# Homosexuality & Heterosexuality **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [July 25, 2010, 2:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexuality-heterosexuality/547910 "2010-07-25T02:22:21Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 12\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![StusBlues](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/dc4da7/32.png) [@StusBlues](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/StusBlues)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2010, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexuality-heterosexuality/547910/41 "2010-07-26T19:47:17Z")
> [@purplehorseshoe](#): > > > [@StusBlues](#): > > > > > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > > > > > The psychiatric evidence is not a matter of opinion, and no, you don’t find pontification by “both sides.” The emprical, peer reviewed, psychiatric data speaks for itself. Sexual orientation (which is not the same thing as behavior) is innate and fixed, and cannot be changed, even if the behavior can sometimes be modified. > > > > I’m going to call faux on this. There are many instances of people who, by their own reckoning, anyway, did change their orientation later in life. This isn’t a case of their finally being true to their “real selves”; again, by their reckoning, they were very passionately attracted to one gender at one time, then found themselves very passionately attracted to the other gender later on. [Sheryl Swopes](http://sports.espn.go.com/wnba/news/story?id=2204322) did this; I have several acquaintances with similar stories. Sexuality can be a very fluid thing. > > In your second sentence you make it sound like a deliberate choice. (“I don’t wanna be attracted to [gender] so I’m gonna make myself be attracted to [other gender].”) Then at the end, you make it sound like a passive thing that oops! just _happens_ to someone. Which is it? (In your mind.) The latter. Again, Sheryl Swopes is one example–in “her mind”, she loved her husband, but they divorced for reasons other than her liking women. Her first partner is the first woman she’s been attracted to. Can’t think of any other famous people off the top of my head. In typing, I though of Meredith Baxter, but her case does seem more along the lines of “I was never really right with men, and deliberately sabotaged my het relationships to avoid intimacy.” That, and one of my friends, who has been a hardcore lesbian for all the years I’ve known her, has recently taken up with a fella. She still likes women, but by her own reckoning, she has drifted into bisexuality. Happens. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2010, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexuality-heterosexuality/547910/42 "2010-07-26T20:07:32Z")
No it doesn’t. She was always bisexual. ---
**Author:** ![StusBlues](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/dc4da7/32.png) [@StusBlues](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/StusBlues)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2010, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexuality-heterosexuality/547910/43 "2010-07-26T20:10:43Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > No it doesn’t. She was always bisexual. Does the phrase “No True Scotsman” mean anything to you? ---
**Author:** ![code\_grey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f4b2a3/32.png) [@code\_grey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/code_grey)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2010, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexuality-heterosexuality/547910/44 "2010-07-26T20:27:55Z")
if **Diogenes the Cynic** were to have better reading skills, he would have realized that my post dealt specifically with the undecidability of the question of what percent of American “gays” are actually “bisexual” and hence can be conceivably transitioned to not engaging in homosexual intercourse. But that requires some mindful reading, not majestically saying “bunk, let all opposing viewpoints shut themselves up”. As for this quaint notion: > [@](#): > > Sexual orientation (which is not the same thing as behavior) is innate and fixed, and cannot be changed, even if the behavior can sometimes be modified. “orientation” is not an empirically rigorously measurable notion, just like “bigotry” or “the state of being a nice person” are not rigorously measurable. Which is why there are so many dumb busybodies, some with fancy degrees, making a living out of making unsubstantiated claims about these nebulous categories. What **is** actually measurable is precisely the **behavior** - i.e.when was the last time that the guy have sex with males and at what frequency he was doing that? And can various “treatments” get the person reduce that frequency to zero? Well, for “bisexuals” the answer is probably yes, and for some gays the answer may be no. “Should” this be done or not? This is beyond the scope of the discussion. If you ask homosexuals, maybe they will tell you that what “should” be done is getting the bisexuals stop having sex with women. These are matters of value judgment, not of empirical reality. ---
**Author:** ![StusBlues](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/dc4da7/32.png) [@StusBlues](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/StusBlues)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2010, 8:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexuality-heterosexuality/547910/45 "2010-07-26T20:38:41Z")
I think what \*\*Dio \*\*was getting at earlier in his scatalogical way was that “treatments” as **code\_grey** describes them have historically resulted in misery, depression, and/or suicide with a much higher frequency than a perceived change in orientation, and as such a consensus has developed among psychotherapists that interventions to change sexual orientation are a horrible idea. I don’t have access to PsycINFO right now (it will always be PsycLIT to me), but it shouldn’t be hard to find this verified in the literature. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2010, 9:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexuality-heterosexuality/547910/46 "2010-07-26T21:30:49Z")
> [@code\_grey](#): > > “orientation” is not an empirically rigorously measurable notion Yes it is. Orientation is defined by attraction. Attraction is empirically measurable. > [@](#): > > What **is** actually measurable is precisely the **behavior** Behavior is not synonomous with orientation. Changing behavior does not change orientation. > [@](#): > > “Should” this be done or not? This is beyond the scope of the discussion. No, it’s part and parcel of the discussion. > [@](#): > > If you ask homosexuals, maybe they will tell you that what “should” be done is getting the bisexuals stop having sex with women. Why do you think homosexuals would tell you that? Most homosexuals I know would say that it’s none of their business. > [@](#): > > These are matters of value judgment, not of empirical reality. No, this is largely a clash of religious morality with empirical evidence. ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2010, 9:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexuality-heterosexuality/547910/47 "2010-07-26T21:42:03Z")
[Here](http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_spit.htm) is an analysis of the Spitzer paper. The main critisms are: > [@](#): > > ``` > * Perhaps its main deficiency was that the persons studied were not a representative sample of persons with a homosexual or bisexual orientation. Many were directly involved in a leadership role in transformational ministries. Most of the subjects were carefully selected as "success stories" from a very large number of clients -- perhaps numbering in the tens or hundreds of thousands -- who had failed to change their orientation even after many years of sincere effort. Thus an average 55% change in behavior for the test subjects could easily imply a 1% or lower change in behavior for a random sampling of persons with a homosexual or bisexual orientation. > > * Another deficiency is that Dr. Spitzer does not recognize bisexuality as a valid sexual orientation. Thus he would consider a person with a bisexual orientation who was involved in same-sex behavior to be a homosexual. If that person simply decided to confine relationships to the opposite-sex, he would conclude that they had changed their orientation to heterosexual. We suspect that all or almost all of the subjects of this study would fit into this description. > > ``` Saying “Many eminent psychiatrists believe that homosexuality is the result of an ill-developed sexual identity due to childhood stress.” Is like saying “many eminent biologists believe in Creationism”. You can always find one or two contrarian scientists to support any claim, the fact is the vast majority of psychiatrists support the DSM assesment of homosexuality. FYI there is an interesting episode of [NPR’s This American Life podcast](http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/204/81-Words) about the campaign to change the DSM. ---
**Author:** ![qazwart](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/5fc32e/32.png) [@qazwart](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/qazwart)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2010, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexuality-heterosexuality/547910/48 "2010-07-26T21:46:48Z")
> [@Bpelta](#): > > 1. The Gay Liberation Movement successfully pressured the American Psychiatric Association to remove homosexuality from the DSM guide. There was intensive lobbying effort on the behalf of gays and lesbians, but much of the pressure came from inside the APA itself. There were many members of the APA who themselves were gay/lesbian, and like most other gays and lesbians, they had to keep their sexual orientation secret because it could get them expelled from the APA. What brought the APA around was the realization that gays and lesbians can be happy and productive members of society. And, they weren’t necessarily unhappy about their sexual orientation. Most members thought that’s pretty much a definition of _normal_. You must understand that this was also the era when the APA was turning away from Freudian philosophy to a more scientific based philosophy. The idea that schizophrenia was caused by weak fathers and strong mothers or that autism was caused by overly intellectual parents was also being dropped around the same period of time. There was a realization that homosexual preferences might be biological and not caused by clinging too closely to an over bearing mother. This American Life did an excellent story on the whole adventure called [81 Words](http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/204/81-Words). It will cost you a buck to listen to the podcast, but it is an hour podcast, and it is well worth the cost. > [@](#): > > 1. The Gay Liberation Movement claims that people living homosexual lives are just as happy as heterosexuals and that the former is one of a plethora of acceptable lifestyles. However, studies show that depression and death by suicide, anus cancer, venereal diseases, and AIDS “far exceeds the heterosexual population.” . There comes a thing called _The Problem_. For example, there was _The Negro Problem_, and _The Jewish Problem_, and of course, _The Gay Problem_. The question is asked by general society about what to do about _The Problem_ and how should it be solved. Brows are furrowed, viewpoints are raised, and white papers are written. However, if you asked the group that is the center of _The Problem_, they’ll tell you there is no problem with them, and if people stopped treating them as _The Problem_, the problem will go away. You said that this tract you read lied throughout the whole track. Who says that their numbers are even correct? But, I’m going to (just for this exercise) assume their correct. Okay, there is more depression in _Teh gays_ than among straight individuals. So, now, do we look at all gays as in the same group? Do we merely assume that being gay makes you unhappy and therefore, we must _treat_ anyone whose gay? Or, is it better to look at people who are individuals and say, if you’re well adjusted, happy, and productive, who cares whether you’re gay or straight? Is it possible that there are more gays (as a percentage of the population) who have certain issues than straights? It could be. After all, if you’re a teen who suddenly finds themselves attracted not to the opposite sex as most of their peers, but to the same sex, you might feel there is something wrong with you. Imagine if you’re a God fearing person, and you go to church every week, and the minister harangues on the evils of homosexuality, you might think that you’re a terrible, evil person. You don’t want to be gay, but you are. What if that’s the reason gays have more mental issues? Maybe the solution should be simply to stop making them feel they’re sick disgusting perverts whom God hates and begin to treat them as you would any other human being. Maybe that will solve _The gay problem_ [/QUOTE] The point is instead of looking at people as a group, we look at them as an individual. Is there a person who’s unhappy about their sexual orientation? Could very well be. Let’s find out **why** they’re unhappy instead of merely hooking them up with prostitutes in hopes that it’ll (pardon the pun) straighten them out. Maybe if they learned to handle the prejudice and disappointment their family and friends have, they’d feel better about themselves. > [@](#): > > 1. There are those who make “the argument that same-sex marriages will reduce promiscuity,” but statistics give the lie to this assertion; one study showed that 95% of couples studied were not faithful to each other. Another found that with time close to 100% were not faithful and homosexuals considered “marital fidelity (not _in_fidelity) to be a threat to their ability to stay together.” Man 'o man, they sure do they have a lot of studies. What’s that word I’m thinking of? Oh yeah! **CITE!**. What study? Who ran it? How old is the study? Remember that homosexual marriage is still illegal in over 90% of the states and much of the world. There isn’t much data to go on for such wide ranging studies. What we do know is that the few states which legalized homosexual marriage, there has been no effect on the divorce rate, the rate of infidelity, or the rate of people who rate their marriages as in trouble. Basically, they legalized gay marriage and society didn’t collapse. I do know one thing. It is rare when I am walking down the street with my wife, and some young person says “Man, I’ve got to get me some of that!”. Heck, if gays and lesbians see my marriage and still want to get married, let them go for it. > [@](#): > > 1. “Many eminent psychiatrists believe that homosexuality is the result of an ill-developed sexual identity due to childhood stress. Their view is that to the extent that other emotional problems can be healed, homosexuals can be healed as well. To bolster this view there are countless case histories of homosexuals who have converted to heterosexuality.” Robert Spitzer in a landmark APA paper provided evidence regarding the possibility to convert and found that those who had converted “reported that they had a greater degree of happiness and well-being.” The NARTH organization, itself “headed by an eminent psychologist…has helped thousands of individuals convert.” The _Landmark APA paper_ was a paper given in 2001 in an APA meeting. The APA itself disavowed the paper. The paper was criticized because it was not peer reviewed, and couldn’t state one study supporting its assertions. The last thing you could call the paper was _landmark_. 1. OTOH, “the gay community…[makes] scientifically unbased claims that homosexuality in innate and cannot be changed. They have even been successful in passing legislation prohibiting professionals from encouraging their patients to convert.” Yet people have converted and the “fact that there is no member of the animal kingdom that is naturally attracted to the same sex” gives the lie to their position. [/QUOTE] There is no homosexuality in the animal kingdom? You’ve got to be kidding? Homosexuality in the animal kingdom is well documented. Here’s [a list of mammals](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mammals_displaying_homosexual_behavior) that have displayed homosexual behavior. Here’s a [list of birds](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_birds_displaying_homosexual_behavior) also doing something that is an admonition in the eyes of the Lord. Maybe this [study](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/5550488/Homosexual-behaviour-widespread-in-animals-according-to-new-study.html) would be of interest to you. In fact, it’s gotten so bad that those who are anti-gay have taken the other tact: Homosexuality in the animal kingdom is proof that it is beneath human beings to do. You’ve said yourself that the book or whatever you’re reading made several false claims and never gave you a single reference. So, what makes you think anything in the book has any validity? Imagine if you were a juror. A witness takes a stand and makes several absolutely amazing claims. Many of them are later proven false. What, as a juror, do you think about this person’s ability to tell the truth? Would you accept any claim they said? I hope not. So, why do the same for this book? ---
**Author:** ![jackdavinci](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackdavinci/32/3259_2.png) [@jackdavinci](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jackdavinci)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2010, 12:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexuality-heterosexuality/547910/49 "2010-07-29T00:19:05Z")
> [@Bpelta](#): > > 1. The Gay Liberation Movement claims that people living homosexual lives are just as happy as heterosexuals and that the former is one of a plethora of acceptable lifestyles. However, studies show that depression and death by suicide, anus cancer, venereal diseases, and AIDS “far exceeds the heterosexual population.” This probably used to be true, at least for gay men, doubtful for lesbians except perhaps for the depression. Teen suicide is definitely greater for gay youth than straight youth. The implied conclusion, that homosexuality inherently causes these things is of course false. Depression and suicide is obviously much more common in gays who are trying to hide, resist, or deny their feelings - so that’s not really an argument against it. Most of the rest are or were from being the victim of hatred or discrimination. Gay men were and some are still a bit more promiscuous, but it could be argued that the only reason straight people aren’t is because they are subject to different social pressures. And of course, before there was a movement to educate the public about the dangers of STDs, birth control was seen as not needed by gays because well, they couldn’t get pregnant. > [@](#): > > 1. There are those who make “the argument that same-sex marriages will reduce promiscuity,” but statistics give the lie to this assertion; one study showed that 95% of couples studied were not faithful to each other. Another found that with time close to 100% were not faithful and homosexuals considered “marital fidelity (not _in_fidelity) to be a threat to their ability to stay together.” While I wouldn’t be surprised if gay couples (male again, not so much lesbians) have some amount of greater fidelity issues (is an open marriage the same thing as infidelity?), I doubt the statistics as states, they seem exaggerated. You’d also have to look at heterosexual couples using the same benchmarks and definitions to get a sense of what this means (is divorce considered infidelity? I know very very few heteros still in their first marriage past 40). Of course, more gays are, by the nature of being excluded from those social groups with more ‘traditional’ sexual rules, not going to follow them as strictly. > [@](#): > > 1. "Many eminent psychiatrists believe that homosexuality is the result of an ill-developed sexual identity due to childhood stress. I’m sure you could find an “eminent psychiatrist” for any theory out there. The quote itself admits “many” meaning… not most, and… doesn’t give details on how many are basing this position on psychological studies, and how many have some kind of religious motive. More on this below.. > [@](#): > > 1. OTOH, "the gay community…[makes] scientifically unbased claims that homosexuality in innate and cannot be changed. Well…like anything else, it’s about 50% genetics/physiology and 50% environment. Is heterosexuality innate and unchangeable? We don’t really have the mechanics of sexual identity pinned down yet. My guess is, everyone has a unique sexual identity that is the result of 100s of different things: genetics, hormones, education, upbringing, social context, religious background, cultural background, exposure to certain experiences, social status, network of friends, etc. And add to the multiple influences the fact that sexual identity itself isn’t any one thing. It comprises sexual desires, behavior, sexual identity, gender identity, emotion, all of which will not necessarily converge. > [@](#): > > They have even been successful in passing legislation prohibiting professionals from encouraging their patients to convert." Yet people have converted I’m sure you could ‘convert’ anyone to anything given the right techniques. See: torture, cults, indoctrination, etc. But is that healthy? Generally speaking, professionals are expected to help their voluntary patients with their own goals, and not push an agenda. They generally will not try to aggressively influence the patient about behaviors that are not self-destructive. > [@](#): > > and the “fact that there is no member of the animal kingdom that is naturally attracted to the same sex” gives the lie to their position. This is patently false. There are numerous and well documented cases of all sorts of sexual behavior in the animal kingdom. There are even a few popularized books on the subject. There are even some species for which it is the norm. But even if it were true, that would be a hypocritical argument. Those who are against homosexuals will be the loudest proponents of the idea that humans should not be looking to the animal kingdom for guidance. Infidelity, for example is far more present in the animal world. Humans are nearly unique in that regard. ---
**Author:** ![waterj2](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/858c86/32.png) [@waterj2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/waterj2)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2010, 4:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexuality-heterosexuality/547910/50 "2010-07-29T04:03:59Z")
> [@Bpelta](#): > > I appreciate y’all’s answers, but I’d like to have sources to back up my understanding of these issues. Do you have any good links? > > (I saw the above questions to me, but I’m extremely busy today, will answer tonight or tomorrow) Box Turtle Bulletin is a great site for information about what the anti-gay crowd is up to. Here’s what they’ve got about NARTH, for starters: [http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/category/converstion-reparative-therapy/narth](http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/category/converstion-reparative-therapy/narth) ---
**Author:** ![matt\_mcl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ab992/32.png) [@matt\_mcl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/matt_mcl)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2010, 5:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexuality-heterosexuality/547910/51 "2010-07-29T05:21:09Z")
> [@](#): > > Many eminent psychiatrists believe that homosexuality is the result of an ill-developed sexual identity due to childhood stress. Their view is that…homosexuals can be healed as well. To bolster this view there are countless case histories of homosexuals who have converted to heterosexuality. Here, by the way, is the APA’s [statement on the subject](http://www.apa.org/helpcenter/sexual-orientation.aspx): > [@](#): > > Is Sexual Orientation a Choice? > No, human beings cannot choose to be either gay or straight. For most people, sexual orientation emerges in early adolescence without any prior sexual experience. Although we can choose whether to act on our feelings, psychologists do not consider sexual orientation to be a conscious choice that can be voluntarily changed. > > Can Therapy Change Sexual Orientation? > No; even though most homosexuals live successful, happy lives, some homosexual or bisexual people may seek to change their sexual orientation through therapy, often coerced by family members or religious groups to try and do so. The reality is that homosexuality is not an illness. It does not require treatment and is not changeable. However, not all gay, lesbian, and bisexual people who seek assistance from a mental health professional want to change their sexual orientation. Gay, lesbian, and bisexual people may seek psychological help with the coming out process or for strategies to deal with prejudice, but most go into therapy for the same reasons and life issues that bring straight people to mental health professionals. > > What About So-Called “Conversion Therapies”? > Some therapists who undertake so-called conversion therapy report that they have been able to change their clients’ sexual orientation from homosexual to heterosexual. Close scrutiny of these reports, however. show several factors that cast doubt on their claims. For example, many of these claims come from organizations with an ideological perspective that condemns homosexuality. Furthermore, their claims are poorly documented; for example, treatment outcome is not followed and reported over time, as would be the standard to test the validity of any mental health intervention. > The American Psychological Association is concerned about such therapies and their potential harm to patients. In 1997, the Association’s Council of Representatives passed a resolution reaffirming psychology’s opposition to homophobia in treatment and spelling out a client’s right to unbiased treatment and self-determination. Any person who enters into therapy to deal with issues of sexual orientation has a right to expect that such therapy will take place in a professionally neutral environment, without any social bias. The American Medical Association’s [policy on conversion therapy](http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/about-ama/our-people/member-groups-sections/glbt-advisory-committee/ama-policy-regarding-sexual-orientation.shtml): > [@](#): > > H-160.991 Health Care Needs of the Homosexual Population. 1. Our AMA: […] (c) opposes the use of “reparative” or “conversion” therapy that is based upon the assumption that homosexuality per se is a mental disorder or based upon the a priori assumption that the patient should change his/her homosexual orientation. ---
**Author:** ![Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/46a35a/32.png) [@Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tim_T-Bonham.net)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2010, 5:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexuality-heterosexuality/547910/52 "2010-07-29T05:38:35Z")
And the APA statement is hardly new ground. Over 75 years ago, Sigmund Freud, one of the founders of psychology stated his views in a letter to a mother with a gay son: > [@](#): > > By asking me if I can help [your son], you mean, I suppose, if I can abolish homosexuality and make normal heterosexuality take its place. The answer is, in a general way we cannot promise to achieve it. In a certain number of cases we succeed in developing the blighted germs of heterosexual tendencies, which are present in every homosexual; **in the majority of cases it is no more possible**. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homosexuality-heterosexuality/547910.md?page=2)