?

Log in

No account? Create an account
All is vanity.
Science Says Part II: Phallusy of Logic 
23rd-Apr-2007 02:44 pm
Old article I found before I went to bed this morning when I was searching for much different things with similar keywords:


http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/05/health/05sex.html?ex=1278216000&en=5a82f18cadf2ad83&ei=5088



A total sample size of 101 is more than adequate to draw conclusions from. Similarly, a group of 33  "bisexuals" is more than enough to disprove male bisexuality. 33's a lot! Especially when you consider the fact that there are only about 43 of them worldwide anyway.

It is absolutely appropriate to publish the aforementioned, 100% certain findings in an article with an authoritative, offensive title. And even if it wasn't, writing the article in a tone of fake impartiality and including the opinions of some people who aren't persuaded is enough to put everything into perspective.

Measuring how hard a guy's dick gets in response to two porno flicks, one all male and one all female, creates an accurate representation of his whole orientation. I mean, if the mere thought of lesbians, ANY set of lesbians, doesn't give you a boner, you are so gay. And we all know homos can't help but jerk off at the sight of a couple of dudes doing teh buttsecks.

Also, it is unnecessary to mention the content of the dirty movies the researchers had their test subjects watch, as what the pornstars were doing to each other is irrelevant.

There is no reason to print exactly how erect the guys of each orientation got from each movie. A table of the findings would not have helped readers come to their own conclusions, or given them more reason to be trusting of what they were already being told.

The fourth paragraph from the bottom of the first page does not bother me at all. There is no missing information about how straight gay men are or how gay straight men are that could suggest that most of the people studied were, in fact, maybe a little bit bisexual. In addition to that, there is no attempt to make straight men seem straighter than gay men are gay.

Though the main author of the study admits that 1/3 of the men in each group WEREN'T TURNED ON BY ANY OF THE PORN, that shows no flaws in the experiment. It in no way suggests that both the stimuli and sample size were inadequate. As has been stated, there is no reason to suspect that not getting an erection from watching the two provided movies, probably in an intimidating, unsexy setting, with some sort of measuring device attached to your cock, isn't enough to prove that you, and everyone of your proclaimed orientation, are not attracted to the gender of the people who failed to give you a stiffy.

It makes perfect sense that even though there are no boys who really do swing both ways, some of them fuck as if they did. I know plenty of gay guys who regularly screw women. Why? God, don't ask me. Gays work in strange, mysterious ways that don't make sense to you or I. Look at their parades. All those rainbows and sequins... Who can say for sure why they do anything?

This Dr. Baily they speak of isn't full of shit at all. I don't want to castrate him. Really. It's just like he said, men and women are essentially different creatures. Why else would we have Men Are From Mars, Women Are From Venus? Separate planets, I tell you. Therefore, while there are no male bisexuals, all women secretly want to nail each other, and lesbians are just waiting for the right guy. Some study, one that almost definitely measured arousal using a vastly different method, like monitoring brain activity instead of genitals, proves this. Quick, easy, do-it-yourself proof that all girls are half gay: Ask any openly bisexual girl or "lesbian" if she got laid last time she tried to score with a "straight" chick. 9/10 times she nailed her. And the sex was great. The "hetero" was totally into it.

It is completely impossible that many bisexual men actually call themselves straight. Or gay, but especially not straight. No one would ever deny their bisexuality because he had been raised in a culture that made him afraid to admit it to others, and perhaps even himself. Where would you get such an idea? Even if these guys did exist, which they don't, I'm sure they'd be willing to participate in these sorts of experiments to ensure that male sexuality could be properly documented.

Articles like "Gay, Straight, or Lying" don't make coming out as bisexual even less appealing than it already was.
Comments 
24th-Apr-2007 12:41 am (UTC) - "for men arousal is orientation"
Measuring devices make me horny.
24th-Apr-2007 12:54 am (UTC) - Re: "for men arousal is orientation"
You know, I've got two rulers in my dorm. One is metal, while the other is clear plastic with blue paint. Both are slightly flexible and have the numbers done in black. With a combined length of 36 gorgeous inches, well, I'll just say we could do a whole lot of measuring...
24th-Apr-2007 05:34 pm (UTC) - Re: "for men arousal is orientation"
Mmm. Blue paint.
24th-Apr-2007 09:57 pm (UTC)
I must admit that when I hear the word "bisexual", my first thought is "tiresome attention-seeking myspace mong who snogs friends when drunk but would probably vomit into pretentious Emily Strange handbag if presented with a REAL VAGINA"

I particularly hate those type of girls. I had to contend with a seemingly endless shower of those when I went through my Gay Phase circa 1998. That was infuriating, because there were no properly interested people anywhere, just those posers trying for a snog to impress the guys.

That tangented, I do think that any article that tries to use science as a cloak for ignorance and homophobia deserves all the ripping you can give it.
24th-Apr-2007 10:24 pm (UTC)
There are tons of fake bi girls running around, I'd never disagree with that. The fact of the matter is, I don't know how common bisexuality is. But you got exactly what I thought was (especially) wrong with the article: the tiny, incomplete set of data we were given to work with wasn't persuasive at all, IMO, yet the article implied that it was some huge step in figuring the many secrets of human sexuality out. Bullshit. Give me a large, randomly chosen group of test subjects and monitor their brain activity as well as genital, then we'll talk. The experiment would still be flawed, but much less so. And it was so dumb of them to bring up the idea that all women are bisexual without a whole lot of evidence, especially when empirical data suggests otherwise. Plus, I think it indirectly supports sexism through suggesting that men and women are so dissimilar. Which is one of the faster ways to piss me off.
24th-Apr-2007 10:33 pm (UTC)
You sound like you might be studying a science... is that right?
24th-Apr-2007 10:40 pm (UTC)
My crazy, hippie college does this thing where we only take one class, but it's interdisciplinary and we do enough credits worth of it to be a full-time student. My current one, Gender and Media, is exactly what it sounds like, so no sciencey science right now. But I'm drawn to it and will probably do chemistry and biology all next year.
24th-Apr-2007 10:52 pm (UTC)
I did Biology undergrad. It was great! I recommend.

This page was loaded Feb 17th 2018, 7:36 pm GMT.