In later research he also examined the phenomenon known as gaydar with Gerulf Rieger
brow
Comment on PSA
Vanth@reddthat.com 3 days ago
At a minimum, someone with really bad judgement, who cares more about making headlines than doing high-quality research, and who shouldn’t be trusted to treat the subjects of this study with respect.
Bailey was the Northwestern professor who had a live demo of a reciprocating sex toy, put on by a volunteer and her partner. It was optional to attend the demo, students were over 18 and allegedly informed on what they were going to see.
He’s also been repeatedly called out for not properly informing participants in his studies. One accusation of sleeping with one of his research subjects. And toed the ethics line on writing evaluation letters for candidates of sex assignment surgery when he didn’t hold a license.
His wikipedia article links to sources.
BodyBySisyphus@hexbear.net 3 days ago
lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com 3 days ago
How is this a problem? Do we live in a free society or not?
Can we raise the standard of criticism in a community dedicated to science to scientific integrity & facts rather than throwing mud? These objections look like the latter & that wikipedia article isn’t panning out your claims.
Pretty frivolous, no, to claim a book qualifies as IRB-regulated research & to self-anoint oneself as subject of it? Worse to present the accusation as credible by filtering out all the relevant information. More omissions:
Regarding case evaluation letters
Ironically, those accusations seem to mirror what you’re doing:
Misleading, antagonistic rhetoric of this sort is antithetical to the expectations of a community that purports to support science & is worthy of the strongest contempt. Not linking to the article doesn’t seem accidental. By attempting to mislead us, you’ve also wasted our time. You & your upvoters are an utter disappointment: we should expect a focus on science, not on throwing mud.