Good resource about research on homosexuality

[Patavium]

Here’s a good resource for us to learn what the scientific research says about homosexuality.

mygenes.co.nz/

A book about it :mygenes.co.nz/download.htm

Debunking Myths and Misconceptions

mygenes.co.nz/myths.htm

 

[gnfd92]

This seems to be a good resource for some alternative theories on human sexuality and behavior from the mainstream research; it’s always good to analyze things from other perspectives, so thank you!

To return the favor, I’d recommend reading “On Human Nature” by O. Wilson and/or “The Third Chimpanzee” by Jared Diamond; while I may not agree with everything these authors say, these books are well-written and present some thought-provoking theories, on both the nature of heterosexual relations and homosexual inclinations as well as other behaviors such as social altruism and reckless behaviors.

 

[allhers]

This is very good too:

Gay Marriage and the Breakdown of the Moral Argument by
Very Rev. Robert Barron
ewtn.com/library/ISSUES/barrgaymar.HTM

His website is:
www.wordonfire.org

 

[livingwordunity]

The intention of this post is to show fast facts and to do so using quotes from left-leaning authoritative sources so as not to be accused of having data that is skewed to the right. The quotes speak for themselves since they all say the same thing which is that actively “gay” and bisexual men are by far at highest risk for HIV/AIDS. This is news to those who want to teach homosexual behavior in schools as the “new normal” calling it “marriage”. Using these statistical facts from these authoritative sources who we can be sure are not biased against “gays”, we can raise people’s awareness of the high risks and dangers of living an active homosexual life.

Fast Facts about AIDS

“Gay and bisexual men are more severely affected by HIV than any other group in the United States .” - CDC

“Among all gay and bisexual men, blacks/African Americans bear the greatest disproportionate burden of HIV.” – CDC

“From 2008 to 2010, HIV infections among young black/African American gay and bisexual men increased 20%.” – CDC

“Fighting HIV among African Americans is not mutually exclusive with fighting HIV among gay and bisexual men. Efforts to reduce HIV among Blacks must confront the epidemic among Black gay and bisexual men as forcefully as existing efforts to confront the epidemic among other groups.” - Obama

“Roughly three-fourths of HIV/AIDS cases in the United States are among men, the majority of whom are gay and bisexual men.” - Obama

“Gay and bisexual men have comprised the largest proportion of the HIV epidemic in the United States since the first cases were reported in the 1980s, and that has not changed. They still comprise the greatest proportion of infections nationally.” - Obama

“CDC reports that HIV diagnoses among young gay men (ages 13-24) of all races and ethnicities rose between 2001 and 2006.” – Obama

Objection:
“But that’s not fact with AIDS/HIV worldwide where most of the cases are heterosexual.”

Answer :
You are ignoring the percentages. There are more heterosexuals with AIDS because there are more heterosexuals. Homosexuals only make up about 2% of the population. One of the primary ways AIDS got into the heterosexual population is because of bisexual men. According to the CDC and President Obama…

“Gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM) represent approximately 2% of the US population, yet are the population most severely affected by HIV. In 2010, MSM accounted for 63% of all new HIV infections” – CDC

“Given the starkness and the enduring nature of the disparate impact on gay and bisexual men, it is important to significantly reprioritize resources and attention on this community. The United States cannot reduce the number of HIV infections nationally without better addressing HIV among gay and bisexual men…Even though gay and bisexual men comprise only two percent of the U.S. population (4 percent of men)” – Obama (bold emphasis given in Obama’s 2010 Whitehouse report)

“Disparities in HIV infection also exist between gay and bisexual men and heterosexual populations. Recently, the CDC announced that gay and bisexual men in the United States are 44 to 86 times more likely to become infected with HIV than heterosexual men, and 40 to 77 times more likely to become infected than women.” – Obama

“Gay and bisexual men comprise the majority of people with HIV who have died in the United States.” - Obama
“1 in 5 Gay/Bi Men Have HIV, Nearly Half Don’t Know” - WebMD

Objection: “But aren’t they were born that way?”

Answer: There’s no such thing as a “gay gene”.

Unlike being able to know what race a baby is, there’s no way to look at a room full of babies and say that any of them are “gay”. Also, hermaphrodites are extremely rare and are typically asexual, not homosexual.

Except for the possibility of a hormonal imbalance, studies suggest it’s more likely caused by social factors such as a sexual or emotional trauma that influenced them to believe they are homosexual. For example, a baby gets molested, and no one in the family ever finds out. Later, the kid starts to think he’s “gay” but doesn’t make the connection to this repressed memory. Most people will admit that they can’t remember anything earlier than 2 or 3 years old.

“In research with 942 nonclinical adult participants, gay men and lesbian women reported a significantly higher rate of childhood molestation than did heterosexual men and women. Forty-six percent of the homosexual men in contrast to 7% of the heterosexual men reported homosexual molestation. Twenty-two percent of lesbian women in contrast to 1% of heterosexual women reported homosexual molestation. This research is apparently the first survey that has reported substantial homosexual molestation of girls. Suggestions for future research were offered.” - California School of Professional Psychology

Sources:

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

President Obama’s National HIV/AIDS Strategy for the the the United States 2010 White House Report

WebMD

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11501300

 

[livingwordunity]

“LGB people are at higher risk of mental disorder, suicidal ideation, substance misuse, and deliberate self harm than heterosexual people.”

“To legalize marriage between two people of the same sex would enshrine in the law the principle that mothers and fathers are interchangeable or irrelevant.”

Sources:
Department of Mental Health Sciences
USA Today article: Archbishop Cordileone states case against “gay marriage”

 

[Monte_RCMS]

Judith Reisman has written several books on the subject.

do a google search for " Judith Reisman "

drjudithreisman.com/about_dr_reisman.html

best known for her criticism and condemnation of the work and legacy of Alfred Kinsey. She is noted as “the founder of the modern anti-Kinsey movement.” Wikipedia

 

[edwest2]

amazon.com/Homosexuality-American-Psychiatry-Politics-Diagnosis/dp/0691028370

Peace,
Ed

 

[DexUK]

I wouldn’t trust that ‘mygenes’ site as far as I could throw it.

For instance: it states this of homosexual people - that “All are prone to suicide attempts”. This is absolute arrant nonsense. I know plenty of people who are homosexual well enough to have discussed this topic who have not attempted suicide.

As ever, sites such as this one mix in a little objective truth so that they can claim that they are correct and people can’t completely write them off, but in the main, the propositions made are balderdash and clearly written with an anti-homosexual bias.

 

[livingwordunity]

I wouldn’t trust that ‘mygenes’ site as far as I could throw it.

For instance: it states this of homosexual people - that “All are prone to suicide attempts”. This is absolute arrant nonsense. I know plenty of people who are homosexual well enough to have discussed this topic who have not attempted suicide.

As ever, sites such as this one mix in a little objective truth so that they can claim that they are correct and people can’t completely write them off, but in the main, the propositions made are balderdash and clearly written with an anti-homosexual bias.

But isn’t their high suicide rate the evidence that “gay” activists commonly use to try to convince people that “gays” get treated worse such as with bullying? Either “gays” have a high suicide rate or they don’t. Which is it?

 

[Dakota_Roberts]

**“LGB people are at higher risk of mental disorder, suicidal ideation, substance misuse, and deliberate self harm than heterosexual people.”
**
“To legalize marriage between two people of the same sex would enshrine in the law the principle that mothers and fathers are interchangeable or irrelevant.”

Sources:
Department of Mental Health Sciences
USA Today article: Archbishop Cordileone states case against “gay marriage”

Do you have any idea what it feels like to desperately want to be normal and yet no matter how hard you try or pray to be normal it never comes true?

 

[hjgyfgdwpp]

Hay quá… Ti?p t?c nha b?n… Gnoc ?ng h? b?n

 

[DexUK]

But isn’t their high suicide rate the evidence that “gay” activists commonly use to try to convince people that “gays” get treated worse such as with bullying? Either “gays” have a high suicide rate or they don’t. Which is it?

That’s not the point.

Even if there is a high prevalence of suicide in the gay community, it doesn’t mean that ALL gay people attempt it, as the site proposes.

If the site can’t present a truthful picture about so called ‘statistics’ on something that serious, then there’s no reason for anyone to trust it about anything else it presents.

 

[Patavium]

That’s not the point.

Even if there is a high prevalence of suicide in the gay community, it doesn’t mean that ALL gay people attempt it, as the site proposes.

If the site can’t present a truthful picture about so called ‘statistics’ on something that serious, then there’s no reason for anyone to trust it about anything else it presents.

You did not understand. The author is a researcher and uses the word prone in the statistical meaning.

The author means in the STATISTICAL meaning of the word. The same of All are LIKELY TO, and thus means the event is considered, and it has a nonzero probability. It doesn’t mean that ALL commit suicide.

In addition, the author is a researcher and presents facts for many of the questions. Some of the facts are hard to swallow.

Some of the most shocking facts are those discussed here:
mygenes.co.nz/lung&shu.htm

 

[Patavium]

But isn’t their high suicide rate the evidence that “gay” activists commonly use to try to convince people that “gays” get treated worse such as with bullying? Either “gays” have a high suicide rate or they don’t. Which is it?

Yes there is, and it is not because of what gays claim (i.e. discrimination). There are not statistical significant differences between rates of suicide in tolerant vs intolerant environments.

 

[livingwordunity]

Do you have any idea what it feels like to desperately want to be normal and yet no matter how hard you try or pray to be normal it never comes true?

Yes. I was born half black and half white and grew up experiencing racism, rejection, and bullying from both sides. I started to hate who I was and wanted to be white (since at the time that was more accepted than black; now black is apparently in and being white is out). But I matured and accepted the body that God gave me and stopped worrying about whether or not others like it. I also experienced the stigma of being poor and without a father growing up and was homeless a couple of times as a child for a week or two. “Gays” aren’t the only ones with problems.

 

[CopticChristian]

I wouldn’t trust that ‘mygenes’ site as far as I could throw it.

For instance: it states this of homosexual people - that “All are prone to suicide attempts”. This is absolute arrant nonsense. I know plenty of people who are homosexual well enough to have discussed this topic who have not attempted suicide.

As ever, sites such as this one mix in a little objective truth so that they can claim that they are correct and people can’t completely write them off, but in the main, the propositions made are balderdash and clearly written with an anti-homosexual bias.

As a Physician, I would recommend this site and trust this site more than I would trust anyone that supports same sex marriage and provides empirical information by way of observation based on personal experience.

 

[CopticChristian]

That’s not the point.

Even if there is a high prevalence of suicide in the gay community, it doesn’t mean that ALL gay people attempt it, as the site proposes.

If the site can’t present a truthful picture about so called ‘statistics’ on something that serious, then there’s no reason for anyone to trust it about anything else it presents.

This is consistent with data found elsewhere…

narth.com/docs/whitehead.html

Then, more recently, in the Archives of General Psychiatry-- an established and well-respected journal–three papers appeared with extensive accompanying commentary (Fergusson et al. 1999, Herrell et al. 1999, Sandfort et al. 2001, and e.g. Bailey 1999). J. Michael Bailey included a commentary on the above research; Bailey, it should be noted, conducted many of the muchpublicized “gay twin studies” which were used by gay advocates as support for the “born that way” theory. Neil Whitehead, Ph.D.

Bailey said, “These studies contain arguably the best published data on the association between homosexuality and psychopathology, and both converge on the same unhappy conclusion: homosexual people are at substantially higher risk for some forms of emotional problems, including suicidality, major depression, and anxiety disorder, conduct disorder, and nicotine dependence…The strength of the new studies is their degree of control.”

and

A good general rule of thumb is that suicide attempts are about three times higher for homosexuals. Could there be a connection between those two percentages?

Another factor in suicide attempts would be the compulsive or addictive elements in homosexuality (Pincu, 1989 ) which could lead to feelings of depression when the lifestyle is out of control (Seligman 1975). There are some, (estimates vary, but perhaps as many as 50% of young men today), who do not take consistent precautions against HIV (Valleroy et al., 2001) and who have considerable problems with sexual addiction and substance abuse addiction, and this of course would feed into suicide attempts.

and if oppression of Homosexuals is blamed as the cause of Addiction, then we are looking at a Nobel prize here for the first ever discovery of the cause of Addiction…

and

A strong case can be made that the male homosexual lifestyle itself, in its most extreme form, is mentally disturbed. Remember that Rotello, a gay advocate, notes that “the outlaw aspect of gay sexual culture, its transgressiveness, is seen by many men as one of its greatest attributes.” Same-sex eroticism becomes for many, therefore, the central value of existence, and nothing else–not even life and health itself–is allowed to interfere with pursuit of this lifestyle. Homosexual promiscuity fuels the AIDS crisis in the West, but even that tragedy it is not allowed to interfere with sexual freedom.
And, according to Rotello, the idea of taking responsibility to avoid infecting others with the HIV virus is completely foreign to many groups trying to counter AIDS. The idea of protecting oneself is promoted, but protecting others is not mentioned in most official condom promotions (France in the '80s was an interesting exception). Bluntly, then, core gay behavior is both potentially fatal to others, and often suicidal.

Surely it should be considered “mentally disturbed” to risk losing one’s life for sexual liberation. This is surely among the most extreme risks practiced by any significant fraction of society. I have not found a higher risk of death accepted by any similar-sized population.

 

[CopticChristian]

I wouldn’t trust that ‘mygenes’ site as far as I could throw it.

As ever, sites such as this one mix in a little objective truth so that they can claim that they are correct and people can’t completely write them off, but in the main, the propositions made are balderdash and clearly written with an anti-homosexual bias.

For instance: it states this of homosexual people - that “All are prone to suicide attempts”. This is absolute arrant nonsense. I know plenty of people who are homosexual well enough to have discussed this topic who have not attempted suicide.

This emperical observation devitates from reality…

narth.com/2012/12/dr-julie-hamilton-on-dr-oz-show-what-you-didnt-hear-on-tv/

Setting the Record Straight: What You Did Not Hear on a Recent Television Show Featuring NARTH

Sadly, we see much higher levels of depression and suicide among homosexuals than among the non-homosexual population. Some will claim that these higher rates of suicide and depression are the result of homophobia (or therapy, as claimed on the show). HOWEVER, we know that the suicide rates are not simply due to homophobia because we see the same rates of depression and suicide in gay-affirming cultures such as New Zealand, Denmark, The Netherlands, and Norway.

 

[Patavium]

Twin studies are flawed, as you can see how studies such as this appear

journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract;jsessionid=568A2D85C73C79D2C34D99545F2244AB.journals?fromPage=online&aid=307693

Are Political Orientations Genetically Transmitted?
We test the possibility that political attitudes and behaviors are the result of both environmental and genetic factors. Employing standard methodological approaches in behavioral genetics—specifically, comparisons of the differential correlations of the attitudes of monozygotic twins and dizygotic twins—we analyze data drawn from a large sample of twins in the United States, supplemented with findings from twins in Australia. The results indicate that genetics plays an important role in shaping political attitudes and ideologies but a more modest role in forming party identification; as such, they call for finer distinctions in theorizing about the sources of political attitudes. We conclude by urging political scientists to incorporate genetic influences, specifically interactions between genetic heritability and social environment, into models of political attitude formation.

Twin studies show no social factors? Really?

Twin studies, from the year 2000 on, particularly, seemed to support the idea that social factors had no effect on homosexuality. Twin studies subdivide influences into genetic factors, environmental factors experienced in common, and environmental factors experienced by one twin but not the other. For homosexuality twin studies could not detect significant influence from common environmental factors. (Kendler, Thornton, Gilman, & Kessler, 2000; Bailey, Dunne, & Martin, 2000; Bearman & Bruckner, 2002; Santtila et al., 2008).

But twin studies conceal the level of common environmental influence in three ways. Firstly, twin studies have tended to be increasingly appropriated in the search for genetic influences, so that scientific attention has not been focused on the strength of environmental influences. Secondly: common environmental influence is actually hidden in the non-common environment category. In other words common environmental influence can be disguised as non-environmental influence because people react in very individualistic ways to a common environment. In fact the case can be made that these individualistic reactions greatly outweigh genetic influences. This point has already been made by Whitehead (2007) and in a much fuller way in another paper submitted for publication. See also chapter 10 on this website. Thirdly, and this is well established now, the twin study methodology itself (for homosexuality) tends to overestimate the genetic percentage at the expense of the common environmental percentage. See (Whitehead & Whitehead, 2007), also Visscher et al. (Visscher, Gordon, & Neale, 2008) ”…the twin literature based upon the classical twin design and model selection procedures could be severely biased…” i.e. twin studies will simply not detect common influences unless sample sizes are very large, and common influences are very strong.

mygenes.co.nz/lung&shu.htm

 

[Patavium]

The most controversial result I have seen on homosexuality is this one (mygenes.co.nz/lung&shu.htm)

At this point in the debate, the paper by Lung and Shu (2007) appeared. It showed a very strong influence of parental style in Taiwan and of neuroticism, on the development of homosexuality. This was not a marginal result like so many tend to be, but unequivocal. It showed that these influences were predominant.

…

Lung and Shu seem to be associated with the military in Taiwan and their subjects were from the annual intake of 140,000 young recruits. In that country military service is compulsory, hence the recruits represent the whole population of men. There are inevitably those who find military training almost unbearable, and many in Taiwan are diagnosed with adjustment disorder (a DSM mental health category). From these the authors selected 51 homosexuals, and 100 non-homosexuals. The controls were 124 recruits without adjustment disorder. Recruits with mental health issues other than these were eliminated from the study. It seems obvious that this study was possible because Lung and Shu were told by the authorities to study recruits who could not cope. However it means that the study of homosexuality is complicated by the adjustment disorder, which the authors had to take into account in the interpretation of their results. No other study has involved those with an accompanying mental condition like this. However it seems to me that the authors allowed for the adjustment disorder quite adequately. Overall the sample is much more representative than many in the West.

…

In their statistical model to explain homosexuality, Lung and Shu managed to explain 62% of the variance by parental factors and neuroticism level, ie 62% of homosexuality in their sample can be explained by parental factors and higher than normal levels of neuroticism. It is quite rare to get a figure as high as this when a sociological survey is involved. The relative strengths of the factors found important were Maternal Care 0.42, Maternal Protection 0.21, Paternal Care 0.21, Neuroticism 0.64. Paternal Protection, although individually the most important, and highlighted by the authors, exerted its effect through production of neuroticism. (General mental health itself did not directly affect development of homosexuality.) Unfortunately because of the peculiarities of modeling mathematics we cannot directly add the parental factors together to get an overall effect and compare them with the neuroticism result, but we can say other parental factors and neuroticism are roughly comparable in effect.

…

This is twice as successful as the explanation of homosexuality that Bell, Weinberg and Hammersmith found, and has an extra fascinating implication: for the first time a careful modern study shows social factors predominate, and hence other factors, such as genetics (at least in Taiwan), must be minor!

These results support those who talk about over-close mothers and distant fathers as causes of homosexuality. Why were Lung and Shu’s results so clear compared with results from the West which were much less clear? Could the authors have manufactured their results? Are they too good to be true? I think not, because the authors seem largely unaware of the details of the controversy there has been in the West, though they understand it existed. They do not appreciate the significance of their results.

…

I conclude that the results reflect one extreme – what happens in a society in which family influences are very strong. That itself is useful because it gives a picture of what would happen at one extreme even in the West, in social groups where only family factors are involved (the Amish?). However generally in the West things are very different. Why? Because in comparison with Taiwan we are hyper-individualistic. Our high divorce rate and extreme diversity of belief and custom are evidence of this. Hyper-individualism seems to be one of our most prized and politically-correct values. Therefore in the West even two genetically identical twins are likely to react in a different way to circumstances which might tend to trigger homosexuality.

**My belief is that if the twin studies done in the West were done in a society like Taiwan (they aren’t), the results would be totally different, and show a much higher contribution from common factors, and much diminished contributions from genes and non-shared environment. (This is already known for various traits – in Japan, twin studies mostly give a much lower genetic contribution than in the West). This has significant research implications. We should deliberately sponsor studies in societies with extreme conditions to get a clearer picture of influences in our own!
**

So for the Western situation, if some male client seems to have the pattern of a distant father, or a family dynamic which has enforced conformity and discouraged initiative and rough-and-tumble play, these factors are inherently credible, and should not be dismissed, though they will not be politically-correct. However reactions to these factors will be very variable, and individualistic.