The Post financial editor, Chauncey Pilgarlic, following up stories of taxpayer funded ‘research’ while holding his nose, discovered this story first reported in the US, then the UK, and now in the Sydney Telegraph.
It is one of many stories with the same theme – studies are made to determine if you pick someone who is gay? Have you got ‘gaydor’ the way the cops have radar?
Stats indicate that men can pick gayness when presented merely with photos of gay women, but they are not as good with gay men though they still pick correctly about two thirds of the time.
Correction, straight men picked the gays reasonably OK though perhaps not much more than chance, but they mistakenly picked some men as gay who were not.  Rather be wrong than sorry? Who knows? Not the ‘researchers’.
All kinds of justifications have been made for funding this research, mostly that the money for the research was reasonable because of some reason that only computes with people who left off breast feeding too late in life. Basically a wild stab in the dark is the basis for using money in this way.
Public opinion was ‘so what’ to judge by the letters, though the publishers rarely ask “Do you approve of your tax money being spent on this research?” Otherwise a wild stab in the dark is exactly what the researchers ought to get.
Is the research reliable?
Pilgarlic has secured a number of photographs of President Obama and defies anyone to pick any sexual preference merely from studying the photos.Snort. [read more....;]