dna, derailing, dummies, minority, privileged, homophobia, homosexual, gay, feminism, funny, religious, right,
Not sure how to maintain your Privileged Person(tm) status against all those Marginalized Persons(tm)? Read Derailing for Dummies, your guide to conversational dominance! (DNA, I'm looking at you!)
Thursday, April 2, 2009
The Rapture- Yeah, We'd Notice
rapture, tribulation, premillenial, dispensationalism, antichrist, christian, jesus, god, bible,
Premillenial dispensationalism is one of those odd, fringey fundy things that takes seeing to believe, though I wouldn't blame you if you saw it, and still didn't believe. Believing in premillenial dispensationalism requires having a world view so odd, so far removed from the real world, that encountering the real world can only happen through the lens of belief.
This is what happens when you view the world through the lens of a particularly bizarre belief (from the Slacktivist.):
. . .
The Rapture is going to make an incredible stir throughout the world. not for the reasons you think. nobody would be impressed that a few million fundy nutters disappeared because they'd be distracted by the fact that EVERY CHILD ON THE PLANET IS GONE. This is one of the greatest moments in human history yes, the suffering of billions of parents, quickly followed by the horrors of the Tribulation will be a wonderful moment in human history. and the result will be an incredible crisis. ya think? The media will explore every detail. in the five minutes before the nuclear holocaust, the ones that aren't in the fetal position, refusing to blink Interviews will be granted to all sides i'm not even sure what that means and many different explanations will be given. how many explanations for EVERY CHILD ON THE PLANET IS GONE could there be? The paranormal world will have a field day with many bizarre stories. ufologists will be having more fun. Somehow the majority of the world will be convinced to carry on and to join the new day of liberty and license. so, EVERY CHILD ON THE PLANET IS GONE, and we're all going to party?
This is seriously offensive. This guy seems to think that most people on the planet regret not getting abortions and would be thrilled if their children disappeared. Have you ever seen one of those pleas from the parents of a missing child? Now imagine the entire world like that.
Under the heading of "The Catholic Church is Teh Evul":
The best way to deal with a crisis is to celebrate it like we celebrated 911 and Katrina? what? and the celebration will begin. catholic church and celebration are not ideas that any sane person would put in the same sentence. The One World Church will quickly develop a speakers’ bureau to appear on all news channels. the news channels being run by the always childless, i guess. Let’s consider what may be their explanation. the mayans were right! I believe they will proclaim that a supernatural miracle has occurred. Religious fanatics and rebellious fundamentalists have been removed by an act of God so that the world can finally experience peace. god wanted peace so he left behind muslim extremists? that seems a little . . . odd. is Mr. Chambers saying muslim extremists will be raptured, too? They will say that these people were no different than the terrorists within the Muslim world. other than the bombs. They were like the Taliban of Afghanistan they are like that, just without the bombs. and we have been spared their hindrance to our planned wonderful world by this miracle of their removal. there is so much wrong with this idea, i can barely scratch the surface.
Forerunners of the Antichrist excellent band name will see this as their golden opportunity and they will join in with the religious One World Church. They will herald the coming revelation of their “Christ” and great paranormal events will become commonplace. As the idea that this “Christ” is waiting to be manifest begins to grip the world, great excitement to His coming will develop. Great speakers with demonic appeal obama! will conduct rallies all over the world. They will build excitement to the point of hysteria. Incredible miracles of healing (i.e., blinded eyes opened) and mass healing events will occur. This new church world of the inclusive church will explode. It will be religious mania. in other words, the fake christian church will actually deliver what the real christian church promised? ummm . . . what?
This new religion will be as emotionally real as the true Pentecost of the past. but not really as real? The only thing missing will be the restrictions of commandments and standards. it's going to be a little hard to have a "christian" religion without the ten commandments. episcopalians are seriously liberal, but not even they have abandoned the restrictions against murder and stealing. It will be the greatest day of mass religious events in history. like unto what mass religious events in history? The music is already written, the african music with scary black rythms! the singers have already trained, and these campaigns will feature the best. hey, at least while we're all deranged with grief, we'll have a nice concert to go to. The present contemporary, rap, rock, funk, and other ungodly (black!) music are all the music of the Antichrist he's black! and are ready to inoculate the world. doesn't "inoculate" mean protect against disease? The multitudes will line up to be baptized and marked as the worshippers of this new “Christ.” They will actually believe that he is the true appearing of the real Christ. dude, he can heal the sick and he's got a good backup band. why not?
The rest of this article devolves into a discussion of the persecution the RTCs so desperately want, but won't experience because they'll be raptured. Always missing out on the good stuff, I guess.
Premillenial dispensationalism is one of those odd, fringey fundy things that takes seeing to believe, though I wouldn't blame you if you saw it, and still didn't believe. Believing in premillenial dispensationalism requires having a world view so odd, so far removed from the real world, that encountering the real world can only happen through the lens of belief.
This is what happens when you view the world through the lens of a particularly bizarre belief (from the Slacktivist.):
Hence the career of Rep. Michelle Bachmann. She's not a demagogue trying to manipulate the rubes on the barking mad religious lunatic fringe. She is herself one of them. She's a true believer. Bachmann is both a member of Congress and, in her mind, a member of the Tribulation Force.
This explains Bachmann's current obsession: stopping the attempt to create a one-world global currency. Matthew Yglesias links to Bachmann's discussion of this one-currency conspiracy with talk-show host Glenn Beck, pointing out that the effort Bachmann opposes is both imaginary and impossible.
Matt's bewilderment here is understandable. His problem here, though, is that he's restricting his discussion to reality and that's not where Bachmann is coming from.
This latest article from Rapture Ready, The World's Response to the Rapture, by Joseph Chambers, is another example of such a distortion of understanding. As far as I can tell, Mr. Chambers views the unsaved as being entirely unlike the saved. I don't mean just in terms of salvation, I mean in every way possible.
Background: according to this belief system, the end of the world begins with every Real True Christian(tm) being taking bodily to heaven at once. Children who have not yet entered puberty will also be taken- mostly because even RTCs can't really get behind tormenting 2 year olds. So, the event Mr. Chambers is discussing is a few million (at best) adults disappearing right in front of our eyes, along with every child in world. All of them. Yeah. I'm guessing those of us left behind might make it 5 minutes before initiating a nuclear holocaust that reduces the entire planet to an asteroid belt.
Mr. Chambers has a slightly different view on things, mostly because he thinks the bible predicts a whole 7 years of inexplicable events following the Rapture.
There is a growing hatred for anything that centers on Jesus Christ. wow- persecution porn in the first sentence! dude, you're over 75% of the population of the US, you are not being oppressed. It apostrophe s like the world wants to promote a “god” idea that can fit all belief systems, but trashes the God of Christianity and the idea of the Son of God as a Savior of all men. There is an even greater hatred for the idea of a Rapture we think you're clinically insane and pity you, we don't hate you, where a large number of people are going to be caught up and supernaturally removed. More and more of the leading ministers in Biblical circles are denying the Rapture and turning to theological ideas that suggest a Christian dominion of the earth rather than escape from the earth. Much of the Evangelical world and all of the Catholic leadership are dead set against a sudden exodus of the chosen saints of God. funny, we get no mention of how Lutherans, anglicans, episcopalians, greek orthodox, russian orthodox, etc. feel about this. i guess they don't count.
When you understand the multitude of different ideas relating to End Times events, it is challenging to describe the many different reactions that may well follow the great escape of the saints. no, it's not at all challenging. no one will notice the rapture of the few million adults because we'll be just a little distracted by the rapture of EVERY CHILD ON EARTH. The Rapture may well serve to unite the religious world and force them to forge a united reaction. right after they stop looking looking for their children. There are not many religious leaders left that do not have a growing distaste for Bible-believing fundamentalism. yes, yes, yes, you're persecuted. we get it. poor you. Every major religious trend has served to build a consensus against what is being called “narrow-minded fundamentalism.” ya know, if everyone hates you, there might be something to it. just sayin'. Building a broad-based movement to bring the Catholic, the Evangelical, and the Pentecostals together well, we managed one more group of christians, but what about all the rest? demands that no theology is important enough to divide the church world. if it really were the "one true faith", wouldn't everybody know that? there's dozens of different "one true faiths", just within christianity, doesn't that say something about the concept of the "one true faith"?
We now have a religious atmosphere that drives the fundamental truths to the back room. considering what else is said to occur in back rooms, that might be an unfortunate metaphor. That is the crowd that is going to be the Raptured saints. who's the crowd? the truths are the crowd? what? It would be a great relief to many religious personalities if we would just disappear. oh, it's not just religious personalities. We will! yeah! Holiness of lifestyle is hated. BWAHAHAHAHAHA what holiness? christians and atheists act the same, except atheists are less likely to get divorced. if we're going by holiness of lifestyle, shouldn't the atheists get raptured? Ministers that still preach and teach separation from the trashy and carnal world are considered cultic and bothersome. if you actually would separate from the world, we'd all be happier. The music of the average church in the acceptable church growth world is unclean and repulsive. it's got african rythms! black, scary rythms! The atmosphere in the Jewish synagogues when Jesus came the first time is a fair example of today’s church atmosphere. they're giving out high interest loans in churches now? Genuine truth has fallen in the streets. THUMP! Most ministers that still continue to preach the Rapture also trash solid Biblical holiness living. nobody is good enough for this guy!
. . .
The Rapture is going to make an incredible stir throughout the world. not for the reasons you think. nobody would be impressed that a few million fundy nutters disappeared because they'd be distracted by the fact that EVERY CHILD ON THE PLANET IS GONE. This is one of the greatest moments in human history yes, the suffering of billions of parents, quickly followed by the horrors of the Tribulation will be a wonderful moment in human history. and the result will be an incredible crisis. ya think? The media will explore every detail. in the five minutes before the nuclear holocaust, the ones that aren't in the fetal position, refusing to blink Interviews will be granted to all sides i'm not even sure what that means and many different explanations will be given. how many explanations for EVERY CHILD ON THE PLANET IS GONE could there be? The paranormal world will have a field day with many bizarre stories. ufologists will be having more fun. Somehow the majority of the world will be convinced to carry on and to join the new day of liberty and license. so, EVERY CHILD ON THE PLANET IS GONE, and we're all going to party?
This is seriously offensive. This guy seems to think that most people on the planet regret not getting abortions and would be thrilled if their children disappeared. Have you ever seen one of those pleas from the parents of a missing child? Now imagine the entire world like that.
Under the heading of "The Catholic Church is Teh Evul":
The best way to deal with a crisis is to celebrate it like we celebrated 911 and Katrina? what? and the celebration will begin. catholic church and celebration are not ideas that any sane person would put in the same sentence. The One World Church will quickly develop a speakers’ bureau to appear on all news channels. the news channels being run by the always childless, i guess. Let’s consider what may be their explanation. the mayans were right! I believe they will proclaim that a supernatural miracle has occurred. Religious fanatics and rebellious fundamentalists have been removed by an act of God so that the world can finally experience peace. god wanted peace so he left behind muslim extremists? that seems a little . . . odd. is Mr. Chambers saying muslim extremists will be raptured, too? They will say that these people were no different than the terrorists within the Muslim world. other than the bombs. They were like the Taliban of Afghanistan they are like that, just without the bombs. and we have been spared their hindrance to our planned wonderful world by this miracle of their removal. there is so much wrong with this idea, i can barely scratch the surface.
Forerunners of the Antichrist excellent band name will see this as their golden opportunity and they will join in with the religious One World Church. They will herald the coming revelation of their “Christ” and great paranormal events will become commonplace. As the idea that this “Christ” is waiting to be manifest begins to grip the world, great excitement to His coming will develop. Great speakers with demonic appeal obama! will conduct rallies all over the world. They will build excitement to the point of hysteria. Incredible miracles of healing (i.e., blinded eyes opened) and mass healing events will occur. This new church world of the inclusive church will explode. It will be religious mania. in other words, the fake christian church will actually deliver what the real christian church promised? ummm . . . what?
This new religion will be as emotionally real as the true Pentecost of the past. but not really as real? The only thing missing will be the restrictions of commandments and standards. it's going to be a little hard to have a "christian" religion without the ten commandments. episcopalians are seriously liberal, but not even they have abandoned the restrictions against murder and stealing. It will be the greatest day of mass religious events in history. like unto what mass religious events in history? The music is already written, the african music with scary black rythms! the singers have already trained, and these campaigns will feature the best. hey, at least while we're all deranged with grief, we'll have a nice concert to go to. The present contemporary, rap, rock, funk, and other ungodly (black!) music are all the music of the Antichrist he's black! and are ready to inoculate the world. doesn't "inoculate" mean protect against disease? The multitudes will line up to be baptized and marked as the worshippers of this new “Christ.” They will actually believe that he is the true appearing of the real Christ. dude, he can heal the sick and he's got a good backup band. why not?
The rest of this article devolves into a discussion of the persecution the RTCs so desperately want, but won't experience because they'll be raptured. Always missing out on the good stuff, I guess.
Taking the Crazy Train to Nutterville
crazy, religion, religious, jesus, miano, lawman, evangelical, evangelism, witness, testimony, god, christian, bible,
This guy lives in California:
So, when did California start executing Christians for their belief? Yet again we have confirmation that what fundys want more than anything else is a return of the lions.
This guy lives in California:
Proclaiming the Law and the Gospel is not a right given to Christians by men. It is a command given to Christians by God. If you want to earn and exercise a right, go earn and exercise the right to die for Jesus Christ at the hands of the very people who insist you do not have the right to speak to them about the Way, the Truth, and the Life.
So, when did California start executing Christians for their belief? Yet again we have confirmation that what fundys want more than anything else is a return of the lions.
Yeeeaaahhh Sweden! Woo Hoo!
gay, marriage, tradition, homosexual, prop 8, doma
Yet another reason to love Sweden:
Parliament voted overwhelmingly on Wednesday to recognise same-sex marriage, becoming the fifth country in Europe to do so.
. . .
The new law lets homosexuals wed in either a civil or religious ceremony, though individual churches can opt out.
The law was passed by 226 votes to 22 and will come into force on 1 May.
Yet another reason to love Sweden:
Parliament voted overwhelmingly on Wednesday to recognise same-sex marriage, becoming the fifth country in Europe to do so.
. . .
The new law lets homosexuals wed in either a civil or religious ceremony, though individual churches can opt out.
The law was passed by 226 votes to 22 and will come into force on 1 May.
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
Guest Posting: Debunking UFI's Sexual Orientation Guide
suicide, homophobia, homosexual, ufi, tradition, traditional, gay, marriage, prop 8, asshat, apa style, sandfort
Today we have a post from [redacted], who has kindly offered to debunk UFI's Sexual Orientation Guide for us. Trust me, this is fun.
[redacted]:
Okay, I'm only on the very first "point" in the UFI document, and I'm having major issues (gasp. shock.)
First of all, if you can't be bothered to properly spell the researcher's last name, I'm going to question the integrity of your research from GO. It's called "attention to detail" and IT FUCKING MATTERS. If you can't pay attention to small details, I'm going to deduce that you may not grasp more complex ones, asshat.
Okay, starting with number 1, which UFI cites as:
(Studyof 5,998 Dutch adults) Theo G.M. Sandforte et al., "Same-Sex Sexual Behavior and Psychiatric Disorders: Findings from the NetherlandsMental Health Survey and Incidence," Archives of General Psychiatry58, 10 (2001): 85-91.
Counterpoint 1 -- Sandfort. No e, asshats.
Counterpoint 2 -- Now, I'll give them the "et al" (even though there are only 3 other names, and it's not been cited previously in the paper [since we're on point one here] and also since there's not a compiled source of references at the end, which means this is NOT a proper APA style citation, but fine, whatever, benefit of doubt and not nitpicking, right?) Okay, so. The et al we're letting slide.
Next up....the volume number. Um, volume 10 of this journal in 2001 does not contain pages 85-91. Volume 1 does. So...typo, but again - attention to detail. I'm starting to wonder if they even want people to be able to find this study... I'm guessing NOT, since...
Counterpoint 3 -- Alvin and Pam at Pam's House Blend already wrote this up better than I could, so here. The gist of it is, this study doesn't say what these people want to say it says (shock. awe. gasp. NOT.) Honestly, people, it's bad enough you distorted the findings, but the researcher himself has said to STOP IT. Please...listen to Dr. Sandfort.
Okay, their second point. They cite two studies. Their 2A is
R. Herrell et al., "A Co-twin Control Study in Adult Men," Archives of General Psychiatry 56, 10 (1999): 867-874. **NOTE: The proper title of the study (really, do they not want people to be able to find these?) is:
Sexual orientation and suicidality: a co-twin control study in adult men
Also, can we just stop with naming only one author? If this is the only citation you're going to provide, and it's not in the context of a paragraph, you do NOT get to just say "Herrell et al." Proper APA citation requires you to list ALL of the researchers. Fuckwads. Oops, sorry.
Okay, so. They use this citation to support the following statement:
A co-twin study found that men with same-sexpartners were 6.5 times as likely as their cotwinto have attempted suicide. The higher rate was not explained by mental health or substance abuse disorders.
Well that sounds sort of bleak. Of course, it ignores the fact that just because gay marriage is legal in the Netherlands doesn't mean gay people don't face prejudice or discrimination or censure; it just means it's not legally permissible that the discrimination is institutionalized. Additionally, although it's technically correct, they conveniently left off the researchers' own results and conclusion, which according to the PubMed abstract , can be stated as
:RESULTS: Same-gender sexual orientation is significantly associated with each of the suicidality measures. Unadjusted matched-pair odds ratios follow: 2.4 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2 - 4.6) for thoughts about death; 4.4 (95% CI, 1.7 - 11.6) for wanted to die; 4.1 (95% CI, 2.1 - 8.2) for suicidal ideation; 6.5 (95% CI, 1.5 - 28.8) for attempted suicide; and 5.1 (95% CI, 2.4 - 10.9) for any of the suicidal symptoms. After adjustment for substance abuse and depressive symptoms (other than suicidality), all of the suicidality measures remain significantly associated with same-gender sexual orientation except for wanting to die (odds ratio, 2.5 [95% CI, 0.7 - 8.81). CONCLUSIONS: The substantially increased lifetime risk of suicidal behaviors in homosexual men is unlikely to be due solely to substance abuse or other psychiatric comorbidity. While the underlying causes of the suicidal behaviors remain unclear, future research needs to address the inadequacies in the measurement of both sexual orientation and suicidality in population-based samples.
All right, that's a little confusing if you haven't taken stats or research design. Basically, they found strong association with gay men who, outside of those who were substance abusers and/or determined to be depressed, who measured higher than their twins in "suicidality measures." I'm still not sure why UFI thinks that people need to avoid being gay in order to avoid being suicidal. First, it ignores the fact that this study doesn't include any gay women. Second, it confuses correlation with causality. Straight men/boys commit suicide, too, and frankly, any number of suicides is too high (oddly, a not-insignificant number of them do it as murder-suicide and take other people with them. Including their children. Just to keep their ex-wives from thinking they can divorce them without "paying" for it.) (If that didn't make sense to you, please see: this article
So sure, being gay in the Netherlands is associated with higher risks of suicidal tendencies. Probably we want to address this risk. Perhaps we might want to see if anti-gay attitudes contributed to this? (Oh, no, wait, that wouldn't do AT ALL.) Regardless, I think another thing ignored by UFI here is the researchers' own conclusion where it says that "While the underlying causes of the suicidal behaviors remain unclear, future research needs to address the inadequacies in the measurement of both sexual orientation and suicidality in population-based samples." It's pretty clear here that: number one, correlation does not equal causation, and number two, the ways that sexual orientation and suicidality were measured in the study are problematic. I guess if this study saw correlations between happiness and orientation, UFI might ignore it as inconclusive. Le sigh.
All right, on to 2B. Which UFI cites as:
Ping Qin, Esben Agerbo, and Preben Bo Mortensen, "Suicide Risk inRelation to Socioeconomic, Demographic, Psychiatric, and FamilialFactors: A National Register-Based Study of All Suicides in Denmark,1981-1997." American Journal of Psychiatry 160 (2003): 765-772.
Well yeaaaa, we seem to have learned to include all of the researchers names! However, since all of the issues in 2003 are volume 160, an issue number of month would be really helpful here. Oh, look, I found it. APRIL 2003. Now, what point are they making here? Oh, yes: Researchers found "an elevated suicide risk for homosexuals" even in tolerant Denmark.
Okay, once again, I think we're confusing "tolerant Denmark" with "no one ever picks on gay people." But fine, whatever, let's see what the FULL STUDY has to say about sexual orientation, and if the researchers mention anything else about this that might have been left out (please. At this point, even though we're only on point 2B, I'd be stupid not to be skeptical of omissions on the part of UFI.)
Why, look. I seem to have found something interesting in the full text of just the ABSTRACT (I'll italicize it to make it stand out)
:RESULTS: Of the risk factors examined in the study, a history of hospitalization for psychiatric disorder was associated with the highest odds ratio and the highest attributable risk for suicide. Cohabiting or single marital status, unemployment, low income, retirement, disability, sickness-related absence from work, and a family history of suicide and/or psychiatric disorders were also significant risk factors for suicide. Moreover, these factors had different effects in male and female subjects. A psychiatric disorder was more likely to increase suicide risk in female than in male subjects. Being single was associated with higher suicide risk in male subjects, and having a young child with lower suicide risk in female subjects. Unemployment and low income had stronger effects on suicide in male subjects. Living in an urban area was associated with higher suicide risk in female subjects and a lower risk in male subjects. A family history of suicide raised suicide risk slightly more in female than in male subjects.
Hmmm. So it appears that in this review of all Danish suicides from 1981 - 1997, the biggest risk factor was history of hospitalization, not sexual orientation. As a matter of fact, since it was only in 1994 that Danish gay couples could cohabit as registered "couples" with marital benefits, any gay suicides before 1994 would have been counted as "single." After 1994, they count as "cohabiting." Let's see what the researchers have to say about this. Oh, look, I found the quote UFI mined for their point in 2B: Registered partners (i.e., homosexual couples living under the same legal status as a married couple) could be distinguished from single persons only from 1994 onward. Okay, so they might have skewed the "single" stats if they committed suicide before 1994, and would be under-represented in the "married" stats, since the researchers didn't cut off the findings at pre-and post-1994. I'm sure they address this. Let's see.
Oh, look, I found the quote that UFI mined for their point in 2B:
As for family structure, previous studies have reported that single people are more likely to commit suicide (2, 3), but our study further shows a significantly higher risk of suicide for cohabiting people even though cohabitation is almost equivalent to an officially certified marriage relationship in the eyes of most people in Denmark. Moreover, consistent with a few studies reporting that same-gender sexual orientation is associated with suicidality (30, 31), our results clearly show an elevated suicide risk for homosexuals, although this effect was likely to be underestimated because data were available only for those choosing to officially register as partners and only for the period after 1994. Taken together, our results suggest that a traditional family structure may be associated with lower suicide risk, although we cannot determine if the lower risk results from a protective effect of marriage, e.g., in the face of setbacks or difficulties, or from a marriage selection effect (32).
[redacted]:
And I'm right, it does seem that the risk is likely to be underestimated because it only includes gay couples who officially registered with the state. So wow, it might be even worse, yet UFI failed to point that out (and it would have strengthened their point!) They also failed to quote-mine the better quote here, which is that "a traditional family structure may be associated with lower suicide risk." Why wouldn't they want to point this out? Well, the researchers themselves say that it is indeterminable whether this is because of "a protective effect of marriage...or from a marriage selection effect."
Okay, let's check out this marriage selection effect in a second, but first I want to point out a couple of things:
1) Oddly, the APA's rejection of homosexuality as a disorder makes the APA "suspect" in most UFI/"traditional marriage" arguments. Yet they're quite happy to use THIS research OF THE OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF THE APA to make their point. Look, people - either they're a credible resource...or they're NOT. And you've stated many many times that, in your opinion, the APA declassified homosexuality as a disorder because they are "political" and not "scientific." Well, then, I say you can't use this study. Wait, let's be more generous than that. Let's go ahead, since our stance relies heavily on the APA, and accept this resource, and see, really, what can be said about it. Shall we?
2) Before we get to that, I want to point out again that just because Denmark is more "tolerant" of gays doesn't mean they don't experience any anti-gay bias that could contribute to suicidality. This "tolerance" is fairly recent, and it would be hard to say that the salutary effects of the legalization of gay marriage could have occurred significantly in the 3 years before the study ended. Okay, on to conclusions by the researchers. (Oddly, the UFI is quick to point out that "we just don't know yet what can happen when you legalize gay marriage" when the results show something GOOD happening; then they claim that "more studies, more long-term studies, larger samples" need to be occur before they will accept the research. [Yes, shock, awe, blah blah.])
Oh, look. That's it for "homosexuality" in the study. But there's THIS interesting tidbit at the end of the study that I find telling, seeing how the US is not Western European:
Research and Clinical Implications
The socioeconomic environment in Denmark is similar to that in other Scandinavian countries and would probably also be comparable to that in most Western European countries. However, it may be difficult to generalize the findings of this study to other countries with different social, economic, or cultural conditions.
So...the researchers basically say not to generalize this study to other countries with "different social, economic, or cultural conditions." I'm guessing that prohibition of gay marriage might count as a "different....cultural condition." Strange, this doesn't seem like a good study to support anti-gay attitudes in the U.S.
PF: so, we got through 2 points out of 20. This could take a while.
Today we have a post from [redacted], who has kindly offered to debunk UFI's Sexual Orientation Guide for us. Trust me, this is fun.
[redacted]:
Okay, I'm only on the very first "point" in the UFI document, and I'm having major issues (gasp. shock.)
First of all, if you can't be bothered to properly spell the researcher's last name, I'm going to question the integrity of your research from GO. It's called "attention to detail" and IT FUCKING MATTERS. If you can't pay attention to small details, I'm going to deduce that you may not grasp more complex ones, asshat.
Okay, starting with number 1, which UFI cites as:
(Studyof 5,998 Dutch adults) Theo G.M. Sandforte et al., "Same-Sex Sexual Behavior and Psychiatric Disorders: Findings from the NetherlandsMental Health Survey and Incidence," Archives of General Psychiatry58, 10 (2001): 85-91.
Counterpoint 1 -- Sandfort. No e, asshats.
Counterpoint 2 -- Now, I'll give them the "et al" (even though there are only 3 other names, and it's not been cited previously in the paper [since we're on point one here] and also since there's not a compiled source of references at the end, which means this is NOT a proper APA style citation, but fine, whatever, benefit of doubt and not nitpicking, right?) Okay, so. The et al we're letting slide.
Next up....the volume number. Um, volume 10 of this journal in 2001 does not contain pages 85-91. Volume 1 does. So...typo, but again - attention to detail. I'm starting to wonder if they even want people to be able to find this study... I'm guessing NOT, since...
Counterpoint 3 -- Alvin and Pam at Pam's House Blend already wrote this up better than I could, so here. The gist of it is, this study doesn't say what these people want to say it says (shock. awe. gasp. NOT.) Honestly, people, it's bad enough you distorted the findings, but the researcher himself has said to STOP IT. Please...listen to Dr. Sandfort.
"There is a difference between the U.S. and the Netherlands in terms of acceptance of homosexuality. That does not mean that there is no homophobia (and homophobic damage) in the Netherlands. It is not clear how difference in climate affects the prevalence of mental disorders. We don't know the final answers, but in the U.S. as well as the Netherlands, homophobia is related to mental health problems.
He also said that Griggs and others who use the study to claim that homophobia does not have an effect on negative lgbt behavior are clearly distorting his work:"They use data to promote their moral convictions without truly understanding what the issues are. They are not interested in understanding how people's lives are affected by their social environment."
Okay, their second point. They cite two studies. Their 2A is
R. Herrell et al., "A Co-twin Control Study in Adult Men," Archives of General Psychiatry 56, 10 (1999): 867-874. **NOTE: The proper title of the study (really, do they not want people to be able to find these?) is:
Sexual orientation and suicidality: a co-twin control study in adult men
Also, can we just stop with naming only one author? If this is the only citation you're going to provide, and it's not in the context of a paragraph, you do NOT get to just say "Herrell et al." Proper APA citation requires you to list ALL of the researchers. Fuckwads. Oops, sorry.
Okay, so. They use this citation to support the following statement:
A co-twin study found that men with same-sexpartners were 6.5 times as likely as their cotwinto have attempted suicide. The higher rate was not explained by mental health or substance abuse disorders.
Well that sounds sort of bleak. Of course, it ignores the fact that just because gay marriage is legal in the Netherlands doesn't mean gay people don't face prejudice or discrimination or censure; it just means it's not legally permissible that the discrimination is institutionalized. Additionally, although it's technically correct, they conveniently left off the researchers' own results and conclusion, which according to the PubMed abstract , can be stated as
:RESULTS: Same-gender sexual orientation is significantly associated with each of the suicidality measures. Unadjusted matched-pair odds ratios follow: 2.4 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2 - 4.6) for thoughts about death; 4.4 (95% CI, 1.7 - 11.6) for wanted to die; 4.1 (95% CI, 2.1 - 8.2) for suicidal ideation; 6.5 (95% CI, 1.5 - 28.8) for attempted suicide; and 5.1 (95% CI, 2.4 - 10.9) for any of the suicidal symptoms. After adjustment for substance abuse and depressive symptoms (other than suicidality), all of the suicidality measures remain significantly associated with same-gender sexual orientation except for wanting to die (odds ratio, 2.5 [95% CI, 0.7 - 8.81). CONCLUSIONS: The substantially increased lifetime risk of suicidal behaviors in homosexual men is unlikely to be due solely to substance abuse or other psychiatric comorbidity. While the underlying causes of the suicidal behaviors remain unclear, future research needs to address the inadequacies in the measurement of both sexual orientation and suicidality in population-based samples.
All right, that's a little confusing if you haven't taken stats or research design. Basically, they found strong association with gay men who, outside of those who were substance abusers and/or determined to be depressed, who measured higher than their twins in "suicidality measures." I'm still not sure why UFI thinks that people need to avoid being gay in order to avoid being suicidal. First, it ignores the fact that this study doesn't include any gay women. Second, it confuses correlation with causality. Straight men/boys commit suicide, too, and frankly, any number of suicides is too high (oddly, a not-insignificant number of them do it as murder-suicide and take other people with them. Including their children. Just to keep their ex-wives from thinking they can divorce them without "paying" for it.) (If that didn't make sense to you, please see: this article
So sure, being gay in the Netherlands is associated with higher risks of suicidal tendencies. Probably we want to address this risk. Perhaps we might want to see if anti-gay attitudes contributed to this? (Oh, no, wait, that wouldn't do AT ALL.) Regardless, I think another thing ignored by UFI here is the researchers' own conclusion where it says that "While the underlying causes of the suicidal behaviors remain unclear, future research needs to address the inadequacies in the measurement of both sexual orientation and suicidality in population-based samples." It's pretty clear here that: number one, correlation does not equal causation, and number two, the ways that sexual orientation and suicidality were measured in the study are problematic. I guess if this study saw correlations between happiness and orientation, UFI might ignore it as inconclusive. Le sigh.
All right, on to 2B. Which UFI cites as:
Ping Qin, Esben Agerbo, and Preben Bo Mortensen, "Suicide Risk inRelation to Socioeconomic, Demographic, Psychiatric, and FamilialFactors: A National Register-Based Study of All Suicides in Denmark,1981-1997." American Journal of Psychiatry 160 (2003): 765-772.
Well yeaaaa, we seem to have learned to include all of the researchers names! However, since all of the issues in 2003 are volume 160, an issue number of month would be really helpful here. Oh, look, I found it. APRIL 2003. Now, what point are they making here? Oh, yes: Researchers found "an elevated suicide risk for homosexuals" even in tolerant Denmark.
Okay, once again, I think we're confusing "tolerant Denmark" with "no one ever picks on gay people." But fine, whatever, let's see what the FULL STUDY has to say about sexual orientation, and if the researchers mention anything else about this that might have been left out (please. At this point, even though we're only on point 2B, I'd be stupid not to be skeptical of omissions on the part of UFI.)
Why, look. I seem to have found something interesting in the full text of just the ABSTRACT (I'll italicize it to make it stand out)
:RESULTS: Of the risk factors examined in the study, a history of hospitalization for psychiatric disorder was associated with the highest odds ratio and the highest attributable risk for suicide. Cohabiting or single marital status, unemployment, low income, retirement, disability, sickness-related absence from work, and a family history of suicide and/or psychiatric disorders were also significant risk factors for suicide. Moreover, these factors had different effects in male and female subjects. A psychiatric disorder was more likely to increase suicide risk in female than in male subjects. Being single was associated with higher suicide risk in male subjects, and having a young child with lower suicide risk in female subjects. Unemployment and low income had stronger effects on suicide in male subjects. Living in an urban area was associated with higher suicide risk in female subjects and a lower risk in male subjects. A family history of suicide raised suicide risk slightly more in female than in male subjects.
Hmmm. So it appears that in this review of all Danish suicides from 1981 - 1997, the biggest risk factor was history of hospitalization, not sexual orientation. As a matter of fact, since it was only in 1994 that Danish gay couples could cohabit as registered "couples" with marital benefits, any gay suicides before 1994 would have been counted as "single." After 1994, they count as "cohabiting." Let's see what the researchers have to say about this. Oh, look, I found the quote UFI mined for their point in 2B: Registered partners (i.e., homosexual couples living under the same legal status as a married couple) could be distinguished from single persons only from 1994 onward. Okay, so they might have skewed the "single" stats if they committed suicide before 1994, and would be under-represented in the "married" stats, since the researchers didn't cut off the findings at pre-and post-1994. I'm sure they address this. Let's see.
Oh, look, I found the quote that UFI mined for their point in 2B:
As for family structure, previous studies have reported that single people are more likely to commit suicide (2, 3), but our study further shows a significantly higher risk of suicide for cohabiting people even though cohabitation is almost equivalent to an officially certified marriage relationship in the eyes of most people in Denmark. Moreover, consistent with a few studies reporting that same-gender sexual orientation is associated with suicidality (30, 31), our results clearly show an elevated suicide risk for homosexuals, although this effect was likely to be underestimated because data were available only for those choosing to officially register as partners and only for the period after 1994. Taken together, our results suggest that a traditional family structure may be associated with lower suicide risk, although we cannot determine if the lower risk results from a protective effect of marriage, e.g., in the face of setbacks or difficulties, or from a marriage selection effect (32).
PF: Doesn’t that say that allowing gays to marry (not civil union, but real marriage) would lower their risk of suicide? And if we’re so concerned about suicide risks among gays, wouldn’t that be the only humane thing to do?
[redacted]: But we're not concerned about suicide rates of gays. We're concerned that our children might be gay and therefore at risk of suicide.
PF: But if you thought that your children might be gay, and at risk for suicide, wouldn't you want to protect them . . . oh, never mind.
[redacted]:
And I'm right, it does seem that the risk is likely to be underestimated because it only includes gay couples who officially registered with the state. So wow, it might be even worse, yet UFI failed to point that out (and it would have strengthened their point!) They also failed to quote-mine the better quote here, which is that "a traditional family structure may be associated with lower suicide risk." Why wouldn't they want to point this out? Well, the researchers themselves say that it is indeterminable whether this is because of "a protective effect of marriage...or from a marriage selection effect."
Okay, let's check out this marriage selection effect in a second, but first I want to point out a couple of things:
1) Oddly, the APA's rejection of homosexuality as a disorder makes the APA "suspect" in most UFI/"traditional marriage" arguments. Yet they're quite happy to use THIS research OF THE OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF THE APA to make their point. Look, people - either they're a credible resource...or they're NOT. And you've stated many many times that, in your opinion, the APA declassified homosexuality as a disorder because they are "political" and not "scientific." Well, then, I say you can't use this study. Wait, let's be more generous than that. Let's go ahead, since our stance relies heavily on the APA, and accept this resource, and see, really, what can be said about it. Shall we?
2) Before we get to that, I want to point out again that just because Denmark is more "tolerant" of gays doesn't mean they don't experience any anti-gay bias that could contribute to suicidality. This "tolerance" is fairly recent, and it would be hard to say that the salutary effects of the legalization of gay marriage could have occurred significantly in the 3 years before the study ended. Okay, on to conclusions by the researchers. (Oddly, the UFI is quick to point out that "we just don't know yet what can happen when you legalize gay marriage" when the results show something GOOD happening; then they claim that "more studies, more long-term studies, larger samples" need to be occur before they will accept the research. [Yes, shock, awe, blah blah.])
Oh, look. That's it for "homosexuality" in the study. But there's THIS interesting tidbit at the end of the study that I find telling, seeing how the US is not Western European:
Research and Clinical Implications
The socioeconomic environment in Denmark is similar to that in other Scandinavian countries and would probably also be comparable to that in most Western European countries. However, it may be difficult to generalize the findings of this study to other countries with different social, economic, or cultural conditions.
So...the researchers basically say not to generalize this study to other countries with "different social, economic, or cultural conditions." I'm guessing that prohibition of gay marriage might count as a "different....cultural condition." Strange, this doesn't seem like a good study to support anti-gay attitudes in the U.S.
PF: so, we got through 2 points out of 20. This could take a while.
Random Notes
war, iraq, afghanistan, soldiers, ptsd, brain, injuries, torquemada, gay, marriage, tradition, traditional, homosexual, homophobia, dalai lama
When I was very little, and my older sister was ignoring me (which she frequently was), I would play this game where I would poke her, gently, until she exploded. (You know how kids are.)
I mention this because if you do anything to someone often enough, poke them, call them names, lie about them, push to legislate them into permanent second class citizens, they will eventually explode. Everyone on earth will explode in this situation, no matter how calm and good natured they are. I imagine, if you did it long enough, you could poke the Dalai Lama* into exploding. (At least a month of poking 24 hours a day. That man is calm. And happy. I like the Dalai Lama.)
Angie seems not to have figured this out yet. Perhaps she is calmer than the Dalai Lama, which I doubt, or perhaps she judges the gay community just a touch more harshly than herself. You decide.
It can be daunting and intimidating to face such a virulent, violent rage that is at the core of the homosexual movement.
You know what, Angie? I'll be happy to explain this to you. Come over here where I can poke you.
--------------------
I truly hate the use of violent words and metaphors to describe what are, or should be, nonviolent events.
Volly brought up an excellent example of this in a comment:
Back in my Christian days, I took a course at church called "Becoming a Contagious Christian." The companion book had the same title. At least twice in the book and during the lectures, the author and the class leader used the expression "Hold their feet to the fire." I didn't finish the course because of that. All I could think of was Torquemada. He was pretty "contagious" too, from what I've heard.
How couldn't you think of Torquemada when hearing that? I also hate references to "war", "battle" and "revolution" that have been flying about the interwebz lately. The US is currently involved in two real life wars (or conflicts, or whatever we're calling them these days): Afghanistan and Iraq. Real life soldiers, brave men and women all, are dying. Real people are coming home without arms or legs, coming home with brain injuries and PTSD. Real people are suffering horribly, and that's not to mention the Afghanis and Iraqis that are suffering horribly.
To compare your attempts to deny same sex marriage, or your unhappiness that the GOP is no longer in charge, with what is going on in Afghanistan and Iraq right now is comtemptable. You're not in a war. You're at no risk of dying or losing a leg or not being able to write your name. Give it up.
*The Dalai Lama has his own website! Squeeee!!
When I was very little, and my older sister was ignoring me (which she frequently was), I would play this game where I would poke her, gently, until she exploded. (You know how kids are.)
I mention this because if you do anything to someone often enough, poke them, call them names, lie about them, push to legislate them into permanent second class citizens, they will eventually explode. Everyone on earth will explode in this situation, no matter how calm and good natured they are. I imagine, if you did it long enough, you could poke the Dalai Lama* into exploding. (At least a month of poking 24 hours a day. That man is calm. And happy. I like the Dalai Lama.)
Angie seems not to have figured this out yet. Perhaps she is calmer than the Dalai Lama, which I doubt, or perhaps she judges the gay community just a touch more harshly than herself. You decide.
It can be daunting and intimidating to face such a virulent, violent rage that is at the core of the homosexual movement.
You know what, Angie? I'll be happy to explain this to you. Come over here where I can poke you.
--------------------
I truly hate the use of violent words and metaphors to describe what are, or should be, nonviolent events.
Volly brought up an excellent example of this in a comment:
Back in my Christian days, I took a course at church called "Becoming a Contagious Christian." The companion book had the same title. At least twice in the book and during the lectures, the author and the class leader used the expression "Hold their feet to the fire." I didn't finish the course because of that. All I could think of was Torquemada. He was pretty "contagious" too, from what I've heard.
How couldn't you think of Torquemada when hearing that? I also hate references to "war", "battle" and "revolution" that have been flying about the interwebz lately. The US is currently involved in two real life wars (or conflicts, or whatever we're calling them these days): Afghanistan and Iraq. Real life soldiers, brave men and women all, are dying. Real people are coming home without arms or legs, coming home with brain injuries and PTSD. Real people are suffering horribly, and that's not to mention the Afghanis and Iraqis that are suffering horribly.
To compare your attempts to deny same sex marriage, or your unhappiness that the GOP is no longer in charge, with what is going on in Afghanistan and Iraq right now is comtemptable. You're not in a war. You're at no risk of dying or losing a leg or not being able to write your name. Give it up.
*The Dalai Lama has his own website! Squeeee!!
Crass Commercialism
money, adsense, commercialism, christian, atheism,
Okay, so I’m no artist on my blog. I’m pedestrian, I use proper grammar and spelling and have occasional flashes of snarky goodness, but I’m torn on the whole adsense monetization thing.
Actually, no I’m not. I’d love to adsense the fuck out of my blog and make some extra cash. I really need money. Really need it. Like now.
My problem with the whole adsense deal is that, as the above screenshot shows, the ads that appear on my (mostly) atheist blog are all ads for books on evangelism, websites about evangelism and work at home scams. I can’t willfully display ads for Christian evangelism on my (mostly) atheist blog. Morally, I have no problems making money off of fundys that buy that kind of stuff. In fact, as an atheist, I find the idea amusing. However, I can’t morally get behind shoving that sort of thing in my atheist/agnostic/pagan/etc. readers’ faces.
You know what I wouldn’t have a problem with, and I wish adsense had a suggestion box- if half the ads were for Christian things and half were for atheist or nonreligious things. See, the reason the Christian ads come up is that my blog is filled with words like “christian” and “jesus” and “evangelism”. However, my blog is also full of words like “atheism” and “atheist”, so surely the people at google could work on something. Or, maybe you could choose to opt out of certain categories of ads. People who feel makeup and weight loss advertising encourages low self esteem in women and girls could just select not to display the categories of weight loss and makeup. People who feel that internet dating is dangerous could opt out of that. I wouldn't mind that system at all.
Anyway, that’s my whingeing for today.
Actually, no I’m not. I’d love to adsense the fuck out of my blog and make some extra cash. I really need money. Really need it. Like now.
My problem with the whole adsense deal is that, as the above screenshot shows, the ads that appear on my (mostly) atheist blog are all ads for books on evangelism, websites about evangelism and work at home scams. I can’t willfully display ads for Christian evangelism on my (mostly) atheist blog. Morally, I have no problems making money off of fundys that buy that kind of stuff. In fact, as an atheist, I find the idea amusing. However, I can’t morally get behind shoving that sort of thing in my atheist/agnostic/pagan/etc. readers’ faces.
You know what I wouldn’t have a problem with, and I wish adsense had a suggestion box- if half the ads were for Christian things and half were for atheist or nonreligious things. See, the reason the Christian ads come up is that my blog is filled with words like “christian” and “jesus” and “evangelism”. However, my blog is also full of words like “atheism” and “atheist”, so surely the people at google could work on something. Or, maybe you could choose to opt out of certain categories of ads. People who feel makeup and weight loss advertising encourages low self esteem in women and girls could just select not to display the categories of weight loss and makeup. People who feel that internet dating is dangerous could opt out of that. I wouldn't mind that system at all.
Anyway, that’s my whingeing for today.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
