It seems like the research suggests fairly equal numbers of male and female homosexuals. But I've always wondered why the impression we seem to get from society is that there are far more gay men than lesbians -- is this just media portrayal?

The association of New Agey-stuff with women might be a white North American or "SWPL" thing -- among East or South Asian immigrants, men and women equally believe in stuff like astrology or herbal medicine. Well that's the inkling I get. Of course for those folks, stuff like chi and chakras is "Old Agey woo".

I've seen this happen a lot at public libraries or on university campuses.  
 
If you look like you have your own laptop or potentially stealable items and that you yourself are keeping an eye on, this probably makes people want to trust you to watch their own laptop as well.

I think that a gut feeling that genes matters or that personality is innate is somewhat part of our folk psychology (Children feel this too ie. can feel that a fictional character who is a mean-hearted villain is who he is by nature. I mean, the villain can be changed, but he was born "bad".) 
 
and that the belief that environmental factors matter 100% is something one picks up through learning or socially acceptable beliefs. 
 
Just a gut feeling though, no evidence.

One could wonder why East Asians are the least lactose tolerant in the world, less so than many tropical peoples such as South Indians.  
 
They also seem to live in a pretty high latitude place (although not as high as Europe), with light skin and could benefit from dairy, but they never did.  
 
I guess East Asians could have been getting calcium from other sources?

In the biological/medical sciences, the distinction would be important in areas that involve biophysics (ie. kinesiology).  
 
(I think I often hear say, biologists (non medical) such as a zoologist refer to the mass of an animal, while doctors refer to the weight of a person, but I don't know if this awareness is even a relevant point).

When I was in high school one particularly dumb classmate was very excited to learn that one's weight is marginally lower at higher elevations. 
 
I do wonder, though, why doctors and other medical professionals still continue to use weight and mass interchangeably.  
 
I know people that work in physical science have to care about the distinction obviously, but at least standardize it across the sciences!

Women produce only acetylcholine, and not adrenaline at all? Is this a qualitative difference? This sounds really odd to me. 
 
I thought most sex differences (such as differences in psychology) differed only quantitatively and overlapped in distribution with no hormonal responses being exclusive to one sex (aside from reproductive and pregnancy/birth related differences).

It seems speakers of tonal and non-tonal languages are both represented across many racial lines though (other than it seems, Caucasoids/Indo-European areas having less tonal languages). 
 
And why all the focus on East Asians? Majority of Sub-Saharan African languages are tonal.

Isn't this analogous to say, places that are most against pre-marital sex having the highest teen birth rates? 
 
Is that the whole thing about places where crimes or undesirable acts aren't commonplace anyway don't need rules or attitudes against them?

"south asian first names aren't really that difficult compared to chinese ones. they are unfamiliar, e.g., amit, but it doesn't take much to pronounce amit close enough to how it's "supposed" to be pronounced." 
 
 
But East Asian names usually monosyllabic and shorter than English names, and South Asian ones longer/more multisyllabic. 
 
I mean I don't know if for an English speaker Krishnamoorthy is easier to remember than Lee or Kim.  
 
Do you mean that South Asian languages are more like English in terms of phonetics (the sounds of the language)?  
 
I mean, considering many S.Asian languages are Indo-European, does that mean phonetics are similar? I mean it sounds weird about, despite the obvious divergence time, I've actually wondered if Indo-European speakers can pick up another one more easily (ie. A Bengali finding it easier to pick up English than an Arabic or Chinese speaker?).

Can you give me an example of the biases that those folks have.  
 
I don't think singularity really belongs to category of "cult"; it's just a statement of what some people believe will happen. No one is being forced to perform rituals or accept any moral/normative statements, or accept anything on faith. 
 
In any case, at worst, trashumanism/the singularity is nerdy speculation.

What's the bias in the Overcoming Bias crowd. The only thing I can think of is the idea that anyone who doesn't sign up for cryonics is stupid/irrational and treating cryonics like a holy grail. 
 
Other than that, I don't see what's cult-like. Believing that a singularity-type situation isn't less rational than the idea that human progress will stay still or that we will wipe ourselves out from the earth.

Doesn't the first virginity loss differs by ethnicity and culture? 
 
-- are there known human population differences in the genes responsible, like Rushton's rule says?

Is there a correlation though between memory and general intelligence/IQ? Because if so, then it may not be erroneous for people to think of good memorizers as "smart". 
 
Plus, regarding the topic of Indian culture and memorization, aren't they good at quantitative fields as well? 
 
I don't know, but from university observations, I get the impression that browns = good at maths is more common stereotype than good at memorizing facts. 
 
If the two were correlated, that would make sense though.

Haha. Are Finnish culture even shier than East Asians like Japanese?