It seems to me that there are many more SSA men than women... and I'm interested to know why.

Is this just a stereotype?
Do men have a greater tendency towards SSA than women?

"Do men have a greater tendency towards SSA than women?"

Who knows? Certainly female SSA is often said to be more 'fluid' and from Kinsey down studies have consistently shown that more women than men have engaged in same-sex sexual acts. Is it harder to understand / imagine / analyse / observe / discuss female sexuality?

The perception that male SSA is more prominent / remarkable seems to have deep resonance. People sit up when sodomy and masculinity are at stake, for various (moral, cultural, anatomical) reasons...

A reporter recently asked me why there weren't more 'high profile lesbians'. I couldn't say, especially given that 'lesbians' are often welcomed, in a way, in certain types of heterosexual male societies; but I said I thought it might have something to do with how people think of identity and gender.

What a man does with his body seems to carry more constitutive weight, whereas - and for whatever reason - women have often been categorised according to what is done (or what they allow to be done) to their bodies...

To be sure, while the numbers here are pretty even, most of the email I get (85% of it) comes from SSA men.

I'm keen to hear from SSA (or otherwise) female DREADNOUGHTERS on this...

How is your experience of Catholicism, love and sex similar and / or different?

- JH

Hmmm, I'm not SSA, but I think men focus more on the physical, while women tend to focus on the emotional. Pornography, for men, is generally graphic, while women are more likely to be addicted to the emotional high of the romantic novel.

While the physical expression of love finds its center in sex, emotional attachments are much less easy to pin down; an emotional attraction may lead to a physical one, but I don't think it necessarily does. Virginia Woolf, in "To The Lighthouse" (a magnificent exploration of femininity, both idealized and corrupted) describes the thought of physical love between women as a kind of exploration, a "would it make us closer?" rather than an inevitable step in their relationship.


"women have often been categorised according to what is done (or what they allow to be done) to their bodies..."

I think you make an important distinction here; "femininity" isn't passivity, but receptivity - which is just as active as "masculine" spontaneity.

Of course, I'm oversimplifying things, and getting a bit off-topic...

John Paul II made the distinction between pornography and pornovision.

http://www.independentcollegian.com/home/index.cfm?event=displayArticlePrinterFriendly&uStory_id=da34e116-56d4-4ad4-9df4-fdf9a78dfe66

I wonder if the generalization could be made that women are more likely to be affected by pornography (e.g. the romance novel) and men are more likely to respond to pornovision...

Of course, this doesn't necessarily say anything about the balance / imbalance of men and women who experience SSA. Unless the argument is made that modern literacy is more driven by images than words...

From my observations, I'm almost certain that there are considerably more gay men than lesbians. In Amsterdam, we have hundreds of gay bars, but only a few for lesbian women.

There is a difference in male and female sexuality. 'Fluid' is perhaps not the right word to describe that difference. Perhaps it's more like the 'hunter' versus the 'collector' difference that explains it. It sounds hopelessly reactionary, I know, but still I think it's true.

We all want love, but men are disturbingly fast destracted by the next big conquest. This explains the grief of many gay men, in case we cling to the wrong things. We should pursue love, yet in the heat of the moment, far too often, the hormones take over. But there is no determinism in this observation: men are called to Love as well. And Christianity is the best call to Truth and Love there is.

Perhaps the answer to why there seems to be more SSA men than woman could lie in what drives people to be SSA? They could be

- just made that way
- driven to it by a traumatic experience with the opposite sex
- peer pressured
- other?

Perhaps some people choose the lifestyle out of curiosity.

From what I can gather, the majority of lesbian women have some previous bad experience with men. On the other hand, there seem to be all sorts of reasons that men are SSA.

Could it be that there is an environmental factor that is influencing men more than women- dare I say- a lack of good male role models in the home/ media/ school?

I've done a bit of reading on the topic and there doesn't seem to be an answer- would be good to keep tab on any new research.

Daphne,

I can't explain the difference between the higher number of male homosexuals compared to female homosexuals, nor can I explain the phenomenon of homosexuality itself.

Science has no answer, though I believe there is a purpose for the homosexual condition in creation. I don't think something primal as sexuality can be (unconsciously) learned or chosen. I had a perfectly normal middle-class upbringing, no abuse, no absent or distant father, the problems started when my mother became mentally ill in my teens and suspected I was gay. She was right by the way, but I chose nothing, and always had good men around me.

Most, if not all gay men and lesbians I know had no history of abuse, or problems with their opposite sex parent other than anyone else. Of course, many had their things with their families, but there was nothing essentially different from their straight peers. In fact, when talking about problems with family, I never heard of anything fundamentally different between gay or straight people on an emotioanl/psychological level.

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/magazine/articles/2005/08/14/what_makes_people_gay/?page=full

This is an interesting article which goes into some detail on different responses men and women have, whether SSA or not. It speculates that many SSA men are determined even before birth, while it isn't quite as clear for women.

Thanks for the article Catherine, it was a good read.

I have to say (and this is also in response to Vincent) that until about 3 years ago I was convinced that homosexuality was a choice or was brought on by environmental influences.

However, I came to know men who, like Patrick in the article, displayed very feminine behaviour since childhood, as well as people who by their mid teens just felt that something was different.

It's something that I suppose won't be scientifically answered for a long time yet, if at all- because perhaps it's just as you say Vincent- maybe it can't be explained scientifically. However, as an avid student of science - I don't think I can dismiss the notion entirely.

And if the cause for homosexuality is not yet close to discovery then I guess the reason for apparently more SSA men than women isn't either.

Catherine,

Thanks for the link, a very interesting article indeed.

I remember as a child, the oldest of 3, I always liked to do roleplay. To act something. When I was 6, my favorite drummed up character was 'neat lady' or 'princess'. My little brother, then 2, immitated me and also put a blanket around him as some kind of dress, just like me. We put on handbags and played like we had tea. My parents took pictures of it even. In the family photo-album the subscript says: "Vincent and Frank play 'neat lady'"

Yet when it came to gender identity, I never, ever doubted I was a boy. In fact, one day when I was 8, I bought something but absent-minded as I am, I left it at the counter. When I discovered that and returned to the shop, the lady at the counter said: "Yes I thought SHE forgot her package."

My God, how that enraged me. Everything inside me screamed: "I am NOT a she, I am a he." It probably had to do with 70's style haircuts, when boys loooked the same as girls (I was born in 1970).

My younger brother is straight as anyone could be, and I am gay as hell. For me, flirting with so called 'effeminate' things was always roleplay, not identity.

Homosexuality and transgender issues are fundamentally different. I've never felt 'trapped in my own body', I am a man, attracted to other men. I love women, but only as friends, sisters, mothers etc.

I am not sure what my point is, but the main point of the article seems very convincing: There probably is a genetic basis for homosexuality and transgender issues. And even if there isn't and it's developmental, it seems that no one can control it. It's a mystery, and probably will remain so.

"I think you make an important distinction here; "femininity" isn't passivity, but receptivity - which is just as active as "masculine" spontaneity."

Are you reading John McDowell in Kantian flight? If not, it could be a good way to give structure to this sort of idea - and, at the same time - probably show that we're getting a little muddled.

In Kant, minds are said to be passive in receptivity (commonly imagined as 'taking in' from 'the world') and active (spontaneous) in the deployment of concepts (thinking). McDowell tries to show how this receptivity and spontaneity might go together in all (human?) minds.

Of course, a mind is not a sex organ. Or is it? Is there a feminine mind?

- JH

"In Amsterdam, we have hundreds of gay bars, but only a few for lesbian women."

Which shows, perhaps, only that SSA women (in Amsterdam) don't congregate in bars...

- JH

"At this point of "Theology of the Body," JP II is considering, as an object of art, man - as male and female - in the resplendent light of the full truth and beauty of his existence as an embodied spirit, that is, as naked as he was on the day of his birth."

"All this is to say that for JP II the problem with "pornovision" (which, I will now disclose, is simply his word for sexually explicit motion or still image in contrast to "pornography" which etymologically is written material of the sort) is not that "it reveals too much, but that it reveals too little.""

Wow. As you know, this is the sort of thinking that led me from this:

http://johnheard.blogspot.com/2005/04/dreadapologia-hotties-make-me-sing-for.html

and

http://johnheard.blogspot.com/2005/08/dreadpecs-catholicism-rejoices-in.html

To this:

http://johnheard.blogspot.com/2007/12/dreadletters-teenager-writes-vocation.html

- JH

No, I'm reading more of von Hildebrand/Stein/Sr.P.Allen/Wojtyla.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_feminism

Definitely both receptivity and spontaneity are in both masculine and feminine minds (which do differ, even though they aren't "sex organs" per se) but one could say that the feminine mind is in the "key" of receptivity, as the masculine is in the "key" of spontaneity.

The point I really wanted to make, though, was that receptivity and passivity are fundamentally different. Imagine visiting a home where your host is receptive to your visit - and one where your host is simply passive. There's a world of difference.

Yes , I agree this is just an observation. Where bar-visits are concerned, it's the same everywhere, not just Amsterdam, but any city in the Western world.

Still I think that the answer to Daphne's question is 'yes'. It's not just that there aren't lesbian saunas for example, but any informal, serious gatherings of homosexuals show the same: People who discuss issues of homosexuality, there are always more men than women.

Again, I could be wrong, but this is my observation. It has no scientific validity of any kind.

Catherine,

You offered me some great food for thought. Receptivity versus spontaneity is a much more humane perspective on the difference between male and female than any Darwinist conceptions which seem to dominate the feminist debates.

In case of a homosexual male or female, things are a little mixed up perhaps, but if one looks at it from your perspective, notions of 'weak' and 'strong' become completely irrelevant. A person's value should not be measured by traditional notions of weak and strong (feminism far too much, tries to immitate perceived notions of masculine strength to prove 'equality'). Instead, I think any person's ability to be receptive or spontaneous should be appreciated. Which by the way, does not deny the difference between male and female, but affirms that male and female are God's creation, and in some persons, there are interchangeable aspects, that will not make them less male of female.

typo in the last sentence:

"will not make them less male OR female""

"Yet when it came to gender identity, I never, ever doubted I was a boy."

You raise another interesting point Vincent- that amongst homosexual men that I've met, there are some who are very masculine, not by any means displaying feminine behaviour..and others who seem to be more effeminate. But now I'm drifting off the topic...

"Imagine visiting a home where your host is receptive to your visit..."

This is a fine distinction. It reminded me of this (mostly) vulgar group:

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=2236409863

that has a telling comment that seems to go to this general idea:

"FATAL MISTAKES MEN MAKE DURING SEX GROUP

39.The fact we are shagging you on the first night does not make us a whore, it just means we feel like we have to have sex with you in order to keep you."

That sentiment is so alien to male sexual sensibilities, yet it seems central to femininity. What is at stake here? Certainly, the idea is outside the Christian sexual ethic... How much have neo-Paganism, materialism and the 'sexual liberation' (variously) corrupted female sexual attitudes and postures?

Is there a chance, then, that SSA women might, by resisting this sort of nonsense, attempt to lead their sisters back to a more considered, humane and Christian understanding of female sexuality?

I know some feminists speak out eloquently against pornography / pornovision and other forms of exploitation.

- JH

The fact that a lesbian sauna seems so ridiculous / incongruous is important, I'm sure, it certainly supports the idea that female sexuality is distinct from male sexuality.

While this might be uncontroversial here, many powerful cultural, political (and other) forces uphold the contrary view. Men and women are supposed to be equal in all things...

- JH

Yes, we are drifting off-topic, but let me say this: most gay men are not effeminate, the difference is perhaps more like that gay men have a heightened receptivity compared to straight men. The cliche of the limp-wristed queen is not true for the vast majority of gay men. Yet most people sense some kind of 'difference' with SSA people, men and women, nonetheless.

By the way, I think that more 'spontaneous' girls (tomboys, which does not mean they're lesbians of course) are more easily accepted than 'receptive' boys. Gender non-conformity is rejected more with boys than with girls.

Alas, yes, some people think equality is sameness. It's not. Political correctness doesn't help obviously. Women become victims when embracing the 'hook-up culture', even when they think it is liberating. The same for men, especially gay men.

It might SEEM more 'natural' for a man to embrace his sexual sensibilities, but without Love, it will leave him barren spiritually and mentally as well.

Sexuality and Love belong together. After 15 years of trying to convince myself it's not necessarily, I came to the conclusion I was wrong. It's a betrayal of the human condition to think sex can be recreational, even for a man, and even for a gay man. In the past, I had wished it could be, but it just can't be like that. There's always that moment of departure when you say 'Bye', and you feel, somewhere deep inside, that you should have given that guy something much more meaningful, like companionship, friendship, love, attention, care, listen to his story, etc.

"Gender non-conformity is rejected more with boys than with girls."

I think that's definitely true, and that it is directly linked to the pseudo-feminist idea you mentioned, that women are "weak" and men are "strong." A girl growing up as a tomboy is seen as "empowering" herself, while there seems no reason for a sensitive, poetic boy to take the "weaker" position.

It's interesting; I had some of the same experiences you had; when I was young, people sometimes mistook me for a boy (I was tall for my age, with short hair, and occasionally helped my dad on a job) and it scared me away from anything perceived as masculine - both close friendships with girls, and attire/behaviour. In my case, then, same-sex attraction and transgender issues presented an equal threat. I don't know if that's because I was a girl, or merely because I was "straight," though.

I think this is a separate topic, but I think you're right in what you're pointing out. Women are naturally more receptive; what has changed is *what* they are receptive to.

I don't think it's a solely feminist problem, either - it's an interplay between the sexes. A precedent is set by women, definitely, and men tend to lose interest in those who try to set higher standards.

Of course, it's all a question of what kind of interest, but modern media has been telling women for a long time that there is only one thing that interests men.

Catherine,<br /><br />You wrote: <br /><br />"A precedent is set by women, definitely, and men tend to lose interest in those who try to set higher standards."<br /><br />I think a woman, or a man should turn this around. Why not lose interest in someone who does not try to set higher standards? Why betray one's self or faith or conscience?<br /><br />Who gives a s**t about modern media? It's all tinsel.

"Why not lose interest in someone who does not try to set higher standards?"

Definitely. :) It just takes a lot of patience to find people who do set high standards. And trust, to believe they still exist. But that's what we're here for - to encourage each other in charity.

Just to answer the overall question I think the SSA is equal for both sexes. Woman however I think are far better at faking a fluid attraction and conjuring up a greater degree of self denial. This is because men need to conjure up a fair degree of imagination (or a fair degree of physical effort) to move past the "biological limitations" of the sexual act. Women unfortunately, quite frequently (for both sexual orientations in fact) can be in unsatisfying sexual relationships and view this as normal.