What is this study? I assume it’s the typical case of a nonsense meme graph masquerading as something “objective.”
The graph is completely fictional, the referenced study is attached to my post. The actual study wanted to find out the correlation between general sexual excitability and inhibition and pedophilic (heterosexual) interest in men. That being said, the study is completely worthless, in the first place they have a "representative" sample size of 80 men. Now, these men were volunteers responding to the following advertisement:
Earn $40
for participation in an experiment on human sexuality that will require a total of 8 hours on two consecutive days. Males 18 and older only. For further information, contact Program Coordinator at _____.
Or in other words these men were all hyper-gooners that responded to an advertisement that said "we will pay you $40 to goon". There were more than 80 volunteers, with a total of 99 volunteers who showed up, completed the physical exam, and understood english, but these 19 volunteers (20%) withdrew when it was explained to them that they would be given child porn for the purpose of sexual arousal. In other words, all 80 of the "normal men" were willing to be given child porn for the purpose of sexual arousal. Among the 80 volunteers, 16 (20%) admitted that they were pedophiles, and three admitted that they had engaged in pedophilic behavior. The procedure was to give (in some order, the study does not mention that it was a random order, so presumably it is in the order mentioned) each subject images of nude adult women (age not specified in study), nude pre-pubescent girls (under 12 years of age), clothed pre-pubescent girls, audio-tapes of second person narration by a man of consensual sex with an adult woman, "consensual" sex with a pre-pubescent girl ("The consenting audiotapes depict the females as being aroused by the sexual activity (e.g., " . . . she likes you to make love to her . . . ; .... ... she's excited..., she really enjoys you..." )), the rape of pre-pubescent girl, non-sexual violence against a pre-pubescent girl, and a non-sexual social encounter with a pre-pubescent girl at a supermarket. Before the stimuli, the participants were instructed to allow themselves to be sexually aroused, except at the very end where they were shown their seemingly strongest stimulus and asked to inhibit their sexual arousal to distinguish participants by their sexual inhibition (a little more than half, 46, were able to inhibit their arousal). Despite this study basically doing everything it could to engineer a pedophilia result, all but one participant were more aroused by adult pornography than child pornography. Participants who could not restrain their sexual urges were much more aroused by all stimuli, especially the social encounter tapes, the child rape tapes, and the child assault tape (there was only 1). The most seemingly arousing stimuli were, in order, the consenting adult audio-tape, the naked women, and the "consenting" child audio-tape, with a nearly identical level of sexual arousal for all remaining stimuli, which in order are: child rape audio-tapes, naked girl slides, social encounter with child audio-tapes, clothed child slides, and child assault audio-tape. For the participants who could inhibit their sexual arousal, the top three were the same, but the remaining are in the following order: naked child slides, child rape audio-tapes, clothed child slides, social encounter audio-tapes, and child assault audio-tape.
