Does this imply that the human race is drastically more sexually fluid than most species when allowed to be without oppression? Or that the culture gen z has grown up in helps cultivate a more fluid preference?
I grew up in the 80s, so I’m trying to understand, but it’s tough meshing statements like this with my experiences.
Please don’t misunderstand this post as disapproval. Just confusion.
Baseball (and sports in general) are wonderful man made examples of evolution and how selection pressure can force the expression of certain traits. About 25% of MLB players are left handed, versus about 10% in the general population.
A similar thing has occurred in the NBA where the average height is about 6’6” (or 198.6cm for those opposed to Freedom Units), which is about 8 inches taller than the average American male.
Doubtless, you can look at any top level professional sport league and find some physical trait (or set of traits) that is wholly disproportionate compared to the general population due to those traits providing some advantage(s) that is unique to that game.
Also huge swaths of bi people and a lot of people who are now understood as gay and trans as opposed to straight people who hate their body and life but got rejected from hormones
The best explanation I’ve heard is that it’s similar to the stats for left-handed people. Way back in the day, almost no one “identified” as being left-handed. But once the stigma against left-handedness was eliminated, the numbers went up.
So in other words, yes, it’s a reflection of LGBTQ+ becoming more acceptable, particularly among Gen Z. There could be other factors, but that’s probably the main one.
It’s a confluence of factors. LGBTQIA+ is sort of a gender/sexuallity/ phenotype physicality solidarity alliance and the actual boundries has grown in scope since the 80’s.
Like take for instance asexual people. Asexuallity became a part of the solidarity when people reached out over the internet and and started realizing that there were a lot of people who just don’t feel sexual attraction and that there are certain widely accepted forms of social coercion that revolve around pushing people towards sexual attraction. But asexuallity as a part of the LGBTQIA only really became a thing in the early 2000’s. Non-binary trans identities are much the same. A lot of people were feeling the way they did about themselves in isolation but they had no frame of reference to think that they were not just the odd person out.
The other half is a society wide re-examination of compulsory heterosexuallity/cis gender hegemony. There are way more people out there who no longer define themselves by who they’ve chosen to have physical sexual experience with and now a lot more people are more frank about defining themselves by the range of people they are attracted to. Like if the majority of people artificially penalize a bi-person for choosing a same sex relationship a lot of people will just take the easier path and just narrow their choices or keep their liasons with the restricted choice secret and not assume the label.
I before I came out as trans initially figured I didn’t count as trans because I both wasn’t physically transitioning and my industry is somewhat hostile to trans people so I was very closeted ao I figured the label only really belonged to the people brave enough to live out of the closet… But eventually someone found me and was like “No, it’s not aspirational. Even deep in the closet you are still trans.”
This combination of destigmatization, solidarity messaging, the inclusion of whole other groups (like intersex people, gender minorities, asexuals) broadening the scope and outreach to the closeted means that more people generally self identify as LGBTQIA or queer.
Animal kingdom wise we’re still less observably sexual fluid than other primates. Bisexuality is actually pretty ubiquitous particularly amongst male primates with it actually being the overwhelming norm in some species so chances are we are probably actually haven’t seen the curve level off from suppressive stigma.
The 11% dip for the GOP makes sense. Their policies are just not in line with what young people value.
That said, the +24% gain in LGBTQ+ identification is fascinating and I would love to know how nature, nurture, taboo, and oppression play impact that. This would be a really cool time to be in university and studying human sexuality and gender.
Putting sexuality in such a defined state is relatively new in human culture. So most often no one would have the worlds to talk about it or even know it could be classified differently.
Our closest related species gets it on so much in so many ways it is one STD away from extinction. It might be that we really are like this. Maybe the norm for humans was to have random homosexual and hetrosexual orgies everywhere. It was only because it became important to know who the daddy was that things changed? Or the sampling of the survey wasn’t great. You know groundbreaking or meaningless.
I’m a bit confused by this.
Does this imply that the human race is drastically more sexually fluid than most species when allowed to be without oppression? Or that the culture gen z has grown up in helps cultivate a more fluid preference?
I grew up in the 80s, so I’m trying to understand, but it’s tough meshing statements like this with my experiences.
Please don’t misunderstand this post as disapproval. Just confusion.
Amazing what not punishing things does
Baseball?
Baseball (and sports in general) are wonderful man made examples of evolution and how selection pressure can force the expression of certain traits. About 25% of MLB players are left handed, versus about 10% in the general population.
A similar thing has occurred in the NBA where the average height is about 6’6” (or 198.6cm for those opposed to Freedom Units), which is about 8 inches taller than the average American male.
Doubtless, you can look at any top level professional sport league and find some physical trait (or set of traits) that is wholly disproportionate compared to the general population due to those traits providing some advantage(s) that is unique to that game.
That’s true… And what I was (jokingly) referencing…
But, my Dad’s mother, my Granny…
She was a natural Lefty…
And musically inclined…
Her Daddy slacked the strings on the family guitar before he left for work…
She figured out how to tune that instrument…
Those in her church, later, made fun of her for playing backwards chords, because she was a lefty. .
She learned to play the other way, too… And she taught me both…
There’s so many sides and nuances to every thought in our lives…
It was a harmless joke, but it has roots in my reality…
This shit is so often much deeper than we think…
You made a fuckin hell of a statement, but it’s without context or understanding…
I was just making an off-handed joke…
There is a fucking shitload of lefties in baseball… Because it fucks with the righties when they’re batting…
I think it’s mostly that very few of them identify as Republican.
But also, the less stigma around gender expression, the more kids will be open to explore theirs.
That’s not what the data said.
https://www.axios.com/2024/01/23/gen-z-less-religious-more-liberal-lgbtq
Identifying as Republican went from 32% in the Boomer Generation to 21% in Gen Z. Identifying as LGBTQ+ went from 4% with Boomers to 28% with Gen Z.
Both changes are major, but the LGBTQ+ change is massive.
It’s probably worth mentioning we recognize certain types of people as part of the LGBTQ+ umbrella who were not before. Asexual people, for example.
Also huge swaths of bi people and a lot of people who are now understood as gay and trans as opposed to straight people who hate their body and life but got rejected from hormones
The best explanation I’ve heard is that it’s similar to the stats for left-handed people. Way back in the day, almost no one “identified” as being left-handed. But once the stigma against left-handedness was eliminated, the numbers went up.
So in other words, yes, it’s a reflection of LGBTQ+ becoming more acceptable, particularly among Gen Z. There could be other factors, but that’s probably the main one.
It’s a confluence of factors. LGBTQIA+ is sort of a gender/sexuallity/ phenotype physicality solidarity alliance and the actual boundries has grown in scope since the 80’s.
Like take for instance asexual people. Asexuallity became a part of the solidarity when people reached out over the internet and and started realizing that there were a lot of people who just don’t feel sexual attraction and that there are certain widely accepted forms of social coercion that revolve around pushing people towards sexual attraction. But asexuallity as a part of the LGBTQIA only really became a thing in the early 2000’s. Non-binary trans identities are much the same. A lot of people were feeling the way they did about themselves in isolation but they had no frame of reference to think that they were not just the odd person out.
The other half is a society wide re-examination of compulsory heterosexuallity/cis gender hegemony. There are way more people out there who no longer define themselves by who they’ve chosen to have physical sexual experience with and now a lot more people are more frank about defining themselves by the range of people they are attracted to. Like if the majority of people artificially penalize a bi-person for choosing a same sex relationship a lot of people will just take the easier path and just narrow their choices or keep their liasons with the restricted choice secret and not assume the label.
I before I came out as trans initially figured I didn’t count as trans because I both wasn’t physically transitioning and my industry is somewhat hostile to trans people so I was very closeted ao I figured the label only really belonged to the people brave enough to live out of the closet… But eventually someone found me and was like “No, it’s not aspirational. Even deep in the closet you are still trans.”
This combination of destigmatization, solidarity messaging, the inclusion of whole other groups (like intersex people, gender minorities, asexuals) broadening the scope and outreach to the closeted means that more people generally self identify as LGBTQIA or queer.
Animal kingdom wise we’re still less observably sexual fluid than other primates. Bisexuality is actually pretty ubiquitous particularly amongst male primates with it actually being the overwhelming norm in some species so chances are we are probably actually haven’t seen the curve level off from suppressive stigma.
I believe it’s your first option, acceptance for being yourself is the normal instead of a beating from your parents like pre 2000.
The 11% dip for the GOP makes sense. Their policies are just not in line with what young people value.
That said, the +24% gain in LGBTQ+ identification is fascinating and I would love to know how nature, nurture, taboo, and oppression play impact that. This would be a really cool time to be in university and studying human sexuality and gender.
deleted by creator
LGBTQ came out if the closet and GOP went in.
Putting sexuality in such a defined state is relatively new in human culture. So most often no one would have the worlds to talk about it or even know it could be classified differently.
Our closest related species gets it on so much in so many ways it is one STD away from extinction. It might be that we really are like this. Maybe the norm for humans was to have random homosexual and hetrosexual orgies everywhere. It was only because it became important to know who the daddy was that things changed? Or the sampling of the survey wasn’t great. You know groundbreaking or meaningless.
Removed by mod
No, they’re just not being persecuted by narrow-minded superstitious assholes like in past decades.