I have a feeling I'm going to regret asking, and I have no doubt Thucy won't like it, but what is NOLA?

New Orleans, Louisiana.

Oh, that was harmless :)

21% *is* an epidemic. Hell, if TV shows could draw a 21% market share, they would be ecstatic. And I'm not gay bashing (we all know about my friend Garry). I'm actually concerned because, despite krellin's claim to the contrary, steroid rage is real, does occur, and can be devastating to the individual and anyone around them.

If we were to make steroids legal, it would have to be under doctor supervision or some kind of monitoring. That shit results in much worse personal, familial, and societal damage than pot does.

draug, I think I alluded to this earlier - if we talked about some massive steroid use by youth in general, people would be terrified, talking about all teh side ffects and all that.

Frankly, the <ho hum....> what's the big deal? attitude that gay/bi men are using a harmful substance in their body at an alarmingly high rate as compared to others is, frankly, a bigotted response. It's a little...."....oh <looks around>...gay men? Are...? Uh...are we allowed to talk about them in a negative way? Uhhhh....? OK, never mind...good for them! Steroid up, my boys!"

This is actually an interesting topic though.

Don't you think it's most likely that the steroid use is a result of societal pressure to look good for men? I'd suspect that gay teens are as a rule much more "aware" of their appearance than straight teens. I bet the same curve exists for straight vs lesbian women in the case of anorexia... I bet it's much more prevalent among straight women.

Does this mean that straight women have a genetic predisposition toward anorexia? Doubtful, since it only occurs in nations rich enough to view fat as bad. Far more likely they do it to in response to societal pressure, the same pressure that gay men feel when they decide to use steroids.

My two cents.


*edit*

Looked for ED amongs gays, and, sure enough, gay men and straight women are more likely to develop anorexia than their women-loving counterparts.

http://www.adiosbarbie.com/2011/10/eating-disorders-and-lgbt-whats-the-connection/

What does erectile dysfunction have to do with anorexia and how can a woman have ED?

ED = eating disorder, sorry.

and FWIW, a woman with erectile disfunction is defined as a woman so ugly that hard cocks go limp at the very sight of her.

"@oscar -- for as much as you mouth off and attack people, it would sure be nice if you had a clue what you are talking about. That you know nothing about Thucy's stance on such an important issue to Thucy makes me wonder *a lot* about you and your liberal attack dog ways of late, as you have been Thucy's snarling defender...andyet you know nothing of him and what he has said? lol It certainly just proves my point that you are just a viscous little attack dog, right?"

I'm not Thucy's defender. I don't even know him. Nor did I ever talk about him. That's why I asked if there is a quote, so I may verify for myself whether he actually said such a thing or whether it's just one of your trolls where you rip something he said out of it's context and then run with it.

If you open yourself up to the possibility krellin, you may find that I actually agree with you sometimes, i.e. there's no need for you to default into defensive mode and call me a viscous [sic] little attack dog every time I talk to you.

oscar...you may use the search function to review the forums and find out what Thucy believes...or you may be patient, and let the love wash over you as the kindler, gentler forum discussion goes on it's merry way. Unless Thucy is hiding, in which case you may never know.

OK oscar - you and me - shake hands, fresh start. Deal?

Yeah, I'm not interested enough to go scrutinize all of Thucy's posts. I guess I'll have to be patient then.

Alright with the fresh start though. <shakes hand>

@Draug: From the article:

"The nationally representative study is an analysis of government surveys from 2005 and 2007. It involved 17,250 teen boys aged 16 on average; almost 4 percent — 635 boys — were gay or bisexual. Blashill said it’s likely more recent data would show the disparities persist."

Using 21% vs. 4%, here are the actual steroid user numbers among the survey:

Straight: (17250 - 635) * .04 ~ 665
Gay: 635 * .21 ~ 133

I can get behind the idea that 21% is in fact a high rate of steroid use among a select group of people, but given that the numbers still show 5x more straight people using them than gay people, it seems imprudent to harp on why gays use them instead of why the average person uses it, and according to the study the average person isn't gay...

@y2k - Agreed to a degree, but we have to start somewhere and it is usually best to start with the group most at risk, even if it is so small. And what it doesn't account for is those unknowns like the teens who didn't yet know their sexuality. Homosexuality doesn't necessarily consciously display itself in the teen years. Some of those non-gay/bi teens may well actually be latent and be "preening" subconsciously.

That said, we need to focus on the problem of steroid use amongst teens and if the study gives us a starting target group, then great. We work with the troubled target group first then expand the program.

It's very possible if not likely that the reason for steroid use among straight vs. gay people is completely different though, no? I would imagine that steroid use among gays is high for body image purposes, as discussed here and in the article, but for straight men, my bet would be that straight men use steroids mostly for improved performance in a sport or physical activity, and less for body image. And if it is true that straight vs. gay men/boys use steroids for very different reasons like this, then focusing on the problem among gays won't help much at all with general steroid use problems.

And focusing on performance minded individuals won't help the higher at risk population or those like body builders who use it for the appearance aspect as well.

I'm just glad it prompts a discussion because I do fear for our youth who see athletic their idols use them or who strive to look like Matt Bomer.

Right, so you focus on both. The most disheartening thing about that article is that it basically looks at the numbers and essentially stops at the point of saying "Steroid use among gays is higher than straights", and that's not what's important. That difference just implies that the reason why a straight and gay person would use steroids is very different and they should be handled separately, but not given more weight and concern as this article implies. It's numbers with an agenda rather than truly evaluated statistics for their merit. We had to have this conversation to root that out, but the average person to read that article is definitely coming away with "Steroid use is a problem for gays" and nothing more.

And that's what I claim is just unnecessarily spreading hate in a way that isn't helpful for anyone.