In the November 1991 issue ofThe Journal of Sex Research, Tiefer (1991) provides a critique of a recent article of mine about sexual science (Abramson, 1990). The present paper is a brief reply to Tiefer. This paper notes the contribution that Tiefer makes about methodological diversity. Additionally, this paper suggests alternative viewpoints about the personal nature of Tiefer's critique, the necessity for polarizing sexual science and feminist perspectives, and the definition of rigorous. In the conclusion, sexual science is briefly restated.