![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Common (Sense)
Oct. 17th, 2008 04:38 pmY'know...
They could just look for "the straight gene".
Speaking purely as a statistician: they'd have a ginormous sample size! And getting the consent forms signed would be SO easy! And *if* there were any oopsies with confidentiality, it's not like there'd be much in the way of social damage to the respondents.
I know a bunch of guys who would be deeply comforted by the knowledge that they were definitively, genetically, unalterably straight.
(To the best of my knowledge, they haven't yet studied the genetic code of lesbians, or, y'know, any women whatsoever, looking for a preference indicator, and thus, they can't make projections.)
I'm perfectly serious. This consideration is, on my part, entirely devoid of anything even close to sarcasm.
They could just look for "the straight gene".
Speaking purely as a statistician: they'd have a ginormous sample size! And getting the consent forms signed would be SO easy! And *if* there were any oopsies with confidentiality, it's not like there'd be much in the way of social damage to the respondents.
I know a bunch of guys who would be deeply comforted by the knowledge that they were definitively, genetically, unalterably straight.
(To the best of my knowledge, they haven't yet studied the genetic code of lesbians, or, y'know, any women whatsoever, looking for a preference indicator, and thus, they can't make projections.)
I'm perfectly serious. This consideration is, on my part, entirely devoid of anything even close to sarcasm.
