Have your voice heard about female same-sex sexuality!
Researchers at The University of Minnesota Medical School are seeking lesbian, bisexual, women-loving-women, and transgendered women who have been in a same-sex relationship for at least 6 months to complete a survey about sexuality. We ask that you be 18 years of age or older and reside in Canada or the United States to participate in the study. We are interested in learning more about women’s sexual orientation, sexuality, sexual trauma history and relationships in order to further understand the complexity of lesbian and bisexual women’s sexuality. This survey is confidential. If you would be interested in participating please go to www.lesbianandbisexualsurvey.com and complete the online survey which is approximately 45 minutes long. If you have questions, please email Shana Hamilton, Ph.D. at svhamilton@umphysicians.umn.edu
Mon Mar 26, 2007 6:08 pm
Cavewoman
Joined: 06 Sep 2005
Posts: 2056
Location: nearby
done..... and it didn't take near the 45 minutes it said it would... only took about 15 minutes.... i found it to be very well rounded....
for the ladies perusing and considering... its harmless, no self identifiers, just honest questions.... simple and plain, no tongue twisters, no mind benders...
and you're going to do WHAT with this info?
shavalere... the answer to your "survey" is that we, as lesbian couples, are EXACTLY like heterosexual couples, we argue, we make up, we disagree, we ignore each other, we love each other, we adore each other, we can't live without the other, yet, we cuss one another occassionally
i have a question for the medical and hetero community... ok?
what makes YOU tick?
what makes you screw up?
what makes you stay together? break up? daydream?... etc.?
ya know, in one way, i'm offended, its like y'all think we dropped out of the sky, we did NOT, we came from our mother's womb, just as you... did you pick hetero? ah! didn't think so... nor did we pick lesbian... its just the way we are... so why all this misunderstanding? mystery?... huh?... and I'm in the health field.... why the survey? 2100 years of recorded history and your'e still trying to "justify" lesbian... WHY?
what is so damned hard to understand? _________________ " The sorcerers in life are created within each of us" --- Lynn V. Andrews
Tue Mar 27, 2007 7:02 am
Footprint
Joined: 24 May 2006
Posts: 478
Location: @ home around the globe
Hi cave and everyone else,
I just saw this now... I was gone for a while so sorry for this late, out-dated comment... but here it is now:
I don't know but from time to time I find a few very aggressive arrows being shot out of this community to individuals from the outside who - for one reason or another - choose to get in touch with us to get some information and/or insight into the world of women who love women.
Cave's response to this scientific study is one of those aggressive arrows being shot outside. And I think the sharpness of the arrow is unfounded, exaggerated. I guess some ladies on here have been repeatedly offended by heteros and therefore are very, very sensitive, yes almost paranoid, when heterosexuals approach us. Hence, bad intentions are smelled where there may not be any bad intentions....
I don't understand your reaction to this survey, cave... as lesbians/bi's, we ARE a minority. It is a fact. Minorities are considered not normal. Majorities are considered normal. Of course it may be of interest to get an insight into how "abnormal" people tick. What the differences are, what the similarities are to the so-called "normal" people. Etc.
Anyways.... I found your response a bit very harsh and aggressive, Cave. We need to be careful not to create a wall between homosexuals and heterosexuals. Shooting at and pushing away heterosexuals who like to find out more about our minds and behaviors is creating a thick wall and separating ourselves completely from heterosexuals. And, as you said yourself, cave, we are not much different from heterosexuals...... after all, we all belong to one race: humans! We are all made of the same kind of molecules.
Life is like a boomerang... like a mirror... the way you treat people, they will treat you. BUT... we all need to share one world..... and live together in it. So we better merge the teeny tiny worlds that make up the big one and not create artificial separations and animosities.
Just my two Eurocents....
Cordially,
Footsie _________________ “Do not go where the path may lead, go instead where there is no path and leave a trail.” – Ralph Waldo Emerson
Wed Jun 13, 2007 12:48 am
realwoman
Joined: 05 Dec 2005
Posts: 1040
Location: under our tree in Africa
Hi Foots!!
Firstly, let me say that I absolutely agree with you regarding this:
quote:Originally posted by Footprint:
we are not much different from heterosexuals...... after all, we all belong to one race: humans! We are all made of the same kind of molecules.
Life is like a boomerang... like a mirror... the way you treat people, they will treat you..
However, I have to come up for cave here... Let me try to explain as follows: We get many of these requests to participate in surveys. When such a request is posted, us mods go and check it out, and based on our evaluation, decide whether the request can stay on the boards or not. Most of these requests (more than 80%) get deleted... Why? Because they are designed by students who think we are subjects, like lab-rats, which will fit nicely into their stereotype thinking of what being gay are, and contain some questions that are so prejudiced, it will offend many woman here. Some questions are designed to get the answers the researcher wants... mainly that we are weird, strange, not normal, etc, etc...
And this brings me to the part of your post that I do not agree with, namely:
quote:Originally posted by Footprint:
as lesbians/bi's, we ARE a minority. It is a fact. Minorities are considered not normal. Majorities are considered normal. Of course it may be of interest to get an insight into how "abnormal" people tick. What the differences are, what the similarities are to the so-called "normal" people. Etc.
I live in a country where my people are considered to be a minority... but being a minority does not make us abnormal, or less human... Can you imagine what would happen if the majority in my country were thinking like you suggest (as fact!?), that it may be of interest to get an insight into how my people tick, what the differences and similarities are and have us all put into camps to study my people because we are a minority? Does that ring any bells??
If we think like that, or even consider accepting it as fact, then we end up in an Orwellian society, or even a Nazi-ish one, where 'experiments' can be conducted on minorities because they are considered to be 'less human'... And whether such experiments are physiological or psychological, does not really matter, does it? It means that the majority can treat the minority as 'subjects'...
The fact is, that society tries to defend itself against what they perceive as threats .. and unfortunately, the gay community is seen as a threat, especially in the current broader American Society. So, students, with their subjective professors, who has vested interests (to get public exposure and funding), design tests that will support their hypotheses, which are usually aimed at proving exactly that - homosexuals are abnormal - if the results of their study shows that we are actually 'normal', then the university will not get funding anymore...
This is therefore about much more than being tolerant. We show the researchers respect by going and checking out their questionnaires, but if their questionnaires do not show us any respect, then we either delete them from the board, or shoot them down with flaming arrows...
The fact is, and this is what i think cave tried to say, and what you said yourself: we are NORMAL human beings ... we are NOT abnormal, 'subjects' worthy of study... and if people accept us as human beings, which they do not have to be afraid of, they will have no need to study us...
Hugs,
~real _________________ .
.
light is to darkness as love is to fear...
Wed Jun 13, 2007 8:18 am
Footprint
Joined: 24 May 2006
Posts: 478
Location: @ home around the globe
Hi there real,
hot topic indeed...
Thank you very much for your reply!!! And of course I have to add some more Eurocents to your comments and argumentations, maybe even a deutsche Mark or two...
I do see your points and the reasoning behind them. Clearly. Your standpoint is very understandable. Yet I still do view a few things from another angle, probably the more naive and not-so-easily-offended one.
quote:Originally posted by realwoman:
I live in a country where my people are considered to be a minority... but being a minority does not make us abnormal, or less human... Can you imagine what would happen if the majority in my country were thinking like you suggest (as fact!?), that it may be of interest to get an insight into how my people tick, what the differences and similarities are and have us all put into camps to study my people because we are a minority? Does that ring any bells??
I guess it also depends on your personality and life experience regarding how you take certain approaches, like the sociological survey here. I personally have not been burnt by anyone regarding my sexuality. However, I have not let myself be exposed to much potential attacking. Moreover, I am fortunate enough to live in a relatively liberal society here in Germany.
I did not participate in the survey as I do not meet all the necessary criteria. However, after reading cave's description about its content, I did not see anything that may be offensive to lesbians. In another thread here, however, I did read some examples given by mods (regarding questionnaire contents) that were anything but scientifically sound. The questions, in fact, were geared at "proving" that lesbians are not normal...."nomal" in this case having a bad connotation.
It seems to me that a lot of people here get offended by being called "abnormal". When I called us "abnormal", I simply, objectively was referring to the statistical Bell Curve. That is why I put abnormal in "". The statistical term of normal and abnormal is purely based on numbers and objectivity. There is no reason to take any offense of that. It IS simply a FACT. We ARE a minority and therefore, STATISTICALLY speaking, we ARE not normal. I also do not always understand why many are so afraid of not being "normal" = like everybody else. I personally am glad that I am not normal, that I am not like everyone else on this planet. I like to stick out. In a positive sense preferrably. But the one aspect of my "abnormality", being from the other shore, I consider anything but bad or negative...and there are many, many heteros who have no problems with homosexuals. I have not made acquaintance with anyone who felt threatened or disgusted or whatever by us. I guess part of the reason I have not met such person is that I tend to surround myself only with open-minded, progressive and tolerant people. A lot of times you can avoid offence by making a loop around such people or simply not taking them seriously... you have got to keep your wall ready...
quote:Originally posted by realwoman:
The fact is, that society tries to defend itself against what they perceive as threats .. and unfortunately, the gay community is seen as a threat, especially in the current broader American Society.
I would not call this a fact. It isn't. It is a cultural matter. I would not say the gay community is considered a threat here in Germany. And several other European countries. It varies across the diverse cultures on this planet.
quote:Originally posted by realwoman:
So, students, with their subjective professors, who has vested interests (to get public exposure and funding), design tests that will support their hypotheses, which are usually aimed at proving exactly that - homosexuals are abnormal - if the results of their study shows that we are actually 'normal', then the university will not get funding anymore...
[…]If we think like that (added: being “abnormal” as a lesbian), or even consider accepting it as fact, then we end up in an Orwellian society, or even a Nazi-ish one, where 'experiments' can be conducted on minorities because they are considered to be 'less human'... And whether such experiments are physiological or psychological, does not really matter, does it? It means that the majority can treat the minority as 'subjects'...
I have a different opinion in that regard, too. I don't take offence of being a "lab rat". I don't mind being part of a study to get more info for whatever is being researched (given that research is based on SOUND research methods!!). Just because someone wants to know more about how a minority ticks, it does not mean that entity has to consider this minority “less human”. There are many minorities on this planet and much research is conducted on them. Many who are considered part of the “majority” are also used as research respondents, are used in experiments. What is so bad about it? There is research on osteoporosis, marketers research how consumers respond to e.g. advertising campaigns, Kenyan runners are being researched to find out why they run longer faster than e.g. American and European distance runners, etc. etc.. Looking into the gay community is just another research topic….to find out more about this planet and who inhabits it and why someone does what or why someone is how s/he is. I don’t take any offence by this…. I am curious myself to find it in fact! I like finding out more about majorities and minorities…and sure I would love to find out why I prefer women over men! …as long as all the investigation is based on sound methods, of course!
You know, real, maybe I also have a completely different standpoint on this subject matter as you because I have – in a way – a lab background. As athletes, we ARE basically lab rats. We are treated like machines. We are constantly looking at how to tune ourselves the way that we bring the absolute best performance out of ourselves. It is like human Formula One. A lot of times I view myself as a machine, yet I am reminded more often than not that I am not one…human weaknesses punch me in the face and shoot me back on the human carpet regularly…and those human “problems” are making my job special complicated. (Pro) athletes are lab rats. We always do experiments on ourselves with the aim of making that engine go the fullest blast possible. And every engine works differently. The more information and insight we got from ourselves, the better we know what buttons to push when and how hard and which direction…
Anyways…that’s enough German Marks for now… you all take care, relax and ENJOY BEING DIFFERENT!!!!!
A big hug,
Footsie _________________ “Do not go where the path may lead, go instead where there is no path and leave a trail.” – Ralph Waldo Emerson
Wed Jun 13, 2007 4:44 pm
realwoman
Joined: 05 Dec 2005
Posts: 1040
Location: under our tree in Africa
Foots!!
Hot indeed, so hot (and interesting) that I will move this thread to the Debate forum... maybe we get some more takers to debate with us...
Firstly then, thanks for your response. I think what you are trying ot say, when i read the last part of your post, is that, every individual is unique, and some individuals, like yourself, have exceptional talents and abilities. These talents and abilities do not make you abnormal, it makes you special... Maybe that is what you are referring too when you refer to yourself as 'abnormal'. But there is a vast difference between being abnormal, and being unique...
However, I think you may have misunderstood what i was trying to say, and where i took issue with your previous post, as the part that you quoted and the words you added was not what i meant. This is what should have been added, and how it should have read:
quote:Originally posted by realwoman:
If we think like that (
added: minorities are abnormal
), or even consider accepting it as fact, then we end up in an Orwellian society, or even a Nazi-ish one, where 'experiments' can be conducted on minorities because they are considered to be 'less human'... And whether such experiments are physiological or psychological, does not really matter, does it? It means that the majority can treat the minority as 'subjects'...
Maybe, if reading it like that, it makes more sense?
You refer to the statistical Bell Curve. Like you, I also have a lab background, but not as a lab rat, as a scientist, and have used this curve many times. Here, we don't call it the Bell Curve, we call it the Bell Normal Distribution Curve ("Bell Normaalverspreidingskurwe", yes, all in one word!! lol). This Curve indicates not what is normal and abnormal, but what the distribution of normal is.... Anything abnormal will fall outside the Bell Normal Distribution, and be called an 'outlier'.
If you plot a Bell Normal Distribution Curve of for example eye colour, you will get a Bell Distribution curve where the centre will be ppl with brown eyes, and people with blue eyes will be on the edges. Does that make people with blue eyes abnormal? I don't think so... If a group of people share a certain feature, like skin colour, or hair colour, or eye colour, or blood type, sexuality, that is not the same as the majority of the population, they are not abnormal, but they fall within the normal distribution of skin colour, or eye colour, or hair colour, or blood type, or sexuality.
In other words, when one plots human sexuality on the Bell Normal Distribution Curve, you will get something that resembles Kingley's scale from 1 to 6 and back to 1 distributed over the normal curve, with most ppl in the middle, i.e. heterosexual, then lets say to the left of that, bisexual females, and on the left edge of the Bell homosexual females, and the same for males to the right side of the curve. Hence, STATISTICALLY speaking, we are NORMAL. Outliers, or abnormal people, would not be inside the shape of the curve, but above it, and would depict those ppl with sexual dysfunctions, or physical abnormalities, or psychological sexual deficiencies, for example serial rapists. (This is one of the reasons why I take issue with calling us 'abnormal', because it places us in a category with ppl with REAL abnormalities, that could pose a REAL threat to society....)
Hence, people with blue eyes are a minority, as are lesbians, but they are not abnormal, they fall within the normal distribution.
You ask what is bad about conducting research on minorities? Well, as long as the minority has a say in the purpose of the research, and it is to their benefit, like cancer research and osteoporosis research, then there can only be benefit. But when the research is conducted to support financial gain for drug manufacturers, or conservative political theories of fundamentalism, then it could result in trying to change brown-eyed ppl to get them to have blue eyes (and this research has been conducted, to the detriment of a certain minority...). When research on being lesbian is done with right-wing conservative prejudice, it spells danger, and there was recently an article on yahoo news about exactly that - so-called 'research' shows that sexual orientation can be detected AND CHANGED in the womb...
In the last instance, I said that the gay community is seen as a threat in the 'current broader American Society'. Maybe one of the Americans on the site can verify for us whether that is a fact or not. It is significant that the more prejudiced requests to participate in research come from universities in America or similar religiously conservative countries...
So, I know my South African Rands and cents are worth way less than Deutchmarks, but I hope you understand what I am trying to say: being labelled different is fine, we all are unique individuals, being labelled abnormal is not fine, and to say that all minorities are abnormal, is statistically incorrect...
Looking forward to get some more German Marks!
Hugs,
~real _________________ .
.
light is to darkness as love is to fear...
Last edited by realwoman on Thu Jun 14, 2007 4:17 pm; edited 2 times in total
Thu Jun 14, 2007 1:53 pm
Mdm Prez
Joined: 19 May 2005
Posts: 1536
Location: U.S. of A.
Foot, Real and Cave
I've just reviewed the questionaire. I immediately placed a phone call to
Dr. Shana Hamilton at the Univ of MN Med School. She was unavailable. I requested a call back from her.
The instrument they are using is flawed in 2 sections and I'd like some further clarification.
I also want to know the sexual orientation of Dr. Hamilton, Dr. Robinson,Dr. Minor, Dr. Larson and May Woodward-Kreitz, MA. I assume they are the designers of the instrument.
In addition, it is important to be assured that the results of this survey will be published to this site, and when would that be.
Cat _________________ If you're not getting the answers you want,
you're not asking the right questions.
Thu Jun 14, 2007 4:10 pm
Footprint
Joined: 24 May 2006
Posts: 478
Location: @ home around the globe
Hi real,
thank you very much for your valuable South African Rands!!! After re-converting them into Euros, I did FINALLY see their real worth. lol
Yes, I got now what you were saying. And I realized I completely used the word "abnormal" or "not normal" wrong so far in my life. Statistics have corrected me. You are completely right... of course the Bell Curve displays the NORMAL distribution. So, as you correctly and very clearly put it on the table, all of us below the curve ARE normal. We have the statistical proof for that. You were correct, I was referring to the "outliers" inside the normal distribution curve. I always called those "not normal" but I was very wrong.
Anyways... I don't really have any more depreciated deutsche Mark to add here. Sorry! :p Your Rands convinced me. Hands down.
In what field of science were you active, real? I could very much tell that you know a thing or two or three about research methods. I just took one PhD level class in research methods as an elective for my master's degree. It was a short glimpse into the world of academia. I have forgotten a thing or two I learned back then, however. :p
Keep up your great teachings, real! Cheers,
"The Outlying Footsie" _________________ “Do not go where the path may lead, go instead where there is no path and leave a trail.” – Ralph Waldo Emerson
Last edited by Footprint on Fri Jun 15, 2007 10:41 pm; edited 1 time in total
Fri Jun 15, 2007 8:37 pm
Footprint
Joined: 24 May 2006
Posts: 478
Location: @ home around the globe
Madame,
thanks so much for trying to find out more about the study. Can you keep us updated on the issue?
Cheers,
Footsie _________________ “Do not go where the path may lead, go instead where there is no path and leave a trail.” – Ralph Waldo Emerson
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Gallery
FAQ
Profile PM's 
