5 Ridiculous Things "Science" Claimed About Bearded Men In 2015
Beards were a hot “science” topic in 2015, but calling these stories scientific is stretch.
2015 was a big year for beard "science."
Jason Kempin / Getty Images / Alex Kasprak / BuzzFeed
Bearded men have poop all over their faces.
The claim: Beards are "about as dirty as a toilet" when it comes to fecal matter.
Just the facts: In a nonscientific sample of a few of dudes' beards, some beards (but not all) had the same bacteria you might find in poop (and many, many other places). The presence of feces itself was never tested.
How legit is this science? Not legit. This is not an actual scientific study. Instead, a local ABC affiliate had a lab technician swab "a handful" of volunteers' beards for bacterial cultures. That technician found that some samples contained bacteria that would also be found poop. The scientist identified the bacteria as "enterics" — an extremely broad group of bacteria found all over the place, not only in feces. If they had swabbed clean-shaven faces or female faces (which they did not), they probably would have found some there as well.
Ian Gavan / Getty Images / Alex Kasprak / BuzzFeed
Bearded men are sexist and hostile.
The claim: Dudes with beards are hostile and sexist toward women.
Just the facts: 223 American men and 309 Indian men completed an online survey that measured demographic variables, ambivalent sexism, and facial hair status. The authors stated that after "controlling for nationality, age, education level, relationship status, and sexual orientation," men with facial hair were more likely to agree with hostile sexist comments.
How legit is the science? Misleading at best. This study was published in the peer-reviewed journal Archives of Sexual Behavior. The researchers asked around 500 men to respond to "'nonsexist,' 'ambivalent,' 'benevolent,' or 'hostile' sexism" statements. Columbia University stats guru Andrew Gelman, however, does not recommend such a study be taken seriously. Noting that the researchers' initial analysis method yielded no significant results, he told BuzzFeed Science that "their headline finding appeared only because, after their first analysis failed, they shook and shook the data until they found something statistically significant."
Thinkstock / Alex Kasprak / BuzzFeed