Are homophobes really gay? Scientific study

[dalaigh lllama]

This is something I have actually wondered about, so when I read this I thought you all might enjoy it, too.

from FUBAR: America's Right-Wing Nightmare by Sam Seder and Stephen Sherrill

You know how when you watch the news and there's some right-wing guy going off on gay people, and then, years later, it turns out that that person is really gay, and you think, "Wow, are all gay-haters gay? I wonder if anybody has ever done a real scientific study on it. I would surely like to see something like that!" Well, you're never going to believe this, but...

In 1996, three scientists from the University of Georgia -- Henry E. Adams, Ph.D., Lester W. Wright Jr., Ph.D., and Bethany Lohr -- published a study called "Is Homophobia Associated With Homosexual Arousal?" in the Journal of Abnormal Psychology, published by the American Psychological Association.

The study involved twenty-nine nonhomophobic men and thirty-five homophobic men...All sixty-four men described themselves as completely straight. Each man was shown three kinds of videotapes: heterosexual, male homosexual, and lesbian.

...here's where it gets interesting. While watching the male homosexual videos, the homophobic men were more than twice as likely to be aroused as the nonhomophobic men -- 54 to 24 percent. Only 20% of the homophobic men showed little or no arousal while watching the homosexual videos.

What's more, when asked to give their own verbal opinion about their arousal, the nonhomophobic men were fairly accurate for all three kinds of videos. The homophobic men were accurate for only two of the video categories. They significantly underestimated their arousal for the other category. Can you guess which one that was?

The authors draw their own conclusions, using a scientific methodology which I'm guessing they gleefully borrowed from I.D. "scientists."

So what does this all mean? For one thing, it means it's perfectly natural to be really, really anti-gay and yet be gay. But does it mean that all homophobes are actually gay? Yes. It does.

Here's some links to articles about the original study:
http://www.psych.org/pnews/96-09-20/phobia.html
http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_fuel2.htm

[jpgray]

1. I think an obsession about non-victimizing sex is a red flag in all cases

What it means exactly varies, but people who try to legislate against harmless bedroom behavior tend to have issues.

[dalaigh lllama]

5. Yes, indeed.

...people who try to legislate against harmless bedroom behavior tend to have issues

Now that's an understatement. I've always thought the louder they "foam," the more personal problems they're probably running from.

[Ian David]

2. While the conclusion is probably correct, this particular study was flawed

The study relied upon a questionable penis-engorgement measuring device to generate their statistics.

While there can be little doubt that homophobia and anti-gay bigotry are mostly the result of suppressed homosexual urges, if you're looking for a smoking gun, this study isn't it.

[Jackpine Radical]

6. The penile plethysmograph is widely used as a clinical measure

for purposes such as detecting deviant arousal (paraphilias), and Henry Adams is well-known in the field. What specific problems are you referring to?


A certain amount of error is tolerable in any research instrument--more than can be tolerated in a clinical instrument, btw. It shows up as "noise" in the statistical analysis, and generally has the effect of increasing the error variance in the study, which will in turn tend to weaken the apparent magnitude of the treatment effect.

[Ian David]

11. Okay, I will be your Google-slave...

Plethysmograph: a disputed device
http://www.tsroadmap.com/info/plethysmograph.html

penile plethysmograph (PPG)
http://skepdic.com/penilep.html

U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals
BERTHIAUME v O'DONOHUE
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=1st&navby=case&no=971958

[idgiehkt]

25. funny that if it's not reliable

it's unreliable in a consistent fashion (scratches head).

[aikoaiko]

37. Aren't the main issues false negative, and not false positives...

at least that was my understanding of the literature.

[Jackpine Radical]

38. OK, I concur that the p-graph shouldn't be used for diagnostic

purposes, particularly in a forensic context with a denying examinee. Your references convinced me.
That still doesn't mean that its use in a scientific study of the sort that initiated this discussion is inappropriate. A measure doesn't have to be perfectly reliable or valid for use in statistically-based research. For some purposes, the p-graph looks like it catches 50-70% of the variance. That may be good enough for a study of this sort. And I would also concur that this is only one type of data, and may be subject to alternative explanation. It constitutes evidence, but not conclusive evidence--regardless of the level of statistical significance. It needs to be followed up with studies of other sorts that would provide convergent validation of the assertion.

Another possible study that comes to mind might involve providing a variety of potentially arousing stimuli simultaneously (e.g. gay & lesbian porn, straight porn, animal porn, whatever) & taking note of which ones the experimental subjects spend the most time gazing at.

And maybe studying various other psychophysiological reactions. There are various indicants, such as the presence or absence of a brief heart rate deceleration v. acceleration at stimulus onset, that distinguish fairly reliably between an orienting (i.e. interested) and a defensive response.

[Ian David]

57. And I'll agree that the "boner-matic" may be useful as 1 line of evidence

... among several others.

You know what would be more useful?

An fMRI or PET-scan.

[Warren DeMontague]

78. I think they should CALL IT the boner-matic.

They'd probably sell a lot more of them.

[tavalon]

56. "I will be your Google slave...."

There are times when I am grateful for my "no liquids at the computer" rule. This is one of them. Must add that one to my Google repertoire. :spray: :rofl: :spray:

[Orangepeel]

65. It isn't the % that shows an effect. It's the difference in %.

The quote in the OP states:

"But does it mean that all homophobes are actually gay? Yes. It does."

I'm thinking that's a typo, because if not, it's a completely unwarranted conclusion. In a lab study like this, the "54%" can't be used to (validly) make estimates about the larger population (and 54% is less than 100% anyway, so I don't understand the quote).

However, from an experimental point-of-view, the important statistic is that 54% is greater (I assume significantly so) than 24%. The same instrument and conditions were used for both groups, so (without reading the original study), the findings provide evidence that homophobic men are more likely to be aroused by homosexual videos than are nonhomophobic men.

[dalaigh lllama]

10. Yup. That's why I posted the extra links

They admit the results aren't necessarily conclusive -- one of the alternate theories about the "tumescence" while watching the homosexual videos was nervousness about the subject matter.

I think it would be quite interesting to come up with more conclusive studies to test this hypothesis. Wouldn't it be great to be able to change the dynamic from "all gays are bad" to "all gay-haters need help."

[aquart]

3. Never doubted it for a second.

Anyone who thinks homosexuality is a conscious "choice" is someone forcing himself to be straight. The rest of us know there isn't a choice in what we are. We just are.

[Jackpine Radical]

8. That is a very interesting insight. Thanks. (nt)

[dalaigh lllama]

14. To illustrate your point

here's another excerpt from FUBAR. These are some quotes from Dr. Paul Cameron, founder of the Family Research Institute. He's described by the authors as "the guru of anti-gayism."

If you isolate sexuality as something solely for one's own personal amusement, and all you want is the most satisfying orgasm you can get -- and that is what homosexuality seems to be -- then homosexuality seems too powerful to resist. The evidence is that men do a better job on men and women on women, if all you are looking for is orgasm...I'm convinced that lesbians are particularly good seducers...It's pure sexuality. It's almost like pure heroin. It's such a rush. They are committed in almost a religious way. And they'll take enormous risks, do anything...Marital sex tends toward the boring end,...generally, it doesn't deliver the kind of sheer sexual pleasure that homosexual sex does."

I think this guy has made a choice -- to ignore his own sexuality.

[Nabia2004]

16. great point

After reading that paragraph it makes you wonder how anyone could take him seriously.

[Clark2008]

21. Really, now?

"Marital sex tends toward the boring end,...generally, it doesn't deliver the kind of sheer sexual pleasure that homosexual sex does."

Really?

Don't tell my husband this because it's anything but boring and certainly delivers. Maybe Dr. Camereon, indeed, has issues with his sexuality because I certainly don't (this isn't directed at you, DVJNU, it's directed toward Dr. Cameron).

[dalaigh lllama]

23. It would be illuminating to get Mrs. Cameron's

take on their marital sexlife. I wonder, do they both "close their eyes and think of the Empire"?

[NMMNG]

50. Don't pay any attention to "Dr" Paul Cameron

He has been condemned and discredited by all associations of any reputation.


On December 2, 1983, the American Psychological Association sent Paul Cameron a letter informing him that he had been dropped from membership. Early in 1984, all members of the American Psychological Association received official written notice that "Paul Cameron (Nebraska) was dropped from membership for a violation of the Preamble to the Ethical Principles of Psychologists" by the APA

<snip>

At its membership meeting on October 19, 1984, the Nebraska Psychological Association adopted a resolution stating that it "formally disassociates itself from the representations and interpretations of scientific literature offered by Dr. Paul Cameron in his writings and public statements on sexuality."6

In 1985, the American Sociological Association (ASA) adopted a resolution which asserted that "Dr. Paul Cameron has consistently misinterpreted and misrepresented sociological research on sexuality, homosexuality, and lesbianism" and noted that "Dr. Paul Cameron has repeatedly campaigned for the abrogation of the civil rights of lesbians and gay men, substantiating his call on the basis of his distorted interpretation of this research."7 The resolution formally charged an ASA committee with the task of "critically evaluating and publicly responding to the work of Dr. Paul Cameron."
At its August, 1986 meeting, the ASA officially accepted the committee's report and passed the following resolution:

The American Sociological Association officially and publicly states that Paul Cameron is not a sociologist, and condemns his consistent misrepresentation of sociological research. Information on this action and a copy of the report by the Committee on the Status of Homosexuals in Sociology, "The Paul Cameron Case," is to be published in Footnotes, and be sent to the officers of all regional and state sociological associations and to the Canadian Sociological Association with a request that they alert their members to Cameron's frequent lecture and media appearances."8

http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_cameron_sheet.html




Shortly after making these claims, however, Cameron came under fire by a number of psychologists whom he had cited in his publications, including Dr. A. Nicholas Groth, director of the Sex Offender Program at the Connecticut Department of Corrections---an expert on child molestation. Dr. Groth and other psychologists complained that Cameron was deliberately distorting or otherwise misrepresenting the results of their studies in order to support his agenda.

In response to these complaints about Cameron from his fellow psychologists, the American Psychological Association launched an investigation of Cameron's research. The APA discovered that Cameron not only misrepresented other psychologists' findings, but that his own studies employed unsound methodologies.

Citing Cameron's breach of the APA code of ethics, the APA expelled Cameron from its membership in December 1983. Cameron claimed that he had actually resigned before the APA expelled him, but APA bylaws prohibit members from resigning while they are under investigation.

Cameron was also censured by the Nebraska Psychological Association, the American Sociological Association, and the Midwest Sociological Society. In 1984, US District Judge Jerry Buchmeyer denounced Cameron for having made misrepresentations to the court in a case involving the Texasstate sodomy law.

http://www.geocities.com/ninure/cameron.html



Paul Cameron is a hypocritical liar with an agenda. Nothing he says can be taken seriously.

[dalaigh lllama]

64. The authors included him

as an exemplary rightwing nutcase. No worries about taking him seriously.

Thanks for the added info.

[XemaSab]

51. Exactly. n/t

[TahitiNut]

4. Phobic people seek safety and control - not love.

:shrug: Thus, they really can't be 'typed' accordingto their affirmative orientations. IMHO, of course.

[dalaigh lllama]

17. Yes. I happened to see Jeanette Winterson

this morning on "Faith and Reason" with Bill Moyers. She was describing what happened when her religious fundamentalist mother found out Jeanette had a lesbian lover. Her mother said, "Why would you choose to be happy when you could be normal?"

[Nikki Stone 1]

30. "Why would you choose to be happy when you could be normal?"

What an incredible comment! I'm still trying to process that one.

[dalaigh lllama]

32. It seemed a quintessential statement

of the total disconnect to reasoned thinking in the fundamental mindset.

BTW, Jeanette Winterson was an absolutely brilliant and very funny speaker. She grew up in a religious fundamentalist home in Britain and had memorized the Bible by the age of 12. They had 6 books in their home -- the Bible and five books about the Bible. When she got a little older, she used to buy books and sneak them into the house. She told an amusing story about how many paperbacks will fit under a single bed mattress. Eventually her mother found the books and burned them, but luckily she had already memorized the books. It reminded me of Fahenheit 451.

If you get a chance to catch a repeat of the show, it was excellent.

[Nikki Stone 1]

48. Thanks for the information. The comment is still in my head

It's amazing how being normal is more important than being happy to many folks.

[Warren DeMontague]

31. Pfffft. That one belongs in the "You just don't get it" hall of fame.

"Why would you choose to be happy when you could be normal?"

Or, to put it another way,

"Why would you live your life for yourself, when you could live it for other people"

[dalaigh lllama]

35. I can only shake my head in amazement

at what passes for logic in the fundy mind.

[TahitiNut]

73. The deification of the "average" - C-czar's legions in lockstep.

The "average" wallow in the 'best' of both worlds - sneeringly superior to the congenitally disabled and able to beat up on the kid who makes them look bad by doing better on the bell-shaped curve. The indolently 'average' have so much fodder for their self-hatred.

Lemmings. :puke:

[Swede]

7. I am straight, I cannot choose to want a man.

It's like the red nose on a clown.

[Warren DeMontague]

9. I tend to doubt anyone is 100% either way, "Gay" or "Straight"

I think most people are for the most part inclined towards either the opposite or the same sex, some folks are equivalently bi, but people in general tend to fall on a spectrum-

My suspicion is two pronged- one, many homophobes probably do fall more towards the "gay" end of the spectrum, but they also tend to react violently and experience more cognitivie dissonance because the idea of ANY sort of same-sex inclination is so unacceptable to them- tending to go berserk when, for instance, pictures of shirtless buffed men give them that "special feeling".

And they become, dare I say it, obsessed with the whole thing:

http://www.afa.net/ford062706.asp



http://www.boycottford.com/

[Ian David]

12. For example, it isn't gay if it's during a game of "truth or dare."

Right?

Right?

RIGHT???

(I'm kidding).

[BlooInBloo]

15. Except if Coldplay is on the stereo. Then it's gay.

:rofl:

[Warren DeMontague]

28. I've been an R.E.M. fan for 22 years

Dear God, what do I tell my wife?

[Neshanic]

36. Hey, that Coldplay drummer is HOT!

[Glorfindel]

13. Beg to differ....I can only speak for myself

But I've never had a sexual thought about a woman in my entire life. It isn't an inclination "for the most part." I'm a homosexual man; that's who I am. There are no subtleties involved.

[Warren DeMontague]

19. And men don't give me woodys, women do.

Nevertheless I tend to think categories in this area are overly rigid, if you'll excuse a pun. That's just my opinion. My experiences around various diverse people's sexuality, desire, and gender have taught me that they're oftentimes more fluid than many folks may want to let on.

But we are, in the end, self-defining creatures. So what one says one is, one is I guess.

[Nevernose]

40. Male prisoners often have sex w/ other male prisoners

And, statistically speaking, it's usually not rape. They're serving ten to fifteen, or 25 to life, or three to five. There aren't going to be any women around, so they figure "what the hell?" They weren't gay BEFORE prison, weren't gay AFTER prison, and don't CONSIDER themselves to be gay while IN prison -- even when having gay sex. (To be fair: while I hold this to be generally true, I did have a friend who served four years in a NY state correctional facillity for drug possession, who did not "realize" that he was gay until he was in prison).

And any straight man who has ever watched a poronographic movie has become aroused at the sight of another man. He may have been focusing on the female, but he was watching some naked guy wave his schlong around at the same time.

[Warren DeMontague]

42. You know what's really upsetting about your post?

That people's tax dollars were wasted sticking your friend in the clink for FOUR GOD-DAMN YEARS for simple drug possession.

[Nevernose]

46. He passed away in 2000

He didn't have health insurance. He went to the ER for a severe lung infection, they admitted him, and he was dead two weeks later. Undiagnosed AIDS. He was a promiscuous, gay, and eventually an intravenous drug user. So while his death didn't shock me, his loss affects me still.

You just can't imagine how smart, loyal, honest, generous, and caring this guy was. He called me up once and asked me what I was doing, and I was having a party with a bunch of people over. Although having been out for many years, he asked, "Is anyone there gay?" When I told him no, he said, "Then I just wouldn't feel comfortable." And that may have been the very first time I ever considered what gay people go through.

I believe that his turning to serious drugs in the first place (what landed him in prison was pot-- apparently it was a LOT of pot :)) was a direct result of his being gay. Like so many drug users, he just wanted to fit in. When meth started hitting the gay community, he still wanted to fit in.

When I was at my poorest, he would invite my daughter and me over to his place for a meal. Fruit Loops might as well ahve been gold bullion. I remember he once invited me into the bathroom to speak to him while he was taking a bubble bath, and he said to his boyfriend, "Don't worry; he's straight." Meanwhile, I was thinking, "I don't care if he's a fag or not: what kind of guy takes a fucking BUBBLE BATH?" ;)

He and his boyfriend took my daughter to the zoo at a local casino, once upon a time ago, and treated us to lunch afterwards. She couldn't have been more than four or five.

She still remembers seeing the penguins.

I wish he were still here to look at them.

[dsc]

47. I have been there

I was a major booze hound and think my being gay had a decent amount to do with it. I was lucky enough that booze kept doing the job for me so I never went for harder drugs. I am so sorry for your loss.

[Nevernose]

49. On behalf of my dearly departed friend, I thank you

Ultimately, though, it wasn't my loss -- it was his. I can only hope to honor his memory in whatever (small) way I can.

[Clark2008]

22. I've heard this before and disputed it on this board.

I developed Kinsey's "gay line" (that sexuality is on a line and you can be any variable in between) in my own mind before I even knew who Dr. Kinsey was.

However, I'm 100 percent straight - yet I'm not narrow - I don't give a flying flip if people want to be with their own gender. It doesn't matter to me. I don't care. Nor do I care what straight people do in their bedroom. It's not a concern of mine as long as I'm getting my fair share. (LOL)

For myself, however, I've never found a woman I'm sexually attracted to. I've seen beautiful women, met intelligent women, been around the most extraordinatry women, but never have I wanted to have sex with them. I think the male body is gorgeous - slithery, slippery, drop-on-your-knees to give thanks, gorgeous.

But, that's just me. :evilgrin:

[Warren DeMontague]

26. Funny, that's how I feel about the female body.

Maybe I phrased it wrong; my point wasn't to rock anyone's boat by saying they're not really "gay" or "straight". More that I think the fuzzy middle is wider than most people in society tend to acknowledge.

For instance, I know plenty of straight people who have experimented with people of the same gender in their lives. Likewise, most of the gay folks I know aren't completely without hetero experience, if only to convince themselves that it wasn't their bag, baby. Maybe it's because I live in the Bay Area. Maybe the bugaboo I'm going after here is the idea that anyone "straight" who has ever had any same-sex experiences, impulses or even thoughts (a pretty large set of people, in my experience) is somehow "less straight" or even in denial and actually gay.. You see the corollary in the gay community, where often people are expected to be 100% Gay. I think that's absurd, overly rigid, and excessively focused on labeling people so that they can be stuck in the appropriate cubbyhole.

***Edit: I also think that kind of rigid societal thinking, and reflexive panic about being PUT in the "gay" cubbyhole- leads to some of the hate, anger and fear these homophobes feel. So it's relevant.***


My view? People should do what they want (assuming everyone's a consenting adult), and not worry so much about what it means.

[kiahzero]

34. Do you sometimes think the focus on sexual orientation is tied to sexism?

After all, if sex really doesn't matter (except in such cases where biology comes into play), then it shouldn't matter whether you fall in love with a man or a woman. I understand the need for GLBT solidarity (hence the Smartass man getting bumped down to Sig status), but I think aside from that, focusing on sexual orientation as opposed to the latent sexism involved might just be counter-productive.

[Warren DeMontague]

41. I don't know. I think language and the use of semantic maps

to describe reality was a massive evolutionary jump for the human animal-

however, we do seem to have a tendency to confuse the map with the territory, and to think that the categories, descriptors, pointers and names we have for things are the things themselves.

This is why we have people wanting to protect a symbol, "the flag" by destroying the very thing the symbol is supposed to represent, namely freedom of (even unpopular) speech.

And hence the desire to label things, stick them in their proper place (and try to keep them there!)

I think lots of elements of human behavior, and lots of characteristics of mind and identity, defy attempts at wholesale categorization, at least some of the time. Sexuality is probably one of those. Some of the time.

That said, I fully support anyone's right to self-identify however they so choose, for solidarity purposes or whatever else.

[kiahzero]

86. My specific concern is a legal sense

It seems to me that the focus on discrimination based on sexual orientation ends up hurting a stronger argument that discrimination against gays and lesbians is in fact discrimination for gender non-compliance: look at "unmasculine" men being derided as homosexual (similarly with women, of course); look at the corelation between homophobia and sexism; look at the stereotypes built up about homosexuals (compiling just about every form of gender non-compliance into one convenient package). So it makes sense to me in a philosophical sense.

Of course, if discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is in fact discrimination on the basis of sex, it's already unconstitutional for the government to discriminate so, and illegal for private citizens to do so in many contexts. So it is rational to adopt it as a legal understanding (to me, anyway).

[Warren DeMontague]

89. legally, I dunno. It would seem to my non-lawyer mind that if the

discrimination is clearly based upon sexual orientation as a category, then it makes sense to maintain it as a category in terms of protections against discrimination.

[wiley]

18. It's unnatural

Homophobia is a psychological disorder that, when treated, can really change a person's life. Besides the obvious and inexcusable damage and sometimes death caused by people who suffer from this condition, the disorder also causes immense physical and psychological damage to the person suffering from it. It's a condition that is often reinforced instead of cured (without even having to have sex with a member of one's sex) by other insecure or self-esteem challenged men and women in a person's life, family, or community.

[Exultant Democracy]

20. But does it mean that all homophobes are actually gay? Yes. It does.

Best line K&R

[dalaigh lllama]

24. My favorite, too.

Great example of "truthiness."

[SensibleAmerican]

27. I hear that people in the KKK are really black ...

:eyes:

[Touchdown]

44. Thank you.

This is such a stupid thing to think...that all homophobes must be gay. Not only Seder, but also Rhodes goes off on this shit. She went on for months about Ashcroft being gay. It's stupid.

When Tancredo longs for the days of crossing deserts to pick avacodos, then there might be an argument for this.

[Quantess]

79. not *ALL*

But definitely some.
It makes perfect sense to me.

I think gay people are great, and I'm as close to 100% heterosexual as you can get. I'm not fighting off any guilty feelings, LOL.

[readmoreoften]

54. Thank you, SA! You live up to your name!

To say that repressed gay people are largely responsible for crimes against gay people is anti-gay.

It's called blaming the victim. If only repressed gay people harm other gay people, where is this initial self-hatred coming from?

Why do straight people SO DESPERATELY want to believe that gayness is the root of all homophobia? Do they want to absolve themselves? (I could never say or do anything homophobic cuz I ain't no stinkin' queer!) Do they want to make fun of the 'dirty sick gays' who hurt the 'sweet gays'?

Someone explain. Yeah. Mary Cheneys and Jeff Gannons exist. But Pat Robertson isn't gay. And Rick Perry isn't gay. Bill Frist isn't gay. Tom Delay isn't gay.

What about people who rape and kill lesbians? Are they gay? So it's our gay brothers who are killing us? It has nothing to do with the fact that women having sexual pleasure without need for them drives them into a rage? That's gay?

Is Phyllis Schafly a dyke? Let's be real.

[dalaigh lllama]

62. Hey people. Please re-read the last paragraph of the article

Their conclusion is done a la Stephen Colbert. Of course you can't conclude that all homophobes are gay. The stats I listed from the experiment obviously don't lead to that summation. This book approaches the whole rightwing nightmare with a huge dose of satire. And actually, I thought my commentary before the last paragraph emphasized that, with my reference to I.D. scientific "methodology." I guess I should have used Intelligent Design instead of the abbreviation. My bad. :)

[dsc]

61. great post

This is beyond aggravating. Not every person who hates gays is a self hating gay.

[dalaigh lllama]

63. Of course not. Their conclusion is satire. n/t

[Quantess]

80. Ah.....not satire.

Look at Fred Phelps. There is no way a person who is so insanely, obsessively, homophobic, is hetero.

Fred Phelps is a flaming fruit underneath his self-directed hate.

[Touchdown]

81. Show me pictures.

:puke: I haven't done that for a while.

[dalaigh lllama]

83. Fred Phelps is not a member of the human race

and so could not be included in the study. He is most likely a humanoid construct conceived by OxyRush and Coultergeist. :)

The study itself is straightforward enough. Based on the stats from the experiment, one might actually conclude that some homophobes are perhaps conflicted in their sexual identity, moreso than non-homophobes, but more testing should be done before any truly definitive conclusions are drawn. It crosses the line into Colbertian "truthiness" with the authors tongue-in-cheek conclusion: that all gay-haters are gay.

I know I'm probably not explaining this very well. Could someone who's better with words help me out here?

[we can do it]

29. The Biggest Homophobes I went To School With Turned Out To Be Gay

I think they do it as a sick defense mechanism so know one will find out about them.....what a shame.

[Neshanic]

33. Unscientific, but I believe the more the basher, the more gay

and in denial.

[TrogL]

39. define "aroused"

and prove that the cause was homosexual feelings vs. a rise in blood pressure cause by anger or stress.

[Quantess]

82. Anger causes

hard-ons?
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[greiner3]

87. A real good dump will;

:rofl:

[porphyrian]

43. Some are, some aren't.

You can't say all gay-haters are gay based on the results of a single survey.

[Name removed]

45. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[XemaSab]

53. Oh really?

Do you have anything to back up these assertions?

[Warren DeMontague]

55. religioustolerance.org is a "scientology website"?

Okay, Back that statement up, please.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/statbelief.htm

[newyawker99]

71. ...

[readmoreoften]

52. This proves nothing. Maybe they get turned on by forbidden things.

Maybe they get turned on by watching dirty films.

Not all homophobes are gay. This is pseudo-science at its worst. I know that straight men like to think that homophobes are all gay, because it means that gay-bashing is just another "gay" issue and thank god we aren't fucked up like those queers who beat each other up because they can't accept themselves.

[LeftHander]

59. Do you like gladiator movies?

Hehehe.....

[Warren DeMontague]

74. .

[porphyrian]

76. "Do you like movies with gladiators in them?" - n/t

[Warren DeMontague]

75. But wouldn't that, in and of itself, be a homophobic outlook?

Where's the logic, there?

Men who are critical of homophobes and homophobia aren't terribly likely to be the same men who aren't sympathetic to gay people.

[LeftHander]

58. I saw protesters, the "Jesus Warriors" at a Pride Event

And this guy had a bevy of young men with him, he was fit, athletic and bulked up shouting into a MegaPhone detailed description of male gay sex acts. Not using slang but more "clinical" descriptions that was quite graphic. He would start and work himeslf into a frenzy....

As I watched him I thought there was something very odd about this tactic he was taking it seemed much to personal...Then I realized he was actually getting off on it!

I mean this guy is so afraid...he has chanelled all that tension into that behavior...actually rather sad.

[dsc]

60. The Dead Zone agrees with you

Last night's episode centered on a arab murdered in an apparent hate crime based on race. Turns out the arab was dating a guy who hated himself for being gay and murdered the arab to keep him from coming out.

[warrens]

66. Bobcat Goldthwaite had a hilarious bit about this

Playing the homophobe punching out a gay guy. "I'm clobbering you because you're so perverted and disgusting even though you're...kinda cute and I...sorta...want...to...fuck you and SO I HAVE TO BEAT THE SHIT OUT OF YOU EVEN MORE...

[Recursion]

67. I dislike the word "homophobia"

It attempts to describe the irrational aversion to homosexuals by using a (largely discredited) theory of its causation. While certainly there are many well-publicized incidences of self-loathing, closeted gays (generally gay men) very publicly espousing violent anti-gay positions, there is little if any evidence I am aware of that this phenomenon is widespread or the basis for most "homophobes" aversion to gays (again, generally it's aversion to gay men). However, this study does seem to fill in some of that gap, so I'll at least keep an open mind about the possibility. I do, however, think that genital arousal is not the sole indicator of sexuality (and I mourn the "genitalization" of sex that has happened during my lifetime).

To my mind, calling it "homophobia" sanitizes the bigotry; it makes it seem like a clinical problem rather than what it is: a moral failing on the part of the homophobes. I do not apologize for judging racists or sexists for their moral failing, and I see no need to apologize for judging persons with irrational anti-gay prejudices either.

[Finder]

72. Technically, a phobia is a fear, not a hatred...

although as we all know, the human reaction to fear is "fight or flight."

Male sexual response can be quite sensitive so I don't think the study proves anything. Other studies have shown humans become aroused by watching the mating habits of the animal kingdom. The conclusion was not that they were into beastiality.

Like another poster, I hold the Kinsey approach to be true.(as far as sexuality and response)

Those that argue that homosexuality is just a choice are more likely to have chosen to ignore homosexual urges in their pasts.

Fear, guilt, repression is what leads many to project hatred towards outward homosexual behavior.(out of site, out of mind?)

As a side note: Bonobos have shaken the "it's unnatural" camp and caused many to want evolution erradicated from our schools.

[TahitiNut]

77. Fear is the universe's "wedge issue" - separating courage from cowardice.

There is no courage without fear. It's what separates "men from the boys" - and clearly identifies the illegal aliens in the "land of the brave."

[slackmaster]

68. Contrary to popular thought, love and hate are really not opposites

They are two sides of the same process - Having strong feelings about something or someone. It should be no surprise that someone who professes to hate something spends more time thinking about it than someone who is neutral about it. People who focus a lot of energy on things are often ambivalent. People have been taught, especially in past generations, that homosexuality is wrong. That fascinates some of us, and others really don't give a hoot.

The opposite of both love and hate, is feeling nothing or not caring.

[TheFriedPiper]

69. Like I need a scientific study to tell me that gay bashers are gay!

Next we'll have a study that says Republicans are cowards!

We already know that!

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

70. Oh, I'd say about 10% of homophobes are gay.

With another 80% having varying degrees of bisexuality.

[Mr_Spock]

84. I've just assumed this from the beginning

Why else would anyone care so much about another's private affairs?

[David Zephyr]

85. Ralph Reed & Gary Bauer are self-hating homosexuals.

And the Republican Party's biggest homophobes are homosexuals.

HOMOPHOBIC MEN ARE ALWAYS HOMOSEXUAL.

[KingFlorez]

88. I believe this argument

Awhile back at a message board I read, there was fundy that was debating gay marriage and he stated for some odd he reason he doesn't hug men, defining all hugging as sexual. Well, another Republican with a little more sense ask, well what about your father and brothers and he said no, because hugging them is sexual. I was like, what the heck?!