How would people even know what someone's sexuality is anyway.
Before anyone says that you can tell if a man is gay, there are lots of very camp performers who are not gay, Lionel Blair, David Walliams, Hal Cruttenden etc
So to me performers are just performers on the telly, who cares about their sexuality
1.5% has to be the most laughable figure i have ever seen for trying to put a number on the amount of 'gays' there are.
if that were true then how in gods name would any homosexuals be able to find partners?? its just ridiculous.
i would say the figure is almost certainly closer to 10%, it certainly is in the area i live in anyway!
It's from the Christian institute! Yay, religious bigotry... and the guy claiming the percentages is from the "anti-gay rights group"... nice
I'm not sure from what position of authority the Christian institute thinks it has at controlling peoples behaviour, sexuality, or how it is represented by writers, who have usually worked pretty hard to get their shows on mainstream tv, or what they hope to achieve with their bigotted attitude, other than to make more people laugh at just how out of touch they are.
According to your own link, 3.9% of respondents said "don't know" or refused to answer.
A further 1.5% are recorded as "No response"
If you assume all those classes are, in fact, homosexual, then that would be 5.4%. As it happens, I don't believe that's a valid assumption, but that's by the by.
You can't than add again the 1.6% of men who gave no response, since they're already included in the 5.4%.
And now I think I'm going to stop responding to your constant abuse of statistics.
My abuse of statistics? That's again your opinion as I`ve stressed every single time these surveys cannot accurately predict the true population of LGBT people but again you ignore that fact and attempt to try and twist what I have said and what the actual surveys themselves state.
My point was simply asking a valid question why would 3.9% and 1.5% of those questioned not know or refuse to answer If they were all heterosexual as you appear to be assuming?
You`ve still not answered that question properly and judging by the tone of your response clearly have an agenda of your own.
There has been no abuse of statistics how can someone abuse statistics when posting the links to those statistics directly in their post, please do get a grip, everyone is entitled to speculate on the possible outcomes or reasons for such statistics because such statistics are clearly not completely accurate to start with they only represent an "estimation" of the general situation.
My question is to you why are you so touchy in the first place when it comes to an estimation of the amount of LGBT people in Britain and when there is a possible suggestion that it could be higher than the estimated statistics show?
Heterosexual total 92.7% Total
Gay/Lesbian 1.2% Total
Bisexual 0.5% Total
Other 0.3% Total
Don`t know 3.9% Total
No response 1.5%. Total
These are the ONS official statistics so would you care to clarify what the 0.3% other and the 3.9% don` know and the no response 1.5% actually are ? Are they automatically heterosexual in your mind?
No mention of Asexual or Pansexual ?? or don`t they exist in your mind set?
So now because of your blatant refusal to recognise asexuals and pansexuals and blatant ignorance to accept ONS as pure estimation and your blatant refusal to accept a lot of LGBT people remain in the closet because of stigma which means an accurate estimation of their community cannot be completely carried out for those very reasons and the fact the Observer Great British sex survey contradicts the ONS itself when it claims 4% are gay 4% bisexual which clearly proves no survey into the area of sexual orientation is reliable and is pure estimation. I have no desire to continue conversation with you.
I also note you make no mention that in the Observer survey 16% of British people want gay men criminalised and sent to prison you know complete throwback to the pre late 1960s of course no mention of that figure which is utterly shocking if we are to believe the current statistics and surveys
Here is a quote from The Guardian recently
While only 8% of the population define their sexual orientation as either homosexual or bisexual, double that number (16%) have had a degree of sexual contact with someone of the same sex: 18% of women have had sexual contact with another woman, while 15% of men have had sexual contact with another man. Among those who define themselves as heterosexual, 12% have had sexual contact with someone of the same gender. Those in the youngest age group have had the most same-sex contact, 22% for 16-24s and 26% for 25-34s.
Do you believe that it is right that same-sex couples can now get married?
Yes = 63%
No = 37%
Do you believe that it is right for same-sex couples to adopt children?
Yes = 61%
No = 39%
Do you believe that the age of consent for homosexual sex should be the same as it is for heterosexual sex?
Yes, it should be the same age = 74%
No, it should be higher = 26%
In the six years since the Observer last conducted this research, national attitudes towards homosexuality have become noticeably more liberal in a number of ways. First, in 2008, three years after civil partnerships were introduced, 55% of Britons supported the right of same-sex couples to marry. That proportion has now increased to 63%. There is a clear correlation between attitudes and age, with the large majority of young Britons supporting gay marriage; 83% of 16-24s support gay marriage, compared with just 34% of those aged 65+. A majority of both genders support gay marriage but men are far more likely than women to oppose the right of same-sex couples to wed (45% and 30% respectively).
There has been an even larger increase in the proportion supporting the right of same-sex couples to adopt children since 2008, when a minority (44%) of Britons supported the idea. That figure has now increased to 61%. There are similar demographic patterns to those previously observed, with women (71%) more likely than men (50%) to support the right to adopt, and younger Britons more open to the idea than older Britons. What is interesting is that the figures do not differ wildly on the basis of sexual orientation. Indeed 37% of homosexuals do not believe it is right for same-sex couples to adopt children.
There has also been a marked period-on-period increase in the proportion of Britons who believe it is right that the age of consent for homosexual sex is the same as it is for heterosexual sex. In 2008, 60% of Britons felt the age of consent should be equal and that figure has now increased to 74%.
Do you think that gay sex should be made illegal?
Yes = 16%
No = 84%
Attitudes to homosexuality are clearly becoming more liberal but there are still pockets of resistance. In total, 16% of Britons continue to believe that homosexuality should be outlawed. Men (19%) are more likely than women (13%) to advocate the banning of gay sex, and rejection of homosexuality peaks in London and the south-east, where more than one in five (21%) feel it should be illegal. However, at a total level, the proportion of Britons who believe gay sex should be illegal has reduced by eight percentage points, from 24%, since 2008.
So don`t come trying to say I`m twisting statistics because there is no evidence either statistic is correct on this issue when they all clearly contradict each other, but of course if`someone is an anti-gay individual naturally they`re going to latch onto the estimation that is nearest to their own prejudice and treat it as fact.
I'm sure there would be people offended by the mere fact a gay joke was uttered in whatever context.
After all people (possibly attempting to further their own agendas) have taken umbrage at the simple pluralisation of the word gay itself.
There are people who will always complain. Forget their sexuality or nationality or gender, forget everything. They will always complain and sadly in this day and age some of them seem to speak the loudest.
If i said a "Rainbow" for the collective term i'm sure someone would complain about it being stereotypical. Or if i said a "Pride" someone would probably roll their eyes at that. With some people ya can't win.
You label it as if its a dehumanising term or emasculating term. saying that there are many gay and bisexual MMA fighters a combat sport which I belong too and believe me some of those gays are more masculine than us straights .
Ignorance is bliss of course because you don`t have to be black to support black and ethnic equality, you don`t have to be a woman to support gender equality and you don`t have to be an animal to support animal rights likewise you don`t have to be gay or bisexual to support gay equality.
I`m intrigued by your ignorance though because the very fact you "assume" anyone with LGBT friends or supports their rights is somehow gay or bisexual clearly says a lot about you.
Now I don`t know you at all like you don`t know me and I would never put a label on you even if I did but I`ve got to be honest if anyone is in the closet its certainly most likely yourself here. I do apologise If you`re already gay or bisexual but if you`re not then here`s a little something just for you http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3j4t185wl-0
In 2014 i'm more likely to believe something called "The Christian Institute" to be out of proportion with reality.
Some less moderate Christians are stuck in the wrong century as far as sexuality is concerned. Fortunately their views get more outlandish as time goes on and people realise they have no authority to tell others how to live their lives so long as they do no harm - which is basic morality that some people can grasp in primary school yet others never manage to see. Like all old relics, the world has moved ahead of them.
Gay agenda is always a funny one to me. Are people so insecure of their own sexuality that they think being exposed to someone who is gay will change their sexuality? Did anyone see Frankie Howard as a kid and think "you know what - I've always fancied women - but this guy is quite funny and he's gay, so maybe I'll be gay too" or did they watch Kenny Everett and think "I better stop watching this - I'm starting to find myself attracted to men"? The whole idea is based on two (IMO) faulty premises - that being gay is a bad thing, and that people's sexuality can be flipped. It would better be called an equality agenda and I have no problems with that. Why would anyone? What kind of person even notices these things in the first place? (Those are rhetorical questions.)
Seeing as this is an organisation who believe that the age of consent for gay sex should be higher than that for straight sex, that gay people shouldn't be allowed to serve in the military and that section 28 should be brought back I'd imagine any gay people on TV at all is too many for them.
1.5% has to be the most laughable figure i have ever seen for trying to put a number on the amount of 'gays' there are.
if that were true then how in gods name would any homosexuals be able to find partners?? its just ridiculous.
i would say the figure is almost certainly closer to 10%, it certainly is in the area i live in anyway!
Exactly, but try telling that to those with an agenda who want to make out homosexuals are smaller in numbers in society in a desperate attempt to try and downplay the need for equal rights.
Some Christians really do believe the Earth is 4,000 to 6,000 years old.
(and Fossils were planted by the Devil)
Or are you getting at something else?
Religious nonsense yet again and yet in 2014 we still have no scientific proof any God exists because in reality there is no God its a bunch of stories created thousands of years ago designed to explain things they did not back then understand.
Comments
That's what immediately stood out to me as well. TOO
Before anyone says that you can tell if a man is gay, there are lots of very camp performers who are not gay, Lionel Blair, David Walliams, Hal Cruttenden etc
So to me performers are just performers on the telly, who cares about their sexuality
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/9b/JohnInman.jpg
If we lost john barrowlad, Alan Carr and that one from Corrie, a natural balance would be restored.
This may come as a shock to some 'straights' but some of 'the gays' call straight people 'breeders'.
Only rude ones.
if that were true then how in gods name would any homosexuals be able to find partners?? its just ridiculous.
i would say the figure is almost certainly closer to 10%, it certainly is in the area i live in anyway!
You do realise that straight people are allies of LGBT people too right?
I'm not sure from what position of authority the Christian institute thinks it has at controlling peoples behaviour, sexuality, or how it is represented by writers, who have usually worked pretty hard to get their shows on mainstream tv, or what they hope to achieve with their bigotted attitude, other than to make more people laugh at just how out of touch they are.
As Popes go, he seems to be the best so far.
My abuse of statistics? That's again your opinion as I`ve stressed every single time these surveys cannot accurately predict the true population of LGBT people but again you ignore that fact and attempt to try and twist what I have said and what the actual surveys themselves state.
My point was simply asking a valid question why would 3.9% and 1.5% of those questioned not know or refuse to answer If they were all heterosexual as you appear to be assuming?
You`ve still not answered that question properly and judging by the tone of your response clearly have an agenda of your own.
There has been no abuse of statistics how can someone abuse statistics when posting the links to those statistics directly in their post, please do get a grip, everyone is entitled to speculate on the possible outcomes or reasons for such statistics because such statistics are clearly not completely accurate to start with they only represent an "estimation" of the general situation.
My question is to you why are you so touchy in the first place when it comes to an estimation of the amount of LGBT people in Britain and when there is a possible suggestion that it could be higher than the estimated statistics show?
I`ll repost the ONS again. http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/integrated-household-survey/integrated-household-survey/january-to-december-2013/stb-intergrated-household.html#tab-Sexual-Identity
Heterosexual total 92.7% Total
Gay/Lesbian 1.2% Total
Bisexual 0.5% Total
Other 0.3% Total
Don`t know 3.9% Total
No response 1.5%. Total
These are the ONS official statistics so would you care to clarify what the 0.3% other and the 3.9% don` know and the no response 1.5% actually are ? Are they automatically heterosexual in your mind?
No mention of Asexual or Pansexual ?? or don`t they exist in your mind set?
So now because of your blatant refusal to recognise asexuals and pansexuals and blatant ignorance to accept ONS as pure estimation and your blatant refusal to accept a lot of LGBT people remain in the closet because of stigma which means an accurate estimation of their community cannot be completely carried out for those very reasons and the fact the Observer Great British sex survey contradicts the ONS itself when it claims 4% are gay 4% bisexual which clearly proves no survey into the area of sexual orientation is reliable and is pure estimation. I have no desire to continue conversation with you.
I also note you make no mention that in the Observer survey 16% of British people want gay men criminalised and sent to prison you know complete throwback to the pre late 1960s of course no mention of that figure which is utterly shocking if we are to believe the current statistics and surveys
Here is a quote from The Guardian recently
http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2014/sep/28/british-sex-survey-2014-nation-lost-sexual-swagger
So don`t come trying to say I`m twisting statistics because there is no evidence either statistic is correct on this issue when they all clearly contradict each other, but of course if`someone is an anti-gay individual naturally they`re going to latch onto the estimation that is nearest to their own prejudice and treat it as fact.
There are people who will always complain. Forget their sexuality or nationality or gender, forget everything. They will always complain and sadly in this day and age some of them seem to speak the loudest.
If i said a "Rainbow" for the collective term i'm sure someone would complain about it being stereotypical. Or if i said a "Pride" someone would probably roll their eyes at that. With some people ya can't win.
You label it as if its a dehumanising term or emasculating term. saying that there are many gay and bisexual MMA fighters a combat sport which I belong too and believe me some of those gays are more masculine than us straights .
Ignorance is bliss of course because you don`t have to be black to support black and ethnic equality, you don`t have to be a woman to support gender equality and you don`t have to be an animal to support animal rights likewise you don`t have to be gay or bisexual to support gay equality.
I`m intrigued by your ignorance though because the very fact you "assume" anyone with LGBT friends or supports their rights is somehow gay or bisexual clearly says a lot about you.
Now I don`t know you at all like you don`t know me and I would never put a label on you even if I did but I`ve got to be honest if anyone is in the closet its certainly most likely yourself here. I do apologise If you`re already gay or bisexual but if you`re not then here`s a little something just for you http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3j4t185wl-0
Some less moderate Christians are stuck in the wrong century as far as sexuality is concerned. Fortunately their views get more outlandish as time goes on and people realise they have no authority to tell others how to live their lives so long as they do no harm - which is basic morality that some people can grasp in primary school yet others never manage to see. Like all old relics, the world has moved ahead of them.
Gay agenda is always a funny one to me. Are people so insecure of their own sexuality that they think being exposed to someone who is gay will change their sexuality? Did anyone see Frankie Howard as a kid and think "you know what - I've always fancied women - but this guy is quite funny and he's gay, so maybe I'll be gay too" or did they watch Kenny Everett and think "I better stop watching this - I'm starting to find myself attracted to men"? The whole idea is based on two (IMO) faulty premises - that being gay is a bad thing, and that people's sexuality can be flipped. It would better be called an equality agenda and I have no problems with that. Why would anyone? What kind of person even notices these things in the first place? (Those are rhetorical questions.)
When they can count, then they can make an argument over how many gays should be on TV.
LOL are you quite sure about that?
I thought the word 'Some' was not required in GD these days
'Some' wasn't the issue there.
Some Christians really do believe the Earth is 4,000 to 6,000 years old.
(and Fossils were planted by the Devil)
Or are you getting at something else?
Exactly, but try telling that to those with an agenda who want to make out homosexuals are smaller in numbers in society in a desperate attempt to try and downplay the need for equal rights.
It is laughable and quite silly.
Religious nonsense yet again and yet in 2014 we still have no scientific proof any God exists because in reality there is no God its a bunch of stories created thousands of years ago designed to explain things they did not back then understand.
I've seen film they call One Million Years B.C. and I know it's older than that because they were using fossils way back then.
And that dinosaurs died in the flood. And that Noah didn't save them. For some reason.