• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Split Thread [Ed] Personal experiences with gays

Quad4_72 said:
I'm just curious what your reasoning is, given the statistics presented in this thread.
Click to expand...

Yes, I know you're obsessed with statistics. I'm well aware your whole reasoning is based on your statistics, therefore, as long as the statistics say something, one still can't be amazed sometimes. That's why you can't see past the serial killer analogy. We're well aware that a lot of serial killers behave normal. Still, if you knew a person for a long time and found out he's a serial killer, it's perfectly reasonable to be surprised.

You also seem to ignore the part where I said I had read that Gershwin had a female lover. That had given me the impression he was straight.
 
Ron_Tomkins said:
Yes, I know you're obsessed with statistics. I'm well aware your whole reasoning is based on your statistics, therefore, as long as the statistics say something, one still can't be amazed sometimes. That's why you can't see past the serial killer analogy. We're well aware that a lot of serial killers behave normal. Still, if you knew a person for a long time and found out he's a serial killer, it's perfectly reasonable to be surprised.

You also seem to ignore the part where I said I had read that Gershwin had a female lover. That had given me the impression he was straight.
Click to expand...

Ok. Sounds reasonable :)
 
Quad4_72 said:
Behaving completely masculine and being gay is the overwhelming majority.

<snip>

it has also been suggested in this thread that there are actually more effeminate straight guys then there are gay guys.
Click to expand...
I haven't seen either of these things asserted in this thread ... can you show me?
 
arthwollipot said:
If he can tell gay from straight based only on a photo, that's definitely MDC-worthy!
Click to expand...

You might be surprised...

William Lee Adams, replicated earlier work by his advisor, Nalini Ambady (now at Tufts University). Ambady's original study, published in 1999, showed that homosexual people were better at correctly identifying sexual orientation from silent videos and photographs than heterosexual people were. Adams' research, started in 2004, focused exclusively on the face; the focal point of most social interaction.[5][6][7] This finding was elaborated by Ron Smyth and colleagues in 2003.[8] A 2007 study under Ambady found that people could identify gay men better than random chance when shown only a photo of only the eye. Accuracy was closer to what participants thought their accuracy would be when hairstyle was included.[9] A 2009 study found that determination of female sexual orientation by similar means was more accurate when a "snap" judgment was made, rather than conscious deliberation.
Click to expand...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaydar#Scientific_research

http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/200510/queer-eyes-blips-the-gaydar

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=something-queer-about-that-face

http://nymag.com/news/features/33520/


Disclaimer - I haven't actually read any of the research on this, just these popular reports of it.
 
Skeptic said:
(shrug)

Why is it so hard to accept that many gays are effeminate and many lesbians are "butch" and that sometimes it's pretty damn obvious, but that hardly means all or most of them are? I just don't get it. I know, publicly or privately, gays and lesbians who were obviously so for a long time before they "came out", and also some that I had no idea were so before they "came out". No doubt I know some people whom I don't know are gay or lesbians because they didn't come out and/or they are casual acquaintances whose sex life is none of my business even in passing.

I dare say my experience is typical.
Click to expand...

In fact, the mere fact that the phrase "coming out" exists points to the fact that many homosexuals don't have any obviously homosexual behaviours.
 
Quad4_72 said:
Well, if what has been vigorously debated by you guys and generally accepted by me now is true, then him being gay should come as no surprise at all.
Click to expand...

Really ? So because something is true, discovering an instance of that thing where it wasn't expected shouldn't be surprising ?

Cancer is not usually something you can spot on someone, and its very common. Should it not be surprising when a 30 year old friend tells you they have cancer, still ? Your logic would escape me if it weren't so blatantly obvious that you're pulling our chains.

Trolling, in this case, is you willfully misrepresenting your opposition.
 
Belz... said:
Really ? So because something is true, discovering an instance of that thing where it wasn't expected shouldn't be surprising ?

Cancer is not usually something you can spot on someone, and its very common. Should it not be surprising when a 30 year old friend tells you they have cancer, still ? Your logic would escape me if it weren't so blatantly obvious that you're pulling our chains.

Trolling, in this case, is you willfully misrepresenting your opposition.
Click to expand...

YAWN at your trolling accusations.
 
Skeptic said:
(shrug)

Why is it so hard to accept that many gays are effeminate and many lesbians are "butch" and that sometimes it's pretty damn obvious, but that hardly means all or most of them are? I just don't get it. I know, publicly or privately, gays and lesbians who were obviously so for a long time before they "came out", and also some that I had no idea were so before they "came out". No doubt I know some people whom I don't know are gay or lesbians because they didn't come out and/or they are casual acquaintances whose sex life is none of my business even in passing.

I dare say my experience is typical.
Click to expand...

Nobody is saying that such people don't exist, though the question of what proportion are is certainly up for debate (and I dare say that those members who are themselves gay might have a better idea).

My point earlier, though, was that even assuming a majority of camp gays and a minority of camp straights (and for simplicity ignoring the many shades of grey), one could still easily be guessing wrong 11% of the time.
 
Belz... said:
And apparently the rest of the post went over your head.
Click to expand...

Actually, the rest of your post was ignored, because I already told Ron in a previous post that his explanation was reasonable. You echoing other posters thoughts when the issue has been resolved is not worth a response.
 
zooterkin said:
Ok, but everyone else is.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I was thinking about that...
If I'm not unique, there would have to be more of me, but as they would have to be exactly identical to me, they would have to be precisely where I am; all the time. Now the question is: If I stand on some scales an weigh as much as a normal human, does that mean that I'm unique, or that I consist of several lightweight copies? Or does it mean that normal humans are not unique, or they would be very light?
Also, what if everyone consists of several lightweight humans; How would one find out how many?

Inquiring minds want to know.
 
Quad4_72 said:
Actually, the rest of your post was ignored, because I already told Ron in a previous post that his explanation was reasonable. You echoing other posters thoughts when the issue has been resolved is not worth a response.
Click to expand...

I was refering to MY explanation, not his.

Anyway, keep on trollin'.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom