I am looking forward to the May 5th symposium in Washington DC, hosted by the APA at their annual conference involving Bishop Gene Robinson, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary President, Al Mohler, Past-President of the Association of Gay and Lesbian Psychiatrists, David Scasta, Harvard psychiatrist John Peteet and me. Here is a rebuttal to a critical article from Wayne Besen about the symposium and brief coverage of the event by Citizenlink.
30 thoughts on “American Psychiatric Association symposium on religion, therapy and homosexuality”
Comments are closed.
@Nate: Go to the top of the blog, the newest entry about the article from the Washington Times as well as my other posts on the issue. Julia Duin has a pretty good summation. Do not rely on the articles from the Gay City News as they are primarily attack pieces.
I heard this got canceled. What happened?
Michael, I do hope I made it clear that I don’t think identity politics is the right way of going about things. I can’t quite tell if you’re reacting against me or the theory I represented. Most of my experience with this comes from academia. When it was time for me to choose a topic for my first major work (on Anglo-Saxon studies), my adviser (who normally does not go in for this sort of thing) immediately began detailing every woman in the AS texts, because he assumed that my being a girl would immediately incline me to choose a women’s studies type of topic. I surprised him by saying that I wanted to study the impact King Alfred of Wessex had on AS conceptions of kingship, which is not in any way, shape, or form something a typical feminist would choose.
BTCarolus: Thanks for explaining this: “Generally speaking ‘identity politics’ refers to the alignment of individuals into their group ‘identities’ which are presumed to represent their political interests because of the common ground represented by the identity.”
That’s a truckload of assumptions! I am gay, but it’s not my “identity”. Thatt’s only part . I suppose you could say I beling to that group which does not find women romantically or sexually attractive, but I don’t think of that as a “group iidentity”.
Finally, to “presume” that there is agreement on political interests or “common ground” with other gays just because I am gay is as silly as making these same presumptions about straight people.
Generally speaking ‘identity politics’ refers to the alignment of individuals into their group ‘identities’ which are presumed to represent their political interests because of the common ground represented by the identity. Somebody could be said to be playing identity politics if they were a black candidate and they constantly used their race to appeal to their potential black supporters, playing them off the white supporters of the other candidate. Usually the ‘identity’ encompasses a group seen as oppressed or marginalized by the dominant group in society. Oftentimes opponents of identity politics point out that assuming that everyone with a shared characteristic shares uniform beliefs doesn’t recognize that individuals that fall into specific categories may have differing opinions on certain issues, or feel they have certain needs that can’t be met if they are seen as part of a collective.
This is often seen in academics when female scholars will only study areas dealing with women, GLBT scholars or Queer Theorists will only study areas pertaining to them, etc. and is reflected by the rise of departments such as Women’s Studies, Chicano Studies, or Pan-African Studies within universities, rather than said scholars working from traditional departments. Unfortunately this often leads professors to assume that their students must only be interested in looking at subjects that pertain to their supposed identity, causing them to purposefully steer students towards pre-decided areas such as feminist issues or queer issues, rather than exposing students to the broad base of knowledge and allowing them to choose what interests them. Overall it creates a vast pigeonholing effect that doesn’t recognize or allow for individual variation, whether in policy choices, or personal choices.
I am still not sure, Eva, what you mean by “identity politics”. Warren has also used this term and I am not sure what either of you mean.
Michael Bussee,
I’m sorry if my English is not as clear as that of a native speaker/writer. It might be too formal and stiff sometimes, because I learned and used English in formal environments (university, governmental institutions etc).
Yes, I meant that there’s too much politics in the field – including the type of therapies you mentioned – and a lot less public effort on the part of the scientific community to be supportive towards individuals, not as much as categories of self-identified individuals (is there such a thing as a 100% pure category of sexuality to keep talking about identity as something real instead of political?). It’s strange and counterproductive, because in real life people are trying to have meaningful relationships with real people, not great identity feelings. The identity stuff was created by science and injected into society by politics. We are past whatever political goals needed to be achieved and I think a couple of decades is already enough. It’s time for science to focus on individuals, on real people and their needs. That is the problem I see with the way things are still going on.
Present scientific practice in its public form and goals is way behind social reality and is missing the point. We are approaching a new decade but we’re still doing identity politics. Not all people who struggle with unwanted attractions are identified in some way, be they Christian or not. People from the scientific community must realise that their position on this subject comes at a social cost. I’m talking from the point of view of a man in his twenties who looks at what his generation is going through (at least what I am seeing in Europe) and I have to say that old politics don’t hold much water anymore in the field of sexuality. In real life, people are past identity age, but still dealing with the same problems. Labels only make it worse. I hope there are people in the scientific community who are perceptive enough to understand that while neutral, science must work to meet real people’s needs. In fact, I know there are, but people need to hear them start talking.
Duh…forgot to subscribe…again.
BTW: Did anyone ever answer Ann’s question (and mine, too) about what the last four shortcuts are all about? LOL. We know bold, italics, link and bquote but where do those other shortcuts do for you? (If you only know one or two, that’s cool…might not be able to absorb four at once anyway.)
I found the quote by Sara Robinson that David used in his rebuttal to be extremely insightful. I realize that she is, in that context, talking to liberals but, the counterproductive attitude and mindset that she portrays does have it’s counterpart in the conservative camp.(Suggest they sign her up for the 2nd annual symposium!) For me, the most exciting part of this whole venture is David’s vision. I admire his pragmatic approach and I appreciate his candor. (LOL! Even he doesn’t know how this is gonna turn out!)
My hope is that all who participate, whether as presenters or audience, will be broadened and that this will be a foundation for some genuine ‘common ground’ discussion in the future.
Michael,
Are you only referring to the Christian religion and/or those who identify themselves as Christian? There are many religions and faiths and beliefs other than Christianity. People of these other faiths and religions and beliefs also have same gender attractions and often face the same obstacles with their religion, many times much worse.
I appreciate and agree with your thoughts about therapies that are unethical. I do not think they should be held out as an example of other therapies that are ethical and have been effective for other people though. I do not consider these therapists whining to the APA when they are representing the right of their client.
It is a new documentary that describes the deleterious effect of shutting out and down inquiries and discussion between people who have two very different beliefs on a subject. When ideas and choice are no longer permitted or are stifled to accommodate only one belief, then we can count on instability as a civilization. Usually the person or people who want to shut down or out inquiries and discussion are the ones who feel threatened by new information that will invalidate what they have always held as the only truth. It is their way of controlling that which is only good for them rather than considering the needs and desires and rights of others. This one was mainly about Darwinism and Intelligent Design, however, the premise can be applied to just about any subject
As an ex gay woman – it has been my experience that gay affirming therapy as well as many “reparative” (for lack of a better word) therapies have been all about politics and not about individuals at all. However – I can say – that my therapy with my counselor has stayed focused on the individual (me) without the politics involved.
With all due respect, Evan, could you translate that into simple English? What is “identity politics”? Are you referring to therapies which are gay-supportive or gay-affirming? My experience is that “ex-gay”, “change” or “reparative” therapies are very deeply wrapped up in politics and religion — and not very much in science.
Jayhuck,
That is not option, that is more like “tea or coffee” when someone needs water or nothing. No one must be forced to make decisions or be imposed decisions by being given very limitative choices, formulated by people whose authority ultimately rests on politics too. This is one thing I don’t like about the whole issue in its entire history. People continue to think reality in man-made terms, using these boxes created some generations before that we still take for granted for a number of reasons. Some use it knowingly for their own agenda. Scientists need some markers to study any differences. Etc. Do people live in discrete realities?
—
For all my knowledge in this field, I’m not convinced that there are real discrete categories of sexuality. In objective terms, it’s still a blackbox until we are able to measure attractions. Let’s hope that policy will be given the deserving openness that would match the state of research in this field, where we’re still very much groping with correlations, self-reports and objective measuring of subjective experience (differentiated based on self-reports). Notice how the strongest statements in this field of research lack precision. It’s time for policy to stop being therapeutic towards identity politics and deal with individual people’s needs. If that doesn’t happen, what is now a limited perception that science does more to massage politics and less to support people is likely to grow. We need more inclusive and more honest approaches in this field or we’ll continue to do politics on one side and innocently study how to curb suicidality in young people, alcohol abuse, drugs use, mental health problems etc. on the other. Is the next decade going to be a wake-up call? I sure hope that debates like this one will provide the space to start addressing real problems and do less politics in the realm of science. Common people only see the results, they do not get into all the fineties we are used to check before making a judgment.
Who needed to be liberated was liberated, who did not need that is still waiting for the next step beyond liberation.
Ann: All religious types, but especially those who call themselves evangelical or conservative — since these are the groups that (in my opinion) have done the most harm when it comes to the “gay issue”. Due to their un-Christlike attitudes and behavior, many gay people are convinced that the church flat out hates them.
The “therapies” they have offered have been at times abusive, often motivated by homophobic prejudice, frequently politically entangled and typically not based on sound science. Then, they whine like babies that the APA won’t recognize or praise them.
(No. I haven’t seen “Expelled”. Can you tell me about it?
Michael,
What religious types are you referring to?
Michael,
Have you see the movie “Expelled” with Ben Stein?
Maybe their attitude towards religion has been negative because their experience with religion has been negative. Many Christians are puzzled by the mistrust and disdain that non-religious folks have towards religion — when it is well-deserved. They need to ask themselves: What can religious types do to win the trust and respect of the scientific community?
Ann,
There are also those that are healthy and happily in Christians churches that are so often being accused of being unaccepting of people with same-sex attraction. I know for myself it has been an issue of coming to know what the church really teaches and what the media claims the church teaches inorder to try to make the church look bad. I do not live in the US but I am so discussed with the national media here in Canada for its distortion of what the church is that I find other than a few programs I tend to ignore most of what they have to say these days and that helps me feel much happier with who I am. They have such an obvious bias and then they claim to be balanced. I find the same thing with the approach the APA has taken for about 2 decades not so it is refreshing to see that they are at least trying to give the impression of listening to the other side of this arguement. If they do not then they are irrelevant to me. Unfortunately, they are a professional organization that has the potential to influence and affect many lives and up until now I have seen their influence to be very negative towards religion, unless of course you see things their way. Isn’t this what bullying is?
Jayhuck,
Yes, there are many people who are happy and healthy with their orientation. That must truly be a blessing. It is only right and fair for others who do not feel the same way, who are not content with their orientation, have the same opportunity and realize there are other paths in life to take, and in doing so, they can also have the privilege of being happy and healthy according to their own personal needs and desires.
Concerned,
It is your opinion that they are distorting things to fit their needs, but they would see you doing the same thing.
Jayhuck,
Just as there are those who deal with same-sex attraction and do not feel that is all that they are and search for meaning in traditional faith communities. They may find happiness in their decision to remain faithful to the teaching of their religion and not see a need to distort the teaching to fit their own needs.
Ann,
I have never been opposed to respecting what the individual wants – but at the same time, the individual should have all options be made known to them and taught what each means so that they can make a truly informed decision.
I was unhappy with my orientation and my religion when I was young and I thought the only options open for me were celibacy or organizations like Exodus – I had no idea there were many happy and healthy gay and lesbian Christians out there.
Jayhuck,
Well, this is where an individual should be respected for their own personal desires and not be influenced one way or the other. I am glad the issue is going to be discussed and not stifled – I think that is a very good beginning.
Ann,
This symposium, I think, is only about those that are not at peace with their orientation because of their religion. However, what I’m hoping will happen is that some of these unhappy people will see gay people who have made peace with their religion and their orientation and realize they don’t have to “change”, even as there are some who will feel that maybe they should.
Jayhuck,
The symposium is also to discuss those individuals who are not at peace with their orientation for personal reasons, their religion being one. It seems as though there are some very intelligent and level headed representatives who will be discussing all sides and topics and hopefully come to a place of common ground. I feel confident they will and set the foundation for further discussions.
This is my favorite quote from Dr. Scasta’s rebuttal to Wayne Besen:
“My standing is of little import if all I do is join my gay affirming colleges, congratulating ourselves about how successful we are in annihilating the arguments of the opposition – and nothing changes. I am well aware that I could become a pariah as a result of this effort (as might Dr. Throckmorton with his group). I would not take this step unless I thought it necessary and one which will ultimately make life less difficult for gay peoples. In the end it is not whether one is loved that counts; it is the love that is left behind that counts.”
Concerned,
I feel that we have said this over 1,000 times now, but I believe its fairly well accepted now that our sexuality, whether it is homosexual or heterosexual, is influenced by genes as well as the environment – and there are probably more bisexual people out there than there are who are strictly gay or straight in their attractions – Whether there is real fluidity is up for debate.
I’m definitely looking forward to this – It seems that gay people are very aware of the face of Ex-Gay therapies because they are controversial and make the news so often, but this meeting will really showcase the many gay and lesbians who are Christian and have made peace with their orientation – I think more gay and lesbian people – especially from a Christian background, need to see this. 🙂
Warren,
I look forward to the outcome of this symposium. I hope there can be some truth put out there about the real causes of same-sex attraction and that there are people who are not being harmed by religion in finding ways of dealing with their faith and their sexuality. The article by Bensen demonstrates his lack of compassion and a lack of willingness to understand why people might choose to live outside of the lifestyle he has choosen for himself. The more I read from him the less I feel any need to accept anything he says.
I give you much credit for taking on this bullying by a group within the APA and I hope that it is fruitful. I have read so much about the fluidity of our attractions that it amazes me that there are still some that want to hold onto the old idea that ones orientation is something that is totally innate and without developmental or environmental influences. To me this is such an extremely dangerous path for anyone with same-sex attraction to be following.
Best of luck.
Hey Warren,
I saw you quoted by Focus on the Family again for one of their stories. Ironic isn’t it? You don’t seem to have any problems lending your voice to organizations that lie, deceive, misrepresent, and fabricate when it comes to homosexuality. Is that how Christians are supposed to act? Why do you make yourself so available to a group that has habitually demonstrated a disdain for Jesus’ teachings and for academic integrity? I guess when a group is so anti-gay you will give them leniency given your own anti-gay bias. Didn’t you recently in these blogs criticize those who distort the truth concerning homosexuality? Yet, you seem more than happy to be quoted by them for their anti-gay propaganda?
By the way, and I’m serious, what actual evidence is there that homosexuality is not inborn? I’ve seen tons of studies that are consistent with it being inborn. I know you don’t think it is – but what actual scientific evidence do you have? I know you tend to rely on your theoretical perspective – but that isn’t actually evidence now is it? So, what actual evidence do you have and, I think it’s fair to ask, are you applying the same level of academic critique to your “evidence” that you do to the legitimate evidence? Just curious.