Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected].
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected] or [email protected]
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
You clearly stated you didn't want to have someone comb through you papers and argue, and their value as evidence is obvious to anyone who bothers to take a look, so the reaction of "nothing will come out of continuing this conversation" is quite understandable. I returned to say thank you for posting sources, but since you seem to take this as some kind of "stunned them to silence"...
The first two sources apparently refer to the same study; Okami 1995 is mostly literature review, methods, and intermediary results, while Okami 1998 is the final results.
Okami 1995: "Consistent with the cross-sectional retrospective literature (and with our expectations), no harmful main effects of these experiences were found at age 17-18. [...] Taken as a whole then, effects are few, but generally beneficial in nature."
Okami 1998: "No harmful "main effect" correlates of the predictor variables were found."
So I fail to see how they'd support your point.
The last one, the Yahoo article, is not a study nor does it refer to any.
Okami 1998 also had a link to Lewis 1988, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3421828/: "The results suggest that childhood experiences with exposure to nudity and sleeping in the parental bed are not adversely related to adult sexual functioning and adjustment. In fact, there is modest support that these childhood experiences are positively related to indices of adjustment."
Recognition of pre-existing bias: I'm Finnish, and this felt like an attack on family saunas.
Fair enough, it does suck. I for one remain unconvinced by your sources, but respect greatly both that you provided them, and your opinion as equivalent to any "based on my non-objective experience..." just like my own. Thank you.