Posted on 07/10/2006 11:22:43 AM PDT by DBeers
TORONTO, Ontario, July 10, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A recent study suggesting that homosexual orientation results from biological factors in the prenatal environment is based on severely flawed research and biased assumptions, a leading Canadian psychiatrist has charged.
Researchers at Brock University in St. Catharines, Ontario, conducted the study entitled “Biological versus nonbiological older brothers and men’s sexual orientation.” The study suggested that male same-sex attraction results from an immune reaction on the part of the mother to the presence of the male child in her womb, a reaction the study’s authors suggest stems from the gestation of previous male children. In other words, the study suggests, having biological older brothers leads to the development of homosexuality.
That suggestion is “absolute utter rubbish,” said psychiatrist Joseph Berger of the University of Toronto.
“It [the study] should never have been published. I suspect it was not peer-reviewed properly or was reviewed by someone so biased and ignorant that they were unable to see the huge flaws and [are] essentially ignorant of the literature,” he wrote in a review published by the National Association of Research and Therapy for Homosexuality (NARTH).
The study’s assumption of a biological basis for homosexuality is a “major glaring flaw,” said Berger, since existing research has not produced conclusive findings indicating grounds for such an assumption.
Secondly, he pointed out, the study relies on the “absolutely fatal flaw” of assuming that siblings in the same family are exposed to identical environments in growing up.
“Absolute utter rubbish. Even identical children are treated differently from birth. [In families,] this one is said to be more assertive, or calmer, or louder, or more anxious, etc, etc. When we come to children born at different times there are an ENORMOUS number of possible factors that might make for significant differences in upbringing that might effect how a child develops a sense of his identity and sexuality” [author’s emphasis].
The study also neglects to address other highly plausible explanations for the link between homosexual orientation and the presence of older biological brothers, Berger said, such as family tendencies to “baby” youngest children, delaying their maturity into an “adult masculine identity.”
“There are many alternative explanations to the findings. It is totally inappropriate for anyone to claim certainty in a study like this because such a claim is obviously political, not scientific in nature.”
“I could go on and on, but psycho-dynamically-oriented clinicians have learnt these things from long experience, while activist-propagandists produce ignorant papers with quite bizarre speculations based upon nothing more substantial than fantasy—such as this absurd notion of some maternal ‘immune response.”
Mr. Berger, Ph.D, is a Distinguished Fellow with the American Psychiatric Association and a member of the Scientific Advisory Committee for NARTH, as well as the author of The Independent Medical Examination in Psychiatry.
“Biological versus nonbiological older brothers and men’s sexual orientation”:
http://www.pnas.org/cgi/reprint/0511152103v1.pdf
NARTH coverage:
http://www.narth.com/docs/bogaert.html
See previous LifeSiteNews coverage:
If Gay Brother Research is Correct It Shows Homosexuality is Abnormal
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/jun/06063003.html
"We should concede there may be -- may be, not is - a biological basis for homosexuality, and then we should add, "So what?" There may be a genetic basis for alcoholism, but no (sane) person is arguing that alcoholics should be allowed to show up at work drunk."
And then bare the double-edged sword to this whole silly leftist 'science' project, one that makes the liberals cringe,
"And if they do discover a 'gay gene,' wouldn't that be awful for the gay community? Just imagine all those breeders aborting kids with the gene to ensure grandkids..."
Then they have to decide whether they'd then choose between abortion rights or gay rights. Their heads will explode.
You are right! How many "gay", "fat" babies are going to make it out of the womb?
Absolute rubbish. Yes indeed.
This article and links on the thread explain in detail the causes of homosexuality. And the fact that if a homosexual wants out of the "gay" life, he or she has a good chance of doing so.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1420619/posts
Right on the nail!!
Note my comment above, click the link, read up and then you'll have a good foundation about the causes of homosexuality.
It will be interesting to see the division on the right on this issue, as well.
Here's something I found out in the process of looking for this article that really, really pisses me off. Doctors setting themselves up as the decisionmakers--because of political pressure--have NOT told some people whose children are at high risk about a test that would let them know if their kid will be born deaf or with a specific form or mental retardation. This seems to me something parents will want to know, and the test is something these folks deserve to know about. Yet deaf-nuts and Downs-nuts have pressured doctors away from even MENTIONING the tests, nominally out of their perception that 'it's okay to be deaf' and 'it's okay to have Down's,' but in reality, out of fear parents will selectively abort the deaf or retarded kids who are these nut groups' future. You can bet gays would try the same kind of thing if the gene is discovered.
yup. His second wife also gave him two daughters. wa-hahahahahaha
I feel sorry for his daughters if he is that shallow. Being the eldest of seven sons I always wanted a girl but my beloved presented me with a couple of lovable lunks of boys. Oh, well.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.