Re: Homosexuality: male & female

Yousuf Khan (
Thu, 12 Sep 1996 04:42:44 GMT

On 11 Sep 1996 10:34:55 -0500, (Lars Eighner) wrote:

>>>However, there really is no good reason to suppose a priori that
>>>male homosexuality and female homosexuality would be symmetrical
>>>phenomena. So far the interesting but far from conclusive attempts
>>>at finding a biological basis of homosexuality have almost all
>>>restricted themselves to male subjects or made wholly unwarrented
>>>assumptions about female subjects. Female homosexuality has been
>>>extensively under-studied and ignored.
>>Why should this be the case anymore? I've seen for decades now that
>>psychology majors are evenly male and female, so one would think that
>>studies should be symmetrical now too, since the studiers are now evenly
>>distributed too.

>I can't explain this. But of course it not merely so for studies
>of sexuality, but is largely so for all kinds of psychological,
>phramacological, physiological, etc., etc. studies. All kinds
>of research seem to think that being a college-aged male is
>the normative state of humankind.

Well, when I was in university, I took first year psychology as one of my
humanities courses (I was in engineering, and we were required to take a
few to "broaden" our horizons). The course was evenly divided male & female
(if not slightly in the female favour), and we were all required to submit
to a few tests for the grad psychology students. So I'd say the normative
state of humankind is really first year college students, either male or
female. :-)

>>>>Also, what are the latest figures on the percentage of homosexuality in the
>>>>general population? Last I heard they were talking about 10% of the human
>>>>population is fully homosexual,
>>>There is essentially no basis for this figure, if by fully homosexual
>>>you mean life-long homosexuality with no opposite-sex sexual experience
>>>whatever. The figure for that kind of homosexuality is consistently
>>>in the 2-4% range every place a reasonably well designed study has

>>Funny, I would've thought the 10% figure was right on the money. And yes,
>>when I say "fully homosexual", I mean no heterosexual acts whatsoever. I
>>was under the impression that Kinsey had said 10% _fully_ homosexual, not
>>just _predominantly_ homosexual. I've not been able to find the text of
>>Kinsey's study at my library, so I was hoping somebody could've quoted from
>>it, if they had a copy.

>Opps. I looked at your signature before I responded and did not
>think you were at the ends of the earth. But I don't have a
>copy at home, so must of this is from memory.

>Exclusive, life long homosexuals: 3.7%
>Exclusively homosexual for three years or more: 6.2%

Well, this comes out to nearly 10%, maybe that's what I was thinking of.

>More homosexual than heterosexual for three years or more: 10.4%
>Any homosexual contact leading to orgasm: 37%
>Homosexual arousal/fantasies, no contact: 13%

>These are just the few figures I recall immediately.

Are there any overlaps in these numbers?

>>I don't think they are too old, but I'm surprised that no one has done a
>>followup study since then. And I don't think those numbers are wrong; I
>>used to think that maybe they were too high, but now I'm starting to see
>>the logic of his numbers.

>I don't believe it will soon be financially possible to do an
>adequate study. Kinsey's figures were so disturbing that sources
>of research funds are very adverse to any such study again.

Well considering that we now have sex therapy clinics, planned parenthood
clinics, pharmaceutical firms doing AIDS research, you'd think there would
be some market for this information now.

Yousuf Khan

Yousuf J. Khan
Ottawa, Ont, Canada
Nation's capital