Alternative lifestyles and PTSD

[Elphaba]

Why is it that acting effeminate or "like a girl" means that someone is "clearly gay" unless someone is being visually intimate with another person of the same sex how can they be "clearly gay"?

I understand your comment, and I should rephrase mine: In hindisght, when my friend told me he was gay, it was clear to me he had been born gay, as the effeminate mannerisms and the things he talked about, as a child, finally made sense.

I know many men who act effeminate and are clearly not gay.

Do they want to kiss boys? Because that's what my friend always wanted to do even as a young child. And if they do, they are, to some extent, gay.

Frankly, I don't know any men who act effeminate who aren't gay. I know men who do not act very masculine, but that's something very different. I also don't know every man on the planet, so I have no doubt some do act effeminate without being gay.

this is an example of how liberal society determines who and what you are by your how they classify your actions and not on who you actually are.

This is nonsensical. It's also ridiculous.

Classifying my friend as gay is not a bad thing because that was an integral part of who he was. --he was gay. Yet, you are upset because I've done so, which demonstrates you think being a homosexual is a bad thing, but it's not. It's not a good or a bad thing, just like heterosexuality is not a good or bad thing. It just is.

Additionally, you're doing exactly what you're accusing me of. You're judging me based on my actions, not who I am. Just like the rest of the human beings on the planet who are not close to me.

I do not believe all men who are gay act the way my friend did. I agree someone could be effeminate and not be gay. I agree there are too many stereotypes about people who are gay, and I abhor negative stereotypes.

The point is, I was able to observe my friend from a very young age, and the strong effeminate mannerisms he displayed as an adult whose sexual orientation was gay were the same mannerisms he displayed as a child. That tells me he was born gay, and I think that's an important observation.

Elphaba

[Guest mysticmorini]

you say that you are not arguing that displaying Effeminate traits equals someone being gay and then you say that effeminate traits are important indicators of homosexuality. either way homosexuality IS bad. it is contrary to the gospel of Christ.

[Elphaba]

you say that you are not arguing that displaying Effeminate traits equals someone being gay and then you say that effeminate traits are important indicators of homosexuality.

I said nothing of the kind. I said the only men I've known who had effiminate mannerisms were gay. I then acknowledged I don't believe all men who do the same are gay.

either way homosexuality IS bad. it is contrary to the gospel of Christ.

No, it's not. A person who is homosexual is worthy to receive all the blessings you do, all of the inspiration you do, hold the same positions you do, and go on a mission as many do. To the Church, there is no difference between you and him, as long as you both do not break the commandments, including the law of chastity.

Elphaba

Edited April 19, 2010 by Elphaba

[Wingnut]

I do not believe all men who are gay act the way my friend did. I agree someone could be effeminate and not be gay.

Just as someone who is gay may not necessarily be effeminate. Not all gay men are obvious.

either way homosexuality IS bad. it is contrary to the gospel of Christ.

No it isn't. As Elphaba pointed out, and as has been clarified ad nauseum on this board, homosexuality in and of itself is not bad, sinful, or otherwise and abomination. Homosexual activity is.

Seriously. Why is it so hard to get that through so many Mormons' thick heads?

[Soulsearcher]

Reading the article and some of the posts make me think back to my childhood and teen years. I was always a very emotional and sensitive youth, also very affectionate. I remember never having a problem with this til a few comments made me very wary of it. One was at a summer day camp i was about 8 years old, we had to build a fort with a team of other kids from the camp and while i enjoyed it i wasn't very good with tools and really more was interested in playing around with one of the girls at the camp., we had to sleep in our fort one night and i remember being home sick and people picking on me cause i was more interested in playing with a girl so i started to cry and just kinda isolated my self. All of a sudden one of the older boys called me a new name i'd never heard. "he's just a queer" I went home the next day and asked my mom what it meant and she told me but i also heard a tone in her voice that let me know this wasn't a good thing. 2 years later just after I'd started to notice guys a lil more but really didn't think anything of it, i was at a family function and as usual i was rather cuddly with everyone there and playfully tickling everyone and hugging them. My mother pulled me aside and made a comment something like " stop that, you don't want people thinking you're gay" This was the first time i knew for sure that gay=bad. Over the next few years til the end of junior high school my being emotionally soft and a lil fragile i put up with the put downs that go with teens and gays. I got to the point i took the wrong bus home every day cause even though it took an hour longer it had 4 kids who'd bully me rather than 120. Aside from being sensitive and such, I'd never really done anything to show i liked boys, i even tried to have little crushes on girls in my classes, but in the end i got labeled gay even before i had come to terms with it and it lead to many years of me fighting it and going into relationships with girls just because that's what i had to do to try and be accepted and to try and get the torment and beatings to stop. I was 31 when i finally was able to just admit to myself that i had to be who i was. I have a great many people online who know my "secret", but less than 10 people in my life who know. I spent so many years being beat and bullied over being something i wasn't even able to understand that now i won't go back to being that weak. I won't trust people with this secret even though it means i can't meet people like me, i keep it all to myself and in the end i find it easier to be alone and safe from how people treated me in the past , than open and facing the daily terror i used to.

I'm not gay because i was bullied. I'm not sure there's any reason i'm gay. I know peoples fear and disgust at anything that might possibly be gay caused me a lot of miserable years and know in the end they really didn't care what damage they did as long as they were comfortable and secure in the end.

[GaySaint]

If I might share an experience from someone who has been there. I remember a specific experience when I was six years old while sitting in line on the playground waiting for my teacher to come get us, where I noticed for the first time that I was different. My parents always pointed out that “one day he’ll make some lucky woman a good husband” because I was “more sensitive” than the other boys.

I was not a “sissy.” I still enjoyed doing the normal boy things, but I recognized a feeling when I was six that I didn’t understand. It wasn’t until puberty that I noticed the connecting thread between that feeling and my sexuality (which makes sense, since sexual feelings didn’t develop before then).

To me this just proves what I already knew: That homosexuality is more than just sexual.

That said, I sure did experience a lot of taunting and violence from people who suspected I might be gay… but that happened in junior high and high school, not during my younger years.

[GaySaint]

Ram: You do bring up an interesting point though. I wonder if there is a correlation between those who may be gay because of abuse or trauma in their life (and I’m not naïve enough to suggest that NO ONE is gay because of abuse), and those with whom therapy is successful in changing their orientation from gay to straight. This would make sense to me, if there was an actual childhood trauma issue that could be resolved by therapy.

Just conjecturing out loud.

[hordak]

No it isn't. As Elphaba pointed out, and as has been clarified ad nauseum on this board, homosexuality in and of itself is not bad, sinful, or otherwise and abomination. Homosexual activity is.

Which is interesting because according to the study the risk only comes to those who act on the behavior

gay men, lesbians, bisexuals, and heterosexuals who have ever had a same-sex sex partner are one-and-a-half to two times as likely to experience violent events, especially in childhood.

Respondents in the study were asked not only about how they classify their sexual orientation, but also about their sexual behavior and feelings of sexual attraction. This enabled the researchers to analyze in more detail to discover that heterosexuals with same-sex attractions but no same-sex sex partners were not at elevated risk of violence or PTSD.

Personally i can't help but wonder if the study is skewed. I mean it isn't the sexual attraction that bring the risk but the actions.

If this is the case i wouldn't be surprised to see that those who are practicing homosexuals face more hardship now and would be more likely to recall the childhood events as traumatic where as a non practicing ones would be more likely to blow off childhood events .

[Elphaba]

Which is interesting because according to the study the risk only comes to those who act on the behavior. '

I went to the website of the Harvard School of Public Health, that, along with the Children’s Hospital of Boston, conducted this study. On the page where the study was posted, it said:

Health care providers urged to look for and address possible stress disorder among this group of adolescents and adults.

The fact that this declaration includes adolescents tells me that, for some of the sampling, their abuse occurred while they were children, and thus, prior to their sexual encounter. Therefore, the encounter had nothing to do with their abuse.

Additionally, as far as the study is concerned, and not within a LDS context, I would point out the risk is not from the sexual encounter itself. It is because of the behavior of other people toward the person that is the risk. The study states:

This is possibly because heterosexual individuals who do not act on their homosexual attractions may not face as much stigma. . . .

I do agree with, I think it was WindRiver, that a member of the Church who struggles significantly with his/her homosexuality could develop PTSD as a result of it, but as far as the study is concerned, the Church's position is not addressed.

Personally i can't help but wonder if the study is skewed.

I listed the institutions above that conducted this study, and they are among the world leaders in public health issues. Their studies go through a rigorous peer review process that is designed to catch incidents of the data being improperly interpreted, so it is highly unlikely the data is skewed.

Having been through the process twice, I would say it is impossible, but I’ve learned to never say never. But it is almost impossible the data is skewed.

I mean it isn't the sexual attraction that bring the risk but the actions.

Again, it's not the actions that cause the abuse/violence. It is the response of other people that does so.

I don't mean to dismiss your point as if it's not valid; obviously, it plays a significant role in the study. But I feel like you're moving toward a line that shouldn't be crossed by saying it's the gay person's fault s/he was beaten and/or even killed, because s/he decided to have a sexual encounter. That's just not true.

Knowing you, I don't believe you think this, but again, I feel like your reasoning is awfully close to that line that shouldn't be crossed.

If this is the case i wouldn't be surprised to see that those who are practicing homosexuals face more hardship now and would be more likely to recall the childhood events as traumatic where as a non practicings ones would be more likely to blow off childhood events .

I disagree. A number of gay people in the sampling had PTSD as a result of their violent encounters while they were children, and PTSD isn‘t something you get from a childhood of minor abuse that can be blown off.

As the article states:

Traumatic events like active combat, child maltreatment, interpersonal violence, or unexpected death of a loved one can lead to PTSD. . . .

None of these things are easily dismissed by the person who experienced them, and I strongly disagree that those in the study who had PTSD did so.

Elphaba

Edited April 19, 2010 by Elphaba

[hordak]

I do agree with, I think it was WindRiver, that a member of the Church who struggles significantly with his/her homosexuality could develop PTSD as a result of it, but as far as the study is concerned, the Church's position is not addressed.

I do Not doubt a gay person could suffer PSTD.

I listed the institutions above that conducted this study, and they are among the world leaders in public health issues. Their studies go through a rigorous peer review process that is designed to catch incidents of the data being improperly interpreted, so it is highly unlikely the data is skewed.

. Self reported data is subject to personal bias.

Again, it's not the actions that cause the abuse/violence. It is the response of other people that does so.

I agree. But i was pointing out it was the actions that bring the response. Not the attraction. (A bit tongue in cheek based on wingnuts post that it's the action that is wrong not the attraction

I don't mean to dismiss your point as if it's not valid; obviously, it plays a significant role in the study. But I feel like you're moving toward a line that shouldn't be crossed by saying it's the gay person's fault s/he was beaten and/or even killed, because s/he decided to have a sexual encounter. That's just not true.

No no no. Not at all.

Knowing you, I don't believe you think this, but again, I feel like your reasoning is awfully close to that line that shouldn't be crossed.

You're reading me wrong

See if i can clarify my point.

I'm saying the violence (not the PSTD which is a separate issue* and medically confirmed i would think) that occurred in childhood (after the fact)

*one-and-a-half to two times as likely to experience violent events, especially in childhood, than the general population and have double the risk of experiencing posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

is subject to that bias. (and admitted that bias can go both ways)

Kids toss a kid in the mud while calling him queer. If he is there is more chance he will internalize it and consider it a violent act based on sexual orientation. (They might not mean anything by it, based on his sexuality, but just as an insult.

Hence it is reported as a violent act based on orientation. even if it is not.

If he is not, he might blow it off as "kids being kids" (And in fact it could be based on the assumption he is gay, in which case it would be an unreported violent act based on orientation)

I have no doubt being gay is extremely hard on a kid growing up. And would never suggest "they get what they deserve" or any such nonsense. What i'm saying is that a person who is a victim now,(openly gay people make "better targets" (for lack of a better term) is more apt to recall being a victim in the past, even to the point of confusing "kids being kids"

Hope that makes sense

[Guest mysticmorini]

Just as someone who is gay may not necessarily be effeminate. Not all gay men are obvious.

No it isn't. As Elphaba pointed out, and as has been clarified ad nauseum on this board, homosexuality in and of itself is not bad, sinful, or otherwise and abomination. Homosexual activity is.

Seriously. Why is it so hard to get that through so many Mormons' thick heads?

Ummm no Homosexuality or the attraction to those of the same sex IS bad and contrary to the gospel. however I never said that merely having that attraction was a sin but that doesn't change the fact that it is NOT good (in other words bad) to be attracted to those of the same gender. I also did not say that those who suffer from these problems are bad people. thanks for misrepresenting my position.

[rameumptom]

Ram: You do bring up an interesting point though. I wonder if there is a correlation between those who may be gay because of abuse or trauma in their life (and I’m not naïve enough to suggest that NO ONE is gay because of abuse), and those with whom therapy is successful in changing their orientation from gay to straight. This would make sense to me, if there was an actual childhood trauma issue that could be resolved by therapy.

Just conjecturing out loud.

And I wasn't saying that it fits in every situation. I think the article comes to some conclusions that don't necessarily follow. Does a young boy with effeminate characteristics who is bullied; is he someone who was born gay, or was "guided" into it because that was how everyone around him treated him?

I grew up a small and quiet child. I knew that to be accepted by my school peers meant I was going to get slugged in the arm, etc., on a frequent basis. They didn't slug each other, btw. I never had an attraction to men, but I did seek their approval, as my own Dad was a violent alcoholic. He was all outdoorsy: hunting and skiing, which I tried, but never were my cup of tea. I was the quintessential nerd, you might say.

I have had people in the past tell me they thought I was somewhat gay or "queer". I'm not, and I did not care to be considered that by my peers.

However, I can see how such events could lead a young man into questioning himself and his orientation.

Once again, I'm not convinced that boys are picked on because they are gay, but simply perhaps because they are somewhat effeminate in their personality and body makeup. And I believe that in many cases such actions by the crowd can cause a person to question their orientation, or even change it.

Edited April 20, 2010 by rameumptom

[Elphaba]

I never had an attraction to men.

Then you aren't gay.

Men who are truly gay usually have a strong attraction to other males. They may be effeminate or they may not. But the attraction is there from a very young age, regardless of whether they are bullied or not.

Elphaba

[Elgama]

Elgama, what's your view on this theory (I just made it up):

* At 6 years old, a boy is not old enough to show that he is gay. Just because he acts effiminate does not mean he is gay. Being teased and bullied for being "gay" (associating being effiminate with gay) in such an early age makes him mentally associate himself with gays so that in his teen years it causes him to cultivate his attraction to the same gender because that's who he thinks he is.

I grew up with effeminate men neither of whom are gay, in fact both are far more effeminate than any gay man I met. My 3 year old loves wearing pink and anything sparkly (well actually he loves being nude more than anything lol) but he I don't think he's gay:), I know men that were bullied for being effeminate and they are still not gay.

I just know that the people I know that are gay and lesbian whether effeminate or not, knew they were different from their earliest memories and their attractions didn't make sense with the world around them. They didn't necessarily know they were gay, but they knew it didn't gel with stories, TV etc, for those of us that swim with the norm our feelings don't stand out so we don't notice we are different.

I didn't know I had Dyspraxia until I in my late teens - I did however notice the problems it gave me that made me feel different. Also being slightly effeminate isn't seen as an awful trait in my culture, its a sign of class and refinement in someways think Hugh Grant etc effeminate is sexy and inherentlly masculine its the sign of a man who is very much at home with who he is.

Edited April 21, 2010 by Elgama

[Traveler]

I know that people are born gay, and that if they have PTSD, it's because they suffer from abuse while growing up as it's seen as something to be ashamed of. That's especially true for those who were unfortunate to be born to families where being gay is evil.

How do you know people are born gay?

The Traveler

[Elphaba]

How do you know people are born gay?

How do you know people are born straight?

Elphaba

[rameumptom]

Then you aren't gay.

Men who are truly gay usually have a strong attraction to other males. They may be effeminate or they may not. But the attraction is there from a very young age, regardless of whether they are bullied or not.

Elphaba

You are making a very broad assumption. Evidence is still out on the chicken and the egg, which came first.

[Soulsearcher]

You are making a very broad assumption. Evidence is still out on the chicken and the egg, which came first.

Not such a broad assumption if you ask the people it applies to. I noticed my attraction to guys long before i was bullied by anyone.

Edited April 22, 2010 by Soulsearcher

[Elphaba]

You are making a very broad assumption.

As are you.

Evidence is still out on the chicken and the egg, which came first.

You were bullied as a child, and were severely abused by your father. Yet you're not gay. What makes you different from the person whose childhood was exactly like yours, but who is gay?

Every single person I've known in my life who is/was gay, including one of my very best friends who died four years ago. told me they were always attracted to boys when they were children. I listen to them, rather than people who aren't gay but think they know what a person who is gay thinks and/or feels, including from when they were a child.

In fact, it amazes me that people dismiss what people who are gay have to say about their own lives. In most cases, you would never dismiss what a person who is straight has to say about theirs.

Elphaba

[Moksha]

I listen to them, rather than people who aren't gay ...Elphaba

But wouldn't that be rather like listening to Mormons teach about themselves rather than from a group that dislikes what Mormons do?

[GaySaint]

Moksha: When I want to know something about the LDS church, I go to official LDS publications, or ask someone who is a member of the church. It would be silly of me to ask a JW their opinion on Joseph Smith, and expect them to give me an unskewed version of what is actually taught as official LDS doctrine.

If I want to know about a particular Catholic practice, I’m not going to ask a member of the LDS church, but instead will ask a Catholic.

I think it would be fair to assume that someone who is gay, has lived the experience, and knows personally what it is like to experience same-gender attraction is going to be the person who has the most insight into their own lives, just like an active, participating Mormon is going to have the most insight into how the LDS church teaches and touches lives.

How often does the church warn against anti-Mormon literature, websites, etc. because of the twists of truth that are often presented therein? We are all human and make errors based on personal experience and perception, so going to an anti-gay organization or website to get the facts on homosexuality is going to be full of the same type of fact twisting and false testimony that occurs on anti-Mormon websites.

To assume an organization that is anti-gay doesn't make the same errors in judgement that an organization would make that is anti-LDS is naive. Both would present information with a point of view colored by prejudice.

[Elgama]

You are making a very broad assumption. Evidence is still out on the chicken and the egg, which came first.

so you are gay:)?