Orientation does not matter, actions matter. A promiscuous strait person is at higher risk than a monogamous gay person for STDs.Right, of course, so what's your point? So why then do gay men have a much higher incidence of STD's? Of course "orientation" matters.
[quoe]Ok, surely it must have an influence, all I'm saying is that it isn't always, or exclusively about the torment that others place upon you. Not all gay people kill themselves because their neighbor called them a fag.[/quote]
What gays have gone through in the 70's and 80's was much more than being called fags. We still see it today on this very board, where people state that gays are pedophiles and perverts doomed to hell. Thankfully, legally, things have gotten much better.
It means Cameron's conclusions are of zero value. When you have flawed data, you cannot make accurate predictions.From your link:
Nice.. Now what does this really mean? Cameron claims that based off "his" sample, he concludes that the avg lifespan of a homosexual is X amount. The author is correct, and I agree, it probably isn't a great sample, however, it doesn't necessarily make Cameron wrong in his conclusions either.
http://www.freewebs.com/palmettoumoj...%20Cameron.pdfThat might be true, however, can you provide proof he lies?
Common thread in Cameron "research", people whose research he quotes point out that is not what their research shows.
Cameron's claims hinge on the incorrect assumption that all male-male molestations are committed by homosexuals. Moreover, a careful reading of Cameron's paper reveals several false statements about the literature he claimed to have reviewed. For example, he cited the Groth and Birnbaum (1978) study mentioned previously as evidencing a 3:2 ratio of "heterosexual" (i.e., female victim) to "homosexual" (i.e., male victim) molestations, and he noted that "54% of all the molestations in this study were performed by bisexual or homosexual practitioners" (p. 1231).
However, Groth and Birnbaum reported that none of the men in their sample had an exclusively homosexual adult sexual orientation, and that none of the 22 bisexual men were more attracted to adult males than to adult females. The "54%" statistic reported by Cameron doesn't appear anywhere in the Groth and Birnbaum (1978) article, nor does Cameron explain its derivation.
Yes, as more information becomes available, any researcher will probably backtrack.Oh come now.. Hehe.. Did you read the study? The fact that Stacey is backtracking is not unusual. The God damn study is ALL about the results of homosexual parenting vs. heterosexual parenting. Are you saying that the study is something other than what it is? This is why to the right, this is the perfect study, and source to use against the left. Ms. Stacey has no axe to grind, yet her results are very damaging to the gay parenting lobby.
Returning to homosexuality is just one of the problems. Those who undergo the "therapy" are self selected, which makes it hard to judge much. Remember my mentioning common problems with the research?Really? By whom exactly? I will be the first to say that you can't teach an old dog new tricks, especially if it's Pavlov's dog, but discredited by whom is what you have to ask yourself. Is getting off alcoholism discredited because a few jump back off the wagon. Please.
I have refuted the claim. It is flawed research based on poor sampling for the task, and taken from a paper on a different subject. it is meaningless. You would get similar results if the subjects had been strait AIDS victims with the same selection characteristics. I have no clue what the real numbers are, but they are nothing like what your source claims.As stated, it's all we have to go on. I'll repeat my challenge: Can you directly refute the claim?
CC has better info on this.But what of the hetero's that needed mental help? To get an average, surely they sampled "straits"?
Primarily homosexual would be more attracted to men than women. Primarily heterosexual would be more attracted to women than men(assuming in both cases we are talking about men).Hmm.. "Primarily homosexual", what does that mean? Also, using the measure of a homosexual act, is not the act of sex between a male youth by a male adult not still homosexual> If it isn't, then what is it? What about females?
Let me guess, it's about power right? (Waiting for that study that you folks usually post) I'll save you the time. Don't bother with the APA study, it is meaningless, and provides that the reader make huge leaps in logic. Why would the orientation of the offender, towards the victims sex, now suddenly become meaningless? So they are attracted to youth... Hmm, wait that doesn't work.. Ok, I'm all ears, please make the argument in your defense. I think I know why - it would be harmful to the gay movement if such a revelation made the mainstream, maybe that's why?
No, it's not about power. It's about being attracted to underage children. Pedophiles and hebephiles(attracted to pubescent children) primary attraction is to children, just as straits are primarily attracted to adults of the opposite sex, and gays are primarily attracted to adults of the same sex. Here is some starter reading: SpringerLink - Journal Article