The Nurture of HomoSexuality?
The Nurture of HomoSexuality?
Can an argument be made that Homosexuality may be a nurtured practice? I believe so! There is a common knowledge all humans need nurturance to grow. John B. Watson’s theory of behaviorism is the theory that human behavior is learned, rather than being instinctive. I believe there can be an association in the recent boom of homosexuality and the general acceptance of GLBT today. In today’s society homosexuality is a common and familiar alternative to heterosexuality and society’s nurture of it Humans learn behavior through observation and imitation of those around them, as well as through language. It is through this social interaction that people develop their distinct personalities and behavioral patterns. Research shows that kids who have parents that smoke are much more likely to smoke as well. These kids observed and imitated the act of smoking from their parents, and possibly with input from peers, etc. They came to understand that such behavior is okay, or is right for them. I believe it would be unreasonable for a person not to consider this may be relevant to the issue of homosexual tendencies.
It is silly that gay advocates argue so emphatically that gay is nature with disregard in consideration to the societal influences that may have encouraged the development of these sexual behaviors. The growth of homosexual practices have influenced every facet of lifestyle. Gay media has established a presence and an audience on all the major television networks. ABC, NBC, and Fox all host productions of GLBT themes. Even PBS was funded for the development of a program including a lesbian couple , on a trip to Vermont — a state known for recognizing same-sex civil unions. “Postcards From Buster”.8 The tendencies of gay and lesbians are so broad and out in the open that kids younger and younger have to form an opinion of what is gay and is it okay. On any given day in California one can find a woman with a tapered hair, cut 501 jeans, and backwards baseball cap. You can just as easily find a young man working inventory at forever 21 with as many bangles on his wrist as one of his female coworkers.
I think in our current society it is absolutely okay to be gay. Laws and statutes become more permissive and granting to the gay community almost yearly. While this softening of statutes has not been designed to affirm homosexuality as healthful and socially acceptable, frequently it has been interpreted to mean exactly that. Even for those who are formidably against homosexuality, it has become a sort of taboo to voice their objection aloud. The societal acceptance of gay has grown to a point that it is permissible of any person of any gender, of any race, and at any age to identify his or herself as homosexually oriented. It is in fact publicly applauded for young children to “come out” and announce themselves as gay activist for the gay community. In an episode of “Ellen” a GLBT talk show hosted by the lesbian comedian Ellen De Generes, a young boy age 13 was invited to share his story as a hero for his late participation as a gay advocate in the hearing of a teacher who was suspended for his actions in a class dispute involving a gay issue. The young boy Graeme Taylor was applauded in standing ovation for his position as a gay and was presented with a $10,000 scholarship to continue such activities. Such rewards and acceptance are the nurturing praise that all young children may seek. Any adolescent would lean towards his certain practices that are praised and encouraged. John B. Watson refers to this type of social relationship between reward and behavior as behaviorism.
Behaviorism is the study of psychology that concentrates exclusively on observing, measuring, and modifying behavior. It began in 1913 when psychologist John B. Watson published his theory of behaviorism in “Psychology as a Behaviorist Sees It.” Behaviorism’s goal is to explain relationships between antecedent conditions (stimuli), behavior (responses), and consequences (reward, punishment, or neutral effect). This theory is relevant to every aspect of conscience life but most especially in consideration of the intelligent human. John B. Watson, was a chief proponent of “nurture” and believed that all human differences were the result of learning. He believed that practice strengthens learning. Watson also proposed that classical conditioning (based on Pavlov’s observations) was able to explain all aspects of human psychology. Watson put the emphasis on external behavior of people and their reactions on given situations, rather than the internal, mental state of those people. In his opinion, the analysis of behaviors and reactions was the only objective method to get insight in the human actions. Watson concluded that everything from speech to emotional responses were simply patterns of stimulus and response.
I think that Watson’s theories are completely relevant in the consideration to both the evolution of homosexuality and its perpetuation. Through statutes and laws the social condition for gays has grown extremely permissive as a lifestyle practice. As bills such Student Nondiscrimination Act of 2010, Ending LGBT Health Disparities Act, and Same Sex Civil Unions are passed through congress an excitement is stimulated through the gay community as they feel a cause for celebratory euphoria. The growth of gay’s constitutional freedom, as they are interpreted by congress, produces more open homosexual practices, and more homosexual behavior which in turn produce more homosexuals. Not only has the condition grown favorable and the behavior been rewarded but the freedom to promote themselves as a lifestyle has grown wider, more acceptable, and more influential to its audience. The social conditions become more gay-friendly almost by the day. This allows more gays to practice homosexuality and express their gay tendencies more openly and freely, therefore exposing more people to the gay lifestyle. As young kids learn of the gay lifestyle many are beginning to practice and imitate what they are presented as gay behavior. It is often that the deeper the consideration of the gay lifestyle, the more likely one is to identify themselves as a GLBT person. Whether a person is born gay or learning gay, the gay world is one of the most accepting, supportive, and nurturing groups of any. Gays and lesbians have exclusive social sites, forums, television talk shows and even gay clubs that encourage new and curious young gays to express their feelings and come out. In the frequent case of the neglected youth in need of some rebellious attention the acceptance of the gay community may be the refuge the child seeks.
In the last 50 years homosexuality has grown tremendously. In the last 50 years the gay community has made progress from being socially demonized and being identified by the American Psychological Association as until 1974 homosexuality was a mental illness homosexuality was listed as a mental illness in DSM-II. In the last 50 years homosexuality has made progress in its own individual rights, civil rights, military rights, marriage rights, and adoptive rights, but mainly its social rights the overall acceptance that gay is okay. In the 1950’s homosexuality was an outwardly despicable act and considered by the APA as mental illness such as pedophilia and was punishable by criminal law. To many people in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, homosexuality and transvestism was a sexual perversion. The German neuro-psychiatrist Richard von Krafft-Ebing first categorized it as a pathological behavior in 1886. By 1952, the American Psychiatric Association listed male, but not female, transvestism as an illness in its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual. Another doctor to concur with these notions was Dr. Charles Socarides.
Dr. Charles Socarides was a psychiatrist, psychoanalyst, and clinical professor of psychiatry for many years at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in the Bronx, New York maintained the theory that homosexuality was a condition amenable to treatment. Dr. Socarides went against mainstream thinking and continued to forcefully proclaim that homosexuality was a curable neurosis when it was amended as a mental illness in 1973 claimed the association was “under political assault by gay activists.” In 1992, Dr. Socarides helped found the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality. The center is really the only one of its sort in the United States. The primary mission of the organization, of which he was a past president, is “to make effective psychological therapy available to all homosexual men and women who seek change.” It is said that Dr. Socarides work out lived its time, but I believe that such of work is need in the balance of perspective on the gay movement. Not everyone practicing homosexuality is an actual homosexual. Some of these dismayed and confused gays can be helped back to heterosexuality. Despite its controversial insinuation sexual orientation is a choice. Dr. Phillp Hickey a mental health and addictions psychiatrist wrote this in response to the issue of sexual orientation as a choice:
It is self-evident that homosexual behavior is a choice (as is heterosexual behavior). If a person goes to a gay bar and chats up an individual of the same gender, this constitutes homosexual behavior, and it is obvious that this is a choice. Unfortunately, however, the word “choice” has acquired an emotional loading which militates against rational discourse. The point I have made repeatedly is that choice is simply descriptive of behavior, not explanatory.
I think it is irresponsible for any person to think that they are not in control of the preference they develop. The only shame I relate with homosexuality is the ignorant excuse that it not ones choice and that they have not control. As one makes a choice to identify himself as a gay person one should educate himself on the derivative of the sexual orientation. The misleading perspective is that homosexuality is primarily the result of biological determinants and is a natural variant of physical development such as eye color or handedness is completely untrue as factual science. I have an abstentious stance on many gay tendencies and gay issues that are irrelevant to myself as a heterosexual, but feel it is my responsibility as a man to object and refute the gay argument that because of biological factors (genetic variation and intrauterine hormonal influences that determine postnatal cerebral, glandular, and general morphologic structure and function), homosexuality is a phenomenon over which individuals have no control. Therefore I have to absolutely disagree that they have neither personal responsibility for its precipitation nor for its modification.
In 1971, in a chapter analyzing the genetic and chromosomal aspects of homosexual etiology,]ohn Money, probably the world’s most highly respected sexologist, concluded: Postnatal differentiation of gender identity and role . . . is dictated not by the chromosomal sex, nor the other prenatal components of sexual differentiation, but is dependent on postnatal determinants, particularly stimuli from the social environment…. Available evidence supports a non-genetic hypothesis for the origin not only of homosexuality, but of psychosexual differences and variations of all types. Prenatal hormonal determinants probably do no more than create a predisposition on which the postnatal superstructure of psychosexual status differentiates, primarily, like native language, under the programming of social interaction.
Jean Foucault is a French physicist of the 1800’s. His opinion of homosexuality was that it exists only as a selection of category he argues that, “…homosexuality became because we made it so. Foucault says that the category of homosexuality itself was only created a mere one hundred years ago, after a German neologism coined some twenty years later. Foucault gives root to the social derivation of homosexuality believing that homosexuality appeared as one of the forms of sexuality, only “after it was transposed from the practice of sodomy into a kind of interior androgyny, a hermaphrodism of the soul.” The theorists believe that the homosexual had been an aberration, and had then become a species, justifying itself with a new word. I agree that some who identify themselves as homosexual only do such because there is an alternative to identify with. This may have everything to do with Dr. Watson’s theory of behaviorism and maybe some of actual mental disorder.
According to the American Psychiatric Association, until 1974 homosexuality was a mental illness. Homosexuality was listed as a mental illness in DSM-II. What’s noteworthy about this is that the removal of homosexuality from the list of mental illnesses was not triggered by some scientific breakthrough. There was no new fact or set of facts that stimulated this major change. Rather, it was the simple reality that gay people started to kick up a fuss. They gained a voice and began to make themselves heard.
With such an influential voice some objective material should come from the gay community as a responsibility to those considering converting or “coming out” in to the gay lifestyle.
The 21 century is absolutely the most permissive climate for homosexual growth and development. This is again relevant to Watson’s behaviorism theory that every psychological trait can be traced to nurture, and that one’s stimuli conditions promote his behavior. But even further than the psychological nurture, conditional nurture and consequential nurture, I think that homosexuality is being nurtured in an actual sense by way of adoptive parenting.
The exposure to gay lifestyles has become wider and wider, but also younger and younger. Some juveniles are exposed to homosexual lifestyles early in their life, but some children are even submerged in gay lifestyles from birth with the growth in gay adoption. Gay couples have been granted adoption rights since 1985 and have been making progressive revisions ever since. Gay adoption is a now a basic of right in all 50 United States. This progressive growth is literally equivalent, to the absolute nurture of homosexuality, bi sexuality, and transgendered sexuality.
The basic of this right is Gay, lesbian, bi sexual and Transgendered by a single person, as one. As two, GLBT joint adoption. GLBT adoption is granted as right in all 50 states. GLBT joint adoption is accepted in 39 states but currently under consideration in in all of the last 11.This means that all 50 states grant adoptive parenting rights to a single person of Gay, Lesbian, Bi, or Transgendered sexual orientation and 39 states to adoptive parenting couples of GLBT orientation.
The Williams institute is a study group dedicated to the official study of those American’s who identify as gay lesbian bisexual and transgender. According to a report by the Williams Institute, in 2007 there were 270,000 children in the United States who lived with same-sex couples. Of these, one-quarter, or 65,000, were adopted. The 2000 U. S. Census reports 33% of female same-sex couple households and 22% of male same-sex couple households already have at least one child under the age of 18 living at home.
In California the adoption situation is complex. Since 1985, “second-parent” adoptions, in which one partner’s child is adopted by the other, had been frequently granted. They are used mainly by lesbian couples. However, in the fall of 2001, a San Diego appellate court ruled that no legal authority existed to permit such adoptions. The legal status of more than 10,000 California adoptions instantly became indeterminate. Pat Logue, counsel for the gay-positive Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund said: “It’s outrageous. This decision destabilizes the lives of thousands of children, exactly the opposite of what adoption is intended to do.” According to Lambda Legal, a legal firm which has represented many same-sex couples in state and federal courts, the rights of LGBT parents vary widely among states. About half of all states permit second-parent adoptions by the unmarried partner of an existing legal parent, while in a handful of states courts have ruled these adoptions not permissible under state laws.
There is no denying the homosexuality has grown more common and more acceptable as a lifestyle through the decades. “Homosexuality as a lifestyle has reached epidemiological proportion” as Dr. Socarides describes its community’s growth. This growth absolutely derives from the nurturing conditions of society and the nurturing qualities of the gay community itself. I have an abstentious position on the practices of the lifestyle and disagree with homophobia as a term and perspective, but have a strong quarrel with what gays claim as the derivative of their sexual orientation. It is not a prenatal disposition and there is no gay gene. These are irresponsible notions to excuse the accountability of a gay people and their choice to be such. Homosexuality is no more of a birth trait than is a criminal trait and I absolute refute and disagree with any saying of such. I absolutely believe that homosexuality is a behavioral choice and that those who wish to identify as homosexuals should be responsibly accountable for its precipitation, modification, and exposure on young and impressionable children. This should be especially considerable in the growth of gay’s adoption rights. Gay should assume a level of responsibility for the political and social influence they have and suggest some objective criteria to consider for those in question of their sexual orientation.
I believe that from a social conscience point it is absolutely not okay for young children to be exposed to gay practices and influenced in any sexual manner. In today’s society children are exposed to homosexuality before they fully understand sexuality. To me it is as if the gay community is seducing young kids into its lifestyle. If gay is the choice of who you love why is there need for such flamboyance in the gay’s community. Parades and charades are unnecessary. People, especially children, should be given to right to make decisions for themselves without such boastful and seductive influences. Nature does not seem to determine human behavior directly, but nurturing does. The gay community is nurturing irresponsible behaviors by promoting irresponsible justifications of their sexual orientation. All people should be accountable for themselves and their choices. As the gay community grows in society so should the assumption of responsibility to society. The GLBT community’s first responsibility should be in ownership of its origins. Sexual orientation is not a birth trait, it is dependent on postnatal determinants such as nurturance, influence, and particularly stimuli from the social environment.
- : http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/01/01/BAGDCGG18Q1.DTL#ixzz1wIvC7SPR
- Psychology as a behaviorist sees it.
- “Homosexuality: A Freedom Too Far,” dr. socarides