 |
  |
| No amateurs, please. Send FReepmail if you want on/off ISHP list |
|
| The List of Ping Lists | |
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.
It is to LOL.
|
|
| No amateurs, please. Send FReepmail if you want on/off ISHP list |
|
| The List of Ping Lists | |
Note the “wide stance.”
LOL! Love the pick Cali.
“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.”
their objective for this “study”
LOL! Go Duncan!
Depending on how many variables they are testing, that's a maximum of 7 degwees of fweedom.
Depending on how many variables they are testing, that's a maximum of 7 degwees of fweedom.
I've told you a thousand times! I don't... 
swing that way!
Not... 
that there is anything wrong with it.
Well, Dis... 
R2 and I still welcome your company.
øø¤º°°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,*(¯´·.!... 
{Speak for yourself, C3!}
Jack... 
what is this?
Grace... 
I can explain!
Dis here... 
was just looking for bedbugs!
Looks like I picked the wrong day... 
to come out of the closet!
I'm so dang old... 
I cannot recall if I was gay or straight!
Well, we know for a fact... 
which way Data swings!
Ooooooooooohhhhhhhhhhhhh yeah... 
we know so wellllllll!
This thread has got me thinking and I hate to admit it... 
but I'm of the belief my boy Arnold goes both ways.
Since I caught my boy, Sherman... 
with Arnold, I fear he does, too.
The little... 
bitch!
I just like... 
the circus...
OMG! those must be the world’s ugliest women or possibly world’s ugliest men?
Oh how polite you are Dilbert!
There are many people around here that would call her a BIG FAT COW.
LOL! My wife and I have developed a similar hypothesis. “If you think he/she might be, he/she is.” I’ve yet to have my hypothesis proven incorrect, even if it takes a few years to find out for sure.
I walk like a dufus. Can’t be too careful.
How gay are you? Find out!
(Very silly survey follows)
http://www.channel4.com/life/microsites/G/gayometer/gayometer.html
Funny, no question that says “Do you have a ‘wide stance’?”
It’s starting to worry me that so many folks have these photos all ready to go for a thread like this. LOL.
Freepmail wagglebee or little jeremiah to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda ping list.
Be sure to click the FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search link for a list of all related articles. We don't ping you to all related articles so be sure to click the previous link to see the latest articles.
Add keywords homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list.
But where do they get this conclusion?
“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.”
What does this have to do with don’t ask don’t tell. If you keep your gayness to yourself in the army then nobody has a problem. The fact that someone can guess your gay has nothing to do with it. Just don’t hit on the guy next to you.
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.