Posted on 12/29/2002 8:59:44 AM PST by scripter
For those of us that can read, that's 25% of new HIV infections, not 25% of homosexuals.
Backpedaling is so unbecoming on you.
It would if it were true. First of all, the study you cited did NOT show that.
A study of Canadians imprisoned for pedophilia reveals that 91% of molesters of non-familial boys admitted to no lifetime sexual contact other than homosexual. In other words, their sexual orientation was clearly homosexual. (Marshall WL et al. ‘‘Early Onset and Deviant Sexuality in Child Molesters.’’ Journal of Interpersonal Violence 1991, 6: 323-336.)
Drs. Freund and Heasman of the Clarke Institute of Psychiatry in Toronto reviewed two sizeable studies and calculated that 34% and 32% of the offenders against children were homosexual. In cases they had personally handled, homosexuals accounted for 36% of their 457 pedophiles. (Freund K et al. ‘‘Pedophilia and Heterosexuality vs. Homosexuality.’’ Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 1984, 10: 193-200.)
Dr. Adrian Copeland, a psychiatrist who works with sexual offenders at the Peters Institute in Philadelphia, said that, from his experience, pedophiles tend to be homosexual and ‘‘40% to 45%’’ of child molesters have had ‘‘significant homosexual experiences.’’ (Quoted by A Bass, Boston Globe, August 8, 1988.) A state-wide survey of 161 Vermont adolescents who committed sex offenses in 1984 found that 35 (22%) were homosexual. (Wassermann J et al. ‘‘Adolescent Sex Offenders -- Vermont, 1984.’’ Journal of the American Medical Ass’n 1986, 255: 181-2.)
Of the 91 molesters of non-related children at Canada’s Kingston Sexual Behaviour Clinic from 1978-1984, 38 (42%) engaged in homosexuality. (Marshall WL et al. ‘‘Early Onset and Deviant Sexuality in Child Molesters.’’ Journal of Interpersonal Violence 1991, 6: 323-336.) Of 52 child molesters in Ottawa from 1983 to 1985, 31 (60%) were homosexual. (Bradford JMW et al. ‘‘The Heterogeneity/Homogeneity of Pedophilia.’’ Psychiatric Journal of the University of Ottawa 1988, 13: 217-226.)
So you acknowledge that the exact same or similar behaviors are evident in the non-gay population as well.
Yes, they're evident in the heterosexual population, but in far smaller numbers. This is what I mean when I say that any argument based on extrapolation and disproportionality goes right over your head. I don't think you're even comprehending what I'm saying here.
Ah, yes, the "chipping away effect"... is that a technical research term? Do you really believe that your kludge of disparate studies demonstrates something conclusive? ... YOU are invalidly extrapolating from very limited research to the general population. THAT is not reasonable.
I'd be the first to agree that we need to spend money on more research into the pathology of homosexuality. These studies, as I've said, suggest that we are only seeing the tip of the iceberg.
There should be a survey conducted under terms that neither madg nor the APA can find fault with. A composite of samples from every large metropolitan area in the United States, selected by computer to produce a truly representative cross-section of America.
The survey should be large, perhaps with a sample size as large as 100,000. The federal government should be prepared to spend millions and millions of dollars on it. After all, we're certainly spending a lot of money on AIDS research. Perhaps we should spend some of that money on gaining a truly accurate picture of the subculture that produced this epidemic. I think an ounce of prevention is worth a billion dollars spent searching for a cure.
This would be the 3D rendering of the entire iceberg: how far beneath the surface of the sea it extends, its precise shape and temperature. Until then, we have enough data from all of these many studies to indicate that it is, indeed, an iceberg. And as a society, we should steer clear of it.
By the way, I'm still waiting for JoshGray to produce one study -- just one will do -- that confirms his claim that homosexuals do not display these pathologies to any greater degree than heterosexuals.
I'm still waiting for JoshGray to produce one study -- just one will do -- that confirms his claim that homosexuals do not display these pathologies to any greater degree than heterosexuals
I don't remember making that claim. Regardless, it's irrelevant -- whatever pathologies homosexuals may or may not display, in whatever proportion to heterosexuals, is irrelevant to whether or not homosexuality itself is or isn't a pathology. In other words, you could show that 99.44% of homosexuals are kleptomaniacs, or that 99.44% of kleptomaniacs are homosexuals, and you still would not have proven that homosexuality is a pathology. Women experience clinical depression in far greater numbers than men, but noone is claiming that being female is a pathology.
Publishing the journal Pediatrics, Carol Jenny and her colleagues used the misclassification error described above to arrive at the preposterous conclusion that a child's risk of being molested by a relative's "heterosexual" partner is "over 100 times greater than by someone who might be identifiable as being homosexual, lesbian, or bisexual."
The study was based upon review of medical records of children evaluated for sexual abuse. The authors reached their conclusion by making the default assumption that an alleged offender was "heterosexual" unless openly identified as gay or lesbian within the community. There is no better evidence of their intellectual dishonesty than that which is provided by their own words as they attempt to justify rejecting the offenders' actual behavior as the basis for classification by sexual orientation:
If sexual behavior was used as the means to determine sexual orientation, a detailed sexual history would be compared with a predetermined standard of what constitutes a heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual orientation. This method leaves important questions unanswered. How does one classify a man who identifies himself as gay, and who leads a homosexual lifestyle, but whose only sexual behavior is limited to an occasional heterosexual contact;
A more important question emerges: how does one classify a "researcher" who would use the phrase "homosexual lifestyle" to describe a man who only has "heterosexual contact"? How is it that such tortured reasoning as this is even allowed to appear on the pages of journals presuming to be "scientific"? Jenny continues:
or the prisoner who has sex with men, sees himself as heterosexual, and who is defined as heterosexual in his community? These examples point out the difficulties in using a strictly behavioral definition of sexuality.
For researchers with no pro-gay ideological agendas, these difficulties do not exist. A male who chooses to have sexual contact with another male is either homosexual or bisexual. He is not heterosexual. Only those allied with the political endeavors of gay advocacy organizations perceive any "problems" in the obvious notion of classifying subjects on the basis of their desires and deeds instead of their self-chosen labels.
After rejecting classification based on behavior, Jenny concludes that "socially determined perception of how one presents himself to the community" should be the "standard by which we can determine the alleged offender's sexual identity." Using this "standard," 46 of the 47 alleged offenders counted in Jenny's study as males molesting boys were called "heterosexual." For most of them, Jenny attempted to justify this because each offender had a presumably sexual relationship with a woman. Nonetheless, on this question she admits to uncertainty:
The majority (222/269 = 82%) of children in this sample were suspected of being abused by a man or woman who was, or had been, in a heterosexual relationship with a relative of the child.
If these adult relationships were indeed sexual, then the males should have been classified as bisexual. It is also noteworthy that Jenny does not admit to the possibility that the male participants in these suspected “heterosexual” relationships were closet homosexuals feigning interest in women in order to gain access to their male children. She also assumed that all of the female offenders were heterosexual, unless they openly identified as lesbian in their communities.
Using these bizarre classification principles, Jenny and her colleagues were able to reach the conclusion that only two "identifiable" gay or lesbian individuals were offenders, and that children are at 100 times greater risk of being molested by heterosexuals.
Jenny, at least, was honest enough to bring her ideological motives out in the open while conducting this atrocity under the pretense of science. In the first two paragraphs of her article, she unabashedly expresses her concern about the fact that supporters of antigay legislation and referenda frequently assert that homosexuals are more likely to molest children than heterosexuals. Finding this problematic, Jenny and colleagues set out to prove otherwise, created a tortured classification scheme to facilitate their endeavor, and slaughtered the Western rational tradition along the way.
Michael P. Wright was graduated from the University of Oklahoma with a BA in political science (1969) and MA in sociology (1976). He has been published in The American Journal of Preventive Medicine, The Journal of the American Medical Association, and AIDS Education and Prevention.
Would you trust your child with a man who admits being homosexual, or with a man who has a wife and/or girlfriend? Word-play aside, Dr. Jenny's results are pretty clear.
Wright has a master's degree in sociology and is very familiar with the scientific method that Jenny, in pursuit of her ideological agenda, ignored.
Jenny declared that almost all of the pedophiles in her study were "heterosexual" without even interviewing one of them. You don't see a problem with that?
No, I don't -- she explained why she did it. She explained the definition of "homosexual" that she used for her study, and she stuck with it beginning to end. A particularly good definition, if we're really concerned with protecting children and not so much in scoring political points or creating propaganda.
Dr. Jenny's "scientific method" is quite sound, regardless of what Mr. Wright thinks of it. Do you really want to apply his reasoning to that mishmash of statistics you keep posting? "A male who chooses to have sexual contact with another male is either homosexual or bisexual. He is not heterosexual."
Do you really?
your "sources"... the very authors of the study you cite... STRONGLY disagree with your conclusion. This is not surprising due to the study's geographical limitations (one Canadian city), the "era" limitation (the exact same study performed TODAY would produce dramtically different results) ... Compared to nothing at all, this has no relevance. Compared to the aforementioned archaic and unrepresentative data... it's just silly ... Obviously a non-representative sample. (Post #307)
Bell (et al) was not representative of the general population when the data was collected, it wasn't representative when it was published, and it's certainly not representative of anything in THIS century. (Post #375)
But now, since you cite Groth and Jenny, you've finally admitted that studies that have geographic and temporal limitations (as almost all studies do) can be extrapolated to the general population. This is wonderful news. Thanks ever so much for finally admitting this.
Now, let's take a closer look at some of Groth's work. The following is from a separate study conducted by Groth in 1985:
http://mhawestchester.org/mhaeducation/incestmono8.asp
Since most such offenders are primarily emotionally invested in women in their adult relationships, it is for this reason that the trend for regressed child molesters is to target girls as victims. They select a child (girl), with whom they will feel more competent, to replace the adult (woman) with whom they feel inadequate.
Do you understand the significance of this observation by the learned Dr. Groth? First, I'll again observe that since 97-98% of the population is straight, it would be amazing if "most such offenders" were not heterosexual.
Second, if heterosexual pedophiles "select a child (girl), with whom they will feel more competent, to replace the adult (woman) with whom they feel inadequate," then wouldn't homosexual pedophiles select a child (boy), with whom they will feel more competent, to replace the adult (man) with whom they feel inadequate?
And doesn't this suggest that since about 30% of child molestation victims are boys, then about 30% of child molesters are homosexuals?
madg: It seems that you have just tacitly agreed with me...
So you're agreeing that homosexuality is pathological and that as a society, we should avoid it. If that's your position now, then yes, I expressly agree with it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.