An Abstract. :D

[Cerpin Taxt]

The authors investigated the role of homosexual arousal in exclusively heterosexual men who admitted negative affect toward homosexual individuals. Participants consisted of a group of homophobic men (n = 35) and a group of nonhomophobic men (n = 29); they were assigned to groups on the basis of their scores on the Index of Homophobia (W. W. Hudson & W. A. Ricketts, 1980). The men were exposed to sexually explicit erotic stimuli consisting of heterosexual, male homosexual, and lesbian videotapes, and changes in penile circumference were monitored. They also completed an Aggression Questionnaire (A. H. Buss & M. Perry, 1992). Both groups exhibited increases in penile circumference to the heterosexual and female homosexual videos. Only the homophobic men showed an increase in penile erection to male homosexual stimuli. The groups did not differ in aggression. Homophobia is apparently associated with homosexual arousal that the homophobic individual is either unaware of or denies.

emphasis mine

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8772014

This, from the Department of Psychology at the University of Georgia, and published in the Journal of Abnormal Psychology. I hear for their next study, they're going to attempt to confirm that water is, indeed, actually wet.

Godspeed, gentlemen. :biggrin:

 

[Newell Steamer]

This sounds like a scientific experiment,.. say, who is this Science fella anyway? What do we know about him? Does he believe in God?

I don't know this guy named Science,... why should I trust him?

No joke, this was the response from someone on these very forums regard in science,... and it's damn near 2016!!

 

[IronWing]

I want a penile circumference meter, for reasons.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

idgi, the study itself says a quarter of non-homophobic men showed significant physical arousal to the homosexual video, vs half of homophobic men. There's obviously a significant difference in the degree between the arousal of the two groups on the whole, but I've seen people cite this study before as if arousal to homosexual stimulus is something not found at all in "true", confident, non-homophobic heterosexual populations. Also, it seems unfair to use a physical gauge to measure sexual arousal but then a questionnaire to measure aggression; if I were a homophobe taking this study, I'd probably downplay my aggression as well. But hey, it's science!

 

[kage69]

I'd like to know what Ted Haggard and Larry Craig think about this study. Other than them inquiring how to assist with taking measurements I mean.

 

[DigDog]

Homophobia is apparently associated with homosexual arousal that the homophobic individual is either unaware of or denies.

something wrong with that ?

 

[Darwin333]

idgi, the study itself says a quarter of non-homophobic men showed significant physical arousal to the homosexual video, vs half of homophobic men. There's obviously a significant difference in the degree between the arousal of the two groups on the whole, but I've seen people cite this study before as if arousal to homosexual stimulus is something not found at all in "true", confident, non-homophobic heterosexual populations. Also, it seems unfair to use a physical gauge to measure sexual arousal but then a questionnaire to measure aggression; if I were a homophobe taking this study, I'd probably downplay my aggression as well. But hey, it's science!

I'm curious about what you are trying to state, are you saying that more aggressive "true" and confident men are more likely to get wood looking at gay porn than less aggressive men?

 

[Charmonium]

Psychology is hardly a science. I don't know how this myth keeps being perpetuated. The only reason it's used at all is because it's marginally better than nothing.

And real scientists have become increasingly tired of the psychobabble bullshit. Just google 'research domain criteria.' You'll see that even the NIMH has had enough of the bullshit and want to start using actual science in the study of mental illness rather than the wibbly-wobbly, timey-wimey criteria used by the DSM V.

 

[FerrelGeek]

This sounds like a scientific experiment,.. say, who is this Science fella anyway? What do we know about him? Does he believe in God?

I don't know this guy named Science,... why should I trust him?

No joke, this was the response from someone on these very forums regard in science,... and it's damn near 2016!!

The quote below is the real answer to your witless trolling, dear boy....

Psychology is hardly a science. I don't know how this myth keeps being perpetuated. The only reason it's used at all is because it's marginally better than nothing.

And real scientists have become increasingly tired of the psychobabble bullshit. Just google 'research domain criteria.' You'll see that even the NIMH has had enough of the bullshit and want to start using actual science in the study of mental illness rather than the wibbly-wobbly, timey-wimey criteria used by the DSM V.

 

[realibrad]

Could it not be that the subconscious is picking up that sex is happening and thus responding? I would imagine the subconscious does not understand the physical gender, just that sex is happening. Only the conscious understands the context.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

Could it not be that the subconscious is picking up that sex is happening and thus responding? I would imagine the subconscious does not understand the physical gender, just that sex is happening. Only the conscious understands the context.

That explains all those erections I get watching Animal Planet.

 

[Moonbeam]

Cognitive dissonance is the ability to have two contradictory opinions at the same time and to be unconscious of one of them. It makes no sense then to say "unaware of or deny" because each causes the other and both are true.

Dissonance occurs where duality exists, being homosexual is evil and heterosexuality is good. This is the result of being programmed to be a bigot as a child. Such bigotry is hard to overcome. Because the persons who feel it believe it is good to be such a bigot.

 

[BurnItDwn]

So, anti-gay people are just gay people in disguise. OK, So, we should all tell the anti-gay people "Don't be so hard on yourself?"

 

[FerrelGeek]

Could it not be that the subconscious is picking up that sex is happening and thus responding? I would imagine the subconscious does not understand the physical gender, just that sex is happening. Only the conscious understands the context.

Or they're blocking out the vids by redirecting their imagination to fantasize about boinking some hot girl.

 

[sm625]

From the OP's quote:

Only the homophobic men showed an increase in penile erection to male homosexual stimuli.

I highly doubt this. Something seems fishy about this. What exactly is homosexual stimuli anyway? There is a huge difference between watching a video of Peter North unloading all over multiple women, and a video of two dudes fudging it up. But both types of videos contain what can be considered homosexual stimuli.

 

[MagickMan]

Social "Science" Wars, the farce awakens.

 

[DigDog]

the physical symptoms of sexual excitement are NOT equivalent to being gay. which the OP implies is the finding of the article.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

I'm curious about what you are trying to state, are you saying that more aggressive "true" and confident men are more likely to get wood looking at gay porn than less aggressive men?

I was being a little sarcastic; you often hear that a man confident in his heterosexuality should not have any issue being around potential homosexual stimulus, because he's so damn straight. I've heard people (including a professor in a sociology 101 class) mis-cite this study, as if none of the non-homophobic individuals were physically aroused. A good number of them were.

I highly doubt this. Something seems fishy about this. What exactly is homosexual stimuli anyway? There is a huge difference between watching a video of Peter North unloading all over multiple women, and a video of two dudes fudging it up. But both types of videos contain what can be considered homosexual stimuli.

They're basically averaging the stimuli and deciding from there, i.e. a quarter to a third of non-homophobic men did show arousal by the homosexual porn, but taking them all together, there was a "significant" difference compared to the homophobic ones on the average. Putting it that way may be technically correct, but people misinterpret that to mean no non-homophobic individuals get aroused by homosexual porn.

And to be fair, they did include a control where they had lesbian porn playing, which would serve as the best stimulus for heterosexual men and the worst for homosexual men. Of course, the homophobic men were equally aroused by both hetero and lesbian porn as the non-homophobic ones, so that would seem to imply that at most there's a latent bisexuality.

I think the Animal Planet point is actually legit even if meant as a joke earlier. To be completely honest I get physically aroused watching bonobos and whatnot going at it on Animal Planet. I'm not attracted to bonobos, but it could just as easily be the case that many homophobes are people that are needlessly afraid of being homosexual, simply because they have uncontrollable physical responses to homosexual stimulus. Just like a neurotic that is afraid they might flip out and kill a group of people, just because they once had casual thoughts of violence, and somehow convinced themselves that they were a threat to society. It doesn't mean many of these guys being aroused are actually gay.