Hi Y'all,
Michael Sylvester wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Jun 1999, Linda M. Woolf wrote:
>
> > similarly to a post that could be defined an anti-Gay/Lesbian a while back where
> > you insinuated that homosexuals could not be objective doing research. My
> >
> As Ronald Reagan would say "There you go again".This was the post where
> I raised the issue about objectivity in
> research. I think the proper labels used are single-blind and double-blind
> research .Now Simon Levay,who is gay, found out differences in brain
> structure between gays and non-gays,hence arguing for a genetic basis.
> And the issue was raised as if there was a self-serving bias because of
> him being gay. Of course,I did not imply that he could not be objective.
Actually, your entire post is quoted below (Archive-Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 11:48:52
EST5EDT4,M4.1.0,M10.5.0):
Seems as if investigators are quick to jump to the thickness of the
corpus callosum to explain differences between male and female.
And Simon LeVay (who is gay) has impilcated some brain
differentiation for homosexuals.
Can LeVay be seriously objective about gay behavior since
he is gay himself?
Anyway,about that thickness of the corpus callosum stuff,is
it possible that it is behavior which causes the changes in the
CC,instead of the structure dictating behavior?
Back to L. Woolf:
I fail to see a discussion of double blind or single blind.
And you do imply that he could not be objective because he was gay.
linda
linda m. woolf, ph.d.
associate professor - psychology
webster university
main webpage: http://www.webster.edu/~woolflm/
Holocaust and genocide studies pages:
http://www.webster.edu/~woolflm/holocaust.html
womens' pages: http://www.webster.edu/~woolflm/women.html
gerontology pages: http://www.webster.edu/~woolflm/gero.html
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
