![]() Logically, if SSA-or for that matter, pedophilia-were determined by genetic or physiological variables, that would not make these orientations more normal or natural. ![]() 5 By contrast, research and publications at variance with the normality view are virtually tabooed at universities and research institutes and unwelcome with most professional journals and publishing houses. The general trend is to interpret and present the findings one-sidedly as supportive of the wished-for biological causation psychologists and social psychologists try to demonstrate the normalcy of homosexual relations and gay parenting. The intensified search for physical correlates of SSA during the last decades must be seen in this light. Much public and private research money is spent on studies that are thought to be potentially useful to the international undertaking to socially normalize same-sex behavior and relations. There are laudable exceptions, but the situation today has not improved. Over fifteen years ago, a lesbian activist cautioned: “We should be aware of the potentially pernicious intermingling of gay activism with science, which produces more propaganda than truth.” 4 In other words, people are misled. Not a few of the prominent researchers are themselves gay activists, several of them openly professing their wish to prove the normalcy of the condition. Disconcertingly, most institutional science and most academic publications on SSA follow this ideology. And this biological argument creates a climate which favors the fallacies of the gay ideology with their detrimental effects on many individuals with homosexual propensities and on public morality. Before perusing this evidence, we must critically inspect the arguments and observations adduced for a presumed biological causation for as long as this deep-seated belief (that in its present form dates from the nineteenth century 2) prevails, the whole issue of homosexuality remains clouded in ignorance and darkness. In reality, primary, efficient causes of same-sex attraction (SSA), inclusive of homosexual pedophilia, have not been found and are very unlikely ever to be found in the field of “biology.” Overwhelming evidence points to “psychology,” namely, to the person's psychological life history, his childhood and adolescent experiences, and his family and peer relationships. By and large, however, we are confronted with a modern mythology masquerading as science. For there is a strong belief that if some people are just “that way” by their biological makeup, it would be unjust to deny them “equal rights,” and inhumane to expect them to suppress their nature or try to change. They serve as the pseudo-scientific rationale for the successful “discrimination” argument. These views have penetrated everywhere, including the Christian and academic world. The two currently prevailing opinions on the causes and dynamics of homosexuality 1 are first, that they are “genetic,” and second, that they are “still unknown, but probably inborn.” Both views have been advocated for some decades now by the proponents of the gay ideology, supported by a stream of like-minded ideas and interpretations in professional periodicals. De-egocentrization and personality maturity, including the development of mature manhood/womanhood, are the goals of therapy. Therapeutically, a holistic approach, simultaneously addressing the emotional, moral, and spiritual components of the psyche, offers the best opportunity for overcoming homosexuality. This syndrome affects not only the emotional but also the moral and spiritual dimensions of the psyche and if indulged leads to generalized personality deterioration. Characteristics of this neurotic character syndrome include personality immaturity, self-victimization, and self-centeredness. Structured around this pivotal evidence from statistical as well as clinical research, homosexuality is explained here as a character neurosis. The third well-established correlation is with inherent, rather than discrimination-produced, “neuroticism” or emotional instability/immaturity. Another factor closely associated with homosexuality is an imbalance in parent-child interaction, notably forms of over-influence of the opposite-sex parent in combination with a deficient relationship with the same-sex parent. In contrast, many studies have shown that the most significant factor which correlates with homosexuality is “gender nonconformity” or same-sex peer isolation. The efforts of the last few decades to find evidence to support a biological theory have made it more doubtful than ever that such evidence will be found. The best-established facts in relation to homosexuality point to developmental-psychological, not genetic or physiological, causation.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |