Search Box

Friday, June 5, 2015

Statistics never mentioned by the mainstream media, Part II

Although heterosexuals outnumber homosexuals by a ratio of at least 20 to 1, homosexual pedophiles commit about one-third of the total number of child sex offenses. (From the Family Research Council.)

Why the disparity?

Although only 5% of the overall population is gay, over half of all serial killers are gay. (From Adherents.)

I'm not sure I buy this second statistic, but whatever the percentage of gay serial killers, it's obviously far higher than the overall percentage of gays in the population. (I'd guess at least close to half.) Of course, only an extremely tiny percentage of gays are serial killers. Nonetheless, the disparity is striking, and you'd think some psychologist would take a crack at figuring out why this is so.

Or why a third of all pedophiles are homosexual.

Or are these subjects too radioactive to hold up to the light of day?


Paavo said...

Homosexuality seems like left-handedness in that they both correlate slightly with negative things that might have something to do with prenatal development. Left-handedness is correlated with lower birth weight,shorter life, criminality, lower intelligence, pedophilia and homosexuality.

It too is a touchy subject to study or comment on, because there is fear of increasing prejudices. People get offended and I can understand it. Even if a left-handed person, or especially someone who cares about them, knows that the left-handed person in question is without no question very fit and exceptionally intelligent, any mention of correlation between lefthandedness and a negative quality is seen as a direct attack against that left-handed person.

It also seems rude and prejudiced to point out that pedophiles and serial killers are more likely of low intellect and social skills than high status leaders. Though of course there are high status intelligent pedophiles and serial killers too and they have potential to cause more harm.

John Craig said...

Paavo --
Wow, interesting, I'd never heard all those rings about left-handers before. (I'm left-hand.) I knew about the correlation with homosexuality and shorter lives, but hadn't heard of the other stuff. Hmm…..Guess I'll have to go molest some children now.

I'd heard of the correlation between criminality and low intelligence, but not between serial killing and low IQ. I've known two pedophiles (that I know of) and both of them seemed reasonably smart. One was a guy who was involved with Big Brothers (do they still exist?) and the other was a swim coach.

Once you realize someone's either a serial killer or pedophile, I don't think it's "rude" to say they are of low intellect. Once you've established one or the other of those first two things, the low intellect is barely even an afterthought. (It's a little like telling someone that he's stupid and ugly and has been a failure at everything he's ever done….and oh, he has bad taste in socks as well.)

Anonymous said...

so am i. very interesting. also my fingers - second digit is shorter than the first. that is supposed to correlate with high testosterone amongst men and amongst moresuccessful traders.

highly interesting. i'm highly intelligent, badly coordinated have high endurance and good health. high math and verbal skills, great memory but poor creativity and no originality.

you john?


John Craig said...

Anon --
Yes my ring finger is longer than my index finger, though I'd say i'm just average in testosterone (being half-Asian). I'm not even sure how I'd rank on coordination; some things i'm good at, others not so much. I used to be known for having a good memory, but recently have been unable to recognize faces of people I've only met once or twice, for some reason that software has burned out. I think I'm pretty good on the creativity side, which is supposed to correlate with left-handedness as well.

Jokah Macpherson said...

"Or are these subjects too radioactive to hold up to the light of day?"

Yes, apparently. I think I would take the gay rights movement more seriously if it was partially about addressing gays' own inner demons (huge disease vector, outsized incidence of pedophilia, etc.) rather than completely about me oppressing them with my indifference.

Have you ever read about Roger Casement? He was an Irish guy who played a major role in publicizing the atrocities in the Belgian Congo to the world at large. He bravely stood up to the powers that be, notably King Leopold II, and helped bring justice to the Congo.

He also really loved sex with young boys and documented these liaisons in an extensive diary. I guess this is a really good example of how both heroic and ugly characteristics can simultaneously exist in the same person.

John Craig said...

Jokah --
You put it perfectly. I forgot about the disease bit. You're right, they try to make it all about the straights who are oppressing them and never look at themselves honestly. I remember during the initial AIDS crisis in the 80's, you'd have thought it was Reagan killing all the gays.

No, I'm not familiar with Casement. Interesting story, though.

Pavonine99 said...

Here's the thorny thing though- while a disproportionate number of pedophiles are men who abuse boys, most of them aren't "gay" in the usual sense. They don't cruise for adult partners, and they don't enter long-term relationships with adult men. If they have any adult relationships at all, it's more likely to be with women.

It's a tricky statistic to talk about, because the logistics of it are difficult.

John Craig said...

Pavonine --
You're absolutely right about that. I saw that, thought about including it in the post, but then didn't. Of the two child molesters I knew, btw were interested in boys. One was a thin, sot of wan fellow who never dated women, or, as far as I know, men. The other was married with a child, though I'd guess he rarely had relations with his wife.

Bu yes, you're right, and that's why I was careful to say "homosexual pedophiles" and not "homosexuals" when quoting that statistic.

Mark Caplan said...

The Family Research Council is a socially conservative, anti-LGBT Christian organization, so one has to read their findings on "homosexuality" with some skepticism. For instance, if you define pedophilia as sexual attraction to children as old as 24, as they do in one case, a lot of gay men are going to be classified as pedophiles. (Jennifer Lawrence was 22 in AMERICAN HUSTLE, so men who found her sexy would be pedophiles by this definition.)

Another article cited by the Family Research Council described pedophiles who were attracted to boys as young as 15, another to boys between 16 and 19. Abolitionist John Brown's second wife was 16. The legal minimum age of marriage in three states is 15.

John Craig said...

Mark --
Good point. I always think of pedophiles as people attracted to pre-pubescents, but I know definitions vary.

The Family Research Council aside, though, I get the impression that a lot of the child molestation that goes on is of boys. It's definitely way out of proportion to the proportion of gays in the population. (When you think of the Catholic priest scandals, the 2000+ lawsuits the Boy Scouts of America have been faced with, etc.) I actually looked for hard numbers from a source other than the FRC, but couldn't find any.

Mark Caplan said...

UC at Davis psych professor Gregory M Herek looks at the relationship between homosexuality and pedophilia here:

He cites research stating that gay men are not more likely to molest prepubescent boys than heterosexual men. Some of the confusion comes about because a legally defined child can be a teenager, so a "child molester" who abuses a 16-year-old minor isn't a pedophile. A pedophile fantasizes or desires sex with a prepubescent child but doesn't necessarily act on his impulses. Herek says Catholic priests abused mostly post-pubescent boys so weren't pedophiles.

One problem with all this is that we know college professors are severely punished or even terminated for espousing politically incorrect opinions, so their research is as polluted with spin as PR from ideologically biased groups like the Family Research Council.

John Craig said...

Mark --
I can't argue with anything you've said. The first statistic I cited does seem to be pretty squishy, and the FRC does had an agenda. And I've heard about how a lot of homosexually-inclined child molesters (i.e. who like little boys rather than little girls) are heterosexual in their adult orientation. But I have a hard time getting my mind around that one. To me, if you like breasts and vaginas and everything else about an adult woman, how can you also be attracted to little boys? Men tend to have very specific tastes, and I would think you'd like one or the other. I wonder if some of these men who have been caught molesting boys really were as hetero as they claimed. Maybe some of them have wives, but that can just be cover, witness the number of gay guys who've married beards over the years.

And yes, there should be a more consistent definition of what "child molester" means. The "statutory rape" of a 16 year old girl by an 18 year old boy is light years removed from a 40-year-old man who molests 10 year old boys, but both can technically be called sex criminals. (And yes, I realize that the former will rarely be prosecuted.) But there's a whole range of situations in between those two, and where you draw the line as to what's acceptable aries.

And yes, you're absolutely right about academia's built in biases.

High Arka said...

A component of all this could be related to the American legal system. We know that:

(1) Homosexuality was classified as a mental disease, and

(2) American jurisprudence allows the mentally ill to receive more favorable criminal justice treatment.

Therefore, it's quite likely that, when serious sentences and media attention are involved, child molesters and/or serial killers (and their lawyers) would be more willing to plead homosexuality, and come up with "corroborating evidence" to prove a homosexual lifestyle, than they would be otherwise.

...just like if you get in trouble for something, and suddenly remember that you have a distant family member who was an Amerindian, and you can claim that the cop arrested you because of racism.

John Craig said...

High Arka --
But I'v never heard of anybody pleading not guilty by reason of homosexuality. I see your logic, but the legal system has never given homosexual serial killers a break because of their homosexuality. John Wayne Gacy, Wayne Williams, Juan Corona, Jeffrey Dahmer, etc, all pretty much got what they wold have gotten if they'd been straight.