While activists like to claim that pedophilia is a completely distinct orientation from homosexuality, evidence shows a disproportionate overlap between the two. About a third of all child sex abuse cases involve men molesting boys--and in one study, 86% of such men identified themselves as homosexual or bisexual. Try as they might, gays and lesbians can't shrug off the link. This is a homosexual problem.
Only one thing. Perkins never gave a name of the study. He supplies a link to an abstract of a 1988 Netherlands study but the link does nothing to either prove or disprove Perkins's claim.
The abstract says the following:
Despite intense interest in the problem of child sex abuse, base rates for different offense characteristics are poorly defined. The likelihood of otherwise uncorroborated allegations of sexual abuse could be assessed in light of known frequencies of alleged behaviors, if such were available. This paper reviews the current literature on the topic of the specific behaviors of child molesters, along with other epidemiological characteristics, and provides new data drawn from experience with 229 convicted child molesters.
It's ironic that Perkins choose to delve into the territory of claiming that the majority of pedophiles are gay. His organization, the Family Research Council, has a history of distorting research to prove this claim and being called out for it. According to author Mark E. Pietrzyk:
The Family Research Council’s analyst Timothy Dailey, who argues that there is a link between homosexuality and child molestation, admits that pedophiles who target boys may also have sexual relations with women. However, he implies that such men are merely closet homosexuals and refuses to admit that heterosexual men may well be attracted to women and to underage boys at the same time. This tactic leads Dailey to again distort the work of a reputable researcher, W. L. Marshall. Marshall's paper, “Sexual Offenders Against Male Children: Sexual Preferences,” discusses the results of a study of the sexual orientation of a sample of male sex offenders against boys. Marshall measured the sexual orientation of the offenders by means of a plethysmograph, a device which measures arousal responses. Marshall found that out of his sample of 21 offenders against boys, two‑thirds of the offenders were predominantly heterosexual in their adult orientation. Yet Dailey completely omits this result, and cites Marshall's paper as evidence for the notion that sex offenders against male children are invariably homosexual.
In fact, Marshall's study found that not only could heterosexual males be attracted to women and young boys simultaneously, the heterosexual males were more inclined to be attracted to the very young, whereas the homosexual offenders chose older victims
Then there was the 1992 controversy with A. Nicholas Groth, former director of the Sex Offender Program at the Connecticut Department of Corrections. Dailey distorted Groth's work to draw the conclusion that gay men molest boys at a high rate, when Groth's research said the opposite.
Needless to say, Groth wasn't happy about this and he wrote a letter to FRC saying so (I have an original copy of the press release with the letter if anyone wants to see it):
Dear Dr. Dailey:
On the web site www.frc.org you reference my work in your article on "Homosexuality and Child Sexual Abuse". I am writing you to object to my name and research being associated in any way, shape, or form to lend legitimacy to the views proposed in your paper.
If you are, in fact, familiar with my research, you must realize that my studies have indicated that homosexual males pose less risk of sexual harm to children (both male and female)--from both an absolute and a percentage incidence rate--than heterosexual males. Your statement that "the evidence indicates that disproportionate numbers of gay men seek adolescent males or boys as sexual partners" appears to come from the assumption that if an adult male is attracted to a male child, this adult male's sexual orientation is ipso facto homosexual.
Since your report, in my view, misrepresents the facts of what we know about this matter from scientific investigation, and does not indicate that my studies on this topic reach conclusions diametrically opposed to yours, I would appreciate your removing any reference to my work in your paper lest it appear to the reader that my research supports your views.
A. Nicholas Groth, Ph.D.
So taking all of this in, I think I understand why Perkins conveniently didn't give the name of the study which he claims proves his point.
How many times can an organization suffer the embarrassment of having it's face cracked and on the ground?