Sexual identity survey

Whale Oil is running a reader survey on age, gender, sexual identity and where you live.

Actually they are running a second survey because the first one was faulty.

Brief Whaleoil Readership Survey because of poorly phrased original question

Dear Readers due to my inexperience I phrased a question poorly in the recent Whaleoil readership survey so the results were inaccurate.

In order to get an accurate picture I have redone that part of the survey and hope that you will all be so kind as to answer it for us.I have also added the option of not answering the sexual preference question.

Unusually for a survey SB has also included her predictions for what she thinks results will be.

SB is mistaken if she thinks she “will get an accurate picture” from a self-selecting online poll, no matter how many times she re-arranges the questions.

There is no way of determining what accuracy you can get from polls like this. They are generally regarded as totally unreliable, except by media organisations trying to make headlines and stories.

In particular asking a question about sexual identity is at the best of times difficult to get accurate results. Particularly with deeply personal questions (at least there’s an option for “None of your business that question is too personal”) it’s well known that people often avoid answering accurately.

I am asking the question because Whaleoil was a big supporter of the gay marriage bill but we have been accused of being homophobic by the left. I am interested to see how many gay readers we have for that reason.

It sounds like she may be using the survey to try and show that Whale Oil is not “homophobic” but given that there are a number of authors and many commenters the survey makes no attempt to evaluate homophobia.

The results from the first inaccurate question, indicated that we have seven gay readers.

No it didn’t indicate that at all.

Typically there are many more readers than active participants on blogs, so a survey is unlikely to give any meaningful measure of the sexual preference of readers.

Seven respondents indicated they were gay, whether they are ot not, that is all.

There is no assurance given of privacy of information – I don’t think Whale Oil would in this case misuse information provided by readers but many people are very wary of what they divulge on the Internet, as they should be. That will increase self selection and in particular self non-selection.

The survey may be ‘fun’ for SB but there can be no confidence in getting anything like an accurate picture of the sexual identity of it’s readers.

And even though some readers may be prepared to reveal their sexual identity that does nothing to determine whether straight or gay or bi or ‘other’ participants see Whale Oil as homophobic or not.

Leave a comment

9 Comments

  1. PDB

     /  25th July 2016

    I didn’t think Whaleoil could get more unreadable………..I was wrong.

    Reply
  2. Joe Bloggs

     /  25th July 2016

    (Yet) another nail in the WO coffin…

    As Pete observed yesterday Juana jumped on the Muslim bashing bandwagon when news on the Munich shooting was sketchy. When news that Islam apparently wasn’t a factor she buttoned up and not a peep has been heard from them since.

    But the wilful ignorance at WO runs far wider and deeper. Last week toxic hate-speech peddler Milo Yiannopoulos was banned for life from Twitter for his role in the online abuse of Leslie Jones over her role in the Ghostbusters reboot.

    His response was to try to make it look as if Jones deserved abuse. So he disseminated fake tweet screencaps purporting to be from the actress in which she expressed racist views.

    WO have ‘used’ Yiannopoulos previously in support of various hate-speech posts of theirs. So it was only natural that they jumped on the bandwagon to support him this time, by reposting some of the more disgusting tweets that the toxic creep and his buddy Chuck Johnson had faked.

    Did WO withdraw and apologise once it became evident/public that the offending tweets were faked? Nope…. ‘cos that might highlight how they have no ‘journalistic integrity’ eh…zip, zero, nada…

    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jul/20/milo-yiannopoulos-twitter-ban-leslie-jones-bad-idea

    Reply
    • Kitty Catkin

       /  26th July 2016

      Some people, like Nelly’s Wayne, cannot understand why this man has been banned from Twitter.

      I can.

      Reply
  3. Gezza

     /  25th July 2016

    Thanks for the link, PG; Looking forward to their next survey results summary.

    Reply
  4. Dave K

     /  25th July 2016

    What’s with the Whaleoil fixation?? We get it, you were slighted but it does get a little droll…pigs, mud and all that.

    Or is it more the case of dodgy porn?. Ooooohhh that’s terrible but somehow you just have to keep going back?

    Reply
    • Bill

       /  26th July 2016

      LOL, Hell I just Googled, dodgy oiled, mud wrestling pig porn and it brought me here.

      Reply
      • Bill

         /  26th July 2016

        Just tried Whaleoil fixation that’s terrible, but somehow it keeps coming back to you Dave.

        Reply
  5. Kitty Catkin

     /  26th July 2016

    I would have thought that ‘sexual identity’ was whether one saw oneself as male, female or other variants, and that straight/gay/bi/a preference was ones ‘sexuality’.

    Neither is any of WO’s business, and his gracious permission to not answer that question is patronising and ridiculous. Why does he want to know ? I wonder how many people stopped the survey at that point.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s