Sexual Health Comparison Between Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Heterosexual Individuals

The Journal of Sex Research published a study by Lisette Kuyper and Ine Vanwesenbeeck in April of 2011 examining the differences in sexual health of lesbian, gay, bisexual and heterosexual individuals. Once the differences were established, they looked at possible causes for the disparity. The study was done by inviting approximately 14,900 Netherland citizens to complete a survey questionnaire on their sexual health. Those participating would be given “clix” which they could use to purchase products via the internet. The response rate was 28% allowing for a total of 4,174 participants with an average age of 38.20. (Kuyper, and Vanwesenbeeck 263-274) To ensure a significant amount of lesbian, bisexual, and gay persons participated, ads were placed in sexual minority magazines and websites. Participants were divided into either heterosexual, homosexual/lesbian, bisexual, or asexual based on the answer to questions of gender attraction. All asexual participates were then excluded.
Results concluded that bi-sexual females and bi- and homosexual males had a higher rate of sexual coercion and need for sexual health care as well as an increased number of sexual partners. This number of sexual partners was concluded to be the key indicator for sexual victimization. However, sexual satisfaction and sexual dysfunction were found to be the same between lesbian, gay, bisexual and heterosexual individual. Also noted, Dutch culture is tolerant of sexual diversity. Studies in other cultures might give more extreme results. This is due to the possible influence of society on sexual health. Stress related to hiding one’s sexual identity, internal homonegativity, bias and expectations of rejection all possible causes for the increased need for sexual health care. This conclusion can also be drawn from the improved sexual health of sexual minorities that had long-term partners compared to those with many partners.
The Huffington post article, “Identifying Disconcerting Gaps in LGBT Research and Health Care” by Loren A. Olson, MD, was the media article selected. Doctor Olson is a Psychiatrist and a member of the gay community. With this, he brings a unique perspective concerning sexual minorities’ health issue. While he cites both the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Science (IOM) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the article is relatively deficient of statistics to back his theories. It is more a perspective of one educated individual on how the lesbian, bisexual, gay, and transgender (LBGT) community is addressed by the medical community.
Dr. Olson described sitting on a committee as a gay male who is hiding his sexual identity. The purpose of the committee was to develop eligibility standards for the HMO. The committee chair explained the HMO was writing the questionnaire to identify gay males to deny them eligibility due to the HIV/AIDS epidemic. At that point, another committee member made a derogatory comment that demonstrated educated individuals are not without bias. The story further explains that, while LBGT is an umbrella term, they are all very distinct populations. The article shows the conflict inside members of the LBGT community when it quotes the CDC estimate that only 4% of the male population is gay but 7% of men have sex with men.(Loren 2010) The 3% difference is concluded to be males who hide their sexual identity. The stress placed on these individuals by stereotypes and a society that doesn’t completely acknowledge them makes it difficult to accept reality. Instead, they make comments such as, "I can 't be gay; I like sports too much".(Loren, 2011) Since these individuals do not self identify themselves as being gay, they do not participate in studies that would gather data to understand their needs. Therefore, much work still needs accomplished to gather accurate data to discover the needs of the LBGT community. Without it, there will continue to be a void in health care and research.
When comparing the two articles, a stark contrast appears immediately. The papers are written in different styles, to different audiences, and with unique points of view. Even the lengths of the papers are designed to a specific purpose. This is not to say one is better than the other, but that it is almost comparing apples to oranges.
The scholarly paper was written with no preconceived certainty. Facts uncovered revealed the outcome rather than trying to prove a specific point. It is important to note that the results can be influenced by volunteers who “are really not willing to participate or to be honest even if they agree to participate (…)”(Greenberg, Bruess & Conklin, 2010 p. 33), also known as volunteer bias. The conclusion is built on these facts; so they must be studied and any flaws revealed before continuing. An example would be discarding information from anyone who fit the asexual category due to relevance. Everything is presented to allow anyone reading to see how conclusions were drawn. The terms used and the evidence presented were meant to identify with other professionals in the field who would be able to expound upon the research.
In contrast, the media article was written with the ideals developed over the lifetime of the author. Facts that were presented were sought out to support these beliefs, rather than letting the facts form the conclusion. Like the scholarly paper, the idea was to shine light on the differences of health issues the distinguish LGBT communities. However, being less fact based, emotion was used to attract the readers. This paper targeted the general population to draw attention to the issues.
Each style of writing serves a purpose with advantages. Scholarly papers are not likely to get a wide audience. They are published in journals that are not read regularly by the general public so they will not draw attention to these needs. The people reading this articles, though, are more likely to continue the research, build upon it, or assist in finding answers to the problems revealed. This takes money and the general population caring about an issue. This is where the media article steps in and captures the publics’ attention. It tells the story that makes people want to right a wrong or reach out to those hurting. One could argue that without the media article to draw attention to the subject, there would be little to no money for the research. With this mindset, the media article is the more important of the two. It has to exist for the research to be conducted. Of course, some would argue this is a chicken and the egg scenario. Without some research to support the media article, it could not be written with any fact to ensure the public takes it seriously. If this is true, the scholarly article would be the most critical. So it really depends on the readers’ vantage point as to which is more important.
From an educational viewpoint, scholarly articles allow looking at a subject objectively, without the fog of emotion. They teach that the facts should tell the story, not the other way around. Once a report is published, it allows others in the field to further the work. Allowing people from all over the world to advance topics without direct interaction allows focus of resources. It is important for students to learn this style so they to can conduct the studies and continue to nudge science to new discoveries.
For human sexuality, the clouds around the subject can make it very difficult to see the details. If it were not for the scholarly papers, information would be dominated by myth, religious beliefs, and allusion. The myths seem to persist despite the research that has been conducted over the years, adding murkiness to a vital topic. Because “Human sexuality is a part of your total personality”(Greenberg, Bruess & Conklin, 2010, p. 4), it is an important part of our overall health. Therefore, it is vital that these studies look into hidden issues and discover methods to resolve them. After all, a happy sex life goes a long way towards a happy life. It helps relieve stress and make people feel wanted, accepted and loved.
Before this assignment, I had never read a scholarly review. I had also never given much thought to the contrast of these reviews to the media articles. Following this assignment, I have an understanding of the need and place for each article. The media is more for the general public and can be used to draw attention to an issue. This is due to the fact that the “media strongly influence sexual communication.”(Greenberg, Bruess & Conklin, 2010, p. 87) Whereas, the scholarly article is used to present facts from a study in a format that is useful to fellow researchers. It lays out the scientific basis for the conclusion with facts and leads the reader down the path of discovery. It allows the research to be continued by others to further the science. Both types can be misguided if the intent behind them is misleading. This is obvious in the media reports, but has been proven several times in the scientific world as well. A recent example would the altered reports on global warming done to display desired results. Taking all this into consideration, I see a need for these two styles, not only coexist, but to feed off one another.
References
Greenberg, J. S., Bruess, C. E., & Conklin, S. C. (2010).Exploring the dimensions of human sexuality. (Forth edition ed., pp. 4, 33, 87). Sudbury, Massachusetts: Jones & Bartlett Publishers.
Kuyper, Lisette, and Ine Vanwesenbeeck. "Examining Sexual Health Differences between Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Heterosexual Adults: The Role of Sociodemographics, Sexual Behavior Characteristics, and Minority Stress." JOURNAL OF SEX RESEARCH. 48. (2011): 263-274. Web. 30 Mar. 2012.
Loren, O. (2011, April 14). Huffington post. Retrieved from http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/finally-out/201108/gaps-in-lgbt-research-and-health-care-0?page=1

References: Greenberg, J. S., Bruess, C. E., & Conklin, S. C. (2010).Exploring the dimensions of human sexuality. (Forth edition ed., pp. 4, 33, 87). Sudbury, Massachusetts: Jones & Bartlett Publishers. Kuyper, Lisette, and Ine Vanwesenbeeck. "Examining Sexual Health Differences between Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Heterosexual Adults: The Role of Sociodemographics, Sexual Behavior Characteristics, and Minority Stress." JOURNAL OF SEX RESEARCH. 48. (2011): 263-274. Web. 30 Mar. 2012. Loren, O. (2011, April 14). Huffington post. Retrieved from http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/finally-out/201108/gaps-in-lgbt-research-and-health-care-0?page=1