#INCLUDING the statistics for being gay and lgbt

[absentmoon]

i think my old hs principal has tried to out me from beyond the grave

[gothhabiba]

A few months ago, an article by Just Like Us about a survey of young UK adults regarding LGBT topics (and other articles on The Pink News and Gay Times UK that reported on that article) did the rounds on here.

The headline of the Gay Times article, written by Amy Ashenden (a cisgender butch lesbian and the interim CEO of Just Like Us, who hired the consultancy that conducted the survey) was "Lesbians being anti-trans is a lesbophobic trope"; of the results of the survey, she writes "I’m so glad that we finally have the research to demonstrate what most lesbians already knew: this narrative is completely false."

A lot of this initial reporting focused on the claims that "most anti-trans adults don’t know a trans person in real life" and "lesbians are the most supportive of trans people of any identity group, and it's a lesbophobic trope that they are anti-trans." These articles were written before the full report of the survey's data had been released.

The full report that these claims are based on is now out, for anyone who wants to take a closer look at the results for themselves. The pdf appears to be OCR readable but not image-described. The survey deals with many topics including being "out" and "feeling supported" at school and at work, but I'll just try to break down the evidence for the above-mentioned two claims.

How respondents were selected:

Just Like Us's report says that "Participants were drawn in partnership between Just Like Us and from Cibyl’s independent database of UK students and young adults" (p. 69). Cibyl offers "bespoke studies and focus groups," and says that "Using our Cibyl-ings student panel, we can source specific students to look at themes and topics important to you and ask the unique questions you want the answers to." This is rather vague.

Sample group and size:

3,695 young adults aged between 18 and 25. 86% cisgender and 12% transgender; 47% LGBT and 53% non-LGBT (used as a control group to compare LGBT responses to); 72% white; 79% students; 54% "female" (self-declared), 36% "male", 8% non-binary (pp. 69-70).

Support for the articles' central claims:

There is no full breakdown of the data resulting from the survey that would allow anyone else to do their own statistical analysis. Here's (what Just Like Us gives of) the data that the "most anti-trans people don't know a trans person in real life" claim is based on:

[ID: Headline reading "Attitudes towards transgender people. Question reading "How supportive are you of transgender people? Of people who "know a transgender person," 64% said "very supportive"; "supportive" 23%; "slightly supportive" 10%; "not supportive" 3%. Of those who "don't know a transgender person," 33% said "very supportive"; "supportive" 28%; "slightly supportive" 20%; "not supportive" 18%. Second question "Do you know any transgender people?" Result: 28% "Yes, someone I'm close to"; 38% "Yes, someone I'm not close to"; 34% "I don't know any transgender people." Further breakdown of the question "Do you know a transgender person?": 49% of "non-LGBT+" people said "yes"; 84% of LGBT+ people; 94% of non-binary people; 93% of transgender people; 82% of asexual people; 85% of bi/pan people; 80% of gay men; 92% of lesbians; 75% of questioning people. End ID]

The "do you know any transgender people" question is worded slightly differently each time—plus, the Just Like Us article and the report (p. 8) adduce the phrase "in real life" to "know a trans person," but this page doesn't—so I don't think we're getting the exact wording for that question that the survey respondents saw. The data for "how supportive are you of transgender people" isn't broken down according to whether the respondent said they were "close" or "not close" to the transgender person or people they knew; it also doesn't seem to be broken down into trans or nonbinary versus cisgender respondents.

"How supportive are you of transgender people?" was the only question dealing with this issue, and the responses "very supportive," "supportive," "slightly supportive," and "not supportive" were the only options available; there's nothing breaking down what "support" means in terms of policy (e.g. support versus non-support for consent-based clinics, national funding for transition care, non-discrimination laws, bathroom laws, &c. &c.). There is also no distinction made between "support" for trans women and trans men.

The claim "UK adults between the ages of 18 and 25 who answer 'not supportive' to the question 'How supportive are you of transgender people?' are several times more likely to also answer 'no' to the question 'do you know a transgender person' (or maybe 'do you know a transgender person in real life')" is supported, in my opinion. The sample size is large enough for that 3% to not be random noise.

The analysis in the Just Like Us article groups together "very supportive" and "supportive" when providing percentages of respondents of given identities who support trans people:

Of all LGBT+ identities, other than trans and non-binary people themselves, lesbian young adults were most likely to say they know a trans person (92%), and most likely to say they are “supportive” or “very supportive” of trans people (96%). In comparison, 89% of LGBT+ people overall said they were  “supportive” or “very supportive” of trans people, and just 69% of non-LGBT+ people said the same.

There is no full breakdown of how many people are "very supportive," "supportive," "slightly supportive" or "not supportive" of trans people by identity label. The relevant data is on p. 63 of the report:

"Looking at who was the most supportive of transgender people:

non-binary respondents were 97% supportive or very supportive with 1% of respondents indicating they were not supportive;

lesbian respondents were 95% supportive or very supportive [everywhere else in the report and in the reporting says 96%, so perhaps this is a typo] (3% were not supportive);

bi/pansexual respondents were 92% supportive or very supportive (2% were not supportive).

Of respondents who were gay men, 82% were supportive or very supportive of transgender people, with 7% indicating they were not supportive.

Among non-LGBT+ respondents 69% were supportive of transgender people, with 12% indicating they were not supportive."

It's not clear to me how they dealt with e.g. lesbians who were also transgender. Pages 69-70 of the report go into the questions that people were asked to identify their identity label for the purposes of statistical analysis ("Is your gender identity the same as the one you were originally assigned at birth?"; and "What is your sexual orientation?"). The fact that these are separate questions (as they should be) tells me that there's overlap between groups throughout the study; any data that says e.g. "83% of lesbian respondents" is combining cis and trans lesbians, and any result that says "67% of trans people" is combining heterosexual and LGB trans people.

So, while narrowing the respondents down to just cisgender LGB people to compare their support for trans people would have been one way to analyse the data, I'm guessing they didn't do that (plus, there's the article's wording of "LGBT+ people overall"; it wouldn't make statistics-analytical sense to compare cis lesbians with all LGBT+ people, plus it would presumably make the higher support % of lesbians less stark, which seems like the opposite of what Ashenden wanted to do).

When the article says "other than trans and non-binary people themselves," they don't mean that they excluded trans and non-binary people from the percentages given; they mean "other than the number you get if you measure support for transgender people just from trans and non-binary people." We're not given the number that would result from doing this. The number we're given in the report for non-binary people is 97% supportive (this number is not included in the article); we are not given a number for just trans people, but we can probably assume it also approaches 100%.

This means that the 96% support presumably measures support from cis and trans lesbians; the 82% of "supportive" and "very supportive" gay men includes cis and trans men; &c.

There is a major statistics-analytical problem with acknowledging that trans and non-binary respondents have the highest rates of support for trans people, but then not controlling the results of this question for whether the respondent was cis or trans. If a higher percentage of lesbian respondents were trans than the percentage of gay men respondents that were trans, this would itself skew the numbers for lesbian support higher. There's no reason to suppose that this did happen, but there is not enough information given about the data that Just Like Us collected to rule it out. Again, at no point are we given information about overlap between LGB and trans groups or a breakdown of what that overlap looked like (how many trans respondents were heterosexual versus LGB, &c.).

As I mentioned above, some of the survey focused on whether respondents "felt supported" at home and at school. Some snippets on the results of these questions can be found on pages 45-49 of the report. "[M]ore than 1 in 4" LGBT+ respondents "felt unsupported" in school compared to "1 in 10" non-LGBT+ respondents; 37% of transgender respondents and 39% of nonbinary respondents said they felt unsupported in school. Despite the survey's focus on the outcomes of felt support, and despite all respondents being asked if they were "supportive" of transgender people, no question asked transgender respondents if they "felt supported" by cisgender LGB people.

Generalisability of claims:

The sampling of the data (which is drawn entirely from people in the UK aged 18-25, mostly students) also means that the claims are not generalisable to the entire UK population; you can't say the "majority of anti-trans adults don’t know a trans person in real life" (the headline of the Just Like Us article) or "Most anti-trans adults don’t actually know a trans person in real life" (the headline of the Pink News article), since the survey did not take a representative sample of all adults. You can't say "lesbians are not anti-trans" (the url of the Gay Times article), since the survey is not representative of all lesbians.

Funding sources:

The report was sponsored by Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited, a firm offering professional services (accounting, auditing, consulting, financial advisory, litigation consulting, and other services offered to businesses).

Cibyl, an independent research firm in the UK, "led on research design and delivery, then worked in partnership with Just Like Us to produce the report." They include the report ("Positive Futures") as an example of their work on their website. Their summary of the study focuses on the claim that "support in LGBT+ young adults’ teenage years" is necessary to the future development of their careers, and on what "employers and careers professionals can do to help LGBT+ young people feel safe and supported." This is the same kind of thing that Deloitte talks about when it comes to LGBT+ issues (namely, inclusion versus exclusion and support versus non-support in the workplace).

A video that Asheden produced with Mags Scott (partner at Deloitte) also focuses on how "support" for LGBT+ people "at home, in school, and in the workplace" leads to confidence in "career prospects" and ability to be onself "at work," and is necessary for LGBT+ people's mental wellbeing.

Just Like Us has an interest in promoting research that suggests that support for LGBT+ people in school will benefit them in their careers, since they sell training resources on forming LGBT+ groups, and talks with LGBT+ speakers, to schools. Just Like Us is a non-profit organisation.

Declaration of conflicts of interest and peer review:

This is an industry-sponsored study and not an academic one. There is no declaration of conflicts of interest required, and the study was not peer-reviewed.

Tl;dr:

Some breakdown of data was revealed in the report. The exact questions that respondents saw were not given. The data is not given with enough granularity to allow for anyone else to conduct statistical analysis based on it.

There is not enough evidence to say whether the study supports the claim that (cis?) lesbians are more supportive of trans people than any other identity group, since the survey was not clear what "support" means (someone may claim to support trans people as individuals while not supporting transition care, for example, due to some kind of "love the sinner, hate the sin" logic).

There is also a statistical problem with the support for this claim, since overlap between "transgender" and "cisgender" respondents is not controlled for. There is not enough data given in the report to allow anyone else to control for this factor. The results would hold if we assumed that similar percentages of e.g. lesbian, bisexual, and gay male respondents were transgender.

The results apply only to people in the UK aged 18-25 and cannot be generalised to all adults in the UK.

Summaries of this report given by the firms that funded and conducted it centre on the idea that "support" of LGBT+ people at home, at school, and in the workplace is necessary to allow them to thrive in the workplace. Just Like Us, who put out the report, sell LGBT+ talks and training to schools.

[letters-to-lgbt-kids]

My dear lgbt+ kids, 

Did you know the practice of meditation can have side effects? Some people experience adverse reactions to meditation, such as heightened anxiety or depression or even delusions and hallucinations. 

What does that have to do with being lgbt? Well, nothing - but meditation is often seen as one of those “healthy things everyone should do”, something that just has so many benefits and doesn’t require you to take anything or undergo any kind of surgery, something that it’s widely recommended and accepted as healing… and even THAT super great thing has some people who will regret doing it. 

Not a perfect comparison, nothing ever is, but you see the analogy coming: Transition (social or hormonal or surgical) is super beneficial to many people. And there are also some people who will regret it. 

Any kind of health decision - and really any decision at all - can end with you regretting it. That’s a part of life. 

“Protecting people from making a decision they might regret” sounds like such a noble goal. We want to live in a world where people can make informed decisions. Education, including on risks and side effects, is something to strive for. But it’s important to remember that we can not live in a world where nobody ever regrets anything. 

People can regret getting their ears pierced. People can regret buying a car. People can regret going to university. People can regret having sex with someone. People can regret marriage. People can regret moving to a different state. People can regret coming out as gay. People can regret hip replacement surgery. And yes, people can also regret transitioning. 

If we seriously wanted to protect people from ever regretting anything, we would need to just take any deciding power away  (and then who would we give it to? Whoever makes our decisions for us then, they could also make a decision they end up regretting!). 

Another reason why this analogy works: I told you meditation has side effects and people regret it - but I pretty conveniently left out that it’s pretty rare for that to happen. Meditation is generally very safe and has a really low regret rate. Plus, people who regret it may not regret that they choose to meditate all together but rather report that they regret a specific experience (such as choosing silent meditation over guided meditation or going on a meditation retreat that lasted multiple days). 

Similar to that, transition also has a low regret rate (statistically much lower than tattoos or hip replacement surgery for example!) - and people who regret it may not actually be a case of “I regret it because I realized I’m not transgender”, even if that’s what transphobes tell you. Some people still identify as transgender but regret their surgery because they experienced complications (as they can arise from any kind of medical procedure). Some people regret it because they lost friends or family or job opportunities after coming out. And so on. 

The topic of regret is much more complicated than “meditation is actually bad” or “they woke up one day and realized they were brainwashed into believing they were trans”. And it’s unfair to not only the ones who will never regret it but also to the ones who do regret it to reduce their stories to a cautionary tale meant to stop people from making a decision over their own body.

“We need to protect people from making decisions they might regret” just isn’t a good argument. 

With all my love, 

Your Tumblr Dad 

[heterophobicdyke]

I think the reasons bisexuals hold so tightly to “queer,” not only as a personal identity but an umbrella identity for the entire LGBT, are numerous:

Queer indicates fluidity. It replaces specifics. When it’s used as an umbrella term for anyone same-sex attracted, then bisexuality becomes the default.

As an extension of the previous dot point, it makes bisexuals feel more connected to homosexuals if we can all forget our specific realities and focus on the fact we are all viewed as “queer” by the rest of the world.

Except, statistically, bisexuals end up with the opposite-sex. That’s not an insult, there are more people in that dating pool and it’s objectively harder living as gay-passing. But the problem is that these male/female relationships often include hiding the bisexual’s same-sex attraction to fit into the Straight World. You’re not telling your partner’s mother and father you’re bi. This happy OSA relationship is a heteronormative privilege, not oppression. When they’re dating the same-sex, or leaning more into that community, they often go polar opposite - it can’t just be “I’m bisexual,” it has to be completely hidden, calling themselves lesbian or gay, or they’ll be “the queerest queer you ever saw.” But you’re usually getting called “queer” because you’re mistaken for homosexual - heteropatriarchal society tolerates a mix of SSA and OSA, in fact it’s normalised as a part of being Straight. Look at threesomes. Society seeing you as normal or a slight deviation, rather than a full error, is not disempowering.

Leaning into this “queerest of the queers” identity when taking part in the rainbow community is over-compensation. I get the root of it, but it doesn’t mean I have to have unlimited empathy about it. Because the insecurity/guilt that causes this over-compensatory reaction is due to indulging in straight-passing privilege that homosexuals do not experience for lacking OSA. It’s not our job to feel sorry for people who can’t help indulging in their advantages over us.

[lowresolutioncryptid]

I’ve been seeing a lot of terfs deny the very clear link between trans exclusionism and nvzism/white supremacy simply because they do not understand the history behind it. ignorance is not a legitimate excuse to perpetuate systems of white supremacy. And it is further testament to the harm that banning critical race theory and queer studies in schools is doing to y’all’s brains. Because if I’m being completely honest, I’m seeing an alarming amount of self-identified terfs and radfems who are legit STILL IN HIGH SCHOOL. YOU ARE NOT WELCOME HERE. My blog is 18+, not for children, anyone under 18 gets immediately blocked. Anyway…

Transphobia and anti-blackness are historically linked and continue, to this day, to be overlapping forms of systemic oppression. Black trans women, specifically, have higher murder rates than any other group. Both trans and black people statistically face more medical discrimination than cis and white people, respectively. The combination of both of these marginalized identities forms a particular and very sinister intersection of oppression.

Not only do both of these systems of privilege work to uphold the social and structural power of cis people and white people.. biological essentialism and transphobia also, historically, were used to define the beliefs of white supremacy and race essentialism. Race essentialism is the false belief that it is “natural order” for whites to oppress other races. For centuries, white “philosophers” made up a whole list of pseudoscientific “reasons” WHY they believed racism was “natural”. One of them was the idea that “distinct and separate biological sexes were the mark of a more evolved race-“ meaning the white race.. they compared European patriarchal sex roles and gender roles to the matriarchal cultures and gender variance that they observed in communities of color.

I have seen terfs accuse people who bring up this historical fact of “masculinizing” black women and women of color, which is a very real issue, but in this case and with historical context, that is a misunderstanding and most of the time is being said by people who want to silence trans people and shut down any criticism of terfism.

Acknowledging the thousands of years of acceptance of gender variance and third/fourth gender categories within pre-colonial African, Indigenous, Latin, Asian, & Middle eastern cultures, is not to blame for the masculinization of women of color, and as a matter of fact: the invention and enforcement of Eurocentric gender roles REQUIRES and RELIES on the masculinization of women of color in order to uphold white women’s place within white supremist systems as the “ideal of femininity” that they can then weaponize against women of color when they do not adhere to those Eurocentric standards.

During times of enslavement and segregation, black women were forced, legally and socially, to conform to very strict Eurocentric femininity standards in order to avoid harassment and violence, and if they deviated from these norms and codes they were dehumanized, masculinized, and were “made into examples” of white femininity being “superior”. Gender roles and biological essentialism do not exist in a vacuum outside of the white supremist systems that they were created within and invented to maintain. To imply that all women share the same experiences within these systems is akin to saying “I don’t see color”.. it’s denying the lived experiences of people of color.

Most gays are familiar with the symbol of the pink triangle, the badge worn by LGBT victims of ww2 concentration camps, but the transgender victims are often overlooked..

“Hitler’s Nazi government, however, brutally targeted the trans community, deporting many trans people to concentration camps and wiping out vibrant community structures.” - Museum of Jewish Heritage.

The US holocaust memorial museum that holds remembrance vigils for the victims persecuted by the nazis, under the Obama administration, included both gay men and transgender people in their list of victims. However, under the Trump administration this was changed to only include gay men. When asked about this change one of the museum’s head curators responded that because trans people were viewed by the nazis as indistinguishable from gay men that they are “included” with the definition. This is an obvious cop-out. The other reason that they gave was that the term “transgender” was only officially coined in the 1980’s, despite the thriving population of German trans people and gender-nonconforming subcultures that pre-date the nazi control of Germany.

Ancient Judaism recognizes at least six (6) distinct sex categories and gender roles, our women fulfilling “traditionally masculine” roles and vice versa.. this is a direct threat and opposition to nazism which relies on Eurocentric patriarchal gender roles. White women serve one purpose within nazi ranks: BIOLOGICAL incubators for white babies. If you don’t have 1) European genetic material 2) biological capabilities of reproduction (vagina, womb, mammaries) to be exploited for domestic labor, you are not considered a “true” woman by nazis. “Woman” being defined within nazism by biological, reproductive traits is so eerily similar to terf’s definition of woman that the only explanation for still perpetuating these ideas that I can think of, other than apathy or being full blown nazis, would be ignorance and historical illiteracy. The systemic eradication and erasure of trans and gender-nonconforming people by the nazi party was essential in maintaining these standards at a structural level, as well as the reinforcement of these false beliefs within popular culture. In order to maintain that false image of “dominance” “supremacy”, they had to invent a subclass that was then deemed “inferior” by their own standards.

When trans people of color and trans Jews are explicitly telling y’all that the harmful rhetoric you spread about trans people has DIRECT historical links to white supremacy and nazism, and (whether intentionally or unintentionally) upholds these systems that are killing us, it’s not your place to dig your heels into the ground and come up with excuses. It’s your place to listen and reevaluate your views.

[orionsangel86]

Watching The Sandman again for the hundreth time and I know everyone always loves to focus on Dreamling, but can we talk about Rose Walker for a moment?

The Sandman is often applauded (and complained about) for being an extremely gay show, but I particularly love how even the characters who aren’t canonically gay come across as extremely gay.

Take Rose Walker. The main character of The Doll’s House story. Neither the show nor the comics ever give Rose a sexuality, but there are some very glaring factors that heavily support her being queer.

The first time we see Rose is in episode 5 24/7. Judy, the lesbian at the diner who has had a fight with her girlfriend Donna, calls Rose and asks if Rose knows where Donna is. We know that Rose considers both Judy and Donna close friends and has a picture of Judy in her apartment.

Rose’s only other friend that we know of besides Lyta Hall (who she got to know via proximity since they were neighbours) is her friend Carl who she clearly is close enough with to let him house sit for her (even though he has sex with The Corinthian on her bed!).

So her closest friends are a lesbian couple and a gay man. I know I know straight people can be friends with queer people but statistically speaking queers flock together. Its more likely that Lyta is the token straight in the friend group than Rose AND Lyta both being straight.

I also question her choice of seeking out accomodation in Cape Kennedy. Isn’t it interesting how she ends up in a very strange B&B also managed by a gay drag artist and filled with colourful characters including Chantal and Zelda (I know their relationship is supposed to remain ambiguous but imo the show also leans more into them being lesbians due to Chantal’s dream where she calls them “soul sisters” and “gothic brides” and I dunno I just think the fact she refers to them as brides is pretty telling!)

Of all your accomodation choices in Florida, this in particular seems like the kind of place one would go to if they were specifically looking for somewhere advertised as “LGBT friendly”. All the characters staying at the B&B are either canonically queer or heavily queer coded.

Gilbert/Fiddlers Green isn’t technically human, but his whole aura is distinguished older gay man - he’s played by Stephen Fry after all!

Also I could go on about Barbie (who I theorise found the accomodation for her and Ken) but without revealing any comic spoilers, she also later surrounds herself with basically all queer people. I know in the comics she is strictly heterosexual, but nah she dreams like a queer theatre kid on speed or something lmao. That girl is a bisexual disaster all the way and yeah I may be projecting on her as a fellow blonde overly dramatic dreamer and disaster bisexual but I claim her for my own okay just let me have this.

So yeah, the queer friendship groups, the specific seeking out of an LGBTQ friendly b&b in Florida, and the fact that she literally wears rainbows in her hair and I think its clear enough that that girl is a baby queer if ever I saw one.

Due to the merging of Rose and Lyta’s stories in the Netflix show, we should actually get to see more of Rose in future seasons. In the comics, after the Dolls House book, she doesn’t appear again (unless she turns up in the Wake since I haven’t read that far ahead), but by making her Lyta’s companion in the show, we know she will appear again since Lyta and the baby (Daniel not that he has been named yet in the show) are reoccuring characters throughout the entire Sandman comic run.

Maybe I just crave more lesbian and bisexual women rep in my fave shows, but sitting here watching this show again it just tickles me that in the entirety of season 1, it is so easy to view practically every major female or female presenting character as queer. Joanna Constantine and Rachel, Judy and Bette, Lucifer and Mazikeen (bring on the make out scene in season 2!), Chantal and Zelda, and in my opinion, Rose Walker, Barbie, Lucienne, and Gault are all queer coded WLW.

(Lucienne and Gault is just a ship I love okay but you can’t deny there was some flirting in episode 10!)

It’s been such a crappy year for lesbian rep with lesbian shows getting cancelled left right and centre. I just think lesbians should therefore claim the Sandman as theirs. if nothing else, claim it out of spite. It’s a fantasy show with a pathetic wet cat emo boy as a main character who literally surrounds himself with lesbians, is probably in love with his best friend, and considers a slutty gay serial killer with teeth for eyes his greatest ever creation. It just seems to me like the kind of show that should appeal heavily to WLW okay! Plus there are more lesbians coming in season 2! Encourage your lesbian and bisexual friends to go watch The Sandman now!

[fandomhop]

hello friend, what is fable? you seem to like it a lot and i gotta be honest i dont know the first thing about it. now,, i COULD ask google but i think that you could explain it better mhm mhm

[Oh boy! /affectionate]

[So, in a general, overall statement, Fable is a series of games from the 2000's-2010's. It's a quintessential bit of adventure fantasy, and totally progressive of its time.]

[Fable, as a whole, is about making your own sort of path within the story, and having your actions reflected on the world and yourself. It has a cool morality morphing system where, when you do something good or bad, not only does it affect the funny lil' NPCs around you, but it also reflects on your body. Do enough good actions, your complexion becomes glowing and you have a halo, do enough bad and you become more demonic looking.]

[There's actually both a deep and semi-shallow amount of lore. The first game was deffo built upon the bending and twisting of stories and folklore- you know, fables- and the games after followed along centuries after that, showing a world trying to grow past it's story built roots, but not being completely rid of them, even as technology grows and advances.]

[It's also British as hell. But, like, in a fun way! There's a fun and wonderful mix of light and darkness, sincerity and satire, sadness and humour. There's these beasties called Hobbes that are these sorta ugly things that act silly in and out of combat, but they also eat human flesh and are rumored to turn children into them. Some of them turn into kamikazes and they like teddy bears.]

[Also you can kick chickens (they're fine, don't worry about it, they have reinforced feathers)]

[Your character is a Hero (with the capital H), a person who is born to be able to deal with the struggles of protecting or commanding respect of the common man. You can wield and utilize Strength, Skill and Will, the trio of combat skills. The combat is a bit simple, but it's also fun and easy to get into. You can also upgrade with experience points to get better with your weapons and will powers.]

[I think the story, world, and characters of Fable: The Lost Chapters are extremely iconic, but the character building and development starts to really shine in the later games. All the games have wonderful setting appearance, though. Looking at pictures of Fable are these beautiful settings and desktop/screen background worthy scenes. The people look a bit silly, though.]

[Also? This game series is also progressive bc of its LGBT+ rep. The first game got called out for letting the male only player Hero marry a man, so the next game include bisexuals. Fable 3 lets you adopt children, regardless of your spouse's gender. There's a potion that lets you trans your gender (available only once in a quest after the main quest) and no one bats an eye to it (if you have a straight spouse, they won't immediately divorce you as long as you treat them well, but they won't have sex either.) There's a quest where you help out a guy find a suitor who is secretly gay, and the end of the quest is him coming out to his dad and being accepted. You can wear clothes of either gender, and get tattoos, hair, and facial hair regardless of your sex. (there is a cross-dressing statistic, but the Brits love a bit of cross-dressing humour.)]

[Now, I will not lie and say that they are perfect games, there are some flaws with them, and Fable 3 gets a bit of a bad rap for it's heavy streamlining, but I can genuinely say that these games are cherished a lot. Fable 2 is my go-to favourite game ever, and every once and a blue moon, I will be revitalized with a longing for the series. If you wanna get into it, I think it's a fun time for an old-ish game, and I really hope the new one that's coming out in {*looks at wrist*} the-yet-to-be-announced-future will be as cherishable, even if it's slightly different.]

[Also? Like, every time I (re)enter an interest/fixation, I make a little Fable AU in my head to consider what kind of heroes the characters might be.]

[thebanishedreader]

Book Bans in California

As of June 2023

This Book is Gay by Juno Dawson

Banned from libraries and classrooms as of September 2022.

Synopsis from BookTrust.org

"Following her previous book Being a Boy, young adult author and former PSHCE teacher Juno Dawson offers up a funny, frank look at all things LGBT in this intelligently-written non-fiction book. 

Including testimonials from people across the gender and sexual spectrums, this is an accessible and inclusive take on what it's like to grow up LGBT, addressing all the worries and anxieties young people may have about this topic - whether or not they are questioning their own sexuality. Dawson writes responsibly and sensitively about her subject, but has plenty of fun along the way - and Spike Gerrell's irreverent illustrations add an extra dose of humour too.

A fantastic book for classrooms and school libraries, This Book is Gay is a must-read for teachers and parents, as well as teens themselves."

Amazon | Barnes & Noble | Blackwell's (UK)

Statistics Source: Pen America

Support the American Library Association!

[meirimerens]

as a simple pole it brings me so much joy that you had fun on your holiday. think most of my fellow polish elgebeetees can relate when i say i've got a complicated relationship with the country and due to the Horrors i often forget how much good is there too.... you're making me want to go to warsaw so bad. pozdrawiam + miłego dnia + daję ci pączka

i so get it darling i was hanging out with polish elgeebeetees the whole time [that's just how it turned out] and we discussed this here and there. other poles have mentioned how my Whimsical polishposting allowed them to see their country through my eyes and maybe see it wasn't just The Horrors as you've mentioned and it's an experience i've lived [in different circumstances] about mine. i needed to travel to see the beauty of my own country back home, and also hearing people experience it as something new re-opened my eyes to things i am so accustomed to and take almost for granted.

i was also telling them how i've seen more pride flags in warsaw than i have anywhere in my Statistically-Less-Homophobic country, including in the capital, and we have the same reasoning that because the homophobic voices (whether they be a minority, a majority, a median, whatever it is it's Loud) are so loud in the country, the resistance must be even louder. there are pockets of resistance, of lgbt+ poles being loud and happy and standing their ground about it, or heterosexual allies who are willing to be louder than the inactive compliance of Not Showing.

on that topic, the sitting room closest to the bar in Same Fusy tea room has a bunch of stickers on the wall that are Explicitly lgbt+ affirming, and while i personally don't care too much because I'll Go Where I Damn Please [i enter churches with glee and whimsy, and i know the position of the church on homosexuals like me, but i am of the belief that If They're So Mad About It They Can Take It Up With Customer Service [the Big Guy]] it did feel good. it did feel nice. as i've said, i haven't seen that many in my country except in explicitly lgbt-centric/inclusive spaces because the general consensus is that acceptation is like Implicit (now whether or not that's actually done. well i shan't speak) so it felt even more like. an Act Of Going Forward. meeting me [gay] where i stand, and not trying to bait me into stepping forward... you know what i mean?

in the capitals as always it will be more accepting because More People esp. More Young People but you know. was a homosexual in the polish countryside was a homosexual holding the polish bees and scratching the beautiful polish foal and mare. there are pockets of resistance like pockets of air underwater where you see people and meet people you recognize and see eye to eye and go places where people will make bluntly sure to show you you're wished here. the horrors might be prolific. but baby we have to serve. we have to keep on serving. we find each other.

bons baisers + you too darling + accepting the pączek ravenously and with great enthusiasm

[hellomynameisbisexual]

Through the years, the term ‘bisexuality’ has undergone a series of redefinitions, and for many bisexuals it holds a deeply personal meaning that has taken years for them to work out. Terms like pansexual and omni-sexual are often included under the umbrella of bisexuality and certainly carry similar aspects. Bisexuality doesn’t have to be limited to being attracted to both men and women, bi advocate and author Robyn Ochs defines bisexuality as “the potential to be attracted — romantically and/or sexually — to people of more than one sex and/or gender,” and includes those who fall on different parts of the gender spectrum.

New terms like bisexuality+ and bi+ have popped up to include the attraction of sexual identities beyond the L and G, including those who are gender queer, fluid, or trans, as well as cisgendered male and females. Bisexuality, simply, is a much more open term for anyone who isn’t attracted to just one gender.

It is a common myth that bisexuals are the least stigmatised of the LGBT+ community. That to be bisexual you can simply date a straight person to camouflage into the heteronormative landscape and thereby escape a lot of the problems associated with being LGBT+. According to GLAAD, bisexuals have higher rates of anxiety, depression, and other mood disorders compared to gays, lesbians and heterosexuals. The Office for National Statistics has found that bisexual woman are twice as likely as their straight counterparts to experience domestic abuse from a partner. While bisexual men are disproportionally affected by HIV and STIs, according to a study from the American Journal of Preventative Medicine – many have blamed biphobia and the stigma against bisexual men, as many bisexual men are too ashamed to seek out proper healthcare.

Further studies have found that 37.3 percent of bisexual adults have reported experiencing depression, compared to 17.2 percent of heterosexual adults. While according to the Pew Research Center, Only 28% of bi or pan people ever feel safe enough to come out to their friends and family. Human Rights Campaign have found that bisexual people face "minority stress," and are more likely to engage in self-harming behaviours and attempted suicide than gay, lesbian, or heterosexual adults. This correlates with a study in the Journal of Adolescent Health, which has found that bisexual and questioning females are at a higher risk of depression or suicide than any other sexual denomination.

���Identifying as bisexual often feels like you're stuck in limbo — not “gay” enough for some, and not “straight” enough for others.”

Many have argued these problems are exasperated because bisexuality is often ignored by the media, academics, and society at large. This is the crux of ‘bi-erasure’, which is defined by GLAAD as “a pervasive problem in which the existence or legitimacy of bisexuality (either in general or in regard to an individual) is questioned or denied outright.”

“Identifying as bisexual often feels like you're stuck in limbo — not “gay” enough for some, and not “straight” enough for others,” writes Kyli Rodriguez-Cayro for Bustle. “While bi people make up 52 percent of the LGBTQ community, they are sometimes excluded from the narrative at Pride festivals and LGBTQ celebrations because of biphobia and bi erasure. Bi erasure is a serious problem that isn't just promoted by straight people, but on occasion, by the non-bi queer community as well.”

“Bisexuals cop biphobia from all sides, from our own community and from straights."

Elizabeth Sutherland writes for SBS about her struggles with occupying both straight and queer spaces and feeling ostracized by both. “There is a privilege in passing as straight, but there is a cost, too. The knowledge that you’re only being treated well, or equally, because part of your self is concealed is a difficult burden to carry… Bisexuals are seen as predatory, promiscuous, untrustworthy, adulterous and confused. We’re vilified as fence-sitters, or just plain greedy. In my line of work I’m in contact with young people all day. It’s easier to reassure colleagues and parents that I’m respectable when I’m seen as a lesbian in a steady relationship. But if I try to describe myself as bisexual—well, for starters, it sounds more sexual.”

Rebecca Dominguez, president of Bisexual Alliance Victoria, explains that “bisexuals cop biphobia from all sides, from our own community and from straights... the reason it’s easier to identify as lesbian than bisexual is that lesbians don't get any homophobia from within the LGBTI communities.”

Unfortunately, the bisexual community oftentimes isn’t united enough to combat these struggles as effectively as the gay and lesbian communities have. Lewis, 26, explains to the Huffington Post: “bisexuals are often invisible from each other. The UK has no mainstream bisexual magazines for us to discuss our issues in. We have no apps to connect us. We have no venues to meet others like us and make friends. I’m one of the most profiled bisexual men in the country yet sadly I’ve never been in a room with even 10 other bisexual men my age. It’s a lonely sexuality, I have no one to talk to that understands some of the unique bi issues I face.

“Another thing that isn’t talked about is the attacks on our straight partners. My girlfriend and I have been together for 18 months, in that time I’d say she has received more abuse than me. People don’t think twice about telling her that I’m going to cheat on her, that she’ll never be enough for me, that’s she’s going to catch HIV. These people have never met me yet they feel it’s fine to cast doubt in my girlfriend’s mind. They’d be perfectly happy for my girlfriend to dump me because of my sexuality and what’s worse is they’d feel the world was back in balance.”

Rob, 41, puts it succinctly enough for the Huffington Post: “Bi-erasure may seem like a small problem but it is thought that bi-invisibility is one of the reasons that, according to several reports, bisexuals have higher rates of depression, anxiety, self-harm and suicide than straight, gay and lesbian people.”

The problems bisexuals face are too dangerous to continue being ignored by the LGBT+ community. If you dismiss a bisexual person as simply going through a phase, not being truthful, after attention, or just being promiscuous then you are part of the problem. Bisexuals make up most of our community and their plight is the same as ours. Standing together and acknowledging the disproportionate mental health issues and discrimination they face, as well as the biphobia within our own community will only strengthen us. Besides, with more young people identifying as queer than ever before, bi-erasure might rapidly become a thing of the past.

[socialchange2022]

Youth homelessness is a unique subpoulation. They are more likely to find successful intervention, and remain stably housed than the general homeless population. Strikingly, nearly 1 in 10 young adults (18-25), and 1 in 30 youth (13-17) experience some form of homelessness in a given year (Morton et al., 2020). The definition of youth homelessness varies slightly but tends to encompass youth under the age of 25. In Portland, homeless youth are defined as unaccompanied persons 24 and under (Multnomah County, 2021). Accompanied youth receive services according to their familial status, and access different services. A systematic international review of interventions for youth homelessness found the most effective interventions utilize counseling and treatment interventions to improve the mental health of youth. Additionally, a small number of studies saw that case management can improve housing situations for youth (Morton et al. 2020). There were few studies on the effectiveness of housing and outreach programs in reducing youth homelessness. Most research tends to focus on the overall population, despite the unique challenges faced by the youth subpopulation. Despite the lack of research, many programs target this specific group and would benefit from a better understanding of what interventions are the most effective, and should be prioritized for funding. Every peer-reviewed study included in my analysis acknowledges there is very little credible data on the demographics of youth homelessness. A phone survey of unaccompanied homeless youth published in the Journal of Adolescent Health found a higher risk o homelessness among “young parents; black, Hispanic, and lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender (LGBT) youth; and those who did not complete high school” (Morton, 2018). The study which covered urban and rural counties across the united states found a household prevalence of 12.5% for youth 18-25, more than double the rate for youth 13-17 years old. These statistics include both explicit homelessness, as well as those who couch surf. Researchers note that populations not experiencing explicit homelessness are much less likely to be counted in others’ studies. It is difficult to study the effect of psychiatric illness on youth homelessness. Because the onset of congenital psychiatric disorders coincides with the age group being studied it is difficult to separate psychiatric conditions and a cause vs a symptom of homelessness. The increased incidence of psychiatric disorders pre-homelessness calls for greater research into psychiatric illness as a cause of youth homelessness. Childhood adversity has been identified as a major indicator of youth homelessness and is easier to isolate because it has already occurred. Despite the strong correlation between childhood adversity and youth homelessness, there is no significant research into PTSD specifically as a risk factor. More research is required to understand the high rates of psychopathology in youth homelessness (Martjin, 2005). In this study crime was initially one of the variable studies, but it was removed from the analysis because only one participant had committed a crime before becoming homeless. Because crime is a well-recognized symptom of homelessness I am interested to see how a conviction for crimes occurring post-homelessness affects the effectiveness of interventions.

 

 

Martijn, C., & Sharpe, L. (2006). Pathways to youth homelessness. Social Science & Medicine, 62(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.05.007 

Morton, M. H., Dworsky, A., Matjasko, J. L., Curry, S. R., Schlueter, D., Chávez, R., & Farrell, A. F. (2018). Prevalence and correlates of youth homelessness in the United States. Journal of Adolescent Health, 62(1), 14–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2017.10.006 

Morton, M. H., Kugley, S., Epstein, R., & Farrell, A. (2020). Interventions for youth homelessness: A systematic review of Effectiveness Studies. Children and Youth Services Review, 116, 105096. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105096 

Multnomah County. (2021, October). Homeless Youth Continuum: Service Point Handbook. Portland, OR. 

[fortressofserenity]

Hell on Earth?

The reason why I'm putting out these prophecies because very soon Philippine television will openly air something blatantly Satanic in the coming hours, where we're going to see Pentagrams, Satanic rituals and the like. This will also include LGBT and polyamory to be more inclusive, but that's what the Devil really wanted: he wants to corrupt the Philippines and he'll actually do this! It's going to be aired on Philippine television, pentagrams and all.

But that's not all since in the following months we'll have more blatantly Satanic programmes every week, coupled with inclusivity that it seems the Devil's out to ruin Philippine people and he'll succeed at just that. More and more Filipinos will turn against the Church for being corrupt and behind the times, then openly practising the occult as a way to reclaim their roots and fight oppression where they see fit.

This is something a lot of Philippine youths will be doing, because they think their parents are oppressive so they'll openly turn to Satanism to remedy this. Since the Devil delights in sin and disobedience, this will really be the case in the very near future. As rebellion and witchcraft are related or similar, many Philippine youths wouldn't just rebel against their parents but also the church.

So they'll turn to Wicca, Satanism and any other form of occultism in addition to LGBT and polyamrous activism to fight back against colonial and Christian norms, because they'll be seen as outdated and oppressive. They'll even pressure the Congress to legalise gay marriage and Satanism, which they'll succeed at those two. But this only sets up for the Philippines to get conquered by China.

It's no different from God allowing Babylon to conquer Judah for the same reason and circumstance, it's going to happen as a sign of his judgement and indignation towards the Philippines for being rebellious and disobedient that he's going to allow China to conquer the Philippines forever. You get what you deserve. What goes around, comes around and what goes up must come down.

The Philippines is very hardhearted and rebellious, but it will repent under Chinese occupation even if it can't entirely escape the consequences of its actions where it's be totally Sinicised forever. This is something Filipinos should care about because we're becoming rebellious and we're backsliding faster than the Europeans and North Americans have.

It will officially be so when it comes to statistics come 2025 and this is where God is telling me this, that's why Filipinos should take heed of this because worse times are coming and it's all our fault why China conquered us, because we're disobedient and foolish deep down inside. So repent Philippines, repent.

[vishwal12santosh]

what percentage of the population is lgbt

When we talk about the LGBT population, we’re referring to individuals who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender. Understanding the size of this community can help in creating a more inclusive and supportive society. So, what percentage of the population is LGBT? Let's dive into the numbers and their significance.

The Numbers Behind the LGBT Population

The percentage of people who identify as LGBT can vary depending on the source and methodology of surveys. However, a commonly referenced statistic comes from the Gallup Poll, which has been tracking LGBT identification in the United States for several years. According to their 2021 data, about 5.6% of U.S. adults identify as LGBT.

Also Read: https://digizidoc.com/

This number has been steadily increasing over the years, likely due to growing social acceptance and more people feeling comfortable to self-identify. It's also worth noting that younger generations, particularly Gen Z, show higher percentages of LGBT identification compared to older generations.

Global Perspective

The percentage of the LGBT population can differ worldwide due to cultural, social, and legal factors that affect self-reporting. For instance, a 2020 survey by the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association (ILGA) suggested that LGBT identification in various countries ranges from 1% to 10%.

In countries with more progressive attitudes towards LGBT rights, such as those in Western Europe, the numbers tend to be higher. Conversely, in regions where there is significant social stigma or legal repercussions for being LGBT, such as parts of Africa and the Middle East, the reported percentages are lower.

Also Read: Boost Your SEO Strategy with SWOT Analysis

Factors Influencing LGBT Identification

Several factors can influence the percentage of people who identify as LGBT:

Social Acceptance: In more accepting societies, individuals may feel more comfortable coming out. Acceptance can be fostered through education, representation in media, and supportive policies.

Legal Protections: Places with strong anti-discrimination laws and protections for LGBT individuals often see higher rates of self-identification. Legal recognition of same-sex marriages and protections against hate crimes contribute to a safer environment for coming out.

Survey Methodology: The way questions are asked can impact responses. Anonymity and the framing of questions play crucial roles. Surveys that assure confidentiality and use inclusive language tend to yield more accurate representations.

Also Read: AI Evolution How Intelligent Machines Are Shaping Our World

Why These Numbers Matter

Understanding the percentage of the population that is LGBT is crucial for several reasons:

Policy Making: Governments can create better policies to protect LGBT rights, such as anti-discrimination laws, and health and social services that cater to the needs of the LGBT community.

Healthcare: Tailoring healthcare services to meet the specific needs of LGBT individuals, including mental health support and specialized medical care, is essential for their well-being.

Social Support: Enhancing support systems in communities, schools, and workplaces can lead to more inclusive environments where LGBT individuals feel valued and accepted.

Moving Towards Inclusivity

Recognizing the diversity within our communities is the first step toward inclusivity. Whether the percentage is 5.6% or varies across different regions, every individual’s identity is valid and deserves respect. Here are some steps to foster inclusivity:

Education: Educating the public about LGBT issues can reduce stigma and promote understanding.

Representation: Increasing LGBT representation in media, politics, and other public spheres can help normalize diverse identities.

Support Networks: Creating and supporting LGBT groups and networks within communities and workplaces can provide a sense of belonging and safety.

Challenges and Considerations

While understanding the percentage of the LGBT population is important, it's also crucial to recognize the challenges faced by this community. Many LGBT individuals experience discrimination, mental health issues, and lack of access to appropriate healthcare. By addressing these challenges, society can better support the LGBT community.

Conclusion

The percentage of the population that identifies as LGBT might seem like just a number, but it represents real people with unique experiences and needs. By understanding these numbers, we can work towards a society that is more accepting, inclusive, and supportive of all its members.

Remember, the journey towards inclusivity starts with awareness and education. Let's continue to learn and grow together, embracing the diversity that makes our communities richer and more vibrant.

Also Read: Boost Your Rankings with SEO Experts

[andrewsoc438]

Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Families

In 2016, a research article on LGBT Families was published and it addresses different ways there are to create a family for a queer person. As well as the various struggles they may encounter when creating their family. The article also goes over how these families go through a lot from the planning stages of having children to having their children and any other discrimination they may face as a family by being queer parents. A key point of the article is how a healthcare provider should properly be familiar with all types of families including queer families. As looking for a healthcare provider that accepts and is welcoming to queer families is vital when in the process of starting a queer family.

In the research article done by Cecil R. Webster MD and Cynthia J. Telingator MD, they created a vignette of a same-sex couple of color that are looking for a doctor for their son and their new child whom they are expecting. The authors also use quantitative measures as data collection and statistics as their main research methodology to back up their findings.

Barriers that hinder queer parents can often be facing stigmatization from their own families or any outsiders which could have them possibly reconsider even becoming parents. They also need to think of their future children when they get older as well because while we do live in a more progressive time there still are bigoted people and bigoted people make bigoted children; so these queer parents have to worry as well if their child will be bullied or made fun of for having queer parents. While this article did have its limitations from the lack of data for gay fathers and transgender parents. I believe that future research could benefit them by conducting their own research to get more diverse results.

[thebanishedreader]

Book Bans in Massachusetts

As of June 2023

This Book is Gay by Juno Dawson

Banned pending investigation as of October 2022, based on a formal challenge.

Synopsis from BookTrust.org

"Following her previous book Being a Boy, young adult author and former PSHCE teacher Juno Dawson offers up a funny, frank look at all things LGBT in this intelligently-written non-fiction book. 

Including testimonials from people across the gender and sexual spectrums, this is an accessible and inclusive take on what it's like to grow up LGBT, addressing all the worries and anxieties young people may have about this topic - whether or not they are questioning their own sexuality. Dawson writes responsibly and sensitively about her subject, but has plenty of fun along the way - and Spike Gerrell's irreverent illustrations add an extra dose of humour too.

A fantastic book for classrooms and school libraries, This Book is Gay is a must-read for teachers and parents, as well as teens themselves."

Amazon | Barnes & Noble | Blackwell's (UK)

Statistics Source: Pen America

Support the American Library Association!