Sure to be on every rightwinger's reading list...

[Sauron]

....a new 143 page study this week claims to have done a meta-review of over 200 studies in the scientific literature on exploring the origins of homosexuality. Their conclusions are below.

First, two bits of information:

1. One of the study's lead authors seems to have an axe to grind:

-- Refers to homosexuality as "erroneous desire"

-- Argues that being medically accomodating to a transgender child is "like performing liposuction on an anorexic child"

-- Filed an amicus brief arguing in favor of Proposition 8 on the basis that homosexuality is a "choice."

--Describes post surgical trans women as "caricatures of women"

-- As part of the USCCB's Review Board, pushed the idea that the Catholic sex abuse scandal was not about pedophilia but about “homosexual predation on American Catholic youth.”

2. the study is co-sponsored by the Ethics and Public Policy Center. With such a professional-sounding name, you'd never suspect that they were hiding anything, would you?

The Ethics and Public Policy Center has been at the center of anti-LGBT activism for years. They’ve spoken out in favor of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), in favor of keeping Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, and in favor of using religion as a weapon to discriminate.

In their own words, the EPCC describes itself as an "institute dedicated to applying the Judeo-Christian moral tradition to critical issues of public policy. From the Cold War to the war on terrorism, from disputes over the role of religion in public life to battles over the nature of the family, EPPC and its scholars have consistently sought to defend and promote our nation’s founding principles—respect for the inherent dignity of the human person, individual freedom and responsibility, justice, the rule of law, and limited government."

And now without further ado, the predictable conclusions:

Part One: Sexual Orientation

● The understanding of sexual orientation as an innate, biologically
fixed property of human beings — the idea that people are
“born that way” — is not supported by scientific evidence.

● While there is evidence that biological factors such as genes
and hormones are associated with sexual behaviors and attractions,
there are no compelling causal biological explanations
for human sexual orientation. While minor differences in the
brain structures and brain activity between homosexual and
heterosexual individuals have been identified by researchers,
such neurobiological findings do not demonstrate whether these
differences are innate or are the result of environmental and
psychological factors.

● Longitudinal studies of adolescents suggest that sexual orientation
may be quite fluid over the life course for some people,
with one study estimating that as many as 80% of male adolescents
who report same-sex attractions no longer do so as adults
(although the extent to which this figure reflects actual changes
in same-sex attractions and not just artifacts of the survey process
has been contested by some researchers).

● Compared to heterosexuals, non-heterosexuals are about two
to three times as likely to have experienced childhood sexual
abuse.

Part Two: Sexuality, Mental Health Outcomes, and Social Stress

● Compared to the general population, non-heterosexual subpopulations
are at an elevated risk for a variety of adverse health
and mental health outcomes.

● Members of the non-heterosexual population are estimated
to have about 1.5 times higher risk of experiencing anxiety disorders
than members of the heterosexual population, as well as
roughly double the risk of depression, 1.5 times the risk of substance
abuse, and nearly 2.5 times the risk of suicide.

● Members of the transgender population are also at higher risk
of a variety of mental health problems compared to members of
the non-transgender population. Especially alarmingly, the rate
of lifetime suicide attempts across all ages of transgender individuals
is estimated at 41%, compared to under 5% in the overall
U.S. population.

● There is evidence, albeit limited, that social stressors such as
discrimination and stigma contribute to the elevated risk of poor
mental health outcomes for non-heterosexual and transgender
populations. More high-quality longitudinal studies are necessary
for the “social stress model” to be a useful tool for understanding
public health concerns.

Part Three: Gender Identity

● The hypothesis that gender identity is an innate, fixed property
of human beings that is independent of biological sex — that
a person might be “a man trapped in a woman’s body” or “a
woman trapped in a man’s body” — is not supported by scientific
evidence.

● According to a recent estimate, about 0.6% of U.S. adults identify
as a gender that does not correspond to their biological sex.

● Studies comparing the brain structures of transgender and
non-transgender individuals have demonstrated weak correlations
between brain structure and cross-gender identification.
These correlations do not provide any evidence for a neurobiological
basis for cross-gender identification.

● Compared to the general population, adults who have undergone
sex-reassignment surgery continue to have a higher risk
of experiencing poor mental health outcomes. One study found
that, compared to controls, sex-reassigned individuals were
about 5 times more likely to attempt suicide and about 19 times
more likely to die by suicide.

● Children are a special case when addressing transgender issues.
Only a minority of children who experience cross-gender identification
will continue to do so into adolescence or adulthood.

● There is little scientific evidence for the therapeutic value of
interventions that delay puberty or modify the secondary sex
characteristics of adolescents, although some children may have
improved psychological well-being if they are encouraged and
supported in their cross-gender identification. There is no evidence
that all children who express gender-atypical thoughts or
behavior should be encouraged to become transgender.