Your theory has the virtue of being backed by science:
http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbo...lestation.html
The link is long and detailed. It's a complex subject. For those seeking the truth, they will learn from it. Those who just want to pigeon-hole all homosexuals as perverts, they will not interested in being persuaded to another point of view.Another problem related to terminology arises because sexual abuse of male children by adult men2 is often referred to as "homosexual molestation." The adjective "homosexual" (or "heterosexual" when a man abuses a female child) refers to the victim's gender in relation to that of the perpetrator. Unfortunately, people sometimes mistakenly interpret it as referring to the perpetrator's sexual orientation.
As an expert panel of researchers convened by the National Academy of Sciences noted in a 1993 report: "The distinction between homosexual and heterosexual child molesters relies on the premise that male molesters of male victims are homosexual in orientation. Most molesters of boys do not report sexual interest in adult men, however" (National Research Council, 1993, p. 143, citation omitted).
To avoid this confusion, it is preferable to refer to men's sexual abuse of boys with the more accurate label of male-male molestation. Similarly, it is preferable to refer to men's abuse of girls as male-female molestation. These labels are more accurate because they describe the sex of the individuals involved but don't implicitly convey unwarranted assumptions about the perpetrator's sexual orientation.
The distinction between a victim's gender and a perpetrator's sexual orientation is important because many child molesters don't really have an adult sexual orientation. They have never developed the capacity for mature sexual relationships with other adults, either men or women. Instead, their sexual attractions focus on children – boys, girls, or children of both sexes.
Aly I admit that I am an ex-Catholic, but I won't go into the details as to why I left the church. Instead I will concentrate on the countless sexual abuse claims that I have seen in my work that have stemmed from the Catholic Church and in particular from the residential schools that they have operated. The Church's celibacy rules have been a mecca for pedophiles for many, many years and the level of physical ordinary abuse and sexual abuse would leave you sick to your stomach. And I have only seen a small percentage of the number of cases. While I don't blame the Church for being the only vector for sexual abuse, I do know for a fact that the residential school administration were always aware of the abuse, and when it became too difficult to conceal, they sent those priests on to other parishes, to again abuse children in a different school. It is absolutely disgusting how many times these predators were moved to different locations, where they simply took up where they left off. For forty or fifty years these vile people were transferred from parish to parish, when the community started asking too many questions. It's sad, but the Church was much more concerned with concealing the problem, than protecting children and they and their insurers have been and continue to pay dearly for that decision. However lest all the other religious communities, Boy Scouts and any other organization that had children in their custody should be feeling smug, they also attracted pedophiles and they too transferred people away to dispose of the problem in one location, just to foist the same pedophiles on new communities. The thing is that 30 or more years ago no one wanted to discuss these issues, never mind even recognize the kind of damage they were continuing to inflict. The chickens have now come home to roost, and all such organizations pay dearly for sexual abuse coverage, so in order to reduce their premiums, they no longer turn a blind eye to abuse. Believe me, reading the details of the abuse of these children leaves me sick to my stomach.
In quoting my post, you affirm and agree that you have not been goaded, provoked, emotionally manipulated or otherwise coerced into responding.
"The difference between what we do and what we are capable of doing would suffice to solve most of the world’s problems.”
Mahatma Gandhi
Obviously not as many people on this thread attest.
I find it interesting that you seem to focus on the gay bashers/homophobes (the negative) rather than those who see a person's sexual preference as being a persona matter and irrelevant to other issues (the positive). Why?