For us to be able to say something is a lie, there must be a truth which is being willfully obscured. What is the source of truth for the statement "I am a woman" if the test is just: 'someone is what they say they are'?
-
-
Replying to @unwitod @Shatterface and
What is the source of truth for someone saying they are straight or gay or bisexual or asexual? Is it not their own perception of the attractiveness of others?
2 replies 0 retweets 8 likes -
Replying to @sophienotemily @Shatterface and
We can test for it though (we can observe arousal in the lab, for eg). And we can observe or obtain evidence of behaviour or relationship. All sorts of things. This is a real world issue, actually, in asylum claims and just the statement 'I am gay' is often judged insufficient.
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @unwitod @sophienotemily and
It's a real world issue in that the use of biometrics to try to "prove" someone's sexual orientation is an invasive abusive ongoing atrocity based on pseudoscientific garbage, yes
1 reply 3 retweets 37 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @unwitod and
Unless you think strapping sensors to someone's genitals and making them watch porn while you watch them watching porn is an okay thing to do if you have a white coat and a clipboard while you do it
1 reply 1 retweet 22 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @sophienotemily and
What are you ranting about now? Are you saying it is never ethical to undertake psychological or sex research with volunteers?
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @unwitod @sophienotemily and
I think it's absolutely and totally unethical to use the plethysmograph and the thermistor clip as the basis for any kind of legal ruling, and their use in asylum claims that you mention is barbaric and monstrous
3 replies 1 retweet 21 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @unwitod and
It's the same kind of power-tripping tea-leaf-reading bullshit as selling the polygraph as a "lie detector", only with genitals involved
1 reply 1 retweet 15 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @unwitod and
As far as "academic sexologists" doing this shit consensually with volunteers, sure, whatever gets your rocks off Just don't make me fund your little games and don't start basing policy on it
1 reply 1 retweet 15 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @unwitod and
You know the key claim behind this kind of biometric testing - that the biometric in question objectively equates to the experience of "attraction" - is unfalsifiable and taken as axiomatic
1 reply 1 retweet 13 likes
You can never disprove it by having someone actually testify "I had a boner but I wasn't into it" The whole point of the test is to argue "Ah, but the boner proves you WERE into it, and you were LYING" The whole worldview is one aimed at eroding consent
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @unwitod and
But yeah if you want to validate the generations-old tradition of defense attorneys in rape trials going "Well she showed the biological signs of arousal and sexual interest" you can fuck right off
1 reply 1 retweet 25 likes - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.