There’s a claim that circulates in certain corners of the internet, sometimes stated outright, sometimes implied: LGBTQ+ people are disproportionately likely to be child predators. The softer version suggests a cycle—that childhood sexual abuse “causes” homosexuality, which then causes abusive behavior, perpetuating itself across generations.
I want to address this directly, with evidence, because it’s going to come up when people read a larger essay I’ll be releasing soon. Some of my readers already believe some version of this claim. Others have heard it and aren’t sure what to think. And still others—including people who identify as same-sex attracted within religious communities that teach this—have internalized it as an explanation for their own existence.
So let’s look at what the research actually shows.
The Claim
The argument typically runs like this:
- LGBTQ+ people report higher rates of childhood sexual abuse than heterosexual people
- Therefore, abuse must cause homosexuality
- Therefore, LGBTQ+ people—themselves products of abuse—are likely to perpetuate abuse
- Therefore, LGBTQ+ people are a threat to children
Each step of this chain is either factually wrong or a logical fallacy. Let me take them one at a time.
Step 1: Do LGBTQ+ People Report Higher Rates of Childhood Abuse?
Yes. This is documented and not disputed.
A 2022 study published in JAMA Psychiatry, using CDC data from over 60,000 people, found that 83% of LGBQ adults experienced at least one adverse childhood experience, compared to 64% of straight adults. The disparities were largest for sexual abuse, household mental illness, and emotional abuse.1
A 2011 meta-analysis in the American Journal of Public Health found that sexual minority individuals were 3.8 times more likely to experience childhood sexual abuse than their heterosexual peers. The rates varied by gender: 21% of gay men reported childhood sexual abuse compared to 5% of heterosexual men; 32% of lesbian women compared to 17% of heterosexual women.2
A multi-state probability-based sample found gay and lesbian adults were 66% more likely to have experienced childhood victimization than heterosexuals.3
This is real. LGBTQ+ people experienced more childhood abuse than their heterosexual peers. The question is: what does this mean?
Step 2: Does Abuse Cause Homosexuality?
This is where the logic falls apart.
The correlation is real, but correlation doesn’t establish causation—and in this case, we have strong evidence that the causal arrow points the other direction.
The Gender Nonconformity Evidence
The most robust finding in sexual orientation research is that childhood gender nonconformity—boys who are more feminine, girls who are more masculine—strongly predicts adult homosexuality. This has been documented through:
Retrospective studies: Adults asked about their childhoods consistently report gender-nonconforming behavior if they’re gay or lesbian.4
Prospective studies: Children followed over time show the same pattern—gender nonconformity in childhood predicts sexual orientation in adulthood.5
Home videos: Researchers had raters judge childhood home videos of adults whose sexual orientation was later known. Prehomosexual children were judged more gender nonconforming—from videos taken before any abuse could have occurred.6
This last point is critical. You can see the gender nonconformity in videos from early childhood. It’s not caused by abuse. It precedes any abuse.
Gender Nonconformity Makes Children Targets
Here’s what the research shows: gender-nonconforming children—regardless of their eventual sexual orientation—are at elevated risk for abuse.
A study of nearly 10,000 youth found that children in the top decile of gender nonconformity had elevated rates of physical, psychological, and sexual abuse compared to gender-conforming children. Critically, most of the highly gender-nonconforming children were heterosexual (59.6% identified as heterosexual, only 9.5% as gay or lesbian).7
Why? The researchers suggest several mechanisms:
“Some parents may be uncomfortable with gender nonconformity in their children, possibly increasing their likelihood of being abusive toward gender-nonconforming children… In terms of sexual abuse, children who appear to be different from typical children are at higher risk of being targeted.”7
Gender-nonconforming kids are different. They stand out. Predators target children who seem isolated or vulnerable. Parents uncomfortable with their child’s nonconformity may become abusive trying to “correct” it.
The Causal Direction
A 2017 study used instrumental variable analysis—a statistical technique designed to establish causal direction—to test whether sexual orientation preceded or followed childhood sexual abuse. The finding:
“The instrumental variable analysis revealed that the increased prevalence of CSA experienced by nonheterosexuals compared with heterosexuals may be due to the influence of sexual orientation on CSA… the results suggest that nonheterosexuality may increase the risk of childhood sexual abuse.”8
Read that again. Sexual orientation increases the risk of being abused. Not the other way around.
A 2020 prospective birth cohort study of over 5,000 children found that when you control for childhood gender nonconforming behavior, the apparent link between maltreatment and later nonheterosexual orientation becomes statistically non-significant. The association “may be explained by confounding factors including GNCB [gender nonconforming behavior].”9
The pattern: Kids who will grow up to be gay are often gender-nonconforming from early childhood. That nonconformity makes them targets. The abuse doesn’t make them gay—being proto-gay makes them targets.
The Biological Evidence
Sexual orientation isn’t learned. It develops before birth.
Twin studies consistently show that identical twins are more likely to share sexual orientation than fraternal twins, indicating a genetic component. The largest genome-wide association study, covering nearly 500,000 people, found that genetic variants account for 8-25% of variation in same-sex sexual behavior. Sexual orientation is partially heritable—like height, like many traits.10
Prenatal hormones play a major role in sexual differentiation. Women with congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH), who are exposed to elevated androgens in the womb, show increased rates of same-sex attraction. Biomarkers of prenatal hormone exposure (like digit ratios) correlate with sexual orientation. The evidence supports “a role for prenatal testosterone exposure in the development of sex-typed interests in childhood, as well as in sexual orientation in later life.”11
Social learning theories are not supported. Children raised by same-sex parents don’t become gay at higher rates. The “recruitment” theory—that gay people make children gay—has no empirical support.12
A comprehensive 2016 review in Psychological Science in the Public Interest by six leading researchers concluded that “evidence for the most commonly hypothesized social causes of homosexuality—sexual recruitment by homosexual adults, patterns of disordered parenting, or the influence of homosexual parents—is generally weak in magnitude and distorted by numerous confounding factors.”13
What the APA Says
The American Psychological Association explicitly identifies “sexual trauma causes homosexuality” as a refuted claim used by conversion therapy proponents:
“Failing to correct refuted claims, some SOCE [sexual orientation change efforts] proponents have referenced discredited factors in sexual orientation etiology…”14
The scientific consensus is clear: sexual orientation is shaped primarily by biological factors operating before birth, with genetics, prenatal hormones, and other prenatal influences all playing roles. Childhood abuse is not among the established causes.
Step 3: Are LGBTQ+ People More Likely to Abuse Children?
No. The research is unambiguous.
The Jenny Study
In 1994, researchers reviewed 352 medical charts of sexually abused children at a Denver children’s hospital. Of the 269 cases where the adult molester could be identified, the perpetrator was gay or lesbian in fewer than 1% of cases—only 2 children.15
The Groth Study
In 1978, researchers studied 175 men convicted of sexual assault against children in Massachusetts. None had an exclusively homosexual adult sexual orientation. 47% were classified as “fixated”—attracted to children, not adults of either sex. 40% were regressed adult heterosexuals. 13% were regressed adult bisexuals, but “in no case did this attraction to men exceed their preference for women.”16
The Freund Study
Researchers measured physiological sexual arousal in gay and straight men viewing images of children and adults. Finding: “Homosexual males who preferred mature partners responded no more to male children than heterosexual males who preferred mature partners responded to female children.”17
Gay men attracted to adult men are not attracted to children. Straight men attracted to adult women are not attracted to children. Attraction to children is a separate phenomenon—pedophilia—that operates independently of adult sexual orientation.
Expert Consensus
Dr. A. Nicholas Groth, author of Men Who Rape: Psychology of the Offender and one of the foremost researchers on sex offenders:
“It is a myth that adult males who molest boys are homosexual.”18
Dr. Gregory Herek, UC Davis, after comprehensive review of all major studies:
“The empirical research does not show that gay or bisexual men are any more likely than heterosexual men to molest children. This is not to argue that homosexual and bisexual men never molest children. But there is no scientific basis for asserting that they are more likely than heterosexual men to do so.”19
Zero Abuse Project:
“Science and case management experience has shown us that most child molesters are heterosexual. Abuse is about power and control and is not anchored by sexual orientation.”20
Who Actually Abuses Children?
The CDC reports that about 90% of child sexual abuse is perpetrated by someone known and trusted by the child or the child’s family.21
RAINN, citing the Department of Justice, breaks it down: 93% of juvenile victims knew the perpetrator. 59% were acquaintances. 34% were family members. Only 7% were strangers.22
The threat to children isn’t drag queens at story hour. It’s family members, family friends, coaches, teachers, youth pastors, and other trusted adults. A peer-reviewed study of 326 child sexual abuse cases in Protestant Christian congregations found that 66% of offenders were pastors or youth ministers, 98.8% were male, 73% were white, with a mean age of 40—trusted figures with institutional access to children.23
Step 4: The Inversion
Here’s what the evidence actually shows:
LGBTQ+ people are not disproportionately predators. They are disproportionately victims.
The very correlation that gets weaponized against them—the higher rates of childhood abuse among LGBTQ+ adults—is evidence of their victimization, not their dangerousness. They were targeted as children precisely because they were different. Gender-nonconforming kids, many of whom will grow up to be gay or lesbian, are preyed upon at higher rates.
The population being labeled “groomers” is the population that was groomed.
They’re being blamed for their own childhood victimization, then accused of being the perpetrators of the very abuse they experienced.
Why the Myth Persists
This isn’t the first time LGBTQ+ people have been accused of threatening children. The pattern is decades old:
- 1950s: Sexual psychopathy laws explicitly linked homosexuality to child endangerment
- 1977: Anita Bryant’s “Save Our Children” campaign warned that gay teachers would molest students
- 1980s: The Satanic Ritual Abuse panic frequently targeted gay men
- 2020s: “Groomer” rhetoric directed at drag queens, trans people, and anyone who supports LGBTQ+ rights
Academic analysis identifies this as a recurring moral panic—”responding to the gradual mainstreaming of gender nonconformity and increase in LGBTQ+ civil rights.”24
The function of the rhetoric is consistent across decades: designate a marginalized group as a threat to children, and any defense of that group becomes “defending child abuse.” It’s a rhetorical trap. It forecloses debate by making the accusation itself unanswerable.
But it is answerable. With evidence. Which I’ve now provided.
The Pattern
I’m writing about this because of Elon Musk’s “groomer” rhetoric, which targets LGBTQ+ people, immigrants, and political enemies while his own AI generates child sexual abuse material. But the myth I’ve addressed here predates Musk and will outlast him.
The accusation that LGBTQ+ people are child predators is:
- Contradicted by every major study on the subject
- Based on a misunderstanding of correlation and causation
- An inversion of actual victimization patterns
- Part of a historical pattern of moral panic
- Weaponized to foreclose debate and target marginalized populations
The research is clear. The population called “groomers” was disproportionately victimized as children—targeted because they were different, because they were gender-nonconforming, because predators prey on the vulnerable and the isolated.
The word “groomer” in contemporary political discourse doesn’t describe child predators. It designates the marginalized undesirables.
Sources
1. Tran et al. (2022). “Adverse Childhood Experiences and Mental Distress Among US Adults by Sexual Orientation.” JAMA Psychiatry, 79(4), 377-379. PubMed ↩
2. Friedman et al. (2011). American Journal of Public Health. “A Meta-Analysis of Disparities in Childhood Sexual Abuse, Parental Physical Abuse, and Peer Victimization Among Sexual Minority and Sexual Nonminority Individuals.” PMC ↩
3. Andersen & Blosnich (2013). PLOS ONE. “Disparities in Adverse Childhood Experiences among Sexual Minority and Heterosexual Adults: Results from a Multi-State Probability-Based Sample.” PLOS ONE ↩
4. Bailey & Zucker (1995). Developmental Psychology. “Childhood Sex-Typed Behavior and Sexual Orientation: A Conceptual Analysis and Quantitative Review.” Meta-analysis showing large effect sizes for childhood gender nonconformity predicting adult sexual orientation. Northwestern University PDF ↩
5. Li et al. (2017). Developmental Psychology. “Childhood gender-typed behavior and adolescent sexual orientation: A longitudinal population-based study.” PubMed ↩
6. Rieger et al. (2008). Developmental Psychology. “Sexual orientation and childhood gender nonconformity: evidence from home videos.” PubMed ↩
7. Roberts et al. (2012). Pediatrics. “Childhood Gender Nonconformity: A Risk Indicator for Childhood Abuse and Posttraumatic Stress in Youth.” PMC ↩
8. Xu & Zheng (2017). Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment. “Does Sexual Orientation Precede Childhood Sexual Abuse?” PubMed ↩
9. Xu, Norton & Rahman (2020). Child Development. “Childhood Maltreatment, Gender Nonconformity, and Adolescent Sexual Orientation: A Prospective Birth Cohort Study.” PubMed ↩
10. Ganna et al. (2019). Science. “Large-scale GWAS reveals insights into the genetic architecture of same-sex sexual behavior.” PubMed ↩
11. Hines (2011). Frontiers in Neuroendocrinology. “Prenatal endocrine influences on sexual orientation and on sexually differentiated childhood behavior.” PMC ↩
12. What We Know Project, Cornell University. “What Does the Scholarly Research Say about the Well-Being of Children with Gay or Lesbian Parents?” (2015). Systematic review of 79 studies; 75 concluded children of gay or lesbian parents fare no worse than other children. Individual studies on sexual orientation (e.g., Bailey et al. 1995) found “more than 90% of sons whose sexual orientations could be rated were heterosexual.” Cornell ↩
13. Bailey, J.M., Vasey, P.L., Diamond, L.M., Breedlove, S.M., Vilain, E., & Epprecht, M. (2016). “Sexual Orientation, Controversy, and Science.” Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 17(2), 45-101. PubMed ↩
14. American Psychological Association (2021). “Resolution on Sexual Orientation Change Efforts.” APA ↩
15. Jenny et al. (1994). Pediatrics. PubMed ↩
16. Groth, A.N. & Birnbaum, H.J. (1978). “Adult sexual orientation and attraction to underage persons.” Archives of Sexual Behavior, 7(3), 175-181. Springer ↩
17. Freund, K., Watson, R., & Rienzo, D. (1989). “Heterosexuality, homosexuality, and erotic age preference.” Journal of Sex Research, 26(1), 107-117. Taylor & Francis ↩
18. Groth, A.N., Hobson, W.F., & Gary, T.S. (1982). “The Child Molester: Clinical Observations.” In Social Work and Child Sexual Abuse, eds. Jon R. Conte and David A. Shore (New York: Haworth Press), 129-144. Cited in: Zero Abuse Project ↩
19. Herek, Gregory. UC Davis. “Facts About Homosexuality and Child Molestation.” UC Davis ↩
20. Zero Abuse Project. Zero Abuse Project ↩
21. CDC. “About Child Sexual Abuse.” CDC ↩
22. RAINN, citing DOJ Bureau of Justice Statistics. RAINN ↩
23. Denney, Kerley & Gross (2018). “Child Sexual Abuse in Protestant Christian Congregations: A Descriptive Analysis of Offense and Offender Characteristics.” Religions 9(1), 27. Analyzed 326 cases (332 offenders): 34.9% were pastors, 31.4% youth ministers (combined 66.3%); 98.8% male; 73.1% white; mean age 40.4 years. MDPI ↩
24. Marwick, A., Smith, J., Basnight, B., Boyles, D., Donnelly, M., & Kaczynski, S. (2024). “Child-Sacrificing Drag Queens: Historical Antecedents in Disinformative Narratives Supporting the Drag Queen Story Hour Moral Panic.” Women’s Studies in Communication, 459-479. Taylor & Francis ↩
This article is a companion piece to a forthcoming essay providing detailed evidence on LGBTQ+ people, childhood abuse, and the “groomer” myth.
Discover more from The Annex
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The Annex 