Category: Homosexuality

Human rights can commonly be accessed through everyday life. The majority of the population receives these rights at birth, for just being human. However, there are specific groups in today’s society that struggle to access these rights. This can be said about the LGBT community, who have been fighting for basic human rights for decades on end. The past century has really shown some terror but also growth for this profound community.

Homosexuality is not a term that people shy away from – for the most part – anymore. However, in the early twentieth century, the views on homosexuality were not only unjustified but downright atrocious. The movement begins with Henry Gerber, a German immigrant living in Chicago (1924). Gerber was amongst the first to document gay rights in the United States. During his time in World War 1, he founded “Homosexual Emancipation” a committee that publicly spoke about the rights of homosexual men. As well as this he also founded the first gay-interest newsletter called, “Friendship and Freedom” – this unfortunately never went very far due to police raids shutting it down before it could lift off. Gerber said, ‘Would it not sound more natural to say that the homosexual is made neurotic because his style of life is beset by thousands of dangers?” (Henry Gerber, responding to newspaper, 1934). This quote perfectly describes Gerber’s views on homosexuality and was definitely the kick-off to the movement for the LGBT community.

In the same year, 1924, English poet and author – Radcliff Hall – stirred controversy when she published a lesbian-themed novel called “The Well of Loneliness”. This once again took the movement far, but it also didn’t sit right with the rest of society. Questions were being asked about how suitable it was for these kinds of novels and writings to be available to the public. In her novel, she writes, “Too late, too late, your love gave me life. Here am I the creature you made through your loving; by your passion you created the thing that I am. Who are you to deny me the right to love? But for you, I need never have known existence.” It is very clear to see Halls’s views on the lesbian community and this novel has soon become a massive part of the LGBT culture. Between 1928 – 1929 Hall was dragged through tedious court trials for this novel. This once again shows that society was not yet ready to accept the community – which is tragic in itself.

The timeline quickly moves onto the years during World War 2. Nazi concentration camps are possibly the most known for the heinous acts upon Jewish citizens, however, there were many other groups of people that were brought and tortured in these camps. Those who were known or suspected of being part of the LGBT community were also brought to these camps. They were given a pink triangle that was pinned onto the infamous stripped clothes that they wore. These triangles were also given to those accused of being sexual predators. This in turn shows that society viewed homosexuals as people who were committing horrible sex crimes. This still shows the mistreatment that the community experienced.

As the LGBT community took two steps forward, society pushed them three steps backward. This can be seen in 1952 when the American Psychiatrist Association deemed homosexuality as a mental disorder. Due to this, anyone known or presumed as being homosexual – male or female- would be put into mental institutions which focused on trying to bring them back to heterosexuality. The people included in these horrible tests were horribly treated. It went against many human rights and morals. It started off with therapy in which the doctor would try to get to the basis of where homosexuality started. It then got much more violent and forced many of the patients to self-pleasure pictures of the opposite sex hoping it would trigger the brain to associate pleasure with the opposite sex. In many countries, this torture also included many forms of rape as well. This not only dehumanized the patients but also gave them irreversible trauma.

Due to these dates, it seems as though these horrors were more than fifty years ago which makes a lot of people question whether or not homophobia is still in society today. The answer to this is of course there is. In 2012 in Ohio, the infamous gay nightclub, Pulse, was shot up – unfortunately killing 48 innocents and injuring 56. The reason for these deaths was no other reason other than the sexuality of these people. This scared the LGBT community for months.

There are still roughly twenty-eight countries that still punish homosexuality with the death penalty. These are mostly middle eastern – Muslim – countries today. Pride – a national holiday and march for the LGBT community gets protested against every year. It Is very clear to see that discrimination has not yet fully changed and quite possibly will take more time for the LGBT community to be fully accepted in today’s society.

In conclusion, The LGBT community may have come leaps and bounds from one hundred years ago, yet these are still humans that deserve the same rights as the rest of the population. No one should be killed for love, and no one should have to hide themselves in fear of being treated this horribly. There are many countries today – such as America – that are desperately trying to take the few rights of the LGBT community away such as the right to marriage. This is repeating history for many different reasons and it would be irresponsible to assume that the LGBT community won’t fight back this time.

This topic is particularly important and close to my heart as I identify as a lesbian female in a society that doesn’t yet fully accept this. I have first-hand experience of discrimination for my sexuality. I understood that my community went through a lot of troubles in the past, yet I had no idea just how bad it had to get before there was a change. In my personal opinion, every human life should be treated with the same respect – despite their gender, race, and especially the people that they love.

Bibliography

1. Graham, G. (2019). George Chauncey. Available: https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/7923349-henry-gerber-writing-in-1932-under-the-pseudonym-parisex-responded. Last accessed 09.09.20
2. Roberta, J. (2019). Christian Martyr, Pagan Witness. Available: https://glreview.org/article/christian-martyr-pagan-witness/. Last accessed 09.09.20.
3. Hall, R. (2019). The Well of Loneliness. Available: https://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/74248.Radclyffe_Hall. Last accessed 09.09.20.
4. REPORTER. (2020). LGBTQ Rights Milestones Fast Facts. Available: https://edition.cnn.com/2015/06/19/us/lgbt-rights-milestones-fast-facts/index.html. Last accessed 09.09.20
5. REPORTER. (2016). 3 Hours In Orlando: Piecing Together An Attack And Its Aftermath. Available: https://choice.npr.org/index.html?origin=https://www.npr.org/2016/06/16/482322488/orlando-shooting-what-happened-update. Last accessed 09.09.20 

Abstract

The older LGBT community is an extremely resilient group that faces additional unique intersectional stressors as they anticipate expected mental and physical health decline. Despite the advances (i.e., marriage equality) made worldwide towards positively evaluating the LGBT community as a whole, there is still a great need in educating service providers, the general public, and very importantly, healthcare providers, to address these diverse issues and enhance adequate care. The purpose of this experiment is to better understand attitudes towards this specific group of LGBT people and investigate whether people’s perceptions towards the LGBT community are influenced by the LGBT person’s age and level of outness (i.e., openly or not openly gay). Experiment 1 would consist of surveying 200 participants from Texas A&M University–Corpus Christi to explore if the participant’s age, the evaluated LGBT person’s age, and the evaluated target’s level of outness influence attitudes towards the target. Expected results are that the openly gay younger targets will be perceived the most positively, followed by the not openly gay young targets, openly gay older targets, and then the not openly gay older targets. If true, these results will illustrate that social prejudice in the form of homophobia and ageism influences evaluations of older LGBT people.

Measuring Attitudes Towards the Older LGBT Community and Their Levels of Outness

Historically, LGBT people have faced more negative evaluations as well as prejudice and violence than compared to heterosexual people. Blashill and Powlishta (2009) note specifically that gay men and lesbians are disliked more than non-gay individuals and are more likely to be avoided by others. In addition, LGBT individuals are more likely to be discriminated against in their workplace (Badgett, Lau, Sears, & Ho, 2007). As a result of these social prejudices and discriminations, some LGBT people are uncomfortable with disclosing their identities and relationships. This has negative implications, especially for members of the LGBT community that are older, as they will be less likely to disclose pertinent medical health information to their providers for fear of being ostracized, which may result in detrimental incompetent care.

With the advances made in technology and health care over the last few decades, the population of individuals aged 65 and older is rising steadily and is estimated to double by 2050, as compared to 2012 (Ortman, Velkoff, & Hogan, 2014). Although difficult to obtain an accurate census data report on the number of older LGBT individuals, it is generally estimated that there are currently up to 4 million LGBT individuals over the age of 65 (Fredriksen-Goldsen, K.I., & Kim, 2017). They note that like the general older population, the LGBT older community population is also expected to double by 2060. In addition to foreseeing the expected health decline that comes with aging, older LGBT adults also face social, legal, economic, and healthcare-related stressors across their lifetime. Research has shown specifically that older LGBT adults are much more likely to live alone and less likely to bear children, leading them into social isolation (Fredriksen-Goldsen, Kim, Shui, Golsen, & Emlet, 2015; Cahill et al., 2000). Legally, there are still many institutional discriminatory laws that prevent LGBT adults from accessing the same benefits that heterosexual people do (Addis et al., 2009). Badgett, Durso, and Schneebaum (2013) found that older LGBT adults are more likely to be financially unstable and insecure as well as earn lower wages throughout their lifetime than compared to their heterosexual counterparts. Finally, older LGBT adults are much less likely to receive appropriate, adequate, and timely healthcare due to either perceived discrimination that they fear from healthcare providers and medical professionals or actual discrimination from service providers that refuse to treat LGBT patients (Hash & Rogers, 2013).

The purpose of this paper is to propose an experiment that investigates the perceptions of the older LGBT community and determine whether those evaluations are influenced by the participant’s age, the older LGBT person’s age, and the older LGBT person’s level of outness. This study would add to the minimally existing literature about the unique concerns and needs of LGBT adults as they age through life. These findings would illustrate the potential intersectional discriminatory factors such as homophobia and ageism that can then be addressed to provide for effective education and training to raise empathy and accommodations of the general community.

Perceptions of Homosexuality

It is only recently that the majority of the public population’s evaluations of LGBT people have changed for the better. Flores (2014) notes that people perceive and express positive attitudes and general acceptance of the LGBT community as compared to thirty years ago. Unfortunately, however, LGBT individuals still continue to be prejudiced and discriminated against, emphasizing the necessity of research that focuses on how and why people evaluate LGBT people (Blashill and Powlishta, 2009). Even further, perceptions of the older, aging community remain relatively negative in comparison to perceptions of the youth (Cottle & Glover, 2007). There is minimal, if any, research specifically on the perceptions of older LGBT individuals, though it can be assumed that they would be in line with the perceptions of the LGBT community and of the older adult community.

There are a number of factors that may contribute to how people perceive and evaluate the LGBT community, such as the evaluator’s characteristics (i.e., gender, age, attitudes towards homosexuality) and information that is provided by the LGBT person (i.e., target person’s gender, age, level of outness). In general, those with prejudiced negative attitudes towards the LGBT community are more likely to prefer to interact with heterosexual individuals (Lehavot & Lambert, 2007). In addition, they found that men more than women, are more likely to possess and publicly exhibit negative attitudes towards LGBT individuals. Herek (2000) and Diamond (2005) found that the characteristics of the target LGBT individual also plays a part in forming the evaluations from others. Specifically, they note that gender plays a part in that lesbians are viewed more positively than homosexual men are viewed.

There are also a number of potential factors that contribute to the perceptions of the older adult population, namely ageist stereotypes and the correlation between declining mental and physical health that occurs in old age (Nosek et al., 2002). Further, they found that implicit negative perceptions of the older community in comparison to young people, were the strongest of any negative attitudes, including those of race and gender.

Level of Outness

Generally, being out is defined as the disclosure of one’s LGBT identity (Frost & Meyer, 2009). This level of outness mediates LGBT individuals in how they express themselves and socially interact with others. The differing levels of outness may depend on the number of people that an LGBT individual has disclosed their identity. Their outness is continual and can therefore be thought of as existing on a spectrum, normally ranging from not out at all, to being completely out to everyone that they know. Troiden (1979) reports that coming out or being out is a hard process that requires LGBT individuals to self-accept their identity and understand and combat the societal prejudice that exists in their world. If they can do that then higher levels of outness are said to reflect higher levels of self-esteem, confidence, and overall better mental health. As a result, openly out individuals may have a higher level of satisfaction in their lives, leading them to interact more socially and maintain more positive relationships, which may then increase positive attitudes towards them.

The Minority Stress Model and the Life-Course Perspective

The minority stress model as explained by Meyer (2003) and the life-course perspective as detailed by Cohler and Hammack (2007) provide two essential theoretical concepts that support this study. The minority stress model proposes that the stress experienced by minority groups, namely gender and sexual minority, leads to a unique divergent of chronic stress that may spread to their mental and physical well-being. The life-course perspective proposes that an individual’s well-being and general development can be explained at least in part by interactions with social others during times of changing political and societal climates. This adaptive skill to interact with various others even through major historical change may contribute to the individual’s health needs and outcomes. An example of this specific to this study is the prejudice and discrimination against LGBT people contributing to their avoidance of actively seeking out competent and supportive care and services that they need (Croghan, Moone, & Olson, 2014). Combining these two perspectives will hopefully be able to provide a more integrative viewpoint into understanding the fears of older LGBT adults.

This study hopes to add to the limited literature on the older LGBT community. Further education and understanding of the unique issues of this community have large implications that for social organizations and assisted living homes, economic and government programs, and healthcare providers. A recent survey has noted that a majority of older LGBT adults have expressed worries and concerns about neglect, abuse, and inadequate or limited access to long-term care and healthcare (AARP, 2018). In addition, these older LGBT individuals have mentioned actual verbal and physical discriminatory events that have happened to them not only throughout their lifetime but in their recent old age as well. This community of people that have faced a lifetime of inequality should not also have to spend their remaining years in fear.

Based on the previous research on perceptions of LGBT people and perceptions of older, aging adults, it can be hypothesized that there will be a main effect for participant age. Specifically, younger participants, more than older participants, will have more negative attitudes toward older LGBT adults. In addition, based on the studies about the correlation between the LGBT community and higher levels of outness leading to the overcoming of shame, then it can be hypothesized that higher levels of outness will lead to more positive attitudes towards the LGBT individual (Eliason & Schope, 2007). Specifically, it can be predicted that older LGBT adults that are openly out will be perceived more positively than older LGBT individuals that are not openly out.

Method

Participants and Design

The ideal number of participants to recruit for this study is roughly a total of 300. About 50 participants can be accounted for to be removed for any number of reasons (ie., failing to complete the survey, misrepresentation of personal characteristics). These participants and their collected data will come from Texas A&M University–Corpus Christi in 2019. The majority of participants in this experiment will most likely be recruited through the Psychology department, mainly through professors to their students in current courses, perhaps for extra credit. Other participants may come from the general university community. The ideal average age of the participants to be recruited in this study is roughly 30 – 40, to represent the perceptions of the general population of people rather than just the attitudes of young people or the attitudes of older adults. This is to avoid the intergroup biases that occur when individuals are a part of the same social group as shown in previous social psychology research (e.g., younger participants viewing younger LGBT people more positively than they view older LGBT people; Aboud 2003).

Measures

Attitudes toward lesbians and gay men. To account for any possible biases in participants’ responses to the survey, they will complete the Attitudes Toward Lesbians and Gay Men scale (ATLG) as developed by Herek (1994). This Likert scale includes 20 items rated from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). An example item includes “Female homosexuality is a sin.” Higher scores represent more negative than positive values toward homosexuality. This scale is reported to have had high internal reliability (α = .97).

Perceptions of the target person. Participants’ attitudes toward the target LGBT individual will be measured using the Perceptions of the Target Person Scale (PTPS), developed by Marks and Fraley (2005). This Likert scale includes 36 items rated from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). An example item includes “This person is successful.” Higher scores will indicate more positive evaluations about the target LGBT individual. Participants will complete this scale using the information on characteristics obtained from the vignette. This scale is also reported to have had high internal reliability (α = .94).

Balanced inventory of desirable responding. With this new wave of acceptance towards minority groups, the LGBT community, in particular, participants may feel the urge to give socially desirable responses to the survey. To attempt to control for this potential bias, participants will complete the Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding (BIDR), developed by Bobbio and Mangenelli (2011). This Likert scale includes 16 items rated from 1 (not true) to 7 (very true). An example item includes “I never regret my decisions.” Higher scores will indicate higher social desirability when answering. This scale is also reported to have had high internal reliability (α = .80).

Procedure

Participants, after being recruited to the experiment and agreeing with informed consent to participate, will be asked to complete the BIDR and the ATLG scales, in that order. They will then be assigned at random to read one of four short story vignettes. The information contained in all of the vignettes will be identical, except for the target LGBT person’s age (older or younger) and their level of openness (openly out or not openly out). After the participants finish reading their assigned vignettes, they will be asked to complete the PTPS. Lastly for the experiment, participants will answer some demographic questions for quantitative statistical use. After the experiment is finished, the participants will be thanked for their time and effort and properly debriefed before leaving.

Results

For this experiment, a hierarchical regression will be conducted to analyze the results and determine if there are any effects in relation to the hypotheses. The hierarchical regression will be completed to examine the dependent variable as being the attitudes towards the target LGBT person. In the first step of the hierarchical regression, the participant’s age, the target LGBT person’s age, and the target LGBT person’s level of outness will be coded for. In addition, the Likert scale averages for the ATLG and the BIDR will be entered in the first step as well. For the second step, potential two-way interactions of the variables will be coded for, including participant age x target age, participant age x target level of outness, participant age x ATLG, ATLG x target age, ATLG x target level of outness, and target age x target level of outness. In the third step of the hierarchical regression, potential three-way interactions of the variables will be coded for, including participant age x target age x target level of outness, ATLG x target age x target level of outness, ATLG x participant age x target level of outness, and ATLG x target age x participant age. Multicollinearity violations are not expected to occur with any of the results.

I expect to find that the step one model will be significant in terms of the attitudes scale, in that there will be a main effect on the target LGBT person’s level of outness. Specifically, more openly gay individuals will be viewed more positively than those that are not openly gay. In addition, I also expect to find a significant main effect for ATLG in that participants will score on the ATLG Likert scale higher than those that don’t, will have more negative attitudes towards the target LGBT people (see Figure 1). For steps two and three, I expect to find that the participant age x target age and the participant age x target age x target level of outness will be significant. Further analyses will include a simple slope analysis in relation to the ATLG scale scores and differentiation between participant ages.

Overall, I expect to find that individuals that score higher on the ATLG scale, or in other words, harbor more homophobic attitudes, will evaluate the target LGBT individuals more negatively, regardless of age. I also expect to find that younger participants will view older target LGBT individuals more negatively than they would the younger target LGBT individuals. Lastly, participants will view the target older LGBT individuals that are openly out more positively than those target individuals that are not openly out, regardless of participants’ age.

Discussion

Many older adults share core, universal themes of what they are concerned and worried about as they age: adequate residential and healthcare, financial stability, and low quality of social life. In addition to these general fears, older LGBT individuals experience additional unique stressors that may lead to detrimental mental and physical health outcomes. Some of these additional unique stressors include either perceived or actual prejudice and discrimination in social or professional settings, based on their LGBT identity, finding competent health care that addresses their distinctive gender and LGBT needs (i.e., transgender, HIV), and the stress of concealing their LGBT identity for fear of rejection (Fredriksen-Goldsen et al., 2014).

Further, research involving the disclosure of an individual’s LGBT identity to others has demonstrated that higher levels of outness, or being openly out, are related to high levels of life satisfaction and overall positive mental health (Clausell & Roisman, 2009). Unfortunately, there is not a lot of research, if any, on the general majority population’s (heterosexual) perceptions of the older LGBT community or on the LGBT community in terms of their level of outness. The purpose of this study then, was to analyze if a general individual’s attitude towards the LGBT community is influenced by the LGBT person’s age and level of outness. In identifying these relationships, education, and training may be implemented to promote awareness and empathy for this growing unique community.

Results of this study will hopefully show that younger individuals perceive older LGBT people more negatively than they would younger LGBT people, then it may be beneficial to address the stereotypes regarding the elderly population and ageism. In addition, if results show that higher levels of outness may lead to more positive attitudes from individuals, compared to those that have lower levels of outness, then it could be stated that perhaps being more open about an LGBT identity will be helpful to that individual instead of attempting to hide.

Implications

Many older LGBT adults face multiple social and economic stresses as they age, in addition to the natural mental and physical health decline. The results of this study may illustrate the importance and benefit of implementing LGBT-competent treatment and care in provider facilities that would address the fears and stressors of the older LGBT community. An example is that perhaps in older residential care facilities, LGBT-affirming psychosocial care could be included to identify and provide support for those individuals in need to maximize their quality of life (Porter et al., 2016).

Further, many LGBT individuals of all ages contemplate being out and consider factors of social support, validation, and discrimination in their decision. Research on LGBT outness has pointed to an incongruent relationship between LGBT people’s anticipated fears of treatment from others compared to general people’s actual attitudes towards the LGBT community. This research could make a suggestion that it would be more beneficial for LGBT individuals to be open about their identity than not, providing opportunities for open discussions and integrative pieces of training for all service providers and the general public.

Limitations

This proposal’s study comes with a few limitations. Predetermined Likert scales must be used to examine people’s attitudes toward the LGBT community. Previous research has dictated that usage of these scales has been successful but these scales in general may be limiting in addressing a wider range of perceptions, which might force participants to make choices that do not accurately represent their feelings. It would be helpful for future studies to include qualitative analyses of interviews, etc., to finely examine deeper meanings of participants’ attitudes towards the LGBT community.

Another limitation is that only LGBT people’s current identity status in terms of the level of outness was analyzed. An important influential factor in that identity status is the coming out process for LGBT individuals. It might be helpful for future studies to analyze participants’ attitudes toward the LGBT person’s coming out process and their justifications for coming out. Specific reasons may appeal to participants’ sense of empathy or even on the reverse, may trigger annoyance, but overall should be examined for further understanding.

References

1. AARP. (2018). Maintaining dignity: Understanding and responding to the challenges facing older LGBT Americans. Retrieved from https://www.aarp.org/content/dam/aarp/research/ surveys_statistics/life-leisure/2018/maintaining-dignity-lgbt.doi.10.26419%252Fres.00217. 001.pdf
2. Aboud, F. E. (2003). The formation of in-group favoritism and out-group prejudice in young children: Are they distinct attitudes? Developmental Psychology, 39(1), 48-60.
3. Addis, S., Davies, M., Greene, G., MacBride-Stewart, S., & Shepherd, M. (2009). The health, social care and housing needs of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender older people: A review of the literature. Health & Social Care in the Community, 17, 647–658.
4. Badgett, M., Lau, H., Sears, B., & Ho, D. (2007). Bias in the Workplace: Consistent Evidence of Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Discrimination. UCLA: The Williams Institute. Retrieved from https://escholarship.org/uc/item/5h3731xr
5. Badgett, M. V. L., Durso, L. E., & Schneebaum, A. (2013). New patterns in poverty in the lesbian, gay, and bisexual community. Los Angeles, CA: The Williams Institute. Retrieved from https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/LGB-Poverty-Update-Jun- 2013.pdf
6. Blashill, A. J., & Powlishta, K. K. (2009). Gay stereotypes: The use of sexual orientation as a cue for gender-related attributes. Sex roles, 61(11-12), 783-793.
7. Bobbio, A., & Mangenelli, A.M. (2011). Measuring social desirability responding. A short version of Paulhus’ BIDR 6. Testing, Psychometrics, Methodology in Applied Psychology, 18(2), 117-135. doi: 10.1007/s12671-013-0270-2
8. Cahill, S., South, K., & Spade, J. (2000). Outing age: Public policy issues affecting gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender elders. New York, NY: Policy Institute of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Foundation.
9. Clausell, E., & Roisman, G. I. (2009). Outness, Big Five personality traits, and same-sex relationship quality. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 26(2-3), 211-226.
10. Cohler, B. J., & Hammack, P. L. (2007). The psychological world of the gay teenager: Social change, narrative, and “normality”. Journal of Youth & Adolescence, 36, 47–59.
11. Cottle, N.R. & Glover, R.J. (2007) Combating ageism: Change in student knowledge and attitudes regarding aging. Educational Gerontology, 33(6), 501-512.
12. Croghan, C. F., Moone, R. P., & Olson, A. M. (2014). Friends, family, and caregiving among midlife older lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender adults. Journal of Homosexuality, 61 (1), 79–102. doi:10.1080/00918369.2013.835238
13. Diamond, L. M. (2005). ‘I’m straight, but I kissed a girl’: The trouble with American media representations of female-female sexuality. Feminism & Psychology, 15(1), 104-110.
14. Eliason, M. J., & Schope, R. (2007). Shifting sands or solid foundation? Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender identity formation. In: The health of sexual minorities (pp. 3-26). Springer, Boston, MA.
15. Flores, A. (2014). National trends in public opinion on LGBT rights in the United States. The Williams Institute.
16. Fredriksen-Goldsen, K. I., Cook-Daniels, L., Kim, H.-J., Erosheva, E. A., Emlet, C. A., Hoy- Ellis, C. P., . . . Muraco, A. (2014). The physical and mental health of transgender older adults: An at-risk and underserved population. The Gerontologist, 54(3), 488–500.
17. Fredriksen-Goldsen, K. I., Kim, H.-J., Shui, C., Golsen, J., & Emlet, C. A. (2015). Successful aging among LGBT older adults: Physical and mental health-related quality of life by age group [Special issue: Successful aging]. The Gerontologist, 55(1), 154–168.
18. Fredriksen-Goldsen, K. I., & Kim, H.-J. (2017). The science of conducting research with LGBT older adults – an introduction to aging with pride: National health, aging, and sexuality/gender study (NHAS). The Gerontologist, 57(S1), S1–S14.
19. Frost, D. M., & Meyer, I. H. (2009). Internalized homophobia and relationship quality among lesbians, gay men, and bisexuals. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 56(1), 97-109. doi:10.1037/a0012844
20. Hash, K. M., & Rogers, A. (2013). Clinical practice with older LGBT clients: Overcoming lifelong stigma through strength and resilience. Clinical Social Work Journal, 43, 249–257.
21. Herek, G. M. (1994). Assessing heterosexuals’ attitudes toward lesbians and gay men: A review of empirical research with the ATLG scale. In B. Greene & G. M. Herek (Eds.), Psychological perspectives on lesbian and gay issues, Vol. 1. Lesbian and gay psychology: Theory, research, and clinical applications (pp. 206-228). Thousand Oaks, CA, US: Sage Publications, Inc.
22. Herek, G. M. (2000). Sexual Prejudice and Gender: Do Heterosexuals’ Attitudes Toward Lesbians and Gay Men Differ? Journal of Social Issues, 56(2), 251-266.
23. Lehavot, K., & Lambert, A. J. (2007). Toward a greater understanding of antigay prejudice: On the role of sexual orientation and gender role violation. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 29(3), 279-292.
24. Marks, M.J., & Fraley, R.C. (2005). The sexual double standard: Fact or fiction? Sex Roles, 52(3/4), 175-186. doi: 10.1007/s11199-005-1293-5
25. Meyer, I. H. (2003). Prejudice, social stress, and mental health in lesbian, gay, and bisexual populations: Conceptual issues and research evidence. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 674–697.
26. Nosek, B.A., Banaji, M.R. & Greenwald, A.G. (2002) Harvesting implicit group attitudes and beliefs from a demonstration web site. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, & Practice, 6(1), 101–115.
27. Ortman, J. M., Velkoff, V. A., & Hogan, H. (2014). An aging nation: The older population in the United States, current population reports, P25-1140. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Census Bureau.
28. Porter, K. E., Brennan-Ing, M., Chang, S. C., Dickey, L. M., Singh, A. A., Bower, K. L., & Witten, T. M. (2016). Providing competent and affirming services for transgender and gender nonconforming older adults. Clinical Gerontologist, 39(5), 366–388.
29. Troiden, R. R. (1979). Becoming homosexual: A model of gay identity acquisition. Psychiatry, 42(4), 362-373.

Today more and more LGBT people are ‘coming out’ at a younger age and are living openly with the support of their family, friends, school, community, workplace, and neighborhoods. Despite these progressive leaps life can still be quite difficult for many lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people, including young LGBT people who are not ‘out’ or who are not supported by family, friends, and their communities. Being affirmed and respected for who one is, is critically important to the formation of a positive self-identity.

Physical and psychological bullying is prevalent in many schools. The global extent of bullying has been explicitly acknowledged in the international declarations and treaties directed at protecting children (and also adults) from all forms of violence. These include the United Nations (1989) Convention on the Rights of the Child; World Health Organization (1999) Violence Prevention: An Important Element of a Health Promoting School; United Nations (1994) Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women; UNICEF (n.d.) Child-Friendly Schools.

A number of social psychological studies have shown that the construct of heterosexist attitudes is highly complex and not unidimensional. In a meta-analysis of sex differences in heterosexist attitudes, Kite and Whitley (1996) identified three factors: (1) attitudes toward lesbian or gay individuals, (2) attitudes toward same-sex sexual behavior, and (3) attitudes toward lesbian or gay people’s civil rights.

A number of sources suggest that Filipinos have rather negative attitudes toward lesbians, gay men, and their sexualities. Observations made by activists and members of the NGO sector, for example, point to prejudice and discrimination against lesbians in many domains including healthcare, education, work, and religion (Women’s Feature Service Philippines, 2001). Likewise, Holmes (1993) asserted that no psychologist in the right mind could ignore the topic of being gay because there is unnecessary anguish connected with being different here in the Philippines. So much cruelty and hypocrisy take place in a country that purports to be a Christian. Too many families cause unspeakable pain to their gay members in a nation that claims that the family is the very bedrock and foundation of its society (p. xv).

A growing strand of research has connected sexuality to violence. This is often referred to as ‘gender-based violence’ to connote violence or abuse based on gender and sexual stereotypes and to connect it to sexism and patriarchy (Hyder and MacVeigh, 2007; Terry and Hoare, 2007). The term gender-based violence has been widely adopted although some argue that all violence is gendered (Dunne et al., 2006; Leach and Mitchell, 2006). In schools, sexual harassment, often carried out by male teachers and male students on female students includes unsolicited acts of physical intimacy or demands for sexual favors with intent to offend, humiliate or intimidate (Wolpe et al., 1997).

Bullying in schools and elsewhere can have potentially serious consequences for many young people.

This important issue was highlighted in the Action Plan on Bullying, which was published, by the Department of Education and Skills in January 2013. The Action Plan acknowledges that, while there is variation in the prevalence rates of bullying reported in studies, “It is clear from the available data that many children and young people will encounter bullying and unfortunately for a minority, it will have a very negative impact on their lives.”

In 2010 just under a quarter of young people aged between 10-17 years reported that they were bullied at school at least once in a previous couple of months (Kelly et al, 2012). A 2016 study funded by the National Office for Suicide Prevention found that 50% of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender (LGBT) people who participated had been bullied as a consequence of their LGBT identity, or their perceived LGBT identity, while at school (Higgins et al, 2016).

Students who are or who are perceived to be lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender (LGBT) often experience harassment, bullying, and discrimination in school. Despite the mission of the educational system to provide each child with a safe and encouraging learning environment, the issues facing LGBT students often remain unnoticed or are actively ignored. Sexual minority youth often come out in high school, and researchers have found that the average age that adolescents self-identify as gay or lesbian is 16 years (Herdt & Boxer, 1996). Additionally, studies have found that 5 to 12% of students are not exclusively heterosexual (Hillier, Warr, & Haste, 1996; Lindsay & Rosenthal, 1997; Remafedi, Resnick, Blum & Harris, 1992; Russell, Seif, & Truong, 2001). Thus, LGBT youth, those presumed to be LGBT, and youth who are questioning their sexual orientation or gender identity represent a significant proportion of the student population and must be protected.

The study is in the significance of exploring the perceptions of non-LGBT+ Students of LGBT+ Students. This research aims to provide both non-LGBT+ members’ perceptions’ when it comes to several factors namely safety in school, experience in bullying LGBT+ students, acceptance of LGBT+ students in social groups, the interaction between Non-LGBT+ and LGBT+ students, and gender identity, the experience of being bullied, the composition of the friendship group, and factors contributing to their sexuality today for the LGBT+ community. This issue is still timely and can somehow notice the bullying and discrimination of other people towards the community thus making this research a way to spread awareness since the LGBT+ community is an important part of society, the LGBT+ youth have special needs and face numerous challenges, that it’s generally deemed acceptable to discriminate people based solely on their sexual orientation and that we need more highly visible positive role models for LGBT+ youth when it comes to acceptance and openness. These goals can be achieved through the respondents who can provide the needed information needed and be put under study. The output of this study is a source material that can be a reference for future developments, and analysis and be used to improve the research study as a whole.  

The freedom of faith, yet as non-discrimination, may be a vital offering, and it’s vital that governments don’t unnecessarily burden the exercise of non secular conscience. this can be particularly vital to minority spiritual teams, whose practices are only too simply trodden on by-laws and policies enacted by majorities. however once exemptions to laws to accommodate spiritual beliefs or practices run into the rights of others or core social group values like nondiscrimination, lawmakers ought to proceed with caution.

Proponents of those laws argue that they properly balance spiritual freedom with the rights of LGBT people. In fact, with few exceptions, the laws as written produce blanket exemptions for spiritual believers to discriminate with no thought of or perhaps mechanism for the thought of the harms and burdens on others. As a result of their slender specialization in the soul, the laws give very little protection for the rights, well-being, or dignity of this UN agency are turned away.

Statements created by legislative supporters of the laws, and in some cases the content of the laws themselves, moreover, give details that they aim to block against recent gains toward LGBT equality and to dilute the rights of LGBT folks to secure protection from unfavorable discrimination.

They send a symbol that the state governments enacting them settle for and even embrace the harmful and harmful notion that discrimination against LGBT folks may be a legitimate demand of each conscience and faith. notably in states that lack any underlying laws prohibiting discrimination against LGBT folks, several of the laws aren’t “exemptions” most as a license to discriminate.

In recent years and principally since 2015, once the United States of America Supreme Court dominated in favor of wedding equality, various states have thought about and a minimum of eight United States of America states have enacted new laws that let folks infringe on the rights of LGBT people and their families to the extent they believe that discriminating against them is critical to upholding their own spiritual or ethical beliefs. In 2018, lawmakers in a minimum of six alternative states can think about similar legislation.

These laws and bills vary in scope. As has been widely promulgated, some would allow folks to refuse to participate in same-sex wedding ceremonies or to supply merchandise and services associated with such weddings. Others, less widely promulgated, would allow kid welfare agencies, physical and mental state suppliers, businesses that serve the general public, and alternative actors to refuse service to LGBT folks and alternative teams. Such legislation forthwith endangers LGBT rights. By permitting folks to elevate their prejudices higher than fairness and equality, it additionally threatens the broader principle that individuals shouldn’t be refused merchandise and services entirely as a result of the UN agency they’re.

Together, the failure of most states to enact nondiscrimination protections and therefore the growing range of nonsecular exemption laws leave several LGBT folks with very little recourse once they encounter discrimination. whereas these exemptions are nearly always couched within the language {of spiritual|of spiritual|of non secular} freedom or religious liberty, they, directly and indirectly, damage LGBT folks in a very style of ways in which.

Some laws modify and encourage businesses and repair suppliers to refuse to serve LGBT folks, compelling LGBT folks to take a position over time, money, and energy to seek out willing providers; others merely quit on getting the products or services they have. Additionally, perniciously, they offer LGBT folks a reason to expect discrimination before it even happens and to require additional precautions or avoid eventualities wherever they may face hostility out of saving.

Such laws additionally threaten the essential dignity of LGBT folks, causing a transparent message that their rights and well-being aren’t valued and are depending on the goodwill of others. Our interviewees explained that, by enacting spiritual exemptions to blunt the advancement of LGBT equality, lawmakers sent a strong signal that they were unequal or unsung in their community.

Brandiilyne Mangum-Dear, a lesbian pastor in Mississippi, delineates the damage in these words: “We’re not being melodramatic. You’re being treated with disrespect, as an inferior subject—not even a citizen, Associate in Nursing outsider. And when a short time, begins to tear an individual down, to harm them by showing emotion and spirituality. Rejection is difficult for everybody, and we compass over and over.”

This report documents however religiously actuated discrimination against LGBT folks will communicate real damage and why state endorsement of this discrimination is dangerous. From August 2017 to Gregorian calendar month 2018, researchers interviewed 112 LGBT folks, service suppliers, and advocates, primarily in states that have enacted spiritual exemptions in recent years, concerning the discrimination that LGBT folks have two-faced as a result of Associate in Nursing absence of comprehensive nondiscrimination legislation and therefore the passage of legislation that has for exemptions supported spiritual or ethical beliefs.

The results of this analysis indicate that the laws already enacted in eight states and therefore the bills still in consideration in more don’t strike a correct balance between the liberty of faith and therefore the equal rights of LGBT folks under the law. And really, few if any of those laws even represent a significant arrangement to do this. Lawmakers at the federal, state, and native levels ought to work to make sure that LGBT folks are shielded from discrimination in a job, education, housing, healthcare, adoption and tutelage, and public accommodations, and will repeal spiritual exemption laws that provide government support to those that would discriminate supported their spiritual or ethical beliefs.

Before starting to discuss the problems faced by the LGBTQ community, it is essential to first understand its background. If we look at the chain, we find the term “homosexual” as the pioneer, but it was soon replaced with the word “gay” in the 1950s because “homosexual “ was believed to have negative connotations. By the 1960s, with the promotion by Lars Ullerstam, this community was referred to as a sexual minority. Then, as time progressed and people became more aware, the phrase “gay and lesbian” became a lot more common. Slowly and steadily, bisexuals and transgenders wanted their share of recognition as a part of the larger sexual minority/community. The LGBT is an acronym that stands for “Lesbian, Gay, Bi, Trans”. This initialism, which is being used since 1988, stands to replace the term “gay” since many activists of that century believed that “LGBT” could represent more accurately the people their movement was trying to refer to. Though the LGBT community has seen abundant disputes concerning the social inclusion of the various members we have come a long way since then and now the term LGBT has been a term of positive image and inclusion.

If we glance at the present situation of the community we find the LGBT “minority” progressing. The social media platform, Facebook, widened its alternatives of genders upon constant lobbying from activists and the general public to eliminate the discrimination. Furthermore, even though some older members of the society disregard the term “queer” since for them it is a “disparaging term” that provokes hate speech, United Nations World Health Organization accepts and embraces “queer” as part of a description. Not only this, the GLAADS’s Media Reference guide declared the LGBTQ as the most liked initialism among young adults. All of this is proof that, slowly, the world is accepting the LGBT community as its own.

The spreading of awareness plays an important role in this social inclusion. There are some countries that are gradually advancing towards the acceptance of this initialism while on the other hand, many remain in opposition. Looking at the world map, we find about 25 developing or fully developed countries that lawfully accept same-sex marriage as of 2018. A country protecting the rights and embracing the trans community is Belgium. The capital town of Brussels, Belgium comes with one of the most thriving gay communities and is an epitome of openness. More examples of social inclusion of the community by a nation are the small island of Malta and the Philippines as they set golden standards in this scenario and provide certain tax policies in favor of the sexual minority or to whoever is directly related to this initialism.

However, if we look at the other perspective, there are about 74 countries where being involved in same-sex marriages is a federal offense. 13 of these countries are the states that impose Islamic Shariah, and hence tying bonds with the same sex in countries like Iran, Sudan, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, etc is punishable by death, according to the law. 17 countries like Morocco, Nigeria, Somalia, Jordan, and Kuwait have bans in place to prevent the spreading of “LGBT Propaganda”. Shockingly, facts and statistics show that there are almost 40 such nations in the world that contain a “gay panic” clause in their legislation that allows the guilty of murder or assault on the basis of their victim being gay, lesbian, or bisexual. This results in a majority of consequences. Since this community isn’t socially accepted, members tend to believe that anonymous internet discussions about the matter or “hookups” don’t count and thus an increase in such online activity is seen in secret groups. Apart from this, the members aren’t the only ones that suffer. Their adopted and powerless children are thought of as a “stain” on the pure society as well. Some fight their way up the ladder despite the hate and succeed in life while this might not be the case for others. According to the World Health Organization, a lot of split personality disorder cases are of children that have homosexual parents. Lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and transgenders tend to succeed in their profession since most of them are assured that they won’t be judged or shamed for who they are, hence they tend to use their energies towards work rather unlike the people who fail to succeed because they are mostly busy in using their energy to act something they aren’t and hide from the judgemental people and the torturers.

In 1972, George Isadora Duncan and Roger Jones were thrown into a river by law enforcement officials because both of them belonged to the LGBT community, leading to Duncan’s death. Jones, however, survived but refused to name his attackers out of concern for his life. Another incident took place, whereby a young adult killed himself because of the constant bullying by his colleagues. Reports also suggest that he was once hospitalized when somebody used a fence as a weapon to hit him in the jaw due to his “out of the ordinary” sexual preference. News reports of 1989 also suggest that David McMahon was attacked in Bondi and he heard his attackers say that the reason was his affiliation with the LGBT community.

LGBT rights in Asian nations are well thought- about taboo. The Asian National Legal Code of 1860 punishes anal intercourse with fines and doable sentences. This code impacts the LGBT community’s right specially the Pakistanis’ in various ways beneath the color of protective public morality and order, since in Pakistan same-sex marriages and sexual acts are punishable by death too. This is the reason that even in large and well-developed cities like Karachi and Islamabad, members of the LGBT community need to be discreet regarding their sexual orientation. Even though, sexual acts between the same gender are legal offenses, acts of homoeroticism don’t seem to be uniformly prosecuted within the country.

For me, the members of the LGBT community are the same as other Homo Sapiens. According to me, they need each and every right to behave normally and progress as others do. It’s surprising how society can act towards the ones that don’t follow their set standards and social norms. Society, without a thought, refers to the LGBT community as abnormal but I believe that just because the majority of people have a certain type of sexual orientation or a way of living does not mean that it is set in stone and is the only right way to live. Moreover, I feel saddened by the fact that a large majority of people are forced to mask their feelings.

I do believe there are certain ways that we can all help the world the LGBT community. Spreading awareness using various mediums can play an important role. Using social media platforms such as Facebook and Twitter to raise pro-LGBT slogans can help reach out to the people. Signing petitions and making Youtube videos and documentaries on the struggles of such people is another way of making the world realize the terror that they are instilling in the LGBT community, so much so that they have to hide their real selves from the world. Simple logical discussions and debates might also help convince people to accept the LGBT community.

In conclusion, I think that the LGBT community needs to continue to fight for their rights till society accepts them and the fact that sexual diversity can exist whether or not they support it or don’t. Moreover, it is high time the world broadens the horizons of their mind and learn to forget the ancient norms and helps the LGBT community to get equal rights so that this “sexual minority” can flourish as well and its members can have a chance to live their life to the fullest.

Love is something I wish was a piece of cake but sadly it isn’t. It is very complicated and it has a lot of versions of it, each one of them beautiful in their way. However, there will always be people who will never find these different versions beautiful and try to change and twist love into something that they think love should be like. And they don’t matter because no one is entitled to anyone’s happiness or the people they choose to love. Love is love. And that’s the most beautiful thing ever.

“ to hate is an easy lazy thing but to love takes strength everyone has but not all are willing to practice ” (Rupi Kaur 2017, The Sun and Her Flowers).

Everyone has rights. You, me; everyone. You and I have Human Rights. Human Rights, what does it mean? Does it mean that we; humans are always right? Or, is it like a certificate that proves you’re a human? No. It means exactly as it sounds. Human rights are these fundamental rights and freedom that are given to individual human beings in the world regardless of their skin color or gender or nationality or any other status.

But, human rights do not stop from there. The list goes on from its philosophy to the laws surrounding it. They are all based on the belief that every human being deserves respect as an equal. No one is above anyone. “It’s human rights for everybody, there is no difference. Live on and be yourself.” (Haggerty, Lambert, and Lewis, 2013)

Sexual orientation and gender identity is a part of human nature and it should never lead towards violence (Reuters, 2013). Human rights ensure to protect that as well.

As said, there are two types of humans in the world – male and female. But, these days that concept has been a little outdated due to the open acceptance of the other gender; apart from the stereotypical “male and female”, which is generally known as the third gender. You might be thinking, isn’t male and female sex? The answer is yes, male and female are sex as well as gender. Aren’t they the same thing? No, they’re not.

Sex refers to biological differences whereas gender is a social creation. You are born a male or a female but the roles that you take up later in life define your gender. Society loves confining everyone in gender norms because of the said person’s sex. For example, a male must be masculine and outgoing and a female must be domestic and sensitive. Gender roles had been defined by sex and also by society has existed for a long time.

Now, there are cases where gender roles aren’t according to their respective sex. In such cases, a born male tends to fall more into the characteristics and roles of a female in their later period of life despite their sex or vice versa. This sort of action or sexuality is homosexuality, which is the exact opposite of heterosexuality. So, the question is whether this behavior is a social taboo or a natural phenomenon.

LGBTQ or LGBTI or LGBT is an umbrella term referring to en masse of people who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex, questioning, and/or queer. A lesbian is someone who identifies as a woman and who experiences romantic and sexual attraction toward another female. Likewise, a gay is someone who identifies as a man and has an emotional, sexual attachment to some other men. Gay is also used as an umbrella term to identify some lesbians and queer folk. Bisexuals are people who like both males as well as females. Other identities such as ‘pansexual’ and ‘demisexual’ may have a similar explanation. Transgender or trans is a broad umbrella term, that’s used to describe people whose gender identity is different from the sex assigned at their birth. Intersex is people that are born with sex characteristics that do not fit typical gender binary notions of male or female bodies. Queer is an umbrella term used to refer to the LGBTQ community as well as an identity that advocates snapping binary thinking and seeing both sexual orientation and gender identity as possible fluid.

LGBT rights are as important as any rights. There was a time when LGBT was a bad thing. But, it’s 2018, and the world is much more than white boys. The world is colorful, LGBT, women in power, and equality. LGBT community, who’ve had to fight so much in the past. There are people, over the years, who have chosen to withstand harassment and hatred. People who have been through violence and had been killed. And not because they wanted to be different, but because they’d rather die than pretend to be something they’re not (SKAM,2016).

According to Fabrice Houdart (2018), in almost a lot of countries, you will find some kind of LGBT movement. But then again, there are a lot of politicians who use LGBT as a pawn to gain benefits from their citizens.

He also says that the LGBT community around the world knows that they deserve the same opportunities, rights, and levels of dignity as everyone else (2018). The importance of LGBT rights is that, with the world changing, there will always be hate. And homophobia and transphobia are harsher and more substantial than any other hate.

Religion plays a vital role in homosexuality, and sometimes homophobia as well. ‘Whatever god you believe in, we come from the same one. Strip away the fear underneath it’s all the same love’, (Haggerty, Lambert, and Lewis, 2013).

The thing is no one can use the name of God as a reason to start hate. God wants the same thing as we do, that we all want equality and we’re all his children he’ll love us no matter what. People will try to legitimize their hate on behalf of religion, don’t believe them. Because hate doesn’t come from religion, it comes from fear.

‘And love is love is love is love, cannot be killed or swept aside.’ – Lin Manuel Miranda. ( Tony Awards, 2016).

References

1. Kaur, R. (2017) The Sun and Her Flowers. 1st ed. Kansas: Andrew McMeel Publishing.
2. Haggerty, Lambert and Lewis, B., M., R. (2013) Same Love. US: Kobalt Music Publishing Ltd.
3. Reuters [online] (2013) LGBT Rights. Available from: https://www.hrw.org/topic/lgbt-rights [Accessed 29th November 2018].
4. SKAM (2016), Series 3 [online]. NRK, 7th October. Available from: https://tv.nrk.no/serie/skam [Accessed 21st January 2017].
5. Houdart, F. (2018) Why LGBT rights are under threat – and what to do about it. Interview with Fabrice Houdart, Human Rights Officer at the United Nations. The Economist, 2nd July 2018 [online]. Available from: https://www.economist.com/open-future/2018/07/02/why-lgbt-rights-are-under-threat-and-what-to-do-about-it[Accessed 29th November 2018].
6. Miranda, L-M. 2016. Tony Acceptance Speech: Best Book of a Musical. [online]. 12th June 2016, Beacon Theatre, Manhattan, New York City. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pi44405wMoI [Accessed on 23rd September 2018]

The term ‘LGBT’ was first introduced in the 1990s meaning those people who identify themselves as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender. It replaced the earlier used term ‘LGB’ that was first used in the early 1980s (Wikipedia. 2018. LGBT.) It is commonly estimated that 1 in 5 people of the world’s population identifies themselves as LGBT (Jennifer Robison. 2002. What Percentage of the Population Is Gay?.), yet, in many countries across the world – even in the Western world – it is still a taboo subject and those who identify as LGBT do not receive the same rights and opportunities as those who identify as heterosexual. However, these estimates are not accurate as often people suppress their sexuality and are unwilling to admit that they are LGBT. In 72 countries across the world it is still a criminal offense to be gay, including 8 countries wherein it can result in the death penalty, and therefore coming out can potentially endanger lives (Duncan, P, 2017. Gay relationships are still criminalized in 72 countries.). Although the majority of Asia Pacific countries have no specific laws against homosexual relationships, it’s not exactly welcomed, and members of the LGBT community are often shunned in society – especially by the older generations. Typically, the Western world seems to be more progressive in its views and treatments of those who belong to the LGBT community, however, there are still pockets of confrontation, such as the Westboro Baptist Church in America, that refuse to acknowledge LGBT people with the same rights and prospects as straight people. Although Asia seems to be lacking in respect for those who identify as LGBT, that may be a changing matter. Taiwan was set to be the first country in Asia to legalize same-sex marriage and shared child custody as well as insurance benefits. In May 2017 the legislative court deemed the existing civil code definition of marriage as being between a heterosexual couple undemocratic – allowing two years to incorporate same-sex marriage into the law. (The Diplomat. 2018. Is Taiwan’s Drive to Legalize Gay Marriage Descending Into Chaos?.) However, the vote on November 24th, 2018, went against the previous consensus that gay marriage was in favor, a frustrating step backward for the LGBT community in Taiwan who hoped that their island would be the first place in Asia to legalize same-sex marriage. The outcome of the referendum instigated three LGBT people to commit suicide and there were numerous other suicide attempts and cases of self-harm (The Straits Times. 2018. Taiwan to enact separate law on gay marriage.), this shows how vital equal marriage rights bill is to the LGBT community in Taiwan.

The main driving reason for Asia’s intolerance of LGBT communities is thought to be the deep-rooted Confucian beliefs that are the foundations of most countries across the Asia Pacific. Confucian values spread from their origin in China, of which foundations began in 551 B.C., to neighboring countries such as Korea, Vietnam, and more forcibly, Japan. The spread was notably due to the traveling of the religion through the Silk Road, and then also due to the colonial rule of other countries. Until 2001 being homosexual was still considered a mental illness in China, and as of 2014 same-sex unions have not been legally recognized in any Confucian society (Adamczyk, Amy & Cheng, Yen-hsin. (2014). Explaining Attitudes About Homosexuality in Confucian and Non-Confucian Nations: Is There a ‘Cultural’ Influence?). The differences between the tolerance of LGBT communities in Asian and non-Asian countries are often put down to the societal values that are considered important. Confucianism places great importance on the ideals of family; family is the cornerstone of all societies and filial piety is regarded above everything else. Continuing the family was of huge importance, as those of the older generations do not enter old people’s homes when they are no longer capable of looking after themselves, it falls to the children to step up and look after their family. Confucianism also outlines strict family roles that were expected to be adhered to; the wife was obedient to her father before marriage, obedient to her husband after marriage, and then obedient to her son after her husband’s death. The concept of 从一而终 (one-man wife) literally means “faithful unto death (i.e. Confucian ban on widow remarrying)” (Yabla. 2018. Chinese English Pinyin Dictionary.), also plays a key part in the familial standards of Confucianism, a wife is viewed as an echo of her husband in order to create a domestic harmony; a wife was expected to assist her husband, care for her children and be a virtuous wife and loving mother. These strict family roles left no flexibility for those who identified as homosexual and wished to have an LGBT partnership. Those who put such value on distinct gender roles within the family structure are more likely to be less supportive of homosexuality. This is because homosexuality challenges the traditional gender roles within a relationship and within a family, wherein men and women have their own distinct roles to play and adhere to (Adamczyk, Amy & Cheng, Yen-hsin. (2014). Explaining Attitudes About Homosexuality in Confucian and Non-Confucian Nations: Is There a ‘Cultural’ Influence?).

Taiwan, however, did not develop under the same circumstances that the majority of Asia did. Taiwan’s roots originate in the Austronesian indigenous groups, the Pre-Austronesian peoples moved to Taiwan from Southern China, displacing Palaeolithic people. A period in Taiwan allowed the Formosan Austronesian languages to develop and diversify and from there rapid movement through the Philippines, Indonesia, and Oceania, to as far east as Samoa was mapped through language chains. The Austronesian peoples lived mostly undisturbed until the first branch of colonialism reached Taiwan in 1622 when the Dutch first arrived on the shores, the Dutch colonial rule finally ended in 1661. At the same time as the Dutch took control of parts of Taiwan, the Spanish also held control of parts of Taiwan from 1626 until 1642. Although throughout history, Taiwan has often been taken over and occupied, they were never really considered a colony as China had too much of a tight grip over the island. (The Guardian. 2018. Taiwan votes down same-sex marriage as China welcomes midterm results.) However, the Dutch and Spanish did not necessarily want a settlement, their main involvement with Taiwan was to do with trading centres and working with the Chinese. It was not always peaceful though, the Dutch often tried to throw the Spanish off the island and there were often spats between the foreigners and the indigenous peoples of Taiwan. Soon after the Dutch colonial rule ended in Taiwan, the Kingdom of Tungning ruled from 1662 until 1683 and then the Qing dynasty ruled from 1683-1895. Followed by Japanese rule from 1895-1945, then the Republic of China’s rule from 1945 until the present day (Wikipedia. 2018. History of Taiwan.). After all these different rules over Taiwan, it’s no surprise that the culture of Taiwan is somewhat different from that seen across other Asian countries. The people of Taiwan have been exposed to various cultures and peoples throughout their history yet have managed to maintain some of their own unique culture through the indigenous groups and customs, however, this exposure to other cultures has partially shaped the way that their own cultures have been developed. Due to the various groups in control of Taiwan at various points in history, the people of Taiwan had to be accepting of people different from themselves in order to progress. This could perhaps be why Taiwan has, arguably, the most progressive views towards homosexual people within their country.

Another difference between Taiwan and the rest of Asia is the main religions that are followed within the country. Whereas a lot of the Asia Pacific follows the traditions of Confucianism and Christianity; the main religions in Taiwan are Buddhism and Taoism, neither of which have any arguable issues surrounding homosexuality within their Holy Scriptures. Nevertheless, much like the rest of the Asia Pacific, homosexuality was a taboo subject for a long time. The first media considering the thoughts and rights of those who identified as homosexual could be argued to be the ‘Crystal Boys’, first published in 1983 in Taiwan. The book follows a boy who was kicked out of his home for having “scandalous relations” with a male classmate, upon leaving home he begins to hang out in a park called New Park, an underground gay cruising area, and hangout for gay men, where he meets the rest of the characters in the novel. This novel was considered a pivotal point in the history of literature surrounding the homosexual community within Taiwan because although it portrayed the negative reaction towards the LGBT community within Taiwan, it also explored the existence of the community and reminded the public that these people were still human (Revolvy. 2017. Crystal Boys.). Shortly after, in the 1990s, the LGBT human rights movement started to gain momentum in Taiwan though, and has since been considered one of the friendliest nations in Asia for members of the LGBT community. There is a considerable gay population within Taiwan and every year there is growing support for the LGBT parade that is held in Taipei, and even in some cities a ‘same-sex partnership card’ is issued to LGBT couples in case of emergency (Revolvy. 2017. LGBT history in Taiwan.). In recent years, places like Ximending (the unofficial gay district of Taiwan), have become very popular for gay people to go and meet other gay people, watch drag shows, and go to gay bars. There is even a club there where there is a floor for lesbian people and a floor for gay people in order to help people meet new friends (Dean Barnes. 2017. Being Gay in Taiwan.) As it stands in Taiwan, in 2018 a separate law for same-sex civil partnerships was proposed but some activists claim that the existence of a separate law will categorise them as second-class citizens. Yet Conservative groups claim that gay marriages should not come under the current Civil code that classifies marriage as between a man and a woman. The referendum, mentioned previously, on whether marriage should be inclusive of same-sex couples won more than seven million votes, and so did the referendum concerning whether LGBT unions should be regulated under a separate law (The Straits Times. 2018. Taiwan to enact separate law on gay marriage.).

Aside from Taiwan, there have been breakthroughs in other Asian countries such as Japan, Hong Kong, and South Korea that protect LGBT communities from anti-gay discrimination in workplaces and education settings, Japan even allows LGBT people to serve openly in the military and has done since 2003. Yet, in South Korea, even though since 2003 homosexuality has not been classed as “harmful and obscene” (Crystal Tai. 2018. Why is South Korea so intolerant of its Gay Community?), the discrimination against the community remains far-reaching. Surprisingly, North Korea actually has no laws against homosexual relationships and never has in the history of the country either. However, there is no legal recognition of same sex-relationships, same-sex marriages and it is still unknown whether the hermit country has any laws concerning gender identity or expression (Wikipedia. 2018. LGBT rights in Asia.). Yet those who do identify themselves as homosexual in North Korea are shunned within society, leaving them feeling unsafe and ashamed of their sexuality. There are 4 countries within south-east Asia wherein being homosexual is still classed as illegal; Brunei, Singapore, Malaysia, and Myanmar, all have laws against homosexuality, some enforce varying prison sentences for those who are openly LGBT or caught committing LGBT acts and there are some that are laxer with legal punishments. Interestingly, in Singapore, the law states that it is only illegal for men to have homosexual relationships, for women it was legalized in 2007 to have homosexual relationships (Wikipedia. 2018. LGBT rights in Asia.). However, even if some of these countries can be quite negligent in legal punishments, it does not mean that homosexuality is accepted or tolerated in society. There have been cases in Singapore called “corrective rape” wherein, mostly females, have been raped by men to “cure” them of their homosexuality (Huffington Post. 2015. Being LGBT In Southeast Asia: Stories of Abuse, Survival, And Tremendous Courage.). A lot of the time abuse within families towards LGBT persons goes unreported as those who are the abusers feel that the abused deserve it as they are LGBT. This disgraceful treatment of the LGBT community is worse in Brunei especially, wherein being homosexual is punishable by death. Even in the more ‘progressive countries’ there are issues regarding hate crimes against the LGBT community, for example, in Thailand, butch women are being killed in rural areas of the country, and in the Philippines, transgender women are constantly being targeted. This may seem a surprise to some who consider Thailand to be the ‘Gay Capital of Asia’, however, the reality is that over 2.5% of LGBT teenagers in Thailand are sent to temples or monasteries to be “cured” and pushed into monkhood. Some others are either pushed into psychological therapy or are kicked out of their homes altogether. Activists within Thailand claim that the worldwide image of Thailand as being a queer-friendly country is only skin deep and even children’s textbooks “specifically warned against any contact with people who act like members of the opposite sex.” The book “advised students to inform their teacher straight away so they can help adjust those kids’ behavior,” (Huffington Post. 2015. Two-Faced Thailand: The Ugly Side Of ‘Asia’s Gay Capital’.). Throughout Asia, Taiwan remains to be the most progressive in its attitudes towards LGBT people; recognizing same-sex partnerships in 18 out of 22 jurisdictions, pending adoption of children by same-sex couples, allowing LGBT people to openly serve in the military, anti-discrimination laws concerning sexual orientation and laws allowing transgender people to legally change their gender (Wikipedia. 2018. LGBT rights in Asia.). Due to cultural differences, the West has developed more of an open and accepting view of homosexual relationships, meaning that it is often a topic that has strongly opinionated views in favor of things such as same-sex marriage. As of January 2019, over 15 countries in Europe have legalized equal marriage rights and from only one state in 2004, all 50 states in America by 2015 have expanded their marriage equality rights through various court rulings and direct votes. In contrast, there is currently none of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) countries that have fully legalized same-sex marriage, and none have offered protection to same-sex couples or entitlement to adopt children either (Huffington Post. 2015. Being LGBT In Southeast Asia: Stories of Abuse, Survival, and Tremendous Courage.).

Within the younger generation, there have become more and more demands for the government to step up in its progressive views and provide the opportunity for equal marriage rights between same-sex couples and heterosexual couples. Every year, the support for LGBT communities and rallies increases and on 28th October 2017, Taiwan saw its biggest-ever turn out for an LGBT parade in Taipei. It was estimated that over 120,000 people attended, showing an ever-growing progressive approach to the “lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender demographic” (Asia News Monitor. 2017. Taiwan/China: LGBT pride parade draws record numbers.). The fight for LGBT equal rights in Taiwan and the rest of Asia continues, however, a Ministry of Justice representative of Taiwan claimed that the government will consider any local marriage-licensing offices as violating the law if they refuse same-sex couples before May 2019 (The Guardian. 2018. Taiwan votes down same-sex marriage as China welcomes midterm results.) – suggesting that although the referendum didn’t move in the LGBT favor, it is still a work in progress. There is the belief that once one country within Asia legalizes same-sex marriage the rest of the countries will follow suit; however, I do not think that this is perhaps the case. I feel that Taiwan will probably be the first to legalize the matter, and I think that they will provide hope to LGBT communities across the rest of Asia, hope for a better future where they are able to freely love whom they wish and enjoy the same rights and opportunities as the rest of the society. However, I think the LGBT community across Asia still has a lot of fighting left to do before they can be presented with the same rights that everyone else possesses.  

‘I grew up with a lot of females and rarely had male friends, at about the age of twelve I began to notice boys or should I say, it was then that I began to notice little else…..it is after all only natural,’. There are many stories just like this one that comes from homosexuals, but ironically they all sound the same. The truth of the matter is that the controversy has spread to a new frontier. The controversy being brought forth, is now being questioned in the environmental and biological aspects of homosexual behavior. Is this behavior something that parents should learn to shelter their children from?. People question whether or not homosexuality is environmental or biological, but people also question the genetics of homosexuality, and whether it is a choice.

During the development of a child, genes are inherited. Genes are codes that give traits. Genes are passed from the parents to the child. It is very possible that the fathers inherent traits may dominate the mothers inherent traits, this is not unusual. Genes traits are a child’s genetic make-up. Genes give eye color hair color, skin complexion etc. but does this means homosexuality is passed on through genes? I do not believe it is, living in a Jamaican culture, you are aware that homosexuals are around, but they aren’t as brave as in a culture where homosexuality is legal, why else would these homosexuals be hiding?

Sexual orientation is the romantic interest in one’s own gender, opposite gender or both. Sexual orientation is not defined by sexual behavior, Heterosexuals, Homosexuals and bisexuals express themselves according to their experiences or feelings. Do you believe homosexuality is innate or learned?. Many would argue that discrimination against left handers or homosexuals is indefensible regardless of the origins of those attributes, but human prejudices are complex and the simple reality is that many people find it easier to accept a difference that is believed to be innate. When it comes to such a topic as this, there are many factors to be considered, but it all boils down to a persons value system and their choice of living.

I strongly believe homosexuality is a learned behavior, which is brought forth from our environment as children. The things parents would tell us, the things we would see others doing, the unwritten norms we were led to be followed because they were seen as ‘the right thing’ in the eyes of our elders. I believe, however, that there may be many, many different factors that play into the conditioning of one to be gay. You see, I personally believe that homosexuality is a conditioned, or learned behavior. But, I must quickly add that one’s perception is his reality. I grew up in a home where I learned Christians values, I understood the true definition of spirituality and, while I still had room for more learning I also grew to understand who God really is, and what doing the right thing really means. I still had the understanding of calling sin by it’s correct name. I believe that sin is a bad thing, though we are humans and we are not perfect, we should be able to understand right from wrong, by trying our utmost best not to go out of the way. According to the bible, God created male and female in the beginning for every living thing that was created, which suggests that creatures of the same sex aren’t suppose to be together, this was for the purpose of procreation and nothing else. The bottom line is, what is to be done about it? If one is drowning in the sea, does it really matter how he found himself to be in that predicament? Does the lifeguard qualify the situation before offering the hand of deliverance?.The same goes for one drowning in the sea of sin. Jesus doesn’t seem to focus much upon the reasons one is the sinner he is, but rather simply offers him salvation from his sin. In Jeremiah 3, God says, “Only acknowledge thine iniquity…, and I will heal your backsliding.”

A central tenet of modern neuroscience is that for every difference in behavior, whether between groups of people, or within an individual person, over time there must be some corresponding differences, in the structure or function o the brain. Many homosexuals believe that they were different, from an early age and that they did not make a conscious choice to be homosexuals. While this may be true, these are anecdotes which are convincing to science. However, research has shown many differences. For some the genetic influence may be very strong, while for others it is weak, and the choice of responding to same sex attraction is much greater than the strongly determined sexuality of others. Psychologists thought that homosexuality was based on biology, because they would normally explain themselves, by saying ‘ this is the way I am’ .They say this due to the fact that they feel like this is the way they are born, or in a sense this is just the way they were meant to be. Hence, they have now decided that it is learned as homosexuals often experience gender dysphoria.

Director Neil Armfield’s decision to create an on-screen adaptation of Tim Conigrave’s memoir Holding the Man (2015) confronted him with the difficult challenge of realistically representing homosexuality on screen; a notion that Australian filmmakers have often failed to achieve. While Australian cinema has welcomed an array of ‘gay’ films, many have struggled to present gay characters and their sexuality accurately – often tarnishing characters with offensive stereotypes (Dyer,16). However, Holding the Man defies stereotyping through an honest depiction of a homosexual relationship. Spanning over 15-years, Tim Conigrave’s (Ryan Corr) and John Caleo’s (Craig Stott) forbidden romance is passionately portrayed from a blossoming high school romance to love that weathers disapproval, illness and death. Through filmic analysis this essay will explore three distinct ways in which Holding the Man challenges stereotypes by ensuring that three-dimensional characters are represented through a true-to-life depiction of the homosexual experience. In order to achieve this profound character, the essay will firstly discuss how the film offers an honest depiction of sexual desires in a same-sex partnership. Secondly, it will discuss the representation of realistic same-sex partnership and the oppressive factors that are associated. Finally, the harrowing depiction of how main characters Tim and John endure the onset of the HIV/AIDs crisis in Australia will be closely analysed. In the essay, I will work under a cultural and sociological framework and will draw upon opinions of various academics from the field of media and cultural studies, in order to compare and contrast homosexual representations.

Firstly, I will explore the ways in which the film incorporates sex scenes and portrays sexual desires to create a believable representation of the homosexual experience. Eminent Australian writer of “A Guide to Gay and Lesbian Writing in Australia” Michael Hurley, discusses the notion of sexual desire in homosexual relationships in reference to the American film Four Weddings and a Funeral (1994). While appreciative of the film, acknowledging its ‘profound representation’ of a homosexual man grieving the loss of love, he finds that the film fails to establish of any sexual desires between the couple. Hurley states ‘I think about how the relationship between these two men is empty of any hint of sexual activity between them, of how they barely touch at all (12)’ and according to Hurley this is a reoccurring issue in popular films. Conversely, Holding the Man cannot be criticised of this. Multiple explicit sex scenes are woven into the plot and presented in varying forms and in different stages of their lives. The sex scenes range from the awkwardness of their first sexual encounter where they are nervous yet excited, to tender and loving and erotic and illicit. The frankness and unapologetic portrayal of their sexual experiences is impactful in demonstrating the profoundness of Tim and John’s characters. This is evident – in perhaps one the most moving and confronting scenes of the film – where the couple make love whilst John is evidently edging closer to his death. The authenticity of the couple’s love is underlines as Tim embraces John’s cachectic body, showing no hint of revulsion despite the advanced state of his lover’s illness. The rawness of the material depicts not only their passion it simultaneously emphasises the notion of sexual desire post diagnosis. Sexual desire post AIDS/HIV diagnosis is a notion that Hurley – lecturer in gender and cultural studies at La Trobe University – believes is often overlooked, even going as far to say that he believes it has never been represented in Australian cinema. Hurley explains it’s important because it demonstrates the strength of a homosexual partnership in particular during the HIV/AIDS crisis (13). With Hurley’s words in mind audiences can appreciate how Tim and John’s relationship – in both in its sexual and emotional dimensions- is portrayed with admirable honesty and highlights that sexual desires in homosexual relations is an important genre to explore insightfully on film.

It is crucial to society that Australia celebrates films like Holding the Man, as it offers an honest representation of realistic same-sex partnership and the oppressive factors that are associated. In his article, Gays and Film, Dyer discusses the notion of comparing homosexual and heterosexual relations; ‘if you are representing sexual and emotional relationships on screen, it does make a difference whether they are gay or straight. One will not do as a metaphor for the other’ (16). He expounds on this idea by saying that they cannot serve as a metaphor for one another as heterosexual relationships have not been oppressed like homosexual relationships have and continue to be (16). Such oppression is clearly demonstrated in Holding the Man, most evidently through the familial disapproval of John and Tim’s relationship. The film offers audiences an insight into how such lack of support, further emphasising the sense of rejections and isolation that homosexual endure, the film furthermore illustrates a painful picture of the struggles met by families of HIV/AIDS victims. The representation of Bob Caleo, played by Anthony La Paglia, depicts conservative father morally upright to the point of oppressive, similar to many other on screen who follows this typically traditional way of thinking. It is fascinating to see how he embodies the anger, confusion and fear that his son’s sexuality and its consequences causes him; right from the moment he discovers the letter to over a decade later as his son rapidly deteriorates. Sadly, above all his cultural and religious beliefs are revealed as prejudices which prevent him from acknowledging the reality of john and Tim’s relationship. At his son’s funeral, the audience’s see’s the sorrowful pain in Tim’s eyes as Bob refers to him as ‘John’s friend … who provided such support in the final months of his life’. This triggers negative emotional as viewers have witnessed the truth and the realistic portrayal of their relationship they know intensely and faithfulness of Tim and Johns love.

Holding the Man grasps the pain brought upon by HIV in Australian society in 1980s, an era that rarely been depicted in preceding Australian films. The final paragraph will analyse how the film depicts the AIDS crisis through its effect on Tim and his relationship with John, which also assists the representation of a three-dimensional character. HIV/AIDS is implicitly alluded to in Sum of Us (1994) and The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert (1994) -when their mobile home is tagged with a homophobic HIV directed slur. However, Holding the Man is one of the first Australian cinematic examples to provide an accurate and distressing account of the AIDS crisis, enabling audiences to begin to understand what this traumatic experience may have been like. ‘We are lucky, we are the second wave. They are going to cure it.’ A chilling reminder that there still isn’t a cure, although advancement of the disease can be delayed it is very much still a prevalent issue in Australian society. John quietly suffers in his bleak hospital room and glimpses of other gaunt HIV victims serve as a poignant reminder of the sheer size of the Australian impact of the AIDS pandemic in the 1980s. Portraying the disease on screen is one of the most effective means drawing attention to AIDS/HIV and its victims and something that is helpful in reducing fear and increasing empathy (Goldman, 1987) It is moments like these in the film that are arguably the most important in creating that non-stereotypical gay character that Dyer desires to see in mainstream cinema. The couple’s love remains unwavered; despite the stark truth that death is imminent, demonstrating that there is more than one facet that depicts the Australian gay experience. Stuart Richard closes his article Holding the Man, that is important to share ‘If ever the devastating effect of AIDS in Australia was going to be told to a mainstream audience, Holding the Man has the potential to be that film’ (The Conversation, 2015).

In conclusion, this essay has examined three ways in which the film has offered an insightful means of realistically portraying homosexuality. It has portrayed three dimensional gay characters through an honest depiction of sexual desires in a same-sex partnership, a representation of a realistic same-sex partnership and the oppressive factors that is associated and finally a depiction of the HIV/AIDS crisis and how it affected Tim and John. The film serves as reminder that minorities such as the homosexual community need, and (more importantly) deserve to be represented by layered, complex characters that are more than merely a shallow stereotype. The film transgresses boundaries and simultaneously creates two postmodern Australian icons. ‘Has been a pivotal text in the formation of an Australian gay identity’ (Stuart).

ABSTRACT

This paper explores four separate articles stemming from research on the origins of homosexuality, whether from a genetic source or as a byproduct of life experiences and conditions. Micheal Price (2018) and Simon LeVay (2003) both agree that homosexuality forms aspart of one’s DNA, while Paul Cameron (2004) believes that homosexuality stems from life experiences. Helen Cothran (2003) does not agree with either theory, indicating that homosexual tendencies result primarily from societal influence with mild genetic influences

“A different lover is not a sin. Believe capital H-I-M. I’m beautiful in my way, ‘cause God makes no mistakes, I’m on the right track, baby, I was born this way.” The pop song “Born This Way” by Lady Gaga enunciated the feelings of many members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community (LGBT). That said, research on whether or not homosexuality actually has genetic roots has yet to provide a definitive answer. Some researchers claim that homosexuality is purely genetic based on studies and data, while others believe it is caused by conditioning and experiences. Given the confusion, I wanted to know for myself the answer to the question, ‘Is homosexuality genetic?’

The first article I researched printed in the October edition of Science Magazine, “Giant Story Links DNA to Same Sex Experiences” by Michael Price (2018). In the article, Price discusses a study of DNA and behavioral information from thousands of individuals to determine if there was a connection between the two. The information found suggested four variants that strongly associate with nonheterosexuality behavior. These variants were found on chromosome seven, eleven, twelve, and fifteen. Two of the variants being specific male same sex experiences only. With this new knowledge, Andrea Ganna of the Broad Institute in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and Harvard Medical School in Boston, gave her final thoughts stating, “I’m pleased to announce there is no ‘gay gene’. Rather, ‘nonheterosexuality’ is in part influenced by many tiny genetic effects” (qtd. in Price, p. 386). This is to imply that unlike other genetic disorders, homosexuality does not have a set genetic variation we can determine in every said individual.

Simon Lavay takes on a slightly different approach to the same idea in his article, “Homosexuality is Biologically Determined” (2003). The first idea that Levay talks about is that rats with high amounts of androgenic hormones are more likely to engage in sex with males. In conjunction, humans with the syndrome known as congenital adrenal hyperplasia also have high levels of androgenic hormones. The article states, “Several studies have reported that when these girls grow up they have a much greater likelihood of experiencing same-sex attraction than do comparison groups of women (such as their unaffected sisters)” (p.1). Numerous other studies continue to be brought up throughout the article including otoacoustic emissions, ability to throw a softball all leading to the same conclusion: there are differences between traits of homosexual and heterosexual individuals. Similar to my first source, this source indicates that homosexuality is indeed genetic. Both studies failed to provide a definitive answer to the question, but the research suggests that there is at least some evidence to support the concept homosexuality is genetic. At this point in my research, I started to understand why countless individuals can agree with the said information.

Paul Cameron refuted this ideology in his article, “Homosexuality is not Biologically Determined” (2004). Cameron discusses the idea that homosexuality is based on a large number of things such as: early homosexual experiences, family abnormality, unusual sexual experience, and cultural experiences. Research conducted within the article on early homosexual experiences reveals two-thirds of the boys whose first experience was homosexual engaged in homosexual behavior as adults; 95% of those whose first experience was heterosexual were likewise heterosexual in their adult behavior. A similarly progressive pattern of sexual behavior was reported for females (p.4). The article also points out that many individuals change their sexual preferences and can claim to be homosexual while also feeling attraction to the opposite sex. Conflicting with my previous two sources, Cameron does not believe homosexuality comes from genetics, but rather is developed through life experiences. Looking at all of my research done thus far, I began to realize why this is such a controversial issue. All of the articles display evidence towards how they believe homosexuality is formed, but neither can say with one hundred percent certainty. However, percentage wise, the study results for the non-genetic article are much higher.

My final source, “Homosexuality Is Caused by Societal Dysfunction,” by Helen Cothran (2003) hits on the point every behavioral trait in human nature has a genetic component. She uses the example of basketball players stating their genetic makeup has tons of similarities. Cothran also points out that just because homosexuality has some relation to genes does not mean that it isn’t changeable. The main point of her article, however, is that society is the driving cause for homosexuality. It is a way for individuals to better adapt into society. “There I believe homosexuality—like narcissism—is best viewed as a spiritual and moral illness” (p.7), says Cothran. She believes that the idea of homosexuality can come and go. Like my previous source, this article further agrees with the idea that homosexuality is changeable. It also does not agree with the idea that homosexuality is genetic but instead society based. This idea of homosexuality being a disease is interesting to me because I have always thought of it to be more of something that you were either born with or had something impact your life big enough that it changed you to become homosexual. Thinking of it in a way that it can come and go better helps me understand why people consider it.

If you were to ask a homosexual what they believed their preferences were caused by, they would most likely tell you it is genetic and they can’t control it. However, even though there are some genetic markers that indicate homosexuality is genetic, hard evidence has yet to be seen in science. I agree with Helen Cothran and her proposal that everything is connected to genetics in some way or another. Evidence such as the mice experiment or finding and studies on softball lead to the conclusion homosexuality is genetic, while other articles like such of Helen Cothran rebuttal that idea and show why it is outside experiences that have a true impact on homosexuality. I believe that the genetic studies shown are not enough. There are too many variables in their experiments. Homosexuality is based on environmental effects and is a choice. Science is just not advanced enough to prove this idea, not to mention, the evidence to support environmentally influenced homosexuality is stronger.

References

1. Cameron, P. (2004). Homosexuality is not biologically determined. In A. Ojeda (Ed.), Opposing Viewpoints. Homosexuality. San Diego, CA: Greenhaven Press. (Reprinted from What Causes Homosexual Desire, and Can It Be Changed? 1999)
2. LeVay, S. (2003). Homosexuality is biologically determined. In H. Cothran (Ed.), Current Controversies. Homosexuality. San Diego, CA: Greenhaven Press. (Reprinted from Sexual Orientation: The Science and Its Social Impact, http://hometown.aol.com/slevay, 2000)
3. National Association for Research Therapy of Homosexuals. (2003). Homosexuality is caused by societal dysfunction. In H. Cothran (Ed.), Current Controversies. Homosexuality. San Diego, CA: Greenhaven Press. (Reprinted from Reflections from Jeffrey Satinover, 2001)
4. Price, M., & Kaiser, J. (2018). Giant study links DNA to same-sex experiences. Science, 362(6413), 385–386.