Did you? Nah, I am pretty sure you simply read the abstract and liked what you saw so you stopped there. Otherwise, you wouldn't have made this stupid comment:<quoted text>
Did you read the study? Here is the abstract...
You see, because had you read the actual study cover to cover, which I just did since you brought it up.(Bet you didn't expect someone to do that?) You would have known that the very people who conducted the study presented in their conclusion OTHER valid reason's for the results they recorded- other than your beloved homophobes are closeted gay's.<quoted text>
I didn't assert it; the authors of the study did. I just happen to agree.
Here ya go, since I guess you missed it the first time you pretended to read it.
"Another explanation of these data is found in Barlow, Sakheim, and Beck's (1983) theory of the role of anxiety and attention in sexual responding. It is possible that viewing homosexual stimuli causes negative emotions such as anxiety in homophobic men but not in nonhomophobic men. Because anxiety has been shown to enhance arousal and erection, this theory would predict increases in erection in homophobic men. Furthermore, it would indicate that a response to homosexual stimuli is a function of the threat condition rather than sexual arousal per se. Whereas difficulties of objectively evaluating psychoanalytic hypotheses are well-documented, these approaches would predict that sexual arousal is an intrinsic response to homosexual stimuli, whereas Barlow's (1986) theory would predict that sexual arousal to homosexual stimuli by homophobic individuals is a function of anxiety. These competing notions can and should be evaluated by future research. "