Comic Genesis Forums

not sure how many of you read my LJ, but i found a New York Times artical that sites a "study" by J. Michael Bailey (a psychologist who has openly advocated the ellimination of homosexuality by fetal gene manipulation) that claims that bisexuality doesnt exist.

link

his study group was a mere 101 men (apprently they feel women dont count when defining "true bisexuality") from a single city that watched gay or straight porn and they measured their genital arousal. They had to trow out nearly 1/3rd of their data as over 30 of the men were not aroused at all.

what makes this so agrivating isnt that the story was posted right beside an article on quantum physics, the NYT is actually pawning this off as good science.

Oooooooooooo, ah hates it when people start tellin me ah don't really like what ah like!

However, despite the NYTimes' -apauling- wording, "casts doubt on the existence of bisexuality" indeed, we're really talking about an inability to "catch bisexuality on film".

I know first hand what bisexuality is, and it isn't lying. So the study is incomplete, and given the personal feelings of us bisexuals, probably not telling the whole story.

I've been trying to think of a good response to this, but honestly, the whole thing is just...wow. I can't think of a good response to this guy. I think Descartes said it best: "I think, therefore, I am." Dude needs to quit telling people what we are and how to act. We'll think for ourselves, and act for ourselves, thank you. We're sorry we don't fit into your world view, but at the end of the day, we'll still be here. And that's the definition of truth isn't it? The truth and reality are things that don't go away when you stop believing in them.

- Jarylan

Anybody still interested in this topic might want to look here. *shrugs*

--RS