From: pdb059@ipl.jpl.nasa.gov (Paul Bartholomew)
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Subject: Re: More Evidence That Homosexuality Is A Result of Child Sexual Abuse
Date: 18 Nov 92 07:59:21 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Image Processing Lab

In article <13214@optilink.UUCP>, cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:
> Previously, I have posted excerpts from two recent scholarly
> works on child sexual abuse that recognized a connection between
> child sexual abuse and adult homosexuality.

I really wish you'd be more careful in your citing of your research.  For
example, you have been making this claim ever since your "Mother" postings,
and it really isn't justified by your research.

The most significant problem is your vague use of terminology--specifically,
just what is this "connection" you refer to?  Were all homosexuals molested
as children?  Do all children who are molested become homosexual?  None of
your sources, based on the information you posted, refer to a "connection"
between homosexuality and child molestation and none provide us with the
specifics we need to determine if such a connection really exists.

The relevant passages were as follows:

From the Everstine's work:

     She might adopt an asexual lifestyle or homosexual lifestyle, as a
     method of coping with the original incestuous conflict, designed to
     protect her from the source of trauma in possible future conflicts.

Note a couple of things in the above passage: 1) it appears that they are
discussing a specific sub-class of molested victims--women who were molested
by a relative (presumably a father?);  2) no hard numbers are provided as to
how many women react in this way;  3) the weasel word, "might", tends to
devalue the point of the paragraph.

Now, perhaps it is just my reading skills, but I don't believe this offers
much support for your stated hypothesis about a "connection between child
molestation and homosexuality"--particularly when you consider that your
arguments have almost exclusively centered around homosexual men.

The second source from your research consists of two passages from the work
by Bagley & King.  The first passage is as follows:

     Boys who had been sexually abused and who as young adults were
     currently practising homosexuals, had rather poor self-concept
     in comparison with all other groups, except those who were cur-
     rently homosexual but who had never been sexually abused as
     children.

Once again, my reading skills may be deficient, but I don't see where this
offers any support for your hypothesis.  Basically, all this passage seems
to say is that homosexuals have low self-esteem.  This is news?  It cer-
tainly offers no support for a link between homosexuality and child moles-
tation.

Bagley & King's second passage is as follows (this sentence immediately
followed the one above):

     It looks as though sexual abuse of boys acts for some as a kind of
     recruitment process into adult homosexuality:  it is the conflicts
     surrounding the homosexual role rather than the child abuse *per se*
     which diminishes self-esteem and self-concept.

When you first posted this, you were almost gleeful about the use of the
word "recruitment" in this passage.  In re-reading this passage, though, I
am not convinced that it says what you think it says.  First of all, the
primary point about the paragraph doesn't seem to be about "recruitment",
but rather about self-esteem.  They seem to be claiming that it is not
the child molestation which causes low self-esteem, but rather "the con-
flicts surrounding the homosexual role."

Secondly, the more I read this passage, the more trouble I have with the
word "recruitment" and I can't help wishing they had been more clear in
their writing.  Are they saying, as Mr. Cramer would like to believe, that
it is the child molestation that causes the homosexual behavior?  I'm not
convinced that they are.

In any case, I think I can safely say that your opening sentence, "recognized
a connection child sexual abuse and adult homosexuality," is simply wrong.
Based on these excerpts from your own research, you cannot honestly make
such a claim.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Bartholomew          |   "The time has come, the walrus said, to talk of
                          |    many things..."                  Lewis Carroll
pdb059@ipl.jpl.nasa.gov   |   Disclaimer:  Opinions?  What opinions?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: ca.politics