Sexual Abuse as a Contributing Factor For Homosexuality

n 1999, Dr. Jeffrey Satinover, M.D. wrote the following regarding the position of sexual
abuse being a contributing factor for homosexuality:

Many studies demonstrate a sadly disproportionate extent of sexual abuse in

“ the childhoods of homosexual men, suggesting at the least that both ”
homosexual unhappiness and homosexuality itself derive from common
causes...[23]

In 2001, the journal Archives of Sexual Behavior published a study entitled Comparative
data of childhood and adolescence molestation in heterosexual and homosexual persons.
The abstract for this article states the following:

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.[24]

The authors of the above medical journal article entitled Comparative data of childhood
and adolescence molestation in heterosexual and homosexual persons also stated that
childhood sexual molestation may not be a causal factor for homosexuality and that the
abuse molestation may be occurring after the individual is a homosexual and the medical
researchers speculated that the victims of molestation may be engaging in behaviors that
put them at greater risk for molestation.[25]

In 1998, Dr. William C. Holmes, M.D. and Dr. Gail B. Slap, M.D. reported in the
medical journal JAMA the following:

Adolescent boys, particularly those victimized by males, were up to 7 times more

“ likely to identify themselves as homosexual or bisexual than peers who had not
been

abused (P<.001).

Dr. Holmes and Dr. Slap also pointed out that "No longitudinal studies examined the
causal relationship between abuse and gender role or sexual orientation, however. Gender
role nonconformity and gay or bisexual identity may precede abuse." [28] Dr. Holmes and
Dr. Slap also offered a speculative scenario in respect to how a homosexual adolescent
exploring his sexuality may put himself at risk but offered no empirical studies in regards
to their speculative scenario.[29]

In 1997, the researcher Gundlach studied the issue of childhood sexual molestation in
respect to lesbians and according the medical researchers Gundlach found the following:

Gundlach (1977) surveyed 225 lesbian and 233 heterosexual women, and
“ found that 30% of the heterosexual women and 21% of the lesbians had been ”
raped. Of the 30 women who had been raped before the age of 14, 26 had an
adult homosexual orientation while 9 had an adult heterosexual orientation.[30]

In addition, the abstract for the Gundlach study states the following additional detail:

Sixteen of the 17 girls, age 4 to 16, molested or seduced (6 for a long time) by
“ a relative or close family friend are lesbians as adults. The subjects' attitudes ”
about the incident were highly determined by parental reactions.[31]

Failure of Experiments to Show Genetic Determinism For Homosexuality

Dr. Dean Hamer is a researcher often cited to show that there is empirical data supporting
the notion of genetic determinism in regards to homosexuality. News organizations like
National Public Radio and Newsweek have done news stories regarding his work.[32] In
respect to the press trumpeting various findings genetics-of-behavior research uncritically
the science journal Science stated the following in 1994:

Time and time again, scientists have claimed that particular genes or
“ chromosomal regions are associated with behavioral traits, only to withdraw
their findings when they were not replicated. "Unfortunately," says Yale's
[Dr. Joel] Gelernter, "it's hard to come up with many" findings linking
specific genes to complex human behaviors that have been replicated. "...All
”
were announced with great fanfare; all were greeted unskeptically in the
popular press; all are now in disrepute."[33]

Martin A. Silverman, M.D. wrote regarding a famous study of Dr. Dean Hamer:

On July 16, 1993, it was reported in Science (pp. 291, 321) that geneticist
“ Dean Hamer and his team at the National Cancer Institute had reported on a ”
study involving 40 pairs of brothers both of whom were gay that had led them
to conclude that they had discovered a factor on the X chromosome through
 which gayness was genetically transmitted to them from their mothers. This
was hailed as proof that homosexuality in men is biological in origin. Two
years later, however, Eliot Marshall reported in Science (June 30, 1995,
p.268) George Ebers and George Rice of the University of Western Ontario
had unsuccessfully attempted to replicate Hamer's findings and had "found no
evidence that gayness is passed from mother to son" genetically. He also
reported that the Office of Research Integrity in the Department of Health and
Human Services was investigating Hamer's work.[34]

In May of 2000, the American Psychiatric Association issued a fact sheet stating that
"..there are no replicated scientific studies supporting a specific biological etiology for
homosexuality."[35]

Genetics and Claims of the immutability of homosexuality

For more information please see: Homosexuality and Genetics

A common argument is that an inclination to homosexuality is inborn and immutable. It

is widely believed that the public will become more accepting of homosexuality if they
are convinced that it is inborn and immutable. For example, neuroscientist and
homosexual Simon Levay stated: "...people who think that gays and lesbians are born that
way are also more likely to support gay rights."[3]

Research into the issue of the origins of homosexuality suggests that adoptive brothers
are more likely to both be homosexuals than the biological brothers, who share half their
genes which suggests that homosexuality is not genetically caused. [4][5][6] This data
prompted the journal Science to report "this . . . suggests that there is no genetic
component, but rather an environmental component shared in families".[7][8][9] However, in
regards to psychosocial and biological theories in regards to the origin of homosexuality,
Columbia University psychiatry professors Drs. William Byrne and Bruce Parsons stated
in 1994: "There is no evidence that at present to substantiate a biological theory. [T]he
appeal of current biological explanations for sexual orientation may derive more from
dissatisfaction with the present status of psychosocial explanations than from a
substantiating body of experimental data".[10]

Dr. Tahir I. Jaz, M.D., Winnipeg, Canada states: "The increasing claims of being "born
that way" parallels the rising political activism of homosexual organisations, who
politicise the issue of homosexual origins . In the 1970s, approximately ten percent of
homosexuals claimed to be "born homosexual" according to a large scale
survey....However, in a survey in the 1980s, with the homosexual rights movement
increasingly becoming active, thirty-five percent claimed to be born that way.[11]
Homosexuality in the Media

Joseph Farah

For more information please see: Homosexuality in the Media

The Traditional Values Coalition states the following regarding the reporting of
homosexuality and the United States media:

The National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association has hundreds of

“ members and is heavily funded by Hearst newspapers, Knight-Ridder, CBS
”
News, CNN, Gannett, NBC, Los Angeles Times, Fox News, and more. Major
newspapers throughout the U.S. have homosexual activists on their staffs who
filter what you read about homosexuality.[233]

In respect to how much influence the National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association
has in respect to the media coverage of homosexuality the organization Accuracy in
Media reported the following in relation to the groups 1999 annual convention: "In his
keynote speech, journalist Charles Kaiser boasted that "the editor and the publisher of
every major news organization in America, except for Peter Jennings, has by now
attended [one of our events].""[234]

Joseph Farah, who founded WorldNetDaily, wrote an article on the National Lesbian and
Gay Journalists Association (NGJA) in which he stated that he had covered the group for
some time.[235] However, it wasn't until their 10th anniversary that the shed the guise of
portraying themselves as an objective professional organization that promotes higher
journalistic standards in regards to the issue of homosexuality and showed themselves as
promoters of a homosexual activist agenda that attempts to gain special rights.[236]
In September of 2000, Mr. Farah stated the following regarding the National Lesbian and
Gay Journalists Association:

It is...a group that has bent so far toward changing the newsroom culture that
“ the big debate in San Francisco was whether journalists should even bother
getting other points of view on homosexuals' issues and stories.

Did you catch that? What was on the table at the NLGJA conference was the
question of whether those with differing viewpoints on homosexuality and
the special "rights" activists are asserting for them based on their behavior
should even have a say in news stories.

CBS correspondent and NLJGA member Jeffrey Kofman made his thinking
clear: "The argument (is): Why do we constantly see in coverage of gay and
lesbian, bisexual and transgender issues the homophobes and the fag-haters
quoted in stories when, of course, we don't do that with Jews, blacks, et
cetera?"

Paula Madison, vice president of diversity at NBC and news director for the
NBC's New York City affiliate WNBC, added: "I agree with him. I don't see
why we would seek out ... the absurd, inane point of view just to get another
point of view."

Kofman rejoined: "All of us have seen and continue to see a lot of coverage
that includes perspectives on gay issues that include people who just simply
are intolerant and perhaps not qualified as well."
”
This was political correctness gone wild. [237]

Joseph Farah makes an excellent point above regarding journalist objectivity and
homosexual activist journalist given the American Media's unwillingness to cover some
of the unpleasant facts about homosexuality. For example, John Cloud is a homosexual
activist who writes for Time magazine and wrote the October 10, 1995 cover story for
Time Magazine which was entitled “The Battle Over Gay Teens.”[238] John Cloud’s article
rendered a positive portrayal homosexual teens who are establishing networks of Gay
Straight Alliance clubs on campuses all over the United States.[239] According to the
Traditional Values Coalition most readers of Time magazine were unaware that John
Cloud is a homosexual who had previously written for the liberal Washington City Paper
in Washington, DC. about his visit to a "homosexual sex orgy club in Washington,
DC."[240]

Influence of the New York Times and News Coverage of Homosexuality

Arthur Sulzberger Jr.

John Stossel is an author, consumer reporter, and a co-anchor for the ABC News show
20/20. Cybercast News Service states the following regarding regarding the influence of
the New York Times and Washington Post:

While the newspapers reach only a fraction of people compared to the

“ television networks, he said radio and television producers rely heavily on
their contents.

"The reason the Times, and to a lesser extent the Post, are so important, and
they are, is because the TV and radio - all of the media - copy it
”
sycophantically," he [John Stossel] said. "That's how bias at the Times
becomes bias in other media."[241]

In respect to the issue homosexuality and the New York Times, Accuracy in Media
quotes a report by Peter LaBarbera stating that Richard Berke, the national political
correspondent for the New York Times, made an appearance on behalf of the National
Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association and revealed that three-quarters of the people
who now decide what goes on the front page of the New York Times are "not so closeted
homosexuals."[242] New York Times publisher Arthur O. Sulzberger Jr. has denied the the
New York Times has a liberal viewpoint and has stated the New York Times has a
"urban" viewpoint.[243] However, in the summer of 2004, the newspaper's then public
editor (ombudsman), Daniel Okrent, published a piece on the Times' liberal bias and cited
the example of their coverage of homosexual marriage.[244][245] In addition, the Gay &
Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) gave the New York Times an award for
"Outstanding Newspaper Overall Coverage".[246] In respect to the an official of the Gay &
Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, Accuracy in Media gives an account of "an
official of the group advising the press not to cover former homosexuals because it would
be comparable to quoting the Ku Klux Klan about civil rights."[247]
Coverage of the Murders of Jesse Dirkhising and Matthew Shephard

Accuracy in Media states the following regarding liberal media bias in relation to the
issue of homosexuality:

A year ago we had raised the issue of Jesse Dirkhising, the 13 year-old boy
“ who was raped and murdered by two homosexuals in Arkansas in September
1999. The media's general failure to cover the murder stands in sharp contrast
to the massive coverage of the death of Matthew Shepard, the gay college
”
student in Wyoming. The Times [New York Times] hadn't published a word
on the Dirkhising case.[248]

In respect to the issue of homosexuality, the case of Matthew Shepard was likely not a
hate crime according to one of the leading police investigators for the murder.[249]

Homosexuality and the Media and American History

In 2002, NewsMax reported the following about homosexuality and the American media:

Four decades ago, media coverage of homosexuality was universally hostile.

“ McGowan recalls Time magazine's description of homosexuality as a "pathetic
little second-rate substitute for reality, a pitiable flight from life" deserving "no
encouragement, no glamorization, no rationalization, no fake status as minority
martyrdom, no sophistry about simple differences in taste, and above all no
pretence that it is anything but a pernicious sickness."

Straight News quoted Mike Wallace as calling the average homosexual

"promiscuous" and "not interested in or capable of a lasting relationship like that of
a heterosexual.[250]

Views on Homosexuality

For more information please see: Views on Homosexuality

In regards to the various views on homosexuality, factors which have affect on an

invidual's view of homosexuality are: religious/philosophical beliefs, geographic
location, education, and age.[287][288][289][290] For example, in the United States those who are
theists are more likely than atheists and agnostics to believe that homosexuality is
morally unacceptable.[291]

According to the Pew Research Center in the United States "twice as many liberals as
conservatives (46% versus 22%) say people are born homosexual."[292] In the United
States liberals are also more likely to believe in the theory of evolution.[293] In 1993, M.
Green wrote in BMJ (British Medical Journal) that there is a conflict in relation to the
theory of evolution and the notion of genetic determinism in respect to homosexuality.
M. Green wrote "...from an evolutionary perspective, genetically determined
homosexuality would have become extinct long ago because of reduced reproduction.[294]