Even those that did maintain some same sex erotic codes still obtained an opposite sex erotic code and the largest of the LGBT lifelong demographics is bisexuality. With most of them ending up in straight/opposite sex long term relationships. The largest group of demographics in multiple Countries all with same sex accepting cultures is the mostly heterosexual population. The majority of people with same sex desires already have opposite sex desires; and they are stronger than their desires for the same sex.
I give you the following quote from a meta-analysis of all of the Longitudinal Studies of people with same sex erotic codes. Just to make sure you cannot say I am some nutty breeder this is written by an openly Lesbian Feminist Psychologist Dr. Lisa Diamond.
We review scientific research and legal authorities to argue that the immutability of sexual orientation should no longer be invoked as a foundation for the rights of individuals with same-sex attractions and relationships (i.e., sexual minorities). On the basis of scientific research as well as U.S. legal rulings regarding lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) rights, we make three claims: First, arguments based on the immutability of sexual orientation are unscientific, given what we now know from longitudinal, population-based studies of naturally occurring changes in the same-sex attractions of some individuals over time. Second, arguments based on the immutability of sexual orientation are unnecessary, in light of U.S. legal decisions in which courts have used grounds other than immutability to protect the rights of sexual minorities.
The best and most reliable data on “naturally occurring” change in sexual orientation come from studies that have longitudinally tracked large, population-based samples of heterosexual and sexual-minority individuals … Several such studies have now been completed, and they unequivocally demonstrate that same-sex and other-sex attractions do change over time in some individuals. The degree of change is difficult to reliably estimate, given differences in study measures, but the occurrence of change is indisputable.
Savin-Williams et al. (2012) analyzed data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (Add Health), which has been regularly tracking same-sex attractions and sexual identity in a random, representative sample of more than 12,000 adolescents since 1994. We focus here on changes in attractions reported between the third wave of data collection (when respondents were between 18 and 24 years old, with a mean age of 22) and the fourth wave of data collection (when respondents were between 24 and 34 years old, with a mean age of 29). …
At the third and fourth waves of data collection, respondents were asked to describe themselves as 100% heterosexual, Mostly heterosexual, Bisexual, Mostly homosexual, or 100% homosexual. Of the 5.7% of men and 13.7% of women who chose one of the nonheterosexual descriptors at Wave 3, 43% of the men and 50% of the women chose a different sexual orientation category six years later. Of those who changed, two-thirds changed to the category 100% heterosexual. … 8% of the exclusively homosexual men and 26% of the exclusively homosexual women who initially considered themselves exclusively gay changed categories six years later.
Following up with Lisa Diamond she has gone on record as saying the Born This Way Hypothesis is wrong and should be thrown out. That it is scientifically not accurate and furthermore that in her mind Attachment Theory plays a much larger role in the process of developing a homosexual or bisexual orientation.
In the APA Handbook, Dr. Diamond states, “Hence, directly contrary to the conventional wisdom that individuals with exclusive same-sex attractions represent the prototypical ‘type’ of sexual-minority individual, and that those with bisexual patterns of attraction are infrequent exceptions, the opposite is true. Individuals with nonexclusive patterns of attraction are indisputably the ‘norm,’ and those with exclusive same-sex attractions are the exception” (v. 1, p. 633). Most people who experience same-sex attraction also already experience opposite-sex attraction.
The APA Handbook reviews a highly regarded study by gay researcher Savin-Williams and colleagues (Savin-Williams, Joyner, & Rieger, 2012; Rosario & Schrimshaw, 2014, APA Handbook, v. 1, p. 562) that followed the sexual identity of young adult participants when most were ages 18 through 24 and again at ages 24 through 34, about 6 years later. Participants indicated whether their sexual identity was heterosexual, mostly heterosexual, bisexual, mostly homosexual, or homosexual. The bisexual group was larger than exclusively gay and lesbian groups combined. But the largest identity group, second only to heterosexual, was “mostly heterosexual” for each sex and across both age groups, and that group was “larger than all the other non-heterosexual identities combined” (Savin-Williams et al., 2012, abstract).
“The bisexual category was the most unstable” with three quarters changing that status in 6 years (abstract). “[O]ver time, more bisexual and mostly heterosexual identified young adults of both sexes moved toward heterosexuality than toward homosexuality” (p 106). Similar change is found in other population-based longitudinal studies, and rates of change do not appear to decline as participants get older (Diamond & Rosky, 2016, p. 7, Table 1).
For both sexes, a heterosexual sexual orientation identity was the most stable” (SavinWilliams 2012, p. 104), as Diamond reports is true in all of the large-scale prospective, longitudinal studies (2014, in APA Handbook, v. 1, p. 637). For women who shifted away from exclusive heterosexuality in the Savin-Williams 2012 study, the greatest increase was to mostly heterosexual (Rosario & Schrimshaw, 2014, APA Handbook, v. 1, p. 562).
In the APA Handbook, Diamond says, “In every large-scale representative study reviewed thus far, the single largest group of individuals with same-sex attractions report predominant—but not exclusive—other-sex attractions” (v. 1, p. 634). Kleinplatz and Diamond say (v.1, p. 256), “Historically such individuals [mostly heterosexual] have been treated with skepticism and suspicion by laypeople and scientists alike. They have been viewed as either closeted lesbian, gay, or bisexual individuals (who cling to a mostly heterosexual label to avoid the stigma associated with same-sex sexuality) or as confused or questioning “heteroflexibles.” Heteroflexibles refers to individuals who, given our culture, have had infrequent same-sex fantasies or experimented with same-sex behavior but are not really gay or bisexual (v.1, p. 256). Kleinplatz and Diamond urge that “it is critically important for clinicians not to assume that any experience of samesex desire or behavior is a sign of latent homosexuality and instead to allow individuals to determine for themselves the role of same-sex sexuality in their lives and identity” (p. 257) . Mostly heterosexual individuals do not identify as LGB, and LGB activists have not recognized or represented them well. Some have had therapists wrongly assume they are really homosexual and would be happier leaving their marriage and family for a gay life.
Readers can hear Dr. Diamond review research in her YouTube lecture for an LGBT audience at Cornell University (2014). She said that excellent and abundant research has now established that sexual orientation—including attraction, behavior, and identity self label—all three—is fluid for both adolescents and adults and for both genders, and exceptions for LGB individuals are a minority.
Further underscoring that sexual orientation is changeable, Diamond reports that some say choice was involved for them, and she says one may choose a context or circumstance that may influence sexual orientation change, such as choice of roommate (2008, pp. 249-250), deciding to live in an ideological, political, or social reference group —as in “political lesbians” (2014, in APA Handbook, v.1, p. 632)
Dr. Diamond has publicly gone on record that she opposes psychotherapy that is open to sexual attraction change. However, she is also on the record openly about LGB individuals not being born that way either. For her full research I recommended downloading the PDF. She also points out that we accept that change is possible and does happen; that fluidity is the norm. Due to those whom are Anti-Gay having access to all the same research as her and their ability to misuse it if the mainstream science does not accept it and explain it in an accepting context. The answer is bodily autonomy of consenting adults. It is a basic condition of the government doing its job to protect your individual rights to be able to be intimate with whatever properly functioning consenting adults that you want.
