"Proof" that homophobia is associated with homosexual arousal.

[rong]

THE NAZIS HAD TESTS... THAT THEY MADE THE JEWS TAKE!

[East Coast Hustle]

So basically, you appear to be saying that anthropology and psychology are useless fields of study because there is no valid means of studying people's attitudes and behavior.

Yay you.

Yep. Because poorly-worded psychometric tests are the only tools that psychologists and anthropologists are allowed to use.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Mind you, I am not demanding that anyone agree with me. I'm just saying that the festival of "the test is invalid" is based in wanton ignorance and deliberate willful egotistical stupidity with some kind of smelly miasma of trying to sound smart and superior. "The questions are worded poorly!"

You have no idea how ignorant it's making you sound. Is all. It's making me sick and I wish you would stop, because it's the same level of intellectual sophistication as "quantumz!"

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

But feel free to dig in and screech, as you are so cleverly accusing me of doing.

OR, read the papers I linked to. Or don't. What the fuck ever.

[East Coast Hustle]

REMEMBER KIDS, ARGUING AGAINST THE VALIDITY OF THIS TEST MAKES YOU AN IGNORANT HILLBILLY WHO HATES THE GAYS.

[East Coast Hustle]

I wonder if this would elicit such a strong response from people if the test were about, say, whether or not people had negative feelings about Victorian architecture.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

This board is depressing the fuck out of me today.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

It's just this thread, IMO.  I think we found another "drug thread" catagory.

Plus rong.

I'm bailing.

[AFK]

I don't have a dog in this hunt, and I haven't read whatever test is in question.

I will point out, however, that question wording is very important when it comes to the validity of an instrument.  If a question is at all leading it is going to give you biased results.  You can't just throw questions together willy nilly, they have to be put together in a measure and thoughtful manner and relevant to whatever it is you are testing or measuring. 

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

The test in question is a minor variation on the IAH.

Not that anyone is going to actually read the critical analyses I linked to.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

The test in question is a minor variation on the IAH.

Not that anyone is going to actually read the critical analyses I linked to.

You're arguing with RWHN.

Just saying.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

My main annoyance with this thread lies with the attempt at dismissing the results of the study based on the premise that the questionairre used to determine homophobia is amateurishly flawed, which is an almost bizarrely presumptuous position and pretty much screams "I don't know what the hell I'm talking about and am banking on no one else knowing either".

Followed by digging in and screeching.

I'm not even asking that anyone agree with the conclusions of the study. All I'm fucking asking is that you first understand what you're criticizing.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

The test in question is a minor variation on the IAH.

Not that anyone is going to actually read the critical analyses I linked to.

You're arguing with RWHN.

Just saying.

Furthermore, I am arguing with a post that says right in it "I haven't bothered to read any of this before forming an opinion".

I am an idiot.

[AFK]

I'm not arguing with anyone, just pointing out that question wording is important.  But if this test was scientifically proven to have strong validity measures, then I don't see much to argue about.  

But as far as the general discussion, my sentiments are similar to LMNO's.  If one or both of my kids decided/discovered they were gay, I would make sure they were well armed with themselves and prepared to tell the rest of the disapproving world to get bent.  

[East Coast Hustle]

My sentiments as well, were I to find myself in that situation.

But I cannot object strongly enough to the attempted characterization of Ippy's position as being one of hatred.