Equality Ride: Starting a dialogue?

Imagine you’re a liberal democrat and your conservative republican neighbor calls and says, “Hey, we are coming over to your house next Tuesday in order to dialogue with your kids about the benefits of conservativism.” Your neighbors say they will drop in sometime that day and leave a copy of God and George Bush by Paul Kengor; copies of the National Review and some literature from Focus on the Family for your kids to read. While they are there, they plan to strike up conversations with them about the Iraq War, the need to cut entitlement programs and about how abortion is discriminatory to the poor.

How would you respond?

Now read this from the Dallas Voice about Soulforce’s plans to visit Liberty University in Lynchburg, VA:

Members of Soulforce, which is based in Lynchburg, were greeted with cookies when they met with Liberty students on campus last spring to discuss the treatment of gays…

Soulforce has been issued a permit to demonstrate on city property, which Zuidema said would be the sidewalk or street bordering the campus. Soulforce’s goal is to meet with students to discuss freedom of expression, not to have a confrontation, Herrin said. Still, the group will not be turned away, she said. “I’m actually very excited that this is our first stop,” Herrin, a 24-year-old (Equality Rider) from Dallas, said in a telephone interview. “We have to go to these places and start this dialogue.”

So when you reply to your conservative republican neighbors, “no, we had you over here once before and we just don’t see eye-to-eye on these things,” they say “we won’t be turned away, we are going to come into your house whether you like it or not. See you next Tuesday!”

How would you respond?

Name the heterosexual: Answers

Ok, so not many wanted to guess. Can’t say I blame anyone; there wasn’t much to go on. However, these cases present some of the assumptions that conservatives often make when conceptualizing male homosexuality. I used a similar exercise about girls and eating disorders in one of my classes recently. Very few got that right either. I used that one to illustrate how clinicians can make poor judgments based on attachment to a pet theory of causation.

So here is the rest of the story…

James – Straight as can be. If one can believe self-report, no attractions to the same sex ever.

Dallas – Same-sex attracted but does not seek same-sex partners. Tried it, didn’t like it but has unmistakable attractions toward men. Weak opposite-sex attractions, may pursue heterosexual relationship if the “right” girl comes along.

John – Bisexually attracted; would rather have no same-sex attractions.

Gareth – A brief snippet of the boyhood of psychologist Gordon Allport who had a life-long heterosexual marriage. Although nothing I can find suggests he had same-sex attractions, one cannot be dogmatic about it.

ADDENDUM: A commenter said she might be able to do better with the eating disorders exercise. Here it is: who has the eating disorder?

Jill’s mother was constantly dieting and urging Jill, who had more of her father’s stocky build, to diet with her. At 14, Jill’s boyfriend dumped her for another girl, someone thinner.

Sarah’s mother was obese but did not seem troubled by it. Her parents were laissez-faire about most things and didn’t bother Sarah about her looks or weight. Sarah however was not proud of her mother’s appearance.

Jen’s parents were trim and athletic but did not force the children to be into sports. They were allowed to find their own interests and did not put much pressure on their children to achieve in school, just asking them to make good effort. Jen was involved in most school activities and is an A- student.

Peter Tatchell: Genetic explanations of homosexuality don’t add up

A commenter requested that I have a look at this article by British gay activist, Peter Tatchell. I had seen it before but it is worth reviewing.

I agree with most of it and certainly agree that whether someone is born gay is a separate question from public policy or even whether to suppress or repress feelings. This is a matter of free will.

I do not think the examples he gives for environment fatally discounts the possibility that there might be a very small number of people who find no flexibility in their homosexual desires. However, there is no proof that requires a belief in genetic determinism of sexuality either.

In general, I agree when he says: The truth is that nurture appears to be more important than nature when it comes to the formation of sexual orientation. Most studies indicate that genetic factors, while not unimportant, are of secondary significance compared to social influences, such as the relationship between a child and its parents, formative childhood experiences, cultural mores and peer pressure.

This could have come right out of I Do Exist.

Tatchell places the solidification of sexual orientation at 5 or 6, which might be an influence of psychoanalytic thinking. I would place it later and at varying ages for different people. Further, I think for some, I would say varying degrees of change could occur spontaneously much later in life. In fact, Tatchell describes situations like that.

This article is consistent with my impression that European gays have not banked their political aspirations on the born gay argument as in America.