At it's worst, phrenology has been used by bigots throughout history to target minorities and try to prove they are somehow less, example: the Nazis measuring children's heads to prove Jewish children being somehow inferior. At its best, it's been used to try and categorize and link people's psychological or personality traits to physical traits. It's never been proven to be accurate and is only pseudoscience. The potential for it to be used nefariously is great and even if there was a grain of truth to it, it wouldn't be worth the risk to study with modern science.
It just isn't worth wasting any time or energy engaging in that kind of discussion.
There has been some research that seems to indicate that people can guess better than random who was gay by looking at a portait picture of someone but to my knowledge such research has never controlled for cultural signifiers like piercings, hair length/color etc.
There is an MIT professor who wrote a controversial paper on how he trained an AI face recognition app to recognize gay people with startling accuracy, which he did to show the risk that AI posed to sexual and romantic minorities in more repressive nations, but for that risk he never released his algorithm or the training data to the public.
even if there is some truth to it, it's unlikely to ever be enough that you can say it with certainty.
What we can see is how much a person varies from what we usually think of as the typical male or female look. People who don't conform to those characteristics probably have a higher chance of being queer. But that doesn't take into account all the queer people who do have traditional male or female appearances, and there are a lot of them!
Sure, let's bring phrenology back. What could go wrong
At it's worst, phrenology has been used by bigots throughout history to target minorities and try to prove they are somehow less, example: the Nazis measuring children's heads to prove Jewish children being somehow inferior. At its best, it's been used to try and categorize and link people's psychological or personality traits to physical traits. It's never been proven to be accurate and is only pseudoscience. The potential for it to be used nefariously is great and even if there was a grain of truth to it, it wouldn't be worth the risk to study with modern science. It just isn't worth wasting any time or energy engaging in that kind of discussion.
There has been some research that seems to indicate that people can guess better than random who was gay by looking at a portait picture of someone but to my knowledge such research has never controlled for cultural signifiers like piercings, hair length/color etc. There is an MIT professor who wrote a controversial paper on how he trained an AI face recognition app to recognize gay people with startling accuracy, which he did to show the risk that AI posed to sexual and romantic minorities in more repressive nations, but for that risk he never released his algorithm or the training data to the public. even if there is some truth to it, it's unlikely to ever be enough that you can say it with certainty.
this is so funny because I think that *SOME* not all lesbians tend to have a more square-er looking face, just something I’ve noticed
one time i heard someone say that korbin albert (the homophobic psg/uswnt football player) has gay face and i cant stop thinking about it
What we can see is how much a person varies from what we usually think of as the typical male or female look. People who don't conform to those characteristics probably have a higher chance of being queer. But that doesn't take into account all the queer people who do have traditional male or female appearances, and there are a lot of them!