Male Homosexuality Essay, Research Paper

Absence of a Father Figure as the Strongest Factor in Male Homosexuality

The status & # 8220 ; homosexualism & # 8221 ; normally evokes a negative feeling from most people, particularly in conventional societies as the Philippines. For many old ages most head-shrinkers presupposed that homosexualism was a signifier of mental unwellness, until 1973 when the American Psychiatric Association ( APA ) decided to specify such status as a normal behaviour. Homosexuals, as described by APA, are & # 8220 ; persons whose sexual involvements are directed toward people of the same sex and who are either bothered by, in struggle with, or wish to alter, their sexual orientations. & # 8221 ;

As aforementioned, traditional societies consider homosexual relationships illicit and immoral. However, what these societies have non taken into history is that there is a deeper ground than simply holding animal desires toward the people of the same sex underlying the causing of homosexualism among work forces: a cause rooted in the household.

Homosexual orientation depends on the troubles in the parent-child relationship, particularly in the early, formative old ages of life. When the kid suffers from an unmet attachment-need to the parent of the same-sex, the kid seeks fondness from a member of the same-sex. In the instance of the boy, the shortage in the relationship with the male parent is the one being compensated. This theory is what Dr. Elizabeth Moberly holds, John F. Harvey noted.

To further understand how do troubles in the relationship with the male parent causes male homosexualism, it is of import to cognize what is the function of the male parent in the overall sex function development of the boy and why does the boy resort to a homosexual relationship to be able to accommodate in the absence of the male parent, physical or psychological.

The male parent is the chief masculine theoretical account in the household. & # 8220 ; & # 8230 ; the male parent is the caput. He is the strong masculine figure to which the male child necessarily place with, & # 8221 ; Pura Medina Flores noted, citing Estefania Lim. He is the parent who provides a different component in the overall development of the boy. During the boy & # 8217 ; s infant old ages, he is much attached with his female parent. Get downing at about the age of three, the boy starts to seek for a masculine theoretical account on which to construct his sense of ego. He easy withdraws himself from his female parent and muliebrity. At some point, he might experience he is meeting a quandary of losing his female parent over placing himself with his male parent. The male parent aid decrease such battle by gently pulling off the boy from an overdependence on his female parent and into interaction with the universe at big.

As the boy grows into a immature grownup, the presence or absence of the male parent will either solidify or confound his sense of individuality, most particularly his gender. If this is the instance, striping the boy of the handiness of the male parent will go forth him in a vulnerable place of non holding a confident and rich theoretical account of manhood, non holding a clear and apprehensible theoretical account representing culturally accepted male traits.

Many would reason that paternal absence would non needfully take to the homosexualism of the boy because brothers, male relations, and equals can besides be rather influential in the sex function development of the male child. However, it should be understood that what the male child absorbs chiefly from them is psychosexuality, the consciousness of being male and masculine, which is frequently forged by the male child through the messages he perceives from their behaviour and attitude. It should be noted that gender designation, which is much deeper than the imitated psychosexuality, is a important portion of the sex function developmental procedure. This procedure requires the nurturance of the male parent. The physical, every bit good as the psychological absence of the male parent would impair this stage of designation, an damage that could perchance take to the deformation of the boy & # 8217 ; s sense of sexual orientation.

Others may besides challenge that withdrawal from the male parent may merely take to the effeminateness of the boy, and effeminacy need non take to homosexualism. Harvey noted Richard Green who cites several retrospective surveies associating boyhood cross-gender behaviour, feature of effeminate, with late stripling and grownup homosexual orientation. Surveies have shown that a big per centum of the male childs who exhibited a & # 8220 ; gender non-conformity & # 8221 ; turned out to be homophiles when they grow up. From this, it can be inferred that most, if non all, homosexual work forces exhibited a cross-gender behaviour during their younger old ages in life.

Why would the boy seek homophile relationship when he experienced such troubles in his relationship with his male parent? As defined by Moberly, Harvey noted, homosexual relationships are based on the thrust to carry through the unmet attachment-need of the boy with his male parent. & # 8220 ; What the male homosexual seeks is what he should hold received from his relationship with his male parent, & # 8221 ; Moberly stresses. Having referred to Bieber & # 8217 ; s major survey of homosexual males, Moberly noted that where the adult male & # 8217 ; s male parent has been detached or hostile to the boy, the homosexual spouse was & # 8220 ; constantly identified with the male parent who had been hated and feared. & # 8221 ; This lone confirms that a male homosexual chooses a spouse who is characteristic of his male parent. From this, it can be noted that there is an effort to finish the procedure of designation with a masculine figure.

This shows that, holding her theory based on a major survey, Moberly & # 8217 ; s averment that homosexualism is the boy & # 8217 ; s signifier of version in the absence of the male parent is significant.

Having had discussed the male parent & # 8217 ; s portion in the sex function development and the boy & # 8217 ; s homosexualism as his signifier of version in the male parent & # 8217 ; s absence, that paternal absence is the strongest factor in the causing of male homosexualism, particularly in the Philippine society, should be established.

Ana Maria Badua

conducted an probe in Baguio to be able to happen out what societal variables cause male homosexualism. The consequences of her survey lead her to claim that “the strongest hindrance against homosexualism are cumulative and strong masculine influences on the male child at an early age.” Taking into history that the male parent is the chief masculine influence on the male child that the latter imitates and identifies himself with, it can be deduced that father absence, physical or more normally, psychological, is the strongest factor that may do male homosexualism. Although others may oppose that the male parent is non the lone major masculine influence on the male child, as have earlier been mentioned, gender designation, which requires same-sex parent fond regard and nurturance, is really important in the sex function development of the boy and a shortage on which would soberly impact the son’s sexual orientation and individuality.

A survey directed by Milagros Du-Lagrosa besides provides account on this affair. Her findings show a considerable difference between the maleness accommodation of teenage male childs in father-absent places and in father-present places. The trial she employed, which measured the sex function penchant of the respondents of both groups, showed consequences that the male childs are feminine. The non-difference is because the psychological facet of paternal absence has non been considered. However, looking at the psychological facet of the male parents, father-present male childs have a considerable border in their maleness development. A good account for this is that male parent & # 8217 ; s physical presence indicates paternal nurturance and handiness to function as the boy & # 8217 ; s theoretical account of manhood. However, a male parent who is physically present but is handicapped in his psychological operation would do the male child suffer from the deficiency of a masculine figure to place himself with.

Lagrosa besides explained that extended research attempts identified three paternally related factors indispensable in the masculine development procedure of male childs: paternal maleness, paternal nurturance, and paternal bound puting. A warm relationship between the male parent and the boy indicates paternal nurturance. Masculine behavior displayed by the male parent in the presence of the boy straight enhances the male child & # 8217 ; s masculine development through the boy & # 8217 ; s designation with the male parent. Paternal bound scene is the male parent & # 8217 ; s disciplinary function in the development of the boy. The more the male parent resorts to punishment, the lesser the chances for imitation and designation are provided.

Based on Lagrosa & # 8217 ; s treatment, it shows that the male parent truly plays a important function in the maleness development of the boy. It can be noted that the former & # 8217 ; s absence would, more likely than non, ensue into a divergence in the culturally recognized masculine orientation of the latter, most likely into a status referred to as homosexualism.

Now that the facts have been laid, what significance does turn outing such phenomenon manifests? What class of action does it oblige?

If there are people who should be compelled to move on this affair, they are the household healers and head-shrinkers. Homosexuality deserves a curative attending.

It has been established that homophiles quest for same-sex love to be able to finish the unmet designation procedure they should hold experienced in their relationship with their male parent. Merely as what Moberly suggests, the healers should be a member of the same sex. Since what needs to be fulfilled is the same-sex attachment demand of the homosexual to the male parent, the healer should be a male.

The healer, besides, should non propose heterosexual contact or relationship as the solution of the job. This can make nil to carry through same-sex shortages. As Moberly pointed out that & # 8220 ; same-sex love is the solution to the unmet developmental demand, and it is non the problem. & # 8221 ;

Indeed, same-sex love is non the job. Still, homosexual behaviour inspires abhorrence in other people, most particularly in traditional Christian societies. However, this apparently normal, psychological antipathy is really homophobic. Homophobia has long diverted the people & # 8217 ; s attending from what truly is the root of this status, which is the household. They focus clearly on the divergence of these homophiles but small do they work scrupulously on troubles in their household relationships.

The findings mentioned above sing the status should actuate these people to give more attending on the household, particularly on reconstructing relationships, if failure or shortage in keeping them is ineluctable. Discrimination is non the reply neither do simply understanding the phenomenon ; realisation and action is. For what brings Forth these homophiles is the household itself and non merely some unconditioned sexual desire towards members of the same sex.

785

Badua, Ana Maria J. , and Ricardo M. Zarco. & # 8220 ; Social Determinants of Male Sexuality: A Search for Causes. & # 8221 ; Philippine Sociological Review 33.3-4 ( 1985 ) : 64-71.

Bryan, Mark. The Prodigal Father. United States: Three Rivers Press, 1997.

Flores, Pura Medina. Socio-Psychological Development of Filipino Children. Manila: Philippine Women & # 8217 ; s University, 1969.

Harvey, John F. The Homosexual Person: New Thinking in Pastoral Care. San Francisco: Ignatius, 1989.

Harvey, John F. The Truth about Homosexuality. San Francisco: Ignatius, 1996.

Lagrosa, Milagros E. Du. & # 8220 ; Some Family-Related Factors and Personality Variables Affecting the Adjustment of Father-Absent Adolescents. & # 8221 ; Philippine Journal of Psychology 19 ( 1986 ) : 72-76.

Osherson, Samuel. Finding Our Fathers. United States: Ballantine Books, 1989.

Thio, Alex. Deviant Behavior. United States: Harper Collins College Pub. , 1989.

Van lair Aardweg, Gerard J.M. The Battle for Normality. San Francisco: Ignatius, 1998.