Bailey, Cochran and Sailer on Homosexuality and Eugenics
by Lynn Conway & Anjelica
Kieltyka
Copyright © 2004 by Lynn Conway & Anjelica
Kieltyka.
All rights reserved [Draft Version of
3-5-04]
Bailey: "Evolutionarily, homosexuality
is a big mistake"*
*J. Michael Bailey on KOOP-FM,
Austin, TX, May 2003.'
Transcribed by
Donna Rose at:
http://www.donnarose.com/JMBInterview.html
"Despite their
different belief systems, in the end what the restless conservative scientists
object to is the same as what religious conservatives object to: not wayward
genetic evolution, but "undesirable" social evolution. Both groups abhor the
idea that society could change so as to include and accommodate GLBT people. For
them, this means the end of the world as they know it." -
Sonia John
Contents:
1.
Introduction.
2. Bailey's
thoughts about eugenics solutions to the "evolutionary paradox" of
homosexuality, in direct quotes from his book, The Man Who Would Be
Queen:
3. Bailey
announces his thinking on the topic of "sexual-orientation eugenics" in
2001.
4. Back in 1998,
Bailey's co-author Greenberg tested the waters on how to present arguments for
eugenic solutions to the "problem" of gay children:
5. Bailey, long
active in the Human Behavior and Evolution Society (HBES), in1999 expressed
concern about the "evolutionary paradox" of homosexuality:
6. Bailey also
became active in the overt promotion of the "germ theory" of homosexuality.
7. Gregory
Cochran, a well-known "race scientist", recently acknowledged Bailey's strong
support of his "gay germ" theory in a post to Gene Expression,
8-19-03.
8. AMERICAN
EUGENICS SOCIETY GOALS 1926-1956: A source of methods.
9. We now see how
Bailey and Greenberg used established AES rhetorical technique in their argument
for a eugenics solution to homosexuality in 2001.
10. Bailey’s friend
Steve Sailer initiated a widespread promotion of the gay-gene gay-germ theory on
the VDARE hate site in August 2003
1.
Introduction:
These investigatory notes (a
work in progress) document J. Michael Bailey’s collaboration with Gregory
Cochran and Steve
Sailer on development and
promotion of their junk-science “gay gene – gay germ” theory of homosexuality.
This theory first presumes homosexuality to be genetically caused. However, this
presents a theoretical dilemma, since gay people reproduce much less often than
do heterosexual people. Bailey, Cochran and Sailer resolve the apparent dilemma
by concluding that the gay gene must be activated by a “gay germ”.
Bailey is CERTAIN that there
must be a gay gene and a gay germ, because his simplistic interpretation of
classical Darwinian evolutionary theory somehow says these things must be so.
And as we know from his views about transsexualism, once Bailey is certain of
something no counter-evidence will ever change his mind.
Why should anyone care about Bailey’s theoretical
speculations? Because it is just a short jump from aborting gay fetuses to
quarantining gay people presumably infected with the "gay germ”.
Also remember
that these people (Bailey, Cochran and Sailer) are all active members of the
same group of “scientists”, right wing journalists and pundits that brought you
The Bell Curve, The G Factor, Alien Nation and other such “race science”
and white superiorist books, namely the infamous Human
Biodiversity Institute and discussion group founded by Steve Sailer.
2. Bailey's
thoughts about eugenics solutions to the "evolutionary paradox" of
homosexuality, in direct quotes from
his book, The Man Who Would Be Queen:
http://www.nap.edu/books/0309084180/html/
(p.114) "What would make
avoiding gay children wrong?"
(p.114) "For example, some of
the people raising the specter of "murdering gay babies" were the same people
who insisted that abortion is no one's business but the
woman's..."
(p.114) "Instead, the real
question is whether parental selection in favor of heterosexuality is
acceptable. To focus on this question, we have to assume that whatever means
parents will use to do this are, in themselves, morally acceptable"
(p.115) "So the next question
is whether selecting for heterosexual children would cause any harm?"
Certainly being straight rather than gay doesn't harm the child itself."
(p.115) "Homosexuality might be
the most striking unresolved paradox of human evolution.
(p.116) "Homosexuality is
evolutionary maladaptive."
(p.116) ""Evolutionary
maladaptive" sounds like an insult, but it isn't."
(p.116) "The desire to have sex
with members of the opposite sex helps people have sex that might result in
offspring. The number of healthy offspring one leaves if perhaps the best
indicator of evolutionary success."
3. Bailey announces his
thinking on the topic of "sexual-orientation eugenics" in
2001:
"Parental Selection of
Children's Sexual Orientation", Aaron S. Greenberg and J. Michael Bailey,
Archives of Sexual Behavior 30 (4): 423-437, August 2001
Abstract: As we
learn more about the causes of sexual orientation, the likelihood increases that
parents will one day be able to select the orientation of their children. This
possibility (at least that of selecting for heterosexuality) has generated a
great deal of concern among supporters of homosexual rights, with such selection
being widely condemned as harmful and morally repugnant. Notwithstanding this
widespread condemnation, and even assuming, as we do, that homosexuality is
entirely acceptable morally, allowing parents, by means morally unproblematic in
themselves, to select for heterosexuality would be morally acceptable. This is
because allowing parents to select their children's sexual orientation would
further parent's freedom to raise the sort of children they wish to raise and
because selection for heterosexuality may benefit parents and children and is
unlikely to cause significant harm.
Keywords: homosexuality,
sexual orientation, genetics, abortion, eugenics, genetic
selection
http://www.kluweronline.com/article.asp?PIPS=301061
You can retrieve
the full PDF version of this Greenberg-Bailey paper on homosexual eugenics at
the following link:
http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Bailey/Greenberg-Bailey/Homosexual%20Eugenics.pdf
4. Back in 1998,
Bailey's co-author Greenberg tested the waters on how to present arguments for
eugenic solutions to the "problem" of gay
children:
Lawyer suggests abortion if a
test could prove fetus has "gay gene",
San Francisco Examiner, Wednesday,
August 26, 1998
"CHICAGO - A Chicago lawyer who
has published articles about the legal and ethical issues of sexual orientation
research says that if a so-called gay gene is ever isolated, parents should have
the right to abort a gay fetus or manipulate its genetic
makeup.
His stand prompted a swift
response in San Francisco, where Supervisor Tom Ammiano called the idea
frightening, the proud parents of a lesbian found it very painful and a gay
rights attorney called it "ludicrous from a scientific point of
view."
In Chicago, attorney Aaron
Greenberg is set to present his argument Thursday at the 16th annual symposium
of the San Francisco-based Gay and Lesbian Medical
Association...
"All things being equal, I
think a kid who is heterosexual would have an easier life, not for any good
reason, but because people irrationally discriminate (against homosexuals)," he
said, giving what he speculated would be the biggest reason parents would want a
straight child.
He said parents who make such a
decision also would probably relate better to a heterosexual child and might
feel they would have a better chance of eventually becoming
grandparents.
"It's just pure evil," said
David Smith, spokesman for the Human Rights Campaign, a Washington-based gay
political group. "It stems from the whole notion that being gay or lesbian is
not quite worthy of a parent's love."...
Greenberg, a corporate lawyer
who has published with Northwestern University researcher Michael Bailey
said he understands that - even if one has no problem with abortion or
genetic engineering - his ideas can make people very
emotional.
"I don't want to upset anyone,"
Greenberg said.
"But I don't think, with
certain conditions, that there's anything morally objectionable with choosing a
child's sexual orientation."...
But in San Francisco,
Greenberg's view raised alarm.
"I find it very frightening,"
Ammiano said. "I think that in Germany during World War II there were some of
the same rationales" for the elimination of Jews....
At the National Center for
Lesbian Rights in San Francisco, staff attorney Shannon Minter said Greenberg's
view has no scientific merit and shows how ill-informed the public is on
theories of how sexual orientation is formed....
"I think all children and all
parents would be much better off if everyone concerned about discrimination
against lesbian and gay children and youth spent their time and energy trying to
educate people and build acceptance and love."...
Read the full article
at:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/examiner/archive/1998/08/26/NEWS3525.dtl
5. Bailey, long active in
the Human Behavior and Evolution Society (HBES), in 1999 expressed concern about
the "evolutionary paradox" of homosexuality:
At the Annual Meeting of HBES, 5
June 1999, Bailey organized a Symposium entitled: "Constraining evolutionary
hypotheses of human male homosexuality" (session 10.4)
Symposium abstract Human
homosexuality is an evolutionary paradox. Homosexual people would seem to be at
a substantial reproductive disadvantage, yet they exist in nontrivial numbers.
These facts have motivated intense evolutionary
speculation.
Bailey also presented a paper on
"Empirical tests of two evolutionary hypotheses of male homosexuality" at that
Symposium. It is at this same 1999 HBES conference that Bailey organized
and presented Gregory Cochran's "pathogen theory" of Homosexuality in a
forum comprised of many of Bailey's fellow members of Steve Sailer's HBI "Think
Tank" and/or are the alleged neo-eugenicists and race scientists mentioned in
SPLC's "Queer Science" report - Kevin MacDonald (HBES sec./archivist
-1998); Rushton (HBES - 1998, 2002, 2003); Buss (HBES - 1998, 1999, 2000, 2002,
2003); Pinker (HBES - 2000)
http://www.hbes.com/HBES/abst99.htm
6. Bailey also became
active in the overt promotion of the "germ theory" of
homosexuality:
See Cochran-Ewald's paper
"Infectious Causation of Disease - A Evolutionary Perspective".
Cochran thanks J. Michael
Bailey for his assistance on p.1, and references Bailey's forum at
HBES'99.
Embedded in the paper
is the introduction of the "germ theory of homosexuality" (see p
437-438).
" For helpful comments the authors
thank W. D. Hamilton, J. M. Bailey, J. F. Crow, Alan P. Hudson, and R.
Taylor.
PBM 43, 3 (2000): 406-448 © 2000 by
The Johns Hopkins University
Press
http://www.isteve.com/Infectious_Causation_of_Disease.pdf
See Steve Sailer's
paper "Gay Gene or Gay Germ?" of 8-17-03 on the VDARE website, in
which Sailer identifies "my friend Bailey" (Note that VDARE has been
declared a "hate site" by the SPLC)
http://www.vdare.com/sailer/gay_gene.htm
7. Gregory
Cochran, a well-known "race scientist", recently acknowledged
Bailey's strong support of his "gay germ" theory in a post to Gene
Expression, 8-19-03 (bold for
emphasis):
"I don't believe it'd be hard
to find out the cause, since we have a good experimental animal, sheep. 5-10% of
male sheep in some herds are totally uninterested in females: you can tie a
female in heat to the fence in front of them and they don't do a thing. Males
they hump. As far as I know, the only two mammals with a few-percent of males
with this kind of preferential homosexual behavior are humans and sheep. The two
species have often been seen together, and I doubt if this is entirely a
coincidence. I'd bet money that the cause is the same, and that we
contracted it from sheep. That's thought to be the case for a lot of
infectious agents - acquired from domesticated animals...
As I said, probably not hard to
solve, may even happen by accident, but almost completely unfundable. This is
banned science: anyone who proved such a thing or even worked on it would likely
never get any federal money ever again .. I have even had one biologist
who secretly came to a similar conclusion... suggest if proven it should perhaps
be kept secret forever...
On the other hand a lot of the smarter
evolutionary biologists think it has a pretty good chance of being correct. Bill
Hamilton thought so. Trivers thinks it is much more likely than any other model
he has heard of (of course he _is_ crazy). Mike Bailey thinks it is the only
evolutionarily plausible model that has ever been proposed."
http://www.gnxp.com/MT2/archives/000887.html
Here’s more of Cochran’s
thinking on homosexuality, in which he outright predicts a eugenics “solution”
to homosexuality once the “infectious causation” is
found:
"...some of the interesting
variations in psychology seem likely to be caused by some kind of infectious
organisms also, especially if they are more than rare, detract from
reproduction, and have been around for some time ...Homosexuality? of course:
biological disadvantageous, culturally consequential. Old and common enough to
probably have an infectious origin....I think that not too long after we
determine the etiology of homosexuality , we'll be able to prevent it, and
almost all parents will... Further: in a
generation or two, we're going to be able to control all these things,
mutational or infectious - at least in the wealthier countries…Soooo... it might
also be the cause that certain kinds of thinking become scarce, kinds of
thinking that occasionally pay off. Even so, we'll do without. Damn few parents
are going to choose to have a manic-depressive kid on the off-chance that he'll
be a major poet someday. The human race will be more
uniform... "
-- Greg Cochran
http://www.jerrypournelle.com/reports/special/germs.html
8. AMERICAN EUGENICS
SOCIETY GOALS, 1926-1956: A source of now well-known methods for sugar-coating
eugenics solutions:
1926:
Pre Hitler Goal: Race
building by conscious selection -- backed with force.
"[Sterilization could] be
applied to an ever widening circle of social discards, beginning always with the
criminal, the diseased and the insane, and extending gradually to types which
may be called weaklings rather than defectives, and perhaps ultimately to
worthless race types."
From The Passing of the Great Race by Madison
Grant, co-founder American Eugenics Society
1956:
Post-Hitler Goal: Race building by a "voluntary
unconscious selection" implemented by deception and
manipulation.
"The very word eugenics is in
disrepute in some quarters ... We must ask ourselves, what have we done
wrong? I think we have failed to take into account a trait which is
almost universal and is very deep in human nature. People simply are not willing
to accept the idea that the genetic base on which their character was formed is
inferior and should not be repeated in the next generation. We have asked whole
groups of people to accept this idea and we have asked individuals to accept it.
They have constantly refused and we have all but killed the eugenic movement ...
they won't accept the idea that they are in general second rate. We must rely on
other motivation. ... it is surely possible to build a system of voluntary
unconscious selection. But the reasons advanced must be generally acceptable
reasons. Let's stop telling anyone that they have a generally inferior genetic
quality, for they will never agree. Let's base our proposals on the
desirability of having children born in homes where they will get affectionate
and responsible care, and perhaps our proposals will be accepted."
From "Galton and Mid
Century Eugenics" by Frederick Osborn, Galton Lecture 1956, in Eugenics Review,
vol. 48, 1, 1956
http://www.africa2000.com/ENDX/aegoals.htm
9. We now see how Bailey and
Greenberg used established AES rhetorical technique in 2001 in their argument for a
eugenics solution to homosexuality in a paper entitled "Parental Selection of
Children’s Sexual Orientation":
"As we learn more about the causes
of sexual orientation, the likelihood increases that parents will one day be
able to select the orientation of their children. This possibility (at least
that of selecting for heterosexuality) has generated a great deal of concern
among supporters of homosexual rights, with such selection being widely
condemned as harmful and morally repugnant. Notwithstanding this widespread
condemnation, and even assuming, as we do, that homosexuality is entirely
acceptable morally, allowing parents, by means morally unproblematic in
themselves, to select for heterosexuality would be morally acceptable. This is
because allowing parents to select their children's sexual orientation would
further parent's freedom to raise the sort of children they wish to raise and
because selection for heterosexuality may benefit parents and children and is
unlikely to cause significant harm." Aaron S. Greenberg and J.
Michael Bailey, Archives of Sexual Behavior 30 (4): 423-437, August
2001
http://www.kluweronline.com/article.asp?PIPS=301061
You can
retrieve the full PDF version of the Greenberg-Bailey paper on homosexual
eugenics at the following link:
http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Bailey/Greenberg-Bailey/Homosexual%20Eugenics.pdf
10. Bailey’s friend Steve
Sailer initiated a widespread promotion of the gay-gene gay-germ theory on the
VDARE hate site in August 2003:
Here is a link to Sailer’s
important recent article on VDARE and then the concluding paragraphs from that
article:
http://www.vdare.com/sailer/gay_gene.htm
“…Male homosexuality could be a
similar “self-destructive” genetic defense against a major infectious disease,
just as the “sickle cell gene” defends against malaria at the price of
increasing susceptibility to sickle cell anemia. But nobody knows what that
illness could be. It would have to be major – and, presumably, relatively
modern, like falciparum malaria, which is puzzling.
Or, as Cochran suggests, an
infectious disease itself could cause homosexuality. It's probably not a
venereal germ, but maybe an intestinal or respiratory germ. If it spreads like
the flu, and if it needs to strike at a particular stage of development before
or shortly after birth, then more male homosexuals might be born in one season
than another, just as more schizophrenics are born in late winter and in early
spring, especially in cities with cold winters. This should be easily
testable.
It's radically unfashionable to
call homosexuality a disease. But you can't think rigorously about the gay gene
theory without drawing straightforward analogies to genetic diseases. Both
reduce the number of descendents, which is the number that counts in
evolution.
Many have reacted with horror
to Cochran's theory because it implies that homosexuality might be preventable
with the right antibiotic or vaccine. Parents might decide that, since they are
putting themselves through all the trouble of raising a child, they ought to
increase the likelihood of grandchildren.
Whether that decision would be
good or bad is a very personal matter—exactly the sort of dispute that VDARE.COM
heroically avoids.
But—as with race—this fear of
what the public might possibly decide in the future must not be allowed to
retard research now.
The truth, it is reliably
reported, will set us free”
- Steve Sailer, VDARE,
For further insights into
Sailer, his background and his thinking, see the following
links:
Note that Sailer is the leader
of the notorious Human Biodiversity Institute:
http://www.vdare.com/sailer/gay_gene.htm
http://www.isteve.com/
http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/BaileyAssociates/HumanBiodiversityGroup.htm
http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/BaileyAssociates/HumanBiodiversityGroup-II.html
Steve Sailer is also Bailey’s
friend, and as we saw above Bailey, Cochran and Sailer,
along with Greenberg’s help in
testing public reactions, collaborated on crafting, promoting and rolling out
this theory:
"My friend J. Michael
Bailey, the chairman of
the psychology department at Northwestern University,
is probably the leading
researcher into sexual orientation in America" –
Sailer
Sailer is a frequent
contributor to VDARE:
http://www.psych.nwu.edu/psych/people/faculty/bailey/index.htm
VDARE is now officially
classified by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) as an internet 'hate
site':
http://www.vdare.com/sailer/index.htm
References:
Information on
the racist, homophobic elite within the HBI group, of which Bailey, his mentor
Blanchard, and his colleagues and supporters
Cochran,
Sailer,
Rushton,
Pinker,
Buss,
Derbyshire,
Brimelow,
Seligman and more - are all
active members:
-
http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?sid=96
http://www.tsroadmap.org/info/human-biodiversity.html
http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/BaileyAssociates/HumanBiodiversityGroup.htm
http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/BaileyAssociates/HumanBiodiversityGroup-II.html
-
- Information about Bailey's friend (and HBI leader) Steve Sailer and
their connections to VDARE.
Note that VDARE is now officially classified by SPLC as an internet 'hate
site':
- "My friend J. Michael Bailey, the chairman of the psychology
department at Northwestern University, is probably the leading researcher
into sexual orientation in America" - Sailer
-
- http://www.isteve.com/
http://www.vdare.com/sailer/gay_gene.htm
http://www.vdare.com/sailer/index.htm
http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=152
-
- Articles about the Bailey controversy in the Chronicle for Higher
Education:
-
-
http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/ChronicleArticle.html
http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Chronicle-7-17-03.html
http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Bailey/The Chronicle of Higher
Education 12-12-03.html
-
- Formal complaints filed against Bailey at Northwestern:
-
-
http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Anjelica/Complaint.html
http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Bailey/SecondComplaint.html
http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Bailey/ThirdComplaint.html
http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Bailey/McCloskey-Conway-complaint.html
http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Bailey/FourthWomansComplaint.html
http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Anjelica/Complaint.html#anchor601714
-
- Websites coordinating the overall investigation of Bailey's research and
professional activities:
-
-
http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/LynnsReviewOfBaileysBook.html
http://www.tsroadmap.com/info/bailey-blanchard-lawrence.html
-
- Partial listing of the many people and organizations participating in
the Bailey investigation:
-
http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/LynnsReviewOfBaileysBook.html#anchor6811
The full PDF version of the Greenberg-Bailey paper on homosexual
eugenics is accessible at the following link:
"Parental Selection of Children’s
Sexual Orientation",
Aaron S. Greenberg and J.
Michael Bailey,
Archives of Sexual Behavior 30 (4): 423-437, August
2001:
http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Bailey/Greenberg-Bailey/Homosexual%20Eugenics.pdf
LynnConway.com >
TS Information >
Bailey Investigation >
Bailey on Homosexuality