Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Pollster1

Yup. That 10% figure must be abandoned and ridiculed. Think of your own personal experience, let’s say in high school. I went to a small school, with a little more than 100 kids in each class. There’s no f’n way 10 of them were homosexual, regardless of the definition. I can think back and imagine the figure was one or two — which fits right into the correct number of 1.6%. I know the 10% figure came from research in prisons, whatever. But now we know it isn’t true. Why do we keep using it????


10 posted on 04/10/2015 4:44:58 AM PDT by duckworth (Perhaps instant karma's going to get you. Perhaps not.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: duckworth

Its all part of the manufactured consensus that was developed by the Wilsonian progressives. Its about creating the appearance of greater numbers as a means of manipulating the human desire to be part of the crowd or not stand out.

Edward Bernays was a Wilsonian propagandist and advertising expert. In those days tobacco companies recognized that they were missing out on all the money that could be generated if women took up smoking. What Bernays did was hire models to go where there were crowds and media. The models would light up on cue and look glamorous doing it.

The same tactics are being used today with every TV show or movie having gay characters. In social media a few can become many.


14 posted on 04/10/2015 5:09:16 AM PDT by cripplecreek ("For by wise guidance you can wage your war")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson