Are Homophobes Perverted?

just_sayin

MayCaesar said:

This seems like a common misapplication of statistics people make: not accounting for updates on a prior with new information. For example, when someone says that a Black person is much more likely to commit a violent crime than an Asian person, they are making a very general population-wide statement. However, as soon as you know even a little bit about the particular Black person and the particular Asian person, the proportion of probabilities changes drastically. For instance, if you know that both are classmates in the law school of Harvard, then the probability of either committing a violent crime is going to be less than among any large racial group on average, and the comparison between the two will not be unfavorable to the Black person.

Similarly, it is true that statistically homosexual people have inferior health outcomes to heterosexual people, outcomes that are not fully explained by their inferior status in the society (which is not even the case any more: in fact, one could argue that homosexual people have more opportunities than heterosexual people when it comes to fellowships and certain job positions targeting sexual minorities). It is hard to see, however, what being homosexual itself can possibly have to do with it, just like in the example above it is hard to see what being Black has to do with one's propensity to committing violent crime. The homosexual person may be a part of the "LGBT community" (whatever the heck it is) and influenced by some poor ideologies promoting reckless hedonism, and then, yes, their expected outcomes will poor. On the other hand, I have a couple of homosexual/bisexual friends who have graduated from elite universities with STEM degrees and are proactive enough to research dangers of unprotected sex and such and do something about it - and their outcomes are not expected (to the best of my knowledge) to be worse than those for heterosexual people of the same socio-economical standing.

I am not sure what use there is in comparing general population outcomes when the question stands as follows: "Should homosexual people be encouraged to deny their sexuality or not?" It would be interesting, to that end, to also compare the health outcomes of homosexual people engaging in homosexual relationships (including sex), and those who deny themselves the pleasure. The latter is quite unlikely to be healthy.

At the same time, it is silly to deny the obvious health risks. Saying that, all other things being equal, homosexual sex is as healthy as heterosexual sex is plainly wrong no matter how much you dislike the fact that it is wrong. Reality is what it is: you are not supposed to like or dislike it, only to accept it. Life is not fair, people are born or evolve to have traits and conditions that make their lives more difficult than if the did not have them. It is more productive to talk about adaptation to those traits and mitigation of risks, than to deny the risks and hope that political correctness will keep them at bay.

I would agree that the risk of an individual within a group can differ from the group themselves.  I believe that is major problem with critical theory and critical race theory is that they dehumanize the individual and they judge based on group affiliation alone.  Group statistics can show us the general trend within a group, but it is always more important to see the individual.  

I agree with you that it is silly to deny the health risks also.  The health risks are the health risks and we should not cover them up because of the impact on a specific group.  The fact that this issue is a political taboo speaks to how people are willing to alter or cover up data that doesn't suit their political agenda.  

I would also agree with you that homosexuality is not a genetic thing, and that it is the behaviors themselves that are healthy or unhealthy.  Within the scope of the behaviors one would also need to take into account the number of sex partners, the frequency of the behavior, and any measures taken to reduce risk.  In just the same way that someone can drive drunk and not have an accident, someone could engage in high risk sexual behavior and not die from it or contract a disease.  However, it would be misleading to say that you can engage in unsafe behaviors and there will never be any consequences.  

MayCaesar

@just_sayin

I would clarify that applicability of group statistics to the individual depends on how the group is defined and what statistic we are talking about. If the group is all alcoholics (say, loosely defined as people whose quality of life is measurably worse than if they did not drink at all), then it makes sense to say that anyone who belongs to this group has a problem with alcohol: that is how the people are grouped together in the first place. But if within the group the particular statistic is segmented, then this conclusion no longer holds.

To your last point, what is safe or unsafe is somewhat subjective. There are absolutely ways to have safe homosexual sex, but they require a bit more work than when it comes to heterosexual sex. With heterosexual sex, in most cases you do not have to worry about anything: just do what the mother nature encourages you to do, and care about your partner's well-being as much as your own - and you are golden. Of course, heterosexual couples may engage in different, less safe, forms of sex too, so it is not black and white. But there is no denial that, in general, homosexual sex done without any precautions is more dangerous than heterosexual sex - at least, when it comes to sex between males (for females, if I remember correctly, dangers may even be lower than for homosexual couples).

It is different with drunk driving: I do not see how one can do it safely. No matter what you do, unless you are in a safe-driving car (and there are no fully self-driving cars on the market today), your judgment will be severely impaired, and your motoric functions inhibited. I belong to the group of "good drunks" where I can generally function close to my full capacity even after many drinks (I rarely drink, but that is beside the point): I can do hard programming and math requiring intense concentration, I can do hours of running and hiking, I do not get hangovers despite being in my 30-s... Yet the two times I tried driving slightly tipsy, I was surprised that I did not hit anything. It is crazy how much your driving ability deteriorates when alcohol is in your system.

Barnardot

@just_sayin @MayCaeser ;Within the scope of the behaviors one would also need to take into account the number of sex partners, the frequency of the behavior, and any measures taken to reduce risk.  In just the same way that someone can drive drunk and not have an accident, someone could engage in high risk sexual behavior and not die from it or contract a disease.

Or may be and wow this only just crossed my mind. What about the health risks associated with being Hetero. Do you realize what heteros do ? And I know that this is a bit on the seedy side of things and not many people want to discuss it. But as you say we shouldnt hide the facts should we. But heteros actually engage in anal sex. Thats right. That is so totally disgusting and unhealthy. In fact more than half of the worlds population of hetero men do the chocolate speedway as a form of contraception. In fact it is the most common form of contraception. And if thats not bad enough hetero men also have p hole sex and spread even more diseases than homos. So we have to raise a wearness about the high health risks of doing straight sex. Its real alarming and totally disgusting if you ask me.

And since you raised the issue of me getting diseased by doing the animals I knock off every day. Dont worry because I'm imune since I had chicken pox when I was a kid.

ZeusAres42

MayCaesar said:

This seems like a common misapplication of statistics people make: not accounting for updates on a prior with new information. For example, when someone says that a Black person is much more likely to commit a violent crime than an Asian person, they are making a very general population-wide statement. However, as soon as you know even a little bit about the particular Black person and the particular Asian person, the proportion of probabilities changes drastically. For instance, if you know that both are classmates in the law school of Harvard, then the probability of either committing a violent crime is going to be less than among any large racial group on average, and the comparison between the two will not be unfavorable to the Black person.

Exactly, AKA hasty generalization fallacy, as well as a mix of of that and lying with statistics. Also, if we truly do care about health issues with any given group of people then we should also try to make sure that we get stats and factual data correct and they align with up to date data. 

@MayCaesar. 

In any case, this debate seems to have gone down a rabit hole with reference to now talking specifically about gay black male.