Note the disclaimer about small and biased samples. And apart from anything else, I don't think anyone would seriously cite Queen Victoria as an authority on human sexuality!
Actually, there's a potentially interesting post here about the non-applicability of classical bivalued, excluded-middle, one-counterexample-disproves-the-theorem logic to the physical world. The claim that there are no women who admire only women is, in a world of 3 billion women, rather unlikely to be true: the claim that they're statistical outliers is a priori more interesting and plausible. As for "gay" and "straight" men - I don't know, but they're interesting questions!
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Actually, there's a potentially interesting post here about the non-applicability of classical bivalued, excluded-middle, one-counterexample-disproves-the-theorem logic to the physical world. The claim that there are no women who admire only women is, in a world of 3 billion women, rather unlikely to be true: the claim that they're statistical outliers is a priori more interesting and plausible. As for "gay" and "straight" men - I don't know, but they're interesting questions!