The homosexual historical footprint is large when it comes to the rape and murder of children. The most notorious child killer might be Gilles de Rais (Bluebeard), remembered for raping, torturing, and killing perhaps 800 boys in 15th century France. Gilles often raped the boy as he hung from a hook by the neck. Before he died, Gilles took him down, comforted him, repeated the act and either killed him himself or had him slain. In his confession, Gilles testified that “when the children were dead he kissed them and those who had the most handsome limbs and heads he held up to admire them, and had their bodies cut open and took delight at the sight of their inner organs; and very often when the said children were dying he sat on their stomachs and took pleasure in seeing them die and laughed...” (www.crimelibrary.com)

At the turn of the 19th century, “hobos” or “bums” in the U.S. were often driven from towns because it was believed that they were responsible for raping and killing boys. Even the murder of a boy by homosexual lovers Leopold and Loeb in 1924, then called the “crime of the century,” likely involved rape. As of July 23, 2001, the Associated Press list of the worst serial killers in the United States was topped by Donald Harvey, followed by John Wayne Gacy, Patrick Kearney, Bruce Davis and Dean Corll in descending number of victims (www.crimelibrary.com). All these perpetrators of serial crimes in the 1970s and 1980s engaged in homosexuality, and the majority of the victims for the last four killers were boys.

Nevertheless, girls get raped and murdered too. Homosexual activists would have us believe that heterosexual abductions are far more common than homosexual child molestations. Perhaps our society has been so slanted against homosexuality that homosexuals are themselves victims of biased historical reporting. If so, what is the situation today? With our modern professional class Ñ including the media Ñ generally in favor of gay rights, it would seem likely that there ought to be minimal reporting bias against homosexuals in the coverage of child molestation cases. So the question remains: are those who engage in homosexuality disproportionately apt to engage in the rape and murder of children?

What We Did

Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe, an on-line search service, scans the whole text of over 50 English regional and national newspapers, largely in the U.S., but also including major papers in Australia, England, Canada, and New Zealand (e.g., the Baltimore Sun, Boston Globe, Independent [London], Ottawa Citizen, etc.). For 1989 through 2002 inclusive, every news story that included “child molestation” was examined Ñ a total of 6,444 stories which, after eliminating repeat stories about the same cases, reduced to 1,914 unique child molestation events. The 6,444 story database was double-checked by running “murder” and “killed” against it. Only news stories were tallied, not editorials or opinion pieces, so these were stories of fairly recent events.

What We Found

One hundred and three news stories involved the rape and/or murder of children: 90 involved the molestation and murder of a child or children, 11 stories involved only the abduction and rape of children, and two the rape and mutilation, but not the murder, of the children involved. Of the 90 news stories where the child was raped and murdered (0.47% of the unique child molestation stories), 40% involved homosexual molestation.

In the most unusual case, an “educated and relatively wealthy” leader recruited two other men and a boy. This team raped and murdered precisely 100 boys1. The leader had had prior arrests for suspicion of sodomizing boys, but his social status kept him from being convicted for many years. In another case, a man molested and killed 9 children of unreported sex.

Of the 95 perpetrators in these 90 stories, at least 43% engaged in homosexuality. These included 39 men, a boy, and a woman who all engaged in homosexuality, and 47 men and 7 boys who engaged in heterosexuality with victims. Of the 217 victims, at least 68% were victimized by homosexual perpetrators, and at least 67% were boys. Boys were also mutilated in the two stories involving mutilation. Furthermore, both multiple perpetrators and multiple victims were associated with homosexuality. In the three stories where two or more killers were implicated, the rapes were homosexual. In 69% of the 13 stories involving more than one victim, the perpetrator engaged in homosexuality. Another 11 stories involved a charge of attempted murder. In 64% of those cases, the perpetrator engaged in homosexuality.

When all other cases of child molestation from the Lexis-Nexis search are added to these stories, there were 2,181 perpetrators in the 1,914 distinct events whose sexual proclivities could be characterized by the sex of their victim: 41% engaged in sex with their own sex, the remaining 59% with the opposite sex (another 118 perpetrators violated at least 190 children whose sex was not given). Of the 5,630 underage victims of these molestations, 61% were victimized by individuals who engaged in homosexuality. And those who performed homosexual seductions were quite one-sided: 3,386 of their victims were boys, only 60 were girls.

Overall, there was a slightly higher rate of homosexuality among perpetrators who raped and killed than among those who “merely” raped or molested (43% vs. 41%). In addition, the proportion of victims attributed to homosexual perpetrators who raped and murdered was higher than the proportion attributed to homosexuals who only raped or molested (68% vs. 61%). All of the cases involving eating or torturing the victim were committed by homosexual practitioners.

What the Findings Mean

The newspapers indexed by Academic Universe undoubtedly concentrate upon events that occur in urban areas. Nonetheless, since the rape and murder of a child is of such widespread interest, a considerable proportion of such events outside of urban areas were probably also cited in these newspapers. It may even be true that the proportions of perpetrators and victims in this sample are roughly representative of what has recently happened in the industrialized world.

Contrary to the claims of homosexual activists, history seems to have repeated itself. The past 14 years give every indication that those who engage in homosexuality are still disproportionately involved in the rapes and murders of children. Likewise, the few instances of mutilation also implicated homosexuals. The historical record disproportionately implicating homosexuals in the rape, torture, and murder of children appears to be in harmony with more recent events.

Murder and child molestation combine in the rape and murder of a child. These two social problems are also independently associated with those who engage in homosexuality. Blanchard, Barbaree, Bogaert, Dicky, Klassen, Kuban, and Zucker, working with male offenders, concluded in 2000 that2 the “best epidemiological evidence indicates that only 2-4% of men attracted to adults prefer menÉ; in contrast, around 25-40% of men attracted to children prefer boys.... Thus the rate of homosexual attraction is 6-20 times higher among pedophiles [those who have sex with children under the age of 12 yr.]” (p. 464).

Likewise, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual III-R (DSM III-R, 1987)3 of the American Psychiatric Association, summarizing the clinical material about men, states that “Attraction to girls [aged 13 yr. or younger] is apparently twice as common as attraction to boys” and notes that the “course is usually chronic, especially in those attracted to boys.... The recidivism rate for people with Pedophilia involving a preference for the same sex is roughly twice that of those who prefer the opposite sex” (pp. 284-5).

Both of these sources estimated that about a third of child molesters engage in homosexuality Ñ similar to the 41% of male perpetrators who ‘only’ raped the underage in the newspaper database. In other studies4, it has also been found that male perpetrators who engage in homosexuality claim larger numbers of rape victims than non-homosexual rapists. For instance, 84% of the 28,574 children under the age of 14 who were raped in Abel, et al. were victimized by homosexuals. Also, the higher rates of recidivism by homosexuals noted in the DSM would imply more victims too.

In line with these reports, of the 217 victims in the 90 murder and rape stories, at least 68% were victimized by homosexual perpetrators. This 68% falls between the estimate that “roughly equal numbers of girls and boys, each year fall victim to some form of sexual exploitation” cited in a recent National Association of Social Workers review of a large set of studies of child molestation5 and the 84% reported by Abel, et al.

Murder also appears to be disproportionately associated with homosexuality. Jim Warren did the intake interview for almost all younger murderers (i.e., those under age 36) at the Washington State Corrections Center from 1971-82. In an interview in 1994, Warren opined that he was “probably the only one who examined the entirety of each of their case files.” Warren said that he was struck with how frequently homosexuality turned up in the cases. Starting with a trickle of 2 or 3 murders/year in 1972 until dozens/year by the early 1980s, he noted a recurrent pattern: Although the motive listed in the report was often robbery or theft, he said that “about 50% of the time” it was associated with homosexuality. Typically, he said, a homosexual would meet someone at a bar or park and invite him to his home. Eventually, an argument would ensue and he or his visitor would be dead.

In Amsterdam, police spokesmen have stated that in “one out of four of all murder cases the victim was homosexual” (quoted by Gemert, 1994, p. 150)6. Gemert opined that “[e]lderly homosexual men often don’t have much to do in daily life. When they know that they will be unwanted in the gay world in the future, they will... seek this form of excitement. Visiting Central Station and ‘hunting’ boys is very important to them” (p. 172). Gemert thus offers a theory about the linkage between child molestation, murder and homosexuality Ñ albeit, one that accounts for the high rate at which homosexuals are murdered by boys, not why they in turn disproportionately rape and murder boys.

Although murder and rape of children are not common events, they are extremely frightening and can greatly impact the communities in which they occur. As its most precious resource, our society takes great pains to protect children and to ensure their safety. Amazingly, our society is also at the vanguard of the pro-gay rights movement. But consider: a group constituting perhaps 1% to 5% of men (1.3% in the 1996 National Household Survey of Drug Abuse; higher in Black, et al.7, Anderson & Stall8, and Cameron & Cameron9) generated 43% of those who were recorded in the most recent 14 years of news stories as having raped and killed children. That this group also accounts for around a third of child molesters, commits between a third to two-thirds of child rapes, and may be involved in up to half of all murders, adds substance to the traditional belief that participation in homosexual activity is anti-social.

References:

The onset of AIDS in the 1980s was a watershed event. By the mid-1970s, it was already known that those who engaged in homosexual sex, along with IV drug abusers, had excessive rates of hepatitis and syphilis. Because of this, some were calling for their exclusion from blood banks. Sexually transmitted infections ran rampant within the gay subculture, particularly among males, due to their high levels of promiscuity, risky sexual activities (e.g., anal/oral, anal/penile, and penile/oral sex), and invasive drug practices (homosexuals are much more apt than heterosexuals to shoot drugs and use illegal substances).

AIDS ‘nailed down’ the rela-tionship. It was no accident HIV hit homosexuals hard — it was a natural consequence of the sexual choices of those who decided to have homosexual sex. And be-cause their sexual practices and rate of partner changing are also conducive to spreading other dis-eases, homosexual practitioners, particularly males, constitute a natural biological ‘sink’ toward which almost every kind of dis-ease organism migrates.

Not unlike biology, the homosexual subculture also acts as a 'social sink' for nearly every kind of social pathology. Increased rates of child molestation, substance abuse, interpersonal violence, promiscuity, criminality, greater dependence upon society, and lessened productivity all characterize those who engage in homosexuality. For instance, from year to year, while less than 1% of American adults shoot any kind of illegal drug into their veins, about a sixth of homosexuals with AIDS or HIV do.

This year, Family Research Report will be especially devoted to how those who engage in homosexuality disproportionately contribute to societal disruption. The theme of this series will be "hidden in plain sight." That is, the greater molestation rates of foster children by homosexuals, the greater rates of child molestation, and a host of social and personal problems are "hidden" from most people. How? Because stories about these problems dribble into the world's newspapers, yet no one until now has gathered them together into a sensible whole. But they do make sense. Our research has harvested a whole bounty of new evidence Ñ and the results are eye-opening. So stay tuned.

For the first time, a large, representative sample of twins both identical and fraternal has been examined for sexual desire. The result? No evidence that homosexual desire is inherited!

The authors concluded that "the pattern of concordance (similarity across pairs) of same-sex preference for sibling pairs does not suggest genetic influence independent of social context." (p. 1179).

Given the spate of media-attention to scientific articles purporting to show that homosexuality is inborn, led by research by Bailey and Pillard on twins, and research on a putative 'gay gene' by Dean Hamer, this study by Bearman and Bruckner appears to grind their conclusions to dust.

The researchers drew a large sample that was reasonably representative of the general population of adolescents, a subset of the 90,118 respondents to the Add Health national study of adolescents in the 7th through 12th grades (this is also called the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health). The subsamples drawn included 289 pairs of MZ (monozygotic, or identical) twins, 495 pairs of DZ (dizygotic, or fraternal twins), 1,251 pairs of full siblings, 442 pairs of half-siblings (e.g., same mother or father), and 662 pairs of non-related siblings (e.g., 'blended' families).

The key questions were "have you ever had a romantic attraction to a female (male)?" and self-reported sexual activity. Overall, 8.7% of the sample reported same-sex romantic attraction (9.5% of boy adolescents, 7.8% of girls) and 3.1% reported a same-sex romantic relationship (2.9% for boys, 3.4% for girls).

When it came to actual physical sex (e.g., touching under clothes, having intercourse involving genitals, or reporting a sexual relationship), only 1.5% said that they had (1.6% for boys, 1.4% for girls). This last estimate is similar to the number of adults reporting same-sex activity in the previous 12 months in the 1996 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse (1.3% of men and 1.1% of women), but markedly lower than the Anderson and Stall analysis of the General Social Survey which calculated it at 3-4%.

The researchers focused on the 'same-sex attraction' item since even with the large initial sample, the numbers involved for homosexual behavior were too small for further analysis. Examining only pairs of twins or siblings in which at least one adolescent reported 'homosexual romantic attraction,' Bearman and Bruckner found that for concordance in homosexual attraction, that is, where both members of the pair gave the same answer Ñ either "yes" they had homosexual attraction or "no" they didn't Ñ the results came out as listed in Table 1.

If homosexual desire were heritable, we would expect to see the highest concordance rates among identical twins, who share almost identical genes. We would then expect the next-highest concordance for fraternal twins and siblings, who share more genetic material than strangers. Lowest on the ladder ought to be step-sisters and step-brothers in blended families, since they are genetically unrelated.

The actual results, however, while in the right order for the boys, don't follow this pattern for either the girls or the combined samples. Furthermore, none of the percentage findings Ñ for either the boys or girls separately, nor for them combined Ñ was statistically significantly different from the others!

The authors, noting this lack of pattern said, "if same-sex romantic attraction has a genetic component, it is massively overwhelmed by other factors" ( p. 1198). Indeed, in this the 'mother' of all studies on the issue published to date, nothing genetic was found.

Reference:

Bearman, P.S. & Bruckner H. Opposite-sex twins and adolescent same-sex attraction. American Journal of Sociology 2002, 107, 1179-1205.

"The Wall Street Journal recently stated that laws prohibiting homosexual behavior were "anachronistic." I presume you also consider a society without AIDS anachronistic. And you're probably right, given your premise about homosexuality, because the two certainly go together. Here are the facts:

In the US, of males whose method of infection is known, 58% are HIV-positive as the result of having sex with another male. Almost certainly, they became infected by engaging in acts forbidden by anti-sodomy laws. The are also inclined to have a variety of other diseases, including hepatitis, and organ failures and infections involving the stomach and lower bowel.

Hundreds of thousands of HIV-infected males have died; thousands who received blood from them have died; scores of health-care workers attending them have died; and heaven knows how many children fathered by them have died after a short, painful life.

For a newspaper preoccupied with money, you miss the obvious point that: (1) HIV-related cases among these males account for about one percent of our total health-care costs -- which in 2000 would have been $13 billion; (2) the hundreds of thousands of men prematurely disabled by AIDS have become a drain on the Social Security and Medicaid systems; and (3) because of frenetic political pressure by gay activists, we are spending in excess of $1 billion annually on AIDS research, more than on the two major killers, heart disease and cancer. (These are just the most obvious expenses.)

So you're probably right. Attempting to maintain a healthy society is indeed anachronistic. Let's legalize sodomy and live in a sick America."

Late last year, the Wall Street Journal documented how large corporations use life insurance on their employees to fatten their bottom line. Specifically, proceeds from life insurance policies that pay off when a worker dies are tax-free, and the accumulation of the value of the policy is also untaxed. (11/30/02) Thus, due to the peculiarities of the tax-code, a large employer can do rather well by insuring its employees, even without their knowledge or consent. In response, I wrote:

"Life Insurance Payoffs Making Corporations Pro Gay Rights?

By insuring the lives of employees, large corporations game the tax code to make all taxpayers fatten their bottom line.

The major sex surveys have reported that homosexuals are less apt to be productive workers. And mounting epidemiological evidence suggests that the median age of death for those who engage in homosexuality hits in the mid-40s to early-50s.

A small business cannot afford to hire the less productive, nor lose employees to early death. But large death benefits for major corporations might make homosexual hires attractive, fairly easily compensating for their reduced efficiency -- especially if they comprised only a small fraction of their workforce.

Might the earlier death of homosexual employees be influencing the ever growing support of large corporations for gay rights? Owning their life insurance may be a significant factor Ñ especially if medical insurers or the Federal government (e.g., social security, Medicaid) have to shell out for the additional costs of medical treatment."