I love scientific studies about sex and gender. Problem is, if you examine the details, too often they sound like bullshit. Such is the case with a recent study that said people can guess, with some degree of accuracy, whether a person is gay after seeing them for just 50 milliseconds.

Ambady and Rule swipe photographs of men from dating websites, carefully choosing only headshots that don't feature "facial hair, jewelry, glasses, or other accessories."

You know, I'm no scientist, but already I'm finding this surprising. I mean, I'd never have guessed there are ninety dudes on ManHunt.com who don't have eyebrows.

Half the photos are self-identified gay men, and half are straight men. Result? The test subjects correctly guess sexual orientation between 57 percent and 70 percent, depending on viewing time.

Even Ambady and Rule admit there are problems. The photos they use are taken by the men themselves, and they suggest that maybe hetero men try to look extra-hetero in their dating-website photos, while gay men try to look extra-gay. I'll agree with the former, but not the latter. I mean, I've cruised SmokinGayDudez.com before and have yet to see someone try to look hotter by holding up a Streisand CD.

At this point I realize I'm lost. Why were "facial hair, jewelry, glasses, or other accessories" excluded? My guess is because, say, a pearl choker might tip somebody off that a subject is gay. But then why did they allow hairstyles? Call me crazy, but I don't think the world needs a study called "Does a Mullet Make a Guy Look Hetero?"

Ambady and Rule catch on too, so they repeat the study. The second time around they steal casual photos of dudes from Facebook. Because, you know, gay guys won't have that extra-gay look when they're at a party, hammered and slipping singles into the jockstraps of go-go boys. This time around they cut out the hairstyles too.

And the accuracy rate drops. It's still better than chance, at 54%, but that's a significant drop.

Their conclusion?

People can accurately judge sexual orientation, and very quickly. It comes in handy. "Women need to be able to rule out unsuitable mates, while men need to determine who their potential competition is."

A reviewer calls the success at quick identification "impressive."

Me, yawn. I can't help but notice that up to 20% of their accuracy was lost with the hairstyles. I realize this study tried to prove that relatively accurate judgments are made very quickly, but I don't understand why they care. Do you really need to stare at a guy to decide that his perm makes him look straight? Do you need to sit there and ruminate on whether that eyeliner makes him look gay?

Plus, this study would be rendered entirely meaningless with the disclosure that 4% of the subjects pluck their eyebrows. Because, c'mon, heteros never know when to stop.