I didn't feel hostile - denigrating a bad study is just that.
>>But I think what he said and what the studies you denounce out of hand says holds true for a significant portion of MAPs, even if certainly not all.
"Out of hand" - on what basis is it out of hand? You say that but have no retort, or defense of the studies that I can see. Are the findings actually true? - I made no claim there.
>>As for your denouncement of the studies, I read Cash's thesis, it was peer-reviewed for publication, and I think it was filled with spot on information.
Haven't read it - if it's the same, more or less, as the paper, I wouldn't have anything to add.
>>As for "stealing" data, that is called a meta-analysis, compiling and comparing data from a bunch of researchers and comparing them to come up with a cohesive theory based upon what they all may (or may not) have in common. That was what the Rind Report was all about too, despite having a control group of its own.
No - a meta-analysis is a completely different thing from what Cash did. And in term of Cash's thesis, there's a reason to collect your own data vs. taking someone else's to use - I believe I referenced some of those reasons.
>>Hence, her data on MAPs certainly rings true to me, and I think it's hardly the useless piece of "excrement" you paint it as, even if I can (again) readily believe you if you say the data collected does not hold true for you personally.
You're kind of missing the point here - none of this really, including my objections to qual research, has anything to do with me.
Note that the claims of these studies - I never said they weren't true, I simply stated that these studies themselves, methodologically, are garbage, and that that invalidates their findings, within these specific studies. If I'm wrong, feel free to explain why.
>>...towards those researchers who have had the courage to go against the herd and get to know us as people.
I'm not sure how work like that represented does anything to help us. In fact, I think writing or publishing bad literature works against us - maybe less so than the typical crap, but a bad study (methodologically) is still a bad study.
>>And speaking for myself and many other MAPs I personally know or have seen speak in Lifeline, there is that pervading loneliness when you realize that you will never be able to have a romantic relationship with a youth in your age of attraction, and you usually have to hide who you are simply to have close routine platonic interactions on a social and emotional level. And the latter is all but impossible if you choose to be "out of the toybox."
I see both of these things as a choice. Resigning yourself to never have a romantic relationship is your own personal resignation. And coming out is a personal choice too - not that I would recommend anyone do it, but you yourself are choosing to hide who you are. And one some level you're also choosing to make a big deal out of it. And about "having to" hide who you are to have close platonic relationships I would say is not true. I know only a couple of people who were largely out, but what you describe is about the opposite of their experience.