"The Side-Effect That Dare Not Speak Its Name"
A post yesterday — Homosexuality Explained? — engendered comments from long-term friend of this blog Francis-Xavier that deserve airing:
- If you talk to MDs and PhDs with the background to understand things, most of them will tell you that homosexuality is the side-effect that dare not speak its name.
At junior high school level biology, students are taught that the presence or absence of a y chromosome determines sex. This is a gross simplification. The y chromosome - with a few exceptions - causes a foetus to produce much more testosterone that foetuses without a y chromosome do, and it is this testosterone in the womb that makes a foetus develop its male gonads and let its female gonads shrivel or vice versa. (There's the odd accident where both develop, and something like one in 5000 women is an XY phenotype where the y chromosome can't produce testosterone.)
The sexual differentiation of the brain - male and female brains are quite different - is also driven by the ratio of testosterone to the oestrogens in the womb. And this is where the side-effects arise. Many years ago, an oestrogen by the name of DES was prescribed as a treatment for morning sickness; it totally unbalanced the equilibrium between estrogens and androgens, and an astounding number of the children born after their mothers had taken DES with them in the womb grew up to be lesbians or had other markers of strong male development, such as enormous clitorises.
Endocrinologists will tell you that the human endocrine system is very subtle, and that it takes more than a year if not two years for people who have taken cortisone or thyroid hormone to revert to completely "normal" rhythms and levels, once they strop. And also for those who have taken synthetic estrogens, aka birth control pills.
In other words millions of women take pills that cause unnatural levels of the hormones that determine who male or female their children will be, and at least part of the huge increase in homosexuals must be due to this.
Years ago, I discussed this with an MD PhD doing such research, who confirmed this connexion, and then with a very well known Roman Catholic authority on Humanae Vitae, and urged said expert to raise money to further investigate this, and it would undoubtedly greatly buttress the case against hormonal contraception.
Much to my surprise, I was told that there was no interest at all in making the best possible scientific case against contraception to the faithful.
The clear sense I got was that said expert considered Humanae Vitae to be their turf, with which to pontificate (pun intended), sell books, and appear on tv to the maximum intent possible, turf to be shared as little as possible, but that this expert in no way believed in or cared about the teachings on which their career had been built, a total fraud.
Rarely have I been more disgusted by a human being.
I am more and more coming to believe that the "Conservative Catholics" have even more phonies in their leadership than the liberal ones.