Question: Is same-gender sexual attraction immutable?

1. REDIRECTTemplate:Test3

Question: Is same-gender sexual attraction immutable?

Introduction to Question

The question of the legality of same-gender marriage has been heavily debated in the United States. In June 2015, the United States Supreme Court institutionalized same-gender marriage in the United States as a constitutionally-protected right of same-gender couples.

As part of their legal strategy, advocates for same-gender marriage affirmed that a homosexual sexual orientation was an immutable part of a person’s genetic and/or biological makeup. This is the same affirmation made by those that are either members or not of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints who wish to change the Church’s doctrine on marriage to include the sealing of same-gender couples in temples of the Church or who may wish to portray it as homophobic and ultimately harmful to those that experience same-gender attraction and/or gender dysphoria.

But is same-gender sexual attraction an immutable trait of a human being?

Response to Question

Lisa M. Diamond and Clifford J. Rosky Examine Scientific Evidence to Dismiss Immutability

Lisa M. Diamond—a leading sexologist and professor of health psychology and developmental psychology at the University of Utah (and herself a lesbian)—and Clifford J. Rosky—an associate professor of law at the University of Utah—conducted a meta-analysis of the relevant literature regarding the immutability of sexual orientation as well as typical legal arguments based in immutability in favor of LGBT rights. The abstract of their paper, published in the prestigious Journal of Sex Research, reads as follows:

We review scientific research and legal authorities to argue that the immutability of sexual orientation should no longer be invoked as a foundation for the rights of individuals with same-sex attractions and relationships (i.e., sexual minorities). On the basis of scientific research as well as U.S. legal rulings regarding lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) rights, we make three claims: First, arguments based on the immutability of sexual orientation are unscientific, given what we now know from longitudinal, population-based studies of naturally occurring changes in the same-sex attractions of some individuals over time. Second, arguments based on the immutability of sexual orientation are unnecessary, in light of U.S. legal decisions in which courts have used grounds other than immutability to protect the rights of sexual minorities. Third, arguments about the immutability of sexual orientation are unjust, because they imply that same-sex attractions are inferior to other-sex attractions, and because they privilege sexual minorities who experience their sexuality as fixed over those who experience their sexuality as fluid. We conclude that the legal rights of individuals with same-sex attractions and relationships should not be framed as if they depend on a certain pattern of scientific findings regarding sexual orientation.

Diamond made the same points two years later (2018) in a TEDx presentation in Salt Lake City:

Further research needs to be conducted to understand the origins of same-gender attraction. Once that is fully understood, then the ultimate degree of mutability of sexual orientation of all humanity can be understood.

Scientists Favor Genetic Explanations, But These Don't Demonstrate that Same-Gender Attraction is Immutable Nor that It Stems Entirely from Your Genetic Makeup

One of the largest studies that has ever been conducted on the potential genetic origins of same-gender attraction and behavior studied 477,522 individuals from the United Kingdom and United States. It concludes that “[s]ame-sex sexual behavior is influenced by not one or a few genes but many. Overlap with genetic influences on other traits provides insights into the underlying biology of same-sex sexual behavior, and analysis of different aspects of sexual preference underscore its complexity and call into question the validity of bipolar continuum measures such as the Kinsey scale. Nevertheless, many uncertainties remain to be explored, including how sociocultural influences on sexual preference might interact with genetic influences.”

Scientists favor these genetic explanations for the origins of attraction and behavior. None, however, have conclusively demonstrated that same-gender attraction is entirely immutable.

Thinking Differently About Same-Sex Attraction

Perhaps one of the most compelling theories for understanding the origins of same-sex attraction was presented by Jeffrey Robinson PhD (Marriage and Family Therapy, BYU), a licensed marriage and family therapist who completed his doctoral dissertation by performing a qualitative study on Latter-day Saint men who reported that they had overcome same-sex attraction, at the 2018 FAIR Conference. We encourage those interested in this topic to consider Robinson's thoughts by watching the video below.

There are three main objections that have been raised to Dr. Robinson's presentation. We wish to answer those to clarify Robinson's points.

1. Some who experience same-sex attraction exclusively, even while thinking about and trying to comprehend opposite-sex attraction, cannot begin to know how to experience opposite-sex attraction. Dr. Robinson does not say in his video that expanding a repertoire is an easy task for anyone and, indeed, it may be harder for some than others. All Robinson means to establish is that sexuality is something that you know how to do and that expanding your repertoire is possible. It's like saying that because learning Spanish is incredibly hard for some that they can never learn Spanish.
2. How does a child of heterosexual parents who experiences nothing but heterosexual modeling and instruction their whole childhood end up homosexual? It is not known. Perhaps it can start out as a curiosity that a child explores. Perhaps they've been modeled that sexuality only occurs between heterosexual partners but then they get a passing thought or wonder if the same is ever possible for people of the same sex and acquire the cognitive repertoire for homosexuality. Also, one can't discount that there may be many cultural and social factors outside of one's family that sparks someone's genes and brain into acquiring the cognitive repertoire required for experiencing same-gender attraction.
3. Robinson's example of gravity is absurd. Robinson does not mean to say that no potential explanation of gravity exists. Indeed, a very popular and well-supported one exists that has to do with Einstein's observations about spacetime and the curvature of it that exists when objects of great mass occupy it. But that is only one theory. What Robinson means to say is that you can't explain gravity by merely pointing to the effects of it. You must identify a cause of the effects. Merely assigning a label to something is not the same thing as explaining it.

The paper referenced by Dr. Robinson is cited below.

This appears to be the video of Lisa Diamond that Dr. Robinson mentions at 29:50 of the video above.

A. Dean Byrd on the Origins of Same Sex Attraction

Another insightful presentation on the origins of same-sex attraction was given by A. Dean Byrd, then a professor of psychology at BYU, at the 2004 FAIR Conference. The presentation can be found here.

Conclusion

We should all remain humble as investigation continues to unfold the origins of same-gender attraction. Latter-day Saints, for now, can continue to promulgate by faith the truths, given to us by revelation and recorded in scripture, that God created us unto the end of keeping his commandments and glorifying him forever, that marriage is ordained of God unto humankind, that marriage between one man and one woman and their becoming "one flesh" is lawful, and that the sealing of man and woman together for all eternity is essential for their exaltation as gods.

Notes