What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

LGBT, LGBTQ, LGBT+ Thread (2 Viewers)

timschochet said:
It isn’t. I wish it was. 
https://www.hrc.org/press-releases/new-fbi-hate-crimes-report-shows-increases-in-anti-lgbtq-attacks
Click to expand...
Sorry but… that opinion blog uses percentages but not overall numbers.  Increases of 2.2 and 2.7% to how many? And how many where homicides?  A few hundred, to be generous? In 2020 42,060 people died in car accidents.   That’s a fraction of a percent.

Using your logic, it is much more reasonable to assume that a black man walking towards you has committed a violent crime.

 
JerryG said:
Sorry but… that opinion blog uses percentages but not overall numbers.  Increases of 2.2 and 2.7% to how many? And how many where homicides?  A few hundred, to be generous? In 2020 42,060 people died in car accidents.   That’s a fraction of a percent.

Using your logic, it is much more reasonable to assume that a black man walking towards you has committed a violent crime.
Click to expand...
The report is actually quite a bit worse than what you're making it out to be.  Those 2.2% and 2.7% figures are the percentage of hate crimes that involve gender identity.  The article that tim linked to claims that this is an increase that we should be concerned about.  

To see why that's silly, suppose that in 2020 there were 90 hate crimes committed against black people and 10 hate crimes committed against LGBT people.  10% of all hate crimes are therefore LGBT-related.  Now in 2021, hate crime against blacks completely disappears, and there are only 5 hate crimes against LGBT people.  LGBT-related hate crimes have now "increased" to 100% of the pool, but it would be far more accurate to say that they fell by 50%.  

I mean, something has to be the #1 cause of hate crimes.  Identifying that something doesn't tell you anything at all about whether hate crime is getting worse or getting better, and it tells you nothing about the overall rate of hate crime.

Interest groups don't mangle statistics like this by accident.  It's done on purpose, and when you see someone lying like this, it's a reliable sign that the data aren't pointing in their favor.  Otherwise they wouldn't have to lie.

Edit: It's also worth noting that this sort of press release is intended for people like tim, who just read the headlines and don't read the body of the article, or at least don't apply any critical scrutiny.  The same kind of person who jumps to conclusions and breathlessly rushes to post them online is the same kind of person who doesn't read past the headline of a story that purports to tell him what he already "knows" to be true.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Rich Conway said:
Without comment on any of the rest, I don't know about the above.  I would contend that lots of groups mangle statistics regularly without intent.
Click to expand...
If it was just innocent error, you'd expect to see a roughly equal number of errors that overstate the problem and errors that understate the problem.  Interest groups literally never seem to make mistakes that understate the problem they're trying to address -- the errors that they make are pretty much 100% in the "overstatement" category.  That strongly implies that their errors aren't random.  They're intentional, in the sense that they flow from motivated reasoning.  

 
IvanKaramazov said:
If it was just innocent error, you'd expect to see a roughly equal number of errors that overstate the problem and errors that understate the problem.  Interest groups literally never seem to make mistakes that understate the problem they're trying to address -- the errors that they make are pretty much 100% in the "overstatement" category.  That strongly implies that their errors aren't random.  They're intentional, in the sense that they flow from motivated reasoning.  
Click to expand...
I could buy that, but there is an alternate explanation that could make sense too.  Isn't it entirely possible that interest groups are just as bad at this as most people, make mistakes all the time in both directions, but only publish the mistakes they like (not knowing they are mistakes)?

Similar result, even similar intent, but not quite as nefarious.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Rich Conway said:
I could buy that, but there is an alternate explanation that could make sense too.  Isn't it entirely possible that interest groups are just as bad at this as most people, make mistakes all the time in both directions, but only publish the mistakes they like (not knowing they are mistakes)?

Similar result, even similar intent, but not quite as nefarious.
Click to expand...
IMO, no.  It's one thing for Tim to post something erroneous on a message board.  I might give him the benefit of the doubt regarding his intentions.  But major political groups?  They are large enough, with educated people who should be able to parse statistics properly.  They don't get the benefit of the doubt.  If they're pushing something it should be factual and statistically accurate, without spin. 

 
IvanKaramazov said:
The report is actually quite a bit worse than what you're making it out to be.  Those 2.2% and 2.7% figures are the percentage of hate crimes that involve gender identity.  The article that tim linked to claims that this is an increase that we should be concerned about.  

To see why that's silly, suppose that in 2020 there were 90 hate crimes committed against black people and 10 hate crimes committed against LGBT people.  10% of all hate crimes are therefore LGBT-related.  Now in 2021, hate crime against blacks completely disappears, and there are only 5 hate crimes against LGBT people.  LGBT-related hate crimes have now "increased" to 100% of the pool, but it would be far more accurate to say that they fell by 50%.  

I mean, something has to be the #1 cause of hate crimes.  Identifying that something doesn't tell you anything at all about whether hate crime is getting worse or getting better, and it tells you nothing about the overall rate of hate crime.

Interest groups don't mangle statistics like this by accident.  It's done on purpose, and when you see someone lying like this, it's a reliable sign that the data aren't pointing in their favor.  Otherwise they wouldn't have to lie.

Edit: It's also worth noting that this sort of press release is intended for people like tim, who just read the headlines and don't read the body of the article, or at least don't apply any critical scrutiny.  The same kind of person who jumps to conclusions and breathlessly rushes to post them online is the same kind of person who doesn't read past the headline of a story that purports to tell him what he already "knows" to be true.
Click to expand...
Andy Ngo shed some light on LGBTQ hate crimes a couple years back. One of the bigger take away from from his reporting was that a decent % of these hate crimes were actually committed by the LGBTQ community. 

When the victim was LGBTQ, it would often be lumped in the hate crime or violence against an LGBTQ person when in reality it was more along the lines of domestic violence. 

Some research has pointed to the LGBTQ community having a higher % of domestic violence than the heterosexual community. 

 
Max Power said:
Some research has pointed to the LGBTQ community having a higher % of domestic violence than the heterosexual community. 
Click to expand...
Is this akin to "many people are saying" or can you point to the specific research? 

I ask this genuinely as I would be surprised if the percentage is higher so I'm curious to see what you're referencing. 

 
Zow said:
Is this akin to "many people are saying" or can you point to the specific research? 

I ask this genuinely as I would be surprised if the percentage is higher so I'm curious to see what you're referencing. 
Click to expand...
https://www.nextlevel.law/blog/2021/02/is-there-a-domestic-violence-crisis-in-the-lgbt-community/

In fact, research indicates that domestic violence occurs at the same rate, if not a higher rate in LGBT relationships when compared with heterosexual relationships. LGBT people are at higher risk for some kinds of sexual abuse than their heterosexual peers.

It looks like most articles reference the CDC numbers/report linked in the above article. 

 
Max Power said:
https://www.nextlevel.law/blog/2021/02/is-there-a-domestic-violence-crisis-in-the-lgbt-community/

In fact, research indicates that domestic violence occurs at the same rate, if not a higher rate in LGBT relationships when compared with heterosexual relationships. LGBT people are at higher risk for some kinds of sexual abuse than their heterosexual peers.

It looks like most articles reference the CDC numbers/report linked in the above article. 
Click to expand...
Thanks. 

And noted that online blogs from lawyers are to be considered good information for here on. :excited:  

 
Max Power said:
Andy Ngo shed some light on LGBTQ hate crimes a couple years back. One of the bigger take away from from his reporting was that a decent % of these hate crimes were actually committed by the LGBTQ community. 

When the victim was LGBTQ, it would often be lumped in the hate crime or violence against an LGBTQ person when in reality it was more along the lines of domestic violence. 

Some research has pointed to the LGBTQ community having a higher % of domestic violence than the heterosexual community. 
Click to expand...
Andy Ngo? 😆 Per Wiki Ngo is an American conservative journalist and a regular guest on Fox News.

Andy Ngo's claims about LGBT+ hate crimes are absurd and should not be taken seriously, particularly given his credibility issues:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Ngo

[...]

Ngô's coverage of anti-fascist groups and Muslims has been controversial, and the accuracy and credibility of his reporting have been disputed. He has been widely accused of sharing misleading and selectively edited videos,[15] described as a provocateur,[23] and accused of having links with militant right-wing groups in Portland.[27]

 
squistion said:
Andy Ngo? 😆 Per Wiki Ngo is an American conservative journalist and a regular guest on Fox News.

Andy Ngo's claims about LGBT+ hate crimes are absurd and should not be taken seriously, particularly given his credibility issues:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Ngo

[...]

Ngô's coverage of anti-fascist groups and Muslims has been controversial, and the accuracy and credibility of his reporting have been disputed. He has been widely accused of sharing misleading and selectively edited videos,[15] described as a provocateur,[23] and accused of having links with militant right-wing groups in Portland.[27]
Click to expand...
Andy Ngo (a gay man) shouldn't be taken seriously about LGBTQ issues because he also reports on Antifa and is a conservative?

Interesting theory. 

Respond to the substance not the reporter.

 
Max Power said:
Andy Ngo (a gay man) shouldn't be taken seriously about LGBTQ issues because he also reports on Antifa and is a conservative?

Interesting theory. 

Respond to the substance not the reporter.
Click to expand...
NO! you are misstating and mischaracterizing what I said.

I did not say that he shouldn't be taken seriously because he was a conservative or because he reports on Antifa, but rather because people have disputed the accuracy and credibility of what he has reported.

Here again is exactly what I day say quoting from Wiki as to why he is not deemed a credible source:

Ngô's coverage of anti-fascist groups and Muslims has been controversial, and the accuracy and credibility of his reporting have been disputed. He has been widely accused of sharing misleading and selectively edited videos,[15] described as a provocateur,[23] and accused of having links with militant right-wing groups in Portland.[27]
Click to expand...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Rich Conway said:
I could buy that, but there is an alternate explanation that could make sense too.  Isn't it entirely possible that interest groups are just as bad at this as most people, make mistakes all the time in both directions, but only publish the mistakes they like (not knowing they are mistakes)?

Similar result, even similar intent, but not quite as nefarious.
Click to expand...
Sure, and if we were talking about some random person or group, I'd be fine with that sort of charitable explanation.  I stopped giving interest groups the benefit of the doubt a long time ago though, and I've never been handed a reason to regret that decision.  Not just left-wing interest groups -- you can't really trust AEI or Heritage or Cato or whoever on the right.  By all means read their stuff, but keep your antennas up.

 
Zow said:
Is this akin to "many people are saying" or can you point to the specific research? 

I ask this genuinely as I would be surprised if the percentage is higher so I'm curious to see what you're referencing. 
Click to expand...
I've always just sort of assumed that there's more domestic abuse in gay relationships.  Not because they're gay, but because they're men.  Testosterone is a serious drug.

 
Max Power said:
Andy Ngo (a gay man) shouldn't be taken seriously about LGBTQ issues because he also reports on Antifa and is a conservative?

Interesting theory. 

Respond to the substance not the reporter.
Click to expand...
He’s using wiki as a source but conveniently omits the fact that Andy Ngo is a member of the lgbtq+ community  🏳️‍🌈 

 
HellToupee said:
He’s using wiki as a source but conveniently omits the fact that Andy Ngo is a member of the lgbtq+ community  🏳️‍🌈 
Click to expand...
So is Andrew Sullivan, along with all the members of The Log Cabin Club, which doesn't really mean that much as far as most LGBT+ issues are concerned.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
IvanKaramazov said:
I've always just sort of assumed that there's more domestic abuse in gay relationships.  Not because they're gay, but because they're men.  Testosterone is a serious drug.
Click to expand...
Assuming arguendo your assumption is correct, that would suggest that there'd be a disproportionate number of homosexual male relationships than female - which I doubt. In other words, I would assume your testosterone theory would be offset by what I suppose we'll call the estrogen theory that there would be less DV in female-female relationships and that the lesser amount would offset the greater amount. 

 
Max Power said:
So was antifa assaulting Andy Ngo an LGBTQ hate crime or an anti asian hate crime. Let's just say both. 
Click to expand...
Under the law it could be neither. It is just as likely he was attacked because he is a journalist.

Is there any proof the attack was motivated by race or anti-LGBT+ hatred? 

Just being a Asian or a member of the LGBT+ community who is attacked or assaulted does not by itself qualify as a hate crime - there has to be some racial or anti-LGBT+ animus shown. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
squistion said:
Under the law it could be neither. It is just as likely he was attacked because he is a journalist.

Is there any proof the attack was motivated by race or anti-LGBT+ hatred? 

Just being a Asian or a member of the LGBT+ community who is attacked or assaulted does not by itself qualify it as a hate crime, unless some racial or anti-LGBT+ animus has been shown. 
Click to expand...
That was his whole point to begin with...

 
IvanKaramazov said:
Sure, and if we were talking about some random person or group, I'd be fine with that sort of charitable explanation.  I stopped giving interest groups the benefit of the doubt a long time ago though, and I've never been handed a reason to regret that decision.  Not just left-wing interest groups -- you can't really trust AEI or Heritage or Cato or whoever on the right.  By all means read their stuff, but keep your antennas up.
Click to expand...
Maybe.  I just tend to think that we all overestimate the intelligence of people just because they are "official" in some capacity or other.  Anyway, didn't mean to derail your point.  Anytime anyone puts statistics in play, one should think critically about the statistics in question.

 
Statement from NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell on Raiders’ DE Carl Nassib:

https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/1407116630002438144

NFL Update @MySportsUpdate 43m

NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell on Carl Nassib:

"The NFL family is proud of Carl for courageously sharing his truth today. Representation matters. We share his hope that someday soon statements will no longer be newsworthy as we march toward full equality for LGBTQ+ community."

 
Zow said:
Assuming arguendo your assumption is correct, that would suggest that there'd be a disproportionate number of homosexual male relationships than female - which I doubt. In other words, I would assume your testosterone theory would be offset by what I suppose we'll call the estrogen theory that there would be less DV in female-female relationships and that the lesser amount would offset the greater amount. 
Click to expand...
I vaguely remember reading something about lesbians having higher rates of DV.

 
Uwe Blab said:
I’ve never seen a ratio quite like that lady is getting (bio says autistic former sex worker,  :mellow: )

Its like 2K comments versus 40 likes! The internet has finally found something we can all unite on. 
Click to expand...
I was surprised to see the WaPo willing to run that piece. 

 
Max Power said:
I was surprised to see the WaPo willing to run that piece. 
Click to expand...
Why?  Should the press suppress such an opinion of a writer?  Because its all it was…an opinion of a writer.

I don’t agree with her opinion and its not something id attend with kids…but thats my opinion.   She has hers and lays out her points and reasons.

 
sho nuff said:
Why?  Should the press suppress such an opinion of a writer?  Because its all it was…an opinion of a writer.

I don’t agree with her opinion and its not something id attend with kids…but thats my opinion.   She has hers and lays out her points and reasons.
Click to expand...
She was paid by the WaPo for that trash. It was an idea rejected by the masses. It was horrible any way you look at it.

Heck, I don't think Joe would even want posters linking BDSM images on his site, let alone advocating kids learn about it. 

If the WaPo thought they were being "brave", they weren't. They are responsible for that content. 

 
Max Power said:
She was paid by the WaPo for that trash. It was an idea rejected by the masses. It was horrible any way you look at it.

Heck, I don't think Joe would even want posters linking BDSM images on his site, let alone advocating kids learn about it. 

If the WaPo thought they were being "brave", they weren't. They are responsible for that content. 
Click to expand...
Sure and that is Joe’s decision.

 
This is a stupid hill to die on. Of course the publisher controls what content is acceptable and what goes when publishing the paper. It's called editorial discretion, and framing the debate and deciding what is legitimate for an erudite and discerning reader. So here the WaPo is giving time to someone who views BDSM behavior as a positive thing, as if there was a pressing need for legitimization of gay bongage. By publishing it, they don't necessarily sanctify it, but they sure give it a position of prominence it need not have.

What, is judgment and common sense down when it comes to the parameters within which our major newspapers publish? Hogwash. Otherwise they'd publish things that make people think a bit, like "How come the Democrats let their constituencies burn down their own cities?" But, no, we get gay BDSM and garbage like that. Talk about defining deviancy down.

 
rockaction said:
This is a stupid hill to die on. Of course the publisher controls what content is acceptable and what goes when publishing the paper. It's called editorial discretion, and framing the debate and deciding what is legitimate for an erudite and discerning reader. So here the WaPo is giving time to someone who views BDSM behavior as a positive thing, as if there was a pressing need for legitimization of gay bongage. By publishing it, they don't necessarily sanctify it, but they sure give it a position of prominence it need not have.

What, is judgment and common sense down when it comes to the parameters within which our major newspapers publish? Hogwash. Otherwise they'd publish things that make people think a bit, like "How come the Democrats let their constituencies burn down their own cities?" But, no, we get gay BDSM and garbage like that. Talk about defining deviancy down.
Click to expand...
:lmao: .  Sho thinks they just hire reporters and they get to write whatever they want. 

 
sho nuff said:
Sure and that is Joe’s decision.
Click to expand...
Max: I can't believe the Washington Post ran that article.

sho: But it's the Washington Post's decision.  Their paper, their rules.

Well, duh.  If it wasn't their paper and if they didn't make the rules, it wouldn't make much sense to criticize them for the decisions they make about how to run their paper and what rules to implement.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Henry Ford
An Older, Conservative Man's Viewpoint After A Semester Of First Hand Experience In An Ivy League School
Replies
12
Views
1K
timschochet
timschochet
adonis
High school paper has compelling interview with Defense Secretary Mattis
Replies
26
Views
1K
Da Guru
Da Guru
BobbyLayne
The 25 Greatest Films of the 21st Century So Far
2 3 4
Replies
155
Views
6K
El Floppo
El Floppo

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Top