problems with before spitting out a dependent or two should now be banned for the safety of their crotch droppings... that doesn't make them responsible, it makes them shiatty parents who don't want to parent, and stupid.

/and what's so dumb about drinking, sex, and recreational drugs, especially in college?

nothing... i'm 28, i'm single, and i lead a pretty hedonistic lifestyle. but I have plenty of friends who got married and put the partying behind them for the sake of a stability family life. on one hand, yeah, it sucks because they don't have time for anything else. on the other hand, i admire their devotion and discipline and selflessness.

 
also, who the eff said anything about banning stuff???


That was what I got out of the original comment about tolerating nothing in the way of drugs, sex, or rap videos after having kids. Because honestly, how many times do you see people with interesting pasts become the champions of banning video games or freaking out over sexually charged dialogue on TV or something stupid like that once they become parents?

Yeah, it is wise for people to caution their kids against doing stupid stuff. But more than a few seem to forget that they were young once, too, and take it too far and want to get rid of everything they used to enjoy, "for teh childrun".
 
2013-03-22 04:03:35 PM  
Could it be that liberals don't usually need gaydar to identify gays because gays aren't afraid to be gay around them?
 
2013-03-22 04:03:39 PM  

the_dude_abides: skozlaw: It's not a stereotype if it really is broadly true.

worst. rationalization. ever.

Multiple studies now have concluded that conservative thinking is dominated by low effort, fear, low IQ and now stereotyping.

ah yes, here comes the pseudo-science. 100 years ago it was phrenology and eugenics, now it's liberals ratfarking the scientific method for their own retarded political gains.


Feel free to post some evidence to support any of what you just claimed.
 
2013-03-22 04:05:27 PM  

CPennypacker: Could it be that liberals don't usually need gaydar to identify gays because gays aren't afraid to be gay around them?


Exactly how does one "be gay" around someone else?

Do they, like, fellate a banana in your kitchen? Suggestively eat clams?
 
2013-03-22 04:08:05 PM  

FirstNationalBastard: CPennypacker: Could it be that liberals don't usually need gaydar to identify gays because gays aren't afraid to be gay around them?

Exactly how does one "be gay" around someone else?

Do they, like, fellate a banana in your kitchen? Suggestively eat clams?


Cucumbers
 
2013-03-22 04:09:46 PM  

CPennypacker: FirstNationalBastard: CPennypacker: Could it be that liberals don't usually need gaydar to identify gays because gays aren't afraid to be gay around them?

Exactly how does one "be gay" around someone else?

Do they, like, fellate a banana in your kitchen? Suggestively eat clams?

Cucumbers


I went to a gay New Years party once and actually had one guy ask the host out loud what all the breeders were doing there. It was fun to be righteously indignant for once ;)
 
2013-03-22 04:19:44 PM  

skozlaw: the_dude_abides: so you're saying that liberals are better critical thinkers than conservatives because you don't stereotype. and then you proceed to stereotype conservatives. brilliant.

It's not a stereotype if it really is broadly true. Multiple studies now have concluded that conservative thinking is dominated by low effort, fear, low IQ and now stereotyping.

The evidence increasingly suggests that conservatism, social conservatism in particular, may simply be the result of inferior brain structure.


An accurate analogy here would be someone assuming a 60 year-old male in a suit is a conservative. Once you know they're conservative, you can make some safe assumptions, just like it's safe to assume a gay man prefers penis over vagina. The preference of penis over vagina isn't a "stereotype," of homosexuality, it is a defining trait.
 
2013-03-22 04:24:21 PM  
Hell I'm gay and my gaydar is sometimes wrong. Some people just don't come off as gay, and some that do happen to be straight.
 
2013-03-22 04:24:57 PM  

victrin: Hell I'm gay and my gaydar is sometimes wrong. Some people just don't come off as gay, and some that do happen to be straight.


How queer.
 
2013-03-22 04:25:48 PM  

victrin: Hell I'm gay and my gaydar is sometimes wrong. Some people just don't come off as gay, and some that do happen to be straight.


or maybe your gaydar is 100% accurate and they just pretend to be not gay cuz you ugly? :)
 
2013-03-22 04:26:59 PM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: Homophobic Men Most Aroused by Gay Male Porn


The gay male porn I've seen mostly just made me think, "Ouch!" But I'm of the opinion (probably because I'm old) that porn is permanently broken.
 
2013-03-22 04:35:14 PM  

mrshowrules: vernonFL: skullkrusher: based on pictures alone? That's pretty hard.

[encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com image 185x273]

It depends on the picture.

That is hilarious because when I was a kid all the toughest kids loved Judas Priest and wore the band's T-shirts.  They were considered very badass.  If you said the guys in that band were gay they would think you were on drugs and you would probably get a beating for suggesting it.  Donny Osmond, Rod Steward and Rene Simard (Quebec) were considered to be homosexual even though (I believe) are actually straight.

I remember thinking George Michael was straight.  That is how farked up my gaydar was.


Rod Stewart actually was gay at one time.  My understanding, though, is that he turned hetero after experiencing the pain of having his stomach pumped for an extended period of time.

Same exact thing happened to Donny Osmond, now that I think about it.
 
2013-03-22 04:42:48 PM  

Noam Chimpsky: There is a certain look about the samers. Most of the Obama administration and the people he promoted are queer. Just sayin. But that is part of the reason he was pretending to be against the samer weddings for the first few years. When you are all about homo, like Obama, you need some policy to disguise the fact.


Even though I realize you are a troll, you are still a detestable slug. Find something to do with your life, you pimple-assed basement dweller.
 
2013-03-22 04:50:09 PM  
Wow, they proved that conservatives were prejudice shiatbirds. Good use of grant money there.
 
2013-03-22 04:51:02 PM  
webpages.charter.net
 
2013-03-22 04:55:30 PM  
skozlaw: Feel free to post some evidence to support any of what you just claimed.

uhh, none of those studies you posted were peer reviewed. hell, only the first url links to the study (and only the abstract, the full text is not available), the other two link to op-ed pieces on political sites. hell, even the guys who conducted the study say the results were inconclusive and should not be taken literally. and yet here you are, spinning it for political purposes. that is exactly what I mean by pseudo-science, dirty little hacks like you making inferences that aren't there. sorry, nice try. seriously, did you even read the text of the links you posted??? lol
 
2013-03-22 04:59:06 PM  
vernonFL: skullkrusher: based on pictures alone? That's pretty hard.

[encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com image 185x273]

It depends on the picture.


So you think only gays(like Mr Halford) are hell bent for leather? you sound more sexually repressed and clueless than the fundiest of fundies.
 
2013-03-22 05:18:23 PM  

the_dude_abides: uhh, none of those studies you posted were peer reviewed. hell, only the first url links to the study (and only the abstract, the full text is not available)


Abstract only is common for peer-reviewed scientific studies. If it wasn't peer reviewed, how was it published.

You're doing the typical social-conservative "I don't want it to be true, so I will pretend it's not! It's the liberals conspiring against us" mental short-cut.

Here's a more comprehensive study on right-wing authoritarianism:
 
2013-03-22 05:18:59 PM  
 
2013-03-22 05:19:31 PM  
My gaydar is pretty terrible. Or more precisely, my gaydar for picking out women is pretty terrible, which kind of sucks because I'd rather not be single forever.
 
2013-03-22 05:41:37 PM  
I would guess liberals, since conservatives can't tell the difference between a gay man and an undercover cop in the next bathroom stall over.
 
2013-03-22 05:43:08 PM  
I for one don't care what your sexual orientation is.  Furthermore, whether they be gay or straight, people who go on and on about their sexual orientation--there seem to be more and more of them these days--bore me to distraction.
 
2013-03-22 05:45:54 PM  
impaler: You're doing the typical social-conservative "I don't want it to be true, so I will pretend it's not! It's the liberals conspiring against us" mental short-cut.

i'll ask you the same thing i asked skozlaw: did you read the links he posted? did you think it's definitive proof of the points he was trying to make? and do you believe that either side has facts and science on their side as a matter of course?

btw i'll check out the link you sent, sounds interesting.
 
2013-03-22 05:47:16 PM  

the_dude_abides: namatad: this adjusting of views is exactly what we liberals claim is the difference between us and the gops. this adjusting views, or critical thinking is also why we turn away from religion and conservatism. we want re-evaluate the world and make changes and improvements. they dont want to think.

so you're saying that liberals are better critical thinkers than conservatives because you don't stereotype. and then you proceed to stereotype conservatives. brilliant.


http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2011/04/does-your-brain-bleed- re d-white-.html

Conservatives don't think the same way as liberals do though. They just don't. They have larger amygdalas and are more fear based in their judgments of the world, (more an observation of my own family than any real science there) which lends towards the general thing that was said. Conservatives don't think, they react. The stress of constantly living in fear like they do must be nearly disabling. I pity them, at least a little bit. Their reaction based system may hinder them from properly analyzing a situation because their brains are busy translating things into fear and disgust. This thinking somewhat goes to explain at least to me why conservatives don't seem to like "outsiders."

Conservatives react to perceived threats, liberals seem more inclined towards trying to understand the motivations of an action that's been taken. Liberals have larger anterior cingulate cortex which is responsible for emotional responses and processing cognitively demanding information. Liberals may well become emotional when reacting to something, but they're not as scared.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7895011
 
2013-03-22 05:49:17 PM  

tirob: I for one don't care what your sexual orientation is.


That's Rapism!
 
2013-03-22 06:07:43 PM  
How about "Who gives a fark?"
 
2013-03-22 06:08:28 PM  
Which is to say about the orientation of the person you're talking to, not over which group can deduce it better.
 
2013-03-22 06:08:53 PM  

ohokyeah: http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2011/04/does-your-brain-bleed- re d-white-.html


sample size is 90 students... yeah, i'm sure it was totally representative of the political spectrum in our country
 
2013-03-22 06:14:40 PM  

FirstNationalBastard: the_dude_abides: FirstNationalBastard: edmo: Rav Tokomi: So basically when liberals stop thinking they become conservative?

Exhibit A: those wild college friends who marry and have kids and now tolerate nothing in the way of sex, drugs, alcohol, or rap videos.

Parenthood makes people stupid. It's true.

really? that's your take? that when they were in college and drinking and having sex and doing drugs they were smart? and now that they're trying to act responsibly because they have a family, they're stupid?

No, because they've turned 180 degrees and decided that everything they were doing and had no problems with before spitting out a dependent or two should now be banned for the safety of their crotch droppings... that doesn't make them responsible, it makes them shiatty parents who don't want to parent, and stupid.

/and what's so dumb about drinking, sex, and recreational drugs, especially in college?


If you're a singer, drinking is dumb, other than that, fornication and dabbling with mind altering substances is what life needs more of.
 
2013-03-22 06:37:53 PM  

FirstNationalBastard: CPennypacker: Could it be that liberals don't usually need gaydar to identify gays because gays aren't afraid to be gay around them?

Exactly how does one "be gay" around someone else?

Do they, like, fellate a banana in your kitchen? Suggestively eat clams?


Duh.  They wear speedos and sing show tunes.
 
2013-03-22 06:44:55 PM  

the_dude_abides: uhh, none of those studies you posted were peer reviewed. hell, only the first url links to the study (and only the abstract, the full text is not available), the other two link to op-ed pieces on political sites. hell, even the guys who conducted the study say the results were inconclusive and should not be taken literally. and yet here you are, spinning it for political purposes. that is exactly what I mean by pseudo-science, dirty little hacks like you making inferences that aren't there. sorry, nice try. seriously, did you even read the text of the links you posted??? lol


Instead of even attempting to refute anything presented to you, you've gone off on a hysterical tangent attacking the studies because of the sites that were reporting on them, claiming they're psuedo-science (even though you claim at the same time that you can't even read them) and that people citing them are "dirty little hacks" involved in some left-wing conspiracy to discredit conservatives using methodology akin to phrenology and eugenics.
 

Way to disprove the idea that conservatism is based on lazy, irrational, reactionary thinking...
 
2013-03-22 06:49:47 PM  

skozlaw: the_dude_abides: uhh, none of those studies you posted were peer reviewed. hell, only the first url links to the study (and only the abstract, the full text is not available), the other two link to op-ed pieces on political sites. hell, even the guys who conducted the study say the results were inconclusive and should not be taken literally. and yet here you are, spinning it for political purposes. that is exactly what I mean by pseudo-science, dirty little hacks like you making inferences that aren't there. sorry, nice try. seriously, did you even read the text of the links you posted??? lol

Instead of even attempting to refute anything presented to you, you've gone off on a hysterical tangent attacking the studies because of the sites that were reporting on them, claiming they're psuedo-science (even though you claim at the same time that you can't even read them) and that people citing them are "dirty little hacks" involved in some left-wing conspiracy to discredit conservatives using methodology akin to phrenology and eugenics.

Way to disprove the idea that conservatism is based on lazy, irrational, reactionary thinking...


Bears repeating.
 
2013-03-22 06:52:24 PM  

the_dude_abides: and do you believe that either side has facts and science on their side as a matter of course?


Depends how you define "sides." If it's Republicans vs Non-Republicans, then 'yes.' One side has facts and science as a matter of course.

Republicans have turned into a cult, and a good part of being a member of that cult is actively denying reality.
 
2013-03-22 07:00:44 PM  
no, actually I did refute what you said, maybe you missed it so let me do it again:

- study 1: no link to text, all I have is the abstract which says they got people drunk and asked them conservative questions. is there something i'm missing? lol
- study 2: direct quote from article -- "(The study) was commissioned as a light-hearted experiment by actor Colin Firth as part of his turn guest editing BBC Radio's Today program but has now developed into a serious effort to discover whether we are programmed with a particular political view. ...'I took this on as a fairly frivolous exercise: I just decided to find out what was biologically wrong with people who don't agree with me and see what scientists had to say about it and they actually came up with something.'"
- study 3: direct quote from article -- "Hodson was quick to note that the despite the link found between low intelligence and social conservatism, the researchers aren't implying that all liberals are brilliant and all conservatives stupid. The research is a study of averages over large groups, he said. 'There are multiple examples of very bright conservatives and not-so-bright liberals, and many examples of very principled conservatives and very intolerant liberals,' Hodson said. Nosek gave another example to illustrate the dangers of taking the findings too literally. 'We can say definitively men are taller than women on average," he said. "But you can't say if you take a random man and you take a random woman that the man is going to be taller. There's plenty of overlap.' Nonetheless, there is reason to believe that strict right-wing ideology might appeal to those who have trouble grasping the complexity of the world."

so again I ask: do you think that's solid proof of your argument that republicans are stupider than democrats? are they reaching beyond their grasp to spin some kind of political point? did you even read them?
 
2013-03-22 07:01:44 PM  

impaler: Depends how you define "sides." If it's Republicans vs Non-Republicans, then 'yes.' One side has facts and science as a matter of course.


citation needed
 
2013-03-22 07:05:22 PM  

the_dude_abides: impaler: Depends how you define "sides." If it's Republicans vs Non-Republicans, then 'yes.' One side has facts and science as a matter of course.

citation needed


Cite me a Republican position backed by facts and science.
 
2013-03-22 07:09:32 PM  

impaler: Cite me a Republican position backed by facts and science.


you should read more carefully, i never said one side has facts and science and the other does not. you're the one saying that. i believe the burden of proof falls on you.
 
2013-03-22 07:21:34 PM  

the_dude_abides: -snip-


1: I don't know what to tell you, they're journals. That's how journals work. If you really care that much, you're free to access them for a fee if you don't have access through an institution. But they're all available.

2. Who commissioned the study is irrelevant. Unless you're suggesting you have some reason to believe Mr. Firth influenced it unduly in some way.

3. I never said all conservatives are stupid. In fact, I never said anybody was stupid. I said the evidence suggests conservatives have a lower IQ, are more fearful, and seek easy answers that don't require complex thinking.

You're still not responding with any refutation. You just continue to whine about the sites they're posted on. If these are so self-evidently wrong why can't you present a review of any of them saying as much? If they're so obviously discreditable it should be fairly easy to find someone who discredited them. Scientists love to tear other scientists a new one for sloppy work, after all.
 
2013-03-22 07:24:58 PM  

the_dude_abides: so again I ask: do you think that's solid proof of your argument that republicans are stupider than democrats? are they reaching beyond their grasp to spin some kind of political point? did you even read them?


Oh, and as for this, I think they're evidence of what I'd already begun to suspect. That conservatives in this country increasingly lack reasoning and critical thinking skills and rely heavily on fear-based, reactionary decision making while attempting to avoid difficult, in-depth thought about complex topics. You, in fact, have so far only further confirmed my beliefs on that matter.
 
2013-03-22 07:27:23 PM  
Finally a study shows conservatives are good at something and they're still not happy.
 
2013-03-22 07:29:43 PM  
skozlaw: I never said all conservatives are stupid. In fact, I never said anybody was stupid.

i direct you to...

skozlaw: The evidence increasingly suggests that conservatism, social conservatism in particular, may simply be the result of inferior brain structure.

aaaaaaaand cue the word games... cmon, explain to me how you didn't mean stupid when you said  "inferior brain structure" lol
 
2013-03-22 07:36:06 PM  

skozlaw: Oh, and as for this, I think they're evidence of what I'd already begun to suspect. That conservatives in this country increasingly lack reasoning and critical thinking skills and rely heavily on fear-based, reactionary decision making while attempting to avoid difficult, in-depth thought about complex topics. You, in fact, have so far only further confirmed my beliefs on that matter.


there it is, the "you're so stupid you just proved my point" defense... i love it

skozlaw, i'm glad you've taken time off from pretending to read scientific journals to demonstrate your intellect
 
2013-03-22 08:03:21 PM  

the_dude_abides: impaler: Cite me a Republican position backed by facts and science.

you should read more carefully, i never said one side has facts and science and the other does not. you're the one saying that. i believe the burden of proof falls on you.


I'm saying it's Republicans vs Non-Republicans, and the Republicans don't have facts and science on their side. This isn't a provable statement, it's a disprovable one.

The provable statement would be "Republicans have facts and science on their side." I certainly can not prove that statement.

If you want to continue to obtuse: Link
 
2013-03-22 08:04:29 PM  

the_dude_abides: aaaaaaaand cue the word games... cmon, explain to me how you didn't mean stupid when you said "inferior brain structure" lol


Brain structure affects many, many attributes aside from intelligence.
 
2013-03-22 08:12:55 PM  

skozlaw: the_dude_abides: aaaaaaaand cue the word games... cmon, explain to me how you didn't mean stupid when you said "inferior brain structure" lol

Brain structure affects many, many attributes aside from intelligence.


I agree. That conservatives are stupid is aside from the point and was not at all implied.
 
2013-03-22 08:21:43 PM  

Ablejack: I agree. That conservatives are stupid is aside from the point and was not at all implied.


citation needed
 
2013-03-22 08:33:16 PM  

impaler: I'm saying it's Republicans vs Non-Republicans, and the Republicans don't have facts and science on their side. This isn't a provable statement, it's a disprovable one.


so you don't need to prove it because it doesn't FEEL false

sounds an awful lot like the religious right lol
 
2013-03-22 08:55:04 PM  

the_dude_abides: impaler: I'm saying it's Republicans vs Non-Republicans, and the Republicans don't have facts and science on their side. This isn't a provable statement, it's a disprovable one.

so you don't need to prove it because it doesn't FEEL false

sounds an awful lot like the religious right lol


No. "X doesn't have Y" can be disproved, not proven. You can't prove a negative.

It's basic logic. Has nothing to do with feeling.
 
2013-03-22 09:12:24 PM  
i appreciate you clearing that up for all us cro-mags... so let's get back to:

If it's Republicans vs Non-Republicans, then 'yes.' One side has facts and science as a matter of course.

still waiting for proof
 
2013-03-22 09:23:41 PM  

the_dude_abides: i appreciate you clearing that up for all us cro-mags... so let's get back to:

If it's Republicans vs Non-Republicans, then 'yes.' One side has facts and science as a matter of course.

still waiting for proof


Evolution, global warming, abstinence only education, labor department statistics,

Math

This website with a Miami GOP registrant.
www.rumproast.com
 
2013-03-22 09:36:37 PM  
that's your idea of proof? that's just a list of issues with no specifics
 
2013-03-22 09:59:35 PM  

the_dude_abides: that's your idea of proof? that's just a list of issues with no specifics


If you're unfamiliar with those topics, and the GOP's stance on them, I can't even begin to teach you in a fark thread.

Start with wiki.
 
2013-03-22 10:09:39 PM  

impaler: If you're unfamiliar with those topics, and the GOP's stance on them, I can't even begin to teach you in a fark thread.

Start with wiki.


lol right, it's soooooo self evident that you can't be bothered to explain... it's always the same thing with you dummies

libs: "we are the party of facts and truth and stuff!"
me: "ok so prove the point to me with facts and science"
libs: "we don't need to prove it! me and my friends and all the people at dailykos know we're right!"

i'm not asking because i don't know... i'm asking because YOU don't know
 
2013-03-22 10:12:02 PM  
and please be specific... cite facts directly, not op-ed articles like your buddy skozlaw did
 
2013-03-22 11:35:20 PM  

the_dude_abides: Ablejack: I agree. That conservatives are stupid is aside from the point and was not at all implied.

citation needed


Good point. I thought I was just kidding about conservatives being stupid, but you showed me.
 
2013-03-23 12:28:23 AM  

the_dude_abides: lol right, it's soooooo self evident that you can't be bothered to explain... it's always the same thing with you dummies


So because I know the well known stance of Republicans on Evolution, global warming, abstinence only education, labor department statistics, and math, and how the facts and science disagree with them, means I'm dumb?

Do you even know what the word "dumb" means? Because it seems to be the opposite of its actual meaning.

Basic run down
Republicans support:
abstinence only education.

Facts and science are against it.

Republicans are against:
Evolution
global warming
labor department statistics
math

Facts and science are support them.

Source www.google.com

Stop being obtuse, Republican. (but that would make you not Republican... so)
 
2013-03-23 12:32:31 AM  

skullkrusher: TheBigJerk: FTFA: Overall, in the study as in the real world, there was indeed a moderate correlation between more "feminine" male faces and being gay. That doesn't mean this relationship holds up in all individuals, but it's true as a statistical average across large numbers of people.

I wonder if that's because the "feminine" male faces have less social factors repressing them.

como?


If you're already too pretty to be accepted by the football and brats crowd, mayhaps you'll not have as much peer pressure to be terrified of "Teh Gay" and catching it, and therefore more likely to hide in the closet.  While the pretty-faced kid who was chased into art class has less constant reinforcement that male attraction is the worst thing ever, and rarely gets it from people he respects or cares about.

I'm just hypothesizing.
 
2013-03-23 02:11:04 AM  

rufus-t-firefly: barneyfifesbullet must be a liberal.


Well, it did vote for Al Gore.
 
2013-03-23 03:01:21 AM  

FirstNationalBastard: Suggestively eat clams?


I read this 2 hours ago and I'm still chuckling about it.
 
2013-03-23 04:24:32 AM  

log_jammin: FirstNationalBastard: Suggestively eat clams?

I read this 2 hours ago and I'm still chuckling about it.


I'm stealing it for use in real life. No, seriously.
 
2013-03-23 07:30:16 AM  
Conservatives rely entirely on superficial appearances? That must be why they're always the ones getting "fooled" by transvestites. And why it seems to be their greatest fear.

"He was wearing LIPSTICK, for chrissakes! How was I supposed to know?"
 
2013-03-23 10:11:36 AM  

the_dude_abides: - study 3: direct quote from article


That's basically saying "even when there is a correlation, there can be outliers from the main distribution tendency". Just like if you meet a random American black woman, the odds are relatively high that she favors the Democrats not the Republicans... but Condi Rice gives an existence proof that there do exist some black women who are also Republican.

impaler: I'm saying it's Republicans vs Non-Republicans, and the Republicans don't have facts and science on their side.

the_dude_abides: so again I ask: do you think that's solid proof of your argument that republicans are stupider than democrats?


That's being careless, by the way; the correlations are more directly to "conservative versus liberal" than "republican versus democrat". Even that somewhat oversimplifies.

Still, you might track down doi:10.1016/j.intell.2010.12.001 at a local institutional library. (That's a subscription link, I'm afraid.) Or see what studies you can turn up for yourself in Google Scholar; there's quite a few. The tendency isn't particularly pronounced, but statistically significant.

You can also look at some of the complexities using the General Social Survey data, if you're inclined to play around yourself. WORDSUM is from a short verbal intelligence test, DEGREE handles education, POLVIEWS and PARTYID are political orientation and party. There's a codebook, which you can search for other items of interest. The 2012 data isn't available by that interface yet, but 1972-2010 is enough to help get a feel.
 
2013-03-23 05:12:04 PM  
Do gay people have straidars?
 
2013-03-23 08:47:19 PM  
*reads article*

So, a conservative mindset is more prone towards making snap judgements and stereotyping according to a new study?

That's not really a "surprise" per se.
 
2013-03-24 03:41:18 AM  
Ahhh.  Another bullshiat MJ article.
 
Displayed 172 of 172 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report