sc94597 said:
20%+ of people are a 0 + 1 on the Kinsey Scale, is what is being said. But I'm sure another 10-15% are a 2, which is bluring the lines between "straight" and "bisexual." I guess it depends on what you consider "straight." I personally don't consider somebody who is "more than incidentally" homosexual/heterosexual to be straight/gay. I consider them bisexual. But I know many people who would think that if somebody prefers the opposite sex they are straight, prefers the same sex they are gay, and there is no such thing as bisexual except for the percentage of people who like both sexes equally. You are perfectly able to provide a study that says otherwise. |
What do you mean that you're "sure" another 10-15 chose 2? Where do we see that number to know it's not 30 or 60 or 70%?
Also for reference his studies are incredibly small in comparison to far larger ones with far better sampling and totally different results. His methodology amounts to junk science:
There have been serious criticisms pertaining to sample selection and sample bias in Kinsey's research. In 1948, the same year as the original publication, a committee of the American Statistical Association, including notable statisticians such as John Tukey condemned the sampling procedure. Tukey was perhaps the most vocal critic, saying "A random selection of three people would have been better than a group of 300 chosen by Mr. Kinsey." [2]. Criticism principally revolved around the over-representation of some groups in the sample: 25 percent were, or had been, prison inmates, and 5 percent were male prostitutes. A related criticism, by some of the leading psychologists of the day, notably Abraham Maslow, was that he (Kinsey) did not consider the bias created by the data representing only those who were willing to participate.
Kinsey’s work didn’t improve in his volume on women. In fact, he interviewed so few average women that he actually had to redefine “married” to include any woman who had lived with a man for more than a year. This change added prostitutes to his sample of “married” women.
In the December 11, 1949, New York Times, W. Allen Wallis, then chairman of the University of Chicago’s committee on statistics, dismissed “the entire method of collecting and presenting the statistics which underlie Dr. Kinsey’s conclusions:’ Wallis noted, “There are six major aspects of any statistical research, and Kinsey fails on four.”
Kinsey claimed, for instance, that 10 percent of men between the ages of 16 and 55 were homosexual. Yet in one of the most thorough nationwide surveys on male sexual behavior ever conducted, scientists at Battelle Human Affairs Research Centers in Seattle found that men who considered themselves exclusively homosexual accounted for only 1 percent of the population.
In 1993, Time magazine reported, “Recent surveys from France, Britain, Canada, Norway and Denmark all point to numbers lower than 10 percent and tend to come out in the 1 to 4 percent range.” The incidence of homosexuality among adults is actually “between 1 and 3 percent;” says University of Delaware sociology and criminal justice professor Joel Best, author of Damned Lies and Statistics. Best observes, however, that gay and lesbian activists prefer to use Kinsey’s long-discredited one-in-ten figure “because it suggests that homosexuals are a substantial minority group, roughly equal in number to African Americans — too large to be ignored.”
Kinsey’s homosexual sample provides another illustration of the problems in Kinsey’s dataset. Because of the difficulty in finding homosexuals in the repressive atmosphere the time, Dr. Kinsey relied on interviews with members of homophile groups such as the Mattachine Society and homosexual communities in a few large cities. He also interviewed prisoners and institutional populations...
