<p>“I find it more than a little amusing that someone claiming to know the
specifics of their individual child’s sex life and the sex life of the
individuals in their workplace is trying to use research on general
populations to “prove” their point.”</p>
<p>Well, I think that you miss the point of the back and forth. There was
anecdotal evidence presented on both sides with no progress. This is
understandable as different people have different experiences. So I
hoppped over to a research library to look for peer-reviewed research
articles in journals in the subject domains. This is the correct
academic approach, no?</p>
<p>“You are working really hard to not deal with the fact that you have
absolutely no way of knowing what your child’s sex life involves and
does not involve. I find your investment in defending the idea that
you do increasingly disturbing.”</p>
<p>I’m a scientist (when I’m not an engineer) and build models of people
over time. In general, when someone tells me that their kid has a 2300
SAT or black hair or they’re a great swimmer, I take them at their
word. It makes life far simpler and promotes a conversation.</p>
<p>The reaction that most have here is very similar to the city of Durham
and the Group of 88 using a particular metanarrative that was laughable.
Many of you presented scenarios that you made up in your minds because
of the particular network of information that I released. Of course it
is incomplete but scientists and engineers frequently have to deal with
incomplete information. Sometimes in abstract form. And that’s all I’ve
left you with. I haven’t said whether some of the things that you’ve
hypothesized are true or false and perhaps some of you assume it is true
because I didn’t specifically say that it’s false. Well, most of the
stuff that you’ve said and assumed is false.</p>
<p>I know my son better than you do having several orders of magnitude
more information available. If you don’t have that kind of relationship
with your kids or you’ve never seen it before, then it is up to you to
make a perceptive change in the variety of relationships that you’re
so far closed to.</p>
<p>“Not to mention your statements about your co-workers.”</p>
<p>Same thing. Scientific method.</p>
<p>“Never mind that he only answers/addresses the questions/topics he
likes!”</p>
<p>1) What is your social security number?
2) What is your real name?
3) Have you ever been arrested?
4) Have you ever been convicted of a felony?
5) What are your credit card numbers?
6) What is your physical address?
7) Where do you work?</p>
<p>[heh, some of these posts kind of remind me of a conversation that i
had with my very socially conservative catholic roommate. she was
telling me that homosexuality was a sin and wasn’t real, and i said
‘just wait until you have a homosexual kid.’ she said, ‘i won’t,’ and
i said ‘why not?’ she said, ‘because if a child is raised in an
environment with catholicism and family values, then the child won’t
be homosexual’…]</p>
<p>Perhaps brain research wasn’t at it’s current level back then. But
it would make for an interesting study to find if religious families
produce lower percentages of self-identified homesexuals.</p>
<p>I spent a little time looking through my sociology databases and
came up with zilch on studies.</p>
<p>Sexual Behavior and Selected Health Measures: Men and Women 15–44
Years of Age, United States, 2002 by William D. Mosher, Ph.D.; Anjani
Chandra, Ph.D.; and Jo Jones, Ph.D., Division of Vital Statistics</p>
<p>(Advance Data From Vital and Health Statistics, Number 362, September
15, 2005.</p>
<p>Objective-This report presents national estimates of several measures
of sexual behavior among males and females 15-44 years of age in the
United States in 2002, as collected in the 2002 National Survey of
Family Growth (NSFG). These data are relevant to demographic and
public health concerns, including fertility and sexually transmitted
diseases among teenagers and adults. Data from the 2002 NSFG are
compared with previous national surveys.</p>
<p>Methods-The 2002 NSFG was conducted by the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention’s (CDC) National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS)
and is based on in-person, face-to-face interviews with a national
sample of 12,571 males and females in the household population of the
United States. The measures of sexual behavior presented in this
report were collected using Audio Computer-Assisted Self-Interviewing
(ACASI), in which the respondent enters his or her own</p>
<ul>
<li>For all males 15-44, 10 percent had never had sex, (page 10)</li>
<li>Table 3 shows that … and 46 percent of 15-17-year-old males had
had no sexual contact with another person. (page 11)</li>
<li>About 22 percent of 18-19-year-old males had not had sexual contact
with another person.</li>
<li>Nearly one-half (49 percent) of 15-17-year-old females had not had
any sexual contact with another person.</li>
<li>At age 18-19, 17 percent of females had not had any sexual contact
with another person, compared with about 22 percent of
18-19-year-old males.</li>
</ul>
<p>There is a huge amount of data and slicing and dicing in this study.</p>
<p>Regarding cheating: I ran across an interesting study at a large
Southeastern University on college student attitudes on cheating.
What surprised me was that the definitions of cheating varied widely
to the point of being a useless definition at the extreme. The article
mentioned the health implications.</p>
<p>That’s enough research for one night.</p>