This was not the first study of its kind, neither would it be the last. For years, scientists have been trying to discover the etiology (or cause) of same gender attractions.  Far from purely scientific the research has political consequences as well. Studies have shown that the public’s beliefs about the origins of sexual orientation are directly correlated to their attitude regarding homosexuality and serve to further political causes.  As such a lot of the science has fallen into the hands of political Ideologies. But apart from the politics of science,  what does the research actually say? Is homosexuality learned or innate? Furthermore, is change possible?

To begin, it’s important to clear up a common misunderstanding about the language used in research. Much of the research to date suggest that there may be a biological link to homosexuality. Many have mistakenly taken this to mean that people are born gay – but that is not necessarily what the research suggests. Many things have been found to have a biological link yet we consider within our control. In fact, Dr. Jeffrey Satinover in his book Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth makes the illustration that a person could be born with genes making him tall with great eye-hand coordination, but his genes alone did not make him a basketball player, in fact he had to train and be exposed to basketball before he could become a basketball player. The same kid could have easily devoted himself to academia and become a lawyer, his genes simply gave him the tools needed to become an accomplished basketball player… this is why many scientist are now choosing to say there might be a “pre-disposition”  to homosexuality. The same way we can be predisposed to heart disease, smoking or basketball.(94)

As for actual studies that have been published, three in particular are held up by some as pointing to a ”gay gene.” Simon LeVay’s Hypothalamus study, Bailey and Pillard’s Twin studies as well as Dean Hamer’s Chromosome study of 1993. The studies made  headlines when  first published years ago making the case for innate homosexuality, and in fact headlines such as the Wall Street Journals which claimed “Research Points Towards Gay Gene” may lead the casual reader to believe a gay gene was found, but what did these studies actually find?

First lets look at the Dean Hammer study mentioned at the beginning. Newspapers claimed the study found a Gay Gene, but is it true? In this study, Hammer and his colleagues noticed that some gay identified men typically had gay identified uncles as well, but only on the mothers side. concluding that since women have (XX) Chromosomes while men have (XY) Chromosomes, Hammer and colleagues hypothesized that if there was a gay gene, it would likely be in the “X” Chromosomes since mothers can only pass on an X chromosome. After studying a group of families who fit their model of gay men with gay uncles of maternal lineage, a deviation was found in a portion of the X chromosome labeled Xq28. The Report concluded that if homosexuality was genetic, the cause could probably be found in the Xq28 region of the X chromosome. Though the study does raise some interesting questions, the population studied was too small to be of any statistical significance and the results of the Hammer study have not been able to be replicated. In fact as of June 25th 1995, Science magazine confirmed that Hammer was under investigation by the Office of Research Integrity at the Department of Health and Human Services for selectively reporting his data. In other words he reported only the data that would suggest homosexuality was innate.

Another famous study is that of Simon LeVay. In 1991, Levay studied the brain structures of deceased men attempting to see if there was any difference in the structures of heterosexual and homosexual men’s brains. What he found was that on average, the INAH-3 section of the Hypothalamus (a part of the brain widely believed to be involved in sexuality,) was smaller in gay identified men than in heterosexual men. Again, criticism of the study includes that the sample was too small to be of any statistical significance. Furthermore, the report stated that “on average” gay men’s hypothalamus was smaller… but in fact some gay men had larger INAH-3 sectors. Therefore,  though “on average” these gay men had a smaller hypothalamus, it was not uniformally small and could not definatively be linked as the cause of homosexuality.

Furthermore, LeVay’s sample of heterosexual men was an assumed sample, in other words, he assumed the men in his heterosexual sample were indeed heterosexual though it could not be confirmed. What’s more, LeVay points out in his own book Queer Science: The Use and Abuse of Research into Homosexuality that “the observations were made on adults who had already been sexually active for a number of years. To make a really compelling case, one would have to show that these neuro-anatomical differences existed early in life – preferably at  birth. Without such data, there is always at least the theoretical possibility that the structural differences are actually the result of differences in sexual behavior.” And admits that “another limitation arises because most of the gay men whose brains I studied died of AIDS.”(143-144)

The media repeatedly touted the LeVay studies as proof of a biological basis to homosexuality, but LeVay himself dismissed these claims saying in a 1994 issue of Discover magazine that “It’s important to stress what I didn’t find. I did not prove that homosexuality is genetic, or find a genetic cause for being gay. I didn’t show that gay men are born that way, the most common mistake people make in interpreting my work. Nor did I locate a gay center in the brain.”

Lastly a major study cited is Bailey and Pillard’s “Twin Studies.” The study was based on a very simple premise: If homosexuality is genetically determined, then Identical twins (which share Identical DNA) should both be gay. In 1991, the researchers released their findings which stated that 52% of Identical twins were both gay. Some argue that this would prove homosexuality is genetic since the concordance rate of both twins being gay is higher than the prevelancy of homosexuality in the general population, but other scientists argue that the findings in fact make a strong case that environment is key in developing homosexuality. They argue that if homosexuality was genetically determined (as opposed to influenced) it must reach close to a 100% concordance rate, much like twins having the same colored eyes (a trait which is genetically determined). However the research seems to indicate that homosexuality may be genetically influenced much like weight in identical twins which can vary due to environmental factors such as diet and exercise. Criticism of the study includes that the sample was self selected, meaning people volunteered knowing the purpose of the study, as such it can be expected that homosexual twins would have overwhelmingly volunteered as opposed to twins in general.

An interesting interpretation concerning twin studies comes from lesbian author and researcher Lisa Diamond in her latest book titled Sexual Fluidity: Understanding Women’s Love and Desire in which she chronicles the natural shift of sexual identity in women over a ten year period. Concerning twin studies she writes: “When considering these heritability estimates, it is useful to compare them to heritability estimates that have been calculated for other complex behavioral traits. For example, twin studies have found that the heritability of smoking (a behavior that most people consider to be under conscious control and yet situationally influenced) is also around 60 percent. Similar estimates have been found for the heritability of marijuana and alcohol use. Even job satisfaction shows significant heritability, most likely because it is strongly related to personality, which yields heritability estimates ranging from 45 to 60 percent. We tend to trumpet biological effects when it comes to homosexuality, but I have yet to see the cover of Time or Newsweek display a newborn baby with the headline ‘Born unsatisfied with his job?’”(31-32)

Some more recent studies that shed a new light on the issue of sexuality include the one mentioned above, Lisa Diamond’s own research documenting the sexual fluidity she discovered in women. She demonstrated that women can not only to go from heterosexual to homosexual but from homosexual to heterosexual as well. She states that “The most unexpected finding was that five women actually gave up their lesbian or bisexual identities, and an additional five women started calling themselves heterosexual!…The women who started calling themselves heterosexual typically reported that their same-sex attractions simply were not strong enough to justify identifying as lesbian or bisexual. They were generally more interested in men and expected to end up with men down the line.” (63)

Also, recently published was another longitudinal (meaning long-term) study of Ex-Gays by Dr. Stanton Jones and Dr. Mark Yarhouse. In their book Ex-Gays? A Longitudinal Study of Religiously Mediated Change in Sexual Orientation, Drs Jones and Yarhouse conclude after following former homosexuals involved in Exodus ministries that “We believe we have provided evidence that change of homosexual orientation may be possible through involvement in Exodus ministries. The change may take the form of a reduction in homosexual attraction and behavioral chastity; it may also take the form of a reduction in homosexual attraction and an increase in heterosexual attraction with what might be described as satisfactory heterosexual adjustment.” They add that they also found little evidence that trying to change ones sexual orientation would be harmful and in fact found that in some cases, it reduced anxiety and stress in some individuals. (387)

Perhaps the greatest shock to the mental health community came in 2001 when Dr. Robert Spitzer of Columbia University published his study on the efficacy of efforts to change one’s sexual orientation. The upset came in that Spitzer has long been known to be a friend of the gay community, and was instrumental in removing homosexuality from the list of mental disorders from the Diagnostics and Statistics Manual (DSM), the manual by which mental health professionals diagnose and treat mental illnesses. After extensive study, the skeptical Spitzer published his findings in the Archives of Sexual Behavior in 2001 concluding that sexual orientation can successfully be changed.

So are people born gay? Studies suggest that sexual orientation is an inter-play of both genetic and environmental factors. Genetics being able to predispose a person to homosexuality, but still relying on intricate environmental factors such as upbringing and social interaction to fully develop what some call the “homosexual potential.” Much like obesity has been discovered to have a genetic link, its understood that a person’s weight is ultimately dependent on environmental factors like diet and exercise.

Is change possible? Recent studies as well as first hand accounts confirm that sexuality is fluid and can indeed change whether through therapy or coincidentally over time. Researchers are careful not to claim that everyone can change their sexual orientation. Such absolute statements are as irresponsible as statements saying “people are born gay.” Researchers Yarhouse and Jones write that “some respondents experienced significant, meaningful change of sexual orientation in this sample, but we did not find that everyone (or anyone) can change. The fact that some human beings can break the four-minute mile barrier establishes that running a four-minute mile is not impossible, but that same fact does not establish that anyone (every human being) can break the four-minute mile barrier. So also our findings firmly refute any notion that change of sexual orientation is impossible.”(372)

In the end, I like the way psychologist John Money put it. He compared sexuality to the development of language. He argued that a person is not born speaking English. And nothing in their genetics made them learn English rather than Swahili. Rather, the fact that a person learned English depended on their native culture. It has been shown that brains are innately predisposed to assimilate a language, whatever language that may be. Once it is aquired, the language becomes so natural to us that it’s as if we were born with it. Yet no matter how natural our native tongue may be, we know we are not born speaking English. In like manner, no matter how natural our same gender attractions may seem, let us not confuse that to mean that we were born gay.

But as we know, sexuality is complicated and trying to reduce it to a neat sound bite only leaves us with more questions than answers. In actuality, the truth lies more to the middle, which should come as no surprise. It’s true that homophobia is alive and well today; groups like the Westborough Baptist church aren’t making the load easier for anybody. I imagine that there are scores of men and women living scared and lonely lives for fear of being rejected by their friends and family. But the opposite is also true, there are scores of men and women who once accepted homosexuality and have since left that behind…for reasons having nothing to do with fear of rejection.

In fact quite the opposite. Many of the people I’ve met over the years used to be openly gay, some were gay activists, and others lived with their partners for years. If they were seeking acceptance surely becoming “ex-gay” (as some have labeled us) was not the way. Those of us who have walked out of homosexuality face a double rejection as many even in the church as well as in the secular and pro-gay world question the validity of our change. So why change?

For one, many find homosexuality incompatible with their faith. Most religious texts make clear that homosexuality is a sin. It is true that many who pursue change are primarily motivated by their faith wishing to bring their whole lives (finances, sexuality, and morality) in line with their faith. This is a perfectly valid reason to leave homosexuality. People’s faith is an integral part of their identity defining for some even what they eat (but no one criticizes the Jewish community for keeping kosher.)

For others, their feelings did not line up with what professionals in the mental health community call a self schema. Everyone has a self schema; it is an outlook through which we see ourselves and the world. It is closely tied to our self image and self esteem. I for one struggled very much as the world kept telling me that I was gay when all along I didn’t believe I was. This wasn’t denial, this was conflict. My sexuality did not match with who I believed I was as a person or who I wanted to be. Like a piece of the puzzle that did not fit, my sexuality did not fit into the view I had for my life. I had to make a decision.

Was I going to live according to my values and who I believed myself to be? Or was I going to live only according to certain sexual feelings?

I have met other still who embraced their homosexuality and lived within that identity for decades. Their stories differ on certain aspects, some had long term relationships, some were promiscuous and unsafe yet all found their lifestyle left them empty. They simply didn’t know they had a choice – but once they found out freedom was possible they took the way out.

You would be surprised however that there are others… some famous who leave homosexuality for no other reason than their tastes have changed. In America we are familiar with Anne Hesche who had a highly publicized affair with Ellen DeGeneres, yet now is exclusively heterosexual in relationships with only men. Yet there are others still who have changed that are lesser publicized. Stephen Daldry for example, who directed Billy Elliot and The Hours was long known to be a homosexual until he fell in love with a woman, married and settled down.

Jackie Clune as well, a comedienne of British fame lived as a lesbian for upwards of 12 years until she, herself changed too. Writing in the British newspaper The Guardian, Clune writes “…after a particularly painful and drawn-out break up, I decided that for me being a lesbian wasn’t all it was cracked up to be. My relationships had all taken the same pattern – idyllic start, passionate intensity, massive conflict, slow merging of identities, rebellion, more conflict, couple therapy…In many ways this is all standard-issue break up stuff, straight or gay; but I couldn’t help feeling my answer lay back on the other side. I longed for my own mind back…” (June 14th, 2003)

It’s sad but true that Homophobia makes life impossible for some gays. But when we choose to change, it’s not because of “internalized homophobia” as some have accused. We come from diverse paths and are all pursuing the best for our lives. Regardless of the reason, whether propelled by our faith or our belief that there could lie something beyond the gay identity… the fact still remains that the common uniting factor in our lives is that we all are trying to live our lives the best way we see fit.

First, you can pray for an unsaved homosexual person and share the gospel with them. If you are relating with a Christian struggling with this issue, you can pray for them, too. Pray God will give them the courage and perseverance to achieve sexual abstinence. Sexual activity usually covers deep wounds. Once activity stops, the “pain-killer” of sex wears off and underlying emotional pain can surface. Be there to listen and support them in this process.

Pray God will help them see and find biblical resolution to underlying issues that led to a homosexual orientation. Learn what you can about these problems, and find someone with expertise that can counsel your friend. Pray the Lord will help them re-connect with His original design and purpose for them as a man or woman. If you are the same gender as your friend, you can play a tremendous part in his or her healing just by being a role-model of what a godly man or godly woman is like. That means being vulnerable about your weaknesses, aggressively pursuing personal maturity, and above all, seeking to grow in your relationship with Jesus Christ.

Don’t discount your ability to help someone leave homosexuality and into all that God plans for their lives. Be a friend: encourage, confront, listen, share. Go side-by-side with them through the challenging adventure ahead.

Not every gay-identified person participates in these often militant efforts, but the efforts are very real and they have specific goals when it comes to youth. Those goals include:

• Promoting homosexual, bisexual and transgender lifestyles as healthy, positive and normal.
• Disintegrating all meaning of gender.
• Silencing and vilifying any different point of view.
• Undermining parental authority to indoctrinate kids.
• Rewriting Christian principles.
• Polarizing students, so that anyone who is not “gay-affirming” is labeled a bigot.

These may seem like pretty extreme statements, but there are several organizations and tens of millions of dollars a year dedicated to these goals.

GLSEN and GSA’s

Most notable among these organizations is the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), an educational lobbying and activist group that is the primary force behind the promotion of Gay-Straight Alliance (GSA) clubs in high schools, middle schools and universities nationwide.

Their ‘resources’

A quick browse through the books GLSEN recommends for 7th through 12th graders will give you a glimpse into the value system they want the next generation to adopt. Here’s a look:

Free Your Mind by Ellen Bass and Kate Kaufman, for instance, is a comprehensive guide-to-life for youth who think they may be gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender. In truth, this book is full of deceptive, dangerous advice. Teens are encouraged to find “meaningful new relationships” via gay and lesbian chat rooms on the internet. The book also greatly overstates the protection offered by condoms, and lists “bathing together” and mutual masturbation as “safe” sexual practices.

Furthermore, Free Your Mind attacks the faith of teens. Throughout several chapters, young people are repeatedly urged to leave their churches if they do not embrace homosexuality. A whole chapter is devoted to “debunking” the Bible.

“…there isn’t any single truth…The one thing you really should beware of in life is when any human being tells you that they have the truth. Run as fast as you can. No one has the truth.” (Free Your Mind, p. 274)

Another book GLSEN recommends for teens, Revolutionary Voices, portrays dangerous lifestyles as positive forms of “diversity.” In the book, one young man shares his story of doing “sex work” involving cross-dressing and sadomasochsim. Revolutionary Voices calls these things an “empowering experience.”

The GSA Network also produced Beyond the Binary, a “gender activism” guide that encourages students to fight the notion that we are made male and female. The booklet teaches that gender is arbitrary, that one can move back and forth between genders, be both at the same time, or invent a new gender altogether–and that schools and other individuals should be forced to recognize these assumed “genders.”

Other controversies

The state of Massachusetts has always been at the forefront of homosexual activism. At least two years in a row, GLSEN (funded by state tax revenue) hosted workshops on school grounds, in which students received graphic instruction on how to perform different homosexual acts. Sex “kits” were passed out, and after a sweeping public outcry, parents were banned when the event was repeated.

More recently, the GSA Network in California elected a man to its Board of Directors who was widely known as a pornographer who peddled pictures of young men to x-rated magazines. When contacted and asked whether they were aware of this individual’s activities, no one from the GSA Network responded. The board member, however, subsequently stepped down.

The actions and attitudes of those who run these organizations don’t quite reflect those of the kids who actually take part in the clubs themselves. Most teens who join GSA’s (who are not all gay-identified) are drawn to the ideals of safety, equality and tolerance that these organizations espouse. What they get, though, is a deceptive and destructive crash-course in immorality.

School Policies

Gay advocacy groups spend millions lobbying every level of government in order to have an impact on school policies and curriculum. California is an example of where they’ve had the most success. The State Senate there has passed bills requiring schools to portray homosexual, bisexual and transgender lifestyles positively through “Tolerance Training.” Other legislation would force schools to allow transgender-identified students to use opposite-sex bathrooms and locker rooms.

As a matter of course, these activists seek to shut parents out while they are changing the educational system. The legislation mentioned above explicitly states that parents are not to be notified about “Tolerance Training” courses, and are not allowed to opt their children out of them.

So What Can You Do?

It’s so important for Christian parents to be involve themselves and communicate with the school. Make sure you know about meetings with school board and faculty members that parents can have access to. Find out the best way to stay up to date on changes in curriculum and policy in your district.

Christian legal groups like the Alliance Defense Fund can advise and support parents facing legal issues with their local districts and governments.

The most effective response to this growing movement, though, comes through Christian students. More than anyone, they have a greater freedom of opportunity to share the truth and love of the Gospel on their campuses. So make sure your youth pastor is educating and equipping students with the truth about these issues. We’ve got some great resources available to help them do that.

Students also have the most freedom (legally speaking) to bring Christian-themed information and resource onto their campuses. Through special campaigns like Allies, Too and the Day of Truth, young Christians can have a huge impact on public schools.

Related Links:

The World According to PFLAG: Why PFLAG and Children Don’t Mix from the National Association for the Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH)

Help Them Open Up

The best way to make it more likely your child might share a sexual struggle with you is to respond with an attitude of compassion and understanding whenever these types of issues come up. Your reaction to the subject of homosexuality when it comes up in conversation, on TV or through other relationships sends your children a message about whether you are a safe person to confide in.

Reacting with a grimace and saying, “That’s disgusting!” communicates hostility. Just consider: would you feel comfortable sharing a personal temptation with someone you knew thought “those people” were a disgusting abomination? Probably not.

Usually, people respond with hostility or anger to this issue because it seems so confusing and overwhelming. It’s not difficult, though, to overcome our fears of this issue by educating ourselves with a compassionate, Biblical standpoint. Exodus has some great resources to help you do just that.

When you can talk about homosexuality with calmness, knowledge and compassion, your children are more likely to talk to you about it. Basic truths to stick to are understanding that 1) nobody chooses to struggle with homosexuality, 2) a person isn’t guilty just because they’re tempted, 3) homosexual behavior is no worse than any other sin, 4) people can find freedom and healing in Christ.

Still, there is no way to guarantee that they will be confident enough to come directly to you. So you do want to know what to look for.

Sure Signs

If your son or daughter has been viewing homosexual pornography or visiting gay, lesbian or bisexual chat rooms online, that is a pretty solid sign that they are dealing with serious sexual identity issues. When confronted about this kind of involvement, most teens will try to dodge with an excuse like “I was just curious” or “I was trying to understand a friend better.”

Please understand that your child probably feels a deep sense of shame about their struggle, and whatever level of behavior they’ve become involved in. Whenever their struggle “comes out,” it’s crucial to reaffirm how much you love them, and that you do not see them any differently.

Other signs you ought to be concerned by include consistent and overt gender-atypical behavior (opposite-sex clothing, mannerisms, etc.), and unhealthy, overly-emotional attachments to a single friend of the same sex

Addressing It

When you observe these types of things, don’t be quick to label it as homosexuality. Simply address what you have observed and ask them questions about it. Don’t assume something is there if it is not plainly true–that can make things worse.

For instance, don’t say: “You and Sarah act like a couple of lesbians. You aren’t doing that, are you?” or, “Son, why do you act so feminine? You don’t want people to think you’re gay.”

Addressing without assuming would sound more like this: “I’ve noticed you and Sarah spend so much time together, you’re neglecting your other friends. Do you think that’s a good idea?” or, “Son, it seems like you aren’t really into hanging out with the guys. Did something happen?”

It is best for your response to communicate that you care about their well-being, and offer them opportunities to share their feelings. Plus if they already know that homosexuality doesn’t make you totally blow up, you’ve created a much more positive environment for them.

Not So Sure Signs

There are also sometimes “yellow flags” that go up for parents, but aren’t necessarily a sign your child struggles with SSA. For instance, if they come home from school with a book, flier or brochure mentioning homosexuality; that’s not necessarily a sign.

Material addressing homosexuality is becoming more and more common in the public school system. Your children will most likely receive information or materials on the subject more than once. Don’t assume they are struggling just because of something like this (pornographic material is another issue altogether) but take the opportunity to talk openly with them about issues of sexuality and see what they’re thinking.

Gay clubs (commonly called “GSA” or Gay-Straight Alliance) are also common on public school campuses. These clubs are not only geared towards students who are gay-identified, but they also encourage non-gay students to become “allies,” or people who are supportive of gay issues and/or making schools safer.

If your child joins the local GSA, it doesn’t necessarily mean they struggle–but you may want to have a talk with them and find out where they’re at in their understanding of sexual morality. These clubs, while exemplifying some good motives like stopping bullying, also promote materials and morals you will be strongly opposed to (see the article GLSEN and Its Influence on Children).

Try not to get into a confrontation with your child, but do your best to have open dialog about what they’re hearing about these issues and what they think.

They probably just want to show their support for making schools safe. Let them know there are great ways for Christian students to stand against bullying and harassment while still speaking the truth about sexuality, like the Allies, Too campaign.