<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: How The Game Is Played&#8230;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.truthwinsout.org/blog/2010/02/6951/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.truthwinsout.org/blog/2010/02/6951/</link>
	<description>Fighting antigay lies and the ex-gay myth</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 04:13:34 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Gaytheist Agenda &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Gaytheist Agenda Smorgasbord.</title>
		<link>http://www.truthwinsout.org/blog/2010/02/6951/comment-page-1/#comment-17685</link>
		<dc:creator>The Gaytheist Agenda &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Gaytheist Agenda Smorgasbord.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Feb 2010 02:19:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.truthwinsout.org/?p=6951#comment-17685</guid>
		<description>[...] This isn&#8217;t anything most of us don&#8217;t already know, but it bears repeating because it&#8217;s urgent, and because the RRRW tries fervently to ignore/deny it. &#160; How the Game is Played [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] This isn&#8217;t anything most of us don&#8217;t already know, but it bears repeating because it&#8217;s urgent, and because the RRRW tries fervently to ignore/deny it. &nbsp; How the Game is Played [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Buffy</title>
		<link>http://www.truthwinsout.org/blog/2010/02/6951/comment-page-1/#comment-17632</link>
		<dc:creator>Buffy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Feb 2010 00:20:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.truthwinsout.org/?p=6951#comment-17632</guid>
		<description>Oh FFS, how long do we have to deal with this biased BS?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh FFS, how long do we have to deal with this biased BS?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bruce Garrett</title>
		<link>http://www.truthwinsout.org/blog/2010/02/6951/comment-page-1/#comment-17627</link>
		<dc:creator>Bruce Garrett</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Feb 2010 22:18:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.truthwinsout.org/?p=6951#comment-17627</guid>
		<description>Evan, Richard: I reckon the rule of thumb now has to be to always wait for the other shoe to drop whenever someone starts waving a study that reinforces gay stereotypes, regardless of whether or not it&#039;s coming from the anti-gay right or not.  Given the Times reputation on science reporting, I expected better of them.

My own personal layman&#039;s hunch is that patterns of monogamy among same and opposite sex couples are probably not too different. More likely the social expectations for heterosexual couples works to keep their dalliances a lot more secretive, the individuals involved a lot more in denial about what they&#039;re doing.  There&#039;s hardly a week that goes by without some heterosexual sex scandal hitting the papers, yet those are never held up as proof that heterosexuals are incapable of forming lasting, deeply devoted unions.  If there was more honesty I strongly doubt you&#039;d see a lot of difference.

So I would be highly suspicious of any study regarding patterns of monogamy among same-sex couples that did not also, and in tandem, study those patterns among opposite-sex couples with the same rigor.  You see another one of these pop into the headlines, just wait for the other shoe to drop.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Evan, Richard: I reckon the rule of thumb now has to be to always wait for the other shoe to drop whenever someone starts waving a study that reinforces gay stereotypes, regardless of whether or not it&#8217;s coming from the anti-gay right or not.  Given the Times reputation on science reporting, I expected better of them.</p>
<p>My own personal layman&#8217;s hunch is that patterns of monogamy among same and opposite sex couples are probably not too different. More likely the social expectations for heterosexual couples works to keep their dalliances a lot more secretive, the individuals involved a lot more in denial about what they&#8217;re doing.  There&#8217;s hardly a week that goes by without some heterosexual sex scandal hitting the papers, yet those are never held up as proof that heterosexuals are incapable of forming lasting, deeply devoted unions.  If there was more honesty I strongly doubt you&#8217;d see a lot of difference.</p>
<p>So I would be highly suspicious of any study regarding patterns of monogamy among same-sex couples that did not also, and in tandem, study those patterns among opposite-sex couples with the same rigor.  You see another one of these pop into the headlines, just wait for the other shoe to drop.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Richard W. Fitch</title>
		<link>http://www.truthwinsout.org/blog/2010/02/6951/comment-page-1/#comment-17623</link>
		<dc:creator>Richard W. Fitch</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Feb 2010 21:38:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.truthwinsout.org/?p=6951#comment-17623</guid>
		<description>The whole article and accompanying comments are well worth the read. One in particular by a &quot;Dr. Matthew&quot; (who was guest lecturer for one of the study&#039;s authors), sheds an interesting light on the project. It is amazing how research can be turned into &quot;proof&quot; for conclusions that were not even originaly addressed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The whole article and accompanying comments are well worth the read. One in particular by a &#8220;Dr. Matthew&#8221; (who was guest lecturer for one of the study&#8217;s authors), sheds an interesting light on the project. It is amazing how research can be turned into &#8220;proof&#8221; for conclusions that were not even originaly addressed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Evan Hurst</title>
		<link>http://www.truthwinsout.org/blog/2010/02/6951/comment-page-1/#comment-17622</link>
		<dc:creator>Evan Hurst</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Feb 2010 20:52:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.truthwinsout.org/?p=6951#comment-17622</guid>
		<description>Oh good lord.  I had seen rumblings about this but hadn&#039;t looked into it.  Glad you did.  

That Times reporter should have to make a public apology.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh good lord.  I had seen rumblings about this but hadn&#8217;t looked into it.  Glad you did.  </p>
<p>That Times reporter should have to make a public apology.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

