"Gaydar" is the abily to distguish homosexual and heterosexual people g direct cu. We vtigated the accuracy of gaydar and the nature of "gaydar signals" nveyg rmatn about sexual orientatn. Homosexual people tend to be more sex atypil than heterosexual people some beh …
Contents:
- GAYDAR—SENDG MIXED SIGNALS
- DISSECTG "GAYDAR": ACCURACY AND THE ROLE OF MASCULY-FEMY
- DISSECTG "GAYDAR": ACCURACY AND THE ROLE OF MASCULY-FEMY
GAYDAR—SENDG MIXED SIGNALS
Gaydar is a reified skill that nfirms the existe * gaydar signals *
Gaydar is a reified skill that nfirms the existence of a gay speech muny, but n terme a speaker's membership? Many people thk that they n regnize a gay man based on his speech. In other words, they believe that they have a gaydar.
However, as a gay man, I thk of gaydar not so much as a tool for intifyg one’s orientatn, but as a meang and discrimatory weapon ed to ntrast sexual and social differenc. For my class project Language US Society, I wanted to qutn the nature of gaydar and trace s origs beyond jt the perceptn of the speaker. Essentially, gaydar is the abily to tect an dividual’s sexual orientatn.
DISSECTG "GAYDAR": ACCURACY AND THE ROLE OF MASCULY-FEMY
The key to unrstandg gaydar is the telemunitn ncept of “radar, ” which is fed as “a radtermatn system based on the parison of reference signals wh rad signals reflected or retransmted, om the posn to be termed” (ITU Rad Regulatns, 2013). Gaydar borrows the functns of receivg and parg signals and reifi the skill of intifyg sexual orientatn to an operatnal tool.
Hence, the technil fn of gaydar is a “system based on the parison of reference signals wh language reflected or retransmted, om the posn to be termed, ” where the posn to be termed ultimately translat to inty. Jt like a radar, an operatnal gaydar reli on the reference signals and the static background of the receiver.
DISSECTG "GAYDAR": ACCURACY AND THE ROLE OF MASCULY-FEMY
A historil example of this is what lguists ll the onted “s” sound that is typilly characterized as a lisp, also known as the “gay lisp” (Mack and Munson 2012). Instead of intifyg the onted “s” as a lguistic variable, listeners equently thk of as an x of non-normative behavr such as a speech fect or homosexualy.
This associatn between language and behavr puts speakers g this variable a double bd: they are perceived eher to have a speech fect or to be gay—wh both perceptns rryg negative nnotatns.
Moreover, gaydar self is not a reliable system bee the stereotypil featur of gay speech n be cross-xil wh other social tegori. The exampl of the pluraly of meang one sound monstrate that gaydar is only an abstractn. It is not a perfect reference system to intify members of a gay speech muny.