Letter to the Editor on “A Worldwide Internet Study Based on Implicit Association Test Revealed a Higher Prevalence of Adult Males’ Androphilia than Ever Reported before”

The recent study by Colledani and Camperio Ciani titled “A Worldwide Internet Study Based on Implicit Association Test Revealed a Higher Prevalence of Adult Males’ Androphilia than Ever Reported Before” will be likely considered a landmark of the research on sexual orientation and its different expression among societies.1 The authors collected and evaluated an online sample through a specular assessment methodology using the Sexual Preference-Implicit Association Test and the Kinsey Scale, 2 tools assessing sexual orientation in implicit and explicit manner, respectively. This strategy appears sound to increase the understanding of male homosexuality, particularly. The authors found a mismatch in the prevalence of sexual preferences, such as androphilia, and male homosexual orientation. The results of the Sexual Preference-Implicit Association Test revealed a percentage of androphilia ranged from 14.4% to 17.6%, while the explicit or self-disclosure of male nonheterosexuality in the Kinsey Scale ranged from 6.3% to 11.4%. In this regard, the authors confirmed the findings of their previous pilot study on an Italian sample.2 On the whole, the relevant mismatch between explicit and implicit assessment of male sexual orientation and the prevalence of androphilia is mainly explained through the antagonist sexually selection theory. However, their findings and explanations induce a further reflection in line with a well-known parallelism between evolutionism and psychoanalysis. Is it possible to interpret these findings in the light of the latent homosexuality theory? Is it possible to establish an epigenetic trait d’union linking evolutionism, psychoanalysis, and psychosocial aspects? In other words, the genetic motive of antagonist sexually selection in terms of reproduction and fecundity explaining male sexual orientation could also interface with environmental factors, as the psychodynamic elements, homophobic societies, and related issues of internalized homophobia.3,4 In this regard, it is possible to consider the individual and collective homophobic attitude as the real modifiable aspect to improve sexual health, social rights, psychological and physical health. The gap reduction between implicit and explicit sexual orientation, often related to discrimination and homonegativity, could positively impact public health. For these reasons, the article by Colledani and Camperio Ciani should be considered a starting point to further discuss the concept of sexual orientation and its phenomenology through an epigenetic and multidisciplinary perspective involving genetic, medical, psychological, and cultural factors.