Skip to main content

On the front page their is an article about Bryan Fischer who claims that gays are pedophiles. Of course serious people know better. But I think it is important to know why we know better.

I followed the link from the front page article about Fischer. The first thing I will do is show you Fischer's reasoning. The next thing I will do is show you why experts on human sexuality disagree with Fischer.

Hereis Fischer's reasoning:

As Tony Perkins of FRC said in his update yesterday, "While activists like to claim that pedophilia is a completely distinct orientation from homosexuality, evidence shows a disproportionate overlap between the two. About a third of all child sex abuse cases involve men molesting boys--and in one study, 86% of such men identified themselves as homosexual or bisexual. Try as they might, gays and lesbians can't shrug off the link. This is a homosexual problem."

Think about that for a moment. Homosexuals comprise less than three percent of the population, yet are responsible for one-third of all child sex abuse cases. There is an overwhelming correlation between homosexual preference and pedophilia. This is further evidence that homosexuality is in fact sexual deviancy. For this reason alone, no homosexual should be elevated to the United States Supreme Court.

First it is not activists who "like to claim that pedophilia is a completely distinct orientation" from homosexual orientation. It is very serious social scientists who have studied the subject closely who differentiate homosexual orientation from pedophilia -- even when acts of pedophilia are homosexual in nature.

One of the world's foremost experts on the subject of pedophilia is Fred Berlin. Here's a summation of his view:

According to Dr. Fred Berlin, a Johns Hopkins University professor who founded the National Institute for the Study, Prevention and Treatment of Sexual Trauma in Baltimore, Md., pedophilia is a distinct sexual orientation marked by persistent, sometimes exclusive, attraction to prepubescent children. ~ Time

The simplest understanding of this, and a very correct understanding is to see that sexual abuse isn't about sexual orientation or sexual attraction. Unattractive people are often victims of sexual abuse and sexual violence. Sexual violence and abuse is about power, domination, and control. It's not about sexual attraction.

Fischer cites a study that says 86% of men who molest boys identify themselves as gay or bisexual with no breakdown of gay or bisexual perpetrators. The study Fischer references is strongly criticized by the consensus of experts in this field. The paper he's referencing is Erickson et al. (1988). Behavior patterns of child molesters. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 17, 77-86. The paper does claim in passing that 86% of molesters of boys identified as gay or bisexual, but the paper does not describe how this data was gathered, and how it ascertained the sexual orientation of these men.

"But wait!" You might begin. "If men molest boys aren't they necessarily gay?" The answer is no. Because , for one, sexual orientation isn't about behavior alone. For example, when Governor Jim McGreevy feigned heterosexuality most of his life and formed a heterosexual family, and presumably engaged in heterosexual behavior was he a heterosexual all of that time? Or was he simply a closeted gay man? Behavior isn't always consistent with sexual orientation and attraction.

Pedophiles are attracted, primarily, to children. The sex of those children matter less than that they are children. The sex of victim has more to do with access than sexual orientation.

The US Catholic Bishops commissioned a study on priestly child sex abuse from John Jay College. John Jay researcher Margaret Smith reported back to the Bishops on early findings from their study. From the USA Today:

We do not find a connection between homosexual identity and the increased likelihood of subsequent abuse from the data that we have right now ... It's important to separate the sexual identity and the behavior. Someone can commit sexual acts that might be of a homosexual nature but not have a homosexual identity.

From the same article:

In the book Mental Disorders of the New Millennium (2006), author and psychology professor Thomas Plante writes:

Although the majority of clergy abuse victims are males, homosexuality cannot be blamed. First, many of the pedophile priests report that they are not homosexual. This is also true of many non-clergy sex offenders who victimize boys. Many report that they target boys for a variety of reasons  that include easier access to boys ... pregnancy fears with female victims ... homosexuals in general have not been found to be more likely to commit sexual crimes against minors compared to heterosexuals. Sexual orientation is not predictive of sex crimes

.

Even Pope Benedict XVI, not exactly a liberal gay rights activist, has said the same thing:

Perhaps this is why Pope Benedict XVI himself, en route to the United States for his visit in 2008, responded this way to a question about the abuse crisis: "I do not wish to talk about homosexuality, but about pedophilia, which is a different thing."  ~ Rev James Martin, SJ, It's Not About Homosexuality: Blaming the Wrong People for the Sexual Abuse Crisis, Huffington Post

This point has been established by mainstream social scientists for over 30 years:

Typologies of offenders have often included a distinction between those with an enduring primary preference for children as sexual partners and those who have established age-appropriate relationships but become sexually involved with children under unusual circumstances of extreme stress. Perpetrators in the first category – those with a more or less exclusive interest in children – have been labeled fixated. Fixation means "a temporary or permanent arrestment of psychological maturation resulting from unresolved formative issues which persist and underlie the organization of subsequent phases of development" (Groth & Birnbaum, 1978, p. 176). Many clinicians view fixated offenders as being "stuck" at an early stage of psychological development.

By contrast, other molesters are described as regressed. Regression is "a temporary or permanent appearance of primitive behavior after more mature forms of expression had been attained, regardless of whether the immature behavior was actually manifested earlier in the individual's development" (Groth & Birnbaum, 1978, p. 177). Regressed offenders have developed an adult sexual orientation but under certain conditions (such as extreme stress) they return to an earlier, less mature psychological state and engage in sexual contact with children.

snip

Using the fixated-regressed distinction, Groth and Birnbaum (1978) studied 175 adult males who were convicted in Massachusetts of sexual assault against a child. None of the men had an exclusively homosexual adult sexual orientation. 83 (47%) were classified as "fixated;" 70 others (40%) were classified as regressed adult heterosexuals; the remaining 22 (13%) were classified as regressed adult bisexuals. Of the last group, Groth and Birnbaum observed that "in their adult relationships they engaged in sex on occasion with men as well as with women. However, in no case did this attraction to men exceed their preference for women....There were no men who were primarily sexually attracted to other adult males..."

There have been repeated attempts to link homosexual orientation with pedophilia. Each attempt has failed miserably. They have even gone as far as to test the arousal patterns of gay men and compared them to the arousal patterns of straight men:

In yet another approach to studying adult sexual attraction to children, some Canadian researchers observed how homosexual and heterosexual adult men responded to slides of males and females of various ages (child, pubescent, and mature adult). All of the research subjects were first screened to ensure that they preferred physically mature sexual partners. In some of the slides shown to subjects, the model was clothed; in others, he or she was nude. The slides were accompanied by audio recordings. The recordings paired with the nude models described an imaginary sexual interaction between the model and the subject. The recordings paired with the pictures of clothed models described the model engaging in neutral activities (e.g., swimming). To measure sexual arousal, changes in the subjects' penis volume were monitored while they watched the slides and listened to the audiotapes. The researchers found that homosexual males responded no more to male children than heterosexual males responded to female children (Freund et al., 1989).

In other words, gay men are no more likely to be sexually attracted to children than straight men.

Another important thing to understand about a pedophile is his inability to gender differentiate when it comes to sexual arousal. Those who prefer mature partners have arousal patterns that demonstrate gender differentiation consistent with preferred gender, pedophiles have difficulty with this:

Pedophiles differentiated erotically between females and males less than males who erotically preferred physically mature partners.

It is important to note that studies of bisexual males show that bisexuals gender differentiate in their arousal patterns. The only group that has difficulty gender differentiating with arousal patterns are pedophiles.

Conclusion

Our guts and personal experience tells us that gay men aren't any more likely to molest children than heterosexual men. So, we tend to just shake our heads when we hear the likes of Fischer spouting off about gay men being pedophiles. But it is important to know exactly why he is wrong.

For example, you might run into someone who has read something like what Fischer has had to say and innocently think he's right. How do you convince them that he is wrong? Well, the sites I link to here give you the scientific explanations for why he's wrong.

Human sexuality is complex. Sexual abuse, assault, and rape confuse the easy and finite sexual orientation continuum we have been taught. Sexual abuse isn't about sexual attraction. Pedophilia isn't about gay or straight or bisexual. Abusers abuse those they have access to. A high number of boys are molested, not because molesters are disproportionately gay or bi, but because men typically have more access to boys than to girls.

Originally posted to RfrancisR on Sat Sep 18, 2010 at 07:38 PM PDT.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Yes gays are pedophiles, (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lucy2009

    if they happen to be corrupt catholic priests or Florida republicans who are in the closet. The people I know are out and proud and have actual grown-up people they are in love with. Repression is what produces all that weirdness, imho.

    Yes we did, yes we will. President Obama

    by marketgeek on Sat Sep 18, 2010 at 07:49:06 PM PDT

  •  I am so sick of that meme (5+ / 0-)

    PLEASE donate to a global children's PEACE project: Chalk 4 Peace

    by RumsfeldResign on Sat Sep 18, 2010 at 07:53:38 PM PDT

  •  I don't know what to say. (13+ / 0-)

    Psychologists don't even look at the sexual orientation-pedophilia link anymore because it's settled. There's no relationship, at all.

    We are witnessing the decline of the radical right. Even in the GOP, acceptance of sexual minorities is rising, so the holdouts are becoming increasingly and increasingly crazier.  Full equality may take a long time, but the wind is at our backs.

    Disclaimer: The contents of this comment are just my opinion.

    by psychodrew on Sat Sep 18, 2010 at 08:31:11 PM PDT

  •  As a gay man who grew up attracted to mature men, (8+ / 0-)

    even when I was an adolescent, the youngest guy I ever had any contact with was in his early thirties when I was 21. Many dates, partners, etc. were significantly older than that. The reason I post this is that I learned early on to distinguish the "freaks" (pedos) from the gay guys. The pedo is always afraid of the truth. Whether it is closeting, dominance/fetish issues, whatever, he ALWAYS keeps it concealed behind a placid, nice-guy face. You can feel it when you are around them. Like women say, trust your gut? It's like that. As I dated around, got into relationships, etc. this dynamic to my gaydar increased, to where it included "straight" men. There are genuinely straight guys who will get embroiled in what looks like a "gay" relationship, and they do so because of their intimacy issues, and the learned defense they use to protect themselves from the ever-threatening (to them) intimacy, which is, they learn how to get a hard-on for anyone they can manipulate.
    These men are so addicted to the "privilege" that our society provides to "straight" men, that they will always be straight no matter whom they have "sex" with. It's like a freeform rapist who is just self absorbed to the point where he thinks he's normal. Many have girlfriends, complete with relationships laden with what appears to be emotional drama, etc. but they are faking it all along.
    I come from humble beginnings, lots of gang bangers where I lived, criminality, etc. If you want to understand the predicament of many men, look at how the "lower classes" of men are forced to trade emotionally for some intimacy, and then look at how many can't, or in my examples above, won't. They say "how could you go to jail and have sex with a man, you're gay! Well, it's not so simple, these people don't have a "sex drive", they have a "dominance drive" Me and my partner call these guys "hate ons", because that's what happens to them physiologically when they want to have an orgasm. Tons of these guys walking around would seriously rape a child, animal, whatever, so long as they felt it's fear.
    Personally, I hate this facet of my "gaydar" but there was a time and place where I relied on it, life and death at times, for real. Sensing a guy like that fixing on me hasn't happened in a long time, thanks to the powers that be, because it makes me sick and paranoid for days on end. Sorry for the long post. It's just that straight people NEVER seem to know this, unless they are women victims, typically.

    I will push back, rise up, and speak out against all forms of discrimination that plague our community. www.getequal.org

    by teloPariah on Sat Sep 18, 2010 at 08:45:06 PM PDT

    •  Yes. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      teloPariah

      Tons of these guys walking around would seriously rape a child, animal, whatever, so long as they felt it's fear.

      Exactly. The same is true of men who rape men. Research has repeatedly shown that the perpetrators of male rape are rarely gay. This is about power and dominance in a great many cases of child molestation. In fact, a lot of men who molest children aren't even diagnosable as pedophiles. A true pedophile really does what he does out of a warped sense of love and erotic attraction in many cases. They are fixated (as described above) and have no adult orientation. Their orientation is towards children -- access is the issue.

      People who commit child sexual abuse commonly exhibit the disorder;[5][6][7] however, some offenders do not meet the clinical diagnosis standards for pedophilia.[8] That is, not all child sexual abusers are diagnoseable as pedophiles (or hebephiles),[9] and not all pedophiles and hebephiles actually commit abuse.[10] In strictly behavioral contexts, the word "pedophilia" has been used to refer to child sexual abuse itself, also called "pedophilic behavior",[6][11][12][13] and to the sexual abuse of pubescent or post-pubescent minors.[14][15] Researchers recommend that these imprecise uses be avoided. ~ Wikipedia

      According to Dr. Fred Berlin, a Johns Hopkins University professor who founded the National Institute for the Study, Prevention and Treatment of Sexual Trauma in Baltimore, Md., pedophilia is a distinct sexual orientation marked by persistent, sometimes exclusive, attraction to prepubescent children. ~ Time

    •  Thank you. This is worth a diary of your own. As (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      irishwitch

      a BDSM bi-guy, I would encourage you to expand on this and write it up.

      Religion: Treat it like your penis. Don't show it off in public, and don't shove it down your children's throats.

      by MinistryOfLove on Sun Sep 19, 2010 at 04:50:14 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  As a kinky woman, please don't equate (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      RfrancisR, teloPariah

      dominance/fetish issues with being a pedophile. Most of us must stay in the closet because of the stigma attached to D/s and S/m still--and in some places, consent isn't a defense against an assault charge. I've yet to meet someone in fetish community who was a pedophile; most groups won't admit anyone under 21 to avoid that problem.

      The last time we mixed religion and politics people got burned at the stake.

      by irishwitch on Sun Sep 19, 2010 at 09:55:40 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Maybe i should clarify.. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        irishwitch

        I've met plenty of people in the gay community at large who hide behind the fetishists when they are actually pedos. This was of course when I was young, and therefore a "candidate" in their eyes. You are right about BDSM folks, I've never met one who was interested in any kind of non-consent type of scenario, but I have met plenty of "vanilla" marrieds who are, and who present as "straight" or "gay".

        I will push back, rise up, and speak out against all forms of discrimination that plague our community. www.getequal.org

        by teloPariah on Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 07:28:20 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  I think I've figured this one out (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    kerplunk, buddabelly, Lucy2009

    Gay pedophiles are pedophiles.  Straight pedophiles are pedophiles. And so forth.

    The most impressive thing about man [...] is the fact that he has invented the concept of that which does not exist--Glenn Gould

    by Rich in PA on Sat Sep 18, 2010 at 09:06:45 PM PDT

    •  Actually, maybe not... (0+ / 0-)

      You have to look at two things.  Are they genuinely a pedophile?  A genuine pedophile would be fixated on children and have little interest in an adult.  They may or may not offend.  So long as they don't they present no problem for society only for themselves.

      But many classed as pedophiles have other adult (and perhaps abusive) sexual relationships.  I would suggest that in this case the sexual identity is based on dominance, fear and abuse.  The sex, age, inclination of the victim only become relevant as matters of vulnerability to be enjoyed and taken advantage of.

      These are the violent ones.  These are the most evil of the evil ones.  They are male and female, they are young and they are old. They are the ones that make something of themselves by making nothings of others.  They see everything but themselves and what they 'own' as enemy, to be controlled or destroyed.

      Best Wishes, Demena Left/Right: -8.38; Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.36

      by Demena on Sat Sep 18, 2010 at 11:58:45 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  It is not uncommon for a male pedophile (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        arlene

        to marry a woman with children to get access to the children. The relationship with the women as wife is simply a necessary cover.

        The last time we mixed religion and politics people got burned at the stake.

        by irishwitch on Sun Sep 19, 2010 at 09:53:11 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Look up the word (0+ / 0-)

          Paranoia.

          Best Wishes, Demena Left/Right: -8.38; Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.36

          by Demena on Sun Sep 19, 2010 at 11:16:40 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Look up the words "TRUTH" and "FACTS" (0+ / 0-)

            The last time we mixed religion and politics people got burned at the stake.

            by irishwitch on Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 12:17:13 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  FACTS: (0+ / 0-)

            A pedophile may be married to, or date people who have children in their desired age range.
            http://www.criminal-law-lawyer-sourc...

            Pedophiles may be young or old, male or female, although the great majority are males.

            In the United States, about 50% of men arrested for pedophilia are married.
            http://www.minddisorders.com/...

            ANd there's incest which is, sadly,. surprisingly common.  WHen I was a rape crisis counselor, I had two child victims. One was 11 (and looked 8) whose father had been fondling her for a year or two.  The other was twelve and was raped vaginally by a neighbor.  THAT is why I started looking into these issues.

            The last time we mixed religion and politics people got burned at the stake.

            by irishwitch on Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 12:38:17 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I know what facts are and what truth is... (0+ / 0-)

              It isn't blatant exaggerations and innuendo.

              "Not uncommon" and "common" are semantically null.  They only have meaning within a very narrow context which does not apply here.  The context is left entirely open.  In other words, despite coming from 'documents' they are not studies.  There is nothing quantative, nothing useful there.  It is anecdotal evidence.

              Lets look at what you say;

              ANd there's incest which is, sadly,. surprisingly common.  WHen I was a rape crisis counselor, I had two child victims. One was 11 (and looked 8) whose father had been fondling her for a year or two.  The other was twelve and was raped vaginally by a neighbor.  THAT is why I started looking into these issues.

              Surprisingly common?  Surprising to who?  What percentage of what population?  Okay two victims of incest, except one wasn't, it was the neighbour.  And the one that was was digital.  So, out of all your cases there was only one case of incest.  Now that doesn't sound like the same information you put in your paragraph does it?  But it was precisely what you put there.

              Simply because this is such and emotional subject, such an evil subject it can only be discussed dispassionately.  I used "only" as if a mere one didn't matter, you used "common" as if it is happening on every street corner.  Neither is appropriate or likely to be listened to.  If you are going to advocate for a cause it is not wise to do it in such a manner as causes people to roll their eyes.

              Best Wishes, Demena Left/Right: -8.38; Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.36

              by Demena on Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 01:24:41 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Actually it's very common--but as late as it was (0+ / 0-)

                last night, I didn't have the energy to do tons of research. Here's your answer, Demena.

                30-40% of victims are abused by a family member. (4)(6)(7)
                 Snyder, H N. (2000). Sexual assault of young children as reported to law enforcement: Victim, incident, and offender characteristics. National Center for Juvenile Justice, U.S. Depar tment of Justice

                http://www.shatteredsouls.net/...

                The overwhelming majority of children are assaulted in their own home or indeed in the home of the offender who is, on the whole, a male they know and trust. In most cases the perpetrator is the father, stepfather, grandfather, brother, uncle or mother's defacto.

                Only a small percentage of perpetrators have a recognisable mental illness. The "average" offender is likely to be a "normal" married man with a family and a job. He is often well respected in the community and otherwise unidentifiable as an offender. The only common factor which researchers have found is that the overwhelming majority of perpetrators are male.

                http://www.secasa.com.au/...

                That last was an AUSTRALIAN source, FYI.

                Of sexual assaults on children and youth by their family members reported to Canadian police in 2000, 39% of the perpetrators were parents, 32% were siblings, 28% were members of the extended family, and 1% were spouses (Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, 20021).

                Incestuous relationships include:

                           »  father-daughter incest
                           »  father-son incest
                           »  stepfather-daughter incest
                           »  mother-son/mother-daughter incest
                           »  sibling incest
                           »  grandfather-granddaughter incest
                           »  uncle-niece incest
                           »  first cousin incest

                In the Canadian Incidence Study of Reported Child Abuse & Neglect, 7% of sexual abuse investigations involved mothers as alleged perpetrators (Trocme, 2001, p. 493).

                http://www.child-abuse-effects.com/...

                Sadly, rape and incest aren't uncommon. You were right about a certain percentage of sexual abuse perps being men who like to control and who may not be true pedophiles. Still,  a lot are, and a number seem to marry in order to get close to children, just  as some work in positions where they have access to kids (as coaches or teachers, for example) or volunteer for activities where they can get close to kids (Boy Scouts,Big Brothers). Many are highly respected and thought to be great guys because of the time they devote to children.

                During my time as a counselor--a move cut it short--I had two cases of child rape.  One of them was incest. That's HALF of my cases. And the stats bear up my statement that incest is sadly common among sexually abused children: the persons most likely to rape them is a family member. I've done my homework over the last thirty years, Demena. On a subject like this, you have to have facts to back up your claims.  Unfortunately some people don't like the facts.  I don't know if you were here for the rape argument in 2005, but I was, and it got ugly.

                The last time we mixed religion and politics people got burned at the stake.

                by irishwitch on Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 12:02:53 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Sadly you still don't understand. (0+ / 0-)

                  30-40% of victims are abused by a family member. (4)(6)(7)

                  This doesn't tell us anything.  Is it about, rape, assault, incest, what?  It also does not tell us what percentage are victims, just that of those who are comes from family members.  It doesn't give us any information just an apocryphal warning.

                  Why should I care what nation a report comes from as long as the science is good?

                  Going through the rest of the quote, we still have the same problem.  No real numbers just numbers expressed in such a way as to appear strongly prejudicial.

                  Sadly, rape and incest aren't uncommon. You were right about a certain percentage of sexual abuse perps being men who like to control and who may not be true pedophiles. Still,  a lot are, and a number seem to marry in order to get close to children, just  as some work in positions where they have access to kids (as coaches or teachers, for example) or volunteer for activities where they can get close to kids (Boy Scouts,Big Brothers).

                  More apocrypha.  Rape and incest are not uncommon?  What do you mean by that?  If it ere common it would be every street corner, no?

                  For the last time the term "common" has no meaning in the contexts you use it and using it will cause people to roll their eyes and ignore you.  With good reason.

                  On a subject like this, you have to have facts to back up your claims.  Unfortunately some people don't like the facts.  I don't know if you were here for the rape argument in 2005, but I was, and it got ugly.

                  I really, really agree.  But it doesn't reflect on me but on you.  Facts, not insinuations, not innuendo, not exaggeration.   You get these from numbers and not fuzzy numbers.  When you say X% of Y% the statement means nothing as long as Y is unknown.

                  You do have to look at facts to make claims but you are not even making claims, you make statements about the X but never about the Y.

                  If I have a 'policing' budget to spend and I get to choose between spending it on preventing murders or preventing rape.  In order to make the wise decision, get the most damage avoided from the money, I have to know which is the more common (note how 'common' is used in a relative not absolute manner) so that my resources can be well assigned.

                  My objection here (and other times our paths have crossed) is that you don't produce facts but fudges because you seldom say anything that can be tied down and worked with.

                  As an offer of good faith I have tried to show you why we have issues when essentially we have the same concerns.  It is not what you say that I disagree with but how you express the reasoning behind it.  Or rather, that you don't express the reasoning solidly.  I ask you, what does "common" mean?  When someone says "men commonly wear hats", what does it actually say?  Truth is, it says very little at all.  It certainly gives us no idea how many men wear hats.

                  It appears I failed.  I'm sorry about that.

                  Best Wishes, Demena Left/Right: -8.38; Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.36

                  by Demena on Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 06:36:56 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I am tired of arguing with you. (0+ / 0-)

                    30-40% of rape victims are assaulted by family members--which is the definition of incest.

                    Rape isn't uncommon. Rape or attempted rape  happens to 1 out of 6 women. That makes it pretty damned common, which is sad.

                    Sorry you don't like facts which don't match your theories.

                    We have issues because NOTHIG will sway you no matter  how much science is behind it.

                    ANd, natch, you offfer no evidence to back up your ideas--never have.

                    The last time we mixed religion and politics people got burned at the stake.

                    by irishwitch on Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 08:44:26 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  We are not arguing. (0+ / 0-)

                      I am trying to educate you.  And as I said.  I failed.

                      You don't actually have an facts.  Never ever have had.  All you ever have is relative information.  Those are not facts and are a best factoids.

                      Facts are not to be liked or disliked, thy are to be analysed.  Stop projecting your mind on to me.  Mine works.

                      We have issues because only science will sway me (whatever that means) and you have no idea of what science is.  Science is based on reason not faith.  While you have faith in your arguments you don't have science.

                      What evidence do I need?  It is all displayed above.

                      And note that you failed to address the points I made, either to concede or deny.

                      And I remind you that in dialog between you and I it has been you that lacks ethos, you that ignores rules.  And I point out that it is you that made this personal, not me.  It isn't personal to me, how ever much you try you are not going to hurt me in any way.

                      ANd, natch, you offfer no evidence to back up your ideas--never have.

                      Always have.  And I have never lost an argument with you.  Never will, not one based on rationality.  It is you that does not understand what the word evidence means.

                      Now please stop making this personal.  I wish dialog about ideas, facts and theories not needless (and mindless) insults and attacks.  

                      Best Wishes, Demena Left/Right: -8.38; Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.36

                      by Demena on Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 10:47:04 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

        •  Saw that with an in-law (0+ / 0-)

          She had been married before and had 3 girls in 4 years.  The oldest was 10.  It turned out he had a rape charge pending when she married the guy.  He went to jail.  She was having second thoughts about getting a divorce again.  I explained that if she valued her girls, she would run, not walk, away from this guy.  She did.

          Don't look back, something may be gaining on you. - L. "Satchel" Paige

          by arlene on Mon Sep 20, 2010 at 04:41:38 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  What a fricking idiot. Is it possible to file a (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    buddabelly, RfrancisR

    class action suit for defamation?

    "If I owned hell and Texas, I'd live in hell and rent out Texas" - Union General Phillip Sheridan

    by ZedMont on Sat Sep 18, 2010 at 09:23:20 PM PDT

  •  Using The Word "Gays" And "Pedophiles" In Your (0+ / 0-)

    diary title is exactly what those that claim "gays are pedophiles" want you to do.

    It helps enable their story line.

    At what point are we going to quit repeating the lies and terminology?

  •  These people are just disgusting. (4+ / 0-)

    I'd like to know what they are fucking when they think no one is looking. They are just dirty, perverts who want to butt into everybodys business, and spread around their own freaky ideas. You know why they want to legislate against gays, because they have to try and figure out how to keep their own compulsions under control.

    My mother who is a wonderful, kind, loving and beautiful human being has been gay for 39 years. She has been with the same partner for 25 years. They have a loving, productive, and mutually supportive relationship. Why would someone want to legislate that sort of happiness and unity out of existence?

    I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. Thomas Jefferson

    by Lucy2009 on Sat Sep 18, 2010 at 10:24:25 PM PDT

    •  .... (7+ / 0-)

      Why would someone want to legislate that sort of happiness and unity out of existence?

      It's all about politics. Nothing more. Nothing less. They have always scored political points off of denigrating others, and so long as that strategy works, they will keep doing so.

      Make no mistake about it: most of the anti-gays of today were anti-women, were anti-African-American, and anti-hispanic. Now that they are losing the anti-gay culture war, they are now moving on to Muslims. They MUST be able to find a group to frighten the American people with because their shallow pro-greed philosophy in itself does not a true constituency.

      •  What a lovely and rational person you are. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        science nerd, RfrancisR, teloPariah

        You make total sense. I'm sure that's exactly what is going on.

        It's so destructive and vicious against the citizenry. I don't know how they sleep at night.

        Keep up the good fight.    :)

        I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. Thomas Jefferson

        by Lucy2009 on Sat Sep 18, 2010 at 10:36:17 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Thanks (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          science nerd, teloPariah

          but really it isn't anything more than the stark undeniable truth. The day bigotry ends, the Republican Party will smother to death.

          While the south was always a vicious bigoted place, it used to not be a selfish place. Remember Huey Long and his "share the wealth" philosophy came from the south. This philosophy was consistent with the notions of Southern Baptist Christianity.

          Did you know that the Southern Baptist once put out a position paper supporting the legalization of abortion?

          You know what shifted the Southern Baptist church into the right wing political machine it is today?

          Racial desegregation efforts by the Federal Government.

          This is what it is about:

          In the course of one of the sessions, Weyrich tried to make a point to his Religious Right brethren (no women attended the conference, as I recall). Let's remember, he said animatedly, that the Religious Right did not come together in response to the Roe decision. No, Weyrich insisted, what got us going as a political movement was the attempt on the part of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to rescind the tax-exempt status of Bob Jones University because of its racially discriminatory policies.

          Bob Jones University was one target of a broader attempt by the federal government to enforce the provisions of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Several agencies, including the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, had sought to penalize schools for failure to abide by antisegregation provisions. A court case in 1972, Green v. Connally, produced a ruling that any institution that practiced segregation was not, by definition, a charitable institution and, therefore, no longer qualified for tax-exempt standing.

          The IRS sought to revoke the tax-exempt status of Bob Jones University in 1975 because the school's regulations forbade interracial dating; African Americans, in fact, had been denied admission altogether until 1971, and it took another four years before unmarried African Americans were allowed to enroll. The university filed suit to retain its tax-exempt status, although that suit would not reach the Supreme Court until 1983 (at which time, the Reagan administration argued in favor of Bob Jones University).

          Initially, I found Weyrich's admission jarring. He declared, in effect, that the origins of the Religious Right lay in Green v. Connally rather than Roe v. Wade. I quickly concluded, however, that his story made a great deal of sense.

          Link

  •  Bad logical argument by Fischer (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Calamity Jean

    It's amounts to saying that all men are murderers because murderers are disproportionately male. Or all men are rapists because rapists are disproportionately male as well. So according to his logic, all us men are murdering rapists.

    And when we ask you why, you raise your sticks and cry and we fall.

    by Ninbyo on Sat Sep 18, 2010 at 11:08:24 PM PDT

  •  It makes sense... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MinistryOfLove

    ...why these fundamentalist pea-brains don't get the point of this diary.   They don't recognize gay identity at all; they only fixate on the behaviors. That's why a discussion of gay rights always devolves into their disgust over corn-holing.    

  •  Okay, look: I don't understand pedophilia. Freak (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ganymeade

    that I am, I just don't get it.

    But trying to link pedophilia with homosexuality makes no sense to me. It's like Thompson's line from "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas", "Why would I want to fuck with children? They're so small!"

    Religion: Treat it like your penis. Don't show it off in public, and don't shove it down your children's throats.

    by MinistryOfLove on Sun Sep 19, 2010 at 05:12:46 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site