Is it true that the ratio of heterosexual to homosexual is 10:1? I read this somewhere just recently and I’m curious to know if it’s true.
While I have no cites (I’ll let someone who knows their stuff get to that), I’ve read that this figure is actually highly exaggerated. From what I recall, it’s closer to 100:3 or so.
Colin
I doubt its 100/3, I know about equal numbers of both, but that may be to the big city environment where people are more comfortable with the idea. Does it make any difference?
Just for the record, though, if 1 in 10 people are gay, then the ratio of heterosexuals to homosexuals is 9:1, not 10:1.
I’m sure somebody will come in with cites (or I will if I develop a few more free minutes) but I seem to recall the the more documents numbers are 3-6%. That is just from memory though so don’t put it in an essay or anything.
The 10%-are-gay figure comes from a widely discredited Kinsey study dating back to the 1950’s. I’ve heard better estimates that suggest the real number is somewhere in the 2-5% range, but I don’t have any links to point you to.
I had always heard that only 2 percent of the population is homosexual.
And I also never refer to homosexuals as “gay” since gay means happy or light hearted.
This page at the Family Research Institute quotes lots of different research and explains Kinsey’s shortcomings.
It is true that the famous Kinsey statistic of “1 in 10” resulted from serious methodological flaws in Kinsey’s selection of participants, and thus it cannot be trusted.
Yet while there is a fair bit of it, there is little or no particularly reliable research on this question because of the significant tendency for many so-called “closeted” homosexuals to misreport their true sexuality. Since these polls rely on honest self-reporting and yet many homosexuals prefer to keep their sexual identity private, there is an unknown but presumably large error in ANY such results. In other words, we don’t know that the 10% figure is wrong, but only that the methods used to calculate it were improper and very unreliable.
But until such time as an objective means of determining sexual preference becomes available and is employed in this research, no one will have reliable data on just what proportion of the population consists of homosexuals.
The latest (unreliable and subjective) research has come up with a range of estimates running from less than 1% of the population to a high of 8% in populous cities; a very wide range indeed. While in my own subjective opinion estimates of greater than 8% seem unrealistically high, in the absence of objective data independent of self-reports, it is not entirely out of the question.
So the most accurate thing we can say about the percentage of homosexuals in society is: No one knows.
You must be one of those language-stifling, smug, pedantic prigs who refuses to apply the word “computer” to refer to the electronic device you use to post here because the word meant a person who performed calculations!
The world would be better off with a great deal less of such hate-fueled pettifoggery, I’d imagine.
Oh, sure. Let’s trust one of the most ignorant anti-gay hate groups in the world to provide accurate information about homosexuality!
And if you want to learn about the Holocaust, then a reliable source of information would naturally be the “I Love Hitler” site and other neo-Nazi web pages.
Sheesh.
Cite, please, from a modern dictionary, using the restricted definition you propose?
The English language is constantly adapting, and while your limited definition may have been an accurate description of the common usage 30 years ago, I don’t think it would still be accepted as accurate.
For example, the Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary gives definitions related to homosexuality as the primary meanings of the word:
So, I suppose if you’re content to describe yourself as “old-fashioned” you can use the word “gay” with a restricted meaning, but I wouldn’t get your knickers in a twist if other people choose to use it in the more modern sense.
It’s a tricky issue, because one can wreak all sorts of havoc with the numbers by narrowing or widening ones definition of what is and is not homosexual. A narrow definition would be someone who has never had a heterosexual experience and is currently sexually active. A broad definition would be anyone who has ever been attracted in any way to someone of the same sex. The former extreme eliminates many from the count who should probably be included, such as the common case of those who due to societal pressures tried to force themselves to be hetero but later became true to their homo nature, or bisexuals who only date outside their sex a low percentage of the time. The latter extreme is probably too inclusive, since pretty much everyone would fall under that umbrella (whether they admit it or not).
As Mark Twain aptly put it, “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.”
The issue of who’s gay and who’s not is also, IMHO, a moot issue right up there with the question of who belongs to what minority.
If you want to accuse someone of priggishness or hatefulness, you will do so in the BBQ Pit but not in General Questions. Don’t make this mistake again.
Since there doesn’t appear to be consensus on the question, I’ll move this thread to Great Debates.
bibliophage
moderator GQ
The whole idea behind the one in ten figure is a flawed interpretation of kinsey’s study. Before you can say x amount of people are y, you have to define y - that is do you mean exclusively gay?
Here are excerpts from the actual study.
In my opinion , i believe that the percentage is more than 10%, because of all the studies that u administer not that many gay ppl are out and/or comfortable with discussing it with the world at large…these studies include a small fraction of the gay population that it cant possible be correct. If we weren’t worried about all the homophobic ppl 
in the world then we might all stand up a take a head count. Until then we will never (in my opinion) get an accurate figure. There are’nt that many ppl out there that are either fully gay or straight so we need a national count of all the ppl in the rainbow of life, then we will be able to get an accurate percentage… I hope that this comment was helpful and hope there are others out there who feel the same way… ttfn baltotop:) 
this is not a post. a post is a thing somewhat like a pole that sticks up out of the ground. signs are often put on it. i refuse to call this a post.
:rolleyes:
Paging Dr. Godwin…
http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/jargon/html/entry/Godwin’s-Law.html
fixed link - DrMatrix
The recent (1999-2001) national survey of sexual attitudes in Britain suggests a figure of 1 in 19 men, 1 in 20 women. A fair amount of thought went into the methodology for this survey, so I’m inclined to regard it as pretty reliable (for the UK anyway). A discussion of the results can be found here. I understand a more complete analysis is available through The Lancet’s website, but only to paying subscribers.
Here is a link to a website that discusses the results of several studies:
www.allhere
It states the number in the US is probably 2-3%.
As Mr Wright points out it is probably higher in in the UK.
As for the assertion that surveys are inaccurate because the respondents do not want to be subjected to adverse reaction, all surveys done by responsible groups are totally anonymous and the results can not be traced back to the respondents.
The correct link this time:
http://www.allaboutsex.org/KidsSpeakOut_Display.cfm?INDEX=5098