Maybe they don't like the absolutism of the question.
Research by Ipsos Mori found that 66 per cent of young people, aged between 16 and 22, are "exclusively heterosexual" - the lowest figure of any generation.Why do pollsters think it's okay to ask about the sexual inclinations of people they don't even know? I'm giving this my "gender privacy" tag. The question might be experienced as retrograde or politically incorrect. The thought might be: These old people with their stupid categories. And then: I'll give the answer that most challenges their pathetic little minds.
Among millennials, 71 per cent say they are exclusively heterosexual, as do 85 per cent of those in "Gen X", and 88 per cent of baby boomers....
Researchers said the statistic showed that the youngest generation were "being affected by more open and fluid attitudes".
That's how I thought when I was 20 (and kind of still do).
Posts
193 comments:
So, 30% of young men, may not be men?
Sounds like young women aren't going to have much fun.
A poll looking for an answer.
How droll.
From what I observe on the street, I'd say that poll is about right.
@rcocean:
So, 30% of young men, may not be men?
Don't confuse sexual orientation with gender identity. I have never understood why the "T" is lumped in with the "G" the "L" and the "B."
Also, this seems like a bunch of BS to me. And what does it say about the "born gay" claim that used to be so near and dear to the gay activist movement? Haven't we been told that homosexual is a result of one's nature and does not have anything to do with "open and fluid attitudes." If the latter is true, then what is wrong with "gay conversion" therapies that attempt to move those "attitudes" in the other direction?
Watching leftists try to make shit up in order to tear apart the foundations of modern free society is getting boring.
Almost as boring as rightists jumping at the bait and validating the leftists.
Maybe they don't like the absolutism of the question.
That's true. But it's a mistake. Many questions are absolute and there should not be so much resistance to such absolute questions:
1. What's your name?
2. What's your age?
3. What's your address?
4. How much do you weigh?
5. Where do your work?
6. What was your last job?
That stuff is easy. I would also add: "Are you a boy or girl?" as another easy, absolute question.
The more interesting stuff is, indeed, flexible and fluid.
7. What do you think of Trump?
8. Are you a member of a political party, if so, which one?
9. What do you think is the best way to deal with the homeless in San Francisco?
10. What's your favorite novel?
Blah, blah, blah
The problem with confused young leftists is that they sputter on the easy stuff in life, which stunts their ability to learn and master the harder, more interesting stuff in life.
To me, the refusal of a person to state whether he is male or female, is on par with a musician who refuses to state whether his instrument is a guitar or violin.
Pretty soon, the left will insist that certain segments of the alphabet such "LMNOP" be optionally re-arranged to "LNPOM" or something else, depending on their moodiness.
It's a big red flag.
Amazing what six or eight years of non-stop 'Hip to be Homo' hype from news and entertainment (but I repeat myself) television and press can accomplish.
When asked whether you would prefer a gift from column A or column B, why not say "both", just in case one of them sucks.
If you're lucky both will suck.
"The thought might be: These old people with their stupid categories. And then: I'll give the answer that most challenges their pathetic little minds."
"The thought might be: These prog surveyors fishing for fluidity. And then: like a good PC Generation Z-er I'll give the answer that most satisfies their pure capacious minds" and give them the category denial they are looking for.
Anyway, caring about categories is the real #Resistance today.
I wonder what the percentages would be if you asked what is 2 + 2. It would not be unanimous.
@Farmer:
"Haven't we been told that homosexual is a result of one's nature and does not have anything to do with "open and fluid attitudes." If the latter is true, then what is wrong with "gay conversion" therapies that attempt to move those "attitudes" in the other direction?"
Yes, looked at logically, and as if evidence matters, it's a puzzle.
But then, following my Universal Theory of Progressive Instrumentalism, identity claims, like ethics and linguistics and all the rest, are just tools, to be deployed as needed, in the interest of the cause--to degrade the culture and clear the path to power as much as possible.
Being definitive, or sure about something is for adults. Young people think all such opinions are judgemental and mean.
What percentage of Generation Z identifies as Generation Z?
The (Douglas) Wilder effect.
I think we need a government program to go out and tell everyone how bad it is to be gay so the conservatives will all feel better and not be so sad all the time.
While they are at it our super government program can help these poor people define male and female.
Both sides here so seek to have the government validate them and punish those they disagree with.
Ask yourself: What answer am I "supposed" to give?
I would submit that the answer to that question has changed.
What percentage of Generation Z identifies as Generation Z?
Yes.
If the latter is true, then what is wrong with "gay conversion" therapies that attempt to move those "attitudes" in the other direction?
The same thing that deaf people find objectionable about new inventions and treatments to cure deafness.
It's all the LUGs skewing the numbers.
Sticking it to the man is one explanation. Personally, I think the better explanation is the oppressor/victim garbage that has been indoctrinated into this generation. Heterosexuals are oppressors and everyone else is a victim. Being a victim is cool. Or at least being a pretend victim is cool, as they seem a lot more like oppressors pretending to be victims.
I am sure there are plenty of straight heterosexual responders who have manufactured some gender fluidity just to fit in better, such as it is.
4 is not exclusively the product of 2 times 2. It is also the sum of 2 plus 2.
Ipsos Mori found that 66 per cent of young people, aged between 16 and 22, are "exclusively heterosexual"
IOW, about 1/3 of them haven't gotten laid yet.
In other UK fake news,
"UK weather – scorching Britain is so hot entire lorries are MELTING into the road amid 33C heat"
("entire lorries" = one truck with the back wheels stuck in a non-melted pothole)
"A BIN lorry sank into a melted road as Britain's record-breaking 33C heatwave left Brits sweltering."
"the stuck truck blocking a street after its wheels became lodged in the liquid tarmac in 30C heat yesterday."
The "liquid tarmac" is supporting people and other vehicles with no problem, and 33C turns into 30C, because 33C didn't happen: "The heat is expected to top the previous 2018 record of 32C."
30 & 33C = 86 & 91F in real money. Oh the humanity.
I hate that generation ... Generation X.
"3.3% of young people aged 16-24 identify as gay, lesbian or bisexual"
That 3.3% is
"Source: Office for National Statistics (2016)
Sexual Identity UK: 2015"
@Gahrie:
The same thing that deaf people find objectionable about new inventions and treatments to cure deafness.
Except those treatments actually work. Homosexuality is not amenable to any kind of conversion therapies because sexual orientation is pretty much set and stable, which is why this study is so absurd. The actual prevalence of homosexuality in the society has been around 3% for a number of decades.
Fernandistein:
That 3.3% is
"Source: Office for National Statistics (2016)
Sexual Identity UK: 2015"
Yes, and that number has been relatively stable for years. You will still hear the occasional citation of Kinsley's BS "10%" number, but pretty much everyone serious in the field recognizes that as a vast overstatement.
Wasn't there a recent poll of the same age group which self-reported that 25% were missing one or more limb?
Farmer writes: Also, this seems like a bunch of BS to me. And what does it say about the "born gay" claim that used to be so near and dear to the gay activist movement? Haven't we been told that homosexual is a result of one's nature and does not have anything to do with "open and fluid attitudes." If the latter is true, then what is wrong with "gay conversion" therapies that attempt to move those "attitudes" in the other direction?
When the 'born gay' theory first emerged it was suggested by some that, if it was a genetic trait, it might, in the future, be corrected in utero. And others even suggested that some might abort a 'gay' baby. This had a chilling effect on the whole 'born that way' movement and we don't hear so much about it anymore. Now it's all about 'fluidity'. What it really boils down to is that sexual preference is a choice but justification must be found for those choices.
There is a difference between Leftist as adherents to Karl Marx's view of: “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.” That particular idea has literally cost millions of lives. Incredibly, despite having been proven false time and again since its first utterance, it continues to spread.
For example, Che Guevara, "Tactics and Stratgey..., 1962", stated, ".....under the established bourgeois legal system, having achieved formal power will still have to wage a very violent struggle against all who attempt, in one way or another, to check its progress toward new social structures.”
You may recognize that doctrine being applied twelve years after it was written in Pol Pot’s regime. More than 20% of the population died horribly in the reeducation camps where they were sent to learn how to think correctly. Or die. Actually, mainly die.
On the other hand, Liberals are low information processors and have embraced many bad ideas. For example, "Mother Earth is Dying", "All Cultures are Good", 'Capitalism is Bad","Political Correctness", "White People are Bad and a Dying Breed". I could go on. But, I will sum up by expressing my concern that parts of the world, in particular the United States and Europe are now cartwheeling down the slippery slope toward disaster. A disaster caused by the epidemic of bad ideas that have germinated in the educational system and subsequently taken root in the halls of political power.
Of course, not everyone has been equally infected. Individuals with common sense and an inclination toward facts are largely immune and can only view with alarm the Liberal's zombie-like madness caused by bad ideas. With the body politic so deeply divided, I really don’t see how a serious sociopolitical crisis can be avoided. One can only hope that, with within certain countries like Poland, Hungary and even political parties in Italy, France and England, the dogma-blinded cretins in the bureaucracy there will be chased back into the shadows.
These kinds of surveys are known to be very difficult. People lie.
The adult leftists promoting this gender/bending nonsense are doing a great disservice to American youth. Sowing tons of confusion -- mucho pain to be felt in the future, when they have to get jobs.
Another reason to support Trump.
@mockturtle:
What it really boils down to is that sexual preference is a choice but justification must be found for those choices.
When did you make the choice to be sexually attracted to men?
I'm guessing the fluid 33% breaks at least 80% female. A girl who confesses a little interest in girls gives a potential boyfriend a little hope for a threesome.
There used to be a stigma associated with being gay forcing people into the closet. It's gone now, so people can tell the truth when asked a personal question by a pollster without fear of a backlash. Bigots still exist especially among the older generation, but they will soon die out. Justice Scalia is a prime example. Good riddance to bad rubbish. Scowling Scalia demonstrates why Bush should not pick Amy C. Barrett, a foe of Roe based on her backward religious beliefs for the Supreme Court.
When did you make the choice to be sexually attracted to men?
As soon as I saw one. ;-D
Last I heard Millennials weren't having a whole lot of sex, period.
-sw
In truth, Farmer, I believe that heterosexual attraction is a natural state but that deviation from that state is a choice. I chose to go with nature rather than against it.
Is transgenderism, physically and mentally (e.g. sexual orientation) divergent attributes, a progressive condition?
If it is, then there is a concern for society and humanity. If it's not, then we return to the question if classes in the transgender spectrum should be normalized, tolerated, or rejected. Perhaps the problem is the press, activists, and Democrat interests, that are known to violate privacy, and unmask competing interests, provoking a response to their persistent intrusions.
@mockturtle:In truth, Farmer, I believe that heterosexual attraction is a natural state but that deviation from that state is a choice. I chose to go with nature rather than against it.
If that were true, then you would expect the prevalence of homosexuality to increase as social acceptance increased. But it has stayed stable for decades, which argues against the "choice" notion. Plus, you have things like this:
"Compared with viewing NS, viewing sexual stimuli induced significantly different brain activations, most of which had the characteristics of cognitive processes. These observations suggest that different cognitive patterns may be the major cause of different subjective responses to sexual stimuli between heterosexual and homosexual men."
-Haemodynamic brain response to visual sexual stimuli is different between homosexual and heterosexual men.
And you really do not choose "to go with nature rather than against it," unless you believe that 12-year-olds should be having babies.
@n.n.:
Is transgenderism, physically and mentally (e.g. sexual orientation) divergent attributes, a progressive condition?
Transgenderism has nothing to do with sexual orientation. The vast majority of gay people (and all people for that matter) experience no conflict between their biological sex and their gender.
Trumpit:
Good riddance to bad rubbish. Scowling Scalia demonstrates why Bush should not pick Amy C. Barrett, a foe of Roe based on her backward religious beliefs for the Supreme Court.
Bad rubbish? That's a shockingly callous attitude towards human life. But let me guess, "tolerance" is a virtue you highly prize, right?
Identifying as "exclusively heterosexual" is inherently homophobic.
Besides, with genderfluidity, it gets complicated. If a young man is physically attracted to a biological female who identifies as male, does that make him not exclusively heterosexual? What would a woke Gen-Zer say? Hard to be absolute about it...
"If the latter is true, then what is wrong with "gay conversion" therapies that attempt to move those "attitudes" in the other direction?"
-- Isn't the biggest issue with them that--at least in popular culture--they're viewed like cult de-programming efforts with the subjects locked away against their will?
I can understand wanting to get female parts to have sex with men, but what's the rationale for getting them to have sex with women? An addiction to lesbian porn?
So much virtual ink wasted over a survey that in all likelihood has a very high potential for dishonest or unserious responses. I'll lump this one in with the survey that had 1/3 of Millennials unsure that the Earth is round. I've lost count of how many commenters on here have mentioned deliberately lying on political surveys.
https://www.livescience.com/62220-millennials-flat-earth-belief.html
I'm getting off on viewing some of that NS right now!
Could there be some non-WEIRD effects? "...College of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China."
@Farmer, the Ipsos (a marketing firm) publication is here, it's not much different than the fake-news article.
Whatever it is that they are, don’t expect grandchildren.
A society can be killed by mind-viruses as well as biological plagues.
"But let me guess, "tolerance" is a virtue you highly prize, right?" What kind of question is that? Don't you "highly prize" tolerance?
I like this song, Children Will Listen, about teaching tolerance to children:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJaXmnWfZh8
Gahrie said...
If the latter is true, then what is wrong with "gay conversion" therapies that attempt to move those "attitudes" in the other direction?
The same thing that deaf people find objectionable about new inventions and treatments to cure deafness.
And the older generations wonder why younger generations think they are dumb.
Only two thirds of Generation Z identify as 'exclusively heterosexual.
Purely genetic I am sure.
I think there is a bit of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs aspect. You ask a 20 year old with little sexual experience, and they might be more open to sex anyway they can get it. You find someone with a bit more satisfaction with their sex; then they won't be so fluid. And of course at age 20; there are still a good number of virgins, who have no real idea what they want in terms of sex, and may not want any at all or will be happy to get anyone to talk to them.
I think that would be the case, even before you get to people thinking with the brain and not with their sex organ. The type of people who would be just as happy messing up a survey with stupid answers for the stupid questioners.
Matthew Sablan said...
"If the latter is true, then what is wrong with "gay conversion" therapies that attempt to move those "attitudes" in the other direction?"
-- Isn't the biggest issue with them that--at least in popular culture--they're viewed like cult de-programming efforts with the subjects locked away against their will?
The biggest problem with them is that they are stupid and derived from ignorance.
The other problem is the same people who blabber about leftist re-education camps want to institute rightest re-education camps.
@Fernandistein:
@Farmer, the Ipsos (a marketing firm) publication is here, it's not much different than the fake-news article.
Yeah, it is pretty pointless to ask someone a subjective question about attractiveness to the same sex. A better question would be to ask what percentage has actually had a sexual encounter with a member of the same sex. In other words, I am willing to bet that a large percentage of those 9% who claim to be "equally attracted to both sexes" have never and will never have a sexual encounter with a member of the same sex.
And never mind how degrading it is to have one's intimate relationships reduced merely to the activities of their nether regions. As Christopher Hitchens once remarked, "homosexuality isn't just a kind of sex; it's a kind of love."
@Trumpit:
"But let me guess, "tolerance" is a virtue you highly prize, right?" What kind of question is that? Don't you "highly prize" tolerance?
Yes, I do. Which is why I could not imagine ever cheering on the death of someone because they happened to disagree with me. How you reconcile that with a love of tolerance is what I do not understand.
Are respondents hung up on the adjective "exclusively" heterosexual and thinking about that in terms of partners not sexuality?
OR...stupid kids and teenagers like 'shocking the normies' and putting in an earring or five just doesn't cut it anymore.
I'm of two minds
One, this is push polling
Two, stupid useless kids who are boring and mundane decide it is more balming to the ego to claim 'I channel as a guy' than 'I am a fat unattractive girl who is too lazy to lose weight, and learn any kind of fashion. That I might have to slip a girl the tongue is much easier than learning how to deal with men folk too, who my teachers tell me are horrible."
>>Young people think all such opinions are judgmental and mean.
Remember when having "good judgment" was a desirable life skill? Now, it's character flaw.
You really believe some kids can't be converted using propaganda?
@Fritz:
You really believe some kids can't be converted using propaganda?
Actually, no. How easily do you think you could be converted into finding sex with a man fulfilling? Sexual attraction is a very primitive force that is older than human beings. The notion that you can talk a kid into who he or she finds sexually attractive I think is pretty outlandish.
mockturtle said...
In truth, Farmer, I believe that heterosexual attraction is a natural state but that deviation from that state is a choice. I chose to go with nature rather than against it.
Then you truly don't know any gay people and chose to derive your world view from ignorance.
Trust me they are not making this "choice" because they want to. The world was not kind to them.
They know it isn't normal and they have assholes reinforcing how different they are on a daily basis. Right now conservatives are being assaulted and yelled at and chased out of restaurants.
Just think what that sort of ostracization would be like if you were 3ish% of the population and that 3ish% was a bunch of it's own little tribes that doesn't always play well together?
I doubt you would do any better than they have under the circumstances.
In other words, if someone claimed to be "equally attracted to men and women" but maintained intimate relationships exclusively with the opposite sex, what difference would it make?
I don't think kids can be "converted" that easily. It's hard enough getting them to eat vegetables from what I hear.
I wish there was some clear consensus on the starting and end years of the various generations. An easy thing to do would be to break the generations down into 20 year spans starting in 1903. So you'd have
Greastest Generation - 1903 - 1922
The Silent Generation: 1923 - 1942
The Baby Boomers: 1943 - 1962
Generation X: 1963 - 1982
Millennials: 1983 - 2002
Generation Z: 2003 - 2022
Fritz said...
You really believe some kids can't be converted using propaganda?
Are you serious? Converted to what?
Farmer is being really nice to you people.
Propaganda is not going to turn a kid gay. The stupidity on this thread is depressing.
You're strange if you don't hate specific people. I hate Trump, Hitler, Scalia, Clarence Thomas, Bush, Cheney, etc. There are many lawyers, doctors, etc. that I've come across that are perfectly bad, and grotesque. There are members of my family that I have revulsion for, and no longer speak to. I don't hate minority groups like Trump does. I hate hunters who kill animals for sport. I'd lock them up tomorrow, if I could. You can say that I'm intolerant of fools and evil people. People who do bad things belong in jail not in the White House or Congress.
How you reconcile that with a love of tolerance is what I do not understand.
Don't bother. The idiot thinks Bush is making the next SCOTUS appointment.
@Trumpit:
I hate Trump, Hitler, Scalia, Clarence Thomas, Bush, Cheney, etc.
Hmm...let's see. Now one of these is not like the other. What could it be?
By the way, Obama's assassination campaign got hundreds of innocent children killed. Is an evil person? Do you wish death upon him?
Also, I'd be interested to know what percentage of that 1/3 of people who identified themselves as not "solely heterosexual" are women. And whatever falls outside the realm of "soley heterorsexual" seems fairly open to interpretation to anything from having an occcasional gay thought to actual sexual encounters.
Why didn't the article cite the text of the question?
The article cites the text of two OTHER questions, but Never lists this question (other than the paraphrase in the headline). There is no link to the survey results. Like Prof Althouse says, the respondents might be (probably ARE) resisting the absolutism of the question (which explains why they won't show it to us). They also don't say if it is the same wording as in the past.
Was the question like this:
Are you Absolutely, Positively, Certain; that you ARE and WILL BE, FOREVER AND EVER, AND EVER AND EVER, Exclusively Heterosexual; that there is No Chance that you could EVER be Slightly twisted?
We have gone over the "nature versus nurture" argument about homosexuality before. I will restate opinions that are based more on professional experience and intuition than clear empirical data. I don't think there is clear empirical data because most of the studies are correlational.
I suspect that a significant percentage of male homosexuals are born with same sex preferences, just as genetics plays a big role in temperament and aesthetic preferences. It is also possible that a certain percentage are born fluid in their sexual attraction.
I also suspect that a significant percentage of lesbians choose same sex partners because of childhood and/or adolescent sexual trauma. Male homosexuals making that choice seem likely to be a lesser percentage because of a lesser degree of sexual trauma. That is not to say that lesbians are not born that way. Most probably are. It is to say that the percentage of lesbians whose sexual orientation is chosen is likely greater than that of male homosexuals.
Just my two cents.
"The idiot thinks Bush is making the next SCOTUS appointment."
I was aware of my mistake and decided to wait until some "idiot" took the time to insult me and point it out. I still can't believe Trump is president. He is such a bad, unqualified person it beggars belief.
Are you serious? Converted to what?
Farmer is being really nice to you people.
Propaganda is not going to turn a kid gay. The stupidity on this thread is depressing.
Hmm!
So one of the foundation corner stones of 'gay acceptance' is 'We can't help being what we are because we are PROGRAMMED by our biology to be gay'.
Well, if they can't help it, they can't help it, and it would be like kicking a kid born with one leg: just mean.
But then comes the Trans-mission which is 'gender is fluid. Who I am sexually attracted to can vary from day to day, outfit to outfit, or moment to moment'
This is directly contradictory to the gay so I would think any gay activist would...have an issue by this muddying of the water.
So current Liberal cant is 'gay people are DEFINITELY BIOLOGICALLY GAY, but Trans people are entirely built of social constructs and thus sexual identification ONLY IN TRANS PEOPLE, is fluid'.
Nothing like double talk.
But let's talk about the possibility of gay indoctrination. Let's chat about Sparta. If 'natural gays' are only 5% of the population, but all the Spartan warriors were...ahem...hanging with their favorite boys in the bath house (Don't drop the Strigil!)
Then 95% of Spartan kids were indoctrinated to 'be gay'.
Discuss.
"By the way, Obama's assassination campaign got hundreds of innocent children killed. Is an evil person? Do you wish death upon him?"
Who was Obama trying to assassinate? Maybe you are thinking of Nixon's Christmas bombing of Hanoi in 1972.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Linebacker_II
@Francisco D:
Just my two cents.
I largely agree with your sentiment. I think as has been well demonstrated (e.g. Zimmer's She Has Her Mother's Laugh) all behavior has some basis in genetic heritability, and complex human traits are likely to be a complex interaction between genes and environment. Nonetheless, given that sexuality is a clear biological trait triggered in puberty, genes are likely to play an outsized role. For example, homosexuality among monozygotic twins is much higher than among dizygotic twins.
@Trumpit:
Who was Obama trying to assassinate? Maybe you are thinking of Nixon's Christmas bombing of Hanoi in 1972.
Ah, so if a murderer was running down the streets, you'd be okay with the police spraying bullets and killing whoever happened to be in the vicinity, right? After all, who were the police trying to kill? Is that your opinion of Libya, too? Obama was well intentioned so it doesn't matter that he destroyed a country and turned into an anarchic hell hole? And how about the 16-year-old American teenager Obama assassinated in Yemen while at a barbecue and then used state secret privilege to prevent his family from the challenging the death in court? You're fine with all that, I take it?
. Male homosexuals making that choice seem likely to be a lesser percentage because of a lesser degree of sexual trauma
It's too bad, that sociology isn't a discipline. If it was; there could be studies on questions like:
What percentage of homosexuals were molested as children? That is, How old was the individual when they had their 1st sexual experience? Does this differ from heterosexual individuals? How much older was the other person? Again, how does this differ? Was the experience considered traumatic at the time?
I have No Idea, what the answers would be; i just know that we are Forbidden to Ask these questions
@FIDO:
But then comes the Trans-mission which is 'gender is fluid. Who I am sexually attracted to can vary from day to day, outfit to outfit, or moment to moment'
Well, for one, no one here is making the fluid argument. In fact, we are saying just the opposite. Also, again, you are conflating two different things. Gender identity and sexual orientation are not the same thing and have completely different mechanisms of action. Gender identity disorder is basically a form of delusion. That is, of course, no reason to treat someone poorly. And it's no reason to celebrate anyone. No one here, as far as I can tell, is defending "current Liberal cant."
But let's talk about the possibility of gay indoctrination. Let's chat about Sparta. If 'natural gays' are only 5% of the population, but all the Spartan warriors were...ahem...hanging with their favorite boys in the bath house (Don't drop the Strigil!)
A system of organized pederasty is not the same thing as individual sexual orientation. Also, there were numerous arguments about what degree the relationship should be sexual. See, for example, Socrates versus Alcibiades. Nonetheless, adult men were never expected to maintain exclusive sexual relationships with other adult men.
"When did you stop beating your wife?" Poll
J. Farmer said...
@Fritz: You really believe some kids can't be converted using propaganda?
Actually, no.
Me neither, in the sense of sexuality or love interests, but apparently someone has been converted to thinking that "pride" means "homosexual". (No offense, but that misuse and "gay" - I remember the pop-media's advertising campaign for its adoption - both bug me, so I almost never write "gay".)
@gilbar:
I have No Idea, what the answers would be; i just know that we are Forbidden to Ask these questions.
Emotional, behavioral, and HIV risks associated with sexual abuse among adult homosexual and bisexual men
Self-reported childhood and adolescent sexual abuse among adult homosexual and bisexual men
Childhood sexual abuse among homosexual men: Prevalence and association with unsafe sex
Understanding childhood sexual abuse as a predictor of sexual risk-taking among men who have sex with men: The Urban Men's Health Study
Childhood sexual abuse is highly associated with HIV risk–taking behavior and infection among MSM in the EXPLORE study
A meta-analysis of disparities in childhood sexual abuse, parental physical abuse, and peer victimization among sexual minority and sexual nonminority individuals
J. Farmer said...
Ah, so if a murderer was running down the streets, you'd be okay with the police spraying bullets and killing whoever happened to be in the vicinity, right?
We need to be clear the difference between police activity and enforcing order in society and war.
Obama was well intentioned so it doesn't matter that he destroyed a country and turned into an anarchic hell hole?
It strains credulity to think Obama was stupid enough to have good intentions in Libya.
He did not have good intentions.
I always thought the “born gay” view was pushed precisely because the gay rights lobby needed the trait to be immutable so they could be a protected class and receive special treatment. Why else would the discussion change from “we don’t really know how or why” to “you’re born that way and if you disagree you’re a homophone and a denier?”
Only after the states started changing laws and Kennedy penned the Obergefell opinion masquerading as legal analysis did the narrative change to “oh no, it’s fluid and we can change our identity any time we want - and who are you to judge, you bigot!”
“It’s fluid and we can change our identity any time we want” wouldn’t get you protected status because of immutable characteristics now, would it?
If they did, Spartans would have died out in one generation.
I read somewhere that on their wedding nights, the women had to cut their hair short, the lamps were really low, and they didn't do 'missionary'.
But then again, most writings about the Spartans were made by Athenians who were occupied by Sparta so...
Let's add to the mix 'prison gay' and the Famous Bryn Mawr 'LUG' (Lesbian Until Graduation)
Discuss
Achilles protests: Then you truly don't know any gay people and chose to derive your world view from ignorance.
Trust me they are not making this "choice" because they want to. The world was not kind to them.
Wrong on both counts. I've had a LOT of gay friends, mostly men but not all, and very close friends, at that. I've yet to meet anyone who is gay who would choose to be straight if he/she could.
“But let me guess, "tolerance" is a virtue you highly prize, right?" What kind of question is that? Don't you "highly prize" tolerance?”
Apparently tolerance isn’t a virtue Althouse commenters value. What else is new? Yawn.
What cognitive dissonance a gay person must have when they align themselves with conservatives.
First of all, there are no such things as generations. People are born every hour of every day non-stop. Second of all, people lie to pollsters.
Some survey respondents may have interpreted "exclusively heterosexual" to not include self-gratification, a friend asks me to point out.
>>Nixon's Christmas bombing of Hanoi in 1972
Of the 11 days of Linebacker II, the only day with no bombing was Christmas day.
Orwell smiles.
@Inga:
What cognitive dissonance a gay person must have when they align themselves with conservatives.
It doesn't actually require any at all. Throughout my life the White House and Congress have been alternately controlled by Democrats and Republicans. And it's had precisely zero impact on my intimate life. Come to my hometown, Inga, and I'll take you for a drink at a gay bar that's been operating here since the 1950s. National politics don't really have much to do with the day-to-day lives people lead.
mockturtle said...
I've yet to meet anyone who is gay who would choose to be straight if he/she could.
You wrote that.
Analyze it yourself.
Contrast it to what you said you believe.
Reflect.
@mockturtle:
I've yet to meet anyone who is gay who would choose to be straight if he/she could.
Why do you think that is? And what do you mean "if?"
"Haven't we been told that homosexual is a result of one's nature and does not have anything to do with "open and fluid attitudes." If the latter is true, then what is wrong with "gay conversion" therapies that attempt to move those "attitudes" in the other direction?"
--
Maybe a look at critical points in earliest psycho-sexual development might be worthwhile.
I remember reading that the fastest growing religion in Britain was Jedi a few years back. I think giving pollsters the pip is a sport there.
@Achilles:
We need to be clear the difference between police activity and enforcing order in society and war.
Murdering someone in a foreign country because secret evidence obtained through secret means tells you that person is a bad guy has nothing to do with "enforcing order in society and war."
It strains credulity to think Obama was stupid enough to have good intentions in Libya.
He did not have good intentions.
Frankly, I don't care. Everyone claims to have good intentions, and I am not a mind reader. Bush's intentions have nothing to do with my judging of the Afghanistan and Iraq Wars, and the same goes for Obama in Libya.
Inga said...
Apparently tolerance isn’t a virtue Althouse commenters value. What else is new? Yawn.
What cognitive dissonance a gay person must have when they align themselves with conservatives.
Today is just be stupid day it seems.
And we can't have a giant pile of stupidity without Inga adding her own hate filled version of stupid.
While you are at it please go look up the words cognitive and dissonance and then look up how they are used in the phrase "cognitive dissonance" so you look like less of an idiot when you use those words.
I know you like to use terms you see here. It is funny to watch you pick up little affectations here and there.
But you couldn't make it any more obvious you are an idiot when you use terms you don't really understand.
Propaganda won’t make anyone gay. It will make people say they are gay, or might be gay, or might be kinda gay.
Survey science is bullshit. You need revealed preferences not expressed ones.
Well, this is borne out by TV where 5 out of every 3 characters are gay and the other 7 are transitioning. 4 out of every 3 are black, of course.
Claiming to be Bi is trendy in some young circles.
Whatever it is that they are, don’t expect grandchildren. A society can be killed by mind-viruses as well as biological plagues.
The leading cause of dysfunction are not classes in the transgender spectrum, including homosexual orientation, but an anthropogenic (i.e. social) fitness function that favors wealth, pleasure, leisure, narcissism, dodo dynasties, and elective abortion.
There is no contradiction in my above statement about gays not wanting to be straight. I used the word 'if' they could because most see themselves as 'born that way'. They enjoy their gay-ness, do not feel discriminated against and yes, some are even Republicans! No 'cognitive dissonance' necessary.
Inga,
You might find the Rubin Report podcast interesting.
@mockturtle:
I have no problem with believing that homosexual people can choose to be straight. I don't happen to believe it but I have no a priori opposition to it. But given that the weight of empirical evidence points pretty squarely against the choice notion, what is your basis for believing it? After all, studies of homosexuality among monozygotic and dizygotic twins would not necessarily have to show any correlations.
Tolerance died with political congruence ("=") that selectively excludes politically unfavorable orientations. The libertarians and conservatives had a solution (i.e. separation of Church and State, of ceremony and classification) to reconcile diverse interests, which in principle includes those excluded by political congruence ("="), but they were overridden by an transgender/homosexual judge and bigoted activists.
Well the way you dress I am sure everyone assumed you are a lesbian.
What's the big deal?
Regarding juvenile experimentation, C.S. Lewis wrote of his observations at school where boys often engaged in such behavior while confined with other boys but most turned out straight [I suppose the same thing happens in prisons]. A female friend of mine who went to an English boarding school observed girls forming emotional [more than sexual, although there was that, too] relationships with other girls. They turned out straight [most of them] when put into a gender-mixed environment. So the experience, itself, may not be predictive of later preference but perhaps abuse, or non-consensual sex?
@n.n:
Tolerance died with political congruence ("=") that selectively excludes politically unfavorable orientations. The libertarians and conservatives had a solution (i.e. separation of Church and State, of ceremony and classification) to reconcile diverse interests, which in principle includes those excluded by political congruence ("="), but they were overridden by an transgender/homosexual judge and bigoted activists.
Huh?
Huh?
What? Political congruence ("=") is selectively exclusive.
J. Farmer,
Homosexuality is not amenable to any kind of conversion therapies because sexual orientation is pretty much set and stable, which is why this study is so absurd.
Sexual orientation isn't in the least "set and stable," if you're including the half of the population that's female. Someone already brought up "Lesbian Until Graduation"; I'd add that the fraction of lesbians I know with small children from prior straight marriages is rather large. Are we to suppose that all these women were just "settling"? Then why don't men do the same thing?
I should add that I do know lesbians of the confirmed, never-wanted-anything-else sort. They are not, in the main, militant types, but more like Florence King's "doggy ladies." A professor at my old university and her [ahem] "sister" were typical of the breed.
LOL. What has this blog’s comments sections come to when Achilles, aka Captain America seriously sees himself as the moral leader of this gathering of people, speaking of cognitive dissonance. He veers between calling people who don’t agree with him “immoral or amoral” and then scolding you folks on the right when you don’t step in line (his line). It’s as if people here don’t recognize Captain America as an authority figure! How dare you?
mock,
Another way of framing that experimentation is influence of living environment. Either way, kinda diverges from the "born that way" premise.
I can't speak to the female side of Generation Z, but my tingling Spider sense tells me that the male side of it is booyah.
You've got young men, in their hormonal prime. It isn't exactly difficult to talk a gay man into having sex with you. There should be lots of gay sex among this crowd. Is there? I doubt it.
If the questions were phrased in something other than touchey-feely "do you feel yourself to be exclusively het", oh, something like, "you ever been blown by another man?" or "Do you enjoy s***ing c***?", I think the responses would be very different. Indeed, while pretenses to tolerance are ubiquitous, asking a young man the latter question I think still remains an instance of "fighting words".
Blogger Michelle Dulak Thomson said...
I'd add that the fraction of lesbians I know with small children from prior straight marriages is rather large. Are we to suppose that all these women were just "settling"? Then why don't men do the same thing?
--
You mean men that have married women, fathered children..then came out?
@Michelle Dulak Thomson:
Sexual orientation isn't in the least "set and stable," if you're including the half of the population that's female.
If you're arguing that men and women's sexuality is different, you won't get a disagreement from me. But individual, discrete sexual experiences do not define sexual orientation. Something around 40% of men who identity as gay have had an opposite-sex partner in their lifetime. It is closer to 60% for lesbians. But that is considering the totality of one's life. The numbers are much smaller when you ask about past-year experiences.
Just to add to the discussion, there is this:
Two novel findings emerged regarding gender and mobility: (1) Although mobility scores were quite low for the full cohort, females reported significantly higher mobility than did males. (2) As expected, for sexual minorities, mobility scores were appreciably higher than for the full cohort; however, the gender difference appeared to be eliminated, indicating that changing reported sexual orientation identity throughout adolescence occurred at a similar rate in female and male sexual minorities. In addition, we found that, of those who described themselves as “unsure” of their orientation identity at any point, 66% identified as completely heterosexual at other reports and never went on to describe themselves as a sexual minority. Age was positively associated with endorsing a sexual-minority orientation identity. We discuss substantive and methodological implications of our findings for understanding development of sexual orientation identity in young people.
-Stability and Change in Self-Reported Sexual Orientation Identity in Young People: Application of Mobility Metrics
@MDK,
The huge differences in "homosexual" behavior between gay men & lesbians has bedeviled researchers since the beginnings of research into sexual behavior. Women's sexual behaviors are so fluid as to lead some researchers to conclude that there really aren't any such things as 100% "lesbians".
Controversial as that stance may be, the position that there seems to be no sort of underlying unity, either psychological or genetic, behind gay & lesbian behavior seems much less controversial. The LGBTWhatever categorization seems to be one of linguistic convenience & little else.
One major difference between gay men and lesbians is that lesbians would never go to a public bath [or a rest stop] to have anonymous sex. Neither would straight women, for that matter.
@mockturtle:
One major difference between gay men and lesbians is that lesbians would never go to a public bath [or a rest stop] to have anonymous sex. Neither would straight women, for that matter.
Very true. Women are also a much smaller percentage of the jail and prison population.
@YoungHegelian - Yes inquiring of the young men "when was the last time you sucked a cock?" would probably get to the root of the matter swiftly.
J. Farmer said...Something around 40% of men who identity as gay have had an opposite-sex partner in their lifetime.
--
Is that perhaps a mischaracterization of their orientation..as in they're Bi?
Not having any attraction to same sex, hard to imagine completing sex with one as an "experimentation".
YoungHegelian,
The LGBTWhatever categorization seems to be one of linguistic convenience & little else.
Agreed. I don't know what work the "B" is really doing in there, either; the number of gay activists who insist that no one is "really" bisexual is awfully large. They're all guys who want to insist that "I do so like women!," and gals who say their marriage and kids were all just a mistake.
Look, bisexual people exist. The aforementioned Florence King is one of them. I've met a few, though nothing like the number of avowedly gay men and women in my circle (hey, classical music in Berkeley, who knew?) It sucks exceedingly that their reward is being shoved into the middle of a jumble of letters by a bunch of people who would just as soon they simply disappeared.
J. Farmer,
You need to take into account not only the lesbians who tried heterosexuality and decided against it, but those who tried lesbianism and then decided against that. The latter -- the LUG factor -- is certainly large, though probably not quite so yuuuge as Bryn Mawr mythology would have it. Then again, every time I decide a statistic is exaggerated, someone pops out and proves it. Are 1 in 20 Wellesley students actually MTF transsexuals, for example? Hard to believe, yes. Literally impossible? Probably not.
walter,
You mean men that have married women, fathered children..then came out?
Yes, that is what I mean. Offhand, the only one I can think of is Michael Huffington, who does indeed say that he's bisexual, though as the only proof he offers is that he was once married to Arianna, well ...
@walter:
Is that perhaps a mischaracterization of their orientation..as in they're Bi?
I think there are multiple reasons. For one, a certain subset of men struggle mightily with their sexual orientation and attempt to lead normal homosexual lives. Thus, if they eventually identity as gay later in their lives, they will still have had opposite-sex partners. Hence, the previous year number is much smaller than the total life number. Also, some men are confused by their sexuality and that includes unsatisfying sexual relationships with women.
Also, I think there is a lot of confusion about exactly what sexual orientation is. It is not defined by discrete, individual sexual encounters. Many gay men are more than capable of being physically aroused by a woman and then having a sexual encounter with that woman, but given the option would never choose it.
If we have exhausted the alphabet with Generation Z then we will have to roll back around to the beginning and call the next one Generation AA.
That could get a little confusing around here.
Well..that doesn't really address the crux of it. Are they really "gay" if aroused by a woman?
@Michelle Dulak Thomson:
You need to take into account not only the lesbians who tried heterosexuality and decided against it, but those who tried lesbianism and then decided against that.
Numbers vary but they tend to be about 2% of heterosexual men who report having a same-sex experience in their life versus about 10% of heterosexual women. Given that approximately 90+% of heterosexual women never have same-sex encounters is strong evidence that their sexual orientation is relatively stable over time. That's not the same thing as saying that it is as stable as men.
mockturtle, J. Farmer,
Indeed! Keeping the bathhouses in SF open during the height of the AIDS epidemic wouldn't have occurred to most lesbians, assuming for the moment that there actually were bathhouses in a world where lesbians predominated and gay men did not. As for "glory holes" and such, I'm pretty sure that the universal reaction to them among women, gay, straight, "gender-fluid," whatever, is one sustained "Ewwwwwwww!"
walter:
Well..that doesn't really address the crux of it. Are they really "gay" if aroused by a woman?
Homosexuality is an attraction to members of one's own sex. It does not preclude attraction to the opposite sex. And again, intimate relationships are about more than just sexual mechanics. Intimacy is not just how your sexual organs go together. To use the prison population example, men are obviously capable of having a mechanical sexual release with other men. That does not mean that given the choice, they would ever choose men over women for sexual partners, and it does not make sense to identify such people as "gay."
"Significantly more white youth identified as exclusively homosexual (3%) than those of ethnic minority backgrounds (0%) but no other ethnic differences were found."
In 2007, Iran’s president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad spoke at Columbia University and declared, “In Iran, we do not have homosexuals like in your country.”
Damn, Mahmoud was right.
Michelle Dulak Thomson:
Indeed! Keeping the bathhouses in SF open during the height of the AIDS epidemic wouldn't have occurred to most lesbians, assuming for the moment that there actually were bathhouses in a world where lesbians predominated and gay men did not. As for "glory holes" and such, I'm pretty sure that the universal reaction to them among women, gay, straight, "gender-fluid," whatever, is one sustained "Ewwwwwwww!"
Undoubtedly. HIV is pretty much nonexistent among lesbians but that has more to do with mechanics than with the differences between men and women. Look at the Ashley Madison embarrassment. It mostly consisted of men talking to each other, which should be obvious to anyone who realizes that there is not a large contingent of women looking for random hookup sex with strangers. And if there was, they wouldn't need an online platform to achieve it. They could frequent the nearest bar in their town. There really aren't female equivalents to Grindr as far as I can tell.
Well..by that definition, Farmer..it's just incorporating what is thought to be Bi within the gay label.
I'm not sure that concept is prevalent.
@walter:
Well..by that definition, Farmer..it's just incorporating what is thought to be Bi within the gay label.
I'm not sure that concept is prevalent.
So let's take a standard definition, the American Psychological Association's. Homosexuality is "an enduring pattern of having emotional, romantic, or sexual attractions to members of one’s own sex." Absence of attraction to members of the opposite sex is not part of the definition.
As to the issue of bisexuality, consider the following example. A man has sexual relationships with women in his late teens and early 20s and then comes out to himself as gay and has exclusive relationships with men from that point forward. Does identifying him as "bisexual" really make sense in that case?
"Absence of attraction to members of the opposite sex is not part of the definition."
Well...neither is pedophilia or bestiality.
On second point, he might be more accurately be described as Bi...depending on if he has evolved to have no attraction to women anymore.
It might inform this more to incorporate strictly hetero orientations into the picture.
@walter:
"Absence of attraction to members of the opposite sex is not part of the definition."
Well...neither is pedophilia or bestiality.
You're missing the point. If we agree that homosexuality is "an enduring pattern of having emotional, romantic, or sexual attractions to members of one’s own sex," there is nothing about having an physiological response to a woman that negates that definition.
So, just because a man was capable of getting an erection from being stimulated by a woman, yet given the choice, would never choose a female sexual partner, it makes zero sense to refer to that person as bisexual.
Similarly, if you were in prison for ten years, and during that time you received oral sex from a man, yet upon your release, you never once looked at or pursued men sexually, it would make zero sense to refer to you as "gay."
J. Farmer said...
Don't confuse sexual orientation with gender identity. I have never understood why the "T" is lumped in with the "G" the "L" and the "B."
L and G and B and T all individually represent 4 groups that are tangentially represented at best. Maybe the L and B have some overlap.
But if you are a bunch of leftists trying to get money for a department at a university the LGBT Center sounds so good!
It also serves to define, separate, and pigeon hole.
It turns all 4 disparate groups with numerous individuals into a nameless mass with a label.
Much more useful to the leftists that way.
Of course they would be natural allies to any group who would want smaller government because governments all over the world try to exterminate them.
But if you have a choice between being lumped and labeled into a group and used as a political tool on the one hand and being told you made a choice to be aberrant on the other there isn't much of a choice.
At least tools get paid.
n.n said...
Political congruence ("=") is selectively exclusive.
Well, congruent politics is exclusively selective and selective congruence is exclusively political, so it all adds up ("+").
Other Riverdale High polls:
42% of teens eagerly prepared to join a mob to throw Betty off the roof, cause she wins everything all the time and is too god-damn sweet for words.
19% of Debate Club fearful that opponents will find out they have an uncle who actually believes in limited government, and he sorta made sense that one time.
53.8% really dont care what paper pushers do with all that survey shit. Kids these days know that the only poll that counts is done in a ballot box, all alone, so screw you, crystal ballers
102% of the hetero male cohort would choose Veronica if they didnt have to put up with her drama after.
Well it was a UK publication. Lots of fairies in Britain.
And lots of gays in the Republican Party. Loads.
Self-hating types fit right in to the Republican Party.
Does identifying him as "bisexual" really make sense in that case?
I think women are much more likely to be bisexual. This is nothing new.
I remember a New England Journal article from almost 50 years ago about tracing syphilis contacts in New York City,
Female to female contacts kept coming up. It was actually hilarious because the PHS officers doing the contact tracing were astonished.
I doubt any if them had ever seen a porno flick (stag movies in those days).
"What cognitive dissonance a gay person must have when they align themselves with conservatives.
Inga,
You seem to be set on embarrassing yourself.
Adults are having a mostly intelligent conversation about a complex and controversial issue.
You need to sit at the kids' table.
Francisco D. Dumbass dispenses yet another post chock full of ad hominem testaments to his narcissistic superiority complex, while talking about being an adult and how the person he can't objectively respond to is supposedly not behaving like one. Interesting. He's a self-negator.
Who woke up Ritmo?
Francisco D. Dumbass dispenses yet another post chock full of ad hominem testaments to his narcissistic superiority complex, while talking about being an adult and how the person he can't objectively respond to is supposedly not behaving like one. Interesting. He's a self-negator.”
Maybe he needs to tell us once again how he would love to eat our brains and spleens (and in my case he mentioned a female body part) like he did a couple of months ago. That is adult level horror.
L and G and B and T all individually represent 4 groups that are tangentially represented at best.
They are all classes in the transgender spectrum. Sex is binary: male and female. Gender is binary: masculine and feminine, respectively, that refers to physical and mental (e.g. sexual orientation) attributes. The difference between a homosexual, neo-sexual (e.g. neo-female), transvestite, etc. is one of degrees (spectrum). #TooManyLabels
That said, now what? What is, what are, the issues of merit for classes in the transgender spectrum?
congruent politics is exclusively selective and selective congruence is exclusively political, so it all adds up ("+")
In a political field, yes. In an apolitical, abiological field, I would venture a guess that we are equal as in individual, not "=" as in diversity.
I think women are much more likely to be bisexual
It is probably because female-female intimate contact is on the surface less intrusive. Also, before the normalization of elective abortion, and the advancement of medical treatment, it carried less personal responsibility and risk, respectively.
I fully get your point, Farmer.
I just think you are reading into an "absence" what you want.
Going that route..could err..insert any attraction avenue(s).
Similarly, "heterosexual" could, via omission, include sexual attraction to the same sex..just at some arbitrarily lower level.
If all is on a wildly variable continuum with no absolutes, the terms hetero and gay really aren't useful.
But yeah, that mentioned prison behavior presents questions that the "born that way"/no choice concept doesn't seem to address.
I've always thought 'ambisexual' more accurately described the situation than 'bisexual'.
@mockturtle:
I've always thought 'ambisexual' more accurately described the situation than 'bisexual'.
Ehh...that could just as easily describe someone who was androgynous. There have been some efforts to get "pansexual" off the ground, but I don't think it's had much success.
@walter:
If all is on a wildly variable continuum with no absolutes, the terms hetero and gay really aren't useful.
Completely agree with the first half of that sentence and completely disagree with the second half. Color is also "on a wildly variable continuum." It doesn't mean "blue" and "green" aren't useful terms.
Since around 1970, it has been "cool" to be a male homosexual.
Since around 2000, it has been "cool" to be a lesbian.
I expect that we will be able to identify 2010 or so, when it became cool to be a trans (if that's the right term -- I mean rejecting or questioning one's biological sex.)
Lots of young people are fascinated by and perplexed by sex as they enter and proceed through puberty. Those people are strongly influenced by what the popular culture sees as "cool". So in the 1960s, being a male homosexual is hard as it opposes popular cultural beliefs (see the role of Sal in MadMen). But in the 1970s or 80s, being a male homosexual is cool,
People who go along with the popular ideas of what is cool are not brave, though they like to think so, as they compare themselves to what their parents generations might have thought of as cool.
So in the age of 2018, the brave people -- those refusing to accept the popular notions of cool as they exist today-- are those who are celibate until marriage, or those men who insist on taking traditional male roles.
I think we should wait calmly until those 2018 brave people are finally seen as the avant guarde.
I said: "I have No Idea, what the answers would be; i just know that we are Forbidden to Ask these questions".
and J Farmer show Lots of data that it's Not forbidden.
Well, WHO'S got egg all over their face Now? Huh?
@gilbar:
and J Farmer show Lots of data that it's Not forbidden.
Well, WHO'S got egg all over their face Now? Huh?
Haha. Not at all. While there is a good deal of data in the literature, your instinct is right that it is not an area that gay rights activists like to dwell in due to the complications to "the narrative," which for political activists is always more important than the actual empirical reality. Gay males over representation in the exploitation of young adolescent males (i.e. pederasty) is an equally fraught topic that is not to be discussed in polite company.
Maybe he needs to tell us once again how he would love to eat our brains and spleens (and in my case he mentioned a female body part) like he did a couple of months ago. That is adult level horror.
Right. Playing at the role of the sadistic pseudo-transexual sociopathic serial killer from Silence of the Lambs. Charming.
Francisco D. Dumbass has all the charm of raw sewage. If a woman called him a creepy scumbag he'd figure he's probably making progress.
You should provide the quote or link, Inga. Fran's a real fucked-up full-blown psychotic, but I imagine having the evidence thrown back at him over and over again should disincentivized the little cretin at least a little.
“You should provide the quote or link, Inga. Fran's a real fucked-up full-blown psychotic, but I imagine having the evidence thrown back at him over and over again should disincentivized the little cretin at least a little.”
I’ll have to see if I can find it, I almost saved it but didn’t. Now I wish I had.
The two human scroll bars are all over this thread, I see.
Inga is starting to lose it. I'm surprised. She seemed to become a little more rational recently.
Ritmo lost it a long time ago.
It = sanity.
h,
You are correct. These are fashions.
Unfortunately, though the fashions are transient, the consequences, personal and demographic, will be permanent.
Even now you have hundreds of thousands (or millions, perhaps) of bitter, barren women.
Imagine the (lesser) problem of tens of thousands of now unfashionable gonad-less men.
This is just a manifestation of the special snowflake environment in which these kids were raised.
Heterosexual and gay are just so... normal. There has to be some way to convince everyone I'm really, really special. Oh wait, I know, I'll stake out my very own spot on the sex/gender line!
The two human scroll bars are all over this thread, I see.
Oh, you're really attuned to that. But the question is, why?
Well, we rolled off of your equally boring daughters and wife long ago.
Now go away, little boy.
It = sanity.
Did you go by the name, "Albert Einstein" in a former life?
Interesting, coming from a guy who aspires to be a combination of Buffalo Bill, Multiple Miggs and Hannibal Lecter all in one.
Dr. Francisco Lecter.
For the last few years the millenials, the post puberty but pre employment generation have grossly over estimated the percentage of the population that is gay. The usual figure is around 25% which is nonsense but may be enough to encourage these fantasies.
As Farmer pointed out above, the real figure for males is around 3% and there is increasing evidence that it, like most behaviors, is probably genetic. There might be an intrauterine hormone level but the genetic theory is getting more support in neurochemistry,
Seriously, would a psychiatric professional of any worth ever say the kinds of unhinged things that Mr. Armchair Diagnosis, Vindictiveness and Judgment repeatedly says, every day?
When you listen to actual psychiatric professionals, even those posting on internet chat rooms, they seem to bend over backwards at listing the evidence for their opinions and how objective they aim to make them.
I can't name a single time when Dr. Francisco D. Dumbass ever said anything that wasn't an insult, opinionated, glib or inane. He's got all the depth of a sewage drain.
At least Special K. aspires to evidence, even if he doesn't know what it is. (Cf. the time when he advocated using opioids for chronic pain!) LOL!!! But Dr. F.D. Dumbass couldn't render an objective, heavily researched fact if his very insignificant life depended on it.
A survey without independent, objective corroboration of the survey answers is a joke.
Back in the Nixon era, my very white bread junior high school class was given a survey on drug use. Apparently we were all, every one of us, LSD users who were heroin addicts who did speed in school and got our pot from the teachers. And a national survey like that is why the War on Drugs is still going strong today, kids. Who knew?
To determine the truthfulness of a survey, you have to test at least a few of the respondents by observation or proof of truthfulness. Otherwise what you have is known as a "pile of crap."
Testosterone levels are dropping in Western Civilizations. 1% a year since 1980.
Men are becoming more like women. I think it's plastics.
“Seriously, would a psychiatric professional of any worth ever say the kinds of unhinged things that Mr. Armchair Diagnosis, Vindictiveness and Judgment repeatedly says, every day?”
Dr. Running With Scissors
in my high schools (1974-5, Northern California - Amador Valley Dons, and 1975-1977 Long Island, Suffolk County (home of Yastrzemski, a friend of whose daughter I once dated -sort of, and of Craig Biggio, whose fastball was slower than mine in the late 70s and early 80s - by the way, does your county have two living Hall of Famers - I think not) about 10 percent of the males tried to look like Mick Jagger. None of those guys were gay. The gay dudes never thought it was worth their time to look like a rock star, because other gay dudes did not care.
Nobody , with a few exceptions, really loves anybody unless the object of love is attractive. Look I do not want to pretend I know what life is like for a good-looking gay male (I am oh for two on that, not good looking not gay) or what life is like for a good looking heterosexual female (hey I am one for two on that, being heterosexual), but I do know this:
we all are going to either be a lot older some day, or are going to be in the graveyard while the other old people sometimes (in my case, almost never, in your case, maybe often, so let us settle on sometimes) remember them. Is the most important thing to be true to what God wants us to do with our gifts? (and remember the commenter who said that gay people are almost never sad about the fact that they are gay ...)
Once or twice I had the opportunity to be really unkind to people who, in turn, were not kind: I remember what it is like to have a beautiful woman try to seduce me for the purpose of fleeting pleasure and for another purpose (either as a way to get back at her boyfriend or husband who she was a little angry with at the time, or just as an overenthusiastic way to show that she really really liked the good things in life - like I said, I have never been physically attractive, but on the other hand I have always been clearly and without a doubt a healthy looking male with good hygiene and a socially acceptable personality), and I never let that happen. Can you imagine how difficult that was?
All we can do, in the end, is do what we can to show we care about other people. When I read these weird statistics about kids who lie about how gay they are, I wonder why they lie like that. But I don't wonder much, everybody wants to be interesting and to be seen as being interesting. It is easier to be seen as interesting than to be interesting. Book of Proverbs, chapter 8 is pretty clear on this, and if you are interested in the psychological subtleties, the chapter in the Gospel of John where Jesus explains to the woman with 7 husbands that she had never been married is the place you want to begin. Thanks for reading, my friend.
I read the article looking for a male/female breakdown, which it didn't have. I did notice that England is about to outlaw "conversion therapy"- with the active support of the Prime Minister herself. So if you are a mixed up guy trapped in a gay lifestyle, you cannot legally receive psychotherapy to convert you to heterosexuality ? This all sounds like some LGBQ activism running amuck.
@rightguy:
So if you are a mixed up guy trapped in a gay lifestyle, you cannot legally receive psychotherapy to convert you to heterosexuality?
Not really a fan of outlawing anything two consenting adults want to engage in, but really how do you get "trapped in a gay lifestyle?" All of the men I know who have no desire to be in gay relationships have no trouble realizing that desire? Do you think this opposite is possible? That is, do you honestly believe that through therapeutic intervention, you could be made to desire gay sex and to live in an intimate relationship with another man?
"Only two-thirds. . ."
Oh. Ok.
J. Farmer said...
@walter:
If all is on a wildly variable continuum with no absolutes, the terms hetero and gay really aren't useful.
Completely agree with the first half of that sentence and completely disagree with the second half. Color is also "on a wildly variable continuum." It doesn't mean "blue" and "green" aren't useful terms.
--
Not so sure an organ working at full, distorted or restricted spectrum is the best analogy to something like sexuality, with its distinct binary biological manifestations and procreative mandate.
Another element to explore would be situational/induced color agnosia in prisons and such.
@walter:
Not so sure an organ working at full, distorted or restricted spectrum is the best analogy to something like sexuality, with its distinct binary biological manifestations and procreative mandate.
The analogy is that just because there is a "wildly variable continuum" between blue and green does not mean that blue and green are not useful terms. Similarly, just because there is a "wildly variable continuum" between heterosexual and homosexual does not mean that the terms are not useful. For a small subset of the population, there is a "wildly variable continuum" between male and female. That doesn't mean male and female "aren't useful" terms.
Well..colors have fixed wavelengths from which color agnosia is determined.
Given most folk don't ever consider sex with their own sex, is there an issue with the more colloquial differential terms like bi, bi-curious or gay and the like for those who do? It just seems to attch an abstract homosexuality to "hetero".
I mean, in the scheme of things, there is a pretty clear bolt+nut=life element to pull into the equation.
J F : its not hard for me to imagine a sexually confused male person, who is attracted to men, finding himself in an unfulfilling gay relationship at around age thirty, hanging around with other gay men mostly, and having second thoughts about it all, even feeling "trapped" . I have known of a few guys something like that.
I did Google 'conversion therapy' (something I have never thought about) and there appears to be an organized jihad against the practice of CT. It looks like the work of the LGBQ political movement, with all the usual suspects weighing in on the 'pseudoscience' of CT. A lot of CT is religiously based, so I can understand the fervor on both sides.
Its hard for me to imagine conversion therapy having a high success rate, maybe a single digit whole number %, probably similar to the success rate of treating alcoholism.
@rightguy:
J F : its not hard for me to imagine a sexually confused male person, who is attracted to men, finding himself in an unfulfilling gay relationship at around age thirty, hanging around with other gay men mostly, and having second thoughts about it all, even feeling "trapped" . I have known of a few guys something like that.
Something like that? What was dissimilar from the example you gave?
Again, why not the opposite? I know quite a few heterosexual men in their 30s in unfulfilling relationships with women, and it never once occurred to me to suggest that the solution to their problems would be to enter a therapeutic relationship aimed at converting them to homosexuals.
Its hard for me to imagine conversion therapy having a high success rate, maybe a single digit whole number %, probably similar to the success rate of treating alcoholism.
What is your basis for claiming that "the success rate of treating alcoholism" is in the "single digit whole number percent?" See Changing sexual orientation: A consumers' report published in the 2002 edition of Professional Psychology. That sexual orientation has a large biological component predicts against the success of conversion therapies. And again, this would hold true for attempts to convert from heterosexual to homosexual.
@walter:
Given most folk don't ever consider sex with their own sex, is there an issue with the more colloquial differential terms like bi, bi-curious or gay and the like for those who do? It just seems to attch an abstract homosexuality to "hetero".
I mean, in the scheme of things, there is a pretty clear bolt+nut=life element to pull into the equation.
I honestly do not know what point you are trying to make. Is it your point that to be heterosexual/homosexual, 100% of your sexual activities must have occurred with members of the opposite or same sex? Otherwise, bisexual is the only useful term? What about 99% of your activities? 98%? 97%? I think there is probably a quality/quantity distinction that most people recognize.
Wow. This thread right here is why I have been lurking around this place for over a decade. Intelligent and thoughtful discussion of a complex issue. There used to be so much more of this and I truly miss it. What's most impressive is, even though the resident trolls came out, no one dropped to their level and allowed them to hijack the thread making it unreadable. Oh and Farmer, I often find your posts a little smug and off putting, but here you have proven that your are far more thoughtful than I previously gave you credit for.
Anyway just wanted to express some appreciation for you folks who try to keep the civil exchange of ideas going. It's become far to rare these days.
"I honestly do not know what point you are trying to make. Is it your point that to be heterosexual/homosexual, 100% of your sexual activities must have occurred with members of the opposite or same sex?"
Well..aside from the fraction who experiment or are bi..
Ummm...yes.
Meet the vast majority.
Is there a solid, non relativistic term for that?
JF : "Again, why not the opposite? I know quite a few heterosexual men in their 30s in unfulfilling relationships with women, and it never once occurred to me to suggest that the solution to their problems would be to enter a therapeutic relationship aimed at converting them to homosexuals."
It would never occur to me suggest anything like that, either.
My main point is that homosexuals who would like to be hetero will soon not have access to conversion therapy in England. And it looks entirely political to me.
FWIW rightguy, the 2002 Shidlo research Farmer references is also referenced in
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4771007/
Abstract
In recent years, national and international medical and mental-health associations typically have emphasized the potential harmfulness of professional care for unwanted same-sex attraction (SSA or homosexuality) and behavior. State legislatures in the US and legislative bodies in other countries either have passed or are considering passing laws which would penalize professionals who provide professional care for unwanted SSA—to minors and/or adults—including the loss of the license to practice. This paper was written as a response to the present situation in the UK. The paper reviews the universal ethics of all medical and mental-health professionals to avoid harm and do good (non-maleficence/non-malfeasance and beneficence); discusses the documented potential for harm when using every mental-health treatment for every presenting problem; clarifies steps taken by the Alliance for Therapeutic Choice and Scientific Integrity (Alliance), its clinical and research divisions, the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality Institute (NARTH Institute) and its international division, the International Federation for Therapeutic Choice (IFTC), to promote ethical professional care for unwanted SSA; clarifies the injustice and presumed ideological biases of the medical and mental-health associations’ warning about the potential for harm for psychotherapy only for unwanted SSA and not all psychotherapy approaches; and documents that the research purporting to show this harmfulness, in the research authors own words, does not do so. Recommendations to promote scientific integrity in the conduct and reporting of relevant research are offered.
Lay Summary: There has been a lot of controversy about the potential harmfulness of professional care for unwanted same-sex attraction and behavior (SSA or homosexuality). This paper reviews the ethics of all medical and mental health professionals to avoid harm and do good; discusses the known potential for harm when using any mental health treatment for any problem; clarifies steps taken to promote ethical professional care for unwanted SSA; notes the injustice and possible biases of those who warn about the potential for harm of psychotherapy for unwanted SSA; and documents that the research said to show this harmfulness, in the research authors own words, does not do so.
J F : "That is, do you honestly believe that through therapeutic intervention, you could be made to desire gay sex and to live in an intimate relationship with another man?"
Interesting question. But I have never known a heterosexual man that wished he were gay.
@walter:
Is there a solid, non relativistic term for that?
I think the current nomenclature works fine. Perhaps as many as 10% of heterosexual women report having a same-sex experience in their lifetimes. I do not think these are women who are lying about heterosexuality or whose lifestyles would be better described as bisexual. Similarly, perhaps about 2% of heterosexual men report having a same-sex experience in their life. I don't think it makes any sense to refer to these men as homosexual or bisexual.
@rightguy:
My main point is that homosexuals who would like to be hetero will soon not have access to conversion therapy in England. And it looks entirely political to me.
Again, I agree that outlawing therapies in which people freely enter into is ridiculous. I just think that conversion therapy is about as useful as phrenology.
Interesting question. But I have never known a heterosexual man that wished he were gay.
True. But I have also never known men who were disowned by their families or ostracized from their communities because they were heterosexual.
farmer,
Maybe incorporating fractions within fractions in order to un-binary essentially binary terms is problematic..
Still don’t know what your point is. And it isn’t from a lack of trying. So either you’re being opaque, or it’s over my head. I am more than willing to accept the latter explanation.
"Maybe incorporating fractions within fractions in order to un-binary essentially binary terms is problematic.."
There are 10 kinds of people : those that understand the binary numeral system and those that don't.
Inga: "What cognitive dissonance a gay person must have when they align themselves with conservatives."
Shhh! Don't tell the lesbian couple with whom we vacationed in Greece this May that we're conservatives. We've been fooling them like that for 40 years now, and they would be devastated to learn that we're actually reactionary homophobes. As would the other gay people in our social circle. In fact, our non white friends and son-in-law and our mixed race grandchildren don't realize we're racist Nazis, either. We've hid it so well all these years, and it would be really embarrassing to now be outed by an elderly, straight white woman who only by chance lives in one of the whitest cities in one of the whitest states in the union. The rest of us have to hide our political sins and prejudices in shame until the Great Accounting then hope for forgiveness from those more pure, righteous and ideologically proper, like the blessed Saint Inga of Madison. Pray for us, Saint Inga, don't belittle us for we know we are political sinners.
What you publicly say, what you think you should say, what you think you should do and what you actually do are all different things. Sometimes they are all different, and sometimes they coincide - but not as often as one would think.
Post a Comment