30 April 2016

Endearment

Words of the day

noun
a word or phrase expressing love or affection.


Nigger
a contemptuous term for a black or dark-skinned person.

Bitch
informal, derogatory a spiteful or unpleasant woman.
• black slang a woman.
• a person who is completely subservient to another

whore
noun derogatory
a prostitute.
• a promiscuous woman.

slut
noun
a slovenly or promiscuous woman.

Cunt
noun, Slang: Vulgar.
The vulva or vagina
Extremely Disparaging and Offensive
a contemptuous term used to refer to a woman
a term used to refer to a contemptible person


Insult
verb
speak to or treat with disrespect or scornful abuse

Disparage
verb
regard or represent as being of little worth

Degrade
verb
treat or regard (someone) with contempt or disrespect

Derogatory
adjective
showing a critical or disrespectful attitude

Why are you saying it?
Why do you feel the need to say it?
Who is it directed to?
What do you want to convey to them?
Are you repeating what you heard?
Do you understand the context?
Why are you so eager to insult someone?

If you change it to bish, what are you saying?
If you change it to nigga, what are you saying?

Why do you want to insult others?
Why do you seek permission to insult people?
Why do you want to use insults to address your friends or those you love?

If you ain't got nothing nice to say...

repost from Jun 20, 2012

Identity, Behavior, Attraction



Identity, behavior, attraction, and orientation are not the same.
Granted, about 80% of people in Western nations will identify as straight, be solely attracted to the opposite sex and only have sexual contact with the opposite sex.
That percentage drops dramatically when surveying teens, to around 40-50%.
That leaves 20% of the population who hold some sort of same sex attraction but their identity range from straight to gay; and that identity might change throughout their lifetime. Not to mention same sex behavior, however it is motivated.



CDC 2013 study published in 2016

Table 2. women aged 18-44
81% were only attracted to the opposite sex and
0.8% were only attracted to the same sex.
1.2% weren't sure.
The rest (16.9) were attracted to both in some degree.

Table 3. women aged 18-44
92.3% identified as heterosexual,
1.3% identified as lesbian, gay, or homosexual.
5.5% identified as bisexual,
0.9% didn't report.
 as something else was dropped from the survey.

As usual, when you narrow the age to younger women (18-24),
reported same sex attraction increases (22.4) and
heterosexual identity drops (89.5%).

2013 CDC study
They only questioned sexual identity
which I think is a shame. The study should be as comprehensive, if not more, than the last study.
Among all U.S. adults aged 18 and over,
96.6% identified as straight,
1.6% identified as gay or lesbian,
and 0.7% identified as bisexual.
The remaining 1.1% of adults chose:
‘‘something else’’ (0.2%),
selected ‘‘I don’t know the answer’’ (0.4%),
or refused to provide an answer (0.6%).
They threw out the 1.1% and the numbers changed, As shown in the study provided.

There is a 2013 Pew Research survey
That only surveys LGB identified people (1,197 people).
The discrepancies between identity and attraction still exists
People wonder why most Bisexual people in this survey have partners of the opposite sex (84%)
It's partially in the numbers,
For bisexual women,
13% report being mostly attracted to the opposite sex
34% report being attracted to the opposite sex more
31% report being attracted to the sexes equally.
That's at least 47% that are geared towards the opposite sex
78% that could easily be in relationships with the opposite sex.
6% who chose the opposite sex for whatever reason.

For the record, only 78% of the lesbians surveyed were mostly attracted to the same sex.

CDC national health report
In the cdc report.

Table 5. women aged 15-44.
12.5(0.8)% have had same sex contact with another woman.
The highest was women aged 20-24 at 15.8(1.8)%

Table 11. women aged 18-44.
83.3(1.1)% were only attracted to the opposite sex and
0.8(0.2)% were only attracted to the same sex.
 0.7(0.1)% weren't sure.
The rest (15.3%) were attracted to both in some degree.

women aged 20-24.
only 77.6(2.3)% were only attracted to the opposite sex and
0.8(0.3)% were only attracted to the same sex.
0.4(0.2)% weren't sure.
The rest (21.2%) were attracted to both in some degree

Table 12. women aged 18-44.
93.7(0.5)% identified as heterosexual,
1.1(0.2)% identified as lesbian, gay, or homosexual.
3.5(0.3)% identified as bisexual,
 0.6(0.1)% as something else, and
 1.1 (0.2)% didn't report.

women aged 20-24.
6.3 (1.1)% identified as bisexual

Table 14. women aged 18-44.
4.6(0.6)% of women who said they were only attracted to the opposite sex still had sexual contact with the same sex.
9.0(0.7)% of Women who identified as heterosexual still had sexual contact with the same sex.


Even this study is skewed because same sex behavior For females, includes oral sex or any sexual experience,
For males, includes oral or anal sex with male partners.

This study, the most comprehensive and the one with the highest sample size (56,032), shows a discrepancy in identity and attraction.

how many people are lgbt

how students identify

UK Research report 35: Sexual orientation explored

british kinsey scale study

discrepancies in adolescents
a study done in Quebec of 1,951 students

Twelve percent of adolescents (n=237) endorsed at least one measure of nonexclusive heterosexuality.
A total of 3.4% reported gay/lesbian or bisexual (GLB) identity
(another 3.4% were unsure),
9.0% reported same-gender attraction, and
4.0% same-gender behavior.
There was no consistent pattern of overlap between the three measures, and no single dimension effectively captured this population.
The question about attraction identified 71%;
identity identified 52%; and
behavior only 31%.
In raw numbers, more heterosexually identified students reported same-gender attraction (n=95) or same-gender behavior (n=33) than
GLB-identified students (n=44 and 29, respectively).

And other scholars see a distinction too.

"...I use the term "sexual orientation" to mean a consistent, enduring pattern of sexual desire for individuals of the same sex, the other sex, or both sexes, regardless of whether this pattern of desire is manifested in sexual behavior. A woman can have a lesbian orientation but never have a same-sex relationship, just as she can have a heterosexual orientation and still pursue multiple samesex affairs. Most scientists consider desire, not behavior, the marker of sexual orientation. "Sexual identity" refers to a culturally organized conception of the self, usually "lesbian/gay," "bisexual," or "heterosexual." As with sexual orientation, we cannot presume that these identities correspond to particular patterns of behavior. Nor can we presume that they correspond to particular patterns of desire. Because sexual identities represent self-concepts, they depend on individuals' own notions about the most important aspects of their sexual selves. These notions, as we will see, can vary quite a bit from individual to individual. Moreover, some people—particularly women—reject conventional lesbian/gay/bisexual identity labels in favor of alternative labels such as "queer," "questioning," or "pansexual." Others reject all identity labels in order to make room for a broad range of sexual possibilities, as well as to acknowledge the fact that all labels are somewhat arbitrary"- Lisa Diamond

Side note, Here is the conclusion of Lisa Diamond's study:

Female bisexuality from adolescence to adulthood: Results from a 10-year longitudinal study:

The findings of this research suggest that there are, in fact, appreciable boundaries between the long-term developmental trajectories of lesbian, bisexual, and unlabeled women, but these boundaries are relatively fluid. 
Hence, the present study supports the notion of bisexuality as a third type of sexual orientation and also supports the notion of bisexuality as a capacity for context-specific flexibility in erotic response. In contrast, the findings are inconsistent with the long-debated notion of bisexuality as a transitional stage or “phase.” 
Of course, this study is limited by its reliance on a small (79), exclusively female, disproportionately White and middle-class sample, and future research on larger and more diverse samples of sexual-minority women and men is important for determining the generalizability of the findings.
 Nonetheless, the results have important social and scientific implications. They contribute to researchers' emerging scientific understanding of the basic nature and longitudinal development of female sexual orientation, and they provide critically important information for educators and clinicians attempting to understand the distinct challenges and meet the unique needs of bisexual individuals over the life course.

I've seen this study used to draw conclusions about female sexuality in broader populations, that is a misuse of the data. The sample size is too small and narrow to draw any broader conclusions. This data just shows that Bisexuality is not a phase.

Reading is Fundamental

revised from 1/30/12

28 April 2016

Deep Thought

Can't help but worry about people who are afraid of/hate people they've never even met. 
But maybe I shouldn't worry about people I haven't met. 

26 April 2016

Deep Thought

'The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.'

No good or evil
No them
No enemy

Only us
We are capable of every good
And every evil

Only we can destroy ourselves 

Only we can save ourselves 

Agnostic Christian

I'm Christian concerning my conduct. 
I'm agnostic concerning other people's conduct. 
My Christianity guides my own purpose and actions. 
Reason guides how I view other people. 

14 April 2016

Word of the Day

(Mis)Appropriation

Say you had a family member who was a mentor to you.
They were very talented, artistic.
They made clothing or whatever.
Say they taught you everything they know and the special meaning that exists in creating it.
Say they learned it from their parents. It's a time honored tradition in your family.
Then they die.
You carry on their creation
Let's say you wear the clothes to school/work.
Your colleagues laugh at you. Say you look stupid.
Call you a slut or the like. Tell you you can't wear it around them.
All kinds of grief.
Forward say a year later. One of your colleagues shows up wearing the same thing.
Your colleagues applaud him. Copy him. Your colleague claims they are the ones who created it.
Then, they put the design up for sale and make money.
Your time honored tradition for profit.
While they shamed you.
This is (mis)appropriation.
Not because someone just says so.
Because this has happened numerous times to numerous peoples.

Now, everything is not (mis)appropriation.
If one has permission to wear, use, or profit from something not their own, then so be it.
It it is sold/given to you by the people of that culture, then so be it.
Humans have created similar cultural products independent of each other. Hair styles included. Before you accuse others of (mis)appropriation, you may want to take a look back into their history to see if their culture had those traits.
It's hard to tell and deserves further investigation not just assumptions.

BUT,
if you are going to wear or use something that is not your own, and don't want to seem like an asshole.
do some research,
Find out what it means, who originated it, where it came from, its significance to its origin culture.



noun
1 the action of taking something for one's own use, typically without the owner's permission
often derogatory the artistic practice or technique of reworking images from well-known paintings, photographs, etc., in one's own work.

11 April 2016

Who controls the world

Political independence does not necessarily mean economic independence.
In the case of developing and least developed countries, it is the opposite.

When people complain that African countries can't get their shit together, well that's bullshit because those countries don't have any shit to get together.

When Europe allowed independence after colonialism, they ensured those new governors were subservient.
They ensured the resources were already held by foreign interests.
They then gave out loans under the guise of helping those nations improve their lot.
These are loans that can never be paid because of interest and no plan to actually help create the capital to pay those loans and provide for themselves.
Nothing of worth in these countries is owned by the native people.

The sole purpose of these countries is to provide labor and resources for developed nations.
It's like these countries are in debt bondage to the developed countries.

01 April 2016

No sex in your violence

Why does culture value violence over sex?
Why is sex taboo yet people hurt each other for public entertainment?

What if our society treated sex as they do violence?
What if the issues were switched?
What if sex was openly enjoyed and violence made taboo?

Of course some christians abhor violence; but you don't see them protesting it to the degree that they do for sex.
Of course there are christians who fully support violence for entertainment.

If you are attracted to someone and the attraction is mutual, why resist?
If sex is consensual, what are valid barriers?
Other than one or both being in exclusive relationships.

Why does sex have to be exclusive to a married couple,
yet consensual violence between anyone is fine?