Human Fear of Sexuality

Sexuality is something that rests at the core of all of us. Though it does not, and should not, define us, our sexuality makes up a large part of who we are and influences our view of ourselves and others. Yet in many instances we as humans tend to overlook issues of sexuality. We tend to try to ignore this aspect of ourselves, or when we do pay it heed, we try to relegate it, define it for everyone and expect all to follow. I am attempting to discover in what ways we do that, why we do it, and what can be done about it. I may not answer all of these questions, but this is my attempt at tackling it.

First, perhaps we should define sexuality. As I see it, sexuality is defined in two general categories: one’s actual gender and one’s sexual orientation. Scientifically speaking, there are three genders: male, female, and transgendered. Though I do recognize that transgendered people do genetically exist, I have done little study in this field and this paper will work on the basis of male and female genders. One’s sexual orientation also breaks down into three general categories: heterosexual, homosexual, and bisexual. In honesty, these categories are somewhat limiting. For purposes of this paper, I will be basing sexual orientation on the Kinsey scale, but then simplifying things into these categories.

The Kinsey scale is a seven pointed scale of sexuality. It ranges from zero (0) to six (6) with zero being absolute heterosexual, six being absolute homosexual, three being perfect bisexual and each point being relegated accordingly. In my studies, I find that it is helpful to allows classification to one decimal place on this. To simplify things, I will define in this paper the following groupings. A Kinsey score of 0.0 to 2.0 is heterosexual. A scoring of 2.1 to 3.9 is bisexual. And a scoring of 4.0 to 6.0 is homosexual. This isn’t an even division, but it’s close enough to be acceptable.

Perhaps at this point we should establish a definition beyond just the Kinsey scale of sexual orientations. For purposes of this paper, heterosexual is defined as sexual an physical attraction to members of one’s opposite gender. Though this can carry over into emotional and mental attraction, it is possible for a man to be emotionally attracted to another man, yet still be heterosexual (I find that this is often a basis for very strong friendships). Likewise, homosexual is the sexual and physical attraction to members of one’s same sex and bisexual is attraction to either gender.

Based upon these assumptions, I plan to discuss in this paper three general topics. What causes someone to have a certain sexuality? What is homophobia and what causes it? How do various people feel about homosexuality? I would like to discuss how homosexuals develop (as in, how they realize they are gay) and also my views on how society should be towards this subject, however, that would increase the length of this paper dramatically, so look for future papers and essays on these subjects. I’m sure I’ll do them eventually.

Sexuality: The Causes and Beliefs

Many people are of the opinion that one chooses their sexual orientation. Though making any blanket statement can be dangerous, let me say that this assumption is wrong. People do not get much of any choice in their sexuality at all. Just as each person does not get to choose their gender, so do people not get to choose their sexual orientation. The myth that it is a choice is attributed predomiately to false biblical ideas and perpetuated (though incorrect) dogma throughout history.

If you need a bit of proof on this point, allow me to illustrate this. Though homosexuality has gained a large measure of acceptance in culture and society within the last few decades, there is still a great deal of discrimination and homophobia (discussed below) that continues. Homosexual (and bisexuals) are often ridiculed, hurt, cut off, and generally given a very hard time. Though acceptance can be gained and success in life established for the homosexual, it would seem highly unlikely that anyone would choose to be homosexual with all of the negativity offered by society. On the same token (assuming you are a heterosexual reading this) if sexual orientation were a choice, you as well would have had a choice to be straight (or heterosexual). But I’m willing to be you never made such a conscious decision, or if you did it was less of a decision and more of a confirmation of how you already were.

So, to continue, we must accept that sexuality is not a choice. So if that is the case, the question arises, what causes it? As stated before, there are two basic parts of someone’s sexuality. Gender is the first part. We are at the point technologically that we can accurately state what causes someone’s gender. Genetically one’s gender is chosen at conception. The female provides an egg which will have an X chromosome in it. It is the man’s sperm cell that offers the choice. If the sperm contains another X chromosome, the resulting child will be female. If, however, the sperm contains a Y chromosome, the child will be born male. It is a simple matter of matching gentic chromosomes that causes gender.

Sexual orientation is not so easily defined. There has been much debate on the exact causes of one’s orientation for years without any real conclusive evidence. At the very least, we can rule out that it is a choice and the American Psychological Association helped establish sometime in the seventies that it is not a disease or even an abnormality. That leaves us with a few predominate theories.

The first theory is that it is biological, or genetic to be more precise. This theory proposes that there are certain genes that have yet to be discovered or understood which control if a person will be heterosexual (straight), homosexual (gay), or bisexual (bi). These genes are as natural as the ones that determine if you have blonde hair or brown, blue eyes or green, and so forth. If this is the case, then it is likely that certain families would have more members that were homosexual than others. This theory can find support in the fact that according to studies, only about ten percent (10%) of the human population is homosexual. Since homosexuality does not readily lead to the propogation (or continued survival) of the species, genes that cause it would be recessive, while heterosexual genes would be dominant (just as brown hair is dominant over red, tall is dominant over short, etc.).

I feel at this point I should stop and make an observation. It is interesting to note that the ten percent idea is a rather consistent number. In nearly all societies of all of history (where it has been recorded) there seems to be approximately ten percent of the people that are homosexual. Though this is also a loose blanket statement to make, especially considering the low documentation in the past, I still find it to be a rather intriguing idea that the number would be so consistent. Remember that this covers societies where homosexuality was encouraged or accepted as well as societies where it was suppressed and outlawed.

Back on subject, however, the second main theory on how one’s sexual orientation forms is that it is societal. This theory puts forth that one’s sexual orientation is not decided at birth. Instead, influences throughout early childhood determine a person’s sexual orientation. There is debate in this field as to by what age one’s orientation is fixed and unalterable, but general consensus seems to suggest between the ages of three and five. By this point a child has established their sexual orientation and in some way or another it should begin to make itself known shortly before adolecence.

The problems with this theory are a bit more than the one on genetic basis. No one is really certain of the specifics that determine the development of sexual orientation. Obviously, the influences a child recieves can affect all sorts of aspects of their psyche, but growing up with heterosexual parents does not guarantee the child will be heterosexual. And even if we could figure out what simuli cause orientation development, it could turn out that there are several possible causes, not just one particular path. Another problem with this theory is that most homosexuals that have children do not find that their siblings are also homosexual. In most families, all siblings in the household are brought up in generally the same manner. Yet not all of them will have the same interests or the same abilities. On the same token, just because one is homosexual does not mean all will be.

Lastly, there is a bit of a theory that you cannot scientifically, psychologically, or sociologically define how one’s sexual orientation is formed. Some believe that God (or however you choose to view this Divine Being) designates a person’s sexual orientation without reguard to genetics or rearing or anything of that sort. This theory would be supported by the ten percent trend, however, the majority of people that support this idea tend to view it as a background to one of the other theories. God chooses your orientation, but uses genetics to do it, just as with your gender. And so on and so on.

Overall, the question can be asked, why does it matter how one’s orientation can be chosen? To a degree, it doesn’t matter. It simply is and should be left at that. However, many of us have a drive to understand everything there is to understand and so we keep searching. We don’t really know what benefits can be gained from discovering this knowledge, and we won’t until we find it, if it is findable. I for one believe that it is, but it may be a long time in coming.

Lastly in this section, I want to discuss another myth held by many people. Some people believe that a person’s sexual orientation can be changed with proper therapy and training. This is as untrue as the belief that one’s orientation is chosen by the person. Many people upon learning that they are gay or even bi will try to change. Often this kind of pressure is because of certain religious beliefs. They will pray and pray for God to make them “normal” but to no avail. Some will enter into therapy programs. Many that go through these will come out of them claiming that they are “cured” and are now straight. However, in most of these cases, after some time has passed, they come back out as gay. They only claimed to be straight becuase of the intense pressure to change and have had to come out again because the self-hate of lying induced by lying was too much to bear. There are also programs of the less humane variety involving drugs, electric shock, hypnosis, and even forms that would be considered torture by many. All these really do are destroy the person in “treatment” and rarely if ever do they cause a person’s sexual orientation to change. Overall, a person’s sexual orientation is like their gender, a fixed thing that must be accepted, not attempted to subvert.

The Issue of Homophobia

Even in light of all of the progress and accomplishments in equality, acceptance, and non-discrimination made in our country, today’s society is predominately homophobic. The majority of this derives from two main sources: lack of understanding and knowledge, and the desire to show superiority in some way. Often this superiority complex is best enacted upon by finding what is different and playing on it.

But what exactly is homophobia? Perhaps we need an understanding of that as well before we continue. Homophobia is, simply stated, the fear of homosexuality and homosexuals. In this category, you can also lump in bisexuality and bisexuals. Basically, it is the fear of that which is not heterosexual. But more specifically, this fear can take many forms. In the words of Yoda, fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate leads to suffering. These words ring of a great truth of humanity. Homophobia is also unbridled anger against homosexuality, hatred of homosexuality, and even the causing of suffering of homosexuality.

Homophobia is as wrong today as any of the other discriminations. Racism, sexism, even supression of religious beliefs, have littered our history. The sad part is that all of these things still exist to some degree today. And each one tends to have the same basic roots as homophobia: lack of knowledge and a superiority issue.

It is a natural thing to fear what one does not understand. If you don’t understand something, you often do not know how to deal with it. It’s easy to get caught up in a trail of lies and perpetuated dictates passed down from one person to another. The cycle that this causes often ends up with the recieving person not truly evaluating what they are told, but simply accepting it as fact and making the most of it. What happens here is that this “fact” often does not reveal much or at times is even a lie. Pertaining to the specific issue at hand, many people do not understand what homosexuality is. As shown before, there are common beliefs that one’s sexual orientation is a choice. This is why it is often heard instead as sexual preference. This is not correct. Sexual preference is a misnomer that only perpetuates the idea that one chooses which gender they are attracted to.

There are many other myths surrounding homosexuals. Some of them were inadvertantly started by homosexuals themselves that somehow drew a lot of attention to themselves. Some work in the manner of rumors, a certain truth that starts out, but gets passed around enough that the original message is skewed or lost. And some are even started with a destructive intent. Ultimately it does not matter how the myths came into being, only that they are found and corrected as much as possible. I could write an entire paper just dealing with these myths and trying to explain the truths around them, but for the time being I do not wish to do so. Perhaps at some future time I will go into more detail on this matter.

The other predominant cause of homophobia is a superiority complex. There are some people that have to prove in some way that they are better than others. There are many reasons for this. Sometimes it is low self-esteem. Sometimes it is an enhanced competitive desire. Sometimes it’s something else. There is nothing wrong with being better than someone, so long as you go about it the right way. For example, I am a better piano player than many of my friends. However, this is because I have had many many years of practicing and learning the piano and how to play it, whereas many of my friends have had little to no experience in this field. At the same time, one close friend of mine is much more athletic than I am. This is due in part to our own physiques and the fact that I have a mild bit of asthma, but predominately it is due to the fact that he has been more physically active in his life and I have not. There is nothing wrong with being better than someone. The catch is that you don’t want to make known of it more than is necessary.

Typically when someone is homophobic due to a superiority issue, they are simply trying to limit those that are different. For one reason or another they feel that they must once again “prove” that they are better and they will do things to limit homosexuals. They may simply make jokes or ridule them. Sometimes they will inflict direct harm, emotionally or physically. The simple fact of the matter is that this is wrong. In all likelyhood, people that express homophobia due to superiority issues also tend to show other phobias and forms of discrimination. Though again, this is a blanket statement, these people usually are also sexist in some way, perhaps racist of a particular ethnic group (or all ethnic groups not like them), and maybe even staunchly opposed to other’s religious beliefs, should they differ from the person’s own. My advice to these people: grow up. You have obviously not developed very far as a person and it would do you good to see a bit more of the world and try to understand what it in it.

I feel at this point I should make a statement concerning the opposite side of these things. In particular, this is directed at homosexuals who may be reading this. Just as homophobia is wrong, beware as well of “heterophobia”. Though there are very limited cases of this, I have heard of it happening, and often it is a problem that goes undefined and unresolved. It is natural to have problems with homophobes. However, be careful that you do not let this develop in you a fear of heterosexuals. Just as you cannot identify all homosexuals by a limited set of characteristics, you cannot identify heterosexuals this way either. This is just a word of caution. Perhaps I will write another paper later expounding upon this topic as well.

What My Studies Show

Before I began writing this paper, my original idea was to simply take a poll of people that I knew to get their general feelings on homosexuality. I was hoping for a broader range than just close contacts, as this could be a bit limiting, but eventually was forced to settle. I have had many people of late asking me for the results that I promised, and since they grow impatient, I have had to make concessions to them.

In my research, I used a survey called the Index of Homophobia (IHP). It is a survey originally compiled and copyrighted by Wendell A. Ricketts and Walter W. Hudson in 1977. I found it in a publication called the Journal of Homosexuality and decided to try working with it. Overall, I find it to be a rather reliable and accurate survey, however, I did find that there were a few problems associated with it. As such, many of the subject’s results had a slight margin of error. I am estimating this error to be no greater than ten percent (10%) in either direction, and in most cases no greater than five percent (5%).

From my searching I ended up with twenty-five (25) respondants, myself included. Added to the test was another question of my choosing which instructed subjects to list their Kinsey score as they percieved it to be. Several people did not respond to this question, which means that this aspect is less reliable for comparitive purposes, but I will use it as I can anyway.

The test itself (shown on the previous page) is comprised of twenty-five questions (not counting the Kinsey score question) and is scored on a scale ranging from zero (0) to one hundred (100). Each answer is a point based answer which follows from one (1) to five (5) with varying degrees of agreement to the statement. Certain questions had to have scores reversed from what they were sent in as, since these questions were “negatively” worded and the scale assumes a positive base. As such, there were four general categories from the results. A score of 0 to 25 gave the person a classification of “high grade non-homophobic”. Subjects scoring 26-50 are considered “low grade non-homophobic”. Scores of 51-75 imply “low grade homophobic” and 76-100 are considered “high grade homophobic. The formula used for scoring is

T=(SX-N)*100/(N*4)

where X is the single item score (appropriately adjusted) and N is the number of items completed. (Note: S=Sigma. I did have it this way, but notepad won't do that font...) Anything not answered is considered omited and scores as zero (0). If all questions were answered, the equation reduces to T=SX-25.

From the group that I surveyed, I found that the average IHP score to be 35.8 (all composite results are rounded to one decimal place unless noted). Average answers to each individual question are as follows:

The averages of the answers are rather non-descriptive of my intended goal however. I will now attempt to elaborate on a few of the more interesting results of this study. To view a complete listing of results (names have been removed), click here. Though many people included comments on their responces, I have not listed those, as some will be brought up below.

Of the subject pool, 15 (60%) listed themselves as heterosexual (by the Kinsey score), 2 (8%) as bisexual, 3 (12%) as homosexual, and 5 (20%) did not respond to this (though it is assumed heterosexual by their responces and knowing the people). As a side note, one of the persons registering as bisexual claims to be heterosexual, however, due to this person’s Kinsey score, is considered bisexual for purposes of this study.

All of the homosexuals and bisexuals had scores in the low grade non-homophobic range, in fact, all were under 20. Of the heterosexuals and non-classifieds (twenty of the remaining subjects), 2 (10%) were high grade non-homophobics, 11 (55%) were low grade non-homophobics, 6 (30%) were low grade homophobics, and only 1 (5%) was high grade homophobic. Predominately, it seems, most of the straight people surveyed were not homophobic, to some degree or another. In fact, of the six that scored in the low grade homophobic range, four of them were still under a score of 60 and none were over the score of 65, save for the one high grade homophobic. This suggests to me that of the test subjects, the majority of them are either not very homophobic or control their homophobia in an attempt to promote tollerance and better understand what homosexuality is.

Again, however, this is a broad statement. As I stated before, there is a degree of inaccuracy in the survey. For one thing, the survey does not at all take into account religious beliefs. There are some who view homosexuality as a sin, and many of these people scored higher than others who perhaps did not. One predominate exception to this is Matt Couch (yes, I have been given permission to use his name). He is an avid believer that homosexuality is a sin, however, he also believes in a very live and let live philosophy. A such, he still scored in the low grade non-homophobic range. Because of the details of his comments and the uniqueness of their conveyance, I asked if I could list what he said with my results. He has agreed, saying that he would like others to know what he thinks. If you would like to view his thoughts on the matter (a very different view than my own, I might add), click here.

As well, other problems have been pointed out to me in the wording of the questions. For example, the question relating ot kissing someone of the same gender was met with the responce “do you mean on the cheek or the lips?”. I do not know how it was intended and in all cases such as this I tried to instruct the subjects to interpret it as they wished. Some took it one way or another while others tried to take it as both. In some cases, this may have pushed their answer off a point one way or another, but that’s how things happen sometimes. Overall, the survey is fairly accurate to how people say they would rate themselves if they only had to choose from the four categories. Those that ended up in a category they did not feel fit them often found that their score only put them in that category by a few points and if they had placed a few points higher or lower they would have been in the category they would have thought themselves.

Lastly, I’d like to do a quick listing of differences in scores based upon age and gender. I did not consider these aspects very heavily in my studies and do not intend to elaborate on them, but I thought it would be nice to list for those interested (and for curiosity’s sake). In the age 25 and under category, 15 (71.4%) registered as non-homophobic and 6 (28.6%) as homophobic (I am refraining from low and high grades to avoid people being able to deduce who gave what results). In the over 25 age range, 3 (75%) registered as non-homophobic and 1 (25%) as homophobic. Of the males, 11 (73.3%) registered as non-homophobic and 4 (26.7%) as homophobic and of the females, 7 (70%) registered as non-homophobic and 3 (30%) as homophobic. If you would like to do more comparison calculations, view the full results and do them yourself!

Conclusions

Ultimately, conclusions on this subject are up to each reader. I for one do not believe in the “virtues” of homophobia and believe that homosexuals should be treated as equally as heterosexuals. It should be nothing more than how you view a person’s hair color or eye color or skin color or height. Unfortunately it is not this way.

Some people may ask (in fact, I have been asked) what all the fuss is for. That is a valid question. Why am I putting so much effort and energy into something like this? What does it really matter? Perhaps in the grand scheme of things it matters very little. But it does matter to me. It is my little corner of the world that I want to understand and I want to understand it completely. Perhaps at some point in my life I will be able to put this knowledge to some direct use somehow, something beyond just reporting it on my webpage for my friends and a few stray internet travellers to read. It’s hard to judge. Overall, I do it because I want to and becuase I want to understand. And this work brings me a step closer to that understanding. We all have our instances of this, even if they are small and often unrecognized.

Here’s to your understanding. May you find whatever it is that you seek.