So, if there are twenty people in my office, and only one is openly female...

During my surfing for the day, I encountered this particular article, that really annoyed me. In particular, I really disliked the line, "Outsports said this must be way short of the real figure and argued that a more accurate estimate could even reach 1,000."

I'm sorry, but why exactly must it be way short? Firstly, estimates of the incidence of homosexuality in the general population have ranged from 0.1% to 10%, with the most recent surveys coming back somewhere between 2% and 7%. This places the figure of 10 in 10,000 right at the low edge of the range of estimates.

Secondly, and more tellingly, the assumption that seems to be being made is that the incidence of homosexuality in Olympic athletes must be the same as that in the general populace, which simply doesn't follow. (Indeed, the article itself points out that being an athlete at this level requires a uniquely singleminded focus, something that is unlikely to be achieved by a child being bullied for being gay. That isn't how things should be, but if we're realistic, we have to concede that it is all too often how things are.)

But the misinterpretation of statistics wasn't really what bothered me, if I'm being honest. Frankly, I've gotten used to it, and anyway I'm much more annoyed by the "women are better drivers" and "women earn 80% what a man earns for the same job" lies.

What really bothered me about this article was the line, "It is just easier to hide and deal with one's sexuality later."

Here's my question for Outsports: what business is it of yours? Whether one is a gay-advocacy group, or just a random person on the street, what right do you have to know the orientation of an athlete, or anyone else for that matter? And isn't the whole point of achieving true social equality that we will one day come to the point where we finally realise that, actually, it doesn't matter, that being at the very top in one's field has nothing to do with whom one finds attractive? Why the need to call it 'hiding', when one hasn't happened to mention something that, frankly, has all the relevance of the athlete's favourite colour?

Or am I crazy?