I've seen quite a few people discussing the new paper by Jabbour et al. in PNAS. As this is twitter and I have something of a vested interest in the topic, thought I'd pop in my penny's worth.

Here's the paper for reference: https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2020/07/14/2003631117

So, firstly; yes, the paper deals with bisexuality and, yes, my above comment does mean what you think. For anyone following me on here for which that is news, I want it to be clear that I still don't feel ready to be fully out about it, particularly with close family...

As such, for those that know me, I'd appreciate it not being spread any further than here. I realise this is twitter, but hopefully I can still do what I need to in my own time and not be accidentally forced into the open to those not on this platform.

Quite a portion of the reason for the above is biphobia. Its something that I have noticed in increased amounts in recent years. Forgive me if this is an oversimplification, but I feel it's partly people transitioning from a position outside LGBTQ+ acceptance...

...coming around to tolerance, but slowly. Perhaps to some, homosexuality is just easier to 'understand' than bisexuality (not that I agree with this, obviously). Certainly I've had experience of it from people close to me where that has been the case.

So. The paper...

I admit, I haven't read it fully as I'm rather tired at the moment, but it does seem a little sweeping and waffling, with not the greatest amount of robustness. The main issues most seem to have, though, are not with the paper itself, but its concept, and M.Bailey's comments.

If I may put forward my feelings to his comments, particularly '...many, including myself, were sceptical about their ability to be sexually aroused by both men and women.'.

The honest truth here is, many would think I would be outraged by this, but I'm really not.

I'm not even sure why. I think it's either because I've heard far worse than that and it just doesn't phase me or if I just feel I want to educate the guy. I don't get angry at people not knowing or understanding something, but look to help them understand.

This aside, should the study have been run at all? Honestly, I have no idea. I'll try and sum this as quickly as possible as I'm very tired, but:

Pros: The fact is, there ARE people out there who exhibit biphobia. Perhaps this study will help to show to some of these people that (OBVIOUSLY!!!) bisexuality is real. Equally, it is a phobia. It's irrational. It seems unlikely this would convince a large number of people.

Cons: In a phrase: The floodgates are open. It's really unlikely that this will be the last paper on this topic. I am concerned by this for a number of reasons. While, I trust in the scientific process, it would only take one or two letters/papers to try and rebuke this...

...and for people to grasp on those rebukes for people to start forming the opposite opinion. This is not helped by the fact that there will likely be many published rebukes as the paper (from my understanding anyway) does not feel overly robust.

All I really want to say is this. Obviously all gender identities and sexualities are valid, I would never say otherwise. On the whole, I don't think this paper was a bright idea, but I also feel that the discourse around it should not be seen as black and white.

Thank you for coming to my ted talk.

Also, as a quick follow up. If anyone wants to talk to me about any of this do drop me a DM, I’d be happy to chat.

Love to you all :)