How Gay Activists Will Respond to a Major Scientific Report That Refutes Their Talking Points

[SirLinksALot]

SOURCE: TOWNHALL

URL: http://townhall.com/columnists/michaelbrown/2016/08/24/how-gay-activists-will-respond-to-a-major-scientific-report-that-refutes-their-talking-points-n2209022

by: Dr. Michael Brown


The internet has been abuzz with headlines declaring, “Almost Everything the Media Tell You About Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Is Wrong,” and “Johns Hopkins Shrinks Warn Against Kids Going Transgender.”

As reported by Ryan T. Anderson on Monday, “A major new report, published today in the journal The New Atlantis, challenges the leading narratives that the media has pushed regarding sexual orientation and gender identity.”

How significant was this report?

“Co-authored by two of the nation’s leading scholars on mental health and sexuality, the 143-page report discusses over 200 peer-reviewed studies in the biological, psychological, and social sciences, painstakingly documenting what scientific research shows and does not show about sexuality and gender.”

What were the conclusions of this study? “The major takeaway, as the editor of the journal explains, is that ‘some of the most frequently heard claims about sexuality and gender are not supported by scientific evidence.’”

How will gay activists respond? They will shoot the messengers. Watch and see.

We’ve seen the pattern for years.

Gay activists and their allies will discredit an individual or a group, then when that individual or group challenges their position, they reply, “No one listens to him/her/them. They’ve been totally discredited!”

The SPLC has often been complicit in this, branding a conservative Christian organization as a hate group or classifying a conservative spokesman as a new leader of the radical right, therefore, whatever they say can be safely dismissed. After all, they’re haters and bigots!

When it comes to the authors of this important new study, they are hardly rightwing, fundamentalist, conservatives. Hardly!

One of the authors, Dr. Lawrence S. Mayer, “is a scholar in residence in the Department of Psychiatry at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine and a professor of statistics and biostatistics at Arizona State University.”

He has taught at 8 universities (including Princeton and Stanford) and, “His full-time and part-time appointments have been in twenty-three disciplines, including statistics, biostatistics, epidemiology, public health, social methodology, psychiatry, mathematics, sociology, political science, economics, and biomedical informatics.”

The other author is even more acclaimed. Dr. Paul McHugh is “University Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry and a professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. He was for twenty-five years the psychiatrist-in-chief at the Johns Hopkins Hospital.”

Dr. McHugh “was elected a member of the National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) in 1992. From 2002 to 2009, he was a member of the President's Council on Bioethics,” among his many accomplishments.

These certainly sound like formidable scholars, and so their 143-page report, which, as stated, “discusses over 200 peer-reviewed studies,” should be taken very seriously when it challenges many of the major talking points put forward by gay activists arguing: gays are not born that way and can possibly change; “non-heterosexuals are about two to three times as likely to have experienced childhood sexual abuse”; when compared to the general population, “non-heterosexual subpopulations are at an elevated risk for a variety of adverse health and mental health outcomes”; and the idea that “a person might be ‘a man trapped in a woman’s body’ or ‘a woman trapped in a man’s body’ — is not supported by scientific evidence.”

Note carefully those closing words, which are a theme of the entire study: These foundational LGBT talking points are “not supported by scientific evidence.”

I can assure you, though, that rather than interacting with the scientific evidence presented in this formidable study, the vast majority of LGBT activists and their allies will dismiss it out of hand.

Why? Because, they will say, Dr. McHugh is an infamous transphobe who is totally out of touch with modern science while Dr. Mayer is unqualified to write on this topic.

As I said before, watch and see.

When it comes to Dr. McHugh, he committed the cardinal sin of opposing sex-change surgery during his tenure at Johns Hopkins Hospital, which is why that surgical procedure was dropped under his leadership. But he did this based on years of interaction with those who identified as transgender, interviewing them before and after surgery, ultimately concluding that, “We psychiatrists . . . would do better to concentrate on trying to fix their minds and not their genitalia.”

I reached out to him in November before I appeared on the Tyra Banks show to discuss transgender children, wanting to know if his views had changed based on more current research. He replied to me on November 18, 2009: “I hold that interfering medically or surgically with the natural development of young people claiming to be ‘transgendered’ is a form of child abuse.”

Not surprisingly, there are few psychiatrists hated more by LGBT leaders than Paul McHugh.

Just within the last few years, the TransAdvocate.com website accused him of “clinging to a dangerous past”; the Huffington Post claimed that he “endangers the lives of transgender youth”; the Advocate.com website referred to the “scary science at John Hopkins University”; and a ThinkProgress.org headline declared, “Meet The Doctor Social Conservatives Depend On To Justify Anti-Transgender Hate.”

So, when it comes to Dr. McHugh, the script has already been written, and no matter what the scientific evidence states and no matter how carefully he has presented it, he will be viciously attacked and his research will be flatly rejected.

As for Dr. Mayer, again, my expectation is that he will be dismissed as unqualified, while his guilt by association with Dr. McHugh and Johns Hopkins will be used against him as well.

The good news is that, over time, truth will triumph, which is why Principle #6 in my book Outlasting the Gay Revolution was “Keep Propagating the Truth Until the Lies Are Dispelled.”

Those who want to know the truth owe it to themselves to study this new report carefully, determined to follow the truth wherever it leads. Those choosing to shoot the messengers will only hurt themselves in the end.

[jmyrlefuller]

Also expect them to attack the journal that published the study—was it open-access?—until it gets retracted.

[goatprairie]

Sorry...have to disagree with the report. While I don't think homosexuality is genetic, I believe hormones have  a lot to do with it. Or why are there so many female homosexuals in sports? Why do so many homosexual males  exhibit similar speech and physical patterns?
How can you have  actors as good-looking as Rock Hudson, Tab Hunter, and others who preferred males to all the beautiful women they could have had? There are male actors, like John Polito, who are fat and ugly. Why would you pick someone like him to have "sex" with rather than an average-looking woman?
Trying to claim every homosexual was abused as a child needs a lot of proof. I've read numerous stories by male homosexuals who said they just felt different when they were younger.

[massadvj]

Sorry...have to disagree with the report. While I don't think homosexuality is genetic, I believe hormones have  a lot to do with it. Or why are there so many female homosexuals in sports? Why do so many homosexual males  exhibit similar speech and physical patterns?
How can you have  actors as good-looking as Rock Hudson, Tab Hunter, and others who preferred males to all the beautiful women they could have had? There are male actors, like John Polito, who are fat and ugly. Why would you pick someone like him to have "sex" with rather than an average-looking woman?
Trying to claim every homosexual was abused as a child needs a lot of proof. I've read numerous stories by male homosexuals who said they just felt different when they were younger.

I think the current thinking on homosexuality is that it has BOTH genetic and learned antecedents.  The idea that all gays "are born that way" is not supported by scientific evidence because no genetic markers have yet been found that identify a majority of gays.  There is a "gay gene" but apparently only about 20 percent of gays have it.

[goatprairie]

I think the current thinking on homosexuality is that it has BOTH genetic and learned antecedents.  The idea that all gays "are born that way" is not supported by scientific evidence because no genetic markers have yet been found that identify a majority of gays.  There is a "gay gene" but apparently only about 20 percent of gays have it.

I've never heard of any evidence of a "gay" gene.  I've read articles about the hormone theory, and it makes a lot of sense to me.  For instance, there is the case of the notorious Kray crime  twins who ran the London underworld in the sixties. They were identical twins, but one was hetero and one was homo.  I doubt one could be attracted to males and the other not attracted, or vice versa.  Hormonal problems during gestation is the only thing that makes sense to me.
 Deficient or excessive hormones would explain a lot of feminine behavior in male homosexuals and masculine i.e. bulldyke behavior in females. Also the tremendous numbers of homosexual females in sports where aggressiveness and  power are rewarded. Think Martina Navratilova.

[massadvj]

I've never heard of any evidence of a "gay" gene.  I've read articles about the hormone theory, and it makes a lot of sense to me.  For instance, there is the case of the notorious Kray crime  twins who ran the London underworld in the sixties. They were identical twins, but one was hetero and one was homo.  I doubt one could be attracted to males and the other not attracted, or vice versa.  Hormonal problems during gestation is the only thing that makes sense to me.
 Deficient or excessive hormones would explain a lot of feminine behavior in male homosexuals and masculine i.e. bulldyke behavior in females. Also the tremendous numbers of homosexual females in sports where aggressiveness and  power are rewarded. Think Martina Navratilova.

I just googled it and found the genetic predictor among men is higher than 20 percent, but still not better than half.  For women less than 20 percent. 

"Biometric modeling revealed that, in men, genetic effects explained .34–.39 of the variance [of sexual orientation], the shared environment .00, and the individual-specific environment .61–.66 of the variance. Corresponding estimates among women were .18–.19 for genetic factors, .16–.17 for shared environmental, and .64–.66 for unique environmental factors. Although wide confidence intervals suggest cautious interpretation, the results are consistent with moderate, primarily genetic, familial effects, and moderate to large effects of the nonshared environment (social and biological) on same-sex sexual behavior.[9]"

The point is that politically it is important for gay activists to instill in the public that all gays are "born that way."  There simply is no scientific evidence to support that claim.  The evidence indicates that for a majority of gays, sexual orientation is learned, and thus homosexuality is more often than not a lifestyle choice.

[Frank Cannon]

How Gay Activists Will Respond to a Major Scientific Report That Refutes Their Talking Points

With a lisp.

[mirraflake]

Sorry...have to disagree with the report. While I don't think homosexuality is genetic, I believe hormones have  a lot to do with it. Or why are there so many female homosexuals in sports? Why do so many homosexual males  exhibit similar speech and physical patterns?

I agree 100%  The gays I have known I knew were gay when they were young kids.we knew they were different.  Like you I think it was hormonal screw up during gestation too much testostorine or too much estrogen.

One of my HS classmates is a gay woman.. her 2 older sisters were all hot knockouts-cheerleaders/home coming queens and she was dyke, butch ugly looking in the first grade and walked and talked like a man with broad shoulders. Something  happened not enough estrogen or too much testosterine

Some lesbians are straight women who had terrible relationships with men-abused etc.

@goatprairie

@massadvj

[truth_seeker]

The science of dna, heredity etc. is very, very new.

Using it for criminal evidence and prosecutions, is well known, and is a high priority. Strides are being made in the use of dna, for medical purposes, another high priority.

It is useful determining origins, by region and ethnic group. Not a high priority. That is the area which I have studied a bit.

I doubt that finding absolute, complete genetic proof, or disproof, concerning homosexuality will rise to the highest priorities. Probably in part since it doesn't entirely work that way.

And again, the field is extremely new.

[massadvj]

The science of dna, heredity etc. is very, very new.

Using it for criminal evidence and prosecutions, is well known, and is a high priority. Strides are being made in the use of dna, for medical purposes, another high priority.

It is useful determining origins, by region and ethnic group. Not a high priority. That is the area which I have studied a bit.

I doubt that finding absolute, complete genetic proof, or disproof, concerning homosexuality will rise to the highest priorities. Probably in part since it doesn't entirely work that way.

And again, the field is extremely new.

I have a PhD in a social science.  I would say that as time goes on, the percentage of behaviors that are explained by genetics is increasing, and thus the percentage of behaviors that are known to be learned is decreasing.  Schizophrenia, for example, was once thought to be the result of an underdeveloped super ego,  Now we know it to be a genetic disease. 

So it may well be that in the future geneticists will identify all the genetic causes of homosexuality.  But we are not there, which is why these scientists are saying there is currently no "scientific evidence" to support the idea that all homosexuals  are "born that way."  What they are saying is accurate, based on what is currently known by all science -- both hard and soft.

[goatprairie]

I agree 100%  The gays I have known I knew were gay when they were young kids.we knew they were different.  Like you I think it was hormonal screw up during gestation too much testostorine or too much estrogen.

One of my HS classmates is a gay woman.. her 2 older sisters were all hot knockouts-cheerleaders/home coming queens and she was dyke, butch ugly looking in the first grade and walked and talked like a man with broad shoulders. Something  happened not enough estrogen or too much testosterine

Some lesbians are straight women who had terrible relationships with men-abused etc.

@goatprairie

@massadvj

I'm not saying that some people can't become one because of a traumatic incident(s), i.e. childhood sexual abuse, etc. or doing it for political reasons (hating men, etc,). I'm just saying there seems to be too many homosexuals with similar behavior in speech, walk, likes, etc. If homosexuality was such a life-threatening kind of behavior fifty years ago, a number of people (Liberace, Truman Capote, Rex Reed, Rip Taylor, others) made no effort to hide it. They were easily picked out by their speech.

[truth_seeker]

Sexual variants have occurred down through history, among different peoples.

Greece for one. Native Americans for another, in the form of "two spirit"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-Spirit

My intellect instructs me there is something "built-in."

[massadvj]

My intellect instructs me there is something "built-in."

There is definitely something built in.  Just not all, or even a majority of the known determinants.

[jmyrlefuller]

Sexual variants have occurred down through history, among different peoples.

Greece for one. Native Americans for another, in the form of "two spirit"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-Spirit

My intellect instructs me there is something "built-in."

That canard was invented by crooked college professors.

[JustPassinThru]

It's a learned appetite.

It's why young boys who're seduced by sodomite pedophiles turn queer.  It's part of the formative years; what you and the little girl down the street, do in the bushes, affects your tastes for a lifetime.

If instead of a little girl, it's a man fifteen years older than you; and you don't do it to him, he does it to you, in an unnatural way, as it were...and if you decide you like it, for whatever reason...they've minted another young gay blade.

[Axel]

It's a learned appetite.

It's why young boys who're seduced by sodomite pedophiles turn queer.  It's part of the formative years; what you and the little girl down the street, do in the bushes, affects your tastes for a lifetime.

If instead of a little girl, it's a man fifteen years older than you; and you don't do it to him, he does it to you, in an unnatural way, as it were...and if you decide you like it, for whatever reason...they've minted another young gay blade.

... if you decide you like it? It's called sexual assault, and I've never met anyone who went through it who "liked it". And that includes many straight males who were touched by male family members, who didn't become gay.

[mirraflake]

It's a learned appetite.

It's why young boys who're seduced by sodomite pedophiles turn queer.  It's part of the formative years; what you and the little girl down the street, do in the bushes, affects your tastes for a lifetime.

If instead of a little girl, it's a man fifteen years older than you; and you don't do it to him, he does it to you, in an unnatural way, as it were...and if you decide you like it, for whatever reason...they've minted another young gay blade.

Let me ask you this.   Young girls are sexually abused 4-5 times the rate as young males but there are 2-3 times  the amount the gay men than lesbians.

The 4  gays I know personally /family or close friends were never abused and came from great homes with loving parents.

Some gays were abused but not all.



@JustPassinThru

[mirraflake]

Homosexuality and all the other deviations of normal put forth by that group are vile behaviors that should be rejected by a healthy culture.  Sympathy and help, yes.  Approval, no.   The fact that it is no longer rejected proves we are not a healthy or intelligent culture.  We are rejecting truth and reality in favor of emotions and wishes and passions.  It cannot be sustained.  The cost will quickly multiply.  As will the judgments of God.

mental illness was once thought to be caused by the devil no we know it's based upon genetic or biological means. I suspect the condition for being gay will be found one day.



@RAT Patrol

[SirLinksALot]

Here's what I personally think:

Genes constitute only one of the many key influences on behavior in addition to environmental influences, personal choices, and interpersonal experiences.

 So-called "sexual orientation" is "fluid," not "fixed" and often changes throughout a person's life.

In fact, some studies found that eighty percent of males who reported homosexual or bisexual feelings as children later identified exclusively as heterosexual.

So, To be clear, the research will continue, and this report isn't exhaustive of all the studies out there, but it is enough to prove that the science isn't settled as we're often told.

Therefore,  those using the levers of cultural power to impose this new vision of sex, marriage, and humanity aren't driven by, nor will they be unconvinced of their vision, by science.

[goatprairie]

Sexual variants have occurred down through history, among different peoples.

Greece for one. Native Americans for another, in the form of "two spirit"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-Spirit

My intellect instructs me there is something "built-in."

Yes.....again if you're a good looking stud like Rock Hudson or Tab Hunter and could bed half the beautiful females in Hollyweird, why would you choose an ugly mutt like (ugh!) Jim Nabors to have "sex" with? It just doesn't make sense. Unless, of course, a person has a natural predilection for that sort of thing.

[JustPassinThru]

Let me ask you this.   Young girls are sexually abused 4-5 times the rate as young males but there are 2-3 times  the amount the gay men than lesbians.

The 4  gays I know personally /family or close friends were never abused and came from great homes with loving parents.

Some gays were abused but not all.



@JustPassinThru

And homosexuals are less than two percent of the population.

So there's a lot greater percentage of deviants who like not only sodomy but pedophilia, than there are pedophiles who are still attracted to females.

[JustPassinThru]

... if you decide you like it? It's called sexual assault, and I've never met anyone who went through it who "liked it". And that includes many straight males who were touched by male family members, who didn't become gay.

There is a difference between forcible rape and statutory rape.

Yes, obviously, some molested boys...and yes, some molested underage girls...do in fact like the experience.  Any police officer who's investigated such claims can tell you that.  There have been times when the child refused to testify or even lied on the stand.

No, I am not advocating pedophiles' activities.

[jmyrlefuller]

Let me ask you this.   Young girls are sexually abused 4-5 times the rate as young males but there are 2-3 times  the amount the gay men than lesbians.

I don't think that's true. Statistics I've seen have suggested maybe a slightly higher prevalence of male homosexuality, but not anywhere near 2-3 times. (3% men to 2% women was the number I saw in an almanac years ago.)

Each case, I believe, is different. There is no one unifying cause or course for all same-sex attractions, just as there is no one single cure for cancer. (I can see it now on some left-wing site: "FULLER COMPARED HOMOSEXUALITY TO CANCER." Of course that's not what I'm saying.) Biology is a strange thing. Yet I do believe there are cultural lesbians (not so much gay men), whose emotions are manipulated into thinking they are gay when they're not.

[jmyrlefuller]

Transgenderism, on the other hand, as the paper puts it, has no basis in reality. It is a delusion, completely unprovable by science, and there is no viable way to actually turn a man into a woman or vice versa, only to give the vague appearance of one, which can do more harm than good. I doubt we're going to be doing uterine/ovarian transplants any time soon to change that.