Y’all are just closeted 😂😂💅🏼

“There is legitimate science behind the gay-bashing = in the closet and excited by gay porn stuff.

There’s a medical device that can measure when a man’s …well, manhood… was swelling with blood. Take one of those and subject volunteers to certain stimulating situations (say, some good ol’ fashioned pr0n) to see what excited them. And make sure you get a good broad spectrum of where they stand politically, so you know whether there’s a connection between vocally hating gayness and secretly having the gayness and such as, or not.

The scientific name for such a device is a plethysmograph. And there is indeed a penile plethysmograph used in medicine…

I’ll cut to the chase: yes. It looks like they angry cos they horny.

The authors investigated the role of homosexual arousal in exclusively heterosexual men who admitted negative affect toward homosexual individuals. Participants consisted of a group of homophobic men (n = 35) and a group of nonhomophobic men (n = 29); they were assigned to groups on the basis of their scores on the Index of Homophobia (W. W. Hudson & W. A. Ricketts, 1980).

The men were exposed to sexually explicit erotic stimuli consisting of heterosexual, male homosexual, and lesbian videotapes, and changes in penile circumference were monitored.

We have the technology…

A mercury-in-rubber (MIR) circumferential strain gauge (Bancroft, Jones, & Pullan, 1966) was used to measure erectile responses to the sexual stimuli. When attached, changes in the circumference of the penis caused changes in the electrical resistance of the mercury column, which were detected by a Parks Model 270 Plethysmograph (pre-amplifier; Parks Electronic Laboratory, Beaverton, OR). The pre-amplifier output was channeled into a Grass polygraph. Tumescence responses were recorded on the chart drive of the polygraph and were channeled to an analog-to-digital (A-to-D) interface connected to an IBM computer.

And yes, they covered the bases with what got the men going.

The stimuli were 4-min segments of explicit erotic videotapes depicting consensual adult heterosexual activity, consensual male homosexual activity, and consensual female homosexual activity. The sexual activity in the videos included sexual foreplay (e.g., kissing and undressing), oral-genital contact ( e.g., fellatio or cunnilingus), and intercourse (i.e., vaginal penetration, anal penetration, or tribadism in the lesbian film). The lesbian videotape was included because it has been shown to be highly sexually arousing to heterosexual men and is a better discriminator between heterosexual and homosexual men than other stimuli (Mavissikalian, Blanchard, Abel, & Baflow, 1975 ).

What you’re looking at is the three graphs, each with two lines on them. Three graphs for the three types of video, two different types of line for the homophobic and nonhomophobic groups.

Figure 1. Stimulus presentations by groups across time blocks. The only significant difference between groups is with the homosexual video. The blocked line represents the nonhomophobic group; the solid line represents the homophobic group. Top: Heterosexual video; middle: lesbian video; bottom: homosexual video.

Results?

The results of this study indicate that individuals who score in the homophobic range and admit negative affect toward homosexuality demonstrate significant sexual arousal to male homosexual erotic stimuli. These individuals were selected on the basis of their report of having only heterosexual arousal and experiences.

The homophobes got a rise (pun specifically intended) from the gay porn: “significant sexual arousal to male homosexual erotic stimuli”.

TL;DR – to paraphrase Shakespeare, methinks the gay-bashers doth protest TOO much…”