Talk:Demographics of sexual orientation/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

From Talk:Prevalence of homosexuality

Can someone check

I'm not a native speaker. Can someone check the last paragraph about the Hamburg Institute for Sexual Research with respect to linguistics? Thanks! --Amys 17:21, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I'm not a native speaker of German, but I'm pretty sure the translation that was there wasn't accurate, so I changed it. The original sentence is:

Seitdem die Homosexualität als eine eigene Sexualform öffentlich verhandelt wird, kommt die Befürchtung der Jungen hinzu, womöglich als "Schwuler" angesehen zu werden.

--Atemperman 00:10, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Statistical problems

The various survey summaries do not really do justice to the referenced articles.

The first summary cites some research that talks about sexual behavior only, in the United States only. The article is accurately quoted, but I'm not sure the attribution of the ultimate source is correct. Certainly it's incomplete, and moreover you can't access the original study from the link given.

The second summary is not clear that this was a survey in Calgary, Canada, only, and muddles behavior vs. self-identification, which is clear in the page referenced.

The third summary should mention that the survey took place in 1992 in the United States only. The quote given is incorrect; it should be "for men...4.9% since 18 years [of age]". It's unclear whether this is self-identification or sexual behavior.

The change in numbers for the German studies seem extraordinary. The summary does not say whether these numbers are for behavior or for self-identification, and whether or not they are measuring the same thing in the same way in the two different years. Also, what is the demographic sample - West Germans? Inhabitants of a particular city? What was the impact of German reunification on the sample? I would seriously question the factual conclusion made in this paragraph unless this study has been replicated. I can't really evaluate the trustworthiness of this study because the pages cited are all in German.

In general, it should be mentioned that the "10%" figure is attributed to Kinsey; see Kinsey Reports for more info on that. -- Beland 03:03, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I don't think it was a nation-wide survey. But even if you criticise this study from a methodical point of view, it is nevertheless important to mention insofar as it gives a hint that those numbers need not be a constant. I mean, perhaps this is the reason why Kinsey achieved much higher numbers in the 40's. --Amys 03:16, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)

My guess would be that it's a badly constructed study that is simply experiencing severe measurement errors. The Kinsey study are widely acknowledged as flawed, and there are (or should be) notes to that effect everywhere it is mentioned in Wikipedia. I have no basis for determining whether it's a reputable, well-constructed study or a junk survey done for PR or something, since the supporting material is in German. If these are not reliable numbers, they might need to be discarded, but could be kept with suitable context. I certainly wouldn't say that they proved anything until I knew whether or not they were reliable. -- Beland 01:14, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)

The broad assertion that "major historical shifts can occur in the prevalence of homosexuality" is simply not supported by the article it links to. The article mentions that fewer boys in 1990 in this particular study acknowledged having had homosexual experiences, but (if the combined efforts of my elementary German and Babelfish are correct in translating) it also explains that result as the result of changing social standards for self-identification, and not proof that there was necessarily such a dramatic change in their activity or their inclination. If it does respresent a decline in homosexual activity, it needs to be put in context of heterosexual activity among 17-year-old boys, which I'd bet was also a lot more prevalent in post-"Summer of Love" 1970 than in middle-of-the-AIDS-pandemic 1990. Even if you suppose that the study soundly demonstrates (as Amys seems to want) that there were simply fewer homosexual Jungen in Hamburg in 1990 than in 1970, that's still not a "major historical shift". It's a single datum about a small demographic. And for all we know, it just means that all the junge Stossenbumser in Hamburg were visiting Amsterdam to buy drugs when the 1990 study was done. :) Tverbeek 20:22, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Strange notion that anybody who has made same-sex sexual experience was a homosexual Junge. Obviously you see homosexuality as a condition and not a behaviour. What about the old Greeks? Was everybody "gay" in those times? That "major historical shifts can occur" is a platitude in view of historical knowledge about antiquity. Also compare the historical statistics of Michael Rocke's Forbidden Friendships. By the way, what is a "Stossenbumser"? Never heard of that! ;-) --Amys 01:29, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The broad assertion is indeed not supported by the articles the entry links to. And yes, they at least partly explain the much lower incidence of homosexual contacts (i.e. behaviour, not self-identification) as the result of changing social standards for self-identification, but not in the way Tverbeek seems to think. The reasons for that decline presented in the two articles are twofold: 1. Sexuality has become increasingly culturally demystified. As a result, sexual prohibitions and bans were lifted, sexual activity among older teenagers has become more or less generally accepted, boys and girls grow up together (instead of separated by sex, as seems to have been the case earlier - I'm not old enough to have experienced this myself). This cessation of sexual separation and sexual prohibitions is said to have "killed off the homophile phase" during puberty, although this is not further explained. (From the way these arguments are presented, they seem to be hinting at the easier availability of female sexual partners as a possible reason for the decline.) 2. The creation of a homosexual (and heterosexual) identity have ritualized and cemented both homo- and heterosexuality. This, and the tight connection of homosexuality to HIV/AIDS in the public mind, has led adolescent boys to forgo the "playful lust of mutual masturbation", which is now labelled a homosexual activity, for fear of being branded a "faggot". As for heterosexual activity among 17-year-old boys, the article mentions that as measured by the incidence of genital petting and sexual intercourse, there was no marked difference between 1970 and 1990.

As for the quality of the studies, I don't have access to the studies themselves, so I can't analyze the data, but the Research Institutes for Sexuality in Frankfurt/Main and Hamburg have a good reputation. I would therefore assume a relatively broad sample basis, probably West Germany for both 1970 and 1990, and probably also East Germany for the 1990 data. An expanded version of the article on bvvp.de is available at the bzga.de site (the German Federal Center for Health Education), and they mention differences between East and West Germany in some data, so they are certainly able to correct for a bias resulting from the lack of East German data in the 1970 study. --gudlat@web.de 11:50, 29 Mar 2005

Kinsey fact-checking

Someone actually needs to read the Kinsey Report and properly summarize its findings; the various tidbits I found were fragmentary and sometimes contradictory. -- Beland 04:17, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Backing up?

In general, surveys quoted by anti-gay activists tend to show figures nearer 1%, while surveys quoted by gay activists tend to show figures nearer 10%, with a mean of 4-5% figure most often cited in mainstream media reports.

This needs to be backed up with at least one example of each side, preferrably more. Also, the word mean here is inaccurate.

I have a citation from GodHatesFags.com that can serve as an example. It's the most prominent anti-gay site I can recall off the top of my head. I will also look for pro-gay citations. - LeaHazel 17:50, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Alternative sources of information

Without being able to remember even which countries were being talked about, I saw a TV program the other week which showed stark contrasts in the behaviour of males with other males, where western taboos did not apply. Basically, that sex with men was considered preferable to sex with off-limits females. This does not help make a definitive answer, but should be followed up by anyone interested.Sandpiper 11:27, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

General observations

I deleted the part that says a transsexual doesn't agree with the gender "assigned to them at birth." This is BS. As long as we're writing in English, we can't just make up our own definitions of "gender" and "assigned." As this author is attempting to do. Amulekii 17:13, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I find very little reason to keep the platitudinous, unreferenced General Observations section. Whatever bit of information there that might be kept is better treated under its specific, appropriate label. - Ktai 09:18, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't know where to ask this so I will here. Why are we talking about the party ID of gay people in a section on prevalence of homosexuality in the US? We would also see that an increasing percentage of democrats are minorities, but it would tell us nothing about the prevalence of minorities in the US. Are you trying to suggest that being a Democrat makes you gay? Even if that is your claim, wouldn't it go on an article about the causes of homosexuality? Of course Gays are more likely to be Democrats and you don't need Fried's book to know that. The 2008 exit poll is cited on this page. Guess what? 70% of GLB people voted for Obama so this "finding" is nothing significant, and the graph is really over the top. Why is there a graph about political party ID on a page about the prevalence of homosexuality in the US? That's what Fried's data is really pointing to: gays tend to be Democrats. So??? What do we need a graph there? This data should be removed from this page and placed on a page about the demographics that make up each political party in the US. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.217.202.107 (talk) 19:29, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Demographics of sexual orientation

The following text is from some other article (I've edited so many tonight I no longer remember which) and it will need to be integrated as well when the Great Merge happens. -- Beland 07:03, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Research, and the experience of non-heterosexuals, suggests that sexual orientation is set in early childhood and perhaps in some individuals even earlier. Studies of homosexual identical twins suggest that when one twin is homosexual that there is a 40 to 60 percent chance that the other twin will also be homosexual. In fraternal twins the figure is 15 to 30 percent. For same sex non-twin siblings the figure is 5 to 10 percent, or roughly the background level (ranges are from a combination of [1] and a site that no longer exists).

For many, these data strongly indicate a significant biological influence on sexual orientation. For many others, including two of the three authors (Bailey and Pollard) of the studies cited above, there is a worry that recruiting subjects from readers of gay advocacy magazines may have skewed the results.

Kudos on getting this far

Merging the two articles must have been an unenviable task, and the result provides a good framework. I look forward to pitching in. Two comments:

1. It will be impossible to say anything meaningful, absent a discussion of history, so it is not clear to me how that section can be broken out.
2. The phrase Most people in most societies around the world have mostly experienced heterosexual attraction and engaged in predominantly heterosexual behavior. reads like someone's projection, and seems both of questionable accuracy as well as questionable neutrality. Haiduc 03:52, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

1.) That section mentions some things that a quick inspection didn't find in the main article, which means that material at least needs to be copied, if not moved, into the main article. Also, this section is not very representative of the material in the main article. In any case, you're right that it might be a good idea to keep a section here on history, so I changed the note to read "refactored" instead of "merged". -- Beland 04:54, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

2.) Well, as far as I know, all of the contemporary countries in the world are populated predominantly with people who identify as heterosexual, are predominantly attracted to the opposite sex, and practice exclusive or nearly exclusive heterosexuality. History of sexuality seems to indicate some societies where ritualized homosexual behavior have been common but existed alongside heterosexual marriage. I'm actually not aware of any societies where the population actually approached anywhere near 50% homosexual orientation or 50% engaging in exclusive homosexual behavior...though there may have been some here or there, hence the considerable hedging. If necessary, we can enumerate all the societies that have ever existed, and attempt to determine from literature from and about them if they had a high rate of homosexuality or bisexuality, though that'd be more appropriate to do for the History of sexuality article itself, since it is currently rather incomplete. Perhaps an easier question to answer would be, is there anything any of us know that would make this statement untrue? If it is true, I'm not sure what the concern about neutrality would be, but perhaps a different phrasing would be better. -- Beland 04:54, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Things are quite a bit more complex. Check out the (same) discussion we just had here: Talk:Heterosexuality#Removal. And that is but one example. At any rate, the statement is a good example of what is meant by heteronormative but as you examine cultures, the more you know about them, the more difficult it is to defend such generalizations. Haiduc 12:42, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)