Gays, lesbians, bisexuals, PART II

[Rían]

Originally Posted by Insidious Rex

Are you talking about a Margi Gras club? Like a Crew?

what's a crew?

[Lotesse]

What does "Is Hollywood in England" mean, Inked - this another one of your private jokes? Do you mean because I referred to punks?

AND - - there might be one or two private uber-exclusive very-wealthy-white-male-only clubs in Los Angeles, in fact I know of one in particular but I cannot right now remember the name of it; I'll get back to you on that, but all the rest of the examples I listed off are all very much public clubs. L.A. is increibly divisive when it comes to the races. You'd think it would be the other way around, but it's not. But for the most part, people just live with it like that and they don't trip. Have you seen the movie "Crash?" It really is a lot like that. And like I said, generally no one has a problem with it. It'd be a pretty strange thing, anyway, for someone to try and get into a nightclub and pay money to "have fun" in a venue where they will be ostracised and alone and snobbed out; that's just common sense. If I were a skinhead, I really wouldn't look to hang out in an Israeli club for fun. They would treat me like sh** there, right? Same if I were a white-collar white guy trying to hang out at a strictly Crips bar in Compton, or something. Recipe for disaster.

So what if a club doesn't want straight people to come in? So? I don't see what the big deal is. And if a straight person wanted access that badly to an all-gay bar, well... are they really straight in the first place? Why would they want to insist upon being in an all gay bar, if they were decidedly straight? And anyway, if they wanted to get in that badly why not pretend to be gay? Look, Studio 54 discriminated heavily against allowing any kind of person they didn't want in their club - if they weren't Bianca Jagger, or Andy Warhol or a supermodel or a flashy-beautiful young gay in a costume, whatever - so? How is that wrong?

[Lotesse]

Oh, here you go, Rian, about what's a crew - they usually spell it "Krewe" -

http://www.krewecentral.com/

[inked]

Just what does it take to make GLBT's happy in Great Britain?

no equality in pubs, please, we don't like it!

BUT, not enough equality on the tele!
http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/enter.../2005-634.html

And, deeper meaning seekers, IT'S THE IRONY!

[Lotesse]

So... what's your point, Inked? You just like to post links everywhere, and yet you don't feel like following up on a conversation about what you link? Do you have an opinion of your own to share, or is it always just going to be links to various and sundry news articles? I really don't get where you're coming from Inked. If you want to start a conversation about one news article, then let's follow through on it; why open up more and more news articles without following through? I really am interested to hear you post something here - or anywhere on entmoot, that is comprised of your own opinion or viewpoint on a topic, in your own words. Rather than these relentless random links.

[inked]

Try reading #239 r-e-a-l-l-y s-l-o-w, Lotesse. It's an answer to your prior question. Scroll back one page and half-way down........there. You have a point you'd like to discuss, let me know.

Now, I happen to enjoy irony. I'm sharing. You don't get it? Sorry.

HOW about this: http://www.boston.com/news/education..._high_schools/

It just happens that 2 positions in are high schools have to be filled by gay principals: one male, one female. Gays are 1 - 3 % of the population. So what are the statistical chance that "it just happened"? I know you think I'm a homophobe for asking the obvious question. But I'm not. I'm just finding it statistically unlikely that these events would transpire in less than a 1/10,000 rate of occurence.

However, this long time observer finds it even more incredible:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=48994

And, given the coincidences listed, if applied to heterosexuals as 97-99% of the population, we'd hear screaming about discrimination from the folks benefitting enormously from the discrimination obviously at work.

Now, read s-l-o-w-l-y......it's the i - r- o -n -y!

[Lotesse]

How about YOU r-e-a-d- s-l-o-w-l-y, since you obviously love to gloss over any points or ideas anybody has to share here and concentrate only upon your own links. Do you have any ideas of your own to share, or do you just like to parrot your newstory links? So what about the irony, Inked? The world is filled with irony and ironic situations - and? What's your point? Is this thread about irony, or is it about Gays, Lesbians and Bisexuals? And, we were talking about discriminating pub/bar/club access for gays/non-gays, and that was the discussion; just because you put up another link to something else entirely doesn't mean that the previous discussion is over. This thread belongs to everyone participating in it, Inked. You are not the thread's "boss."

[Rían]

Originally Posted by Lotesse

Oh, here you go, Rian, about what's a crew - they usually spell it "Krewe" -

http://www.krewecentral.com/

thanks! I've never heard of that ... interesting!

[Nurvingiel]

Inked, we've already established that reverse discrimination is dumb. You're the only one who seems to like it with all your links! j/k

Lotesse, what is Krewe? I went to the website. But I don't get it.

[Lotesse]

O.K., well, I have never personally been in a Mardi Gras Krewe, but I worked in a Creole restaurant once! Anyway - loosely defined, a Krewe is a little group of parade-goers/floatmakers who have a common theme, and get together each year to make their float and celebrate Mardi Gras together. There's tons of Krewes. some going back for many decades, some brand new. Here's another little website to answer a few Mardi Gras questions 4 U: http://carlnivale.theatricana.com/faq.html

AND, also there's this: http://www.neworleansonline.com/newo...mghistory.html

[Spock]

[The Wizard from Milan]

Originally Posted by inked

HOW about this: http://www.boston.com/news/education..._high_schools/

It just happens that 2 positions in are high schools have to be filled by gay principals: one male, one female. Gays are 1 - 3 % of the population. So what are the statistical chance that "it just happened"? I know you think I'm a homophobe for asking the obvious question. But I'm not. I'm just finding it statistically unlikely that these events would transpire in less than a 1/10,000 rate of occurence.

Well, you keep on screaming data! data! But the truth is that you post both data that are unsubstantiated, and statistical calculations that are wrong.
The 1-3% is far too low and just does not correspond with the scientific studies that have been done on the field, such as Laumann et al.
But let's get to the wrong statistics.
Just for the sake of argument I will take the 1% prevalence that you use.
First of all, it is not possible to find out the probability of two principals being LGBT without assuming (implicitely of explicitely) whether the events are dependent or independent. You assumed independence (also known as stockastical independent, also spelled stochastical) without even realizing it to obtain 1/10,000. The assumption of independence is not corroborated by facts in this context because there are all sources of endogeneity at work here, beginning with locational choice.
But let's set aside dependence for an instant, since, to use it, we would have to know its exact mathematical form. For the sake of continuing to prove you wrong, I'll go ahead and work out the case of independence that you want to consider.
If we ask ourselves what is the probability that that particular district in this particular moment had two LGBT principals, under all the assumptions above you do get 1/10,000, but that completely misconstrues the problem. That completely miscronstrues the problem because you would have cried foul whatever district had two LGBT principal. From a stitistical point of view (and I will build the common sense intuition in the post below), that is a completely different question.
The probability that you have to calculate is the probability to have at least one district with two LGBT principals out of all US districts (and you should do it for a reasonably long span or time). I am not familiar with US school districts; I will make some assumptions just to show the correct statistical reasoning; you can go and dig up actual number to plug into the formula.
For this example let's assume that all districts have two principals and that there are 10,000 districts in the US. The probability that you have to calculate is the probabity of having at least one district with two LGBT principals out of 10,000 (I am keeping on using your assumption that LGBT are 1% for the sake of illustation).
One more modeling choice is whether the selection of principals is better represented as "with reinmission" (also called Bernoulli trials) or "without reinmission". Given that I am not doing these calculations in a facetious way, I will just assume Bernoulli trials (for the purpose of this thread assuming non Bernoulli trials would change the name of the distribution that I am going to use) but not the substance of my point.
Under all these assumptions, the right way of computing the probability is by using the binomial distribution.
We still need a small piece of basic probability theory, before we can plow ahead and use the formula. The little piece of probability theory is that the probability of an event is equal to 1 minus the proabability of its complement. Applied to this case that statement says that the probability of having at least one district with two LGBT principals out of 10,000 districts is equal to 1 minus the probability of not having any district with two LGBT principals out of 10,000.
Now we can apply the binomial distribution to find the probability that zero districts out of 10,000 have two LGBT principals (under Inked's assumption that the proabability of two LGBT principals in one specific district is 1/10,000). Plug in the numbers in your calculator and you get approx. 37%.
That means that there is a probability approx 63% that in at least one district (and possibly more than one) out of 10,000 there will be two LGBT principals.

[The Wizard from Milan]

This post will try to show why Inked is completely wrong in more intuitive terms than the ones I have used in my previous post. (Same assumptions as previous post).
Let's make the case that you have an urn with many, many million lots in it. And that 1% of these lots are painted in rainbow colors. If you draw only two of these lots, the probability that both of them is rainbow is tiny, but if you draw thousands of pairs of lots the probability that at least one of these thousands of pairs is ranbow is very high.
Some people have a hard time wrapping their head around the fact that although the probability of each of those thousands pairs being ranibow is tiny, the probability that at least one out of thousands of pairs is rainbows is huge.
Yet this mathematical fact is just another facet of the fact that everybody seems to grasp that the proportion of rainbos lots in your sample is going to be very close to the proportion of rainbow lots in the urn, if the sample is big (and under other assumptions, I am not getting into here)

[The Wizard from Milan]

Originally Posted by inked

However, this long time observer finds it even more incredible:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=48994

And I went there thinking to find an article quoting numbers; I should have known what you link to...

[Nurvingiel]

You need some paragraph breaks in your long post there buddy. My eyes... my eyes!!

[Jonathan]

Wizard, nice explanation of the statistics behind the two gay principals. Even though I like statistics, I'm so darn lousy at explaining it to others . But you explained things well.

Oh, Nurv's right. You do need some paragraph breaks

[Insidious Rex]

So I dont understand why its such an awful thing that there are two principles that happen to be gay. Why all the fuss? Why would it prompt people to write articles that amount to gay bashing diatribes like the one inked posted?

[Nurvingiel]

Maybe because it was an example of reverse discrimination? I didn't read the article so I don't know, but people do get mad about that.

I don't like reverse discrimination either (my dad experienced annoyance around that at his office), but I don't think an anti-gay rant is going to help matters. We need to build bridges, not just piss and moan about how a certain group is doing something wrong.

Building dialogue or taking action in a positive was is more productive than ranting. I realise this looks funny coming from me, but consider what I rant about - things I can't control (cafeteria food) or things I tried to change that didn't go my way (I voted, but the results I wish for didn't completely happen).

Sometimes you need to vent a little, but complaing about a whole group of people only alienates people from each other, which only makes the problem worse.

[The Wizard from Milan]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

You need some paragraph breaks in your long post there buddy. My eyes... my eyes!!

I added a paragraph sign here and there, according to a random algorith

[Insidious Rex]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

Maybe because it was an example of reverse discrimination?

But how is having two principals that are gay a form of reverse discrimination?