Gay Republic Daily

Open Forum - Studies, studies, and more studies

berto - Sep 16, 2006 - 10:14 PM
Post subject: Studies, studies, and more studies
I could'a told them that WITHOUT a study

Quote:
A new report by a leading gay men's health group says scientific research shows that much of gay men's risky sex and drug use is fueled by high levels of depression and related disorders, such as anxiety and dysthymia, a type of mild chronic depression.

The report, titled "Living on the Edge: Gay Men, Depression and Risk-Taking" was released Friday by the Medius Institute for Gay Men's Health, a gay men's health advocacy group in New York City.

In one key study of gay men's mental health cited by the report, more than 17 percent of participants had active symptoms of depression -- about twice the rate of current depression in general.

Other studies indicate that the lifetime risk of depression is roughly three times higher for gay men.

[...]

[Spencer Cox, executive director of the Medius Institute and author of the report, said] "For the most part depression doesn't seem to cause high-risk behavior directly, but it certainly 'pumps up the volume' on risk-taking,"... "And risky behavior may increase the likelihood of depression." Cox pointed to methamphetamine use, which is associated with depression, and which can cause long-term changes in the brain that lead to depression.

Cox added, "For gay men, depression seems to play a central role in health, similar to obesity for Americans in general. Just as overweight people have increased risks of cardiovascular disease, diabetes and other serious illnesses, gay men with depression and related disorders are at increased risk for a host of bad things."


Ummm.... what's next? Are they going to "discover" that the high rates of alcohol and drug abuse among gay men are also due to depression? Geee, I wonder just what is CAUSING all this friggin' "depression" anyhow? Could it maybe be the relentless homophobia that most gay men face? Rolling Eyes
Feral - Sep 17, 2006 - 02:02 PM
Post subject: RE: Study: gay high-risk behaviour linked to depression
Perhaps the professional advocates should sponsor another study?

I like studies. I do. There is very little in this world that is quite so satisfying as a new factoid.

We have had enough of meaningless factoids. Why are we expending effort confirming with studies what has been common wisdom for decades?

For what it's worth on this issue, one of the more sensible theories of depression is that it is a conditioned response to the perception of helplessness. The effect has (to the dismay of animal rights activists everywhere) been confirmed through laboratory trials. The extinction of conditioned responses is fairly straight-forward work -- it is neither difficult nor particularly interesting. The only pitfall I can see in this particular endeavor is the word "perception."

There is a difference between "helplessness" and a "perception of helplessness." Power is most assuredly the cure for a lack of power, but no amount of power can cure a 'perception' of a lack of power.

Blaming this situation on homophobia is comforting, but misleading. We have more than enough culpability of our own. We need to love each other better. We need to support each other better. We need to be more unilaterally on our own side better. We need to stop being helpless individuals within a greater str8 milieu and start being active participants in our own gay milieu.

Where are our gay families, our gay neighbors? Where are our gay fraternal organizations, our charities, our Mutual Protection Societies? Where is our government?

To the extent that we participate in our own culture, we have all of these things and more. To the extent that we participate in a delusion that we are a part of str8 society, we have none of them -- only the homophobia that str8 society has in place of those institutions.
vanrozenheim - Sep 18, 2006 - 01:00 AM
Post subject: RE: Study: gay high-risk behaviour linked to depression
The most certain way to get depressions is to desperately seek love and recognition from people, who are neither willing nor able to give them. Means, trying become an "usefull and accepted member of (straight) society" is a helpless endeavour - it's in vain.

Much better our folks finally learn to love their own race and start live as a true people - sticking together and enjoying the life. But, instead of preaching these obvious solution for our problems, our friends from the press are serving us such rubbish:

Quote:
I hate being gay
This Washington State teen faces a daily battle between the sexual attraction he feels for other men and his religious convictions that tell him being gay is against God’s word.

By Kyle Rice

An Advocate.com exclusive posted September 15, 2006

In late July the Washington State supreme court upheld a law that limits marriage to heterosexual couples. As a gay 19-year-old in Longview, Wash., my delight with that ruling is probably surprising. However, I’m not your average gay person—I'm also a Christian who views living a gay lifestyle as against God's word.

And because of my religious beliefs, I hate the fact that I am gay.

About the time I was 12 years old, it became clear to me that I was sexually attracted to guys. I assumed these feelings would go away as I got older. People choose to be gay, right? I didn’t choose this, so I figured it would pass. But it didn’t. By age 15 I had my first boyfriend.

At about that time I started to attend a Pentecostal church. I began reading the Bible, including its many different and powerful passages condemning homosexual activity. I knew in my heart that being gay was wrong in God’s eyes. I decided to devote myself to living a God-filled life and knew I needed to stop being gay so that I could stop being attracted to guys.

I looked into "ex-gay" ministries and joined such a program offered by a local church. It has taught me that with God’s help I can change my desires. A friend of mine went through another church’s program, and he's changed. He’s now happy and in love with his girlfriend. I pray the same will happen to me someday.

In the meantime I focus on fighting efforts to force the "gay agenda" on those of us who know God does not accept homosexuality. Although I do not condone discrimination, I also do not support gay marriage laws or many of the other issues backed by gay rights groups. I am a proud conservative Republican, and I support political candidates who feel the same way I do.

Many people ask me how I can be gay and also be a Republican and a Pentecostal Christian. My answer is that I am so much more than my sexuality. I don’t vote solely on pet gay issues. My faith and love of God is not guided by one small piece of who I am—a piece of me that I am trying very hard to change.

Being a gay Christian is at times very hard to deal with. Some days I feel as if I’m at war with myself. But I know God would not approve of me acting on my gay feelings, and I have no right to question his directive. I know that in the end I will be happy I lived my life according to God’s standards the best that I could.

That means refusing to accept being gay.
http://www.advocate.com/exclusive_detail_ektid36462.asp

Feral - Sep 18, 2006 - 07:16 AM
Post subject: RE: Study: gay high-risk behaviour linked to depression
Quote:
Many people ask me how I can be gay and also be a Republican and a Pentecostal Christian. My answer is that I am so much more than my sexuality. I don’t vote solely on pet gay issues. My faith and love of God is not guided by one small piece of who I am—a piece of me that I am trying very hard to change.


You will hear this often ... much too often.

It would be better if this young man had never had his head filled with such nonsense. I can excuse him somewhat -- he is only 19 and I seriously question his ability to assess the scope and significance of anything, let alone his sexuality. "One small piece" he says. Is is smaller than his mitral valve, do you suppose? I do not wonder that he from time to time feels as if he is at war with himself -- he is. This "one small piece" is not so very small. It is connected to everything.

I cannot imagine what possessed the Advocate to print such a thing.
vanrozenheim - Sep 18, 2006 - 06:49 PM
Post subject: RE: Study: gay high-risk behaviour linked to depression
The boy will most assuredly learn his lessons -- this world is full of people who will "help" him onto the right track. What is much worse, are all the grown-up homosexual gentlemen who support such attitudes in the community, often combatting any efforts for gay liberation more fiercefully than their oppressors.

The "I am much more than only gay" attitude is pretty wide-spread, suggesting between the lines that people adressing gay issues are one-dimensional.
Feral - Sep 19, 2006 - 12:27 PM
Post subject: Many men who have sex with men deny being gay
Many men who have sex with men deny being gay

Quote:
NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - A substantial percentage of men who have homosexual sex still consider themselves "straight," a survey of New York City men suggests.

The findings imply that doctors should not rely on a man's self-described sexual orientation in assessing his risk of HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases, researchers report in the Annals of Internal Medicine.

Instead, they should ask patients specific questions about their sexual behavior, according to the researchers, led by Dr. Preeti Pathela of the New York City health department.

The findings are based on a 2003 health department survey that included 4,193 men age 18 and up. Respondents were asked about their sexual behavior and their sexual orientation.

Almost 4 percent said they were homosexual, while 91 percent described themselves as "straight." The rest said they were bisexual, "unsure," or declined to answer.

But of men who considered themselves heterosexual, nearly 10 percent had had sex with a man, but no woman, in the past year, Pathela's team found. And of the 337 survey respondents who'd had sex with another man, almost 73 percent identified themselves as straight.

Feral - Sep 19, 2006 - 08:59 PM
Post subject:
A PDF of the actual study, Discordance between Sexual Behavior and Self-Reported Sexual Identity: A Population-Based Survey of New York City Men, can be had here. The study was published in the Annals of Internal Medicine, 19 September 2006, Volume 145, Issue 6, which has a fine discussion of it here.
Feral - Sep 22, 2006 - 04:37 PM
Post subject:
Debunking The Down Low...Again

Quote:
"Nearly 10 percent of New York men who say they're straight are having sex with other men, city health officials found in a first-ever study of the 'down-low' phenomenon here." That's the way the New York Daily News reported the results of a new study this week. The study was cited as further evidence that black women are in great danger of HIV infection because of men on the down low.

After reviewing this so-called "down low study," however, it's pretty clear the media got it all wrong. Again. The media suggest that this study somehow proves the threat of the down low. Actually, it proves nothing of the sort.


Mr. Boykin's reading of this not particularly complex study is correct, and he is rightly annoyed at the irresponsible rubbish that is now being printed about it.
Feral - Oct 17, 2006 - 10:29 PM
Post subject: Gay closet doors open wide, research finds
Gay closet doors open wide, research finds

Quote:
"The closet door is really opening. That's especially true in the Midwest," says Gates, author of a fascinating study based on the newly released 2005 American Community Survey -- a sort of mini-Census -- and the National Survey of Family Growth, both conducted by the federal government.

Overall, the number of same-sex couples identifying themselves to the government soared 30 percent in five short years -- to 776,943. To put that in perspective, the U.S. population grew 6 percent in that period.

The biggest jumps in self-reporting by gay couples were largely in America's heartland: Take for example, Wisconsin, which surged 81 percent in the number of same-sex couples living together; Ohio 62 percent; and Michigan 48 percent.

While more gay folks may be settling down into committed relationships, the biggest factor driving the increases, Gates bets, is that more gay couples are comfortably out.


Should you wish to read Mr. Gate's work (and why wouldn't you?), you can find it here, along with other studies of interest.

Quote:
The release of new data from the American Community Survey (ACS) offers the first opportunity since Census 2000 to update our knowledge of same-sex couples in the United States. This report assesses changes in the geographic characteristics of same-sex couples and estimates the size of the gay, lesbian, and bisexual population in states, large metropolitan areas, and all Congressional Districts (109th Congress). Analyses reveal that the number of same-sex couples in the U.S. grew by more than 30 percent to almost 777,000. The largest percentage increases occurred throughout the Midwest, an area that had relatively low rates of same-sex couples in Census 2000. Six of the eight states with a 2006 ballot initiative that would ban same-sex marriage experienced increases in the number of same-sex couples in excess of the national rate of 30 percent. The ACS data also reveal that gay, lesbian, and bisexual people are found in all Congressional Districts in the U.S.


Or you can just download the PDF right now.

Now remember, kids -- never play with demographic data without supervision. You might hurt yourself.
vanrozenheim - Oct 18, 2006 - 07:56 PM
Post subject: RE: Gay closet doors open wide, research finds
Interesting study. It shows at least that there is much difference in life conditions of gays in District 8, California (16.6% gay) and District 2, Missisipi (1.4% gay). Guess where gays are living more fulfilling lifes...

One of the assumptions of the study, however, might be wrong: the distribution of gay couples over the US is not necessarily corresponding with the distribution of gay individuals. The study itselfe says that in the past five years the number of reported couples has dramatically increased while the number of gays probably remained more or less the same - what if some regions are simply more behind in time than others?

The number of 4.1% identifying as "gay, lesbian or bisexual" appears questionable as well to me. If we would take away all the bisexuals from this number, there would be probably no gays left at all.
Feral - Oct 18, 2006 - 10:30 PM
Post subject:
The problem of bisexuals in demographic data is tricky. Many of the misrepresentations of Alfred Kinsey's work suggest that the number of bisexuals is very high. Aficionados of Sigmund Freud are fond of claiming that everyone is bisexual. Marketing studies of the LGB community rarely ever find that bisexuals make up more than 2% of OUR population. If this is accurate (and there is no real reason to believe that it is), then gays and lesbians make up 4% of the general population. The question of just how many bisexuals there are remains unanswered, largely because it remains unasked.

The figure of 4.1% seems reasonable to me, considering the figure represents how many LGB people will say they are LGB on a questionnaire, not how many there actually are. I have never been a fan of the artificial geometry inherent in the 10% claim, though some studies of high school students suggest it may be close to the mark. I have always preferred the more conservative figure of 6%. It would not surprise me at all if as much as 30% of gays and lesbians in the United States were unwilling to say so in response to a government survey. As I recall from some recent news stories, only 83% of gays in an online poll considered themselves "out" and only 78% claimed to be out to their parents. If 22% of gays won't tell their parents, it is not great leap to accept that 30% will not tell a government survey, particularly when you add in the inevitable population of unhappy souls who would not tell anyone.

Regardless of what percentage of the population is GLB, there is always the error of applying a national statistic to a local population. You cannot say that 4.1% of town I live in is GLB, or that 4.1% of the state I live in is GLB, even if it is true that 4.1% of the country I live in is GLB. Worse, you certainly cannot claim that 4.1% of the workers in this or that shop or the students in some particular school are GLB.

Mr. Grant's study is particularly valuable in correcting this error, if only people will pay attention to it. Naturally one region will differ from another in terms of its gay population. California's District 8 is the area surrounding San Fransisco and gays have been flocking there in droves from all areas of the country for decades. Mississippi's District 2 is different from San Fransisco in just about every way imaginable. I would not be surprised if gays moved away from this place in large numbers. I also wouldn't be surprised if large numbers of gays there declined to identify themselves in surveys.
vanrozenheim - Oct 31, 2006 - 08:55 PM
Post subject: Gay Asians hesitant to 'come out' in NZ
Gay Asians hesitant to 'come out' in NZ

Quote:

Asian lesbian, gays and bisexuals (LGBs) in New Zealand are more likely to keep their sexuality a secret compared with Westerners , a Massey University study says.

Senior social work lecturer Mark Henrickson said his findings reinforced the notion that the idea of having an LGB identity was a highly westernised, European concept.

Health and social workers needed to be aware of the Asian attitude, the study said.

[...]

The study found that while Asian-born immigrants were aware of having same-sex attractions at an earlier age, they were less likely to tell friends, family or colleagues as they grew older.

Only 3 per cent of non-Asian respondents said they hadn't disclosed their identity to anyone, compared with 15.3 per cent of Asian people.

[...]

He said an Asian person's identity stemmed more strongly from family ties and marriage, rather than individual expressions of identity.

"Whereas people from western cultures are more likely to be open and positive about the fact that they are lesbian, gay or bisexual - 'it's me, it's my major identity, who I am' - Asians regardless of sexual orientation, regard their identity as linked to who their parents are, who they are married to," Dr Henrickson said.


Can it be that Dr Henrickson cofuses the fears to come out for the lack of gay identity? I have my doubts that his findings that "people from western cultures are more likely to be open and positive about the fact that they are lesbian, gay or bisexual" is to be attributed to the Western cultures. Rather, the longer experience of democracy and technological revolution in certain countries made gay people less dependent from their straight families.
Feral - Nov 01, 2006 - 12:42 AM
Post subject: RE: Gay Asians hesitant to
Mr. Henrickson's findings do not contradict the theory that having an LGB identity is a highly westernised, European concept. I would not go so far as to say they actually support the notion. Certainly there are sociological differences between Europe and Asia. The role of the family in the lives of individuals is among the more marked differences. One need only glance through an approximate translation of the manifesto of the 1996 Chinese Tongzhi Conference to tell that.

Mr. Henrickson surely did find that the proportion of Asian-born immigrants which did not disclose their gay identity to anyone was nearly five times the proportion of similarly closeted non-Asians. However, 84.7% of the gay Asians in his study DID disclose their identity. This is not an insubstantial number.

I cannot help but wonder what the figures for people of European descent would have been if this study had been conducted in some western country 20 years ago. Even certain very recent studies in western cities contain very similar figures. Data such as this reveal challenging problems for "social and community workers, especially in the area of sexual health education, Aids awareness and prevention." As Mr. Henrickson points out, "No social worker should assume that their client is heterosexual, or exclusively heterosexually active."

If a gay identity is a western concept, then just who are these Tongzhi, why do they insist that they have existed for a very long time, and why are they meeting and writing manifestos?
Feral - Mar 31, 2007 - 06:07 AM
Post subject:
Oh look -- it's another study.

Gay Students 3 Times More Likely To Be Bullied

Quote:
(Boston, Massachusetts) In what is described as the broadest study of bullying and sexual orientation to date, lesbian and gay adolescents were three to four times more likely to report having been bullied than heterosexual teens.

The study, conducted by researchers at the Children's Hospital Boston Division of Adolescent Medicine, also found that bisexual adolescents and those identifying as "mostly heterosexual" were twice as likely to be bullied.

"It's clear that sexual minority youth are a population vulnerable to bullying," researcher Elise Berlan, MD said on Friday.

"This needs to be addressed, particularly in schools."


Cool... and it tells me something I already know.

Quote:
Berlan and Austin said they hope to conduct a more detailed follow-up study to better understand how bullying affects health outcomes.


I am just agog.
Feral - Apr 07, 2007 - 07:26 PM
Post subject: Studies, studies, and more studies
CSUF study says gays more likely than straights to be left-handed

Quote:
So says Richard Lippa, a veteran Cal State Fullerton psychologist who has been poring over the sex, gender and behavioral data contained in a BBC Internet survey that involved more than 200,000 people. The "Beeb" used the data as part of its highly praised 2005 documentary "Secrets of the Sexes." And it comes amid growing efforts by scientists to examine everything from the length of a person's fingers to hair patterns for signs of sexual orientation.

Lippa, who helped craft the BBC survey, says the data shows that:

1. More gay men (13 percent) than heterosexual men (11) and more lesbians (11) than heterosexual women (10 percent) reported being left-handed.

2. More bisexual men (12 percent) than gay or heterosexual men (8 percent) describe themselves as ambidextrous, and more bisexual women (16 percent) than lesbians (12 percent) and heterosexual women (8 percent) reported "mixed hand preferences."


About the only thing surprising in this particular study is the mildness of it's results. Of course gays are more likely to be left-handed than heterosexuals -- I've seen this in day to day life for decades. I'm wondering where the researchers dug up all these right-handed 'mos though. I'm pretty sure I can't name more than five gay acquaintances who are right-handed.

As far as what possible meaning the study (and related ones mentioned in the news article) might have -- genetics, specifically the complicated mechanisms that govern asymmetry in the body.
Feral - Apr 10, 2007 - 11:17 PM
Post subject:
I came upon this quotation in a New York Times piece entitled, Pas de Deux of Sexuality Is Written in the Genes. The story is otherwise an entirely readable article on the current state of neurological research regarding orientation.

Quote:
Presumably the masculinization of the brain shapes some neural circuit that makes women desirable. If so, this circuitry is wired differently in gay men. In experiments in which subjects are shown photographs of desirable men or women, straight men are aroused by women, gay men by men.


You have got to be kidding me. Someone went to the trouble to conduct experiments in this? As it happens, what would appear to be an exercise in idiocy turned up something that I, at least, would not have expected.

Quote:
Such experiments do not show the same clear divide with women. Whether women describe themselves as straight or lesbian, “Their sexual arousal seems to be relatively indiscriminate — they get aroused by both male and female images,” Dr. Bailey said. “I’m not even sure females have a sexual orientation. But they have sexual preferences. Women are very picky, and most choose to have sex with men.”

vanrozenheim - Apr 11, 2007 - 12:52 AM
Post subject:
Muwhahaha! And prostitutes get aroused by money, or what?
Feral - Apr 11, 2007 - 03:59 AM
Post subject:
What's this... you allege that prostitutes are PAID, and with MONEY?

Surely this anecdotal claim must be PROVEN through rigorous scientific evaluation. Perhaps the prostitutes in Köln receive currency for their labor, but what clinical evidence is there that those in München do as well? And surely there are IMPORTANT cultural differences. I mean, who are we to allege that prostitutes in Montréal get paid, or that prostitutes in Los Angeles get paid?

Alert the academics -- there are surveys and studies and experiments to conduct! They will no doubt wish to apply for government grants to fund these inquiries... lots and lots of grants. After all, experiments must be reproducible before they can be considered conclusive. Why, it could take decades to even begin supporting this claim that prostitutes have any connection at all with money.

Muwhahaha!

Nice work, if you can get it. Wink

Incidentaly, this Bailey fellow (the New York Times chooses to call him an "expert on sexual orientation at Northwestern University") is more than a little controversial.
vanrozenheim - Apr 11, 2007 - 04:32 PM
Post subject:
Feral wrote:
Nice work, if you can get it. Wink


Well, I would consult some friends for an advice in getting grants from the European Commission... We could apply for scientific examination of the relation between prostitutes and money, with particular attention being paid .. *ghasp* .. to regional developements in urban communities, focussing on juvenile sex workers and their specific needs. Who says it's not a study worthy of experimental research? Show an increasing amount of [government] money to the lad and measure his arousal, then... OK, this definitely goes too far. Twisted Evil
Feral - Apr 25, 2007 - 11:48 PM
Post subject:
Gay bullying turns teens off education

Quote:
Gay and lesbian people in New Zealand who come out openly in their teens are more likely to opt out of higher education because of school bullying, says a new study.

Lower educational achievement over the course of their whole lives was the likely long-term impact on teens bullied as a result of coming out as gay or lesbian, says Dr Mark Henrickson, author of the study.
...
In the survey, which 2269 people responded to, a multi-disciplinary team of researchers deliberately focussed on developing a more general profile of New Zealand’s lesbian and gay sector by asking questions about identity and self-definition, family, immigration, politics, work, income and spending, leisure, community connections, religion and spirituality.

The two studies, one on educational attainment and gay sexual identity and another on bullying and educational attainment, found that gay and lesbian people with higher qualifications tended to come out about their sexuality later in life. The result surprised Dr Henrickson.


I am perplexed by this surprise. This result seems quite obvious and self-evident to me. Most of the core research team in this project are members of the community being studied, and I would have imagined that this result would not only appear self-evident to them, it would have been readily predicted. I guess I imagined incorrectly.

This particular study has the sovereign benefit of being readily accessible. The paper, along with a number of other documents can be read here. The research touched upon a host of other subjects (many of which are handled by separate papers.
vanrozenheim - May 23, 2007 - 02:20 AM
Post subject:
Study: 38 Percent Of People Not Actually Entitled To Their Opinion

Quote:
CHICAGO—In a surprising refutation of the conventional wisdom on opinion entitlement, a study conducted by the University of Chicago's School for Behavioral Science concluded that more than one-third of the U.S. population is neither entitled nor qualified to have opinions.

"On topics from evolution to the environment to gay marriage to immigration reform, we found that many of the opinions expressed were so off-base and ill-informed that they actually hurt society by being voiced," said chief researcher Professor Mark Fultz, who based the findings on hundreds of telephone, office, and dinner-party conversations compiled over a three-year period. "While people have long asserted that it takes all kinds, our resarch shows that American society currently has a drastic oversupply of the kinds who don't have any good or worthwhile thoughts whatsoever. We could actually do just fine without them."

In 2002, Fultz's team shook the academic world by conclusively proving the existence of both bad ideas during brainstorming and dumb questions during question-and-answer sessions.


Muwhahaha! Indeed, it takes several years of hard research field work to find out that some people have much to say about thing they don't undersand anything about.
Feral - May 23, 2007 - 05:37 AM
Post subject:
I could wish that the Onion was not satire at times. Of course, were such a study really to be conducted, I would guess that the percentage would be far greater than 38.

As it happens, NO ONE is entitled to their opinion. Most everyone has opinions, of course. Some people don't, but no one pays them much mind. What conceivable power exists that may draw up a title to an opinion? What power can deny the right to form one? There is no such power -- it is an absurd foible of the language that this phrase "entitled to your opinion" can even be uttered. No one has any right to an opinion; they just have opinions.

The right to express opinions is often conferred by governments of all sorts. This right is hardly universal and is by no means as broad as anyone supposes that it is. I have, for instance, strong opinions on the efficacy of misting houseplants in general and orchids in particular (it can be readily demonstrated by experiment that there is no beneficial effect to this pointless practice) but the school board will hardly allow me to express these opinions at their next meeting. Nor would any court permit me to do so. In fact, there are few places where people gather where an opinion on the misting of houseplants will be tolerated for long. No one wants to hear irrelevant drivel.

Only a few show-pieces of the political right to "free speech" exist where any opinion may be uttered. As it happens, there is a public square near me where freedom of expression has been enshrined in law for several centuries. On days with fine weather one can hear any number of peculiar things in that square. Apart from specifically outlawed expressions (one may not incite riots or exhort people to commit crimes), no governmental agent will take any steps to prevent anyone from speaking their mind. I could preach the uselessness of plant misting to my heart's content there. No one would listen too closely. (The problem with such venues is that they are so filled with crack-pots that a certain taint of madness sticks to everything said there. It is noteworthy that I cannot recall even one politician or political candidate making use of that venue's protected speech.) Besides -- everyone knows that misting one's plants increases the local humidity... it says so in a hundred books. Never mind that this notion is demonstrably false.

The phrase "entitled to your opinion" though comes up more often is simple conversation. It seems people have gotten it into their heads that these opinions that they form in their heads have some sort of inherent right to be respected.

Ha!

This is just not so; an opinion must earn its respect. No one gets it for free.
Rain - May 23, 2007 - 09:35 AM
Post subject:
They should do a study entitled "Now Here's Something You Didn't Know!"....LOL
vanrozenheim - May 23, 2007 - 04:14 PM
Post subject:
Sexual Orientation Affects How We Navigate And Recall Lost Objects

Quote:
Researchers at the University of Warwick have found that sexual orientation has a real effect on how we perform mental tasks such as navigating with a map in a car but that old age does not discriminate on grounds of sexual orientation and withers all men’s minds alike just ahead of women’s.

[..]

However for a number of tasks the University of Warwick researchers found key differences across the range of sexual orientations studied.

For instance in mental rotation (a task where men usually perform better) they found that the table of best performance to worst was:
Heterosexual men
Bisexual men
Homosexual men
Homosexual women
Bisexual women
Heterosexual women

In general, over the range of tasks measured, where a gender performed better in a task heterosexuals of that gender tended to perform better than non-heterosexuals. When a particular gender was poorer at a task homosexual and bisexual people tended to perform better than heterosexual members of that gender.

[..]

Article: "Gender and Sexual Orientation Differences in Cognition Across Adulthood: Age Is Kinder to Women than to Men Regardless of Sexual Orientation"Archives of Sexual Behaviour, April 2007 DOI 10.1007/s10508-006-9155-y

Feral - Jun 14, 2007 - 11:51 PM
Post subject:
75% of Brighton gays have suffered abuse

Quote:
Research into the levels of homophobia on the streets of the UK's gayest city has revealed that three-quarters of gay, lesbian, bisexual or trans residents residents have been on the receiving end of physical or verbal abuse in the last five years.


The survey also found that 21% of the respondents have been homeless.
berto - Jun 15, 2007 - 06:57 PM
Post subject:
BC study: lesbian teens face more violence than straights

Quote:
A new report says gay, lesbian and bisexual teens in British Columbia face more violence and health problems than heterosexuals.

The report was prepared by University of B.C. researcher Elizabeth Saewyc and released by the McCreary Center Society of Vancouver.

The survey found that gay, lesbian and bisexual teens were up to three times as likely to suffer physical and sexual abuse or harassment in school, as well as discrimination.

Members of the same group are also three times as likely to have become pregnant or gotten someone pregnant.


And yet the BC Liberal government has voted not to protect queer students...

(Bit more to story @ top link)
vanrozenheim - Jun 15, 2007 - 11:36 PM
Post subject:
Quote:
Members of the same group are also three times as likely to have become pregnant or gotten someone pregnant.


You mean... teenage gays, lesbians and bisexuals are more fertile than STRAIGHTS??? Sounds little credible to me.
berto - Jun 16, 2007 - 02:18 AM
Post subject:
vanrozenheim wrote:
Quote:
Members of the same group are also three times as likely to have become pregnant or gotten someone pregnant.


You mean... teenage gays, lesbians and bisexuals are more fertile than STRAIGHTS??? Sounds little credible to me.


I'm not certain what to make of that statistic; I don't think it's so much a commentary on fertility rates as perhaps it is on the frequency of having sex, the carelessness/ignorance of having unprotected sex... maybe the degree to which so many queer youth still feel driven to prove their sexual orientation -- whether by trying to stay in the closet by "prove" their straightness to others, or by trying out straight sex in order to prove to themselves that "Yuk! That was awful! Guess I *am* gay!" Or maybe some of all of the above...?
Feral - Jun 16, 2007 - 03:44 PM
Post subject:
Quote:
Members of the same group are also three times as likely to have become pregnant or gotten someone pregnant.


My first thought on this was "what was the study really of?" One would have to delve into the methodology to answer it. One of the difficulties inherent in the "LGBTQI" tactical alliance is also the chief motivation for that alliance: it increases the numbers of people involved. Unfortunately for the realm of scientific inquiry, the shared social and political interests of these groups do not always carry over into the matter at hand.

I think its safe to say that the researcher (who has done some valuable work) did not find even one Gay man that 'became pregnant.' There is little reason to leap to the conclusion that the research found that Gay men 'got someone pregnant.' Not that this is impossible -- certainly not -- but depending on how broadly the research cast its net, there may well be other groups in the data for whom this finding is more understandable (even predictable). The 365 story consistently referred to "gay, lesbian and bisexual teens." Pregnancy is a predictable outcome of at least one behavior common among bisexual teens.

Also, as Berto points out, a certain amount of experimentation is not unheard of among Gay teens. After all, did not my own mother recite the nostrum "how do you know you don't like it if you haven't even tried it" so often that the walls repeated it in her absence? (That's a rhetorical question: she did.) It has also been my observation that Gay teens and straight teens do not view sex in the same way. One key difference is that the straight teens have a vast body of cultural reinforcement dictating what they ought to think and feel on this subject while the Gay teens find themselves abruptly cut off from this cultural input with nothing to replace it. (Ha! My straight co-workers rail against the 'uncontrolled' character of their teen-aged children... they haven't seen uncontrolled.)

While this research does not, at first glance, seem to be as compromised as the Fair’s Fair report out of Australia, one does have consider with all of these research projects the possibility that they serve only to secure more government funding rather than to illuminate.

Were I to take this newest report at face value, I can only come to the conclusion that British Columbia's sex education curriculum may (just 'may') be appropriate for heterosexual teens, but is clearly failing when it comes to Gay, Lesbian, and bisexual teens. It will come as no surprise that I find separate schooling for these kids to be the most reasonable solution. It has the benefit of being a convenient solution for the other major finding in the research -- that Gay and Lesbian kids are not physically safe where they're at now. Unless I'm very much mistaken, its actually unlawful in British Columbia to willfully place minors in physically unsafe conditions.
Feral - Jun 19, 2007 - 08:14 PM
Post subject:
Study: 28 Percent Of LGBT Workers Harassed

Quote:
(New York City) A study of diversity in the workplace has found that 28 percent of LGBT employees have suffered harassment in the workplace with nearly half describing it as severe.

...

Thirty percent of African Americans reported discrimination at work, as did 29 percent of Hispanics. With the margin of error both groups were tied with LGBT workers.

Feral - Jul 01, 2007 - 11:29 PM
Post subject:
Here they go again.

Quote:
The study showed that the gay, lesbian and bisexual population was more than twice as likely as the heterosexual population to have used marijuana over the last year; nearly four times as likely to have used amphetamines on a regular basis in the previous 12 months; more than four times as likely to have used LSD over a year: and more than three times as likely to have regularly used ecstasy over the same period. Over 42 per cent of them said they smoked regularly compared 27.7 per cent of heterosexual respondents.

Lead researcher, Frank Pega is presenting the findings to the annual conference of the Public Health Association and says this is the first comprehensive evidence that differences do exist between the groups.

“The implication is that there needs to be health promotion targeted specifically at the gay, lesbian and bisexual community,“ he says.


Yeah, right... "the first comprehensive evidence that differences do exist between the groups."

I tried, I did.

In charity, perhaps he means "the first in New Zealand." Perhaps he means something peculiar by the word "comprehensive" -- after all, all evidence is not equal, or even persuasive. I will give the researcher all of that. It seems, though, that some crazed bubble of fantasy has popped -- did they truly think that there were no relevant differences between Gays and straights... none at all? That delusion borders on the psychotic. Where has this guy been -- under a rock (at the bottom of an oceanic trench)?

Had he asked me, or any other observant Gay person, twenty years ago to guess at the figures presented here, he'd have gotten somewhat higher figures, but the general trend would be the same. As it happens, I suspect his methodology is flawed (isn't every methodology?) and that were he to correct for those flaws he would get the higher figures of my guess.

There is a reason, after all, why the word 'straight' has also meant "prudish." It has for years and years. I think the usage may predate its use to denote heterosexual proclivities.

Yes, there are a great many things that straight people just don't do with any regularity or enthusiasm. They are welcome to their lifestyle, though it would be better if they did not flaunt it so -- they are poor role models for our Gay youth and this unhealthy aversion to anything that might be called 'fun' is not something they should be sharing with our kids.

Were our intrepid scholar to make inquiries, I think he would find that Gays also consume 2 times as much cake as straights, 3 times as much candy, and 4 times as much alcohol (and further, that alcohol is 12 times more likely to be something other than beer). Oh yes -- let's not forget the cigarettes -- we smoke more cigarettes too. Lesbians smoke like chimneys, as a class, though that would be in comparison to straights -- Gay boys do not smoke all that many fewer cigarettes than Lesbians. The cigarettes and alcohol are known from other studies (but surely these studies have no bearing on the population of New Zealand, and self-evidently they have few implications for New Zealand's Gay Maori population). Perhaps they should commission a new telephone survey... hmmmm? I just hate the thought of out-of-work telemarketers. By all means, bring forth the bean counters to refute my outrageous claims of Gay cake eating.

I stand by those numbers, too. If they find somewhat lower figures, I shall again question their methodology. It has been my experience that straight people, who really do enjoy cake from time to time, just don't eat it with any regularity or enthusiasm in comparison to Gays.

"There needs to be health promotion targeted specifically at the gay, lesbian and bisexual community"? Are they out of their freaking minds? Seriously -- any body of people, Gay or straight, who needs to do a bloody study to find out that the 'mos have been *gasp* doing drugs is just not the sort of people I'd think would have any chance at all of success with a health promotion.

The Gay people would benefit from a health promotion or three, but they would gain no benefit from some cock-eyed scheme thought up by the Keystone Kops. The straights might consider funding the existing Gay efforts in that regard (if they're really all that concerned).
vanrozenheim - Jul 02, 2007 - 03:55 AM
Post subject:
Feral wrote:
Were our intrepid scholar to make inquiries, I think he would find that Gays also consume 2 times as much cake as straights, 3 times as much candy [..]

Now this might be the explanation for why lesbians are more inclined to being overwheight than straight women. Rolling

But it seems that use of the word "comrehensive" in scientific publications needs some explanation. You see, whenever you are late with your research (late because others have published similar stuff years ago), you need a reasonable justification for why your results are still meaningfull and should be published at all. Well, you claim your results are more "comprehensive" than results of those pioneer researchers. Wink
Feral - Jul 02, 2007 - 04:18 AM
Post subject:
Ahhhhhh. Much is explained so simply and concisely. Many thanks.

I'm standing by my claims, and I'll up the ante: they are comprehensive claims.

That's right.

After two and a half decades of countless interviews, grueling (and nearly round-the-clock) observation, and a battery of exhaustive experiments, I can conclusively state that Gays also eat 5 times as much food in restaurants as straight people, see three to four times (it varies by region) as many movies in theaters (horror movies mostly), Travel 3 times as often and go twice as far as their straight counterparts, and (I really hate to say it) have 7 times as much sex by the age of 25. A cruel blow, I know, what with the average Gay penis being somewhere around an inch longer and all, but it can be hidden no longer. All those stories your straight roommates told you in university? Confabulations and repetitions of other men's tales. Yup. They eventually confess to it in their older years. They weren't getting laid anywhere near so often as we assumed they were. Many of them weren't getting laid at all. It must do just a terrible thing to their self-esteem.

I will beg to differ on the idea of overweight Lesbians. My observations have been limited to Gay fellows. It is they who eat more cake than their straight counterparts (often in entertaining custom shapes -- body parts, or at least certain body parts, are well-represented at Gay celebrations). I dare say nearly every Gay in North America knows at least one guy who will produce an amusing and tasty cake for nearly any occasion.

What's this? Its Canada Day? (It is.) Here -- I made you a cake shaped like a maple leaf. Bet you didn't know I had a novelty cake pan shaped like a maple leaf. I do. Bet you thought no one made such things. Nope -- they do.

It's actually been my observation that Lesbians are, on average, a tad slimmer than their straight counterparts. I don't know if they eat cake, but they seem to me to be just way too active. All those hiking boots and back packs. I've yet to meet a Lesbian who was not into walking just miles and miles and miles through unpaved and obscenely un-level places just for the fun of it. It's fun, they say. Tiresome is what I call it. (Though I always admired those shoes. I can't carry them off the way they do though. I look like a poseur.) It's been my observation that the skinny straight girls get a great deal of attention and the super skinny models get a great deal of press, but there is no lack of straight women who are (one might put delicately) "of a size." The Lesbians of my acquaintance are too busy having their own brand of fun to much give a damn what people think about their weight. The straight girls of my acquaintance are all on diets that don't work. They should lighten up -- maybe join the Lesbians on a hike through the mountains. It's my understanding that Lesbians don't bite (at least, not unless you say "please").
berto - Jul 02, 2007 - 05:03 AM
Post subject:
Quote:
maybe join the Lesbians on a hike through the mountains.


And having a lesbian along might help you to fend off the bears (and sasquatches) who are out to steal your beer. Wink Razz
Feral - Jul 02, 2007 - 05:29 AM
Post subject:
Ahem. It is well-known that the simple and gullible bears do not steal bear. The sasquatches merely enlist their aid in creating diversions.

It is the sasquatches that steal the beer. Sometimes by the truckload (or so I hear).

Fortunately, the naive bears of these parts have little cause to fear being led astray by sasquatches bent upon mischief.


I did just recollect a small and possibly important detail -- I have never met a Lesbian who was not proud, PROUD I say, of her prowess at making S'mores. Never once. While there may be Lesbians who do not have this skill, I have never met one. While there may even be Lesbians who do not care for S'mores, I have yet to hear of one. S'mores would have to be classified somewhere in between candy and cake.

I cannot hazard a guess as to how fond of S'mores straight women are, so I am powerless to come up with a comparison of Gays to straights in this matter. I call for immediate study of this pressing issue -- in what ways do Lesbians and straight women differ in the making and consumption of S'mores? Further, while it is well-known that straight men generally eschew S'mores, there is little or no research on the extent to which Gays participate in this curious culinary ritual.

The scope of the problem, coupled with its obvious urgency, calls for immediate governmental sponsorship of a study..... NO a battery of studies... to be repeated around the world. After all, this Lesbian S'more eating may be a Western social-construct that has no meaningful counterpart among the Tongzhi. Could it be that there are no S'mores in China?
berto - Jul 02, 2007 - 05:42 AM
Post subject:
Quote:
It is well-known that the simple and gullible bears do not steal bear.


But do they steal beer?!

Quote:
in what ways do Lesbians and straight women differ in the making and consumption of S'mores?


I think the het chycks prefer cheesecake...
Feral - Jul 02, 2007 - 05:51 AM
Post subject:
berto wrote:
Quote:
It is well-known that the simple and gullible bears do not steal bear.


But do they steal beer?!


No, Sweetie. That was a typo. Everyone knows that bears do not steal beer. It is the sasquatches who steal beer -- often with the aid of bears as pawns.

The bears seemingly wander into the back yard, go rooting around in a compost heap just long enough for people to notice, rush to the windows and gape, and whisper "look it's a bear... what's it doing?" Yah. Then bang, Bob's your uncle, the sasquatches have jimmied the front door, slipped into the kitchen, and make off with all the beer in the house.

Not the bears. No. The sweet, innocent bears are out rooting in the compost heap, not lurking in the kitchen.

Ever hear of a bear hijacking a beer truck? No, I didn't think so. That would be because bears lack opposable thumbs. It is quite difficult to drive a large beer truck without thumbs. Without specialized training it is impossible. Sasquatches, of course, have opposable thumbs.

And they often make off with entire truckloads of beer (when they aren't pilfering it in smaller quantities from your refrigerator).
Feral - Jul 02, 2007 - 05:58 AM
Post subject:
You will now notice the astonishing and unprecedented restraint with which I did not use the awesome powers of moderator to make my unfortunate error vanish. Unless, of course, this is a conspiracy to spice up this thread with talk of beer-stealing sasquatches. Were that to be the case, then perhaps I really did use my awesome and almost god-like powers as an administrator to fabricate berto's last post.

I mean... berto might not be 'berto. He might be some species of nefarious sock-puppet. Something may have happened to 'berto... something too horrible to put into words... something involving sasquatches... and this creature berto has taken his place. Hmmmmm?
berto - Jul 02, 2007 - 06:13 AM
Post subject:
Oh, so the bears are just witless dupes, are they?

Then how do you explain this?! Huh?

Quote:
A black bear went on a binge at a campsite in the US state of Washington - guzzling down some 36 cans of beer. Campground workers were stunned to come across the bear sleeping off the effects in their grounds, surrounded by dozens of empty beer cans.

But this was no ordinary case of a bear with a sore head at Baker Lake resort, 80 miles (129km) northeast of Seattle. He had apparently tried out and rejected the mass-market Busch beer in favour of local brand Rainier.

The bear appeared to have got into campers' cool boxes and used his teeth and claws to puncture the cans. Fish and wildlife enforcement Sgt Bill Heinck said the bear tried one can of Busch and ignored the rest - then got stuck into three dozen cans of Rainier.

"We noticed a bear sleeping on the common lawn and wondered what was going on until we discovered that there were a lot of beer cans lying around," camp worker Lisa Broxson was quoted by Reuters news agency as saying.

She said the bear was chased away by wildlife agents, but returned the next day. The agents decided to trap the bear with doughnuts, honey and, of course, two cans of Rainier beer. It did the trick and he was captured.


There even exists plenty of evidence of the boozy habits of bears.

So....... what did the bears promise you in return for shilling for them, huh? How did they get to you, mister?!?
vanrozenheim - Jul 02, 2007 - 06:15 AM
Post subject:
Feral wrote:
I mean... berto might not be 'berto. He might be some species of nefarious sock-puppet. Something may have happened to 'berto... something too horrible to put into words... something involving sasquatches... and this creature berto has taken his place. Hmmmmm?


Alas, you were then still hardly able to boost his post counter to over 700? Whatever happened to the ' in 'berto it is only for berto's best. Wink

<rumor>Btw, I have even read somewhere that those 's were responsible for some users being unable to post in SMF forums.</rumor>
Feral - Jul 02, 2007 - 06:25 AM
Post subject:
Did I say that the bears did not drink beer? They love beer. The boozy habits of bears is, as you rightly pointed out, well documented.

I said they did not steal beer.

Quote:
He had apparently tried out and rejected the mass-market Busch beer in favour of local brand Rainier.

The bear appeared to have got into campers' cool boxes and used his teeth and claws to puncture the cans.


Notice the clever and deceptive use of the word "appear" here. No one saw the bear open the cans (though it proves nothing if it did -- I asserted that bears do not hijack beer trucks, not that they cannot open cans). No one even saw the bear "trying out" the Busch.

Thankfully, Reuters and the BBC are not so dominated by sasquatch infiltrators as US media outlets are. It is clear what has happened here -- some gang of sasquatches has, yet again, duped some innocent bear into cooperating in their criminal scheme (clearly they plied the poor bear with cheap local beer). You will note that all the other beer is missing -- gone without a trace. All the Heineken at the scene is gone, and I'll bet the rangers and staff are in on the frame up as well -- no doubt paid several cans of Busch to frame the bear.

And that photo? The bear is obviously a graduate of the sasquatch bear training camps just across the border in British Columbia. Yah -- provincial government is in on it too.
berto - Jul 02, 2007 - 03:34 PM
Post subject:
lol Very Happy
Kyleovision - Jul 02, 2007 - 03:39 PM
Post subject:
I've long wondered who buys those old-fashioned beers nowadays. When was the last time you saw somebody with a can of Pabst Blue Ribbon, or Carling lager, or Schlitz?
berto - Jul 02, 2007 - 04:21 PM
Post subject:
Pabst? Less than a week ago -- a Yanqui tourist.
Feral - Jul 02, 2007 - 11:29 PM
Post subject:
Study: Homosexuals smoke more

Quote:
OAKLAND, Calif., July 2 (UPI) -- Smoking is more common in the California gay community than in the state's general population, but researchers say more study is needed.

Lead researcher Elisabeth Gruskin, a scientist at Kaiser Permanente Northern California, compared results from a 2003-2004 tobacco-use survey of 1,950 self-identified gay, lesbian or bisexual residents with a general population survey from 2002.

"It is important to know the prevalence and reasons for smoking because we would like to have tailored prevention and cessation interventions that are appropriate for lesbians, gays or bisexuals," Gruskin said in a statement. "If stress is a huge issue, then you would want stress management as part of an intervention. If glamor is a big reason, you want to contradict that in the media."


Twelve percent of women in California smoke, as opposed to 29 percent of Lesbians.

Duh.

Hence my perception that Lesbians smoke like chimneys -- not ALL of them, to be sure... not even MOST of them... smoking is just nearly three times more prevalent among Californian Lesbians than is is among California's general female population.

For completeness, twenty percent of California's men smoke while 27 percent of California's Gay men smoke. I suspect California is weird as far as smoking goes. As I recall, these very studies were quoted a few years ago as evidence of a massive decrease across the board in smoking in the state.

But you know what? There isn't a whole lot of further studies that need to be done on this, just as there is little need to count how many times school kids hear the word 'faggot'. Come back in a decade or so when the study would demonstrate the success or failure of some program or other. I can give Ms Gruskin a hint -- It's not glamor.

Really.

No need for a study.

If 'mos smoked because it was glamorous, Gucci would make cigarettes. They don't. That would be because it isn't, and no sensible person with even a trickle of fashion sense would think that it is.

It's some other reason.

Now -- long cigarette holders (if you happen to already smoke) -- that would be a fashion accessory. I happen to know that my cigarette case is sufficiently stylish to garner at least three complimentary remarks from yuppies a week... not that anyone who doesn't smoke is going to dash out to buy a pack so they can fill that bitchin-cool vintage cigarette case. I frankly doubt that anyone over 16 smokes because of some perceived 'glamor' (or 'coolness'). I've never seen it. That doesn't make it so... I've just never seen it. Should some iggit do a study of motivations for smoking, they won't see a hell of a lot of it either, no matter how many stones are turned over.

Yah.

So... if you have peculiar schemes to "contradict that in the media" -- knock it the fuck off. You're wasting my time and someone else's money. Contradicting fables with more fables in the media doesn't work. Just ask the Democrats. They've been playing that game for years.

Next question: Why is a Moonie-run news syndicate flogging three-year-old statistics that they already flogged three years ago?
Feral - Jul 07, 2007 - 08:46 PM
Post subject:
Fun with surveys

Quote:
Has your child come out of the closet? Ynet-Gesher survey reveals that most Israelis would accept that and go on as usual, but that 27 percent would cut off contact or limit it


All manner of numbers coupled with touchy-feely pablum follow. Oddly enough, these numbers are rather in line with similar figures regarding what becomes of Gay children in the US and UK -- only the Israeli's do just a trifle worse.

Over one in four would throw away their children and we're supposed to congratulate the three for behaving like -- well, I was about to compare them to cats and dogs, but cats and dogs don't reject one in four of their offspring.
Kyleovision - Jul 08, 2007 - 02:01 AM
Post subject:
More to the point: Ynet-Gesher survey reveals that most Israelis *say* they would accept that and go on as usual...

We all know what such assurances are worth absent the actual event. I'd be more interested in a survey that tried to determine what most Israelis actually *do* when it happens.
vanrozenheim - Jul 17, 2007 - 11:02 AM
Post subject:
Results from a survey done by the public opinion pollster Tárki in October, 2006:

Quote:
Do you have a gay acquaintance?

Country %

Hungary 8
Poland 14
Slovakia 30
Czech Republic 43

Do you regard civil partnerships as acceptable?

Country %

Hungary 36
Poland 42
Czech Republic 61
Slovakia 39

Would you allow homosexuals to marry?

Country %
Hungary 25
Poland 21
Czech Republic 37
Slovakia 23

Would you allow homosexuals to adopt children?

Country %

Hungary 26
Poland 9
Czech Republic 18
Slovakia 14


One thing interests me: when do people perceive themselves as homophobes? Is it when they reject equal marriage, reject equal adoption rights or is it first when they demand for re-installation of public burning of sodomites?
Kyleovision - Jul 17, 2007 - 01:04 PM
Post subject:
Quote:
"One thing interests me: when do people perceive themselves as homophobes? Is it when they reject equal marriage, reject equal adoption rights or is it first when they demand for re-installation of public burning of sodomites?"


When you say 'people,' I'm assuming you mean str8 people, right?

Well, in general, they don't see themselves as homophobes... not ever, regardless their positions on any of the above subjects.

Wherever they stand on the homophobic continuum, they see themselves as anointed by Truth and/or God. even the atheists. They see themselves as uniquely fit to judge nature of the existence of their betters.
Feral - Jul 31, 2007 - 07:13 AM
Post subject:
Straight or gay talking? Speech reveals all

Quote:
In 1994, Rudolf P Gaudio, of Stanford University, published a paper called Sounding Gay: Pitch Properties in the Speech of Gay and Straight Men. Gaudio studied the speech sounds of (a) some openly gay white American men and (b) some openly straight white American men. Then he asked volunteers to listen and see if they could identify which was which. They could.

...

In 1996, Jack Avery and Julie Liss produced a study called Acoustic Correlates of Less-Masculine Sounding Speech. Based at the Veterans Administration Medical Centre in Minneapolis, Minnesota, and at Arizona State University, Avery and Liss compared recorded samples of two kinds of speech, applying colourful acronyms to each. One they called "less-masculine-sounding (LMS) male speech". The other they termed "more-masculine-sounding (MMS) male speech".

...

Nearly a decade later, a team based at Northwestern University and at the University of Minnesota took things further still. Janet Pierrehumbert and four colleagues looked at a very particular aspect of the question "What, technically, is the sound of gay male American speech?" They also examined the speech of lesbian and bisexual American women.

The team published a study called The Influence of Sexual Orientation on Vowel Production. Its summary is unapologetically technical. But for acousticians and linguists accustomed to reading dry reports, one passage sings with lilting clarity:

"Differences in the acoustic characteristics of vowels were found as a function of sexual orientation. Lesbian and bisexual women produced less fronted /u/ and /[open aye]/ vowel sounds than heterosexual women. Gay men produced a more expanded vowel space than heterosexual men. However, the vowels of gay, lesbian, bisexual speakers were not generally shifted toward vowel patterns typical of the opposite sex."


That last sentence is amusing in it's own way. Of course they aren't. Why would they be (apart from the fantastical delusions of straight people who insist upon seeing everything as some shadow of themselves)?

Now that the white-coat set have satisfied themselves that it really is possible to "talk Gay," perhaps they might move on to demonstrate what underlying unity makes the Gay accent of the American South, the East Coast, and the West Coast all identifiably "Gay," while at the same time identifiably their respective regional accents. When they get done with that one, they can move on to explain how it is that Australians (who by no means have anything resembling an American accent) who are Gay can manage to talk identifiably Gay.
Rain - Jul 31, 2007 - 08:57 AM
Post subject:
You know, I have read a myriad of unapologetically technical, dry reports...being an amateur linguist and having a ridiculous fascination with the whys and hows of human linguistic evolution (yes, Virginia, Europeans are closely related to Eskimos and Navajos...the linguistic evidence says so...but not all that closely related to Apaches or Incas).

Vowel fronting, if any non-linguist could possibly understand what that means and entails, is contingent on many factors..chief of which is the point of articulation of consonants whithin a speech environment.

They should have concentrated on the production of consonants by gay people...gay men in particular. That would have been more interesting. Especially the production of the letter "S" which seems to have a distinctive forward point of articulation no matter where a good faggot is found.
vanrozenheim - Aug 13, 2007 - 01:40 AM
Post subject:
Study of gay brothers may find clues about sexuality
Quote:
The scientists hope that by gathering DNA samples from 1,000 sets of gay brothers like the Mierows they will be able to find genetic linkages smaller studies failed to detect. They'll be recruiting brothers again at the Halsted Street festival this weekend.

The results may ignite controversy, the researchers acknowledge, both by providing ammunition in the raging cultural war over homosexuality and by raising fears about ethically questionable applications like genetic profiling and prenatal testing.

But, they argue, the research is essential to our biological understanding of sexual behavior.

[..]

Studies that compare identical and fraternal twins for the frequency of a particular behavioral trait have consistently suggested there are both genetic and environmental causes of homosexuality. Identical twins, who share 100 percent of their genes, show a higher chance of both being gay compared with fraternal twins, who typically share the same family environment but only half their genetic code.

What indeed is interesting, is the fact that not all identical twins have the same sexual orientation. The most favoured theory today is that the hormons (or mysterious antibodies) within the mother's bood are determining the developement of the fetus. Obviously, even tiny variations of hormonal environment within the womb can lead to greate differences.
Rain - Aug 13, 2007 - 02:16 AM
Post subject:
Oh yes. I heard that theory about fetal hormonal triggers for homosexuality. And I also shared it with my mother. She swears it comes from my father's side...despite that there are so many openly gay and lesbian people on her side. She says "all the fags on your father's side have no balls to come. You and your cousin Victor the only ones who managed to embarrass that side of your family".

How nice....
Rain - Aug 13, 2007 - 03:36 AM
Post subject:
Sexist Babies
vanrozenheim - Aug 14, 2007 - 10:36 AM
Post subject:
Study

Quote:
One paper at the session featured what may be the most eye-catching title of the meeting: “Erections, Mounting and AIDS: Incestuous Gay Monkey Sex (or seven words you can’t write in your NIH grant).” While the title drew laughter from the crowd here, the paper left many worried. Joanna Kempner, a research associate at the Princeton University Center for Health and Wellbeing, shared preliminary results of her study of the impact of having one’s sexuality-related research attacked by politicians. (In fact, the words from her paper title all come from words whose use was attacked by conservative groups.)

Kempner studied 162 researchers who in 2003 either had their research questioned by lawmakers who tried (and almost succeeded in the House of Representatives) to have their projects blocked for support from the NIH or whose work appeared on what became known as “the hit list” of projects for which the Traditional Values Coalition tried to generate opposition. The research projects — all of which had been approved through the peer review process at the NIH — involved such topics as prostitution, gay sex, unsafe sexual acts, and drug use. Kempner interviewed some of the researchers and sent an e-mail survey to all of them.

While she is still analyzing the results, early findings suggest that the experience of being a target has led some of the scholars to rethink their work or careers. Generally, she found that scholars fell into three, roughly equal groups: those who were proud of their work and who viewed being a target as “a badge of honor,” those who were scared and nervous about the future of their work and careers, and those who had a mix of reactions.

For those who had fears and concerns, there was a real impact on their subsequent decisions, Kempner said. Nearly half said that they took steps to either lower their profile or to change the language in their projects to disguise those qualities that would attract criticism. As one scholar told Kempner of the change, “I do not study sex workers. I study women at risk.” About a quarter said that they had decided to seek funds from non-federal sources in the future, seeking to avoid controversy. This choice is significant, Kempner said, because the NIH is among the better sources of funds for large projects.


Smacks of a prolongued Middle Age - I am afraid, such things happen all over the world. Mind you, the scholars of our days (alike journalists and other supposed martyrs of freedom) also appreciate representative vehicles, 3-room appartments and exquisite furniture. This makes them vulnerable to threats of loosing their jobs, too.
Rain - Aug 15, 2007 - 05:11 AM
Post subject:
Quote:
About a quarter said that they had decided to seek funds from non-federal sources in the future, seeking to avoid controversy. This choice is significant, Kempner said, because the NIH is among the better sources of funds for large projects.


Not only is the NIH a better source of funds, its facilities are better at providing unfettered access to research that is not deemed "profitable". Private sources are more willing to provide money and research facilities if the results will eventually be marketable. In the process a lot of research that can't necessarily be marketed, but can help increase the body knowledge is not carried out.
Feral - Aug 15, 2007 - 07:42 PM
Post subject:
Massive Study on Gay and Lesbian Consumers Released

Quote:
A new largest-ever survey of gays and lesbians and their consumer spending habits has been released by Community Marketing, Inc. (with Rivendell Media). 26,205 complete responses to the survey were gathered. Of those, 24,563 of them reside within the United States.
...
According to Community Marketing, "From April 13 to May 16, 2007, Community Marketing, Inc. conducted an online survey of lesbian and gay adults. As an incentive, respondents were offered a chance to win one of four airline vouchers valid for a roundtrip flight in North America. This survey comprehensively and effectively represents a broad spectrum of LGBT consumers in all parts of the USA. With a sample size of more than 10,000 for each Index, the margin of error is plus or minus 1% with a 95% confidence interval...


I have a horrible suspicion that we shall be seeing any number of elements of this creation trumpeted as newly-discovered 'facts' in the coming weeks. I even suspect that we've already been subjected to a few -- like some peculiar claims about Gay and Lesbian voting habits.

You will note that the thing is called a "study" in the headline. It isn't one. In the quoted potion, the thing is called a "survey" four times. Yes, it's a rather large on-line survey. One can, if one wishes, apply value to online surveys. I just don't recommend that anyone do so seriously. It is, on it's face, probably a perfectly reasonable indicator of how the respondents to the survey answered the questions. Just what that body of respondents represents, however, is open to debate. Whether the answers generated by the survey are entirely (or even partly) truthful is also open to debate.

Shall we draw, for instance, some inference from the fact (it is one) that more than half of the Lesbian respondents have a cat but only a bit more than a quarter of Gays responded likewise? Are Lesbians really nearly twice as likely to have a cat than Gays? For what it's worth, the ratio looks like it holds true with dog ownership as well.
berto - Sep 09, 2007 - 03:12 PM
Post subject:
Gays have swagger, study suggests

Quote:
People can accurately judge the sexual orientation of others based on body type and motion, suggests a study released in the September issue of Journal Of Personality And Social Psychology.


Don'tcha just LOVE these studies?
Rain - Sep 09, 2007 - 08:13 PM
Post subject:
File that one under "Duh!". Although are they seriously trying to make a case for the hetero version of gaydar? I think not.
Feral - Sep 10, 2007 - 03:16 AM
Post subject:
Heteros may well have a functioning version of 'gaydar.' They would have to acknowledge that there was something to see before they could attempt to begin to look for it. Then they would need practice... lots and lots of practice.

I don't see it happening.

I was asked some weeks ago if I thought So-and-so was Gay. It was an innocuous enough question, so I answered in the affirmative. Then comes the inevitable "what makes you say that?"

Piff.

In this instance it was the way So-and-so moved through space. Plus, So-and-so employs two different ways of speaking. He has a fine "straight-boy voice" for most people, and then an easily recognized 'East-Coast-'Mo" accent for others.

"Then what about this other So-and-so?" (They always seem to be making lists, these straight people. I wonder if they know they do that?) As it happens, yes... I thought that fellow was Gay as well. Why? The way he moved his eyes.

"You'll label someone as Gay just because of the way they move their eyes?"

Duh... when they're clearly, obviously, and blatantly smitten with some other So-and-so to the point of distraction, to the point their eyes track him in passing (even when in conversation with someone else)... is the mating dance of the East-Coast 'Mo really that invisible to straight people? Ye Gods! I's like the freakin' birds in Spring, the frogs in Summer, the stags in Autumn (OK... that one's a stretch). Mr. So-and-so wants at least one date (probably several) in the worst possible way from Mr. "I have two accents."

Yah. He's Gay.

And it's not "a label." It's a statement of fact.
Rain - Sep 10, 2007 - 03:45 AM
Post subject:
Fer...I'm laughing hysterically. Because your story is so true and so typical. I had a straight female roomie for a while in college. At least, she swore she was straight. I begged to differ. Anyway, one time she asked me (and a friend of mine) to accompany her on a date to see if this guy she met at dance class was gay. It seems all the guys she took a liking too either were gay or later on came out of the closet. That included me (she tried to 'convert' me one night) and a very nice boy who had been her boyfriend since she was in grade school. She was just a faggot magnet, that one.

Well, long story short...the "date" shows up with a date of his own...another guy. While at this über-macho sports bar, she kept asking for feedback on the "gayness" of her love interest every time we were alone. I engaged the guy in conversation and found out that he had been on vacation recently to Puerto Rico with none other than the guy he'd brought along. When I inquired about the places they visited while on vacation EVERY single bar and club he mentioned was a gay establishment. After they left, I told my friend that, frankly, she'd outdone herself this time. Not only had she managed to set her sights on what was probably the biggest queen in toe shoes, but one that was, quite obviously, already happily involved with what could only be called a "lover."

Maybe her defective gaydar was the result of the fact that Yvonne was a lesbian in heavy self-denial. At least, that's what I have always believed about her. Any well-healed het could clear have spotted that tippy-toeing diva from across a crowded room. Some things you just don't need gaydar for.
berto - Sep 14, 2007 - 12:52 PM
Post subject:
Study: GSAs show positive effect in schools

Quote:
Secondary institutions that have gay-straight alliances provide a more positive learning environment for LGBT students than schools that don't, according to a study released Wednesday.


Shocked Well. I never...

Rolling Eyes
Feral - Sep 15, 2007 - 06:57 AM
Post subject:
berto wrote:
Study: GSAs show positive effect in schools

Quote:
Secondary institutions that have gay-straight alliances provide a more positive learning environment for LGBT students than schools that don't, according to a study released Wednesday.


Shocked Well. I never...

Rolling Eyes


You don't say!

Surely they're joshing us... REALLY -- "A more positive learning environment"?

And someone did a study on this.

PIFF

They'll need to do many, many more studies, then. After all... these things must be reproducible before they can be accepted as fact. And let us not forget that dreadful bugbear of methodology; the phenomenon must be demonstrated to exist with a wide variety of methodologies before the 'reasonable' people will deign to believe in it.

(We're talking about people who aren't sure they believe in chromosomes, after all.)

Meanwhile, my 'bullshit meter' has just broken. It seems it suddenly detected a massive influx of some really fetid bovine effluvia. (Methinks said bull needs to have his diet monitored more closely).

"More positive?" What is this thing, 'more positive,' and does anyone even want such a thing? The mortality rate for a Marburg virus infection is substantially 'more positive' than the mortality rate for an Ebola infection. Do not tell me my lot in life is better if I am protected from Ebola but still subject to Marburg. I ain't buying it.

HOWEVER... GSAs are good for the kids. Positive learning environments don't really enter into it, but if that's what gets the hets through their day... whatever.

I went to high school, you know. (They kind of made me... it was NOT my idea.) I had eyes to see and ears to hear and I know quite well what such places were like back then. Since then, I've met any number of high school students, any number of parents of high school students, and any number of high school teachers (and a principal or two that richly deserves a criminal indictment). I'd really prefer to say that not one thing has changed in those wretched places since my passage through them. I really, really would. After all, this idea of mine that "not one thing has really changed" is a common thread through my discussions. Sadly, I can't. I have been quite unanimously informed that the hell-hole called high school has gotten worse... quite a lot worse... since I first identified the place as a hell-hole.

"A more positive learning environment"?

The street is "a more positive learning environment."

Any shelter for Gay kids is "a more positive learning environment."

A Gay home is "a more positive learning environment."

I have absolutely no interests in these people's self-serving claims of being able to remedy a situation that has grown ever more lethal.

But if they absolutely must do studies... I quietly point out that their results may be contaminated by any number of phenomena other than the GSAs that they attribute this "more positive learning environment" to. I quietly suggest that a new battery of studies quite likely will confirm or refute this thesis. Let them found ten thousand new GSAs in ten thousand schools without them and observe what, if any, changes take place.

One must, after all, have reasonable controls in one's experiments. Otherwise it's just masturbating with your clothes on.
Feral - Sep 26, 2007 - 07:43 PM
Post subject:
Victimization For Sexual Orientation Increases Suicidal Behavior In College Students

Quote:
The study was provoked by a question from a 15-year-old gay male while Murphy was working on an internship as a school psychologist at a high school. The youth, who was suicidal and using drugs, asked her, "Does it get better in college"" She didn't know.

To find out Murphy recruited 528 participants -- 404 heterosexuals, 79 same-sex attracted heterosexuals, 38 gays, lesbians and bisexuals, and 7 who said they were not sure of their sexual identity. The students ranged in age from 17 to 26, with a mean age of 19, and 63 percent of them were female.

...

The study is the first to explore the link between victimization and suicidal behavior among college students. In the course of the study, University of Washington researcher Heather Murphy also uncovered a group of students who previously had not been studied and are at increased risk for suicidal behavior. These students identified themselves as heterosexual, but also reported being attracted to people of the same sex or engaging in same-sex behavior.

This group was three times as likely as heterosexuals to have made a plan to commit suicide in the past year and six times more likely to have actually attempted suicide in the same period. Gay, lesbian and bisexual students also were at increased risk for suicidal behavior. They were twice as likely as heterosexuals to have planned and to have attempted suicide in the previous year.


Sadly, the good Doctor does not answer the question. In case anyone forgot, it is "Does it get better in college?"

For all the fifteen-year-olds who might be wondering the same thing, the answer is yes. It gets better in college. It gets better still after college. (Someone else can dig up the statistics for similar questions pertaining to high school. My recollection, however, is that they are worse. As disturbing as Dr. Murphy's finding are, the data for high schools are worse.)

"Better" is not good enough, however. It's not even close to good enough.
vanrozenheim - Sep 26, 2007 - 09:33 PM
Post subject:
Quote:
same-sex attracted heterosexuals

Now what is that? I can leave with Bisexuals and Two-Spirits, but "same-sex attracted heterosexuals" is a bit too much. What they actually say is that there is a group of teenagers who are attracted to the same sex, but are deeply offended by the idea they actually might be Gay or Bi.
Feral - Sep 27, 2007 - 12:30 AM
Post subject:
It is also possible that what is referred to here is a passing infatuation. A youth might not be attracted to his own sex at all... except for this one particular lad. It is a grotesquely heterocentric way to phrase things though. As you say... what we have here is, in all likelihood, either someone who is Gay or Bi (discounting the scant evidence that suggests that there are no Bi males at least).

I was initially suspicious of this article, and remain somewhat so still -- "same-sex attraction" is a phrase used almost exclusively by the "ex-gay" crowd. Normal, sane people do not use the phrase. After all... it isn't a meaningful string of words.
All times are GMT
Powered by PNphpBB2 © 2003-2006 The PNphpBB Group
Credits