Reorientation therapies in the UK: Survey results

A new survey from BMC Psychiatry found that 4-17% of therapists surveyed offer some form of therapy designed to reduce homosexual attractions.
From the article in the BBC News:

A significant minority of mental health professionals had agreed to help at least one patient “reduce” their gay or lesbian feelings when asked to do so.
The survey, published in the journal BMC Psychiatry and conducted by London researchers, involved 1,400 therapists.
Many were acting with the “best of intentions”, said the lead author.
Only 4% said they would attempt to change a client’s sexual orientation, but when asked if they would help curb homosexual feelings some 17% – or one in six – said they had done so.
The incidence appeared to be as prevalent in recent years as decades earlier.

Here is the abstract from the journal article:

Background
We know very little about mental health practitioners’ views on treatments to change sexual orientation. Our aim was to survey a representative sample of professional members of the main United Kingdom psychotherapy and psychiatric organisations about their views and practices concerning such treatments.
Methods
We sent postal questions to mental health professionals who were members of British Psychological Society, the British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy, the United Kingdom Council for Psychotherapy and the Royal College of Psychiatrists. Participants were asked to give their views about treatments to change homosexual desires and describe up to six patients each, whom they have treated in this way.
Results
Of 1848 practitioners contacted, 1406 questionnaires were returned and 1328 could be analysed. Although only 55 (4%) of therapists reported that they would attempt to change a client’s sexual orientation if one consulted asking for such therapy, 222 (17%) reported having assisted at least one client/patient to reduce or change his or her homosexual or lesbian feelings. 413 patients were described by these 222 therapists: 213 (52%) were seen in private practice and 117 (28%) were not followed up beyond the period of treatment. Counselling was the commonest (66%) treatment offered and there was no sign of a decline in treatments in recent years. 159 (72%) of the 222 therapists who had provided such treatment considered that a service should be available for people who want to change their sexual orientation. Client/patient distress and client/patient autonomy were seen as reasons for intervention; therapists paid attention to religious, cultural and moral values causing internal conflict.
Conclusions
A significant minority of mental health professionals are attempting to help lesbian, gay and bisexual clients to become heterosexual. Given lack of evidence for the efficacy of such treatments, this is likely to be unwise or even harmful.

Going a little deeper into the study, it appears that some of the efforts designated as change might not be direct efforts to change after all. Consider some reasons given for what is labeled by the authors as support for change efforts:

“…where someone had a strong faith, then working to help the person accept their feelings but manage them appropriately may be the best approach if (the) person felt they would lose God and therefore their life was not worth living.”
“Some bisexual individuals may wish to choose an orientation that is
comfortable for them and their lifestyle choices for example. This is a
therapeutic issue to explore and support if that is their wish. It is different from behavioural attempts to reshape desire.”
“Yes, possibly those within marriages that wish to continue with that
relationship rather than break up”

Rather, these therapists give what sound like client-centered responses based on the individual circumstances of the clients. I wonder if the authors of this article may have pushed these responses into either change or gay affirming camps without considering a third more neutral position – what Mark Yarhouse and I call sexual identity therapy.
Most of the other comments relied on a belief that therapists should follow the wishes of the client. This seems reasonable if the client is informed that change is infrequent at best and we do not know going in who might shift and by how much. Also, it is necessary to provide prospective clients with accurate information regarding homosexuality without regard to the ideological loyaties of the therapist. Also, it seems clear that non-homosexually identified people experience same-sex attraction. Helping them sort out their particular situation and arrive and a value-congruent position is not the same thing as reparative or reorientation therapy.
The authors paint a picture of 1 in 6 therapists engaging in change therapy and I think that is misleading. The 4% figure seems like the right number of therapists who deliberately promote change among their same-sex attracted clients.

190 thoughts on “Reorientation therapies in the UK: Survey results”

  1. Rander is correct that the thread has become about something other than the post.
    I think points have been made and remade about science and faith — there are clear disagreements about those issues.
    Does anyone have anything to add about the post and the King study?
    I for one would like to see Dr. King address the questions he did not address above (e.g., why he categorized congruence therapy as change therapy).

  2. This conversation has devolved into mudslinging and disrespect, and I just dont have time or energy for that.
    I thank you all for teaching me about how you see the world. It has been an interesting exchange.
    I will move on now.
    Warm regards,
    Malene / Rander

  3. So when people are influenced by society it will have more validity than when they are influenced by their faith.
    That makes sense#$%^&*()_

  4. BUT, before I go to bed, I just wanted to let Carole know that enjoyed the Slate article – and I agree with a great deal of what the writer was trying to say.
    One thing missing from the article are those gay people who do live a heterosexual life but for whom that life is causing distress – we usually see this in those men and women who were married first and then come out later in life affirming their SSA.
    One thing you said Carole that I never told you I agree with is that people are multi-faceted. We have to make room for the full spectrum of sexuality. I have a bisexual friend who stopped dating men one day and started dating women – finally he got married and has two kids. He did this because he felt that this would curb the distress he felt over being gay in today’s climate. The problem is that he is very unhappy now – he has gained a great deal of weight and is considering divorce.
    I just think we have to remember that being gay, as the article said, is not in need of a cure. That it is a normal variation of sexuality – realize that society can and does put pressure on gay people, even today, to live heterosexuality – and then go from there, all the time remembering that each person is an individual with different needs.
    It will be very interesting in a few years, when gay married couples become more widespread and prevalent – how this cultural change effects people’s desire to want to change. I would assume that as being gay in society become’s less and issue that we would see a reduction in the desire to seek change – outside of religious reasons that is!
    Anyway – thanks for posting that link

  5. LOL. My inbox that usually shows me when I have new incoming mail wasn’t doing that. I was just down to my neighbors where I’m having my moving sale and she asked if I’d gotten the email she just sent…and, even though, it didn’t display that I had any, there was hers in the midst of a number of a bunch of blog notices. I’m sure, though, that that wasn’t in anyone’s list of possibilities.
    I agree that my post to Warren bordered on bad taste but it only spoke to my interpretations of what was already visible on the page. I don’t believe I cited anything that wasn’t available for anyone to read publicly…so it would only be my stating how it came across to me that was in danger of crossing the line. And, I believe I also laid out the possibility that I may be the one that’s a bit out of kilter. Again, relying on the visible facts already present in this conversation.
    And the quote from you that I interpreted as saying that me and others are anti-science:

    it is a tendency of people in almost any faith-based system to deny, repudiate or ignore science when it doesn’t fit their belief system. I think about Evangelicals on this blog only because they, as a group, have been so powerful a voice in misrepresenting gay people – with some exceptions – the owner of this blog being one

    LOL. Even if we think of ourselves as ‘pro-gay’, having gay friends, wanting their best, etc, you have rationalized calling us ‘anti-gay’ if we happen to oppose gay marriage proposals, how then can you say that the above statement by you doesn’t make us ‘anti-science’? Were you speaking of other Evangelicals on this blog? You labelled me as one several times. Yet, you’ve just denied that you said we were anti-science. Is this yet another Jayhuck distinction in definitions that we all have to learn in order to communicate with you? The statement sure sounds ‘anti-science’ to me.

  6. Rander,
    You asked Ann more than once about why someone would want to change attractions, and she responded a few times. Then you wrote this about what as a future therapist you “would do.”

    First I would be obligated to tell them that any type of therapy to change sexual attractions has been proven quite ineffective over numerous studies. I would also have to tell them there is significant evidence that such therapy can cause damage. Finally I would tell them that I could not in good faith provide therapy designed to change their sexual attractions, because I would not risk to hurt them.

    I fully understand this as a professional obligation and, in fact, would not respect any therapist who didn’t state this off the bat. Research certainly suggests that treatment to change orientations have been quite ineffective; however, you chose in your post to ignore the idea of the article, that one might wish to simply reduce attractions. You seem not to even conceive of the possibility that a reduction in attractions might be beneficial to someone, somewhere for a whole host of reasons. You are cocksure, it seems, that such a reduction is not only unlikely, but probably impossible, and even unwarranted and harmful. You can conceive of absolutely no reasons why this might be a healthy thing for a client?
    What blew me away most is that you chose this time to offer your “I would do’s” while you are addressing a woman who has said she has undergone a change in her attractions. Talk about crossing boundaries!
    In addition, the thought seemed not to occur to you that such a hypothetical client needn’t be homosexual. There are all kinds of reasons someone might want to reduce attractions, stop attracions, change attractions. Think of a heterosexual male or female who is a serial adulterer and wishes to curb his/her attractions in order to reduce his philandering. Are you sure that under all situations you’d never agree to help someone modify attractions? Would it not be prudent in those cases? Might even a homosexual need help with avoiding attractions that led to distress, danger?

    Then I would challenge them to think about why they want to change their attraction. I would suggest they fully explore different schools of thought about what homosexuality is, and how it works, all the while talking about it in length, and encouraging the individual to find their own story about their sexuality.
    I would do everything in my power to take the shame, embarrasment or discomfort out of their attractions. And I would continue to look for ways to strengthen their sense of self.

    So, talking to a person(s) on this board who has undergone such shifts, you then proceed to talk of shame, embarrasment [sic] or discomfort” caused by their attractions? You don’t see the lack of manners in this? Here you are talking to a person who has spoken to you of a shift at your urging, yet you chose that point at which to speak of shame and embarrassment and societal pressure, clearly suggesting those are the only possible reasons that someone might want to modify attractions?
    And you don’t think that through these words of yours you told the others on the board who had spoken of their SSA how to feel? And you don’t think you told them why they feel the way they do? You think that is true just because you didn’t use those specific words ? Come on; we’re bright adults here. If you’re going into the field of psychology, you’ve got to practice not only how to use words but when to use them.
    If we don’t communicate with one another again, it’s fine with me. I am usually a rather measured sort, but I do admit to really getting steamed this time. Eddy and Ann and the others have had to listen to simple explanations of why they feel as they do and how they shouldn’t have to feel this way and it becomes clearer and clearer that those who think they know what Eddy and Mary and Ann and all the others need is just as doctrinaire as the kooks on the other side. No one seems to LISTEN TO THEM. (You do, Warren.)

  7. Jayhuck,
    So those who follow science differently than you on same sex attraction and also have a religious life are wrong?

  8. You asked for an example – I obliged – and the only thing I got in return is a lengthy post to Warren. I’m not sure I understand YOUR tactics Eddy, but I’m back to questioning them.

  9. Eddy,
    If you wanted to go off on me to Warren you should have done it in a personal email – what you just posted on a public forum borders on bad taste – IMHO.
    You’ve twisted my words enough this evening!

  10. Warren–
    I apologize if my last comments to Jayhuck seemed confrontive. But, in part, it goes to his statement last evening that suggested that a number of the bloggers here were anti-science Evangelicals. He didn’t name any names, but he did exclude you from the mix. But, I don’t think it took a lot of science to figure out who he was referring to. He was responding to statements I was making; he referred to me several times as Evangelical but he didn’t include me along with your name as an exception. Beyond that, it seems clear that he was trying to make that allegation against ‘regular bloggers’ as opposed to ‘drop ins’. I’ve grown weary of his tactics. He stayed under your ‘offensive’ radar only because he didn’t name names. It’s a tacky tactic, IMHO.
    Carole wrote a lengthy and thoughtful post, It was so lengthy that Rander said later that it amounted to several pages of download. Rather than comment on it’s essence or anything in the post that had any merit, Jayhuck instead found a portion of a sentence to take exception to. I wrote a comment in which I tried to even embrace the option that Carole’s friend might choose heterosexuality, homosexuality or live a life in-between, and, again, he found a sentence that he blew out of proportion as proof that I am biased. (LOL. Perhaps I am, but that sentence didn’t prove it!) We then went off on a 1 to 2 hour back and forth detour and, by the end, I wasn’t at all sure if he had a point other than to score points somewhere with someone.
    If he can extract one sentence out of Carole’s lengthy piece or out of my considerably shorter one and demand that we respond, isn’t it appropriate that we can do the same in return? I know that it borders on the edges of good taste and propiety…I felt that very strongly several nights ago when he demanded (several attempts by Carole not to go there) that she reveal ‘exactly’ what her friend meant by his statement..
    If I ‘need to chill’, you know how to reach me via a sidebar. If he needs to be reined it just a bit, I hope you know how to reach him. I personally find his insinutations regarding my timing and motives offensive. If they were bleeding through in my comments, I do need to know that. But, if he was speculating, I really believe we have enough going on with the written words.

  11. We can settle on one though Eddy – Creationism/Intelligent Design is a great example – a group of people who went to great lengths to try and put forth their religious views as science. When the courts intervened it was determined that what they were putting forth was not, in fact, science, but their own beliefs. I can find plenty of articles for you to read if you missed this in the news.

  12. Bottom line–others don’t like that others don’t like being SSA and would like to convince them that they have been manipulated by society, by church, etc.
    You don’t need to like it, but you should honor it, IMHO.

    Carole,
    I dont have the time to read your whole long thing again today. I will get to it when I can.
    Let me just say that above comment is highly discourteous and disrespectful, and it crosses my boundaries.
    There is nothing within this discussion that I “should do”. There is nothing humble about telling people what they should do, think or what their opinions “should” be.
    I am here to ask questions. Without reading your last long post I think I am beginning to get what the differences in our opinions are. Once I am sure I have understood those differences. I will move on. There is no way we will end up agreeing on most of those things. I have no desire to change your mind, and I am certain you wont manage to change mine. I see this as the “spice of life”, and respect your opinions. I have gone to great lengths to be courteous and to set aside as many prejudices as I could find to set aside.
    Comments such as the one quoted above, or as this one:

    To tell another or to suggest to another how to feel is form of tyranny in that it devalues the individual experience.

    Where you skirt the borders of – while talking directly to me – calling me a tyran because I happen to disagree with you.
    It is also a bit interesting that in one post you tell me that telling others how they should feel is a tyranny, but then you go on to tell me what I must do.
    I would really appreciate it if the heat of the discussion could be dialled back a bit. I am here to learn and understand where you come from. I wont end up agreeing with you, although we have found a few places where we agree and thats neat.
    Malene / Rander

  13. Rander/Marlene,
    Suffice to say I bought into all the things gays teach people about being gay. Yes, I always felt different than the other kids. I had questions about my sexuality from an early age etc… etc….
    Sorry but you are making many assumptions about how I viewed myself and it sounds like it is just easier for you to say I wasn’t gay. I don’t think your intentions are malicious just sounding like the same ole, same ole story that those who want to believe that sexuality is fixed would say.

  14. Jayhuck–
    it was a simple request that goes to your statement: Please show examples of when religion has tried to masquerade as science.
    Instead of answering my direct questions, you make personal attacks against me instead. I’m trying to demonstrate to both you and readers here that you, all too often, say things that aren’t quite accurate. Religion having a disdain for science isn’t the same as masquerading as science. Religion trying to use science to suit its needs (thats a wild one) but again it isn’t religion masquerading as science. My impression is–and has been–that you spout things you’ve heard but haven’t thought through. So I simply ask for you to show that it is indeed your own thought. If it is, you should be able to tell us how it is that you’ve seen religion actually trying to masquerade as science.
    IMHO, I wasted an hour or more last evening playing semantics games with you, if you’d simply answer to the issue of how you perceive religion to be masquerading as science, I could avoid that again. Did you misspeak or can you provide examples? (It’s a statement you made; I don’t comprehend it. Let’s not detour from it.. Please explain if that’s what you meant or not. It seems to go counter to what you said last evening.) And please, leave the personal attacks out of it. I am for getting to the bottom of things. I don’t make allegations against you…I question the actual words that you write and try to stick to the context in which you’ve written them. If you can’t handle that, then you have no business blogging.
    I try very hard to keep my comments and questions only to the words that have been written here. I understand very well that others who are reading are clueless to the other dialogues that have gone on between any of us. Yet you constantly seem to be trying to fish out my motives for asking what I do. I find it offensive. I’ve said time and time again that I’m determined to get to the essence…to the truth. When you assume a motive beyond that, you’re inferring I’m a liar. I take exception to that. I’m simply asking that you, like any of us, need to support the words you write. So, I ask again, how do you see religion actually masquerading as science when all of your previous comments seem to indicate that religion has a complete and total disdain for science? The two don’t seem to go together very well.
    No doubt, you’ll find much of what I’ve just said offensive and will feel the need to strike back. Fine. Just don’t leave out the answer to my question in your response. How do you see that religion has tried to masquerade as science?
    Thanks!

  15. Jayhuck,
    It would stand to reason then that some very religious people are scientists. And that they are not exclusive categories.

  16. I will concede this though Eddy, I don’t always do a good job of being precise with what I am trying to say and end up having to explain myself. The problem is that all of us on here have preconceived notions about the motives of others, and I think it makes us – myself included – apprehensive and distrustful – often when we shouldn’t be.
    I’ll be more careful about the things I say in the future!

  17. Rander/Marlene,

    Ummmm….. you jumped to some conclusions there. But hey… if it makes it easier for you to understand and accept then that is fine. I was pretty gay and pretty much set well into my late twenties that that was how it was going to be. So….. I don’t know what you mean by youth and not “really” being gay. But whatever. You may make up my story and feelings as you like …. plenty of people have done that here and I am getting used to it.

    Well, I based my conclusions of what you have told me – IE that women’s sexuality is more fluid than mens (I took this as based on your own personal experience), and also that your sexuality had gone through a few changes.
    This is different from the experience of someone who has always felt gay or straight, and cant even really imagine being with someone opposite to their orientation.
    Typically in western countries our twenties is a time still of experimentation with all sorts of things. For some this settles down earlier than for others. I would say my time of exploration took a great hit around 23/24 years old, but really didnt settle downl until around 26 year old. Its a natural growth pattern that most people can relate to. Which is also why we talk about the great Three Zero as an age barrier that we prefer to not reach without having experienced some of that settling down and focusing on goals. Whatever those goals are.
    Now, you may have an experience or explanation for the change(s) you experienced at that time which is different from “it sounds like a normal growth process”. Maybe this explanation or experience is more meaningful to you. I certainly do not discredit that.
    During that time frame – middle to late twenties – I think most of us experience or interpret some of our experiences in ways that help us settle down to live the kind of life we prefer to live. Those experiences will always remain meaningful. They just happen at a time when its pretty common for that to happen.
    As far as “being not really gay”. Well – again from what you have told me there has been some fluctuations in how you see your own sexuality. IE your sexuality might have been just a bit more fluid than some other people’s. In comparison I have always been straight. While I can imagine loving a woman, snuggling with a woman, and showing a lot of affection for a woman there is definitely a line I cant imagine myself ever crossing. So, you and I have different experiences of our own sexuality. Yours has been more fluid, mine has been more set.
    Some of your late to mid twenties development includes – for whatever reason makes the most sense to you – a change to become mainly heterosexual. As long as you are happy with that, its great.
    I have no intention to “tell you how you feel”. I can make observations based on my prior general knowledge and what you tell me. Often I wont have the whole story. That is the beast of the Internet. So in some ways I have to fill in gaps based on my own experiences. This can give rise to misunderstandings. Dont take that personally though. There is no harm meant.
    Ohh, and on the subject of misunderstandings. There is no “R” in Malene.
    Malene / Rander

  18. Mary,
    Yes I do! But the majority of his religious contemporaries disliked what he had to say about the Universe – because religion had taught something that Galileo was going to disprove.

  19. Eddy,
    Please re-read what I wrote – I never, anywhere, ever said that I agree 10 times with EVERYTHING you said – please don’t suggest I did. There are points that I do agree with of course.

  20. And just to make sure Eddy understands what I mean, history has shown, time and Again, from the fields of astronomy to evolution, that religious people have and will skew science to suit their own religious needs – from Galileo to the Scopes Monkey trial, to climate change to the recent court fights over Creationism. Well-intentioned, I’m sure, people who do their best to make science fit their beliefs – this is where religion masquerades as science.

  21. In short, I think we all agree on a definition of science as ‘a thoughtful, systematic study’ of a given topic, please tell us where religion is trying to present itself as such.

    That’s wonderful to hear from you Eddy – then I can assume we accept what science has to say regarding homosexuality? I mean, if religion isn’t getting in the way here, and your Evangelical attitudes aren’t skewing your outlook, I assume we are on the same page where science is concerned – science says that homosexuality is a normal and healthy variation of sexuality. That is the consensus of a majority of the scientific community – of course, different ideas are put forth by those who have a religious agenda.

  22. Most of us here are trying to move beyond the ‘patent’ responses. Feel free to join us when you can.

    Wow Eddy – LOL – Um, thanks for the patronizing attitude – once again – you’ve proven to so many that you are adept at that.

  23. Jayhuck–
    Not to worry! I’ve yet to see religion trying to masquerade as science. If you have examples, please present them. Much of religion actually respects science…but holds some reservations that science might be unduly prejudiced by prevailing public opinion. And, as you’ve pointed out more than a few times, much of religion actually has a disdain for science. So, I’m very curious where you feel that religion actually respects science so much that they actually masquerade as such.
    Most of us here are trying to move beyond the ‘patent’ responses. Feel free to join us when you can.
    I realize that sounded like a ‘dig’ or ‘cut’. I didn’t intend it that way…but it came across much like your exasperated ‘I’ve told you 10 times that I agree with you’. when, in fact, you disagreed with my major points…please realize that you are dealing with thoughtful people and state your thoughts and opinions more precisely.
    Please don’t take exception to my request for you to speak more precisely. You set the bar for that when you challenged Carole several times to tell you ‘exactly’ what her friend meant by his statement. When we aren’t clear in what we’re saying, it is exasperating for everyone else involved in the discussion. In short, I think we all agree on a definition of science as ‘a thoughtful, systematic study’ of a given topic, please tell us where religion is trying to present itself as such.

  24. Carole,

    You don’t need to like it, but you should honor it, IMHO.

    I’m not sure who you were talking to, but I do honor their struggle, and I don’t immediately assume that people who have a religious issue surrounding their SSA – their feelings of wanting to curb their behavior are the result of society, etc..
    I identified as ex-gay for several years – I understand and appreciate the struggle. Its not an easy path to choose, and I talk regularly with others who are ex-gay or who used to be.
    However, religion is not science and should not masquerade as such!

  25. Katie,
    Thanks for this quote – I agree with it 100%:

    Claiming a natural, healthy, variant is a long way from claiming determinism.

    But shying away from claiming determinism should hold for both heterosexuality and homosexuality – I don’t think anyone on here would disagree with the fact that most people are probably bisexual to some extent – some to a greater degree than others, and most certainly not all people are!
    I was simply talking about how secular therapists should and do approach this subject. If someone has religious beliefs that require them to curb certain feelings, I would, and actually already do, support that 100% – but that’s a different thing than saying secular therapists or science for that matter, should cater to various religious groups and their stance on the issue – whatever that stance may be

  26. Rander, you said,

    If the community he preferred to live in was completely open to gays. If gays where open about being gay in his immediate and surrounding communities. If he could retain his career, his friends and his current life style all while remaining gay would that not increase his desire to remain gay

    ?
    He lives in a rural Oregon community . It’s one of those places that over the years has remained small and has its share of iconoclasts; some are, to use George Carlin’s terms, kind of “hippy dippy,” you know, those who walk to the beat of their own drum, so we are not talking about a judgemental, “backwoods” type of place although it is true that no such place is completely w/out judgement. It’s a throwback to another time or maybe saying that it is a “timeless” place is a better description. His dad was a college professor by the end of his teaching career; his mother writes children’s stories. This is not at all the kind of repressive family circumstance that many gay people face. This is the danger of generalizing.
    There simply are not a lot of gay people in this area.
    I will see him on our annual trip to Lake Shasta in a few months.

  27. I like to return to two of the points made in Warren’s original post.
    1. The first is a quote from the BBC news article:

    A significant minority of mental health professionals had agreed to help at least one patient “reduce” their gay or lesbian feelings when asked to do so.

    2. The second point is from Warren himself:

    Going a little deeper into the study, it appears that some of the efforts designated as change might not be direct efforts to change after all. Consider some reasons given for what is labeled by the authors as support for change efforts:
    “…where someone had a strong faith, then working to help the person accept their feelings but manage them appropriately may be the best approach if (the) person felt they would lose God and therefore their life was not worth living.”
    “Some bisexual individuals may wish to choose an orientation that is
    comfortable for them and their lifestyle choices for example. This is a
    therapeutic issue to explore and support if that is their wish. It is different from behavioural attempts to reshape desire.”
    “Yes, possibly those within marriages that wish to continue with that
    relationship rather than break up”

    Warren’s further explanation is specific as well (anyone to whom it is important can re-read it) and he concludes with

    The authors paint a picture of 1 in 6 therapists engaging in change therapy and I think that is misleading. The 4% figure seems like the right number of therapists who deliberately promote change among their same-sex attracted clients.

    Now, no one that I know of who has been posting on this board since I have been reading it (which, admittedly, is not all that long) has EVER suggested that any therapist should, using Warren’s words above, “deliberately promote change among their same-sex attracted clients.”
    Therefore, the thread itself, as I perceived it, was not at all about therapists who try to encourage gay people to change their orientation or about therapists who mislead their clients into thinking a change from a homosexual to a heterosexual is a viable option. Why would I or anyone else think that? 99.9% of us on this board are in agreement that such conduct is totally unacceptable. We agree.
    ****************************************************************************************
    Thus, the two points I listed had me wondering what the fuss was all about. The points are so inoffensive, so understanding of human nature, so supporting of human beings that I just couldn’t fathom what it was in either of them that should lead to disagreements or misunderstandings.
    So…with what is there a problem? In words, what’s the beef?
    Now, if one wished to specifically discuss the therapists who would claim they were able to “change a client’s orientation” when evidence does not support that , clearly the turn of this discussion would make sense to me, but that is not what some concentrate on.
    So, let’s take the first point, shall we?

    A significant minority of mental health professionals had agreed to help at least one patient “reduce” their gay or lesbian feelings when asked to do so.

    There are at least two posters on this board (I think there are others as well, but I am not as familiar with them and their stories or their points of view) who have shared with all of us that they are ex-gay. (Please, let’s not argue the word–I chose it for brevity’s sake.) They have made clear over and over again that they make no such claims that all SSA has disappeared. They have made clear that they are not suggesting at all that they have simply moved from a homosexual orientation to a heterosexual orientation.
    Their stories are different; their experiences are unique; their reasons for wanting to leave behind a gay life or gay behavior or gay attractions are unique. I don’t need to know what their individual stories are. I accept that the reasons for their decision are varied, complex or simple (I don’t know), but fully and completely individual, a result of a lifetime of experience. The bottom line is enough for me: something in them seeks harmony and peace, and for heaven sakes, who the heck is anyone else to even so much as suggest to them what it is that can provide that harmony for another human being? And what makes anyone think that such reasons for wanting change can be boiled down to the simplistic equation of: one human being=a total creation of society???????
    We are not amoebas; we are complex, highly individualistic organisms who only get one shot at this life on earth, and for those who are only bloggers on an impersonal computer to pretend to know WHY someone else might choose to lead life as one does strikes me as the height of arrogance. One size doesn’t fit all. Yes, it’s an aphorism for sure, but aphorisms persist because they contain truth. Your brain is not someone else’s brain. Your reactions to stimuli are not someone else’s reaction to stimuli, whether the stimuli are societal, familial, religious, or biological.
    One cannot assert, not without being challenged at least, that it is primarily cultural influences that have led an individual to choose the whatever paths he or she travel in life. Cultural anthropology and sociology have fallen several steps on the rungs of the “scientific ladder” over the last few decades precisely because of their overemphasis on the idea that it is the cultural that is responsible for most of human behavior. One cannot generalize the specific. One cannot describe the individual by describing the group any more than one can describe the group by describing a single individual within the group. To do so begs inaccuracies and applies tyranny.
    However, what if for a split second I told you something that I don’t believe at all, but which would allow me to make a point? What if I said, “We ARE the product of societal pressures and only the result of societal pressure ?”
    So what? What the heck would that change? It wouldn’t mean a darned thing. If they didn’t like their lives as they were and wanted to change those lives, even if they concluded that their feelings were simply the result of “society” 100%, so what if they still concluded they wanted to change?
    They have both made clear that they prefer a life that is not led as gay people. They have told us why. They have said they are happier now and at peace with their choice. They have both said that their gay or lesbian feelings have reduced over the years. They have never, ever suggested that others ought to feel or do as they feel or do.
    You know, how the heck hard is it do accept what they say? To applaud their determination? To see their strength? To appreciate their spirit, to cheer the beauty of their exercising of their individual choice to fight a battle that FOR THEM is their chosen struggle? Can you not see the nobility of the human spirit in their lives, in their struggle? Their valor is diminished when you suggest their battle is a poorly chosen one!
    It is that there are those who would identify what struggles are appropriate for others, what battles we should and should not face in our lives, what dragons we choose to slay or not slay and WHY we choose such that bothers me.
    If they feel their attractions are a dragon to be slayed, then so be it. They aren’t asking you or I or anyone else to do the same! They aren’t rousing crowds to annihilate anything. They have chosen a path they have deemed appropriate for them for reasons that are individual.
    Maybe we should protect those who decide to ascend the highest peak by telling them they cannot go–too many die, it’s dangerous to their well-being.
    And when the climbers respond with, “But I feel ALIVE when I am scaling that peak,” what will be your answer?
    And, if you saved their lives in so protecting them from that peak, what have you really given them? Safety? A sure thing? The life you want? The life you have deigned worthy? What? What? Maybe their struggle is what makes them feel alive, I don’t know. It doesn’t matter.
    I’d like to give them their respect as thinking and feeling individuals. As individuals who’ve lived a life very different from my own. As individuals whose battles I have never faced as they have never faced mine. I’d like to applaud them for their forebearance. It’s not up to me to chose their battles. I can’t know how they feel no matter what I have in common with them.
    These posters have never, as far as I have been able to see, tried to persuade others to feel as they do. In fact, they have offered themselves up, over and over again, as INDIVIDUALS with their own life’s experiences. Yet, there are those who pussyfoot around them, knowing that they can’t come out and simply say, “Hey, you guys, you shouldn’t even want to change. ” So, every time a topic comes up for discussion, some try to tiptoe around the issue, but the message is clear: “Hey, you guys. You really just haven’t accepted your natures. You really should just accept and BE the people that you are, that you were born as.”
    The rest is clear as well…the insidious, unwritten, unspoken words are, “it would make it easier on the rest of us if you’d just think as we do and do as we do.”
    Those who have felt the boot of the majority on the backs of their necks so easily place it on their foot and firmly plant it on the necks of others when the opportunity arises, history has taught us.
    On every single level that is sooooo wrong.

    A significant minority of mental health professionals had agreed to help at least one patient “reduce” their gay or lesbian feelings when asked to do so

    So, here we have two people who have, on every occasion, tried to tell us that for reasons of their own they would prefer not to be gay or at least not to act out any gay behaviors, yet there are those who tell them (indirectly, of course) that they ought not feel as they do–that they feel that way only or primarily because of societal or religious pressures.
    To add to the absurdity of it all, one of the more regular posters who feels it’s not a good idea for people to want to change at all, (but of course, he is never direct enough to tell them that THEY shouldn’t feel as they do, only that the faceless OTHERS shouldn’t… because after all, it’s only society and pressure and religious persecution that makes them feel that way; he adds that it’s perfectly okay if a person does want to abstain from gay behavior IF it’s out of religious convictions! Yet, this is the same person who argues that religious doctrine is persecuting gays by telling them homosexuality is wrong. Confoundingly, he argues that if one is making personal choices based on such religious doctrine, it’s perfectly understandable and just fine. What the heck? The logic is all over the place!
    We have on this board two people at minimum who are a testament to the first point raised–that people can “reduce” their gay attractions/feelings. They don’t ask for anything except that people respect them and their individual reasons for wanting that to happen, that people respect that they are happier and more at peace in the place they now occupy.
    Among the life experiences of millions of people, there are all kinds of personal reasons that drive people to seek one path over another, one experience over another in search of peace and happiness and contentment or excitement or adventure or ..whatever. One life to live—they get to choose. Out of all the millions of chemical reactions in the human brain, out of all the thousands of experiences we all have by the age of five, much less by the age of adulthood, why would anyone believe that when it comes to a subject such as sexuality, generalizations can be applied to any one individual?
    Now, as for my comment about the success rate of therapies for other things such as drug use, weight issues, etc. I have to say that the numbers are not good, not good at all. That they are better than the efforts to “change orientation”–well, of course they are better than that. I don’t think it would take too much to beat that, but who the heck ever said we were discussing the CHANGE of ORIENTATION???????????
    How is it that so frequently when Warren posts a piece of research about therapy, it winds up being a discussion about the CHANGE OF ORIENTATION?

    Only 4% said they would attempt to change a client’s sexual orientation, but when asked if they would help curb homosexual feelings some 17% – or one in six – said they had done so.

    CURB HOMOSEXUAL FEELINGS. That is what is says, and we have two regular posters who have stated again and again and again that their homosexual feelings/attractions have ebbed over the years, have “curbed” in other words. For people to suggest, imply, hint that they shouldn’t want to do that is self-centered. How the heck would you know ANYTHING about their lives that gives you the gall to do that?
    Now, if what people really want to discuss is whether or not a person with SSA should want to change his or her attractions, that’s another topic, one that’s been discussed too and again, the same thing occurs. Unbelievable. At least it would allow those of you who obviously think it a bad idea to tell Ann and Eddy and others UPFRONT that you think they have made the WRONG decision, that you don’t like their decision instead of hiding behind the moniker of “others.” At least there would be some intellectual honesty in all this.
    Bottom line–some people don’t like having SSA (for reasons they have expressed and reasons they have chosen not to express), would rather be straight or at least not act on their SSA
    Bottom line–others don’t like that others don’t like being SSA and would like to convince them that they have been manipulated by society, by church, etc.
    You don’t need to like it, but you should honor it, IMHO.

  28. @ Katie–
    I’m with Warren on this one. You said it very well. Your comments are worthy of my ‘keeper’ file.

  29. @Katie Cannon:
    You said it before I could get there and you did it much better.
    The difference is that I am religious so we come at things from different points of view on that but see the science similarly. How about that?

  30. I’m not at all religious, support gay marriages, think biological reductionism is silly, especially when it comes to such complicated matters as sexual orientation.
    Thinks gays need acceptance. Think people who feel their sexual/romantic/fantasy/social, etc…. life doesn’t hang together well enough to move forward need acceptance….
    I don’t know where the religion vs. science thing comes into play.
    Yes, science shows that homosexuality can be a normal, healthy, variant. But you still have to define “Orientation”…..
    Science also shows that attractions are not reductionistically determined — Ancient Greece, the Bonobos vs. Chimps, etc…..
    Claiming a natural, healthy, variant is a long way from claiming determinism.
    And people might find that they are less flexible simply because we live in a culture where straight/gay has been polarized and biologized/medicalized, and so we create inflexible identities where there might simply be attractions, fantasies, behaviors, etc….
    Katie

  31. Jayhuck–
    In your initial post after you ‘found the answer’ to the question you asked Carole, your entire post reduced it to ‘the failed relationships’ and your concluding statement was that you hoped he’d find a good man some day.
    In my first post here, I took exception to that as a simplistic conclusion and warned of the dangers of bias that might not entertain that heterosexuality was an option for him.
    You then had several posts that bashed the unscientific Evangelicals, including me among them. (Noted that you were talking to me and Carole but you only made exception for Warren.) The impression you strongly gave is that the notion of possibly embracing heterosexuality is unscientific and is the result of Evangelical religious thinking.
    So, it’s clear that since I DO entertain that option, we are in disagreement there.
    Much of the rest of our conversation revolved around my thoughts that the scientific community has a few biases of its own…and this you also disagreed with quite strongly. So, again, we disagree.
    The only thing you seem to have agreed to is that there may be factors other than the ‘failed relationships’ that fueled the musing of Carole’s friend. I see that and appreciate it.
    Back to preparing for the move.

  32. Jayhuck,,
    But what if your science is wrong. This is something your bias refuses to consider and yet for many who choose to leave gay behaviour behind them find that it is not normal or healthy for them to act in this way. Until you are able to accept that this is also true for many your words are empty.

  33. Eddy,
    Just to clarify things – science says homosexuality is a normal healthy variation – we START there – we don’t have to end there – when it comes to therapy. We should examine WHY a person might be saying something like what Carole’s friend said. Surely, you of all people can understand that there might be very unhealthy reasons a person – any person – might make such a comment. It would be between the therapist and the client which direction they go in, but not all reasons for change are good and healthy – I believe we’ve been down this road before – but it would be up to the therapist and client to figure that out. If the person making such comments is doing it merely out of some idolized version of heterosexuality or because their dislike of who they are is coming from something society has done – these are obviously not healthy reasons to look for change – whatever shape that “change” might take.
    This is why I side with science and say – unless the person is having an issue with their faith, start with science which says being gay is normal and healthy. Your bias is such that you seem to feel either side is of equal importance and that a desire for change should be entertained regardless of the reason someone has that desire.

  34. I entertained numerous possibilities for Carole’s friend saying that we simply didn’t have enough to go on

    LOL – and for the 10th time Eddy I agreed with you

    …and that psychology has a bias against the prospect of a ‘homosexual’ even considering heterosexuality.

    Psychology’s bias is scientifically based – yours is based on a personal faith – I’m being dogmatic only in that I am siding with science, which, on the whole, tends to be frequently less biased than religion.
    Should we also listen to a person’s personal faith when it comes to matters of medicine, Evolution, Astronomy, etc???? If you wish too Eddy, then all the best – LOL

  35. Hey Carole,
    Wow Carole – did you know when I copied your write up into my word processor it was over 5 pages long? Thanks for challenging me – I appreciate it. I will have to do some cutting as I write though.
    First of all on Choice. I agree with you. We all want, and revel in choices. We all have limited choice to some degree. Some have more limited choices than others. That is the nature of the beast.
    I believe in the right to choose, and will always make efforts to support the right of the individual to choose. For instance when I volunteered at the rape crisis line the right for the victim to choose to report any incidents was paramount. I might have a preference to see such situations reported, but I never, ever pushed my own agenda. Yet – there is limits to choices as well.
    For instance when I volunteered at the suicide and crisis hotline I did not support the right to commit suicide. If someone had me convinced they intended to die within a certain time frame I took action to stop that choice.
    Other examples of choices I dont respect are self injury – including cutting, burning, bulimia, anorexia and other attempts to cause serious damage to one self.
    So yes – choices. Certainly. To a large degree I couldnt agree more. Within certain limits.

    You said your concerns about therapy arise from the fact that such therapy is unsuccessful in the majority of cases and that it “has a high risk of damage to the client.” Certainly your first concern is substantiated by most clinicians (although we can’t disregard the exceptions to the rule to be fair),

    No, I dont want to rule out the exceptions. I dont know what the percentages are of successful changes. They might not even stay constant. IE a change might happen immediately after the therapy, but then over the next say 10 years revert back to their original preference. I know the successful changes are the minority.

    but I am not at all convinced that your second assertion ( “has a high risk of damage”) is true or that it is any more true for therapy for this issue (sexual orientation or sexual behavior) than it is true for therapy for any other issue.

    I am supportive of “exploring his or her sexual orientation” in a questioning, non-judgmental format. Such a format should be completely open to either end – maybe the person will end up living as a gay person, maybe the person will end up living as straight. No judgment in any form on either choice.
    The damage can happen when religious people makes it a moral and religious issue. IE if the exploration reveals “I am gay, and I want to find a wonderful same gender person to live with”. Such a choice can be and has been turned against the person receiving help. It has been called an abomination before God. I have an issue with that judgment.
    When a person is pushed towards not living a gay life even if their questioning and has led them to that decision I have seen extra ordinary damage. I have talked to literally hundreds of people who has felt significant damage from that kind of therapy. Yes – that is many years on various hotlines as a volunteer. Quite a few people I have talked to has become highly suicidal due to the influence of their belief, and the authorities who judges them in the name of God.
    It is the mixing of judgment against gays and religion that scares me. It is the damage such “therapy” does to their sense of self and connection with God that literally makes me sick.

    We have to assume that many people, adults, wish to explore their sexual orientation or their sexual behaviors for any number of reasons and that exploration may or may not include a desire to change orientation and that it may or may not include the specific goal to change orientation.

    Yes – that is true. As long as it remains a truly non-judgmental exploration with either decision being OK then I am onboard. If it is an exploration with the expressed desire to change sexual reorientation the evidence of lack of results, and the evidence of long term damage makes me cautious. When there is a desire to actually change sexual orientation there is also a judgment against sexual orientation. Given that for the majority of gays this is not possible such a judgment can become harmful. Therapy that does not identify and neutralize the judgment has a high likelihood of causing damage.

    Once we are adults, we take into our own hands repsonsiblity for our lives, something that children do not, cannot do. And it is this point that is at the crux of what I want to say–strong>that we humans are really creatures who seek choices in our lives. It’s a primal instinst.

    Yes – if the desire to change sexual orientation is a product of choice. Not a product of shame, fear, self loathing and a longing that for the person at that moment might seem impossible – the longing to live as homosexual, remain liked in the community, and have a good relationship to God.
    That too is a limitation on choices. Choose between God and homosexuality. I say a person can have it all if they so wish.
    Yes – once we are adults we need to own our own life completely. We are supposed to have the skills to do so at the time. Although not everyone does. A person seeking therapy is vulnerable. Such a person is to a certain extent at the mercy of the therapist. They have the option to walk away at any time. Unfortunately the client does not always see that option. So the vulnerability should be respected.
    Imposing religious standards on a vulnerable person is a recipe for harm. It also causes ethical problems!

    So when I think about all the people who visit a psychologist, a counselor, a psychiatrist… I see the patient’s visit as an exercising of a choice he has made……being one’s own agent involves the clarification of choices, which in and of itself is an achievement that can be seen as an expansion of choice, I would argue.

    I agree

    At the same time, I know those who say their therapy was unsuccessful….

    Yes – those are two categories of people who are not happy with the results of therapy. There are many other categories. People who got hurt due to improper therapy. This could be people with whom the therapist didnt have correct termination at the end of therapy, or people who felt pathologized, not heard and judged. It could also be people who went to a religious therapist and felt their relationship to God was negatively impacted in the process. There are many other categories of people who might have been damaged by a given therapy. In some extreme cases this leads to quite a bit of long term damage caused by (potentially) well meaning, but incompetent therapists.

    Can we assume, therefore, that the still obese…. should not have sought therapy at all because it was harmful for them, that it must have a “high risk of damage” ?

    Well – in this case I think that the research shows a significantly higher incidence of success to all the conditions listed above, and a significantly lower incidence of damage than therapy to change one’s sexuality.
    For that reason I do not recognize your comparison – sorry.
    Sexual orientation is a heck of a lot more complicated to change than stuttering, shyness etc.

    Thus, I return to my earlier point–that we are creatures who like to know we have choices; we don’t like options closed to us.

    We all have some limitations on sex / love partners we want or can choose. It is a very small minority of straight people who would consider changing their sexual preference. Age differences are taken more serious in this culture than in any other culture I know of. Same gender attractions are heavily discriminated against. In some areas choosing someone of a different culture or color than one’s own is frowned on. There are limits on sexual / love partners across the globe.
    Now the hypothetical gay who wants to simply have the option to change their sexual preference. We know a few things – we know that few (not all, but few) manages to do it. We know that some gets damaged in the effort. This damage can range from loss of money, deep disappointment it didnt work, to actual further estrangement from themselves. We know these damages – mild to severe – are more likely when we try to change sexual attraction than when we try to change obesity, shyness etc.

    On another thread I told the story of a gay friend of mine who doesn’t want to be gay. I won’t repeat the story. I realize you and others would say his feelings are what they are because he has been conditioned by society to feel the way he does.

    I have said society most likely has an impact on his desire to change sexual orientation. I have not said it was the only influence. I have never told anyone how they “should feel”. I have however acknowledged the hurt many gays have expressed to me when their community ostracizes them due to being gay.

    He disputes that, and I dispute that, knowing him and his life as I do, but can you entertain the idea that perhaps what may make him feel as he does as much as any other reason is that he has a primal, instinctive desire for choices and that he is aware that biology has limited his choices to a large degree?

    As mentioned above – to a large degree biology limits everyone’s choices. I have spoken with many gays who has designed their life to be confirmed gay. Many of them have said something in the neighborhood of this: “I didnt choose to be gay. My life would have been so much easier if I was straight. I cant change it. I simply cant feel sexually attracted to someone of the other gender”. ( I realize not all gays feel this way)
    I can understand that statement. I can understand that some gays would feel the same way and say “damn it, I wont accept I cant change my sexual attractions”. In that case they might continue to try and change. I can understand the impetus to do so. Again – I look at the potential for damage. I look at the lack of ongoing proven positive results. I feel sad for people who cant find ways to live with being same sex attracted, and while I wish them all the best in pursuing which ever solutions they believe are right, I also know they fight an uphill battle. And I hold in my heart that at the very least they dont get further hurt from attempting to make such a change.

    Now, you or others may say, “He shouldn’t care about his attractions. Society has made him feel this way.” First, to say that to him and to others who may feel as he does, robs them of their choices about what to care about, robs them of their right to feel. To tell another or to suggest to another how to feel is form of tyranny in that it devalues the individual experience.

    I know I have never told anyone how to feel. I often try to express what I hear someone say they feel. Sometimes I am wrong, often times I am right. The internet makes it a bit more complicated. It can be even more complicated when I walk onto a web site where the culture in many ways seems different than my own.

    but I’ll just say that he doesn’t have a lot of choices of people to fall in love with while still retaining the career and lifestyle he loves, but I’d answer your question more directly by offering that it is in our nature to seek choice.

    Ok, but if all else is equal. If the community he preferred to live in was completely open to gays. If gays where open about being gay in his immediate and surrounding communities. If he could retain his career, his friends and his current life style all while remaining gay would that not increase his desire to remain gay? Would that not offer him the choices you advocate for?
    In the end I think it might be easier to change attitudes than to change gender attraction. If we could give back your friend the choices he values in the rest of his life. If we could give your friend options to find same sex partners that does not hurt him on par with straight people. If he had all those options – then just maybe being gay wouldnt be so much of an issue.

    Some people more than others are especially independent, especially reluctant to accept restrictions, and while you may think that those who seek therapy are the most malleable, the ones most prone to bend to the strictures of society,

    No, I do not think so. Never has. Never will. I have the utmost respect for people who seek help and support in the varieties that life throws their way. I am certain I have never expressed anything otherwise. I have a large investment in making sure the help and support available has a high likelihood of causing positive change to the majority, and a low likelihood of causing damage

    is it not possible that at least some of them may be the most independent in that they are after choice?

    Ohh absolutely. Now – some choices are not in range. For some people – please note the some not all – for some people changing their sexual attraction might not be do-able. For some people it is too hard wired into their being. For those folks – I would rather see society change than I would see them get further hurt by judgmental folks.
    And when all is done and said – if there was no difference living as a straight than living as a gay, I would hazard the guess that most people would go with what comes easiest to them – the option to choose which ever gender they are naturally attracted to.

  36. Rander,
    I want to thank you for the polite and thoughtful way you posted your responses to me in our prior discussions.

    Thank you Ann. Right back at you.
    Rander

  37. Hey Zoe,
    Every time I see a post from you – you make me smile. :).

    See “assumptions, incorrect”.

    Ok, I stand corrected.

    Yes, there was a sexual relationship – but only while I looked, smelt, and tasted male. As I’m sure you know, smell plays a far greater role in famale sexual response than male.

    That makes perfect sense of course. What I was trying to get at is at this time you have a lot of choices as to how to approach this conundrum. I would think it might do some good with a well informed psych to help you figure those choices out.

    It had one advantage though – most women take some time to get used to the new anatomy. I already had the device-drivers installed, and found things like urination far easier than I’d ever done before.

    I have always thought that urination must be so much easier for a guy. Not quite fair. To those who might be tempted to speculate if I have penis envy I can only say – Naa, not so much 😀

    Sometimes you have to laugh.

    Yes – sometimes it seems that if there is a God he might be having one major joke on us. Sometimes it can make me quite pissed off as well.
    Warm regards,
    Malene / Rander

  38. But I’m not the one being dogmatic, Jayhuck, you are!
    I reread the posts I wrote that you took exception to. Please do the same!
    I entertained numerous possibilities for Carole’s friend saying that we simply didn’t have enough to go on…and that psychology has a bias against the prospect of a ‘homosexual’ even considering heterosexuality.
    You, however, answered:

    I base my interpretation of his statements on my own experience with friends, family, self and others.

    LOL. He made the one statement and yet you have an interpretation!
    Hmmm….now where’s that bias hiding out? Anyone? Anyone?

  39. And above post should obviously read – Hey Carole – not Katie. Sorry about that Carole.

  40. And I’ve seen the propensity people of faith have to undermine science when it suits their interest – I think we’ve come to a standstill Eddy – I see science as continually growing and changing, although I by no means see it as infallible – ti wouldn’t have to grow and change if it were – but I do see science progressing and doing away with old and most likely wrong ideas – whether we are talking about Evolution or Homosexuality

  41. As it grows in knowledge it, science, does away with old ideas – I guess that’s a better way to put it.

  42. But it was Science…and they held onto their errors for a long, long time…and even harassed and persecuted those who disagreed with them. HMMM….

  43. Science used to say the earth was flat too Eddy – as well as the earth was the center of the universe – I don’t see those things as errors Eddy, I seem them as growing in knowledge – that’s what science does.

  44. Jayhuck–
    Now if you could only acknowledge that it might be your bias that refuses to recognize that maybe science has done these studies with a bias.
    They took giant steps from ‘mental illness’ (calling it a mental illness was an error they held to for a very long time, BTW) to ‘socially unacceptable behavior’ (that one said more about society than the individual) to ‘ego dystonic homosexual’. Holy crap! In my lifetime, they had me deemed as ‘mentally ill’ because I was gay and now I’m ‘ego-dystonic’ because I have both faith and personal issues with it.
    I’ve seen their capacity for errors. I’ve seen how they sometimes are swayed more by the ‘public mind’ than the ‘individual mind’. I’ve seen how rigid and defensive they can be when challenged. I recognize the possibility that they may not have all the answers yet.

  45. Hey Katie,
    You are going to keep me on my tippy toes. Thanks for all the time you are taking.

    If you’re going to allow everyone to define their sexual orientation as they see fit, then doesn’t that imply that a variety of therapeutic stances should also be available?

    Absolutely and of course. There is never a one size fits all for humans. We dont need to go to Greece to agree on this.

    And by the way, at least among the upper classes, older men were expected to engage sexually with male youth.

    Ohh, thats interesting. Quite different from today huh.

    And while you might be more interested in the present, it seems to me that keeping identity formation within an historical context is important because otherwise we can fool ourselves into thinking that certain identities are an inevitable, immutable, trans-historical, fact — like rocks.

    I never assumed that. I have lived in three very distinct cultures, and 7 or 8 subcultures. I speak or understand multiple languages. Trust me issues of gender are treated quite differently in the various cultures, and the resulting way people handle their sexuality is influenced by it too. One thing has seemed constant to me. There are some people that find out they are gay very early on. Those folks are often incredibly hurt when their communities cant accept them, and they have trouble accepting themselves based on their upbringing. In most of those cases their homosexuality seems as constant as my own heterosexual preference.

    So…. If this is the case, what would you have the therapeutic community do?

    Well, in trying to figure that one out, I believe i need to speak with many different people. So uhm, well – thats what I am doing. :o)

    ….. saying how important it is that people remain open to the idea that not all men who want to reduce their homosexual attractions are doing so due to internalized homophobia, etc….

    Ok, could you give me some examples of reasons a person who feels 100% gay would prefer to reduce their homosexual attractions? I am really just curious. What are the other components of this wish to change their attractions?
    Thanks,
    Malene

  46. Rander/Marlene,
    Ummmm….. you jumped to some conclusions there. But hey… if it makes it easier for you to understand and accept then that is fine. I was pretty gay and pretty much set well into my late twenties that that was how it was going to be. So….. I don’t know what you mean by youth and not “really” being gay. But whatever. You may make up my story and feelings as you like …. plenty of people have done that here and I am getting used to it.
    Somewhere on this blog is my story in more detail.

  47. You know Eddy, it might be your own bias preventing you from EVER seeing such a thing.

  48. And I haven’t seen enough thorough and unbiased study in the past 40 years to convince me they’ve dealt with their errors yet.

  49. I don’t worship science either Eddy – but the thing about it as a discipline is that errors are usually gotten rid of over time.

  50. think you will find that women are more fluid in their sexuality. At a time in my life before ever becoming a christian I began to change my interests from women to men. I became a christian years later. Had some struggling some time after that. And have pretty much settled into the life of a chirstian who happens to be ex gay.

    I couldnt agree more. For us women our sexuality is a bit more fluid than for men. I also think a lot of people, men and women experiment especially when they are younger adults. Eventually they settle down with a main attraction, and yes if there has been same sex attraction prior to settling in with opposite sex attraction then it is quite likely that it will remain a little closer to the surface. I dont really call that being gay though.
    Most gays I know have been confirmed gays most of their life. That is a little different from a bit of confusion and trying out what works.
    Malene

  51. Contrary to your prescription of people finding acceptance, I who had the full acceptance of my family and community for being gay, am ex gay. People are influenced beyond social circumstances to change their lives.

    Hey Mary,
    I have made efforts to include the attitudes of the individual and the attitudes of the surrounding community. When I point to the surrounding community I also include much more than family. Certainly family influences are strong, but not everything.
    So in the I agree with you. We are all influenced from so many different directions. Depending on our own preferences we seek more or less of certain attitudes in our lives – and we seek that for so many different reasons it is not easy to figure out what is internal direction, and what comes from outside.
    Acceptance comes from inside as well as outside.
    Warm regards,
    Malene / Rander

  52. One might say, it is your bias expecting a bias, where one very well may not exist. Your comment just goes to prove that people of faith will ignore or try to repudiate science when it does not mesh with their beliefs.

  53. I wouldn’t expect you, as an Evangelical, with such a worldview, to say anything else:

    I happen to see a bias that’s become so entrenched in a span of 40 years…but it’s still a bias.

  54. Jayhuck–
    In this conversation, you’ve been talking to Carole, Evan, Mary, Warren and me. Not one of us has the total disregard for Science that you speak of. Please talk to the people ‘in the room’ and speak to the words we’re actually saying.
    I respect Science but I don’t worship it. I don’t think it’s infallible and I am able to recognize the dangers of a bias. Science recognizes that bias can lead to a flawed conclusion. I happen to see a bias that’s become so entrenched in a span of 40 years…but it’s still a bias. As long as I continue to perceive it, I will speak to it…especially on a website that might also have an inkling that there’s a bias or two needing to be reckoned with.

  55. Actually – I shouldn’t have limited that statement above to just Evangelicals – it is a tendency of people in almost any faith-based system to deny, repudiate or ignore science when it doesn’t fit their belief system. I think about Evangelicals on this blog only because they, as a group, have been so powerful a voice in misrepresenting gay people – with some exceptions – the owner of this blog being one

  56. First of all – sorry everyone it took me so long to get back to this thread. Life sometimes takes over. I will read over everything now and respond.
    Malene / Rander

  57. Evolution is a great example – its a pretty much done deal in the scientific community, even if the theory has changed some over time – but I can find hundreds if not thousands of Evangelicals, and maybe even other Christians who don’t believe in it.
    This is where science butts heads with belief – even if the science of psychology isn’t as neat and tidy as some of the natural sciences – the tendencies for some Evangelicals to dismiss science outright simply because it does not fit their belief system is widespread.

  58. Actually, the APA agrees that it cannot decide religious questions (see the right hand column for their resolution on religion). They can say what research says about consequences of certain religious practices but the APA has limited itself by policy to say one should or shouldn’t want a certain kind of life on religious grounds.

    I absolutely agree with this Warren – Religious issues will have to be treated differently than secular ones – and that is all the point I was really trying to make.

  59. Eddy,
    And there are those who have those issues for whom mainstream psychology can, has, and will continue to help!

  60. I see a gay man looking at some straight couples and saying “would give anything to have” I ask myself, what would I do or think if it were a straight person saying that about gay relationships? I think all the mainstream professional psychiatric, psychological and medical would back me up here.

    I can think of single men, gay and straight, who would say that. There are some things you can do in a straight relationship that you can’t do in a gay one and not having experienced that, a person might wish for it. I do not think it good to deny reality in order to recognize the potential for a valued life for gay people.
    Therapists are not priests or preachers or moral advisors, or at least I do not see them as secular priests deciding for me or you what I should think about the life I should live. Actually, the APA agrees that it cannot decide religious questions (see the right hand column for their resolution on religion). They can say what research says about consequences of certain religious practices but the APA has limited itself by policy to say one should or shouldn’t want a certain kind of life on religious grounds.

  61. Eddy,
    Your own bias makes you blind to the fact that maybe I am right about this individual – even though I have repeatedly said I don’t know and can’t know

    Your very deep bias, however many people share it with you, is still a bias and it will not./ can not meet the needs of this individual.

    You have no idea if that statement is true or not Eddy. It might be just what the individual needs.
    Your own bias is glaring in its ability to detract from what the psychological community says – Evangelicals in so many areas would prefer that science take a back seat to what their faith says – It is even-handed on the surface but only because it means to give more Credence to the Evangelical/Religious bias than it deserves.
    However, I agree with you that any of those things you listed might be possible reasons he made such a comment – although, if I remember right, Carole already stated that he was not interested in making any sort of attempts at change.

  62. Mary,
    How often must I repeat myself before you hear me???? There ARE those people who have issues with homosexuality and their faith, and I completely understand why, for them, they must make adjustments – whether those be celibacy or an attempt at a heterosexual relationship

  63. NO, Jayhuck, emphatically NO!
    I’m for trying to find out what made him say what he said–whatever that motivation might be. You and the biased psychological community refuse to even recognize that his desire might be legitimate on some level. What if he’s truly bisexual and his desire for ‘loving wife and family’ outweighs his desire for men? What if his homosexuality was a dalliance with lingering after effects? What if he has Christian beliefs that would make a fulfilled homosexual relationship impossible? What if he learned some things about himself in those failed homosexual relationships that made him realize that he’d never be truly happy with a man? Your very deep bias, however many people share it with you, is still a bias and it will not./ can not meet the needs of this individual.
    The science of psychology is the study of the workings of the human mind. It has not completed even its basic study in this area and yet you speak of it as dogmatic truth. I’m very sorry that you remain blind to that.
    Rant away. You prove my point more with every word you write.
    Oh, there’s another incoming…you must have more ‘insight’ to share.

  64. Jayhuck,
    You accuse others of having bias and your bias is glaringly obvious, too. It just so happens that Carole’s comment about people wanting choice happens to be true. You just seem to not like the choices. Not wanting to be homosexual and having unwanted same sex attraction do not always equate to internalized homophobia as you so often push. It ‘s not an either or situation where someone is either gay and accepts it or they have internalized homophobia and do not accpet it. Those are not the only options available to people.

  65. Ah, but your bias did show Eddy – You carefully talked about him possibly pursuing a heterosexual relationship and then warned us how DANGEROUS that is – when I wouldn’t have even gone there – no one in the mainstream professional community would have – such a statement would raise a red flag and tell us, that outside some faith issue, this person is having a problem accepting who they are, and that they are sort of idolizing of straight relationships – all of which can and should be dealt with without even considering first pursuing something heterosexual

  66. LOL. But I didn’t state my Evangelical bias! I very carefully stayed away from any such thing and only addressed the issue of how our bias–whatever it may be–can impact someone seeking help. Thanks for taking the opportunity to tell us your bias once again.

  67. The only agenda I’ve pushed is that bias is dangerous and has an impact on a real person with real issues.

    I agree with you here Eddy, but our problem is in our worldview and how we approach these issues. I approach being gay as a normal, HEALTHY, variation of sexuality – one that does not need mending, or fixing, or changing – much in the same way that heterosexuality does not. I see a gay man looking at some straight couples and saying “would give anything to have” I ask myself, what would I do or think if it were a straight person saying that about gay relationships? I think all the mainstream professional psychiatric, psychological and medical would back me up here.
    You, however, approach the issue from an Evangelical perspective, a religious perspective – one that does require gay people not to act on their feelings, that does not see gay relationships as normal or healthy.
    I should probably clear a few things up about where I stand and why I see things the way I do
    1) We, as humans, tend to gravitate towards what we don’t have. I found it amusing that on another thread Allen Chambers is talking about the fulfillment he has found in marriage, even if he’s not really straight, and how another man, a gay man, talked as if he had been repressed in his marriage – living a lie so to speak.
    2) We have to acknowledge that people, including some gay people, DO carry around internalized homophobic feelings – that’s a fact, whether it applies to Carole’s friend or not – and these feelings may not have anything to do with religion and everything to do with a dislike of who they are for other reasons – or even a propensity to idolize relationships that others have
    3) Its prudent. I feel, to begin dealing with someone like Carole’s friend as if the gay feeling is normal and natural and go from there – if there is a religious issue then it can be dealt with.
    4) I do understand and support religious views on sexuality and the efforts some make to adjust their orientation to fit their faith – I empathize a great deal with these things actually because I am dealing with them myself

  68. If memory serves, you’ve been chastised a time or two as well Eddy! I never said you couldn’t jump in on a discussion – fyi!

  69. Jayhuck–
    I believe you’ve just made a few judgements of your own. It’s true that I haven’t been a part of this discussion up til now. I’ve been quite consumed with some personal matters and preparing for a cross-country move. I do try to keep up with reading on some of the posts…and I made comments on another post just a day or so prior…my first comment in some time. I don’t think there are any guidelines for when we may drop into or out of a conversation…only that we try to actually engage in the conversation. The responses I received from others indicate that I was well within the accepted boundaries. You are out of line and personally offensive to question my timing.
    A decision I made while on my hiatus from commenting was to try to avoid speaking ‘for Exodus’…so I’ve refrained from the myriad of posts dealing with Scott Lively and the Uganda conference. I spoke on the reorientation in the UK thread because that is a theme that is close to my heart. I spoke on this thread after a day or two of ‘holding my tongue’ and principally because I was offended that any of us would attempt to speak for someone who wasn’t even present.
    The only agenda I’ve pushed is that bias is dangerous and has an impact on a real person with real issues. I made a point to make it clear that, whether his ultimate decision be gay or straight, it was important that his counselors or friends were sensitive to the potential effects of their bias. I can live with the guilt of pushing that agenda.
    I’ve noticed that you’ve been chastised a time or two for your unique manner of intolerance so pick away in your agenda-free way.

  70. Evan,
    You missed the point of that quote I posted – re-read the bold text! I did not say that any such thing was a problem for gay men.

  71. Eddy,
    I find it interesting that you jump into this discussion professing to be open-minded on the subject and refusing to know why Carole’s friend would make such a statement, then turn around and make this one of your own:

    We may never know if your friend could find happy heterosexual fulfillment. The bias against such exploration is rampant.

    As if that is really what he meant by his statement or if that is in fact what he really wants. Pushing your own particular agenda, me thinks!

  72. BTW Carole,
    I am sorry that I borrowed only that one paragraph for my comments, but your additional comments on this thread do not take away from what I was trying to point out – I’m sure no matter how much of your original thread I had copied it would not be enough for some. As you said, the original thread is out there for any and all people to read.

  73. Carole and Eddy,
    I’ve said several times that I don’t and can’t know for certain what Carole’s friend was thinking – but as surely as you feel I’ve reduced Carole’s friends’ feelings, you reduce me and what I’ve said.
    For the record Carole – I truly don’t know why your friend feels the way he does. But his statements do point to some possible answers, not the least of which is that he may have some internalized homophobia – its not a new thing in the community – its not unheard of by any means. Do I know for certain that is what is going on? – there is no way I could – and I’ve said as much in the past.
    Neither you, nor I, nor Eddy could know for certain what is going on with your friend – I base my interpretation of his statements on my own experience with friends, family, self and others. BUT, when gay people make such statements I find it helpful to turn these statements around and see how I would react if the person speaking were of a different orientation – say if the person were straight and he were making the comment about gay people/gay couples. I think its a worthwhile exercise – and can open our eyes to our own views on the matter.

  74. Eddy said,

    but I ain’t dead yet! What matters most to me is that I’ve found peace and a true sense of fulfillment on my life’s journey.

    I love it!!! LOL
    You know, I have learned so much about how different are the individual’s needs from talking to my sister about marriage and about intimacy (both sexual and otherwise) . I always realized how different she and I were. We share the same mother but not the same father, and our childhoods were very, very different, Then too, she is 13 years older than I, from a different generation really.
    Her husband died several years ago and ever since then we have talked of things we only alluded to before, but to put it simply–she and her husband had a very strong marriage as do my husband and I, but what she wanted from marriage and what made her happy would not have worked for me and vice versa, and that makes perfect sense given the uniqueness of the individual.
    However, what we both have derived from marriage is happiness, even if the characteristics of the marriage that have provided us with that happiness are very different.

  75. Carole–
    I’m with you all the way. I sensed you glimpsed more of your friend’s big picture but some conversations here seem to always want to ‘box things up ever so neatly’.
    We may never know if your friend could find happy heterosexual fulfillment. The bias against such exploration is rampant. I understand the need to express caution to an individual pursuing such a path but most go beyond ‘caution’…the only resolution they seem to entertain is that the individual can only find life fulfillment in a same-gender relationship. Without the freedom to openly/freely explore ALL of the possibilities, people like your friend are likely to be plagued with lingering doubts regardless of which path they choose or embark upon.
    I made a distinction there at the end with ‘choose’ or ’embark’. I don’t think that I would have ever chosen celibacy but, as my life plays out, it has been my experience. Neither a committed homosexual or a committed heterosexual relationship seems particularly viable to me…but I ain’t dead yet! What matters most to me is that I’ve found peace and a true sense of fulfillment on my life’s journey.

  76. Sorry, Eddy, I left out something.
    I don’t think you were part of the old thread’s discussion at this point so I meant to clarify. What he told us he wanted (“would give anything to have” were his exact words) was a relationship with a woman, such as that which his brother had with his wife and that which his dad had with his mom, and kids.

  77. Eddy,
    Yep, I shrugged my shoulders at the “reduction.” I noticed that the paragraph removed chose just a part of what I had related about my friend. What was omitted were other things, including what had started the discussion–my relating that he had said his homosexuality never “felt right” to him, that it still didn’t, that given a chance, he’d opt to change in a NY minute. Beyond that, what I know about his feelings on the subject come from his aunt, my good friend, someone very close to him.
    I think it’s a pretty easy concept to accept that people are very unique and that no two people react to life or anything about life the same way. My friend’s feeling that he would opt to change if there were a way (his aunt said he jokes about being the first in line to drink a magic potient) is just, in my opinion, an example of how he would like another choice open to him in his life, one that more closely matches what brings him happiness and what feels peaceful and in harmony for him. There is a bit more his aunt has shared with me involving feelings for a woman with whom he once had a relationship, but it doesn’t serve to advance the discussion.
    Warren hit the nail on the head–that he has a life that is valued.

  78. LOL. I’m glad we were able to reduce Carole’s friend to the sum of our preconceived notions. Earlier Jayhuck asked ‘exactly what he meant’ when he said when looking at the straight couple who were holding hands, “I want that.” It seems we weren’t really looking for ‘exactly’ but rather for a launching point for promoting out viewpoints.
    I’m sure that Carole and her friend have been exposed to other couples, both straight and gay, in the course of their friendship. But he didn’t say “I want that’ then. Something in this particular sighting moved him. Since his ‘failed relationships’ were both in the past, if that was the simple explanation, nothing should have prevented him from saying what he said when in the presence of any apparently happy couple whether gay or straight.
    I don’t know, myself, exactly what he meant. In truth, I doubt that Carole does either. In fact, he might not even know himself. He expressed a feeling in a 3 word sentence. I’m sure he doesn’t speak every feeling that he has so we can conclude that this feeling had some significance. But until we explore that feeling and it’s significance with him, we are quite simply putting him into one of our own preconstructed boxes. If the individual or counselor who explores that feeling with him isn’t guarded against their own preconceived constructs, there would be a danger of ‘leading’ him towards the simplistic conclusion that it’s simply due to ‘failed relationships’.
    In my own experience, I have seen many couples both straight and gay; I’ve seen a number both straight and gay who seem to have found contentment and fulfillment but I’ve only had that ‘I want that’ feeling 2 or 3 times. Those experiences have, so far, only been with respect to straight couples…but, as has been so clearly pointed out, there are more of them and they are more highly visible. Without the benefit of an agenda-free counselor or friend, I haven’t been able to explore those ‘I want that’ feelings to my satisfaction. To date, the only thing that stands out is that these couples seem to ‘truly complete’ each other. It’s more than just a relationship, more than just a marriage, they truly seem to have found a best friend, some would say a ‘soul mate’. My impression is that any of them could have had a happy and fulfilling lifetime relationship with another but somehow, they hit the jackpot, and found a fit that suits them perfectly. Perhaps the gesture of happily holding hands triggered that image in Carole’s friend. And perhaps, whether straight or gay, the longing for that specialness is what caused the previous relationships to end. My point is simply that we here on this blog don’t know. And it troubles me that we’ve boxed it up and trivialized it as it suits the discussion and our own agendas.

  79. Jayhuck,
    Apropos of carole’s friend, it’s possible that many men like him are afraid of loneliness coming from a lack of attachment. As you admitted in a comment one year ago, it seems to be a problem for gay men. That could be one reason why some might consider any possible choice.

  80. Warren,
    I do think he has constructed a life that is valued, by others and by him. I do hope he can keep what he has because he is so passionate about it while also finding someone with whom to share it! (It’s the matchmaker in me). LOL.

  81. Jayhuck,
    Glad you reviewed. Yes, he had two relationships, long ago both of them.
    I do think , as you said, it illustrates that it’s much easier to be straight, for all kinds of reasons, not the least of which is the sheer odds, the numbers. My friend’s love of nature, the job he loves, the small town life he prefers is not condusive to meeting lots of people from whom to seek a mate.
    As for his ever seeking therapy…no, he wouldn’t seek it thinking he could change his orientation because he has a scientific background. His aunt says he is very well-read on the subject, keeping up with all the latest research.

  82. AH – I did find what I was looking for – thank you Carole – its actually what I expected to find – your friend wants to change because he has had failed relationships – I knew there was something underneath that statement.
    This is from one of your posts on that thread from last month:

    The friend I told you about? Consider this. He didn’t tell me the following details. I found this out a day or so after he told us he’d change in a New York minute if he could. His aunt, my best friend, shared this. It helps me understand why he would feel wistful, and why he said he would be straight if he could. He has had two failed relationships, both with men he met in the city. In each case , neither man wanted to live in a small, rural town while my friend practiced veterinary medicine. They didn’t like the isolation, didn’t share his hobbies. On top of it all, he told his aunt that neither man wanted monogamy and he does.

    Would we jump to support any person wanting to change orientation simply because of a few failed relationships? Does anyone think that’s a wise or even healthy decision? Would we support, or think its a good idea, for a straight person to change orientation because that person had two failed relationships and their boyfriend/girlfriend refused to move to a rural setting with them?
    However Carole – like you, I DO understand your friend’s frustration. I even empathize with it a great deal – things might actually be easier if he were straight – or if I were straight for that matter …….. OR, we might simply be playing the Grass Is Always Greener On The Other Side game too. I still maintain that the reasoning behind wanting to change is unhealthy though
    I do hope your friend finds a guy that makes him happy!

  83. Anti-gay is a legitimate term – A person need not be a “bad” person to have anti-gay attitudes though – perhaps that is worth stating!

  84. Carole,
    I’m asking about a specific statement he made – one you did not elaborate on to the best of my knowledge – if you could do it for me here I would greatly appreciate it
    Thanks

  85. nor does it take away from the fact that it always seems like the people most concerned with pointing out differences are people with anti-gay types of attitudes.

    Oops – sure you want to resort to this again ??

  86. Thank you Carole for the post to Rander – you articulated perfectly what I was was trying to say in earlier posts.

  87. Jayhuck,
    Warren’s post of Feb. 24 elicited over a hundred comments, and I was an active participant; you and I exchanged quite a few comments. What you ask … and more…is there for your review. Take a look and follow the comments even to around March 9th or 10th.

  88. I appreciate the fact that Warren does not support Reorientation Therapy – I think its also worth noting that ALL major mainstream organizations concerned with a person’s mental well-being have denounced Reparative/Reorientation Therapy as well!

  89. Carole,
    I did not want to review our past discussion, I was hoping you could elaborate on what your friend said about “wanting that” – what did he mean exactly?

  90. Jayhuck,
    you and I had a dialogue about the rather detailed comments I offered about my friend. I just located the date of our conversation on Warren’s handy blog calendar–February 24. It’s there for your review.

  91. I think one of the crucial parts to any sort of therapy is the therapist’s job of understanding why the client wants whatever it is they are seeking in therapy

  92. Jayhuck asked if I was “comparing gay to”

    the still obese, the still shy, the still angry, the still stuttering, the still addicted, the still agoraphobic, the still fearful,

    Paragraphs 4, 5, and 6 of my wordy response, particularly paragraph four and this sentence within it —

    I am not at all convinced that your second assertion ( “has a high risk of damage”) is true or that it is any more true for therapy for this issue (sexual orientation or sexual behavior) than it is true for therapy for any other issue.


    illustrate that the list was intended to suggest a myriad of reasons people seek therapy, and the use of the adverb still was to emphasize that therapies often fail to meet the expectations/hopes of the patient.

  93. Carole,
    One of the things that raised a red flag for me where you friend is concerned was when you said something about him looking at another couple – that was, I think, straight and in love – and saying something about “wanting that”. Can you elaborate on this a bit more?

  94. David,
    The shame exists in attempts to undermine the persecution of gay people – and in not acknowledging the parallels that exist between the prejudice aimed at gay people and that which is aimed at other minorities.
    Heck – I would assume differences exist in the experiences of many minorities – I doubt we could say that Asian Americans experience prejudice and bigotry in the same way that African Americans do – that doesn’t mean there aren’t similarities – nor does it take away from the fact that it always seems like the people most concerned with pointing out differences are people with anti-gay types of attitudes.

  95. Carole,
    Are you comparing being gay to:

    the still obese, the still shy, the still angry, the still stuttering, the still addicted, the still agoraphobic, the still fearful,

    I am just curious

  96. Rander,
    I have been thinking about a few points you raised, a few questions you asked a poster over the last few days, and I’d like to offer these thoughts for what they are worth. Your points got me thinking about what might be something that is crucial to our natures, something that is simply part of being alive. That’s about the best way I can put it. It may be the very trait that is in evidence when one who is gay decides either consciously or unconsciously that he or she doesn’t want to be gay and why he or she so resents those who suggest that if only society were fairer, the gay person himself or herself would feel differently and that therefore, should feel differently.
    I think it’s a very simple thing humans struggle for in their very short time on this planet–choices. We confront choices either forced upon us by circumstance (I think of the pictures of my youth–an Ethiopian woman, starving herself, having to decide which child to feed with what little she had) –or if we are lucky, we may find ourselves looking at a variety of choices that are not forced choices at all–a cornucopia of good, better, and best.
    I’m going to apologize ahead of time at this point for what might appear any disorganization of thoughts and assure you I will try to connect my points by the end.
    You said your concerns about therapy arise from the fact that such therapy is unsuccessful in the majority of cases and that it “has a high risk of damage to the client.” Certainly your first concern is substantiated by most clinicians (although we can’t disregard the exceptions to the rule to be fair), but I am not at all convinced that your second assertion ( “has a high risk of damage”) is true or that it is any more true for therapy for this issue (sexual orientation or sexual behavior) than it is true for therapy for any other issue. Do we have reliable evidence about how therapy in which a client explores his or her sexual orientation “has a high risk of damage”?
    Yes, of course —a young person taken against his will to a counselor’s office where he is told by both his parents and by the counselor that he can indeed change his sexual orientation if only he pursues and enthusiastically participates in therapy would be damaging, and such an attempt is unconscionable to me, but that’s only one scenario, isn’t it? We have to assume that many people, adults, wish to explore their sexual orientation or their sexual behaviors for any number of reasons and that exploration may or may not include a desire to change orientation and that it may or may not include the specific goal to change orientation.
    I also think it’s important to remember that there are the Nicolosis of the world and there are the Throckmortons of the world; let’s remember too that there are children and there are adults. Once we are adults, we take into our own hands repsonsiblity for our lives, something that children do not, cannot do. And it is this point that is at the crux of what I want to say–strong>that we humans are really creatures who seek choices in our lives. It’s a primal instinst.
    There are those in the world for whom, by our standards, choices are practically non-existent. I am thinking here of those in third world countries in which finding food and water are a constant source of worry and where survival is the only concern. About the only choice many of the world’s citizens have is whether to give up and die….or to persevere, but as bleak as that is, it’s still a choice, and without the instinctive exercising of choice number 2 by at least some our distant ancestors, none of us would be here today.
    The politics of tyranny and oppression pose another layer of the limiting of choice to far too many people of the world, past and present. Still, in thousands of ways, ways little and big, humanity struggles to lift their voices even under threat from those who would muffle them. They want choice. That image of that young man standing in front of that tank in Tiananmen Square sticks in my head as much as that Ethiopian woman is still with me over fifty years after I first saw her.
    Ten thousand years ago or today, starving or full-bellied, rich or poor, sighted or unsighted, sick or healthy, young or old, running or crawling, sheltered or unsheltered, loved or unloved….it seems that what humans struggle for is choice during our limited time here on earth. Perhaps life is for all of us, for those of us starving as well as for those of us who can’t decide between lobster or filet mignon, an attempt to increase our range of choices.
    We perceive whatever is it that limits us, I think, as an affront to our sense of being alive, as an indignity to our very existence and sense of self. That some of us who live in lands of plenty have more choices than those who don’t doesn’t seem to change our basic natures. That some of us like more variety than others, from what we choose to eat, to where we choose to travel, to whom we choose to befriend, to what kind of job we seek, to….well, you get the picture– we are seekers of choice.
    So when I think about all the people who visit a psychologist, a counselor, a psychiatrist , and when I think about all the issues that human beings bring to the offices of those professionals in seeking help from them, I see the patient’s visit as an exercising of a choice he has made. Furthermore, that he is in such an office is proof that he feels that he cannot achieve whatever it is he seeks without help of some sort. Successful therapy of any sort is that which empowers the individual, and empowerment occurs when one can become one’s own agent, and being one’s own agent involves the clarification of choices, which in and of itself is an achievement that can be seen as an expansion of choice, I would argue.
    So, lest you think I have gone too far afield, I’ll try to get now to the point–I have known all kinds of people who have had therapy for all kinds of things, and I’d have to say that many of them are very happy with the results of their therapy. Because of it they have attained life-long skills that have enriched their lives by empowering them and that empowerment came , in part, from the individual’s recognition of his choices in life.
    At the same time, I know those who say their therapy was unsuccessful. These people range from those whose only outward sign of unhappiness with such therapy is their claim that it was a waste of their time and money to those who seem to have fallen into different levels of despair and even depression over what they perceive as a lack of success. I think of those who have sought help for weight issues and who, years later, are still obese. I think of those who went for drug issues, and years later, are still using. I think of the agoraphobic who went with high hopes of one day feeling safe enough to eat in a restaurant with her kids, but who is still virtually house-bound.
    Can we assume, therefore, that the still obese, the still shy, the still angry, the still stuttering, the still addicted, the still agoraphobic, the still fearful, the still sleepless should not have sought therapy at all because it was harmful for them, that it must have a “high risk of damage” ? These people had high hopes (not for the first time either), they weren’t successul (another failure), their hopes were dashed (they are depressed). Should they, therefore, be told to stay away from therapy for their issues? After all, the numbers of “cured” drunks and addicts and the obese and the agoraphobic are not good. And what about failing marriages? Should we not look at the percentage of marriages that don’t make it in spite of marriage counseling?
    So, I have to say that when you speak of “high risk of damage” I wonder if you’ve applied the same criteria by which you judge therapy/ treatment of one issue to all the other issues as well.
    You asked,

    How come the gender that a person is attracted to and falls in love with is more important than a person’s ability to deeply bond with, love and be committed to another human being?

    and you added in speaking to Ann,

    In the end I am convinced that we all develop in interaction with our surroundings. We just dont live in a vacuum. You might not have become ex-gay because your family put pressure on you, but I am certain there have been influences around you. These influences most likely interacted with your natural inclinations that you brought to the table and in the end you made your decision. Even my decision to reject christianity was based on influences around me. I attended church for over 2 years before I made that decision. Did that experience influence my decision? Of course it did!
    Like me – you dont live in a vacuum.
    I do have a question for you – what do you feel is the number one biggest reason you wanted to become ex-gay?

    I know this was asked of Ann, not me, but I hope you don’t mind an attempt from a straight person to offer one explanation because Ann has her own individual experiences and perspectives and as a thoughtful and articulate woman can speak well for herself.
    Thus, I return to my earlier point–that we are creatures who like to know we have choices; we don’t like options closed to us. It’s what drives some to the top of Everest, what drives us still into space, what makes a child ask for something he may not even want, what makes many men seek many women, what sends some to the far ends of the world, what makes some of us content with a life lived in one town while others travel to the far ends of the earth. Even those who are predictable in their choices, even those who’d not describe themselves as adventurous when choices present themselves like knowing there are 31 flavors behind the Baskin-Robbins counter even if they choose the Jamoca Almond Fudge every single time.
    On another thread I told the story of a gay friend of mine who doesn’t want to be gay. I won’t repeat the story. I realize you and others would say his feelings are what they are because he has been conditioned by society to feel the way he does. He disputes that, and I dispute that, knowing him and his life as I do, but can you entertain the idea that perhaps what may make him feel as he does as much as any other reason is that he has a primal, instinctive desire for choices and that he is aware that biology has limited his choices to a large degree?
    Now, you or others may say, “He shouldn’t care about his attractions. Society has made him feel this way.” First, to say that to him and to others who may feel as he does, robs them of their choices about what to care about, robs them of their right to feel. To tell another or to suggest to another how to feel is form of tyranny in that it devalues the individual experience.
    Second, while it is very true that society conditions us all, to one degree or another, it may also be true (for we just don’t know) that the aversion of some people with SSA to embrace their homosexual attractions is as much biological as psychological and social. The science of all this is still a mystery.
    Say a man were to go to a therapist and say, “I’ve come because I want to get over my shyness. I’ve been shy since I can remember.” Exploring the details of the man’s life, the therapist discovers the man has a job with which he is quite content, has a happy marriage and children. There appear to be no grave consequences of the man’s expressed shyness.
    The therapist is rather surprised the man has come at all to his office, especially considering his purported shyness, but the man insists that for once in his life, he’d love to be able to go up to a stranger at a party or at work or in a store and simply begin a conversation. He’d love to be able to respond with more than a one word answer to people who speak to him first. The man is really after choices, I would submit. Shyness limits choices.
    How would we view a therapist who told him, “Hey, why sweat it? You have a great life: good job, financial security, loving wife and kids. So you’re shy—that shouldn’t bother you. It really hasn’t affected your life very much or else you wouldn’t have a great wife and kids and a good job. So, go home and enjoy the life you have. The only reason you think you are shy is because you are comparing yourself to others who are not like you, and you’ve been conditioned by society to see shyness as something weak and bad, but it can’t be because your life is good.”
    Nonsense? Of course it is. I know you wouldn’t approve of a therapist who would apply that “logic” to someone seeking help for such characteristic like shyness, would you?
    So, I’ve thought about your points and questions, and this is the best that I can do–it is part of human nature to seek the expansion of choices; when we feel choices exist, even if we don’t “choose” them, we feel a sense of control of our short existence. The kinds of choices we seek are very individual and that makes sense too.
    So, when you ask,

    How come the gender that a person is attracted to and falls in love with is more important than a person’s ability to deeply bond with, love and be committed to another human being?

    There is a lot I could add that is based on my friend’s experience, but I’ll just say that he doesn’t have a lot of choices of people to fall in love with while still retaining the career and lifestyle he loves, but I’d answer your question more directly by offering that it is in our nature to seek choice.
    Some people more than others are especially independent, especially reluctant to accept restrictions, and while you may think that those who seek therapy are the most malleable, the ones most prone to bend to the strictures of society, is it not possible that at least some of them may be the most independent in that they are after choice?
    I suspect too, that human nature being what it is, the more people try to tell others what they ought not seek, the more they will seek it.

  97. @ Jahuck,
    calling me shameful, does not change the significant differences between systemic racial prejudice and persecution of gays and lesbians…
    There are differences, they are real…there is no shame in mentioning them.
    The only shame is in trying to shame someone into not discussing the issue from a perspective different than yours…

  98. I think we will continue to run up against a wall trying to explain, mutually feeling misunderstood or not heard etc. The Internet can be a difficult place for these kinds of discussions.

    Rander,
    I want to thank you for the polite and thoughtful way you posted your responses to me in our prior discussions.

  99. Marlene –

    ou mentioned at least one child, so there must have been a sexual side to the relationship at some point. Now there isnt. Just an incredible amount of bonding and love. This would give rise to questions, issues, unfulfilled needs etc. I would think it worth talking about in depth and at length.

    My son’s conception required syringes to extract the gametes. No sex involved. My “meat and two veg” was semi-vegetarian, remember. About the same as a pre-op FtoM who’s been on hormones for a year or two.
    See “assumptions, incorrect”.
    Yes, there was a sexual relationship – but only while I looked, smelt, and tasted male. As I’m sure you know, smell plays a far greater role in famale sexual response than male.
    Some women are capable of the “mental gymnastics” required when the genitalia and neurology are mismatched. I never was. Sex was to please my partner.
    It had one advantage though – most women take some time to get used to the new anatomy. I already had the device-drivers installed, and found things like urination far easier than I’d ever done before. I could operate totally by instinct rather than having to think about which muscles to relax in what sequence.
    The nurses at the Aikchol hospital said that happens about 1 time in 4. No need for training, the instincts are already there. They can tell the first time the patient urinates post-op.
    If I were ever to have intercourse, my instincts and reflexes would no longer be mismatched with my body, and I wouldn’t have to think about what I was doing. The problem is of course that I’m set up to make love to a man, as is my partner. And the only person I want is the wrong darned sex! My partner’s in the same situation of course.
    Sometimes you have to laugh.

  100. Rander,
    If you’re going to allow everyone to define their sexual orientation as they see fit, then doesn’t that imply that a variety of therapeutic stances should also be available?
    And by the way, at least among the upper classes, older men were expected to engage sexually with male youth.
    And while you might be more interested in the present, it seems to me that keeping identity formation within an historical context is important because otherwise we can fool ourselves into thinking that certain identities are an inevitable, immutable, trans-historical, fact — like rocks.
    But they’re not.
    Also, looking at different cultural sexual practices opens our eyes to what appears to be not A Homosexuality or A Heterosexuality, but to a variety of homosexualities and heterosexualities, and not all of them are made up of the stuff that creates a stable identity within the confines of Modern identificatory practices.
    So…. If this is the case, what would you have the therapeutic community do?
    There’s a gay therapist named Joe Kort who’s written a best-selling book called “10 Things Gay Men Can Do to Improve Their Relationships”. He also has a blog called “straightguise”, and is coming out publicly (Oprah, etc) saying how important it is that people remain open to the idea that not all men who want to reduce their homosexual attractions are doing so due to internalized homophobia, etc….
    Might check him out — google joekort.com
    He’s gay, believes in gay positive therapy — and also sees first-hand that some people change their fantasies and/or attractions. And that, for them, it’s a very positive thing.
    Katie

  101. Rander,
    Would a man in Ancient Greece have been hurt in the process of choosing to nurture his heterosexuality?
    Katie

    I know too little about ancient Greece to be able to give a good answer.
    Malene

  102. David Blakeslee,

    Racial discrimination and sexual discrimination are not comparable.
    One has to do with skin color…the other with behavior.

    That is a patently false statement and you know it. There are PLENTY of parallels between the two – discrimination of minorities is still discrimination of minorities, whether we are talking about behavior or skin color or belief.
    Homosexuality is not illegal – homosexuality is not a disease. Scores of homosexuals were killed by Nazis – A mere 30 years ago homosexuals used to be dragged out of bars and beaten by the police – people are still attacked physically and verbally for being gay – people are killed for the same reason. The one big difference here is that it is usually easier to hide orientation as opposed to skin color. Your attempts to undermine the suffering that gay people endure is shameful.

  103. Marlene/Rander,
    I think you will find that women are more fluid in their sexuality. At a time in my life before ever becoming a christian I began to change my interests from women to men. I became a christian years later. Had some struggling some time after that. And have pretty much settled into the life of a chirstian who happens to be ex gay.

  104. Ann,
    I think we will continue to run up against a wall trying to explain, mutually feeling misunderstood or not heard etc. The Internet can be a difficult place for these kinds of discussions.
    I will put a cab on it now – no need to go any further.
    Warm regards,
    Malene / Rander

  105. Hey Zoe

    Er… we’ve been celibate since. There isn’t any sexual side to the relationship. That’s the point. Hugs, yes. Affection, certainly. That’s it though.

    Sorry – thats exactly what I meant though. You mentioned at least one child, so there must have been a sexual side to the relationship at some point. Now there isnt. Just an incredible amount of bonding and love. This would give rise to questions, issues, unfulfilled needs etc. I would think it worth talking about in depth and at length.

    Hence the exasperation TS people have about being so profoundly misunderstood, with assumptions being made that just don’t apply.

    ughm, am I still not understanding? Here I think I am getting it all. Feel free to correct me though.
    Warm regards,
    Malene

  106. How would you define sexual orientation? Behavior, fantasies, identity, etc….

    I am more than happy to let each individual define their own sexual orientation, based on how they experience themselves.

    Should all people with homosexual behavior adopt a homosexual identity? And if they don’t, are we to assume that they just need to overcome their internalized homophobia?

    I think we are all different. Some people have short periods of experimentation. Some people participate in three-somes with one or more partner being their same gender. They might still prefer the opposite gender though. I am happy to take each individuals word for what their sexual orientation is.
    If someone tells me that they had some fun for a short while with someone of their own gender, but really it wasnt “it” for them my answer is “ohh, ok”.

    Could a man in Ancient Greece have stepped back and question the compulsory homosexuality that was demanded of him and based on evaluating the social forces, have decided he would rather nurture his heterosexuality?

    I know precious little about ancient Greece and am much more interested in the present, so I cant really comment.

    Or would you have advised him to seek ONLY straight positive therapy in order to overcome his internalized heterophobia?

    I would ask what his experience of his own sexuality is, and start to support him from there.
    Malene / Rander

  107. Your argument – as I hear it – is that same sex attracted people have the right to try and change their attractions because they deserve the option to live in accordance with their own values.

    Rander,
    Please read my earlier two responses. I do not have any argument nor did I use the word “change”, nor am I referring to all same sex attracted people. Therefore the problem you have with what you think I wrote is not applicable to what I actually said. I believe you are referring to a completely different set of circumstances and individuals than I am.

    None of this answers my original question which I think I am about to state for the third time.
    How come the gender that a person is attracted to and falls in love with is more important than a person’s ability to deeply bond with, love and be committed to another human being?

    Right, because we are talking about two different things. I can only speak for myself – the gender that a person is attracted to and falls in love with is not more important than a person’s ability to deeply bond with, love, and be commited to another human being.

  108. What I also hear is that the sexual side of your relationship has been under strain

    Er… we’ve been celibate since. There isn’t any sexual side to the relationship. That’s the point. Hugs, yes. Affection, certainly. That’s it though.
    People who are TS say that it’s not about sex, but about gender – not who you want to go to bed with, but who you want to go to bed as. But most people don’t “get it”, nor realise the implications. They think it has to be about sex, really.
    There are consequences that affect sexuality, but sexuality is an effect, not a cause. Hence the exasperation TS people have about being so profoundly misunderstood, with assumptions being made that just don’t apply.

  109. Rander,
    Would a man in Ancient Greece have been hurt in the process of choosing to nurture his heterosexuality?
    Katie

  110. Oops, second to last paragraph should have read: would you have advised a guy in Ancient Greece to not question his culture’s compulsory homosexuality, and instead seek out ONLY gay-positive thearapy?
    Yes, we’re all a product of our environment, we’re all influence by it, and we can never fully escape it, but we can – to some degree – step back and question, at least here and there.
    Anyway — define sexual orientation for us.
    And then please fit into that definition things like Ancient Greece.
    Take care,
    Katie

  111. Rander,
    How would you define sexual orientation? Behavior, fantasies, identity, etc….
    It seems to me that this is where a reasonable discussion must begin, otherwise we might just be talking past eachother.
    Should all people with homosexual behavior adopt a homosexual identity? And if they don’t, are we to assume that they just need to overcome their internalized homophobia?
    Could a man in Ancient Greece have stepped back and question the compulsory homosexuality that was demanded of him and based on evaluating the social forces, have decided he would rather nurture his heterosexuality? Or would you have advised him to seek ONLY straight positive therapy in order to overcome his internalized heterophobia?
    Sorry, I know there are more than one question…. but that question should lead us to these others….
    Katie

  112. What if SSA is 50% genetic (or prenatal)
    10% environmental
    40% behavior?
    How would that effect our interventions?
    (I am open to suggestions about these percentages).
    @ Michael King,
    You really had no one who reported positive benefits…what was your selection process?
    Why is that than people use the word “numerous” and “harm” to describe the studies on changing attractions?
    The studies are not numerous.
    The studies are not categorically harmful.

  113. My comments referred to many individuals who feel as though the restrictions of being same gender attracted, and either currently or with the possibility of acting out on those desires, prevents them from living in harmony with their personal values. Please note, I said “personal”, not what others think.

    Hey Ann,
    I get that you refer to personal values. I include values of the surrounding community, because noone lives in a vacuum. Even when we reject an opinion or position we dont do it without influences.
    Personal values develop in an interaction with our surroundings. When I rejected Christianity I did so partly because of the influences of having been to church.
    Your argument – as I hear it – is that same sex attracted people have the right to try and change their attractions because they deserve the option to live in accordance with their own values.
    Here is my problem with this. There has been extensive research on these kinds of therapies and it shows:
    1. This kind of therapy is unsuccessful in a large majority of cases
    2. This kind of therapy has a high risk of damage to the client.
    Given the risk, and given the low success rate I am inclined to write it off. Not because I dont want those who would like to change their gender attractions to be successful, but because I am afraid they will be further hurt in the process.
    I understand and respect that you dont write off this option as readily as I do.
    None of this answers my original question which I think I am about to state for the third time.
    How come the gender that a person is attracted to and falls in love with is more important than a person’s ability to deeply bond with, love and be committed to another human being?
    I will even include this question for those with personal values who makes them seek out ways to change their natural inclinations – no matter where those inclinations come from.
    Thanks,
    Malene / Rander

  114. There’s a deep divide that seems silly to me between those who claim there’s a genetic/in utero predisposition (oftne interpreted as determinism) and those who claim that sexuality is fluid.

    Hey Katie,
    I am sorry, I havent commented on it, because it just isnt important to me. I can easily accept that some people come by being homosexual from in-utero hormonal washes, and some people have some other kind of influence that makes them swing in that direction.
    I dont really care why someone is homosexual – just that those who are homosexual arent hurt by their same sex attraction. That all that matters to me.
    Malene / Rander

  115. I feel it most for my partner. I got a release from constant torment. Though that’s not right, it’s not torment, it’s constant embarrassment, a constant feeling that you’re living a life that is perverted, un-natural, false, shameful, morally wrong. Forced into it by circumstances. I’m now freed from that. I have “Gender Euphoria” even 3 years later. Nearly 4 now.
    My partner had the father of her child feminise before her eyes. Yet she’s been completely supportive. See why I’m in love with her still?

    Hey Zoe,
    Wow, what a story. Congratulations for having found some kind of peace with your gender transformation!
    I can understand why this wouldnt be an easy situation for your partner, and for the sexual side of the relationship. What I hear is the two of you are incredibly bonded and absolutely adore each other. Few people have that – what a gift. It also couldnt have developed that way unless both of you had very open hearts.
    What I also hear is that the sexual side of your relationship has been under strain. I cant imagine that all therapists would turn you away from trying to find out how to handle it. I could imagine that therapists with a specialty in couples therapy, gender confusion, or even sex therapy might be able to help you. I am certain this area would have plenty of people who would happily take on the case. I hope it is the same in your area.
    Warm regards,
    Malene / Rander

  116. Contrary to your prescription of people finding acceptance, I who had the full acceptance of my family and community for being gay, am ex gay. People are influenced beyond social circumstances to change their lives.

    Hey Mary,
    Let me make a comparison from my own life before I answer your question. I was raised in a family that had a Christian culture, but absolutely no faith beliefs what-so-ever. I mean seriously – None.
    When I was 5 I forced my mom to read me goodnight stories from the bible. It was the first time she ever read anything fromt he bible. The storie go that I simply wouldnt hear anything else. From then on I have never doubted there is a God. I have felt somewhat baffled by my family’s refusal to see what I see.
    I have doubted, and sometimes still do which faith is the most “correct” one. I have questioned my faith, and sought out places to practice. I am still somewhat confused on this one – but the fact there is a God? No confusion at all. I have written off the practice of Christianity, mostly because I have not found a Christian church that I feel covers my need for practices.
    I still dont consider myself uninfluenced by my surroundings. Granted I havent accepted my parents or family’s lack of faith as correct. I have certainly sought out places of various faith’s to see what was there, and to learn from them. I have taken classes in comparative religions, and classes individually in various religions. I have attended church, synagogue, mosque, and buddhist ceremonies and meditations. I have questioned, and listened to various believers of different faiths. Every single one of these experiences have had an influence on me – of course they have. Even my upbringing in a marginally Christian culture has had an influence.
    In the end I am convinced that we all develop in interaction with our surroundings. We just dont live in a vacuum. You might not have become ex-gay because your family put pressure on you, but I am certain there have been influences around you. These influences most likely interacted with your natural inclinations that you brought to the table and in the end you made your decision. Even my decision to reject christianity was based on influences around me. I attended church for over 2 years before I made that decision. Did that experience influence my decision? Of course it did!
    Like me – you dont live in a vacuum.
    I do have a question for you – what do you feel is the number one biggest reason you wanted to become ex-gay? From your answer to me, it is most likely something inside yourself, I just wonder what it is?
    Thanks,
    Malene / Rander

  117. We agree on one thing. Some people people suffer because their same gender attraction is against what they believe in, and what their surrounding community believe in.
    You say these folks should have the option of changing their attraction.

    Hi Rander,
    I don’t believe that is what I said exactly. My comments referred to many individuals who feel as though the restrictions of being same gender attracted, and either currently or with the possibility of acting out on those desires, prevents them from living in harmony with their personal values. Please note, I said “personal”, not what others think. I did not use the word suffer as it is subjective and might not apply to all people with unwanted same gender attractions/desires. I also did not include what their surrounding communities believe in. My post indicated that the issue of having same gender attractions, at the exclusion of opposite gender attractions, is unwanted for many people. It has everything to do with their personal reasons, not what other people think. Acceptance of same sexual activity for them is not an option. Please note, I said “activity”, not how they feel. They do not want to yield to these desires for their own person reasons – whatever they may be. Dr. Throckmorton has, what I think is, a very viable option to consider for these individuals.
    This is very different from the individual who is content with their same gender identity, same gender relationships, and same gender sexual activity. People will either accept that or they won’t. I think if the issue is forced, as I have observed at times, there will be a natural human inclination to feel imposed upon and the acceptance might be delayed.

  118. Malene / Rander

    So I still wonder what you think would be helpful in a situation like that? I would lean towards simply focusing on what works in the relationship, and then slowly try to help the couple find out what they want to do about what doesnt work in the relationship.
    What do you think?

    I’m too close to the situation to have an objective opinion.
    We have been married for 28 years. In 1985, I was diagnosed at a Fertility Clinic as a mildly intersexed male, PAI syndrome. I looked normally male, with some minor anomalies – borderline microphallus for example.
    In 2005, after some extensive natural somatic changes, I was given a full battery of tests, and in view of the results, was re-diagnosed as a “severely androgenised non-pregnant woman”. By that time I looked female with extensive anomalies, and there were significant personality changes from the hormonal storm. Psychological disorientation too, I originally presented for treatment because I thought I had to be delusional. I didn’t know enough to know that such things, while rare, are possible.
    I’ve always had a female gender identity, but when you look like a rugby football player… a female social role was infeasible. When that stopped being the case, my GID became instantly uncontrolled. It was always extremely intense, just completely supressed because the slightest crack in the facade would have been catastrophic.
    If the change had been against my desires, I would have accepted it as just one more cross to bear. But to have a miraculous cure, an answer to my prayers since childhood? Of course I thought I had to be psychotic! Much of the therapy from my medical team was continued assurances that they saw the changes too.
    My partner and I are just as much in love as we were when we got married, but neither of us are lesbian, nor even bi. It would only be sensible to split up, but we are co-parents of a child, and we love each other far too much. It’s not that the relationship doesn’t work, it’s that it works far too well.
    I think on the whole that neither of us would like to have such a fundamental part of our identities as sexual orientation changed. But there’s no help available even if we did.
    A thorny problem, isn’t it? Medically, morally, ethically…
    *sigh*
    I feel it most for my partner. I got a release from constant torment. Though that’s not right, it’s not torment, it’s constant embarrassment, a constant feeling that you’re living a life that is perverted, un-natural, false, shameful, morally wrong. Forced into it by circumstances. I’m now freed from that. I have “Gender Euphoria” even 3 years later. Nearly 4 now.
    My partner had the father of her child feminise before her eyes. Yet she’s been completely supportive. See why I’m in love with her still?
    Zoe

  119. Notice how those who believe sexual orientation is fixed in each and every individual never tackles the issue of Ancient Greece….
    There’s a deep divide that seems silly to me between those who claim there’s a genetic/in utero predisposition (oftne interpreted as determinism) and those who claim that sexuality is fluid.
    Both might be true, it’s certainly not illogical to assume that for some individuals, a genetic influence is at work, for others, other factors are at work.
    Again, why isn’t this being addressed?
    Even fruit fly studies indicate that there’s a gene involved in some fruit flys who pursue males, and because this gene can be controlled for in fruit flys, there’s indication that early experience can ALSO produce homosexual behavior.
    It’s not a logical conundrum where only one stance or the other is correct. They both can be true.
    And as far as personal reports of whether some people experience a shift in their attractions, the measure of change which questionairs assume has a lot to do with the outcome of such collecting of personal reports. So I’d wonder what the measure of change would be — ?
    Katie

  120. MArlen/Rander,
    Contrary to your prescription of people finding acceptance, I who had the full acceptance of my family and community for being gay, am ex gay. People are influenced beyond social circumstances to change their lives.

  121. Rander,
    Perhaps I did not clarify my thoughts in the prior posts. I am not referring to individuals who are attracted to or in relationships with others of the same gender and are content with their life….. it is what many say they cannot do and have, and deeply want to, because of the restrictions these unwanted desires put on them that is the issue. This does not always include being in an opposite gender relationship – it could mean holding a different perspective on these unwanted desires that would allow them to be in harmony with their personal values. I personally think they deserve this.

    (bold added by me for emphasis on what I answer to.)
    Hey Ann,
    Thanks for the clarification I appreciate it. We agree on one thing. Some people people suffer because their same gender attraction is against what they believe in, and what their surrounding community believe in.
    You say these folks should have the option of changing their attraction.
    I say if the surrounding community changed their minds then the folks wouldnt suffer. In the alternative I believe there is strong evidence that it is easier to seek acceptance for how the folks with same gender attraction feel about themselves, and possible acceptance from their immediate surroundings than it is to change who they are attracted to.
    I also think there is strong evidence that changing someone’s sexual attractions is difficult – to make an understatement, and simply rarely works.
    Thus acceptance is a better strategy.
    I think we have truly arrived at the crux of the matter though. Each individual has the right and responsibility to find out what their personal values are. Once they have figured it out baring direct harm to others, it is the law in the US that we respect it. And Thank God for that law!
    But what do we do when there is indirect harm to others based in the values of some subcultures of the US. When people suffer when the values that are less accepting of homosexuals cause hurt to the homosexuals. Then what? Even more so if the homosexuals in question are directly hurt in their relationship to God, which is a serious wound. Now what? Do we question the values, or do we srug our shoulders and say “to each their own”?
    Now, The answer I have heard to that question are: “It isnt the values that are causing the problem rather it is caused by the wrongful attraction to someone of the same gender”.
    I can respect that answer – but I still feel those specific attitudes are responsible for an awful lot of hurt.
    It also brings me back to the original question. “How come it is more important to people who someone is attracted to, than it is how much Love and Compassion a person is capable of having and showing in their life?” I assume this placement of values, because long time same sex partners are not given the respect they deserve for having managed to keep their love intact.
    Warm regards,
    Malene / Rander

  122. That’s the trouble. The people I’m talking about are not Gay. In fact, that’s the whole point, and your misunderstanding of the issue illustrates this.

    Hey Zoe,
    Thanks for setting me straight on this. I see where you are coming from now. It would indeed be a conundrum.
    Here are a few assumptions that I add to the mix:
    1. That given the affection each of those partners feel for each other they have a strong desire to stay together. And in fact, they have stood by each other through a lot – because sexual reassignment is a pretty darn big deal.
    2. It is at best extra ordinarily difficult to shift what attracts one sexually about a person. Although, I am sure that affection for someone can often override other sexual triggers.
    So I still wonder what you think would be helpful in a situation like that? I would lean towards simply focusing on what works in the relationship, and then slowly try to help the couple find out what they want to do about what doesnt work in the relationship.
    What do you think?
    Thanks,
    Malene / Rander

  123. Andy F –

    we can surely say without any clinical experience at all, that no-one has ever successfully changed from male to female.

    Er..your mileage may vary on that one.
    You’d have to define “male” and “female” very carefully.
    For what it’s worth, my take on the situation is this (and I over-simplify horribly).
    Emotional and instinctive responses are set in the womb that conform to a greater or lesser degree to either a typically male or typically female stereotype, template or pattern.
    These will usually be correlated to a great degree with a typically male or typically female somatic appearance, genotype etc.
    Neonates show sexually differentiated patterns of behaviour, facial recognition etc strongly suggesting sexual differentiation of the neurology in the lymbic nucleus, even if the rest of the brain is ‘undifferentiated pudding”.
    By mechanisms unknown, this differentiation correlates with higher brain development and lateralisation to a greater or lesser degree with the corresponding stereotypes for male or female in the cerebral cortex.
    It’s theorised that the hard-wired emotional response when put into a social context (mixing with other children and adults) leads to crystallisation of a gender identity of male or female, long before puberty. But there are degrees, and there’s evidence strongly indicating that about 1 in 3 could function adequately in either gender role. Which one they identify with is more a matter of environment, their body shape, what gender they’re told by others they are, rather than something inate. Their gender may not crystallise till very late. But for 2/3, it is inate, unchangeable, and towards the extremes, even having the wrong shaped body won’t affect the gender identity.
    I’ll quote from Gender change in 46,XY persons with 5alpha-reductase-2 deficiency and 17beta-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase-3 deficiency. by Cohen-Ketternis:

    Individuals with 5alpha-reductase-2 deficiency (5alpha-RD-2) and 17beta-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase-3 deficiency (17beta-HSD-3) are often raised as girls. Over the past number of years, this policy has been challenged because many individuals with these conditions develop a male gender identity and make a gender role change after puberty. The findings also raised doubts regarding the hypothesis that children are psychosexually neutral at birth and emphasized the potential role of prenatal brain exposure to androgens in gender development. If prenatal exposure to androgens is a major contributor to gender identity development, one would expect that all, or nearly all, affected individuals, even when raised as girls, would develop a male gender identity and make a gender role switch later in life. However, an estimation of the prevalence of gender role changes, based on the current literature, shows that gender role changes occur frequently, but not invariably. Gender role changes were reported in 56-63% of cases with 5alpha-RD-2 and 39-64% of cases with 17beta-HSD-3 who were raised as girls. The changes were usually made in adolescence and early adulthood. In these two syndromes, the degree of external genital masculinization at birth does not seem to be related to gender role changes in a systematic way.

    This is consistent with the hypothesis that about 1/3 had an unchangeable female gender identity (so became transsexual when the change hit), 1/3 had an unchangeable male gender identity(so were cured of transsexuality when the change hit), and 1/3 just “went with the flow”.
    I’ve corresponded with different people with 5ARD, and their narratives fit this hypothesis.
    What this means is that trying to change gender identity in children displaying cross-gendered behaviour is a fraught issue. Sometimes, transsexuality will be prevented – but they will probably “grow out of it” without intervention. Often it will merely be suppressed, with consequent lifetime anxiety, depression, suicidal ideation, and substance abuse issues. I have very great concerns about Dr Zucker’s experimentation on children diagnosed with GID. His publications show too many confounding factors. Many did not fit the diagnostic criteria. Some were Intersexed. But the worst thing was that “preventing transsexuality” was the only criterion. If the patient suicided, as long as they did so while maintaining their assigned gender, that was a “success”.
    It appears to me that absent intervention, 2/3 of children displaying cross-gendered behaviour when young will turn out merely Gay, not transsexual, and this will be apparent by age 12. With intervention, this may increase to 3/4, but with unfortunate sequelae in some.
    So have we demonstrated gender change in a laboratory setting? Yes and No. Mostly No.

  124. My question is what is the difference between the APA’s stance on sexual “reorientation” or “modification” therapy and their stance on gender re-assignment therapy?
    In other words, while there may still be leeway for the headstrong to try to argue that no cases of sexual re-orientation have ever been documented in a clinical setting we can surely say without any clinical experience at all, that no-one has ever successfully changed from male to female.
    So why is one clinically taboo (“unethical”) and the other permissible?
    In other words Mr. King, your analogy about race would fall flat if you had substituted gender/sex instead.
    Sexuality and sexual orientation are far less understood and have shown themselves to be far less fixed than gender/sex is and thus I believe that there is room for the type of thing Dr. Throckmorton advocates at the very least.
    Even that would be less radical than gender re-assignment is currently.

  125. Zoe,
    Loooking at the source, I would not have called that comment that you provided a common one. Nonetheless, you get my point. As you can see in the rest of the comments you left out that affirming gays see homosexuality very differently than do ex gays. Most of those comments were provided by affirming gays in the source you used.

  126. I think i made out a little counting problem or typo. Allover there are 413 patients. when i sum

    “reasons given for the client seeking help”

    (236 + 59 + 45 + 28 + 15 + 14 + 9 + 8)

    there are 414. And the %-sum is also 101.

  127. Rander,
    Perhaps I did not clarify my thoughts in the prior posts. I am not referring to individuals who are attracted to or in relationships with others of the same gender and are content with their life. Depending on various parts of the country or world, society either supports this or not and it is something that cannot be forced either way. I personally believe when one is forced to agree with an issue, their natural inclination is to feel imposed upon. This is important as I think it would help those interested in acceptance from others regardless of what they want accepted.
    It is not what people do freely regarding their sexuality that is an issue to me, rather, it is what many say they cannot do and have, and deeply want to, because of the restrictions these unwanted desires put on them that is the issue. This does not always include being in an opposite gender relationship – it could mean holding a different perspective on these unwanted desires that would allow them to be in harmony with their personal values. I personally think they deserve this.

  128. It seems as if my English sense of irony has been completely missed. I used the metaphor of race to illustrate how gay and lesbian people might feel when their sexuality is regarded as something that could or should be treated. It just so happens that I am a white Christian male so I’m not sure how “hatred” or “enemies” come into it. I believe academics (like anyone else) should be able to participate in robust discussion without their scientific integrity being questioned.
    And yes, we will place positive accounts of treatments on the website. When we conducted our original oral history research, we couldn’t find any. However, we did find professionals who continued to advocate treatments and their comments were published in our papers in the British Medical Journal and on our website.

  129. Professor King (if you’re still reading this thread),
    Would you be amenable to using your website here to also post anecdotal stories of those who have had positive experiences of reparative therapy or other faith-based pastoral approaches?

  130. Marlene/Rander:

    Do you think different parts of the country are maybe more helpful if they are more gay friendly communities? I am in the San Francisco general bay area, and I just cant imagine gay’s having trouble finding gay friendly practitioners in this area.

    That’s the trouble. The people I’m talking about are not Gay. In fact, that’s the whole point, and your misunderstanding of the issue illustrates this.
    A traditional, Gay-unfriendly psych will throw them out as an abomination in the sight of God. Or at least, someone who makes them distinctly uncomfortable.
    A traditional, Gay-friendly psych will start out assuming they’re gay, and get totally confused. They’re both straight, but wish to become Gay, And if that’s possible, then it will be used by the Religious Reich as proof that Gays are “recruiting”, and also undermine the accepted wisdom that sexual orientation is innate and immutable. No Gay-friendly psych dare get involved.
    And the ex-Gay movement…. is unlikely to be sympathetic due to Religious convictions. To say the least.
    Finally, a gender specialist who knows something about Transsexuality will be out of their depth. Sex therapy isn’t part of their remit, and sexual orientation is something they help their patients accept, not try to change. Despite all the claims of NARTH et alia, sexual orientation is a peripheral issue. Look, these psychs have enough on dealing with that minority of patients (like myself) who acquire a sexual orientation, or have a latent one revealed, when they transition.
    Actually, that’s difficult enough for me too. I’d only just got my head around the fact that I’d been asexual-to-lesbian rather than asexual-to-straight when I acquired a libido and found myself very not asexual and very straight indeed. Not just inconvenient, but positively dangerous for a woman who’s transitioned and doesn’t look as if she has. Date the wrong guy, you end up in a morgue.

  131. Rander,
    What is different about our backgrounds?

    Ann,
    I might have jumped to conclusions. My background is ultra liberal for American standards. I believe that as long as people show respect and love to one another just about anything goes – as long as it is consenting adults.
    I live in one of the most liberal strong holds of this country – by choice. I doubt I would really survive long in more conservative circles.
    It was my sense of you – based on your posts – that you are quite a bit more conservative than I am. I also think I detected a conservatism related to upbringing – just as my liberal views have been shaped throughout my own life.
    Now – if I was wrong I apologize. If I was right, I wrote the above statement simply to affirm that I come with respect.
    Warm regards,
    Malene / Rander

  132. Rander,
    This might be true in some cases, however, some individuals have value systems that do not include religious beliefs. One does not have to have a religious belief to have personal moral convictions.

    One does not need to have religious beliefs to have personal moral convictions that is correct. In my experience – the majority of secularists have moral convictions that says its a bigger wrong to discriminate against, or in any way hurt those who Loves someone – no matter if it is same sex or opposite sex Love.
    Malene / Rander

  133. The comment about Christianity and attitudes toward homosexuality reminded me of a post on a blog that is given primarily to statistical data collection on all kinds of topics. This link provides data from a recent Gallup poll conducted in many countries. You might find it of interest. The question asked respondents if the city in which they lived was a good place for gays to live. The bar graphs show the % responding “no” in five different religious groups. Muslims had the highest % of “no”, then Buddhists, followed by Jews, then Christians, Hindus, and secularists.

    Hey Carol,
    My statement was about subcultures of the USA. In this country Christians are the majority. The majority of discrimination against homosexuals in this country come from Christians – only because there are more of them.
    The Jews follow the old testament, and the Muslims where told specifically by Muhammed that the rules of the old testament in regards to homosexuals should be followed. There is no surprise that people from those two religions strongly fight against homosexuals.
    I would have suspected Buddhists to have more relaxed attitudes towards homosexuals. So far I have not met a single judgmental Buddhist. Again, that might also be influenced by the culture of the country in which the question is asked. Most of the Buddhists I have met have been in the US.
    That secularists are the most relaxed about homosexuals is not a surprise, and underscores my argument that the damage of discriminating against homosexuals is caused by religion in all its shapes.
    Malene / Rander

  134. I actually know some couples in this situation, but there is such a depth of misunderstanding in the whole psychiatric and religious community that I know of none who have obtained help. The reaction when they ask tends to be not just negative, but vehemently, even violently so.

    Hey Zoe,
    For people in that situation – highly misunderstood by the psychiatric community what would you suggest might be helpful?
    Do you think different parts of the country are maybe more helpful if they are more gay friendly communities? I am in the San Francisco general bay area, and I just cant imagine gay’s having trouble finding gay friendly practitioners in this area.
    Malene / Rander

  135. The comparison of race to sexual orientation is one that confounds me. I was struck by Mr. King’s remark, particularly because I would have thought him to be schooled in science. I am also struck by his tone, hardly a professional, measured, collegial one.
    The concept of race refers to a collection of heritable traits shared by a particular group. When one asks, ” would you support ‘treatments’ to make black people white if they worked?” the implication is that race and sexual orientation are analogous from a scientific perspective. No such similarity has been established by those in the hard sciences. That a homosexual orientation is due to a collection of any number of heritable traits (as is race) is not something that science supports.
    Racial traits are those which have evolved over the course of mankind’s existence to give the members of that race the best chance to survive in a particular environment until such time as they are capable of getting their genes into the next generation through reproduction. So far, there is no evidence that homosexuality is an adaptive trait or part of a collection of adaptive traits that
    leads to the spreading of genes into the next generation. If there is an evolutionary advantage to the orientation, it has not yet been discovered.
    Because a few traits in all races have grown deleterious in new environments, it is inaccurate to suggest that modifications to racial traits aren’t already being studied and planned in labs all over the world.
    For instance, researchers believe they can one day eliminate the predisposition to diabetes among several races of people. This plan for genetic engineering is indeed an instance of modifying race. So, let’s not pretend that the world isn’t already engaging in modifications that are in many ways race-based.
    Now, if by his use of the word “race” Mr. King did not mean the collection of adaptive traits particular to an extended subset of people, if all he really meant was appearance, say skin color, or hair texture, or facial structures, well then he is forgetting or ignoring that millions of individuals of many races already modify their appearance by modifying traits peculiar to their race, traits they evidently don’t like.
    People dye their hair, straighten it, curl it, have plastic surgery on a nose they deem too wide or too long or too thin or too big, on a butt they feel is too flat; people try to darken their skin by exposing themselves to ultra-violet rays, people apply creams and lotions to lighten their skin. In short, people do all kinds of things to themselves in an effort to look, in their own minds, attractive, even if that means eliminating traits specific to a race.
    I know a heck of a lot of white teenagers who, if they could, would get an Achilles tendon transplant if they thought it would make them better leapers, faster runners. I suppose that will be possible one day.
    My point–Mr. King, people of a heck of a lot of races already do things to modify the phenotypic looks of their race. My father’s big Italian nose concerned me greatly when I was a young child. One day it dawned on me that I would maybe grow a schnoz like his. Having seen a tv show in which a very young Japanese girl had had her feet bound, I decided I could prevent my nose from becoming my father’s if only I pressed it at night with the palm of my hand. I never made it more than fifteen minutes before I fell asleep, and my efforts lasted only a couple of weeks so I know I owe my rather small nose of decent shape not to that nightly practice but rather to good fortune, for had I indeed inherited Dad’s nose, I would have saved money for plastic surgery. Dad’s nose was a fine bold, proud Italian nose. However, I didn’t want it, and I am glad I didnt’ get it. Now if only I had been as lucky when it came to the likely heritable racial trait of lipid metabolism. The Mediterrean diet for which my body is suited has not been my American diet.
    You might have also noticed that when a sub-group of people do not have at their disposal the financial means to effect certain changes, they manage to imitate the looks of others in other ways. In my town, in my state, it’s quite common to see young white males, and even some not-so-young, trying to look and “act black.” It is their perception that the black gang-banger is an alpha male, someone to be feared, respected so a certain sub-culture of white young people make themselves over in an effort to be perceived as tough and hip, yo.
    Let’s not kid ourselves then, shall we: people all over the world make themselves into someone else in looks and in behavior. They usually don’t need sophisticated “treatments” to achieve this, but if they so choose, well then, that’s their choice, isn’t it?
    Since I have been reading this blog, I have been astonished at the vitriol of a few who are gay toward those who have stated that they would prefer not to be gay . The irony of it all is overwhelming. That people who have been victims of judgement so quickly jump to judge others, that people who claim they want to be free to live their lives as they see fit as long as they harm no one then turn around and mock those, criticize those who’ve made different choices in their lives is…well, it’s just so unfortunate.
    I can well understand the concern about therapy and therapists who make claims that are unsubstantiated. I don’t feel it’s at all responsible for any therapist to tell a client that therapy will indeed result in a changed orientation, but as long as the therapist is informed and is honest with his client, then it’s up to the two of them to set their goals and work within that framework.
    I have to agree with the other poster–your comments are not those of a respectable professional. There isn’t just bias–there’s hatred in those words. A person who feels that way ought to find another profession.

  136. A totally different question – would you feel if someone came to you and said I want to change my gender attraction towards being attracted to my own gender – would you say they deserve the same support as others?

    This is not (quite) a hypothetical situation.
    Somewhere between 5-20% of marriages where one partner transitions (ie “changes sex”) survive. In the majority of these cases, a sexual relationship continues, though on a different basis.
    In a large minority though, it does not. One or both partners have no attraction to the same sex. Usually both, if the marriage survives.
    For some in that situation, they wish to overcome their strict heterosexuality so as to find their partner (though not anyone else of that sex) sexually attractive. While intimate sexual relations are not strictly necessary in such a close, stable and monogamous relationship, they are most advantageous. To state the obvious.
    I actually know some couples in this situation, but there is such a depth of misunderstanding in the whole psychiatric and religious community that I know of none who have obtained help. The reaction when they ask tends to be not just negative, but vehemently, even violently so.

  137. The GLBT community on the large supports physical manipulation of one’s body. That is to transgender.

    Er.. your mileage my vary on that one. A lot. Perhaps 1 in 3 of the GLB population have a very contrary opinion. That’s about 1 in 4 of GLBT people in aggregate.
    See for example this common view:

    i agree with this decision. i find it odd that the gay community is so quick to support everything transsexual. while insurance is a different issue, i am not sure that i would want my taxpayer money funding sex-change surgeries, if that was the case. why is it that we assume the “body” should be changed, when we are so quick to prescribe drugs for everything else? if you are depressed, or have anxiety disorder, then take these drugs to balance your neurons. but in the case of “gender identity”, how dare anyone suggest someone take drugs to balance their hormones. no, they have to have a sex-change operation. i don’t know enough about psychology to advocate one thing or the other, and so i’ll reserve judgment if you can prove me wrong. but let’s be rational about the subject and not jump to defend people just because we don’t want to be “intolerant”.

  138. The GLBT community on the large supports physical manipulation of one’s body. That is to transgender. I find it curious that those who simple want to change they way they feel or bahve is such a tension for gay people to understand. AFter all us ex gays are not cutting body parts, nor changing our color. We simple “think” differently than affirmed gays on the subject and sooo many want us to stop thinking as we do.

  139. Dr. Michael King

    would you support “treatments” to make black people white if they worked? Perhaps if we could all enter treatment to make ourselves into white Christian males the world would be a better place….

    I find your point curious. Normally I’d expect to find arguments of that caliber on MySpace.com.
    To your point, I don’t remember gay men marching in the streets carrying signs that read Keep the King of Pop Black when Michael Jackson made a shabby attempt at “whitening up” his life. What people do with their skin tone is not a public policy interest. The same will apply to sexual orientation should a medical therapy be invented that can alter it.

    You would have done a great service for your readers had you included those two sentences in the footnotes of your study.
    A) The first sentence illuminates the motivation behind your “research paper
    B) The second sentence tells your readers who is at the top of your enemies list

  140. The comment about Christianity and attitudes toward homosexuality reminded me of a post on a blog that is given primarily to statistical data collection on all kinds of topics. This link provides data from a recent Gallup poll conducted in many countries. You might find it of interest. The question asked respondents if the city in which they lived was a good place for gays to live. The bar graphs show the % responding “no” in five different religious groups. Muslims had the highest % of “no”, then Buddhists, followed by Jews, then Christians, Hindus, and secularists.
    http://inductivist.blogspot.com/search?q=religion+and+homosexuality

  141. You bring up that some people have value systems that does not include an acceptance of homosexual behavior. This is of course the crux of the matter. A few religions judge homosexual behavior very harshly. Some schools of thought within Christianity certainly believe that way.

    Rander,
    This might be true in some cases, however, some individuals have value systems that do not include religious beliefs. One does not have to have a religious belief to have personal moral convictions.

  142. Even though we obviously have different backgrounds to say the least, I would love to continue the exchange, and promise to do so with a lot of respect.
    Rander,
    What is different about our backgrounds?

  143. This thread has got me thinking – As a psych major, what would I do if someone came to me and told me they wanted to change their sexual attractions.
    Here are some of my thoughts.
    First I would be obligated to tell them that any type of therapy to change sexual attractions has been proven quite ineffective over numerous studies. I would also have to tell them there is significant evidence that such therapy can cause damage. Finally I would tell them that I could not in good faith provide therapy designed to change their sexual attractions, because I would not risk to hurt them.
    Then I would challenge them to think about why they want to change their attraction. I would suggest they fully explore different schools of thought about what homosexuality is, and how it works, all the while talking about it in length, and encouraging the individual to find their own story about their sexuality.
    I would do everything in my power to take the shame, embarrasment or discomfort out of their attractions. And I would continue to look for ways to strengthen their sense of self.
    If someone thought they had been abused in to their attractions I would focus on what happened, and apply sound trauma treatments. All the while asking the client to keep an eye on how they feel sexually – and support any sexual feelings they have as perfectly ok. (unless they were hurting someone).
    At this stage in my education – that would be how I would handle it. Who knows, it might change in the future.
    Malene / Rander

  144. Hey Ann,
    Thanks for your answer. Even though we obviously have different backgrounds to say the least, I would love to continue the exchange, and promise to do so with a lot of respect.
    Where I was driving at with my question – why would someone want to change their sexual attractions – is this: I think it is possible that many of those wishing to change their sexual attractions would not wish to do so if their friends, family and community completely accepted them as they are. The need to change would go away.
    Katie raised a great point. If someone feels their sexual attraction is driven by abuse, rather than personal need that abuse would cause a lot of hurt, and it would interact with their sexuality. Thus help or support could be focused on aleviating the pain of the abuse.
    You bring up that some people have value systems that does not include an acceptance of homosexual behavior. This is of course the crux of the matter. A few religions judge homosexual behavior very harshly. Some schools of thought within Christianity certainly believe that way.
    I do in fact question those schools of thought that condemn homosexuals based on religious ideals. I absolutely respect each individuals right ot choose their religious beliefs. I always back away when someone strongly state their belief, knowing it is not my place to question it.
    In my mind though I have to admit, I dont like it when religion causes damage. Much damage to people’s sexuality has been caused in the name of Christianity, and it hurts my heart.
    This to me is the crux of the matter. When people within a faith condemn others based on who they are, they are capable of hurting a person’s personal relationship to God. I find that painful to watch. I tend to think such condemnation that hurts others in their relationship to God is a bigger fault than those who lives according to who they experience themselves to be.
    So, I also questioned how Christians can actually get themselves to do it – based on the bible. And brought up the attitudes and behavior of Jesus. Because most condemnation of homosexuals come from Christians in this country. I dont think the new testament has a single place that would allow for hurting others, and even less so hurting their spirituality.
    Warm regards,
    Malene / Rander

  145. Hey Katie,
    Thank you for your honest answer. I respect your openness. I am a psych major, so eventually these questions are something I have to deal with.
    My first thought is that I think most people have fantasies that cant or shouldnt be acted out in real life. When I say cant be acted out I mean logistically impossible. (think kama sutra) When I say shouldnt be acted out I mean it wouldnt be sexy, comfortable or a pleasant experience. I have seen research that up to almost 70% of women have S&M fantasies from time to time. I certainly know I have fantasies that need to remain fantasies. That does not mean I cant talk about them to my SO, and enjoy the conversation. To me – fantasies are a twilight zone much like dreams. They are my dreams and fantasies and many of them are unrealistic. But at least in my mind I can be free to take it where-ever I want.
    I appreciate your attention to returning each individuals choice. How does this interpretation sit with you?
    Sometimes it is possible someone has sexual attractions based on abuse of some kind. Those kinds of attractions have an uncomfortable element – due to the abuse that has started them. Treating the trauma, and helping with the abuse will most likely cause some shifts in sexual attractions. It is impossible to know which direction that shift will go. Any shift in attraction can be cause for discussion and exploration between partners or professional helpers.
    In all situations – baring real harm done to another – the attractions each individual has should be respected.
    Would you agree with such a statement?
    Further more I know of several situations where someone has become deeply afraid of their own sexuality – even when the sexuality fits within “normal parameters”. They have become afraid because of the religiously induced shame towards sex they were raised with. I would venture the opinion that such shaming of sexuality is just as abusive and damaging as other sexual abuse. I certainly know of situations where someone’s sex life has suffered significant damage.
    Malene / Rander

  146. Rander,
    Sorry – I should have said
    I really am not sure that some want to change their attraction to become heterosexual so much as they want change the way they perceive themselves and live their life according to their own value system, which does not include same gender sexual activity. What comes after that varies from indivual to another.

  147. Why would a homosexual want to change their attractions?

    Hi Rander,
    This is a great question and in order to give you the best answer it would have to be posed to each individual who who feels this way. What is most important is that it is individual and personal and should never be discounted or diminished by anyone who has a different opinion.

    A totally different question – would you feel if someone came to you and said I want to change my gender attraction towards being attracted to my own gender – would you say they deserve the same support as others?

    Yes – absolutely. Choice is paramount. It is not what someone CAN do that is the issue, it is what they say they cannot do and if given the choice, they would.

    If homosexual people are so eager to change their attraction to become heterosexual then why dont some heterosexual people feel a need to change their attraction?

    I really am not sure that some want to change their attraction to become homosexual so much as they want change the way they perceive themselves and live their life according to their own value system, which does not include same gender sexual activity. What comes after that varies from indivual to another.

  148. Hey Rander,
    I know this wasn’t addressed to me, but I think for some people their same sex attractions are analogous to my S&M fantasies in that my fantasies, and this may not be the case with all people who have S&M fantasies, are directly linked to a physical abuse history. Why do I feel strongly that there’s a direct link as opposed to some normal variant of sexual fantasies that might be expressing our human potential for aggresiveness in a broader way? Cuz it’s a mirror image of real life events. It’s really that simple.
    Would there be something wrong with me enacting these fantasies in a relatively safe and respectful environment? Nope, don’t think so. And many people do so.
    I’m not able to. Why? Not because of social pressure to never enact in a respectful environment S&M fantasies, but because, for me, doing so would feel horrible.
    That it wouldn’t feel horrible for someone else is ok too.
    It’s not a moral issue. Nor is it a social issue. It’s an individual issue.
    And by the way, I could join an S&M group who holds an identity politic and adopt an identity as being S&M oriented. Then one day maybe I’d begin to feel that doing so has served it’s purpose and would begin to feel that such an identity no longer works as well, and begin to do those things that people do to lessen the hold unwanted attractions might have over them. Why? Because maybe it would feel better to do so. Again, not for religious, social, political, or moral reasons, but because of individual reasons.
    Like wanting to reclaim a greater area of freedom that was restricted due to the violent behavior of others.
    And the claim that 1) there’s a bio-chemical predisposition towards homosexuality in some people, and 2) some people have SSA attractions because of the environment, especially trauma, is not logically incompatible.
    It’s possible to believe both, and it’s possible to hold an intellectual and therapeutic stance that allows for being responsive to the needs of the individual.
    Have you read Joe Kort’s pages on the web? He’s a gay therapist who also talks about sex who have sex with men for reasons other than what goes into making up a homosexual orientation.
    Take care,
    Katie

  149. Hey Ann,
    Thanks for the reply – I appreciate it. It begs another question though. Why are their sexual attractions unwanted? Personally I have always liked feeling attracted to another person. Yes, there were diffuse attractions to women as well when I was very young. They were never very specific though. Yet, every single attraction I have had has felt as normal and natural as breathing. Never questioned them. Certainly didnt want to change them. Why would a homosexual want to change their attractions?
    If they had nothing to fear as far as reactions from friends, family and community would they still want to change their sexual attractions?
    If people saw them as absolutely no different, accepted them, respected them and who they love, and gave them all the same rights and responsibilities in partnership as heterosexuals have then would they really want to change their gender attraction?
    A totally different question – would you feel if someone came to you and said I want to change my gender attraction towards being attracted to my own gender – would you say they deserve the same support as others? If homosexual people are so eager to change their attraction to become heterosexual then why dont some heterosexual people feel a need to change their attraction?
    Rander

  150. So my question is – why so much more focus on the specific sexual acts we might all engage in? Why not focus on good loving hearts?
    Rander,
    For me it is not a question or focus on specific sexual acts or good loving hearts, rather, to provide resources to those individuals who have an unwanted same gender attraction – they do exist and deserve the same consideration and support as those who have same gender attraction and are content with it.

  151. For the record, I”m a straight female, who has gay friends who I admire and also am dating a man with a sexual abuse history who has a history of sex with men.
    I support gay affirmative therapy.
    And I support the rights of those who feel a need to do so to deal with past trauma and ask the question of whether their sexual feelings are of the type that promotes positive bonding with others or not. And if not, why not?
    It would be just as harmful to a 16 year old boy who was abducted and raped for 3 years and now has memories, neural connections, flash backs, obsessions, etc…. about homosexual sexual acts (or acts that also happen to be homosexual, ie, two males) and to tell him — “Gee, you were just born gay, go home, all’s fine”. Especially if, prior to his abduction, he like Suzie.
    And again, what about those Greeks?
    I don’t really care why I’m straight as long as I’m relatively content being so. And I personally have never felt simply born straight — too many early questions and uncertainties, and crushes on women.
    If others feel they were simply born straight, then I respect that because I have no proof one way or the other.
    It seems to me that we can prove two things: That some people feel they were born straight, and others don’t. That some people seem to want to change, but fail at it. And that Ancient Greece teaches us that, at least for some people some of the time, it’s not genes or in utero hormonal washes, which creates homosexual behavior.
    Likewise, I doubt it’s so simple when it comes to heterosexuality either.
    Katie

  152. I have wanted to ask this question for a long time, and maybe now is not such a bad time.
    Let me start out by saying I am heterosexual, married and living in California – because I love how liberal we are over here. I was also raised in a country in Europe where gays have gotten married since I was a kid, and thats a while ago. While I was raised in a Christian culture, I do not now identify with Christianity.
    Now, I think my bias’es have been established.
    When I have read the bible I saw and heard Jesus stand up for the people that supposedly committed sins on many occassions. He ate with tax collectors and prostitutes. He preached that what was in the hearts of these people were more important than their actions.
    I have seen many homosexual couples treat each other with a depth of love and respect that we should all aspire to show in our lives. I have seen one person in homosexual couples staying with and taking care of a partner dying from cancer, aids or other horrific diseases.
    I have always felt that such love and dedication to another human being was well in line with a Christian message.
    So my question is – why so much more focus on the specific sexual acts we might all engage in? Why not focus on good loving hearts? Wasn’t that the ultimate message of Jesus?
    I am truly curious as to the reason for these obsessions casting homosexual behavior as necessarily so much worse than heterosexual behavior.
    I am aware the old testament sharply denounces homosexuals. The old testament truly is a tough and judgmental document. Jesus added a lot of understanding, compassion and focus on the heart to this message overlaying the old testament. Why not focus on those qualities instead of the harsh ones of the old testament?
    Rander

  153. The abuses suffered under racism are much more longstanding and severe than sexual discrimination.

    David,
    Are you sure about that statment? Just because one is publicized more does not mean less. Women have suffered tremendously throughout history.

  154. This is just another example of intolerance of homosexuality.
    In response to (yet again tediously anonymous) Drowssap: would you support “treatments” to make black people white if they worked.? Perhaps if we could all enter treatment to make ourselves into white Christian males the world would be a better place….
    Michael King,
    It is disheartening to see that you have resorted to the above comments – they are so unnecessary, unfair, stale, and IMHO diminish your otherwise good work.

  155. Michael King,
    I’m new to studying this field of science (I started one and a half years ago after getting an interest in neuroscience) and back in 1999 I was attending high-school. So, to be honest, I wasn’t familiar with your work until I’ve recently read the news. A few searches on the internet didn’t help either, so thanks for making that clear again, I had no previous knowledge that some of the authors are gay, though I thought it were possible. My question was a matter of principle that should apply to all researchers in this field (which can be very influential, socially and politically).
    The greatest part of my contribution to this blog has been related to research and ideas on sexuality, a lot less on therapy and none I can remember on advocacy of any sort. So the issue of therapy, in my book, ranks very low and is not related to therapy aimed at changing one’s homosexual orientation from Kinsey 5-6 to Kinsey 0-1. Rather, I support people’s right to choose the way they use their sexual potential and find the professional support to reduce inner conflict. I find this highly unlikely to be the case with people in the Kinsey 5-6 area, but choice should still be left open to anyone. It’s important not to shut the door in the face of anyone and promote more inclusiveness both in people and in society.
    On the subject of therapy. If a person had been exclusively attracted to opposite-sex people until the end of puberty and then started to have mixed feelings, it’s likely that they have constructed a certain self-concept that gets challenged by a new and complex sexual reality. So, if this type would feel conflicted do you think that they should have the right to receive professional support that is open-ended in outcomes?

  156. Racial discrimination and sexual discrimination are not comparable.
    One has to do with skin color…the other with behavior.
    The abuses suffered under racism are much more longstanding and severe than sexual discrimination.
    Are gay affirmative therapies and transsexual treatments effective? That would be an interesting post.
    “Reorientation” therapies are broad, poorly defined, non-operationalized and so on.
    Very much like most humanistic psychology interventions…which we allow…and do not assess “harm” (when for some character structures there is likelihood of harm).
    Thanks for stopping by Michael King…although I think we disagree; I admire your courage and integrity.

  157. In response to Evan – that is why I made my sexual orientation clear in 1999 (well before actually) but it seems I need to keep on repeating it. Dr Bartlett and I made that declaration precisely because we were aware that no researcher can ever be completely neutral. There is a potential conflict of interest in everything we do. May I also take this opportunity to state that I have never contemplated “therapy” for my sexual orientation in case you next assume that I am on some sort of vendetta for past bad experiences with a therapist. For the moment I can’t think of any other personal or professional declaration that I should make but I have no doubt someone with imagination will suggest some ruse I might be up to that explains the results of our study.
    In response to (yet again tediously anonymous) Drowssap: would you support “treatments” to make black people white if they worked.? Perhaps if we could all enter treatment to make ourselves into white Christian males the world would be a better place….

  158. Hey Warren, I really like your analogy with curbing heterosexual feelings re. affairs, or polygamy.
    What I still don’t get is how people who take the strong stance that there is no flexibility when it comes to “orientation” takes into account Ancient Greece — or even modern day “Mexican Bisexuality”.
    Katie

  159. Michael King,
    I’m a regular commenter on this blog and I used the alias because I didn’t know if the owner of this blog would accept the comment and I didn’t want to use my quality of regular commenter to get the comment approved. So it was supposed to have the comment either pass by its own relevance or get rejected for the same reason. The second reason is that you didn’t answer Dr Throckmorton’s question and that you would be interested to come back in the discussion after replying to my comment. Thanks for doing that and I hope you will answer it now.
    I think that information on one’s background is relevant, because no one is perfectly neutral when it comes to sexual orientation and everyone, researchers included, have motivations to pursue certain subjects instead of others and to focus on emphasising certain conclusions, instead of projecting the larger, heterogenous picture. So I would like to know that when a researcher – straight, gay, or otherwise – publishes a scientific work that is likely to get into mainstream media and be advertised as a proof for a belief that already exists in certain parts of society (see the headline in this piece of news).
    Another reason I think it’s important to start pushing for this information is that one day we will have the meta-debate on how research was used (designed, approved, funded, conducted, published, quoted, misquoted and interpreted) to shape public opinion on a value-laden subject like sexual orientation.
    My field is political science and I’m very familiar with how writers, theorists and political leaders have used ideas and words in order to further their political interests or that of their own affiliation. Plato, Machiavelli and Bartolus, they were all involved in the politics of their time and used their arguments and professional status to promote their own interests or advancement. We tend to forget that we are humans and we are still doing it even in an age of “neutrality”. Present-day scientists are not above this, so it’s necessary to see a statement of one’s own background as a cautionary measure of detecting bias when bias is present. It doesn’t take away from the quality of research which can stand on its own methodological validity.

  160. Michael King
    Would you be supportive of reorientation therapies or medical procedures if they actually worked?

  161. Dr. King – I suspect the reverse is sometimes true, if a straight person comments on gay issues, there views are discounted due to the source. In any event, you are describing a kind of stereotyping that hopefully good research methods will help counteract.
    I am hopeful that you can comment on the comments above, especially the bold print which seems to me to reflect acceptance and accommodation rather than attempts to change orientation.

  162. Michael King – I didn’t interpret it that way, I was thinking more about the bias straight people like myself may have on gay issues.
    The results don’t surprise me, I’m afraid. If you think there’s medical ignorance in the UK on Gay issues, that’s nothing compared with the ignorance on Trans ones. And that in turn is nothing compared with the ignorance on Intersex issues.
    Over 80% of GPs in the UK opposed NHS treatment for Transsexuality (as opposed to 50% who opposed treatment for heroin addiction). And 25% of Transgendered patients reported being outright refused treatment by their NHS GP.
    Until we start teaching these issues in Medical and Pschology lectures, the ignorance will continue. I’ve given talks at the Australian National University to 3rd year Medical students and budding Psychologists, so I know just how little time is devoted to the subjects. None in most places.

  163. In response to E (who seems afraid to put his/her name to his/her comments), it is no secret that I am gay. I have never “hidden” my sexuality, as seems to be suggested by these comments. In a paper we published many years ago (King & Bartlett British Journal of Psychiatry 1999;175; 106-113) we stated on page 111 that “Our perspective was as gay and lesbian psychiatrists”. It’s just that people like E don’t research their suggestions enough. However, I find it curious that E brings up this point because his/her implication is that if I am gay I must be biased. If a woman commented on feminist issues or a black professional on black issues I imagine that types like E would respect that – and correctly. They are likely to be best informed. But somehow when someone gay comments on homosexuality his or her view is denigrated as biased. This is just another example of intolerance of homosexuality.

  164. If they’re going to publish their sexual orientation when researching same, then perhaps they should be publishing their preconceived notions of religious thought at the same time. If someone is absolutely sure that their god says homosexuality is an abomination, then I’d want to know. But then in my field of study, geology, we’ve never worried if someone was a YEC. But then in peer review something like that generally is obvious if it has a meaning in the work they are doing.

  165. I really think that researchers should declare their sexual orientation when they publish studies related to sexual orientation, just as they declare any possible competing interests. We have to get over the advocating 90’s in the science on sexual orientation.
    I don’t mean any ad hominem by this request, only a healthy clarification of each and everyone’s possible bias when they enter such a mined field of study as this one.

  166. Michael King

    Furthermore, the American Psychiatric Association has clearly indicated that such therapy is unethical.

    I doubt that reorientation therapy is effective. However if it was effective I think the APA and other groups would call it a lot worse than “unethical.”
    That’s the political reality of the current arrangement.

  167. Dr. King – Thanks for dropping by. I am wondering if you could help me clarify something. These comments seem not to refer to change in orientation:

    “…where someone had a strong faith, then working to help the person accept their feelings but manage them appropriately may be the best approach if (the) person felt they would lose God and therefore their life was not worth living.”
    “Some bisexual individuals may wish to choose an orientation that is
    comfortable for them and their lifestyle choices for example. This is a
    therapeutic issue to explore and support if that is their wish. It is different from behavioural attempts to reshape desire.”

    See especially the bold print. These points seem to align more closely with a neutral stance. The point is not to change orientation but rather to help a person live in concert with chosen values. Those values may or may not include homosexual behavior. If the values do not and the therapist helps a person live a celibate life or to minimize the same-sex aspect of a bisexual orientation, that seems very different than a therapists who says change in orientation is the preferred goal, is it not?
    I appreciate your comments and hope you can help me with my question.

  168. This is a very tired argument. No one knows if sexual orientation is stable over time in even a small portion of the population much less how stable it is. All therapists are invested in helping their clients change something. Clients hire therapists to help them change. My experience is that clients have all sorts of sexual proclivities. As therapist our job is to help our clients explore the meaning of their sexual provlivities and discover and create meaning in their lives. It is no more offensive to help a client find meaning in heterosexual relationships than it is to help them find meaning in homosexual relationships. Being a gay affirmative therapist is as unethical as being a reparative therapist. When will we get back to allowing our clients to form their own treatment goals and not imposing our values on them?

  169. David King,
    What is unethical is the continued attempt to make it sound that no one does change or experience a better life as a result of this kind of therapy. The APA has an agenda that is so obvious I do not understand how anyone can pay any attention to what they say anymore. People who experience sexual identity confusion are looking for ways of finding peace with themselves. This constant bombardment by those who do not want to see this type of work succeed are the problem.

  170. “Although they may have been well meaning and client-centered in their attitudes, there is no evidence that attempting to change someone’s sexual orientation is effective.”
    There is no evidence? That is a bit categorical and opinionated.
    “hey would help curb homosexual feelings some 17% – or one in six – said they had done so. ”
    Help curb homosexual feelings is not the same as changing someone’s orientation.
    As a heterosexual, I work to help curb heterosexual feelings that drive some men to act out in a way that harms their marriage…am I trying to change them from being a polygamist…or honoring their goals for therapy?

  171. I do not think we placed these 17% of therapists into a misleading or inappropriate category, nor do I think we misunderstood their intention. All had attempted to change or redirect their client’s homosexual orientation (that was the question posed). And when we asked this 17% of therapists: “Given the extent of knowledge about homosexuality and treatments available to change or redirect homosexual or lesbian feelings, are there any circumstances where people should have the opportunity to reduce or redirect their homosexual or lesbian feelings?”, 72% agreed. Thus, they were a group of therapists who were obviously in favour of helping people to change or redirect their homosexual desires and behaviour. Although they may have been well meaning and client-centered in their attitudes, there is no evidence that attempting to change someone’s sexual orientation is effective. Furthermore, the American Psychiatric Association has clearly indicated that such therapy is unethical.

Comments are closed.