You are on page 1of 35

3.4.

ALGUNAS INVESTIGACIONES

3.4.1. Investigaciones internacionales

Revisaremos algunos trabajos:

a) En “The Close Relationships of Lesbians and Gay Men”, Letitia Anne Peplau y Adam W.
Fingerhut (2007) (Annual Review of Psychology,58, pp. 405–424) revisan la literatura
norteamericana sobre relaciones homosexuales. Notan que la investigación en parejas del
mismo sexo empezó en los 70s, creció en 80s y luego declinó por el interés en SIDA en
comunidad gay. Hace unos años, se ha renovado el interés por la homosexualidad pero con
énfasis en la legalización de uniones del mismo sexo por uniones civiles o matrimonio
experiencias de parejas del mismo sexo criando niños.
b) En el 2000, el Censo en Estados Unidos incluyó la categoría “pareja no casada” y permitió
identificar al menos 600,000 parejas del mismo sexo viviendo juntas, tanto gays como
lesbianas, sobre todo en zonas urbanas. Las autores concluyen que es un estereotipo
prejuiciado el creer que los homosexuales son personas infelices, con relaciones románticas
inestables, y solitarios. Igualmente, existe el prejuicio de que sus relaciones son más
disfuncionales que las heterosexuales. No difieren en medidas de amor, gustar, satisfacción
actual o con el tiempo (con, por ejemplo, costos, equidad, justicia, balance de poder/toma de
decisiones y compromiso), con cercanía o ajuste en la relación, teniendo iguales resultados
que las parejas heterosexuales. Es un mito, también, el creer que recrean roles de esposo y
esposa. Aunque para algunos norteamericanos todavía existen distinciones
masculino/femenino estructurando sus relaciones sociales, hoy los gays y lesbianas tienden a
compartir roles de trabajo y en el hogar. La Investigación aporta evidencias a la APA y para no
discriminar legalmente por orientación sexual en acceso al matrimonio y sus derechos y
privilegios. Se probó generalizabilidad de teorías basadas en parejas heterosexuales pero los
conceptos clave –por ejemplo, apego- resultaron corroborados en homosexuales en cómo
funcionan las parejas, aunque difieran en cómo se constituyan y en algunas barreras a la
disolución de la relación. Se vio que al margen de orientación sexual, parejas con menos
poder en una relación usan estrategias de influencia más débiles, como retiro o súplica, en
vez de negociación o “bullying”. En sexualidad se ve gran variabilidad tanto entre parejas
heterosexuales como homosexuales, pero en gays hay mayor frecuencia sexual al inicio de la
relación y en las lesbianas, menor frecuencia sexual que en los gays y que en heterosexuales
pero se ven problemas metodológicos al estudiar esto. Alta satisfacción sexual es reportada
por gays y lesbianas blancos y afroamericanos jóvenes y adultos, y se asocia con frecuencia
y con otras medidas de satisfacción con la relación de pareja.
Se ven diferencias en la exclusividad, los gays difiriendo en actitudes hacia la monogamia,
con poca aceptación (36%) comparada a las lesbianas (71%) y a los heterosexuales casados
hombres (75%) y mujeres (84%); y en conductas sexuales, como sexo más allá de la díada
(82% de gays contra 28% de lesbianas, 21% de esposas y 26% de esposos heterosexuales), y
con más parejas en los que tienen sexo extradiádico, los gays. Hay peleas en parejas homo y
heterosexuales y sobre los mismos temas: finanzas, afecto, sexo, críticas, y tareas del hogar.
Similares habilidades para resolver estos conflictos (ejemplo, negociación y ceder), y las
mismas dificultades (como ataques personales o negarse a hablar). También en
homosexuales, las parejas más felices tienden a enfoques constructivos de solución de
problemas. Asimismo, hay violencia en la pareja y escalamiento de la misma, pero no se sabe
si, como en heterosexuales, son factores: tamaño físico, fuerza y actitudes tradicionales
hacia el género.
En heterosexuales el compromiso y longevidad de la relación se asocia con atracción y amor,
existencia de otras parejas disponibles, y obstáculos psicológicos, emocionales, financieros,
morales o religiosos para terminar una relación. En lesbianas se ha visto que la satisfacción
con la pareja, existencia de otras alternativas e inversión hecha, predicen compromiso
psicológico y éste, estabilidad en la pareja. En lesbianas y gays hay menos rompimiento que
en heterosexuales, pero asociado con que cohabitan y no están casados. El General
Accounting Office de EEUU en el 2004 estimó que el matrimonio afecta 1138 derechos,
incluyendo impuestos, seguridad social y beneficios de veteranos. Aunque hay oposición al
matrimonio gay, asociando homosexualidad a inmoralidad, se acepta que tengan derechos a
herencia, salud y seguridad social, siendo más aceptable la unión legal.
La encuesta en homosexuales muestra que asocian matrimonio con ciudadanía. El
matrimonio es visto como que daría seguridad y compromiso, dificultando disolución.
También está asociado a menos estrés, reduciendo homofobia internalizada y sentimiento de
discriminación, pero se teme genere desbalances de poder y se dañe a comunidad
homosexual al asimilar valores y normas predominantes como el matrimonio. Aún no se sabe
por qué unos quieren casarse y otros no, y se desconoce el impacto a largo plazo.
El Censo muestra que en el 2000 había autoreportado un 22% de gays y 34% de lesbianas en
pareja, y que tienen cerca de 250,000 hijos menores de edad que están criando. Las
investigaciones muestran que no difieren de otros niños. Hay similar disminución del afecto a
pareja y aumento del conflicto en madres con recién nacidos, en homo y heterosexuales. No
cambian las tareas domésticas como sucede en heterosexuales ni hay roles tan distintos en
cuidado del niño. La evidencia es contradictoria sobre si las lesbianas son más igualitarias que
las heterosexuales. La mayoría (74%) de las lesbianas y gays en E.E.U.U. refieren haber sido
discriminadas por orientación sexual, un 23%. El 34% reporta discriminación de su propia
familia (rechazo, no apoyo, ignorarlos). Hay discriminación cotidiana (por ejemplo, rechazo en
hoteles, bromas, insultos y ataques). También estresa esconder la orientación sexual. A más
experiencia de discriminación, mayores problemas de ajuste y desórdenes por estrés. Los gays
perciben menos soporte familiar que lesbianas y heterosexuales. El soporte familiar se asocia
con satisfacción con pareja y bienestar. Hay que estudiar la resiliencia a estrés y
discriminación en homosexuales. A veces se compensa con familias “de elección”.
c) Con 375 estudiantes de Psicología españoles, mayormente mujeres, Frias-Navarro, Monterde
i Bort y Peris García, Francisco (2009) estudiaron prejuicio, medido con la Escala de Prejuicio
Manifiesto y Prejuicio Sutil de Pettigrew y Meertenes, 1995, quienes ven el prejuicio como
expresión de respuestas afectivas negativas (incluyendo tanto reacciones emocionales como
evaluativas) que conduce al rechazo del individuo que no pertenece al endogrupo.
Comprobaron que los estudiantes prejuiciados en general muestran prejuicio hacia los
padres homosexuales tanto como oposición individual como normativa.
d) En el 2011, Pennington y Knight, en un estudio cualitativo con entrevistas a nueve adultos
heterosexuales vieron qué actitudes y creencias tenían hacia las parejas de homosexuales y
lesbianas que crían a niños, encontrando suposiciones heteronormativas, homofóbicas y
heterosexistas, un prisma que daba color a sus percepciones. Notaron que a veces los
participantes intentaban ajustar su prisma y adoptar diferentes perspectivas, con
ambivalencia y posiciones contradictorias, pero un consenso del posible impacto negativo
para los niños criados por padres del mismo sexo.
e) Dempsey, en 2012, estudió, más bien, los conceptos de algunos hombres gay australianos
sobre su relación con los niños, la paternidad. Es común que lesbianas recurran a gays para
inseminarse informalmente. Encuentra, a través de entrevistas, discursos patriarcales de
derecho a la autoridad y propiedad o derechos legales, y otros discursos de afinidad. Nota
que diferencian ser padre de ser sólo un donante, pero la mayoría sentía una relación con el
hijo aunque no sintieran que tenían titulareidad o derechos. Estos sentimientos podían
afectar la relación de las lesbianas con el hijo.
f) Morrison y Morrison (2011), en Canadá, con una muestra no universitaria y la Escala Moderna
de Homonegatividad de los autores, vieron que ésta se asociaba con neoracismo, neosexismo
y ética de trabajo Protestante, y correlacionaba negativamente con humanitarismo e
igualitarismo. En mujeres y hombres la mayor homonegatividad se dirigía a los gays más que
a las lesbianas. En otro estudio, con 196 personas de la comunidad, la homonegatividad
moderna predijo intenciones de conducta discriminatoria hacia los gays.
g) Talley y Bettencourt (2011), en Missouri, empleando análisis de regresión con 79 hombres gay
y mujeres lesbianas, encontraron que el estigma sexual percibido interacciona con el grado de
haber sincerado su identidad (¨salido del closet¨), y con las estrategias de afrontamiento
evitativas o de solución de problemas, para predecir si tienen síntomas depresivos.
h) Smith (2011) encuentra, en un estudio con la Universidad de Chicago, que la mayoría de
países se han vuelto más aceptantes de la homosexualidad, aunque en Rusia y otros tres
países mayormente ex - socialistas (República Checa, Latvia, y también Chipre) se vea una
ligera tendencia reversa entre 1998 y 2008. Se ve que en 27 países aumentó
significativamente la aceptación, mejorando las actitudes hacia la homosexualidad. La mayor
aceptación se vio en Holanda, Dinamarca, Noruega, Suiza y Bélgica/Flandes. Donde fue menor
la mejora fue en tres países de América Latina, Chipre, Sudáfrica y Turquía. También se vieron
algunos países polarizados, como Estados Unidos de Norteamérica, aunque una ligera
mayoría (54%) considere siempre mal a la homosexualidad, 32% diciendo que no era mala y
11% diciendo que a veces o mayormente mala. En general, se vio actitudes más positivas en
los adultos más jóvenes, aquéllos con mayor educación, los que van muy poco a servicios
religiosos, y los de ciudades grandes. Las mujeres tienden a ser más tolerantes pero en
algunos países la diferencia de género es mínima o es a la inversa.
i) Bos, Goldberg, van Gelderen y Gartrell (2012), con un estudio nacional longitudinal en
E.E.U.U., vieron que, según autoreporte de 78 adolescentes hombres y mujeres de 17 años
que crecieron con madres lesbianas, la mitad de ellos no tuvieron un modelo masculino, pero
ello no afectó su ajuste psicológico (State Trait Personality Inventory yy Child Behavior
Checklist) que no difirió de los de familias heterosexuales. Tampoco difirieron de ellos en su
estereotipia masculina o femenina, medida con el BSRI. Hombres y mujeres no difirieron
entre si en estereotipia masculina pero si en la femenina. Solo se vio que la feminidad se
asocia con el rasgo de curiosidad en ambos sexos pero no impactaba el bienestar psicológico.
Tampoco hubo diferencias entre mujeres y hombres en su bienestar. Se concluye que no hay
evidencia de que se requiera el adolescente varón requiera del padre del mismo sexo o de un
modelo masculino para tener buen desarrollo psicológico. Ya son 26 años que se realiza el
estudio nacional de familias lesbianas en E,E.U.U. y estudios previos tampoco han evidenciado
diferencias en el bienestar psicológico de niños y niñas en familias lesbianas y heterosexuales.
http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Bos-Goldberg-VanGelderen-
Gartell-Gender-Society-June-2012.pdf
http://gas.sagepub.com/content/early/2012/05/30/0891243212445465
3.4.2. Investigaciones en Perú

A continuación presentaremos resultados de algunas investigaciones recientemente realizadas


por estudiantes de Piscología de la PUCP en los cursos de Sexualidad Humana y Psicología del
Género. Se trata de investigaciones con muestras pequeñas, no representativas, mayormente
descriptivas comparativas, mediante encuestas, cuestionarios y escalas, profundizadas con
entrevistas abiertas. Aunque son muestras chicas, se usan porcentajes para efectos de
comparabilidad.

a) Estudio: Apertura a Adopción en Parejas Homosexuales.

Gutiérrez, P.; Bardales, G.; Espinoza, A.; Ramírez, C.; Pérez, R.; Romañska, N.; Guevara, L. y
Salinas, I. (2009), con 31 adultos jóvenes heterosexuales y 32 homosexuales de Lima,
exploraron sus actitudes hacia la adopción homosexual con una encuesta construida por
los autores y 8 entrevistas con 10 preguntas abiertas para una profundización cualitativa.
Con análisis de diferencias se determinaron diferencias a nivel global y a nivel ítems, entre
heterosexuales y homosexuales, encontrándose menor apertura en los primeros e
importantes diferencias específicas.

Algunos resultados:
• Acuerdo con la Familia nuclear -padre/madre/hijos- es lo que predomina en 74% de
Heterosexuales pero, también, en casi la mitad de los Homosexuales (47%) con 16% más
sin decidirse, dejando sólo un 38% en desacuerdo.
• Un 18% de Homosexuales está en desacuerdo con la adopción homosexual.
• No aceptan el matrimonio homosexual todavía un 16% de Heterosexuales, y no se decide
un 32% adicional. En Homosexuales también se encuentra rechazo en 9% y duda en 13%.
• Un 13% de heterosexuales no acepta que una persona homosexual pueda cumplir
correctamente el rol de padre o madre y otro 13%, duda. Sorprende que un alto 19% de
Homosexuales tampoco lo acepte.
• Un 61% de Heterosexuales cree que niño criado por homosexuales puede tener problemas
psicológicos y 10% no se decide. Un 14% de Homosexuales lo cree así y un alto 28%
adicional no se decide.
• Curiosamente, 56% de Homosexuales cree, y 22% más no se decide sobre, que el niño
criado por homosexuales tendrá confusión en su orientación sexual, mientras que esto no
se da en los Heterosexuales, con sólo 26% creyéndolo y 10% no decidiéndose.
• Los Hetero y Homosexuales mayormente no se deciden o tienden al desacuerdo con que
es preferible la adopción en lesbianas que en gays.
• 61% de Heterosexuales y 81% de Homosexuales creen que la sociedad peruana no está
preparada ni es abierta para aceptar adopción homosexual.
• 16% de Heterosexuales no permitirían, y 29% más no deciden si permitirían, la amistad de
su hijo con hijos de padres homosexuales. Un 6% de Homosexuales tampoco lo permitirían
y 3% más no deciden.
• 52% de Heterosexuales dicen estar en contra, y 16% más no se deciden sobre, que esté
permitida la adopción homosexual; 16% de Homosexuales también están en contra y 6%
no se decide.
• 55% de Heterosexuales personalmente no acepta la adopción homosexual y 23% más no
decide; 16% de Homosexuales personalmente no acepta y 9% no decide.
• Incluso 42% de Heterosexuales no aceptaría que su religión acepte la adopción
homosexual y 19% más no se decide. En Homosexuales, 10% no lo aceptaría y 26% no se
decide, pero 48% de Heterosexuales cree que su religión debería aceptar la adopción
homosexual con 20% que no se decide y 32% en contra. Curiosamente, en Homosexuales
un 55% se opone y 35% no se decide, sólo 10% está de acuerdo.
• A modo de ilustración, transcribimos algunas narrativas:
• Respecto a la adopción por parejas homosexuales, ¿qué opinas? “Bueno no estoy
de acuerdo (con adopción homosexual)…el niño o niña necesita de una familia bien
constituida y esto implica que haya un padre y una madre que sean el soporte del
niño, creo que el niño o niña necesitan de la figura de un padre o madre para saber
con quien identificarse…Imagínate! Con dos papás o dos mamás, esto no seria
normal. Sus mismos amiguitos podrían hasta lastimarlos..burlándose.. , lo que
conlleva a que el niño puede tener alguna especie de daño psicológico o
emocional…, quién sabe inclusive pueda llegar a renegar de sus mismos padres.
Claro que he escuchado en los medios de comunicación que las parejas
homosexuales están luchando por adoptar hijos….yo diría que ni siquiera tienen
familias bien constituidas. Por Dios! Sólo son parejas que inclusive son inestables y
hasta pueden llegar a ser promiscuos. ¿Qué clase de ejemplo seria esto para sus
hijos? O sea que le dirían a sus hijos que hoy tiene un papá o mamá diferente al de
hace un mes. ¿Acaso eso ayudaría a la estabilidad de los niños? En mi opinión
personal creo que no se debería aceptar la adopción de parejas homosexuales. Por
último, tampoco el matrimonio; Dios nos creó hombre y mujer, no hay un tercer
sexo ni nada, Creo que estas personas están enfermas y que necesitan ayuda para
que vuelvan a orientarse por el buen camino.” (Mujer, 24 años, Católica).
• ¿Piensas que la sociedad en tu país está preparada y es suficientemente abierta
para aceptar la adopción por parejas homosexuales? “Yo creo que no…y que no
debería ser aceptada…..esto solo haría peligrar a la formación de las familias. Ante
todo se debería velar por la institución familiar, la que está compuesta por un
padre, una madre y sus hijos…en ningún momento se contempla a dos papás o dos
mamás... Esto va en contra de la naturaleza y la familia. Además que también hay
una pérdida de valores morales que deben formar parte de la institución familia.
Creo que la posición de las autoridades hasta el momento es la mejor. Debemos
velar por el bienestar de los niños, y esto implica no dejarlos a merced de personas
que aún tienen confusión en su orientación sexual” (Mujer, 24 años, Católica).
• ¿Crees que la adopción por parejas homosexuales produciría consecuencias
negativas para la sociedad? ¿Cuáles serian? “Claro que si, y serian muy negativas,
ya que lo primero que estaría atacando sería la familia nuclear, la institución
familiar se vería afectada…además que esto atentaría con los valores morales….la
unión matrimonial es consagrada frente a Dios y es de un hombre y una mujer, no
de un hombre que pretende ser una mujer con otro hombre…o una mujer que se
comporta como hombre con otra que si es mujer….¿qué es esto? No es lo normal.
La unión es de un hombre y una mujer que formar una pareja y son quienes van a
forman una familia, ya sea de forma natural y si no pueden tener la posibilidad de
contribuir y ayudar a niños que no corrieron con la suerte de tener una familia y
darles la posibilidad de crecer con padres que lo quieran y valoren.” (Mujer, 24
años, Católica).

b) Estudio de Prejuicio en Adolescentes y Adultos Mayores

Alarcón, Alva, Fernández, González, Ordinola, Vergara y Verhoeven (2009), con 20


adolescentes y 18 adultos mayores (65-88 años) de Lima, con una encuesta sobre
actitudes y creencias y ocho entrevistas en profundidad , no se encontraron diferencias
etáreas ni por sexo a nivel global, todos evidenciando alto prejuicio. Algunos resultados:

• 68% cree que los homosexuales son fácilmente identificables, pero 65%, que tienden
a ocultar su identidad sexual.
• 55% está de acuerdo con matrimonio homosexual en Perú.
• La mitad cree que los homosexuales pueden cambiar, que son ateos, que lesbianas
son más vengativas con su pareja que mujeres heterosexuales.
• 47% cree que niños que viven con homosexuales tenderán a ser homosexuales.
• 42% cree que marchas gay atentan contra moral y buenas costumbres; que la mayoría
de lesbianas usan pene artificial en relaciones; y que lesbianas tienen menos placer
sexual.
• 39% cree que homosexuales son más promiscuos, que cambian más rápido si tienen
relaciones heterosexuales, y que estarán solos en su ancianidad.
• 37% cree que homosexuales violan niños más que heterosexuales
• 34% cree que hay más hombres que mujeres homosexuales, y que la mayoría de
lesbianas fue violada de niña.
• 32% cree que homosexuales cometen más homicidios que heterosexuales.
• Algunas narrativas: “La homosexualidad es un modo de vida como los demás… al
principio es triste que no te entiendan, que te rechacen pero así es acá..” ¿Alguna vez
dudaste de tu orientación heterosexual? “Dudar, dudar, no, porque siempre me han
gustado los hombres, sino que por ahí tuve mis cosas con una prima lejana, pero yo
creo que fue más juego que otra cosa... como quien explora.” ¿Qué opinas de los
homofóbicos? “Son personas con muy poco de acá (no inteligentes), creen que todos
deben pensar como ellos y se basan en la moral… recontrahipócritas, tremendos
pecadores…porque no aceptan a los demás” (Mujer heterosexual, 68 años, educación
Secundaria, soltera).
• La homosexualidad es “una opción sexual para algunos y otros nacen así, creo que
para los últimos no queda otra pero a los que eligen no los entiendo, será que algo les
pasó en sus vidas, pero creo que podrían cambiar”. Si me enterara que un amigo
cercano es homosexual me sentiría… “Mmm, no me gustaría, sería muy raro, ¿cómo
podría confiar en él, de repente se confunde conmigo y no sé, pero no me gustaría,
definitivamente”. ¿Si es un familiar? “Peor, no me gustaría estar cerca”. ¿Qué opinas
de los homofóbicos? “Una cosa es que no te gusten y prefieras no verlo, pero de ahí a
pegarles, no, me parece mal, no creo que sea necesario, bueno, a menos que te
quieran hacer algo y ahí los pones en su sitio” (Adolescente varón, 15 años, Primaria
completa, estudiante nocturno y vendedor de bodega, heterosexual).

c) Estudio sobre Prejuicio en Heterosexuales en Personas Religiosas

Cuentas, Cosamalón y Montes (2009), con encuestas a 22 personas entre 18 y 30 años de


grupos religiosos, encontraron diferencias por sexo en una serie de prejuicios con relación a la
homosexualidad, pero, también, consistencias. Algunos resultados:

 La casi totalidad manifestó ser indiferentes frente la homosexualidad masculina.


 91% de hombres y 64% mujeres cree que homo y heterosexuales tienen conductas típicas
que los diferencian.
 Mayoría de hombres (73%) y mujeres (64%) cree que hay diferencias en conducta, siendo
los homosexuales: más escandalosos, sensibles, chismosos, receptivos, fuertes y
delicados, pero menos empáticos (respuestas cerradas).
 64% no cree que hay diferencias entre homosexuales y heterosexuales en puestos
laborales. Creen que homosexuales pueden ser buenos estilistas y bailarines; también
profesores, economistas, enfermeros. No diferencias en cobrador (respuestas cerradas).
 84% mujeres y sólo 36% hombres de acuerdo con que hombres gay críen hijos . Los que
están de acuerdo creen que homosexuales son igualmente aptos, tienen iguales
derechos, y no dañan al niño. Los que se oponen creen que va a ser negativo para el niño,
van a confundir su orientación sexual, que el gay está “mentalmente enfermo”, y la
sociedad no está preparada.

Algunas narrativas como ilustración son:


 “La homosexualidad es algo fuera de nuestro alcance, uno no puede remediarlos ni
criticarlos, mejor hubiera dicho que es una opción que desgraciadamente se dio en una
persona.”
 ¿Qué opinas de una pareja homosexual? “Me dan un poco de asco”.
 ¿Cómo te sentirías si fueras homosexual? “No sé, creo que no lo puedo pensar, no concibo
esa idea. Aunque ellos se sienten tranquilos, frescos, no se dan cuenta.” “No conozco a
ninguna lesbiana, gracias a Dios no me he topado con una de ellas”. “Los gays son fuera
de la razón, fuera del mundo donde vivimos, no ha sido formado para gays.”
 ¿Qué opinas de los homofóbicos? “Me dan lástima por su maldad” (Mujer heterosexual,
75 años, educación Secundaria, viuda).

d) Estudio sobre Prejuicio y Escuela

Ibáñez, Micalay y Fernández (2009), con 24 estudiantes de Estudios Generales (EEGG) de


Letras y Ciencias de la PUCP, y mediante una escala (de Micalay, Rojas y Valera, 2008) y 4
entrevistas semiestructuradas, encontraron diferencias significativas con las mujeres
universitarias teniendo bajo prejuicio hacia la homosexualidad y los hombres, medio. Algunos
resultados:

 En Estudios Generales Letras se aprecia bajo prejuicio autoreportado, y en Ciencias,


medio, con diferencias estadísticamente significativas.
 Aunque no llega a ser estadísticamente significativa hay una diferencia en el prejuicio
según religión: el prejuicio es medio en estudiantes que fueron a escuelas religiosas y
bajo en las que fueron a laicas.
 Los que fueron a colegios mixtos muestran bajo prejuicio; los de colegios segregados,
prejuicio medio, aunque no sean diferencias significativas.
 En el nivel socioeconómico bajo, el prejuicio es bajo; en el NSE medio, el prejuicio es
medio, pero no son diferencias significativas, posiblemente por ser muestras muy
pequeñas, sesgadas y por haber determinado el NSE sólo por colegio de procedencia.
 Ejemplos de narrativas:
o ¿(En el colegio religioso) pensaban lo mismo de dos chicos que podían ser
gays de dos chica que podían ser lesbianas? “No, porque hay todo un fetiche
alrededor de las lesbianas como que es excitante. Ver a dos lesbianas creo que
no es tan malo como ver a dos patas besándose.”
o ¿Tú sentías que la gente de tu colegio tenía una posición frente a la
homosexualidad? “La mayoría era homofóbico. Éramos puros varones, sobre
todo si había homosexuales que lo demostraban los insultaban” (Varón, de
colegio religioso segregado).
o ¿Qué piensas de dos hombres que sean pareja? “Bueno yo tengo amigos que
son pareja y no hay problema”.
o ¿Y qué piensas de que se casen? “Bueno, en el Perú no es posible”. ¿Y en otro
lugar? “De que se casen no tengo inconveniente. Pero hay una cuestión de que
no es segura en el hecho de que tenga familia y adopten un hijo. ¿Por qué?
“Porque no hay comprobación cierta de lo que pueda pasar con ese hijo.” ¿Y
qué piensas en cuanto a que dos lesbianas adopten un hijo? “Yo creo que es
igual, viéndolo desde mi perspectiva sesgada de ver crecer una familia de
parejas homosexuales, en el otro caso yo me pregunto cómo ese hijo verá a
sus padres, aparte la sociedad también ayudaría a que se cree un conflicto.
Pero el hecho de que sean homosexuales no quiere decir que no le puedan
inculcar valores” (Varón, de colegio religioso segregado).
o ¿En tu colegio se trataron temas de sexualidad? “Sí, me acuerdo que en 3ero
de secundaria fue el año en que más se trató de eso.” ¿De qué hablaban?
“Pasaban videos de la procreación, sobre el VIH, de relación con los padres.
Pero no me gustaba que algunos eran demasiado explicados o fuertes, sobre
todo los videos, como escenas de sexo.” ¿Se tocó el tema de homosexualidad?
“Sí, me acuerdo que en ese tiempo todo el mundo decía que estaba mal, lo
trataba como un tema de la sexualidad.” ¿Qué hablaba la gente de tu colegio
en ese tiempo? “Ah, éramos medio homofóbicos… Por ejemplo, entre amigos
nos poníamos en la situación de que uno de nuestros hermanos fueran
homosexuales y nosotros decíamos que daría vergüenza.” (Mujer, colegio
laico mixto).
o ¿Qué opinas de que dos hombres sean pareja? “No tengo problema por ese
lado”. ¿Y de qué adopten? “Bueno, eso depende de la religión de cada uno.
Por ejemplo, yo soy católica, y en la Biblia dice que solo se pueden casarse
entre hombres y mujeres, pero no dice que puede haber unión entre personas
del mismo sexo.”
o ¿Consideras adecuado que dos lesbianas adopten un niño? “Um, no, porque
yo creo que ahí sí va a haber confusión, tanto si son hombres que adoptan un
niño o si son dos mujeres, ya que por tradición siempre es papá o mamá,
entonces el niño puede sentirse confundido con respecto a sus otros
compañeros que tiene padres homosexuales, podrían causarle al niño un daño
psicológico” (Mujer, colegio laico mixto).

e) Estudio Percepciones sobre identidades y orientación sexual

Palacios, Tarma, Chonn y Villanueva (2009), con muestra incidental de 41 personas de


Lima entre 18 y 41 años, mujeres y hombres, encontraron que eran mayormente
heterosexuales (85%); con 5% homosexuales y 10%, bisexuales). Un 32% se declaró
católica, otro 32% sin adscripción religiosa, 12% ateos y 12% agnósticos, 10% cristianos y
2%, evangélicos. Algunos resultados:
 Con un cuestionario autoaplicado y respondido On Line, con preguntas cerradas y
abiertas, se encontró que predominaba la definición de homosexualidad como
atracción sexual al mismo sexo. Algunos aludían a orientación sexual o
comportamiento sexual distinto, a que son personas normales, sin complejos,
abiertas, o que son discriminadas, con vida problemática, retraídas.
 También la heterosexualidad se definió por el mismo criterio; algunos hablaron
de que son normales, no hay características comunes, que son homofóbicas o que
sólo creen que hay dos sexos.
 La bisexualidad se definió, mayoritariamente, como atracción por el mismo sexo
y sexo opuesto. Algunos hablaron de orientación sexual indefinida, que no
discriminan entre sexos, más abiertas y no reprimidas, o que no son abiertas o,
incluso, no existen.
 Se veía la homosexualidad como algo común en todos lados (86%), en el
extranjero (5%) o en Perú (10%).
 La bisexualidad se veía como común en todas partes (78%), en el extranjero (15%)
o en Perú (7%).
 Se cree que la heterosexualidad se está convirtiendo en menos común en todos
los países (76%), en Perú (15%) o en el extranjero (10%).
 Se diferenciaban grupos de homosexuales, mayormente activos y “caletas”;
algunos hablando de modernos, machonas, o aludiendo a marginalidad,
normalidad, orientación o identidad, conductas y estereotipos.
 En heterosexuales se hablaban, por igual, de normales, monógamas, o de
personas complejas, prejuiciosas, que intercambian parejas, que les gusta
experimentar o mostrar su sexualidad, o extremistas.
 En bisexuales se diferenciaban por orientación sexual y por activos, menos, por
caletas, por variaciones en conducta, en físico o en personalidad y alguno afirmó
que no se involucran emocionalmente.
 La gran mayoría sostuvo que no hay un comportamiento homosexual específico;
muy pocos aludieron a que son escandalosos, rebeldes, retraídos, o abiertos,
divertidos, cariñosos y sin complejos.
 Para los heterosexuales tampoco se identificó ningún comportamiento. Para los
bisexuales, tampoco.
 La mitad afirmó que los homosexuales socializan con todas las personas, un 25%
refirió que sólo con homosexuales o con personas tolerantes. Menos hablaron de
sólo con la pareja o amigos o que depende de cada uno.
 La gran mayoría dijo que los heterosexuales socializan con todas las personas;
algunos hablaron de que depende de sus prejuicios o de la personalidad o la
persona, de su cultura o creencias, o que sólo socializan con heterosexuales, con
su círculo social o de amistades.
 Los bisexuales se cree, también, mayoritariamente, socializan con todas las
personas. Menos, se habla de sólo con bisexuales, con sus preferencias, con
homosexuales, o con todo menos heterosexuales.
 Poco más de la mitad afirma frecuentan todas partes, cualquier lugar; algunos
hablan de discotecas y bares gay o donde puedan expresarse, y lugares privados.
 Casi todos dijeron aceptarían un amigo homosexual, la gran mayoría, un
conciudadano, visitante, compañero de estudios o trabajo, bajando la aceptación
en vecino, mucho en miembro familiar y a 10% en pareja.
 Similar patrón se ve en que mayoría aceptaría bisexual como amigo, ciudadano,
compañero de estudios o trabajo, visitante; menos como vecino y mucho menos
como familiar y poco, (10%) como pareja.
 Casi todos aceptarían un heterosexual como amigo, pareja, familia, ciudadano,
vecino, compañero de estudios o trabajo o visitante, por igual.
El Comercio, 25-4-2010, p.a6

f) Estudio del Movimiento Manuela Ramos

La ONG Manuela Ramos realizó en el 2007 una serie de autodiagnósticos cualitativos


recogiendo información de niños y niñas, adolescentes y jóvenes adultos en pobreza en
ciudades y zonas rurales de la Costa, Sierra y Selva. Colaboramos con la sistematización y
análisis de resultados (Raguz, 2009), los cuales nunca se publicaron pero sirvieron para
intervenciones en las zonas. Algunas narrativas interesantes son.

 “(La homosexualidad) viene de violación, por problemas genéticos, por comer


pollo y productos que tienen hormonas y productos químicos en las grandes
ciudades, y por comer mucha cebolla que excita a los hombres”. “No
discriminamos mientras vivan lejos de nuestra comunidad”. Grupo adolescentes
varones de Pomabamba, Ayacucho, y mujeres de Lurín.
 “Si no puedes tener una mujer entonces buscas un maricón, un cabro, o los
adolescentes se pueden iniciar con cabros o aceptar tener relaciones con gays que
pagan, sin volverse homosexuales”. “Hoy, en España, hasta los maricones se
casan; en algunos países adoptan hijos, pero no en Perú, en mi comunidad los
matamos si vienen.” Adolescentes varones del Boquerón de Padre Abad, Ucayali.

 En la Amazonía en zonas de pobreza, la homosexualidad se asocia con drogas, pandillas


(perniciosas), robos y malos hábitos.
• Los niños pequeños de Ucayali, de 10 a 14 años, expresan temor de ser violados por
homosexuales, una creencia muy fuerte de su comunidad homofóbica que forma parte de
los pánicos morales que se fomentan.
• Adolescentes periurbanos de Lurín, Lima, evidencian homofobia, aunque en menor grado
que en la Amazonía, y si tienen algunos amigos homosexuales.
De la revisión de estudios hecha resulta pertinente concluir con las siguientes citas:

Aún (en Perú) se trata de una cultura sexista, machista y homofóbica, y un


fundamentalismo católico que defiende la familia patriarcal y sus valores y las jerarquías y
desigualdades de género. La Iglesia se irroga la vigilancia moral de lo prohibido:
homosexualidad (sexo entre el mismo sexo), prostitución (trabajo sexual), aborto,
relaciones sexuales en gente joven (C. Cáceres, M. Cueto y N. Palomino, 2007).

“La sexualidad es un aspecto fundamental de la identidad del individuo. Ayuda a definir


quién es la persona… Los derechos sexuales (son) derechos humanos… (e) incluyen el
derecho de toda persona a expresar su orientación sexual, con el debido respeto al
bienestar y derechos de los demás, sin temor a persecución, privación de libertad o
interferencia social (Relator en Derechos en Salud ante la ONU, Paul Hunt, presentación
en la 16 de Febrero de 2004, 60ava. Sesión de la Asamblea General, Naciones Unidas,
Nueva York).

3.5. BIBLIOGRAFÍA

Alarcón, G.; Alva, M.; Fernández, R.M Gonzalez, R.; Ordinola, M.; Vergara, A. y Verhoeven, M.
(2009), Prejuicio hacia la homosexualidad: La perspectiva de adolescentes y adultos
mayores. Investigación inédita, curso Sexualidad Humana Psicología PUCP, Lima,
diciembre.
Alto Comisionado de las Naciones Unidas para los Derechos Humanos (2011), Leyes y prácticas
discriminatorias y actos de violencia cometidos contra personas por su orientación sexual e
identidad de género (Documento ONU A-HRC-19-41
http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/HRBodies/HRCouncil/RegularSession/Session19/A-HRC-
19-41_sp.pdf
American Psychologist Association (2004). Resolution on sexual orientation and marriage.
http://www.apa.org/pi/lgbc/policy/marriage.pdf
American Psychologist Association APA Task Force on Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to
Sexual Orientation. (2009). Report of the Task Force on Appropriate Therapeutic Responses
to Sexual Orientation. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
www.apa.org/pi/lgbc/publications/
Amnistía Internacional (2012), Hacer realidad los derechos sexuales y reproductivos. Marco de
derechos humanos. Madrid: EDAI. www.amnesty.org
Anderson, K. J. y Kanner, M. (2011), Inventing a Gay Agenda: Students' Perceptions of Lesbian
and Gay Professors. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 41: 1538–1564.
doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2011.00757.x
Andersson, G.T., Noack, T., Seierstad, A. y Weedon-Fekjaer, H. (2006). The demographics of
samesex marriages in Norway and Sweden. Demography 43:79–98.
Andía, B. (2007). Patrones de violencia y machismo contra las personas Trans. En Mesa redonda:
“De la convivencia a la violencia…”. Foro Masculinamente…¿hablando? Porque todos los
hombres no son iguales. Organizado por el Proyecto MACHO de INPPARES el 7 y 8 de
junio en el Hotel José Antonio, Miraflores – Lima.
Anton, B. S. (2010). Proceedings of the American Psychological Association for the legislative year
2009: Minutes of the annual meeting of the Council of Representatives and minutes of the
meetings of the Board of Directors. American Psychologist, 65, 385–475. doi:
10.1037/a0019553
Arranz, E., Olabarrieta, F. Manzano, A., Martín, J.L., Galende, N., Oliva, A., Parra, A., Antolin, L. y
Lamb, M. (2009), Análisis de la calidad del contexto familiar y ajuste infantil en las nuevas
estructuras familiares. Bilbao: Extadi, Universidad del País Vasco, y Universidad de
Cambridge. www.extadi.org
Ascenzo, F.; Dongo, P. y Villanueva, L. (2008). Percepciones sobre homosexualidad em mujeres y
hombres de clase media de Lima. Investigación inédita, curso Sexualidad Humana
Psicología PUCP, Lima, diciembre.
Ayosa, C. (2008), Actitudes hacia la homosexualidad. Investigación inédita, curso Psicología del
Género, Psicología PUCP, Lima, diciembre.
Badget, M.V.L. y Herman, J.L. (2011), Patterns of relationship recognitions in same-sex couples in
the United States. Los Ángeles: UCLA, The Williams Institute, noviembre.
Bailey, J.M., Gaulin, S., Agyei, Y. y Gladue, B.A. (1994). Effects of gender and sexual orientation on
evolutionarily relevant aspects of human mating psychology. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 66:1081–93.
Ballero, M.J. (2010), Informe Anual sobre derechos humanos de personas Trans, Lesbianas, Gays y
Bisexuales en el Perú 2009. Versión abril de 2010.
Balsam, K.F., Szymanski, D.M. (2005). Relationship quality and domestic violence in women’s
same-sex relationships: the role of minority stress. Psychology of Women Quarterly,
29:258–69.
Beals, K.P., Impett, E.A. y Peplau, L.A. (2002). Lesbians in love: why some relationships endure
and others end. Journal of Lesbian Studies, 6:53–63.
Beals, K.P. y Peplau, L.A. (2005). Identity support, identity devaluation, and well-being among
lesbians. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 29:140–48.
Berghe, W. V., Dewaele, A., Cox, N. and Vincke, J. (2010), Minority-Specific Determinants of
Mental Well-Being Among Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Youth. Journal of Applied Social
Psychology, 40, 153–166. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2009.00567.x
Bermúdez, V, (2003), La orientación sexual: aproximaciones desde los derechos humanos. En:
GALF, La libre orientación sexual, un derecho de las mujeres. Lima: GALF. pp 34-35.
Black, D., Gates, G., Sanders, S. y Taylor, L. (2000). Demographics of the gay and lesbian
population in the United States. Demography 37:139–54
Blumstein, P. y Schwartz, P. (1983). American Couples. New York: Morrow. 656 pp.
Bos, H. M. W., y Gartrell, N. (2010). Adolescents of the U.S. National Longitudinal Lesbian Family
Study: The impact of having a known or an unknown donor on the stability of
psychological adjustment. Human Reproduction, 26, 630-37.
Bos, H., Golberg, N., van Gelderen, L y Gartrell, N. (2012). Adolescents of the U.S. National
Longitudinal Lesbian Family Study: Male role models, gender role traits, and psychological
adjustment. Gender and Society, en línea, junio, doi 10.1177/089124321244565
http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Bos-Goldberg-VanGelderen-
Gartell-Gender-Society-June-2012.pd
Bos, H. M. W., y Van Balen, F. (2008). Children in planned lesbian families: Stigmatisation,
psychological adjustment and protective factors. Culture, Health, & Sexualities, 10. 221-36.
Bos, H. M. W., y Van Balen, F. (2010). Children of the new reproductive technologies: Social and
genetic parenthood. Patient Education and Counseling, 81, 429-35.
Bos, H. M. W., Van Balen, F. y Van den Boom, D. (2007). Child adjustment and parenting in
planned lesbian-parent families. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 77, 38-48.
Bracamonte, J. y Álvarez, R. (2006). Informe anual 2005. Situación de los Derechos Humanos de
Lesbianas, Trans, Gays y Bisexuales en el Perú. Lima: Movimiento Homosexual de Lima
(MHOL).
Buijs,L., Hekma, G. y Duyvendak, J.W. (2011), 'As long as they keep away from me': The paradox of
antigay violence in a gay-friendly country, Sexualities, 14(6). 632-652. DOI:
10.1177/1363460711422304 http://sex.sagepub.com/content/14/6/632 Recuperado abril
26 de 2012.
Bryant, A.S. y Demian, S. (1994). Relationship characteristics of American gay and lesbian
couples: findings from a national survey. En: L.A. Kurdek (ed.), Social Services for Gay and
Lesbian Couples, , pp. 101–17. New York: Haworth
Cabral, M. (2006), En estado de excepción: Intersexualidad e intervenciones sociomédicas. En:
Caceres et al, op cit, 69:90.
Cáceres, C. (2000). La (re)configuración del universo sexual. Cultura(s) sexual(es) y salud sexual
entre los jóvenes de Lima a la vuelta del milenio. Lima: UPCH/REDESS-Jóvenes.
Cáceres, C., Careaga, G., Frasca, T. y Pecheny, M. (2007). Sexualidad, estigma y derechos
humanos. Desafíos para el acceso a la salud en América Latina. Lima: UPCH.
Cáceres, C., Cueto ,M. y Palomino, N. (2007). Sexual and reproductive Rights Policies in Peru.
Unveiling false paradoxes. . En: R. Parker, R. Petchesky, & R. Sember (Eds).Sex Politics
Reports from the Front Lines (pp. 127-166). Rio de Janeiro: Sexuality Policy Watch.
Cáceres, C., Mogollón, E., Pérez Luna, G. y Olivos, F. (2011). Sexualidad, ciudadanía y derechos
humanos en América Latina: un quinquenio de aportes regionales a la reflexión. Lima:
IESSDEH y UPCH:
Cáceres, C., Pecheny, M., Frasca, T. y Raupp, R. (2008). Review of Legal Frameworks and the
Situation of Human Rights related to sexual diversity in Low and Middle Income Countries.
Nueva York: UNAIDS.
Caldwell, M.A. y Peplau, L.A. (1984). The balance of power in lesbian relationships. Sex Roles
10:587–600.
Cárdenas, M. y Barrientos, J. (2008), Actitudes explícitas e implícitas hacia los hombres
homosexuales en una muestra de estudiantes universitarios en Chile. Psykhe, 17(2), 17-
25.
Carrington, C. (1999). No Place Like Home: Relationships and Family Life Among Lesbians and Gay
Men. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 273 pp.
Cava, F. (2004). Identidad, cultura y sociedad. Un grito desde el silencio. Lima: Proyecto Arius
S.R.L.
Chan, R.W., Brooks, R.C., Raboy, B. y Patterson, C.J. (1998). Division of labor among lesbian and
heterosexual parents: associations with children’s adjustment. Journal of Family
Psychology, 12:402–19.
Ciano-Boyce, C. y Shelley-Sireci, L. (2002). Who is mommy tonight? Lesbian parenting issues.
Journal of Homosexuality, 43:1–13.
Coelho, T. (2011), Hearts, groins and the intricacies of gay male open relationships: Sexual desire
and liberation revisited, Sexualities, 14(6), 653:668. DOI: 10.1177/1363460711422306
http://sex.sagepub.com/content/14/6/653 Recuperado el 26 de abril de 2012.
Correa, S. y Muntarbhorn, V. (2007). Principios de Yogyakarta. Principios sobre la aplicación de la
legislación internacional de derechos humanos en relación con la orientación sexual y la
identidad de género. Elaborados por la Comisión Internacional de Juristas y el Servicio
Internacional para los Derechos Humanos, Yogyakarta, Indonesia, 6-9 de noviembre de
2006.
Correa, S., Petchesky, R. y Parker, R. (2008). Sexuality, health and human rights. Nueva York:
Routledge.
Cosme, C., M. Jaime, A. Merino y J.L. Rosales (2007) La imagen in/decente. Diversidad sexual,
prejuicio y discriminación en la prensa escrita peruana. Lima: Instituto de Estudios
Peruanos.
Costa, M.P. (2011), Homoparentalidades: nuevos perfiles parentales, nuevos perfiles psíquicos. El
Grito, 3, 12-18.
Crawford, I. y Solliday, E. (1996). The attitudes of undergraduate college students toward gay
parenting. Journal of Homosexuality, 30:63–77.
Cuentas, P., Cosamalón, T. y Montes, V. (2009), Prejuicio hacia homosexuales por parte de
hombres y mujeres heterosexuales. Investigación inédita, curso Sexualidad Humana
Psicología PUCP, Lima, diciembre.
Dador, M. J. (2007). La no discriminación por orientación sexual: Un deber del profesorado. Lima:
Documento del Mov. Manuela Ramos.
Dewaele, A., Cox, N., Van den Berghe, W. and Vincke, J. (2011), Families of Choice? Exploring the
Supportive Networks of Lesbians, Gay Men, and Bisexuals. Journal of Applied Social
Psychology, 41: 312–331.
Diamond, L.M. y Dube, E.M. (2002). Friendship and attachment among heterosexual and sexual
minority youths. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 31:155–66.
Duffy, S.M. y Rusbult, C.E. (1986). Satisfaction and commitment in homosexual and heterosexual
relationships. Journal of Homosexuality, 12:1–24.
Dunne, G.A. (1997). Lesbian Lifestyles: Women’s Work and the Politics of Sexuality. Toronto:
University of Toronto Press. 258 pp.
Eldridge, N.S. y Gilbert, L.A. (1990). Correlates of relationship satisfaction in lesbian couples.
Psychology of Women Quarterly, 14:43–62.
Elizur, Y. y Mintzer, A. (2003). Gay males intimate relationship quality: the roles of attachment
security, gay identity, social support, and income. Personal Relations, 10:411–36.
Falbo, T., y Peplau, L.A. (1980). Power strategies in intimate relationships. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 38:618–28.
Fassinger, R.E. y Morrow, S.L. (1995). Overcome: repositioning lesbian sexualities. En: L. Diamant
y R.D. Mc Anulty, The Psychology of Sexual Orientation, Behavior, and Identity: A
Handbook (pp. 197–219). London: Greenwood.
Fernández, M (2007), Acerca de la problemática de las uniones homosexuales: matrimonio y
adopción Themis, Revista de Derecho, Nº 53, PUCP.
Fingerhut, A. W. (2011), Straight Allies: What Predicts Heterosexuals' Alliance With the LGBT
Community? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 41: 2230–2248. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-
1816.2011.00807.x
Flaks, D.K., Ficher, I., Masterpasqua, F. y Joseph, G. (1995). Lesbians choosing motherhood: a
comparative study of lesbian and heterosexual parents and their children. Developmental
Psychology, 31:105–14.
Flores Galindo, M.; Graña, D. Laos, K. y Martínez, C. (2007). Soporte social en un grupo de
transexuales de Lima Metropolitana, Investigación inédita, curso Psicología de la Salud,
Psicología, PUCP. Julio.
Fulcher, M., Sutfin, E.L., Chan, R.W., Scheib, J.E. y Patterson, C.J. (2006). Lesbian mothers and
their children. In Sexual Orientation and Mental Health: Examining Identity and
Development in Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual People, ed. AM Omoto, HS Kurtzman, pp. 281–
99.Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Furuzawa, E.; Gallegos, A.; Kantor, D.; Núñez del Prado, P. y Watson, V. (2008), Satisfacción en
relaciones de pareja homosexuales y heterosexuales. Investigación inédita, curso
Sexualidad Humana Psicología PUCP, Lima, julio.
Gartrell, N., Peyser, H y Bos, H.M.W. (2011). Planned lesbian families: A review of the U.S. National
Longitudinal Lesbian Family Study. En: D. M. Brodzinsky y A. Pertman (eds.). Adoption by
lesbian and gay men. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Gates, G. y Ost, J. (2004). The Gay and Lesbian Atlas. Washington, DC: Urban Inst. Press. 232 pp.
Gen. Account. Off. (2004). Defense of Marriage Act: update to prior report. Document GAO-04-
353R.Washington, DC: GAO
Generelo, J., Pichardo, J.I. y Galofré, G. (2006), Adolescencia y sexualidades minoritarias. Voces
desde la exclusión, Madrid: Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, COGAM y FELT, 2006).
Giberti, E. (2004), Adopción: La Caída del Prejuicio. Buenos Aires: Editorial del Puerto/CHA.
Girard, F. (2008). Negotiating sexual rights and sexual orientation at the UN. En: R. Parker, R.
Petchesky, & R. Sember, Sex Politics (pp. 311-358). Brasil: Sexuality Policy Watch.
Instituto de Opinión Pública-PUCP (2009). Encuesta Lima Metropolitana Febrero 2009,
Relaciones y percepciones de género: Optimismo en época de cambio. Lima, marzo de
2009. www.pucp.org
Goldberg, A. 2010. Lesbian and gay parents and their children: Research on the family life cycle.
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Goldberg, A., and K. R. Allen. 2007. Lesbian mothers’ ideas and intentions about male involvement
across the transition to parenthood. Journal of Marriage and Family, 69:352-65.
Goldberg, A.E. y Sayer, A. (2006). Lesbian couples’ relationship quality across the transition to
parenthood. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 68:87–100.
Golombok, S. y Badger, S. (2010). Children raised in mother-headed families from infancy: A
follow-up of children of lesbian and heterosexual mothers, at early adulthood. Human
Reproduction, 25:150-57.
Golombok, S., Perry, B., Burston, A., Murray, C., Mooney-Somers, J., Stevens, M. y Golding, J.
(2003). Children with lesbian parents: A community study. Developmental Psychology
39:20-33.
Gottman, J.M., Levenson, R.W., Swanson, C., Swanson, K, Tyson, R y Yoshimoto, D. (2003).
Observing gay, lesbian and heterosexual couples’ relationships: mathematical modeling
of conflict interaction. Journal of Homosexuality, 45:65–91.
González, A., Grover, K. W., Miller, C. T. y Solomon, S. E. (2011), A Preliminary Examination of
Sexual Orientation as a Social Vulnerability for Experiencing HIV-/AIDS-Related Stigma.
Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 41. 1258–1274. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-
1816.2011.00756.x
Gutiérrez, P.; Bardales, G.; Espinoza, A.; Ramírez, C.; Pérez, R.; Romañska, N.; Guevara, L. y
Salinas, I. (2009), Apertura a la adopción en parejas homosexuales. Investigación inédita,
curso Sexualidad Humana Psicología PUCP, Lima, diciembre.
Hall, R. (1928). The Well of Loneliness. New York: Bard Avon. 506 pp.
Hand, S.I. (1991). The lesbian parenting couple. PhD thesis. San Francisco: Prof. School Psychol.
Harkless, L.E. y Fowers, B.J. (2005). Similarities and differences in relational boundaries among
heterosexuals, gay men, and lesbians. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 29:167–76.
Harry, J. (1984). Gay Couples. New York: Praeger. 151 pp.
Harry, J. y DeVall, W.B. (1978). The Social Organization of Gay Males. New York: Praeger. 223 pp.
Heaphy, Brian (2011), Gay identities and the culture of class. Sexualities, 14(1), 42-62. Doi
10.1177/1363460710390563 http://sex.sagepub.com/content/14/1/42 Recuperado abril
26 de 2012
Herdt, G. y Kertzner, R. (2006). I do, but I can’t: the impact of marriage denial on the mental
health and sexual citizenship of lesbians and gay men in the United States. Journal of
Sexuality Research and Social Policy, 3(1):33–49, online ISSN 1553-6610
Herek ,G.M. (2006). Legal recognition of same-sex relationships in the United States: a social
science perspective. American Psychologist, 61: en prensa.
Hickson, F.C., Davies, P.M., Hunt, A.J., Weatherburn, P., McManus, T.J. y Coxon, A.P. (1992).
Maintenance of open gay relationships: some strategies for protection against HIV. AIDS
Care 4:409–19.
Howard, J.A., Blumstein, P. y Schwartz, P. (1986). Sex, power, and influence tactics in intimate
relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51:102–9.
Ibáñez, C.; Micalay, T. y Fernández, R. (2009), Prejuicio hacia la homosexualidad según el tipo de
colegio de procedencia. Investigación inédita, curso Sexualidad Humana Psicología PUCP,
Lima, diciembre.
Ilkkaracan, P. & Jolly, S. (2007). Género y sexualidad: Informe general. Londres: Bridge.
http://www.bridge.ids.ac.uk/vfile/upload/4/document/1105/Sexuality_OR_Spanish.pdf
IPPF (2008). Derechos sexuales: una declaración de IPPF. Londres: IPPF. www.ippf.org
Parker, R., Petchkesky R., & Sember, R. (2007). Sex politics: Reports from the frontlines. Rio de
Janeiro: Sexuality Policy Watch.
Jackson, S. (2011), Heterosexual hierarchies: a commentary on class and sexuality. Sexualities,
14(1), 12-20. En línea DOI: 10.1177/1363460710390572
http://sex.sagepub.com/content/14/1/12 Recuperado abril 26 de 2012
Johnson, M.P. (2006). Violence and abuse in personal relationships: conflict, terror, and
resistance in intimate partnerships. En: A. Vangelisti y D. Perlman (ed.), The Cambridge
Handbook of Personal Relationships (pp. 557–78). New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
Johnson, S. (1990). Staying Power: Long-Term Lesbian Couples. Tallahassee, FL: Naiad Press. 333
pp.
Jones, D.A. (1996). Discrimination against same-sex couples in hotel reservation policies. Journal
of Homosexuality, 31:153–59.
Kaiser Family Found (2001). Inside-Out: A Report on the Experiences of Lesbians, Gays and
Bisexuals in America and the Public’s View on Issues and Policies Related to Sexual
Orientation. Menlo Park, California.
Karney, B.R. y Bradbury ,T.N. (2005). Contextual influences on marriage: implications for policy
and intervention. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14:171–74.
King, M. y Bartlett, A. (2006). What same-sex civil partnerships may mean for health. Journal of
Epidemiology and Community Health 60:188–91.
Klinkenberg, D. y Rose, S. (1994). Dating scripts of gay men and lesbians. Journal of
Homosexuality, 26:23–35.
Kurdek, L.A. (1988). Perceived social support in gays and lesbians in cohabitating relationships.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54:504–9.
Kurdek, L.A. (1991). Correlates of relationship satisfaction in cohabiting gay and lesbian couples.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61:910–22.
Kurdek, L.A. (1993). The allocation of household labor in gay, lesbian, and heterosexual married
couples. Journal of Social Issues, 49(3):127–39.
Kurdek, L.A. (1994). The nature and correlates of relationship quality in gay, lesbian, and
heterosexual cohabiting couples. Lesbian and Gay Psychology 1, B Greene, GM
Kurdek, L.A. (1994). Areas of conflict for gay, lesbian, and heterosexual couples: What couples
argue about influences relationship satisfaction. J. Marr. Fam. 56:923–34.
Kurdek, L.A. (1995). Developmental changes in relationship quality in gay and lesbian cohabiting
couples. Developmental Psychology, 31:86–94.
Kurdek, L.A. (1995). Lesbian and gay couples. En: A.R. D’Augell y C.J. Patterson (ed.), Lesbian, Gay,
and Bisexual Identities over the Lifespan (pp. 243–61). New York: Oxford.
Kurdek, L.A. (2000). Attractions and constraints as determinants of relationship commitment:
longitudinal evidence from gay, lesbian, and heterosexual couples. Personal Relations,
7:245–62.
Kurdek, L.A. (2002). On being insecure about the assessment of attachment styles. Journal of
Social and Personality Relations, 19:811–34.
Kurdek, L.A. (2004). Are gay and lesbian cohabiting couples really different from heterosexual
married couples? Journal of Marriage and the Family, 66:880–900.
Kurdek, L.A. (2005). What do we know about gay and lesbian couples? Current Directions in
Psychological Science, 14:251–54.
Kurdek, L.A. (2006). Differences between partners from heterosexual, gay, and lesbian cohabiting
couples. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 68:509–28.
Kurdek, L.A. (1998). Relationship outcomes and their predictors: longitudinal evidence from
heterosexual married, gay cohabiting, and lesbian cohabiting couples. Journal of
Marriage and the Family, 60:553–68.
Kurdek, L.A. y Schmitt, J.P. (1986). Relationship quality of partners in heterosexual married,
heterosexual cohabiting, and gay and lesbian relationships. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 51:711–20.
Kurdek LA, Schmitt JP. (1987). Partner homogamy in married, heterosexual cohabitating, gay, and
lesbian couples. Journal of Sex Research, 23(2):212–32.
Lannutti PJ. (2005). For better or worse: exploring the meanings of same-sex marriage within the
lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered community. Journal of Social and Personality.
Relations, 22:5–18.
Lewis GB. (2006). Thinking about gay marriage: putting the moral condemnation back into
morality policy. Presented at Williams Inst. 5th Annu. Update Sex. Orientation Law Public
Policy, Univ. Calif., Los Angeles
Lewis, R.J., Derlega, V.J., Berndt, A., Morris, L.M. y Rose, S. (2001). An empirical analysis of
stressors for gay men and lesbians. Journal of Homosexua;ity, 42(1):63–88.
Luu, T. D. y Bartsch, R. A. (2011), Relationship Between Acculturation and Attitudes Toward Gay
Men and Lesbians in the Vietnamese American Community. Journal of Applied Social
Psychology, 41: 2621–2633. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2011.00840.x
MacCallum, F., y Golombok, S. (2004). Children raised in fatherless families from infancy: A follow-
up of children of lesbian and single heterosexual mothers at early adolescence. Journal of
Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 45, 1407-19.
Mahaffey, A. L., Bryan, A. D., Ito, T. A. y Hutchison, K. E. (2011), In Search of the Defensive Function
of Sexual Prejudice: Exploring Antigay Bias Through Shorter and Longer Lead Startle Eye
Blink. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 41: 27–44.
Mays, V.M. y Cochran, S.D. (2001). Mental health correlates of perceived discrimination among
lesbian, gay, and bisexual adults in the United States. American Journal of Public Health,
91:1869–76.
Mays, V.M., Cochran, S.D. y Rhue S. (1993). The impact of perceived discrimination on the
intimate relationships of black lesbians. Journal of Homosexuality, 25:1–14.
McCormack, M. y Anderson, E. (2010). The re-production of homosexually-themed discourse in
educationally-based organised sport. Culture, Health & Sexuality: An International Journal
for Research, Intervention and Care, 12(8), 913-927
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13691058.2010.511271.
McWhirter, D.P. y Mattison, A.M. (1984). The Male Couple: How Relationships Develop.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. 341 pp.
Melgar, J.; Yugar, M.; Zapata, M.; Watson, V; Pérez, B. y Pizarro, D. (2009), Percepción y aceptación
de conductas afectivas en parejas homosexuales y heterosexuales. Investigación inédita,
curso Psicología del Género, Psicología PUCP, Lima, julio.
Metz, M.E., Rosser, B.R.S. y Strapko, N. (1994). Differences in conflict-resolution styles among
heterosexual, gay, and lesbian couples. Journal of Sex Research, 31:1–16.
Meyer, W., Costenbader, E.C., Zule, W.A., Otiashvili, D. y Kirtadze, I. (2010). ‘We are ordinary
men’: MSM identity categories in Tbilisi, Georgia. Culture, Health & Sexuality: An
International Journal for Research, Intervention and Care, 12(8), 955-971
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13691058.2010.516370.
Morrison, M. A. y Morrison, T. G. (2011), Sexual Orientation Bias Toward Gay Men and Lesbian
Women: Modern Homonegative Attitudes and Their Association With Discriminatory
Behavioral Intentions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 41: 2573–2599.
doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2011.00838.x
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1559-816.2011.00838.x/abstract
Nuffield Council of Bioethics (2002). Review of the Evidence: Sexual Orientation. Genetics and
human behaviour: The ethical context . Londres: Nuffield Council of Bioethics.
Orne, J. (2011), 'You will always have to ''out'' yourself': Reconsidering coming out through
strategic outness, Sexualities, 14(6), 681-703. DOI: 10.1177/1363460711420462
http://sex.sagepub.com/content/14/6/681 Recuperado de sex.sagepub.com en HINARI el
26 de abril de 2012.
Palacios, A.; Tarma, F.; Chonn, V. y Villanueva, L. (2009), Percepción de identidades de orientación
sexual. Investigación inédita, curso Psicología del Género, Psicología PUCP, Lima,
diciembre.
Patterson, C.J. (2003). Children of lesbian and gay parents. En: L.D. Garnets y D.C. Kimmel (eds.),
Psychological Perspectives on Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Experiences (pp. 497–548). New
York: Columbia University Press. 815 pp.
Patterson, C.J. (2004). What difference does a civil union make? Changing public policies and the
experiences of same-sex couples: comment on Solomon, Rothblum, and Balsam 2004. J.
Fam. Psychol. 18:287–89
Patterson, C.J. (2004). Gay fathers. In The Role of the Father in Child Development, ed. ME Lamb,
pp. 397–416. New York: Wiley. 4ta edición.
Patterson, C.J., Sutfin, E.L. y Fulcher, M. (2004). Division of labor among lesbian and heterosexual
parenting couples: correlates of specialized versus shared patterns. Journal of Adult
Development, 11:179–89.
Peplau, L.A. (1991). Lesbian and gay relationships. En: J.C. Gonsiorek y J.D. Weinrich (eds.),
Homosexuality: Research Findings for Public Policy (pp. 177–96). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Peplau, L.A. (2001). Rethinking women’s sexual orientation: an interdisciplinary, relationship
focused approach. Personal Relations, 8:1–19.
Peplau, L.A. y Cochran, S.D. (1980). Sex differences in values concerning love relationships.
Presentado en el Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Association, Montreal.
Peplau, L.A. y Cochran, S.D. (1981). Value orientations in the intimate relationships of gay men.
Journal of Homosexuality, 6:1–19.
Peplau, L.A., Cochran, S.D. y Mays, V.M. (1997). A national survey of the intimate relationships of
African American lesbians and gay men: a look at commitment, satisfaction, sexual
behavior, and HIV disease. En: B. Greene (ed.), Ethnic and Cultural Diversity among
Lesbians and Gay Men (pp. 11–38). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.
Peplau, L.A., Cochran, S.D., Rook, K. y Padesky, C. (1978).Women in love: attachment and
autonomy in lesbian relationships. Journal of Social Issues, 34(3):7–27.
Peplau, L.A., Fingerhut, A.W. y Beals, K.P. (2004). Sexuality in the relationships of lesbians and gay
men. En: J. Harvey, A. Wenzel y S. Sprecher (eds.), Handbook of Sexuality in Close
Relationships (pp. 350–69). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum
Peplau, L.A. y Garnets, L.D. (eds.) (2000). Women’s sexualities: new perspectives on sexual
orientation and gender. Journal of Social Issues, 56(2):181–364.
Peplau, L.A., Padesky, C. y Hamilton, M. (1982). Satisfaction in lesbian relationships. Journal of
Homosexuality, 8:23–35.
Peplau, L.A. y Spalding, L.R. (2000). The close relationships of lesbians, gay men and bisexuals. En:
C. Hendrick y S.S. Hendrick, Close Relationships: A Sourcebook (pp. 111–24). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Peplau, L.A., Spalding, L.R., Conley, T.D. y Veniegas, R.C. (1999). The development of sexual
orientation in women. Annual Review of Sexual Research, 10:70–99.
Petchkesky, R. (2007). Introduction. En: Parker, Petchkesky & Sember, Sex politics: Reports from
the frontlines (pp. 13-24). Rio de Janeiro: Sexuality Policy Watch.
Pickard, J., y Strough, J. (2003). The effects of same-sex and other-sex contexts on masculinity and
femininity. Sex Roles, 48, 421-32.
Potoczniak, M.J., Mourot, J.E., Crosbie-Burnett, M. y Potoczniak, D.J. (2003). Legal and
psychological perspectives on same-sex domestic violence: a multisystemic approach.
Journal of Family Psychology, 17:252–59.
Prati, G., Pietrantoni, L. y D'AUGELLI, A. R. (2011), Aspects of Homophobia in Italian High Schools:
Students' Attitudes and Perceptions of School Climate. Journal of Applied Social
Psychology, 41: 2600–2620. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2011.00842.x
PROMSEX (2008), Concertando Diversidades. Guía de apoyo para facilitadores y facilitadoras.
Talleres de fortalecimiento de las capacidades de participación social en grupos
organizados de lesbianas, gays, travestis, transexuales y bisexuales. Lima: PROMSEX.
Ragúz, M. (2009), Representations of Sexuality, Gender, Sexual Diversity and Stigma in Children,
Adolescents and Young Adults in Poor Rural and Urban Settings in the Peruvian Amazon
and Lima: A Qualitative In-Depth Study. Conferencia en la IASSCS Conference “Contested
Innocence – Sexual Agency in Public and Private Space”, Hanoi, Vietnam, Abril 16.
Raguz, M. (2011), “Desgenerando”. El Grito, 3, 4-10.
Red Peruana TLGB y PROMSEX (2012), El Amor No Discrimina 2012. Lima: Promsex.
Red Peruana TLGB y PROMSEX (2012), Informe anual sobre derechos humanos de personas trans,
lesbianas, gays y bisexuales en el Perú 2011. Lima : PROMSEX www.promsex.org
Reilly, M.E., Lynch, J.M. (1990). Power-sharing in lesbian partnerships. Journal of Homosexuality,
19:1–30.
Renzetti, C.M. y Miley, C.H. (1996). Violence in Gay and Lesbian Domestic Partnerships. New York:
Haworth. 121 pp.
Ridge, S.R. y Feeney, J.A. (1998). Relationship history and relationship attitudes in gay males and
lesbians: attachment style and gender differences. Australian and New Zealand Journal
of Psychiatry, 32(6):848–59.
Rook, K.S. (1998). Investigating the positive and negative sides of personal relationships: through
a lens darkly? En: B.H. Spitzberg y W.R. Cupach (eds.), The Dark Side of Close
Relationships (pp. 369–93). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum
Rose, S., Zand, D. y Cini, M. (1993). Lesbian courtship scripts. En: E.D. Rothblum y K.A. Brehony
(eds.), Boston Marriages: Romantic but Asexual Relationships Among Contemporary
Lesbians ( pp. 70–85). Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press.
Rosky, C. J. (2009). Like father, like son: Homosexuality, parenthood, and the gender of
homophobia. Yale Journal of Law and Feminism, 20,256-355.
Rothblum, E.D. (2000). Sexual orientation and sex in women’s lives: conceptual and
methodological issues. Journal of Social Issues, 56(2):193–204.
Rutter, V. y Schwartz, P. (1996). Same-sex couples: courtship, commitment, context. En: A.E.
Auhagen y M. von Salisch, The Diversity of Human Relationships (pp. 197–223). New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Salazar, X. (2009), Diagnóstico de la violencia contra los y las trabajadores/as sexuales, mujeres,
transgéneros y varones y su vulnerabilidad frente a las ITS y el VIH. Lima: MINSA y
CONAMUSA.
Schreurs, K.M.G. y Buunk, B.P. (1996). Closeness, autonomy, equity and relationship satisfaction
in lesbian couples, Psychology of Women Quarterly, 20:577–92.
Siddiqi, D.M. (2011), Sexuality, rights and personhood: tensions in a transnational world. BMC
International Health and Human Rights, 11, Suplemento 3, S5.
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-698X/11/S3/S5
Smith, T. (2011). Cross-national differences in attitudes toward homosexuality. GSS Cross-
national Report, 31 . UCLA The Charles R. Williams Institute on Sexual Orientation Law,
abril. http://www3.law.ucla.edu/williamsinstitute/pdf/Smith-CrossNational-NORC-
May2011.pdf
Solomon, S.E., Rothblum, E.D. y Balsam, K.F. (2004). Pioneers in partnership: lesbian and gay
male couples in civil unions compared with those not in civil unions and heterosexual
married siblings. Journal of Family Psychology, 18:275–86.
Solomon, S.E., Rothblum, E.D. y Balsam, K.F. (2005). Money, housework, sex, and conflict: same-
sex couples in civil unions, those not in civil unions, and heterosexual married siblings.
Sex Roles 52:561–75.
Stoever, C.J. y Morera, O.F. (2007), A confirmatory factor analysis of the Attitudes Toward
Lesbians and Gay Men (ATLG) measure. Journal of Homosexuality, 52(3-4), 189-209. Doi
10.1300/J082v52n03_09 http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1300/J082v52n03_09
Swim, J.K. (2004). Day to day experiences with heterosexism: heterosexist hassles as daily
stressors. Working Paper, Department of Psychology, Penn State University.
Talley, A. E. y Bettencourt, B. A. (2011), The Moderator Roles of Coping Style and Identity
Disclosure in the Relationship Between Perceived Sexual Stigma and Psychological
Distress. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 41: 2883–2903. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-
1816.2011.00863.xhttp://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1559-
1816.2011.00863.x/abstract
Tasker, F. (2005). Lesbian mothers, gay fathers, and their children: a review. Journal of
Developmental Behavioral Pediatrics, 26(3):224–40.
Testa, R.J., Kinder, B.N. e Ironson, G. (1987). Heterosexual bias in the perception of loving
relationships of gay males and lesbians. Journal of Sex Research, 23:163–72.
Todosijevic, J., Rothblum, E.D. y Solomon, S.E. (2005). Relationship satisfaction, affectivity, and
gayspecific stressors in same-sex couples joined in civil unions. Psychology of Women
Quarterly, 29:158–66.
UNESCO Perú (2011), Módulo en temas de estigma y discriminación asociados al VIH y Sida y
diversidad sexual para jóvenes educadores de pares. Lima: UNESCO. 9789972841149.
Vincent, W., Parrott, D. J. y Peterson, J. L. (2011), Combined Effects of Masculine Gender-Role
Stress and Sexual Prejudice on Anger and Aggression Toward Gay Men. Journal of Applied
Social Psychology, 41: 1237–1257.
Wainright, J. L,. Russell, S.T y Patterson, C.J. (2004). Psychosocial adjustment, school outcomes,
and romantic relationships of adolescents with same-sex parents. Child Development, 75,
1886-98.
Ward, J. y Schneider, B. (2009). The reaches of heteronormativity: An introduction. Gender &
Society, 23, 433-39.
Weinstock, J.S. (2004). Lesbian FLEX-ibility: friend and/or family connections among lesbian ex-
lovers. Journal of Lesbian Studies, 8(3/4):193–238.

ANEXO
Report of the APA Task Force on Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation (resaltados nuestros)
Summary
The task force conducted a systematic review of the peer-reviewed journal literature on sexual orientation change
efforts (SOCE) and concluded that efforts to change sexual orientation are unlikely to be successful and involve some
risk of harm, contrary to the claims of SOCE practitioners and advocates.
Even though the research and clinical literature demonstrate that same-sex sexual and romantic attractions, feelings,
and behaviors are normal and positive variations of human sexuality, regardless of sexual orientation identity, the task
force concluded that the population that undergoes SOCE tends to have strongly conservative religious views that lead
them to seek to change their sexual orientation.
Thus, the appropriate application of affirmative therapeutic interventions for those who seek SOCE involves therapist
acceptance, support, and understanding of clients and the facilitation of clients’ active coping, social support, and
identity exploration and development, without imposing a specific sexual orientation identity outcome.
Executive Summary
In February 2007, the American Psychological Association (APA) established the Task Force on Appropriate Therapeutic
Responses to Sexual Orientation with a charge that included three major tasks:
1. Review and update the Resolution on Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation (APA, 1998).
2. Generate a report that includes discussion of the following:
 The appropriate application of affirmative therapeutic interventions for children and adolescents who present
a desire to change either their sexual orientation or their behavioral expression of their sexual orientation, or
both, or whose guardian expresses a desire for the minor to change.
 The appropriate application of affirmative therapeutic interventions for adults who present a desire to change
their sexual orientation or their behavioral expression of their sexual orientation, or both.
 The presence of adolescent inpatient facilities that offer coercive treatment designed to change sexual
orientation or the behavioral expression of sexual orientation.
 Education, training, and research issues as they pertain to such therapeutic interventions.
 Recommendations regarding treatment protocols that promote stereotyped gender-normative behavior to
mitigate behaviors that are perceived to be indicators that a child will develop a homosexual orientation in
adolescence and adulthood.
3. Inform APA’s response to groups that promote treatments to change sexual orientation or its behavioral expression
and support public policy that furthers affirmative therapeutic interventions.
As part of the fulfillment of its charge, the task force undertook an extensive review of the recent literature on
psychotherapy and the psychology of sexual orientation. There is a growing body of evidence concluding that sexual
stigma, manifested as prejudice and discrimination directed at non-heterosexual sexual orientations and identities, is a
major source of stress for sexual minorities. This stress, known as minority stress, is a factor in mental health disparities
found in some sexual minorities. The minority stress model also provides a framework for considering psychotherapy
with sexual minorities, including understanding stress, distress, coping, resilience, and recovery. For instance, the
affirmative approach to psychotherapy grew out of an awareness that sexual minorities benefit when the sexual stigma
they experience is addressed in psychotherapy with interventions that reduce and counter internalized stigma and
increase active coping.
The task force, in recognition of human diversity, conceptualized affirmative interventions within the domain of cultural
competence, consistent with general multicultural approaches that acknowledge the importance of age, gender, gender
identity, race, ethnicity, culture, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, disability, language, and socioeconomic
status. We see this multiculturally competent and affirmative approach as grounded in an acceptance of the following
scientific facts:
 Same-sex sexual attractions, behavior, and orientations per se are normal and positive variants of human
sexuality—in other words, they do not indicate either mental or developmental disorders.
 Homosexuality and bisexuality are stigmatized, and this stigma can have a variety of negative consequences
(e.g., minority stress) throughout the life span.
 Same-sex sexual attractions and behavior occur in the context of a variety of sexual orientations and sexual
orientation identities, and for some, sexual orientation identity (i.e., individual or group membership and
affiliation, self-labeling) is fluid or has an indefinite outcome.
 Gay men, lesbians, and bisexual individuals form stable, committed relationships and families that are
equivalent to heterosexual relationships and families in essential respects.
 Some individuals choose to live their lives in accordance with personal or religious values (e.g., telic
congruence).
Note. We use the term sexual minority (cf. Blumenfeld, 1992; McCarn & Fassinger, 1996; Ullerstam, 1966) to designate
the entire group of individuals who experience significant erotic and romantic attractions to adult members of their own
sex, including those who experience attractions to members of both their own and the other sex. This term is used
because we recognize that not all sexual minority individuals adopt a lesbian, gay, or bisexual identity.
http://www.apa.org/pi/lgbt/resources/sexual-orientation.aspx
marzo 21 de 2012

Resolution on Appropriate Affirmative Responses to Sexual Orientation Distress and Change Efforts
Research Summary
The longstanding consensus of the behavioral and social sciences and the health and mental health professions is that
homosexuality per se is a normal and positive variation of human sexual orientation (Bell, Weinberg & Hammersmith,
1981; Bullough, 1976; Ford & Beach 1951 ; Kinsey, Pomeroy, & Martin, 1948; Kinsey, Pomeroy, Martin, & Gebhard,
1953 ). Homosexuality per se is not a mental disorder (APA, 1975). Since 1974, the American Psychological Association
(APA) has opposed stigma, prejudice, discrimination, and violence on the basis of sexual orientation and has taken a
leadership role in supporting the equal rights of lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals (APA, 2005).
APA is concerned about ongoing efforts to mischaracterize homosexuality and promote the notion that sexual
orientation can be changed and about the resurgence of sexual orientation change efforts (SOCE)1. SOCE has been
controversial due to tensions between the values held by some faith-based organizations, on the one hand, and those
held by lesbian, gay and bisexual rights organizations and professional and scientific organizations, on the other
(Drescher, 2003; Drescher & Zucker, 2006). Some individuals and groups have promoted the idea of homosexuality as
symptomatic of developmental defects or spiritual and moral failings and have argued that SOCE, including
psychotherapy and religious efforts, could alter homosexual feelings and behaviors (Drescher & Zucker, 2006; Morrow
& Beckstead, 2004). Many of these individuals and groups appeared to be embedded within the larger context of
conservative religious political movements that have supported the stigmatization of homosexuality on political or
religious grounds (Drescher, 2003; Southern Poverty Law Center, 2005; Drescher & Zucker, 2006). Psychology, as a
science, and various faith traditions, as theological systems, can acknowledge and respect their profoundly different
methodological and philosophical viewpoints. The APA concludes that psychology must rely on proven methods of
scientific inquiry based on empirical data, on which hypotheses and propositions are confirmed or disconfirmed, as the
basis to explore and understand human behavior (APA, 2008a; 2008b).
In response to these concerns, APA appointed the Task Force on Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual
Orientation to review the available research on SOCE and to provide recommendations to the Association. The Task
Force reached the following findings.
Recent studies of participants in SOCE identify a population of individuals who experience serious distress related to
same sex sexual attractions. Most of these participants are Caucasian males who report that their religion is extremely
important to them ( Beckstead & Morrow, 2004; Nicolosi, Byrd, & Potts, 2000; Schaeffer, Hyde, Kroencke, McCormick,
& Nottebaum, 2000; Shidlo & Schroeder, 2002, Spitzer, 2003). These individuals report having pursued a variety of
religious and secular efforts intended to help them to change their sexual orientation. To date, the research has not
fully addressed age, gender, gender identity, race, ethnicity, culture, national origin, disability, language, and
socioeconomic status in the population of distressed individuals.
There are no studies of adequate scientific rigor to conclude whether or not recent SOCE do or do not work to change a
person’s sexual orientation. Scientifically rigorous older work in this area (e.g., Birk, Huddleston, Miller, & Cohler, 1971;
James, 1978; McConaghy, 1969, 1976; McConaghy, Proctor, & Barr, 1972; Tanner, 1974, 1975) found that s exual
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. Some individuals appeared to learn how to ignore or limit their attractions.
However, this was much less likely to be true for people whose sexual attractions were initially limited to people of the
same sex.
Although sound data on the safety of SOCE are extremely limited, some individuals reported being harmed by SOCE.
Distress and depression were exacerbated. Belief in the hope of sexual orientation change followed by the failure of the
treatment was identified as a significant cause of distress and negative self-image (Beckstead & Morrow, 2004; Shidlo &
Schroeder, 2002).
Although there is insufficient evidence to support the use of psychological interventions to change sexual orientation,
some individuals modified their sexual orientation identity (i.e., group membership and affiliation), behavior, and values
(Nicolosi, Byrd, & Potts, 2000). They did so in a variety of ways and with varied and unpredictable outcomes, some of
which were temporary (Beckstead & Morrow, 2004; Shidlo & Schroeder, 2002). Based on the available data, additional
claims about the meaning of those outcomes are scientifically unsupported.
On the basis of the Task Force’s findings, the APA encourages mental health professionals to provide assistance to those
who seek sexual orientation change by utilizing affirmative multiculturally competent (Bartoli & Gillem, 2008; Brown,
2006) and client-centered approaches (e.g., Beckstead & Israel, 2007; Glassgold, 2008; Haldeman, 2004; Lasser &
Gottlieb, 2004) that recognize the negative impact of social stigma on sexual minorities 2 (Herek, 2009; Herek &
Garnets, 2007) and balance ethical principles of beneficence and nonmaleficence, justice, and respect for people’s
rights and dignity (APA, 1998, 2002; Davison, 1976; Haldeman, 2002; Schneider, Brown, & Glassgold, 2002).
Resolution
Whereas the American Psychological Association expressly opposes prejudice (defined broadly) and discrimination
based on age, gender, gender identity, race, ethnicity, culture, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, disability,
language, or socioeconomic status (American Psychological Association, 1998, 2000, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2008b);
Whereas the American Psychological Association takes a leadership role in opposing prejudice and discrimination (APA,
2008b, 2008c), including prejudice based on or derived from religion or spirituality, and encourages commensurate
consideration of religion and spirituality as diversity variables (APA, 2008b);
Whereas psychologists respect human diversity including age, gender, gender identity, race, ethnicity, culture, national
origin, religion, sexual orientation, disability, language, and socioeconomic status (APA, 2002) and psychologists strive
to prevent bias from their own spiritual, religious, or non-religious beliefs from taking precedence over professional
practice and standards or scientific findings in their work as psychologists (APA, 2008b);
Whereas psychologists are encouraged to recognize that it is outside the role and expertise of psychologists, as
psychologists, to adjudicate religious or spiritual tenets, while also recognizing that psychologists can appropriately
speak to the psychological implications of religious/spiritual beliefs or practices when relevant psychological findings
about those implications exist (APA, 2008b);
Whereas those operating from religious/spiritual traditions are encouraged to recognize that it is outside their role and
expertise to adjudicate empirical scientific issues in psychology, while also recognizing they can appropriately speak to
theological implications of psychological science (APA, 2008b);
Whereas the American Psychological Association encourages collaborative activities in pursuit of shared prosocial goals
between psychologists and religious communities when such collaboration can be done in a mutually respectful manner
that is consistent with psychologists’ professional and scientific roles (APA, 2008b);
Whereas societal ignorance and prejudice about a same-sex sexual orientation places some sexual minorities 2 at risk
for seeking sexual orientation change due to personal, family, or religious conflicts, or lack of information (Beckstead &
Morrow, 2004; Haldeman, 1994; Ponticelli, 1999; Shidlo & Schroeder, 2002; Wolkomir, 2001);
Whereas some mental health professionals advocate treatments based on the premise that homosexuality is a mental
disorder (e.g., Nicolosi, 1991; Socarides, 1968);
Whereas sexual minority children and youth are especially vulnerable populations with unique developmental tasks
(Perrin, 2002; Ryan & Futterman, 1997), who lack adequate legal protection from involuntary or coercive treatment
(Arriola, 1998; Burack & Josephson, 2005; Molnar, 1997) and whose parents and guardians need accurate information
to make informed decisions regarding their development and well-being (Cianciotto & Cahill, 2006; Ryan & Futterman,
1997); and
Whereas research has shown that family rejection is a predictor of negative outcomes (Remafedi, Farrow, & Deisher,
1991; Ryan, Huebner, Diaz, & Sanchez, 2009; Savin-Williams, 1994; Wilber, Ryan, & Marksamer, 2006) and that parental
acceptance and school support are protective factors (D’Augelli, 2003; D’Augelli, Hershberger & Pilkington, 1998;
Goodenow, Szalacha, & Westheimer, 2006; Savin-Williams, 1989) for sexual minority youth;
Therefore be it resolved that the American Psychological Association affirms that same-sex sexual and romantic
attractions, feelings, and behaviors are normal and positive variations of human sexuality regardless of sexual
orientation identity;
Be it further resolved that the American Psychological Association reaffirms its position that homosexuality per se is
not a mental disorder and opposes portrayals of sexual minority youths and adults as mentally ill due to their sexual
orientation;
Be it further resolved that the American Psychological Association concludes that there is insufficient evidence to
support the use of psychological interventions to change sexual orientation;
Be it further resolved that the American Psychological Association encourages mental health professionals to avoid
misrepresenting the efficacy of sexual orientation change efforts by promoting or promising change in sexual
orientation when providing assistance to individuals distressed by their own or others’ sexual orientation;
Be it further resolved that the American Psychological Association concludes that the benefits reported by participants
in sexual orientation change efforts can be gained through approaches that do not attempt to change sexual
orientation;
Be it further resolved that the American Psychological Association concludes that the emerging knowledge on
affirmative multiculturally competent treatment provides a foundation for an appropriate evidence-based practice with
children, adolescents and adults who are distressed by or seek to change their sexual orientation (Bartoli & Gillem,
2008; Brown, 2006; Martell, Safren & Prince, 2004; Ryan & Futterman, 1997; Norcross, 2002);
Be it further resolved that the American Psychological Association advises parents, guardians, young people, and their
families to avoid sexual orientation change efforts that portray homosexuality as a mental illness or developmental
disorder and to seek psychotherapy, social support and educational services that provide accurate information on
sexual orientation and sexuality, increase family and school support, and reduce rejection of sexual minority youth;
Be it further resolved that the American Psychological Association encourages practitioners to consider the ethical
concerns outlined in the 1997 APA Resolution on Appropriate Therapeutic Response to Sexual Orientation (American
Psychological Association, 1998), in particular the following standards and principles: scientific bases for professional
judgments, benefit and harm, justice, and respect for people’s rights and dignity;
Be it further resolved that the American Psychological Association encourages practitioners to be aware that age,
gender, gender identity, race, ethnicity, culture, national origin, religion, disability, language, and socioeconomic status
may interact with sexual stigma, and contribute to variations in sexual orientation identity development, expression,
and experience;
Be it further resolved that the American Psychological Association opposes the distortion and selective use of scientific
data about homosexuality by individuals and organizations seeking to influence public policy and public opinion and will
take a leadership role in responding to such distortions;
Be it further resolved that the American Psychological Association supports the dissemination of accurate scientific and
professional information about sexual orientation in order to counteract bias that is based in lack of knowledge about
sexual orientation; and
Be it further resolved that the American Psychological Association encourages advocacy groups, elected officials,
mental health professionals, policy makers, religious professionals and organizations, and other organizations to seek
areas of collaboration that may promote the wellbeing of sexual minorities.
References
American Psychological Association. (1975). Policy statement on discrimination against homosexuals. American
Psychologist, 30, 633.
American Psychological Association. (1998). Resolution on appropriate therapeutic responses to sexual orientation.
American Psychologist, 53, 934-935.
American Psychological Association. (2000). Guidelines for psychotherapy with lesbian, gay, and bisexual clients.
American Psychologist, 55, 1440-1451.
American Psychological Association. (2002). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. American
Psychologist, 57, 1060-1073.
American Psychological Association. (2003). Lawrence v. Texas: Brief for amicus curiae, Supreme Court of the United
States. Washington, DC. Retrieved February 25, 2008.
American Psychological Association. (2005). APA policy statements on lesbian, gay, and bisexual concerns. Retrieved
July 4, 2008.
American Psychological Association. (2006). Resolution on prejudice, stereotypes, and discrimination. American
Psychologist, 62, 475-481.
American Psychological Association. (2008a). Resolution rejecting intelligent design as scientific and reaffirming support
for evolutionary theory. American Psychologist, 63, 426-427.
American Psychological Association. (2008b). Resolution on religious, religion-related and/or religion-derived prejudice.
American Psychologist, 63, 431-434.
American Psychological Association. (2008c). Resolution opposing discriminatory legislation and initiatives aimed at
lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons. American Psychologist, 63, 428-430.
Arriola, E. R. (1998). The penalties for puppy love: Institutionalized violence against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and
transgender youth. The Journal of Gender, Race, and Justice, 429, 1-43.
Bartoli, E., & Gillem, A. R. (2008). Continuing to depolarize the debate on sexual orientation and religious identity and
the therapeutic process. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 39, 202-209.
Beckstead, L., & Israel, T. (2007). Affirmative counseling and psychotherapy focused on issues related to sexual
orientation conflicts. In K. J. Bieschke, R. M. Perez, & K. A. DeBord (Eds.), Handbook of counseling and psychotherapy
with lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender clients (2nd ed., pp. 221-244). Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association.
Beckstead, A. L., & Morrow, S. L. (2004). Mormon clients’ experiences of conversion therapy: The need for a new
treatment approach. The Counseling Psychologist, 32, 651-690.
Bell , A. P., Weinberg, M. S., & Hammersmith, S. K. (1981). Sexual preference: Its development in men and women.
Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Birk, L., Huddleston, W., Miller, E., & Cohler, B. (1971). Avoidance conditioning for homosexuality. Archives of General
Psychiatry, 25, 314-323.
Blumenfeld, W. J. (1992). Introduction. In W. J. Blumenfeld (Ed.), Homophobia: How we all pay the price (pp. 1-19). New
York: Beacon Press.
Brown, L. S. (2006). The neglect of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered clients. In J. C. Norcross, L. E. Beutler & R. F.
Levant (Eds.), Evidence-based practices in mental health: Debate and dialogue on the fundamental questions (pp. 346-
353). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Bullough, V. L. (1976). Sexual variance in society and history. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Burack, C., & Josephson, J. J. (2005). A report from "Love won out: Addressing, understanding, and preventing
homosexuality" Minneapolis, Minnesota, September 18, 2004. New York: National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Policy
Institute.
Cianciatto, J. & Cahill, S. (2006). Youth in the crosshairs: The third wave of ex-gay activism. New York: National Gay and
Lesbian Task Force Policy Institute.
D’Augelli, A. R. (2003). Lesbian and bisexual female youths aged 14 to 21: Developmental challenges and victimization
experiences. Journal of Lesbian Studies, 7(4), 9-29.
D’Augelli, A. R., Hershberger, S. L., & Pilkington, N. W. (1998). Lesbian, gay, and bisexual youth and their families:
Disclosure of sexual orientation and its consequences. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 68(3), 361-371.
Davison, G. C. (1976). Homosexuality: The ethical challenge. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 44(2), 157-
162.
Drescher, J. (2003). The Spitzer study and the culture wars. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 32(5), 431-432.
Drescher, J., & Zucker, K. J. (Eds.). (2006). Ex-gay research: Analyzing the Spitzer study and its relation to science,
religion, politics, and culture. New York: Harrington Park Press.
Ford, C. S., & Beach, F. A. (1951). Patterns of sexual behavior. New York: Harper & Row.
Glassgold, J. M. (2008). Bridging the divide: Integrating lesbian identity and Orthodox Judaism. Women and Therapy,
31(1), 59-73.
Goodenow, C., Szalacha, L., & Westheimer, K. (2006). School support groups, other school factors, and the safety of
sexual minority adolescents. Psychology in the Schools, 43(5), 573-589.
Haldeman, D. C. (1994). The practice and ethics of sexual orientation conversion therapy. Journal of Consulting and
Clinical Psychology, 62, 221-227.
Haldeman, D. C. (2002). Gay rights, patient rights: The implications of sexual orientation conversion therapy.
Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 33, 200-204.
Haldeman, D. C. (2004). When sexual and religious orientation collide: Considerations in working with conflicted same-
sex attracted male clients. The Counseling Psychologist, 32, 691-715.
Herek, G. M. (2009). Sexual stigma and sexual prejudice in the United States: A conceptual framework. In D. A. Hope
(Ed.), Contemporary perspectives on lesbian, gay, & bisexual identities: The 54th Nebraska symposium on motivation
(pp. 65-111). New York: Springer.
Herek, G. M. & Garnets, L. D. (2007). Sexual orientation and mental health. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 3,
353-375.
James, S. (1978). Treatment of homosexuality II. Superiority of desensitization/arousal as compared with anticipatory
avoidance conditioning: Results of a controlled trial. Behavior Therapy, 9, 28-36.
Kinsey, A. C., Pomeroy, W. B., & Martin, C. E. (1948). Sexual behavior in the human male. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders.
Kinsey, A. C., Pomeroy, W. B., Martin, C. E., & Gebhard, P. (1953). Sexual behavior in the human female. Philadelphia:
Saunders.
Lasser, J. S., & Gottlieb, M. C. (2004). Treating patients distressed regarding their sexual orientation: Clinical and ethical
alternatives. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 35, 194-200.
Martell, C. R., Safren, S. A., & Prince, S. E. (2004). Cognitive-behavioral therapies with lesbian, gay, and bisexual clients.
New York: Guildford.
McCarn, S. R., & Fassinger, R. E. (1996). Revisioning sexual minority identity formation: A new model of lesbian identity
and its implications for counseling and research. The Counseling Psychologist, 24, 508-534.
McConaghy, N. (1969). Subjective and penile plethysmograph responses following aversion-relief and Apomorphine
aversion therapy for homosexual impulses. British Journal of Psychiatry, 115, 723-730.
McConaghy, N. (1976). Is a homosexual orientation irreversible? British Journal of Psychiatry, 129, 556-563.
McConaghy, N., Proctor, D., & Barr, R. (1972). Subjective and penile plethysmography responses to aversion therapy for
homosexuality: A partial replication. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 2(1), 65-79.
Molnar, B. E. (1997). Juveniles and psychiatric institutionalization: Toward better due process and treatment review in
the United States. Health and Human Rights, 2(2), 98-116.
Morrow, S. L., & Beckstead, A. L. (2004). Conversion therapies for same-sex attracted clients in religious conflict:
Context, predisposing factors, experiences, and implications for therapy. The Counseling Psychologist, 32, 641–650.
Nicolosi, J. (1991). Reparative therapy of male homosexuality. Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson.
Nicolosi, J., Byrd, A. D., & Potts, R. W. (2000). Retrospective self-reports of changes in homosexual orientation: A
consumer survey of conversion therapy clients. Psychological Reports, 86, 1071-1088.
Norcross, J. C. (2002). Psychotherapy relationships that work: Therapist contributions and responsiveness to patients.
New York: Oxford University Press.
Perrin, E. C. (2002). Sexual orientation in child and adolescent health care. New York: Kluwer/Plenum.
Ponticelli, C. M. (1999). Crafting stories of sexual identity reconstruction. Social Psychology Quarterly, 62(2), 157-172.
Remafedi, G., Farrow, J. A., & Deisher, R. W. (1991). Risk factors of attempted suicide in gay and bisexual youth.
Pediatrics, 87, 869–875.
Ryan, C. & Futterman, D. (1997). Lesbian and gay youth: Care and counseling. Adolescent Medicine: State of the Art
Reviews, 8(2), 207-374.
Ryan, C., Huebner, D., Diaz, R. M., & Sanchez, J. (2009). Family rejection as a predictor of negative health outcomes in
White and Latino lesbian, gay, and bisexual young adults. Pediatrics, 129(1), 346-352.
Savin-Williams, R. C. (1989). Parental influences on the self-esteem of gay and lesbian youths: A reflected appraisals
model. Journal of Homosexuality, 17(1/2), 93-109.
Savin-Williams, R. C. (1994). Verbal and physical abuse as stressors in the lives of lesbian, gay male, and bisexual youths:
Associations with school problems, running away, substance abuse, prostitution, and suicide. Journal of Consulting and
Clinical Practice, 62, 261–269.
Schaeffer, K. W., Hyde, R. A., Kroencke, T., McCormick, B., & Nottebaum, L. (2000). Religiously motivated sexual
orientation change. Journal of Psychology & Christianity, 19, 61-70.
Schneider, M. S., Brown, L., & Glassgold, J. (2002). Implementing the resolution on appropriate therapeutic responses
to sexual orientation: A guide for the perplexed. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 33, 265-276.
Shidlo, A., & Schroeder, M. (2002). Changing sexual orientation: A consumer’s report. Professional Psychology: Research
and Practice,33, 249-259.
Socarides, C. W. (1968). The overt homosexual. New York: Grune & Stratton.
Southern Poverty Law Center. (2005, Spring). A mighty army. Intelligence Report, Issue 117. Retrieved May 14, 2009,
from http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=524.
Spitzer, R. L. (2003). Can some gay men and lesbians change their sexual orientation? Two hundred participants
reporting a change from homosexual to heterosexual orientation. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 32, 403–417.
Tanner, B. A. (1974). A comparison of automated aversive conditioning and a waiting list control in the modification of
homosexual behavior in males. Behavior Therapy, 5, 29-32.
Tanner, B. A. (1975). Avoidance training with and without booster sessions to modify homosexual behavior in males.
Behavior Therapy, 6, 649-653.
Ullerstam, L. (1966). The erotic minorities: A Swedish view. New York: Grove.
Wilber, S., Ryan, C., & Marksamer, J. (2006). CWLA, Best practice guidelines. Washington, DC: Child Welfare League of
America.
Wolkomir, M. (2001). Emotion work, commitment, and the authentication of the self: The case of gay and ex-gay
Christian support groups. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 30, 305-334.
1The APA uses the term sexual orientation change efforts to describe all means to change sexual orientation (e.g.,

behavioral techniques, psychoanalytic techniques, medical approaches, religious and spiritual approaches). This
includes those efforts by mental health professionals, lay individuals, including religious professionals, religious leaders,
social groups, and other lay networks such as self-help groups .
2The Task Force uses the term sexual minority (cf. Ullerstam, 1966; Blumenfeld, 1992; McCarn & Fassinger, 1996) to

designate the entire group of individuals who experience significant erotic and romantic attractions to adult members
of their own sex, including those who experience attractions to members of both their own and the other sex. This term
is used because the Task Force recognizes that not all sexual minority individuals adopt a lesbian, gay, or bisexual
identity.
http://www.apa.org/about/governance/council/policy/sexual-orientation.aspx

August 5, 2009
Insufficient Evidence that Sexual Orientation Change Efforts Work, Says APA
Practitioners should avoid telling clients they can change from gay to straight
TORONTO—The American Psychological Association adopted a resolution Wednesday stating that mental health
professionals should avoid telling clients that they can change their sexual orientation through therapy or other
treatments.
The "Resolution on Appropriate Affirmative Responses to Sexual Orientation Distress and Change Efforts" also advises
that parents, guardians, young people and their families avoid sexual orientation treatments that portray
homosexuality as a mental illness or developmental disorder and instead seek psychotherapy, social support and
educational services "that provide accurate information on sexual orientation and sexuality, increase family and school
support and reduce rejection of sexual minority youth."
The approval, by APA's governing Council of Representatives, came at APA's annual convention, during which a task
force presented a report that in part examined the efficacy of so-called "reparative therapy," or sexual orientation
change efforts (SOCE).
"Contrary to claims of sexual orientation change advocates and practitioners, there is insufficient evidence to support
the use of psychological interventions to change sexual orientation," said Judith M. Glassgold, PsyD, chair of the task
force. "Scientifically rigorous older studies in this area found that sexual orientation was unlikely to change due to
efforts designed for this purpose. Contrary to the claims of SOCE practitioners and advocates, recent research studies
do not provide evidence of sexual orientation change as the research methods are inadequate to determine the
effectiveness of these interventions." Glassgold added: "At most, certain studies suggested that some individuals
learned how to ignore or not act on their homosexual attractions. Yet, these studies did not indicate for whom this was
possible, how long it lasted or its long-term mental health effects. Also, this result was much less likely to be true for
people who started out only attracted to people of the same sex."
Based on this review, the task force recommended that mental health professionals avoid misrepresenting the efficacy
of sexual orientation change efforts when providing assistance to people distressed about their own or others' sexual
orientation.
Read the task force report
 Report of the American Psychological Association Task Force on Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual
Orientation (PDF, 834KB)
APA appointed the six-member Task Force on Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation in 2007 to
review and update APA's 1997 resolution, "Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation," and to generate
a report. APA was concerned about ongoing efforts to promote the notion that sexual orientation can be changed
through psychotherapy or approaches that mischaracterize homosexuality as a mental disorder.
The task force examined the peer-reviewed journal articles in English from 1960 to 2007, which included 83 studies.
Most of the studies were conducted before 1978, and only a few had been conducted in the last 10 years. The group
also reviewed the recent literature on the psychology of sexual orientation.
"Unfortunately, much of the research in the area of sexual orientation change contains serious design flaws," Glassgold
said. "Few studies could be considered methodologically sound and none systematically evaluated potential harms."
As to the issue of possible harm, the task force was unable to reach any conclusion regarding the efficacy or safety of
any of the recent studies of SOCE: "There are no methodologically sound studies of recent SOCE that would enable the
task force to make a definitive statement about whether or not recent SOCE is safe or harmful and for whom,"
according to the report.
"Without such information, psychologists cannot predict the impact of these treatments and need to be very cautious,
given that some qualitative research suggests the potential for harm," Glassgold said. "Practitioners can assist clients
through therapies that do not attempt to change sexual orientation, but rather involve acceptance, support and
identity exploration and development without imposing a specific identity outcome."
As part of its report, the task force identified that some clients seeking to change their sexual orientation may be in
distress because of a conflict between their sexual orientation and religious beliefs. The task force recommended that
licensed mental health care providers treating such clients help them "explore possible life paths that address the
reality of their sexual orientation, reduce the stigma associated with homosexuality, respect the client's religious
beliefs, and consider possibilities for a religiously and spiritually meaningful and rewarding life."
"In other words," Glassgold said, "we recommend that psychologists be completely honest about the likelihood of
sexual orientation change, and that they help clients explore their assumptions and goals with respect to both religion
and sexuality."
Members of the APA Task Force on Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation:
Judith M. Glassgold, PsyD, Rutgers University – Chair
Lee Beckstead, PhD
Jack Drescher, MD
Beverly Greene, PhD, St. John's University
Robin Lin Miller, PhD, Michigan State University
Roger L. Worthington, PhD, University of Missouri
The American Psychological Association, in Washington, D.C., is the largest scientific and professional organization
representing psychology in the United States and is the world's largest association of psychologists. APA's membership
includes more than 150,000 researchers, educators, clinicians, consultants and students. Through its divisions in 54
subfields of psychology and affiliations with 60 state, territorial and Canadian provincial associations, APA works to
advance psychology as a science, as a profession and as a means of promoting health, education and human welfare.
http://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2009/08/therapeutic.aspx

Sexual orientation and homosexuality


Since 1975, the American Psychological Association has called on psychologists to take the lead in removing the stigma
of mental illness that has long been associated with lesbian, gay, and bisexual orientations. The discipline of psychology
is concerned with the well-being of people and groups and therefore with threats to that well-being. The prejudice and
discrimination that people who identify as lesbian, gay, or bisexual regularly experience have been shown to have
negative psychological effects. This information is designed to provide accurate information for those who want to
better understand sexual orientation and the impact of prejudice and discrimination on those who identify as lesbian,
gay, or bisexual.

What is sexual orientation? Sexual orientation refers to an enduring pattern of emotional, romantic, and/or sexual
attractions to men, women, or both sexes. Sexual orientation also refers to a person’s sense of identity based on those
attractions, related behaviors, and membership in a community of others who share those attractions. Research over
several decades has demonstrated that sexual orientation ranges along a continuum, from exclusive attraction to the
other sex to exclusive attraction to the same sex. However, sexual orientation is usually discussed in terms of three
categories: heterosexual (having emotional, romantic, or sexual attractions to members of the other sex), gay/lesbian
(having emotional, romantic, or sexual attractions to members of one’s own sex), and bisexual (having emotional,
romantic, or sexual attractions to both men and women). This range of behaviors and attractions has been described in
various cultures and nations throughout the world. Many cultures use identity labels to describe people who express
these attractions. In the United States the most frequent labels are lesbians (women attracted to women), gay men
(men attracted to men), and bisexual people (men or women attracted to both sexes). However, some people may use
different labels or none at all.
Sexual orientation is distinct from other components of sex and gender, including biological sex (the anatomical,
physiological, and genetic characteristics associated with being male or female), gender identity (the psychological
sense of being male or female),* and social gender role (the cultural norms that define feminine and masculine
behavior).

Sexual orientation is commonly discussed as if it were solely a characteristic of an individual, like biological sex, gender
identity, or age. This perspective is incomplete because sexual orientation is defined in terms of relationships with
others. People express their sexual orientation through behaviors with others, including such simple actions as holding
hands or kissing. Thus, sexual orientation is closely tied to the intimate personal relationships that meet deeply felt
needs for love, attachment, and intimacy. In addition to sexual behaviors, these bonds include nonsexual physical
affection between partners, shared goals and values, mutual support, and ongoing commitment. Therefore, sexual
orientation is not merely a personal characteristic within an individual. Rather, one’s sexual orientation defines the
group of people in which one is likely to find the satisfying and fulfilling romantic relationships that are an essential
component of personal identity for many people.

How do people know if they are lesbian, gay, or bisexual?According to current scientific and professional
understanding, the core attractions that form the basis for adult sexual orientation typically emerge between middle
childhood and early adolescence. These patterns of emotional, romantic, and sexual attraction may arise without any
prior sexual experience. People can be celibate and still know their sexual orientation-–be it lesbian, gay, bisexual, or
heterosexual.

Different lesbian, gay, and bisexual people have very different experiences regarding their sexual orientation. Some
people know that they are lesbian, gay, or bisexual for a long time before they actually pursue relationships with other
people. Some people engage in sexual activity (with same-sex and/or other-sex partners) before assigning a clear label
to their sexual orientation. Prejudice and discrimination make it difficult for many people to come to terms with their
sexual orientation identities, so claiming a lesbian, gay, or bisexual identity may be a slow process.

What causes a person to have a particular sexual orientation? There is no consensus among scientists about the exact
reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay, or lesbian orientation. Although much research has
examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no
findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor
or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles; most people experience little or no sense of
choice about their sexual orientation.

What role do prejudice and discrimination play in the lives of lesbian, gay, and bisexual people?Lesbian, gay, and
bisexual people in the United States encounter extensive prejudice, discrimination, and violence because of their sexual
orientation. Intense prejudice against lesbians, gay men, and bisexual people was widespread throughout much of the
20th century. Public opinion studies over the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s routinely showed that, among large segments of
the public, lesbian, gay, and bisexual people were the target of strongly held negative attitudes. More recently, public
opinion has increasingly opposed sexual orientation discrimination, but expressions of hostility toward lesbians and gay
men remain common in contemporary American society. Prejudice against bisexuals appears to exist at comparable
levels. In fact, bisexual individuals may face discrimination from some lesbian and gay people as well as from
heterosexual people.

Sexual orientation discrimination takes many forms. Severe antigay prejudice is reflected in the high rate of harassment
and violence directed toward lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals in American society. Numerous surveys indicate that
verbal harassment and abuse are nearly universal experiences among lesbian, gay, and bisexual people. Also,
discrimination against lesbian, gay, and bisexual people in employment and housing appears to remain widespread. The
HIV/AIDS pandemic is another area in which prejudice and discrimination against lesbian, gay, and bisexual people have
had negative effects. Early in the pandemic, the assumption that HIV/AIDS was a “gay disease” contributed to the delay
in addressing the massive social upheaval that AIDS would generate. Gay and bisexual men have been
disproportionately affected by this disease. The association of HIV/AIDS with gay and bisexual men and the inaccurate
belief that some people held that all gay and bisexual men were infected served to further stigmatize lesbian, gay, and
bisexual people.

What is the psychological impact of prejudice and discrimination?Prejudice and discrimination have social and personal
impact. On the social level, prejudice and discrimination against lesbian, gay, and bisexual people are reflected in the
everyday stereotypes of members of these groups. These stereotypes persist even though they are not supported by
evidence, and they are often used to excuse unequal treatment of lesbian, gay, and bisexual people. For example,
limitations on job opportunities, parenting, and relationship recognition are often justified by stereotypic assumptions
about lesbian, gay, and bisexual people.

On an individual level, such prejudice and discrimination may also have negative consequences, especially if lesbian,
gay, and bisexual people attempt to conceal or deny their sexual orientation. Although many lesbians and gay men
learn to cope with the social stigma against homosexuality, this pattern of prejudice can have serious negative effects
on health and well-being. Individuals and groups may have the impact of stigma reduced or worsened by other
characteristics, such as race, ethnicity, religion, or disability. Some lesbian, gay, and bisexual people may face less of a
stigma. For others, race, sex, religion, disability, or other characteristics may exacerbate the negative impact of
prejudice and discrimination.

The widespread prejudice, discrimination, and violence to which lesbians and gay men are often subjected are
significant mental health concerns. Sexual prejudice, sexual orientation discrimination, and antigay violence are major
sources of stress for lesbian, gay, and bisexual people. Although social support is crucial in coping with stress, antigay
attitudes and discrimination may make it difficult for lesbian, gay, and bisexual people to find such support.

Is homosexuality a mental disorder? No, lesbian, gay, and bisexual orientations are not disorders. Research has found
no inherent association between any of these sexual orientations and psychopathology. Both heterosexual behavior
and homosexual behavior are normal aspects of human sexuality. Both have been documented in many different
cultures and historical eras. Despite the persistence of stereotypes that portray lesbian, gay, and bisexual people as
disturbed, several decades of research and clinical experience have led all mainstream medical and mental health
organizations in this country to conclude that these orientations represent normal forms of human experience. Lesbian,
gay, and bisexual relationships are normal forms of human bonding. Therefore, these mainstream organizations long
ago abandoned classifications of homosexuality as a mental disorder.

What about therapy intended to change sexual orientation from gay to straight? All major national mental health
organizations have officially expressed concerns about therapies promoted to modify sexual orientation. To date, there
has been no scientifically adequate research to show that therapy aimed at changing sexual orientation (sometimes
called reparative or conversion therapy) is safe or effective. Furthermore, it seems likely that the promotion of change
therapies reinforces stereotypes and contributes to a negative climate for lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons. This
appears to be especially likely for lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals who grow up in more conservative religious
settings.

Helpful responses of a therapist treating an individual who is troubled about her or his same-sex attractions include
helping that person actively cope with social prejudices against homosexuality, successfully resolve issues associated
with and resulting from internal conflicts, and actively lead a happy and satisfying life. Mental health professional
organizations call on their members to respect a person’s (client’s) right to self-determination; be sensitive to the
client’s race, culture, ethnicity, age, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, religion, socioeconomic status,
language, and disability status when working with that client; and eliminate biases based on these factors.

What is “coming out” and why is it important?The phrase “coming out” is used to refer to several aspects of lesbian,
gay, and bisexual persons’ experiences: self-awareness of same-sex attractions; the telling of one or a few people about
these attractions; widespread disclosure of same-sex attractions; and identification with the lesbian, gay, and bisexual
community. Many people hesitate to come out because of the risks of meeting prejudice and discrimination. Some
choose to keep their identity a secret; some choose to come out in limited circumstances; some decide to come out in
very public ways.

Coming out is often an important psychological step for lesbian, gay, and bisexual people. Research has shown that
feeling positively about one’s sexual orientation and integrating it into one’s life fosters greater well-being and mental
health. This integration often involves disclosing one’s identity to others; it may also entail participating in the gay
community. Being able to discuss one’s sexual orientation with others also increases the availability of social support,
which is crucial to mental health and psychological well-being. Like heterosexuals, lesbians, gay men, and bisexual
people benefit from being able to share their lives with and receive support from family, friends, and acquaintances.
Thus, it is not surprising that lesbians and gay men who feel they must conceal their sexual orientation report more
frequent mental health concerns than do lesbians and gay men who are more open; they may even have more physical
health problems.

What about sexual orientation and coming out during adolescence?Adolescence is a period when people separate from
their parents and families and begin to develop autonomy. Adolescence can be a period of experimentation, and many
youths may question their sexual feelings. Becoming aware of sexual feelings is a normal developmental task of
adolescence. Sometimes adolescents have same-sex feelings or experiences that cause confusion about their sexual
orientation. This confusion appears to decline over time, with different outcomes for different individuals.

Some adolescents desire and engage in same-sex behavior but do not identify as lesbian, gay, or bisexual, sometimes
because of the stigma associated with a nonheterosexual orientation. Some adolescents experience continuing feelings
of same-sex attraction but do not engage in any sexual activity or may engage in heterosexual behavior for varying
lengths of time. Because of the stigma associated with same-sex attractions, many youths experience same-sex
attraction for many years before becoming sexually active with partners of the same sex or disclosing their attractions
to others.

For some young people, this process of exploring same-sex attractions leads to a lesbian, gay, or bisexual identity. For
some, acknowledging this identity can bring an end to confusion. When these young people receive the support of
parents and others, they are often able to live satisfying and healthy lives and move through the usual process of
adolescent development. The younger a person is when she or he acknowledges a nonheterosexual identity, the fewer
internal and external resources she or he is likely to have. Therefore, youths who come out early are particularly in
need of support from parents and others.

Young people who identify as lesbian, gay, or bisexual may be more likely to face certain problems, including being
bullied and having negative experiences in school. These experiences are associated with negative outcomes, such as
suicidal thoughts, and high-risk activities, such as unprotected sex and alcohol and drug use. On the other hand, many
lesbian, gay, and bisexual youths appear to experience no greater level of health or mental health risks. Where
problems occur, they are closely associated with experiences of bias and discrimination in their environments. Support
from important people in the teen’s life can provide a very helpful counterpart to bias and discrimination.

Support in the family, at school, and in the broader society helps to reduce risk and encourage healthy development.
Youth need caring and support, appropriately high expectations, and the encouragement to participate actively with
peers. Lesbian, gay, and bisexual youth who do well despite stress—like all adolescents who do well despite stress—
tend to be those who are socially competent, who have good problem-solving skills, who have a sense of autonomy and
purpose, and who look forward to the future.

In a related vein, some young people are presumed to be lesbian, gay, or bisexual because they don’t abide by
traditional gender roles (i.e., the cultural beliefs about what is appropriate “masculine” and “feminine” appearance and
behavior). Whether these youths identify as heterosexual or as lesbian, gay, or bisexual, they encounter prejudice and
discrimination based on the presumption that they are lesbian, gay, or bisexual. The best support for these young
people is school and social climates that do not tolerate discriminatory language and behavior.

At what age should lesbian, gay, or bisexual youths come out?There is no simple or absolute answer to this question.
The risks and benefits of coming out are different for youths in different circumstances. Some young people live in
families where support for their sexual orientation is clear and stable; these youths may encounter less risk in coming
out, even at a young age. Young people who live in less supportive families may face more risks in coming out. All young
people who come out may experience bias, discrimination, or even violence in their schools, social groups, work places,
and faith communities. Supportive families, friends, and schools are important buffers against the negative impacts of
these experiences.

What is the nature of same-sex relationships?Research indicates that many lesbians and gay men want and have
committed relationships. For example, survey data indicate that between 40% and 60% of gay men and between 45%
and 80% of lesbians are currently involved in a romantic relationship. Further, data from the 2000 U.S. Census indicate
that of the 5.5 million couples who were living together but not married, about 1 in 9 (594,391) had partners of the
same sex. Although the census data are almost certainly an underestimate of the actual number of cohabiting same-sex
couples, they indicate that there are 301,026 male same-sex households and 293,365 female same-sex households in
the United States.

Stereotypes about lesbian, gay, and bisexual people have persisted, even though studies have found them to be
misleading. For instance, one stereotype is that the relationships of lesbians and gay men are dysfunctional and
unhappy. However, studies have found same-sex and heterosexual couples to be equivalent to each other on measures
of relationship satisfaction and commitment.
A second stereotype is that the relationships of lesbians, gay men and bisexual people are unstable. However, despite
social hostility toward same-sex relationships, research shows that many lesbians and gay men form durable
relationships. For example, survey data indicate that between 18% and 28% of gay couples and between 8% and 21% of
lesbian couples have lived together 10 or more years. It is also reasonable to suggest that the stability of same-sex
couples might be enhanced if partners from same-sex couples enjoyed the same levels of support and recognition for
their relationships as heterosexual couples do, i.e., legal rights and responsibilities associated with marriage.

A third common misconception is that the goals and values of lesbian and gay couples are different from those of
heterosexual couples. In fact, research has found that the factors that influence relationship satisfaction, commitment,
and stability are remarkably similar for both same-sex cohabiting couples and heterosexual married couples.

Far less research is available on the relationship experiences of people who identify as bisexual. If these individuals are
in a same-sex relationship, they are likely to face the same prejudice and discrimination that members of lesbian and
gay couples face. If they are in a heterosexual relationship, their experiences may be quite similar to those of people
who identify as heterosexual unless they choose to come out as bisexual; in that case, they will likely face some of the
same prejudice and discrimination that lesbian and gay individuals encounter.

Can lesbians and gay men be good parents?Many lesbians and gay men are parents; others wish to be parents. In the
2000 U.S. Census, 33% of female same-sex couple households and 22% of male same-sex couple households reported
at least one child under the age of 18 living in the home. Although comparable data are not available, many single
lesbians and gay men are also parents, and many same-sex couples are part-time parents to children whose primary
residence is elsewhere.

As the social visibility and legal status of lesbian and gay parents have increased, some people have raised concerns
about the well-being of children in these families. Most of these questions are based on negative stereotypes about
lesbians and gay men. The majority of research on this topic asks whether children raised by lesbian and gay parents
are at a disadvantage when compared to children reaised by heterosexual parents. The most common questions and
answers to them are these:

Do children of lesbian and gay parents have more problems with sexual identity than do children of heterosexual
parents?For instance, do these children develop problems in gender identity and/or in gender role behavior? The
answer from research is clear: sexual and gender identities (including gender identity, gender-role behavior, and sexual
orientation) develop in much the same way among children of lesbian mothers as they do among children of
heterosexual parents. Few studies are available regarding children of gay fathers.

Do children raised by lesbian or gay parents have problems in personal development in areas other than sexual
identity?For example, are the children of lesbian or gay parents more vulnerable to mental breakdown, do they have
more behavior problems, or are they less psychologically healthy than other children? Again, studies of personality,
self-concept, and behavior problems show few differences between children of lesbian mothers and children of
heterosexual parents. Few studies are available regarding children of gay fathers.

Are children of lesbian and gay parents likely to have problems with social relationships?For example, will they be
teased or otherwise mistreated by their peers? Once more, evidence indicates that children of lesbian and gay parents
have normal social relationships with their peers and adults. The picture that emerges from this research shows that
children of gay and lesbian parents enjoy a social life that is typical of their age group in terms of involvement with
peers, parents, family members, and friends.

Are these children more likely to be sexually abused by a parent or by a parent’s friends or acquaintances?There is no
scientific support for fears about children of lesbian or gay parents being sexually abused by their parents or their
parents’ gay, lesbian, or bisexual friends or acquaintances. In summary, social science has shown that the concerns
often raised about children of lesbian and gay parents—concerns that are generally grounded in prejudice against and
stereotypes about gay people—are unfounded. Overall, the research indicates that the children of lesbian and gay
parents do not differ markedly from the children of heterosexual parents in their development, adjustment, or overall
well-being.

What can people do to diminish prejudice and discrimination against lesbian, gay, and bisexual people? Lesbian, gay,
and bisexual people who want to help reduce prejudice and discrimination can be open about their sexual orientation,
even as they take necessary precautions to be as safe as possible. They can examine their own belief systems for the
presence of antigay stereotypes. They can make use of the lesbian, gay, and bisexual community—as well as supportive
heterosexual people—for support.

Heterosexual people who wish to help reduce prejudice and discrimination can examine their own response to antigay
stereotypes and prejudice. They can make a point of coming to know lesbian, gay, and bisexual people, and they can
work with lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals and communities to combat prejudice and discrimination. Heterosexual
individuals are often in a good position to ask other heterosexual people to consider the prejudicial or discriminatory
nature of their beliefs and actions. Heterosexual allies can encourage nondiscrimination policies that include sexual
orientation. They can work to make coming out safe. When lesbians, gay men, and bisexual people feel free to make
public their sexual orientation, heterosexuals are given an opportunity to have personal contact with openly gay people
and to perceive them as individuals.

Studies of prejudice, including prejudice against gay people, consistently show that prejudice declines when members
of the majority group interact with members of a minority group. In keeping with this general pattern, one of the most
powerful influences on heterosexuals’ acceptance of gay people is having personal contact with an openly gay person.
Antigay attitudes are far less common among members of the population who have a close friend or family member
who is lesbian or gay, especially if the gay person has directly come out to the heterosexual person.

Where Can I find more Information About Homosexuality?American Psychological Association


Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Concerns Office
750 First Street, NE
Washington, DC 20002
E-mail
Mental Health America (formerly the National Mental Health Association)
2000 N. Beauregard Street, 6th Floor
Alexandria, VA 22311
Main Switchboard: (703) 684-7722
Toll-free: (800) 969-6MHA (6642)
TTY: (800) 433-5959
Fax: (703) 684-5968

What Does Gay Mean? How to Talk With Kids About Sexual Orientation and Prejudice

An anti-bullying program designed to improve understanding and respect for youth who are gay/lesbian/bisexual/
transgender (GLBT). Centered on an educational booklet called What Does Gay Mean? How to Talk with Kids About
Sexual Orientation and Prejudice, the program encourages parents and others to communicate and share values of
respect with their children.
American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP)
Division of Child and Adolescent Health
141 Northwest Point Blvd.
Elk Grove Village, IL 60007
Office: (847) 228-5005
Fax: (847) 228-5097

Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual Teens: Facts for Teens and Their Parents
Suggested Bibliographic CitationAmerican Psychological Association. (2008). Answers to your questions: For a better
understanding of sexual orientation and homosexuality. Washington, DC: Author. [Retrieved from
www.apa.org/topics/sorientation.pdf.]

This material may be reproduced and distributed in whole or in part without permission provided that the reproduced
content includes the original bibliographic citation and the following statement is included: Copyright © 2008 American
Psychological Association.

Articles and text from APA Help Center may be reproduced in their entirety with credit given to the American
Psychological Association. Images may not be reproduced. Any exceptions to this, including requests to excerpt or
paraphrase documents from APA Help Center, must be presented in writing to Help Center and will be considered on a
case-by-case basis. Permission for exceptions will be given on a one-time-only basis and must be sought for each
additional use of the document.
http://www.apa.org/helpcenter/sexual-orientation.aspx