Re: Polygamy
On 4 Feb 2008, at 05:10, Julia Thompson wrote: On Mon, 4 Feb 2008, William T Goodall wrote: On 4 Feb 2008, at 03:24, Alberto Vieira Ferreira Monteiro wrote: Keith Henson wrote: Considering that polygamy is the norm for the vast majority of the cultures in the world, it's an interesting question how the western countries, and a few others, became monogamous. It seems to be associated with settled agriculture but I don't know if there is a connection or why. I would guess that it's peace that doomed polygamy. There can't be polygamy unless there's more women than men, otherwise the men without women will revolt. If gay men don't marry women then there are more available women than straight men. You're failing to take into account lesbians who have absolutely no interest in men. (Like several people in one of my social circles) That might balance things out somewhat there, putting you back to square one. The consensus is that the proportion of women who are lesbians is much lower than the proportion of men who are gay. If we remove all gay and lesbian people from the equation there is still a surplus of straight women to straight men. How big a surplus depends on whose numbers for the proportions are correct. San Francisco Maru -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ There's no chance that the iPhone is going to get any significant market share. No chance - Steve Ballmer ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Polygamy
On Mon, 4 Feb 2008, William T Goodall wrote: On 4 Feb 2008, at 05:10, Julia Thompson wrote: On Mon, 4 Feb 2008, William T Goodall wrote: On 4 Feb 2008, at 03:24, Alberto Vieira Ferreira Monteiro wrote: Keith Henson wrote: Considering that polygamy is the norm for the vast majority of the cultures in the world, it's an interesting question how the western countries, and a few others, became monogamous. It seems to be associated with settled agriculture but I don't know if there is a connection or why. I would guess that it's peace that doomed polygamy. There can't be polygamy unless there's more women than men, otherwise the men without women will revolt. If gay men don't marry women then there are more available women than straight men. You're failing to take into account lesbians who have absolutely no interest in men. (Like several people in one of my social circles) That might balance things out somewhat there, putting you back to square one. The consensus is that the proportion of women who are lesbians is much lower than the proportion of men who are gay. If we remove all gay and lesbian people from the equation there is still a surplus of straight women to straight men. How big a surplus depends on whose numbers for the proportions are correct. I think the concensus is off, then. I think it's close to equal, or very slightly biased towards more lesbians. Do you have sources to cite? I'd be interested in seeing them if you do. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Polygamy
On 4 Feb 2008, at 14:40, Julia Thompson wrote: On Mon, 4 Feb 2008, William T Goodall wrote: On 4 Feb 2008, at 05:10, Julia Thompson wrote: On Mon, 4 Feb 2008, William T Goodall wrote: On 4 Feb 2008, at 03:24, Alberto Vieira Ferreira Monteiro wrote: Keith Henson wrote: Considering that polygamy is the norm for the vast majority of the cultures in the world, it's an interesting question how the western countries, and a few others, became monogamous. It seems to be associated with settled agriculture but I don't know if there is a connection or why. I would guess that it's peace that doomed polygamy. There can't be polygamy unless there's more women than men, otherwise the men without women will revolt. If gay men don't marry women then there are more available women than straight men. You're failing to take into account lesbians who have absolutely no interest in men. (Like several people in one of my social circles) That might balance things out somewhat there, putting you back to square one. The consensus is that the proportion of women who are lesbians is much lower than the proportion of men who are gay. If we remove all gay and lesbian people from the equation there is still a surplus of straight women to straight men. How big a surplus depends on whose numbers for the proportions are correct. I think the concensus is off, then. I think it's close to equal, or very slightly biased towards more lesbians. Do you have sources to cite? I'd be interested in seeing them if you do. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_sexual_orientation United States 1990: Homosexuality/Heterosexuality: Concepts of Sexual Orientation published findings of 13.95% of males and 4.25% of females having had either extensive or more than incidental homosexual experience. [12] 1990-1992: The American National Health Interview Survey does household interviews of the civilian non-institutionalized population. The results of three of these surveys, done in 1990-1991 and based on over 9,000 responses each time, found between 2-3% of the people responding said yes to a set of statements which included You are a man who has had sex with another man at some time since 1977, even one time. [13] 1992: The National Health and Social Life Survey asked 3,432 respondents whether they had any homosexual experience. The findings were 1.3% for women within the past year, and 4.1% since 18 years; for men, 2.7% within the past year, and 4.9% since 18 years;[14] 1993: The Alan Guttmacher Institute found of sexually active men aged 20–39 found that 2.3% had experienced same-sex sexual activity in the last ten years, and 1.1% reported exclusive homosexual contact during that time.[15] 1993: Researchers Samuel and Cynthia Janus surveyed American adults aged 18 and over by distributing 4,550 questionnaires; 3,260 were returned and 2,765 were usable. The results of the cross-sectional nationwide survey stated men and women who reported frequent or ongoing homosexual experiences were 9% of men and 5% of women. [16] 1998: A random survey of 1672 males (number used for analysis) aged 15 to 19. Subjects were asked a number of questions, including questions relating to same-sex activity. This was done using two methods — a pencil and paper method, and via computer, supplemented by a verbal rendition of the questionnaire heard through headphones — which obtained vastly different results. There was a 400% increase in males reporting homosexual activity when the computer-audio system was used: from a 1.5% to 5.5% positive response rate; the homosexual behavior with the greatest reporting difference (800%, adjusted) was to the question Ever had receptive anal sex with another male: 0.1% to 0.8%. [17] 2003: Smith's 2003 analysis of National Opinion Research Center data[18] states that 4.9% of sexually active American males had had a male sexual partner since age 18, but that since age 18 less than 1% are [exclusively] gay and 4+% bisexual. In the top twelve urban areas however, the rates are double the national average. Smith adds that It is generally believed that including adolescent behavior would further increase these rates.The NORC data has been criticised because the original design sampling techniques were not followed, and depended upon direct self report regarding masturbation and same sex behaviors. (For example, the original data in the early 1990s reported that approximately 40% of adult males had never masturbated--a finding inconsistent with some other studies.) -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If so, then Microsoft would have great products. - Steve Jobs ___
Re: Polygamy
On Mon, 4 Feb 2008, William T Goodall wrote: On 4 Feb 2008, at 14:40, Julia Thompson wrote: On Mon, 4 Feb 2008, William T Goodall wrote: On 4 Feb 2008, at 05:10, Julia Thompson wrote: On Mon, 4 Feb 2008, William T Goodall wrote: On 4 Feb 2008, at 03:24, Alberto Vieira Ferreira Monteiro wrote: Keith Henson wrote: Considering that polygamy is the norm for the vast majority of the cultures in the world, it's an interesting question how the western countries, and a few others, became monogamous. It seems to be associated with settled agriculture but I don't know if there is a connection or why. I would guess that it's peace that doomed polygamy. There can't be polygamy unless there's more women than men, otherwise the men without women will revolt. If gay men don't marry women then there are more available women than straight men. You're failing to take into account lesbians who have absolutely no interest in men. (Like several people in one of my social circles) That might balance things out somewhat there, putting you back to square one. The consensus is that the proportion of women who are lesbians is much lower than the proportion of men who are gay. If we remove all gay and lesbian people from the equation there is still a surplus of straight women to straight men. How big a surplus depends on whose numbers for the proportions are correct. I think the concensus is off, then. I think it's close to equal, or very slightly biased towards more lesbians. Do you have sources to cite? I'd be interested in seeing them if you do. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_sexual_orientation United States 1990: Homosexuality/Heterosexuality: Concepts of Sexual Orientation published findings of 13.95% of males and 4.25% of females having had either extensive or more than incidental homosexual experience. [12] 1990-1992: The American National Health Interview Survey does household interviews of the civilian non-institutionalized population. The results of three of these surveys, done in 1990-1991 and based on over 9,000 responses each time, found between 2-3% of the people responding said yes to a set of statements which included You are a man who has had sex with another man at some time since 1977, even one time. [13] 1992: The National Health and Social Life Survey asked 3,432 respondents whether they had any homosexual experience. The findings were 1.3% for women within the past year, and 4.1% since 18 years; for men, 2.7% within the past year, and 4.9% since 18 years;[14] 1993: The Alan Guttmacher Institute found of sexually active men aged 20–39 found that 2.3% had experienced same-sex sexual activity in the last ten years, and 1.1% reported exclusive homosexual contact during that time.[15] 1993: Researchers Samuel and Cynthia Janus surveyed American adults aged 18 and over by distributing 4,550 questionnaires; 3,260 were returned and 2,765 were usable. The results of the cross-sectional nationwide survey stated men and women who reported frequent or ongoing homosexual experiences were 9% of men and 5% of women. [16] 1998: A random survey of 1672 males (number used for analysis) aged 15 to 19. Subjects were asked a number of questions, including questions relating to same-sex activity. This was done using two methods — a pencil and paper method, and via computer, supplemented by a verbal rendition of the questionnaire heard through headphones — which obtained vastly different results. There was a 400% increase in males reporting homosexual activity when the computer-audio system was used: from a 1.5% to 5.5% positive response rate; the homosexual behavior with the greatest reporting difference (800%, adjusted) was to the question Ever had receptive anal sex with another male: 0.1% to 0.8%. [17] 2003: Smith's 2003 analysis of National Opinion Research Center data[18] states that 4.9% of sexually active American males had had a male sexual partner since age 18, but that since age 18 less than 1% are [exclusively] gay and 4+% bisexual. In the top twelve urban areas however, the rates are double the national average. Smith adds that It is generally believed that including adolescent behavior would further increase these rates.The NORC data has been criticised because the original design sampling techniques were not followed, and depended upon direct self report regarding masturbation and same sex behaviors. (For example, the original data in the early 1990s reported that approximately 40% of adult males had never masturbated--a finding inconsistent with some other studies.) Oh, OK. All I was operating on was anecdotal evidence, which was *very* heavily biased towards lesbians. Thank you for the information! Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Polygamy
On 4 Feb 2008, at 15:50, Julia Thompson wrote: Oh, OK. All I was operating on was anecdotal evidence, which was *very* heavily biased towards lesbians. Thank you for the information! Anecdotal evidence is unreliable. Thirty men and women started a computer science degree with me and by the fifth year there were only six of us (all male) left. And one (at least) of my five classmates was gay. So that's nearly 17%. And in my first programming job in an office with about ten men and one (married) female office administrator (at least) one of my male colleagues was gay. So that's about 10%. So by my personal experience of college and the workplace up to that point I'd have to say between 10% and 17% (at least) of men were gay. Looking on friendsreunited at my old high school class I see only one of them has come out - as a lesbian, but I don't actually remember her. She's the only lesbian I know (AFAIK) whereas I know a few gay men apart from my ex-classmate and ex-colleague. So my anecdotal evidence would have gay men outnumbering lesbians by around 5 to 1 or so. But the numbers I believe are the ones from serious scientific surveys Maru. -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ I think a case can be made that faith is one of the world's great evils, comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to eradicate. - Richard Dawkins ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Conservative Declaration and Liberal Constitution?
On Feb 3, 2008 4:54 PM, Dave Land [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Folks, I'm going to attend an Aspen Institute seminar in a couple of weeks, so I've been reading the source materials, and an intriguing thought occurred to me. I'd like to see this group's reaction to it. In American Creation: Triumphs and Tragedies at the Founding of the Republic, Joseph J. Ellis writes: There were really two founding moments: the first in 1776, which declared American independence, and the second in 1787-88, which declared American nationhood. The Declaration of Independence is the seminal document in the first instance, the Constitution in the second.The former is a radical document that locates sovereignty in the individual and depicts government as an alien force, making rebellion against it a natural act. The latter is a conservative document that locates sovereignty in that collective called the people, makes government an essential protector of liberty rather than its enemy, and values social balance over personal liberation. http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l Certainly an interesting way to look at them. I just re-read the Declaration and found myself imagining what it would sound like to an Iraqi... I'm having a hard time seeing the Declaration as strongly locating sovereignty in the individual. It speaks directly to individual rights, but I think it justifies itself only because it represents shared beliefs and a shared will. I can only see it establishing individual sovereignty by virtue of what is missing -- a declaration of nationhood. Yet it declares an intent to form a new nation and by implication, I think, treats total individual sovereignty as a transient state between governments. Only a true anarchist believes in total individual sovereignty. Still, the Declaration's statements about the consent of the governed speaks to this question... but I'm searching for a word other than sovereignty to describe it. The trouble is that this document is very far from treating government, in general, as an alien force and rebellion natural. This was rebellion against a specific government, not government in general. Today's conservatives complain about the bigness of government and its inefficiency, which are hardly the issues identified in the Declaration. Rather than being against taxation without representation, they're against taxation with liberal representation. Seems to me that there isn't a mainstream conservative who would say that taxes are bad per se. They just want them kept to an absolute minimum, believing that everything that can be done without government should be. (Which yields blessings such as Blackwater, ugh.) Interesting perspective. Nick -- Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] Messages: 408-904-7198 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
In case I go silent . . .
When I woke up the computer this morning, the monitor made a number of popping sounds somewhat similar in sharpness and volume to the sound a cap pistol makes. (I had hit a key in passing and gone into another room before the noise started, and at first I thought that it was coming from outside, maybe the neighbor breaking up some limbs for disposal.) When I watched the screen I noticed that every time the sound occurred, the image dimmed and shrank like the picture on an old TV when you turned it off. Eventually after I turned off the monitor for a few minutes and turned it back on it seemed to work properly, and it has been doing so for the better part of a couple of hours now. I'm guessing that the problem may have been that it was so warm yesterday afternoon and last night that I left a couple of windows open and this morning the humidity is very high I later found some places on the wall which felt cool and damp to the touch so I'm hoping that the problem is related to that, but I thought I'd let some folks know in case it turns out to be something more serious, because if the monitor fails completely now I don't know when I'll be able to replace it . . . -- Ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Number of gays [was: Polygamy]
William T Goodall wrote: So by my personal experience of college and the workplace up to that point I'd have to say between 10% and 17% (at least) of men were gay. Let's be non-scientific! I remember, at school, that every class had one or two gay men, and no lesbians. In classes of 40 to 60 people, with half to 2/3 male, this turns out ranges of 0.5 to 2.5% of gay men, and an upper bound of 2% for lesbians. OTOH, my middle daughter reports a rate of 12% among her male classmates - probably in this age it's more common to get out of the closet. Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Polygamy
theocracy violates the separation of church and state. jlm William T Goodall wrote So does making laws that support a Judeo-Christian notion of marriage whilst outlawing the practices of other religions. there are limits to religious freedom, otherwise any one can claim to be the next joseph smith and prophecize that any child can be forced into marriage before they even hit puberty. jlm The limit to 'religious freedom' in the USA is that it doesn't apply to non-Judeo-Christian traditions. muslims, buddhists, and even Cof$ are allowed to proselytize and practice their scams in american, as long as they don't get caught breaking the law. american institutions, often recognize and practice judeo-christian traditions, with impunity most of the time, but more and more, they are being challenged. polygamy was legal in utah until they applied for statehood. even now it is being practiced in some heretic compounds (according to big love)... serial monogamy and infidelity are more the norm now. during the free love era of the 60s and 70s, i was fortunate to have participated in consensual sex outside the bonds of matrimony, and on a few occasions, even some group activities. then i did the honorable thing and made my wife an honest woman, for the duration of our open marriage...~) years after she passed i did the same with the mother of my second son. now that i am long in the tooth, i am finally prepared to commit to monogamy, only to find that i have burned my bridges. i suspect that many of my fellow baby boomers find themselves alone now that our salad days are over... so it goes... jon Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: In case I go silent . . .
Ronn! Blankenship wrote: When I woke up the computer this morning, the monitor made a number of popping sounds somewhat similar in sharpness and volume to the sound a cap pistol makes. ... up some limbs for disposal.) When I watched the screen I noticed that every time the sound occurred, the image dimmed and shrank like the picture on an old TV when you turned it off. ... Ronn-- Oh, yes, I've had that. I presume that something inside the (CRT, right?) monitor was sometimes shorting out. In my case, the monitor lasted a few months more, then died. You know, I haven't actually bought a monitor in several years. I've been taking the ones that other people give away when they upgrade to flat panels. My source for this is Freecycle: http://www.freecycle.org/search ---David Pop goes the ... ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Polygamy
- Original Message - From: William T Goodall [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com Sent: Monday, February 04, 2008 8:54 AM Subject: Re: Polygamy On 4 Feb 2008, at 14:40, Julia Thompson wrote: On Mon, 4 Feb 2008, William T Goodall wrote: On 4 Feb 2008, at 05:10, Julia Thompson wrote: On Mon, 4 Feb 2008, William T Goodall wrote: On 4 Feb 2008, at 03:24, Alberto Vieira Ferreira Monteiro wrote: Keith Henson wrote: Considering that polygamy is the norm for the vast majority of the cultures in the world, it's an interesting question how the western countries, and a few others, became monogamous. It seems to be associated with settled agriculture but I don't know if there is a connection or why. I would guess that it's peace that doomed polygamy. There can't be polygamy unless there's more women than men, otherwise the men without women will revolt. If gay men don't marry women then there are more available women than straight men. You're failing to take into account lesbians who have absolutely no interest in men. (Like several people in one of my social circles) That might balance things out somewhat there, putting you back to square one. The consensus is that the proportion of women who are lesbians is much lower than the proportion of men who are gay. If we remove all gay and lesbian people from the equation there is still a surplus of straight women to straight men. How big a surplus depends on whose numbers for the proportions are correct. I think the concensus is off, then. I think it's close to equal, or very slightly biased towards more lesbians. Do you have sources to cite? I'd be interested in seeing them if you do. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_sexual_orientation United States 1990: Homosexuality/Heterosexuality: Concepts of Sexual Orientation published findings of 13.95% of males and 4.25% of females having had either extensive or more than incidental homosexual experience. [12] 1990-1992: The American National Health Interview Survey does household interviews of the civilian non-institutionalized population. The results of three of these surveys, done in 1990-1991 and based on over 9,000 responses each time, found between 2-3% of the people responding said yes to a set of statements which included You are a man who has had sex with another man at some time since 1977, even one time. [13] 1992: The National Health and Social Life Survey asked 3,432 respondents whether they had any homosexual experience. The findings were 1.3% for women within the past year, and 4.1% since 18 years; for men, 2.7% within the past year, and 4.9% since 18 years;[14] 1993: The Alan Guttmacher Institute found of sexually active men aged 2039 found that 2.3% had experienced same-sex sexual activity in the last ten years, and 1.1% reported exclusive homosexual contact during that time.[15] 1993: Researchers Samuel and Cynthia Janus surveyed American adults aged 18 and over by distributing 4,550 questionnaires; 3,260 were returned and 2,765 were usable. The results of the cross-sectional nationwide survey stated men and women who reported frequent or ongoing homosexual experiences were 9% of men and 5% of women. [16] 1998: A random survey of 1672 males (number used for analysis) aged 15 to 19. Subjects were asked a number of questions, including questions relating to same-sex activity. This was done using two methods a pencil and paper method, and via computer, supplemented by a verbal rendition of the questionnaire heard through headphones which obtained vastly different results. There was a 400% increase in males reporting homosexual activity when the computer-audio system was used: from a 1.5% to 5.5% positive response rate; the homosexual behavior with the greatest reporting difference (800%, adjusted) was to the question Ever had receptive anal sex with another male: 0.1% to 0.8%. [17] 2003: Smith's 2003 analysis of National Opinion Research Center data[18] states that 4.9% of sexually active American males had had a male sexual partner since age 18, but that since age 18 less than 1% are [exclusively] gay and 4+% bisexual. In the top twelve urban areas however, the rates are double the national average. Smith adds that It is generally believed that including adolescent behavior would further increase these rates.The NORC data has been criticised because the original design sampling techniques were not followed, and depended upon direct self report regarding masturbation and same sex behaviors. (For example, the original data in the early 1990s reported that approximately 40% of adult males had never masturbated--a finding inconsistent with some other studies.) *** Inconsistent with other studies? Hell, that is inconsistent with reality!! Masturbation is almost a universal fact of life. But my
Re: New Anonymous Vid
- Original Message - From: Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 8:11 AM Subject: Re: New Anonymous Vid Thanks, Rob, I passed along the link to a mailing list on which it's perfectly acceptable to leave a bare link. :) (At least I included a subejct line, which doesn't always happen there, either.) Oh, and in Austin, in December, there was a Santa Rampage from about 10AM until after midnight one Saturday, and at one point, there were a good number of Santas in front of the Scientology building on the Drag chanting, Naughty! Naughty! Naughty! (Heard about this from one of the Santas) Just a little thing, but *something*. LOL! This whole thing is just so crazy. It is as if a cross between 1984 and V For Vendetta had been written by Phillip Jose Farmer and John Scalzi. I think that is why I find it so entertaining and addictive. My favorite is Anonymous' Response To The Media: http://youtube.com/watch?v=-3ujR3DJ308 Dear News Organizations. We have been watching your reporting of Anonymous' Conflict with The Church of Scientology. As you said. The so called Church of Scientology, have actively misused copyright, and trademark law, in pursuit of its own agenda. They attempt, not only to subvert free speech, but to recklessly pervert justice to silence those who speak out against them. We find it interesting that you did not mention the other objections in your news reporting. The stifling and punishment of dissent within the totalitarian organization of Scientology. The numerous, alleged human rights violations. Such as the treatment and events that led to the deaths of victims of the cult such as Lisa McPherson. This Cult is Nothing but a psychotically driven pyramid scheme. Why are you, the news media. Afraid of discussing these matters? It is your duty to report on these matters. You are Failing in your Duty. Their activities make them an affront to freedom. Remember. All that is necessary. For the triumph of evil. Is that good men do nothing. This information is Everywhere. It is your Duty to expose it. It is easy to find. Google is your friend. This is not Religious Persecution. But the suppression of a powerful, criminal fascist regime. It is left to Anonymous. The Church has been declared Fair Game. It will be dismantled and destroyed. When Anonymous, sees an evil fascist brainwashing organization. Anonymous knows, it has to help mankind. Because Anonymous knows that it is only Anonymous that can help. Members of the Church. Anonymous is not your enemy. The Church of Scientology is your enemy. The Church has enslaved you. Free Yourselves. Change, does not roll in, on the wheels of inevitability. But comes through continuous struggle. Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor. It must be demanded by the oppressed. Take it. Demand it. We are Anonymous. We are Legion. We do not Forgive. We do not Forget. This is only the beginning. Expect us. The first time I saw this I got chills and began to weep to myself. The way anon takes the words of Tom Cruise and throws them back into the face of COS, the way they mix this with the words that could come from any freedom fighters manifesto, it is brilliance. It resonates with my sense of justice. It makes me wonder if there are subsonics hacking into my emotional centers in my brain.G It is just so unreasonable.G Anon is promising to make a stand for the general good. Nobody does that these days, at least not without looking like a corny goofball. But they pretty much seem to be pulling it off, and pulling people in with them. Their ranks are said to be growing. Who knows if they can pull this off. It is most likely they will buckle before attaining anything approaching their stated goal. But it sure is fun to watch, and who knows, they might just get some reform out of the COS. G xponent That's Infotainment! Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: CoS in the news
What Anonymous hath wrought: Protests next Sunday in at least 170 cities worldwide with over 300,000 people participating. And a severe shortage of Guy Fawkes masks. xponent Minimums Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: New Anonymous Vid
Rob wrote: But it sure is fun to watch, and who knows, they might just get some reform out of the COS. G You know, I'm sympathetic towards the outrage directed towards the CoS, but it makes me want to scream Where's the [EMAIL PROTECTED]@#$ outrage about what's going on in the White House??!!??!! Torture, suspension of habeas corpus, Illegal wiretapping, destruction of evidence, perjury, deception via propaganda and outright lies, incompetence on a massive scale. To me the CoS is small potatoes compared to all that, and I know that many many people have similar sentiments. I'd suggest that maybe we're just practicing and we'll take on the despots of the Bush administration next, but we're running out of time for that. Maybe we can get them when they're out of office and can't pardon each other. Doug ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Polygamy
William wrote: But the numbers I believe are the ones from serious scientific surveys Maru. But the Wiki article isn't very conclusive is it? It's prefaced with this: Measuring the prevalence of various sexual orientationshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_orientationis difficult because there is a lack of reliable data http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Reliable_dataaction=edit. Problems gathering data include: - Survey data regarding stigmatized or deeply personal feelings or activities are often inaccurate. Participants often avoid answers which they feel society, the survey-takers, or they themselves dislike. - The research must select measure some characteristic that may or may not be defining of sexual orientation, and that may involve further testing problems. The class of people with same-sex desires may be larger than the class of people who act on those desires, which in turn may be larger than the class of people who self-identify as gay/lesbian/bisexual.[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_sexual_orientation#_note-black - In studies measuring sexual activity, respondents may have different ideas about what constitutes a sexual act. - There are several different biological and psychosocial components to sex http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex and genderhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender, and a given person may not cleanly fit into a particular category. and concludes with this: In general, surveys quoted by anti-gay activists tend to show figures nearer 1%, while surveys quoted by gay activists tend to show figures nearer 10%, with a mean of 4-5% figure most often cited in mainstream media reports. It is important to note, however, that these numbers are subject to many of the pitfalls inherent in researching sensitive social issues. It is possible that survey results may be biased by under-reporting, for instance. (See note 1 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_sexual_orientation#Footnote.) The frequent use of non-random sampleshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Random_sample(white college students) in many studies could also serve to skew the data. In general, most research agrees that the number of people who have had multiple same-gender sexual experiences is fewer than the number of people who have had a single such experience, and that the number of people who identify themselves as exclusively homosexual is fewer than the number of people who have had multiple homosexual experiences. In addition, major historical shifts can occur in reports of the prevalence of homosexuality. For example, the Hamburghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HamburgInstitute for Sexual Research conducted a survey over the sexual behavior of young people in 1970, and repeated it in 1990. Whereas in 1970 18% of the boys aged 16 and 17 reported to have had same-sex sexual experiences, the number had dropped to 2% by 1990. [2]http://www.lsbk.ch/articles/gunter_schmidt.asp *Ever since homosexuality became publicly argued to be an innate sexual orientation, boys' fear of being seen as gay has, if anything, increased,*the director of the institute, Volkmar Sigusch, suggested in a 1998 article for a German medical journal. [3]http://www.bvvp.de/artikel/jugendsex.html In 2005, as part of the statistical and financial measurements required to implement the UK http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom's new Civil Partnership Act http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Partnership_Act_2004, the British government's H.M. Treasury actuaries calculated that there are 3.6 million British people who may want to enter into a gay or lesbian civil partnership arrangement. This is equal to around 6 percent of the UK population. I'm not convinced by any of the data. Doug lies, damned lies, statistics maru ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
