LA has 11% of the US LGBT population, not taking into account illegal residents.
NYC has 14% of the US LGBT population, not taking into account illegal residents.
This is assuming a 4million US LGBT population. NYC and LA combined represent 25% of the US LGBT population. NYC, LA and SF combined represent 31% of the US LGBT population
LGBT Politically Correct Police
|
LGBT Politically Correct Police
Bahamut.Baconwrap said: » LA has 11% of the US LGBT population, not taking into account illegal residents. NYC has 14% of the US LGBT population, not taking into account illegal residents. This is assuming a 4million US LGBT population. NYC and LA combined represent 25% of the US LGBT population. NYC, LA and SF combined represent 31% of the US LGBT population Shiva.Onorgul said: » Bahamut.Baconwrap said: » LA has 11% of the US LGBT population, not taking into account illegal residents. NYC has 14% of the US LGBT population, not taking into account illegal residents. This is assuming a 4million US LGBT population. NYC and LA combined represent 25% of the US LGBT population. NYC, LA and SF combined represent 31% of the US LGBT population So now that those numbers are posted. What percentage of the US LGBT population does your city hold in relation to those three cities? Cite where your numbers came from, 'cause I can provide you several citations showing why the only number you used is wrong.
Quote: Researchers said their results defied stereotypes that portray the LGBT community as heavily grouped in urban centers. With the exception of the District of Columbia, LGBT populations range 3.4 percentage points nationwide, with a low of 1.7% in North Dakota to 5.1% in Hawaii. Kind of hard to say that those 3 cities alone make up 1/3 of the LGBT population Nationwide. Especially when there are studies that conclude otherwise. Shiva.Onorgul said: » Cite where your numbers came from, 'cause I can provide you several citations showing why the only number you used is wrong. Gay Population In U.S. Estimated At 4 Million, Gary Gates Says Additionally you have failed to publish your city and state. Bahamut.Baconwrap said: » Shiva.Onorgul said: » Cite where your numbers came from, 'cause I can provide you several citations showing why the only number you used is wrong. Gay Population In U.S. Estimated At 4 Million, Gary Gates Says Additionally you have failed to publish your city and state. Quote: A new study tracking the percentage of gay and lesbian adults in America has established a first-ever demographic atlas of the group, finding that state populations range from a low of 1.7% of in North Dakota to a high of 10% in the District of Columbia. The study, conducted by Gallup Poll Editor-in-Chief Frank Newport and UCLA scholar Gary J. Gates is the largest population-based survey to include a state-by-state measurement of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender identification. How amusing, the citation I intended to provide is from the same researcher (claiming twice the number). Aren't you the wonderful argumentum ad auctoritas fellow? How does it play out that an apparent authority figure can be off by literally 4 million?
Bahamut.Baconwrap said: » Additionally you have failed to publish your city and state. Tell you what, ***, how about you go whine to a moderator to have your thread deleted AGAIN because you're losing AGAIN? Shiva.Onorgul said: » blah blah blah Gurl you need to calm the *** down. Seriously calling me a *** now lol And this thread is going to be nuked. lol
[+]
Bahamut.Baconwrap said: » Gurl you need to calm the *** down. Seriously calling me a *** now lol Feel like answering any of the many questions I've posed at you? Or is it time to pull a standard tactic and feign ignorance that you've been asked on multiple occasions to clarify and support your argument?
[+]
Vaguely related: trying to figure out how many gay folks there are is a headache, not helped by Mr. Gates's shifting approximations. It has been too many years since I filled out census data and I'd quite forgotten that the closest they come to collecting information about sexual proclivity is asking if you live with someone who is your spouse.
Also, I was a bit distracted when answering the survey by the hot little census taker. Shiva.Onorgul said: » Also, I was a bit distracted when answering the survey by the hot little census taker. More like avoiding questions gurl. Gurl city and state!!!?! lol The only census takers around these parts, are ugly old hags about 4'5", in all directions.
Bismarck.Bloodrose said: » The only census takers around these parts, are ugly old hags about 4'5", in all directions. I secretly wish we had more Mormon missionaries, too. Bahamut.Baconwrap said: » More like avoiding questions You want an irrelevant piece of information, you need to provide a reason that it will be relevant. Considering you didn't even manage to answer the very simple question I asked regarding populations in your precious little enclave city, I'm in no mood to do anything short of quid pro quo. I don't open the door for anyone typically. The census workers around here are young people anyway, they can't even do the ***properly. You sleep through training and don't give a ***, I can tell by the look in your eye and the canned responses you're giving me.
When the Mormons and Witnesses come around though I shout atheist to ward them off. It's like magic. I guess I should shout death to America in order to get the census folk off my back. Guys, if you're going to argue, keep it half way civil and try to avoid name calling.
Shiva.Onorgul said: » go whine to a moderator Lakshmi.Sparthosx said: » When the Mormons and Witnesses come around though I shout atheist to ward them off. With regards to Jehovah's Witnesses, I think I scared them off permanently when I came downstairs barely dressed in a bathrobe, sticky with sweat and lube, and stinking of sex. Shame they couldn't see my boyfriend to ensure the message was hammered in deep. So does this mean you'll lock the thread this time instead of capitulating to vanity by deleting it? It's already apparent that no argument is forthcoming to warrant sustaining this.
[+]
Shiva.Onorgul said: » So does this mean you'll lock the thread this time instead of capitulating to vanity by deleting it? It's already apparent that no argument is forthcoming to warrant sustaining this. Aww why? Has your misogynistic language become tiresome? Shiva.Onorgul said: » So does this mean you'll lock the thread this time instead of capitulating to vanity by deleting it? It's already apparent that no argument is forthcoming to warrant sustaining this. Bahamut.Baconwrap said: » Aww why? Has your misogynistic language become tiresome? You're just kow-towing to the feminazis by suggesting "***" or "pussy" are feminine words instead of the neuter interpretation well understood by the gay community here in Nameless City, Nameless State, which, by virtue of some numbers that I can use to conveniently misconstrue a point, makes it the most important place in the world for gauging gay use of words that might be read as misogynistic by overly sensitive "women" and other mythical creatures. Anna Ruthven said: » Shiva.Onorgul said: » So does this mean you'll lock the thread this time instead of capitulating to vanity by deleting it? It's already apparent that no argument is forthcoming to warrant sustaining this. What would constitute needing to lock it that isn't already in it?
[+]
'dat sig fone:
[+]
Shiva.Onorgul said: » You're the one who keeps repeating (along with your far-right cadre) that words don't mean anything (If I misunderstood your statement, then carry on).
[+]
Odin.Jassik said: » Anna Ruthven said: » Shiva.Onorgul said: » So does this mean you'll lock the thread this time instead of capitulating to vanity by deleting it? It's already apparent that no argument is forthcoming to warrant sustaining this. What would constitute needing to lock it that isn't already in it?
[+]
|
All FFXIV and FFXI content and images © 2002-2025 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD.
FINAL FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.