{"id":66,"date":"2018-07-02T18:49:49","date_gmt":"2018-07-02T22:49:49","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/sites.miamioh.edu\/gleam\/?page_id=66"},"modified":"2018-07-02T18:51:37","modified_gmt":"2018-07-02T22:51:37","slug":"ten-hateful-anti-gay-myths","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/sites.miamioh.edu\/qtfsa\/fyi\/ten-hateful-anti-gay-myths\/","title":{"rendered":"Ten Hateful Anti-Gay Myths"},"content":{"rendered":"

Exploring 10 key myths propagated by the anti-gay movement, along with the truth behind the propaganda.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Origin of article:http:\/\/www.alternet.org\/sex\/149060\/10_hateful_antigay_myths_debunked?page=entire
\nAuthor: Evelyn Schlatter and Robert Steinback
\nPublished: December 9, 2010<\/p>\n

Ever since born-again singer and orange juice pitchwoman Anita Bryant helped kick off the contemporary anti-gay movement more than 30 years ago, hard-line elements of the religious right have been searching for ways to demonize homosexuals \u2014 or, at a minimum, to find arguments that will prevent their normalization in society. For the former Florida beauty queen and her Save Our Children group, it was the alleged plans of gays and lesbians to \u201crecruit\u201d in schools that provided the fodder for their crusade. But in addition to hawking that myth, the legions of anti-gay activists who followed have added a panoply of others, ranging from the extremely doubtful claim that homosexuality is a choice, to unalloyed lies like the claims that gays molest children far more than heterosexuals or that hate crime laws will lead to the legalization of bestiality and necrophilia. These fairy tales are important to the anti-gay right because they form the basis of its claim that homosexuality is a social evil that must be suppressed \u2014 an opinion rejected by virtually all relevant medical and scientific authorities. They also almost certainly contribute to hate crime violence directed at homosexuals, who are more targeted for such attacks than any other minority in America. What follows are 10 key myths propagated by the anti-gay movement, along with the truth behind the propaganda.<\/p>\n

MYTH #1: Homosexuals molest children at far higher rates than heterosexuals.<\/strong><\/p>\n

THE ARGUMENT: Depicting gay men as a threat to children may be the single most potent weapon for stoking public fears about homosexuality \u2014 and for winning elections and referenda, as Anita Bryant found out during her successful 1977 campaign to overturn a Dade County, Fla., ordinance barring discrimination against gay people. Discredited psychologist Paul Cameron, the most ubiquitous purveyor of anti-gay junk science, has been a major promoter of this myth. Despite having been debunked repeatedly and very publicly, Cameron\u2019s work is still widely relied upon by anti-gay organizations, although many no longer quote him by name.<\/p>\n

THE FACTS: According to the American Psychological Association, \u201chomosexual men are not more likely to sexually abuse children than heterosexual men are.\u201d Gregory Herek, a professor at the University of California, Davis, who is one of the nation\u2019s leading researchers on prejudice against sexual minorities, reviewed a series of studies and found no evidence that gay men molest children at higher rates than heterosexual men. Anti-gay activists who make that claim allege that all men who molest male children should be seen as homosexual. But research by A. Nicholas Groth, a pioneer in the field of sexual abuse of children, shows that is not so. Groth found that there are two types of child molesters: fixated and regressive. The fixated child molester \u2014 the stereotypical pedophile \u2014 cannot be considered homosexual or heterosexual because \u201che often finds adults of either sex repulsive\u201d and often molests children of both sexes. Regressive child molesters are generally attracted to other adults, but may \u201cregress\u201d to focusing on children when confronted with stressful situations. Groth found that the majority of regressed offenders were heterosexual in their adult relationships. The Child Molestation Research and Prevention Institute notes that 90% of child molesters target children in their network of family and friends. Most child molesters, therefore, are not gay people lingering outside schools waiting to snatch children from the playground, as much religious-right rhetoric suggests.<\/p>\n

MYTH #2: Same-sex parents harm children.<\/strong><\/p>\n

THE ARGUMENT: Most hard-line anti-gay organizations are heavily invested, from both a religious and a political standpoint, in promoting the traditional nuclear family as the sole framework for the healthy upbringing of children. They maintain a reflexive belief that same-sex parenting must be harmful to children \u2014 although the exact nature of that supposed harm varies widely.<\/p>\n

THE FACTS: No legitimate research has demonstrated that same-sex couples are any more or any less harmful to children than heterosexual couples. The American Academy of Pediatrics in a 2002 policy statement declared: \u201cA growing body of scientific literature demonstrates that children who grow up with one or two gay and\/or lesbian parents fare as well in emotional, cognitive, social, and sexual functioning as do children whose parents are heterosexual.\u201d That policy statement was reaffirmed in 2009. The American Psychological Association found that \u201csame-sex couples are remarkably similar to heterosexual couples, and that parenting effectiveness and the adjustment, development and psychological well-being of children is unrelated to parental sexual orientation.\u201d Similarly, the Child Welfare League of America\u2019s official position with regard to same-sex parents is that \u201clesbian, gay, and bisexual parents are as well-suited to raise children as their heterosexual counterparts.\u201d<\/p>\n

MYTH #3: People become homosexual because they were sexually abused as children or there was a deficiency in sex-role modeling by their parents.<\/strong><\/p>\n

THE ARGUMENT: Many anti-gay rights proponents claim that homosexuality is a mental disorder caused by some psychological trauma or aberration in childhood. This argument is used to counter the common observation that no one, gay or straight, consciously chooses his or her sexual orientation. Joseph Nicolosi, a founder of the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality, said in 2009 that \u201cif you traumatize a child in a particular way, you will create a homosexual condition.\u201d He also has repeatedly said, \u201cFathers, if you don\u2019t hug your sons, some other man will.\u201d A side effect of this argument is the demonization of parents of homosexuals, who are led to wonder if they failed to protect a child against sexual abuse or failed as role models in some important way. In October 2010, Kansas State University family studies professor Walter Schumm said he was about to release a related study arguing that homosexual couples are more likely than heterosexuals to raise gay or lesbian children.<\/p>\n

THE FACTS: No scientifically sound study has linked sexual orientation or identity with parental role-modeling or childhood sexual abuse. The American Psychiatric Association noted in a 2000 fact sheet on gay, lesbian and bisexual issues that \u201cno specific psychosocial or family dynamic cause for homosexuality has been identified, including histories of childhood sexual abuse.\u201d The fact sheet goes on to say that sexual abuse does not appear to be any more prevalent among children who grow up and identify as gay, lesbian or bisexual than in children who grow up and identify as heterosexual. Similarly, the National Organization on Male Sexual Victimization notes on its website that \u201cexperts in the human sexuality field do not believe that premature sexual experiences play a significant role in late adolescent or adult sexual orientation\u201d and added that it\u2019s unlikely that someone can make another person a homosexual or heterosexual. With regard to Schumm\u2019s study, critics have already said that he appears to have merely aggregated anecdotal data, a biased sample that invalidates his findings.<\/p>\n

MYTH #4: Homosexuals don\u2019t live nearly as long as heterosexuals.<\/strong><\/p>\n

THE ARGUMENT: Anti-gay organizations want to promote heterosexuality as the healthier \u201cchoice.\u201d Furthermore, the purportedly shorter life spans and poorer physical and mental health of homosexuals are often offered as reasons why gays and lesbians shouldn\u2019t be allowed to adopt or foster children.<\/p>\n

THE FACTS: This falsehood can be traced directly to the discredited research of Paul Cameron and his Family Research Institute, specifically a 1994 paper he co-wrote entitled, \u201cThe Lifespan of Homosexuals.\u201d Using obituaries collected from gay newspapers, he and his two co-authors concluded that gay men died, on average, at 43, compared to an average life expectancy at the time of around 73 for all U.S. men. On the basis of the same obituaries, Cameron also claimed that gay men are 18 times more likely to die in car accidents than heterosexuals, 22 times more likely to die of heart attacks than whites, and 11 times more likely than blacks to die of the same cause. He also concluded that lesbians are 487 times more likely to die of murder, suicide, or accidents than straight women. Remarkably, these claims have become staples of the anti-gay right and have frequently made their way into far more mainstream venues. For example, William Bennett, education secretary under President Reagan, used Cameron\u2019s statistics in a 1997 interview he gave to ABC News\u2019 \u201cThis Week.\u201d However, like virtually all of his \u201cresearch,\u201d Cameron\u2019s methodology is egregiously flawed \u2014 most obviously because the sample he selected (the data from the obits) was not remotely statistically representative of the homosexual population as a whole. Even Nicholas Eberstadt, a demographer at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, has called Cameron\u2019s methods \u201cjust ridiculous.\u201d<\/p>\n

MYTH #5: Homosexuals controlled the Nazi Party and helped to orchestrate the Holocaust.<\/strong><\/p>\n

THE ARGUMENT: This claim comes directly from a 1995 book titled The Pink Swastika: Homosexuality in the Nazi Party, by Scott Lively and Kevin Abrams. Lively is the virulently anti-gay founder of Abiding Truth Ministries and Abrams is an organizer of a group called the International Committee for Holocaust Truth, which came together in 1994 and included Lively as a member.The primary argument Lively and Abrams make is that gay people were not victimized by the Holocaust. Rather, Hitler deliberately sought gay men for his inner circle because their \u201cunusual brutality\u201d would help him run the party and mastermind the Holocaust. In fact, \u201cthe Nazi party was entirely controlled by militaristic male homosexuals throughout its short history,\u201d the book claims. \u201cWhile we cannot say that homosexuals caused the Holocaust, we must not ignore their central role in Nazism,\u201d Lively and Abrams add. \u201cTo the myth of the \u2018pink triangle\u2019 \u2014 the notion that all homosexuals in Nazi Germany were persecuted \u2014 we must respond with the reality of the \u2018pink swastika.\u2019\u201d These claims have been picked up by a number of anti-gay groups and individuals, including Bryan Fischer of the American Family Association, as proof that homosexuals are violent and sick. The book has also attracted an audience among anti-gay church leaders in Eastern Europe and among Russian-speaking anti-gay activists in America.<\/p>\n

THE FACTS: The Pink Swastika has been roundly discredited by legitimate historians and other scholars. Christine Mueller, professor of history at Reed College, did a line-by-line refutation of an earlier (1994) Abrams article on the topic and of the broader claim that the Nazi Party was \u201centirely controlled\u201d by gay men. Historian Jon David Wynecken at Grove City College also refuted the book, pointing out that Lively and Abrams did no primary research of their own, instead using out-of-context citations of some legitimate sources while ignoring information from those same sources that ran counter to their thesis. The myth that the Nazis condoned homosexuality sprang up in the 1930s, started by socialist opponents of the Nazis as a slander against Nazi leaders. Credible historians believe that only one of the half-dozen leaders in Hitler\u2019s inner circle, Ernst R\u00f6hm, was gay. (R\u00f6hm was murdered on Hitler\u2019s orders in 1934.) The Nazis considered homosexuality one aspect of the \u201cdegeneracy\u201d they were trying to eradicate. When the National Socialist Party came to power in 1933, it quickly strengthened Germany\u2019s existing penalties against homosexuality. Heinrich Himmler, Hitler\u2019s security chief, announced that homosexuality was to be \u201celiminated\u201d in Germany, along with miscegenation among the races. Historians estimate that between 50,000 and 100,000 men were arrested for homosexuality (or suspicion of it) under the Nazi regime. These men were routinely sent to concentration camps and many thousands died there. In 1942, the Nazis instituted the death penalty for homosexuals. Offenders in the German military were routinely shot. Himmler put it like this: \u201cWe must exterminate these people root and branch. \u2026 We can\u2019t permit such danger to the country; the homosexual must be completely eliminated.\u201d<\/p>\n

MYTH #6: Hate crime laws will lead to the jailing of pastors who criticize homosexuality and the legalization of practices like bestiality and necrophilia.<\/strong><\/p>\n

THE ARGUMENT: Anti-gay activists, who have long opposed adding LGBT people to those protected by hate crime legislation, have repeatedly claimed that such laws would lead to the jailing of religious figures who preach against homosexuality \u2014 part of a bid to gain the backing of the broader religious community for their position. Janet Porter of Faith2Action was one of many who asserted that the federal Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act \u2014 signed into law by President Obama in October 2009 \u2014 would \u201cjail pastors\u201d because it \u201ccriminalizes speech against the homosexual agenda.\u201d In a related assertion, anti-gay activists claimed the law would lead to the legalization of psychosexual disorders (paraphilias) like bestiality and pedophilia. Bob Unruh, a conservative Christian journalist who left The Associated Press in 2006 for the right-wing, conspiracist news site WorldNetDaily, said shortly before the federal law was passed that it would legalize \u201call 547 forms of sexual deviancy or \u2018paraphilias\u2019 listed by the American Psychiatric Association.\u201d This claim was repeated by many anti-gay organizations, including the Illinois Family Institute.<\/p>\n

THE FACTS: The claim that hate crime laws could result in the imprisonment of those who \u201coppose the homosexual lifestyle\u201d is false. The Constitution provides robust protections of free speech, and case law makes it clear that even a preacher who suggested that homosexuals should be killed would be protected. Neither do hate crime laws \u2014 which provide for enhanced penalties when persons are victimized because of their \u201csexual orientation\u201d (among other factors) \u2014 \u201cprotect pedophiles,\u201d as Janet Porter and many others have claimed. According to the American Psychological Association, sexual orientation refers to heterosexuality, homosexuality and bisexuality \u2014 not paraphilias such as pedophilia. Paraphilias, as defined by the American Psychiatric Association, are disorders characterized by sexual urges or behaviors directed at nonhuman objects or non-consenting persons like children, or that involve the suffering or humiliation of one\u2019s partner. Even if pedophiles, for example, were protected under a hate crime law \u2014 and such a law has not been suggested or contemplated anywhere \u2014 that would not legalize or \u201cprotect\u201d pedophilia. Pedophilia is illegal sexual activity, and a law that more severely punished people who attacked pedophiles would not change that.<\/p>\n

MYTH #7: Allowing homosexuals to serve openly would damage the armed forces.<\/strong><\/p>\n

THE ARGUMENT: Anti-gay groups are adamantly opposed to allowing gay men and lesbians to serve openly in the armed forces, not only because of their purported fear that combat readiness will be undermined, but because the military has long been considered the purest meritocracy in America (the armed forces were successfully racially integrated long before American civilian society, for example). If gays can serve honorably and effectively in this meritocracy, that would suggest that there is no rational basis for discriminating against them in any way.<\/p>\n

THE FACTS: Homosexuals now serve in the U.S. armed forces, though under the \u201cDon\u2019t Ask, Don\u2019t Tell\u201d (DADT) policy instituted in 1993, they cannot serve openly. At the same time, gays and lesbians serve openly in the armed forces of 25 countries, including Britain, Israel, South Africa, Canada and Australia, according to a report released by the Palm Center, a policy think tank at the University of California at Santa Barbara. The Palm Center report concluded that lifting bans against openly gay service personnel in these countries \u201cha[s] had no negative impact on morale, recruitment, retention, readiness or overall combat effectiveness.\u201d Successful transitions to new policies were attributed to clear signals of leadership support and a focus on a uniform code of behavior without regard to sexual orientation. A 2008 Military Times poll of active-duty military personnel, often cited by anti-gay activists, found that 10% of respondents said they would not re-enlist if the DADT policy were repealed. That would mean some 228,000 people might leave the military in that instance. But a 2009 review of that poll by the Palm Center suggested a wide disparity between what soldiers said they would do and their actual actions. It noted, for example, that far more than 10% of West Point officers in the 1970s said they would leave the service if women were admitted to the academy. \u201cBut when the integration became a reality,\u201d the report said, \u201cthere was no mass exodus; the opinions turned out to be just opinions.\u201d Similarly, a 1985 survey of 6,500 male Canadian service members and a 1996 survey of 13,500 British service members each revealed that nearly two-thirds expressed strong reservations about serving with gays. Yet when those countries lifted bans on gays serving openly, virtually no one left the service for that reason. \u201cNone of the dire predictions of doom came true,\u201d the Palm Center report said.<\/p>\n

MYTH #8: Homosexuals are more prone to be mentally ill and to abuse drugs and alcohol.<\/strong><\/p>\n

THE ARGUMENT: Anti-gay groups want not only to depict sexual orientation as something that can be changed but also to show that heterosexuality is the most desirable \u201cchoice\u201d \u2014 even if religious arguments are set aside. The most frequently used secular argument made by anti-gay groups in that regard is that homosexuality is inherently unhealthy, both mentally and physically. As a result, most anti-gay rights groups reject the 1973 decision by the American Psychiatric Association (APA) to remove homosexuality from its list of mental illnesses. Some of these groups, including the particularly hard-line Traditional Values Coalition, claim that \u201chomosexual activists\u201d managed to infiltrate the APA in order to sway its decision.<\/p>\n

THE FACTS: All major professional mental health organizations are on record as stating that homosexuality is not a mental disorder. It is true that LGBT people suffer higher rates of anxiety, depression, and depression-related illnesses and behaviors like alcohol and drug abuse than the general population. But studies done during the past 15 years have determined that it is the stress of being a member of a minority group in an often-hostile society \u2014 and not LGBT identity itself \u2014 that accounts for the higher levels of mental illness and drug use. Richard J. Wolitski, an expert on minority status and public health issues at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, put it like this in 2008: \u201cEconomic disadvantage, stigma, and discrimination \u2026 increase stress and diminish the ability of individuals [in minority groups] to cope with stress, which in turn contribute to poor physical and mental health.\u201d<\/p>\n

MYTH #9: No one is born a homosexual.<\/strong><\/p>\n

THE ARGUMENT: Anti-gay activists keenly oppose the granting of \u201cspecial\u201d civil rights protections to homosexuals similar to those afforded black Americans and other minorities. But if people are born gay \u2014 in the same way people have no choice as to whether they are black or white \u2014 discrimination against homosexuals would be vastly more difficult to justify. Thus, anti-gay forces insist that sexual orientation is a behavior that can be changed, not an immutable characteristic.<\/p>\n

THE FACTS: Modern science cannot state conclusively what causes sexual orientation, but a great many studies suggest that it is the result of biological and environmental forces, not a personal \u201cchoice.\u201d One of the more recent is a 2008 Swedish study of twins (the world\u2019s largest twin study) that appeared in The Archives of Sexual Behavior and concluded that \u201c[h]omosexual behaviour is largely shaped by genetics and random environmental factors.\u201d Dr. Qazi Rahman, study co-author and a leading scientist on human sexual orientation, said: \u201cThis study puts cold water on any concerns that we are looking for a single \u2018gay gene\u2019 or a single environmental variable which could be used to \u2018select out\u2019 homosexuality \u2014 the factors which influence sexual orientation are complex. And we are not simply talking about homosexuality here \u2014 heterosexual behaviour is also influenced by a mixture of genetic and environmental factors.\u201d The American Psychological Association (APA) acknowledges that despite much research into the possible genetic, hormonal, social and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no evidence has emerged that would allow scientists to pinpoint the precise causes of sexual orientation. Still, the APA concludes that \u201cmost people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation.\u201d In October 2010, Kansas State University family studies professor Walter Schumm said he was about to release a study showing that gay parents produced far more gay children than heterosexual parents. He told a reporter that he was \u201ctrying to prove [homosexuality is] not 100% genetic.\u201d But critics suggested that his data did not prove that, and, in any event, virtually no scientists have suggested that homosexuality is caused only by genes.<\/p>\n

MYTH #10: Gay people can choose to leave homosexuality.<\/strong><\/p>\n

THE ARGUMENT: If people are not born gay, as anti-gay activists claim, then it should be possible for individuals to abandon homosexuality. This view is buttressed among religiously motivated anti-gay activists by the idea that homosexual practice is a sin and humans have the free will needed to reject sinful urges. A number of \u201cex-gay\u201d religious ministries have sprung up in recent years with the aim of teaching homosexuals to become heterosexuals, and these have become prime purveyors of the claim that gays and lesbians, with the aid of mental therapy and Christian teachings, can \u201ccome out of homosexuality.\u201d Exodus International, the largest of these ministries, plainly states, \u201cYou don\u2019t have to be gay!\u201d Another, the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality, describes itself as \u201ca professional, scientific organization that offers hope to those who struggle with unwanted homosexuality.\u201d<\/p>\n

THE FACTS: \u201cReparative\u201d or sexual reorientation therapy \u2014 the pseudo-scientific foundation of the ex-gay movement \u2014 has been rejected by all the established and reputable American medical, psychological, psychiatric, and professional counseling organizations. In 2009, for instance, the American Psychological Association adopted a resolution, accompanied by a 138-page report, that repudiated ex-gay therapy. The report concluded that compelling evidence suggested that cases of individuals going from gay to straight were \u201crare\u201d and that \u201cmany individuals continued to experience same-sex sexual attractions\u201d after reparative therapy. The APA resolution added that \u201cthere is insufficient evidence to support the use of psychological interventions to change sexual orientation\u201d and asked \u201cmental health professionals to avoid misrepresenting the efficacy of sexual orientation change efforts by promoting or promising change in sexual orientation.\u201d The resolution also affirmed that same-sex sexual and romantic feelings are normal. Some of the most striking, if anecdotal, evidence of the ineffectiveness of sexual reorientation therapy has been the numerous failures of some of its most ardent advocates. For example, the founder of Exodus International, Michael Bussee, left the organization in 1979 with a fellow male ex-gay counselor because the two had fallen in love. Alan Chambers, current president of Exodus, said in 2007 that with years of therapy, he\u2019s mostly conquered his attraction to men, but then admitted, \u201cBy no means would we ever say that change can be sudden or complete.”<\/p>\n

\n

Evelyn Schlatter is a research fellow at the Southern Poverty Law Center. She is the author of Aryan Cowboys: White Supremacists and the Search for a New Frontier, 1970-2000.<\/p>\n

Robert Steinback is deputy editor of the Southern Poverty Law Center’s Intelligence Report magazine and Hatewatch blog. Prior to joining SPLC, he worked for 24 years at The Miami Herald as a reporter, editor and columnist.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Exploring 10 key myths propagated by the anti-gay movement, along with the truth behind the propaganda. Origin of article:http:\/\/www.alternet.org\/sex\/149060\/10_hateful_antigay_myths_debunked?page=entire Author: Evelyn Schlatter and Robert Steinback Published: December 9, 2010 Ever since born-again singer and orange juice pitchwoman Anita Bryant helped kick off the contemporary anti-gay movement more than 30 years ago, hard-line elements of the […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1593,"featured_media":0,"parent":62,"menu_order":13,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"_bbp_topic_count":0,"_bbp_reply_count":0,"_bbp_total_topic_count":0,"_bbp_total_reply_count":0,"_bbp_voice_count":0,"_bbp_anonymous_reply_count":0,"_bbp_topic_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_reply_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_forum_subforum_count":0,"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-66","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.miamioh.edu\/qtfsa\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/66","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.miamioh.edu\/qtfsa\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.miamioh.edu\/qtfsa\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.miamioh.edu\/qtfsa\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1593"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.miamioh.edu\/qtfsa\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=66"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/sites.miamioh.edu\/qtfsa\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/66\/revisions"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.miamioh.edu\/qtfsa\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/62"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.miamioh.edu\/qtfsa\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=66"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}