“The survey – based on interviews with more than 121,000 people – contradicts the perception that lesbians and gays are mostly white, urban and affluent, said lead author Gary Gates.”
“‘But this data reveals that relative to the general population, the LGBT population has a larger proportion of non-white people and clearly is not overly wealthy.’”
In evolutionary terms, you don’t have to raise children you can’t make.
I cannot find survey data on what percentage of mixed race people aren’t straight.
That is weird.
It’s basic demographics, why is that buried?
You would think they’d shout it from the rooftops.
But parents want grandkids, don’t they? Or their own investment is worthless.
“Very little research has been done into which races are more likely to be homosexual.”
That sounds likely.
“Estimates of the proportion of the population who are lesbian or gay range from 2 per cent to 10 per cent, although recent US surveys have put it at around 4 per cent.
In 2010, a survey by the Office for National Statistics concluded that 1.5 per cent of Britons identified themselves as gay or bisexual, although a 2008 poll put the proportion at 6 per cent.”
If you sample urban gay areas, your data will be skewed.
This is interesting but twists things.
“The concept of continuity was harnessed to growing attention to miscegenation, or “amalgamation,” in social science writing in the first decades of the twentieth century. Edward Byron Reuter’s The Mulatto in the United States, for instance, pursued an exhaustive quantitative and comparative study of the mulatto population and its achievements in relation to those of “pure” white or African ancestry.”
That bias isn’t science, it’s propaganda.
How little he turned up is great negative evidence though.
Spot the frauds.
“Xavier Mayne, for example, one of the earliest American advocates of homosexual rights, wrote, “Between whitest of men and the blackest negro stretches out a vast line of intermediary races as to their colours: brown, olive, red tawny, yellow.” He then invoked this model of race to envision a continuous spectrum of gender and sexuality: “Nature abhors the absolute, delights in the fractional. . . . Intersexes express the half-steps, the between-beings ”
Most hermaphrodites are infertile.
We evolve FOR one thing and AGAINST another.
Nature loves the absolute, bears can’t breathe underwater.
You evolve for ONE ecosystem at the EXCLUSION of all else.
This is Origin of the Species tier, old biology. This guy’s anti-evolution.
“In this analogy, Mayne reversed dominant cultural hierarchies that privileged purity over mixture. Drawing upon irrefutable evidence of the “natural” existence of biracial people,”
What about the evidence of their fertility issues?
And there’s no such thing as irrefutable in biology on the level of individuals.
Real identity problem, huh?
If race doesn’t matter, why pretend you have one?
Miscellaneous is not a category, that’s a category error.
Why have racial pride if that’s the root of evil to you?
And how can atheists believe pride is a sin?
“Mayne posited a direct analogy to a similarly mixed body, the intersex, which he positioned as a necessary presence within the natural order.”
False equivalence. Naturalistic fallacy.
You can see the slow creep of genocidal rhetoric.
Pure races have a human birthright to exist in their homeland, invader.
If you want the whites kicked out of Africa but not the blacks from America, you’re a massive hypocrite.