Day: August 13, 2007

In this second post about therapeutic neutrality, I want to discuss what it does and doesn’t mean in sexual identity therapy. Again, I want to react to some of the thoughts from Dr. Nicolosi in his article, Why I Am Not a Neutral Therapist.

Dr. Nicolosi writes:

What will happen when the uncommitted (“neutral”) therapist hears his client revealing self-destructive behaviors that are statistically proven to be associated with SSA? How will he interpret these behaviors? Staying out of philosophical territory with the client would require a sort of “Rogerian neutrality” that even Carl Rogers himself couldn’t live up to. I can’t imagine any psychologist who actually does this therapy on a regular basis believing that such an approach would be successful.

This needs to be unpacked a bit. First of all, when clients, either gay or straight or in between, describe self-destructive behavior, I believe therapists should confront the consequences to the client and others of this behavior. Asking clients about the consequences and pointing out denial is a standard therapeutic stance. SIT can be used by directive and non-directive therapists. There is nothing in the SIT framework that prevents the confrontation of self-harm.

What Dr. Nicolosi seems to be implying about the behavior of homosexuals in this paragraph, he make more explicit in the next:

Along the way, clients always report a host of maladaptive, self-defeating behaviors that restrict their maturation. The successful clinician must have an understanding of the meaning of these common factors. He will also observe fundamental distortions of self-identity. Once seen, how can these factors — including their meaning and likely origins — be ignored?

Apparently, he sees self-destructive behaviors in all of his clients. I do not, and in my research investigations, I have not found this to be invariably true. Statistical association is not cause nor does statistical significance implicate an entire group of people. I have addressed elsewhere on this blog, to wit:

Thus, it would be inconsistent with the research on psychiatric risk to deny members of at-risk groups “even the possibility” of a “fulfilling life,” whether partnered or not. Higher risk, yes; inevitable mental health maladjustment for all members of a group of people? No.

To further address Dr. Nicolosi’s question: when maladaptive, self-defeating behaviors are evident, therapeutic respect for the client’s value position does not mean that these behaviors are ignored. They are not. However, not all clients who are attracted to the same sex have the same issues. The SI therapist does not assume that all same-sex attracted clients have the same concerns, problems, issues, behaviors or backgrounds. This is more like theoretical neutrality; the SI therapist interprets the literature to depict a varied clinical landscape, not one of uniform histories and dynamics. We also do not tell clients that being attracted to the same sex assigns them to a life of despair and promiscuity. Nor do we tell them that their attractions to the same sex mean one thing. In the advanced informed consent phase, we discuss the research on the health and mental health correlates of behavior. Thus, if we have a client who is engaged in risky behavior, we inform them of the risks. If we learn that a client’s draw to the same sex has some historical referent, we certainly help that client process the issue. However, we do not assume that all attractions to the same sex mean the same thing, or that such attractions are of necessity tied to some historical set of deficits.

Dr. Nicolosi then contrasts himself further:

As Charles Socarides once said, the therapist must be neutral in judging the client, his behavior, and his choices; but he cannot be neutral about the condition of homosexuality.

Indeed the SI therapist is open to the distinct possibility that sexual preferences derive from multiple pathways and follow multiple trajectories. The SI therapist agrees with APA past president Nicholas Cummings who said: “There are as many kinds of homosexuals as heterosexuals. Homosexuality is not a unitary experience.”

So to summarize, SI therapists are not neutral when confrontation of self-destructive behavior is warranted, but we do not presume a uniform set of antecedents and outcomes of homosexual attractions. I guess you might say, we have an “Ask, Don’t Tell” policy.

On August 8th, I reported on a website owned by Brian Wyant of Omaha, NE/Council Bluffs, IA that contained disturbing messages justifying violent retribution toward bullies. There has been much discussion here and elsewhere whether or not these sites have been hacked to include these messages. As of this writing, the original offensive statement has been changed to the following:

VIOLENCE IS A STARK REALITY FOR CHILDREN GLOBALLY. TORMENTORS REMAIN PATHETICALLY SILENT OR HARASS THE GRIEVING FAMILY WHEN BULLIED CHILDREN COMMIT SUICIDE BUT DISINGENUOUSLY BECOME VOCAL WHEN REMINDED OF THE FACT THAT THESE DAYS BULLIED STUDENTS MAY CHOOSE RETALIATION RATHER THAN KILLING THEMSELVES; EVIL TORMENTORS THINK THEIR VERSION OF RELIGION GIVES THEM SPECIAL RIGHT TO TORMENT GAY CHILDREN UNCHECKED; EVERY 2 MINUTES IN THE USA ANOTHER GLBT AMERICAN DIES FROM HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS

Since August 8th, the messages on this page have changed several times. The above message may be a response to the scrutiny this family of sites has been getting. Numerous efforts have been made by me and others to contact Brian Wyant. He has yet to return a call or answer an email. Several people around Mr. Wyant have told me that they have talked to him about the messages on the websites. According to representatives of PFLAG of Omaha and the Rainbow Outreach (GLBT Community Center in Omaha), Mr. Wyant is aware of the messages and the content of his sites, but he has yet to contact me or other bloggers who are trying to reach him. One person associated with PFLAG of Omaha told me that he thought it was a series of “dirty tricks” by a hacker that is responsible for the disturbing messages. This representative who prefers to remain anonymous told me that Mr. Wyant told him that he checks his site “every 30 minutes” to remove the offensive material.

Indeed the site says repeatedly that it is updated daily, and just in the days I have been checking it, it is updated frequently and yet some disturbing material remains. And some of that material is very similar to the material that has been taken down. One particular disturbing popup page advocating violence and anarchy was removed on August 10. On that day a message appeared at the top of the page saying “hacks are being fixed on this site.”

The message about hacks being removed is now down. Even so, some disturbing messages remain. This one advocates vague punishments toward opponents and is found on the main section of gayhumanrights.org.

Equal protection/equal justice under law is the defining foundation of a democracy. The Rule of Law is irrelevent in regions that violate this irreplacable principle of democracy and human rights. If you live or enter one of these areas, be prepared to do whatever it takes to punish human rights violators. Also visit the top human rights violators and their bloodlines to ensure they never know a moment of security for their crimes against our people, our children, our family members, our friends, and our allies.

and this one in reference to states without recognition for same-sex unions:

This region has forfeit credibility, having succumb to majoritarianism rather than maintaining the basic requirements of a sustainable democracy. Equal Protection under Law, the foundation of democracy and human rights, does not exist in these jurisdiction. There is no reason to uphold any law within this jurisdiction or to preserve the bloodlines of oppressors. Top human rights violators and their bloodlines should be visited and held personally accountable for killing gay family members. It is worth noting that speciously named concept “separate-but-equal” has never been Equal Protection.

Note the use of the term “majoritarianism.” While in itself this is a reference to political views that do not of necessity promote retribution or violence, it is idiosyncratic enough to make me wonder if the author of these statements on the main website may also have authored the extremist material on the now removed popup page. I also found this term one other place that is troubling. On the website for the Rainbow Outreach the same term is applied to Nebraska.

The State of Nebraska has an anti-democracy, anti-family, anti-human rights constitutional amendment violating Equal Protection Under Law, the foundation of democracy and human rights (hypocritically, the State motto is Equality Before the Law). The amendment, installed by majoritarianism, says the State will not recognize any relationship at all between same-sex couples (marriage, civil union, domestic partnership, etc).

At this point, I am reluctant to conclusively connect the dots but there is enough material here of concern that it would be good to hear from Mr. Wyant.

Why is this important? I am quite concerned about the tone and specifics of these writings. What if Mr. Wyant promotes these websites to the youth/others he is involved with in Omaha? Even what remains is inflammatory stuff and he apparently is in a position of leadership (on the board of the Omaha Metro GLBT Community Center) and influence in the gay community of Omaha. Retaliating against the oppressors may sound noble on a website, but it would be awful on the front page of newspapers. Analogy – Even though I am pro-life, I would not want for my kids a youth leader who believes laws should be ignored because abortion is legal or that abortionists “and their bloodlines” should be “visited” with vague retaliation. And I certainly do not want an influence who holds up retaliation or suicide as an either-or scenario for bullied kids (“THESE DAYS BULLIED STUDENTS MAY CHOOSE RETALIATION RATHER THAN KILLING THEMSELVES”). If this is a “dirty trick,” I believe it is long past time for Mr. Wyant to take control of these websites and make this clear.

Note that Exgaywatch is reporting similar information and concerns this morning with more emphasis on technical aspects of website.