Why Do Gay Men Sound Gay?

So we're in agreement that you weren't constructing a logical argument.

quote:

---

Some gay men do in fact sound gay.

---

Is not reinforcing a stereotype. You got your cock out. Why else? ...but you were talking to Dr. Adequate.And what makes you think Faith is not talking from personal experience? The one is not necessarily in contradiction with the other. Stereotypes are cognitive tools for categorizing the world and thinking about groups. Personal experience is a part of their formation and persistence. So far the only thing vaguely scientific I've seen in this thread has confirmed its existence. I didn't realize you were so high minded, my apologies. Please tell me - a bisexual, cross dressing, mentally ill person - about how stereotypes can lead to harmful conclusions.Had it occurred to you that my position on stereotypes is lost on you? Stereotypes are a problem when one assumes the characteristics of the group apply to all its individuals, and thus tend to treat all individuals in the group accordingly It wouldn't however, be intrinsically harmful to observe this phenomena and comment on it such as 'Some gay men do in fact sound gay'.Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.

quote:

---

Obviously the point about the harm of stereotypes is lost on you and others in this thread.
  —Theo

---

I think maybe you were a bit too quick to jump on this one.The camp voice is quite obviously 'a thing'. It's not used by all gays of course and some - I think a relative few - straight men apparently have it although I've personally never met one. (There's a UK stand-up commedian who gets a laugh from it tho').It's a stereotype like any other I suppose, but unless it's used to harm, it's, well, harmless - almost affectionate. I think those that have it, use it deliberately - a sort of signal or differentiator or self-image conformation.I should say that I live in one of Europe's major gay cities so meet hundreds of gay men (and women, and etc) day in and day out - relatively few affect 'the voice' and some that do, do it with considerable humour.I may be accused of stereotyping, but I have to say that the most precociously gay people I meet are also the funniest people I meet. I mean laugh out loud, couldn't-give-a-fuck, theatrically, piss-yourself funny. And fantastically generous. But that's just my personal experience.There's a tranny in my town called Patty O'Doors that just creases me up. (Apologies if that's a referrence only Brits might get. And yes, I know that trannies aren't necessarily - or even usually, gay.)

But your ideas of this are not at all what Faith meant in the OP. Faith used the term Sound Gay as a pejorative.
Unless you want to discount everything Faith has said in this thread about the subject, especially the exchange with NoNukes.

I have to write something here because I don't want to be thought of as exclusively 'berating' someone. As a Mancunian, my favourite nights out in the city are in 'gay town' or 'canal street' or 'anal treet'. Straight bars can feel positively depressing or even threatening in comparison. Never forget the night some scrote started getting in our faces only to be picked up and thrown into the canal by a random passing six foot tall transsexual woman in heels. Everybody helped him back out, of course. I maybe thinking of someone else - but I think Patty O'Doors would generally be referred to as a 'drag queen' (it's certainly a name typical for drag queens). It's a different kettle of fish from transvestites...who generally prefer 'cross dresser'. 'Trannies' is kind of why cross dressers prefer that term - it's not a word that is traditionally used kindly (googling it is very NSFW - lots of porn uses the term). Historical usage of the term in general has left it tasting sour, though like other such terms - some people have taken to reclaiming/owning it.Though it can be used innocently, or even affectionately - in the medium you are in (ie internet forum) - I'd suggest sticking to a term almost nobody objects to.And that's how to set boundaries without demanding a person conform to the politically correct line through outrage. I hope.

How is "gay" a pejorative? And most everybody else seems to understand what it means to "sound gay," even you, otherwise you'd have nothing to complain about. The fact of the matter is that a lot of gay people do speak like that, and actually it would seem that you're the one implying that there's something wrong with it. That's the irony about this whole thing!

Watermelon eating may be the best example of a stereotype that is not based on the truth at all. Surely there are far more white men in the US who like watermelon that there are black men who do so.The stereotype regarding black people and watermelon dates back to post civil war days where growing and selling watermelons was a method of deriving income for newly freed blacks who saw an economic opportunity. Some whites made fun of blacks and watermelons at the time out as an expression of animosity. Everyone was eating watermelons back then, but blacks were mostly around them and eating them.Of course that is not the reality or a reflection of the truth anymore. There is absolutely no truth or basis to the stereotype in the form in which it currently exists. No evidence that any person of any color is more prone to eat watermelon. All that there really is regarding this stereotype is an echo to an era that 99 percent of people had nothing to do with, and that (with respect to race relations) has very little to recommend it.Yes I have seen black and white children voraciously eating watermelon after a soccer game on a hot day in North Carolina. But I cannot distinguish between their behaviors in anyway. It ain't a black thing.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

You haven't even made an assertion. You claimed to 'think' something. Why make up your mind about something like that without at least looking for facts? Yeah, you are certainly allowed to have your own thoughts. But how is making stuff up and then sticking to it a reliable process?

A lesbian friend of mine had a gay hairdresser. (She kept her hair boyishly short in summer and I don't like short hair on women but she was cuter than two buttons.) I pictured her hairdresser as slim, well-groomed, well-dressed, etc.Unfortunately, my friend died and at the funeral I met the hairdresser. He was fat and bald and wearing a brown suit. He looked more like my grandfather than a gay hairdresser.

Long long ago and in a land far far away ...I used to wander over to the Library of Congress. Many folk don't realize that the LOC has maybe the best collection of recordings in the world and that they are available just like books for people to enjoy. Back then I was really interested in regional sounds and among the collections at the LOC were all the recordings that had been made in the 30's and 40's under WPA grants. They recorded regional voices, fold singing on the porch, story telling, comparisons of the same story as read by folk from area to area.. almost an unlimited area to explore.There were about four of us who would drive down to spend a day listening to the records and tapes that were available. Often we'd spend hours listening to the same recording over and over simply lost in the nuances.Many of the recordings are available these days online.

Hi, Lammy. In your experience, about what proportion of gay men would you say speak with the classical "gay accent"?Edited by Blue Jay, : No reason given.

I've no idea. We see more of them around during pride parade and boys town. Other than that, we rarely ever encounter any.I don't think there is anything wrong with the campy gay voice. One of my ex's was like that. I saw a video of him when he was little, and he acted and sounded just like that. So, it was very early on for him.Here's the thing with Faith's theory. My ex had a sister and 2 brothers. His dad and two brothers were very masculine when we visited them. As far as I could tell, the dad was just as nurturing as the mom.So... let's leave the attempts at coming up with explanations to the experts who do studies, shall we?I'm not sure why homophobes like Faith feel the need to explain everything, and I'm of the opinion that being gay can both be a choice and born this say.

You can leave off the PC "homophobe." My view of homosexuality comes first from my biblical perspective on everything, then from old experiences in psychological thinking, there's nothing about my personality that conditions my opinions, such as the fictional personality disorder PC calls "homophobia."I know there are different life stories and that homosexuality can't be reduced to any particular clearcut cause, but from my own observations, the one I've come up with fits some. I also applied my reasoning to myself as I believe I developed my own sexual identity from conflicted relationships with my parents, particularly my mother. You don't have to take such ideas as intended to be universal but in my opinion there is reason to apply them in some cases.I'm surprised you say it can be a choice because that is one view of it I definitely DON'T have, unless it applies to a less than strong homosexual inclination. There are also situations where the person seems to be born with it, and certainly it's common for it to be apparent in very young children. But it always seems to be something that just happens to a person so I don't think of it as a choice.As for why bring this stuff up, I really wanted to know the various explanations for the gay voice because of the Trump voice on the humor thread, and this thread has been very educational on that topic, so that I now have some idea of what a "camp" voice is, and the believable explanation of the experts in the film that it's based on the female speech pattern which I wouldn't have recognized without their spelling it out.But I think I do have another motive and that is I am probably looking for a way to expose political correctness, and like to make issues out of controversial subjects because I object to their being controversial and object to the PC attempt to shut me up.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Hi, Lammy. For sure, there's not anything wrong with it. I just came in with the preconception that it was a really common thing, but I was basing that on a small sample size (I can only think of about a dozen openly gay men that I know). It sounds like I need to recalibrate my worldview. Well, let's rely on the high-quality information they provide to inform our opinions, but let's not use that as a reason to avoid trying to understand it on our own.I think Faith is an intelligent person who's genuinely trying to understand. But I also think she's bringing a lot of philosophical baggage into the discussion, and I think it will ultimately prevent her from reaching a conclusion that I find reliable. Still, I believe there's value in the effort, so we should try to recognize her good qualities. (Easy for me to say, right? I don't really have a horse in this race: I'm just here out of idle curiosity.)Well, I understand it. I'm a scientist: my main motivation in life is understanding how and why things are the way they are. I sometimes get frustrated with social and political pressures that inhibit my drive to learn what I want to know.On the other hand, I can also understand why the scrutiny could become incredibly fatiguing to a gay person. Heterogeneity is the general rule for everything, I think.

There seems to be a feeling on this forum that stereotypes are ok if they are not a perceived bad stereotypes. Then again maybe some of you do not think this is a stereotype but a known fact. If you do you are wrong, plain and simple. If want to show you are not wrong, present evidence. There also seems to be a group that thinks that since they self identify as being part of the gay community that they should be the arbiter of if the "gay voice" stereotype is true or ok. That right there is a fallacy that they seem to be unwilling to grasp.I have also been challenged to present scientific evidence about the "gay voice" stereotype. Studies have shown that they "gay voice" is more or less a myth.

quote:

---

To start with, the stereotypical gay voice isn’t necessarily gay.

​

In a study published in 2003, Ron Smyth, a linguist at the University of Toronto, found that participants readily separated recordings of 25 diverse voices into those who sounded gay and those who sounded straight. People picked up on features of the gay stereotype voices that were higher and more melodious were more often labelled gay.

​

The trouble was that these labels had little relationship with sexuality. In Smyth’s study, people correctly guessed a man’s sexuality about 60 per cent of the time, only a little better than random.

​

In another small study at the University of Hawaii, both gay and straight listeners were equally likely to misclassify people as gay or straight. In fact, the straight men with so-called gay voices weren’t aware that people thought they sounded gay at all.

​

It turns out that what most people perceive as a stereotypical gay voice is just a male voice that sounds more stereotypically feminine mainly higher pitched and more melodious. And that often has more to do with the voices that a person identified with as they grew up, rather than sexuality.

​

Smyth and other researchers say some men, both gay and straight, develop more feminine voices because they are influenced by women when young. They might be raised by women, or just gravitate toward female role models or friends, Smyth says. But that doesn’t mean that they are gay.

​

Some men with ‘gay voices’ are straight, and some men with ‘straight voices’ are gay, says Smyth. There are butch and femme gay men; there are butch and femme straight men; there are butch and femme straight women. And so on.

---

Read the whole article. Unless, of course your mind is made up. There is actually quite a bit of information on this stereotype and the fact that is not in fact a "gay" voice at all.
Exposing the myth of the ‘gay voice’Now lets look at the idea being put forward here that stereotypes are ok as long as they are not "bad" stereotypes. Nope. Science doesn't support that either.

quote:

---

But we're less good when it comes to "positive" stereotypes: the idea that black people are just naturally better at sports, say, or that women are more in touch with their emotions. These don't seem so pernicious, since their content, after all, is complimentary. But a fascinating new study led by Aaron Kay, a psychologist at Duke University (and brought to my attention via Eric Horowitz's ever-interesting blog Peer Reviewed By My Neurons), suggests they might be worse.

​

The study centered on fake articles purporting to show evidence for three of the most time-honoured stereotypes about black people: that they're less intelligent, more prone to violence, and better at sports. (None of the study participants were black themselves.) Unsurprisingly, being exposed to this phony "evidence" made people more likely to believe the stereotypes. But the surprise was in the differences between people exposed to the negative stereotypes and the positive one.

​

First, the article claiming to show superior athletic ability among black people was more likely to be unquestioningly accepted as true: it seemed to fly under people's stereotype-detecting radars. Second, the positive stereotype seemed more likely to lead people to believe that differences between blacks and whites were biological in origin.

​

And third: when asked to estimate the probability that a hypothetical series of people with typically African-American names might commit a crime, people exposed to the positive stereotype rated that possibility as higher than did those exposed to a negative one. The positive stereotype ("good at athletics") apparently led to stronger negative beliefs about black people than the negative one ("prone to violence"). Positive stereotypes, the researchers write, "may be uniquely capable at reinforcing cultural stereotypes and beliefs that people explicitly eschew as racist and harmful."

---

Why stereotypes are bad even when they're 'good'
There is plenty of science to support this too, if any of you are so inclined to do the research.ABE
Have any of you figured out yet that the whole OP is just an attempt by Faith to troll and express homophobic views?Edited by Theodoric, : No reason given.

Is that a problem?If so, why? And is it only a problem when 'homophobes' 'need to explain everything'? If non-'homophobes' seek the same explanations, is that okay?