A critique of the Journey Into Manhood claims of change.
Recently, People Can Change issued a press release (PDF) suggesting 79% of respondents reported (PDF) a decrease in frequency or intensity of homosexual feelings as a result of participating in a Journey Into Manhood weekend retreat. Furthermore, in supporting documents, they indicate 13% of the respondents now consider themselves to be straight, all thanks to a two-day retreat. However, as with so many other claims of change, they are without any substance.
People Can Change queried 500 men who had participated in the retreats ranging from 6 months to 5.5 years prior to the study. They suggest 45% of the 500 men queried responded to the survey and that the results of the survey are consistent with other studies demonstrating homosexuals can change: specifically, a 1997 study from NARTH, Robert Spitzer’s controversial 2003 peer-reviewed article, and the recent Jones and Yarhouse book Ex-gays?
By referencing the other studies, People Can Change hopes to give their survey an aura of scientific credibility. However, neither the NARTH study nor Jones and Yarhouse’s book is peer-reviewed by qualified scientists and both are riddled with methodological problems (see my exchange with Stanton Jones on Ex-gay Watch for more information on the Jones and Yarhouse study). Although Spitzer’s study is peer-reviewed and published in a respected journal, it also has serious methodological problems that render the conclusions suspect.
The People Can Change survey is entirely unreliable from a scholarly perspective. The survey is retrospective, relying on participants to reflect on their original condition prior to the retreat. It is well established that retrospective data are not reliable. The respondents’ sexual orientation is based entirely on self-report: neither the Kinsey scale nor any other scientifically recognized measure is used. Furthermore, People Can Change does not provide definitions for any of the terms and categories they use. These problems alone render the study completely unreliable. Add to it additional methodological problems and one is left with a survey more appropriate for the rubbish bin than a serious discussion.
—
Patrick M. Chapman has a PhD in biological anthropology and is author of “Thou Shalt Not Love”: What Evangelicals Really Say to Gays (Haiduk Press: in press).
One of the co-creators of the Journey into Manhood weekend is David Matheson. He was my therapist for several years, while he was part of Nicolosi’s practice in Encino CA.
I’m sure David’s weekend is every bit as effective and helpful in changing sexual orientation as the years I spent talking to him once a week. (Did I mention that I’m now an out-and-happy ex-ex-gay?) If only I’d known! I could have boiled all those sessions down to one weekend and saved a pile of money.
That 13% is very similar to J&Y’s 15%, and we all know from that landmark study that change is possible in an ambiguous, complicated sort of a way.
If that is the best that can produce, well then, it’s just another form of silliness masquerading as science and truth.
PS good for you, nick.
13% just sounds a bit more scientific than 15%, which sounds more like a rounded off estimate. They both seem about 13 to 15 percentage points too high for complete, uncomplicated change from gay to straight.
They also include Jim Phelan in their list of therapy referrals.
I find it just offensive that they call this event “Journey into Manhood.” I mean, it’s like saying gay males have no manhood because they are gay; that the only thing that defines your manhood is who you sleep with. What makes a man to ME is being a good and honorable person. A “real man” isn’t simply a grunting tough guy who plays football. Please.
You mean all those “who can piss the farthest” contests at deer-hunt camping didn’t prove to anyone my masculinity?
I believe that Journey into Manhood is based on the New Warriors weekend, which has been discussed here previously. David Matheson was getting very involved in New Warriors at the end of my time with him, and was trying to get me to sign up for a weekend.
Getting back to the claim about how many participants “change’ through this weekend, the point that always bothers me is the idea that any ability to feel some heterosexual attraction or functioning constitutes a change in orientation.
I’ve made this point frequently in the past, but will say it again for the record:
As an ex-gay, I was married 26 years and had no problem at all in my sexual relationship with my wife. I felt attraction to her and we had a very good sex life for a long time. So by the definition of People Can Change, I had “changed.” But the fact remains: my basic orientation always remained 100% homosexual.
Most of my closest gay friends my own age (mid-50s) were also married, and the same can be said for them. My partner got married purely as a publicity stunt when he was working in a fashion design business, and even he had a very successful marriage for 14 years and has a son. Yet he and all the other friends I’m talking about will all tell you that their sexual orientation is exclusively gay. Not bisexual, not fluid, but gay.
(I have friends who are bisexual, by the way. Just not the guys I’m talking about here.)
The ability to feel some attraction to the opposite sex and function in a heterosexual relationship does NOT constitute change of orientation. So please–whether it’s Jones and Yarborough or People Can Change–stop trotting out these half-baked “Gosh, I feel something stirring” claims as evidence of anything.
Hi Nick,
With all due respect, I think a lot of people would say that anyone capable of having a good sexual relationship with a woman is not 100% homosexual. I would call you bisexual with strong homosexual leanings.
As a former adjunct professor that taught business statistics, I concur with much of Patrick’s critique. But I wish to approach this article from a more ‘spiritual’ than ‘statistical’ point-of-view.
I think it is good to note that these men had ‘unwanted’ SSA, and that they encountered a method that worked for them, and 13% are pleased with the results. I say ‘praise our Lord!’ Even if the statistics were half-correct, I will still praise Him. Even if 1% (one percent) were pleased, I would still praise Him.
For you see, it is the ‘handling’ of the statistical information that concerns me as a Christian much more than its lack of excellent accuracy.
I think that the main concern of mine has been for the men (and women) that have ‘unwanted’ SSA, and nothing has worked for them… I am wondering about the 87% that do not change to the level that brings them peace:
– Shall they be encouraged to struggle forever in conflict?
– Shall they be encouraged to marry in hopes that such marriage will end the internal conflict?
– Shall they be told that because they are in the vast majority of SSA ‘strugglers’ that do not ‘change’, that their legal rights shall be null and void when they choose a SSA partner for a life-time commitment?
– And what of those that have not ‘unwanted’ SSA, but ‘wanted’ SSA? Shall we demand that they change or face consequences from the state and city governments, and decry their religious experience as ‘deception’? Shall we assume that God has called them to celibacy, as if we know the mind of God for every person with SSA?
From my Christian perspective, I am watching much of the USA church ignoring or coming to grips with “Who are you to judge another man’s servant? To his own master he shall stand or fall, and God shall make him to stand.” [Romans 14] The individual conscience is what our Master views… not the outward behavior, but the heart. Statistics do not sway God. But a broken and contrite heart are of great value; a humble heart can move Him; and the ‘greatest in the kingdom of heaven’ is not the repentant heterosexual nor the repentant homosexual – the greatest in the kingdom is still, still, still ‘the servant of all’. [Matthew 23:11; Mark 9:35; 10:43; Luke 9:48; 22:26]
As God makes the 87% ‘to stand’ – as He teaches them via mercy, grace, acceptance, and faithfulness, of an ‘easy yoke and light burden’, and as He ‘binds up their wounds’ — I fear that much of the USA Church will race over to God and scream, “You foolish God! How dare you show mercy to the 87%!”
I fear that He will reply to His own people with gentle warning: “Judgment without mercy will be shown to the one that has not been merciful.” [James 2:13] Will they hear His rebuke or become more shrill?
It will be horrifying to such organizations to realize that God did indeed value the giving of ‘mercy, faithfulness, and justice’ as the ‘weightier’ value of the Law of Moses [Matthew 23:23]. I hope that we, who are peace with our Master – that understand and live before Him because ‘He has made us to stand’ – that we continue to humbly pray for our brothers- and sisters-in-Christ, for “ everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted.” [Luke 18:14].
I offer that we rejoice for those 13% that prayed for a miracle, and God gave it to them.
I offer that we rejoice for those of the 87% that God is willing to ‘make them to stand’.
But I also offer that we weep for those that are tempting our Lord to give them ‘judgment without mercy’.
That’s a bit confusing to me as well. I’m quite certain I could never even fake an intimate relationship with a woman, it’s just not in my ability to do so. I can certainly be good friends as long as there is no sexual pretense. From my discussions with straight male friends, I suspect it is similar to their inability to do the same with a man.
This truly is a complex issue. I have friends on various parts of the spectrum, but I know others that are like me – calling themselves Kinsey 6.5 in jest. In my own experience, I have met more people who claim to be strongly at one end or the other, and live that way.
When I read this – “Gay to straight in one weekend!” – the first think that came to my mind were adds of the kind – Go slim in one weekend! You know it’s not possible, let alone changing sexual orientation!
John, thanks for your input, but we do require a real email address from those who participate. It is never shared or disclosed, and only used for private, mostly technical matters if ever. Please enter one with your next comment should you decide to continue.
Thanks!
How true! I tried to go slim in 5 weekdays and ended up with liver inflammation and had to check in into the hospital for treatment. Such statements are really DUH!
As an ex-gay, I was married 26 years and had no problem at all in my sexual relationship with my wife. I felt attraction to her and we had a very good sex life for a long time. So by the definition of People Can Change, I had “changed.” But the fact remains: my basic orientation always remained 100% homosexual.
Quite a puzzling statement: I agree with the above comment: you are a bisexual with strong homosexual leanings.
After all, my gay friends tell me that the thought of having sex with a woman is a complete turn off, which is something different altogether.
I’ve been on vacation, so just catching up to the responses above.
I guess I can understand the puzzlement from some. I frequently find that gay men who’ve never been married cannot imagine ever having sex with a woman. But those who have been married or otherwise heterosexually involved–and I have many close friends in that category–generally agree that sex itself was not a problem, even if they regard themselves as exclusively homosexual.
I hope the following doesn’t get too creepy, but to define what I mean by “exclusively homosexual”: I myself have never experienced any level of sexual attraction toward women in general. I am not at all aroused by women visually–whether pornography or a beautiful woman in a swim suit lying next to me at the beach. I have never fantasized sexually about women. I feel no response (except a little “what do I do now?” panic) when a woman expresses sexual interest in me.
Before my marriage, right up to the wedding night, I was quite worried about how I would respond sexually. But I discovered that once the physical intimacy started, I could respond to the touch and sensations and fully enjoy the whole experience. Even then, I never got to the point where I responded to my wife visually. Sexy lingerie was totally wasted on me, unless it felt sexy. But it’s amazing what nerve endings alone can do when you let them take over!
Again, I don’t think this is unique for me. In my head right now I’m naming friends (… eight, nine, ten, and still counting) who have told me pretty much the same story.
Why is all this in the least important? Because the ex-gay industry keeps defining down “change” to mean “If you experience any heterosexual response or functioning at all, then you’ve changed.” That’s explicitly the standard used in the Jones & Yarborough study. It’s also the standard used in the “People Can Change” web site.
In response, I point out that plenty of gay men like me have been able to respond heterosexually in a particular relationship or particular circumstances without ever experiencing a change in the basic direction of our sexual attractions and feelings.
I repeat my assertion above: The ability to feel some attraction to the opposite sex and function in a heterosexual relationship does NOT constitute change of orientation.
NickC typed:
How about the breast augmentations some of my friends paid for! THAT was a bit of wasted money! Some of their wives thought it would help spark some more favorable sex and finally make them “click” into heterosexuality…or hope it would.
It didn’t work in any of the cases…they just closed their eyes when having sex. My friends admitted they fantasized about men when they had to climax. Did anyone use gay porno to help? Did anyone of them tape up pictures of naked men on their headboards? I am not sure. But nothing changed anything about their sexual orientation.
One silver lining: The breast augmentations certainly helped in assisting the ex-wives in finding a new hubby.
If I had to pay for breast implants I would be curious as to where the scars are and that’s about it. Okay…Okay…I would be curious as to how they feel too…purely on a medical basis. But there wouldn’t be any stirrings in my nether regions for me.
And as further proof: The new swimsuit catalogue from Victoria’s Secret just came yesterday in my mail. I haven’t even cracked open the first page.
And I maintain, women KNOW there is something amiss. How many say “looking back I should have seen the clues”.
I understand your viewpoints, but I guess we just go about our definitions a bit differently. we can agree to disagree, but basically, I feel that a distinction needs to be made between the physical act of having sex with a woman, and truly having sex with a woman and enjoying it in of itself.
Your experience with your wife is unique around where I’m from, and it just maybe that maybe I haven’t met enough people.
But, back to what I was saying about the distinction: If you have to close your eyes and fantasize about men during heterosexual sex, then you are basically masturbating in the presence of another human body. Rather than using your hand you are using another person’s body. This would make a person exclusively gay in my book–exclusive in that only masculinity can turn him on. At least in my own gay friends, this was a common thing–sex was not a problemin that outwardly they were following through with heterosexual intercourse, but internally and mentally it was anything but heterosexual.
However, if a man was able to *TRULY* enjoy sex with a woman without resorting to gay fantasies, this would make him anything but exclusively gay–probably some sort of bisexual with homosexual leanings of varying degrees. My best female friend who dated a closeted gay man will attest (and OH BOY was the man a HOTTY)–who simply cannot perform in the presence of a woman. They physically cannot get it up, and it is all but impossible to fool the woman into thinking that he is heterosexual. Instead, the woman just ends up thinking that maybe the problem is with her not being sexy enough. The woman can sense that something is not right. This latter point seems to have been touched upon to some degree already by other posters
(And it goes both ways too–guys who say they are “totally straight” but enjoy mutual “JO” masturbation sessions with other men (without the presence of any heterosexual stimulation, visual or otherwise) are anything but “totally straight,” at least in my book).
However, despite our semantical differences, I wholeheartedly agree with your assertion that heterosexual functioning is NOT indicative of change. Even if a “gay” man one day finds that he has a dual preference for vaginas, he did not “change,” no sir, he was probably bisexual from the start but didn’t know it. Instead, he discovered something new about himself already in existence.
Norman
This whole idea that a “truly gay” man can’t have fall in love and have sex with a woman, at least without fantasizing about a man, plays right into the self-deception of the ex-gay ministries. How often on this site and others have I read comments from someone like Peter Ould, saying “Look, I’m no longer gay because I’m married! And I truly love my wife! And yes, maybe all the rest of my sexual desires and fantasies focus on men, but I’M NOT GAY because I’ve been able to have sex with a woman!”
To me, it’s ridiculous to argue back that “you were actually bisexual all along and just didn’t know it.” I believe these ex-gays when they say their orientation was 100% homosexual. But I also can’t credit their claims as evidence of “change,” even toward bisexuality. That’s because I personally know so many gay men, including myself, who were able to maintain a successful heterosexual relationship without experiencing a change in their fundamental orientation.
(Sorry to leave out gay women here. I just don’t personally know lesbians with the same background.)
When a Peter Ould says–“I used to be gay, and now I’m happily married and am having a child, and what do you say to THAT?” I answer, “I was happily married 26 years and have three children and finally had to face the fact that I was still and always gay!”
In the long term, I think it is extremely difficult to sustain a strong heterosexual marriage when one partner is fundamentally homosexual by orientation. Even if the lovemaking is not a problem, there is always a missing element of the connection that should exist between spouses. And that is why this ex-gay delusion, that the ability to function in a marriage means you’ve “changed,” is ultimately so destructive.
A little comment on your comment, Nick. I consider myself 100% gay, and never anything else. Before I came out at 21, I thought maybe if I had sex with a woman, I would find out that maybe I could be straight after all. I didn’t have any problem with being gay, other than it seemed it would be a major inconvenience to me.
My first solution was to form very passionate attachments to my very straight buddies. I had a couple of girl friends, sorta, whom I made out with–no sex. But I never really had any interest in a girl friend.
When I was 25, 4 years after I came out, I finally had sex with a girl, much to my gay roommates surprise. (He thought at first she was a guy in drag!!!) It was BORING, to put it mildly. I remember thinking– if this is what straight guys get, thank G I’m gay!
4 years later, to the day, I embarked on a two week affairette with a girl, all with my then BF’s permission. It wasn’t boring. It was actually a lot of fun–for two weeks. But I just knew I wasn’t actually interested– it was novelty.
Over the years since, I’ve had some interest in bi porn, and even tried to instigate a ménage a couple of times, though it never went anywhere. But the point of the attraction was the other man, not the woman. No man there, and I wouldn’t be interested.
The point being, despite the “interest”, despite my experiences, I don’t have hetero bone in, or attached to, my body. Likewise, I am fairly knowledgeable about religious matters–interested– but I’m a thorough-going atheist (in a very peculiar sense I won’t explain here)– in other words, not attached to it.
NickC typed:
Oh so true! I have seen it with my happily married friends in just how they act with each other and that “element” lasts long after the honeymoon. However, I see that element missing in some of my gay-coupled friends. The act of co-habitation is not the complete picture of true happiness in gay or straight couples.
Not according to Mormons. The very act of pretending heterosexuality is enough to get you a pass to their Temple rituals and eventually a high place in their three-tiered heaven. A murderer who is married is probably on a higher status in their heaven than a homo. Of course, I may be wrong and it’s pure speculation since I haven’t obtained any census data from St. Peter’s roll book.
My parents met at a fundamentalist Bible college and were trained to raise their kids according to the doctrine of the most extreme right. I don’t doubt that my parents loved me, but they certainly were at a loss to hide their homophobia from me when they discovered that I’m a big ol’ sissy. So they encouraged me to date girls and finally to marry one in order to avoid the whole flamer in the inferno scenario.
At 20, I married my best friend (and fortunately she is so wonderful that we are STILL best friends even 14 years after our divorce) hoping that I would then be spared the specter of certain damnation. It didn’t make me straight. It may have instantly doubled my wardrobe, but it didn’t make me straight. That’s not to say that for the 3 years of our marriage I didn’t force myself to have sex with her (running reels of Antonio Banderas flicks in my mind) to fulfill my duties.
But I still wasn’t heterosexual at all. Just delusional. And dishonest.
I think it’s pretty funny that their “Change” logo with the “C-as-an-arrow” is a metaphor for change that, ironically, points people back to where they started.
I guess I’m an anomaly but as a gay man, I don’t find the thought of sex with a woman disgusting or unimaginable. True, I don’t walk around thinking about it, but gay men seem to get on the bandwagon too quickly about the disgustingness of having sex with women. I mean, c’mon guys–sometimes our lingering looks at the haircut, makeup, total female package just could be a little more than that. At least, I’ve entertained the fleeting thought of that anyway. Oh I know it’s not PC gay to think this way but I don’t find women repulsive. SO there! And for the record, to all you who come pre-offended, I’m not bisexual or a sell-out to my orientation either. It’s like this hombres, in “Chinatown” when Noah Cross says to Jake, “You see Mr. Gittes, what most people never have to face is that, in the right place at the right time, anything is possible.”
Gil said:
Not PC? The Kinsey scale is a range, so of course there are those who fit somewhere less than absolute this or that. If recent research has told us anything, it is that people often fit somewhere between the two extremes. Why would you feel like it was somehow taboo to say you had thought about women?
I don’t think you’re that much of an anomaly, just like I’ve talked to many straight men who aren’t disgusted by sex with a man. As David said, we’re all at different places on the scale, and I’m sure many of us move around a bit in our lifetimes. (As a result of a variety of factors, but very rarely because of a concerted decision or effort to change for religious reasons!)
I think “gay” and “straight” tend to be applied as convenient labels in public discourse, but in reality, they are often only very rough parameters. For example, I identify myself as “gay” because I am predominantly attracted to males, both romantically and sexually, but at the same time I’m not totally averse to finding a woman sexually attractive. If I was open to sowing a few wild oats, I’m sure I could have a good time with a woman in bed!
I’ve never felt it’s un-PC to express that. I think if anything it’s just a big effort to explain all the nuances all the time, so the labels “gay” and “straight” tend to be sufficient as rough indicators.
Full disclosure, I do happen to be one of those for whom there should be a Kinsey 6.5 😉
” For example, I identify myself as “gay” because I am predominantly attracted to males, both romantically and sexually, but at the same time I’m not totally averse to finding a woman sexually attractive. If I was open to sowing a few wild oats, I’m sure I could have a good time with a woman in bed!”
Well, thanks for being honest. There aren’t too many gay circles where one can actually say that without the tired bisexual vs. truly gay argument taking place. Gay men, I find, are becoming rigid and almost sexist in attitudes about women as we gain more public acceptance and advance on the careerist front. Undoubetedly a result of the old male privilege being exerted once we get a leg up in the world–Straight women are “beneath” us now.
It’s out there. And it’s nauseating, especially on these web forums. The way women and their body parts are trashed is disturbing.
Anyway, I, for one, don’t subscribe to the ME-MAN, YOU-LESS-THAN-WOMAN BS that straight men have been ridiculed for and I, as a gay man, will not be taking on any aspect of that boring mantle of sexist diatribe. It’s already been done anyway–read Henry Miller and Norman Mailer.
Oh dear, I guess I have to be the contrarian here.
I love women. They are great marvelous creatures but, personally… ick.
However, even though I am somewhat repulsed by the idea of heterosexual sex, I do fully support the equal rights of heterosexuals. 😉
You’re not the contrarian. Not really. You’re right on target with lots of even PC’d heterosexuals who when asked privately about gay male sex say,”eeyew!”
The difference is that the majority of us in the gay community feel we have the right to say”ick” and straight people don’t have the right to say “eeyew.” After all, that would be anti-gay or homophobic, capische…
I’m not offended, per se, by heterosexuals who say, “Ew,” at the thought of having gay sex themselves. I take it for granted that for many straight people, the idea of having sex with someone of the same sex is a big turn-off, just as straight sex is a big turn-off for many gays. In-between, there are all kinds of variations.
It all depends on how it’s expressed, and in what context.
What Rattigan said 😉
I have no problem whatsoever with straight folks that say “ewww”.
I just ask that they leave it at “ewww” and don’t try to pass laws.
What Timothy said 😉
When my oldest son was about 18, he seemed totally fascinated by everything gay. He was reading William Burroughs and Jean Genet and other gay authors; he talked all the time about his many gay friends.
One day I asked him, “What’s going on? Are you trying to tell us you’re gay?”
He said, “I wouldn’t mind being gay. There’s a lot of stuff about gay culture I like. But when I think about the sex, it just really disgusts me.”
Ten years later, my son remains the gay-friendliest straight guy I know. When I’m in New York, where he lives, we go out together to gay bars and clubs, often with a big group of his friends of both orientations.
But his reaction to the idea of having sex himself with another man? Still disgusting!
NickC,
I had a friend with a similar story. he thought he was bi, even had a boyfriend while he was in England for awhile.
But he said when he was able to sit back and look at it, he really was more interested in queer theory, culture, writers. That he wasn’t gay, or really bi, that he can understand and appreciate male beauty, but that women are really more his thing.
This, more than anything else to me, undoes a lot of the anti-gay rhetoric. The idea that it’s some pervasive, addictive lifestyle, that any amount of exposure is so tantalizing that people are hopelessly lost in homosexuality.
And yet I’ve known at least two people, who at different points in their lives considered themselves gay or bisexual and eventually turned out to be straight. No magic interventions were needed. No holy ghost to save them. No camps, or therapy, or anything like that. No agonizing about their purpose or path. No death scares, no fire and brimestone turning points.
What happened is essentially a story of maturity and self-acceptance. They discovered through trial and error that “gay” isn’t who they are, though they don’t have an issue with gay people, or spiritual/sexual issues with homosexuality —-they just found that the opposite sex turned them on so much more, that they drifted away from gay and found themselves in straightland — much to their own surprise and disbelief. They never made a conscious choice to be straight, or gay, just found that their journey through life turned out to be more “straight” than they expected. Like waking up one day, looking back on the past few months and thinking, “Oh, I guess I’m not as bisexual as I thought I was.”
I had a similar experience, in the opposite direction, I found out I wasn’t bisexual, but 100% gay.
That’s why I have a hard time believing the ex-gay industry. I know people who WANTED To be gay, who genuinely walked the walk, talked the talk, then one day realized it just wasn’t their town, although they had a lovely visit.