Treatment of Male Homosexuality

It is difficult to accurately label therapeutic approaches to treatment, because there are few purists among us. That is, although we might label what we do as reparative therapy, how we actually intervene may vary from therapist to therapist. The term I most often use for my own work is "gender- affirmative therapy."
Although I do not have extensive training in the psychoanalytic model of treatment, I do find the reparative, psychoanalytical approach to be helpful theoretically and conceptually. But the practical approach to treatment that I have adapted for use with homosexual men over my work of the past twenty years would most aptly be described as cognitive- behavioral/interpersonal.
I have found the cognitive-behavioral interventions to be useful in working with the symptoms, while interpersonal interventions provide the key to real healing. Although I appreciate the importance of childhood development, I have found it useful to place a greater emphasis on the biopsycho- social explanations for homosexual development. Childhood development, in this model, likely provides the context in which temperament and personality traits interact with family and social surroundings to usher in the emergence of an individual's sexuality.
Perhaps I should first describe the patient population that I have treated for more than 20 years. They primarily have been men between the ages of 30 and 45 who have spent significant time in the gay lifestyle and have been unhappy. Many describe the lifestyle as being unfulfilling, lonely, depressing, distracting, and lacking in meaningful relationships. Frequently, I hear these men say that homosexual activity serves as an antidepressant for them.
Before I focus on several specific interventions, I will describe the treatment approach that I have found to be helpful. I have divided treatment into four phases. Please note that these phases are not discrete but are very adaptable and flexible; however, they do represent the general flow of therapy. As with all therapies, the patient must have some degree of motivation, must come to understand the origins of his homosexual attractions and must be fully committed to the therapy process.

PHASE I

The prerequisites noted above are determined during the first phase of treatment. During this phase, a thorough assessment is completed, taking into account the possible presence of psychological disorders that may co-exist with homosexual struggles.I frequently find varying degrees of narcissism, dependency, hysteria, anxiety, and depression. A social/sexual history is a "must" during this phase and is routinely completed. I always conduct the sexual history in the contest of the social history because I want the patient to conceptualize his struggle in this perspective. For many, this provides a new look at an old struggle.
Emphasis during this phase is placed on the patient's global, social and emotional functioning and does not focus narrowly on the patient's homosexuality. Frequently, information is shared about the origins and treatment of homosexuality and questions are entertained about change and "cure." Journaling begins in this phase and is used throughout the treatment process.

PHASE II

Phase II is characterized by a strong behavioral approach. The goal of this phase of therapy is to help patients organize and stabilize their lives. A clear majority of these men are "out of control." Efforts are made through behavioral strategies to help them gain some control. In this phase, behavioral control is viewed as a prerequisite to behavioral change. Patients are helped to set behavioral goals to improve socially, intellectually, spiritually, emotionally, physically, and sexually. Specific interventions might include monitoring, reinforcement strategies, distraction, modeling, response inhibition and paradoxical strategies. The individual is empowered through selfcontrol. The establishment of control, experience of success and some degree of stability are important in this phase of treatment.

PHASE III

Phase III focuses on interrupting homosexual arousal patterns. The emphasis during this phase of therapy is to help the patient explore, interrupt and eventually break the homosexual arousal processes. During this phase of treatment, the focus shifts from a behavioral to a cognitive emphasis. Cognitive interventions such as relaxation and guided imagery are used to help patients become more aware of and gain control over their cognitions, fantasies and feelings.Interventions such as emotional tracing, defragmentation, and discrimination of feelings are employed to interrupt the neuro-psychological processes. Many of these men have sexual addictions and emphasis is placed on correcting faulty belief systems, breaking myths, expanding options for being nurtured, handling anxiety and developing a lifestyle that is congruent with personal values. Patients are taught how to ask for help and how to develop self-affirmations.

PHASE IV

During Phase IV of treatment, a combination of individual, group and family therapy approaches may be used depending on the needs of the patients. The emphasis during this phase of treatment is quite affective and interpersonal and is geared at helping patients better understand and engage in the appropriate relationship process (i.e., friendship, non-sexual intimacy with men).Problems with intimacy, self-worth, self-love, love of others, love of God, defensive detachment, distortions (unequal relationships with men as well as intensity in relationships), developing non-erotic support systems with men, assertiveness, anger (with men and women), masculinity, guilt, shame, loneliness and abandonment are explored and resolved in a group therapy context.
Frequently, during this phase, I introduce each patient to a married couple to function as special companions. Desired outcomes include the absence of homosexual behavior, reduction or elimination of homosexual attractions, a sense of congruence or inner peace resulting from integration, and development of comfortable and appropriate relationships with men and women. Spiritual (not religious) interventions are frequently used in this phase (although they may be employed in the other phases, too.)
Now, with this summary, I would like to briefly describe several of the interventions noted above.

• Journaling
• Emotional tracing
• Defragmentation
• Spiritual interventions

JournalingJournaling is a useful way of helping homosexual men clarify their thought processes, experience and release their feelings, and generally explore issues in their lives. Instead of letting thoughts buzz around in their head, they make journal entries.
Initially, in the process, most of these men use journaling as a way to monitor their homosexual thoughts, fantasies and attractions. This awareness frequently results in a decrease of homosexual attractions. Later, journaling becomes a form of self-help as they are able to make connections, make shifts in perception and confront distortions.
Patients typically purchase two notebooks. Journal entries are made in the first book and given to the therapist for comment. They begin entries in the second notebook which is exchanged with the therapist during the next session. I make fairly extensive notes for them to consider.
One advantage to journaling is that it not only encourages greater involvement in the therapy process but empowers the patient to address significant issues regarding his struggles. At the end of the treatment, the patient edits the journals and this edited version is uses as a means of relapse prevention.

Emotional TracingHomosexual activity represents, symbolically or otherwise, attempts to meet legitimate needs. Many of these men are affectively governed and are quite reactive as they attempt to meet these needs through the eroticization of same-sex relationships. Many have a talent for histrionics. Emotional tracing is an intervention that is designed to identify and appropriately respond to primarily emotional needs. I simply ask them to explore what they were feeling prior to the homosexual attraction. Oftentimes, they report feelings of boredom, depression or anger, the latter most often being a reaction to hurt, pain, fear or frustration. I will have them re-experience these earlier feelings, and explore their origins. Frequently, this process helps them to clarify the origins of their homosexual attractions and results in a diminishing of these attractions.

DefragmentationThis intervention is related to emotional tracing but is more active. Its purpose is to assist in the de-eroticization of same-sex relationships. Van den Aardweg talks about the psychology of envy as central to the struggles of homosexual men. Homosexual men eroticize that which they are not identified with. Many of these men whom I have treated have multiple partners, with no ongoing relationships. Oftentimes, free-floating anxiety attaches itself to particular, desired characteristics. These men do not deal with other men, heterosexual or homosexual, in a holistic or complete way. I suspect that this is one of the reasons for the instability of their relationships. It's like incompleteness struggling with incompleteness.
The defragmentiaton process addresses the issue of fragmenting or incompletely dealing with others which I reflect back to them. It works this way: in an individual session, I will often ask that they focus on a past relationship and examine their attraction. This attraction is often focused on a particular trait or characteristic with which they are unfamiliar, they view as lacking in themselves or which they regard with simple envy. Most often these envied characteristics are perceived masculine traits.
I have them explore other traits, both physical and otherwise, so as to deal with this man in a holistic way. Questions such as, "What were his other physical traits?" "What was he like as a person?" are aimed at surfacing the emotional needs particularly as they relate to intimacy issues.
The need to get close to another man can be met without sexualizing that man. This intervention helps the client to equalize the relationship and focus on mutuality to develop non-erotic relationships with significant heterosexual men.

Spiritual InterventionAclear majority of men I have treated have a deep sense of disconnectedness. They feel an alienation from God. Freud indicated that God was an extension of the father figure. This seems to hold true for these men's own view of God. When describing their relationship to a Deity, many of these men describe a "mean-spirited Santa Claus" image. There is a certain fear of God.
Individuals in positions of authority such as ecclesiastical leaders often unwittingly trigger feelings of anxiety and resultant responses of fear and detachment. I work very closely with ecclesiastical leaders who often provide father/son nurturing relationships for these men. Such relationships are very valuable in addressing issues such as forgiveness.
Specific spiritual interventions include:

• The personalizing of scriptures.
• Imagery involving God as a loving, caring father whose love is unconditional.
• Older, wiser self scenario. Service to others. Particularly, this intervention helps these men learn to give. They often feel unworthy to give of themselves. They often report wanting to feel that they are "acceptable to God."

Spiritual interventions help these men enjoy the process of discovery and to articulate the true self, their core values, and the basic purpose of life and to develop their spiritual nature to its greatest fulfillment. Such interventions help them clarify and trust their deepest values in a quiet way through attentive contemplation and mediation.These interventions also allow these men to commit to their values and to identify with them in the present tense, and to find the strength to live by them. I help them to visualize themselves doing well and, through regular meditation, doing well comes to feel natural. Many of these men report experiencing love, joy, peace and fulfillment and help others to do the same. Spiritual interventions involve issues of integrity, personal empowerment and control, becoming connected with others, and finding greater purpose in life. It is through spiritual interventions that these men are really anchored and receive strength to resolve their struggles through what they call their "personal healing process."

Treatments of homosexuality in Britain since the 1950s—an oral history: the experience of patients

Abstract

Objectives To investigate the circumstances since the 1950s in which people who were attracted to members of the same sex received treatments to change their sexual orientation, the referral pathway and the process of therapy, and its aftermath.

Design A nationwide study based on qualitative interviews.

Participants 29 people who had received treatments to change their sexual orientation in the United Kingdom and two relatives of former patients.

Results Most participants had been distressed by their attraction to their own sex and people in whom they confided thought they needed treatment. Although some participants chose to undergo treatments instead of imprisonment or were encouraged through some form of medical coercion, most were responding to complex personal and social pressures that discouraged any expression of their sexuality. While many participants found happiness in same sex relationships after their treatment, most were left feeling emotionally distressed to some degree.

Conclusion The definition of same sex attraction as an illness and the development of treatments to eradicate such attraction have had a negative long term impact on individuals.

Introduction

Religious objections to same sex attraction between men have existed since at least the Middle Ages1 but were first endorsed in law in England in the 1533 Act of Henry VIII, which classified sodomy as an illegal act between man and woman, man and man, or man and beast.2 This law, which was re-enacted in 1563, was the basis for all male homosexual convictions until 1885, when the Criminal Assessment Act extended the legal sanction to any sexual contact between males.2 The end of the 19th century saw the advent of the concept of homosexuality as a pathological medical or psychological condition,3^–6 which legitimised treatments to change it. The social construction of the diagnosis of homosexuality occurred within the context of powerful sociopolitical forces against any variation from the heterosexual norm that prevailed for much of the 20th century.6 Though sexual behaviour in private between adult men was decriminalised in Britain in 1967, treatments to change homosexuals into heterosexuals peaked in the 1960s and early 1970s.7 However, we have little knowledge of the patients who experienced, or the professionals who administered, such treatments. We conducted an oral history study of treatments to change same sex attraction in Britain from 1950 tounderstand why people received treatment, how they experienced it, and how it affected their lives.

Methods

All participants gave written, informed consent. They were recruited through articles in newspapers, gay magazines, and newsletters of gay groups; interviews with one of the authors (GS) on local and national radio and television discussing the project; and direct contacts with the research team. GS undertook in depth, unstructured interviews with participants that were audiotaped and transcribed for qualitative analysis.

Analysis

We analysed narratives following a chronological pattern from early development and sexual feelings to the treatment received, their lives thereafter, and their current attitudes to their treatment. We examined each transcript systematically for data relating to these aspects and extracted text segments accordingly using the software package (NVivo). All authors undertook a series of discussions about emerging themes to resolve discrepancies and reach a consensus on the meaning of the texts.

Results

Twenty nine former male patients, two female patients, and two female relatives of male patients made contact, of whom one male and one female patient eventually declined because of personal commitments. This made 31 participants who were aged 27 to 83 years (mean 54.4, SD 12.2) at interview. One was married, six had married and divorced, and the remainder were single. One man had considered himself heterosexual until experiencing same sex attraction in his early 20s, four regarded themselves as bisexual, and the remainder had consistently been attracted to same sex partners.

Life before treatment

Many participants felt they lacked parental affection during childhood and adolescence and experiencing same sex attraction gave rise to considerable anxiety. Those who grew up between 1940 and1970 often commented on the negative influence of the British media:

There were no positive role models and the newspapers were full of the most vituperative filth that made me feel suicidal… I felt totally bewildered that my entire emotional life was being written up in the papers as utter filth and perversity.

Male 1

Those who confided in others were usually met with silence, condemnation, and rejection or toldthat their homosexual feelings constituted a temporary phase. Two who confided in their teachers were referred to psychiatrists for treatment. Although many had experimented with same sex partners, the legal and social risks involved were considerable. Isolation from other gay young people also drove several, as young adolescents, to engage in sexual experimentation with adults and vice versa, that might not otherwise have occurred. Growing up and realising that their sexual feelings were not a passing phase increased their sense of shame and isolation. A few requested help directly from mental health professionals to change their sexual orientation. Most, however, talked abouttheir homosexual feelings with their general practitioners. However, doctors often lacked knowledge and were uncomfortable with the disclosure of homosexual feelings:

He said he'd never had any experience with this and no one had ever raised this before. He said, “if you come back next week I'll do some research.” I went back to see the GP and he said, “well, I've been in touch with colleagues,” and he said, “obviously you can't go on living with the stress and the way you are—it's wrong, it's perverse, it's a sickness.”

Male 2

General practitioners referred participants to NHS professionals who were known to specialise in treatment of homosexuality. Only one general practitioner counselled a participant not to have treatment. Two men were arrested for homosexual activity and underwent treatment to avoid imprisonment.

Treatments

The age at which people received treatment ranged from 13 to 40 years, with most being in their late adolescence and early 20s. Treatments described were mainly administered in NHS hospitals throughout Britain and in one case a military hospital. Those treated privately usually underwent psychoanalysis. The most common treatment (from the early 1960s to early 1970s, with one case in 1980) was behavioural aversion therapy with electric shocks (11 participants). Nausea induced by apomorphine as the aversive stimulus was reported less often (four participants in the early 1960s).

In electric shock aversion therapy, electrodes were attached to the wrist or lower leg and shocks were administered while the patient watched photographs of men and women in various stages of undress. The aim was to encourage avoidance of the shock by moving to photographs of the opposite sex. It was hoped that arousal to same sex photographs would reduce, while relief arising from shock avoidance would increase, interest in opposite sex images. Some patients reported undergoing detailed examination before treatment, while others were assessed more perfunctorily. Patients would recline on a bed or sit in a chair in a darkened room, either alone or with the professional behind a screen. Each treatment lasted about 30 minutes, with some participants given portable electricshock boxes to use at home while they induced sexual fantasies. Patients receiving apomorphine were often admitted to hospital due to side effects of nausea and dehydration and the need for repeated doses, while those receiving electric shock aversion therapy attended as outpatients for weeks or in some cases up to two years.

Oestrogen treatment to reduce libido (two participants in the 1950s), psychoanalysis (three private participants and one NHS participant in the 1970s), and religious counselling (two participants in the 1990s) were also reported. Other forms of treatment were electroconvulsive therapy, discussion of the evils of homosexuality, desensitisation of an assumed phobia of the opposite sex, hypnosis, psychodrama, and abreaction. Dating skills were sometimes taught, and occasionally men were encouraged to find a prostitute or female friend with whom to try sexual intercourse.

Many described the treatments as unsophisticated and un-erotic because of the clinical setting and images used:

The whole week was totally un-erotic. I don't think I could have had an erection for any reason that week because I didn't like being there.

Male 3

Most were kept away from others undergoing the same treatment and avoided talking to family and friends about it. One participant claimed that a male doctor whom he consulted for help with his homosexuality sexually abused him several times at the age of 14, another that one or more doctors physically assaulted him during his treatment, while a third believed his name was given to the police and his family. Nevertheless, some reported concern and sympathy from those who treated them:

A psychologist was the man who administered the jolts to me, and he was quite charming because I could tell he couldn't be disloyal to the hospital but he kind of, in his way, tried to dissuade me from doing this.

Male 4

The contrast between the depth of their sexual feelings and the simplicity of the treatment made many doubt the wisdom of the approach. Most became disillusioned and stopped the treatments themselves. Sometimes treatment ended abruptly:

I said, “when am I going to find a breakthrough? You keep saying things will change and everything's going to be OK.” She [the psychiatrist] said, “well, I'm going to have to tell you nowI don't think we are going to get anywhere. To be quite honest I never expected we would in the first place. You're going to have to go home and tell your wife that you're gay and start a new life.” Boom!

Male 5

This man left the hospital and immediately made a serious attempt on his life. Most participants were never followed up for more than a few months.

Life after treatments

For the brother of one participant, there was no life after treatment. He died in hospital due to the side effects of apomorphine. Several sought out further treatment, usually private psychoanalysis; none had further behavioural treatments. Some believed that the treatments had helped themto deal with their sexual feelings but not in the way intended:

Mainly that from a guilt-ridden Christian point of view it meant that at least I had tried to do something and it had proved not to work. I think it's mostly the feeling that I'd done my bit to try and deal with the problem. I found that comforting.

Male 6

With the decriminalisation of certain homosexual acts in 1967 and more tolerant social attitudes, most participants were able to explore their sexuality and several found fulfilling, same sex relationships. However, most never spoke to their partners, friends, or families about their treatment. One man was content to remain celibate when treatment failed to change his orientation, asserting that the main enjoyment in his life had been his hobbies. Three other men also avoided sex altogether but unhappily claimed it was the result of treatment. Other participants married in the hope this would complete their cure. Some marriages lasted many years and resulted in children. All except one—which was essentially a sexless marriage—ended in divorce on the grounds of sexual incompatibility. Several considered that they had hurt others:

I have great pangs of conscience that, to some extent, I have wasted [his wife's] life, which she says not. We are very much in love but it's a very gentle, very tender, very caring but platonic love and the other feelings [homosexual] are still there and mount up and up by the day.

Male 7

Several remained confused and angry at their naivety in accepting treatment:

This feeling of a lack of self worth—I think that was a tremendous impact, because I shouldn't feel like that and I don't have any gay friends who do feel like that. I think that treatment had a lot to answer for in that respect.

Male 5

Half of the participants were continuing to receive psychological help at the time of interview. However, only one informant, who had grown up in the 1990s, still wanted to change his sexualityand thought that mental health professionals currently denied him this option.

Discussion

These narratives show that hostile family and social attitudes rather than the police or courts impelled most people to seek professional help. However, our companion paper (Online First on bmj.com) on professionals who administered the treatments, suggests that patients were referred fairly regularly from the courts.8 No participant suggested that treatment had had any direct benefits, and for many it had reinforced the emotional isolation and shame that had been a feature of their childhood and adolescence. Occasionally, it enabled acceptance of their sexuality, but many retained a sense of loss and unease.

Limitations

These participants may not be representative of all people who underwent treatment. Many may have died, emigrated, or been reluctant to take part. Conversely, those most affected may have been more likely to come forward than others on whom it had less impact. Treatments do not seem to have been extensive. We also had few who underwent psychoanalysis, possibly because the focus is less explicit than behaviour treatments and people may often have been unaware of their analyst's intent.9 Although our data suggest that treatment was unsuccessful and indeed harmful, the nature of our study means that we cannot address its efficacy. Although people who changed may have been less willing to participate than those who did not, there is no evidence from outcome studies that these treatments were effective at changing sexual orientation.7 Nor is it simply the case that the wrong type of treatment was developed. The medicalisation of homosexuality itself seems to have been the fundamental error, rather than what type of treatment arose as a consequence.

Conclusions

Homosexuality was removed from ICD-10 (international classification of diseases, 10th revision) only in 1992. Our study shows the negative consequences of defining same sex attraction as a mental illness and designing treatments to eradicate it. It serves as a warning against the use of mentalhealth services to change aspects of human behaviour that are disapproved of on social, political,moral, or religious grounds.

Homosexuality and Illegal Drug Use

In 2007, the Los Angeles Times reported the frequency of methamphetamine use is twenty times greater among homosexuals than in the general population.^[213]

In January of 2007, the journal AIDS (London, England) in an article entitled Use of illicit drugs among gay men living with HIV in Sydney stated the following: "Higher rates of illicit drug use have been reported among gay men than among similar populations of heterosexual men..."^[214]

In June of 2004, the journal Nursing Clinics of North America reported the following regarding homosexuality and illegal drug use:

“

...the increased use of recreational or party drugs such as ectasy, "poppers", and methamphetamine ("crystal meth") influence unsafe sexual behaviors in gay men. Many of these illicit drugs are used during "circuit parties," in which gay men from various geographical locales congregrate in one large metropolitan community over an extended 2- or 3-day period for the purposes of intense partying and sexual activity.[215]

”

In June of 2001, the American Journal of Public Health reported the following in respect to homosexuality and illegal drug use and homosexual circuit parties and disease:

“

...Nearly all participants stated that strong motivations for having attended circuit parties in the previous year were “to listen to music and dance” and “to be with friends”...“To get high on drugs” was a strong motivation for most participants... Sexual activity, including unprotected anal sex, was relatively common during circuit party weekends... Consider the potential impact of circuit party weekends on HIV infection rates and rates of infection with other sexually transmitted diseases, based on sexual mixing opportunities and patterns both within and beyond the 3-day periods. Our data pertain to a single circuit party weekend for each participant. If we multiply the prevalence of sexual risk behavior by the median of 3 parties per year revealed in this sample, and if we consider the large number of men who attend circuit parties, as well as the growing popularity of such parties, then the likelihood of transmission of HIV and other sexually transmitteddiseases among party attendees and secondary partners becomes a real public health concern.[216][217]

”

Roman Catholic Church, Homosexuality, and the Sexual Molestation of Minors

See also: Homosexuality and pederasty

Throughout the 1970s and 1980s, the American Roman Catholic bishops and the Vatican had noted a growing problem with clerical sexual abuse in the U.S.^[218] In addition, Ireland and other European countries have experienced problems relating to instances of Roman Catholic priests sexually abusing children.^[219]

Catholic League president Bill Donohue declared concerning the scandals of priests molesting minors:

“

The latest attempt to silence me comes from GLAAD (Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation), Call to Action and the Interfaith Alliance. The three left-wing organizations have joined hands demanding that the media "ignore Bill Donohue." Their complaint? My telling the truth about the role homosexual priests have played in the abuse scandal. The data collected by John Jay College of Criminal Justice show that between 1950 and 2002, 81 percent of the victims were male and 75 percent of them were post-pubescent. In other words, three out of every four victims have been abused by homosexuals. By the way, puberty, according to the American Academy of Pediatrics, begins at age 10 for boys. No problem can be remedied without an accurate diagnosis. And any accurate diagnosis that does not finger the role that homosexuals have played in molesting minors is intellectually dishonest. The cover-up must end. And so must attempts to muzzle my voice. Everything I am saying is what most people already know, but are afraid to say it. It's time for some straight talk.[220]

”

Bill Donahue published in the New York Times:

“

The Times continues to editorialize about the "pedophilia crisis", when all along it's been a homosexual crisis. Eighty percent of the victims of priestly sexual abuse are male and most of them are post-pubescent. While homosexuality does not cause predatory behavior, and most gay priests are not molesters, most of the molesters have been gay.[221]

”

HIV Infected Adolescents and Young Adults in America and Infection by Older Men

For related information please see: Teenager Homosexuality and Homosexuality and pederasty

In 2006, the noted pediatric journal entitled Journal of Adolescent Health published a position paper entitled HIV infection and AIDS in adolescents: An update of the position of the Society for Adolescent Medicine. ^[222] The aforementioned 2006 position paper of the Journal of Adolescent Health stated the following: "Among adolescents and young adults with HIV or AIDS, most infections are acquired by having sex with HIV-infected men."^[223] In addition, the Journal of Adolecent Health stated the following:

“

As of December 31, 2003, almost 38,500 cases of AIDS had been reported in adolescents and young adults 13–24 years old in the United States of America. Previous studies demonstrating that the risk of AIDS increased with the age at infection suggest that a large proportion of people developing AIDS in their third decade of life became infected with HIV as teens.[224]

”

Medical Community Negligence and Government Negligence

For more information please see: Adolescent AIDS and Medical Community Negligence and Homosexuality and pederasty

In 2000, the medical journal AIDS (London, England) made the following embarrassing admission in respect to a 1998 review of the medical literature by medical researchers Mansergh and Marks:

“

In their review of age and HIV risk behavior among gay men, Mansergh and Marks concluded that younger age was fairly consistently found to be associated with unprotected anal sex in North American studies, while only limited evidence was found for the association in European and Australian samples. Reasons for this are unclear. In order to assess more accurately the HIV risk for young gay men, it would be helpful to examine the degree of sexual 'mixing' across age groups and HIV status more closely. Although some studies have included assessments of perceived or known HIV status of young men's sexual partners, none of the studies reported the age ranges of the young men's sexual partners.(emphasis added)[225]

”

Illustration of HIV reproduction

In 1995, without giving specific age ranges of homosexual adolescents' sexual partners, medical researchers stated the following regarding youths seeking help at the only homosexual identified agency New York City: "...many homosexual male adolescents have sexual relationships with homosexual men, the group with the highest prevalence for AIDS."^[226]

Given that the adolescent HIV infection was seen as a problem in the late 1980's, the failure of medical researchers to publish material in the past regarding the age ranges of the individuals infecting adolescents is inexcusable. The pro-homosexaulity publication The Advocate stated the following regarding adolescent HIV infection on March 24, 1992 in a article entitled America's Worst Kept Secret - AIDS is devastating the Nation's Teenager and Gay Kids are Dying by the Thousands:

“

And while adolescents currently represent only 2% of the AIDS cases reported by the CDC, for the past six years the number of adolescent case of AIDS has doubled every 14 months, which is, according to epidemiologists, the same rate of expansion seen in the gay male population in the first few years of the epidemic. "Teenagers are the next wave of the epidemic," warns Dr. Karen Hein, associate professor of pediatrics, epidemiology, and social medicine at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York City.... The CDC stated in November that in Los Angeles and Miami, adolescent AIDS cases represent about 20% of all reported cases in those cities and that in Newark,N.J adolescents represent almost 35% of all AIDS cases. The infection rates among adolescents are similarly high in San Francisco,Boston, and Philadelphia.[227]

”

In 1987, in an article entitled Male Homosexuality: An Adolescents Perspective the medical journal Pediatrics made the following admission regarding the poverty of medical study regarding adolescents and homosexuality:

“

The controversies surrounding adolescent homosexuality may, in part, be attributed to the lack of investigations directly involving homosexual youths. A recent review of the literature concluded that current knowledge is based on opinions, clinical anecdotes, and studies of gay adults, recalling their adolescence. To our knowledge, there has been only one previous attempt to understand homosexuality from an adolescent's perspective.[228]