Alcorn: ‘Choice’ to be gay may affect others

Published 11:17am Monday, October 29, 2012

The woman very angrily attacked the human rights commission, “Do you think I would choose to live the way I am having to live?” Hers was an outburst against a fellow commissioner who, rather in passing and intending to be polite, referred to “choice of lifestyle.” The woman then testified to incidents of prejudice, discrimination and persecution because she is, she insisted, lesbian.

Although I find it tenuous to presume homosexuality is a conscious choice, yet recent anecdotal evidence strongly suggests choice is a factor and, in some instances, even the decisive factor.

This was not always so clear, but both culture and society have changed since I researched the nature and cause of homosexuality as part of my doctoral work at New York University almost 40 years ago. I was required to study all current biological, psychological and social scholarly literature but also to conduct extensive personal interviews with self-identified gays and lesbians and with therapists who work with them.

To put it as simply as I can, the most typical occasion for a male feeling homosexual and acting upon his feeling (the research was delimited to males) was this: He spent his childhood in a home setting without a strong male with whom to identify and upon whom he could model his own identity and with a very strongly influential male-like mother with whom he did identify with the consequence of role diffusion and confusion. Even more strongly determinative was the physical presence but emotional absence of his father, a father who was either emotionally distant or subservient to the mother or both. My findings were adjudicated by scholars in several university departments and its schools of medicine and law and judged to be valid. Accordingly, the “Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders” at the time classified homosexuality a mental disorder.

Mind you, this was long ago and many changes have occurred not only among homosexuals but in the thinking of many who work with them. The gay community itself has since (with self-serving convenience) produced a survey that reports instances of twins reared separately but both being homosexual, suggesting genetic rather than social cause. What was not reported is that this phenomenon was not present in the majority of instances, thus rendering the conclusion invalid.

More impressive is the research that has identified what it calls a biological propensity toward homosexuality, but none establishes a cause-effect connection. That a person sustains homosexual feelings does not require him or her to be homosexual. The possibility and option of choice enters here.

As to the DSM, the current edition no longer categorizes. When I learned this and inquired of professionals in the field, they reported it was the intimidation of political correctness that forced the change and not conclusive clinical research.

The biggest change in society is also political. Whereas forty years ago they were often unfairly denied employment, they have since achieved special status toward employment. Indeed, there are places where reverse discrimination prevails, i.e., gays receive preference over non-gays. It used to be many hid their behaviors in shame (which, of course, is not healthy), but now most are open and even boastful. In point of fact, it has become fashionable and advantageous to become gay, act as if one is, or at least actively advocate for those who are.

I have listened to university students who are put upon for not being gay or, at least, not engaging in such behavior. I have listened to young people in the arts who are marginalized for not being gay and persecuted for just saying so. Of course, the woman who testified before our commission would not choose to be mistreated and persecuted for this specific reason. But she may have chosen her sexual orientation, considering such a trade-off. There are people suffering from persecution complexes or masochist tendencies everywhere, and at least some are within the gay community. Such, at least, have made choices without being conscious of them.

That a same-sex couple has chosen homosexual behavior and domestic partnership does not earn or merit legal marital status. They have made their choices, and their choices are tolerated. It is both illegal and unethical to demand society change its choices to suit theirs.


Sign in to Comment | Need help commenting? Click here

  • Cal Briz

    This article is complete hogwash. You are obviously misinformed and don’t speak from empirical evidence, but rather from ambiguity and subjectivity. I hope you are no longer involved in psychology as you have no place in science.

    Report comment

  • Cal Briz

    And as for the anonymous “college students” and “artists” suffering from the “persecution” of not being homosexual, how does this compare to the many homosexuals literally beaten and killed almost every day just for being who they are? You seem like an awful person, cloaking your bigotry in obsolete pseudo-science. I’m currently a graduate student in psychology and all the studies I’ve seen, which were NOT conducted by homosexuals, indicate that it is an unchosen disposition that naturally arises among a small percentage of the population in both humans and most animals.

    Report comment

  • Yeah…

    Mr. Alcorn is a bit obsessed with gay people, wouldn’t you say? You know what they say about people who have such deep seeded obsessions and hate…

    Report comment

  • plumbing101mike

    Wow! I am amazed and encouraged to read this kind of simple and straight forward truth in a newspaper that I gave up on long ago! Thank you Mr. Alcorn! I know that uncomfortable truth is not popular, so thankyou in advance for all of the scorn and hate speech that you are sure to stir up!

    Mike

    Report comment

  • Johnny Quest

    Hi Dr. Alcorn. It seems ironic as you explain your perspective that “choice”is tenuous a (weak or flimsy) argument for being gay and that only in “some” instances is the “deciding factor”. I agreed with the necessary bio/pscyho/social context in which you have researched and applied your perspective and opinion. However, the use of some anecdotal evidence as you know does not validate much, other than opinion as we often base our opinions on insufficient information or evidence. It seems logical to suggest that behavior is not an exact science and that behavioral science is actually quite a messy business. The question I might ask is what are the strongest and most influential factors or deviation variables in being gay? Then I would ask: what does it really matter? For many, a life filled with rejection, hate and inequality. For others, maybe the incredible need for attention from those who there was non given and for awhile this cause and effect relationship did appear to be a form of popularity represented ( I think this school of thought is pretty much over…this writer’s opinion). Regardless it seems, being gay is always going to be a messy business with very divided opinions and research. This outcome could very well be the plan of the “evil one” as the church continues to divide itself based on this issue. The biblical principle I will rest on is Love thy neighbor as thyself and what that means to this writer. Hopefully you get the implications. In the Florida City I reside in, the City Council affirmed the current charter law that discriminates against those who are homosexual. For example, if a person is gay I don’t have to rent to them. In other words, acts of discrimination and inequality continue to exist. Unfortunately this outcome is very discouraging for this writer and stretches vastly into the already corrupt political system. Enough said for now, its time for some breakfast.

    Report comment

Editor's Picks