World Library  
Flag as Inappropriate
Email this Article


Article Id: WHEBN0000320473
Reproduction Date:

Title: Gaydar  
Author: World Heritage Encyclopedia
Language: English
Subject: Lorenza Colzato, Fag stag, Alvin Yapan, Fruit machine (homosexuality test), Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2015 April 9
Collection: 1990S Slang, 2000S Slang, Lgbt Culture, Lgbt Terms, Slang
Publisher: World Heritage Encyclopedia


Gaydar (a portmanteau of gay and radar) is a colloquialism referring to the intuitive ability of a person to assess others' sexual orientations as gay, bisexual or heterosexual. Gaydar relies almost exclusively on non-verbal clues and LGBT stereotypes. These include (but are not limited to) the sensitivity to social behaviors and mannerisms; for instance, acknowledging flamboyant body language, the tone of voice used by a person when speaking, overtly rejecting traditional gender roles, a person's occupation, and grooming habits.

The detection of sexual orientation by outward appearance or behavior is frequently challenged by situations in which masculine gay men who do not act in a stereotypically "gay" fashion, or with metrosexual men (regardless of sexuality) who exhibit a lifestyle, spending habits, and concern for personal appearance stereotypical of fashionable urban gay men.[1][2][3][4]


  • Scientific research 1
  • Electronic device 2
  • See also 3
  • References 4
  • Further reading 5
  • External links 6

Scientific research

A number of scientific studies have been conducted to test whether gaydar is real or just a popular myth. Perhaps the earliest study[5] asked people to judge sexual orientation from video clips, with results concluding that it was a myth. A later and more rigorous study published in a prestigious psychology journal showed that people could accurately judge sexual orientation.[6] This study asked people to indicate their sexual orientation using the Kinsey scale and then had others view very brief silent clips of the people talking using thin-slicing. The viewers rated their sexual orientations on the same scale and the researchers found a significant correlation between where the people said they were on the scale and where they were perceived to be on the scale. Sexual orientation was therefore perceived accurately just from nonverbal behaviors. Later studies have repeated this finding[7] and have even shown that home videos of children can be used to accurately judge their sexual orientation later in life.[8]

Later studies found that gaydar was also accurate at rates greater than chance for judgments just from the face. Study participants use gendered facial cues and stereotypes of gay people to make their judgments, but reliably misjudge sexual orientation for people countering stereotypes.[9] The race, ethnicity, and nationality of neither the person making the judgment nor the person they are judging seems to make a difference when making judgments from faces.[10][11][12] Even individual facial features (just the eyes) can sometimes give enough information to tell whether a man or woman is gay, straight, or lesbian.[13][14] One study showed that judgments of men’s[15] and women’s[14] faces for about 1/25th of a second was enough time to tell whether they were gay, straight, or lesbian. People’s judgments were not any more accurate when they had more time to make their judgments. Follow-up work to this suggested that gaydar happens automatically when someone sees another person and that seeing someone’s face automatically activates stereotypes about gays and straights.[16] People seem not to know that they have gaydar, though.[13] Gay men have better gaydar than straight men[17] and women have better gaydar when they are ovulating.[18] One study hypothesized that this might be because homosexual people are more attentive to detail than heterosexual people are, apparently as an adopted perceptual style aiding in the recognition of other homosexual people.[19]

Other studies have found that men and women with body shapes and walking styles similar to people of the opposite sex are more often perceived as gay. The study, by UCLA assistant professor Kerri Johnson, found that observers were able to accurately guess the sexual orientation of men 60 percent of the time — almost a coin toss; with women, their guesses didn’t exceed chance. But what’s most interesting to researchers is understanding how that snap judgment can unleash a series of stereotypes. Contrary to hype surrounding the study, the results suggest that walking styles and body shapes do not give away sexual orientation. The study was intended to reveal information about the perception of the observer, but has been misinterpreted as conveying reliable information about the sexual orientation of the participants. Gender-specific body movements are not reliably associated with a person’s sexual orientation[20] This is true of face shape,[21] but surprisingly not for voices,[22] even though people think they do.[23] A handful of studies have investigated the question of gaydar from the voice.[24][25][26][27] They have found that people can tell who is gay and straight from their voices but have mostly focused on men. Detailed acoustic analyses have highlighted a number of factors in a person’s voice[27] that are used, one of which is the way that gay and straight men pronounce "s" sounds.[24]

Other research on the topic proposed that “gaydar” is simply an alternate label for using LGBT stereotypes to infer orientation (e.g., inferring that fashionable men are gay).[28] This work points out that the scientific work reviewed above that claims to demonstrate accurate gaydar falls prey to the false positive paradox (see also the base rate fallacy), because the alleged accuracy discounts the very low base rate of LGB people in real populations.

Electronic device

In the early 2000s, an electronic device based on the Japanese Lovegety wireless dating device was marketed as 'Gaydar', and reported on widely in the media.[29][30] This was a key-chain sized device which would send out a wireless signal, alerting the user via a vibration, beep or flash when a similar device was within 12 m (40 ft). This let the user know that a like-minded person was nearby.

See also


  1. ^
  2. ^
  3. ^
  4. ^
  5. ^
  6. ^
  7. ^
  8. ^
  9. ^
  10. ^
  11. ^
  12. ^
  13. ^ a b
  14. ^ a b
  15. ^
  16. ^
  17. ^
  18. ^
  19. ^
  20. ^
  21. ^
  22. ^
  23. ^
  24. ^ a b
  25. ^
  26. ^
  27. ^ a b
  28. ^
  29. ^
  30. ^

Further reading

  • Gaydar by Donald F. Reuter (ISBN 978-0-609-61102-9)

External links

  • Public Radio Program on gaydar
  • The Science of Gaydar: The new research on everything from voice pitch to hair whorl
This article was sourced from Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. World Heritage Encyclopedia content is assembled from numerous content providers, Open Access Publishing, and in compliance with The Fair Access to Science and Technology Research Act (FASTR), Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., Public Library of Science, The Encyclopedia of Life, Open Book Publishers (OBP), PubMed, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Center for Biotechnology Information, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health (NIH), U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, and, which sources content from all federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial government publication portals (.gov, .mil, .edu). Funding for and content contributors is made possible from the U.S. Congress, E-Government Act of 2002.
Crowd sourced content that is contributed to World Heritage Encyclopedia is peer reviewed and edited by our editorial staff to ensure quality scholarly research articles.
By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. World Heritage Encyclopedia™ is a registered trademark of the World Public Library Association, a non-profit organization.

Copyright © World Library Foundation. All rights reserved. eBooks from Project Gutenberg are sponsored by the World Library Foundation,
a 501c(4) Member's Support Non-Profit Organization, and is NOT affiliated with any governmental agency or department.