Domestic Violence Appears More Likely for Same-Sex Couples

I've seen research suggesting that this is true in the past - but this adds to the evidence. It would be useful, too, to get a more comprehensive assessment of male same-sex domestic violence. As the article below notes, most of the research has been conducted on lesbians, not gay men or bisexuals.

We need to increase prevention eduction to the LGBT community, not just professional athletes and other high profile people.

Domestic Violence More Likely for Same-Sex Couples

By Janice Wood Associate News Editor
Reviewed by John M. Grohol, Psy.D. on September 21, 2014


Domestic violence occurs at least as frequently — and likely more so — between same-sex couples, according to a review of literature conducted by researchers at Northwestern Medicine.

“Evidence suggests that the minority stress model may explain these high prevalence rates,” said senior author Richard Carroll, associate professor in psychiatry and behavioral sciences at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine and a psychologist at Northwestern Memorial Hospital.

“Domestic violence is exacerbated because same-sex couples are dealing with the additional stress of being a sexual minority. This leads to reluctance to address domestic violence issues.”

Previous studies have shown that domestic violence affects 25 percent to 75 percent of lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals. However, researchers believe that a lack of representative data and underreporting of abuse suggests even higher rates.

An estimated 25 percent of heterosexual women experience domestic abuse, according to researchers, who note that that percentage is “significantly lower” for heterosexual men.

“There has been a lot of research on domestic violence, but it hasn’t looked as carefully at the subgroup of same-sex couples,” Carroll said. “Another obstacle is getting the appropriate samples because of the stigma that has been attached to sexual orientation. In the past, individuals were reluctant to talk about it.”

The research that has examined same-sex domestic violence has concentrated on lesbians rather than gay men and bisexuals, according to the Northwestern scientists.

“Men may not want to see themselves as the victim, to present themselves as un-masculine and unable to defend themselves,” Carroll said.

He suggests that homosexual men and women may not report domestic violence for fear of discrimination and being blamed for abuse from a partner. They also may worry about their sexual orientation being revealed before they are comfortable with it.

“We need to educate health care providers about the presence of this problem and remind them to assess for it in homosexual relationships, just as they would for heterosexual patients,” Carroll said.

“The hope is that with increasingly deeper acceptance, the stress and stigma will disappear for these individuals so they can get the help they need.”

The review was published in the Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy.

Source: Northwestern University

The Missing Myth: A New Vision of Same-Sex Love - An Interview with Gilles Herrada

In this interview from last summer, Vanessa Fisher (co-editor of Integral Voices on Sex, Gender, and Spirituality, scheduled for release in July, 2014) interviews one of the contributors, Gilles Herrada, about his book, The Missing Myth: A New Vision of Same-Sex Love. Here is the publisher's ad copy for the book:

If homosexual behavior is an aberration from the standpoint of reproduction, why is it widespread among humans, primates, and a myriad of other animal species, and why has it been favored by evolution? And if homosexuality is considered a moral problem based on religious beliefs, why were more homosexuals exterminated under the brief reigns of such secular regimes as the Communists and the Nazis than during the entire Christian Inquisition. Why is everything about homosexuality always a paradox? In The Missing Myth, Gilles Herrada tackles the many questions about the role and meaning of homosexuality in the evolution of our species and the development of civilization: what evolutionary edge same-sex relationships have provided to the human species; what biological mechanisms generate the sexual diversity that we observe; why homosexual behavior ended up being prohibited worldwide; why homophobia has persisted throughout history; why the homosexual community resurfaced after World War II; and others.

I've had the good fortune of reading Gilles book and I highly recommend it for anyone who wants to understand the depth and complexities of same-sex love - including its rejection and the still persistent homophobia many people express.

The interview is excellent - enjoy.

The Missing Myth: A New Vision of Same-Sex Love

An Interview with Gilles Herrada by Vanessa D. Fisher


Download this Dialogue as an MP3


Gilles Herrada, Ph.D., is a research scientist, a writer, and life coach at LifeAsACreation. He has worked at the universities of Nice, Paris, Columbia, and Harvard, and is published internationally.
In this Dialogue, I interview Gilles about his recently published book, The Missing Myth: A New Vision of Same-Sex Love.

Below is a short quote from the book, which offers a taste of the new and expansive context Gilles opens in his book for re-visioning same-sex love...

After having been stigmatized as a sin or a perversion by two millenniums of homophobic culture, a mere half-century of well-intentioned pro-homosexual discourse has left homosexuality impoverished, truncated, disjointed, and ripped apart. Why is this? Modern homosexual identity only started to emerge in the nineteenth century and really grounded itself no earlier than the second half of the twentieth century. In this respect, this identity is extremely young, and because of the historical cultural context in which it was born, modern homosexuality has essentially been conceived and theorized within a biological, psychoanalytic, and sociological, and hence profoundly materialistic context.

As a result, modern homosexuality exists in body and mind, but has no soul.

Modern homosexuality has been analyzed and rationalized by modernists, contextualized and even deconstructed by postmodernists, but not many have dared to give it meaning…. As a consequence, the sacred dimension of modern homosexuality—symbolic and spiritual, inevitably—has remained largely ignored by the homosexual discourse, leaving its brutal rejection by traditional religions still unanswered.

In this sense, the original and somewhat humble premise of The Missing Myth is that homosexuality has yet to discover itself..."

While at Harvard, Gilles discovered a large family of genes involved in the detection of pheromones, those “secret” odors that trigger animal sexual and social behaviors. Gilles also attended and facilitated programs in what is commonly labeled as “personal development.” These workshops gave him the rare opportunity to discuss with homophobic men in an open and intimate setup. This offered him a unique chance to inquire into the mechanisms of homophobia empathically, that is from a homophobic standpoint.

Part of his research work regarding homosexuality’s history was presented at the First Integral Theory Conference in 2008 and will soon be published in the anthology titled Integral Voices on Sex, Gender, and Spirituality, co-edited by Sarah Nicholson and Vanessa D. Fisher, to be published by SUNY Press.

Gilles currently lives in New York City.
This Dialogue was recorded July 11, 2013

Did Anyone Really Expect the Star of "Duck Dynasty" to Be a Liberal Regarding Same-Sex Couples?

Honestly, I had never even heard of Duck Dynasty until last week when someone gave a DVD of the show as a White Elephant gift where I work. Then, the very next day, all hell breaks loose because the redneck star of the show, Phil Robertson, who is vocally pro-God and pro-guns, said in an interview with GQ that he thinks same-sex couples are sinful and might lead to beastiality (he made the implication there without stating directly what he meant: "Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there").

Was anyone, other the execs at A&E, surprised he felt this way? 

The man is living in a very traditional, nearly pre-modern world, so of course he holds traditionally conservative positions in line with his fundamentalist faith. Robertson is pro-God and pro-guns, as well as harboring a dislike for modern technology (he proudly admits that he does not own a cellphone or a computer).

The people at Duck Dynasty and A&E surely knew his beliefs when they created the show four seasons ago, before it became the most watched non-fiction television show in cable history. Still, on December 18, 2013, A&E announced that it was suspending Phil Robertson from the show indefinitely due to comments he made in the GQ interview.

Seriously?

What happened to freedom of speech? 

There is actually an opportunity here to have a real national conversation on values and beliefs, but A&E has crushed it by censoring their star and distancing themselves from him and his beliefs.

Why couldn't A&E just make the usual disclaimers, "the views and opinions of Phil Robertson do not reflect the views and opinions of A&E or its staff." Done. THEN we could have a discussion on why people who live in the south tend to be so much more socially conservative than the coastal states. Or we could be discussing the Political Correctness Police who seem intolerant of those who are not liberal progressives.

As Larry Alex Taunton stated in The Atlantic:

Tolerance is not the same thing as acceptance, and acceptance is not the same thing as an endorsement. The message A&E’s decision sends is that there is zero tolerance on television for Christians who are conscientious objectors to homosexuality. More than that, it implicitly suggests that the campaign for tolerance has advanced to a campaign to pressure 45 percent of Americans to recant their beliefs and endorse a lifestyle to which they are opposed, conscience be damned.

We stand at a crossroads. The country must decide. Is the endgame here to be that orthodox Christians will henceforth have no voice within their own culture? If so, does this mean we have become a nation of bullies, forcing conformity while calling it tolerance?

I agree with these sentiments. While I think Robertson's beliefs are archaic and promote inequality, I fully defend his right to believe and say what he feels in his heart.

When we begin trying to force everyone to believe the same things, we are entering into a kind tyranny.