Homosexual Orientation and the 'Ten Percent' Myth
ShareCHAPTER 116 — HOMOSEXUAL ORIENTATION AND THE "TEN PERCENT" MYTH
American Life League
I campaigned with Gay groups and in the media across the country for the Kinsey-based finding that 'We are everywhere.' This slogan became a National Gay Task Force leitmotif. And the issues derived from the implications of the Kinsey data became key parts of the national political, educational, and legislative programs during my years at New York's Gay Activist Alliance and the National Gay Task Force.
After years of our educating those who inform the public and make its laws, the concept that 10 percent of the population is gay has become a generally accepted 'fact.' While some reminding always seems necessary, the 10 percent figure is regularly utilized by scholars, by the press, and in government statistics. As with so many pieces of knowledge and myth, repeated telling made it so.
Bruce Voeller, "Some Uses and Abuses of the Kinsey Scale."[1]
WARNING!
Some of the material described in this chapter is extremely offensive in nature.
Anti-Life Philosophy.
Homosexuality is just like the color of your skin; ten percent of all people are born that way. Being gay is the same as being left-handed. Therefore, those with a homosexual orientation should receive comprehensive civil rights protection and their lifestyle should be taught in all of our schools as a perfectly acceptable alternative to heterosexuality.
Anyone who is intolerant enough to think of homosexuals as anything other than good citizens (just like me) is a fascist and a homophobic bigot.
Introduction.
It was a good day. I was really glad to be part of a lesbian and gay contingent, because "choice" includes choice of sexuality too. Abortion is about sex, not about life, but about sex and about women being able to have sex without fear of getting pregnant, and that leads to sexual experimentation, and that leads to women being able to sleep with women and men and whoever they want to ...
Woman participant in the April 1989 "March for Death" in Washington, D.C.[2]
The Purpose of the Myth.
Those activists battling "gay rights" must recognize that homosexual activists do not do anything in the public realm unless it serves the homosexual movement very well indeed.
The most powerful weapon in the "gay rights" arsenal is the victim status.
A close second is the allegation that sodomites are "born that way." If it can be shown that homosexuality is a genetic trait, then the sodomites have a legitimate claim to being protected as a 'minority class' under Federal and state civil rights laws.
This weapon has been very effective indeed at convincing those in power that homosexuals should indeed be a protected class.
"Born That Way?"
The psychology behind the advancement of the myth of inherent vs. acquired sexual orientation is quite simple. If a person is born homosexual, then he can claim that he has no choice in being created homosexual; in other words, he was, as the sodomites so shrilly claim, "born that way."
This allegation fails to explain why homosexuals commonly use the terms "alternative lifestyle" and "sexual preference," which both imply that sexual perverts choose their particular lifestyle. The terms "alternative lifestyle" and "sexual preference," along with many others coined by the homosexuals, are artificial, sloganistic constructs coined for public consumption, rather like the abortionists' coveted "potential life" and "pre-embryo."
After all, we never hear about amputees adopting an "alternative leg style."
What Freud Said.
Sigmund Freud, the most famous psychologist/psychiatrist of all time, precisely identified the critical turning point in a homosexual person's life the point at which a natural priority is subordinated to an unnatural urge;
Moreover, it is a characteristic common to all the perversions that in them reproduction as an aim is put aside. This is actually the criterion by which we judge whether a sexual activity is perverse if it departs from reproduction in its aims and pursues the attainment of gratification independently. You will understand, therefore, that the gulf and turning-point in the development of the sexual life lies at the point of its subordination to the purposes of reproduction. Everything that occurs after this conversion takes place, and everything which refuses to conform to it and serves the pursuit of gratification alone, is called by the unhonored title of perversion and as such is despised.[3]
The "Ten Percent" Studies.
Homosexuals desperately crave public acceptance for their perversions, and they will stoop to almost any deception in order to obtain it.
Perhaps the most effective tactic the sodomites use (after the victim status) is to wrap their allegations in a veneer of science. Members of the public automatically lend credence to any claim that originates with a professional medical organization or a prestigious journal, and the sodomites know this.
The four scientific events most used by homosexuals to support their viewpoints are;
(1) The original 1948 Alfred Kinsey report entitled Sexual Behavior in the Human Male, which was the first to claim that ten percent of the population is homosexual;
(2) The removal of homosexuality as a sexual dysfunction by the American Psychiatric Association in 1973;
(3) Simon LaVey's 1991 study of the human hypothalamus; and
(4) J. Michael Bailey's 1991 study of the sexual orientations of identical and fraternal twins.
This chapter examines these four studies in detail and exposes the fatal flaws inherent in each.
Following this section on the four studies is a discussion of four very important points regarding the reality of the homosexual orientation;
• What homosexuals say about themselves;
• What the experts say about the genetic basis of a homosexual orientation;
• The actual percentage of homosexuals in the general population; and
• The addictive nature of the homosexual orientation.
The Dubious Origins of the Big Lie: The "Ten Percent" Myth is Born.
The Legend.
One of the most persuasive arguments that homosexuals have traditionally used to support their position is the assertion that fully ten percent of the population is "gay."
Just as pro-abortionists label their organizations and publications to reflect the myth of the "pro-choice majority" (i.e., the National Abortion Rights Action League refers to its newsletter as "The Voice of the Majority"), so do homosexuals attempt to perpetrate their myth with names such as "The Ten Percent Foundation," "Project Ten," and the "One in Ten Club."
The original source of the 'ten percent' statistic is Alfred Kinsey, the country's best-known sex researcher. His most famous 'finding' held that ten percent of the male population is "more or less exclusively homosexual for at least three years between the ages of 16 and 55." Kinsey also claimed that four percent of all males are exclusively homosexual throughout their entire lives.[4]
The Institute.
It is instructive indeed to examine the life and methods of the world's foremost sex researcher, Alfred Kinsey, and the research organization he founded, the "Kinsey Institute for Research on Sex, Gender, and Reproduction." The methods used by this man and his organization reveal much about how the sex researchers and sex educators operate.
Every year, Kinsey's Institute swallows millions of tax dollars and produces thick volumes of information that forms the basis for much of our country's sex education 'industry.' However, the information and 'research' generated by Kinsey's institute is dubious at best, because the Institute steadfastly refuses to reveal its sources and study methods. This, in and of itself, is enough to render its research utterly meaningless, because it cannot be checked by examination and replication.
The prime directive of scientific research is that it is useless without verification or replicability.
Kinsey was so fanatical about secrecy that he told his staff photographer William Dellenback that he would destroy all his files and risk imprisonment rather than let authorities see them.[4]
Kinsey's unbendable rules included having no journalists present when he talked, and demanding that journalists submit any articles mentioning him or his Institute to him for approval before publication, in order to screen them for unfavorable remarks or implications.
All of this renders meaningless the Kinsey Institute slogan; "All Kinsey Institute activities derive from the belief that social policy and personal decisions about sex, gender, and reproduction should be made on the basis of factual information rather than on ignorance. The Kinsey Institute continues its commitment to providing such information."[4]
In summary, the Kinsey Institute has received tens of millions of dollars in tax money but allows no inquiries whatever into its research methods. It is supposedly a library of information on sex, but it allows nobody to peek into its files, not even for the purpose of scientific verification.
The Most Important 'Finding.'
The single most important 'finding' that Kinsey produced was unquestioningly his assertion that ten percent of the population is homosexual. This percentage is not only the basis of the homosexual-rights "ten percent" myth, but also serves as a cornerstone of the sex education classes being taught in the United States today.
Kinsey's conclusions on sexuality were contained in the famous studies he co-authored with Wardell B. Pomeroy, C.E. Martin, and P.H. Gebhard. These were entitled Sexual Behavior in the Human Male and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female, published by the W.B. Saunders Company of Philadelphia in 1948 and 1953 respectively.
Kinsey's Flawed Research.
Kinsey's research represents a classic example of looking for data to support a preordained set of desirable conclusions.
Gershon Legman, the original compiler for Kinsey's pornography collection, revealed that
Kinsey's not-very-secret intention was to "respectabilize" homosexuality and certain sexual perversions ... He did not hesitate to extrapolate his utterly inadequate and inconclusive samplings to the whole population of the United States, not to say the world ... This is pure propaganda, and is ridiculously far from the mathematical or statistical science pretended.[5]
Sexual statistics were not the only areas in which Kinsey 'fudged' the truth. He often engaged in outright propaganda to slander those he considered to be the most dangerous enemies of his sexual agenda. For example, he would often claim that The Vatican possessed the world's largest collection of pornography, a tactic commonly used by anti-Catholic pro-abortion bigots. He continued to spread this lie even after it was disproved.[4]
After his desired conclusions were drawn, all Kinsey had to do was insure that the study process supported them, regardless of what data was gathered and analyzed.
The best way to do this, of course, was to hire biased researchers. All applicants to the Kinsey Institute who believed that homosexuality was wrong were rejected.
After his conclusions were drawn and his biased researchers were hired, all Kinsey had to do to guarantee 'successful' results was to study a population that had a very high percentage of homosexuals compared to the general population.
Kinsey's Male Report was based upon the detailed analysis of the backgrounds and sexual practices of more than 5,000 men. These men came from three classes that would inevitably guarantee a very high percentage of homosexuality: Convicted sex criminals, male prostitutes, and volunteers.
At least one-fourth of Kinsey's sample population were prison inmates and convicted sex offenders, as compared to one percent of the general population.[4,6] According to Male Report coauthor Wardell Pomeroy, "We went to the [prison] records and got lists of the inmates who were in for various kinds of sex offenses."[7] 44 percent of all of the prisoners in the Kinsey male sample had had homosexual experience in prison, according to John Gagnon, a Kinsey researcher.[6] Kinsey himself concluded that members of the prison population were more than four times more likely to be homosexuals than the normal population.[8]
Since the actual percentage of homosexuals in the general population is from one to two percent, this factor alone was enough to guarantee that Kinsey would get his "ten percent" figure.
According to page 216 of the Male Report, Kinsey's second sample population consisted of "... several hundred male prostitutes [who] contributed their histories." Male prostitutes are by definition homosexual. So if we assume that 300 male prostitutes were interviewed for the Kinsey study, this factor alone would add a (300/5,000) = 6 percent rate of homosexuality to the final conclusion.
But Kinsey was not satisfied with skewing his results just two ways. Most of the reminder of his sample population consisted of volunteers, many of whom were actively seeking Kinsey's advice on sexual dysfunctions.[6]
This method automatically insured that he would include a heavy "volunteer bias" in his study. This well-known statistical principle proves that volunteers for any type of study in any field will invariably skew the study results, because they are always unrepresentative of the general population. A random sampling is always more accurate.
Even after leading statistical researcher Abraham Maslow experimentally demonstrated to Kinsey that a high percentage of volunteers would skew his study, Kinsey ignored him. Statistician Quinn McNemar of Stanford University confirmed this conclusion independently of Maslow.
Even the use of three biased populations was not enough for Kinsey. He wanted to make absolutely certain that his study results were "satisfactory," so he deliberately asked his volunteers biased questions. Page 53 of the Male Report admits that "We always assume that everyone has engaged in every type of activity. Consequently, we always begin by asking when they first engaged in such activity" [emphasis in original].
Finally, the Truth. Dr. Judith Reisman and Edward W. Eichel co-authored a book on Kinsey and the sex educators entitled Kinsey, Sex, and Fraud. In this work, they characterize Kinsey's most famous works, Sexual Behavior in the Human Male and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female as "... the most egregious example of scientific deception in this century."[4]
Despite the shoddiness of the research that backed up Kinsey's "studies," they have had a profound impact upon our society, because the sex educators seized upon his tattered results much as the population controllers pounced on Paul Ehrlich's ridiculous book The Population Bomb.
Reisman and Eichel have concluded that the actual percentage of male homosexuals in the United States is one to two percent. This figure is strongly confirmed by the eight studies described in Figure 116-1, which shows that only 3.0 percent of men and 3.5 percent of women have ever had a homosexual experience in their entire lives. The percentage of "full-time" homosexuals is about half of these figures around 1.5 percent, or one-seventh the representation claimed by militant sodomite groups.
FIGURE 116-1
RESULTS OF STUDIES AND SURVEYS ON THE PERCENTAGE OF THE PUBLIC THAT CLAIMS TO HAVE A HOMOSEXUAL ORIENTATION
[A medium text size on your computer's 'view' setting is recommended, otherwise, the tables may be discombobulated.]
Percent Reporting a
Homosexual Experience at
Location Persons Any Time in Their Lives
of Study Year Surveyed Men Women[11]
Norway[1] 1987 6,300 221/3,150 (7.0%) 189/3,150 (6.0%)
Denmark[2] 1987 1,155 46/1,155 (4.0%)
Denmark[3] 1989 3,178 92/1,589 (5.8%) 86/1,589 (5.4%)
Great Britain[4] 1989 2,171 54/1,086 (5.0%) 52/1,085 (4.8%)
United States[5] 1987 36,741 700/18,370 (3.8%) 700/18,371 (3.8%)
United States[6] 1989 904 47/904 (5.2%)
United States[7] 1992 109,654 3,070/109,654 (2.8%)
France[8] 1992 20,000 410/10,000 (4.1%) 260/10,000 (2.6%)
United States[9] 1992 15,490 205/7,745 (2.6%) 167/7,745 (2.2%)
United States[10] 1993 3,321 76/3,321 (2.3%)
TOTALS 198,914
4,921/156,974 (3.0%) 1,454/41,940 (3.5%)
[1] J.M. Sundet, et.al. "Prevalence of Risk-Prone Sexual Behaviour in the General Population of Norway." Described in Georg Liss, Global Impact of AIDS, 1988, pages 53 to 60.
[2] K.W. Schmidt, et.al. "Occurrence of Sexual Behaviour Related to the Risk of HIV-Infection." Danish Medical Bulletin 1989:36; pages 84 to 88.
[3] M. Melbye and R.J. Biggar. American Journal of Epidemiology 1992, 135 pages 593 to 602.
[4] G.M. Breakwell and C. Fife-Shaw. "Sexual Activities and Preferences in a United Kingdom Sample of 16 to 20-Year Olds." Archives of Sexual Behavior, 1992:21, pages 271 to 293. Also see D. Forman and C. Chilvers. "Sexual Behaviour of Young and Middle-Aged Men in England and Wales." British Medical Journal, 298, 1989, pages 1,137 to 1,142.
[5] G. Ramafedi, et.al. "Demography of Sexual Orientation in Adolescents." Pediatrics, 1992:89, pages 714 to 721.
[6] S. Roberts and C. Turner. "Male-Male Sexual Contact in the USA: Findings From Five Sample Surveys, 1970-1990." Journal of Sexual Research 1991:28, 491-519.
[7] Deborah Dawson. "AIDS Knowledge and Attitudes for January-March, 1990, Provisional Data From the National Health Interview Survey;" Joseph E. Fitti and Marcie Cynamon, op. cit. for April-June, 1990; Pamela F. Adams and Ann M. Hardy, op. cit. for July-September, 1990. All in Advance Data, numbers 193, 195, and 198, National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control, Public Health Service, United States Department of Health and Human Services. Page 11 in all three documents.
[8] Study ending in June of 1992, performed by Alfred Spira of the Bicetre Hospital of Paris. described in Peter Aldhous. "Sexual Behavior: French Venture Where U.S. Fears to Tread." Science Magazine, July 3, 1992, page 25.
[9] Results of a November 1992 election exit poll, described in Murray Edelman. "The Gay Issues." The New York Times, November 5, 1992, pages B8 and B9.
[10] Alan Guttmacher Institute. Family Planning Perspectives. April 15, 1993. Study quoted in Kim Painter. "Only 1% of Men Say They Are Gay." USA Today, April 15, 1993, pages 1A and 8D.
[11] From those studies that included both men and women only. For all cases in which both men and women were studied, it is assumed that the studies and surveys concentrated on a population that was split evenly between men and women.
An exhaustive study of human sexuality performed by sociologist Tom W. Smith of the University of Chicago's National Opinion Research Center (NORC) showed that 93 percent of the American population has been exclusively heterosexual since the age of 18. Five to six percent considered themselves bisexual, and only one percent called themselves "exclusively homosexual." The NORC study also showed that only 6.8 percent of the entire general population engages in "unsafe sex," that is, sexual behavior that would put them at risk of contracting AIDS.[9]
Even the Kinsey Institute finally released the comprehensive results of its 1970 poll after 20 years and admitted that it found that less than two percent of all males had participated in homosexual activity in the last year.[10]
Kinsey Child-Molesting 'Research.'
Kinsey's research into homosexuality was not the only area in which he was unethical. Some of his 'research' was simultaneously pornographic and abusive of young children.
For example, Kinsey's book Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (The Male Report) describes mechanically-induced orgasm in very young children.
According to Table 31 of the Male Report, "Preadolescent Experience in Orgasm," children as young as two months were manipulated, and infants as young as 5 months achieved "orgasm." Many of the younger children had to be masturbated for more than ten minutes, according to Table 32, "Speed of Preadolescent Orgasm." Table 34, "Examples of Multiple Orgasm in Preadolescent Males," alleged that an 11-month old achieved 14 "orgasms" in 38 minutes, a 4-year old experienced 26 "orgasms" in 24 hours, and a 13-year old had three "orgasms" in one minute.
Such intense physical stimulation appeared to be agonizing to the youngest children, as evidenced by the description of their reactions when being "manipulated;" "Extreme tension with violent convulsion, often involving the sudden heaving and jerking of the whole body ... gasping, eyes staring ... mouth distorted, sometimes with tongue protruding ... whole body or parts of it spasmodically twitching ... throbs or violent jerking of the penis ... masochistic reactions ... more or less frenzied movements ... groaning, sobbing, or more violent cries, sometimes with an abundance of tears (especially among younger children) ... extreme trembling, collapse, loss of color, and sometimes fainting of subject ... panicked or frightened ... will fight away from the partner and may make violent attempts to avoid climax ..."[4]
According to Pediatrician Lester H. Caplan, "These children had to be held down or subject to strapping down, otherwise they would not respond willingly."[6]
Wardell Pomeroy, in his book Dr. Kinsey and the Institute for Sex Research, describes one of the "qualified researchers" who manipulated the children:
This man had had homosexual relations with 600 preadolescent males, heterosexual relations with 200 preadolescent females, intercourse with countless adults of both sexes, with animals of many species, and besides had employed elaborate techniques of masturbation. Of thirty three family members, he had had sexual contacts with seventeen. His grandmother introduced him to heterosexual intercourse, and his first homosexual experience was with his father.[7]
When syndicated columnist Patrick Buchanan read this material and dared to publish charges against Kinsey, pro-abortion lawyer Harriet Pilpel of the American Civil Liberties Union threatened him with legal action.
The 'Right to Privacy' In the Schools.
Through the sheer force of publicity and compelled uniformity, sex educators of Kinsey's time declared him to be the scientific equivalent of Newton, Galileo, and Einstein. They obviously made such absurd comparisons in order to advance the various points of their agenda.
They knew full well that no true and rigorous scientific research would support their views. Therefore, they had to create a "star:" Alfred Kinsey.
Kinsey's preoccupation with privacy (described above) could only have one logical purpose: That of self-protection. This ingrained obsession with concealment naturally transfers to the public school system.
Homosexuality is uniformly presented as a higher good in secular sex education programs. This is perhaps the primary reason the school sex education experts will do anything to prevent parents from seeing the materials that their children are exposed to.
For example, the paganistic Unitarian Universalist Association's sex education program entitled About Your Sexuality depicts, among other things, explicit scenes of anal intercourse which it labels "harmless," and "only one possible variation of sexuality," equal to all the others. There have been many instances of parents being banned from even previewing these and like materials because of a lack of "open-mindedness," "good faith," or some other indefinable fault.
In summary, parental involvement in secular sex education programs is encouraged only when the parents are deemed to be "enlightened." This terms applies only to those parents whose views coincide exactly with those of the sex educators and school-based clinic pushers.
In the lofty opinion of the sexologists, of course, the vast majority of parents are by no means "enlightened."
The American Psychiatric Association Coup.
Introduction.
Homosexuals commonly point to the fact that the 'medical community' and, more specifically, psychiatrists agree with them that homosexuality is a "normal human sexual response."
It is certainly true that the American Psychiatric Association (APA) removed homosexuality from its list of "mental disorders" twenty years ago, in 1973. This is a fact that almost always comes up in debates with sodomites.
What the homosexuals do not mention, of course, is that this sudden change in attitude was not based on any new scientific evidence. As described in the following paragraphs, it was a purely political move, induced by a relentless saturation campaign of deception, intimidation, and unethical collusion between the APA committee and activist sodomite groups.
Preparing the Ground.
In 1968, representatives of activist homosexual groups approached leading psychiatrists and the officers of psychiatric organizations and began to lay the groundwork for the reclassification of their perversions as normal manifestations of human sexuality.
These activists correctly recognized that such a move was absolutely mandatory if they were to win public acceptance. After all, society in general would not look very kindly upon the subsequent lobbying done by a group whose members were officially recognized as "mentally disordered."
In the three years during which the APA's Homosexuality Task Force was deliberating, it collaborated actively with several sodomite groups, including the Gay Activist's Alliance, the Mattachine Society, and the Daughters of Bilitis, while completely ignoring organizations with views that contrasted with the homosexuals'.
Abram Kardiner, former Professor of Psychiatry at Columbia University, revealed that
A powerful lobby of "gay" organizations has brought pressure on the American Psychiatric Association to remove homosexuality from the category of aberrancy. This is only one facet of the tidal wave of egalitarianism and divisiveness that is sweeping the country ...[11]
During this unethical collusion, Kinsey colleague Paul Gebhard said that anyone who was known to harbor the view that homosexuality was a disorder was systematically excluded from being a member of the Task Force or from even being able to present his views or evidence to it.
In other words, the sodomites packed this committee in the same manner that pro-abortionists and fetal tissue harvesters do: Only those people with the "correct" viewpoint were allowed to voice an opinion.
But the homosexuals did not focus on the APA alone; they intimidated psychiatrists all over the nation. While the APA Task Force was preparing its report, any psychiatrist or psychoanalyst who dared present documentation that homosexuality was a psychological disorder anywhere in the country was shouted down and even physically attacked at public forums or at local and national meetings of mental health professionals.[11]
The APA Caves In.
The years of hard work put in by the sodomites began to pay off in 1972. The National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) Task Force on Homosexuality Final Report parroted Alfred Kinsey's proclamation that "exclusive heterosexuality" and "exclusive homosexuality" were "sexual extremes," and that most people were basically bisexual.[12]
This report in turn exerted a great deal of influence on the APA. In order to make its final report appear to be scientific, the APA's Homosexuality Task Force sent a letter to all APA member psychiatrists. This letter did not ask whether or not homosexuality should or should not be declared "normal." It was signed by all candidates for the upcoming elections for the APA presidency and urged all members to vote that homosexuality was thereafter declared to be on a level with normal sexuality.
This view was so voted by a very slim margin. The letter did not, of course, reveal the fact that it was written and funded by the National Gay Task Force. One of the letter's signers, in fact, later confessed that he knew that such knowledge would have been the "kiss of death" for a pro-homosexual vote.[13]
Subsequently, the APA eliminated homosexuality as a mental disorder from the 1973 edition of its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual.
APA member Dr. Henry W. Riecken cut to the heart of the APA's motivation as he wrote a scathing dissent in the appendix to the above-mentioned NIMH report entitled "Detailed Reservations Regarding the Task Force Recommendations on Social Policy:"
It is as if they [the Task Force] said, "Here is a phenomenon about which we know almost nothing and about which there is a great deal of anxiety and concern; therefore, let us suggest a major revision in public policy for dealing with this phenomenon." I cannot escape the belief that this is an utterly unreasonable conclusion to draw from the sea of ignorance and misinformation in which we find ourselves.
The Essential Point.
The essential point to be made about this chicanery is that the sudden complete reversal in the APA position on homosexuality was not brought about as a result of a careful regime of scholarly research and study; it was a blatantly political move, a vote, of all things, on the status of a mental illness. Furthermore, this vote was undertaken in a climate of deception and intimidation.
At no time before or since has the APA or any other psychological or psychiatric professional group ever addressed a mental health question in this manner.
Behind the Scenes.
It is fascinating indeed to see what psychiatrists really think about homosexuality when they are free of the restraints of intimidation and political pressure.
Almost simultaneously with the 1972 National Institute of Mental Health report, the New York County District Branch of the APA's Task Force on Homosexuality produced a second report. According to APA member Charles Socarides, M.D., the document concluded that "... exclusive homosexuality was a disorder of psychosexual development, and simultaneously asked for civil rights for those suffering from the disorder."[11]
It is even more revealing to examine the results of polls of psychiatrists taken since 1973 regarding the issue of homosexual orientation.
The original "voting" letter distributed by the APA Homosexuality Task Force in 1973 was answered by only about one-quarter of the recipients, leading one to speculate that the "volunteer bias" ignored by Kinsey in his original studies led to pro-homosexual results. It is quite certain that, if all of the APA members had returned their "ballots," homosexuality would have remained a mental disorder in the view of the organization.
A later series of private surveys which could be answered confidentially and without fear of retaliation showed that two-thirds of APA member psychiatrists regarded homosexuality as abnormal despite the parent organization's switch.[11]
More specifically, in 1977, four years after the APA 'switch,' the journal Medical Aspects of Human Sexuality revealed that it had polled 2,500 psychiatrists on their view of what "current thinking on homosexuality" was, and, by a lopsided margin of 69% to 18% (nearly four to one, with 13% undecided), the respondents answered that "Homosexuality was usually a pathological adaptation as opposed to a normal variation."[14]
This is certainly a more accurate poll than the original APA letter because the letter was subject to all of the "volunteer bias" that self-selected populations exhibit. However, by comparison, the 1977 survey was truly random, and so its results should certainly be given more weight.
But will this letter ever be mentioned by the pro-homosexual media or by sodomite activists themselves?
Don't hold your breath.
Recent Studies "Supporting" the Allegation of Hereditary Homosexual Orientation.
One effective tactic used by supporters of sexual perversions is the emphasis on 'doctored' scientific studies that 'support' pre-ordained (and invariably favorable) conclusions that in turn are used to lend credibility and legitimacy to the perversions of interest.
There are many examples of this anti-scientific nonsense. Alfred Kinsey used deception and outright lies to "show" that ten percent of the population of the United States was homosexual. The North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) uses bizarre 'studies' and 'surveys' that purportedly support their position that sexual intercourse should begin shortly after birth. And the abortion-pill pushers produce heavily-flawed documentation of their position that RU-486 is "a necessity for women's health."
Perhaps the most egregious and laughable attempts at producing scientific support revolve around attempts to prove that homosexuality is a genetic, not acquired, condition.
The two studies most widely quoted that supposedly support the idea of homosexuality as an inborn condition are Simon LaVey's study of the hypothalamus and J. Michael Bailey's study of the sexual orientations of identical and fraternal twins.
These studies and their fatal flaws are described in the following paragraphs.
The Brain Node Study.
Introduction.
Simon LaVey, a confessed sodomite, examined the brains of 35 male cadavers (16 heterosexuals and 19 admitted homosexuals) to see if he could find any differences between those of homosexuals and those of normal people.[15] He found that the INAH3 cluster of brain neurons was twice as large in normal men as it was in homosexuals.
Professional homosexual propagandists immediately seized upon this bit of information and alleged that it "proved" that homosexuality is an ingrained or genetic condition; i.e., that homosexuals are "born that way."
Problems With LaVey's Study. However, there were several very obvious difficulties with LaVey's study that the propagandists glossed over or ignored completely.
(1) LaVey did not verify that his 16 "non-homosexual" subjects were, in fact, heterosexual. This is significant in light of the fact that six of these 16 men (37.5%) died of AIDS. LaVey acknowledged in his article that this was "a distinct shortcoming of my study."
(2) Three of the "heterosexual" brains had smaller node clusters than the average of the "homosexual" ones, and three of the "homosexual" brains had larger node clusters than the average of the "heterosexual" ones.
(3) LaVey's sample population size was ridiculously small. What he would like us to believe is that an examination of 35 cadavers somehow "proves" that the sexual orientation of billions of human beings is inbred or genetic. The best that LaVey could rationally claim is a percentage probability that his study reached the correct conclusion not what he actually did, i.e., that his study had a 100 percent chance of reaching a correct conclusion.
(4) LaVey's logic is obviously flawed because the brain node in question has not been proven as being either a cause or an effect of homosexuality. In other words, the brain node might be smaller because of homosexual activity instead of causing it.
A Comparative Situation.
Perhaps the most serious difficulty of LaVey's study is related to his painfully obvious conflict of interest.
This study can best be debunked by comparing it to a situation in which a pathologist hired by the American Tobacco Institute performs autopsies on 35 men. Sixteen of these men had never touched tobacco in any form. The other 19 began smoking at a very young age and smoked two packs a day until the day they died.
The pathologist removes and examines the lungs of the 35 men. He finds that the lungs of the nonsmokers are generally pink and healthy and the lungs of the smokers are obviously discolored and badly fouled by tar deposits.
Based upon the researcher's data, the American Tobacco Institute announces that some babies are born with badly damaged and tarry lungs and that this trait causes them to become smokers. Conversely, those babies that are born with pink and healthy lungs will not become smokers.
This line of reasoning makes no sense at all, of course, but the media accepted the identical logic of the homosexuals in LaVey's study without question.
The 'Twins' Study.
Introduction.
Dr. J. Michael Bailey of Northwestern University and Dr. Richard Pillard of Boston University School of Medicine found that, if one male twin is homosexual, identical twins are three times more likely to be homosexual than fraternal twins.[16]
In sets of identical twins where one brother was homosexual, there was a 52 percent chance that the other twin was homosexual as well. This number was 22 percent for fraternal (non-identical) twins and only 9 percent for non-twin brothers.
The conclusion that the authors drew from these comparisons was this: The incidence of homosexuality became higher as the genetic link between brothers became closer. Therefore, homosexuality must have a genetic basis.
Yep, More Problems ...
As with LaVey's research, there were very serious shortcomings in the methodology of this study.
Incredibly, the advertising for volunteers for the study was done in a homosexual magazine. Therefore, it can be expected that the incidence of homosexuality among all respondents would be exceedingly high. After all, normal people don't often read sex-saturated homosexual literature.
Secondly, the fact that 48 percent of the identical twins of homosexual brothers were not homosexuals themselves indicates that homosexuality is the result of environmental influences. Dr. Bailey himself acknowledged that "There must be something in the environment to yield the discordant twins."[17]
Finally, previous research had shown an extremely strong correlation between incest and resultant homosexuality, but the authors dismissed the effects of incest as "insignificant."[18]
Brown University developmental biologist Anne Fausto put her finger on the study's fatal flaw, which was its failure to separate environmental from genetic influences. She said that "In order for such a study to be at all meaningful, you'd have to look at twins raised apart. It's such badly interpreted genetics."[17]
Has the Propaganda Been Effective?
Christian activists must recognize that the purpose of the above studies was not to convert the hearts and minds of the people. Average Americans have a good dose of common sense and instinctively realize that homosexuality and all of its entrained evils are unhealthy for both individuals and societies in general.
The purpose of these studies was to convince the power structure (in particular, the court system) that homosexuality is an innate characteristic.
After all, the court system is all that the sodomites need in order to fulfill their many goals. The court system was used to enshrine abortion in this country over the objections of most of the population, just as the euthanasiasts are using it now.
It is very important indeed to note that a decade of intense pro-homosexual propagandizing by the media has done nothing more than harden public opinion against homosexuality, as shown below.
RESULTS OF GALLUP POLL ON PUBLIC ACCEPTANCE OF HOMOSEXUALITY
QUESTION: "Should homosexuality be considered an acceptable alternative lifestyle?"
Yes No Undecided
Responses in 1982: 34% 51% 15%
Responses in 1992: 38% 57% 5%
CHANGES: + 4% + 6% -10%
Reference: Judy Treible. "Changing Opinions on Gays." Gallup Poll survey of 1,002 adults, Knight-Rider Tribune. The Oregonian, January 29, 1993, page A16.
These polls show that the intended effect of a full decade of homosexual and media propaganda to 'favorably' change public opinion towards sodomites has not achieved its purpose. While more people have an opinion on sodomites (only one-third as many people are now "undecided" than a decade ago), the margin of unfavorable over favorable replies has increased from 17% to 19%.
The Actual Percentage of Homosexuals in the General Population.
The notion that 10% of men are gay born in the studies of Alfred Kinsey and popularized by activists is dying under the weight of new studies.
Kim Painter. "Only 1% of Men Say They Are Gay." USA Today, April 15, 1993, pages 1A and 8D.
Figure 116-1 summarizes the results of the eight major studies that have been performed on homosexual orientation all over the world in the last five years. The percentages of those persons who claim a homosexual orientation are remarkably consistent from study to study.
Even more significantly, the cumulative results of these studies show that 3.7 percent of men and 3.2 percent of women have ever had a homosexual experience even if it was only one such experience. In other words, these tiny numbers include even that large number of people who "try out" perverted sex just once and, due to revulsion and/or shame, never try it again.
The percentage of 'lifetime' or 'exclusive' homosexuality would of course be much lower, and this fact is borne out by the studies as well. For example, the most recent study, completed by Alfred Spira of the Bicetre Hospital of Paris in June 1992, showed that only 1.1 percent of men and 0.3 percent of women had had a homosexual experience in the last twelve months.[19]
Since the average percentage of homosexuality among both genders would thus be about 0.7 percent, the "ten percent" myth exaggerates the true incidence of homosexuality by a factor of about fourteen.
What Homosexuals Think About Their Condition.
Introduction.
It is all well and good to debate about scientific studies and scholarly opinions, but nothing is more revealing than to find out what homosexuals really think about themselves. Only in the homosexual mind is the truth about 'homosexual orientation' known.
The homosexual activist has two faces; one is for 'straight' consumption, and the other, which is remarkably truthful, finds its expression in the homosexual media and in certain radical segments of the scientific community.
It is important to be able to separate propaganda (the line that is fed to the outside world) from what the homosexuals really believe. Nowhere is the dichotomy between the two greater than in matters relating to 'sexual orientation.'
Not Really 'Born That Way' After All.
Perhaps the most damaging evidence against the "born that way" theory is provided by the homosexuals themselves.
Homosexuals themselves generally don't believe that their orientation is genetic or inborn. Sexologist Alfred Kinsey (the originator of the "ten percent" myth) conducted a survey of 979 homosexuals in 1970, before the "gay rights" movement had gathered momentum. He found that less than ten percent of all his respondents believed that they were "born that way." More than 80 percent attributed their "sexual orientation" to childhood trauma or other environmental influences.
The actual responses to Kinsey's survey were as follows;
RESULTS OF THE KINSEY SURVEYS ON REASONS FOR HOMOSEXUAL ORIENTATION
Reasons Given for Orientation Percent
"Early homosexual experience with adults or peers" 22%
"Around homosexuals a lot, have a lot of homosexual friends" 16%
"Poor relationship with mother" 15%
"Poor relationship with father" 14%
"Unusual development (labeled sissy, tomboy, etc)." 15%
"Heterosexual partners unavailable" 12%
"Social ineptitude" 9%
"I was born that way" 9%
References. (1) A.P. Bell. "Homosexualities: Their Range and Character." Paper in Nebraska Symposium on Motivation. J.K. Cole and R. Dienstbier (editors). Lincoln, Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press, 1973. (2) Paul Cameron. What Causes Homosexuality? Lincoln, Nebraska: Institute for the Scientific Study of Sexuality (ISIS), 1984.
One Step Further.
Even if society were to grant that homosexuals have no control over their sexuality, the sodomites would not be satisfied. They have gone one step further and now assert that it is impossible to turn away from homosexuality. They even vigorously resist any attempts to prove otherwise by censoring media presentations of "reformed" or "reforming" homosexuals and by attacking any institution that assists anyone in turning away from their homosexual perversions.
Homosexual literature and pornographic fiction are replete with the strange theme of heterosexuals who, when seduced by sodomites, suddenly "convert" into homosexuals. It is therefore reasonable to assume that homosexuals can be "reconverted" back to normalcy. However, the sodomites do not buy this logical argument; they insist that changes in "sexual orientation" can only be one way; a kind of perverted check valve, if you will.
Several studies have confirmed that many or most homosexuals can overcome their lust for other men. In one of these, Bieber and Bieber concluded in the Canadian Journal of Psychiatry (24(1979) 409-421) that 30 to 50 percent of homosexuals can actually overcome their sexual orientation to a certain extent, and the remainder can be helped to achieve greater self-control and higher self-esteem.[20]
Many homosexuals not only change their behavior, they change their orientation to the point where they become disgusted with their previous activities.[21] If homosexuality were innate, this would not be possible. It is now recognized that alcoholism is probably genetic and that there is no such thing as a fully-recovered alcoholic: The urge to drink will always be there, even if it is latent. Recovered homosexuals, by contrast, usually have no desire whatever to re-enter the perverted lifestyle they left behind.
It is obvious that homosexuals realize that this fact is a great threat to their "ten percent" myth; this is why they vigorously attack any research or statement that shows that homosexuals can be turned into normal people.
The critical point to remember is this: If homosexuality is genetic or innate, then environmental influences would not greatly affect the incidence of this characteristic.
However, environmental influences do have a profound impact on the number of people who become sexual perverts. The most effective of these influences, of course, is religion: Those persons raised in households without religious values are 450% more likely to become homosexual than those raised in homes where religion is important.[22]
Homosexuals engage in a wide range of perversions, including sodomy, fisting, rimming, pederasty, transvestitism, necrophilia, and sado-masochism. It is ridiculous to assert that all of these behaviors are innate. In fact, if homosexuality was an innate characteristic caused by a particular gene, then homosexuals would more likely participate in a narrower, more uniform range of deviations.
The Experts Speak on Homosexual Orientation.
Relief From Responsibility.
If the public accepts the homosexual assertion that their 'orientation' was passed on to them by their parents, then their sexual perversions will lose all of their moral implications. Homosexuality will become absolutely neutral in content, like a person's gender, left-handedness, or skin color.
This would naturally relieve homosexuals of any responsibility for their actions. If they contract gonorrhea of the mouth, it's not their fault. If they get AIDS, it's not their fault, they can just yell for the government to come to their rescue. If health authorities close a "gay bathhouse," the sodomites can claim that they have violated the Constitutional rights of homosexuals (and of all people) everywhere.
The Objectives of the Movement.
Chapter 117 describes in detail the actual stated objectives of the homosexual movement.
Believe it or not, these objectives include;[23]
• the closing of all churches that oppose them;
• the total destruction of the family;
• exile and actual murder of those who oppose them in any way;
• the "conversion" by forced sodomy of all young men to homosexuality;
• the official condemnation of normal love between men and women, and
• the raising of private armies of thugs to enforce their agenda.
If anyone opposes this hateful agenda, the homosexuals just snivel that their civil rights are being violated, and demand that the "homophobic bigots" responsible for their "oppression" be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law and forcibly indoctrinated in "sensitivity sessions."
Opinions of the Experts.
Unfortunately for the sodomites, they cannot be relieved of responsibility for their actions under this argument, because it is a lie. The world's leading experts on human sexuality agree that homosexuality is an acquired orientation, not a hereditary orientation.
Some quotes by these experts are listed in Figure 116-2.
FIGURE 116-2
THE EXPERTS SPEAK ON THE SOURCE OF HOMOSEXUAL ORIENTATION
The genetic theory of homosexuality has been generally discarded today. Despite the interest in possible hormone mechanisms in the origin of homosexuality, no serious scientist today suggests that a simple cause-effect relationship applies.
William Masters and Virginia Johnson. Human Sexuality. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1984, page 319.
No one has ever found a single replicable genetic hormonal or chemical difference between heterosexuals and homosexuals.
Dr. Judd Marmor, head of the American Psychological Association. Homosexual Behavior: A Modern Reappraisal. New York: Basic Books, 1982.
There is little evidence of the existence of such a thing as innate perversity. There is an abundance of evidence that most human sexual activities would become comprehensible to most individuals if they could know the background of each individual's behavior. I have myself come to the conclusion that homosexuality is largely a matter of conditioning.
Alfred Kinsey, quoted in Wardell B. Pomeroy. Dr. Kinsey and the Institute for Sex Research. New York: Harper & Row, 1972, pages 247 and 273.
We're born man, woman, and sexual beings. We learn our sexual preferences and orientations.
William Masters and Virginia Johnson, interview with United Press International, April 23, 1979.
The only thing most experts agree on is that homosexuality is not a result of any kinky genes.
Time Magazine editorial, October 31, 1969, page 64.
With rare exceptions, homosexuality is neither genetic nor the result of some glandular disturbance. Homosexuals are made, not "born that way." From my 25 years' experience as a clinical psychologist, I firmly believe that homosexuality is a learned response to early experiences and that it can be unlearned.
Dr. R. Kronemeyer, in an interview with the New York Tribune, May 6, 1983.
Homosexuality, the choice of a partner of the same sex for orgiastic satisfaction, is not innate. Such an object choice is learned, acquired behavior; there is no inevitable genetically inborn propensity toward the choice of a partner of either the same or opposite sex ... Establishing the psychosexual institution of homosexuality alongside the sexual institution of heterosexuality could well produce a massive social disruption without parallel in medical and social history.
Dr. C.W. Socarides, professor of psychiatry, State University of New York, International Journal of Psychiatry, December 1972.
We may tentatively conclude that the main source for gender and sexual behavior deviance is found in social learning and psychological development variables.
Dr. G.A. Rekers, North American Social Science Network, Arlington, Virginia, February 27, 1987.
Whatever may be the possible unlearned assistance from constitutional sources, the child's psychosexual identity is not written, unlearned, in the genetic code, the hormonal system, or the nervous system at birth.
Dr. John Money. Perspectives in Human Sexuality, New York, 1974, page 67.
Neither present-day endocrinological tests nor microscopic or clinical examinations have revealed any physiological differences between a heterosexual and a homosexual individual.
Dr. James McCary, Sexual Myths and Fallacies. Quoted in Fidelity Magazine, March 1987, page 7.
Homosexuality: A True Physical Addiction.
In 1981 we drew back and became more sexually conservative because of fear of the AIDS epidemic. Now we have decided that certain death is preferable to dull sex lives.
A homosexual radio spokesperson.[24]
A Sexual Addiction.
Promiscuous homosexuals display every one of the classic attributes of substance addiction.
In reality, they are physically addicted to perverted sex. Dr. Gerard van der Aardwag struck to the heart of this matter when he stated that "[The] homosexual's erotic drives consume much of their thinking, more so than in heterosexuals. Homosexual impulses really have something compulsive about them, in that they resemble other neurotic disturbances such as phobias, obsessional worries, and obsessive-compulsive neuroses. They make the sufferer restless. The driving force of this compulsiveness is the inferiority complaint. This makes the longing insatiable, because the same complaint will always recur."[25]
If this "addiction theory" seems like a novel concept, consider the classic signs of substance addiction as applied to active homosexuals. These indications, listed in Figure 116-3, precisely fit the promiscuous homosexual deathstyle.
FIGURE 116-3
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE HOMOSEXUAL ADDICTION
(1) Reoriented Priorities. The homosexual addict's life centers around his 'habit.' His job, his wife and family (if any), and his possessions mean nothing. All that matters is that he be guaranteed a steady supply of mostly-anonymous 'partners' in sodomy. For information on the incredible degree of homosexual sexual promiscuity, see Chapter 119, "Homosexual Practices."
(2) Obsessiveness. The homosexual addict is obsessive. He constantly craves sodomy and other perverted sex acts. In fact, these thoughts occupy most of his thoughts; all that matters is the next sexual encounter.
(3) Compulsiveness. The homosexual addict is compulsive. He is completely out of control in many instances. He may make occasional half-hearted attempts at limiting or controlling his behavior, but such attempts generally fail.
(4) Reclusiveness. The homosexual addict withdraws from his former (normal) activities and friends. The homosexual lifestyle is so extraordinarily perverse that it is incomprehensible to the mainstream public. So he 'hangs out' with his new 'friends,' because they 'understand' him and help him get more and more deeply into the homosexual deathstyle.
(5) Personality Changes. The homosexual addict undergoes severe personality changes. He becomes secretive, furtive, obsessive and compulsive. These changes are brought on by feelings of persecution, victimization, isolation, and, above all, acute guilt.
(6) Withdrawal. The homosexual addict experiences withdrawal symptoms to varying degrees if he is placed in an environment where sodomy and other perverted sexual acts are considered unacceptable or are unavailable.
(7) Escapism. The homosexual addict is an escapist. He avoids responsibility for his actions and blames everyone else for anything in his life that is not to his liking. This aspect of homosexual addiction has assumed extreme proportions in the so-called 'gay rights' movement.
(8) Privacy Obsession. The homosexual addict is extremely concerned about privacy. Hence names like "The Right to Privacy PAC" and "The Privacy Newsletter." He knows that privacy is essential to continuing his socially unacceptable behavior.
(9) Cross-Addiction. Finally, the homosexual addict is usually cross-addicted. This means that he does not limit himself to the "standard" perversions, but becomes involved in pedophilia, transvestitism, sado-masochism (S&M), bestiality, hard-core pornography, and other horrors. He is very frequently alcoholic and/or addicted to various illegal drugs, as well.
The Evidence is in the Ads.
Another indication that homosexuals are true addicts is provided by The Advocate Magazine (originally The Advocate: Newspaper of America's Homophile Community).
This stylish weekly bills itself as "The National Gay and Lesbian Magazine" and is configured to appeal to 'mainline' (i.e., most non-activist) homosexuals. Therefore, it accurately represents the opinions and desires of most homosexuals.
The addictive aspect of the homosexual orientation is revealed in the massive pull-out classified ad section of the magazine. An analysis of the photo and written ads in The Advocate Magazine by The Institute for Media Education revealed that 100 percent dealt with sexual matters. 15 percent advertised torture and brutality; five percent had a strongly Nazi theme; and 11 percent implied a desire for adult/child sex.[26]
Homosexuals often play on the sympathy of 'straights' by asserting that they are capable of long-term monogamous relationships, but all of the available evidence points to sodomites caring only about their sex lives with as many people as possible.
The Institute for Media Education found that only one percent of the sex ads in The Advocate revealed a desire for a 'permanent' or 'loving' relationship. As far as homosexual 'marriages' go, they average 30 months in duration, and more than half of the 'partners' cheat even during this short time interval[27]
Escaping the Deathstyle.
There has never been a single documented case of change in sexual orientation.
A. Damien Martin of the Institute for the Protection of Lesbian and Gay Youth.[28]
A Big Secret Indeed.
Homosexual propagandists in the "gay rights" movement have a very important secret.
Homosexuals can leave their lifestyle.
Why is this important?
Because, if it can be shown that homosexuals can be 'converted' to heterosexuality, then the theory that 'gays' are 'born that way' is effectively refuted.
And if the 'born that way' allegation is debunked, the homosexuals lose their claim to being a protected minority under civil rights laws.
What the Homosexuals Say.
The most truthful indicators of whether or not the 'gay' lifestyle can be given up are naturally provided by the homosexuals themselves and those who study them carefully. It is interesting to hear their opinions on this subject.
• 61 percent of homosexuals agree that they could be 'converted' to exclusive heterosexuality and 58% agreed that "People are homosexual only if they want to be."[29]
• Masters and Johnson (the famous husband and wife 'sexologist' team) reported that 79.1 percent of their clients who attempted to discontinue homosexual behavior were successful immediately, and 71.6 percent remained successful after an elapsed period of five years.[30]
• About a quarter of all homosexuals believe that their condition is a disorder and 37% believe that they themselves are "psychologically disturbed" because of their sexual orientation.[31]
• When asked the question "If a teenager who was just starting [homosexual activities] came to you and asked your advice, what would you tell them?," 80 percent of all homosexuals recommended cessation over continuation.[32]
Help in Escaping.
Just as those addicted to drugs or alcohol can free themselves from slavery, so too can promiscuous homosexuals. They may or may not always suffer from their cravings, but they can learn to control themselves and reintegrate themselves into society.
For information on how one can turn away from homosexuality, contact one of the following organizations.
Beyond Rejection Ministries
Post Office Box 2154
Hemet, California 92343
Telephone: (714) 925-0028
James Johnson operates an AIDS hospice and a ministry that helps homosexuals turn away from their deathstyle.
Courage
St. Michaels' Rectory
424 West 34th Street
New York, New York 10001
Telephone: (212) 421-0426
Exodus International
Post Office Box 2121
San Rafael, California 94912-2121
Telephone: (415) 454-1017
Exodus International is the nation's leading clearinghouse in helping people overcome a homosexual orientation and offers information on more than 60 different national ministries.
Homosexuals Anonymous Fellowship Services
Box 7881
Reading, California 19603
Telephone: 1-800-253-3000
Provides group support and a 14-step recovery program.
Metanoia Ministries
Post Office Box 33039
Seattle, Washington 98133
Outpost
1821 University Avenue South, #S-296
St. Paul, Minnesota 55104
Regeneration Books
Post Office Box 9830
Baltimore, Maryland 21284
Telephone: (301) 661-0284
Spatula Ministries
Post Office Box 444
La Habra, California 90631
Transformation Ex-Gay Ministry
Box 12121
Washington, DC 20005
Telephone: (202) 483-3800
References: The Homosexual Orientation.
[1] Bruce Voeller. "Some Uses and Abuses of the Kinsey Scale." Homosexuality, Heterosexuality: Concepts of Sexual Orientation. The Kinsey Institute Series, June Machover Reinisch (general editor), Oxford University Press, 1990, pages 35 and 36.
[2] Female participant in the April 1989 "March for Death" in Washington, D.C. Quoted in Voices for the Unborn [Feasterville, Pennsylvania], October 1991, page 4.
[3] Sigmund Freud, "The Sexual Life of Man." Quoted in The Major Works of Sigmund Freud: A General Introduction to Psycho-Analysis. Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc., Chicago, London, and Toronto. Lecture 20, page 575.
[4] E. Michael Jones. "The Case Against Kinsey." Fidelity Magazine, April 1989, pages 22 to 35.
[5] Gershon Legman. The Horn Book: Studies in Erotic Folklore and Bibliography. New Hyde Park, New York: University Books, 1964.
[6] Judith A. Reisman and Edward W. Eichel. Kinsey, Sex and Fraud: The Indoctrination of a People. Lafayette, Louisiana: Huntington House Publishers, 1990. 237 pages. Pages 20 to 23 and 40.
[7] Wardell Pomeroy, in his book Dr. Kinsey and the Institute for Sex Research, Harper & Row, 1972.
[8] P.H. Gebhard, J.H. Gagnon, W.B. Pomeroy, and C.V. Christenson. Sex Offenders: An Analysis of Types. New York: Harper & Row, 1965.
[9] "Americans More Traditional On Sex Than Portrayed." Focus On the Family Citizen, April 1990, page 5.
[10] Science Magazine, January 20, 1989, page 13.
[11] Charles Socarides, M.D. "The Sexual Deviations and the Diagnostic Manual." American Journal of Psychotherapy, July 1978. Also see Arno Karlen. "Homosexuality: The Scene and Its Students." The Sociology of Sex. James Henson and Edward Sagarin (editors). New York: Schocken Publishers, 1978.
[12] John M. Livergood, M.D. (Editor). National Institute of Mental Health Task Force on Homosexuality: Final Report and Background Papers. United States Government Printing Office, 1972, page 2 (Introduction).
[13] Ronald Bayer. Homosexuality and American Psychiatry: The Politics of Diagnosis. New York: Basic Books, 1981. Page 146.
[14] Medical Aspects of Human Sexuality, November 1977.
[15] Simon LaVey. "A Difference in Hypothalamic Structure Between Heterosexual and Homosexual Men." Science Magazine, 258, 1991, pages 1,034 to 1,037.
[16] J.M. Bailey and R.C. Pillard. "A Genetic Study of Male Sexual Orientation." Archives of General Psychiatry, 48:1991, pages 1,089 to 1,096.
[17] David Gelman, et.al. "Born or Bred?" Newsweek Magazine, February 24, 1992, page 46.
[18] A.P. Bell, M.S. Weinberg, and S.K. Hammersmith. Sexual Preference. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press, 1981.
[19] As described in Peter Aldhous. "Sexual Behavior: French Venture Where U.S. Fears to Tread." Science Magazine, July 3, 1992, page 25.
[20] As described in a letter by Father Anthony Zimmerman, SVD, of Tokyo, Japan entitled "Therapy for Homosexuals." Fidelity Magazine, December 1987, page 5.
[21] Many studies and texts support this conclusion. For instance, see I. Bieber, Homosexuality: A Psychoanalytic Study. (Basic Books, 1962); C. Socarides, "Homosexuality Concepts and Psychodynamics," International Journal of Psychiatry, October 1972, page 118; W.H. Masters and V.E. Johnson, Homosexuality in Perspective (Little, Brown, 1979); D.J. West, Homosexuality Re-Examined (Duckworth, 1977); E.M. Pattison and M.L. Pattison, "Ex-Gays: Religiously Mediated Change in 11 Homosexuals," American Journal of Psychiatry, 1980, 137:1553-1562.
[22] "What Causes Homosexuality and Can it Be Cured?" Institute for the Scientific Investigation of Sex, 1984
[23] Essay by Michael Swift in the Gay Community News. Reprinted in the February 15-21, 1987 Congressional Record.
[24] David A. Noebel, Wayne C. Lutton, and Paul Cameron. AIDS: Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome. Summit Ministries Research Center, Manitou Springs, Colorado, 80829. 1985, 149 pages. Reviewed by Chilton Williamson, Jr. on page 58 of the April 11, 1986 issue of National Review. A review of the literature that has been written about AIDS, and an examination of the tactics used by homosexuals to take advantage of the plague to further their own goals.
[25] Gerard Van den Aardweg. Homosexuality and Hope. Servant Books, 134 pages. 1986.
[26] The Institute for Media Education. A Content Analysis of Two Decades of The Advocate (July 5, 1972 - July 2, 1991) and The 1991 Gayellow Pages. June 1991.
[27] A.P. Bell, M.S. Weinberg, and S.K. Hammersmith. Sexual Preference: Statistical Appendix. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press, 1981.
[28] A. Damien Martin, Institute for the Protection of Lesbian and Gay Youth, quoted in Warren Bird. "New York Tax Dollars Fund a High School for Homosexuals." Christianity Today, August 9, 1985, page 37.
[29] C.J. Williams and M.S. Weinberg. Homosexuals and the Military. New York: Harper & Row, 1971.
[30] Mark F. Schwartz and William H. Masters. "The Masters and Johnson Treatment Program for Dissatisfied Homosexual Men." American Journal of Psychiatry, February 1984, pages 173 to 181.
[31] A.P. Bell and M.S. Weinberg. Homosexualities: A Study of Diversity Among Men and Women. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1978.
[32] P.H Gebhard and A.B. Johnson. The Kinsey Data: Marginal Tabulation of the 1938-1963 Interviews Conducted By the Institute for Sex Research. New York: Saunders Publishing, 1979.
Further Reading: The Homosexual Orientation.
Ronald Bayer. Homosexuality and American Psychiatry: The Politics of Diagnosis.
New York: Basic Books, 1981. This author defies the strong politically correct wind from the American Psychiatric Association and tells, among other things, how sodomites have used certain medical societies to defraud the public and further their own ends.
A.P. Bell and M.S. Weinberg. Homosexualities: A Study of Diversity Among Men and Women.
New York: Simon & Schuster, 1978.
A.P. Bell, M.S. Weinberg, and S.K. Hammersmith. Sexual Preference: Statistical Appendix.
Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press, 1981. Some of the author's results were tabulated from a 550-item questionnaire answered by 4,340 adults from Los Angeles, Denver, Omaha, Louisville, Dallas, and Washington, DC in 1983 and 1984. This survey was conducted by the Institute for the Scientific Investigation of Sexuality.
Greenhaven Press. Human Sexuality: Opposing Viewpoints.
Greenhaven Press Opposing Viewpoints Series, Post Office Box 289009, San Diego, California 92128-9009. 1989, 440 pages. This series consists of a basic volume followed by annual updates by the same name. The main arguments for and against each idea are written by the leading activists in each field. Topics covered include contraceptives (the birth control pill and condoms are emphasized), AIDS, homosexuality, and abortion. This topic is covered by a series of books, beginning with a basic set of essays entitled Sources and continuing with an additional and updated annual series of essays. A catalog is available from the above address and can be obtained by calling 1-(800) 231-5163.
Dick Hafer. Homosexuality: Legitimate, Alternate Deathstyle.
204 pages. The "comics commando" strikes again with a comic-book style book on the various aspects of homosexuality: Homosexual practices, including pedophilia; AIDS; the "gay agenda;" and facts about homosexual orientation. This book is not only easy to read because of its format, but also full of well-documented and footnoted information.
Father John F. Harvey. The Homosexual Person: New Thinking in Pastoral Care.
This book shows Catholic priests how to counsel homosexuals from an orthodox position to lead chaste lives. Father Harvey is the founder of Courage, the Catholic group for those homosexuals trying to lead chaste and Christian lives. The author discusses the theories on the origin of homosexuality, the possibility of change in sexual orientation, and the pastoral perspectives and programs offered to them.
Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. On the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons.
26 pages, 50 cents. Order from Ignatius Press, 15 Oakland Avenue, Harrison, New York 10528. This brief document outlines the Catholic Church's position that homosexuality is an "intrinsically disordered condition," and discusses the special pastoral concern that should be directed towards homosexuals.
Judith A. Reisman and Edward W. Eichel. Kinsey, Sex and Fraud: The Indoctrination of a People.
Lafayette, Louisiana: Huntington House Publishers, 1990. 237 pages. An excellent and detailed examination of the background of the Alfred Kinsey sexual studies that "showed" that children are sexual from birth and that ten percent of the population is exclusively homosexual. This book examines in detail the flaws in Kinsey's studies, and looks at the machinations of modern-day 'sexologists' who build their work on his studies. Reisman also details the impacts that Kinsey-style sex education has had on our country.
United States Government, National Institute of Mental Health Task Force on Homosexuality. Final Report and Background Papers.
John M. Livergood, M.D. (editor). United States Government Printing Office, 1972.
Gerard Van den Aardweg. Homosexuality and Hope: A Psychologist Talks About Treatment and Change.
Servant Books, Post Office Box 8617, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48107. 134 pages, 1986. Reviewed by Joseph Sobran on pages 53 and 54 of the October 10, 1986 issue of National Review>. Dr. Van den Aardweg holds that homosexuality is indeed a psychological disorder, and a curable one. He states that it is rooted in feelings of inferiority and is basically different from lesbianism in some respects but similar to various expressions of arrested heterosexual development. In all, a fascinating book on relevant theory.
© American Life League BBS — 1-703-659-7111
This is a chapter of the Pro-Life Activist’s Encyclopedia published by American Life League.
