sebastienne (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
sebastienne) wrote2006-07-24 12:17 pm
sebastienne) wrote2006-07-24 12:17 pm
(no subject)
Hi Emma,
We did not 'tell any proportion of our readership that it did not exist.'
We reported the opinions of one person. That is what newspapers do. We
also reported the views of someone else who disagreed with him and quoted
George melly as a well-known example of a bisexual - again, hardly a
denial that bisexuals exist. We suspect that our readers have enough
intelligence to make up their own minds on such issues.
regards
Kieran Meeke
Features Editor
We did not 'tell any proportion of our readership that it did not exist.'
We reported the opinions of one person. That is what newspapers do. We
also reported the views of someone else who disagreed with him and quoted
George melly as a well-known example of a bisexual - again, hardly a
denial that bisexuals exist. We suspect that our readers have enough
intelligence to make up their own minds on such issues.
regards
Kieran Meeke
Features Editor
no subject
Particulaly the paragraph:
"A 2005 study claimed that a sample of men self-identifying as bisexual did not respond equally to gay pornographic material involving only men, and only women, but instead showed four times more arousal to one than the other. However, bisexuality does not imply equal attraction towards both genders. In addition, opponents claim that genital arousal to homosexual pornographic material is not a good indicator of orientation. They also point out that the study showed a third of men had no arousal, and ask why this doesn't mean that one third of men are really asexual. LGBT advocates subsequently attacked the study and the New York Times article which reported it as flawed and biphobic."