Posted on 05/12/2009 6:32:53 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
The causes of homosexuality continue to both fascinate and divide people. Recently, in London, a conservative group of Anglicans, called the Anglican Mainstream hosted a conference to discuss the causes of homosexuality and promote change from gay to straight. Featured at the conference was American psychologist, Joseph Nicolosi. Dr. Nicolosi stirred much controversy when he said, without research support, that most of his clients show some degree of change in their sexual orientation.
Nicolosi's views regarding causes of homosexuality are also controversial. In response to a question about the existence of a gay gene, Nicolosi said:
In other words, that fact remains that if you traumatize a child in a particular way you will create a homosexual condition. If you do not traumatize a child, he will be heterosexual. If you do not traumatize a child in a particular way, he will be heterosexual. The nature of that trauma is an early attachment break during the bonding phase with the father.
In a popular book written with his wife, A Parent's Guide to Preventing Homosexuality, Nicolosi pegs the "crucial period" for bonding between father and son at "between one and a half to three years." Elsewhere, Nicolosi argues that fathers of homosexual sons are unavailable, detached and/or hostile. To fathers in London, he advised, "If you don't hug your sons, some other man will," suggesting that male homosexual attraction is a search for a father's love.
The father-deficit theory is considered outdated by mainstream sexuality researchers, but is popular among conservative Christians. This evangelical acceptance has always puzzled me because Nicolosi's statements regarding the origins of homosexuality can be discounted not only by research but by common experience. His theory is contradicted in at least two ways. The first way should be quite obvious to Nicolosi's audiences: there are many men who experienced poor fathering not only during the first six years of life but throughout childhood and are nonetheless, exclusively heterosexual.
Since many in Nicolosi's audiences are either unhappy with their homosexual attractions or do not know many secure gay people, the second problem might not be so clear. In contrast to Nicolosi's depictions of the typical family of gay males, many such men experienced loving, close relationships with their fathers throughout childhood with no break in attachment. Listen to one such father who spoke to me recently about his gay son.
When my son was 18 months to 3 years old (and on into childhood), we enjoyed a wonderfully close relationship. We explored the world behind the YMCA and called it travelling, looking for creatures in nooks and crannies. When it would snow, we bundled up and follow the same path. We hunted for snakes together in the creek, built a swamp world for various amphibians and generally loved each others' company. Wherever I was, there was my son; as my wife would say, we were like "Peel and Stick."
As he got older our relationship changed, but in a way that it should change. It matured into a friendship as father and son. After our son came out to us, our relationship did not change.
Does this sound like an uninvolved, detached father? This man's son concurs with his dad's assessment of the relationship. They were and are close, with no breaks during the period Nicolosi theorizes should cause homosexuality.
Devout Christians, the family attended conferences put on by conservative Christians who believed parental deficits were responsible for homosexuality. The answers they heard were very much like what Dr. Nicolosi promotes. These parents also took their son to a reparative therapist (i.e., counselor who holds to Nicolosi's theory) who evaluated the potential for sexual orientation change. The father reported that it wasn't helpful.
Not understanding the nature of his condition, we did take our son to a counselor. After several weeks of "therapy," our counselor told our son that he didn't know what to do. None of the stereotypes fit. Our son told his counselor that he had a wonderful and close relationship with his father and mom.
Although the parents maintain the traditional Christian, non-affirming view of homosexual behavior, parents and son have maintained their relationship. What they all do much less often now is become preoccupied over causes and self-blame. The father sees a bigger picture.
Dr. Nicolosi gets it wrong to reduce the thorns in our sides/lives to a human event where we have but one chance to get it right. Does that sound like the relationship we have with our heavenly Father? God has allowed all of us to experience thorns, some painfully obvious, others less so. No doubt the thorns God allows are refining our character and leading us back to Him.
In fact, sexual orientation is quite complex. Most likely, multiple pre-and post-natal factors are involved in different ways for different people. One size does not fit all. What this means for Christian groups, however, is the stuff of controversy. For some, it means that homosexuality should be affirmed and Scripture reframed. For others, it does not lead to a change of orthodoxy, but rather to greater humility regarding the need for spiritual support to live a different and often difficult calling. What is not needed is adoption of simple, but misleading, answers.
....................................................................
Warren Throckmorton, PhD is Associate Professor of Psychology and Fellow for Psychology and Public Policy at Grove City College (PA). He can be contacted through his blog at www.wthrockmorton.com.
I forgot to mention: “Psychosis” is a medical/mental health condition that has very specific criteria developed over time by many panels of scientists and practitioners. Therefore, in terms of definitions, I prefer the DSM or ICD over a dictionary because it is the physicians and psychologists who make that diagnosis.
In Bizarro World perhaps. Psychological research has become very political over the past 25 years, but we still have neuroscientists and other professionals who are seeking knowledge in a disciplined scientific manner. Phrenology is for the P.T. Barnum crowd.
I discovered that women were attractive in my early teens, and never had any sexual interest in other males.
The boys I grew up with who turned out to be gay all had overprotective mothers, who stifled most male expression, almost as though they were raising a girl. One of them is now serving time, for molesting young boys. As I recall, he never had a chance, his mother was on him 24/7, making sure his hands didn't get dirty.
People are individuals, no telling how parental influence will affect them, but it is no doubt better if you have rational parents.
Vanilla,
I never ever said having those things happen to you meant you would turn out gay, I said that people I have met who have been gay the vast majority have one or more of those factors in their life. I agree with you that it is a conscious action, not a factor of genetics.
Throckmorton turns Nicolosi’s argument into a straw man argument so he can excuse himself for any role in the fact his son is a homosexual. His is not being fair but is being disingenuous.
Nicolosi did not say that ALL SONS whose FATHERS fail to bond with them will be homosexuals. Nor does he say that ALL SONS whose FATHERS do bond with them will be heterosexual.
This is not a cut-and-dried arrangement or a simple mathematical, logical calculation. We’re talking psychological influences on sexual identity. They will play out differently from one individual to another. What Nicolosi is saying is that when FATHERS fail to bond with SONS at an early age, it sets the stage for the possible homosexualization of the son.
Oh, and by the way, Throckmorton may have been close to his son at the very young ages, but maybe he was distant at a later stage and did, in fact, contribute to the forces that led to his son becoming a homosexual. Or, while Throckmorton may have spent time with his son, perhaps his son did not sense his father loved him at that early age.
There is little doubt that ones first experiences with sex do tend to impact people for life, I would not in the least be suprised that Rosie and her brother were both molested by a Male in their life, most likely an authority figure. Rosies reaction was to stay away from men, Her brothers was to run to more. This would not suprise me in the least, its pretty classic behavior.
Of course you have to find a copy of the DSM prior to homosexuality being removed as a mental disorder due to POLITICAL CORRECTNESS, not because of research proving otherwise. Nearly all reasearch that lead to that conclusion has never been discredited.
Male homosexuality is often a sort of perpetual adolecense, a male yearning for acceptance by other men, and willing to do whatever it takes to receive it.
Psychology, on the other hand, has politicized so much of the actual science in the field that it doesn't even have much left which is useful in the scientific realm.
FYI, we are finding that earlier neuroscience notions of tying specific parts of the brain to specific functions was a bit simplistic. The circuitry of the brain is currently (no pun intended) way too complex for us to figure out. However, different brain parts seem to interact much more than was originally thought.
I am not aware of phrenology’s scientific contributions in the past 50 years. Perhaps, it deserves more credit as a precursor to modern neuroscience.
My preference for defining “psychosis” is no different than my preference for defining “myocardial infarction”. The most specific, detailed and up-to-date professional definition is standard practice in my field. The dictionary is for non-practitioners who want a general idea of what a term means. If you create a logical argument based on a superficial definition, remember that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link.
OTOH, we agree. Providing homosexuals with special rights reminds me of how the civil rights movement has transmogrified into reverse discrimination and special privileges. In that political sense, it does not matter whether homosexuality is completely volitional or (for a minority) a genetic, biological or psychosocial disposition. IMHO, they have a right to their behavior and I have a right to freedom of association and equal opportunity. However, as a straight White male, my rights are less important than those special rights of “historically disadvantaged minorities”.
I was referring to the father’s absence in terms of homosexuality, only. Clearly, a child does best overall with two loving and caring parents.
Acknowledged...
My Apologies.
I blame Satan.
Reference resource for that statistic is from where???
"What's he that was not born of woman?"Macbeth. Act V, scene VII...
"What's he that was not born of woman?"- Macbeth. Act V. Scene VII
If you have to tell a grown man that babies will not come out of his rectum, there is a genuine case of mental illness.
There is an axiomatic truth to mammalian anatomical functions.
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.