"Lady Gaga has said it. The Pope has said it. But are people really born gay? Lisa Diamond, a professor of psychology and gender studies, deconstructs the ""born this way"" argument and shows why it doesn't advance LGBT equality.
About the speaker:
Lisa Diamond is an author and professor of psychology and gender studies at the University of Utah. Lisa Diamond is Professor of Psychology and Gender Studies at the University of Utah. She studies the expression of sexual attractions and sexual identity over the lifetime, and the influences of early life experiences on later sexual development. Dr. Diamond is known for her research on sexual fluidity, which describes the capacity for individuals to experience shifts in their pattern of same-sex and other-sex attractions over time. Dr. Diamond is co-editor of the APA Handbook of Sexuality and Psychology and is a fellow of two divisions of the APA. Dr. Diamond has published over 100 articles and book chapters, and has been invited to present her research all over the world. She has received awards from the Developmental Psychology and LGBT Psychology Divisions of the APA, the American Association of University Women, the International Association for Relationship Research, the Society for the Scientific Study of Sexuality, and the Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues. This talk was given at a TEDx event using the TED conference format but independently organized by a local community.
Showing posts with label Sexual fluidity. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sexual fluidity. Show all posts
Monday, April 15, 2019
Wednesday, February 20, 2019
Why the “born this way” argument doesn't advance LGBT equality | Dr. Lisa Diamond | TEDxSaltLakeCity
"Lady Gaga has said it. The Pope has said it. But are people really born gay? Lisa Diamond, a professor of psychology and gender studies, deconstructs the ""born this way"" argument and shows why it doesn't advance LGBT equality.
About the speaker:
Lisa Diamond is an author and professor of psychology and gender studies at the University of Utah. Lisa Diamond is Professor of Psychology and Gender Studies at the University of Utah. She studies the expression of sexual attractions and sexual identity over the lifetime, and the influences of early life experiences on later sexual development. Dr. Diamond is known for her research on sexual fluidity, which describes the capacity for individuals to experience shifts in their pattern of same-sex and other-sex attractions over time. Dr. Diamond is co-editor of the APA Handbook of Sexuality and Psychology and is a fellow of two divisions of the APA. Dr. Diamond has published over 100 articles and book chapters, and has been invited to present her research all over the world. She has received awards from the Developmental Psychology and LGBT Psychology Divisions of the APA, the American Association of University Women, the International Association for Relationship Research, the Society for the Scientific Study of Sexuality, and the Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues. This talk was given at a TEDx event using the TED conference format but independently organized by a local community.
Saturday, December 22, 2018
Gender Identity issues; their causes and treatments at present
It can be very controversial in this very Social Justice Warrior/PC age to even dare bring up the question of what causes one to dissociate mentally from their birth sex. Why do gender dysphoric people exist? What causes conditions of Gender Identity in-congruence to occur in a person? The answers to these sorts of questions the SJW types say we know it is like evolution they say. They say it is because you do somehow have the wrong body, but, that is not what the science says or shows.
The science is not settled on matters of Gender Identity related disorders and conditions of Gender Dysphoria. What is settled is that some people "feel" like they are the wrong sex. Why do they "feel" that is still up in the air and there might not even be just one cause of the outcome of this "feeling." There is a whole lot of different reasons why someone might not want to be their birth sex, and it is not so cut, and, dry what the best thing for each person with the condition is.
The causes for some has ranged from bullying all the way to generalized identity dissociation disorders. Some whom gained the condition have said their parents told them at a young age they wished their child was whatever the opposite of their sex was. There is a large overlapping of Atypical Neurological Disorders such as Autism and Identifying with the other sex as well. In addition, there is a very large sample of Sexual Abuse and Rape survivors among the very small population that has Dysphoric issues. This is a very scary thing when it comes to those whom are seriously concerned for peoples mental well-being and their safety from harm.
This article is not meant to denigrate in anyways those whom suffer from Gender Identity related conditions. It is not an anti-trans message, but, instead if anything a calling out that I wish we knew more how to help said population. Gender Identity conditions "formally Gender Identity Disorder" now known as Gender Dysphoria is a very serious and harrowing condition to live with. However, the truth is that we do not know all the causes or all the reasons people develop this condition. We just know some people do.
I wish I lived in a world where no one suffered a condition of not being congruent with their biological sex. However, that is not going to happen anytime soon if it happens at all. So, in the meantime we have other stop gap measures. We do in fact have forms of therapy and counseling specifically geared towards figuring out if one will need hormones or sex change to better their conditions. Most people with Dysphoric feelings do not have them through their entire lifetime and in fact most people do end up being better without even needing hormones or sex changes. Thankfully, it is only the most extreme cases that usually need these things and do not subside.
This was pointed out in The New Atlantis report and was called anti-trans for sating this. However, all it did was state the actual stats given by people like the American Psychiatric Association. According to the DSM-5, as many as 98% of gender confused boys and 88% of gender confused girls eventually accept their biological sex after naturally passing through puberty. Whatever the cause it is not a permanent part of most peoples identities and it recitatives as the term goes in therapy.
Other words much like how most people with same sex attraction change over time (also right from the APA) so too do most people that could have been Transsexual and transitioned if they did not become congruent. Once again I wish I could say we have a 2+2=4 when it comes to dealing with the condition we do not. There are some people for whom with our current level of medical advancement do end up needing transition surgery, changing pronouns and taking hormones. These are those lifetime transgender people. The T in the LGBT, but, the un-PC truth is that there is very little of them in any population even population of people whom have conditions related to their Gender Identity. Most people whom had gender dysphoria related issues as children grow up to be fine.
Lifetime Gender Dysphoria is incredibly rare and I feel very bad for people whom need to go under the knife and fill their bodies full of hormones just to feel comfortable in their life. If it is the only thing that will work than it is, but, I just wish we had other ways to make these people feel comfortable in our society without needing to have surgery or to take hormones. I am your "ally," but, I still wish we could find a less intrusive way to help these people. As having said condition must be a nightmare of the worst order.
Blair White, herself a Trans-Woman once got in hot water when she said she wished she could end the existence of Gender Dysphoria in peoples lives. This was mistaken to mean she meant she wished Trans people were dead or something such nonsense. She said what I am saying that she wished there was a non-surgery, non-hormonal, non-intrusive and less dangerous way to help people with Gender Identity issues heal so as to feel complete. The idea that people thought she was literally saying she should die or something is ludicrous in the extreme.
Saying you wished for a seriously debilitating mental/medical condition to cease to exist is not saying people with it should die. We all want Cancer to stop existing or at least be minimized. So, what is wrong with saying you wish less people would be inflicted with a medical condition that causes them to literally want to kill themselves at a higher rate than almost any group you can calculate in the population. Ask anyone suffering Gender issues if they wished there was a way to snap their fingers and accept their Birth sex and most of them would say, "sign me up and save my life." I wish I could snap my fingers and all the Gender Dysphoria suffering people would be healed and love their bodies.. not hate them to the point of self-mutilation and suicide.
They do not need to stop having atypical interests or switch how they express. However, they would lose the condition that made them need to change their bodies to be happy having those interests and those expressions. They would lose the misery of the Dysphoria and just be their unique individual selves without needing to go under the knife, take hormones or anything. That would be my dream for all people with Gender issues and in this way I do wish that the condition did not exist. Not the people that have it. No more than my desire that we conquered the causes of depression means I wished for the depressed to be genocide out of existence. I mean the condition and not the people.
It is because so many amazing and beautiful individuals in this world suffer with this nightmare condition that I would like it gone. I do not hate trans people I want them to no longer suffer. They can be as Queer in their bodies they were born in as they want and be not wanting to remove them. That would be my dream that all Dysphoric people just became the Queer people essentially and it was no longer a nightmare without end for those with serious long term Dysphoric issues. This is my dream a dream of happy, healthy people without a condition. That is not anti-trans that is anti-hell on Earth. Why would I not want a condition with such horrible amounts of self-harm and suicidaility not to be minimized or eliminated? I also hope some day we have come closer to a cure for Autism spectrum disorder as well. Does that make me anti-Autistic people? Not at all.
What I want is for all the people currently suffering any Gender related issues to be healthy, happy and feel whole without making life altering pretty much irreversible surgery be the only hope for them. People with Gender Identity related conditions deserve better from medicine than knives and in-taking foreign hormones whose effects we are still testing out in people. We need to find a better way to make these people able to live flourishing lives without the dangers of sex-reassignment surgeries and hormones. Not because I hate them, but, because I have a good will towards any of them that are sane, rational and good people.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/part-three-gender-identity-sexuality-and-gender
https://www.news-medical.net/health/Causes-of-Gender-Dysphoria.aspx
https://www.scribd.com/document/2811816/Gender-Identity-Disorder-Research-Paper
https://www.symptomfind.com/diseases-conditions/gender-identity-disorder/
https://www.parentsofrogdkids.com/other-causes-for-gender-dysphoria/
https://dsm.psychiatryonline.org/doi/10.1176/appi.books.9780890425596.dsm14
Wednesday, December 12, 2018
The LGBT community needs to stop using "Born This Way" arguments for their rights. Bodily Autonomy is the answer.
One can no longer say people are "born predetermined to be Kinsey 7 Gay." I am not anti-gay and I fully support equality of rights and under the law for all peaceful people in a free society. Religious fundamentalist brainwashing is not the only means nor source of sexual reorientation. In truth sexuality reorients itself and changes naturally overtime for many people whom has acquired same sex erotic desires in the past. In Longitudinal studies of the same populations of people whom have at some point acquired same sex erotic feelings ended up by the Wave 4 as being mostly or completely heterosexual and straight having more or less lost or dropped said same desires naturally without any therapeutic assistance. Sexual flexibility and fluidity is the norm.
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.
Thursday, November 29, 2018
The Flourishing Man Episode 2 | Same-sex Masculinity
In this second Episode the primer on definitions continues as I dispel the notions of same-sex experiences being incompatible with retaining manhood. I will be also citing the same article What is Masculinity from A Voice For Men.
Which can be found at;
Monday, November 26, 2018
Lisa Diamond and The New Atlantis Report both come to the same conclusions and fairness for non-LBGT people whom has same sex experiences.
I am going to link in this post to Lisa Diamonds work from her latest report she did in the Journal of Sex Research. She is an American Psychological Association affiliated psychologist and also an open lesbian. She comes to the same conclusions that The New Atlantis does that the science does not at all prove the born biologically determined to be Gay hypothesis. That as the APA themselves have stated publicly; there is lots of interacting factors coming together that leads to ones current sexual identity.
She is a fierce defender of everyone's equal rights under the law. She is both a defender of LGBT rights and is the L herself. However, she refuses to lie about what the research actually says. Nor is she comfortable with saying sexuality never changes for people over time. She also states that immutability is not needed to have equal rights. Which I totally agree with. The etymology of ones current sexual identity/orientation does not matter in the defense of equal rights for all peaceful individuals under the law.
However, she comes to the same conclusion on sexual orientation as Lawrence S. Mayer did in The New Atlantis report. In fact, the American Psychological Association has for ages officially said there is no valid scientific experiments which have shown any specific etymology for a non-heterosexual orientation. The APA's Handbook for dealing with LGBT clients it specifically states the following;
There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles; most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation.
In other words; the American Psychological Association and non-Religious and Not Ex-Gay affiliated therapists has not yet ever found any actual science that proves you are at birth genetically or otherwise biologically determined to be gay, lesbian or bisexual. The idea that the opposite is true and that science has found the definitive gay brain or the definitive gay gene is not at all scientific. It is a narrative that is played in the media by people that think immutability is needed to grant LGBT people their rights. As well as by scientists that make unscientific pronouncements of their actual experiments. The lack of scientific evidence for the determined to be LGBT at birth does not in anyway affect the defense of LGBT rights or ones rights under the law.
I sit here before you someone whom just like Lawrence S. Mayer and Lisa Diamond supports LGBT rights under the law. I am against people being mistreated due to their orientation or identity as such , but, I agree with the lack of evidence for the deterministic hypothesis. The idea that orientation is not determined and even can and does change in people is not at odds with being a proponent of the rights of LGBT people. The Ex-Gay movement hijacked the idea that gays were not determined and it is a package deal to think that anyone that shows actual evidence against the genetic determinism view is also anti-gay. People actually taking on a Gay Identity vs simply same-sex sexual behavior is a very recent phenomenon in our species. Anyone that has looked at cultures in history can see this.
Admitting this is not the same as saying the behavior should be enforced to be stopped externally somehow. I also do not think someone whom has had either a curiosity about or even engaged in some same-sex behavior should feel pressured by external society to identify as LGB either. Individuals should be the ones in control of their sexual orientation identity in society regardless of where they fall among the sexual continuum. This is why I think reports should not be silenced that happen to come to counter-narrative conclusions based on the actual evidence. This is because it does an injustice to all the people that do not fall into the LGBT boxes, but, have had said experiences.
The truth is that behavior and identity are not at all necessarily the same thing. The New Atlantis report and Lisa Diamonds papers both acknowledge the differences between these two concepts. I fully support people owning their sexuality in either direction or no direction at all. I do not think any particular individual LGBT person or Ally is in the right to disavow someones identity if it is not LGBT just because of certain behavior in their past. It is the need to push people into a box you are comfortable with which makes for the erasure of the mostly heterosexuals, bisexual males, and even 100% heterosexuals whom have had same sex experiences in the past. Sexual Tribalism at its worst.
This includes people that change overtime. Someone identifying as gay or bi at one point in their lives and then being heterosexual later. Or the other way as well as is also sometimes the case. It is sexual tribalism to try to say to said person they are bad or wrong, or even lying to themselves for naturally changing overtime. Sexual orientations and identity is not up for democratic debate by some ruling LGBT Counsel that gets to denote whom other people are. Sexuality is a complex thing and it is not the cut and dry thing most LGBT people would like science to say it to be. Reports that acknowledge changes over time and that other categories exist give fairness back to people whom do not fit into some LGBT and their Allies boxes.
I have the same view as the following columnist at Scientific America whom is far from Anti-Gay;
At the same time someone that is curious and wants to "change" to living as a gay person or bisexual person coming from the heterosexual realm should be free to "try on the life" if they wish and if they can do so in a mentally safe manor. In the above I added the brackets with the other two categories. However, she mentions in her article herself the difference between same-sex behavior and identity. I once again support LGBT rights. However, individuals sex lives is theirs to decide not other people. Denying natural change over time and pushing immutability as the proper defense for LGBT people is unjust to all people that do not fit any of those categories, but, deserve the same sexual respect as anyone else.Just as gay people (or people with homosexual/bisexual experiences) who are happy as they are should not be forced to change their sexual orientation, gay people
(or people with homosexual/bisexual experiences) who want to be straight should have the right to change if they can – and the correct word is “change” – not “cure”.
Here is her research https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/72dc/40ce66723ab7a74ccf1dc29336d33d6e0755.pdf
Sexuality and Gender by Lawrence S. Mayer (The New Atlantis Report in Audio Book form)
From the Frequently Asked Questions of the New Atlantis Report;
1. Does the report argue that being gay or transgender is a choice?No. The report explicitly states that “sexual orientation is not a choice,” but demonstrates that, according to currently available scientific research, “biological factors cannot provide a complete explanation” for sexual orientation and argues that “environmental and experiential factors may also play an important role.” The report does not argue that gender identity is chosen, but notes that “almost nothing is well understood when we seek biological explanations for what causes some individuals to state that their gender does not match their biological sex.”No. The report shows that the “born that way” hypothesis is not supported by scientific evidence. Observing that something has not been proved true is not the same as demonstrating that it is false. What is false is the claim that the “born that way” hypothesis is supported by science.No. The report argues that “sexual orientation may be quite fluid over the life course for some people” and observes that “only a minority of children who experience cross-gender identification will continue to do so into adolescence or adulthood.” The report does not advocate trying to change — or confirm — a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity through therapy. The report’s authors are especially wary of medical interventions directed at children.The report argues strongly for better addressing the mental health problems (anxiety, depression, suicide) and behavioral and social problems (substance abuse, intimate partner violence) that non-heterosexual and transgender populations experience at much higher rates than the general population.
Wednesday, November 14, 2018
Digit Ratio/Gender Non-conformity and sexuality -- A Meta-Analyses of the actual research
There is a word that is often thrown about in our society called "Gaydar." and it is prevalent throughout various areas of science too. It is not just a term bandied about by people that come off as stupid, but, people that seem quite logical as well. They point to studies which claim that all the stereotypes about straight people and gay people are correct. That straight equals being a gender conforming god and gays being gender queer and atypical aberrations from the norm in ways other than their sexual desires.
However, is it really true that Gaydar exists and is it also true that straight people never are gender-non conforming? Oh and does a difference in your ring finger really tell you anything about your orientation? Most people will point to studies mainly by the people associated with Michael J. Bailey and his studies. However, how correct are these studies? Are they consensus building? Are they even scientific or are they quackery? Looking at the Meta-Analyses of the data shows serious holes in the idea that Gaydar is a consistently true phenomenon.
Moreover it shows some serious flaws in the idea of what is manly for men as well. Especially when it comes to activities like dancing. If you look at the studies gay men played game show and performance more than straight boys did as children.. However, there is a serious flaw in all these studies. No straight people are even given a chance to take part in the research. Of course you will have a majority of gay boys and lesbian girls being sissies and tomboys. There is no control sample of straight people or even just mostly straight people in these studies to see how many of them have videos of non-conforming home movies.
If you saw my Moms old photos of me back at her place one of them is me in a very flamboyant coat that has a color in it a mix between purple and pink. Yet, I am straight I am not gay. I both danced when I was younger, was in a play "Twelve Dancing Princesses," and played with guns too. I was the 1 of only 3 boys in a play and was also playing Chris Bond with my toy gun at the same time. As long as there is no control group in any of these studies I call unscientific BS on them all. I call them quackery and Michael J. Bailey is himself in denial about the existence of sexual fluidity. He did not even acknowledge male bisexuality exists and still denies it is prevalent to this day in the male sex.
If Michael J. Bailey is not a good source and even denies evidence he does not like where can we look outside his inner circle for information on the markers of being gay? Is there any studies on Gaydar related traits that is not by Bailey and what do they show? Well, they show that most people in our species that are men do have a conformism and so do women. However, it also shows much more importantly the demographics of actual non-conforming people no matter how small the number. The top tier of people whom had gender non-conforming childhoods are in fact heterosexual as adults.
Not mostly heterosexual, but, self-identified complete Kinsey 0 heterosexuals are the most to have had moments of various levels of non-conformism in life. This was according to a wonderful study done outside of Bailey's narrative back in 2012. However, there are other ideas out there trying to tell people certain factors tell you what orientation you are. That being your ring to index finger ratio with the length of your ring finger being longer meaning you are more likely straight than not as a man. While supposedly gay men have digits similar to women not straight men. Yet, in meta-analyses shows there is not enough evidence to show any sort of connection.
I think the meta-analyses of non-conformity makes perfect sense. As meta-analyses of orientation identification overtime shows heterosexuality as being the most stable and the most likely to be where people with any sort of same sex play to end up. The two most taken up identities are either mostly straight or completely straight for most men and women by the time they are in their 30's and going into their 40's. This is shown in the studies that took a scientific and objective eye on human sexual orientation. Every single Longitude based tracing of populations done since around 2002ish shows a bisexual or a just curious at one time direction. Lisa Diamond; a very out and proud Lesbian Psychologist for the APA cites this among other things in her research which shows a lack of any real evidence for the biological determinism or existentialist etiology for bisexual or homosexual attractions.
So, it would make sense that most men and women irregardless of behavior or interests to be not gay and to be at least some variant of heterosexual. Only 2-3% of any human population is steadily gay or homosexual over their entire life without change to at least at bisexual identity. People with non-conformism with actual Gender Dysphoria (Transsexualism) is less than even 1% of the population. Most people whom have at some point gone through non-conformism or continue to be non-conforming are Gender Concordant and heterosexual. There is no reason to assume someone is gay just because they act a certain way, talk a certain way or have certain interests.
Gaydar is a false pattern which does not help when dealing with people as individuals and not collectives. You should never collectivize all people with certain traits together into one mind. Individualism is the answer and to think first about if someone is a good person and treat them by their character. Do not prejudge about people before getting to know them. Gaydar is collectivism and it should be shoved off as the Pseudio-science it is for it is quackery at its finest.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://dc.law.utah.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1023&context=scholarship
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID2969161_code835085.pdf?abstractid=2965179&mirid=1
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID2969161_code835085.pdf?abstractid=2965179&mirid=1
Saturday, October 6, 2018
The New Atlantis report on Sexuality and Gender an Objective review.
On Thursday evening I ran across an audio book form of the New Atlantis Report on Sexuality and Gender. I decided to give it a unbiased and objective review of what I thought and if it is as horrible as some have said it is. First of all I want to quote from the preface of the report about whom the lead author is for this report. This will help to clarify and set at rest the idea it was written by an ex-gay movement bigot.
Readers wondering about this report’s synthesis of research from so many different fields may wish to know a little about its lead author. I am a full-time academic involved in all aspects of teaching, research, and professional service. I am a biostatistician and epidemiologist who focuses on the design, analysis, and interpretation of experimental and observational data in public health and medicine, particularly when the data are complex in terms of underlying scientific issues. I am a research physician, having trained in medicine and psychiatry in the U.K. and received the British equivalent (M.B.) to the American M.D. I have never practiced medicine (including psychiatry) in the United States or abroad. I have testified in dozens of federal and state legal proceedings and regulatory hearings, in most cases reviewing scientific literature to clarify the issues under examination. I strongly support equality and oppose discrimination for the LGBT community, and I have testified on their behalf as a statistical expert.
An undertaking as ambitious as this report would not be possible without the counsel and advice of many gifted scholars and editors. I am grateful for the generous help of Laura E. Harrington, M.D., M.S., a psychiatrist with extensive training in internal medicine and neuroimmunology, whose clinical practice focuses on women in life transition, including affirmative treatment and therapy for the LGBT community. She contributed to the entire report, particularly lending her expertise to the sections on endocrinology and brain research. I am indebted also to Bentley J. Hanish, B.S., a young geneticist who expects to graduate medical school in 2021 with an M.D./Ph.D. in psychiatric epidemiology. He contributed to the entire report, particularly to those sections that concern genetics.
I
dedicate my work on this report, first, to the LGBT community, which bears a disproportionate rate of mental health problems compared to the population as a whole. We must find ways to relieve their suffering.
The lead author of the report is one Lawrence S. Mayer, M.B., M.S., Ph.D.; who's credentials and acceptance/support of the LGBT community is written about in the preface quoted above. Since he was being misunderstood he took the time to write a FAQ about his report which says the following.
Does the report argue that being gay or transgender is a choice?No. The report explicitly states that “sexual orientation is not a choice,” but demonstrates that, according to currently available scientific research, “biological factors cannot provide a complete explanation” for sexual orientation and argues that “environmental and experiential factors may also play an important role.”
Does the report argue that sexual orientation or gender identity can be changed through therapy?No. The report argues that “sexual orientation may be quite fluid over the life course for some people” and observes that “only a minority of children who experience cross-gender identification will continue to do so into adolescence or adulthood.” The report does not advocate trying to change — or confirm — a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity through therapy. The report’s authors are especially wary of medical interventions directed at children.The report argues strongly for better addressing the mental health problems (anxiety, depression, suicide) and behavioral and social problems (substance abuse, intimate partner violence) that non-heterosexual and transgender populations experience at much higher rates than the general population.
So much for the report being some sort of clandestine undercover ex-gay pushing investigation. Not once throughout the 5 hours it took to listen to the report in full did it support therapy to convert people. Not once in the 5 hours did it support any sort of hypothesis of the ex-gay community. In fact, it said they were incorrect for considering orientation to be a chosen lifestyle choice or somehow being volitional. Not a single study that was vetted for the report was connected to the ex-gay movement in anyway. All 500 plus citations are from mainstream scientific studies and not from any form of therapy group that supported therapeutic conversion.
While the report does actually acknowledge that evidence is on the side of orientation being mutable and changing within people it never says it can be done through therapy and willpower, It instead represents the studies it cites correctly by considering it a natural change overtime in the populations studied. The statement it makes in the summary that 80% of the population in the studies they cited were heterosexual by a certain Wave/Age of study is correct. That is what the cited studies they have in the linked citations in the report says it found. It is simply reporting honestly what these Longitudinal Studies showed.
In fact, out and proud Lesbian Psychologist with the American Psychological Association Lisa Diamond has this same information in her contributions to the APA's LGBTQ Handbook for working with the LGBTQ population. Similarly, also Out and Proud Gay Psychologist also contributing to the research on LGBTQ peoples and the handbook Ritch Savin-Williams said as much as well. There was no disputing that there was more movement in the studies of the population towards an opposite sex attraction being present. I think if people knew that their sources were studies cited by LBGTQ people themselves the accusations that this was an Ex-Gay based report would have never taken off.
In fact, the idea that orientation is a combination of factors is in fact the official statement of the American Psychological Association.
There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay, or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles; most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation.
In other words exactly what The New Atlantis stated in their summary of their findings when they said that it appeared to be a mixture of different factors which affected ones orientation and identity of themselves sexually. However, when The New Atlantis said the research we have supports this view and not the easily digestible have a gay gene be gay narrative people went nuts. Unfortunately, due to the role of the ex-gay movement with trying to squash gay rights by dismissing gay gene hypothesis anyone whom ever says there is more to it than your genes will be mistaken for being on their side.
It is also in the APA Handbook on LGBTQ issues that cross-gender identifying children will indeed the majority of the time not be trans and be identifying with their biological sex by the time they have been through puberty. In order to be considered Trans or gender dysphoric you need to be having it long term and not just as a little child, but, an ongoing issue with your gender of your body./ The New Atlantis is not differing from mainstream psychology or science in this regard either. They correctly articulate the studies they have present in their list of hundreds of citations they used.
A little boy playing with Barbies or even wearing a dress is not determined or destined to be a trans person. Or to have gender dysphoria or to take hormones nor to transition with surgery. Many little kids can play fantasy without really being the sex they are playing as based on their dress or other traits. After all we do not say that all butch, tomboyesque little girls are boys in girls bodies. Cross-sex fantasies and play does not equal being gender dysphoric and needing to be transitioned to the opposite sex. Kids are kids and let kids be kids. They should not be pushed or indoctrinated into thinking that just because they might have differences from others of their sex that means they are trapped in the wrong body.
On the issue of Gender Identity I fully concur with The New Atlantis lead author that we should not be placing labels on kids and assuming they are trans based on their traits alone. The idea that children as young as 2 years old whom cannot even fully reason what the truth of the world is yet are being seriously considered to be not their right sex by their parents is insane. It is not OK to take a young person whom is not yet capable of fully reasoning and confusing them by talking about gender dysphoria or transgender to them. That should be left until they have developed the mental capacity to be able to reason for themselves about such matters. They are more than likely to be just engaging in harmless childhood flights of fancy and not showing signs of gender identity in-congruence. In some instances they might turn out to be LGBQ, but, more than likely not T.
Gender Dysphoria or the state of being Transgender is not something that is likely to be the case for most children that people have. It is a very, very small minority of the overall population. One should not be jumping on the idea that ones kid is this way just based on their habits, or toy preferences, or other interests or the like. Nor should our kids be put into a list for hormones to stop them from going through puberty simply based on these things either. The introduction of hormone blockers in ever growing younger children is an issue for me as well. The vast majority of cross-identifying children if allowed to go through puberty will be identifying with their biological sex once puberty has been allowed to occur. Most of them will not be someone that should ever have been on the blockers in the first place.
If you are an older person and you are not a child. If you want to go on hormones and it has been deemed safe it is your body. However, children are a special case and they are not consenting of age adults. They can be pressured or hell even completely brainwashed by batshit crazy militant parents whom want to push the Trans label onto their non-conforming kids. Young people are susceptible to suggestion and parents whom are pushing their own agenda could easily manipulate a gender atypical child into thinking they are in the wrong body and then say, "see he or she is saying they are not what they were assigned at birth." This is why I recommend that kids be at an age where they have better cognitive capacity before they learn about sexuality and gender identity. It is too easy for them too be confused or downright manipulated by parents that are teaching to push an identity not teach acceptance.
In the end I found upon looking at their citations that The New Atlantis report is far from ex-gay propaganda. Indeed it does an excellent job of giving a summary of the current state of sexuality and gender identity based sciences. I, in fact will link the report at the bottom of this review, so, you can look at it or listen to it for yourselves. However do not just be second handed and believe me nor the report dogmatically like sheep as opposed to humans. Go to all of their citations and read them as well. Then see if it matches the reality of the science articles cited in their 500+ citations. Use your own mind and your own reason. Be objective!
https://www.thenewatlantis.com/docLib/20160819_TNA50SexualityandGender.pdf
Wednesday, July 4, 2018
Glee is not all that Glorious upon a re-view of the Series.
Recently I have been thinking about the TV Series Glee and how it presents life. When I was younger I used too enjoy the series; well at least the first two seasons. Yet, there is something off in its over all worldview. Something no longer quite sits right about the show. Let us start by the portrayal of Atheism as shown through Kurt being staunchly against Religious based worship on School Grounds. He is portrayed as being a bad guy and lumped in with Jane Lynch's character over their shared dedication to the separation of Church from Public School life. The series makes it seem like this purely reasonable approach which is a Constitutional requirement of any school receiving Tax money is a bad thing.
Let us continue with the series portrayal of Kurt during the later part of Season One. In one episode in which Kurt plays it Straight he is shown as all of a sudden switching music styles of John Mellancamp. He is shown as starting to dress in plaid and a mix of obnoxious stereotypes about gays vs straights. The truth is that he could have liked these things and not changed his orientation one bit. Yet, these are the markers prior to making out with a cheerleader of his being straight. It clearly shows that the creators have a very narrow view of what being straight means. This might come from the fact that it is so well tied to groups like G.L.A.D. (GL Anti-Defamation League.) A group which has bought whole sale into the fucked up Gender version of the Origin of homosexual desires in a person. Thus, accepts the stereotypes as legit.
Further more anyone that does not like the idea of jumping up and down singing out of nowhere is seemed to be shown a bully. There is a serious malevolent and zero sum game world view on display in this show. Different clubs are constantly pitted against each other making so much of the show about collective conflicts between people. There is no sitting down to the meeting of the minds through reason. On the contrary breaking with reality and living in a delusion they take to singing/dancing in public as some sort of fix for real life issues. They essentially evade reason and embrace feel good emotions at any cost. Not a single once does the realistic choice between self-esteem or self-destruction show up. At least not at the level of essentials. Their idea of self-esteem is the entitled snowflake variety of safe spaces and bubble wrapped worlds.
Saturday, June 16, 2018
Brokeback Mountain was/is an immoral mess not a LGBT Landmark
Back in 2006 the movie Brokeback Mountain was released to critical acclaim and the word on the street was it was an LGBT landmark; a gay cowboy movie. However, I would argue it is not a landmark of any kind. In fact, the main characters of this movie are immoral and vile men whom should not be admired in the least. The truth is that we have no evidence that both of the main men are even Gay let alone that it is a wonderful story one should embrace.
Take for example the infamous tent scene with the two men having sex. Nowhere in this scene does it seem that we are seeing two gay or even bisexual men. It seems in all aspects of the situation like situational homosexual behavior and not homosexual or bisexual men. When Jack has to leave our other lead does cry at first true, but, he soon gets married and he seems very content. His face is filled with smiles and Jack does not even seem to come to his mind at all to be honest. It seems that he has moved on.
It is not until Jack Twist starts to communicate with Heath Ledger's character that he seems to even begin thinking about him at all. Although, this does not make the proceeding story anymore moral. As the rest of the movie consists of nothing, but, evasion of reality after evasion of reality. Not too mention that it is all one big game of dishonesty and infidelity. Just because you have same sex attraction does not mean you get to run out all the time to fuck while your wife is at home being left in charge of your kids. To say that the behavior between the leads in this movie is some sort of big LGBT thing is madness.
It promotes the worst stereotypes of men that like other men and it makes them seem like they cannot be trusted. It makes men that like men out to be promiscuity laden unprotected (Yes, they do not use condoms) male-sluts. Whom cannot control their own manhood and take off at any chance to get away from the world and bed each other. If you are in a relationship with a woman and like the same sex you let them know this and then you make sure they are OK with it. Now, in this case that might have been dangerous, and, not telling for self preservation would be in order. Yet, that does not mean that you do not get a divorce. Which they did eventually anyways.
The fact that Jack was possibly in love with Heath Ledger's character is not an excuse. He is interfering in a contract between Heath's character and his wife. This is wrong on two fronts; one legally he is interfering in a contract he was not asked to be a part of. On front two he is thinking he is entitled to a man vowed to be a woman's simply because he has feelings for him. Neither of these scenarios are OK in anyway. It is an immoral mess of a story and frankly I no longer even see what the appeal is of this monstrosity of a story.
Friday, June 15, 2018
On Sexual Reorientation in a Secular Society and the True Scientific and Psychological Origins of homosexuality/bisexuality Erotic Codes.
I fully support the right of any gay man or woman to freely choose to obtain sexual reorientation therapy. Any grown up man or woman of appropriate age and within the context of reality, reason, self and consent should have the ability to change to being straight if that person is able to and wishes to do so.
Religious fundamentalism is not the only means nor source of sexual reorientation. In truth sexuality reorients itself and changes naturally overtime for many people whom has acquired same sex erotic desires in the past. In Longitudinal studies of the same populations of people whom have at some point acquired same sex erotic feelings ended up by the Wave 4 as being mostly or completely heterosexual and straight having more or less lost or dropped said same desires naturally without any therapeutic assistance from a properly standardized secular psychologist or psychotherapist.
One can no longer say people are "born predetermined to be Kinsey 7 Gay." Same sex erotic codes are acquired after birth and they often subside in a lot of people for a replacement by a heterosexual based orientation. I am not anti-gay and I fully support equality of rights and under the law for all peaceful people in a free society. However, the science of orientation is that it is an evolutionary adaptation and not some immutable and hardwired, unchanging life time attribute of most peoples identity and it is not a forever primary erotic code.
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. Which is essentially a heterosexual with a cherry on top not a homosexual orientation. With most of them ending up in straight long term relationships. In all long term studies of the LGBT demographics over time the most coherent thing is the most stable identity is a heterosexual one. Not stable as in mentally ill or disorder, but, stable as in same over time without changing. Meanwhile in the same demographics gayness or exclusive homosexuality was the least stable and the most likely to go away was a persons obtained same sex eroticism not their opposite sex attraction.
I know from actual research that has been done following people over time that people with same sex erotic codes can and do go straight without even a single visit to a sexual reorientation therapist. If the people involved are non-pressured and not coerced grown ups then I see no problem with such therapy being available to give gays even more assistance with wanting to change their orientation. I am talking about consenting, fully informed and self-determined grown up homosexuals and bisexuals wanting to cultivate their straight ability. Not wanting "cured" but, simply wanting change.
I echo the sentiments of LGBT rights supporting Marcia Malory on October 19, 2012 whom wrote in Scientific American (hardly an anti-gay periodical and also fairly strongly vetted);
Just as gay people who are happy as they are should not be forced to change their sexual orientation, gay people who want to be straight should have the right to change if they can – and the correct word is “change” – not “cure”.
I can hear people screaming in the isles of my blog about how horrible I am for saying gays should be able to change and reorient their sexuality to being some form of heterosexual if they so feel it is in their best personal long term happiness in life. However, you are not that person it is not your brain, it is not your mind it is the individual gays mind, brain and very soul to be poetic. Whom are you to dictate what they can and cannot do with it? No one is the answer! The minds owner, the brains between the eyes of the owner of the self that wants to live a straight life and not you.
However, I hear you also shout such efforts do not work and I used too think so too. Before I found some research that showed this is not the case some forms of efforts do in effect work and are in fact humane, and not dangerous. There are forms of sexual reorientation that are not harmful and have actual results behind them. I will link to them at the end of this discussion as well as to all the evidence that sexual orientation is not what people seem to think it is.
If you think I am full of shit about homosexual/bisexual desires disconnecting from ones erotic code for a predominantly or fully heterosexual orientation even without external therapy I give you the following quote from a meta-analysis of all of the Longitudinal Studies of people with same sex erotic codes. It is not being reported by another straight person such as myself. 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.
However, she is not alone in finding the evidence for innate lifelong gayness in most people with some bisexual or homosexual behavior to be scientifically lacking. Take for instance LGBT Advocate John D'Emilio whom says;
The idea that people are born gay—or lesbian or bisexual—is appealing for lots of reasons. Many of us experience the direction of our sexual desires as something that we have no control over. We just are that way, it seems, so therefore we must be born gay. The people who are most overt in their hatred of queer folks, the religious conservatives, insist that being gay is something we choose, and we know we can’t agree with them. Hence, again, born gay. Liberal heterosexual allies love the idea. If gays are born that way, then of course they shouldn’t be punished for it. …What’s most amazing to me about the “born gay” phenomenon is that the scientific evidence for it is thin as a reed, yet it doesn’t matter. It’s an idea with such social utility that one doesn’t need much evidence in order to make it attractive and credible.
Furthermore we now have a Longitudinal study of men over a year out from having secular and non religious based sexual reorientation therapy which shows at least a good portion of the clients achieved some level of heterosexual shift successfully with 0 evidence of harm done. As presented in the Peer Reviewed online Journal "The Journal of Human Sciences."
We are presented with a group of self-determined and self-directional men whom together with their own efforts and assistance from a licensed, proper therapist become some level of straight from an exclusively gay starting point. Yes, I said exclusively with them rating themselves The Klein Grid equivalent of a Kinsey 7 homosexual at starting point with going towards anything ranging from some to complete heterosexuality at the end point and the year followed after the therapy.
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 is 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. Also, she is not the only one that says this. The only official American Psychological Hypothesis is not even that you are born a Kinsey 7 gay identifying person. Instead you are born with certain temperaments.
According to the APA when these temperaments are combined with specific environmental and nurture related forces you at puberty develop an erotic code based on the exotic nature around your own sex due to your temperament differences from other people of your sex making your own sex the exotic turned erotic ones. Essentially it is an overwhelming and devouring Fetish for your own sex that subsumes you. Notice I said Fetish not Mental Illness or disorder. It is in essence a Fetishistic Psychological Adaptation. In other words it is an evolutionary adaptation that can be, could be, but, is not predestined in your future based on your temperament differences and how you learn to identify and fit in with the sexual world and your sex/gender at a young age.
This hypothesis is the only one that makes sense with all the other data we have. Including the fact that in 2012/2013 the only Non-Biased and Non-Michael Bailey associated Gender non-conformity study showed 85-90% of them were heterosexual. What does this mean? Simple, that only when mixed with certain other conditions does one develop the Evolutionary Adaptation of a bisexual or homosexual erotic code while having unique temperaments. Specifically, if you are unique and atypical, but, do not see your own sex as the exotic one than you are less likely to develop an erotic code around Puberty which is aimed at your own sex and more likely to develop heterosexually at that time. Regardless of if your favorite color is Pink or your favorite band is The Spice Girls or whatever.
It also explains why sexual reorientation towards heterosexuality can and often does happen naturally over time and without therapy. It is after all a Fetish that is overwhelming and not an innate and immutable, unchanging thing. So, all you do is reorient yourself, so, the Fetish is simply an amplification of the natural norm for the mammalian species AKA the opposite sex. AKA you restore in a sense the Erotic code you would have gotten if you did not obtain the other one by thinking of yourself as the Exotic sex as a child. This could be done without even trying at all just like the original exotic becomes erotic code was formed without being done consciously.
The young time frame of when the code begins to take shape and the memories of being different explains why gays, bisexuals and lesbians assume they were "born this way." They are remembering their different even if as simple as being sensitive as over rough and tumble play. They are not recalling something called being born "gay," but, being born unique and feeling not like the other the true Origin of the Exotic Becomes Erotic Fetishism towards their same sex/gender. They are in effect recalling being born in the state of the actual causes and not the end point of those causes direction.
So, where does this leave the LGBT? Well, in just as good of a position as ever. I am not arguing here that people whom have cultivated towards the same sex over time and actually stuck there are sinners. Or that they are bad or that they are diseased or anything of the nature. Or that they even all can change even if their DNA did not code them to be Gay or Lesbian as such. I am arguing though that most can change and that it is not immutable, or innate, or hardwired for you to be "exclusively gay." Most people whom have such Erotic Codes are not even Gay when you remove the Mostly Heterosexuals. They are still a variant of bisexual and thus they still retain their opposite sex Erotic code as well.
I am not saying that you need to be or should be coerced, pressured or cajoled to be heterosexual. I will argue that most people by their very nature as a member of the human species have some amount of heterosexual possibility in them. However, if anyone dares to preach that people with your Erotic Code with your Fetish for the same are bad people or evil because you have obtained an Erotic code that is atypical I pray for them to become more Christ like. Bigotry and hatred is not defended by the ability for people to have straight potentiality in them. I love my gay and lesbian friends just as much as if they were "born that way." However, if they switched teams I would not freak out either and act like they lost their value. Good people are good people regardless of which consenting adults they mate with. Whether it is the human sexual norm of our species or not does not matter.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.tsroadmap.com/info/APA-address.pdf
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22730310-100-sexuality-is-fluid-its-time-to-get-past-born-this-way/
https://dc.law.utah.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1023&context=scholarship
https://badgerherald.com/news/2017/02/10/professor-strikes-down-born-this-way-argument-for-homosexuality/
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.
“Although change in adolescence and emerging adulthood is understandable, change in adulthood contradicts the prevailing view of consistency in sexual orientation” (Rosario & Schrimshaw, 2014, APA Handbook, v. 1, p. 562).
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, emphasis added). “[O]ver time, more bisexual and mostly heterosexual identified young adults of both sexes moved toward heterosexuality than toward homosexuality” (p 106, emphasis added). 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) (emphasis added). 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 LGBTaudience 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. (See Rosik, 2016 for a penetrating critique of her position as expressed in Diamond & Rosky, 2016.) Nevertheless, she says in her book (2008, p. 252) that some same-sex attracted individuals may have more capacity than others to channel the direction of their sexual fluidity in response to their context, and they may for that reason modify it in psychotherapy.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/41433375_How_do_I_love_thee_Implication
http://www.glbtqarchive.com/ssh/situational_homosexuality_S.pdf
https://www.j-humansciences.com/ojs/index.php/IJHS/article/download/4282/2137
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/is-homosexuality-a-choice/
https://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/part-one-sexual-orientation-sexuality-and-gender
Ten percent of kids defy gender norms before age 11, a new study published in the journal Pediatrics found. Boys considered "girlie," because of their activity choices and interests, and girls deemed "boyish" are more likely to face abuse -- both physical and sexual -- and experience post-traumatic stress disorder by early adulthood. According to USA Today, parents or other adults in the home were mostly responsible for the abuse.
Andrea Roberts, lead author of the study and research associate in the department of society, human development and health at the Harvard School of Public Health, told USA Today that children under 11 are very likely to display behavior that has nothing to do with their future sexual orientation -- of 9,000 young adults studied, 85% of the 10% considered gender-non-conforming children identified as heterosexual.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)