Jump to content
An Old School Catholic Message Board

Homophobic? Maybe You’re Gay


4588686

Recommended Posts

[size=4][color=#000000][font=georgia,]WHY are political and religious figures who campaign against gay rights so often implicated in sexual encounters with same-sex partners?[/font][/color][/size]

[size=4][color=#000000][font=georgia,]In recent years, Ted Haggard, an evangelical leader who preached that homosexuality was a sin, resigned after a scandal involving a former male prostitute; Larry Craig, a United States senator who opposed including sexual orientation in hate-crime legislation, was arrested on suspicion of lewd conduct in a men’s bathroom; and Glenn Murphy Jr., a leader of the Young Republican National Convention and an opponent of same-sex marriage, pleaded guilty to a lesser charge after being accused of sexually assaulting another man.[/font][/color][/size][color=#000000][font=georgia,][size=1]
[size=4]One theory is that homosexual urges, when repressed out of shame or fear, can be expressed as homophobia. Freud famously called this process a “reaction formation” — the angry battle against the outward symbol of feelings that are inwardly being stifled. Even Mr. Haggard seemed to endorse this idea when, apologizing after his scandal for his anti-gay rhetoric, he said, “I think I was partially so vehement because of my own war.”[/size][/size][/font][/color][color=#000000][font=georgia,][size=1]
[size=4]It’s a compelling theory — and now there is scientific reason to believe it. In this month’s issue of the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, we and our fellow researchers[url="http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/psp/102/4/815/"]provide empirical evidence[/url] that homophobia can result, at least in part, from the suppression of same-sex desire.[/size][/size][/font][/color][color=#000000][font=georgia,][size=1]
[size=4]Our paper describes six studies conducted in the United States and Germany involving 784 university students. Participants rated their sexual orientation on a 10-point scale, ranging from gay to straight. Then they took a computer-administered test designed to measure their [i]implicit [/i]sexual orientation. In the test, the participants were shown images and words indicative of hetero- and homosexuality (pictures of same-sex and straight couples, words like “homosexual” and “gay”) and were asked to sort them into the appropriate category, gay or straight, as quickly as possible. The computer measured their reaction times.[/size][/size][/font][/color][color=#000000][font=georgia,][size=1]
[size=4]The twist was that before each word and image appeared, the word “me” or “other” was flashed on the screen for 35 milliseconds — long enough for participants to subliminally process the word but short enough that they could not consciously see it. The theory here, known as semantic association, is that when “me” precedes words or images that reflect your sexual orientation (for example, heterosexual images for a straight person), you will sort these images into the correct category faster than when “me” precedes words or images that are incongruent with your sexual orientation (for example, homosexual images for a straight person). This technique, adapted from similar tests used to assess attitudes like subconscious racial bias, reliably distinguishes between self-identified straight individuals and those who self-identify as lesbian, gay or bisexual.[/size][/size][/font][/color][color=#000000][font=georgia,][size=1]
[size=4]Using this methodology we identified a subgroup of participants who, despite self-identifying as highly straight, indicated some level of same-sex attraction (that is, they associated “me” with gay-related words and pictures faster than they associated “me” with straight-related words and pictures). Over 20 percent of self-described highly straight individuals showed this discrepancy.[/size][/size][/font][/color][color=#000000][font=georgia,][size=1]
[size=4]Notably, these “discrepant” individuals were also significantly more likely than other participants to favor anti-gay policies; to be willing to assign significantly harsher punishments to perpetrators of petty crimes if they were presumed to be homosexual; and to express greater implicit hostility toward gay subjects (also measured with the help of subliminal priming). Thus our research suggests that some who oppose homosexuality do tacitly harbor same-sex attraction.[/size][/size][/font][/color][color=#000000][font=georgia,][size=1]
[size=4]What leads to this repression? We found that participants who reported having supportive and accepting parents were more in touch with their implicit sexual orientation and less susceptible to homophobia. Individuals whose sexual identity was at odds with their implicit sexual attraction were much more frequently raised by parents perceived to be controlling, less accepting and more prejudiced against homosexuals.[/size][/size][/font][/color][color=#000000][font=georgia,][size=1]
[size=4]It’s important to stress the obvious: Not all those who campaign against gay men and lesbians secretly feel same-sex attractions. But at least some who oppose homosexuality are likely to be individuals struggling against parts of themselves, having themselves been victims of oppression and lack of acceptance. The costs are great, not only for the targets of anti-gay efforts but also often for the perpetrators. We would do well to remember that all involved deserve our compassion.[/size][/size][/font][/color]

[color=#000000][size=1][i]
[size=4][url="http://www.psych.rochester.edu/faculty/ryan/"]Richard M. Ryan[/url] is a professor of psychology, psychiatry and education at the University of Rochester. William S. Ryan is a doctoral student in psychology at the University of California, Santa Barbara.[/size][/i][/size][/color]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And maybe you're not.

Maybe you've thought about it from multiple perspectives and come to an intellectual conclusion that is at odds with the current intellectual fashion.


And really - does [i]any[/i]one take Freud seriously these days?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Luigi' timestamp='1335655379' post='2424526']
And maybe you're not.

Maybe you've thought about it from multiple perspectives and come to an intellectual conclusion that is at odds with the current intellectual fashion.


And really - does [i]any[/i]one take Freud seriously these days?
[/quote]

I take it you didn't read the article.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Basilisa Marie

[quote][color=#000000]But at least some who oppose homosexuality are likely to be individuals struggling against parts of themselves, having themselves been victims of oppression and lack of acceptance. The costs are great, not only for the targets of anti-gay efforts but also often for the perpetrators. We would do well to remember that all involved deserve our compassion.[/color][/quote]

I think that^ is important. I've noticed that it's not just that these people who are later "outed" are anti-gay rights, it's that more often than not it seems that they push an anti-gay position with an unsettling amount of hatred attached. Everyone deserves compassion.

But I also think that articles like these are dangerous, because the final message of compassion for everyone is almost ALWAYS lost, and people take this as supposed "evidence" that anyone who opposes gay rights in any fashion is secretly gay and hates himself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Basilisa Marie' timestamp='1335657818' post='2424547']
I think that^ is important. I've noticed that it's not just that these people who are later "outed" are anti-gay rights, it's that more often than not it seems that they push an anti-gay position with an unsettling amount of hatred attached. Everyone deserves compassion.

But I also think that articles like these are dangerous, because the final message of compassion for everyone is almost ALWAYS lost, and people take this as supposed "evidence" that anyone who opposes gay rights in any fashion is secretly gay and hates himself.
[/quote]

I think that any article can be 'dangerous' if you are deciding that label on what somebody who doesn't bother to read the article could possibly come away with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we lose compassion, we lose the capacity for reasoned, open dialogue. We won't get anywhere without it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' timestamp='1335659273' post='2424564']
I have never met any who was afraid of gay people. Who could not like a happy person?
[/quote]


[img]http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/000/681/what-you-did-there-i-see-it.thumbnail.jpg[/img]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tab'le De'Bah-Rye

Why does not agreeing with somone asertain to being anti or persecutive. Your all paranoid. Grow up! I'm tired of the cold war which indeed now seems to have become a social war, vying for position and glory. We have all watched Lord of the rings yeah? And how mans greatest weakness is his thirst for power. And we christians should already know that because it is the devils oldest trick where he said to adam and eve that God didn't wan't us to eat from the tree in the middle of the garden because God secretly knew we would become Gods if we did so. I'm neither anti homosexual nore pro homosexual, but i do understand lust is a sin and can become a grave disorder which reduces the ability to recieve Gods love and return with true charity in what we say and do,and not just a dollar bill.

Edited by Tab'le Du'Bah-Rye
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tab'le De'Bah-Rye

Well possibly a bit hard on the cane but it all does seem overly paranoid. And i should know coz i'm like the noid of nodes thinking everyone and everything is out to get me @ times and please whack me whenever i vocalise these misled feelings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Hasan' timestamp='1335655578' post='2424530']
I take it you didn't read the article.
[/quote]

I did read the article. I find it meaningless. If they published an article that said "It might rain tomorrow," my reaction would be the same - "and it might not."

Additionally, I question their methodology. The efficacy of subliminal suggestion is still disputed, so I question their claim that their experiment "reliably distinguishes" true sexual identity from stated sexual identity.

Their results show a discrepancy between real sexual identity and stated sexual identity of "over 20%" - but they don't say how much over. Can I assume 'just over'? 'Approximately'? Good researchers would tell you, not let you assume.

The 20% in the discrepancy group were "more likely" to be harsher toward homosexuals. How much more likely? Are we talking 50% of 20%?

And even if the results [i]are[/i] valid, so what? Is the implication that we should disregard the anti-homosexual stance of those who are secretly homosexual? Is their stance tainted or invalidated by the fact that they have a direct connection & involvement with the question? If anything, that should strengthen the validity of their opinions. Perhaps they see the negative consequences more clearly than those who aren't connected & involved, and struggle to do something about it in much the same way that a diabetic might fight to have hidden sugars removed from processed foods, an alocholic might work to get liquor stores out of the neighborhood, or a reformed smoker might campaign to limit smoking in public places.

It's basically an ad hominem attack - if I can figure out your background and who you (really, truly, secretly) are, I can rationalize my way to ignoring your position. But true argumentation looks at reasons, not who is speaking the reasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...