# Homosexuality propaganda. Is there anything to it? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 22, 2016, 11:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexuality-propaganda-is-there-anything-to-it/769324 "2016-10-22T11:50:02Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2016, 3:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexuality-propaganda-is-there-anything-to-it/769324/61 "2016-10-23T15:51:36Z")
The only “propaganda” is the attempt to make people more empathetic towards the LGBT community. If that’s propaganda, then I’m 100% in support of it ---
**Author:** ![Nava](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/da6949/32.png) [@Nava](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nava)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2016, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexuality-propaganda-is-there-anything-to-it/769324/62 "2016-10-23T15:56:18Z")
> [@alexidsa](#): > > Agree. That’s the approach I eventually came to while talking with average Russian homophobes. You don’t prove it’s okay to be gay, it’s not working with those people. You just ask why a person hates/dislikes gays and then logically/scientifically destroy this argument (perfectly in a nice way so a person does not feel humiliated). But that wasn’t your original question. They’re two separate ones. Heck, answering this for someone who truly is a religious, traditionalist Christian is actually very easy: “God made gays. Are you saying He made a mistake?” ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2016, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexuality-propaganda-is-there-anything-to-it/769324/63 "2016-10-23T16:53:54Z")
Playing devil’s advocate, here are some risks of homosexuals. 1. Gays have higher rates of drug abuse 2. Gays have higher rates of suicide 3. Gay tolerance has resulted in higher admitted rates of LGBT 4. Gays have higher rates of HIV and STDs Now as for points 1 and 2, you can very easily argue that the reason this happens is because of societal pressure and rejection. Gay teens have higher rates of homelessness, but that is cause vs effect. If people said ‘we should oppress gays because gays are more likely to end up homeless’ that is putting the cart before the horse, gay kids end up homeless due to social prejudice against them, which is then used as a justification to mistreat them. It is no different than in the south under jim Crow where they’d say ‘blacks are poor and do not have education, that is why we need to oppress them’ and then they’d oppress them by denying them access to financial opportunities or education. It is circular logic. GLBTers are more likely to be homeless, attempt suicide, use drugs, etc. which can be used to increase social prejudice against them, which can increase rates of homelessness, suicide and drug abuse. As for point 3, looking at polls like [this](http://content.gallup.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/mnnbqbxtxeugyg9-pb-p0a.gif)it shows that as society has become more tolerant of LGBT lifestyles, more people admit to them. So in that regards, I guess you could make the argument that gays are encouraging others to be gay. But what is really happening is people who are already gay and deep in the closet are coming out. But the % of people 18-29 who admit to being LGBT is over 3x higher than people age 65+. However the % who say no is about the same. So I think there is a kernel of truth to the idea that ‘gays encourage others to be gay’, if you look at polls like that. Millennials are over 3x more likely to admit to being LGBT than people age 65+. But it isn’t because there are more gays, it is just that younger people feel more comfortable coming out of the closet. But if one wanted, one could interpret it as GLBT lifestyles encouraging others to ‘adopt’ the GLBT lifestyle. Point 4 is true. Anal sex (which obviously heterosexuals can engage in also) transmits HIV far better than oral or vaginal (however one would assume gay men who only engage in oral sex would have extremely low rates of HIV, probably lower than heterosexuals who engage in penis in vagina sex). If a culture wants to prohibit homosexuality, they could look at the higher rates of HIV and other STDs and use that as a reason to oppress. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2016, 5:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexuality-propaganda-is-there-anything-to-it/769324/64 "2016-10-23T17:13:02Z")
As to that last point, doesn’t the math mean that we should encourage lesbianism? Which, in a way, is always _the_ question: if, statistically, gays were found to have a slightly _lower_ rate of drug use or suicide or whatever, would we promptly spearhead a movement to discourage – or simply criminalize – heterosexuality? Do we, in fact, actually care all that much about that metric? Or would we just file that finding under ‘mildly interesting trivia’ and of course keep on with our straight selves? ---
**Author:** ![Roderick\_Femm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/roderick_femm/32/14875_2.png) [@Roderick\_Femm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Roderick_Femm)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2016, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexuality-propaganda-is-there-anything-to-it/769324/65 "2016-10-23T18:15:42Z")
> [@alexidsa](#): > > There’re a lot of reasons to be concerned about sexual orientation. Let’s say it may cause harm to others. In case of homosexuality there were claims that due to relationships instability it may harm children. There were similar claims about HIV (gay disease, you know…). All those claims turned out to be false in case of homosexuality. > > Bu let’s take pedophilia as another example of sexual orientation (I assume here it’s a sexual orientation while it’s still debatable). There’re reasons to be concerned, aren’t there? Unfortunately the way people are concerned about pedophiles is very inhumane pretty much everywhere besides Germany. There is no “debate” about pedophilia being a sexual orientation. And putting that assertion in this conversation about homosexuality is extremely disingenuous. I don’t believe anything about your supposed motivations for making this thread for a minute. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2016, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexuality-propaganda-is-there-anything-to-it/769324/66 "2016-10-23T20:06:42Z")
> [@alexidsa](#): > > Any homophobe can answer something like “my son is 3 years old, he saw pride parade and now he thinks it’s okay to be gay, he is brainwashed by their propaganda” and your argument will not be very convincing for him. I thought the argument was that the “propaganda” turned people gay, not turned them tolerant. The tolerant part I can see. In fact, one big reason for gay pride parades and other such things like sympathetic gay characters in the media is to increase tolerance. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2016, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexuality-propaganda-is-there-anything-to-it/769324/67 "2016-10-23T20:13:51Z")
I suspect the “okay to be gay” phrase indicated that it was okay for the 3-year old to become gay, not to simply tolerate homosexuality. The hypothetical speaker is certainly not tolerant. ---
**Author:** ![Merneith](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/57b2e6/32.png) [@Merneith](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merneith)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2016, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexuality-propaganda-is-there-anything-to-it/769324/68 "2016-10-23T20:20:53Z")
> [@alexidsa](#): > > Let’s say it may cause harm to others. Why should we say that? The people who claim that homosexuals will harm non-homosexuals bear the obligation to provide evidence for their claims. Tell them that they need to prove that homosexuality harms non-homosexuals in some way. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2016, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexuality-propaganda-is-there-anything-to-it/769324/69 "2016-10-23T21:20:07Z")
> [@Merneith](#): > > Why should we say that? The people who claim that homosexuals will harm non-homosexuals bear the obligation to provide evidence for their claims. Tell them that they need to prove that homosexuality harms non-homosexuals in some way. I also am curious why we should assume that which the OP has yet to prove. ---
**Author:** ![Broomstick](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/broomstick/32/246_2.png) [@Broomstick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Broomstick)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2016, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexuality-propaganda-is-there-anything-to-it/769324/70 "2016-10-23T22:49:58Z")
> [@alexidsa](#): > > Any homophobe can answer something like “my son is 3 years old, he saw pride parade and now he thinks it’s okay to be gay, he is brainwashed by their propaganda” and your argument will not be very convincing for him. There are some people you just aren’t ever going to convince, period. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2016, 12:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexuality-propaganda-is-there-anything-to-it/769324/71 "2016-10-24T00:51:29Z")
> [@alexidsa](#): > > Bu let’s take pedophilia as another example of sexual orientation (I assume here it’s a sexual orientation while it’s still debatable). There’re reasons to be concerned, aren’t there? Unfortunately the way people are concerned about pedophiles is very inhumane pretty much everywhere besides Germany. What does pedophilia have to do with being gay? And why is it somehow “inhumane” to be concerned about pedophiles? :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2016, 1:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexuality-propaganda-is-there-anything-to-it/769324/72 "2016-10-24T01:04:48Z")
> [@Guinastasia](#): > > And why is it somehow “inhumane” to be concerned about pedophiles? :dubious: The claim is that everyone else treats pedophiles inhumanely while Germany treats them humanely. That is probably a reference to [this program](http://www.upworthy.com/a-provocative-treatment-program-for-pedophiles-in-germany-is-raising-some-eyebrows), (that appears to be a small, privately organized effort). ---
**Author:** ![RivkahChaya](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rivkahchaya/32/8919_2.png) [@RivkahChaya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RivkahChaya)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2016, 1:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexuality-propaganda-is-there-anything-to-it/769324/73 "2016-10-24T01:29:21Z")
> [@Guinastasia](#): > > What does pedophilia have to do with being gay? And why is it somehow “inhumane” to be concerned about pedophiles? :dubious: I think the point was that no one is concerned about pedophilia, until it’s a crime. If someone admits to pedophilic feelings upon which the person has not acted, in order to ask for help, there is no help, and often skepticism on the point that one could not have acted. Back to the gay thing: personally, I think that the more that gay people are accepted by the general public, the more the gay subculture will fade. For example, there used to be lots of “Womyn’s” bookstores, that were feminist hubs, but also the only place for lesbian literature and publications. They also occasionally sold things like _The Advocate_ and it was the only place gay men could get it without a subscription. Those stores flourished in the 70s and 80s, but begin to disappear in the 90s, when regular bookstores started having Gay/Lesbian sections. When gay people can hold hands, make out, and dance together in any bar, gay bars will fade. Now that Wanda Sykes has specials on comedy central, it becomes less necessary to have special venues for lesbian comics. It’s kinda like when Jackie Robinson broke the color barrier in baseball, and eventually the Negro League faded. Right now, there is still a gay subculture, but it is not really a gay “underground,” which once was a fair way to describe it. I think the more it fades, the less suspicion there will be of gay people. I mean, the DA who accused a gay man of plotting to assassinate Pres. Kennedy couldn’t tell the gay underground from a political plot, and it was partly because the DA was a loon, but it was also because the gay subculture at the time was deeply underground and secretive. I doubt that would happen now, even with a paranoid loon as DA, because gay life it pretty open. Anyway, a secretive subculture can seem to have an “agenda” for a lot of reasons, mainly because anything secretive is suspicious. Now that gay subculture is no longer secretive, I think the idea of an “agenda” has gone away to a great extent. I mean, gay people _did_ want to change society-- not the way people thought they did-- they just wanted it to be safe for them, but they did sort of have an agenda: it was mostly things like making it unacceptable to beat gay people to death, and not OK to fire someone just for being gay, which are all fairly benign. A lot of those things have been accomplished-- and if you don’t think so, you don’t remember anything before the year 2000. It’s not a perfect time to be gay, but my gawd, is it better. TLDR: The less closeted gay people are in general, the less suspicious people will be of them; once upon a time, there was an unfortunate feedback loop of secretness on the part of gay people, and suspicion on the part of straight people, which is fading. ---
**Author:** ![ghettomotels](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/8baadc/32.png) [@ghettomotels](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ghettomotels)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2016, 6:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexuality-propaganda-is-there-anything-to-it/769324/74 "2016-10-24T06:44:54Z")
There are societies where LGBT(QI) are simply seen as part of society, and not viewed with disdain, feigned tolerance, or reverence (whether true or feigned) as the progressive agenda has tried to impose on the public in the US. LGBT(QI) has been around since the days of Egyptians (i.e. the beginning of recorded time), so it’s really nothing new how it’s made out to be. Only a small percentage of people throughout history have been able to adequately realize that. ---
**Author:** ![alexidsa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/97f17d/32.png) [@alexidsa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alexidsa)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2016, 9:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexuality-propaganda-is-there-anything-to-it/769324/75 "2016-10-24T09:53:36Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > The claim is that everyone else treats pedophiles inhumanely while Germany treats them humanely. > That is probably a reference to [this program](http://www.upworthy.com/a-provocative-treatment-program-for-pedophiles-in-germany-is-raising-some-eyebrows), (that appears to be a small, privately organized effort). Yeah, I meant this program in Germany. I heard about a plan to make a similar program in the US, not sure if it worked out. As I understand the major problem on the way to implement it in other countries is legal system: a doctor must call police if he found out you committed a crime. ---
**Author:** ![alexidsa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/97f17d/32.png) [@alexidsa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alexidsa)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2016, 10:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexuality-propaganda-is-there-anything-to-it/769324/76 "2016-10-24T10:29:14Z")
> [@RivkahChaya](#): > > I think the point was that no one is concerned about pedophilia, until it’s a crime. If someone admits to pedophilic feelings upon which the person has not acted, in order to ask for help, there is no help, and often skepticism on the point that one could not have acted. Yeah, I meant pretty much it. And what’s important many pedophiles are not exclusively pedophiles (they’re often attracted to adults of the same or different gender, or both), so with appropriate help they can be productive members of society. They do need help and they still can not get it sometimes even in the most developed parts of the world. A recent example from Russia. It happened like 4 years ago or so. Suddenly every media started writing about pedophilia, it turned out to be a biggest problem in the country. Not poor infrastructure, not oil-driven economy, not alcoholism, not poor democracy - pedophilia. And the solution was found out: they passed a law that allowed to easily ban web sites without court decision. “Surprisingly” this law is used mostly to ban opposition political web sites. So instead of treating pedophilia rationally and humanely, it was demonized and used as part of political game. > [@RivkahChaya](#): > > Back to the gay thing: personally, I think that the more that gay people are accepted by the general public, the more the gay subculture will fade. For example, there used to be lots of “Womyn’s” bookstores, that were feminist hubs, but also the only place for lesbian literature and publications. They also occasionally sold things like _The Advocate_ and it was the only place gay men could get it without a subscription. Those stores flourished in the 70s and 80s, but begin to disappear in the 90s, when regular bookstores started having Gay/Lesbian sections. When gay people can hold hands, make out, and dance together in any bar, gay bars will fade. Now that Wanda Sykes has specials on comedy central, it becomes less necessary to have special venues for lesbian comics. I think you’re right, it goes both directions. I heard a similar idea in regards to the 70s when gays in the US were pushed to get into heterosexual families and reproduced naturally. And as there seems to be an inherited element to homosexuality, it could increase amount of gays. So in future generations we might get a slight decrease in the amount of gays as nowadays they mostly adopt (it applies mostly to males I guess). This idea is discussed here by Richard Dawkins: [https://youtu.be/MHDCAllQgS0?t=3m2s](https://youtu.be/MHDCAllQgS0?t=3m2s) ---
**Author:** ![alexidsa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/97f17d/32.png) [@alexidsa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alexidsa)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2016, 10:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexuality-propaganda-is-there-anything-to-it/769324/77 "2016-10-24T10:50:57Z")
> [@ghettomotels](#): > > There are societies where LGBT(QI) are simply seen as part of society, and not viewed with disdain, feigned tolerance, or reverence (whether true or feigned) as the progressive agenda has tried to impose on the public in the US. Unfortunately we don’t have good data (at least to my knowledge) about those societies to treat it for or against the idea of “gay propaganda”. How many gays were there? What about their democracy? > [@ghettomotels](#): > > LGBT(QI) has been around since the days of Egyptians (i.e. the beginning of recorded time), so it’s really nothing new how it’s made out to be. Only a small percentage of people throughout history have been able to adequately realize that. I did not research it thoroughly but sexuality in ancient times sometimes was nor what we would call moral nowadays. The most quoted example are male adults having sex with male children in Ancient Greece on a regular basis. It’s often used as an argument that culture/society influences the amount of this or that sexual “preferences”. Here’s my take on it (not a very educated one). Pedophilia was not considered immoral in Ancient Greece. I don’t think it increased the amount of pedophiles in comparison to our days. They just felt free to come out of closet and act on this aspect of their sexuality (which is not a harmless act like in case of homosexuality). Now we know it’s not good for children and we make our best (still a long way to go) to explain to pedophiles they should not act on this part of their sexuality, though the amount of pedophiles in our society is pretty much the same. ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2016, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexuality-propaganda-is-there-anything-to-it/769324/78 "2016-10-24T16:20:24Z")
Stating that morality is a function of society in which it is developed and enforced is neither surprising nor insightful. In addition, observing that it changes from society to society and generation to generation is not a revelation. We’ve known this to be true for a very long time now. So what point are you trying to make about the subject of pedophelia in (I assume) modern day society? That it’s right? That it’s wrong? That the age of consent is too low/high/arbitrary? And what does this have to do with your original topic of “homosexuality propaganda”? ---
**Author:** ![alexidsa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/97f17d/32.png) [@alexidsa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alexidsa)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2016, 12:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexuality-propaganda-is-there-anything-to-it/769324/79 "2016-11-01T12:59:54Z")
> [@QuickSilver](#): > > So what point are you trying to make about the subject of pedophelia in (I assume) modern day society? That it’s right? That it’s wrong? That the age of consent is too low/high/arbitrary? > > And what does this have to do with your original topic of “homosexuality propaganda”? I should’ve been more specific about it. I was answering to a point “homosexuality has always been around, calm down”. While it’s true and fair, that’s a poor argument for a homophobe believing in homosexuality propaganda. They usually go with the following reasoning: While homosexuality has always been around, it doesn’t mean it was equally widespread in different societies. They usually provide Ancient Greece as an example of a society where non-heterosexual sexual acts were seemingly much more widespread ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2016, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexuality-propaganda-is-there-anything-to-it/769324/80 "2016-11-01T16:45:41Z")
There no “harm” to being homosexual, there is only the reaction of society to gays which can create harm. If my child was gay, I’d be fine, but worry a little more because the world isn’t accepting of gays enough. But I wouldn’t care if something like propaganda makes it more likely for kids to identify as gay. We need more of that. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexuality-propaganda-is-there-anything-to-it/769324.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexuality-propaganda-is-there-anything-to-it/769324.md?page=5)