|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 63 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 916,387 Year: 3,644/9,624 Month: 515/974 Week: 128/276 Day: 2/23 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1465 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Why Do Gay Men Sound Gay? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
You pick out things I say and make them mean something else. No, I did not do that. I quoted you exactly.
...does not imply I didn't know a lot about psychology, family pscyholgoy, the development of sexual identity and all that, from reading, and from practical experience among psychologists as a "paraprofessional." Are you now making the claim to have read up on all of that and done all that? Are you claiming to be a paraprofessional in psychology? Given your unfamiliarity with writings in the field, I know you don't have the experience you are hinting at but are so far not actually claiming to have. You just think, you know what you are talking about in a way similar to the way you claim to have a 'B' knowledge in geology. Although it is easy to find people, like Pat Robertson, who opine on how sexual identities are developed, there isn't any evidence that the factors you think cause gayness or camp gay speech actually do. So I know you did not pick up the idea because you are familiar with the literature or from any practical experience. It as as you said. What you think. Mere assertion. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Blue Jay Member (Idle past 2718 days) Posts: 2843 From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts Joined: |
Hi, Faith.
Faith writes: Blue Jay writes: And this is certainly a criticism of Faith that's fully justified. She doesn't finish the investigative process: she just reasons to a comfortable conclusion, then digs in her heels. People psychoanalyzing or otherwise explaining me around here are something I just have to shrug off all the time as it is. While I was writing that post, I had this nagging feeling in the back of my mind that I have been too psychoanalytical recently, and your comments just confirmed that for me. I had originally included an "I think" in that sentence, but I thought it made me sound to wishy-washy, so I deleted it. In retrospect, it would have been more appropriate, because it was a tentative hypothesis, not a conclusion.
Faith writes: I have NOT said anything I treat as fixed in concrete, you are reading anything like that into very brief remarks I've made. Well, technically, I'm reading that conclusion into your 23 posts from this thread, 171 posts from Oh No, The New Awesome Primary Thread, and 43 posts from our old Great Debate thread, Reduction of Alleles by Natural Selection (Faith and ZenMonkey Only); as examples that are particularly prominent in my mind. I felt comfortable presenting my hypothesis for your behavior because I feel like I've seen enough data over the years. I suppose it's up to everybody else to decide whether or not they think I'm right. But, as for myself, I think you tend to transition too quickly to the "conclusion" step and don't spend enough time at the "careful consideration" step.
Faith writes: And where are you getting "comfortable conclusion?" "Comfortable?" Do you impute that motive to everybody who tries to understand something, or just me? I may offer my reasoning in general terms because it makes sense to me. It's a very normal, pragmatic human process of thinking: people tend to think about something until they come up with a solution that satisfies them, and then stop looking for solutions. My argument is that your criterion for "satisfaction" with an argument is less rigorous than I think it should be. You usually start out with what I believe is an honest and sincere question ("Why do gay men sound gay?" or "Why do people think Trump is racist?"), you listen to what other people say for a couple pages, you consider it for awhile, then you make a decision that almost inevitably goes completely against what everybody else is saying, and defend it against all comers, which attracts a dog-pile. That said, I don't think I want to keep pushing this, because it's not really on topic. I think gay men sound gay for a variety of reasons, and that there's a very wide bell curve around the average "gayness" of a gay man's voice, such that it's really hard to see clear patterns. That's why people there's such a wide range of opinions on the topic.-Blue Jay, Ph.D.* *Yeah, it's real Darwin loves you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Blue Jay Member (Idle past 2718 days) Posts: 2843 From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts Joined:
|
Hi, Theo.
My institution has access to the actual study your source referred to and Modulous linked to, so I took some time to read it this weekend. Here's the abstract. In a nutshell, the authors recorded 25 men reading several passages (a technical passage, a dramatic passage, and a personal anecdote), and tried to see how accurately people could rate how "gay" the men's voices sounded. Here are some snippets:
quote: For people who don't speak statistics, this means the sexual orientation of the man speaking had a real effect on whether or not listeners thought he "sounded gay," even though the listeners did not know the man's sexual orientation. In other words, men who were actually gay were more likely to have voices that listeners identified as "sounding gay" than men who were actually straight. That said, it also appears that it's uncommon for somebody of any sexual orientation to "sound gay": only 10 of the 25 voices were classified as "sounding gay" by more than half of the listeners. Interestingly, 9 of those 10 men actually were gay. Now, putting the snippet into context, here's the entire paragraph:
quote: So, the study sample is not representative of the gay community: it was specifically chosen to allow an analysis of the acoustic properties of the "gay voice," and not to allow an analysis of whether gay men actually talk that way. There's also another section called "Gaydar Analysis" (awesome, isn't it?). Here's an interesting quote:
quote: Modulous's source said this:
quote: ...which isn't accurate. The 62% was the percentage of men whose sexual orientation was accurately identified by their voice. Identification was more accurate for straight men than for gay men: the listener only correctly identified a gay man by his voice in 55% of trials, which is not much better than coin-flipping. Note, I didn't say "not much better than random guessing," because randomness is defined by a preconceived hypothesis, not necessarily a 50-50 choice. Most people's preconceived hypothesis is probably that gay men are comparatively less common than straight men (so, not 50-50), so they are more likely to guess "straight" than "gay" if they aren't sure. So, 55% accuracy is probably considerably better than random guessing. Of course, also note that the sample was intentionally biased toward men who would likely "sound gay," so it's hard to make that judgment. In my mind, perhaps it would be more accurate to argue from this data set that there's an identifiable "straight voice," and that gay men are less likely to conform to it than are straight men.-Blue Jay, Ph.D.* *Yeah, it's real Darwin loves you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 432 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
I wonder if it's possible to type gay on the Internet?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1465 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Well, technically, I'm reading that conclusion into your 23 posts from this thread, 171 posts from Oh No, The New Awesome Primary Thread, and 43 posts from our old Great Debate thread, Reduction of Alleles by Natural Selection (Faith and ZenMonkey Only); as examples that are particularly prominent in my mind. I felt comfortable presenting my hypothesis for your behavior because I feel like I've seen enough data over the years. I suppose it's up to everybody else to decide whether or not they think I'm right. But, as for myself, I think you tend to transition too quickly to the "conclusion" step and don't spend enough time at the "careful consideration" step. Yes there's a pattern there isn't there? From my point of view what it reflects is the fact that hardly anyone ever gives the slightest credence to anything I say, even when I knock myself out coming up with evidence. I've sometimes barely had a chance to think through the position I just came to before I'm barraged with a million objections of varying degrees of validity, most of them just wild shots against "the creationist." So I am determined to find a way to show all the objections wrong and I may sometimes overshoot the mark. Nevertheless the objections are in fact open to criticism. When they are really on target I think I'm pretty good at acknowledging it. The very few times someone recognizes a good point in my arguments are so rare I feel like framing them and hanging them on the wall. But it never lasts long. I know I'm right at least half of the times I'm treated like this. Why don't you point out THAT pattern? Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1465 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Amazing. You did it again.
You pick out things I say and make them mean something else. No, I did not do that. I quoted you exactly. But what you quoted was not relevant to the point I was making, which is one of the things you do that drive me crazy. The quote was about KNOWING gays, now I'm talking about kowledge of psychology. I gave a little list of things you do that drive me crazy by somehow misreading my posts. This is one of them.
...does not imply I didn't know a lot about psychology, family pscyholgoy, the development of sexual identity and all that, from reading, and from practical experience among psychologists as a "paraprofessional." Are you now making the claim to have read up on all of that and done all that? I'm claiming to have read a LOT and worked with a group of pscyhologists for many years.
Are you claiming to be a paraprofessional in psychology? I'm claiming I used to be. You DO have trouble reading, don't you?When I became a Christian I gave up most of my old life. Well, all of it really. But I still think psychologically where it fits. You haven't given any research whatever to prove your claim that I'm wrong about my thoughts. And actually, my thoughts are so general your objections are ridiculous anyway. ABE: You know what makes me hold onto my general thoughts against your research claim? The fact that my thoughts seem to be considered INSULTING to gays. Insults and offense are a red flag that we're losing touch with reality and entering PC territory. That suggests that there's a strong PC drift to deny any psychological element at all in the formation of gay identity, and PC drift certainly can occur in research. All you have to do is define your terms so that they couldn't apply to any known reality, then declare their failure to fit the experience of gays to prove they're irrelevant. So, if you want me to take current research seriously, you're going to have to present it in a serious fashion. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6409 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
From my point of view what it reflects is the fact that hardly anyone ever gives the slightest credence to anything I say, even when I knock myself out coming up with evidence.
I don't doubt that you knock yourself out. I give credence to that. I might not give credence to what you present as evidence. But that's a different issue entirely. That you said it does not make it evidence. What makes it evidence has to be found in what is presented. If I find it wanting, this is not a matter of giving you credence. If I consider what you present, that is already giving you all of the credence that is appropriate. But whether I find the presentation persuasive has to come from the content, not from the fact that you presented it.Fundamentalism - the anti-American, anti-Christian branch of American Christianity
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
But what you quoted was not relevant to the point I was making Yes it was relevant. It revealed that your personal experience with gays was extremely limited based on your own words.
I'm claiming to have read a LOT and worked with a group of pscyhologists for many years. You claimed something like 'parapsychologist' or something like that. I know what people who are paralegals do, and it is not practice law. Surely you are not going to tell me that your experience allowed you to observe patients and reach conclusions. And you did not deal with gay people other than distantly. Are you now claiming that you've read material that supports the propositions that I questioned in this thread? Because your carefully worded statements never get around to actually saying that or to telling me why you have a basis for knowing where the gay voice comes from.
You know what makes me hold onto my general thoughts against your research claim? The fact that my thoughts seem to be considered INSULTING to gays. Thanks. Now I no longer have to guess about the purity of your motivation. Thanks for also confirming the actual meaning of PC. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
Faith writes: So, Faith, were you quite an easy person for carnal gratitude?
I'm claiming I used to be.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
So, if you want me to take current research seriously, you're going to have to present it in a serious fashion. I don't want you to take current research seriously. (And we really are not talking about anything all that modern). Whether you lean or lean not to your own understanding is up to you. If making decisions based on the evidence were your mode of operation, you would have looked the stuff up yourself at some point. I'm not trying to convince you of anything, because I know I could never do that. I know from experience that if the stack of evidence gets too high, you are perfectly capable of simply denying it. I expect you to continue along the same lines you as you do now. Keep on thinking "psychologically" or "geologically" or whatever. I'm not trying to change you. I like you just fine the way you are. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member
|
Seriously bro? That's effed up.
Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jon Inactive Member |
I wonder if it's possible to type gay on the Internet? Like, OMG, totally, right?Love your enemies!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ramoss Member (Idle past 632 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
You mean, it comes from your interpretation of the biblical perspective, which is taken more from later misinterpretation of the letter of Paul and the Torah.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member
|
I wonder if it's possible to type gay on the Internet? FABULOUS!!!!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9140 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.3 |
That would be valleyspeak, something completely different.
Valley girl - WikipediaFacts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts "God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024