The Gay Boogieman - Part II - "Recruit, Recruit!"
Dave Muskera, M.A.
August 06, 2008
One of several myths about gay folk that continues in the rantings of anti-gay groups is that homosexuals constantly attempt to recruit children and young people into their ranks. People in these "groups" adamantly believe homosexuality is a choice and since gays do not reproduce (an incorrect assumption) the only way they can increase their ranks is to recruit. In particular, gay men are accused of seducing the young into the "gay lifestyle". This myth also includes the notion that in their efforts to promote the mysterious gay agenda, gays even have the audacity to "demand" that kids be taught tolerance for diversity in public schools. To the average parent, these ideas can be super frightening. They easily bring to mind images of sleazy, depraved sexual perverts slinking about alleyways and playgrounds just waiting to pounce on unsuspecting 10-year-olds. Such images can quickly whip moms and dads into a frenzy of action including loosening their purse strings to give money to help fight the homosexual scourge. Or so itīs hoped for.
With gays more visible today, on television, the movies and being presented more often as decent, caring and productive individuals, the voices of the far right warn that if our children even see these things, they will somehow just chose their sexual orientation and decide to become gay! In that framework of thought, one is which everything "gay" is bad and a no-no, it is reasonable to object to gay-positive characters in a TV series or movie. Itīs reasonable to deny civil marriage contracts to same-sex couples. Itīs justified to see to it that gays do not have legal protections in jobs, housing and hate crimes. But itīs important to note that all these "reasonable" attitudes follow from just two fundamental beliefs.
The first of these is based upon the religious doctrine that homosexual behavior is a sin. The Christian Bible says so! Period! End of discussion. End of thinking. The reality that none of the Bibles original languages contained a term equivalent to the current day concept of "homosexuality" is unimportant to such a line of mis-reasoning. The fact that the word homosexual and the modern notion of "gay" were not even part of the English language till the late 1800s and afterwards has no bearing. In addition and besides, as we have all been taught, it is generally useless to argue religious beliefs.
The second belief, and Iīve written about it many times before, is the idea that sexual orientation is a choice or "preference". Like when you choose chocolate over vanilla. Like when you prefer mountain vacations over the sea shore. All the same thing. Pushing this idea is an essential support of the first belief about sin. Sin, after all, is defined as a willful act against Godīs law. So, if being or becoming homosexual is a choice made by the individual, then that person can be held accountable as having sinned. Holding such a belief therefore makes it perfectly sensible to be concerned about "homosexual recruitment". Kids make bad choices all the time. It is just a matter of protecting them from another bad choice. Like deciding to smoke or having sex too early. Right?
Well, as mentioned, you really shouldnīt even attempt to debate religious belief. Faith in any religious doctrine, by definition, requires no proof and responds to no evidence. However, the second of these two beliefs, the one about "choice" is quite arguable. In fact, the idea that sexual orientation is a simple conscious choice flies in the face of most all the accumulated reputable social science evidence of the past one hundred or so years. For example, anti-gay writers are still apt to insist that homosexuals are "made" by dysfunctional family structures. Being raised by a cold and distant father in combination with an over-protective mother is offered as a sure fire formula for producing male homosexuals. In reality, well structured studies have repeatedly failed to uncover any specific family structure or dynamic that produces homosexuals. What we do find is that various sexual orientations tend to grow up in a wide variety of functional and dysfunctional family groups. There seems to be no predictable relationship between family dynamics and sexual orientation of any type. Despite this understanding of human sexual behavior, this ludicrous idea of "choice" is still believed by many even some gay people.
Itīs certainly still true that a complete scientific understanding of the complexities of human sexuality is some years in the future. But while we may not yet know all the specific factors that lead to different sexual orientations, it most assuredly seems not the product of conscious choice. The current state-of-the-art evidence points strongly in the direction that "gay" is something about a personīs mental and physical operation pre-determined quite early in life and very likely has some genetic or brain structure components. There is also little credible evidence to support the notion that early sexual trauma is routinely involved in becoming homosexual.
Given the nature of early learning and the passing on of negative thoughts associated with same-sex feelings (typical in our culture) is it any wonder that so many young gays suppress from awareness and deny their own developing impulses? After all, where in the dominant heterosexual world do they find reinforcement for their budding sexual identity?
Those who promote the "choice" concept are also fond of the word "life-style" and frequently pair it with the words gay and homosexual. I have written about this damnable linkage many times in the past. In a typical dictionary the word lifestyle is defined as " .a way of life that reflects the attitudes and values of an individual or group". Implicit in this definition is the notion that "attitudes and values" are mostly (if not always) a matter of choice and personal decision. So the concept of choice receives even more reinforcement when the two terms "gay" and "lifestyle" are joined. The phrase "gay life-style" has unfortunately become both a journalistic shorthand and a part of the "Down with Homosexuals" chant that, despite all evidence to the contrary, can still be heard in our supposedly enlightened times.
While fewer rational people believe these types of distortion and deliberate disinformation campaigns, unfortunately, some otherwise very good folks still have their wits and money scared out of them by these varieties of the gay boogieman.
However, what is ironic is that these fears about "recruitment" are, in some regards, correct and valid. But only for reasons not often considered or discussed.
But before going further into this notion, let me take you on a few quick related side bar trips. The first is about the frequently debated question as to just what percentage of gays there are in the population at large. This is another interesting rallying point for fundamentalist thinkers. They challenge the old 10% figure and are convinced the percentage is much lower. At the same time, they remain certain (and hope to convince others) that the very existence of this small number of gay people somehow constitutes a greater threat to marriage, heterosexual family life and public health than any and all other named perils of the modern world combined! Never mind about child sexual abuse (most often perpetuated by disturbed heterosexual men), never mind about domestic violence, never mind about the soaring divorce rate. Just worry about gays recruiting your kids.
The second side bar is about the frequently reported "findings" regarding sexuality that are based, for the most part, on questionnaire surveys asking people to respond (and be honest) about private sexual matters. Iīd like to believe that the "thinking" public doesnīt for a minute accept these "results" without question. But Iīm not always so sure. Iīd like to think that even the most naïve intuits that, when a push come to a shove, many will lie about, distort or otherwise be less than truthful in answering questions about their sex lives. For example one recent study, conducted by a prestigious university and reported in major human science journals made conclusions about the percentages of gay men in the population based upon person-to-person interviews, conducted mostly by females and requiring the responders to provide their name, address, place of employment and social security numbers! Of course, these men were guaranteed their responses would remain confidential. Would you put much faith in the results of such a study?
It almost goes without saying people often find it difficult to fez-up to truth. This is particularly the case when it comes to nosy interview questions about sexual behavior. The tendency is to deny, exaggerate and otherwise be less than candid. If this is so about "accepted" behavior within the heterosexual sphere, then how much more distortion occurs when the issues are sexual orientation and homosexual behavior?
Well, putting aside these side bar questions, where does all this lead in understanding why the Right is right about their recruitment fears - but for all the wrong reasons? Itīs not complicated. First, one must at least consider the very real possibility that becoming or being gay is not a matter of simple choice.
Then consider: in the life stories of many gay men and women, there are emotional trends and similarities. Among these threads is a sense of isolation while growing up. An awareness of somehow being different from all others and depressingly alone. A majority of adult self-identified gays either recall or can reconstruct early elements of their sexual orientation often as far back as age 4, 5 and 6. Keep in mind that all gay persons are reared under the protective umbrella of the heterosexual family and culture. Early on, this reality sets up the development of denial and repression that sometimes lasts a lifetime. No sane person - even as a child - will accept identification with a concept they are taught is so evil and perverted. No one wants to be called a "fag", a "queer" or worse. Hence, early gay identification is often suppressed out of consciousness.
A second common factor is the mention that while growing up there were no positive role models. As everyone learns to keep secrets, the young gay person is less likely to have an opportunity to compare notes with peers or even have feelings recognized and deemed acceptable. Most generally there are no adult positive gay and out members of the community for them to turn to or admire. Instead, their heads are filled will cultural elements and models of male-female relations that though fundamentally alien to them are offered as the only acceptable choice. So, when it comes to choice, it can truly be said that a great number of gay people as youngsters, choose to try to be heterosexual and fulfill the expected roles of their family, friends and culture.
But, what is now happening that never happened before is that adult gay persons of a positive nature are now very visible on television and in other media. To be gay is no longer to be invisible. Even the stogy long running soap opera "As The World Turns" features a young gay male couple who actually kiss and show affection to one another. Amazing! From rock stars to politicians, gays are becoming increasingly willing to be out and open about themselves and their lives. There is more willingness now to confront bigotry and stand up against civil injustice. In this process, visibility and availability as positive role models is very likely having an influence on "recruitment". Even when the anti-gay groups flash signs of two men or women kissing (with nasty wording at the bottom of the poster), it still shows the young a picture of something that can be seen as positive and was never seen in the days my generation was growing up. Itīs not, as the far right fears, that gays are enticing kids to chose homosexuality, its that the young gay person has finally an opportunity to break through the alone feeling and become aware that others like themselves exist and that, as a gay person, they can be happy, involved and productive. Life long repression and depression are much less likely today than even 20 years ago. Todayīs media (mostly owned by conservatives) and the constant anti-gay drum beat of the far religious right seems rather to be encouraging an earlier and more confident coming out than discouraging "recruitment". It really is that simple.
I have written before that I believe the greatest danger to the individual and society is not the gay person who is out, open and accepting of him or herself. Rather, it is the person who should have been gay (by biological pre-disposition) but whose mind and heart were twisted into an unhealthy mess of conflicting feelings by family and culture. This person, trying to be what they are not, often expends tremendous mental energy in keeping themselves wrapped-up, held emotionally tight and bringing into their eventual maelstrom opposite sex partners who they marry and become close to. It may be such an individual who lives an unfulfilled life, or in a worst case scenario, commits heinous crimes.
Younger gay men may not remember well (or at all) a time when there was nothing but negative views offered about their sexual orientation. Though still in a sexual orientation minority, there has been recently much more than ever before an opportunity for young gays to discover who they really are and to develop the determination to live their lives openly and with positive self-regard.
When recently I read of a young man who took his "boyfriend" to a senior prom, I marveled at his courage. I found myself chanting under my breath, "Recruit, recruit, recruit!" And, as odd as it may seem, I think all the attention given "gay" by the far right does, despite their intentions, aid with recruiting folks not "into" homosexuality but simply "out of the closet". Please, Focus On The Family do carry on. We gay folks appreciate the spotlight you keep shinning our way. A lot of us see through your smoke and mirrors. We are happy to be who we are.
With gays more visible today, on television, the movies and being presented more often as decent, caring and productive individuals, the voices of the far right warn that if our children even see these things, they will somehow just chose their sexual orientation and decide to become gay! In that framework of thought, one is which everything "gay" is bad and a no-no, it is reasonable to object to gay-positive characters in a TV series or movie. Itīs reasonable to deny civil marriage contracts to same-sex couples. Itīs justified to see to it that gays do not have legal protections in jobs, housing and hate crimes. But itīs important to note that all these "reasonable" attitudes follow from just two fundamental beliefs.
The first of these is based upon the religious doctrine that homosexual behavior is a sin. The Christian Bible says so! Period! End of discussion. End of thinking. The reality that none of the Bibles original languages contained a term equivalent to the current day concept of "homosexuality" is unimportant to such a line of mis-reasoning. The fact that the word homosexual and the modern notion of "gay" were not even part of the English language till the late 1800s and afterwards has no bearing. In addition and besides, as we have all been taught, it is generally useless to argue religious beliefs.
The second belief, and Iīve written about it many times before, is the idea that sexual orientation is a choice or "preference". Like when you choose chocolate over vanilla. Like when you prefer mountain vacations over the sea shore. All the same thing. Pushing this idea is an essential support of the first belief about sin. Sin, after all, is defined as a willful act against Godīs law. So, if being or becoming homosexual is a choice made by the individual, then that person can be held accountable as having sinned. Holding such a belief therefore makes it perfectly sensible to be concerned about "homosexual recruitment". Kids make bad choices all the time. It is just a matter of protecting them from another bad choice. Like deciding to smoke or having sex too early. Right?
Well, as mentioned, you really shouldnīt even attempt to debate religious belief. Faith in any religious doctrine, by definition, requires no proof and responds to no evidence. However, the second of these two beliefs, the one about "choice" is quite arguable. In fact, the idea that sexual orientation is a simple conscious choice flies in the face of most all the accumulated reputable social science evidence of the past one hundred or so years. For example, anti-gay writers are still apt to insist that homosexuals are "made" by dysfunctional family structures. Being raised by a cold and distant father in combination with an over-protective mother is offered as a sure fire formula for producing male homosexuals. In reality, well structured studies have repeatedly failed to uncover any specific family structure or dynamic that produces homosexuals. What we do find is that various sexual orientations tend to grow up in a wide variety of functional and dysfunctional family groups. There seems to be no predictable relationship between family dynamics and sexual orientation of any type. Despite this understanding of human sexual behavior, this ludicrous idea of "choice" is still believed by many even some gay people.
Itīs certainly still true that a complete scientific understanding of the complexities of human sexuality is some years in the future. But while we may not yet know all the specific factors that lead to different sexual orientations, it most assuredly seems not the product of conscious choice. The current state-of-the-art evidence points strongly in the direction that "gay" is something about a personīs mental and physical operation pre-determined quite early in life and very likely has some genetic or brain structure components. There is also little credible evidence to support the notion that early sexual trauma is routinely involved in becoming homosexual.
Given the nature of early learning and the passing on of negative thoughts associated with same-sex feelings (typical in our culture) is it any wonder that so many young gays suppress from awareness and deny their own developing impulses? After all, where in the dominant heterosexual world do they find reinforcement for their budding sexual identity?
Those who promote the "choice" concept are also fond of the word "life-style" and frequently pair it with the words gay and homosexual. I have written about this damnable linkage many times in the past. In a typical dictionary the word lifestyle is defined as " .a way of life that reflects the attitudes and values of an individual or group". Implicit in this definition is the notion that "attitudes and values" are mostly (if not always) a matter of choice and personal decision. So the concept of choice receives even more reinforcement when the two terms "gay" and "lifestyle" are joined. The phrase "gay life-style" has unfortunately become both a journalistic shorthand and a part of the "Down with Homosexuals" chant that, despite all evidence to the contrary, can still be heard in our supposedly enlightened times.
While fewer rational people believe these types of distortion and deliberate disinformation campaigns, unfortunately, some otherwise very good folks still have their wits and money scared out of them by these varieties of the gay boogieman.
However, what is ironic is that these fears about "recruitment" are, in some regards, correct and valid. But only for reasons not often considered or discussed.
But before going further into this notion, let me take you on a few quick related side bar trips. The first is about the frequently debated question as to just what percentage of gays there are in the population at large. This is another interesting rallying point for fundamentalist thinkers. They challenge the old 10% figure and are convinced the percentage is much lower. At the same time, they remain certain (and hope to convince others) that the very existence of this small number of gay people somehow constitutes a greater threat to marriage, heterosexual family life and public health than any and all other named perils of the modern world combined! Never mind about child sexual abuse (most often perpetuated by disturbed heterosexual men), never mind about domestic violence, never mind about the soaring divorce rate. Just worry about gays recruiting your kids.
The second side bar is about the frequently reported "findings" regarding sexuality that are based, for the most part, on questionnaire surveys asking people to respond (and be honest) about private sexual matters. Iīd like to believe that the "thinking" public doesnīt for a minute accept these "results" without question. But Iīm not always so sure. Iīd like to think that even the most naïve intuits that, when a push come to a shove, many will lie about, distort or otherwise be less than truthful in answering questions about their sex lives. For example one recent study, conducted by a prestigious university and reported in major human science journals made conclusions about the percentages of gay men in the population based upon person-to-person interviews, conducted mostly by females and requiring the responders to provide their name, address, place of employment and social security numbers! Of course, these men were guaranteed their responses would remain confidential. Would you put much faith in the results of such a study?
It almost goes without saying people often find it difficult to fez-up to truth. This is particularly the case when it comes to nosy interview questions about sexual behavior. The tendency is to deny, exaggerate and otherwise be less than candid. If this is so about "accepted" behavior within the heterosexual sphere, then how much more distortion occurs when the issues are sexual orientation and homosexual behavior?
Well, putting aside these side bar questions, where does all this lead in understanding why the Right is right about their recruitment fears - but for all the wrong reasons? Itīs not complicated. First, one must at least consider the very real possibility that becoming or being gay is not a matter of simple choice.
Then consider: in the life stories of many gay men and women, there are emotional trends and similarities. Among these threads is a sense of isolation while growing up. An awareness of somehow being different from all others and depressingly alone. A majority of adult self-identified gays either recall or can reconstruct early elements of their sexual orientation often as far back as age 4, 5 and 6. Keep in mind that all gay persons are reared under the protective umbrella of the heterosexual family and culture. Early on, this reality sets up the development of denial and repression that sometimes lasts a lifetime. No sane person - even as a child - will accept identification with a concept they are taught is so evil and perverted. No one wants to be called a "fag", a "queer" or worse. Hence, early gay identification is often suppressed out of consciousness.
A second common factor is the mention that while growing up there were no positive role models. As everyone learns to keep secrets, the young gay person is less likely to have an opportunity to compare notes with peers or even have feelings recognized and deemed acceptable. Most generally there are no adult positive gay and out members of the community for them to turn to or admire. Instead, their heads are filled will cultural elements and models of male-female relations that though fundamentally alien to them are offered as the only acceptable choice. So, when it comes to choice, it can truly be said that a great number of gay people as youngsters, choose to try to be heterosexual and fulfill the expected roles of their family, friends and culture.
But, what is now happening that never happened before is that adult gay persons of a positive nature are now very visible on television and in other media. To be gay is no longer to be invisible. Even the stogy long running soap opera "As The World Turns" features a young gay male couple who actually kiss and show affection to one another. Amazing! From rock stars to politicians, gays are becoming increasingly willing to be out and open about themselves and their lives. There is more willingness now to confront bigotry and stand up against civil injustice. In this process, visibility and availability as positive role models is very likely having an influence on "recruitment". Even when the anti-gay groups flash signs of two men or women kissing (with nasty wording at the bottom of the poster), it still shows the young a picture of something that can be seen as positive and was never seen in the days my generation was growing up. Itīs not, as the far right fears, that gays are enticing kids to chose homosexuality, its that the young gay person has finally an opportunity to break through the alone feeling and become aware that others like themselves exist and that, as a gay person, they can be happy, involved and productive. Life long repression and depression are much less likely today than even 20 years ago. Todayīs media (mostly owned by conservatives) and the constant anti-gay drum beat of the far religious right seems rather to be encouraging an earlier and more confident coming out than discouraging "recruitment". It really is that simple.
I have written before that I believe the greatest danger to the individual and society is not the gay person who is out, open and accepting of him or herself. Rather, it is the person who should have been gay (by biological pre-disposition) but whose mind and heart were twisted into an unhealthy mess of conflicting feelings by family and culture. This person, trying to be what they are not, often expends tremendous mental energy in keeping themselves wrapped-up, held emotionally tight and bringing into their eventual maelstrom opposite sex partners who they marry and become close to. It may be such an individual who lives an unfulfilled life, or in a worst case scenario, commits heinous crimes.
Younger gay men may not remember well (or at all) a time when there was nothing but negative views offered about their sexual orientation. Though still in a sexual orientation minority, there has been recently much more than ever before an opportunity for young gays to discover who they really are and to develop the determination to live their lives openly and with positive self-regard.
When recently I read of a young man who took his "boyfriend" to a senior prom, I marveled at his courage. I found myself chanting under my breath, "Recruit, recruit, recruit!" And, as odd as it may seem, I think all the attention given "gay" by the far right does, despite their intentions, aid with recruiting folks not "into" homosexuality but simply "out of the closet". Please, Focus On The Family do carry on. We gay folks appreciate the spotlight you keep shinning our way. A lot of us see through your smoke and mirrors. We are happy to be who we are.
Print
Email
