This the the prevailing psychological understanding of gender development.
"Psychologists note that although biological factors contribute to sex differences in behaviors, environmental factors account for most of the sex differences that are reported, as children learn from and imitate the behaviors of their siblings, peers, and others they interact with. Parents however, play a vital role in this respect, and they not only influence the child's adoption to sex-typed behaviors, but other aspects of personality as well."
Children
Development and Social Issues
Edward F. Zigler
posted on October 23, 2001 08:33:28 PM new Why the heck isn't the testimony of the vast majority of gay people who have been asked considered? To whit, "Yes, I was always gay, never had a heterosexual day in my life".
Interesting question, to which I offer the following responses:
1. I've obviously been speaking to the wrong gay people [and can I assume that lesbians and bisexuals don't count as far as your concerned? Or do you feel that the vast majority of lesbians and bisexuals also feel that their sexual preference is an inborn trait? If so, I've definitely been talking to the wrong lesbians and bisexuals.]
2. Do you have some sort of survey data to support what the "vast majority of gay people who have been asked" think about the subject? Or do you really mean the vast majority of gay people you have asked? And if so, how many would that be?
3. Even if there is some sort of survey out there, do you think it's significant that it only applies to gay people "who have been asked"? Do they represent the views of all gay people, or even the vast majority of them? In other words, is it a statistically valid sample?
4. I read an interesting article a couple of years ago in which some members of the gay community were strongly opposed to the idea that homosexuality was something they were born with. They felt this belief to be very dangerous, since it might lead people to think that homosexuality was akin to a birth defect and should therefore be "cured". According to these gay people, homosexuality is primarily a matter of choice, and the whole issue is whether gay people should have the freedom to choose their lifestyle as long as they are not hurting anybody. Of course, I'm sure that these gay people were in the "vast minority" of gay people asked, so their opinion doesn't matter.
Just some thoughts to ponder. I'm off to count sheep....
Barry
---
The opinions expressed above are for comparison purposes only. Your mileage may vary....
[ edited by godzillatemple on Oct 23, 2001 08:35 PM ]
posted on October 23, 2001 08:39:33 PM new
Wow, a Barry roasting.
Well, yeah, it's anecdotal. Since we have different perceptions; the James and Barry Perspectives, perhaps others can weigh in so we'll have an informal idea of what has been the case in our collective experiences.
So if you can answer this (question for all), has it been your experience that homosexual people you know have always been or chose to become gay?
---------------------------
As an aside, Barry, do you think heterosexuality is the result of a decision? I made no decision. Did you?
posted on October 23, 2001 08:43:24 PM new
Personally, if I had a son in the Boy Scouts, the scoutmasters I would be worried about wouldn't be the gay ones. The vast majority of male child molesters are NOT gay--they are as heterosexual as any Christian fundamentalist could desire.
posted on October 23, 2001 08:50:42 PM new
kraftdinner
I want to answer this statement you to clarify something
"I was asking you why homosexuality was "looked down upon" (so to speak) by Christians when God says that we are not to judge but we're suppose to leave that to Him plus the other things I've stated. Some people seem to be so wrapped up in their firm stance on gays, and like what's been said here, base their beliefs on what the Bible says "
It is not me that condems the practice of homosexulity but its the Bible that does it for me.I only go by what it says in this matter.
I guess it boils down to the fact whether you believe the Bible to be the word of God or not.If you do then you realise it is God and not me that condems the act of homosexuality.Hopefully that clears up part of what you asked.
posted on October 23, 2001 08:59:38 PM new
imabrit, thank-you your views. This is the hurdle I'm unable to get over.....that people form their opinions (selectively, I might add) based on a book, instead of having their own opinion and having the book either jive or not jive with that belief. What am I not seeing????
posted on October 23, 2001 09:06:20 PM new
I do wish that Christians could make up their minds. On the one hand they tell us that they follow the teachings of Jesus (love, sweetness, forebearance, forgiving) and that the OT is superceded by the NT, meant for Jews & not Christians, etc. etc. etc. On the other hand they say that they must do exactly what the Bible says & quote OT scripture as proof in arguments. And if the entire Bible was "inspired by God" how can half of it be superceded?
posted on October 23, 2001 09:19:52 PM new
It sounds to me like God is being used as a scapegoat for the hate and intolerance that you feel instead of "love and tolerance" that you should be feeling.
posted on October 23, 2001 09:24:40 PM new
Im still confused about something. It concerns transexuals. If a man turns into a woman with surgery, and then dates and is attracted to men, why does that not make them homosexual???
If I had a son in the Boy Scouts and found out the BS leader is gay, there are two things I would have to consider. One, is he a good BS leader? Two, is he a "flamer"? If he is the second, then yes, I would pull my son out. Why? Because children dont need to be subject to what happens in the bedroom, thats why. Regardless of whether its man/woman, man/man or woman/woman. How do I come to that belief? Because I do, no other reason.
posted on October 23, 2001 09:29:39 PM newIt sounds to me like God is being used as a scapegoat for the hate and intolerance that you feel instead of "love and tolerance" that you should be feeling.
Again, I ask WHY it is considered hate and intolerance because someone doesnt want to accept homosexuality? Who says they HATE anyone just because they dont agree with it? If someone doesnt particularly like Roses, but loves Tulips, does the tulip lover accuse the shopper of being hateful to Roses? Some like cats. Some like dogs. So dog lovers automatically are cat haters and torture them, or do they just not choose one as a pet because the PREFER a dog? Its a matter of choice. Where does the hate come in? Yes, some DO hate. But the majority are lumped into one, and that is not fair for those who are dont.
edited for some spelling. Just got off work and Im tired.
[ edited by Hepburn on Oct 23, 2001 09:30 PM ]
posted on October 23, 2001 09:30:25 PM new
bunnicula.
Both the OT and the NT codemn the practice of homosexuality.There is no contradiction between one part and another.
Its just that most people are not that familiar with all parts of the Bible.
I have been studying the Bible since I was a young child and have been doing so daily for over 30 years.So I am very familiar with it.
kraftdinner
I agree that some not all do selectively believe what they want within the Bible.They decide what they want to follow as long as it does not contradict with their life style.
You either take it as a whole and not just as a part.Not all the Bible is literal there is much symbolism within it.
Not all can be applied to us today but those areas that do not apply to us have much we can learn by way of principals etc.
posted on October 23, 2001 09:32:17 PM new
A transsexual is someone who was "born in the wrong body". If M2F transsexual undergoes the surgery, they become in fact female. Homosexuals are attracted to the same sex, but have no feelings that they are "in the wrong bodies" & are happy with the gender they were born with.
As for the Boy Scout scenario, a "flaming" gay would no more subject boys to "what is in the bedroom" than a macho he-man super stud...probably less in all actuality.
I do not,knorr have I ever hated anyone.I do not hate homosexuals.But I do not agree with their life style if they choose to practice it.As it goes against my Bible trained conscience based on reading and applying what is both contained within the OT and NT.
posted on October 23, 2001 09:36:06 PM new
Bunnicula, it still doesnt compute. Sorry if Im slow, but Im trying to understand. If a male is born female, with all the parts (or lack thereof), and has implants to be female, and is attracted to males, that still is homosexual because they were BORN a certain gender and changed it via surgery. They are still a man, whether they have fake boobs and other "parts" cut off or made "open". How can one say this is not homosexual? I dont get it.
posted on October 23, 2001 09:36:38 PM new
Well, here's my two cents.
I disagree with homosexuality for two reasons.
1) My faith. For example, God created Adam and Eve. He didn't make Adam and Bill, and he didn't made Martha and Eve. He made one man and one woman. That (to me) says that his intention for us is to live in a one-man-one-woman relationship.
2) As far as nature/science goes, biologically, it doesn't work! Two females can't produce offspring; nor can two males. A couple of the same sex just don't have the equipment required to produce children. Sure, people don't have sex JUST to make a baby each time, but I believe that reproduction is the reason sex was created in the first place.
Okay. Even though I disagree with homosexuality itself, I will also say that what someone does in private isn't any of my business. I don't have a problem being friends with a gay person, because even though I might not agree with their lifestyle, that doesn't change who they are as a person. My next door neighbor is a lesbian, and we get along just fine.
In other words, for me, homosexuality is not a lifestyle I would choose for myself, but it's not up to me to decide whether it's "right" or "wrong" for someone else. Live and let live.
On a side note, it does bother me, however, to see a gay couple purposely flaunting it, JUST AS MUCH as it bothers me to see a man and woman hanging all over each other in public. There is a time and place for that, and the check-out at Walmart isn't it.
posted on October 23, 2001 09:38:04 PM new
Also, I still would not want my son with a BS leader who flaunted what he did in the bedroom anymore than I would want him around a BS leader who flaunted what he did with the ladies in the bedroom. Same principle.
If Mr Studly bragged about the women he bedded, it would be no different. my son would be jerked out of there. Period.
posted on October 23, 2001 09:41:27 PM newOn a side note, it does bother me, however, to see a gay couple purposely flaunting it, JUST AS MUCH as it bothers me to see a man and woman hanging all over each other in public.
BINGO!!! What I dont understand, and what pisses me off royally is Gay Parades. What would happen if we had STRAIGHT parades? People would scream DISCRIMINATION. Also, of heteros did some of the stuff gays do in public, they would be arrested for indecent exposure. But not if gays do it. Its their RIGHT. They have been suppressed TOO LONG. Well guess what? Im sick of it. Reverse discrimination, is what I call it.
Then on top of that, if someone says "no, I dont accept it. No, I dont agree with it. No, I dont want to understand it because to me, its wrong" that someone gets screamed at, called names, told they are blind or intolerant or bigoted or racial, or whatever else comes to mind.
And in answer to any questions or accusation that may come my way since I said the word BIGOT again, YES, Im still pissed off at being called one. You betcha I am.
[ edited by Hepburn on Oct 23, 2001 09:43 PM ]
posted on October 23, 2001 09:47:24 PM new
The Kinsey Reports and secondarily the Family Research Institute studies are still probably the most extensive collection of empirical data concerning human sexual behavior ever made and some excerpts that seem relevant are below. I've taken them from a report of controversy resulting from the claims made by a Dr. Imsay, a homosexual psychiatist.
Note that nowhere in any of it is there mention of any 'change' to be enforced through electro-aversion therapy or other torture and unless I glossed it, no mention of any of our several gods is made.
"That sexual desire and behavior are flexible was demonstrated by the Kinsey Institute in 1970. It reported(9) that 81% of 684 gays and 93% of 293 lesbians had changed or shifted either their sexual feelings or behaviors after age 12.58% of the gays and 77% of the lesbians reported a second shift in sexual orientation; 31% of the gays and 49% of the lesbians reported a third shift; and 13% of the gays and 30% of the lesbians reported even a fourth shift in sexual orientation before "settling" into adult homosexuality. The shifts reported by these subjects varied in degree, but some were quite dramatic - about a quarter of gays and a third of lesbians once had heterosexual desires and 5% of heterosexual men and 3% of heterosexual women once had substantial homosexual desires. Heterosexuals in the study were much less likely to report shifts in their orientation. Even so, 29% of 337 heterosexual men and 14% of 140 heterosexual women reported at least one shift; while 4% of the men and 1% of the women reported at least three shifts. Immutable things like eye color or skin color don't change once, much less three or four times!
Unlike biological changes, the shifts in sexual orientation began at age 18 or later for half of both gays and lesbians. Sexual changes, five or more years after puberty, are exceptionally late and without biological precedent in development. But changes in tastes (e.g., food or entertainment) often take place around age 18.
Other Evidence
The same Kinsey study also produced other evidence that can not be explained in terms of biological determinism, but would readily support the idea that choice is involved in sexual orientation and behavior:
74% of their gays admitted to having been sexually aroused by a female and 80% of lesbians said that they had been sexually aroused by a male;19% of their gays and 38% of lesbians had been heterosexually married; 20% of gays, 5% of heterosexual men, 7% of lesbians and no heterosexual women had had sex with animals.
Consistent with these results, the Family Research Institute (FRI) 10 conducted a nationwide random survey of 4,340 adults drawn from 5 U.S. cities in 1983 and found:
82% of those currently lesbian and 66% of those currently gay said that they had been in love with someone of the opposite sex; 88% of lesbians and 73% of gays had been sexually aroused by someone of the opposite sex; 67% of lesbians and 54% of gays reported current sexual attraction to the opposite sex; 85% of lesbians and 54% of gays, as adults, had sexual relations with someone of the opposite sex; 32% of gays and 47% of lesbians had been heterosexually married; and 17% of gays, 3% of heterosexual men, 10% of lesbians and 1% of heterosexual women reported sex with animals.
These are the kinds of sexual choices one would expect from the sexually adventurous or confused. Unless Dr. Isay and his supporters are willing to believe that people are "born" to fall in love, get married or to have sex with animals, some measure of choice, rather than biological inevitability, must have been involved.
The ability to change explains the FRI findings that:
Overall, 7.8% of women and 12% of men claimed to have been homosexually aroused at some point in their life. Yet 59% of the once homosexually aroused women and 51% of the once homosexually aroused men were currently heterosexual; 5.1% of the women and 9.4% of the men admitted to at least one homosexual partner. Of these, only 58% of the women and 61% of the men were currently gay;4.1% of women and 5.8% of men reported that they had, at least once, been "in homosexual love." Yet only 66% of those who had fallen in love with a member of the same sex were currently gay; and almost a third of those who admitted to homosexual relations in adulthood were now heterosexual.
People Can Change
Where is the "biological inevitability" or "immutability" in these findings? The evidence suggests that people can modify their sexual tastes. The FRI survey in Dallas,(11) similar to the Kinsey survey in San Francisco, found that 1% of heterosexual females and 3% of heterosexual males at one time considered themselves homosexual (i.e., were ex-gay when interviewed).
And a survey of 50 wives who had no homosexual experiences or interests up to age 30, but who participated in homosexual sex acts as part of "swinging" (where married people swap partners) reported that all of these women eventually considered themselves to be bisexual.(12)
These are among the findings that seriously challenge the claim that sexual orientation is predetermined before or after birth, or even that it is permanently fixed in
adulthood.
What is at Stake?
If sexual orientation is actually a matter of choice like drug use, we can expect that more of our youth will try homosexuality the more that it is tolerated and encouraged. Along these lines, Dr. Christopher Hewitt's(13) analysis of the frequency of homosexuality in various societies is summarized in the Table: societies that accept homosexuality have more of it and those that disapprove of and punish it have considerably less of it." (good one, eh?)
Much more can be found easily enough which works both sides of the street.
posted on October 23, 2001 09:50:54 PM new
It still looks to me like being honest with the world was the gay's damnation. Shouldn't it have been the other way around? Shouldn't their honesty have been/be rewarded instead of being condemned?
posted on October 23, 2001 09:52:36 PM newIf sexual orientation is actually a matter of choice like drug use, we can expect that more of our youth will try homosexuality the more that it is tolerated and encouraged.
posted on October 23, 2001 09:52:40 PM new"On a side note, it does bother me, however, to see a gay couple purposely flaunting it, JUST AS MUCH as it bothers me to see a man and woman hanging all over each other in public. There is a time and place for that
Funny, that's how I feel about Christian persuaders.
posted on October 23, 2001 09:54:50 PM new
I missed a lot of the previous discussions regarding topics like this, but I don't think anyone can (or should) be labeled a "bigot" just because they personally aren't comfortable with another person's lifestyle/race/whatever.
IMO, feeling a certain way doesn't make one prejudiced. ACTING on that feeling does.
As mentioned above, I don't feel that a homosexual lifestyle is one that's appropriate for me. That's not prejudice -- that's a personal decision, and just my opinion.
Now, if I ACTED on that opinion and chose to treat gay people with less respect than straight people, THEN I would be a "bigot".
posted on October 23, 2001 09:54:54 PM new
I'd like an answer to my question if someone is so inclined. What if we had Straight Parades. Would that be ok? And I mean advertised as STRAIGHT PARADE. Or, STRAIGHT PRIDE WEEK. Is that permissible? If not, why not?
This topic is 11 pages long: 1new2new3new4new5new6new7new8new9new10new11new
