doi: 10.1037//0021-843x.105.3.440

  • underscores@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    I really don’t like the idea of citing this study. It’s always this same one from the 90s, and if it were acurate I expect the results would have been reproduced more. It’s also not clear that the results indicate what the paper says. There’s other reasons than sexual arousal that could explain the results. It could be they’re imagining the scenario and are axious or disgusted by it. There’s this paper that indicates homophobia is usually caused by fear or hate.

    I don’t like the idea of putting the blame for homophobia on closeted queer people. It’s seems extremely likely to me that most homophobic people are straight, since most people are straight. Also we should respect other people’s own identification instead of trying to force labels on people, even if they’re bigots.

      • zalgotext@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Nah, nope, nuh-uh, that’s not how science works. A person’s concerns about the methodology or conclusions of a particular study are not invalid just because they haven’t run their own experiments.

        It’s pretty easy for even a layperson to question this particular study, for a few reasons:

        • The sample sizes are very small
        • Some men can get erections/aroused if the wind blows the wrong way, or even for no reason at all - putting porn in front of someone and expecting them not to become aroused is a dubious assumption at best
        • Using some external test to determine someone’s sexuality, instead of using the person’s self-identification, goes against the last 30 years of progress we’ve made in gender and sexuality studies
        • The conclusion of the study may indicate some level of homophobic or anti-homosexual bias

        Don’t gatekeep good critical thinking. Good critical thinking is the only thing you ever need to question any scientific study.