They also refer to both men and women. I don't think my math is wrong.
Not to quibble over such a trivial matter, but to hit the percentage that you list (4%), according to the sites you posted, one would need to include not only men, but women, bisexuals, and transgendered. So, using your sites as a frame of reference:
Originally Posted by ABC news article you posted
Bisexuals make up slightly more than half that group, 1.8 percent of the total U.S. population, and they are substantially more likely to be women than men.
In short:
Originally Posted by Slate article you posted
Americans tend to greatly overestimate the percentage of gay Americans, and it's not entirely clear-cut as to why
I don't think the percentage changes if you separate men and women, unless your point is that there are more gay women than men or something.
If 4% of men and women are gay, that still means that a 53-man roster is likely to have 2 gay people.
If your point is that some of the 4% would be bi sexual or trans-gendered, well, I could certainly see bi-sexuals on NFL rosters, so they are not excluded, though trans-sexuals would be. But trans-sexuals are clearly a very small percentage of the gay population as a whole.
The reference to Americans over-estimating the number of gays was referring to earlier estimates that 1 in 10 people are gay--these polls suggest the number is actually more like 4 in 100. The 10% thing apparently goes back to Alfred Kinsey's pioneering sex research in the 1940s and has since proven to be an inflated estimate.
I don't think the percentage changes if you separate men and women, unless your point is that there are more gay women than men or something.
If 4% of men and women are gay, that still means that a 53-man roster is likely to have 2 gay people.
If your point is that some of the 4% would be bi sexual or trans-gendered, well, I could certainly see bi-sexuals on NFL rosters, so they are not excluded, though trans-sexuals would be. But trans-sexuals are clearly a very small percentage of the gay population as a whole.
Again, the NFL doesn't have a woman on an NFL roster, so that eliminates a significant portion of the pool to draw from. In order to make up the difference, there would have to be a higher percentage of gay males in the NFL than the general populace. If that's your opinion, fine. Personally, I don't think that's the case.
Sharp dressers that keep themselves in shape? Nah, NONE of those guys are gay.
"the blade itself incites to violence." - Homer
--
"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - Kung fu Monkey
Sharp dressers that keep themselves in shape? Nah, NONE of those guys are gay.
Except nobody is saying that. I expected you to bring better sarcasm than that to the table. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
Again, the NFL doesn't have a woman on an NFL roster, so that eliminates a significant portion of the pool to draw from. In order to make up the difference, there would have to be a higher percentage of gay males in the NFL than the general populace. If that's your opinion, fine. Personally, I don't think that's the case.
But is there a difference in the percentages of gays among men or women? The ABC News article said that "substantially more" women were likely to be bisexual, but the link was broken so I don't know how substantial that is.
The Slate article (referencing a Gallup poll) had a lower percentage - 3.4%. But it said that 8.2% had a same sex experience and that non-white Americans were more likely to be gay (4.6% for blacks) and that those from 18-29 were as well (6.4%). And its percentage for males being gay was 3.3% vs. 3.6% for women. For 32 53-man rosters, that would multiply out as 56 gay players if the percentages are equivalent to the regular population. If you look at just 18-29 year old men, it's 4.6%. (They didn't have stats for 30-49 year old men, but for everyone in the 30-49 age category, it was 3.2% and it's been consistently lower for men than women.)
You're the one arguing that NFL players are substantially different from the rest of the population (which may be true; it's a small enough subset and I wouldn't be surprised if gay men felt discouraged from playing football).
You're the one arguing that NFL players are substantially different from the rest of the population (which may be true; it's a small enough subset and I wouldn't be surprised if gay men felt discouraged from playing football).
If by this you mean that I don't think that the NFL is an apt comparison to the American population, the answer is yes. Do I think that there are gay players currently in the NFL? Undoubtedly. Do I think that it's close to the same ratio as what one would find in general society? I doubt it.
"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - Kung fu Monkey
The reference to Americans over-estimating the number of gays was referring to earlier estimates that 1 in 10 people are gay--these polls suggest the number is actually more like 4 in 100. The 10% thing apparently goes back to Alfred Kinsey's pioneering sex research in the 1940s and has since proven to be an inflated estimate.
Disagree, any poll estimating the gay-straight ratio will not take into account those who are in the closet, in denial, etc.
I believe the true percentage is closer to Kinsey's 10% than 4%.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Iggloo
Bookmarks