In three short articles I propose to give a survey of the most important issues touching the subject of homosexuality (or “same sex attraction”—SSA). The survey highlights what I consider to be the best insights into the origins (etiology) and treatment of homosexuality and is based on over forty-five years of research and therapeutic experience.
My readers, especially those who are themselves wrestling with same-sex attractions, will want to know at the outset how I understand the problem of homosexuality, what I understand to be its causes, and what I think can be done about it. I ask for a little patience. The next two articles will provide the answers. But they will make more sense if we first consider what homosexuality is not.
There are all sorts of specious notions on the subject. The reader will be less inclined to lend them credence if he understands where these ideas come from and why so many social and professional “experts” continue to repeat them. We need to flatly refute these ideas, which are constantly being spread by the print and electronic media and have become deeply rooted in people’s minds. Besides presenting a distorted image of the reality of homosexuality, they undermine the motivation of people burdened with SSA to resist their desires and undertake efforts in the direction of change.
It is no easy matter to educate a misled public: to convince it that, on the subject of homosexuality, the western world, which thinks of itself as rational and enlightened, is actually in the grip of rank ignorance and myths. Most of what is asserted on same-sex attractions by the media and many social and political authorities cannot be believed. It is based on half-truths and wholesale lies. The grim and bizarre reality is that most organizations of the western world, political, social, and academic, have succumbed to over half a century of persistent and aggressive pressure and capitulated to the harmful “gay” ideology. Today this ideology is being foisted upon the world by the reigning political and social elites of the USA and EU and reinforced by a tireless media propaganda campaign and coercive sex education program in our public schools. It is, to put it bluntly, a modern instance of mental tyranny—brainwashing. The public is being fed the lie that the homosexual “orientation” is as normal and healthy as heterosexuality and that a homosexual union is equivalent to an authentic marriage between a man and woman. In their heart of hearts, the vast majority of people does not accept this ideology and will always remain opposed to it. What is abnormal can never feel normal. But owing to the ongoing public indoctrination campaign (replete with its arsenal of slogans such as “You’re born this way” and “Homosexuals are discriminated against”), many people have become confused and no longer trust their common and moral sense; as a result, they find themselves gradually buckling under the social pressure; the more so, as the rapid de-Christianization of the western world has greatly enhanced our susceptibility to ideologies and superstitions.
First, then, we need to trust in our common and moral sense. We cannot allow ourselves to be swayed by propaganda or intimidated by social pressure. It is sad and hard enough when a person feels attracted to those of his or her own sex. But the person is scarcely helped by the kind of compassion that refuses to see the obvious; namely, that this “orientation” is unnatural and that homosexual behavior degrades the dignity of the human person.
The human anatomy and physiology is undeniably ordered to propagation. When this function is blocked owing to the absence (or near absence) of an emotional attraction toward the opposite sex, there can be no doubt something is wrong. Even if it were true that some people are born with homosexual tendencies (because of certain genetic, hormonal, or brain factors), it would not make these tendencies any more natural. A genetically determined disorder is no less a disorder. The fact remains, however, that there is no scientific evidence supporting the notion that homosexuality is caused by hormonal or genetic factors or by any peculiarity of the brain. To the surprise of many who had hoped to find hard evidence of a “biological cause,” the research of the last twenty-five years has failed to adduce any such physical evidence. (The interested reader may consult a solid, easily readable survey of this research prepared by New Zealand scientists Neil and Briar Whitehead: “My Genes Made Me Do It!” (whiteh@paradise.net.nz). In other words, there are no grounds to suppose that people with homosexual inclinations are physiologically, anatomically, or neurologically abnormal or special. And fortunately so! For then there is hope. How depressing it would be to have to believe that our behavior is determined by our biological make-up, and that no escape is possible!
Despite the regular appearance of this or that report in a scientific journal alleging that such-and-such a physical factor distinguishes homosexuals from others, it turns out, upon closer examination, that either the factor is not a cause of homosexuality at all or that it is simply a peculiarity of the group under study. Studies of other SSA groups fail to replicate the findings.
Most leading professional journals in North America and Europe have thrown in with the gay ideology and promote the social normalization of homosexuality by way of that peculiar blend of pseudo-science and ideology which has rightly come to be called “gay science.” At the drop of a hat, they tout “promising findings” that point to a biological cause. The mass media are quick to pick up on them, trumpeting them as if it were now virtually certain that homosexuality resides in the genes, the brain, or the hormones. When, in the course of time, these findings prove to be a dead end, they pass over them in journalistic silence. But by then they have a new biological “candidate” lined up. And so this continuous flow of suppositions gives the impression that science is in the process of accumulating a body of evidence supporting the notion of a genetic or otherwise biological causation.
Why do movements and organizations striving for social normalization (among them powerful international agencies advocating revolutionary sexual reform and an anti-family agenda) adopt this strategy? Quite simply, because it is so effective. It has been shown that people are much more inclined to believe in the naturalness of same-sex attractions and to tolerate the social recognition of homosexuality and all that it entails (gay “marriage,” child adoption by gay couples, etc.) when they believe the condition to be an innate one rather than one caused by defects in the person’s upbringing and personality development. The myth of “being born a homosexual” has then to be presented as a scientific fact. The myth is aided by its appeal to the emotions of those who are convinced that the effeminacy characterizing a portion of male homosexuals and the overtly masculine behaviors of some lesbians must have biological roots. Hence the attempts to revive, over and again, the old theory that male homosexuality has its origins in abnormal concentrations of female hormones during the child’s embryonic stage, resulting in its developing “feminized” brains; and that lesbians suffer high pre-natal concentrations of male hormones. Although patently false, the theory remains attractive because people find it harder to accept the notion that effeminacy in boys and men, and boyishness or masculine behavior in girls and women, can be learned; i.e. these traits can become habitual as a consequence of the child’s rearing and treatment by its parents, siblings, and peers and its own self-view as to its sexual identity.
The idea of SSA as a biologically determined and natural orientation gives strength to the second most effective weapon in the gay propaganda arsenal; namely, the question of social justice. To withhold from homosexuals (with their “different nature”) the “human rights” enjoyed by those of a heterosexual nature is an instance of unjust discrimination. Clearly, the injustice needs to be redressed. Those who would deprive people of this right are “homo-haters” or “homophobes”—people with a pathological aversion toward homosexuals. Thus, the propaganda at once imprints on the masses the image of the homosexual as a victim of injustice and morally intimidates those who are loath to comply with the gay ideology.
The injustice argument has been highly successful in winning over Christians as well, since it appeals to their sentiments of justice, charity, and compassion, not to mention their fear of being denounced as inhumane, bigoted, and lacking in mercy. Objectively, of course, it is the other way round. Promoting homosexuality as equivalent to heterosexuality and placing homosexual unions on an equal footing with authentic marriage, while redressing no real injustice, only creates new injustices. We are dealing here with a false compassion because it is based on a lie. Only a little reflection is needed to reveal that such an attitude is not compatible with real love for those burdened with SSA. More than this: it creates an unjust situation for the parents, family members, friends, and possible wives or husbands. It implies a grave injustice for the children who are adopted by gay couples. It represents a grave violation not only of the dignity of married people and the institution of marriage in general, which is placed on a par with deviant relationships, but also the dignity of young people who are indoctrinated with a distorted view of sexuality and human relationships. The normalization of homosexuality wreaks harm on society as a whole. The consequences may not be readily apparent to many, but sooner or later they cannot fail to make themselves felt.
Understandably, many people with SSA are comforted by the assurance that their emotions are normal and that they have a right to act on them. Yet there are many who are not so comforted. Though they know the homosexual lifestyle is far from satisfying, they see no other perspectives. They have no hope of addressing their condition. The propaganda of normality only reinforces their fatalistic outlook. They receive the kind of compassion that tells alcoholics there is nothing wrong with their cravings and that they have a right to indulge them. Some, who initially identify with the gay lifestyle, decide to seek change. The decision may follow a life-crisis or realization of the deception and futility of their same-sex relationships, or they may experience a religious conversion. What these people need is not sentimentality, but authentic compassion. They need the right insights into their psychological and moral behavior and then help and encouragement in fighting the good fight toward change.
There are many more “silent sufferers” from same-sex feelings and fantasies than is generally acknowledged. These people would never admit their feelings were natural and normal. On occasion they succumb to them and seek out a sexual encounter; but this out of human weakness, not because they have suppressed their common and moral sense. Many young people belong to this category. They are loath to label themselves “homosexuals” and often look in vain for real help and guidance. The militant gay organizations despise such people, treating them exactly as they complain of being treated themselves. They deny them their rights. The gay ideology dismisses out of hand any talk of providing constructive assistance to those who wish to change, much less for developing and recognizing reparative therapies for SSA sufferers. Worse still, the ideology would make such initiatives illegal. Gay advocates and their fellow travelers may like to spout words such as “diversity,” “tolerance,” and “human rights,” but they will not tolerate the diversity and rights of SSA sufferers who reject the gay lifestyle and seek change, for they stand as a threat to their monopoly position and—for some—a burden on their conscience.
On the other hand, these sufferers set a good example to others. If we are to show true compassion to adolescents and young adults who develop homosexual inclinations, we need to dissuade them from resorting to the all-too-easy and illusory solution of labeling oneself as “gay.” We need to provide them with the right guidance and sex education: an insight into the emotional and character weaknesses that drive their same-sex fantasies and longings—into the sexual inferiority complex that motivates such desires. We need to teach and motivate them to fight their weaknesses. (The next two articles will deal with these issues). Clearly, we need to caution them against the mendacity of gay propaganda, which pictures gay life as romantic and self-fulfilling. We need to open their eyes to the pernicious effects of such a life: to the frustrations, loneliness, depressions, and crises that will certainly be their lot: the enslavement to sex, the greatly enhanced chances of substance abuse and contracting sexually transmitted diseases (including AIDS). It is supremely uncompassionate not to confront them with the truth that however alluring the apple may appear it is deadly poisonous.
Only the most naïve and ignorant sex educator, teacher, doctor, or pastor will be so blinded by gay propaganda as to counsel a young person to “come out of the closet” and start seeking same-sex relationships. Wherever the gay ideology prevails, parents, family members, spouses, and friends of young people and adults involved in same-sex relationships receive the cold shoulder. Doctors and other professionals give them little or nothing in the way of understanding, sensible advice, and support. Instead they persuade them to accept their child’s (sibling, friend, husband, wife’s) “orientation” and be accepting of their same-sex lovers. The rights and feelings of the homosexual husband or wife trump those of the legitimate spouse. Concerned parents of young children who display behaviors and a disconcerting degree of interest typical of the opposite sex (e.g. “cross-dressing,” an obsessive desire to act as one of the opposite sex—these are already signs of a gender identity disorder) are told to go along with the child’s desires, for the child has a right to develop its own—allegedly natural—“gender identity.” In all likelihood that child will end up sexually disordered. Some mothers of male homosexuals or overtly effeminate boys take pride in their son’s “specialness” and play along with him. Some even relate to their son’s lovers as if they were their daughters-in-law. To those who know such a mother, it is all too plain that she is deceiving herself and engaging in a fiction. However, for the vast majority of parents with an openly gay child (or for the siblings and friends of this child, and, in the case of the child being married, for its spouse and children), the behavior of this gay child causes lasting sorrow and pain—often made all the worse because they witness their loved one’s gradual emotional, moral (or physical) degradation.
Especially tragic is the plight of children of parents living a gay lifestyle and—in countries where adoption has been legalized—of adoptive children of gay couples. These are a new class of abandoned children created by the gay-compassionate ideology. Their lot is reminiscent of that of orphans in former centuries; they long for normal parents and normal parental love, feel ashamed, inadequate, humiliated, and, above all, lonely. They find no understanding at home, from teachers, professionals, and their enlightened environment forces them to accept their situation as “normal.” In her outstanding autobiography (Out From Under: The Impact of Homosexual Parenting. Enumclaw WA: Annotation Press, 2007; ISBN 13: 978-1-59977-011- 6), Dawn Stefanowicz, daughter of an actively gay Canadian father, gives a powerful view of the suffering of such children and the difficulties they will have to face in order to find emotional balance and reconciliation with their parents and their past. Thus does the dominant gay ideology foist false views on an ignorant public.
At the same time, the truth about homosexuality and the life of practicing gays is systematically repressed and kept from public awareness. Well-founded information inextricably linking the gay lifestyle with compulsive promiscuity, depression, suicide, and neurotic emotionality is prevented from reaching the light of day. Ditto the extraordinary prevalence among practicing homosexual men and women of sexually transmitted diseases, alcoholism, drug abuse, the chronic infidelity and conflict-ridden nature and short duration of their relationships (this last being especially true of male relationships). Vigorously repressed are relevant questions on the psychology and treatment of homosexuality. Where these cannot be suppressed, they are ridiculed and summarily dismissed as unscientific, antiquated, and inhumane. Fortunately, modern insights into the psychology of homosexuality and its origins in childhood and adolescence are based on the most reliable scientific evidence available. Then there is the militant gay indignation over the very possibility of changing and overcoming SSA. The gay “nature” must be considered unchangeable. Reparative therapeutic programs should be banned and seen as a violation of human rights. Fortunately, this is a fallacy too. The next two articles will focus on these various issues.
Dr. Gerard J. M. van den Aardweg,
psychologist, The Netherlands