A shocking, double-blind study released by Harvard, in collaboration with MIT, has revealed that all men who are homophobic are actually homosexuals themselves. The study, which was carried out over the course of 5 years and involved nearly 5,000 male subjects, is being accepted by the American Psychological Association as being “scientifically irrefutable.”
This lengthy, intricate study was conducted by the folks at the Harvard Center for Brain Science and incorporated proven Penis Responsiveness Technology (PRT) and Brainwave Function Reading (BFR) from leading scientists from the Biomimetic Robotics Lab at MIT.
The Penis Responsiveness Technology was created from an offshoot program with the Meshworm Soft Robotics sleeve which was fitted around each of the subjects’ tiny penises. It is capable of measuring blood flow, responsive twitches, and swelling. Meanwhile, Brainwave Function Reading system was set up with diodes attached to the different parts of the skull to read basic emotional responses in each part of the brain as stimuli was taken in by each subject.
Test subjects were then shown pictures of gay males in various affectionate scenarios of increasingly sexual nature. “We began with hand holding, cuddling, and kissing,” Head Researcher Maxwell Kow stated.
“Without fail, each and every person in the study who strongly expressed a dislike of LGBTQ+ individuals in the intake survey always had brain activity that showed feelings of confusion and extreme arousal,” Kow stated. “This was inevitably coupled with physical arousal to various degrees, but it was certainly significant enough to show that they have a desire to rub sweaty, hairy balls all over their face.”
The study also showed a direct, positive correlation between the degree of homophobia expressed in a subject’s survey and the decreased time it took the individual to produce a full-on, albeit tiny erection.
“If our findings make you angry, just know that it’s because you’re gay,” Kow concluded.
4 problems with this so-called “study:”
(1.) The blogger” doesn’t provide any verifiable links. The Center for Brain Studies does not list this study or the lead researcher. Quotes used by the “blogger” don’t appear in any place that can be considered academic. Since the “original blogger” is not willing to show where they got the information, then the only small “study” (Adams HE1, Wright LW Jr, Lohr BA.) they are rehashing is the one done in 1996, which I’m familiar with.
(2.) The APA board of directors is run by a homosexual activist caucus (AGLP and Division 44), so of course they’re going to agree with this “study”
http://barbwire.com/2014/03/17/american-psychiatric-association-cited-reputable-non-biased-source/
(3.) “Homophobia” has to be itself a scientific possibility. It’s origins come from nothing scientific
http://www.spcs.org.nz/the-term-homophobia-its-origins-and-meanings-and-its-uses-in-homosexual-agenda/
(4.) The Penis Responsiveness Technology (PRT) PLETHYSMOGRAPHY
Rejection by U.S. and Canadian courts of plethysmographic data on the basis of its unreliability reflects the flaws underlying the science of the examination. Proposed as an “objective” measure of sexual orientation, plethysmography fails to pass rigorous scrutiny of its methodology. Moreover, the research cited to support the use of plethysmography hasbeen contaminated by both selection and experimenter biases that render its conclusions inapplicable to determining sexual orientation.”
‘ Testing Sexual Orientation:A Scientific and Legal Analysisof Plethysmographyin Asylum & Refugee Status Proceedings’ 2010
This homosexual activist site acknowledges this fact when it was used as a measure within the therapies they disagree with, but it’s all of the sudden valid when it is for something that puts forth their propaganda. Funny how that works
http://www.scribd.com/doc/45350420/Testing-Sexual-Orientation-A-Scientific-and-Legal-Analysis-of-Plethysmography-in-Asylum-and-Refugee-Status-Proceedings
There was a second one that tried to argue this based on response times to images. On what scientific basis do they build a conclusion that response times to images determine anything at all ?? Am I gay if I read the chart at the eye doctor’s too slow ?? Goofy stuff
Ever hear of MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Drivers)? Did you know by the logic and reasoning of “adversion to homosexuality = closet homosexual” that must mean that all of the members of MADD must be closet drunk drivers?
THIS IS SATIRE, YOU IDIOTS!
The problem lies in the definition of homophobic. People tend to label anyone who is against a gay lifestyle as homophobic. Does that make homosexuals heterophobics? Probably not.
What’s the gay lifestyle?
Usually, the ones who talk about the “gay lifestyle” are those who beieve ina scary man in heaven, a tlaking snake, they have abook that tells them who they must hate and oppress, want averybody to follow their book, want society completely to follow their book, pray, go to church, avoid certain people according to what they book says, avoid eating certain thinsg according to what their boo says atc. The irony os that it’s these people who are leaving a lifestyle; not gay people.
From the study, it looks like the Homophobic group was simply less secure in their heterosexuality than the non-Homophobic group. The intensity of their homophobia could probably be correlated with how much they fear being homosexual; since the “conservative” mind experiences fear more strongly, this result probably partially explains why more conservatives tend to be homophobic.
Probably needs a better designed study to resolve the details.
Reblogged this on HELIOS.
A 2014 study on the subject http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24473940 studied responses of gay & straight men to same- and opposite-sex stimuli. “In line with previous research, we found “category specificity” in men’s sexual arousal, in that sexual responses were strongest to orientation-congruent stimuli. Also, both homosexual and heterosexual men experienced stronger sexual responses to conditions in which their attention was directed to sexual versus nonsexual content of orientation-congruent stimuli. Only homosexual men manifested higher sexual responses when their visual attention was directed towards the sexual content of orientation-incongruent stimuli. Heterosexual men experienced weaker positive and stronger negative affective responses to orientation-incongruent content, suggestive of potential avoidance or inhibitory mechanisms.” I think we can conclude men are turned on by either porn, just a bit more to porn with their own orientation.
Mixers followed the testing in which participants had sex with each other to demonstrate how much they don’t like it.
If it’s on the internet, it’s gotta be true!
NOT A REAL STUDY!
Reblogged this on Blissfully Single and commented:
Not news to me!
Anyone who disagrees with this is either homophobic and gay themselves or closeted. Not to mention science behind the fact is blowing up their cover. Live with it there’s no changing it and you don’t have to be a scientist to know that!!
Anyone who disagrees with this is either homophobic and gay themselves or closeted. Not to mention science behind the fact is blowing up their cover. Live with it there’s no changing it and you don’t have to be a scientist to know that!
With no reference to the research, no record of the research having been conducted at the Harvard Center for Brain Research (I performed an intensive database search), no actual name for the lead researcher and no statement even as to which professional journal this article is allegedly soon to be published by, this article lacks any credibility whatsoever. And in publishing an article so lacking in credibility, you do the academic pursuit of the subject no favours.
Were this article genuine, it would have been wiser to save any mention of it until the study is actually released, and could be referenced and consulted directly. The fact that you have instead published the article on no testable foundations whatsoever leads me to believe that this is a strawman: an article created to be utilised by those in the field as a factual reference, only to then be deliberately demolished by its instigators after its claims have been well spread. In short, a dirty political trick designed to discredit and humiliate the experts in order to render their expertise non-credible and thus non-dangerous to their opposers.
I am a trained medical scientist, and I am a gay man who has had to spend his entire adult life watching out for the political knife in the back. And both of these facts lead me to believe that this is a deliberate fraud and strawman study.
You put in so much time and effort.
(Begins slow clap)
You are entitled to your opinions.
I’m calling BS. There is absolutely no or reference to the study at all, and reading through the comments all the author has done to people question the authenticity of the article us give crappy excuses with still absolutely no proof. Give some solid evidence and proof that this is true before posting something this controversial so you don’t end up looking like such an idiot.
I get aroused watching two girls or two men or a straight coupleor a lot of girls, a lot of men, a lot of couples with a lot of geese with a lot of girl and men and goose and famale geese with gay goose with straight girl with gay couples!!!!!!!!!!!!!! OH NO! I’m a sexual maniac!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
phobia
/ˈfəʊbɪə/ noun (psychiatry) an abnormal intense and irrational-fear of a given situation, organism, or object
That is the definition of a phobia. I am posting this to say that homophobia is a word that was made up by the gay community and liberals to make it sound like that there something wrong with people like me who do not like or approve of the gay lifestyle. Where I don’t like or approve of the gay lifestyle I am by no means afraid of it. In the same sense to where I don’t like mayonnaise or salad dressing but I am not afraid of it I don’t go running screaming every time I see Thousand islands or potato salad with mayonnaise on it I simply choose not to eat them. But that do not make me afraid of it. Also it don’t mean that I am in the closet and I secretly do like mayonnaise and salad dressing. The same way that I am 100% sure that I do not like mayonnaise or salad dressing I am 100% sure that I am not gay, but I am also 100% sure that I am not afraid of gay people.
Homophobes are the most gayest, closeted motherf***er’s thats ever walked the planet. They are simply entrenched in fear, ignorance, bias, prejudice and intolerance – ravelled in denial.
They are worse than the devil, in my opinion. Raving hypocrites, who need a lot of love and nurture. Self righteous liars who know nothing about God, they proclaim to love, who gave them mercy and compassion, un-meritously; daily – yet, they fail, and are unable to give the same accordingly back.
I cry for humanity. The heresy, the sham, the indignation – makes me want to vomit.
Many Xtains will see no pearly white pearly gate on judgment …’ Why? They don’t know Love*. God is Love*. God is the boss and author of Free Will. Unfortunately – Xtain homophobes use their free will to hate – than love. It’s hilarious.
Lets talk about catholic priests and continue this conversation later!
Yep… and every person who dislikes islam, is in actuality an ISIS warrior.
…this isn’t science. It is quasi-science, on par with homeopathy and genderstudies.
Homophobia works more as reaction-formation. A defense mechanism.
the irony is, all this demonstrates is that the appearance of tolerance is en vogue. and that “being gay” has the undertone of being an insult or punishment.
Odd that there is no Maxwell Kow when you search on the Center for Brain Science’s site.
http://cbs.fas.harvard.edu/search/node/Kow
He asked for his name to be changed for personal safety reasons. This is angering people.
LOL
Read the comments. Plus those that I had to delete. Some people are violent.
That’s for sure. But what you are describing here works in Dan Brown novel, not in the actual science world. Sorry, I just don’t buy your story.
I, personally, think there are some major red flags generating many questions about the authenticity & credibility of this article/information…like for instance, “a study revealed that ALL people who are homophobic are homosexuals”. Some links to these publications would be really useful and beneficial for skeptics like me that call bullshit on this blog post! Just Sayin’!
There is a saying in Spanish about homophobes:
“Detrás de un homofóbo hay un culo con hambre”.
–> In every homophobe there’s a hungry butt.
Perhaps not the best translation but it clearly points out what most people think about homophobes and what studies say about them.
study link other than Harvard but telling none the less.
http://archives.politicususa.com/2011/12/06/proof-that-homophobia-is-associated-with-homosexual-arousal.html
Reblogged this on Peterson Ssendi and commented:
Homophobic People are Gay
Not refuting anything, but if it were a double blind study, what was the placebo used in the study to measure natural response to life. As a man, I have a hard-on throughout the day regardless what im doing. I can eat something great and get an erection. That doesn’t mean I want to fuck a cookie.
Maybe u do – u just don’t know u would – like it as mush as thee cookie lol 🙂
I’m straight, but definitely not homophobic. Some of my best friends, and all that. But I might well get a bit aroused by gay male porn, just because all sexual activity is at least somewhat arousing to everyone.
Not entirely true… Two Girls, One Cup is considered sexual activity, and is not arousing at all to most individuals.
I don’t know what to make of the article. I think it was maybe a good excuse for Harvard researchers to get paid to watch porn. The title suggests arachnophobes are spiders…according to the comments it may have been more telling if they’d used footage of geese doing it instead.
I feel as though the test itself may be flawed. I personally was very much afraid of homosexuals In a generalized standpoint because a former friend of mine attempted to sexually assault me in junior high. Although I do not yet have my bachelors in experimental psychology yet, I do believe that the men who were chosen as subjects of the experiment were men who merely identified themselves as outspoken homophobes. There are a large amount of factors that should be looked at. Like I said, I was afraid of gay people for a long time, but I overcame the falsified stereotypes that I affiliated with homosexuals. Now I’m 21 years old and I’m getting married to a beautiful Christian woman. (If you’re wondering, I’m not, nor have I ever been, a homobasher. I believe that God loves all people, not just this or that person.) So my point is, just because somebody is afraid of a person who labels themselves as homosexual… It does not mean they themselves are homosexual. Especially people who have dealt with traumatic events.
Homosexual guys are also assaulted by heteropsexual women sexually many times.
I am bisexual and I will tell you this is bullshit. Plus, the definition of “homophobia” is so broad compared to what it meant in 1996 that this can’t accurately mean anything. If anything I think this is biased and probably inaccurately reported or interpreted and it is based on some delusional fantasy that queens have because they want some manly man.
An example of the modern loosely defined label of “homophobia” is my response to dumb gay and straight people that think they can read my mind regarding bisexuality and their ridiculous biphobic idiocy and I proceed to tell them about my bisexual only policy. Apparently not wanting to deal with the hate and abuse from some paranoid gay flamer makes me a homophobe.
However, I know what I am because in my younger years I had threesomes with two bi women, which I like the most, two bi men and a bisexual opposite sex couple and let me tell you I went hard so I don’t need some insecure faggot telling me what the fuck I think or their loser breeder hag bitch friends. A lot of us are sticking to our own because we are sick of both your idiotic assumptions and the way you fuckers expect us to appropriate and express our sexuality the way you do.
Plus, there is no way a small sample from Harvard can determine everyone in the world’s choices. There was some single bullshit experiment that a bunch of faggots that were faking bisexuality in some college sample that was like 40-50 people and you fags used that as “proof” we don’t exist. Get the fuck over yourselves. Also, straight men experiment, usually with us bisexuals because you faggots destroy their lives and tell everyone when they think they can trust you to experiment because you fall in love. There is no way a sample can determine this statement.
Now, yes, this is the case with some but what are the parameters that determine homophobia. I mean, if you have a shitty attitude and get it in return or grope a straight guy and he punches you for sexually assaulting them by grabbing their junk. That is not homophobia. Sorry. This is just fantasy for some dumb queers who have no idea how to interpret studies in the least. Really, you guys are never going to get that dream straight guy who “turns” and falls for you. There are rare cases of straight men who go that way but you are single because you are busted looking, dramatic, ugly and/or have shitty attitudes. Homophobia nor bisexual men are not the reason nobody wants you. Maybe you should look at why no other homos want you. It is the opposite of the ugly homophobe that cannot get laid and assume because women don’t want them that men will. Wake up.
So if I make fun of people that watch hentai, but I’m secretly turned on by it, does that make me a cartoon? Please confirm, don’t piss me off thou or KAMEHAMEHA!!!!!
The relevant people at Harvard and MIT should make their research Public knowledge a downloadable result and conclusion for any person to peruse and read their findings for them selves.
I think that stating that all homophobes are actually homosexuals is a bit of a stretch. And you forget about repressed bisexuality here, too.
Most studies show that the majority of homophobes (80% approx) are actually homosexual and bisexual men. The other 20% is perfectly heterosexual men who have been taught to hate LGBT people during their childhood, they have been taught to see LGBT people as enemies.
Sometimes, it is relatively easy to tell the homophobe who is a repressed homosexual/bisexual and and the one who is heterosexual apart.
Homophobes who are repressed homosexual/bisexual men tend to be much more agressive and heavily fixated on anal sex and make display of aggressive masculinity. Regardless of their obsessive need to make aggresive and intimidating display of masculinity (to get rid of any suspicion of homosexuality), ironically, some of these men tend to sublimate their same-sex attraction through activities such as bodybuilding (one of the most homoerotic activities) in which they subconsciously enjoy the sight of other men’s muscular bodies but try to project aggressive musculinity by developing their own bodies to any degree as a way to visually state that their are strongly heterosexual.
a small sample size in no way can determine your claim or the claim of this. I am bisexual and I am telling you gay men to get over your delusional fantasy of some straight man who is the John Wayne archetype who will suddenly up and turn for you. Let’s face it, that is the purpose of selling this crap, to sell fairy tales to lonely gay men. However, those lonely gay men should focus on why gay people don’t like them before worrying about straight or bisexual men.
If you’re bisexual yu are part of the despised group so don’t dream of being superior in any sense, hunny.
They can’t say “all” homophobes are gay when they only studied male subjects. I would like to see the real study
Maxwell Kow isn’t found on google. It is odd that a researcher at a prestigious institution isn’t linked with other research. While it is pretty intuitive that homophobia is probably linked to some latent sexual desires, fake articles like this are irresponsible and can actually be detrimental to helping promote knowledge of sexual complexity to broad publics.
The head researcher had me change their name because this is so controversial.
So people who become sexually aroused and/or orgasm while being raped, really aren’t actually being raped? They wanted it, and were pleased rather than violated and traumatized?
Interesting. I mean if we’re going to jump to conclusions based on stimuli vs. reactions.
Sounds like you are comparing rape to voluntary participants in studies that simply show images and monitor reactions. A male watching gay men and getting aroused sounds a bit different to the logical mind.
Homophobes “choose” to be straight
Even the small assortment of people here are pointing out obvious flaws in the study. There are a few potential compounds, but more importantly, this study is inherently biased because sexuality is a spectrum, and this study, if valid in other ways, only shows only that homophobic men are more aroused by images of homosexual intimacy. This is not the same as being gay. Think of how many men have watched all kinds of strange porn. That doesn’t mean they would ever actually act out those images, or even want to.
This is mostly in my layman’s terms. I’d wait for the official release.
Could the men’s arousal in this study be continued to the device around their penis adding stimulation?
This study would have been more believable/have a more solid argument if the men were only exposed to images of individual men in an increasing state of sexual arousal, as opposed to two men. Watching porn in general puts your mind in a fantasy state, these men could easily be getting aroused by the sexual nature and not the content, fantasizing on the act of sex itself.
My final thought tells me that none of this can be conclusive. As human beings we express ourselves by defining what things are and what they are not. Human nature sometimes combats what we have defined. For this study to be true we would have to say definitively that there are only gay, straight, bisexual, etc people as opposed to just sexual people. Just because society defines our sexual boundaries doesn’t mean they actually exist. Hopefully in the future we will all see each other as equals so that we don’t waste so much time or money discriminating against our fellow man. This is not progress it’s embarrassing.
Lol there nothing sexual about the device used to record their penile simulation; we often use it on our civilly confined, maximum security sex offenders before they can renter society.
straight =heterosexual crooked = gay? it´s already discriminatory
Maybe it is straight=hetero, wavy = gay.
I’m searching pubmed for the primary literature and cannot find it. Is there a reference to the study somewhere?
The 1996 study is available. This one, which was a furthering of it, should be soon.
Uuh, and you simply happened to know its content, in details, before it was even published?
Seriously, a link, even to a draft or a preprint version of the paper, would take a lot of awkwardness out of this conversation.
There’s a second “peer review” happening. Somewhat rare from what I understand, but it’s a controversial topic. It is aligned with the 1996 findings – but on a larger scale.
If you read the 1996 report. This is far from far fetched. It further proves it.
Wait, hold on. So the study is NOT published. I am sorry, but I have to be highly skeptical. And I am gay.
Read the 1996 study and you’ll see the trend suggesting this to begin with.
I have read the 1996 paper. The question is not whether these allegations are far-fetched but whether they are true. Sorry. I’m also gay, and as much I would love all of this to be true, I’m also all for science. As much as I love my men gay, I love my facts straight, and I am really not impressed by the fact that you cannot provide the slightest evidence to support your story.
And now, the Internet’s most clueless and gullible are expected to arrive in 3…2…1…
They furthered the 1996 study.
Homosexuality is an infectious disease.
Could you please tell me how I got infected stupid!
BTW, it’s “HEIL Hitler.” If you’re going to be a troll, at least be a correct troll.
I’m pretty sure we are being spoofed.
Source please ? The only one I can find is the famous 1996 study, on 64 people (not 5000!) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8772014
I’ve always known this and all racist people are actually Black. All sexist are really females. And all Islamphobics are really muslims! All Atheist are really believers. What you aren’t is really what you are! It’s easy! All You Need Is Love!
And you think you’re clever. 😉
Seriously though, you’re closer than you might think. We tend to blank out stuff that has no relevance to us and when we see something in another that reflects a part of ourselves that we are uncomfortable with, it gets magnified. My response to you could in other words be interpreted as a response to my own lack of knowledge and desire to learn. I read your statement as jocular (Jock, see what I did there?) but also as dismissive of data you don’t automatically agree with and an attempt to diminish it. Personally I think this is a satire site. I didn’t see any other references to this study in mainstream media and it seems unlikely anyone could avoid such a clickbait headline.
But anyhow, you’re pretty close. We hate on fat people and drug addicts because we like to imagine they don’t have our willpower. We project our lives onto theirs and assume they have the same metabolism and pain tolerance we do. We imagine that they were taught good habits when they were children. We imagine their impulse control is less than ours, etc. In short, WE are highly intelligent and evolved beings and THEY are dumb animals.
I’m skeptical all homophobes are gay. As many others have pointed out, sexual response is not sexual orientation. Men who report being raped often have difficulty dealing with their physical response of getting an erection. Men in desperate life-or-death situations also sometimes find themselves physically aroused, etc. Most of the really committed homophobes do seem to be religious though and most likely what they are responding to with the bigotry is fear for themselves. The root of it is probably they doubt. Nobody wants to die and because of that, no matter how pretty a picture you paint of heaven, you’d still have to give up your life for it. Because of that, they can’t ever really wholly trust God or their faith. The best they can do is let go of their attachment to life. When they see someone doing something their religion protests it must stab that self doubt to 11. What if you’re wrong? What if your faith was all a farce and you denied yourself pieces-of-heaven on Earth for a maybe-heaven that will never come? So they want to drive those thoughts from their head. They don’t want to remember their doubt. Doubt would reduce their chances of getting to maybe-Heaven. The path of lease resistance from there is to try to eliminate the thing that reminds you. Even though it isn’t what the bible says you should do… But being reminded of that is also distressing because down deep we all recognize that we’re as much dumb animals as everyone else.
Here’s a link to the actual study. Get your facts straight before you make us all look like idiots.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8772014
So what this study uncovers is that homophobes are scared of gay people because they know that they will easily fall to temptation and become gay themselves.
I clicked on your link, it’s a very short abstract that confirms what this story says.
That is not the study… the study in your link was done at University of Georgia with 35 men, the article references a study done by Harvard and MIT with 5,000 participants….
Thank you for providing a link to the study, Mica. I’m curious if they ‘reacted’ to homosexual images of those strictly if the same-sex, though. As previous people have mentioned, even if the acts were of a nature counter their association, as long as they saw a person whom they felt sexual attraction to, they were aroused (I.e. a gay male would become aroused from a heterosexual act, if they found the desired sex physically appealing). The study says Hetero acts, and homosexual images of the opposites sex (lesbians) were shown, so I wonder how the volunteers’ reactions were/would be, if no desired sex (female) were shown in the study…
There’s being anti-gay, and then your biological wiring taking over, regardless of the second person involved in the act of sex.
This proves that they were aroused while watching gay sex acts. That’s what it proves and nothing more. I can easily get aroused by watching straight sex acts. Does it make me straight? No. I am in love with my husband and gay as a goose.
It is more significant than your getting aroused by straight sex. I get aroused by straight sex as well because there is a man involved and men turn me on. I do not, however, get aroused by lesbian sex/porn.
Very interesting, the same for me. Two women don’t do a thing but a straight couple (one a hot man usually) and I get aroused!
THANK YOU selfevolved, now ask him do he get aroused by lesbian sex like most str8 men do.
Regardless, it’s bullshit. Even a Google search for the name of the “lead researcher” will show nothing related to this.
It’s my layman’s terms.
Geese are gay?
Not all geese are gay, but some of the gooses are!
According to Bruce Bagemihl, author of “Biological Exuberance, Animl Homosexuality and Natural Diversity”, They definitely can be. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals
I’m gay, watching two women have sex does not arouse me in the least, watching a straight couple have sex can arouse me depending on the man. Your post isn’t logical to me.
Not defending the conclusion of this study or the article, just hammering out the logic of your comment:
Straight sex would still have an element of appeal to you, as a gay man, would it not? Thus your arousal could be easily explained by the presence of a physically attractive, nude male. Now, if you are watching lesbian porn and becoming aroused, that would speak against your claim of complete homosexuality. I don’t think it would definitively prove you to be a liar, but it would certainly raise a few intriguing questions.
While I get the point you’re trying to make, it’s not a very strong one with regards to debunking the conclusions drawn in the “study.”
PS I call bs on the whole thing. No source or link to the study. The whole conclusion is based on simple correlation. There is nothing concrete about it and those responses could be explained by a myriad of other things.
Eh, I can’t say a gay man being somewhat aroused by lesbians porn would necessarily make them any less gay – the sex act, in itself, can be arousing regardless of the sex or sexualities involved.
Can you get aroused from women only having sex with each other? Sexuality is a spectrum, but the fact that these men are sexual stimulated by even sensual encounters among men is very revealing.
When you’re watching “straight sex,” there is a male involved. How would you react with two women? That’s one point. The other would be, as they mentioned in the study, the “decreased time it took the individual to reach FULL arousal.” So, you’d be fully aroused watching two women have sex sooner than a straight male. Hmmmmm methinks NOT!
The more homophobic, the less time it took for arousal. There were only gay males in the visuals.
Finn T I agree. I too can be aroused by hetro sex too and have but have never had the desire too be with a woman and also have been with my husband for 21 yrs. but that don’t make me straight.
Gay as a goose 😃
Geese are gay? 😉
Actually Finn T is right(if you’ll take the time to read my kinda long explanation you will understand why). That doesn’t prove that they are gay, it only proves they are aroused by porn images, either gay or straight… That does not really make them gay. I’ve read a study a couple of years ago(unfortunately I cannot remember the title of the article, it’s been to long ago), that was about porn, and proved that men usually when watching porn are aroused not only by the woman but also by the man. Actually the penis of the man. The brain associates the erect penis in the video with its own and, as the conscious brain has little or no control on arousal, a man could get aroused just by seeing in a video another man’s erect penis and associate it with sex or masturbation, and it gets ready for action, sort of speaking. That does not mean it is associated necessarily with gay sex. Women are different and don’t make such associations with porn or erotic images. Even the author of this article says that the men “had brain activity that showed feelings of confusion and arousal”. They were confused because the brain made an involuntary association with sex, because they were probably told they will watch porn(or the music from the start just made the brain associate it with porn; you very well know how music influences the feelings during a movie; example: horror movies, although you know consciously what will happen and that you are safe, the music makes the unconscious brain get into defense mode and you get scared, heart starts to pound, muscles get tensed, etc.). The unconscious mind had the habit of just letting feelings and emotions flow without analyzing them. And very interesting this article only refers to males. why weren’t women involved in the study? or were they and they did not show the same result because women brains are different when it comes to sex!? (not that much visual, the case of men, and more psychological, so sex, for them, is not associated with porn images of erect penises or whatever). The study will probably be irrefutable once female subjects will be taken into account and eliminate the male image associated arousal… Not everything that comes from Harvard has to be irrefutable right… And I have a feeling the study does not make such a claim, that they are gay, that is why there is no reference to the scientific article or at least its abstract…
Oh and I forgot, the fact that the more homophobic they where the quicker they would get aroused again shows nothing. As you know hardcore homophobic men are pretty aggressive when it come to their beliefs so when seeing gay porn they might just got really angry. What does the anger emotion do? Increases blood flow in the body (muscles) to make it ready for action (physical aggression). How does a penis get erect? Well you probably see my point… Either there is no study, or whoever has done the study has jumped prematurely to conclusion.
Your boner, your belief.
Actually mine is not really that much a belief, but it is based on previous studies and logic. You don’t have a reference… And plus I am a physicist so i think I know a thing or two on how things work with experiments. These may be psychological experiments, but the principles are mathematical. As long as someone has counter-arguments that disprove your sayings, with counter-arguments based on facts, what you are saying is a belief. Plus where is the reference to the original article, or at least the abstract; put it here so that we can see at least the scientific work; as long as you don’t have it you are making a personal claim, without any proof or support whatsoever. Please show me the study, to prove that what you are saying is not just you belief…
Well in that case the non homophobic should have felt the same reactions. Or will you conclude that non homophobic test subjects are less arousable than homophobic ones?
But are you getting aroused by the sex act or the male “actor”? try watching lesbians and see if that works for you
Is gay porn arousing you?
But are you arouse watching girl on girl action? I won’t.
A reference link to the actual study would add credibility. The premise is intuitively appealing, and certainly some homophobes are gay or bi, but certainly not all. Nice idea though.
yes link to this study please
You realize that this is satire, right? lol
http://www.landman-psychology.com/Homophobia%20Associated%20with%20Homosexual%20Arousal.pdf
Definitely not satire.
So, I guess you know more than the experts at Harvard and MIT who conduct this kind of research. Nice idea though.
This was a general briefing. They decided to extend the 1996 study. I’m not a scientist, but this was the gist of it.
No. Of course not. If history proves anything, it’s that the “experts” are NEVER wrong. Especially from Harvard.
So it’s safe to ASSUME you accept ANY AND ALL research with out having read it yourself as long as the research agrees with your opinion. According to your comment it is reasonable to conclude that “ALL” true non gay homophobes will agree with my statement without reading the research paper and “all” true Pro-homosexuals will disagree without having first read the research. Or I GUESS you believe any research as long as it is either written by Harvard and MIT so long as they are “experts”. BAD IDEA – If you lack the skill set to analyze their research then wait for the peer reviews.
http://www.landman-psychology.com/Homophobia%20Associated%20with%20Homosexual%20Arousal.pdf
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8772014
Sorry but the link shows an old study made on a few amount of people, and even if I’m gay and agree with this previous study what is said above is 100% wrong/fake/hoax
I’m pretty sure this is satire
Holy crap the fact that you thought this was real is frightening; it’s easy to forget half of Americans have an IQ below 100.