I occasionally have inquiries about my own experience with ex-gay / reparative therapy. I was a client of Joseph Nicolosi for about a year between 1999 and 2000. What I’m most frequently asked about is not why I entered therapy but why I stopped trying to become straight. My effort and desire to become straight continued after my last session with Nicolosi which is why I phrased the previous sentence “why I stopped trying to become straight” and not “why I left therapy.” Maybe someday I’ll sit down and write about things that happened before and during therapy but for now click below to read the extended interview.
I know this post is supposed to be about leaving therapy but can you quickly sum up how you got involved with Nicolosi?
Originally two things drew me into therapy with Nicolosi. 1) My religious faith at the time wasn’t compatible with my sexuality and 2) I viewed homosexuality as contrary to having a normal productive happy life. Had I simply had the religious problem I would have sought out some faith-based Exodus affiliate, which even at the time I had no interest in. When I was a freshman in college the year I started therapy I was realizing I was gay or as Nicolosi puts it, a non-gay-homosexual. Anyhoo, it just so happened my university library had a copy of his book (Repairative Therapy of Male Homosexuality) which I read pretty much straight through in one sitting and decided that’s what I wanted to do.
Do you feel like you gained anything positive from the experience?
Young guys who are realizing they’re gay often suffer from a long string of issues like depression, poor body image, self-esteem, fear of rejection. Nicolosi says these things are what causes one to crave men. Nicolosi doesn’t aim to directly treat the same-sex-attractions, he aims to treat what he believes causes them. Queer theorists tend to agree young gay men face these same issues because they have grown up in a culture of institutionalized discrimination where they don’t get to do all the normal things other kids do like take a date to the prom without worrying about it. Bem’s theory about Exotic Becomes Erotic is very much the same same chicken and the egg debate. Don’t get me wrong, talking to a psychologist about that string of issues was great. Maybe that’s why I’m not as “loud and out there” about my time with Nicolosi as some ex-ex-gays because he really did help me become the person I wanted to be, confidant, self assured and not to mention hotter since he encouraged me to start going to the gym. As that part of my life began to improve I found it easier and easier to ignore the same sex attractions.
About those attractions, did they change before, during or after therapy?
I’m probably a Kinsey 5. I was a 5 before therapy and I still am now. During therapy I saw the world through tinted-glasses. Every single thought of physical attraction or gender relations that went through my mind was analyzed for how it related to my efforts to change. Any sexual thought about a guy was immediately deconstructed and processed along the lines of “what is it about this guy that I’m drawn to?” or “what does my attraction to this guy represent about my own self image?” and so forth. It was an exhausting, unsustainable and dare I say unhealthy mindset. So while male-attractions were whisked off for endless processing before they could register as arousal, each occasional female attraction was exalted upon a pedestal. At the peak of that dichotomy of repression and exaltation virtually all my social time was spent with the sort of guys Nicolosi was having me demystify. Even under those circumstances my perceptions of how I related to the opposite sex never changed. I went on one straight date which is probably my second most awkward dating experience ever. (the first most awkward dating experience was a blind date the gay magazine Instinct did a photo essay on) I never had any qualms about masturbation but rather the qualms came from fantasizing about guys. There was a period of a couple months where a good portion of my fantasies were about girls. I remember telling myself at the time it was difficult (more likely distasteful) to think about guys. The fantasies about girls were never vivid or exciting and tended to be more focused on working to imagine a girl than imagining a specific activity with her as with guys. Forgive my vagueness on this matter of fantasy but it really came at the peak of my distortions. Memories of this experience having sat for years it’s hard to distinguish what’s reality and what lies I used to tell myself I have simply come to believe as a valid experience and memory. There are times in life we look back on and say “God, what was I thinking?” and cringe. No matter how hard we try to recall that mindset it simply can not be brought into view. This period of my life where I attempted to twist every thought that crossed my mind is one of those mindsets I can’t even begin to comprehend again.
So then what made you eventually decide to leave therapy?
By then l I was downright pro at ignoring my same sex attractions and after a year or so of weekly therapy I was feeling so much better about myself and basically Nicolosi and I ran out of things that needed to be talked about so we decided I’d stop making appointments and it was agreed that I would simply continue to live as my “genuine self” and provided I stuck to what he’d taught me I’d gradually become straight over time. The parting was definitely amiable.
Unlike Love In Action’s program which forbids participants from keeping a personal diary, central to therapy is being honest and introspective, examining your own emotions and learning from them. There’s really no point in paying to talk to a therapist is you’re not going to be honest with them and yourself. In the end being honest to myself about my own emotions is what got me out of being an ex-gay. Here I’ll get specific.
In retrospect yes Nicolosi had me work to “demystify” the alpha-type males I was attracted to by getting to know them. I don’t recall him ever explaining that part of the theory in much detail or giving the concept a name. I tried that for nearly two years and along the way I felt trying to connect with the sort of guy I was attracted to at the time was silly, unsatisfying, force and felt un-genuine. I agree, the mystery of the guys I was attracted to helped feed the attraction. However actually working to get to know these guys turned into a big hassle that never introduced me to new meaningful friends or people I had any continuing desire to spend time with. I felt as though I’d worked to demystify the type of guy I was physically attracted to, realized there was nothing special I was missing out on and moved on.
You’re saying it was straight boys that caused you to stop being an exgay?
No way! Also central to Nicolosi’s theories is the idea same-sex relationships were fundamentally broken and disingenuous. Before and during therapy I had never so much as kissed another boy and grown up in an American Baptist church so I was willing to believe this notion of gay relationships being broken. That notion that same-sex relationships are inherently flawed and thus not an acceptable life was one of the primary reasons I was interested in pursuing change. I never had any desire to live as a celibate homosexual. Whichever way I went in life, I ultimately wanted to end up in a life-long relationship. I believed being gay would not allow that and thus I had no choice but to change. In therapy Nicolosi set me up with a support pen-pal named Nic who was my same age and also in college and a client of Nicolosi’s. Nic and I both felt the same way about wanting to have life-long relationships and viewed homosexuality as an impediment to that. Throughout our daily email correspondence (which continued on well after we both ended therapy) we both came to the realization that if (and it was a big IF a the time) either of us somehow ended up in a genuine, non-disfunctional same-sex relationship, that would be morally acceptable and we would be happy and ultimately be more willing to accept our affliction. Don’t misread that last sentence and think I got involved with Nic, I meant each of us having our own individual relationships. The summer of 2001 I was at home at my parents place and was romantically involved with a local guy for the summer. Also contrary to the stereotypes my first relationship was not about being taken advantage of or shame-filled unprotected sex but rather he was one of the most caring and compassionate guys I’ve ever been involved with. I don’t know anyone, gay or straight, who has had a better first relationship. Needless to say this pretty much shattered everything Nicolosi had told me about how same-sex relationships are doomed and supposedly about disfunction, power and satisfaction of carnal desires. Before that relationship there had been doubt cracks in the wall but afterwards I was ready to accept I was gay and would have relationships with guys on MY own terms, not the flawed sort Nicolosi told me I was doomed to.
Whatever. I grew up in a church that was part of the American Baptist Convention, in a suburb of Cincinnati OH. (That’s the northern baptist church) I got rid of them in 1960, when I was 10 years old. The minister railed against Catholic Kennedy’s candidacy because Kenney was a Catholic. That did it for me. The anti-catholic bigotry was evident, and, presumably, part of the Harlot Vatican, the Whore of Babylon. It was disgusting.
Thereafter, I brought science fiction books to read when I was dragged to church services by my parents. The SciFi books had more to do with reality than the ravings of the minister. It upset my parents, but I quite frankly didn’t give a damn (to quote Rhett Butler).
BTW, Nicolosi is an RCCi (Roman Catholic Church, Inc) nut who makes money (I believe that you get my drift) out of causing pain in others.
https://math.ucsd.edu/~weinrich/NCLSWNRC.HTML
My only issue early on was whether I would ever find a partner (I did). I had supreme confidence in myself. You should, too.
Thanks for sharing your Nicolosi story, Dan. My reparative therapist was more of a run-of-the-mill no-name ‘Christian counselor’ who somehow got the rep in my area of being the expert on sexual issues. It took more than a year of weekly appointments to figure out he had no clue what to say or do re: homosexuality. Soon after he gave me Cohen’s ‘Coming Out Straight’ to read, I timidly confronted him with the off-the-wall parts of the book and the blatant contradictions with his own counsel and other materials he provided. I discovered he had never read the book himself, but in return I was blasted (loudly lectured) for a full session on my lack of faith for asking questions. Needless to say, that was the end of reparative therapy for me. The bubble world of evangelical CW in ‘counseling’ ministries does not acknowledge the reality of healthy same-sex relationships. The revelation that they actually existed changed everything for me, and I appreciated reading your testimony of how the same was true for you.
Thanks for sharing your story Dan. It was a very brave thing to do — especially in your description of your relationship with Nicolosi as having beneficial aspects. That was particularly brave, and not likely to be very popular. (e.g. “Whatever.”)
We need to understand the reparative proponents with a clear eye, with all of their complexities because we’re battling real people, not two-dimensional cutout props.
Daniel, when you say you were attracted to alpha males do you mean attracted to what you believed their physical appearance to be, or to what you believed their personality to be (i.e. the way you thought they’d treat you versus the way you wanted alpha males to look)?
How did the man in your first relationship differ from the alpha males you thought you were attracted to? Nicolosi doesn’t seem to recognize that this de-mystifying process can cut both ways. Its inevitable that as one gets to know someone you find they differ from the ideal you’re attracted to. That works to seperate heterosexual couples as well as gay couples. Dan you say your desire for alpha males diminished, but did your desire for men in general diminish or just change to a different type of man?
Posted by: raj at January 3, 2006 09:17 AM
Raj, that explains a lot to me. I don’t think very many children at that age from religious backgrounds get the kind of autonomy that would allow them to read sci-fi in church against their parents wishes. That may well be the better way to raise children, but I wonder if your experience makes it hard for you to understand somone like Daniel, or maybe a lot of people as most I know would have run the risk of mild to severe spankings for such autonomous actions. I think you were pretty fortunate and the “whatever” pretty dismissive of what I find to be very helpful in understanding all this anti-gay exgay business.
Raj, do you ever contribute anything positive here? Sheesh. (with friends like that…. comes to mind)
And Randi is right. Many of us were not raised to experience any kind of autonomy.
You strike me as the kind of person that expects everyone else to pull themselves up by the bootstraps when perhaps they weren’t even provided the boots in the first place.
Dan, thanks for sharing this. It mirrors my story in some ways…and is helpful in understanding the whole picture.
I also relate to experiencing some positives from the ex-gay experience, although I still think I could have gotten them without all the pain and extra baggage I got from my time as an ex-gay.
Jim Burroway at January 3, 2006 12:02 PM
“Thanks for sharing your story Dan. It was a very brave thing to do — especially in your description of your relationship with Nicolosi as having beneficial aspects. That was particularly brave, and not likely to be very popular.”
I think that illustrates a point that Dan, Mike, and others have both made here before and which I think it is important to remember.
The ex-gay ministries do some good, though usually not in their intended way. We’ve heard countless times about how gay people went through the programs and came out the other side as healthier happier gay people.
It is probably true that many guys and gals that approach the ex-gay ministries would not be comfortable approaching a counselor with a pro-gay perspective and the therapy received from a mental health professional can often outweigh the “gay is bad” agenda. I doubt this is always the case, but based on what I’ve heard here, it is at least sometimes the case.
What concerns me is that the ex-gay ministries don’t always have professionally trained and certified counselors, much less psychiatrists or psychologists.
If I could make three New Years wishes for ex-gay ministries, it would be this:
1. No more lies
2. No more unsubstantiated claims – if you aren’t willing to provide the support for your claims, then don’t make them. Based on “the calls to our center” or “my observations” or any other subjective criteria just isn’t honest.
3. No more unqualified “counselors”. If you don’t have credentialed staff, don’t offer counseling, reorientation, or any other mental health or “sexual healing” program.
In retrospect yes Nicolosi had me work to “demystify” the alpha-type males I was attracted to by getting to know them.
If porn is any guide, the “mystify/demystify” process(es) applies to sexual acts as well. 30 years ago gay men didn’t fantasize about licking ass very much. Rimming must be a popular craving today because almost every gay porn DVD includes a rimming scene. Anal sex has been mainstreamed as a heterosexual fantasy in much the same way. Vaginal sex is now strictly foreplay in straight porn. But that wasn’t always the case. Anal sex was a rare “perversion” in 1970s straight porn.
I’m not going to argue that sexual orientation can be modified as easily as types can be “demystified” or certain sexual acts popularized but our sexualities are not as immutable as we sometimes like to believe.
Thanks for sharing your experience…my experience wasn’t as pretty or as useful. The church I attended believed queerness was demon possession ala Derik Prince…As a self confessed homo I went through many fasts and exorcisms. The last exorcism was almost a kidnapping…I was taken to a remote farm house where a half dozen believers laid hands on me and shouted at me in tongues for what seemed to be hours….when they were through..I smiled…the next week I moved out of state….this was in 1976 near Columbiana, Ohio
I prefer straight porn to gay porn but am mystified by the prevalence of anal sex in it (which I do not enjoy watching). A straight friend says its the taboo aspect that’s a turn on, but I suspect many straight people don’t like all that anal sex in straight porn either – I think the porn producers are simply providing it on the basis that its the most “extreme” sex act they can portray and they are mistaken in thinking that’s what most people want. I don’t believe that they’ve popularized anal sex, I just think the public hasn’t been given any other choices in porn.
Timothy at January 3, 2006 01:51 PM
I believe that you are missing a couple of issues.
Regarding (1), how do you know that they believe that what they are saying is untrue? I believe that what they are saying is contraverted by the evidence, and, apparently, so do you.
Regarding (2), I agree. They should have something like 30 years of “counsellees” and they should be able to provide us with some indication as to their success rate over time. What percentage of their counsellees did not engage in homosex following their “therapy”? And how are we to know? Do they have people following them around to verify their stories? Decidedly not.
Regarding (3), it appears that they do not have counselors, qualified or not. They have ministers. There is a substantial difference.
1630r at January 3, 2006 03:22 PM
30 years ago gay men didn’t fantasize about licking ass very much.
Don’t bet on it.
One of the major problems with Nicolosi and his ilk is that they encourage people like Dan to believe they can’t have a happy, productive supportive same sex relationship under any circumstances. That’s a lie and until that at a minimum stops I don’t see how they can be considered anything other than anti-gay. Nothing wrong with helping someone with their self-image, low self esteem, or depression, but doing so doesn’t exonerate them from being also destructively anti-gay.
Randi Schimnosky at January 3, 2006 03:57 PM
I prefer straight porn to gay porn but am mystified by the prevalence of anal sex in it (which I do not enjoy watching).
It’s probably a formula. A couple of years ago, I read a portion of an interview with gay-porn director Chi Chi Larue in which he (or she, I don’t know which) opined that other forms of sex (oral, frottage) were far more erotic than anal sex, but he (or she) believed that they needed to provide an anal segment in order to sell the videos.
Long&short: it’s all about marketing.
raj at January 3, 2006 04:04 PM
“I believe that you are missing a couple of issues.”
No, I’m not missing any “issues” when it comes to the three wishes I am making. But please feel free to make whatever wishes you like.
Thanks for the correction. Generally, though, you may want to be better informed before correcting others. When you make erroneous statements like “they do not have counselors, qualified or not” without bothering to find out if you’re right (you’re not), you run the risk of appearing to be a blowhard jackass.
Just a friendly suggestion
🙂
Randi Schimnosky at January 3, 2006 04:27 PM
One of the major problems with Nicolosi and his ilk is that they encourage people like Dan to believe they can’t have a happy, productive supportive same sex relationship under any circumstances.
This may be true, but I have one question. What drove Dan into Nicolosi’s clutches in the first place? Nicolosi is Catholic. It appears (unless I misread Dan’s post) that Dan was raised in the American Baptist tradition. From my experience, American Baptists don’t particularly care for Catholics. Southern Baptists are even worse.
It was largely because of the anti-Catholic bigotry of my American Baptist minister that I gave up on “establishments of religion.”
Timothy at January 3, 2006 04:51 PM
As you wish. I suppose that anyone can set up a couch and do “question&answer” sessions and call him- or her-self a counselor. Dr. Phil is a counselor. Dr Laura is a counselor (she has a certificate, after all, for what that’s worth). Sally Jesse Raphael is a counselor. I could name others.
Regarding
Thanks for the correction. Generally, though, you may want to be better informed before correcting others.
one might presume that you have evidence to support your point. Your evidence that the ex-gay “ministries” have credentialed counselors on-staff, and the nature and source of the credentials is precisely, what?
Thank you for your story. I can sympathize with your expierences of crack pottery. I’m really glad to see that you came out of it okay. I will just add another expierence to the thread, after my latest session I was asked if my attraction to puerto rican men was a symptom of my failed relations with my white father and if I was afraid to be intimate with men of my own race. I laughed and said ‘No, I just like the way they fuck.’ Anyways sorry for the interlude. And yes they are stupid anti gay weirdos that cost 80 dollars for half an hour
raj,
first, it took me less than a minute to find five ex-gay ministries in California alone affiliated with Exodus which listed yes in the “Professional Counsel” category. Of these, it appears that at least some are psychologists.
https://www.exodus-international.org/ministry_pages/ministry-ca.shtml
But the greater question is: when I pointed out that your “correction” was incorrect, rather than apologize (the appropriate action) or at least find out if you were right (the smart action), you tried to cross-examine me.
And having a friendly reminder that you might not be right didn’t even slow you down. You question Randi’s statement with “This may be true, but I have one question. What drove Dan into Nicolosi’s clutches in the first place?”
This was so very clearly laid out in Daniel’s original post that it makes me wonder if you even bothered to read it. The entire second paragraph of Daniels story tells EXACTLY why Daniel went to Nicolosi.
Raj, it can be very frustrating trying to communicate with you. It does not seem to me that you are having a two-way discourse but rather are like the guy so determined to make his point that he’s shouting over the other.
Just for the sake of the rest of us can you please for a while try to restrict your opinions to things you know something about, make sure your “facts” are factually based, and save your corrections for when they are correct.
Raj said (to Timothy):
one might presume that you have evidence to support your point. Your evidence that the ex-gay “ministries” have credentialed counselors on-staff, and the nature and source of the credentials is precisely, what?
Actually, the onus is (once again) on you Raj, for making the first statement:
…it appears that they [ex-gay ministries] do not have counselors, qualified or not. They have ministers. There is a substantial difference.
Timothy challenged that statement because you gave no proof to back up such a broad assumption. So the proper question here would first be:
Raj, one might presume that you have evidence to support your point. Your evidence that none of the ex-gay ministries have counselors, qualified or not, on-staff but have only ministers; and the nature and source of your evidence is precisely, what?
It lowers the standards of discourse when you constantly demand of others what you rarely, if ever, are willing to provide yourself. And when you do provide it, you do so to mock those who have politely and patiently requested that you do so. There are sites that indulge that sort of thing and the atmosphere around them reflects that. I would hope that XGW does not degrade into such a place.
David
Timothy at January 3, 2006 05:46 PM
This was so very clearly laid out in Daniel’s original post that it makes me wonder if you even bothered to read it. The entire second paragraph of Daniels story tells EXACTLY why Daniel went to Nicolosi.
No, Timothy, it did not, and apparently you missed my point. Dan said that he had been raised in the American Baptist tradition. I was too. Why would Dan be referenced to Nicolosi, who was a Roman Catholic? From my experience, the American Baptist tradition doesn’t particularly like Roman Catholics. That was my question.
ReasonAble at January 3, 2006 05:53 PM
Another chicken&egg issue, right? Presumably Timothy can provide some evidence for his original assertion. Along with some evidence that his assertion should be taken seriously.
I’m not trying to be mean. I’m trying to do cross-examination. It is usually during cross-examination that the truth comes out.
Raj said:
Another chicken&egg issue, right? Presumably Timothy can provide some evidence for his original assertion. Along with some evidence that his assertion should be taken seriously.
I have no idea what that means, but the original assertion was yours.
I’m not trying to be mean. I’m trying to do cross-examination. It is usually during cross-examination that the truth comes out.
And how many people do you suppose come to XGW to be “cross-examined”?
David
raj,
First,
raj at January 3, 2006 06:13 PM
“The entire second paragraph of Daniels story tells EXACTLY why Daniel went to Nicolosi.
No, Timothy, it did not, and apparently you missed my point.”
STOP!!!! Don’t draft your response. Go back and read the second paragraph at the very beginning of this thread.
WAIT!! Now really go back and read it.
As Daniel clearly said, he wasn’t looking for a religious solution. You don’t need to wander off on all your theories about Baptists and Catholics. He read the guy’s book and decided to go to him. Simply enough for all us rational folk. Maybe from “your experience” you know something about Daniel’s reasoning that is different than he – or the rest of us – knows but somehow I doubt it.
Second,
raj at January 3, 2006 06:15 PM
“Another chicken&egg issue, right? Presumably Timothy can provide some evidence for his original assertion. Along with some evidence that his assertion should be taken seriously.”
1. No it isn’t chick & egg. It’s the rules of civil discourse. If you challenge someone AND YOU’RE WRONG, then you should stop bluffing and apologize.
2. Was the link I provided not enough for you? Or did you decide you didn’t have time to go look at it?
Or is it your style to just pretend not to see anything that doesn’t support your position of the moment?
Timothy Kincaid at January 3, 2006 06:44 PM
First, I can’t figure this out. How many “Timothies” are there around here?
On the point of the comment
As Daniel clearly said, he wasn’t looking for a religious solution.
I doubt that. What did he believe he would get from the director of the Thomas Aquinas Psychological Clinic, and the author who dedicated his book to the priest who had founded the homosexual ministry “Courage”? Aquinas was not entirely secular, and neither was the priest, and frankly apparently neither was Nicolosi.
Let’s get something straight. I am not trying to attack Dan–far from it. I am trying to understand why he, after having been raised in the American Baptist tradition, would go to someone who had an obvious conservative Roman Catholic ax to grind. It seems incongruous. Maybe he was desparate (I don’t know why he would be). But a Baptist going to a conservative Catholic strikes me as being a bit incongruous.
Dan might not have been looking for a “religious solution” but it should be evident that the solution that he got himself embroiled in stemmed from a religious point of view. It’s unfortunate that Dan didn’t realize that when Nicolosi got him in his clutches, but it really is true.
I grew up in the American Baptist tradition, too, and was moderatly interested in the Catholic litergy, liked my friends who were Catholic (who were more secular than not) but otherwise paid no attention to the issue.
Regarding “Was the link I provided not enough for you? Or did you decide you didn’t have time to go look at it?” I went to look at it. I’m going to cut to the chase Three points. One, you have no idea whether any of these people have a religious ax to grind. Neither do I.
Two, when I was in engineering school in the late 1960s and early 1970s, the people who originally entered engineering school but couldn’t hack it, transferred either to business or psychology. That’s one reason that I hold psychology in such low esteem. There are other reasons.
Three, Dr Laura has a “certificate” in some kind of family counselling. Apparently, all that is required to be considered a counsellor is a certificate, a microphone and a couch. The certificate is probably optional.
Raj, where do you suppose Dan should go for “exgay” conditioning other than a religiously motivated source? There are none as far as I know.
I think I have to tell a story here.
My best friend M, a young gay man is energetic and uncomplicated. And was gleefully anticipating seeing a high school friend he hadn’t seen for ten years.
She was bringing her best friend and roommate along as well.
My houseguest J, son of a famous anti abortion, anti gay activist was in attendance and the five of us, shared a huge meal at an Italian restaurant, replete with good red wine.
During the coarse of our visit, we entertained each other. Our conversation was lively all day. Lots of laughter. M, read his poetry to us.
Three straight women, two gay men. Mixed of color and geography.
One of the girls had been betrayed by a gay boyfriend, who hadn’t told her he was gay.
She was bewildered at his dishonesty, but not bitter. Her humor helped her to take it in stride. And as she has other gay men friends, I doubt the ex gay or anti gay would have been able to use her single negative experience to color her attitude.
Interestingly, all of us women had experienced horrendous female organ trouble.
Years of pain, erratic cycles and invasive, difficult and painful treatments had all left us sterile. One of the girls had had a complete hysterectomy at age 23. I had mine at age 41. The other’s is deformed and it’s of no use.
Imagine that.
All of us without ovaries, or any other pertinent internal organs that make us female.
Yet, we knew, all of us in that room the pain of the stereotypes that makes us seem worthless to the human race.
We will produce no children, and long lost interest in doing so, for our own emotional healing.
J, the son of the anti abortionist, is also anti abortion.
But he listened with the utmost sensitivity. We as women, wanted our health care pros to deal with US, and OUR needs.
WE deserved the ultimate decision and ultimate responsibility, because WE bear the ultimate risks and always will.
the profession of ob/gyn is becoming unpopular and difficult. Pharmacists now take their moral objections to work with them to withhold vital medications from women (but not men), with no regard to the risks they put the patient in.
My point to all this?
There was a time when polygamy and women’s requirement to arrange their entire lives around the nurture of a living child was necessary JUST for survival of those who bear human fruit.
Now, that time is past.
The worth of procreation, and those capable of it is no longer an ultimate pursuit.
But one of choice, not necessity.
Despite war, famine, tsunami, quake and hurricane…these have barely made a dent in the number of human population and the movement of it from continent to continent.
Is it the QUALITY of life the human population we pursue to increase, or simply QUANTITY that matters still?
But why?
Gay men, mostly love women. Gay men are the sometimes gentler version of their hetero peers.
The more civilizing go between of that which devils men and women at the extremes of heterosexuality.
Why would the female friendly nurturing gay men do be a PROBLEM?
Same goes for lesbians, the stronger, less willing to succumb to procreative urges of their hetero sisters.
The median that delivers women’s concerns beyond children, but intellectual discourse for men to respect.
The ‘purpose’ of homosexuality is very clear and potent:
without that bridge, men and women are lost and violent with one another.
Those natural norms, are stormy and confusing. Without those who can ‘see’ and ‘feel’ the concern of the other, we are at risk.
Their value brought DOWN to the animal instinct to have children, not simply additional intellectual instinct that engages creativity, invention, physical prowess, that also protects and serves the entire community.
Not just that which brings the young, but also nurtures the other aspects young children need outside of their parents.
We three women, were in the company of two men who loved us. Would be gentle with us. And in common we’d never bear children and our worth is far beyond that and has had to be brave.
Our fruit is not children, but something the world will still need.
And always has.
Changing someone from gay to straight, forces a person into an intense discipline, better put to other use.
MORE heterosexuals, as if there weren’t enough…at this point in time, is more redudant than ever, reductive of the worth of homosexuality and most of all….leaves straight people adrift in their own steaming, flaring, naturally combustible juices.
Randi Schimnosky at January 4, 2006 11:37 AM
That was, kinda, my point.
Randi,
I understand your point but I think your statement may not be accurate.
NARTH is (purportedly) not religious in nature. I suspect the motivation is there but the process (from what I can tell) is not.
We know that before the 60’s, that many non-religious therapysts offered converstion therapy. I highly suspect that some of those offering such therapy now (or sympathetic to such therapy) do so from a sense that heterosexuality is a happier, heathier, more natural state, rather than from the dictates of a religious text.
When we lump all ex-gay practitioners into the same category, we lose our ability to understand them. And without understanding their full motivations and proceses we cannot either sway those who are rational with facts or counter the polital efforts of those who are not. This type of stereotyping weakens us, not those who oppose us.
From Dan’s description above, it appears that though Nicolosi may have had personal religious convictions, his therapy was not about religious conversion. And though some here may rudely discount Dan’s testamony, I think Dan is being truthful.
I believe your point was, though, that religion is the most prominant motivation for those offering reorientation therapy. And that is clearly the case.
However, what I think others are misunderstanding (perhaps on purpose) is that someone seeking secular counsel is not particularly interested in the religious background of the counselor. This is why an Episcopalian seeking advice on relationships doesn’t care if Dr. Goldberg is Jewish and why Dan, seeking SECULAR counseling on orientation, didn’t care if Dr. Nicolosi is Catholic.
Raj said:
Two, when I was in engineering school in the late 1960s and early 1970s, the people who originally entered engineering school but couldn’t hack it, transferred either to business or psychology. That’s one reason that I hold psychology in such low esteem.
Could this evidence be more anecdotal? Raj, your disdain for anything resembling fact continually amazes me. With all due respect, you appear to be a walking bundle of bias.
David
Timothy Kincaid said:
However, what I think others are misunderstanding (perhaps on purpose) is that someone seeking secular counsel is not particularly interested in the religious background of the counselor.
Exactly. It seems that some who may have the proverbial chip on their shoulder concerning matters of faith develop a type of one-dimensional thinking with these matters. I saw the same psychiatrist for several years and to this day I honestly have no idea what her personal religious convictions are. She addressed mine with great care and professionalism, but injecting her own would not have been appropriate I don’t think.
David
I have only recently emerged from reparative therapy and feel it could be useful to share a few details concerning my own experiences.
My therapist worked mainly with adolescents, and, at the time when my family first contacted him, several years ago, he worked in the Thomas Aquinas clinic with Nicolosi. I am sure, from reading the description, that my experiences were very similar to Daniel’s–analyzing every interaction with males, deluding myself into thinking I was beginning to like girls, etc. It was a highly devastating process– made even more so by my therapist’s insistence that I befriend the guys in my high school I was most attracted to. While I believed I was pursuing friendships, my interest in these guys often reached the point of unhealthy obsession. It was not friendship that I was really interested in, but rather I was cultivating safe, controlled crushes.
While my motivation for pursuing change was primarily religious, even then I had the sense to not pursue an LIA type ministry– My thinking was that if homosexuality were something I could pray away it would have already happened, and I didn’t need a boot camp to teach me to do so. While Nicolosi may have be Catholic, and I was raised in a Baptist family, I was not aware of Nicolosi’s religious alignment until I read this post. My therapist purported to be a “Christian” counselor, but we rarely spoke of religious issues and he often fell under fire from my parents–particularly my mother–for not being religious enough.
This just goes to show that even when someone seeks change on religious grounds, you can wind up in unreligious settings. While my therapist probably finds the base for his work against homosexuality in religious beliefs, his primary concern was developing my self-esteem and personal independence. When I told him several months ago that I was leaving therapy and beginning to believe that God was OK with me being gay, he said that he was, “happy for me no matter what route I took, so long as I was making my own decisions in life.”
While religious beliefs are typically–but not always–at the center of a therapist’s conviction against homosexuality, my therapist truly believed that homosexuality was a less fulfilling lifestyle. Nevertheless, I will give him credit for being more interested in seeing my development as a whole person and encouraging me to be open, thoughtful, and introspective. If not for much of the thinking-for-myself that he taught me, I probably would have never had the strength to realize what a sham all the ex-gay stuff truly was.
ReasonAble at January 4, 2006 04:43 PM
Could this evidence be more anecdotal?
I’m not exactly sure what your point is. Each datum is anecdotal. At some point, a set of data becomes a trend.
Regarding psychology, I will give you one hideous example: the so-called “recovered memory” practice, which was used by psychological counsellors to convict people who ran day-school operations in more than a few states, including here in Massachusetts. In many cases, the convictions were overturned after it became clear that “recovered memory” was pretty much a fraud. So much for psychology.
Posted by: Timothy Kincaid at January 4, 2006 03:40 PM
Timothy, I never said the process at Narth was religious, just that the motivation to provide such a “service” was. Last time I was on Narth’s site they had a prominent link to religious sites (I’d give a link if its still there, but I’m on dialup and conserving my five hours/month – I’m financially challenged). As I understand it Exodus also refers clients to Narth’s St. Aquinas
clinic and before they’ll do so the “therapy” provider must sign a pledge something to the effect that the provider agrees the bible is the final arbiter on right living and moral issues.
I agree Dan probably didn’t care what the religious background of the “therapy” provider was. Maybe we’d know that if Raj hadn’t scared him off from answering questions by trivializing his generous invitation to know his private life.
I strongly question the sincerity of exgay shops usage of the secular argument that heterosexuality is a happier, heathier, more natural state. Its been my experience that religious people believe its okay to make anti-gay secular arguments without admitting they personally don’t believe their own argument because of an obvious failing in the position they’ll rarely acknowledge. A reasonable person acknowledges the existence of homosexuality throughout nature and history as a natural state. No doubt Nicolosi, Throckmorton, Exodus, etc. are aware many GLBTs are offended by that continuum ignorant idea that heterosexuality is a happier, healthier, more natural outcome – precisely because there are happy and healthy GLBTs who are naturally together well into old age. Regardless of how many unhappy unhealthy GLBTs there might be the happy and healthy ones derserve to be acknowledged as desirable outcomes, not to have their relationships unconditionally opposed.
Posted by: raj at January 5, 2006 06:00 AM
Raj, by the same token does that mean the many prominent failures of the legal system are reason to dismiss it, i.e. “so much for the legal system”? I’m thinking specifically of those states where DNA testing has exonerated more death row inmates than were actually on death row.
If you feel psychology has no successes or is primarily about failures, that’s a bit of a different story. Other than that I don’t see why you’d want to dismiss the effort any more than you’d want to dismiss the effort at law enforcement just because most cops aren’t engineers and error prone judgement calls are an unavoidable part of doing the best that can be done.
Posted by raj at January 4, 2006 08:36 AM
Posted by raj at January 5, 2006 06:00 AM
Raj, you are quite a piece of work. You seem to fancy yourself as a critical thinker but your arguments come across as those of a Ufologist. If you can use a few college mates switching majors to invalidate the field of Psychology – and actually believe that – more power to you.
Any further debate would truly be a waste of time and energy.
David
I enjoyed your story and find it encouraging as I struggle with these same feelings.
thewardcleaverfiles.blogspot.com
Ward Cleaver at January 5, 2006 05:38 PM
Is that your real name? It reminds me of Leave It To Beaver.
randi,
“Timothy, I never said the process at Narth was religious, just that the motivation to provide such a “service” was.”
Fair enough. Sorry, I didn’t mean to put words in your mouth.
While I agree with your assessment that most ex-gay practioners come to their position from a religious basis, I’m not yet willing to make “all” or “none” statements about this.
“A reasonable person acknowledges the existence of homosexuality throughout nature and history as a natural state.”
Well yes, many do. But I’m certain that there are reasonable persons who do not (just because they disagree with us does not mean that their position is lacking in thought or reason). And not all of their objections are religious in nature. Some may be cultural or simply the application of their own experiences.
I don’t think we’re that far apart. But we differ by a factor of “most” and “all”. Perhaps we’re arguing the opposite sides of the same coin.
Randi Schimnosky at January 5, 2006 11:58 AM
Raj, by the same token does that mean the many prominent failures of the legal system…
Cite chapter&verse. What are you referring to?
Actually, I hold the US legal system in fairly low regard, too. Most judges at the state level are elected, and most determinations are made by juries.
If you are particularly referring to the OJSimpson case, the prosecution’s loss there could probably be laid on their incompetence. If they couldn’t tell their story in a couple of weeks (a murder trial is a story) they didn’t have a story to tell. That’s the long&short of it. The prosecution dragged out their “story” for months. It was ridiculous.
Posted by: raj at January 5, 2006 06:08 PM
No, Raj, I wasn’t thinking of the OJ case, I was thinking of perhaps Illinois or Texas where the governer put a halt to all death row executions because more inmates had been proved wrongfully convicted by DNA evidence than were actually convicted. To me its an expensive hassle to check it out over dial up so you are welcome to hold me in similarly low regard as you do the legal system and psychological profession. By the way, its nice to have you clarify you’re opinion on the legal system although it is what I had suspected. Also, thanks to Ex-Gay Watch for having pages that download quickly.
Oops, I meant to say “more inmates were proven wrongfully convicted by DNA evidence than inmates who weren’t”.
Randi Schimnosky at January 5, 2006 11:58 AM
Randi, you’re wasting your time. Don’t expect a rational intelligent conversation that considers your points and concedes when wrong, and you won’t be disappointed.
Occasionally I’ll forget that and try to argue or reason with raj but eventually I just return to the realization that it’s pointless. I’ve found the best thing to do is to ignore him. He’s not interested in your opinions or your position or your experiences. He’s not going to acknowledge his errors even when you make them glowingly obvious. Forget it, save yourself the frustration.
However, if you’re looking for thoughtful debate with people who will both learn from you and also give you their perspective, most everyone else is here for that purpose.
Yeah, we’re all opinionated, but that’s what makes it interesting. Sometimes we all forget to be courteous, but usually will draw back in when reminded. And we’re all here to contribute. That’s what I love about this site.
Dan, Thanks for your personal story. I am a 61 year old divorced man that still has not found his way — still in conflict about my faith and my SGA (same-gender-attraction — I use “gender” instead of “sex” because the sex is only a part of my drive — I’d probably be more appropriately termed “homo-emotional” — for me it is the relationship aspect for which I long). Anyway, I was in an ex-gay ministry in 1996 and 1997 and was asked to leave when I fell in love with a guy 20+ years younger.
I began “c”hristian psychological therapy when I entered the ex-gay ministry. (I use a lowercase “c” because Christianity/christianity is relative to one’s experience, beliefs and actions — the only thing I experienced in therapy that was Christian was a rare use of the Bible — there was no agape love, no prayer, and for the most part the counseling was not based on Christ). The therapist, to whom I was referred by the Exodus referral ex-gay ministry, was a licensed psychologist who also was used by Love-In-Action for their participants.
While the ex-gay ministry did help me to learn about the roots of my homo-emotional needs and desires, they did not in the long run help me overcome those desires. In fact, I learned more, from the other participants, about how to fulfill the desires, than how to lessen those desires.
All of the small group leaders were also “strugglers” and all eventually, within only a few years, were back in the gay lifestyle. I do not know the story of all of the men, but for those I do know, there were none who became free of the desires. Some are living celibate; some are married, and some living openly gay lives. At least one lives in a state of deception, portraying himself to be “ex”, but found in gay chat rooms, X-rated book stores, and having sexual encounters, and he till says he is “ex”, not even honest with himself.
Regarding the psychologist, at the time I was ex-communicated from the ex-gay ministry, I was also going though a marriage separation and the psychologist was able to help me with that to some degree. Eventually I was no longer benefiting from psychological therapy and I ended the sessions. It was at that time that the psychologist became verbal abusive and hostile.
If you wonder why I married in the first place, I do not have an answer other than I had not yet accepted the fact that I was attracted to other men and it was the late-60s (a different time), and I didn’t know any other gay men, nor even where to look for them. Using your terminology, I simply “ignore[d] the same sex attractions.” But those attractions do not lie dormant forever. In time they resurfaced and grew in strength. The more I was starved for that which I needed, the stronger the drive to quench that thirst.
So here I am, still gay; still love Jesus, but still torn an, therefore, unable to live either life with satisfaction. I don’t go to gay bars or have any other gay connections. Men I’ve met through gay websites and dating sites are either married or long-distance or only have sex in mind. When I tell church men them of my struggle, instead of receiving some Christian Love and support that could help assuage the desires, I am rejected either openly or subtly, but in either case I’m left out in the cold and if I want companionship and friendship on any level, I have no place to turn except a life of loneliness or searching for the elusive male-male relationship.
My test result for Tickle.com’s test “Who’s the Man of Your Dreams?” is “The Boy Next Door”, which is very accurate (Jack on Dawson’s Creek). But I will also put some thought into “what is it about this guy that I’m drawn to?” and “what does my attraction to this guy represent about my own self image”, but only to the point of understanding myself, and to redirect any unrealistic attractions to the realm of possibility.
In the mean time I have occasional encounters with guys, but there is no relationship potential, and I also have started attending a different church just for some general teaching and some activities to the men’s group. Shhhh! “Don’t ask, don’t tell.” But from experience, I know that is a phase and it will not likely last either.
Raj, you can criticize or contradict me all you want, but this is my story and it is irrefutable!
Thank you for sharing your story, i am searching the internet to find ways to help me “not to be gay” im only young and am engaged to a lovely beautiful woman who i love, but those desires and fantasys about other guys kick in when they are around me. I have a very good friend (straight) who is very loving, by this i mean he hugs and just a genuine nice guy, but when he hugs me i try my best to make it last and i cant stand the way i feel. My heart is with my fiancee but my mind seems to be guys. Reading your story has made me think alot and i will be returning ofen to read again to refresh my mind and i will hopefully find peace with my heart and mind.
Thanks again for sharing your story, you really are helping people out there who like me need it
Kyle,
I do hope you stick around and read what people have to say. But let me give you some initial advice, if I may.
First, don’t marry this woman until you know for certain that you are not at all attracted to men. This is non-negotiable. If you do, you will only hurt her and yourself. If you are in the state right now where you are questioning your sexuality, STOP THE ENGAGEMENT. And be completely honest with her about the reason. If she’s meant to be your mate, you both can wait.
Second, take an honest look at yourself and try to figure out what is going on. If you find yourself romantically attracted to your fiance but not physically or sexually attracted, then the odds are that you are not a straight guy – and you need to be completely honest with yourself about that.
Third, you need to ask yourself why you don’t want to be gay. Is this for a religious reason? Is it because you want to be “like the other guys”? Is it because you think that gay people are weird or uncool? Is it because you think it’s a more difficult life?
Because if you decide to try and be ex-gay, you have to be aware of some facts.
First, everyone agrees that the vast majority of people who try to be ex-gay do not continue their efforts.
Second, most ex-gay men are not what you would call “straight”. Very few, if any, reach a state where they generally find women attractive and do not find men attractive at all. Some ex-gays are able to find one woman attractive, but not women in general. Others decide that they are not able to love a woman the way she should be loved and choose celibacy instead. But please know that even if you go through an ex-gay program, you will still not be “one of the guys”.
If your concerns are about being liked or social conformity or really anything other than devout religious convictions, you have almost no chance of changing your orientation. And even if your concerns are religious, your odds are quite low.
My final advice is to chill out for a bit. Disentangle yourself from your relationship and spend some time with just yourself – no girls or guys. Before you do anything rash, do a lot of reading. And introspection. Don’t make any decisions – either to marry, try ex-gay therapy, experiment with a guy, nothing – for six months. Just listen and think. After that’s over I bet you will know what is right for you.