"Ex-Gays" | 2012 Election | Iowa | Marcus Bachmann | Michelle Bachmann | News

Confronted by 'Gay-Friendly Iowan', Michele and Marcus Bachmann Call Kinsey Report a 'Myth': VIDEO

Bachmann_kinsey

A voter in Clarion, Iowa yesterday asked Michele Bachmann to autograph her "gay-friendly Iowan" sign and then asked the candidate about her views on gay people, CNN reports:

"I wonder if you're aware that 10% of the population is gay. And if you have 28 children, then 2.8 of those kids are very likely gay."

The congresswoman, within definite earshot as she hovered over Schnell, at first seemed to avoid the question, trying to say "hello" to someone new. Schnell turned to her friend and said, "She's not listening to me." Bachmann must have heard that because she then turned back.

"Well, that's according to the Kinsey Report," the candidate replied.

Dr. Alfred Kinsey is best known for conducting interviews with thousands of individuals and publishing his findings in books on human sexual behavior during the 1940s and '50s. Bachmann's husband, who runs a clinic in their district in Minnesota that has long been accused of conducting "reparative therapy" by trying to help gay individuals become straight, then chimed in.

"Your facts are wrong," he said.

"That's not valid?" Schnell asked back.

"No it isn't," Michele Bachmann said. Her husband added, "No, it's not at all. It's been a myth for many years."

Watch VIDEO of the exchange, AFTER THE JUMP...

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. Regardless what the actual numbers are, I'm SURE our sexual attraction/identity plots a bell-curve, with relatively-few people exclusively gay or straight, and the vast majority exhibiting some degree of attraction and/or behavior toward members of both sexes.

    I happen to be strongly attracted to (and my behavior is exclusively with) same-sex (men), but I do have some attraction to women.

    Regardless of various forms of therapy and personal effort, my attraction has been remarkably consistent for the 30+ years I've been sexually active...though my behavior has changed from exclusively-straight to exclusively-gay.

    Posted by: Chris | Dec 19, 2011 3:21:33 PM


  2. Well, as someone who has been on the Kinsey Institute faculty, it's very difficult on a number of levels to estimate "the gay." For example, the lowest number was published by the Battelle Institute and they announced it at 1%. One of the things I teach my university students is "The question determines the answer." Doing sex research in one of the most sex negative nations (i.e., the U.S.) means we are challenged in terms of doing random samples. Imagine if I were to randomly call your mother and explain I'm a researcher with the Kinsey Institute and then ask her how many times a week she masturbates? A lot of random calls of this nature get a slammed receiver as a response. Just so, we often have to depend on using a large population base that volunteers (often university students) or using a "friendship/snowball" network. For example, when I was researching inter-racial same-sex couples, after I would finish the interview, I would ask the couple if they knew others like themselves,and if they would be willing to introduce me as someone professional and respectful working in a legitimate context. The problem with this approach is a "truncated range." Those with whom you socialize tend to reflect your own social/economic/educational status, so I don't tend to get to interview referrals who are homeless or hang with Bill Gates. Anyway--the Battelle study actually not only did a random sample--they deliberately did not call anyone on the coasts--bye bye NYC, South Beach, San Francisco, or L.A.--the caller asked you if you were a homosexual, and if you said yes, asked for your address and social security number. And still--1% responded positively. But this is how you get "bad" research publicized so some (esp. anti-gay groups) accept the stats without question, esp. if they are on the low side, so the gay population can be dismissed. The other problem comes with labeling and self-identity--as some of the other comments have pointed out. This is why CDC shifted in HIV research from using the term "gay" to "MSM" or men who have sex with men, so you could look at a behavior, rather than an identity. And then you end up with a majority of Americans who believe sex is only defined as vaginal/penile penetration, so "gay" sex isn't considered "real sex," and that's why a man can have sex with a man and honestly believe his straight identity is not compromised.

    Posted by: Ty Nolan | Dec 19, 2011 3:41:06 PM


  3. I am sick of hearing its just 10%. If being straight caused a man to be labeled a f@g then only 10% would admit to being heterosexual. Any sexually attractive gay guy can tell you the number of guys willing to go there is way, way higher.

    Posted by: Michael | Dec 19, 2011 9:33:21 PM


  4. Most present-day sexologists both question Kinsey's methods and percentages and question, for many of the reasons stated below, that they are at all applicable today or across any set of cultures. In some sense the Bachmanns are therefore correct. However, in no sense can their comments be taken as subtle or intelligent ones. On the other hand, it is not subtle or intelligent to simply quote the Kinsey percentages either.

    Posted by: DW | Dec 19, 2011 9:41:51 PM


  5. The real myth is that her husband is straight!

    Posted by: Me | Dec 20, 2011 1:28:09 PM


  6. no reliable study concludes more thatn 3-5%

    Posted by: asfasf | Dec 20, 2011 2:46:56 PM


  7. « 1 2

Post a comment







Trending


« «Ron Paul Talks Gay Marriage, Rips His Fellow Candidates: VIDEOS« «