>On what basis are you going to debunk these myths? And on what >grounds do you grant something myth status? I ask because the only >tools of attack I can see for this purpose - psychology, statistics, >etc - are more confused about the subject than your target >misconception.
These are important questions.
With regard to the myths themselves, I would define them as cultural assumptions and general misconceptions that do not stand up to scrutiny. And, actually, many studies themselves have created myths or erroneous assumptions, partially because of faulty methodology, and I think I want to address that as well.
With regard to tools of attack, I have been using for my model the methods employed by members of the Skeptical Society--applying critical thinking, looking at available data, looking at the basic logic of assumptions. These are valuable tools, in addition to studies and statistics.