And that is the behind the entirety of the socio-political underpinnings of the ex-gay/change philosophy. It is not that any certain percentage of persons of homosexual orientation might be able to change. The point for the ex-gay ministries/ministerial therapies is that they be able to have access to those who might change their orientation (for however short a period).

The number of people that they can change, not necessarily any percentage increase but simply the number that might change (for however short a time), is dependant upon the absolute number which may be shamed enough by societal and relgious pressures. The religous/faith-based pressure has always been there in society.

The political pressure which ex-gay groups tacitly approve is now necessary in that egalitarian society which Christianity envisioned. Thus democracy then is no longer that means to an egalitarian society through the implementation of personal rights, but that means by which to impart societal pressure. All of which is meant to shame the individual into not accepting himself. Thus the numbers may be increased (for however short a period) even though their percentage of success may decline.

And it probably ruined Regina Grigg’s day!

(I’m pasting the link here, but it’s a long and awkward one, so if it doesnt’ work, just visit the NYT home page and look for the story. Registration required.)

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/nyregion/nyregionspecial2/01RParenting.html?hp=&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1175448598-TgfdTyP9ZKK9aEjBKgnhyg

What would have happened if Zach’s family, instead of reacting to his identity with simple love and approval, had shipped him off to a Love in Action or ex-gay therapist? How much additional turmoil and depression would he have endured if he spent his adolescense battling his own sexual feelings as “unwanted attractions”?

Instead, because he did find a welcoming community, he has grown up as a confident, successful young man, far less focused on his gay identity than on his school activities and friends.

That’s why I have a difficult time with the Dr Throckmortons and Karen Booths and others who keep seeking new (or resurrect old) therapeutic approaches for gay “strugglers.” I don’t think you will ever find any therapy that produces as much mental health as honesty and self-acceptance.

In other words, coming out really is the best therapy for unwanted same sex attractions.

Warren, you do have a wicked sense of humor 🙂

Ivan – I have no idea about percentages. If Dr. Nicolosi’s numbers are accurate, maybe a third of those who want to change? But it would be a guess.

RE: therapist’s oversight. Perhaps that is a authoritarian way of stating it. What we mean is that if a therapist and client think some kind of physical containment is needed – lets say if the client is dealing with grief or other powerful emotions, and that client wants a friend or family member there – then the therapist may (not must or should) participate and not run afoul of the framework.

Okay. Garlic doesn’t cure my attractions to other men necessarily, but it does seem to have a signiciant impact on their attractions toward me.

“Therapists may supervise or oversee the client’s involvement in physical contact with others of the client’s choosing (friend, family member) during sessions only if the client has given consent.”

Why would the therapist serve in this role or capacity? As a therapist, I have never and would never “oversee” or “supervise” an adults physical contact with someone during sessions….I may “take note of” these, but the terms described seem a bit too regressive to me, not allowing clients (and disempowering them) to work through in insight or self-direct their own actions.

In the framework of sexual identity therapy, I cannot think of a scenario which would require such oversight as a helpful or therapeutic method…nor can I think that this would be appropriate in any capacity in sexual identity work. It seems belittling…I don’t “oversee” a person who self-injures, or individuals in abusive relationships (due to later retribution, etc..) and individuals are responsible for their own changes of behavior through insight…if they choose to change.

Interactions with the therapist, however, are usually commented on as a therapeutic rapport builds. I agree that there should be no physical contact – hugging, etc..as I believe there should not be in any therapy session.

I am wondering if Warren could explain a bit more about his thoughts in the opening statements made in the sexual identity therapy framework about oversight, etc……when it might be necessary, etc…

I admit, I might be missing something here….

But too often religious and non-religious healers alike tend to make the mistake. The old adage seems to be true: “When the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail.”

Warren mentioned that he is compiling a “list of strange things said in the name of reorientation.” It must be a pretty big list by now! Are chile peppers on your list of proposed cures for gayness?