NineInchCock_160IQ:
Originally posted by SomeGuyOverThere+Feb 9 2005, 07:13 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(SomeGuyOverThere @ Feb 9 2005, 07:13 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-jeepwranglerboi@Feb 9 2005, 10:23 PM
This is ridiculous! Saying that you can look at someone and tell if they are gay or straight is like looking at someone and guessing their ethnicity, or what city they are from, or if they are an only child, etc. It's all a stereotype. Get over the stereotypes and evolve a little. Not that we don't all do it a little, I'll be the first to admit that I do but let's get real people. Golly! :wacko:
[post=281538]Quoted post[/post]
Even if it is stereotypeing, stereotypes exist for a reason - because some people are actually like that.
Besides, as Ive said my "Gaydar" does appear to work... I dunno why, I dont like stereotypes etc, but I have a decent rate of figureing out sexuality of somebody.
I know its all psychological triggers etc, but hounestly I have had a very decent sucess rate.
:ninja:
[post=281558]Quoted post[/post]
[/b][/quote]
I dislike negative stereotypes as much as the next person and I have a stronger distaste for people's incessant need to put a label on *everything* than most people do. However, so many people now have a kneejerk negative reaction to anything they see as stereotyping which is, in my opinion, a little bit of overreaction. Some stereotyping is good, it lets us live our lives by having a set schema of how things are. For instance, for us straight guys, the stereotype that most men do not have breasts, women do not have facial hair, and in general each sex wears gender-appropriate attire helps us out a great deal when we are in a bar trying to pick up girls. A lot of stereotypes are true, or at least mostly true. Of course there are exceptions, and people need to realize that, not all gay men act alike. But enough of them do act in certain ways that it has become the common perception that they share certain traits. Jeepwranglerboi pointed out this was like saying you could identify someone's race by looking at them. Well, good point. It is. Myself personally, I think the whole concept of "race" is an outmoded concept and I don't like to use the term. However, I can't in good conscience argue against the fact that it is very possible to look at someone and be able to identify what region of the world their ancestors came from. Though, once again, there are exceptions, people of mixed ethnicities, people with recessive traits or genetic abnormalities, people who belong to ethnic groups that are underrepresented on television and in movies and therefore not as well-known or recognized by the general population. I myself am pretty good at this. In addition to the white/black/asian/mid-eastern/latino categories most people in the USA seem to use, I have been able to accurately identify the differences between a Polish girl and a Romanian one by the shape of their toes. It's possible to see some general physical differences between people of predominantly Swedish, English, Irish, Scottish, German, French, Italian, Dutch, Spanish or Greek ancestry. I'm just listing the ones I know fairly well. I'm sure to a Slovak they can probably pick out differences between someone from Prague and someone from Zagreb. I've successfully identified people who were from Iraq, Iran, Israel, Egypt, Turkey and Pakistan (Pakistani women are often really hot, by the way) by country and not just by the general term "middle-eastern". I think I can spot the difference between a Somali and someone from Ghana. Harder to tell the difference between a Somali and an Ethiopian, though I've done this correctly before too. I work with a lot of hispanic people and have successfully guessed their country of origin many times, including two from Guatemala, one from El Salvador, one from Mexico, one from Bolivia, one from Peru. There was another from Chile, I got her wrong. I think she must be mixed. ;-) Puerto Ricans, Cubans and Dominicans all look fairly distinct as well. and now I think I'm to the point where I can also pretty easily identify the difference between Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese, Thai (though sometimes get them confused with Cambodians and other surrounding countries), Filipinos and East Indians.
Anyway. the point of that overlong ramble... it is possible, if you're observant. and this isn't an inherently negative thing. The same way that there are subtle differences between a person with parents from Guatemala and another who is from El Salvador, there are some subtle differences between straight and gay men. Maybe not as much of this is genetic (though I think that question is still up for debate at this point), but for whatever reason there is a certain set of mannerisms, a kind of appearance, posture, etc. Just the way a person presents themselves that sort of gives it away. That's not even getting in to stuff like affection for musicals (which I also happen to enjoy) or an unnatural affinity for Barbara Streisand or Madonna. Some stereotypes are right. They help us cope with all of the information of the world that we are bombarded with on a daily basis without rendering us completely unable to function. Of course it is also possible to be wrong. It's possible to use stereotypes to hurt people. It's possible to overgeneralize. and there are exceptions to every rule. Stereotypes ignore the individual by assuming all things are average. I'd say keep an open mind and you should do fine, but I feel like at this site I'm almost preaching to the choir. Still, some of us do need to control that kneejerk reaction whenever we hear whatever word is on the liberal's and PC-Nazi's latest hitlist (in this case "stereotype"). That's all part of keeping an open mind.
After all of the above I even forgot to mention Native North Americans, I guess one good example for an underrepresented ethnic group in the media. Ironic, since I myself am 6% Cherokee. It's not too hard to pick out people with native blood in this country either, though often they are mixed. The English, Irish, German and Dutch who decided to colonize here did a pretty good job of decimating the native population. These days unless you travel to a reservation it's almost a question of identifying how much indian a person is, rather than whether or not they are.