Slog
News & ArtsWednesday, June 23, 2010
Politics Why The Stranger Accepted the Ad on Page 15 of This Week's Paper
Posted by Eli Sanders on Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 11:28 AM
In April, Pastor Ken Hutcherson threw a shit fit after the Snoqualmie Valley Record refused to run an ad similar to this one.
This month, The Stranger received our own ad submission from Hutcherson, and we figured: We’ll run it, take his money, and donate all of it—$2,115—to his archenemies at the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network. If you’d like to honor Hutch’s idiocy with your own donation, you can do so here.
As for the “facts” in his Stranger ad:
They are false. Obviously.
Fighting against homophobia does not cause you or anyone you know to become a homosexual (though it will cause you to become a better person). Being a homosexual does not cause HIV/AIDS any more than, say, being born with the body of an NFL linebacker causes a person to grow up to play for the Seahawks and then, later in life, become an evangelical pastor who exhibits symptoms of football-induced chronic traumatic brain injury.
Yes, gay men in the United States contract HIV at higher rates than any other group. But in South Africa, where HIV is believed to be more prevalent than in any other country in the world, HIV is more common among women than men—and no one is arguing that being female causes HIV. What causes HIV is being exposed to HIV. Protect yourself and your partners.
Yes, homosexuals are at higher risk of suicide. (Because of persecution by people like Hutcherson, among other reasons.) Yes, male homosexuals are prohibited from giving blood. (Because certain politicians listen to people like Hutcherson.) Yes, one million people are living with HIV in America, and that number seems to be increasing. (For black women, this increase is occurring at nearly 15 times the rate of white women—because, among other reasons, people like Hutcherson encourage black gay men to stay in the closet, thus fostering the “down low” sex habits that leave many unsuspecting women HIV-positive.) No, the median age of death for gay men and lesbians is not 42 and 45, respectively. (These “death facts,” and the count of sex partners had by “practicing homosexuals,” come not from the CDC, as Hutcherson claims, but from a long-discredited 1978 screed. What part of “Thou shalt not bear false witness” does Hutch not understand?)
As for the following statement in Hutcherson's ad:
Rainbows are caused when sunlight passes through water droplets in the earth’s atmosphere. That sunlight gets refracted and reflected by the water droplets in a complicated way, producing a beautiful progression of colors that can be apprehended by the human eye. God doesn’t poop rainbows, and neither does this lobster.
Happy Pride!
2
When I click this to view, the graphic pop-up is actually smaller than it appears in the column...both too small to read.
6
Even if the median age of death for gay men and lesbians WERE 42 and 45 respectively (which I doubt), that's not the same as saying that's the "average" age of death.
Definition of Median: "In probability theory and statistics, a median is described as the numeric value separating the higher half of a sample, a population, or a probability distribution, from the lower half. The median of a finite list of numbers can be found by arranging all the observations from lowest value to highest value and picking the middle one."
If they meant average, they would have said "mean" instead of "median". I flunked college statistics twice, and I still know that.
Definition of Median: "In probability theory and statistics, a median is described as the numeric value separating the higher half of a sample, a population, or a probability distribution, from the lower half. The median of a finite list of numbers can be found by arranging all the observations from lowest value to highest value and picking the middle one."
If they meant average, they would have said "mean" instead of "median". I flunked college statistics twice, and I still know that.
7
@4: So it is. Good eyes! That's not God's rainbow?
[church lady]Who would pervert the rainbow like that, anyway? Could it be...SATAN???[/church lady]
Also, lobsters are not kosher. They swim in the sea but do not have fins and scales. Not God's rainbowlobster.
[church lady]Who would pervert the rainbow like that, anyway? Could it be...SATAN???[/church lady]
Also, lobsters are not kosher. They swim in the sea but do not have fins and scales. Not God's rainbowlobster.
11
I'm a 43 y.o. lesbian!!!!! My lover is 47!!!!!!!!!!!! Shit, we should be in a museum somewhere or at least in the Guiness Book!
12
When I was in first or second grade, there was a little black-and-white outline picture of a rainbow in my phonics book. We were supposed to write down what it was a picture of, then color it in. There was no context to make it easily identifiable as a rainbow, no trees or sun or anything. I, in my mind that was a little warped even then, decided that it was a bowel movement. However, I had no idea how to spell bowel or movement, and I ended up writing "bow" which was the right answer. Of course, I also colored it brown, which Sister Carol told me was wrong. I was very confused that day.
God pooping rainbows reminded me of that, and I thought I'd share.
God pooping rainbows reminded me of that, and I thought I'd share.
15
"Practicing Homosexual?"
Is gayness a religion now? That would make it the only organized religion I could possibly tolerate. When are services?
Is gayness a religion now? That would make it the only organized religion I could possibly tolerate. When are services?
17
@6 - There appears to be a very good reason you flunked twice.
Perhaps, knowing that, you should look things up for confirmation before entering the mode of lecturing the masses about probability and statistics.
Not trying to be mean, I'm just sayin'...
Perhaps, knowing that, you should look things up for confirmation before entering the mode of lecturing the masses about probability and statistics.
Not trying to be mean, I'm just sayin'...
18
Stranger, you've blasphemed the Lobster God for the last time. Prepare to face his delicious, buttery wrath!
20
Wow - so if the average lifespan is 42, that would mean that the 1/3 of homosexuals who admit to 1000 partners or more (don't ask me how they kept track of that) had to find new partners at a truly amazing rate.
Let's see... If they started at age 16, and lived to 42, that gives them about 9,496 days of sex-havin' life. That means that that every 9.496 days, on average, they found a new sex partner. Pretty impressive!
Let's see... If they started at age 16, and lived to 42, that gives them about 9,496 days of sex-havin' life. That means that that every 9.496 days, on average, they found a new sex partner. Pretty impressive!
21
Ok so using the almighty google I was unable to find any information on the KHM Families Foundation, they are not listed on
http://www.irs.gov/app/pub-78/search.do?…
There is a KHM Falmies Inc in Missoula Mt.
Anyone else find this strange?
http://www.irs.gov/app/pub-78/search.do?…
There is a KHM Falmies Inc in Missoula Mt.
Anyone else find this strange?
22
@6:
Indeed. If we assume the definition of "man" and "woman" to be the legal one - 18 or older - we can do a little math and surmise that a median age of 42 would have a tail somewhere around the mid 60s, with 45 putting it closer to the 70-year mark.
That doesn't seem particularly reasonable, though, given that the CIA World Factbook has life expectancy in the States at 77-80 years, which suggests to me that Hutchie is using age from date of birth. (Logically. That would put median age at death pretty much squarely around 40. This is, of course, assuming the death rates for those under 40 are more or less the same as those above 40.)
That would give us a very unsurprising median death at just about precisely the middle of the lifespan, or in other words, exactly where you'd expect the middle to be. Actually, at 42 to 45 years, it's skewed upward.
In other words, the median age at death for gays and lesbians is higher than the prediction for the general population. Gays and lesbians live longer than heterosexuals, by these numbers.*
Put that on your pole and smoke it, Hutch.
==
* One example of why Twain called it "lies, damned lies, and statistics." You can do just about anything you want to with highfalutin statistical language.
Indeed. If we assume the definition of "man" and "woman" to be the legal one - 18 or older - we can do a little math and surmise that a median age of 42 would have a tail somewhere around the mid 60s, with 45 putting it closer to the 70-year mark.
That doesn't seem particularly reasonable, though, given that the CIA World Factbook has life expectancy in the States at 77-80 years, which suggests to me that Hutchie is using age from date of birth. (Logically. That would put median age at death pretty much squarely around 40. This is, of course, assuming the death rates for those under 40 are more or less the same as those above 40.)
That would give us a very unsurprising median death at just about precisely the middle of the lifespan, or in other words, exactly where you'd expect the middle to be. Actually, at 42 to 45 years, it's skewed upward.
In other words, the median age at death for gays and lesbians is higher than the prediction for the general population. Gays and lesbians live longer than heterosexuals, by these numbers.*
Put that on your pole and smoke it, Hutch.
==
* One example of why Twain called it "lies, damned lies, and statistics." You can do just about anything you want to with highfalutin statistical language.
23
One could easily use statistics to make a case against any group of people. Does Hutch have a newspaper that accepts advertisements? I have a series of ads I want to do.
24
As the proud parent of a 21 year old lesbian I applaud you Stranger! Keep taking Pastor Hutcherson's cash, as much of it as you can.
@ 17 - ?? #6's definition and explanation of median are spot on. List of numbers - 1, 2, 5, 23, 107. The median is 5, the mean (or average) is 27.6
@ 17 - ?? #6's definition and explanation of median are spot on. List of numbers - 1, 2, 5, 23, 107. The median is 5, the mean (or average) is 27.6
26
You should promote a donor match to GLSEN. We could all donate in Hutch's name, and they could send him dozens of thank you notes.
35
@22, I don't think you're correctly describing the significance of the difference between mean and median. In any reasonable distribution of ages at death, with a large sample, the mean and median will be pretty close. If the distribution of ages at death is remotely normal/Gaussian/bell curve-ish, the mean and median (and even the mode!) will be in the same ballpark, I expect within a couple of years.
If the numbers he gives are based on anything and not straight-up lies, it's probably a problem of bad-faith sampling. If you recorded every out gay person who died in the last ten years, it's not a terrible shock if the average of those ages is low, even by decades, compared to the population at large. 80-year-old gay people are probably not as reliably out of the closet as younger gay people. If you recorded the average age at death of everyone born in the 70's, it would be less than 40 because most of them aren't dead yet, and that's probably pretty close to what you're measuring when you count dead gay people. Clearly the problem isn't the depopulation caused by AIDS, or lesbians wouldn't be such a low age too.
How do you make statistics about this anyhow? They don't record your sexual orientation when you die.
If the numbers he gives are based on anything and not straight-up lies, it's probably a problem of bad-faith sampling. If you recorded every out gay person who died in the last ten years, it's not a terrible shock if the average of those ages is low, even by decades, compared to the population at large. 80-year-old gay people are probably not as reliably out of the closet as younger gay people. If you recorded the average age at death of everyone born in the 70's, it would be less than 40 because most of them aren't dead yet, and that's probably pretty close to what you're measuring when you count dead gay people. Clearly the problem isn't the depopulation caused by AIDS, or lesbians wouldn't be such a low age too.
How do you make statistics about this anyhow? They don't record your sexual orientation when you die.
37
here is a [relatively] simple explanation for the lower median age of death gay people [assuming he is even correct. i'm suspect of anyone who doesn't provide a source when citing statistics]:
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/308/…
read the first letter and replace "left-handed" with "gay." it's the exact same phenomenon.
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/308/…
read the first letter and replace "left-handed" with "gay." it's the exact same phenomenon.
38
"Nearly one half of practicing homosexuals admit to 500 or more sex partners and
nearly one third admit to 1,000 or more sex partners in a lifetime."
Well shit, I've got some catching up to do
nearly one third admit to 1,000 or more sex partners in a lifetime."
Well shit, I've got some catching up to do
39
That's such a fugly ad, I would boycott the advertiser anyway. But then, I'm gay, and God knows we're only interested in sparkly things. And buggery, naturellement.
40
@15 Yes, I believe it's like being a practicing lawyer. There's an exam (a "bar" exam) and everything
43
Would you do the same with any other hate group? Earnest question, because I'm extremely torn as to whether this was a good idea or not.
44
@15: Yah. If there was a gay church with a lobster pooping rainbows I might actually attend! New Religion FTW! Homosextus Rainbux Amen, Sistah!
45
500 or 1000 sex partners in a lifetime? AND more fabulous parties??
Dang. I kind of wish I were gay.
Dang. I kind of wish I were gay.
48
The stats about deaths of LGBTQ men and women come from the discredited research of Paul Cameron. He based his research on obits in gay newspapers in the 80's at the height of the AIDS epidemic. Keep in mind that these obits would normally include only younger "out" men and women, a large number of whom would have been victims of HIV/AIDS. More often than not, older, closeted, or even just more private individuals' obits would not have made it to the pages of gay papers. Anyone with a vaguely scientific mind can see how using this sampling will result in skewed results.
49
I don't understand the part about the lobster but I know the rest of this was really cool.
It's *impossible* to know the median or mean age at death of gay men or lesbians. If you just tallied the ages of everyone who died who you were able to determine, from their records, to be gay or lesbian, it wouldn't be a statistically representative sample. The fact that their status would even be ascertainable by researchers correlates with among other things, their outness, which itself correlates with age and various cultural and lifestyle factors.
It's *impossible* to know the median or mean age at death of gay men or lesbians. If you just tallied the ages of everyone who died who you were able to determine, from their records, to be gay or lesbian, it wouldn't be a statistically representative sample. The fact that their status would even be ascertainable by researchers correlates with among other things, their outness, which itself correlates with age and various cultural and lifestyle factors.
50
I think Hutcherson is on the right track. Male fetuses have a higher mortality rate and men die significantly earlier on average than women. They commit the majority of crimes, cause more accidents, have higher rates of STDs, highest rates of suicide, and generally lack highly evolved skills such as empathy, sociability, and communication. For this reason we should ban the promotion of the male lifestyle.
51
Well, I did some actual RESEARCH....
"In a recent study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, more females than males ages 13-19 tested positive for HIV.1 The most common source of infection for females of all ages is heterosexual sex."
"African Americans account for 48% of new HIV infections.
AIDS is the leading cause of death for African American women aged 25 to 34 and HIV rates among Hispanic women are increasing.
The number of women living with HIV has tripled in the last two decades. "
(So I guess we should boycott black hystory month and anything "promoting" women or hispanic people?)
Another common way of getting AIDS is to be born from a mother who had AIDS, and since most gay families adopot it can be assumed that they were born with AIDS that they got from their straight parents. As for lesbian coupls who find a sperm donor and there is usually no way of knowing if the donor is staright or gay but they'd probably test the donor befor he donates anyway.
So along with gays we should also have a problem with black and hispanic people, straight couples who want to have a baby, and women.
And while we're obeying the small bit of the bible that mentions homosexuality, we should also mention the part of the same book of the bible that forbids tatoos, "round haircuts" clothes made of more than one fabric, and touching the skin of a dead pig, which I feel I should mention, is what many footballs are made of, and didn't I hear something about him being a linebacker for the Dallas Cowboys, San Diego Chargers, and Seattle Seahawks?
Well, I'm sure he found a way to play football without touching the ball. :]
As for his argument that what black people went through with civil right was worse than what gay people went through, I'm pretty sure there werent nearly as many laws saying that black people should be put to death or in prison, as there were, and still are, laws about killing or arresting people for being black. Yeah, they were often treated unfairly and killed or arested for stuff they shouldnt have been because of their skin color but they werent criminals just for existing (and yes, I understand how often african americans were wrongly acused and killed). SO yeah, they're pretty equal, and considering the way he looks at homosexuals and talks about rasicim, he's pretty hypocritical.
Also considering how much racism has declined compaired to homophobia, there is a big difference.
Violent crimes againt black people have gone down much more than violent crimes against homosexuals.
He was also against a bill preventing buisnisess from firing people based on their sexual orentation, and...wait, wasnt there a similar bill regarding race at one point? Hm...
More...
"In a recent study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, more females than males ages 13-19 tested positive for HIV.1 The most common source of infection for females of all ages is heterosexual sex."
"African Americans account for 48% of new HIV infections.
AIDS is the leading cause of death for African American women aged 25 to 34 and HIV rates among Hispanic women are increasing.
The number of women living with HIV has tripled in the last two decades. "
(So I guess we should boycott black hystory month and anything "promoting" women or hispanic people?)
Another common way of getting AIDS is to be born from a mother who had AIDS, and since most gay families adopot it can be assumed that they were born with AIDS that they got from their straight parents. As for lesbian coupls who find a sperm donor and there is usually no way of knowing if the donor is staright or gay but they'd probably test the donor befor he donates anyway.
So along with gays we should also have a problem with black and hispanic people, straight couples who want to have a baby, and women.
And while we're obeying the small bit of the bible that mentions homosexuality, we should also mention the part of the same book of the bible that forbids tatoos, "round haircuts" clothes made of more than one fabric, and touching the skin of a dead pig, which I feel I should mention, is what many footballs are made of, and didn't I hear something about him being a linebacker for the Dallas Cowboys, San Diego Chargers, and Seattle Seahawks?
Well, I'm sure he found a way to play football without touching the ball. :]
As for his argument that what black people went through with civil right was worse than what gay people went through, I'm pretty sure there werent nearly as many laws saying that black people should be put to death or in prison, as there were, and still are, laws about killing or arresting people for being black. Yeah, they were often treated unfairly and killed or arested for stuff they shouldnt have been because of their skin color but they werent criminals just for existing (and yes, I understand how often african americans were wrongly acused and killed). SO yeah, they're pretty equal, and considering the way he looks at homosexuals and talks about rasicim, he's pretty hypocritical.
Also considering how much racism has declined compaired to homophobia, there is a big difference.
Violent crimes againt black people have gone down much more than violent crimes against homosexuals.
He was also against a bill preventing buisnisess from firing people based on their sexual orentation, and...wait, wasnt there a similar bill regarding race at one point? Hm...
55
@53 I rather envision him and his fellow hatemongers impaled, Vlad-the-Impaler-style at the gates of their own imaginary Hell, where they belong, for eternity. Meanwhile...
As for me, the concept of an omnipotent, loving God seems completely incompatible with the existence of a hell or a devil, so as far as I'm concerned Hutch's fundamentalist theology is a load of crap with which Christ would have never agreed.
Any "religion" that doesn't believe God loves everyone, just the way (s)he made them, isn't worth an ounce of lobster poop. And, anyone capable of giving and receiving love already has all the religion they'll ever need.
As for me, the concept of an omnipotent, loving God seems completely incompatible with the existence of a hell or a devil, so as far as I'm concerned Hutch's fundamentalist theology is a load of crap with which Christ would have never agreed.
Any "religion" that doesn't believe God loves everyone, just the way (s)he made them, isn't worth an ounce of lobster poop. And, anyone capable of giving and receiving love already has all the religion they'll ever need.
56
Just to clarify about closet bi black men causing the increase of black women becoming HIV positive: Heterosexual black men with multiple sex partners – not bisexual men who secretly have sex with men – are responsible for high rates of HIV among black women, according to a senior CDC official.
“We have looked to see what proportion of infections is coming from male partners who are bisexual and found there are actually relatively few,” said Dr. Kevin Fenton, director of the National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD and TB Prevention. “More are male partners who are having female partners and are injecting drugs or using drugs or have some other risks that may put those female partners at risk of acquiring HIV.”
“We have looked to see what proportion of infections is coming from male partners who are bisexual and found there are actually relatively few,” said Dr. Kevin Fenton, director of the National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD and TB Prevention. “More are male partners who are having female partners and are injecting drugs or using drugs or have some other risks that may put those female partners at risk of acquiring HIV.”
57
As a museum-aged, native-Seattlean Lesbian Artifact, all I got to say iz: I love reading me The Stranger. There has always been a reason for that. This Hutcherson stupidity is just one more reason.
58
For more on where Hutcherson was pulling his statistics from, this is an overview on the research of Paul Cameron compiled by a professor of psychology @ UC DAVIS.
http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/ht…
Along with a number of links to other examinations of Cameron's extremely questionable work, the professor provides a systematic analysis of Cameron's major studies and why they do not in the least bit accurately reflect any population other than the extremely small and selective one sampled.
for example:
"in one of their 1996 papers, Cameron and Cameron identified 17 respondents from the combined 1983-84 samples who claimed to have a homosexual parent. The questionnaire responses of these 17 people were scrutinized for various negative experiences, such as reporting incestuous relations with a parent (5 reported such incest). From these data, Cameron and Cameron concluded that 29% (5/17) of children with a homosexual parent have incestuous relations with a parent, compared to 0.6% of the children of heterosexuals, and that "having a homosexual parent(s) appears to increase the risk of incest with a parent by a factor of about 50."
This bulls**t is the kind of data Hutcherson is making his claims with. nice.
http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/ht…
Along with a number of links to other examinations of Cameron's extremely questionable work, the professor provides a systematic analysis of Cameron's major studies and why they do not in the least bit accurately reflect any population other than the extremely small and selective one sampled.
for example:
"in one of their 1996 papers, Cameron and Cameron identified 17 respondents from the combined 1983-84 samples who claimed to have a homosexual parent. The questionnaire responses of these 17 people were scrutinized for various negative experiences, such as reporting incestuous relations with a parent (5 reported such incest). From these data, Cameron and Cameron concluded that 29% (5/17) of children with a homosexual parent have incestuous relations with a parent, compared to 0.6% of the children of heterosexuals, and that "having a homosexual parent(s) appears to increase the risk of incest with a parent by a factor of about 50."
This bulls**t is the kind of data Hutcherson is making his claims with. nice.
60
Hey thethofjuly - thanks so much for sharing the link. I had heard that Cameron's studies were questionable, but that article at ucdavis was a great read! I learned a lot.
Unfortunately for the world, Hutcherson is the kind of man desperate enough and stupid enough to quote from discredited "research", and his followers are stupid enough to keep paying him to do so.
One has to wonder what Hutcherson is so desperate to hide that he continues to lie so loudly and so boldly to his community.
Men with good hearts and clear consciences don't do that sort of thing.
Unfortunately for the world, Hutcherson is the kind of man desperate enough and stupid enough to quote from discredited "research", and his followers are stupid enough to keep paying him to do so.
One has to wonder what Hutcherson is so desperate to hide that he continues to lie so loudly and so boldly to his community.
Men with good hearts and clear consciences don't do that sort of thing.
61
@59: DAMN. I'm tempted to send that to my STAT 222 teacher as an example of really really bad experimental design.
63
@60 Behold the power of belief. I am pretty confident Pastor Hutcherson thinks the Cameron research is valid, and that the facts back up his anti-gay positions. I am almost completely sure he believes he is doing the right thing, that he is serving God, and trying to rescue the poor gay people from the lifestyle that is destroying them. He probably also thinks that he is standing against a horrible moral pollution that is destroying society just as surely as the oil is destroying the marsh ecosystems in the Gulf of Mexico. He is probably completely sincere in these beliefs, and, like all of us, has an elaborate system of defense against intrusive counter-evidence.
All of us do this--all of us have beliefs which color which experts we trust, which studies we accept. I am less bothered by this than by the assumption that people we disagree with must be evil. It precludes any real dialog. Progressives do this just as much as right-wingers. Learning to go beyond our moralistic judgments is quite difficult...I have been consciously working at it for years, and I still catch myself thinking that "those people" (conservatives, usually) are morally bankrupt. What helps me most is the work of people like Marshall Rosenberg and George Lakoff.
All of us do this--all of us have beliefs which color which experts we trust, which studies we accept. I am less bothered by this than by the assumption that people we disagree with must be evil. It precludes any real dialog. Progressives do this just as much as right-wingers. Learning to go beyond our moralistic judgments is quite difficult...I have been consciously working at it for years, and I still catch myself thinking that "those people" (conservatives, usually) are morally bankrupt. What helps me most is the work of people like Marshall Rosenberg and George Lakoff.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Portland Voters Are Stoopid by Goldy
-
An I-5 Bridge Over the Skagit River Has Collapsed by Paul Constant
-
Rightwing Anti-Gay French Activist Commits Suicide at Notre Dame Cathedral by Dan Savage
-
Why They Break Windows by Unpaid Intern
-
Spoiled Rotten: Star Trek Into Darkness by Paul Constant
-
Usually When I'm Sent a Photoshopped Image of a Gun Pointed At Me... by Dan Savage
-
There Are No Atheists In Foxholes by Dan Savage
-
Tornado Truthers by Dan Savage
-
SL Letter of the Day: Did You Think I Was Going To Tell You Not To Come Out? (PLUS: Help Free Kate!) by Dan Savage
-
SL Letter of the Day: Have You Ever Heard of...? by Dan Savage
Stranger Personals
The Stranger
RSSSeattle Art & Performance Quarterly
A complete guide to Seattle's current art, film, dance, and theater season.
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (63) RSS