I Take Offense

I am a member of a LinkedIn group titled “Society for the Scientific Study of Sexuality — SSSS.”  Within that group there is currently a discussion on a recently linked and extensively footnoted article, “Sexual Abuse: A Major Cause Of Homosexuality?

It is difficult for me to begin to express my feelings on this “report”, but first let me acknowledge what I do know.  Many homosexual men are victims of sexual abuse.  Many more lesbian women are victims of sexual abuse.  Most cases of any form of sexual abuse are not reported.  Sexual abuse can have profound effects on a person’s future sexual behavior and identity.

But let me include some pertinent quotes from the linked “report” debated in this Scientific group.

“It is a well-documented fact that many many homosexuals were sexually abused when young….In other words, there is an abundance of evidence that many many homosexuals were born heterosexual but were disoriented by sexual abuse.” 

Oh?  Interesting connection.  Because someone is homosexual and had suffered abuse, then ipso facto, that means that they were born heterosexual.  Does that mean that the hundreds of thousands of people who are heterosexual and have suffered abuse were born homosexual?

“Whatever the true percentages are of male and female sex abuse victims, considering how high the suggested/reported numbers are compared to the percentage of the population that is homosexual (only 1%-2%), we can see that sexual abuse can theoretically account for every case of homosexuality.” 

My eyes widen.  So, because there are many more cases of childhood sexual abuse than there are homosexuals, every case of homosexuality is accounted for by abuse.  A fine bit of Aristotelian logic, that is.

“Too, there currently is no definitive proof that anyone is born homosexual. Several studies by homosexual researchers claimed to find some possible biological bases for homosexuality. But other scientists easily pointed out the flaws in those studies, and the results of those studies have yet to be replicated by others. In the words of pro-homosexual Newsweek magazine: ‘In the early ’90s, three highly publicized studies seemed to suggest that homosexuality’s roots were genetic….More than five years later the data have never been replicated.’  (This fact has been almost totally ignored by the biased, untrustworthy, dominant liberal media.)” 

Ah, that argument.  I was waiting for that one.  “Your study seems to show proof that homosexuality is born into you, therefore you are a homosexual pushing your agenda, and anyone supporting your argument is pro-homosexual, biased and untrustworthy.”

“Those who push the born-homosexual line are effectively ignoring the sexual abuse of children. What kind of “people” want to let pedophiles get away with sexually abusing little kids?” 

Good, that is a powerful argument.  If you believe that homosexuality is biologically determined, you are promoting pedophilia.  Certainly wouldn’t want to do that.

“Skilled psychologists and psychiatrists like Masters and Johnson, Charles Socarides, Joseph Nicolosi, Benjamin Kaufman, Elizabeth Moberly, Jeffrey Satinover, and Gerard van den Aardweg, have had success changing homosexuals into heterosexuals. (They have been successful because most if not all homosexuals were probably born heterosexual.)” 

What phenomenally healing therapists these are, bringing the errant back to the fold.  Further proof that Homos were born pure.

“Those who oppose using therapy to change homosexuals into heterosexuals are, in effect, trying to keep homosexuals locked into homosexuality. Those who oppose such therapy do not want homosexuals to have a choice, a way out of homosexuality. That’s un-American, inhumane, intolerant, and meanly oppressive.” 

And so the truth is given, and must be believed.

What is truly frightening to me is that this kind of biased personal agenda is given any form of credence in a group that purports to be based in Science.   While I disagree wholeheartedly with its underlining assumptions, I certainly accept anyone’s right to debate the issue and express their opinion, but to state that this has any basis in Scientific legitimacy is ludicrous to the extreme.  One might as well say that it is the word of GOD and unbelievers should be stoned.

Oh, wait, people do say that.

The Eroticist


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to Top