FAMILY RESEARCH REPORT	Journal of the Family Research Institute Founded 1982
How Much Rape is Homosexual Rape?			Vol. 17 No. 2 Mar-Apr 2002

Rape is a gruesome crime, an awful jellyroll of sex, lust, violence, and forced submission. We often think of a woman walking down a deserted street, stalked by a powerful (male) sexual assailant. But is the problem confined to sadistic men preying on helpless women? How much of rape is homosexual rape? Some have estimated that the rape of males by males accounts for between 5% to 10% of all rapes reported in the U.S.1 Others have asserted that homosexual rape is on the increase2. Where does homosexual rape fit into the rape picture?

Getting a handle on the total amount of rape committed is rather difficult. While many rapes are reported to the police each year and tracked by the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports3, most researchers believe - with good reason - that the vast majority of rape cases go unreported to authorities.

It is also difficult to define rape in a way that everyone agrees on. Often surveys don’t ask about rape in particular, but about a broader range of behaviors that might include - depending on the study - unwanted sexual advances, ‘sexually abusive language,’ improper ‘touching,’ etc.

The definition is also complicated by the fact that victims of rape can be either underage or adult. Some researchers have failed to inquire about underage rape occurrences, focusing solely on adult victims. Also there is the issue of ‘consensual,’ statutory rape - where an underage ‘victim’ consents to sex with someone older (e.g., Mary Kay Letourneau). No coercion is involved, but the law defines such behavior as rape anyway, on the assumption that the underage participant is incapable of giving mature, informed consent.

The existing studies are also hard to compare because the sampling methods, questions, and/or target populations have been quite different. Interviewing patients at a sexually transmitted disease [STD] clinic about their rape experiences is not at all like asking the same questions to a cross-section of the general population. Nevertheless, enough usable data exist to allow us to draw some important insights.

Kinsey Institute Study

One important study that asked about homosexual, but not heterosexual, rape was the 1970 Kinsey Institute survey of 979 homosexuals and 477 heterosexuals in the San Francisco area4. Homosexuality was, of course, in ‘full bloom’ in San Francisco even as early as 1970. It was known and tolerated there probably more than any other city in America at that time.

When asking about homosexual rape (i.e., “has a person of the same sex ever attempted to use or threatened to use physical force to get you into sexual activity against your will?”), the Kinsey investigators reported the following:

• 207 (20.2%) of all the men said that they had been homosexually raped. Broken down by sexual preference, 25.8% of the 686 gays and 8.9% of the 337 straights said that they had been homosexually raped
• Most of the instances among males were statutory rape - that is, where the victim was a child or young teenager. For gays, 15.7% of the rapes occurred when they were under age 14. For male heterosexuals, 31% of those who had been raped said the same. Only 17.6% of gays and 34.5% of heterosexuals said that they were at least 17 years old, being homosexually raped as adults or near-adults
• Among all the women, 38 (8.8%) said that they had been homosexually raped. This worked out to 11.6% of the 293 lesbians and 2.9% of the 140 female heterosexuals
• For lesbians, 5.9% of the homosexual rapes occurred while they were under age 14. One out of four (25%) rape victims among the straight females was also that young. Mostly the women were adult or near-adult victims: 91.2% of the lesbians and 75% of the heterosexuals who were raped said it occurred when they were 17 or older

On balance, both gays and lesbians in the Kinsey Institute survey reported being raped homosexually at a rate 3 to 4 times higher than that for the heterosexual sample. Since the investigators apparently did not ask about heterosexual (i.e., male on female, or female on male) rape, we don’t know whether the heterosexual cohort ‘caught up’ to the homosexual sample by experiencing more heterosexual rape. We do, however, know something about the sex lives of these dwellers by the bay (see Table 1).

With the exception of receptive anal sex - for which lesbians and heterosexual women essentially tied - homosexuals of both sexes were far more on the ‘cutting edge’ of sexual exploration. They were more apt than their heterosexual counterparts of both sexes to have sex with animals, and to practice both varieties of pain-sex (i.e., sadism - where you hurt someone else for fun, and masochism - where you are hurt for fun by someone else). Not surprisingly, they were also more apt to be homosexually raped.

The media likes to portray all rape victims as being totally ‘innocent’ of any responsibility, like when someone breaks into your house at night and rapes you in your bed. The reality is that many rape victims place themselves at some risk by frequenting bars or clubs late at night, mixing sex with drugs or alcohol, or by ‘hanging out’ with others on the sexual ‘cutting edge’ and engaging in ‘kinky,’ unconventional sex behaviors themselves.

Family Research Institute Study

The Family Research Institute sex survey in six U.S. metropolitan areas in 1983-84 (including Washington, Los Angeles, Denver, Omaha, Louisville, and Dallas)5 appears to be the only probability-based sample which inquired about homosexual and heterosexual rape. A total of 5,182 adults were asked “Have you ever been forced into having sexual activity against your will (you were raped)?” They were also asked how many times they had been raped heterosexually and homosexually.

A total of 4,714 respondents answered the rape question. 522 (11.1%) reported that they had been raped at least once. Broken down by sex, of the 1,867 men, 80 (4.3%) said that they had ever been raped. For the women, 442 (15.5%) of 2,847 said that they had been raped.

Like the Kinsey Institute survey from San Francisco, rapes could have occurred either in childhood or adulthood. The FRI study thus tried to capture the broadest lifetime experience of actual rape. However, concentrated as it was in urban areas - and tilted purposely in Dallas toward reputedly ‘gay’ areas - the FRI sampling method probably included a larger percentage of homosexuals (i.e., people who said they were homosexual or bisexual) than generally exists in America. All in all, 7.9% of the men and 3.1% of the women who answered the rape question said they were homosexual.

Nevertheless, the FRI investigation still aimed at constructing an efficient cross-section of the U.S. population, so it was nowhere nearly as skewed toward homosexuals as the Kinsey Institute effort. (The Kinsey study deliberately gathered a large homosexual subsample from any source it could, and then only in San Francisco.) Some of the key results about rape from our study are listed in Table 2 (p. 4).

Almost every way you slice it, proportionately more homosexuals than heterosexuals said they had been raped - both homosexually and heterosexually! Male homosexuals were about 5 times more apt to have experienced rape than male heterosexuals. Female homosexuals were about three times more apt to have experienced rape than female heterosexuals.

Again, much of this is almost certainly from ‘putting themselves in the line of fire.’ That is, if you associate with homosexuals, you have a better chance of being homosexually raped, and if you engage in ‘atypical sexual sport’ such as sadomasochism, you are probably going to find yourself mixed in with a ‘rough’ crowd.

For men, about half of those who reported rapes had been raped homosexually - 43 men had experienced homosexual rape, while 42 had experienced heterosexual rape. For women, 20 reported being homosexually raped, while 434 reported heterosexual rape. Overall, about 4% of all the female rape victims had experienced homosexual rape.

Of those who experienced either kind of rape, 63 had been raped homosexually and 486 had been raped heterosexually. So overall, of those 522 who claimed rape experience in the FRI sample (some experienced both kinds), 12% had been homosexually raped at some point. Adjusting these data for sampling variation and national figures on the prevalence of homosexuality, the FRI survey would estimate that homosexual rape is experienced by 11% to 13% of all rape victims, with an approximate statistical error of 3% either way.
Whether in homosexual rape or heterosexual rape - overwhelmingly - men were the rapists. Men initiated the sexual assault for 88.2% of all those who claimed to be rape victims, while women assailants accounted for only 11.8%.
Other Studies
A small study6 of 185 second-year medical students in Australia - 101 men and 81 women - came up with similar conclusions. The students filled out a questionnaire that asked them if they had ever been forced or had ever forced someone to have sex with them. About 4% of the men and 2% of the women said that they had forced someone sexually.

The key finding from our perspective was “approximately a quarter of the men and half of the women who reported using one of these forms of coercion stated their victims were of the same sex” (p. 498). This is a very small sample, and probably not representative of anybody but second-year medical students. However, 1% of the men and 1% of the women said that they forced someone homosexually and 3% of the men and 1% of the women said that they forced someone heterosexually. That is, even though the proportion of homosexuals in the general population is probably between 2% and 4% (and may be little different in medical schools), the results from this small sample suggest that about a third of self-reported ‘rapists’ may have initiated homosexual rape.

A slightly larger study7 involved 229 volunteer male British homosexuals. These homosexuals were asked “how old were you when you were first sexually molested or raped, that is subjected to sex without your consent?” Only the first molestation or rape was addressed.

Ten (4.4%) of the homosexual men were assaulted by women (in the FRI study it was a statistically similar 2.7%). The remaining 219 were assaulted by men. The victim was forcibly anally penetrated in 99 (45%) of the cases, and in a further 11 (5%) an unsuccessful attempt at penetration was made. Penetration of the mouth but not the anus occurred in an additional 13 instances. Altogether, penetrative rape (in the legal sense) occurred in 56% of all cases.

In this study, the rapes could again have occurred at any age. The median victim age, in fact, was 13 years old, meaning that half of the first rape experiences occurred when the respondent was no older than 13. Interestingly enough, in 23 cases the victim was assaulted by a person with authority over them. In 9 (39%) of these 23 cases the assailant was a teacher, in one case the perpetrator was a cub-master, and in another a choirmaster.

Our research at FRI has established that about half of the reported assaults upon pupils by teachers are homosexual assaults (see our latest published journal article8 on teacher molestations reported in the Boston Globe). This British study seems to jibe with our findings.

Worried about strangers raping your boy? 36 of the assaults on boys were carried out by strangers. Eight (22%) of these assaults occurred in public lavatories, four in movie houses, five in parks or wasteland - almost half overall in public places. Though the mayor of Amsterdam has publicly stated that he is sympathetic to gays having sex in public facilities, FRI believes - for the sake of our children at least - that restrooms and rest areas are properly reserved for personal waste disposal, not sex.

Coxell Studies

Researcher Adrian Coxell has done two studies on rape. One included 224 men attending an STD clinic9 - obviously, this sample would be very rich in homosexuals. Indeed, 22% were. The other drew 2,474 respondents from 18 general medical practices in England10. There, 3.1% said that they were gay, bisexual, or “heterosexual but sometimes had sex with men.”

In the first Coxell study - featuring men attending an STD clinic - the following was reported:

• 18% said they had been raped as adults. This included 38% of men who had sex with men [MSM] v 12% of men who only had sex with women. All of the MSM who had been assaulted were raped by men (19 of 19), and 3 of the 21 men who only had sex with women were raped by a man. The homosexual rape rate overall was 22/40 or 55% of the reported rapes.
• Looked at another way, for this entire set of very sexually active men, 9.8% reported having been homosexually raped, while 8.0% said they had been heterosexually raped.
• 10% of the men raped by men and 13% of the men raped by women contracted an STD from the rape.
• 12% of the men reported childhood sexual abuse; 20 (80%) of the 25 perpetrators in these instances were men. On average, the boys were 9.8 years old when the abuse occurred. Exact breakdowns were not provided, but MSM more frequently reported being sexually abused as a child.
• 55 instances of consenting (but illegal) sexual experiences with adults were reported - 17 (31%) were homosexual; the rest were usually with an older woman involving intercourse or oral sex.
• Not a single childhood or adulthood rape was reported to the police.

The second Coxell study, of 18 general practices, probably approximates the experiences of a fair cross-section of men. The key question was whether “a person had used force or other means so that they could do sexual things to you or get you to do sexual things to them.”

Coxell also asked whether the individual had done sexual things (even if non-coerced) with a person 5 years or older his senior, because he wanted to also address the issue of consensual, statutory rape.

2.9% of men reported non-consensual sexual experiences as adults, 5.4% said they were raped as children, and 7.7% reported consensual, but illegal, sexual experiences as children (i.e., statutory rape).

Male perpetrators were responsible for 81% of the cases of rape in childhood, and 13% of the consensual experiences in childhood. Also, rape in adulthood was committed by a male assailant in 40 (55.6%) of the 72 rapes. So, using a legal definition of rape/statutory rape, 124 (39.9%) of 311 instances involved sex with a man – i.e., homosexual rape (the FRI study found a similar range of 42% to 46% using a slightly different measure).

Men who had sex with men [homosexuals] were 6 times more apt than non-homosexuals to report rape in adulthood, 2.5 times more apt to report consensual, but illegal, sex in childhood, and 2.7 times more apt to report having been raped as a child (that is, under the age of 16). (Note that the FRI study found that gays were approximately 5 times as likely as heterosexual men to report ever being raped.)

Summing Up

Here is what we appear to know about homosexual rape:

• First, homosexual rape is probably experienced by around 11% to 13% of all those who are raped
• Men who have sex with men are more apt to be homosexually raped than non-homosexuals both during childhood and as adults. Whether being raped homosexually causes men to become homosexual has not been proven. But the findings are consistent with this notion
• Men are the majority of rapists, and women are the majority of those raped
• About half of the rapes of men are homosexual

References:
1. Forman, BD. (1983) Reported male rape. Victimology 7:235-6.
2. King, M. B. Male rape. (1991) British Medical Journal, 301, 1345-1346.
3. Federal Bureau of Investigation. (1990) Uniform Crime Reports. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
4. Bell AP, Weinberg MS, Hammersmith SK. (1981) Sexual Preference: statistical appendix. Bloomington: Indiana Univ. Press.
5. Cameron, P, Proctor, K, Coburn, W Jr, Forde, N, Larson, H, Cameron, K. (1986) Child molestation and homosexuality. Psychological Reports 58:327-37.
6. McMonaghy, N. & Zamir, R. Heterosexual and homosexual coercion, sexual orientation and sexual roles in medical students. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 1995, 24, 489-502.
7. Ford, C. I., Hickson, B, Davies, P. M., Hunt, A. J., Weatherburn, P., McManus T. J., Coxon, A. P. M. Gay men as victims of nonconsensual sex. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 1994, 23, 281-294.
8. Cameron, P. Do homosexual teachers account for about half of news stories of molestations of pupils? A Boston Globe replication. Psychological Reports, 2002, 90, 173-174.
9. Coxell, AW, King, MB, Mezey GC, & Kell P. Sexual molestation of men: interviews with 224 men attending a genitourinary medicine service. International Journal of STD & AIDS, 2000, 11, 574-578.
10. Coxell A, King, M, Mezey, G, & Gordon D. Lifetime prevalence, characteristics, and associated problems of non-consensual sex in men: cross sectional survey. British Medical Journal 1999, 318, 846-850.

A new British sex survey has been unveiled. Only those aged 16 through 44 years of age were interviewed, but the sample was large (n= 11,161 respondents) and randomly-drawn (however, only 65% of those contacted cooperated). This new survey was conducted by many of the same researchers who did a similar British sex study in 1990, so comparisons between the 1990 and 2000 samples allow estimates as to how Britain has sexually changed in the past decade.

Aside from Sweden, this is the first long-term follow-up on what AIDS education, freer sexuality in public and in the schools, and the loosening of restraints upon homosexuality may have led to.

Here are some of the findings ‘off the top’:

• Marriage dying
  The proportion of those single went up, from 33.0% in 1990, to 34.7% in 2000. 9.6% were cohabiting in 1990, 17.3% in 2000. The fraction of the population either separated, divorced, or widowed went from 5.8% to 6.0%; and the proportion married dropped from 51.5 to 42.0%.
• Number of sexual partners up
  82% of men and 76% of women reported more than one sexual partner in their lifetime; 35% of men and 19% of women reported at least 10 sexual partners in their lifetime
• Number reporting homosexual experience in the last 5 years up
  In 2000, 2.6% of men and 2.6% of women reported having engaged in homosexual relationships at least once in the past 5 years. This is an increase of 175% for men and 343% in women - in just a decade! These findings tend to support the estimated recent increase in female homosexuality here in the U.S. by Amy Butler in 2000 [see Family Research Report March 2001].

What is happening sexually in Britain generally seems to happen in America and vice-versa. Now two good studies have come to the same conclusion - homosexuality appears to be finally ‘on the move.’ Though still the taste of a small minority, that minority may have grown appreciably over the past decade. All the talk about it, all the positive depiction of it in the media is finally surfacing in scientific sex surveys!

If this apparent rate of increase is real and continues on the same track, in another decade more women than men would be involved in homosexuality, and the fraction of the population participating would top 5%! Possibly, and this is a large speculation, Kinsey’s infamous “10% of the population” could actually come true, maybe as early as 2020! Will the West transform itself into Sodom via ‘education,’ ‘non-discrimination,’ and ‘media exposure?’

• AIDS education is associated with increased HIV, STI risk

The authors noted that they had found an increase since 1990 “in reporting a wide range of behaviours associated with increased risk of HIV and STI [sexually transmitted infection] transmission, including number of heterosexual partners, homosexual partnership, concurrent partnership, heterosexual anal sex, and payment for sex. For many of these variables, the magnitude of the observed changes is large [over 150%].

The authors also noted that:

Between the two surveys we have also recorded increases in consistent condom use, which were greatest for men with multiple partners in the past year. This suggests that sexual health promotion messages may have had some impact. However, the apparent increase in number of sexual partners may have served to discount some of the public health advantages of increased condom use. Combining data on condom use and number of partners as an indicator of ‘unsafe sex,’ we found that overall the proportion of the population who reported two or more partners in the past year and did not use condoms consistently, had increased between the surveys.... New diagnoses of acute STIs in UK genitourinary medicine (GUM) clinics fluctuated between 1990 and 1999 but rose overall by 20% and 56% in men and women respectively. (p. 1840)

After this study first appeared, FRI corresponded with one of the principal researchers, Dr. Kevin Fenton. We told him that FRI had estimated, from its survey of six U.S. cities in 1983-84, that the 13% of the men and 6% of the women who had ever engaged in homosexuality accounted for 25% and 10% of the STIs reported. If just those who claimed to be bisexual or homosexual (6% men, 3% women) were considered, they accounted for 11% and 4% respectively of STIs.

FRI noted that the publication of Fenton’s 1990 survey only reported on GUM visits, but that the 3.9% of men who reported at least one homosexual partner accounted for 14.8% of such visits, and the 1.9% of women accounted for 7.9% of GUM visits.

Dr. Fenton replied that “Homosexual men do bear a disproportionate disease burden: Although only 2.6% of the male population had a male partner in the past 5 years, they accounted for 10% of all acute STIs reported during the period of observation.”

When we asked him about women who had sex with women [WSW] he said “we are not presenting the estimates for WSW. In general they are associated with increased risk of having an STI. However this is because they are more likely to report more lifetime male partners than WSM. Looking at exclusively homosexual women leaves us with much smaller numbers and the risk of STI acquisition is significantly lower than heterosexual females. We will not be presenting these data however.”

While unrestrained sexuality has grown, it appears that only about 1.3% of men and 0.6% of women of this age group have engaged in intravenous [IV] drug abuse in the past 5 years (versus 1.3% of men and 0.8% of women in 1990). So while AIDS education about sex may be making the sexual pot boil, IV drug information has apparently had no effect, one way or the other.

References:
1. Johnson, AM, Mercer, CH, Erens, B, Copas, AJ, McManus S, Wellings K, Fenton, KA, Korovessis, C, Macdowall, W, Nachahal, K, Purdon S., Field, J. Sexual behaviour in Britain: partnerships, practices, and HIV risk behaviors. Lancet, 2001, 358, 1835-184.
2. Cameron, P. et al. Sexual orientation and sexually transmitted disease, Nebraska Medical Journal, 70, 292-299.other.

Corner

A 'Monster' Story

He was one of the first men with AIDS to be arrested and imprisoned for having sex with a 15 year-old boy. Was he a ‘Monster?’ Decide for yourself after reading the ‘rest of the story.’

Jim was a popular, good-looking guy at 15 years of age. He was president of his junior high school class, had dated five different girls, had an intact family that went regularly to church, and he played on both the baseball and football teams. He got along with both of his parents and his three siblings. To top it off, he was an outstanding student.

His public school counselor was a charismatic, good-looking fellow. Envy of all the boys, and the lust of all the girls (and single teachers).

One day the counselor approached Jim’s parents about a trip. He had to deliver a luxury car to California and he thought he’d take Jim and four of his classmates along. They would tour the state, then they’d all fly home filled with memories of museums, church settlements, and scenery. The parents left the decision to Jim; after all, he would get to further his education. The boys’ parents got together to compare notes and plan. And the trip began.

Two weeks later, Jim called to say that he wanted to come home early - he was homesick. Yet, when he arrived, he was different. Where before he was easy to live with, now he was surly. He kept trying to phone someone, but could never get through. He was sent to his grandparents, but within the week he did something very bizarre - he removed his clothes, wrapped himself in a blanket, and jumped in front of a police car.

His folks were shocked and dismayed. Figuring it was best, they sent Jim to see a psychiatrist. When the family got to the psychiatrist’s office they were puzzled - the psychiatrist waited for them to speak before he would, and then the good doctor often just ‘reflected back’ what they were saying. The psychiatrist saw Jim alone and apparently decided what had ‘caused’ this sudden turn about in his behavior. But he wouldn’t tell the parents. Jim was his client; the parents were there to pay the bill. The psychiatrist would release information only as client Jim saw fit.

In about 2 months, Jim tried to commit suicide again. This time it was aspirin. Into the hospital and more mental health ‘treatment.’ More bills. The psychiatrist ordered a medicine to calm Jim down and gave the bottle to Jim. Within days Jim decided to take all the medicine at once. Back to the hospital.

The psychiatrist wanted Jim to stay in the hospital for ‘treatment.’ Jim’s father decided he had had ‘enough of this.’ He told Jim to ‘cool it, get out of here, and get to work.’ Jim did. And things seemed to be OK for awhile. Jim got married in his early 20s. His marriage lasted about 4 years while Jim worked as a flight attendant based in San Francisco.

Then a divorce came. And Jim separated himself from his family. Within a few years Jim had AIDS. Then came Jim’s arrest and conviction for having sex with an underage, 15 year-old boy. The governor got Jim got out of prison early so that he could be treated and die more comfortably. Toward the end, Jim repented and told his parents what had happened. He died in 1995 at age 39.

It turned out that his trip to California in junior high school was the pivotal event in Jim’s life. The school counselor, Steve Anderson, had molested Jim (and apparently some of the other boys). Jim ‘fell in love with Steve’ and did everything he could to garner Steve’s attention (Steve was the one Jim was trying to reach by phone). Steve told Jim to make sure that if he ran into any problems or people asked, that he was to blame his parents. And apparently that is often what Jim did - his parents were ‘responsible’ for his suicide attempts or bizarre behavior whenever he talked to the cops or hospital staff that treated him after his suicide attempts.

On the other hand, Jim told the psychiatrist right away what had happened on the trip, and that he had tried to kill himself because of the molestation and his unrequited love for counselor Steve. The psychiatrist kept mum because Jim was his client. He just kept seeing Jim and sending bills. The parents didn’t find out the full story until Jim was dying 20 some years later.

There’s a lot to notice in this sad tale. First, homosexuality has the power to disrupt and destroy. A family was seriously injured - both psychologically and financially - because of it. Jim’s life was turned upside down. A promising lad became a troubled man and died because of it. Who knows how many other people Steve or Jim injured along their tortured paths?

Secondly, consider the state of our ‘mental health’ profession. The psychiatrist knew that an employee of the local public school had seduced Jim. But he didn’t tell the school. The psychiatrist knew that the family was deeply concerned about Jim, and wanted to know why he had so dramatically changed. But the psychiatrist didn’t tell the family (years later, they found out that the psychiatrist had issued orders that Steve was not to be allowed to see Jim in the hospital).

The psychiatrist kept sending the bills for ‘treatment,’ the family kept praying and paying, and not a thing was done about counselor Steve (eventually, he too decided to become an airline attendant, because Jim ran across him years later - looking gaunt). If Steve had been turned into the police and brought to court, Jim might have felt differently about what Steve had done to him. As it was, Jim eventually became sexually involved with other men (and at least one boy). And the psychiatrist never turned Steve in, nor told Jim homosexuality was wrong or dangerous.

A hundred years prior to this tale, when then-teacher Walt Whitman was caught sexually ‘messing’ with his boy pupils, Whitman was denounced from the pulpit, tarred and feathered, and run out of town. Had Jim been molested during this time, Jim probably would have been taken to the preacher. After learning what had happened the preacher would have alerted both the family and the town. The whole community would have been involved in denouncing Steve and in trying to ‘save and protect Jim.’ Though Jim might still have believed he was ‘in love with’ Steve, he also might have begun to view the whole matter in a different light, maybe to the point of casting homosexual interests out of his mind.

Instead, using our modern ‘wisdom’ and psychiatric ‘know-how,’ Jim - at 15 years old - was put ‘in control.’ Nothing happened unless he, Jim, wanted it to happen. Steve’s employment depended on Jim’s discretion. The psychiatrists’ employment depended upon Jim’s discretion. His family would only get the truth if Jim ‘ratted’ on Steve. Instead of his family or the community, Jim was ‘the boss’ - and he tried to kill himself three times bearing that burden.

Third, consider the Freudian notion that ‘the family’ causes homosexuality in children. As near as can be determined (and I talked with both parents), there wasn’t a shred of evidence that Jim was ‘primed by his experiences with his family’ to get involved with homosexuality. On the contrary, Jim was primed to fall in heterosexual love - to marry, have kids, etc.

But then Steve came along. Two weeks in an unfamiliar environment and with no other accountability except counselor Steve was long enough for Steve to turn Jim’s interests toward men. True, Jim still had some sexual interest in women - after all, Jim got married. But a seed was planted that grew in secrecy. And when it blossomed, Jim became consumed with men instead of women. The early 1970s were a bad time to be having sex with other men in San Francisco. AIDS was present even if it hadn’t been recognized. And Jim paid the price.

How many other boys did Steve ruin in this way? We’ll never know, but it’s pretty unlikely that Jim was the only one. And Steve was clever. He knew the psychiatric storyline. On Steve’s advice - and straight from the annals of psychiatry - Jim parroted Freudian notions by telling everyone who asked in the mental health and law enforcement communities that ‘my family made me do it!’

How many others did the psychiatrist and the mental health system ‘help’ in this way? Just how much ‘help’ did they provide? How could it be ‘ethical’ to take a family’s money yet leave the predator untouched unless Jim - the 15 year-old ‘in love’ - said so? Today schools hire homosexuals because ‘diversity’ is an important value. Today’s psychiatrists see nothing wrong with homosexuality. Is our society really ‘more enlightened’ now than it was in Walt Whitman’s day? Or is it the other way around?

Family Research Report critically examines empirical data on families, sexual social policy, AIDS, drug addiction, and homosexuality, digging behind the 'headlines' and breaking new scientific ground.

FRR is published 8 times/year by the Family Research Institute.

Dr. Paul Cameron, Publisher
Dr. Kirk Cameron, Editor

Subscriptions: $25/yr ($40 foreign)

©2002

Family Research Institute

P.O. Box 62640

Colorado Springs, CO 80962-2640

(303) 681-3113

Return to top

Return to the FAMILY RESEARCH INSTITUTE Web site