Gays and Lesbians Trying to Convert Others to Homosexual

Behavior:
Eugene Volokh, August 22, 2005 at 1:25pm
I've seen lots of assertions that it's a "myth" that gays and lesbians try to recruit others into
homosexuality. (See, among many other examples, here and here.) Yet it seems to me that this
assertion of "myth" is likely itself something of a myth, or at least quite incomplete.

I rather doubt that many gays and lesbians harbor hopes that many heterosexuals will "become
homosexual." That just isn't likely to happen, and I doubt that gays or lesbians make plans
around it. Moreover, it may well be that you can't really change a person's sexual orientation, in
the sense of whom the person is attracted to. (I'm not sure whether that's right, but I'm willing to
assume it for purposes of this post.)

But sexual orientation is not the same as sexual behavior. In particular, people who are at least in
some measure attracted to both sexes may be seen as having a bisexual sexual orientation, but
they may choose to behave heterosexually, homosexually, or bisexually. And in fact, it appears
that the majority of men — and nearly all women — who are at least in some measure attracted
to the same sex are also at least in some measure attracted to the opposite sex:

Sexual attraction Among men Among women

Only opposite gender 93.8% 95.6%
Mostly opposite gender 2.6% 2.7%
Both genders 0.6% 0.8%
Mostly same gender 0.7% 0.6%
Only same gender 2.4% 0.3%
(Source: Laumann et al., The Social Organization of Sexuality 311 (1994), which I also noted —
with the suitable warnings about the limits of even well-conducted random studies of small
sexual minorities — here.) Here is the data from Laumann et al. about reported sexual practices
(not just attraction) of people who have had some same-sex partners in particular time frames
(numbers rounded):
Time frame in which Fraction of male respondents (the Fraction of female respondents (the
the person has had ones who had some same-sex ones who had some same-sex
some same-sex partners) who had partners of both partners) who had partners of both
partners sexes sexes
In the last year 25% 25%
In the last 5 years 50% 60%
Since age 18 80% 90%
(As best I can tell, the time frame in the numerator is the same as in the denominator — the 50%
number, for instance, means that 50% of the men who have had a same-sex partner in the last 5
years have also had an opposite-sex partner in the last 5 years.) I did read a recent news report of
a study that claimed that ostensibly bisexual men actually had the same physical arousal patterns,
when shown potentially stimulating pictures of men and women, as either homosexuals or
heterosexuals: "[I]n men there's no hint that true bisexual arousal exists." But as others pointed
out in that news story, "the technique used in the study to measure genital arousal is too crude to
capture the richness — erotic sensations, affection, admiration — that constitutes sexual
attraction," especially given the consistent self-reports of men who claim to be bisexual. And the
story reports that true bisexual physical arousal in women has indeed been documented.

The gay rights movement has aimed — in my view, on balance quite laudably — to make
homosexuals feel more comfortable with their homosexuality, and to help people who are
attracted to the same sex be more willing to act on that attraction. But it follows that the
movement also necessarily, and I suspect intentionally, also helps people who are attracted to
both sexes be more willing to explore the homosexual facet of that attraction. It thus increases
the likelihood that the bisexually-attracted people who would otherwise engage in purely
heterosexual relationships (because of fear of social stigma, or because of their own disapproval
of their homosexual attraction) will instead be also willing to engage in some homosexual
relationships.

If I'm right, the movement thus is trying to convert those who have a bisexual orientation but act
purely heterosexually — or would act purely heterosexually, if we're talking about people who
haven't started having sex yet — into also experimenting with homosexuality. This doesn't mean
that most gays and lesbians are trying to do this to particular people up close and personal; there
are obvious costs to that, such as the risk of rebuff if you get the other person's interest wrong, or
the risk of quick abandonment if the other person is interested in experimenting but then
concludes the experiment has been a failure from his or her point of view, so many gays and
lesbians might well prefer partners who have a more definite homosexual preference. But there
are many actions that might go into this sort of "conversion" (if only a conversion into a mix of
homosexual/heterosexual behavior, and a conversion that in many cases will end up proving to
be only temporary): Providing oneself for the actual sexual behavior is one, but so is public
action to destigmatize homosexual behavior, or to provide positive homosexual or bisexual role
models, something that for perfectly understandable reasons many gays and lesbians are indeed
trying to do.

To further illustrate this, ask yourself: How would most gays or lesbians who believe that
homosexuality is perfectly proper respond to these questions?

(1) A person who has had only heterosexual experiences is feeling some homosexual attraction.
Should he or she experiment with homosexual relations to see if he or she finds them more
rewarding, or at least a valuable facet of his or her future sex life (assuming this wouldn't
constitute infidelity, that it's done with the proper protection against disease, that it's done with
the right person, and so on)?

(2) Should gay rights groups try to change society so that such experimentation is less
stigmatized?

(3) Should gay and lesbian friends of this person urge the person (of course, sensitively and
without browbeating) to experiment, and to see if — given that he or she feels at least some
same-sex attraction — he or she might indeed find same-sex relationships more rewarding?

(4) If this were a friend of yours to whom you were attracted, you knew that he or she felt at least
some same-sex attraction, and you weren't worried about the emotional risk to yourself, would
you consider having you be the person with whom the friend experiments? (Again, assume that
neither of you is otherwise committed, the approach would be suitably sensitive, and so on;
naturally, even sexual behavior that's perfectly proper in the abstract can be made wrong if done
under the wrong circumstances.)
(5) Do you think that older teenagers (say, 16 and above) should have out-of-the-closet gay,
lesbian, and bisexual role models so that those of the teenagers who feel some same-sex
attraction would feel more open to experimenting to see if same-sex relationships will be more
rewarding to them than opposite-sex relationships? (I'm not asking about sexual experimentation
with the role models, but rather about the role models' presence making the teenagers more
comfortable with their same-sex attractions.)

I suspect that most gays and lesbians who think homosexuality is proper would say "yes" to most
or all of these questions. I know that if I were a heterosexual in some hypothetical future
overwhelmingly homosexual society, and I were asked similar questions about "converting"
people who were open to heterosexuality but had so far had only engaged in homosexual
behavior into practicing bisexuals or heterosexuals, I'd say "yes." If you think some behavior can
be proper and, for some group, very rewarding, you would naturally want people who aren't sure
whether they fall into that group to try it out.

And if that's true, then gays and lesbians (though not necessarily each gay and lesbian) are trying
to get others who have been behaviorally heterosexual, but who might be open to homosexual
behavior, to try homosexual behavior. They almost certainly don't see all heterosexuals as likely
converts. But they probably do think (with good reason) that some fraction — a substantial
fraction compared to the number of pure homosexuals — might well be willing to change
behaviors, especially if they are made to feel right and welcome in doing so. And, yes, that
would include teenagers as well as fully grown adults. If most people think the age of sexual
consent should be around 16 (the legal norm in the country), then I doubt that most gays and
lesbians would think that it's wrong to encourage 16-year-old boys and girls who have some
same-sex attraction to experiment with that attraction.

Now, as I've suggested, I don't think there's anything inherently immoral about such attempt to
convert people away from purely heterosexual behavior, if they are interested in homosexual
behavior, and of course if the "conversion" is done without force, imposition on those who are
genuinely too young to decide, and so on. If it weren't for the disproportionate and grave health
danger from male homosexual activity, I'd think such encouragement to explore which
relationships give people the most happiness would be positively quite good. (Yes, I realize that
the danger can be reduced by not engaging in anal sex, always using a condom, not having sex
with a partner unless he's been tested and had not had sex for some months before the test, and so
on. But most people are not nearly this cautious, and the reality thus remains that, given the
vastly disproportionate prevalence of HIV among gays in America today, the greater risk from
anal sex, a practice that for understandable reasons many male homosexuals do not want to
forego, and the notorious difficulty with getting people to actually practice safe practices —
whether aimed at preventing disease or conception — the fact remains that experimenting with
male homosexuality is dangerous activity.) Given this danger, I'd prefer that men with bisexual
orientations who can be happy with women not experiment with men; but that's a judgment
about medical risk, not about the inherent morality of "conversion" attempts, and in any event it
doesn't apply to lesbianism.

Nonetheless, if I'm right, then I don't think we should deny that the gay and lesbian movement
does aim in part at "converting" people who have a wholly or partly bisexual orientation from a
purely heterosexual behavior pattern to one that involves at least some (initially experimental)
homosexual behavior.

UPDATE: A bunch of commenters think I shouldn't use the word "convert," for various reasons.
The reason I'm using it is that I'm responding to an alleged "myth": People claim that it's a
"myth" that gays and lesbians try to convert or recruit others, and I am arguing that this "myth"
claim is "likely itself something of a myth, or at least quite incomplete." If you prefer to describe
this not as "converting," but as something else (e.g., "influencing the person to change his
practices"), that's fine. But if my analysis above is right, then one still shouldn't deride claims of
conversion as "myth," even if one thinks that the word is slightly imprecise or has a bad
connotation.

But in any event, it seems to me that the term is fine. It is hardly inherently pejorative: Changes
in religious beliefs and practices are called conversions, and if people view them negatively, they
do so because they disapprove of the new belief or practice, not because they disapprove of
"conversion."

And it's also quite sensibly applied to changes in behavior (especially behavior that many people
find important to their felt identity) and not just changes in some supposed inherent nature. If
you persuade someone to become a vegetarian, you can be said to have converted him to
vegetarianism. He's still biologically an omnivore, but his practices are now different. Likewise,
changing someone from (a) being an orientational bisexual who engages solely in heterosexual
relationships to (b) someone who is an orientational bisexual who engages solely in homosexual
relationships, or to (c) someone who is bisexual both by orientation and practice strikes me as
quite rightly called a "conversion."