*This article does not represent the views of Her Campus FSU
A recent study suggests that all women are either gay or bisexual—and are almost never straight. The articles written on the study have created an outbreak of debates within social media communities. The study, lead by Dr. Gerulf Rieger from the Department of Psychology at the University of Essex, studied the sexual arousal of women to determine their responses to both males and females. The study found that many women claiming to be heterosexual responded to female sexual content, which prompted an arguable conclusion that most women—if not all—are not straight.
The study, entitled “Sexual Arousal and Masculinity-Femininity of Women,” bases its study off the idea of a sexual spectrum. This spectrum known as Kinsey’s Heterosexual-Homosexual Rating Scale is a scale indicating sexual preference through ratings from zero to six, with zero indicating one is exclusively heterosexual and six indicating one is exclusively homosexual. The study is born out of numbers one through five, indicating that one is bisexual. Dr. Rieger’s research included women of varying backgrounds (different educational backgrounds, ethnicities, ages, and sexual orientations). His study asked 345 women to rate themselves on the sexual spectrum. Following, Dr. Rieger had the women watch a series of videos containing sexual content whilst measuring biological responses typical to sexual arousal—such as pulse and blood flow of the genitals and pupil dilation.
Courtesy: Kinsey Insitute
This is not the first time research like this has been conducted. Previous studies have been conducted with both men and women. A study entitled “A Sex Difference in the Specificity of Sexual Arousal” was a study conducted in 2004 began under the belief that the sexual arousal of women was not as straightforward as that of the sexual arousal of men. The abstract of the study states that heterosexual men are more aroused by females than males, and homosexual men are more aroused by males than by females; however this is not as simple for women. The study produced similar results stating that women responded to both males and females in viewing sexual content. Using these biological responses, the study concluded that sexual arousal is not the same for men and women. Essentially, while male sexual orientation is more candid, the lines for female sexual orientation are more blurred.
Courtesy: Wikipedia
Having been published in a scientific journal, this study—and others—has proven to be controversial amongst social media users, with some articles reaching over 94,000 shares on Facebook alone. Responses have ranged from approval to backlash. Much of this backlash is due to what some suspect as “bad journalism.” In short, the research article is presented in the wrong way. When articles want to spread, authors will use catchy titles; in this case, making a bold statement about sexual orientation has done just that, making people latch onto the subject as a point of staunch agreement or disagreement. Questions have been raised about the experiment’s validity in many comments on social media. One suggestion is that Dr. Rieger’s conclusion is not what should be taken from this experiment; rather, it can be inferred that women’s responses to other women is more an empathetic response (the women are identifying with the women they see in the videos) than a sexual one.
Other contesters of this article feel Dr. Rieger is jumping to conclusions. Supporters however are seeing this experiment as an opportunity for backlash against those who deny bisexuality. Some commenters have even gone so far as to claim the article is giving people, such as straight Christian women, a taste of their own medicine. This media hype that has nearly lead to conflict between supporters and contesters is owed to bad journalism. The research article was marketed as a science-backed experiment that puts something as private as someone’s sexual orientation on display and up for questioning. The point of bad journalism comes from the concern that readers who are latching onto the subject are also latching onto a certain belief—a belief supported by an experiment standing on shaking ground.
A study called into question more often than not is still in the process of working toward an answer. Whether accurate or inaccurate, the study has left many with unanswered questions. A consideration that sexual stimulation and sexual orientation are not connected may explain why so many women responded to both sexes, as many believe that there is much more to sexual orientation than sexual arousal.