Now, I don't mean to sound pedantic, but a recent study of the sexual abuse problem has found that over 80% of the victims were adolescent males. Yet the study also claims that this is not a sign of homosexual activity...
I have to wonder how one defines 'homosexual' in such a way that it excludes sexual attraction to adolescent males? While I might agree that Bill Donohue misspoke when he referred to the perpetrators as 'gay', one certainly cannot ignore the fact that the perpetrators had homosexual inclinations.
The main thing is that psychologists have classified these behaviors in ways that make it difficult to ascribe motive to sexual deviants. By establishing that homosexuality is an orientation only toward 'healthy' and 'legal' relationships, you effectively remove any possibility of drawing a connection between homosexuality and any other sort of deviant (or illegal) behavior.
It is baffling for psychologists to be able to claim that male priests who rape and seduce young men are not behaving homosexually. I understand the ideology of it, but I don't understand the logic of it.
No comments:
Post a Comment