In light of conversations on the Exodus-PFOX thread, I thought it might be good to review a past mainstream media article that brought SIT more into the mainstream conversation.
The LA Times article now titled “Approaching agreement in debate over homosexuality” by Stephanie Simon (now with the Wall Street Journal) was published on June 18, 2007 with the title, “New ground in debate on ‘curing’ gays.”
The article begins with some familiar ground to this blog:
Alan Chambers directs Exodus International, widely described as the nation’s largest ex-gay ministry. But when he addresses the group’s Freedom Conference at Concordia University in Irvine this month, Chambers won’t celebrate successful “ex-gays.”
Truth is, he’s not sure he’s ever met one.
With years of therapy, Chambers says, he has mostly conquered his own attraction to men; he’s a husband and a father, and he identifies as straight. But lately, he’s come to resent the term “ex-gay”: It’s too neat, implying a clean break with the past, when he still struggles at times with homosexual temptation. “By no means would we ever say change can be sudden or complete,” Chambers said.
His personal denunciation of the term “ex-gay” — his organization has yet to follow suit — is just one example of shifting ground in the polarizing debate on homosexuality.
I am not sure if I am correct, but I think Alan later nuanced the remarks about not knowing ex-gays, but I do think he has made efforts including the recent article regarding Bryce Faulkner, to paint an accurate picture of his personal situation.
This article brought to a wide audience conversations that we have been having here for quite awhile — and continue to have. The ex-gay conversation is a recurring one here. Some newer readers may want to review this post (Ex-ex-gay?) and this one ( What does change mean?) and this one (Acceptance and Commitment Therapy).
The LA Times article quoted several people who approved of the framework, including commenter Michael Bussee.
“Something’s happening. And I think it’s very positive,” agreed Michael Bussee, who founded Exodus in 1976, only to fall in love with another man — a fellow ex-gay counselor.
Now a licensed family therapist in Riverside, Bussee regularly speaks out against ex-gay therapies and is scheduled to address the Ex-Gay Survivor’s Conference at UC Irvine at the end of the month.
But Bussee put aside his protest agenda recently to endorse new guidelines to sexual identity therapy, co-written by two professors at conservative Christian colleges.
Other notable folks gave a thumbs-up to the framework as well.
He and other gay activists — along with major mental-health associations — still reject therapy aimed at “liberating” or “curing” gays. But Bussee is willing to acknowledge potential in therapy that does not promise change but instead offers patients help in managing their desires and modifying their behavior to match their religious values — even if that means a life of celibacy.
“It’s about helping clients accept that they have these same-sex attractions and then allowing them the space, free from bias, to choose how they want to act,” said Lee Beckstead, a gay psychologist in Salt Lake City who uses this approach.
The guidelines for this type of therapy — written by Warren Throckmorton of Grove City College and Mark Yarhouse of Regent University — have been endorsed by representatives on both the left and right. The list includes the provost of a conservative evangelical college and the psychiatrist whose gay-rights advocacy in the 1970s got homosexuality removed from the official medical list of mental disorders.
“What appeals to me is that it moves away from the total polarization” common in the field, said Dr. Robert Spitzer, the psychiatrist.
“For many years, mental-health professionals have taken the view that since homosexuality is not a mental disorder, any attempt to change sexual orientation is unwise,” said Spitzer, a Columbia University professor.
Some therapies are widely considered dangerous, and some rely on discredited psychological theories. “But for healthcare professionals to tell someone they don’t have the right to make an effort to bring their actions into harmony with their values is hubris,” Spitzer said.
Just over two years later, we continue to discuss very similar concerns and the tension remains.
Activists on both sides caution that the rapprochement only goes so far.
Critics of Exodus note the group still sponsors speakers who attribute homosexuality to bad parenting and assert that gays and lesbians live short, unhappy lives.
And though Chambers has disavowed the term “ex-gay,” his group’s ads give the distinct impression that it’s possible to leave homosexuality completely behind.
Haven’t we just been discussing this topic?
The article concludes with a reference to the APA Sexual Orientation Task Force.
The American Psychological Assn. set up a task force this spring to revise the group’s policy on sexual orientation therapy. The current policy is a decade old and fairly vague; it states that homosexuality is not a disorder and that therapists can’t make false claims about their treatments.
The new policy, due early next year, must help psychologists uphold two ethical principles as they work with patients unhappy about their sexuality: “Respect for the autonomy and dignity of the patient, and a duty to do no harm,” said Clinton Anderson, the association’s director for lesbian, gay and bisexual concerns. “It’s a balancing act.”
In fact, the Task Force will report soon, in August, sometime during the APA convention. Stay tuned…
Although we will soon migrate the website, more on the SIT Framework is now here.
Me either. I don’t know anything about Jesus’s sexuality. I only know He was not married, but was “tempted in all things, just as we are, yet without sin” — Hebrews 4:15.
The Bible seems silent on the topic of masturbation specifically — but it does seem to caution against sexual addictions, misuse of sex. adultery, lust, etc. So He did none of those.
I assume He was probably so consumed with His ministry and the cross before Him that he was completely celibate — most likely did not masturbate — but that is only speculation. In any event, we SSA only folk are fully human. He was fully divine and fully human — so His experience of sexuality must have differed from ours.
Thank you for your very candid explanation of how you deal with this issue. The best I have heard.
Real LOL — This is a bust up: (We started referring to the color as ‘masturbation blue’ much to the dismay of our Christian printer.) At EXIT, gays were “Code 13” — to correspond with the log sheet at the hotline — “1″ for Drugs, “2″ for Alcohol, “3)” for Divorce, etc.
Sometimes, we ex-gays at Melodyland would speculate about which church members or church staff might be “code 13″. Turned out the choir director was. He now directs the Orange County Gay Men’s Chorus. I want to join!
Okay guys – we don’t know much about Jesus’ sexual system or his looks.
To follow that God gave someone a fully functioning sexuality to be used makes a lot of assumptions in theology that we don’t agree with.
1) That homosexuality was God made
2) That since it was God made it is to be used
3) Since it is God made, to be used, it cannot be sinful
Michael – I’m not picking on you – just pointing out that the logic you use is obviously not the same logic that others with SSA have used and that others draw very different conclusions about sexuality.
There are other theologies that people have about their sexuality (God given or not, sinful or not etc…) that do not assume that just because it is there it must be used.
Not sure if I want to jump into this about the fully functioning system, desires, etc..
But the first verse that popped into my mind was, “It is better to marry than to burn in lust.” There are others like it: behaving unseemly toward one’s virgin. (Don’t have the references at hand.)
Clearly, those in circumstances such as those above, would have fully functioning systems *and* the remedy of what to do with them. So, using that logic, I can fully understand where Michael is coming from. Straights have a stated alternative. Curiously, the verses do not state to strive harder for celibacy, i.e. surrender more, etc…
And that I have always wondered about when Paul (and Jesus to some extent) seems to extol celibacy as a better way. The conumdrum for me is why so many ssa or gay Christians who want to embrace celibacy (because of their beliefs) don’t seem to be given the gift of celibacy. I have had some folks tell me there is no such thing as a “gift of celibacy” but to me it seems that Paul must have had it to some substantial degree — at least I infer that — and I am not the only one who sees that in his writings.
Mary, actually, I am not saying that:
I was only asking what an SSA-only male was supposed to do with his sexual urges. Nothing? Never touch it? I could have asked the same question about straight single men — is masturbation ever morally OK for single men?
To AM:
Exactly. Straights have the option of “marrying rather than burning” — and I think that “burning” here refers to being overwhlemed by sexual desire — not Hell — correct?
Are we to assume that SSA-only males (like me) are all “eunuchs” and never to do anything sexually? In understand the “no gay sex” part. But also, no straight marriage — at least not for the “SSA-only” ones like me? Here is what I mean:
I was married and loved my wife deeply. I tried to be “heterosexual enough” to please by wife, but could not create any sexual arousal. I thought God might create some — over time — at least enough to keep us relatively happy together as husband and wife.
But that did not happen. She often cried herself to sleep, wondering what was wrong with her. What was wrong with her faith? Was she an inadequate woman? A bad wife? She thought so.
I had to think about men to function. She wondered what was wrong with her. Nothing was. She was straight.
So for us SSA-only guys, who cannot be a proper husband sexually, we must reamin single and chaste. What alternative is left for sexual release? Is it not even OK to relieve sexual tension through masturbation?
I sought advice from our minitsry leaders. They suggested that masturbation might bne OK if I “didn’t think about anything”. I never, ever managed to do it without thinking about something erotic. That would have seemed oddly disconnected if I could.
To not connect sexual thought to sexual beahvior? Is that even healthy? It sounds dissociative. And yet, that is what I was counseled to do — the only way to relieve myself without sin.
Nothing at all?
Re:
Not that it’s anyone’s first choice but we can’t rule out ‘wet dreams’. Some would rather avoid them for fear that the dreams would be more erotic than a controlled fantasy but the element of choice and willfulness is absent. And…as odd as it may seem, God can work through dreams. I’ve known one or two ex-gay men who practiced resisting masturbation and they even wound up having a hetero wet dream or two. Shocked ‘em!!! They hadn’t been aware on a cognitive level that some of their barriers and aversions to heterosexuality had fallen by the wayside.
You can rule them out for me. Never had one. Asked a lot of guys why — I thought everyone did. They said I should stop all masturbation for at least three months. Nothing. Go to bed with a full bladder. Nothing. Pray for one. Nothing. Don’t pray for one. Nothing. One guy said I should wear boxers shorts to bed since the friction of the fabric might… Nothing.
That would shock me too! Had some dreams with women in them, but kept waiting for them to leave… I guess none of my barriers and aversions have fallen… I have tried to find women attractive sexually. Nothing. Nude female form evokes no response.
So, no wet dreams — have waited since age 12 or so for that. Am almost 56 now. Can’t satisfy a woman heterosexually in marriage. No gay sex. Masturbation maybe OK sometimes… But complete sexual abstinence would be preferable for the SSA-only male like me. Am I getting this right?
I’m having an open discussion, what are you having? You know, if I’m not offering conclusions, it’s really kind of rude of you to presume that I am and to assume what they are. I tend to withhold conclusions until I have all the facts or pretty complete discussion at least, we’re not there yet.
How about having a gay lover and living together if we had no sex? I ask, because I actually have two close friends, Steve and Mark, who are in such a relationship. Both are deeply committed Christians. They started out as a sexually monogamous gay couple.
Then, they felt convicted that gay sex was sin. Theyreally mean it. So they stopped having sex — but they still live together, eat together and fall asleep together, cuddling in the same bed. I don’t know what they wear to bed, if that matters. Maybe sleep naked together.
They think of each other as spouses. I think they hug and kiss a little too. I don’t know if they masturbate — together or separately. Would their example be an morally acceptable option for two exclusively SSA Christian men?
-Very interesting conversation! Also, and it is very timely. More young people seem confused about their gender and sexual feelings and science must identify what makes them have this experience.
Genetic and medical research can tell us more on what makes men and women have sexual emotion and maybe find therapies for very specific problems, in my opinion.
I read about the therapy called SIT on this site and would like to ask: Is there any scientific study to see the results of this therapy? Thank you.
My name is written: Takeo.
Okay, I admit to curiosity about this. I read the posts about masturbation earlier today and wondered, even asked my husband, “Do you suppose a wet dream is the first time a boy actually realizes he must be gay–because his dream includes a guy, not a girl?” He looked at me with raised eyebrows, a shaking of the head, a little shrug accompanied by his lovable grin, the one he always exhibits when his wife asks him something he cannot answer.
A minute passed before he asked, “What do they talk about on that blog, Carole?”
Now it was my turn to shrug…and grin.
Anyway, just a point– women can masturbate w/out fantasizing. I would imagine men can too as long as their circulatory system and equipment is in tip-top shape. Obviously the experience is probably more intense for both with fantasizing.
@MIchael,
Question, if you don’t mind answering and I surely understand if you don’t wish to.
You have mentioned that you married when you were young. I wondered why you didn’t wait a few years. That is, when you dated your wife-to-be, surely you knew that you didn’t feel any lust for her even if you did feel love for her as a person. What made you think that a marriage ceremony would make a physical difference in your lack of sexual attraction to her?
I don’t know tip-top mine is, but I simply cannot do this. Wonder how many guys can? And would that be holier if they could?
What is it like to be totally devoid of any sexual thought when stimulating oneself to orgasm? To cut off sexual pleasure from emotion or thought — it still seems dissociative, as I mentioned earlier. Would be interesting though…
In therapy with straight couples, I sometimes help them to put emotion, healthy fantasy and thought back in — when sex has become “empty” — rather disconnected, stirictly physical or somehow automatic.
I don’t know. As I said, I have never had one. I have met many men, straight and gay, who haven’t. I wonder what percentage of men don’t?
As far as the first time I realized? First grade was the first definite emotional/sexual crush. Didn’t realize that having SSA meant I was gay until I heard the words “queer” and “homo” in 5th grade.
Went to the library and looked up “homo” — I found “homosexual” — a person attracted to their own sex, not the opposite sex. I actually didn’t hear “gay” until High School.
I didn’t start having sexual dreams until about age 13. Would just get started and then see a female nearby in the dream. Wanted her to leave. Felt uncomfortable having her watch us. Yuck!
Always woke up dry.
I am sorry, Eddy. I did not realize I was coming across that way. I thought were were having an open discussion. I was not presuming that you were offering conclusions. Did not mean to be rude or assume anything.
I was trying to clarify in my own mind what might be acceptable for the SSA-only male — where the proper boundaries might be. I really did not mean to imply that I thought you were offering conclusions. I took your comments as your thoughts on the matter, not conclusions for others.
I thought we were just kicking around ideas. Sorry if I came across in a rude manner. You know I am trying to avoid that. I have really appreciated your willingness to discuss these issues so openly. Thanks.
Kum ba yah is still alive and well. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZqsW_noBIjQ
Thanks, Michael.
I guess statements similar to “So you’re saying thus and such” really get under my skin. I feel like I’m simply saying what I’m saying…but people tend to assume that I’ve got an agenda. (Okay, sometimes, like all of us, I do.) But I’m here exploring too. Sometimes I’m just tossing in another piece of the puzzle that I found lying around.
Michael,
I suppose different people come to different consclusions as to what they shall do with their sexual urges. And religions are built from those ideas. LOL!! I obviously came to a different conclusion for mine than you did for yours. My beleif system did shift in a way I never expected. But it certainly does not follow the same logic as yours does.
When I do it, I am usually just trying to sum up what I understand the other person to be saying — to check if I am getting it right. I don’t assume you have an agenda.
I should probably phrase it like — “I think I understand you to be saying “X”…Is that correct?”
Mary:
What logic do you mean? How does our belief system differ? Do you mean BIblically?
Michael–
This is all that I said about ‘wet dreams’:
But it led to this response from you
:
So this doesn’t quite explain what you do:
So, although I was still discussing…provided a good bit on masturbation (at your request) and thought I’d round out the topic with ‘wet dreams’ as another option we hadn’t discussed…you tried to sum up what you thought I was saying with:
Did I speak a word about a ‘conclusion’? How can you be ‘getting this right’–my conclusion on the matter when I haven’t spoken it?
Hello Takeo–
We didn’t mean to ignore you. We often get very involved in these discussions and sometimes don’t notice when someone else drops in.
I think we all agree that science ought to be doing more study in the area of ‘the origins of sexual orientation’. Some of us here feel that science has caved in to societal pressure and that they aren’t researching as thoroughly as they could. We believe they have a bias that would likely affect the outcome of their studies.
At this point, science hasn’t yet determined if homosexuality is inborn, genetic, learned or a combination of factors. It’s all still theory. But all of us here feel pretty strongly about our points of view so, in reading, you’d think we were talking facts not opinions. I, for example, hold to what’s been termed a ‘conservative religious’ viewpoint and feel very strongly that while there may be some pre-natal influences that it’s a learned or conditioned behavior. Others are quite adamant that they were ‘born this way’.
Some say that this polarization–both sides feeling so strongly about their views–has impacted the scientific study. But it does go on. Warren, our website host, has a pretty good eye for what’s being done and, if it’s significant and newsworthy, he’ll usually bring it here as a topic for discussion. So, please, keep checking back in and if a topic hits close to your concerns, feel free to join in on the conversation.
I am guessing that English is not your native language. That’s okay. Your involvement would help us to speak more clearly.
Eddy: As I said, I was trying to figure out what, if any, kind of sexual behavior might be morally OK for the SSA-only male, like me.
You had mentioned wet dreams as one alternative. For me, they are not. I know that gay sex with another person is out. For me, so is heterosexual marriage.
So what’s left? It seems that only masturbation would be — and that it would be desireable, morally, to be able to do this without gay fantasy.
I was not trying to accuse you of coming to a conclusion. I was trying to come to one for myself — something that would still be Biblically OK.
But Michael,
If that isn’t the topic
and
if I haven’t pronounced any conclusions
then
why do you address questions to me based on your preconceived conclusions about my conclusions?
That would be similar to me responding to any point you made with ‘so you’re saying that ex-gays are misguided and mistaken’? LOL. That may well be your point but I give you the space to ask your questions, to make your observations, to build your case if that’s what you’re doing without forcing you to announce a conclusion before you decide to.
As I’ve said, I’m exploring. I’m asking questions. The Lord knows ‘wet dreams’ are an infrequent topic of conversation. I made no value judgements. I’ve announced that I try not to pronounce them. I have freely stated my bias and yet you continue to request that I also pronounce value judgements. I choose not to go there. God has convicted you to lighten up on ‘attacks and attitude’; He’s convicted me to lighten up on ‘pronouncing judgement’. Just as your attacks and attitude weren’t conducing to furthering productive converstation, neither is my pronouncing judgement or stating what is or isn’t sin. Always leads to a detour and never furthers the conversation.
“conducing” should have been “conducive” and “conversation” is normally spelled with only one ‘t’. My apologies!!!!
Me:
You:
Fair enough, Eddy. I was just asking for your opinion. I respect your decision to avoid value judgements. I won’t push for one. I guess each person will have to work this out between himself and God. We can leave it at that, OK?
AM, I like your style!
These passages have been very important in helping me see how badly the church has mangled scriptural teaching about marriage and sexuality. I cannot see that Paul in these passages is saying that marriage is about procreation–in his comments here and in his comments about widows remarrying, he is clearly saying that marriage is an acceptable means for people to release their sexual urges. (He doesn’t tell widows that it’s okay for them to remarry–he DEMANDS they remarry, even if they’re clearly past menopause, on account of their sexual desires.) Marriage maybe a poor second-place option to chastity, but that’s all it is–certainly not the foundation of civilization!
So, yah, gays and lesbians either get left out in the cold or (as I believe) should be given the option of marriage.
I also agree with you about the gift of celibacy. Martin Luther pointed out that the calling to ministry quite plainly did not always come with the calling to celibacy; it was only the church who made that extra burden on the monks and priests. Again, the lack of understanding on this issue has left gays and lesbians out in the cold. It is unreasonable and (I believe) legalistic to demand they remain chaste.