E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSBy Susan Heavey
Reuters
Gay people in the United States are just as likely as heterosexuals to experience domestic violence, sexual violence or stalking, and bisexual women are more likely than other women to be abused, federal health experts said on Friday.
Until now, little had been known about how often violence occurred among gays and bisexuals in the United States, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said of its findings. The CDC said its report offered the first national data on the issue.
"We know that violence affects everyone, regardless of sexual orientation. This report suggests that lesbians, gay men and bisexuals in this country suffer a heavy toll of sexual violence and stalking committed by an intimate partner," CDC Director Tom Frieden said in a statement.
For example, domestic violence against a woman was reported by nearly 44 percent of lesbians and about 61 percent by bisexuals compared to 35 percent of heterosexuals. Among men, 26 percent of gays and about 37 percent of bisexuals reported partner violence compared to 29 percent of heterosexuals.
"Bisexual woman had significantly higher prevalence of virtually all types of sexual violence," the CDC said in its report.
Additionally, CDC found the majority of women who experienced violence, regardless of their sexual orientation, faced male perpetrators.
It also looked at rape, and among female victims found that 48 percent of bisexual women and 28 percent of straight women experienced their first rape between the ages of 11 and 17 years.
The agency's findings come as Democrats push to renew the Violence Against Women Act, a bipartisan 1994 law that has been reauthorized several times but officially expired in 2011. The law aims to protect domestic violence victims by easing access to legal protection orders and preventing a victim's sexual history from being cited at trial, among other steps.
Democrats, who control the Senate, reintroduced the measure this week in both chambers of Congress. It has bipartisan support in the Senate, but it is unclear how the bill will progress in the Republican-controlled U.S. House of Representatives.
Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, a Vermont Democrat, said CDC's finding support the need for his version of the bill's reintroduction, which also includes strong protections for the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community.
"A victim is a victim is a victim, and no victim of these crimes should be denied access to these crucial services," he said in a statement.
CDC's study, which reviewed 2010 data from its National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey of more than 16,000 U.S. adults, is critical for prevention programs and policies in hopes of reducing such incidents, the agency said.
It also called for more research on the issue, and said it would work with lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender, or LGBT, communities to bring more attention to the problem.
"This information is critical to informing prevention programs and policies aimed at reducing these types of victimization," it said.
Leave a Comment:
Pity?
Umm, were they supposed to be any different? 'Gay', isn't anything significant, it just lets everybody in on one's personal sex secrets. Besides that, no diff.......
Someone saying they are gay does not let "everybody in on one's personal sex secrets" any more than someone saying they are straight does. How could it?
One of the problems with homophobia is that it occurs in internalized forms, such as racism does, and gay partners can "remind" gays that they're going to "hell", so to say. Or that they're garbage. Further, when they had to hide being gay, sexual blackmail was prevalent. They had to come out to file complaints. Many of acquiesced instead.
As for men perpetrating violence against women, I say that is at the root of heterosexuality. That's how it became the dominant sexual orientation - not some "need" to perpetrate the species. Women went to men for protection from other men, and it became the norm. Many women have come to like that protection and don't realize it's an integral part of their relationships with men. Men can rape men but it's more difficult to pull off, but all that's needed to rape women is an agreement that women are to be the prey. Many men, of course, prefer willing partners. But "willing" is an interesting concept in a societies that use religious, political, and social harassment, and sometime murder, to enforce a "norm." Many women sleep with men only because many men exact great pressure and harassment. That's why there is increase bisexuality among women. However, some women are indeed homosexual - not bisexual.
You, lady, are bat@!$%# crazy. You are obviously a friend of Nancy Palosi and the two of you must hang by your toes while conversing.
OMG What an awesome argument. You're logic is impeccable and your facts indisputable! I have never heard such an amazing oration! /s
Perhaps if you actually had included some facts in your statement or even quoted the part of the statement you disagreed with we might be able to take you seriously, but for now you present yourself as an uneducated angry troll.
Stally, he/she is making a statement, they are not required on this post to submit researched facts. This is MSN not the Scientific Journal.
Brenda, as a woman myself, if that's been your experience with men, you have my sympathy.
I never said he didn't have the right to ramble. I just pointed out that the post had absolutely no value or credibility. I believe everyone has a right to make a fool of themselves.
I don't get it? Why is this a story??? So they have domestic violence, wow, big story there! hahaha Who thought they would not have violence in their relationships or rape??? Duhhh, ok next ignorant story!
@ brenda I agree with niord.....and I'll add, maybe a bit psycho and an extreme anti-male nutjob! You are a prime example why I refuse to get married!! If a chick would spill some nutty rhetoric like that... I'd excuse myself, change my number, and file a restraining order!! SO...how many have you had filed against you is my question??
In other words, they are no different than anyone else. Go figure!
Actually , it said they were worse.
Huh go figure. Who would've thought right ~ seems only natural for the group with the highest collective suicide rates.
They could have saved a lot of time by just asking some cops. Common knowledge among LEO.
Actually, they are much different.
Rates of domestic abuse for female bisexuals are 2x hetero, and for lesbians much higher.
It seems that the world wants to blame men for everything, when the violence is worse among women.
From the article:
So much for the homosexuality not hurting anyone. We know "no true gay person"
How does it hurt anyone?
Aids, amongst other things. The anus was not designed for something to be shoved up it.
I'm fairly old and negative.
And for some the mouth wasn't designed for speaking.
@Joey...not all gay people engage in anal intercourse. And guess what? Lots of straight people engage in it too. Your should do some research and stop buying into the stereotypes. And AIDS is just as prevalent in the straight community as it is the gay community.
AIDS is rampant among straight blacks b/c they will sleep with anybody, until they decide to chase another tail. AND btw, Utah has the highest rate of anal sex among straights because it isn't "really" sex.
@Truman,
That's not true for gay males, and not entirely true for heterosexuals. While aids is a disease, you can't say the high rate of promiscuity among gays, in america, helped any. There are also sexually transmitted diseases particular to lesbians. A lot of lesbian women vesiculate during their lifetimes, and many gays have open relationships. Sexual orientation isn't as concrete as people believe. It's entirely possible for a lesbian to get an infection from her lesbian partner, who had a random sexual encounter with a man. Yes, contrary to popular belief, there are lesbians who have sex with men. Go ahead, try talking a women into having anal intercourse. I'm sure she will be okay with it as long as she does the pushing.
As a gay male I can say you're absolutely wrong and have no idea what you're talking about. Not all gay males engage in anal intercourse. I know this for a fact.
HIV is spread through promiscuity, not from homosexuality. There is a difference. The Gay community has acknowledged that promiscuity is a problem and is trying to promote monogamy through marriage. The bigots have always hoped that gays would exterminate themselves. That's why they blocked HIV/AIDS research and why they would prefer that the gay community continue to be promiscuous. In fact their interference may have obstructed AIDS research enough so that they are responsible for a similar amount of deaths as the Nazi concentration camps.
If they are drawn towards men as well as women then, by definition, they are bisexual.
You really need to work on your facts.
Well I guess we need to pass fifty more laws protecting the homosexual population from themselves...a true protected class...from other homosexuals.
Ouch...this does more harm that good. Better step off the pedestals since you folks aren't the shining light on how to live your lives anymore. Real pain, and real problems (should I dare say it) for real people. Welcome home again guys...I mean gays. The real world awaits.
@at stally where do you get your facts? The AIDS epidemic originated from people having sex with monkeys and possible medical practices involving monkeys in western Africa.....it made its way to south Africa, and then it transferred strictly in the gay community in the U.S., most likely by a HIV positive gay male flight attendant! The CDC followed this gay male and found out he had many sexual partners in bathhouses, etc. across the U.S. whom contracted the virus. At that time, with promiscuity running ramped in the gay community, it grew. It then was transferred to the heterosexual community by bisexual males...... I know liberals want to be "gay" friendly and try to distort the facts, but this is how it happened!!
OMG, where do you get your facts? HIV was most likely caused by hunting monkeys and coming in contact with their blood. http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/basic/ BTW it was a Chimpanzee that ripped a woman's face off.
Yea, you know the facts /s
Again it wasn't homosexuality that spread HIV, it was promiscuity; the same promiscuity that spreads it through the heterosexual community. If it was just homosexuality then heterosexuals wouldn't get it. So get some facts instead of quoting urban legends and stop your proselytizing. Patient zero was never identified.
Domestic violence is not discriminatory. Violence against any gender whether it be child woman or man is unacceptable. There is no need to out any particular group. The fact is no one deserves abuse.
@Regis
I agree. The point, however, is that there's a prevailing myth that there's nothing harmful being gay, no legitimate, non religious based, reason to be opposed to homosexuality, or that the problems experienced by the homosexual community are solely from religious opposition. The evidence proves that homosexuals have issues of their own.
The evidence shows that homosexuals are just like everyone else. Duh.
@ItIs:
No. Really, just no.
When people say that homosexuality doesn't hurt anyone, what they mean is that the fact same-sex couples exist does no one any harm. It doesn't hurt straight people that gay people exist and live in the same ways the straight people live and exist.
Can people honestly not parse the difference between the words "homosexuality" and "homosexual?"
Try it this way:
Heterosexuality doesn't hurt you.
Heterosexuals can hurt you.
Get it now? It's the difference between "a way of being" and "a being."
Of course there's domestic violence among homosexuals. That's what people have been saying all along: they really are just like anyone else: HUMAN.
If you oppose homosexuality because they have the same level of domestic abuse as heterosexuals, does that mean you also oppose heterosexuality? (after all, they have the same levels as heterosexuals too)
Ok, so why, per the article, do "lesbians, gay men and bisexuals in this country suffer a heavy toll of sexual violence and stalking committed by an intimate partner" ?
So I guess it just hurts gay people then, or can you not honestly parse the article?
Try it this way:
Considerable amount of substance abuse, suicide, and depression among gays would seem to indicate they are affected by homosexuality, and the domestic violence among gays shows they can hurt each other.
The original qualification of homosexuality was that it was an ego-dysentonic mental disorder where the sufferer experienced the inability to distinguish themselves from their disorder, homosexuality. Given the recent trend of demanding apologies based on someone's personal opinion, I feel that classification was spot on. Also gay people don't exist except as a referance to human beings with a self identified homosexual, sexual, orentation; an orientation, I might add, that hasn't even been conclusively proven yet.
No, that isn't.
You didn't read the article. Gay men are at 26% compared to 29% in the general population.
Actually they're affected by homosexual bigotry. There is a level of self deprecation that is pushed on Gays from a bigoted society. Your statement is completely disingenuous. It's like telling a Jew in the 1940's that it was bad to be a Jew because they would end up in a concentration camp. The cause of the depression and suicide is social ostracism. You're blaming gays for something the hatred of others caused.
Of course you would. It's like telling a black person that they shouldn't demand an appology from someone who is simply expressing their opinion that they're a *****.
Yes it is
So much for the TV/media stereotypes that this particular one percent of the population is perfect.
Curious about where you've evern seen anything in the press about homosexuals being "perfect".
Treated like garbage and animals by backwards, hateful religious idiots yes, perfect no.
WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA. Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
Timothy knows very well that nobody has ever claimed any such thing. His religious zealotry tends to make him petulant. You should hear him talk about evolution. LOL
Amazing. A poster states his opinion, and is called a hateful religious zealot. Yet, he made no reference to religion in any way, shape, form, or fashion.
I think the zealous haters are the ones making the asinine presumptions.
One need only review his comment history to understand exactly where he's coming from, and it is indeed a profoundly bigoted and ignorant religious perspective. Tim is a thumper.
skrekk,
All you do is call people names who dare to not agree with your opinion.
.
Domestic violence what are they fighting over who's wearing the strap on that night!
Wait. who wrote this garbage, He must a racist - no, wrong category. OK, he must be sexist - no not quiet. Got it, he's heterophobe - sorry, it's the other one. We all know according to Obama that gays are superior to normal people so how could they engage in violence in their relationships - which last forever. These are facts in this article and we all know how valid "facts" are for the gay community. It's just too bad they didn't study the rate at which the gays abuse children - that would be a great study.
You're really just embarrassing yourself at this point.
According to the American Psychological Association, gays do not molest children at a higher rate than heterosexuals.
Molesting children appears to have more to do with a person being a pedophile rather than whether a person is heterosexual or homosexual. Key word is appears. There are opposing groups that indicated differently.
People assume that people like Jerry Sandusky who is a pedophile is gay, but he may actually be bi-sexual in behavior because he was married to a woman.
Actually the groups that try to link homosexuality and pedophilia have no science to back it up. They are typically religious organization engaging in slander against a group of people. For Christians this violates the 9th commandment and means they aren't actually following the way of Christ. They are in fact Satanist by their definition.
Here is a good article. What you will notice is that it basically says that those with a developed sexual orientation whether that be heterosexual or homosexual are actually less likely to be pedophiles.
http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_molestation.html
Projection if I've ever seen it. Where's the gay gene again? Never been discovered, but many gays still believe they were born that way. Any study to date, supporting homosexuality, I've seen, has been written in the language of probability. Correlation doesn't equal causation. Here's what the bible actually says:
Rom 1:18-26. Also, that's new testament, for those of you still stuck in the book of Leviticus.
Blind justification for bigotry if I have ever seen it. Genes are hard to find, but who cares? Whether it's a gene or not it doesn't matter. If you can show that a specific behavior is detrimental enough to society that it demands action then it doesn't matter if it's genetic or not. You have not been able to show that. I don't care whether or not it's genetic. I know I can't change. I've tried. I have two options give up a very important part of life or not. For you to ask me to give up a part of life that most people take for granted you need to have a good reason. You don't and in fact have made it up.
No where in this verse does it specifically mention homosexuality. You have taken the liberty to define homosexuality as sexual deviance not this verse. You are speaking for God and that is a sin.
Where's the straight gene again?
What a book of fairy tales has to say on the matter is irrelevant in this secular nation.
Really? And here all this time I thought they were just perfect. Go figure.
Well, nobody else did, so what does that say about you? If you are going to try sarcasm, iy actually has to make sense to work.
Yup. Gay people are just.... people. No more and no less. Welcome to reality.
It's interesting how all the trolls ignored the fact that gays had lower rates than straights, but truth has never been a big factor in the anti-gay arguments. They like to cherry pick their arguments.
Who gives a flyin' fuque?
Was this meant to be a shocking revelation?
What this is telling us is that bisexual women need more protection. Common sense really, people being the jerks that they are.
In the small town I live in there were 5 murders in the last 8 years. Four of the murders were homosexual men stabbing their lovers for cheating on them.
Well it is a small town. This study doesn't support agree with your conclusions. This study actually says that gays (homosexual men) are less likely to engage in domestic violence than straights. Thanks for actually reading the article though /s
Questions this study doesn't answer
1) In order for one to claim bisexuality they probably have had relations with the opposite sex. Was the first occurrence of domestic violence in a heterosexual relationship or homosexual relationship? Do people discover their bisexuality when they get out of a bad relationship, and if they get out of a bad relationship were they the ones that caused it? Do they figure they just can't get along with one sex so they turn to the other simply finding out that it really is them?
2) 48% of rape victims were bisexual. Well, they most likely were raped by a man. You don't think rape wouldn't allow someone to discover their bisexuality? Bisexuality is far more prevalent than people realize.
Bisexuals simply choose heterosexual relationships because it's what society expects and as long as they are happy in their heterosexual relationships they have no reason to admit bisexuality.
3) 26% of gays were involved in domestic violence where it was 29% in heterosexual relationships. Seems like gays care about their partners more than straights.
Comparing my gay friends to my straight ones, I'd say the gay couples fight a little more intensely and often. Not sure if this is true overall.
Surprise,surprise..the debauched and abominable lifestyle is just as bad as any of the rest of the unregenerate..obviously this abominable sin does not deserve a free pass or admiration at all...but another poll will appear soon which accentuates some kind of positive in the abominable community,and all will be well once again in Sodom...
Actually for one to draw that conclusion (even if you ignore an incorrect translation) from Sodom and Gomorrah, one must first say that rape is fine. So perhaps your understanding of the Bible is incomplete or perhaps your moral compass is slightly out of wack, because I was under the impression that rape against a man or woman was a sin, but that's just me.
Uh..you didnt read the comment very carefully..i stated that homosexuality was no better sin than any other..before you choose to rebut,please read the comment slowly and carefully..the conclusion on Sodom and Gomorrah in the context,was about going after "strange flesh"..couple that with Jude 7,and you will see it is without a doubt correct understanding....but thats just scripture...now you can divert to translation arguments,but the comparison of scripture in any translation concludes the same thing..and your allusion to rape was a strange inclusion,as it was never mentioned...maybe try and prove your point better using scripture,instead of looking down your nose at me?
Actually the term used in Sodom and Gomorrah by the town folk translates in Hebrew "That we may know them" which in most writings means interrogate not rape, which in the context of the story makes a lot more sense. It seems rather callous for Lot to sacrifice his daughters to the mob so they can be raped. It makes more sense if it's in the context of the men wanting to get answers about these strangers and lot is saying his daughters can provide them. In fact the story has less to do about sexual perversion as it does with the Jewish tradition of hospitality.
As far as Jude 1:7 goes there are many different translations. It uses perversion as a general term and doesn't specify homosexuality. They could be talking about sex with goats. It doesn't clarify. You're using poetic license to make that stretch. The 10 commandments do not mention homosexuality. They do mention bearing false witness against your neighbor. The closest the 10 commandments get is adultery, and one could argue that homosexuals are forced into adultery by those that wouldn't allow them to marry. So who is the sinner in that case? The one that commits the sin or the one that causes the sin?
So it's alright for you to look down at your nose on me, but I can't return the favor? Sorry, welcome to life.
Gerry - The sin of Sodom and Gomorrah was rape and inhospitality, not homosexuality. Genesis 19:4-5 says that ALL of the townsmen came to rape the angels. There is no way that every man in Sodom and Gomorrah was a homosexual. In addition, Genesis 19:8 states that Lot offered the men his daughters in place of the angels. Why would Lot offer his daughters to a group of homosexual men? This passage is about rape and inhospitality, not homosexuality.
Also, Ezekiel 16:49 (NIV) states, "Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy."
............................................Yawn..............................
....................................stomp.............................
Too funny Leroy!!!
There isn't anything that would be much more amusing than watching a couple of fallas slap it out as a disagreement over the color of draperies escalates. It's kinda like when girls argue or fight- it's usually over something meaningless..like drapes or some nonsense.
And then dykes fighting for male dominance...and then afterwards chugging Bud Light and shooting pool. I dunno...I got better things to do at the moment.
I thought they liked to beat the crap out of each other.
Y1 tobacco?? Phillipp Morris and the U.S. gov't having ownership and subsidies in over fifty countries around the world. Have these people ever heard of cotton???? Why is it even grown??