My “Gaydar” works remarkably well. My mother asks me to pick them out on the boob tube and I get about 80% right.
The article almost defies comment.
It proves nothing about me personally therefore the personalized YOUR is typical media broad-brush nonsense.
If gaydar really isn’t a thing (a linguistic formulation which I despite, incidentally) then why and how is a publicly-funded professor attempting to disprove it?
The author of study even gets the generally-accepted definition of gayday wrong. We are NOT relying on specific visual cues ie stereotypes - in fact, most of the time there is a gaydar ‘alert’ when someone LACKS such cues and often when that person takes great pains to adopt heterosexual mannerisms, speech, dress, etc. The point is that gaydar is intuition in the face of counterintuitive information.
This is why men who, for example, are cast as pop music teen idols or even as Bachelors seeking the hand of a female in marriage ie often ping gaydar.
To repeat: gaydar is NOT stereotyping - it is the ability to see beyond stereotyping.