Comments on: Research note: Gay and straight men assess parental qualities

By: Evan

Evan — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 22:21:34 +0000

My mistake, Warren! 🙂 I meant that the matter should continue to be researched. Of course, I know that it has been researched, but it doesn’t mean that the present or past methodology that was used in those studies is infallible. It is possible that there is no one single type of same-sex orientation and that this is reflected in a different mixture of factors for each type.
There is evidence for childhood gender nonconformism predating adult homosexual orientation – checked, evidence for gender typicality and toy preference and hormones – checked, gender nonconformism and peer rejection – checked, and so on…
One can easily reconstruct a common path for ex-GIDs and effeminate gays and expect to find some biological package strong enough to resist any influence from other factors.
But then, where do non-effeminate gays come from, if they were not to be found among gender nonconforming, cross-sex socialised, peers rejected children? Did they follow the exact typical childhood path common to gender conforming children and then came to the realisation that they are mostly attracted to the (same)sex they theretofore found ordinary? I find it impossible that in their case no developmental factor would play a role in the choice of their partners’ sex.

I would like for the environmentalists and especially evangelical community to face the facts. Al Mohler is a high profile evangelical that has done this but I would really like to hear from Exodus and Focus publicly that they have oversold the reparative theory. Will I ever hear that tree fall?

Thanks for coming out with your motivation. I’m not familiar with their world, but if they’ve got no results with their clients, then they should have been discredited by now. Reparative authors continue to sell books and therapy sessions, right? If they sell phony recipe books then no one would recommend them to another one and they should go out of business soon. After all, it’s customers who decide what works for them before science gets to pry into causes.

By: Warren

Warren — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 00:45:56 +0000

@Ann: The perception thing is what makes this study striking. This is a study of perception in that it is self-report.

By: Warren

Warren — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 00:44:21 +0000

@Evan: But the issue of developmental factors, including parenting and peers relations, playing a part in future outcomes I think is valid and should be researched. Not seeing any evidence for them doesn’t mean that they don’t exist. You know, if a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?

If there is no sound maybe there is no tree. I am surprised to see you imply that the developmental and parental factors have not been researched. One would think with the research we have that something would show up if these factors are necessary conditions for SSA in any general sense. If the predictions based on a theory are not supported then the theory must be modified or discarded. None of the studies purporting to show a pervasive same-sex parental contribution have done so.There are always exceptions, even when the design and sampling are stacked in favor of the theory. I am not saying I know what the factors are but I would like for the environmentalists and especially evangelical community to face the facts. Al Mohler is a high profile evangelical that has done this but I would really like to hear from Exodus and Focus publicly that they have oversold the reparative theory. Will I ever hear that tree fall?

By: Evan

Evan — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 00:26:10 +0000

minty,
I would forget about the single cause explanation. But could anyone seriously bet that there is no developmental contribution to sexual attractions? Where would that contribution come from if not from the patterns of early socialisation and upbringing?
My bet on this blog has always been that the aggression and stress systems in the brain must primarily drive attractions, for two reasons: they are the biggest and clearest sexually dimorphic components in human brains (aggression and the stress response). Most brain studies have confirmed that gays and lesbians are atypical in these respects. So questions arise: what events would shape and exercise these parts to produce exclusive sexual reactions in a male brain similar to those of the hetero- opposite sex? Could an early mother’s influence on a boy encourage him to exercise his aggressiveness that would help him be competitive in rough games or could it stifle it? How would a boy’s anxious attachment to his mother shape his reaction to stress in adult age? What about exercising these components with his father or male peers? Could any of these patterns or a combination of them make a difference in future sexuality? This is the kind of questions that would be great to find some answers to, not if fathers’ absence could singly cause anything, IMO. I think it would be a waste of time to refute reparative theory using facts, since its proponents didn’t produce any. But the issue of developmental factors, including parenting and peers relations, playing a part in future outcomes I think is valid and should be researched. Not seeing any evidence for them doesn’t mean that they don’t exist. You know, if a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?

By: Ann

Ann — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 23:54:40 +0000

and we must remember the temperment of the child and how they perceive the absence or emotional distance of a father or other familial circumstances – one son might be greatly affected in an adverse way that could create vulnerabilities whereas another son might not be affected in quite the same way or even at all