In practice, this means that the rules of evidence are so unlike those with which most psychologists are familiar that the author’s “truth claims” cannot be assessed according to the usual criteria. There are no experiments or statistics. Research participants have not been recruited nor have controls been applied. Hypotheses have not been tested nor conclusions tempered by a host of caveats. That is not to say that archival resources have not been investigated, for the author has drawn on multiple sources: newspaper reports, television series, tabloid exposés, comedy routines, films, and pornography. And it is not to say that the conclusions are divorced from data, for the author “reads” her “images” very closely, and her illustrations are vivid and compelling. It is rather to recognize that this book’s mode relies on persuasion, conviction, and personal disclosure rather than on empirical verification.