Sexual Reorientation

While some predilections may be neuro-biological, why shouldn’t we seek methods to assist our children with some of those issues? If a person has a predilection towards alcohol/drug addiction, would we not intervene to try and help them avoid that addiction?

Given that many studies suggest that sexual orientation is often heavily affected by the child’s relationship to father/adult males, should we allow chance events to control the outcome? Should I allow a child who may have a predilection toward alcoholism to take an occasional sip offered by relatives and friends? Or do I step in early and firmly to try and resolve what I perceive to be a potential problem?

I think it’ll turn out that there is a strong genetic component to homosexuality, an even stronger effect from fetal development, and then some early environmental factors. The point is that no one knows what they are. The evidence is pretty strong though that by the time you are a teenager the majority of people have this set cognitively.

I would beg to differ on these claims, but it’s an argument that essentially boils down to my opinion and pointing to differing ways of looking at the evidence you’re talking about (for now, I’ll simply point to social constructionist arguments, such as Hillary Lips’ arguments in her textbook Sex and Gender). (I used to teach psychology of gender, so I got into all this stuff.)

I will say, however, there is very clear evidence that your claim about cognitively set sexuality by the time one is a teenager needs to be qualified. For women, anyway, this does not appear to be the case with a large (and increasing) number. Check out, in particular, Lisa Diamond’s research about sexual fluidity, in which an increasing number of women change their sexual orientation in college, midlife, or even later. Often it is a friendship with a lesbian women that sparks the change, or even a college course in human sexuality or psychology of gender (and, of course, many other self-assigned reasons). And here’s the fascinating thing: hardly any of these women say that they were “really” lesbian (or straight) the whole time. They “really” were straight (or lesbian), and then they “really” did change–they say. It gets even more complicated, with an increasing number of women who say that they are generally lesbian (or straight) but nonetheless sexually attracted to a certain man (or woman) they are in a relationship with. It is tempting to label these women as “bisexual,” but many oppose this label because they don’t see themselves as having a bisexual identity.

Now, what might this research suggest? It MIGHT suggest that whatever can be pointed to on a neurological basis, this neurology only makes sense against a larger, socially constructed or hermeneutic backdrop. The problem, then, with sexual reorientation may be that this backdrop is always in flux, always changing. In the case of women, the increasing acceptance of lesbianism has prompted many women to affirm lesbianism as their current (but not previous!) preference. Many in the LGBT community would deny this (because they don’t want to see homosexuality as being “contagious”) but the research of Diamond (who, by the way, is a politically active, “self-identified lesbian,” not someone trying to crusade against homosexuality) would suggest otherwise — at least for women. And certainly this social matrix of homosexuality will be different for your daughters and mine — and MAYBE even our sons. My personal belief (though certainly argued by many social constructionists) is the current fixedness of male homosexuality coincides with rigid male gender roles; female roles are more fluid, and thus it is a no-brainer that female sexuality is more fluid. So, if the upcoming generation of males grows up against a backdrop of more fluid gender roles, it is at least conceivable that we will see more male sexual fluidity, just as we are currently seeing for women. (I say all of this as a Latter-day Saint who believes there are clear and essential differences between being male and female, but that we nonetheless assume certain stereotypes of “maleness” and “femaleness” that at best are simply stereotypes and at worst are very detrimental (perhaps even contributing to undesired homosexuality).

Another intriguing theme to pull from Diamond’s research is that of local vs. general sexual orientation (a generally gay man being sexually attracted to his wife, for example, but not other women). This distinction, I imagine, is not being considered by the sexual reorientation camps…