553
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 77:
Line 77: + + + + + + + + + + + +
→10% or 4%
::What evidence? You have provided no evidence for me to look at. Simply asserting a thing to be true, especially when the evidence I have provided says that what most people believe is false, is not evidence.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 17:28, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
::What evidence? You have provided no evidence for me to look at. Simply asserting a thing to be true, especially when the evidence I have provided says that what most people believe is false, is not evidence.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 17:28, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
:The discussion has moved on to [[User:Conservative/socialeffectevolution]]. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 17:53, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
:The discussion has moved on to [[User:Conservative/socialeffectevolution]]. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 17:53, 10 May 2007 (EDT)
::There is no need to move the discussion—especially to the page of a user rather than to the appropriate article (I’ve not been invited to post on that user’s page, and will not violate the rule that a user’s page is his castle to pursue this discussion with you)—or to a page that is tangentially related at best—we are discussing what number Kinsey gave on a page about Kinsey, we are not discussing anything about Darwin and so I think talking about this on a page about the impact on society of Darwin’s theory is inappropriate. I will therefore respond here, as this is the relevant location.
::Most of the “evidence” posted on the page you linked to comes from Dr. Reisman, who for all the reasons I listed above is not a reliable source—and I still see no reason to trust her. The other “evidence” you post pertains to the bill we have discussed at length here—which for all the reasons discussed above is still not relevant to this discussion—the Eagle Forum piece on the bill reemphasizes that it deals with child sexuality not homosexuality—that is it is not. So the evidence offered is 1 untrustworthy source and the discussion of an bill never passed (or voted on) that deals with a separate issue. Compared to the two reliable sources (remember they were and are both used in the version of the article you have twice reverted back to) that I have provided for the 4% number—including 1 from a peer reviewed journal in a relevant field, psychiatry.
::To attempt to forestall further misunderstanding let me quote the relevant sources.
::From “Franklin D. Jones and Ronald J. Koshes, "Homosexuality and the Military," American Journal of Psychiatry, Vol. 152, No. 1, January 1995, pp. 16 (citing to Kinsey’s Sexual Behavior in the Human Male.):
::<blockquote>Kinsey et al. found that 4% of men are exclusively homosexual past adolescence. </blockquote>
::There it is in plain English, from a peer reviewed article in a journal on psychiatry - Kinsey gave the 4% number.
::From Boyce Rensberger, "How Many Men in U.S. Are Gay?, Estimates Vary By Millions" The Washington Post, April 17, 1993, p. A-1:
::<blockquote> Although that figure is so much a part of conventional wisdom that a year-old San Francisco gay magazine is called Ten Percent, Kinsey never intended it as a measure of the proportion of homosexual men. The pioneering sexologist recognized that human sexuality encompasses a range of behaviors shading from exclusively heterosexual to exclusively homosexual.</blockquote>
::<blockquote>Kinsey estimated that just 4 percent of men were purely homosexual (that extrapolates to 5 million men in the United States), but said the population could be as high as 10 percent (12.5 million) if men were included who had been "more or less exclusively homosexual" for at least three years out of a lifetime that was otherwise heterosexual. </blockquote>
::There, from a reliable newspaper you have the 4% number given again and an explanation of where the 10% mythos comes from. Kinsey was interested not just in behavior over a life time, but in snapshots of behavior as well—the additional 6% comes from misunderstanding what Kinsey said. He said that 6% of the people he surveyed went through, what we might now call, a homosexual phase, they were not homosexual, they engaged in heterosexual behavior for most of their lives, but they experienced a prolonged period of exclusively homosexual behavior at some point in time. In modern parlance we would call these people bisexual.
::So you can see the reliable sources on this, and how the 10% figure came to be the dominant one in the popular imagination.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 22:45, 10 May 2007 (EDT)