Preface: The Christian spouting-off the greatest degree of hatred against homosexuals who

Preface:  The Christian spouting-off the greatest degree of hatred
against homosexuals who is then caught in the act has become cliche
in American society.  The Christian priesthood being the "profession"
which harbors the highest incidents of homosexual child rape has
been the accurate stereotype for decades (review "The Sins of the
Fathers," from your local Public Broadcasting Station.)

Now comes the latest clinical review of claimed behavior vs.
physiological response in regards to homosexuality -- another case
in a long list of such cases.  The conclusions of all such cases are
consistent:  The homophobic bigots who rants the loudest are those
who are themselves harboring feelings of homosexuality -- and doing
their best to deny it.  But are those conclusions accurate?

The chairman of The Skeptic Tank must point out that these tests
are and will remain inconclusive so far as what such studies are
designed to measure (that is, how one relates to homosexuals in
regards to how one exhibits arousal behavior when subjected to
visual stimulus of a homosexual nature.)  The penile arousal which
homophobics exhibit when exposed to video and photos of homosexuals
exhibiting sexual behavior does _not_ always mean that the
homophobic is himself always homosexual -- it merely shows a very
good _probability_ of same.

Alternative possibilities are undeniable:  Homophobics subjected to
visual displays of what they have been conditioned to hate can
cause increase in blood pressure (and thus heart rate.)  Additionally
there is _always_ a degree of physiological response associated with
viewing naked people -- it's hardwired into human biology through
humanity's evolutional ancestry -- so it's the _degree_ of arousal
that's what's important, not the _fact_ of the arousal.

What remains for a medical doctor to answer is whether emotional
arousal of hatred in a test subject directly translates to penile
proto-erection -- something I am not equipped to answer.  If the
answer is, "it doesn't," then the conclusions seem to have been
accurate.  If it does, the tests remain inconclusive.

Another possibility that needs to be explored pertains to
desensitization of homoerotic materials.  The results of such tests
could indicate that those who are comfortable about sexuality in
general exhibit the least amount of physiological response when
exposed to such materials.  Those who are comfortable about their
sexuality may actively review sexual materials or not recoil in
horror when inadvertently exposed to sexual materials, resulting
in a desensitization of uncontrollable physiological responses.

In contrast, those who are violently homophobic may simply be
uncomfortable with their own sexuality in general rather than
homosexuality in the specific and the degree of arousal these tests
indicate may be due to a lack of a history of desensitizing
experiences with sexual materials.

It is my opinion that no conclusion can be reached from the
results of such tests unless many more control groups can be
called into the equation.

1) Individuals broken into groups arranged by the amount of sexual
materials they have viewed in the past should be added to such
tests to help factor the results.

2) The heart rates and respiration of test individuals should also
be plotted to determine if hate and disgust are a factor in penile
turgidity.  If heart rate and respiration are incapable of indicating
rise in emotional hatred and disgust, another test should be made to
solve for them.

3) Additionally, a test group consisting entirely of homosexual
men should be factored into all tests.

4) A group of men who review pictures of fully-clothed men engaged
in sexual behavior should be included in the tests.

5) A group of men who review pictures of fully-clothed men NOT
engaged in sexual behavior should be included in the tests.

6) A group of men who review pictures of fully-clothed WOMEN engaged
in sexual behavior should be included in the tests.

7) A group of men who review pictures of fully-clothed WOMEN NOT
engaged in sexual behavior should be included in the tests.

8) A test group shown heterosexual sexual behavior should be
included or, even better, an entire suit of tests conducted for
the heterosexual arena should be conducted and the results compared
against the results of the homosexual arena suit of tests.

Such a broad suit of groups would tell us a great deal more about how
well penile physiological responses relate to visual stimulus and
what individuals are biologically predisposed toward.

~*~

Dr. Edell, by the way, is _highly_ regarded for no-nonsense medical
advice and his dedication toward exposing health quackery while
exposing a little sanity.  I've been able to listen to his talk show
for years and he keeps up on clinical reviews and medical journals
from institutions and organizations around the world, boiling down
the conclusions into layman speech for his show.

                                        - Fredric L. Rice

(128)   Sat 21 Dec 96 14:49

Ed Mills Mentions:

     Today, on the Dr. Dean Edell radio show, I heard something that
supports a suspicion I've had for years. It's old hat, the idea that
homophobia is a manifestation of repressed homosexuality. Everyone's
heard the postulate, but today, some very telling evidence came to
light at the University of Georgia.

     A group of professed heterosexual men was queried as to their
feelings about homosexuality. They were then connected to a "penile
turgidity" measuring instrument - some kind of micrometer connected to
a computer. They were then made to view gay porn videos while the
instrument monitored their schwantzes for "turgidity."

     Guess who got the substantial majority of the hardons during the
test? The men who professed revulsion for homosexuality, of course!


Rod Swift comments:

Those tests were reproduced this week.  Heterosexual college-aged
males were classified by reactions to questions -- whether they
had a dislike for gays, whether they wanted to imprison gays, or
have them exterminated, or whether they were ok with gay people, or
supported equality for gay people.  They were also asked to
answer questions about their reaction to gays propositioning them
-- violent or not.

They were divided into two groups -- gay-neutral or supportive,
and condemnatory or violently hostile.

All were subjected to video screenings of gay sexual scenes.

Of the neutral or supportive group, 34% of the subjects had an
erectile response to the homosexual videos.  Of the violent or
hostile group, 80% of the men had erectile response.

This has further expanded the theory that the people with
*violent* hatred or condemnation of gay people or homosexuality
do so out of fear that they could possibly be gay.

Rod "... interesting result, no?" Swift

--- Maximus 2.02
 * Origin: Perth Omen BBS -- FASTER LIVE InterNet (+619) 244 2111 (3:690/660)