Due to the fact that our society is traditional, homosexuality is not a topic, on which people have discussion, and even if people do talk about it, they most of the time talk about it in a very negative way. This topic has not been researched in Kyrgyzstan, and it is considered to be a deviation. Many homosexuals want to believe that the cause of their sexual orientation is biological, but is it in reality?

To understand the causes of homosexuality we should look at the existing theories.

First of all I need to define a term ‘homosexual’. I use a sociological definition of this term, which does not include married men (women) who have or had sexual encounters with other men (women), because they do not have homosexual identities (Clinard). Also, people mainly begin to identify themselves as homosexuals between 15 and 21 years, and there is a tendency for females to identify themselves as homosexuals around age of 18.

The following theories are usually used to explain the causes of deviant behavior, but since homosexuality is considered a deviation in our traditional society, I think these theories may be applied to our society.

Labeling theory. This theory was mostly based on writings of Lemert; his most recent work came out about 20 years ago. Labeling theory includes two components: "a particular conception or definition of deviance and a concern with the consequences of social control efforts" (same, 134). The theory tries to "stress the importance of the process through which society defines acts as deviant and the role of negative social sanctions in influencing individuals to engage in subsequent deviant acts" (same, 134). This theory studies secondary deviation. To clarify this notion I will give and example of the consequences of labeling.

"According to labeling theorists, the deviant label may produce a basic change is the labeled individual’s perception of deviance. They distinguish number of reasons including risk-taking, chance, and situational factor from secondary deviance, which Lemert has described as behavior, or a role based on behavior, intender as a defense against or adjustment to the problems caused by the label (Lemert, 1951:76). The label produces a deviant social role and confers a social status on the deviant… Ritsue (1980) has suggested further that some deviants rebel against their labels and attempt to reaffirm their self-worth and lost social status. These tertiary deviants may join social movements to combat negative images associated with their behavior, in effect denying that their actions make them deviants"(same, 135).

Yet, there are some criticisms to this theory. It neglects the fact that the first deviation act took place before labeling; not all people who act deviant are labeled as deviants; this theory doesn’t define the conditions in which the person is considered a deviant and who labels; what level of labeling can cause deviation (same, 135-36). Labeling does not always involve the acceptance of the deviant label by the stigmatized; he/she may act normally, trying to get rid of the label.

Learning or socialization theory. This theory explains the causes of deviation, saying that they come "from learned acquisition of deviant norms and values, particularly those learned within subcultures and among peers" (same, 147).

This theory suggests that people become homosexuals, because they adopt different norms due to lack of proper sexual education, not given by parents, lack of emotional support, lack of display of love from their parents. If a girl did not get enough emotional support from her mother, she would seek it in other women. When it is not common for the parents to talk about sex with their child, s/he will learn about it from other agents of socialization, like Mass Media and friends, which not always give the right notion of sex. If a child cannot satisfy his/her curiosity in the opposite sex or s/he is not popular among other kids, s/he may try to satisfy the curiosity socializing only the children of the same sex. "When she was younger, her best friend [a girl] served her as a support in escaping the maternal circle, in exploring the world – especially the world of sex" (de Beauvoir, 365). Also, if the secondary socialization takes place in a homosexual subculture, the people may adopt norms, different from the norms of the dominating culture.

Yet, this theory claims that people, while learning, conform to meet the expectations of other, but deviants do not always conform.

Biological perspectives in sexual development. Theories, which belong to this perspectives claim that homosexuals have a different biological structure: their brain has "an enlarged suprachiasmatic nucleus compared with that of the heterosexual brain, and "smaller interstitial nucleus of the anterior hypothalamus than is heterosexual brain"(Clinard). Some scientists say that homosexuals have a hormonal disbalance. But these theories are still disputed and these differences could be interpreted in different ways.

In order to understand which theory is the most adequate, I decided to interview 10 homosexuals, whom I chose according to the sociological definition of homosexuals.

As a methodology I used semi-structured interviews. I thought it was the best way to get rich data. The interviewees become more open, try to answer the questions, because they become interested in the topic of research and want me to get very full information. Also, the respondents feel that I am not biased, sincerely interested in their personal experience; and it is better than questionnaire because they do not feel, as they are "guinea-pig". It is easier to get answers on the questions of my particular interest. In a survey I may miss some questions, but during the interview, I may ask questions I forgot to include first-hand.

Sometimes there is too much information, so the person does not want to write it all, and in an interview I will write down and remember more information.

Moreover, comparing to structured interview, semi-structured interview is better, for homosexuality is the topic, on which the respondent first needs to get to trust the interviewer, and in informal interview it is easier to make the respondent talk about very sensitive things.

Finding respondents was not a problem for me, for a lot of my friends are homosexuals. The only problem was that there were fewer boys than girls; I interviewed 3 boys and 7 girls, age 17 to 21.

Problems: Except for the problem of finding male homosexuals, there was another problem – sometimes, during the interview, I felt that the respondents were not telling the truth. The reason for this fall into several categories:

• The issues were too sensitive, so they never talk about them
• The respondents did not trust me enough to tell me some things
• The respondents did not admit some things even to themselves (e.g. most homosexuals want to believe that the cause of their sexual orientation is strictly biological).

Limitations: There are several weaknesses of the research.

One of them is that I only took young people. I should have interviewed older people, because there is a greater chance that they are absolutely positive about their sexual orientation. Second, while deciding what kind of people I should interview, I did not look at the social status. In our traditional society, most families, belonging to lower class do not talk about sexual development, or sex at all. This could have shown the correlation between the class and number of homosexuals. And finally, I should have chosen people who have checked the level of hormones, because it would have been easier to verify the biological theory.

First theory that I will analyze is Socialization theory, which claims that during the period of primary socialization a person, due to lack of sexual education, may adopt deviant norms and values, also, a person may feel lack of emotional support, which may cause homosexuality.

If parents do not talk to their child about human sexual development, s/he tries to find out about it from other agents of socialization: TV, peers, and subcultures. Sometimes the norms adopted by the child are not in a close agreement with the norms of society. The other case may be when a child is raised by one parent or is reared by only one parent; s/he begins to identify him/herself with the parent.

All of the interviewed girls went through a period in their lives when they dressed like boys and tried to act like boys. "Researchers note that this sex-role nonconformity (‘sissy’ behavior in boys and ‘tomboy’ behavior in girls) is common for large numbers of subjects who have developed homosexual preferences"(Clinard, 135).

All of the interviewees, except for one, answered that their parents have not talked to them about human sexual development at all, or until they were 12 or 13; and this is the age when some children begin to suspect that they have a homosexual orientation and it is too late.

When a child does not get enough emotional support or display of love from the same sex parent, s/he tries to get it from other same sex people.

In all cases it was not common for the families to show love: they never kissed or hugged, except for very special occasions.

Female, 21:

This theory also suggests that when only one opposite sex parent raises a child, s/he may begin to identify with the parent, and adopt the norms, typical for the sex-role of the parent. All of the interviewed girls, who have both parents, said that they were more attached to their fathers.

When a person socializes with other gays, s/he may internalize the homosexual norms. 8 of the 10 interviewed had gay friends before their first homosexual experience. One of the girls even admitted that the reason she became gay might be the fact that almost all her friends were gay.

Female, 18:

Yet, this theory is not always relevant.

First of all, the socialization theory implies that the person might have adopted the different norms. One of the girls said that her parents’ attitude was "forbearing-scornful", in all other cases the parents’ attitude towards gays was unambiguously negative.

Second, there are some cases when the people never even suspected about their homosexual orientation.

Female, 21:

One of the boys said that his father talked to him about sex, his mother was always supportive, and he didn’t have any homosexual friends before the first homosexual act, and also while he attended kindergarten and school, he was popular among girls and respected by boys.

Also, the theory claims that the cause of homosexuality may be the fact that children could not satisfy their interest in the opposite sex, but almost all of the respondents were popular among the opposite sex in kindergarten and school.

The next theory I will examine is a Labeling theory, which suggests that once one’s associates find out about the first deviant act, they begin treating the actor differently, labeling him/her as gay, deviant; consequently, the actors starts identifying him/herself as gay.

In three cases the associates found out about the first deviant at and changed their attitude.

Female, 18:

Female, 21:

The company of gay friends considered the fact that a person socialized with them as an attempt to admit that she was gay, so they treated the "officially straight new-comer" gay.

However, in all cases, close friends did not change their attitude towards the actors.

• After they found out that you kissed a girl, have they ever told you: "Oh, I saw this one girl, I think you would like her."
• No, never, we never talked about things like that, nothing changed after they heard that I kissed a girl."

Also, in more than half cases, the people around found out about the sexual orientation of the actor only several months or even a year after the first deviant act, when the actor have already identified him/herself as homosexual, so the associates need not to label the person.

Biological theory implies that the only reason for a person to be a homosexual is a, so called, "homosexual gene".

Unfortunately, only two of the respondents checked their hormonal level. One of the girls had more male hormones and the doctor said it could be treated if she took pills for one month. The other girl said:

The last girl is not a bi-sexual, she is "100% gay", she despises men, and she thinks that they are primitive and disgusting. In her case it was not a biological reason, although she always wanted to believe it was. She was always attached to her father, mother brought her up, but they were never close. She always suspected that she was gay, and realized it when she fell in love with a girl. All this suggests that the Socialization theory is the most adequate in this case.

After analyzing the three theories I can make a conclusion that although there are many contradicting moments in a socialization theory, it can be considered as the most adequate theory.

First, almost all of the respondents did not get a proper sexual education - consequently they adopted deviant norms.

Second, they felt lack of emotional support from their same sex parents, and tried to find it in other same sex acquaintances.

Also, they socialized with gays before they became homosexuals. In this gay subculture they were in the process of secondary socialization and internalized deviant norms.

Why did not I accept other theories?

Labeling theory must be rejected because it analyzes only secondary deviation and neglects the fact of primary deviation. Also, most of the respondents were not labeled as gays, because their associates did not find out about their sexual orientation until the actors "came out". So, the actors first realized that they are homosexuals, and then other found out about that, moreover, the reference groups did not change their attitude towards the actor.

The biological theory could not be adequately evaluated due to the limitations of the research, but there was evidence in one of the cases that the theory is sufficient. The doctor examined one of the girls, and the psychiatrist rejected the hypothesis that the cause of her homosexual orientation might be biological.

In sum, people become homosexuals because they adopt norms, different from the norms of the society. They do not receive a proper knowledge of human sexual development, feel lack of emotional support, and socialize with homosexuals. All this leads to homosexuality.

Feminists say that homophobia is a weapon of the sexists, for they created a heterosexual world, male and female sex-roles in order to maintain the world patriarchal. Heterosexuality is learned through socialization when the sex-roles are internalized, thus homosexuality can also be a learned behavior in the process of socialization (Pharr).