Laelia wrote:
Well I guess someone from NSync was a bad example, but I think he definitely has a look I would associate with being gay. It's not something I can describe in words, but human brains are incredibly good at pattern matching. I have a friend who looks quite similar and is also gay, which I why I used Lance as an example.
Fair enough, but really, I would have to question the test itself.
If you were showing men's faces...they should all be relatively similar. It wouldn't be fair to show entire bodies, or upper-bodies...because if you see a guy wearing some faggy low-cut tight shirt, and you see he has no chest hair...you've already made conclusions that weren't based solely on his face. He's either really metro, or gay.
Also, if you only choose faces where one gay guy is all carefully groomed and maybe waxes his eyebrows (as some gays do), and compare that to some gruffy guy who looks like a mountain man, you are still stacking the deck because...clearly the person who looks like he waxes and wears foundation is probably gay.
No, the only way to truly do the test would be to compare a bunch of guys who all had a similar "look" to them...no one with special makeup, or special trims...heck all of their beards or lackthereof should be similar.
I think if this was a case, and it was just random faces of dudes and you had no information to judge on...other than their faces...It doesnt matter if women are ovulating or not...they wouldn't be able to truly tell "oh this one is gay, this one is not."
The test itself was flawed.