On July 8, David Clarke Pruden, the executive director of Evergreen International, an ex-gay group for Mormons, wrote an opinion piece in the Salt Lake Tribune in which distorted the results of several studies to claim that there is “no scientific basis for ‘born gay’ theory”.
We pointed out several inaccuracies here.
On Sunday, the Tribune published a rebuttal by Simon LeVay, a neuroscientist and leading researcher in the study of sexual orientation and its origins. LeVay is clear in exposing the deliberately deceptive nature of Pruden’s opinion piece.
Employing a turn of phrase calculated to confuse any reader, Pruden writes that a recent genetic study from the University of Illinois “reported that there is no one gay gene.” That’s correct – it reported evidence for three! How does finding three “gay genes” rather than one show that the born-that-way theory of homosexuality has “no basis in science,” as Pruden argues?
LeVay also seems annoyed that Pruden distorted and misreported LeVay’s opinion.
Pruden grossly misrepresents me as someone who has abandoned or disproved the biological perspective. He quotes me as saying that my 1991 study, by itself, didn’t prove whether gay people are “born that way.” That’s true, but the totality of the available evidence points strongly in that direction.
LeVay is a scientist and researcher and, as such, has been hesitant in the past to make rash claims. He has often pointed out the limitations in his own work and cautioned against overreading his results. So it is not hyperbole, political hype, or exageration when LeVay says about the cumulative evidence found in his and other studies
collectively these have greatly strengthened the general conclusion that I drew 15 years ago: Biological factors – including prenatal brain development, hormones and genes – exert a powerful influence on the direction of a person’s sexual attractions.
(hat tip to howler)
Simon LeVay maintains an excellent web page in which he discusses the strengths and weakenesses of all of the research here: https://members.aol.com/slevay/page22.html
I must say LeVay seems one of the few that does attempt follow what gets said about “him” with any frequency, and is prepared to correct and clarify when required. I wish more would do that, and more quickly.
Also confirms the concerns raised here earlier, even if we’ve all had to slog through some mind-numbingly circular responses etc.
And I’m sure, Timothy, you’ll be waiting for Pruden’s apology/retraction etc to add as an update for this post. Right? And you’ll be holding your breath while waiting? Correct? 🙂
“And you’ll be holding your breath while waiting?”
I’m already a lovely shade of blue
Thank heaven LeVay jumped on this one so quickly. The Evergreen leadership are using much of the same tactics as Exodus and other “ex-gay” organizations in supporting the premise of NARTH. They typically cherry pick the evidence they want while ignoring or downplaying the evidence that does not support their premise.
It’s pathetic when you think about it because in all reality what Pruden (along with Evergreen) is trying desperately to do is to support the leadership of the Mormon Church’s view that homosexuality is something that is changeable or at least it should be diminished. If homosexuality is not genetic then it most certainly is subject to change according to Pruden’s view.
The Church still circulates the extremely bigoted pamphlet’s entitled To Young Men Only and To The One by Elder Boyd K. Packer. These two pamphlets alone consist of incredibly bigoted and fear based statements about gay people. It is these two pamphlets that are typically given to Mormon Youth by their Bishops. It is because of this persistence of the Church to hang on to these limiting and hurtful views regarding gay people that Evergreen even exists. If gay people feel they are sinful and want to change badly enough then Evergreen tends to fill that niche.
There is a tremendous amount of good and positive about the Church and it’s teachings that makes it very tragic and difficult for gay people when they are taught things that fly in the face of their very being. That is that they are not worthy or valued as they are unless they change. When your sense of self worth and connection with the people and organization (the Church) is very deep and fulfilling in many ways, no wonder so many gay and lesbian Mormons often have such a conflicted sense of self.
Unfortunately it’s going to take a tremendous amount of science for these people to start waking up to the reality of the fact that the gay minority is not a threat to the Church or the family but a great blessing to both.
It actually doesn’t matter to anti-gay people what the cause of a homosexual orientation is. Whatever the cause is, they will say you should either be celibate or try to go straight. Whatever research comes out in the next 100 years WILL NOT MATTER. Anything will be spun to fit their agenda.
Ben,
How much science and personal life experience will it take to convince those who want to convince us that if you have any level of same-sex attraction you must consider yourself unhappy unless you act on these. Everyone has some level of attraction to the same sex. I would suggest that many purely heterosexual people would find themselves capable of acting on these feelings but they choose not to. I may have a high level of same-sex attraction that draws me into relationship with other men because I find a distinct void in my character. That does not make me gay, it makes me incomplete. When I overcame the fear of this attraction I began feeling more comfortable with the company of men and stopped wanting to hop in the sack with them. Well you know what, my sexual desire towards them was deminished and I began to feel myself growing up. I know longer needed to rely on adolescent lust to feel fulfilled. I am finding adult relationships to make me feel like I belong to a much larger community.
Freedom is heavenly.
Dennis,
Who, exactly, is trying to convince you that if you have any level of same-sex attraction then you must act upon it? Please name specific activists or individuals that have done this.
None of XGW’s writers believe that one must act upon one’s attractions, and frankly, I doubt you can name anyone at all who believes that.
Those of us who are honest about our sexual orientation have no difficulty whatsoever in finding adult platonic relationships and forming healthy ties with the larger community. Furthermore, we do not feel like jumping in the sack with every person that passes by — that impulse passes with age whether one is same-sex-attracted or opposite-sex-attracted.
Freedom is indeed a good thing. Mature adults (gay or straight) are free of the need to live down to your oversexualized expectations.
Mike,
I am very glad to hear that. I will not be bothering you with any additional comments after this posting. You cannot imagine how many people are so quick to pigeon-hole someone as gay simply because they have same-sex attractions. That does damage to the relationships that are essential to growing beyond the need to identify ourselves as “gay”. The science is not conclusive. More and more we are finding that the environment does influence the choices we make and when we stop seeing that this is true we fall into a pattern of feeling we do not have to take any responsibilty for the things we do. On the other hand, as we have seen with Ted Haggard’s situation, when we try to cover up our deep rooted feelings we can easily get caught up in the trap of pride and arrogance.
The mind is an amazing organ. If something makes us feel good we want more of it. If that makes us feel better we need more and more and more. I find that freedom has come for me by recognizing the need to balance these two influences on the way I feel. My same-sex attraction may have had a stronghold on me in the past and as long as I tried to fight that feeling it only intensified. If I tried to cover it up I was not dealing with the reasons for it. Believing that there was nothing I could do to change it only prevented me from moving forward. Once I stopped acting out and began to be honest to myself about what the feelings were I began to develop the kinds of relationships that helped me come to understand who I really am, and it is not “gay”. Has my orientation changed? You bet. Am I completely heterosexual? No, but I am moving in that direction. Am I feeling better about who I am as a man? You better believe it, more than I could have ever dreamed.
Dennis doesn’t seem to understand that the overwhelming majority of English speaking Americans understand gay to mean attracted to members of the same sex.
This whole identity thing that the ex-gay groups try to propagate seems to engender a real sense of persecution among their followers, and I wonder if that is a deliberate part of the strategy.
Dennis really does seem hurt that anyone would consider him gay due to his struggle with same sex attraction, because it isn’t the identity he claims. Yet very few in our society would even understand what he means by identity, while they refer to him as gay due to his attraction to members of the same sex.
Growing up Catholic, I was always amused by some of the distinctions that the Church made, but it doesn’t even seem to come close to the mental and linguistic gymnastics of the ex-gay groups.
Dennis also seems to think that a prerequisite for growing up is that he has to be able accept his sexual feeling and then set them aside. This is what he reports as giving him freedom.
Dennis might be surprised that as part of growing up and being free I too had to accept my sexual feelings. But in my case, I decided to come out to family and friends and live my life honestly and openly.
I guess the real requirement for feeling the freedom of living your own life is honesty to yourself and those that you most care about. I don’t know Dennis, but perhaps he and I aren’t so very different.
John,
I am also Catholic and I have not in anyway set my sexuality aside, but I also know that my sexuality is not everything that I am. I love the Catholic church and what it teaches. As far a English speaking society understanding what “gay” means I would have to say that that it is a label that we have put on ourselves. It is more honest to say that I have a level of same- sex attraction than to say “I am gay”. For some that might be a very powerful force in their life and for others it might be small, but having same-sex attraction does not make you “gay” by the definition we have for this. We choose to identify ourselves that way. True, we may have to be able to admit to ourselves and others around us that we have these feelings, but I would contend that the feeling are present because of some void in our nature that is looking to be filled. I know for myself that my self identifying as “gay” only increased that void because it pulled me away from the people who meant the most to me in my life. Once I could see that my level of same-sex attraction was not the only part of my sexuality that made me who I am I could move forward into meaningful relationships.
I feel so much judgement in this group. I am not wanting any arguement with anyone over this. If we truly believe in the Love that we so often talk about then we will begin to accept where people are at in their journey. If they want to move beyond the “gay self identity” they have the right to do that without judgement. I know that for myself complete honesty has been my only option and I surrendered my will to that of my faith. Surrender is not a bad thing. It helps me see a side of myself that I could not see when I tried to cover up my actions or attempted to justify my behaviour. The truth does truly set one free, but I must be careful whose idea of truth I am listening to, not all ideas lead me to life.
Dennis- perhaps a simple question might bridge the gap in understanding here:
Is a heterosexual Catholic priest who keeps to his vows of celibacy still straight, ex-straight, something else?
Such a person is a true representative of Gods church who still likely struggles with sexual attraction. He is human being. I do not agree with labelling and on the other hand I do not agree with putting labels on myself that limit me from discovering my true self. If I truly have an open mind I will be open to listening to what others have to say. I may not agree with them and I may even hope for something more for them.
For a Catholic priest who is able to keep his vows of celibacy I can only have praise and thanks. He gives me a model to strive for. I am married with children. I need that model to keep me faithful to my family. I also know that I have a responsibilty to that priest to give him encouragement and support in his ministry. He is still human and still needs fellowship, but sex is not a requirement for fullfillment. I think it is time we seriously looked at Pope John Paul IIs Theology of the Body with an open mind. I believe that he gave us a clear theology of what it means to be fully human. Struggle is part of life. If we fall into the trap of thinking that life must always be easy we miss out on experiencing the fullness of life. I am not trying to preach to anyone here. I am only trying to convey the extreme joy that I have found by opening myself to others, even those who do not see the purpose of life as I do. I can still learn something from them, as I have by stumbling onto this blog. I doubt I will change the minds of many here, but I hope that a few might be abit more open to discussing their life with someone who is coming from a very different point of view without judgement.
“Is a heterosexual Catholic priest who keeps to his vows of celibacy still straight, ex-straight, something else?”
Well, could we perhaps say that he has overcome his heterosexuality? Or that he has overcome his other-sex attractions? Or even that he has come out of heterosexuality?
Actually, there are no heterosexuals. There are only celibates who “act out.”
but having same-sex attraction does not make you “gay” by the definition we have for this.
Dennis, yes actually it does. The definition we have for “gay” (your words) is being attracted to the same sex.
You may not want to call yourself gay but really you don’t get to unilaterally decide what is “the definition we have for this”.
We really do wish you well, Dennis, in your life. We hope you find happiness.
And frankly, Dennis, no one here really cares what you call yourself. Or how you identify. But we do object to your playing with words to change the meaning.
Here’s something you may want to consider – if you find yourself changing language because you don’t like what it says, if you find yourself trying to obscure meaning because you don’t want to think about the concepts behind the meaning, you probably are not in a healthy and happy place. Be honest. Use direct and exact language. Don’t quibble about “accepting identity” or try to cover up things from your own eyes.
You are a same-sex attracted man. You are gay. You don’t want to be. You are chosing to avoid same-sex sexual activity and you hope that at some point you will no longer be gay and will instead be fully heterosexual.
See, that’s not that hard.
“Gay” is a term imposed by those who have choosen to live their life according to an a certain mind set. When we choose not to label ourselves in this way we are being called liars even if we are honest about having some level of same-sex attraction. When will you get it in your heads that it is not an all or none condition and it is maluable as is so much of our human behavior. If this was not the case then why are we deceiving so many adults into taking course to improve their lot in life. That is what education is all about and for that to occur we need to have an open mind and so do our students.
“But we do object to your playing with words to change the meaning.”
I would have to suggest that your community was the first to do this. “Gay” use to mean being happy.
Dennis,
“Gay” is a term imposed by those who have choosen to live their life according to an a certain mind set.
You keep on telling yourself that. You might also want to chant the mantra “no one is born gay” and add a little “complete change is completely possible”.
Just don’t be upset that no one else here want to join you in your self-deception. We deal in reality here, not ex-gay slogans.
I don’t know if you have or will change your sexual orientation and become a heterosexual but it will take more than a self-help class. And I do know that as long as you insist on playing word games you’re only fooling yourself.
And that’s a pity. You deserve better. Be honest with yourself. You don’t have to change your life or your behavior or even your unhappiness about your attractions. You can still seek your ex-gay journey. Just don’t let slogans replace objective reality, OK?
“But we do object to your playing with words to change the meaning.”
I would have to suggest that your community was the first to do this. “Gay” use to mean being happy.
Word meanings generally evolve by social agreement, not by individual fiat. But if you want us to go by your own personal idiosyncratic definitions, it might help to know what those definitions actually are.
Please give us your definitions of the following words:
Gay
Homosexual
Change
Temptation
Identity
Lifestyle
Aardvark [as a control]
Dennis said “Once I could see that my level of same-sex attraction was not the only part of my sexuality that made me who I am I could move forward into meaningful relationships.”.
Dennis, most gays have no problem accepting their same sex attractions and having meaningful relationships. Its your anxiety over being same sex attracted (gay) that interferes with your relationships. Once you learn to relax and accept that that’s okay you’ll find meaningful relationships come naturally.