The link between male sexual abuse history and homosexuality

study here behind a paywall (you know, the connection people deny has ever been researched)

Complete abstract;

“Existing cross-sectional research suggests associations between physical and sexual abuse in childhood and same-sex sexual orientation in adulthood. This study prospectively examined whether abuse and/or neglect in childhood were associated with increased likelihood of same-sex partnerships in adulthood. The sample included physically abused (N = 85), sexually abused (N = 72), and neglected (N = 429) children (ages 0–11) with documented cases during 1967–1971 who were matched with non-maltreated children (N = 415) and followed into adulthood. At approximately age 40, participants (483 women and 461 men) were asked about romantic cohabitation and sexual partners, in the context of in-person interviews covering a range of topics. Group (abuse/neglect versus control) differences were assessed with cross-tabulations and logistic regression. A total of 8% of the overall sample reported any same-sex relationship (cohabitation or sexual partners). Childhood physical abuse and neglect were not significantly associated with same-sex cohabitation or sexual partners. Individuals with documented histories of childhood sexual abuse were significantly more likely than controls to report ever having had same-sex sexual partners (OR = 2.81, 95% CI = 1.16–6.80, p ≤ .05); however, only men with histories of childhood sexual abuse were significantly more likely than controls to report same-sex sexual partners (OR = 6.75, 95% CI = 1.53–29.86, p ≤ .01). These prospective findings provide tentative evidence of a link between childhood sexual abuse and same-sex sexual partnerships among men, although further research is needed to explore this relationship and to examine potential underlying mechanisms.”

I disagree with the sampling (inc. ambiguous “neglect”) but I haven’t seen the datasheets so I can’t be sure.

The first p-value is proof enough for a causative link to be made. 0.05 is the standard level.
The second is gold, 0.01 is definitive, as close to a certainty as social science psychology (attraction study) gets.

I highlighted male because it is interestingly a male-only connection. This is consistent with a pathogenic explanation of male homosexuality switching the response patterns of the hypothalamus from normal, reversed (female as in-utero hormone exposure instead). HBD chick here and Jayman here. Wouldn’t it be ironic if after all this complaining they weren’t born that way?

I see this probable explanation in a dispassionate, empirical way. At worst, I feel a small amount of pity for the suffering caused by this. However, if true, the gay male community should be frightened of a possible vaccine being developed. Most of the world would use one.

If you think there is no precedent for an invasive pathogen creating an immune response that changes hypothalamic function: here and here, and here’s a psychologist discussing the necessity of the brain segment for sexual attraction. Think for yourself.

3 responses to “The link between male sexual abuse history and homosexuality

  1. The first p-value is proof enough for a causative link to be made. 0.05 is the standard level.The second is gold, 0.01 is definitive, as close to a certainty as social science psychology (attraction study) gets.

    No. Never! Correlational studies can’t prove causation.

    While this is interesting, I’m not convinced. What’s the sampling like for their “abused” subjects? Would it be surprising that the people likely to report abuse were also more likely to be gay?

    • For a first study of its kind, it’s sufficient evidence for further study, at which point the multiple results could be taken together. However, the psychology standard (which is low for the social science side) is met for a tentative link. Until further study.
      Socially, it would be. The Gay Uncle hypothesis has been repeated ad nauseum, any contradiction would rock the boat.
      For the only study of its kind it appears sound and a good start, but it’s by no stretch the final word. However, this should lead onto funding for more research, were it not a politically-charged topic.

1. Be civil. 2. Be logical or fair. 3. Do not bore me.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s