Posted on 09/12/2007 2:10:02 PM PDT by presidio9
An individual's body motion and body type can offer subtle cues about their sexual orientation, but casual observers seem better able to read those cues in gay men than in lesbians, according to a new study in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.
"We already know that men and women are built differently and walk differently from each other and that casual observers use this information as clues in making a range of social judgments," said lead author Kerri Johnson, UCLA assistant professor of communication studies. "Now we've found that casual observers can use gait and body shape to judge whether a stranger is gay or straight with a small but perceptible amount of accuracy."
Johnson and colleagues at New York University and Texas A&M measured the hips, waists and shoulders of eight male and eight female volunteers, half of whom were gay and half straight. The volunteers then walked on a treadmill for two minutes as a three-dimensional motion-capture system similar to those used by the movie industry to create animated figures from living models made measurements of the their motions, allowing researchers to track the precise amount of shoulder swagger and hip sway in their gaits.
Based on these measurements, the researchers determined that the gay subjects tended to have more gender-incongruent body types than their straight counterparts (hourglass figures for men, tubular bodies for women) and body motions (hip-swaying for men, shoulder-swaggering for women) than their straight counterparts.
In addition, 112 undergraduate observers were shown videos of the backsides of the volunteers as they walked at various speeds on the treadmill. The observers were able to determine the volunteers' sexual orientation with an overall rate of accuracy that exceeded chance, even though they could not see the volunteers' faces or the details of their clothing. Interestingly, the casual observers were much more accurate in judging the orientation of males than females; they correctly categorized the sexual orientation of men with more than 60 percent accuracy, but their categorization of women did not exceeded chance.
The findings build on recent research that shows that casual observers can often correctly identify sexual orientation with very limited information. A 1999 Harvard study, for example, found that just by looking at the photographs of seated strangers, college undergraduates were able to judge sexual orientation accurately 55 percent of the time.
"Studies like ours are raising questions about the value of the military's 'don't ask, don't tell' policy," Johnson said. "If casual observers can determine sexual orientation with minimal information, then the value in concealing this information certainly appears questionable. Given that we all appear to be able to deduce this information to some degree with just a glance, more comprehensive policies may be required to protect gays against discrimination based on their sexual orientation."
The findings also are part of mounting evidence suggesting that sexual orientation may actually be what social scientists call a "master status category," or a defining characteristic that observers cannot help but notice and which has been scientifically shown to color all subsequent social dealings with others.
"Once you know a person's sexual orientation, the fact has consequences for all subsequent interactions, and our findings suggest that this category of information can be deduced from subtle clues in body movement," Johnson said.
Reference: Kerri L. Johnson, Simone Gill, Victoria Reichman, and Louis G. Tassinary "Swagger, Sway, and Sexuality: Judging Sexual Orientation From Body Motion and Morphology", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 93, No. 3, pp. 321–334.
Video available at: http://www.apa.org/journals/supplemental/psp_93_3_321/Supplement1.mov
Note: This story has been adapted from a news release issued by University of California, Los Angeles.
the velour baby blue jumper gives it away...
N = 8. How'd they get a study published with only eight subjects of each sex? Geez.
The only real clue is the way they carry themselves; stand, walk and move.
I think that they mean more of a man’s shape, and less of a woman’s.
Tubular means thick waistline relative to bust and hips. Because it is a relative measure, it could refer to a thin woman, but is certainly more noticeable in women who are a bit overweight.
This is really stupid on so many levels. But let me help these confused people out. Go into a room by yourself and take all your clothes off. See a penis between your legs? You are a make who is sexually designed to complement a female. No penis? You are the complement of a male. Desires don’t match anatomy? Seek counseling. Your body parts are not wrong. Your desires are wrong.
You can also tell by their dental floss.
Ok, I like that...
?
I didn’t feel too sure about posting that one, but it slays me every time I see it!
I have substantial anecdotal evidence from more than 20 years of experience in public gyms (mostly Ballys) that not only makes me laugh, but ask first - how they selected their “straight” and “gay” males and what were the venues - cities.
Because, my confirmed observation is that body type - hourglass and not tubular - is a body type that typically more often (averages, percentages) fits “straight” men than “gay men”; thus the “blind” randomness or lack of randomness in the selection of study subjects, the repetition or non-repetition of the study process in more than one venue and the accounting for sampling errors - all part of actual science - is greatly questioned, in my humble opinion.
As to the walk or “gait”, my own observations suggests to me that the distinction (a “gay” walking style verses a “straight” style - in men) is (a) only obvious if other mannerisms are obvious as well and (b) the observation of “gay men” who display combinations of “gay” mannerisms is extremely more prominent among older gay men than younger ones, and (c) suggests culture-time-specific factors (you walk like your friends) more than sexual-orientation specific factors.
Deeper and more important question - who in the %^%$# cares and how in the &*^%$ do people get funding for such “studies”. Some people’s lives are vastly empty and shallow.
It’s perfect. Our future Sec. of Defense should frame it himself so it can hang above every “Don’t ask don’t tell” discharge board meeting...
I like that movie, but whenever I see Robin Williams on TV now... :)
Lemmee guess.. these guys are... French ? They look French.
n=8 does not produce a statistic, just a meaningless number.
Gee, how much did this “study” cost the taxpayers?
I lived in an apt building on South Beach with a Lesbian club on the 1st floor, so I saw them quite often.
The majority of them were slender, gorgeous and near model perfect. Of course this was Miami Beach too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.