Sex Research

So I'm drowning in books researching for one of my summer school classes and I came across this

"In October 2003, during a major committee meeting, a member of the U.S. House of Represenatives, Rep. Mike Ferguson (R-NJ), waved a list of research projects funded by the National Institute of Health (NIH) that he claimed were ridiculous and a terrible use of taxpayer's money. As it turned out, the hit list had been compiled by the Traditional Values Coalition, a right-wing religious group, which asserted that U.S. taxpayers' would deplore these "smarmy" projects. Earlier in July, Rep. Patrick Toomey (R-PA) had introduced a measure dubbed the Toomey amendment to halt the funding of five specific grants, effectively trying to stop the research. The amendment was defeated by a narrow margin of two votes.

One of the projects on the list was a study conducted at the Kinsey Institute at Indiana University, in which physiological responses of sexual arousal were studied in the laboratory. The rationale for the Kinsey Institute study involved the fact that some some serious problems in society today such as pedophilia, adult sexual attraction to children, involve people being aroused by inappropriate stimuli. If we are to do something about this social evil, we must understand the basic processes of sexual arousal and identify the stimuli that elicit arousal, which were exactly the issues this research worked on. The Tradional Values Coalition, however, could not understand the merits of the research.

Some members of Congress stood up to their colleagues, especially Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) accusing the Traditional Values Coalition of scientific McCarthyism.
(Hyde, Delamater - Understanding Human Sexuality10th edition 2009)


So, here are my questions for ya'll ~
How can we fight such problems as the AIDS epidemic or pedophilia when we lack the accurate knowledge of the factors that contribute to them? Should politicians be permitted to interfere with the integrity of the scientific peer review process? Are elected officials qualified to judge the difference between high-quality and low-quality research?

I found it particularly interesting, and I'm all for sex research, heck I'll participate in sex research (not the pedophilia thing yuck! but others....)

So I'm drowning in books researching for one of my summer school classes and I came across this

"In October 2003, during a major committee meeting, a member of the U.S. House of Represenatives, Rep. Mike Ferguson (R-NJ), waved a list of research projects funded by the National Institute of Health (NIH) that he claimed were ridiculous and a terrible use of taxpayer's money. As it turned out, the hit list had been compiled by the Traditional Values Coalition, a right-wing religious group, which asserted that U.S. taxpayers' would deplore these "smarmy" projects. Earlier in July, Rep. Patrick Toomey (R-PA) had introduced a measure dubbed the Toomey amendment to halt the funding of five specific grants, effectively trying to stop the research. The amendment was defeated by a narrow margin of two votes.

One of the projects on the list was a study conducted at the Kinsey Institute at Indiana University, in which physiological responses of sexual arousal were studied in the laboratory. The rationale for the Kinsey Institute study involved the fact that some some serious problems in society today such as pedophilia, adult sexual attraction to children, involve people being aroused by inappropriate stimuli. If we are to do something about this social evil, we must understand the basic processes of sexual arousal and identify the stimuli that elicit arousal, which were exactly the issues this research worked on. The Tradional Values Coalition, however, could not understand the merits of the research.

Some members of Congress stood up to their colleagues, especially Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) accusing the Traditional Values Coalition of scientific McCarthyism.
(Hyde, Delamater - Understanding Human Sexuality10th edition 2009)


So, here are my questions for ya'll ~
How can we fight such problems as the AIDS epidemic or pedophilia when we lack the accurate knowledge of the factors that contribute to them? Should politicians be permitted to interfere with the integrity of the scientific peer review process? Are elected officials qualified to judge the difference between high-quality and low-quality research?

I found it particularly interesting, and I'm all for sex research, heck I'll participate in sex research (not the pedophilia thing yuck! but others....) Originally Posted by JamieYoung

I think the research is necessary. The United States has never been strong in the category of "sex research" which has left some of the other...more "open" countries to lead in that sector. However, the purpose behind this research seems to be for societal understanding and helping thwart crimes of a sexual nature. That is OUR problem, so WE need to do the research. (OUR and WE..being the USA).

I had to proofread a college paper a young man did about Prostitution and its correlation with sex crimes throughout the world. The results were appalling. There are more rapes in the USA than most other developed nation in the world. We also rank high on the list of number of sex crimes...but a crappy little country like Turkey (its Asian portion)...which is also a Muslim nation, is full of sex crazed men...yet has a very small instance of rapes. Come to find out, their government runs brothels to keep rape in check. Does it work ? The proof is in the pudding.

So yes, I think the research is necessary and maybe the numbers will convince lawmakers to decriminalize certain things which would benefit society as a whole.

So I'm drowning in books researching for one of my summer school classes and I came across this

"In October 2003, during a major committee meeting, a member of the U.S. House of Represenatives, Rep. Mike Ferguson (R-NJ), waved a list of research projects funded by the National Institute of Health (NIH) that he claimed were ridiculous and a terrible use of taxpayer's money. As it turned out, the hit list had been compiled by the Traditional Values Coalition, a right-wing religious group, which asserted that U.S. taxpayers' would deplore these "smarmy" projects. Earlier in July, Rep. Patrick Toomey (R-PA) had introduced a measure dubbed the Toomey amendment to halt the funding of five specific grants, effectively trying to stop the research. The amendment was defeated by a narrow margin of two votes.

The federal government has no business doing scientific research of any kind. The Constitution pretty clearly defines a minimalistic approach to government but has been twisted and ignored.

One of the projects on the list was a study conducted at the Kinsey Institute A well known lift wing "think tank" but not painted with the same brush as the TVC. at Indiana University, in which physiological responses of sexual arousal were studied in the laboratory. The rationale for the Kinsey Institute study involved the fact that some some serious problems in society today such as pedophilia, adult sexual attraction to children, involve people being aroused by inappropriate stimuli. If we are to do something about this social evil, we must understand the basic processes of sexual arousal and identify the stimuli that elicit arousal, which were exactly the issues this research worked on. The Tradional Values Coalition, however, could not understand the merits of the research.

Some members of Congress stood up to their colleagues, especially Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) accusing the Traditional Values Coalition of scientific McCarthyism. In point of fact, McCarthy was right, except that the Verona documents later proved he underestimated the number of communists in the state department.
(Hyde, Delamater - Understanding Human Sexuality10th edition 2009)


So, here are my questions for ya'll ~
How can we fight such problems as the AIDS epidemic or pedophilia when we lack the accurate knowledge of the factors that contribute to them? In the case of AIDS I think we have a very accurate knowledge of the factors. Should politicians be permitted to interfere with the integrity of the scientific peer review process? Peer review largely serves to preserve the livelihood of the peers (look at the global warming hoax). Again, the federal government should not do any scientific research, nor sponsor any. If you take the King' schilling, you get the King's interference, every time. Are elected officials qualified to judge the difference between high-quality and low-quality research? Some probably are, a few have scientific backgrounds.

I found it particularly interesting, and I'm all for sex research, heck I'll participate in sex research (not the pedophilia thing yuck! but others....) Originally Posted by JamieYoung

My comments above in bold.

Regards,

Jamie Young,

Great question. AIDS is a very complicated and tough subject. Any research that can help combat this disease should be welcomed and funded. However, in our society, we elect officials to make certain decisions for us as a society. If we are not happy with those elected officials, then we exercise our disapproval with our vote.

Regarding pedophilia, because of my chosen profession, I don't need any additional research for any questions. I already know the answers.

Great question, Jamie Young and I hope you learn a lot from what sounds like a very interesting class.

Good Luck!

I think we ought to research why "girlfriend sex" only happens with an escort or with a women that isn't a man's wife! Why does ownership of a diamond ring inhibit sex?

I think we ought to research why "girlfriend sex" only happens with an escort or with a women that isn't a man's wife! Why does ownership of a diamond ring inhibit sex? Originally Posted by Bobster36

There is Kryptonite in the diamonds. It does the same thing to penises as it did to superman.

Thats why the saying "My dick was as hard as diamonds" shows that you have superhuman strength !

I would spend money on this research.

That's it. You've nailed it. The next Mrs. Black Sedan doesn't get a diamond.

More research is warranted about the diamond connection.

As for Iaintliein's comments: Ideally, only private money would be used for research. But when is anything ever exactly ideal?

Bobster,
I would definitely like a piece of that grant (or a piece of any sort actually).

But, the Coolidge effect is pretty well documented:
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/...ys-in-the-mood

Proof once again that monogamy is not a natural phenomenon.

Regards,

"The federal government has no business doing scientific research of any kind. The Constitution pretty clearly defines a minimalistic approach to government but has been twisted and ignored." - Iaintliein

I agree. Whenever I think about how much of our money the government wastes it make me want to vomit.

Jamie, I hereby donate my body to your research. Just let me know where you'd like it delivered.

Jamie, I hereby donate my body to your research. Just let me know where you'd like it delivered. Originally Posted by Mister Tudball

haha why thank you!
hmm, now where shall we begin??

I agree. Let's give the government even more money. Yeah, that should work.

You are correct Jamie there is know way to make good judgements without the proper research, that being said Mr. Tudball is correct as well and I too am willing to donate

I think we ought to research why "girlfriend sex" only happens with an escort or with a women that isn't a man's wife! Why does ownership of a diamond ring inhibit sex? Originally Posted by Bobster36

This is a common misconception. It's not the ring at all.....




It's the wedding cake.




There's something in that damned wedding cake. Ever wonder why they are so expensive?? DO NOT LET HER EAT THE CAKE!!!!

I think Dannie is on to something...sex after the diamond was fine but after the cake...well it all started to go downhill. A HA!!! It makes so much sense... If not the cake maybe it's subliminal messages in the song "Celebrate".