Sexual Misinformation Disorder: Understanding and Treating the Madness of the Moment

By Koby Frances, Ph.D., Psychologist in Private Practice

Original article is written on November 19, 2024. You can download the PDF here

Introduction

The concept of “natural, fixed and immutable sexual orientation” has been refuted by scientific study after study.

In 2016, The New Atlantis published research from a team of Johns Hopkins psychiatrists and epidemiologists who sought an “up-to-date explanation of research — from the biological, psychological, and social sciences — related to sexual orientation and gender identity.” Their key finding was that “the understanding of sexual orientation as an innate, biologically fixed property of human beings — the idea that people are ‘born that way’ — is not supported by scientific evidence.”¹

In 2019, the prestigious journal Science published the most comprehensive study of its kind to conclude that there is no “gay gene.”²

Many philosophers, social scientists, and legal scholars have also found systematic flaws in the research assumptions and methodologies of studies that claim to show some link between biology and sexual preference. For example, back in 1999, Edward Stein Ph.D., Associate Professor of Law at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, wrote in his book The Mismeasure of Desire: The Science, Theory and Ethics of Sexual Orientation, “The studies that are the backbone of the emerging research program are far from conclusive… The strong claims frequently made on behalf of this program are overblown.”³

In my experience, when critical information like this is presented to religious individuals and communities, a common reaction is to quickly state, “Then people with same-sex attractions should stop acting out and get married to the opposite sex,” or “Then people should just marry heterosexually and push through their lack of interest and excitement.”

But it isn’t so simple. Many people report very powerful sexual urges for different kinds of same-sex situations, in ways that pale in comparison to their feelings with the opposite sex. Those feelings don’t just go away when you tell them that they aren’t actually gay or that the whole idea of being “inherently gay” is scientifically flawed. Others, who do not necessarily have powerful same-sex drives, still report feeling a certain disinterest, or even dread, of heterosexual relationships in ways that are different from how their same-gendered peers feel.

Individuals like these are unlikely to “just get married” unless they have a different theory—other than “I’m gay”—to explain these patterns, and unless they are given actual solutions to help them change these patterns.

This brief summary is meant to do just that: to provide other terms and theories that can rationally explain the kinds of relationship and sexual patterns that lead people to avoid, dread, doubt, or delay heterosexual relationships.

I will try to accomplish this by providing concise scientific answers to five specific but central questions that will help shed more light on some of these patterns, without resorting to identity-labeling or canned psychoanalytic theorizing. From my years of experience treating religious clients and teaching rabbis and therapists, these five questions are the ones religious individuals and communities are most often seeking clarity on. In the absence of having access to the answers, they are likely to remain confused or to gravitate toward the most accessible possible explanation and lifestyle, even if it comes with a grave personal cost.

1. If “natural sexual orientation” is not an accurate term of belief, why are so many people rigidly attached to it, even if they have no personal connection to this issue? Can everyone be wrong, including highly intelligent people, psychologists, and devoutly religious people? Why is intelligent society so suspicious of anyone—rabbi, therapist, or philosopher—who challenges these beliefs and offers a different understanding?

According to Carl Trueman Ph.D., professor of biblical and religious studies at Grove City College, the LGBTQ movement has been especially persuasive and shape-shifting because it piggy-backed onto several centuries-in-the-making cultural developments, which have redefined how society views tradition, ethics, and sexuality.

These developments, popularized by articulate intellectuals, artists, and tastemakers, include:a) Replacement of abstract religious ethics with man-made ethics.b) The idea that people can know their authentic identity through their thoughts and feelings.c) Valuing self-actualization over self-restraint and conformity to higher ideals.d) Viewing sexual feelings as central to a person’s Self or identity.e) Exalting “victims” as inherently virtuous while portraying elites as oppressive.f) Seeing “the new” or “disruptive” as intrinsically better than “the old.”g) The concept of a “virtual community” where people meet their needs for belonging, recognition, power, and admiration.

Recognizing these changes helps explain why society now expects not merely tolerance of public homosexual behavior, but active affirmation, even in traditional religious spaces.

2. If “sexual orientation” is a socially-constructed identity label that is not naturally fixed, why do people universally seek opposite-sex intimacy and marriage? Aren’t most people “ingrained heterosexuals” while a minority are “ingrained homosexuals”?

Sexual energy is inherently aimless. Culture and family teach how, where, and when to channel it. Most cultures encourage opposite-sex partnerships and discourage same-sex partnerships.

Children often learn to see heterosexual marriage as a developmental milestone. The Bible’s prohibitions against non-heterosexual relationships suggest that without family, societal, and religious constraints, sexual energy could be expressed in many ways.

Psychologists like Anne Stirling Hastings note that sexual energy can be activated by:

• Observing others projecting sexual energy through dress, gestures, words, and movements.

• Physical and emotional closeness between people of any gender.Other factors such as repeat exposure, openness, admiration, shared joy, and vulnerability can intensify attraction.

In most cultures, same-gender intimacy is limited early to prevent sexual feelings. Relaxed boundaries can increase same-sex sexual interest. In modern contexts with widespread homosexual imagery and reduced shame, same-sex behavior is more common, even in religious schools.

3. If sexual orientation is not fixed, how do we explain those with strong same-sex attractions or other non-heterosexual preferences?

Sexual energy is aimless; non-heterosexual desires are not unnatural. What is abnormal is childhood-based, recurring, intense, part-object (CRISP) arousal reactions to stimuli (body part, hair, physique, clothing, personality type, or interaction) without intimacy.

This reaction is called a sexual script⁴ or “lust-trigger.” Problems arise if:a) the arousal is unfairly compared to real relationships, orb) there is an unhealthy fixation on pursuing arousal.

Repeated exposure to same-sex lustful behavior can reinforce these patterns, similar to addiction. These reactions do not reflect innate sexual orientation but are often subconscious coping strategies. Therapy can help reduce dependency on these triggers and develop interest in real romantic partners.

4. How do we explain an absence of romantic interest in the opposite sex if a person is not “inherently gay”?

Many people are not drawn to the opposite sex until they experience a relationship. Strong “lust-triggers” to non-opposite-sex targets can mislead expectations of real partners.

Some may identify as “inherently gay” even without experience, creating psychological barriers to heterosexual connection. Awareness of this dynamic can help them explore real romantic relationships while addressing their lust-triggers.

5. Why are young people increasingly identifying as gay or lesbian regardless of experience or sexual literacy?

Gallup (2024) reported that 30% of U.S. women aged 18–26 self-identify as LGBTQ; Ivy League colleges report even higher numbers. Herd mentality and desire to conform explain much of this.

Other reasons include:

• Emotional deprivation of basic social needs (belonging, recognition, power, independence, life-purpose).

• Early social exclusion, strict parental/religious control, and social media influence.

The LGBTQ movement offers validation, control, and self-expression for these young adults, even without actual intimate or sexual experience.

Notes

1. Lawrence S. Mayer and Paul R. McHugh, “Executive Summary,” Sexuality and Gender: Findings from the Biological, Psychological, and Social Sciences, The New Atlantis, Number 50, (Fall 2016), pp. 7–9.

2. Andrea Ganna et al., Large-scale GWAS reveals insights into the genetic architecture of same-sex sexual behavior, Science 365, eaat7693 (2019). DOI:10.1126/science.aat7693

3. Edward Stein, The Mismeasure of Desire: The Science, Theory and Ethics of Sexual Orientation, Oxford (1999), p. 191.

4. J. Park, Imprinted Sexual Fantasies: A New Key for Sexology (Existential Books, 2008).