Teh Gayers and drugs

Gay people are seven times more likely to take illegal drugs than the general population, a new study conducted over two years has found.

And one in five show signs of dependency on drugs or alcohol.

The report, conducted by the Lesbian and Gay Foundation (LGF) and the University of Central Lancashire, sampled more than 4,000 people over two years.

This was in the Indy yesterday as well.

And it struck me then that there\’s something wrong with the study. It\’s lumping in all non-heterosexuals as a homogenous population. Which even a moment\’s consideration of the world as it actually is shows is not the case.

Far more interesting would be to see a breakdown within that population. We might predict greater use of poppers among the homosexual population than the lesbian, just as one example (no idea what amyl nitrate does to women but it has a known and certain effect upon men).

There\’s also the fact that this is a survey of a self selecting population. No, really. Which is something: sex research that is even worse than Julie Bindel\’s reports on prostitution really is something.

28 thoughts on “Teh Gayers and drugs”

  1. So Much For Subtlety

    Far more interesting would be to see a breakdown within that population.

    I am not sure that breaking it down between Gays and Lesbians would tell us much. This is clearly not just an issue of Gays using Gay-related drugs like poppers:

    The study, reported in the Independent on Sunday, found they were 10 times more likely to have used cocaine in the last month than the wider population, and 13 times more likely to have used ketamine.
    The use of heroin use was similar among both populations.

    The Gay lifestyle does seem to go with drug use. As in fact they say:

    Kitty Richardson, 25, who runs the Most Cake, a blog for lesbians in London, said the scene had a lot to answer for.

    She added: ‘People are very quick to label gay people as troubled, or inherently needing those crutches, but all our methods of socialising revolve around drink or drugs.’

    The only problem I have with that is the word “but”. Why wasn’t the more appropriate “and” used? Or even “so”? Or even better “because”?

    The research was carried out at Pride events, which celebrate gay, lesbian and bisexual culture, and through online and postal surveys.

    OK. Asking people at a drug-fuelled binge about drug use is poor practice, but postal surveys are not necessarily bad. As long as they are careful in their population selection. Of course we know they won’t be, but it is not impossible they were.

    The research also found that whereas drug use in the general population declined with age – almost as many lesbian, gay and bisexual 36- to 40-year-olds were taking drugs as their younger counterparts.

    So it is not a question of being young and stupid.

    Needless to say, no article on Gays is complete without blaming the rest of us:

    David Stuart, education, training and outreach manager at London Friend, the UK’s only targeted LGBT drug and alcohol service, told the paper feelings of “rejection” and “fear” as well as “shame around sex” could contribute to drug use.

    Could.

    Drug counsellor Sarah Graham, from London, told the Independent on Sunday her own experiences of being subjected to homophobic bullying was a factor in her battle with addiction, which at one point saw her spending £600 a week on drugs and alcohol, such as cannabis, speed and acid, and then cocaine

    Not my fault! The Straight people made me do it!

    There is a simpler explanation – the psychiatric profession did not remove homosexuality from the DSM because the science changed. They did so because people like Peter Tatchell inflicted and threatened more physical violence if they did not.

  2. SMFS>

    Oh, just go and get yourself laid. No-one cares if you want to have a bit of cock and bum fun. You don’t need to come up with nonsensical justifications for your self-hatred, just accept yourself for what you are. I’m sure you’ll be a lot happier that way.

  3. I think it would be more accurate to say that “people who attend festivals and people who choose to complete online surveys about drug use (in some unspecificed ratio) are seven times more likely to take illegal drugs than are people who participate in the Crime Survey for England and Wales.”

  4. Dave – ah, yes. I’d forgotten that people who talk about homosexuality in anything less than approving tones are obviously all closet gayers.

    Obviously by the same logic people who read the Guardian are closet Thatcherites.

    Personally I couldn’t care less about what sort of bum fun, or drug fun, consenting adults get up to, but there does seem to be a strong correlation between gayness and self destructive behaviours.

  5. ….The research also found that whereas drug use in the general population declined with age – almost as many lesbian, gay and bisexual 36- to 40-year-olds were taking drugs as their younger counterparts……

    As a married father in his 40s, my opportunities for binge drinking, drug taking are just not what they were 20 years ago. Were I gay and not married, I am sure that my lifestyle would have changed a lot less.

    If there is a real difference (sampling very suspect), then I guess this could be an important part of it.

  6. Steve>

    Not closet – repressed. There’s a big difference. And whilst there may be the odd exception, I’ve found it to be invariably true that those who start criticising homosexuality end up telling you in nauseating detail exactly what it is they really, really dislike (honest) about throbbing hard penises plunging in and out and in and out, as two lithe male bodies grind sweatily against each other, and so-on and so-forth and ooh, matron, it’s just so disgusting, you know?

    The homophobes I’ve actually known a bit better have all been extremely unhappy, aggressive and violent people constantly trying to ‘fit in’ at the expense of doing what they actually like doing.

    To claim that more than a tiny minority of homophobes (at most) aren’t repressed homosexuals themselves is utterly bizarre and flies in the face of all the evidence to the contrary.

  7. Also, as you’ve pointed out before in these surveys, their definition of homosexual might be a bit wide-reaching. Some surveys define it as “anyone who has had a homosexual experience”, which is the entire army and rugby-playing population right there.

  8. The Straight people made me do it!

    There is a simpler explanation – the psychiatric profession did not remove homosexuality from the DSM because the science changed. They did so because people like Peter Tatchell inflicted and threatened more physical violence if they did not.

    Teh Gayers made me do it!

  9. Or another viewpoint. Being openly gay is now possible because of more liberal attitudes. So it could also be a liberal attitude to indulge in drug taking. Drug taking that should be legal according to liberal attitudes.

  10. Richard Allan>

    No. Have you ever met a homophobe? Perhaps there’s a tiny minority who differ, but they overwhelmingly show themselves to be repressed homosexuals. It’s hardly a controversial point – everyone knows it’s true.

  11. ….Have you ever met a homophobe? Perhaps there’s a tiny minority who differ, but they overwhelmingly show themselves to be repressed homosexuals…..

    That may well be true, I have no expertise. However, it did always strike me a more of a method of shutting people up, rather than anything else. Its like shouting racist at anyone you disagree with.

  12. Poppers sold commercially in the UK are generally isopropyl nitrite rather than amyl. They’re completely legal, although they are marketed as ‘room odorisers’ because it would be illegal to advertise them for human consumption. As might be expected, their effect on girls is identical to their effect on chaps.

  13. This is my point, Dave. Only a moron or someone pretending to be a moron would say something as mind-bogglingly stupid as “Everyone knows it’s true”.

  14. Looks like we might have a closet heterosexual hanging round the gaff. Go on. Admit it Dave. There’s times you wonder, don’t you? You’re tempted?

  15. Dave – “Not closet – repressed. There’s a big difference.”

    I resent the implication I am repressed! By all means Dave, let me be the first to admit being totally flamboyant. It does not change a single word that I wrote. Which I notice you do not even begin to dispute. Hence what you lamely think of as a personal smear.

    “And whilst there may be the odd exception, I’ve found it to be invariably true that those who start criticising homosexuality end up telling you in nauseating detail exactly what it is they really, really dislike (honest) about throbbing hard penises plunging in and out and in and out, as two lithe male bodies grind sweatily against each other, and so-on and so-forth and ooh, matron, it’s just so disgusting, you know?”

    Uh huh. This like little Johnny Hari’s fantasy of being butt-f**ked by Fascists? You two just have this thing for haters?

    11 ukliberty – “Teh Gayers made me do it!”

    Well made them do it. They picketed every meeting of the APA – and disrupted talks inside – from 1970 until they got their way in 1973. There was no change in the psychiatric profession.

    12 ukliberty – “Incidentally, as Peter Tatchell threatened or used physical violence against any psychiatrists?”

    I don’t know. I doubt it. But where was he in 1972 and what was he doing? Apart from campaigning to put Pol Pot in power.

  16. Serf – “As a married father in his 40s, my opportunities for binge drinking, drug taking are just not what they were 20 years ago. Were I gay and not married, I am sure that my lifestyle would have changed a lot less.”

    Which would go along with everything we know about younger men – getting married makes them less likely to take drugs, break the law, be unemployed, etc etc. If someone does not get married and have children, they are quite likely to continue high risk behaviours.

    As opposed to suffering the stigma of not being married and hated by everyone for it which forces them to take drugs.

  17. 14 Dave – “No. Have you ever met a homophobe? Perhaps there’s a tiny minority who differ, but they overwhelmingly show themselves to be repressed homosexuals. It’s hardly a controversial point – everyone knows it’s true.”

    Dave, oh Dave. What a sad little effort. Everyone knows it is true? Everyone knows a lot of things about Blacks and Jews too. I would hesitate to describe them as true. So homophobia is a problem among the Gay community and nothing to do with the vast majority of British people? Just a problem for paid up members of the Friends of Dorothy Club like you and me? I don’t know why it is that Gays like the bash the crap out of other Gays but I would suggest that whatever the reason, it does little for your argument that Gay people do not have some issues. In fact I would think that claiming Gay Bashing is almost entirely a Pink-on-Pink crime you are more or less conceding the entire argument.

    But it is a good thing I am fine with my orientation and don’t feel the need to be mean to other Gay people. Secure, that’s me. If only you were as happy, then you wouldn’t go around defaming Gay people in this way. I am terribly disappointed in you Dave.

  18. But where was [Peter Tatchell] in 1972 and what was he doing?

    The answer is here.

    SMFS and Dave: I conclude from your discussion that the best way to cut illicit drug use would be for the two of you to get married. I wish you every happiness together.

  19. ‘What was [Peter Tatchell doing ] in 1972?’

    part of a group setting in train the events that would lead to the Labour Party being out of Office for 18 years, and as far as I know, making regular reports to the Komitet GosurdarstVennoy Besopasnosti , as he continued to do until 1991….

  20. VP: your allegation about Tatchell and the KGB seems rather unlikely to me. Is there some evidence for it, or did you just make it up?

    Incidentally, whereas spelling out the initialism would seem to be an affectation designed to make it harder to read, if you’re going to do it you might as well get it right: “Komitet gosudarstvennoy bezopasnosti” (“??????? ??????????????? ?????????????”).

  21. PaulB–If you want to worry,don’t worry about fucking spelling, worry about the 150 milliom murdered so far by your favourite death-cult.
    (That is socialism not the KGB–the names change but the killing never stops)

  22. Mr Ecks: There is no death cult that I favour. I’d say more, but it’s wildly off topic and I don’t want to distract VP from either substantiating or withdrawing his accusation.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *