Answering Seattles challenge ...

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Archaea

If your ratio is representative, it would suggest a higher propensity for homosexuals to abuse than for heterosexuals.

I think it suggests the opposite.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

I think it suggests the opposite.

Three to one.

Most recent reports hold incidence of homosexual rates at about 1 to 3 percent.

If one to three percent of the abusers account for one third of all abusers, then it suggests a higher likelihood within that community of a homosexual abusing than a heterosexual.

[RockyBalboa]

Thanks for sharing tooblue.

Your courage is inspiring to me and I thank you for it.

[TripletDaddy]

Originally Posted by Archaea

If your ratio is representative, it would suggest a higher propensity for homosexuals to abuse than for heterosexuals.

It would also suggest that using the "propensity to abuse" argument to prohibit homosexual marriage as an erosion of the family is a strawman.

Heterosexuals are abusing an awful lot of kids...and in much greater numbers.

[Taq Man]

Originally Posted by Archaea

If your ratio is representative, it would suggest a higher propensity for homosexuals to abuse than for heterosexuals.

I have worked somewhere in the neighborhood of 3000 sexual assault cases in the last 7 years. Of those dealing with adults its about 80/20 hete/homo.

Of the cases dealing with abuse of children it is about 75/25. This did not change from D.C./Utah/Vegas.

[TripletDaddy]

Originally Posted by Taq Man

I have worked somewhere in the neighborhood of 3000 sexual assault cases in the last 7 years. Of those dealing with adults its about 80/20 hete/homo.

Of the cases dealing with abuse of children it is about 75/25. This did not change from D.C./Utah/Vegas.

Whoops! Archaea?

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

It would also suggest that using the "propensity to abuse" argument to prohibit homosexual marriage as an erosion of the family is a strawman.

Heterosexuals are abusing an awful lot of kids...and in much greater numbers.

Do people argue that propensity for abuse is a reason to prevent marriage?

For me, the main logical reasons are a desire to preserve a "traditional" concept of a man and a woman marrying being the ideal.

This does not mean, that other arrangements don't exist and that legal consequences can't be attached to those arrangements. However, what is the societal need to call these non-traditional arrangements "marriage"? If a majority don't desire to call them legally "marriage", why are the majority insensitive and bad?

The only counter-argument that I've heard which is appealing, is, 'Why should heteros be the only ones to know the misery which is marriage?'

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

Whoops! Archaea?

Did you cut yourself? Are you blaming me for your cutting yourself?

[myboynoah]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

To the extent that such a response is a choice. Read my post on vomiting on the first page. Have you ever had something like that happen to you? Was it a choice? Magnify that experience by a ridiculously high number and contemplate whether a response to sexual abuse would be a choice. Seems like an unfair label to me.

I read it and actually think you make a good point about choice. I just don't think it is that black and white. I believe that amid the confusion one might feel there is still volition to follow one path or the other. Seattle has suggested that no one would choose a gay lifestyle. I don't see it as that simple and wonder if there couldn't be external factors that may lead one to choose a path they've been taught to be wrong.

What I saw was a teenage boy that was an outcast, and who did things even though he knew they would keep him as an outcast. Perhaps this was his way of carving out an identity. Given his previous abuse I wondered if that experience didn't lead him to take on "homosexuality" as another component of his identity, even though he didn't need to.

Look, I'm way in over my head with this. Just sorting through some thoughts. I'm still not convinced that choice in some way might not play a role in some or even many cases.

[tooblue]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

tooblue, I'm sorry if my posts hurt you. You tell an inspiring story of personal tragedy and triumph. You're a man of great character and an impressive artist to boot.

But I disagree that "a link between homosexuality and child abuse is well established." This in fact is an old, fortunately now discredited though still invidious prejudice against gays. The scientific community, and equally important, general public opinion (based on common experience), don't support your assertion. Anita Bryant saw her brilliant musical career go up in flames after she made this same charge against gays (she is now sorry for what she did), and the same accusation made implicitly by the Boys Scouts of America has practically wrecked the Boy Scouts' public image.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anita_Bryant

The simple fact of the matter is it is not discredited in whole by the larger community that deals with issues of abuse and sexuality but by a relative vocal few who have a vested interest in maintaining the political correctness gag over a more expansive study on the subject. To say it is discredited is to put your head in the sand and admit an unwillingness to delve deeper into the heart of the issue.

The percentages are undeniable Seattle. There is a direct correlation that cannot be argued. In the link Mike posted 1 – 7 homosexuals report being sexually abused. I have read elsewhere that 80% of incidents of sexual abuse go unreported. The Child pornography industry, supported by the so-called soft porn industry is a world wide billion dollar industry that shows predatory sexual behavior is epidemic. Common sense dictates a connection. Political sensitivities curtail open and outward expression of said connections.

I am not prepared to discuss all of my personal experiences in such an open forum. Yes, it is cathartic to find ways to reach out and help others. Sometimes however it is exceptionally difficult and painful. No, I am not nor have not suggested that it is exclusively an issue of choice. I only advocate that choice is a MAJOR factor. SEQ very perceptively outlines the issues with his thoughts posted in another thread;

Originally Posted by Sleeping in EQ

I don't think there is a genetic cause, but I do think sexuality is mostly beyond one's control. A combination of genetic and early formative experiences (beyond one's control) probably explain most of it. The rest can probably be chalked up to the cognitive reinforcement that comes with the sense of self that is constantly being constructed and reconstructed through behaviors and reasoning.

I do think people's sexuality has a range within which it can shift. Not all homosexuality is the same, and neither is all heterosexuality. Homosexuals are often keenly aware of this fact, heterosexuals are less likely to be so.

You must understand that exposure to abuse leads to compulsive behavior that is part of a larger cycle of potentially self-destructive behavior:

http://www.stopitnow.org/asit_survivors.html

Again, I confidently assert, framed by the limitations of you intitial poll, that Homosexuality is a choice.