Only one from the mailbag today, because of the length and importance.
From Jay, who points us to the New Atlantic’s major study on sexuality. Bookmark this one, folks. You’ll need it. All what follow below is from the Executive Summary (I didn’t want to use Blockquote, since it italicizes the text, and this passage is too long).
Part One: Sexual Orientation
- The understanding of sexual orientation as an innate, biologically fixed property of human beings — the idea that people are “born that way” — is not supported by scientific evidence.
- While there is evidence that biological factors such as genes and hormones are associated with sexual behaviors and attractions, there are no compelling causal biological explanations for human sexual orientation. While minor differences in the brain structures and brain activity between homosexual and heterosexual individuals have been identified by researchers, such neurobiological findings do not demonstrate whether these differences are innate or are the result of environmental and psychological factors.
- Longitudinal studies of adolescents suggest that sexual orientation may be quite fluid over the life course for some people, with one study estimating that as many as 80% of male adolescents who report same-sex attractions no longer do so as adults (although the extent to which this figure reflects actual changes in same-sex attractions and not just artifacts of the survey process has been contested by some researchers).
- Compared to heterosexuals, non-heterosexuals are about two to three times as likely to have experienced childhood sexual abuse.
Part Two: Sexuality, Mental Health Outcomes, and Social Stress
- Compared to the general population, non-heterosexual subpopulations are at an elevated risk for a variety of adverse health and mental health outcomes.
- Members of the non-heterosexual population are estimated to have about 1.5 times higher risk of experiencing anxiety disorders than members of the heterosexual population, as well as roughly double the risk of depression, 1.5 times the risk of substance abuse, and nearly 2.5 times the risk of suicide.
- Members of the transgender population are also at higher risk of a variety of mental health problems compared to members of the non-transgender population. Especially alarmingly, the rate of lifetime suicide attempts across all ages of transgender individuals is estimated at 41%, compared to under 5% in the overall U.S. population.
- There is evidence, albeit limited, that social stressors such as discrimination and stigma contribute to the elevated risk of poor mental health outcomes for non-heterosexual and transgender populations. More high-quality longitudinal studies are necessary for the “social stress model” to be a useful tool for understanding public health concerns.
Part Three: Gender Identity
- The hypothesis that gender identity is an innate, fixed property of human beings that is independent of biological sex — that a person might be “a man trapped in a woman’s body” or “a woman trapped in a man’s body” — is not supported by scientific evidence.
- According to a recent estimate, about 0.6% of U.S. adults identify as a gender that does not correspond to their biological sex.
- Studies comparing the brain structures of transgender and non-transgender individuals have demonstrated weak correlations between brain structure and cross-gender identification. These correlations do not provide any evidence for a neurobiological basis for cross-gender identification.
- Compared to the general population, adults who have undergone sex-reassignment surgery continue to have a higher risk of experiencing poor mental health outcomes. One study found that, compared to controls, sex-reassigned individuals were about 5 times more likely to attempt suicide and about 19 times more likely to die by suicide.
- Children are a special case when addressing transgender issues. Only a minority of children who experience cross-gender identification will continue to do so into adolescence or adulthood.
- There is little scientific evidence for the therapeutic value of interventions that delay puberty or modify the secondary sex characteristics of adolescents, although some children may have improved psychological well-being if they are encouraged and supported in their cross-gender identification. There is no evidence that all children who express gender-atypical thoughts or behavior should be encouraged to become transgender.
It also pretty clear that homosexuals, transsexuals, etc. are not the least bit interested in a scientific analysis of their condition in fact they would be enraged. And we can say that about the main stream press, large corporations, many churches, Universities, etc. Anyone who takes this on can expect the same treatment as Charles Murray. Truthfulness is simply not Politically Correct as everybody knows.
“Compared to the general population, non-heterosexual subpopulations are at an elevated risk for a variety of adverse health and mental health outcomes.”
The same is true of pedophiles. Why are we still abusing and vilifying this group? It’s not their fault. They were born that way. In fact, why vilify ANY behavior? That’s moralistic and nasty. Everything should be okay. Morals are fluid, you know, so why even bother to create any for brief periods of time? It’s a waste.
Bad sexual morals cause bad health. Bad health caused by bad morals in an unjust expense for society. Bad sexual morals hurts others physically and psychologically.
Consider another WordPress theme! You can have a more pleasing Blockquote and I can have a theme that isn’t this bright. Also the yellow text selection barely appears when I use it with some screen settings (looks the same as unselected), and might also annoy some of the colorblind.
This one I just looked up looks a bit like Fr. Z’s blog’s: https://wordpress.org/themes/twentyeleven/
Not that this is urgent or anything.
I find it amusing that the author starts the article by using several paragraphs to present his bonafides. I wrote technical articles and usually at the end of the article there would be a few sentences about the author. You weren’t given several paragraphs at the beginning of the article to brag about yourself.
“ • Compared to the general population, non-heterosexual subpopulations are at an elevated risk for a variety of adverse health and mental health outcomes.”
Statistics cannot prove cause!
It is impossible to say whether something which causes homosexuality which is innate does not also come with other problems. The point aimed at there is blame but it falls very far short. Craftily, the conclusion is left to the reader.
~~~~~
The next bullet point flies in the face of years of experience of patients, I would have seen, and it would be noted amongst staff, a higher number of homosexuals falling into problems post injury and suffering with chronic pain than heterosexuals. This 1.5 is a high enough figure for this to have been a tangible number amongst my case loads over the years. Only the day before yesterday, a claim that mental illness was insanity, which is also utterly false:
“• Members of the non-heterosexual population are estimated to have about 1.5 times higher risk of experiencing anxiety disorders than members of the heterosexual population, as well as roughly double the risk of depression, 1.5 times the risk of substance abuse, and nearly 2.5 times the risk of suicide.”
Now if people have a single depressive episode resulting from being an adolescent and being homosexual this would be expected to show in a higher rate in the population. It still has no bearing on cause of the homosexuality. It’s as if those pushing their agenda want people to think they’re doing it for virtuous reasons! “If you get out of that category it will save your life! “
~~~~~~
“• Members of the transgender population are also at higher risk of a variety of mental health problems compared to members of the non-transgender population. Especially alarmingly, the rate of lifetime suicide attempts across all ages of transgender individuals is estimated at 41%, compared to under 5% in the overall U.S. population.”
What a surprise!
• There is evidence, albeit limited, that social stressors such as discrimination and stigma contribute to the elevated risk of poor mental health outcomes for non-heterosexual and transgender populations. More high-quality longitudinal studies are necessary for the “social stress model” to be a useful tool for understanding public health concerns.”
If they brought out their high quality longitudinal studies for the ‘social stress model’ should people be allowed to watch?
~~~~~~
There is a lot of ignorance talked about around anxiety and depression, mental illness, and ‘personality disorders’ and in particular where there is argument or controversy on separate matters See religious discussions, see moral discussions, see debates on aesthetics. Rathe like Godwin’s law.
It’s not what you expect from intelligent people though, with some knowledge of life and an even basic understanding of philosophy.
It further plays into stigmas for people of all stripes who suffer with anxiety or depression, making it more likely that they become fixed in that state for the want of seeing a Dr about it or admitting to their health care provider that there is a problem. They know though.
I would say there are as many heterosexuals who become depressed and anxious about love or due to love, even when they don’t know it. This is the problem that nobody wants to talk about. The sixty year old man who sailed though life and had everything he wanted who suddenly hits a wall and has no idea why.
“It’s all the others.”
Just thank your lucky stars that you don’t have the problems that some of these individuals have. I also thank my lucky stars that I’ve never been an addict of any kind. There is evidence for hereditary components there, too. Users of illegal substances should be prosecuted…but ‘the wrong people’ would be in jail.
For anyone who missed it and is still reading:
If this phoney snake oil salesman/ Charlatan doesn’t make your skin crawl then your creep meter’s not working properly.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnBBqYFGKB8
You have to leave people to make their decisions. Once people know the rules, they have been exposed to the same teaching as everybody, they can’t claim ignorance, so leave them alone or promote tyranny.
If medicine finds a cure, if they do, it will be in spite of the gulls who are just following the tractor, up and down, back and forth.
I used to call it Sexual Suicide. Nothing has changed since Men and Marriage.
“The understanding of sexual orientation as an innate, biologically fixed property of human beings — the idea that people are “born that way” — is not supported by scientific evidence.”
This is a very materialistic view of what a human is. I could even say atheistic view of life, which you usually abhor.
This view is borne from the belief that we have no free will and that everything is in your life is determined by your genes.
The only conclusion of that study is that our biology doesn’t determine who we are.
Biology doesn’t determine if someone is left-handed or right-handed, or homo or heterosexual. Yet no one would ever choose to be gay or left-handed only for the heck of it.
I didn’t want to use Blockquote, since it italicizes the text
What designer / programmer in his right mind would make Blockquote italicize all the text within it? It is more anti-useful than useful.
@ Michael Dowd:
“Bad sexual morals cause bad health.”
Says a Catholic. Don’t you disapprove of condoms and all birth control, thereby encouraging the spread of HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases and condemning millions to live in poverty? Isn’t poverty one of the greatest causes of ill health?
Question for heterosexuals: Do you choose who you’re attracted to?
Having asked that, the whole issue of whether people are “born that way” or choose their behaviour, is an irrelevance. Religious morality has to push the concept of choice, otherwise there’s no justification for god to condemn billions to eternal torture.
In reality, homosexual behaviour isn’t justified on the grounds that homosexuals are “born that way” but on the basis that what two people do in the privacy of their own homes, as long as it’s done with the informed consent of both parties, is okay.
@swordfishtrombone. Condoms and poverty have nothing to do with my point. Sodomy, adultery, fornication are morally wrong and contribute to the costly destruction of society.
Just had a surprise phone call today from an old agent friend of mine who I have known for many years. He has, he tells me, since we last spoke, split from his wife and is now in a two year relationship with someone which he plans to be a permanent situation. It struck me, as he is a particularly lovely man, how dreadfully the Catholic Church would treat him. How he would now be considered to be a something or other and ruining society. Yet he is one of the bricks which hold society up and is a particularly good example of an upstanding citizen.
Then there’s the case of the priest who decided to leave and marry a lovely young girl. They were a very pretty couple in fact. The church refused to marry them. They had to leave that church and go elsewhere. So much is the ungodly social rubbish thrown at people. I’d post the link but the youtube video was banned by the Vatican.
SwordfishTrombone, read the four gospels and see what Jesus, the son of God, had to say about your predicament. He would not take the line that some of the latter day scribes and preachers are taking. Most of whom are not ordained anyway.
I know you know this and my saying it is probably sounding a bit off. Just reminding. Not all moral teaching, i.e., that of Jesus is as described by the religious fanatics.
@ Michael Dowd:
“Sodomy, adultery, fornication are morally wrong and contribute to the costly destruction of society.”
Sorry, but this is just wrong. Would you rather live in a country where the things you disaprove of are lawful, like Sweden, or where they are banned by religious authorities, like Somalia?
These thing were banned in the United States for a long time until we lost our senses. Banning them is not a religious act. Banning them is a benefit to society. Tell me please how doing these things is helpful to others? Good morally is the entire basis for our freedom as our Founders have stated.
@Joy: “He has … split from his wife and is now in a two year relationship with someone which he plans to be a permanent situation.” And you still think he is a “lovely man”, “one of the bricks which hold society up” and “a particularly good example of an upstanding citizen”? Your dear friend needs a good-talking to from someone who can administer it in a manner likely to dissuade him from his course.
The church refused to marry a “lovely” couple because one of them had forsworn a vow he’d made to serve that church in favor of a different vow, administered by that same church? Why did he even want the church to witness his vows when his own personal experience is that vows administered by that church aren’t very durable? (Actually, the church’s experience is that vows made by him aren’t very durable.)
From the abstract: ” …there are no compelling causal biological explanations for human sexual orientation….” Why doesn’t writing a phrase like that cause the author to go back and re-examine his entire thinking on the subject? Take sexual orientation out of the mix. Are there compelling causal biological explanations for (some) human sexual behaviors? Why, yes there are, and we’ve known what those are for longer than we’ve known ourselves to be human beings.
Richard A,
keep those sordid mental pictures of the people I describe going, they’re clejrly good fuel for your phoney outrage.
…and I’m not your dear friend Richard, I don’t know you from Adam.
Divorce exists, deal with it and stop looking for scapegoats.
As for the priest, he left the priesthood, so what?
His reasons for leaving did not even have to do with the girl but rather you can find the youtube video all about the sexual perversion in the church of cardinals and archbishops close to the pope and who are still not serving prison sentences. For men of the cloth partaking of gay sex and going to gay nightclubs.
Don’t shoot the messenger.
As for me and my views on how to view others, you reach too far. Keep your own council on who you think is lovely and I’ll do the same, thank you. It’s not for you to tell me who to like or who to love, who to disregard.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztisTKy2KTE
Here’s one video, I think the young priest appears near the end or I’m afraid it’s on a different video. Nevertheless, reason for a very young priest to think he might take a better path outside of the priesthood.
Let’s hope Pope Francis shows a back bone.
Since he’s supporting Gaia, I take Briggs for don this after listening to a radio interview, it’s not looking hopeful. I saw another post from Briggs contradicting descent on Pope Francis as reactionary progressivism, so who knows where the facts lie regarding the goings on within the Vatican. You never can get to the truth in such institutions where politics and power are involved.