The previous three posts examined the website’s claim that science’s proposed biological bases for sexual orientation are incorrect and play no role sexual development (Bogaert 2018). The final section of godandscience.org attempts to prove why social and cultural factors are the ultimate cause of homosexuality, thus leading to the conclusion that homosexuality is a voluntary behavior that can be altered. The website first cites a 2006 cohort study and explains that:
“Factors that increase the probability of becoming homosexual include having divorced parents, absent fathers, having older mothers, being the youngest child, and being a city (as opposed to rural) dweller. For women, maternal death during adolescence and being the only or youngest child or the only girl in the family increased the likelihood of homosexuality. In particular, paternal overprotection plays an important role in the development of male homosexuality”
However, this is a flagrant example of misinterpreting correlation as causation, and the authors make no mention of any causal relationships in this paper (Frisch et al 2006).
All but one study mentioned by this website were merely correlational studies, and each had been misconstrued as finding evidence for a causal relationship between various social factors (childhood abuse, risky family environment, etc.) and homosexuality (Lung et al. 2007)(Schumm 2010)(Cameron 2006). Due to the prevalence of anti-homosexuality ideology at the time of these studies, it is likely that abusive childhood experience was a result of open homosexual identity.
The one study that attempted to find causal relationships used an instrumental variable model to eliminate correlational vagueness by using “instruments” that sexual orientation could not affect (childhood poverty, parental alcoholism) to determine a causal effect of general maltreatment of sexual orientation (Roberts et al 2013). However, this study design does not adequately address confounding variables, and some of the instruments (parental alcoholism and mental illness) may be the result of a confounding genetic predisposition for such behaviors, which have also been found to be genetically associated with homosexuality (Bogaert et al. 2013). Furthermore, since individuals with minority sexual orientations have a higher prevalence of depression, it is possible that those individuals would self-report instruments like childhood poverty more critically than they actually are.
The final point addressed by this website is the putative effectiveness of religious “conversion therapies” to permanently change the sexual orientation of an individual. This ideology rest on the shallow premise that sexual orientation is a matter of personal choice.
The website references a 2011 study of conversion therapy, and draws attention to the “successful” 23% conversion rate (Jones et al. 2011). Numerous, blatant methodological flaws and inconclusive data remove the credibility of this experiment and certainly any indication of treatment success.
First, the authors themselves acknowledge the study as a “quasi-experiment” because “the design is inadequate, as the [APA] Task Force pointed out, because of the absence of a control or comparison group. . . This methodology fails to meet a number of ideal standards for longitudinal, prospective studies.” Furthermore, the study exclusively “followed participants pursuing sexual orientation change" (Jones et al. 2011). Because all participants had a strong desire to achieve a heterosexual identity, there is a clear bias in this experiment for participants to under-report homosexual identity and over-report heterosexual identity after therapy.
While the 23% success rate was based on participant’s subjective feelings of success, more objective data show little success. Because 11 of the 73 participants reported heterosexual identity from the start of the experiment, only 14 participants “converted” to heterosexuality, a rate of 19%.
While only 33 of the 73 participants demonstrated a degree of shift towards heterosexuality, 22 demonstrated a shift towards homosexuality.
Furthermore, statistical tests were only significant for the first three weeks of therapy, and 2 of the three markers for homosexuality increased during therapy beyond three weeks. Most importantly, 25 of the original 98 participants dropped out of the study, and while it is impossible to determine the cause, it is reasonable to assume that participants with the most negative experiences or unsuccessful results are some of the most likely to drop out (Jones et al. 2011).
Because participants are biased to report successful conversion, 27% of the original sample discontinued therapy, and 30% of participants reported increased homosexual identity, the actual success rate is likely much lower than 23%.
The website’s conclusion that “for a portion of individuals, being homosexual or heterosexual is something they can choose.” Is flagrantly false even in light of the most optimistic study available.
In the APA’s “Resolution of Appropriate Affirmative Responses to Sexual Orientation Change Efforts” authors concluded that “Scientifically rigorous older work in this area found that sexual orientation (i.e., erotic attractions and sexual arousal oriented to one sex or the other, or both) was unlikely to change due to efforts designed for this purpose . . . Although sound data on the safety of SOCE are extremely limited, some individuals reported being harmed by SOCE. Distress and depression were exacerbated" (Chanska et al. 2108). The ever-increasing bans on conversion therapy are evidence of growing realization among the public of the dangers and inefficacy of such treatments (Byne 2016).
Even among those who desire to change, efforts to transition into a new sexual orientation is consistently found to be unsuccessful.8 Such compelling findings in this post and others comprehensively disprove the ideology espoused in this website, and instead support the already self-evident conclusion that sexual orientation is an integral, immutable part of an individual’s identity.
1. Deem, Richard. “Genetics and Homosexuality: Are People Born Gay? The Biological Basis for Sexual Orientation by Richard Deem, MSc.” Are People Born Gay? The Biological and Genetic Basis for Homosexuality, Godandscience.org, 2017,
2. Frisch, Morten, and Anders Hviid. 2006. "Childhood Family Correlates of Heterosexual and Homosexual Marriages: A National Cohort Study of Two Million Danes." Archives of Sexual Behavior 35, no. 5: 533-547. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10508-006-9062-2.
3. Cameron, P. 2006. "Children of Homosexuals and Transsexuals More Apt to Be Homosexual." J Biosoc Sci 38, no. 3 (May): 413-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s002193200502674x.
4. Lung, For-Wey, and Bih-Ching Shu. 2007. "Father-Son Attachment and Sexual Partner Orientation in Taiwan." Comprehensive Psychiatry 48, no. 1 (1//): 20-26. Accessed 2007/2//. http://dx.doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.comppsych.2006.08.001.
5. Schumm, W. R. 2010. "Children of Homosexuals More Apt to Be Homosexuals? A Reply to Morrison and to Cameron Based on an Examination of Multiple Sources of Data." J Biosoc Sci 42, no. 6 (Nov): 721-42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0021932010000325.
6. Roberts, Andrea L., M. Maria Glymour, and Karestan C. Koenen. 2013. "Does Maltreatment in Childhood Affect Sexual Orientation in Adulthood?" Archives of sexual behavior 42, no. 2 (09/14): 161-171. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10508-012-0021-9.
7. Bogaert, Anthony F., and Malvina N. Skorska. "A short review of biological research on the development of sexual orientation." Hormones and Behavior 119 (2020): 104659.
8. Jones, S. L., and M. A. Yarhouse. 2011. "A Longitudinal Study of Attempted Religiously Mediated Sexual Orientation Change." J Sex Marital Ther 37, no. 5: 404-27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0092623x.2011.607052.
9. Chańska, Weronika, and Katarzyna Grunt-Mejer. "Commentary to the „Resolution on appropriate affirmative responses to sexual orientation distress and change efforts” by the American Psychological Association." Seksuologia Polska 16.2 (2018): 67-71.
10. Byne, William. "Regulations restrict practice of conversion therapy." (2016): 97-99.