EXPOSING MYTHS ABOUT
SEXUAL ORIENTATION (EMASO)

If you have arrived at this website for the purpose of looking at the scientific evidence why such a thing as a homo gene has never been found nor will it ever be, then click here if you want to go directly to this evidence (myth 3, items 4 and 6).

If you are not a Swede or don’t live in Sweden, click here for some background about this website.

It’s my hope that the information that follows speaks to you with an openness that’s not meant to hurt anyone.  It’s the concern about our children and grandchildren that compels me to bring forth the truth as I have come to know it.

---

WARNING !
This website in NOT for children.  Some of the material presented here is taken from the official website of the principal homosexual organization in Sweden, RFSL, which is generously funded with taxpayers’ money.  The material is very lewd and sleazy in nature and is shown here for the following reasons:
1. It is an example of what we Swedes have to put up with and fund with our tax money.  It stands as a warning example of what can happen to a nation when rampant sodomy is given favored status.
2. It is intended to show concerned parents the lifestyle from which they ought to be highly motivated to save their children.
3. For concerned health officials it illustrates why the next serious sexually transmitted epidemic is just waiting to happen.  As you will see and understand, the various forms of anal practices - in which more than two thirds of male homosexuals engage - have far reaching public health implications.

Keep in mind that the depraved lifestyle - so prominently and unashamedly promoted by RFSL, not only on their website but also in their disseminated material - is something that's part of our public school curriculum.  The filth and smut abound as you will find. To most people, the RFSL material is no doubt very disgusting and repulsive.  But for the vulnerable children in our midst, many of whom already struggle with gender identity problems, when they come home from school and go to the RFSL website, the material to them is nothing short of pornographic in nature.

But if you want to avoid altogether the references to RFSL's materials you will find ample warnings. 

---

Recent News:
One of the program items during the Pride Festival in Stockholm last summer was a discussion panel consisting of leaders from most political parties in our country. One of the topics of special interest to RFSL, but not an issue of interest to Swedes in general, was whether young boys should be made to wear girls’ skirt when coming to pre-school or elementary school. It’s no coincidence that such a topic, otherwise a silly item for party leaders to debate, is very close to RFSL’s heart. Because the homosexual community knows all too well that their homosexuality typically started with gender confusion at a very early age. And by introducing such a program early on in school, the vulnerable boys might one day become homosexual themselves and further swell the ranks of the homosexual lobby with all the associated increase in power, money and influence. You can read much more about such gender confusion (the origin of most homosexuality) under Myth 2 below.

Introduction
My name is Ron Linden.  I am a Swedish citizen from Skåne, the southernmost province of our country.  I got my engineering degree from Chalmers University in Gothenburg Sweden, followed by research in California where I received my Ph.D. in 1982 from the University of California, Davis.  But since a few years back my research has been in a field much different from Engineering.  My recent research has been in the field of Behavioral Science.  In particular I’ve researched the area of homosexuality and the roots and origins of the same.  And what I’ve learnt came as quite a surprise to me.  It’s contrary to commonly held beliefs by most people and often runs contrary to what’s considered “politically correct” in our days.  It has transformed me from being an indifferent person about this issue into becoming a homophobe (see footnote below), who greatly fears the devastating impact on our children from the activities by the homolobby in our land.  I therefore feel an obligation to share with others – and in particular with parents and grandparents – what I’ve found.  In particular I feel obliged to expose three commonly held myths.  To withhold this important information would be morally wrong and would deprive parents and grandparents of important knowledge on how they can prevent a homosexual outcome in their offspring.  Especially fathers play a very important role in developing masculinity in their boys and thereby prevent a homosexual outcome when their sons enter puberty. What I will talk about is based solely on research and scientific studies and reports.  With the exception of the last sidebar link, it’s not based on religious or moral attitudes on this issue.  My emphasis will be on homosexuality among men where the origin and development is well documented.  The development of lesbianism among women is not equally well understood.  Therefore, this presentation is meant for parents and grandparents and not for people who have already developed their homosexuality.
Again, please note: This is not for you if you have already acquired a homosexual orientation.

Footnote:
There are two kinds of homophobes (fear of homosexuality). The first kind are those who fear the impact that the homosexual advocacy and popularization in the media will have on our children. That kind of homophobes include many people in our country.

The second kind of homophobes are those who fear and feel threatened by the homomafia/homolobby. The threat could be of different kinds. Some are afraid because the homomafia poses a physical threat to them and their family as we shall see with examples. Others fear threats of non-violent nature. It could be fears by religious ministers that the financial support by the government will disappear (unless they open their membership and clergy to homosexuals) as we shall see. Or it could be businessmen fearing to lose their customers due to homomafia intimidations. Or it could be professional career people in all walks of life, fearing to be labeled homophobes by homo pressure groups or in the media.

Most homophobes of the first kind are typically also homophobes of the second kind, since they fear harassment if they were to voice their opinions in any public setting. (People who are not homophobes of the first kind are called homophiles and as such are never homophobes of the second kind either since they, of course, are never threatened or intimidated by the homomafia). People who are homophobes of both kinds (much fewer in numbers) are those who both worry about the impact of the homosexual agenda on our children and also worry about their safety and/or career or business, because they dared to voice their opposition. There are of course shaded areas between being a homophobe or a homophile of either kind.

Not for Children
Likewise, what I will present is not suitable material for children to read.  The principles you will learn about should be applied to your children but the information itself is solely meant for you as a parent. My presentation is divided into the following parts:

1.  Which sexual orientation is the most desirable for your child or grandchild?  Without proper information about the homosexual lifestyle, and the practices associated with the same, you will not be able to decide to what extent you want to go to promote the development of one of the two orientations (homo or hetero).  

2.  How can you, during your child’s formative years, lay the groundwork for the sexual orientation that will develop when puberty sets in? 

3.  Is a child born homosexual or heterosexual?  Is it in the genes?  

---

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The introduction and the three parts (myths) are divided into the following subparts (by clicking on any of the parts or subparts you will be taken directly to that topic): 

Introduction
References
Free Literature
Tour of Sweden


Myth Number 1: The heterosexual and homosexual lifestyles are equally wholesome and desirable.
1. Average life expectancy
2. Use of illegal drugs
3. Frequency of suicide
4. Frequency of pedophilia
5. Sexually transmitted diseases (STDs)
6. Infidelity with partner
7. Social and religious acceptance
8. Abnormal focus on sex
9. Rectal problems

Myth Number 2: You cannot influence your child as to what sexual orientation he will choose when puberty occurs.
1. Convincing results from extensive research is suppressed by the homolobby
2. Research report by Bieber et al (REF. 4)
3. Conclusions to be drawn
4. THE PARADE OF SHAME
5. More about the father’s role
6. The common role of both parents
7.  Attacks by the homolobby in USA against people who disagree with their agenda
8.  Attacks by the homolobby in Sweden against people who disagree with their agenda

Myth Number 3: Sexual orientation is something inherited.  It’s determined by the genes.
1. The bias/spin of research results by the homolobby
2. Kallman
3. Bailey-Pillard (1991)
4. Bailey-Dunne-Martin (2000)
5. Yet another fake study (Hamer, Hu, Magnusson, Hu and Pattatucci)
6. Bearman-Bruckner (2001)
7. Simon LeVay (1991)
8. Prenatal Hormonal Hypotheses
9. Trend i Recent Homosexual ”Research”

---

Introduction

References:
In the presentation I will refer to three types of references.

Type 1. To keep the main presentation within limits I have placed some of the background material in links that you will find on the left sidebar menu.  Whenever you see an underlined number (like No.1) you will find additional information on this issue by either clicking right there on the link or going to the left sidebar and click on the same number there.

Type 2. I have used material from several books as sources for the presentation.  References to these books appear as "REF." (upper case letters), followed by a number and then the page number in the book where you can find the information.  Most of these books in turn have many references of their own. 

Type 3. Some of the source material that I consider especially significant is referred to with the designation "ref." (lower case letters) followed by a number.  I also use this type of reference to particular websites on the internet.  Some of these references, especially RFSL’s web pages, have a habit of being withdrawn whenever they get in hot water for their lurid material.  So, I don’t know whether a particular link is current (i.e. up and running) and have therefore “frozen” the page in time for you.  But the material I have included was posted on the web as recently as March 2007.  All the references of this type (type 3) have a direct link if you just click on the ref. number. A listing of all the three types of references (“Nr”, “REF” and “ref”) can be found by clicking on the link at the bottom of the left side bar.

Back to Table of Contents

Free Literature
If you are a parent or grandparent, with a child (or grandchild) under the age of 16, you may receive some of our material free of charge.  This material can be found by clicking on the link called “Free Literature” at the bottom of the sidebar menu or under “Contact” on the horizontal top menu bar.

All the free literature is in the English language.  Whatever material that is not available to you free of charge can be bought at (for example) www.amazon.com.

Contact
You may also communicate with me by writing to me at:

Ron Linden
Kungsgatan 12
211 49 Malmö
Sweden

Sweden

Back to Table of Contents

Tour through Sweden
We plan to visit many cities in Sweden where we will make our free literature available.  See our schedule under the link titled “Tour through Sweden” on the top menu bar.  We will also put an ad in local newspaper when we come to your city.  But sometimes the local newspaper may not accept our ad.  After all, we are talking about information that RFSL and their sympathizers do not want parents and grandparents to know about. 

Update note: The tour was ended in 2006 and will not be completed due to ongoing threats by the homo mafia in our country. For further information about the tour see link on top menu bar titled “homolobby or homomafia?” 

Back to Table of Contents

---

Let’s now start with Myth Number 1.

Myth Number 1: The heterosexual and the homosexual lifestyles are equally desirable  

Why is it necessary that we take a look at the prevalent homosexual acts?
In their book “After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear of Gays in the ‘90s” (New York: Penguin, 1989) – which has become the de facto bible of the homosexual agenda – the marketing geniuses Kirk and Madsen write (page 146):
“When you’re very different, and people hate you for it, this is what you do: first get your foot in the door, by being as similar as possible; then, and only then – when your one little difference is finally accepted – can you start dragging in your other peculiarities, one by one.  You hammer in the wedge narrow end first.  As the saying goes, allow the camel’s nose beneath your tent, and his whole body will soon follow.”

They continue (page 155):
“We mean the conversion of the average American’s emotions, mind and will, through a planned psychological attack, in the form of propaganda fed to the nation via the media.  We mean subverting the mechanism of prejudice to our own ends – using the very processes that made America hate us to turn their hatred into warm regard – whether they like it or not.”

And Kirk and Madsen further explain (page 155-156):
“In Conversion, we mimic the natural process of stereotype-learning, with the following effect: we take the bigot’s good feelings about all-right guys, and attach them to the label ‘gay’ either weakening or, eventually, replacing his bad feelings toward the label and the prior stereotype ….Whereas in ‘Jamming’ the target is to show a bigot being rejected by his crowd for his prejudice against gays, in ‘Conversion’ the target is to show his own crowd actually associating with gays in good fellowship.  Once again, it’s very difficult for the average person, who, by nature and training, almost invariably feels what he sees his fellows feeling, not to respond in this knee-jerk fashion to a sufficiently calculated advertisement”.

And with respect to the truthfulness of the ads, Kirk and Madsen arrogantly proclaim (page 154):
“It makes no difference that the ads are lies.  Not to us because we’re using them to ethically good effect, to counter negative stereotypes that are every bit as much lies, and far more wicked ones.”

Well, here in Sweden the camel is already fully inside our tent.  Here the lies have, by and large, already been swallowed by us gullible Swedes.  Here the RFSL has already “dragged in all the peculiarities one by one”.  It’s only by describing them that you (as a parent) will be motivated to save your child from such a lifestyle.  Only when you realize that “the ads are lies” will you seek and find the tools necessary to prevent a homosexual development in your child.

So, let’s now compare the two lifestyles.  But let’s first establish that - in spite of all the ad lies from RFSL and their supporters - the homosexual and heterosexual people are of equal value.  All people have equal value.  We should all agree on that.  However, if we talk about what is the desirable sexual orientation both for individuals and for society, opinions differ. There are those who would argue that the homosexual lifestyle, with its lack of taboos and freedom to enjoy any kind of sex, is the more desirable lifestyle. But there are also those who believe that the heterosexual lifestyle is to be preferred, both from the individual’s point of view as well as from society’s point of view.

Let us therefore compare the two lifestyles so that you, as a parent, can decide for yourself what you believe is the desired outcome in your own offspring and take action accordingly.  Since we are talking about what you as a parent find desirable we shall only touch on what is best for you and your offspring and not the impacts on society at large (e.g. medical costs for sexually transmitted diseases, the cost to society for drug abuse, how other medical research has suffered lack of resources due to the intense focus on AIDS etc.).A comparison of the two lifestyles reveals the following:

Area of comparison	Homosexual	Heterosexual
1. Average life expectancy	55 years (men)	75 years (men)
2. Use of illegal drugs	greater	smaller
3. Frequency of suicide	greater	17.6 (per 100K/yr)
4. Frequency of pedophilia	>3 to >10	1
5. Sexually transmitted deceases (STD)	greater	smaller
6. Infidelity with partner	greater	smaller
7. Social and religious acceptance	smaller	greater
8. Abnormal focus on sex	greater	smaller
9. Rectal problems	greater	smaller

Many of the categories are interdependent.  For example: drug abuse, suicide, and sexually transmitted deceases all affect the average life expectancy.  And in certain social and religious environment (with a low acceptance of the homosexual lifestyle), the frequency of suicide among already established homosexuals may be higher, which is compensated for by a much lower percentage of homosexuals.  In other words: The absolute number of suicides in such a culture is probably lower.   But once a person becomes homosexual he/she is more likely to commit suicide.  We must also remember that we are talking about statistical averages.  In other words: the probability of a particular outcome.  For example, there are homosexual men with no STD while there are heterosexual men with many of them.

The root problem with the male homosexual lifestyle – apart from moral and fidelity aspects – are the various forms of anal sex.  This is very central to their lifestyle as evidenced by the focus on the “Anal Manual” (ref. 13) at RFSL’s official website.  About two thirds of all male homosexuals engage in various forms of anal intercourse and activities.  From this practice follow many health related maladies and associated problems.  The next epidemic for mankind is just waiting to happen.

Let’s now take a closer look at each of the 9 areas of comparison.

Back to Table of Contents

1. Average life expectancy.
The 75 years in the table for heterosexual men is actually based on statistics from USA for all men.  And I could not find any direct statistics for homosexual men, probably due to historic problem of classifying men as homosexual due the stigma that used to be associated with such a lifestyle.  However, I found two separate sources for a 20 years shorter life span for homosexual men: (ref.1) (Psychological Reports (2005; 96:693-697) and (ref.2) (1997; International Journal of Epidemiology 1997; Vol. 26, 657-61) both of which are referred to in (ref.3) (Yet Another Study Confirms Gay Life Expectancy 20 Years Shorter).

Back to Table of Contents

2. Use of illegal drugs. 
We only need to go to RFSL’s own website to realize how commonplace illegal drug use is among homosexuals.  If there is any organization in our country that could be considered representative for the homosexual community it must be the RFSL.  After all, they are the organization who regularly receives generous amounts of taxpayers’ money from our government to finance activities such as their website and various other recruitment programs.  Let’s take a look at their website here (ref.4).  Here you can see for yourself a list of the most common illegal drugs with a description of how to use the particular drug.  Take for example Ecstasy (by the way they misspell the word Ecstasy) which is a very prevalent drug on the homosexual social scene.  The given recommendation for its use is: “Drink water regularly but not more that half a liter every hour”.  And then they have other recommendations on how to use amphetamine, cocaine, crystal meth, GHB, LSD and so on.  I searched the websites of many other organizations in our country – National Organization of Motorists, Swedish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and many, many other organizations – but not a single one of them give recommendations to their member on how to use illegal drugs.  So, the obvious question is: “why is there such strong correlation between illegal drugs and the homosexual lifestyle?”

The answer is found on another one of RFSL’s web pages.  I must admit that I hesitated to include this material.  It is indeed repulsive to most normal people.  But after all, it’s from RFSL’s own website and it explains better than words why illegal drugs are so prevalent.  Here on this RFSL page (ref.5) they write:

“Licking the ass - Rimming
For the non-initiated participant, the meeting between the tongue and the asshole is a mystery, painful and even repulsive.  However, for the experienced participant it’s heaven on earth.  One of the favorite positions among rimmers is when one of them sits hunched above the other’s face and spread his cheeks apart.  By doing so the rimmer can reach with his tongue everywhere."

In other words: “for the novice it’s repulsive but for the experienced participant it’s like heaven on earth”.  And this very fact - that it’s repulsive for the novice – explains why illegal drugs are conveniently used to facilitate the practice.  The same thing goes for many of the other activities that homosexuals engage in (for example the so called “fisting” etc.).  It’s well recognized that experienced older men love to initiate younger men and boys to the “mystery” of various sexual practices. Like when our Supreme Court Justice Leif Thorsson sought and paid for homosexual favors from a young 20 years old boy in Stockholm (No.1).  We’ll look more at this phenomenon later.  As you read the RFSL website you realize that there is a progression in homosexual practices.  The vile and depraved acts of yesterday will not suffice today.

Back to Table of Contents

3. Frequency of suicide.
We know that the suicide rate is 17.6 per 100,000 of all citizens per year (4-5 times higher among men than among women).  Quite understandably, there is no reliable statistics on suicide frequency among homosexuals.  Many suicides are among young people who are wrestling with a nascent homosexuality because (tragically) they were never given the help and opportunity to develop their masculinity.  So, it’s hard to know the real cause of suicide among such adolescents.  However, studies have been conducted about unsuccessful suicide attempts were the person survived (of course) and the cause for the attempt could be ascertained (ref.6; "The Relationship Between Suicide Risk and Sexual Orientation: Results of a Population-Based Study").  All of the studies conclusively point to a much higher rate of attempted suicide among homosexual men and adolescents. Some of the underlying causes of the emotional trauma associated with suicides by homosexuals are:

1). When a “pre-homosexual” boy enters puberty he has often already experienced plenty of rejection by his male peers.  During his formative years he often felt like he was not like the other boys.  This has already caused emotional trauma for him.  He urgently needs help from another man (or men) to be affirmed in his masculinity.  Instead, what he too often receives is RFSL propaganda that pulls him deeper and deeper into the homosexual lifestyle.

2). If he then ”comes out” as a homosexual he often experiences further scorn and rejection from many people.  He may even be rejected by member of his own family.  Even many church members unfortunately don’t know how to give the proper help.  But even with total acceptance, most homosexual men will never be happy because they feel deep inside that something is wrong and unnatural. 

3). When he then progresses in the homosexual lifestyle he finds that it never leads to true satisfaction.  Since it’s against nature there will never be emotional satisfaction.  And what worked yesterday will no longer satisfy today and he will typically progress into increasingly depraved acts and feel even more dissatisfied. 

There is a fallacy promoted by the gay agenda that full and unreserved tolerance and acceptance will lead to fewer suicides.  It may be that the rate (or frequency) itself might decrease somewhat.  But it also leads to many more boys developing homosexuality.  Parents will come to consider it fully normal and natural and not do what they can to prevent it.  And although the frequency might come down somewhat, the fact that many more will be drawn into the homosexual lifestyle means that the total number of suicides will increase.

In this context I want to discuss a little more the proper attitudes towards homosexuals by caring and loving heterosexuals.  Of all the e-mails I have received from my countrymen, through contacts on this site, one gentleman (apparently Christian) wrote: “Isn’t it a problem (from a Christian point of view) that the ones who have suffered the most from an unfortunate upbringing (i.e. absentee father) will also be the ones to suffer the most risks of developing homosexuality.  The question of how to show Christian love and care to a homosexual person is very difficult”.

It’s apparent what’s on the writer’s mind.  When an adolescent displays pre-homosexual tendencies, and we know (or have reason to believe) that it’s rooted in an inadequate upbringing, should we not embrace the lifestyle and make it easier for him (or her) to accept the homosexual lifestyle.  There are two issues involved in the writer’s contribution: a) Our attitudes and b) The fairness of it all.

a) Our attitudes
The answer (in my point of view) has a lot to do with whether or not one believes that homosexuality is something inherited (something in the genes) and therefore nothing can be done about it.  The many people (probably a majority in many Western countries) who have fallen for such disinformation – so successfully promoted by the homosexual lobby – believe that they express love and concern by facilitating and supporting the homosexual lifestyle.  But those among us who don’t accept homosexuality as something inherited and about which nothing can be done, have a different response.  Once you realize that it can indeed be prevented in the first place, and even “repaired” once developed, your attitude and actions are very different.  It’s no longer a question of showing pity to the unfortunate homosexuals, but a strong and true compassion to prevent it from developing in the little boy and girl, and (if already developed) help a person to escape from the snares of a deprived lifestyle.

This thought is well communicated in the touching story about “Randy” in Chuck Colson’s book “The Good Life”.  By permission from Prison Fellowship, this chapter (titled “Morality and the Natural Order”), has been translated into Swedish and is made available upon request.  See the sidebar under “Free Literature” for information on how to order.   If you understand English I strongly recommend that you buy the book (“The Good Life” by Chuck Colson, the founder and chairman of the successful Prison Fellowship).

So, what it all boils down to is this: Do you or don’t you believe that homosexuality is something that can be prevented in the first place and “repaired” if already developed?  To that very end I have written about Myth 2 and Myth 3 below to help you understand why it can indeed be prevented.  And also why it’s so important for the homosexual lobby that such information be withheld from you.

b) The fairness of it all
It’s true that it’s not fair that some boys will have a very wholesome upbringing with a father (or other close male) giving him the necessary affirmation in the development of his masculinity, while other boys tragically lack such role models.  Some poor boys are even molested in childhood which leaves horrendous scars for life.  This tragic situation ought to inspire caring adults, especially men, to take an unfortunate boy “under his wings” and give him the emotional support that a boy desperately needs from a male.  But to do so you first need to understand that you can make a difference.  You can indeed prevent a homosexual development in a child.  To not care and try to prevent it, under the false pretense that some children are genetically destined to become homosexual, is the greatest of tragedies in our country today.  This must be changed to counteract the evil misinformation disseminated by groups like RFSL. They want their ranks filled and are daily recruiting our young and most vulnerable ones.  They know all too well that for each new adolescent they recruit into their ranks, they often also get a great number of sympathetic members from the child’s family and their friends.  Numbers means clout and political power.

Back to Table of Contents

4. Frequency of pedophilia.
Most people realize intuitively that the frequency of pedophilia is greater among homosexual than among heterosexual men.  The total number of pedophilia is of course higher among heterosexual men – and then with girls.  But the frequency is much higher among homosexual men by a factor of at least 3 and maybe as high as 10 or even more.  Since pedophilia is still illegal, whenever a crime is investigated it’s very difficult to ascertain whether the perpetrator is homosexual or heterosexual.  A homosexual perpetrator is more likely to hide his true sexual orientation.  But we can look at the kind of pedophilia at hand and then apply some logical reasoning.  Molestations of children are almost always perpetrated by men.  Women somehow tend to not suffer as much from this deviancy.  When women molest, and it does happen, the media tends to be more interested in the tantalizing aspects of the crime than the abhorrence of the rape as such. 

Whenever a boy is molested by a man, the act itself is by nature a homosexual act whether or not the perpetrator becomes identified as a homosexual man per se.  Just think about all the catholic priests who have molested boys.  Obviously it was by someone with homosexual tendencies even though the priest would never admit that he is homosexual.  Likewise, the molestations of virtually all girls are crimes of heterosexual pedophilia. 

So, it therefore follows that a look at the ratio of molestations of boys to molestation of girls ought to give us some insight.  If anything, the molestation of boys by men are likely to be more underreported that the molestation of girls by men.  It should be noted though that there are some bisexual molesters who seek out both boys and girls.  Statistics indicate that molestations of boys are not too far below molestations of girls even though there are between some 25 to 50 times more heterosexual than homosexual men in the general population. 

Even a politically correct liberal media outlet like Los Angeles Time had to admit that.  On August 25-26 1985 they reported on a survey of 2,628 adults across the US.  A full 27% of the women and 16% of the men claimed to have been sexually molested as children.  In other words, only about 1.7 times (=27/16) more girls than boys had been molested.  Since 25/1.7=14.7 and 50/1.7=29.4 it follows that homosexual men are between 14.7 and 29.4 times more likely to become pedophiles than heterosexual men.  A crude analysis like this is, as stated above, based on the assumption that all molesters were males.  However, in the LA Times study 7% of the girls were molested by a woman and also 7% of the boys were molested by a woman.  So, male molesters were 93% as opposed to the previously assumed 100% of the total number of molesters.  Through this “adjustment” they found that 4 out of every 10 molestations in the study were committed by homosexuals.  So, with 40% divided by a 2-4% homosexual population it becomes between 10 (=40/4) to 20 (=40/2) times more likely that any given homosexual man is a pedophile than any given heterosexual man.  This compares to the “unadjusted” numbers above (14.7 to 29.4 times more likely).  For a further discussion of this one and other scientific studies on the subject click here. And for even more evidence click here (PDF-file 210 KB). The conclusions of a wealth research into this subject are so uniform and undeniable. In short: the evidence is overwhelming.

One thing should be noted.  Much of the statistics in previous studies are based on a data base before there was an explosion of homosexuality due to the media’s popularization of this lifestyle.  Today, the percentage of homosexuals may far exceed the historic levels of 2%-4% of the population.  Therefore, if – as an example - the percentages today are between 4% and 8% homosexuals and it’s applied to the same data base, the results are reduced by a factor of 2 from 10-20 times to between 5-10 times higher probability of pedophilia among homosexual men.  But such a calculation is of course an artifact.  Because, as the percentage of homosexuals among the population at large increases, so does that the total number of crimes of pedophilia by homosexuals.  Therefore, the probability will always be some 10-20 times higher that a homosexual man is a pedophile than a heterosexual man.

It’s apparent from the numbers that most homosexuals are of course not pedophiles.  So, to be part of a group with such an elevated frequency of pedophilia is (quite understandably) often disturbing to non-pedophilic homosexuals.  This is similar to the situation with the “North American Man-Boy Love Association” (NAMBLA) which is an embarrassment to many non-pedophilic homosexuals.  However, the acceptance of pedophilia is slowly but surely gaining acceptance in our decadent society.  So, it won’t be long before NAMBLA will no longer be an embarrassment. 

Let’s now look at some examples and then I’ll present my own statistical analysis on an extensive and interesting data base.

4:1. In a statement on RFSL’s own  website they express admiration of older men having sex with young boys.  They write: ”In ancient Greece the love between older men and young boys was greatly appreciated” For further information click here (No.2)

4:2.  It’s no secret that just Thailand - with its infamous child prostitution - is such a popular travel destination among homosexual men.  On this information page (ref.8) - directed towards homosexual men - we read why the country is so popular.  It reads in part:

About the gay scene.
We wish and intend to make your visit to our gay community as happy as possible. Many guests are familiar with gay life in Phuket, but for those new explorers, we have some thoughts we would like to share

Please remember that the Thai-men you will meet in the bars are working men and your satisfaction and happiness is their income. If you talk with a man for a while in the bar, buy him a drink, leave him a tip, or both.
You will as everywhere find many kinds of (Thai-) men: masculine men, feminine men, masculine boys, feminine boys and lady-boys. And do not be surprised that some of the Thai-men who go with a gay-tourist are straight…. (comment: They are called “Thai-men” even if many of them are still boys).

Patong has bars with cabaret shows, go-go boys, sexy shows, bars and restaurants, and almost all have Thai-men who would go with a guest. If a Thai- man appeals to you, find out through the captain or owner if he speaks English. It is always best to be straightforward with the Thai-man and the owner of the bar. Find out what the Thai-man likes and does not like. Also find out if he will spend the night, or just spend a shorter time together with you. If you do not find out about this in advance you may be confused and disappointed later. There is always a fee to the bar that is not negotiable if you want to take away a Thai-man working in that bar. There may be some flexibility with your payment to the Thai-man. It may involve only sex, staying the night, or perhaps you will have company for your entire holiday. Please remember, he has friends or family, and will need some time for his daily life too. Payment can be at the end of your adventure, but it is more thoughtful to consider payment as you both go along…
Different Thai-men you will meet here have as well as all other men different intentions with seeking contact with you. Making contact to find: love, the pleasure of sex, money for their living or a combination of all.
We as western-gay are normally very used to seek sexual contacts just for the pleasure of sex or as a part of seeking love but we are not very prepared that that may involve money. Here that is a reality. And regardless if you want to be a part of that or not it probably make your stay here in the gay community easier if you are mentally aware already when you enter….
We hope you will have a really nice time here and that our thoughts will help you to make it even better”

Additionally, after the Tsunami hit Thailand the gay community was forced to postpone a big gay festival in Phuket, much to the disappointment of many of our gay people.  Something that was regretfully announced on RFSL’s website.

4:3. The Netherlands and Belgium are countries well-known for continuously lowering the ”age of consent” between grown-up and children (presently 12 years).  It therefore didn’t come as a surprise that Bo Svensson - Chief Justice of the Swedish Supreme Court and an apparent defender of the sex trade – seems to take his cues from the Belgian judicial system.  He discussed it in an interview where he defended his buddy on our Supreme Court, Leif Thorsson, who had bought sex from a young student boy in Stockholm. (No.1).

4:4. Recently The Journal of Homosexuality ran a special edition of their publication devoted to ”The paedophilia debate”.  The publisher, John DeCecco also serves on the editorial board of “Paedika: The Journal of Paedophilia”, a Dutch publication that sponsors “paedophilia research” in an attempt to make pedophilia more acceptable in society.  This special edition reflects an essential, influential and growing segment of the homosexual community that neither hides, nor condemns pedophilia (REF.1 page 63).

The homosexual lobby likes to emphasize that there are more heterosexual than homosexual pedophiles in society.  And if we talk about the total number of such crimes it’s of course true.  And a gullible public leaves it at that.  But if you look at the rate (or frequency) of pedophilia, homosexual pedophilia is far more common.  By a factor probably somewhere around 10.

The reason for a substantial variation from study to study is – as stated before - that it is difficult to ascertain exact numbers in the data base.  This may cause some people to wrongly discredit the whole issue of a serious increased frequency of pedophilia among homosexual men.  But all the studies have the same clear trend.

To be sure, there are some studies on the low side of the factor of 10.  One such study (REF.1 page 64-65 and ref.9) found that there are 36 times more heterosexual than homosexual men.  But, the number of heterosexual molestations was “only” 11 times higher than homosexual molestations.  Thus there was only about a 3 times greater probability (=36/11) that a homosexual man would turn out to be a pedophile than a heterosexual man.  Yet another study from 1988 was reported in the “Psychiatric Journal of the University of Ottawa” by Bradford, Bloomberg and Bourget (ref.10).  They found that between 19% and 33% of all reported pedophilia is by homosexual men.  With 3% of all men being homosexual, the “overrepresentation” of pedophilia among homosexuals become between 6 (=19/3) and 11(=33/3) times the frequency by heterosexual men.

It’s important to remember that since 1973, when APA suddenly declared homosexuality a normal behavior (See Myth 2 subchapter 1 below), the disciplines of psychology and psychiatry seem to have been flooded by homosexuals with a distinct agenda.  It’s therefore to be expected that studies of recent date (and especially when the authors themselves are homosexuals) are strongly biased and often lacking intellectual honesty in the area of “research” on homosexuality.  See Myth 3 below for several such examples.  Therefore, studies on the area of pedophilia among homosexuals conducted nowadays, need to be taken with a grain of salt.

(REF.2) pages 121-140 lists over a dozen reputable studies and reports all of which points to an appreciably higher frequency of pedophilia among homosexual men.  I would also suggest this reference (ref.38) (Report: pedophilia  more common among 'gays' - Research purports to reveal 'dark side' of homosexual culture).  A detailed analysis of a comprehensive data base (from 12 states in the USA between the years 1991 and 1996) issued by the Bureau of Justice of the US in 2000  (ref.11 and ref.12), suggests a ratio of 10:1 of the frequency of pedophilia between homosexual and heterosexual men (Nr.3).

Back to Table of Contents

5. Sexually Transmitted Deceases (STDs)
HIV infection has of course been in the spotlight over the last two and a half decades since its spread in the so called “homosexual bath clubs” in New York in 1981 and soon thereafter in San Francisco.  The extremely dangerous and self-destructive practice by homosexual men was the major driving force in the critical and rapid initial epidemic.

At that time the disease went under the name GRID (Gay-Related Immune Disorder).  But very soon the gay community – having suddenly become very influential – managed to change the name to AIDS (Acquired Immune-Deficiency Syndrome).  Today everybody knows about the tragic and worldwide HIV/AIDS epidemic.

But beyond HIV/GRID/AIDS there are many other STDs.  Among them are HPVs (Human Papillomavirus), a group name for some 70 different types of virus.  A study of homosexual and bisexual men in San Francisco showed that HPV was almost universal among HIV-positive men and a full 60% among HIV-negative homosexual and bisexual men.  Likewise, many other STDs (Gonorrhea, Syphilis, Kaposi Sarcoma, etc.) are far more common among homosexual men.  Also Hepatitis B is more common among homosexual men.

There are two major underlying reasons for the high spread of STDs among homosexual men:

5:1. The frequency of anal intercourse among homosexual men is very high.  According to one report (ref.13): Increases in Unsafe Sex and Rectal Gonorrhea among Men who have Sex with Men (MSM) San Francisco, California, 1994-1997, Mortality and Morbidity Weekly Report, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, January 29, 1999,45 ] the percentage of anal sex among homosexual men (MSM) increased from 57.6% to 61.2% between 1994 and 1997.  One only needs to look at RFSL’s own “Anal Manual” - prominently displayed on their website (ref.14) - to realize how widespread this practice is among homosexual men. 

And anal intercourse transmits STDs to a much higher degree than vaginal intercourse.  In a study presented in New England Journal of Medicine it was found that “the probability of HIV transmission in unprotected received anal penetration was between 0.008 and 0.032, or between 1 in 125 and 1 in 31 for each time of such an act” (REF.2 page 71-72).  By comparison, the probability of HIV transmission in unprotected vaginal intercourse is “only” between 0.0005 and 0.0015 or between 1 in 2000 and 1 in 666.  Thus anal intercourse is between 5 and 64 times more risky than vaginal intercourse.

But it’s not only through “blood to blood” or “mucus to mucus” that transmission takes place.  From the publication “Anal Pleasure and Health” (Jack Morin, Anal Pleasure and Health: A Guide for Men and Women, San Francisco, Down There Press, 1998 p. 220) it reads: “Sexual activities offer many opportunities for small doses of feces to find its way to the mouth of the sexual partner. The most direct rout is via oral-anal contact”.

5:2. The high number of partners among homosexual men.  We turn again to the RFSL’s website to see that such is the case and what chances homosexuals are willing to take with respect to unprotected sex (ref.15).  There someone writes: ”We love each other and are tested HIV negative.  We fuck without with each other but with condom with others.  Negotiated security works if both have tested hiv-negative twice with three months in between and had safer sex in between.  It takes up to three months for antibodies to form.  Then you must be in agreement about what rules apply if you meet someone on the side. To then always fuck with condom and immediately tell your partner if you had unprotected sex, is a good agreement.”

Back to Table of Contents

6. Infidelity with partner.
The average number of partners throughout life is 50 among homosexual men and 4 among heterosexual men (REF.1; page 54).  Again, an average like this does not exclude that there are homosexual men who are faithful to their partner (although rarely if ever throughout life) and that there are promiscuous heterosexual men.  Over the last 12 months, the number of partners was 8 among homosexual men and 1.2 among heterosexual men.  Anal intercourse over the last 12 months was 65% among homosexual men (MSM or men sex with men) and 9.5% among heterosexual men (MSW).

Beyond the much higher risk of STDs among homosexual men (see above) the high infidelity in their partnerships often results in additional emotional trauma for one of the partners when a partnership is broken.  Besides. there is of course emotional trauma to any adopted children.  Beyond the much higher risk of pedophilia this has now also become a reality for our little ones since our Parliament ("Riksdag") in a very shameful act legalized adoption by homosexual partners.  (See “The Parade of Shame” under Myth 4.2 below). 

Back to Table of Contents

7. Social and religious acceptance.
Although part of a shrinking minority, there are still Swedes who don’t find the homosexual lifestyle equally acceptable.  The reasons are twofold:7:1  Some Swedes resent the fact that (on the average) the homosexual community taxes the medical, social and financial resources to a much larger extent.  The high costs of AIDS and other STDs, drug addiction etc. decreases the financial resources available for other social services and research programs.7:2. Some people in Sweden - even after an enormous shift in society’s attitudes over the last decades – still have religious roots that govern their opinion of the homosexual lifestyle.  Let’s look at the three biggest religions in our society today.

ISLAM
Islam – probably already the biggest religion in Sweden (at least as far as expression of their religion is concerned) – have some clear prohibitions against homosexual behavior:

(Koran 4:16)
If two men among you have unnatural lust (affection), they shall both be punished.

(Koran 27:55)
Would you rather come to a man in lust than to a woman.  No, you are an ignorant people.

JUDEO-CHRISTIAN
Both of these world religions traditionally condemn homosexuality.  That said, it must be recognized that most of today’s Christians (with the exceptions of the Catholics) have changed their religion and today embrace homosexuality.  To find out how this has happened over just the last 3 decades click on this link (Nr.6; Response to the Onslaught of Homosexuality from Religious Groups).  Notwithstanding the greater acceptability, all the three main religions in Sweden - at least at their original core values and historic Holy documents - condemn homosexuality.  Therefore, if your child turns out homosexual he or she is likely to have a harder time relating to at least some people in our country.

Back to Table of Contents

8.  An abnormal focus on sex.
For the homosexual person in general, sex occupies a much larger part of his life.  When an adolescent person, of either orientation, becomes sexually active, there is typically a heightened interest in sex.  While this focus for the heterosexual person subsides with marriage and the start of a family, for the homosexual person it becomes unnatural in its intensity and scope.  You never saw a heterosexual organization celebrating their orientation in a Stockholm “Straight Day Parade” with its members on a truck-bed making fucking motions in front of the Royal Palace.  The heterosexual person has so many other things and duties that occupy his life.

Back to Table of Contents

9. Rectal problems.
Even when condoms are used to lower the risk of transmission of viruses and bacteria (see above), anal intercourse still injures; especially for the person who is anally penetrated.  The rectal sphincter is created for only so much stretching to pass bowel movements.  The pressure from a penis may greatly injure the sphincter.  Even worse is the common practice of “fisting” as described in this way in RFSL’s online “Anal Manual” (ref.5)

“Fisting
Fistfucking is an advanced sex technique and means that your whole hand is inserted in the ass.  To fist or to be fisted demands great knowledge combined with calm, responsibility and consciousness.  It’s a question of practice and confidence.  To insert your fist in another man’s ass is a privilege.  The one who is being fisted shows that he trusts you and it means that you must respect his vulnerability.
A good fister is fully focused on his partner and attentive to his reactions.  The bottom line for the one who is being fisted is to be relaxed and be carried away rather than forcing the anal canal to be opened.  If you are a beginner you are advised to use an experienced fister as your teacher.  A few recommendations:
* Prepare yourself with a flushing of your intestine.
* Avoid injury by having fingernails cut short.  Remove bracelets, rings and the like.
* Use rubber gloves
* Never the same glove on two people – Switch
* Use lots of lubricants, preferably silicone based.
* If you use a water based lubricant keep a glass of water nearby to dip your hand in.
* Avoid rimming after fisting.
* Lick and fuck first.  Then you fist.”
(End of quote from RFSL’s website.)

Therefore, even when condoms are used to lower the risk of viral and bacterial infections (see above) anal intercourse is injurious, mainly for the man who is being penetrated.  It often leads to "rectal incontinence" as well as anal cancer.  The membrane that surrounds the rectum is almost always damaged.  Even without major trauma, there are minor (sometimes microscopic) ruptures in the rectal membrane, that promotes immediate transmission of bacteria into the blood stream.  Therefore, even though faithful homosexual partners have a lower risk of AIDS they often (due to their relative fidelity and trust) engage in such activities and are very vulnerable to other non-AIDS infection.

They are often victims of other serious - and sometimes deadly – infections caused by feces entering the bloodstream.  This includes hepatitis B and a host of otherwise unusual infections such as shigellosis, Guardia Lamblia, which together are now referred to as "Gay Bowel Syndrome (GBS)"(REF.2; pages 80-82).  An article in a publication [F.N. Judson, "Sexually Transmitted Viral Hepatitis and Enteric Pathogens", Urology Clinics of North America 11,. No.1 (February 1984), pp.177-185] sums it up as follows

“Because of their larger numbers of sexual partners and sexual practices such as anilingus and anal intercourse, homosexual men are at particular high risk of acquiring hepatitis B, giardiasis, amebiasis, shigellosis, campylobacteriosis and anorectal infections with Neisseria gonorrhea, Chlamydia trachomatis, Treponema palladium, herpes simplex virus, and HPV (Human Papilloma Viruses)".

With this comparison of the lifestyles as background, you – as a parent or grandparent - may form an independent opinion about which lifestyle is the one preferred for your offspring (especially boys).  And especially to what extent you are prepared to go if you want to prevent a homosexual outcome.  In the next chapter (Myth 2) we shall explore what you can do to influence your child (at a very early age) so that he is likely to assume your preferred sexual orientation when he enters puberty. 

Back to Table of Contents

Myth Number 2: You cannot influence a child’s future sexual orientation.

In the exposé that follows, I have chosen to describe the actions you ought to take – and which ones to avoid – if you want your child or grandchild to choose the heterosexual lifestyle upon entering puberty.  However, if you prefer the homosexual lifestyle (for example homosexual partners who have adopted children) you will want to do the opposite to what is suggested below.

Back to Table of Contents

1. Convincing results from extensive research is suppressed by the homolobby.
First a word about what’s considered “politically correct” in Sweden today.  What follows is widely considered homophobic (“an unfriendly or unfavorable view of the homosexual orientation”) in our country.  Although meant as an invective it’s a proper term.  It’s the opposite of homophilic (”a friendly or favorable view of the homosexual orientation”).  In Sweden today there are many more homophilic than homophobic people.  Just the other way around from what it used to be just a generation ago.

This is the result of an incessant propaganda drumbeat from RFSL and SVT over the last three decades.  If you are not a Swede, you should know that SVT is the Swedish TV monopoly; in effect a propaganda and indoctrination arm of RFSL.  Therefore it came as no surprise when SVT was awarded the prestigious “Rainbow Award” as the best and foremost promoter of their agenda.  This was awarded in connection with the “Gay Pride Week” in Stockholm, Sweden.  Our capital Stockholm has become a magnet (a virtual Mecca) for homophiles from all over Europe.

The homolobby is extremely influential in our society today.  At all levels.  They know all too well that their political influence is in direct proportion to their numbers.  Many parents and relatives become very supportive of RFSL once they learn that one of their own have become homosexual. But at the same time they believe, deep inside, that it’s a tragedy.  Therefore, if you are a parent or grandparent who wishes that one day your offspring will choose the heterosexual orientation, listen carefully to what follows.  

Much of the contents that follows is taken (with permission) from an American book by Joseph Nicolosi titled ”A Parent's Guide to Preventing Homosexuality”  (REF.3).  Nicolosi has a Ph.D. in Psychology.  It should be noted that his book is based on what psychological research has shown and not based on religious concepts.  Because of his views Dr. Nicolosi is now anathema to the leaders and many members of the “American Psychological Association.  In 1973 a related association – The “American Psychiatric Association” or “APA” voted to strike homosexuality from the officially approved list of psychiatric illnesses (the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual or DSM for short).  It occurred through nothing short of a coup by a limited but very vocal and angry group of homosexual members and sympathizers (REF.1 pages 32-35).  Ever since that time, homosexual psychiatrist, psychologists and their sympathizers have increasingly controlled research, reports and symposia within their organizations.  Through an example Dr. Nicolosi explains this shift in policy.  He writes (REF.3; page 171-172):

” Political correctness continues to plague all of our mental health associations.  A 1999 American Psychiatric Association annual convention was scheduled to include a debate on whether sexual orientation could be changed through therapy.  But that debate was cancelled when two of the scheduled speakers withdrew, saying that the subject of homosexuality-as-changeable was too politically charged for a scientific meeting.  Psychiatrist Jeffrey Satinover and I were originally proposed as members of that panel, but the gay-activist psychiatrists refused to participate if either Satinover of I took part in such a discussion.
So you are in graduate school and think that heterosexuality is normative?  Good luck expressing your viewpoint, publishing your thesis, and getting along with your colleagues.  You had better keep that view to yourself, or you may find yourself squeezed out of the social club from which you are trying so hard to gain approval.”

For more information on this subject click on this link (Nr.4 on the side bar).

If the suppression of the truth by the homolobby in the US is so prevalent, imagine how it must be in our country.  There’s probably not a single psychologist or psychiatrist in Sweden who wants to (or dares) cooperate with parents who bring their boy to their office for concern about developing feminine behavior in their child.  Therefore, you as a parent or grandparent are left to yourself to address this concern about your offspring’s future sexual orientation.  

After this somewhat lengthy introduction, let’s now take a look at what honest research reveals and what you can do today to prevent initial pre-homosexuality and subsequent homosexuality from developing in your children.  Let’s first look at the root (genesis) of homosexuality among boys.

Back to Table of Contents

2. Research report by Bieber et al (REF.4)
Let’s first look at an important study conducted by Irving Bieber and some seventy psychiatrists and psychologists. The comprehensive study started in 1952 and 10 years later - after many evaluations and follow-up activities - a team of eight medical psychoanalysts and one clinical psychologist on the Committee issued the report titled “Homosexuality: A Psychoanalytic Study of Male Homosexuals, New York: Basic Books, 1962. (REF.4).  

In addition to the considerable size in scope and the expertise of the authors, the study is significant for two important reasons:

2:1. It was conducted between 1952 and 1962.  This was before it became political taboo to consider homosexuality an undesired behavior that should be prevented.  After 1973, when APA removed homosexuality as abnormal from their DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual), it became virtually impossible to conduct studies of this kind.  And if any group of researchers would dare to conduct something similar today, they would be incredibly ostracized by their peers.  But the findings are still valid today and extremely important for parents seeking to avoid homosexuality from developing in their boys.

2:2. In 1962 homosexuality had not yet been popularized by mainstream media or glorified by the entertainment business.  Today it’s very different.

Just look at what RFSL today writes on their website (ref.16) and you’ll understand what I’m talking about:
“Who Takes Who? – About sex for you who are young and on
A gal meets cute guy. Guy meets another guy. Guy happens to be together with a cute gal who has just been together with another gal.
Try out your sexuality !  Who you are yourself, wants to become and what you’re curious about.  The world is open and there are lots to try out and everything is possible. And of course, you regret more those things you never tried than that which you did try out.”
(End of quote from RFSL’s website.)

It’s obvious that today many young people - who are actually not pre-disposed to become homosexuals (i.e. they were never “pre-homosexual” due to an unfortunate upbringing) - nevertheless choose that lifestyle anyhow because it’s such a fad today.  Or at least they try it out, many of whom then get trapped in its snares (see item 7 under free literature on the menu side bar).  The conditions behind such clearly chosen lifestyle are not really addressed on this website.  It can only be stopped if activities such as those of RFSL are brought under control and outlawed in the interest of a wholesome society. So, it’s safe to say that when the study was conducted in the 1950-ies and 60-ies, homosexuality still carried a stigma and nobody wanted to choose or even try out that lifestyle.  Just like nobody chooses to be an alcoholic.  In the Bieber study no fewer than 106 homosexual men were studied at length, together with a control group of 100 heterosexual men.  The basic question was all along: Why had the 106 men become homosexuals.  What, if anything, in their background or upbringing had caused them to be physically attracted to other men?

The findings were remarkable in that there was one common denominator for the homosexual orientation of all of these 106 men.  Bieber and his team found that they had all (without exception) had an emotionally absent father or no father at all during their upbringing.  None of them felt close to their dad.

Sometimes, but not always, this was combined with an animosity towards their dad for a variety of reasons.  The result was based on how the men had experienced their dads.  Not the other way around.  Some dads might have thought that everything was fine and they might have believed themselves that they met their son’s emotional needs.  

The study found among other things:
“Profound interpersonal disturbance is unremitting in the homosexual father-son relationships….. Not one of the fathers (of homosexual sons) could be regarded as reasonable normal parent.“ 
It’s interesting that in the control group (100 heterosexual men) far from all of them had a good relationship to their father.  A full 37 of them (37%) even confessed that they hated their father.  On the other hand, in the homosexual group 63 of them (59%) said that they hated their father.

Back to Table of Contents

3. Conclusions to be drawn
First of all let me say that just because the father-son relationship had a common denominator for all 106 homosexual men, does not mean that there will never be an exception to the rule.  However, there is very strong evidence to conclude as follows:

If a father bonds emotionally to his son, the son is extremely unlikely to become homosexual.  However, if a father does not bond to his son, that will not necessarily lead to homosexuality.  After all, as many as 37 % of the 100 heterosexual men in the study stated that they hated their father (compared to 59% in the homosexual group).  But the homosexual men somehow failed to bond to their fathers.

In other words: The lack of father-son bonding is a necessary - but not always sufficient - cause of homosexuality. 
Think about it!  Therefore,
Dads: You can prevent homosexuality in your son by bonding with him!  But if you don’t your son is not necessarily doomed to a life in homosexuality.  There are other factors at play as well, that we will look at later.

Beyond the uniform result with respect to emotional bonding between father and son many other relationship aspects varied more, although the trend is similar.  Here are some of them.  (The numbers do not add up to 100% since not all men could answer all questions).
“H” designates the group of 106 homosexual men; “C” designates the control group of 100 heterosexual men:             

	H	C
Patient is father’s favorite	7	28
Another sibling is father’s favorite	59	36
Patient felt accepted by father	23	47
Patient knowingly hated father	60	37
Patient accepted father	20	50
Father expressed affection for patient	25	51
Father has less respect for patient than for other male siblings	42	19
Patient coped with father more easily than with mother	21	40
Patient regards father as admirable	16	47

But first let’s look at why this study demonstrates that homosexuality is not hereditary.  If it were indeed hereditary there would be many men in the homosexual group (“H”) who as children would have experienced emotional bonding to their fathers.

So, let me now summarize as follows:
If a dad is emotionally involved in his son’s development and his son bonds to him in early childhood, there is an almost 100% probability that the son will turn out heterosexual.

I will explain below (Item 5) why this strong link exists.  But let me say here that my heart bleeds for those little boys who lack a male role model in their lives.  And my blood boils when I see how these boys are relentlessly sought out by RFSL in an attempt to recruit as many of them as possible into their ranks. 

Back to Table of Contents

4. THE PARADE OF SHAME
June 5, 2002 was a very fateful day for all mother- and fatherless children in our country.  On that day the Swedish Parliament voted to pass a law that gave the green light for homosexual partners to adopt children.  The vote was 198 in favor and 38 against.  How could any responsible and ethical person deliberately deprive a child of a mother and a father when there are so many heterosexual childless couples yearning to adopt a child?  Up to that point in our history, we had typically shown great care for the well-being of our little ones.  More than anything it shows the level to which our politicians have stooped to accommodate the homosexual lobby.  What judgment must await such men and women?

This is how the Parade of Shame looked when the Parliament voted on proposition 2001/02:123 (ref.17)

Prop. 2001/02:123
LU27 Partnership, adoption etc.
Point 1 (Rejection of proposition regarding adoption and guardianship)
1. Proposal
2. Reservation (kd)
Voting:
198 in favor of proposal
38 in favor of reservation
71 abstained
42 absent
Parliament passed proposal.
Distribution of votes cast:
In favor of proposal: 118 Social Democrats, 9 Moderates, 34 Left Party, 12 Center Party, 15 Environment Party, 9 People’s Party
In favor of the reservation: 1 Moderate, 37 Christian Democrats
Abstained: 60 Moderates, 4 Center Party, 6 People’s Party
Absent: 13 Social Democrats, 11 Moderates, 9 Left Party, 5 Christian Democrats 2 Center Party, 1 Environment Party, 1 People’s Party
Anne-Katrine Dunker (m) and Runar Patriksson (fp) noted that they had intended to abstain but had been marked for a “Yes”

As can be seen from this official tally, it was only the 37 MPs (Members of Parliament) from the Christian Democrats who opposed homoadoption.  Honor to them.  The “Moderate Party” actually did not want to allow homo adoption per se but only to allow homo guardianship of our children. An incredulous position. Think about it!  Would the Moderate MPs have agreed to homosexual people guarding their own children or grandchildren?

Imagine if it were your own son!  If you yourself - due to circumstances beyond your control - would have to let someone else care for your son.  And if you could choose between a husband and wife in an apparent normal marriage on one hand and a pair of homosexual men on the other.  How would your choose?  When you really think about what happened on that fateful day (June 5, 2002) you realize what a reckless and callous act it was against the most vulnerable of our little ones.  By all the parties in our Parliament except the Christian Democrats.  How can the other MPs live with themselves?  See themselves in the mirror daily and realize how they sold out our defenseless children.

The legislative history of this despicable law 
When the Social Democrats (the majority party in Parliament) voted in their own plenum on how to cast their votes as a block in Parliament, those who wanted to pass the law prevailed by only one vote.  Those opposed were only one vote short.  That implies that just under half of the Social Democrats believed it to be in the best interest for the orphaned children to have both a mother and a father.  Nevertheless, when they voted in Parliament not a single one of them dared to vote according to their conscience.  If they had voted what their conscience told them, they would loose their job, income and all the cushy benefits as parliamentarians.  In short, their own financial benefits were more important than the wellbeing of orphaned children.

It should also be noted that the following major organizations, with their expertise on the wellbeing of children, had expressed strong opposition to the proposal for homoadoption: Save The Children (sw: Rädda Barnen), The Children’s Ombudsman (Barnombudsmannen), The Network of Adoption Organizations (Nätverket för Adoptionsorganisationer).

Furthermore, opposition had also been expressed by the following organizations: The Social Department, The National Committee of International Adoptions, The Swedish Association of Physicians, Swedish Society of Psychologists, Sociologists for Family Justice, National Society of Family Counselors,  AFO Organization for Adopted Children and Foster Children, Organization of Adopted Children from Korea, Forum for Adoption, The Family Organization for International Adoption, Children First, The National Organization for Justice for Children (BRIS), The Secretaries for Family Justice, Counseling Center for Adoption, The Network Voice of Adopted Children, Friends of the Children.
(In Swedish the name of the organizations are: Socialstyrelsen, NIA (Statens nämnd för internationella adoptionsfrågor), Svenska Läkaresällskapet, Sveriges Psykologförbund, Familjerättssocionomernas Riksförening Föreningen Sveriges Kommunala Familjerådgivare, AFO-Organisationen för adopterade och fosterbarn, Adopterade koreaners förening (AKF), Forum för adopterade Förbundet Adoptionscentrum, Familjeföreningen för Internationell Adoption, Barnen Framför Allt - Adoptioner, Riksförbundet Barnens Rätt i Samhället (BRIS), Rädda Barnen, Familjerättssekreterarna, Adoptionsrådgivningen, Nätverket Adopterades Röst, Barnens Vänner)
All of these organizations and experts opposed the law for homoadoptions. 

For example, The Swedish Society of Psychologists commented as follows: “The proposal is based on a worldview where the child is peripheral and parenthood is at the center.  The text of the proposal shows a complete lack of understanding of a child’s need”.  (sw: Promemorian har tillkommit utifrån en världsbild där barnet är perifert och föräldrarskapet står i centrum. Författningstexten uppvisar en total avsaknad av förståelse för och kunskap om barns behov. )

And in an interview in the newspaper The World Today (Sw: Världen Idag) (ref.18) on May 18, 2005 Lars Ahlin, chairman of the Swedish Society of Psychologists, commented on the sharp response submitted by his organization: “We normally don’t express us in such terms if we don’t believe that it was a major shortcoming of the proposal.  Our lack of knowledge of how a child is impacted by being reared by two parent of the same sex is a big problem.  We have opted to assume the child’s perspective since there is insufficient knowledge in research based on the evidence.  Of course it’s a moral dilemma but we must not experiment on children.  If we had known for sure that the children would not be exposed to unnecessary risks it would have been different. But the children cannot speak up for themselves.
[ in Swedish: “Så här formulerar vi oss inte om det det inte upplevs som en verklig brist i promemorian. Bristen på kunskap om hur barn påverkas av att växa upp med två föräldrar av samma kön är ett stort problem.
- Vi har valt att inta barnperspektivet på grund av att det finns för lite kunskap, den evidensbaserade forskningen saknas. Det är ju visst ett moraliskt dilemma, man kan inte göra experiment på barn. Kunde vi vara säkra på att barnen inte utsätts för onödiga risker, då hade det varit en annan situation.
- Barnen kan ju inte föra sin egen talan]

Back to Table of Contents

5. More about the father’s role
Let us now return to the question of why it’s so important that the father is emotionally engaged in his son’s development.

It has been said that that the mothers produce boys but fathers produce men.  At a very early age the child starts to realize that the world is divided into natural opposites of boys and girls, men and women.  At that point it’s not enough for the boy to observe the differences.  He must also decide where he belongs in this gender divided world.  The girl has a much easier task.  Her prime bonding is already to her mother so she does not need to go through the additional developmental task of being “de-identified” from the person closest to her – the mother – to become identified with the father.  But for the boy it’s decidedly different.  He must be separated from his mother and grow in difference from his prime love object if he one day will stand a chance of becoming a heterosexual man.  This explains why there are more homosexual men than women.  The first task in the development into a man is to not develop into a woman.

It’s here that the enormously important task for the father begins.  And if the father is not there, another male must fill the role.  It’s extremely important.  Because the little boy is in constant need of help and encouragement in his development into a man.  The father must let him understand that one day he will be like daddy.  For example, the little boy and his daddy may take a shower together so that he may discover that he and daddy look the same and that one day he will become like daddy.  That he is simply created that way and it can’t be changed.  This also means that the son develops great confidence in his father.  Daddy becomes a role model for his boy.  Mommy must gradually decrease her influence over her son, starting at about 2 years of age.  The father must display warmth and care towards his son and not hesitate to hug him.  Someone has said that if the boy is never hugged by his dad, other men may hug him, in a very different way, later on in life.  If this natural and necessary development is not encouraged, the boy may come to suffer from “Gender Identity Disorder” (GID), which is the first step for the pre-homosexual boy. 

Please notice:
5:1. As stated earlier, not all boys who lack an emotionally engaged father will have problems with gender identity.  But the boy who does have an emotionally engaged father to provide encouragement, will most likely not suffer from problems with gender identity.

5:2. Problems with gender identity often seem to affect boys with a sensitive temperament more than other boys.  Such boys are especially vulnerable if they experience that their dads reject them rather than encouraging them.  Such a situation may easily arise if, for example, a boy has different talents and natural gifts than their father and brothers.  The father is often interested in sports and may already have older boys whom he loves to take to soccer practice and soccer games.  If the father’s third or fourth son instead is interested and gifted in arts or music it’s so easy for dad to neglect his little boy and fail to encourage him in what he finds interesting.  Instead, the father must especially take time and pay interest in his little boy’s interest and talents and encourage him in that area.  And to let his boy meet with other boys with the same interest.  So he will become “one of the boys”.  The boy must not be surrendered to his mother’s care and become “mom’s little boy”.  In short: the father must help develop his son’s masculinity in a way that builds a warm trust, respect and affection between them.  All of it to make sure that the boy will one day want to be like his dad.

The problem with gender identification comes in different forms at different levels.  In extreme cases – called Gender Identity Disorder (GID) – the boys start playing with his sister’s dolls, dress in girl’s dresses and so on.  It’s very important that the parents together agree to stop such behavior in love and without rejecting the boy or teasing him.  But it’s more common with milder forms of such behavior which is referred to as “gender conflicted” or “gender confused”.  But all boys with any kind of gender confusion are at risk of becoming “pro-homosexual”.  Such a boy will soon feel that he is not like the other boys.  He may become isolated from and teased by other boys for a developing femininity.  All of this will further reinforce for him that he is different.  Oh, how such a boy is in desperate need of a man who can reassure him that he is just like other boys and that he will grow into becoming like all men.  How I wish that all men were aware of this need, not only in the lives of their own sons, but also in those vulnerable boys who don’t have a father.  And that they would do all they can to prevent RFSL from laying their hands on such boys.

Without help, the ”pre-homosexual” boy will feel more at ease and more secure among girls.  But he is torn inside.  On one hand he wished that he were like other boys but believes that he probably is not.  And when puberty then sets in the picture changes.  The erotic appeal is always towards something that’s different than myself.  And if a boy has been associated more with girls while growing up and felt strange and odd among other boys, then his sexual attraction will be towards other men.

The homosexual lobby sometimes argue that they do a favor for pre-homosexual boys by giving them comfort while developing (so they argue) an inborn, homosexual identity that was there from birth.  But it’s up to you as parents (and grandparents) to prevent that.  But you must first be convinced that homosexuality is not – repeat NOT – something that’s in the genes at birth.  To that end you need to read about “Myth number 3” below. 

Back to Table of Contents

6. The common role of both parents
The second most important element in preventing homosexuality in your child is to protect him/her from sexual predators. (A male role model is number 1).  Child molestation is on the rise.  In an extensive 1985 study by Los Angeles Time on 2,682 adults, a full 16% of all men and a whopping 27% of all women claimed to have been sexually molested as children.  Incest will not only leave physical scars.  The emotional scars may be worse.  Incest is a major cause of the development of homosexuality.  Any given child who has been violated in this way is about 7 times more likely to become homosexual.  This is especially true for girls.  Besides, a molested child has a much higher likelihood of becoming a pedophile himself.  As the saying goes: “Hurt people hurt people”.

Such unfortunate children need special attention by the parents to help heal deep emotional scars.  Unfortunately it’s the children from broken homes who are the most vulnerable ones for a variety of reasons.  It’s not always an adult male who violates children.  An older child or an adolescent, many of whom have already been molested themselves, may also commit such acts.  So, in today’s society with its loose morals, its intense focus on everything sexual, and such widespread acceptance of deviancies, you should be very aware of what kind of person is around your child when you are not present.  Both the mother and the father play an extremely important role here.

The third most important factor (in preventing homosexuality) is the relationship and interaction between the parents.  A happy and loving relationship between husband and wife is a good antidote against a pre-homosexual development.  Especially for the son. The father’s treatment of his wife will leave indelible impressions on the boy.  He will see and learn, while growing up, how it should work.  How it was meant to work.  The mother should, more than anything, show respect for her husband and encourage her son to “go and see daddy” when he has an important question or problem.  The mother must “let go” of her son early on.  She must break the bonding to herself and let her son start bonding with his daddy instead.  This must start after the first 2-4 years of the boy’s life.  But it’s wrong to say that starting later is too late.  It’s never too late but gets increasingly harder the more the years go by without the boy “unbonding” from his mother.  The mother should also resist temptations to “take control of the house” even though she may have a better education, a better job or be smarter than her husband. 

All of this interplay will make the boy want to become like his dad.  It helps the boy to become self-assured and safe in his developing masculinity, while at the same time loving and caring as he observes how his dad treats his wife.  It’s exceedingly beautiful when these forces are at work the way it was meant to be.  But no marriage is perfect.  At least not all the time.  Some lapses in the ideal “role playing” will of course not make a boy homosexual.  But the ground rules of the interaction between the parents in preventing homosexuality in their offspring is apparent and well understood.

How about the boy who – through a myriad of reasons - does not have both a mother and a father?  Well, the task is harder but far from hopeless.  After all, most boys growing up with a single parent will of course not become homosexual.  It can also be argued that a boy with an abusive father is worse off than a boy with no father at all.  This is especially true for the boy who has been traumatized through molestation by his father or stepfather.  A single mom does well if she can get her boy to know a male relative well (uncle, grandfather etc).  Actually any man whom she trust could become a substitute role model for her boy.  Also, if the boy with a single mom has many sisters, the mother does well to keep an eye on her boy so that he does not get caught up in the girls’ doll toys but instead has his own boy toys.  A single father has another set of problems.  A boy needs of course a mother too.  But the loving and caring single father has an easier time to prevent homosexuality in his son than does the single mother.  Remember: mothers make boys but fathers make men.

The activities of the gay lobby (mainly RFSL) in our schools today, combined with the glamorization of the homosexual lifestyle in media and the entertainment business have made it much more difficult for parents today to prevent their offspring from being pulled into the homosexual lifestyle.  I recently came across this article (ref.19) in “The Evening Daily” (Sw: Aftonbladet), a daily newspaper in our country.  Here they recommend the very worst kind of medicine for the pre-homosexual boy.  It reads:

“When was the last time that you gave a doll to your son?  Expert: We subconsciously raise our children through outdated gender roles”.

How important it seems to be for this “expert” that we raise our boys in new gender roles!  To become more feminine.  To attempt to lead them into gender confusion.  There’s just no other conclusion that can be drawn from this garbage.  And this drumbeat goes on and on at all levels in schools, society, the media and the entertainment business.  The homosexual community knows all too well that homosexuality develops from pre-homosexuality which in turn originates from gender confusion.  Through their diabolic activity they go after our children in a flagrant attempt to increase their membership and power.  At the expense of the most vulnerable little ones among us.  How evil can it get?

My hope and dream is that one day there will be a “Save The Children Fund” to counteract all this garbage.  It should target the children in the danger zone.  It can happen in many ways but the aim would be to help boys connect with male role models to help them develop into men.  It could mean things like sponsoring summer camps, where the leaders are happily married and stable heterosexual men with a high moral standard and a desire to help fatherless boys.  For additional information about the role of the father read “Childhood Experiences of Homosexual Men” by Dale O’Leary for NARTH (ref.20)

Back to Table of Contents