sinisterporpoise

Red Eye Chicago: Asexuals Gaining Visibility

14 posts in this topic

I'm not sure it was wise of them to touch on Demi and Gray in a grand total of one sentence, since those are hard to explain even when you've got a lot of space to do it, but I was very glad to see links to AVEN. Nice article; thanks for sharing!

I'm kinda curious, now. That Bailey guy. What kind of evidence would he accept?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s probably best not to make too big a deal of the comment by Bailey. He’s not saying asexuals are wrong, so much as expressing skepticism about the status of asexuality in sexological models. Skepticism has its place in science, and psychological research on asexuality is in very early stages. I too am curious what sort of evidence he would accept.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I'll have to agree with what Lord Happy Toast said. However, I'm also curious as to what kind of evidence Mr Baily is looking for.

Overall I think it was a pretty good and respectful article. It wasn't perfect, but it was also far from bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I liked the extensive contrast of sexual attraction with other attractions, specifically with romantic attraction.

Noticed "asexual" is randomly capitalized at least once, whoops?? :P

I found it interesting how there were so many references to the schools that people went to. Is there some significance in that? o_O?

Overall, I would say that I, for one, am quite pleased with the article. ^_^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty good article.

The title of the webpage is a little odd though. Probably an error?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, that is odd. My guess is that the author lost their train of thought while writing the title.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apart from the title, and that one spam comment, I thought this was a good article. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Michael Bailey was a coauthor of that famous paper which the media reported as casting doubt on the existence of bisexuality. More recently, he coauthored a paper which revised the earlier conclusion. Perhaps his involvement in that controversy is what motivated journalists to contact him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually think this is one of the better articles on asexuality I've read. The author does a good job of defining asexuality specifically as a lack of sexual attraction, instead of saying something like, "Asexuals don't have a sex drive," which is something a lot of articles do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was interviewed for this too, but she didn't use anything at all from my interview.

I'm not big on the quote from the little-respected psychologist from Northwestern University saying he doesn't believe in asexuality, and I think it could have been balanced with a well-known doctor who DOES recognize it...The one who does recognize aceness that they quote isn't well known at all.

Transphobia from this very same NU professor:

http://www.tsroadmap.com/info/man-who-would-be-queen.html

"Bailey uses scientific-sounding arguments to claim sexual minorities and people who display gender variance are "evolutionary mistakes," and he claims those who disagree with his ideas are liars. "

Northwestern University has a history of hiring "professors" who deny a lot of things, like the holocaust for example, like Arthur Butz:

http://www.adl.org/learn/ext_us/butz.asp?LEARN_Cat=Extremism&LEARN_SubCat=Extremism_in_America&xpicked=2&item=butz

http://marathonpundit.blogspot.com/2006/02/northwestern-universitys-tenured.html

There is also a big problem with bigotry at that school among students too, probably influenced by their professors:

Menorah vandalized @ NU

http://lubavitch.com/news/article/2029955/Chabad-of-Northwestern-University-Menorah-Vandalized.html

Blackface @ NU

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/05/blackface-northwestern-un_n_347745.html

Sexism @ NU

http://www.nytimes.com/1991/11/24/nyregion/campus-life-northwestern-sexist-newsletter-provokes-outrage-at-campus-rally.html

.....

TRANS ACTIVISTS FILE CHARGES AGAINST NU PROFESSOR:

Article on Bailey

"Between 1996 and 2002 Mr. Bailey interviewed and counseled young transsexual women who believed him to be a licensed clinical psychologist," stated the complaint filed by two transgender professors and a California-based transgender advocate.

A second complaint to the IDPR asked state investigators to also look into charges filed last year with NU that Bailey "published confidential case-history information about transsexual women he had interviewed as a clinician, and that he published this information without the women's knowledge or permission."

Unusual level of bi-partisanship exhibited as

GLBT groups and liberals are joined by convervatives

in denouncing Bailey's junk science:

http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Bailey/Washington%20Times%2011-25-03.html

Edited by Arca nine Huggles
Double post? What double post?? (Merged)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bailey has certainly been at the center of...controversy...in the past, and this was in part the motivation for my earlier suggestion that too much not be made of his comment. I think that everyone would be better off if massive brouhaha was not made over this matter. He seems to be working with a rather idiosyncratic idea of scientific objectivity that privileges "objective" measures over subjective self-report (even though there is an enormous about of subjective self-report involved at all levels of interpreting "objective" data).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't prepared to take issue with this in part because there is not a lot of research on Asexuality. Even if there is, we should be prepared to have the results be something other than what we want them to be. It does not really matter who said this, scientific research should work slowly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bailey has certainly been at the center of...controversy...in the past, and this was in part the motivation for my earlier suggestion that too much not be made of his comment. I think that everyone would be better off if massive brouhaha was not made over this matter. He seems to be working with a rather idiosyncratic idea of scientific objectivity that privileges "objective" measures over subjective self-report (even though there is an enormous about of subjective self-report involved at all levels of interpreting "objective" data).

BROUHAHA!

And they mentioned aromantic sexuals too :)

Glad to see articles like these out there.

Edited by Arca nine Huggles
Merged double-post =P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.