Remember that PNAS study about bisexual men and erections? I had some problems with it, and PNAS were kind enough to publish my comments.
https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2020/11/16/2016533117

You can find a preprint here:
https://sites.google.com/site/alonzivony/publication

Below is a thread of some things that were left unsaid.
1. I tried to cram am much as I could in 500 words, but there are plenty of things that I had no space or could not otherwise talk about in this comment. The main thing I could not comment on was ethical responsibility.
2. To give context, one must understand that bisexuality in men is constantly contested and challenged. Some people think it doesn’t exist at al. Most people think it can exist, but still find reasons to challenge individual bisexual men.
3. So what’s the problem with an article that supposedly affirms bisexuality? Well, for one, in order to justify the question “does bisexuality exists in men”, one must first make the case that it’s an open question. Which the article does in the first sentence of the abstract.
4. It happens every time. A bisexual men is confused, actually gay, experimenting, seeking attention, mentally ill, just having fun. Anything but bisexual. You’ll hear questions like: but which do you prefer? Are you more gay or straight? The challenges are endless.
5. Am I saying there are no “transitional bisexuals”? Of course not. Many people change their self-identification. But one may wonder why we never hear about “transitional heterosexuals\\gays?”, even though plenty of people from these orientations change self-identification.
6. In fact, my comment points to a bizarre state of affairs: by their own "objective" measures one may claim that most men are bisexual, because most show attraction to more than one gender, regardless of their location on the Kinsey scale (note the % from 0 to 1+)
7. Throughout, the article subtly provides the ammunition to invalidate bisexual men. Why do some studies find no evidence for bisexuality in men? Not because of the method or construct. Instead, the fault is again, in men who identify as bisexual but are not really bisexual.
8. Next, by implying that erections are a proxy to orientation and can be used to classify someone as bisexual or not, the article give ammunition to people challenging bisexuality in specific men.
9. What if someone is more stressed by intercourse with one gender? Is that evidence that they are “less” bisexual? I used to think that, and it cost me in plenty of mental wellbeing. It's ethically irresponsible to fuel this kind of narrative.
10. The reasonable defense to all of these charges is: that’s not what we said, you’re reading into this. Here’s my counter: this CAN EASILY be read, and it’s the researchers’ responsibility to contextualize their results so it won’t be used against the group that is studied.
11. On a personal note, my opinion about this line of research was shaped long ago. I was 20 years old when the NY times published their infamous “gay, straight, or lying” article based on the 2005 study by Reiger et al that concluded that bisexuality does not exist in men.
12. Here's my call to action for researchers: be more ethically responsible. Your studies, your conclusions, your phrasing - can have real life effects on people.
13. If you want to read more, @BFeinsteinPhD and @PazGalupo also wrote an EXCELLENT comment: https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2020/11/16/2016612117

For a more political analysis I highly recommend @ShiriEisner’s book which has a terrific section on the 2005 study, which applies to this study as well.
Bisexual orientation cannot be reduced to arousal patterns

In their article, Jabbour et al. (1) claim to demonstrate “robust evidence for bisexual orientation among men,” but their research is guided by problematic assumptions about, and definitions of,...

https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2020/11/16/2016612117
14. By the way, in his response Michael Bailey completely sidestepped my criticism and misrepresented my claim as: "self-reported bisexuality is sufficient". I didn't say that. I said that with their *own* measures, one can claim that monosexuality doesn't really exist.
15. And that was just a step to say that erections in response to porn are not a good proxy for orientation.
16. This upcoming response by @BiMenResearch,
@drjuliashaw & @criticalprvrsn is really great.
…https://77e00c52-d8dd-4e7e-a868-2e20307240c9.filesusr.com/ugd/572c94_56a84413aa484ff4829c0a2917a00db1.pdf
Among other things it expands on the scientific consensus and speaks about the problematic nature of medicalizing sexualities
So happy about this group effort
You can follow @AlonZivony.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled:
Those who think consciousness raising & movement building are disconnected, or even a distraction from electoral politics have not paid attention to the history of social change.In this thread, we
Read more
The 2020s will be known as the Remote Work decadeA few predictions of what is likely to emerge[ a thread ] Third Space: Office and Working from Home will
Read more
1/29: Have you ever had a concept explained to you that helps frame complex issues you’ve been wrestling with and opens your eyes to new possibilities? A concept that I
Read more
By continuing to use the site, you are consenting to the use of cookies as explained in our Cookie Policy to improve your experience.