I’d note that the numbers in here for “actual” are also a bit suspect for some categories.
For example the percentage bisexual - a study showed about 10% of american men and 20% of american women have had bisexual attractions - which would indicate a real number being somewhere in the 15% realm.
It can be misleading if the results are presented like total for any person who had bisexual attraction, like I would say this does.
I’m not sure why you think it would be 15%. You would need to account for cultural factors such as homophobic masculine culture likely making men lie. Especially with marginalized groups you would expect the true number to be higher than what any survey would say because the oppression of marginalized identities means fewer respondents would self identify. The real number is likely more than 20%.
I think its higher as well for the same reasons, just noting that even a single self-reported survey resulted in a number several times the “actual” shown here.
Or something much closer to that, than to ‘has ever experienced some kind of non hetero attraction or had a consensual non hetero encounter’.
I do agree that it would be useful to explain the methodology a bit more in depth, they do say:
Real proportions were taken from a variety of sources, including the U.S. Census Bureau, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, YouGov’s internal poll results, and the results of other well-established polling firms. Most estimates were collected within the past three years; the oldest is from 2009. Because the real estimates presented cover a range of time periods, they may differ from actual population sizes at the time our survey was conducted.
So… yeah, you’d have to untangle all of that, all of those metholdogies, to know exactly what they are saying, exactly what they mean by various terms.
So… yeah, you’d have to untangle all of that, all of those metholdogies, to know exactly what they are saying, exactly what they mean by various terms.
Yup, which just makes it a pretty bad graphic for the things that aren’t hard numbers, like income.
I’d note that the numbers in here for “actual” are also a bit suspect for some categories.
For example the percentage bisexual - a study showed about 10% of american men and 20% of american women have had bisexual attractions - which would indicate a real number being somewhere in the 15% realm.
It can be misleading if the results are presented like total for any person who had bisexual attraction, like I would say this does.
I’m not sure why you think it would be 15%. You would need to account for cultural factors such as homophobic masculine culture likely making men lie. Especially with marginalized groups you would expect the true number to be higher than what any survey would say because the oppression of marginalized identities means fewer respondents would self identify. The real number is likely more than 20%.
I think its higher as well for the same reasons, just noting that even a single self-reported survey resulted in a number several times the “actual” shown here.
They’re probably going with ‘openly identify as’.
Or something much closer to that, than to ‘has ever experienced some kind of non hetero attraction or had a consensual non hetero encounter’.
I do agree that it would be useful to explain the methodology a bit more in depth, they do say:
So… yeah, you’d have to untangle all of that, all of those metholdogies, to know exactly what they are saying, exactly what they mean by various terms.
Yup, which just makes it a pretty bad graphic for the things that aren’t hard numbers, like income.