Tweet
Cross of Plaintiffs’ Expert Witness Gary Herek by Plaintiffs Counsel Detmer.
We are all stretching now, not taking an actual break.
Nope I think we are taking an actual break, five minute break, will resume shortly.
WALKER: Resume, please
D: Does the term homosexuality encompass many phenon, including origins, and that is a difficult task, yes?
H: I said in my report there are many different ideas about the origins of homosexuality.
D: Tab One, page 151, under Origins, first graf: you write "The term encompasses many distinct phenom, so it’s a difficult task to identify the factors of orgin. " You said that in your depo?
H: Yes
D: Why a person becomes Homo or hetero, lots of dispute?
H: Yes
D: No compelling evidence, no single theory enjoys unequicoalsupport?
H: Yes
D: Different individuals arrive at their orientation through different means and methods?
H: Yes that is my theory
D: That is your opinion
H: Yes, it my hypothesis
D: Debates about its origins have led to a more pluralistic views of human homosexuality?
H: Are those my words?
D: Yes they are, (provides source)
H: (Finds cite) Yes
D: Scientists have come to appreciate that homo and hetero are not binary phenom, right?
H: Yes that is my speculation
D: SCientists now refer to homosexualITIES and heterosexualITIES, right?
H: YEs, to account for differences in age, race, culture.
D: And when you say origins you mean sources of homosexuality, right
H: Well in not coming up with one reason why one person has a specific sexual orientation, I was trying to sum up where I was going with increasing pluralism/
D: Some individuals ID as gay afteer multiple experiences; others without any sex at all, right?
H: Yes
D: Women sometimes ID as lesbian without acting on it sexually?
H: WhenI wrote that I was writing about the 1980s and 1987s "political lesbians."
D: Is it a true statement?
H: Well it was then
WALKER: Why less so now?
H: Absence of research on those sorts of women. At one point, that concept showed up in decribing lesbian communities, but I haven’ty seen it much so I think it’s less common now.
D: Increasing evidence in samples that G&L attain a higher eeducational level?
H: What passage please?
D: from your depo
H: OIh, well, yes
D: Do we have a clear correlation for this attainment edeucationally?
H: No
D: Why do we think this is?
H: Heterosexual women often interrupt their plans for school to marry men. Lesbians might be less likely to leave school for a partner. Higher levels of education among gay men since they don’t marry early and have to stop school to support a family. Those are speculations.
D: Those are speculations?
H: Yes, but there is no correlation
D: But the difference emerges in many studies?
H: Well yes in my studies we found thast was true, it may be a real difference.
D: Tab 35e, Volume 2: Transcript of 1/12 testimony of Prof Cott. Are you familiar wit her?
H: not directly, some sense of who she is.
D: Transcript page 328 line 6: "Do you believe behavior is infinitely malleable by social circumstances?" Do you agree?
H: Well I’d qualify that
D: She did to, with regasrd to self-preservation
H: I’d want to think about that before I said yes or no.
D: return to binder one, article by Badgett
WALKER: I thought we were done with Binder One, counselor.
D: Your honor I’m trying to do this topically
Walker: Alright
D: (reads quickly from Badgett) "Same sex partner choice is about budget choices, from Judge Posner’s theories about sexual partner choice."
H: Is he saying men who have strong attractions to other men, because they have higher incomes, they can meet more men who are potential partners?
D: "From a rational choice perspective, partner choice comes down to search costs"
H: Not comforrtable commenting without understanding it better.
D: She goes on, about access to social scripts and networks. Openness to homosexuality would make being open about homosexuality easier"
H: I think she’s talking about it appears that the more educated women and men were more likely to ID as G&L&B. Does more education make it more likely to be G&L&B? Or do people who are G&L&B more ikely to ahve access to education?
D: So it could be correct?
H: In Badgett paper?
D: Yes
H: It is stated as a hypothesis
D: Could it be correct, as you sit here today, can you say it is not correct?
H: As I sit herer today, I have to reiterate I haven’t read this article or understand the context of this hypothesis of Badgett’s .
This looks to me like an economists’ argument. I am not an economist.
D: read the next sentence: better educated are more likely to have same sex parters.
H: Yes that appears to be what she is saying.
D: Tab 29, Big Binder
H: Back to Peplau?
D: Bullets points on page four: Fourth point, "women sexual orientation is shaped by social and cultural forces such as economic circumstances and womens education…."
H: I have not read this very brief article, be sure I understood it, I don’t know whether they are talking abuot the correlation we just discussed. I can’t comment without reading more abuot this.
D: As you sit here, you can’t comment?
H: Well it may be the hour, but without cites, I can’tcommment.
D: Last bullet point, there is no single determinative factor or developmental pathways to same sex attraction.
H: Well I think we will find that there are multiple determinative factors.
D: Turn to Tab 30: (Peplau: In summary the concept of erotic elasticity. Womens sexual orientation is not responsive only to genetic and hormalal influences, not tightly scripted…."
D: I would guess she is offering this as a contrast to men. Researchers have found that womens sexuality is more responseive to situational and environmental factors than mens sexuality. This notion of ‘erotic plasticity’ is more applicable to women than men.
D: She speaks of this erotic plasticity is about orientation
H: No, it’s about womens sexuality generally as part of a new paradigm for understanding orientation
D: She writes; ONe implication is that the entire concept of sexual orientiation may be misguided.
H: I am very reluctant to take this out of context. She has other places talked about orientation as a relational concept. Her understanding of sexuality for men and women might be different. Her point is that mens and womens might be different and require differenty cultural constructs.
D: Again Peplau Tab 15: Biologocial contributions to the sexuality of women are minimal.
H: Goes to earlier part of paragraph: She says many earlier studies don’t show one contribution. She says the avaiable evidence doesn’t suggest a biological construct. We simply don’t undertand the origigins of sexual orientation in men or in women.
D: Page 87; Comp analyis shoulud begin with empirical (reeads a lot about masculinty in womens sexual orientation… sorry, too late to get this stuff in any great detail, and there will be gotcha quesitons.)
D: Do you disagree with any of these conclusions?
H: well, there’s lots there. I couldn’t say without reading it in great detail.
D: REading from document: "Urban visible g&l communities made the choice of the G&L lifestyle easier in the end of the 20th century.
H: This is another paper I haven’t read recently if at all. THere may be individuals who have desires and occasional behavior, but may not have had a label to describe people like themselves. I speculate (and I have to because I have not read this) that the author thinks those individuals might realize there are other people like themselves and form a community.
D: Turn to tab 14 (Peplau): Fluidity of womens sexuality; influence of social environment: "Consider the link between education and sexual orientation. 900% increase in women with higher education who had lesbian idntity.
H: This goes to the correlation/causation question. Which came first, which caused which?
D: Under the heading social influence on womens sexual preference: It says it varies across time and place. DO you agree with that?
H: We have already discussed this. Different cultures, different etnic groups, different racial groups, different socioeconomic groups: different understanding of one’s sexual self.
D: Living in same sex institutions increases womens erotic involvement with one another. True?
H: 1929 study of women in womens colleges about intense same sex relationships; also a prison study. Perhaps they are more likely to form bonds based on that environment, or base don their behavior in that environment
D: Tab ??: ID this please?
H: An article pub in Journal of Gay and LEsbian Mental Health: MAsculinty, Feminity, and teh DEvelopment of WOmens Sexual Orientation (Peplau and others)
D: Does it discuss your survey there? Bottom of the graf: During the same time period, she found that of 2200 graduates of same sex colleges. 42% of sample said they had intense feelings, 22% reported a sexual relationship wehether they had relations with women afterwards or not.
H: Yes, same study of same sex schools and prisons?
D: DIX1254?
H: Journal of Helath and HUman Rights, commentary titled torture and ill-treatment based on sexual orientation, a document.
D: "Although human rights work requires identification of a person as a human, but sexual identities are social constructs" True?
H: You have to look from the group standpoint, it’s a useful perspective but not when applied to individuals. I’ve not seen this article before, and I guessing, but perhaps they are saying LGBT face oppression and even torture in some culture, and that the authors thinnk that is bad, but I can’t really comment beyond that.
D: Tab 38, Witness Binder DIX1278. ID?
H: reprint of webpage: HEALTHY MINDS HEALTHY LIVES
D: Turn to the first page of the printout "What causes hetero, homo, bisexualty? "There are no replicated studies that prove biological basis for sexual orientation"
H: I would not know that, but I would agree with statement at the top that says> There is no way to know what causes sexual orientation.
B: Tab 41, (going to skip a little bit) DIX642. ID that?
H: I’m going to misprounce the names. Jorn, and others? Cohort difference in sexual orientation, age stratified sample. Published in the journal of gerontology in 2003. These are Australian authors.
D: Thank you, THis study found that women in different age cohorts reported different rates of female sexual partner in adulthood….
H: More likely than what?
D: than other age cohorts
H: Okay….
D: Shows major cohort effect, there must be historical and biological changes thaet affeect sexual orientation.
H: Well I would say that people who grew up in the 1920s 1930s and 1940s grew up without reference to people who were gay, or without much discussion of sexuality at all. These age cohorts might have more to do with environment.
D: So that’s an alternative. Is their hypothesis reasonable?
H: Well they pose it, perhaps they expeect to disprove it.
D: NOw, Williams Institute study of Mass couples….
H: No, it was a Mass Public Health study which the Willimas Institute analyzed.
D: When you studies marriage, it was heterosexual marriage, the physical an dmental helath outcomes didn’t compare hetero marriage and same sex couples?
H: No
D: Can you name any benefits not available to DPs in CA that would be available to married couples in CA?
H: I don’t know aboput the law, there are some legal differences, but I am not an expert on that, but "tangible" benefits wouldn’t be there, more ‘intangible’ symbolic benefits of being married, more of a commitment. I couldn’t really speak about tangible benefits.
D: You talked about hate crimes. Are hate crimes illegal in CA?
H: I think crime is illegal in CA!
(laughter)
D: But do they occur?
H: Yes hate crimes occur
D: Do you think same sex marrigae has a direct link to stigma that creates hate crimes?
H: Yes there is a relationship there.
D: Your honor, I believe I am done, but I want to consult my counsel to be sure.
Walker: WE HOPE YOU GET GOOD NEWS.
Detmer to redirect (NEILSEN WAS CROSS)
Good evening, professor (Laughter)
D: Tab 12, page 24, large binder, on screen: from Meyer’s work on smapling and definition: behavior re STDs, identity re developmental models for youth; there is not one answer to the question, it’s up to researcher to define study’s population with regard to its study;’s purposes. AGree?
H: Yes, other examples might be discrimination/identity, hard pressed to come up with other examples at this hour.
D: Demonstrative 18, that comes up in other contexts. do social scientists have the same definitional issues in other areas, not just sexual orientation.
H: Yes, for example race: people might come from and ID with a different racial ancestry, or identity, or as a mixed race person. Things can get pretty messy for studies, and not just about sexual orientation.
D: Not just in SO but also race and ethnicity?
H: Yes, that’s what I meant
D: Now about labels
H: YEs
D: WRT race and eethnicity, thse change over time?
H: Yes, lots of different names for races and ethnic gourps inour history.
D: Gay men and lesbians have ID to groups, change over time, earlier we talked about this.
H: Seems like a long time ago, but yes.
D: Circumstances in which the three aspects — behavior, attraction, identity — when they don’t match up. Do they overlap for the vast majority?
H: YEs, vast majority shows 90% overlaps for heterosexuals, 2% lesbian/gay/bisexual. Rest of the sample, things weren’t so neat.
B: Taking this out of the research context, you’ve asked many people in surveys their sexual orientation. How many?
H: Thousands
B: People answer correctly?
H: they are able to answer the question, they might not know the word "heterosexual" but they knew the word straight and knew that’s what they were.
B: Recall discussions of causes?
H: YEs
B: Despite not knowing causation, can you say with confidence that some people are gay, some are straight, some are lesbian?
H: Yes, and some are bisexual.
D: Are poeple consistent with their sexual orientation?
H: Best bet is that people, if they engage in sex, they will stick to their pattern.
D: Proportion of people who are consistent?
H: 92% in that study. People might have a period of engagement earlier in straight sex, but not now.
D: Concept of a continuum is useful, why?
H: Alerts us to the fact we must be careful as to catergories that arn”t neat. Kinsey sensitized us to varying levels of sexual attraction, its not black and white.
D: Is that concept change your opinion that people do not choose their orientation?
H: Well some people in my sample did say thay chose: 5% of gay men; 15-20% of lesbians say they had a dergree of choice. But the vast majority said they did not hav e achoice about their sexuaility.
D: Did the studies you looked at today change your view that the three aspects of sexuality overlap?
H: Lisa Diamond looked specifically at the non-overlap people, not representative, you couldn’t generalize, she was documenting the plasticity especiually for women, and how it happens.
D: Also studies from Peplau: claims of plasticity do not mean most women will change over time. Is that your understanding of her theory?
H: Yes
D: Consistent with your own theories?
H: Yes
D: Familiar with Daniel RObinson?
H: In connection with this case, yes
D: Demonstrative #20, expert hired by D-Is,
OBJECTION: We WITHDREW HIM!@ WHAAAAA!
D: He lives in England or Maryland so more than 100 miles, therefore we can use this without him here.
WALKER: Very well.
D: (reads) Do you beleive Sexual orientation is subject to change? A: No." Do you agree?
H: Yes
D: (reads) Enduring changes would not be subject to reparative therapy abnd would not be common? And you have found therse changes not to be common? robinson: No it’s not common, it’s not reported to be common." Is this your finding as well?
H: Yes
D: (reads) So when you say (tying Robinson’s research to Spitzer’s studies, regarding studies that samples regular churchgoers and people on speaking tours at churches) what does that refer to?
H: He was referring to the very religious people in his study,and that many of the people hasd been involved in reparative therapy through their church, so he was saying that was a strong qualification that poeple needed to understand about his sample.
D: (reads) There is little unanimity about the definiation of lesbian and gay. We reject the term ‘sexual preference’ b/c it is not a choice ad are a basic part of identity. Do you agree with that?
H: Yes I do
D: Do you recall Kris Perry’s testimony: (What it means to me to be a lesbian, always had strong attraction to women, being in love with women, and in love with Sandy) Is that what it means to be a lesbian?
H: Yes, it has identification, behavior, and attraciton.
D: More of Perry: "Coiuld you develop that attraction with a man? NO I couldn’t…." Is that conssitent with your understanding about coming out process?
H: Yes, it shows how G&L will try to have relationships with the opposite sex, but it doesn’t work. She recognizes it isn’t who she is.
D: One more excerpt from Kris Perry: Were you born with this? YES Will it change in the future? I’m 45, I don’t think so. Is that what you understand to be true about the constancy of sexual orientation>?
H: Yes, although we can’t understand cause or from when or if born, but if you are 45 then you probably know who you are if you want to be in a committed relationship.
D: If two women want to marry, are they lesbians?
H: Yes
D: If two men want to marry, are they gay men?
H: Yes
No more questions
Walker: Boutrous, you have 90 minutes of video?
B: Yes your honor
Walker: well are you ready to do that mondya?
Bourtors: Yes we are
Walker: Cooper, re you ready then to proceed with your wirtnesses? Which ones?
Cooper: Yes, Blankenhorn and MIller.
Walker: Which one first?
Cooper: we don’t know
Walker: well it would be polite to let the opposing counsel to know which is first
Cooper WE will give them 48 hours notice first thing tomorrow morning, we really don’t know which one will go first.
Walker: Very well, plaintiffs counsel had better be ready for either one I suppose.
Cooper; And we might bring another non-expert witness to authenticate docs
Walker: And is that a defendant?
Cooper: No it is not
Walker: Very well, have a wonderful weekend, see you all Monday at 8;30am.
VODKA THIRTY
36 Comments
“We are all stretching now, not taking an actual break.”
is there actual dance music happening ?? lol
I believe they are playing vintage Sylvester….You make me feel….mighty real
Well, I worked my way through college because I thought a degree would help protect me against anti-gay discrimination. I could move a little upward socially, out of the conservative working class. Does that sound familiar to anyone?
OT: I ran into Sylvester in 1981 at Cafe san Marcos … what a hoot. LOVED HIM !!! thanks for the memory jog.
Another hypothesis as to why l&g achieve more is to prove that they are no less than the average person.
Folks, if a person hasn’t had sex, that doesn’t say a thing about their sexual orientation. It says the person is a virgin.
that is SO cool! I still crank up his tunes when I am doing housework…
I don’t need to have slept or had sex with a woman to know I don’t want to sleep or have sex with a man. In the words of Popeye “I am what I am, and thats all that I am”
There is also a growing school of thought that says that coming out is easier for people with means — wealth, education, etc. — than it is for someone closer to the economic edge.
If staying in the closet means keeping your low-paying job which keeps food on your table, GLBTs on the low end of the economic totem pole will often choose to stay in that closet.
My husband has NEVER had sex with a woman … evah
… and has never expressed interest in doing so ….
Same with a friend of mine. Some people just *know* and know early in their life. He was about 6.
That was also the testimony of the socioligist this week…that the lower the income the less likely to come out.
There are so many problems with arguing that the fact that sexuality can change therefore you don’t deserve protection. B/c who cares if it changes in a few cases, which as it has been stated repeatedly, it is the exception not the rule. Bottom line, just b/c some ppl are confused about their sexuality or transition does not mean that there should be a license to discriminate against those that do. Just as people who identify as religious should not face discrimination nor should LGBT…b/c in the great thinking of the supreme court, altho religious beliefs can change for some people over time, it is still can be deeply rooted.
Oh fer cryin’ out loud! Do you really have to define it to a gnat’s ass to let people get married?
It seems like the D-I’s are working on the assumption, if you can’t define it, you can’t see it therefore it doesnt exist… well some of us nonexistant ones should take him out betwixt the house and the barn
Slow Curtain. The End.
but as someone else said, they don’t have any trouble defining it when they want to harass someone one way or another.
One argument I personally would like to see brought up is that suppose the court doesn’t strike down Prop 8 (which ultimately I think it will be struck down, but lets suppose it doesn’t.) We take the issue back to the ballot box in 2012 (or this years) and we win. What exactly will prevent the haters from going back to the ballot box in 2014 or 2016 and try to strip us of the right to marriage again? Nothing. So our rights, unlike ANY OTHER, can honestly be a political football for many years. When would it end. Seriously, how many times has “Parental Notification” been placed on the ballot? Granted it has been turned down on every occasion, but every time it appears on the ballot it seems to get closer and closer to passing.
As the stage fades to black and the curtain slowly closes(not a moment too soon) the house lights raise and the ushers wake the snoring audience.
The Hawaii state senate just passed a civil unions bill 18-7 which is a veto-proof majority. Now it goes to the House (which passed it last year) for consideration. It’s unclear whether the Republican governor will veto it or not, but it looks like they’ve got enough votes to override the veto.
Wonderful news.
Meanwhile. . .
“Kill The Gays”: From Uganda to. . . Newark.
90 minutes of Video?
These 7 minutes and 35 seconds should do quite nicely.
Yikes! Insidious.
oh,yeah. Very nice. Very nice.
I almost fell asleep during this one. That defense lawyer is so boring and annoying, keeps repeating self. First time since this started I felt like I was going to nod off.
Hey – I’m about to turn 45 – and although later in my life I have become comfortable enough with myself that I am now able to be flirty, be naked around, and even feel comfortable being physically demonstrative with women…just because there are so many women in my life that I love…and bascially among my friends, we are all demonstrative, regardless of where we fall on the gender spectrum…
None-the-less, I have never had sex with a woman. In high school, I almost threw up when I touched my first female breast. Later, when I was desperate to convince myself I was “straight” – all the stigma heaped upon me for being gay met with my complete lack of desire to even be naked in the same room with a woman…and my initial sexual encounters were with the most unattractive men I could find so that I could prove to myself I was “straight.” It was warped logic! If I don’t like sex with men, I can’t possibly be gay. But I was forced into such an indefensible position – must be straight, but unable to physically contemplate having sex with women. That was the way I coped (my therapist still shakes his head in disbelief when we talk about my early sexual experiences).
Okay…that cross was a bugger to get through just reading it. Definitely would have gotten myself ejected for throwing things at the DI lawyer. Context, Context, CONTEXT!!!
That’s the problem with ballot propositions! Why do we let idiot America make laws by popular vote… especially laws regarding other people’s constitutional rights? We need a Constitutional Convention in California to re-write the damn thing and eliminate propositions entirely. We live in a representative democracy, not a direct democracy. I want professional legislators who have been voted into office and who have legal staffs and the time to study and debate and hash these things out and then make intelligent decisions. I don’t want Dr. Tam writing my laws!
I know it’s late and probably no one is even going to read this, but I wanted to make a point about this defense argument that appears to be that because you can’t identify where sexual orientation comes from, that it is malleable over individual’s lifetimes, and that it is a continuum, not neat little boxes, actually argues in FAVOR of allowing marriage regardless of gender. If people are naturally all hetero, mostly hetero but a little bi, or mostly bi, or a little bi but mostly gay, or mostly gay, then it’s completely arbitrary and UNNATURAL to say people with penises can only marry people with vaginas and vice versa. And if you believe that god made people, then he made them this way…. so denying them their freedom to form committed emotional, sexual, and economic bonds with whomever they want is against god’s law. Why don’t they get that?
That is so New Testament, which the Prop 8 proponents are desperately anxious to have us forget.
I’ve never had sex with a woman, Jay. No desire to whatsoever. And it’s never created a problem for me personally that I haven’t.
Socially and politically is another matter.
I love the scene in Tom Ford’s movie of “A Single Man” where teh insanely yummy Matthew Goode calmly mentions to Colin Firth that he has never had sex with a woman.
I would have started yelling, probably something like “what part of ‘context’ do you not understand?”
(I have to use something similar at work: I get asked questions, which I can’t answer correctly without context. I think I’m getting them trained. Finally.)
No, don’t eliminate propositions. Raise the number of signatures to something where they need real support to get on the ballot in the first place. I understand the current limit is something like 2 percent of the registered voters, which is ridiculously low for stuff that affects everyone.
Better yet, do what other states have done – keep the idea of propositions, and make them moderately easy to generate, but put some procedural barriers in place to make them take longer – so that people can’t stir up fear and panic about some specific current event and rewrite the constitution over it.
Massachusetts for example requires the legislature to approve the wording of a ballot initiative in two separate sessions, and then it goes to the voters the election after that.
I could support the idea that there was some threshold of signatures that you could reach that would force the issue even if the legislature doesn’t support it, but it still needs to be something that takes a couple rounds to generate – like the same petition hitting those numbers two years in a row.
Teddy what happened to that video you said you were going to post. I have not been able to find anything about this trial. Maybe I am looking in the wrong spot. But I thought that both the pro and con 8 lawyers are making media statements and I can’t find them. If anyone knows where I may find some footage I would appreciate some help pointing me in the right direction.
P.S. Teddy what you are doing is Amazing! Thank you so much!
Not sure which video you are looking for but Here’s the link to ALL FDL’s Prop 8 Trial coverage