How does /lgbt/ afress things:
>https://stream.org/yes-childhood-sexual-abuse-often-contribute-homosexuality/
Gay men are more likely to be victim of abuse
>http://www.wnd.com/2002/04/13722/
Pedophilia among gay individuals
>https://mainweb-v.musc.edu/vawprevention/lesbianrx/factsheet.shtml
Lesbian have higher domestic voilence abuse
Not even trying to hate. I'm not sure about these stats because I know a lot of them are fuelled by homophobia, on other hand I'm not ready to dismis them.
In short, I'd like to know what "the other side", or rather the side involved think and justify these things.
i think they're disgusting and should be wholly condemned. what more can i say?
>>8686178
I'm not asking to /pol/ tard, moron. I'm asking to genuine LGBT people how they justify these site.
>>8686186
what? i am a genuine lgbt person.
>>8686193
So what d you think of these sites? Do they tell the truth?
>>8686165
How does any random group of people justify their existence when you can google a ton of random articles and statistics that show similar negative associations?
I think only insecure people spend their free time justifying their existence. I just exist, I am the way I am, and I do the best I can to be a good person. I am not apart of some monolithic hive-mind. I'm not going to make those other faggots my problem.
>>8686208
>How does any random group of people justify their existence when you can google a ton of random articles and statistics that show similar negative associations?
I know, hence I'm trying to find more.
I'm pretty neutral to LGBT, but I was discussing with a friend and he wiped me these articles. Obviously I'm nost stupid enough to think every LGBT person is like that, but If the % about gay and child rape is true or just bollocks.
>>8686215
>Obviously I'm nost stupid enough to think every LGBT person is like that
some are
so are some straight people
some humans are fucked up
>>8686241
I know. Anyway, back to my question. For example the lesbian stats, is it true they have more abuse than straight couples? Why is that?
>>8686249
>2 women in a relationship with no man to keep them in check
Gee I wonder why.