Posted on 07/07/2009 10:04:17 PM PDT by Maelstorm
Last week when I discussed the case of Frank Lombard, Associate director of Duke University’s Center for Health Policy, who molested his adopted 5-year-old son and offered his son to other homosexuals for molestation, I also touched on the higher molestation rates of children by homosexuals.
Judith Reisman, president of the Institute for Media Education, cites this research, as does a study by Dr. Gene Abel, director of the Behavioral Medicine Institute in Atlanta, which found that homosexuals sexually molest young boys with an incidence five times greater than the molestation rate of girls. Dr. Able’s study also found that 150 boys are molested by one male homosexual offender, compared to 19.8 girls by heterosexual offenders.
I also mentioned that homosexual men have been molested as children at much higher rates than heterosexual men (35% versus 4% in one study). One of many important aspects of this finding is that, while childhood abuse does not automatically mean the child will grow up to perpetuate the abuse, it has been long known that most molesters were in fact molested themselves as children. Obviously it is a terrible cycle that should be broken where ever possible.
The folks from NAM and AidsMap in London published an article last week which examined the connection between childhood sexual abuse and adulthood risky sex and AIDS transmission:
The study lasted for four years and included a total of 4244 men. These men were recruited to the study in six US cities. All had recently had anal sex with another man, and all the men were HIV-negative at baseline. The men were randomised to receive a behavioural HIV prevention intervention or standard HIV prevention counselling. Every six months they were tested for HIV and provided details about their recent sexual behaviour.
To ascertain if an individual had a history of childhood sexual abuse they were asked on entry to the study to say if they had had a sexual experience before the age of 13 with an individual five years or more older than themselves; and/or if they had a sexual experience between the ages of 13 and 17 with an individual who was ten or more years older.
Of the 4244 individuals in the study, 1686 (40%) reported childhood sexual abuse. There were 258 HIV infections during the course of the study, a rate of 2.1 per 100 person years.
Notice that all of the individuals in this study were practicing homosexual men. Of the 4,244 homosexual men in this study 40% of them reported childhood sexual abuse. And as this relates to AIDS transmission, we are reminded of the startling statistics from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) regarding AIDS transmission: 72% of AIDS cases are associated with male homosexual conduct.
While the incidence of risky behavior and AIDS transmission is interesting and seems indicative of the mental health issues associated with victims of molestation, it is ultimately the percentage of homosexual men who report childhood sexual abuse.
The causes of homosexual behavior are complicated and the subject of considerable debate. This debate is made all the more convoluted by the propaganda thrown about by homosexual activists and their apologists who would have us believe that an immoral and unnatural sexual behavior is completely normal and legitimate.
But before the world of clinical science became so confused with politically correct misinformation, indications were that homosexual behavior often resulted from childhood molestation, relational issues with a mother or father or both, and similar circumstances. We have historically seen that for homosexual men, childhood sexual trauma is a very common factor , and for homosexual women, childhood sexual trauma is almost universal, though sometimes later sexual trauma can be a factor.
Essentially, the evidence is strong that homosexuality is not a “sexual orientation” as homosexual activists want us to believe, but rather a “sexual disorientation.”
What does it mean to be disoriented? The dictionary defines it as “to cause to lose bearings : displace from normal position or relationship b: to cause to lose the sense of time, place, or identity.”
When we are driving or flying or walking in the woods and we become disoriented, we enter a state in which we are unsure about where we are, where we should be going, and how to get there.
Since we need only look at our body’s sex organs to tell quite obviously that we were created to function heterosexually (not to mention that only 2.9% of the population is homosexual), it becomes quite clear that any orientation other than heterosexual is a disorientation.
It seems more than fair to say that, due to childhood sexual trauma, relational problems with one or more parent, or some other issue, the person has become disoriented about their sexuality.
As anyone who has become disoriented knows, one can become re-oriented with some effort and frequently some help from others.
There are those who, for whatever reason, come to enjoy disorientation. When someone drinks to excess or takes strong drugs, these have a disorienting effect, often leaving a person unsteady on their feet, not in firm command of their surroundings and how they should be acting. Often people come to like this state of disorientation, seeking to maintain that state by frequent indulgence in intoxicating substances. They, too, often need help in realizing the dangers of remaining in this disoriented state.
The similarities between a physically disoriented person and a sexually disoriented person (i.e. one not correctly oriented to their obviously heterosexual purpose) are quite striking when you think about it.
When homosexuals sometimes say they were created that way, that their “sexual orientation” is homosexual, they are incorrect. One who insists their proper orientation is homosexual is akin to the drunk who says with slurred speech, “I’m not drrunk.” Their orientation is obviously heterosexual (their bodies tell us that), but they have become disoriented as to their true nature and purpose.
And like any disoriented person, they can change. If they really want to.
So don’t be fooled by this deception. Help them by insisting on the truth and pointing those who are disoriented toward that truth. It is to their ultimate benefit, and to those around them.
ping
I heard a stupid radio host call a guy a bigot and hang up on him, because he just stated that half the lesbians he knew had been molested. Is it that hard to believe that a woman with a negative traumatic experience with male genitals early in life would become a lesbian? (I know other women who were molested who instead became very promiscuous heterosexuals.)
Okay, here we go...(ahem) (mi mi mi mi...)
DUH!!
My wife’s former roomate was molested by a female maid as a child, and later became a total nympho with both men and women, now mainly with women. Also a basket case on 3 different psych meds at any one time. Homosexual molestation destroys lives. Do not let any homosexuals near your children, in their school classroom, at their camp, etc.
It is true on both counts - either people are traumatized and become a lesbian - or become very promiscuous heterosexuals.
I’ve seen and known of cases of both.
This is pretty meaningless without a comparison group of sexually active heterosexual men.
I agree it isn’t hard to believe. Those that use the word bigot in relation to homosexuality don’t understand the meaning of the word. I know of some lesbians who have been molested and you are right molestation doesn’t not automatically lead to lesbianism and there are some studies showing correlation with a greater likelihood of becoming a prostitute/sex worker. Abuse doesn’t effect all children in the same way but the denial that abuse can and does affect sexual orientation and sexual behavior is not helpful and places other children at risk and leaves those who have been abused less likely to get the help they need. I think many cases of lesbianism today is incidental. Very few women remain lifelong lesbians.
If it is so duh then why do so many cry bigot when it is brought up in polite company?
This isn’t scientific or anything, but during my college years I worked in a restaurant in a mall. We had a plethora of gay guys working there because the manager was a homosexual.
Every gay guy I ever got to know while working there told me he had been molested.
I kid you not.
I agree but what is even worse are the married men who molest children. I mean how can you protect from that? They are the camp counselors, Scout Leaders, etc. That is difficult right there. At least with single gays you know to watch for them. Married men who molest are the worst!!!!!
Every gay guy I ever got to know while working there told me he had been molested.
100 percent true! It is a shame which is why I am more tolerant of them than most. They were dealt a crappy deal.
I know of one gay guy for certain who was molested as child. I went to high school with him. His gay uncle molested him. This is one case where I know that he had normal interests in girls up until that point. I feel badly for him. He was sick physically the last time I saw him, he has an intestinal disease related to his lifestyle. That said there are numerous studies which show at a minimum that homosexual men report being sexually abused as children at a rate far greater than heterosexual men. Why this has been ignored as a probable explanation for many typical issues that are manifest to a very large degree in gay men such as depression, suicide, promiscuity, risky sexual behavior,chronic need for constant need for approval and appreciation, molestation, self mutilation, drug abuse etc.
I believe the politics around this issue has made it very difficult for people who need help to get it effectively. Instead they are often times being forced into a life of perpetual denial even that the abuse they faced was even wrong. This is dangerous. There is already a more than tactic approval of predatory sexual practices in mainstream gay literature. The recent case of Frank Lombard’s reading list highlighted as much.
Because so few know that homosexuality is strongly linked with childhood psychosexual trauma. And many of those who do know that, or strongly suspect that, don’t acknowledge it because it doesn’t fit in with the family-destructive embracing of homosexuality as a lifestyle. Shame on them.
Whenever someone brings up the subject of homophobia to me, I say “Well, have you ever considered the possibility that it’s YOU who are heterophobic, not me who’s homophobic? And which do you think does the most damage?” That shuts them up pretty good.
People like Bob Ellis purposefully conflate child molesters and homosexuals to unfairly stigmatize gays. A pedophile is attracted to children. Half of children are male, half are female. The reason why 30% or so of child molestation is ‘homosexual’ is because 50% of children (the object of pedophiles) are male. There is no evidence that those who have a homosexual orientation towards adults are more likely to molest children. Zero.
Instead of taking every instance of male-male molestation and blaming homosexuals, you can actually look at the data. It indicates that child molesters have either:
1) Always been exclusively attracted to children
2) Were involved in a relationship with an adult, then “regressed” to sexually abusing children. This happens a rate no higher in heterosexuals than in homosexuals. This is what experts in child molestation believe, and is what the data supports:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/666571?dopt=Abstract
*The more you know*
bookmark
Several cross-sectional studies have found the rate of childhood sexual abuse to be about 7.2% in all men in the US. Homosexual men comprise about 2% of the male population.
So about 6.4% of child molestations are heterosexual in nature for 98% of the male populace. Thus, about 6.53% of heterosexual males have been abused.
It’s not 40%, that’s for sure.
(In the UK, the estimated total for male childhood sexual abuse is about 8% of the populace.)
The answer is simple really. The study cited wasn’t meant to accurately sample the gay population. (A task that is almost impossible) The study’s purpose was study the effects of child molestation. As such it is necessary to have a significant number of men who were sexually abused in the study and then a similar number of men to act as a control to compare data to. Just because a study is comprised a certain number of individuals does not mean that it is an accurate representation of the population as a whole.
I'm sooo sorry
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.