A Random Image

Jett Superior laid this on you on || July 5, 2005 || 7:38 am

The New York Times takes a look. Of course, since it’s the Times, this may all be lies.

1 worked it out »

  1. john 7.6.2005

    As far as I know Jason Blair no longer works for the NYT, but this article is more or less an example of what far too many reporters do, which is sensationalize a study that’s far from conclusive on a controversial subject. It’s nearly impossible to draw real conclusions from this study since there are far too many things unaccounted for.

    It’s possible that the porn itself is the culprit. No bisexual porn was used, if any exists. Was the lesbian porn the kind made for straight males or for lesbians? What about the accuracy of only a 0-6 sexuality scale? Is this merely pointing out that a dead equal bisexual arousal in people is rare? Is arousal a good method for determining sexuality without considering whether or not each person even likes porn or if his attraction to one sex might be less physical than mental?

    One surprising thing is that the reported didn’t do much homework on Dr. Bailey. He’s been accused of a number of things like performing “bad science.”

    Here’s a link:


RSS feed for comments on this post.

(you know you want to)