EphemeralGayz
StanI am aware of this study. It has tenuous validity, I agree. I don't remember if it covers things such as standards of beauty, especially in gay men, but that is another factor. And, of course, the binary. I would be lying if I said I've never looked for hints in faces because duh. Haha. That wasn't my main issue. And it does not speak to testosterone levels or the pitch of one's voice being an indicator for sexuality. That is the part I find dangerous and out of touch in all honesty.So with the gay face thing I know of one study for it. The results were definitely not "everyone who has this face structure is gay" at all, just an increased likelihood the learning model paired it. Instead of 50% accuracy it was 67% accuracy. This isn't insignificant but it's also really not that compelling, if there was still that much failure in a 50/50 choice test. As far as I know there hasn't been many replications of this study so I'd take it with a grain of salt. It also sort of hinges on the assumption that sexuality is a binary hetero/homo situation which it is definitely not as well all know.
I am obviously not a researcher in any of the topics this bisects so of course I wouldn't just take my word on it, read it yourself and come to your own conclusions!
I think its okay to talk about neurodiversity in regards to queerness because there definitely is a correlation there, but I agree general discussion of it would make sense to be in its own thread.
I think in the future we should heavily encourage the use of spoiler tags or direct links to articles? That way it's easier to navigate through as you read and isn't so overwhelming. I hope new users still feel comfortable posting though!
The two are linked, absolutely. And that link can be talked about and celebrated. I'm concerned that this space isn't equipped for discussion on it because it's so easy to fall into the trap of "this is what neurodivergance looks like." It is not my topic as I would feel uncomfortable even attempting to speak on if an idol/actor is or isn't unless they've said so themselves (with explicit evidence, of course). So I will leave that to your discretion, but I can't help worry. Perhaps needlessly. The last thing I want is for neurodiverse people to feel othered in a thread talking about a different type of otherness and I hope that comes across. I don't want to be exclusory at all.
I also encourage posts in the thread. More activity is great! Spoiler tags can help immensely. Trigger warnings before them for sensitive things as well. In addition, I totally get being excited, but that does not mean walls of text for pages and pages. People should be open and welcomed, but there must also be mindfulness for others. That's all I'm trying to say.