Wayne Besen - Author, Activist, Columnist, Public Speaker

Tuesday, March 14, 2006

(Weekly Column)

Gay men are limp-wristed and may have a Queen Gene, according to a controversial segment on CBS's 60 Minutes, "The Science of Sexual Orientation." The show suggests that gay men are prissy and prance and wear lavender pants while they lisp and dance. Which can certainly be true, in some cases, but is this just crass stereotyping masquerading as science?

The segment featured two sets of twins. The fist pair - Adam and Jared - was nine years old. Jared was tough as nails and had a collection of G.I. Joes, while Adam painted his nails and dreamt of pantyhose.

Steve and Greg, the second pair of twins, were adults. Steve, who is straight, grew up playing sports, while gay Greg "liked helping out in the kitchen."

The idea of studying identical twins is to show that upbringing has nothing to do with the outcome of sexual orientation. Indeed, one has to be a dolt with an agenda to still believe the outdated myth that homosexuality is caused by bad parenting.

"Psychologists used to believe homosexuality was caused by nurture - namely overbearing mothers and distant fathers - but that theory has been disproved," reporter Leslie Stahl authoritatively said. "Today, scientists are looking at genes, environment, brain structure and hormones. There is one area of consensus: that homosexuality involves more than just sexual behavior; it's physiological."

Identical twins with differing sexual orientations suggest that there are other factors at work than just genes.

"There's also the environment that happens to us while we're in the womb," said Northwestern University researcher Michael Bailey in the segment. "And scientists are realizing that environment is much more important than we ever thought it was."

Michigan State University's Marc Breedlove drove home this point by showing Stahl how he can take a rat that scurries and make him sashay with a shot of hormones or castration.

"I wouldn't call these gay rats," explained Breedlove, who has the perfect name for a vermin sex researcher. "But I would say that these are genetic male rats who are showing much more feminine behavior."

The show also pointed out that for every older brother a man has, his chances of being gay increase by one-third. Additionally, Bailey addressed the lie that gay men are more promiscuous by nature. He said both gay and straight men are "shallow" and tend to focus on looks, but gay men simply have more opportunity.

"They're [gay men] just more successful at it, because the people they're trying to have sex with are also interested in it," Bailey said.

I applaud this dose of truth, because anyone who has spent five minutes around straight men, know that they are just as frisky as their gay counterparts. The only people who deny this are uptight fundamentalists. And they are really no different, except they have hang-ups and feel guilty after the sex.

Whether Bailey has hit the scientific jackpot or is a crackpot is open for debate. Many people bristle, for example, when he claims that gay people walk and talk differently. True, one's gaydar does not have to be finely tuned to figure out Richard Simmons or Clay Aiken is gay. Oh, wait, is Clay gay?

Before Bailey makes such broad assumptions, however, he should put on football pads and collide with former NFL player Esera Tuaolo. This might rattle him out of his one-dimensional mind-set and lead him to expand his research to include gay and lesbian people who are not borderline transgender.

There are also critics who rightfully question Bailey's potentially dark motives. He once told The New York Times that if it became possible for parents to determine sexual orientation in the womb than, "selecting for heterosexuality seems to be morally acceptable....Selection for heterosexuality may tangibly benefit parents, children and their families and seems to have only a slight potential for any significant harm."

"His research is highly questionable," said Lisa Mottet, a transgender rights attorney with the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force."Bailey's work is simply not credible." NGLTF has criticized his research on transgender people and bisexuals calling it shoddy and filled with unscientific assumptions.

Still, the 60 Minutes segment, as a whole, was very helpful to the gay rights movement. It brusquely dismissed the inane pseudo-science of our opponents. But in the process of neutralizing the right, it neutered gay men. While we are cheering the segment, Bailey should know that most of us aren't using pompoms.

VIDEO LINK

53 Comments:

Interesting.

George W. Bush, when essentially asked "Why do people become gay" (in his debate with John F. Kerry in '04) said: "I don't know".

Isn't that pretty much what this 60 minutes piece said as well?

Weird thing...Dr. Kenneth Kendler did research on identical twins where at least one is gay. In his results (released in 2000), he concluded that if you're gay and an identical twin, your identical twin has a less than 1/3 of a chance to be gay. It might have made for a much stronger segment had they interviewed two identical twins rather than non-monozygotic fraternal ones.
posted by Anonymous, at 3/14/2006 1:03 PM

Twin studies will never answer the nature/nurture question because even identical twins aren't completely identical -- they have different fingerprints.

Besides, I've always believed that if the gay gene were ever found, Exodus would be able to trumpet gene therapy to "cure" gay people.
posted by Jim Burroway, at 3/14/2006 2:01 PM

"I dont know" is the most accurate thing george bush could say about anything and everything!
And kurt you can start signing your name again, we know it's you because you almost always start every post with that annoying 'interesting' or 'fascinating'. Neither of which you are.
Bitchard Queer
posted by Anonymous, at 3/14/2006 2:04 PM

What I took away from the piece was continuing respect for scientific study as opposed to religious lunatics with a god hates Adam and Steve agenda.

Also in terms of scientific study, the piece lent confirmaiton to ideas of genetic and in-the-womb determination, clearly long before any opportunity to (shudder!) "choose the gay lifestyle."
posted by Bob Schwartz, at 3/14/2006 2:12 PM

That's why I'm unconvinced...as religious people try to tell me, that heterosexuality is driven by piety...and not lust.

At least they say that's the reason THEY get married.
It's not for the sex, it's for getting right with God and Jesus.
posted by Regan, at 3/14/2006 2:17 PM

I agree with you, how do you define a gay guy. they can be very masculine or feminine. you can not tell if a guy is gay or not?? We all look alike!!
posted by Anonymous, at 3/14/2006 4:01 PM

Who are you people kidding?? I can spot a damn queer anywhere. They stand out like a sparkler on a dark country night. That is why are they called FLAMERS.Get it???

Red -- Alabama
posted by Anonymous, at 3/14/2006 5:11 PM

" 'Psychologists used to believe homosexuality was caused by nurture - namely overbearing mothers and distant fathers - but that theory has been disproved,' reporter Leslie Stahl authoritatively said."

With all due respect. I'm not sure who disproved this theory - not that I'm happy in using the word 'theory' at all!

I blog on Evolution but one of my other interests is in the evolutionary origins of psychological trauma which originates within the 'old mammalian brain' - and thereby gives an indication of how long it has been part of Man's heritage.

I know 'homosexuals' who are self-aware of the psychological harm they acquired during childhood and I also know homeophobes who are unaware that their hatred stems from mal-adjustment to an acquired psychological history of their own!
posted by Jorolat, at 3/14/2006 5:25 PM

I'm not sure how looking at identical twins disproves nurture. How can you know for a fact that their parents treat them both exactly the same?
posted by Boo, at 3/14/2006 5:42 PM

Besen sez, "The idea of studying identical twins is to show that upbringing has nothing to do with the outcome of sexual orientation. Indeed, one has to be a dolt with an agenda to still believe the outdated myth that homosexuality is caused by bad parenting."

What about good parenting? Why jump to the assumption that if a particular sort of parenting did cause homosexuality, that parenting would be bad parenting? Now who's homophobic?
posted by Anonymous, at 3/14/2006 6:58 PM

How stupid is the previous poster? Besen is not stating his opinion, but what the right wing says about homosexuality.

Some people have about two brain cells. I'm always amazed by how obtuse some fools are.

Fred
Seattle
posted by Anonymous, at 3/14/2006 8:17 PM

John Latter -- I wouln't call it a theory either...

The hypothesis that family dynamics (specifically, bad ones) caused homosexuality was a direct result of psych. professionals applying their anti-homosexual minds during an anti-homosexual era. They didn't question that the people they saw in their clinics were indeed mentally ill / had poor childhoods etc but unrepresentative of gay men and women as a whole.

Bell and Weinberg effectively destroyed the hypothesis some 30 years ago with the publication of Homosexualities.

As the title suggests, they deliberately sought out a range of people and expressions. They found no connection to family dynamics. The study is not useful for wider application (as it examined the bar culture of 1970's San Francisco...), but would have been able to find common family-nurture heritages etc if such things had existed.

Apart from all that -- why do some seem to insist that gender and sexual attraction are one and the same thing? They may instead be viewed as an intersect of two different traits.

Even if one was to find, as example, that gay men are indeed less or more "masculine" than straight men (and a mirror for lesbians) this does not address the fact that both gay and straight men display a full range of gender-typical attributes. That alone questions assumptions about direct linkage between gender non-conformity and sexual attraction per se.
posted by grantdale, at 3/14/2006 10:39 PM

It's a bit odd to mention one study done in the late 1970s as absolute proof that there is no connection between family dynamics and sexual preference. It's reasonably well known that different studies often produce different results. Presumably then one needs to consider the results of more than a single study?

Take a look at the summary of the state of sexual orientation research on Simon LeVay's home page (http://members.aol.com/slevay/page22.html). LeVay mentions several studies that showed that homosexual men did tend to have close mother/distant father type family relationships. LeVay 's comments on this point show that it's an open question whether or not family dynamics are a cause.

Anyone who wants confirmation on this can ask LeVay himself, and if you ask politely I'm sure he'll respond.
posted by Anonymous, at 3/14/2006 11:52 PM

Anonymous, perhaps is you'd actually read LeVay's page you would know that he has compiled a list. It's a history page.

Read what he really thinks down the end of the page. It is dishonest to present LeVay otherwise.

Bell and Weinberg (and Hammersmith) were merely the first to conduct such a large study on the subject and use pathway analysis. That was both innovative (for the soft sciences) and much repeated since. The weight of literature supports the findings.

The fact the study was available nearly 30 years ago, and has been accepted ever since, simply indicates that those who continue to cling to claims about "family nurture" are slow learners. Or deliberate.
posted by grantdale, at 3/15/2006 12:38 AM

Anonymous stated: LeVay mentions several studies that showed that homosexual men did tend to have close mother/distant father type family relationships.

Which would make these gay men just like the vast majority of hetero men. The distant-father thing is so typical as to be virtually an archetype.
posted by Anonymous, at 3/15/2006 2:53 AM

In response to grantdale - I have to suggest it's you who has a reading comprehension problem, not me.
posted by Anonymous, at 3/15/2006 3:25 AM

"Which would make these gay men just like the vast majority of hetero men. The distant-father thing is so typical as to be virtually an archetype. "

Weird thing...I've never read a biography of a gay man who had a close relationship with his father.

Whereas on straight men I've seen some very close relationships with their dads, even in some cases I didn't expect it, such as Alice Cooper and his father who was a fundamentalist minister.
posted by Anonymous, at 3/15/2006 9:15 AM

"Weird thing...I've never read a biography of a gay man who had a close relationship with his father."

What a joke. You obviously don't read very much. On this very web-site, Wayne has discussed many times his close relationship with his father.

Time to wake-the-fuck-up!
posted by Anonymous, at 3/15/2006 9:40 AM

Anonymous, brother, you are either a troll or a total fuckin idiot. I am gay and my Southern Baptist minister, USMC officer, Republican father is and always has been my VERY best friend. He also is my greatest advocate and speaks publicly about his awakening about the true nature and expression of homosexuality.

If the Alabama idiot thinks he can spot a “flamer” a mile away then I challenge him to meet this Mississippi redneck “flamer” any time, any place and we’ll see. I’ve beat the fuck outa plenty of straight, loud mouthed pussy boys right in front of their girlfriends. I took great pleasure in turning to their old ladies afterwards and telling them, “make sure you tell all of his friends and family how he got his ass kicked by a cock suckin faggot. Makes for great dinner conversation”.

Might I suggest that some of these "studies" which present cause and effect might be misreading or at least misinterpreting their test subjects and their relationships. Causation is a VERY tricky animal and is VERY easy to misread and/or misinterpret. They assume that a person turns gay because his father was distant and his mother showed him too much attention. Is it not more likely that the child was gay and was a bit different than most boys and therefore the father, consciously or unconsciously, distanced himself from his child, especially in the case of gay kids who do not gender conform (i.e. not interested in sports or talking about girls or maybe shows feminine traits)? The mother in response, consciously or unconsciously begins to shelter and dote on the child.

I’m sure that if they would have taken the “study” one step further they would have discovered that masculine men (straight OR gay) were more closely bonded to their masculine fathers than feminine men (straight OR gay). Those with a preconceived notion or agenda would automatically assume that the distant father causes femininity rather that considering the more likely scenario that masculine fathers (usually but not always) tend to bond more closely to sons that exhibit traditionally masculine traits. I would be willing to bet that feminine fathers would bond more closely to daughters or feminine sons rather than tomboy daughters or ruff and tumble sons. Of course they didn’t do a study of feminine fathers and their sons.

I think of the child in the 60 minutes story who plays with dolls and paints his fingernails. Do you think the average American father would bond equally to him and his masculine brother? I’m not asking if they should, I asking how many, in the real world would? Unfortunately I think the average American father would bond much more closely with the boy who collected GI Joes and played sports. I don’t think it would necessarily be a conscious decision but I think he would favor the masculine kid because that’s what he knows, that’s what he understands, and yes, that’s what he is most comfortable with. Then a "researcher" comes along and says, a) child is gay; b) father is distant/less involved; c) mother is clingy and doting THEREFORE the ONLY possible conclusion has to be that the child is gay because his father is distant and mother is clingy. Poor cause and effect analysis, poor "science" and poor "psychology".

Sorry for the long post.
posted by Zeke, at 3/16/2006 4:47 PM

Sorry for the bad language ladies and gentlemen. When someone pisses me off the redneck in me comes charging through. No offense intended. I will be happy to edit my post for language if the moderator takes issue.

Thanks.
posted by Zeke, at 3/16/2006 4:54 PM

Well, aren't some people childish. It's astounding that anyone can seriously claim that your relationship with your parents can't possibly influence your sexual preference, because sexuality is physiological! Guess what: because we don't have disembodied minds, everything we do and are is 'physiological.' So, therefore, by that reasoning, your relationship with your parents couldn't influence anything. See the problem?

I am homosexual myself, by the way, for the benefit of those of you who told me to ask a gay person about homosexuality. I have first hand experience of what I am talking about.

Some of you other gay people may disagree with me about this issue, but it's possible that different gay people are gay for different reasons. Alternatively, some of us may have better insight into our own psychologies than others. Gee, I wonder which.
posted by Anonymous, at 3/16/2006 10:44 PM

Wow, ok people, this is supposed to be a scientific discussion. i read through these and i find people sniping at one another. god people how bout a little emotional maturity? you'll be better people for it i assure you.

Now then, as to the issue at hand:

As far as I am able to discern in my little microcosm (my high school is a sociologists dream. its very diverse in many fascinating ways) i have been able to determine this.
(please don't hate me this is just an observation)
I have observed that stereotypes are true about 59% of the time. now, I myself am an androginous (i think i spelled that right...) open gay student. a vast majority of my friends are gay or bi (one of thems even a drag queen!).

Now for example, some of my male gay friends. they are (and i say this with endearment) gay as a spring rainbow with flying glitter. Ironically, most of my lesbian friends act VERY feminine. (well, they DO watch football, but no flannel or anything lol).

Oh, and another thing is that its impossible for it to be a psychological "problem" (Felps thinks its a problem, but who gives a crap about him anyway) because A. that would mean its reversable through therapy, which it doesnt (despite claims from a minute and highly publicized faction of "ex-gays")and B. that things such as parenting ARE in effect of a childs developing sexual identity. which is NOT true! as early as 3 i remember having some "gay" qualities. (i thought my mothers clip on earrings were the best toys in the universe & wore my mom's big pajama shirt regularly but hey it was comfy) and i didn't even feel any strong attachment to my mother until after she passed away shortly before my 7th birthday (hell of a present eh?)

so yeah, lots of theories, yet no one really knows what causes it. why worry about it?

OH and another thing, those people that are so against research that could lead to a "cure", why are you so against this? we have no idea WHY we are gay. if it IS a problem, then ok! fix it & move on. if it isnt a problem, SAME FREAKIN ADVICE!

Love
-Tommy
posted by Anonymous, at 3/17/2006 12:11 AM

Red in Alabama - you can't "spot (a gay man) anywhere". My husband's cousin is gay and he's a big burly truck driver who acts and talks... like a big burly truck driver. I also have a straight male friend who is sort of feminine... but he's absolutely straight. Pull your stereotypes out of your ass and get a clue.
posted by Anonymous, at 3/17/2006 10:37 AM

Yes, BC WaterBoy, I know what you think. You're repeating something you already said, but repeating it does not make it true. You don't have an argument.

You're only making assertions.
posted by Anonymous, at 3/17/2006 3:17 PM

Waterboy, I believe your 'argument' was something about how there are two different components to human beings, one 'physiological' and the other 'psychological'. Since our minds are part of our bodies, this is a quite mistaken idea, and you should give it up.
posted by Anonymous, at 3/18/2006 1:45 AM

The entire human body is "a physiological stimulus response mechanism." What else do you think it is?
posted by Anonymous, at 3/18/2006 3:15 PM

Feel free to change the subject when you have been out-debated, Waterboy. You are only making a fool of yourself.
posted by Anonymous, at 3/18/2006 3:27 PM

No, I'm not calling this a 'debate.' It was you, not me, who used that word. I answered your argument, such as it was, but you didn't notice. Too bad.

Let me make another point to you - if sexual orientation (not 'sexuality', please, because that lumps together so many different things) is purely 'biological' (leaving aside the question of what difference there is supposed to be between the 'psychological' and the 'biological') then why is it that it can sometimes shift?

I ask because my sexuality some time ago shifted from exclusively homosexual to midway between homosexual and heterosexual. As per your theory, what happened? Do you think my hypothalamus suddenly changed shape? Did my genes spontaneously mutate? I have asked this question before, and no one has ever been able to answer it intelligently.
posted by Anonymous, at 3/18/2006 11:13 PM

That was just a 'blah blah' type post to cover over the fact that you don't know what you're talking about.

It really doesn't make sense to just repeat the same claims over and over and ignore obvious problems with and objections to those claims.
posted by Anonymous, at 3/19/2006 2:43 PM

A few questions Waterboy - when you say 'some sexual orientation is on a continuum' what are you saying? Are you acknowledging that change in sexual orientation may occur or are you just using a vague expression to avoid that question? Is a change from homosexual to bisexual 'a change in core orientation' or not? How do you define 'core orientation'? Finally, how the hell would you know about what might or might not occur to my sexual orientation in future?
posted by Anonymous, at 3/19/2006 11:22 PM

Your pathetic inability to defend your stupid dogmas when challenged is morbidly amusing.
posted by Anonymous, at 3/20/2006 3:23 PM

runescape money runescape gold runescape gold runescape money buy runescape gold buy runescape money runescape money runescape gold wow power leveling wow powerleveling Warcraft Power Leveling Warcraft PowerLeveling buy runescape gold buy runescape money runescape items runescape accounts runescape gp dofus kamas buy dofus kamas Guild Wars Gold buy Guild Wars Gold lotro gold buy lotro gold lotro gold buy lotro gold lotro gold buy lotro gold runescape money runescape power leveling runescape money runescape gold dofus kamas cheap runescape money cheap runescape gold Hellgate Palladium Hellgate London Palladium Hellgate money Tabula Rasa gold tabula rasa money Tabula Rasa Credit Tabula Rasa Credits Hellgate gold Hellgate London gold wow power leveling wow powerleveling Warcraft PowerLeveling Warcraft Power Leveling World of Warcraft PowerLeveling World of Warcraft Power Leveling runescape power leveling runescape powerleveling eve isk eve online isk eve isk eve online isk tibia gold Fiesta Silver Fiesta Gold SilkRoad Gold buy SilkRoad Gold runescape accounts buy runescape accounts rs2 accounts buy rs2 accounts runescape power leveling rs2 power leveling FFXI Gil buy FFXI Gil gaia gold buy gaia gold buy dofus kamas buy dofus kamas dofus kamas
posted by Anonymous, at 3/13/2008 10:24 PM

wow gold cheap wow gold buy wow gold world of warcraft gold wow world of warcraft wow gold WoW Warrior WoW Hunter WoW Rogue WoW Paladin WoW Shaman WoW Priest WoW Mage WoW Druid WoW Warlock power leveling powerleveling wow power leveling wow powerleveling wow guides wow tips google排名 google左侧排名 google排名服务百度推广百度排名网站推广商业吧机床 LED灯电池塑料摄像机移民甲醇染料福州热线体育博客股票博客游戏博客魔兽博客考试博客汽车博客房产博客电脑博客 powerlin518 logo design website design web design 商标设计
posted by Anonymous, at 3/18/2008 9:56 PM

i coming from Singapore,To a person 團體制服here.
I was an excellent credit咖啡 staff.Many well-known in the credit 徵信社company to work, and excellent credit 徵信performance.
I love this job;I work brought endless fun.I hope that the formal減肥I appreciated the boss .I hope to continue to work in the credit徵信.
I work seriously,Peaceful coexistence with colleagues.The company has no particular request, 徵信社I can only hope that the wisdom I 燈光音響play.
posted by Anonymous, at 5/20/2008 3:20 AM

ugg shoes
ugg boots
ugg
ugg sale
fake ugg
ugg store
ugg discount
men's ugg
womens ugg
buy ugg boots
ugg cardy
replica ugg
cheap ugg
ugg classic
Ugg Amelie Suede
UGG Bailey Button
UGG Classic Cardy
UGG Classic Crochet
UGG Classic Mini
UGG Classic Short
UGG Classic Tall
Ugg Gypsy Sandal
Ugg Halendi Sandal
UGG Hammond Slipper
UGG Infant's Erin Baby
UGG Layback Slipper
UGG Locarno
Ugg Matala Sandal
Ugg Napoule Sandal
UGG New style
UGG Nightfall
Ugg Persephone Sandal
Ugg Skimmer
UGG Sundance
Ugg Tasmina
UGG Ultra Short
UGG Ultra Tall
UGG Women's Coquette
UGG Women's Knightsbridg
UGG Women's Mayfaire
posted by 和玄, at 12/22/2009 1:10 AM

Do you know how to convert avi to iphone? here, i would like to recommend you this ultra AVI to iPhone converter, which can help you convert any avi file to iphone format easily and quickly, you can download it and have a wonderful try! you may also interested in iPhone to Mac Transfer and iPhone to Computer Transfer.
posted by Titanic, at 5/05/2010 1:37 AM