Homosexuality & Politics in the 21st Century

[miles0624]

I've seen sources where homosexuals are in the 20% range (which is WAY more believable, because the nation is definitely not 2% homosexual. That estimate isn't correct) and where bisexuals are in the 45% range. Of course, this is flawed in a number of ways, mostly because people have a tendency to lie to themselves, and because the samples taken could simply be a weird group.

Also, there's apparently considerable evidence suggesting that bisexuality doesn't actually exist, but that may be a different debate.

I don't believe that homosexuality is it at 20%. They may be becoming more popular, but saying it is that high is rediculous. (Also, please mind you that lying works in both way. people may lie to themselves that they aren't homosexual, but people may also lie to themselves that they are.) I have not seen evidence that bisexuality does not exists, can you cite me for this?

I gave information earlier, but from all my research, I still conclude that 2-3 percent of the Human race is homosexual and 2 percent is bi-sexual. As for America, I don't think we can put a definate number on it because of immigration and such. Homosexuals do tend to immigrate here to escape persecution, so our number may not reflect the general population of the world.

 

[7 tyranitars]

I don't believe that homosexuality is it at 20%. They may be becoming more popular, but saying it is that high is rediculous. (Also, please mind you that lying works in both way. people may lie to themselves that they aren't homosexual, but people may also lie to themselves that they are.) I have not seen evidence that bisexuality does not exists, can you cite me for this?

I gave information earlier, but from all my research, I still conclude that 2-3 percent of the Human race is homosexual and 2 percent is bi-sexual. As for America, I don't think we can put a definate number on it because of immigration and such. Homosexuals do tend to immigrate here to escape persecution, so our number may not reflect the general population of the world.

Lol at bolded part. It is not a matter of populair.

The estimated ammound is between 5-10% counting Bisexuals and Homosexuals.

 

[Sadib]

If only there was a sexuality litmus test...

 

[miles0624]

Lol at bolded part. It is not a matter of populair.

The estimated ammound is between 5-10% counting Bisexuals and Homosexuals.

That is about what I was saying. I brought in the popularity aspect to show how people can come up with extremely biasised numbers like 20%. Not only is there no proof of this (as all official test put the estimate around the world at 2-5 percent), but it is putting up a statistic that is directly misleading.

 

[Grei]

I don't believe that homosexuality is it at 20%. They may be becoming more popular, but saying it is that high is rediculous. (Also, please mind you that lying works in both way. people may lie to themselves that they aren't homosexual, but people may also lie to themselves that they are.)

You do realize just how unlikely of a scenario this is, right? America is still very much a heterosexualist society. Most people assume others are heterosexual by default, until they claim otherwise.

And thinking that 20% of the entire population of America is homosexual is nowhere near ridiculous. Homosexuals are not nearly as uncommon as you apparently think they are, and then there's the multitude of homosexuals who refuse to come out and still claim heterosexual.

I have not seen evidence that bisexuality does not exists, can you cite me for this?

Unfortunately, I cannot. I've only ever heard this information from a friend who did research on it in college. I was bringing it up solely for us to consider as something else to confound the statistics regarding sexuality.

That is about what I was saying. I brought in the popularity aspect to show how people can come up with extremely biasised numbers like 20%. Not only is there no proof of this (as all official test put the estimate around the world at 2-5 percent), but it is putting up a statistic that is directly misleading.

Excuse you. Can you not arbitrarily claim that my data is "biasised?" 20% for America really is not that far-fetched. I'd personally assume a percentage in the teens range, but regardless, it's rude of you to claim that the data I'm presenting is biased and not worth consideration just because your data disagrees.

That said, however, statistics and research are so often incorrect that it hardly makes a difference. When collecting data from humans there are so many variables that may go into the data that research findings are very often skewed and unreliable.

 

[miles0624]

You do realize just how unlikely of a scenario this is, right? America is still very much a heterosexualist society. Most people assume others are heterosexual by default, until they claim otherwise.

And thinking that 20% of the entire population of America is homosexual is nowhere near ridiculous. Homosexuals are not nearly as uncommon as you apparently think they are, and then there's the multitude of homosexuals who refuse to come out and still claim heterosexual.



Unfortunately, I cannot. I've only ever heard this information from a friend who did research on it in college. I was bringing it up solely for us to consider as something else to confound the statistics regarding sexuality.



Excuse you. Can you not arbitrarily claim that my data is "biasised?" 20% for America really is not that far-fetched. I'd personally assume a percentage in the teens range, but regardless, it's rude of you to claim that the data I'm presenting is biased and not worth consideration just because your data disagrees.

That said, however, statistics and research are so often incorrect that it hardly makes a difference. When collecting data from humans there are so many variables that may go into the data that research findings are very often skewed and unreliable.

Here is the thing about debate, the problem is you cannot cite a friend. How do we know what your friend collect. Do we know if he is factual. He could be making things up off the top oh his head. (As said, we have continually provided information that homosexuality is somewhere between the 3% and 10% range.) Yes, most research findings are skewed, but that does not mean they are unreliable. The 20% you just described puts that margin 10-17% off of a margin that was only two to three percent off. It is for this reason that 20% is a very far-fetched number. One cannot just make a claim and say, "Well its not that far fetched, and my friend did a study about it in college." A college student has more of a chance of misrepresenting information than the government or university professors who have made it their life work to document these phenomena. I wouldn't discredit these people based on a personal belief. This is the reason i said your information is biased*. You have not presented any data that can compete with other data presented through this entire thread, thus your information is skewed and unreliable.

Lastly, it is easy to say how research findings are unreliable because a variables, but then you are just working to discredit science as a whole. If you are willingly to say the findings of people posted earlier in unreliable, you must accept the fact that your friends research is just as unreliable, if not more so based on the fact that he is one out of XXX amount of people willing to even state that homosexuality rates are that high.

Edit: Last three weeks of school and I have major finals coming up, so I probably won't be on for the next three weeks. I may try to sneak on, but don't be susprised if you guys don't see me on here at all. Wish me luck.

 

[mattj]

there's this thing called google
where you can search for information
here i'll link you
http://www.google.com

 

[Ambre]

there's this thing called google
where you can search for information
here i'll link you
http://www.google.com

This was a really random post. If it is in response to Miles, he has posted findings, he was saying how no where will one find a statistic as high as twenty percent, if so, please cite it. Also, you know that in a debate, you cite your information and don't say "you look it up." Just saying.

 

[Ereshk]

I also don't think 20% is ridiculous. Half of the boys in my class are gay. Sure, it is an isolated example, but it's enough to say that claiming 20% of the population is gay isn't baseless. I also think that bissexuality don't exist, but I don't have any evidence to back up on that.
Bringing up a new topic, I think people should stop defining people by their sexual option/condition. You don't need to know if someone is gay to befriend a person, just like you don't need to know your best friend's favorite color. People are free to be hetero or gay, and also to show or hide that. Pressing someone is really uncomfortable and embarrassing. Personal experience.

 

[Kaiserin]

Because it not worth my time dealing with people who only want to yap their mouth off. What do you want me to do? Crush them beneath my boot just because they talk crap to one of my gay friend? The best thing I would do is mess with them and talk about how ugly he/she is, and that take works. Best thing is it go, and bring your gay friend somewhere else.

Tell them it's unacceptable, because it is? Or discourage it somehow? You don't have to get into a huge argument about it, but I'm pretty sure prevention would be better than waiting until said gay friend gets beaten up by those same people.

And if this gay person is your friend, it astonishes me you wouldn't be willing to support or stand up for them. That doesn't sound like much of a friend to me. A gay person who happens to be in your totally-impersonal vicinity, maybe I could buy that. But if you mean an actual openly gay friend of yours? Then you're just a terrible friend.

Kids are so cruel. Good thing we aren't kid now are we?

It's not just kids who will go out and kill homosexuals for their perception of them and try to get off of it using the gay panic defense, regardless of whether that person was actually gay or not.

 

[Ambre]

I also don't think 20% is ridiculous. Half of the boys in my class are gay. Sure, it is an isolated example, but it's enough to say that claiming 20% of the population is gay isn't baseless. I also think that bissexuality don't exist, but I don't have any evidence to back up on that.
Bringing up a new topic, I think people should stop defining people by their sexual option/condition. You don't need to know if someone is gay to befriend a person, just like you don't need to know your best friend's favorite color. People are free to be hetero or gay, and also to show or hide that. Pressing someone is really uncomfortable and embarrassing. Personal experience.

But see, you are still going on personal experience. In my entire nineteen years on this planet, I have only met ten homosexuals. TEN... Based on your example, I have the basis to claim that less than one percent of the population is homosexual. That is why, by studies posted, and much research, twenty percent is seen as ridiculous. This is especially true when taking in the variable about how people may lie about their orientation, the max, with variable incorectness, is still only at 10%. That other ten percent that you are asserting needs to be proved with more than just a feel. I still go by the fact that twenty percent is a rather baseless number.

On the issue of bi-sexuality, what would you call those people? "Experimenters."

Also, I wouldn't call it pressing, but more of getting to know your friends. I befriended two of my friends before they told me they were gay. (kinda of guessed, but oh well.) But I don't get comparing it to a color. Really, yes you are expected to know your best friend's favorite color. By getting that title of "best friend" you officially assume that you know more about that person than any of their other friends. (This extends to favorite colors/food/etc.) Plus, you can't just say stop defining people by their sexual orientation, because that is who they are. They should be proud to define themselves. It is the same with race; when people ask me what I am, I first say American, then divide myself into the sub-group of a African/Native American. If you are truly a friend to someone, you shouldn't put on blinders. However, now I am getting off topic.

 

[chuboy]

It is very hard to determine the true percentage of people who identify as homosexual. Even if the sample was perfectly representative of the whole population, homosexuality is not culturally acceptable enough for many people to respond truthfully, whether they are lying to themselves or only to outsiders.

Should it matter?

 

[Ambre]

It is very hard to determine the true percentage of people who identify as homosexual. Even if the sample was perfectly representative of the whole population, homosexuality is not culturally acceptable enough for many people to respond truthfully, whether they are lying to themselves or only to outsiders.

Should it matter?

Well, because we are in a debate, and I want to win... Yes .

Well since Chuboy succefully ended that tangent, and I can't spell, lets start a new one.

I don't think that homosexuals are going to be all that active as a group in politics (like the teaparty.) My belief is that they only are active for the rights of gay marriage, but after that, they will separate back into the groups they were in before it had its surge. What do you guys think?

 

[Kaiserin]

Well, because we are in a debate, and I want to win... Yes .

Well since Chuboy succefully ended that tangent, and I can't spell, lets start a new one.

I don't think that homosexuals are going to be all that active as a group in politics (like the teaparty.) My belief is that they only are active for the rights of gay marriage, but after that, they will separate back into the groups they were in before it had its surge. What do you guys think?

I wouldn't be surprised, since it's the main political/government-related issue most of the LGBTQ group has. Outside of the ones who might fall into a different type of oppressed group (people of color, the disabled, etc.), I think they'd be satisfied once they get the equality and rights they deserve. Why would they need to keep going after they get what they've been asking for the whole time?

I mean, the same happened with the civil rights movement, even though we still have racism and racial profiling half a century later. It's at least no longer legal to do so, and there will always be bigots, both in regards to racism and sexual identity/equality, but the issue quieted down a lot afterwards. It'll take generations and then some to phase out the homophobia with the racism, but I think it would certainly be a very important step towards that goal.

 

[Sadib]

This video is kind of obnoxious about their point of anti-hate.

 

[Malanu]

Why would they need to keep going after they get what they've been asking for the whole time?

To make sure they keep what they fought so hard to earn? At least that would be my guess.

 

[Ambre]

To make sure they keep what they fought so hard to earn? At least that would be my guess.

But would that mean they would make an organization like the NAACP (GAWD) of would the become something like the tea partiers (Even worse), or just fade back into this two party system that we have.

 

[Malanu]

NAACP probably, but that's just my thoughts.

 

[Ambre]

NAACP probably, but that's just my thoughts.

Ahh man, that means they will never go away. See, I think there are times when all groups are needed to flourish, but then they should fall back into obscruity( like Unions, but that is a different debate. ^.^). I happy for what the LGBT is doing for their community, but if they just don't fade back, I think they will become a living joke. See All Sharpton.

That is just me personally though. Does this community really have any power in the political spectrum. It could be argued that the laws on marriage are changing because of changing times, and that even without this group, it would have changed.

 

[7 tyranitars]

Ahh man, that means they will never go away. See, I think there are times when all groups are needed to flourish, but then they should fall back into obscruity( like Unions, but that is a different debate. ^.^). I happy for what the LGBT is doing for their community, but if they just don't fade back, I think they will become a living joke. See All Sharpton.

That is just me personally though. Does this community really have any power in the political spectrum. It could be argued that the laws on marriage are changing because of changing times, and that even without this group, it would have changed.

Any politcal group except the republicans and the democrats are basicly of nonimportantce, they can't do anything because the undemocratic 2 party system.