Researchers have trained AI to identify gay men with 91% accuracy rate.

The accuracy of these studies depends on the participants being 100% out of the closet regardless of sexuality.

What does "bisexual-face" look like then?

Great. Another tool for straights to identify and hunt us.

Spoken like a true closet-case R2.

I want one of these!

Run Tom Cruise's pic through that there machine!

What's the point of something like that? Shouldn't money be spent on more important things. This world is circling the drain really fast.

R6 This was done to test the facial-recognition powers of this particular AI software.

Different people define what's important differently, as can be clearly observed after the last US elections when funds for renewable energy research were diverted into fossil fuel research. You should weep for that lost money, not because of this breakthrough research. AI's the future of everything.

We need this technology here at DL immediately!! Think of all the celeb threads that could finally end.

If you think theres no harm in a machine that can pluck gay men out of a crowd you've never been to Chechnya r3. This technology is dystopian.

The new Gaydar 3000 X, brought to you by Pepperidge Farms.

Creators - programers - pushers of such technology should be identified as anti-social criminals and should be hunted down in the coming revolution.

It really depends on people being open, honest, and self-aware of their sexual orientation? What about bisexuals?

People were accurate most of the time too

So they've come up with a cookie-sniffing algorithm.

Can't think of any good use for this technology. Research needs to be focused on biological or genetic root of homosexuality.

Could people that openly identified as gay have had more atypical facial structures than other people, included closeted gays?

[quote]People were accurate most of the time too

Yeah, other studies have shown there is some truth to the idea of "gayface" and people tend to do better at identifying people who are gay based on pictures than random chance.

The Keebler Elves are behind this.

Trust.

Aaron Schock, you in danger gurl!

I also wondered where bisexuals fit in - do they read as straight or gay?

MALFUNCTION! MALFUNCTION! MALFUNCTION! MALFUNCTION! MALFUNCTION! MALFUNCTION! MALFUNCTION! MALFUNCTION! MALFUNCTION! MALFUNCTION! MALFUNCTION! MALFUNCTION! MALFUNCTION! MALFUNCTION!

Close the pod bay doorssssss, BITCH.

Let's suss those homosexicals OUT!

R23 is right, the potential for misuse of this is very dramatic.

It's not "science" unless they can find a reason for the distinctions.

So can we use this on Tom Cruise, George Clooney, Bradley Cooper et al and solve those is he or isn't he questions once and for all?

it just read the clothes those gays wore

[quote]It's not "science" unless they can find a reason for the distinctions.

Hormone exposure in womb plays a role in facial development and is thought to a play a role in your sexuality as well. Makes sense there could be a link there.

"Please re-enter your password, sissy."

r21 lol!

There's always the 9% they're wrong about, right?

Praying I'm among the 9% that flies under the radar!

I don't believe that there are differences in facial structure. I think it's something to do with facial expression. Do straight guys really do duck lips or look like they're smelling cookies?

Gay people are not more androgynous. MOST people have some androgynous features.

I will add that specifically gay men are not more androgynous if you look at the research and know what makes a face masculine.

When the new iPhone with facial recognition comes out, they'll use this tech to target more advertisements to you.

The Gaydar 3000 X should be used to screen all those "G4P" porn stars the DL goes on about.

Years ago, somebody was able to reliably use Facebook to identify Gays.

From an article about the study:

"The program was found to pay most attention to the nose, eyes, eyebrows, cheeks, hairline and chin for determining male sexuality; the nose, mouth corners, hair and neckline were more important for women.

Gay men had less facial hair, suggesting differences in androgenic hair growth, grooming style, or both. They also had lighter skin, suggesting potential differences in grooming, sun exposure, and/or testosterone levels. Lesbians tended to use less eye makeup, had darker hair, and wore less revealing clothes (note the higher neckline), indicating less gender-typical grooming and style. Furthermore, although women tend to smile more in general (Halberstadt, Hayes, & Pike, 1988), lesbians smiled less than their heterosexual counterparts.

Male facial image brightness correlates 0.19 with the probability of being gay, as estimated by the DNN-based classifier. While the brightness of the facial image might be driven by many factors, previous research found that testosterone stimulates melanocyte structure and function leading to a darker skin.

Additionally, consistent with the association between baseball caps and masculinity in American culture (Skerski, 2011), heterosexual men and lesbians tended to wear baseball caps (see the shadow on their foreheads; this was also confirmed by a manual inspection of individual images). The gender atypicality of the faces of gay men and lesbians is further explored in Study 2."

Is that why beards are in among gay men this decade?

[quote] Lesbians...wore less revealing clothes (note the higher neckline)

Flannel? How about the flannel?

[quote] Furthermore, although women tend to smile more in general... lesbians smiled less than their heterosexual counterparts.

Caneface.

If this is identifying gayface, it will obviously only be able to identify bottoms, which is completely useless as there are more than enough out bottoms to choose from. What we need is a way to identify tops.

[quote]The0 Gaydar 3000 X should be used to screen all those "G4P" porn stars the DL goes on about.

Oh shit.

[quote]Do straight guys really do duck lips or look like they're smelling cookies?

Yes.

Does it work on children?

I haven't seen many straight cookie sniffers. I could see the duck lips though.

This stuff is all cultural so of course it can change.

Would love Al out all closet cases of Hollywood

A poster on another thread had hypothesized that gay men had one eye smaller?/lower? than the other.

Now I can't stop noticing it. Not sure how accurate this is, but it seems consistent with those whom I know are out about they're homosexuality.

I wonder if this system utilizes that as one of the determining criteria.

Checking Tom Cruise's eyes right now

As if there's any question about T.C.'s orientation.

Almost everyone has one eye smaller and lower than the other. Most people tilt their heads and have one side of their face larger.

What about my eyes?

....

Gaydar And Facial Symmetry: New Study Examines Link Between Sexual Orientation And Faces

For better or for worse, a person’s sexuality is not usually something that can be determined simply by looking at them. But that doesn’t mean that people haven’t tried to identify specific, recognizable physical characteristics that could be used to shed light on one’s sexual orientation.

“Gaydar” — real or fictional — is the tool or process by which some claim they can “sniff out” gay people based on a look, the way one carries him or herself, or even by relying on information as seemingly arbitrary as the length of one’s fingers.

Now a new study is examining how a person’s facial symmetry might offer clues to his or her sexuality.

Researchers at Albright College in Reading, Pennsylvania, investigated perceptions of sexuality based on the symmetry and proportions of the face. According to the scientists’ findings, self-identified heterosexuals had features that were slightly more symmetrical than gay people. Not only that, but a press release on ScienceDaily.com reports that the more likely raters felt someone was heterosexual, the more symmetrical that individual’s face turned out to be.

The study involved 40 participants viewing photos of 60 men and woman — 15 straight men, 15 straight women, 15 gay men, and 15 lesbians. The individuals were then asked to give their opinions of the sexualities in question using a scale based on measuring who they believed the person in the photo would be attracted to (1=only men, 2-mostly men, some women, 3=men and women equally, 4=mostly women, some men, 5=only women).

“We found differences in measures of facial symmetry between self-identified heterosexual and homosexual individuals,” says Dr. Susan Hughes, an evolutionary psychologist who led the study. “We also found that the more likely raters perceived males as being attracted to women (i.e. holding more of a heterosexual orientation), the more symmetrical the males’ facial features were.”

The press release also notes that the study also looked at “sexual dimorphic facial measures — i.e. how masculine or feminine a face appeared” and discovered that, overall, heterosexual men had more masculine features than gay men did.

“We were surprised to find that symmetry played a larger role than masculine/feminine features in assessing sexual orientation,” says Hughes. “But it appears that individuals use cues of symmetry to make assessments about one’s sexual orientation and may be one of the features that comprise a person’s ‘gaydar’ abilities.”

The study, “The effects of facial symmetry and sexually-dimorphic facial proportions on assessments of sexual orientation,” appeared in the December 2011 issue of The Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology.

What do you think about “gaydar” — real? Fake? Do you have it? Are there tricks you use? We want to hear about it in the comments section below.

Enough about the Bi-sexual comments. BORING.

Clooney is right now under the knife having eye job

Good luck to Hollywood.

I agree with R33... it must have to do with the way facial expressions are made. I don't think the "lower testosterone in the womb" argument makes sense. Gay men can have very masculine bone structure, but the way they express the facial muscles might be different and become more fixed over time.

But Ryan Reynolds doesn't have any facial expression his face is wooden

Well the face lifts and eye tucks mimic the appearance of looking surprised or excited ... or gay.

It makes total sense that the New World order not only wants us to forget about common sense but us to let go of our own gaydar! Think about it. We forget how to access our own gaydar and some AI tells us that the next Taylor Lautner closet case is a total straight pussyhound and we believe that PR AI bot!

It's a Methodist college.

I suppose I could read the study. I'm curious about the people who were getting it right 61% of the time. I'm not sure the comparison is valid. For example the machines were trained by being shown pictures of men who are gay, and then cataloging their features. How were the people trained? For example when I came out of the closet some people were surprised and others were in the "of course your gay" camp. I know it just anecdotal but those who were surprised might have known gay men but didn't know they were gay. The "of course your gay" camp were gay and knew many gay men and knew they were gay. In other words if the people received the same level of training as the machine, they might have done as well.

R 59 You talking to me?

There are regimes in this world under which such technology would be used as an absolutely evil repressive tool.

The more direct question for us in more developed or more progressive societies is what kind of rules and regulation would be appropriate for this technology?

OK, Cupid, at R64. Calm down.

Chechnya, the Middle East, some African countries will put this to good use. Maybe the USA too under Trump.

Kazakhstan

Possibly the Chinese government could misuse this too. Given that the Chinese government is atheist it's a puzzle to me in some ways why their so anti gay. What do they fear?

r62, good point. I am skeptical of the study for similar reasons.

What is the purpose of this?

R68 Extreme left-wing socialism is always virulently homophobic because homosexuality is associated with the effete aristocracy. Notice how homophobic the trans- and Islam-loving left are becoming today.

I'd like one that would identify men who want to have sex with me.

[quote]Extreme left-wing socialism is always virulently homophobic because homosexuality is associated with the effete aristocracy. Notice how homophobic the trans- and Islam-loving left are becoming today.

R71 is, of course, correct.

Many global Communist and Marxist organizations disapprove of homosexuality. They find it strange and unrelatable and a distraction from their mainstream political aims. Up until recently the Revolutionary Communist Party USA's official policy was:

"the elimination of homosexuality" and the "rehabilitation of homosexuals".

The Communist Party of Great Britain is also uncomfortable with male same sex attraction as it see's it's working-class, masculine identity as "incompatible" with homosexuality.

The Castro regime declared homosexuality"a deviation incompatible with the revolution" and criminalized it. Many gays along with other cultural "undesirables" were sent to concentration camps where they were brutally treated. Castro followed the model enacted in the former Soviet Union which, from Stalin and throughout the Cold War, was equally punitive and murderous to gay men.

These stories are just the tip of the iceberg. Just because heterosexual, neo-Marxist/Socialist activists,academics,politicians,intellectuals and their acolytes in the media seem to stand against "oppression" be aware that to them oppression is a hierarchy and gays are not the favored group to throw the weight of the movement behind. If anything gays are looked upon as a messy distraction from their attempts to mainstream their social/economic political goals.

Bump (like the 3am knock on the door by the Authority)

Gaydar works in different ways. It can go from "wow, this guy knows how to dress" to "that guy's checking other guys out with hunger in his eyes!". Inbetween are things like "he has that look on his face like he's smelling a delicious, fresh batch of cookies from his gay pink oven!" or "when he opens his mouth, purses fall out!".

A friend of mine once said that gaydar is about detecting expressions. Gay men, and people who have something to hide (like being in the closet), tend to express themselves more because they either are not afraid of their sexual identity (and refuse the "boys don't cry" taboo of expressing emotions in public) or try to cover up / compensate for something.

sorry (and REJECT the "boys don't cry" taboo of expressing emotions in public) ..

R15 Would that be any less dangerous than this could be? If a biological or genetic component were to be found, and testable in the womb, gay kids would be aborted like down syndrome kids I'd imagine, except in the most homophobic regions which are also anti-abortion. I have little doubt in my mind that there's a biological factor - I'm just not sure if finding its specifics would be all it's cracked up to be.

[quote]If a biological or genetic component were to be found, and testable in the womb, gay kids would be aborted like down syndrome kids I'd imagine, except in the most homophobic regions which are also anti-abortion.

I don't believe that in a society where a lot of people are in favor of gay marriage and very supportive of their gay relatives and friends.

R78 Perhaps not quite as high as down syndrome babies, true, but I think supporting one's gay friends and the prospect of raising a child that will be gay are quite different things. Like come on, you couldn't think 'It's fine for other people but IDK if I want a gay child' wouldn't be a thing at all lol. I'd still expect a very high abortion rate even among so-called supporters.

r79, modern day people love these type of "challenges" because it gets you all the attention on social media.

Just putting this here

Made symmetrical

Nothing to worry about. BTW have you heard of the "fruit machine" the Canadian government developped in the 50s and 60s to seek out and fire employees in various government departments, police and military because they were "dangerous homosexuals"? (Basically the system mesured eye pupil dilation while subject was shown a series of images).

AI? Gay?

Haven't read the whole thread. Did anyone mention today's news that AI can recognize faces even if hidden behind veils, burkas or masks?

I hate these fucking robots and now they have fast tracked self driving cars! we are about to be killed by fucking machines!

Goddamn robots!!!

I find this terrifying.

EXTERMINATE!

EXTERMINATE!

To R62s point, I wonder which "dating sites" they got the photos from.

I say that because there are some sites where the vast majority of men look obviously gay in their photos and others where they don't, where many are trying so hard to look like "jocks" they're wearing the very baseball caps the study claims is proof positive of heterosexuality.

That 61% number seems to match real life-- roughly half of all gay men have the sort of stereotypical behaviors that you can tell instantly they're gay and the rest have some or none of those characteristics.

Why TF would legit researchers focus on sexuality? The so-called empirical evidence is based on what should be random people who claim to be gay. There's no way to guarantee random. It's bullshit.

Aha, so they found that gay men significantly do not wear baseball caps as much as straight dudes. And people here claimed weakened baseball caps don't make men seem straighter or more masculine

Additionally, R91. I was just struck with the fact that experts are trained to observe the biological reactions that can't be controlled via the central nervous system. Like people who are trained to detect lying and deception. The central nervous system gives things away - you can't control what your pupils do for dilation etc.. people who lie tend to turn their eyes in one direction, if it's the truth, the other direction. If someone strikes your fancy, your pupils dilate. It's micro movements that are done before a person realizes it. Why would they focus on sexuality? Who is providing the funding for it?

Weakened baseball cap R92?

Wearing baseball caps

What they found R92 was that straight men are more likely to wear baseball caps in their profile photos on the "dating sites" they looked at.

Make of that what you will.

[quote]Why would they focus on sexuality? Who is providing the funding for it?

Peter Thiel? Did you see the news reports last week he's getting blood infusions from young men to stay young?

Elizabeth Bathory would be proud.

Does it include a test of gayvoice? Until then, I call bullshit.

And I think the point too was that putting say Sean Hayes in a baseball cap, golf shirt and cargo shorts would make him seem straight until he spoke or moved his body.

Not being a dating site person, I can't fathom why'd they'd want to look like a goober when they're trying to impress someone.

Women are attracted to traditionally masculine men too. Wearing baseball caps connotes athleticism and masculinity.

YES, women are attracted to dudebros

[quote]R47: ...those whom I know are out about they're homosexuality.

Oh, double dear.

r102, maybe for casual sex. But I'd dare to claim that women, who are looking for a date, look for someone who can provide financial stability or at least have a job to provide financially stability for himself. It's a sign of being mature enough to settle down.

[This from the other thread]

From The Guardian article:

gay men had narrower jaws, longer noses and larger foreheads than straight men, and that gay women had larger jaws and smaller foreheads compared to straight women.

The research found that gay men and women tended to have “gender-atypical” features, expressions and “grooming styles”, essentially meaning gay men appeared more feminine and vice versa...

Human judges performed much worse than the algorithm, accurately identifying orientation only 61% of the time for men and 54% for women. When the software reviewed five images per person, it was even more successful – 91% of the time with men and 83% with women. Broadly, that means “faces contain much more information about sexual orientation than can be perceived and interpreted by the human brain”, the authors wrote.

The paper suggested that the findings provide “strong support” for the theory that sexual orientation stems from exposure to certain hormones before birth, meaning people are born gay and being queer is not a choice. The machine’s lower success rate for women also could support the notion that female sexual orientation is more fluid.

Beyond this study, I find that word use and language is a huge indicator. Many gay men use words and phrases that straight men almost never use. Of course, straight men don't say "girl/gurl" or call males female pronouns, but they rarely say "gorgeous" or use flowery language or terms. They are careful not to sound girly or effeminate, whereas a lot of gay men seem to not care if they sound like what others would call "fruity." Also, straight men listen rarely deliberately listen to music by female singers, whereas a lot of gay men primarily listen to female music

I hope this tires out to be laughable bad science. But lets face it the gay guys we lust over do fall into the minority of non-gay face/straight-looking men ...perhaps this is why there's so many G4P and bisexual guys are in the porn industry?

Turns* out to be ...

Yes R106-- you've just described the stereotypical femme gay man. Who make up about half the gay population, not 91%

R109, do only about half of openly gay men use words, language that other men do not, or have unusual taste in music, entertainment for men? I find most openly gay men tend to watch movies or tv considered atypical of men. Music taste seems to be even more atypical, with much more preference for female artists and less interest in hip hop or rock

Dress style is definitely generally distinct among gay men. Even in the age of compression pants, gay men in the gym distinctively wear shorter shorts than other men. They also wear tighter, more decorative shirts or tank tops than other men.

Does this supposed "model" include an eyebrow analyzer?

I hate the idea that "gay" might not simply be a difference into the sexual cue "module" of the brain (or maybe akin to different taste preferences) but instead incoded throughout the whole body or phenotype to the point of homosexual men not being considered truly fully male but rather some male-female hybrid instead. It's like going back to the bad old days. It makes very uneasy. Nauseous

Yeah, it's unsettling, but society generally treats male homosexuality as a state of being less manly or masculine anyway. Of course, this could make it worse

It definitely has an effect on my perception. I've been looking at a lot of these masculinisation-feminisation scales things and every single one of them screams "gay" towards towards the middle. And I always find the most masculinised the hottest. Probably why I've always been much more picky because I'm queasy (sexually) around androgyny and gay face.

Both men and women in studies show preferences for men with angular faces

Does this mean guys who are into more feminine faced twinks have more capacity for bisexuality than guys who only like super androgenised faces?

Not sure. It depends

THey mentioned smiling among women, but I think gay men smile much more than other men

Set one up in a mall kiosk and hope the fraus make their husbands or boyfriends try it.

I wonder what the trannys will think about this I'm thinking in particular about the super masculine pussy chasing ones (not infrequently in macho occupations like the military, emergency services, construction, engineering) who peddle the narrative about being drenched in feminine hormones in utero causing lady brain..but wouldn't it show on THEIR features? I contend you can usually spot the "gay boy" trans from the "heteron male" trans too

UH no

Yes, I too would say a man with a penis in his mouth is statistically more likely to be gay.

R119 it's true. I see it all the time in photos. It's like gay men have the same desperate need as girls to demonstrate likability, to placate and be as non-threatening as possible. Personally I find it a big turn off but I know I'm in the minority. I like to see the wolf in a man's eyes. Give me a mean mug any day -- and when he smiles it's much more special like the sun emerging out of a thunder cloud.

r124 's ideal man.

Ladies and gentlemen, uh, we’ve just lost the picture, but what we’ve seen speaks for itself. The uncanny beeswax-sniffer known as "gaydar" to generations of homosexualists has apparently been taken over — ‘conquered’ if you will — by a master race of intelligent robots. It’s difficult to tell from this vantage point whether they will consume all Earthlings or merely enslave them. One thing is for certain: there is no stopping them. The robots will soon be here.

[bold]And I for one welcome our new robot overlords![/bold] I’d like to remind them that as a trusted TV personality, I can be helpful in rounding up others to toil in their microchip factories.

In the paper, the authors cite a Czech study which says that gay male faces are a mosaic of masculine and feminine features, citing big jaws (a masculine feature) and small noses (a feminine feature) as an example. Another way to put this, however, is that straight men, too, are a mosaic of masculine and feminine feature, seeing as compared to gay men in that study they had on average longer (more masculine) noses and narrower (more feminine jaws). They don't put it this way in the paper, however, because of their preconceived assumptions -- that gay men must be more feminine whenever a difference with straight men is found -- which they failed to critically analyze before writing their paper. It's worth nothing that, in this Czech study, the gay male faces were rated as more masculine than the straight males by the raters, a group of 40 (or was it 80?) straight volunteers. This paper is guilty of the same bias. Out of three differences they cite between gay men and straight men -- longer noses, bigger foreheads, narrower jaws -- two (noses and forehead) point to greater masculinity among gay men. Out of the two differences found between lesbians and straight women, one (smaller forehead in lesbians) is indicative of greater femininity in lesbians. So how can the authors say these findings support the theory of greater hormone feminization among gay men and masculinization among women? What the findings suggest is that gay men and women are more gender atypical in some features, less so in others, which suggests that these differences are occurring randomly, and are not the result of a universal process of masculinization or feminization. For example, why do gay men have longer noses than straight men - and longer noses are a masculine feature - if supposedly they've been exposed to fewer masculinization hormones in uterus? It would be interesting to find what percentage of the algorithm's success was due, not to physical differences (which were ambiguous) but to cultural signifiers - for example, grooming style, the way one smiles or tilts one's head, etc. If it was cultural signifiers that most helped the gaydar, then there's no reason we should impute variations in sexual orientation to hormones instead of genes, socialization, etc. It is known that cultural signifiers are a major aid in helping gaydar accuracy. A study comparing gay men across levels of outness found that gay men who were less out in "real life" were less likely to be guessed as gay in the lab. The Czech study mentioned above is, as far as I know, the only gaydar study which tried to examine gaydar accuracy by removing such signifiers, for example, by asking the men before taking their photographs to make neutral facial expressions, remove earrings or other ornaments, and wear a bandana to hide their hair. And in this study, as said above, the gay male faces were rated as more masculine, and raters (especially straight male raters) rated them as less gay than the faces of their own straight fellows.

Paragraphs have never been optional, R127. If you want your views to be considered, make them easy to read for Oh Dear's sake!

This type of study can only be meaningful if 100% of all images used are standardized and without any variety in head tilt angles and expressions.

I.e. no make up, no eyebrow plucking, no hair, just the face with a blank and non expressive stare, kind of like it is required in biometric passport-type photos.

r128 Fine:

In the paper, the authors cite a Czech study which says that gay male faces are a mosaic of masculine and feminine features, citing big jaws (a masculine feature) and small noses (a feminine feature) as an example. Another way to put this, however, is that straight men, too, are a mosaic of masculine and feminine feature, seeing as compared to gay men in that study they had on average longer (more masculine) noses and narrower (more feminine jaws). They don't put it this way in the paper, however, because of their preconceived assumptions -- that gay men must be more feminine whenever a difference with straight men is found -- which they failed to critically analyze before writing their paper.

It's worth nothing that, in this Czech study, the gay male faces were rated as more masculine than the straight males by the raters, a group of 40 (or was it 80?) straight volunteers.

This paper is guilty of the same bias. Out of three differences they cite between gay men and straight men -- longer noses, bigger foreheads, narrower jaws -- two (noses and forehead) point to greater masculinity among gay men. Out of the two differences found between lesbians and straight women, one (smaller forehead in lesbians) is indicative of greater femininity in lesbians. So how can the authors say these findings support the theory of greater hormone feminization among gay men and masculinization among women? What the findings suggest is that gay men and women are more gender atypical in some features, less so in others, which suggests that these differences are occurring randomly, and are not the result of a universal process of masculinization or feminization. For example, why do gay men have longer noses than straight men - and longer noses are a masculine feature - if supposedly they've been exposed to fewer masculinization hormones in uterus?

It would be interesting to find what percentage of the algorithm's success was due, not to physical differences (which were ambiguous) but to cultural signifiers - for example, grooming style, the way one smiles or tilts one's head, etc. If it was cultural signifiers that most helped the gaydar, then there's no reason we should impute variations in sexual orientation to hormones instead of genes, socialization, etc. It is known that cultural signifiers are a major aid in helping gaydar accuracy. A study comparing gay men across levels of outness found that gay men who were less out in "real life" were less likely to be guessed as gay in the lab.

The Czech study mentioned above is, as far as I know, the only gaydar study which tried to examine gaydar accuracy by removing such signifiers, for example, by asking the men before taking their photographs to make neutral facial expressions, remove earrings or other ornaments, and wear a bandana to hide their hair. And in this study, as said above, the gay male faces were rated as more masculine, and raters (especially straight male raters) rated them as less gay than the faces of their own straight fellows.

Thank you, R127/R130!!!

[quote]Out of three differences they cite between gay men and straight men -- longer noses, bigger foreheads, narrower jaws -- two (noses and forehead) point to greater masculinity among gay men.

Along which plane does one measure the length of one's nose? (Not as easy as measuring one's hose.)

Another criticism I have is that the authors are sort of ignoring previous finds in the literature about the genesis of homosexuality in order to make things fit with their own results. They say, for example, that the fact that their gaydar performed slightly worse for women than for men may indicate that hormones play less of a role in female sexual orientation, which may be more fluid.

My guess is that worse accuracy for women was due to the fact that cultural signifiers of homosexuality are less important for lesbians than for gay men. Because what the literature say about hormone differences across genders and sexual orientations is precisely the opposite of what the authors of this study suggest -- lesbians are more masculinized than straight women across hormone measures (for example, digit ratio and direct testosterone measures), whereas no significant differences, according to at least two meta-analyses, emerge between gay and straight men.

In "Prenatal Influences on Human Sexual Orientation: Expectations versus Data", researcher addresses this point, that contrary to all expectations, it is so far only among women where biology has proven decisive in influencing sexual orientation. He writes:

"In non-human vertebrate species, sexual differentiation of the brain is primarily driven by androgens such as testosterone organizing the brains of males in a masculine fashion early in life, while the lower levels of androgen in developing females organize their brains in a feminine fashion. These principles may be relevant to the development of sexual orientation in humans, because retrospective markers of prenatal androgen exposure, namely digit ratios and otoacoustic emissions, indicate that lesbians, on average, were exposed to greater prenatal androgen than were straight women. Thus, the even greater levels of prenatal androgen exposure experienced by fetal males may explain why the vast majority of them grow up to be attracted to women. However, the same markers indicate no significant differences between gay and straight men in terms of average prenatal androgen exposure, so the variance in orientation in men cannot be accounted for by variance in prenatal androgen exposure..."

As for female sexuality being more fluid, which supposedly explains why their gaydar worked a bit less well for women, I'd say greater female fluidity is likely just the result of female homosexuality and sexual experimentation being more socially accepted than male homosexuality and experimentation. There's some evidence for this - for example, the fact that, before the mid-90s, ie, before the lesbian chic in much of pop culture, men tended to disclose more homosexual attraction and experimentation than women in social surveys. Plus, we can all think of societies, especially ancient societies, where fluidity - the pursuing of sex with partners regardless of gender - was a universal feature of male, not female, sexuality, so male sexuality is not all the result of biological causation.

Btw, the name of the researcher cited at r133, arguing that the literature shows more hormone differences between women than men across sexual orientations, is Stephen Marc Breedlove.

Boys..I mean girls, the jig is up we may as well go quietly with dignity before they load up the cattle tracks to the transition camps💃

Trucks*

This is purely going to be used for persecution and employment rejection.

Look at the photos in the author's notes for this study. Scroll down to get to them.

The "straight" people look a little more "Walmart."

The "lesbian" looks more intelligent.

r138 The lesbian looks very attractive. The gay man looks like a lovable nerd. The straight man looks like a sex offender and the straight woman looks like his alcoholic wife.

Exactly, R139!

And who will get persecuted thanks to this, and the jobs?

This guy, who's a professor with work published on "Nature", doesn't seem very impressed but I can't find his precise criticisms.

The gay guy looks pleasant and "cuter" than the straight guy. But the straight guy face looks way hotter to me and says "sex" while the gay face says "harmless" and "lets do brunch "

Neither male face is particularly attractive to me, but the heterosexual face is more manly to me and therefore preferable.

The lesbian/straight woman face comparison doesn't work at all. That straight woman's face is way too robust and clearly reads older. Whereas the lesbian looks far too delicate and pale. Cane face is a thing (kinda) and so is lesbian alcohol consumption with resultant ruddy completion

R82-so, the symmetrical Cooper looks like Liberace?

I'm confused.

R141 yeah but he's an activist professor (not that there's anything wrong with that etc) so politics comes into everything even "neutral" science

We also know many very masculine gay men and very feminine gay women. We also know many very old men, which does not invalidate the statement that women tend to live longer. The fact that the faces of gay men are more feminine on average (as we show in our study) does not imply that all gay men are more feminine than all heterosexual men, or that there are no gay men with very masculine faces (and vice versa for lesbians).

The differences in femininity/masculinity observed in this study were subtle and spread across many facial features: enough to be apparent to a sensitive algorithm, but imperceptible to humans. “This must be wrong; many of your participants must have lied about their sexual orientation!” It is certainly possible that some of the participants who told us that they were straight were, in fact, gay (or vice versa). We believe, however, that people voluntarily posting and seeking partners on dating websites have little incentive to lie about their sexual orientation.

You hang out with the wrong type of homosexual R110

You keep describing femmes and/or guys who are part of the "gay scene" (there is huge overlap between the two)

But there are plenty of gay men who like rock or rap, sports, wear baggy clothes at the gym and get their hair cut by some old school barber.

Since the latter group don't immediately read as gay maybe you're not aware of them?

This thing just picks out femmes, right? All it means is 91% of the guys it identified were gay, not that it picked out all gay men in a crowd 91% of the time.

Gay men who use face pics to seek men on dating sites are obviously openly gay. In all likelihood, these gay men are probably less masculine than closeted gay men, both in cultural and FAcial traits. A lot of gay and bi men are closeted because they are presumed straight, whereas a lot of openly gay men are out because they were presumed gay already

Do we know which "dating sites" they pulled the pictures from?

I ask because Grindr photos (and the people who use Grindr) are very different than the people who use say OK Cupid.

Dating apps could use this AI as a money maker. Pay extra and we'll weed out the femmes for you.

The straight male composite face is gross and looks low class. You people like it because this is DL and "we" love straight men no matter what.

The straight dude looks tougher, whereas the gay guy looks nice but boyish

"The straight male composite face...looks low class."

Everything you need to know about femmes and DL in one sentence.

R153

Occupation: Interior Decorator

Education: Jonesville (AR) Senior High School

Parents: Bobby (carpenter, general tradesman), Lurleen (homemaker, convenience store clerk)

Love the Trumpster at r71 trying to blame "the left" for homophobia. I guess the left gave us the constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage

The reasoning why is just all just possible hypotheseses though r130/r133.

The actual point of the study is that there are enough identifiers written in people's faces that AI can identify the difference between gay and straight people very well, higher than humans themselves are capable of noticing.

THE researchers are concerned the technology will be used to identify and harm gays

And it is worth pointing out this team did not "invent" this technology. They used preexisting AI technology and a public database to run this experiment.

Duh we know dude

So, the trend of guys to have facial hair and to wear baseball caps really does make people think they look straight.

Most gay men accept that gay men generally are more interested in culturally nonmasculine things than other males. Well, if that's the case, it's likely there are corresponding physiological markers of femininity in many men. It's not just nurture or culture at work in this distinction. Again, there are still Many exceptions to the general rule

Is it just me or does the lesbian in r136's link resemble Emilia Clark (as Dynaris Targarian in Game of Thrones)?

Sorry, r138 not r136

I've no idea what you mean, R162

[quote] features of those faceprints and their owners’ sexuality (as declared on the dating website)

sorry but I am not buying it, I thought maybe it was people walking down the street, but photos from web dating sites, I could probably do that good and my gaydar sucks.

WE IN DANGER GURL!

Dear Lord in Heaven!

I found the source of the research data

[quote]I hate the idea that "gay" might not simply be a difference into the sexual cue "module" of the brain (or maybe akin to different taste preferences) but instead incoded throughout the whole body or phenotype to the point of homosexual men not being considered truly fully male but rather some male-female hybrid instead. It's like going back to the bad old days. It makes very uneasy. Nauseous

Maybe it's Maybelline.

I swear some people never satisfied. What this research suggests that is yes, you really are born gay and there are real biological differences between gay men and straight men. It is an innate part of who you are.

We know no bisexual guys would put their face pics on a m4m site, so they were not part of the study

R172, actually for many, but not all

R89 😂

Wake me up when the machine can tell us which guys have the biggest dicks.

Does this mean my career ends now?

I'm so symmetrical

GAY!

Does this symmetrical thing works for women too? I mean if their face is not symmetrical does this means they are lesbians?

Noticed how many female celebs have asymmetrical faces just look to their chins there are lots of them!

R176 has the right idea. Let's see how the AI does with BDF.

Would just like to say that the study at r53 has not been replicated. This study which uses a bigger sample found that gay male faces were more symmetrical than straight male ones.

Fascinating that dark complexion correlates with straight maleness. I know that dark men are universally considered more masculine, often more attractive than pale men, and that Black men are perceived as the ultimate masculine men.

That's RACIST!

...

[quote] I know that dark men are universally considered more masculine, often more attractive than pale men, and that Black men are perceived as the ultimate masculine men.

Yes it is so great out their for dark-skinned men....

If only that were true, white men are easily the most desired. Black men and asian men are the least desired. Studies have shown this over and over.

out there*

r183 Interesting, but studies show that among Caucasians, men tend to be lighter in skin than women.

If is true that gay men are lighter pigmented than straight men, this is just more proof that gay men are NOT feminized in body shape. See the table below. Lower numbers indicate more lightness.

I do believe, by the way, that gay men are more feminine. But only in regards to psychological, brain-based characteristics.

Tiger Woods and Usain Bolt

The researchers found that most women speed daters said yes (meaning they’d like to see a man again after the four-minute speed date) less often to men of another race than they did to men of their own race. Here’s how much less interested they were in the other races, as compared with their enthusiasm for men of their own race:

African-American women said yes about 30 percent less often to Hispanic men; about 45 percent less often to white men; about 65 percent less often to Asian men.

White women said yes about 30 percent less often to black or Hispanic men, and about 65 percent less often to Asian men.

Hispanic women said yes about 20 percent less often to black or white men, and 50 percent less often to Asian men.

Asian women didn’t discriminate much by race (except for showing a very slight preference for Asian men over black or Hispanic men).

White chicks are much more open to dating black dudes than black chicks to white guys. The masculinity gap is the reason.

I've always felt that Black women begrudgingly drool over white guys. They love to hear of a cute famous white guy dating a Black woman. Opposite is not true. I remember to have read somewhere that Black women contacting White men have biggest rates of rejection on dating websites.

The data for this stuff is readily available.

DL needs to propose BDF as the next study to these researchers.

According to this research, straight men and lesbians wear lots of baseball caps. (So you can now close down that strange series of posts with the 14,000 thread count.)

That breeder test will never be able to stereotype me!

R192, your feelings contradict empirical data

In a new body of research published by the American Psychological Association, 950 online participants from the US were asked to rate black and white men based on their weight, height, strength and build.

"We found that these estimates were consistently biased. Participants judged the black men to be larger, stronger and more muscular than the white men, even though they were actually the same size," said the study's lead author, John Paul Wilson, of Montclair State University.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[quote]So, the trend of guys to have facial hair and to wear baseball caps really does make people think they look straight.

Yea--in PICTURES. I have to laugh when I see sometimes see queens dress in football attire holding a football in a sad attempt to look 'masc' in their online photos. Bitch you ain't never thrown a football in your life, who the fuck do you think you're kidding!?

R195 Hi

Exhibit A: Bruh4Bruh only!

R200, you type sassy drag queen, man. Just sayin

How do drag queens type, exactly?

R202, a bruh would not take an indoor selfie in football pads, and especially not in a stupid jockstrap

You never see actual athletes or masculine guys take selfies in jockstraps, so it definitely undermines the desired effect

Plus that guy is so skinny he doesn't even have the build of a football player

Does this football make me look masc? Just don't ask me to throw it!

Hie pose is feminine. Guys stand boxy

THough lean, this guy knows the football stance

I'm afraid for Ryan Seacrest but mayb, just maybe he'll luck out and fall in the > 9%

Real football players

Articulate what makes him masculine

He looks like he needs a shower, R213. Good thing one is right behind him. What are those scars on his chest?

R214, let us guess: you're extremely fem, old, and prissy.

Can it eliminate the undesirable posters @ DataLounge?

Asymmetrical brothers club

[quote] What are those scars on his chest?

He's a trans man.

Another sexual orientation clue: r202 is Trace from "Flipping Out".

'the potential for this kind of software to violate people’s privacy or be abused for anti-LGBT purposes'

from The Guardian

Al is the reason Brad is everyday in my clinic

October 31, 2009 Source: Harvard University Summary: New research suggests that regardless of sexual orientation, men prefer sexual dimorphism in faces. This study finds that gay men preferred the most masculine-faced men, while straight men preferred the most feminine-faced women. The findings suggest that regardless of sexual orientation, men's brains are wired for attraction to sexually dimorphic faces -- those with facial features that are most synonymous with their gender.

Will tabloids use the gayface machine to out people?

What'd ya think? Is this enough to fool the The Machines and escape the roundup?

The guy behind the study looks like he has gay face

Huh. Pity the 9% who are still saying, "But I'm not gay. Really." Maybe they should reconsider.

R190 Nobody wants Chinese men.

With the composite faces looking so vastly different, and the straight faces in particular looking more hillbilly, now I think that what this study picked up was not sexual orientation differences but cultural and class differences implicit in sexual orientation groups.

R188 Actually women are naturally lighter than men across all ethnic backgrounds. It is believed this is a result of adaptation related to vitamin D absorption.

r229 I'm aware this is true of most ethnic groups. But it doesn't appear to be true of Europeans. Plenty of studies have found European men to be lighter.

Beware of anything coming out of Stanford University home to the hyper conservative Hoover Institute a refug think tank with direct links to gov.

I don't like the sound of this.

R230 Such as? The research conducted by Jablonski and Chaplin over decades is the largest, most complex of its kind and covered populations all across the planet (including Europeans). Ever seen those skin pigmentation world maps? That's just some of their work. The results were universal: males are darker than females.

R232 You can even see this in the image with the composite faces. Both men have noticeably darker skin than the women.

[quote]The model performed worse with women, telling gay and straight apart with 71% accuracy after looking at one photo, and 83% accuracy after five.

I'm kind of impressed the hit rate is that accurate with women. I was under the impression a certain percentage of women saying they're lesbians are straight/bi women (I say this as a lesbian, I'm just saying the tumblr/political lesbian is a thing that dilutes the reality).

Where are all these straight women claiming to be lesbians? Women are much more likely to identify as bi than gay

r232 I already linked at one in r188, which surveyed four European countries - Ireland, Poland, Portugal, and Italy. It's from the study below. In all four countries men were lighter skinned than women.

I've seen straight people on Twitter angry that the straight faces are too frumpy. Some say it's evidence of sampling bias. Even though they sound like they're just mad, I agree with them. I wouldn't doubt if the straight faces were more likely to come from rural areas and lower classes.

Heavens ! Next thing I know you'll tell me that I have gay face. I ask you, is this the face of a gay man ? I thought not.

r238 Nice try. That's clearly a butch dyke.

R239

try again

R236 4 countries surveyed vs 50+ in Jablonski and Chaplin's work.

I'm not trying to be snarky here, I mean sure, could it be true in those 4 countries with a total sample size of 294 (around 74 people per country)? Ehh, perhaps? But I don't think so.

bump

So why do women tan so much? They go to great lengths to get a nice golden brown skintone and tanning is associated with femininity and men who tan are looked at as gay. Women tan because straight men find it attractive.

There was a study that said gay men subconsciously wish to be women. Maybe that's why so many want masculine men, because they're feminine and want to feel like a girl with the big manly protective masculine man.

R244 There was a study that said gay men subconsciously wish to be women

What!?

Ha, I'd love to see it try to identify a closet case, gay bashing, married, southern pastor.

Plus closet case celebrities.

Does this mean that homosexuality is likely chromosomal?

r244 = trollbait

Some computer scientists seem to question the methods used by these psychologists. It gets a bit confusing, but this seems to say that the software used to "learn and detect sexual orientation" basically is being used in a way that it is not designed for. Basically, the psychologists try to say that they told the software to ignore things like emotional expression, facial positioning, and photo background - but the software can't do that by design. At least I think that's what is being said here...

That being said, here are their composite gay and straight faces... I don't think the AI is too far off.

Can somebody use this on my HIIT instructor?

He won't shut up about how hot girls are.

Post his pic on DL and he's guaranteed to be rated G-A-Y R252

r251 I don't fine the composite lesbian too representative of real world lesbians. And the straight faces are too stereotypical.

R244 is correct. Majority of gay men would give anything to be with someone burly and macho looking like Joe Manginiello. They themseves are soft and feminine and are not attracted to sissy gays or women. That's why there are no heterosexual Drag Queens.

Joe Manganiello? I'd call him a metrosexual actor, not that macho.

You can find literally thousands of gay men on IG who look like Manganiello.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

The gaydar machine is back!

What's a computer?

VOX won't be happy until homosexuality is wiped off the face of the earth.

Does this explain Canadians yet?

that is the asexual study, R262

Someone explain to me how this could possibly be of benefit to anyone.

I fused a gay man and a lesbian together and got this.

But can they play " Gay or European"?

Not even supercomputers can match the good old fashioned detector.

^ Who is that with Brad?

I hear the AI was confused when photos were taken of men in the vicinity of fresh cookies.

Did no one else pick up on the original article saying that sexuality was just the first thing? They also want to be able to identify a person's politics and IQ! So in addition to the potential persecution, there will also be manipulation. This is some scary shit.

No one tell Putin about this

Tell? Who do you think commissioned the research?

[quote] Does this explain Canadians yet?

You mean like how you want to fuck more Canadian men than American guys on average so you project your sexuality onto us?