Is Homosexuality On The Increase?

[Steven]

Forgive my ignorance but are these facts or opinions?:

- much of the controversial gender-realignment / cross-identified behaviours seen (especially amongst younger people) is primarily a form of defensive virginity

- ...the inescapable biological fact that males are modified females)

 

[StinkyYankee]

Also sexual health services talk of 'men who have sex with men' (MSM) as a different 'group' than those men who openly identify as gay/lgbtq+/queer which is very much a Western concept and arguably a political statement as much as anything else (especially during the 70s-90s where there was the push for an equal age of consent and gay marriage).

Well, I'd say interest in members of your own sex and the the identification of being gay/lgbtq+/queer are a world apart, to be honest. The only thing required to be homosexual is to be homosexual, but to be part of any social movement/identity group/culture/social circle is going to require at least a few things more. You need involvement and to keep up with the things going on around you, etc etc. Forgive my nerdiness, but it's like being a fan of a piece of media without ever getting involved with the fanbase.

Forgive my ignorance but are these facts or opinions?:

- much of the controversial gender-realignment / cross-identified behaviours seen (especially amongst younger people) is primarily a form of defensive virginity

- ...the inescapable biological fact that males are modified females)

On the second point, he is entirely factually correct. On both a chromosomal and embryonic level, males are modified females. This is just how most animals with 2 sexes work. The male sex chromosomes tend to be the mutant, and on an embryonic level most of the groundwork is laid out the same for males and females until the male genetics kick in and start making some changes to the reproductive system.

On the first point, I can't really comment. There is great contention in the world of science on such matters and I don't want to state an opinion on the matter either way. In my opinion, facts muddled by opinion end up creating politics, and politics are to be avoided on this forum. I won't get on anyone's case about their own beliefs in any context but it would be wise for my own sake not to invoke any of my own politics.

 

[StinkyYankee]

The question posed by this thread is relevant & interesting, and is extremely difficult to answer with a singular yes or no.

Deflection statements such as "human homosexuality has always existed at statistical levels similar to the present day, and the perception of any increased incidence is merely a function of broader societal acceptance" are spectacularly missing the point.

There is absolutely no doubt that (particularly in the developed & affluent parts of world) there has been a massive expansion of those openly-declaring themselves to be in long-term same-sex non-reproducing relationships (or, are happily living in states of overt homosexual casual semi-promiscuity).

The quasi-equalised way in which society now accepts this (and the manner in which it is represented & projected by our technomagnified media & the arts) is most intriguing in all sorts of Fortean ways, and I think nobody could disagree that our permanently-universal mechanisms of communication & contact provide a validative & enabling conduit for all varieties of human behaviour (in an extremely intimate way that nearly everyone massively underestimates).

I agree. There's definitely something *queer* (that's a joke there, boy, ya almost missed it!) about the magnitude of change. There are plenty of questions or explanations of a fortean nature. The mouse utopia, for example. Or, here's a question: does rate of homosexual people change in gradients across different places, like if I had to guess a map of the US might show more gay people in major cities vs in the many "flyover" states. And, stepping away from my admittedly materialist perspective on things, are there spiritual implications? Perhaps even zany theories like, maybe only so many new spirits can be made so quick, and homosexuality might be a way to choke back the rate?

- widespread open declarative homosexuality in the western world (as opposed simply to acts of homosexual intercourse) can be seen as a product of wealth, health and societal stasis

This sort of goes hand in hand with the general model of the rate at which us human animals reproduce. Generally, the poorer the person, the more children they will have, and the richer the person, the less. It reminds me with reproduction strategies employed in the wild where the more an animal contributes to the welfare of the their offspring, typically the less offspring they have. Like how an elephant only can have one baby at a time and it takes two years to gestate and then grows up under the supervision of many adults, vs how butterflies just have to lay a few hundred eggs under a leaf and cross their fingers and hope their kids do well. The less your situation allows you to provide for your children, the more you have to have in hopes of some of them making it in the world. Perhaps, in a sense, the whole not having kids thing is something that can happen when a person's life is so well off (not necessarily free or the life you want or rich, just "well off" in the sense that you've had an education and can afford food and shelter), that the amount of kids you instinctually want rolls down to 0?

- the parallels (and crossovers) between open/acknowledged neurodivergence and 'out' homosexuality are inescapably-evident (and relevant in any analysis)

See, this is another one of those quasi-political topics that I can't really comment on but I will acknowledge is, like, a good question that is muddled by politics.

- there is almost certainly a correlation between a major strand of creativity (cf expression, communication) and homosexuality- this is a blunt and untuned statement that includes a kernel of truth

Man I went to art school. Denying it is most common in people trying to avoid "stereotype threat". Most artistic people aren't gay, and most gay people aren't autistic, but I'd say the ratio of gay people in touch with their artistic side vs the gay people who aren't is higher than than the ratio of straight people who are in touch with their artistic side vs the straight people who aren't.

- the relative lack of sexual dimorphism in humans (and the inescapable biological fact that males are modified females) means that at the level of species we are inevitably on a continuum more of similarity rather than difference

I'd say human sexual dimorphism is actually a lot more distinct than people give it credit for, but life in the first world generally results in situations where those differences either matter less, are harder to notice, or, in individual humans, are brought closer.

 

[Steven]

On the second point, he is entirely factually correct. On both a chromosomal and embryonic level, males are modified females. This is just how most animals with 2 sexes work. The male sex chromosomes tend to be the mutant, and on an embryonic level most of the groundwork is laid out the same for males and females until the male genetics kick in and start making some changes to the reproductive system.

On the first point, I can't really comment. There is great contention in the world of science on such matters and I don't want to state an opinion on the matter either way. In my opinion, facts muddled by opinion end up creating politics, and politics are to be avoided on this forum. I won't get on anyone's case about their own beliefs in any context but it would be wise for my own sake not to invoke any of my own politics.

Thank you for the information regarding 'point 2'. I was totally unaware of that fact, previously.

Regarding the first point: maybe Ermintruder will clarify it later.

 

[uair01]

He did joke that I "was safe" as he didn't fancy me and had seen me in the changing rooms. I wasn't sure whether to feel offended or complimented

So you've been "friendzoned" I have a gay colleague and we have very pleasant chats about everything, but I would never dare to ask how attractive I am looking from the gay side (AFAIK I'm plain vanilla hetero).
Anecdotally: a famous Dutch gay author writes about some of his trysts in Spain, and he mentions how saying that he liked both men and women (that was a deliberate lie!) was especially exciting for his gay companions ...

What interests me in this, is if lgbtq+ predisposition and behaviour is actually increasing (rather than the stats being explained entirely by increased openness) then what could explain such a phenomena?

Anecdotally: it might even be the other way around. I've been told that at gay meeting points there are also some hetero men, who are not gay, but who, being men, prefer uncomplicated sex without all the extra attentions that women tend to expect ...

 

[Ermintruder]

Forgive my ignorance but are these facts or opinions?:

- much of the controversial gender-realignment / cross-identified behaviours seen (especially amongst younger people) is primarily a form of defensive virginity

Regarding the first point: maybe Ermintruder will clarify it later.

It is an opinion, but based upon quite a lot of (incidental) observational analysis and careful consideration....to the extent that I could (and maybe should) expand it into a robust hypothesis.

@StinkyYankee - many thanks for your upvote/validative support for my assertion that us, mammalian males, are modified females.

Being 'higher' primates or prehensile bipeds doesn't somehow give us a magical claim for bypass in this respect. I have often wondered if this simple (scary) fundimental fact is why (subjectively) there are many times more gay men than there are gay women....and apparently many bazillion times more Gay(Ver2) trans-women (male sex but female gender...whilst not mentioning autogynephyliacs) than there are trans-men (female sex but male gender)

 

[Steven]

...all the extra attentions that women tend to expect

Like acknowledgement of existence, for example.

 

[Yithian]

much of the controversial gender-realignment / cross-identified behaviours seen (especially amongst younger people) is primarily a form of defensive virginity

Forgive my ignorance but are these facts or opinions?:

- much of the controversial gender-realignment / cross-identified behaviours seen (especially amongst younger people) is primarily a form of defensive virginity

- ...the inescapable biological fact that males are modified females)

It is an opinion, but based upon quite a lot of (incidental) observational analysis and careful consideration....to the extent that I could (and maybe should) expand it into a robust hypothesis.

Just a pre-emptive nudge to remind posters that we shall not be exploring answers to the fashionable question 'What is a woman?'

 

[Paul_Exeter]

So you've been "friendzoned" I have a gay colleague and we have very pleasant chats about everything, but I would never dare to ask how attractive I am looking from the gay side (AFAIK I'm plain vanilla hetero).
Anecdotally: a famous Dutch gay author writes about some of his trysts in Spain, and he mentions how saying that he liked both men and women (that was a deliberate lie!) was especially exciting for his gay companions ...

Anecdotally: it might even be the other way around. I've been told that at gay meeting points there are also some hetero men, who are not gay, but who, being men, prefer uncomplicated sex without all the extra attentions that women tend to expect ...

I can see how that would be the case. Women have traditionally had to adopt the role of 'gatekeepers' to sex due to the very real possibility of pregnancy and thus lifelong consequences. Also studies show that women have a much more emotional approach to sex than men. It is all fascinating stuff and has historically suffered from a lack of academic research due to religious and legal obstacles.

 

[ramonmercado]

Just a pre-emptive nudge to remind posters that we shall not be exploring answers to the fashionable question 'What is a woman?'

Just a request for clarification: are you saying that biological/scientific facts cannot be cited here, exempli gratia: a definition from a medical text?

 

[escargot]

… and mail.

I still don't know what this means.

 

[escargot]

Like acknowledgement of existence, for example.

An extreme example being the glory hole experience.

 

[escargot]

Also sexual health services talk of 'men who have sex with men' (MSM) as a different 'group' than those men who openly identify as gay/lgbtq+/queer which is very much a Western concept and arguably a political statement as much as anything else (especially during the 70s-90s where there was the push for an equal age of consent and gay marriage).

Our old friend Laud Humphreys explained all this in his splendid work The Tearoom Trade.
We have a discussion of his work somewhere hereabouts.

Here it is in a free PDF format -
The Tearoom Trade

 

[escargot]

some hetero men, who are not gay, but who, being men, prefer uncomplicated sex without all the extra attentions that women tend to expect ...

They could always pay sex workers.

 

[uair01]

Maybe not increasing, but definitely changing. Recently I've stumbled on this fascinating book:
https://www.bitebackpublishing.com/books/something-for-the-weekend
(Note: This is also a very interesting publisher overall.)

The most fascinating part was in the last chapter, where the author explains how this gay subculture is enabled by modern technology, and couldn't exist without. I wonder how many other subcultures are fuelled by this:

[...] Let’s dig deeper into something we have just been talking about: technology. Earlier, we looked at all the things that the progression of technology has allowed us to do now that smartphone-based living has become part and parcel of modern life. Yes, we can all now apply for a credit card, watch a movie and order food by using hand-held devices, but in the context of gay men and how we communicate, there has also been another smartphone revolution.

[...] Today, though, thanks to end-to-end encryption messaging provided by WhatsApp, it’s much easier. I can order anything I like from a dealer using this anti-snooping bit of kit. Thanks, Silicon Valley!

[...] For ease and haste, I might offer to get the supplier to my property quickly, perhaps by sending a car to collect him: Uber offers a quick and convenient service that is cheaper than any non-public mode of transport which isn’t public. Uber is also safe and discreet, and of course it can be easily accessed by your smartphone. I know some dealers who depend on Uber for their entire business operation.

[...] There’s a good reason why chemsex was never as popular in the past as it is today; it used to require so much more bloody effort. You didn’t have a secure line into a drug dealer’s pocket. And those dealers were a lot more cautious about who they supplied to and how. You had to meet would-be partygoers in a venue like a club, and then invite them back to your place using the ancient art of conversation. You depended on cabs, which became expensive once you hit the third tariff, or on the dreaded night bus.

And you also needed cash. It’s a hell of a step forward when you can pay for your drugs with your credit card, and when you can simply ping it into someone’s account in about a minute. The ease with which all of this complexity can now be handled is a major reason why chemsex has more than just flourished in today’s world.

 

[escargot]

Maybe not increasing, but definitely changing. Recently I've stumbled on this fascinating book:
https://www.bitebackpublishing.com/books/something-for-the-weekend
(Note: This is also a very interesting publisher overall.)

The most fascinating part was in the last chapter, where the author explains how this gay subculture is enabled by modern technology, and couldn't exist without. I wonder how many other subcultures are fuelled by this:

[...] Let’s dig deeper into something we have just been talking about: technology. Earlier, we looked at all the things that the progression of technology has allowed us to do now that smartphone-based living has become part and parcel of modern life. Yes, we can all now apply for a credit card, watch a movie and order food by using hand-held devices, but in the context of gay men and how we communicate, there has also been another smartphone revolution.

[...] Today, though, thanks to end-to-end encryption messaging provided by WhatsApp, it’s much easier. I can order anything I like from a dealer using this anti-snooping bit of kit. Thanks, Silicon Valley!

[...] For ease and haste, I might offer to get the supplier to my property quickly, perhaps by sending a car to collect him: Uber offers a quick and convenient service that is cheaper than any non-public mode of transport which isn’t public. Uber is also safe and discreet, and of course it can be easily accessed by your smartphone. I know some dealers who depend on Uber for their entire business operation.

[...] There’s a good reason why chemsex was never as popular in the past as it is today; it used to require so much more bloody effort. You didn’t have a secure line into a drug dealer’s pocket. And those dealers were a lot more cautious about who they supplied to and how. You had to meet would-be partygoers in a venue like a club, and then invite them back to your place using the ancient art of conversation. You depended on cabs, which became expensive once you hit the third tariff, or on the dreaded night bus.

And you also needed cash. It’s a hell of a step forward when you can pay for your drugs with your credit card, and when you can simply ping it into someone’s account in about a minute. The ease with which all of this complexity can now be handled is a major reason why chemsex has more than just flourished in today’s world.

BUY THIS BOOK​

not available

 

[gordonrutter]

Just a request for clarification: are you saying that biological/scientific facts cannot be cited here, exempli gratia: a definition from a medical text?

Clarification.

This is a thread about the increase in homosexuality--not transgenderism.

We don't want 'biological facts' about who is and who is not this or that sex because this is a thread about the increase in homosexuality--not transgenderism.

And from past experience, transgender debate = culture war and drives people away and leads to thread closure etc, etc...

 

[ramonmercado]

Clarification.

This is a thread about the increase in homosexuality--not transgenderism.

We don't want 'biological facts' about who is and who is not this or that sex because this is a thread about the increase in homosexuality--not transgenderism.

And from past experience, transgender debate = culture war and drives people away and leads to thread closure etc, etc...

Good, in that case people should discuss LGB which are sexual orientations and not the rest of the alphabet soup which has attached itself to the LGB community.

Straight people think that their become queer if they dye their hair blur. They along with BDSMers, fethishists, and Furries have taken over Pride and driven LGBs like myself away.

That might explain why there is a perception that homosexuality is on the increase.

 

[Mythopoeika]

Straight people think that their become queer if they dye their hair blur. They along with BDSMers, fethishists, and Furries have taken over Pride and driven LGBs like myself away.

Yes. Maybe Pride marches have had their day and are no longer relevant?

 

[StinkyYankee]

Anecdotally: it might even be the other way around. I've been told that at gay meeting points there are also some hetero men, who are not gay, but who, being men, prefer uncomplicated sex without all the extra attentions that women tend to expect ...

A man is what he does. Those are not straight men no matter how you figure it.

Women have traditionally had to adopt the role of 'gatekeepers' to sex due to the very real possibility of pregnancy and thus lifelong consequences. Also studies show that women have a much more emotional approach to sex than men. It is all fascinating stuff and has historically suffered from a lack of academic research due to religious and legal obstacles.

Women generally control the rate of sex in humans.

Just a request for clarification: are you saying that biological/scientific facts cannot be cited here, exempli gratia: a definition from a medical text?

Yes. There are plenty of topics with scientific or fortean backgrounds that have been bescmirched and muddied by the dirty, dirty hand of politics. If bigfoot was a topic of political contention for some ungodly reason, he too would have to be put out of our minds on this forum for the time being.

They could always pay sex workers.

I think most men prefer to have sex with someone who wants to have sex with them rather than pay them, although that could simply be a good excuse to explain why they're tooootally not gay even though they've elected to have gay sex.

Anyways, back to the main topic of the thread. What if it is something silly? What if like, we aren't being more gay as a species at all, we just kind of think we are because of how much more prevalent "gay representation" is these days? Like some sort of mass hysteria, but in the silliest way where we just kind of assume more people we know are gay than really are.

 

[ramonmercado]

Yes. Maybe Pride marches have had their day and are no longer relevant?

Or bring them back to when they were family friendly events before the fethishists took over.

 

[Steven]

Don't get me started on Bigfoot's political career - I voted for him and yet whenever MP's surgeries were scheduled he was nowhere to be seen.

 

[uair01]

To get back on topic again, I'm curious about solid statistics but I've only found fragments at the Dutch Bureau of Statistics.
But these are interesting anyway:

More women than men marry someone of the same sex. Only in the first two years after implementation was the number of male couples higher. Over the past five years, an average of 751 marriages between two women and 619 marriages between two men were concluded annually. Fewer marriages were concluded in 2020 than in previous years, including among opposite-sex couples. Especially during the first wave of the corona pandemic, the number of marriages fell. The figures for 2020 are not yet final.



Women's [lesbian] marriages more likely to end in divorce
Over 400 marriages of same-sex couples break down every year. Marriages of two women do not last as long as marriages of two men or of a man and a woman. Of women who married another woman in 2010, 26 per cent were divorced after just under 10 years (on 1 January 2020). This is almost twice as many as for married male couples (14 per cent). The percentage of divorced couples consisting of a man and a woman is similar to that of male couples. Of them, 16 per cent were divorced after 10 years. Even for couples who married in earlier or later years and for couples who entered into a registered partnership, unions consisting of two women most often end in divorce or separation.



And gay couples have the highest income (that's already well known in advertising IIRC)

Of all registered cohabiting couples (including married couples), male couples have the highest joint income from work or business, known as primary income. Their average gross annual income is 15 thousand euros higher than that of heterosexual couples. The incomes of female couples and heterosexual couples are almost equal.

 

[escargot]

Or bring them back to when they were family friendly events before the fethishists took over.

My local Pride event was about as wholesome as it could possibly be.

 

[Frideswide]

My local Pride event was about as wholesome as it could possibly be.

yeah - I always go and watch (used to walk ) and I enjoy the waving and being given windmills, mardi gras beads and... what's the name for those coiled things you blow and there's a feather on the end? Wonderful costimes but really just a family day out. It may change as the day goes on I suppose?

 

[Mythopoeika]

yeah - I always go and watch (used to walk ) and I enjoy the waving and being given windmills, mardi gras beads and... what's the name for those coiled things you blow and there's a feather on the end? Wonderful costimes but really just a family day out. It may change as the day goes on I suppose?

Party blowers, also known as noisemakers, blowouts, or party horns, are festive items that produce a noise when blown into, commonly used at parties and celebrations to enhance the atmosphere and excitement.

 

[StinkyYankee]

yeah - I always go and watch (used to walk ) and I enjoy the waving and being given windmills, mardi gras beads and... what's the name for those coiled things you blow and there's a feather on the end? Wonderful costimes but really just a family day out. It may change as the day goes on I suppose?

It really depends on where you are and how big the event is and also your personal definition of what you consider family friendly.

 

[Frideswide]

your personal definition of what you consider family friendly.

What I'm happy to watch while being an extra lap and safe arms for children from church! Last couple of years we've had a sign that said The Lord is My Shepherd and He Knows I'm Gay. Which is a personal touchstone for several of us.

After a certain point of people assembling to watch we put the sign away because being the safe lap and arms is more important - and unless we grow more arms we can't do both!

 

[escargot]

It really depends on where you are and how big the event is and also your personal definition of what you consider family friendly.

We can depend on parents to decide what is family-friendly. They know what's best for their children and it's their opinion that matters.
My local theatre hosts drag queen storytelling sessions for young children. We love our LGBT+ sisters and brothers.

 

[Swifty]

We can depend on parents to decide what is family-friendly. They know what's best for their children and it's their opinion that matters.
My local theatre hosts drag queen storytelling sessions for young children. We love our LGBT+ sisters and brothers.

Don't forget Gay Zombies Skarg ..