The American Academy of Physician Assistants (AAPA) issued a press release today announcing the results of Monday’s vote on a variety of issues. Among these is the matter of conversion therapies, where they voted the following:
The American Academy of Physician Assistants opposes any psychiatric treatment directed specifically at changing sexual orientation, such as “conversion” or “reparative” therapy which is based upon the assumption that homosexuality per se is a mental disorder or based upon the a priori assumption that the patient should change his/her sexual orientation.
With this decision, the AAPA joins a large number of prestigious professional organizations in the view that homosexuality is not a disorder to be cured, and therapy claiming to do so not something to be endorsed.
Question: If reparative therapy were a drug, would it pass the FDA as safe and effective?
I just wanted to say, in case people don’t realize, but the indented quotes used on ex-gay watch appear invisible to readers browsing with Safari – the color of the text matches the color of the background.
We have only just become aware of a Safari issue. I had to find someone with a Mac who actually uses Safari to verify it, they all seem to use Firefox 😉 Safari has some know CSS issues and we are trying to figure out which ones are at work here. The site appears pefrectly in 15 other browsers and platforms, with the exception of IE 5 – if you are using that I’m just sorry for you!
Thanks for mentioning it but let’s keep the rest of the comments on topic here, and we will announce as soon as this is fixed. Any other problems can be sent to editor@exgaywatch.com.
So, with your “Safari” web browser, Tom, it’s “Sa-far-i no good” here in this blog? I use Internet Explorer’s web browser and everything works just fine.
Question:
Not likely, alcoholic beverages and tobacco products are drugs and the FDA does not control them at all.
Besides, almost all reparative therapy, especially the ex-gay and ex-homosexual ones, is based on religion, not on science or human sexuality as both of the APAs are.
Most of the early day ex-gay ministries seem to have been started in Trinitarian Doctrine Pentecostal or Charismatic churches. I had assumed that Melodyland Christian Center in Anaheim, CA was an Assembly of God because I first read about Exodus in the AG’s weekly magazine, The Pentecostal Evangel. Mike Bussee told me on the phone that it was a Charismatic church and an internet search even backed that up. From what I understand Melodyland no longer exists; but, I won’t go into that here, since it is off-topic.
All “conversion therapy” does is to teach the “converted” individual to lie and use stock phrases and sentences if he is asked questions about his conversion while others are around. They are taught how to act “straight” in public.
Anyone can act “straight.” Just look at a the straight actors who have been playing gay roles in Broadway productions, in movies and on television, they can play the whole spectrum of gay behavior, real and stereotypical.
When I want person think that I am gay (although I really am), I have to “act gay” to convince him. I don’t like to be referred to as a “straight-acting” gay man; because I am just a normal man who just prefers to be myself most of the time.
Oh, I use the latest version of IE. Microsoft says it is IE7; but, my computer’s “Registry Mechanic” program says it is IE6.0.2900.
Think of the drugs that have been approved by the FDA and later recaleed and involved in calss action suits.
If only they could “recall” conversion therapies and the survivors could file class action suits. Actually, that last one might not be far off 😉
Whoops – sorry about my atrocious typos!!
It is off topic, but Melodyland was one of the mains hubs of the Charismatic movement of the 1970′ and 80’s. I am not sure if it was AG. It is now a big hole across the street from Disneyland — where a new housing project will soon stand.
As for the question: “If reparative therapy were a drug, would it pass the FDA as safe and effective?” They would first have to define it before it could pass the FDA. What is it exaclty? No one knows. They can’t even decide on what labels to use to desribe it.
Actually, we just enabled a short (5 min) edit period for comments to avoid these “oops, I made a boo boo” comments 😉 Just hover over the post which should highlight in yellow and click up to 5 min after posting and it will open up an edit window so you can correct errors.
This should be fixed now. A single little undefined CSS element was a show stopper for Safari. I am told Apple is working to fix this intolerance of trivial errors, but for now we should be fine.
Off-topic but on tangent, so to speak, I do have a lot more typos and wrong words more than I care to remember. My fingers will finish the spelling of a word when I was thinking about something else. And they also misspell words that my brain spells correctly. All of this is due to a head injury combined with a sort of dyslexia related to a detached retina in my right eye. I do use an add-on ieSpell check program to catch spelling errors; but, it won’t catch my other mistakes.
In March 1984, I left Tulsa, also leaving the closet behind, before I even knew there were any ex-gay organization in Tulsa. I returned in January 1992.
Grace Fellowship which really isn’t in any town yet is out in the country Southeast of Tulsa and South of Broken Arrow. In 1994 a heterosexual couple was in charge of a program there with the initials HOPE. I forget exactly what the “H, O, & E” stood for; but, the P was for Parents. There “straight” daughter, Yolanda, went to All Tribes Community Church (where I was a member for a while) and when she found out that I was gay, she gave me a whole stack of testimonies ENDORSED by Exodus which she got from her parents. I did not tell her what I thought about her giving me that stuff, especially since she was not married to the man who lived with her.
I called the number Yolanda gave me and talked to her mother who claimed that she and her husband had helped hundreds of men “overcome” their homosexuality. Well, that was not exactly true, because I had a private therapist, Sandy, who told me that she had counseled several men who had been been made even more confused by the Grace church ministry preparative therapies.
They retired several years ago and a heterosexually married ex-gay and his wife are in charge. Their ministry claims to help folks with all kinds of sex-related problems even those of the abuser kinds. But, they had a coach in their Christian school who got convicted of molesting boys in the church. He was not even certified to be a teacher although he had a degree from ORU. IMO, if they, as a Charismatic ministry, had been able to do what they claimed to do, he would have been found out by the leaders of that program.
It is interesting that leaders in local large Charismatic churches believe there is a spirit of homosexuality and yet, they also have homosexuals in their congregation who are openly gay when away from their respective churches . . . and yet the pastors know their names.
David – I get the spirit of the question but alas, you could ask this question about a variety of therapies. “If (gestalt therapy, EMDR, inner child healing, bioenergetics) was a drug, would it pass the FDA as safe and effective?”
There are no organized efforts to ban these therapies even though they have potential for harm and are not based in solid outcome research (some might quarrel at me over EMDR on this point).
Very few therapies have solid research backing which is bad enough. While I do not share the theoretical or technical views of reparative therapists, I do believe more research would be required to ban all efforts to alter aspects of sexual orientation (keeping in mind that sexual orientation is comprised of at least attraction, identity, and behavior.)
It may well be that some of these should also not be considered safe and effective, however I don’t believe there is any massive, organized effort to promote any of these as there is with conversion therapies, either. And on the social side, I doubt any of these could be considered quite so demeaning of the lives of an entire segment of the population. IOW, compared to Nicolosi and NARTH, bioenergetics is a mild diversion – worst things first 😉
I’m not sure I would agree with that assumption. I think what you call attraction is what many others would call orientation. But then again, these definitions contribute to the confusion in the first place.
Perhaps to continue the analogy, these therapies should be restricted to monitored trials only until they can be properly evaluated. This way the public is not subjected to unproven and potentially harmful or at least useless procudures.
I would be fine with monitored trials and agree this should be done. I do know it hard to get funds for this. Michael Bailey and I are trying to get funds for some brain imaging research with people who say they have changed. There is no ready source for this line of research.
In his book “Anything But Straight,” Wayne Besen gives some pretty good advice as to how to undertake a study for people who claim to have changed. I would love to see a research group follow Wayne’s suggestions, albeit adding their own to make it completely scientifically and logically sound.
As I recall, Wayne calls for lie detector tests and penile plythesmography. Both of these approaches are of questionable reliability. No self-report research I have ever seen uses lie detection.
Brain imaging has real advantages which I why I hope we can get some funding to pursue this line of research. Much less invasive and much more reliable.
Whether we have ‘approval’ or any type of resolution from such organizations and institutions as the AAPA, the AMA, or the APA, gay people are valid in and of ourselves. I concede that such statements are affirmations for society’s march toward acceptance, but all it takes for such groups to issue a condemnation is simply a change in their political ideology or structure.
Studying those who have claimed to change orientation seems the least interesting group. Almost all of these folks are professional ex-gays with a vested interest in making claims of change. Studies of these folks may give more information about those involved in religiously motivated political groups than it does about conversion therapy.
The more interesting group is those who attempt to change their orientation. Following as many of these as possible from first approach to ex-gay religious program or reparative therapist to drop out or over some number of years would give far better information.
Whether change is possible on a planet of 6 to 10 billion isn’t terribly useful information for those deciding to spend thousands of dollars and years of their life in hopes of changeing their orientation. Far more useful to someone who is thinking about making this sort of personal investment is a study that tells them what the liklihood of success is for those who attempt to change their orientation. Success rates much less than 1% would probably be very discouraging.
IMO, the penile plythesmography testing method would not be exactly accurate; because some non-homophobic straight men are turned on by pornography containing men who are having sex with each other.
I have read the university case study where that test was used with “straight” men who were adamantly opposed to homosexuals having sexual activity of any kind and with straight men who had no problem with homosexuals at all. The same pictures (both opposite gender and same gender types) were shown to men in each group and each one wore that little device around the shaft of his penis. The homophobic men had an increase of blood flow to their penes when there were pics of men having sex with each other while the men in the other group had very little or no measurable response at all.
The lie detector test does not exactly test where a person is lying or not; but it would seem to be more reliable than the penile plythesmography test, IMO.
Since so many of the early ex-gay ministries were started in Pentecostal or Charismatic churches, I have another way to “test” the person’s spirit who claims to have God change his sexual orientation from being exclusively homosexual to exclusively heterosexual. That is because there is a “lying spirit” which “Christians” sometimes use when they don’t want to tell another person the real truth about their sexuality.
It is quite interesting that Pentecostal/Charismatic ministers who have actively used the Holy Spirit’s divine gift of Discernment of Spirits have quenched the Holy Spirit’s power when a person claims to be an ex-gay who is a Christian.
I don’t remember which case-study books or professionals journal I found the 3 word phrase “physiological sexual attraction” (PSA) in; but, I do definitely understand how the description of PSA is used in regard to normal male human beings. I try to simplify that as a feeling a guy gets below the waist, behind the pubic bone, in the area of his prostate when he is in the live presence of another person and he might not even be thinking about the other person when the PSA activates his attention toward that other person. The purpose of the PSA, when it occurs, is to tell the guy that the other person might be sexually compatible.
A man only experiences a PSA related to his sexual orientation. Because of where and how the PSA occurs, I say that lust is not involved at all, initially anyway.
I have personally known men and women who did not actually felt a PSA directed toward the person they either moved in with to have a relationship or legally married. They liked being with the person and even loved them unconditionally but were never in love with them. In some cases, the other person fit their “ideal” requirements for a spouse which also included their looks. Because of that, their intimate sex lives were terrible.
I dated women until after I was 35 years old. Everyone of them would have made an ideal wife for a man who was going to be an ordained evangelist and possibly an educational missionary. A professor and friend at ORU was also an AG missionary and he suggested that I become a writer for materials for AG missionaries to use. But, since I was a single man, I could not have missionary status to do that and go to churches to raise monies for my own support. Oh, I could do the same thing as a lay person who was a volunteer as long as I financed my own way while doing the same job in Europe in Belgium. I wouldn’t even have to rough it. But, I never fell in love with any of them, although I loved them as friends and unconditionally in the Lord, too.
James – I agree, which is why I advocate a more neutral position on these things or at least a position that respects the alternate views.
I have never actually met an ex-gay who was not an important person with an ex-gay ministry. But, I have met several ex-ex-gays in person and on line.
In real life, the only folks I have known who believed that ex-gay ministry methods work are heterosexual and they have never been involved with any ex-gay organization. If someone told them that they were an ex-gay, they believed what they heard and did not ask any questions about how that came about.
Wouldn’t more reliable study also have to involve volunteers to be subjected to conversion to HOMOSEXUALITY, as well?
Or at least the same methodology, similar test subjects, accounting for cultural backgrounds as part of it also?
I’ve already floated the question, and so have others, that if the believed causation of homosexuality is the emasculation of a family, than it would follow that black American homes, many devoid of father figures, should have the highest incidence of homosexuality compared to others.
At the very least, it’s fair to ask those questions, be comprehensive in the questioning, observance and time period spent with the test subjects.
Since no one really has bothered to convert heterosexuals to gay….despite the fact that some heterosexuals seem to believe that casual contact in some way WILL make them gay, or that gays can somehow train or convert children.
Perhaps trying the opposite is wise, just to clear things up.
Most importantly of all, since competence and socialization and integration isn’t helping to further the evidence that conversion isn’t necessary.
Dr. Throckmorton, I’m interested to know what the urgency is for conversion? After all, life threatening behaviors are evident in heterosexuals, and nobody blames THEIR orientation for it.
I’m also interested to find out, why prejudice should prevail in how a gay person feels about themselves?
Sometimes, black women-such as myself, who have gone through many forms of social prejudice and misunderstanding of their emotional, physical and social needs, wouldn’t be served by saying that those who isolate us, and reject us…are correct to do so.
The behaviors prevalent among more isolated black women leads to eating disorders, obesity, drug abuse and promiscuity.
One could argue that there is no correlation to race prejudice…or perhaps too, loss of hope.
If I were told that my only hope, would be to change myself, and be more appealing to the dominant culture, by LOSING my OWN identity…I’d be hard pressed to see what that was, especially in myself, or how that would help.
Especially since the dominant culture is no great shakes either.
Sure, the grass might look greener, and it might actually BE greener-but the bottom line is:
It ain’t MY GRASS!
I’m usually creeped out by white folks that affect black speech patterns and flamboyance. It doesn’t ring genuine and it can be pretty condescending, since it IS hard to have my identity. It’s not a costume I wear.
So unless there is a much more compelling reason for gay folks to change, like….homosexuality makes you drop dead from a lightning bolt, what’s the problem?
Because although I know whose grass is whose….to tell me I don’t deserve greener grass because of who I am.
If straight folks are uncomfortable with giving up their entitlements and supremacy, that’s really too bad.
My friends here can tell me, straight folks have a debt to pay to the truth. It’s coming due, and I see so little preparation for when it arrives.
I meant to say that although I know whose grass is whose, to tell me I don’t deserve greener grass because of who I am, well….folk that don’t like it can kiss my grass.
And every young gay person that’s told the same thing, should demand that straight folks try walking barefoot in gay grass sometime.
Fair?
What i like about Wayne’s suggestions is that he gives a good call as to how the group should be sampled. For example, it would be futile to ask ex-gays who are paid to be spokespeople of EXODUS whether they have changed.
Warren,
I’m not sure if you’re missing the point, or side-stepping it. David did draw your attention to it, and an answer would help frame things.
You know as well as anyone here that the vast bulk of re-orientation promoters hold out the promise of a change in sexual attractions. (And these people include yourself, in forums other than here.)
Not merely identity. And not merely behaviour. But sexual attractions.
One of the attitudes behind this is that homosexual attractions of themself are inferior to heterosexual attractions. Regardless of any parallel claims about the dignity of individuals etc. This is also a view that you express in public from time to time.
Even when motivated by such attitudes (and once they are involved) most client’s soon realise that the “promise” of a change in sexual attractions they read about in the headlines and in the press releases is not what is contained in the small print. That’s when they find out they can just stop calling themself gay and hence — da dah — they have “changed”. Or that some can override their attractions and force themself to have sex against their orientation. Also — da dah — “change”.
Classic bait and switch. Unethical on that basis alone.
(Personally I also see nothing moral about accepting a bribe of social acceptance, or succumbing to a threat of eternal damnation. But that’s just me.)
On a directly related topic: brain imaging of people who claim to have “changed” (WETM) will tell you nothing about the harm done to those who have failed. I am concerned that you again appear to have no interest in properly considering what happens to those people, or the reasons why the attempts are made in the first place. At the very least, these people and the potential for harm need to fully considered right from the get-go.
Brain imaging may well show a distinct difference between subjects who claimed to have changed and another population sample. Savic et al, Moltz et al etc have already done such imaging work (as you’ve discussed before).
The imaging would need to be done both before and after. And what the observed differences tell about sexual orientation, or change in that, needs interpretation. It may well be picking up change in a propensity for lying or propensity for delusion for all we know. Or aging.
In the interest of being helpful as well as critical…. here’s a suggestion for funding a study: Exodus forego a round of all that expensive advertising of their claim that “change is possible”, and instead fund the evidence for that claim. Horse before the cart, if you will.
———————-
Oblique thought for the day
Recent headlines indicate a record number of people will successfully reach the summit of Mt Everest this season — about 600.
Hence, “Climbing Mt Everest is possible!” I wouldn’t be exactly lying if I made that claim on a billboard.
Alas, over the years some 200 others have died in the effort; and an unknown number have failed (often with tragic consequences, such as amputation).
These climbers — the successful, the failed, and the dead — were also a select group of people who were most keen to conquer Mt Everest.
We don’t know how many would have failed or died if just anyone had made the attempt. I’d guess, a lot more than 200.
Therefore, I think it’s just as well that not everyone is expected to have climbed Mt Everest.
I thing that it would only be futile to ask ex-gay males who are paid to be spokespeople of EXODUS whether they have changed when there is a crowd of people around. I would ask them one at a time, with no other “ex-gays” around, and I would have the questions all written down in advance.
I don’t consider myself to be an expert in psychology; but, because I had taken so many courses in psychology and counseling for both Education Degrees, BA and Masters, I had “psychology” added to my OK State Teaching Certificate when I reapplied up date my credentials for teaching in public school. I only expected them to just put Spanish, French, Art, and arts and crafts as they had done before. And, I have read a whole lot of case studies and journal articles written by professionals who deal with sexual orientation issues in more recent times.
I have been asked enough questions by various certified licensed and certified therapists to know how to ask some questions and even expect certain answers. I would want to be blunt and explicit as to how, where, and toward whom they felt those sexual attractions. I would want to point out that there is a difference between visual lust and internal lower body PSA feelings.
Finding a person visually attractive is no sign that you will be sexually compatible with them. I can use the BTDT and was greatly disappointed response to myself wanting to be intimate with a guy who looked “hot” sexually. This can sort of be like having a “crush” on someone.
Regan said:
The urgency is not mine. We have been over this many times on this blog and many others. It seems straightforward to me. Some people decide they should not do what they feel like doing sexually. They seek help to avoid those things. They reason: “If there was a way I could feel the desires less, then that would make life less stressful.” Such change is rarely complete, but does occur for some unknown percentage of people to varying degress. For some unknown percentage of people, even if they feel little or no change in their attractions, they feel more satisfied with their decision to pursue what for them feels like core values.
So I understand the rationale for the pursuit of change even if I think it is unnecessary to live a valued life.
Dr. Throckmorton…excuse me, but that is SUCH a dodge!
“The urgency is not mine…”…?
“Some people decide they should not do what they feel like sexually.”
“If there is a way I can feel desires less, then that would make life less stressful.”
Sorry Dr. Throckmorton, but that is NOT the goal of the gay person without a great deal of social, mental and emotional blackmail and intimidation.
And if other gay people are subject to this stress, then a field of people with the good emotional balance needed to form successful and meaningful bonds is lessened.
All this, does not ring genuine for the good of the gay person, but for the intents and purposes of the straight world that not only discourages that gay people form into enduring couples, but discourages their very existence.
Abusive relationships tend to start with that caveat “I’m punishing you for your own good.”
Or another form of it is to exploit the mental and emotional exhaustion that comes from constantly having to justify yourself, your identity and what you want to people who don’t want to understand you.
Dr. Throckmorton, you seriously cannot help your case when you have such intellectual disconnects, if not dishonesty.
Life IS stressful when you belong to a hated minority whose lives involuntariliy get committed to another, lower status.
However, there are other ways of dealing with that stress, other than allowing your identity to be compromised.
This isn’t strictly about being a sexual person or giving up sex.
Because the straight world doesn’t care if you are or aren’t having it to still treat gay people with such inequity.
What’s happening here Dr. T, is that you are giving more justification to straight people’s treatment of gays and lesbians, than you are the tools for the gay person to emotionally and physically fight straight people’s prejudices.
In other words, why hand over the stick to get beaten down with?
Grantdale….I LOVE you guys!
So Regan, since you already knew, why did you ask?
While I’m not always sure that Warren is as conscious as he should be of the power society has to make someone feel the need to try to change their sexual orientation, I don’t think that is the reason that every single one of those people make that choice. There are some who truly believe that their faith does not allow for romantic, same-sex relationships. No doubt there will be fewer as time goes on, but there may always be some.
If you don’t trust Dr. Throckmorton, that’s fine. But let’s hold off on calling anyone dishonest without more facts. We are here to discuss, not attack. We don’t always succeed, but let’s try 😉
David,
Sort of echo those words, sort of, for the reasons you are concerned, but we’ll also try and word from first basis what we also read Regan to be broadly saying; and add more than a bit more. Don’t want some important points to be lost — and feel free to correct us Regan, if need be
(fab, a fence to straddle and it’s topped by razor wire…).
Warning: POV, based on our witness (to coin a phase familiar to many of you). Agree or disagree as you want. Individuals used for illustrative purposes. Trying to discuss a broad issue here people, helped by said illustration. Terminology per common understanding. Supporting documentation available. Just ask. But not today. No promise that we have or have not left out/left in a “most” or “many” or “some” or something at an inappropriate place (those we will correct when drawn to our attention). Spelling, what’s that? Also very not joining in any silliness with “valued life” vs “exgay” semantics and what that all means. etc.
Right… where were we…
There exists a very small group of people that Warren is prepared to work with and on whose behalf he wishes to advocate for. There is also a much larger group that he keeps at a distance and actively works against (with flying visits to places such as ExGayWatch not providing evidence to the contrary.)
All the people in these two groups are homosexual or bisexual.
(Or, in a minority of cases, simply bent out of shape due to past abuse or present confusion. Personally we would exclude these people from what we are discussing, as the issues they are actually dealing with are not about their underlying sexual orientation per se. But these people arrive at the party in any case, uninvited or not, and that’s rather too academic for us to be bothered arguing strongly about for now. Simply deal with the abuse, or educate, and things will right themselves as a consequence.)
All these people want to live their own lives, displaying as much variation in the ways that are as available to gay men or lesbians as do straight men and women.
Now. Urgh, STOP.
We’re going to be perfectly clear here: “exgay” is simply one way that gay men and lesbians may choose to live, once you strip away all the nonsense. Personally don’t care if they do, and personally don’t care if they don’t. Really. Don’t. Care.
No problems for anyone sane or uninvested, so far, I hope.
But… the efforts of this smaller group of homo/bisexual men and women to live the way they want to is — all too obviously — firmly linked to a wider effort by some within the heterosexual majority to denigrate and abuse homo/bisexuals. (As to why this is so will need to wait for another day.)
Warren’s advocacy for this exgay minority is not problematic. Or, rather, it need not be.
But Warren makes it be.
Because, alas, that is not all that Warren does. He also actively advocates against other people while he’s about it, and those efforts by himself and like-minded individuals are one of the prime reasons that many homo/bisexual people seek out the “help” of exgay advocates in the first place.
This is analogous to — say — a doctor setting up a clinic to treat cancer, and at the same time sneaking out of a night to dump PCPs into the local water supply as a member of a group seeking to “highlight the problem of chemicals in the environment”.
Yes, seriously.
In linking up with broad social prejudice and discrimination, Warren’s efforts in other forums provide him, and others like him, with a steady supply of often highly distraught clients; many of whom would not otherwise have been clients except for those efforts.
But something else intervenes at this point. In the manner of some unrecognised audio feedback loop, the hideous squeal coming through their headphones fails to be identified as caused by the very way they have set things up. Instead, a cry for exgay therapy — a noise partly of their making — only reinforces a pre-determined view that such therapy is widely wanted, and the pre-determined view that having people make the effort is of itself a socially desirable goal.
Even so, when these clients present for The Treatment(c), the majority fail to respond; often tragically and at great personal cost.
At best exgay advocates appear indifferent to this exgay-seeking majority that attempt… and fail. Despite exgay advocating therapists having as much access to the records about these “failed” clients as they do to the “successful”, one will look in vain for any research or publications about their failed clients from exgay advocates. On this score, pro-change/anti-gay therapists haven’t changed in 60 years: the ghost of Rado lives and breathes in the way they continue to present only a mere skerrick of all the information about their performance or their influence.
Ever ready to promote their “solution” and get on stage with their “success stories”, the very best one will squeeze from exgay advocates — such as Warren, even — is a bland comment that it would be a good idea if somebody, someday, was to do a study about those failures.
Well, yes, a very good idea. But why?
The answer, of course, is plainly obvious: the risk of harm, a need to assess the initial suitability of any candidate, and knowing what corrections are available should the whole thing go pear-shaped. (In other words, complete guidelines)
Apparently, a good idea for good reasons. But they still don’t bother.
Moving outwards… and now away from any individual… we begin to consider why they don’t bother.
The attitudes — and the behaviours — are worse than indifferent toward the majority of homo/bisexual men and women who never wish to darken an exgay advocates doorstep.
Against those people, exgay advocates reserve their right to link up with social prejudice and discrimination; even when they are professionally qualified to know the harm this will cause or even if they are personally empathetic enough to appreciate how harmful that behaviour is.
On this, their contribution to broadly caused harm, exgay advocates are overwhelmingly silent; except when prodded into denial.
For some exgay advocates, they are driven by barely concealed malice. Some, because they remain ignorant. Others know, but don’t care enough. And, for more than a few, because their religiously-inspired viewpoints overwhelm what concerns they otherwise might have — an attitude akin to “we had to destroy the village in order to save it”.
So too — and assisting in their disengagement from the problems they make — the public exgay advocates often do not deal with their failures; let alone with the far more numerous group of gay men and women harmed by social prejudice and baseless discrimination.
The mess is instead left for other therapists, both because failed clients are unwilling to return or because the solutions to the mess are ones that exgay therapists will refuse to involve themselves with.
> Fail, and flick.
> Be the cause, and curse others.
> Cripple the child, and blame the man for not walking.
And on that, we lead naturally to the reasoning behind why the majority of therapists have serious professional qualms about exgay advocacy…
But not now. Back to work for us, and it’s Saturday. What a damnable, miserable existence this turned out to be.But we’re dreaming of ancient deckchairs, cool (very plural) Bintangs and being the only muka putih gracing that small, never-to-be-revealed village somewhere in the bucolic north of Bali… /sigh, roll on July…Hope everyone’s keeping well in any case — cheers!
Now that’s the grantdale I remember.
It all seems so simple, evangelicals stop believing their silly myths and then all will be well. No muss, no fuss.
And if only Warren didn’t have the wrong viewpoint, then all those people wouldn’t want to live by what Warren believes. They, after all, believe as they do because Warren does. So Warren goes away and all those evangelical-myth-believing-ex-gay types go away too.
Now I am off to think up more ways to attract clients I don’t have time to see. Since grantdale busted me on the ex-gay thing, I have to find some other line.
Because Dr. Throckmorton, I’ve tried for years to see what you’d say about societal pressure to change.
What you’d answer with regard to correlations and causations that aren’t squaring up with what ex gay therapists say.
And to see if I would get a serious response when I ask about cultural, familial, religious, ethnic and generational responses to what is an indigenous human characteristic not effected by the aforementioned, but what ex gay therapists rarely discuss.
I just want to see what you’d do, what you’d say and how you’d say it.
And you’ve done nothing to engage my questions.
And considering what an expert you’re supposed to be, was I wrong or too respectful of you earlier to expect that you would?
The thing is Dr. T, you’re one of many ex gays that I’ve tried to engage. As a group, you seem eager to teach, convince, inform and induce gay people and those who care about them into the process of giving up the identity and behavior of same sex attraction.
Am I disrespected because I”m not a bidder? Because I don’t pay to look beyond door number one? Is your expertise reserved for those who are genuinely frightened, intimidated or exhausted by life as a gay person?
Many ex gays seem to be ex basket cases on many levels, other than what their orientation would take them.
Or did they fall into the trap that because they were gay, they had to validate the low expectations of their larger community, and so went straight for the other behaviors that people connect to being gay?
Like substance problems, promiscuity, broken relationships with other gay people?
What I have observed, Dr. T….is a serious lack of humility from those who consider themselves reformed from being gay.
Indeed, there is a distinct snobbery and a condescending tone when dealing with those who are gay and honestly and unashamed of it.
I’m an outsider, an observer. At one tiime…and completely unbiased one. Only looking for information, and to be taught.
I tried you, Stephen Bennett…Alan Chambers, DL Foster…I called Living Waters up and asked o be included in the sessions. Same for Desert Stream and other and various churches and places of support for answers and help in wondering what the commitment of the ex gay business was.
And I learned a lot Dr. Throckmorton. A great deal.
And eventually, I ended up here for the same reasons I sought you out…FIVE YEARS AGO.
My own curiosity…and perhaps empathy, is why I am respectful of gay folks, and gay identity and integration.
Sometimes we might take it for granted that some people who have witnessed or been on the receiving end of prejudice, would empathize with another group.
That Jews might with gay people…or women might with gay men.
That sort of thing.
That a gay person, who went throught the discipline, could best know what a gay person goes through. So they are the best to go to, to help them alter into a hopefully more stress free, easier life.
This is, more disturbing. Much more.
Because I see what’s done to convince a gay person they need to change. I see what the expectations are, and a lower expectation-much steeped in bigotry, is traded for higher expectations, that place another burden on the gay person….
but lightens the burden of accountability for the dominant group (heterosexuals) that’s prejudiced.
Prejudice can make normal people, do very extreme and difficult things to fit in.
There is no concern for what is normal and right for a person to be.
I have witnessed that also. And I know it’s destructive.
Women in particular can suffer from this outrage. Especially when it comes to weight, body type and aging.
I see no less destructiveness to gay lives with ex gay interventions.
I tried to see the other side…I really, really did.
I still haven’t been answered by you, or any other ex gay or supporter of ex gay interventions.
There are rationalizations, which is a different thing from JUSTIFICATION.
I have found rote defense-religious grounds, but not scientific or socio/political ones.
All have been used before to deny other’s identity.
And identity is powerful doctor. THAT is God given, and shouldn’t be tampered with by ordinary mortals.
Your’e perfectly welcome to answer my original question. But since you haven’t….are you willing to admit it’s because you can’t?
Warren, that was mature of you.
Let’s get one thing clear, for a start: you don’t know either of us. You’ve only dealt with us on-line.
However when a professor of psychology appears in front of a government committee on behalf of anti-gay groups and states …
… then anyone can know that he’s either ignorant on the subject of homosexuality, or that he’s motivated to spread falsehoods.
Yes, that was you Warren Throckmorton PhD. Just a single example from a collection now dating back years, but a good example where you actually stood up in public and declared that gay relationships are not based on trust.
You then went further: and discussed how the pairing of gay couples does not result in bonding.
Gay relationships are bereft of trust, love, affection and concern for the other; according to you. That’s what you impressed upon the law makers of Ohio. Twice. Whilst you were involved in an anti-gay political campaign.
Is this also what you tell your clients? Or do you just allude to it? Or do you reserve those opinions for public announcements knowing full well that your potential client group will have absorbed your viewpoints long before they even meet you?
There’s also no need to be so egotistical. That wasn’t about you, as we made plain. We used you as a example of the damaging behaviour that is an alliance of therapy and prejudice.
Note: nothing to do with religious beliefs, despite whatever ridiculous persecution complex is doing the rounds this week at Grove City. Behaviour. It’s the behaviour of people (like you) toward others, and what the outcome of that behaviour will be.
Your public campaigning increases the disgust and anger that conservative religious people feel toward gay men and women. Your false and highly negative portrayal of homosexuality increases the self-disgust that conservative religious gays feel about themselves.
And you do this despite also knowing that the “solution” you then offer is an abject failure the majority of the time; leaving an exhausted wreckage of lives. Needlessly.
Does the few that you have helped even come to balance the sacrifice of these others?
To end: the good news is, you need not retire as a self-proclaimed expert on homosexuality.
Change is possible. You need to be more considerate, and better educated.
To do that you will need to drop your rancour, religiously inspired or not, and begin to understand gay men and lesbians; both as individuals and as couples. And I’m sorry, but you’ll actually have to leave your castle walls and meet with them in order to do that.
Selective reading, and meeting disturbed clients, just isn’t enough.
Reagan, you’re one in a million.
I’m not sure you need Warren’s attention or his answers — you’ve worked it out, yourself, because of that warm, searching heart of yours.
But you still beg to ask why some people behave cruelly toward others, right? I don’t think you’ll ever get an answer on that.
Just remember, always, that alongside the cruelty between people is also the love and decency between people.
Love and decency never make sense of cruelty, but they do make it bearable. And for that, we know how many appreciate you.
grantdale — As you know, the context for those remarks was this:
The point was that research suggests differences between straights and gay males in fidelity. I would phrase this differently now to be sure – implying that gay males are incapable of trust was wrong of me.
But speaking to your original point (that my religious/political views create demand for ex-gay therapy), I don’t buy it. If I changed all my views to match yours tomorrow, I would still provide the same framework for therapy as I do now. And there still would be people who had religiously based conflicts over their homosexual attractions. Others who support the redefinition of marriage to include same sex partners (e.g., Robert Spitzer) also support our framework for handling sexual identity conflicts.
I would say the stats, if they are accurate, reflect a time in history more than an inherent inability or even lack of desire to form lasting relationships.
The cards are indeed stacked against a stable, long term relationship for gays, which is one reason I do support same-sex marriage. But even if all civil inequities were removed tomorrow, I suspect it may be another century or more before things even out. Society doesn’t turn on a dime, as we know very well from other plights.
What would a study of the relationships, or even the intelligence of African Americans have yielded if done in 1807? If I remember correctly, they were deemed to be inherently inferior, and of low intelligence. At the time it might have appeared so, but would anyone here argue that this was was the result of a society which viewed them as inferior in order to justify treating them as property? And here we are still fighting that perception 150 years after emancipation and 40 years after the last major civil rights legislation.
This discussion is an eerie echo from the past, a past which should make every civilized person nauseous. But somehow there are those who feel perfectly justified in repeating it, albeit with new players and a different script – a kinder, gentler form of dehumanization for the new millennium. Good Lord, barely 150 years ago we purchased and owned other human beings! Is it so hard to understand that we could be doing the 21st century equivalent to the few classes which are still “safe” to hate? The church sanctions it, why not? How many other grotesque bigots like Paul Cameron do we have making decisions that affect the lives of millions of gay people, either by direct civil authority or the poisoning of those who will listen?
I apologize for the rant.
The state has a compelling reason to promote marriage for a variety of reasons but one is to support the development of kinship bonds based on trust. The entire mind set or culture of homosexual relationships is antithetical to this basic building block of relationships.
The point was that research suggests differences between straights and gay males in fidelity. I would phrase this differently now to be sure – implying that gay males are incapable of trust was wrong of me.
And remember, when discussing the intersection between homosexuality and public policy, it’s only the guys who need to be considered.
Maybe the trust/fidelty thing is just a male thing, not a gay or straight thing. In that case, wouldn’t it make sense that the indescretions be higher for gay males? I may be way off-base with that, but it’s just my first thought based on those percentages.
Boo, good point.
Dr. Throckmorton’s reference is indicative of making a conclusion from or about a group that’s had a completely different status than heterosexuals.
The HOPE and support of marriage for gay couples or gay individuals would alter behavior.
Alter it towards a more discplined life around planning for that bond.
Any human being without hope, is more likely to be reckless and irresponsible.
This isn’t indicative of a quality exclusive to gays and lesbians, and especially not gay men.
But indicative of what happens to people when they are deprived of the hope of participating in stabilizing and disciplined institutions.
And Dr. Throckmorton, ignore me all you want except to get defensive.
But Pam Ferguson is also an indication of the folly of encouraging marriage and children in mixed orientation marriages. It’s a risking thing to encourage and most often fails.
Not because of the lack of faith or discipline in the individuals, but as a result of false hope and disrespect for what homosexuality is and means.
The empirical evidence is there that such marriages are not advisable, and non marriage between two gay people won’t create anything better.
It’s very dishonest and irresponsible to not distinguish an action from a REACTION.
The basis for what you’re talking about is a reaction to a system that excludes gay people alone from marrying who is most compatible to them.
Gay youth are subjected to being told over their lifetimes of what they are unworthy of, and so…they respond like someone who feels themselves unworthy.
Hello?
So to say that researchers finding that gay couples, or gay men…(funny, lesbians are left out of so much of this research), seem to have no cohesion, or pattern of commitment because they are gay, is wrong if they leave this social treatment out of the equation.
To all intents and purposes, what you seem to be agreeing with is in some characteristic inferiority.
David Roberts, I just did reiterate what you brought up so well and accurately.
And I appreciate the historical and cultural context, as a woman…as a black woman. It’s fair, it’s accurate and a powerful analogy.
I am wary, and dislike intensely…the same pattern being followed in the treatment of gays and lesbians.
Even saying relgious belief is a good reason, was also employed against black slaves and women.
So why trust those who state their rationalization as religious values in this?
I state emphatically there is no reason to. None.
And they should be stopped as surely as those who rationalized, for religious reasons and moral reforms, the treatment of blacks and women and gays…to deny their identity, humanity and self determination.
Maybe the trust/fidelty thing is just a male thing, not a gay or straight thing.
Yes, I think so. You can find plenty of examples of reckless, destructive, irresponsible and unfaithful sexual behaviour among gay males if you look for them. But don’t kid yourself that straight males aren’t capable of similar behaviour when restraints are removed.
I’m old enough to have had a father who served in World War II. When they got the other side of the English Channel the soldiers were told that they had four hours to spare if anyone wanted to go to the brothel. A hell of a lot of them went – and NOT just the unmarried ones either.
As a dispenser in the Medical Corps in Germany, who spent hundreds of hours making up prescriptions for all the soldiers who’d caught STDs, my dad got to know quite a lot about the sexual behaviour of the other men. Many were as irresponsible and promiscuous as any gay man could be. Incidentally, the Commanding Officer found it necessary to warn the troops that any British soldier who raped a German woman would be shot. I wonder why.
After the war was over my dad worked in the dispensary of a hospital in the north of England. One of the other men working there made a regular practice of grabbing female cleaners, taking them down into the basement and having sex with them – sometimes while his wife was upstairs in the office.
“If I changed all of my viewpoints to match yours tomorrow, I would still rpovide the same framework for therapy as I do now. And there would still be people with religously based conflicts over their homosexual attractions.”
I know of very few households that don’t start their children early in religious teaching and disciplines. And you know that.
So you know too, that you have a hedge in having a ready stash of people in need of your services.
Those conflicts don’t come out of nowhere. Looking for assurance in identity in a home where no one else has it. Putting a word to it, and articulating it to a trusted, non judgemental adult is not an option for gay kids.
And many churches and organizations have outreach for gay youth, well ahead of that young person being fully realized and developed in their TRUE orientation and identity, not the one artificially enforced through religious dogma.
Instead these kids are indoctrinated to believe that heterosexuality is their real identity and homosexuality is not only false, but dangerous and a compromise to their entrance in heaven.
What a big stick to swing at a child!
So your clients are artificially created and reinforced Dr. T, long before they find you.
The conflict isn’t in being gay. The conflict is created by religious teaching that devalues gay people.
The conflict cannot be resolved by reinforcing gay lives, and attractions as legitimate and accountable, but is taught that ONLY what religious belief values is legitimate.
However, since we are talking about intangibles, that’s a hard sell, in and of itself.
God cannot actually confront the gay person, nor can heaven be presented as a reality.
And the Biblical Scriptures themselves come from a very narrow view of the world and it’s events, contents and human conditions.
The rest then, is editorializing and gravitas and a distortion of action, method and results.
David Roberts and Grantdale are correct regarding how this conflict originates.
The end, so to speak, does not justify the means.
As I have often said and will here again, the destruction of a person’s identity, whether religious, familial, ethnic, physical or cultural is never the right thing to do.
To accomplish it takes methods and systems that we know are cruel and do more harm than good.
That your belief system doesn’t allow you to accept this is beside the point.
Your religion is acquired, being gay is not. And rejecting your belief, or outreach should not come at the price of one’s civil and social liberties and protections.
The religious persuasion is a very powerful and cruel one, especially on a vulnerable youth.
And there is risk of deadly results worse than the threat of God or no after life in heaven.
There is something so very hollow about your motives. Affecting the straight life, playing the part and knowing all the lines…still doesn’t make a person straight. It’s false…and often a caricature, while at the same time, the former gay life is portrayed as if a cartoon.
I am a straight person, doctor. A real one, born and raised that way.
I look at this ex gay intervention the way women feel compelled to get breast implants.
There is nothing wrong, fatal or abnormal about being smaller in breast size.
And even if a woman went through a lot of pain, risk and expense to get implants-which is perfectly legal and her ‘choice’ to get and obviously obtain.
The new arrangement is still false and not hers. And sometimes a woman’s worth, unfortunately seems to be tied up in boob size.
Sure, the plastic surgeon is just there to comfort her with her conflicts over her breast size.
But if a woman’s worth wasn’t in them, would he be in business?
Something tells me doc, that YOU wouldn’t be in business when even religious people start getting really consisent and morally ethical about a person’s worth, gay or not.
William wrote:
Well, the same thing sorta happened with US Servicemen who were serving in Vietnam. Hawaii had been set up as a place to go on R&R for 6 days and nights apparently at first for married men to spend time with their wives.
But, until the latter part 1967, it was the only R&R location where one could not go primarily to meet up with prostitutes. It was then Australia was added as a location. There were a Jewish guy in my company who was able to get an in-country R&R for a religious holiday. I had never known that would include a spending time hooker who was working where he went. Oh, I would have taken his word for it but he had explicit photographic proof which he had to show everybody even when they didn’t ask. Other guys who went out of country to Asian locations brought back similar proof and most of them were married, too.
Before us guys finished our in-country training at the US Army 196th Light Infantry Brigade’ Charger Academy (in Vietnam), we were told by training cadre that in Vietnam there was an STD which was completely untreatable and there was no cure for it. They never told us what the name of it was. After I found out about AIDS in the 1980s, I wondered if that was what they were actually talking about.
Zummo, the other Staff Judge Advocate section clerk-typist with whom I first worked with in the 196th HQ, officially went to Hawaii and when the JAG officers asked him where he stayed, he said “The Reef.” The R&R folks in Hawaii thought that was where he stayed but, he caught a ride back to the airport and went home to Long Island (New York) and then made it back to be picked up at the R&R Center at Ft. DeRussy in Waikiki for the return flight to Vietnam. He never talked about his private life.
I might add that when I’m in Naples (Italy), a city that I visit most years, I’m not infrequently accosted at night in the street by American sailors who ask me where they can go to find prostitutes (although they usually frame their requests for information in more graphic language, often accompanied by appropriate gestures). Are they all unmarried? I doubt it.
Christian Newswire quote:
You cannot bring your sexual orientation into alignment with your religious convictions if those convictions state that you cannot be a Christian and an unrepentant homosexual sinner (even if you are still a virgin). Such convictions are based on imposed by others “guilt trips” when such guilt-trip convictions don’t even come from the Holy Spirit. Those “convictions” come from “Fundamentalist Christians” who only know what their English Versions Bibles say or what their church’s doctrine is. Jesus said the only one who could convict a person of sin is God’s Holy Spirit.
Warren, alrighty — it’s the “Alan Chambers defence” is it?
Gee. Sorry. Didn’t notice it when it was happening. Won’t happen again. I promise. Trust me.
But we are glad to at least see that admission from you. (We’d be even more pleased to see you place a statement directly on the relevent pages that remained on your site when we last checked.)
I have to say, your appearance in Ohio was one of your lower moments. You actually let slip all the nonsense at once. And in very clear terms. Perhaps being in such close proximity to Greg Quinlan and the rest of the deranged people from his Pro-Family (sic) Network caused you to temporarily lose your reasoning.
Indeed, your appearance was so distorting of the research that the Ohio Psychological Association actually had to send both a highly gay-experienced praticising therapist and an expert in childhood development — neither of which you are, BTW — to correct the gross impressions you had left about gay men and lesbians, gay couples and gay parents.
Moving on: apart from knowing the context of those remarks, I also know the context of that study.
Least people again be mislead by your incomplete response, we’ll say it for you.
The study wasn’t random and did not set out to establish or compare rates of non-monogamy. It used a deliberate variety of cohabitating gay male couples — just 41 of them — who had varying levels/lengths of commitment to their primary relationships. The study examined the many ways that a range of cohabitating gay male couples establish their relationship in the context of AIDS. Even the title, for once, is clear about that aim.
You took that study and compared that small sample of a range of gay male couples to the most committed type of cohabitating heterosexual couples (the married). That is an utterly false comparison and, we’ll note, is exactly the way that Paul Cameron goes about his work.
Yet, that aside, even using those two studies: one says 38% and one says up to 35% of males in a cohabitating relationship are non-monogamous.
A sample giving 38% versus a possible 35%… is this is what you really think is a “striking difference” between coupled gay men and coupled straight men?
You may also cease with whatever pleading you are attempting to interject about therapy for some of the distressed. That’s not what we raised. Please either read our words before you respond, or do not attempt to divert away from the serious matter we did raise.
This is about what happens to members of a group of people that are subject to constant slander and abuse. A subject well within a psychology graduate’s capabilities. And it’s about the enabling role taken by therapists like you.
I’ll repeat:
OK Professor: exactly what do you imagine that toxic environment results in?
We’ve had, you may recall, some sharp words in the past about you serving two masters.
You cannot expect to claim pious concern for some of the victims when you are also, in part, to blame for the shrill and distorted anti-gay environment that harms both them and very many more others.
Warren, are you genuinely concerned about the mental health of all gay men and lesbians? Or is your professionalism reserved only for those who worship at the same altar, and after the harm is done?
Your production of a sexual identity framework doesn’t answer those questions. But much else does.
Grantdale…I love you guys. You’d be such a blast to be around at the corner Starbucks!
Darn the distance!
Grantdale…I am and have been for a long time, very invested in gay kids.
Teenagers are already some kind of mutant form of secrets, hormones and attitude.
You were gay kids once, I wasn’t. I don’t have to tell you.
So went I have a sit down, with my young charges I am sometimes a counselor, PFLAG consult)-I can get awestruck at how creative, brave and just plain full of gumption the gay kids will be.
There is nothing funnier than seeing them learn a certain foxiness to beat out the ignorantly blissful straight people.
Even I cringe at the dumbassed way that straight folks will argue about homosexuality being a choice WITH a gay person.
It IS to laugh, and so…in a fine humor about other absurdities, I’ll let the kids have at it in any way they want. It is THEY who have to live with being gay, not me.
However, I find myself rather blessed to be able to love kids like that and see what the possibilities are.
Even better and what’s underestimated is the fierce protectiveness their loving SIBLINGS or best friends will bring into the fray.
The alliances at first don’t look intimidating. But this generation isn’t as soft or cowed by the authorities in their lives as some people might think. These are brainy, entertaining…or unflappable kids.
Maybe it’s my location, Studio City…in Los Angeles. It’s a little easier to be showy, In fact, showiness is a religion around these parts.
But there is a lot they can teach their peers in other places about safety in numbers. Even two and threes.
Considering they are mutant teens, they have a certain cunning patience about this.
Like tigers, and chameleons….and the brightest birds and bugs-they will make a lot of noise, they will be annoying and move along at their own pace.
It’s a big Garden after all….
And then there is lil ol me…’mama bear’ I”m known to my young darlings.
And like a mama bear, to the Dr. Throckmorton’s and the Alan Chambers we all know and oh so love….I will eat you first!
For anyone interested, the citation for the study referenced is Julien, D., Chartrand, E. & Begin, J. (1996). Male couples’ dyadic adjustment and the use of safer sex within and outside of primary relationships. Journal of Family Psychology, 10, 89-96.
The percentages for fidelity are 38% vs. 65-85%.
I am concerned for the mental health of all my clients and do the humanly best job I can for them – gay, straight or whatever.
I do not begrudge gay therapists the right to take public positions on political matters. I will continue to do so as well. I do see how doing so can impact clients with a variety of ideologies but we have to live together. The approach advocated in our sexual identity therapy framework seems to me to be a way for client values to take the lead in a social climate that is and will continue to be highly polarized.
The way you respect the beliefs of those who consider their sexuality to conflict with their faith is to be honest about their options. Tell them that short of a bona-fide miracle, that they will always struggle with their ‘unwanted attractions’ and the best you can do is help them develop healthier coping mechanisms. Tell them that their current strategy of self-denial while traumatic to their self-esteem is about as good a method of coping as any. Heck, go ahead and tell them that accepting their sexuality is an option. Treat them as adults capable of handling the truth.
But do not stand by and let those people have the false hope that they will change their orientation when you know that the vast majority of those who have tried have not succeeded. Do not offer therapy which you cannot back up with valid scientific studies. Do not stand by and let them think that a prominent ex-gay person has succeeded when they actually haven’t. Do not remain silent when others make foolish proclamations that someone is straight after three weeks’ therapy. Do not offer up the agenda-oriented portrayals of gays and lesbians that are more about shocking the sensibilities of ignorant straights than telling the truth. And do not back up the efforts of any of those who are using the desire of these people to be true to their beliefs as an excuse to deny other people justice and rights.
IMO, “sexual identity therapy” should be applied to those who are transsexuals/transgenders or even Intersex persons. But, “sexual orientation therapy” should be applied to those who know that their gender is definitely male or female and have no desire to change, although they don’t experience physiological sexual attractions toward members of the opposite gender. The PhD psychologist might refer to this as semantics and claim that he was actually talking about orientation rather than identity.
I NEVER wanted to be female. I am a man and I have always wanted to stay that way. My own father was a great role model on how to be a man. And, as far as I know he was definitely heterosexual without being macho. I learned from him how to be in a covenanted relationship with my late partner/husband, Ed. Both men had been farmers and they more or less like to eat the same kinds of food, too.
While a client’s mental health is important for any licensed and certified professional mental health therapist, those therapists who call themselves “Christian” ought to be concerned about a client’s spiritual health and that includes self-acceptance without the guilt feelings.
BTW, what makes the “Fellowship of Christian Physician Assistants” experts on sexual orientation? None of the physician’s assistants I have met in the past 20 plus years even mentioned they had certification in psychology or counseling. But, they certainly had a great rapport with me when I saw them instead of a doctor at the clinics. One at the VA actually listened better that the doctor she was working with.
Joe: ditto. And I think — one blue moon, long ago — we even suggested that a framework be titled “Resolution of Sexuality and Religious identity conflict” or something similar to ensure that it was being even-handed.
In most cases we are talking about people who are conflicted about their sexuality (which simply emerged, by nature) and their religious community (which was inculcated within an easily identified environment). It isn’t simply a sexual identity conflict.
Alas, I also think we are dealing with a deeper attitude out there (too many times) that sees (a particular) religion as The Truth that must be reinforced, rather than an identity that people are indeed capable of taking-up and shedding with demonstably far greater fluidity than their sexuality. Overwhemingly.
It’s at this place we find people promoting “Good on you, you are a non-gay homosexual and you now think this makes you heterosexual” rather than a more grounded “Those attractions mean you are not heterosexual — now, how shall you live?”.
————————–
Warren: All gay men and lesbians includes the far larger non-client group. Mental health professionals have a responsibility toward the mental health of all people, up to and including not causing mental health issues in the first instance. This includes people who aren’t paying you to listen to them.
A right to political activity — take that as a given — is tempered by that need to also behave in an ethical, caring and knowledgeable way. That’s what accepting the scroll from the dean means when you graduate and join a professional body.
This is particularly so whenever anyone so privilged appears in public, or writes an op-ed, and is identified as a professional therapist.
Flowers in the waiting room, and white sheets in the public square, is not an acceptable way for a professional to behave (even if being Jewish was to become a “controversial social issue”, as example).
Even ignoring the fact that heterosexual men and women are not a beseiged minority group: I’ve yet to see a (sane) gay therapist take an anti-heterosexual stance in a public forum — and present distorted viewpoints that are damaging to the health of heterosexuals — as part of some discriminatory political movement or for self-serving personal reasons.
If they did, they would deserve censure.
All professional people are expected to know better, and are rightly judged to a higher standard; especially by their peers.
QED: Paul Cameron.
(As to why the psych. professions are so slow and weak in this regard, in comparison to other professional groups, is another debate.)
————————–
And bad confusing us, while we’re at it. Got too excited about writing non-monogamy and couples too many times. Left out a “two” and/or “non” somewhere: Two men at 62% non, one man at 35% non and the probability comparison should now make more sense. Even if it’s a thoroughly illegitimate one to begin with, based on the sample types.
Those of you that can read French will perhaps also enjoy googling “Danielle Julien” and “Montreal” or something and checking out her body of work. Julien was an expert witness when Canada moved to marriage non-discrimination and, from the look of it, she would be horrified to see her work distorted to support anti-gay politics. Correction: horrified, but unsurprised.
Yeah, I’m concerned about the mental health of MY charges too….
But the one who most needs to answer this question won’t….
What’s changing one’s orientation…or affecting celibacy and non gay activity got to do with the value of homosexuality, the value of the gay person and their worth in the public and civil arena?
Hmmm…gang, let me put it this way. There is a great deal this country and the world needs to learn about gays and lesbians. Prejudicial organizations have tended to put out a lot of misinformation or distorted information.
And the atmosphere and threat compromises accuracy or accounting as to a correct or honest sampling.
Dr. T…seriously, the ex gay industry thoroughly destroys this accounting, honesty, truth and isn’t justified doing so.
Religious belief that homosexuality is bad, doesn’t make it so.
It asserts what ancient cultures believed, and in their time, couldn’t or wouldn’t have as much opportunity for analysis or experience.
And the quotes often utilized, didn’t come from an expert on human behavior or sexuality.
This isn’t about moral relativism, but how our natural curiosity and experience with each other diminishes distrust, fear and violence.
And it’s fear, confusion, distrust and personal doubts that the ex gay industry fosters.
Sure, perhaps because you are part of a usually caring, compassionate and gentle profession, at once what you do wouldn’t necessarily seem at all a problem.
You’re there to presumably SOLVE a problem and help someone manage it, if not cure it.
I dont know specifically what you do in practice, nor what sorts of people your students or clients are.
But I DO know, that straight people are very ignorant, confused and will rationalize their own hostile activity BECAUSE of what you do.
And I suppose it’s futile to ask you, but knowing that straight people ARE the way they are, what is the point in fueling their ignorance and fear and confusion?
You know THEY aren’t going to respond to gay people the way YOU do.
The threshold of what the straight person will accept cannot be pinned down because of their confusion and ignorance.
In so many ways, you’re making the gay person out to be the confused one. The one who shouldn’t be what they are and responsible for how straight people feel.
One of the worst things you can do is make someone be held responsible for someone else’s prejudice, and allow the prejudiced to be vindicated.
It’s straight people and ex gays who are thwarting every effort to learn more, have different expections and understand gay people.
And really, what’s the point in getting in the way of this?
Indeed, isn’t really learning about another, and understanding them better…the ULTIMATE in compassion, higher learning and justice?
The quotes are from what grantdale said.
Off-topic but June 2007 is a Blue Moon month which is very rare anyway.
As I have written before, I don’t have a problem with my sexual identity and I have never had one either. I really didn’t have religion-related guilt feelings about sexual activity that I did while growing up. Homosexuality was a very rare topic among the Christians in the Pentecostal or Charismatic churches I attended until the late 1960s (I was in my later 20s by that time). The sin of Sodom until that time had never been classified as “homosexuality” in those churches. My late mother told me the same thing a few years before she passed away in May 2005.
The sexual orientation guilt feelings thing first came up in the early 1970s. Some church people in the small town where I was teaching found out through someone who should not have told the son of an independent radio evangelist about me. That evangelist’s family attended the same church I did but he would not be a member since he was not ordained by that church’s denomination and had no desire to do so and the man was a bigger gossip than his wimpy tattle-tale son was. I won’t go into further detail here about this than to say I asked the men in the church to pray for me about it. Which they did. I agreed in faith with them; but, nothing happened. I never did tell members of my family about the situation; I only told them that the reason that I did not go back to that school system was that a tale-bearing preacher would not promise the school superintendent that he would shut up. (Besides, my private life was none of his business anyway, especially since he was not a member of the church.)
Warren Throckmorton should be held responsible for causing mental health issues with his clients and everyone else who reads what he writes.
As a Believer in Christ Jesus, I know The Truth and his name is Jesus.
This last quote reminds me of Alan Chambers on Anderson Cooper’s 360 on CNN a while back. Chambers is “completely heterosexual now” but the told the CNN reporter that he still has sexual attractions toward men. Of course, he said that when his own crowd of supporters was not around to hear him say that.
The ridiculous notion of “conversion” is a wonderful myth that conveniently used to deny people rights, opportunities and freedom in our society. It is not supported by research….But, it is a theory used only conveniently…
The same individuals, for example, that would not wish to have hate-crimes legislation protect gay/lesbian/transgendered people…would likely not wish to have religious affiliation removed as a protected group. My point? Even if orientation is a choice, why is it not a valid one? Why does it matter?
Like it or not, in America, we are not a theocracy. While some might like that to happen, we should extend full rights (marriage, housing, employment, benefits) to lesbian/gay/trans individuals and stop making laws based on theological judgments of “healthy” and “unhealthy”…”right” and “wrong.” If you do not believe in same-sex attraction or relationships…don’t be in one. But have the intellect to be able to follow the research…not your personal level of comfort. I’m not comfortable with plaid shorts, but hey, I realize there is not logical basis from preventing you from wearing them.
As for now, evangelical circles claim that you can’t trust those darn scientists and studies…maybe you have to believe that to justify why every respected major medical organization does not view same-sex attraction as a mental illness, and why they all support same-sex adoption, etc.
Homosexuality occurs in thousands of species across nature, and it occurs in human beings. While some would like to believe that it is due to environmental factors…it’s hard to make the argument that a penguin is gay because he has “father issues.”
Let’s start getting real, stop with the emotional overlay, and start acting like scientists.
Conversion therapy, as well as even funding “brain scans,” is to what end? It doesn’t matter in the end…
I feel badly that some would seek therapy to change their attractions…why does it matter to anyone who you are attracted to, when they are of consenting age and sound mind? gheesh…
denial of research, inability to be objective, and bigotry are just unbelievable.
As long as there is bigotry, there will always be a market to want to change – no one wants to be persecuted. Ask many african-americans during segregation, interracial marriage prohibitions, etc..if some wished they could be caucasian so they would not face bigotry…
It’s no mystery.
Accepted, happy, successful, relationally satisfied gay/lesbian individuals are not looking to change…and those that prey on the ones that do, are hardly respectable scientists.
Something no one has mentioned here, (and Dr. T. thanks for responding some to the comments here, even if there continues to be passionate disagreement,)
but….
Early in this post you (Dr. T) mentioned what sounded like collaboration of some degree with a Michael Bailey:
I really hope this is not J. Michael Bailey, he of the The Man Who Would Be Queen brand of “research” and “scholarship.” The Man Who Would Be Queen
If so, folks, we are in for a real WILD ride if they ever get the funding. I would be spring-loaded against the findings before I ever read the conclusion.
A collaboration with Bailey (assuming this is the guy) will do nothing to boost your standing in the research community, or endear you to the GLBT people you say you are trying to help.
!!!!!!YIKES!!!!!
Yup, I think it is that Dr. Bailey.
Though his scholarship can be called into question and his ethics are downright scary (he seems to favor a form of eugenics), I suspect he’s also one of the few who do research in this area who would also partner with Warren on brain scans for ex-gays.
And I doubt Warren would say that he’s helping those in the LGBT community. Instead I think he views his efforts as helping those who have unwanted same-sex attractions find a way to live consistently with their values.
And I doubt Warren would say that he’s helping those in the LGBT community. Instead I think he views his efforts as helping those who have unwanted same-sex attractions find a way to live consistently with their values.
You know, that’s the part I don’t really get. I mean, what’s so difficult about just… not having sex?
Boo said:
I guess it’s only not difficult for a person who has never had any sexual activity of any kind and has no desire to ever have it. But, that is contrary to the divinely created human nature of normal folks.
But, if you have been in a committed/covenanted relationship like I was, you would miss the intimate relationship you experienced in the bedroom. I had lived with Ed for a short while before I actually fell in love with him. I loved him as a friend from the very first night he introduced himself to me and I felt comfortable being intimate with him, too.
But, one day we were in the kitchen and he was preparing something to eat while we chatted. It reminded me of being back at home with my mother and my leaning against the kitchen/dining room door and talking to her. I felt right at home with Ed, and I said to myself, “I want to spend the rest of my life with this man.” Well, it was not the rest my life as such but, it was the rest of his life and he passed away at home.
No one can take Ed’s place in my heart; but, I just feel that a new place was created and it has remained empty for a long time now.
I guess it’s only not difficult for a person who has never had any sexual activity of any kind and has no desire to ever have it. But, that is contrary to the divinely created human nature of normal folks.
True, but I guess my point is you don’t see the average non-molesting Catholic priest undergoing years of therapy just to keep their vows.
RE: Dr. Bailey – I know he has taken some hits but much of his research work in peer reviewed journals has held up rather well. He also has the integrity to acknowledge where his earlier work probably was off (e.g., the twin research). He is doing some very interesting brain scan research to help map brain correlates of sexual response. We disagree on some things but that is what would make the research interesting and I think add to its credibility. I pursue research because it interests me and I think it would answer interesting and potentially important questions. People of all ideologies would be interested in it if it is done well. I also think it would assist people who struggle with identity and religious conflicts.
Stone, cold, deaf and blind comfort….
You know, that’s the part I don’t really get. I mean, what’s so difficult about just… not having sex?
You’re kidding, right? 🙂
The internet is funded by the fact that people just can’t seem to help needing sexual stimulation of some sort. Yeah, you can just not have sex and just not watch porn and just not masturbate and just not fantasize… but that’s when you find yourself screaming at your co-workers and assaulting the mailman.
And it’s actually more than that. I think they also are often married and want to make it work. Or they would like to pursue that. Or they would like tools on how to feel more content. Or whatever… honestly it’s Greek to me but, hey, I know there are folks out there who want it.
Regan, we benefit from interaction and debate. Your dispute with Dr. Throckmorton seems to have become rather personal, and for whatever reason it’s not being resolved. At this point I think it may be more appropriate for you to deal with him directly (personal email, etc).
While there are many issues on which I believe we will always have disagreement, Dr. Throckmorton has taken important steps in his understanding of ex-gay issues and his input can be helpful. However, we deny commenters here the opportunity to question him and others who visit if we chase them off with personal insults.
Debate, but don’t browbeat.
Unless, of course it tended to undermine the validity of said change…
On the other hand, I just don’t see Bailey as an impartial researcher.
Regan,
I think Dr. Bailey starts with the presumption that orientation is determined prenatally. Dr. Throckmorton, I believe, thinks some contributing factors may be genetic or prenatal (dispositions) but that orientation (as a result of those predispositions) may be environmentally impacted.
OK, I probably didn’t state that accurately, but my point is that they are not both coming from the same ideology and therefore it’s not really collusion to support a predetermined notion.
I think it would be interesting to see if there are brain differences between gay and ex-gay persons.
Obviously there are limitations. It would be hard, if not impossible, to do a study that compared pre-reorientation with post-reorientation brain scans – or at least not with the budget and timeframe that would be allowed.
Also, I think that if indeed reorientation is possible in some instances it would be very difficult to separate those for whom it has happened from those ex-gays for whom, well, the claim is not particularly supported by the evidence.
For example, would Jose Luis Maccarone be included if the research was done two years ago? Would Noe Gutierrez? Would Michael Johnston a few years ago?
Probably. Yet it is pretty likely that their brain scan would register “gay”. So too are there likely to be ex-gays now who will – in a few years – not be so “ex”. Their readings could skew the results.
Although I don’t think the brain differentiations are so dramatic, it would make me chuckle to have the results be:
sorry but after years of trying your brain is still gay.
So that’s what’s happening on those days when I can’t even think straight!
Timothy: You stated it well. We have different points of view on the development of sexuality so it will be an unusual collaboration in research.
Moderator Note: Comment deleted as completely unsubstantiated, off topic, and rambling. Commenter has been repeatedly asked to avoid this type of comment – please do so in the future if you wish to participate.