麻豆传媒

Much of your work explores what you call 鈥渟exual fluidity鈥�. What does it mean?
It means that people are born with a sexual orientation and also with a degree of sexual flexibility, and they appear to work together. So there are gay people who are very fixedly gay and there are gay people who are more fluid, meaning they can experience attractions that run outside of their orientation. Likewise for heterosexuals. Fluidity is the capacity to experience attractions that run counter to your overall orientation.

How did you end up doing this kind of research?
The classic answer is, well, I鈥檓 a lesbian and I鈥檓 a developmental psychologist, so I guess I鈥檒l study the development in this area. People ask me if I am a really fluid lesbian, and actually I鈥檓 not: I鈥檓 a garden-variety lesbian and initially I had a lot of trouble understanding that people had very varied experiences. After I had interviewed women in depth and followed them over time, I just found these unbelievable twists and turns in their experiences that were fascinating and contrary to what I had come to believe based on the scientific literature. As a scientist you look for those opportunities.

Many advocates of gay rights say people are 鈥渂orn this way鈥� 鈥� which is at odds with the idea of fluidity. Where did this view originate?
It really dates back to a campaign against the gay community back in the 1960s and 70s, led by American singer and activist . Her whole argument was that gay people were a threat because they were going to recruit young people to be gay. She specifically said homosexuals are made, not born; they can鈥檛 reproduce, so they鈥檙e trying to recruit our children. Gay people said, that鈥檚 ridiculous, we鈥檙e not trying to recruit your children 鈥� that wouldn鈥檛 even work! This isn鈥檛 something you can be recruited into. It鈥檚 just the way we are.

Did that argument feature in the recent case that legalised same-sex marriage throughout the US?
What was interesting was that Justice Anthony Kennedy actually said, almost as an offhand comment, that studies suggest sexual orientation is immutable. It鈥檚 kind of hilarious because he doesn鈥檛 elaborate: he sort of throws it out there 鈥� like 鈥渙h, we all know that鈥� 鈥� but importantly, that was not the basis on which the ruling was made. That shows conventional wisdom still holds the idea that sexual orientation is immutable, but that鈥檚 not the basis for legal reasoning in the US. And it shows that we don鈥檛 need to be considered a protected class in order to make strong and successful arguments about civil rights.

What other arguments do opponents of same-sex marriage make?
They are concerned that children would grow up seeing, wow, gays can get legally married, that must mean our society thinks that being gay is okay. So people will then be more likely to consider gayness themselves and over time there will be an increase in the number of gays out there. And frankly, regardless of the basis of their fear, they鈥檙e right about the result. Over the past 20 years, every survey repeated over time has shown that the number of individuals who self-identify as gay has been going up, especially people who identify as bisexual or who identify as heterosexual but who have had some same-sex sexual experiences.

So what is behind the increase in people reporting same-sex sexual experiences?
Probably there鈥檚 a core part of the population that is about as gay as the day is long, and they don鈥檛 appear to be affected at all by social acceptance, whether you put them in South Africa or America or 1920 or 1980. They鈥檙e like, 鈥淚 am gay and I鈥檓 going to find some way to be gay鈥�. But the most common form of same-sex attraction is not exclusive attraction but a bisexual form. You can imagine that these people are likely to be influenced by social acceptance of same-sex sexuality. If you are bisexually attracted you may think, 鈥淲ow, the world is going to hate me if I end up with someone of the same sex, my life is going to be a lot easier if I end up with someone of the opposite sex.鈥� So you end up focusing on that.

How does science support these ideas about the rise in same-sex sexuality?
For a start, same-sex attraction does not appear to be contagious. There have been a number of really cool social network studies done over the years looking at whether some traits, such as obesity, can spread through social communities. And they can. So researchers used data from the , took the same analytic technique and applied it to same-sex attraction. If a lot of your friends are same-sex attracted, are you more likely to be same-sex attracted? Are the attractions themselves spreading? they were not.

So it鈥檚 not the attractions that are growing, it鈥檚 the awareness of them and the ability to articulate and act on them. It鈥檚 social acceptance that is contagious.

鈥淪ame-sex attraction is not contagious, but social acceptance is鈥�

Does this mean that many people are born with an inclination for same-sex attraction?
Yes. I think all the evidence suggests that we鈥檙e born with an underlying capacity, and then that capacity interacts with a whole bunch of other influences. Some of them are prenatal; some maybe in the first year of life. We still don鈥檛 know whether there鈥檚 a point at which things become more fixed. We鈥檙e clear that there is some environmental input, but there is absolutely no evidence that the family dynamic, in terms of closeness or distance with mom or dad, has anything to do with same-sex sexuality. I think it鈥檚 an important finding because a lot of parents think they are the cause 鈥� what did I do? I think we can pretty much say you did nothing. People hear the word 鈥渆nvironment鈥� and think family environment. When scientists talk about the environment, they鈥檙e talking about things like the amniotic fluid the fetus grew in. We鈥檙e talking about everything that is around you. Even a genome is not as fixed as we thought.

But there is a genetic component to sexual attraction鈥�
Yes, twin studies show that there鈥檚 a genetic contribution to same-sex attraction 鈥� but that is not the only thing going on. There are so many interacting causes for sexual orientation that two different individuals can be gay for a different combinations of reasons. Some people know at earlier ages than others, some are bisexual rather than gay, some show more change over the course of their life. All this means that whenever someone comes up with a tag line like 鈥渨e鈥檙e born that way鈥�, they ultimately do everyone involved a disservice.

What would you like to happen to that tag line?
It is time to just take the whole idea of sexuality as immutable, the born this way notion, and just come to a consensus as scientists and as legal scholars that we need to put it to rest. It鈥檚 unscientific, it鈥檚 unnecessary and it鈥檚 unjust. It doesn鈥檛 matter how we got to be this way. As a scientist, I think it鈥檚 one of the most fascinating questions out there and one that I will continue to investigate. As a lesbian and a progressive, I think it鈥檚 totally irrelevant and just politics.

This article appeared in print under the headline 鈥淭ime to lay 鈥榖orn this way鈥� to rest鈥�